WORKSHOP ON CLIMATE RELATED WATER CONSTRAINTS IMPLICATIONS ACROSS NORTH AMERICAN BOUNDARIES Mexico City, D.F. March 6, 2009.

WORKSHOP ON CLIMATE RELATED WATER CONSTRAINTS

IMPLICATIONS ACROSS NORTH AMERICAN BOUNDARIES

Mexico City, D.F.March 6, 2009

Water Management During Climate Change

• David J. Eaton, Ph.D.• Bess Harris Jones Centennial Professor of

Natural Resource Policy Studies• Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs• The University of Texas at Austin • Austin, TX 78713-8925• [email protected]

Overview

• Climate change and water availability• Generic options for management changes with

respect to climate change • Trans-boundary water management in North

America – existing rules• Implications of climate change for water

management across North American boundaries • Water management across political boundaries, as if

science and people mattered

Climate Change and Water

• Climate change could lead to• More water• Less water• No change in amount of water• Shift in timing of water• Increased variablity of water

Problem: less certainty of water availability

Responses to Water Uncertainty

• Create and share new water• Share less water• Change the rules?

Create new water

• Reservoirs: Amistad and Falcon• Conservation and reuse: Rio Grande, El Paso • Desalination: El Paso

Share Less Water

• War, peace, negotiation will not resolve water instability

• Prevent disputes by sharing uncertainly

Climate Change Management Options

• New operating rules for reservoir storage (position analysis)

• New operating rules for droughts (position analysis)

• Voluntary sharing of reduced withdrawals• Inter-basin water transfers (rights; water

loans)• Intra-basin water transfers (rights; water

loans)

Trans-boundary Water Management in North America

EXISTING RULES:• Mexico-US• Canada-US

Treaties for Water Management

• Trans-boundary water management in North America is empowered and limited by treaties

• Treaties govern water allocation and water quality for surface and ground waters between sovereign states

• States, provinces, regional institutions and local government have limited roles

• Treaties are not likely to be modified

Mexico-US Water Treaties

• 1906 Rio Grande/Rio Bravo– Water allocation at El Paso/Jarez

• 1944 Mexico-US border rivers– Water allocation in the Colorado river basin– Water allocation in the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo

basin– Water quality in border rivers– Silence on groundwater allocation and quality

Canada-US Water Treaty

• 1909 Treaty• Open as to content• Management by basin

Water Management Practice: Mexico-US

• Surface water allocation• Surface water quality• Groundwater allocation and quality• Water infrastructure investment

Mexico-US Surface Water Allocation

• Each party insists on its water allocation under the treaty• There is insufficient water in the basins to meet the water

allocations, let alone the water needs of the people• Each side declares ‘unusual drought’ on a regular basis to

avoid releases under droughts• Regular circumstance of insufficient water• Water conflicts resolved by rain, not institutions• Each side cooperating in new water investment• Example: new water supply investment improving water

availability to poor along Mexico-Texas Border ($1.5 billion since 1994)

Mexico-US Surface Water Quality Management

• IBWC/CILA responsible for water quality along the border• No joint standards; coordinated unilateral action• Each Mexico-US sewerage or wastewater treatment project

has its own ‘standard’• Mexico/US agreed to invest jointly in border water quality

under NAFTA• $1.5 billion in water supply, water quality, water conservation

along Mexico-Texas border• Improvements in water quality where investment is made

Mexico-US Groundwater Management

• Treaties are silent as to groundwater• Two sides have not sought to establish rules for

groundwater allocation or quality management• Two sides give no indication of interest in

establishing rules• US groundwater rules differ by state• Result: unilateral action• Result: groundwater mining and degradation of

groundwater quality

Implications of Climate Change for Water Management in North America (1)

• It is unlikely that there could be a change in treaty agreements

• Two sides can and will cooperate to improve conditions for surface water supply and surface water quality (e.g. IBWC/CILA Minutes)

• Cooperation takes the form of investment which can and does deliver results

• Groundwater not likely to be addressed unless local communities or states bring parties along

Examples of Mexico-US Local or State Involvement in Bi-national Water Issues

• Informal water group in Juarez-El Paso• Laredo-Nuevo Laredo treatment plant• Border 2012 efforts• BECC/NAD Bank investments• Ten state effort

Implications of Climate Change for Water Management in North America (2)

• Water management under climate change will be the same as water management

• Likely option: coordinated unilateral action and coordinated investment

• Possible option: unilateral action without insight into unintended consequences

• Possible option: local or regional efforts to manage own water resources by co-opting national governments

Process of Water Dispute Prevention

• Transparent and accessible water data and models

• Training in water management models• Narrative elicitation to develop goals and

measures• Multi-party drought management simulations• Voluntary pre-emptive solutions• Exhaustive, responsive, verbatim, public

participation

Narrative :The Idea

Telling a story is an efficient, effective, equitable and rapid way to identify problems and solutions in a river basin

Narrative as Language

• Every human society tells stories• The structure of narrative is common among

people• Stories of different people often have much in

common

A ‘Future’ Water Hypothesis

People from different places with different lives, distinct priorities and strong preferences tell stories that have much in common

Narrative and Dispute Research

• A narrative approach can identify appropriate, consensus, and smart management steps for river basin management

• People may disagree on who is at fault or what goals exist, but can agree on some actions to take

Water Narrative Elements -1

• What are the water problems in the Basin?• What are the causes of these problems?• What could be consequences of failure to

address these problems?• What actions could help prevent or reduce

the harm from problems?

Water Narrative Elements - 2

• What barriers to actions exist that need to be overcome?

• What aids to action exist that can help?• What are the metrics to measure success or

failure after action?• What is the ideal future after actions are

implemented?

Examples of Dispute Prevention

• GMA-9 groundwater in Texas: desired future conditions over 50 years

• Inter-basin water transfer from Colorado River basin to Brazos River basin - with exporting basin gaining water and income

• Water management in the South Saskatchewan basin in Alberta

• Mexico-US experience• Palestinian-Israeli joint narrative

Groundwater Flow in Model Cell

Summary of GMA 9 Stakeholder Narratives

Current Problems

• Some dry wells• Some dry springs• Some contaminated water supplies• Urban encroachment

Causes of Water Problems

• Population growth• Limited water resources • Drought• Legal interpretations on use of groundwater• Limited authority of district

Consequences if No Action

• More dry wells• More dry springs• More water contamination• Litigation

Possible Actions

• Cooperation• Responsible development• Market incentives• Public education• Alternative sources and conservation• Infrastructure investment

Barriers to Action

• Limited resources: money, data, staff, education

• Mistrust • Costly alternatives• Resistance to change• Resistance to regulation

Ideal Outcomes

• Assured water availability for domestic use• Spring flows• Maintenance of groundwater levels

Groundwater Management Area 9-Major Aquifers