Water Governance in NIS UNDP Workshop for NIS

Environmental Focal Points

15 June 2004

Tim Turner

Water Governance in NISOverview

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

1. Current situation anddevelopment trends in NIS in the area of water governance

Involvement in water projects

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Armen

ia

Azerb

aija

n

Belar

us

Estoni

a

Georg

ia

Kazak

hstan

Kyrgyz

stan

Lativ

ia

Lithuan

ia

Mol

dova

Russia

Tadjik

ista

n

Turkm

enis

tan

Ukrai

ne

Uzbek

ista

n

Regional Projects

National Projects

Nu

mb

er o

f U

ND

P p

roje

cts*

* According to UNDP Country websites

NIS International Waters ProjectsProject Location Date

StartedProject Status Project

Value (USD)

Black Sea 1992 SAP implementation

$ 10 m

Danube River 1992 Final GEF $ 17 m

Caspian 1998 Full Project PDF-B $ 6 m

Black Sea Danube Strategic Partnership

1998 Implementation $ 75 m

Tumen River Area 1998 PDF-B TDA/SAP $ 5.2 m

Baltic Sea 2001 PDF - B $ 12.5 m

Dnipro River 2001 SAP implementation

$ 9.5 m

Lake Peipsi 2002 TDA/SAP $ 1.7 m

Kura- Aras Basin 2002 PDF-B TDA/SAP $ 1.5 m

UNDP CO National Water Projects Countries Projects Status

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 ??

UNDP CO National Water Projects Countries Projects Status

Ukraine Tisa River sustainable development programme

??

Uzbekistan Capacity building for sustainable development (integration of land and water use)

??

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

Institutional learning

Kura Aras

Dnipro River

Programme

Danube EPRDB

CaspianCEP

Black SeaBSEP

MEDAction Plan

Lessons learned

Feedback

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

region

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

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

National level priorities

Economic development water for: agriculture industry Transport Fisheries

Access to clean/safe waterEnvironmental management

3. Strategic priorities for GEF assistance in the International

Waters focal area

GEF priorities

• Global benefits• Country ownership• Stakeholder

participation• Replicability• Catalysis• Institutional

sustainability

GEF Water SpecificOperational 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

Mainstream SAP/NAP procedures into country plans

Strategic Action Programme

IMCNational

Action Plan

IMCNational

Action Plan

IMCNational

Action Plan

IMCNational

Action Plan

SteeringCommittee

endorsement

Government endorsement

4. Potential entry-points for UNDP future support at the

national and regional level

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?

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

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)

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

UNDP COs coordination with IWPsIWP Benefits• Improved communication at

national level• Links with donors and IFIs• Improved local intelligence

UNDPCO

IWPProject

staff

UNDPCO

UNDPCO

CO Benefits• Leveraging money for national

projects associated with IWP• Capacity building of local staff• Attracts funding from private

sector for related projects

CO involvement in IWPsBarriers:

– 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.

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

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

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

Strategic Partnership

DANUBE(EPDRB)

BLACK SEA

(BSEP)

DNIPRO(DEP)

GEF Nutrient Investment

Facility

UNEP WORLD BANKUNDP

JOINT WORKING GROUPNutrient Reduction Facility

Advisory Groups

National Coordinators

IntersectoralWorking Groups

EU

MPPIs

SHA

TDA

CCA

InterventionsPrelim SAP

EQOs

Interventions

SAP

NCAPs

NCCA

NTDA

IWPTDA/SAP Process

Initial TDA

• 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