CARnet: Central Asia is among the priority areas of work for the Unice Water Convention

CARNet: What are the goals and objectives of the 5th Meeting of the Parties to Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes?

FB: The Convention was adopted in Helsinki in 1992 and entered into force in 1996. In early 1990s, with the emergence of new states, many formerly domestic rivers and lakes became transboundary. The Convention therefore turned to be an instrument which helped establish transboundary water cooperation in the region. Today, 35 countries and the European Community are Parties to the Convention. The Convention became a model for new multilateral agreements on the rivers Rhine, Danube, Meuse, Scheldt, and Sava. It served as a basis for development of a number of bilateral agreements on transboundary waters (e.g. between Russian Federation and Ukraine, between Russian Federation and Kazakhstan, between Russian Federation and Estonia). The Convention had a great influence in advancing the concept of a “catchment area” as a main unit for water management – this concept later became the main idea of the EU Water Framework Directive. The Convention helps countries to implement the principles of integrated water resources management. Evaluation of the progress made so far is among the tasks of the 5th Meeting of the Parties.

However our goal is also to look ahead what needs to be done for the improvement of transboundary water cooperation in the region and how the Convention can help countries to achieve more efficient cooperation.

CARNet: What role, in your opinion, will the 5th Meeting of the Parties play in promoting implementation of and facilitating compliance with the Convention?

FB: That is a very good question. We are often asked how proper implementation of and compliance with the Convention by all States can be achieved. At the previous Meeting of the Parties three years ago in Bonn, two non-Parties – Georgia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia – communicated their request to clarify several aspects related to the practical implementation of the Convention. In response to this request, the Legal Board of the Convention supported by water experts developed a Guide on Implementing the Convention. The Guide explains the basic provisions of the Convention and provides a number of concrete examples how selected provisions are implemented in practice. The Meeting of the Parties will discuss this document. We expect that this practical Guide will become a push for adequate application and implementation of the Convention by all Parties.

The Meeting of the Parties will discuss another “historical” decision – to start developing a mechanism to facilitate implementation of and compliance with the Convention. The mechanism could be trigged for the settlement of differences and disputes in case there are grounds to suggest that a Party is not in compliance with its obligations under the Convention. It would be too premature to suggest now how could such a mechanism look like; however it shall undoubtedly be a non-confrontational and effective instrument to settle differences.

CARNet: How would you characterize the overall implementation process of the Convention? What are the main achievements in this area? What are the barriers that Parties face with?

FB: The Convention assists countries in establishing and maintaining transboundary water cooperation on a permanent basis. The Convention itself is a framework document; however it contains a number of specific obligations and mechanisms. These include the obligation to take all necessary measures to prevent, control and reduce transboundary impact, the obligation to enter into bilateral and multilateral agreements on specific waters, the obligation to establish joint bodies to facilitate cooperation of the Parties. A number of bilateral and multilateral agreements are already in force in the region. A number of “mature” joint bodies actively function (e.g. the International Commissions for the Protection of Mosel and Saar against Pollution, the Rhine Commission, the former USSR-Finland – currently Russian-Finnish Commission). In the post-Soviet space, there is an ongoing work to enter into new agreements and establish joint bodies. In some areas, interstate cooperation on transboundary waters starts with joint work in the framework of concrete projects. So the progress definitely does take place.

However there are a number of difficulties. In the areas where problems with water quantity and water quality are of particular importance, transboundary water cooperation often faces strong political controversies. However exactly these countries are in the most urgent need of the Convention as an instrument which does not provide ready-to-go solutions but helps establish permanent cooperation of States, which in turn facilitates finding solutions to the problems.

CARNet: Monitoring and evaluation of the status of water resources is a key point in water management. What measures are taken under the Convention and what difficulties do you encounter here?

FB: The Convention provides for the obligations of Riparian Parties to implement joint programmes for monitoring the conditions of transboundary waters, including floods and ice drifts, as well as transboundary impact. It obliges the Riparian Parties to agree upon pollution parameters and pollutants whose discharges and concentration in transboundary waters shall be regularly monitored. The Riparian Parties shall regularly carry out assessments of the conditions of transboundary waters.

Some Parties and joint bodies, e.g. the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River, have achieved significant success in organization of regular monitoring and in development of early warning and alarm systems for critical situations, which is another obligation under the Convention. Others are only making first steps in this direction and start with the regular exchange of information – a precondition for any cooperation on transboundary waters.

Periodic assessments are done to monitor the Convention’s effectiveness and progress. The “First Assessment of Transboundary Waters in Europe” was developed for the Belgrade “Environment for Europe” Conference in 2007. We are now preparing the “Second Assessment” to be submitted to the Seventh Ministerial Conference “Environment for Europe” (Astana, 2011). The Second Assessment will have a stronger subregional and thematic focus and will cover in more details Central Asia and the impacts from climate change.

CARNet: Is climate change a factor, which should be taken into account when developing transboundary water cooperation? How this factor could be reflected in implementation of the Convention?

FB: Even though the Convention does not mention climate change, the climate change certainly impacts on the state of transboundary waters and calls for increasing interstate cooperation. Even now countries experience negative impacts connected with increased frequency and intensity of floods and droughts, worse water scarcity, intensified erosion and sedimentation, reduction in glacier and snow cover, sea level rise, salinization, soil degradation, and damage to water quality, ecosystems and human health. As both water and climate change do not respect borders, international cooperation on adaptation to climate change is important. If countries adapt unilaterally without consulting their neighbours this will result in an increased risk of conflict over dwindling water resources. Adaptation to climate change in international river basins is urgently needed. This is why, Guidance on Water Resources and Adaptation to Climate Change was developed in the framework of the Convention. This Guidance will also be discussed by the Meeting of the Parties and is expected to assist governments to agree upon and take coordinated action in this area.

CARNet: The Convention should be implemented at international and national levels, at the level of ministries and agencies… What are the differences between approaches to implementation at different levels?

FB: The Convention imposes its obligations on States which shall ensure their implementation through adoption of relevant legislation and its implementation at national and local level as well as by entering into international agreements. The way that a State ensures implementation of its obligations under international law depends on specific mechanisms laid down in its Constitution and legislation.

We often see cases when local authorities or non-governmental organizations become the initiators of transboundary water cooperation and of progressive steps in the national legislation. This is very encouraging since the principles of integrated water resources management include the involvement of all stakeholders. Non-governmental environmental organizations often become the “engines” of transboundary cooperation by insisting that governments pay attention to poor efficiency of existing cooperation and take relevant measures to improve it. For example, the 1997 Agreement between Estonia and Russia was pushed by an NGO. In Moldova and Ukraine, NGOs became a driving force for strengthening transboundary water cooperation on the Dniester River.

CARNet: What problems do Central Asian countries encounter in the context of implementation of the Convention? What could the Convention offer to our region?

FB: Today Central Asia is among the priority areas of work for the UNECE and for the Water Convention. As you know only Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan are Parties to the Convention. Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan take part in activities of some working bodies under the Convention. In general, these States demonstrate an increasing interest towards the Convention.

Such interest is easy to explain: the Convention, being a framework instrument, provides for a foundation to build transboundary water cooperation on. Such foundation is extremely needed in Central Asia. The Convention is not a few paper sheets; it is a compilation of principles and mechanisms to facilitate permanent cooperation. In addition, implementation of the Convention is supported by the Meeting of the Parties – a collective body that brings together countries with different political, economic and social backgrounds and allows them to jointly assess existing challenges, help each other and facilitate financial support for specific projects. Such forum and mechanisms would be very useful for countries of Central Asia.

There are a few wide spread myths about the Convention in Central Asia: e.g. “the Convention is only beneficial for downstream countries”, or “the Convention prohibits building dams and hydropower stations”, or “the Convention is not applicable to regions where water quantity issues prevail”. These are all not true. The Convention obliges its Parties to take all necessary measures to prevent transboundary impact which means “significant” adverse effects. If you consider the Convention as a permanent process of cooperation (not as a means to solve your immediate problems!) then it has its benefits for all countries, both downstream and upstream, since such cooperation prevents differences and disputes, strengthens peace and cooperation, and helps achieve sustainable management of resources. The notion of “transboundary impact” under the Convention covers both issues of water quality and water quantity. That is why the Convention is applicable to Central Asia as it is applicable to any other region.

CARNet: Thank you Francesca. We wish you and all delegations a very productive Meeting.

Source: CARNet

URL

For further information: CARNet