INTRODUCTION

Overview: The Third Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management

The Third Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management (D-3) was held in Panama City, Republic of Panama. It brought together a selected group of experts who, in conjunction with technicians, professionals, users, managers, and decision-makers, analyzed the present situation of the water resources in the Americas. The Third Dialogue took place in the Conference Center of the Hotel Panamá. The 300 participants met in four sessions and split up in five breakout groups for discussions on the different themes. The five main themes of the conference were:

1. Water and Health • Strategies for Improving Access to Safe Drinking Water • Approaches to Hazards Mitigation • Management of Water and Sanitation Services

2. Integrated Water Resources Management

• Transboundary Water Resources Management • The Panama Canal Watershed

3. Environmental, Social, and Economic Valuation of Water

• Valuation of Water, Water Pricing, and Water Allocation • Changing Role of the Public and Private Sectors in Water Resources

Management • Financing the Water Infrastructure

4. Public Participation in Water Resources Decision-Making

• Community Participation in Water Resources Management • The Role of Education and Public Awareness • Strategies for Conflict Resolution to promote Societal, Economic, and

Environmental Security

5. Global Change and Water Resources

• Integrated Assessment of Water Resources in the Context of a Dynamic World

• Current Understanding of the Pattern of Climate Change in the Americas • El Niño: Prediction Capabilities and Impacts

The consensus was that the event was succesful, with over 300 registered participants actively taking part in the working group sessions. The busy agenda proved to be challenging, because once group discussions began, they were close to impossible to stop. The plenary sessions were both stimulating and informative. Social events were used as a valuable setting to stablish and renew professional relationships. They consisted of two receptions, daily happy hours, a boat trip through the Panama Canal, and dinner in a typical Panamanian villag, and VIP dinner. Preparatory activities for the Third Dialogue began several years prior to the event. IWRN, CATHALAC, and the government of Panama agreed to host the event. Specifically, the IWRN established four international committees (financial, Program, publicity, and proceedings). On the domestic level, CATHALAC and the Government of Panama (via ANAM), with support of the National Committee handled aspects and logistics in-country. The Third Dialogue´s Honorary Committee was comprised of an impressive number of CEOs, senior level United Nations officials, and high-ranking politicians. This committee was chaired by the Honorable Dora Boyd de Pérez Balladares, First Lady of Panamá. Her support to the event and participation was most valuable and impressive. Organizers: Autoridad Nacional del Medio Ambiente (ANAM) Centro del Agua del Trópico Húmedo para América Latina y el Caribe (CATHALAC) Inter American Water Resources Network (IWRN) Organization of American States (OAS) Funding / Sponsors IDB OAS ARI Philip Morris UNDP IICA Panama Canal Commission TVA SWFWMD SFWMD POLAR XEROX Texaco CES-FAU COPA Cable & Wireless USGS Papelería Istmeña Shell

USMA USAID U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Boskalis Philips ARGO tours

AGENDA

INTER-AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES NETWORK

Saturday, March 20, 1999 5:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. Inter-American Water Resources Network Executive Committee

Meeting (Zafiro) Sunday, March 21, 1999 10:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m Inter-American Water Resources Network Focal Point Meeting

(Esmeralda 2) 12:00 noon - 9:00 p.m. Registration Open (Lobby) 2:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. Inter-American Water Resources Network (IWRN) Advisory

Council Meeting (Zafiro) 7:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. Welcoming Reception−−−−Opening of AQUA’99 (Diamante)

THIRD INTER-AMERICAN DIALOGUE ON WATER MANAGEMENT

Monday, March 22, 1999

7:30 a.m. - 8:00 p.m. Registration 8:30 a.m. -10:00 a.m. Water Week in Panama Inaugural Ceremony (Ceremonia de

Inauguración de la Semana del Agua) Rescuing Rivers Across the Americas: Experiences of the

Everglades and the Pantanal (Rescatando los Ríos a través de las Américas: La Experiencias de los Everglades y el Pantanal) – Courtesy of Kurtis Productions, Ltd. , and South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), U.S.A.

Welcoming Remarks (Bienvenida)

Mirei Endara, Administradora General, Autoridad Nacional del Ambiente (ANAM), Panamá, Presidenta de la Semana del Agua en Panamá. Richard A. Meganck, Director, Unit for Sustainable Development and Environment, Organization of American States (OAS). Federico Mayor, Director General, United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Su Excelencia, Dora Boyd de Pérez-Balladares, Primera Dama de la República de Panamá, Presidenta del Comité Honorario de la Semana del Agua en Panamá.

10:00 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. Coffee Break 10:30 a.m. - 12:45 p.m. Plenary Session I: Dimensions of the Water Crisis (Dimensiones

de la Crisis del Agua)

Co-chairs Mirei Endara, Administradora General, Autoridad Nacional del Ambiente (ANAM), Panamá, Presidenta del Dialógo III. Mario de Marco Naón, Presidente, Instituto Nacional del Agua y del Ambiente (INA), Argentina, Presidente del Dialógo II.

. Introductory Remarks -- Haroldo Mattos de Lemos , Ex Secretário do Meio Ambiente, Ministério do Meio Ambiente, Brasil.

Keynote Address: Comprehensive Water Resources Management for Sustainable Development (Gestión de los Recursos Hídricos para el Desarrollo Sostenible)−−−−Alfred Duda, Team Leader, GEF Operations, Global Environment Facility (GEF).

Water Action Plan for the Americas (Plan de Acción del Agua para las Américas) −−−−Richard A. Meganck, Director, Unit for Sustainable Development and Environment, Organization of American States (OAS).

Plata Basin (La Cuenca del Plata) −−−− Carlos Tucci, Profesor, Instituto do Pesquisas Hidraulicas, Universidade Federal do Río Grande do Sul, Brasil.

Tennessee River Valley (El Valle del Río Tennessee) – Ron Williams, Vice-President of Environmental Research and Services, Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), U.S.A.

Caribbean Islands (Islas del Caribe) −−−− Thorant Hardware, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Housing, Jamaica.

12:45 p.m. - 2:30 p.m. Luncheon Introductory Remarks – Hélio de Macedo Soares, Director, Centro

Regional Sur, Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura (IICA), Paraguay.

Keynote Address: Dividing the Waters: Food, Environment, and

the New Politics of Scarcity (Dividiendo las Aguas: Alimentos, Medio Ambiente y las Nuevas Políticas en torno a la Escasez) −−−− Sandra Postel, Director, Global Water Policy Project, U.S.A.

Special Presentation: Vision of Water, Life, and the Environment

in 2025 (Visión del Agua, la Vida, y el Ambiente en el 2025) −−−− Carlos Fernández-Jaúregui, Member, Committee for the Water Vision of the Americas (CWVA).

CONCURRENT ROUND TABLE SESSIONS Participants will attend one of five concurrent thematic Round Tables. The discussion of each theme is led by two co- chairs and two or more panelists. A rapporteur in each session will take notes and summarize the discussion and conclusions. The goal of each Round Table Session is to identify three or four significant and specific actions that water institutions and governments, NGOs, and members of the general public need to take to implement various aspects of integrated water resources management in the Americas. The Round Tables will attempt to list actions in priority order. The themes include: 1) Water and Health; 2) Integrated Water Resources Management; 3) Social, Environmental, and Economic Valuation of Water Resources; 4) Public Participation in Water Resources Decision Making; and 5) Global Change and Water Resources. Los participantes asistirán a una de las cinco sesiones paralelas de las Mesas Redondas Temáticas. La discusión de cada tema es dirigida por dos Presidentes de Mesa y por dos o más panelistas. En cada sesión, un "relator" tomará notas y sintetizará las discusiones y conclusiones. El objetivo de cada sesión de las Mesas Redondas Temáticas es el de identificar tres o cuatro acciones significativas y específicas que las instituciones del agua y los gobiernos, los organismos no gubernamentales, y los miembros del público en general, necesitan llevar a cabo para desarrollar varios aspectos del manejo integrado de los recursos hídricos en las Américas. En las Mesas Redondas se intenta hacer un listado de acciones en orden prioritario. Los temas a discutir incluyen: 1) Agua y Salud, 2) Manejo Integrado de los Recursos Hídricos; 3) Valorización Social, Ambiental y Económica del Agua; 4) Participación Pública en la Toma de Decisiones sobre Recursos Hídricos; y 5) Cambio Climático y Recursos Hídricos.

2:30 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Round Table Session I Theme 1.1 – Water and Health: Strategies for Improving Access

to Safe Drinking Water (Agua y Salud: Estrategias para Mejorar el Acceso al Agua Potable).

Co-chairs: Enrique Arnesten, President, Inter-American Association of Sanitary Engineers (AIDIS). William White, Director, Department of Environment, Health, and Safety, Texaco, Inc., U.S.A.

Case Study: Guaranteeing Water for São Paulo, Brazil (Garantizando el Agua para San Pablo, Brasil) - Stela Goldenstein, São Paulo State Secretary of Environment, Brazil.

Panelists: Roberto Troya, Country Director, The Nature Conservancy, Ecuador.

Jorge Jenkins Molieri, Pan American Health Organization (PAHO). Gebdulio Castillo, President, Asociación Panameña de Ingenieros

Sanitarios (PANAIDIS), Panamá. Theme 2.1 – Integrated Water Resources Management: Transboundary Water Resources Management (Manejo

Integrado de los Recursos Hídricos: Gestión en Cuencas Transfronterizas).

Co-chairs: Thomas Ankersen, Mesoamerican Environmental Law Program, University of Florida, U.S.A. Marco Antonio González, Director de Legislación, Comisión Centroamericana de Ambiente y Desarrollo (CCAD).

Case Study:

Río Bravo (México/USA) – Robert G. Varady, Deputy Director, Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy, University of Arizona, U.S.A.

Río Usumacinta (México/Guatemala) – José Carlos Fernández, El

Colegio de la Frontera Sur (ECOSUR), México. Panelists: Richard Harmman, Mesoamerica Environmental Law Program,

University of Florida, U.S.A. Marilyn Crishlow, Divisional Manager Water Resources, Responsible for Water Planning and Environment, Water and Sewage Authority, Trinidad and Tobago.

Theme 3.1 – Social, Environmental, and Economic Valuation of Water : Valuation of Water, Water Pricing, and Water Allocation (Valorización Social, Ambiental y Económica del Agua: Valorización del Agua, Precio del Agua y Distribución del Agua).

Co-chairs:

Jaime Collado, Subcoordinador de Aprovechamientos Hidráulicos, Instituto Mexicano de Tecnología del Agua, México. Lawrence Gumbiner, Regional Environmental Officer, U.S. Embassy, Costa Rica.

Case Study: Reallocation of Water in the Western United States (Redistribución del Agua en el Oeste de los Estados Unidos) – Olean Paul Matthews, Michael Campaña, and David Brookshire, University of New Mexico, U.S.A. Panelists: Cathleen Vogel, Director of Government Relations, Pavase, Garner, Haverfield, Dalton, Harrison & Jensen, U.S.A. Rodrigo Tarté, Presidente GEA Consultores, Panamá Theme 4.1 – Public Participation in Water Resources Decision Making: Community Participation in Water Resources Management (Participación Pública en la Toma de Decisiones en Recursos Hídricos: Participación de la Comunidad en la Gestión del Agua). Co-chairs: Alberto Palombo, Consultant, Alberto J. Palombo, Inc.,Venezuela. Zoila Girón, Program Manager, Inter-American Strategy for Public Participation, Organization of American States (OAS). Case Study: Community Participation in Water Resources Management (Participación de la Comunidad en la Gestión de los Recursos Hídricos) – Adalberto Gabaldón, ex Ministro del Medio Ambiente, Venezuela. Panelists: Nicholas G. Aumen, Research Director, South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), USA. Maria do Carmo Zinato, Universidade Federal do Viçosa, Brasil. Manuel Guzmán Arrollo, Instituto de Limnología, Universidad de Guadalajara, México. Theme 5.1 – Global Change and Water Resources: Integrated Assessment of Water Resources in the Context of a Dynamic World (Cambio Global y Recursos Hídricos: Evaluación Integral de los Recursos Hídricos en el Contexto de un Mundo Dinámico). Co-chairs: Philip E. Greeson, Assistant Regional Hydrologist, Southeast Region, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S.A. Héctor Garduño, Consultor, Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Agricultura y la Alimentación (FAO).

Case Study: Water Balance of Colombia: Assessment of Water Resources and

Climate Change (Balance Hídrico de Colombia: Evaluación de los Recursos Hídricos y el Cambio Global) – Félix Dario Sánchez, Especialista en Meteorología, Instituto de Hidrología, Meteorología y Estudios Ambientales (IDEAM), Colombia.

Panelists: Mike Bonell, International Hydrologic Programme (IHP), United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Luis E. Loureiro, Director Nacional de Hidrografía, Ministerio de Transporte y Obras Públicas, Uruguay. Carlos Díaz Escobar, Director Ejecutivo, Servicio Nacional de Meteorología e Hidrología, Bolivia.

4:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Coffee Break 4:30 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. ROUND TABLE SESSIONS II

Theme 1.2 – Water and Health: Approaches to Hazards Mitigation (Agua y Salud: Métodos para Mitigar Riesgos). Co-chairs: A. Ivan Johnson, Honorary President, International Association of Hydrological Sciences (IAHS), U.S.A Benedito Braga, President, International Water Resources Association (IWRA). Case Study: Hydrologic Warning and Information System for Plata Basin (Sistema de Información y Alerta Hidrológica de la Cuenca del Plata) thematic– Dora Goniadzki, Coordinadora, Sistema de Información y Alerta Hidrológica del Instituto Nacional del Agua y del Ambiente (INA), Argentina. Panelists: Claudio Osorio, Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), Dominican Republic. Miguel Medina, Professor, Duke University , U.S.A. Theme 2.2 – Integrated Water Resources Management: Transboundary Water Resources Management (Manejo Integrado de los Recursos Hídricos: Gestión en Cuencas Transfronterizas). Co-chairs: Kirk P. Rodgers, Consultant, U.S.A. Bertjan B. Beekman, Coordinator of Operations, Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura (IICA), Brazil. Case Studies: Río San Juan (Nicaragua/Costa Rica) – Jorge Rucks, Chief, Division II (Latin America), Unit for Sustainable Development and Environment, Organization of American States (OAS).

Río Bermejo (Argentina/ Bolivia) – Abel Barroso, Binational

Commission for the Development of the Upper Rio Bermejo River Basin and the Rio Grande de Tarija, Bolivia.

Panelists: John Gladwell, CATHALAC Board of Directors; President,

Hydrotech International, Canada. Walter Rast, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

José Antonio Montes, Consultor, Guatemala.

Theme 3.2 – Social, Environmental, and Economic Valuation of Water Resources: Changing Role of the Public and Private Sector in Water Resources Management(Valorización Social, Ambiental, y Económica del Agua: El Papel Cambiante del Sector Público y Privado en la Gestión del Agua). Co-chairs: Vinio Floris, Consultant, U.S.A.

Mantha Mehallis, Director, Center for International Business Information Transfer, Florida Atlantic University, U.S.A.

Case Study:

Private Participation and Public Sector Roles in the Provision of Water and Sanitation Services (Papel de la Participación Privada y del Sector Público en el Suministro de Agua y Servicios de Saneamiento) – Vinio Floris, Consultant, and Mantha Mehallis, Director, Center for International Business Information Transfer, Florida Atlantic University, U.S.A. Panelists: Carlos López-Ocaña, Senior Professional, Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). Rafael Mezquita, Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados Nacionales, Panamá. John Banyard, Director, Severn-Trent, England.

Theme 4.2– Public Participation in Water Resources Decision Making: The role of Education and Public Awareness (Participación Pública en la Toma de Decisiones en Recursos Hídricos: El Papel de la Educación y la Concientización Pública).

Co-chairs:

Peter Hubble, Water Resources Associates, U.S.A. Stanley Muschett, Rector, Universidad Santa María la Antigua, Panamá.

Case Study: Educational Strategies for the Management of Water Resources in

Rural Communities of the Pampa Prairies, Argentina (Estrategias Educacionales para la Gestión de los Recursos Hídricos en las Comunidades Rurales de las Pampas, Argentina) –A. Herrero, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Panelists:

Ramón Vargas, Superintendencia de la Provincia del Chaco, Argentina. Manuel Aumente Villalobos, Director, Escuela Granja Casiciaco Haren Alde, Panamá. Julio Bermúdez, Presidente, Asociación de Pequeños Empresarios, Panamá.

Theme 5.2 – Global Change and Water Resources Current Understanding of the Pattern of Climate Change in the Americas (Cambio Global y Recursos Hídricos: Comprensión Actual de los Patrones de Cambio Climático en las Américas). Co-chairs: Nicolaas de Groot, Deputy Director, CATHALAC.

Sadi Laporte, Jefe del Departmento de Hidrología, Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, Costa Rica. Case Study: Climate Change: Patterns and Impacts (Cambio Climático: Impactos y Patrones) – Pilar Cornejo, Principal Investigator, Trade Convergence Climate Complex Network (TCCC), Ecuador. Panelists: Omar Lucero, Professor, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina. Arthur Mariano, Professor, University of Miami, U.S.A. Pedro Morera, Instituto de Investigaciones en Salud, Universidad de Costa Rica, Costa Rica.

6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. Happy Hour 7:30 p.m. – 9:30.p.m. Inaugural Reception

Tuesday, March 23, 1999

7:30 a.m. – 2:00 p.m. Registration 8:30 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. Plenary Session II: Water Education and Public Awareness: The

Key to Change (Educación sobre el Agua y Conciencia Pública: la Clave para el Cambio). Co-chairs: Ceferino Sánchez, Secretario Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología, Panamá.E. D. Sonny Verara, Executive Director, Southwest Florida Water Management District, U.S.A.

Keynote Address: Public Participation in Watershed Management (Participación Pública en el Manejo de Cuencas) – Frank Devlyn, Rotary International, Mexico. Case Study: GLOBE Program (Programa GLOBE) – Paul Filmer, National Science Foundation (NSF), USA, and Martha Conklin, GLOBE, USA.

Panelists: José Ochoa, Professor, Universidad Católica Andrés Bello, Venezuela. Alicia Fernádez Cirelli, Profesora, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina. Virginia Newell, Assistant Dean, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami, USA.

10:00 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. Coffee Break 10:30 a.m. - 12:00 noon ROUND TABLE SESSION III

Theme 1.3 – Water and Health: Management of Water and Sanitation Services (Agua y Salud: Manejo del Agua y Servicios de Saneamiento).

Co-chairs: Patricio Leyw, Director del Colegio de Ingenieros y Arquitectos, Panamá. Sergio Caporali, Director, Centro Panamericano de Ingenería Sanitaria y Ciencias Ambientales (CEPIS), Perú.

Case Study: Decentralization of Water and Sanitation Services in Central

America (Descentralización de los Servicios de Suministro de Agua y de Saneamiento en América Central) – Carlos Linares, Consultant, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), El Salvador. Panelists: Morris Israel, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), USA. Marda Mayo, TLC Systems, USA. Daniel Cummings, Manager, Central Water and Sewage Authority, St. Vincent & the Grenadines.

Theme 2.3 – Integrated Water Resources Management: Panama Canal Watershed (Manejo Integrado de los Recursos Hídricos: la Cuenca del Canal de Panamá).

Co-chairs: Aristides Lorlesse, Director Nacional de Cuencas Hidrográficas,

Autoridad Nacional del Ambiente (ANAM), Panamá. Jorge Illueca, Assistant Executive Director, Division of

Environmental Conventions, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Case Study:

Comprehensive Watershed Management: The Panama Canal Experience – (Manejo de Cuencas: Experiencia del Canal de Panamá) – Daniel Muschett, Especialista en Protección Ambiental, Panama Canal Commission.

Panelists: Abdiel Adames, Consultor, Panamá. Lars Klassen, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Alberto Uribe, División de Administración de Recursos Naturales y

Medio Ambiente, Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (BID). Theme 3.3 – Social, Environmental, and Economic Valuation of Water: Financing the Water infrastructure (Valorización Social, Ambiental y Económica del Agua: Financiamiento de la Infraestructura del Agua). Co-chairs: Francisco González, International Corporate Finance Coordinator, Holland & Knight, U.S.A Alberto Pons, Presidente, Sindicato de Industriales, Panamá.

Case Study: Financing Water Infrastructure Projects in Latin America and the Caribbean (Financiamiento de Proyectos de Infraestructura del Agua en América Latina y el Caribe) - Francisco González, Holland & Knight, U.S.A

Panelist:

Ellis Juan, Head of Latin American Project Finance, Santandex Investiments, U.S.A. Roberto Galán, Cuencas Hidrográficas, Autoridad Nacional del Ambiente, Panamá. Theme 4.3 – Public Participation in Water Resources Decision Making: Strategies for Conflict Resolution to Promote Societal, Economic, and Environmental Security (Participación Pública en la Toma de Decisiones sobre Recursos Hídricos: Estrategias para la Resolución de Conflictos para Promover la Seguridad Social, Económica, y Ambiental).

Co-chairs:

Armando Llop, Instituto Nacional del Agua y del Ambiente (INA), Argentina. Susan Kessel, Director, Government Relations, Southwest Florida Water Management District, U.S.A. Case Study: Mechanisms to Resolve Conflicts in Administering Water in Uruguay (Mecanismos para la Resolución de Conflictos en la Administración del Agua en Uruguay) – Roberto Torres, Director, División Recursos Hídricos, Dirección Nacional de Hidrografía, Ministerio de Transporte y Obras Públicas, Uruguay.

Panelists:

Aaron T. Wolf, Professor, Oregon State University, U.S.A. Dimas Arcia, Sub-Administrador, Autoridad Nacional del Ambiente (ANAM), Panamá.

Theme 5.3 – Global Change and Water Resources:El Nino:

Prediction Capabilities and Impacts (Cambio Global y Recursos Hídricos: El Niño: Impactos y Capacidades de Predicción) - (Bella Mar 1)

Co-chairs:

Luis García, Senior Water Resources Specialist, Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). Luz Amalia González, Ex Sub-Directora, Instituto de Recursos Hidraúlicos y Electrificación, Panamá.

Case Study:

Climate Forecasting at the International Research Institute and Applications (Pronostico Climático en el Instituto Internacional de Investigación y Aplicaciones) - Paulo Nobre and Kenny Broad, International Research Institute for El Niño Prediction (IRI), USA. Panelists: Ligia Castro de Doens, M.D., Ministerio de Salud, Panamá.

Eduardo Bustamante, CIRSA, Argentina. Donatus St. Aimee, Secretary, Caribbean Council on Science and Technology, United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (UN/ECLAC).

12:00 noon - 2:00 p.m. Luncheon Introductions – Joseph B. Browder, Dunlap & Browder, USA. Water Resources of Panama and the Panama Canal (Los

Recursos Hídricos de Panamá y el Canal de Panamá) – Nicolás Ardito Barletta, Administrador General, Autoridad de la Región Interoceánica (ARI), Panamá. Panama Canal Tour Orientation – Panama Canal Commission Representative.

2:00 p.m. - 3:30 p.m. ROUND TABLE SESSION IV

Discussion of Recommendations and Priorities for Action (Discusión de Recomendaciones y Acciones Prioritarias)

Theme 1 – Water and Health (Agua y Salud). Co-chairs:

Abdiel Adames, Panamá. José Ochoa, Venezuela. Theme 2 – Integrated Water Resources Management (Manejo

Integrado de los Recursos Hídricos). Co-chairs: Thorant Hardware, Jamaica. Kirk P. Rodgers, USA. Theme 3 – Social, Environmental, and Economic Valuation of

Water (Valorización Social, Ambiental y Económica del Agua) - (Coral)

Co-chairs: Mantha Mehallis, USA. Gertjan Beekman, Brasil. Theme 4 – Public Participation in Water Resources Decision Making (Participación Pública en la Toma de Decisiones sobre Recursos Hídricos) Co-chairs: Alberto Palombo, Venezuela. Alicia Fernández, Argentina. Theme 5 – Global Change and Water Resources (Cambio Global y Recursos Hídricos). Co-chairs: Paul Filmer, USA. Pedro Morera, Costa Rica.

3:30 p.m. Departure for Children’s Water Festival 4:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. CHILDREN’S WATER FESTIVAL (Festival del Aguay la Niñez) . Presentation of Children’s Declaration (Presntación de la

Declaración de los Niños). Dedication of the “Water for Life” Fountain (Dedicación de la Fuente "El Agua para la Vida").

6:30 p.m. – 7:30 p.m. Happy Hour 6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. Synthesis of Recommendations and Priorities for Action (Síntesis

de Recomendaciones y Acciones Prioritarias). Co-chairs: Mirei Endara, Administradora General, Autoridad Nacional del

Ambiente (ANAM), Panamá , Presidenta del Dialógo III. Leonard Berry, Director, Center for Environmental Stiudies (CES),

Florida Atlantic University,USA. Presentations by Round Table Chairs (Presentaciones a cargo de

los Presidentes de Mesa). 7:30 p.m. - 10:30 p.m. Dinner at Mi Pueblito (Cena en Mi Pueblito) Wednesday, March 24, 1999 7:15 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Tour of Panama Canal and Environs 4:30 p.m. – 6:30 p.m. Happy Hour

Thursday, March 25, 1999 8:30 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. Plenary Session III -- Water Networks and Networking: Sharing

of Experiences and Knowledge (Redes de Agua y "Networking": Compartiendo Experiencias y Conocimientos). Co-chairs: Leonard Berry, Director, Center for Environmental Studies, Florida Atlantic University, U.S.A. María Concepción Donoso, Directora, Centro del Agua del Trópico Húmedo para América Latina y el Caribe (CATHALAC).

Presentations: Water on the Web ’98: Results of Workshop and Future

Directions (El Agua en la Red '98: Resultados del Taller y

Directrices Futuras) – Faye Anderson, International Water Resources Association (IWRA).

Networking in South America (“Networking” en América del Sur)

– Miguel Solanes, United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (UN/ECLAC).

Panelists: Kelly Hodgeson, Global Environmental Monitoring System (GEMS),

Canada. Carlos Fernández-Jáurgui, United Nations Educational, Scientific,

and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), International Hydrological Programme (IHP).

Eduardo Mestre, Secretario Técnico Permanente, Red Latinoamericana de Organizaciones de Cuenca (RELOC).

10:00 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. Coffee Break 10:30 a.m. - 12:00 noon Plenary Session IV -- Presentations of Recommendations and

Priorities for Action (Presentación de Recomendaciones y Prioridades).

Co-chairs: Fernando Rodríguez, Secretário de Recursos Hídricos, Ministerio del Medio Ambiente, Brasil. David W. Moody, Secretariat, Inter-American Water Resources Network (IWRN), Organization of American States (OAS). Summary of Recommendations and Priorities for Action (Sumario de Recomendaciones y Prioridades) Discussion of the Statement/Declaration (Discusión de la Declaración)

12:00 noon – 2:00 p.m. Luncheon Introductory Remarks – Humberto Peña, Director, Dirección

General de Agua (DGA), Chile. Keynote Address: Role of the Private Sector in the Future Management of Water Resources (Papel del Sector Privado en el Manejo Futuro de los Recursos Hídricos) – Cathy Leiber, Director for Corporate Affaires, Phillip Morris International, U.S.A. Special Presentation: Water Policy of the Inter-American Development Bank (Política de Agua del Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo) – Luis García, Senior Water Resources Specialist, Inter-American Development Bank (IDB).

2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. Water Week in Panama Closing Ceremony (Ceremonia de Clausura de la Semana del Agua en Panamá).

Chair:

Mirei Endara, Administradora General,Autoridad Nacional del Ambiente (ANAM), Panamá , Presidenta de la Semana del Agua en Panamá.

María Concepción Donoso, Directora, Centro del Agua del Trópico Húmedo para América Latina y el Caribe (CATHALAC).

Richard A. Meganck, Director, Unit for Sustainable Development

and Environment, Organization of American States (OAS). Carlos Fernádez-Jaúregui, United Nations Educational, Scientific,

and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), International Hydrological Programme (IHP). Dalys de Pérez, Secretariado del Primer Festival del Agua y la Niñez, Despacho de la Primera Dama de la República de Panamá.

Report of the Children’s Festival Report of the Second International Colloquium on Hydrology and

Water Management in the Humid Tropics Report of the Third Inter-American Dialogue on Water

Management Joint Statement of the Water Week in Panama (Declaración

Conjunta de la Semana del Agua en Panamá) Closing Remarks (Pensamientos al Cierre) –Tilford C. Creel, Former Director, South Florida Water Management District and a Founder of the First Dialogue, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, U.S.A.

3:00 p.m. Adjournnent

INAUGURATION SPEECHES

Palabras de Bienvenida a la Semana del Agua en Panamá

Mirei Endara∗∗∗∗ Para mí es un gran honor presidir el Tercer Diálogo Interamericano sobre Administración de Aguas y el Segundo Coloquio Internacional sobre Hidrología y Manejo de los Recursos Hídricos en los Trópicos Húmedos, y ser la anfitriona de la Visión del Agua para las Américas. En esta fecha, en la cual las naciones del mundo celebramos el Día Mundial del Agua, con el firme propósito de recordarnos cada instante la importancia que para la vida del planeta tiene este recurso natural y especialmente para nosotros los panameños, para quienes el agua representa una de nuestras principales riquezas naturales ya que de ella obtenemos el 70% de la energía eléctrica que mueve la industria y el comercio nacional, nuestra producción de alimentos y el futuro promisorio, que en los albores del siglo XXI, representa la reversión del Canal de Panamá. Dada la importancia que el agua dulce tiene para el país y lo que significa para nuestro futuro, decidimos conmemorar este año el Día Mundial del Agua con la Semana del Agua en Panamá y organizar eventos regionales y mundiales que nos permitieran compartir información, discutir problemas comunes e intercambiar experiencias en la gestión integrada del recurso hídrico. En esta tarea, fuimos ayudados por el Centro del Agua de los Trópicos Húmedos para América Latina y el Caribe (CATHALAC). El Tercer Diálogo Interamericano sobre Administración de Aguas representa la culminación de un proceso que se inició en Miami en octubre de 1993, en el cual se dispuso el establecimiento de una Red Interamericana de Recursos Hídricos y se solicitó a la OEA fungir como secretaría técnica de la red; continuó con la Cumbre de las Américas celebrada en Miami en octubre de 1994, con la aprobación por parte de los Jefes de Estado de las Américas del Plan de Acción; posteriormente en septiembre de 1996, en Buenos Aires, Argentina, se celebró el Segundo Diálogo Interamericano sobre Administración de Aguas. En Buenos Aires se exhortó a los gobiernos, las instituciones financieras internacionales, a los sectores público y privado, a comprometerse en elaborar y ejecutar planes de acción coordinados que aborden los problemas de los recursos hídricos. D-3, como logísticamente hemos llamado al evento, dará un marco detallado para el que en los albores del siglo XXI los gobiernos y la sociedad civil del continente, juntos una vez más, desarrollemos las acciones que finalmente nos conducirán a la adecuada gestión de los recursos hídricos, principalmente el agua dulce. Las recientes evaluaciones de los recursos de agua dulce en el ámbito global hacen temer una crisis del agua en los siglos venideros, si no modificamos nuestras formas de actuar sobre el agua. Se ha percibido que el manejo del agua dulce ya no puede seguir bajo la visión de un recurso natural renovable, que este tiene un valor económico que debe ser tomado en cuenta al momento de discutir las políticas sobre su gestión y uso, a fin de asegurar su calidad y cantidad a corto, mediano y largo plazo.

∗ Administradora General de la Autoridad Nacional del Ambiente, Presidenta del Comité Organizador y Presidenta de CATHALAC.

Por lo que en el ámbito global, el Segundo Coloquio Internacional sobre Hidrología y Manejo de los Recursos Hídricos en los Trópicos Húmedos es la oportunidad para que investigadores y administradores de los recursos hídricos de los trópicos húmedos evalúen, después de casi diez años, el estado del recurso en la región, en el marco de las recomendaciones que surgieron en el Primer Coloquio celebrado en Townsville, Australia, en julio de 1989. Asimismo tendrán la oportunidad de desarrollar los mecanismos apropiados para promover la integración de esfuerzos entre científicos y planificadores de la región. El Comité para la Visión de las Américas sobre el Agua, miembro del Consejo Mundial del Agua, el cual a través de su proyecto Visión definirá la "Visión Global de Largo Plazo del Agua, la Vida y el Medio Ambiente para el Siglo 21", estará desarrollando durante los dos últimos días de esta semana el proceso que permitirá conducir el ejercicio de esta iniciativa en las Américas, examinando las recomendaciones y prioridades definidas en D-3, así como en el Coloquio y otras reuniones sobre el tema celebradas recientemente en la región. Esto conllevará finalmente al desarrollo de un consenso del futuro de los recursos hídricos del continente, bajo algunos escenarios propuestos, para el siglo XXI. Crear conciencia en las nuevas generaciones sobre la importancia de cuidar y valorar el agua como un recurso esencial para la vida, es uno de los objetivos principales del Festival del Agua y la Niñez, que el Despacho de la Primera Dama de la República, Señora Dora Boyd de Pérez-Balladares, ha organizado y que junto a los otros eventos ya mencionados conforma la Semana del Agua en Panamá, reflejando el firme compromiso de todos los panameños de tener siempre presente que la vida del planeta depende de este recurso natural y que hoy 22 de marzo, Día Mundial del Agua, y durante toda esta semana, estaremos compartiendo información, discutiendo problemas comunes e intercambiando experiencias en la gestión integrada del recurso hídrico a fin de enfrentar la creciente crisis del agua en el siglo XXI. Finalmente deseo expresarle nuestra más cordial bienvenida a Panamá, deseándoles una placentera estadía y una fructífera jornada de trabajo.

Welcoming Remarks

Richard A. Meganck∗∗∗∗ It is a distinct honor to be here this morning with you and particularly to be charged with representing the Secretary General of the Organization of American States, Dr. César Gaviria. He sends his sincerest apologies for not being able to be here personally today. Madam President, as a first order of business, on behalf of the member states of the OAS, i am pleased to note our gratitude for the generous offer of your country to host this important gathering, and for the unmatched dedication-to-task which has characterized all our dealings leading up to this unique week. Among the many activities that you and the Honorary Committee have spearheaded is what I hope will become a regular part of all future Dialogues – I refer to your inspiration in convening the first Inter-American Children’s Water Festival. If the theme of the Festival, “Water is Life, ” means anything, then deeds must follow words. I, for one, anxiously await the delivery of the Children’s Declaration on Water. It should be considered by each of the meetings taking place this week as a guide for the future, and particularly the World Water Visioning process. The Secretary General specifically asked me to convey his thanks to the many organizations that were involved in organizing Water Week. In that regard, I wish to note the members of the office of the First Lady of Panama and the National Environmental Authority who were involved in virtually all aspects of the five events occurring this week. I wish to mention UNESCO for its efforts in organizing the Second International Colloquium on Hydrology and Water Management in the Humid Tropics and, in fact, providing a unique opportunity for scientists, policy makers, and managers to exchange ideas. Also, the World Water Council for its work in catalyzing the World Water Vision meeting, which will take place later in the week. I must also give special thanks to the staff of the Water Center for the Humid Tropics in Latin America and the Caribbean (CATHALAC), the Inter-American Water Resources Network, and my own staff for a near-non-stop effort over the last several months to organize the Third Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management. It is somewhat prophetic that Panama is the venue for this meeting. The commerce of the world depends on the availability of freshwater to the Panama Canal. But even in a country with 52 major watersheds, problems occur, as happened last year when portions of this water-rich country suffered the effects of an El Niño-related drought. The point is that good water management is incumbent on all governments, especially in these days of climate vulnerability. Madam President, we are at a critical juncture in the planning and management of water resources in the Americas. The OAS is fully committed to working with all sectors of

∗ Ph.D. Director, Unit for Sustainable Development and Environment, General Secretariat, Organization of American States

society to ensure that future generations have both the quantity and the quality of fresh and near-shore marine water to ensure that this precious resource will not set limits to continued economic growth throughout the hemisphere. Today we are faced with unprecedented challenges to our skills as water policy makers, managers, and scientists. Most of you are familiar with the problems: population growth, access to safe drinking water, the rapid urbanization of many regions, increasing water demands by all sectors, and the possible impacts of global change on the adequacy and distribution of water supplies and the frequency and distribution of extreme events such as floods, which may drastically damage water resources infrastructure, or droughts, which take their toll in production losses and hardships for people living on the land, to take but a few examples. Overarching these sector-related problems are a number of issues of which i would like to highlight just two. The need to improve communications with the public on these important issues so that individuals become stewards of the water resources where they live. Often, many water problems can be solved at the local level if the public there works together to protect water resources, and if government gives them the chance to do so. The other issue I would like to highlight is that of information and technology transfer via networks. We are living in an age based in large part on the analysis and exchange of information of all types. Information and knowledge, generated by good science and research, empower people to act, to solve problems, and to execute programs efficiently. They allow organizations to establish priorities based on real needs and to cooperate with one another to achieve regional objectives. Information allows us to evaluate how well we have done, so that we can make mid-course corrections in our journey to shape and meet the needs of a productive society. Networks are the glue that helps hold the system together. Water Week in Panama brings together scientists, policy makers, managers, academics, NGOs, and children to see new insights as to how we may work better together in the future. Collectively, we hope to achieve a collective vision of what we need to do now in order to preserve options for the future. Through the work of the OAS on transboundary river basins, providing the secretariat for the Inter-American Water Resources Network, operating the Inter-American Environmental Law Network, and the Inter-American Strategy for Public Participation, we are demonstrating our commitment to meeting these water challenges. It is our hope that this meeting will encourage you to go back to your respective countries and watershed and try to implement some of the ideas that will be raised here over the next few days. At the other end of the spectrum, we hope that governments will be able to act on many of the recommendations made at this meeting. We seek your active participation and substantive contributions to this very full and busy week in Panama.

Hidrología y Gestión del Agua en el Trópico Húmedo: Discurso en la Sesión Inaugural

Federico Mayor∗∗∗∗ Permítanme comenzar agradeciendo a las autoridades de la República de Panamá la acogida que han brindado a esta reunión y el apoyo resuelto y generoso que otorgan al Centro del Agua del Trópico Húmedo para América Latina y el Caribe (CATHALAC). En varias ocasiones he tenido el privilegio de disfrutar de la proverbial hospitalidad panameña y siempre he recibido el trato alegre y cálido que caracteriza a este pueblo. El Canal de Panamá, esa maravilla de la moderna ingeniería hidráulica, crea inevitablemente en el resto del mundo la imagen de que ésta es una tierra de paso. Nada más alejado de la realidad. Esta es una tierra para quedarse, un país donde nadie se siente extranjero, muchísimo menos un español como yo. Por diversas razones, la problemática medioambiental se ha dirigido preferentemente hacia los asuntos relativos al aire y la tierra. El agua, ese tercer elemento absolutamente fundamental para la supervivencia de la especie, había quedado un tanto relegada, quizá porque el ciclo de las lluvias y la vastedad de los océanos nos tranquilizaban con la ilusión de su infinita disponibilidad. Pero la evolución de los recursos hídricos en los últimos años ha puesto de relieve la urgencia de elaborar y aplicar una estrategia orientada a prevenir las crisis que el uso indiscriminado del agua podría causar en un futuro no muy lejano. Al respecto, conviene recordar que el 62 % de la población mundial vive en la interfase agua/tierra y que ya en estos momentos finales del siglo, la mitad de esas personas --o sea, la tercera parte de la humanidad-- residen en las zonas tropicales húmedas. Hace ya más de 20 años, en previsión de estas tendencias, la UNESCO creó el Programa Hidrológico Internacional (PHI), con miras a otorgar a los recursos hídricos la prioridad que les corresponde. Hoy, este programa cuenta con una amplia red de colaboradores, en más de 150 países. El agua subterránea es una fuente principal de suministro, tanto en el campo como en la ciudad. El PHI ha lanzado como actividad de alta prioridad la formulación de metodologías para el seguimiento y la evaluación del deterioro de los mantos fréaticos y los procesos vinculados a este fenómeno. Además de los medios educativos formales, el Programa Hidrológico abarca aspectos de mentalización de la ciudadanía con respecto al agua, que incluye la preparación de publicaciones didácticas para la juventud, los maestros y el público en general, así como talleres sobre política del desarrollo y el perfeccionamiento de las técnicas de sensibilización de la población. En el marco de estas iniciativas, se estableció aquí, en 1992, CATHALAC, bajo los auspicios de la UNESCO y con el apoyo del gobierno panameño. Como ustedes saben, hay centros análogos en Asia y África.

∗ Director General, Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura (UNESCO).

Debo señalar además que el sistema de las Naciones Unidas había manifestado desde mucho antes su preocupación por lograr que la sociedad moderna gestione de modo racional los recursos naturales del planeta. En lo que respecta al agua, esta línea de pensamiento, orientada a la acción ecológica, alcanzó una de sus cumbres en la Conferencia sobre el Medio Ambiente Humano, celebrada en Estocolmo en 1972. Las conclusiones y recomendaciones de esta reunión se vieron refrendadas posteriormente en diversos foros, como la Conferencia sobre el Agua y el Medio Ambiente, efectuada en Dublín (1992), la Conferencia de Río de Janeiro sobre Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo del mismo año, la Conferencia Ministerial sobre Agua Potable y Saneamiento Ambiental, que se llevó a cabo en Noordwijk, Holanda (1994), y el Primer Foro Mundial del Agua, celebrado en Marruecos en 1997. Los principios relativos al aprovechamiento del agua, que estableció la Conferencia de Dublín, constituyen ahora un componente fundamental de la estrategia que la UNESCO propugna para la formulación de las políticas hidrológicas. Estos principios ponen de relieve la limitada disponibilidad y la gran vulnerabilidad de este recurso, su carácter de bien económico, la necesidad de adoptar procedimientos de participación en su gestión y aprovechamiento, así como el papel central que desempeña la mujer en todo lo relativo a su uso y administración a escala global. En fecha reciente, la ONU, con la activa participación de la UNESCO, publicó una “Evaluación amplia de los recursos de agua dulce del mundo”. Este estudio resume el estado de los conocimientos sobre el tema y analiza las implicaciones de la situación. Una de las conclusiones del documento es que “el pronóstico es sombrío, pero la crisis no es inevitable”. Debo añadir que es nuestro insoslayable deber impedir esta crisis, asegurando así el bienestar de las generaciones venideras. El agua, ya sea dulce o del mar, es un recurso absolutamente fundamental. Esta verdad es obvia y sería superfluo recordarla, si no fuera porque en nuestros países la mayoría de la población sigue comportándose como si las reservas acuíferas del planeta fueran ilimitadas y su uso irresponsable no entrañase un grave peligro para el porvenir de la civilización. Sólo cuando saltan a la primera plana de los periódicos las situaciones extremas --como la sequía del Sahel, la cuasi desaparición del Mar de Aral o las inundaciones provocadas por el ciclón Mitch en América Central-- caemos en la cuenta de que no sólo ese elemento, indispensable para la supervivencia de la vida, está también amenazado por diversas tendencias económicas y sociales que ensombrecen el futuro, sino que hay muchísimos seres humanos que aún no pueden disfrutar de algo tan simple como el agua corriente. El último "Informe sobre el Desarrollo Humano" de las Naciones Unidas señala que todavía hay más de mil millones de personas que carecen de acceso al agua potable. Es fácil imaginar cuánto empeoran las condiciones sanitarias y cómo se dificulta la vida cotidiana --sobre todo para las mujeres-- con estas privaciones. Estoy convencido de que el tiempo y el esfuerzo que millones de niñas y mujeres tienen que dedicar cada día a buscar agua para las familias influyen muy negativamente en sus posibilidades de obtener una educación adecuada. La escasez de agua se transforma así en un freno al desarrollo --educativo, sanitario, social e incluso físico--, que impide a estas personas alcanzar la plenitud de su potencial individual y de la dignidad humana.

La ilusión de que se podía disponer de agua dulce en cantidades ilimitadas si nosotros, los dueños y señores del planeta, así lo decretábamos y colocábamos la correspondiente infraestructura, se ha hecho añicos contra la dura realidad en los últimos 20 años. La disponibilidad efectiva de agua para uso humano es un minúsculo porcentaje del total existente en el planeta, como puede apreciarse en el hecho que el 97,5% de toda el agua es salada y que la mayor parte de la restante se encuentra en los casquetes polares, en el suelo, en forma de humedad, o en profundas bolsas subterráneas, de donde es muy difícil extraerla. En realidad, el agua fácilmente accesible y renovada con regularidad equivale a menos del 0,1% del total con que cuenta la Tierra. Aunque la cantidad de agua dulce disponible permanece aproximadamente constante, la demanda supera con mucho a la disponibilidad en casi todas partes. Los síntomas de una crisis inminente son claros: la aguda escasez de agua en muchas regiones del mundo, la disminución de los mantos freáticos, ríos y lagos, la contaminación generalizada y la desertización progresiva. A esto debemos añadir el costo humano de la carestía de este líquido: desnutrición, enfermedades, éxodo rural y hacinamiento urbano. En el transcurso del siglo --desde 1900 a esta fecha-- la demanda total de agua se ha multiplicado siete veces, mientras que la población se ha triplicado, que ya es mucho, lo que indica que la demanda per cápita se ha duplicado con creces. La subida del nivel de vida y la creciente dependencia del regadío explican este aumento. El mayor peligro actual es que este crecimiento de la demanda continúe sin control, hasta alcanzar su límite natural y económico, poniendo al descubierto lo insostenible de los patrones vigentes en el uso del agua y causando serios perjuicios a las sociedades que lleguen a esta situación. En muchos sitios, particularmente en el Oriente Medio, ya se están encontrando los límites físicos y la costosa tecnología de la desalinización del agua marina se considera cada vez más una solución viable. Pero la UNESCO sostiene que existe un amplio margen de ahorro de agua mediante la modificación de las prioridades, las políticas y las estrategias de la sociedad moderna, sin tener que recurrir a métodos onerosos y nocivas para el medio ambiente. En este sentido, quiero destacar el trabajo que el sistema de las Naciones Unidas --y en particular, la UNESCO-- ha llevado a cabo para asegurar la gestión de los recursos hídricos en las islas tropicales, que, como ustedes saben, son especialmente vulnerables a los efectos del crecimiento demográfico y el desarrollo económico. Como resultado de la conferencia celebrada en junio de 1994 en las Islas Salomón y de las recomendaciones de la ONU sobre el desarrollo de los pequeños estados insulares, la UNESCO financió sendos proyectos de investigación en Tonga y Kiribati, orientados a examinar la renovación del manto freático y las consecuencias de la contaminación de las aguas subterráneas en las islas. En el marco de su estrategia para los próximos años, la Organización ha planteado tres grandes objetivos que deben orientar la acción común en materia de recursos hídricos: primero, evitar la contaminación ulterior de las aguas del planeta; luego, promover la purificación de las aguas ya contaminadas; y por último, favorecer el acceso de todos los seres humanos a este precioso líquido. ¿Cómo lograrlo? Hace unos años, asistí a una reunión en la que, con gran ironía, Sir John Daniel, el Rector de la Open University del Reino Unido, dijo: “Señoras y señores,

la tecnología es la respuesta. ¿Cuál era la pregunta?” Sin duda, la tecnología sólo es una fracción, un elemento de la respuesta. Del mismo modo, la crisis del agua es un aspecto particular, pero importantísimo, de la crisis más generalizada, causada por la adopción de un modelo de desarrollo que, en su obsesión macroeconómica, hace caso omiso de los aspectos sociales, humanos y medioambientales. No es razonable esperar que el problema vaya a resolverse mediante la aplicación de más tecnología. La insatisfacción con la situación actual y la incapacidad de controlarla conducen cada vez más a la búsqueda de una respuesta que necesariamente debe ser ética y cultural. Al considerar las grandes inversiones indispensables para prevenir una crisis de agua a escala global, lo primero que viene a la mente es el volumen de recursos que se necesitarían. ¿Dónde pueden obtenerse los medios para construir represas, conducciones, canalizaciones y cisternas, que permitan no sólo aliviar la sed de millones de seres humanos, sino también cultivar vastas extensiones de suelo árido? ¿Cómo financiar los “ecojobs” que se necesitan para aplicar los criterios científicos a la agricultura y la protección del medio ambiente? ¿Con qué contamos para imprimir libros, difundir programas de radio y televisión, y organizar los cursos que permitan, poco a poco, modificar las actitudes de la población hacia el consumo y el ahorro de agua? Este problema ilustra el dilema que afronta la sociedad contemporánea y que cualquier texto de economía resume en la alternativa clásica: “cañones o mantequilla”. Los bienes económicos son limitados y su escasez nos obliga a elegir entre los diversos usos posibles. Dicho de otro modo: no podemos seguir destinando US$900 mil millones de dólares a la compra de armamentos y, al mismo tiempo, lamentarnos que no disponemos de recursos suficientes para invertir en obras destinadas a la paz y el desarrollo. No es posible pagar al mismo tiempo el precio de la guerra y el precio de la paz. Pero raras veces se plantea el problema desde este ángulo fundamental. En vez de esto, se proponen “soluciones fantásticas” como el transporte de icebergs desde los casquetes polares o la construcción de nuevas plantas desalinizadoras, que consumen aun más combustibles. Yo creo que es preciso oponerse con firmeza a este proceder, que se limita a considerar el costo económico y los beneficios a corto plazo, sin tener en cuenta los intereses de la humanidad en su conjunto y el bienestar de las generaciones venideras. No sigamos en la miopía y en la inercia. ¡Bastante hemos hecho ya contra el medio ambiente y la salud de nuestros hijos! Es absolutamente indispensable impedir que se afecten los Polos, que se sigan destruyendo los bosques o que continúe creciendo el uso indiscriminado de combustibles fósiles. Con este enfoque, es preciso alentar el estudio de nuevas modalidades de gestión del agua, tales como la regulación de la demanda, aplicando precios más altos para el agua de mayor calidad; el saneamiento seco como alternativa al saneamiento tradicional; el agua de lluvia como recurso potencial, guardando opciones para su reutilización o para la recarga del manto freático; el tratamiento local del agua de lluvia usando sistemas biológicos de drenaje; y el desarrollo de tecnología para el reciclaje de nutrientes de las aguas residuales para la agricultura. El agua y la civilización son inseparables: las más tempranas culturas surgieron en los valles de los grandes ríos Eúfrates, Nilo, Indo y Yangtzé, y hoy en día, el futuro de la

civilización depende del uso racional de este recurso finito y vulnerable. En Occidente, del binomio urbanístico que Roma nos dejó en herencia, formado por viaductos y acueductos, sólo hemos desarrollado el primero, el viaducto. Hemos construido millones de kilómetros de carreteras, que facilitan el transporte terrestre al precio de un elevado consumo de petróleo y altos índices de contaminación ambiental. Ahora, además de sanear y descontaminar nuestros medios de transporte, tenemos que desarrollar el segundo término de la ecuación romana: hay que transportar agua mediante infraestructuras tan eficaces como las que se han construido para transportar el gas y el petróleo. Y además de las conducciones, hay que establecer reservas hidrológicas a gran escala que permitan evitar o atenuar las consecuencias, tanto de las sequías como de las inundaciones. Ahora, una de las metas más relevantes en el ámbito local consiste en lograr que todos comprendan el valor del agua y que ésta se recoja, conduzca y almacene mediante sistemas capilares que alcancen a cada pueblo y a cada familia. Con una tecnología mucho más rudimentaria que la actual, los alarifes y alamines árabes lograron crear en la Edad Media una red de aljibes, acequias, albercas y cisternas que facilitó la distribución de agua, tanto para uso agrícola como para consumo urbano, incluso en zonas particularmente áridas de la Península Ibérica y el Norte de África. Es el “agua culta” de Andalucía que cantaba Juan Ramón Jiménez; es la “sonora copla borbollante” que surca la poesía de Antonio Machado. Toda obra humana es una respuesta a ciertos desafíos y, en el proceso de civilización, la escasez de agua puede ser fuente de conflicto entre los usuarios que compiten por ella, en particular si intervienen también rivalidades políticas, culturales o religiosas. Pero el agua puede ser igualmente un aliciente para la cooperación, como lo demuestra el número cada vez mayor de convenios de aprovechamiento conjunto de cuencas fluviales que se firman y aplican, aun en regiones donde la tensión política es aguda. Yo creo firmemente que la civilización humana puede encontrar los recursos para responder exitosamente al desafío global del agua y que puede hacer de ésta un factor de cooperación y armonía, un elemento sine qua non de la cultura de paz que la UNESCO propugna. Creo que la tecnología debe desempeñar un papel clave en este esfuerzo, pero, como decía antes, deberá subordinarse a los valores éticos. Y una parte esencial de estos valores es el cumplimiento de las promesas, de las declaraciones, de las convenciones que firmamos; valores que exigen reformar las relaciones de los grupos humanos entre sí y con respecto a la naturaleza. En muchas regiones del mundo, la búsqueda de soluciones a los problemas del agua debe orientar la formulación de los objetivos del desarrollo socioeconómico. La planificación y la gestión integral de las cuencas, desde el ámbito local al internacional, son elementos importantes de dicha estrategia. La gestión del consumo, o sea, la aplicación de políticas que, en particular, reconozcan el valor económico del agua a fin de reducir la demanda, se puede considerar como la piedra angular de la misma. Para lograr estos objetivos, la gestión, el desarrollo y la protección de los recursos hídricos deben recibir la adecuada prioridad en la formulación de la política nacional e internacional. Los parlamentos y los medios de comunicación, creando la conciencia pública e incorporando estas pautas al marco jurídico nacional, son piezas claves para lograrlo.

En 1997, dicté en Marrakesh y Madrid sendas conferencias en las que expuse la necesidad de promover una nueva actitud hacia el agua, una nueva “ética del agua”. Las políticas tarifarías y los mecanismos de mercado, aunque imponen difíciles problemas de equidad social y de responsabilidad pública, tienen un importante papel que desempeñar en la revalorización del agua y en la reducción de la demanda. Pero también lo tiene la educación, en su sentido más lato como un proceso a lo largo de toda la vida. Una reacción civilizada a la crisis global del agua requiere una mejor comprensión de la interconexión que existe entre los recursos hídricos y el comportamiento humano, así como políticas adecuadas de alcance nacional y transnacional. Una de las características esenciales de nuestra época es que no podemos dar respuestas exclusivamente nacionales a las tendencias y los problemas que transcienden el ámbito del Estado-Nación. Al igual que la contaminación ambiental, el narcotráfico o el comercio ilegal de armamentos plantean retos que exigen respuestas de la comunidad internacional en su conjunto, el desafío del agua requiere la cooperación de todos los países en la búsqueda de soluciones. Los expertos del PHI examinan actualmente con las autoridades españolas la posibilidad de crear un Centro Internacional para el Adiestramiento e Investigación en Materia de Resolución de Conflictos Relativos al Agua. En noviembre próximo, someteré a la Conferencia General de la UNESCO un proyecto al respecto con el fin de establecer a escala internacional los principios que regulan las transferencias de agua y el aprovechamiento de las cuencas fluviales. Esta iniciativa se inspira en una prestigiosa institución: el Tribunal de Aguas que funciona en la ciudad de Valencia desde la Edad Media. Sin duda, nuestro conocimiento del ciclo hidrológico y nuestra percepción de las necesidades futuras de agua y de los parámetros socioeconómicos del próximo siglo son imperfectos, pero debemos afrontar la incertidumbre y el riesgo como parte de la existencia. Me gusta repetir que si el riesgo sin conocimiento es peligroso, el conocimiento sin riesgo es inútil. La audacia, la consideración hacia el prójimo y la capacidad de compartir --esa terna que en inglés compone el verso “daring, caring, sharing”-- están entre las cualidades humanas indispensables para hacer frente a los retos del porvenir. Ese porvenir que es, hoy más que nunca, un por-hacer. El diagnóstico certero y la acción oportuna y radical son las claves de toda empresa humana. Saber para prever, prever para prevenir y actuar convencidos de que la prevención es la única victoria que está a la altura de las facultades distintivas de la especie humana. Para la Organización que me honra dirigir, este Coloquio constituye una excelente oportunidad de reforzar nuestras relaciones de trabajo con las instituciones y asociaciones científicas especializadas en este importante tema. Desde hace medio siglo --y con renovado ahínco desde 1989-- nos esforzamos por cumplir el cometido fundacional de la UNESCO: “construir los baluartes de la paz en la mente de los seres humanos”; por hacer realidad el ideal que proclama la Carta de las Naciones Unidas: evitar a las generaciones futuras el horror de la violencia y de la guerra.

Ustedes saben, igual que yo, que el agua es un recurso absolutamente fundamental para ese mundo más pacífico y más justo al que aspiramos. Por eso, me complace felicitar a cuantos han hecho posible este Coloquio y desearles a todos mucho éxito en las actividades que llevarán a cabo a partir de hoy.

Palabras de la Primera Dama en la Sesión Inaugural

Dora Boyd de Pérez-Balladares∗∗∗∗ Me siento muy honrada en presidir la Semana Interamericana del Agua, que celebramos en el año de la reversión del Canal de Panamá, el acontecimiento de mayor transcendencia histórica para nuestro país y con importantes proyecciones para la intercomunicación mundial. Reciban a nombre del Excelentísimo Señor Presidente de la República la más cordial bienvenida a este pequeño istmo centroamericano, que se ha preparado durante un año para recibirlos, como los mejores huéspedes del fin del milenio. Como Presidenta del Pacto por la Niñez Panameña, puedo decirles que Panamá ha desarrollado una amplia estrategia de educación ambiental de la niñez y la juventud, con significativos avances en la formación de las nuevas generaciones para preservar una vida saludable. Los eventos que hoy inauguramos, son una importante contribución a esta misión. Durante una semana, compartiremos tres jornadas de alto nivel científico, vinculadas con el manejo de los recursos hídricos y su efecto en el desarrollo y la vida humana. Estas son el III Diálogo Interamericano sobre Administración de Aguas, el Segundo Coloquio Internacional sobre Hidro1ogía y Manejo de los Recursos Hídricos en los Trópicos Húmedos y el Primer Festival Internacional del Agua y la Niñez, este último con la asistencia de 120 niños y niñas de 21 países del Continente, reunidos bajo el lema "El Agua Es Vida", y quienes preparan una declaración sobre sus aspiraciones proteccionistas en materia de agua. A lo largo de los años 1998 y 1999 muchas voluntades en el Continente se unieron torno a estos eventos. Al inicio parecía una meta inalcanzable, pero vencimos mitos y miedos. No fue sencillo internalizar esquemas nuevos donde niños y niñas trabajan junto a científicos, técnicos y políticos en una agenda común. La experiencia ha sido extraordinaria y esperamos que ustedes puedan disfrutarla en toda su magnitud. Comprender la importancia del agua en la vida de los países, es entender las perspectivas de la vida sobre el planeta y la verdadera integración de la humanidad. Ello es así porque más de 200 sistemas fluviales atraviesan fronteras nacionales y casi 100 países se intercomunican al compartir 13 ríos y lagos importantes. Para Panamá, servir como sede para la celebración de los eventos de esta semana es una ganancia mayúscula. El agua no es solo un recurso económico social; para nuestro país, es el más importante recurso de desarrollo. El aporte que ustedes ofrecen a la ampliación del conocimiento técnico y la evaluación de las políticas hídricas, son un insumo vital para un país como el nuestro, bañado por el

∗ Primera Dama de la República de Panamá.

Atlántico y el Pacífico, que ha dedicado toda su historia republicana a recuperar el tránsito marítimo por su territorio a través del Canal de Panamá. Del agua depende el funcionamiento del Canal de Panamá, y cada barco que lo atraviesa diariamente consume una cuarta parte del consumo humano total del área metropolitana. Por eso, mejorar la eficiencia del Canal y racionalizar su consumo de agua es cuidar la sobre vivencia de la familia panameña. El Gobierno de Panamá asume con gran responsabilidad las medidas proteccionistas de agua. La creación de la Autoridad Nacional del Ambiente, con una macro visión de los recursos naturales y una política de reformulación de las relaciones entre la persona humana y su medio, es la principal garantía de que los acuerdos de estos eventos encontrarán en el Gobierno Nacional, su principal aliado. La Autoridad Nacional del Ambiente (ANAM), el Centro del Agua del Trópico Húmedo para América Latina y el Caribe (CATHALAC) y mi despacho hemos compartido un año de trabajo conjunto para garantizar que durante las sesiones de todos los eventos de la semana, ustedes dispongan del apoyo necesario para trabajar en un ambiente de alta productividad y amena convivencia. No reparen en comunicarnos cualquier inconveniente. Panamá tiene tradición de hospitalidad y belleza; disfrutarán momentos de esparcimiento en medio de la más corta travesía entre nuestros dos océanos, respirando un ambiente sano y flora. Gracias por permitirnos ser sus anfitriones y que disfruten de una grata estadía en este, "su país".

PLENARY SESSION I: DIMENSIONS OF THE WATER CRISIS

Introductory Remarks

Haroldo Mattos de Lemos∗∗∗∗

It is for me a great honor and privilege to make the introductory remarks of our first plenary session, on the Dimensions of the Water Crisis. Allow me to start by repeating the Rime of the Ancient Mariner, by Samuel Taylor Coleridge: "Water, water everywhere. Nor any drop to drink". This rime reminds us that water covers most of the globe, but only a small portion of it is available to us as freshwater. Many of you will remember that the Inter-American Water Resources Network has been concerned with this issue since its creation. Back in 1994, during the Fourth Meeting of our Advisory Council, we convened a panel on Water Issues Facing the Americas, and Kirk Rodgers asked me to talk about the water crisis. At that time, I quoted a statement that Dr, Mustafa Tolba, former Executive Director of UNEP, used to repeat: "Energy was the great crisis of the beginning of the 70s, and water will be the great crisis of the end of the 90s." The data available give us no room for doubt: the demand for water for human activities has grown at a higher rate than the population during the 20th century, and the population is likely to double before stabilization is achieved, hopefully, by the end of next century. The main problem is that, from now up to that time, more than 90% of the population growth will take place in the developing countries. Therefore, the looming water crisis will hit developing countries harder than the industrialized ones. If nowadays about 25,000 people are dying every day in developing countries owing either to lack of water or to the consumption of water of bad quality, we can imagine what may happen in the near future. In 1994, almost no attention was being given to the water crisis, either by scientists or by the international press, unlike global warming, which was every day in the press, although it had not yet claimed any life. As a result, water had a very low priority on the international agenda. Fortunately, the situation is changing now. Some important international initiatives have taken place in the last few years, following the creation of the Inter-American Water Resources Network, such as the Global Water Partnership and the World Water Council. The United Nations has already recognized that two-thirds of humanity will face shortages of clean fresh water by the year 2025. Last year, several important international meetings on water were held, such as the International Dialogue Forum on Global Water Politics: Cooperation for Transboundary Water Management, organized by Germany in cooperation with the World Bank, in Bonn, from March 3 to 5, the International Conference on Water and Sustainable Development, organized by France

∗ Ex-Secretário do Meio Ambiente, Ministério do Meio Ambiente, Brasil.

at UNESCO headquarters in Paris, from March 19 to 21, and the International Conference on World Water Resources at the Beginning of the 21st Century, organized by UNESCO in Paris, from June 3 to 6. Its title was very much in line with what we discussed earlier: "Water: A Looming Crisis?" I would like to mention the conclusions of two of the presentations at this last meeting. First, Prof. I.A Shiklomanov, of the State Hydrological Institute in St. Petersburg, Russia, who in his paper "Global Renewable Resources" said: "By 2025 a greater part of the Earth's population is expected to live in conditions of very low and catastrophically low water availability, and about 30-35% of the world population will have a catastrophically low water supply.” Second, Prof. V. Yu Georgiyevsky, of the same institute, in his paper "Global Climate Warming Effects on Water Resources", said: "Global anthropogenic climate warming and its effects on water resources are one of the most acute problems of modern hydrology, if great land and water sensitivity to comparatively small changes in climatic characteristics are taken into account." The United Nations University (UNU) is now devoting great effort to the study of the "pressing global problems of human survival, development and welfare." The UNU comments in its newsletter Work in Progress (Vol. 15, No. 2, Winter 1998) that "one is hard put to come up with a problem that fits the definition more precisely than that of the planet's stressed water resources.'' During our Advisory Committee Meeting, in 1994, we also discussed the fact that water had been the main motivation for several wars in the past, and may catalyze other conflicts in the near future, threatening international peace. In his article "Water: The 21st Century's Oil," published in the same UNU newsletter mentioned above, Mikiasu Nakayama says: "Heightened competition for water poses a major threat to human security the world over--it could well prove to be major source of conflict in the 21st century, not unlike oil in our present era." I am sure that there is no need to add anything to convince you about the seriousness of the water crisis. It is high time now to take concrete actions to minimize the impacts of this crisis. For more ideas about that, we are now going to listen to keynote addresses by Alfred Duda, Team Leader for Operations of the Global Environment Facility, and Richard Meganck, Director of the Unit for Sustainable Development and Environment of the Organization of American States.

Comprehensive Approaches to Water Resource Management for Sustainable Development

Alfred M. Duda∗∗∗∗ It is a great pleasure for me to be here with you today to address this important meeting on behalf of the Global Environment Facility. May I congratulate the National Environment Authority, the Water Center for the Humid Tropics, and the Inter-American Water Resources Network for organizing this third in a series of dialogues on water resources for the Americas. I cannot think of a more appropriate place to have the Third Dialogue. Panama provides a bridge to several continents, it links several oceans, and, from our perspective at the GEF, it has been a key country with several activities related to climate change and four or five projects related to biodiversity conservation. I would especially congratulate Panama on working so closely with GEF and your neighbors on the Meso-American Biological Corridor initiative, which is aimed at conservation and sustainable use of your land and water resources to protect globally significant biodiversity. Water covers more than three-quarters of our tiny planet. It nourishes our ecosystems, powers our industry, grows our food, and makes life itself possible. Yet this image of a watery Blue Planet is deceptive. Beneath the surface of all that water, and most of it is salty, a crisis of global proportions is evident. And while many of our political leaders have only recently acknowledged this crisis, it is still very low on their priority list. Those of you who have worked for a while with water resources know that this is not a new development--the crisis has been around for quite a while–but now it is deepening and expanding. The organizers of our session this morning have asked me to provide an overview of this water crisis that is facing our planet today. My role on the agenda is to challenge you and to get you thinking about the particular water resource problems you face so that you may bring your ideas to the roundtable discussions that begin this afternoon. GLOBAL WATER CRISIS? I am really tempted to start my presentation this morning with a somewhat simple statement: there is no global water crisis. Rather we face a global land and water resource (and I stress resource) management crisis. We face a global crisis of poverty . . . a crisis of population expansion and migration in many countries. We face a crisis with our water environment--abused through pollution releases, deforestation and sedimentation of catchments, drainage and diking of wetlands, overfishing, and contamination with modern chemicals that have the power to make our children learning disabled, listless, and dysfunctional. We face a crisis of unbridled subsidies for irrigation water, urban water, energy production, and industrial fishing. We face a lack

∗ Team Leader, GEF Operations, Global Environment Facility (GEF).

of political will to reverse our course, a lack of will to enact the policy reforms necessary to begin addressing this enormously complex situation, a lack of political will to pay attention to the voices of the poor who deserve access to safe drinking water and proper sanitation. But I am not going to start out my presentation that way, although it is tempting. It really is too simplistic to say there is no global water crisis, because there are countries today facing impossible challenges. Consider China, with its rivers subject to cycles of floods and droughts as a result of deforestation, poor agricultural practices, and soil erosion--just like the Tennessee River Valley in the 1920s, before TVA was created with a mandate to integrate land and water management for the social and economic development of the people of the region. In China's case, the lack of sound management practices has been made worse by just too many people and too much irrigation. And in some dry years, the enormous Yellow River dries up for hundreds of days a year before reaching the sea. Experts predict that China will soon have to restructure its entire economy because of this water-related crisis. The social and economic implications of this are just unprecedented. India is in much the same shape as China, except that it is located in a three-country transboundary basin; and I won’t even mention the Africa situation, where some countries have impossible challenges with recurring droughts, degraded lands, and impoverished people. Globally, some 1.4 billion people still do not have access to safe drinking water that is reliable in quantity and quality. Over two billion people do not have proper sanitation facilities. At least two million children still die every year because of unsafe water. These numbers are shocking, and they are growing each year. For those of us who are old enough to remember the UN Water Conference held in Mar del Plata some 22 years ago, and the excitement of the Water Supply and Sanitation Decade of the 1980s, these global numbers are pretty discouraging. Contrast these numbers with the announcement last week at the World Trade Organization in Geneva that almost US$700 billion each year is spent by governments for water subsidies, agricultural subsidies, industrial fishing subsidies, and energy subsidies. These are environmentally damaging subsidies that are draining our pockets through increased taxes. Just think that if governments reduced subsidies only 1 percent, US$7 billion per year—think of the campaign that could be mounted for improved management of land and water resources with US$7 billion each year. And what if the subsidy reduction was 10%? With US$70 billion each year for water resources the world would not be able to spend it all. MAJOR MESSAGES My purpose in making such a roundabout and lengthy introduction is to set the global stage for the three major points I would like to leave with you today. First, we do face a global crisis in land and water resource management that threatens entire economies. The crisis is quite complex, as I have described, and the solution relates to the title of my presentation: more comprehensive approaches to land and water resources management that place the water environment and the people who depend on it at the

center of management interventions. Only by making the transition to cross-sectoral management of water resources, basin by basin, will countries be able to achieve sustainable development. Second, even though the water resource problems of the Americas seem serious and formidable, the hemisphere is much better off than some other places in the world. The Americas have progressive nations that have tried new approaches, and we can all learn from these experiences. Finally, it is likely that international and global pressures will overwhelm some nations and will be powerful driving forces for either increasing land and water resource conflicts or helping to gain the attention of decision-makers in supporting necessary reforms of policies, institutions, and programs. A good example is global climate change and the intensified El Niño effect on floods and droughts. The same with globalization of trade and financial systems, and adverse downstream effects in transboundary river basins will be another driving force for reform and for multi-country conflicts. Related to this, international conventions, especially those for the environment such as the biodiversity and climate conventions, can provide opportunities for restructuring policies and gaining access to external funding such as the GEF or the upcoming carbon trading offset program for reforestation and forest management. CROSS-SECTORAL MANAGEMENT Let me elaborate on the three points. Many of us have taken water resources for granted and have forgotten their multi-functional roles. We have become more specialized, more sectoralized, to the point that in some countries development equates to a sector-by-sector grab for land or water resources while totally ignoring natural constraints and existing uses. Poor land management policies result in deforestation, soil erosion, and sedimentation of river systems that destroy aquatic biodiversity and intensify flood damage. I was part of the World Bank team in the early 1990s that examined the Bank’s policies and our client countrie’s needs in the area of water resources, which led to the Bank’s landmark Water Resources Management Policy 1993. The Bank recognized that water management was characterized by policies that were economically, socially, and environmentally unsustainable, and warned the world community not to continue on the same path. The Bank diagnosed four principal failures: the refusal to treat water service delivery as an economic good; excessive reliance on government to provide water service delivery; inadequate recognition of health and environmental implications of development actions, including impacts on downstream coastal areas; and finally, fragmented management of water between sectors and institutions, with little regard for conflicts or complementarities among social, economic, and environmental objectives. My message today on how to address this resource management crisis and make the transition to sustainable development is to treat land and water resource development issues through a more systematic, comprehensive approach by adopting national policy reforms to fix each of those four policy failures I listed and by starting to manage land resources and water resources--including the water environment and its associated biodiversity--in a cross-sectoral fashion, river basin by river basin. Sounds easy, but it

is so hard to get started. Complex situations in river basins can be broken down into more easily managed pieces in each sector following a comprehensive framework for analysis that identifies complementarities and sets priorities. Water resources management is not only for us water people anymore. A key factor in the approach is recognizing that land resource management cannot be separated from water resource management. Residents of a basin, including the poor, should participate in exploring complementarities and setting priorities for action with different ministries and subnational governments. It is important to involve these stakeholders actively, whether the basin is agricultural, as in Mexico, where farmers user organizations collect tariffs and manage the irrigation infrastructure, or whether it contains a favela in Brazil where community organizations help plan, build, and maintain low-cost, simple water supply and sanitation. If a country cannot succeed in getting sectoral ministries to work together with basin stakeholders, then a TVA approach may be the only way to meet the crisis. PROGRESS CAN BE MADE My second point to leave with you today is that the situation is not hopeless here in the Americas. The crisis is not as bad as elsewhere, and there are partners and supporting institutions ready to assist countries of the Caribbean and Latin America in making this transition to a comprehensive approach. In Tarija, Bolivia, I have seen serious soil erosion and water resource management problems, but they can be overcome. In Leticia, Colombia, on the Amazon, sustainable use of the tropical forests and catchment management pose challenges. In Petrolina, toward the semiarid northeast of Brazil, irrigation conflicts with navigation, power, and environment were clearly evident to me as plans for inter−basin transfer from the São Francisco River take shape, and in Buenos Aires, at the Delta of the Paraná River known as El Tigre, I had to shake my head in dismay at all the pollution discharges to the Plata River. While these all pose real challenges, they can be overcome in our lifetime to leave a brighter future for all our children. And there are examples of success stories and pilot activities here in the Caribbean and Latin America that can be shared--especially with an exchange of experiences through the Inter-American Water Resources Network. The new water resources laws in Mexico and Brazil represent examples of addressing some of the policy failures. Brazil’s key investments with loans from the IDB in the Tietê River draining São Paulo and in the coastal clean-up near Rio, each with about a billion dollars in investments, show that polluted waters do not have to remain polluted. Even in the favelas, experience from Recife with low-cost “condominial” sewage systems has spread to other cities in Brazil along with low-cost water supplies that poor communities help plan, build, operate, and pay for. In Mexico, the city of Monterrey is famous for going from the worst urban water service to the best water service in Latin America after poor women organized and protested until governments made access to affordable water services a priority. And the involvement of farmers in irrigation user associations is legendary in Mexico as they manage millions of hectares of irrigated land by collecting tariffs for service delivery. In the use of economic instruments and markets, Chile is well known, although

environment may need to become a larger consideration in the market structure. There are many other examples, especially in land management. A noted success story was the OAS-supported initiatives on land capability and environmental zoning dating back to the 1970s that have important applications today. And Mexico is well known for reducing the use of DDT for malaria control. One of your partners that can help with this transition to a more comprehensive approach is my organization, the Global Environment Facility. The GEF stands as a practical manifestation of the Earth Summit, which confirmed its role as a financial mechanism for several global conventions. GEF was restructured in 1994 after a three-year pilot phase to help implement the objectives of the biodiversity and climate change conventions and to address transboundary water resource issues and land degradation. GEF has been replenished twice, most recently in 1998 with US$2.75 billion. We are not a new institution but a partnership with the UNDP, UNEP, and the World Bank. Our members are 165 developing and developed countries, and our governing Council balances the interests of all. Thirty-four countries in the Caribbean and Latin America have sought and received individual country grants from us to support the agreed incremental costs of projects in our four focal areas. In just the Meso-America Corridor initiative, with seven countries, GEF is providing US$120 million to accompany US$200 million of co-finance from other sources. Total GEF funding in projects for the region exceeds US$450 million. Of all the countries in the Americas, the United States will need to spend the most to make this transition to a more comprehensive approach consistent with sustainable development. This is because the U.S. has created such a huge environmental deficit through its industrialization that hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars are needed for cleanup. By some accounts, half a trillion dollars are needed for cleanup of toxic and hazardous waste sites and contaminated groundwater, perhaps tens of billions more to remediate toxic substances stored in contaminated harbors (especially in the Great Lakes basin shared with Canada), and billions more to restore some of the 50% of wetlands that have been lost, to restore biodiversity to western rivers, particularly endangered salmon stocks, for the abatement of persistent toxic substances released from agriculture and industry that contaminate Canada and the Arctic, for nutrient reduction in the Mississippi River basin to restore the enormous “dead zone” of the Gulf of Mexico; and billions more for efficient water management in the Colorado Basin and the West to restore the environment of the Gulf of California in Mexico. In this last case, industry and agriculture in the United States can be viewed as having an unfair economic advantage over those other countries due to inexpensive water, and the Colorado virtually dries up, creating an ecological disaster in its estuary in Mexico just like the Aral Sea, the Ganges, and the Yellow River. Proper water pricing and billions of dollars of investments are needed in the United States to restore the ecosystem.

TRANSBOUNDARY AND GLOBAL ISSUES WILL SOON DOMINATE The lack of attention to environment and water cleanup in the U.S. has given it a competitive advantage in the global marketplace. Many people believe the pace of spending for restoration is too slow, and many of these issues are transboundary or international in nature. This leads to the final point I want to leave with you today. Transboundary, international, and global issues, especially where water and the water environment is concerned, will provide stronger and stronger driving forces for reform of land and water resource policies toward sustainable development. Even as early as 1972, the international water treaty between Canada and the United States was a strong driving force for reform of water pollution control laws in the United States. Similar pressures with globalization and regional trade blocs are now developing with NAFTA and Mexico and the four MERCOSUR countries. Competitive economic advantages for one country over another are often associated with degradation of the water environment. Is it equitable that the United States has had a competitive advantage over Canada in industry by avoiding the costs of controlling emissions of toxic substances that contaminate the water, aquatic biodiversity, and people of Canada and the Arctic? Even Central America and Mexico contribute agricultural chemicals and DDT to Canada’s water environment through transboundary air movement. Different land management practices are the answer here. Is it equitable for the United States to have a competitive advantage in producing livestock and agricultural products in the Mississippi Basin over, say, Argentina, by avoiding the cost of controlling nutrient pollution from fertilizers and livestock? The dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico is one of the planet’s worst eutrophication problems and is caused by nutrient overenrichment from modern agriculture. By the way, just last week GEF agreed to a request by Cuba and Jamaica for assistance with low-cost nutrient reduction in wetland treatment systems to accompany sewage treatment plant upgrades in Havana and Kingston. Cuba has expressed a desire to do its fair share in nutrient reduction to the Gulf of Mexico, which it shares with Mexico and the United States. GEF is also providing funding to Nicaragua and Costa Rica to improve joint management of the San Juan River Basin and its coastal area to help reduce Caribbean pollution under the regional Cartagena Convention. Many other cases occur in the Americas and vary from water-use restrictions to pollution discharges, dredging practices, and the conversion of valuable coastal mangrove swamps to shrimp ponds. Central American countries, Ecuador, and Colombia profit greatly from shrimp exports as a result of converting mangrove areas, which is very damaging to the coastal environment. Global economic pressures, climate change, and transboundary water impacts will stress our management systems to the limit as the new millennium becomes more of a borderless world. Think of the reduction of budgets for environmental protection in Brazil that has accompanied the global financial pressures Brazil is now experiencing. Think of the billions of dollars of damage associated with droughts and floods in El Niño years. The island states of the Caribbean will be particularly affected by climate change, sea-level rise, and more severe hurricanes. The island states are using GEF funding through the World Bank with the assistance of the OAS to plan for adaptation

to changing climate, and they have now requested assistance in our International Waters area to develop a comprehensive protection program for priority drinking water supply and groundwater supply catchments that includes policy reforms to sustain the interventions. Transboundary water resource problems will also generate conflicts that provide opportunities to adopt reforms. The five-country Plata Basin is a good example. Argentina suffers from massive, billion-dollar floods now during El Niño years. Comprehensive interventions in land use and water management upstream provide the only hope for flood abatement. Toward improved cooperation, GEF is currently funding three international waters projects in portions of the basin. One of them, the Bermejo Basin binational project, is particularly important in that it is helping to determine the sustainable development future of the basin, given that the downstream riparian country, Argentina, is investing in the construction of several hydropower dams upstream in Bolivia as part of a comprehensive approach. This has important global implications for Egypt and Ethiopia in the Nile. The Bermejo is also important because the GEF project provides the opportunity for participation of citizens and NGOs in the planning for sustainable development of the basin and for incorporating biodiversity protection and other global environmental benefits into the work of the binational commission for the Bermejo Basin. In another International Waters project in the São Francisco River, draining six states of Brazil, comprehensive management to incorporate environmental considerations (quality, quantity, ecosystems) into the semiarid basin’s irrigation and hydropower projects and into coordinated activities of six subnational governments is being funded as part of implementing Brazil’s new water law. If this is successful it will have global implications for India, China, and other areas where the water crisis involving many subnational jurisdictions is much worse. SUMMARY GEF has invested heavily in Latin America and the Caribbean. We believe you have the capacity to succeed and we believe you should share your success stories with the rest of the world. A key to your success will be to utilize the full range of technical, economic, financial, regulatory, and institutional measures in land and water resource management necessary to underpin sustainable development, and this is why it is called a comprehensive approach. In my presentation today, I have asked you to broaden your focus, to think more comprehensively, in a cross-sectoral and creative manner, and to keep your eyes on the ultimate goal—sustainable development—and not just on the allocation and use of water. And please harness the opportunities presented by international environmental conventions as well as other global and transboundary stresses to be an advocate for reforms now, before we slide deeper into the crisis. Here at the dawn of a new century, each of us in this room has the opportunity to help our nation take the next logical step toward sustainable development by addressing both land and water resource management as a development imperative with the necessary policy reforms to support a comprehensive approach. Our World Bank team six years

ago could think of no other way out of the coming water resource management crisis. The 21st century can provide answers to many of the questions that plague us here in the 20th. We can be agents of positive thinking, and we can be catalysts for partnerships. We must succeed because the cost of inaction is just too high for our children to struggle for survival on our tiny Blue Planet.

Water Action Plan for the Americas

Richard A. Meganck Ph.D.∗∗∗∗ It is a distinct honor to be here this morning with you at this critical juncture in the planning and management of water resources in the Americas. I hope my comments will help set the stage for a very important week of meetings and water-related events. My message, on behalf of the General Secretariat of the OAS and the member states, is straightforward: we are involved in an on-going process that will directly affect the ability of the countries of this hemisphere to: (1) comply with the mandates of both UNCED and the Summits of the Americas, (2) contribute to the World Water Council visioning process, and (3) attract and manage investments for the water sector for the benefit of the Americas. Realizing the goal of a strategy for managing water in a sustainable manner at the inter-American level is not an easy task. Yet its importance cannot be overstated Many feel that quality water is the critical and limiting factor for future investments, a necessary component of public health, and basic to the maintenance of aquatic ecosystems. Before I get to a few specifics as to how I think we should proceed, let me review the process to date. One of the earliest actions relating to water management following the UNCED Summit was the convening of the First Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management in October 1993. The Statement of Miami called for the creation of the Inter-American Water Resources Network (IWRN) to facilitate communication and cooperation among groups with a shared commitment to sound management of water resources in the Americas. The OAS was asked to serve as the technical secretariat for the IWRN. This afforded the opportunity, through the convening power of the OAS, to request the governments of the Americas to officially appoint focal points to represent their views and policies in technical meetings sponsored by the IWRN. To date, 27 countries in the Americas have appointed focal points to this Network. At the same time, the IWRN sought to build its membership with international agencies, professional societies, universities, and representatives of the private sector. The Americas was the first region to take such a step and I believe that we remain the global pacesetters in this regard. At the First Summit of the Americas, held in Miami in October of 1994, the heads of state approved a Plan of Action to catalyze partnerships and mechanisms to facilitate technical cooperation, capacity building, and public participation in environmental decision-making. The heads of state again called on the OAS to play a secretariat function. As a result, we worked towards establishing the IWRN Advisory Council, its Executive Committee, and a related nonprofit foundation–all of which were debated at some length at an Inter-American Technical Meeting on Water in July 1996.

∗ Director, Unit for Sustainable Development and Environment, General Secretariat, Organization of American States.

Shortly after that, in September 1996, the Second Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management was convened in Buenos Aires. This meeting prepared inputs for the specialized Summit of the Americas on Sustainable Development. The Declaration of Buenos Aires called for a new commitment by governments, international financial institutions, and the public and private sectors to implement action plans in the water sector and gave particular attention to the importance of transboundary river basins and other shared bodies of water. By this time it was becoming clear that a consensus on water priorities was emerging. In this regard, the Summit Conference on Sustainable Development held in Santa Cruz, Bolivia, in December 1996 was perhaps the most important regional meeting held to date in response to the outputs of UNCED. The Plan of Action included 65 Initiatives, 12 of which dealt with water management, providing us with a political decision for addressing issues confronting the management of the water sector. But important as that was, perhaps more important in the long term is the mandate contained in Chapter 3 to work towards defining and prioritizing specific activities for the initiatives and assigning specific institutional roles for secretariat, technical assistance, and financing of these priority actions. Shortly after Santa Cruz, the OAS, in its secretariat role, organized an Intergency Task Force of major international agencies to coordinate actions following up the Bolivian Summit and initiated a process for tracking the status of implementation of the initiatives. Regular progress reports are received from the fifteen members of the Task Force. A report summarizing these efforts was subsequently presented by the OAS Secretary General to the Inter-American Council for Integral Development in March of last year and also to the Second Summit of the Americas, which took place in Santiago in April 1998. The fact that mechanisms were established in support of a continuing and constructive dialogue is perhaps the most important outcome of Bolivia. The work of the Task Force and that of the Inter-American Water Resources Network brought to the fore the need for regional dialogues, which were held in 1997 and 1998 and attended by the focal points and representatives of many of the agencies and organizations present at this meeting. In December of last year, what could be called the final preparatory meeting for the Third Dialogue was held in Washington, D.C. This high-level technical meeting reviewed the outputs of the three regional consultations. The final report will serve as the basic reference document for the Third Dialogue. I urge you to pay particular importance to the recommendations in the summary tables, as they will be of great assistance in familiarizing you with the details of all the meetings to which I have referred and in suggesting concrete actions that will contribute to the development and implementation of integrated water resource management policies in the Americas. I also want to emphasize that a number of related meetings and institutions addressed water management issues in parallel to the events described above. For example, The Inter-American Institute for Corporation on Agriculture (IICA), has coordinated a number of events related to water management and agriculture, the World Water Council has created a visioning process, and UNESCO the Colloquium on Hydrology and Man, among others. The GEF also greatly increased its funding portfolio on shared water resources, as did the Andean Development Corporation, the Inter-American

Development Bank, and the World Bank. UNEP developed proactive partnerships with regional bodies such as the one I represent as a means of fulfilling its catalytic role in water globally. So what is required for us to continue with the dialogue and really develop a coordinated approach to the management of fresh and coastal waters at the hemispheric level? Let me be specific and not leave any doubt as to what I am suggesting. First, I would encourage each of you, as you participate in technical sessions of this meeting, to take very seriously what has occurred to date–in terms both of mandates and outputs. This includes giving serious consideration to the document “Status and Proposed Actions to Continue the Implementation of the Initiatives on Water Resources and Coastal Areas of the Plan of Action for the Sustainable Development of the Americas.” It represents a lot of work by the best water minds in the hemisphere and should not be minimized. The heart of this conference will be the thematic roundtables, and we need your thoughts as to priorities at the hemispheric level on these themes. Second, I hope you will give serious consideration to the cross-sector forum mechanism proposed by the OAS Secretary General to the last meeting of the Inter-American Commission for Integral Development. Some of the most difficult challenges of implementing the initiatives approved in Santa Cruz occur at the interface between different sectors. Cross-sectoral issues are complex to resolve because they require coordinated actions of different branches of government. A good example is the initiatives on water management that affect on the health sector. The report of the Secretary General of the OAS on Bolivia Summit Implementation (March 1998) recommended the convening of a meeting on health and water within the framework of the Inter-American Council for Integral Development, during 1999. Dialogue at the interface between two sectors has the effect of engaging higher authorities of government, which are needed to address problems or conflicts that cannot be resolved within the individual sectors. The interface between water and health is only one set of cross-sectoral issues. Equally important are water and sustainable agriculture, water and biodiversity, water and tourism development, to name just a few. This is the arena where the sustainable development debate is heading and we should use it to our full advantage. Third, in addition to formal cross-sectoral dialogue at the technical and political level, is the maintenance and expansion of the IWRN. The demand for services from this network is evident throughout the conclusions of the three regional workshops and the Inter-American Technical Meeting on Water. Probably no single mechanism is cited more often as the tool for implementation of the recommendations that have been made by the many participants in this sequence of meetings on water. The IWRN is a relatively inexpensive mechanism for both sustained dialogue and technology transfer. It is both flexible to adapt to changing needs and highly cost-effective. It also has excellent working relationships with groups such as CATHALAC, the Florida Center for Environmental Studies, IICA, UNESCO, and UNEP, among many others. Fourth, the Framework Strategy for Public Participation in Sustainable Development Decision-Making in the Americas offers you the opportunity to open the water dialogue to civil society. This strategy responds to a request by the heads of states and government of the Americas that the OAS promote the involvement of the public in

decisions that affect their livelihood and that of future generations. This spirit is crucial to the future success of water management policies and investments. And fifth, we must all work to break down institutional jealousies and unnecessary competition at all levels, achieving a true collaborative effort and, above all, fostering the political will to actually implement what we have agreed to as a hemisphere. By the time the Fourth Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management is held in 2002, the first Water Vision will have been presented at The Hague and many additional water meetings in the hemisphere will have been held. If these regional meetings can be linked together and jointly planned to build on the work begun in the Summit on Sustainable Development and carried forward at this meeting, a powerful mechanism will be in place for advancing water resources management in the Americas. We believe that the Water Vision project, which will move forward this year, provides us with an opportunity to put such a mechanism in place. In a recognition that strategic planning is a continuous process, the various national, regional, and organizational meetings and the Inter-American Dialogues can work together to make a continuing vision process a reality. We in the Americas are far ahead of other regions of the world in both understanding issues and setting priorities related to investments in integrated and sustainable management of water resources. The Americas has the opportunity to become a model for the Visioning process as we aim for The Hague in the year 2000. Integrated water management is the best chance we have to help drive the development process. We ought not to miss the chance represented by this gathering to advance that goal.

Environmental Issues in the Plata Basin

Carlos E. M. Tucci and Robin T. Clarke∗∗∗∗

ABSTRACT The Plata River Basin is one of the largest in the world, with an area of about 3 million km2. It includes parts of five countries (Paraguay, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay) and the water resources of the Plata Basin are essential for their economic development. The main tributaries are the rivers Paraná, Paraguay, and Uruguay. Some of the main developments having environmental impacts that influence the basin have been the following: (1) the development of many hydropower reservoirs in the Upper Paraná River, in Brazil, from 1960 to 1990; (2) deforestation in the Paraná, Uruguay, and Paraguay basins from 1950 to the 1990s; (3) introduction of intensive agricultural practice after 1970; (4) urban development, with change to flood regimes; and (5) navigation and conservation of the Upper Paraguay River. Since 1970, flow increases have been observed that may have been caused by changes in vegetation cover or by climate variation. The changes raised important issues for both water resource development and environmental conservation. This paper discusses the water management and environmental issues, taking account of climate patterns and the development of the five countries sharing the basin. INTRODUCTION Throughout almost its entire course, the Plata River is known as the Paraná; it only becomes the Plata below its junction with the River Uruguay. This Plata Basin is one of the largest in the world, and the region has the highest level of development in South America. Economic developments have had important consequences for the environment, the main ones being the following: Deforestation and intensive agriculture in the Paraguay, Paraná, and Uruguay basins: the agricultural expansion since the 1960s, mainly in Brazil, has left some areas with only 5% of their original natural cover. Many hydropower developments in the Paraná River: most of the hydropower of Brazil, and indeed of South America, comes from this basin. Dams have modified the behavior of rivers and environmental conditions both upstream and downstream.

∗ Institute of Hydraulic Research, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.

Climate variations: hydrological records show increases in both rainfall and runoff after 1970. The increases have had important impacts in areas such as the Pantanal, in the basin of the River Paraguay, and in the basin of the River Paraná. Environmental degradation in the principal cities: the population of the region is highly concentrated in urban areas. The Brazilian state of São Paulo, with 36 million people, has 92% of its population in cities. Urban development has had severe environmental impacts. Proposed improvements to navigation in the Upper Paraguay: these will have grave consequences for the Pantanal wetland. Flood hazard in the main rivers: flooding has resulted in extensive damage, particularly since the 1980s. This paper presents some of the main characteristics of the Plata River Basin and discusses some of the main issues related to development and environment conservation. THE PLATA RIVER Main Characteristics In area, the drainage basin of the Plata river is second only to that of the Amazon in South America, and it is the fifth largest in the world: 3.1 million km 2 (see figure 1). The Plata Basin is important in different ways for the economy of each country; about 70% of the total GNP of the five countries combined is produced within the basin, which is also inhabited by about 50% of their combined populations.

Figure 1. Water Resource Development in the Plata Basin

Table 1: Distribution of Area Between Sub Basins and Countries

Argentina Bolivia Brazil Paraguay Uruguay Sub-basin

Area (103km2

)

% of Plata Basin

Area %

Area % Area %

Area %

Area %

Paraná 1,510 48.7 565 37.5

890 59 55 3.5

Paraguay

1,095 35.3 165 15.0

205 18.7

370 33.9 355 32.4

Uruguay

365 11.8 60 16.4

155 42.5 150 41.1

Plata 3,100 100 920 29.7

205 6.6 1,415 45.7 410 13.2 150 4.8

Table 1, giving the distribution of drainage basin area by country and by subbasin, shows that almost half the total basin area is drained by the Paraná, and of this area 59% lies within Brazil and 37.5% in Argentina. The River Paraguay is the next largest subbasin, making up a little over 35% of the Basin as a whole; of the area drained by the River Paraguay, about a third lies within Paraguay and Brazil (32% and 34%, respectively), 15% in Argentina and 19% in Bolivia. The much smaller subbasin of the River Uruguay makes up about 12% of the total, of which about 43% lies in Brazil, 41% in Uruguay, and 16% in Argentina. In the years 1967-1968, the five countries set up an intergovernmental committee that led to the signing of a agreement aimed at the rational development of the Plata Basin in all its aspects. However, between the years 1969 and 1979 there were many diplomatic conflicts, mainly between Brazil and Argentina, because upstream dam construction caused detrimental effects downstream. Early in the decade of the seventies, Paraguay, Brazil, and Argentina signed an agreement concerning the operation of the hydropower plant at Itaipú, and this was followed by various binational agreements such as those concerning Salto Hydropower in the Uruguay Basin (between Argentina and Uruguay), Yaceretá Hydropower on the River Paraná (between Argentina and Paraguay), and the planned Garabí Project (between Argentina and Brazil). With the growth of Mercosur, which began as an agreement on commercial trade among some South American countries and has now has been extended to other areas, there are many projects in progress. Some Hydrologic Aspects The hydrological behavior of the main rivers draining the Plata Basin is the product of Basin topography--itself a product of geology and climate--and human activities within its boundaries. Natural conditions vary greatly from north to south (the general direction of drainage) and from west to east. In the eastern half of the Basin, the boundary is clearly defined, with a mean altitude of 1,000 m; however, the water divide can reach 1,500 m in the extreme eastern part, but falls to as low as 200 m in the south. On the western boundary, the Andean Cordillera reaches altitudes between 1,000 and 4,000 m, although there are stretches of this boundary,

notably in the northwest and southwest, that rise to only about 500 m and 300 m, respectively. Mean annual rainfall decreases both from north to south and from east to west; rainfall in the maritime uplands along the Brazilian coast reaches about 1,800 mm, but falls to 200 mm along the western boundary of the Basin. Rainfall is greatest in the upper parts of both the Paraguay and Paraná River basins (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Isolines of Precipitation of Plata River Basin

Table 2 presents mean annual flows at selected points within the three subbasins, together with the lengths of upstream sections and the areas drained. A point of interest concerns the relative contributions to the Plata flows of the rivers Paraná and Paraguay; where it joins the Paraná, the Paraguay has a mean annual

discharge of 2,700 m3 s - 1, for a total drained area of 1.095 billion km2. At the outfall of the Paraná, on the other hand, annual mean discharge is 17,700 m3 s - 1, over six times that of the Paraguay, for a drained area of 1,510 billion km2. Thus the specific yield of the Paraguay is 2.47 m3 per 1,000 km2, compared with 11.72 m3 per 1000 km2 for the Paraná. The difference (by a factor of 4.75) can be partly explained by high evaporation losses in the wetlands lying in the upper reaches of the Paraguay, particularly the Pantanal wetland described below.

Table 2: Some Characteristics of the Three Principal Subasins Main River Distance from

upstream (km2)

Basin area (103km2)

Mean annual flow (M3 s -1)

Paraná River Junction of Paranaíba and Grande

1,200 (Paranaíba) 1,000 (Grande)

376 4,370

Junction with Paraguay 2,540 975 11,800 mouth 3,780 1,510 17,700 Paraguay River At Cáceres 420 33.8 345 Final section 2,620 1,095 2,700 Uruguay River 1,600 365 5,500 Channel slope is very shallow for much of the River Paraguay. From Cáceres to the sea is a distance of over 3,400 km, while the difference in altitude between Cáceres and mean sea level is a few tens of meters. The poor natural drainage of the region has created the Pantanal, one of the world's largest wetlands, with an area of approximately 140,000 km2 (Figure 1). Between the Pantanal and Corrientes in Argentina, where the Paraguay joins the Paraná, the mean slope is about 0.04 m km-1, falling to 0.01 m km-1 in some parts. The slope of the Pantanal itself is 0.25 m km- 1 in the east-west direction but only 0.01 m km- 1 north to south. The time difference in the flood peak to the north and south of the Pantanal is about four months, and the flow regime in the Paraguay as a whole is strongly influenced by the Pantanal storage, one consequence being that annual peak water levels in the Upper Paraguay are correlated between one year and the next, regardless of rainfall conditions. We return to the hydrology of the Pantanal later in this paper. As is to be expected in such a large area, the principal matters of hydrological concern vary considerably from subbasin to subbasin and from upper reaches to lower reaches. In the Upper Paraná River, above the confluence with the River Iguaçu, the principal matter of hydrological concern is the change in land use from natural forest to arable cropping systems based on soybean production. In the lower courses of the rivers Paraguay and Paraná, principal matters of hydrological concern are navigation and flood control; in the recent past, floods have caused significant loss of life and damage to property.

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENTS AND IMPACTS The river basin is the region where water is available for planning water resources use, yet demands usually occur according to a different geographic division, since, in the past, rivers provided clearly defined boundaries. Thus, part of the basin is managed by one state or country and part by another, which involves organizations from different states or countries with different water-use policies. The Plata Basin is an example of this situation. Basin planning involves definition and projection of water use in the Basin. Often, water resources planning is seen as the study of different alternatives for a specific project, with one or more purposes, or for a watercourse reach. Planning for the whole basin involves the integration of efforts to identify needs and define water use priorities for multiple purposes. Water use in the river basin has been dictated by national goals such as energy production and water supply. The reservoirs have been designed according to specific objectives that reflect economically tangible benefits. Consequently, areas around headwaters reservoirs, which store water for irrigation, flood control, or navigation regulation reserve, do not enjoy the benefits or may make things worse. Planning is required to harmonize the multiple water uses and obtain tangible economic benefits, as well as benefits such as avoiding loss of human life and environmental conservation. We now consider aspects of the main factors influencing the water resources of the Plata Basin. Hydropower Hydropower plants are usually sited in large basins and require significant investment with eight years of planning. Their performance depends on two main factors: hydraulic head and flow. Since these developments regulate large flows, large volumes of storage are required, so that extensive areas must be flooded. Development design in a large river usually makes use of regulating reservoirs and several others with small volume and high hydraulic head. Because of the environmental impact of large flooding, it becomes increasingly difficult to obtain approval for regulating reservoirs that flood large areas. As a result, a cascade of small regulation reservoirs with high heads becomes likely, with important consequences for the downstream environment. Throughout the Plata Basin, the total capacity identified is about 92,000 MW; 53% of this total has been used or works are in progress to exploit it. The number of plants planned is significant, both at the domestic level of countries such as Brazil and as international projects. The main areas with hydropower potential are on the Upper Paraná River and on the River Uruguay. Brazil's energy is largely supplied by hydropower (93%), and between 1965 and 1985 many dams were built for hydropower production (Figure 2) in the Paraná River, which yields more than 50% of all Brazil's energy production. Today, some hydropower plants are planned for the Iguaçu and other tributaries of the Paraná (Piquirí and Ivaí).

In the international reach, Corpus (downstream from Itaipú) is the dam that remains to be built but some difficulties await resolution, since although the dam is to be built by Argentina and Paraguay, part of Brazilian territory will be flooded. The Uruguay River Basin presents a large hydropower potential with a yield of 40,5 KW km-2. The total energy available from the basin is 16,500 MW, while the total energy so far developed is 6,680 MW. Existing hydropower developments in the Basin are on the Passo Fundo River, also a tributary, on the left bank in the international reach, and the Salto Power Plant in the international reach between Argentina and Uruguay. The greatest hydropower potential of the basin is found in the upper part, where several projects have been planned. Navigation In the last century and at the beginning of the twentieth, the navigable waterway of the Plata tributaries provided the main channel for human settlement and development. Today the principal navigable stretches (Figure 2) are the following: On the Paraná-Paraguay: from the coast up to Cáceres in the Brazilian Mato Grosso, a distance of 3,600 km. There is a major proposal to improve this waterway to increase river depth, thus allowing more permanent traffic through the countries with territory within the basin. This project will have an important impact on the environment, to be discussed later in this paper. Tietê- Paraná: The Tietê river is one of the main tributaries of the Paraná, flowing through the highly developed region of the state of São Paulo, which yields about 36% of the GNP of Brazil and has 36 million inhabitants. This waterway has dams for navigation purposes, allowing transport by water from near the city of São Paulo downstream to the River Paraná. River Uruguay: According to OEA (1985), the River Uruguay is navigable in its lower reaches, which form the border between Argentina and Uruguay up to the Salto Grande dam. Upstream from Salto Grande, the river is navigable as far as up to São Borja. AGRICULTURE AND LAND-USE IMPACTS Until 1970 most of the agriculture in the state of Paraná and in a large part of São Paulo State was devoted to coffee production under permanent cover, but after a series of cold years, at the end of the 1960s, coffee plantations were destroyed by burning over a large area, with important economic losses. Subsequently, coffee was replaced by annual crops such as corn and soya. This land-use practice increases soil erosion in rural areas. At the end of the 1970s, some soil conservation programs were initiated, mainly in the Planalto towards the headwaters of the River Paraguay, and in the upper reaches of the rivers Paraná and Uruguay (see Figure 1). Soil erosion from the Upper Paraguay is 4 t. yr-1.ha -1 (Borges et al., 1996). In Rio Grande do Sul the estimated erosion is from 16 to 32 t yr-1.ha -1 (Benetti et al., 1989). Another important area of erosion and riverbed mobility is in the Bermejo River, which flows to the Paraguay River near Asunción. Natural conditions of high bed river slope,

rainfall, and soil have magnified the changes caused by human activities, and cities have suffered from severe flooding. Very little of the water in the Upper Paraná is used for irrigation. In the Uruguay there are some private developments for rice production. This irrigation occurs mainly along the Ibicuí River, a tributary of the Uruguay. In this area there is some conflict between the requirements for water supply and for irrigation during dry months. The present demand is about 13% of the mean flow. Floods Flooding is of major concern in the Plata River Basin. Most of the rivers have long, wide flood plains which have been occupied by settlements or used for crop production. The River Paraguay has a wide flood plain from its upstream reach in the Pantanal down to its junction with the Paraná. Flood plains of the River Paraná in Brazil and its tributaries such as the Iguaçu, contained many settlements which experienced damage after 1970. Two major conurbations-- São Paulo, with 16 million inhabitants, and Curitiba, with 2.5 million–occupy large areas of the flood plains of the rivers Tietê and Iguaçu, respectively. In the international reaches and in Argentina, the River Paraná commonly extends over large areas during the flood season. These areas are used for some agriculture and contain important cities such as Santa Fé, Corrientes, and Rosario. Over a considerable period (1950-1973), the annual floods were not extensive, and this gave rise to the belief that settlements could be built on areas that were subsequently shown to be at severe risk of flooding. The largest flood of the century occurred along the Plata and Paraná in 1983, when for a year and a half, the Paraná flood level was above street level in parts of Santa Fé, Argentina, although the city is protected by dikes. In União da Vitória on the River Iguaçu, the cost of the flood amounted to US$78 million. In the state of Santa Catarina the damage represented 8% of that state's gross product for the year. The steep gradient of the upper reach of the River Uruguay produces floods with large and rapid changes in water level, whereas downstream in the international reaches the plains can be under deep floods for long periods. Table 3 shows the number of cities and population affected by the floods in some years. Water Supply Demands for water supply and irrigation can usually be met by small basins, in which developments for water supply tend to be sited near areas of demand. However, water supply and irrigation may compete for the available water, especially during low-flow periods, when demands increase.

Despite the fact that demand is not high relative to the available resource in the Basin, uneven temporal and spatial distribution of flow in the headwaters and water-quality degradation are of major concern in the Plata Basin, particularly in and around the metropolitan areas of São Paulo and Curitiba. The city of São Paulo requires about 60 m3 s- 1, of which 33 m3 s- 1 is imported from basins other than that of the Tietê, which lacks water of a sufficiently high quality. Curitiba uses 7 m3 s - 1 for water supply from the River Iguaçu but has some restrictions during floods because of pollution and because water catchment areas need to be protected from urban development. THE MAIN ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES The main Basin developments and environmental impacts are the issues discussed here. Because of the size of the Basin, the choice of environmental issues discussed is somewhat selective. Climate Variation, Deforestation, and Agricultural Practices Climate variation and its impacts have been a major issue for the Plata Basin since the 1970s, when the mean annual flow increased markedly in some river sections. Table 4 shows flow increases from 19% to 46%. Figure 3 shows the flood-level variation of the River Paraguay at Ladário and mean rainfall in the Basin, both standardized so as to be dimensionless. It can be seen that after 1970 there is a large increase in the level and a smaller increase in the rainfall.

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

1,

1,

1,

1,

2

190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 2000Year

Nondimensional P , H

Rainfall

lLevel

The main effects of increased flow and rainfall in the Basin are the following: − Soil erosion and sediment deposition in river channels, decreasing the depth of soil available for agriculture; − Increase in river level and flood frequency − Change in the river bed and the riparian environment − Decrease of reservoir volume capacity with sediment deposition − Increased production of energy from hydropower − Changes in water quality due to resuspension of bed material during flood

conditions. These increases in flow and river water level may be due to one or both of the following causes: Rainfall increase after 1970 Anderson et al. (1993), using data from the River Paraná at Corrientes (both rainfall and runoff) concluded that the unusual heavy precipitation of 1990s and early 1900s was the most important reason for the flooding of these years. They also concluded that there is no consistent evidence, statistical or otherwise, that changes in rainfall-runoff dynamics associated with land-use changes played an important role in recent flooding in the Basin. The same paper says, that however, there is some evidence that when precipitation is not extremely high, some change has taken place that causes stream flow to be greater than would otherwise have been expected. The mean annual rainfall from 1901 to 1970 in the Paraná Basin at Corrientes was 1,364 mm and for the period 1971 to 1991, 1,438 mm, 5.4 % greater. This increase was very similar to that observed in the part of the Paraná Basin lying within the Brazilian state of Paraná. In theory, if all the additional rainfall were to generate runoff, an increase of 6% in rainfall over a river basin with runoff coefficient of 17% (the value for the Paraná) would lead to an increase in runoff of 35%. However, this is, of course, an upper limit to the increase in runoff. Barros et al. (1995) analyzed rainfall trends in southern South America to the east of the Andes, citing many other authors who had concluded that rainfall has increased in some parts of the Plata Basin. In particular, Barros, Castañeda, and Doyle (1995) found an increase from 850 mm during the 1920s to 1150, mm in the 1980s in the mean rainfall for the humid pampa. They found strong positive trends since the 1960s over the subtropical region to the east of the Andes. Deforestation and soil use Bosch and Hewlett (1982), Bruijnzeel (1992), and Sahin and Hall (1996) reported many experiments in small basins showing that deforestation increases the mean flow and that deforestation followed by annual crops that use machinery for soil preparation are practices that resalt in higher increases in the mean flow. The development of agriculture and settlement resulted in much deforestation in the Upper Paraná, Paraguay and Uruguay basins in Brazil. Table 5 shows the changes in original cover in the states of Paraná and São Paulo, both of which lie in the basin of the River Paraná.

In the state of Rio Grande do Sul, southern Brazil, which has one third of its area in the Uruguay Basin, the forest cover at the beginning of this century was about 40% of the total area of the state; today, it is estimated at only 2.6%. It can be seen that although deforestation started before 1970, most of the increase in flow occurred after 1970; but an important change in agricultural practice from coffee to soya production occurred in Brazil after 1970, as is described above. Soya is a high-value crop and its cultivation spread over large areas. Figure 4 shows an example of the change in vegetation cover from one area of the Paraná Basin. Soya is also an annual crop that requires machinery for soil preparation (Figure 5 shows the increase in machinery sold in the region after 1970). Such changes commonly increase mean flow, as is reported above, but the area is large and the extent of the impact of such changes at the basin-wide scale is not yet clear.

Figure 4. Soil-Use Change in a Sampled Area in North of Paraná

Figure 4. Soil-Use Change in a Sampled Area in North of Paraná

Figure 5. Number of Pieces of Equipments Sold in Paraná

As can be seen, there are more questions than answers, and much more research is required to solve them. The main conclusion are that flow has increased in the Upper Paraguay, Paraná, and Uruguay basins and that rainfall and land-use changes have both contributed to cause the flow increase, although there is not yet a clear answer as to the relative magnitudes of the two contributory causes. In the context of water resource development and environment protection, the main question is how permanent is the increase in flow. In terms of energy production, a permanent increase in flow represents greater firm energy yield, but possibly a shorter reservoir life due to sedimentation; in terms of navigation, water depth is increased and the period during which the rivers are navigable may be lengthened; in terms of the flood regime, flood damage may be greater. The question is difficult, requiring more research before quantitative answers can be given. Pantanal climate variation The River Paraguay and its tributaries flow from an upstream area called the Planalto, with an altitude above 200 m, into the large wetland of the Pantanal, where the altitude is less than 100 m. The Pantanal is one of the world’s largest wetlands, with an area about 124,000 km2. The ecosystem of the Pantanal is very distinctive and its preservation is important for Brazil. Nevertheless, current human activities and proposed developments constitute a considerable threat to its existence. Although cattle production in the Pantanal is widespread, there is increasing mineral development, while intensive soya production in the Planalto has increased soil erosion and sediment deposition in the Pantanal. Most important of all is the proposal to extend the navigable length of the Paraguay in order to open up central South America to trade and for the export of the region’s agricultural production. The consequences of this development must be carefully studied if the Pantanal is to avoid total destruction. In addition, to establish how development will influence the region it is first necessary to understand its hydrology. Flow in the Paraguay and its tributaries is drastically reduced where they enter the Pantanal, since the abrupt decrease in the gradient leads to the deposition of sediment on the river bed. The reduced erosive power of the river thus causes a reduction in the cross-section relative to that farther upstream. In periods of flood, downstream sections of the Pantanal rivers have smaller conveyance than those upstream, resulting in extensive overbank spillage to a broader channel, and the greater the flood the more extensive is the overbank spillage. However, the plain of the Pantanal contains a large number of depressions that are filled during floods, forming a landscape of small lakes that merge as the water level rises and retain water as the level falls again in the main channel. A large part of the inflow from upstream is therefore retained as storage in depressions having no direct link with the main channels of rivers flowing across the Pantanal. The flow and sediment that are the basis of the ecosystem are reduced by about half.

Climate Climate changes over time have been marked. The mean annual flood level at Ladário on the River Paraguay fluctuated around 4 m from 1900 to 1960. During 1960 to 1973 the annual flood level varied around 2 m. This reduction of flow energy and consequent siltation diminished the channel cross-section relative to that of the preceding period. The inhabitants of the region--especially cattle ranchers--began to use areas that had previously been flooded for long periods. After 1973, however, the mean annual flood level increased again, to around 5 m. Areas that had been free of flooding for several months of the year became almost permanently flooded. During the 1960s, the flooded areas of the Pantanal extended to about 17,000 km2, but after 1973 the flooded area exceeded 50,000 km2, reaching a maximum of about 100,000 km2 in 1988 (5). Soil erosion In the Planalto, there has been a dramatic increase since the 1970s in areas planted to annual crops, principally soya, which has resulted in significantly grater soil erosion and sediment transport to the Pantanal. At the same time, the short-term increases of annual rainfall in the upper part of the Basin have caused soil loss in the Planalto, with deposition in some reaches and, in the Pantanal, greater deposition of sediment and reduced channel conveyance. Within the Pantanal itself, land-use changes have been largely restricted by the hydrological regime, although some dikes have been constructed to control flooding. However, during floods, rivers may change course by cutting across meanders, and where this results in a landowner´s losing part of his property, he may seal off the new course, so that the river will revert to its old one. Where this occurs, there is a consequent high mortality of fish and other aquatic life in the cut-off section. Paraná-Paraguay Waterway This is a 3,600-km-long waterway, from Nueva Palmital, near the coast, to a point upstream of Cáceres in Brazil (Figure 6). To improve transport, works are planned that will improve the river channel through its entire length. The first projects were presented by Intervave and the last one by Hidroservice-Louis Berger-EIH. This last project made the following proposal: − from Santa Fé (Argentina) to Asunción (Paraguay), a channel 100 m wide and 3m

deep; − from Asunción to Corumbá (Brazil), a channel 90 m wide and 2.6 m deep; − from Corumbá to Cáceres, many projects that will result in at least 1.5 to 1.8 m of

water depth.

Figure 6. Paraná-Paraguay Waterway A major concern is the environmental impact of these works on the Pantanal wetland. They will improve river conveyance, which may decrease the flood area. The decrease in over-bank flow and flood-plain sedimentation will tend to change the Pantanal from wetland to savannah, since the difference between rainfall and potential

evapotranspiration is negative. In a sequence of drought years, the effect would be even more critical. The main questions relating to this issue are the following: Will the proposed works in the waterway modify flow conditions so as to reduce flow volume to the flood plain, and if so, by how much? What would be the effect on the flood-plain environment of a sequence of drought years? More research based field data is required before these questions can be satisfactorily answered. CONCLUSION The basin of the Plata is one of the world's largest, and its 100 million people are responsible for a major part of the economy of South America. The countries sharing the basin are receiving high investment and have a high index of economic growth, with consequent pressures on the environment. This paper lists the main environmental issues related to water resources and discusses the following issues: Climate variation, agriculture practices, and flow increase. Increased runoff after the 1970s may be due to rainfall or agricultural practices or both. If rainfall has been the principal cause of the increased runoff, it may not be permanent and river behavior may revert to conditions of the 1960s; but if changes in land use and agricultural practices have contribued to it, it is possible that the higher flows are more permanent. If they are, this has important economic and environmental consequences for strategies for sustainable development, which will need to take into account (1) increases in water depth and in duration of navigable conditions, in the watercourses; (2) increased energy production; (3) possible decrease of reservoir capacity from sedimentation; (4) and more extreme flood conditions. It will become more necessary than ever to improve agricultural practices for water and soil conservation and to develop nonstructural measures for flood control in critical areas, such as flood zoning, real-time flood forecasting, and insurance. Pantanal wetlands conservation. The Pantanal is a major wetland environment of South America that has been greatly influenced in the last thirty years by climate variation and changes in land use and agricultural practices. In addition, a waterway has been proposed for the Plata Basin countries that could greatly affect the wetland system. In broad terms, increasing the channel transport capacity by dredging, as planned for the waterway improvements, would reduce the volume of water retained in the Pantanal wetland, possibly changing it from wetland to savannah, but sound quantitative evaluation is necessary to establish how and where the changes would occur before any decision on investment is taken. Sustainable development of this region must be achieved without damaging its natural behavior, and an important conservation planning program is required to reconcile the conflicting requirements of conservation and economic development.

REFERENCES Anderson, R., J.N.F. Ribeiro, and H.F. Díaz.1993. An Analysis of Flooding in the Paraná/ Paraguay River Basin. Washington, D.C., World Bank Latin America Technical Department. Barros, V., M.E. Castañeda, and M. Doyle. 1995. Recent Precipitation Trends in Southern South America to the East of the Andes: An Indication of a Mode of Climatic Variability. Proceendings of Latin America Workshop on Greenhouse Gas Emission of Energy Sector and Their Impacts ufrj, Rio de Janeiro, Universidade Federal de Rio de Janeiro. Bosch, J.M., and J.D.Hewlett. 1982. "A Review of Catchment Experiments to Determine the Effect of Vegetation Changes on Water Yield and Evapotranspiration”. Journal of Hydrology. Bruijnzeel, I. A., 1990. "Hydrology of Moist Tropical Forests and Effects of Conversion: A State of Knowledge Review.ihp. iahs.UNESCO. 224 p. Hamilton, S.K., S.J.Sippel, and J.M. Melack, 1995. "Inundation Patterns in the Pantanal Wetland of South America Determined from Passive Macrowave Remote Sensing.". Hydrobiologie, January. Kroner. 1990. "A Erosão do Dolo de 1952 a 1985 e Seu Controle no Paraná". Londrina, Iapar, Boletim Técnico, No. 30 53. OEA. 1969. Bacia do Prata. Estudo para sua Planificação e Desenvolvimento. Washington D.C., Organização dos Estados Americanos. Parchen, C. A. P., and Bragagnolo. 1991. Erosão e Conservação de Solos no Paraná. emater – pr. Sahin, M. J., and Hall, 1996."The Effects of Afforestation and Deforestation on Water Yields". Journal of Hydrology, o. 1178, pp. 293-309.

Lessons In Basin Development: The Experience of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)

Ronald J. Williams∗∗∗∗ INTRODUCTION My organization, the Tennessee Valley Authority, is responsible for providing innovative environmental solutions through science and engineering to problems faced by TVA, its customers, Federal agencies, and others. Our TVA customers include organizations with responsibilities to operate the Tennessee River system and to provide TVA stewardship of the Tennessee River watershed--a 106,000 km2 region including parts of seven states in the southeastern part of the U.S. These TVA organizations oversee river system operations and the land resources, shoreline, and watershed improvement activities associated with the Tennessee River, part of a system of 54 dams that work as a unified system to provide flood control, navigation, power supply, and recreation benefits to about 8 million Valley residents. As a representative of the Tennessee Valley Authority, I am pleased and honored to participate in this meeting and to share my thoughts with you on "Lessons in Basin Development." I am absolutely convinced that TVA's success in regional development is the result of our integrated approach to resource management, and I am excited about being able to speak to you at this Third Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management. TVA applauds the efforts of the OAS, the Inter-American Water Resources Network, and the various sponsors and countries represented here for their foresight--and eagerness to share and cooperate in the critical area of water management. Just as TVA was created as a national demonstration and a testing ground for innovative solutions to the environmental and economic problems of the Tennessee Valley, each Latin American country represented here has the opportunity to become a leader and demonstration and testing ground for the rest of the world. Your people can reap the benefits, and developing countries across the world will be able to learn from your example. TVA has been part of a similar development effort. Prior to the creation of TVA, the Tennessee Valley was one of the poorest regions of the United States of America. Most people lived on small farms which had been worked for generations using poor agricultural practices. The land was suffering from soil depletion and erosion. Malaria, yellow fever, and encephalitis were common, and poverty was the rule. Average income in these areas was only 40 percent of the national average. Four percent of the population had electricity in their homes. Three percent had running water. The Tennessee River was not navigable for most of its length because of the presence of ∗ Vice President, Environmental Research & Services, Tennessee Valley Authority, Muscle Shoals, Alabama, U.S.A.

numerous shoals and silt from deforested lands--primarily the result of uncontrolled logging and mining. Today, the TVA region is prospering. It is attracting new industry and growing faster than the U.S. economy in general. The unemployment rate is among the lowest in the nation. The Tennessee River has become a major transportation artery linking regional industries to world markets. The river system contributes more than 15 billion kwh to the TVA power system, provides drinking water for more than four million people, and serves as a recreational outlet for nearly one-tenth of America's population. In the process of this transformation, we faced many of the same questions you face today. Priorities had to be set. Which resources should be developed? For what purpose? How much planning should be done and by whom? After 65 years of debate and history, we still face many of the same questions. But we've also learned some important lessons. My purpose today is to .share some lessons with you. We invite you to learn from our experience --to take advantage of our mistakes--and we would be delighted to work with you, in any way we can, to address the wide range of complex water, economic, political, and technical issues so important to the future of the Americas and the rest of the world. Because planning is so important to water resource development, I want to focus primarily on the lessons that TVA has learned about planning for regional development. Then I'll touch briefly on some other lessons related to environmental protection, political support, and the financing of multipurpose resource development. PLANNING LESSONS We've learned a lot of lessons about planning in our 65 years of experience. In fact, TVA was created as a planning agency for the Tennessee Valley region. The TVA Act charges TVA with "the broadest duty of planning for the proper use, conservation, and development of the natural resources of the Tennessee River drainage basin and its adjoining territory." But TVA was different from other planning agencies in one important respect: we also were given the necessary power to put our plans into effect. The TVA idea of planning combines planning and action. TVA is responsible not only for developing plans, but for achieving results. This has been fundamental to our success. One planning lesson we learned early on was the value of a shared regional vision. TVA was to develop the natural resources of the Tennessee Valley for the "economic and social well-being of the people" who live there. The unified development of resources for the benefit of human life became a common purpose that brought together not only the technical experts needed to get the job done--the engineers, the architects, the biologists, the agronomists, the foresters, the navigation experts, the town builders, the public health experts, and others--but also helped to unify the Valley's people, businesses, and governments.

It also helped to have a clear charter. The TVA Act defined the job to be done clearly, simply, and yet in broad, inclusive terms: a 9-foot minimum navigation channel from Knoxville to the Ohio; flood control on the Tennessee and lower Mississippi; maximum hydroelectric generation consistent with other uses of the river's water; agricultural and industrial development; operation of the Muscle Shoals plant; research; and so on. From the outset, everyone knew exactly what was expected of TVA, and by what measure TVA's administrators would be judged and held accountable. Another important planning lesson was the effectiveness of an integrated approach to river and resource management. By operating TVA dams, power plants, and locks as a single unit, TVA is able to optimize the benefits to the citizens of the Tennessee Valley. This is perhaps the single most important lesson I can share with you from TVA's 65 years of operating experience. Other federal and state agencies in the U.S. have responsibility for managing water resources for specific uses within specific political jurisdictions. They work river by river, project by project--building a dam for irrigation here, another for navigation or water supply diversion there. But TVA, in the words of its early chairman, David Lilienthal, "was to envision in its entirety the potentialities of the whole river system, for navigation, for power, for flood control, and for recreation." Lilienthal was determined that the Tennessee River would be developed differently from other rivers. He wrote these words in 1944: "Not far from where I write are other rivers developed by private interests or public agencies. On these rivers it is common practice . . . to build a single dam without first having fixed upon a general plan that will ultimately insure the full use of the whole river as a unit. There are darns built for the single purpose of power development. Such individual dams, in order to yield an immediate return in power, impair or destroy the river's full development of power at other sites, for they were not designed with the whole river thought of as it is in nature, a unit. These power dams are not built or operated to control floods, and do not provide a continuous navigable channel. The full usefulness of the river is lessened. Similarly, hundreds of millions of dollars in public funds have been expended for the single purpose of navigation on some of our rivers, but most of the dams constructed will not control the rivers' floods or create electric energy. They now stand as massive barriers against the erection of multi-purpose structures." This leads me to a third planning lesson: the advantages of multi-purpose development. TVA learned that no single activity should be considered an end in itself. The goal was to release the total benefit of the Tennessee River for the people by balancing use of the water for hydro-electric power production, navigation, water supply, recreation, and other purposes, while controlling flows to reduce flood damages and erosion. The wisdom of this multi-purpose approach is no longer in question. TVA's integrated water control system has transformed the Tennessee River and its tributaries into one of the most useful river systems in the world. It tamed the Tennessee's unpredictable flow, which once varied from a trickle of about 130 m3 per second to a torrent of over 13,000 m3 per second.

It has prevented more than US$4 billion in flood damages in the Tennessee Valley since 1936, plus more than US$250 million in damage on the lower Ohio and Mississippi rivers. It has opened a 1,050 km navigable channel that links the Tennessee Valley ports by way of an inland waterway system with ocean ports leading to countries around the world. And, of course, the system helped generate electric power for industrialization and rural electrification. Furthermore, TVA operates the river system to serve a wide range of secondary objectives--for example, fluctuating lake levels for mosquito control, providing minimum flows for assimilative capacity near major cities, and maintaining lake levels for recreation. We are able to provide such a wide range of benefits by using every drop of water over and over as habitat for fish and flotation for navigation, as coolant for power plants and fuel to spin turbines, to drink, and to irrigate crops. And we feel very strongly that maximizing the use of the water for a single purpose--whether it's hydropower or recreation or municipal use--is not an acceptable alternative to the balance for which the TVA river system was designed. Designing a multi-purpose system, as you know, is much more than an engineering problem: it is an exercise in long-term planning--the fourth lesson I'd like to share with you. It is critical that you do it right the first time--not only because of the public investment that is required, but because you only get one chance. Natural resources can only be developed once, and future generations must live with the consequences. That's why it is so important to try to look down the road--to try to project the demands on the system in the future--40 or 50 years from now. At the very start, it's important to: − Acquire shoreland to provide a buffer zone between adjacent land uses and the

water. − Build navigation locks large enough for future traffic. − Forecast future power needs as accurately as possible. − Plan for rural development and infrastructure--not just population centers. Of course, our ability to see into the future is limited, and our world is constantly changing. A compromise that achieves a satisfactory balance among needs and demands at one point in time may eventually become unsatisfactory as patterns of use and the needs and expectations of users gradually change. Development, after all, is a complex process. It is always evolving. A paradigm, or way of looking at things, which made perfect sense in the past is bound to be outdated and superseded by new realities and scientific knowledge. So it is important to continually reassess operating plans and priorities. Let me give you an example of how TVA recently adjusted its reservoir system operating priorities in response to changing needs and user expectations.

In the 1930s, when TVA was created, navigation and flood control were top priorities. But today's world is much different. Most people in the United States take navigation and flood control for granted. They have all but forgotten the times when it was possible to walk across the Tennessee River during drought periods, or the times when flood waters regularly devastated the cities along the river banks. New problems have captured the public's attention. Today, the people who use the Tennessee River have become much more concerned about water quality, and they are demanding more, and improved, recreational benefits from the region's waters. In the 1980s, these new priorities drew attention to two longstanding conflicts related to TVA reservoir operations. Conservation of stored water for hydrogeneration during periods of peak electricity demand resulted in intermittent periods of high releases from TVA dams, followed by zero or low releases that affected use of tailwater streams for fish and aquatic life, water supply, recreation, and other purposes. In addition, releases from tributary reservoirs to maintain downstream navigation flows during the dry season, or to provide storage capacity during the flood season, required wide fluctuations in tributary water levels and tailwater flows that could limit various types of lake and stream recreation--both of growing importance to the economic development in tributary areas. In 1987, to address these conflicts and to respond to the growing public interest in water quality and recreation, TVA undertook a major review of its reservoir operating policies. The result, which we call our Lake Improvement Plan, increased the emphasis placed on water quality and recreation in the operation of TVA dams and reservoirs. We adopted new year-round minimum flow requirements for tributary and mainstream dams, installed aeration equipment to improve dissolved oxygen levels below 16 TVA dams, and delayed the drawdown of ten tributary reservoirs an additional two months to promote recreation and economic development. This represented a remarkable turnabout. Conventional wisdom held that additional water quality and recreation benefits could only be provided at great sacrifice to navigation, flood control, and--particularly--hydroelectric power production. As things turned out, this was not the case. By taking a broad view, and by vigorously incorporating public input in the entire planning process, we were able--in effect--to make the pie bigger, instead of just changing how we sliced it. This brings us to the last planning lesson I want to highlight: the importance of involving the public--the people who use the river and reservoir system--in decision-making. Our Lake Improvement Plan is a good example. Throughout the three-year study, TVA made an extraordinary effort to keep the public informed, and we provided numerous opportunities for all stakeholders to express their views and challenge the views of others as the decision was being constructed.

This had two principal benefits. First, it produced a better decision by strengthening the quantity and quality of the decision base. The public was able to give us more ideas than we had, document additional facts, and give us their views and wants--which minimized the chance that critical issues might be overlooked. And, second, it increased public support for the final decision, effectively dissipating the public controversy that surrounded the issue at the beginning of the study. Not everyone got what they wanted, but they were generally satisfied because all requests were fairly considered. Involving the public is now standard operating procedure for TVA, whether we are seeking to alter the management or use of the land and water resources, whether we're seeking to improve the management of our shorelines, or whether we're routing new transmission lines. ENVIRONMENTAL LESSONS Any discussion of the benefits of developing the Tennessee River system would be misleading if it were not balanced by a reminder of some of the adverse environmental impacts. Impounding a river to form a reservoir changes water quality. Although some changes are beneficial, others cause problems. When cold water from the bottom of a reservoir is released, water temperatures downstream are altered--sometimes to the extent that streams below the dam are not suitable for warm-water aquatic life. During periods of thermal stratification in the reservoir, levels of dissolved oxygen near the bottom decrease. When this low-oxygen water is released, it may decrease oxygen concentrations downstream to levels that are inadequate to support fish. Low oxygen levels also decrease the ability of streams to break down waste, a process that requires and consumes oxygen. Also, as I've already mentioned, sudden, intermittent releases through dams, such as those resulting from hydroelectric power peaking operations, can affect water quality. They can change water temperatures downstream and produce up to 100-fold increases or decreases in flow within a matter of minutes one or more times a day--alternately scouring the bottom during high releases and drying much of the streambed during low releases, which can severely degrade habitat conditions for aquatic life and interfere with recreational uses in tailwater streams. During the TVA development era, however, no one fully understood these environmental impacts. Technologies for mitigating these effects either had not yet been developed or were not commonly applied because the need was not perceived or the expense could not be justified under the existing value system. This is a mistake that I hope you may be able to take note of and avoid. The failure was more a lack of understanding and foresight than an effort to avoid responsibility. In focusing on increased social and economic benefits to Tennessee Valley citizens, we failed to address the pollution and waste that economic activity contributes to

environmental deterioration, as well as the health risks that disproportionately affect certain segments of society. Let me give you a few more examples. In the 1970s, TVA made the mistake of trying to avoid the expensive problem of controlling emissions of sulfur dioxide and other pollutants from our coal-fired power plants through dispersion by building tall smokestacks. This was allowable under early regulations. However, when regulations were changed, TVA resisted because of the expense involved. It took legal action by environmental groups and the United States Environmental Protection Agency to persuade TVA to make the investments in pollution abatement equipment needed to achieve compliance. Similarly, TVA became embroiled in controversy and litigation over its final reservoir projects--TheTellico and Columbia dams, which were contested on the grounds of noncompliance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973. Most people have heard of the snail darter, which was made famous by TVA's Tellico project. As a result, like many U.S. corporations, TVA had to reexamine some of its environmental policies and make substantial investments in pollution control. I've already mentioned the improvements we made under our Lake Improvement Plan. We now provide minimum flows below all TVA dams, and we've developed and installed aeration weirs, hub baffles, surface water pumps, diffuser systems, and other innovative technologies to boost oxygen levels in tailwater areas. Since 1980, we've reduced power plant sulfur dioxide emissions by 65 percent from 1977 levels, and we're making further reductions by use of low-sulfur coals and flue gas desulfurization technology. And, finally, since the Tellico and Columbia controversies, TVA has put priority on efforts to devise plans, before a course of action has been set, for protecting threatened or endangered species and their habitats or relocating such species to other suitable habitat as part of project development. Many of these programs are now being emulated throughout the United States. In retrospect, we should have placed much higher priority on research and development to identify and mitigate the environmental impacts resulting from our operations. We learned the hard way that it is much cheaper to prevent environmental impacts than to take remedial action later. Let me add another "planning" lesson to my earlier list: it is important to factor environmental issues in on the front end. But environmental assessment cannot be a one-time consideration during project planning. Rather, it must be a continuing process of refinement and fine-tuning, an integral part of all stages of system construction, operation, and long-term management. Today, I'm happy to say, TVA is on the road to environmental leadership. We are committed to operating our facilities in compliance with environmental regulations; we have integrated pollution prevention into our core businesses; we are developing new technological solutions to environmental problems at our Environmental Research Center in Muscle Shoals, Alabama; and we have implemented a highly successful initiative to make the Tennessee River the cleanest, most productive commercial river system in the United States.

POLITICAL LESSONS How to keep "politics" out of TVA was the subject of much debate when the agency was first established. There was a great deal of concern, for example, over the possible consequences if politics were injected into TVA's selection of personnel, into decisions about the location of transmission lines, or into transactions for purchase of materials and equipment. I think it is safe to say that TVA has demonstrated to the satisfaction of all that the task of getting resources developed should be kept non-political. But, at the same time, resource development must be guided by public policy. As Lilienthal observed, "The decision to develop resources as a unified whole was a political one; the opportunity afforded for regional decentralization, the fixing of responsibility on a single agency in the region, even the decision that TVA must keep politics out of the selection of personnel--all these were political decisions." Because resource development must be guided by public policy, political support is essential. TVA was able to develop the Tennessee River system, and continues to exist, only because it is supported by--and accountable to--the U.S. Congress and because it is responsive to the wishes of the people it serves. Many factors are important in maintaining political support for resource development, but I want to briefly highlight these two: the importance of clearly demonstrating the local economic benefits of natural resource stewardship and the advantages of a decentralized approach in building local grassroots-level support. Remember that conditions in the Tennessee Valley, when TVA was created, were among the worst in the United States. Per capita income was far below the national average, and jobs were scarce. Putting people to work had to be a top priority. And so TVA focused on giving the people the tools they needed to create new jobs and build a healthier economy: electric power, water resources, technical assistance, and even vocational training to prepare them for new types of jobs demanding special skills. TVA continues to provide these tools for economic development today. Our experience also shows that a decentralized approach encourages the public to get involved in natural resource protection and improvement efforts and provides a foundation for building strong partnerships among federal, state, and local resource managers. Prior to the creation of TVA, two schools of thought existing regarding the management of natural resources. The first school argued that such vital resources could only be managed effectively by a highly centralized national govemment. And the second argued that natural resources should be managed by the individual states that make up the United States of America. TVA demonstrated that yet a third system could be effective in managing large river and land systems: a regional agency, "clothed with the power of government but possessed of the flexibility and initiative of a private enterprise," headquartered not in Washington, our nation's capital, but near the river it was to manage. Lilienthal saw decentralization as an "antidote for remote control."

"The fact that TVA was not remote but close at hand has been the most effective way to dissipate the considerable initial suspicion of this enterprise and secure from citizens of every point of view the continued wide measure of warm cooperation." This approach not only helped to build trust and participation in TVA programs on the part of Valley citizens; it also resulted in increased cooperation from businesses, local and state agencies, and non-governmental organizations. This cooperation has been critical to TVA's success because we have no regulatory authority. TVA does not--and cannot--dictate change. Instead, we must accomplish our management objectives through cooperative partnerships with other governmental agencies, businesses and industries, private organizations, citizen groups, and individual resource users. Experience has taught us that it is possible to shift from conflict to collaboration when we focus on common values to guide our actions. For government, this means shifting gradually from prescribing action to facilitating, creating incentives, monitoring performance, and providing information. TVA's Clean Water Initiative is a good example. TVA has no regulatory responsibility for clean water. We don't set pollutant limits or enforce standards for discharges. But the public holds us responsible for the health of the Tennessee River and reservoir system because we built the dams and we're responsible for managing the water's flow. We've been able to exert a positive influence on water quality in the Tennessee Valley principally by supporting and working cooperatively with federal and state regulatory agencies and with cities, industries, and individual water users. Our Clean Water Initiative is based on what many still regard as a radical idea: that a non-regulatory approach is more effective--in the long run--than any program structured around enforcement. Our fundamental strategy is coalition building. We've assigned teams of water resource experts and community and education specialists to specific watersheds and charged them with building partnerships among the different groups of people to whom the water is important: citizens, businesses, state and federal agencies, local governments, and environmental groups. We work with stakeholders to assess water quality conditions and identify resource needs and then to develop cooperative protection and improvement projects. The focus is on finding creative ways to achieve the desired water quality improvements--rather than on penalties for non-compliance--and on encouraging local ownership and responsibility for watershed conditions. Another lesson we've learned is that, when armed with information and data, the local population is more than willing to support efforts aimed at enhancing water quality. We regularly sample the lakes, rivers, and streams in the Valley, analyze the results, and publish them in a form that is easy to use and understand. We do this because we've learned that watershed residents need to know the condition of their lakes, rivers, and

streams before they can try to improve them. And, once they've begun improvement projects, they need to know if their efforts are making a difference. I am impressed with the spirit of collaboration evident at this meeting and encourage you to expand your efforts to include local, grassroots representation and build public/private partnerships. We've found that this approach is an effective way not only to stretch limited resources--to leverage private sector funding and to maximize the impact of government spending--but to generate public support for resource management projects. FINANCIAL LESSONS Before the advent of hydropower, it was assumed that government would pay the full cost of developing rivers. This was because the primary benefits--navigation and flood control--were considered to be part of the public good, but rarely if ever generated sufficient revenues to cover a project's cost. Moreover, those who received the economic benefits were not necessarily those who paid for the projects that made the improvements possible. With hydropower added to the formula, however, the calculations changed dramatically. Gifford Pinchot and others thought that power provided the key to progress toward multiresource development. Unlike single-purpose projects for navigation or flood control, multipurpose projects -- as long as they included power production--could be self financing. The policy implications were enormous. A program for multi-resource development would not only improve the environment and economy, but also pay its way. The key, however, was public ownership. Single-purpose projects, dedicated to profitable returns, were goals for private interests. Multi-purpose projects, dedicated to the public's welfare, were goals only the government could pursue successfully. Such thinking was instrumental in TVA's creation. In the original TVA Act, all programs were financed through congressional appropriations. Lump sums with no interest were provided for the construction of dams, reservoirs, transmission lines, land purchases, and all other activities. Since the purpose of the dams was primarily navigation and flood control, very little of the cost was allocated to the electric generation program. Customers were charged unheard-of low utility rates, which boosted economic development. In 1959, however, Congress amended the Act to require that TVA's power program be self-financing. This was done because the hydropower TVA produced was no longer sufficient to meet growing demands for power. To meet the demand, TVA had begun expanding its coal-fired steam-generating power system, and private utilities objected to "unfair" TVA competition. Under the self-financing arrangement, the TVA Board is responsible for raising capital for building new power plants and acquiring new generation. Utility customers pay not only for fuel and operation of the plants, but for interest on debts and retirement of capital investment. TVA has received no funds from the federal government for its

power program since 1959. Also, in accordance with the 1959 amendment, TVA is continuing to repay--with interest--the original capital investment in TVA's power program made by the federal government from 1933 to 1959. To meet these obligations and obtain capital for growth, TVA has designed and pioneered the sale of numerous innovative power bond issues, and the demand for these instruments has been strong all over the world. Funding for TVA's water resource infrastructure projects depends on the primary beneficiary. Projects that directly reflect the stewardship responsibilities of the federal government navigation and water supply, for example--are funded 100 percent by Congressional appropriations. Power projects that were constructed to benefit the power production function are funded 100 percent by power revenues. And projects that serve multiple purposes are funded by a combination of Congressional appropriations and power revenues, depending on the allocation of benefits to the two stakeholder groups. On the basis of a l0-year Financial Plan adopted in 1997, TVA is currently restricting capital investments to a level that can be funded through power proceeds and retained earnings. New capacity is added to the TVA system, as needed, though a combination of buying power from independent power producers and installing natural gas turbines. As a federal agency, TVA pays no property or sales taxes. To compensate for the loss of tax revenues to states in which TVA owns property and for land lost to reservoirs, TVA makes an annual in-lieu-of-taxes payment to each state in which it owns land. This payment amounts to 5 percent of adjusted power proceeds in the preceding year, excluding that sold to federal agencies. These payments are then allocated by individual states to their municipalities, according to formulas developed by each, state to support school systems, hospitals, and fire, emergency, and other public services. These are just a few of the "financial lessons" that can be drawn from this experience:

− Public benefits--navigation, flood control, recreation, water supply--most likely will always require the investment of public funds.

− Seed money from the government is important to get started. Once the system is in place, self-financing of system growth--with revenues from hydropower or water sales--may be an option.

− Economic development benefits justify keeping the cost of hydropower and other system benefits low.

− In-lieu-of-taxes payments help to build an environment of cooperation between local, state, and federal governments by ensuring a direct benefit from the process of integrated river management.

CONCLUSION There are many more lessons I could share with you. I realize that, in many ways, TVA's experience may be unique. But, at the same time, I am confident that much of what has worked for us--especially our integrated, multipurpose approach to river and resource development--also will work for you. That is the point I'd like to emphasize in closing: I encourage you to remain faithful to the concept of integrated resource development.

To paraphrase Lilienthal one last time, resist the temptation to dissect your region's resources into separate bits that fit into the jurisdictional pigeonholes into which government is traditionally divided. Don't settle for single-purpose projects. Put the river to work for your people by managing instead for the full range of potential benefits--hydropower, navigation, flood control, water supply, recreation, water quality. It isn't easy. Like us, you'll make mistakes. But it can be done! Again, I applaud your efforts at this very important dialogue and if we can be of assistance, please call on us.

SESSION

El Agua como Área de Acción del IICA

Hélio de Macedo Soares*

El tema agua se refiere a sus diversos estados en el ciclo hidrológico. La cantidad de agua es finita aunque la demanda aumenta con el incremento del uso. Parte del ciclo es la demanda del agua por la vegetación. Así, la agricultura es un usuario muy importante. En algunos países, principalmente aquellos con climas áridos o semiáridos, la proporción en que la agricultura usa el agua, es el 80% del agua disponible. Seguramente por esta razón, la gestión del agua en las cuencas ha sido tradicionalmente de responsabilidad en el sector agropecuario. Es más, las inversiones en el desarrollo hidráulico para riego en algunos países han sido desproporcionalmente mayores que para otros sectores. En general, la inversión ha endeudado al gobierno central, en muchos casos con resultados poco satisfactorios. Este énfasis en un determinado sector (en Brasil, el sector energético y el de riego) explica en parte, en América Latina y el Caribe, la desatención a que ha estado sometido el sector agua con relación a las necesidades de todos los usos, tanto en cantidad como en calidad. En la actualidad, existe un proceso de cambio sobre el tema, resultado de la preocupación mundial al respecto, el que se expresa claramente en la documentación de la Reunión de Río 1992, en especial el Capítulo 18 de la Agenda 21 y los subdocumentos. Hay diversas iniciativas, algunas ya con avances significativos en América Latina y el Caribe, por modificar el modelo de gestión del agua para hacerlo integrado, descentralizado, autónomo, administrativo y financiero, y absolutamente multisectorial. Este modelo no es ajeno a los sistemas de gestión existentes en los países más avanzados, pero en la región donde la actualización del sector agrícola en la gestión del agua es aún preponderante el IICA debe ser un promotor de la gestión integrada multisectorial con miras a eventualmente continuar de actos importantes dentro del sistema de recursos hídricos en todo lo relacionado con la irrigación y, como un socio del sistema, en la gestión multisectorial. En Brasil se está implementando una nueva política de recursos hídricos. El IICA, que ha estado participando del proceso desde que empezó, ha estado trabajando en el sector en Brasil hace mas de 30 años. Por solicitación de las autoridades brasileñas el IICA/Brasil y la Dirección del Centro Regional Sur han incrementado su capacidad técnica y promovido diversos eventos entre workshop, seminarios, talleres, etc., culminando con la promoción, conjuntamente con la Secretaria de Recursos Hídricos, del Encuentro de las Aguas. En ese momento estamos por solicitud del Gobierno de la República Uruguay prestando nuestra cooperación a la organización del II Encuentro del Agua. Será el gran tema del próximo siglo. No debemos ni podemos limitar las discusiones. ____________________ *Director, Centro Regional Sur, Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura (IICA), Paraguay.

Video Presentation: The New Explorers

Nick Aumen

Narrator: Once we saw a swamp here and wanted to train it. We did a very effective job trying to control the Everglades, until we realized it was a miracle of nature, a river of grass, that supported a vast community of life, including fresh water that could support us. But it was too late. And now we’re spending millions of dollars to restore just a part of it. In this episode of “The New Explorers,” we travel to another wetland being threatened by the forces of industry, on the verge of making the same mistake. This wetland is in South America, the greatest in the world. We join a team of scientists who will survey, document and collect the evidence needed to prevent another mistake that can’t be reversed. As originally outlined, the Hidrovía would extend from Cáceres in Brazil to Nueva Palma in Uruguay. The project has the support of five governments, all of which see substantial benefits. But others see disaster for an area at the headwaters of the river called the Pantanal. It is the largest wetland in the world, as large as all of Great Britain, with the greatest concentration of wildlife in the New World. For years we have heard of the wonders of the Amazonian rain forest, while the Pantanal has remained almost a secret. The concern is that if the flow of water through the Paraguay River is increased, water levels in the Pantanal will drop and the flood plain will begin to dry out. And the world may well lose its largest wetland. The Hidrovía also threatens to bring development to the Pantanal. With all its destruction and pollution it could destroy a huge diversity of life supported by an enormous bank of fresh water. This is the real gold in the Pantanal. For those from the United States, the prospect of what might happen here is all too familiar. They have seen it before, almost 4,000 miles away from the Paraguay River, in the Florida Everglades. In recent years, the panther has become a symbol for all that has been lost in the Everglades, from the time it was much like the Pantanal, an enormous, unrestricted, wet wilderness. But in those days, many looked at the Everglades and saw a flood-prone swamp that needed to be controlled. And they called in the Army Corps of Engineers. (Movie clip from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “Waters of Destiny.”) “Then, as water shows its other face: hideous, unrelenting, streaking its rage, the vicious scourge of mankind, bearing life and land under its relentless and merciless grip. This is the story of such water and its mastery by the determined hand of man.” Narrator: To begin, a dam was put around the lake that fed the water to the swamp. Then 1,400 miles of canals were dug, 200 structures built to control the flow of water. By all accounts the project was a success. Movie clip from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: “Waters of Destiny” “Much has

been done. Central and southern Florida is no longer nature’s fool. The stooge for the impractical jokes of the elements, the stooge for the impractical jokes of the elements. . .” (repeats two times and fades out) Narrator: But today it is realized that the success of the 1950s came at enormous price. The Everglades is dying. It’s considered one of the most endangered ecosystems in the United States. Much of the land available for wildlife has been taken over by cities and agriculture. Along with the panthers, 90% of the wading birds of South Florida have disappeared. The remaining wildlife is threatened by toxic pollution, and there are serious concerns about the future supply of clean drinking water for growing cities. The parallels between what happened to the Everglades and what could happen to the Pantanal are striking. Both are stories about the manipulation of huge fresh-water systems to suit the plans of those who seek to control them. The difference is that in Paraguay scientists are working to prevent the damage before it begins. To get a real understanding of the life below the water, you have to journey down one of the few clear rivers in this part of the world. One of the most impressive is a river known as Monito, in the Pantanal in Brazil. It is unlike any river I’ve seen; with its abundance of fishes it’s almost like a coral reef. The spring that feeds this river bubbles through a limestone bottom that filters out the organic material that muddies other rivers. It provides a clear view of what a South American river is all about. In the entire Mississippi River basin, there are 360 species of fishes. In the large river basin in South America, there could be as many as 3,000, with more being discovered every year. In recent years, forests, not rivers, have been the focus of conservationists. But today, scientists have learned there’s an amazing connection between the forests and the fishes. In order for seeds to germinate, like those of rubber trees, they must first pass through the stomach of a fish. If we lose the fishes, we lose the forest. But that’s not all. Consider the importance of a fish like this, the enormous predator, the dorado. It’s among the fishes that could help feed the world. In the next 12 years, estimates are that the world will require 20 million more metric tons of food to come from oceans and rivers than are now produced. If we destroy rivers like this, where will that food come from? How many forests will be cut down to support the cattle that will make up for the loss? It is why the Aqua-Rap Expedition is so important. It is about teaching the world to value rivers for what they have to offer. Not to change them, divert them, to suit some other need, to simply recognize how dependent we are on rivers already. In many parts of the world, that lesson has been learned the hard way. Most notably, in the Florida Everglades. For more than a century, not many who came to South Florida understood the true value of the Everglades. Today it serves as a prime example of how our lack of appreciation for a system led to its near collapse. Only now, after the damage has been done, are scientists trying to understand its basic components in order to undertake the largest ecosystem restoration project in the world. In some parts of the park it’s possible to believe that this is as pristine as the Pantanal, because one of the most serious problems here is hard to recognize. It’s pollution,

runoff from agricultural fields that’s causing some plants to grow at alarming rates, suffocating the life around them. The predictions of scientists are not mere speculation. They know that if you destroy a flood plain, you destroy a river, because it’s happened time and again. And today around the world, as countries attempt to correct mistakes, a whole new science is being created, the science of river restoration. The textbooks are being written in South Florida on behalf of a river called the Kissimmee. People who remember say it was once a beautiful river. Meandering for more than 100 miles, it formed the headwaters of Lake Okeechobee that fed the Everglades. But damaging hurricane-induced floods led people to believe that the Kissimmee had to be controlled. And so it was dredged, straightened, just as the Río Paraguay would be under the Hidrovía. It took ten years, and by 1971, the Kissimmee was no longer a river. Without a flood plain to filter pollutants and to provide food for fishes, it had become a drainage ditch, known as C-38. Even before the construction was complete it was obvious that a terrible mistake had been made. Nick Aumen: “What we did was destroy thousands and thousands of acres of flood-plain wetlands with the construction of this canal. We eliminated habitat for wading birds, waterfowl, other fish and wildlife species. In fact, some of the estimates were that we lost over 90% of the wading bird and waterfowl use of this area just from the construction of the canal.” Narrator: The fight to restore the river began immediately, and in 1994 a test was made to fill in 1,000 feet of the canal, forcing the water into the old riverbed. It signaled a dramatic reversal of a major public works project, for the single purpose of giving nature a second chance. Since the restoration was first discussed, the goal has been to bring back the life of the old river. As we move down the newly flooded river channel, all indications are that life is finding its way back. Restoration came just in time. It’s clear that the Kissimmee is coming back, but at a tremendous cost. It took US$34 million to channelize the river. It will cost US$400 million to put back just one-third. And no one expects to get the old river back entirely. The lessons from the Kissimmee River have been heard around the world and certainly all the way down to the Paraguay River. The scientists on board the Don José are all acutely aware of what happened in South Florida, and they know how important it is to prevent it from happening here. Conservation biologist Jorgen Thomsen: “The best lesson of all is really to tamper as little as possible with these areas, make sure that they remain healthy. That means people will remain healthy; it means that our world, the way we live, will be a healthy living.” Narrator: The debate on the Hidrovía will undoubtedly continue for some time. And those in South Florida hope that the lessons of their experience will in some way be useful. Nick Aumen: “Well, I’m hoping that folks in Brazil and other parts of the world will look at the mistakes we’ve made. I think we’ve made a lot of mistakes in South Florida over the past 50 years and we’re now paying a pretty large price in order to undo some of those mistakes.”

Narrator: Maybe the lesson is that when you have an impact like this it’s very difficult to put it back together again. Ron Jones: “We’ll never put this back together again. This used to be four million acres, and we have less than two million now.” Jorgen Thomsen: “There are lots of these lessons, and yet we seem not to use those lessons when new projects are being created. And the main lesson here really is that you should maintain these ecosystems as intact as possible.”

GWP/SAMTAC La Visión Mundial Del Agua

Carlos A. Fernández-Jáuregui∗∗∗∗ CONTENIDO 1. Introducción 2. Objetivos 3. Organización 4. Plan de trabajo 5. Cómo se puede contribuir al desarrollo de la Visión en las Américas 6. Referencias Anexo: Desarrollo de escenarios futuros del agua en América Latina (v03) 1) INTRODUCCIÓN − Naciones Unidas encargó a un grupo de selectos profesionales en diferentes

disciplinas llevar a cabo un estudio sobre la identificación de los mayores problemas que tendrá que enfrentar la humanidad en el próximo siglo. En su informe (Glenn y Gordon, 1998), los autores identificaron que el segundo mayor problema y preocupación, después del incremento de la población, se localizó en la escasez de agua dulce.

− 1.200 millones de habitantes en países en desarrollo no tienen acceso al agua segura.

− 2.900 millones de habitantes no tienen servicios sanitarios adecuados.

− Mujeres y niños en África gastan aproximadamente 40.000 millones de horas al año − recogiendo agua de zonas alejadas.

− 4 millones de niños mueren cada año en el mundo por enfermedades relacionadas al agua

− 23 países en el mundo ya sufren escasez de recursos hídricos. Por otro lado, también debemos reconocer que: − El crecimiento de la población se reducirá en el futuro. − Se desarrollarán nuevas fuentes de energías alternativas y más baratas, reduciendo

los costos de desalinización.

∗ Miembro, Comité para la Visión del Agua de las Américas (CWVA).

− Los avances biotecnológicos pronto permitirán que la producción de alimentos utilice menos agua.

− La participación de las comunidades influirá mucho más en los gobernantes en la

toma de decisiones sobre inversiones en el sector hídrico. − La comunicación y el desarrollo de nuevos sistemas remotos permitirán identificar y

hacer seguimiento de precipitaciones para un uso óptimo. Todo lo anterior sumado a la implementación de los Principios de Dublín y el desarrollo de una cultura del agua con ética, nos permite pensar que hay una oportunidad notable para hacer un cambio radical de lo hecho en el pasado en lo relacionado con el agua. 2) OBJETIVOS La Visión Mundial del Agua ("la Visión a Largo Plazo del Agua, la Vida y el Medio Ambiente en el Siglo 21") pretende trasladarnos de donde estamos a una situación donde se pueda afrontar la demanda del agua en forma segura y sostenible. La Visión incluye un proceso de estudio, consulta y promoción que se prevé logre lo siguiente: − Desarrollar el conocimiento sobre lo que ha ocurrido en el mundo del agua a nivel

regional y global, así como otras acciones fuera del mundo del agua que afectarán el uso futuro de este recurso.

− Basado en este conocimiento, desarrollar consensos sobre la Visión del agua para el año 2025 con la participación de los especialistas en agua, tomadores de decisiones en el gobierno, sector privado y la sociedad civil.

− Desarrollar mayor conciencia sobre los problemas del agua entre la población en general y los tomadores de decisiones a fin de lograr el apoyo y liderazgo necesario para el ejercicio de la Visión.

− Utilizar el conocimiento y apoyo generado para contribuir al marco de acción desarrollado por la GWP (Sociedad Global del Agua).

3) ORGANIZACIÓN El ejercicio de la Visión utilizará tres tipos de consulta: − Consultas sectoriales − Consultas regionales − Consultas a través de redes de organigramas de diferente índole del sector hídrico Los elementos básicos de la Visión son: − La Comisión Mundial del Agua − Los paneles temáticos de expertos

− El panel para el desarrollo de escenarios − Los mecanismos de comunicación − Las consultas a través de redes existentes − Las consultas subsectoriales − Las consultas regionales − La participación de las comunidades organizadas: sociedad civil − Vínculos entre los componentes de la Visión

Julio 1998 Enero 1999 Julio 1999 Marzo 2000

Mensaje de la Visión

Escenarios de Referencia de la

Visión

Herramientas Integradas

Visiones de la

Visión

Visiones Subsectoriales

Implementación de la Visión

Enlace con Foro Mundial del Agua GWP

Visiones Regionales

Primera Ronda de Consultas

Contribución al Segundo Foro Mundial del Agua

Segunda Ronda de Consultas

4) ORGANIZACIÓN A NIVEL DE LAS AMÉRICAS − Se ha establecido un comité de coordinación compuesto por la OEA, UNESCO,

CATHALAC, Red Interamericana de Recursos Hídricos (RIRH) y GWP-SAMTAC (Comité Técnico Asesor para Sudamérica de la Sociedad Global del Agua), IICA, OPS, NAFTA, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) y WWC.

− Se dispone de un plan de acción que prevé el desarrollo de tres ejercicios por subregión:

− Visión subregional para Sudamérica (coordinado por GWP-SAMTAC) − Visión subregional para Norteamérica (coordinado por TLCAN-CEC) − Visión subregional para Mesoamérica (coordinado por CATHALAC) − Visión subregional para el Caribe (coordinado por CATHALAC)

− Se prevé el desarrollo de los siguientes escenarios:

− escenario convencional − escenario de crisis − escenario de desarrollo sustentable, y se consideraron las siguientes fuerzas − dinamizadoras: cambios demográficos, cambios económicos y financieros, cambios

tecnológicos, cambios ambientales, y cambios políticos 5) PLAN DE TRABAJO − Consulta regional: 25-27 marzo 1999, Panamá. Semana del Agua

− Presentación de la Visión − Presentación del primer borrador sobre el ejercicio a nivel subregional − Discusión del primer borrador sobre nuevas contribuciones al ejercicio

− Consultas subregionales: abril-mayo 1999 − Consulta regional: 25-28 mayo 1999, Santiago. Reunión PHI/LA/UNESCO

− Presentación del segundo borrador de las consultas subregionales − Discusión del segundo borrador a la Visión de las Américas

− Consulta regional: 15-18 junio 1999, Montevideo. Reunión IICA

− Presentación del tercer borrador − PreseDiscusión general de la Visión de las Américas con nuevas contribuciones − Presentación de los escenarios en las Américas

− Consulta mundial: agosto 1999, Estocolmo. Reunión GWP/WWC

− Presentación de los informes finales en borrador de las Visiones regionales − Homogeneización

− Presentación de la Visión para el año 2025: marzo 2000, La Haya 6) CÓMO SE PUEDE CONTRIBUIR AL DESARROLLO DE LA VISIÓN EN LAS

AMÉRICAS

− Participando en el desarrollo de las Visiones subregionales

− Agua potable y saneamiento − Seguridad alimentaría − Ecosistemas − Otros

− Apoyando el desarrollo de las Visiones para su subregión

− Soluciones deben originarse en la comunidad − Contribución de información y experiencias positivas y negativas

− Introducir en sus conferencias y talleres el concepto de la Visión

− Los organizadores de eventos están invitados a contribuir a la Visión con los resultados de sus actividades utilizando los medios de comunicación

− Los GWP/TAC pueden ampliar la información sobre los objetivos de la Visión en los eventos organizados a nivel nacional, subregional o regional

− ¿Cuál es la Visión de su organización o grupo de trabajo?

− Las comunidades, profesionales y sociedad civil están invitados a enviar su Visión del agua en su lugar de acción

− La Visión facilitará documentos de información para facilitar la discusión Bibliográfia

1) Water policy. World Water Vision. Jerome Delli Priscoli. Elsevier Science. 1(1998)115-122.

2) Proposal for the Vision in the Americas. GWP/SAMTAC, CATHALAC, UNESCO, OAS. 1998-99.

3) Proposal for the Vision in Mesoamerica and the Caribbean. GWP/SAMTAC, CATHALAC, UNESCO, OAS. 1998-99.

4) Proposal for the Vision in South America. GWP/SAMTAC, UNESCO. 1998. 5) El agua como fuente de conflictos: repaso de los focos de conflicto en el mundo. Carlos

A. Fernández-Jáuregui. UNESCO. Revista Afers (España). 1999. 6) Desarrollo de los escenarios futuros del agua en América Latina. Carlos A. Fernández-

Jáuregui. UNESCO-SEI. 1997-1999. 7) World Water Vision. Workplan 1998-2000. William Cosgrove and Frank Rijsberman.

Version 15/11/98.

ANEXO

ESCENARIO 1 A. Oferta de recursos hídricos = constante Aspectos institucionales = 60% disponible y actualizado Aspectos legislativos = 60% “ “ Balances hídricos superficiales = 90% “ “ Educación y formación = 90% “ “ Recursos humanos en hidrología = 90% “ “ Recursos humanos en hidrogeología = 90% “ “ Recursos humanos en áreas conexas = 60% “ “ Investigación y desarrollo = 100% “ “ Cooperación internacional = 70% “ “ Infraestructura física del sector hídrico = 60% “ B. Demanda de recursos hídricos = en aumento Crecimiento demográfico = 1,8 % (tasa anual de crecimiento) Población con acceso al agua potable = 80% Población con acceso al saneamiento = 66% Tierra cultivable = 6.8% de superficie total Tierra bajo riego = 11.8% de tierra cultivable Aridez total = 25,42% Am.S; 7,8% C.Am., 20,5%

Caribe Expectativa de vida = 70.7 años Tasa de alfabetización de adultos = 85.5% Población económicamente activa en agricultura = 55% Población económicamente activa en industria = 15% Población económicamente activa en servicios = 30% Mayor ciudad = 30% de la población urbana C. Desarrollo y aplicación de tecnologías = constante (sin innovación) Científicos y técnicos por 1000 hab. = 0.45% Centros de investig. en ciencias del agua = 53 Cursos de post grado en ciencias del agua = 26 (M.Sc. & Ph.D.) Publicaciones en ciencias del agua = 680 trabajos/año Proyectos de investigación e innovación tecnológica en ciencias del agua = 310/año Conclusiones − La población se incrementa 2/3 para el año 2025. − Estrés hídrico a nivel nacional en Perú, El Salvador, México, Honduras, Guatemala, Uruguay,

Paraguay

− Estrés hídrico en ciudades capitales o grandes ciudades: todas. − Déficit de recursos humanos especializados: toda la región − Déficit de centros de investigación: América del Sur y Central − Déficit de infraestructura física: toda la región − Déficit de publicaciones: toda la región − Déficit de desarrollo tecnológico: mayoría de los países − Aumento de costos de inversión para obras de infraestructura

ESCENARIO 2 A. Oferta de recursos hídricos = disminuye (en calidad-contaminación) Aspectos institucionales = 60% disponible y actualizado Aspectos legislativos = 60% “ “ Balances hídricos superficiales = 90% “ “ Educación y formación = 90% “ “ Recursos humanos en hidrología = 90% “ “ Recursos humanos en hidrogeología = 90% “ “ Recursos humanos en áreas conexas = 60% “ “ Investigación y desarrollo = 100% “ “ Cooperación internacional = 70% “ “ Infraestructura física del sector hídrico = 60% “ B. Demanda de recursos hídricos = en aumento Crecimiento demográfico = 1,8% (tasa anual de crecimiento) Población con acceso al agua potable = 80% Población con acceso al saneamiento = 66% Tierra cultivable = 6.8% de superficie total Tierra bajo riego = 11.8% de tierra cultivable Aridez total = 25,42% Am.S; 7,8% C.Am., 20,5

Caribe Expectativa de vida = 70.7 años Tasa de alfabetización de adultos = 85.5% Población económicamente activa en agricultura = 55% Población económicamente activa en industria = 15% Población económicamente activa en servicios = 30% Mayor ciudad = 30% de la población urbana C. Desarrollo y aplicación de tecnologías = constante (sin innovación) Científicos y técnicos por 1000 hab. = 0.45% Centros de investig. en ciencias del agua = 53 Cursos de postgrado en ciencias del agua = 26 (M.Sc. & Ph.D.) Publicaciones en ciencias del agua = 680 trabajos/año Proyectos de investigación e innovación

tecnológica en ciencias del agua = 310/año Conclusiones − La población se incrementa 2/3 para el año 2025 − Estrés hídrico a nivel nacional en: Perú, El Salvador, México, Honduras, Guatemala, Uruguay, Paraguay, Argentina, Ecuador, Costa Rica, Colombia − Estrés hídrico en grandes ciudades: todas − Déficit de recursos humanos especializados: toda la región − Déficit de centros de investigación: toda la región − Déficit de infraestructura física: toda la región − Déficit de publicaciones: toda la región − Déficit de desarrollo tecnológico: mayoría de los países − Mayor aumento de costos de inversión para obras de infraestructura

ESCENARIO 3 A. Oferta de recursos hídricos = disminuye (en calidad-contaminación) Aspectos institucionales = 60% disponible y actualizado Aspectos legislativos = 60% “ “ Balances hídricos superficiales = 90% “ “ Educación y formación = 90% “ “ Recursos humanos en hidrología = 90% “ “ Recursos humanos en hidrogeología = 90% “ “ Recursos humanos en áreas conexas = 60% “ “ Investigación y desarrollo = 100% “ “ Cooperación internacional = 70% “ “ Infraestructura física del sector hídrico = 60% “ B. Demanda de recursos hídricos = en aumento Crecimiento demográfico = 1,8% (tasa anual de crecimiento) Población con acceso al agua potable = 80% Población con acceso al saneamiento = 66% Tierra cultivable = 6.8% de superficie total Tierra bajo riego = 11.8% de tierra cultivable Aridez total = 25,42% Am.S; 7,8% C.Am.,20,5

Caribe Expectativa de vida = 70.7 años Tasa de alfabetización de adultos = 85.5% Pobl. económic. activa en agricultura = 55% Pobl. económic. activa en industria = 15% Pobl. económic. activa en servicios = 30% Mayor ciudad = 30% de la población urbana C. Desarrollo y aplicación de tecnologías = innovación acelerada

Científicos y técnicos por 1000 hab. = 0.45% Centros de investig. en ciencias del agua = 53 Cursos de postgrado en ciencias del agua = 26 (M.Sc. & Ph.D.) Publicaciones en ciencias del agua = 680 trabajos/año Proyectos de investigación e innovación tecnológica en ciencias del agua = 310/año Conclusiones − La población se incrementa 2/3 para el año 2025 − Estrés hídrico a nivel nacional en: Perú, El Salvador, México − Estrés hídrico en grandes ciudades: capitales de países con estrés hídrico y ciudades con más del 40% de la población urbana total − Déficit de recursos humanos especializados: en países con gasto público en educación inferior al 3% del PNB − Déficit de centros de investigación: en países con gasto público en educación inferior al 3% del PNB − Déficit en infraestructura física: en países con deuda externa superior al 60% del PNB − Déficit de publicaciones: en países con desarrollo humano bajo e intermedio − Aumento del desarrollo tecnológico en países con gasto público en educación superior al 4% del PNB − Reducción de costos de pre-inversión para obras de infraestructura

ESCENARIO 4

A. Oferta de recursos hídricos = constante Aspectos institucionales = 60% disponible y actualizado Aspectos legislativos = 60% “ “ Balances hídricos superficiales = 90% “ “ Educación y formación = 90% “ “ Recursos humanos en hidrología = 90% “ “ Recursos humanos en hidrogeología = 90% “ “ Recursos humanos en áreas conexas = 60% “ “ Investigación y desarrollo = 100% “ “ Cooperación internacional = 70% “ “ Infraestructura física del sector hídrico = 60% “ B. Demanda de recursos hídricos = en aumento Crecimiento demográfico = 1,8% (tasa anual de crecimiento) Población con acceso al agua potable = 80% Población con acceso al saneamiento = 66% Tierra cultivable = 6.8% de superficie total Tierra bajo riego = 11.8% de tierra cultivable Aridez total = 25,42% Am.S; 7,8% C.Am., 20,5

Caribe

Expectativa de vida = 70.7 años Tasa de alfabetización de adultos = 85.5% Pobl. económic. activa en agricultura = 55% Pobl. económic. activa en industria = 15% Pobl. económic. activa en servicios = 30% Mayor ciudad = 30% de población urbana C. Desarrollo y aplicación de tecnologías = innovación acelerada Científicos y técnicos por 1000 hab. = 0.45% Centros de investig. en ciencias del agua = 53 Cursos de post grado en ciencias del agua = 26 (M.Sc. & Ph.D.) Publicaciones en ciencias del agua = 680 trabajos/año Proyectos de investigación e innovación tecnológica en ciencias del agua = 310/año Conclusiones La población se incrementa 2/3 para el año 2025. Estrés hídrico a nivel nacional en: Perú, El Salvador. Estrés hídrico en grandes ciudades: capitales de países con estrés hídrico y ciudades con más del 50% de la población urbana total Déficit de recursos humanos especializados: en países con gasto público en educación inferior al 3% del PNB. Déficit de centros de investigación: en países con gasto público en educación inferior al 3% del PNB. Déficit en infraestructura física: en países con deuda externa superior al 60% del PNB. Déficit de publicaciones: en países con desarrollo humano bajo e intermedio. Aumento del desarrollo tecnológico en países con gasto público en educación superior al 4% del PNB. Reducción de costos de pre-inversión para obras de infraestructura.

ESCENARIO 5

A. Oferta de recursos hídricos = disminuye (en calidad y cantidad) Aspectos institucionales = 60% disponible y actualizado Aspectos legislativos = 60% “ “ Balances hídricos superficiales = 90% “ “ Educación y formación = 90% “ “ Recursos humanos en hidrología = 90% “ “ Recursos humanos en hidrogeología = 90% “ “ Recursos humanos en áreas conexas = 60% “ “ Investigación y desarrollo = 100% “ “ Cooperación internacional = 70% “ “ Infraestructura física del sector hídrico = 60% “

B. Demanda de recursos hídricos = en aumento Crecimiento demográfico = 1,8 % (tasa anual de crecimiento) Población con acceso al agua potable = 80% Población con acceso al saneamiento = 66% Tierra cultivable = 6.8% de superficie total Tierra bajo riego = 11.8% de tierra cultivable Aridez total = 25,42% Am.S; 7,8% C.Am., Caribe

20,5 Expectativa de vida = 70.7 años Tasa de alfabetización de adultos = 85.5% Pobl. económic. activa en agricultura = 55% Pobl. económic. activa en industria = 15% Pobl. económic. activa en servicios = 30% Mayor ciudad = 30% de población urbana C. Desarrollo y aplicación de tecnologías = disminuye (reducción de la actividad innovadora) Científicos y técnicos por 1000 hab. = 0.45% Centros de investig. en ciencias del agua = 53 Cursos de postgrado en ciencias del agua = 26 (M.Sc. & Ph.D.) Publicaciones en ciencias del agua = 680 trabajos/año Proyectos de investigación e innovación tecnológica en ciencias del agua = 310/año Conclusiones − La población se incrementa 2/3 para el año 2025 − Estrés hídrico a nivel nacional en: Perú, El Salvador, México, Honduras, Guatemala, Uruguay, Paraguay, Argentina, Ecuador, Costa Rica, Colombia, Brasil − Estrés hídrico en grandes ciudades: todas en la región − Déficit de recursos humanos especializados: toda la región − Déficit de centros de investigación: toda la región − Déficit en infraestructura física: toda la región − Déficit de publicaciones: toda la región − Déficit de desarrollo tecnológico: mayoría de los países − Incremento sostenido de los costos de inversión para todo tipo de obras de infraestructura y altos costos de operación.

ROUNDTABLE SESSION I

Guaranteeing Water for São Paulo

Stela Goldenstein∗∗∗∗

The conflict over water resources has been a long-standing issue in governmental spheres in Brazil, including the state of São Paulo. The Constitution correctly stipulates the priority that water should be used to supply the public. The government of the state of São Paulo, during this administration, in order to guarantee this priority, established a macro-strategy to protect and recover the watersheds and the water production capacity of these areas. The critical situation in the areas of the watersheds is a result of the failure of traditional urban planning procedures over the past 20 years, as a result of the various incongruent sectoral policies on urban planning and the related social and material impact. Today there are approximately one and a half million persons living in these areas. They are not only violating the law regarding the protection of watersheds (see maps), but they are also living without any infrastructure whatsoever. Furthermore, all the national statistics about the housing deficit, the number of houses that should be built, the amount of money that should be invested, ignore this segment of the population. From the point of view of housing policies, at all government levels, these people are not classified as "homeless," since they are living somewhere. The pressure for new--and always insufficient--investments is so great that the decision on a specific policy to remove and relocate them has always been postponed. Is there government money that could cover the expense in a consistent manner, to remove and relocate a population of this size? Obviously not. How can this problem be faced? What strategy should be proposed? Removing a population this size is impossible, and it would be irresponsible to grant the settlers amnesty for invading the watershed areas. Since the year 1995 we have been acting aggressively to prevent the problem from increasing. This government has adopted firm measures, initially to prohibit connecting water pipes and electricity in the areas illegally occupied, guaranteeing that public services will not be used that may induce or stimulate the irregular occupation of the watershed areas. The purpose of this is to make drinking water available in quality and quantity. The government did not choose an easy formula to meet specific and isolated demands, such as the urbanization of a neighborhood or to carry out work projects in specific areas or neighborhoods that are not appropriate for the sustainability of the region as a whole. Thus, it is difficult to identify in this administration of the state of São Paulo any similarity with the historic and systematic connivance among government bodies, their leaders, and real-estate speculators, which together with the short-sighted vision of sector policies, induced and encouraged the population to occupy these watersheds irregularly decade after decade. The second step was to work toward a new law that serves the social interests of the greater São

∗ São Paulo State Secretary of Environment, Brazil.

Paulo area, a contingent of approximately 17 million persons, threatened by the shortage of water. The Watershed Law was approved by the State Legislature after being debated in nearly 200 public hearings, in Watershed Basin Committees, in the Council of Water Resources, and in the State Environment Council (CONSEMA). It was without any doubt one of the most publicly debated laws in the history of the state of São Paulo. With the new legislation, a direct link has been established between the definitions of the norms for land use and the urban standard with a decentralized management for each watershed basin, which had been previously defined by the Integrated System for Water Resource Management. Representatives of São Paulo State, municipal governments, and the public at large participate in the water resource management committees. This is an innovative mechanism of fundamental importance because it brings the community and the users of water resources together to participate in the decisions regarding the production of water in the region, as well as defining the restrictions to be imposed and the mutual commitments to make feasible the applicability of these restrictions and, consequently, the availability of adequate water resources. The specific laws for each watershed protection and recovery area represent significant progress because they expedite better quality treatment for each subbasin or series of subbasins for the production of water, taking into consideration the problems and characteristics of each region. The law's most immediate measure to repair the damage caused to the watersheds over the decades of abandonment is the Emergency Recovery Plan, since in certain areas of the basin the environmental and sanitary conditions represent risks to life and health. Far from representing an amnesty to the occupants of the area, this Plan, prepared on the basis of 383 proposals presented by 26 municipal governments of the greater São Paulo region, will only permit infrastructure works that help to improve the situation of the watersheds. The law will in no way whatsoever permit legalizing the documentation of land titles or deeds of these areas, as the last-minute critics of the law claimed in trying to amend it. The law not only does not legalize the irregular operation of these areas, it especially does not legalize the occupation of areas of risk, areas near reservoirs, creek bottoms, etc. The plan was debated in four public hearings in Diadema, Embu-Guaçu, São Paulo, and Santo André, in the City Council of ABC, and in the Citizens, Forum of ABC. At each meeting from 900 to 1,900 persons were present. The process of setting up the law was always clear and transparent. Billings Reservoir is the natural resource of the Government of São Paulo State for supplying water to the metropolitan region. Facing a chronic shortage, we have sought water in regions that are further and further away, with increasing environmental, financial, and social costs. A good example is the region of Campinas, whose growth has been affected because 67% of its water resources have been diverted to supply the needs of the greater São Paulo area since the decade of the 80s. In 1997, the government of the state set up the Program for Environmental Recovery of the Billings Basin, setting the needs of the population as top priority for the use of the watershed. The guidelines and goals of the Program were based on a broad program of public hearings that involved all the segments of the population in the various municipalities in the region.

The program covers all the environmental aspects of the Basin and also outside of its geographic limits. The measures on a metropolitan scale include new operational rules to reduce the pumping of water from the Rio Pinheiros to Billings, a plan for macro-draining, and the lowering of the riverbed of the Tietê River. Within the limits of the Basin, the measures seek to control the occupation of these areas by intensifying decentralized inspection procedures. Especially important is the relocation of towns located in risk areas, areas around the reservoirs, and areas of environmental protection. The project also defines the areas that are subject to being officialized as non-irregular urban areas. Fundamentally, the project understands that the reservoirs, rather than being a burden for the municipalities where they are located, are a great asset that can leverage development, revenue, and jobs, especially in the service sectors (leisure, hotels, education) and environmental recovery. The Billings Project, which is already partially implemented, involves 1.25 billion reals, of which approximately 550 million has already been identified in various programs of depolluting and lowering the bed of the Tietê River, among others. Another 700 million is being identified by the Government of São Paulo State. The Secretary of Environment (USMA) is discussing the possibility of a 350 million loan with the Inter-American Development Bank. The remaining funds should be made available by the federal, state, and municipal governments. Throughout this process, the participation of the population is essential. The renewal of audit and inspection mechanisms by various social segments that are affected by the problem and the efficacy of the measures must replace the traditional evaluations of performance, which merely check the physical and financial progress of the project for which the funds are allocated.

METROPOLITAN REGION OF SÃO PAULO

Situation of the municipalities, according to the annual geometric São Paulo Metropolitan area Situation of the districts, according to annual geometric growth rate, 1996/1991 A P M (Watershed Protection Area) A P M (Watershed Protection Area) A P M (Watershed Protection Area) less than 0% from 0 - 2% from 2 - 4% from 4 - 6%

MUNICIPALITY OF SÃO PAULO

Situation of the districts according to the annual geometric growth rate, 1996/1991 less than 0% from 0 - 2% from 2 - 4% from 4 - 6% greater than 6% ______limit of APM (Watershed Protection Area)

Post-Nafta Environmental Management In The U.S.-Mexico Border Region: Openness, Sustainability, and public participation∗∗∗∗

Robert G. Varady, Lenard Milich, and Rachael E. Ingallττττ

International borders are often tinderboxes, places where conflicts incubate and hostilities erupt. The last few decades, for instance, have witnessed numerous wars and border disputes brought on by ethnic conflict, growing populations, and competition for resources. Natural resource and environmental management is particularly problematic in border areas. Many political borders apportion natural systems to two or more nations, imposing different and sometimes conflicting management regimes on holistic systems. In addition, borders often provide incentives for the uncontrolled exploitation of resources. Water is one of the resources that are most prone to lead to transboundary environmental problems and conflicts. Not only is water a vital commodity, but more than 300 river basins—accounting for nearly 50 percent of Earth’s land surface—are shared by two or more countries. Underscoring the tensions that divided basins engender, nearly 300 international treaties have been adopted for the purpose of avoiding conflicts over water.1

Existing analyses of such treaties tend to be academic and legalistic, ignoring the specifics of place and the tensions among the parties to these accords. Comprehensive examinations of the ways in which international river basins are actually managed are markedly lacking. As a result, the conclusions rarely mesh with observations on the ground.2 This article examines six river-basin compacts, taking into account both their geographical and their historical contexts and each signatory’s values and customs. On the basis of this examination, the authors then draw some general lessons for the successful management of shared river basins. The article then turns to what is arguably the most promising agreement to date, a new transboundary authority created by Mexico and the United States as a consequence of the North

∗ This article is based on a study of environmental policy along the U.S.-Mexican border that the Udall Center for Studies in Public has been conducting since 1989. The study is made possible by generousgrants from the Ford Foundation and the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation. The authors are also indebted to Helen Ingram, Warmington Endowed Chair in the Social Ecology of Peace and International Cooperation at the University of California at Irvine, for her invaluable contributions. *Various versions of the present paper by Milich and Varady have appeared in much longer forms as "Openness, Sustainability, and Public Participation: New Designs for Transboundary River-Basin Institution," Journal of Environment and Development, September 1999, pp. 258-305; and "Managing Transboundary Resources: Lessons from River-Basin Accords," Environment, vol. 10-15, October 1998, pp. 35-41. τRobert Varady is deputy director and director of environmental programs at the Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy at the University of Arizona. Lenard Milich is a program officer at the United Nations World Food Programme Indonesia and a visiting scholar at the Udall Center. Rachel Ingall is a gradute student in Latin American studies at the University by Professor Varady. 1See P. Rogers, "Economic and Institutional Issues: International River Basins," in G. Moigne, et al. (eds.), Country Expericience with Water Resources Management: Economic, Institutional Technological, and Institutional Issues, Washington, D.C., World Bank, 1996 (World Bank Technical Paper N° 331). 2For a good study in this area, see S.C. McCaffery, "Water, Politics, and International Law," in P.H. Gleick, (ed.), Water in Crisis: A Guide to the World's Fresh Water Resources, New York, Oxford, 1993 pp. 92.

American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).While river-basin accords are but one type of environmental instrument, focusing on them is highly informative for two reasons. First, these accords best exemplify the competing values involved in the management of natural resources—conflict versus cooperation, openness versus secrecy, established cabals versus public values, use versus environmental protection, overallocation versus conservation, and sustainabilty versus immediate economic gain. Second, such accords were among the first to address transboundary resource issues, and as a result they are the most capable of offering general lessons to resource managers and political leaders. SIX ACCORDS This section takes a brief look at six river basin accords that highlight many of the competing values listed above. The Rhine Commissions The Rhine flows through six countries (Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Austria, Germany, France, and the Netherlands) and has tributary rivers that pass through two others (Belgium and Luxembourg). Two commissions regulate the river, and yet it continues to suffer heavily from pollution, partly as a result of their shortcomings.3 The first, the Central Commission for the Navigation of the Rhine, established in 1815 by the Congress of Vienna to deal with matters concerning navigation, can only tackle pollution problems that stem from that source. The second, the International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine against Pollution, created in 1963 to overcome this limitation, directly addresses the issue of the Rhine’s pollution and yet has two considerable limitations. First, it has no independent power: it cannot even consider an issue unless it is authorized to do so by the signatory governments. Second, its mandate is impeded by the Central Commission, which retains jurisdiction over navigation-related pollution issues, thus creating situations where the actions of the two commissions conflict. The result is a cacophony of voices and a weak governance system that is incapable of formulating and enforcing water-quality standards. The Danube Declaration The Danube Basin includes portions of 17 countries, the principal ones being Germany, Austria, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Yugoslavia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Moldova, and Ukraine.4 Two agreements have been important for the river’s management. _______________________ 3See J. A. Van Ast, "Environmental Aspects of the Rhine River," in J.M. van Dunne (ed.), Transboundary Pollution and Liability: The Case of the Rhine River, Rotterdam, Institute of Environmental Damages, Erasmus University, 1991, pp. 131. 4Central European University, "The Danube Basin Information Network."

The first, the Danube Commission, created in 1948 by the Danube Convention, maintains safe navigation and has performed hydrologic services, tackled flood-control problems, and sponsored hydroelectric plants, but pays only limited attention to questions of sanitation and inspection of pollutant levels. The second, the Danube Declaration, is a nonbinding agreement reached in 1986 by representatives from the eight countries through which the Danube then flowed, declaring a willingness to cooperate in its management, especially on the mounting problems of water pollution.5 Two aspects of these agreements have proved problematic. First, although the Danube Declaration is the first step toward an ecosystem-based management approach, both agreements contain the expectation that all antipollution measures will focus on only two (or perhaps a small cluster of) countries rather than being integrated and comprehensive efforts. However, such bilateral and multilateral agreements are difficult to achieve given the cultural, political, and economic diversity of the nations through which the Danube flows. Second, there is no agreement on what the water quality ought to be or how it should be tested, and there is no authoritative scientific body with jurisdiction over the entire basin engaging in policy-related research or offering advice on which aspects of the river should have priority in the decision-making process. Thus, although the Danube Declaration represents an important step forward, like its predecessors it suffers from Europe's longstanding tendency to forge agreements behind closed doors, excluding public participation in any form, even that of lower-level governments with an obvious interest in the proceedings. The Finnish-Swedish Frontier Rivers Commission The Finnish-Swedish Frontier Rivers Commission (FSFRC) was created by the Boundary Waters Agreement of 1971 and has jurisdiction over a 75,000 km² area along the Torneälven River and its tributaries, borderland lakes, and part of the Gulf of Bothnia.6 It is responsible for managing these waters for the benefit of both countries while effectively promoting the interests of the local area and is specifically mandated to balance the interests of the public and the environment against those of polluters. FSFRC has been relatively effective in meeting its responsibilities, principally because only two countries are involved, their environmental regulations have largely been harmonized, and the commission has strong regulatory and enforcement tools. Nonetheless, it is clearly controlled by the numerous technical and regulatory agencies of the two nations. While not an issue in this case, similar regulatory approaches elsewhere have tended to minimize local concerns and values, applying national standards that may be irrelevant. However, despite its successes, FSFRC may soon be terminated, which would leave local governments in charge of environmental matters in the border region, with only loose oversight at the national level.

5 J. Linneroot, “The Danube Riber Basin: Negotiating Settlements to Transboundary Enviromental Issues,” Natural Resourses Journal, vol. 30, no. 3, 1990, p. 629. 6 See M. Fitzmaurice, “The Finish-Swedish Frountier Rivers Commission,” Hague Yearbook of International Law. no. 5, 1992, p. 33.

The Plan of Action for the Zambezi The Zambezi River Basin comprises all or part of eight countries (Zambia, Angola, Namibia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Tanzania, Botswana, and Malawi). In May 1995, these countries and three others that lie outside the Basin (Lesotho, South Africa, and Swaziland) adopted a broad plan of action for the Zambezi (ZACPLAN) to coordinate the use and level of the basin's resources. To implement this plan, the participating countries created the Zambezi River Basin Commission (ZRBC). This commission consists of the heads of state (who meet biannually to set policy), a council of ministers (which meets annually to monitor operations), an executive directorate responsible for day-to-day operations, and a coordinating unit responsible for coordinating intercountry activities on the river and its tributaries.7 ZACPLAN has several drawbacks: it is very much a top-down agreement; its focus on activities in 36 economic sectors, including energy, water, agriculture, animal husbandry, fisheries, forestry, transportation, and industry, is overambitious; and the pursuit of goals in so many areas may lead to institutional weakening due to inadequate funding. The Plata Basin Treaty In 1969, the five countries that share the Río de la Plata Basin (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay) adopted the Plata Basin Treaty, thus establishing a coordinating committee and providing the first framework for integrated development among these nations. The treaty is essentially an agreement to cooperate in a number of areas rather than a point-by-point directive. Such an agreement indicates that the signatories were unwilling to undertake more substantive obligations, instead confining themselves to an institutional coordination mechanism through which a framework for conflict resolution could be established. The Plata Basin Treaty uses a classic top-down, diplomatic approach and incorporates diverse types of instruments and tools to achieve its aims. It may be credited with avoiding open conflicts among countries and easing the construction of hydroelectric dams on international rivers. Nevertheless, it remains institutionally weak, for it has only limited capacity to regulate and to enforce its decisions. The Niger Basin Authority In 1964, nine West African countries (Guinea, Côte d'Ivoire, Mali, Niger, Upper Volta [now called Burkina Faso], Dahomey [now called Benin], Nigeria, Cameroon, and Chad) formed the Niger River Commission to collect and analyze basic hydrological data. In 1980, the commission was reorganized as the Niger Basin Authority and its mandate was extended to ensuring the integrated development of the basin and formulating a regional policy for both surfacewater and groundwater.8

7 See M. M. Tawfik, Integrated Management of Transboundary Fresh Water resources: Problems and Projects, Addis Ababa, United Nations Economic Comission for Africa, 1996 (ECA/MRAG/96/19/TP); and T.Maluwa, “Toward an Internationalization of the Zambezi River Regime: The Role of International Law in the Common Management of an International Watercourse”, Comparative and International Law Journal, vol. 25, no. 1, 1992, p.20. 8 See Tawfik, op.cit.

However, the Authority has been unable to formulate a coherent master plan. National governments may voice support for such plans, but their actions remain purely domestic.9 Complicating matters was a serious disagreement over the requirement that financial contributions to the Authority be equal. As a result, when economic difficulties followed the 1994 devaluation of Francophone West Africa's common currency at the same time that massive inflation plagued Nigeria, members ceased to fund the Authority, rendering it to all intents and purposes moribund. Only very recently has the United Nations Environment Programme laid firm plans among member states to strengthen the Authority's institutional capacity. It is unclear, however, whether such plans will be able to accommodate the imbalances in size and power among the member states or to advance regional cooperation when (occasional) acute conflicts break out. LESSONS SO FAR In one way or another, all of the international river-basin accords discussed above have significant drawbacks. An analysis of these accords suggests six common failings: They tend to be "top-down" in nature. That is, policy decisions are usually made in national capitals and rarely consider the needs, desires, and aspirations of those affected by them. This complicates the implementation of agreements: goals are often poorly chosen and the people or organizations in charge of implementation generally lack the capacity and motivation to be effective. There is little public participation in the decision-making process. In keeping with the top-down nature of international agreements, negotiations over river basins are usually restricted to high-level diplomats (often assisted by technocrats and perhaps military officials as well). Few transnational environmental accords accommodate, let alone encourage, formal participation by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), community-based organizations, or other spokespersons for public interests. The accords often reflect political and economic imbalances among the participating members. As a result, they can be stymied by a powerful party's refusal to act in good faith. In the case of the Danube Commission, for example, the former Soviet Union exercised its influence (and its doctrinaire position on West Berlin) by refusing to allow West Germany to become a full member. Implementation is often inadequately provided for. The implementation of river-basin accords is generally left to the discretion of the parties rather than being unequivocally written into the agreements. The accords often frequently betray a scientific or technical bias. River-basin accords are frequently driven by development or navigation needs. As a result, the commissions that manage

9 M S. Gould and F. A. Zobrist, “An Overview of Water Resourses planning in West Africa,” World Development, vol.17, no. 11, 1989, p. 1717.

them are often staffed by engineers and technocrats, both of whom are prone to underestimate their sociocultural, economic, and public-health consequences. The accords tend to adopt an inflexible regulatory approach. The trend in international environmental agreements has been toward numerical standards and strict regulation of pollution. Even in the United States, however, uniform national standards fit local conditions quite poorly. For example, most people would want the air in national parks to meet a higher standard than that in urban areas. The management of transboundary resources has suffered from these six drawbacks—particularly those related to the dominance of national governments—for nearly 150 years. Today, however, national hegemony may be quietly giving way to multiple interests. In an era of instantaneous global communication, decisions made in distant capitals often seem capricious, arbitrary, and irrelevant to the inhabitants of border regions. Yet abandoning common intra- and international interests in favor of local control of natural resources and the environment may well result in the dominance of parochial interests that have no regard for sustainability. A new model is needed, one that judiciously combines local needs with multinational environmental security. The first significant attempt at achieving such a union has been in effect along the U.S.-Mexican border since 1994: the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) that grew out of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). As detailed in the next section, this commission may prove to be a superior model for international cooperation. THE BORDER ENVIRONMENT COOPERATION COMMISSION The 3,140-km (1,965-mile) border separating the United States and Mexico (see Figure 1), two nations with distinct cultures and histories, has at various times served as an outpost of nationalism, a barrier, and a point of conflict, and yet it has also been a line of contact and cooperation. Despite vast differences between the United States and Mexico, common physiographic features and ecosystems, longstanding kinship and cultural ties, and historically interdependent economies characterize the border region. Indeed, while the relationship between Washington D.C., and Mexico City has often been “fragile,”10 harsh frontier life has tended to foster cooperation rather than antagonism in the border zone itself.11 Water, however, has been a troublesome issue, given its scarcity in much of the border region. In particular, competition over two major rivers, the Rio Grande (Río Bravo in Mexico) and the Colorado, has been intense.12 As a result, three major agreements regulating water supply to Mexico have been reached during this century. In 1906, the Mexican and U.S. governments signed a treaty formalizing the United States' obligation to deliver 60,000 acre-feet of water from 10E. Williams, “ A Political Perspective: from Fragility to Creativity,” in V. K. Pvlakovich and M. A. Worden (eds.), Free Trade: Arizona at the Crossroads, Phoenix, Arizona Town Hall, 1992 p. 45. 11Examples of such cooperation are given in H. Ingram, L. Milich, and R. G. Varady, “ Managing Transboundary Resources: Lessons from Ambos Nogales ”, Evironment, May 1994, p. 6. See also H. Ingram, N. K Lanely and D. M. Gillilan, Divided Waters: Bridging the U. S-Mexico Border, Tucson, University of Arizona Press, 1995. 12 See R. Sanchez, “ Water Conflicts between Mexico and the United States: Towards a Regional Water Market?” in E. J Haan and E. Brands (eds.), The Scarcity of Water: International, European and Legal Aspects, London, Kluwer International, 1997, p. 260.

the upper Rio Grande Basin to Mexico each year; in 1922, seven U.S. states signed the Colorado River Compact, thus accepting responsibility for supplying water to Mexico; and in 1944, concern that these seven states were sucking the Colorado dry led to a treaty requiring the United States to provide 1.5 million acre-feet of water from the river to Mexico.13 However, the 1944 treaty made no mention of water quality, and the post-irrigation return flow, now heavy with dissolved salts, is decimating the wetlands at the river's delta, severely impairing the ecology of the upper portion of the Gulf of California, reducing agricultural yields, and salinizing irrigated lands. A New Policy Direction In late 1993, a radical change occurred in U.S.-Mexican relations: along with Canada, these two countries signed the North American Free Trade Agreement, removing most tariffs and other barriers to the flow of goods and services throughout the continent.14 To complement that treaty, environmentalists obtained two important sets of agreements addressing environmental concerns—the trinational Environmental Side Agreements and a special agreement between the United States and Mexico. For the first time anywhere, these instruments link environmental sustainability and economic development--a linkage called for by the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development but never before actually attempted. Such linkage is especially important along the U.S.-Mexican border because development of the region's economy will require sizable investment in environmental infrastructure (such as water-delivery systems and wastewater treatment plants) to assure residents a clean, safe, and healthy environment. The special agreement between the United States and Mexico established two binational organizations that operate solely within the border region. The first, the Border Environment Cooperation Commission, is responsible for certifying proposed environmental infrastructure projects. The second, the North American Development Bank (NADB), helps to fund those projects through public-private loan programs.15 BECC is unique among the institutions stemming from international accords in that it avoids most of the pitfalls outlined in the previous section. It does this both through its structure—particularly the provisions for public participation in the decision making process--and through its fundamentally different approach. BECC is governed by a binational 10-member board of directors comprising a high proportion of nonfederal and nontechnical representatives. By law, the board has to include the two commissioners (both certified engineers—one from the United States and one from Mexico) of the International Boundary and Water Commission; the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; and her Mexican counterpart, the Secretary of Environment, Natural 13 See P. L. Fradklin, A River No More: The Colorado River and the West, 2d ed., Berkeley, University of California Press, 1996; A. E. Utton, “ Mexican International Waters, in R. E. Beck (ed.), Waters and Rights Management Study: Upper Rio Grande Basin, Report to the Western Water Policy Revew Advisory Commission Springfield, National Technical Information Service. 14 The full text of NAFTA may be found at Trade Compass, “North American Free Trade Agreement.” 15 For more information on the roles of NADB and BECC, see H. Ingram, R. G. Varady, and L. Milich, “Enhancing Transboundary Environmental Policy: Some Principles for the New Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC)”, Initiative, vol. 7, no. 1 (Winter 1994-95), p. 8; and R. G. Varady, D. Colnic, R. Merideth, and T. Sprouse, The Journal of Borderlands Studies, vol. 11, no. 2, (1996), p. 89.

Resources, and Fisheries. The other members are people affiliated with private organizations and state and local governments. Thus, the scientific-technical-engineering point of view is complemented and counterbalanced by the viewpoints of environmental agencies, while local involvement helps to avoid excessive centralization. Furthermore, BECC is unusual among international organizations in that its charter makes explicit provision for public participation. The program is designed so that project requests to the board originate at the grassroots level, that is, among affected communities themselves, while the commission must also ensure public access to all documents relating to proposed projects and provide opportunities for public comment. In this regard, the commission is aided by BECCnet, an Internet-based discussion group open to all members of the public that has influenced decision-making on a number of occasions.16 When the commission failed to adhere to self-imposed guidelines for a forthcoming meeting, for instance, e-mail protests were so numerous that the directors rescheduled the meeting. Similarly, at another meeting, the chairman gaveled the proceedings closed before allowing public comment; the cascade of protests on BECCnet led to a public apology and a binding modification of the procedures for such comment. Significantly, BECC's emphasis on public participation is paired with a commitment to openness. The board meets quarterly at various sites in the border region (most often in Ciudad Juárez or El Paso), and thus far the only barrier to attendance seems to have been geographical distance. Attendees have witnessed open discussions that were remarkably free of hidden agendas, secrets, and manipulation. Decisions are never final until voted on publicly—and then only after public input, questions, and discussion. On several occasions, projects thought to be all but approved were sent back for redesign following the public-comment period. Finally, BECC's approach stresses flexibility and capacity building rather than adherence to strict regulatory standards. In response to their pressing need for enhanced infrastructure, border communities have begun to hold open meetings to establish priorities for project proposals. BECC is supporting this process by furnishing technical and financial aid to economically disadvantaged communities, thereby providing them with the resources to prepare sound proposals. Largely as a result of this support, many communities are beginning to articulate unmet needs for the first time. Frequently their most immediate needs are for a physical plant of some sort and the financial base to assure its long-term operation. But the projects approved to date have also entailed significant investments in human capital, especially the training of environmental managers. This is an integral part of the commission's broader purpose, which is to promote sustainable development through its project decisions. While the BECC process (as it has evolved) provides an unprecedented opportunity for public comment and influence, it cannot wholly overcome established imbalances of power. The communities in which projects are to be built are usually poor, and in Mexico especially there is little tradition of environmental activism at the local level. Project proponents, by contrast, have strong ties to government, party politics, and finance. BECC attempts to alleviate this imbalance by providing technical assistance to needy but technically inexperienced communities. Still, the gulf between the advantaged and disadvantaged sectors in both countries remains wide. The 16 BECCnet’s address is BECCnet@listserv.arizona.edu. It was developed and is maintained by the Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy at the University of Arizona in Tucson.

position of affected residents and their representatives may be further compromised when the projects actually become operational. The monitoring of compliance with design criteria has yet to be tested, and the role of the public at large during implementation is similarly unclear. But to judge by nearly five years of good-faith operation, there is reason to expect a continuation of strong public influence. BECC as a Model The emergence of new environmental institutions in the U.S.-Mexican border region is a large transnational experiment, one that recognizes that sustainable development requires linking economic prosperity with other quality-of-life goals: to achieve one without the other is neither practicable nor equitable. Although BECC is new, it has shown great promise in focusing on the needs and ambitions of border residents in following a path toward sustainable development, in offering a viable and dynamic alternative to diplomatic decision-making, in shifting the world's focus away from purely engineering-based solutions, and in beginning to promote a vision of social equity. While different situations clearly call for different solutions, there is reason to believe that the model's roots—openness, transparency, capacity-building, and bottom-up design, all in the context of sustainable development—could take hold in other border areas.

1. Reallocation Of Water In The Western United States: Legal Issues

Olen Paul Matthews∗∗∗∗ BACKGROUND For the past 20 years water law in the western United States has been in a period of transition. These changes reflect new societal values that were relatively unimportant when the law developed. During this formative period, economic development was the driving force on the arid and semi-arid frontier. The goal of many was to completely consume the water so that none was left in streams and rivers. Today, the needs of urban areas and concerns about the environment are changing the way westerners view water use. The need for reallocation has become evident. In the 1800s, when the U.S. frontier was moving westward, the federal government was largely silent about how water should be allocated between competing users. This silence allowed each state to develop its own water allocation law. In the eastern states water was considered to be private property, held in common by all the landowners with land adjacent to the water source. Under this “riparian” right, water could only be used on the landowner’s adjacent land and could not be taken out of the watershed. A current water use could be terminated if another riparian owner had a more important use. The eastern riparian -rights doctrine was inappropriate for the West, where scarce water resources needed to be moved long distances in order for economic development to occur. Also, the need to protect infrastructure investments meant that title to the water right had to have long-term security, which was not provided by the riparian-rights doctrine. The result was an allocation system called the appropriation doctrine. The appropriation doctrine, which evolved in the West starts from a very different legal premise from the eastern riparian−rights doctrine. In western states water is so important that state constitutions declare it to be the property of the state or property held in trust for the people of the state. Although the water is considered public property, individuals can establish a right to use it by intentionally diverting it from its source and applying it to a beneficial use. All western states but one also require a permit from the state in order to establish a water right. The right thus established is based on priority--first in time, first in right. How the water is actually used is immaterial as long as the use is beneficial. Traditionally, “beneficial” meant any use that promoted economic development. The water right is a property right that can be sold, and if the water is taken from the owner for a public purpose, compensation is owed the right holder. If the water is sold by a private right holder, the state receives no portion of the proceeds, nor does the right holder pay the state anything for the use of the water. The result is a peculiar water-rights system where public rights exist, but private rights can be established without compensating the state for the water taken from the public sector. Although the western states’ system of water-rights allocation evolved without federal interference, the actual development of delivery systems was expensive and required federal ∗ Professor and Chair, Department of Geography, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

assistance. The first major federal role in western water management came with the Reclamation Act of 1902. The act authorized the federal government to build dams and delivery systems to benefit irrigated lands. Farmers were supposed to repay the costs of the projects over time, but in fact only a small fraction has been recouped. In more recent times, the federal role as environmental regulator has protected the public’s rights to a clean environment, but it has also constrained the way private water rights can be exercised. Nowhere is this more true than with the Endangered Species Act. Because the federal government regulates water that states claim they own, intense jurisdictional conflicts have occurred. Today, public water rights are asserted by both state and federal governments and private water rights are granted by the states. All these rights are exercised over the same drop of water either simultaneously or sequentially as the water moves through the hydrologic cycle. This public and private mix of water rights adds a measure of complexity to water management that creates conflicts as public “environmental” rights are expanded and urban demands increase. Pressure is being placed on private water-rights holders to change the way water is used. Because most surface waters are already allocated in the West, the need for reallocation to satisfy urban and environmental needs has become a reality. The transition within the western states’ legal systems is a reflection of that reality. In order to satisfy the needs of urban places, water rights can be sold by one private party to another, with the payment being whatever the market can bear. As will be discussed below, this reallocation mechanism is problematic. To satisfy the public’s environmental needs, governments can regulate water use, buy rights on an open market, or condemn rights. These choices are also controversial and problematic. If water were still available for allocation, some of the reallocation conflicts could be avoided. But even where surpluses exist, choices about the balance between public and private rights still need to be made. The traditional appropriation doctrine fails to do this, and some states are changing their allocation laws to accommodate the need for a new balance. The three papers in this session present a framework for evaluating the problems associated with reallocation within the western United States. DEFINING PUBLIC AND PRIVATE WATER RIGHTS One of the major problems with reallocating water is defining the water right that is to be reallocated. This problem is compounded because water is mobile. As water moves through the hydrologic cycle it can be “public property” and simultaneously “private property.” A single drop of water can be “reused” many times as it passes sequentially through a series of private uses. This means that any change in the way water is used has the potential for interfering with other public and/or private rights. Before reallocation issues can be examined in the western United States, the nature of these public and private rights must be examined. Under the traditional appropriation doctrine, public ownership of water was claimed by the states. This claimed public right was a very narrow one, however, and private rights were established with few restrictions. The main aspect in the exercise of the public’s right was requiring a permit before appropriating water. Traditionally, the permit was never denied if the proposed use was beneficial, which was interpreted to mean that it contributed to economic development. Completely depleting a stream so no water remained was considered appropriate

and compatible with the public’s right. Although many states have provisions that would allow the denial of a permit if it is within the public interest, historically permits were rarely denied. “Waste” was not considered an acceptable private use, but this did not preclude customary uses that were inefficient from a conservation perspective. Also, permits were not denied even if there was going to be a better use for the water in the future. Public rights were very narrowly interpreted. Today, public rights have expanded in some states through the passage of laws protecting minimum stream flows, requiring an environmental impact statement before issuing a permit, or increasing the grounds for permit denial. In addition to changes in state law, federal courts have determined that state claims of water ownership do not preclude federal regulation. Examples of federal protection of public rights are the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, and the Endangered Species Act. Public rights, especially those asserted by the federal government, are very expansive today and have significant potential for interfering with private rights. Under the appropriation doctrine, defining what private rights should be is easy from a legal perspective. But applying that definition in the real world is more problematic, because not all the elements associated with the right may be clearly known and because it is difficult to determine how much water is actually associated with that right. The elements of a private surface right include (1) a right to use a given volume of water, (2) a right to use the water for a specific purpose, (3) a right to use the water at a designated place and time, but only at that place and time, and (4) a right to divert water from a specific point to a fixed point of return. Although these elements are easy to state, specific information on each element may be absent in a permit or the permit may differ from actual practice. Another element of the private right is “priority.” The first person to use water has priority over all subsequent users and can prevent others from interfering with that prior right. A “senior” priority will have better rights to use water than subsequent appropriators, regardless of the type of subsequent use. If there is insufficient water to satisfy all water users’ needs, “junior” water- right holders may be deprived of water. But the junior holders are not completely unprotected. Senior holders cannot change the place of use, type of use, time of use, amount of use, point of diversion, or point of return flow if the change will interfere with the water due under a junior’s permit. Junior water-rights holders are protected so that the conditions of the stream must remain as they were when the junior appropriation was made. Essentially, senior water users are protected by their priority, and juniors are protected from changes to the conditions of the stream from the time they obtain a permit. The only water available for sale or reallocation is the amount consumed by each water user. This consumptive amount is defined as the amount of water taken out of the system so that it is not available to a subsequent user. How much water this is can be extremely difficult to determine. Problems with determining consumptive amounts and lack of clarity in how the specific elements of a water right are actually exercised place significant constraints on the free operation of water markets and make reallocation difficult. The amount of water to be reallocated from the private sector to the public sector is a policy decision similar to one that would make water unavailable for allocation in the first place. The major question is how much water is needed to satisfy a public goal. For example, if the policy goal is to protect an endangered fish, how much water is needed to accomplish that purpose. The volume may be different if survival of the fish, as opposed to restoration of the population, is the

purpose. Often these goals are not clearly enunciated in policy. Even when they are, scientists may disagree on the amount of water needed to satisfy the “public right.” As a result, a degree of uncertainty exists in trying to determine the amount of water needed in the public sector. The uncertainty exists because the public right is not clearly defined and because scientists have difficulty in measuring the amount of water needed. Uncertainty is also found in reallocating private water rights, and it exists for the same two reasons--unclear rights and problems in measurement. REALLOCATION METHODS Two basic methods exist for reallocation: transfers or legislation. Transfers include changing the “owner” of the right as well as changing an element of the water right such as place of use. Transfers can result if water is initially appropriated with “ownership” changing from public to private. In this case no money is paid for the water transferred. Transfers between parties can also occur from a sale, from a bequest, or through condemnation. Sales occur on an open market with willing sellers and willing public or private buyers. Price is determined by the “market.” Condemnation occurs when a government unit takes private property for a public use. When condemnation occurs, compensation based on market value is paid. More than one method of determining market value exists in condemnation proceedings, and results may vary significantly based on the method used. For the purposes of this paper, the discussion of transfers will be limited to sales that change the place where the water is used. Sales on an open market have been promoted by some as the best way to reallocate water. One point needs to be clarified. A major difference exists between the sale of a water right and the sale of water. The sale of water involves the temporary transfer of water to another place of use while the “owner” of the right remains unchanged. When the right is sold the “owner” changes. Temporary sales of water are more common than the sale of water rights. In either case the problem hindering free transferability relates to the nature of the right established under the appropriation doctrine. No transfer can be made that interferes with a senior right. No transfer can be made that interferes with the conditions of a stream existing when a junior appropriation was made. In other words, nothing can be done that interferes with anyone else’s water rights. If the transfer is from a river basin with 100 users, how can we know whether or not any of the 100 will be injured? This is a question for hydrologists and will be discussed in the next paper. The second reallocation method is legislation. Both state and federal governments have power to legislate with regard to water resources. Generally, the federal government has allowed state governments to control allocation, but many federal laws have indirect and direct impacts. The resulting jurisdictional conflicts are resolved under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, with federal law generally prevailing. The main conflict between public rights and the private rights established under the appropriation doctrine relates to how much water is to be left in a stream or put back into it. The appropriation doctrine allows private rights to be established that could take all the water and move it out of the basin. State and federal laws have restricted this free right to appropriate. State laws have several general approaches. Some states give a state agency power to appropriate water for instream uses. This method creates a water right that has a priority dating from the time of the appropriation. This may be insufficient to protect the desired instream use if a shortage

occurs. Other states allow water to be reserved so that it cannot be appropriated. This works well if water is available. Other states have changed the definition of “beneficial use” to include a variety of instream uses. Also, water-rights permits can denied or conditioned to protect instream values in some states, but this method is only useful when unappropriated water is available. A few states allow transfers of private rights to the public, but generally condemnation is not allowed. Often the main question is how much water is needed for the instream use. The answer is not always clear. Whatever method is used, the states generally try to preserve the rights already established under the appropriation doctrine. This deference to prior appropriation is not always present with federal law. Although many federal environmental laws have an indirect impact on water allocation, only a few have a direct impact. The Endangered Species Act is the most important and can provide an illustration of the conflicts created. The Endangered Species Act is designed to prevent harm to designated threatened or endangered species. If an aquatic species is being protected, then sufficient water must be left in a stream to prevent harm to the species. If a stream is completely appropriated under state law, junior appropriators will have to give up their water so the species can be protected. Again, the main question is how much water is needed. And again the answer is not always clear. The next paper looks at problems of determining how much water can or should be reallocated from a hydrological and ecological perspective. The last paper looks at economic issues associated with the reallocation of water for endangered species.

2. Reallocation of Water in the Western United States: Hydrologic and Ecologic Issues

Michael E. Campana∗∗∗∗

INTRODUCTION Professor Matthews’ paper dealt with some of the legal issues surrounding the reallocation of both surface water and groundwater in the western United States. We will now address some of the hydrologic and ecological issues surrounding such reallocations. These issues include the measurement aspects of water reallocations--determining how much water is actually available--and the effects of such reallocations on hydrologic systems and ecosystems. Illustrative examples will be given. OVERVIEW OF HYDROLOGIC AND ECOLOGIC ISSUES Although hydrologists have made great strides in measuring the quality and quantity of flows and stocks in the hydrologic cycle, there are still deficiencies in their measurement techniques. This is especially true in arid areas, such as many parts of the western United States. The overriding complication is essentially one of uncertainty, which results from the heterogeneity of natural systems and insufficient data to characterize and model hydrologic systems. For example, the often-great variability in porous-medium and watershed properties can lead to substantial uncertainty in evaluating and predicting water quality and quantity. We must also deal with uncertainty in processes. Further, we are just beginning to understand the interactions between hydrologic systems (surface water and groundwater) and aquatic/riparian ecosystems. Interchange between surface water and groundwater, while understood theoretically, is extremely difficult to quantify in space and time. It is arguably the most important hydrologic process in western water issues, as it has far-reaching implications regarding water rights and allocation, irrigation return flows, streamflow generation, groundwater recharge, water quality, and riparian and aquatic ecosystem health. One of the largest components of the hydrologic cycle in riparian and irrigated areas of the western United States is evapotranspiration (ET). Despite the sophisticated techniques available for ET estimation, it is still difficult to measure this quantity accurately, especially on a regional or basin-wide scale. For regional or basin-wide water budgets ET is often obtained as the residual--that is, all the other components of the hydrologic cycle are assumed to be known and the ET is obtained by the difference. This approach, while seemingly appropriate, can actually produce huge errors in ET estimates because all the uncertainties in the other budget components (precipitation, runoff, groundwater recharge, etc.) are lumped into the residual, ET. Since many reallocations will involve riparian and irrigated areas, the issue of how much water is lost via ET looms large.

∗ Professor and Director, Water Resources Program, University of New Mexico, Albulquerque.

Runoff is another component of the hydrologic cycle that can be difficult to estimate and predict. In ungauged areas, runoff, especially that due to convective precipitation events, is notoriously difficult to predict on both spatial and temporal scales. This is due partly to the problem of predicting spatial and temporal distributions of precipitation and snowmelt and partly to the complicated interplay between watershed properties and precipitation/snowmelt that produces runoff. Groundwater recharge is an important hydrologic component that can be important in reallocations because it relates to aquifer replenishment. Some of the western states have sanctions against groundwater mining and aquifer overdevelopment. Many water managers believe that to avoid groundwater mining, pumpage from a basin must not exceed the amount of basin recharge. This premise, while flawed, is nevertheless ingrained in many western water planners and managers, so the estimation of natural basin groundwater recharge thus assumes great significance. Like ET, it is often estimated as the residual in a water budget, which can lead to large errors because of the uncertainties in the other components. Groundwater recharge is also estimated by several empirical equations whose theoretical underpinnings are tenuous at best, yet the use of these techniques persists because of their simplicity. Finally, factored into all our imperfect knowledge is the ominous specter of global change, whose effects on local and regional hydrologic cycles we are just beginning to assess (although we are not yet in agreement as to the exact nature and magnitude of this change). Assessment of the effects of global change on hydrology is not merely an academic exercise to evaluate phenomena that will occur in the distant future. Indeed, the geologic record has demonstrated that natural climate change can occur on the decadal scale. These effects will have important ramifications for water reallocations because they will dictate the total amount of water available and when it is available; in effect, the spatial and temporal distributions of hydrologic processes will change, as will the ecosystems reliant on these processes. CASE STUDIES City of Albuquerque: Surface Interactions Between Water and Groundwater The city of Albuquerque, New Mexico, which straddles the Rio Grande, is currently the largest single pumper of groundwater in the Albuquerque-Belen basin. The city currently supplies water to about 450,000 people and a number of large industries. Future growth is inevitable, and the city is continually searching for additional water supplies. Although the city uses only groundwater, the New Mexico State Engineer, the official charged with allocating and protecting the state's waters, has determined that groundwater in the Albuquerque-Belen basin is tributary (connected) to the Rio Grande, which means that even though Albuquerque pumps groundwater, it must offset the water it uses with surface water rights. Unfortunately, the State Engineer's method of calculating the degree of interchange between surface water and groundwater is archaic-- it is an analytical method dating from the mid-1950s. Many prominent hydrologists have realized this for years, but the State Engineer has resisted efforts to update the method. However, recent results from a U.S. Geological Survey numerical model of the basin's groundwater reservoir strongly suggest that the city has not been receiving sufficient credit from the State Engineer, essentially meaning that Albuquerque has been excessively penalized for its

groundwater pumpage for many years. Although the State Engineer has not formally accepted these new results, he is likely to do so. This is an excellent example of how our imperfect hydrologic measurement abilities have resulted in penalizing one water user for leaving less water available for other users in the region. Ecosystem Health of the Middle Rio Grande Water reallocations for environmental purposes are currently being considered along the middle Rio Grande in New Mexico. The Rio Grande, a major perennial stream in the western United States, flows through the Albuquerque-Belen basin. The basin contains approximately 600,000 people, and additional growth is inevitable. Both surface water and groundwater are used, and the basin's waters are fully allocated. Despite the dearth of water in the region and the many different users, there is no regional water resources planning and management, although efforts are under way to devise a regional water plan. It now appears likely that reallocation of water may be required for two purposes: (1) to preserve the silvery minnow, a small fish that is protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and (2) to maintain the bosque, the riparian forest whose decline is causing concern among many. To maintain a viable silvery minnow population, more water must be kept in the Rio Grande's channel, which means less water can be diverted. But how much water is required to maintain a viable population? What will be the effect of keeping the water in the channel for the fish as opposed to allowing current users to continue their withdrawals? The maintenance of the bosque is also a perplexing issue. The bosque is declining because its dominant cottonwood trees require periodic flooding for their seeds to germinate, yet the Rio Grande's flooding has been all but eliminated because of dams and other engineered structures; in essence, the river is no longer connected to its floodplain. The health of the ecosystem is obviously intimately related to the hydrology, but we are not sure to what degree, nor do we know how much water must be supplied to maintain the ecosystem. How can we reallocate water for ecosystem health if we do not know how much is needed? Groundwater Recharge in Fallon, Nevada Reallocation of surface water can also effect groundwater resources. A dilemma faces the town of Fallon, Nevada, an agricultural community about 80 km east of Reno. Fallon's economy depends largely on the Reclamation Act of 1902, which authorized the federal government to become a major provider of water for irrigation projects. The first project completed under this Act was the Newlands Project, which diverts approximately half the flow of the Truckee River, whose source is Lake Tahoe in the Sierra Nevada of California, for irrigation. But the diversion of this water has had severe environmental consequences. The water level in Pyramid Lake, a large desert lake and the terminus of the Truckee River, has dropped approximately 25 meters, all but destroying this once world-renowned fishery. The ESA is being invoked to try to restore the fishery. The water issues in this area are indeed complex, but we will focus on just one aspect: that of groundwater recharge to the aquifer system supplying Fallon's water. Irrigators in the area are being offered substantial sums to cease irrigation, relinquish their water rights, and allow the water they use to remain in the Truckee River. This would be beneficial to the ecosystems of both the stream and Pyramid Lake; few dispute this. However, the residents of Fallon have raised an interesting issue: they claim their aquifer system is being recharged by the

irrigation water and the leakage from the irrigation canal, which is not completely lined. If the irrigators sell their water, there will be less irrigation-induced recharge and less canal seepage. So Fallon claims its water supply will be diminished. But can it document by how much? We previously mentioned that groundwater recharge is a difficult quantity to assess. Can we determine how much recharge is received by Fallon's aquifer system? Furthermore, can we determine how much recharge is "natural" and how much is "artificial"? Will water reallocation to restore ecosystems actually harm the residents of Fallon? Another issue, beyond the scope of this paper, is whether the residents of Fallon actually have a right to that recharge water. SUMMARY The hydrologic and related ecosystem issues surrounding water reallocation in the western United States are every bit as daunting as the legal issues. Three examples have illustrated this; there are many more to choose from. Although not all areas in the Americas have the same hydrology and ecosystems as the western United States, they present the same issues of uncertainty and lack of knowledge about the linkages between hydrologic systems and ecosystems.

3. Economic Impacts of the Endangered Species Act

David Brookshire∗∗∗∗ The growth in recent years of federal legislation asserting public water rights has affected and will continue to affect public and private water rights created under state law. More specifically, these new additions to the overall structure of water allocation institutions in the West will have direct and indirect economic impacts. At a minimum, the effects of implementing these new institutions will attenuate private water rights. One of the most comprehensive and powerful legislative acts is the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The Act assigns the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) the responsibility of creating a list of species of plants and animals in the United States whose existence is threatened or endangered. If a species is placed on the endangered list, the USFWS is responsible for, among other things, developing recovery plans, reviewing proposed public and private actions to ensure that they do not compromise recovery efforts, and designating critical habitat and instream flow regimes. In recovering endangered fishes as dictated by the Act, the river system must be protected and/or altered to more closely represent the historical natural conditions that are believed to be biologically necessary for the survival of the species. Alteration of biological conditions through the designation of critical habitats will restrict and/or alter human uses of the river and in turn generate direct and indirect economic impacts, measured as changes from the current baseline level of economic activity. The Act requires the USFWS to assess the monetary impacts of the alteration of biological conditions. As a result, economists have participated in the modeling of the economic impacts resulting from the designation of critical habitat. It is axiomatic that the modeling of the impacts of setting aside critical habitat for endangered fishes involves the reallocation of resources. Endangered species are usually endangered because the current allocation of water resources has resulted in the degradation of instream flows and associated habitat. Such adverse modification of natural habitat is generally due to economic activities that have occurred as a result of specific resource allocation for human settlement and economic development. Stabilizing and/or reversing this development requires that some resources be reallocated to other uses. For instance, trees may not be harvested when the harvesting degrades instream habitat through sedimentation, or water may not be used for irrigation so that instream flows are returned to more historic levels. However, not harvesting trees or irrigating certain lands, and thus setting aside instream flows in one area, makes more water available for development elsewhere. Assessing the economic impacts of designating critical habitat thus requires a general equilibrium economic analysis to fully capture the range of potential activities created, ∗ Professor and Chair, Department of Economics, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

abandoned, and/or altered throughout an economy by the critical habitat and instream flow designation. In sum, the reallocation will potentially yield economic impacts that are benefits as well as costs. The proposed discussion will set forth the methodology and results from two case studies that measure the economic impacts of designating critical habitat under the auspices of the Act. The case studies vary in regional scope. The first incorporates seven states along a 2,200-mile stretch of the Colorado River and its many tributaries and focuses on six endangered fishes. A second study analyzes the impacts of protecting two endangered fishes in a two-county study region in Utah and Nevada through which the Virgin River flows. The two study regions differ considerably in the sizes of their economies. The output of the region in the Colorado study is approximately US$1.3 trillion annually, compared to US$28 billion in the Virgin study area. The Colorado study region constitutes a diversified economy that has experienced growth above the national average. The Virgin study region is a much less diversified economy, but the area is experiencing significant population growth. The methodology used in both case studies was to measure the economic impacts of designating critical habitat and instream flow regimes and involves the following steps: (1) determining how the biological needs of the endangered fish will affect the physical reallocation of resources among river users; (2) assessing the direct economic impacts of resource reallocations on river users; and (3) using a set of applied general equilibrium economic models of the affected region in order to capture all of the direct and indirect effects resource reallocations. Two classes of applied general equilibrium models were developed. The first consists of a set of conventional Input-Output (I-O) models of an entire region and of the subregional units (i.e., one for each of the seven states). The second is a Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) model of the entire Colorado region. For the Virgin River study, separate I-O models for each of the two affected counties and a regional model for all three counties were developed. The I-O and CGE analyses permit the determination of two impact measures at three spatial levels: the subregional, the regional, and the national. Thus, distributional and national efficiency effects of the resource allocation are determined. The applied general equilibrium approach forces recognition of potential offsetting distributional and efficiency effects as resources are reallocated to preserve critical habitat and create instream flow regimes for the endangered fishes. Thus, in the Colorado River study, the flow changes required for the endangered fishes decrease agricultural activity in the upper basin of the Colorado River but increase agricultural activity in the lower basin. A partial equilibrium analysis would ignore such effects. The principal results of the two case studies in considering the impacts of critical habitat designation and instream flow allocations are that sectoral impacts are both positive and negative. The subregional impacts for both case studies are not distributed evenly. The regional impacts, whether positive or negative, are small relative to the baseline level of economic activity representing the designation of no critical habitat. The national efficiency effects as

determined in the Colorado study are effectively zero for the designation of critical habitat and instream flow regimes.

Community Participation in Water Resources Management∗∗∗∗

Alberto J. Palomboττττ “A farmer rises early to face the day of hard work in the fields. His village water supply is not always reliable, and no one checks to see if it is safe. Meanwhile, another worker rises in an urban apartment, prepares for her day with a modern water supply system, and worries more about crime than about the reliability or safety of her water supply. In the village, there is no sewage system, and the nearby waterway has caused children to get sick. The city dweller’s water supply is safe, but her community discharges sewage into a river that has toxic chemicals and the fish cannot be eaten. These experiences, separated by a wide gulf in distance and culture, are faced daily in our Hemisphere, and both deal with issues that are important to our citizens in their villages, towns and cities.” (Grigg, N., 1993) It has been almost six years since the First Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management was held in Miami. It resulted from the need to raise the awareness among water resource professionals and policy makers that they must to implement mechanisms for cooperation and information exchange regarding the sustainable management of water resources in the Americas. And it reiterated the tenets set forth by then recently held Earth Summit, in which the importance of community participation was highlighted as one of the key initiatives that must be addressed in order to manage water resources within the limits of sustainability. But how successful have we been as communities or individuals in becoming involved in our villages and cities to make better use of water since that time? This case study portrays some of these experiences in a wide variety of cultures and places scattered throughout the hemisphere. An attempt has been made to include cases that are successful and others that are not so successful. The intention is to share wide perspectives with the Dialogue participants that can direct us to the key factors in making projects possible with the acceptance of the communities they are supposed to serve. Geographically, the experiences represented here vary from socioeconomically well-developed communities to regions with abundant water resources but remotely located. There is no attempt to compare the experiences in a matrix that depicts only benchmarks with statistics, but to instill an understanding that community involvement as a whole is definitely a key factor itself for the success of a water project, whether it deals with urban supply and treatment, irrigation, or ecosystem restoration.

∗ Proposed and coordinated by Florida Center for Enviromental Studies, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, U.S.A. τ Coordinator for Latin American and Caribbean Affairs, Florida Center for Environmental Studies, Florida Atlantic University.

The regions portrayed in the case study are, from south to north, the following: • The state of Minas Gerais, Brazil. There are a number of aggressive programs carried out at

different levels (federal, state, local) that have a strong component of community participation and mobilization. Among these programs are Cidadania pelas Aguas and Adopte uma Bacia, in which 17 Brazilian universities invite community in 93 watersheds.

• The west-central region of Venezuela. The Venezuelan Government embarked on a program

of decentralization of the water supply and management system. It resulted in a mixed experience of success and abandonment of many government-sponsored irrigation systems. But the Sistema Hidráulico Trujillano received a lot of help from its community, which helped in its economic and social success.

• The basin of the Lerma River and Lake Chapala, Mexico. The largest enclosed freshwater

body of Mexico, Lake Chapala is subject to an as-yet-unarticulated water management plan. As a consequence, communities along the Lerma River and Lake Chapala shores see their economic activities affected by unsustainable agriculture practices, upstream discharges of nutrients and untreated waste, and a lack of coordination among neighboring state and local governments. Lakeshore communities around Lake Chapala in the states of Jalisco and Michoacán are taking affairs into their own hands and have initiated a network for citizenship participation called the Lake School Municipal Council. The Council is raising awareness among the community to encourage academic, scientific, and government stakeholders to work jointly on an integrated water management plan for the Lerma-Chapala-Santiago ecosystem.

• The Everglades Restoration project in Central and South Florida, in the United States. This

is considered one of the most complex and costliest environmental restoration efforts under way. The participation of the community in shaping the project has been crucial to understanding the complexities from many perspectives, including the socioeconomic and basic science, that affect the ecosystem. The South Florida Water Management District is an active participant in and promoter of the restoration effort, taking a holistic approach at the subregional level through the Governor’s Commission for a Sustainable South Florida.

These experiences are to be presented by the following persons: • Nicholas Aumen, South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, Florida,

U.S.A. • Adalberto Gabaldón, Ex-Minister of Environment, Caracas, Venezuela • Manuel Guzmán Arrollo, Institute of Limnology, University of Guadalajara, Chapala,

Jalisco, México • Maria do Carmo Zinato, UFV, Viçosa, Minas Gerais, Brazil • Moderator: Alberto J. Palombo, Center for Environmental Studies, Palm Beach Gardens,

Florida, U.S.A. Each panelist will present a synopsis of the state of participation of communities in water resources management at the basin, province, or local level. There are four "angles" from which

we recommend evaluating the level of success or failure of the efforts in getting the community involved: • Political will. Are there appropriate programs to approach community-based organizations to

assist in the implementation of management plans for water bodies in the region (lake, river, aquifer)? What kind of incentives exist for making it happen? Are there any projects to entice participation? (Multilateral, federal/national, municipal funding?)

• Available technology and know-how. In the efforts to involve the people, are there

appropriate advisers/consultants/experts to assist the project manager or sponsoring organization? Is there a clear plan established to pass on management know-how so the project can be self-sustaining, or is there a constant dependency on outside knowledge and government institutions to carry the project to its objectives?

• Environmental/natural resource management outreach/education. As part of the project, are

there educational components to inform the community about the science and practices behind water management, environmental conservation/restoration, and sustainable development? Who carries out this component: the schools? NGOs? government? The private sector? How successful is it?

• Finance. This is the tricky part. How are financial resources assured to accomplish the

objectives of the program to involve people in water resources management? Are they enough? Do they have continuity? Are they assured until the objectives set forth are achieved? How effective/efficient are the financial resources made available and invested in the community? Are there any benchmarks to evaluate how well the resources have paid off? (measurable success, rate of return)?

The intent of the panel presentation is to raise awareness of the issue of community participation, and share the sense of the cross-cutting factor it becomes in dealing with other aspects of water management, such as infrastructure development and maintenance, policy making, ecosystem research and management, and the impact of climate change due to anthropogenic activities. Panelists are working together in developing a background paper that will be distributed at the Panama meeting. The panel, proposed to be held in a plenary session, will be structured as follows: Presentation of panelists and introduction of concepts driving the case study 10 minutes Synopsis of experiences (each panelist will have 6 minutes) 24 minutes Panel discussion comparing key success and failure factors 25 minutes Interaction with Dialogue participants (questions, comments) 15 minutes Conclusions and proposed actions to follow up in the Dialogue Conference 6 minutes Contingencies 10 minutes Total time: 90 minutes

Estudio Nacional del Agua, Balance Hídrico y Relaciones Oferta -Demanda de Agua en Colombia: Indicadores de Sostenibilidad

Fuente: Organización Meteorológica Mundial. Autores Principales: Pablo Leyva, IDEAM, Transv. 97 #17-60 piso 7, tel. 6356003, fax 356218 -pablol@ideam.gov.co Martha García, IDEAM, Transv.97 #17-60 piso 3, tel. 6356035, fax 6356130 - martha@ideam.gov.co Rodrigo Marín , IDEAM , Transv.97 #17-60 piso 3, tel. 6356035, fax 6356130 - rodrigom@ideam.gov.co Felix Darío Sánchez, IDEAM, Transv.97 #17-60 piso 3, tel. 6356035, fax 6356130 felixds@ideam.gov.co RESUMEN Pese a que Colombia es reconocido internacionalmente como uno de los países con mayor riqueza en recursos hídricos del mundo, y hasta hace pocos lustros no se consideraba que existieran problemas significativos de abastecimiento para los diferentes usos de la población y de la economía, el crecimiento del consumo, y sobre todo la deforestación y escasa gestión de las cuencas y manejo de los recursos naturales, al igual que la ausencia casi total de tratamiento de aguas residuales, han hecho emerger problemas cada vez mayores de disponibilidad,

incluyendo limitaciones por calidad, desabastecimiento y racionamiento, en un número cada vez mayor de municipios del país, con sus consecuentes efectos nocivos en la calidad de vida de la población y las actividades económicas. Para los procesos del desarrollo del país y de las regiones, en general no se ha tenido en cuenta lo suficientemente la oferta natural de los recursos naturales y del recurso agua en particular, lo cual genera una mayor vulnerabilidad de los sistemas de abastecimiento tanto para la población como para las diferentes actividades económicas. Como es bien sabido, los rendimientos más elevados se concentran en las zonas de más baja densidad poblacional, como son las regiones de la Amazonia, la Orinoquia y el Pacífico. De acuerdo con los informes del Instituto de Recursos Mundiales y las Naciones Unidas,1 Colombia, con una disponibilidad de 33.630 m³ al año por persona, se coloca en la situación promedio de América Latina, la cual es casi cinco veces mayor a la disponibilidad promedio del mundo que apenas alcanza 7.700 m³. Como referencia, el promedio de este indicador para América del Norte es de 16.300 m³, para Europa de 4.700, para África de 6.500 y para Asia de 3.400. Según los estimativos del IDEAM con base en la evaluación de los rendimientos hídricos de las 45 unidades hidrográficas del territorio nacional, la oferta hídrica total supera los 2.000 km³ al año, correspondientes a 57.000 m³ anuales por habitante. En cuanto a la oferta neta, en la cual se incorporan reducciones tanto por alteración de la calidad como por regulación natural, se alcanza apenas los 1.260 km³ que corresponden a una disponibilidad de 34.000 m³ por habitante al año. Para las condiciones de año seco consideradas, esta disponibilidad se reduce a 26.700 m³ al año por persona. Sin embargo, la muy desigual distribución del recurso, de la población y de las actividades económicas en Colombia hace que el indicador promedio, relativamente favorable, que ostenta el país sea engañoso, o menos favorable en la medida en que se consideren exclusivamente las zonas donde se concentra la mayor parte de su población y estas actividades. Esta situación se corrobora en las diferencias de las relaciones de demanda y oferta de agua de 45 grandes cuencas del país que permiten observar cómo las mayores presiones sobre el recurso se concentran en las cuencas de los ríos Magdalena y Cauca y las de los ríos que drenan al Caribe colombiano, incluido el Catatumbo (ver Mapa 1). A fin de que el país disponga de una primera visión de su situación real de abastecimiento de agua, el IDEAM elaboró el presente Estudio Nacional de Aguas que comprende tanto las condiciones globales del balance hídrico como las relaciones de oferta y demanda, a nivel de grandes cuencas, de los municipios y de las áreas que abastecen la casi totalidad de las cabeceras urbanas que hacen parte del territorio nacional. Para el efecto se utilizaron dos indicadores sencillos y de fácil interpretación: en el primer caso el índice de aridez, y en el segundo el índice de escasez, que representa la demanda como porcentaje de la oferta estimada a los diferentes niveles temporales y territoriales considerados, para condiciones tanto de oferta media como la del año seco y su distribución mensual. También se evaluó la vulnerabilidad por disponibilidad

1 Instituto de Recursos Mundiales, Recursos Mundiales 1990-1991, México, 1991.

de agua, que además considera la capacidad de regulación hídrica del conjunto suelo-cobertura vegetal. RESULTADOS El estudio permite confirmar que pese a la situación relativamente favorable de oferta y disponibilidad hídrica con que cuenta buena parte del territorio nacional, ya se presentan serias señales de preocupación e incluso de alarma en algunos municipios y áreas urbanas del país, por lo cual el IDEAM llama la atención de los organismos nacionales y territoriales involucrados de diferente manera en la gestión de los recursos hídricos a acelerar los planes de gestión, ordenamiento del uso de los recursos naturales, manejo y regulación y de las cuencas, especialmente las áreas que presentan indicadores de escasez de agua más desfavorables. Según los resultados del presente estudio y teniendo en cuenta los parámetros establecidos por Naciones Unidas, en un año con condiciones hidroclimáticas normales (media multianual) el 11% de los municipios del país, correspondientes al 13% de su población, acusan un índice de escasez mayor del 20% (ver la gráfica).

Gráfica 1 Indices de escasez. Condiciones medias y secas

La Gráfica 2 muestra la vulnerabilidad por disponibilidad de agua de los municipios y la población involucrada en las diferentes categorías. Tanto la vulnerabilidad como la población afectada en categorías muy alta y alta, aumentan en la medida que se consideran el año seco y los meses más secos de dichos años, para los cuales se alcanzan los índices más críticos, que varían según las características de las regiones.

3% 8%2%

37%

50%

CATEGORIA POBLACION TOTAL MUNICIPIOS COLORALTO 1.034.952 11MEDIO ALTO 2.993.488 11MEDIO 830.956 18MINIMO 17.784.983 328NO SIGNIFICATIVO 13.265.083 700SIN INFORMACION 29.059 2

31%

51%

5%3%

10%0%

CATEGORIA POBLACION TOTAL MUNICIPIOS COLOR ALT 3.433.52 17 MEDIO 1.090.87 16 MEDI 1.773.35 31 MINIM 18.601.7 439 NOSIGNIFICATI 11.009.9 565 SIN 29.05 2

Nota: El Porcentaje está referido a la población.

Gráfica 2

Vulnerabilidad por Disponibilidad. Condiciones Medias y Secas

Nota: El porcentaje está referido a población. Como es de esperar, el mismo indicador y las mismas categorías aplicadas a las fuentes que abastecen cabeceras municipales (ver gráficas 3 y 4), en la medida en que concentran una mayor demanda sobre fuentes limitadas, presentan un porcentaje mucho mayor de localidades y por ende de población urbana en situación de alerta que requieren mayor atención. La condición mas crítica se presenta en los meses más deficitarios de agua de los años secos. Como puede observarse, para un año de condiciones secas, el 14% de las cabeceras municipales, correspondientes a una población del 61%, alcanzan índices de escasez con categorías de alto, medio alto y medio. Es importante anotar que para estas últimas condiciones la vulnerabilidad con categorías muy alta, alta y media, por disponibilidad de agua, alcanza al 62% de las cabeceras y al 81% de la población.

CATEGORIA POBLACION TOTAL MUNICIPIOS COLORMUY ALTA 3.804.957 19ALTA 1.061.612 49MEDIA 19.382.805 837BAJA 3.042.453 135MUY BAJA 8.491.979 21SIN INFORMACION 154.715 9 54%

3%11%

0%24%

8%

0%24%11%

6%

51%8%

CATEGORIA POBLACION TOTAL MUNICIPIOS COLORMUY ALTA 4.017.340 27ALTA 1.987.490 74MEDIA 18.244.544 804BAJA 3.042.453 135MUY BAJA 8.491.979 21SIN INFORMACION 154.715 9

Gráfica 3 Índice de escasez. Condiciones medias y secas

Gráfica 4 Vulnerabilidad. Condiciones medias y secas

CATEGORIA POBLACION URBANA MUNICIPIOSCOLORALTO 2.319.176 12MEDIO ALTO 7.446.061 38MEDIO 4.012.445 43MINIMO 5.799.429 403NO SIGNIFICATIVO 6.192.694 572SIN INFORMACION 5.835 2

22%

24%

16%

29%

9%CATEGORIA POBLACION URBANA MUNICIPIOSCOLORALTO 3.397.380 27MEDIO ALTO 8.051.175 50MEDIO 4.130.599 73MINIMO 4.471.222 440NOSIGNIFICATIVO 5.719.429 478SIN INFORMACION 5.835 2

0%

13%

32%

16%17%

22%

CATEGORIA POBLACION URBANA MUNICIPIOSCOLORMUY ALTA 3.711.800 37ALTA 2.699.575 85MEDIA 9.185.759 736BAJA 1.860.405 182MUY BAJA 8.245.531 21SIN INFORMACION 72.570 9

7%

32%0%

14%10%

37%

0%32%19%

11%

32%6%

CATEGORIA POBLACION URBANAMUNICIPIOSCOLORMUY ALTA 4.823.850 58ALTA 2.859.319 112MEDIA 8.206.274 693BAJA 1.568.096 177MUY BAJA 8.245.531 21SIN INFORMACION 72.570 9

Nota: El porcentaje está referido a la población.

Nota: El porcentaje está referido a población.

De acuerdo con las Naciones Unidas, cuando el índice de escasez para el año medio se sitúa entre el 10% y el 20% (que corresponde a la categoría media del índice), deben iniciarse procesos de ordenamiento de cuencas, y en los casos en que el índice supera el 20% es prioritario ordenar la oferta con la demanda para prevenir futuras crisis. En el ejercicio de proyección realizado para el año 2016, en el cual se incrementan las demandas y reducen las ofertas bajo el supuesto de ausencia de suficientes medidas de conservación de cuencas y tratamiento de aguas residuales, el 19% de los municipios y el 38% de la población alcanzarían en dicho año un índice superior al 20%; tales condiciones serían más críticas al considerar las áreas que abastecen las cabeceras municipales, para las cuales cerca al 70% de la población se encontraría en una situación delicada de abastecimiento de agua (Gráfica 5).

Gráfica 5 Índice de Escasez. Escenario 2016

Aunque ciertamente, de acuerdo con los resultados consignados en el informe detallado y aquí resumido, la situación de abastecimiento de agua en Colombia no alcanza los niveles críticos que acusa en muchos otros países del mundo con ofertas hídricas muy limitadas, las evidencias aquí presentadas muestran síntomas ya preocupantes que invocan una creciente atención de las autoridades nacionales, regionales y locales y de todos los organismos involucrados en la definición de políticas, en la planificación manejo y utilización de nuestros recursos naturales en general y en particular el recurso hídrico. A fin de cualificar la real significación del índice de escasez utilizado en buena parte del estudio, es necesario aclarar que las graduaciones utilizadas por Naciones Unidas son aplicables al

CATEGORIA POBLACION URBANA MUNICIPIOS COLORALTO 9.308.760 40MEDIO ALTO 7.745.686 57MEDIO 7.658.988 109MINIMO 25.799.149 563NO SIGNIFICATIVO 13.867.394 299

40%

22%

12%

12%

14%

CATEGORIA POBLACION URBANA MUNICIPIOS COLORALTO 22.099.638 99MEDIO ALTO 7.639.881 127MEDIO 2.698.141 124MINIMO 7.648.045 416NOSIGNIFICATIVO 5.754.777 302

47%

17%

6%

17%

13%

Nota: El porcentaje está referido a población.

promedio de la situación mundial caracterizada por disponibilidad de agua considerablemente menor que la existente en América Latina y Colombia. También debe considerarse que en muchos países se han desarrollado cultural, institucional y económicamente importantes procesos que involucran la regulación hídrica para garantizar el uso sostenible del recurso, así como trasvases de cuencas, sistemas de almacenamiento y conducción de agua. En efecto, cuando se estima que en un territorio la demanda constituye mas del 20% de la oferta se considera en una situación de difícil abastecimiento, teniendo en cuenta que solo una fracción del agua disponible puede ser aprovechable a costos de almacenamiento, transporte y tratamiento razonables. En el caso colombiano, donde las condiciones hidroclimáticas y topográficas garantizan en la mayoría del territorio una buena oferta de agua y una densa red hidrográfica, no existen en la mayoría de los casos políticas claras de ordenamiento para el uso de los recursos hídricos. Lo anterior determina que ciertos aprovechamientos como los acueductos, que se abastecen en general de ríos pequeños, quebradas y arroyos cercanos, no cuenten con programas de conservación de cuencas, sistemas de almacenamiento, transporte y tratamiento ni previsiones económicas para realizarlas. Es decir, no existen hábitos de conservación, regulación y manejo de los recursos hídricos, y en tales circunstancias, muchos municipios que para el conjunto de sus territorios respectivos todavía presentan índices de escasez inferiores al 20% o incluso al 10%, tendrán que recurrir en un futuro próximo a fuentes alternativas de abastecimiento. Por supuesto, enfrentar las dificultades de abastecimiento previsibles en un futuro implicará sopesar cuidadosamente los beneficios y costos de programas de ordenamiento, manejo y regulación de cuencas para garantizar su máxima productividad, y los correspondientes a infraestructuras para almacenar o transportar agua de fuentes cada vez más distantes, debido a disminuciones de calidad y alteraciones en la regulación hídrica. El presente trabajo recoge el conocimiento y el análisis efectuado a partir de la información básica de la red de referencia de estaciones hidrometeorológicas que opera el IDEAM. Parte del proceso de planificación y gestión del recurso que debe adelantar el país en los próximos años para evitar dificultades cada vez mayores en las disponibilidades de agua, requiere evaluaciones más detalladas a partir de información regional y local que mejore el conocimiento e información disponible, en lo cual se requiere la participación activa tanto de las Corporaciones Autónomas Regionales y las autoridades ambientales en los grandes centros urbanos, así como de los entes territoriales y los diferentes sectores usuarios.

ROUNDTABLE SESSION II

Hydrologic Warning and Information System for the Plata Basin

Dr. Dora Goniazki∗∗∗∗

The National Institute for Water and the Environment (INA), a decentralized agency of the Secretariat of Natural Resources and Sustainable Development, is responsible for--among other things--the development and operation of the Hydrologic Warning and Information System for the Plata Basin. The system provides continuous diagnostic information on the basin's hydrologic evolution and develops methodologies to produce forecasts and issue timely risk warnings. More specifically, it is INA's responsibility to produce river-stage forecasts for the Basin and to issue timely warnings (floods or marked water-level drops) to national and provincial agencies charged with emergency management and protection of the population and the environment. The Plata Basin, located between parallels 16 and 34 S and meridians 44 and 66 W, covers 3.2 million km2. It comprises a large part of Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, and Bolivia and all of Paraguay. The Basin has important rivers, such as the Paraná, one of the longest and with the largest flow in the world; the Paraguay, its main tributary; and the Uruguay. These rivers flow into the Atlantic Ocean through the Plata River, with a mean annual flow rate of 24,000 m3/s. With its heavily populated urban-industrial centers (100,000,000 inhabitants altogether), and highly productive agricultural, cattle raising, and forested areas in the river valleys, the Basin contributes 70% of the gross product of the countries that share it. More than 40 hydropower dams have been built in the Upper Basin in Brazil, and at present the construction of the Paraná-Paraguay "Hidrovía" (for river navigation) and of several river ports is under way. Downstream, Argentina is affected by the hydrometeorological events that take place in the Upper Paraná in Brazil, Paraguay, and southern Bolivia. EVOLUTION OF THE SYSTEM The Hydrologic Warning Operations Center was set up to deal with the devastating flood of 1982-1983. Once the flood water had receded, government authorities decided that the Center should be operated by the National Institute for Water and the Environment. The Hydrologic Warning and Information System for the Plata Basin has been operational since then, interacting with agencies furnishing information and working in close contact with the users in order to respond to their demands adequately. The results obtained in these 17 years are worthy of the efforts made.

∗ Coordinadora, Sistema de Información y Alerta Hidrológica del Instituto Nacional del Agua y del Ambiente (INA), Argentina.

SYSTEM OPERATION To carry out a permanent hydrologic surveillance of Basin conditions and to forecast potential flood and low-water events, it is necessary to collect, process, and transmit real-time information with forecasts and scenarios of the possible evolution of these phenomena. For this purpose, the following activities are performed: • Meteorological, hydrometric, and field data reception: All the information furnished by

riparian countries, by binational hydroelectricity operators, and by national and provincial agencies is centralized.

• Database development and updating: The information is checked and organized into

databases for fast updating and real-time use. • Hydrologic and hydrodynamic modeling: Models are calibrated and applied to make river-

stage forecasts. • Data processing and GIS applications: Data are digitalized and included in

geographic information systems. The topography of the alluvial valley is surveyed and digitalized for use in the forecasting of inundation boundaries.

• Satellite image processing: This is an incipient activity aimed at making an accurate

determination of river beds and at analyzing the progressive flooding of alluvial valleys. • Permanent forecasting and hydrologic warning service: All the preceding activities

provide data that make it possible to generate forecasts. The forecasts are disseminated among decision-making agencies to enable them to take non-structural measures to mitigate the catastrophe. In normal conditions, the Service contributes to better water use.

PRODUCTS • In normal conditions: Daily reports containing hydrometeorological information are issued.

Two weekly reports are prepareed on the Basin's hydrometeorological conditions and forecasts.

• In alert conditions: Early warning reports on risk conditions in the Basin. Daily reports

describing the situation and presenting short-, medium- and long-term prospects. Forecasts of maximum river stages are made, indicating the probable number of days at risk.

CURRENT SITUATION AND PROSPECTS The Hydrologic Warning and Information System is operated by a highly specialized scientific-technical team. Through the acquisition of the necessary infrastructure for data reception and processing, a flexible and upgraded system capable of incorporating new technologies for data collection, analysis, forecast, and transmission has been set up and a network made up of provincial nodes (Misiones, Corrientes, Entre Ríos, Formosa, Chaco, Santa Fé, Buenos Aires) was established to allow for information transmission and technology transfer. After the devastating flood of 1992, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development granted a loan (BIRF 3521-AR) to launch a Rehabilitation Program for Flood Damage Mitigation (PREI). The program was executed by the Central Subunit for Emergency Control (SUCCE), of the Secretariat for Financial Assistance to the Provinces of the Interior Ministry. One of the program's objectives is to provide technical assistance to INA (formerly INCYTH) in order to strengthen its operational capacity to calculate hydrologic trends, forecast flood events, and issue evacuation warnings. The following data processing equipment was acquired for PREI's Hydrologic Warning System: database server for INA, work stations for INA and the provincial nodes, communications and programming software, and a relational client-server database administrator. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development granted another loan (BIRF 4117AR) to carry out the Flood Protection Program (PPI, for its acronym in Spanish), cofinanced by the Export-Import Bank of Japan and the Argentine coastal provinces. One of the program's objectives is to strengthen INA's Hydrologic Warning System. The PPI's Hydrologic Warning System will be equipped with a telemetry network with stations linked by satellite to a central station at INA. The information thus obtained will be inputted into a database; flood forecast software will be upgraded and training will be provided to INA staff and to the people working in the provincial nodes. RECENT EMERGENCIES The system consolidated itself by improving flood forecasts and data collection and by adequately responding to users' needs when confronted with the floods (1987, 1992, 1995, 1997, 1998) or marked water-level drops (1985, 1988) that have occurred in the Basin since 1983. In Puerto Iguazú warnings were delivered with 40 days’ lead time, while water-level forecasts for Corrientes, Goya, La Paz, Santa Fé, and Rosario were issued with 7, 12, 20, 25, and 30 days' lead time, respectively. As for the recent floods in the littoral region, by July 1997 INA had already issued warnings about possible torrential floods in the area. By the first days of October, INA reported that conditions in the Uruguay and Iguazú rivers had worsened. When the rivers rose to a critical stage, daily reports were issued on the hydrometeorological evolution in the upper basins and on

the gradual increase in atmospheric moisture. Flood and evacuation warnings were delivered with 5 and 10 days' lead time for the Middle Paraná River; 40 days’ lead time for the Lower Paraná River; and 5 days, lead time for the Uruguay River. The Hydrologic Warning and Information System issued monthly forecasts of the hydrologic situation, described possible scenarios, and determined the maximum water levels the rivers were likely to reach after heavy rains. Users acknowledged the accurate and timely forecasts that the Hydrologic Warning and Information System issued during that national emergency.

Manejo Integrado de Recursos Hidricos en Cuencas Transfronterizas: El Caso de la Cuenca del Río San Juan

Costa Rica-Nicaragua

Jorge Rucks∗∗∗∗

EL RIO SAN JUAN Y LA GRAN CUENCA La Cuenca del Río San Juan conforma el mayor sistema de agua dulce de Centroamérica. Es compartida por Costa Rica y Nicaragua. La extensión de la Cuenca, considerando su área de influencia, es de 38.569 km². De ellos, el 64% se localiza en territorio nicaragüense y el 36% en territorio de Costa Rica. MAPA DE LA GRAN CUENCA El sistema hidrográfico de la Cuenca del Río San Juan está integrado por el Lago de Managua; el Lago de Nicaragua o Cocibolca, con 104.109 m³, y el Río San Juan, que recibe aproximadamente el 85% de su caudal directo de la vertiente costarricense (excluido el aportado por el Lago de Nicaragua). El Lago de Managua y su cuenca no han sido integrados a los estudios del Proyecto dado su carácter netamente nacional y su particular situación de contaminación. Sin embargo, es considerado, por su vínculo, como factor incidente en el Lago de Nicaragua. Se han incorporado al área de estudio las cuencas de los ríos Indio y Maíz en Nicaragua, por sus fuertes relaciones dentro del ecosistema de Bosque Húmedo Tropical y los ecosistemas costeros, integrando la gran Reserva Biológica de Indio y Maíz. Se han incorporado asimismo las cuencas de los ríos Tortuguero y Colorado en Costa Rica, que permiten vincular las áreas protegidas de las llanuras del Tortuguero y de la costa costarricense. Una característica muy particular de esta cuenca transfronteriza es la demarcación de la frontera entre los dos países. La situación ha dado lugar a históricos desentendimientos. El río San Juan fluye por territorio nicaragüense; su ribera derecha, en gran parte, define la frontera desde su desembocadura hasta la localización de El Castillo, luego la línea de frontera se interna hacia el sur, al interior del territorio, por la vertiente costarricense, dejando el Lago de Nicaragua totalmente dentro de territorio nicaragüense. Las definiciones fronterizas y las regulaciones sobre el uso del río han sido definidas por un largo proceso de tratados y acuerdos entre los países, en un delicado equilibrio que ∗ Jefe, Área Geográfica II, Unidad de Desarrollo Sostenible y Medio Ambiente, OEA.

constantemente requiere de esfuerzos de entendimiento entre sus gobiernos para salvar situaciones conflictivas. Actualmente, el Tratado Cañas-Jerez, el Laudo Cleveland, la Convención Matus Pacheco y las Actas de la Comisión Alexander son los documentos que definen su situación jurídica. Las causas de esta particularidad se remontan, entre otros motivos, al alto interés geopolítico y económico del sistema del Río San Juan y el Lago de Nicaragua, como vía de conexión entre los océanos Atlántico y Pacífico. El promedio de lluvia anual en la Cuenca varía entre los 1.500 mm hacia el oeste y los 6.000 mm en la zona costera. La mayor parte de la Cuenca está por debajo de los 500 msnm y llega a alturas entre los 1.500 y 3.000 msnm en la Cordillera Volcánica Central, en Costa Rica. De acuerdo con Holdridge 4 son las zonas de vida más importantes en ella el bosque seco tropical al este del Lago de Nicaragua hasta el bosque muy húmedo tropical costero, lo cual define áreas con déficits hídricos en las zonas más pobladas y un fuerte exceso de humedad en las áreas costeras con menor densidad de población. Se identifican asimismo zonas intermedias de bosque húmedo tropical, como interfase entre las dos anteriores, y en Costa Rica son importantes las formaciones de bosque muy húmedo premontano, en las cuales se localizan las nacientes de los ríos afluentes más importantes por su caudal de aporte al Río San Juan. El caudal del Río San Juan en la boca del Lago de Nicaragua es de 475 m³/s y llega a un promedio de 1.308 m³/s, en su desembocadura. Después de haber cumplido un importante papel como vía de comercio en la época española, el Río San Juan es muy poco utilizado para el transporte, no obstante lo cual es el único vínculo para las escasas poblaciones que habitan en sus márgenes o en las margenes de sus afluentes. Han existido y aún se proponen numerosas iniciativas y proyectos para un uso más intenso del río, tanto para dinamizar el transporte fluvial como para otros usos como el hidroeléctrico, los cuales parecen estar aún lejos de poder concretarse. Las aguas subterráneas en la Cuenca son en general abundantes y de buena calidad. Las redes de datos hidrometeorológicos no son actualmente suficientes para conocer el comportamiento del sistema hidrológico. En Costa Rica las estaciones de medición de caudales se localizan en la cuenca alta, por el interés hidroenergético para lo cual se instalaron; no existen estaciones hidrológicas en la cuenca media y baja. En Nicaragua existe una debilidad en la red, dispersión geográfica, y problemas de calidad de los datos por falta de continuidad en la información de varias de las estaciones. La calidad de las aguas superficiales es en general buena, pero existen problemas originados por tres factores: 1) la contaminación puntual derivada de la presencia de ciudades y ciertas agroindustrias que vierten las aguas servidas sin tratamiento directamente al ambiente; 2) la contaminación dispersa debida al uso de agroquímicos en cultivos intensivos tradicionales y de incorporación más reciente, y 3) sedimentos en los ríos que bajan de las zonas altas e intermedias más antropizadas y volcadas a la producción agrícola, caracterizadas por la alta tasa de deforestación. Si bien se puede afirmar que la buena calidad general de los cuerpos de agua

superficiales es buena, sólo se han realizado estudios puntuales sobre el tema que dejan preocupaciones y no permiten un adecuado diagnóstico del sistema hidrológico. Se trata de una zona importante por su diversidad biológica y clave por su papel en el corredor biológico que ha sido el Istmo Centroamericano. Se localiza en la interfase entre la Zona Neotropical Sudamericana y la Neoártica que caracteriza Norteamérica. La zona baja de la Cuenca es parte del mayor bosque húmedo tropical al norte de la región amazónica. El cuidadoso manejo de los recursos hídricos es clave dados los bienes y servicios que éstos prestan a los ecosistemas naturales. Existen 51 áreas protegidas definidas dentro de la Cuenca, 33 en Costa Rica y 18 en Nicaragua. Prácticamente toda la zona costera está dentro de áreas protegidas. En Nicaragua se verifica una fuerte expansión de la frontera agrícola hacia el este presionando sobre la gran Reserva Biológica de Indio Maíz. Más allá de los esfuerzos que se realizan para conservar las áreas protegidas, por parte del país y del apoyo internacional, existe debilidad en la capacidad de manejo y vigilancia de las mismas. Por otra parte, los esfuerzos de conservación se han centrado en el bosque húmedo tropical, en tanto el bosque seco tropical, que predomina en la cuenca del Lago de Nicaragua, más afectado históricamente por la presencia y las actividades humanas, no ha tenido atención proteccionista y sus cuencas menores presentan síntomas de deterioro, con afectación de los recursos hídricos, los cuales son muchos más presionados en esta zona para su utilización. En Costa Rica la amplia incorporación de la zona a la producción en las décadas de los años 70 y 80 y la deforestación generalizada han aislado y atomizado las áreas protegidas, fenómeno que busca recuperarse mediante la definición de áreas de conservación como estrategia de gestión conservacionista del territorio. Sin embargo, en la delimitación de ellas no se han tomado como base las cuencas hidrográficas, demostración de la menor prioridad que se le ha otorgado al manejo del agua en la política de conservación. La población que habita dentro de la Cuenca alcanza 1.100.000 personas. El 73% de ellas viven en territorio de Nicaragua, donde la densidad media es de alrededor de 46 hab/km²; el 55% es rural. Las poblaciones mayores se localizan hacia el oeste, en la subcuenca del Lago de Nicaragua. Ciudades como Granada y Masaya se localizan en esta zona. La subcuenca del Río San Juan tiene una población muy escasa, pero es la que experimenta un mayor crecimiento porcentual por migración interna. En Costa Rica la población es fundamentalmente rural (68.3%) y su densidad promedio es inferior a la de Nicaragua (22.3 hab/km²); sin embargo, su distribución en el territorio es más homogénea. Su población en los últimos 20 años se duplicó largamente. En el período reciente las migraciones desde Nicaragua hacia Costa Rica, tanto zafrales como permanentes, han sido muy fuertes. Por otro lado, ha existido tradicionalmente vinculación e intercambio entre las poblaciones fronterizas, aisladas cada una de ellas de sus respectivos centros hegemónicos de San José y Managua.

La población indígena es muy escasa; se limita al grupo de los Guatusos o Malekus, unas 520 personas que habitan en el Cantón Guatusos, en la zona fronteriza de Costa Rica. En ambos países las condiciones de pobreza y los índices de calidad de vida de la población superan los índices promedio nacionales; sin embargo, la calidad de vida y cobertura de la infraestructura y servicios son en promedio superiores en Costa Rica, lo cual, unido a las oportunidades laborales, genera una fuerte presión migratoria. Las condiciones de saneamiento y abastecimiento de agua potable son altamente deficitarias, particularmente en Nicaragua Existe una fuerte asimetría en la actividad económica entre los dos países y al interior de la Cuenca. La expansión de la frontera agrícola parece haber perdido agresividad en Costa Rica después de la década de los 80, pero hay presión por el crecimiento de la población rural y la entrega de tierras como parte de la reforma agraria. En Nicaragua la presión de los campesinos pobres en busca de suelos más fértiles ha generado un nuevo empuje de la frontera agrícola hacia el este, con la consecuente tala y quema de los bosques primarios. En ambos casos la economía de la Cuenca está basada en el sector primario que se ha abierto espacio desplazando la cobertura boscosa. La deforestación calculada en Nicaragua por el Plan Forestal estimaba al año 97 que la disminución de bosques a nivel nacional era de 150.000 ha/año y en Costa Rica la estimación para ese período fue de 18.500 ha/año. Los cultivos intensivos tradicionales en Costa Rica y Nicaragua, como el algodón, arroz, banano o caña de azúcar, y la introducción de nuevos cultivos agroindustriales y sus plantas procesadoras, tales como los cítricos y palma africana, plantean problemas de contaminación de los cuerpos de agua, ya desprovistos de los bosques protectores en sus márgenes. Entre los principales factores directos que han acelerado e incrementado los procesos de erosión y sedimentación afectando el cauce del Río San Juan, de por sí con una dinámica compleja, se identifican: 1) la construcción de caminos sin consideración a su impacto ambiental; 2) la agricultura en suelos de alta pendiente o altamente erosionables; 3) la utilización de tecnología no conservacionista de los recursos naturales; 4) la deforestación generalizada en las tierras intermedias y bajas; 5) los incendios forestales y las quemas. El antiguo puerto de San Juan del Sur, en las bocas del San Juan, ha visto sedimentada su bahía y hoy su acceso por embarcaciones comerciales es imposible. El mismo río ha cambiado su desembocadura y actualmente desemboca a través del Río Colorado, en territorio de Costa Rica, ampliando los conflictos de soberanía y uso del río entre los dos países.

Nuevas amenazas plantean actualmente las presiones por concesionar tierras para actividades de exploración y explotación minera en ambos países. EL PROYECTO En el año 1993, el interés de los gobiernos de Costa Rica y Nicaragua por avanzar coordinadamente para la solución de sus problemas en la zona fronteriza y en la Cuenca del Río San Juan llevó a incorporar la idea de un proyecto binacional en el marco del Plan de Desarrollo de Zonas Fronterizas de Centroamérica, bajo los auspicios de la XIII Cumbre de Presidentes Centroamericanos. Los vicepresidentes de ambos países, responsables de la gestión del proyecto, delegaron su ejecución en los actuales MINAE y MARENA. En 1995 la OEA y el PNUMA juntan sus esfuerzos para cooperar con los gobiernos de Costa Rica y Nicaragua a fin de realizar un primer diagnóstico de la situación de la Cuenca que es finalizado y publicado en 1997. Este es el documento que ha sido entregado en esta oportunidad. Durante todo este período de trabajo se coordinaron acciones horizontales con diferentes instituciones en cada país y se avanzó en la conceptualización de los problemas de interés común, en un excelente entendimiento entre las unidades técnicas de Costa Rica y Nicaragua. Durante 1997 y 1998 la SG/OEA, a través de la Unidad de Desarrollo Sostenible y Medio Ambiente, mantuvo la cooperación técnica al Proyecto. Se fortaleció la capacidad de gestión de MINAE y MARENA en la Cuenca y se avanzó y fortaleció la relación institucional vertical del Proyecto con las municipalidades (Nicaragua) y los cantones (Costa Rica). Se elaboró el Atlas Ambiental de la Cuenca a nivel municipal, validado por los propios municipios; se realizó educación ambiental, y se consolidaron las relaciones de trabajo binacionales. Ambos períodos no estuvieron exentos de problemas de la más diversa índole, tanto en la frontera terrestre como en la marítima, que por momentos parecieron dificultar el avance de los trabajos conjuntos en el Proyecto. No obstante la sensibilidad política del tema, primaron los esfuerzos de entendimiento y cooperación mutua. Durante este período se crea en Nicaragua la Asociación de Municipios para la Protección del Lago de Nicaragua. Algunas conclusiones parecen haber quedado de estos esfuerzos: • En ambos países existe una fuerte voluntad política de atender los problemas de desarrollo

con un enfoque de sostenibilidad y de coordinar a nivel técnico las soluciones que se identifiquen. Esa voluntad se afianzó en el proceso de trabajo y se eliminaron desconfianzas. Sin embargo, los problemas políticos derivados de la situación de límites persisten y seguramente persistirán en el futuro.

• La resolución de los problemas ambientales es de largo aliento y pasa necesariamente por

resolver los problemas de pobreza aguda que afecta gran parte de la población de la zona. Es prioritario atacar los factores causales del deterioro de la Cuenca con soluciones viables de uso sostenible de los recursos naturales, con enfoque integral.

• En las condiciones actuales de los países y de la Cuenca, no obstante sus diferencias de desarrollo relativo, la viabilidad de los proyectos depende de los esfuerzos coordinados de la sociedad civil involucrada, los gobiernos locales, las instituciones de gobierno nacional y la cooperación internacional.

• Se hace necesario un plan de carácter estratégico que oriente y coordine los diferentes

esfuerzos. • El valor de los ecosistemas naturales terrestres y acuáticos y de su diversidad biológica

trasciende el interés de los dos países. El esfuerzo de la cooperación internacional es imprescindible y debe adecuarse a las voluntades y capacidades y orientaciones de las políticas nacionales.

• La calidad, cantidad y dinámica de los recursos hídricos son condición fundamental y están

intrínsecamente interrelacionados por los bienes y servicios que prestan al conjunto de la naturaleza y al desarrollo humano, por lo que su manejo en el ámbito de Cuenca es imprescindible para el desarrollo sostenible de la misma y de los países.

• No es posible que cada país actúe unilateralmente utilizando los recursos naturales sin

objetivos de manejo comunes y sin acordar la disponibilidad y formas de uso de los recursos hídricos.

• La falta de conciencia de los procesos naturales, las condicionantes políticas y administrativas

del territorio, las angustias por el desarrollo y las consecuentes presiones económicas y sociales han restado jerarquía a las unidades naturales de análisis y actuación, planteando la falsa disyuntiva entre el desarrollo socioeconómico y el manejo ambiental. Esta se expresa en la práctica en una ambigüedad en el relacionamiento binacional, entre una actuación concertada en el ámbito fronterizo, incluyendo las variables ambientales (tratado de cooperación fronteriza, sobre la base de unidades político-administrativas), y en el ámbito de la Cuenca. Esta disyuntiva no se ha resuelto claramente hasta el momento.

PROYECTO FMAM EN AGUAS INTERNACIONALES A partir de los estudios y conclusiones de la primera fase del Proyecto, ambos gobiernos acordaron formular una solicitud de financiamiento al Fondo para el Medio Ambiente Mundial (FMAM). En diálogo entre la OEA/UDSMA, con el PNUMA, y la Secretaría del FMAM, se acordó que la formulación de un Plan Estratégico de Acción era viable dentro del Programa 8: Programa Operativo basado en Cuerpos de Agua, destinado a "apoyar a grupos de países para trabajar junto a las agencias de implementación para lograr cambios en las actividades y políticas sectoriales, para solucionar problemas de carácter transfronterizo que degradan los cuerpos de agua". En julio de 1998 el FMAM aprobó una cooperación, Bloque B, por un monto de US$283.000 destinado al Manejo Integrado de los Recursos Hídricos y Desarrollo Sostenible de la Cuenca del Río San Juan y su Zona Costera.

El objetivo expreso del proyecto aprobado es "Preparar un documento de proyecto FMAM que incluya los elementos de trabajo necesarios para formular un Plan Estratégico de Acción (PEA) para el manejo integrado de la Cuenca del Río San Juan y su zona costera". Los temas de actuación considerados en el Plan Estratégico de Acción se derivan del diagnóstico realizado y prevén su actualización y el análisis de causalidad para orientar las decisiones. Consisten en: • Identificar soluciones regionales para asegurar la calidad de las aguas, resolver problemas de

erosión y sedimentación en la Cuenca del Río San Juan y su zona costera y priorizar las acciones que deben ser tomadas consensuadamente entre ambos países.

• Avanzar en los acuerdos binacionales a nivel institucional incluyendo la participación de la

sociedad civil y los gobiernos locales en el manejo de los recursos naturales de la Cuenca. • Proveer asesoramiento a los gobiernos sobre proyectos de manejo integrado de los recursos

hídricos para impulsar el desarrollo sostenible. • Definir y evaluar los procesos de naturaleza geomorfológica y bioquímica que se detectan en

la Cuenca, en la zona del delta y en la costa, que son fruto del impacto ambiental de actividades humanas.

• Identificar proyectos piloto que pueden ser relevantes para probar metodologias y técnicas, así

como para resolver problemas de desarrollo sostenible y rehabilitación de áreas degradadas. • Preparar estudios de prefactibilidad para actividades priorizadas y análisis de los mecanismos

económicos que permitan la recuperación de costos, a fin de asegurar su sostenibilidad y la de las instituciones que pudieran requerirse o involucrarse.

• Ejecutar programas de participación pública que incluyan a los interesados de la sociedad

civil, las municipalidades, las instituciones nacionales y las organizaciones privadas pertinentes para el manejo de la Cuenca.

El Bloque B se estructuró en 7 actividades:

1. Establecimiento de un Consejo Directivo y preparación de términos de referencia de los trabajos.

2. Revisión de los problemas ambientales presentes y emergentes en la Cuenca y en la zona

costera.

3. Análisis de los problemas ambientales de carácter transfronterizo, proyectos en ejecución y previstos, y condiciones futuras en la Cuenca y la zona costera.

4. Revisión de los asuntos institucionales.

5. Definición de prioridades, en proceso de amplia consulta (sociedad civil, instituciones

académicas, gobiernos locales, ONG, instituciones de los gobiernos).

6. Desarrollo de las propuestas para la consulta pública durante el PEA.

7. Preparación del documento de proyecto para la solicitud al FMAM.

El eje de la organización está en la formación de: • Un Consejo Directivo, ya integrado por las instituciones ejecutoras a nivel de Ministros

(MINAE y MARENA), las Cancillerías, representantes de los gobiernos locales (alcaldes), representantes de las organizaciones de implementación y ejecución del Proyecto (PNUMA y OEA), y representantes de las instituciones de implementación del FMAM (PNUD y BM).

• La Unidad Técnica del Proyecto, con un Director y un Coordinador Técnico en cada país y

personal de facilitación y consultoría especializada, trabajando en el ámbito de la Cuenca. • Seminarios y talleres de participación para la selección de proyectos y priorización de los

elementos de trabajo que integrarán el PEA. • La primera reunión del Consejo Directivo se realizó en Managua en noviembre de 1998. En la fase actual de ejecución el proyecto permitirá lo siguiente: • Completar el diagnóstico con la identificación de los problemas de carácter transfronterizo,

problemas que pueden contar con financiamiento del FMAM en las fases siguientes. • Definir los “elementos de trabajo” que darán lugar al PEA, para avanzar en el desarrollo

sostenible, constituyéndose por su metodología participativa en un instrumento de concertación entre los diferentes actores del desarrollo.

• Concertar las voluntades locales, nacionales e internacionales en una cuenca de importancia

global y fortalecer las inversiones de base, orientando y canalizando inversiones nacionales y de otras instituciones de financiamiento. Ello a su vez aumenta la posibilidad de financiamiento de costos incrementales que el FMAM puede absorber y da al PEA un papel catalítico para resolver y enfocar esfuerzos de desarrollo nacional, en cada país.

• Coordinar estrategias con el Corredor Biológico Mesoamericano, dada su localización clave

en el Istmo y la articulación que el PEA permitirá para las actividades concertadas del Corredor en Costa Rica y Nicaragua.

• Incorporar en la práctica una experiencia de manejo integrado de cuencas que tome en cuenta la vulnerabilidad de la región a los desastres naturales, a fin de permitir acciones preventivas en el corto, mediano y largo plazo y, por lo tanto, disminuir los niveles de riesgo.

Particularmente importante es la experiencia del paso del Huracán Mitch por Centroamérica y frente a las perspectivas de fenómenos similares que han llevado a plantear el tema del manejo integrado de cuencas como prioridad de las políticas nacionales y regionales. Finalmente, es especialmente interesante poder plantear esta experiencia abierta a todos los niveles de actuación en oportunidad del III Diálogo Interamericano sobre Administración de Aguas. El Proyecto trabaja actualmente con consultores nacionales e internacionales en la Cuenca, involucrando a los actores en los diferentes niveles, buscando llegar a los seminarios nacionales y binacionales en los próximos meses de abril, mayo y junio, en los cuales se avanzará hacia la selección de los “elementos de trabajo” y “proyectos piloto” que conformarán las bases del futuro PEA. El espacio de participación está abierto, entonces, también a cada uno de ustedes, instituciones y organizaciones interesadas en juntar esfuerzos en esta Cuenca transnacional, particularmente desafiante e importante. El Bloque B del Proyecto tiene previsto ser culminado en el mes de setiembre próximo, para ser presentado por el PNUMA al Consejo del FMAM en octubre o noviembre de 1999.

La Comisión Binacional para el Desarrollo de la Alta Cuenca del Río Bermejo y del Río Grande de Tarija

Abel Barroso∗∗∗∗ 1. ANTECEDENTES FECHAS

CARÁCTER

FIRMANTES

OBJETO

30-oct-70

Acuerdo de asistencia técnica

La OEA y el Gobierno argentino

Estudio de los recursos hídricos de la Alta Cuenca del Río Bermejo

21-abr-72

Acuerdo adicional

La OEA y los gobiernos de Argentina y de Bolivia

Estudio de los recursos hídricos de la Alta Cuenca del Río Bermejo

12-sep-91

Notas revérsales

Gobiernos de Argentina y de Bolivia

Creación de la Subcomisión Binacional para el Aprovechamiento de los Recursos Hídricos de la Alta Cuenca del Río Bermejo y del Río Grande de Tarija

26-oct-92

Notas reversales

Gobiernos de Argentina y de Bolivia

Definición de la Fase I de los estudios de factibilidad para el desarrollo de los recursos hídricos de la Alta Cuenca del Río Bermejo y del Río Grande de Tarija

09-jun-95

Acuerdo

Gobiernos de Argentina y de Bolivia

Creación de la Comisión Binacional para el Desarrollo de la Alta Cuenca del Río Bermejo y del Río Grande de Tarija

06-nov-95 07-dic-95

Notas reversales

Gobiernos de Argentina y de Bolivia

Aprobación del Estatuto de la Comisión Binacional

19-nov-96

Protocolos complementarios

Gobiernos de Argentina y de Bolivia

Autorización a la Comisión Binacional a licitar la concesión para la construcción, operación, mantenimiento, explotación y administración de los proyectos de propósito múltiple Las Pavas, Arrazayal y Cambarí

08-abr-98 Acta de intercambio

Gobiernos de Bolivia y de Argentina

Intercambio de instrumentos de ratificación del Acuerdo de Orán

24-abr-98 Protocolos adicionales

Gobiernos de Bolivia y de Argentina

Régimen impositivo y arancelario, creación de una contribución aplicable a la generación de energía

∗ Secretario Ejecutivo, Comisiòn Binacional para el Desarrollo de la Alta Cuenca Rio Bermejo y del Rio Grande de Tarija, Bolivia.

2. LA COMISIÓN BINACIONAL PARA EL DESARROLLO DE LA ALTA CUENCA DEL RÍO BERMEJO Y DEL RÍO GRANDE DE TARIJA

Creación

A través de un acuerdo suscrito el 9 de junio de 1995 en la ciudad argentina de San Ramón de la Nueva Orán, crean la Comisión Binacional para el Desarrollo de la Alta Cuenca del Río Bermejo y del Río Grande de Tarija.

Ratificaciones

Bolivia: Ley N° 1711 de 9 de octubre de 1996, promulgada por el Poder Ejecutivo el 18 de octubre de 1996. Argentina: Ley N° 24.639 publicada en el Boletín Oficial de 13 de mayo de 1996.

Conformación

Participan dos delegados por cada país. El primero es el representante de cada cancillería, con rango de Embajador. Los segundos son, por Bolivia, el Director Nacional de la Comisión Nacional de los Rios Pilcomayo y Bermejo y, por la Argentina, el Director Presidente de la Comisión Regional del Río Bermejo. Éstos a su vez fungen de Secretarios Ejecutivos de la Comisión Binacional.

Status Jurídico

Organismo internacional jurídico-técnico, con autonomía de gestión técnica, administrativa y financiera.

Sede

Bolivia: La ciudad de Tarija. Argentina: La ciudad de Buenos Aires.

Institucionalidad

Organismo técnico operativo dirigido por dos Secretarios Ejecutivos definidos por el Acuerdo de Orán.

Atribuciones y Funciones

Atribuciones

a) Realizar todas las gestiones necesarias para el desarrollo de la Cuenca, según se encuentran definidas en el Acuerdo de Orán.

b) Negociar con los inversores interesados, desde la etapa de prefactibilidad, las condiciones técnicas, económicas, financieras y legales de los

emprendimientos para la redacción del pliego definitivo con el objeto de otorgar las concesiones correspondientes.

c) Tener competencia sobre las obras conjuntas independientemente del territorio en que se encuentren. Dichas obras serán objeto de un acuerdo complementario entre las partes, en el que se especificarán los datos técnicos relativos a su diseño, construcción, administración y explotación. Estos acuerdos tendrán el carácter de un protocolo complementario o de tratados ejecutivos dentro del marco del presente Acuerdo y, por lo tanto, podrán celebrarse mediante instrumentos que entrarán en vigor desde el momento de su firma.

Funciones

a) Identificar programas de desarrollo sostenible. b) Seleccionar las obras a realizar en los cursos de agua, sobre la base de la

correspondiente evaluación del impacto ambiental (EIA). c) Redactar los términos de referencia para los programas y obras a realizar;

gestionar la financiación de los estudios y proyectos seleccionados y los convenios de cooperación técnica no reembolsable con organismos internacionales.

d) Llamar a licitación internacional para la realización de estudios de prefactibilidad y factibilidad, cuyos procedimientos serán establecidos por la Comisión.

e) Preseleccionar empresas, asesores, técnicos y consorcios para su precalificación y calificación.

f) Adjudicar la realización de estudios y programas, proyectos y obras de los recursos hídricos.

g) Otorgar concesiones para la ejecución y explotación de las obras y emprendimientos a realizar, sin garantías ni avales gubernamentales.

h) Suscribir los contratos de concesión con las empresas y consorcios adjudicatarios y supervisar la realización de los proyectos y obras adjudicadas y el cumplimiento de las cláusulas de las concesiones otorgadas.

i) Aprobar la planificación y el trazado de puentes, ductos y otras estructuras que crucen los cursos de los ríos y que pudieren afectar los usos y el funcionamiento hidráulico de los mismos, así como su navegación.

j) Determinar las zonas en las cuales no podrán efectuarse extracciones de recursos que afecten el comportamiento hidráulico y morfológico de los rios.

3. PROYECTOS EN VIAS DE EJECUCIÓN Entre los años 1995 y 1996, se realizaron los estudios de factibilidad, Fase I (Prefactibilidad), con el objetivo de seleccionar los proyectos para el aprovechamiento de los recursos hídricos localizados en los tramos binacionales de los ríos Bermejo y Grande de Tarija y los ubicados en territorio boliviano y argentino para su inserción en el desarrollo socioeconómico de ambos países.

3.1 Características Productivas de los Proyectos en Vías de Ejecución

PROYECTO

POTENCIA INSTALADA (MW)

ENERGÍA MEDIA

(GWh/año) CAMBARÍ

95

461

LAS PAVAS

75

394

ARRAZAYAL

83

471

3.2 Costos de Inversión de los Proyectos (US$)

COSTOS

LAS PAVAS

ARRAZAYAL

CAMBARI

TOTAL

COSTOS DIRECTOS Obras civiles Obras electromecánicas Transmisión y subestaciones Expropiaciones COSTOS INDIRECTOS Administración, Ing. Obrador y Campamento Caminos a construir Caminos a reparar Nueva traza Km. 19- Desemboque

98.200.000 52.900.000 34.000.000 7.800.000 3.500.000 104.000.000 39.000.000 0 0 65.000.000

94.000.000 49.000.000 34.000.000 6.500.000 4.500.000 37.000.000 30.000.000 0 0 7.000.000

135.300.000 88.800.000 37.000.000 9.000.000 500.000 51.500.000 33.000.000 3.500.000 15.000.000 0

327.500.000 190.600.000 105.000.000 23.300.000 8.500.000 192.500.000 102.000.000 3.500.000 15.000.000 72.000.000

COSTOS TOTALES DE OBRA

202.200.000

131.000.000

186.800.000

520.000.000

3.3 Características Técnicas de las Presas

DESCRIPCIÓN

LAS PAVAS

ARRAZAYAL

CAMBARÍ

1. EMPLAZAMIENTO Provincia argentina Departamento boliviano Rio Usos prioritarios del recurso 2. OPERACIÓN DE EMBALSES Cotas de embalse

Nivel máximo Nivel máximo de operación Nivel mínimo de operación

Cotas de restitución Nivel máximo extremo Nivel máximo de operación Nivel eje turbinas Area de embalse Capacidad de embalse Caudal medio anual Crecida de proyecto

3. PRESA Tipo Altura de presa Tipo de toma Carretera sobre la presa Tipo Ancho 4. ALIVIADERO Caudal de diseño Tipo de aliviadero Longitud total, incluidos pilas Compuertas Tipo Número 5. CENTRAL Tipo Unidades generadoras Turbinas

Salta Tarija

Bermejo Energía y

agua regulada

683 m 680 m 652 m

599 m 585 m 582 m

3600 ha 1839 hm3 75 m3/s

9600 m3/s

Gravedad 110 m

En torre

Circulación Gral. 10 m

5.902 m3/s Perfil guiado

76 m

Segmento 6

Pie de presa 2

Francis

Salta Tarija

Bermejo Energía y

agua regulada

556 m 555 m 527 m

474 m 459 m 457 m

3800 ha 1324 hm3 82 m3/s

7600 m3/s

Gravedad 120 m

En torre

Circulación Gral. 10 m

5.227 m3/s Perfil guiado

76 m

Segmento 6

Pie de presa 2

Francis

Tarija Tarija Tarija

Energía y agua regulada

645 m 640 m 622 m

544 m 544 m 537 m

3600 ha 1679 hm3 86 m3/s

6800 m3/s

Arco-Gravedad 110 m

En torre

Circulación Gral. 10 m

5.500 m3/s

Perfil guiado 76 m

Segmento

6

Pie de presa 2

Francis

4. EL PROGRAMA ESTRATÉGICO PARA LA CUENCA BINACIONAL DEL RIO BERMEJO (PEA)

4.1 Objetivos Formulación de un diagnóstico ambiental de la Cuenca para identificar las prioridades ambientales transfronterizas y temas sectoriales vinculados Formulación del plan para la cuenca binacional a base de las áreas focales del Fondo para el Medio Ambiente Mundial (FMAM) que busque resolver los problemas ambientales transfronterizos Realizar actividades demostrativas piloto a fin de obtener información ambiental Prestar cooperación a ambos gobiernos para: Incorporar temas ambientales dentro de las políticas de desarrollo de la Cuenca Instituir un sistema de consulta pública en la implementación de los proyectos de desarrollo de la Cuenca 4.2 Organismos Participantes Fondo para el Medio Ambiente Mundial (FMAM), Organismo Financiador Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente (PNUMA), Agencia de Implementación Organización de los Estados Americanos (OEA), Agencia de Ejecución Comisión Binacional para el Desarrollo de la Alta Cuenca del Río Bermejo y del Río Grande de Tarija, Beneficiario 4.3 Financiamiento del PEA (US$)

GOBIERNO DE

BOLIVIA ARGENTINA PNUMA Y

OEA FMAM COSTO TOTAL

1.147.500

1.362.500

225.000

2.990.000

5.725.000

Case Study: Private Participation and Public −−−−Sector Roles in the Provision of Water/Sanitation Services in Latin America

Vinio V. Floris and Mantha Mehallis∗∗∗∗ SUMMARY In the last decades, most water and sanitation utilities in the Latin American region have been in the hands of government-owned enterprises providing on average a deficient service. The most recent data available (1988) show that 79% of urban areas and 55% of rural areas had water connections. In urban areas, 49% of the population had house connections for sewerage and excreta disposal, while in rural areas the number did not exceed 32%. Partial and more recent data indicate that the situation has not significantly improved since the 1980s. Also, public services companies have been unfairly affected by political manipulation that resulted in low tariffs and caused heavy financial burdens to those enterprises. In many cases, revenues have not covered operational costs, seriously affecting investments in new infrastructure and vital maintenance activities. Latin America alone needs between US$100 and US$200 billion in infrastructure investment over the next decade, and multinational financial institutions can only provide about 10-20% of the financing needed. In order to meet these needs and to increase coverage and improve the efficiency and reliability of water and sanitation services, the Latin American governments have committed themselves to creating and expanding programs of state modernization in which the emphasis is in the new supporting role of the private sector. The traditional role of governments (as owners, policy makers, operators, and regulators of public service entities) has been evolving towards the regulation of utilities and promotion of private participation. Pioneer countries like Argentina and Mexico followed different schemes and strategies. They are being emulated by several other Latin American and Caribbean nations. Even though private participation activities are carried out following many and various arrangements and approaches, it is a fact that they have all had an impact on the social, economic, political, and environmental aspects of those nations. Water and sanitation utilities are quite different from any other enterprise, including other public service utilities. Water is an essential resource for sustaining life and preserving health and environmental quality. Water/sanitation utilities are usually vertically integrated natural monopolies allowing for very little or no competition. For this reason, regulatory institutions play a key role in setting appropriate tariffs and performing enforcement of agreed activities. The privatization of water and sanitation services in the region has shown some still partial but very important lessons to be learned. It has been determined that an independent and well-trained regulatory authority can greatly assist in maximizing benefits and increasing the efficiency, availability, and reliability of services. It can also guarantee a fair climate and avoid ex post ∗ International consultant, Florida, U.S.A., and Director, Center for International Business Information Transfer, Florida Atlantic University, Florida, U.S.A., respectively.

opportunism. On the other hand, private concessionaires, although relatively new in the region, see a economically beneficial environment in the future by making significant cost reductions, productivity gains, and a more efficient use and allocation of water. A key issue that still needs improvement is the determination of appropriate water tariff mechanisms that perform well under uncertainty, gradually raise water quality standards, favor innovation, and give incentives for more investments. This document serves to provide background knowledge and stimulate discussion at the "Changing Role of the Public and Private Sector in Water Resources Management" session of the Third Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management. It discusses the quality of water and sanitation services provided in the region and the new role of governments in improving the situation. It also shows the most recent private participation advances, discusses weaknesses and strengths of the process, and summarizes some of the lessons learned. THE QUALITY OF WATER AND SANITATION SERVICES As was mentioned before, the region has had a history of providing insufficient and generally low-quality water and sanitation services to its population. During the so-called “lost decade” of the 1980s, the situation worsened in the light of high rates of population growth, lower levels of public investment, and deficient operation and maintenance of infrastructure. Data collected in 1988 show that 79% of urban areas had water connections, 9% had some access to them, and 12% had no services at all. In the rural areas the situation was even worse: only 55% of the population had water services. For sewerage and excreta disposal in urban areas, 49% of the population had house connections, 32% had some other solutions (septic tanks, latrines, etc.), and 19% had no services at all. In the rural areas the situation was very critical, as only 32% of that population had access to sewerage and excreta disposal (Artana, Navajas, and Urbiztondo, 1996). Current data are scarce, but it is known that in recent times the situation has not improved much. Of the one billion people worldwide currently lacking an assured supply of good-quality water, 100 million live in Latin America; and of the 1.7 billion people in the world who have no adequate sanitation, 140 million are also in the region (Reilly, 1999). For instance, in Mexico in 1990, 16.7 million people lacked access to potable water and 28.8 million to sewerage services. Of the 250 m3/s that were provided to the population, 160 m3/s returned to water bodies as wastewater, and of this total only 10% at most was treated. Even in 1994, cities/towns with fewer than 500 people had 48% and 26% coverage of water and sewerage services, respectively, while cities with 80,000 people or more had over 90% coverage of both services (Floris, 1998).1 In Peru, the water and sanitation services are, in general, below any acceptable standard, in both quality and reliability. For instance, in the rural mountain area (the so-called “sierra rural”) only two of every ten poor people have access to potable water, one to electricity, and none to sanitation services (Revista Caretas, 1998). In general, most water supply facilities have basic treatment, but the sanitation infrastructure only collects sewage and disposes of it raw to different water bodies. This has created serious health problems and environmental liabilities. 1 It is important to note that in Mexico, 80 cities of over 50,000 inhabitants have no wastewater treatment at all, even though they have excreta systems (Reilly, 1997).

The regulatory agencies provide little environmental monitoring, and almost no enforcement is performed. A major concern in the region is the growth of urban populations with huge marginal zones in the peripheries, which is a product of massive immigration from rural areas with no planning for infrastructure and services. These regions already harbor 40% of the urban population and are expected to account for 80% of the population growth during the 1990s (Ash and Castro, 1999). It is estimated that the population of Central and South America will almost double from year 1990 (404 million) to year 2050 (754 million), according to a United Nations estimate.3 Already there are 13 cities in Latin America with more than 3 million people, and urban populations are growing at 3.6% a year. (Lee and Castro, 1999). There is very little culture of wastewater treatment in the region. It is estimated that fewer than 10 percent of sewerage systems have treatment plants, between 5 and 10 percent of collected wastewater receives some treatment (which is often inadequate or incomplete), and less than 5 percent of raw sewerage receives proper filtration and bactericidal processing. Estimates also show that in 1990 a total of 350 m3/s of untreated wastewater was improperly disposed of (Ash and Castro, 1999). The absence of even limited availability of water and sanitation services increases the incidence and prevalence of associated diseases and accelerates the degradation of the resource and the environment. For instance, in 1993, 3.8 million children under the age of five in the developing world died of diarrheal diseases caused by impure drinking water (Reilly, 1999). These problems are augmented by untreated industrial releases, such as heavy metals and chemical substances from the pulp/paper and steel/iron industries (two of the region’s biggest industrial polluters), into water bodies. These industries are growing twice as fast as the economy as a whole and give off residuals that are more harmful than those found in domestic wastes. PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR ROLES IN THE PROVISION OF WATER/SANITATION SERVICES For decades, water and sanitation utilities in the Latin America region have provided mostly unreliable and inefficient services to the population. The provision of these basic services has favored the few larger and wealthier cities, mainly urban populations, while neglecting to address the needs of the large rural communities.4 One of the reasons for this disproportionate coverage is the fact that central and local government enterprises have traditionally owned the utility companies. Water utilities, more than any other public service, have been affected by perverse political manipulation and undermanagement. In an effort to improve the situation, governments in the region have been immersed in programs of modernization through the encouragement of private participation.

3 United Nations Department for Economic and Social Information and Policy Analysis, 1996. 4 There were some notable (and very few) exceptions in the region. Chile and Costa Rica invested heavily in making water services widely available to all their citizens. For instance, Chilean water utilities increased the population’s access to drinking water from 25% in 1965 to over 95% today. Also, some relatively small water utilities (run as cooperatives) were managed efficiently in provincial cities in Argentina. However, this stands more as the exception than as the rule.

Private participation in public services is defined as the turning over of a public-service enterprise to private interests. It usually involves the transfer of management (control) and/or ownership (total or partial) of enterprises from the public sector to the private sector, and the transfer of financial assets from the public sector to the private sector. The most common objectives in seeking private participation in public institutions are the following, cited in no particular order of priority (Dekock, 1994): • To increase the internal efficiency of public enterprises. • To intensify competition in the goods, services, and financial markets. • To alleviate financial problems of the public sector (diminish public deficit and external debt

service and eliminate subsidies). • To increase public participation in the ownership of enterprises by promoting “popular

capitalism” (ownership by citizens) or “labor capitalism” (ownership by the workers of an enterprise).

• To transfer to the private sector some enterprises that have no current valid reasons for remaining public.

• To ease the process of reengineering the public sector. • To develop the domestic capital markets. • To “immunize” public administration from political manipulation. Government restructuring programs have used private participation as one of the main tools for improving the situation, and new policies have granted the private sector a central role in managing water and sanitation public service enterprises. Pioneer nations like Argentina and Mexico in the early 1980s and Chile even in the 1970s (with state-owned utilities running as private enterprises) followed different strategies and implementation procedures. Other countries in the hemisphere have followed suit, and now private participation endeavors are a common practice. Water and sanitation utilities (whether private or public) need to be under the supervision of regulatory agencies in order to assure a climate conducive to fair play. The region does not have a tradition of autonomous regulatory bodies, but recently these organizations have been created to monitor water and sanitation utilities in both the private and the public sector. Also, legal and institutional arrangements are being created or enhanced at a fast pace. PRIVATE PARTICIPATION IN WATER AND SANITATION UTILITIES Depending of the magnitude of the water/sanitation utility, private participation performance is generally shown in a medium- and a long-term horizon. Even though participation by the private sector is relatively new in the region (no older than a decade) there are some experiences (with all the pros and cons) that are worth commenting on. Argentina is the world’s pioneer in the privatization of water and sanitation utilities. By the beginning of 1999, the Greater Buenos Aires Metropolitan Area and the provinces of Santa Fé, Córdoba, Corrientes, Tucumán, and Mendoza had privatized their water and sanitation utilities. Buenos Aires Province, Misiones, and some cities and provinces are in the process of being concessioned. The concession contract with the Province of Tucumán has been canceled after a long dispute with provincial authorities.

Aguas Argentinas (the 30-year concessionaire for Greater Buenos Aires) has turned a money-losing utility (US$200 million a year losses), into a profitable one without raising rates to customers in real terms (Poole, 1999). Figure 1 shows some of the characteristics before and after the privatization of the water and sanitation utility of Buenos Aires. Tariffs have been altered twice by modifying the “adjustment factor” (also called the “K” coefficient): first by 13.5% and 5.25% thereafter (giving a current K value of 0.831). It is important to note that the concession has fallen behind in meeting the contractual goals for infrastructure improvement, for reasons external and internal to the utility. An ordinary review of the entire contract is allowed after year 5. Water and sanitation regulatory matters are handled by the Tripartite Sanitary Works and Services Authority (ETOSS), an agency that represents federal, provincial, and municipal governments. Its mission is to ensure enforcement of the concession contract, including the conditions of service, investment plans, and allowable tariffs. ETOSS’ income for enforcement and its operational duties comes from a percentage (2.67%) of the regular water fee. Other provinces have a similar regulatory arrangement. Bolivia has privatized its water and sanitation services for the cities of La Paz (population 700,000) and El Alto (population 500,000) to a consortium called Aguas del Illimani, S.A. The concessionaire plans to invest US$362 million over the 30-year contract by expanding, upgrading, and renovating the water-supply and sewerage network, and adding new water sources and wastewater infrastructure. One of the main and challenging assignments of the new concession is to make the resource available to deprived areas like El Alto, which has high indexes of poverty and vastly lacks water availability. During the five years of the concession (1997-2001), the concessionaire is scheduled to provide 100 percent piped water-supply coverage to both cities with a minimum of 78,250 water connections (of which 71,250 will be in El Alto), installing a maximum of 39,000 sewerage connections (of which 27,000 will be in El Alto), completing the construction of the 1.5 m3/s wastewater treatment plant in El Alto, and increasing water sourcing capacity by constructing two additional reservoirs. Sewage of the city of La Paz is emptied (without treatment) into the Choqueyapo River, which is used for irrigation downstream. Aguas del Illimani has contractual obligations to implement a mitigation plan. The concessionaire will prepare a sanitation plan by the end of 2001, presenting options to address collection and treatment. Aguas del Illimani will also prepare an industrial pollution inventory, and with this information the company will renegotiate the contract and new sanitation fees will be determined. Also in Bolivia, the city of Cochabamba, after several interruptions, is in the process of privatizing its water utility. Bolivia’s water regulator is the Superintendency of Waters. This institution, the national regulator of all water companies, agreed on water quality levels in the Aguas del Illimani contract. The concessionaire has the obligation to self-monitor its water releases, but the control and certification is done by a private firm paid by the company, which raises an issue of conflict of interest.

Pre-privatization characteristics in 1985: Regulated area: 281,500 ha, of which 50,900 ha had water supply and 37,400 ha had sewerage availability. Total population served: 8.4 million, of whom 5.5 million had water supply and 4.6 million sewerage. Water production: 3,578,000m³ per day. Water connections: 1,002,176 but only 148,354 were metered. Sewerage connections: 665,347. Wastewater treatment: 97,080 m³ a day. Number of employees: 9,000, with an average age of 52 years; only 50% involved in fieldwork. Consumption: 600 liters/person/day. The UN World Health Organization considers that 400 liters/person/day is a reasonable consumption for a city with more than 1 million inhabitants. Age of the water network: 83% was 40 years or older; 55% was 60 years or older. Time for repairing water leaks: 1 month in the city of Buenos Aires and 2 months in its suburbs. Real tariff (1960=100): 19.6 (average for all public services = 128.1). Delinquent payment: 85% (average delay in payment: 2.5 years in the Federal Capital). Real salaries (1978=100): 164.1 (average for all public services = 124.1). Annual absence record: 20.4% (average for all public services = 14.5%). Labor cost/total income: 57.0 (average for all public services = 25.6). Investment (in 1991 US$ million; 1981=100): 67.8 (average for all public services = 67.8). Post−−−−privatization characteristics in 1995 (or as otherwise indicated): Increases in water services: 844,000 (115% of the goal achieved). Increase in wastewater services: 386,000 (340% of the goal achieved). Rehabilitation of the water network: 634 km (115% of the goal achieved). Water losses: 31% (goal for year 15); it was 43% at the beginning of the concession. Water meters: 92,500 (115 percent of the goal achieved). Increase in water production: 37 percent. Water pressure in the Federal Capital above 8 m: from 15% in year 1 to 97% in year 3. Water pressure in Greater Buenos Aires above 8 m: from 13% in year 1 to 54% in year 3. Investment: US$145 in year 1, US$210 in year 2, and US$270 in year 3. Number of employees: 7,365 at the beginning; 3,800 at the end of year 3. Number of jobs indirectly created (includes contractors): 2,100 in year 1, 5,300 in year 2, and 8,200 in year 3. Increases in average salary: 46% in three years. Time for repairs of water services: 50 hours at the end of 1995 (it was 70 two years before). Time for repairs of wastewater services: 25 hours at the end of 1995 (it was 70 two years before). Assets: from US$95 million in 1993 to US$185 million in 1995. Net profit: US$-23.2 million in 1993, US$26.5 million in 1994, US$53.6 million in 1995 and US$57.7 million in 1997. * Includes the Federal Capital (Buenos Aires) and 13 “partidos” (districts/suburbs). Source: Artanas, Naranjas, and Urbiztando (1996).

Figure 1: Pre- and Post −−−−Privatization Characteristics of the Buenos Aires Concession

Chile operates its water utilities quite differently from others in the region. Its existing system of public regional water companies and a few private concessions (Aguas Décima in Region 10 and other small ones) has been successful. The companies are well managed and the quality of service is superior to that in any other Latin American country. Water revenues are sufficient to cover the cost of operating the system (Lee, 1998). At the beginning of 1999, ESVAL (the Valparaíso region utility) was recently concessioned and EMOS, the Santiago metropolitan water utility and one of the best-managed water utilities in the Americas, will follow. There are a few build-operate-and-transfer (BOT) projects with the water companies. One example is a water treatment plant in Antofagasta by the British firm Bywater. Under the current regime, most utilities have four different (perpetual) concessions given by the Superintendency of Sanitary Services (SISS), its regulatory agency. These are (1) water extraction and treatment, (2) distribution, (3) wastewater collection, and (4) wastewater treatment. Each concession has different tariffs set by the SISS. The SISS supervises all water companies’ operations and also develops norms and standards for water and wastewater. The water utilities render outstanding water-supply services but have achieved very little in the provision of environmentally acceptable sanitary services. Wastewater is usually discharged raw into different water bodies, and only around 10% of the country’s sewage gets any treatment. In Mexico the National Water Commission (CNA) is an independent decentralized institution of the Secretariat for the Environment, Natural Resources, and Fisheries (SEMARNAP) that manages all federal waters (including water supply and sanitation). Mexico has a Water Law and regulations with special sections for prevention and pollution control and penalties. The CNA gives two kinds of permits for water use: (1) concessions to the private sector, and (2) designation or “asignación” to the public sector. Both licenses are for specific uses of water, human consumption being the highest priority. Water supply and sanitation quality is monitored by the health authorities and is enforced by the CNA. There have been some water-supply privatization experiences in Mexico. One of the most recent is in the Federal District, where CNA has awarded water supply and sanitation concessions. However, all four concessionaires spent several years on an infrastructure inventory and on implementing the stages of the commercial system. By 1999 they were getting ready to operate and maintain the water/sanitation network, and no wastewater treatment has been implemented yet. In 1993, the State of Quintana Roo decided to give a water concession contract for Cancún and Islas Mujeres. It was awarded without any competition, limiting the bargaining power of the state. In Cancún 60% of the city had running water and 30% had sewerage. There were large differences in tariffs: 95% of the customers were subsidized by the remaining 5%. Expected improvements did not occur, while the privatized company made a substantial profit. The negative backlash was loud and forced the municipality to declare the concessionaire in default of its contract. The lack of an effective mechanism had dire consequences. A regulatory agency would have anabled the government to establish standards for service quality and given it an array of tools to enforce those standards. Cancún could only encourage the concessionaire to do better; it had no ability to protect the public interest. Admittedly, the city renegotiated a second, more flexible concession with the same company, but it had to go through eight months of threats, counterthreats, and difficult negotiations to reach this end (Lee, 1998).

In Mexico other water-supply and sanitation experiences are in Aguascalientes and Puerto Vallarta. Wastewater collection and disposal violate the minimum and maximum standards mandated by Mexican law. The government lacks resources for monitoring, developing, and rehabilitating appropriate infrastructure. In sanitation alone, Mexico has had several experiences with wastewater treatment plants, mostly implemented by BOT. Private- and public-sector officials estimate that Mexico needs to invest at least US$6 billion to solve its municipal wastewater needs in major municipalities. In Panama, the National Institute of Water and Sanitation (IDAAN) provides water and sanitation services to seven provinces plus an eighth zone composed of the Panama City metropolitan area, West and East Panama (Panama Province), and the province of Colón. This last zone is the jurisdiction of the recently created IDAAN Metropolitana, S.A., a company that provides services to approximately 74% of the inhabitants of the area. IDAAN’s privatization committee (CIPSP) is in the process of giving a concession for the city’s services. All rivers that release waters into the Gulf of Panama and the Gulf itself are highly polluted with raw industrial and domestic waste. Wastewater treatment is a complex topic that has no short-term solution, and it is not included in the privatization of IDAAN. In Colombia, the city of Cartagena had the first water concession in Colombia. In the beginning, 70% of the city had running water (with severe rationing) and 50% sewerage, with no wastewater treatment at all. There were massive pollution problems, with 30% of the network in disrepair, tariffs collected from only 40% of the customers, and revenues below cost. Cartagena signed a 26-year concession without negotiation owing to the absence of any competition for the contract. The concessionaire increased metering by 75%, doubled bill collection, increased the detection of illegal connections, earned a profit of US$900,00 in 1995 (versus a US$2.5 million loss in 1994), and performed an excellent job of publicizing the improvements it did make. Most people in the city felt that water services were improving. Thus, when the privatized company eventually sought a tariff increase, there was almost no public opposition. The concession contract was negotiated with outgoing authorities. The city did not have a regulatory body. However, the new authorities renegotiated the contract by reducing the concessionaire’s share and increasing the city’s and by giving the city the majority and a veto over all major decisions. The city established a 20-year reversion fund to pay back the concessionaire the money it had paid for stock, plus interest, adjusted for inflation. The city also assumed control of the previous company’s pension obligations (Lee, 1998). In Peru, water and sanitation services are, in general, below any acceptable standard, both in quality and reliability. Generally speaking, most water supply facilities have basic treatment but the sanitation infrastructure only collects sewage and discharges it raw into different water bodies.5 This has created serious health problems and environmental liabilities. The Superintendency of Sanitary Services serves as the national regulatory agency. It has been able

5 The central government has created the Water and Sanitation National Program (Programa Nacional de Agua Potable y Alcantarillado or PRONAP) which contains the ambitious Residual Waters Management Project for Metropolitan Lima (Proyecto Manejo de Aguas Residuales de Lima Metropolitana or PROMAR) which is in charge of planning and implementing a vast sanitation program for Lima. The cost of the first stage will be $165 million, of which 125 million is expected to be financed by the Japanese Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund (OECF) and the rest by the Peruvian treasury.

to comply with some of its regulation duties in Lima but other cities in the provinces are only partially regulated. Also, little environmental monitoring and enforcement is performed. In 1993 Lima’s water utility was in the process of being privatized, but this operation was halted by the central government, and since then no other privatization initiative has prospered. The government has several programs to improve water and sanitation services, but still no private participation is expected because of a lack of political will, insufficiency of incentives, incomplete legislation, and weak institutional arrangements. COSTS AND PRICING OF WATER AND SANITATION SERVICES There is little doubt that the long years in which public bureaucracies exercised a monopoly over the provision and cleanup of water were characterized in country after country by overstaffing, poor maintenance, high losses, and inefficient collection of tariffs. To compound the matter, undercapitalized utilities have an urgent need to invest in water and sanitation infrastructure. The World Bank estimates that the world will need about US$600 billion over the next decade to augment water reserves and meet quality needs. The Bank anticipates that it can provide US$30 to US$40 billion. Latin America alone needs between US$100 and US$200 billion in infrastructure investment over the next decade, and multinational financial institutions can only provide about 10-20% of the financing needed. Government funds fall far short of meeting these needs, leaving the private sector with the opportunity and challenge to come up with the remainder. However, it has been found that water/sanitation infrastructure is not as attractive financially as other capital-starved services (e.g., telecommunications, energy, and even transportation). Political and economical instability and weak legal and institutional arrangements have contributed to have an unattractive rate of return for the private sector. For instance, the construction of a conventional secondary wastewater treatment plant for a population of a 1million requires a capital investment of about US$100 million plus additional steady and substantial expenditures for the proper operation and maintenance works (6). Water is vastly underpriced in the region and as a consequence does not cover the cost of supplying and maintaining the resource and treating its waste. Water utilities are always in financial stress and end up being subsidized in many forms, the most notorious being the cross subsidies of energy users in Caracas, Venezuela. The consequence of these policies is insolvent utilities that cannot invest in new projects. Because there is still a large unsatisfied demand for water, an informal market is created (“vended” water) that supplies it in inferior quality and at about 5 to 20 times the price of “piped” water. Ironically, it is people at the lowest income levels who pay for these services, and the beneficiaries of the subsidies are large industries and others that do not need economic protection. Table 1 shows some water and sanitation rates in the region.

Table 1: Water and Sanitation Rates in Latin America (in US$/m3)

City Vended Piped Santiago, Chile --- 0.70 Northern Chile --- 1.50 - 3.00 Cochabamba, Bolivia 4.00 0.10 Buenos Aires, Argentina --- 0.33 Lima, Peru 6.00 0.24-0.85 Panama City, Panama not available 0.34 La Paz, Bolivia not available 0.19-0.56

Source: Floris (1998). There are two principal mechanisms of price regulation in the region: the rate of return and the price cap. The rate of return (also known as cost-plus or cost of service) ensures that the regulated firm earns a “fair” return on its investment of capital, but not much more. The rate of return is set at a constant level. If it falls below that level, the regulators allow prices to rise. It scores well on the criterion of restraining monopoly power, but poorly on securing maximum operating efficiency by giving little incentive to limit costs and, when the target rate of return is higher than the cost of capital, giving the company a strong incentive to invest more, in anything at all. The price-cap system sets a maximum tariff, so that an efficient firm will on average obtain the cost of capital on the assets employed. It follows the RPI-X formula, which increases the price of water by the increase in the retail price index (RPI) adjusted by a factor X, to account for expected productivity gains and other changes. The price cap avoids the tendency to put upward pressure on costs, seeks to limit the scope for regulatory failure, reduces the burden of regulation, and provides incentives to improve efficiency and to innovate production technology and service offerings. Neither is applied in the region in a pure way but there is a tendency to move towards a price-cap system. However, judging by experience in Argentina, the difference beween those two methods is not as big as it might seem. The price-cap formulas need to reviewed every five years or so, since the regulator does not know how large X should be and in reviewing whether X was set appropriately, will take into account the profits made by the firm (Klein and Irwin, 1996). It is expected that either methodology will prompt heated and long debates about the setting of their parameters. LESSONS LEARNED There is little doubt that water and sanitation infrastructure investment is badly needed in the region. Nonetheless, governments and multinational financial institutions can only provide a small portion of the total expenditures. The private sector can certainly play an important role by increasing its investment in the region, thereby easing the severe deficit. However, it is important to take into account that private participation in water and sanitation utilities is different from

any for-profit enterprise and even from other public services. Because there are few or no opportunities in water/sanitation utilities to introduce competition among suppliers, natural monopolies are inevitable to provide those services. Also, as opposed to other public services (e.g., energy), water and sanitation utilities are usually vertically integrated (production, treatment, storage, and distribution of water, and wastewater collection and treatment). Although theoretically it is possible to separate those processes with competing firms, “no one has yet succeeded in implementing this sort of competition” (Klein and Irwin, 1996). It goes without saying that water is an indispensable fluid for preserving life and health and maintaining a critical environmental balance. Previous privatization experiences in the region are showing that if special care is taken, private participation can lead to significant reduction of social costs (by maximizing social welfare) and increase the efficiency, availability, and reliability of services. Nevertheless, one of the main issues that have to be seriously considered is the one related to regulatory functions. Regulatory agencies should be mainly concerned with setting prices to allow an efficient company to make a fair profit. The regulator should have access to information to determine the appropriate price of water and encourage cost reduction, productivity gains, and efficient use and allocation of water; to perform well under uncertainty; to raise standards gradually; and to give incentives to invest more but always considering the shortfalls of the investment. It is also essential that the regulatory agency have well-trained and technically competent staff, be as independent and financially sustainable as possible, and fulfill its mission, avoiding manipulation by either the government or the public utilities. Tariff reform is as essential as structural reform in developing nations. Water prices below cost create negative incentives that are contrary to the interests of all parties. As in the case of Chile, direct payments or vouchers to sectors in need of assistance create much less distortion than cross subsidies. A well-designed and implemented tariff framework attracts the investment needed to improve the quality of service. Private participation in the water and sanitation sectors can provide significant benefits in the form of improved services and increased financial investment. Also, private concessionaires are often more accountable to the public. However, the governments need to understand that they cannot evade responsibility for insuring adequate oversight of the newly created monopoly. In the end, all agreements, expectations, and details are included in concession contracts. Essentially, a well-balanced document contains the “living rules of the game” for the next 20-30 years. All parties should agree on avoiding ex-post opportunism by governments or private companies, and asymmetry of information. Contracts usually perform well when framework laws and regulations, commercial and antimonopoly codes, and institutional structures are complete and in place. Even though the region is massively engaged in drafting institutional and legal arrangements, there is still room for improvement (for example, in effective conflict resolution), especially when tangible experiences can be learned from countries like Argentina, Chile, and Mexico.

REFERENCES Artana, Daniel, Fernando Navajas, and Santiago Urbiztondo. 1996. Regulación, Organización e Incentivos. La Economía Política de los Servicios de Agua Potable: El Caso Argentino. Buenos Aires, Banco Internacional de Desarrollo. Dekock, Paul. “Privatizaciones: Panorámica de un Tema de Actualidad” (Ia Parte). 1994, Santiago, Chile, Second International Course on Economic Reforms and Public Strategic Management. (September-October). Floris, Vinio. 1998a. Environmental Evaluation of the Privatization of Public Services in Latin America. Washington, D.C. Inter-American Development Bank. (in press) Floris, Vinio. 1998b. “Water and Sanitation Services and Utilities Privatization in Latin America”. In Report on the Second Workshop on Private Participation in Water Supply and Sanitation Utilities in the Americas. Santiago, Chile, United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and Caribbean. November. Ash and Gonzalo Castro. 1997. “Latin American Ecosystems and the Global Water Crisis: An Introduction”. In The Impact of the Water Crisis on Freshwater Ecosystems in Latin America and the Caribbean: Predicted Trends and Proposed Policy Responses. Washington, D.C., World Wildlife Fund. Idelovitch, Emanuel, and Klas Ringskog. 1997."Wastewater Treatment in Latin America: Old and New Options." In World Bank, Directions in Development. Washington, D.C. Klein, Michael, and Timothy Irwin. 1996. "Regulating Water Companies." In World Bank, Public Policy for the Private Sector. Washington, D.C. Lee, Henry. 1998. “Designing Water Concessions: Case Studies from Latin America”. In Report on the Second Workshop on Private Participation in Water Supply and Sanitation Utilities in the Americas. United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. Santiago, Chile, November. Lee, Terence, and Andrei Jouravlev. 1997. Regulation of the Private Provision of Public Water-Related Services. Santiago, Chile, United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. Poole, Claire. 1997." Bridge over Troubled Water." Latin Trade. May. Reilly, William. 1997. "The Participation of the Private Sector in Meeting Clean Water Demands." In The Impact of the Water Crisis on Freshwater Ecosystems in Latin America and the Caribbean: Predicted Trends and Proposed Policy responses. Washington, D.C., World Wildlife Fund. Revista Caretas. 1998. "Mar de Fondo". no. 1514. Lima, April.

Estrategias Educativas para la Gestión Integrada del Recurso Hídrico en Comunidades Rurales de la Pradera Pampeana de la

República Argentina

A. Herrero, I. Thiel, V. Maldonado, G. Sardi, L. Carbó y A. Fernández Cirelli∗∗∗∗

RESUMEN El aprovechamiento correcto del recurso agua crea oportunidades para poder vincular los resultados de la investigación y la docencia universitaria. Así se logra la transferencia a la comunidad rural como principal beneficiaria de los resultados producidos en este proceso para solucionar un problema. La vinculación entre la universidad, la escuela rural y los productores agropecuarios y la capacitación técnica a los agentes responsables de llevar adelante el proceso, son los ejes a fin de transferir a los diferentes grupos sociales la importancia del agua como recurso limitado y las acciones a seguir para su utilización adecuada. En las áreas rurales el agua es frecuentemente utilizada para bebida de los seres humanos y de los animales y para la irrigación de los cultivos. Las posibles fuentes de contaminación, su detección y corrección, las consecuencias en la salud de la población y los comportamientos del hombre con respecto al agua como recurso, son privativos de cada comunidad. En el caso de la Pradera Pampeana (Argentina) se diseñaron diferentes estrategias de transferencia y se llevaron a cabo en escuelas agrotécnicas secundarias, en escuelas rurales primarias y en grupos de productores nucleados por su actividad específica. SUMMARY The correct use of water resources creates opportunities to establish links between research results and university training. This way we can accomplish a transfer to the rural community as the main beneficiary of the results produced by this process to solve a problem. The links between university, rural schools, and producers and the technical training of the agents responsible for carrying out the process are the axes for transferring knowledge of the importance of water as a limited resource, as well as the actions necessary for its adequate use, to the different social groups. In rural areas the same water is used frequently for drinking by humans and animals and for crop irrigation. The possible sources of contamination, their detection and correction, the consequences to public health, and the behavior of man towards this resource are unique to each community. In the Pradera Pampeana (Argentina) a variety of transfer strategies were designed and carried out with agrotechnical high schools, rural elementary schools, and groups of producers joyned by their particular activities. INTRODUCCION

∗ Los profesores Herrero, Maldonado, Sardi y Carbó son mienbros del Departamento de Producción Animal, Área Agrícola, Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, y los profesores Thiel y Fernández Cirelli del Departamento de Química Orgánica, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, todos de la Universidad de Buenos Aires.

El recurso agua es fundamental para el desarrollo de la vida del hombre, de los animales y de las plantas y por esto la generación de conocimientos y el manejo racional de los recursos hídricos contribuyen al mejoramiento de la calidad de vida. No existe vida ni producción agrícola sin agua. A su vez la sociedad genera problemas y sufre sus consecuencias. Se deben identificar estos problemas para poder remediarlos, con una postura consciente, activa y comprometida. Los conceptos de explotación racional, uso sustentable y vulnerabilidad son fundamentales, ya que para la producción agropecuaria existe una relación estrecha entre la calidad del agua a utilizar y el uso que se pueda hacer de ella. Pero el uso y manejo condicionarán también su calidad futura y deben ser tenidos en cuenta. Se conocen los factores que determinan la calidad del agua y los mecanismos que la regulan, pero hay muy poca información sobre la calidad del agua en áreas rurales de poco y dispersa población rural con heterogénea distribución. La Argentina no es ajena a esta situación. La vinculación entre la universidad, la escuela rural, y los productores agropecuarios es un camino posible para informar, concientizar y remediar. La educación es el pilar fundamental y si se puede lograr la motivación y toma activa de conciencia de los alumnos y sus familias, se puede aprender así a preservar el ecosistema en el cual se vive. “Aprender haciendo” lleva a un aprendizaje integral, pero sus resultados sólo tienen un efecto duradero si se aplican a vivencias directas. En estos aprendizajes se deben abarcar temas arraigados en ámbitos muy diversos, ya que se tratan procesos físicos, biológicos y sociales muy diferentes. Se debe incorporar el aprendizaje-servicio como un método que va más allá del aprender-haciendo, ya que los estudiantes aprenden y se desarrollan a través de la activa participación en un servicio cuidadosamente organizado, que es conducido y atiende necesidades sociales contribuyendo al desarrollo de la responsabilidad cívica. Abarcamos el tema desde la universidad y con la comunidad educativa rural. Los alumnos con su participación activa y los productores se convierten en un camino por el cual se llega a la sociedad general y por la cual se hacen partícipes a distintas instituciones del medio rural. Este enfoque se ve incentivado por los mecanismos no formales de educación en lo que respecta al sistema de producción y su estrecha retroalimentación con el medio ambiente y el desarrollo comunitario. La toma de conciencia del cuidado del recurso agua es un ejemplo cercano a todos ellos, y tomar conocimiento de la relación calidad-uso-manejo del agua no solo beneficia a los individuos en particular sino también a la sociedad en la que viven. En la experiencia realizada se determinó un proceso en el cual el aprendizaje de los problemas genera espontáneamente su propia resolución y prevención, en especial, por la importancia de la participación de la sociedad en la gestión integrada de los recursos hídricos.

EXPERIENCIA Metodología Los actores involucrados fueron: (1) productores agropecuarios de diferentes zonas y tipos de producción, (2) alumnos de escuelas agrotécnicas secundarias y sus docentes, (3) alumnos de escuelas rurales y sus maestros, y (4) personal docente de la universidad. En todos los casos se realizó un diagnóstico de situación sobre las necesidades e intereses de los diferentes actores. Esto permitió establecer estrategias para cada grupo que fueron luego implementadas. En el trabajo con los productores se estableció la modalidad de conferencias/taller con etapas: la realización de encuestas, encuentros, el muestreo de agua y taller de discusión de resultados con la confección de mapa de calidad y pautas de manejo. Se realizó un video en el cual se resalta la necesidad de muestreos y los diferentes cuidados, si se trata de una muestra para determinar la presencia de contaminantes inorgánicos, o para la detección de contaminación microbiana. Se elaboraron manuales explicativos para los participantes. El eje del taller era la relación entre calidad, uso y manejo, ya que de ellos depende la calidad final del agua para la producción agropecuaria. La discusión conjunta permitió vislumbrar medidas de prevención y de recuperación. En el caso de las escuelas primarias rurales, se trabajó con especial atención a la capacitación de los docentes, la generación de material bibliográfico en forma de manuales para los alumnos, la realización de videos y experiencias educativas prácticas similares a la situación que viven los alumnos en sus casas. Para el trabajo con las escuelas agrotécnicas secundarias se diseñaron experiencias de mayor complejidad. Las mismas consistieron en capacitación de los docentes de la escuela para establecer los criterios del muestreo y metodología de recolección; entrenamiento de los docentes auxiliares (alumnos) de la facultad, para su capacitación en este tipo de experiencias; muestreo de la zona por parte de los alumnos y los docentes profesionales de la escuela de los pozos de agua Taller (Workshop), donde se presentó una encuesta para relevar pre conceptos de los participantes respecto a la temática agua, sus usos y la relación estrecha con el manejo; desarrollo de un seminario teórico-práctico participativo, motivando la colaboración desde el comienzo. Las técnicas fueron un torbellino de ideas para establecer el eje del taller, la exposición sobre la relación existente entre los componentes del sistema y sus consecuencias en la calidad final del agua para la producción agropecuaria, y el desarrollo conjunto de medidas de prevención y recuperación que podrían aplicarse. Se facilitaron manuales explicativos sobre los aspectos considerados, elaborados especialmente para docentes y para alumnos. Los alumnos realizaron análisis de las muestras con la supervisión de los docentes universitarios, y participaron activamente en la interpretación de los resultados y el diagnóstico sobre la calidad del recurso para cada uso, realizada en el transcurso de la jornada del Taller.

Resultados El agua disponible en las áreas rurales tiene un uso compartido entre humanos y animales. Fue determinado en este caso que en un 55% de los pozos el agua se comparte entre ambos usos, siendo un 45% solo para uso animal. Muchos de los contaminantes presentaron valores superiores a los permitidos para agua potable. Es de destacar que en el 48% de las muestras se observaron concentraciones de nitratos superiores a los recomendados para uso humano y que el 90% de los productores encuestados no sospechaban la posibilidad de algún tipo de contaminación en sus aguas de pozo. También es importante destacar que los productores se interesaban y motivaban más si se podía vincular el agua con la calidad y cantidad de la producción a obtener, por ejemplo en el caso de la calidad de la leche en relación con el lavado de la máquina de ordeño. Cabe destacar, en este punto, que resultó sumamente enriquecedor el trabajo realizado por los docentes alumnos de la universidad que lograron establecer un vínculo muy estrecho con los alumnos de la escuela. Se confeccionó un mapa de la calidad del agua subterránea en sus respectivos usos y según las zonas asignadas al muestreo. Se elaboraron pautas sencillas para la prevención de las contaminaciones en la región. Se entrenó a los alumnos para entregar el diagnóstico al productor e indicar la conveniencia, en algunos casos, de realizar controles microbiológicos para detectar posibles contaminaciones de origen fecal. En los encuentros en las escuelas agrotécnicas, fue evaluado el aprendizaje logrado en todo el proceso. Los resultados indican una toma de conciencia, ya que el 47% logra definir con precisión la interrelación existente entre calidad, uso y manejo, un 35% la expresa utilizando conceptos adecuados para dicha relación pero aún no puede relacionar todas las etapas, y sólo un 18% no logra expresarla. Estos trabajos, iniciados en 1996 con un grupo de 62 alumnos voluntarios de un colegio agrotécnico, se extendieron a otros grupos escolares y se continúan ya que la interacción entre la sociedad y la universidad se debe intensificar para enriquecer a ambas partes. Gran parte de los cambios logrados se centran en el crecimiento personal de los estudiantes en lo que respecta a las actitudes hacia la escuela y hacia el compromiso con su comunidad. Pero lo más importante fue que la información brindada en el trabajo de campo respondió a las necesidades reales de la comunidad, haciendo mas fluidas las relaciones que pretendía la experiencia propuesta. La continuidad de este trabajo es muy importante. Se pretende, en una etapa próxima, la instalación de laboratorios de control en las escuelas agropecuarias, donde docentes y alumnos motivados prestarían un servicio de control a la comunidad, favorecidos por la capacitación de los productores y en estrecha vinculación con la universidad.

CONCLUSIONES Esta propuesta participativa demostró que este método de intervención, basado en un proceso formativo y preferiblemente de carácter permanente, en especial en una temática que los involucra a todos en aspectos sociales y económicos, puede facilitar y ampliar la capacidad para identificar y resolver los problemas comunitarios, generando caminos viables para el entorno en el cual viven, y convirtiendo a los afectados en actores de su propia transformación y la de su medio.

Climate Change Patterns and Impacts

M. Pilar Cornejo R. de Grunauer∗∗∗∗

During the last 20 years the general public has increasingly become aware of the potential impacts that climate change and variability have on human activities and natural resources. Simultaneously, the scientific community has devoted a lot of research time and funds to several topics related to the issue, especially to those concerning forecasts of climate-change patterns and impacts. Nevertheless, little has been done in developing a two-way communication between the two groups, and this has resulted in some extreme positions, where some people blame negative impacts of climate change solely on anthropogenic activities while others do not even care to know how these changes could affect their lives. The situation is even worse when we look at climate patterns in the world and realize that climate variability is more important than climate change (at least to ordinary people), because its time scale is affecting human activities in a tangible way. This is easily corroborated when we look at extreme climate events such as ENSO, which has shown how vulnerable to climate societies are. The last ENSO event, in 1997-98, alone generated estimated losses above US$15 billion in Latin America and the Caribbean, almost double the losses estimated for the one in 1982-83 (US$8 billion). This means that in order to work on climate change patterns and their impact we need first to address the issue of climate variability. If we do not know the climate at its seasonal to interannual scale, its variability, and its impact on society, there is not much we can do for climate-change scales, which go from decades to centuries. To cope with this need, a group of climate researchers started developing in 1994 the concept of applied climate research in the humid tropics under a completely new scheme. Today this group is part of the Trade Convergence Climate Complex and has become a regional Research Network (TC3Net, see http://www.cathalac.org/etccc.htm). Its main goal is to conduct applied climate research based on the concept that climate processes shared by the countries of the region link the TC3 region and that the impacts of climate variations also tend to be similar. TC3 already encompasses a broad range of scientists from the physical and social sciences as well as people involved in policy- and decision-making. Its geographic domain extends from southern Florida (U.S) and southern Mexico through Central America and the Caribbean to the northern portion of South America from Guyana to northern Ecuador. TC3 applied research goes to the heart of what the economic sectors of the intra-American region require in the area of climate. Currently, global coupled ocean-atmosphere models can only produce SST forecasts and predict the occurrence of Pacific ENSO phases (El Niño, La Niña, etc.). While useful in their own way, these forecasts are not directly applicable to each sector´s needs; they must be "translated" into equivalent forecasts of climate variables of direct

∗ Principal Investigator, Trade Convergence Climate Complex Network (TCCC), Ecuador.

relevance to seasonal decision-making. This task is one that is best done through empirical studies at regional levels and is carried out by the TC3 Physical Processes Component (PP). An understanding of the physical mechanisms of climate variability and an increased level of confidence in this understanding is essential to our ability to use the information to determine policy. TC3, through its Human Dimension component, integrates existing knowledge of climate variability and the results of the PP component to develop applications that enable users of climate information and decision-makers to use scientific results effectively. We have been working with four key socioeconomic sectors vulnerable to and dependent on climate variability in the TC3 region that have been identified as the priority targets for applications of climate variability information: agriculture, aquaculture and fisheries, human health, and energy and water resources. This regional perspective has been possible since common interests have been identified in various ways (workshops, questionnaires, etc.), and also because there are more social and cultural similarities than differences within the region. Through this component the participating nations obtain direct benefits and the characteristics of a particular climate process can be taken into account in management practices. This approach has been applied through sectoral pilot projects. Several examples of applied research with this approach are available, but probably one of the most “complete” and successful is the aquaculture sector. CASE STUDY: SHRIMP AQUACULTURE AND FISHERIES The rearing of shrimp in ponds in Ecuador is largely dependent upon the capture of wild larvae for stocking ponds. Although more recently hatchery-produced larvae have also been used for stocking ponds, both seed sources rely on fisheries either for post-larvae (PL) directly or for capturing wild gravid and broodstock. Shrimp aquaculture in Ecuador therefore is highly dependent on and highly vulnerable to climatic variability and in particular extreme climatic events. The maturation, spawning, and recruitment of PL and the migrations of the immature juveniles are strongly correlated with seasonal to interannual variability of ocean temperatures off the Ecuadorian coast. El Niño (EN) and its counterpart La Niña (LN) are the most important climatic events affecting the shrimp industry in Ecuador, having known impacts, both positive and negative, on the shrimp industry. The magnitude of these impacts depends on the subsector affected and the action taken to mitigate them. At the end of May 1997 the Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral (ESPOL) set up a press conference to inform the government, the private sector, and the general public about the development of an ENSO event in the Pacific Ocean. In July 1997, TC3 began publishing a biweekly ENSO report (see http://www.cathalac.org/enos.htm) targeting the users of climate information. It provided information not only on the ENSO status but also on the potential ENSO impacts on various socioeconomic sectors of the TC3 region and especially on the Ecuadorian economy. The responses from the public sector (government) and the private sector were markedly different. While the government established a unit under presidential control to coordinate all actions needed to mitigate the event, with largely ineffective results, the response of the private sector was fast and largely effective. In areas such as shrimp aquaculture and agriculture for export (bananas, melons, watermelons, asparagus, passion

fruit, etc.), organized meetings, workshops, and conferences were organized to provide their members with the information needed to avoid losses. ENSO effects were felt first by the fishery industry. Ocean warming showed anomalies exceeding 5°C in the water column, from the surface to a depth of 100m, for more than 10 months. This resulted in both negative and positive effects on the Ecuadorian shrimp industry, which are summarized in the following table. Positive and negative impacts of the 1997-98 ENSO event in the shrimp aquaculture sector

POSITIVE IMPACTS NEGATIVE IMPACTS Constant and abundant wild larvae supply during 1997 and beginning of 1998

Collapse of shrimp hatcheries (300 labs with 6,000 families)

Increase in shrimp production due to favorable environmental conditions

Reduced salinity in ponds increased off-flavor problems

Increased shrimp exports: 1) Fisheries: twice

tails/pound in 1997 as in the Gulf of Guayaquil alone

2) Total exports increased 40% in 1997 (US$872,827,000) over 1996 (US$631,469,000)

Decrease in fisheries of small pelagic species affected fish-meal production for feeds, leading to increased imports of fish meal and increased prices

Improved water quality due to flushing of estuaries and farms

Transportation difficulties due to damage to and losses of infraestucture (highways, bridges, electric lines, etc.)

It is very clear that, while little can be done to avoid these impacts, prior warning of impending events is vital. Satellite monitoring, informed modeling (jointly by both public and private sector), and the Internet were instrumental in minimizing impacts of the latest EN event. From a national standpoint these aspects need to be strengthened, both economically and legislatively. From an industrial viewpoint, climate analyses need to be better incorporated into budgets, cash-flow calculations, and other aspects of economic planning. Current projections, for example, predict LN conditions for 1999 through 2000, implying a scarcity of wild seed and an increased reliance on hatchery seed from maturation sources. An investment in maturation departments thus seems well warranted. Overall, seed prices may be expected to rise considerably during the next 12 months. On the other hand, the analysis of climate and socioeconomic information in the aquaculture sector shows that LN effects are positive in fisheries of small pelagic fish, such as sardines and those used for fishmeal. This should result in a more stable price of feed (which represents up to 35% of production costs), and help to offset potentially poor production of pond-reared shrimp due to the cooler conditions expected to reign over the Ecuadorian area in the following 12-month period.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Experience has shown that success can be obtained where major user interests are involved and where the climate research activities are user-driven. To avoid lack of communication and information, and to ensure transfer of results, all users and sectors participate in the development of any proposed research on climate issues through interaction with the research groups and through interdisciplinary and multisectoral workshops. Within this collaboration the issue of water availability/scarcity has to be addressed not only in terms of climate change, but also in connection take with other relevant issues such as the following: • Demand-supply relationship • The socioenvironmental dimension of water use • Water policy design and implementation mechanisms • Population vulnerability (usually related to poverty) • Water pollution (industrial waste) • Human health • Conflicts among multiple users, e.g., irrigation, industry, tourism, navigation, hydroelectric

energy, human consumption • Privatization trends On the basis of TC3 experience we recommend that the different groups (research, governmental agencies, and non-governmental organizations) interested in the issue of climate change and variability “serve as integrating fora or platforms where all the different interested groups (e.g., the private sector, the end users) can establish a dialogue that can respond to a need to shape joint policies, where commitments can be made, and implementation agreements can be reached. ” We also recommend: • Promoting the development of interdisciplinary, multinational, and multisectoral research groups that enable us to establish a strong link between the users and providers of climate information.

• Better disseminating the current knowledge of climate and the relationships between climate variables and climate events at scales required by socioeconomic sectors.

• Establishing the relationships between climate variability and economic variables that define a sector and that are relevant to each region and each sector and to the users.

• Educating the press; some efforts have been devoted to this task but not enough.

• Τaking a profound look at the existing organizations, local, regional, and global, involved with climate-change research, which we think need a re-engineering process to avoid

overlapping of activities, coordinate research, and allocate funds more efficiently.

• And, what is most important, convincing the people that we must learn how to deal with climate variability because it is part of our lives and with climate change because it is part of humankind.

Finally, the strategy being used by TC3, which has been successfully applied and can be tailored to other needs, may be summarized as follows:

• Identification of an important socioeconomic sector for a region. • Identification of the end users of water. • Workshops and meetings held within a region with the participation of all actors--climate

researchers, end users, regional government, and the private sector to--identify end user needs for information and the desired format. Funding for these meetings could be available through several sources: national, regional, and international research funding agencies, non-governmental organizations, private companies, labor unions, universities, and others. Groups should be kept small (25 people).

• Partnerships developed among climate researchers and end users and empirical relationships tailored for the uses of climatic information are sought between climate variables (mostly precipitation). Once the relationship is established, an operational scheme has to be set up.

• One important result of this approach is that researchers do not promote policy-making directly; this is done through the end users that have the economical power to promote policy-making and its enforcement.

PLENARY SESSION II

EDUCATION AND PUBLIC AWARENESS: THE KEY TO CHANGE

The Globe Program: Global Learning and Observations to Benefit the Environment

The GLOBE Program is a hands-on science and education program that unites students, teachers, and scientists from around the world in study and research about the dynamics of the Earth's environment. Hundreds of thousands of GLOBE students in over 7,500 schools in more than 80 countries are taking important environmental measurements and reporting their data for use by scientists. The goals of the GLOBE Program are: • To enhance the environmental awareness of individuals worldwide, • To increase scientific understanding of the Earth, and • To improve student achievement in science and mathematics. The GLOBE Program is implemented through a worldwide network of primary and secondary schools, where GLOBE students: • Take environmental measurements at or near their schools, • Report their data through the Internet to the GLOBE data archive, • Create maps and graphs to analyze GLOBE data sets, and • Collaborate with scientists and other GLOBE students around the world. GLOBE students have reported data from almost 4 million science measurements in the areas of atmosphere/climate, hydrology, soils, and land cover/biology. These global data sets are made freely available via the Internet to the world science community and to the students themselves for scientific research, student-scientist partnerships, and worldwide school-to-school collaborations. TEACHERS IN GLOBE Age-appropriate environmental science educational materials have been developed by scientists and educators as a resource for GLOBE teachers. Professional development workshops enable GLOBE teachers to guide their students in taking daily, weekly, and seasonal environmental measurements in areas such as weather and hydrology according to rigorous scientific protocols. Using the Internet or a local reporting arrangement that allows access to the Internet, students send their data to the GLOBE Student Data Archive. Scientists and other students may then use this data for their research. GLOBE provides an excellent opportunity for teachers to integrate computers and the World Wide Web into classroom activities, and for creating partnerships among students at GLOBE schools around the world. GLOBE SCIENCE: The set of GLOBE measurements reflects the desire of the GLOBE Program management, scientists, and educators to respond to the needs of the education community as well as to provide scientifically useful environmental data. All GLOBE schools are strongly encouraged to

participate in the full range of GLOBE environmental measurements. GLOBE protocols exist for the following areas: Atmosphere/Climate: Students monitor atmospheric conditions every day within one hour of local solar noon at a site adjacent to their school. The measurements taken are as follows: • Cloud cover: Students report the amount of cloud cover and the types of clouds present. • Liquid Precipitation: Students report the depth of liquid precipitation accumulated during

the previous 24-hour period. • Solid Precipitation: Students report the depth of new snow, the total depth of accumulated

snow, and the liquid water equivalent of the new snow. • Precipitation pH: Students report the pH of precipitation whenever accumulated rainfall is

at least 2 mm or 20 mL of melted snow can be obtained. • Air Temperature: Students report the maximum and minimum temperatures over the

previous 24-hour period along with the current temperature. Hydrology: Students take weekly measurements of surface-water properties at a nearby water body (river, stream, bay, ocean, lake, pond, etc.), which serves as the hydrology study site. The measurements taken are as follows: Water Transparency: Students measure the turbidity of the water at their study site. Water Temperature: Students measure the water temperature at their study site. Dissolved Oxygen: Intermediate and advanced-level students report on the concentration of DO at their study site. • Water pH: pH paper, pens, or meters are used according to the level of the students to

measure water pH at their study site. • Electrical Conductivity: Freshwater sites report conductivity. • Salinity: Salt-water or brackish water sites measure salinity. • Alkalinity: Intermediate and advanced students measure the alkalinity. • Nitrates: Intermediate and advanced students measure the nitrate concentration. Soils: Students summarize the top meter of soil at two or more sample sites. The measurements taken are as follows:

• Soil Characterization: Students measure top and bottom depth, structure, color, consistence, texture, presence of rocks, roots, and carbonates bulk density, particle size distribution, pH, and fertility for each soil horizon found within the top meter. Each site is characterized only once.

• Soil Moisture and Temperature: Students measure the water content of multiple soil

samples collected 12 times a year from their study site. Water infiltration rates are observed three to four times a year, and soil temperature is measured weekly.

Land Cover/Biology: Students assess the land cover of a 15 km by 15 km area centered on their school and track the yearly change in vegetation at one particular site within this area. The measurements taken are as follows: • Qualitative Land Cover Assessment: Students classify the land cover at multiple 90 m by 90

m sample sites within their area according to a modified UNESCO land-cover classification scheme.

• Quantitative Land Cover Assessment: Students perform a quantitative assessment of the

vegetation in 90 m by 90 m sample sites classified as forest, woodland, or grassland. Tree heights, diameters, dominant and subdominant species, and percentage of canopy cover are measured.

• Biometry: Students perform the Quantitative Land Cover Assessment at a 30 m by 30 m

study site once or twice a year and monitor changes. • Land Cover Mapping: Land-cover maps of the entire 15 km by 15 km area are classified

using both manual and computer techniques to interpret satellite imagery. The sites used for the Qualitative and Quantitative Land Cover Assessments are used to help in making the maps and assessing the map classification accuracy.

Location: At every site where a GLOBE measurement is taken, the latitude, longitude, and elevation are determined to within 100 meters using Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers. INTERNATIONAL PARTICIPATION Broad international participation is integral to the design of the GLOBE Program. Bilateral agreements establish partnerships between the United States and its international partners, which are then responsible for designing program implementation in their own countries. As of September 1999, the following 90 countries were participating in GLOBE: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Madagascar, Mali, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolia,

Morocco, Namibia, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Palau, People's Republic of China, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Senegal, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Tanzania, The Gambia, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uruguay.

ROUNDTABLE SESSION III

Descentralización de los Servicios de Agua Potable y Saneamiento en El Salvador

Carlos A. Linares∗∗∗∗ ANTECEDENTES Entre los meses de junio y diciembre de 1998 se realizó un estudio sobre la descentralización de los sistemas de agua potable y saneamiento (SAPS) en El Salvador. Este estudio forma parte de una actividad de descentralización mas amplia del Global Bureau´s Team, con fondos del Joint Action Incentive Fund (JAIF) de la USAID. Es ejecutado por el Environmental Health Project (EHP). Los problemas y las oportunidades relacionadas con el manejo de los sistemas urbanos y rurales se vieron desde una perspectiva integral, incluyendo el análisis de la situación institucional y legal actual, las opciones para el mejoramiento de los servicios de agua y saneamiento para la población, el desarrollo municipal y la conservación del medio ambiente, enfocado al manejo de las cuencas hidrográficas. El estudio ejecutado tenía, entre otros objetivos: a) aprender de las experiencias de USAID y otras instituciones que trabajan en el sector en la región; y b) promover y diseminar estas experiencias y lecciones en otros países del Istmo. Se ejecutaron cinco tareas. La primera consistió en identificar las opciones de manejo para el suministro de agua potable y saneamiento a nivel municipal urbano. Dentro de esta tarea se revisaron las experiencias existentes, se redactaron 13 estudios de caso, se identificaron opciones de manejo, se analizaron estas opciones en consulta con expertos y se preparó un informe: “Opciones de manejo para el suministro de agua potable y saneamiento a nivel municipal urbano”. La segunda tarea consistió en identificar arreglos institucionales para apoyar el manejo de sistemas rurales de agua potable y saneamiento. Se revisaron experiencias existentes, se identificaron los arreglos institucionales más adecuados, se analizaron las opciones en consulta con expertos y se preparó un informe: “Arreglos institucionales para el apoyo al suministro de agua potable y saneamiento a nivel rural”. La tercera tarea consistió en llevar a cabo un seminario/taller nacional sobre la descentralización del agua, que se celebró los días 2 y 3 de diciembre de 1998, y para el canal se preparó una síntesis de los resultados de las tareas 1 y 2. Los principales resultados, conclusiones y recomendaciones de este seminario fueron publicadas y distribuidas ampliamente a todo nivel.

∗∗∗∗ Consultor EHP, USAID, El Salvador.

Las otras tareas consistieron en llevar a cabo talleres regionales de capacitación de alcaldes y otros funcionarios municipales en el manejo de empresas de agua y en el manejo de cuencas hidrográficas. En estos talleres participaron la tercera parte de los municipios del país. LA SITUACIÓN ACTUAL La descentralización de la toma de decisiones relacionada con el agua como recurso y como servicio a la población es un proceso incipiente en El Salvador. El estudio encontró, entre otras cosas, que no existe en el país un mecanismo para la adjudicación de los derechos de uso del agua, ni la claridad legal y reglamentaria que apoye la operación eficiente de los sistemas de agua y saneamiento en el interior del país. Los medios de comunicación salvadoreños han reportado muchos conflictos entre usuarios y prestadores del servicio en varias localidades. Muchos estudios, elaborados con base en las estadísticas de la Administración Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (ANDA), señalan que El Salvador tiene el índice mas bajo de cobertura rural de agua potable de todo el Hemisferio Occidental. Solo 16 de cada 100 habitantes rurales tienen servicio domiciliar de agua potable y una cantidad mucho menor tiene el servicio de alcantarillado sanitario. Adicionalmente, es un hecho reconocido que las aguas del país están contaminadas. Esta contaminación proviene de la disposición inadecuada de la basura; de prácticas agrícolas inadecuadas y uso excesivo de agroquímicos; y de descargas de aguas servidas de industrias, agroindustrias y centros urbanos, sin ningún tratamiento antes de su descarga a los ríos, quebradas, lagos y océano. Este factor tiene un alto costo social: las estadísticas de salud indican que las enfermedades gastrointestinales son la causa principal de la muerte de 12.000 niños cada año en el país. El problema en El Salvador es complejo debido al alto nivel de atomización de sus pueblos y ciudades. El 51% de las cabeceras municipales del país tienen menos de 2.000 habitantes y la inmensa mayoría (el 89%), tienen poblaciones menores de 10.000 habitantes. ANDA enfoca su atención y sus recursos al Area Metropolitana de San Salvador (AMSS), la cual genera el 70% de sus ingresos de administración y emplea al 72% de su fuerza laboral. Las oficinas regionales de ANDA tienen poca autonomía y presupuestos limitados. La cobertura y frecuencia del servicio de agua en el AMSS es muy superior al resto del país, en donde residen 4 millones de salvadoreños. ANDA opera los sistemas de agua y alcantarillado en solamente 181 de los 262 municipios del país, incluyendo el sistema más grande que abastece al AMSS con 300,000 conexiones, hasta algunos de los más pequeños sistemas con menos de 200 conexiones. Existen 78 cabeceras municipales cuyos sistemas no son manejados por ANDA: 73 son manejados por la municipalidades directamente; uno por una empresa municipal; 3 bajo el modelo PLANSABAR – comunidad; y uno por una organización no gubernamental. El manejo por parte de las municipalidades se ha dado, ya sea porque estas nunca entregaron los sistemas a ANDA, porque esta los ha abandonado por dificultades de servicio; o porque los sistemas han

sido construidos por las propias municipalidades con apoyo de otras dependencias del Estado u organismos de cooperación internacional. Del análisis de la operación de estos sistemas, se concluyó que las modalidades de gestión directa de comisión municipal, gestión compartida de empresa de agua y municipalidad y gestión a través de una ONG prestan un mejor servicio de agua que las otras, incluyendo la gestión centralizada de ANDA. En estas localidades, la operación se realiza con recuperación de costos, con micromedición al 100% y con una atención inmediata a las reclamaciones de los usuarios. Adicionalmente a estos casos exitosos de gestión local, la USAID, a través de su proyecto de Desarrollo Municipal y Participación Ciudadana, ha impulsado la conformación de una Sociedad de Economía Mixta de Capital Variable para el manejo intermunicipal del sistema de agua “Tetralogía”, que abastece a seis municipios del Departamento de Usulután en el oriente del país. A pesar de que no ha existido la voluntad política de parte del Gobierno Central para firmar el convenio de concesión para la prestación del servicio, se han alcanzado importantes beneficios por la obtención de recursos financieros para mejorar las instalaciones, sustituir las redes y sistemas de bombeo, mejorar la calidad y frecuencia del servicio, dar mejor atención a las reclamaciones y organizar a las comunidades para labores de vigilancia. En el año de 1965, el Ministerio de Salud creó e impulsó el Plan Nacional de Saneamiento Básico Rural (PLANSABAR). Bajo este Plan se construyeron 308 sistemas rurales, además de 400 construidos con apoyo del Fondo de Inversión Social (FIS). Sin embargo, en 1994, el Gobierno de El Salvador cerró PLANSABAR y traspasó la responsabilidad de los sistemas rurales a ANDA, la cual creó, en 1996, la Gerencia de Sistemas Rurales. Hasta el momento, esta gerencia no cuenta con una organización adecuada, ni con los recursos necesarios para hacerle frente al reto de dar apoyo institucional a los sistemas rurales que fueron abandonados en 1994 y que actualmente están siendo operados por las mismas comunidades. Durante la realización del estudio en El Salvador se descubrió, entre otras cosas, que existe una propuesta para la reforma sectorial del agua, preparada por la Comisión Coordinadora para la Reforma Sectorial de los Recursos Hídricos (COSERHI) de la Comisión Presidencial para la Modernización del Estado, con el apoyo del BID. Se concluye que esta reforma es de gran importancia y, al mismo tiempo, muy poco conocida a todo nivel en el país. Ninguno de los principales actores interesados --la Comisión Presidencial para la Modernización, ANDA o el BID, ha diseminado esta información o organizado eventos con el propósito de dar a conocer la reforma y solicitar retroalimentación. Esta actividad de la USAID ha suministrado el primer medio para la discusión abierta de este tema. El proceso ha involucrado a la tercera parte de las municipalidades del país, entidades del Gobierno Central y donantes internacionales. Sin embargo, se concluye que aún queda mucho por hacer, especialmente por el hecho de que muchas municipalidades expresaron su deseo de asumir la responsabilidad por el manejo de los sistemas de agua potable y alcantarillado mediante la creación de empresas municipales autónomas y contratos de concesión de los servicios. Sin embargo, aún no existe en el país el marco legal y regulatorio para apoyar el manejo descentralizado de los sistemas.

CONCLUSIONES Y RECOMENDACIONES El estudio recomienda que la USAID deberá permancer involucrada en el diálogo, con el objeto de utilizar su capacidad técnica y credibilidad para impulsar una descentralización realista y efectiva. Un primer paso será crear un grupo de actores interesados, bien informados, que apoyen e impulsen este proceso de reforma sectorial. Está muy claro que las municipalidades en El Salvador deberán desempeñar un papel clave en cualquier esquema futuro de decentralización. Está muy claro que la gestión centralizada no ha sido sostenible en El Salvador y se recomienda una reforma hacia la descentralización en el manejo de los servicios y una reorganización institucional, legal y reglamentaria. El Estado deberá facilitar el cambio de un manejo centralizado a esquemas por concesiones a entes especializados y empresas muncipales autónomas. La mayoría de los participantes en los talleres ejecutados concluyen que la reforma del sector es necesaria y, por lo tanto, recomiendan que la Asamblea Legislativa conozca la reforma y los anteproyectos de Ley que se han preparado para crear el ente rector de los recursos hídricos (CONRA) y el ente regulador de los servicios de agua potable y saneamiento (ARESA) e inicie su discusión con grupos de sectores interesados lo más pronto posible. Se considera que existirán buenas condiciones para el manejo local de los sistemas en el país si se aprueba la reforma sectorial. Sin embargo, deberán existir buenas condiciones jurídicas, voluntad política, financiamiento y recursos. El marco legal debe garantizar la autonomía institucional y financiera de las empresas de agua y se debe trabajar en la compatibilización de los marcos legales para agilizar la gestión. Es un hecho importante que existe un alto nivel de conciencia entre las entidades locales y del Gobierno Central sobre los aspectos ambientales relacionados con el manejo del recurso hídrico y que los participantes en los talleres y seminarios recomiendan promover el manejo integrado de cuencas hidrográficas para proteger las fuentes de abastecimiento, las zonas de recarga y la calidad del agua. Ya que las comunidades rurales están manejando sus sistemas de agua potable y la participación es un elemento clave del buen manejo de los sistemas rurales, se recomienda que las mismas continúen sus operaciones. Sin embargo, el apoyo técnico, los recursos y la capacitación son indispensables para la sostenibilidad del manejo de estos sistemas, por lo que se recomienda crear una institución especializada de atención al sector rural, que apoye las actividades que las comunidades no son capaces de realizar por sí solas. Un cambio importante en el panorama municipal en El Salvador ha sido la creación, por decreto legislativo, del Fondo de Desarrollo (FODES), que otorga 728 millones de colones (cerca de US$100 millones) a los municipios. Se considera que este es un elemento clave del fortalecimiento de las capacidades locales. Significa recursos para la inversión y la posibilidad de obtener créditos de otras fuentes nacionales e internacionales para resolver los problemas de agua potable y saneamiento locales.

Es importante reconocer que la reforma sectorial requerirá de un gran esfuerzo y participación de parte de las municipalidades, y una fuerte alianza entre el Gobierno Central, las municipaldades y el sector privado. En estos momentos, el nuevo Gobierno de la República de El Salvador, recién electo el pasado 7 de marzo, prepara una propuesta de reforma sectorial, que incluye la formulación de una Ley General de Aguas, fundamentada en los esquemas y avances que hacia la descentralización se han venido preparando desde el año de 1993. Hay buenas expectativas para que esta reforma se dé a conocer y se discuta ampliamente en un futuro próximo, y que su implementación, en el mediano plazo, cree oportunidades para el mejoramiento del servicio en las comunidades rurales y cabeceras municipales, para cuya gestión deberá dársele alta participación a las organizaciones locales y las alcaldías.

Manejo de Cuencas: Experiencia del Canal de Panamá

Daniel Musschet∗∗∗∗

Diapositiva 1

M ANEJO INTEGRAL DE LA CUENCA La Experiencia delCanal de Panam á

M ANEJO INTEGRAL DE LA CUENCA La Experiencia delCanal de Panam á

Daniel M. Muschett IbarraComisión del Canal de Panamá

1999

Durante los próximos minutos les presentaré una visión resumida de las acciones que lleva a cabo la Comisión del Canal de Panamá para el manejo del recurso agua dentro de la cuenca hidrográfica del Canal y aquellas que adelanta en preparación de sus nuevas responsabilidades como Autoridad del Canal de Panamá.

∗ Especialista en Protección Ambiental, Comisión del Canal de Panamá.

Diapositiva 2

Cuenca Hidrográfica delCanal de Panam á

Cuenca Hidrográfica delCanal de Panam á

OCEANO PACIFICO

OCEANO ATLANTICOColón Colón

Panam áPanam á

Las áreas de acción tradicionalmente asignadas a la Comisión del Canal han sido aquellas relacionadas estrictamente con la operación y funcionamiento del Canal: las presas y estructuras de regulación hidráulica, las instalaciones de operación de las esclusas, el equipo y ayuda de la navegación y áreas adyacentes, las estaciones hidrometeorológicas ubicadas dentro de la cuenca y las áreas de mantenimiento de las compuertas y sus oficinas auxiliares. Aparte de estas edificaciones y equipo, el ámbito de acción de la Comisión dentro de la cuenca es bien limitado y restringido.

Diapositiva 3

Ley 19 del 11 de junio de 1997Ley 19 del 11 de junio de 1997

Todo este enfoque cambia con la inclusión del Título XIV a la Constitución Política de Panamá y la aprobación de la Ley 19 del 11 de junio de 1997, Ley Orgánica de la Autoridad del Canal, que les asignan nuevas responsabilidades que abarcan toda la cuenca del Canal.

Diapositiva 4

Colón

Lago Gatún Lago Alhajuela

Esclusa de Pedro Miguel Esclusa de MirafloresCiudad de Panamá

Esclusa de Gatún

O CEANO PACIFICO

O CEANO ATLANTICO

Cuenca Hidrográfica delCanal de Panam á

Cuenca Hidrográfica delCanal de Panam á

La cuenca del Canal está definida como el área geográfica cuyas aguas, superficiales y subterráneas, fluyen hacia el Canal o son vertidas en éste, así como en sus embalses y lagos. Es una línea imaginaria que sigue los puntos más altos de las montañas que rodean el sistema hidrológico del Canal.

Diapositiva 5

Cuenca Hidrográfica Superior eInferior del Canal de Panam á

Cuenca Hidrográfica Superior eInferior del Canal de Panam á

O CEANO PACIFICO

OCEANO ATLANTICO

Colón

Lago Gatún

CUENCA SUPERIOR

CUENCA INFERIOR

Lago Alhajuela

Esclusa de Pedro Miguel Esclusa de MirafloresCiudad de Panamá

Esclusa de Gatún

Abarca aproximadamente 330,000 ha y se divide en dos regiones distintas: la Cuenca Superior, al este del cauce de navegación, que se caracteriza por su terreno montañoso, laderas empinadas y bosques densos y que ocupa casi una tercera parte de la cuenca pero suministra casi la mitad del agua que suple al Canal; y la Cuenca Inferior al Oeste del Canal, que está formada típicamente de colinas pequeñas, de suaves laderas. Esta última región fue deforestada hace muchas décadas para sostener actividades agrícolas y ganaderas.

Diapositiva 6

Im agen de LandsatIm agen de Landsat

El sistema de embalses que abastece al Canal esta construido para almacenar la mayor cantidad de agua durante los meses de mayor precipitación y escorrentía y poder liberarla durante los meses de temporada seca. Esta operación suele tener dos aristas que requieren una vigilancia permanente del régimen de precipitación dentro de la cuenca y cómo la misma llega a los embalses afectando los niveles de los lagos Alhajuela y Gatún, lo que permite proteger las represas y prevenir inundaciones que puedan afectar la operación del Canal durante los meses de mayo a noviembre y mantener un calado adecuado de diciembre a abril.

Diapositiva 7

Estación Hidrom eteorológicaRío Pequení

Estación Hidrom eteorológicaRío Pequení

Las investigaciones realizadas por la Comisión utilizando registros extensos de precipitación y escorrentía indican que no hay tendencias significativas de disminución o aumento en las lluvias que puedan afectar al Canal a largo plazo. La última evaluación del almacenaje del Lago Alhajuela, realizada en 1997, indica que en los 62 años de existencia del lago, la sedimentación ha reducido el almacenaje activo un 15%. No esperamos que estos niveles de sedimentación tengan impactos adversos sobre las operaciones del Canal, si se mantienen las medidas de conservación en la Cuenca Superior, que es el área más crítica.

Diapositiva 8

Derram adero de GatúnDerram adero de Gatún

Estas imágenes permiten apreciar los extremos de las situaciones que se dan en el sistema de almacenamiento y derramamiento de agua en las represas principales ,

Diapositiva 9

Efectos de “El Niño”Bajo Nivel del Río Chagres

Efectos de “El Niño”Bajo Nivel del Río Chagres

El bajo caudal observado en el Río Chagres durante el verano pasado,

Diapositiva 10

Efectos de “El Niño”Bajo Nivel del Lago Gatún=Restricciones

de Calado

Efectos de “El Niño”Bajo Nivel del Lago Gatún=Restricciones

de Calado

Y la aparición de los bosques sumergidos del Lago Gatún afectado por el fenómeno de El Niño en 1997.

Diapositiva 11

! Esclusajes

! GeneraciónHidroeléctrica

! Consumo Municipal

! Esclusajes

! GeneraciónHidroeléctrica

! Consumo Municipal

Usos del AguaUsos del Agua

Recuerden que el agua que produce la cuenca actualmente tiene usos que no solo inciden sobre la operación del Canal, también que suministran el agua potable para las ciudades de Panamá y Colón. Este último renglón representa tan solo un 6% del total, aunque ya se trabaja en la construcción de nuevas potabilizadoras y proyectos de extracción adicional de agua desde el Lago Gatún.

Diapositiva 12

Nuevo Título ConstitucionalArtículo 310:

Nuevo Título ConstitucionalArtículo 310:

“A la Autoridad del Canal de Panamácorresponde la responsabilidad por laadministración, mantenimiento, uso yconservación de los recursos hídricosde la Cuenca Hidrográfica del Canal dePanamá.”

“A la Autoridad del Canal de Panamácorresponde la responsabilidad por laadministración, mantenimiento, uso yconservación de los recursos hídricosde la Cuenca Hidrográfica del Canal dePanamá.”

Ahora deseo hablarles sobre algunas funciones adicionales de protección ambiental que la Constitución y las leyes de Panamá le han asignado a la Autoridad del Canal de Panamá, sucesora de la Comisión del Canal. El título sobre el Canal, que se adicionó a la Constitución Política de la República de Panamá, estipula que "A la Autoridad del Canal de Panamá corresponde la responsabilidad por la administración, mantenimiento, uso y conservación de los recursos hídricos de la cuenca hidrográfica del Canal de Panamá, constituidos por el agua de los lagos y sus corrientes tributarias". Este es el único caso en que nuestra Carta Magna le asigna a un organismo específico la responsabilidad de custodia de un recurso natural.

Diapositiva 13

Ley Orgánica de la Autoridad delCanal de Panam á (ACP)

Artículo 120:

Ley Orgánica de la Autoridad delCanal de Panam á (ACP)

Artículo 120:

La ACP adoptará la reglamentación sobrelos recursos hídricos para:" Administrar los recursos hídricos parafuncionamiento del Canal y elabastecimiento de agua para consumo dela poblaciones aledañas." Salvaguardar los recursos naturales dela cuenca hidrográfica del Canal, y enespecial, de las áreas críticas.

La ACP adoptará la reglamentación sobrelos recursos hídricos para:" Administrar los recursos hídricos parafuncionamiento del Canal y elabastecimiento de agua para consumo dela poblaciones aledañas." Salvaguardar los recursos naturales dela cuenca hidrográfica del Canal, y enespecial, de las áreas críticas.

Específicamente, los artículos 120 y 121 establecen qué materias deben ser reglamentadas para la protección del recurso hídrico: La administración de los recursos hídricos para el abastecimiento de agua para consumo de las poblaciones aledañas y el funcionamiento del Canal. La salvaguarda de los recursos naturales de la cuenca y en especial los de las áreas críticas.

Diapositiva 14

Ley Orgánica de la Autoridad delCanal de Panam á (ACP)

Artículo 121:

Ley Orgánica de la Autoridad delCanal de Panam á (ACP)

Artículo 121:

Los reglamentos que apruebe la ACPdeberán contener los siguientes puntos:" Protección, conservación y mantenimientodel recurso hídrico." Protección, conservacion, mantenimiento ymejoramiento del ambiente." Saneamiento de las aguas del Canal." Coordinación con las autoridadescompetentes para proteger la calidad de lasaguas dentro de la cuenca.

Los reglamentos que apruebe la ACPdeberán contener los siguientes puntos:" Protección, conservación y mantenimientodel recurso hídrico." Protección, conservacion, mantenimiento ymejoramiento del ambiente." Saneamiento de las aguas del Canal." Coordinación con las autoridadescompetentes para proteger la calidad de lasaguas dentro de la cuenca.

La protección, conservación y mantenimiento del recurso hídrico. La protección, conservación, mantenimiento y mejoramiento del medio ambiente. El saneamiento de las aguas del Canal. La coordinación con las autoridades competentes para proteger la calidad de las aguas dentro de la cuenca.

Diapositiva 15

Reglam ento sobre el M edioAm biente y Cuenca

Hidrográfica del Canal

Reglam ento sobre el M edioAm biente y Cuenca

Hidrográfica del Canal" Protección del Ambiente en Areas

Patrimoniales del Canal" Protección del Ambiente en el Area de

Compatibilidad con la Operación delCanal

" Administración, Uso y Conservaciónde los Recursos Hídricos

" Prevención y Control de Derrames" Sanidad Ambiental

Actualmente, luego de más de un año de consultas internas, visitas de consultoría, apoyo de la Agencia para el Desarrollo Internacional de los Estados Unidos, (USAID), discusiones conjuntas de la Autoridad del Canal y la Comisión, y la revisión desde el punto de vista legal, hemos completado un borrador de reglamentos que desarrolla los requisitos de la Ley Orgánica y contiene los siguientes temas: • La protección del ambiente en áreas patrimoniales del Canal • La protección del ambiente en el área de compatibilidad con la operación del Canal • La administración, uso y conservación de los recursos hídricos • La prevención y control de los derrames • La sanidad ambiental La propuesta de reglamentos ha sido elaborada tomando en cuenta la situación actual dentro de la cuenca que incluye la duplicidad y dilución de responsabilidades y recursos institucionales, la falta de un sistema de coordinación institucional para la aprobación de proyectos, la necesidad de un plan de ordenamiento ambiental de los lagos de la cuenca y la necesidad de normas y límites específicos para las actividades dentro de la cuenca para preservar la calidad del agua.

Diapositiva 16

Desarrollos UrbanosDesarrollos Urbanos

La situación actual dentro de la cuenca tiene dos aspectos que normalmente no se asocian cuando se evalúan sus condiciones actuales: el sistema de bosques y lagos y los centros urbanos y semiurbanos que se encuentran a su alrededor.

Diapositiva 17

Construcción de CarreterasConstrucción de Carreteras

Y es precisamente esa presión y desarrollo de las poblaciones y centros urbanos que la rodean, los que mayor impacto y peligro pueden causar. Una creciente urbanización, no siempre ordenada, industrias actuales y futuras, desarrollos turísticos y carreteras son actualmente aprobadas por diferentes entidades con escasa coordinación y poca ponderación del impacto ambiental acumulativo de estas obras o proyectos.

Diapositiva 18

OBJETIVOS FINALESOBJETIVOS FINALES

" Comisión Interinstitucional de laCuenca Hidrográfica del Canal dePanamá.(Artículo 6, Ley Orgánica)

Para normar esta situación y coordinar adecuadamente la labor de las diferentes instituciones con responsabilidades dentro de la cuenca, el Artículo 6 de la Ley Orgánica establece que “. . . la junta directiva de la Autoridad establecerá y reglamentará una comisión interinstitucional de la cuenca hidrográfica del Canal, la cual será coordinada y dirigida por la Autoridad.”

Diapositiva 19

Coordinación de EsfuerzosInstitucionales en la CuencaCoordinación de EsfuerzosInstitucionales en la Cuenca

Las propuestas para el establecimiento de la comisión interinstitucional incluyen la representación de las entidades del sector salud, agropecuario, y de los gobiernos locales, junto con la ARI, la ANAM y las ONG. Igualmente se contempla la creación de consejos consultivos para abordar temas específicos que se presenten o surjan dentro de la comisión para su evaluación y aprobación (turismo, comercio, desechos, explotaciones mineras, etc.) y establecer un mecanismo de participación de las autoridades y residentes de los distritos que se encuentran dentro de la cuenca.

Diapositiva 20

Oceano Atlantico

Oceano Pacifico

Cuenca del Canal Nuevos LimitesCuenca del Canal Nuevos Limites

Diapositiva 21

#

#

#

#

N

Océano Atlántico

Coclé del Norte

Caño SucioIndio

Ciudad de Colón

Ciudad de Panmá

Océano Pacífico

Coclesito

El CopéEl Valle

Diapositiva 22

Con esto concluyo mi presentación sobre los aspectos más relevantes que lleva a cabo la Comisión del Canal y aquellos en proceso de implantación para el manejo integral de la cuenca del Canal. Seguidamente el Ing. Jorge Espinosa ampliará el tema sobre el manejo del recurso agua de la cuenca del Canal.

Financing Water Projects in Latin America and the Caribbean

Francisco J. González∗∗∗∗

Slide 1

Financing Water Projects in LatinFinancing Water Projects in LatinAmerica and the CaribbeanAmerica and the Caribbean

Francisco J. GonzálezInternational Corporate Finance Coordinator

HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP

∗ International Corporate Finance Coordinator, Holland & Knight LLP.

Slide 2

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Format of this presentationFormat of this presentation

• This is a dialogue….• So, please interrupt me at any time• This is an informational piece, therefore you are not

expected to come up with recommendations until youhave heard it all and only if you have any...

• Once the presentation has taken place, we will hearfrom the panelists

• We will try to reach some conclusions andrecommendations

• This presentation will be made available to you beforethe Dialogue is over.

• Let’s get on with it...

Slide 3

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

IntroductionIntroduction• This presentation is designed to provide a summary of the different

sources of private sector financing for water projects• The nature of water projects (capital intensive, long repayment periods

and need for specialized management) makes for a complex processwhich requires a special sensitivity on the part of the financing source

• We will first explore the obvious. We will determine the reasons thatmake water projects specially important and difficult to finance.

• We will then explore the different sources of financing. From theMultilateral entities such as the World Bank and the IADB toinstitutional investors and specialized investment funds

• We will attempt to identify some of the largest players and , timepermitting, explore some of the more recent private sector participationexercises.

Slide 4

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Socioeconomic Conditions of the RegionSocioeconomic Conditions of the Region

8,000

3,6004,200

1,9003,300

2,300

7,000

3,000

27,000

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

Arg

entin

a

Bra

zil

Chi

le

Col

ombi

a

Mex

ico

Per

ú

Pue

rto R

ico

Ven

ezue

la

US

A

(Per Capita GNP, 1995 US$ Thousands)

Slide 5

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Urban vs. Total PopulationUrban vs. Total Population

88%

78%

86%

72 %75%

72% 73%

93%

76%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Argentina Brazil Chile Colom bia Mexico Perú PuertoRico

Venezuela USA

(Percentage of urbanization, 1995)

Slide 6

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Provision and regulation of water and sanitationProvision and regulation of water and sanitation

Country P rovide r Regula tionArgentina Munic ipal DecentralizedBra zil Munic ipal UncertainChile Regional National CentralizedColom bia Munic ipal National CentralizedMe x ico Munic ipal UncertainPeru Munic ipal National CentralizedP ue rto Rico National National contractualVene zue la Munic ipal to be defined

Source: World Bank

Slide 7

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Coverage (as a % of the urban population)Coverage (as a % of the urban population)

Country W ater connections Se w er Conne ction Trea tm e ntArgentina 68% 39% Less than 5%Bra zil 74% 35% Less than 10%Chile 99% 79% Less than 5%Colom bia 86% 65% NoneMe xico 93% 81% Less than 10%Pe rú 63% 59% Less than 5%Pue rto Rico 98% 50% Aprox 100%Ve nezue la 73% 62% Less than 5%USA 100% Unknown Unknown

(Percentage of urban population, 1995)

Source: World Bank

Slide 8

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Quality of ServiceQuality of Service

Country Continuous S ervice Qua lityArge ntina Generally UncertainBra z il not always UncertainChile Yes AcceptableColom bia Generally UncertainMe x ico not always UncertainPe rú not always UnacceptablePue rto Rico not always UncertainVe nezue la not always UncertainUSA 100% Acceptable

Source: World Bank

Slide 9

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Reasons for Private Sector ParticipationReasons for Private Sector Participation

Public Sector Objectives• Better Service, Coverage

and Quality• Efficient operation and

maintenance• Elimination of subsidies• Financing without

government guarantees

Private Sector Objectives• Long term profits• Market share• Risk management• Profits based on risk level

Slide 10

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

What makes water so different?What makes water so different?

#Natural monopoly

#Capital Intensive

#Externalities

• It is not economic toduplicate a water andsewer system

• Investments reach 10times the level of annualrevenues

• External elements:environment and Health

Slide 11

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Sources of Financing for Water ProjectsSources of Financing for Water ProjectsSource Multilaterals Private Investors Capital Markets

Type

Equity • IFC

• IIC

• Private SectorOperators

• Private EquityInvestors

• For Mature Projects

• As part of A/B loans

Debt • A/B Loans • Mezzanine DebtFunds

• Construction loans

• Debt placements

Other:GuaranteesGrantsFeasibility StudiesOther

• Private Sector Loans

• Guarantees

• MIGAOPICUSAID

• Grants andInstitutionaldevelopment funds

• N/A • N/A

Slide 12

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

MultilateralsMultilaterals• IFC

• IIC

• World Bank

• IADB

• Loans• Equity• Quasi Equity

• Loans• Equity

• Adjustment Lending• Investment Loans• Guarantees

• Investment Loans• Global Credits• Guarantees

Slide 13

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

IFCIFC• Loans

• Equity

• Quasi Equity

• To private sector• IFC’s largest product• Fixed and variable rate loans• Any currency• 8 to 12 years with or without grace periods• Flexible repayment schedules

• Based on project needs and anticipated returns• Never the largest single shareholder• Limited to 8 to 15 years• Clear exit mechanisms• Preference to domestic capital market sale

• Convertible debentures, subordinated loans, loanswith warrants

Slide 14

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

IICIIC• Loans

• Equity

• To private sector• IIC’s largest product• Mostly variable rate loans• LIBOR plus a spread (3%-6%)• Any currency• 8 to 12 years with or without grace periods• Flexible repayment schedules• $2-$10 million• Up to 33% of total investment (New projects)• Up to 50% of total investment (Expansion)

• Based on project needs and anticipated returns• Never the largest single shareholder• Clear exit mechanisms• Preference to domestic capital market sale

Slide 15

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

World BankWorld Bank• Adjustment lending

• Guarantees

• Directed to public entities• Designed to act as catalysts to private sector

participation

• Partial risk guarantees:– Protect lender against payment defaults arising from

breaches of sovereign contractual obligations,transfer risks and certain force majeure events

• Partial credit guarantees:– Protect lenders against payment defaults, regardless

of the cause, but only for specified debt serviceobligations in order to extend maturities

Slide 16

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

World BankWorld Bank

1039.5

809.8

706.1

FY '95

FY '96

FY '97

Yearly allocation of resources to Water and Wastewaterprojects (in millions of US$)

Slide 17

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

World BankWorld Bank

14.58%

10.47%

10.06%

FY '95

FY '96

FY '97

Yearly allocation of resources to Water and Wastewaterprojects (as % of total allocation)

Slide 18

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

A/B LoansA/B Loans

World BankWorld Bank Project CompanyProject Company

Water/WastewaterProject

Water/WastewaterProject

Commercial lendersCommercial lenders

Investment

A LoanPartialGuarantee

B Loan

Slide 19

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

IADBIADB• Adjustment

lending

• Direct loans

• Cofinancing(A/B Loans)

• Directed to public entities• Designed to act as catalysts to private sector participation

• Directed to private sector entities• Sponsor driven• Requirements:

– Financially, legally, technically, economically andenvironmentally sound

– Institutional managerial and structural capacity to carry out theproject

– Meet the standards of the international financial community

• Joint financing with other private sector entities• Portion of funds is financed with IADB’s own resources (A

Loan)• B Loans from private sector funds but the IADB remains as

lender o of record. The project enjoys a lower cost of funding.

Slide 20

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

IADBIADB• Project eligibility

• Amounts

• Loan terms andconditions

• New projects, expansions and rehabilitations• Debt refinancing is excluded• Beneficiary of the loan must be a company of the

country where investments will be made• No limitations as to nationality

• IADB will finance up to 25% of the total cost of theproject or $75 million, whichever is less.

• No limitation as to B portion

• Flexible term and repayment schedule.• Most likely 13 years• IDB loans will rank as senior debt• IDB charges a fee to cover for outside consultants,

counsel and other transaction related costs

Slide 21

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

OthersOthers• MIF

• USAID

• OPIC

• Designed to promote private sector participation• In one of three areas:

– Technical cooperation for policy reform– Human resources development– Small enterprise development

• Equity participation• Grants and other• From less than $1 million up to $5 million

• Although with reduced resources, pays for developmentprograms and private sector initiatives

• Pre-feasibility studies• Market assessment missions

Slide 22

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Private InvestorsPrivate Investors• Operators

• Private EquityInvestors

• Privateplacements

• Capital markets

• Equity investments as part of their overall managementcommitment

• Either as individual investors (Institutional Investors) or asgeneral or infrastructure investment funds

• High returns• Qualified operators in mature projects• Investors exercise managerial control• Examples are:

– TCW Mezzanine Fund ($600 million)– AIG/GE Capital Latin American Infrastructure Fund ($1 Billion)

• Once structured, a portion of the project is brought to aspecific set of institutional investors. Investment takes theform of shares without specific control provisions

• Formal issues placed in international markets

Slide 23

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

What are the investors looking at?What are the investors looking at?• National and Municipal Water

and Wastewater– Investor-Owned water utilities– Municipally-Owned water utilities– System operators– Treatment equipment and

technologies• Commercial and industrial

– Treatment equipment andtechnologies

– Service Providers• Consumer products

– Domestic Water Treatment– Bottled water

• Water resources– Water rights storage facilities and

or conveyances

Business lines include• Chemical and equipment

manufacture and sales• Engineering and facility design• Analytical instruments and services• Facility operations• Regulated utility services, retail

sales• Residential dealerships, and• Water resources transactions

Business lines include• Chemical and equipment

manufacture and sales• Engineering and facility design• Analytical instruments and services• Facility operations• Regulated utility services, retail

sales• Residential dealerships, and• Water resources transactions

Slide 24

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

What are the investors looking at?What are the investors looking at?• Private sector participation programs in national and municipal

systems– Asset sales

– O&M Contracts

– BOO ContractsStorage

9%

W ater source8%

Other1%

treatment26%

Transmission and distribution

56%

Total $14.2 billion per yearSource: World Bank/HSBC Analysis

Slide 25

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Who are the players?Who are the players?• Vivendi/Aqua Alliance/Philadelphia Suburban/Consumers Water• Suez Lyonnaise des Eaux/United Water Resources• US Water (United Utilities and Bechtel)• Severn Trent Environmental• CH2M Hill/Thames Water• American Water Works/American Anglian• US Filter• Philip Utilities Management Corp• Saur International• Enron (Azurix)/Wessex Water• NIPSCO (IWC Resources, Indianapolis)• Minnesota Power & Light (Florida Water Services, America’s Water

Services)• DQE (Aqua Source)

Slide 26

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Options for Private Sector ParticipationOptions for Private Sector Participation

Option Ow nership Financing Opera tionSe rvice Contra ct Public Public PublicMa nage m e nt Contra ct Public Public Priva teLe ase Public Public Priva teConce ssion Public/Private Private Priva teBOOT Private and later Public Private Priva teRe ve rse BOOT Public and later Private Public Priva teMix e d ow nership Private/Public Private/Public Priva te /PublicSa le Private Private Priva te

Slide 27

Some Examples...

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Slide 28

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Big Bang (Buenos Aires)Big Bang (Buenos Aires)

• Phase 1

• Phase 2

• Phase 3

“Opportunity in a Crisis”

• Poor quality of services provided by public sectorentities opens a political window for a fast pacedprivatization process

• A concession contract is put out for bids andexecuted with a private sector operator who isresponsible for operation, maintenance andfinancing

• A formal regulatory framework for the concessionis created and developed

Slide 29

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Progressive (Chile)Progressive (Chile)

• Phase 1

• Phase 2

• Phase 3

“Slowly but Surely”

• A legal and regulatory framework is put in place. Itis aimed at promoting efficiency, cost recovery andcompetition.

• Public entities charged with the provision of waterand sewer services are transformed intocorporations and forced to perform efficiently

• Shares of these companies are sold in a progressiveform to strategic investors.

Slide 30

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Ingredients for a Successful PSPIngredients for a Successful PSP

#Strong and sustained political support

#Financial viability

#Ideal legal and regulatory framework

Slide 31

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Santiago, ChileSantiago, ChileResults• Competition

• FinancialViability

• Social equality

• Efficiency

• Competition with revocable concessioncontracts.

• Flexibility with competitive service contracts

• Increased financial viability with only marginalincreased costs

• Tariff model reflecting efficient enterprises

• Support of low income customers with directedsubsidies

• Productivity: Reduction of 1 employees per1000 connections

• Operational losses: Reduction of 26%

Slide 32

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Santiago, ChileSantiago, ChilePending Reform - Ownership

1995Central Government 92%Private enterprises 4%Municipal governments 4%

Total 100%

FutureMinimum 35%Maximum 65%

100%

Slide 33

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Santiago, ChileSantiago, ChilePending Reform - Stronger Regulation

Problem: Regulatory body is still too weak toeffectively deal with private sectorconcessionaires

Solution New legislation provides limitation ofownership of telecom or electricity forconcessionaires operating in water

Slide 34

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Puerto RicoPuerto Rico

• Management contract for the operation of water and sewerservices

• Decades of neglect and over-employment• Drought and rationing in 1995-95 mitigated revolt• Issued RFP• Incentive laden management contract (5 years)• Unexpected increase in productivity of 40% and a decrease

in operating costs of $225 million

Slide 35

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Puerto RicoPuerto Rico

Results after two years• Productivity goals not achieved• Substantial losses incurred by the operator• Tensions between operator and regulatory authority

(Autoridad de los Servicios de Acueducto y Alcantarilladode Puerto Rico - PRASA)

Slide 36

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Cartagena ColombiaCartagena Colombia

FeaturesType: O&M Contract for 25 yearsTransfer: June 1995Population: 750,000Operational goals: - Unaccounted water: 52% to 25% in 10

years- Collections from 80% to 95% in 10 years- Stiff quality standards

Required investment: $250 Million in the next 5 yearsRegulation: National Commission

Slide 37

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Cartagena ColombiaCartagena Colombia

Achievements• Administrative improvements• Increased collections (from 50%

to 99%)• New commercial and accounting

systems• Geographical coverage increased

from 70% to 74%• sewer coverage increased from

58% to 69%

Still to resolve• Distortions and low tariff levels• Weak regulation• Uncertain financing mechanisms

Slide 38

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Buenos Aires, ArgentinaBuenos Aires, Argentina

FeaturesType: Concession for 30 yearsTransfer: May 1993Population: 8.6 millionCoverage: Water: 70%

Sewer: 85%Operational goals: - Coverage Water 100%

- Treatment 93%Required investment: $4,000 million, $1,200 in the first 5 yearsRegulation: ETOSS (Federal, Provincial and

Municipal Governments)

Slide 39

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Buenos Aires, ArgentinaBuenos Aires, Argentina

Achievements - Coverage and Quality• Installed capacity increased from 3.6 million of m3/year (1993 to 4.9

million m3/year (1996)• Quality increased dramatically• Increased water coverage (+25% to 1.3 million customers)• Increased sewer coverage to 600,000 more customers (+12%)

Achievements - Satisfied Customers• Lower tariffs• Faster repairs

Achievements - Personnel• Payroll reduction from 7,450 (1993) to 4,400 (1996)• Average salary increased from $1,010 (1993) to $1,460 (1996)• Average training hours increased from 10 (1993) to 90 (1996)

Slide 40

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Buenos Aires, ArgentinaBuenos Aires, Argentina

Achievements - Financial viability• Annual investment increased from $20 million (1992) to $220 million

(1996)• Cash flow increased from $10 million (1993) to $120 million (1996)• Total outstanding debt increased from $110 million to $460 million

(1996)

Mishaps• In 1997 the Federal government renegotiated the concession bypassing

the regulatory entity• Credibility of the regulatory body was seriously damaged• There are still severe inefficiencies in the tariff structure• Inefficient water consumption

Slide 41

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Cancun, MexicoCancun, Mexico

FeaturesType: Concession for 30 yearsTransfer: January 1994Population: 340,000Coverage: Water: 61%

Sewer: 34%Operational goals: - Coverage Water 95%

- Coverage Sewer 95%- Treatment 100% (1996)

Required investmentRequired investment: $120 million (1994-2000)Regulation: Agencia Estadal Operadora, CAPA

Slide 42

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Cancun, MexicoCancun, Mexico

Achievements• Increased water production (+7%)• Improvements in measuring (from 54% to 86%)• Improvements in collections (from 85% to 88%)

Mishaps• Tariff distortions• Ambitious goals• Conflict of interest in regulation• High level of losses

Slide 43

HOLLAND & KNIGHT HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLPLLP

Problem AreasProblem Areas

B e fo r e A fte r B e fo r e A fte r B e fo r e A fte r B e fo r e A fte r B e fo r e A fte rQ u a lity a n d C o v e r a g eP r o d u c tiv it y

In v e s tm e n ts

R e g u la t io n

T a r if f

S u b s id ie s

G o o d R e g u la r P o o r

C o r r ie n te s (A r g e n tin a )

B u e n o s A ir e s (A r g e n tin a )

C a n c u n (M e x ic o ) C a r ta g e n a (C o lo m b ia )

S a n t ia g o (C h ile )

Mecanismos de Resolución de Conflictos en Apoyo a la Administración de Aguas en El Uruguay

Ing. Roberto Torres∗∗∗∗ INTRODUCCIÓN El presente documento técnico proporciona un marco conceptual y de referencia para enfrentar y resolver conflictos originados por el uso de las aguas, independientemente de su fuente y destino. Si bien está elaborado considerando la legislación aplicada de aguas en el Uruguay, resultará un marco de referencia para otros países de la región. OBJETIVOS La demanda y competencia de los distintos sectores por el agua irá en aumento. La reforma o modernización de la gestión del Estado, tercerizando actividades, dando participación a actores sociales para la toma de decisiones, creando mecanismos de participación pública y de usuarios en particular, impondrá marcos de administración de aguas muy distintos a los del pasado. Por consiguiente, la resolución de conflictos por el agua, tradicionalmente una actividad o competencia exclusiva de organismos del Estado, tenderán también a ser transformados y modificados. ANTECEDENTES Y EVOLUCIÓN HISTÓRICA Existen actualmente un número importante de actividades en riego que demandan grandes volúmenes de agua, como el cultivo de arroz. Representan un número elevado de usuarios y derechos de agua vigentes. Se suma a la creciente construcción de pequeñas obras de represamiento para abrevadero de ganado. Como consecuencia, la conflictividad ha ido creciendo. Es natural y previsible que lo siga haciendo en forma proporcional. NECESIDAD DE UN MARCO LEGAL ADECUADO El Código de Aguas del Uruguay le da la responsabilidad de autoridad de aguas a nivel nacional al Poder Ejecutivo. Dicha autoridad la ejerce a través del Ministerio de Transporte y Obras Públicas y dentro de éste por la Dirección Nacional de Hidrografía (entidad administradora del agua).

∗ Director, División Recursos Hídricos, Dirección Nacional de Hidrografía, Ministerio de Transporte y Obras Publicas, Uruguay.

El Código de Aguas consta de 203 artículos y sin embargo pocos de ellos hacen referencia a mecanismos de resolución de conflictos. La autoridad administrativa del agua, tanto se trate en el caso de jurisdicción nacional o por cuenca hidrográfica, debe tener claramente delimitadas sus competencias e intervención cuando surjan conflictos y controversias por el agua en el territorio de su competencia, cuales quiera que sean las partes involucradas. Debe administrar las aguas dentro de los principios rectores que establece el Código de Aguas y leyes concordantes y cuando surjan los conflictos, tener claros los procedimientos de gestión e intervención y el alcance de sus competencias De no ser así, se podría caer en situaciones burocráticas e inefectivas de "administrar conflictos", en vez de adoptar y asumir posiciones institucionales que permitan "resolver conflictos" por el agua. La creciente actividad en la administración de aguas en el país lleva consigo un creciente número de los conflictivos inherentes al aprovechamiento y uso del agua. Su amplio espectro de posibilidades y combinaciones tanto en el espacio físico como en el tiempo, por su magnitud y impacto sobre el propio recurso, otros recursos naturales y el medio ambiente en general, o por las características socioculturales y de legitimación de las partes involucradas, actores tanto del sector público como del privado, van imponiendo la necesidad y conveniencia de crear y disponer estructuras reglamentarias y normativas que permita tenerlos identificados y clasificados. Las competencias jurisdiccionales deben ser claras y precisas, con procedimientos y mecanismos de resolución definidos y conocidos. DESCRIPCIÓN Y CLASIFICACIÓN DE CONFLICTOS El sector del agua requiere la implementación de mecanismos de resolución de conflictos rápidos y efectivos. Para analizarlos resulta conveniente introducir una clasificación genérica de conflictos. Se considera como adecuada a los fines perseguidos realizar la clasificación territorial, en función de dónde se puede producir el problema. En tal sentido identificamos tres zonas: Zona A: De Aprovechamiento Se identifica como Zona A la zona de extracción o captación del agua en la fuente natural, río, arroyo, lago, laguna, etc., de donde se extrae o capta el agua, por medio de una obra hidráulica de extracción o captación. Territorialmente tendría su frontera en la línea de ribera o límite del álveo. En el otorgamiento de los derechos de agua, es imprescindible, entre otros principios, considerar la naturaleza del aprovechamiento, derechos registrados otorgados aguas abajo o aguas arriba, y usos actuales y futuros en función de las prioridades por los usos. Los conflictos que se generan en esta zona, inherentes a la adjudicación de derechos, captación o extracción de las aguas, volúmenes o caudales aprovechados, resultan de competencia y resolución de la entidad administradora del agua.

Un usuario de aguas haciendo uso de la concesión o permiso de que es titular, puede en la eventualidad producir daños y perjuicios a terceros. Rige el principio general que para afectar, usar o inundar predios ajenos deberá lograrse el acuerdo previo de las partes o en su defecto gestionarse las servidumbres civiles establecidas en el Código de Aguas. Todas las resultantes y conflictos que se generen por aplicación de estas servidumbres se deben sustanciar y resolver por la vía judicial. Hasta el presente se han constituido Juntas de Riego que actúan en el proceso de negociación y mediación del conflicto. Zona B: De Transición El agua que es captada y extraída en el curso mediante la ejecución de una obra hidráulica a esos efectos, requiere ser conducida o transportada hacia la zona de uso efectivo o aplicación. Es una zona perfectamente identificable en la mayoría de los proyectos hidráulicos e involucra el área por donde se desarrolla el trazado de la conducción y sus áreas contiguas. Por ejemplo, en un proyecto hidráulico por represa con fines de riego, los canales o cañerías de conducción se desarrollan por esta zona hasta ingresar en el área de riego, zona de aplicación del agua en los plantíos. En la legislación uruguaya se establece que las autorizaciones para conducir aguas se deberán hacer bajo acuerdo de partes entre los titulares de predios sirvientes y los beneficiados, o en su defecto gestionar la vía judicial la aplicación de servidumbres de acueducto. Los conflictos que se generan por aplicación de estas servidumbres se sustancian en la misma vía. Zona C: De Aplicación o Uso La tercera zona identificable para agrupar y describir conflictos es aquella donde efectivamente el agua es usada o aplicada. En un proyecto de riego de arroz, sería el área donde se han hecho las plantaciones y se aplica el agua. Es un área manejada y controlada por el propio titular de la explotación. Las actividades que se realizan en ella no están reguladas por la entidad administradora del agua y sí en cambio por la autoridad sectorial del riego, el Ministerio de Agricultura. Los conflictos que se generan en esta zona, por ejemplo en afectación a terceros por corte de escurrimientos de aguas o desvío de ésta hacia predios vecinos, se resuelven por acuerdo de partes o la vía judicial.

MECANISMOS Y ESTRATEGIAS DE RESOLUCIÓN La instrucción de conflictos de aprovechamiento (Zona A), de conducción (Zona B) y de uso (Zona C) se realizan por parte de funcionarios del administrador del agua, iniciados por denuncia formal de un afectado o por actuación de oficio, conformando en todos los casos un expediente. Los pasos recomendados como metodología para encarar denuncias de conflictos son, en primer término, clasificarlo y determinar su origen en función de la zona donde se generó; en función de ésta, considerar en segundo término el tipo de conflicto de que se trate, con identificación de las partes; seguidamente preguntarse cuál es el organismo, autoridad o entidad competente; y finalmente hacer referencia al mecanismo o proceso de gestión para resolverlo. Mediación y Conciliación Las asociaciones de usuarios, como las Juntas de Riego, intentan mediar en conflictos que se produjeren entre las partes afectadas procurando conciliar sus intereses. La experiencia uruguaya en estos procedimientos no ha sido efectiva en los casos en que el pleito haya implicado daños o perjuicios. Sin embargo, ha habido casos de ser un mecanismo muy efectivo. Por ejemplo, en momentos de sequía en los que atraviesa el Uruguay periódicamente, se producen importantes conflictos en Zona A. La capacidad de aporte de las cuencas no permite abastecer los sistemas de bombeo de los concesionarios de aguas. La intervención de las Juntas de Riego ha permitido sobrellevar los períodos deficitarios, imponiendo en forma negociada y conciliatoria entre todos los afectados, turnos de extracción y funcionamiento de las bombas, su control efectivo y mecanismos de sanción acordado. Jurados La Ley de Riego del Uruguay entró en vigencia en septiembre de 1997. Creó una figura jurídica, la sociedad agraria de riego. El contrato social de conformación de la sociedad puede prever la existencia de un jurado uni o pluripersonal. Sus competencias son conocer todas las cuestiones de hecho que sobre el uso del agua en el riego se susciten entre los miembros e imponer a los infractores del estatuto, contrato social, reglamentos y ordenanzas dictadas por la entidad los correctivos y sanciones a que haya lugar con arreglo a los mismos. El procedimiento del jurado resulta público y verbal, en la forma que establece el contrato social. Está obligado a dictar sus fallos, consignándolos en un libro con expresión de los hechos y del derecho en que se funden.

Arbitraje Como tal puede entenderse una forma o proceso de solución de conflictos que consiste en someter la decisión de un diferendo por el aprovechamiento, conducción o uso del agua a un órgano no judicial, elegido para el caso por las partes involucradas o por terceros. A ella se denomina laudo y se le confiere la misma eficacia de una sentencia dictada por un juez o tribunal. El fundamento de esta institución reside en la autonomía de la voluntad de las partes. Son varias las ventajas inherentes al arbitraje: celeridad, menor costo relativo, confiabilidad, especialización, confidencialidad e informalidad. Un arbitraje suele durar un lapso breve. Las propias partes determinan el tiempo de substanciación del proceso arbitral y la fecha límite para dictar el laudo. En su defecto se podrán regir por el reglamento de la institución arbitral que hayan designado o por la ley procesal vigente en el país. Otra cualidad del arbitraje, de significante valor, está constituido por la alta especialización y el crédito que merecen las personas que pueden ser designadas como árbitros. Cada vez es mayor el grado de complejidad que implican los conflictos por aprovechamiento, transporte y uso de las aguas en nuestro país y en el mundo. Por consiguiente, deben ser resueltas por personas con gran especialización en la materia. Se debe tener conocimientos especializados y experiencia en administración de aguas, ser un entendido en legislación aplicada de agua, dominar los aspectos técnicos hidráulicos e hidrológicos para identificar el problema, determinar sus causales, cuantificar sus eventuales daños y perjuicios, dar solución técnica, económica y jurídica al diferendo, etc. El arbitraje en materia de aguas puede ofrecer, a las partes afectadas en primer término e indirectamente a la propia entidad administradora, soluciones rápidas y económicas a los conflictos que de sus derechos de agua, relaciones contractuales, aplicación y resultancia de servidumbres, funcionamiento de obras hidráulicas, hayan surgido o pudieren surgir. Arbitraje internacional En el comercio internacional, sometido a un fenómeno de globalización, con la consiguiente intensificación de las relaciones comerciales a nivel mundial, es imprescindible que los agentes económicos que operan en el escenario internacional se familiaricen con las técnicas y prácticas propias del comercio. Entre éstas se encuentra el arbitraje internacional. Este mecanismo de resolver disputas está en condiciones de satisfacer las necesidades que las transformaciones del sector del agua imponen en un medio ambiente de desarrollo sostenible, en el cual se plantean cambios de valoración y normativos permanentemente, procurando una justicia que se adapta adecuadamente a su ámbito de aplicación. Un problema de aguas compartidas por dos o más países puede ser resuelto por el mecanismo del arbitraje.

Del mismo modo que en controversias comerciales a nivel nacional o internacional intervienen instituciones de arbitraje, algunas de ellas muy antiguas y de reconocida trayectoria como las citadas, se deberían constituir de igual forma en el sector de la administración del agua a nivel interamericano. RECOMENDACIONES Y SUGERENCIAS El presente ítem incluye recomendaciones y sugerencias para ser considerados en los grupos de trabajo del Tercer Diálogo Interamericano sobre Administración de Aguas: • Análisis de procesos de creación de instituciones de arbitraje a nivel nacional, regional o

internacional. • Identificación de instituciones públicas y privadas encargadas de elaborar programas de

capacitación. • Financiamiento de un centro regional como experiencia piloto al cual acudan profesionales

que trabajan en administración de aguas para especializarse en resolución de conflictos. • Creación de programas de formación y capacitación, orientados a especialistas en recursos

hídricos, negociación, mediación y técnicas de resolución de conflictos y controversias.

ROUNDTABLE SESSION IV

Theme 1: Water and Health

Theme Co-Chairs: Bernhard Griesinger, OAS Abdiel Adames, Panama

SUMMARY Water quality management should be an integral part of national water resource policy in order to optimize and focus planning and investments in water quality protection, control, and remediation and to reduce the cost of water pollution to the national economy. The transition from the old, sectoral planning of water and sanitation to modern methods of integrated planning and management needs to be better handled. Outcomes will differ depending upon the state of development and the complexity of the issue. Part of the transition process requires improved methods of evaluating alternative management options. The choice and implementation of water quality standards and guidelines in developing countries needs to be based on local priorities, concerns, and conditions, affordability, and other socioeconomic factors such as life expectancy. In the selection process, the question whether risk factors originating in fully developed countries are realistic in the local situation should also be taken into account. RECOMMENDATIONS The working group therefore makes the following recommendations: 1. Matching imported expertise with local needs and expertise in water quality management:

• Foreign experts should increasingly become facilitators rather than “doers.” • Simple technology that may be more appropriate to the local situation should be considered

by donors and recipients. • New techniques (knowledge-based systems) now available in the field of information

technology should used to bring knowledge and expertise into the hands of local practitioners.

• Greater effort should be devoted to developing techniques of decision-making in data-poor environments.

• Water-quality data programmes should focus on client needs so as to be service-driven rather than data-driven. They should be structured to take into account new field and laboratory methodologies that can greatly increase its.

2. Warning Systems

• Hydrometeorological networks should be established according to needs defined by the river basin management plan.

• Hydrometeorological networks and flood warning systems of the different countries in a transboundary river basin should be interactive.

• Interagency cooperation in transboundary river basins should be strengthened and mechanisms to facilitate it should be adopted.

• Hydrological management should be performed according to a river-basin management plan.

• Public awareness and involvement in critical hydrological situations such as floods and droughts should be strengthened.

• The use of existing means and organizations for cooperation like IWRN, AIDIS, and IWRA, among others, to share and disseminate information and knowledge among countries should be encouraged.

• Developing countries should cooperate to share their experiences. 3. Water Resources Management and Sanitation

• A legal framework should be established to regulate water resources management activities and drinking water and sanitation services.

• Legal reforms should be made to establish efficient management for drinking water supply and sanitation services.

• A general law on water leading towards decentralization should be drafted. • Support should be given to local governments, which have an active role in sectoral

reform. • Water-quality regulations or policies using country-adaptable criteria should be

formulated. • Regulations and mechanisms should be adopted to enforce quality control. • A mechanism should be found to prevent the interference of politics in drinking-water

supply and sanitation services. • A mechanism should be created to strengthen the sectoral reform program. • New educational projects or programs on water use, disinfection, and quality should be

developed and existing ones supported. • Appropriate technology should be used to complement to the sectoral reform program. • Due attention should be paid to the systems’ vulnerability.

Theme 2: Integrated Water Resources Management: Transboundary Issues

Theme Co-Chairs: Thorant Hardware, Jamaica

Kirk P. Rodgers, U.S.A. SUMMARY Integrated water resources management has been a matter of growing concern at international meetings on development and environment, especially in the past decade. The dialogue on water management intensified sharply during the preparations for the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in the early 90s, and Chapter 18 of Agenda 21, which was approved at UNCED in 1992, includes significant international agreements on approaches to integrated water management. These blueprints for action in turn set the stage for the development of operational guidelines for the International Waters portion of the Global Environment Facility. Subsequent to the Earth Summit in Rio, attention was given to the special concerns of small island states. The United Nations Global Conference on Sustainable Development of Small Island States approved the Barbados Program of Action in 1994, which dealt extensively with water management issues. The United Nations Environment Program adopted the Global Program of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities in Washington in 1995. At the international level, discussion on integrated water management became even more sharply focused at meetings held as follow-up to the Rio Earth Summit. A defining moment for the Western Hemisphere came at the Summit of the Americas on Sustainable Development, held in Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia, in December of 1996, which approved a Plan of Action containing 12 initiatives related to the management of water resources and coastal zones in the Americas. The Organization of American States was assigned the responsibility of following up on the progress made by countries in implementing these initiatives. The attached graphic displays the process of inter-American dialogue on water. The meetings at the subregional level in the Americas sponsored by the OAS clearly demonstrated a striking coincidence of interests in one subject–transboundary water management. The reason for this common concern is easy to understand simply by looking at the geography of the region: a large percentage of the land area of Central and South America is composed of river basins shared by more than one country. Likewise, while the island nations of the Caribbean, with one exception,6 do not share river basins, they all share the Caribbean Sea, which makes each country’s integrated water management policies and actions transboundary in effect and therefore a matter of concern for all.

6 Haiti and the Dominican Republic share the island of Hispaniola.

The working group that examined these decided early on in its deliberations to frame its recommendations within the context of specific international agreements that have been approved in recent years. Giving such context to each recommendation was intended to reduce the amount of verbiage needed to present and defend each proposal and also to facilitate the implementation of an action proposal by tying it to potential sources of financing and political support. The action proposals that follow are therefore not simply the fresh new ideas of a group of experts and government authorities who happened to come together at a particular moment, but rather of technical/political dialogue both in the region and internationally. Each proposal has a specific context politically, technically and in some cases financially. RECOMMENDATIONS In accordance with Chapter 18 of Agenda 21, and the GEF operational strategy, sustainable development of transboundary basins in the Americas can be enhanced by: 1. Developing pilot projects in transboundary river basins that demonstrate the benefits of

integrated water resource management and encourage the participation of local communities. As a result of the pilot projects, and in the light of existing agreements, countries should agree to establish commissions or committees for the joint management of transboundary basins.

2. Giving emphasis to the significance of groundwater movement across borders, and the

exchange of transboundary coastal waters in the context of transboundary water resources management.

3. Undertaking the auspices of UNEP, a global analysis of transboundary water resource

management institutions and agreements. The OAS and its intitutional partners on water resources should contribute to this analysis for the Americas. An additional effort needs to be made to evaluate mechanisms for public participation in transboundary decision-making.

4. Developing, on the part of countries sharing transboundary waters, harmonized

methodologies and protocols for coordinated information and data exchange.

5. Improving the capacity of existing transboundary institutions to serve as regional centers for basin-wide training and research and to encourage basic grass-roots watershed education across borders.

6. Holding a regional meeting on transboundary river basins of the hemisphere in the second

half of 1999, to exchange information and practical experiences with a view to jointly implementing sustainable water resources development. Venezuela has expressed interest in hosting this meeting.

7. Designing and developing cost-effective information systems to permit systematic and orderly transfers of data in transboundary river basins. This will support the management of water resources and the exchange of experiences between countries, so as to enable decision-makers to use the information in water resources management.

8. Promoting new pilot projects in transboundary river basins that offer a potential for

alternative management mechanisms, such as the Usumacinta River.

Under the Barbados Program of Action, the Cartagena Convention, and the Global Program of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment against Pollution from Land-Based Sources, countries are to reduce pollution loading of coastal waters. In order to do so: 1. The Caribbean states should be given special support for the implementation of

integrated water resources management in the areas of multinational concern. 2. A meeting should be held in the Caribbean to analyze sucessful models of water

legislation and successful institutional frameworks for integrated water resources management and design an ongoing dialogue on these matters.

3. Integrated management approaches for transboundary and single-country basins should take into consideration downstream and coastal-zone environmental needs.

4. Under the Convention on Biological Diversity, countries have accepted duties and responsibilities to restore and protect their freshwater and coastal ecosystems.

Countries in the Americas should: 1. Foster the incorporation of aquatic and marine biodiversity considerations into their

natural resource and environmental legislation and into operational guidelines for river- basin management organizations.

2. Strengthen the links between water and biodiversity conservation efforts, particularly on issues such as public participation and industrial frameworks.

3. Propose to the Seventh Conference of the Parties to the RAMSAR Convention that it incorporate integrated management of transboundary river basins into RAMSAR’s lines of action.

Theme 3: Social, Environmental, and Economic Valuation of Water

Theme Co-Chairs: Gertjan Beekman, Ph.D., IICA, Brazil Mantha Mehallis, Ph.D., FAU, U.S.A.

SUMMARY The valuation of water is determined by the social, ecological, and economic importance placed on it by society. The Americas are composed of numerous cultures and societies, from indigenous populations to highly urbanized, technically sophisticated populations. While some countries are fairly homogeneous, others contain many cultures, each steeped in its own values and traditions. These inherent values play a primary role in how water resources are perceived. For example, some indigenous groups believe that water has a spirit and, as such, should be treated with reverence rather than as an economic commodity. Other societies, such as those in the Caribbean, view water as a “God-given right” and thus do not believe that monetary value should be placed on it. More urbanized regions accept the need to place a monetary value on water but get caught up in the clash of water-use priorities: economic development, personal use by the population, the need to preserve natural ecosystems, etc. Societal values not only vary according to the culture but also change over time. Case studies presented on the reallocation of water in the western United States resulted in some heated debate concerning the definition of public and private water rights, how much water is needed to satisfy public goals, how much water can or should be reallocated from the hydrological and ecological perspectives, and economic issues associated with reallocation of water for endangered species. The results of these discussions reemphasized that defining private/public rights can be easy, but applying the legal definitions to the “real world” is more difficult. The same issues of lack of knowledge about the linkages between hydrological systems and ecosystems and concern about data integrity and appropriateness pertain across the Americas. The question of privatizing water resources is fraught with concerns for the social, ecological, and economic valuation of water. Privatization can take various forms, from concessions to “full” private ownership. Factors such as the stability of the political and economic systems, along with the existence of a legal system that acknowledges the need for environmental preservation while encouraging economic growth, play an important role in the appropriate valuation of water. Empowering communities to manage their water resources in a sustainable manner following natural systems, such as the river basin, is a high priority. Appropriate technologies should be promoted to ensure equitable access to water for different uses by different users. Case examples were presented from the United Kingdom (Severn-Trent) and from the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), as was a compendium of findings on private participation and public-sector roles in the provision of water and sanitation services. Political issues appeared paramount in much of the discussion. The financing of water projects (reasons for private sector participation, what investors look at, etc.) in Latin America and the Caribbean was explored to determine the nature of the water

projects (capital-intensive, long repayment periods, the need for specialized management) and potential finance sources. The discussion centered on the need for financing strategies to assist smaller projects where private and public sources may be used. It was recommended that the hydrological services provided by ecosystems be incorporated by water authorities into the valuation of water resources so that the conservation of these services can be financed. Wastewater standards were also discussed, including the need to monitor and enforce them. Agreements between national institutes, educational institutions, and extension services appear to be important in the dissemination of information and the optimal transfer and utilization of technology to the proper valuation of water. In general, the social, ecological, and economic aspects should be integrated to promote a sustainable environment for all populations and for economic growth that contributes to that sustainability. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Encourage “community self management” of water resources in a sustainable fashion with

the river basin as the base unit. 2. Develop strategies to encourage financial institutions to finance small operations. 3. Promote agreements between national institutes on research, extension services, and

technology. 4. Promote the adoption of regionally appropriate technologies to ensure equitable access to

water for different uses and users. 5. Promote integrated (social, ecological, and economic) valuation of water. 6. Monitor and enforce wastewater standards. 7. Have water authorities incorporate the hydrological services provided by ecosystems in the

valuation of water resources in order to finance the conservation of those services.

Theme 4: Public Participation in Water Resources Decision Making

Theme Co-Chairs: Alberto J. Palombo, Venezuela

Alicia Fernández, Argentina

Community Participation in Water Management

Alberto J. Palombo Florida Center for Environmental Studies

Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, U.S.A.

Dublin Statement, 1992: “Principle 2: Water development and management should be based on a participatory approach, involving users, planners and policy-makers at all levels.” SUMMARY The Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, produced a challenging road-map document to sustainable development for the 21st century. Chapter 18 of Agenda 21 highlights the importance of the community in making decisions regarding the use of water resources. Combined with the generally accepted principle of using the watershed as the basic unit for natural resources management, the advent of new approaches to involve the people in the management of water resources has become the first challenge to overcome. In an increasingly competitive race for financing to raise awareness and promote educational values, communities along with governments are looking for innovative models to involve everyone in a process of sharing water more equitably and efficiently. Among the conflicts to be resolved in the near and medium term is the assignment of the rightful value of water for different stakeholders--for principally urban water supply/sanitation, energy, industry, agriculture, and the environment. With such diversity, conflicts over water become the norm rather than the exception. As we enter the Third Millenium, communities around the world are becoming more knowledgeable about the impact of their activities on the environment. People must learn to coexist within these conflicts and face them adequately, knowing that the relative scarcity of water will increase as time goes by as a result of economic growth, social demands, and climate variations. However, the real challenge is to share knowledge among all stakeholders throughout a greater geographical scope to raise the awareness needed to understand that conflict resolution can only be achieved by compromise. Who gets the last drop of water is whoever we all collectively agree should get it. Even though the Americas hold far more water per capita than the rest of the world, water users must change their perception of an infinite supply. As we evolve towards the development of a “water culture,” the public participation dynamics will adapt slowly to an understanding of the limits of the surrounding ecosystem.

The group discussion centered on the opportunities for collaboration in formulating strategies for community participation in water resources management. As the starting point, the Florida Center for Environmental Studies coordinated a one-year communication exchange to present a case study that would entice a three-day dialogue between participants and produce recommendations for the Statement of Panama. The subjects of community participation and conflict resolution seemed to go hand in hand throughout the sessions. All the presentations pointed out that differences between water users, not technology to tame water, are the stumbling block on the road to shared water management, and thus to sustainability. The participants also stressed the importance of continuing to share successful community-based experiences such as the ones presented during the three days of discussions in Panama. Also, it would not be a bad idea to share the “not-so-successful” experiences to avoid a waste of financial resources and time elsewhere. As is well known, time and money have become limiting commodities nowadays. As these processes were discussed and analyzed, it became apparent that communities had to become “good salesmen” and “marketing strategists” to put forward ideas about sustainability before the general public. Equally important is to understand of water cycles and their role in complex relationships between natural and societal systems, the reason why academia plays a crucial role in the process of involving the community. One recommendation made by the group is to promote innovative teaching to make the learning experience more enjoyable; this might be accomplished by disseminating action-driven learning materials in the schools, which would involve not only the children but also the parents. According to one of the presentations, the increasing activity in water management in Uruguay is creating a backlog of conflicts, since the current water code has very little to say about conflict resolution. At the national and the basin level, bureaucratic processes are falling into “conflict management” rather than “conflict resolution.” Though this may be a transitory situation, it becomes necessary to involve the public in decision-making instances such as mediation teams and juries. Also, so-called “irrigation committees” play an important role during times of drought. Much exercise of citizenship and compromise is necessary during times of scarcity to make water available to as many water-use sectors as possible. The role of universities in strengthening integrated water management in rural areas in the Argentine pampas was presented as one of the models to follow. By linking university extension units with rural schools and producers, the community obtained hands-on training in treating water appropriately in accordance with its use, thus preventing health problems with humans and crops due to contamination. In Venezuela, the Government became the facilitator rather than the bureaucratic intermediary in enabling a community to develop an informal watershed plan (in the absence of a national water management policy at the time). With the help of the private sector, the community successfully rescued an aging infrastructure inherited from the agrarian reform of the 1950s, converting it into an enterprise that exports produce at world market prices. Though just an isolated experience, the Trujillano Water System (SHT) might become a start for a successful model of local water management that corresponds to the economic and natural system realities of the region. Such models must be largely participative and must promote sustainable economic activities. The key to the consolidation of these initiatives will be the involvement of the private sector. It is a reality that commercial banks usually act with great caution in the rural sector. Thus,

overcoming risk factors in the rural financial portfolio would make available significant monetary resources towards the achievement of sustainability of experiences like SHT. At the national level, the strategies for community participation in Brazil were discussed. The “Citizens for Water” Movement is an initiative of the Secretariat of Water Resources of Brazil in recognition and reinforcement of efforts by individuals, non-governmental organizations, academia, and professional groups that are carrying out water conservation and management actions through more than 150 “reference centers” throughout the country. In a sense, the movement is a way to tell citizens that government can do much, but not everything, particularly when dealing with multiple water uses close to the individual citizens and far from the bureaucracy. This movement provides a new approach to sustainability by fostering a more decentralized and autonomous water-management structure. It conducts “community mobilizations” to raise awareness among citizens within a watershed. One such mobilization experience, Vau Açu in Minas Gerais, was reported to participants as a case study. At the ecosystem level, Lake Chapala in Mexico was described as a natural system suffering from years of water-use conflicts. The lake is a critical component of the Lerma-Chapala-Santiago system, a basin occupied by more than 20 million people and responsible for 40 percent of the agricultural throughput of Mexico. The decisions regarding land and water use are made by a small number of actors, but are important in impact. The communities around Lake Chapala are considered to be the lesser contributors to the environmental degradation of the water body and have little decision-making authority about water uses affecting it. In recent years, the mayors of municipalities around Lake Chapala have formed a “mayors’ association around the lake,” and are mobilizing public opinion to obtain a seat on the Lerma-Chapala River Basin Committee. As the Mexican presenters commented, they came to the Third Dialogue to raise international awareness of the importance of coming up with a community-based plan to save Lake Chapala from further degradation. Thus, the communities living within those aquatic ecosystems are beginning to understand the level of effort and resources needed to manage the water in a sustainable manner. The communication link to allow these communities to share these experiences is the Inter-American Water Resources Network proposed by the Miami Dialogue participants, of which the OAS Unit for Sustainable Development and Environment is now the technical secretariat. It is quite encouraging to know that water people (users, professionals, scientists, regional organizations, stakeholders) have taken this step towards sharing knowledge and experiences in sustainable water management. To complement these bottom-up efforts, the OAS is implementing an Inter-American Strategy for Public Participation in Sustainable Development. The objective of the ISP is to promote a responsible, effective, transparent public participation in the decision-making and implementation of environmentally sustainable development policy in Latin America and the Caribbean. To accomplish this, the ISP relies on demonstration projects throughout the region, technical assistance to and training of community groups, and guidelines for legal and institutional frameworks among other components. Six years ago, the First Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management embarked on a process that is striving for answers to what the sustainable management of water resources is. Stakeholder participation was a key issue in the Declaration of Miami. In 1993, the Everglades

Restoration effort was looking for parallel ecosystems that would be more pristine so that scientists, engineers, and the people in the watershed could find benchmarks for values in ecosystem health. At a similar latitude in the Southern Hemisphere, the South American Pantanal is also subject to pressures of economic development that might alter natural water flows in that vast region as the Everglades was affected more than half a century ago. The stakeholders in the Pantanal are also searching for answers. The Dialogue process has helped in the exchange of information and experiences between these ecosystems at different levels of human intervention. But most definitely, the people living within those watersheds must be collectively responsible for maintaining a delicate balance between human needs and the available riches provided by a healthy ecosystem. To make this statement valid, collective responsibility would best be assumed by a conscious and educated community making decisions about sustainable water uses. RECOMMENDATIONS The participants in the roundtable sessions on Theme 4 support the proposals related to public participation and awareness presented in the OAS document "Status and Proposed Actions to Continue the Implementation of the Initiatives on Water Resources and Coastal Areas of the Plan of Action for the Sustainable Development of the Americas." They also make the following recommendations: 1. Social aspects (group dynamics) should be introduced into the curricula for the education of

technical professionals in the field of water resources management. 2. The need to develop a "water culture" through the promotion and use of innovative teaching

activities that make the learning process more enjoyable should be stressed. 3. Once water conflicts have reached the crisis stage, damage to the ecosystems is already

severe. Much greater effort must be made toward the prevention of conflicts. The involvement of all stakeholders, whether at the local, regional, or international levels, should occur early to avoid the development of conflicts.

4. The processes for solving water-related problems should be harmonious, multidimensional,

formed by consensus, cross-disciplinary, and all-inclusive. 5. Political will should support continuity and the permanency of "good" water-related projects

and processes. 6. Support should be given to the availability of appropriate technology and technical

assistance. 7. Organizations should promote the strengthening of education systems throughout the

Americas for the dissemination of teaching materials in a mode of action-driven learning (“learning by doing”). One example is the use of arts and tradition for communicating the important aspects of water management in an enjoyable fashion.

8. A model based on successful community-based experiences should be drafted, and its use

should be promoted by distributing it through, the Internet and other media. 9. Water-related themes should be publicized through the use of cartoons and other youth-

oriented mechanisms.

Theme 5: Global Change and Water Resources

Theme Co-Chairs: Paul Filmer, U.S.A

Pedro Morera, Costa Rica SUMMARY

Paul E. Filmer, Ph.D. National Science Foundation

The term global change is often interpreted to mean “climate change,” but what is actually meant is a much broader set of phenomena. Climate change is only one of the phenomena included under the umbrella of global change. Other familiar phenomena under the umbrella include global warming, population increase, land-use change, re-emergent diseases, and ozone-layer depletion. In short, the term global change is a recognition that the environment within which societies function is full of changes occurring simultaneously in different, but interlinked systems. Some of the changes are natural, and some are due to the activities of our own busy civilization. The term is also a recognition that when we attempt to forecast future conditions, the actuarial or empirical approaches that we have commonly used are encountering limitations. A deeper, more fundamental understanding of the complex interplay between natural and societal systems is necessary if we are ever to become effective stewards for the natural resources we have inherited. Many of these phenomena are inextricably linked to water. They affect and are affected by many aspects of the hydrological cycle: water supply, collection, storage, distribution, usage, and disposal or treatment. A change in any one of these aspects has downstream implications that must be thoroughly understood if governments are to mitigate or adapt to long-term global change. The average amount of available water per capita for the Americas is almost five times the world average. This relative oversupply is both a boon and a bane. The relative abundance of water in most of the Americas has led to a state where political pressure to formulate cooperative water management policies has come to bear late in the game. In addition, most of the Americas have developed deep cultural roots that have led to habits that do not automatically preserve resources. One of the most formidable and politically dangerous tasks a government can take on is to alter established social and commercial structures for the allocation of a critical resource like water--not to mention the challenge of changing millions of personal habits in the use of that same resource. Sound scientific and political reasoning is needed to take such a decision, and to navigate the hazards that accompany it. Two things are certain about the future: both the population and the global temperature will increase. With increased global temperature comes a more dynamic atmosphere: stronger and more frequent weather systems, with cold areas getting colder, warm areas warmer, wet areas wetter, dry areas drier. With the increase in population come larger settled areas, often in vulnerable areas like steep unstable hillsides, gullies, washes, or floodplains. These fast-growing settlements increase the demand for water supply and for secondary treatment (if it was even

present), as well as increasing the amount of deforestation in local catchment basins. These settlements also overstress resource planning and catchment management structures, particularly those related to water quality. Two recent incidents illustrate this problem. The La Niña-El Niño (ENSO) cycle of 1995-1998 and Hurricane Mitch caused severe damage in many different economic sectors of the region. While these events were of short duration when compared to global change, and therefore more strictly represent events linked to climate variability, they may be looked upon as dress rehearsals for what the region will experience in the long term. Mitch was an extremely powerful storm independent of its location, but its impact on Central America was aggravated by several factors. High rates of migration to urban areas led to the growth of the vulnerable settlement areas mentioned above--housing composed of flimsy constructions on steep, denuded, and unstable slopes, and to the colonization of flood-prone gullies and plains. The rapid growth of these areas far outpaced the capacity of the local and national governments to provide even the most basic infrastructure for the distribution of water and the collection of sewage. This lack of infrastructure made the areas even more vulnerable to a disaster that cut off their access to drinking water. While a hurricane brings with it the problems of excessive precipitation and the attendant problems of flooding, infrastructure damage, and loss of life and property, an ENSO event is often played out in slow motion, and involves extremes of both flooding and drought, depending on the location. In addition, media attention is often focused on ENSO flooding and its consequences. ENSO-related drought can be just as damaging, especially when there is little political pressure for governments to aid the affected economic sectors. Twenty-one out of the thirty most important reservoirs in Mexico are in the drought-prone northern states, precisely because of the dry conditions. Efficient management of these systems is necessary to avoid critically low reserves, particularly when La Niña-related drought is overlaid on a longer-scale drought, as it was in 1995-1997. In this area, El Niño conditions bring increased winter rains, which must be stored to endure the La Niña droughts. Even with planning, almost 12 of these states received extensive federal aid in early 1999 to support agricultural relief programs. Even though the largest percentage change in precipitation is in the southern Pacific coastal states of Jalisco through to Chiapas, these states are not as severely affected as the northern Pacific coastal states of Baja California to Nayarit. The southern states have a much larger baseline against which to post precipitation deficits. However, several southern states have the fastest-growing populations in Mexico, and an increase in their vulnerability to the fluctuations in precipitation is sure to follow. Given the inevitable increases in population and the attendant increase in the footprint of developed areas, as well as the increase in both the number and the severity of storms expected with global warming, we can unfortunately expect to see similar disastrous scenarios repeated in the most vulnerable regions of the Americas.

The recent tremendous increases in the availability of computing power for forecast and hydrological modeling, coupled with the advances in basic knowledge about the climate system, have given rise to a situation in which a climate event like ENSO can be forecast with about one year of anticipation. This has given governments a chance for many preparative activities, and for more prudent approaches to long-term hydrological planning. However, many of these models and techniques remain experimental, and their use carries levels of scientific and political risk that need to be both thoroughly understood and clearly accepted. In addition, both of the cases, mentioned above Hurricane Mitch and the ENSO cycle, occurred within broader contexts that need to be recognized: a regional economic recession was in progress, and high levels of foreign-debt servicing had depleted currency reserves, making large-scale preparations difficult, if not impossible. The critically important catchment basins were often international, and a regional approach and solution would have been necessary for any effective mitigation measures. Strengthening regional organizations that deal with the monitoring, scientific research, and management of hydrological resources and global change remains an important requirement for progress. Almost every case presented to the forum presented evidence that in the short term, and very probably also in the long term, regional development policies controlling urban planning and zoning, land-use change, and large agricultural, hydropower, or irrigation projects will have a dominant impact on the effective use of hydrological and other natural resources. A solid understanding of global change, and how decisions in one area of our society affect seemingly unrelated issues like water, is critically important to our search for the path to a sustainable future. RECOMMENDATIONS Owing in great part to the recent El Niño and Hurricane Mitch, the region is particularly sensitive to the impact that weather, climate variability, and global change have on water, its management, and its uses. There is an increasing interest in identifying areas of economic vulnerability to future global change, and in pursuing the most effective strategies for mitigating the effects of that change and adapting the water resources management sector to it. While uncertainties in climate prediction are unavoidable, certain activities are emerging as intelligent responses--the effective integration of land-cover management practice with water quality monitoring exercises in catchment basins, and efforts at widespread education on the impact of farming practices and possible soil degradation on the hydrologic system. The recent emergence of well-coordinated research networks in the region promises to deliver useful, scientifically valid data about the processes of global change. The next critical step is to transform these data into information useful to the myriad sectors that depend on water resources and that will be affected by global change.

The participants in the discussion on Global Change and Water Resources recommend giving priority to the following actions: 1. The assessment of the economic impact of climate variability on social and ecological

systems in order to encourage government support for prevention, rehabilitation, and research activities.

2. The support and stimulation of training and education and the dissemination of the

information available on global change and its impacts on water resources through audience-appropriate channels, such as global organizations like the UN and IGBP, national governments, regional networks such as the IWRN, and local organizations.

3. The provision of support by national governments and external agencies for the long-term

sustainability of data collection networks enabling integrated water resources management and research on possible statistical relations between climate change and water availability, and the development of better climate models. UN agencies such as the WMO and UNESCO should stimulate the development and adoption of standardized monitoring practice built upon existing systems. These should include both the quantity and the quality of water availability and its use, and also the land use affecting those water resources.

4. The establishment of regional application centers to improve local climate forecasting with

the aim of preventing, mitigating, and even taking advantage of potential impacts of climate variability on various economic sectors, and the support of information exchange between men and providers of climate change and variability information (such as the HD program of TCCC, CATHALAC, and RU).

THE IMPACTS OF GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE ON QUALITY OF WATER RESOURCES AND QUANTITY The availability and quality of water resources in a particular region are a function of both climate and land conditions. While there is much controversy among scientists worldwide over whether the global climate is "changing," there is agreement about the deleterious impacts of inappropriate land use on the quality and quantity of water for human uses. In fact, regardless of what the climate may be in the future, the increased pressure of human activities on natural resources−such as the replacement of natural vegetation cover by pastures, crops and developments−is likely to increase our vulnerability to climate variability. Predictions of climate variations on several time and space scales, from seasonal to interannual and longer, can become extremely useful for decision-makers, governments, and international and national organizations as the science behind them develops and more reliable models and comprehensive global data sets are amassed. However, climate predictions are still at the experimental level, and cannot be used indiscriminately.

PLENARY SESSION III:

WATER NETWORKS AND NETWORKING

Water on the Web ’98: Results of Workshop and Future Directions

Faye Anderson∗∗∗∗

Diapositiva 1

Water on the Web Workshop

October 23-24, 1998Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA

Faye Anderson on behalf of the WaterWeb Consortium

∗ International Water Resources Association (IWRA).

Diapositiva 2

Sponsored by:

• Organization of American States• Inter-American Water Resources Network

joint international effort

Diapositiva 3

Co-Sponsored by:

• Center for International Business andInformation Transfer (FAU)

• Florida Center for Environmental Studies• International Water Resources Association• Water Center for the Humid Tropics in

Latin America and the Caribbean

Diapositiva 4

Idea Originated in 1997 Montreal WWC

• session on networking= organizations

• session on Internet= web efforts

Diapositiva 5

Common Concerns

• Water InformationNeeds

• Sustainable WaterManagement

• Capacity Building

• Connectedness/Partnerships

Diapositiva 6

Dialogue Needed

• Evaluate existing information needs• Explore options to take advantage of

advancing Internet technologies• Develop avenues for cooperation

Diapositiva 7

Vital to Future of SustainableWater Management Activities

Critical resource for sustainable development

• Information is fundamental foundation• Quality decision-making processes a must• Collaboration is necessary component

Diapositiva 8

Role of Information Technologies

• Email allows for global connectivity• WWW useful tool to sustain partnerships

= Greater abilities to manage and shareinfo = Improved capacities to make better useof the knowledgethat information helps to create

Diapositiva 9

Rise of WWW Technology

• 43 million hosts on the Internet• 4.3 million websites

February 1999

Diapositiva 10

Search Engine Results: water

• AltaVista: 8,865,656 web pages

• Infoseek/Go: 23 directory topics 15,394,684 webpages

Diapositiva 11

Yahoo: “water”271 categories, 12,998 sites

• beverages• water amusement

parks• water gardens• water dogs• toy water guns• water spas

• water supply/treatment• water and environment• natural resource mgmt• government agencies• water pollution• water conservation• water and health

Diapositiva 12

Workshop

• 25 participants from North, Central, andSouth America and Europe

• Web developers, content providers, andinformation users

Diapositiva 13

Objectives

• Exchange of Information• Assessment• Identification and Prioritization• Opportunities for Collaboration• Develop a Strategic Plan

Diapositiva 14

Three Working Groups

• User Needs andAssessment ofExisting Efforts

• Design andTechnology Issues

• Opportunities forCollaboration

“interdependent”

“overlapping”

Diapositiva 15

User Needs/Assessment of Existing EffortsCarlos Fernandez-Jauregui

• user needs must drive use of technology• dual problem of duplicated effort online and

existing information gaps• promote existing quality efforts• improve users’ abilities to find useful info• focus placed on “value added”

Diapositiva 16

Design and Technology IssuesTom Bakkum/Dennis Dunn

• emphasis on user accessibility andfriendliness

• effort not to “over do” the technology• advocate for design standards• develop guidelines to evaluate websites• strategies for language issues• access issues: other delivery methods

Diapositiva 17

Opportunities for CollaborationTerry Dodge

• promote benefits from information sharing• place emphasis on improved decision-mkg• need for content quality control• gather users input in defining fruitful

collaborative efforts• investment in Latin American web efforts• identify funding sources

Diapositiva 18

Recommendations Report

Provides further details on these issues

• Dialogue III CD-ROM• Published on-line at www.WaterWeb.org

Diapositiva 19

Workshop Outcomes

1. Listserver: email communications- promote continuing discussion- provide updates on activities

waterweb@great-lakes.net

sponsored by: Great Lakes Information Network

Diapositiva 20

Workshop Outcomes

2. Website: virtual home

www.WaterWeb.org initiated by Florida Center for Environmental Studies

Diapositiva 21

Website Products

Initial Products:$ WaterWeb Ring join water sites in a circle$ Links Database search water related websites

Diapositiva 22

Workshop Outcomes

3. Dialogue III CD-ROMdocuments and database of water resources info on WWW

Underwritten by OAS/IWRN and FCES

Spearheaded by Terry Dodge

Diapositiva 23

4. Advisory Committee

• Faye Anderson (IWRA)

• Tom Bakkum(CATHALAC)

• Len Berry (FCES)

• Carlos Fernandez-Jauregui (IHP)

• Kelly Hodgson(GEMS)

• J. Eduardo Mestre(RELOC)

• Mantha Mehallis(CIBIT)

• David Moody/Nelsonda Franca (OAS/IWRN)

• Ken Lanfear (USGS)external advisor

Diapositiva 24

Workshop Outcomes

5. Theme Issue of Water International

June 1999

= focus on water information efforts andInternet-related technologies

Diapositiva 25

Workshop Outcomes

6. Conference Sessions:

• AWRA Meeting - December 1999• IWRA World Water Congress - March 2000

• WWC World Water Forum - March 2000• Other TBA

= Latin America

Diapositiva 26

Workshop Outcomes

7. Planning for Water Information Summit

• larger event• wider participation• more extensive coverage of issues

Diapositiva 27

Integrated Approach

Mediaemail

WWWprint

conferencesCD-ROM

Audience

geographytypes of content provider

types of web usercross-disciplinary

kinds of stakeholders

Diapositiva 28

WaterWeb.org

consortium dedicated to improving theinformation strategies of the watercommunity in their pursuit of sustainablewater management

“using technology to place people and theenvironment at the center of our efforts”

Diapositiva 29

We Invite Your Participation

• join Listserver• add website to “Links Database”• add website to WaterWebRing• feedback on Dialogue III CD-ROM• presentation at conference• attend Water Information Summit

…your input is critical!

SESSION

Role of the Private Sector in the Future Management of Water Resources

Cathy Leiber*

I very much appreciate the opportunity to speak here at the invitation of UNESCO, the OAS and the First Lady of the Republic. Dora Boyd de Pérez-Balladares and I have worked together productively on a number of projects here in Panama. I am happy to be here today for two reasons. First, I am proud to represent Philip Morris Companies, Inc., a leading corporate sponsor of the Dialogue. We view participating in functions such as these as yet another expression of PM’s continuing commitment to environmental conservation throughout Latin America and the world. Second, I am personally gratified to be among such a distinguished assembly of experts, and to share Philip Morris’s perspective on solutions for the Western Hemisphere’s deepening water crisis., There is a Chinese word for "crisis." It is composed of two characters: one means change and the other opportunity. I believe both encompass the primary goal of all of us here today: seeking ways to identify and formulate practical recommendations and guidelines for the equitable and sustainable use of water resources in the Americas. As we approach the millennium, it is apparent that global changes relative to water management will require innovative approaches. And, if I may add, an open mind. For water management is a shared responsibility. Setting goals and standards to design, implement, and sustain effective water management practices must be a shared responsibility. No one sector can do it alone. No one sector should seek to impose its priorities on another. It’s going to take all of us, working together—business, governments, regulatory agencies, non-governmental organizations, and community groups. At Philip Morris, we believe strengthening water management capabilities and practices not only makes good environmental sense, it makes good business sense. As the largest consumer packaged goods company in the world, Philip Morris Companies, Inc., is also one of the world’s foremost producers of agricultural commodities. Each of our businesses—food, tobacco, and beer—relies on agricultural products. _____________________________ * Director for Corporate Affairs, Phillip Morris International, U.S.A.

Sound water management practices are vital to every aspect of those businesses. Water sustains the land on which crops grow and livestock feed. Water is essential to manufacturing processes that convert agricultural commodities and other raw materials into the products we make—products that provide superior value to millions of consumers in more than 180 markets worldwide. Given our profile, it should be obvious that to the operating companies of Philip Morris, good water management isn't just a matter of pollution control. For Philip Morris U.S.A., Philip Morris International, Kraft Foods North America, Kraft Foods International, and Miller Brewing Company, being diligent in the use of water is a key element of environmental management systems in our manufacturing processes. We also believe there is a beneficial link between economic growth and environmental preservation. Both are vital to our sustainable business growth over the long term. And our desire is to help shape an approach to sustainable development that is fair and reasonable--one that promotes and ensures high-quality and bountiful crops, without sacrificing economic progress. How do we achieve that balance? By being willing to change. To adapt. To embrace continuous improvement and explore opportunities to go "beyond compliance." We strive constantly to find ways to reduce the environmental impact of our operations on the land, air, water, and other natural resources in the myriad communities where we have facilities. Given our worldwide operations and diverse line of products, Philip Morris has significant expertise in many forms of water treatment. We use this knowledge and experience to strengthen water management capabilities and practices throughout our businesses, especially as we develop operations in emerging markets. We realize how critical safeguarding water resources in this region is to our businesses. As director of corporate affairs of Philip Morris International’s Andean, Central America, and Mexico Region, I have personally witnessed PM’s growing allocation of resources to Latin America’s environment. Various environmental projects—large and small—across the region range from water and land conservation to educating local communities on ecologically sound farming methods. Since 1994—when PM began focusing on Latin America corporate contributions on the environment—water conservation has been a key priority. In just five years, we have devoted substantial funds to projects protecting rain forests, rivers, and vital watershed areas from ecological danger. In Brazil, Philip Morris International environmental initiatives undertaken in our plants include wastewater treatment and ecological projects such as the preservation and land-management initiatives undertaken in the Guaraquecaba region. In Guatemala, we sponsor a program to promote employee ecological awareness at work and at home through encouraging responsible solid-waste disposal and emphasizing the importance of water quality and nature preservation.

In Colombia, Kraft is sponsoring an agricultural program to support “best practice” development for coffee growing and processing. And we all know how important good water management is to the growth and processing of coffee beans. This program is a direct result of a research tool we’ve developed called life-cycle assessment: the technique of looking at environmental impacts from production to disposal. In Mexico, our food operations have initiated a highly user-friendly environmental program to encourage employees to conserve resources. The program also provides “please turn off” stickers, which are placed next to water faucets and light fixtures. Most recently, in Costa Rica, we announced our plan to make a US$7 million investment in our food business. On the drawing board is a new beverage manufacturing facility as well as a warehouse with state-of-the-art environmental systems, including modern wastewater treatment technology. We understand that water management is not just the "end of the pipe." We continually seek ways to reduce consumption in both manufacturing and sanitation processes. Many of our plants, whether they produce food, beer, or tobacco, have sophisticated wastewater treatment facilities. Many older systems have been upgraded to take advantage of leading-edge technology. Moving to another part of the world, in Almaty, Kazakhstan, the new tobacco factory includes a custom-designed water supply facility that provides the factory and local residents with a consistently clean source of water. We also supported efforts to create Kazakhstan’s first environmental action plan for sustainable development. Kraft in Spain recently built a new wastewater treatment plant at its Len food facility. This plant is adjacent to the Orbigo River, famous for its trout fishing. The wastewater treatment not only preserves the quality of the river water, but also provides a valuable fertilizer used by local farmers. In addition, at our tobacco plant in Torbali, Turkey, we upgraded its wastewater treatment facility, leading to increased benefits to the entire community. And to protect waterways from accidental releases of materials, our facilities have spill-prevention control and countermeasure plans. These SPCC plans are required in the United States. But we operate on the premise that if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. Therefore, we've decided to go further on our own, by adopting these concepts even where no legal requirement exists. As far as we are concerned, effective and complete water management system is a good business practice that also makes good environmental sense. In fact, we have voluntarily integrated long-term environmental management goals into all aspects of our operating company business plans. Our nine environmental principles, adopted in 1991, help to guide our company-wide operations and environmental actions. They provide us with the foundation to make long-term decisions, including investment strategies, around environmental concerns such as water resources management.

One of these principles requires us to work with representatives of industry, government, and public interest groups to develop sound policy, as we have been doing here all this week. In fact, just six months ago, we were the leading co-sponsor of the Latin America Conference on the Environment in Caracas—creating a regional network for environmental preservation. We are committed to lending our expertise in the process of developing laws, regulations, and systems to protect water quality and to promote effective management practices in Latin America and around the world. Plainly put, environmental concerns are central to our corporate culture. Therefore, there is unanimous agreement that environmental protection is a given in all we do. To accomplish our corporate environmental goals, we meet frequently to exchange information on our respective environmental programs. For example, in January, the PM operating companies held a three-day worldwide environmental policy network conference to review the progress made toward fulfilling PM’s nine environmental principles. Furthermore, in addition to being employees of Philip Morris, Kraft, or Miller, we are also citizens of our communities. Like you, many of us participate in grassroots volunteer efforts to beautify communities and protect the environment. And Philip Morris supports our efforts by sponsoring programs that help educate the public about the harmful effects of litter and the benefits of solid waste reduction, materials reuse, and recycling. These lessons are learned at a young age—in elementary school, high school, and universities. And we have discovered that young people enjoy participating in projects that enhance and beautify their surroundings. I see that one of the water-related events held this week in conjunction with the Dialogue is the Children’s International Water Summit. About 40 children from 30 countries met to learn about water issues and to think about how they and their families might help solve some of the problems. Obviously, as the manufacturer of hundreds of high-quality food products familiar to kids all over the world, we have a keen interest in how they view the world and their role in making it better. Since before the turn of the last century we have been in the marketplace with products like Post cereals, Jell-O desserts, Kraft cheeses, Jacobs Suchard chocolates, Oscar Mayer bologna, and, more recently, Tombstone pizza. So I salute both the organizers of the event and the youngsters who are participating. Because, after all, these are some of the youngsters who will define life in the 21st century and deal with problems of a magnitude that is to difficult to imagine now. They have a role to play. And we have a role to play. I stand here today to tell you that all of us at each Philip Morris operating company is ready, willing and able to help. We want to share what we have learned through managing the largest consumer products company in the world. We want to share our significant expertise in the many forms of water treatment, as well as in all other environmental projects, and our experience in formulating legislation to advance those priorities.

Recently, I noticed a flock of geese, flying in their traditional “V” formation heading for Canada. It reminded me of a study I heard about: Two engineers discovered that each bird, by flapping its wings, creates an uplift for the bird that follows. Together, the whole flock gains something like 70 percent greater flying range than if they were journeying alone! We sincerely hope that our involvement in this conference will motivate and excite other businesses to follow in the search for solutions relevant to the environment--to be part of the solution. Only by working together in a global partnership—combining our efforts, our talents, our experience, and our creativity—can we move effectively and efficiently into the 21st century. Taking our cue from the Canadian geese, let’s promise to go on this journey together.

CLOSING CEREMONY

DECLARATION

Third Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management Panama City, Panama

March 25th, 1999

PREAMBLE The Third Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management, "Facing the Emerging Water Crisis in the 21st Century," continues and strengthens the hemispheric information exchange begun by Dialogues I (Miami, Florida, U.S.A., October 1993) and II (Buenos Aires, Argentina, September 1996). The goal of Dialogue IIIl was to lay the foundation of an action plan to significantly benefit society, protect the environment, and promote sustainable development. Dialogue III continues the spirit of the Inter-American Water Resources Network (IWRN)—to share experiences and information across the Americas and to promote new partnerships and collaboration. Dialogue III is the culmination of seven years of ideas, action plans, and specific initiatives on water resources in the Americas, building on the momentum generated by the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1992), the United Nations Conference on Small Island Developing States (Barbados, 1994), and the recommendations of Agenda 21. Dialogue III benefited from the first two dialogues; the Summit Conference on Sustainable Development (Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia, December, 1996), various regional meetings (Trinidad, Panama, and Brazil, 1997-98), the Inter-American Technical Meeting on Water (Washington, D.C., U.S.A., December 1998), and other important local, regional, national, and international meetings. The IWRN continues to be the principal mechanism for communication among all groups involved in integrated water resource management, and is an important source of technical information. Active, timely, and appropriate participation by all members is necessary to make a stronger network. Dialogue III emphasized case studies and roundtable discussions of five topic areas: (1) water and health; (2) integrated water resources management; (3) social, environmental, and economic valuation of water; (4) public participation in decision-making on water resources; and (5) global change and water resources. In consideration of roundtable outcomes from the five major topic areas, the findings of cross-cutting themes and new issues introduced in Dialogue III are summarized here. These findings represent new, innovative, and creative water management ideas that build on outcomes of previous meetings.7

7 The outcomes of the roundtable discussions, statements from the first two Dialogues, and information on the IWRN can be found on the Internet at http://iwrn.ces.fau.edu.

FINDINGS Cross-cutting themes Information exchange: Web-based and other computer technologies, together with ongoing information exchanges not reliant on computers, are necessary to share information throughout the hemisphere. Resources are needed to increase Internet access, particularly for water management experts, to make the Internet more user-friendly, and to train those with Internet access on how to better use it. Financing: Recommendations having financial implications should be passed on to the appropriate political bodies to engage their support and approval. New and non-traditional sources of financing and the building of partnerships among governments, universities, non-governmental organizations, small and medium-sized companies, and other water organizations are needed to implement the recommendations. Education/public participation: Education and public participation are essential for a sustainable environment and economy. Non-traditional and enjoyable educational approaches that are sensitive to national cultures can increase the effectiveness of education and outreach. Integrated management: The fundamental unit of water resource planning should be the watershed. Transboundary water resources management (surface and subsurface waters) within and between countries is necessary for sustainable water resources development. Pilot projects offer one good mechanism to implement this holistic approach that encourages the participation of decision makers, the private sector, local communities, and others. Appropriate technology: Locally and regionally appropriate combinations of technologies (both state-of-the-art and low-tech) should be brought to bear on water management issues to ensure the most positive outcomes. New issues introduced in Dialogue III Regional meetings to address specific problems: The promotion of local and regional dialogues can improve the management of water resources in the context of sustainable development. International meetings foster hemispheric coordination and information exchange. Regional and local meetings with wide public participation often create opportunities for concrete actions that address local problems. Strengthening the science/management connection: High-quality research and data collection that address water management issues have increased over the last decade. Water Week in Panama succeeded in improving the interaction between scientists and managers, and future dialogues can benefit from this continued interaction. Privatization: Privatization is a very complex process, and each situation should be thoroughly analyzed to ensure that the process is equitable to civil society as well as the private and public sectors.

Social, environmental, and economic valuation of water: The valuation of water must take into consideration the need for conservation and sustainable management of ecosystems and watersheds, the health of which is critical to maintaining adequate water supplies. Water management authorities would benefit from the incorporation of ecosystem service valuation into their valuation and pricing systems. Public participation: Public participation cuts strongly across all themes considered in this dialogue. The Inter-American Strategy on Public Participation offers the opportunity to involve water managers and scientists in interchanges with all sectors of civil society. National, regional, and local governments can develop public participation policies and strategies to guarantee the sustainable use and management of hydrobiological resources through the involvement of stakeholders in all levels of decision-making. Conflict prevention: The resolution of water-related conflicts is a many-sided and cross-disciplinary process that calls for continuous attention through institutional mechanisms and consensus among all parties involved. However, when the water conflicts reach the crisis stage, damage to ecosystems may already be severe. Much greater effort should be made toward the prevention of conflicts, using mechanisms such as preventive diplomacy at the international level and the development of early public awareness and participation at all levels. Impacts of global change: Assessment of the economic, environmental, and social impacts of climate variability on social and ecological systems should be strengthened in order to encourage government support for research, education, prevention, and rehabilitation activities. The combination of increased variability in climatic conditions and widespread changes in land use and cover could mean that historical meteorological and hydrological data on which we have relied may not be valid. Finally, climate issues transcend political borders, thereby offering a framework for transboundary collaboration. Cross-sectoral fora affecting water resources: There are complex policy, technical, institutional, and legal issues that should be resolved to achieve significant progress in water quality and quantity management, including water and health, water and agriculture, water and biodiversity, and others. Cross-sectoral fora, expert meetings, and research initiatives provide opportunities to advance debates on sustainable development. The OAS Secretary General has proposed the first high-level meeting of water and health experts for 1999. Networking/coordination among organizations: The new policies of globalization require an increase in exchanges and collaboration among organizations at the hemispheric, national, and regional levels. The efficient use of the available financial and human resources can only be reached if each organization strengthens and implements components within the sustainable development equation. In summary, these considerations and findings provide a foundation for improved water resource management across the Americas. We encourage all Dialogue III participants to build on this foundation, and to continue the momentum toward Dialogue IV in 2002.

Joint Statement of Water Week in Panama Water Week in Panama brought together children, scientists, academics, managers, policy makers, civil-society representatives, and the private sector to exchange information and experiences concerning one of the world’s most precious resources, water. The involvement of this mix of people provided a synergism that has led to new challenges and opportunities which should be built into future Inter-American Dialogues on Water Management. The Children of the Americas have taught us that “Water is Life.” They have expressed their concern that future generations will not have access to adequate supplies of good-quality water unless current patterns of water use are changed. The children committed to taking a number of actions to improve public education about water issues. They called for more attention to the needs for water conservation, water and wastewater treatment, pollution prevention, and reforestation. The children challenged participants in Water Week in Panama to nurture a strong stewardship ethic for water resources in all parts of society, watershed by watershed. There has been a long tradition of separation between the scientific research and water policy communities. Continued efforts are needed to bridge the gap between the two communities, with the goal of achieving integrated water resources management in the Americas. The Colloquium stressed the need for further developing field-oriented research programs focused on hydrological processes up to the basin scale, addressing policy and development issues, and strengthening hydrometric and water quality monitoring networks. Such a program will strengthen the information and understanding needed by water managers and will increase communication among policy makers, managers, and scientists on the scientific and management questions that need to be answered. The Third Dialogue reaffirmed the need for water managers to renew their efforts to educate the electorate and government, in order to develop the political will to implement the elements of integrated water resources management. Above all, a clear vision is needed for water in the Americas that will serve each region and each country as a basis for strategic planning in order to avert a water crisis in the 21st century. An active participation of regional stakeholders in the formulation of a “Vision on Water, Life and the Environment in 2025” is expected. This will permit a sound basis for future implementation of realistic programs of action for water issues. The organizers and participants in Water Week in Panama are committed to forging new partnerships and to developing a new spirit of cooperation among organizations, individuals, and civil society that will lead us with confidence into the 21st century.

Informe del Festival Internacional del Agua y la Niñez

Por Dalys Batista de Pérez∗∗∗∗

En febrero de 1998, la Honorable Primera Dama de la República, Dora Boyd de Pérez Balladares, acoge, con gran entusiasmo, la invitación de la Organización de los Estados Americanos, el Centro de Aguas para el Trópico Húmedo y la Autoridad Nacional del Ambiente para promover y presidir el Primer Festival Internacional del Agua y la Niñez, como parte del programa de la Semana del Agua 1999. En su calidad de Presidenta del Pacto por la Niñez Panameña, asume este compromiso como un aporte al logro de los objetivos del área de medio ambiente y los talleres ecológicos del Facto y se compromete a motivar a los despachos de las Primeras Damas de las Américas, para que la niñez de sus respectivos países compartieran con nosotros este evento, como modelo de educación hídrica de las nuevas generaciones. Esta fase de sensibilización regional llega a su punto culminante con la presentación del Proyecto del Festival, por parte de la señora de Pérez Balladares, a la VIII Cumbre de Esposas de Jefes de Estado y Gobierno celebrada en el mes de octubre en Santiago de Chile, recibiendo el compromiso de asistencia autofinanciada para la niñez, de parte de todas las Primeras Damas asistentes. La selección de los niños y niñas en cada país se sustentó en un perfil común, entre las edades de 11 y 13 años, evaluado a través de concursos infantiles de ensayo relativos al tema "El agua es Vida". Al final obtuvimos la asistencia de la niñez de 19 países americanos, quienes compartieron dos días de aprendizaje interactivo sobre el significado del agua y los peligros para su disponibilidad futura. La metodología participativa incluyó dinámicas como Acuabingo, donde la niñez jugó con imágenes y situaciones de vida para internalizar el concepto de racionalidad del agua; la dinámica "No te enojes acuático" que culmina con la entrega del Premio Ambiental por prevenir la contaminación ambiental; la dinámica "Así es el Agua" dirigida a conocer la importancia del Canal de Panamá; y el juego "Nuestra Cuenca Hidrográfica", en la que se diseñó una maqueta de todas las fuentes de agua y sus peligros de contaminación. El producto del Festival fue la Declaración del Agua y la Niñez, elaborada por los niños y niñas, en su propio lenguaje y que recoge compromisos específicos en materia de manejo, protección y conservación del agua a nivel de la familia, la comunidad y las autoridades. ∗ Secretario del Primer Festival del Agua y la Niñez, Despacho de la Primera Dama de la República de Panamá.

Los y las asistentes efectuaron una evaluación individual del proceso vivido, en la que se reconoce la gran experiencia compartida en términos de la comprensión de los peligros a que sometemos este factor esencial de vida como es el agua y el potencial humano que tienen los niños y niñas para revertir su contaminación. El monumento al Agua y la Niñez, construido en el Parque Omar, con el apoyo de la empresa privada panameña, es un mensaje permanente de la niñez americana para que asumamos responsablemente el compromiso de conservación del agua A nombre de la Excelentísima Primera Dama de la República, Honorable señora Dora Boyd de Pérez Balladares, y el Comité Organizador del Festiagua, agradecemos el valioso apoyo nacional e internacional recibido, expresándoles las muestras de la inmensa complacencia que sentimos, por los logros alcanzados por la niñez americana, la que hoy dispone de un grupo de embajadores(as) infantiles de la educación hídrica.

Declaración del Agua Primer Festival del Agua y la Niñez

22 y 23 de marzo de 1999, Panamá Nosotros, los niños y niñas de todos los países de América, reunidos en la Casa Club del Parque Recreativo yCultural Omar, de la ciudad de Panamá, en el marco del Primer Festival del Agua y la Niñez, consideramos que: − El agua es el recurso más importante para la vida en nuestro planeta. − El agua es esencial para todo y todos: para la agricultura, generación de energía eléctrica,

recreación, consumo humano, entre otros. − Sin el agua muchos proyectos no funcionan; por ejemplo, es fuente vital para el manejo

del Canal de Panamá. − El agua es vida, pero a su vez puede ser causante de enfermedades y muerte. − Los seres humanos somos los principales causantes de la contaminación del agua y los más

afectados por ésta. De continuar utilizando el recurso agua de manera inadecuada y excesiva, corremos el riesgo de que las futuras generaciones no tengan cantidad y calidad de agua para abastecerse. En consideración a los puntos anteriores, los niños y niñas nos conprometemos a: 1. Primero: Realizar campañas de informacíón para la población, relacionada con el manejo,

conservación y aprovechamiento del recurso hídrico. 2. Segundo: Prestar atención durante las actividades que realizamos con agua. 3. Tercero: Desarrollar jornadas de limpieza de ríos, quebradas, lagos y playas en cada uno de

nuestros piases. 4. Cuarto: Solicitar a las autoridades y empresarios los espacios requeridos para difundir

programas infantiles que promuevan la conservación del agua. 5. Quinto: Solicitar a las autoridades de nuestros países que legislen y hagan cumplir las leyes

para la conservación del agua. 6. Sexto: Solicitar a nuestros gobernantes programas para el tratamiento adecuado de las aguas

residuales. 7. Séptimo: Solicitar a las autoridades mayor control de1 paso de naves con cargamento

radiactivo y sustancias tóxicas que puedan alterar el medio ambiente . 8. Octavo: Promover la participación de niños y niñas en los proyectos de reforestación en las

cuencas hidrográficas . 9. Noveno: Trabajar en familia y comunidad para lograr los compromisos propuestos en esta

Declaración. Dada en la ciudad de Panamá a los 23 días del mes de marzo de 1999.

UNESCO/IHP - CATHALAC Second International Colloquium on

Hydrology and Water Management in the Humid Tropics Panama City, Panama, March 21-25, 1999

Closing Remarks

Dr. John Fischer

It is an honor for me to represent my colleagues from the Second International Colloquium on Hydrology and Water Management in the Humid Tropics to report to you this afternoon on the results of our discussions together. Colloquium scientists discussed the status of the science of hydrology in the humid tropics under six themes. Those themes were surface and groundwater quality, tropical island hydrology, climate variability, urban hydrology, the hydrology of tropical montane cloud forests, and multi-dimensional approaches to water management My job is to condense the sometimes strongly held opinions of fifty scientists expressed over a period of four days in fifteen minutes. This restriction certainly will prevent me from representing the fullness of our discussions. I hope my colleagues will forgive me. I will begin with the theme of surface and groundwater quality. The overall conclusion from that theme was that, in the humid tropics, the subject of water quality has not been adequately addressed and its importance is generally undervalued. As a result, there is a severe lack of data collection and long-term monitoring programs, without which meaningful analyses are most difficult to accomplish. In terms of research needs under this theme, microbiological contamination leading to waterborne diseases is the major water quality issue in most areas of the humid tropics. And there is a resultant need for research into the development of low-cost, low-technology methods of water treatment. Finally, there was an extensive discussion of the need for education, a topic which appeared within several of the themes. Within the theme of tropical island hydrology, the primary water resource issue is the limited supply of freshwater. The limitations are not necessarily the result of low precipitation but, more commonly, inadequate storage capacity, either in reservoirs or aquifers. Moreover, the freshwater resources of tropical islands are highly vulnerable to natural hazards such as cyclones and drought. Those hazards have been particularly apparent during the recent intensive El Niño/La Niña cycles. Many tropical islands experienced deviations of the normal hurricane/cyclone events; that deviation and the corresponding decrease in total annual precipitation resulted in drought. Tropical island groundwater resources are also vulnerable to land surface contamination because the pathways from the surface to the aquifers are so short. Research needs under this theme include the impact of land-use change such as deforestation and mining and water resources. Scientists also discussed the need for water reuse for purposes such

as irrigation and sanitation. Another subject within the theme of tropical island hydrology that received attention was the need for research to develop innovative groundwater extraction systems such as galleries that can effectively skim water from thin freshwater lenses. Finally, within this theme there was a recognition of the value of strengthening regional focal points for the purpose of facilitating communication and enhancing education. Natural variability was the primary discussion point within the theme of climate variability. The effects of the El Niño/La Niña cycle were thoroughly discussed, culminating in a recognition of the lack of understanding of extreme event cycles. Another major issue discussed by participants was the alarming decrease in the number of hydrometeorological stations worldwide. In discussing research needs, scientists returned to the need for a better understanding of extreme events, their occurrence and impact. Several participants believed that the effects of urbanization and microclimates deserved special attention. The impact of airborne contaminants on water quality was pointed out as an issue within the humid tropics. Recognition of the impact these contaminants have had on water quality in other environments led scientists to question whether or not research into this phenomenon should be conducted within the humid tropics. Extensive discussions also were held on the need for research to define the links between deforestation and climate variability. Scientists discussing the theme of urban hydrology defined the need to improve supply as one of the major issues facing water managers. The multiple uses of water and the possible need for multiple water systems to deliver water of differing qualities was discussed. The need to reuse gray water was thoroughly discussed as a way to decrease freshwater use for sanitation purposes. Scientists discussed pollution prevention at length, recommending that urban buffer zones similar to those established in agricultural areas be established in urban areas to reduce the negative effects of contaminants in surface water runoff. The final issue discussed under this theme was flood protection, with scientists suggesting that urban vulnerability can best be addressed by measures taken upstream such as the establishment of reservoirs and diversions. Research recommended within the urban hydrology theme focused on the development of conjunctive use techniques. An interesting element of the research discussion was the recognition by scientists of the importance of local citizen involvement in the development of solutions to water resource problems. Scientists stated their belief that technical solutions to water resource problems are most effectively implemented with the direct participation of those most affected by the problem. Moreover, remedial measures are more likely to be sustained if local citizens understand and have participated in their development. Scientists concluded that tropical montane cloud forests are under-researched and under-appreciated as a freshwater source. Condensation from clouds and resultant fall-through and stemflow are very difficult to quantify, and water balance methods to make such determinations are notoriously suspect. In order to rectify this shortcoming there is a need for a network of research sites on which long-term process-based studies may be accomplished. Examples of such sites include Monteverde in Costa Rica, Mt. Cameroon, Mt. Kinabalu in Malaysia, the Mérida region in Venezuela, and others.

A primary research issue identified under this theme was the need to address the issue of dry-season flow before and after deforestation, once again through process-based research. The second was the need to elucidate the linkage between hydrometerological processes along the elevational gradient. Changes with elevation are believed to be substantial but are largely undocumented. The final theme was multidimensional approaches to water management. The primary issue identified by scientists was the need to improve communication and understanding between scientists and managers. There is a perception that multidimensional approaches are costly, and therefore it is sometimes difficult for such projects to be implemented. In addition, management complexities are greater than in conventional projects. The discussion of research needs centered around the need to demonstrate that the value of multidimensional approaches to solving water resource problems justifies the potential higher cost and more complex management requirements. Our discussions on forming better linkages between managers and scientists took some interesting turns. The flavor of those discussions was that our science, and technical solutions resulting from that science, are most effectively applied at very local levels. In this way, the culture and knowledge of the local community can be integrated into the plan of action. They can be active participants, stakeholders. Words along these lines are often spoken but too often are not followed by consequent actions. The reality is that large-scale plans by “experts from afar” too often do not succeed in the long term. They are not sustainable because, as may occur in any central planning exercise, they may fail to take into account local culture. The debates produced a sense that the most effective way to introduce science and technology into local water resource issues is through the local community. Of course, this is much more easily said than done. At least two major changes are required: first, the establishment of local citizen groups, most probably organized along watershed boundaries, would have to be encouraged. Such citizen groups would best understand their water resource problems, would have local knowledge to apply to the implementation of technical solutions and would have a strong interest in sustaining remedial measures. I should add that government would have an interest in supporting such citizen groups because they can be building blocks for a sustainable, low-cost, volunteer water data and information network. The second requirement is water resource education to facilitate communication and information transfer. Here, we scientists would have new and major responsibilities. First, we would need to publish more in non-technical language so that our information can be more widely appreciated. Currently there are major institutional obstacles to publishing in this form, as many of you realize. Second, we would have to become more personally involved with the aforementioned local watershed organizations. Both of these actions, the encouragement of local watershed councils and broadening the audience for our science, will require change—and change requires champions. Fortunately there are people and organizations here who could fill those roles. Just one more comment on education. This week’s festival on Water and Children is an inspired idea of fundamental value. We certainly hope that it will be sustained.

I have only had time to briefly sketch the concept of local citizen-based watershed organizations, but we believe there is substance behind the thought and that communication with such groups is the key to linking our science to the solution of water resource problems. In summary of our meeting, we identified important gaps, prioritized research to fill those gaps, and concluded that our technology can be most effectively applied through the direct participation of local citizen groups. I am greatly indebted to the six chairs of our working groups who put in many extra hours to make our Colloquium a success. I thank each of them for their intellect and energy. And on behalf of Colloquium scientists I would like to thank the several people who facilitated our meetings, specifically Angélica Lussich, Tom Bakkum, and Nicolaas de Groot. These people and many others have done a wonderful job under frequently trying circumstances, and always with a smile. And now, since we will be parting from one another shortly and going our separate ways, I will take speaker’s license and leave you with these words from a familiar Irish blessing: May the road rise up to meet you, may the wind be always at your back, may the sun shine gently on your face, and until we meet again, may God hold you in the palm of his hand. On behalf of my Colloquium colleagues, thank you very much for your attention and for including us in the Water Week in Panama.

Water Week In Panamá

Closing Address

Dr. Tilford Creel∗∗∗∗ My remarks will be brief. I am very much honored by your gracious invitation to speak to you as the closing speaker for the Semana del Agua en Panamá. I know how expensive, time-consuming, but exciting it is to put on a conference like this. This is my second trip to Panama and it is obvious that so many, many vital, important changes have taken place in your water knowledge and practices. What I want to discuss with you is how the First Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management and the Inter-American Water Resource Network (the IWRN) came to be in Miami in 1993. Some of you consider me to be the founder or father of the Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management. I was merely the catalyst because of my position as Executive Director of the South Florida Water Management District in 1993--but it is you, the many professionals here today and at that time, who created the momentum to move forward with the Dialogue: Alberto Palombo, Vinio Floris, Cathy Vogel (my staff), Haroldo Mattos de Lemos, Al Duda, Kirk Rodgers, Joe Browder, Axel Dourojeanni, David Moody, and many others. There were many obstacles: money, time, other commitments that kept appearing as we planned the conference, but you, all of you, kept up the enthusiasm and the drive necessary for the 400 natural resource professionals and policy makers from 19 countries throughout the Western Hemisphere to come to Miami, the city which many consider the crossroads of the Americas. It was truly a dialogue, this First Dialogue, with outstanding keynote speakers, interesting plenary sessions and dynamic roundtable discussions. The dialogue resulted in three major efforts: The Statement of Miami (English, Spanish, and Portuguese) The groundwork for creation and subsequent development of the Inter-American Water Resources Network (IWRN) Passing of the torch for action to the Organization of American States (OAS). The First Inter-American Dialogue was more than two years in the making. It was a direct outgrowth of the Earth Summit in Rio and particularly the freshwater component mentioned in Agenda 21. ∗ Former Executive Director, South Florida Water Management District, and Founder of the Inter-American Dialoge on Water Management, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, U.S.A.

The overriding question of the Dialogue was “How to take the results of the Earth Summit and begin to make a difference on the ground,” or in the water, so to speak. The then UN Secretary General Boutros Ghalli said: “The challenge after Rio is to maintain the momentum of commitment to sustainable development, to transform it into policies and practices, and to give it effective and organized support.” Truly, the Brundtland Commission’s simple definition of sustainable development was “using natural resources to meet the needs of the present (what you and I need today) without compromising the ability of future generations (manifested in the children here this week) to meet their own needs”—into the next millenium! So where do we go from here? The Second Dialogue in Buenos Aires built on Miami; the Third Dialogue, here in Panama City, continued the work started in Miami and followed in Buenos Aires, and the outstanding Summits in Bolivia and Chile. New, remarkable people and ideas have been added at each opportunity. But we all are people that crave instant success and our interest wanes if there is no immediate satisfaction after all our har work. To be true watershed managers we must be in it for the long haul. We may not see dynamic improvements in our own lifetime. In many cases pollution and water resource problems were created over a long period of time and some solutions will, in turn, take an equally long time to prove effective. But you must be willing to take that first step at the watershed, state, country, or regional level on what may be a long, arduous journey. You, the focal points of your countries, here this week, must persevere to the decision-making levels of your governments, but also take actions at the grassroots levels as well. You must also look for new partnership opportunities. In the Western Hemisphere we are blessed with 42% of the world’s population. Even with this abundance there are huge disparities between demand and supply—between clean and polluted water. But as others have said, we are ahead of other parts of the world in communications and solving our problems. President Clinton’s comment recently in El Salvador highlighted the need to rebuild based on the watershed. In closing, I would like to leave you with a story that I believe captures the essence of what we are trying to accomplish in these dialogues, this IWR network, and continuing regional water summits. One day a traveler came upon three stonecutters. He asked the first: “What are you doing?” He said: “I am cutting stone.” He asked the second and he replied: “I am shaping a cornerstone.” He asked the third and he said: “I am building a cathedral!” How you respond to that question shows a lot about your character—as an individual and collectively as organizations.

As water resource professionals and managers, with the 21st century fast approaching, we cannot afford to waste our precious time and effort merely cutting stones. We must with all our energy build this cathedral of knowledge with dedication to solving the water problems of this hemisphere. I promise you I will remain active in these efforts. I look forward to seeing you at the Fourth Inter-American Dialogue!

APPENDIX

La Problematica del Agua de Mexico: Apuntes para una Solución Integral

Dr. Andrés Valdez Zepeda∗∗∗∗

LA SITUACIÓN CRÍTICA DEL LAGO DE CHAPALA El agua es un recurso primordial para el desarrollo; es la base de sustento que da viabilidad y certeza a una sociedad. Históricamente, las grandes metrópolis han dependido de la extracción del agua, ya sea de acuíferos localizados en el subsuelo donde se asientan o de recursos hidráulicos transportados desde otros lugares. La Ciudad de México, por ejemplo, se abastece principalmente de un acuífero localizado en su subsuelo (72%) y de la importación de agua desde las cuencas del Lerma y Cutzamala, a una distancia de 127 kilómetros y con una elevación neta de 1,200 metros. Por su parte, la ciudad de Guadalajara toma el agua del lago de Chápala a 43 kilómetros de distancia, del acuífero Tesistán-Atemajac a las orillas de la ciudad y del sistema regional la Zurda-Calderón a 31 kilómetros, mientras que Monterrey la obtiene de los acuíferos

∗ Centro Universitario de la Ciénega, Universidad de Guadalajara.

y manantiales locales (50.7%) y de las presas La Boca y Cerro Prieto (49.3%), a 20 kilómetros de la ciudad. El abastecimiento del agua potable para las metrópolis es uno de los principales problemas que enfrenta hoy la sociedad mexicana, del igual o mayor magnitud a los problemas de la seguridad pública o de la cartera vencida. La demanda de ese vital liquido mantiene una correlación positiva con el crecimiento de la población y su disponibilidad está íntimamente ligada a las potencialidades futuras de desarrollo económico y social de las urbes. Por ejemplo, por citar un caso, se considera que dentro de 25 años, la demanda de agua en Guadalajara aumentará en un 140 por ciento aproximadamente de 10.7 a 26 metros cúbicos por segundo), demanda que necesitará la búsqueda de fuentes alternas de abastecimiento. El acelerado crecimiento urbano y demográfico ha dado como resultado no solo un aumento anual de la demanda del agua, sino también un deterioro de las condiciones naturales de los recursos acuáticos y de los ecosistemas relacionados con ellos. En Monterrey, por ejemplo, para 1992 la demanda de agua ascendió a 14,124 litros por segundo, mientras que el abasto fue de 9,537 litros por segundo, existiendo un déficit del 32 por ciento. México es un país con una gran abundancia de recursos naturales. En materia hidráulica, la riqueza más importante del país, cuenta con la infraestructura de almacenamiento y distribución de agua, el sistema hidroeléctrico, la legislación vigente y la serie de instituciones, dependencias y recursos humanos relacionadas con el uso y manejo de este líquido. Los recursos hídricos de México se calcularon para 1997 en un billón 570 millones de metros cúbicos. De esta cantidad, como se apuntó mas arriba, 410 mil millones se escurren superficialmente y 40 mil millones se infiltran en el subsuelo para recargar los acuíferos. De las aguas dulces existentes en el país, se extraen unos 174 mil millones de metros cúbicos. La presencia de estos recursos constituye una fortaleza relativamente importante para el país. Como consecuencia de la situación geográfica, la distribución de los recursos hidráulicos es muy irregular a lo largo del territorio nacional; existen grandes diferencias en precipitación media anual y escurrimientos de una región a otra. Por ejemplo, en el 75 por ciento del territorio escurren sólo el 25 por ciento del agua, en cambio, en el restante 25 por ciento del país, se presenta el 75 por ciento de los escurrimientos. Generalmente, las precipitaciones ocurren en los meses de junio a octubre, siendo el promedio nacional de 777 mm, equivalente a 1 billón 570 millones de metros cúbicos. De esta cantidad, 1 billón 120 millones de metros cúbicos se evapora retornando a la atmósfera, 410 millones de metros cúbicos se infiltra en el subsuelo. Los recursos hidráulicos del país con disponibilidad natural, existentes en lagos, ríos, lagunas, presas y mantos freáticos se estiman en 450 millones de metros cúbicos. De esta cantidad, se extraen 174 millones de metros cúbicos al año y el resto se localiza en lagos, presas, acuíferos o fluye hacia el mar. En todo el territorio nacional existen 37 cuencas hidrológicas, con contrastes marcados en cuanto a recursos hídricos disponibles, niveles de consumo, índices de contaminación e infraestructura

hidráulica existente. Estas cuencas proporcionan la mayor parte de los recursos hídricos, tanto de agua supeficial como de agua subterránea. El uso del agua superficial es destinado en un 63.5 por ciento para la generación de la energía eléctrica, 32.9 por ciento en el sector agropecuario, el 1.8 por ciento en el industrial y el 1.8 por ciento para el uso doméstico. En cambio, del agua extraída del subsuelo se destina el 67.9 por ciento para riego, 20 por ciento para consumo urbano, 7.1 por ciento para uso industrial y el 5 por ciento restante para consumo de la población rural. El gasto por habitante en la Zona Metropolitana del Valle de México, sin considerar fugas de red, es de 360 litros por día, en Guadalajara de 285 y en la ciudad de Monterrey de 207 litros. Sin lugar a duda, hoy día uno de los problemas más graves de la sociedad mexicana es la escasez de agua útil. Este problema, que no es privativo tan sólo de las metrópolis, sino también de una gran cantidad de áreas rurales, representa uno de los retos que la sociedad en su conjunto tendrá que enfrentar en el futuro cercano. La naturaleza del problema es compleja. Por un lado, se encuentra la presencia de graves sequías periódicas en la zona norte del país, que en 1996 afectaron a 22 estados de la República y a más de 680 municipios. Por el otro lado, existe una mayor demanda de este vital líquido para satisfacer las necesidades crecientes de las grandes metrópolis y de sus planes de desarrollo, así como una mayor contaminación de las aguas. El problema del abastecimiento de agua a los centros urbanos es complicado, el cual demanda soluciones múltiples e integrales que tomen en cuenta las actividades de investigación y evaluación de los recursos. La sustentabilidad del abastecimiento del agua en las zonas urbanas, además, está sujeta a la capacidad física del sistema hidrológico, a la vulnerabilidad del sistema a la contaminación, a la capacidad institucional para el tratamiento, la distribución y el desecho de aguas residuales y a la capacidad administrativa y tecnológica de la sociedad y el gobierno. Los problemas más importantes relacionados al suministro de agua a las metrópolis son: la sobreexplotación de los acuíferos, la contaminación de las aguas, el desperdicio del líquido, la ausencia de instalaciones apropiadas para el tratamiento de las aguas residuales y, sobre todo, la falta de una cultura del agua. A continuación se analizan estos principales problemas de las zonas urbanas del país. PRINCIPALES PROBLEMAS DEL AGUA EN MEXICO 1) Sobreexplotación de los acuíferos Con el objetivo de solventar la necesidad creciente de agua para los centros urbanos, el hombre ha sobre explotado los mantos freáticos, ha producido un abatimiento de los niveles de los acuíferos y ha causado el deterioro de las zonas acuíferas aledañas a las grandes urbes. Los montos de agua extraídos para satisfacer la creciente demanda de este líquido son enormes. Por ejemplo, hoy día la explotación de agua en la región del Valle de México se estima en 60.3 m3 por segundo, de los cuales 43.0 m3 por segundo provienen del subsuelo. La extracción masiva del agua del subsuelo genera, entre otros problemas, el abatimiento de los niveles hídricos y los asentamientos en las zonas lacustres. La cuenca de la Ciudad de México es un ejemplo clásico que presenta abatimientos de los niveles hídricos entre 1 y 3.5 metros por año y asentamientos en las zonas lacustres de 40 cm por año, en algunos lugares.

Asimismo, la sobreexplotación de los acuíferos y el abatimiento de los niveles producen hundimientos que causan daños considerables al sistema de drenaje y de obras públicas de la gran metrópoli. Tan sólo en materia de hundimientos, por ejemplo, algunas investigaciones científicas han señalado que desde que se inició la explotación del agua subterránea en el siglo XIX a la fecha, se ha provocado un hundimiento cercano a los 7.5 metros en el centro de la Ciudad de México. Con la sobreexplotación se ha aumentado también el contenido de sales, de arsénico y de flúor en el agua y se ha producido la desecación y fracturación de las capas de arcilla en los acuíferos. La Comarca Lagunera es un caso que ejemplifica el cómo la extracción excesiva de agua ha traído como consecuencia altos contenidos de arsénico en este vital líquido. A nivel general, se estima que la recarga anual de acuíferos en el país asciende a 17 mil 409 millones de metros cúbicos y de 16 mil 395 millones el de extracción, con lo que está a punto de romper el equilibrio y poner en serio riesgo la sustentabilidad de este recurso. Incluso, en algunas zonas, principalmente urbanas, el equilibrio ya se ha roto. Por ejemplo, la sobreexplotación de los mantos freáticos y manantiales del Valle de México es alarmante. De cada 40 metros cúbicos que se extraen del subsuelo, tan sólo se recargan aproximadamente 22 metros cúbicos, lo que ocasiona una serio agravamiento y merma de estos recursos. 2) La contaminación del agua El problema de contaminación en las grandes urbes, no se reduce al deterioro de la calidad del aire, sino que abarca también la contaminación del agua, tanto subterránea como superficial. La contaminación se produce principalmente debido a la rápida industrialización y urbanización sin salvaguardias ambientales adecuadas y por la falta de cuidados de los desechos que la actividad industrial, doméstica y comercial produce. La contaminación del agua representa un grave riesgo para la salud pública, demanda una gran inversión económica para su saneamiento y pone en riesgo la sustentabilidad de este recurso. La contaminación del agua superficial y de los mantos freáticos se produce por diferentes vías. Algunas de ellas son los desechos industriales, las aguas residuales y la contaminación térmica por el uso de este líquido en plantas de generación de energía eléctrica. Desdichadamente, los problemas de degradación de la calidad del agua del subsuelo, se detectan una vez que el agua, proveniente de los pozos, ha sido seriamente afectada por algún tipo de contaminante, ya sea por la intrusión de gérmenes patógenos, contaminantes tóxicos, metales pesados o compuestos orgánicos. La posibilidad de que los contaminantes se filtren y contaminen el agua del subsuelo depende de varios factores como lo son la morfología y composición de los suelos, los niveles freáticos, la tasa de recarga y las características de las formaciones geológicas de la región. De acuerdo con información de la Red de Monitoreo de la Calidad del Agua, se estima que el 6.7 por ciento del agua de los mantos freáticos, cuencas hidrológicas, mantos subterráneos, puertos industriales y centros turísticos está excesiva o fuertemente contaminado.

Las regiones con mayor cantidad de mantos freáticos contaminados son la Comarca Lagunera, el Valle de México y la Península de Yucatán. Los que presentan intrusión salina son los acuíferos de los valles de Santo Domingo, de Guaymas, las costas de Hermosillo, Vizcaíno y la Paz. En cuanto a degradación del recurso por infiltración de aguas superficiales contaminadas, sobresalen los acuíferos del Valle de México, del Valle de Tula y de Mérida. La contaminación del agua también se da en las tuberías que transportan el agua de las plantas potabilizadoras hacia las tomas domiciliarias. La contaminación se produce principalmente por plomo, óxidos y por la intrusión de gérmenes en las redes dañadas o en los pozos de abastecimiento, En algunos lugares, el problema de la contaminación es grave. El 23 por ciento de los 242 pozos de abastecimiento de agua que surten al área de servicio del Estado de México, por ejemplo, no cumplen con las normas establecidas para bacterias coliformes y el 11 por ciento no lo hacen con las normas relativas a constituyentes inorgànicos. 3) El uso irracional del agua y la cultura del desperdicio La cultura que ha caracterizado a una mayor parte de los mexicanos, ha sido la del desperdicio e irresponsabilidad para el manejo del agua. Mientras el agua se desperdicia en las grandes ciudades, el problema de la disponibilidad de este líquido se hace crítico de manera periódica en la zona norte del país. El manejo irracional de este recurso se pone de manifiesto en un dato muy singular a nivel micro. De acuerdo con el ex presidente de la Comisión de Uso y Aprovechamiento de Bienes y Servicios Públicos de la Asamblea Legislativa del Distrito Federal, Francisco González, las personas gastan casi cuatro vasos de agua para lavar un vaso. Los desperdicios a nivel macro también son alarmantes. De los 60.3 mil litros de agua que entran en la Ciudad de México cada segundo (39.3 mil para el Distrito Federal y 21 mil para los municipios conurbados), se desperdician casi el 40 por ciento; es decir, unos 24 mil litros que permiten abastecer de agua a ciudades como Guadalajara, León, Madrid o Roma. De ese porcentaje, casi el 30 por ciento se fuga en las antiguas redes de abasto, las cuales tienen en su mayoría 40 años de antigüedad; el resto se desperdicia en los hogares y en los centros de trabajo. Para el caso de la Zona Metropolitana de Guadalajara, la segunda concentración urbana más grande del país, el desperdicio del agua potable es de 43 por ciento, ya que el 14 por ciento de la más de 860 mil tomas de la metrópoli registran fuga de agua, entre otras causas por deficiencia en la red de distribución y por las tomas clandestinas. 4) Falta de tratamiento de aguas residuales Otro de los graves problemas del agua es, sin duda, la falta de tratamiento de las aguas residuales. De acuerdo al documento “Problemática y Oportunidades de la Gestión Ambiental en los Municipios Metropolitanos”, presentado en mayo de 1996 por la Secretaría del Medio Ambiente, Recursos Naturales y Pesca, tan sólo el 10 por ciento del agua contaminada recibe algún tipo de tratamiento; el resto se deja escurrir al subsuelo, corre por los ríos y se incorpora al mar. En algunos casos, las aguas residuales, sin tratamiento previo, se utilizan para la irrigación, como sucede con cerca de 80.000 hectáreas de sembradíos en el Valle del Mezquital, en el estado

de Hidalgo, que son irrigadas con las aguas negras de la Ciudad de México, los que generan problemas de salud a los que cultivan y consumen los productos agrícolas. El diez por ciento de las aguas tratadas se utilizan en diferentes proyectos para la recarga de los acuíferos y para la irrigación de las zonas arboladas y escénicas de la zona urbana. Para el caso de la Zona Metropolitana de la Ciudad de México, existían en 1992, trece plantas de tratamiento de aguas residuales en el Distrito Federal y catorce en el área de servicio del Estado de México. La red de agua y alcantarillado para las metrópolis es de gran longitud. En la Ciudad de México, la red del sistema abarca de 10.000 kilómetros de largo, 68 estaciones de bombeo, numerosos disques y lagunas para el control del flujo acuático, 111 kilómetros de canales abiertos, 42 kilómetros de ríos utilizados, principalmente, para drenaje y 118 kilómetros de túneles. En Monterrey, la red de alcantarillado abarca 3.800 kilómetros para agosto de 1992. A lo largo de esas redes se extienden los malos olores, la contaminación ambiental y se presentan múltiples fugas. 5) El agua en el medio rural

El agua juega un papel restrictivo y condicionante en el desarrollo de la agricultura. Las potencialidades de incremento de la producción de alimentos se ven seriamente afectadas por la falta de humedad. En este sentido, la paradoja que enfrenta este sector primario es, por un lado, satisfacer una necesidad creciente de alimentos y, por el otro, tener una disponibilidad cada vez menor de agua. Parte de la precipitación que puede ser provechosa y económicamente utilizada, está en función de numerosos factores tales como el clima, la geología, la topografía, la estructura del suelo y su cubierta vegetal. De la superficie territorial de nuestro país, se dedican al uso agrícola 31.7 millones de hectáreas, de las cuales 82 por ciento es de temporal y el 18 por ciento restante (seis millones de hectáreas) cuenta con sistemas de riego. La principal problemática del agua en el medio rural es la distribución desigual de las precipitaciones y las sequías, la sobreexplotación y el uso irracional de este recurso y la contaminación. México presenta una distribución contrastante de humedad y de sus precipitaciones pluviales. De acuerdo con la distribución geográfica de la lluvia y la temperatura, 52.7 por ciento del territorio nacional tiene un déficit hídrico presentando climas desérticos, áridos y semiáridos, mientras que el 47.3 por ciento restante es sub-húmedo y húmedo. Esta situación de desigualdad genera que, por un lado, se presenten inundaciones y abundancia de agua en unas regiones, principalmente al sur y sureste de la República, y por el otro, paradójicamente, varías zonas país sufran la escasez de este líquido. En cuanto al uso irracional, se dan principalmente en los distritos de riego. La sobreexplotación de las cuencas se produce por la creciente demanda de agua potable para el uso agrícola, el despilfarro y la deficiencia de la infraestructura en los diversos distritos de riego. El uso de prácticas de riego, como la anegación de los surcos, hace también que los malgastes de agua sean

elevados, ya que una gran cantidad de este líquido se infiltra en el subsuelo o alimenta a las malezas. La contaminación de las corrientes de agua superficiales en el medio rural se produce por la presencia de sales, desechos domésticos y por el uso de químicos en las labores agrícolas. Entre las corrientes de aguas superficiales más contaminadas del país, se encuentran las cuencas de los ríos Lerma, Chapala, Santiago, San Juan, Balsas, Blanco, Pánuco, Nazas y Bravo. ALTERNATIVAS DE SOLUCION El agua es la herencia más preciada que debemos cuidar para las generaciones futuras. De su disponibilidad dependerán las potencialidades de desarrollo y grandeza de las metrópolis y de los núcleos de población rural del próximo milenio. Por ello, se necesitan realizar esfuerzos en diferentes áreas encaminadas a lograr solucionar el problema de la escasez de agua, fomentar una cultura de uso racional de este líquido y eficientar los sistemas de distribución y administración. Una solución integral al problema de la escasez del agua tiene que pasar por las adecuaciones y el cumplimiento del marco normativo actualmente existente, el establecimiento de campañas educativas y el impulso de programas para un uso adecuado de este vital líquido. A continuación se enlistan las principales estrategias, que a juicio del autor, son necesarias para solventar la compleja problemática del agua. Por razones de espacio sólo se profundiza en los más importantes. 1) Cumplimiento del marco normativo y fomento de la desregulación de los servicios de

agua El agua es un bien de la nación, según lo señala el Artículo 27 Constitucional. La legislación que se ocupa de reglamentar el uso y aprovechamiento del agua, básicamente se concentra en cuatro leyes generales y en sus respectivos reglamentos: la Ley General del Equilibrio Ecológico y Protección al Ambiente, la Ley de Aguas Nacionales, la Ley Federal Sobre Metrología y Normalización y la Ley General de Salud. La Ley General del Equilibrio Ecológico y Protección al Ambiente, promulgada en 1988, busca la conservación y protección general de los recursos naturales; la Ley de Aguas Nacionales, aprobada en 1992, tiene por objeto regular la explotación, uso y aprovechamiento de las aguas nacionales, su distribución y control, así como la preservación de su cantidad y calidad para lograr un desarrollo integral sustentable; la Ley Federal sobre Metrología y Normalización, promulgada el 1 de julio de 1992, establece el sistema general de unidades de medida referidas a la conservación, seguridad y calidad en la explotación, uso, aprovechamiento y administración de las aguas nacionales; y la Ley General de Salud, publicada en el Diario Oficial de la Federación el 14 de junio de 1991, certifica la calidad del agua para el consumo humano y establece una serie de requerimientos para los sistemas de abastecimiento de agua, el transporte del agua potable y los distintos procedimientos de muestreo. Las dependencias gubernamentales con jurisdicción para intervenir en asuntos relacionados con el agua son: la Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería y Desarrollo Rural, la Comisión Nacional

del Agua, la Secretaría de Salud, la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, la Secretaría de Desarrollo Social, la Procuraduría Federal del Medio Ambiente y las diferentes dependencias locales en las entidades federativas. La legislación vigente permite que se privatice y desregularice la administración de los servicios del agua y drenaje, con lo que se autoriza que el capital privado pueda intervenir en la presentación de este servicio. De hecho, en algunos casos, como en el Distrito Federal, ya se ha concesionado, por un período de 10 años, parte del servicio de mantenimiento y operación de la red de agua potable y alcantarillado a cuatro empresas con capital nacional y extranjero. En el caso de algunas ciudades del interior de la República también, por ejemplo, en Aguascalientes, el agua se concesionó a la empresa CAASA, filial del grupo ICA. A nivel nacional, por cuestiones históricas existe una gran presión social para que este recurso no se privatice y siga otorgándose de manera altamente subsidiada a la población. Sin embargo, los subsidios y la sub-valuación del agua ha producido distintos problemas, como son un mayor consumo, un uso irracional del mismo y una deuda financiera enorme de las instituciones encargadas de suministrar este servicio. Las actuales políticas populistas en materia de agua ya no son sostenibles. Las altas subvenciones han ocasionado que las dependencias encargadas del suministro del agua se encuentren inmersas en una severa crisis financiera. Por ejemplo, en el Distrito Federal el subsidio anual para el servicio de agua y drenaje asciende a más de 3.000 millones de pesos. Para el caso de la Zona Metropolitana de Guadalajara, la deuda del Sistema Intermunicipal de Agua Potable y Alcantarillado (SIAPA), para julio de 1996, equivalió a casi 2.5 veces su presupuesto anual. El agua es un bien económico que se tiene que usar de manera eficiente y racional. Las políticas en esta materia para el presente y futuro, que en algunas regiones del país ya empiezan a implementarse, tienen que tender a reducir el gasto y aumentar la recuperación de los costos, fomentando la participación del capital privado como ha pasado en otros países. La actualización de los aranceles del servicio de agua tiene que realizarse de manera gradual, tratando de evitar conflictos sociales y políticos, y sobre todo, buscando la racionalización de la agua y su uso eficiente. Las políticas de desregulación deben estar orientadas a diversificar las fuentes de financiamiento, jerarquizar los recursos de inversión dirigidos a mejorar la prestación del servicio y, sobre todo, a proteger a los usuarios. Para fomentar el ahorro en materia de agua es recomendable que se estandarice un sistema nacional de tarifas que graven al consumo y estimule el ahorro, y que sean diferenciadas para el uso doméstico, industrial y de servicios. La diferenciación de aranceles para estos sectores es necesario, ya que algunas ramas industriales y de servicios pueden usar aguas tratadas en sus procesos productivos. El principio básico de las tarifas debe ser, “que más pague, el que más consuma,” ofreciendo agua barata a los consumidores ahorradores y agua cara para los despilfarradores, buscando, ante todo, terminar con los malos hábitos relacionados con el uso del agua. Para ello, se hace necesario elaborar y, en su caso, actualizar el padrón de usuarios en toda la República,

regularizar las tomas, instalar un sistema de medición adecuado, incluyendo a los consumidores en pequeño, y levantar un catastro de redes primarias y secundarias de aguas potables, residuales y tratadas a nivel nacional. Mediante la apertura de nuevos espacios para las empresas privadas se deben promover esquemas de riesgo compartido, conversiones y concesiones totales, garantizando a la sociedad un servicio de mayor calidad. Para solventar las deudas que han contraído las empresas públicas estatales y municipales de abastecimiento de agua, se puede pensar en el otorgamiento de facilidades de pago a los usuarios morosos o la creación de impuestos especiales a la venta de licores, tabaco y a la gasolina, mas no es recomendable la condonación de los pagos atrasados, como ha sucedido en la ciudad de Aguascalientes, ya que esto puede generar tendencias y presiones futuras favorables a las condonaciones. En el área de administración y comercialización se tiene que medir con precisión el consumo y reparar o reponer medidores defectuosos, proporcionar un adecuado mantenimiento a las redes, introducir un sistema administrativo tecnificado y, sobre todo, capacitar al personal. Por último, se debe aplicar de manera estricta la legislación vigente, ya que el análisis efectuado muestra que es avanzada y adecuada para lograr un mejor aprovechamiento de las aguas nacionales, una eficiente conservación de este recurso y el castigo a los infractores. Reconvertir la actual cultura del consumismo Por desgracia, la constante búsqueda que han emprendido los países desarrollados por proporcionar una mayor cantidad de satisfactores materiales a sus habitantes, han sido imitados por naciones en vías de desarrollo como México. Esta dinámica ha generado una cultura del máximo consumo y la del despilfarro. Esta situación ha originado altos consumos innecesarios de agua para uso doméstico, industrial o agropecuario por todos los sectores sociales. Puesto que el recurso hídrico no es ilimitado y su costo aumentará a medida que las fuentes de aprovechamiento se encuentren más distantes de los centros de consumo, las prácticas de conservación deben alentarse tanto a nivel público como privado. Un programa serio de uso y conservación del agua que permita impulsar un desarrollo integral sustentable tiene necesariamente que incluir medidas punitivas, así como educativas. Con las medidas punitivas se pretende castigar el uso inadecuado de este recurso, mientras que con las medidas educativas se busca fomentar una cultura de valoración y conservación del agua, que hasta el momento no existe en amplios sectores de la población mexicana. Hasta hoy, se han impulsado por diferentes instancias gubernamentales y organizaciones intermedias de la sociedad civil, campañas de concienciación sobre el uso del agua. Sin embargo, estos trabajos, aunque encomiables, no han sido permanentes ni sistemáticos y se han presentado como esfuerzos aislados de instancias bien intencionadas, pero sin una coordinación, planeación y evaluación adecuada. Lo recomendable sería que se organizara una campaña nacional permanente de educación y concienciación sobre el uso de agua.

En especial, hace falta una mayor información de parte de las autoridades hacia los habitantes. Es necesario decirle al ciudadano, cuánto cuesta traer el agua de los diferentes centros de abastecimiento que no están en las zonas urbanas e informarles también cuánto dinero se gasta en proporcionar el agua que llega a sus hogares o centros de trabajo. Sería conveniente, además, que la educación ambiental y el desarrollo sostenible se incluyeran en la curricula del sistema escolarizado de educación primaria, secundaria y media superior. Con esta medida, se lograría influir en la construcción y fomento de una cultura de valoración y uso racional de los recursos naturales, donde el agua recibiría una atención importante. Con el fomento de una cultura del agua, las nuevas generaciones valorarían, lo que hasta hoy no se ha logrado en un sector considerable de adultos, la “importancia estratégica” que tiene este recurso para el desarrollo nacional, y estarían educados con una perspectiva que permita el uso racional y eficiente del agua en el futuro. El abandono de la cultura del consumismo, permitirá un uso racional de los recursos naturales y sentará las bases para un desarrollo sustentable.

1) Reducir el crecimiento y la alta concentración demográfica. 2) Disminuir el número de fugas y fomentar el ahorro. 3) Aumentar el reciclado de aguas residuales y la recarga de acuíferos. 4) Involucrar a la sociedad en la toma de decisiones. 5) Reducir los índices de contaminación del agua por las industrias. 6) Apoyar la investigación científica y tecnológica. 7) Reducir la contaminación

a) Del agua subterránea en los centros urbanos. b) De los ríos y las aguas superficiales.

c) Usar tecnología agrícola que demande un menor uso de agua. d) Aminorar los efectos de las sequías y buscar mejorar la distribución de agua en la región. e) Reducción de evaporaciones en vasos de almacenamiento.

Acerca del autor. Andrés Valdez Zepeda es Doctor en Ciencia Política por la Universidad de Nuevo México, Estados Unidos. Es Coordinador de la Maestría en Administración y Secretario Académico del Centro Universitario de la Ciénega de la Universidad de Guadalajara. Es miembro del Sistema Nacional de Investigadores y autor de varios libros y ensayos de carácter científico.

Public Participation in Water Resources Decision Making: Community Participation in Water Resources

Lake Chapala: Strategies for a Lake

Manuel Guzmán-Arroyo∗∗∗∗

THE WATER CRISIS The lack of water is the most important restriction in the 21st century in food production around the world, moreover than the lack of farming lands. The water crisis is worldwide despite the great technological innovations of the modern era, actually there are more people lacking of water than 10 years ago. The needs in health matters are more and more indispensable even in the developed countries, where they have bigger resources and better administrations for a more demanding society. Just as the soil, the amount of available water for farming use can not be rise but can be better used. (NWC, 1994; Guzmán, 1997). The Brundtland Brief “ Our Common Future” (1987) says: “The environment and development are not contradictory, they are inexorably bound” so there can not be development over deteriorate resources. The panoramic worldwide view is about lacking, over exploitation and pollution rising so high until becoming a restraining factor of sustainable development in many nations. This drove to the formulation of objectives in the Agenda 21st of the Congress of the Earth, for the 18th Chapter of Water (U.N., 1992, Aldama; 1994). To reach this goals, the United Nations had set specific actions towards priority areas: − Full exploitation of water resources. − Water resources evaluation. − Protection of the quality of the water. − Supplies of drinking water and cleansing. − Sustainable development over rural, water and food. THE WATER MANAGEMENT Mexico has a rich water related tradition whose beginnings are pre-Hispanic; Aztecs, Purepechas and Mayas had complex ways of water management and organization. In Colony the Spanish domain was established over water and land. Back in the 19th century was created the Hydraulic Law.

∗ Apdo. Post. 310 Limnology Institute, Guadalajara University, Chapala (45900), Jalisco, México.

In the modern era, the concept of collective use was created of water, with a social content in it. There are three institutions who sustain Mexico actually: Bank of Mexico, National Commission of Roads and the National Commission of Hydrology. Therefore, the water takes a fundamental roll in policies development, conceiving down in the 27th Constitutional Article that lands and water are property of the Nation with an unalienable and they have no prescription. Furthermore, the exploitation of National Waters only can be made through concessions and assignments of the Federal Executive Power (Aldama, 1994). The history of water management began near 25 years ago here in Mexico, the actual National Water Law reflects the major consents of Chapter 18th of Agenda 21st. The national mean water balance, although registrations of apparent surplus, does not reflects the bigger problems affecting a great number of aquifers and river basins of the country found in the regional balances, showing a considerable deficit in almost half of the territories (Aldama, 1994).

S

N

W E

Fig 1. Location of the Lerma Basin and Lake Lerma River Basin The Lerma-Chapala River Basin is found in the midwest of México, it occupies part of State of México, Queretaro, Guanajuato, Michoacán and Jalisco. The water exploitation in this river basin is like follows: Superficial water (4,048 M´m3) and subterranean water (3,537 M´m3) with a global consumption of 7,585 M´m3 yearly. In farming use the needs are 3,447 M´m3 of the area and 3,083 M´m3 of the underground water, with a total of 6,560 M´m3. For domestic use 530 and 315 M´m3 with a total of 845 M´m3 and for industrial use 41 and 139 M´m3 respectively with a total of 180 M´m3. Irrigation consuming 78 to 86.5% of all the water of the river basin. The water for domestic use represents 11.4% and in industrial use 2.37% (Sandoval, 1990: NWC, 1993, Mestre, 1994).

Lake Chapala

Lerma River Basin

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

N

S

W E

����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

������ ������

León

Guanajuato

Irapuato

Salamanca

S.M. Allende

Querétaro

Celaya

Toluca

Ayotlán

Guadalajara

Ocotlán

La Piedad

Zamora

México D.F.MICHOACAN

JALISCO

GUANAJUATO

QUERETARO

ESTADO DE MEXICO

MICHOACAN

����������Chapala

�������

������������������ ��������� �������

���������������������������

��������������

������� ����������������

�������������������

����������������

������������������������

��������

����������������

��������

�������������������� �����������

������������������������

�����

����������������

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

Fig. 2. The Lerma Basin and Lake The Lerma-Chapala River basin is one of the most important regions in the center of the country, not only for its size but for the high grades of populations gathered and productive activities. Is one of the more dynamic river basin of all México forming a development axle between the two biggest cities of the country: México, D.F and Guadalajara. In it are almost 1 of ten Mexican people living in (9.5 millions), there are 1 of 8 hectares of irrigation, more than 30% of national industrial production and more than 20% of national commerce (NWC, 1993). The mean precipitation in the river basin is about 750 mm; this index puts it like a poor zone compared with other zones of the Republic. In terms of available water per capita, the Lerma-Chapala river basin is poor; in general terms, any place of the world where water availability is less than 5,000 m3 per capita and by year is found to be in a lacking condition (Mestre, 1994), in México we have less than 4,000 m3 (Aldama, 1994). The use of water is an intense one, basically in farming use who exploit more than 78% of the river basin water as well of superficial as underground waters. There are important districts and irrigation units; the total of the irrigation area is about three quarters of million hectares in almost 54,000 Km3; this talks about and intense use of water for farming use. Lake Chapala Lake Chapala is located in the western part of México, with 90% of its whole area in the east side of Jalisco, and the 10% left being in the northeast side of Michoacán; even when this proportion has change in recent times for the given changes of the lake level. It is between parallels 20¼ 07´ y 20¼ 21´north latitude and meridians 102¼ 40´45 “ and 103¼ 25´30” west longitude and with an altitude of 1,524 m osl. The historical mean of the lake, corresponding of years 1900 to 1990 are: Area = 109,801 hectareas and Volume = 6,000 M´m3, this is in elevation 96.02 (1,522.82 m osl), under this same conditions showing 78.5 kms of maximum length and 20.5 kms maximum width. Has a mean depth of 4.5 m and a maximum depth of 7.0 m (Guzmán, 1996).

Problematic Quantity and quality of the water are two fundamental problems that the Lerma-Chapala river basin presents. The demographic, agricultural and industrial developments have reach such growth, demanding each time more water volumes for different uses and this produces greater discharges of residual urban, industrial and pertaining to agriculture and cattle raising waters. Because of all this we are starting to feel a chronic lack of water (superficial and freatic) and it is becoming more apparent a greater diminution in its physicochemical and bacteriological qualities exceeding the official established rules making it a severe restrain for the local development. We can find the following factors among the main ones considered to be limiting for the concrete actions in an adequate management and preservation of the water pollution in the Lerma-Chapala river basin:

− Lack of strict application of laws, rules and norms up at date to manage, distribute, use, prevent and control the water pollution in Lerma-Chapala river basin (Guzmán, 1997, Montoya, et al., 1997)

− Insufficient technical qualified personnel, as well as branch offices, institutions or enterprises devoted to study, manage, distribute, preserve and control water quality,whether it is national, state or municipal, just as a lack of expertise, ethical and political will to solve this problematic.

− Believe and make believe that the main problem is the lack of rain (NWC, 1998) and not the waste due poor water management, which are the real cause of the lack of it.

− Considering that water is not wasted due bad use in agriculture, believing that it will recycle eventually (García-Mayen, 1999).

− Considering that evaporation is the main cause of lost volumes and lake area, accordingly a malicious hydrological balance and not knowing the real causes and for that reason the lake has to be reduce at half of its actual area (Sandoval, 1990).

− Wrong concepts considering the water bodies can transform all dropped waste, being that- most of them- the capability of self purification is beyond the superficial water bodies (Montoya, et al., 1997).

The reduction of the management body in the National Water Commission (NWC), as for personnel and economic resources due the actual financial crisis in Mexico, produces poor attention in water users. Efforts The efforts destined to the Lerma-Chapala river basin does not correspond with the expected results manifested in the actual situation. Numerous studies and analysis have been done, just as all kind of reunions, congress, workshops, forums, etc. of every kind whether politic, technical or social they have been. There are also have been arranged through General and local Counsels of the river basin, educational institutions, foundations, associations, etc.

Some actions and numerous sectional programs have been generated: whether federal, state, from ecological and social groups with a very restrained reach and far from the focal points of the problem. Early in 1990 four important actions were establish: Cleaning of river basin, Classified use of water; there are more users demanding water than water itself; Achieve better use of water; if we do not use water well, then we will have to find better ways to improve or preserve the river basins (Mestre, 1994). None of this actions were concrete. The problematic of the lake has become a reason of economical (construction) and political protagonist (elections). The biggest part of the official and local actors are not from the river basin, nor users of it. Strategies The strengthening of the riversides actions has been pretended to be through formation or motivation of local organizations (NGO or Rotary International) and with the creation of the Municipal Riverside Counsel made out of riversides counties. The actions have been focus mainly to improve quality of life with strong environmental basis. It is the purpose that the county will become the promoting unit of development through a solid riverside society, economical and environmentally sustainable. The purpose is to frame the problematic into three big action lines in two levels: Lerma river basin and Chapala Lake and its river basin through a conceptual structure firmly related with a systematic analysis: − Natural Frame : It is related with the physical part, consider as its geological and

physiographic structure, its hydrology, weather, soil, local animal and plants communities terrestrial and aquatic.

− Social Frame : Population, quantity, localization, distribution, tendencies towards growth and sociocultural structures.

− Productive Frame : Consequently to the natural interactions of population towards its natural environment, accordingly with the traditional models of use and abuse of natural resources.

Immediate Needs The following have been identified as immediate needs: 1. Use of an operational binnacle in all bombing plants to measure the volumes they handle,

with participating authorities and city representatives, from the Municipal Riverside Counsel and the Local Counsel of the Chapala Lake Riverside, for supervision of authorized volumes and managed by SIAPA.

2. Establishment of an Hydrological network over extraction sites and water conduction in Lerma and Santiago Rivers and for the Guadalajara Metropolitan Zone (GMZ). In the bombing plants, in canals, aqueducts, storage and derivation morsels and potable plants. Use of precise measurement mechanisms to establish a permanent Hydraulic Auditory with solid legal basis to supervise volumes of extracted and conducted water. So far the water extracted from Lerma and Santiago Rivers as well as the one extracted from Chapala Lake will be the necessary and handle efficiently.

3. Establishment of a rehabilitation program in Santiago River since its exit from Chapala Lake to Juanacatlán Spring. Including aquatic weed control, verification of agricultural and

cattle raising urban and industrial loads and unloads over the river, reforestation and riversides protection, control over illegal extraction and a monitor program of water quality.

4. Establishment, in an urgent way, of a permanent maintenance program of hydrological infrastructure of conduction systems to avoid the actual loss of huge volumes of water. Just as the cleaning of canals and bombing plants specially in Ocotlán and in Guadalajara area.

5. Establishment and maintenance of a users pattern of Santiago River water and Irrigation canals legislation to technical irrigation systems using Chapala Lake water, excluding farming demanding great volumes of water as in strawberry cultivation farms.

6. Prepared and operate a conjunctive contingence plan between the Municipal Riverside Counsel and the Riverside Counsels to face dry seasons situations.

7. Solicitation to the Federal Government to enforce the National Water Commission to reinvest totally all charges over the concessions in the Federal Zone in Chapala Lake for the lake benefit. Further establishment of a minimum level for concessions under which will be absolutely forbidden to extract any volume . It is known that the lake is always sacrificed in order to save the agriculture who extract greater quantities of water .

8. Establishment of a permanent surveillance program in Chapala Lake and Lerma and Santiago Rivers over clandestine urban and agricultural water takes.

Strategies The next issues are considered in the Environmental Policy for a Sustainable Growth in México as part of the National Development Plan 1995-2000 (SHCP, 1995): “The national strategy for development looks out a balance -global and local- between economic, social and environmental objectives, so it can be possible to stop the environmental deterioration processes; to induce an environmental order of the national territory, taking in count that the development could be compatible with environmental aptitudes and capabilities of each region; to have full and sustainable benefits of natural resources, as a basic condition to overcome poverty; and finally taking care of the waste and an effective enforcement of the law”. Proper technologies are required for the actual technologies improvement, needed to rationally use water and protect it against over exploitation and pollution. Agenda 21st application over the Water Sector must be supported with wider basis and development programs allowing adequate technical solutions. As a whole part must be included the transference, cooperation and divulgence. Integration of all actors must be real and effective. The real basis of a rational benefit and preservation in Lerma-Chapala-Santiago river basin as well as any other natural river basin in the State requires a complete participation of two mayor factors: Scientific and technical knowledge adequate to natural, social and productive systems and a consequent action of a politically willful state and a well organized and committed society. Men natural environment preservation is a fundamental need for its existence, abuse of the exploitation in natural resources and deterioration of nature will have a high cost particularly to our future generations, the delay bills are yet to be paid due lack of proper actions regarding concrete actions.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Aldama, R.A.,1994. Water panorama in México. Franco Mexican Meeting about Water Management. National Water Commission. Guadalajara. 6 pp. Brundtland, H.G., et al. 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford. 400 pp. CNA. 1993. Master Plan of Lerma-Chapala River basin. National Water Commission. México. 82 pp. CNA. 1994. General Conclusions. Local Water Management in México. Franco Mexican Meeting about Water Management. National Water Commission. Guadalajara. 2 pp. CNA. 1998. Intervention. Internal Forum for analysis and reflection over supply problems of potable water and cleanliness in Guadalajara Metropolitan Zone. State Congress. Guadalajara. March 1998. Garcia, M.J.R.1999. Intervention. Workshop about priority identification for Chapala Lake. Environment, Natural Resources and Fishing Secretary. Environment Canada. Ajijic, Jal., Mexico. March 10 -12, 1999. Guzmán, A.M.., 1996. Chapala Lake. Basic Information. Limnology Institute. University of Guadalajara. 25 pp Guzmán, A.M., 1997. Superficial Waters in Jalisco State. Diagnosis. Program for Ecological and Territorial Order in Jalisco State. Limnology Institute. University of Guadalajara. Chapala. 250 pp. Limon, G.M., 1985. Ten years Study For Water Quality in Chapala Lake. Theorem. Civil Engineers College Magazine of Jalisco State. 28-40 pp. Mestre. R.J.E., 1994. Local Water Management in México. Lerma-Chapala River Basin Case. Franco Mexican Meeting about Water Management. National Water Commission. Guadalajara. 9 pp. Montoya. H.A., Contreras y V.M.R. Garcia. 1997. Study for Total Water Quality in Jalisco State. National Water Commission. Local Lerma-Santiago Management. Guadalajara. 106 pp. Sandoval, F. de P., 1990. Chapala, yesterday, now, tomorrow. Chapter IV En Alba V.C. (De.). Chapala. Local Ecology and Planning. Jalisco College. Goethe Institut. Guadalajara. 75-85 pp. UN. 1992. United Nations Meeting over Development and Environment. Chapter 18. Protection of quality and supply of fresh water resources. United Nations. Rio de Janeiro. 45 pp. SHCP. 1995. National Development Plan 1995-2000. Income and Public Credit Secretary. México. 177 pp.

El Código de Aguas de Chile: Entre la Ideología y la Realidad

Axel Dourojeanni y Andrei Jouravlev∗∗∗∗

RESUMEN EJECUTIVO Muchos países de América Latina y el Caribe se encuentran en proceso de impulsar cambios en las legislaciones y organizaciones orientadas a la gestión del agua. La índole concreta de esas reformas varía mucho de un país a otro en cuanto a su ejecución, en sus avances y, aún más, en su contenido. Algunos países, como por ejemplo, Brasil y México, ya han reformado la institucionalidad del sector hídrico, mientras que otros, la gran mayoría, están en proceso de cambios institucionales. En muchos de ellos el debate, que aún persiste, lleva una o más décadas. Los motivos más destacados que han originado la corriente actual de reformas en la legislación del agua son (CEPAL, 1998): • La búsqueda de la participación del sector privado en la prestación de los servicios públicos

relacionados con el agua tanto para reducir la presión sobre los presupuestos estatales y el gasto en materia de infraestructura conexa con el agua, como para mejorar la eficiencia en la prestación de esos servicios. Igualmente existe una fuerte corriente para utilizar los instrumentos económicos y de mercado para mejorar el uso y la asignación del agua.

• La necesidad de mejorar la gestión del agua para enfrentar la creciente competencia por su uso múltiple, en particular debido al incremento de la demanda de agua en grandes concentraciones urbanas, así como en la agricultura de riego y para la generación hidroeléctrica. A ello se suman los problemas crecientes de contaminación del agua y el efecto de los fenómenos naturales extremos que son cada día más percibidos por la población e influyen en la política de los gobiernos.

• Una concientización creciente sobre la importancia del agua expresada en una serie de eventos internacionales, así como en la activa participación de organismos no gubernamentales y la sociedad en general, para alcanzar metas de sostenibilidad ambiental en las cuales el buen manejo del agua tiene un rol primordial.

En los debates que se están realizando para avanzar en el proceso de reformas del sector hídrico se ha notado un fuerte énfasis inicial en elegir como modelo al Código de Aguas de Chile de 1981. En algunos países, los anteproyectos de leyes de aguas escogidos para ser debatidos han sido una copia casi fiel de este Código. Sin embargo en su difusión se menciona rara vez, si alguna, los problemas que su aplicación ha provocado, como tampoco el amplio debate que existe en Chile en relación a la conveniencia de modificarlo.

∗ Funcionarios de la División de Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo de la Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), Casilla 179-D, Santiago de Chile, fax: (56 2) 208 0252 y (56 2) 208 1946, teléfono: (56 2) 210 2248 y (56 2) 210 2257, e-mail: adourojeanni@eclac.cl y ajouravlev@eclac.cl. Las opiniones expresadas en este documento son de la exclusiva responsabilidad de los autores y pueden no coincidir con las de la Organización.

El presente documento trata de llenar este importante vacío. Sus objetivos específicos son: (i) analizar algunos de los problemas más importantes que la aplicación del Código de Aguas ha generado, incluyendo los problemas —como la especulación, el acaparamiento y el poder de mercado— relacionados con la asignación original de derechos de agua (el primer capítulo) y los problemas relacionados con la inadecuada consideración de los efectos externos en la constitución de nuevos derechos y las transferencias de los derechos existentes (el tercer capítulo); (ii) analizar los factores que explican la escasa actividad del mercado del agua y sus efectos (el segundo capítulo); (iii) analizar logros más importantes del Código (el cuarto capítulo); y finalmente, (iv) dar a conocer el debate poco divulgado que se ha generado en Chile en torno a la modificación del Código. El análisis aquí presentado se basa principalmente en estudios teóricos y evaluaciones empíricas de la aplicación del Código de Aguas, efectuados por diversos expertos, tanto chilenos como extranjeros. El presente documento analiza tres ámbitos diferentes pero interdependientes en torno a los cuales se centra usualmente el debate sobre el Código de Aguas: el sistema de gestión del agua, los derechos de agua y los mercados del agua. La gestión del agua. Si se compara el Código de Aguas con los principios básicos mínimos que una legislación de agua debe contener (véase el Anexo 1) y con las recomendaciones de las principales conferencias internacionales sobre el agua (CEPAL, 1998), se puede apreciar que presenta importantes avances pero que también adolece de ciertos y no menos importantes vacíos y limitaciones (en el Anexo 2 se presenta un conjunto de temas potencialmente conflictivos que diferentes expertos han identificado como relevantes para una buena gestión de los recursos hídricos en Chile). “No cabe la menor duda que la aproximación que supone el actual ordenamiento legal y jurídico en general al tema de los recursos hídricos presenta graves fallas, por una insuficiente presencia de los aspectos técnicos en el momento de la definición de las normativas legales. En algunos sentidos, la normativa ha olvidado completamente las cuestiones más elementales de la hidrología, como es la continuidad del ciclo hidrológico o el carácter aleatorio de las variables hidrológicas” (Peña, 1996). Una de las principales ventajas del sistema institucional de administración de los recursos hídricos en Chile es que —aunque en el sector hídrico chileno existe una dispersión institucional que produce “contradicciones, ambigüedades y, a veces, superposición de competencias” (Pickering de la Fuente, 1996)— las responsabilidades en cuanto a constituir los derechos de agua y en general controlar y planificar su uso se concentran en la Dirección General de Aguas (DGA) del Ministerio de Obras Públicos (MOP), que es un ente no sectorial e independiente de los sectores usuarios y que no ejecuta por sí obras de aprovechamiento. La DGA fue creada en 1969. Por otro lado, sus funciones de gestión y planificación son en la práctica nominales y las de policía y vigilancia muy limitadas, y su capacidad de implementación de programas de uso múltiple es reducida. Las facultades de la DGA “son más bien limitadas, y no puede introducirse ni en la distribución de las aguas … ni puede resolver los conflictos de aguas … En ningún caso puede introducirse este organismo público en las transacciones de derechos de aguas” (Vergara,1998a). En materia de calidad del agua hay una notable dispersión de funciones. La DGA tiene la responsabilidad de investigación y medición de los recursos hídricos. La concentración de las tareas de medición, investigación y administración en una sola institución no sectorial “tiene la enorme ventaja de orientar la evaluación de recursos hídricos hacia las

necesidades más urgentes de la toma de decisiones por parte de la autoridad y de los usuarios” (Peña, 1998). Por otro lado, no obstante los grandes esfuerzos que se realizan, no existe en este momento información necesaria para elaborar políticas de agua y se ha constatado la compartimentalización de la información radicada en diversos organismos (Pickering de la Fuente, 1996). Hay desconocimiento de la oferta y demanda del recurso, sobre todo a mediano y largo plazo, y los derechos de aguas están lejos de estar adecuadamente regularizados y registrados: “la Dirección no puede cumplir con su papel de conocer e informar los recursos de agua del país, porque carece de los medios suficientes para hacerlo. Se pretende administrar un recurso que no se conoce, lo cual crea graves problemas tanto a la DGA como a quienes hacen uso de los mismos” (Peralta, 1997). Una de las limitaciones principales del sistema de gestión de los recursos hídricos establecido en virtud del Código de Aguas es que la gestión del agua no está integrada y las responsabilidades de asignación y gestión del recurso se separan en una manera que no corresponde a sus características físicas y su uso óptimo. Esta situación dificulta hacer frente con solvencia a la creciente competencia por el agua, la enorme expansión de la contaminación del agua y en general la creciente demanda sobre los recursos hídricos. La falta de un sistema integrado de gestión impide además incursionar en el manejo del uso múltiple del agua. Aunque las aguas superficiales y subterráneas pertenecen habitualmente a un sistema hidrogeológico integrado, las dos se manejan en forma separada y hay serios deficiencias y vacíos en cuanto a la normativa de gestión de las aguas subterráneas. En muchos ríos, los recursos hídricos se administran a nivel de secciones o tramos y no a nivel de cuencas, lo que dificulta la implementación de acciones que, por su naturaleza, afectan al conjunto del sistema hídrico. El recurso sigue siendo utilizado casi exclusivamente para fines sectoriales: la mayoría de los proyectos de inversión en obras hidráulicas son realizadas por entidades sectoriales privadas y públicas orientadas al riego, hidroelectricidad, abastecimiento de agua potable y saneamiento, etc., sin que establezcan ni existan mecanismos de coordinación entre ellos. Aunque casi todos los usos de agua pueden causar contaminación, la regulación de la calidad del agua y el control de la contaminación no están integrados en la administración y gestión del recurso y hay deficiencias en cuanto a la normativa de la protección de la calidad del agua. El principal instrumento que el Código de Aguas introduce para fomentar el uso múltiple del agua y abordar la problemática de relaciones intersectoriales —derechos de aprovechamiento no consuntivo— no ha funcionado como se esperaba. En consecuencia, el Código de Aguas ha demostrado vacíos importantes para facilitar la gestión del uso múltiple del agua. La DGA tiene débiles atribuciones regulatorias y no puede resolver la mayoría de los conflictos por el agua, los que deben ser resueltos por las organizaciones de usuarios o por los tribunales ordinarios de justicia, pero ambos no han podido responder bien a este desafío. A pesar de que históricamente Chile ha reconocido la importancia de la cuenca hidrográfica, éstas no se consideran unidades de gestión de los recursos hídricos y no existen entidades para la gestión integral del agua por cuenca equivalentes a las existentes en Francia y España. El Código de Aguas fortalece las organizaciones de usuarios y les entrega una gran autonomía. Prácticamente todas las decisiones de gestión relacionadas con el uso del agua están en manos de los usuarios y sus organizaciones. Éstas se encargan de administrar y distribuir las aguas a que tienen derecho sus miembros, y de explotar y conservar las obras de aprovechamiento común. Las organizaciones de usuarios del agua poseen actualmente la mayor parte de las obras de riego

y drenaje. Los propios usuarios han construido muchas de ellas y las instalaciones construidas con fondos públicos se traspasan ulteriormente a los regantes para su explotación y mantenimiento. Sin embargo, estas organizaciones no han logrado avanzar más allá de su limitado ámbito tradicional: ni en la resolución de conflictos intersectoriales, ni en el manejo integral de la oferta de agua superficial y subterránea, ni en el manejo de las cuencas de captación (tarea encargada a la Corporación Nacional Forestal (CONAF)), ni en el control de evacuación y tratamiento de aguas utilizadas y mucho menos en tratar el tema ambiental en forma holística (Dourojeanni, 1995). En general, casi no han cambiado desde el siglo XIX, a pesar de existir hoy situaciones muy diferentes en los ríos, y muchas de ellas enfrentan serios problemas (Puig, 1998). El Código de Aguas considera el agua sobre todo un bien económico, pero el único instrumento económico que consagra es el mercado del agua. No hay ni cobros por el uso del agua, ni impuestos específicamente vinculados al agua, ni pagos por descargas de aguas servidas. En general, puede decirse que existe una gratuidad en la mantención o tenencia del recurso, en su uso, y en la generación de efectos externos. Los derechos de agua. Conviene distinguir dos grupos de normas, a saber: las normas estructurales, que determinan la estabilidad y la flexibilidad de los derechos que se entregan a los agentes económicos sobre las aguas y tienen por objetivo asegurar la inversión privada en el desarrollo del potencial económico del recurso; y las normas regulatorias, que reflejan las características físicas, químicas y biológicas del recurso y tienen por objetivo asegurar el uso eficiente y ordenado del agua y posibilitar su adecuado control en función de objetivos económicos, ambientales y sociales (véase CEPAL, 1995a). El desafío es encontrar el balance adecuado entre las normas estructurales y regulatorias. Por un lado, las normas estructurales no deben resultar en monopolios, especulación o deterioros sociales y ambientales, mientras que por el otro, las regulatorias no deben ahogar el sistema económico ni perpetuar los patrones de uso anticuado que se oponen a la asignación eficiente de los recursos hídricos. El sistema de derechos de agua establecido en virtud del Código de Aguas está fuertemente desbalanceado en favor de la protección de derechos de propiedad sobre la concesión del uso del agua —que en Chile, por la forma de otorgamiento que se hace de dicha concesión se convierte en la práctica en un derecho de propiedad del agua— y en perjuicio de las normas regulatorias. Conforme al Código de Aguas, las aguas son bienes nacionales de uso público y se otorga a los particulares el derecho de aprovechamiento de ellas en conformidad a las disposiciones del Código (artículo 5). No obstante, tanto los derechos concedidos por el Estado como reconocidos por éste gozan de una amplia y fuerte protección y están amparados por las garantías constitucionales respecto del derecho de propiedad. En el artículo 24 de la Constitución Política de Chile se declara que “Los derechos de los particulares sobre las aguas, reconocidos o constituidos en conformidad a la ley, otorgarán a sus titulares la propiedad sobre ellos”. Es un caso único en los países de la región en que se menciona específicamente en la constitución esta disposición y del cual se acogen, obviamente, los opositores a cualquier modificación del Código de Aguas que poseen estos derechos. Es una limitación extremadamente seria. El Código de Aguas consagra además una total y permanente libertad para el uso del agua a que se tiene derecho, pudiendo los titulares de los derechos de agua, entre otras cosas: (i) usarlos o no, y destinarlos a las finalidades o tipos de uso que deseen; (ii) transferirlos, en forma separada

de la tierra, para utilizarlos en cualquier otro sitio; y (iii) comercializarlos a través de negociaciones típicas de mercado (vender, arrendar, hipotecar, etc.). Todas estas concesiones se otorgan con pocas y débiles normas regulatorias: (i) la DGA tiene facultades muy limitadas y está obligada a otorgar derechos a nuevos peticionarios bajo la condición de que la solicitud sea legalmente procedente, se constate técnicamente que existen recursos de aguas disponibles y no se afecten los derechos de terceros; (ii) los titulares de derechos no están obligados a utilizar efectivamente los caudales a que tienen derechos, ni a construir las obras de aprovechamiento, y no están sujetos a ningún impuesto, tarifa o cobro por la titularidad del derecho o el uso de las aguas; (iii) no hay prioridades ni preferencias para asignar el uso del agua, ni normas expresas sobre requerimientos ecológicos; (iv) la transferencia, transmisión y adquisición o pérdida por prescripción de los derechos agua se regula por el Código Civil, en todo lo que no esté previsto por el Código de Aguas (artículo 21); y (v) el dominio sobre los derechos de aprovechamiento no puede extinguirse sino por las causas y en la forma establecidas en el derecho común (artículo 129). Con la excepción del Código de Aguas y de unas propuestas de ley de aguas que se han elaborado para algunos países de la región, inspiradas en el sistema chileno, no hay ningún país prácticamente en el mundo en el que los derechos de agua se entreguen incondicionados (CEPAL, 1995a). Los elementos regulatorios más importantes de la legislación de aguas tienden a asegurar el uso efectivo y beneficioso del recurso, a proteger su base, tanto en calidad como en cantidad y a prevenir la transferencia de externalidades negativas entre los usuarios del recurso. El desequilibrio fundamental de la estructura del sistema de derechos de agua establecido en virtud del Código de Aguas tiene varios efectos negativos: (i) fomenta la especulación y el acaparamiento, afecta el desarrollo regional, promueve una transferencia de un bien público de alta importancia económica, social, ambiental y estratégica a particulares —muy a menudo sin ninguna contrapartida de corto o mediano plazo en lo que al incremento de la actividad económica se refiere—, los que podrán lucrar con ella, sin que mientras tanto hayan tenido que pagar o arriesgar nada, permite el uso de los derechos de agua para ejercer un poder de mercado en los mercados de productos y servicios de los que el agua es un insumo y “ha dado lugar a la aparición de un fuerte monopolio con gran influencia política” (Solanes, 1997) y además “se han producido importantes efectos para la base de recursos, los terceros y el medio ambiente”; y (ii) impide introducir modificaciones en el Código de Aguas y tiene como resultado que la oposición a su modificación se ha planteado en términos ideológicos o muy generales. Los mercados del agua. La adopción de un criterio de mercado para la asignación del agua en Chile ha despertado gran interés en todo el mundo, aunque todavía casi no se ha hecho un análisis económico serio de la experiencia chilena: “hasta ahora, … no se ha comprobado, no ha habido ningún estudio serio en que se haya probado la eficiencia del mercado de agua” (Vergara, 1993). Las conclusiones de los pocos estudios serios que se han efectuado sugieren la importancia de remediar esta carencia (Bauer, 1995; Hearne e Easter, 1995). No cabe duda que se ha escrito mucho más sobre el sistema chileno actual que sobre cualquier sistema previo de asignación del agua adoptado en cualquier otro país latinoamericano. Sin embargo, lamentablemente la abrumadora mayoría de estos estudios son de tipo teórico o político, sin ninguna o con muy pobre sustentación empírica.

Desde que el agua tiene un valor económico su transferencia es un elemento importante para asegurar su optimización económica y por ende, en principio, es recomendable que los países permitan la transferencia de los derechos de agua tanto intra como intersectorialmente. La creación de un mercado del agua ofrece potencialmente muchas ventajas importantes, siendo la principal la mejor asignación del agua desde el punto de vista económico. Las transacciones de mercado ocurren cuando tanto los compradores como los vendedores potenciales perciben que pueden obtenerse beneficios económicos transfiriendo agua a una finalidad, lugar o tiempo de uso en que genera rentabilidades netas más elevadas de las que producen los patrones de uso existentes. Las transferencias ocurren en forma automática siempre que los beneficios netos de una reasignación son positivos hasta que los valores marginales se igualan entre los usuarios, los usos y las ubicaciones del agua. Las transacciones proseguirán hasta que a todos los usuarios les sea indiferente comprar o vender derechos de agua. De este modo los usuarios irán pasando paulatinamente de los usos menos rentables a los más rentables, maximizando así el valor económico obtenido del escaso recurso. La creación de un mercado del agua ofrece otras potenciales ventajas, entre las cuales se puede destacar las siguientes: (i) el mercado fomentará la conservación del agua, su uso más eficiente y el tratamiento de las aguas servidas, y racionalizará el consumo de este recurso; (ii) confrontará —fijando un precio de equilibrio y haciendo tomar conciencia a los participantes actuales y potenciales en el mercado sobre la capacidad de comprar y vender a ese precio si lo desean— a los usuarios del agua con el costo de oportunidad de sus decisiones en materia de uso y transferencia, lo que tendrá muchas consecuencia positivas emanadas del encarecimiento del agua; (iii) proveerá mecanismos para posponer la realización de obras hidráulicas costosas mediante la reasignación de las disponibilidades de agua existentes y ofrecerá un incentivo continuo para la adopción, investigación y desarrollo de tecnologías más avanzadas para la utilización, conservación y producción del agua; y finalmente (iv) ayudará a enfriar algunos de los graves conflictos sobre la asignación del agua, así como entre los intereses ambientales y los usuarios. Por cierto que la medida en que todas estas y otras ventajas se materialicen, depende de la medida en que las características del mercado se aproximen a aquellas del paradigma competitivo. La eficiencia de los mercados competitivos se basa en muchos supuestos restrictivos. Las disfunciones del mercado (externalidades, poder del mercado, etc.) plantean la posibilidad de que una transferencia pueda ser beneficiosa para el comprador y el vendedor, pero ineficiente desde una perspectiva social global. En la medida en que no se cumplan las condiciones del paradigma competitivo, los precios de mercado se desviarán del verdadero costo de oportunidad del agua y, por ende, no transmitirán señales de mercado precisas ni fomentarán las decisiones eficientes para usarla y transferirla. En el caso de las disfunciones del mercado, la teoría económica prescribe que el papel que ha de desempeñar el gobierno consiste en intervenir de forma que las corrija y que restablezca o reponga las condiciones necesarias para implantar nuevamente la eficiencia económica. Como los mercados del agua suelen desviarse considerablemente del modelo competitivo —a causa de la competencia imperfecta, el poder del mercado, los efectos externos de las actividades de mercado, etc.— éstos deben ser regulados por el Estado, como lo comprueba la experiencia de los mercados del agua en el oeste de los Estados Unidos (véase CEPAL, 1995ª, y Lee y Jouravlev, 1998). “El mercado puede, en efecto, ser un buen asignador de los recursos hídricos, pero siempre que se permita que exista un sistema para corregir las distorsiones que la naturaleza

del recurso genera y cumplir así con la función del Estado y de la sociedad civil (incluidos los propios usuarios), de tutelar el interés público y el recurso mismo” (Dourojeanni y Berríos, 1996). Por otro lado, en general, no existe una razón en particular para esperar que aun un mercado competitivo tenga que conducir necesariamente a una asignación equitativa de los recursos hídricos o modificar de una manera positiva la distribución del ingreso. Son generalmente los usuarios con más recursos económicos y mejor acceso al financiamiento —y no necesariamente los que tienen mejor capacidad de destinar el agua al uso de mayor valor— los que compran los derechos de los usuarios con menos poder económico. Esto significa que aun un mercado competitivo puede conducir a la concentración del agua en pocas manos y efectos sociales y culturales negativos, en la medida que los sectores de menores ingresos o los grupos étnicos cuyas culturas se centran en el uso del agua transfieren sus derechos a los sectores con más poder económico y con poder de realizar inversiones de alta rentabilidad a corto plazo como en la minería. Si la equidad y otros valores colectivos, públicos o sociales destacados relacionados con el uso del agua son parte importante de las políticas de recursos hídricos, habría que optar por cierta regulación gubernamental. El Código de Aguas adolece de importantes limitaciones en estos aspectos. Al no condicionar los derechos a usos efectivos y beneficiosos o adoptar medidas alternativas, ha fomentado la especulación y el acaparamiento, facilitado el manejo de los derechos de agua como un instrumento de competencia económica desleal y permitido su uso para ejercer un poder de mercado en los mercados de productos y servicios de los que el agua es un insumo. Aunque el Código de Aguas marginalmente se refiere a la regulación de algunos efectos externos (“derechos de terceros”), ésta es sumamente débil y poco eficiente: “Esto no está regulado en la legislación de aguas, la que no establece ni una sola línea ni un solo artículo en relación a los ‘efectos colaterales’ de la transferencia. No existe una ‘regulación’ de las transferencias de los derechos de aguas” (Vergara, 1998b). Como el mercado del agua es el único instrumento económico que consagra el Código de Aguas, se apuesta prácticamente toda la eficiencia en el uso del agua, así como la resolución de conflictos intersectoriales, y el logro de otros objetivos de gestión del recurso, al mercado. Sin embargo, el mercado ha sido muy inactivo: “La idea original del legislador, de suponer un mercado de aguas fluido, a través del cual se realizaría la asignación, en la práctica no ha sucedido” (Lagos, 1997). En general, la baja actividad del mercado del agua en Chile es poco sorprendente dado que estudios, tanto teóricos como empíricos, de mercados del agua sugieren que éstos, afuera de ciertas áreas geográficas con características muy especiales, tienden a ser relativamente pequeños o estrechos. La lección principal para otros países es que las leyes de agua no deben limitarse a un sólo instrumento de gestión por atractivo o eficiente que sea, sino que deben ofrecer una amplia y variada gama de instrumentos de diversa índole. El establecimiento de los mercados del agua demanda a su vez nuevas competencias y actitudes de parte de la administración pública, los sistemas judiciales y los usuarios del agua, así como inversiones en los sistemas adecuados de administración, vigilancia, control y seguimiento, de información y datos sobre los recursos hídricos y de catastro, registro y regularización de los derechos de agua, y tal vez en mejorar los sistemas de almacenamiento, distribución, transporte y medición del recurso. En suma, “los requisitos previos necesarios para la existencia de un

mercado del agua viable son los mismos que se necesitan para una gestión adecuada del agua” (Simpson, 1994). La implementación de un sistema de mercados del agua sin estos requisitos resultará eventualmente en serios problemas y conflictos sociales, ambientales y económicos. En la práctica el mercado del agua en Chile ha demostrado su vulnerabilidad en estos aspectos, ya que: (i) el sistema institucional de administración de los recursos hídricos adolece de importantes debilidades; (ii) la información disponible es muy escasa, fragmentada y dispersa y presenta serios problemas de calidad y confiabilidad; (iii) existen muchísimos derechos no regularizados, no inscritos en registro ni en catastro público alguno y cuyas características esenciales resulta difícil de constatar; (iv) el sistema judicial chileno ha sido lento e ineficaz; y (v) la infraestructura disponible es rígida e inadecuada. “A primera vista, nos da la impresión de que se estableció este libre mercado, pero no se hicieron todos los arreglos institucionales previos y necesarios para que el mercado funcionara adecuadamente” (Vergara,1998b). La experiencia chilena con los intentos de modificar el Código de Aguas, así como los resultados de su implementación, sugieren que aunque los cambios en la legislación hídrica pueden introducirse sin mayores dilaciones, puede ser difícil y oneroso, o imposible, revertir la situación creada. Si surge una situación inconveniente, el Gobierno podría verse obligado a recomprar los derechos, una empresa compleja y de costo prohibitivo, o expropiarlos, lo que tiende a ser políticamente impracticable y, de lograrse, podría minar la confianza de los inversionistas en la economía. Esto significa que la decisión de legislar sobre recursos hídricos debe tomar en cuenta que los cambios a introducir pueden resultar esencialmente irreversibles (Dourojeanni y Berríos, 1996). La gestión de los recursos hídricos debe ser adaptable y dinámica, es decir, debe tratar de aprender de la experiencia. Si se esperan resultados sorpresivos o si no se puede estar seguro de que el contenido de una nueva ley va a alcanzar plenamente las metas esperadas, tal vez los cambios más radicales, como por ejemplo la entrega de derechos de agua incondicionados o con pocas condiciones, la eliminación de ciertas facultades de la autoridad administradora del recurso, la introducción de la comercialización de derechos de agua, etc. deberían realizarse dentro de una cierta escala bajo supervisión reguladora, a fin de minimizar la posibilidad de resultados adversos irreversibles. Conforme a este criterio, un proceso evolutivo lento podría ser más bien una ventaja que una desventaja. En España, por ejemplo, se ha propuesto que “la reforma que habría de perseguirse en materia de autorización de intercambios de aguas debería proyectarse a través de planes piloto en zonas y cuencas que voluntariamente, quizás con alguna recompensa económica, quieran implantar políticas novedosas. Es improbable que un cuerpo legislativo, pese a ser redactado con el máximo rigor y competencia técnica, pueda acertar a la primera a regular sin fricciones los intercambios de aguas” (Garrido, 1998). El análisis efectuado en el presente documento permite arribar a las siguientes observaciones: (i) los sistemas hídricos y de gestión de los mismos deben responder a las características tanto físicas como culturales, sociales, económicas y ecológicas de cada región de un país y de sus cuencas hidrográficas en particular (nacionales y transfronterizas); (ii) las ideologías vinculadas a las políticas económicas y sociales deben considerar las características anteriormente señaladas; (iii) la gestión del agua es equivalente a la gestión de conflictos entre los mismos usuarios y entre los usuarios y el ambiente; (iv) para garantizar la equidad social, ambiental y económica hay un conjunto de reglas de juego que deben respetarse; (v) es necesario crear

mecanismos de prevención y solución de conflictos tales como de conciliación, de concertación y otras negociaciones similares, tendientes a evitar pesados y demorosos procedimientos judiciales; (vi) dada la heterogeneidad de orígenes de conflicto es fundamental que en cada sistema hídrico o cuenca exista la posibilidad de solucionar dichas situaciones con la flexibilidad necesaria y respetando el marco general de la ley; (vii) la forma idónea para enfrentar estos conflictos es disponer de sistemas de gestión de recursos hídricos por cuencas para la toma de decisiones acorde con cada situación; (viii) en general, la legislación hídrica debe poner mayor énfasis en medidas de prevención y resolución de conflictos que en el castigo y en la búsqueda de responsables; y (ix) el mercado del agua y cualquier otra opción para asignar con eficacia los recursos hídricos para fines de uso múltiple funcionará mejor en la medida en que se cuente con estas condiciones básicas. En el documento principal se analizan: (i) algunos de los problemas más importantes que la aplicación del Código de Aguas ha generado, incluyendo los relacionados con la asignación original de derechos de agua y las externalidades en la constitución de nuevos derechos así como en las transferencias de derechos existentes; (ii) los factores que explican la dinámica del mercado del agua y sus efectos; y (iii) un resumen de algunos logros y limitaciones del Código. Estos tres aspectos ciertamente no agotan los temas a ser tratados con relación al Código de Aguas los cuales se espera abordar a futuro, tales como el tema de la institucionalidad requerida para la gestión de los recursos hídricos, la necesidad de crear entidades de agua a nivel de cuencas, el manejo conjunto del agua superficial y subterránea y muchos otros. BIBLIOGRAFÍA Bauer, Carl J. (1995), Against the current? Privatization, markets, and the state in water rights: Chile, 1979-1993, Berkeley, California, University of California. Brzovic, Francisco (1998), “Situaciones de conflicto o problemas que pueden asociarse a la gestión actual de los recursos hídricos”, Formulación de bases para planes directores de gestión integrada de recursos hídricos. Taller de concertación institucional. Documentos de referencia, Programa de Desarrollo Sustentable, Centro de Análisis de Políticas Públicas, Universidad de Chile y Departamento de Planificación, Dirección General de Aguas, Ministerio de Obras Públicas. CEPAL (Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe) (1995), Mercados de derechos de agua: entorno legal, LC/R.1485, 9 de enero, Santiago de Chile. ________ (1998), Recomendaciones de las reuniones internacionales sobre el agua: de Mar del Plata a París, LC/R.1865, 30 de octubre, Santiago de Chile. Colegio de Ingenieros de Chile (1997), “Las conclusiones del informe ejecutivo del Colegio de Ingenieros sobre las materias principales que contiene el proyecto de ley que modifica el Código de Aguas” en Contenido de sesiones — Cámara de Diputados, legislatura ordinaria 335, sesión 67, 7 de mayo (se encuentra disponible en el sitio de internet http://wwwcam.congreso.cl/boletines/legis334/ses67.zip). Confederación de Canalistas de Chile (1997), “Síntesis de las observaciones formuladas por la Confederación de Canalistas de Chile” en Contenido de sesiones — Cámara de Diputados, legislatura ordinaria 335, sesión 67, 7 de mayo (se encuentra disponible en http://wwwcam.congreso.cl/boletines/legis334/ses67.zip).

Confederación de la Producción y del Comercio (1997), “Documento de la Confederación de la Producción y del Comercio” en Contenido de sesiones — Cámara de Diputados, legislatura ordinaria 335, sesión 67, 7 de mayo (se encuentra disponible en http://wwwcam.congreso.cl/boletines/legis334/ses67.zip). Domper, María de la Luz (1999), “Legislación de Aguas”, El Mercurio, 2 de febrero, Santiago de Chile (se encuentra disponible en http://www.mercurio.cl/990202/e6.html). Dourojeanni, Axel (1995), “Gestión de cuencas hidrográficas: América Latina y Chile”, Anales de la 1a Conferencia Nacional sobre Desarrollo del Riego en Chile, Ministerio de Agricultura, Ministerio de Obras Públicas, Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Agricultura y la Alimentación, Santiago de Chile, febrero. Dourojeanni, Axel y Jorge Berríos (1996), “Eficiencia = mercado = propiedad del agua: una ecuación incompleta”, Actualidad Económica del Perú, N° 177, octubre, Lima, Perú. Figueroa, Luis Simón (1993), “Cambios a la legislación de aguas”, El Mercurio, 21 de enero, Santiago de Chile. Garrido, Alberto (1998), Retos institucionales para la economía del agua en España ante el futuro cambio de ley de aguas y la directiva marco europea sobre política de aguas, Seminario “Institucionalidad y Gestión del Agua” (24 de noviembre) y Jornadas “I Jornadas de Derecho de Aguas” (25 de noviembre), Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Programa de Derecho Administrativo Económico. Hearne, Robert R. y K. William Easter (1995), Water allocation and water markets: an analysis of gains-from-trade in Chile, Technical Paper N° 315, Banco Mundial, Washington, D.C. Lagos, Ricardo (1997), “Exposición del Ministro de Obras Públicas, señor Ricardo Lagos Escobar” en Contenido de sesiones — Cámara de Diputados, legislatura ordinaria 335, sesión 67, 7 de mayo (se encuentra disponible en http://wwwcam.congreso.cl/boletines/legis334/ses67.zip). Lee, Terence R. y Andrei S. Jouravlev (1998), Los precios, la propiedad y los mercados en la asignación del agua, Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), LC/L.1097, octubre, Serie Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo Nº 6, Santiago de Chile. Peña, Humberto (1996), “’Debemos ir a una tarificación general del uso del agua’ (entrevista al Ing. Humberto Peña, Directos General de Aguas)”, Revista de la Sociedad Chilena de Ingeniería Hidráulica, volumen 11, número 1, abril. ________ (1998), Análisis del papel del estado y de los usuarios en la gestión y aprovechamiento de los recursos hídricos en Chile, documento presentado al Taller de la Red Internacional de Organismos de Cuenca (RIOC) "La Participación de los Usuarios en la Gestión y Financiación de los Organismos de Cuenca", París, 20 de marzo (se encuentra disponible en http://www.oieau.fr/ciedd/contributions/atriob/contribution/chile.htm). Peralta, Fernando (1997), “Exposición del señor Fernando Peralta, Presidente de la Confederación Nacional de Canalistas de Chile” en Contenido de sesiones — Cámara de Diputados, legislatura ordinaria 335, sesión 67, 7 de mayo (se encuentra disponible en http://wwwcam.congreso.cl/boletines/legis334/ses67.zip). Pickering de la Fuente, Guillermo (1996), “Necesidad de una política nacional de aguas”, Seminario Internacional Gestión del Recurso Hídrico, Santiago de Chile, diciembre 1996, Ministerio de Obras Públicas, Dirección General de Aguas, Dirección de Riego y Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Agricultura y la Alimentación. Puig, Aurora (1998), El fortalecimiento de las organizaciones de usuarios para una gestión integrada de los recursos hídricos, documento presentado en la Conferencia Internacional "Agua y Desarrollo Sostenible", París, del 19 al 21 de marzo (se encuentra disponible en http://www.oieau.fr/ciedd/contributions/at2/contribution/aurora.htm).

Simpson, Larry D. (1994), “Are ‘water markets’ a viable option?”, Finance and Development, N° 2, junio. Sociedad de Fomento Fabril (1997), “Documento de la Sociedad de Fomento Fabril” en Contenido de sesiones — Cámara de Diputados, legislatura ordinaria 335, sesión 67, 7 de mayo (se encuentra disponible en http://wwwcam.congreso.cl/boletines/legis334/ses67.zip). Solanes, Miguel (1997), “Observaciones de Miguel Solanes, CEPAL — Chile”, Privatización, mercados de agua y derechos de aguas negociables. Seminario sobre instrumentos económicos para la ordenación integrada de recursos hídricos. Anales, Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (BID), mayo, Nº ENV97-101, Washington, D.C. Solanes, Miguel y David Getches (1998), Prácticas recomendables para la elaboración de leyes y regulaciones relacionadas con el recurso hídrico, Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL) y Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (BID), febrero, borrador. Vergara, Alejandro (1993), “Intervención de los regantes mendocinos”, III Convención Nacional de Regantes de Chile. Los Angeles, 5 y 6 de noviembre de 1993, Confederación de Canalistas de Chile, Santiago de Chile. ________ (1998a), “Estatuto jurídico, tipología y problemas actuales de los derechos de aprovechamiento de aguas en especial, de su regularización y catastro”, Estudios Públicos, N° 69, verano, Centro de Estudio Públicos, Santiago de Chile. ________ (1998b), Derecho de aguas, tomo II, Editorial Jurídica de Chile, Santiago de Chile.

Papel de la educación y la concientización para promover la

participación pública La Experiencia de la Universidad de Buenos Aires:

el Trabajo en Redes, Transdisciplina y Participación

"La aspiración conciliación entre la sobrevivencia tanto decontinuarán siendo conPero la gestión de la capacidad de regeneracel mismo capital ecológmañana.

Por consiguientqué tipo de desarrollo vamos a usar para gadesarrollo del hombre y estamos obligados a repmismo sino como un pro

Conferencia Jefes de

Dra. Alicia Fernández Cirelli Lic. Raquel Zabala

al desarrollo sostenible surge como una apuesta por laecología y la economía, como una apuesta por lal hábitat como del habitante. Los recursos naturalessumidos, pues de eso depende el proceso de desarrollo.naturaleza se hará de tal manera que preservará su

ión, en el tiempo y extensión apropiados, para garantizarico de hoy a favor de su uso por las generaciones del

e se trata de redefinir los dos términos de la ecuación: anos estamos refiriendo y qué forma de sustentabilidad

rantizarlo. Esquemáticamente se solicita optar entre elel desarrollo de la riqueza del hombre. En otras palabrasensar los fines del desarrollo, no ya como un fin en sí

ceso que deseamos esté al servicio de los seres humanos” Científica de la III Cumbre Iberoamericana de Estado y de Gobierno – Conclusiones y Recomendaciones

AGUA Y DESARROLLO SOSTENIBLE El agua es el recurso natural básico para la sustentación del hombre e interviene a través del uso múltiple, con frecuencia conflictivo, en todas las etapas de la vida en sociedad. Las necesidades primarias del hombre están centradas en la alimentación, la salud y la educación. Todas ellas están vinculadas, en alguna medida, con la disponibilidad de agua y su conocimiento. Este vital elemento se constituye, por lo tanto, en el centro de las preocupaciones tanto de individuos, como de grupos e instituciones sociales. El manejo y aprovechamiento del agua se relaciona con los otros elementos naturales, con el suelo, con el aire, con la vegetación, con la fauna. No puede ser analizado en forma aislada, es imprescindible visualizar en toda su magnitud y complejidad las diferentes usos y demandas que inciden sobre el recurso para conciliar conflictos, a veces inevitables, y optimizar su manejo en términos de rendimientos sociales. A pesar de ser esta necesidad, en última instancia, de satisfacción individual, no admite sino soluciones sociales y cada vez más interrelacionadas y aun de carácter global, para asegurar el acceso al agua a todos, oportunamente, en la cantidad y calidad necesaria para garantizar la vida. EL ROL DE LA UNIVERSIDAD En la mayor parte de los actuales problemas ambientales y del desarrollo, las ciencias son esenciales para detectar y analizar los problemas, identificar soluciones y asegurar la adopción de directrices de política y acciones adecuadas desde el punto de vista científico. Al mismo tiempo, la complejidad de los problemas hace que los enfoques interdisciplinarios e integrados sean una importante herramienta metodológica. Por un lado, será preciso que las ciencias naturales trasciendan los paradigmas de investigación tradicionales, para aprehender los complejos sistemas naturales de índole regional y planetaria y el funcionamiento de la Tierra en tanto que sistema. Por el otro, para estudiar la interacción entre el desarrollo y el medio ambiente, habrá que recurrir necesariamente tanto a las ciencias naturales como a las sociales, lo que añade otra dimensión a la cooperación interdisciplinaria. A su vez, las propiedades de la totalidad estudiada determinan el carácter del proceso de producción del conocimiento científico y el modo singular de construir el objeto de dicho conocimiento. En esencia las diferencias y las particularidades que tales procesos adquieren a partir de la totalidad definen y caracterizan la investigación transdisciplinaria. La gestión de un recurso multifuncional y escaso como el agua, cuya necesidad es creciente, requiere de profesionales capaces de dirimir y anticipar conflictos intrasectoriales, intersectoriales e intergeneracionales, ya que del uso que nosotros hagamos dependerá la disponibilidad futura del recurso. Estos esfuerzos ponen de manifiesto la ventaja comparativa de la Universidad que integra las actividades de investigación, docencia y extensión, otorgando el marco institucional ideal para desarrollar y fomentar la interacción entre ciencia , educación. y gestión. TRANSDISCIPLINA Al llevar a cabo tareas de investigación en temas ambientales en un contexto de desarrollo, deben aunarse las fuerzas de diferentes disciplinas de las ciencias naturales y

sociales a través del trabajo interdisciplinario, con el objetivo de aportar soluciones a problemas complejos. La problemática de los recurso hídricos es esencialmente transdisciplinaria. La interconexión e interdependencia de los problemas manifestados desde lo concreto permite la confluencia de procesos reflexivos, múltiples y dispares desde la teoría y desde el método, cuyas interrelaciones conforman la estructura de una totalidad articulada. Dicha totalidad es el camino donde los paradigmas formalizados de las distintas disciplinas se encuentran, y en algunos casos fusionan sus dominios, desde una relación de franca interdependencia. La transdisciplinariedad surge, así, a partir de las aproximaciones sucesivas que van problematizando la realidad para permitir una mirada integral de la misma. La dinámica de los proceso físicos, biológicos y sociales son totalmente diferentes y requieren un permanente esfuerzo de articulación conceptual. La fuerte compartimentacion entre distintas disciplinas que tienen que ver con el agua crea innumerables dificultades, superposiciones y fracasos a la hora de la acción. Es necesaria la interrelación de los objetos conceptuales de cada disciplina (intra-disciplina) entre sí para generar nuevos objetos conceptuales (inter-disciplina). Nuevas interrelaciones en espacios complejos de razones múltiples, crean a su vez, un enfoque superador (trans-disciplina) que se revierte y retroactúa en los estados y objetos conceptuales anteriores. EL TRABAJO EN REDES Puede comprobarse la importancia de la decisión de unificar esfuerzos para reforzar y complementar el potencial de trabajo disponible, a fin de ser más fructíferos en las distintas ramas del avance del conocimiento, y más eficientes en la transferencia de esos conocimientos hacia la sociedad. El aprovechamiento y gestión de recursos hídricos requiere de un enfoque de varias disciplinas con participación de múltiples actores. Para ello debe forjarse una estrecha cooperación transversal entre sectores y disciplinas, y entre organismos sectoriales y departamentos dentro de los organismos. La fijación de objetivos es de hecho un resultado final del funcionamiento total del sistema. La idea es manejar en forma efectiva esas realidades en la práctica organizacional: El paradigma de organización para lograrlo no es ya la estructura jerárquica y piramidal, sino la configuración de redes que atraviesan límites institucionales y se extienden más allá de las fronteras políticas. Se trata de que en esas redes se desarrollen en forma creciente todas las sinergias posibles entre las entidades componentes. Los objetivos no se logran en forma aislada; necesitan que otras entidades marchen en direcciones semejantes, porque la naturaleza y amplitud de los objetivos requieren de un concurso multiinstitucional. Representan también una contribución para el avance hacia la formación de bases de datos consolidadas de especialistas y expertos en los diferentes temas, y del conocimiento de la demanda social en cuanto a investigaciones y desarrollos tecnológicos específicos . Por otra parte, permiten evitar la duplicación de esfuerzos, y aumentar la capacidad de trabajo en común, con el consiguiente beneficio en la planificación de recursos económicos, físicos y humanos. Los integrantes de la comunidad universitaria en general se ven beneficiados por la posibilidad de interacción entre sí y por las posibilidades de consulta con expertos. Los miembros de organizaciones sociales acceden más fácilmente a la información disponible y pueden plantear con mayor efectividad la demanda social para la investigación y el desarrollo tecnológico en el seno de las universidades.

Las redes son horizontales, con puntos de coordinación instrumentales que puede aportar los organismos o instituciones especializadas en la problemática específica en su conjunto, pero su base de cohesión no es la jerarquía sino la identificación de sinergias. El medio académico y de investigación de la región reúne potencialidades importantes para este tipo de trabajo. Es posible identificar en el marco de una red, proyectos comunes en campos críticos. El trabajo en red se transforma en el instrumento indispensable para ejercitar una visión sistémica para cada acción con referencia a los modelos de desarrollo sostenible, con un abordaje holístico de la realidad. Una visión compartida, transdisciplinaria y operativa, que permite reflexionar y accionar sobre los problemas hídricos, posibilitará la construcción y reconstrucción de una cultura hídrica conducente hacia la viabilidad y sustentabilidad. RELACIONES CON EL ENTORNO El desempeño de la Universidad acorde a los criterios explicitados requiere el diseño de estrategias de inclusión en un entorno que no sólo condiciona y limita sus posibilidades de acción, sino que presenta niveles de complejidad creciente y acontecimientos inéditos que requieren la instrumentación de nuevos recursos y el desarrollo de capacidades no habituales en el ámbito académico. Es preciso tener en cuenta las transformaciones que definen el nuevo escenario en el que la Universidad actúa, en el cual el proceso de globalización ha cambiado las bases del poder político propio del concepto tradicional del Estado Nación y ha provocado la disgregación de las líneas de mando del sistema en un proceso abierto, interactivo y socialmente disperso. En este sistema de múltiples actores mutuamente involucrados, se replantea el espacio que se le atribuye a las diferentes organizaciones con una flexibilidad tal que no permite poner límites rígidos o plenamente definidos. El análisis conceptual de este fenómeno responde a la necesidad de teorizar de algún modo acerca de las nuevas condiciones para la producción del conocimiento, y en las cuales las capacidades y productos científicos se tornan más ubicuos y heterogéneos. Supone que la investigación se oriente no sólo por las preguntas que hacen los investigadores, sino que se de cabida también a las preguntas de la sociedad. Supone desestimular la segmentación (característica de la actividad científica) y favorecer la interdisciplinariedad y la interinstitucionalidad, tanto en el plano nacional como en el plano de la cooperación internacional, condiciones imprescindibles para poder abordar los temas y problemas de hoy, cada vez más complejos. Al mismo tiempo que el entorno ofrece la más variada gama de posibilidades y demandas, las oportunidades y los procesos no se estructuran en una configuración secuencial o sincrónica. Lo previsible son las asincronías y las crisis. En este escenario y para poder responder a las demandas sin perder identidad, las instituciones y en general todos los actores del sistema, como lo es la Universidad, deben tener la capacidad de definir y redefinir sus estrategias y sus alianzas. Insertada en la realidad social, capaz de interactuar con los diversos actores que la conforman para trazar objetivos genuinamente colectivos, dándole sentido de dirección, la vigencia de la Universidad como la del Estado pasa por su transformación. Esta transformación institucional está planteando un cambio de las estructuras y funciones a la luz de la redefinición de lo público y lo privado así como de la relación entre ambos. Para contrarrestar los riesgos de la atomización, superposición y polarización en esa trama de interacciones individuales y grupales es imprescindible la presencia de otra capacidad fundamental: la de ejercer el control que preserve el ámbito y la identidad

institucional. La Universidad no puede eludir la incorporación de los valores sociales y culturales en el cumplimiento de sus funciones de docencia, investigación y extensión definidas en el contexto social donde se inserta. LA PARTICIPACIÓN NECESARIA Y LA NECESIDAD DE LA PARTICIPACIÓN La cuencas hidrográficas en las que el recurso hídrico es el elemento unificador, resultan ser el espacio geográfico donde los procesos de participación, integración y desarrollo habrán de localizarse. De este modo el agua considerada a través de una cuenca hídrica constituye el eje para el desarrollo regional o subregional. Las propuestas de opciones de gestión del uso múltiple del agua en cuencas, con participación de los actores estatales, privados y de la sociedad civil, tienen como meta establecer mecanismos de gestión participativa y permanente para resolver conflictos heredados, solucionar conflictos actuales y prevenir conflictos futuros. El desafío mayor no está en la complejidad técnica de los sistemas hídricos sino en la gobernabilidad y articulación que debe existir entre los múltiples actores que intervienen en la gestión del agua. De esta manera el agua como elemento vital, está profundamente ligada a las condiciones de aparición, existencia y continuidad de una cultura democrática. Cada actor interactúa socialmente conforme a sus intereses particulares en un marco institucional consensuado de derecho, que articula legítimamente sus peticiones, sin discriminaciones. De ese modo se constituye la conciencia de sujetos sociales y de pertenencia e identidad que legitima el lugar de sus intereses particulares. La generación de conocimientos en el tema requiere también actividades que sean capaces de producir un activo intercambio entre el sistema científico-tecnológico y el educativo formal, manteniendo un sistema interactivo para la difusión de la información y el conocimiento a través de la trama diversa y plural de la sociedad. Instruir a los ciudadanos en los problemas relativos al medio ambiente y al desarrollo sostenible induce a cambios de comportamiento y propicia una opinión pública más consciente, e involucrada. La Universidad desempeña un papel fundamental al proporcionar un contenido educativo objetivo y equilibrado, y al informar sobre los avances de la ciencia a los tomadores de decisiones y al público en general. En este sentido, la Universidad aparece como un actor destacado y un viabilizador fundamental de los objetivos perseguidos. LA EXPERIENCIA: AVANCES, RESULTADOS, PERSPECTIVAS De acuerdo al marco conceptual definido anteriormente, la Universidad de Buenos Aires ha desarrollado un proceso de reacomodamiento a las nuevas circunstancias, provocando que, a menudo, se hayan generado mecanismos ad hoc, para poder afrontar la transición y dar lugar a la formación y fortalecimiento de las capacidades institucionales exigidas; por ello las estructuras y mecanismos reales difieren en algunos aspectos de los formalmente establecidos La UBA ha asumido el apoyo de la investigación científica y tecnológica, y la promoción de actividades intersectoriales tratando de superar los esquemas rígidos de las disciplinas. Es así que se dispone de una base firme para definir con rigor la estrategia con relación a la temática de los recursos naturales, y en particular de los recursos hídricos, en las mejores condiciones posibles acorde al objetivo de un desarrollo sostenible. En este sentido se realizan esfuerzos importantes para definir la

mejor manera de formar profesionales capacitados para afrontar las diversas actividades y problemáticas, y para llevar a cabo proyectos de investigación que se orienten a la obtención del conocimiento para la solución de problemas concretos. Con estos mismos criterios se han estructurado cursos, fundamentalmente de posgrado, con la integración de varias disciplinas. La problemática del agua es un claro ejemplo de la forma en que se ha trabajado durante los últimos años, lográndose la vinculación dentro de la UBA de todos los grupos de investigación relacionados directa o indirectamente con la temática del agua. Esta forma de vinculación y convergencia responde a las nuevas configuraciones organizacionales de la investigación que supera las tradicionales estructuras piramidales. Entre los logros y avances realizados se encuentra la concreción de proyectos integrados, transdisciplinarios, de investigación, que incluyen la definición de las unidades territoriales con el criterio de cuencas hídricas, y la consideración de la participación de los usuarios. Asimismo se completa el círculo del conocimiento práctico con las actividades de extensión y las experiencias de participación comunitaria. Un caso concreto de aplicación se describe a través de la ponencia “Estrategias educativas para la gestión integrada del recurso hídrico en comunidades rurales de la pradera pampeana de la República Argentina”. Consciente de la inserción de la UBA en un marco globalizado, y partiendo desde lo local, se han ido estableciendo los mecanismos adecuados que garanticen la necesaria relación entre la universidad y el sistema cientifico-tecnológico nacional y regional. El objetivo primordial es establecer mecanismos de coordinación y vinculación que permitan la convergencia y la coordinación de esfuerzos, intereses y propósitos. En el ámbito nacional resulta sumamente importante la interacción regular con las restantes universidades del país, fundamentalmente públicas, como también con los institutos de investigación del Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas, y otros centros que nuclean las actividades de investigación y desarrollo. Los avances logrados en este sentido se han verificado en el relevamiento actualizado de potencialidades y la identificación de posibilidades de conexiones. De esta manera se asegura la presencia de la UBA en todo el ámbito geográfico del país, y que a través de estas redes de contacto todos los componentes conozcan y cuenten con la información acerca de las disponibilidades existentes en cada ámbito disciplinario. En relación con los recursos hídricos, este tipo de vinculación y coordinación ha sido particularmente intenso con las universidades nacionales que forman parte de la Asociación de Universidades del Grupo Montevideo, y en particular entre los miembros del Comité Académico Aguas. Asimismo existe una referencia permanente con los organismos de gestión tanto en el área de ciencia y técnica como en el de recursos naturales. El Plan Plurianual de Ciencia y Técnica formulado a nivel nacional reconoce que no existe una auténtica estrategia de desarrollo cuando se ignora la variable ambiental, por lo que se ha establecido una agenda con la definición de un marco referencial e integrador acorde con una concepción holística del ambiente y del desarrollo sustentable. La UBA registra una variada experiencia de cooperación bilateral en el ámbito regional que ha conformado su plataforma de lanzamiento hacia otras iniciativas más complejas. Resulta particularmente interesante el espacio de colaboración subregional específico establecido entre los países que conforman el Mercosur. Se trata de la ya mencionada Asociación de Universidades Grupo Montevideo (AUGM), que está conformada por 15 universidades públicas de los países miembros del Mercosur.

Pertenecen asimismo a países de la Cuenca del Río de la Plata, que es una de las mayores del mundo. Abarca una superficie de 3.100.000 km2., y se extiende por los territorios de Argentina, Brasil, Bolivia, Paraguay y Uruguay. La unión de las universidades de la AUGM, resulta el ámbito idóneo para trabajar en proyectos de interés regional. Las actividades de la Asociación se organizan a través de una serie de Núcleos Disciplinarios y de Comités Académicos, estos últimos caracterizados por abarcar temáticas interdisciplinarias. En 1993 se creó el Comité Académico Aguas cuya coordinación ejerce la Universidad de Buenos Aires a partir de 1995. Gracias a la variedad de especialidades que aportan cada uno de los miembros del Comité, se ve promovida la cooperación interdisciplinaria construida sobre la fortaleza de las diferentes instituciones, aprovechando al máximo la complementariedad y sinergia de los componentes. Los logros y avances son particularmente destacables. Con un importante potencial disponible y respetando al mismo tiempo la especificidad e independencia de cada uno de los miembros, se han concretado acciones integradas, y el surgimiento de subredes temáticas, tales como las de calidad de agua en el Mercosur, impacto de actividades agropecuarias en el recurso hídrico, y salinización de acuíferos costeros por intrusión marina. Las acciones más relevantes se refieren a investigaciones, cursos de posgrado, publicaciones conjuntas y la organización de eventos nacionales e internacionales de calificado nivel y con una exitosa convocatoria. Es de hacer notar no sólo la participación de instituciones y organismos de los distintos países de la región, sino también la vinculación con organizaciones y redes internacionales. Otro cometido de la UBA que resulta de particular relevancia destacar, ha sido la elaboración del Estudio Prospectivo en el Área de Aprovechamiento y Gestión de Recursos Hídricos en la región, encomendado por el CYTED (Programa Iberoamericano de Ciencia y Tecnología para el Desarrollo), para determinar la eventual apertura de un nuevo subprograma. Las actividades realizadas para llevar a cabo el Estudio Prospectivo y evaluar correctamente la posibilidad y las condiciones concretas de implementación del subprograma, implicaron un trabajo basado en la convocatoria y vinculación con instituciones académicas, centros de investigación, organismos nacionales, regionales e internacionales relacionados con el tema. Se realizaron contactos institucionales y acuerdos de trabajo conjunto con representantes de diversas entidades y se logró establecer una red de enlaces con un representante por país. La cooperación que se propicia centrada sobre todo en la actividad y coordinación de las instituciones y centros universitarios, permitirá responder a las demandas de investigación requeridas para los proyectos de gestión que están en marcha o las actividades que se llevan a cabo a través de las redes existentes, de modo que se apuntaría a reforzar los puntos débiles y cubrir las áreas vacantes evitando la duplicación de esfuerzos, y optimizando el trabajo y los recursos invertidos. En base al diagnóstico de la situación, se ha propuesto como condición determinante evitar la superposición de actividades. Implica asimismo la complementación, colaboración y compatibilización con los organismos, centros e instituciones que trabajan en el tema, con miras a un uso racional y eficiente de los recursos para que el plan de acción se traduzca en un aporte efectivo y oportuno. Como consecuencia de los avances logrados ha quedado establecida una importante red de contactos con universidades que a su vez se han convertido en centro de referencia de su país de origen. Llegados a este punto también han comenzado a plantearse

demandas de capacitación y consultoría, y se han detectado oportunidades para la realización de cursos y proyectos de investigación conjuntos. El empeño puesto y la continuidad sostenida han sido los soportes básicos para cumplir y avanzar en este proceso que ha merecido el reconocimiento no sólo nacional sino también el de los organismos internacionales . A la fecha, se está en condiciones de concretar importantes iniciativas de cooperación , de modo tal que ya se ha comenzado ha trabajar en los nuevos proyectos programados para el período 1999 -2000.

La Universidad de Buenos Aires Frente al Tema del Agua Transdisciplina y Participación

AGUA SOLUCION DE PROBLEMAS EN EL CONTEXTO DE APLICACIÓN

TEMÁTICA COMPLEJA

MULTIDIMENSIONAL

CONOCIMIENTO

TRABAJO INTERDISCIPLINARIO

ENFOQUE INTEGRADO

TRANSDISCIPLINA

ACTORES

PARTICIPACIÓN PROCESO DE COORDINACIÓN

INTERESES COMPROMETIDOS ARTICULACIÓN INTERINSTITUCIONAL

SOLUCIÓN DE CONFLICTOS

VISIÓN PROSPECTIVA

ENTORNO

PLANEAMIENTO ESTRATÉGICO

ESCENARIOS FUTUROS

DISEÑO DE ESTRATEGIAS A CORTO, MEDIANO Y LARGO PLAZO

EL TRABAJO EN REDES

UNIVERSIDAD

Organismo

De gestión

CENTROS I+D

UBA Red AGUASUBA

Comité Aguas AUGM

SUBPROGR. CYTED

AMBITO NACIONAL Organismos Provinciales

CENTRO I + D

UNIVERSIDAD

AMBITO SUBREGIONAL

MERCOSUR ASOCIACION DE UNIVERSIDADES

GRUPO MONTEVIDEO

UNIVERSIDAD

AMBITO REGIONAL

PICTURES

Group of Participants of the Third Inter-American Dial ogue on Water Management

Childrens Festival

Panamá Canal Tour

SPONSORS

DISCLAIMER

The information and ideas expressed by the individual authors, presenters, participants, chairpersons and/or reporters of the various meeting sessions contained in this CD does not necessarily reflect the opinion of CATHALAC, its Governing Board, Directorate, and/or Secretariat.