Photo: P. Stålnacke

Integrated Water Resources Management "IWRM is a process, which promotes the co- ordinated development and management of water, land and related resources, in order to maximise the resultant economic and social wel-fare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems." What is really meant with IWRM? The Technical Advisory Committee of Global Water Partnership Photo: Lake Peipsi (Estonia/Russia); P. Stålnacke

Normally four main characteristics of Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) can be observed... 1.Multifunctionality and multisectoral (e.g., fishing, farming, drinking water supply, energy) thus user interests and conflicts 2.Multiple managers at different levels (e.g., local, regional, national, inter-state) 3.Asymmetric power-relations (e.g., up- and downstream users and managers) 4.Technical complexity Tungabhadra, India (US Nagothu) Tagus (Spain/Portugal)

In other words…. IWRM is all about sustainability, and is a well-established concept and should thus be straightforward! or? …and how to conduct it in real practice?

IWRM can have multiple meanings (polarities) (Gooch&Stålnacke; 2006) PolaritiesExamples of Forms of Integration Economy versus EcologyEnvironmental economics Sector versus sectorEnvironmental planning and cooperation between economical sectors Nation versus NationTransboundary river basin management National authority versus MunicipalityMulti-level government Government versus Non-governmental organisations Governance Policy makers versus Stake-holders/the public Bottom-up policy-making Scientists versus Policy/decision makersScientific communication strategies Land versus WaterLand use change/nutrient loss models Surface waters/groundwater versus Coastal waters Coastal zone management Water quantity versus Water qualityWater boards Upstream versus Downstream usersRiver basin management Large scale versus Small scale approachesRegional perspective Water supply versus Wastewater management Grey water and use of wastewater as irrigation water Social scientists versus Natural scientistsMultidisciplinary and/or Interdisciplinary approaches

Water Framework Directive – the European approach to IWRM How will the policy process and basin authorities look like? How to define good ecological quality and what mitigation measures (incl climate change)? WFD: § Good surface water status all over EU in 2015 How to include the public? Target for restoration high good moderate poor bad What about all transboundary river basin districts?

Is WFD and good ecological status the issue/methodology outside Europe????

STRIVER stands for: Strategy and methodology for improved IWRM - An integrated interdisciplinary assessment in four twinning river basins (STRIVER) S TRIVER is funded by EC /DG Res STRIVER is one out of 8 twinning river basin projects Should contribute to EUWI, MDG and the Johannesburg sustainability Summit

July Start July 2006 End June 2009

STRIVER is less on scientific publications but rather on hands-on management cases Sounds easy or?

Some Briefs statements PB1: Fisheries, though an important source of livelihood in Tungabhadra does not find a place in the water policy or management decisions. The study shows that water management if integrated with other sector needs such as fisheries, can benefit a number of poorer groups and at the same time increase water use efficiency. ( PB2: Water management regimes in transboundary rivers are dependent on efficient legal systems and communication and cooperation between a combination of formal institutions such as governmental organizations and managers, as well as on actor networks of NGOs and other stakeholders. (

STRIVER statement 1 Less weight should be on paid to scientific publications in peer-review journals with high impact factor!

Capacity building (Nesheim et al., 2008) Capacity building was officially emphasized as part of many water policies and strategy documents in the Sesan, Tungabhadra and Tagus case study basins. However, it was evident that these official statements were seldom operationalised to any larger degree by the authorities. Competence building which includes NGOs are increasingly becoming a part in basins and covers information campaign brochures for the public and training programs for certain sectoral groups (especially for local communities, farmers). In Cambodia, foreign donors were an important actor being responsible for training programs.

Case 1) Glomma River (Norway)

STRIVER 3rd stakeholder meeting Glomma, February 2009 Kraftproduksjon/magasinkapasitet Forvaltning Økt kraftproduksjon/me r samhandling mellom sektorer/forvaltning smyndigheter Kraftproduksjon som idag/mer samhandling mellom sektorer/forvaltnings myndigheter Økt kraftproduksjon/for valtning / sektorer som idag Kraftproduksjon som i dag / sektorer/forvaltnin g som idag Klimaendring

STRIVER 2nd stakeholder meeting, Juni 2008 Glomma stakeholder feed-back There will be a conflict between the national environmental objectives in WRD (GEP) and the global energy trends (global protocols, emission trading, renewable energy) Cost-benefit assessment? Norms and values among people (difficult to change peoples attitiude) Price for electricity in future and consumers behaviour?

Further STRIVER results in Glomma Nutrient pollution modelling results (SWAT) was used in the RBMP for the WRD in the Glomma subbasin Public hearing at the moment

Should never have said yes to STRIVER field work

Case 3) Tungabhadra river (India) Land and water use interactions (livelihoods) Pollution aspects (SWAT modelling) Transboundary issuse between Andra Pradesh and Karnataka Stakeholder meetings

STRIVER findings in the Tungabhadra the National and State water policies are reflecting about the principles of IWRM, but are not implemented in a basin context. There are several organizations across the basin working on various aspects; however, there is no single authority as River Basin Organization or an effective co- coordinating mechanism for existing agencies in the TB. Fisheries is not regarded as one of the priorities while allocating water (Nagothu, 2008) US Nagothu

Dont play around with key stakeholder

Case 4) The Sesan (Vietnam/Cambodia)

Claimed local impacts No financial compensation due to loss of working places and food (fish) Health problems (respiratory and skin problems)

Coliform bacteria (Tiodolf, in press)

Analyses of algae toxins (March 2008; Tiodolf, in press) ELISA

Environmetal flow technique (Berge et al, 2009)

Environmental flow technique (science- stakeholder interaction)

Pressure impact curves according to fishermen in Sesan (Vietnam; Berge et al, 2008) Figure 4 Pressure-impact curve was drawn by hand for Fish Catch. The horizontal axis show the water level, The vertical axis show productivity (standardised).

From the meeting in March 2008 with the fishermen and river users at Sesan Resource Centre

Some overall STRIVER reflections so far 1(2)… A small research-based project like STRIVER can act as independent facilitator /start enginge /meeting arena for cooperation around IWRM River basin managers need help with the public and stakeholder participation process Transboundary cooperation problems seems also to be a major obstacle for succesful IWRM Environmental data /natural science fact and figures is a prerequisite but rarely used in the decision-making process unless it is connected to the economic and social situation …more on

Some overall STRIVER reflections so far 2(2)… Without doubt a fully implemented IWRM system will serve as a solid fundament for water issues at all levels IWRM is a long-term process that need polticial commitment and appropriate resources and mandate at all management levels (national/inter-state, regional and local) Scientific models, data and information (such as SWAT, EF, GIS) can function as tool for discussions around IWRM Scientific ambassadors?

STRIVER conference starts tomorrow 400m away!

Thanks for your attention! M. Tiodolf Two of the authors. Guess whom?