P. Stålnacke, US. Nagothu, J. Deelstra, H. P. Stålnacke, US. Nagothu, J. Deelstra, H. Thaulow, LJ. Barkved, D. Berge, I. Nesheim, GD. Thaulow, LJ. Barkved, D. Berge, I. Nesheim, GD.

Gooch, A. Rieu-Clarke, DK. Nhung, S. Manasi, A. Lo Gooch, A. Rieu-Clarke, DK. Nhung, S. Manasi, A. Lo Porto, B. Grizzetti, S. Beguería Portugués Porto, B. Grizzetti, S. Beguería Portugués

Integrated Water Resources Integrated Water Resources Management: STRIVER efforts to Management: STRIVER efforts to

assess the current status and future assess the current status and future possibilities in four river basins possibilities in four river basins

Photo: P. Stålnacke

Integrated Water Resources Management "IWRM is a process, which promotes the co-ordinated development and management of water, land and related resources, in order to maximise the resultant economic and social wel-fare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems."

What is really meant with IWRM?

The Technical Advisory Committee of Global Water Partnership

Photo: Lake Peipsi (Estonia/Russia); P. Stålnacke

Normally four main characteristics of Integrated Water Resource

Management (IWRM) can be observed...

1. Multifunctionality and multisectoral (e.g., fishing, farming, drinking water supply, energy) thus user interests and conflicts

2. Multiple managers at different levels (e.g., local, regional, national, inter-state)

3. Asymmetric power-relations (e.g., up- and downstream users and managers)

4. Technical complexity

Tungabhadra, India (US Nagothu)

Tagus (Spain/Portugal)

In other words….

• IWRM is all about sustainability, and is a well-established concept and should thus be straightforward!

• or?• …and how to conduct it in real practice?

IWRM can have multiple meanings (polarities)(Gooch&Stålnacke; 2006)Polarities Examples of Forms of Integration

Economy versus Ecology Environmental economics

Sector versus sector Environmental planning and cooperation between economical sectors

Nation versus Nation Transboundary river basin management

National authority versus Municipality

Multi-level government

Government versus Non-governmental organisations

Governance

Policy makers versus Stake-holders/the public

‘Bottom-up’ policy-making

Scientists versus Policy/decision makers

Scientific communication strategies

Land versus Water Land use change/nutrient loss models

Surface waters/groundwater versus Coastal waters

Coastal zone management

Water quantity versus Water quality Water boards

Upstream versus Downstream users River basin management

Large scale versus Small scale approaches

Regional perspective

Water supply versus Wastewater management

‘Grey water’ and use of wastewater as irrigation water

Social scientists versus Natural scientists

Multidisciplinary and/or Interdisciplinary approaches

Water Framework Directive – the European approach to IWRM

How will the policy process and basin

authorities look like?

How to define ‘good’ ecological quality and what

mitigation measures (incl climate

change)?

WFD: § Good surface water status all

over EU in 2015How to include the

public?

Target for restorationhigh

good

moderate

poor

bad

What about all transboundary river basin

districts?

Is WFD and ’good ecological status’ the issue/methodology outside

Europe????

STRIVER stands for:Strategy and methodology for

improved IWRM - An integrated interdisciplinary assessment in four

twinning river basins (STRIVER)• STRIVER is funded by EC

/DG Res• STRIVER is one out of 8

’twinning’ river basin projects

• Should contribute to EUWI, MDG and the Johannesburg sustainability Summit

July 2006- Start July 2006

End June 2009

STRIVER is less on scientific publications but rather on hands-on

management cases• Sounds easy or?

Some Briefs’ statements

• PB1: Fisheries, though an important source of livelihood in Tungabhadra does not find a place in the water policy or management decisions. The study shows that water management if integrated with other sector needs such as fisheries, can benefit a number of poorer groups and at the same time increase water use efficiency. (http://www.striver.no/diss_res/files/STRIVER_PB1.pdf)

• PB2: Water management regimes in transboundary rivers are dependent on efficient legal systems and communication and cooperation between a combination of formal institutions such as governmental organizations and managers, as well as on actor networks of NGO’s and other stakeholders. (http://www.striver.no/diss_res/files/STRIVER_PB2.pdf)

STRIVER statement 1

• Less weight should be on paid to scientific publications in peer-review journals with high impact factor!

Capacity building (Nesheim et al., 2008)

• Capacity building was officially emphasized as part of many water policies and strategy documents in the Sesan, Tungabhadra and Tagus case study basins. However, it was evident that these official statements were seldom operationalised to any larger degree by the authorities. Competence building which includes NGOs are increasingly becoming a part in basins and covers information campaign brochures for the public and training programs for certain sectoral groups (especially for local communities, farmers). In Cambodia, foreign donors were an important actor being responsible for training programs.

Case 1) Glomma River (Norway)

STRIVER 3rd stakeholder meeting Glomma, February 2009

Kraftproduksjon/magasinkapasitet

Forvaltning

Økt kraftproduksjon/mer samhandling mellom sektorer/forvaltningsmyndigheter

Kraftproduksjon som idag/mer samhandling mellom sektorer/forvaltningsmyndigheter

Økt kraftproduksjon/forvaltning / sektorer som idag

Kraftproduksjon som i dag / sektorer/forvaltning som idag

Klimaendring

STRIVER 2nd stakeholder meeting,

Juni 2008

Glomma stakeholder feed-back

• There will be a conflict between the national environmental objectives in WRD (GEP) and the global energy trends (global protocols, emission trading, renewable energy)

• Cost-benefit assessment?• Norms and values among people (difficult to

change peoples attitiude)• Price for electricity in future and consumers

behaviour?

Further STRIVER results in Glomma

• Nutrient pollution modelling results (SWAT) was used in the RBMP for the WRD in the Glomma subbasin

• Public hearing at the moment

Should never have said ’yes’ to

STRIVER field work

Case 3) Tungabhadra river (India)

• Land and water use interactions (livelihoods)

• Pollution aspects (SWAT modelling)

• Transboundary issuse between Andra Pradesh and Karnataka

• Stakeholder meetings

STRIVER findings in the Tungabhadra

• the National and State water policies are reflecting about the principles of IWRM, but are not implemented in a basin context.

• There are several organizations across the basin working on various aspects; however, there is no single authority as River Basin Organization or an effective co-coordinating mechanism for existing agencies in the TB.

• Fisheries is not regarded as one of the priorities while allocating water (Nagothu, 2008)

US Nagothu

Don’t play around with key stakeholder

Case 4) The Sesan (Vietnam/Cambodia)

Claimed local impacts

• No financial compensation due to loss of working places and food (fish)

• Health problems (respiratory and skin problems)

Coliform bacteria (Tiodolf, in press)

Analyses of algae toxins (March 2008; Tiodolf, in press)

ELISA

Environmetal flow technique (Berge et al, 2009)

Environmental flow technique (science-stakeholder interaction)

Pressure impact curves according to fishermen in Sesan (Vietnam; Berge et al,

2008)

Figure 4 “Pressure-impact” curve was drawn by hand for Fish Catch. The horizontal axis show the water level, The vertical axis show “productivity (standardised)”.

From the meeting in March 2008 with the fishermen and river users at Sesan Resource

Centre

Some overall STRIVER reflections so far 1(2)…

• A ’small’ research-based project like STRIVER can act as ’independent’ facilitator /’start enginge’ /meeting arena for cooperation around IWRM

• River basin managers need help with the public and stakeholder participation process

• Transboundary cooperation problems seems also to be a major obstacle for succesful IWRM

• Environmental data /natural science ‘fact and figures’ is a prerequisite but rarely used in the decision-making process unless it is connected to the economic and social situation

…more on www.striver.no

Some overall STRIVER reflections so far 2(2)…

• Without doubt a fully implemented IWRM system will serve as a solid fundament for water issues at all levels

• IWRM is a long-term process that need polticial commitment and appropriate resources and mandate at all management levels (national/inter-state, regional and local)

• Scientific models, data and information (such as SWAT, EF, GIS) can function as tool for discussions around IWRM

• Scientific ambassadors?

STRIVER conference

starts tomorrow

400m away!

Thanks for your attention!

M. Tiodolf

Two of the authors. Guess whom?