Improving Water Policy and Governance

Cecilia Tortajada, Asit Biswas

• Publisher: Taylor & Francis
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN: 9780415606288
• eBook ISBN: 9781317985556
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Physical Sciences
• Subtopic: Geography
• Index: Geography

Old forms of governance in both public and private sectors are becoming increasingly irrelevant because of rapidly changing conditions. Because of these changes, both governance processes and the scope of the institutions through which power is exercised throughout society may have to undergo a radical break with the past and prevailing models of governance. Water sector is an integral part of the global system. Consequently, its governance processes and the institutions responsible for its management must change as well in order to cope with the current challenges and potential future changes. Because of these current and future changes, water governance may have to change more during the next 20 years compared to the past 2000 years, if societal expectations are to be successfully met. All these changes will make water governance more complex than ever before witnessed in human history. Improving water governance will require good and objective analyses of case studies from different parts of the world as to what has worked, why and the enabling environments under which good governance has been possible.

The present volume analyses case studies of good water governance from different parts of the world, and for different water use sectors. It concludes with an analysis of the critical issues that should be considered for water governance and a priority research agenda for improving water governance in the future.

This book was published as a special issue of the International Journal of Water Resources Development.

Future Water Governance: Problems and Perspectives

Asit K. Biswas & Cecilia Tortajada

Third World Centre for Water Management, Atizapan, Mexico; Institute of Water Policy, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, Singapore

ABSTRACT One development can be predicted with complete certainty; the world in 2030 will be significantly different from what it is in 2010. Water governance, which is a broad concept, must also adopt to these changes. While there are no usable indicators for water governance that exist at present, some general indicators for governance of individual countries are available. These are of limited value for the water profession. It is argued that at least 10 to 12 good, independent and objective case studies of good water governance would be very useful to learn what were the enabling environment and critical factors that contributed to their success and could allow others to significantly improve their current practices and processes.

Where is the life we have lost in living?

Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?

Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?

(T. S. Eliot, Nobel Laureate, 1945)

Introduction

Over the past thee millennia, overall governance has progressively shifted from kings and chieftains to a broader coalition of elected representatives, bureaucrats and interest groups representing different sectors of civil society. There is now every indication that the old forms of governance in both the public and private sectors are becoming increasingly irrelevant because of rapidly changing conditions at the global, national and sub-national levels. These changes are due to a variety of factors which include, but are not necessarily limited to, deeper and accelerating global integration, increasing free trade, higher levels of education, rapid scientific and technological developments in nearly all fields, revolutions in information and communication technologies, institutional innovations, growing demographic diversity within countries and between countries, incessant pressures exerted by economic, social and political dynamism, changing societal perceptions, institutional values and structures, and increasing but perceptible demand by the governed of yesterday to become the governors of tomorrow. All of these changes, and more accelerated developments that are likely to be witnessed during the next two decades, mean that there is an urgent need to review the current processes and practices of governance which are becoming increasingly in adequate and ineffective with time. It is highly likely that many of the past (and present) methods of governance, which depended to a significant extent on command, control and obedience, will become less and less applicable and relevant in the future (Michalski et al., 2001). These developments are likely to ensure that in the coming years both governance processes and the scope of the institutions through which power is exercised throughout society may have to undergo a radical break with the past and its prevailing models.

The water sector is an integral part of the global system. Its governance will not be immune to the rapid changes that have occurred, and will continue to occur, both within the governance of the sector and also of other sectors which are likely to affect the water sector, either directly and indirectly. There have to be radical changes in the governance processes and the institutions responsible for water to cope with the immediate challenges, potential future changes and uncertainties both from within the sector and around the sector.

Because of the changes that are likely to take place, water governance has to change more during the next 20 years than it has in past 2000 years if societal needs for water-related activities, including environmental requirements, are to be met successfully in a timely, equitable and cost-effective manner. While many of these changes will come from within the water sector, many more will come from outside the sector which will directly affect this sector and on which the water institutions and professionals, unlike in the past, will have only limited or even no control. They will have to react to these changes and thus these changes have to be correctly anticipated and managed.

All these likely developments will make water governance more complex than ever before witnessed in human history. The water profession will have to seriously consider ‘business unusual’ approaches and solutions. Yesterday’s approaches and solutions, based on past and current experiences, and dependence on incremental progress to solve the global, regional, national and sub-national water problems, will most likely fall far short of what will be required to meet the turbulent times due to the increasing economic, hydrologic and technological uncertainties of the future, and also the accelerating social and political expectations of civil society for a better standard of living and quality of life in all parts of the world.

Water-related Issues

During the past decade, water-related issues have attracted considerably more interest from the media, the general public and political leaders compared to what they had received during the 1980s and 1990s (Tortajada, 2008). This increasing interest could, for the most part, be considered beneficial since it has steadily moved water higher up international and national political agendas. However, whether this move of water higher up the political agenda has had commensurate positive impacts in improving its governance practices and processes is difficult to say. Developments in the water sector probably would have been somewhat similar with or without water moving higher up the political agenda. At best, the improvements have been somewhat marginal because of this move.

Regrettably, a significant part of the discussions in the media in recent years has been on the incorrect water-related issues. For example, much has been written on how the world will face a water crisis of unprecedented proportion in the coming years because of the physical scarcity of this resource, and there will be wars between nations because of acute scarcities of water. Publications on water crises and water wars have become a growth industry! During the past few years, one can easily identify a dozen books in the English language alone on “water crises.” The number of articles on the water crisis in the media and scientific periodicals during the past decade would easily run into the thousands in the English language alone. The media also have shown an unhealthy obsession with water wars. Many professionals and political leaders have unnecessarily fuelled this flame because of faulty reasoning, poor knowledge of the water issues, and use of erroneous data. For example, Kofi Annan, the former Secretary General of the United Nations said “Fierce competition for freshwater may well become a source of conflict and wars in the future” (Annan, 2001). In 1988, the then Egyptian Foreign Minister, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, who subsequently became the Secretary General of the United Nations, said, “The next war in the Middle East will not be about politics but over water.” Much later, during a 2006 BBC interview, when asked if he was still worried that there could be a war over water, his response was “Yes certainly … . Water will be during this century more important than oil” (Ghali, 2003). On sober reflection, and based on the reliable data and analyses that are now available, such statements are neither correct nor realistic. At best, they are simplistic generalizations of complex issues.

Such erroneous statements by leading public figures, several major international institutions, many water professionals, and most media pundits are based on a simple misunderstanding. Unlike oil, gas and coal which are non-renewable resources and which once used can no longer be reused, water is a renewable resource, which can be used and then reused several times with good governance. Furthermore, in contrast to fossil fuels whose efficiency of uses has undergone remarkable improvements since the 1970s because of increasing demand and higher prices, water continues to remain heavily subsidized in most countries. Consequently, water governance practices continue to be poor to very poor. During the past 35 years, the efficiency of energy usage in most countries of the world has steadily improved. Unlike energy, however, the water sector has not made commensurate progress due to misguided policies and governance practices.

While global figures for water use are extremely unreliable, it is commonly accepted that agriculture accounts for nearly 70% of all water use. And yet very few countries, if any, have realistic agricultural water pricing policies which could contribute to efficient water use. Similarly, in most countries of the world, domestic water supply is heavily subsidized. Consequently, water continues to be overused in both the agricultural and domestic sectors.

Based on research conducted at the Third World Centre for Water Management, it can be confidently said that the world is NOT facing a crisis because of the physical scarcity of water. However, the world will most certainly face a water crisis in the future if the past and current poor to very poor governance practices continue to be used in nearly all developing and developed countries. Surprisingly, at present the world has enough knowledge, technology, management capacity and investment funds to solve its water problems (Biswas & Tortajada, 2009a) within the foreseeable future.

Water Governance

As discussed by Tortajada (2010a) in this issue, governance is a broad concept, has no agreed upon definition, and operates at many levels. Different international institutions such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), World Bank, various United Nations (UN) agencies, and the European Union define governance based on their mandates, interests and biases. However, there are some common features for most of these definitions. These include accountability, transparency, and participatory and decentralized decision making. Furthermore, good governance requires proper allocation and management of resources to collective problems, that is, all citizens receive in a timely and efficient manner requisite public goods of appropriate and acceptable quality.

While the issue of governance has since about 1980 received increasing attention in the development literature, it is a comparative newcomer to the water resources sector. One would indeed be hard-pressed to find any serious discussion of water governance prior to 2000. Between 1980 and 2000, the overwhelming paradigms for the water sector were sustainable water management and/or integrated water resources management, neither of which managed to make any long-term impact on the water sector (Biswas & Tortajada, 2005; Biswas et al., 2005).

The overall definition of governance by the various international institutions has limited value to the water sector especially in terms of the implementation of the concept. In 2003, the Global Water Partnership defined water governance as “the range of political, social, economic and administrative systems that are in place to develop and manage water resources, and delivery of water services, at different levels of society” (Rogers & Hall, 2003).

Based on much of the recent discussion of water governance, a cynic may well ask, “If the word ‘governance’ is replaced with the earlier focus on ‘management’, would it make any practical and significant difference?” A cynic may further claim that the water profession has got into a muddle by being unable to distinguish between management and governance, or where management ends and governance begins, or if management is subsumed under governance or vice versa.

Regardless, if one reviews the current water literature, one fact clearly stands out, that is, the era of ‘sustainable water management’ appears to be coming to an end, or may have even ended. So too is the era of ‘integrated water resources management’ of the past two decades, which is now being gradually but quietly discarded by national water institutions and international organizations because it has not been possible to implement anywhere in the world for macro- or meso-scale water policies or programme of projects, even though this paradigm has been around for more than half a century in one form or another (Biswas, 2004, 2008a, 2008b). These two paradigms are being rapidly replaced by ‘water governance’. Only time will tell if this change is simply the old wine that is being recycled into a new bottle, or if it is indeed anew wine which will have major and perceptible impacts in improving how water is managed or governed in most countries of the world.

Governance Indicators

While there have been dozens of governance indicators in the development literature, four have received considerable global attention. These were developed and continue to be regularly updated by International Country Risk Guide (ICRG), Freedom House, Transparency International and the World Bank. It should be noted that even the four most popular governance indicators that are used at present are not very useful to develop a road map in terms of how to improve local and regional governance, or how best to improve the governance of any specific sector such as water, energy or agriculture. All of the available indicators of national governance suffer from lack of transparency, problem so inter-comparability between different countries, and even in the same country over time, and suffer from selection biases since all of them are based, to a significant extent, on forms of a composite perception index of experts (Arndt &Osman, 2006). The choice of experts could introduce significant biases in the overall governance indicators. In addition, no corresponding indicator specifically for water governance is available at present which remotely receives similar levels of attention from countries or the media such as the following four overall governance indicators.

International Country Risk Guide

The International Country Risk Guide (ICRG) group has provided its indicators to its clients regularly since 1980. It is an analysis of the potential risks which may be useful for international business operations. It is designed to assess financial, economic and political risks in countries and to compare them between countries (ICRG, 2010).

This indicator contains two components: financial and economic risks and political risks. The first part is based on observed statistics such as levels of economic growth and inflation, per capita GDP, relation of external debt to GDP, and budget surplus or deficit as a percentage of GDP. While it is difficult for most countries to estimate these statistics reliably, the fact remains this part of the indicator is based on observed and estimated data. The political risk assessment, in contrast, is a totally subjective view of the ICRG experts on different pre-selected issues such as the government’s potential to stay in office and carry out its declared programmes, investment risks such as contract validity and expropriation, levels of corruption, the quality of the bureaucracy, and the presence of independent legal and law enforcement systems.

ICRG provides its clients with monthly assessments for some 140 countries, and also one-year and five-year scenarios on the basis of best and worst case scenarios.

Freedom House

Freedom House assesses the political rights and civil liberties of countries through its in-house experts. Both types of risk are assessed on a scale of 1 to 7 (1 is the best and 7 is the lowest), and then these risks are averaged to decide if a county is free (below 3), partly free (3 to 5), or not free (6 to 7). Political rights consider electoral process, political pluralism and participation, and the functioning of the government. Civil liberties consider freedom of expression and belief, the right to organise, the rule of law, and individual rights.

For some 192 countries and s...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• 1. Future Water Governance: Problems and Perspectives
• 2. Water Governance in the Middle East and North Africa: An Unfinished Agenda
• 3. Water Supply of Phnom Penh: An Example of Good Governance
• 4. Service Quality and Performance Measurement: Evidence from the Indian Water Sector
• 5. Municipal Water Supply Management in Bangkok: Achievements and Lessons
• 6. Is Access to Water as Good as the Data Claim? Case Study of Yucatan
• 7. Challenges for Water Governance in Rural Water Supply: Lessons Learned from Tanzania
• 8. Governing to Grow Enough Food without Enough Water—Second Best Solutions Show the Way
• 9. Irrigation Modernization in Spain: Effects on Water Quantity and Quality—A Conceptual Approach
• 10. A Spatial Planning Perspective for Measures Concerning Flood Risk Management
• 11. Water Governance: Some Critical Issues
• 12. Water Governance: A Research Agenda
• Index