1. Evolving the Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) Paradigm:To reassess the underline policy assumptions Part A MukhtarHashemi ❶ Associate Researcher, The Centre for Land Use and Water Resources Research (CLUWRR), Newcastle University, UK; ❷ Scientific Advisor, The Office of Applied Researches, IWRMC, Ministry of Energy, Iran ❸ National IWRM Consultant, UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project, Department of Environment, Iran 22-24 Feb 2011 Amman- Jordan Kempinski Hotel
3. WANA Geopolitical conditions: Semi arid and Arid
4. Mecca Madina Riyadh Driving Forces: Population Growth Urbanization -Mega Cities Tehran Amman Cairo Damascus
5. Regional disparity The degree of the ability of WANA Countries to meet the 2025 urban water demand?
6.
7. Results 7 countries with no difficulty to achieve the demand include: Iran, Turkey, Lebanon, UAE, Qatar,, Kuwait and Bahrain Persian Gulf states depend on desalination
8. 9 countries with no difficulty but they conditionally can meet the demand Yemen- no urban population driver due to poverty Syria- depends on water from Turkey Sudan- friction with Egypt? poverty, less demand Morocco: short term problem with re allocation of water resources Libya- Oil to water- desalination?? Iraq- water from Turkey Eritrea/Ethiopia - Poverty- no demand increase Egypt- if 60% share of the Nile Unchanged Algeria- underdeveloped Afghanistan- Poverty and under-development
9. 1 country with geopolitical problems rather than resource problems Palestinian – a question of Equity Israel takes a lion Share no urban supply infrastructure
10. 4 countries with sever problems in meeting the demand Tunisia- rundown of its irrigated agriculture by 50% or desalination KSA-Small renewable resources and huge urban populations and there might be a need for more desalination plants and use of groundwater Oman-Extensive groundwater mining not viable long term option and require desalination in the future Jordan- Small renewable resource; import of water from Lebanon via Israel is a non-starter; desalination from Aquaba port is a difficult task with over 1000 m pumping requirements and 250 km of water transport; reallocation from irrigation only buys time;
15. B. Moves towards implementing IWRM Dominant paradigm- 40 years of history There has been a lack in implementing IWRM worldwide despite its adoption by national governments around the globe
16. Characterisation of efforts Numerous researchers- variety of IWRM themes Scattered and dispersed efforts Lack of communication World Bank (2007): water scarcity in MENA (=WANA) Impact of non water policies are greater
17. Integration; IWRM and Sustainable development Meeting the criteria for sustainability Underlying theoretical background
19. How to achieve holism?: sustainability criteria integration, spatial adequacy (basin level), manageability, systematic, representation (participation), comparability, communication (precautionary), and forward looking (prediction).
20.
21.
22.
23. The omissions 1- Green water- soil moisture and water stored in plants 2- Gray water and return water 3- Environmental services (functions) of water
24. 3. Impact of land use change on blue water Forest Policy based on Land and water myths (e.g. Calder 2005) 1 Forests increase rainfall. 2 Forests increase runoff. 3 Forests regulate flows. 4 Forests reduce erosion. 5 Forests reduce floods. 6 Forests ‘sterilize’ water supplies – improve water quality. 7 Agro forestry systems increase productivity.
25. More research needed….. The negative/ positive impact due biophysical interactions Site specific Type of plants and canopies How impact? Geological factors such as landslide and jungle management activities, roads etc liter cover
28. More research: scarcity vs. Dependency water scarcity water dependency Iran and Pakistan water scarcity but low dependency Iran 93 water self sufficiency Pakistan 100 water self sufficiency
31. Iran Half liter of drink beverage from sugar beet- The total water footprint of 0.5 litre PET-bottle sugar-containing carbonated beverage according to the type and origin of the sugar (SB=Sugar Beet, SC=Sugar Cane, HFMS= High Fructose Maize Syrup) UNESCO-IHP (Ercin et al, 2009)
34. More omissions … 6- fisheries sector in river basin management -neglected 7- role of belief systems - direct bearing on policy making decision
35. Recommendation 2 Redefinition of the scope or focus of IWRM equitable allocation strategy include whole water balance (Blue and Green Water or so called the ‘ever-green’ revolution: Falkenmark and Rockstörm, 2006).
36. Policy to acknowledge technical challenges – technology driven to understand the physical processes affecting green water (e.g. vapour flow and green soil flow) and be able to include these concepts in the water balance components of the water resources models. Hence, there are many technical challenges to initiate the new green revolution. Technology will have an important role to play. It has to adjust to new paradigms and take an adaptive and innovative technical strategy.
37. Recommendation 3: Redefinition of the scale of IWRM A depoliticized river basin concept approach- but most decisions are political Most use- Agricultural water use- smaller unit - smaller physical unit (at catchment or watershed level) can be used to reflect what happens at the farming level.
39. Recommendation 4: ecohydological concept- interface among ecology, land and water Redefining water science intersecting applied and socio-economic disciplines Restoration/ adaptive management as part of the policy
41. Recommendation 6: Enhancement of the Role of belief systems and culture in policymaking Policy making- straggle over idea and [values] Interplay between policy and Legitimacy
42. Recommendation 7: linking IWRM and ICZM- water –land-sea-interface Coastal ecosystems are vital 60% of population 90% of global fisheries 25% global biological productivities Integrated Coastal Area and river basin management- ICARM – not new but focus on new gaps….
43. Science and Policy Interface:An integrated socio-technical and Institutional Framework to deal with water scarcity in WANA region Part B MukhtarHashemi ❶ Associate Researcher, The Centre for Land Use and Water Resources Research (CLUWRR), Newcastle University, UK; ❷ Scientific Advisor, The Office of Applied Researches, IWRMC, Ministry of Energy, Iran ❸ National IWRM Consultant, UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project, Department of Environment, Iran 22-24 Feb 2011 Amman- Jordan Kempinski Hotel
44. Framework: Science and Water policy interface Transforming Scientific evidence into policymaking
46. Definitions A Framework is a non-predictive representation of structures and provides interlinkges for the relevant components of a system that influence the policy in question. theory “makes specific assumptions on the linkages between variables and outcomes” (quoting Clement 2008)
47. Definitions cont. a model “makes more precise predictions than a theory and often relies on mathematical tools" Interface: a mechanism or framework to link two systems; be able to exchange, use or process the information Perspectives are mental models of actors involved in designing , implementing and affected by policy in question
48. A Science- water policy interface defines the points of interaction, interplay and linkage between technical and social or non-technical frameworks.
49. Multidimensional Water scarcity 3 levels (World Bank, 2007) Governance level: lack of transparency in decision making Organisational capacity level: inability of organisations to effectively manage water resources Physical resource level (water shortage, water stress conditions, temporal and seasonal variations
50. Avoiding pitfalls Poor definition of policy objectives Lack of Local knowledge Inadequate consideration of Ethics Lack of clear participation mechanisms Undermining learning during the process Lack of economic assessment of policy
51. Science and water policy interface Linking sociopolitical and technical assessment frameworks use of different theories and frameworks to form the a single conceptual framework
52. Components Conceptual frameworks: underlining policy assumption (IWRM) and dealing with cultural and ethical issues (perspectives) Analytical frameworks:to study change, predict future trends, assess impacts of policies on the water resources systems and provide alternative options- integrated socio-technical assessment frameworks- institutional assessments to evaluate policy implications
53. Components DSSsto model the system - empirical evidences -consisting of coupled tools such as process, planning and evaluation models and tools statistical and multi-criteria decision-making (MCDA) tools. stakeholder participation platform – clear policy on enabling environment - feedback mechanisms
56. uncertainty is a byproduct of analyzing complex issues The scientific uncertainty of any analytical assessment -limit the authority of scientific knowledge in policy making The scientific ambiguity serves both policymakers and scientists: it can be used as an alibi in accounting for a lack of policy effectiveness. However this should not affect the importance of scientific knowledge in decision making as uncertainty is a byproduct of analyzing complex issues
58. support the decision-making process despite scepticisms and uncertainties, modelling systems have become indispensable tools in water resources management Past research indicates that decision makers are becoming more dependent on scientific information (e.g. Matthies et al, 2007; Liu et al, 2008) and hence there is a quest for developing comprehensive DSSs;
59. a tool to facilitate an informed, transparent and participatory decision-making process certain end-users expect the so called ‘super’ software which can make decisions with a click of a button i.e. they require instantaneous answers to extremely intricate situations. DSSs are not off-the-shelf software packages but they are interactive multi-stakeholder decision-making platforms. A DSS is not a tool for making-policy but it is.
60. first, establishing the relationships between the dominant paradigms (e.g. IWRM) and different analytical frameworks (e.g. Institutional Analysis, DPSIR); and second, linking social (policy) and scientific methodological approaches through an exchange mechanism among outputs of the frameworks used in the Decision Support tools. integrated methodological framework
61. An evolving IWRM An IWRM approach can use scenario analysis which is embedded in the DPSIR framework. This will interface with the IA framework. The interface between science and policy can be established by looking at integrating technical and social assessment methodologies on a dynamic, interactive multi-windowed stakeholder interface platform. The IWRM paradigm will itself need to evolve to embrace emerging issues such as the management of ‘green’ water and accounting for virtual water.
62. Perspectives and ethics Polices to deal with water scarcity in WANA region are influenced by cultural and ethical aspects which represent a dimension of the community attributes which has to be considered in any policy analysis exercise. On the above basis, it is argued that it is vital to incorporate ethical perspectives into integrated institutional and technical frameworks for better water resources management under water scarcity
63. Science and water policy interface an interface between scientific knowledge systems and policy-making decisions.
64. Conclusions Given the complex nature of water scarcity in the WANA region, finding the science –policy interface is vital to enhance the policymaking process in the region.
65. In the WANA region in which water scarcity is a fact of life, water sector institutions need to be re-oriented to cater for the needs of changing supply-demand and quantity-quality relationships in the emerging realities
66. Thank you Questions? Water Resources Group School of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Newcastle University, UK
