seminar on water policy issues

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Water Management in the South Caucasus

SEMINAR ON WATER POLICY ISSUES

Tblisi Marriott Hotel

Tblisi, Georgia

July 11, 2002

Water Management in the South Caucasus SEMINAR ON WATER POLICY ISSUES

SEMINAR AGENDA

_________________________________________________________________________________________ TOPIC PRESENTER TIME _________________________________________________________________________________________

1. INTRODUCTION 10:00 am

Welcome/USAID Michael Farbman/USAID Welcome/Minister of Environment

And Natural Resources Ms. Nino Chkhobadze/MENR Seminar Purpose and Outline Paul Dreyer/DAI Identification of Participants

2. NATIONAL ISSUES ON WATER MANAGEMENT 10:30 am

Overview of Legislation in the Region Ekaterina Otarashvili/DAI EU Partnership Agreements in the Region Andrew Huckbody/EU Tacis Summary of Water Code Legislation Vladimir Narimanyan Discussion of Issues Participants

3. INTERNATIONAL ISSUES ON WATER MANAGEMENT 11:15 am

International Experiences in Water Management Malcolm Baldwin/DAI Caspian Environmental Programme Tim Turner/CEP Interstate Prog. EU Tacis Joint River Management/Kura Rieks Bosch/EU Tacis Discussion of Issues Participants LUNCH 12:30 pm

4. INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES IN RIVER BASINS 2:00 pm

Trans-boundary Case History Aaron Wolf/OSU Examples of Trans-boundary Agreements Aaron Wolf/OSU Applications in the South Caucasus Aaron Wolf/OSU

Discussion of Issues Participants 5. SUMMARY OF SEMINAR 4:00 pm

Summary from a National Perspective Malcolm Baldwin/DAI Summary from an International Perspective Aaron Wolf/OSU Suggested Continuing Activities USAID Discussion of Issues Participants

__________________________________________________________________________________________

July 1, 2002 D244C

of 4


LIST OF INVITEES

ARMENIA

Ministry of Nature Protection of Armenia Mr. Alfred Nersisyan Director Water Resources Management and Protection Agency Ministry of Nature Protection of Armenia 35 Moskovian Street Yerevan 375002 Armenia Tel: (374-1) 531-181, Fax: (374-1) 531-861 Mr. Georgi Arzumanyan Head, Department of International Cooperation Ministry of Nature Protection of Armenia 35 Moskovian Street Yerevan 375002 Armenia Tel: (374-1) 531-861, Fax: (374-1) 531-861 Mr. Vladimir Narimanyan Head, Department of Water Protection of Armenia Ministry of Nature Protection of Armenia 35 Moskovian Street Yerevan 375002 Armenia Tel: (374-1) 532-832, Fax: (374-1) 151-959 State Committee of Water System Mr. Gagik Ayvazyan Deputy Chairman State Committee of Water System 13a Varanants Street Yervevan 375010 Armenia Tel: (374-1) 540-135, Fax: (374-1) 540-264 Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring Agency Mr. Guennadi S. Kojoyan Head of Department Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring Agency 54 Leo Street Yerevan 375002 Armenia Tel: (374-1) 532-001, Fax: (374-1) 533-575 Mr. Vilik Sargsyan Head Department of Hydrology Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring Agency 54 Leo Street Yerevan 375002 Armenia Tel: (374-1) 532-001, Fax: (374-1) 533-575 Ms. Tamara Hovhannisyan Director Environmental Monitoring Center 29 Komitas Street Yerevan 375012 Armenia Tel: (374-1) 272-007, Fax: (374-1) 151-959

National Academy of Sciences Mr. Armen K. Saghatelyan Director Center for Ecological-Noosphere Studies National Academy of Sciences 68 Abovyan Street Yerevan 375025 Armenia TEL: (374-1) 569-331, FAX: (374-1) 580-254 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ US Agency for International Development Dr. Michael L. Boyd Senior Energy Policy Advisor Office of Economic Restructuring & Energy US Agency for International Development 18 Baghramian Avenue Yerevan, Armenia Tel: (374-1) 529-975, Fax: (374-1) 543-871 Ms. Marina Vardanyan Project Management Specialist Office of Economic Restructuring & Energy US Agency for International Development 18 Baghramian Avenue Yerevan, Armenia Tel: (374-1) 529-975, Fax: (374-1) 543-871 Donor Organizations Mr. Adibek Ghazaryan Director Irrigation Rehabilitation Project The World Bank - IDA 13 Vardanants Street Yerevan 375010 Armenia Tel: (374-1) 540-642, Fax: (374-1) 540-472 Other Contractors Mr. Tigran Yeghyan Project Deputy Director Sustainable Resources Management Project Associates in Rural Development, Inc. 7 Alikhanyan Street, 1st Lane Yerevan 375019 Armenia Tel: (374-1) 545-106, Fax: (374-1) 544-976 Development Alternatives, Inc. Mr. Vahagn Tonoyan Water Advisor/Armenia Development Alternatives, Inc. American University Armenia Center 9 Alex Manukian Street, Suite 207 Yerevan 375070 Armenia Tel: (374-1) 512-066, Fax: (374-1) 512-068

of 4


LIST OF INVITEES

AZERBAIJAN Parliament (Milli Mejlis) of Azerbaijan Ms. Asya Manafova Chairwoman Commission on Natural Resources, Energy, and the Environment Parliament (Milli Mejlis) of Azerbaijan 1 Parliamentary Avenue Baku 370152 Baku Tel: (994-12) 989-796, Fax: (994-12) 989-719 Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of Azerbaijan Ms. Maya Adigozalova Lead Specialist Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of Azerbaijan 50 Moskva Avenue Baku 370154 Azerbaijan Tel: (994-12) 483-954, Fax: (994-12) 925-907 Mr. Sahib Khalilov Chief Engineer, National Meteorological Service Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of Azerbaijan 50 Moskva Avenue Baku 370151 Azerbaijan Tel: (994-12) 415-138, Fax: (994-12) 415-685 Ms. Matanat Avazova Chief Engineer, Monitoring Services Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of Azerbaijan 50 Moskva Avenue Baku 370151 Azerbaijan Tel: (994-12) 415-138, Fax: (994-12) 415-685 Mr. Asif Verdiyev Head, Hydrological Forecast Department National Meteorological Service Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of Azerbaijan 50 Moskva Avenue Baku 370073 Azerbaijan Tel: (994-12) 415-138, Fax: (994-12) 415-685 Azerbaijan Committee on Water Amelioration Mr. Mammad Asadov, Head of Scientific Department Azerbaijan Committee on Water Amelioration 40 Uzeir Hagibeyov Street Baku 370016 Azerbaijan Tel. (994-12) 938-011, Fax: (994-12) 931-176 Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences Mr. Mahmud Kerimov President Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences 29 A H. Javid Avenue Baku 370143 Azerbaijan Tel: (994-12) 923-529, Fax: (994-12) 925-699

Baku State University Mr. Farda Imanov Professor Hydrometerological Department Baku State University 2-nd Yeni Yasamal, House 5, Apartment 85 Baku 370012 Azerbaijan Tel: (994-12) 474-068, Fax: (994-12) 983-376 Non-Governmental Organization Mr. Rajab Mammadov Deputy Director ECORES Env ironmental Agency 157/23 Sh. Azizbeyov Street Baku 370134 Azerbaijan Tel: (994-12) 951-223, Fax: (994-21) 983-181 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ US Embassy/USAID Mr. Richard McCrensky Regional Energy Officer Embassy of the United States of America 83 Azadlig Avenue Baku 370007 Azerbaijan Tel: (994-12) 980-335, Fax: (994-12) 906-671 Mr. William McKinney Country Coordinator US Agency for International Development 83 Azadlig Avenue Baku 370007 Azerbaijan Tel: (994-12) 980-335, Fax: (994-12) 906-671 Donor Organizations Mr. Timothy Turner Programme Coordinator Caspian Environmental Programme Government Building, Room 108 40 Uzeir Hadjibeyov Street Baku 370016 Azerbaijan Tel: (994-12) 938-003, Fax: (994-12) 971-786 Development Alternatives, Inc. Mr. Rafig Verdiyev Water Advisor/Azerbaijan Development Alternatives, Inc. Caspian Business Center, 40 Jafar Jabbarli Street, Suite 604 Baku 370000 Azerbaijan; Tel: (994-12) 475-204, Fax: (994-12) 475-208

of 4


LIST OF INVITEES

GEORGIA

Parliament of Georgia Mr. Giorgi Lazarashvili Chairman of Subcommittee on Natural Resources Environmental Protection & Natural Resources Committee Parliament of Georgia 8 Rustaveli Avenue Tblisi 3280018 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 933-346, Fax: (995-32) 987-345 Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources Protection of Georgia Ms. Nino Chkhobadze Minister Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources Protection of Georgia 68a Kostava Street Tblisi 380015 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 230-664, Fax: (995-32) 983-425 Mr. Zaal Lomtadze Deputy Minister Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources Protection of Georgia 68a Kostava Street Tblisi 380015 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 331-575, Fax: (995-32) 333-952 Mr. Tamaz Tsholokava Head of Water Protection Department Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources Protection of Georgia 68a Kostava Street Tblisi 380015 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 334-082, Fax: (995-32) 333-952 State Department of Hydrometeorology of Georgia Mr. Nikoloz Beradze Chairman State Department of Hydrometeorology of Georgia 150 Agmashenebeli Street Tblisi 380012 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 953-682, Fax: (995-32) 955-006 Mr. Givi Gigineishvili Deputy Head State Department of Hydrometeorology of Georgia 150 Agmashenebeli Street Tblisi 380012 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 950-253, Fax: (995-32) 955-006 Mr. Gia Kordzakhia Head of Policy and International Relationship Department State Department of Hy drometeorology of Georgia 150 Agmashenebeli Street Tblisi 380012 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 953-682, Fax: (995-32) 955-006

Tblisi State University Mr. Nodar P. Kekelidze Head of Material Research Department Iv. Javakhishvili State University 1 Chachavadze Avenue Tblisi 380028 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 221-100, Fax: (995-32) 232-689 Non-Governmental Organization Mr. Nato Kirvalidze Executive Director The Regional Environmental Centre for the Caucasus 74 Chachavadze Street, Room 804 Tblisi 380062 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 253-649, Fax: (995-32) 253-649 US Embassy/USAID Mr. Michael Farbman Caucasus Mission Director US Agency for International Development 20 Telavi Street, Fifth Floor Tblisi 380003 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 778-540, Fax: (995-32) 001-013 Mr. Peter S. Argo Director Office of Energy & Environment US Agency for International Development 20 Telavi Street, Fifth Floor Tblisi 380003 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 778-540x161, Fax: (995-32) 001-013 Mr. Sanath K. Reddy Program Officer Office of Program and Project Support US Agency for International Development 20 Telavi Street, Fifth Floor Tblisi 380003 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 778-540, Fax: (995-32) 001-013 Ms. Tamuna Barabadze Project Development Specialist Office of Energy & Environment US Agency for International Development 20 Telavi Street, Fifth Floor Tblisi 380003 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 778-540x135, Fax: (995-32) 001-013 Ms. Bonnie Gutman Regional Environmental Officer US Department of State Embassy of the United States of America 110 Ataturk Bulvan Ankara, Turkey 06688 Tel: (90-312) 455-5555x2198, Fax: (90-312) 468-6138

of 4

Donor Organizations Mr. Markus Duerst Counsellor for International Cooperation Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation 12 Radiani Street Tblisi 380079 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 253-682, Fax: (995-32) 253-684 Ms. Darejan Kapanadze Operations Officer The World Bank 18A Chankadze Street Tblisi, Georgia Tel: (995-32) 942-213, Fax: (995-32) 995-288 Ms. Keti Chachibaia Environmental Programme Manger United Nations Development Programme 9 Eristavi Street Tblisi 380079 Georgia Tel: (994-32) 998-558, Fax: (995-32) 250-271 Other Contractors Mr. George Zarubin Regional Director The Eurasia Foundation 3 Kavsadze Street Tblisi 380079 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 223-264, Fax: (995-32) European Union Mr. Andrew Huckbody EU Advisor NEAP2 Programme 68a Kostava Street Tblisi 380015 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 225-774, Fax: (995-32) 225-774 Mr. Rieks Bosch Team Leader Joint River Management/Kura River Programme 7 Abashidze Street Tblisi 380079 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 250-955, Fax: (995-32) 250-955 Ms. Inessa Kuzanova Deputy Team Leader Joint River Management/Kura River Programme 7 Abashidze Street Tblisi 380079 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 250-955, Fax: (995-32) 250-955

Development Alternatives, Inc. Mr. Ramaz Gokhelashvili Water Advisor/Georgia Development Alternatives, Inc. 14 Paliashvili Street Tblisi 380079 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 231-077, Fax: (995-32) 274-896 Ms. Ekaterina Otarashvili Policy & Legal Specialist Development Alternatives, Inc. 14 Paliashvili Street Tblisi 380079 Georgia Tel: (995-32) 231-077, Fax: (995-32) 274-896 Mr. Aaron Wolf Associate Professor of Geography Oregon State University, Department of Geosciences 104 Wilkinson Hall Corvallis, Oregon 97331-5506 Tel: (1-541) 737-2722, Fax: (1-541) 737-1200 Mr. M alcolm F. Baldwin Environmental Law Specialist 39595 Weatherlea Farm Lane Lovettsville, Virginia 20180 Tel. (1-540) 822 5097, Fax: (1-540) 822-5141 Mr. Paul C. Dreyer Representative Development Alternatives, Inc. 14 Paliashvili Street Tblisi 380079 Georgi a Tel: (995-32) 231-077, Fax: (995-32) 274-896

July 5, 2002 D244D

___________________________________________________________________________

14 Paliashvili Street, Tblisi 380079 Georgia AUA Center Building; 9 Alex Manukian Street, Suite 207; Yerevan 375070 Armenia Caspian Business Center; 40 Jafar Jabbarli Street, Suite 604; Baku 370000 Azerbaijan


Project: Water Management in the South Caucasus (Phase II) Start Date: August 2001 Duration: Eighteen Months Contractor: Development Alternatives, Inc. (DAI)

Background USAID contracted with DAI to help address water resources management in the Kura-Aras River basin in the South Caucasus among the riparian countries of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia that have a wide variety of cultures, politics, and natural resources. Phase I was concluded in April 2001, and included a Needs Assessment and recommendations for activities to be implemented in Phase II.

Objectives The objective of Phase II of the project is the implementation of a series of technical activities on issues pertaining to the management of trans-boundary water resources in the Kura-Aras River basin. These Phase II activities are intended to result in improved water management in the South Caucasus.

Activities The Phase II activities are organized from a regional office in Tblisi, Georgia, and include meetings with representatives from institutions in the public sector, the private sector, NGOs and the donor community in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. Five inter-related activities identified in Phase I are being implemented to demonstrate the benefits from better management of the river basin. Team members are working in the region in bi-lateral settings to identify the critical issues and to continue the dialogue with stakeholders on the technical components of these water management activities. These activities are scheduled to be completed in January 2003. Outcomes

The Phase II project activities are being implemented in five specific categories: • Monitor water quantity and quality in the Kura-Aras River basin, • Develop a framework for a geographic information system (GIS), • Promote data and information exchange to facilitate water management, • Initiate a process for building capacity for integrated river basin planning, and • Initiate a process for an improved legal framework for co-riparian management. The intended outcome is an increase in the quality and quantity of key information that encourages a regional dialogue leading to enhanced water management in the region. A Final Report will be issued with the results of the principal activities being implemented, and will include long-term plans for basin management as well as a concept paper on the legal aspects of integrated basin management. All activities in this project will be implemented in accordance with United States Government restrictions on recipients of assistance.

D104A

of 2

NEAP2 Programme 68a Kostava Street Tbilisi 380015 Georgia Tel. +995 32 225 774 E-mail: [email protected]

SUPPORT FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES and NEAPs in the NIS Project Number : SCRE/111232/C/SV/WW Country: Newly Independent States (NIS) A Consortium of: BCEOM Société Française d’Ingénierie,

HALCROW GROUP LTD., and COWI Consulting Engineers and Planners AS

Period: September 2001 - February 2003 Project Objectives in Georgia The wider objective of the project in Georgia is to improve the capacity of the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Natural Resources of Georgia (MoE) in the area of the implementation of environmental policies through increasing the effectiveness of economic instruments and strengthening environmental compliance and enforcement. This remains an important issue in the country and is adversely affected by an overly complicated system of environmental permitting and the inherent weaknesses of compliance and enforcement in practice. The MoE would like to see improvements in this area, and this aspect is inextricably linked to reform of environmental taxation, which is the subject of the project main subtask for Georgia. The main objectives of the project are:

• To assist the implementation of measures recommended by the NEAP on the improvements of the environmental pollution and natural resource use tax system;

• To support MoE in strengthening of environmental compliance and enforcement focusing on

water sector in Georgia by providing: - review and training in Environmental Permitting and Water Quality Standards, - evaluate/address the weaknesses of current water management policies and permitting

system in a practical case study (the ongoing Integrated River Basin Management Planning project); and

• To strengthen the linkages between the environment sector and other sectors of the Georgian

economy and government institutions to establish improved dialogue for the operation of these linkages by providing:

- Cross-training for Ministries of Environment, Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Economy

- Establishment of an Inter-Ministerial Working Group/Committee - Industrial NGOs round table workshop to discuss environmental quality objectives.

The main goal of the subtask will be to test various environmental taxation mechanisms in Georgia and propose any necessary changes that might be made concerning the taxes themselves, as well as with regard to other tools in the respective policy packages (especially concerning the regulatory structure associated with these taxes, for example, with regard to the Georgia Tax Code).

of 2

The key focus for ad hoc activities relate to environmental permitting and water quality standard setting. The provision of training and guidance is aimed to assist with moving towards the EU style of environmental permitting, with a reduced complexity towards an integrated approach. The general support and guidance has been carefully devised to maximize linkages with ongoing or proposed initiatives in the water sector, which include integrated river basin management and water quality standards. Project Objectives in Azerbaijan The objective of the project in Azerbaijan is to improve the capacity of the MENR, particularly its ability to develop and implement environmental policy. The immediate objectives are threfore:

• to target the Environmental Policy Department within MENR to evaluate and strengthen their personal and institutional capacity for environmental policy formulation and its implementa-tion, taking into consideration all relevant legislative, regulatory and economic mechanisms;

• to strengthen the linkages between the environmental sector and other sectors of the

Azerbaijanian economy and Government institutions and to establish improved dialogue for the operation of these linkages; and

• To provide training and awareness of Environmental Management Systems (ISO14001) in

conjunction with BP, representing the ‘way forward’ for integrated management and operation by industry and to serve as a role model for the industrial sector both existing and future.

Project Objectives in Armenia The objective of the project in Armenia is to:

• To review and revise the institutional, legislative arrangements and the licensing procedures

that form part of Armenia’s permitting system for the water sector and to prepare package of recommendations for developing new national water quality standards,

• To contribute to the strengthening of institutional capacity of the State Environmental

Inspectorate and the new Water Resources Management Agency of the Ministry of Nature Protection,

• To design follow up projects on financing and institutional capacity building,

• To support dialogue between Ministries of Nature Protection (MoNP) and Finance and

Economy (MoFE) and to provide ad-hoc advice to MoNP, and

• To support on going work on economic tools development. PROJECT DETAILS : Andy Huckbody, NEAP2 EU Advisor for Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan & Turkmenistan

Tbilisi, Georgia Tel/Fax: +995 32 225 774 or 995 32 290 853 Mobile: +995 77 745 732 Email: [email protected]

of 2

Caspian Environment Programme (CEP) Programme Coordination Unit 40 Uzeir Hadjibeyov Street, Room 108, 3rd Entrance Baku 370016 Azerbaijan Tel. +994 12 971 785 or 938 003 E-mail: [email protected] CASPIAN ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME Countries: Azerbaijan, Islamic Republic of Iran, Kazakhstan, Russian Federation, and

Turkmenistan Funding Sources: EU Tacis, UNDP, the World Bank, Ecotox, local governments, and UNEP

Implementing Agency: UNDP, UNEP, the World Bank Period: July 1999 - June 2003 Project Website: www.caspianenvironment.org Regional Programme The Caspian Environment Programme (CEP) is a regional programme developed for and by the five Caspian Littoral States, Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Russia and Turkmenistan, aiming to halt the deterioration of environmental conditions of the Caspian Sea and to promote sustainable development in the area. The need for joint protection and management of the Caspian environment and its resources has been an ongoing issue for the Caspian States. In particular, since the collapse of the Soviet Union (1991) there has been heightened awareness of such a need. So, the CEP born out of a long desire for regional cooperation, expressed through a number of regional agreements since 1991:

• A draft Convention on the Conservation and Utilisation of Bioresources of the Caspian; • The Baku Resolution, June, 1991; • The Tehran Communique, October 1992; • The Astrakhan Communique, October 1993; • The Declaration on Environmental Cooperation in the Caspian, Almaty, May 1994; • The Protocol of the Meeting on Programmes for the Protection of the Environment in the

Caspian Region, Almaty, 1994; • The report of the joint meeting of the task force and TDA experts, Almaty, 1997; • National reports on the state of the Caspian, 1998; • Report of TDA Experts Meeting (including Framework TDA), Tehran, April, 1998; and • Decisions of the First Meeting of the Interim Steering Committee of the CEP, Ramsar 1998.

During the Ramsar meeting held in the Islamic Republic of Iran in May 1998, the CEP was officially launched. The CEP addresses multiple environmental and bioresource issues, falling into various thematic areas. The CEP focuses on:

• Effective Regional Intersectoral (public and private sector) Coordination and Environmental Management;

• Public Awareness and Involvement in the CEP, including the National Caspian Action Plans (NCAP) and regional Strategic Action Programme (SAP);

• Regional Data and Information Management Systems; • Regional Assessment of Contaminant Levels; • Trans-boundary Biodiversity Priorities; • Sustainable Management of Fish Resources and Other Commercially Exploited Aquatic

Bioresources; • Integrated Trans-boundary Coastal Area Planning and Management;

of 2

• Combating Coastal Desertification and Land Degradation; • Sustainable Human Development and Health; • Regional Emergency Response Actions; • Institutional, Legal, Regulatory, and Economic Frameworks for SAP implementation; • Strengthen Contaminant Abatement and Control Policies and Procedures; and • Priority Investment Portfolios for Tran-boundary Priorities.

The CEP is funded by the International community through the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) (of which United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Bank are the implementing agencies), the European Union / Tacis and the growing participation of the private sector. This programme and project support will assist in securing a full implementation of the CEP during the first four years. In the course of these years other projects may apply to be included under the CEP umbrella, and decisions as to their inclusion will be made on a project-by-project basis. The first four years (July 1998 to June 2002) of activities within the CEP focuses on the production and endorsement of:

• Establishment of the Project Coordination Unit and the Caspian Regional Thematic Centers / Themes

• Trans-boundary Diagnostic Analysis • National Caspian Action Plans • Strategic Action Programme • Priority Investment Portfolio • Framework Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Caspian Sea

The Caspian Environment Programme (CEP) is governed by a Steering Committee composed of representatives, typically at the Ministerial or Deputy-Ministerial level, from each of the five Caspian littoral states. In addition, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the World Bank (WB), The European Union/Technical Assistance to the Commonwealth of Independent States (EU/Tacis), and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) are members of the Steering Committee. The Steering Committee is the Governing and Policy-Making body of the CEP. The Steering Committee meets at least once a year in its ordinary meetings, but may hold additional meetings at the request of the Steering Committee Chairman. Representatives of the private sector, public and non-governmental organizations are often invited to participate as observers. The Steering Committee Chairman, Mr. Matkarim Radjapov, Minister of Environment of the Republic of Turkmenistan. He serves from October 2001 through October 2002. The Steering Committee decides on policy and governance questions, reviews Work Plans for the CEP and discusses new projects and their relationship with the CEP. A new project that focuses on the Caspian Sea may decide to either become a part of the CEP, or just to liaise closely with the CEP through the Programme Coordination Unit. Regardless of the definition, all environmental Projects operating within the Caspian region are encouraged to liaise closely with the Programme Coordination Unit. PROJECT DETAILS:

Azerbaijan: Mr. Gouseyn Bagirov, Minister of Ecology Contact: Rasim Sattarzadeh, Tel. +994-12 924 173, E-mail: [email protected]

Iran: Dr. M.S.Hosseini Emani, General Director of Marine Environment Research Bureau Contact: Dr. Parvin Farshchi, Tel. +98-21 8808 876, Email: [email protected]

Kazakhstan: Dr. Andar Shuputov, Ministry of Environment Protection and Natural Resources Contact: Ms. Ludmila Shabanova, Tel. +7-31622 54265, Email: [email protected] Russia: Dr. Amirkhan M. AmirKhanov, Head of the Environment Department, Ministry of Natural Resources Contact: Ms. Tatyana Butylina, Tel. +095 124 0471, Email: [email protected] Turkmenistan: Dr. Matkarim Radjapov, Minister, Ministry of Nature Protection of Turkmenistan Contact: Mr. Gozel Orazdyrdiyeva, Tel. +993-12 393 737, Email: [email protected]

of 1

Tacis Joint River Management Project - Kura Basin Paliashvili Street 72, Apt. 3, 1st entrance Tbilisi, Georgia Tel. +995 32 291 219 E-mail: [email protected]

JOINT RIVER MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME

Monitoring and Assessment of Water Quality on Transboundary Rivers - Kura Basin

Rivers are essential parts of the ecosystem, and if they are poisoned, then the whole of nature suffers. Water is not only the source of nature but too an essential economic resource. Main part of our social and economic life, like water supply, power supply, agriculture, fishery, industry and even our sewage systems is depending on good quality fresh water. In the Southern Caucasus, one of the cornerstones of the ecosystem is the River Mtkvari.

The Tacis Joint River Management Project is concerned with the monitoring and assessment of transboundary waters as step towards integral river basin management, for four international rivers, Mtkvari among them. The European Commission’s 1999 Tacis Interstate Programme funds the project.

On March 25, in Tbilisi, the project held a regional workshop, “Introduction to Joint River Management – Kura Basin”. At the workshop, participants from Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia discussed common objectives in monitoring strategy development and information management, to link monitoring again with water related policy and information needs of water users.

The aim of the project is to introduce and test, in the practice of river management, “Guidelines on Monitoring and Assessment of Transboundary Rivers”, which have been prepared within the framework of the Helsinki Convention. The project started in January 2002 and will continue for the next two years. The project has a budget of 4 million euro, of which 1 million will be allocated for the purchase of equipment.

The Helsinki Convention on The Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes defines the principles of management of international freshwaters. An essential requirement is an accurate assessment of water quality in each transboundary zone on which both countries can agree.

The project will demonstrate the application of the guidelines in the river basins, evaluate the present local practices and recommend cost effective improvements on to them. As part of the project, managerial and technical staff will be trained on river basin management, modern systems for monitoring and assessing water quality.

Besides Mtkvari, the project involves three other international rivers: the Seversky-Donetz, Tobol, and Pripyat, all included in a group of eight European transboundary rivers that form part of the Guidelines’ pilot programme.

If everything goes to plan, the project will help to reduce water pollution and ensure that better quality water is made available to consumers. The project should also stimulate an exchange of information between the participating countries and inform the public about water conditions.

The Tacis Joint River Management project on monitoring transboundary waters will help to reduce water pollution in the Mtkvari basin - a cornerstone of the South Caucasian social, economic and ecosystem.

PROJECT DETAILS:

Team Leader: Rieks Bosch Tel. +995 99 157 798 m/ Tel. +995 32 250 955 h E-mail: [email protected]

Deputy Team Leader: Inessa Kuzanova Tel. +995 77 731 132 m / Tel. +995 32 232 083 h

Country Coordinator - Armenia : Kamo Aghababyan 39 Tumanian Street, Yerevan; Tel. +374 9 419416 m E-mail: [email protected]

Country Coordinator - Aze rbaijan: Farda Imanov 32 Ac. Z. Khalilov Street, Baku; Tel. +994 50 346 2686 m E-mail: [email protected]


Page 1 of 2

Table 1

LAWS ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND WATER MANAGEMENT IN ARMENIA

No.

Name

In Force

Last Amendment

1

Law on Specially Protected Natural Areas

17 December 1991

No amendment

2 Law on The RA Code on Underground 19 March 1992 No amendment 3 Law on The RA Forestry Code 01 November 1994 No amendment 4 Law on Atmospheric Air Protection 01 November 1994 28 April 2001 5 Law on Environmental Impact Expertise 03 April 2000 No amendment 6 Law on Nature Use and Nature Protection Fees 01 January 1999 05 December 2000

15 May 2001 7 Law on Flora 23 November 1999 No amendment 8 Law on Protection and Quarantine of Plants 20 March 1999 No amendment 9 Law on Fauna 03 April 2000 No amendment 10 Law on Rates of Nature Protection Fees 19 April 2000 05 December 2000 11 The RA Land Code 04 June 2001 02 April 2002 12 Law on Ecological Education of Population 20 November 2001 No amendment 13 Law on Lake Sevan 15 May 2001 No amendment 14 Law on Securing Sanitary Epidemiological Security of the Population 16 November 1992 No amendment 15 Law on Medical Help and Support of Population 04 March 1996 18 December 2000 16 Law on Activities of State Agricultural Inspections 15 May 1996 No amendment 17 Law on Use of Air Space 16 April 1997 No amendment 18 Law on Energy 09 June 1997 No amendment 19 Law on Medicines 27 October 1998 No amendment 20 Law on Protection and Use of Historic and Cultural Monuments and

Historic Environment 11 November 1998 No amendment

21 Law on Protection of Population in Emergency Cases 02 December 1998 No amendment 22 Law on Safe Use of Nuclear Power for Peaceful Purposes 01 February 1998 No amendment 23 Law on Veterinary 26 October 1999 No amendment 24 Law on Protection of Selection Achievements 23 November 1999 No amendment 25 Law on Food Security 08 December 1999 No amendment 26 Law on Fire Security 18 April 2001 No amendment 27 Law on Hydro - meteorological Activity 07 February 2001 26 April 2002 28 Law on Purposeful Use of Nature Protection Fees Paid by Organizations 15 May 2001 14 December 2001 29 Law on Geodesy and Cartography 02 May 2001 No amendment 30 Law on Water Users' Associations and Federations of Water Users'

Associations 04 June 2002

31 Water Code Adopted by the National Assembly on 04 June 2002 and in effect after three months. The current code was adopted on 23 March 1992

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Note: The information provided in this table was prepared by Development Alt ernatives, Inc. for the Water Management in the South Caucasus Project funded by the US Agency for International Development.


Page 2 of 2

Table 1A

LEGIS LATIVE ACTS, AFFECTING WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT IN ARMENIA

No.

Name

No

Date

1

Rules on Irrigation Water Supply, Use and Record The RA Government

Decision ? 418

July 27, 2000

2 On Reforms of Management System of Water Economy The RA Government

Decision ? 92 February 9, 2001

3 On Irrigation Water Supply, Recording, Efficient Use and Support of Measures for Collecting Fees The RA Government

Decision ? 232 March 22, 2001

4 On Technical Requirements Represented to Water Meters of Drinking Waters The RA Government

Decision ? 84 May 31, 1999

5 On Regulation of Import, Export and Transit Transfer of Hazardous and Other Wastes The RA Government

Decision ? 97 December 8, 1995

6 On Rates of Nature Protection Fees (has the force of law) The RA Government

Decision ? 864 December 31, 1998

7 On Determination of Actual Extent of the Object for Nature Use and Nature Protection Fees The RA Government

Decision ? 340 May 25, 1999

8 Order of Control over Registration and Payment of Nature Use and Nature Protection Fees The RA Government

Decision ? 419 July 10, 1999

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Note: The information provided in this table was prepared by Development Alternatives, Inc. for the Water Management in the South Caucasus Project funded by the US Agency for International Development.


Page 1 of 2

Table 2

LAWS ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND WATER MANAGEMENT IN AZERBAIJAN

No.

Name

In Force

Last Amendment

1 Water Code

17 March 1998

No Amendments

2 Law on Environmental Protection 10 August 1999 30 March 2001 3 Law on Environmental Safety 14 August 1999 No Amendments 4 Law on Amelioration And Irrigation 26 September1996 No Amendments 5 Law on Water Supply and Waste Waters 31 January 2000 No Amendments 6 Law on Hydrometeorological Activities 25 August 1998 No Amendments 7 Law on Bowels of the Earth 13 February 1998 01 December 2001 8 Law on Protection of Atmospheric Air 22 June 2001 No Amendments 9 Forest Code 03 March 1998 No Amendments 10 Law on Plants Protection 30 January 1997 No Amendments 11 Law on Plants Quarantine 12 July 1996 07 February 1998 12 Law on Fauna 08 August 1999 No Amendments 13 Law on Fish-farm 24 June1998 No Amendments 14 Law on Extra-Specifically Protected Natural Territories and Objects 15 July 2000 No Amendments 15 Law on Domestic Wastes 28 October 1998 No Amendments 16 Law on Radiation Safety 01 April1998 01 December 2001 17 Law on Obligatory Ecological Insurance 21 March2002 No Amendments 18 Law on Public Data on Environment 20 March 2002 No Amendments 19 Law on Population Health 31 July 1997 No A mendments 20 Law on Sanitary -Hygienic State 10 November 1992 20 February 2001 21 Law on Land Code 08 August 1999 No Amendments 22 Law on Pesticides and Agricultural Chemicals 02 August 1997 No Amendments 23 Law on Geodesy and cartography 22 July 1998 No Amendments 24 Law on State Border 09 December 1991 No Amendments 25 Law on Utilization of Energy Resources 20 Novemeber

1996 No Amendments

26 Law on Energy 02 February 1999 No Amendments 27 Law on Electro Energy 14 June 1998 No Amendments 28 Law on Electric and Thermal Power Plants 11 March 2000 No Amendments 29 Law on Gas Supply 29 September 1998 No Amendments 30 Law on Technical Safety 02 February 2000 No Amendments 31 Law on Major Town-Planning 05 September 1999 No Amendments 32 Law on Architecture 20 June 1998 No Amendments 33 Law on Natural Monopoly 13 March 1999 No Amendments 34 Laws on Standardization 27 September 1996 No Amendments 35 Tax Code 01 January 2001 No Amendments

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Note: The information provided in this table was prepared by Development Alternatives, Inc. for the Water Management in the South Caucasus Project funded by the US Agency for International Development.


Page 2 of 2

Table 2A LEGISLATIVE ACTS, AFFECTING WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT IN AZERBAIJAN

No.

Name

No.

Date

1

On Application of the Water Code President of Azerbaijan Republic

Decree ? 685

13 March 1998

2 On Application of Law on Hydrometeorological Activity President of Azerbaijan Republic

Decree ? 747 19 August 1998

3 On Application of Law on Melioration and Irrigation President of Azerbaijan Republic

Decree ? 492 14 September 1996

4 Regulation on Implementation of the State Control on Exploitation and Protection of Water Objects The Cabinet of Ministers of Azerbaijan Republic

Res. ? 195 25 September 1998

5 Regulation on Determination of the Category of Extra-Protected Water Objects The Cabinet of Ministers of Azerbaijan Republic

Res. ? 77 1 May 2000

6 Regulation on Determination of Location for Enterprises, Buildings and other Objects, Co-ordination of Construction Projects, State Expertise and Commission The Cabinet of Ministers of Azerbaijan Republic

Res. ? 197 28 September 1998

7 Regulation on Control of Measuring Facilities, and Natural Environment and Hydrometeorogy Monitoring Data Certificate The Cabinet of Ministers of Azerbaijan Republic

Res. ? 205 15 October 1998

8 Regulation on Appliance of Water Legislation of Azerbaijan Republic The Cabinet of Ministers of Azerbaijan Republic

Res. ? 206 15 October 1998

9 Approval of Utilization of Water Objects in Recreational Purposes The Cabinet of Ministers of Azerbaijan Republic

Res. ? 216 22 October 1998

10 On Normative-legal Acts on Hydrometeorologies and Monitoring of Natural Environment The Cabinet of Ministers of Azerbaijan Republic

Res. ? 237 14 December 1998

11 On Application of Law on Hydrometeorological Activity The President of Azerbaijan Republic

Decree ? 103 13 February 1999

12 Order on Licensing of Hydrometeorological Activities The Cabinet of Ministers of Azerbaijan Republic

Res. ? 48 23 March 1999

13 Approval of Instructions on Observation, Preparation and Utilization of Materials on Limited and Public Data Category on Hydrometeorology and Natural Environment Monitoring The Cabinet of Ministers of Azerbaijan Republic

Res. ? 65 12 April 1999

14 Approval of Procedures and Categories of Payment on Data Utilization of Hydrometeorology and Natural Environment Monitoring”. The Cabinet of Ministers of Azerbaijan Republic

Res. ? 115 9 July 1999

15 On Application of Law on Water-supply and Waste Waters” The President of Azerbaijan Republic

Decree ? 267 26 January 2000

16 Regulations on State Registration of Water Resources The Cabinet of Ministers of Azerbaijan Republic

Res. ? 7 17 January 2000

17 Regulation on Determination and Utilization of Water Protection Territories, Coastal Protection Zone, Coordinates and Borders. The Cabinet of Ministers of Azerbaijan Republic

Res. ? 56 24 March 2000

18 Regulation on Utilization of Water Objects for Fish-breeding and Hunting Farms Purposes The Cabinet of Ministers of Azerbaijan Republic

Res. ? 82 8 May 2000

19 Regulation on Utilization of Water Objects for Hydropower Engineering Purposes The Cabinet of Ministers of Azerbaijan Republic

Res. ? 216 6 December 2000

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Note: The information provided in this table was prepared by Development Alternatives, Inc. for the Water Management in the South Caucasus Project funded by the US Agency for International Development.


Page 1 of 3

Table 3

LAWS ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND WATER MANAGEMENT IN GEORGIA

No.

Name

In Force

Last Amendment

1

Law on Water

16 October 1997

30 June 200

2 Law on Environmental Protection Permits 15 October 1996 No Amendments 3 Law on Environmental Protection 10 December 1996 30 June 2000 4 Law on Melioration of Lands 16 October 1997 21 December 2001 5 Law on Management and Protection of the Sea Coust and River Banks 27 October 2000 No Amendments 6 Law on State Ecological Expertise 15 October 1996 No Amendments 7 Law on Sanitary Protection of Health Resorts 02 March 1998 No Amendments 8 Law on Protection of Soil 12 May 1994 16 September 1997 9 Forest Code 22 June 1999 02 March 2001 10 Law on Underground Resources 17 May 1996 16 March 1999 11 Law on the Protection of Atmospheric Air 01 January 2000 20 June 2000 12 Law on Land Registration 14 October 1996 28 May 1999 13 Law on Ownership of Lands of Agricultural Use 22 March 1996 14 June 2000 14 Law on Fauna 25 December 1996 02 March 2001 15 Law on Protection of Plants from Harmful Organisms 12 October 1994 16 March 1999 16 Law of Agricultural Quarantine 15 May 1997 No Amendments 17 Law on Reimbursement for the non-Agricultural Use of Agricultural Lands and

Compensation of Damage. 02 October 1997 No Amendments

18 Law on Geodesy and Cartography 28 April 1998 28 May 1999 19 Law on Nuclear and Radioactive Security 30 October 1998 30 June 2000 20 Law on Pesticides and Agricultural Chemicals 25 November 1998 No Amendments 21 Law on Oil and Gas 16 April 1999 02 March 2001 22 Law on Mineral Resources 17 May 1996 16 March 1999 23 Law on Cattle Breeding 05 September 1996 No Amendments 24 Law on Protected Areas Systems 07 March 1996 No Amendments 25 Law on Transit and Import of Wastes on the Territory of Georgia 08 February 1995 16 October 1997 26 Law on Establishment and Management of Kolkheti Protected Areas 01 January 1999 09 September 1999 27 Marine Code 13 July 2000 No Amendments 28 Law on Social and Cultural-Economical Development of the Mountain Regions 08 June 1999 25 February 2000 29 Law on Construction, Function, Service, Maintenance and Operation of some

Oil Transportation Facilities and Legislative Principles of Import, Transportation, Storage and Export of Oil Carried out by these Facilities on the Territory of Georgia.

02 March 1996 No Amendments

30 Law on Expansion of territory of the Bordjomi-Kharagauli National Park. 28 March 2001 No Amendments 31 Law on the State Secrets 28 October 1996 19 March 1999 32 Law on Security of Hazardous Industrial Objects 10 December 1997 07 May 2002 33 Georgian Tax Code:

Article 10. Taxes for Usage of Natural Resources Article 11. Taxes for Compensation of Damage Caused by Use of Harmful Materials

34 Law on Electro Energy 27 June 1997 30 April 1999 35 Law on Compensation for Damage Caused by Utilization of Harmful Materials 23 July 1999 No Amendments 36 Laws on License Taxes 23 July 1999 16 March 2001 37 Law on Regulations on Export and Re-export of Ferrous and Non-ferrous

Metal, Scrap Metal, and Waste 26 June 1998 21 December 2001

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Note: The information provided in this table was prepared by Development Alternatives, Inc. for the Water Management in the South Caucasus Project funded by the US Agency for International Development.


Page 2 of 3

Table 3A

LEGISLATIVE ACTS, AFFECTING WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT IN GEORGIA

No.

Name

No.

Date

1 Regulation on Protection of Surface Water of Georgia from Pollution

Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection of Georgia Order #130 17 September 1996

2 Procedures for Estimation of Feasible Constrains on Collection of Polluted And Discharged Water, Flowing into Water Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection of Georgia

Order #105 8 December 1996

3 App Approval of Regulations on “Environmental Impact Assessment” And Instructions of Trunk Pipelines Projects Ministry of Environment And Natural Resources Protection of Georgia

Order #59 16 May 2002

4 Regulations of Sea and River Shores of Georgia and Regulations for Engineering Protection The Ministry of Urbanization and Construction

Order # 4 18 January 2002

5 Allocation of Budget Funds for Arrangement of the First Category Immediate Works in Duruji Riverbed President of Georgia

Decree #518 28 May 2001

6 Georgian Sea and River Shores Morph dynamic Scientific Research Institute “SANDI” President of Georgia

Decree #386 24 August 2000

7 Protection of the Black Sea Shore and River-banks of Georgia Against Erosion President of Georgia

Decree #72 6 February 1998

8 Approval of Surface Water Market Price The Ministry of Economy, Industry and Trade

Order # 67 15 December 2000

9 Exploitation Rules of Water Reservoirs for Irrigation purposes Ministry of Agriculture and Food Products

Order # 25 19 February 2001

10 Promotional Measures for Establishment of Water Users Associations President of Georgia

Decree #563 29 September 1999

11 Creation of the Commission for Studying Utilization Issues of Sulfur Hydrogen Existing in the Black Sea President of Georgia

Decree #467 7 August 1998

12 The License for Water Consumption and Water Products Manufacturing

A letter of Tax Office # 03-5-7

13 March 1998

13 Rates for Drinking Water and Waste Water Treatment Works Decision of Self Governance of Tbilisi

13 February 2002

14 Establishment of Governmental Agency – Legal Entity Under the Public Law - “Protection and Research- Consumption of the Black Sea Resources” President of Georgia

Decree #459 7 November 2001

15 Instruction on the Calculation of Taxes for Consumption of Natural Resources And Regulation for Tax Payment. State Tax Office

Order # 265 11 November 1999

16 Reimbursement of damages to State caused by Natural Resources Destruction on the territory of Tbilisi Tbilisi Municipal.

Order # 4 18 March 1998

17

Georgian Tax Code Taxes for Usage of Natural Resources

13 June 1997

18 Approval of Regulations and Structures of the Ministry of Environment And Natural Resources Protection of Georgia President of Georgia

Decree #230 17 March 1996

19 Conservation and Further Development of the Monitoring Sphere of Hydrometeorology and Environment Background Pollution in Georgia President of Georgia

Decree #477 24 November 2001

20 Approval of Regulations of Georgian State Department of Hydrometeorology, President of Georgia

. Decree #473

31 October 2000


Page 3 of 3

21

Protective Measures Against Dangerous Geological Process

Decree #322

26 July 2000

22 Regulations for Identification and Inventarization Rules for Permanent Polluters Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection

Order #69 27 August 2001

23 Estimation and Calculation of dissipation of hazardous substances from Permanent Polluters Instructions of the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection

Order # 66

27 August 2001

24 Investigation of the Black Sea Pollution Reasons with Oil and Oil Products And Creation of Committee for Remedy Actions President of Georgia

Decree #635 2 June 1999

25 Setting of Limits on Hazardous Pollution of Environment Tax Service of Georgia

Letter #5/16 30 September 1997

26 Establishment of the Center (Implementation of the World Bank’s Project (“Rehabilitation of Georgian Irrigation and Drainage Systems”) as a Legal Entity under Public Law, President of Georgia

Decree #203 25 May 2000

27 Approval of Wholesale Rate for 2002, for Water Supply and Drainage Works Carried Out by the State Melioration Systems under The Ministry of Agriculture of Georgia, The Ministry of Food and Agriculture

Order # 78 27 May 2002

28 Approval of Resolution on License for Extraction of Materials from Water Objects Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection

Order #74 6 June 2002

29 Approval of Resolution on License and Form of License for Utilization of Objects for Recreational Purposes

Order # 73 6 June 2002

Note: The information provided in this table was prepared by Development Alternatives, Inc. for the Water Management in the South Caucasus Project funded by the US Agency for International Development


Page 1 of 2

Table 4

INTERNATIONAL AND BILATERAL AGREEMENTS IN SOUTH CAUCASUS

No.

Name

Armenia

Azerbaijan

Georgia

1 Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar,1971)

X X X

2 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (London, 1973)

X X

3 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) Washington, D.C., 1973)

X X

4 Convention on Long-range Trans-boundary Air Pollution (Geneva, 1979) - Protocol on Heavy Metals - Protocol on persistent organic pollutants - Protocol on Abate Acidification, Eutrophication and ground-level Ozone Formation

X X X

5 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn, 1979)

X X

6 Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer (Vienna, 1985)

X X X

7 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal, 1987)

X X X

8 Convention on the Control of Trans-boundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (Basel, 1989)

X X X

9 London Amendment to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (London, 1990)

X X

10 Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Trans-boundary Context (Espoo, 1991)

X X

11 Convention on Biological Diversity (Rio de Janeiro, 1992) X X X 12 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (New York,

1992) X X X

13 Convention on the Protection of the Black Sea Against Pollution, (Bucharest, 1992)

X X

14 Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (Paris , 1972)

X X X

15 Convention for Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage (London, 1992)

X

16 Copenhagen Amendment to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Copenhagen, 1992)

X

17 Convention on the Trans-boundary Effects of Industrial Accidents (Helsinki, 1992)

X

18 Convention on Combat Desertification in those Countries Experiencing Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly Africa (Paris, 1994)

X X X

19 Agreement on the Conservation of African-Asian Migratory Water birds (The Hague, 1995)

X

20 Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans of the Mediterranean and Black Sea (Bonn, 1996)

X

21 Kyoto Protocol to Amend the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (Kyoto, 1997)

X X

22 Montreal Amendment to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal, 1997)

X X

23 Convention on Access to Public Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus, 1998)

X X X


Page 2 of 2

24

Convention on Protection and Use of Trans-boundary Watercourses and International Lakes - Protocol on Water and Health

X

X

25 Convention on plant protection( Roma , 1951) X 26 European Convention on Wildlife and Environment

protection( Bern 1979) X

27 Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemical and Pesticides in International Trade (Rotterdam)

X

28 Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (Stockholm) X 29 Memorandum of Understanding among the Ministry of

Environment of Georgia and the State Committee for Ecology and Natural Resources of Azerbaijan Republic on Collaboration in the Development and Implementation of the Pilot Project On Monitoring and Assessment in the Mtkvari/kura River Basin (1997)

X X

30 Agreement between the Governments of Georgia and Azerbaijan Republic on Geodesy, Cartography, Land Cadastres and Remote Sensing (1997)

X X

31 Agreement between the Governments of Georg ia and Azerbaijan Republic on Collaboration in the Environmental Protection (1997)

X X

31 Agreement between the Governments of Georgia and Armenia on Geodesy, Cartography and Remote Sensing (1993)

X X

32 Agreement between the Governments of Georgia and Armenia on Geodesy, Cartography and Geoinformation (1998)

X X

33 Agreement between the Governments of Georgia and Armenian Republic on Collaboration in the Environmental Protection (1997)

X X

34 Agreement between the Tbilisi City Hall and the Executive Authorities of Baku (1997)

X X

35 The Protocol on Results of Negotiation between the Governmental Delegations of Georgia and Republic of Azerbaijan on Water Resources Usage.(1997)

X X

36 Agreement between the Governments of Georgia and Armenian Republic on the Principles of the Water System Usage (1997)

X X

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Note: The information provided in this table was prepared by Development Alternatives, Inc. for the Water Management in the South Caucasus Project funded by the US Agency for International Development.

Republic of Armenia Page 1 of 4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE WATER CODE Chapter One: General Guidelines The Chapter first defines words important to the understanding of the law. The specific definitions of the terms of art used in this Code are based on international norms. Each term and definition is critical to the Code functioning properly and forms the basis for the entire legal framework. Critical definitions include: “Water Resources”: All water occurring on the surface or subterranean (subsurface); any stream, river, spring, wetland, lake, pond, snow pack, glacier, aquifer, and any other body of water, including seasonal water resources. “National Water Reserve”: The quality and quantity of water required to satisfy the basic human needs of people now and in the reasonably near future and to protect aquatic ecosystems and to secure ecologically sustainable development and use of the relevant Water Resource. “Water Use”: Removing water from or otherwise reducing water in a water resources; storing water; impeding or diverting the flow of a water resource; polluting a water resource; discharging wastewater into a water resource; disposing or storing waste in a manner that may detrimentally impact a water resource; and, altering the beds, banks, course or characteristics of a water resource. “Non-Competitive Water Supply System”: A system of hydrotechnical structures whose primary purpose is to supply the public with drinking water, wastewater treatment facilities, or irrigation services that represents the only available supplier of such services. “Pollution”: The direct or indirect alteration by human of the physical, chemical or biological properties of a water resources making it (1) less fit for any beneficial purpose for which it may reasonable be expected to be used; or, (2) harmful or potentially harmful to the welfare, health or safety of human beings; any aquatic or non-aquatic organisms; water body quality; or property. Pollution includes any accumulation in the water body articles foreign to the ecosystem in question. The Chapter next describes the law’s purposes. The main purpose is equitable distribution of water to satisfy basic human needs and promote ecological stability. The Chapter states the importance of conjunctive, integrated water management that incorporates the conservation of ground and surface water as well as associated ecosystems. Other objectives include creating a stable investment situation supported by water management based upon an understanding of water supply prior to water allocation. The section includes a statement of the “public trust doctrine” that clarifies the Government’s responsibility to “conserve” and properly manage water use for the benefit of all persons. The law recognizes “water use permits” as the primary regulatory tool for water use and protection, and “water system licenses” to regulate non-competitive water supply systems. Chapter Two: Water Resource Management Authorities The law recognizes three main government bodies to implement water resource management, protection and use management. First, the “Water Resources Management Agency” and its “Water Basin Management Authorities” manage, monitor and plan the conservation and use of all water resources. The Water Resources Management Agency controls water management and protection primarily by issuing mandatory “water use permits”. The second authority, the “Regulatory Commission”, oversees the quality of non-competitive public drinking water, water treatment and irrigation supply through the issuance of mandatory “water system licenses” that regulate both safety and tariff controls. The third authority, “State Water System Management Committee”, oversees state owned water delivery systems, established water user federations and ensures appropriate management of water systems by tendering private “management contracts”. In addition to these main implementing authorities, the law also creates an intersectoral advisory body, the “National Water Council, primarily tasked with reviewing the “National Water Policy” and “National Water Program”.


Chapter Three: Strategic Water Use Protection and Information Systems This Chapter describes the important ingredients to strategic water management and protection, and informed decision-making. The “National Water Policy” clarifies the objectives of water management and protection. The national water program “provides a strategy for water management by identifying problems and methods to remove these”. The Program classifies major water resources, establishes water quality standards and identifies critical habitats associated with water conservation and implements programs for their conservation. The Program states the finances required for water resources management and the potential impacts if money is not allocated. The “National Water Reserve”, and important component of the National Water Program, establishes the quantity of water that must remain within each stream, river or lake. The National Water Program identifies water basins for the establishment of “Water Basin Management Plans” to provide more specific management strategies for water basins with more advanced management requirements. As both a planning and reporting mechanism describing each year’s water resource management activity, the National Water Program will be submitted to the National Assembly annually. This chapter also establishes water resource monitoring systems to inform the decision-making process. Finally, the Chapter requires officials to facilitate public participation in the water management process and to disclose of any threats to human health or safety. Chapter Four: Water Use Permitting “Water Use Permitting” is the main legal instrument regulating the protection and allocation of water resources. A “water use permit” must be secured prior to engaging in any “water use” as defined be the Act. A single water use permit regulates both water extraction and any pollution discharge. The water use permits states the terms of water use, including all charges associated with both extraction and discharge. Each water use permit must conform with strategic management requirements such as the National Water Program, and water quality and quantity standards. The Water Resources Management Agency grants water use permits according to very clear procedures and criteria established within the Act. Chapter Five: Water System Licensing Any legal person acting as a non-competitive water supplier must acquire a “water system license” from the Regulatory Commission. Each water system license regulates (1) the right to operate a non-competitive water supply system (public drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities or irrigation water transport systems), (2) the tariffs that may be charges to consumer for associated water services, and (3) the quality of services provided. A water use permit is a prerequisite to a water systems license. This requirement helps to make certain that each water system license conforms with strategic management requirements. The Regulatory Commission allocation water system licenses according to very clear procedures and criteria established within the Act. Chapter Six: Use Management of Government Owned Water Systems The State Water Systems Management Committee is responsible for the management of state owned water systems (hydrotechnical structures). The law recognizes the importance of proper management of such systems, and provides the State Committee with the authority to seek out qualified private legal persons to serve as managers. There must be done through a process that is both competitive and transparent. State owned water systems must follow the water use permit and water systems licensing requirements of this Act. The “management contract” concluded between the State Committee and the private manager describes all terms and conditions, including the requirement by all parties to uphold any water use permit or water system license stipulations. Chapter Seven: Regulation of the Use of Transboundary Water Resources International Agreement may establish the norms for the protection of transboundary water resources and the Government may establish a committee for this purpose.


Chapter Eight: Water Resource Quality Standards The Water Resources Management Agency must establish water resource quality standards which preserve the quality of surface and ground waters. The water quality standards will be reviewed regularly and stated in the National Water Program. All water use must conform with water quality standards. Through water use permits, the Agency may specify wastewater discharge limits that a permit holder must meet. If such standards are higher than water use permit holder may reasonable achieve, the holders must devise and implement a legally biding plan that improves standards to the required levels within a five-year period. The Act also calls for the established by regulation of drinking water quality standards. Chapter Nine: Water User Associations The Law defines and recognizes the establishment of water user associations and federations. These non-profit organizations operate and maintain irrigation systems in the public interest and for the benefit of their members. Chapter Ten: Recording of Legal Documents To provide a record of the three main legal documents (water use permits, water system licenses and management contracts) the law requires that each document, as well as associated amendments and easements, be recorded in order to be legally binding. The two record depositories are the State Water Cadastre and State Land Cadastre. The Law provides clear instructions for recording methods and allows for public access and review of all recorded documents. Chapter Eleven: Economic Incentives and the System of Payment in Water Relations The Law relies upon four main economic instruments to provide incentives for protection of water quality and quantity. Each water use permit incorporates “water use permit fees”. These fees reflect all charges related to water extraction and discharge. The fees vary according to particular water uses as stated within the water use permit. The Water Resources Management Agency proposed the general fee parameters and incorporates these within the National Water Program. “Tariffs” represent the charges non-competitive water supplier may levy against consumers. The Regulatory Commission establishes tariffs and includes the terms within each water system license. The National Water Program states the general tariff parameters. Application “processing fees” may be charged by the Water Resources Management Agency in the case of water use permits and by the Regulatory Commission in the case of water systems licenses. In both cases, Government Regulations determine the levels of these nominal fees. Finally, the Act provides for penalties to be levied against persons who violate the Act. The Government established the level of these fees through regulation. In all cases, the Government makes certain to allocate money required for water resource management. Chapter Twelve: Safety of Hydrotechnical Structures This Chapter provides general guidance regarding the safety of hydrotechnical structures. The Chapter details the obligations of owners and operators of such facilities, including requirements, declarations of safety, and prevention of disasters. Chapter Thirteen: Prevention and Eradication of Waters Harmful Impact This Chapter details basic information regarding procedures related to the nature of disasters including drought and floods. Chapter Fourteen: Hydrotechnical Structure Use and Maintenance in Emergency Situations This Chapter describes the Government’s authority to use and protect hydrotechnical facilities during periods of emergencies including times of war and drought.


Chapter Fifteen: Protection and State Supervision of Water Resources The Chapter states several requirements related to the protection of water resources and associated ecosystems. All citizens have the duty to avoid harming water resources. The Government must be proactive and identify, designate and conserve water resources and associated wetlands and watershed (water basins) of critical importance to the conservation of water quality and quantity. Regulations passed according to this act and implemented by the Ministry of Nature Protection will guide activity in these areas. The Act provides guidelines for the construction of facilities to make certain harm does not occur. Chapter Sixteen: Settlement of Disputes in the Area of Water Relations and Liability under the Water Code This Chapter provides for the enforcement and resolution of conflicts related to this Act. To make certain activity that may harm water resource is halted in a timely the Act allows the implementing agencies to provide suspected violators with “violation notices”. These notices may require the suspected violators to immediately cease harm causing actitivities. The issuing Government entity provides a copy of the violation notice to both the violator and the Prosecutor General for the resolution of the matter. The Act states the types of remedies available as violation penalties. These include any “polluter” being economically liable for the mitigation (clean-up) of harm. If the polluter fails to alleviate the situation in a timely manner, the Act requires the Ministry of Nature Protection to take mitigation procedures and seek compensation for any cost from the violating party. The Act allows the Water Resources Management Agency in the case of water use permits and the Regulatory Commission in the case of water system licenses to require the posting of an adequate security as a condition to the permit or license. The purpose of this security is to make certain financing is available to remedy potential violations. The Act allows for the resolution of disputes regarding water use by using and the “Dispute Resolution Commission” as an alternative to the Court of Law. Regulations passed according to this act prescribe alternative dispute resolutions procedures. Chapter Seventeen: Closing and Transitional Provisions The final chapter states the various actions required during the transition between the existing and new water code. This includes the amendment of several laws and the conclusion of various normative acts (regulations). The Act identifies the party responsible of each of these activities and the time frame within which they must be completed. __________________________________________________________________________________ Note: The Water Code was adopted by the Armenian Parliament on June 4, 2002 and will be in force three months after signing by the President of Armenia.

DArmWaterCodeES

of 4


LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL EXPERIENCES IN WATER MANAGEMENT

Malcolm F. Baldwin Introduction As several of the examples below illustrate, success in integrated water management requires recognition of the underlying institutional behavior toward natural resource, including water, management, and what is necessary and possible legally and institutionally in developing integrated water management approaches that will over come them. Powerful, frequently predominant disincentives discourage sound long-term environmental or economic development practices by government agency. Mexican Irrigation Management A good example of the institutional problem is Mexico’s experience with irrigation policies and practices over the past century. It is one of nine case studies conducted and analyzed by William Ascher in his seminal book on natural resource management in developing countries.1 The rural water management problem that arose in Mexico involves combinations of water depletion, over-investment in large-scale irrigation systems, and deterioration of irrigation systems. Underpricing of water has led to over use that has depleted rivers, aquifers and lakes and damaged soils from water logging and salinity. The conveyance efficiency of the irrigation system is about 30 percent versus 50 to 60 percent for comparable systems in California.2 Ascher explains that these results have occurred not because government policy makers and managers were technically ignorant, nor simply corrupt and greedy, but because other policy and institutional incentives predominated over decisions favorable to sustainable water management. After the Mexican Revolution the government encouraged distribution of subsidized water to the undercapitalized communal groupings (ejidos) and small farms. By 1940, the ejidos controlled some 60 percent of irrigated land. The government provided cheap water on an “ability to pay” principle. Subsidization became an entrenched government policy that soon applied to large farmers as well. Despite internal reports in 1960 criticizing the lack of revenue that was harming investment in operation and maintenance, subsidies persisted as part of overall efforts to promote agriculture. This was true even though higher fees would have provided sustainable operation and maintenance with minimal impact on the production costs of large or even small farmers. By 1980 subsidies and deterioration of irrigation systems meant that only 15 to 25 percent recovery of operating costs, causing the ministry to reduce maintenance budgets, which further damaged the system. The resulting crisis led to reform by the end of the 1980s. Reform involved creation of water user groups like those being created in the South Caucasus. The government decided that rather than simply raising water prices it would adopt “[t]he far more clever strategy… to transfer irrigation districts over to user groups, who gained a large degree of control just as they had to take on more responsibility for financing water costs.”3 While the transfer process was slow, due to needs of water districts for training and financial accountability capabilities, even with partial transfer to the 80 districts water users covered 57 percent of operation and maintenance costs in 1991, and up to 80 percent by 1994. Notably, along with the user groups, the government changed the legal status of the ejidas and gave members rights to sell land and use it as collateral, creating incentives for better land management and water use.

1 Asher, William, Why Governments Waste Natural Resources: Policy Failures in Developing Countries, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1999. 2 Ascher, p. 130 3 Ascher, p. 137

of 4

Reforms came with crises, when there was no choice but to reform, and when the lessons of big government’s mismanagement of natural resources were sinking in around the world. Why had these lessons been so slow to learn? First, irrigation costs in Mexico were high in part because the government agencies favored large dams and canals over smaller wells, tanks and pond systems. The former, of course, required major government involvement that was favored for several reasons: it offered opportunities for government to control who received the benefits – large farms or the ejidas; it provided opportunities for government to obtain political credit for providing irrigation benefits; it provided employment opportunities, with their political benefits; and it created dramatic symbols of development progress. Second, irrigation policy and management was wrested in the control of institutions with distinctly different priorities than long-term agricultural productivity. The various agencies put in charge of irrigation had no incentives to collect revenues for the water provided. Having no discretion over the spending for irrigation they had no incentives to collect fees that would pay for upkeep. Moreover, credit banks and the ministries of agriculture were motivated to do what they could to increase farmer incomes, not to make farmers pay more. Finally, irrigation policy and management was for years in the hands of a major construction-oriented agency, not of the agriculture ministry. With these insights into government and institutional behavior in mind, examples below illustrate the diversity of models for basin-wide management, estimated by Alaerts to cover some 20 different types among the several hundred basin agencies operating worldwide.4 They illustrate in particular the importance of institutional structures and getting the incentives right for sustainable management. Integrated Water Management in Sri Lanka The Mahaweli River, Sri Lanka’s largest (though small by international standards), has had billions of donor dollars invested in hydro electric dams, and years of effort have gone into development of effective upstream catchment area management. Despite successes – Sri Lanka gets about 60 percent of its power from the Mahaweli dams -- efforts have been far more difficult to achieve than one would expect from within a single small country where the government owns in some form 80 percent of the land. Actions have been led by the Mahaweli Development Authority, which has statutory independence, a clear and focused objective, and an increasingly market-oriented management approach that makes it very different from other government agencies. Constraints on progress in catchment management have largely been due to lack of ownership incentives for farmers to invest in and comply with best practices (especially on steep slopes), ongoing lack of effective extension services for technical assistance to farmers, and overlapping and confusing legal mandates of government agencies responsible for land and water use in the Mahaweli River Basin. On the other hand, Sri Lanka’s management efforts have incorporated truly integrated water management objectives and efforts to engage stakeholders in planning and decision-making. Sri Lanka’s environmental impact assessment procedures for large investment projects, for example, include a fairly high level of public participation. Watershed Management in the United States Integrated water management in the United States is most well known and developed under the Tennessee Valley Authority. For the Tennessee Valley in the 1930s the “no action” alternative of regular and costly flooding was widely recognized as economically and socially costly, and the economic potential of management for power and, later, recreation, was attractive. Moreover, strong federal leadership and investment in river basin development was politically acceptable in the depression era and through the 1950s. Today, however, the TVA experiment remains unique in the United States for its breadth, dominant federal structure, and its pervasive regional impact.5 With the

4 Alaerts, p. 9 5 The Bonneville Power Authority on the Colombia River is the other, although less comprehensive and large, example, but there again the impetus for river basin management was the development of electric power resources. Less comprehensive, but significant, have been the state-federal agreements for allocation and use of the Colorado River among upstream and

of 4

advent of the Reagan Administration in 1981all Federal River Basin Commissions were abolished. In today’s political climate, dominated by more “market based” and decentralized management approaches, two other United States examples, the Everglades (water allocation) and the Chesapeake Bay (water pollution), illustrate the legal and institutional complexities of integrated water management. Managing Water Quality in the Chesapeake Bay Protection of the Chesapeake Bay, the largest estuary in the United States, from pollution became a regional priority for a number of Middle Atlantic states and the federal government by the mid 1970s. Fishing and recreation stakeholders, active NGOs, and economic academics had steadily highlighted its immense economic value.6 Protection by riparian states and the federal government against rising levels of industrial and domestic pollution proved inadequate because of high levels of nutrients runoff from farm into the distant tributaries of the Bay. The Chesapeake Bay watershed spans parts of six states and the District of Colombia, covering 64,000 square miles. A Chesapeake Bay Agreement was signed in 1983 by the states of Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the District of Colombia with amendments since. Today the Chesapeake Bay’s Executive Council, made up of State Governors, the D.C. mayor and the EPA Administrator, meet annually to establish policies and directions for restoring and protecting the Bay’s resources, most notably by reducing nutrients by 40 percent through a program of tributary strategies that attack nutrients at their upstream sources.7 An agreement among four states and the District of Colombia addresses pollution control and waste treatment systems along the Potomac River, just one of the tributaries. Other efforts to manage the Bay’s water resources come from agreements between the riparian states of Maryland and Virginia, which both directly benefit from the Bay. They have various agreements to protect fisheries, monitor pollution, and to restrict shoreline development. A strong citizen environmental organization, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, has been a critical element in successfully developing public awareness programs, and it has led and coordinated efforts with state and federal agencies for citizens to conduct regular pollution monitoring of streams entering the Bay. Industry associations have been active in pollution reduction, spurred by the federal government’s public disclosure of their toxic releases into the Bay (the Toxic Release Inventory program). The federal government has provided essential critical coordination, analyses of watershed data and often behind-the-scenes leadership under the Environmental Protection Administration’s Chesapeake Bay program. Fifteen federal agencies have formal agreements with EPA to support the program through a Federal Agencies Committee that meets regularly to coordinate federal actions and support EPA. Modest federal funding has helped broker agreements among the upstream states (and the District of Colombia) affecting the Bay’s resources and in expanding the reach of the awareness program particularly to the upstream states whose farms and communities substantially affect the Bay’s pollution levels but do not directly benefit from the Bay’s resources. Currently nutrients come from farms, septic and wastewater treatment plant discharges. A vexing problem is how to establish incentives for upstream residents to curb this pollution when they fail to receive direct benefits from a healthy Bay.8

downstream stat es, ratified and established by U.S. Supreme Court, without whose presence no agreement would have been possible. Similarly, the U.S. Supreme Court took the leading role in establishing the Delaware River Basin Commission. 6 Commercial shellfish and finfish harvests alone were nearly $196 million in 1997. http://www.Chessapeakebay.net/econintr.htm, the website of the Chesapeake Bay Program. 7 The Chesapeake 2000 agreement guides the Bay Program partnership through 2010 by outlining 93 commitments to a wide range of integrated water management actions. (See basic website above.) 8 It is the classic upstream-downstream problem that was sought to be solved in the 1998 Syr Darya River Basin agreement for Kyrgyzstan to withhold water in winter and release it in summer in return for coal from Kazakhstan and natural gas from Uzbekistan.

of 4

Institutional Strengthening of the International Rhine Commission9 Covering a watershed of some 200,000 square kilometers, the Rhine is the largest West European river with nine riparian states. It provides significant water for drinking, irrigation, transportation, industrial, hydroelectric, and recreational functions. The evolution of its management authority, primarily for pollution control, provides a helpful chronology of how key institutional barriers were overcome. That began with initiation of the International Rhine Commission (IRC) in 1950, which provided a forum for user nations at least to communicate concerns about growing downstream (Dutch affecting) pollution problems. In the early 1950s the IRC began to inventory pollution problems, establish an international monitoring network, publish results annually, and analyze trend data. Only by 1963, however, and the Treaty of Bern, was the IRC converted from a research organization to one empowered as a forum to discuss problems and propose international agreements on pollution regulations. Its structure grew, a three-year President was appointed, and annual plenary sessions were established for delegates from all riparian states. By 1972 the Dutch, the energetic down stream nation most engaged in empowering the IRC, obtained approval for ministerial level conferences on Rhine pollution, which have been held periodically since 1972. Today perhaps the most vexing institutional conflict concerns the requirement for unanimity versus the Dutch-preferred majority rule for approving recommendations. Nevertheless, in its narrowly defined role, and with policies that encourage active involvement of highly professional NGOs, the IRC has established action programs that harmonize pollution reduction policies and reduced pollution concentrations of key pollutants and reductions in heavy metals, with hopeful efforts to restore indigenous salmon to the Rhine. Management Devolution in Indonesia Alaerts discusses a contrasting integrated water management experience that became the administrative structures of the river basin management system established in 1974 on the Citarum river near Jakarta. A river basin authority was established that soon became poor and under the financial and administrative control of the central government’s Ministry of Public Works. The basin authority leased major irrigation, water supply, and other infrastructure investments and recovered at least some costs from water supply sales to cities, industries, and for hydropower. Since 1999, however, water management has become less centralized, with the devolution of authority and finance to local governments, farmer water user associations established to pay for water use, introduction of water pollution charges, and greater supervisory roles over management by stakeholder associations. A continuing complication is the autonomous status of the hydroelectric dams.10

Malcolm Forbes Baldwin Mr. Baldwin has over 35 years of experience as an environmental lawyer and policy analyst with expertise in environmental and natural resource management and institutional development. His international experience began at the end of six years as an independent consultant to industry, NGOs, and US government agencies when he took up residence in Sri Lanka in 1988 and worked throughout South and Southeast Asia.

He joined the consulting firm International Resources Group, Ltd. in Sri Lanka in 1991, where he served as Chief of Party for USAID’s Natural Resources and Environmental Policy Project. He directed IRG’s Environmental and Natural Resources Group (1993-95) and led environmental project teams for USAID in the Russian Far East. As a Managing Director for IRG with the United States-Asia Environmental Partnership (1995-97) he led the industrial environmental policy program and ten country assessment teams.

9 This section summarizes Dieperink, C., International Regime Development: Lessons from the Rhine Catchment Area, TDRI Quarterly Review, Vol. 12 No. 3, September 1997, pp 27-35, www.info.tdri.or.th/library/quarterly/tet/s97_4.htm 10 Alaerts, p. 8.

of 2


CONFLICT AND COOPERATION: THE CHALLENGE OF INTERNATIONAL WATERS

Aaron T. Wolf

Introduction

River basins and groundwater aquifers which cross international boundaries present increased challenges to effective water management, where hydrologic needs are often overwhelmed by political considerations. While the potential for paralyzing disputes are especially high in these basins, history is rich with examples of water acting as a catalyst to dialog and cooperation, even among especially contentious riparians.

Background to International Waters

There are 261 watersheds, and countless aquifers, which cross the political boundaries of two or more countries. International basins cover 45.3 per cent of the land surface of the earth, affect about 40% of the world's population, and account for approximately 60 per cent of global river flow.

These basins have certain characteristics that make their management especially difficult, most notable of which is the tendency for regional politics to regularly exacerbate the already difficult task of understanding and managing complex natural systems.

Disparities between riparian nations—whether in economic development, infrastructural capacity, or political orientation—add further complications to international water resources management. As a consequence, development projects, treaties, and institutions are regularly seen as, at best, inefficient; often ineffective; and, occasionally, as a new source of tensions themselves.

Despite the tensions inherent in the international setting, riparians have historically shown tremendous creativity in approaching regional development, often through preventive diplomacy, and the creation of "baskets of benefits" which allow for positive-sum, integrative allocations of joint gains.

Traditional Chronology: Development, Crisis, Conflict Resolution

A general pattern has emerged for international basins over time. Riparians of an international basin implement water development projects unilaterally first on water within their territory, in attempts to avoid the political intricacies of the shared resource. At some point, one of the riparians, generally the regional power, will implement a project which impacts at least one of its neighbors.

This project which impacts one's neighbors can, in the absence of relations or institutions conducive to conflict resolution, become a flashpoint, heightening tensions and regional instability, and requiring years or, more commonly, decades, to resolve—the Indus treaty took ten years of negotiations, the Ganges thirty, and the Jordan forty—while all the while water quality and quantity degrades to where the health of dependent populations and ecosystems are damaged or destroyed. This problem gets worse as the dispute gains in intensity; one rarely hears talk about the ecosystems of the lower Nile, the lower Jordan, or the tributaries of the Aral Sea - they have effectively been written off to the vagaries of human intractability.

of 2

Getting Ahead of the Curve: Preventive Diplomacy and Institutional Capacity Building

Despite their complexity, the historical record shows that water disputes do get resolved, and that the resulting water institutions can be tremendously resilient, even among bitter enemies, and even as conflicts rage over other issues. Some of the most vociferous enemies around the world have negotiated water agreements or are in the process of doing so, and many treaties and management bodies have survived subsequent hostilities intact. The challenge for the international community is to get ahead of the "crisis curve," to help develop institutional capacity and a culture of cooperation in advance of costly, time-consuming crises, which in turn threaten lives, regional stability, and ecosystem health.

One productive approach to the development of trans-boundary waters has been to examine the benefits in a basin from a mult i-resource perspective. This has regularly required the riparians to get past looking at the water as a commodity to be divided, and rather to develop an approach which equitably allocates not the water, but the benefits derived there from.

Dr. Aaron T. Wolf

Dr. Aaron Wolf is a specialist in trans-boundary water conflicts and conflict resolution, water basin technical and policy analysis, and environmental policy analysis. In addition to currently being Assistant Professor in the Department of Geosciences at Oregon State University in Corvallis, Oregon, Dr. Wolf is also the Director of the Trans-boundary Freshwater Dispute Database Project and an Affiliate Staff Scientist of the Pacific Northwest National Lab.

Dr. Wolf is the author of several books, book chapters, and scholarly articles on topics related trans-boundary water issues, and has consulted the US government and international organizations on such issues. Since 1997, Dr. Wolf has been on the organizing committee for the UNESCO/ADC Third Millennium Center for the Prevention and Management of Water Conflicts. Dr. Wolf has also worked with the United Nations University in Tokyo, Japan, by organizing and co-directing a planning workshop for stakeholders of the Salween Basin and writing and presenting background paper for Mideast policymakers in Cairo, Egypt. Dr. Wolf's advisory experience also includes consultancies with the World Bank, USAID, EPA, the Foreign Service Institute, and the Alabama Office of Water Resources.

PWolf

of 6

Steering Group on the Development of the NIS Environment Strategy

Geneva, 1 July 2002

Draft Outline of the Background Paper on integrated water resources management including trans -boundary river basin issues

Document No. 7 NIS ENVIRONMENT STRATEGY Extended outline of a background paper on integrated water resources management including transboundary river basin issues 1 I. Introduction Access to safe water is a fundamental need and a human right, vital for dignity and health of all people. Furthermore sustainable nature resource development is crucial for creating jobs, attracting investments and generating funds for social development and for ensuring the availability of resources for generations to come (UNECE Regional Ministerial Meeting for WSSD). Effective development and management of water resources are essential for sustainable growth and poverty reduction. The challenge of water resources management has become acute for many newly independent States (NIS) as water scarcity grows, quality declines, environmental and social concerns mount and the threats posed by floods and drought are exacerbated by climate change. Furthermore the unsustainable use and inefficient protection of the quality of water can have economic and social impacts that constitute potential sources of conflict. Many NIS consider water management and its interrelation with agriculture and economy among their highest priorities. And their recent policies call for improvement in the area. However financial resources for full implementation are only partially available. Integrated water management is a multifaceted concept and water management is gradually extending its scope: it integrates surface water and groundwater, coastal water and the marine environment, on the one hand, and water, land, legal, social and economic components, on the other. Thus the objective of the NIS Environment Strategy “integrated water resources management including transboundary river basins” should include development and harmonization of polic ies and legislation; definition of organizational roles and strengthening of institutions; pollution prevention and control; integration of environmental considerations into sectoral policies; elaboration of financing mechanisms; development of democracy in decision making; and solution of transboundary problems. II. Challenges From an overall perspective, a NIS water strategy could particularly address two major problems that are common to all of these countries: Ø Quality of water resources and effects on human health and the environment;

Ø Allocation of water resources;

1 This background paper draws mainly on the UNECE Environmental Performance Reviews carried out on NIS countries (Republic of Moldova, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, and Uzbekistan) and on the conclusions and recommendations of the second International Conference on Sustainable Management of Transboundary Waters in Europe (Miedzyzdroje, Poland, 21-24 April 2002) that marked the 10th anniversary of adoption of the UNECE Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes.

of 6

Possible important tools to tackle the above issues could be: Ø Infrastructure, technical facilities; Ø Monitoring and assessment of water-basins; Ø Regulatory framework and its implementation; Ø Establishment and strengthening of institutions; Ø Access to information and public participation; and Ø Financing (as an integral component of all the above topics).

Quality of water resources and effects on human health and the environment Pollution of surface and groundwater is a serious problem in the whole region. The quality of water from surface sources is deteriorating as a result of discharges of insufficiently treated and untreated sewage from populated localities and industrial plants, as well as of industrial accidents. In the NIS, only 60 per cent of the population is connected to sewers; for 18 per cent of these, wastewater is discharged untreated. The remaining wastewater is treated before being discharged into surface waters, mainly secondary treatment to remove organic matter (EEA, 1999b). Agriculture (fertilizers and pesticides) is another source of pollution for both surface and groundwater causing increasing salinity, nitrate, phosphorus and pesticide content. The quality of groundwater is also affected by industry (mainly mining and chemical industries) and municipal landfills, leading to a high concentration of heavy metals and toxic chemicals. For piped water, the situation is aggravated by the unsatisfactory sanitary and technical conditions of water supply equipment and networks and the shortage of chemicals for purification. This situation has a very serious impact on health, with in some countries more than 1/3 of the population using drinking water that does not meet hygiene standards, where, in some sub-regions, this proportion can exceed 50%. Infectious intestinal diseases, often caused by poor drinking water, are among the main causes of infant mortality in the southern regions for the Russian Federation and the Central Asian states (UNICEF 1998) 2. Effects on the environment should also be accounted for. Allocation of water resources The problem of water allocation includes the problem of water scarcity and competition of water uses and users. Access to water for drinking and for agriculture is a major problem in some parts of the region, particularly in Central Asia, in the southern part of Ukraine and in the European part of the Russian Federation. Among the reasons are the poor management of the irrigation systems and the over-consumption for agriculture. Agriculture is the dominant water use in Central Asia (more than 90 per cent) (WRI, UNEP, UNDP and WB 1998). The inefficient irrigation practices, deficiencies in water resources management and lack of incentives for water conservation are among the main causes of water scarcity. Over-exploitation of water, especially increasing use of groundwater for public water supply, and over-use of surface water for irrigation, has serious consequences such as drying-up of spring-fed rivers, destruction of natural wetlands and salt-water intrusion in aquifers. In Central Asia, a regional cooperation on water allocation has been working since 1992. However there is competition and discussion between the different uses of water and the resource sharing between upstream and downstream users: upstream countries prioritise the use of water for hydroelectricity generation in winter whilst downstream countries mainly use water for irrigation in summer.

2 WHO/EURO is establishing an evidence-base under the Protocol on Water and Health, particularly with inputs from the Russian Federation and Central Asia countries.

of 6

Reasonable and equitable use of water resources is also a problem in the Kura basin (shared between Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia) and in the Samur basin (between the Russian Federation and Azerbaijan). Infrastructure, technical facilities Water infrastructure is often obsolete, e.g. reservoirs are silting up, water distribution networks are leaking, with huge consequences in water losses, which can be up to 50%, and in water quality, due to infiltrations in the networks. Irrigation systems are falling into disrepair affecting efficiency. The extent and consequences of these losses are not fully recognized, since the operational arrangements for monitoring and controlling leakages are often weak. The conditions of dams and pipelines are another concern: due to a general lack of maintenance over a long period of time, their safety is, in many cases, not guaranteed. For what concerns waste-water treatment installations, not only all industrial and municipal water are not treated, but the efficiency of the treatment in the existing plants is sometimes inadequate. Monitoring and assessment of water-basins Adequate information, based on reliable data, is a necessary precondition for the protection and use of water. In many cases, reliable data are not available, monitoring stations not working, equipment and methods not adequate and monitoring systems not harmonized in the basins, due to different methodologies and equipments. Thus, water is not correctly assessed. Present knowledge and information for decision-making on water and land, and related socio-economic factors, is not sufficient, not reliable, not consistent and reporting not sufficiently well-organised for planning and decision-making. Regulatory framework and its implementation The regulatory framework is frequently not optimal and its implementation weak. Often clear targets are lacking and enforcement mechanisms insufficient. There are still many outdated regulations and standards, from the Soviet period, inconsistent with international guidelines (e.g. WHO guidelines on water quality), too complex and impossible to enforce, also due to lack of staff. Another problem is the lack of the necessary by-laws needed to implement the environmental legislation (operational regulations on monitoring, procedures for expertise, auditing, insurance, public access to information, public participation, certification, procedures for emergency situations), which leads to inconsistency in the implementation of environmental policies, and limits their effectiveness. Most countries, despite the introduction of discharge and abstraction permits and pricing mechanism for water use, do not have working systems for self-financing of water management. The resources devoted to the implementation of the programmes are not sufficient and lower than even minimal cost estimates. Due to the lack of clear priorities, the few available funds are often divided over the measures to be taken, which can result in no single measure fully implemented. Another important issue is the insufficient level of cooperation on transboundary waters. Even if there are agreements, these are often not consistently implemented, do not represent an effective tool to tackle the issue, nor do they address social, economic and environmental impacts. Establishment and strengthening of institutions There are several institutions and bodies involved in water resource management but there is sometimes no clear definition of responsibilities. An unclear division of responsibilities together with lack of communication and coordination between the authorities often cause “gaps” in or duplication of decisions and activities. The representation of or the communication with the different stakeholders in the institutions is not adequate.

of 6

Access to information and public participation Access to information and public participation are undoubtedly important tools for sustainable integrated water management. In NIS, despite a general effort, public participation is still limited and environmental awareness often poor. Financing Financing of water management is frequently weak, an important reason being the difficult overall economic situation many NIS are facing. In particular, there is a shortage of funds for investments in water supply, waste-water treatment and sewage systems, as well as weak systems for recovery of costs for these services. III. Action taken to-date During the 90s, countries have made significant efforts in environmental management and are continuing to do so, with different degrees of success, mainly due to the economic and social difficulties related to their transition to a market economy. Since their independence, countries have adopted basic environmental legislation and introduced new environmental policies, generally based on a combination of legal (standards, norms, environmental impact assessment, permits for water abstraction and discharge) and economic instruments (charges for water use and pollution discharge, fines). NIS have also been very active at international level, ratifying many environmental conventions or developing subregional cooperation on the basis of various bilateral and multilateral agreements. Some environmental conventions, such as the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes and its Protocol on Water and Health, have proven to be excellent frameworks for the establishment of cooperation between countries. Many countries have now recognized the advantages of the river-basin approach for water management and, after testing it on particular basins (for instance the Dnieper basin in Ukraine) are now considering using it more widely. The approach has proven to be useful not only for pollution control, but also to optimise funds collection and use. Several measures for water conservation have been adopted. Economic instruments, mainly based on the “polluter and user pay” principles have been introduced (abstraction charges, permits, increased water charges and taxes). More could be done to change consumer attitudes, especially by introducing metering, which has proven to be a very efficient tool to reduce water use. There exists a variety of jointly agreed principles, approaches and best practice to manage domestic and/or transboundary waters and resolve the above problems. Examples include guiding documents drawn up by the UNECE and in particular under the ECE Water Convention. As for financing, funding for sustainable water management activities is obtained from national environmental funds and national or local private investments, from bilateral and official development assistance (ODA), through EU assistance like the TACIS Programme and through multilateral disbursements via international development banks such as the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the World Bank and programmes like UNDP, UNEP and the Global Environment Facility. A number of projects, aimed at sustainable management of domestic and/or transboundary waters are already being carried out in NIS. Over the last month, additional initiatives have been proposed, among them a draft UNEP-ECE project on transboundary water agreements in NIS, and a discussion paper drawn up by Ukraine to explore the potential for developing a regional NIS water initiative as a regional element of a global water initiative of the EU. Examples of ongoing work with the participation of UNECE include pilot projects under the Convention in NIS countries on monitoring and assessment of transboundary waters (rivers Kura, Pripyat, Severski Donets

of 6

and Tobol), financed under the EU TACIS programme 3, the UNECE-ESCAP SPECA project under which, a strategy for the rational use of water resources and energy in Central Asian countries is being drawn up. International networks that bring together people and organizations from different backgrounds exist or emerge in the region. Examples include the Global Water Partnership, the Water Convention’s International Water Assessment Centre, the European Centre for River Restoration, the WHO European Centre for Environment and Health and the future international groundwater assessment centre of UNESCO, that serve as hubs for knowledge on water and water management. These networks could possibly help to develop and implement the NIS “water” strategy. IV. Further actions needed Integrated sustainable watershed management, that integrates water quantity and quality aspects, as well as both flood and groundwater protection, social, environmental and economic aspects should be considered to be the best approach to achieve the objectives of improved: Ø Quality of the water resources and effects on health and the environment; and Ø Allocation of the water resources.

Possible further action in NIS water management strategy could deal with: Ø Infrastructure, technical facilities

There is a great need to improve old and build new infrastructure. Keywords for further work are prioritisation and improved funding, both from national and international sources;

Ø Monitoring and assessment of water-basins Planning and decision-making should rely on consistent, relevant and timely information on the status of the water systems, including socio-economic information, that is tailor-made to the needs for planning and decision-making;

Ø Regulatory framework and its implementation Revision of the legal and economic instruments, in close cooperation with all stakeholders, to set: - clear priorities, targets, time frames and phased implementation; - performance indicators and regular monitoring of implementation to be published; - implementation responsibilities at all levels of governments to ensure effective response; - adequate funds for domestic implementation of water management provisions, including for

enforcement; - a clear legal framework for cooperation on the protection and use of transboundary waters in

Central Asia and in the Caucasian States; Ø Establishment and strengthening of institutions

- through institutional capacity building, especially of the enforcement staff; - by enhancing coordination between competent authorities in different governments departments; - through international cooperation, particularly on transboundary waters;

Ø Access to information and public participation - ensuring public access to information on, and public participation in the development of

concerted action plans, especially on water quality and natural disasters; - promoting participatory approaches to water resource management and emphasizing the

important role of all stakeholders (for instance, through the introduction of water users’ associations);

Ø Financing - improving access to international sources of finance (bilateral and multilateral assistance); - improving coordination of different programmes and different donors; - applying economic instruments in support of more environmentally friendly solutions, including

incentives for polluters to invest in pollution minimization and abatement; - improving systems for self-financing of water supply and water treatment.

3 Other pilot projects on the rivers Bug and Latoriza/Uhz, financed under TACIS programme, have been completed in 2002.

of 6

V. Indicators of progress toward the objective Many sets of indicators on the basis of the DPSIR framework4 have already been developed, for example by the European Environment Agency, or are being drawn up to answer specific requirements 5. UN bodies have recently developed a set of indicators for the World Water Development Report, which are currently tested world-wide in rivers basins including the Lake Peipsi basin 6. Countries should identify the most suitable indicator sets that are of value for testing the effectiveness of measures taken according to their water strategies and priorities. VI. The role of international cooperation Bearing in mind the two main objectives:

- improvement of quality of water resources and decreased negative effects on human health and the environment; and

- equitable allocation of water resources, international cooperation of NIS countries could possibly address the following issues: Ø How could NIS take advantage of achievements of the cooperative work done under international

conventions (especially countries that are not yet Parties to the Water Convention and its Protocol) or at EU level (for riparian states at the fringe of an enlarged EU area)? In particular it would be important to develop clear legal frameworks on the protection and use of transboundary waters in Central Asia and in the Caucasian States. The frameworks should define mutual relations and conduct of the basin States regarding water use and sustainable management of water resources. It should define duties of the basin States with regard to unilaterally planned water utilization, procedures for transboundary environment impact assessment and responsibilities in case of floods, drought or emergency situations. It should provide operational mechanisms to prevent, control and reduce transboundary impact including identification of pollution sources, water pollution abatement, monitoring water quality, public information and participation, liability regime for damage, and dispute settlement.

Ø How could existing experiences, sources of expertise and opportunities for capacity building be used as efficiently as possible to intensify the provision and dissemination of information and know-how in the right format, to share experience, to offer assistance for cooperation and to create partnerships and mechanisms for capacity-building, including funding; - In particular, what kind of joint work should be developed with the bodies established under the

other ECE environmental conventions as well as other United Nations bodies and governmental and non-governmental organizations and institutions active in integrated water management, and which partnerships should be set up?

- Which specific implementation projects could be designed to address the major difficulties that NIS countries face in integrated water management, to provide, for example guidance on normative approaches, support capacity-building, strengthen institutional frameworks, provide access to sources of finance, and assist in planning and implementing concerted action plans?

DUNECENo.7

4 Driving Forces - Pressures - State - Impact - Responses. 5 Development of indicators in the area of water and health by EEA and on transboundary waters by the Meeting of the Parties to the Water Convention. 6 Examples include indicators for surface and groundwater resources, extreme events, water storage and delivery, water and health, municipal-industrial-and-energy -water demands, food and agriculture, ecosystem coping capacity, in-stream and other non-consumptive use, and poverty and gender.

of 2

STATEMENT Ministers of Environment of 12 Countries

on the Development of the Environment Strategy

We, Ministers of the Environment from the following sovereign states: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, Russian Federation, Tadjikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, met on the 16th of April 2002 in the Hague (the Netherlands) and agreed on actions to accelerate environmental reforms in our countries, and to strengthen our position in European and international co-operation. At their Conference in Aarhus in 1998, Ministers of Environment of the region of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE) agreed to refocus the “Environment for Europe” process on the needs of our states in order to prevent further environmental degradation in our countries. However, the environmental situation in our countries remains serious and there has, so far, been only limited progress in refocusing efforts on our region. Recognising the need to strengthen the role of our countries in the “Environment for Europe” process and to provide our input for the implementation of the Aarhus decisions, we decided to join our efforts and to develop an Environmental Strategy. This Strategy, developed by our states in the framework of the “Environment for Europe” process, would lead to real improvements in the state of the environment in our countries; its successful implementation will become an important step towards a united and sustainable Europe. The Strategy would aim to find solutions to common environmental problems of our countries on the basis of close co-operation. A common approach is needed because many environmental problems identified as a priority in national policies of individual countries have common roots in the legacy of the Soviet Union and in the specific features of economies in transition. In particular, continued adherence to deeply rooted methods of inefficient economic development and administrative management have delayed the transition of our countries to a market economy, democratic practices and effective protection of the environment. We believe that at the World Summit on Sustainable Development, that will take place in August-September 2002 in Johannesburg, special attention should be paid to environmental protection as a basis for sustainable development. In this regard, the Environment Strategy could become an instrument for meeting the objectives formulated in Agenda 21, and for strengthening the environmental pillar of sustainable development in the region. Our message to the World Summit about the development of the Environment Strategy would promote a stronger position of transition economies in global co-operation on overcoming obstacles on the way towards sustainable development. The participants of the meeting noted the need to develop new forms of partnership in the framework of specific regional initiatives. The Strategy should also become an instrument for providing clear information about the most effective forms of co-operation to partners in the “Environment for Europe” process. The Environmental Strategy of our countries should be a concise document that would focus on a few principal objectives, each addressing a common environmental problem. The Strategy would build on the successes and failures of environmental reforms. A ten year time frame would be adopted for the Strategy, with actions divided into short-, medium- and long-term. In particular, the objectives may include the following: Harmonisation of Environmental Policies and Legislation; Pollution Prevention and Control; Natural Resources Management in Economies in Transition; Integration of Environmental Considerations into Sector Policies; Financing Mechanisms, Including Debt-for-Environment Swaps; Democracy of Environmental Decision-Making and Providing Information to the Public; Identification of Transboundary Problems of the Participant Countries. The Strategy will be supported by detailed analytical documents. An overview of our countries’ experience in environmenta l reforms over the last 10 years will be presented in an overall Assessment Report. Each objective would be supported by a more detailed Background Paper outlining key challenges, goals and proposed actions for achieving the objective. Under each objective, the Strategy should specify an action programme that will be implemented at national and international levels, as well as performance indicators, which will help to monitor progress toward achieving the Strategy’s objectives, and provide a means for the governments, potential donors and investors to measure the effectiveness of their financial and technical assistance. For each subject area, the Strategy should identify one or more international programme and institution that could facilitate the co-operation within and beyond the countries to support the achievement of respective objectives.

of 2

The process of Strategy development should be open and include all stakeholders and institutions interested in meeting the objectives of the Strategy. To ensure the overall leadership and co-ordination of the Environment Strategy preparation, we decided to establish a Steering Group consisting of senior officials of our Environment Ministries and NGOs. We call upon international organisations and programmes working in the areas targeted by the Environment Strategy to take an active part in its elaboration and to support the activities of the Steering Group. We also invite environmental NGOs and other partners to contribute to the development of the Strategy within the framework of the Steering Group’s activities. We call upon the Regional Environmental Centres to provide support to these initiatives. The Steering Group will regularly inform Ministers of the progress in preparing the Strategy; in particular, it will provide the Ministers with an interim report about the preparation of the Assessment Report and Background Papers by November 2002. We also request that the Steering Group provide information about the development of the Strategy to relevant international and regional organisations. This meeting’s conclusions and recommendations will be discussed at the joint meeting of Environment Ministers of our countries and Environment Ministers from Western Europe that will take place 17th April in the Hague. We will inform colleagues about our decision to launch the development of the Strategy and will emphasise the unique character of this initiative for transition economies in the “Environment for Europe” process. We will also discuss the significance of this Strategy at European, Eurasian and global levels as a possible input to the development of new forms of partnership in regional co-operation – a potentially important mechanism for reforming environmental management and for transition towards sustainable development. We will meet again early in 2003 to review the final draft of the Strategy. At this meeting we will make a decision concerning the transmission of the Strategy for the discussion at the fifth “Environment for Europe” Ministerial Conference in Kyiv in May 2003. The meeting participants are grateful to Mr. Jan Pronk, the Minister of Environment of the Netherlands for inviting the Ministers to the Hague and for organising our joint session with Ministers from selected European Union counties. We also thank Mr. Sergei Kurykin, the Minister of Environment of Ukraine for organising this meeting and for active co-ordination of the initiative to develop the Environment Strategy. 16 April 2002, the Hague, the Netherlands Signed: Vardan AYVAZYAN

Minister of Nature Protection, Armenia Gussein BAGIROV

Minister for Environmental Protection and Natural Resources, Azerbaijan Vasiliy PODOLYAKA

Deputy Minister of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, Belarus Nino CHKHOBADZE

Minister of Environment, Georgia Nurlan ISKAKOV

Deputy Minister of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, Kazakhstan Ratbek ESHMAMBETOV

Minister of Environmental Protection, Kyrgyzstan Nicolae STRATAN

Deputy Minister of Environment and Territorial Development, Moldova Alexander POVOLOTSKY

Deputy Minister of Natural Resources, Russian Federation Usmankul SHOKIROV

Minister of Environmental Protection, Tajikistan Matkarim RAJAPOV

Minister of Nature Protection, Turkmenistan Khalillulo SHERIMBETOV

Chairman of the State Committee for Environmental Protection, Uzbekistan Sergei KURYKIN

Minister of Environment and Natural Resources, Ukraine DMOEStatement

of 5

Draft EU Water Initiative – NIS Component June 22, 2002

Background As part of the EU Water Initiative for the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in August 2002, Denmark has taken the lead in developing an NIS component in addition to the African component that was initially announced in the framework of the initiative. An exploratory meeting to gauge the interest in the initiative was held in Brussels on 16 May 2002, based on the note “Exploring the potential for development of a regional NIS water initiative as an regional element of a global water initiative by the EU”. The current note describes the status of the development of the component and suggests a process for further development, building on the above-mentioned note and subsequent meetings and deliberations. Why a regional NIS water initiative? Water is key to all pillars of sustainable development- for poverty eradication, health, economic development and peace. At the UNECE Regional Ministerial Meeting for the World Summit on Sustainable Development (Geneva, 24-25 September 2001) it was emphasised that safe supply of drinking water, wastewater treatment, sanitation, the interdependence of water, development and health were extremely important issues in the region. It was recognised that water is the main limiting factor for further development in many countries and it was proposed that fresh water issues should be high up on the agenda of the WSSD. The ministerial declaration adopted in Almaty October 2000 by economic/finance and environment ministers from the NIS and selected OECD countries documents the serious situation of the urban water supply and sanitation sector in the NIS and includes an endorsement of a set of guiding principles for its reform. An NIS environmental strategy is under preparation by the NIS environment ministries under the auspices of the Environment For Europe process. This strategy may be seen as providing an overall strategic framework for a regional NIS water initiative. Thus, there is no need for a specific agreement from NIS to the water initiative as water is already one of the key areas for action in the Environmental Strategy, and this initiative will therefore be seen as one response from EU to the Environmental Strategy. While most of the principles and best practices in water management are on the table and agreed by a broad international audience, there is a clear lack of co-ordinated action and implementation of the principles and best practices. Water policy in the EU has been reformed and may serve as inspiration and a framework for harmonisation across the European region and providing the framework for action and implementation of the principles and best practices.

of 5

Overall targets and objectives Regional targets and objectives shall be developed in co-operation with the NIS countries. The EU global initiative has the following targets and objectives:

- to half the number of people with no access to safe drinking water and sanitation by 2015,

- to balance the human needs with those of the environment by 2015, - support that water resource management strategies and plans are in progress by

2005, and - to achieve the objective by implementing Integrated Water Resources Management based on a river basin approach.

Outputs The NIS component will have the following major milestones and outputs:

• WSSD, Johannesburg, August 2002: - NIS component of EU initiative launched

• Third World Water Forum, Kyoto, March 2003: - Presentation of water related problems of NIS - Listing of existing initiatives + required new initiatives - Announcement of start of implementation of identified actions

• “Environment for Europe” Ministerial Conference, Kiev, May 2003 - Political endorsement of NIS Environment Strategy, including the water component - Initiate a discussion on implementation

Structure of NIS component

• There will be three main thematic pillars of the NIS component:Urban water management, including financing of water infrastructure

• River basin management, including transboundary issues • Integrated water resources management.

Subject to agreement with NIS partners, within each pillar there will be a focus on the following cross-cutting aspects:

• Awareness raising at all levels • Exchange of knowledge and experience • Identification of gaps and priorities • Developing best practices and benchmarks • Development of regional and subregional co-operation mechanisms • Capacity building • Promoting the implementation of demonstration projects

All NIS countries might not necessarily focus on all themes. Depending on the particular circumstances and priorities in each country, there will be different weights attached to the three pillars and the cross-cutting issues. A cluster of building blocks (projects/programmes financed and supported by various development partners) will constitute each pillar, thus bringing partners with related activities together under a common framework and co-ordination, but without taking the ownership and responsibility away from individual partners.

of 5

Urban water management, including financing of water infrastructure. The OECD-led Task Force under the Environmental Action Programme for Central and Eastern Europe (EAP Task force) has offered to take lead on this pillar of the initiative. This pillar will build on work being carried out in response to the conclusions and recommendations from the Almaty Ministerial Consultation in October 2000, where options for reform of urban water management, infrastructure and financing in NIS werediscussed. Essentially, a part of the NIS Environmental Strategy will constitute this pillar. The Almaty meeting requested the EAP Task Force to develop a focussed programme of work to facilitate implementation of the agreed guiding principles. Progress will be reviewed at the “Environment for Europe” Ministerial Conference in Kiev in 2003. Thus, this pillar is an important element in achieving the target set in Almaty. Background reports for the Environmental Strategy will be prepared for the end of August 2002 and will be presented and discussed mid-October 2002. The elements of the work programme on water management are: • Economic and financial issues, including development of environmental

financing strategies, municipal finance, manuals on reform of the tariffs systems (water pricing);

• Legal and institutional issues, including the role of private sector participation; • Performance indicators and contracts, including the development of model

performance contracts, identification of the responsibilities in municipalities and utilities;

• Social issues, including issues related to affordability and provisions that may need to be made to ensure that poor and vulnerable groups have adequate access to water servicesA group of NIS senior officials on the reforms of the urban water supply and sanitation in the NIS has been established to provide support to this work programme and exchange information on water management issues in the NIS. The first meeting took place in Kiev in November 2001 and the next meeting is scheduled for November 2002.

River basin management, including transboundary issues UN ECE has been asked to to take lead on the development of this pillar of the component. The rationale for UN ECE to play this role is the UN ECE Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes from 1992. The emergence of 12 new independent states in the wake of the dissolution of the Soviet Union has created the basis for a potential international conflict over sharing of transboundary water resources in the region, notably in water scarce Central Asia. Examples of other initiatives that relate to this theme and need to linked to the NIS component are the EU TACIS programme with its activities on the Caspian Sea, the Aral Sea and support to establishing regional water sharing agreements between Central Asian states, and the OSCE water management initiative for central Asia. Integrated water resources management (IWRM) Global Water Partnership (GWP) will take the lead on the development of this pillar of the NIS component. Denmark financed a study in 2000 on how Danish assistance can contribute to promoting sustainable water resources management in the Caucasus and Central Asia. This resulted in a catalogue of potential support actions at regional

of 5

level, of which support to IWRM was one of the main recommendations. This recommendation is now being implemented and support has been initiated to GWP facilitated activities in the eight countries of Caucasus and Central Asia. Support to this initiative might well be seen as the nucleus of the IWRM pillar of the component.

• The regional GWP initiative is still in its early infancy and activities have not yet been finally designed. However, some of the relevant IWRM related activities identified during the Danish study, and which may be promoted through the initiative, are:Preparation of national water resources strategy and water action plans

• Water resources assessments (hydrometric/water quality monitoring system rehabilitation and upgrading of environmental laboratories)

• Development of lake management strategies • Decision support systems (e.g. strengthening of water licenses / discharge

permit systems) • Promotion of water as an economic good (e.g. valuation f/charging for water,

valuation of environmental services) • Public awareness of water resources problems • Watershed management / links between soil and water management

(contribution to salinization and water logging prevention) • Promotion and establishment of public-private partnerships • Promotion and preparation of adequate water-related legislation • Promotion of the linkages between water management and health • Promotion of international conventions related to water resources management

These issues are likely to be representative also for the remaining four NIS countries, although this needs to be established as part of the further development of the component. Organisational issues

• Denmark being the overall lead country for the NIS component, each of the three pillars will be co-ordinated by the following partners who will each report on progress to Denmark:Urban water management: EAP TF

• River basin management: UN ECE • Integrated water resources management: GWP

The three partners will each be responsible for setting up the necessary mechanisms and for managing their respective pillar, but since there is a significant repetition of actors for different pillars, not least on the NIS side, there would be merits of co-ordinating activities and meetings between the pillars. Therefore, a co-ordination group will be established, with participants from EAP TF, UN ECE, GWP, Denmark and selected NIS representatives, representing e.g. the NIS environmental strategy proces, the OECD EAP working programme, and the GWP network The development will thus utilise, the structures already established in NIS as part of ongoing initiatives will be used to the extent possible and appropriate, in order to avoid duplication of efforts and waste of resources. For instance, the regional GWP group working with IWRM in Caucasus and Central Asia may support the other

of 5

pillars as well, and the EAP network may be used to support the IWRM pillar in countries without GWP networks. Process The design phase will last until Kyoto, March 2003 and Kiev, May 2003, and will be followed by the implementation phase. The June 24-25 EU water Initiative meeting in Brussels will speed up the process of further development of the initiative, in particular in bringing EU´s own assistance programmes, memberstates initiatives and private sector and NGOs from the EU memberstates in as building blocks of the initiative. The EU water Initiative expert group and its multi-stakeholder forum will provide the main organisational set-up for this, however ad-hoc meetings may be set up for a broader multi-stakeholder group from the EU countries. July 2002 NIS Environmental Strategy senior officials meeting:

Presentation of NIS component Planning of Johannesburg launchConstitution of co-ordination group

August Meeting of GWP regional group in Tbilisi: Mobilisation of NIS resources for the NIS component. Joint meeting of all three pillars + co-ordination group.. Detailed planning of further process untill Kyoto and Kiev.

August-September Launching of NIS component of the EU water initiative at WSSD in Johannesburg

September-December

National and regional stakeholder meetings to identify existing and required initiatives. Meetings of co-ordination group.

January-February 2003

Development and finalisation of action programme on the basis of stakeholder meetings. Meetings of co-ordination group.

March 2003 Launching of NIS action programme at WWF-3 in Kyoto

May 2003 Political adoption of action programme as part of NIS Environment Strategy

CONVENTION ON COOPERATION For the Protection and Sustainable Use of the Danube River

(Excerpts from the Convention)

The Contracting Parties, Determined by the strong intention to intensify their water management cooperation in the field of water protection and water use; Referring in particular to the convention on the protection and use of trans-boundary watercourses and international lakes of 17 March 1992 as well as the existing bi- and multilateral cooperation among Danubian States, which will be continued and duly taken into account by the cooperation of all Danubian States, as well as pointing to the Convention on the protection of the Black Sea against pollution of 21 April, 1992; Striving at a lasting improvement and protection of Danube River and of the waters within its catchment area in particular in the transboundary context and at sustainable water management taking duly into account the interest of the Danubian States in the field of water use and at the same contributing to the protection of the marine environment of the Black Sea; Have agreed as follows:

Article 2 - OBJECTIVES AND PRINCIPLES OF COOPERATION

(1) The Contracting Parties shall strive at achieving the goals of a sustainable and equitable water management, including the conservation, improvement and the rational use of surface waters and ground water in the catchment area as far as possible. Moreover the Contracting Parties shall make all efforts to control the hazards originating from accidents involving substances hazardous to water, floods and ice-hazards of the Danube River. Moreover they shall endeavor to contribute to reducing the pollution loads of the Black Sea from sources in the catchment area. (2) The Contracting Parties pursuant to the provision of this Convention shall cooperate on fundamental water management issues and take all appropriate legal, administrative and technical measures, to at least maintain and improve the current environmental and water quality conditions of the Danube River of the waters in its catchment area and to prevent and reduce as far as possible adverse impacts and changes occurring or likely to be caused. (3) To this end the Contracting Parties, taking into account the urgency of water pollution abatement measures and of rational, sustainable water use, shall set priorities as appropriate and shall strengthen, harmonize and coordinate measures taken and planned to be taken at the domestic and international level throughout the Danube Basin aiming at sustainable development and environmental protection of Danube River. This objective in particular is directed to ensure the sustainable use of water resources for municipal, industrial and agricultural purposes as well as the conservation and restoration of ecosystems and to cover also other requirements occurring as to public health. (4) The Polluter pays principle and the Precautionary principle constitute a basis for all measures aiming at the protection of the Danube River and of the waters within its catchment area. (5) Water management cooperation shall be oriented on sustainable water management, that means on the criteria of a stable, environmentally sound development, which are at the same time directed to:

-maintain the overall quality of life; -maintain continuing access to natural resources; -avoid lasting environmental damage and protect ecosystems; -exercise prevention approach.

(6) The application of this Convention by no means shall cause any significant direct or indirect increase of impacts to the riverine environment.

(7) Each Contracting Party has the right to adopt and implement measures being more stringent than those resulting from the provisions of this Convention.

Article 4 - FORMS OF COOPERATION The forms of cooperation under this Convention as a result are the following:

(a) Consultations and joint activities in the framework of the International Commission pursuant to the provisions of this Convention; (b) Exchange of information on bi- and multilateral agreements, legal regulations and on measures in the field of water management; exchange of legal documents and directives and other publications; other forms for the exchange of information and experiences.

Part II - MULTILATERAL COOPERATION Article 5 - PREVENTION, CONTROL AND REDUCTION OF TRANSBOUNDARY IMPACT

(1) The Contracting Parties shall develop, adopt and implement relevant legal, administrative and technical measures as well as provide for the domestic preconditions and basis required in order to ensure efficient water quality protection and sustainable water use and thereby also to prevent, control and reduce transboundary impact. (2) To this end the Contracting Parties shall separately or jointly take in particular the measures indicated below:

(a) Record conditions of natural water resources within the Danube River catchment area applying agreed quantity and quality parameters including the methodology concerned. (b) Adopt legal provisions providing for requirements including time limits to be met by waste water discharges.

(c) Adopt legal provisions for the handling of substances hazardous to water. (d) Adopt legal provisions for reducing inputs of nutrients or hazardous substances from nun-point sources, especially for the application of nutrients as well as of plant protection agents and pesticides in agriculture. (e) With the aim of harmonizing these regulations at a high level of protection as well as for the harmonized implementation of corresponding measures the Contracting Parties shall take into account results and proposals put forward by the International commission. (f) The Contracting Parties shall cooperate and take appropriate measures to avoid the transboundary impacts of wastes and hazardous substances in particular originating from transport.

Article 9 - MONITORING PROGRAMMES On the basis of their domestic activities, the Contracting Parties shall cooperate in the field of monitoring and assessment.

(1) For this aim, they shall - harmonize or make comparable their monitoring and assessment methods as applied

on their domestic levels, in particular in the field of river quality, emission control, flood forecast and water balance, with a view to achieving comparable results to be introduced into the joint monitoring and assessment activities;

- develop concerted or joint monitoring systems applying stationary or mobile measurement devices, communication and data processing facilities;

- elaborate and implement joint programmes for monitoring the riverine conditions in the Danube catchment area concerning both water quality and quantity, sediments and riverine ecosystems, as a basis for the assessment of transboundary impacts such as

transboundary pollution and changes of the riverine regimes as well as water balances, floods and ice-hazards;

- develop joint or harmonized methods for monitoring and assessment of waste water discharges including processing, evaluation and documentation of data taking into account the branch-specific approach of emission limitation (Annex II, Part 1);

- elaborate inventories on relevant point sources including the pollutants discharged (emission inventories) and estimate the water pollution from non-point sources taking into account Annex II, Part 2; review these documents according to the actual state.

(2) In particular they shall agree upon monitoring points, river quality characteristics and pollution parameters regularly to be evaluated for the Danube River with a sufficient frequency taking into account the ecological and hydrological character of the watercourse concerned as well as typical emission of pollutants discharged within the respective catchment area. (3) The Contracting Parties shall establish, on the basis of a harmonized methodology, domestic water balances, as well as the general water balance of the Danube River Basin. As an input for this purpose the Contracting Parties to the extent necessary shall provide connecting data which are sufficiently comparable through the application of the harmonized methodology. On the same data base water balances can also be complied for the main tributaries of Danube River. (4) They shall periodically assess the quality conditions of Danube River and the progress made by their measures taken aiming at the prevention, control and reduction of transboundary impacts. The results will be presented to the public by appropriate publications.

Article 12 - EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION

(1) As determined by the International Commission the Contracting Parties shall exchange reasonable available data, inter alia, on:

(a) The general conditions of the riverine environment within the catchment area of the Danube River; (b) Experience gained in the application and operation of best available techniques and results of research and development;

(c) Emission and monitoring data; (d) Measures taken and planned to be taken to prevent, control and reduce transboundary impact; (e) Regulations for waste water discharges; (f) Accidents involving substances hazardous to water.

(2) In order to harmonize emission limits, the Contracting Parties shall undertake the exchange of information on their regulations. (3) If a Contracting Party is required by any other Contracting Party to provide data or information that is not available, the former shall endeavor to comply with the request but may condition its compliance upon the payment, by the requesting Party, of reasonable charges for collecting and, where appropriate, processing such data or information. (4) For the purposes of the implementation of this convention, the Contracting Parties shall facilitate the exchange of available techniques, particularly through the promotion of: the commercial exchange of available techniques, direct industrial contracts and cooperation, including joint ventures; the exchange of information and experience; and the provision of technical assistance. The Contracting Parties shall also undertake joint training programmes and organization of relevant seminars and meetings. (5) The provisions of this Convention shall not affect the rights or the obligations of Contracting Parties in accordance with their domestic laws, regulations, administrative provisions or accepted legal parties and applicable international regulations to protect information related to personal data, intellectual property including industrial and commercial secrecy, or national security. (6) If a party nevertheless decides to supply such protected information to another party, the Party receiving such protected information shall respect the confidentiality of the information

received and the conditions under which it is supplied, and shall only use that information for the purpose for which it was supplied.

Article 13 - PROTECTION OF INFORMATION SUPPLIED Insofar as pursuant to this Convention industrial and commercial secrets or other confidential pieces of information are transmitted in conformity with domestic laws, the receiving Contracting Parties shall observe the secrecy of this information by not using it for any other purposes than those stipulated in this Convention, publishing it, or making it available to third parties. In case any one Contracting Party feels unable to comply with this obligation regarding confidential information that has been transmitted to it, it shall inform the transmitting Contracting Party about it without any delay and re-transmit the transmitted information. Personal data shall be transmitted to Contracting Parties in conformity with the domestic law of the transmitting Contracting Party. The receiver shall use personal data only for the purpose indicated and under the conditions specified by the transmitting side.

DDanubeExcerpts

___________________________________________________________________________

14 Paliashvili Street, Tblisi 380079 Georgia AUA Center Building; 9 Alex Manukian Street, Suite 207; Yerevan 375070 Armenia Caspian Business Center; 40 Jafar Jabbarli Street, Suite 604; Baku 370000 Azerbaijan


INTEGRATED RIVER BASIN PLANNING IN BILATERAL AREAS OBJECTIVE The principal objective of this work is to demonstrate the process of Integrated River Basin Planning at the local level, and the focus of this activity will be on capacity building in the region. PROPOSED ACTIVITIES Two bilateral areas were selected for this process. The work plan includes a detailed schedule with seven tasks being implemented, as follows:

• Identification of Stakeholders - Interviews were conducted with 250 local organizations in both basins including field branches of state agencies, municipal authorities, mass-media, NGOs and CBOs, donor organizations, and industries and private enterprises. Training sessions were conducted for the stakeholder representatives in Telavi (Georgia), Zakatala (Azerbaijan), Rustavi (Georgia) and Vanadzor (Armenia).

• Inventory of Water Uses - Data were collected and analyzed on general aspects of both river basins such as physical-geography, land use, groundwater resources, hydrology, and water quality. More detail data were colleted on legal and institutional issues on water management, drinking water supply, urban wastewater treatment, irrigation, hydropower generation, industry, recreation, and other uses. The information was presented in technical reports that are supplemented with tables, figures, and maps.

• Assessment of Issues - All water related issues were identified and a prioritization process was conducted with three stakeholder sessions. Four prior ity issues were selected: potable water, public health, irrigation, and hydropower generation.

• Public Awareness Campaign - This campaign is being conducted by NGOs in each basin and includes: leaflets and posters, news-paper articles, TV programs, training sessions for local NGOs and mass-media, public meetings, and other items.

• Preliminary Basin Plan - The preliminary integrated river basin plan is being developed with the participation of experts and local users in each basin.

• Identification of Pilot Projects - Project forms were prepared in each basin to identify small-scale water resources projects.

• Final Integrated River Basin Plan - Following public hearings, a comprehensive integrated river basin plan will be prepared with stakeholder participation and presentation of the results.

SUBCONTRACT STATUS Based on a prequalification process, one consortium was selected for each pilot area as follows:

• Alazani River Basin – An Agreement was executed with Origo Consulting in Tblisi, Georgia on December 14, 2001 and the work is being implemented at the local level in both the Georgian and Azerbaijan areas of the basin by a team of technical experts from ORIGO Consulting, Nature Protection Society/NGO, and Little Town/NGO. All the activities will be completed on September 30, 2002.

• Khrami-Debed River Basin – An Agreement was executed with JINJ Co. Ltd. in Yerevan, Armenia on December 28, 2002 and the work is being implemented at the local level in both the Georgian and Armenian areas of the basin by a team of technical experts from JINJ Co. Ltd.., Little Town/NGO, ORIGO Consulting, and the Environmental Public Advocacy Center/NGO. All the activities will be completed on September 15, 2002.

D244H

Akhmeta

Telavi

Kvareli

Tianeti

Sagarejo

Gurjaani

Sighnaghi

Lagodekhi

Dedoplistskaro

Belaken

GatekhZagatala

Aliabad

Gakh

Sheki

Oghuz

Gardabani

Gazakh

Tovuz

Rustavi

Sioni Res.

Shamkir Res.

Mingechevir Res.

Chachuna Res.

Lake Jandara

Kura

Aghstafa Res.

Jagas

Aghs

tafa

Tovu

zcha

y

Khrami

Iori

Alazani Canal

Ilto

Iori

Alazani

Stori

AlazaniDur

uji

Kab

ali

Sharokh

evi

Talach

ay

Bel

aken

chay

Gatekhchay

Alazani

Agrichay

Ku rmukhchay

Gar

acha

y

Shi

ncha

y

Kishchay

Bei yuk-Kobu

Ajinour Lake

Russia

Georgia

Prep

ared

for

: Dev

elop

men

t Alt

erna

tive

s, I

nc.

14 P

alia

shvi

li S

tree

t, T

bilis

i 380

079

Geo

rgia

Prep

ared

by:

GIS

& R

S S

cien

tifi

c T

rain

ing

Cen

ter

Ded

amits

a -

Tbi

lisi,

Geo

rgia

Wat

er M

anag

emen

t in

the

Sout

h C

auca

sus

Ala

zani

Riv

er B

asin

Dat

e: M

ay, 2

002

km 6

06

1218

24 k

m

Azerbaijan

Armenia

SettlementsLEGEND

Borders Hydrography

River/Canal

Lake/Reservoir

City State

Alazani Basin

Azerbaijan

Alazani_watershe.pdfSource of Database: GIS & RS Scientific Training Center "Dedamitsa"

Tsalka

Dmanisi

BolnisiMarneuli

Ninotsminda

Tetri-Tskaro

Gori

Kaspi

Kareli

TBILISI

Khashuri

Mtskheta

Rustavi

Lake Khanchali

Mtkvari

Lake Kumisi

Tsalka Res.

Lake Paravani

Lake Saghamo

Prone

Ted zami

Dzama

Tana

Ktsia

Lake Tabatskuri

Parav

ani

Khrami

Khrami

Debeda

Mash ave ra

Algeti

Ksani

Ara

gvi

Sioni Res.

Lake Bazaleti

Mtkvari

Lake Madatapa

Shulav

eri

Khrami Res.Shavtskala

Pol

adauri

Tashir

Debed

Dzoraget

Arpilich Res.

Akhurian

Chichkan

Pambak

Martsiget

Akhurian Res.

Aparan Res.

Kasakh

M armarik

Hra zdan

Lake Sevan

Arik

Sevan

Tashir

Gyumri

Spitak

Aparan

Hrazdan

Dilijan

Alaverdi

Anipemza

Vanadzor

Stepanavan

Khrami-Debed River Basin

Prepared for: Development Alternatives, Inc.14 Paliashvili Street, Tbilisi 380079 Georgia

Prepared by: GIS & RS Scientific Training CenterDedamitsa - Tbilisi, Georgia Water Management in the South CaucasusDate: May, 2002

0km 5 5 10 20 km15

LEGEND

Settlements

Other CityState Capital

Hydrography

River/CanalLake/Reservoir

Borders

StateKhrami-Debed Basin

ArmeniaTurkey

Georgia

Khrami-Debed_watershed.pdfSource of Database: GIS & RS Scientific Training Center "Dedamitsa"

of 4

Steering Group on the Development of the NIS Environment Strategy

Geneva, 1 July 2002

Draft Outline of the Background Paper on transboundary problems of participating countries

Document No. 3 NIS ENVIRONMENT STRATEGY Trans-boundary problems of participating countries Introduction The multilateral environmental agreements of UNECE are designed to deal with transboundary problems in air, water and other media. A NIS strategy on transboundary problems should address - Management of transboundary river basins; - Transboundary air pollution; - Transboundary effects of industrial accidents; and - Environmental impact assessment in transboundary context,

through the four Conventions that address these issues. To deal with trans-boundary problems in an effective and transparent way that is consistent with other ECE countries, NIS should seek to become Parties to the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes and its Protocol on Water and Health, to the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution and its protocols, to the Convention on Trans-boundary Effects of Industrial Accidents and to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, and meet their obligations under those instruments. In the sections below the specific challenges found by NIS for each of these transboundary issues are discussed in relation to the four conventions. Transboundary river basins Management of transboundary river basins is dealt with in the paper on “Integrated water resources management including transboundary river basin issues”. In the future, a legal framework to deal with civil liability for damage caused by hazardous activities on transboundary waters will be provided by the legally binding instrument that is at present negotiated under the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes and the Convention on Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents, and is expected to be ready for signature at the Fifth Ministerial Conference "Environment For Europe", Kiev, Ukraine, (21-23 May 2003). Almost all NIS are participating to the negotiation process and should seek to sign and ratify it. Transboundary air pollution The Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP) creates a framework for controlling and reducing damage to human health and the environment of transboundary air pollution. It is implemented through protocols that have been adopted to control specific air pollutants. Challenges in Achieving the Objective in the NIS Transboundary air pollution problems vary from one NIS to another. While in some countries the problems are better, if not well, defined, in others information is scant. In addition, few NIS are Partie s to protocols and they are very rarely Parties to the more recent protocols.

of 4

There are two main challenges: - To establish monitoring and reporting networks; - To encourage accession to protocols and implement abatement strategies to ensure the meeting of

obligations. Actions Taken To Date by NIS to Achieve the Objective Many NIS have taken action to accede to the Convention and many participate in meetings of the main subsidiary bodies. The LRTAP Convention provides various programmes under various Task Forces to evaluate effects, emissions, pollutant levels, etc, though none of these are specifically targeted at the NIS, many NIS experts participate in workshops and task force meetings. Some programmes, e.g. EMEP and critical loads mapping, arrange regional workshops from time to time to aid the understanding and increase the participation of experts from NIS; these are generally well attended by experts. Further Action Needed to Reach the Objective Transboundary Air Pollution problems in NIS can, in principle, be addressed through the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution. While most NIS are Parties to the Convention there are still a small number, e.g. Uzbekistan, who are not. There is also an urgent need for better monitoring and better reporting of emissions throughout the region. Following identification of the nature of the problem, steps to address the issues need to be devised and linked to protocol obligations to provide possibilities for accession to and compliance with protocol obligations. Indicators towards the Objective The ultimate indicators are accession to and compliance with the protocols to the Convention. Intermediate indicators are the participation of experts in the monitoring programmes and main subsidiary bodies and the reporting of monitoring data and emissions. The Role of International Cooperation in Reaching the Objective International cooperation will play a key role in reaching the objective. It is an area of concern for the Convention that at present NIS are unable to ratify protocols. The steps needed should be identified through the LRTAP Convention’s Executive Body or its subsidiary bodies. Action is most likely if it were seen as a useful mechanism for aiding the accession of NIS to protocols. Transboundary effects of industrial accidents Although the Industrial Accidents Convention operates in a transboundary context, its implementation requires the establishment of national legislation addressing a wide range of issues relating to the safe operation of hazardous activities (installations handling and/or producing hazardous substances – criteria defined in the Convention). Its practical application requires the identification of hazardous activities, ensuring their safe operation, setting up on- and off-site emergency plans and establishing notification and response mechanisms in case of a major industrial accident. The Convention is a legal framework and a mechanism to promote bilateral cross-boarder cooperation on prevention of, preparedness for, and response to industrial accidents. This involves cooperation between neighbouring Parties at the national level, and in particular at the local level between authorities, industry and communities on both sides of the boarder. Challenges in achieving the objective in the NIS Drawing up and applying in practice national legislation transposing the Convention. Setting up of competent authorities responsible for the implementation of the Convention and developing bilateral contacts to address bilateral tasks under the Convention. Actions taken to date by NIS to achieve the objective Some of the NIS undertook to draw up appropriate national legislation transposing the Convention. Only Armenia, Kazakhstan Republic of Moldova and the Russian Federation are Parties to the Convention. Experts from other countries participate in the activities under the auspices of the Conference of the Parties.

of 4

Further action needed to reach the objective The cross-boarder cooperation should deal with the exchange of information and discussion on hazardous activities as potential risk spots that may bring about transboundary effects in case of an industrial accident. It should also focus on establishing off site emergency plans, making them compatible or preferably lead to drawing up joint contingency plans. This process should involve all concerned, including the potentially affected public in the two countries. The bilateral contacts should also facilitate the application of coordinated joint response mechanisms in the case of emergency and if needed. Other issues which could be the subject of bilateral or in some cases multilateral cooperation may include:

- Exchange of information and safety technologies; - Joint scientific and research programmes; and - Learning from past industrial accidents in order to avoid similar accidents from happening in

the future. Indicators towards the objective The ultimate indicators are the ratification/accession to and compliance with the provisions of the Convention. Active participation of experts in meetings under the Convention is also an indicator. Progress in implementing the Convention is monitored within the process of reporting on implementation and evaluated by the Working group on Implementation The role of international cooperation in reaching the objective The Conference of the Parties realizes that the NIS are only at the starting point in implementing and applying the Convention in practice, and in particular in fulfilling their bilateral tasks. In order to assist these countries, a subregional workshop on the implementation of the Convention is in the process of preparation and will take place early in 2003. It is expected to achieve two goals: firstly, to identify obstacles in implementing and ratifying the Convention by these countries and secondly, to try to work out an internationally sponsored programme aimed at assisting these countries in overcoming their problems to become Parties to the Convention. Environmental impact assessment in transboundary context The Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (EIA Convention) could provide an inclusive legal framework for NIS to address the issue. The following NIS have become a Party to this convention: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Republic of Moldova and Ukraine. Belarus and the Russian Federation have signed but not yet ratified this Convention. Challenges in Implementing the EIA Convention According to their respective national legal frameworks, Parties should prepare laws and regulations to enable them to implement the EIA Convention, in order to do so key obligations should be identified. Normally a Party is preparing a National Strategy to implement the EIA Convention, this strategy will identify the laws and regulations which have to be adapted or prepared to implement fully the obligations of the Convention. National institutions will have to be identified, established or strengthened with the responsibility for the implementation of the Convention. Parties are expected to nominate national focal points on matters related to the EIA Convention. In the case of the EIA Convention it is also necessary to appoint a point of contact, the person or authority to whom the notification should be sent. Parties are expected to inform the Secretariat about these authorities. Actions taken to achieve these challenges Half of the NIS have taken the necessary steps to become a Party to the EIA Convention. Most of the NIS have nominated focal points and point of contact for the EIA Convention. Most counties are in the process of elaborating a National Strategy in order to be able to implement the Convention. Further actions needed The actions needed can be summarized as follows: development of guidance on the nature and number of documents required by environmental authorities, form and format of documents, identification of the public,

of 4

understanding on how the public will be involved, agreement on the use of methodologies, agreement on the languages to be used, identification of the responsib ilities for translations and costs involved, clarity of the functions of the lead agency for the Parties involved and agreement on how consultations will be undertaken. Indicators of progress Indicators of progress include ratification and the development of a national strategy for the implementation of the EIA Convention. The role of international cooperation As the implementation of the EIA Convention may give rise to practical problems for the NIS and other Parties to the Convention, it is very important that representatives of the NIS are actively participating in all the work areas under the Convention. In particular, the NIS should provide information to the Meeting of the Parties on the problems encountered and develop support programs specifying their needs in relation to the implementation of the EIA Convention. Representatives of the NIS should be involved in the preparation of guidance under this Convention.

DUNECENo.3

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

14 Paliashvili Street, Tblisi 380079 Georgia AUA Center Building; 9 Alex Manukian Street, Suite 207; Yerevan 375070 Armenia

Caspian Business Center; 40 Jafar Jabbarli Street, Suite 604; Baku 370000 Azerbaijan