1. Water Governance in NIS UNDP Workshop for NIS Environmental Focal Points 15 June 2004 Tim Turner

2. Water Governance in NIS Overview 1.Current situation and development trends in NIS in the area of water governance 2.National and regional priorities and key water-related initiatives in the region 3.Strategic priorities for GEF assistance in the International Waters focal area 4.Potential entry-points for UNDP future support at the national and regional level

3. 1.Current situation and development trends in NIS in the area of water governance

4. Involvement in water projects Number of UNDP projects* * According to UNDP Country websites

5. NIS International Waters Projects Project LocationDate Started Project StatusProject Value (USD) Black Sea1992SAP implementation $ 10 m Danube River1992Final GEF$ 17 m Caspian1998Full Project PDF-B$ 6 m Black Sea Danube Strategic Partnership 1998Implementation$ 75 m Tumen River Area1998PDF-B TDA/SAP$ 5.2 m Baltic Sea2001PDF - B$ 12.5 m Dnipro River2001SAP implementation $ 9.5 m Lake Peipsi2002TDA/SAP$ 1.7 m Kura- Aras Basin2002PDF-B TDA/SAP$ 1.5 m

6. UNDP CO National Water Projects CountriesProjectsStatus Belarus Environmental management and monitoring system in in Belarus ?? Kazakhstan Aral Sea Regional Development and Humanitarian Assistance programme National Integrated Water Resources Management Plan Completed On-going. UNDP $20K, Gov. of Norway $380K via GWP Russia Water Quality evaluation and prediction in areas affected by Chernoyl Sustainable development of the Oka river valley in N. Novgorod region Creation and extension of a polymer plant for drinking and waste water treatment for St. Petersburg region On-going, UNDP $228K Completed, UNDP $65K Pipeline, UNDP $91K Turkmenistan Amu Darya water quality system??

7. UNDP CO National Water Projects CountriesProjectsStatus Ukraine Tisa River sustainable development programme ?? Uzbekistan Capacity building for sustainable development (integration of land and water use) ??

8. Challenges to water governance in NIS ►Historical legacy of USSR ►Lack of capacity, including economic resources for environmental issues ►Multiple sectors involved in water use and multiple uses for water in societies and economies ►Lack of regional and intersectoral coordination

9. Institutional learning Kura Aras Dnipro River Programme Danube EPRDB Caspian CEP Black Sea BSEP MED Action Plan Lessons learned Feedback

10. 2. Global, regional and national priorities and key water- related initiatives in the region

11. Millennium Development Goals 7. Ensure Environmental Sustainability Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes; reverse loss of environmental resources Reduce by half the proportion of people without sustainable access to drinking water 8. Develop a Global Partnership for Development

12. Regional guiding lessons  Riparian ownership - Common management of water resources  Complexity - institutional learning process and intersectoral coordination  Partnerships - water governance transcending boundaries  Trust - environmental security issues

13. National level priorities  Economic development water for:  agriculture  industry  Transport  Fisheries  Access to clean/safe water  Environmental management

14. 3. Strategic priorities for GEF assistance in the International Waters focal area

15. GEF priorities Global benefits Country ownership Stakeholder participation Replicability Catalysis Institutional sustainability

16. GEF Water Specific Operational Programmes  OP 8 – Water body based OP, including Large Marine Ecosystems and lakes, often focusing on large scale remedial measures  OP 9 – Integrated Land and Water multiple focal areas OP, river basins, focusing more on remedial measures  OP 10 – Contaminant based OP, demonstrating ways of overcoming barriers to adoption of best practices to limit contamination of international waters

17. Mainstream SAP/NAP procedures into country plans Strategic Action Programme IMC National Action Plan IMC National Action Plan IMC National Action Plan IMC National Action Plan Steering Committee endorsement Government endorsement

18. 4. Potential entry-points for UNDP future support at the national and regional level

19. Is there real interest? Do the UNDP COs want to get involved in the water sector for the right reasons? What strengths can the UNDP COs bring to the water sector? Who are potential partners?

20. Water Projects Design and contruction of water supply, irrigation, hydro-electric and wastewater systems, etc. Water supply and wastewater masterplans. Irrigation and drainage plans. Water utiliity management plans. Country-wide water use strategies (water yields/demands), including water demand strategies Integrated water resource plans River basin management plans (Water Framework Directive) Transboundary river basin environmental plans and management bodies Sub-basin management bodies and plans

21. Potential Partners Governments GEF International Water Projects Bi-lateral Donors (USAID, KfW, Dutch Government, etc) Global Water Partnership EU Water Initiative Private Partnerships, including Public-Private Partnerships (PPP)

22. Partnership involvement The water sector should be a priority for the CO and the Government CO needs to build a project track-record, and technical and large project management capacity UNDP needs to identify a facilitating role and provide seed money

23. UNDP COs coordination with IWPs IWP Benefits Improved communication at national level Links with donors and IFIs Improved local intelligence UNDP CO IWP Project staff UNDP CO UNDP CO CO Benefits Leveraging money for national projects associated with IWP Capacity building of local staff Attracts funding from private sector for related projects

24. CO involvement in IWPs Barriers: –Traditional lack of involvement of COs in IWP implementation –Need to establish implementation fee to support CO involvement activities –IWP Project Management must maintain open lines of communication with CO and maintain regular contact regarding project activities Roles for COs: –The COs sometimes serve through UNOPS as executing agents for projects. Often gets confused with the primary implementation role. –Serve as implementing agents for IWPs Serve as implementing agents for linked GEF biodiversity projects and Small Grants Programmes.

25. Public - Private Partnerships Public-Private partnerships to improve environmental management are seen as priority targets for both UNDP and GEF. However they are difficult to forge particularly in the CIS where the public sector is weak Potential projects include waste-water treatment (including low-tech), mini-hydro- electric development, sustainable agricultural programmes, fisheries co-operatives

26. Public involvement components Development of mechanisms for increasing public involvement in IW projects through CO assistance Public participation support and coordination of NGOs and Stakeholder Groups development Improve public input into projects through: –Public forums to address issues –Coordinated region wide learning –Media support and training

27. Wrap Up and Summary Do you want to be involved in the water sector? At what level should you become involved? Build on successes and challenges from previous project implementation Facilitate partnerships

28. Strategic Partnership DANUBE (EPDRB) BLACK SEA (BSEP) DNIPRO (DEP) GEF Nutrient Investment Facility UNEPWORLD BANKUNDP JOINT WORKING GROUP Nutrient Reduction Facility Advisory Groups National Coordinators Intersectoral Working Groups EU

29. MPPIs SHA TDA CCA Interventions Prelim SAP EQOs Interventions SAP NCAPs NCCA NTDA IWP TDA/SAP Process Initial TDA

30. Enhances institutional learning Provides feedback on programmatic challenges and successes with project implementation and improves effectiveness of future projects Helps with the design and execution of exit strategies. Must provide GEF feedback regarding OP project implementation