Current situation in Southern African International Waters

Current situation in (Southern) African

international waters

Welcome the

Chinese delegation

in South Africa –

you are building on

a strong

foundationMinisters Wang Shucheng and Kasrils,

Dujiangyan 2001

Outline

• An African perspective on water, development and shared rivers

• Southern Africa’s water resources and their use

• Institutions for development and management of shared rivers

• Some key issues and conclusions

An African perspective

• Most countries of sub-Saharan Africa have adequate water resources available at a national level

• Most countries of sub-Saharan Africa use a very small proportion of their available water resources

• Much of Africa’s water is in rivers shared between two or more countries but this is not a major constraint on water resource development

• The location and variability of water resources require significant investment to enable their effective use and Africa lacks the financial resources to develop the infrastructure needed

• Despite the need for infrastructure, the formal focus of water policy in donor-dependent sub-Saharan African countries has been on protection and conservation. This is because they have depended on finance from countries opposed to large infrastructure development

• Africa is now committed to increasing its water use to support development and the arrival of new partners such as Brazil, China and India is changing the political economy of water resource development

Water scarcity?

Volume available{ cubic metre }

{ per person }

{ annually }

Less than 1,400 _ ___ S.Africa, Lesotho, Malawi, Kenya, Rwanda, Eritrea, Burkina Faso Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt

1,400 - 3,200 ______ Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Burundi, Somalia, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Niger, Benin, Togo, Ghana Senegal

3,200 - 7,600 _______ Swaziland, Botswana, Angola, Chad, Cote Ivoire, Mali, Mauritania

7,600 - 23,000 ________ Namibia, Mozambique, Madagascar, Zambia, DR Congo,Cameroon, Guine, Guinea Bissau

23,000 - 530,000 ______ Congo, Gabon, Central African Republic, Eq. Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone

Although

population growth

will also put

pressure on

water security








Water withdrawals in

Africa – a continental

comparison

Total water Withdrawals

withdrawals for agriculture

AFRICA 5% 86%

NAfrica 201%* 85%

SSA 3% 87%

Americas 49%

SAmerica 1.4% 68%

NAmerica 8% 43%

Europe 6% 29%

Asia 20% 82%

SAsia 56.80% 91%

E Asia 19.90% 64%

SE Asia (mainland) 9.50% 83%

Oceania (Australia & NZealand)

3% 73%

WORLD 9% 70%* North Africa uses more water than is sustainably available from natural sources by drawing on “fossil water”

which is not recharged as well as by producing freshwater through desalination.

Who uses their water?

(Nile countries) WATER

COUNTRY AVAILABLE M3 P/C USE %

Egypt 790 118

Sudan 1880 58

Ethiopia 1680 2

Eritrea 1470 5

Uganda 2470 0

Kenya 930 5

Tanzania 2420 2

Rwanda 610 1

Burundi 2190 2








Much of Africa’s water

is in shared rivers

That is not generally a constraint

Scarcity

versus

“Dependency

ratio”

DEPENDENCY 2012 Renewable/capitaEgypt 96.9

Mauritania 96.5

Niger 89.6

Botswana 80.4

Congo 73.3

Namibia 65.2

Chad 65.1

Gambia 62.5

Benin 61.0

Somalia 59.2

Eritrea 55.6

Mozambique 53.8

Guinea-Bissau 48.4

Ghana 43.1

Swaziland 41.5

Uganda 40.9

Mali 40.0

Zimbabwe 38.7

Senegal 33.5

Kenya 32.6

DR Congo 29.9

Zambia 23.8

Nigeria 22.8

Togo 21.8

Burundi 19.8

Liberia 13.8

South Africa 12.8

Tanzania 12.8

Tunisia 8.7

Malawi 6.6

Côte d'Ivoire 5.3

Cameroon 4.4

Algeria 3.6

CAR 2.4

Angola 0.0

Burkina Faso 0.0

Djibouti 0.0

Equatorial

Guinea 0.0

Ethiopia 0.0

Gabon 0.0

Guinea 0.0

Lesotho 0.0

Libya 0.0

Madagascar 0.0

Morocco 0.0

Rwanda 0.0

Sierra Leone 0.0

SCARCITYM3/cap/yr

7 - 1,400

1,400 - 3,200

3,200 - 7,600

7,600 - 23,000

23,000 - 530,00

Water scarce countries

generally not more

dependent on shared

rivers

Aside from the Nile

and the arid north,

less than 10% of

available water is

used in most major

African rivers and

water regions

Name of the basin or

water regionArea in km2

Natural runoff

(without

irrigation) in

Mm3/yr

Net

irrigation

water use

in Mm3/yr

Total runoff

(with

irrigation) in

Mm3/yr

Irrigation water

use as

percentage of

natural runoff

Central West Coast 714,642 524,636 17 524,619 0.00

Congo River Basin 3,712,787 1,290,086 175 1,289,911 0.01

East Central Coast 1,039,479 113,603 480 113,123 0.42

Indian Ocean Coast 641,821 66,507 1,380 65,127 2.07

Lake Chad Basin 2,416,210 0 603 -603

Limpopo Basin 415518.00 5362 1019 4343 19.00

Madasgacar 601,286 329,696 1,628 328,068 0.49

Mediterranean Coast 571,706 21,982 4,782 17,200 21.75

Niger River Basin 2,136,780 220,332 3,485 216,847 1.58

Nile Basin 3,109,223 63,620 44,233 19,387 69.53

North East Coast 780,854 1,824 1,006 818 55.15

North Interior 5,697,480 0 6,681 -6,681

North West Coast 757,141 19,875 7,055 12,820 35.50

Orange Basin 968605.00 7890 1131 6759 14.33

Rift Valley 641,505 0 776 -776

Senegal River Basin 433,958 15,262 808 14,454 5.29

Shebelli & Juba Basin 805088.00 8083 1328 6755 16.43

South Atlantic Coast 372,734 4,734 887 3,847 18.74

South Interior 876,152 0 31 -31

South West Coast 502,580 50,683 79 50,604 0.16

West Coast 1,436,820 662,667 573 662,094 0.09

Zambezi Basin 1,388,476 107,860 739 107,121 0.69

Total 30,020,845 3,514,702 78,896 3,435,806

Irrigation Use as % of available water:-

0 – 5%

5 - 10%

10- 20%

20% +

The Nile is a unique situation

Downstream, arid Egypt and Sudan depend on green sub-Saharan Africa








Economic

scarcity not

physical

scarcity is

the main

challenge








from:

Muller M, The challenges of

implementing an African water

resource management agenda (in) Africa In Focus Governance in the 21st century, (ed) Kondlo and Ejiogu, HSRC, 2008

(available at:

http://www.hsrcpress.ac.za/product.php?productid=22

83&cat=0&page=1&featured&freedownload=1)

DIMENSION

“PRAGMATIC”

RIO

“PRESCRIPTIVE”

DUBLIN

Economic

Nature of water

Priority of economic instruments

Priority setting

Role of private sector

Characterised as:-

Economic and social good

Economic instruments balanced

by social considerations

Within national economic

development policy

Major role for government,

recognition of private role

Developmental

Economic good

High priority for economic

instruments

Stakeholder participation,

economic instruments

High priority for role of private

sector, limited government

Washington Consensus

Institutional, national

Institutional objectives

Participatory approaches

Governance

Characterised as:-

Importance of national

development strategies

Where there is clear demand

Appropriate institutions

Public administration

Focus on “enabling

environment”

Heavy emphasis on participatory

approaches

Performance based institutions

New Public Management

Institutional, international:

Transboundary approaches

Institutionalisation of global

water

Characterised as:-

Basin specific approaches

United Nations system

Multilateralism continued

River basin organisations

World Water Council outside

inter-governmental domain

Retreat from multilateralism

Environmental

Infrastructure

Decision making

River basin organisation (RBO)

Characterised as:-

Infrastructure development, a

key element

Effective implementation and

coordination required

Manage “in basin context”

Balance needs of people and

environment

“Development” deleted

Emphasis on “full stakeholder

participation”

RBO the most appropriate entity

Ecosystem approach

Competing water

management paradigms: World Summit on Sustainable Development

The differences between Rio and Dublin

Inappropriate donor

policies have

aggravated scarcity

The EU’s Water Framework Directive

returns to nature

• “…. ecological protection should apply to all waters: the central requirement of the

Treaty is that the environment be protected to a high level in its entirety.

• ”… the controls are specified as allowing only a slight departure from the

biological community which would be expected in conditions of minimal

anthropogenic impact.”

Africa’s underdeveloped hydropower - 2004

Major investments made in coal fired power

because of lack of support for regional

hydropower options








In Africa, only 5% of water resources are currently

utilized. AMCOW has set the aspirational target of

raising this proportion to 40% by 2030.

Decisions of the 11th Executive Committee of the

African Ministers Council on Water

(AMCOW), Cairo, 2013

A changing environment:

China’s Involvement in

African Dams

Sudan

The 1250 MW Merowe Dam on the fourth cataract of the Nile is Sudan's biggest hydropower project. The project was funded…

In 2010, the Sudanese government contracted the Chinese company Sinohydro to build the 360 MW Kaibar Dam on the Nile's third …

In 2010, the Sudanese government also contracted two other Chinese companies to build the Shereik Dam on the Nile's fifth cataract, and a hydropower and irrigation …

Zambia

The largest utility in Zambia, Zesco, announced in 2003 that it will contract with Sinohydro for the development of the 660 MW Lower Kafue Gorge Dam. The proposed power station would have a generating capacity of about 750 MW and the estimated cost of US $600 million. Zambia plans

Republic of CongoThe China Exim Bank bankrolled the construction of the 120 MW Imboulou Dam on the Lefini river, a…

In Gabon, a Chinese consortium headed by China National Machinery & Equipment Import & Export Corp signed a deal in September 2006 to invest US$3 billion to mine iron-ore for export to China - the world`s largest producer of steel. The project also includes construction of railways, a port and two hydroelectric dams to be completed within three years.

EthiopiaChinese contractors have built the 300 MW Tekeze hydroelectric dam. …

After the World Bank and many other banks declined to get involved in the Gibe III Sam on the Omo River, China's biggest bank ICBC approved a loan of $500 million for a Chinese … China’s Gezhouba Water and Power Co. is building the 100 MW Amerti-Neshe Dam hydropower dam on the Neshi River. ….

MozambiqueThe China Exim Bank has agreed to finance the proposed MphandaNkuwa Dam on the Zambezi… Chinese funding has also been made available for the Boa Maria Dam on the Pungue

NigeriaChina has expressed interest in a number of dam projects, …. Mambilahydropower dam, which would increase Nigeria’s electricity supply by nearly 4,000 MW, doubling its current capacity.

GhanaChina is building the Bui Dam Project, which is flooding nearly a quarter of the Bui National Park, destroying habitat for rare hippos, forcibly resettling 2,600 people and affecting thousands more. The project could cost ….

The Southern African perspective is similar

Southern Africa

Water scarcity is not

the primary issueVolume available

{ cubic metre }{ per person }

{ annually }

Less than 1,400 _ ___ S.Africa, Lesotho, Malawi

1,400 - 3,200 ______ Zimbabwe, Tanzania

3,200 - 7,600 _______ Swaziland, Botswana, Angola

7,600 - 23,000 ________ Namibia, Mozambique, Madagascar, Zambia, DR Congo

SADC’s water use still very low

COUNTRY

Angola

Botswana

Lesotho

Malawi

Mozambique

Namibia

South Africa

Swaziland

Zambia

Zimbabwe

DRC

AVAILABILITY M3 P/C USE %

10510 0.2

6820 1

1680 2

1400 6

11320 0.3

8810 2

1110 31

4160 18

9630 2

1584 13

23850 0.03

Southern Africa:

also suffers

economic scarcity

Water availability has not constrained development

Country

Water

Availability

South Africa 1110

Malawi 1400

Zimbabwe 1550

Lesotho 1680

Swaziland 4160

Botswana 6820

Namibia 8810

Zambia 9630

Angola 10510

Mozambique 11320

m3/p/yr

Least water

Most water

Source: UN WWDR 2006

Much of

Southern Africa’s

water is in shared

rivers

That is not generally an evident constraint

Scarcity

versus

“Dependency

ratio”

Southern

Africa

DEPENDENCY2012

%

Renewable/

capita

Botswana 80.4

Namibia 65.2

Mozambique 53.8

Swaziland 41.5

Zimbabwe 38.7

DR Congo 29.9

Zambia 23.8

South Africa 12.8

Tanzania 12.8

Malawi 6.6

Angola 0.0

Lesotho 0.0

Madagascar 0.0

SCARCITYM3/cap/yr

7 - 1,400

1,400 - 3,200

3,200 - 7,600

7,600 - 23,000

23,000 - 530,00

Water scarce countries are

less dependent on

shared rivers

Cooperation successful where users can support it

Katse Dam – Lesotho Highlands Water Project

No formal river basin organization was involved(dam owned by Lesotho government, managed by Lesotho Highlands Development Authority, in terms

of bilateral agreement with South Africa whose users fund the project)

Cooperation in water in 2002…

2002: The WSSD WaterDome, birthplace of historical Incomaputo agreement

“Swaziland, Mozambique, and South Africa made water history for the African continent when they signed a water-sharing agreement governing the use of two of their shared rivers. The Interim IncoMaputo Agreement, which involves the Incomati and Maputo rivers, provides significant benefits to all three nations. The agreement immediately unlocked financial support for a major new irrigation development in Swaziland, the Lower Usuthu Smallholder Irrigation Project, which will create direct employment for 10,000 people through the development of over 11,000 hectares, providing much needed poverty relief in this area of otherwise limited economic potential.”

… produces food and livelihoods

LUSIP, Swaziland, in 2010

Transboundary

water management

is part of broader

regional integration

Institutions for transboundary WRD&M

Implications of regional integration for water:-

Cooperation or shared sovereignty?

• Greater regional integration a fundamental political objective for Africa

• To address small economies; lack of complementarities; import dependence

• Structured institutional models failing (e.g. SADC RISDP)

• After 50 years, guiding principles proposed (AfDB) include:-

• Variable geometry, progressive flexible, bottom-up, approach not normative model

• Implications for water:-

• Project i.d. by engagement between interested parties (e.g. inter govt. commissions)

• Greater focus on implementation through bottom-up, practically focused SPVs

• Limited mandate for formal “normative” institutions such as RBOs


• Many architectures for transboundary cooperation and development

• After 2000 amendment, SADC Protocol prescribes no specific architecture

• (East Africa has parallel structures – EAC-LVBC, NBI, CFA)

• (West Africa, French influence, has preference for executive RBOs)

• Institutional architecture should be determined by nature and location of

project and financial and operational requirements

• RBOs (River Basin Organisations) can play specialized roles which should

determine their size and structure

• Strong national institutions are foundation of regional cooperation

Southern Africa’s transboundary issues

• Challenges:

• Orange (Lesotho, South Africa, Namibia, (Botswana?) ) continuing development, will require policy decisions on physical limits

• Limpopo (South Africa, Zimbabwe, Mozambique) and Komati (Swaziland, South Africa, Mozambique) highly developed, reaching physical limits

• Zambezi (Angola, Botswana, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Malawi, Mozambique) could achieve greater efficiencies (+10% ?) in the longer term through coordinated planning and operational coordination

• Okavango conflict between Botswana and Namibia over environmental impact on Delta. Namibia’s needs (2% TARWR) are small compared to climate variability

• Basin approaches not always appropriate due to inter-basin linkages

• Diverse water architecture reflects specific challenges

SADC institutions for transboundary WRD&M

• After 2000 amendment, SADC Protocol prescribes no specific architecture

• Many transboundary architectures, including:-

• Orange:

• Lesotho South Africa Water Commission

• Namibia/SA irrigation

• ORASECOM

• Limpopo, Komati, Maputo

• Mozambique/South Africa JWC

• Swaziland/South Africa JWC

• Limcom

• Komati/Maputo Tripartite Commission

• KOBWA

• Zambezi

• ZRA

• ZAMCOM (etc)

Southern Africa’s transboundary issues

• Advantages:

• SADC protocol in place

• Guides cooperation, institutions not prescribed

• Good examples of cooperation (through SPVs not RBOs)

• (e.g. Lesotho Highlands, Incomaputo/LUSIP, ZRA)

• Approach to regional integration under review

• Emphasis likely on practical “bottom-up” cooperation

• rather than “top-down” institutional structures

Some key issues and conclusions

• Africa’s problems: economic scarcity, weak economies not water conflicts

• Most successful cooperation through ad hoc institutions not RBOs

• Donor policies have hindered development

• African countries are now taking greater responsibility

• Deciding what they need and how to achieve it

• China now has important role

• Must be aware of context and help to avoid mistakes

Thank you!

Is SA a potential predator?

• Costs• Lesotho R2/kl

• Wastewater to Lephalale R20/kl

• Zambesi water R100/kl?

• Desalination and reuse R4/kl and falling

• Water for the economy• Singapore 150kl/person/year

• South Africa 1200 kl/person/year

1890s local springs

1902 Rand Water - Zuurbekom

1923 Vaal Barrage

1938 Vaal Dam

1982 Tugela-Vaal

1998 Lesotho Highlands Phase 1a

2004 Lesotho Highlands Phase 1b

Evolution of Gauteng’s water supply “footprint”

1970s Waste

from

Gauteng

to Crocodile

2010 Waste to

Lephalale &

Limpopo

Next, the Zambezi?!

2020 Lesotho Highlands Phase 2

Integration of Orange/Vaal, Crocodile/Mokolo/Limpopo

Proposed Developments:

Eskom Power Stations

Coal to Liquid Plants

Mokolo Catchment

Crocodile Catchment

Vaal Catchment

Scope, scale and integration

• Functions performed at various physical scales,

• from very local to river basin, countries and regions.

• River basin a useful unit of management, different units are often more appropriate

• Governance and administration must reflect needs, interests and impacts of different users

• Coordination of functions and users described as integrated water resource management (IWRM).

• Contested approaches to IWRM: Africa must include D for infrastructure Development

• greater or lesser emphasis on infrastructure, “soft” management, environmental protection, socio-economic development and participation

• Rio 1992: Agenda 21 – Integrated Water Resources Development and Management;

• Dublin prepcon: IWRM – limited infrastructure

• We use WRD&M and TBWRD&M (water resources development and management)

• Infrastructure development essential to mobilize variable water resources for development

• With appropriate integration of different users, dimensions of water and functions of management

Multiple water resource management functions

• How to harness potential contribution of water to produce development outcomes?

• Requires performance of wide range of technical functions, including:-

• Monitoring of water availability (levels, flows and quality) as well as water uses;

• Assessment and interpretation of monitoring data (for example, to understand how much

water may be reliably taken from a river whose flow varies over and between seasons);

• Regulation of water abstraction and other activities that may affect the resource or other users

(for example, hydropower production or the discharge of waste water);

• Planning of infrastructure and other interventions required to meet users’ future needs;

• Implementation of infrastructure and information projects;

• Operation and maintenance of infrastructure

Functions serve multiple water uses and users

Urban and Industrial use

International and environmental flows

Ecosystem protection

Abstraction infrastructure

Irrigation Flood management

How WRD&M supports economies

Flow

TimeReliable Flow

Reliable Flow

Maximum flood flow

Maximum flood flow

Management and

Infrastructure interventions

Reliable

supplies =

Less risk, more

investment,

greater productivity

Ethiopia: water security and development

Rainfall, GDP and Agricultural GDP

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

year

perc

en

tag

e

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

rainfall variation around the mean

GDP growth

Ag GDP growth

Ethiopia: Rainfall, GDP and Agric. GDP

World Bank

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

year

perc

en

tag

e

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25


GDP growth

Ag GDP growth


-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

year

perc

en

tag

e

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25


GDP growth

Ag GDP growth


World Bank

To achieve water security …

• High level requirements for water security,

investment in:-

• Competent INSTITUTIONS

• Adequate INFORMATION, and

• Required INFRASTRUCTURE

How TBWRD&M supports

Regional integration

ACTIVITIESInstitutions to support:-• Country cooperation agreements• Know resource and its uses• i.d. needs and opportunities• i.d potential projects• Implement and operate projects

OUTPUTSReliable financially and environmentally sustainable water uses

OUTCOMESWater used to support Sustainable Social and Economic Development at national and regional level

GOAL: WRDM supports

Regional development and

integration

Water for

regional

integration :

Possible

Institutional

arrangements

Function Institutional options Comments

Communication Ad hoc committee;

Permanent committee;

Facilitator;

Specialised organization

Many options with little distinction as long

as they are perceived as honest brokers

and not promoting a sectoral agenda

Agreement Meeting of national principals, supported

by one of above

Need to convene and support formal

government participation

Studies for

Resource

characterization

etc.

Ad Hoc or Permanent Committee ,

commissioning consultant review;

RBO, with appropriate tech support for

study management

Joint reviews provide basis for discussion;

needs national information.

Institution needs status to contract

technical work, even if undertaken by

national entities.

Resource

planning

As above Need to collate national inputs on relevant

user sectors

Project i.d. Study management as above; decisions on

implementation of projects will be by

national principals

Project opportunities identified at national

level need comparative review through

objective institutional structure.

Implementation National agencies; or

SPVs; or

RBOs

Even if RBO present, may require an SPV

to implement partner agreements over

cost and benefit sharing

Operation Generic bilateral, National agency/ies,

SPV, RBO

Must reflect location but also provide

oversight and involvement for partners

Resource

monitoring

National agencies; RECs;

National/regional regulator/s; RBO

Require common communication

platform; data collection can remain

national

Water resource related findings

• In general, physical water scarcity is not Africa’s dominant concern

• Apparent water scarcity often due to a lack of financial resources

• Transboundary conflicts: dependence not generally linked to scarcity

• Economic water scarcity can be reduced by infrastructure investment

• Limited financially viability of water resource projects

• Many projects are economically viable – floods and drought mitigation produces significant returns

• Irrigation investments provide livelihoods and benefits for national economies

• Financial viability determines potential for project financing

• payment for private goods provided by multi-purpose investments enhances their viability

• Financial viability challenges aggravated by high cost structures; size of many countries imposes additional transport costs.


• Many architectures for cooperation and development in transboundary rivers

• there is no single institutional architecture that is optimal in all basins

• many different institutional arrangements are already used

• specialized formal River Basin Organisations (RBOs) in which most riparian countries participate

• ad-hoc groups of countries, national structures and local stakeholders

• many effective transboundary investments made by SPVs involving only interested parties rather than RBOs

• Strong national institutions are building blocks for regional water cooperation

• Regional institutions important but TB WRD&M needs effective national institutions

• Support for national WRD&M capabilities contributes directly to enhanced regional cooperation

• Institutions for implementation

• Variety of approaches to implementing investment projects supporting regional integration

• national agencies (particularly where project is in one territory, as Ethiopia’s Gibe III dam)

• bilateral organisations (e.g. ZRA which operates Kariba dam on the Zambezi) and

• SPVs to promote single project (e.g. Rusumo Falls project; Sogakope/Lome pipeline in Volta Basin)

• Architecture determined by nature and location of project and financial arrangements


• The specialized roles of RBOs (River Basin Organisations)

• Little agreement about overall roles, functions or optimal structures for formal RBOs

• West Africa favours formal RBOs, other regions use more SPVs, RBOs may facilitate

• Specialised role for RBOs:

• building trust

• promoting communication and information sharing, and

• supporting cooperation between countries

• These activities can help to identify and promote cooperative investment projects

• The size and structure of formal RBOs

• Structure of formal RBOs should reflect their role

• European RBOs, very small secretariats, most work done by national organisations

• Architecture should be determined by nature and location of project and financial arrangements

Scope, scale and integration

• Functions performed at various physical scales,

• from very local to river basin, countries and regions.

• River basin a useful unit of management, different units are often more appropriate

• Governance and administration must reflect needs, interests and impacts of different users

• Coordination of functions and users described as integrated water resource management (IWRM).

• Contested approaches to IWRM: Africa must include D for infrastructure Development

• greater or lesser emphasis on infrastructure, “soft” management, environmental protection, socio-economic development and participation

• Rio 1992: Agenda 21 – Integrated Water Resources Development and Management;

• Dublin prepcon: IWRM – limited infrastructure

• We use WRD&M and TBWRD&M (water resources development and management)

• Infrastructure development essential to mobilize variable water resources for development

• With appropriate integration of different users, dimensions of water and functions of management

Multiple water resource management functions

• How to harness potential contribution of water to produce development outcomes?

• Requires performance of wide range of technical functions, including:-

• Monitoring of water availability (levels, flows and quality) as well as water uses;

• Assessment and interpretation of monitoring data (for example, to understand how much

water may be reliably taken from a river whose flow varies over and between seasons);

• Regulation of water abstraction and other activities that may affect the resource or other users

(for example, hydropower production or the discharge of waste water);

• Planning of infrastructure and other interventions required to meet users’ future needs;

• Implementation of infrastructure and information projects;

• Operation and maintenance of infrastructure

Functions serve multiple water uses and users

Urban and Industrial use

International and environmental flows

Ecosystem protection

Abstraction infrastructure

Irrigation Flood management

Current situation in Southern African International Waters

Science

available water resources

ofafricas water

water scarcity

fossil water

water security

variability of water

formal focus of water

countries of subsaharanafrica