GOVERNANCE OF TRANS-BOUNDARY WATER RESOURCES IN EASTER AFRICA FOR HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT: CHALLENGES AND AFRICA FOR HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT: CHALLENGES AND

OPPORTUNITIES 5.3.1 The African Context

Optimum management of water resources to meet the MDGs requires effective governance of the resource especially, along with transnational lakes and river basins. Water governance refers to the different political, social and administrative mechanisms that must be in place to develop and manage water resources and the delivery of water services at different levels of society. It is the framework of political, social, economic and legal structures within which societies choose and accept to manage their water-related affairs.

Efficient water governance requires transparency and accountability, participatory mechanisms appropriate to regional realities, needs and wishes and respect for the law and contractual obligations set for the region.

The social dimension of water governance deals with equitable use of water resources while the economic dimension draws attention to the efficient use of water resources and the role of water in overall economic growth. The political empowerment dimension addresses granting water stakeholders and citizens at large equal democratic opportunities to influence and monitor political processes and outcomes. The environmental sustainability dimension shows that improved governance allows for enhanced sustainable

177

use of water resources and ecosystem integrity. Figure 97 illustrates the relationships of these dimensions of water governance.

Water governance capacity also reflects a society’s level of competence to implement effective water arrangements through policies, laws, institutions, regulations and compliance mechanisms. Without a clear policy, it is difficult to develop a coherent system of laws.

Without a clearly established legal structure, it is difficult for institutions to know how to operate. Without effective institutions, compliance and enforcement are likely to be lax (Iza and Stein, 2009). This is particularly true when dealing with water as a transnational resource that is to be shared for sustainable development of a region, such as Eastern Africa.

Figure 97: Different dimensions of water governance.

Source: http://www.watergovernance.org/why.

While water governance is a complex subject that needs an extensive treatment, the focus on water governance in this report is in the context of energy production. Good water governance along trans-boundary lakes and river basins is a necessary while not sufficient prerequisite for achieving the MDGs. Equitable governance of water resources implies finding a balance between citizens’ needs, and the demands from stakeholders in the agricultural, industrial, and other fields. While water is considered a national resource by governments, it is not demarcated by borders that are political by nature. By connecting people and creating interdependence among local users from different countries, trans-boundary rivers and lakes pose governance challenges and can become a source of tension at the political level. Trans-boundary water resources hold considerable potential for conflict and escalation, but also offer a variety of different possibilities for transnational cooperation.

In the 1980s and 1990s, concerns were greatly raised about water shortages-related conflicts in various regions given the rising consumption of water and the asymmetrical power relations between riparian countries. A much-cited example was conflict among the riparian countries along the Nile. The relations between the riparian countries of Southern Africa were likewise seen as a potential source of conflict. However, these somber

178

predictions have not materialized. The UNDP Human Development Report (2006)³² affirms that water could foster conflicts, but more frequently it has been a bridge to cooperation.

Indeed, experience shows that trans-boundary water resources are far more likely to serve as the motor of trans-boundary cooperation than of violent conflict between nations. Since the end of the apartheid regime in South Africa, it is precisely Southern Africa – a region with an exceptional number of trans-boundary rivers – that has a number of positive developments to show in this regard. Also in other sub-regions, Africa’s heads of State and government have opted for a cooperative management that has been affirmed in many declarations and bi- and multilateral agreements.

Trans-boundary water resources management in Africa is addressed in various international documents with guideline characters; including the G8 Africa Action Plan, the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) Action Plan, and the Abuja Declaration of the African Ministers Council on Water (AMCOW). These efforts also have reference to the work of the UN Secretary-General's Advisory Board on Water and Sanitation and the International Water for Life Decade proclaimed by the UN General Assembly (2005–2015).

Trans-boundary water resources management provides for governance of water resources shared between two or more riparian neighboring countries. Issues of differing and elastic political agendas and competition for scarce water resources complicate the governance approach. The Nile Basin with 10 riparian countries and complex upstream/downstream issues is one such example. In the South African Development Community (SADC) alone, there are 13 trans-boundary rivers shared by two or more riparian states. As many local, national and international stakeholders are involved, Trans-boundary Water Resources Management (TWRM) cannot be conducted purely on a state-by state basis.

Multi-national dialogue and negotiations are the basis of wide-ranging agreements between riparian states. The need for cooperation and information sharing is an essential element.

This can be facilitated by the creation of trans-boundary-basin institutions or agreements – such as the Congo-Oubangui-Sangha International Basin Commission (CICOS), the still-born Zambezi Basin Commission, or the Nile Basin Initiative – established to monitor the policies of riparian states and ensure equitable utilization of water resources, create development strategies and monitor the implementation of national Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) plans. In most cases, however, such institutions have faced severe challenges impeding their ability to get off the ground (Schmeier, 2010).

Governance of trans-boundary water resources in riparian countries along the Nile present both challenges and opportunities. While at the national-level different institutions have been created to settle disputes over water allocation, at the regional-level institutional structure with authority to enforce water agreements are rather absent.

While progress made with regards to conventions is commendable, a sustainable regional framework is absent. Governments also have preference for bilateral agreements to settle disputes over trans-boundary water resources. Internationally, there exist two multilateral agreements, the UNECE “Convention on the protection and use of trans-boundary watercourse and international lakes”, signed in Helsinki in 1992 and in force from

32 UNDP Human Development report. 2006. Beyond scarcity: power, poverty and the global water crisis.

179

1996, and the UN “Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses”, adopted in 1997, but still not in force (Sinnona, 2007).

5.3.2 The Political Economy of the Nile and Implications for Water Governance

Trans-boundary water management is mainly a political process. This is the reason why cooperation and conflicts on water resources are determined by asymmetries in power among riparian states. It is not without good reason that the example of the Nile is often cited in the popular discourse on "water wars." Egypt is wholly dependent on the waters of the Nile for its economic development, and hence it has declared a secure supply of water from the areas beyond its border to be a vital national security interest. In the past there have been repeated conflicts between Egypt and the upstream Nile riparian states over the allocation of the waters of the Nile, and these conflicts have even led to threats of war in times of particular stress (i.e. in periods of drought). It is important to point out that while there are ten riparian countries, only three of these are in the most critical position for peaceful, cooperative sharing of Nile water—Ethiopia as the primary supplier, and Egypt and Sudan as the dominant consumers.

Among riparian states, Egypt has the highest Nile water share, subject to water management of the upstream riparian states. In 1979 it was declared that at the beginning of 2000 Egypt would have faced a water deficit of 4 billion m3 due to its alarming population growth (one million every nine months) and agricultural water uses. Still in 1990s, Lake Nasser, because of the high evaporation, could not meet the population’s water demand, thus 50% of food was imported from abroad (Swain, 1997). These occurrences caused high internal instability and a strong political and economic dependence on other countries’

policies, threatening Egyptian national security. In order to face these political problems, Egyptian diplomacy has strongly promoted water allocation based on old treaties, basically attempting to maintain the status quo. North and South Sudan (secession with the referendum of 9th of January 2011), as well, are strongly dependent on the river.

After the Second World War, with independence of riparian states, the river became the scenario for power games and disputes related to the Cold War. In 1956, when the Sudan obtained independence, it requested a renegotiation of the 1929 Water Agreements with Egypt. Sudan accepted the Aswan High Dam construction by Egypt, in exchange for sharing the water of the dam. The two countries signed in 1959 Nile water agreements to allocate the resource and to share costs and benefits of future projects on the river. From then on, cooperation between the Sudan and Egypt more or less continued (Sinnona, 2007).

The Hydromet Agreement was signed in 1967, originally among Egypt, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda and the Sudan with the collaboration of the United Nations Development Programme and the World Meteorological Organization, and later joined by Rwanda, Burundi, D.R. Congo and Ethiopia, increasing cooperation. Hydromet lasted for 25 years, terminating in 1992. The same year the water resource ministers from Egypt, the Sudan, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda and D.R. Congo created a new organization, the Technical Committee for the Promotion of the Development and Environmental Protection of the Nile Basin (TECCONILE). The rest of the four riparian states participated as observers. In February 1999, the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) was launched by all riparian countries, except Eritrea. In September 1999, the NBI Secretariat replaced TECCONILE in Entebbe, Uganda.

The NBI is considered a transitional arrangement until the member countries agree on a

180

permanent Nile River Basin Commission for sustainable development of the river basin (Sinnona, 2007).

This positive development is a good indication that the constellation outlined above also offers incentives for international cooperation. Decision makers throughout the world, and precisely in Africa, have come to recognize in principle that trans-boundary waters call for cooperative trans-boundary management. This has found expression in numerous bi- and multilateral declarations and agreements on individual water bodies as well as in framework agreements that lay down general principles governing the management of trans-boundary river basins.

Cooperation is often extended to other benefits. The UNDP Report (2006) claims that more than 40% of transnational water treaties include provisions on financial investments, energy commerce and peace negotiations. This approach could facilitate agreements, because it provides governments national justifications and it promotes financial flows, capable of opening cooperation on a variety of matters. Moreover, it offers a bargaining power to weaker states that could grant something in return to an equitable water management.

Trans-national cooperation is influenced by asymmetries in power. In this framework, trans-national relations for the management of common water resource become a matter of interactions, more than a pure problem of conflict or cooperation. Conflicts and cooperation coexist in situations where a resource is shared.

5.3.3 Public Participation in Water Governance

In many respects, civil society participation in water resources management and water supply and sanitation is the key to successful sector governance, encompassing management, quality service provision and sustainability. This has been recognized in the Dublin-Rio principles, which are clear in their statements that water development and management should be based on a participatory approach, involving users, planners, policy-makers at all levels and that women play a central part in the provision, management and safeguarding of water. This calls for a sharing and balance between stakeholders (both top-down and bottom-up) in their planning and management. It has also been recognized that service provision functions should be delegated to the “lowest appropriate level” at which stakeholders involved in management need to be identified, resourced and mobilized. It follows that in the water sector, far more than most, the beneficiary needs to be involved at all stages of the project cycle from monitoring and needs identification right through maintenance and basin and system management.

In order to manage water equitably, governments must solicit stakeholders’

involvement. Involvement of stakeholders at the trans-boundary scale is key in order to ensure adaptive water management (Kranz and Mostert, 2010). Principle 10 of the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development affirms that environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens. The Declaration exhorts nations to facilitate public participation through methods to increase transparency, participatory decision-making and accountability. The International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) defines public participation as “any process that involves the public in problem solving or decision making and uses public input to make better decision”. As mentioned by Kranz and Mostert (2010), there is public participation when the involvement is direct. This