Linking IWRM & WSS UNDP’s Kazakhstan Experience

1. Linking IWRM & WSSUNDP’s Kazakhstan Experience Andrew Hudson Principal Technical Advisor, International Waters and Officer-in-Charge, Water Governance Programme 16 No 2006

2. UNDP’s Water-related Work • IWRM & WSS: • Focusing on water governance; • Human Development (and Human Rights) approach; • Poverty-reduction / MDGs • Projects in Europe & CIS: • Transboundary (regional) level: IWRM in Danube & Black Sea, Caspian Sea, Dnipro, Kura-Aras (S. Caucasus), Lake Peipsi & Prespa, Upper Syr Darya (Ferghana Valley), …  UNDP Bratislava Regional Centre, mainly GEF (approx. US$ 75 Mio. last decade) & EU/bilateral co-funded • National level: IWRM & WSS interventions  implemented through UNDP Country Offices … … for example: Kazakhstan – IWRM & Water Efficiency Plan UNDP Regional Centre for Europe & CIS – Bratislava SK

3. The Project:“National IWRM & WUE Plan for Kazakhstan” • Time Frame: 2004-2007 • Partners: • Kazakh Committee for Water Resources (CWR) • Government of Norway • Global Water Partnership (GWP) • Department for Int’l Development (DFID) • Co-funding: Total USD 1.62 mil. • Norway (cash) USD 1.085 mil. • GWP (in-kind) USD 320,000 • UNDP (cash) USD 100,000 • DFID (cash) pounds 50,000 UNDP Regional Centre for Europe & CIS – Bratislava SK

4. Kazakhstan Context • Water Use by sector: • 71% Agriculture (85% of which irrigation) • 24.4 % Industry / 0.6 % Fisheries • 4 % Domestic Use • 44% of water comes from neighboring countries (6 out of 8 river basins in KAZ are transboundary) • WB Study in 66 local communities reported hard ship & conflicts over water, land & energy use in 50% UNDP Regional Centre for Europe & CIS – Bratislava SK

5. Why IWRM ? (Kazakhstan Context II) • Water Resources Management in K. is: • … Fragmented(Committee for Water Resources (CWR) in MoA, yet: monitoring  management; separate quality/quantity monitoring; surface  groundwater management; water services  sanitation providers) • … Under-funded MAIN REASON: WRM not seen as revenue earning area. • … Poorly governed(new Water Code (2003): good potential for IWRM, but currently not used / enforced) • At present, no organization has the responsibility to manage Kazakhstan’s water resources • Apparent “Water scarcity” as a result of ineffective management • Johannesburg directive – IWRM plans by 2005 UNDP Regional Centre for Europe & CIS – Bratislava SK

6. Kazakhstan context III: Main Barriers towards IWRM • Poor public understanding & involvement, • Poor governance, capacity (govt. investment; RBOs), transparency, … • Water Info: Lacking, poorly accessible and/or managed • Education Gap (water-related expertise / national capacity) • Soviet Legacy: • ‘Overnight’ loss of central resource allocation & management • New borders = new compartmentalization of watersheds • “Low sympathy” for water pricing • Water-Energy Nexus dominates dialogue UNDP Regional Centre for Europe & CIS – Bratislava SK

7. The Guiding Principles • IWRM is about Governance! • Integrating government policies across water-related sectors through governmental, institutional & legislative reforms (e.g. agricultural with environment & water policies; Environment with municipal WSS policies; poverty reduction with water policies, etc.) • IWRM is a Process of Adaptive Management! • IWRM speaks to Efficiency – 2 Types: • Technical E.: efficient use, minimizing waste ( demand management) example: decrease irrigation losses • Allocative E.: economic efficiency, water to highest value user ( supply management), requires social responsibility; example: “release” water from agriculture for higher valued Drinking Water use ( lowering social/health costs, etc.) UNDP Regional Centre for Europe & CIS – Bratislava SK

8. UNDP’s Strategic Approach to IWRM in Kazakhstan • Basis: • Johannesburg Directive 2005 IWRM plans; • Build on Kazakhstan Water Code (2003); • Assist Committee for Water Resources (CWR). • Water Quality Management  Responsibility of River Basin Organisations (RBO) = Subsidiary Principle • Adopt EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) approach UNDP Regional Centre for Europe & CIS – Bratislava SK

9. Main objectives & Milestones • National IWRM and W.U.E. Plan [End 2005], and IWRM Plans for all River basins [2007] • Establish 8 River Basin Councils [2006] • Preparation of a Strategy for Achievement of MDGs for WSS [End 2006] • Improving cooperation and development of partnerships at regional and country levels Outlook: • 2007-2010: Schemes for comprehensive use & protection of Water Resources • 2010-2015: Fully adapting to EU WFD UNDP Regional Centre for Europe & CIS – Bratislava SK

10. 1. National IWRM & WUE Plan: 4 Initial Focus Areas • Instituting Management of Water Quality & Ecology • Responsibility, information gaps, cooperation • Achieving the MDGs for WSS (2015) • Safe DW through better/cheaper raw water quality; • Capacity development, etc. • Addressing Water Use Efficiency • Mind shift: Water pricing and institutional cooperation • Preparing for Transboundary IWRM • Start small (simpler bi-lateral agreements, bring RBOs up to speed, address “in-house” issues first)  IWRM & WUE Plan: primarily institutional (organizational, financial) in scope, not infrastructural or operational UNDP Regional Centre for Europe & CIS – Bratislava SK

11. 2. How to set up River Basin Councils • What is it? • Advisory body for River Basin Organizations (RBO), NOT a water resources manager • Expanded stakeholder participation • Instituted in 2003 Water Code (Art. 43) • Key issues requiring serious consideration: • Funding • Information (basis for functioning & effective counseling for RBO) • Reliability & Trust: for stakeholders to participate as RBC members, they have to be sure this is a tool to truly influence RBO & RB decisions • Since there’s no model: “Learning by Doing” • Set-up step by step to truly include/represent all water users, and cautiously empower to provide effective RBO advice UNDP Regional Centre for Europe & CIS – Bratislava SK

12. 3. Strategy for Achieving Water MDGs • Achieving MDG target (10) = can be achieved on time in KZ given appropriate effort & support!) •  Complete working plan with concrete projects & full financial streaming 2007-15 – Main steps: • Define “Sustainable Access to Safe DW & Sanitation” • Quantifying Current Level of Access • Determining priorities, specific works, financial requirements • Determining strategy to meet financial costs • Outlining strategy • Strongly linked to Objective 1 (IWRM & WUE Plan): • Basis for Plan development • Involvement of all stakeholders required (CWR, RBO, etc.) UNDP Regional Centre for Europe & CIS – Bratislava SK

13. (Preliminary) Conclusions & Lessons Learned • Before actually starting to draft the IWRM Plan, much more efforts than expected were required to actually prepare (all) partners/stakeholders for IWRM • Promising approaches: • Bottom-up: build RBO & RBCs • “Inside-out” (build local/national capacity before attempting (transboundary) IWRM) • Decentralization: The right way to go • Some risk that it leads towards ambiguity about responsibilities & ownership of rural WSS systems, hence to low willingness to invest. • Kazakhstan Case: many country specific factors (e.g. 2003 Water Code) • careful when replicating! UNDP Regional Centre for Europe & CIS – Bratislava SK

14. Why Linking WSS & IWRM in Kazakhstan ? • Fulfillment of WSS MDGs will require more Water for People (as will economic growth) BUT: Kazakhstan’s available Water Resources unlikely to increase in future, therefore: • Increased demands can only be met by improving efficiency: DEMAND SIDE MANAGEMENT  Best done through IWRM • Safe Drinking Water requires effective treatment • This requires “reasonable” raw water (surface & ground) quality, • ..is linked to (industrial & municipal) discharge policies • ..requires also capacity (CWR, RBOs, Vodokanals, Health Ministry, etc.) for coordination • Again, IWRM is best vehicle UNDP Regional Centre for Europe & CIS – Bratislava SK

15. Thank You! For more Information: www.voda.kz www.undp.kzwww.undp.sk www.undp.org/water