1. INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON LARGE DAMS 64 th Annual Meeting October 12 – 19, 1996 Workshop on Shared Water Resources, The Case of Chile

2. HISTORY CHILE Discovered and conquered by spaniards Bernardo O’higgins & Jose San Martin Liberators Independence 1810 1881 Treaty  Strait of Magellan Several coups latest 1973 1978 crisis Democracy has strengthen since reinstated 1989 ARGENTINA Discovered and conquered by spaniards Jose San Martin Liberator Independence 1816 1881 Treaty  patagonia Several coups latest 1976 1978 crisis Democracy has struggled since reinstated 1983

3. POLITICS CHILE Republic 13 Regions/Provinces Disputes  Argentina, Bolivia ARGENTINA Republic 23 Provinces Disputes  Chile, UK (South Atlantic Islands)

4. ECONOMY CHILE Military good job in economis issues Market oriented economy Based in commodities Good monetary policy Strong financial institutions GDP up to 8% by 1997 Political stability  good international rating Economic Treaty with USA, Canada ARGENTINA Military poor job in economic issues Benefit from natural resources Export-oriented agriculture Weak monetary policy Precarious financial situation GDP up to 8% by 1997 Political instability  fair international rating Economic Treaty Mercosur

5. ECONOMY

7. TREATIES, AGREEMENTS & ACTS Act of Santiago on Watersheds* Act of Puerto Montt, 1978 Environmental Treaty of 1991 *: could not find info

8. INTERNATIONAL PRINCIPLES ON WATER GOVERNANCE (WG) The Dublin Statement (1992) Principle No. 2 - Water development and management should be based on a participatory approach, involving users, planners and policy-makers at all levels Protecting aquatic ecosystems Resolving water conflicts (river basin most appropriate in P&M WR) The knowledge base River Basin Organizations (transboundary) Argentina, Brazil, Mexico Know-How  regional professional highly qualified, but short number Impact on WG of disparity of countries in region

9. ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC PROTOCOL ON SWR An “addendum” to Article II, point 3 of the Treaty on the Environment (1991) Concepts and agreements: Comprehensive water management Accept existing developments in region/basins SWR = water (surface, ground) flowing through both countries Coordination and joint teamwork (general utilization schedules or integrated management) Environmental impact study/assessment Share technical-scientific info, seminars Respective Governments will consider and decide over the GUS Protocol is indefinite, but can be denounced by either party previous notice

10. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS 1. Do you think a similar protocol or agreement between more than two nations is feasible? 2. Do you agree with the concept described as “harmonic optimum”? in other words, Should an optimal use of the resources be integrated for both interested parties or should they achieve individual goals and then try to reach an integral equilibrium? 3. Do you think the previous agreements and treaties facilitated the reach of this protocol? 4. According to “Water Governance in LAC (Peter Rogers)”, Latin America lacks of integrated planning, transparency, perceptions of actual necessities, Would this Protocol be a step forward for the Region and may be an example to imitate by others? 5. Are there any other concepts/issues that should have been addressed in the Protocol?