The interface of water resources and development and
the achievement of the MDGs is complex and includes many specific
linkages. Examples of the linkages
between water and achieving the MDGs are emphasized in the previous section. This wide array of important linkages that
present many synergies, explains why pursuing each
goal separately reduces the complex process of human and economic development
to a series of conflicting, and unsustainable interventions. In addition, the interface of water
resources and the achievement of the MDGs occurs at
several different institutional levels, explaining why water resource policies
in many countries have evolved in a fragmented and piecemeal fashion. Under this framework, policy objectives have
been set without consideration of the implications for other water users and
without consultation across sectoral and institutional boundaries. This traditional approach to water management
has, in general, proven to be an ineffective policy strategy due to the fact
that these problems fall outside of the normal purview of the agencies tasked
with addressing them and, thus, require cooperation from multiple sectors. In order to optimize water resources
for development and the MDGs, countries must overcome constraints through
appropriate investments and management arrangements within broad planning and
policy iniciatives.
Saleth and Dinar (1999, 2004) also emphasize that
institutional changes are needed to improve water management since previous
institutions were developed during a water surplus era. Moreover, as Global Water Partnership (2000) points
out, water management is usually left to top-down institutions, the legitimacy
and effectiveness of which have increasingly been questioned. However, it is
important to highlight that the effectiveness of these sectoral improvements
will be affected by the country’s institutional and macroeconomic environment since many of these
reforms depend on economic, ecological, and political constraints (Saleth and
Dinar, 2004) and reflect the fact that institutional reform is path dependent
(North, 1990).
An IWRM approach, defined as a process
that “promotes the coordinated development and management of water, land, and
related resources, in order to maximize the resultant economic and social
welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital
ecosystems” (Global Water Partnership website), provides an opportunity to
attack these problems more effectively, identifying root causes and solutions
that lie outside of any one specific sectoral area and focusing on investment
as well as management issues. IWRM is not a reform whose objective is just to
achieve a more efficient management of water as a resource, it considers
reforms whose objectives are to improve governance and financial systems at all
levels, in order to meet each country’s development goals.
Thus, an IWRM approach considers the
diverse linkages between water resources and the achievement of the MDGs, ensuring that investments across sectors work together,
producing greater returns by exploiting the synergies between the
linkages. In addition, the involvement
of multiple sectors highlights opportunities that are often hidden by sectoral
thinking. For example, examining domestic water and sanitation needs along with
food security issues generates opportunities to provide communities with water
for domestic and food production purposes at a lower additional cost compared
with traditional water planning approaches (Global Water Partnership, 2004a). IWRM also helps reduce the negative consequences
of undesired environmental impacts associated with water development and the
costs associated to the environmental damage. For example, the annual cost of mitigating
the effects of land and water degradation in Asia
associated to water development strategies has been estimated at US$35 billion
(Global Water Partnership, 2004a). Finally, since IWRM considers in an
integrated manner social, economic and environmental goals, it promotes a more
strategic and socially efficient water allocation than traditional approaches
driven individual sectors interests. The
UN Task Force on water and sanitation, based on the advantages of IWRM,
is convinced the MDGs as a whole will not be met unless an IWRM Plan, which
considers deliberate planning and investment in sound water resources
management and infrastructure, is implemented (Lenton, 2005).
1. Saleth, R.M. and Dinar, A. 1999. Evaluating water
institutions and water sector performance Tech.
paper 447, World Bank, Washington D.C.
Available at: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/IW3P/IB/1999/09/21/000094946_99090305381648/Rendered/PDF/multi_page.pdf
2.
Saleth, R.M. and Dinar, A. 2004. The institutional economics of water: A cross country analysis of
institutions and performance Edward Elgar, Mass. 398 pp.
3. Global Water Partnership. 2004a. Catalyzing Change: A Handbook for Developing
Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) and Water Efficiency Strategies.
Technical Advisory Committee, Global Water Partnership, Stockholm , Sweden
4. Lenton, R. 2005. Water Resources Management and the
Millenium Development Goals. Presentation at the Seminar Water and the
Millenium Development Goals: It’s Contribution to Development. Organized by
IDB. Okinawa , Japan
No comments:
Post a Comment