Blog 7 - Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) - a new approach to managing water
There are many different methods employed to manage water resources. Many approaches in the past have been a top down approach but since the 1990s a new way to manage water has been sought after. Integrated Water Resources Management aims to involve all aspects of society and as such is a more inclusive initiative based on equity and cooperation.
IWRM:
IWRM:
Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) is defined by the Global Water Management Partnership as a "process which promotes the coordinated development and management of water, land and related resources in order to maximise economic and social welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems and the environment." Savenjie and Van der Zaag (2008) outline the 4 principles as agreed at International Conference on Water and the Environment (ICWE) in Dublin, Ireland in 1992:
- Water is a finite, vulnerable and essential resource which should be managed in an integrated manner
- Water resources development and management should be based on a participatory approach, involving all relevant stakeholders
- Women play a central role in the provision, management and safeguarding of water
- Water has an economic value and should be recognised as an economic good, taking into account affordability and equity criteria.
As such, IWRM requires considerable coordination to implement and formation of the Global Water Partnership (GWP) and the World Water Council (WWC), who both have the aim to coordinate the implementation of IWRM principles and practices worldwide (2008) whereas before the aims of water management were spread across various other UN bodies. Through this the GWP and WWC aim to use Integrated water resources management as a means of reconciling basic human needs, ensuring access and equity, with economic development and the imperative of ecological integrity, while respecting transboundary commitments. (Van der Zaag, 2005). In a transboundary context, IWRM is meant to be a way in which to preclude conflict (2005) as it encourages dialogue between various stakeholders for whom riparian disputes may concern. Apropos of Blog 6, this sort of approach is desirable and likely to be forthcoming too as evidenced by the GERD (see blog 6) agreement signed by Sudan, Egypt and Ethiopia in March 2015.
Challenges and Criticisms:
On the other hand, IWRM does pose some challenges to its implementation - especially in Africa. As alluded to earlier, IWRM requires intricate coordination and requires institutional capacity to integrate (2005). Such capacity is in short supply. That is to say, many countries in Africa simply don't have the governance capabilities to enact such changes. This is in part due to a lack of trust in many political systems for many countries that have been plagued by corruption and ineffective governance alike. Moreover, the implantation of such an initiative is likely to take time and may not be accepted by competing elements of the population. Biswas (2004) states that "integrated water resources management, even in a limited sense, becomes difficult to achieve because of extensive turf wars" - this statement is likely to resonate particularly in a lot of African countries because of the nature of many African states. That is to say, many states are mercilessly bureaucratic and as such there is neither the wherewithal or the desire in some cases to introduce such an initiative. In addition, there seems to be a more practical point that is overlooked by proponents of IWRM. Given the intricate nature detailed in this blog the knowledge ,or lack thereof, will likely involve such an initiative being open to those with the requisite knowledge of water systems, thus overlooking and not representing the needs of many stakeholders in the targeted area for IWRM - in effect, thus completely nullifying one of the key tenets of the initiative - equitable management.
Conclusion:
To conclude, IWRM certainly provides an ideal and a new and refreshing approach to the issue of managing water. It is also true that such initiatives have had some success and have been to seen to work in a transboundary context also e.g GERD on the Nile between Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia. However, at this current juncture, I contend it is unlikely to be a success - at least not for its intended reasons anyway. That is to say, the manner in which it is intended to be implemented simply isn't suited to many African countries at this point on account of the detailed knowledge and sophisticated governance required to enact such an initiative. To that effect, as stated above, implementation of IWRM will likely keep the decision making process in the hands of those with knowledge thus excluding many stakeholders thereby negating one of its' key tenets. Nonetheless, IWRM does provide a sound basis for how waters should be managed and may be more applicable to African countries as time progresses but currently many African countries don't have the political means to enact such a policy.
Challenges and Criticisms:
On the other hand, IWRM does pose some challenges to its implementation - especially in Africa. As alluded to earlier, IWRM requires intricate coordination and requires institutional capacity to integrate (2005). Such capacity is in short supply. That is to say, many countries in Africa simply don't have the governance capabilities to enact such changes. This is in part due to a lack of trust in many political systems for many countries that have been plagued by corruption and ineffective governance alike. Moreover, the implantation of such an initiative is likely to take time and may not be accepted by competing elements of the population. Biswas (2004) states that "integrated water resources management, even in a limited sense, becomes difficult to achieve because of extensive turf wars" - this statement is likely to resonate particularly in a lot of African countries because of the nature of many African states. That is to say, many states are mercilessly bureaucratic and as such there is neither the wherewithal or the desire in some cases to introduce such an initiative. In addition, there seems to be a more practical point that is overlooked by proponents of IWRM. Given the intricate nature detailed in this blog the knowledge ,or lack thereof, will likely involve such an initiative being open to those with the requisite knowledge of water systems, thus overlooking and not representing the needs of many stakeholders in the targeted area for IWRM - in effect, thus completely nullifying one of the key tenets of the initiative - equitable management.
Conclusion:
To conclude, IWRM certainly provides an ideal and a new and refreshing approach to the issue of managing water. It is also true that such initiatives have had some success and have been to seen to work in a transboundary context also e.g GERD on the Nile between Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia. However, at this current juncture, I contend it is unlikely to be a success - at least not for its intended reasons anyway. That is to say, the manner in which it is intended to be implemented simply isn't suited to many African countries at this point on account of the detailed knowledge and sophisticated governance required to enact such an initiative. To that effect, as stated above, implementation of IWRM will likely keep the decision making process in the hands of those with knowledge thus excluding many stakeholders thereby negating one of its' key tenets. Nonetheless, IWRM does provide a sound basis for how waters should be managed and may be more applicable to African countries as time progresses but currently many African countries don't have the political means to enact such a policy.
Comments
Post a Comment