CONSULTATION WITH BILATERAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES

1. CONSULTATION WITH BILATERAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES Lisbon 05.20.2010

2. Binational Project for Zoning, Management and Development of the Catamayo-Chira basin. • Building up the Right to Water in rural indigenous communities of Argentina. • Water and Sanitation Cooperation Fund.

3. Binational Project for Zoning, Management and Development of the Catamayo-Chira basin

4. Background • 1971: Agreement of the hydrographic basins Puyango-Tumbes and Catamayo – Chira. • 1998: Ecuador – Perú Peace Treaty. • 2000: Technical mission of the Binational Plan: Ecuador, Peru, AECI (Ministerio de Medio Ambiente de España). • 2001 -2007: Preparation Phase: diagnosis and binational planing. • 2008: Planning, Management and Development of the Catamayo-Chira basin (document). • 2009 – 2011: Execution phase and institutionalization.

5. 17,199km2 ECUADOR 7,212 km2 42 % 9,987 km2 58% PERU

6. CATAMAYO 4,184 km2 24.3 % ALAMOR 1,190 km2 6.9 % SISTEMA CHIRA 4,711 km2 27.4 % MACARA 2,833 km2 16.5 % QUIROZ 3,108 km2 18.1 % CHIPILLICO 1,170 km2 6.8 %

7. Context • Migration and population reduction due to social, economic and enviromental problems. • Inadequate management of natural resources. • Lack of training and knowledge in the management and treatment of solid and liquid wastes. • Water suply deficit: only 20% in Ecuador area; 50% in Peru. • Inadequate tariff system. • Atomized and low productivity. • Weak institutions. • Diffused and difficult access to information.

8. Description • Beneficiary: Peru-Ecuador Border Region Binational Development Plan. • Total cost: 8.768.935 euros. AECID: 70%. • Goal: Comprehensive and share management of Catamayo-Chira basin, permitting a better use of resources and socioeconomic development of the population. • Specific goals: 1.Binational management organization; 2.Binational center for technical formation; 3.Zoning, Management and Development of the Catamayo-Chira basin Plan.

9. 1. Binational management organization • Designed: previous constitution of a binational technical secretary. • Ecuador-Peru shared institutions in charge of implementing the plan (Zoning, Management and Development of the Catamayo-Chira basin Plan).

10. 2. Binational center for technical formation • Two headquarters: Mallares (Peru) and Zapotepamba (Ecuador). • Aims: promotion of young enterprising initiatives, scientific projects and technical and technology transference.

11. 3. Zoning, Management and Development of the Catamayo-Chira basin Plan • Long-term plan: 15 years horizon. • Document: pretends to guide the comprenhensive and share management of the basin. • Includes six specific goals,nine programs and several projects.

15. Lessons Learnt • Comprenhensive management of the water resource. • Enviromental sustainability. • Experience in binational management of a border basin. • Binational institutional strengthening. • Peacebuilding through binational plans.

16. Building up the Right to Water in rural indigenous communities of Argentina Consultation with Bilateral Development Agencies Lisbon 20th May 2010

17. Index • Description • Criteria. How does the practice meet the criterion of…?” • Final remarks, challenges, lessons learnt.

18. Description:Aims • Strenghtening of rural organizations by his technical and political capacities • Implementation of demostrative community modules of water supply • Investigation orientated to the participative planning of water resources

19. Description:Target group • Rural indigenous communities, most of them in situation of social exclusion, without access to the resources, socially organized , with high participation. • These organizations are articulated around the MNCI – Movimiento Nacional de Campesinos Indígenas

20. Description:Partners involved • MNCI(Mocase Vía Campesina, Sercupo, Red Puna, Encuentro Calchaquí, Movimiento Campesino Córdoba, Unión de Trabajadores Rurales sin Tierra) • Spanish NGOs: Engineering without Borders Navarra, Catalunya, Valencia and Baleares With the support of AECID between others.

21. Description:Duration of practice 2004 2007 2010 Beginning 1est Phase 2nd Phase (still going on) Description:Financing Budget: 550.000€ over the passed 6 years

22. Description:Brief outline Comprehensive response to all factors related to the actual situation, from a human rights perspective. Axes: • Technical and political outcomes, to improve legal frames and public politics • Promotion of participation and democratization in the management of the resource • Building infrastructure in an appropriate manner.

23. Criteria:Accessibility and Availability There has been built demonstrative modules for water supply. Calculation of the volume: - drinking needs - cleaning needs (personal and house cleaning) - animals and land - future perspective (during the construction’s life) - rains Book published with all factors taken in consideration

24. Criteria: Affordability Water is consider as a good so no price is given to it. The right to water is considered essential for a full development so, the effort goes to political pressure and public dialogue, to achieve access and the community’s responsibility of its maintenance and control. The own community is who takes care that the resource is properly used, in a responsible way.

25. Criteria: Quality / Safety • Analysis campaign of water quality adapted to each use depending on each source contamination (microbiological and physicochemical analysis) • Periodic trainings on hygiene , proper use and maintenance of the infrastructure

26. Criteria: Acceptability • The strong participation and proaction of the communities in relation to the type, use, shape and place where the modules were built has supposed an absolute acceptation. • As a consequence they were chosen such diverse solutions as wells, tanks, community dams, etc.

27. Criteria: Non-discrimination • Use of the infrastructure is totally free and controlled by the community, all member are part, so there have not been situations of discrimination.

28. Criteria: Active, Free and Meaningful Participation Through all the practice participation has been an esencial axe. All decisions were taken in assambly, as; • Place of modules • Technical solutions • Construction process In trainings the maximum participation was promoted Specially women’s. Example: placing meetings in accessible places or helping with travelings Always information was accessible to strengthen decision making.

29. Criteria: Accountability • Definition of roles and responsibilities of each actor • Meetings each 3 months: Evaluations and discussion about the achievement of actions and results. • Continuous follow up of actions • Continuous observation of the non violence of community’s rights by jurisdictional consultants → Improving community’s knowledge of rights.

30. Criteria: Impact Various levels: • Improvement of the access to water • Improvement of the dialogue with the public organizations → Agreement achieved with the competent ministry in order to: • Guaranty total access to water and, • Guaranty production instruments

31. Criteria: Sustainability • Local materials, appropriate construction methods, adapted to physical availability of resources (water resources with the minimum intervention) • Pressure on the Government so that he guaranty the Human Right to Water

32. Final remarks, challenges, lessons learnt • The principal defeat was the constant fight for the water due to the indiscriminated use by strong agriculture activities, resulting in negative effects on small farmers. • Strengthing their capacity and their organization skills has proved that improves significantly their access to water as the development of their activities and for a healthy life.

33. Water and Sanitation Cooperation Fund Implementation of the right to water and sanitation.

34. Background • At the 17th Ibero-American Summit,in November, 2007, the President of the Spanish Government announced the creation of a Fund for cooperation in the field of water and sanitation. • Budget of 1.500 million dollars for a period of four years. • In June, 2008, the Office for the Water and Sanitation Cooperation Fund was created

35. Goal • Implement the human right to water with the purpose of contributing to the achievement of target 7.c of the MDG´s: “Halve, by 2015, the proportion of population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation”.

36. Purposes • Extend sustainable access to drinking water and to basic sanitation services. • Favor public, comprehensive and participative management of the water resource. • Reinforce countries institutional system for a suitable sector management. • Contribution to the establishment of sustainable systems of water and sanitation services.

37. Action Lines • Sustainable access to drinking water. • Sustainable access to basic sanitation services, included solid waste management. • Strengthening of policies and institutional frames of water management. • Strengthening of comprehensive water resources management. • Establishment of sustainable public services systems for supply of water and sanitation.

38. Financing Criteria • Mainly non-refundable funds, grants • Beneficiaries: public administrations and civil society organizations. • Focused in Latin America: 85% of the resources directed to priority countries. • Co-financing requirements according to development level and sector needs.

39. Principles • Poverty reduction as a priority: the Fund is focused on urban peripheral and rural areas. • The right to water as a fundamental and universal human right: available, healthy, acceptable, accessible and affordable water for personal and domestic use. • Recognition of the diversity and heterogeneity of the territories: inclusion of marginal population. • Bottom-up process: participative management.

40. Principles of the Fund • Environmental sustainability and environmental governance. • Peacebuilding through social and economic development. • Transparent and participative public management with efficient policies in the field. • Emphasis on the hygiene and health education. • Alignment with the Paris Declaration principles in order to increase aid effectiveness.

41. Monitoring • General Plan of monitoring and evaluation of the Fund underway. • Implements the normative content of the right to water, according to General Comment No.15 (CESCR).

42. Indicators • Availability:beyond the WHO recommendations: 50 liters inhabitant/day. • Quality-safety: water chlorination, sanitation systems in all the interventions and quality control plans. • Accessibility: intermediate and optimal access. • Affordability: adequate tariff system, assuring the sustainability of projects with in the poor population. • Acceptability: cultural approach and previous identification of the peculiarities in the managing of the water resource in the communities.

43. Experience • 46 projects (2009): 782 million dollars. • 375 m. bilateral and 407 m. multilateral (IADB). • Preference for national programs: governments,departments and regional and local administration. • Open national programmes approved that allow flexibility: earthquake in Haiti and Chile

44. Experience • Leverages new resources: 1.7 billion $ in total. • Promotes national plans in water and sanitation policies. • 90% of the interventions include institutional strengthening and community development, assuring sustainability.

45. Thank you very much for your attention.