A perspective on the new and changing information requirements for IWRM

1. A perspective on the new and changing information requirements for IWRM

2. Research question What information, tools and methodologies do we require to implement the National Water Act? Not How can our current tools and methodologies be used to implement the National Water Act?

3. Objective of presentation? • Present a perspective that will stimulate debate and discussion • In terms of the research question ask: What is the water resource management and user community currently doing in South Africa? • Do we understand what is needed? • What mistakes can we make by adopting an inappropriate approach? • What are the potential consequences of these mistakes?

4. Presentation Outline • Ask a number of water management related questions and attempt to answer them • Present some research findings • Poverty and vulnerability mapping MCDA model builder • Biophysical land use potentials • Mike Basins discussion and demonstration

5. Research questions • In the course of our research with the SEA, ISP and WAS project over the last few years these are some of the research questions we have asked and answered from our own perspective

6. Research Question 1 • Are the current water related institutional arrangements adequate and commensurate with the goals of the NWA (1998)? • No!Need to introduce institutional structures that will encourage water users to adopt WCDM measures • Current curtailment methodology is subject to the tragedy of the commons and encourages wasteful use • Water banking and fractal allocation produce incentives towards water savings • Stimulates investment in water saving technologies and management tools such as forecasting as water becomes an economic good • The water banking institutional structures also enable the effective implementation of water trading • They represent the ultimate decentralisation of management as the water users control their own risk

7. Research question 2 • What options exist to assist with the allocation and re-allocation of water? • Compulsory licensing • Licensing • Trading/leasing • Re-licensing

8. Research question 3 • What is the most appropriate method of water re-allocation in stressed catchments • Water trading/leasing offers the most stakeholder friendly option in the majority of areas: • Willing buyer/ willing seller : fair compensation • Stimulates investment in water saving technologies and management tools such as forecasting as water becomes an economic good

9. Research Question 4 • Does water resource planning and management needs to reflect the operational complexity in a catchment? • Yes! • If the water resource planning, management and modelling does not reflect the operational complexity within a catchment then the assurances associated with such estimates are compromised (Especially in smaller quick response catchments and those with few control structures) • The operationalisation of the IFR introduces a high level of complexity that must be reflected in modelling, planning and management of systems

10. Research Question 5 • What other elements need to be considered in water management? • The NWA makes provision for considering equity, efficiency and sustainability • We therefore need good spatially linked social, economic and environmental information which can be linked with our water management decisions. This will allow us to factor in aspects such as the environmental classification, the equity allocation and water use efficiency of individuals and communities

11. Research Question 6 • What elements need to be addressed in order to implement arrangements such as water banking, water trading and the complex management arrangements already discussed? • The equity allocation needs to be addressed with mechanisms identified that will not compromise the economic viability of an area • Water rights need to be well defined and have a tenable associated property right • There must be a common currency between the definition of licenses for different water use sectors and SFRA (i.e. Water use can not be defined as an impact on yield and SFRAs as an impact on low flow)

12. Research Question 7 • What are the information requirements that will enable the water management community to adopt new institutional arrangements? • Water banking, fractal allocation and water trading require a higher degree of management and information • Need good high density monitoring networks which can not only monitor climate and flow data but also other elements such as water usage and landuse changes • There is a requirement for water management to be performed at the same spatial and time scales as operational management of the catchment. In some areas this would require daily modelling

13. Research Question 7 cont • A good database needs to be maintained that can communicate from an operational level to a overall management and planning level • Social, economic and environmental information is required in the water management context • All this should be housed in a single database system that allows storage of both spatial and temporal information which can automatically aggregate to higher levels for strategic planning

14. Research Question 8 • What are the modelling requirements for the adoption these new institutional arrangements? • Flexible enough to incorporate different methods of specifying licenses, therefore needs to account for water banking and fractal allocation • Assumptions must be transparent • Results and information generated must be transparent enough to encourage public participation • Need to be able to simulate actual use and operation of the system

15. Research Question 8 Cont • Must be able to ensure that reserve requirements are met and simulate the operational complexity required to institute these aspects • Need to be able to be applied operationally in a water audit system which enables users to track water use in a particular system • Set up time must be fast enough to allow for continual ongoing scenario generation to test trading scenarios and facilitate licensing • Needs to be spatially explicit allowing for spatial complexity and have the ability to link with other spatially referenced information

16. Conclusion • What is currently being done by the WR modelling community in SA? • How can our current tools and methodologies be used to implement the National Water Act? • Do we understand what is needed? • Not completely and we need a lot more research and investigation into other institutional arrangements

17. Conclusion • What mistakes can we make by adopting an inappropriate approach? • Stifle development costing the country millions • Create conflict that could lead to socio-political upheavals • Compromise the economic sustainability of areas and communities • Damage the environment • What are the potential consequences of these mistakes? • Legal actions (unproductive and costly) • Social, economic and political instability • Unsustainable development

18. Selected Research Findings • Selected 3 elements to present from some of the research that we have performed in order to demonstrate how spatial and hydrological modelling could be linked together to assist water resources planning. • We will show various spatial manipulations using the MCDA methodology and the Model builder tool in Arc View • We will explore a water management and planning model (Mike Basins) which links with these spatial tools and describe some of its features and why we chose to use it in the WAS project

19. Selected research findings • Examples of the use of the spatial tools • Poverty and vulnerability mapping performed to assist with the ISP work in the Usutu-Mhlathuze WMA • Biophysical landuse potential mapping in the Usutu-Mhlathuze WMA SEA project

20. Poverty and vulnerability mapping • Made up of three cornerstones in this assessment • Community vulnerability • Situational vulnerability • Hazard threat

21. Resource dependency Level of water utilisation Water quality Institutional support Type of use Community vulnerability Situational vulnerability Overall score Hazard threat Flow variability Aridity Flood peaks Water quality Mortality rate HIV aids Health Income levels Employment Poverty levels Wealth Education level Access to facilities Sanitation Potable water Entitlements

26. Biophysical landuse potentials • To assess the viability of replacing current existing land use with an alternative land use scenario, it is necessary to understand the potential of the area with respect to • The potential for replacement by alternative land uses; and • The production potential (yield) for that land use at the study location.

27. Maize BLUP

28. Mike Basins • A number of modelling systems both local and international where studied these included: • HSPF • WRYM & WRPM • Modsim • Riverware • WAS • SWAT

29. Why Mike Basins? • Mike Basins was chosen for the following reasons • Mike Basins interfaces with ArcView which means that it is very easy to learn, to set up and to use • Spatial link allows it to integrate with other spatial analysis tools • Spatial link aids transparency and improves stakeholder interaction • Mike Basins has the ability to perform management from both a curtailment system and a water banking scenario

30. Why Mike Basins? • It has the facility to be customisable through a com interface which allows users to perform their own application development • The spatial linking allows the users to set up and use other GIS tools and models with relative ease • The support structures are extremely good with a large number of people being on hand to assist the user at any particular time • Price (relatively cheap)

31. Mike Basins advantages • User friendly • Easy to learn and use • Customisable • Interface with GIS software means easily link with other systems • Good backup support • Links with a larger set of other models • International recognition • Separates development from application (reduces protectionism)

32. Disadvantages • Not locally developed requires some customisation • Price • Development not local

33. Demonstration