WHOSE WATER IS THIS?

1. V WHOSE WATER IS THIS? Challenges of participatory water management in Brazil: the case of Cantareira. The Piracicaba, Capivari, Jundiai Watershed Committee and the water permit renewal process of the Cantareira System. Fabiana Barbi Master’s student at PROCAM – USP (University of Sao Paulo)

2. Presentation Content 1. Research context 2. Research question 3. Theoretical Approach 4. Research Directions 5. Methodological Approach 6. Conclusions

3. Water Resources Management Units in SP

4. Piracicaba, Capivari, Jundiai Watershed

5. The Region at a glance • Second industrial pole in the country • Responsible for 7% of Gross Internal Product • Around 5 million people in 15.320 km2 • 74 municipalities (69 in SP and 5 in MG)

6. Environment • Civil society began to worry about the environment in this region in the 60’s, motivated by the fish kill due to river pollution. • This mobilization got stronger in the 70’s with intense river pollution due to industrial and demographical development and the water diversion to SP through the Cantareira System. • All this led to the creation of the Consortium in 1989.

8. Cantareira System - SP

9. Cantareira System - SP The system was built in 1973 and is comprised of 07 dams, 07 water diversions and 48 km of tunnels and canals which allow, after the treatment at ETA Guaraú, the distribution of 31 m3/s of water in the SP Metropolitan Region according to the water permit from 1974.

10. SistemaCantareira Sistema Alto Tietê Sistema Baixo Cotia Sistema Alto Cotia 15% 20% 1,7% 49% Reservoirs Importance F. MORATO F. Morato F. DA ROCHA Mairiporã MAIRIPORÃ Sta. Isabel F. da Rocha R.Juquerí Cajamar P. B. Jesus CAIEIRAS Caieiras R.ÁguasClaras CAIEIRAS ARUJÁ ARUJÁ Arujá GUARULHOS Guarulhos GUARULHOS Guararema S. do Parnaíba ITAQUA Itaqua Mogi das Cruzes R.Paraitinga BARUERÍ BARUERÍ Poá POÁ Osasco OSASCO Salesópolis F. Vas. F. VAS. São Paulo CARAP. JANDIRA Jandira Carap. ITAPEVÍ Itapeví SÃO PAULO R.P. Nova Biritiba Mirim SUZANO Suzano SUZANO S.C. do Sul R. R. doCampo S.C. DO SUL T. da Serra V.G. PAUL. T.DA SERRA Cotia V.G.Paul. R.Biritiba Mirim COTIA STO. ANDRÉ Sto. André Embu EMBU Mauá MAUÁ R.Taiaçupeba DIADEMA. Diadema R.Jundiaí R.G.Serra R.daGraça R.PIRES R.Pires SistemaRio Claro R.Guara Piranga R.G. SERRA Itap. Da Serra ITAP. DA SERRA Rib Estiva R.P.Beicht S.B.do Campo SistemaRibeirão da Estiva S.B.DO CAMPO Embu Guaçu EMBU GUAÇU S.LOURENÇO. DA SERRA S.Lourenço da Serra R.Billings Sistema Rio Grande 0,2% Juquitiba 6% Sistema Guarapiranga 7% Importância Relativa dos Sistemas Produtores 1,3%

11. Research question Facing the decentralization process in the water management and the possibility of different actors taking part in this process, the interest conciliation, cooperation capacity among actors and conflict negotiation are necessary. ?? How the cooperation history among the PCJ Committee members contributed to strengthen its negotiation capacity in the water permit renewal process of the Cantareira System?

12. Important Changes • Water Management State System from 1991, based in the French model. • Decentralized • Shared • Participative • Creation of the Watershed Committees. • Define strategies and projects on the watershed. • PCJ Committee was the first one in 1993.

13. PCJ Committee Structure State17 Entities17 Votes Municipalities69 Mayors17 Votes Civil Society17 organizations17 Votes Directory President; Vice-President; Executive Secretary Technical Chamber of Planning (Plenary Members) CT-AS Underground water CT-EA Environmental education CT-ID Technology and research difusion CT-MH Hydrological monitoring CT-OL Permits and licenses CT-PB Watershed Plan CT-RN Natural resources conservation and protection CT-SA saniting CT-SAM Environmental health CT-Rural Water use and conservation in rural areas GT CANTAREIRA GA-Plano GA-Rel. Sit.

14. Water permit renewal process • Many actors involved with different interests. • Negotiation lasted one and a half year.

15. The Cantareira PermitNow and Then . • 1974 – centralized decision • 30 years permit • Water priority to Sao Paulo M A (31 from 33 m3/s) • Centralized management by Sabesp • 2004 – participative process • 10 years permit • Gradual change in water priority (water bank, 6 m3/s to PCJ) • Participatory management

16. Research Direction There is a satisfatory stock of • cooperation, • trust, • solidarity and • reciprocity among the members in this Committe so that they can build institutional arrangements, adopting coordinated strategies to negotiate solutions to shared management problems, for instance, in the case of the water permit renewal.

17. Theoretical Approach • “Much of the world is dependent on resources that are subject to the possibility of a tragedy of the commons.” (E. Ostrom) • “A group in an interdependence situation can organize and govern in order to obtain joint continuous benefits when they adopt coordinated strategies.” (E. Ostrom) • Social capital The capacity that a group has to develop trust ties and cooperation networks in order to produce collective goods.

18. Methodological Approach • Cognitive social capital: trust, solidarity, reciprocity and cooperation. • Structural social capital: social networks. • Coordinated strategies lead to collective action – decision making, participation, resources mobilization and management, communication and conflict resolution.

19. Conclusions • The Cantareira system water use permit renewal process opened important channels of participation, allowing the Universities to play an important role. • The negotiation process strengthened the Committee as a water management organization and the water management system as a whole. • It raised awareness in how people reflect on the natural resources depletion.

20. References • Projeto Marca d’Agua: www.marcadagua.org.br • ANA: www.ana.gov.br • CBH-PCJ: www.comitepcj.sp.gov.br • CONSORCIO: www.agua.org.br • DAEE: www.daee.sp.gov.br • Contact: fabarbi@terra.com.br