Transboundary Water Governance - Union Portal - International Union ...

2 downloads 741 Views 8MB Size Report
on-site, reducing sediment in water bodies (wetlands, ponds and lakes, streams, ..... conditions, mangroves can provide a host of ecological goods and services, ...... water-battle-3482548.php (accessed June 4, 2013); and Hawkes, L. (2012).
Transboundary Water Governance – Adaptation to Climate Change

Transboundary Water Governance Adaptation to Climate Change Juan Carlos Sanchez and Joshua Roberts (Eds.)

IUCN Environmental Law Programme Environmental Law Centre Godesberger Allee 108-112 53175 Bonn, Germany Phone: ++ 49 228 / 2692 231 Fax: ++ 49 228 / 2692 250 [email protected] www.iucn.org/law

ELP 75 2014.indd 1

IUCN Environmental Policy and Law Paper No. 75

10.06.14 16:57

Transboundary Water Governance Adaptation to Climate Change

Transboundary Water Governance Adaptation to Climate Change Juan Carlos Sanchez and Joshua Roberts (Eds.)

IUCN Environmental Policy and Law Papers No. 75

The designation of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the material, do not implydesignation the expression of any opinionentities whatsoever the part IUCN, the International The of geographical in thisonbook, andofthe presentation of the Climate material,Initiative do not (IKI) orthe theexpression German Federal Ministrywhatsoever for the Environment, Conservation, Building and Initiative Nuclear imply of any opinion on the partNature of IUCN, the International Climate Safety (BMUB) concerning the legalfor status of any country, territory, or area, orBuilding of its authorities, or (IKI) or the German Federal Ministry the Environment, Nature Conservation, and Nuclear concerning the delimitation of its frontiers Safety (BMUB) concerning the legal statusorofboundaries. any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of IUCN, IKI or BUMB. The expressed in this publication dowith not the necessarily reflect of IUCN, IKIClimate or BMUB. This views publication has been made possible kind support of those the International Initiative (IKI). publication The German Federal Ministry for thewith Environment, Nature of Conservation, Building and Initiative Nuclear This has been made possible the kind support the International Climate Safety (BMUB) supports this initiative on the basis of a decision adopted by the German Bundestag. (IKI). The German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB) initiative on the basis of aindecision adopted bythe the IUCN German Bundestag. Published by: supports this IUCN, Gland, Switzerland collaboration with Environmental Law Centre, Germany Published by: IUCN, Gland,Bonn, Switzerland in collaboration with the IUCN Environmental Law Centre, Bonn, Germany Copyright: © 2014 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Copyright:  ©  2014 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Reproduction of this publication for educational or other noncommercial purposes is authorized without prior permission fromthe copyright Reproduction of this publication for written educational or other noncommercial holder provided the source is fully purposes is authorized without prioracknowledged. written permission fromthe copyright holder provided is fully Reproduction of the thissource publication foracknowledged. resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior writtenfor permission of thecommercial copyright holder. Reproduction of this publication resale or other purposes is prohibited without permission of the(2014). copyright holder. Citation: Sanchez, Juan Carlosprior andwritten Roberts, Joshua (Eds.) Transboundary Water Governance. toJoshua Climate Change, IUCN, Gland, Citation: Sanchez, Juan CarlosAdaptation and Roberts, (Eds.) (2014). Transboundary Switzerland. xx + 284 Adaptation pp. Water Governance. to Climate Change, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. xx + 284 pp. ISBN: 978-2-8317-1660-2 ISBN: 978-2-8317-1660-2 Cover photos: © 2010 Allen Clinton / CARE, © IUCN Mesoamérica, IUCN Photo Library/ © IUCN Hichem Azafzaf, © IUCN Programme/Taco Anema, ©  ©IUCN Juan Cover photos: ©  Mesoamérica, IUCN Water Photo Library/ © Hichem Azafzaf, CarlosProgramme/Taco Sanchez, IUCN-ELC Water Anema, © Juan Carlos Sanchez, IUCN-ELC by: Layout by:

layout & more, Bonn, Germany

by: Printed by:

medienHaus Plump, 53619 Rheinbreitbach, Germany

from: Available from:  IUCN Publications Services Rue Mauverney 28 1196 Gland Switzerland Tel +41 22 999 0000 Tel Fax +41 22 999 0010 Fax [email protected] www.iucn.org/publications

Print

compensated Id-No. 1439399 www.bvdm-online.de

Contents Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv Chapter One Sustaining Ecosystems through Better Water Management for Climate Change Adaptation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1



1.2 The Hydrological Cycle and Freshwater Ecosystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3



1.2.1 Ecosystems and their interconnectedness through the water cycle . . . . . . . . 3



1.2.2 Ecosystem services and human well-being . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8



1.3 The Impacts of Climate Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10



1.3.1 Climate change impacts on water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11



1.3.2 Impacts of climate change on ecosystem services and human well-being . . . 13



1.4 Adaptation to Climate Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16



1.4.1 Building adaptation through ecosystem services and water management . . . 16



1.4.2 Applying the ecosystem approach to Integrated Water Resource Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17



1.5 The Water Governance Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Chapter Two Adaptive Water Governance and the Principles of International Water Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23



2.2 Governance Challenges Associated with Climate Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25



2.2.1 Governing under uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25



2.2.2 Multi-level water governance for climate adaptation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26



2.2.3 Effective public and stakeholder engagement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27



2.2.4 Increasing resilience through the ecosystem approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28



2.3 Adaptive Water Governance and the Principles of International Water Law . . . . . . . . 31



2.3.1 Equitable and reasonable utilisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32



2.3.2 Prevention of significant transboundary harm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40



2.4 Principles of International Environmental Law and their Contribution to Adaptive Water Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43



2.4.1 Sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43



2.4.2 The precautionary principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46



2.4.3 The ecosystem approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48



2.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

v

Chapter Three Cooperative Transboundary Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51



3.2 Strategies for Responding to Climate Change and Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53



3.2.1 Ignoring uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53



3.2.2 Complete contracts approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53



3.2.3 Reducing the effects of climate change uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54



3.2.4 Open-ended approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55



3.3 Cooperative mechanisms components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56



3.3.1 Scope and applicability of cooperative mechanism: the basin approach . . . . 56



3.3.2 Substantive and procedural rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59



3.4 Developing Governance Structures to Implement Cooperative Mechanisms . . . . . . 68



3.4.1 Institutional structure and authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69



3.4.2 Institutional flexibility and agility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72



3.4.3 Stakeholder participation in institutional mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74



3.4.4 Political level of implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75



3.4.5 Formality of the Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76



3.4.6 Financial and other support for institutional mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77



3.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

Chapter Four Stakeholder and Public Participation in Adaptive Water Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81



4.2 Stakeholder and Public Participation in Adaptive Water Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . 82



4.2.1 The role and importance of stakeholder and public participation in climate change adaptation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83



4.2.2 Challenges to stakeholder and public participation in adaptive water governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85



4.3 International Legal Principles on Public Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87



4.3.1 Access to environmental information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88



4.3.2 The right of the public to participate in environmental matters . . . . . . . . . . . . 89



4.3.3 Access to justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91



4.3.4 The right to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92



4.4 Tools for Creating an Enabling Environment for Participatory Adaptive Governance . 94



4.4.1 Legal frameworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95



4.4.2 Institutional mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98



4.4.3 Adaptive knowledge and information management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104



4.4.4 Stakeholder inclusiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108



4.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

vi

Transboundary Water Governance: Adaptation to Climate Change

Chapter Five Adaptation Planning – Views towards Resilience and Up-scaling Success to Enhance Transboundary Water Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113



5.2 Understanding Vulnerability and Resilience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114



5.3 The Management Cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118



5.3.1 Visioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120



5.3.2 Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122



5.3.3 Strategising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126



5.3.4 Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128



5.3.5 Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130



5.3.6 Reflection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132



5.4 Transboundary Institutions in Adaptation Planning – Roles and Challenges . . . . . . . 133



5.4.1 Integrating visions at multiple scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133



5.4.2 The role of transboundary cooperative mechanisms in assessing vulnerability 134



5.4.3 The role of transboundary cooperative mechanisms in developing adaptation strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136



5.4.4 Spatial planning at the basin level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139



5.4.5 Implementation challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140



5.5 A Framework for Up-scaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142



5.5.1 Key aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144

5.6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

Key Messages and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 Case Study The UNECE Water Convention and its Program of Adaptation to Climate Change in Transboundary Basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159

2 The Contextual Setting of Climate Change and the UNECE Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159



3

Legal Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162



3.1

Prevent, control, and reduce transboundary impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163



3.2

Ensure reasonable and equitable use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163



3.3

Cooperate through agreements and joint bodies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164



4 Programme of Work on Water and Climate Change in Transboundary Basins under the UNECE Water Convention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165



4.1

Guidance on Water and Adaptation to Climate Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165



4.2

Programme of pilot projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165



4.3

Platform for the exchange of experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166



5 Examples of Good Practice and Lessons Learned from the Pilot Projects . . . . . . . . 166



5.1 Reducing vulnerability to extreme floods and climate change in the Dniester River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167



5.2 Pilot project on river basin management and climate change adaptation in the Neman River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 vii



5.3 The Adaptation of the Meuse to the Impacts of Climate Evolutions (AMICE) Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170



5.4 Water scarcity is an increasing problem: The revision of the Albufeira Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172

6 Conclusion/Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173 Case Study The Senegal River Basin: Adapting to Climate and Environmental Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175

2

Ecological and Environmental Context of the Senegal River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176



2.1

The hydrological and seasonal cycles of the basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176



2.2

Climate change projections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178



Legal and Institutional Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179

3



3.1

The 1972 OMVS Convention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179



3.2

Agreements related to construction and maintenance of dams in the basin . . 181



3.3

The 2002 Water Charter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182



4 Current Mechanisms to Manage Present and Future Climate Variability . . . . . . . . . . 183



4.1

Notification regulations in the 2002 Water Charter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184



4.2

Distribution and allocation regulations in the 2002 Water Charter . . . . . . . . . . 185



Stakeholder and Public Participation in the Senegal River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185

5



5.1

Observer status under the 2002 Water Charter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186



5.2

Capacity building efforts to enhance representation and local management . 187



5.3

Remaining challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188



6

Data and Information Management and Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188



6.1



7

Vulnerability Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190



8



The 2002 Water Charter and subsequent capacity building efforts . . . . . . . . . 189

Adaptation Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 8.1

Ecosystem-based Adaptation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194

9 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 Case Study Incorporating Climate Adaptation into Transboundary Ecosystem Management in the Great Lakes Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

2

Ecological and Environmental Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198



2.1

Hydrologic, physical and ecological context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198



2.2

Environmental issues and water management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199



2.3

Climate change projections, drivers and impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200



Legal, Policy, and Institutional Framework for Adaptation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202

3



4

3.1

Binational policies and institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203

Mechanisms to Deal with Variability/Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207



4.1

The IJC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207



4.2

State-provincial institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 viii

Transboundary Water Governance: Adaptation to Climate Change



4.3



Data and Information Gathering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209

5

The GLRI Task Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209



5.1

Hydraulic and hydrologic data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210



5.2

Ecological and biological data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210



5.3

Climate data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210



5.4

Data management, communication and use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211



6

Stakeholder and Public Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211



6.1

The IJC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212



6.2

State-provincial institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212



6.3

The GLRI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213



Vulnerability Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213

7



7.1

Scenarios and models for projecting climate impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213



7.2

Vulnerability assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214



Adaptation Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215

8



8.1

The IUGLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215

9 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216 Case Study Up-scaling Adaptation in the Sixaola River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

2

Ecological and Environmental Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220



2.1

Hydrologic, physical, and ecological context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220



2.2

Environmental issues and water management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221



2.3

Climate change scenarios and impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222



3

Legal, Policy, and Institutional Framework for Adaptation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223



3.1

Binational policies and institutional structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224



3.2

The Binational Commission of the Sixaola River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227



Public Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228

4



4.1

Public participation in the PBC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228



4.2

Public participation in the BCSRB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228



4.3

Public participation under domestic legal frameworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229



4.4

Linking local participation with representation at the binational level . . . . . . . 230



Local Adaptation Planning in the Sixaola River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231

5



5.1

Vulnerability assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232



5.2

Adaptation Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232



6 From Local Experiences to Binational Cooperation: Up-scaling Solutions . . . . . . . . . 233

7 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234

ix

Glossary

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237

Bibliography

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241

Introduction

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241

Chapter One Sustaining Ecosystems through Better Water Management for Climate Change Adaptation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242 Chapter Two Adaptive Water Governance and the Principles of International Water Law . . 247 Chapter Three Cooperative Transboundary Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253 Chapter Four Stakeholder and Public Participation in Adaptation Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 Chapter Five Adaptation Planning: Views Towards Resilience and Up-scaling to Enhance Transboundary Water Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 Case Study The UNECE Water Convention and its Program of Adaptation to Climate Change in Transboundary Basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273 Case Study

The Senegal River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275

Case Study Great Lakes Governance: Incorporating Climate Adaptation into Transboundary Ecosystem Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 Case Study

The Sixaola River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283

x

Transboundary Water Governance: Adaptation to Climate Change

Foreword

Since the beginning of civilization, water has supported the very essence of life, as well as agriculture, energy, industry, local livelihoods, ecosystems, and cultural and religious traditions. Nevertheless, growing populations, domestic development priorities and competing uses between States have placed increasing pressure on the sustainable management of waters, including transboundary waters. As countries struggle to engage in sustainable development and lift their people out of poverty, climate change presents an additional number of unknowns. Today we have better understood that water is at the centre of many climate change impacts. Additionally, it is becoming clearer that climate change will likely exacerbate many existing water governance challenges —both locally and internationally—; therefore cooperative solutions should be part of a comprehensive basin-wide adaptation strategy. In this context there is also a pressing need to better understand how institutions and cooperative mechanisms can be more responsive to climate change. Furthermore, there is a need to better understand the role that ecosystems-based approaches can play in enhancing natural infrastructure to strengthen resilience to climate change. This was part of the pre-conceptual background of the IUCN´s Good Water Governance to Climate Change Project. This project was a joint venture between IUCN´s Environmental Law Centre and the Regional Office for Mesoamerica which provided the much needed experience to better understand the complex relationships between water governance, ecosystem management and climate change adaptation. Precisely, one of its main goals was to diagnose to better understand the best legal and institutional frameworks for ecosystem-based adaptation. The lessons compiled in this publication respond greatly to insights experienced throughout the project and are only a first step towards understanding what could be described as adaptive water governance capacity. Nonetheless, governance remains only a mean to an end, which in this case is to reduce the high vulnerability levels of different shared river basins, mainly through ecosystem restoration and sustainable development. After a number of years of gaining experience, there are lessons that are ready to be shared. At the local level ecosystem based adaptation continues to develop as a very cost effective and promising approach to climate change. At the national level, we continue to underpin the need for governance reform highlighting the need to understand environment holistically and not to regulate through piece meal laws and regulations which can have an adverse overall effect. At the basin level, we see the benefits of developing joint collaborative adaptation strategies, considering the basin as the most adequate administrative unit and outplaying the risk of harming due to non-coordinated adaptation efforts. Finally, at the global level, under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), adaptation is gaining in prominence as international efforts become more focused on assisting the most vulnerable countries develop adaptation plans. Furthermore, as the UN has dedicated 2013 as the “International Year of Water Cooperation”, the international community is now recognising the importance of developing cooperative and collaborative responses to climate change. “Transboundary Water Governance – Adaptation to Climate Change” aims to provide an overview of best practices in transboundary adaptive water governance thus far. It is our hope that this book can xi

serve as a basis for contributing towards developing a better understanding of the linkages between water and climate change, and what can be done to help institutions and societies to adapt. Dr. Alejandro Iza Director, Environmental Law Centre Head, Environmental Law Programme

Acknowledgements This publication is a product of collaborative effort. The ideas presented in this book are the result of a long thought process with many law and policy experts on water and climate change adaptation. In addition to thanking the authors, we would like to express gratitude our gratitude to the following individuals for their contributions in the preparation and final editing of this book: The editors and authors are especially grateful for the insights and guidance of Stephen McCaffrey from University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law, Dr. Alistair Rieu-Clarke from University of Dundee, Dr. Alejandro Iza, Director of the IUCN Environmental Law Centre (ELC), Dr. Mark Smith, Director of the Global Water Programme (IUCN), Ruby Mahana Mynihan from Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Dr. Owen McIntyre from University College Cork, Dr. Amadou Lamine Ndiaye from the Senegal River Basin Development Authority (OMVS), Carl Bruch from the Environmental Law Institute (ELI), and Paula Pacheco from Agua Sustentable – Bolivia, during the drafting stages of the project. In addition, our thanks go out to Abby Onencan from the Nile Basin Discourse, Simon Thuo from the Global Water Partnership, Ram Babu Dhakal, Deputy Permanent Delegate of Nepal to UNESCO and J.S.D. Candidate at McGeorge School of Law, and Louis Maier and Isaac Ferrera from Fundación Vida, for their contribution of case studies for the chapters. Furthermore, we would like to express our deepest gratitude to Stefano Barchiesi, Project Officer for the IUCN Global Water Programme, for his contributions during key aspects of the editing process. We also appreciate the contributions of Professor Philippe Cullet of the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), Dr. Charles Biney, Executive Director of the Volta River Commission, Ana Cascao from the Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI), John Matthews from Conservation International, and Patrick MacQuarrie from the IUCN Global Water Programme, for sharing ideas that contributed towards the early development of the book. We would also like to thank Quinn Tattle, Intern at the IUCN ELC, for his assistance to the editors during the editing process. Finally, we would like to express our gratitude to Anni Lukács and Ann Devoy for their work in helping to prepare the publication. This publication was possible thanks to the support of the International Climate Initiative (IKI) of the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB), on the basis of a decision adopted by the German Bundestag.

xiii

xiv

Transboundary Water Governance: Adaptation to Climate Change

Introduction Joshua Roberts and Juan Carlos Sanchez1

Management of transboundary waters is increasingly becoming more challenging, particularly within a context of complex social and environmental changes. Population growth, often concentrated in the developing world, will increase pressure on already scarce resources. With more people there will be more mouths to feed and greater energy needs. Population growth will also lead to reduced water quality from increases in sewage runoff, and industrial and agricultural pollution. These factors will place additional stress on how institutions manage this life-sustaining resource. Climate change is likely to exacerbate these pressures, making it more difficult to manage water across boundaries. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), climate change will result in a number of impacts on water, including, inter alia: •

Increase in precipitation for some regions, while decreased precipitation is experienced in others;



I ncrease in average river runoff and water availability for some regions, with decreased runoff in others;



Increased risks of flooding and drought from the corresponding increased precipitation and variability;



Increase in glacier melt;



Decreased food security and increased vulnerability for farmers;



Negative impacts on the function and operation of existing water infrastructure; and



 ignificant impacts on water quality, particularly related to sediment loading, chemical S composition, total organic carbon content, and microbial quality.2

Climate variability has always played a factor in societies’ relations with freshwater, and environmental systems have always been changing. However, the onset of climate change will increase uncertainty and variability around the availability and quality of freshwater, and in some instances it may irreversibly change some systems. Institutions, which have always been at the heart of how human societies interact with water,3 will find that what has worked in the past may no longer be the case in the future. In order to maintain sustainable ways of life, these institutions will need to rethink how water is used, managed, and governed at all levels. Not least because climate change is a global issue, adaptation will require an international response. In 2001, the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) established the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) Work Programme, which had a particular focus on identifying immediate adaptation needs for the most vulnerable countries, 1 Joshua Roberts, Staff Lawyer (U.S. qualified), ClientEarth, London, U.K, Juan Carlos Sanchez, Legal Officer, IUCN Environmental Law Centre, Bonn, Germany. 2 Bates, B.C. et al. (eds.) (2008). Climate Change and Water: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Technical Paper VI, p. 3. IPCC Secretariat: Geneva, Switzerland. 3 See Cook, J. et al. (2011). Shifting Course: Climate Adaptation for Water Management Institutions. World Wildlife Fund (WWF): Washington, D.C., U.S.A. xv

in particular through National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs).4 In 2006, the Nairobi Work Programme was established as a knowledge sharing platform, in order to help Parties better understand and assess impacts, vulnerability, and adaptation to climate change, and to make better informed decisions.5 The work conducted under these programmes has done a lot to enhance understanding over climate change’s impacts on water, and potential adaptation responses. In 2010, in Cancun, Mexico, the Parties to the UNFCCC agreed to establish the Cancun Adaptation Framework, whose objective is to enhance action on adaptation, including through international cooperation and coherent consideration of adaptation under the UNFCCC, particularly for water.6 Two important components designed to help achieve this objective are longer-term adaptation planning through developing National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), and promotion of sharing knowledge and lessons learned.7 Furthermore, the Green Climate Fund (GCF) was established to enhance the delivery of climate finance, with a mandate to balance provision of financial resources between adaptation and mitigation.8 In 2011, in Durban, South Africa, the Parties requested the Secretariat of the UNFCCC to advance and explore links between water, climate change impacts and adaptation strategies.9 Despite this progress at the global level, there is still a need to enhance understanding of climate change and water at all levels of governance – from the local to the transboundary level. Increase in climate variability will change the way shared water systems function – hydrologically, ecologically, economically, and socially – requiring cooperative adaptation responses.10 Because climate change will have local impacts, water management, including laws, policies, and regulations at national and local levels, will play a critical role in supporting adaptive efforts. In the transboundary context, there are two major implications from a perspective of adaptive governance. First, responses to climate variability will probably increase the need for transboundary water sharing agreements and institutions where there were none. Although there are approximately

4  United Nations Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (2001). Conference of the Parties (COP) Decisions 28/CP.7 and 29/CP.7, FCC/CP/2001/13/Add.4, Report of the Conference of the Parties on its Seventh Session, Held at Marrakesh from 29 October to 10 November 2001. 5 UNFCCC (2006). FCC/SBSTA/2006/11, Report of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice on its Twenty-Fifth Session, held at Nairobi from 6 to 14 November 2006, pp. 5-13, paras. 11-71. 6 UNFCCC (2010). COP Decision 1/CP.16, paras. 13-14, para. 14(a), FCCC/CP/2010/7/Add.1, Report of the Conference of the Parties on its Sixteenth Session, held in Cancun from 29 November to 10 December 2010. 7

COP Decision 1/CP.16, paras. 15-17.

8

COP Decision 1/CP.16, para. 102.

9 UNFCCC (2011). COP Decision 6/CP.17, para. 4(a), FCCC/CP/2011/9/Add.2, Report of the Conference of the Parties on its Seventeenth Session, Held in Durban from 28 November to 11 December 2011. 10 According to the IPCC, adaptation describes “changes in processes, practices and structures to moderate potential damages or to benefit from opportunities with climate change.” IPCC (2007). Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report, Annex II – Glossary. IPCC Secretariat: Geneva, Switzerland. xvi

Transboundary Water Governance: Adaptation to Climate Change

300 transboundary agreements recorded,11 currently 60 percent of the world’s 263 watercourses (158 transboundary river basins) have no cooperative management framework.12 Second, where agreements and institutions are already in place there may be a need to adjust the way water is managed in order to adapt to the realities presented by climate change. For instance, while international agreements usually account for seasonal variability, yearly precipitation fluctuations, droughts, flooding from unusually heavy rain fall, and consequences from climate change often remain uncovered.13 The aim of “Transboundary Water Governance – Adaptation to Climate Change” is to identify issues, both theoretical and practical, that States face in establishing cooperative transboundary mechanisms to effectively adapt water management to climate change. Furthermore, this publication will address complex legal hurdles that existing transboundary water institutions face when attempting to adapt existing mechanisms to function in a changing climate. Through a number of bilateral and multilateral water sharing agreements that have been concluded over the past century or so, there are many useful examples of States attempting to deal with scarcity and variability. Moreover, as States become increasingly aware of climate issues affecting their basin, there are a growing number of cases that provide lessons and learning tools for initiating and adapting cooperative responses to current and future climate impacts. There are also an increasing number of examples where options for adaptive and cooperative water governance have actively involved – and built the capacity of – numerous and diverse stakeholders on multiple levels for improved implementation. Evidence regarding the effectiveness of efforts to develop and implement tools for adaptive water governance is still emerging. Nevertheless, there is now enough experience to begin compiling lessons learned and best practices – a goal this publication seeks to achieve. It builds upon IUCN’s practical experience on the ground, and particularly from the project “Climate Change Governance Capacity: Building regionally- and nationally- tailored ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) in Mesoamerica”. This 11 Cooley, H. et al. (2009). Understanding and Reducing the Risks of Climate Change for Transboundary Waters (Pacific Institute: Oakland, CA), p. 8, citing Gleick, P.H. (2000). “How Much Water is There and Whose is it,” The World’s Water 2000-2001: The Biennial Report on Freshwater Resources. Island Press: Washington, D.C., U.S.A.; and United Nations Environment Programme and Oregon State University (UNEP/OSU) (2002). Atlas of International Freshwater Agreements. UNEP Press: Nairobi, Kenya. 12 “Of the 105 international basins that employ some type of water management institutions, less than 20 percent of those basins with more than three riparians have multilateral agreements involving all of the riparians.” Eckstein, G. (2010). “Water Scarcity, Conflict, and Security in a Climate Change World: Challenges and Opportunities for International Law and Policy,” Wisconsin International Law Journal, Vol. 27(3), pp. 410-461, at p. 442, fn. 143, citing UNEP/OSU (2002), supra note 11; and McCaffrey, S. (1990). Sixth Report on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses, (U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/427), at p. 43, para. 5, which refers to a 1979 list, compiled by the Secretariat of the U.N., that identified 90 bipartite and multipartite commissions concerned with the non-navigational uses of international watercourses. “… of the 273 known transboundary aquifers worldwide, only one has such a framework – the Genevese Aquifer, (See Convention relative a la protection, a l’utilisation, a la realimentation et au suivi de la Nappe Souterraine Franco-Suisse du Genevois, 1 January 2008) – while two others have a basic data sharing agreements.” Eckstein, G. and Eckstein, & (2003). “A Hydrologeological Approach to Transboundary Ground Water Resources and International Law,” American University Law Review, Vol. 19(2), pp. 201258, at p. 227. 13 McCaffrey, S. (2003). “The Need for Flexibility in Freshwater Treaties,” Natural Resources Forum, Vol. 27, pp. 156-162, at p. 157. xvii

project has aimed to develop local, national and regional capacities for adaptive water governance through applied research, awareness raising, community participation, and up-scaling effective models of integrated ecosystem approaches to water management.14 In Mesoamerica, like in many regions of the world, unequal distribution of waters between geographic areas, sectors, and uses has resulted from weak natural resources governance. This has had a direct impact on vulnerable societies that rely heavily on nature and its services to sustain their ways of life. The referred project has built upon the idea that ecosystems are a means to improve livelihoods in a sustainable manner, and it has resulted in the development of valuable lessons for water governance and adaptation. EbA is being promoted as a methodology that integrates the use of biodiversity and ecosystem services into an overall strategy to help people adapt to adverse impacts posed by climate change. It includes the sustainable management, conservation and restoration of ecosystems to provide services that help people adapt to both current climate variability, and climate change. It contributes to reducing vulnerability and increasing resilience to both climate and non-climate risks, and provides multiple benefits to society and the environment, recognising that healthy ecosystems have an important role to play in helping people to adapt. EbA is therefore a means of adaptation that is readily available and can be integrated into community-based efforts to addresses concerns and priorities, particularly of vulnerable people. Unfortunately, there are not many experiences where EbA has been incorporated into relevant laws and policies, either at the national or basin level. This is partly because EbA is still evolving, and also because there are knowledge gaps regarding the inter-linkages between existing governance frameworks, nature, and adaptation challenges and responses. As awareness of climate change increases, the more evident it becomes that countries and communities lack normative, policy, and institutional capacity to tackle vulnerability to climate change. Thus, there is a need to thoroughly revisit and adjust when necessary national and regional adaptation strategies, considering water governance and EbA as interesting lenses that can support and enrich the process. In light of the current and evolving context, this publication shares lessons and guidance from project implementation, and analysis of specific countries’ governance frameworks. Incrementally, this can support a global community of practitioners in understanding the legal and policy implications of EbA, and adaptive water governance more broadly as an emerging sub-field in environmental law and policy, aiming to bring adaptation considerations into the water sector. “Transboundary Water Governance – Adaptation to Climate Change” was envisioned as a knowledge resource for decision makers in order to help better understand linkages between water and climate change adaptation from a governance perspective. It is intended to be thought of as a guide for those involved in conceptualizing policies, strategies and drafting laws; and designing institutional dynamics across sectors (e.g., water management, energy, agriculture, health, risk management, biodiversity conservation, etc.) and levels (i.e., global, regional, basin, national, municipal, and local) in relation to water and adaptation. Finally, it should serve as a reference for some of the latest advances in the topic, and as consultative material for non-experts. It compiles and presents new approaches and perspectives of water and climate change with a view towards enhancing adaptive 14  The project has been implemented by the Environmental Law Centre and the Regional Office for Mesoamerica, supported by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU). xviii

Transboundary Water Governance: Adaptation to Climate Change

governance through consideration of ecosystems, environmental services, human dependencies, and full and effective public participation as the best way to cope and to build resiliency. This publication has been conceived as an input towards various governance processes taking place in different parts of the world. The objective is that it ignites discussion and normative analysis as a means to foster and view gaps and opportunities for strengthening instruments that are being developed (from specific projects to laws), with a view to improving mid- and long-term governance approaches that place ecosystems and its services at their centre. With these objectives in mind, this publication explores and breaks down the concept of governance into the different chapters, with a view to better understand: adaptive water governance, cooperative mechanisms and institutions; enabling environments for participatory adaptive preparedness; and up-scaling successful adaptation approaches into higher basin-level governance reform. In order to accomplish this task, the first half of the book is divided into five chapters: Chapter One focuses on the interface between water, climate change, and adaptation. First, it briefly introduces the hydrological cycle, focusing on the specific role that ecological systems play in maintaining water regimes.15 It then highlights the interconnectedness of ecosystems throughout the water cycle, and effects that climate change will have on this cycle, focusing specifically on changes to various freshwater ecosystems. It also highlights the interactions between river basin ecosystems and human well-being, focusing on the various impacts climate change can have on people. Subsequently, this Chapter provides an overview of the concept of adaptation, highlighting the specific role that EbA can play in adapting water management to a changing climate. Chapter Two introduces the concept of adaptive water governance, looking at existing relevant substantive international legal principles relating to management of transboundary freshwaters, and how they may require redefinition in light of the need to consider adaptation to climate change. In addition to international principles of freshwater law, Chapter Two points to other relevant international environmental law principles that are relevant to climate change, specifically those contained in Article 3 of the UNFCCC (Sustainability, Precaution, and Intra- and Inter-generational Equity), and the ecosystem approach. Together these principles play an important role in international efforts to integrate climate change concerns into water governance; examples of their incorporation into binding agreements by States are highlighted. Chapter Three focuses on strategies devised between States to cooperatively respond to climate change and uncertainty. In particular, it identifies various tools that can be built into transboundary agreements, such as flexibility and adaptability, enforceability, resilience, and implementation of the ecosystem approach. Chapter Three also focuses on cooperative mechanisms, including procedural and substantive rules that States use to manage transboundary waters against variability and scarcity. Lastly, it highlights different options and pathways that cooperative relationships can take in response to climate change. Chapter Four touches upon the role and importance of public and stakeholder participation in the development and implementation of adaptation responses. This chapter addresses the main challenges and constrains for effectively including the public in adaptive governance systems and related decision-making processes. With a particular emphasis on international legal norms around 15 This publication is intended to serve as the third component of a series on IUCN water governance publications. For a thorough discussion and explanation of the hydrological cycle therefore, the reader should refer to “Governance of Shared Waters: Legal and Institutional Issues”. xix

public participation, the chapter then looks at how institutions can foster and coordinate collaborative multi-level climate knowledge and information frameworks that are capable of effectively engaging all relevant stakeholders to develop and implement different adaptive governance strategies. Finally Chapter Five explores the different cycles of adaptation planning, and how they work on the ground. With a strong focus on participation at the local level, it explores the roles and challenges of transboundary institutions in the adaptation planning process. Using case studies, the chapter draws on specific lessons learned from in-the-field examples in order to extract conclusions from successful strategies for building resilience to climate change (e.g., EbA). Furthermore, it explores how such examples might be up-scaled to the national and transboundary levels in order to drive higher level adaptive governance reforms. Four case studies are presented with the intent to illustrate the options available to States when devising cooperative adaptation approaches. The case studies bring into focus each major concept addressed in the previous chapters, placing them in the context of a single river basin or region. These cases were chosen considering their geographical variation, their regional complexity, and their varied stages of development, both in terms of international cooperation in water management and in addressing adaptation to climate change. The case studies seek both to exemplify best practices, and highlight challenges related to selected issues identified throughout the publication. They also aim to provide a holistic picture of how the identified basin or region deals with adaptation, highlighting both strengths and weaknesses. The case studies covered are: 1) The Senegal River Basin (shared between Senegal, Guinea, Mali and Mauritania); 2) the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Region; 3) the Great Lakes Basin (shared between the United States and Canada); and 4) the Sixaola Basin (shared between Costa Rica and Panama).

xx

Transboundary Water Governance: Adaptation to Climate Change

Chapter One Sustaining Ecosystems through Better Water Management for Climate Change Adaptation Stefano Barchiesi, Rebecca Welling, James Dalton, Mark Smith1

1.1 Introduction Impacts of climate change, in combination with other drivers of global change, are compromising our ability to address global economic, security, and social priorities. In terms of impacts of climate change on freshwater, water scarcity currently affects around 700 million people in 43 countries worldwide. It is estimated that by 2025, 1.8 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity (