tha pda: bang pakong dialogue initiative (final report)

jd3

Text Box

The views expressed in this paper are the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), or its Board of Directors, or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this paper and accepts no responsibility for any consequences of their use. Terminology used may not necessarily be consistent with ADB official terms.

Department of Water Resources Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

Pilot and Demonstration Activities for Thailand: Bang Pakong Dialogue Initiatives

Final Report

by

Kasetsart University July 2006

Pilot and Demonstration Activities for Thailand: Bang Pakong Dialogue Initiatives Final Report

Table of Contents

Page No. Table of Contents List of Tables List of Figures Preface 1. Introduction

1.1 Water situation in Bang Pakong-Prachin Buri and Upper Tonelesap River Basin

2. Pilot and Demonstration Activities (PDA) for Thailand: Bang Pakong Dialogue Initiatives 2.1 Objectives 2.2 Details of Work

3. Water Allocation and Its Setting in the Bang Pakong 4. Selection of Water Allocation Model and Decision Support Tool 5. Collation of Existing Data and Development of Water Allocation

Scenarios 6. Development of WEAP Model Simulation of Bang Pakong Basin

6.1 Water Demand in the Basin 6.2 Scenario Development and Management 6.3 Scenario Analysis and Results 6.4 Recommendation and Suggestion

7. Analyzing of Water Allocation Process and Involvement of BPRBC 8. Lesson Learned from the Project

8.1 Observation on BPRBC Roles of Water Management 8.2 Co-management that Existed in the Project 8.3 Recommendation

Annex Annex 1 Sub-Committee of Bang Pakong-Prachinburi and Tonlesap River

Basin Annex 2 Water and culture in the Bang Pakong River Basin: A general

overview Annex 3 Report of the Workshop Meeting onRoles, Duties, and Guidelines

to Support Sub-River Basin Committee Annex 4 Report of the Workshop on Water Management in Bang Pakong-

Prachin Buri and Tonlesap River Basin Annex 5 Modeling Tools Annex 6 Brief description of Water Evaluation And Planning (WEAP)

iii

iii122

7

711202324

262627282929343436383939

42

53

56

5860

i


List of Tables

Page No. 1. Summary of Basin’s Water Resources Status 2. Summary of data collated for Bang Pakong water allocation model 3. Summary of Water Demand for Overall Basin in 2004 4. Summary of Water Demand for Overall Basin in 2024 5. The priority of water demand activities 6. Unmet Demand in Difference Scenario (MCM.)

62527272829

ii


List of Figures

Page No. 1. Bang Pakong-Prachin Buri and Upper Tonlesap Sub-River Basins 2. Bang Pakong-Prachin Buri River Basin Schematic Diagram 3. Upper Tonle Sap River Basin Schematic Diagram 4. Screen shot of WEAP model representation of Bang Pakong-Prachin Buri

River Basin 5. Screen shot of WEAP model representation of Upper Tonlesap River Basin 6. Unmet Demand in Difference Scenarios 7. Water allocation process – Overview

345

25

262930

iii

Pilot and Demonstration Activities for Thailand: Final Report Bang Pakong Dialogue Initiatives Department of Water Resources

1

Preface Since the project started with TA 6123–REG: Promoting Effective Water Management Policies and Practices (Phase 3) – Pilot and Demonstration Activities (PDA) for Thailand: Bang Pakong Dialogue Initiatives from Asian Development Bank (ADB) in middle of 2004 it has taken 2 years until concrete result is evident. The project attempt in trying to achieve a practical river basin management in the Bang Pakong river basin has been implemented and it is traced in this report. Its objective is to reveal a close relation and link between strengthening the Bang Pakong River Basin Committee (BPRBC) and its secretariat, exchanging of water information and know how in water allocation, dialogue of stakeholders, and co-management in managing water resources in the Bang Pakong river basin and also to identify the needed factors for such interventions. Effective water allocation needs a continuous effort in collecting right information, communication throughout its lifetime and among core group, promoting direct or represented participation from stakeholders, identifying components and managing process that must work out through government-people cooperation. In order to strengthen the water resources management in a river basin context any of the effort will have the full technical support from various government departments; however, to decide on such a complex and formative course of action requires the full understanding of those making the decisions. The BPRBC still needs to get a solid grasp on the fundamentals of water management. In fact, this is a major concern of committee members. The project’s effort in trying to fulfill the needs of capacity building in various aspects has been practiced and the process was adapted through time by mutual learning and acceptance of changes in behaviors. Its development is illustrated in this report and the author wishes that the experiences may be valuable to those who want to practice the same concept in water resources management.

PiloBang Pakong

t and Demonstration Activities for Thailand: Final Report Dialogue Initiatives Department of Water Resources

2

1. Introduction 1.1 Water situation in Bang Pakong-Prachin Buri and Upper Tonelesap River Basin The Bang Pakong-Prachin Buri and Upper Tonelesap River Basin is located in the eastern Thailand; connected to Saraburi, Nakorn Ratchasima and Burirum in the north; Cholburi and Chantaburi in the south; Saraburi, Bangkok and Samut Prakarn in the west and Cambodia in the east. The Basin covers 4 provinces namely Nakhon Nayok, Chachoengsao, Prachin Buri and Sakaeo. The north of the Basin is the mountain range that divides Nakorn Ratchasima provincial zone from those of Nakhon Nayok and Prachin Buri. In the south, there is a mountain range that originated tributaries of Bang Pakong River. The Bang Pakong-Prachin Buri and Upper Tonlesap River Basin has a drainage area of 18,670 km2, comprised of main Bang Pakong, Prachin Buri and Upper Tonlesap River Basin, which have drainage areas of 6,422 km2, 9,592 km2, and 2,656 km2, respectively. The Bang Pakong river basin consists of three sub-basins: Nakhon Nayok, Thalat and Main Bang Pakong Basins while the Prachinburi River Basin is comprised of four sub-basins: Khlong Phra Sathung, Khlong Phra Prong, Mae Nam Hanuman, and Main Prachinburi sub-basin. The sub-basins are shown in Fig. 1. The Prachin Buri River Basin is the upstream basin, and contains main Prachin Buri River, Khlong Phra Sathung, and Mae Nam Hanuman. The Prachin Buri River combines the Nakhon Nayok river as Bank Pakong river and then flow out to the Gulf of Thailand as shown in Fig.2. The Upper Tonle Sap consists of three sub-basins as shown in Fig.3 which whole main rivers flow out to the Kingdom of Cambodia. The Bang Pakong River discharges into the Gulf of Thailand. Tidal influence is pronounced, with brackish water reaching 170 km upstream during the dry season when freshwater runoff is minimal. The basin contains a mixture of land uses ranging from wet and dry season rice, annual and perennial crops, rubber plantations, to tropical forests, and wetlands. Moreover, the settled areas in the basin comprised of villages with home gardens and mixed orchards. The irrigated area within the basin is estimated about 388,000 ha. The basin’s fishery resources are valuable and include both freshwater and marine catches as well as pond-raised fish, oysters, mussels and prawns. Bang Pakong River Basin supports the livelihoods of a wide range of communities involved in agro-forestry, agriculture, and fisheries. It has also seen rapid development of private enterprises, such as pig farms, shrimp and fish farms, and small and medium sized industries. Several water resources infrastructure projects have been implemented to address the region’s increasing water needs but their operation has created lot of conflicts among the stakeholders and led to environmental consequences including severe water pollution, river bank erosion, soil degradation, and devastating floods. The present status of basin’s water resources can be summarized as shown in Table 1.

t and Demonstration Activities for Thailand: Final Report g Pakong Dialogue Initiatives Department of Water Resources Ban

3

720000

720000

740000

740000

760000

760000

780000

780000

800000

800000

820000

820000

840000

840000

860000

860000

880000

880000

900000

900000

920000

920000

146000

0 1460000

148000

0 1480000

150000

0 1500000

152000

0 1520000

154000

0 1540000

156000

0 1560000

158000

0 1580000

160000

0 1600000

10 0 10 20 30 Kilometers

N

EW

S

Reservoirs

Rivers

SunbasinsHunuman

Khlong Phra Satung

Khlong PhraProng

Main Bang Pakong

Main Prachinburi

Nakhon Nayok

ThaLat

Upper Tonle Sap

Legend

Fig. 1 Bang Pakong-Prachin Buri and UpperTonlesap Sub-River Basins

Pilo


500

11,400

3,000

4,000

2,800

111,300

60,000

16,400

60,000

60,000

60,000

60,000

60,000

326,000

2,0002,700

1,000

20,000165,000

360,000

85,600

38,700 114,400

200,100

70,500

63,000

Khlong Phra ProngPrachin Buri River

Prachin Buri River

Bang PlungIrr. Proj.

-Ong ChaiyanuchitIrr. Proj. Part1

Bang PakongIrri. Proj.

Tha LatIrr. Proj.

Tha LatIrr. Proj.

Tha HaeIrr. Proj.

Huy KasianIrr. Proj.

Prachan TakhamIrr. Proj.

Khlong Sara PleeIrr. Proj.

Kok KachaIrr. Proj.

Khlong Ban Na Irr. Proj.

Nakhon NayokIrr. Proj.

Extended Khlong Tha Dan Irr. Proj.

Khlong Tha Lat

Khlong Si Yat

4

Phra

1,500

44,000

40,640

2,20012,200

Khlong Phra Satung

Huy KraiIrr. Proj.

11,000 10,000

35,000

Phra

Phr

-Ong ChaiyanuchitIrr. Proj. Part2

a-Ong ChaiyanuchitIrr. Proj. Part3

Remark: Irrigation Project Area Existing Dam

Potential Dam Fig.2 Bang Pakong-Prachin Buri River Basin Schematic Diagram


5

Remark: Irrigation Project Existing Dam Fig.3 Upper Tonle Sap River Basin Schematic Diagram


6

Water Demand was calculated by simulation model as WEAP model. Average water demand in 2004 (Current Year) for overall basin is 2,480 MCM./year approximately whereas existing water storage in the basin is only 901.44 MCM. or 9.36% of the average annual runoff. The trend of such problem is becoming crucial. Provision of increasing available water sources, increasing water utilization efficiency by improving existing water sources to be able to gain more water storage capacity and better up distribution are the guidelines for solving the problem at present and in the future. Table 1 Summary of Basin’s Water Resources Status

Unit Prachin Buri Basin Bang Pakong Basin Tonlesap Basin Total

No. of Sub-basin No. 4 3 1 8 Sub-basin 1. Khlong Phra

Sathung 2. Khlong Phra Prong 3. Mae Nam Hanuman 4. Main Prachinburi

1. Nakhon Nayok 2. Tha lat 3. Main Bang Pakong

1. Upper Tonlesap

Major Tributaries Prachinburi river, Khlong Phra Sathung tributary, Khlong Phra Prong tributary and Hanuman river tributary

Bang Pakong river, Nakhon Nayok river tributary and Tha Lat tributary

Mean Annual Rainfall

mm./year 1,499 1,334 1,209 1,347

Mean Annual runoff

MCM./year 4,986 3,667 831 9,484

Combined Storage Volume of Present Large and Medium Scale Reservoirs

MCM. 126 702 74 902

Present Irrigation Area

Million Rai 0.478 1.151 0.082 1.712

Notes: mm. = Millimeters

MCM. = Million Cubic Meters Hectare = 6.25 Rais

The Bang Pakong River Basin Committee (BPRBC) was established in 2001 and then revised in 2003 (its composition and mandates in Annex 1). It is the only one RBC from 29 RBCs across the country that has a representative of the private sector as its chairman. While the Bang Pakong Dialogue Initiative project was designed to promote consultations in water resources issues in the river basin at the grass root level, BPRBC needs strengthening its capacity. Therefore to facilitate it and to promote the BPRBC learning process, the project approached the BPRBC to be a core mechanism in the dialogue and water allocation would be discussed and identified how it can be introduced in a participatory way. Approaching BPRBC instead of reaching the people at the grass root in an initial stage of the dialogue is appropriate in term of a constraint


7

in the budget and personnel and it will provide BPRBC a technical assistance to learn how water allocation can be implemented at the basin level. 2. Pilot and Demonstration Activities (PDA) for Thailand: Bang Pakong Dialogue Initiatives 2.1 Objectives The PDA received from ADB to implement the Bang Pakong Dialogue Initiative aims to help the BPRBC to create network that will deliver the process of water resources management at the smallest unit of the river basin. The next objectives are to scrutinize the internal process of managing BPRBC in order to make it more competent, and the factors that contribute to BPRBC competency and its weakness. Its other objectives are studying on how water allocation can be implemented by the BPRBC and how it will be perceived and involved by the people at the grass root level, identifying the driving force for people participation, and providing recommendations to the future plan for water resources management in the Bang Pakong river basin and the rest of the country. Scope of work

a) Situation Analysis with people in the communities, gathering relevant information on hydrology, ecology, socio-economic baseline, state of experience in water management and stake-holders analysis.

b) Discussions on alternate water allocation methodologies and strategies, and facilitate dialogue amongst the stakeholders.

c) Initiation and facilitation of consultations with stakeholders with the participation of the Bang Pakong River Basin Committee - BPRBC.

d) Formulating water and resources use scenarios with the committee and the community.

e) Preparation and implementation of information and awareness campaign including small conservation projects to be implemented by the communities.

Water allocation and scenarios testing will be the topic that proposed to BPRBC and other stakeholders to considered and studied. If they find it applicable then an implementation should be experimented. And it should become their work that will start by the BPRBC members. The project will only be a catalyst that provides them with relevant knowledge. Therefore, when and if the BPRBC members create an experimental project for water allocation it will be an achievement of the project. The project also aims to learn together with the people of the river basin on how the dialogue can add value to the existing work that has been done by the BPRBC. Activities and highlights of the outcomes Since the project started in July 2004 many activities have been done. An observation of the research team from the International Water Management Institute (IWMI), which was sent to the field in August 2004 revealed that the members of BPRBC and its secretariat lacked experiences in water resources management and water allocation was not well defined and even not existed with participation. The first target was concentrated on the capacity building for the BPRBC secretariat through a training


8

course followed by study visits for the secretariat and BPRBC members to the other 2 river basins. The training partly helped the secretariat to perform their duty but there still be more to be learned especially the way to effectively work with people sector. The study visit was considered to be a sensible way to promote understanding of water resources management. The weakness of BPRBC was again reiterated in the first workshop of the project in February 2005 the Chairman of the Committee presented the problems he perceived on managing the BPRBC. He cited that most agencies in 4 provinces of the Bang Pakong did not recognize the Committee. The member of the Committee did not clearly understand its mandate. Lacking of budget and personnel in the secretariat was a critical problem. Recommendation was made to increase knowledge base management for the Committee and local people, formulate community research, and organize dialogue in local areas in order to identify problems and analyzing for solutions. And eventually the river basin organization should be upgraded to be public organization in order to provide more flexibility and resources. Knowledge sharing between and amongst government sector and people sector and also the dialogue at locality was highlighted in his presentation. The project then tried to promote this component and water allocation was the strategic topic that fitted to the purpose. Many consultations that followed the first one showed that even water allocation at the basin level is difficult to imagine but the allocation considered in term of individual use and concern is the topic that drives people interest. The extended dialogues, which the BPRBC and its network created in various locality areas were the evident of such summary. However, apart from the appropriate topic there are many important factors contributed to such extended dialogues especially people participation. Participating approach has been promoted in Thailand since 1976 under the Royal Development Project. The Constitution of 1997 was also the factor because it gave people the duty of managing local resources. Data and information in water resources of the Bang Pakong river basin that has been studied in many reports of the government agencies was analyzed and used in the project to test the scenarios in water allocation by using WEAP (Water Evaluation and Assessment Program) model. The BPRBC and its network were introduced to use this model. However, to help these people learns more on this model it must be promoted through actual use and this will be done through upgrading the secretariat capacity in order that it can be used in a sustainable way. This process needs more attention at the level of both central and regional office in managing the data and information especially concerning of the model. However, one important thing that was raised in the project related to data that should be gathered by local people. When the component of water allocation was presented to the BPRBC and its network particularly regarding water use registration form, they considered it as a good tool for raising awareness of people at grass root and it should be adjusted to call water use survey. The survey should be done by local people in order that it will advocate their learning process and create sense of belonging. It is a very important factor in promoting people participation in managing water resources. In addition this data can be kept and updated at the level of a community, which is very useful for managing the resources at this level.


9

Although collecting of data using the water use survey was done in 5 sub-districts in such a participatory and it was satisfactory to the people, there is an obstacle that made it cannot proceed. The system needs a full support from the government agency to allocate budget and provide staff to facilitate local people to collect their own data for the whole basin. Concurrently, DWR has experimented data collection, which promote people to collect it in piloting sub basins throughout the country. Water use is one element in the data collected. However, such action cannot contribute to the purpose of participating data collection due to many reasons but the project will not analyze it because it is not within the scope of work. The data collection under the project has to be pending and needs consideration at DWR level. The project was gradually created mutual learning on how water should be allocated in the river basin. WEAP model was selected to present to BPRBC and its network, in doing so the researcher analyzed data that was available from existing studies and during demonstration period to the BPRBC, its application was trained to some of them. The training does to some extent developed and aroused the requirement to scrutinize more on water allocation. And when it came to one of the workshops to consider this issue for actual us of water from the reservoir in the river basin, the BPRBC realized that water allocation has to be decided through a system of distribution among every main reservoir in the basin and it tries to create this system by involving themselves to the government agencies concerned and asks for its role in this matter. WEAP model is now promoting to be used and it is registered for using at central division of DWR and at the Regional Office that is responsible to BPRBC work. And it will be applied in a smaller scale in the sub basin of the Bang Pakong. The project has tried learning with the BPRBC and its network a different way in approaching water allocation. An introduction of an economic instrument such as a voluntary compensation when water does not contribute was organized in a consultation and it was considered in one of a sub basin. And also in this sub basin the BPRBC agreed to try a method of monitoring water uses through measuring of water level from station gauges. This is a development of the performance of the BPRBC and it worked through the coordination with the Royal Irrigation Department (RID) in the basin and this pilot project is the procedure that needs to be further developed in order to experiment on the appropriate method that will lead to actual participatory water allocation in the sub basin. The BPRBC has developed an involvement of the Governors of main provinces in the river basin on water allocation of the 4 reservoirs, which has to be coordinated with the RID, the main agency in implementing this performance. Allocation plan for each reservoir was formulated but it lacked a comprehensive allocation plan for the entire river basin. The project has induced the BPRBC to perform the role with participatory of various agencies concerned for example the provincials and RID. Now the allocation of water from these reservoirs is monitored in order to coherently distribute available water to serve a sustainable balance between various uses including an environment. Learning of water allocation has created an expansion into the other initiatives that happens after the Dialogue project because there is a close link between water that would be allocated and its quality and also water sources in different form. Take for


10

example, the people sector requires wetland rehabilitation that would provide water to be used and it has to be a sustainable use with involvement of the local people to manage it. At present the project observes that in the BPRBC a relationship between its members belonging to people sector and the secretariat, which is the government sector is quite loose. The secretariat has not sufficiently responded to a requirement for knowledge exchange that is needed from the people sector. There are a number of reasons that can be explained to this situation. While people sector usually wants to have many problems that arise in different locations solved this needs BPRBC secretariat to prioritize them, analyze, and facilitate concrete actions for the solution. Although the secretariat tries to implement some actions that often create at central level but could not respond to the people need in this sense because of its unfamiliarity to this kind of work. And usually there is a factor of a different in timeliness of the work that government agencies always need but the people sector does not respond to this need. Therefore, there usually be conflict in work style between these two sectors that needs special attention in moving them together in a more smoothly manners. Lesson learned and recommendations To involve people into the mechanism of water resources management and to make them give real concerns to manage their resources needs a process. First, there need an official platform for the people to be represented and the RBC is such a body. Involving the people into the RBC work must be done through the openness of the agenda to create trust among them and it is the starting point for involving its network as well. Continuous of agenda, which designed well for the topic will lead to a wider consideration in participatory water management. Together with determining the process mutual learning is one of the very important factors for creating interest and trust and continuous action will create sense of belonging among BPRBC and its network. The topic to be learned should be carefully considered to pave the way for success. Cooperation between government sector and people sector is another factor that will contribute to the RBC concrete action. Knowledge base management itself needs and at the same time provides such cooperation. Practicing the work will improve familiarity and development of such cooperation. The project is in the midst of this process and on two ends, the government and the people there is a strategic action. One of the elements that provide a smooth operation in the people sector is the person so called “change agent”. He or she must be the local people who will be a coordinator and promoter of the action at the local level. Therefore, this person needs a strong promotion with technical knowledge to be a catalyst in delivering water management to the level of the smallest unit of people at the community or grass root level. On the other end cooperation from the government sector is needed, the RBC secretariat must explicitly provide its coordinator in order to continuously work with the change agents. In addition, because technical and managerial skill is lack the experts/advisors are needed to help these people learn an appropriate work. One of the principle is these people themselves must work, the experts/advisors will provide advice. And this recommendation was submitted to DWR from the project. We hope that the promotion of water allocation and its concerned activities will be carried out through DWR as recommended. Another government body


11

that has to be involved is RID and the cooperation between these two agencies especially endeavoring water user groups must be thoroughly considered and implemented. To expand the work to the other river basins, this kind of project must be adopted at DWR and the lesson learned including the activities done in the Bang Pakong river basin should be studied and applied. The strategic plan starting from involving RBC into the operation should be formulated and for its implementation, active secretariat and experts/advisors are needed. Experiment of water allocation is at the forefront of the action and at the later stage, more specific issues in water management will be included such as upper watershed conservation, water quality monitoring, wetland rehabilitation, and related coastal resources management. A use of the model for supporting a decision in allocating water is more to be learned in the Bang Pakong river basin and it is one of the elements that is worthwhile for in depth study including the other components of water allocation that was trailed in the Bang Pakong. 2.2 Details of Work The following part is contributed to the work in details and we hope that it will be a learning forum for those who wish to practice the river basin management: Stakeholders Analysis and Participation in the Dialogue In this Pilot and Demonstration Activities (PDA) one element in a study process that is considered to be very important is stakeholder]s participation, since in Thailand water resources management through people participation has been introduced and a mechanism for such management is an RBC. The Bang Pakong River Basin Committee (BPRBC) is the only one RBC from 29 RBCs across the country that has a representative of the private sector as its chairman. This would allow for an increasing role of private sector and civil society in managing their river basin. A water allocation part, which places emphasis on a model used as a decision support system will be a technical tool for BPRBC to employ in managing and allocating water. In order to maximize efficiency in water resources management in a river basin context one factor that is extremely important is co-management of the community based management and the higher level of the management system which is usually the government sector. How Did the Dialogue Start? Involving People The Dialogue wants to create a network of people who will share their experiences and facilitate their cooperation on water related issues with a support from Department of Water Resources (DWR). Small budget and restriction in number of personnel did not allow involvement of people at the grass-root level. Therefore, the selection of stakeholders was a crucial step in the initial stage after the introductory forum because these people will be a catalyst group for stimulating and incorporating water resources management into their community activities and expanding the Dialogue into other communities through networking. Small group discussions with key stakeholders of the BPRBC were held to provide some recommendations on strategies for drawing


12

people’s attention on water resources management. It was agreed that the selection of the key stakeholders from the four provinces who would be invited to participate would be made on the basis that they already actively support environmental work in their communities or they are already involved in some kind of networking in different areas. It was also agreed that the meeting should be conducted in a very informal manner without a rigid agenda. Thirty-two stakeholders, eight per province, were thus selected to attend the meeting, which was held during 11-12 September 2003 in a very cozy and friendly environment. In the meeting, the facilitator asked the participants to convey their attitudes and opinions on water resources in an open manner. Apart from the problems and requirements of the basin, it emerged that an important topic that most participants wanted to discuss was a basin network on water resources. Many practical ideas for networking were floated at the meeting. An example of an unsustainable network was discussed and many recommendations to avoid such kind of experiences were made. A good network has to be open, with clear and distinct goals, addressing mutual interests, but should not be tied to strict regulations. The network should generate its own revenue, which will lead toward its own managerial sustainability. Information should be shared in the network. What should be avoided is a network established by a government agency with some money allocated to set it up and support some activities: this type of network becomes inactive shortly after its creation and ultimately disappears. Other issues raised in the meeting varied from capacity building for local government units and others and awareness raising and dissemination of information to promote transparency. Many activities were recommended, in particular aiming at improving water quality. This reflects participants’ familiarity with pollution control activities, which have been introduced to them by government agencies for nearly ten years and which they commonly practice. Many of the recommended activities can be considered as land-based activities, which are also related with water and thus integrated by natural processes. For example, some participants recommended an expansion of chemical-free agriculture, which is water-friendly and is successfully implemented in some areas of Sakaeo Province in the upstream reaches of the basin.

Small-Group Consultations After the above-mentioned workshop, there were several consultations with focus groups of BPRBC members to find out their interests in the basin management issues. It can be considered that these meetings were an assessment of their performances. Many options were discussed during the meetings. 1. Members of BPRBC observed that their work was to fulfill a program designed by the Department aimed at forming working groups down to the level of sub-districts as a mechanism for collecting projects and proposals for water developments in those areas. The members noted that submitting such proposals under the integrated budgetary plan may not be sufficient to make their work in river basin management effective. They stated their wish to create greater interactions with the stakeholder groups and to focus more on capacity building for these groups as well as for the BPRBC itself. In addition


13

they noted the need to extend links beyond the official groups, established through formal procedures, to develop close relationships with other groups, established by local requirements and which have been seen to be effective. These groups are the genuine nexus that should be supported through increased Dialogue amongst stakeholders and to be developed as trainers of trainers (ToT) in water resources management. These groups would be expected to be more effective in the facilitation of local level dialogue and the development of small projects. These proposals are in line with the project plan and stimulate and develop local water management capacity The BPRBC members agreed that, to promote cooperation with these groups, the informal groups should be recognized by registering them and making them admired in an appropriate way. This registration should be done by BPRBC secretariat with support from the Dialogue’s Project Management Unit (PMU). 2. Some members of the BPRBC stated their wish to focus on concrete actions aimed at formulation and implementation of water development projects that really benefit stakeholders. This is seen as critical in order that the stakeholders will recognize and accept the existence and role of BPRBC. It was agreed that for this purpose the project will organize two workshops with participation of local administrative bodies or Tambon Administrative Organizations (TAOs), and other stakeholders concerned, in order to discuss the availability of water distribution from the Seeyad Reservoir for consumption purpose in nearby areas. 3. For working with government office especially the Water Resources Regional Office Region 6, which also provides the BPRBC secretariat, there is still a gap between these two parties. The members of the BPRBC want the secretariat to become more responsive more to their decisions and also they want the Department to pay more interest in river basin management. The committee members noted the need to improve internal management to ease or to drive the movement at the river basin. An important proposal is to split the BPRBC secretariats duties from other routine work to ensure the staff has clearly defined roles and responsibilities to support the members of the committee. In this respect, the project will help by submitting the report to the Department requesting adjustments to the arrangements for the secretariat staff duties to enable more energetic support to the BPRBC. 4. The members of BPRBC have observed that a substantial volume of information on the basin is available and that there are computer systems at the Regional 6 Office that hold the data. They asked whether these equipments can be used by the committee for official purposes and whether information can be disseminated to whoever interested in it. This will be proposed by the project to the Department in order to ease access to information for the stakeholders and the committee. 5. The committee members expressed very strong views that, in formulating integrated plans for the river basin, most of the projects were proposed by government agencies with little input by the people’s networks. Furthermore the members perceived that some of the projects proposed by the network do not get budget allocations. The project PMU explained that the approval process involves the overall process of budgeting and to gain approval projects have to go through the budgeting mechanism at the national level. However, at the level of the river basin it is possible to immediately identify


14

some small projects, which are within the capacity of the local people to implement by seeking local budget allocations or accessing budgets that are available in the government agencies for such implementation. Workshop and Other Activities in 2004 Workshop During 22-23 April 2004 there was one workshop to intensify cooperation in water resources management of the dialogue partners and to promote awareness among these people. In this workshop the need for information and knowledge exchanges were again emphasized. Participants wanted to have the process of consultations and dialogue tied to the people at the grass-root, they believed that it will help those people learning more and becoming active in mutually conserving water resources and environment. Questions about problems, people requirement, and solutions to problems were asked per province. Many requirements and recommendations in implementing water resources management were made and they will be analyzed and proposed for further actions but only some that can be implemented under this PDA. International Water Management Institute (WMI) Research Team Field work was initiated in August 2004 as part of the water allocation component to identify attitudes of the Bang Pakong population and officials concerning water resources, culture, and water allocation options. The IWMI field team reviewed the current and proposed regulatory frameworks for water allocation and management in Thailand and how the BPRBC would be able to implement the duties and responsibilities the draft law would confer on the organization. Despite the emphasis being given to water and the law, the draft water law is still in the consultation stage and is not expected to reach Parliament for debate in the near future. However, the basin committee is becoming involved in water allocation decisions and a number of discussions were held with the committee and others on the concepts and issues of water rights. A key finding was the confusion of water rights with water charges. Although these two ideas are often discussed together, the cultural setting of Thailand and the current focus on assisting the rural poor to move out of poverty provides opportunities to address the questions of water rights independent of water charges. Interviews with the committee members and other stakeholders found a keen interest in the concepts of water rights once the link to water charging was broken. One advantage in Thailand in water management is that water and culture have long been deeply involved. And to some extent it is an underlining factor that makes Thai people feel comfortable to participate in water management. In the Bang Pakong river basin, the IWMI field team studied on water and culture as described in Annex 2. More of the research team’s work can be found in water allocation part. Training of BPRBC Secretariat As part of a capacity building component, a training course was organized for BPRBC secretariat staff during 28 – 29 September 2004. Its purpose was to enabling them to effectively perform their work as the secretariat. Most of the staff has no experience in secretary work, therefore a training course in a basic work of a secretary was needed. In such training presentations were made on mandate of BPRBC, public sector reform, team working, organizing meeting and the


15

secretariat's role in the meeting, management for end results, presentation technique, and project writing. Practices in relevant topics were made. The training was the first step of involving the secretariat staff in this project. In November 2004 Chairman of the BPRBC attended the 1st General Meeting of Network of Asian River Basin Organization (NARBO) in Indonesia. He also attended NARBO other activities in 2005-2006. And attending more on the other event organized following the first one. Searching for a River Basin Profile In 2004 under this project the river basin’s information or profile was gathered from many previous studies. One of the recent studies was a study on integrated plan for water resources management in the Bank Pakong, Prachin Buri, and Tonle Sap of the Department of Water Resources in year 2004. In this plan all relevant data of water resources in the river basin was collected. It included information of surface water, groundwater, land uses, forest, coastal resources, socio-economic, environment. In running the water allocation model these data together with previous data collection was used. However, for the purpose of sharing this data with stakeholders, gradual process has to be employed and an opportunity must be provided for them to recheck such the information. Series of Workshop and Other Activities in 2005 The first workshop under the ADB support was held on 11 February 2005. It concentrated on the BPRBC’s role in water resources management both in actual and potential consideration. Another important issue was seeking a recommendation on the cooperation between BPRBC and agencies concerned in water resources. Chairman of the Committee presented the problems he perceived on managing the RBC itself. He cited that most agencies in 4 provinces of the Bang Pakong did not recognize the Committee. The member of the Committee did not clearly understand their mandate. Lacking of budget and personnel in the secretariat was a critical problem. Recommendation was made to increase knowledge based management for the Committee and local people, formulate community research, and organize dialogue in local areas in order to identify problems and analyzing for solutions. River basin organization should be upgraded to be public organization in order to provide more flexibility and resources. In this workshop, consideration on water pollution management and river basin planning process was made. It was stated that access to information in this area was important but for the time being it was collected and processed at central level therefore it was difficult for BPRBC to reach such information. The network to monitor state of water quality should be established and also warning system of water quality. In order to achieve budget at the provincial level, water resources plan should be included in the provincial strategy with clearly identified responsible agency in the project implementation. For planning process, as it was timely and its preparation needed more technical survey it was suggested that the preparation of the river basin plan


16

should be in advance and as mentioned before should have a proper mechanism to link it to the provincial/group of provinces strategy. There was another concern over the role and responsibility of BPRBC, its goals should be limited according to what can be easier to achieve. It should consider further beyond present situation to identify mutual benefit and ways to generate its own income. And one last element, it should have more technical people included in the composition. Details of the workshops can be found in Annex 3. Study Visit Two study visits had been organized for members of the BPRBC– firstly to the Mae Khlong river basin, to the west of Bangkok, and the second the Mae Ping river basin in Northern Thailand in February and April 2005 respectively. Members of the committee were able to discuss water allocation and management issues with members of the basin management organizations in these two basins and to examine application of indigenous knowledge to resolve water related problems and some water conflict in the basin take for example the conflict resolution in the sub-district areas within the Mae Khlong river basin. It is found that the study visit is a good mechanism in learning and raising awareness among the BPRBC. The second workshop was organized on 17 May 2005 to discuss an element of water allocation as described in the draft Water Law (its content in an Annex 4). Participants agreed that when the Law comes into force the river basin committee will become a very important body in making a decision on water allocation. They also agreed that information, a model and a decision support system is a useful technical tool to facilitate an efficient, equitable and sustainable water allocation. In this workshop questions were asked about the roles of the committee, its secretariat, and other agencies in water allocation; the role of the committee comparing to the National Water Resources Committee in planning for water allocation of the river basin; and permitting of water uses. The third workshop was held on 13-14 June 2005 to consider water allocation model, its input and output, the allocation process and water use registration form. After a long discussion participants observed their opinion toward many issues. First, an information which was used as the model’s input had been collected without a participatory process most were collected by consultants. It was then lack of awareness of local people on how water should be managed and how they will have their roles in water management. Second, participants wanted to test the model in some small sub-basin as they considered it easier for identification of data by the people of the areas. Third, when the word register was used it was quite sensitive if this water registration form distributed, it may confuse with water charge or people will understand that it implies to charge water uses. The fourth workshop was held on 6 July 2005 to discuss criteria in selecting a sub district that would be chosen to conduct data collection on water use and also to adapt the registration form and change it to a form for surveying water use at the household level. Discussion on training the volunteer to collect the data using such form was made. After the workshop there was a meeting for the volunteers in the field to explain how the data should be collected.


17

The fifth workshop was held on 23 September 2005 to discuss the experiences of collecting water data in five villages. The registration form was adapted to call a survey on water use and it was employed in collecting data at the household level. It was found that the activities helped raising awareness among villagers to think about their appropriate roles in managing water resources for the sake of local people themselves. However, before budget is allowed to conduct collecting data of every household to raise awareness for public at large might be established through public consultations where people can exchange their experiences and problems on water and environment that occurred in their areas. It is believed that through facilitation, solutions for such problems will be sought out together with sense of ownership in mind. People will volunteer to behave thoughtfully and water will not be taken for granted as usual. The sixth workshop was held on 14 October 2005 to consider the role of local administrative bodies in Khlong Tha Lat, one of the Bang Pakong sub basin of their cooperation with the Royal Irrigation Department in allocating water from Si Yat reservoir, one of the reservoir in the sub basin. It was found out that their interest in water resources management were not consistent when there seemed to be a prospect for deriving water from the reservoir their interest in managing water was dropped. The seventh workshop was held on 14 December 2005 to discuss collecting of the data where DWR also has its program to collect the data of water sources concentrated on water sources at the household level. More effort in integrating these two sides of data would be employed. Training on WEAP Model. The training was organized at IWMI office during 17 October to 20 December 2005 for participants from DWR, the BPRBC Secretariat and the Bang Pakong Dialogue network including member from one sub-basin of the Ping river basin. Participants were trained to acquaint themselves in using the model and at the end of the training they presented to the BPRBC on how it is used in making a decision on water allocation of the basin.

Extended Dialogue on Water Pollution After the Dialogue consultations with the BPRBC on 11-12 September 2003 and 22-23 April 2004, the BPRBC used the Dialogue process to analyze and to seek solutions to the problems in the basin. They organized a Dialogue to discuss water pollution in the river basin on 27 December 2004 in one of the areas in Prachin Buri province, which affected by pollution with about 300 participants. The meeting openly discussed and exchanged information on the causes and proposed solutions that can be implemented by people themselves. The solutions proposed are:

1. Before any external campaign the first step must be to prevent oneself from dumping wastes into river, canals and there should be voluntary groups to monitor water quality in main sources of water. A center for coordination of the activities of the voluntary groups should be set up.

2. The other sectors like agriculture and industry should start to reduce pollution such as moving to organic agriculture, and asking cooperation from industry to treat water and to introduce any other re-use technology.


18

3. Capacity building should be considered in term of formulation of database and information on map, physical data of ecosystem and people/local research should be encouraged for such purpose.

4. Fund should be raised either from government or local communities in order to fund the work mentioned.

5. Training at every level, including in school, to raise awareness and promote activities of water conservation and prevention of pollution.

In 2005 and afterwards in the above mentioned area there have been several consultations amongst local people and they agree to monitor water quality and not to quarrel to the other about water pollution but try to keep their behavior from increasing wastes to water sources. In addition people agree to survey all water data in their area to be a reference for the consultations. Workshops in 2006 The eighth workshop was held on 24 January 2006 to assess the project and actual cooperation between government sector and people of the basin and also to identify guidelines for future implementation of the components of water allocation. In this workshop the advantages and disadvantages of the project was analyzed. It was pointed out that the Secretariat of the BPRBC should get more support from DWR and also from other government agencies in the basin and its office should comprise these agencies to help working on technical aspects. Future activities of community involvement in water resources management for example surveying natural streams and canal for rehabilitation and development and developing and documentation of knowledge modules for dissemination were discussed and suggested. The areas for cooperation with the government sector were discussed and identified such as a survey of water uses at a sub-district level to cover the whole basin, an attempt to solve water pollution in some specific areas facing with this problem. The workshop also considered many aspects and tools for water allocation, which are precise data on water supply and demand, clear responsible agency, decision support system, consultations for best alternatives, and water rights and supported laws. Other aspects were discussed for example procedure in allocating water, water use efficiency, water user group strengthening, water use in industrial sector, and transbasin water diversion. The ninth workshop was held on 3 February 2006 to brainstorm opinions for selection of scenario for water allocation. Different scenarios were set, which are when water right is determined and permit is issued how water should be shared among sector uses, in dry season and dry year if cropping is prohibited but farmers disobey and continue to plant their crops and in this case when less water is got and damage arises whether compensation is deserved. The last scenario was if in dry season water is allocated to industry and tourism instead of agriculture what their opinions are. A question was also asked for the participants to identify priority in water allocation for sector uses in each sub-basin. The tenth workshop was held on 15 May 2006 to consider the matter of concrete implementation of water allocation. In this workshop one sub-basin called Khlong Phra Prong sub basin was raised as a case. In this sub basin most occupation is agriculture but at the downstream many industries are located. Considering the scenario of dry year


19

where water is contributed to the industry, the participants were asked to calculate the amount of compensation that farmers should get from the situation. From this workshop, participants foresaw and were aware of the benefits from the case study at Phra Prong tributary, therefore, proposed for further study and to appoint an ad hoc working group under the BPRBC to implement the study. If and when the BPRBC agreed to the proposal, a draft of the project with the characteristics of being a learning process and operational research would be prepared to seek for sources of financial support.

The eleventh workshop was held on 13 June 2006, which was initiated by the BPRBC to identify and discuss about the proposal for trial of water allocation in the Khlong Phra Prong sub basin. Main topic that was discussed focusing on how water allocation of this sub basin should be started and it is found that the situation can be divided into two cases. For the case of dry year, allocation and its other components should be practices and on the other hand for normal year monitoring of water distribution from the reservoirs should be introduced and in order to predict the case RID must provide information to BPRBC. The workshop participants agreed that the BPRBC members from this sub basin will draft the proposal with an assistance of RID office that has responsibility in the area. This project will be supported under the Bang Pakong Dialogue work plan of this PDA.

Existing Networks Working on Water Quality Campaign One of the provinces in the river basin that is usually hit by water pollution Chachoengsao, consultation aiming at tackling with the problems was normally held by the existing network. And when they got more information from the Bang Pakong Dialogue, since March 2006 the network has organized a series of consultations, the first one was held on 27 March 2006 to discuss water quality management of a big industrial company, which is a car production company that will start its production in 2007. The representative from that company agreed to taste draining water every month in front of witnesses from local villages, government officials and the media. The following consultation was held on 18 July 2006 to identify how water activities will be taken care and what will be the issues that local people can do to help preserving their water and ecosystem. They agreed to proceed with collecting their own data in water resources and related resources, firming their network at the level of villages and sub-district, identifying problems and solutions especially the ecosystem, water quality, and coastal resources. Water Initiative in a Small Sub-basin The Bang Pakong network who is the sub-district’s head that faced the problems of water shortages, flood and pollution asked the BPRBC to help in the dialogue with villagers and to try solving the problems through consultations, identifying problems, causes and solutions in a community plan that will submit to the government sector. The first and second consultations were held on 18 and 25 July 2006. The BPRBC facilitated them until they set up the working group to tackle with the problems. They


20

also agreed to divide the responsibility in some urgent issues for example DWR’s Regional Office in coordinating for dredging of their water sources to keep more volume of water, the representative from provincial office in coordinating with RID to try to avoid draining huge volume of water into their water sources, and the working group was set from villager volunteers to draw a community plan to include water management. The experience in this case will be followed up and learned in order to understand its context for future replication. Public Consultation and Awareness Raising Program On 30 June to 1 July 2006 the Bang Pakong Dialogue networks and their partners organized a public consultation meeting and focused the discussion on water issues. The objective of this meeting was to seek cooperation from the people in 2 sub basins, Main Bang Pakong and Prachinburi in identifying a project of local research and core group for implementing the research. A wide range of public relations and media communication was promoted. The Dialogue PMU has prepared a book on the Dialogue process to disseminate to stakeholders in the basin. This book was co-written by the PMU and the Dialogue network aiming at raising awareness to a wider public about how the dialogue has implemented and how it should proceed. 3. Water Allocation and Its Setting in the Bang Pakong In general the demands from industrialization and a growing population in Thailand have eclipsed water supply in many areas, leaving the country with mounting problems of both water quality and equitable water distribution. Water needs are most pressing in the dry season (November-April) and storage capacity has becoming increasingly inadequate. While more supply-side projects are currently underway, Thailand has recognized the need to implement the principles of Integrated Water Resource Management. Currently, the legislative and institutional climate in the country’s water sector is under a period of major transition.

However, water allocation system in Thailand has not yet been established. There are several laws concerning water and many organizations that are responsible in policy and operation. But conflict in water uses at all levels prevails, conflicts among government agencies, between government agency and water users and among users can be seen everywhere. Open access to water causes unequal distribution even in the Chao Phraya river basin where RID sets a system of bulk allocation of water, the amount of water determined to deliver for a certain purpose in the downstream can be drawn by the other purpose upstream. In this sense the amount of water is set to allocate from large reservoirs to resource managers and users e.g. Provincial Waterworks Authority for rural water supply and water user groups for agricultural water. For agriculture, which is the majority use because water user groups were not fully established all across irrigated areas, in dry year competing of water uses exists and even more severe in non-irrigated areas. Mechanism for conflict resolution is not yet in place and there is no water user participation in water allocation, all decisions are made by government sector.


21

In the Bang Pakong river basin considering statistical data alone for example per capita water, it may lead to a perception that there is enough water for every sector of use and there should be no water shortages. But the fact is on a contrary, in the main river, the Bang Pakong which discharge into the Gulf of Thailand, in dry season sea intrusion is its main problem, with brackish water reaching 170 km upstream. It means that inflow of freshwater into the river is less than the amount used to push salt water to the point that can be considered as a healthy level for the river and people. Main problems related to water in this basin were identified as water shortages and water pollution. A water resources master plan in the Bang Pakong river basin conveyed them as follows: (1) Insufficient water with following sub-categories

- Insufficiency of pipe water - Insufficiency of water for domestic use and consumption (outside

service areas of providers) - Insufficiency of water for agriculture and others

(2) Water quality problems have been sub-divided into following categories: - Pipe-water quality - Water quality for domestic use and consumption (outside pipe-water

service areas) - Water quality for agricultural activities and others

(3) Flooding problems have been sub-divided into following categories - Regular flooding problems - Drastic flooding problems

(4) Water resources management with following sub-categories - Lack of organized water-user groups - Lack of water allocation management resulting in inequitable

distribution of water at the upper and lower part of the waterways

Main water agencies, which are service providers of surface water in the Bang Pakong river basin are RID, East Water Resources Development and Public Company, RID conducts operations to insure water supply for agriculture, industry, and public utilities. The East Water Resources Development and Management Public Company manage water resources, especially raw water, transmission systems for industrial and consumer use. As mentioned earlier, all the decisions made in water projects were done by these agencies with little attention to local people participation. In non-irrigated areas water was at a limited concern from all of these agencies. The process of decentralization in 1999 and a public sector reform in 2002 tasked responsibility of water resources reservation and water supply in rural area to local administrative bodies with technical assistance from DWR. At the same time Water Policy of 2000 emphasizes on equitable water allocation and in 2001, the Office of the National Water Resources Committee established the Bang Pakong River Basin Committee. This Basin Committee has the mandated responsibility to manage water resources in the Bang Pakong-Prachinburi River Basins. Two out of its mandate are to determine the volume of water use, water allocation and other measures that ensure appropriateness, fairness, and efficiency of


22

water allocation, and to reconcile the conflicts of water resources management that occur in the river basin. The RID currently remains the main water management agency in the Bang Pakong Basin. The department distributes water based on estimated demand. This is particularly pressing in the dry season, when water delivery is constrained by water stored in the basin reservoirs. Additional factors that influence water distribution include requirements for transportation, salinity control, and crop requirements. There are several conflicts within the basin, but there is no effective means for resolving the conflicts (Taesombut, 2002). The BPRBC is expected to take a significant role in future water allocation and the resolution of water related conflicts. The objectives of water allocation component of the PDA are to identify appropriate evaluation and decision support tools and processes to assist the BPRBC address the critical issue of water allocation between competing water use sectors and users. To address these objectives the water allocation support system for the Bang Pakong basin will answer three key questions:

• How much water is needed in the river to protect the environmental values desired in the basin?

• How can water diversions be managed to minimize the effects on ecosystems, receiving waters and community values?

• How can the greatest economic and social benefit be gained form the water diverted form the river system?

Existing water allocation conflicts include:

• Water for agriculture, industrial and domestic use, fisheries (brackish water for shrimp), livestock (pig farms)

• Salinity intrusion in the dry season up to 120 km from the river mouths • Reservoir regulations for different water demands • Operation of Bang Pakong diversion dam for different water use at both

upstream and downstream areas. The water allocation plan for the Bang Pakong will include:

• information on water resources of the basin, • evaluation of water resource values in meeting the needs of water dependent

ecosystems, meeting the social and cultural needs of communities, and satisfying industrial, agricultural and public water supply demands,

• allocation decisions and licensing policy. Water allocation scenario will be based on:

• identifying key ecological, social and cultural values to be protected, • describing water regimes or related criteria that must be met to ensure that

those values are protected (termed environmental water provisions or EWPs),

• defining the quantities of water that can be diverted while maintaining EWPs, and


• indicating the share of the water that can be licensed for use by agricultural, industrial or public water supply users.

4. Selection of Water Allocation Model and Decision Support Tool The model selection was based on the evaluation of candidate models against commonly accepted criteria as described in Annex 5 for selection of models; namely: Technical: The selected model has to be capable of meeting the technical requirements, i.e. the range of processes and conditions that the models must be capable of simulating, to satisfy the objectives of the water allocation methodologies. Requirement of input data is also considered as one criteria in technical requirement.

Use

r Fr

iend

lines

s

Sust

aina

bilit

y

Tec

hnic

al

Water Allocation Simulation Models

AQUATOR S1 S1 S3

HEC-RESSIM S2 S2 S1

User Friendliness: Users are able to appreciate the functions of the models and to set up and run water allocation scenarios.

MIKE BASIN S1 S1 S3

WEAP S1 S1 S1

Fully complies Legend: S1

23

Sustainability: (i) meets the user’s current needs and data conditions, (ii) adaptable to meet emerging future needs, and (iv) maintainable. Selection of the Basin Simulation Model Four available models: AQUATOR, HEC-RESSIM, MIKE BASIN and WEAP have been reviewed and evaluated based on the above criteria. Bearing in mind the comments received with respect the modelling approach presented in the Inception Report, it was decided that a single model would be selected for development of the Bang Pakong water allocation support tool. On the basis of the above criteria and the availability, existing in-house experience with the candidate tools and the cost of the modelling systems the WEAP model was selected for this project. Following a rapid evaluation of the candidate models, the Water Evaluation and Allocation Program (WEAP) developed by SEI was selected. This modeling environment is selected as it best meets the selection criteria as it is now available free of charge for Government; non-profit; and educational use. Furthermore, the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) has collaborated with various organizations to produce versions of the interface in Chinese and other languages. The details of WEAP model as described in Annex 6 A parallel activity in the Mae Sa sub-basin in the Ping River is considering use of the WEAP model for water allocation studies in the Mae Sa basin, led by the four Tambon Administration Organizations (TAO) responsible for this area. In addition the DWR Planning Unit has requested assistance, from IWMI, to strengthen the in-house capacity to undertake water resources and water allocation modeling. IWMI has proposed

S2 Moderately complies

S3 Major shortcomings

N Do not comply


24

training DWR staff in the application of WEAP. Availability of a Thai language version of WEAP will enable widespread application of modeling system. 5. Collation of Existing Data and Development of Water Allocation Scenarios Since inception of the project in August 2004 the project team have made numerous field visits to collect data from the relevant agencies in the basin and to meet with members of the BPRBC. In addition to the basic basin information collated to enable development and calibration of the WEAP model of the basin, summarized in Table 2, focus group discussions with the BPRBC, agency personnel and stakeholders in the basin are helping develop water allocation scenarios for testing with the model once calibrated. The PDA project is fortunate in the availability of nationwide coverage of the major river systems and leading demographic data in the “Thailand on a Disk”, developed by the Thailand Research Institute. This compact disk contains digital mapping and associated databases for the entire country and has been imported directly to the WEAP interface as the base map for the WEAP model. On-screen digitization has been utilized to create the WEAP representation of the river networks, as shown in Figure 4 and 5, from the Thailand on a disk GIS files1. Additional information on location, capacity and operating rules for reservoirs have been obtained from RID. Information on the operation of water supply systems and irrigation systems have been obtained from the Provincial Water Works Organization and RID. Basic hydrological and meteorological data have been collected from RID and the Thailand Meteorological Department. Additional data have been extracted from the recent Integrated Plan for Water Resources Management (IP-WRM) in Bang Pakong - Prachin Buri Basins (PTC and Tesco Ltd, 2004). These data have been preprocessed and checked for consistency before inclusion in the WEAP modeling database. The WEAP model may be operated using actual hydrological time series or by the use of a Base, or Reference Year, then creating a sequence of above or below reference years for the modeled time period. The use of actual hydrological observations has the attraction of being based on “real observations”; however as the model is used to project possible scenarios the “hydrological year” method can be considered equally valid. Currently the model is being operated using “hydrological years” in a sequence that demonstrates the same statistical parameters as the observed time series.

1 NB: the Thailand on a disk uses UTM mapping projections which required the study team to utilize the ESRI Arc View tools to project the relevant section of the coverage to a latitude and longitude coordinate system for import to WEAP. However, it appears most local administration organizations and line agencies in Thailand have these tools and the necessary expertise available. The conversion is only required once when the model is first established and thus does not constrain wide application of the model.


Table 2 Summary of data collated for Bang Pakong water allocation model

Data No. Station No. Year Time Period Time Step Units

Rainfall Station 91 53 1952-2004 Monthly mm.

Discharge Gage Station 20 30 1975-2004 Monthly cms.

Evaporation Station 4 30 1975-2004 Monthly mm

Demand Site 46 30 1975-2004 Monthly cms.

Supply Site 40 30 1975-2004 Monthly cms.

Reservoir 19

Fig. 4 Screen shot of WEAP model representation of Bang Pakong-Prachin Buri River Basin

25


Fig. 5 Screen shot of WEAP model representation of Upper Tonlesap River Basin 6. Development of WEAP Model Simulation of Bang Pakong Basin Following selection of the WEAP model as the Bang Pakong water allocation simulation model, the network of river channels, diversions, demand and return flow locations have been entered to the model framework, and also the model was used for the water balance analysis to evaluate unmet demand 6.1 Water Demand in the Basin The water demand can be classified into 7 types activities; namely, domestic consumption, agriculture, industry, fishery, brackish fishery, livestock, flushing against salt water intrusion and environment conservation and tourism. The combined water demand for all activities for 2004 was approximately 2,472 MCM./year and 2,918 MCM./year for 2024 The simulated results found that the main consumption in the basin is agricultural demand, especially in Main Bang Pakong River Basin of present year and 2024. The study of the water demand in the basin in 2004 and 2024 is shown in Table 3 and 4, respectively.

26


Table 3 Summary of Water Demand for Overall Basin in 2004

27

Khlo

Khlo

Hanu

Main

Subt

Nakh

Bang

Tha L

Subt

Uppe

Tota

Water Demand in 2004 (MCM.)

Domestic Agriculture Industry Livestock Fishery TourismSalt Water Intrusion and Environmental

ConservationTotal

ng Phra Prong Prachin Buri 4.649 33.606 0.278 0.077 0.000 0.135 0.272 39.018

ng Phra Satung Prachin Buri 7.177 2.542 0.255 0.028 0.000 0.100 0.272 10.374

man Prachin Buri 0.469 0.000 2.016 0.044 0.000 0.100 0.272 2.901

Prachin Buri Prachin Buri 22.986 409.255 8.741 0.247 82.733 0.163 26.780 550.905

otal 35.281 445.403 11.290 0.397 82.733 0.498 27.596 603.197

on Nayok Bang Pakong 9.487 635.630 1.481 0.262 93.613 0.124 0.272 740.869

Pakong Bang Pakong 34.273 507.273 3.721 11.474 239.712 0.651 98.044 895.148

at Bang Pakong 5.632 104.170 0.38 1.738 9.430 0.302 0.272 121.924

otal 49.392 1,247.073 5.582 13.474 342.755 1.077 98.588 1,757.941

r Tonlesap Tonle Sap 21.654 89.104 0.037 0.043 0.000 0.110 0.272 111.220

l 106.327 1,781.580 16.909 13.914 425.488 1.685 126.456 2,472.358

Sub-Basin Basin

Table 4 Summary of Water Demand for Overall Basin in 2024

Domestic Agriculture Industry Livestock Fishery TourismSalt Water Intrusion and Environmental

ConservationTotal

Khlong Phra Prong Prachin Buri 10.531 33.606 0.374 0.231 0.000 0.246 0.272 45.260

Khlong Phra Satung Prachin Buri 18.073 43.182 0.343 0.084 0.000 0.173 0.272 62.127

Hanu

Main

Subt

Nakh

Bang

Tha L

Subt

Uppe

Tota

Sub-Basin Basin

Water Demand in 2024 (MCM.)

man Prachin Buri 0.469 111.300 2.715 0.132 0.000 0.195 0.272 115.083

Prachin Buri Prachin Buri 61.914 409.255 11.773 0.737 82.733 0.349 26.780 593.540

otal 90.986 597.343 15.205 1.184 82.733 0.963 27.596 816.010

on Nayok Bang Pakong 24.179 635.630 1.995 0.781 93.613 0.294 0.272 756.764

Pakong Bang Pakong 93.524 507.273 5.012 35.423 239.712 1.553 98.044 980.540

at Bang Pakong 12.609 187.120 0.512 6.516 9.430 0.720 0.272 217.179

otal 130.313 1,330.023 7.518 42.720 342.755 2.567 98.588 1,954.484

r Tonlesap Tonle Sap 50.610 97.104 0.049 0.129 0.000 0.176 0.272 148.339

l 271.908 2,024.470 22.773 44.032 425.488 3.706 126.456 2,918.833 6.2 Scenario Development and Management Water sustainability evaluation requires a scenario approach for taking a long wide view that considers futures with fundamentally development and environmental assumptions and policies. Using integrating water management scenarios, diverse stakeholders can engage in informed dialogues around balancing trade-offs and


devising appropriate actions. Scenario analysis proposes to answer “What if…?” questions. Data are essential to evaluate the current and future situation. (Alfarra, 2004) 1. Reference Scenario The reference or business as usual business is the base scenario the uses the actual data, to help in understanding the best estimates about the studies period. The reference scenario objective is to help people learn what likely could occur if current trend continue and to understand the real situation 2. Water Demand Scenario The water demand scenario is to set priorities of water demand in the basin which consists of domestic consumption, agriculture, industry, fishery, brackish fishery, livestock, flushing against salt water intrusion and environment conservation and tourism as shown in Table 5. The priorities derived from the opinions of the Bang Pakong River Basin Committee (BPRBC) meeting on May,15 2006 at Chachoengsao province. It was the water allocation participating process of BPRBC. 3. Water Supply Scenario The water supply scenario focuses on the development of potential irrigation area or reservoir. Table 5 The priority of water demand activities

28

Current Future Current Future Current Future Current Future Current Future Current Future Current Future Current Future

1 Domestic 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 Agriculture 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 Industry 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 4

4 Fishery 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4

5 Brackish Fishery 3 6 4 6 5 5 3 5 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 5

7

No. Water Demand ActivityKhlong Phra Prong Khlong Phra Satung Tha Lat Upper TonlesapHanuman Main Prachin Buri Nakhon Nayok Bang Pakong

6 Livestock 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 1 5 1 3 5 3 3 3 2

Salt Water Intrusion and Environmental Conservation 5 5 2 3 2 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 3

8 Tourism 5 3 5 4 3 2 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 6.3 Scenario Analysis and Results Water shortage is a continuous problem especially in dry season and in dry spell. The study shown that in 2004, the water shortage was 12.27 MCM. in all scenarios and the water shortage was decreased from 12.27 MCM in 2004 to 12.20 MCM in 2005, because of the construction of Tha Dan Dam in all scenarios. The water shortage forecast in 20 years of reference and water demand scenarios will tend to increase to 17.16 MCM. As a result of the higher water demand and significant difference could not be found between the reference and water demand scenarios. On the other hand, the water shortage in the water supply scenario was decreased from 12.20 MCM. in 2005 to 4.08 MCM. in 2009 because of the construction of new reservoirs. In 2024, there


will be an increase in water shortage by 8.92 MCM. The simulation results shown in Table 6 and Fig. 6 Table 6 Unmet Demand in Difference Scenario (MCM.)

Scenario 2004 2005 2009 2014 2019 2024 Reference 12.27 12.20 12.27 12.33 12.33 17.16 Water Demand 12.27 12.20 12.27 12.33 12.33 17.16 Water Supply 12.27 12.20 4.08 8.48 8.92 8.92

29

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

Year

Unm

et D

eman

d (M

CM

.

18.0

20.0

)

ReferenceDeamndSupply

Fig.6 Unmet Demand in Difference Scenarios

6.4 Recommendation and Suggestion Normally, a problem of water allocation in the river basin scale is an acceptable data. The reliability and verifying data were mentioned in many consultation meetings. The accepted approach is to establish the working group for data checked that comprises representative from government, private, business, River Basin Committee (RBC) and stakeholders sectors and to publish the information. 7. Analyzing of Water Allocation Process and Involvement of BPRBC If BPRBC adopts the conceptual model in which the committee is primarily responsible for development of the strategic plan for water allocation in the basin with both spatial and temporal dimensions, then the major task is to develop a range of scenarios for the basin. These scenarios must match the probable development trajectories for the local communities in terms of population growth; economics and social aspirations and the desired environment in the basin. The WEAP model will be used to evaluate the impact on the basin scale water regime of these alternate development scenarios, enabling the


committee to interact with stakeholder communities, both the local community and the agencies and political representatives. Results from the model can be used to better inform the dialogue between the stakeholders providing a quantitative basis for a shared vision of water allocation amongst the various stakeholder groups and sector agencies

30

Processing an issue of water consent with reference to analysis of options.

Current Position

Collation of records of existing institutional water use (RID, Municipal water supplies etc)

Registration of existing individual water uses (including extraction and discharge from surface and ground waters)

Evaluation of current and projected water uses: relative to water resources and socio-economic and livelihood development plans.

Analysis of future development and water allocation options

Monitoring and evaluation of water quality and quality in river basin and user satisfaction analysis

Figure 7 Water allocation process – Overview


31

There will need to be a period of transition from the current position, whereby individual line agencies make water allocation decisions on a case by case basis, to a more integrated form where the river basin committee oversees the strategic water allocation in the basin. Individual line agencies can then make allocations within the structure of the plan, without having to involve the RBC in every decision. Furthermore the BPRBC secretariat is understaffed to undertake the tasks of registration of the water uses and making allocations across the entire basin. Therefore, at least during the period of transition, and most probably into the future, the BPRBC will implement basin management in collaboration with a broad range of line agencies including RID, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (Department of Water Resources: DWR, Pollution Control Department: PCD), Ministry of Industry, and the agencies of the provincial authorities and municipalities. Figure 7 illustrates the major elements of the transition phase and a proposed water allocation and monitoring cycle.

1. Collation of existing bulk water abstractions and discharges Existing records of current water abstractions from, and discharges to, water bodies in the Bang Pakong are widely distributed amongst the various line agencies and institutions involved in water management in the basin. Although the recent changes in the institutional arrangements for water management in Thailand have streamlined these arrangements a collated record of water uses is not known to be generally available to the organizations involved.

It is proposed that the BPRBC Secretariat takes a leading role in the collation of existing records of bulk water abstractions and discharges, currently thought to be held by provincial and regional offices of the relevant line agencies and provincial authorities. An agreed minimum information set should be captured in a relational database, ideally web-enabled and linked to a GIS to enable easy access by all stakeholders.

2. Registration of individual water abstractions and discharges

It can be assumed there are numerous water abstractions and discharges to the water bodies in Bang Pakong that are not currently registered with any agency. The draft water act distinguishes three classes of water use; with individual water abstractions for domestic or private minor agricultural uses are not subject to a requirement to obtain consent for use. However, although the act does not require these minor water users to obtain water use consents it is suggested that it is in the interest of the individual water users to register these uses so that the total water allocation can be made taking these uses into account. Also by registering such abstractions the users may obtain a higher level of certainty that the water will remain available in the future.

Priority should be given to registering the larger water abstractions and discharges for agriculture, aquaculture, livestock and industrial water uses. Registration of individual household abstractions and discharges is unlikely to be necessary in the foreseeable future.

3. Evaluation of existing and projected water uses


32

As the records of abstractions by individuals and organizations are updated the BPRBC can evaluate the impacts of existing water uses and projected developments in terms of the water allocations in the basin. These data will constitute the Base Case for the basin water allocation model (WEAP) against which the alternate development and water allocation scenarios can be tested.

4. Analysis of future developments and water allocation scenarios

The future development trends in the basin will, to a large extent, be determined by the allocation of water and land resources. However, future water and land allocations will be guided by the socio-economic development and livelihood objectives of the population that make their living in the basin. Therefore the key task of the RBC and other organizations responsible for water resources governance is to assess the future development trajectory of the communities in the basin in order to anticipate the water requirements for different uses.

Anticipation the development trajectory in a basin sufficiently far into the future with any certainty is clearly a risky undertaking. Changes in policy or political leadership and external “shocks” can have dramatic impacts on development plans. The impacts of climate change are beginning to be understood but how these will impact on specific river basins is still uncertain, as is the reaction from the population to these changes.

The uncertainty inherent in projecting development plans into the future suggests that a scenario based analysis of water requirements offers a sound basis for development of allocation plans. Scenario based analysis also offers the benefit of providing a vehicle to facilitate effective participation by the full range of stakeholders. Basing model parameterization on alternate scenarios enables interested parties to define their visions of how the basin will evolve in natural language which can then be “interpreted” to provide a numerical representation for analysis in the decision support system (DSS).

The World Water Vision study that resulted in the Making Water Everyone’s Business (Cosgrove and Rijsberman, 2000) at the 2nd World Water Forum utilized a scenario approach to set modeling frameworks used in the study. A set of three global scenarios were used to initiate consultation amongst the global community. The scenarios were based on three alternate views of the likely evolutions of the major forces driving the global water situation. The driving factors were considered to be economic, demographic, technological, social, environmental and governance. The Vision exercise considered three alternate scenarios: Business-as-Usual scenario (BAU), representing the future trajectory if no major policy or lifestyle changes take place; the Economics, Technology and Private Sector scenario (TEC), which may result from policies favored by those who rely on the market, the involvement of the private sector and mainly technological solutions, and largely national/local or basin-level action; and the Values and Lifestyles scenario (VAL), that could materialize through a


33

revival of human values, strengthened international cooperation, heavy emphasis on education, international mechanisms, international rules, increased solidarity and changes in lifestyles and behavior (Gallopin and Rijsberman, 2000)

At basin scale a DSS, such as WEAP, can enable the RBC and the secretariat to evaluate a range of alternate development scenarios relatively quickly, where the scenarios can be developed through consultation with the stakeholder community, including discussion with community representatives and through more widespread consultations with the general public. To initiate the discussion about future development three alternate scenarios are proposed in outline here. Further consultation will be required to develop these outlines to provide the parameters for modeling.

• Business as Usual (BAU) – in this scenario it is assumed that

development planning and water allocation will continue to be driven by sector specific objectives and plans that are only loosely coordinated at basin scale.

• Accelerated Industrialization (AI) – priority is given to the expansion

of industrial and commercial activities in the basin, with rapid expansion of urban areas. Water allocations are focused on these expanding municipal and industrial uses with agricultural allocations being reduced to provide the required resources. Little priority is given to protection of environment and in-stream flow requirements are generally inadequate to sustain aquatic environments.

• Balanced Development & Demand Management (BDDM)– Industrial

and domestic water requirements continue to increase to support increased economic activities and expanded urban communities; however the rate of increase is minimized through investment in improved technologies for water management. Agricultural water use will remain stable or decrease resulting from improved agricultural water management, improved technologies and changes in cropping patterns. Increased priority will be given to environmental water uses and expansion of eco-tourism to support the requirements of the population of Bangkok and expanded cities in the Bang Pakong basin, requiring increased water allocations to maintain in-stream flows and wetland areas. Industrial and agricultural effluents treated at source in order to maintain water quality in the receiving waters.

Combinations of elements of these scenarios can be implemented in different parts of the basin at different times; each with differing impacts on the water regime that the population, flora and fauna of the basin will have to cope with. However by analyzing the expected impacts of the communities best estimates of how development will play out in the basin


34

and arriving at a shared vision of how water resources should be used to support the basin communities’ aspirations will provide the agencies with a firm basis to assess application for consents for water use.

5. Processing applications for consent to use water

The level of detail required by different authorities making water allocations in river basins varies considerably in different basins. Examples of forms used by these authorities are available on the internet; see for example Environment Waikato (2005b), Armenia (2005), British Columbia (2005), City of Waterloo (2005), New South Wales (2005), Oklahoma (2005) and others. However, in the first instance it is proposed that the approach of the Philippines National Water Resources Board (2005), is adopted as the minimum requirements for registration of an application for consent to use water resources in Bang Pakong. A similar form may be developed for consent to discharge effluents to a water body.

The issue of water use consents will require the secretariat (or relevant line agency) to confirm that the applicant has completed the application correctly, the application is consistent with the overall water allocation plan for the location of the intended abstraction or discharge; and that the applicant is eligible to make the application. If these conditions are met then the consent for use can be issued; otherwise the application may be held pending further information or rejected.

6. Monitoring and evaluation of impacts of water allocation decisions

Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of the impacts of the implementation of the allocation process will be an essential part of the basin management tasks of the BPRBC and the Secretariat. M&E should include the evaluation of the efficiency of the application and approval process; and the effectiveness of enforcement of allocation decisions, particularly with regard to the discharge of effluents and polluted waters.

Integrated water resources management is recognized as requiring a more dynamic approach than in traditional basin management planning; it is not adequate to develop a water allocation plan and then to assume the plan holds good for some predetermined period. The BPRBC must continue to monitor and evaluate the development trajectory on the basin and adjust the water allocation plan on a regular basis, updating the water allocation summary at quarter yearly intervals. The RBC should publish an annual report describing major development activities in the basin and long, medium and short term objectives for water management improvements in the basin. The RBC has a key role in the promotion and dissemination of water management improvements and water saving technologies, in order to ensure that water reserves can be maintained while savings can be reallocated for other users or uses.

8. Lesson Learned from the Project


35

8.1 Observation on BPRBC Roles of Water Management Overall the studies up to May 2005 revealed a lack of understanding of integrated water resources management, water allocation and water rights. However the members of the BPRBC have shown a great desire to learn how to become an effective water management body for the benefit of the basin stakeholders. But, it appears there remains some considerable antipathy between the line agencies and the BPRBC regarding the roles and responsibilities of the various parties involved in the BPRBC; and possibly about the potential for the BPRBC to play an active role in the management of the basin. We have also observed some disconnection amongst the departments involved in the basin. Further efforts must be directed towards overcoming existing departmental divisions and suspicions if the fully integrated plan of action is to be developed and implemented. A concerted effort by the DWR regional and central offices must focus on revitalizing the BPRBC and encouraging full participation by all members. It has been noted that the participation of line agency representatives in the work of the committee is not adequate, leading to the individual private sector members, becoming less enthusiastic about participation. The secretariat, currently staffed by members of the DWR Regional Office as additional duty to other activities, should be reviewed. A dedicated and appropriately skilled team should be assembled and assigned to the tasks of the BPRBC. Ideally the Secretariat should draw on staff from other line agencies in addition to the DWR regional office. The above comments were made in an interim report of June 2005. There has been gradually changed over BPRBC performance since the time of the last report to the end of the project in June 2006. The workshop on 13-14 June 2005 made the BPRBC and its network agreed to trial collecting water use data by employing the form that the project developed it from a water registration form. After piloting it in 5 sub-districts people in the areas started to realize how much water they use in their every day life and other activities and this is how awareness raising on water business started among local people. The following workshops were about introducing how water should be allocated and there was training on WEAP model to the BPRBC network and some of the RBC secretariat and at the end of the training the trainees presented the model to the BPRBC. Before the end of 2005 the BPRBC organized a meeting of the Committee and other government agencies concerned on 14 November 2005 to discuss how water should be allocated considering the linkage of allocating plan among the 4 main reservoirs of the basins and this concern involved a task of Royal Irrigation Department (RID). RID’s staff attending the meeting made a brief on such scheme in order to provide the BPRBC with an update of water quantity of such reservoirs but there was not yet an allocation plan with full linkage in distributing water from those 4 reservoirs.


36

In another meeting in early 2006 a question was raised about data collection at sub-district level on its correctness. But they agreed that data collection helps grass-root localities learn about their water resources. Attempts have been made continuously under the project and by the BPRBC to expand participation to the grass root level by working closely with various agencies. Efficient and equitable water allocation will be achieved through better cooperation from stakeholders especially at the smallest unit like grass-root level. In order to promote such cooperation, full participation will be met through sharing of information between government officials and people at the grass-root level. And the coordination between people sector in the BPRBC and the government agencies concerned has improved through the working process that the BPRBC and the project tried to establish. In the Bang Pakong river basin the Dialogue in coordination with BPRBC creates the people that can be called “Change Agent” to liaise the process of exchanging such information and facilitate the procedure that will allow a system of efficient and equitable water allocation to occur at the later stage. It will be achieved in a co-management approach, which is a two-track approach that adopts a strategy of formulating actions simultaneously at the community and different governance levels. This strategy begins with demonstration projects at selected sites that identify and analyze the issues that must be addressed and formulate new approaches to resolving them at small scale. The assumption is that success will allow the scaling-up and networking of activities to be replicated as a process and eventually produce a coherent and effective water co-management plan and decision-making procedures that encompass the nation as a whole. 8.2 Co-management that Existed in the Project An approach being used for the RBC is it will be tasked for the work that was not a responsibility of any agency. Unfortunately, this means that information and policies are either non-existent or confused because of different levels of development within the river basin. Water planning and management options in the river basin need considerable work, simulation models, systems and the underlying data and information are not readily available, and existing organizations are not sufficiently skilled to undertake the necessary work. The RBC comprises from the governmental side water planning and management experts, often drawn from existing water-related agencies. It would not interfere in household water supply, irrigation the areas where there are explicit responsible agencies but it would deal with the policy and management of the rivers and catchments. Major stakeholders on the governmental sector are BPRBC’s secretariat, which is part of the Regional Office of DWR (region 6), RID, provincial offices, local administrative bodies, and other government agencies. On the private or civil society side there are representatives from different groups and concerns for example agriculture and other sector of water users, experts from various occupation, and academe. Their work is mostly coordination that should move an implementation ahead and it needs considerable cooperation between these two main sectors.


37

The management system that the Dialogue built on is trying to include active participation of local people as one of a component into the former bureaucracy system. And it was organized through BPRBC’s mandate of coordinating in water resources management by introducing water allocation to be implemented as an important task of the BPRBC. Main attributes that qualify the co-management approach have been practiced in the project, which are

• Participation – Depending on the socio-economic system, the available capacity and financial resources of the project, and the existing institutional arrangements, the type of participation used has been consultative, collaborative and informative and the level of participation has been through representation but there is an attempt to extend it to direct participation. Identifying the concerned stakeholders does not mean that their involvement can be taken for granted. Most of them are busy with other activities and will make the effort to come only once they understand that their participation will benefit them. Time spent participating in co-management comes at a cost and in order to outweigh this cost it is vital to develop trust through commitment, throughout the process, to transparency, accountability as well as to developing skills and increasing organizational capacity.

• Partnerships – In a given area, there are many actors, individuals and organizations, already involved in developing their own policy for water resources management, be there government and donor agencies, NGOs, community organizations, or the private sector. It is realistic to expect that individual projects will make a difference that is mainly incremental and cumulative rather than singular and dramatic. It is thus crucial to develop a strong partnership policy with these different actors taking into account their own objectives and finding out the appropriate synergies where each one is convinced of the benefit of collaboration. The Dialogue has promoted this concept through BPRBC collaborates with other partners.

• Integrated approaches and methods – The integration requires multidimensional: - integration of science with policies, with a strong emphasis on the social

and political process and the belief that research and technical tools (model, economic instrument, quantity monitoring, etc.) are of little value if the institutional and societal context in which they are introduced is not yet capable of making the changes in values and behavior that such tools require;

- integration between bottom-up and top-down approaches to water management;

- integration between large and small scale management, and between short and

long term time scales; - integration among sectors and disciplines that may be expressed through

a multi-agency project steering committee and through the participation of the academic and research institutions.

• Learning and adaptation – One of the principles of the adaptive learning approach is that the management process should build on strengths and existing knowledge rather than identifying and focusing on weaknesses. To


38

that purpose, it is important to identify and develop information flows but also to find out the means and channels to communicate this information to the right stakeholders. Again, instead of “re-inventing the wheel”, it is better to examine existing communications networks and use this to identify new opportunities or build on existing connections. Existing communication networks are usually quite complex and are more likely to be a series of inter-linked webs that may include both formal and informal lines of communication. Techniques and mechanisms have to be developed to encourage the open exchange of ideas and experience and foster learning both internally among the BPRBC, and externally with partners and with the public at large.

• Creating the enabling condition – Create an enabling environment in which co-management plans might be developed is crucial. Most of the time, a double-track approach for decision making arrangements is needed, i.e. focusing the work on community groups’ organization and institutional arrangements for management planning at a scale that matches the scale of the resource. Management planning will occur within each co-management unit (of which there may be many), and will be influenced not only by conditions within the water unit but also by the decisions made at the policy level, i.e. the political will to legitimize the local management planning and provide an enabling framework within which detailed and locally appropriate rule making can occur with full backing of the law. The question is to have enough skilled practitioners to help the community and local administrative bodies put the pieces of co-management together and legitimize them. In this context, members of BPRBC are core group that try to facilitate this role and capacity building is crucial but requires addressing the entire water governance system and how the different levels of governance interact.

8.3 Recommendation At the end of the project, the result of the Dialogue was presented to the Director General of DWR. In the meeting, topics that needed to be reconsidered as an important step to achieve a better water management in the basin were discussed. It was stressed that in order to prolong and exemplify the activities of participation, exchanging of information and technical know how, and establishing of efficient and equitable water allocation DWR must invent a strategy and planning at the river basin for fair allocation of water with a support budget to BPRBC for implementing the plan, promote continuity in exchanging of information and technical know how in a dialogue process with a promotion of local research for supporting an extension of the technical know how, employ monitoring and evaluating, and provide technical consultant to assist the BPRBC secretariat. The meeting agreed to try using WEAP model in a small pilot area of the river basin where problems usually happens within this scale and it should be implemented with the other components like collecting of water use information, monitoring of water quality, introducing an economic instrument to be used in a dry year, and a continuous dialogue with the public at large in order to identify related problems and their


39

solutions and then moving to actions in solving such problems. It is the process that needs co-management and this must be facilitated through the BPRBC secretariat. Therefore, the next step is to sharpen the people understanding toward water allocation and try to fix its components into the BPRBC’s function and to the behavior of the public at large. This is not an easy work especially when there is no water law in place. All that can be done are only through co-management, and it should be studied and improved in the next step.

Annex

Annex 1 Sub-Committee of Bang Pakong-Prachinburi and Tonlesap River Basin - Components 1. Governor, Chachoengsao Province Sub-committee 2. Governor, Prachinburi Province Sub-committee 3. Governor, Nakon Nayok Province Sub-committee 4. Governor, Sakaeo Province Sub-committee 5. Representative from Office of the Permanent Secretary to the

Ministry of Interior Sub-committee

6. Representative from Department of Groundwater Resources Sub-committee 7. Representative from National Park, Wildlife and Plant

Conservation Department Sub-committee

8. Representative from Royal Irrigation Department Sub-committee 9. Representative from Forestry Department Sub-committee 10. Representative from Department of Disaster Prevention and

Mitigation Sub-committee

11. Representative from Community Development Department Sub-committee 12. Representative from Department of Public Works and City

Planning Sub-committee

13. Representative from Marine Department Sub-committee 14. Representative from Provincial Waterworks Authority Sub-committee 15. Representative from Local Administration Organization,

Chachoengsao Province Sub-committee

16. Representative from Local Administration Organization, Prachinburi Province

Sub-committee


40

17. Representative from Local Administration Organization, Nakon Nayok Province

Sub-committee

18. Representative from Local Administration Organization, Sakaeo Province

Sub-committee

19. Representative from Water User Organizations or Groups from Agricultural Sector, Chachoengsao Province

Sub-committee

20. Representative from Water User Organizations or Groups from Agricultural Sector, Prachinburi Province

Sub-committee

21. Representative from Water User Organizations or Groups from Agricultural Sector, Nakon Nayok Province

Sub-committee

22. Representative from Water User Organizations or Groups from Agricultural Sector, Sakaeo Province

Sub-committee

23. Representative from Water User Organizations or Groups from Business or Industrial Sector, Chachoengsao Province

Sub-committee

24. Representative from Water User Organizations or Groups from Business or Industrial Sector, Prachinburi Province

Sub-committee

25. Representative from Water User Organizations or Groups from Business or Industrial Sector, Nakon Nayok Province

Sub-committee

26. Representative from Water User Organizations or Groups from Business or Industrial Sector, Sakaeo Province

Sub-committee

27. Representative from Civil or Private Sector for Natural Resources and Environment, Chachoengsao Province

Sub-committee

28. Representative from Civil or Private Sector for Natural Resources and Environment, Prachinburi Province

Sub-committee

29. Representative from Civil or Private Sector for Natural Resources and Environment, Nakon Nayok Province

Sub-committee

30. Representative from Civil or Private Sector for Natural Resources and Environment, Sakaeo Province

Sub-committee

31. Representative from Academe or Intellectuals for Natural Resources and Environment, Chachoengsao Province

Sub-committee

32. Representative from Academe or Intellectuals for Natural Resources and Environment, Prachinburi Province

Sub-committee

33. Representative from Academe or Intellectuals for Natural Resources and Environment, Nakon Nayok Province

Sub-committee

34. Representative from Academe or Intellectuals for Natural Resources and Environment, Sakaeo Province

Sub-committee

35. Director, Water Resources Regional Office 6, Department of Water Resources

Sub-committee

36. Director, River Basin Coordination and Management Division, Water Resources Regional Office 6, Department of Water Resources

Sub-committee

- Authority and Duties 1. Propose to the National Water Resources Committee the policies, plans, projects,

and guidelines for solving problems and obstacles in development, usage, conservation, and any implementation necessary for water resources management, including any implementation of agencies within the jurisdiction area of the river basin.


41

2. Formulate Water Resources Management Plan within the jurisdiction area of the river basin.

3. Coordinate operation plans from agencies within the jurisdiction area of the river basin to comply with the plan in 2.

4. Consider the prioritization and quantification of water usage and measures for appropriate, equitable, and efficient water allocation.

5. Monitor and evaluate the operation of agencies concerning with water resources within the jurisdiction area of the river basin.

6. Request for documents, information, and facts and figures related to water resources to collate statistic, information, opinions and recommendations concerning with water resources management, water sources development and conservation, prevention and solution to water shortage, flood, and quality of water within the jurisdiction area of the river basin.

7. Negotiate conflicts and solve problems related to the implementation of water resources management within the jurisdiction area of the river basin.

8. Coordinate operations on water resources with Sub-committees of other related river basins.

9. Disseminate and generate understanding to the public about the results or the implementation of the Sub-committee.

10. Appoint Working Groups to implement operations that may be assigned by the Sub-committee.

11. Operate other tasks that may be assigned by the National Water Resources Committee.


42

Annex 2 Water and culture in the Bang Pakong River Basin: A general overview. Introduction Buddhism and water In order to establish and assess the linkage between Thai culture and water, one needs to review the influence of Therevada Buddhism introduced into the Siamese peninsula during the Sukhothai era, 700 years ago that is deemed to be regarded as the first Thai Kingdom. Within the religion there is considerable symbolism and/or events that are linked to and require the presence of water (i.e. water festivals, water bathing, and water splashing). Along with an ethos within the religion that espouses the virtues of living in harmony with natural elements, there is clearly a link with between natural resources, of which water is a component, and culture. Water is viewed in two contrasting roles within the Buddhist faith. Firstly there is the role of water in significant Buddhist ceremonies, and secondly teachings that have their roots associated with water. From a ceremonial perspective ‘holy’ water is used in various ceremonies. Selected examples are as follows:

• During the wedding ceremony the Buddhist monks will sprinkle water over the heads of the couples and guests are invited to pour water into their hands in order to wish them a happy married life; and during house warming ceremonies water is used to wash away any bad luck.

• The important bathing ceremony that is performed on the death of a member of the community is a significant event to those who follow the Buddhist faith. During this ceremony friends and relatives of the deceased pour water on palms of the individual that symbolizes a request for forgiveness for mistake or bad acts that may have been committed against the deceased. In addition, the ceremony also symbolizes a request for the deceased to be re-


43

born without any negative influences and to have a safe passage to the next life.

• Water can also be seen to symbolize the process of giving. In this respect, when somebody gives an object that cannot be lifted with easy, the giver is required to pour water over the hands of the intended receiver to symbolize the act of donation.

It can be concluded that within the Thai culture water represents purity that is able to was all kinds of evil and misfortune and to bring good luck and happiness. A somewhat more abstract and at times difficult concepts to understand by those that are not practicing Buddhist, is in the teachings of Buddhism that have their roots or origin with water. For example:

• The abstract concept that water can destroy solids such as stone in spite of its ‘sweetness’ suggests that water can have both destructive and healing powers. Hence teachings encourage individuals to cultivate good deeds by being humble, speaking nicely and politely of others.

• A further abstract concept pertains to the unifying effect of water. This is best symbolized by the fact that even if one uses a knife to cut water, water will quickly come together without loosing shape or form. Buddhism explains that if we are harmonious and united, one can be viewed as being able to do anything.

• The binding effect of water as exhibited in the construction of buildings in which water is required as the basis of holding the structure together. Without water, the building cannot be constructed. The symbolism lies in the fact that Religion's function in a similar manner to water used in construction, as it brings together and integrates peoples from different families and countries into one.

• Water is often viewed as being representative of adjustment and development. Since water adjusts to any shaped vessels, so everybody should adjust and develop themselves in accordance with the place and the society where they live.

In reviewing the relationship between Buddhism and nature, of which water is an intricate component, there is clear evidence in the teachings that support the conservation and sustainable utilization of these resources. Sulak Sivaraksa, a prominent and outspoken Thai intellectual and social critic, suggests that Buddhism can play an active role in curtailing the destruction of the natural resources. He comments “there is a kind of Buddhist revolt against the deterioration of Nature” (Sulak Sivaraksa, 1987), but this revolt can be achieved only through peaceful action. Buddhism can help, and lead a “strong and conservationist movement in our country” (Sulak Sivaraksa, 1987). However, Sulak Sivaraksa, has also echoed the following point: “hence many good religious traditions, religious festivals, and religious ceremonies become shrouded in superstition and alienate members of the younger generation” (Sulak Sivaraksa, 1987). He suggests that the solution to this impasse is to promote the Buddhism way of thinking in schools, in the leaders’ sphere, and in the conservationists’ sphere, in order to rehabilitate the real value of Nature.


44

A heritage that is intimately connected with water through religion, practical use (i.e. transportation along the rivers, klongs or canals), and beliefs, has resulted in a Thai culture with rich and abundant water symbols. Water symbols are commonly found in art works including sculptures of the Naga on temples; the traditional architecture with houses being constructed on stilts over water; beliefs; and traditional songs, clearly indicate the importance of water in the everyday lives of communities and individuals. Water and culture in the Constitution of Thailand The most recent Constitution of Thailand was adopted on the 11th October 1997 to further strengthen the democratic process and enhance the sovereign power of the Thai people. Within the context of the constitution water appears only once under Section 84 where it refers to the role of the State in providing sufficient quantities to farmers. Contrasting this, the word culture is mentioned in five different sections of the new constitution. In Section 69, 81 and 289, in the context of everybody having a responsibility in protecting, preserving and promoting culture is mentioned in each of these sections. More specifically in Section 69 it is recommended that it is the duty of every person to protect and pass on, to conserve the national arts and culture and local knowledge and conserve natural resources and the environment. Section 81 explains that the State shall promote culture and local knowledge, and Section 289 reiterates the contents of Section 81 but at the level of local government. Section 40 refers to national and local communication (i.e. radio, television, and radio communication) and their responsibility in providing and supporting for public benefit, at the national and local levels, the concepts of culture. Even though in Section 69 it states that Thai people have to protect and conserve the culture, as well as their responsibility in protecting and conserving natural resources and the environment, there is no link between culture and environment and hence no link between culture and water. However, Section 46 states that persons assembling in a traditional community shall have the right to conserve or restore their customs and good culture and participate in the management, preservation, exploitation of natural resources (Office of the Council of the State, 2004). In fact it states that local organizations have the right to manage water resources and to take care of cultural aspects. One can infer from the latter that such local organizations such as a river basin committees would fall into this category. Clearly aspects of culture, preservation and its role in preserving natural resources that include water are implicitly as well as explicitly embodied in the constitution. One can infer from this that culture and its preservation is an important component of Thai society for it to be included in the constitution.

Water and Culture in the Bang Pakong River Basin In the following section we specifically address the issue of water and culture in the Bang Pakong River Basin

Brief overview of the population in the River Basin History The Bang Pakong River Basin has within it four Provinces, namely Chachoengsao, Nakhon Nayok, Prachinburi, and Sakaeo. The history of Chachoengsao dates back to the Ayutthaya Period during the reign of King Phra Borom Tri Lokkanat (14th century). The name is derived from Khmer meaning ‘deep canal’. It is the most fertile region of


45

the basin where significant agricultural production takes place. The town of Nakhon Nayok that falls within the province of the same name, dates back to the Dvaravati Period (11th century). During the Ayutthaya Period, this town was situated at the eastern border of the Kingdom. Nakhon Nayok was previously named Ban Na (village of rice field) but the emergence of Jungle fever in the area forced people to move into the current city (Tourist Authority of Thailand, 2004). Prachinburi Province dates back 800 years to the Sukhotai period. There are a number of ruins within the Province that have been discovered, some of which have become places that have religious significance. For example Wat Morakot, has the largest and oldest footprint of Lord Buddha which is carved on the natural laterite floor (Tourist Authority of Thailand, 2004). In the past, Sakaeo was a major civilized community. The archeological sites of Khmer arts and stone inscriptions are outstanding examples of the degree of civilization reached in the 12th century. Before 1993, Sakaeo was a district of Prachinburi Province, but has since been officially upgraded as a Province. Socio-economic situation Prior to the latter part of the eighteenth century, small-scale subsistence farming was the predominant feature of the Thai rural sector. Farming activities focused on meeting the basic needs of the family. The process of agricultural commercialization started to emerge from the late eighteenth century to early nineteenth century and was slow to expand both spatially and structurally during this period. In spatial terms, commercial farming occurred mainly in the areas accessible by transport, such as the central plain and near the coasts with the predominant crop being rice (Sulak Sivaraksa, 1987). Post Second World War witnessed a rapid expansion of world trade in agricultural raw materials. Several cash crops were introduced into Thailand to utilize the available upland areas not suitable for rice farming. A massive expansion of farmland occurred during this period together with the growth of export crops, such as maize, sugar cane and cassava. During the sixties a significant shift in government policy occurred with respect to national development. A policy based on import-substitution and industrialization was implemented with agriculture playing a significant role in this process. Agriculture through exports continued to provide vital foreign currency needed to finance the industrialization and modernization process. In addition, the agricultural sector provided cheap and affordable food for a rapidly growing urban and industrial based population. The dominant process by which agricultural production increased was through lateral expansion of the industry by bringing more land into production. With the advent of the ‘Green revolution’ in the seventies rice yields increased significantly particularly in the Central Plains, the major rice producing region of the country. Over time the industrial sector within the economy has continued to grow at a greater rate than the agricultural sector and currently dominates the export sector of the economy (UNESCAP 2002). The Lower Bang Pakong River Basin is an excellent example of an area that has experienced these significant changes from an essentially agricultural based economy in the seventies to an area that has undergone significant industrialization. This process of industrialization has been at the expense of considerable environmental degradation. The enforcement of laws pertaining to the release of effluents to water bodies has not been effective resulting in significant pollution and environmental degradation of


46

receiving waters of the Bang Pakong. The dominant sources of pollutants are paper producing facilities and intensive pig production enterprises. The economic collapse of 1997 has resulted in reduced invest in the area but this has had little effect on dampening the labor market which continues to grow. New enterprises in aquaculture have arisen over the past two decades. The number of shrimp farms has increased dramatically in the Bang Pakong basin that has resulted in an emerging socio-category in the basin (Hambrey, 1996). As the profit margins are high in shrimp production, farmers have converted their traditional agronomic enterprises to shrimp-farming with the associated environmental degradation. Thailand is currently undergoing monumental changes in the agricultural sector. Thailand’s farming sector comprises 5.6 million household, and according to recent statistics approximately 25 million people are living on farms. These statistics also reveal startling changes in the demographic trends towards an aging farmer community. In 2002, 1.7 million farmers were over the age of 64. This figure is up by 10% since the previous survey undertaken in 2000. The reasons for this are several and include a decline in the death rate and prolong life expectancy of individuals associated with improvements and access to health-care services in rural communities. More importantly, there has been a significant decline in the numbers of young people adopting farming as a career. This being due to the unattractiveness of the career to young people, the hard physical requirements to be a successful farmer today and above all young people have aspirations that are beyond the farm gate. In perspective these changes within rural communities of Thailand is not dissimilar to that of highly developed countries such as the USA and a Europe that have undergone structural economic changes from an agrarian-based economy to a service and industrial driven economy. With the structural changes that have occurred within the economy in Thailand, the ability of traditional farmers to continue to maintain their current lifestyles have been eroded and continue to decline. Often farmers are saddled with significant debt levels due to low commodity prices and inefficiencies. These negative impacts can be clearly seen within the basin with declining numbers of full time farmers and increasing dependence on off-farm sources of income. Human development indices for the basin that have a focus on health, education, employment, incomes, community and selected infrastructure (i.e. communications and transport), are relatively strong when compared to the overall country. With respect to the Human Development Index (HDI) utilized by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in 2003 to assess development progress, Chachoengsao, Prachinburi, Nakhon Nayok, and Sa Kaeo are respectively ranked 17th, 20th, 33rd, and 46th out of the 76th Provinces of Thailand (UNDP, 2003). Health indices show that all four provinces are well placed in this area and that Chachoengsao Province was ranked the best in the country. The education index was less encouraging with Chachoengsao and in Nakhon Nayok being ranked 18th and 33rd respectively with Prachinburi and in Sa Kaeo ranked 48th and 57th in the country. There is lack of secondary and tertiary education establishments in the two latter provinces that contribute to the low score. This is not surprising as the two provinces historically are rural in nature and are dependent on agriculture for livelihoods (UNDP, 2003). The employment index shows that all provinces other than Nakhon Nayok, have acceptable levels for the country as a whole. The income index places Sa Kaeo Province as a relative poor area. For example,


47

household incomes are half the average for the country, (6 845 bath per month instead of 12 765 baths per month), almost 23% of the population are classified as very poor (i.e. earn under 882 bath per month) and 66% of household are in debt.

Water culture in the River Basin

Significant water festivals

The inhabitants of the basin celebrate along with the rest of Thailand the two major water related festivals, namely Songkran and Loy Krathong. Songkran Songkran effectively celebrates the Thai Traditional New Year and occurs in April. Songkran means movement or displacement and refers to the sun moving into the New Year. The celebrations take place from April 13th-15th annually. This is a national holiday and an occasion for families to get together and unite. For those Thai’s that are Buddhist, the day begins with merit making in remembrance of departed souls. Later in the day, they visit their elders for the anointment rite and the elders in return wish the youth good health, longevity, and prosperity (Office of the National Culture Commission, 2002). Known internationally for its characteristic tradition of water-throwing that ranges from a courteous sprinkle or a polite splash, the tradition is enacted throughout the country during the festival. Songkran also celebrates the anticipated onset of the rainy season and includes Brahmanic rain-invoking ceremonies. There is however a much deeper significance to Songkran. Apart from marking a new beginning, Songkran is also a time for thanksgiving. It is an important time for individuals to reflect upon the many acts of kindness and thoughtfulness each has personally experienced and to remember how such acts of generosity and compassion bring peace, happiness and well-being. The underlying significance of Songkran is the process of cleansing and purification - the purging of all ills, misfortune and evil and starting the New Year afresh with all that is good and pure. Scented water is symbolic of the cleaning process and signifies purity (Office of the National Culture Commission, 2002). The cultural values inherent in the Songkran Festival are expressed through various ceremonies and rituals. The first cultural value is ‘thanksgiving’. The demonstration of gratitude and an expression of thanks to individuals who have ‘done good’ or shown goodwill and are worthy of respect and recognition. Thanksgiving is demonstrated in the ceremonial aspects of Songkran such as the bathing of Buddha statues with scented water, and the pouring of scented water over elders and respected individuals, conveys this and other outward demonstration of respect. The second cultural value is loyalty to ancestors which is effectively achieved through merit-making. The third cultural value focuses on an individual’s sense of awareness of his or her responsibilities towards the family and home. It is demonstrated via the traditional custom of ‘spring cleaning’. The fourth component of Songkran addresses the value of religion and highlights the well defined roles and responsibilities of the temples and monasteries on the one hand and the community served by religious institutions. Observance of this principle involves:

• Community involvement in the spring-cleaning of temples.


48

• Merit making and offering food and alms to monks. • The bathing of Buddha statues and monks. • The construction of ‘chedis’ or stupas and the decoration or beautification of

temple surroundings. The fifth value is ‘acts of kindness and generosity’ towards others or doing good for others. This is demonstrated by the preparation, exchange and sharing of food and desserts by members of the community and the sprinkling of water on each other. This is a gesture of hospitality shown as individuals attempt to ‘cool’ each other off in the intense summer heat. Finally, the sixth value is the spirit of co-operation and community spirit demonstrated through the enthusiastic participation of individuals of the community in Songkran festivities, sharing in fun, spreading happiness and goodwill to all. Loy Krathong The Loy Krathong Festival is one of the most beautiful and popular festivals in Thailand. It is also related with water, but whereas Songkran is primarily about having a boisterous good time and letting off steam, Loy Krathong is a gentle and beautiful festival, concerned more with inner reflection (Phra Peter Pannapadipo, 1997). It takes place on the full moon in November. During the evening many people will go down to their local klong or river and float their krathongs in the belief that this will bring them good luck. The krathongs contain a flower, a candle and three incense sticks which are lit before being placed in the water. It is common for individuals to make a wish as they release the krathong in the water (Office of the National Culture Commission, 2002). The Loy Krathong Festival dates back to the Sukhothai Kingdom 700 years ago. It marked the end of the rainy season and the main rice harvest. It is based on a Hindu tradition of thanking the water god for the waters. The farmers of Sukhothai used to hold a festival of floating candles. One year a beautiful woman name Noppamas, who was the chief royal consort, made some special lanterns for the festival. She made them from banana leaves and shaped them like lotus flowers. The king was impressed with what he saw and so announced that krathongs would be floated on the water every year from then on. Further explanations for the festival is that it is a way of making offerings to Mae Kong Ka, the goddess of water, to thank her for allowing the donor to make use of the water in various ways over the past year. The gifts of light, incense and money also atone for any pollution the donor may have caused to the water. As the krathong floats away, the sins of the donor are carried away with it. Another explanation is that the gifts atone for boating and swimming over Buddha images which may be lying on the riverbed. Yet another explanation is that it prevents death by drowning (Phra Peter Pannapadipo, 1997). A key point is that the festival has no place in the Buddhist calendar. Local water festivals There are a number of local festivals that are celebrated within the basin. In Prachinburi Province, three major events are celebrated annually. These are discussed individually. Bang Fai Procession: Normally organized on Wisakha Bucha Day at Wat Maha Phot, Si Mahosot, this spectacular procession is held to celebrate Bang Fai or the


49

Northeastern rocket festival. One version of the original legend speaks about the rain god Vassakam who lived in the sky (in heaven), and was well-known for his fascination for fire. Only those who correctly appeased Vassakam received rain. To ensure that there was rain for the cultivation of rice worshippers sent rockets toward heaven as a symbol of appeasement to Vassakam. The preparation and launching of the rockets is a community event that involves all. Local people, under the guidance of Buddhist Monk, make a decorated rocket of 3-4 metres. The festival is usually organized during the second week of May, which is the beginning of the rainy season when rice farmers are preparing their field for cultivation (Tourist Authority of Thailand, 2004). Traditional Boat Race Festival: Every year in the second week of September, on the banks of Bang Pakong River in front of Amphoe Mueang Office, the festival features long boats and local boats that compete for the Princess Sirindhorn’s Trophy (Tourist Authority of Thailand, 2004). Week of Rafting at Kaeng Hin Phloeng: Held during September to October every year at Khao Yai National Park Ranger Unit 9, Na Di, a competition in white water rafting is organized (Tourist Authority of Thailand, 2004) In Chachegsao Province there is a single main festival: The Festival Paying Homage to Luang Por Sothorn: Local people pay homage to the Buddha image, Luang Por Sothorn. The celebrations are held three times a year and include the middle of the fifth lunar month, the middle of the twelfth lunar month and during the Chinese New Year Festival. Luang Por Sothorn is a Buddha image which is regarded as most sacred and draws a large number of Buddhists from all over the globe, who pay homage to the image especially during Buddhist holidays, or on special occasions. There are reasons why the festivals are held at different times during the year. The 3 days and 3 nights festival held in the middle of the fifth lunar month is in accordance with the belief that it was the day when the image was taken out of the river and housed at Wat Sothornworaviharn. The ceremony in the middle of the twelfth lunar month has been held for more than one hundred years. It started in 1891 when local people had to endure drought, poor crop yields, famine and widespread cholera and smallpox. The people asked the Buddha image to help relieve them from their sufferings. The rains came and brought abundance while the epidemics disappeared, so the people held a big cerebration to pay homage to the image. The festival has been in existence ever since. The last festival is held during the Chinese New Year which is considered another auspicious occasion. In Nakhon Nayok Province there is a single principal festival that has linkages to water. Thai Merit Making (Sat Thai) and Long boat Racing Festival: This festival is annually held in October along Khlong 29 at Wat Thawiphon Rangsan, Amphoe Ongkharak. The festival showcases a variety of long boat races, making Krayasat contest (Krayasat is a sticky paste made from rice, bean, sesame, and sugar, usually eaten during Sat Thai Festival), merit making on Sat Thai day, and local entertainment at night. There have been studies undertaken in the basin in order to document indigenous knowledge with respect to water management. A recent report of DWR written in 2003 entitled Indigenous Knowledge in Water Management in the Bang Pakong River Basin,


50

identify eight local wisdoms that are still in use and practiced in the basin. The report presents eight local techniques that are used in the management of water resources and discusses their origin and advantages. People are still using those techniques because they still have an interest in water management. The objective for undertaking such a study was to identify the local wisdom still being practiced; undertake a study on the potential expansion of these techniques in water management; and finally to officially recognize these techniques in order to preserve the indigenous knowledge. Community opinions on water and culture. In 2005 a survey was undertaken within the basin by Thai colleagues to ascertain the opinions and thoughts of individuals, communities and the River Basin Committee on water in the basin and their general understanding of the role of the RBC. The outcomes of these interviews and discussions are summarized below. They capture the thoughts of the people with respect to a wide ranging number of elements that cover the RBC and general perceptions of the community with respect to water and culture. Further discussion on the cancellation of Luang Pho Sothorn festival in Chachoengsao Province that was assumed to be associated with the construction of the Bang Pakong Dam is undertaken.

The River Basin Committee. The interviews revealed that the existence and role of the River Basin Committee (RBC) was relatively unknown amongst the wider community. There was very little understanding of the existence of the RBC, its role in the management of water resources for the basin and its responsibilities. There seemed to be confusion amongst individuals with respect to the RBC and the role and activities of the Royal Irrigation Department (RID), in that they believe the roles of both were exactly the same. The most striking example of this confusion was observed in an interview with a teacher in Prachinburi Province. She was sure that the project “we love Prachinburi River” was the responsibility of RID. In fact the aforementioned was the brainchild of the RBC who developed and promoted the entire concept. It is heartening to see that the efforts of the RBC, although not recognized, are having a positive impact on the wider community. This would suggest that with further promotion of the RBC,acceptance by the wider community would be forthcoming. In interviews conducted with RBC members, participants were enthusiastic and proud to be members of the committee and to participate in the activities of the RBC. They were of the opinion that by participating in the RBC, it would enhance their knowledge in the management of water resources in a sustainable and equitable manner. There was the general acceptance that they were not ready to manage the water resources of the basin at this stage as they did not feel competent enough to do so. An individual on the committee remarked that the present role of the RBC is ‘only a place where we share a lot of ideas’. This clearly indicates the recognized limitations of the members of the committee as to their ability to manage the water resources of the basin. They also recognized a greater involvement by the DWR in assisting to both manage and develop the skill base amongst the members to effect appropriate management of water resources at the basin level. An interesting perspective on the influence of culture in the management of water resources was presented by the committee. While they admitted that culture is one of the main ‘issues’ they have to deal with, they also highlighted that


51

this is not the first priority that they have to address. Today cultural questions are seen “as an extra, because the priority is elsewhere”. This suggests a pragmatic approach to the role of culture in the management of water resources and would suggest that other factors supersede cultural and traditional matters when it comes to its management. The water culture In discussing the role ‘water culture’ in the everyday lives of communities and individuals in the basin, it is pertinent to reflect on the role of water in the past. Thirty years ago water was the easiest and dominant means of transportation within the basin as basic road infrastructure was still being developed. In this respect water played a vital role in the everyday lives of communities as a means of travel; conducting business; irrigation of crops prior to the development of large industrial complexes and therefore was the focus of livelihoods for the majority of people in the basin. An interesting comment made by a monk in Chachoengsao Province and several others is that some youth today ‘do not know how to swim’ suggesting that previously the ability to swim was a prerequisite to living on or along the river as livelihoods were intimated linked with water. However, it is of note that there may be an underlying reason for the decline in youth being able to swim in these communities. Whilst there have been dramatic changes in the social fabric of these communities associated with the development of the basin, there have also been significant changes in the quality of the water in the basin. Interviewees in Chachoengsao Province acknowledged the changes in people attitudes with respect to swimming in the river was not solely due to changes in societal attitudes but changes in the quality of water in the river. Local people in the Province commented on the health of the river by saying ‘now the water is polluted, so I don’t want my child to swim in this river anymore’. This clearly indicates that with changes in the quality of resources there have been significant changes in individual attitudes towards water in the basin. The various festivals that are linked with water are still important for people. However there was overall agreement that peoples attitudes on this had changed over the past 25 years. Previously these festivals represented a means by which the transfer of cultural values and practices were undertaken to youth and also facilitated the mixing of genders. Nowadays, the influence of the city (western culture as many interviewees indicated), and changes in society make the traditional way of meeting individuals from the opposite sex completely old fashion. Many people interviewed in the field stated that ‘the youth doesn’t know anymore about the meaning of those festivals’. This was re-enforced by a comment of a monk from Nakhon Nayok Province ‘…Songkran festival can be summarized in the water throwing for most of our youth’. Water teaching To a monk that was interviewed in Nakhon Nayok commented that nothing had changed in the way the value water should be taught. He argued that Buddhismes teach us “to preserve the natural environment”. However, according to the abbot of a temple in Chachoengsao Province a more pragmatic view was put forward “even if the teaching is exactly the same, Buddhism value have to compete with the Western values of consumption” so the influence of Buddhism is declining in the lives of most young people. This is re-enforced in a further comment that some young people, “now don’t know about the meaning of some festivals, or beliefs”.


52

As highlighted in the constitution is the preservation of culture which is the responsibility of the government whose task is to preserve, promote and teach these precepts, in reality there is no clear delineation of responsibilities between different parties. Whilst water is a part of the education curriculum in schools throughout different grades, the focus is on the physical and scientific aspects of water. The more abstract aspects of water, local beliefs and wisdom are not covered as a teacher in Prachinburi Province commented ‘this is not my job’. This aspect of water knowledge is the duty of monks. Pupils have a strong grasp of the water cycle, the effects of the pollution, the aquatic ecosystem, the treatment of tap water, and the importance of water in general. It is interesting to note that when interviewees were asked the question as to whose responsibility was it to teach the youth about the cultural significance of water several indicated that it was the responsibility of the government because the government ‘always do what they have to do for the well-being of the population’ explained a local farmer in Nakhon Nayok Province. Cancellation of Luang Pho Sothorn Festival as a result of the construction of the Bang Pakong dam A key aspect in this assessment of culture and water in the study undertaken was to evaluate the impact of the construction of the Bang Pakong Dam and its influence of culture. It has been extensively reported in the media that the construction of the dam resulted in the cancellation of the Luang Pho Sothorn Festival in Chachoengsao Province. The importance of this local festival has been discussed previously. Prior to the construction of the dam the procession of boats would travel from Chachoengsao to Bang Kla along the river. However, it has been reported that with the construction of the dam people and communities have had to stop the festival. In discussions with individuals within the basin who would potentially take part in such events, it would appear that this event still takes place even with the construction of the dam. In reality the festival was never cancelled. The construction of the dam forced the boats taking part in the festival to take a different route that followed a diversion canal. It was suggested that one of the reasons for the misreporting by the media of the cancellation was based on ulterior motives. Firstly, with the use of the diversion canal as a means of moving the boats up stream there was a restricted area in which traders and merchandising outlets could undertake business. People were concerned that with the restricted area available to undertake business there would be effective controls set in place. In addition, there was dissatisfaction amongst some interest groups that their opinions that were voiced during the consultation process prior to the construction of the dam were not considered. One can effectively split the group of interviewees into two, those living in close proximity to the dam and who would or have been directly impacted upon through the construction of the dam and those that live further away. In the initial phase of the interviews concerning this matter respondents were asked about the cancellation and their feelings. The responses that were elicited from individuals ranged from powerlessness and sadness, but also indifference and fatality. This duality is very well described by two interviewees that were met in the field that were somewhat distant from the dam; to a farmer in Sakaeo Province his response followed the following argument ‘it’s not a problem, because the dam gives life’, and of a monk in Nakhon Nayok Province: ‘to give enough water to everybody is more important than the

Comment [C1]: Khun Sukontha will give name


53

festival’. In general for those that lived some distance away from the dam they were of the opinion that ‘everything that was done under a governmental agency are automatically good, whatever the regrettable consequences’. In contrast individuals who lived in close proximity to the dam and who were directly impacted upon by the construction of the dam a different opinion was voiced. To locals from Chachoengsao Province they commented that ‘the goal of the dam was to help people suffering from scarcity and bad quality [water], but the dam gave to us many problems. The cancellation is one of those problem, but this festival was so famous that it’s a pity that they did not take account of what people used to believe in, when they built this dam’. To local people affected by the construction of the dam, the dam is a symbol of failure since none of the objectives of the dam was successful. This argument was based on the fact that the dam is still not functioning because of the numerous problems the dam has experienced since its commissioning; in addition there is the opinion that the dam represents the misuse of money. These communities are still hopeful that a solution to all the problems that the construction of the dam has caused with be addressed to the satisfaction of everyone. Annex 3 Report of the Workshop Meeting onRoles, Duties, and Guidelines to Support

Sub-River Basin Committee, 11 February 2005. At Room 201, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

1. Opening Ceremony

The Director General of the Department of Water Resources (Mr. Sanong Chanthanintorn) declared the workshop meeting opened and thanked representatives of government agencies who attended the meeting. He suggested the meeting to discuss the river basin management with participation from the people, the fostering of the Sub-River Basin Committee as the driving force in setting direction and guidelines for efficient river basin management, the fostering of the cooperation between government agencies and Bang Pakong-Prachinburi and Tonle Sap Sub-River Basin Committee on the matter concerning water allocation, regulations on water usage, conflict resolution, approval of plans and projects considered by local people, coordination with the strategies of provincial cluster and the Ministry, where the management should cover the areas from headwater through to downstream and seashore. Additionally, there should be a consideration on having a Sub-River Basin Fund to support the implementation.

2. Details of the project

The Director of Foreign Relations Division (Ms. Sukontha Aekaraj) gave details on the objectives of the project and the related documents which consisted of the implementation of the Bang Pakong Dialogue, the research to find formats and guideline for participatory water allocation, the establishment of Network of Asian River Basin Organization (NARBO), the joining of the Bang Pakong-Prachinburi and Tonle Sap Sub-River Basin Committee in the River Basin Organization Benchmarking Project as a case study for other river basins in Thailand and the region. Ms. Sukontha also gave details on the points for consideration which the Sub-River Basin Committee


54

regarded as very important namely wastewater management and the important authority of the Sub-River Basin Committee in integrated river basin planning.

3. Special Lecture: Roles of the Sub-River Basin Committee in Water Resources

Management The Chairman of Bang Pakong-Prachinburi and Tonle Sap Sub-River Basin

Committee (Mr. Chamroon Suaydee) gave an overview of roles of sub-river basin committee by explaining his analysis of the roles of sub-river basin committee within the past 2 years which consisted of the roles and duties as shown in written documents, as expected from the society, and as should be at the present and in the future. He also summarized the conditions of the problems and limitations in the implementation such as the attitude towards and the acceptance of the sub-river basin committee, the uncertainty and ambiguity of the written roles and duties, the lack of personnel, budget, and coordination, and the inadequacy of human resource development.

Concerning the application of the principles of Integrated Water Resources Management to the management of river basin Mr. Chamroon found that the good governance in water management was not properly developed. There were still no linkages and relationships between different natural ecosystems and the lack of support for searching of local wisdom in water management. Database for effective planning and decision making was not available. There was no clear linkage between sub-river basin committee and the National Water Resources Committee. Fragmentation of agencies was still a problem.

The lecturer also gave some recommendations such as water management

should be knowledge base management; establishing knowledge search in the form of villagers research; provision of more platform for discussion like Bang Pakong Dialogue to analyze problems and guidelines for solutions; entering into international water management networks; upgrading river basin organizations to public organizations; and establishing communities cooperation networks.

4. Brain Storming

The meeting shared opinions on the direction and guidelines for the implementation of sub-river basin committee, particularly on wastewater management and integrated water management planning. Summaries of each topic were as follows:

5. Wastewater Management

5.1 Related database system was centered at central quarter. This caused lacking of access to database for decision making and implementation however water quality information can access through the internet.

5.2 Concerning water quality inspection, water quality surveillance, and

networks for water quality inspection, Pollution Control Department and NECTEC established shared database and manual for wastewater and sewage management. However, many works were transferred to local authority units where budgeting was now managed.


55

5.3 The fact that budget was not approved by the Office of the Sub-River Basin Committee was a hindrance for small projects which were the need of the localities. The meeting concluded that if the projects were the need of the locals, there were many alternates for budget request. Only to find the core units for the implementation of the projects. Budget was partly reserved at the CEO provinces, and if the project was previously included in the strategies, budget should be allocated for.

5.4 The meeting agreed that wastewater warning could be implemented by local

agencies. The Pollution Control Department could inspect major river and set up indicators. Local people could help taking care of the tributaries. This would create better management particularly when there was abrupt water pollution.

5.5 Wastewater warning could possibly implement locally. Overall information

could be inspected for example, the Industrial Works Department requested the factories that produced wastewater more than 500 cubic meters per day to report to the provincial office. 6. Integrated Water Management Planning and Other Related Topics

6.1 Planning was restricted by time frame. When concluded provincial plan, most of the projects were from government agencies because they prepared their plans in advance. Therefore, for the integrated water management planning, if the projects were the need of the localities, there should be a mechanism for project preparation in advance. The committee and concerned people should be equipped with full knowledge about planning. There should also be a mechanism for coordination at provincial level to ensure linkages with the strategies of the province and provincial cluster.

6.2 For the proposal of plans and projects, the sub-river basin committee should

include the need for the next 3-4 years, therefore, capacity building in this preparation should be available for the sub-river basin committee and related working groups.

6.3 For the sub-river basin committee, consideration should include:

- Revision of the authority and duties should emphasize those that are practical

- Building awareness that mutual benefits were created particularly on income for self sustaining and availability of budget for allocation

- More academic consultants should present in the components of the committee


56

Annex 4 Report of the Workshop on Water Management in Bang Pakong-Prachin Buri

and Tonlesap River Basin, 17 May 2005. At Indochin Hotel, Sakaeo. Objective

This Workshop was part of the Bangpakong Dialogue Project which emphasizes on procedures, format, and criteria for allocation of water in river basin. The workshop set objective on proposing for consideration the significant factors for water allocation which are laws, regulations and technical instruments for decision making. These subjects were raised to the consideration of the Bangpakong Prachinburi and Tonle Sap River Basin Sub-committee to apply for water allocation under its authority and duties. Before this first proposal, data on rules and regulations under the draft Water Resources Act, which is now undergoing drafting, and data on technical instruments for decision making were documented. The water allocation model and technical instruments for decision making were presented as appears in attachments 1 and 2.

Summary of the Workshop Conclusion

1. The participants agreed that by the draft Water Resources Act the River Basin Sub-committee will play the major role of decision-maker for allocation of water within the river basin. At the same time, the draft Water Resources Act will be one of the significant factors that advocate better water allocation system. However, data, model, and decision-making instruments are important for effective, fair, and sustained water allocation.


57

2. From the questions on water permit provisions appeared in the draft Water Resources Act and presented to the participants as in the attachment 1, opinions from the participants were concluded as follows;

2.1 The Secretariat to the River Basin Sub-committee requested that experts from various Bureaus should assist with the operation to test the implementation of water allocation because expertise were needed for data formulation, model development, decision-making instruments, and etc. This will greatly assist the Secretariat to the River Basin Sub-committee in data analysis.

2.2 For the usage of water classified as type 3 which is the use of water from

river basin, the draft Water Resources Act gives authority to the National Water Resources Committee, instead of River Basin Sub-committee, for giving water permit. This might cause conflicts. However, as the representatives of river basin sub-committees are included in the National Water Resources Committee, the representatives may veto the concerned water permit. If the conflicts are not solvable by way of veto, there should be an arbitration.

2.3 There should be a very careful and comprehensive consideration on giving water permit. The Bangpakong Prachinburi and Tonle Sap River Basin can be a pilot implementing area.

2.4 For justice, water permit should all be reconsidered bearing in mind

causing minimal affects to the original water users and the protection of the rights of the social disadvantages.

2.5 The River Basin Sub-committee should be the policy formulators for

overall water allocation and planning for water allocation. Water permit for particular cases should be considered and given by the staff of the Office of the River Basin Sub-committee. The River Basin Sub-committee will monitor to assure that water is allocated as planned.


58

Annex 5 Modeling Tools

Brief Available Models Four candidate models were evaluated for applying in the Bang Pakong river basin. Each of the models has different capabilities and also license arrangement, depending on the number of licenses required, and the status of users. 1. AQUATOR: Ian Makin was involved in the initial development of this model,

hence it is being make available for the study without a license fee for 12 months. However, a charge of US$3,000 is included to cover support costs in training the team.

2. HEC-RESSIM: has been developed by the Hydrologic Engineering Center for the

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, but is made available to the public whenever appropriate.

3. MIKE-BASIN: a licensed version owned by DWR can be used for the Bang

Pakong study. 4. WEAP: has been used in several IWMI studies and is available with license free for

non-profit organizations in developing countries.


59

Criteria for Selecting the Water Allocation Simulation Model The following requirements for the WASM are adapted from Halcrow, 2001 criteria in selecting models for the Mekong Committee: A. Technical capabilities The model must have the appropriate technical capabilities to: 1. Include water resources development interventions in the basin, such as irrigation,

industrial and domestic water supply, aquaculture and wastewater discharge 2. Synthesize effects on water availability downstream 3. Accurately represent offtakes, diversions and return flows 4. Model river channels and infrastructure, wetlands and reservoirs and the interaction

between these 5. Provide flow routing through the model to ensure flows are modelled accurately 6. Undertake reservoir simulations by incorporating complex operational rules 7. Output time series of river flows and quality at any desired location, reservoir

operations, irrigation diversions and demands, and drainage returns 8. Prioritise demands such that available resources are always directed to the most

important areas 9. Be demonstrably capable of modelling water quality (salinity) and pollutant, albeit

in a simplified manner 10. Synthesize effects on water quality downstream 11. Output time series of river water quality at any desired location 12. Data requirements are currently (or potentially) available B. User friendliness The WASM must be easy to use, particularly in terms of a user-friendly interface and robustness: 1. Must be user friendly and preferably use the latest software technology (should be a

Windows application). 2. Openness of software in terms of easy transfer of input and results data. 3. Manageable simulation run times (need to allow many potentially complex

scenarios to be undertaken within a reasonable time). 4. Thai language version C. Sustainability The WASM must be sustainable: 1. Expandability of the modelling system (how easy will it be to extend the model to

other basins or to increase the modelled resolution in the future). 2. Availability of appropriate technical support, training and software upgrades. 3. Non-excessive initial and ongoing (support/upgrade/training) costs.


60

Annex 6 Brief description of Water Evaluation And Planning (WEAP) Model objectives • WEAP (“Water Evaluation And Planning” system) is a user-friendly software tool

that fully integrates water supply, demand, water quality and ecological considerations for water resources planning.

• WEAP is developed by the Stockholm Environment Institute’s Boston Center at the Tellus Institute. The Hydrologic Engineering Center of the US Army Corps of Engineers funded significant enhancements.

• WEAP applications generally include several steps. o Study definition: The time frame, spatial boundary, system components and

configuration of the problem are established. o Current accounts: A snapshot of actual water demand, pollution loads,

resources and supplies for the system are developed. o Scenarios: Alternative sets of future assumptions are developed based on

policies, costs and factors that affect demand, pollution, supply and hydrology. Scenarios are constructed consisting of alternative sets of assumptions or policies. (Possible scenario opportunities are presented in the next section.)

o Evaluation: The scenarios are evaluated with regard to water sufficiency, costs and benefits, compatibility with environmental targets, and sensitivity to uncertainty in key variables.

Main features • Integrated Approach: Unique approach for conducting integrated water resources

planning assessments


61

• Stakeholder Process: Transparent structure facilitates engagement of diverse stakeholders in an open process

• Water Balance: A database maintains water demand and supply information to drive mass balance model on a link-node architecture

• Simulation Based: Calculates water demand, supply, flows, and storage, and pollution generation, treatment and discharge under varying hydrologic and policy scenarios

• Policy Scenarios: Evaluates a full range of water development and management options, and takes account of multiple and competing uses of water systems

• User-friendly Interface: Graphical drag-and-drop GIS-based interface with flexible model output graphics and tables

Model components • WEAP is comprehensive, straightforward and easy-to-use, and attempts to assist

rather than substitute for the skilled planner. • WEAP operates in many capacities:

o Water balance database: WEAP provides a system for maintaining water demand and supply information.

o Scenario generation tool: WEAP simulates water demand, supply, flows, and storage, and pollution generation, treatment and discharge.

o Policy analysis tool: WEAP evaluates a full range of water development and management options, and takes account of multiple and competing uses of water systems.

• Scenario analysis is central to WEAP. Scenarios are used to explore the model with an enormous range of “what if” questions, such as:

o What if population growth and economic development patterns change? o What if reservoir operating rules are altered? o What if groundwater is more fully exploited? o What if water conservation is introduced? o What if ecosystem requirements are tightened? o What if new sources of water pollution are added? o What if a conjunctive use program is established to store excess surface

water in underground aquifers? o What if a water recycling program is implemented? o What if a more efficient irrigation technique is implemented? o What if the mix of agricultural crops changes? o What if climate change alters demand and supplies?

• WEAP consists of five main views

o Schematic—GIS tools for configuring your system. Drag and drop to create and position. Add ArcView or other standard GIS vector or raster files as background layers. Instant access to data and results for any node.

o Data—Model building: create variables and relationships, enter assumptions and projections using mathematical expressions, and dynamically link to Excel.

o Results—Detailed and flexible display of all model outputs, both in graphical and tabular form.

o Overviews—Design a bird’s-eye view to highlight key indicators in your system.


62

o Notes—Document your data and assumptions. Model compliance Technical capabilities • Highlights of technical capabilities:

o Integrated water resources planning system o GIS-based, graphical drag and drop interface o Model-building tool o User-created variables and modeling equations o Dynamic links to spreadsheets & other models o Embedded linear program solves allocation equations o Flexible and expandable data structures o Powerful reporting system including graphs o Context-sensitive help and User Guide o Minimal requirements: runs under Windows 95/98/ 2000/NT on a Pentium

computer with 32 MB RAM • Operating on the basic principle of water balance accounting, WEAP is applicable to

municipal and agricultural systems, single sub-basins or complex river systems. • Moreover, WEAP can address a wide range of issues, e.g., sectoral demand analysis,

water conservation, water rights and allocation priorities, groundwater and stream flow simulations, reservoir operations, hydropower generation, pollution tracking, ecosystem requirements, and project benefit-cost analyses.

• The analyst represents the system in terms of its various supply sources (e.g., rivers, creeks, groundwater, and reservoirs); withdrawal, transmission and wastewater treatment facilities; ecosystem requirements, water demands and pollution generation.

• The data structure and level of detail may be easily customized to meet the requirements of a particular analysis, and to reflect the limits imposed by restricted data.

User friendliness • An intuitive GIS-based graphical interface provides a simple yet powerful means for

constructing, viewing and modifying the configuration—the user designs a schematic of the water system using the mouse to “drag and drop” system elements, which can all be overlaid on a map built from ArcView and other standard GIS and graphic files.

• Data for any component can be edited directly by clicking it on the schematic. • With WEAP’s highly flexible and comprehensive reporting system, the user may

customize reports by selecting metric or English water units, years and format (e.g., absolute levels, percent shares or growth rates).

• Specific report configurations can be saved as “favorites,” which can be combined into “overviews”—bird’s eye views of key system indicators.

• All tables can be exported directly into Excel. Model calculations run in minutes. • WEAP is available both in English and in Chinese. (An option on the WEAP menu

switches between the two languages.) Sustainability


63

• A free copy of WEAP is available for immediate download. It is fully functional except that the "Save Data" feature is disabled. To fully activate your copy of WEAP, a valid License is required.

• Free licenses available for not-for-profit organizations in developing countries • Licensed users are entitled to free upgrades and technical support. If your computer

is connected to the internet, WEAP will automatically notify you when upgrades are available.

• Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI-B) offers a range of services to assist you in your use of WEAP, including training, data preparation, collaboration on integrated water planning, and customized WEAP software enhancements.

http://www.weap21.org/index.asp?doc=09a

tha pda: bang pakong dialogue initiative (final report)

Documents