Governance

This blog discusses Pay: Establishing payments for watershed services that provides guidance on how to improve water security by establishing rewards or payments for ecosystem services provided by a given water resource. Providing appropriate payment to land and water managers to maintain or restore watershed services is an innovative way to improve water security.

Water-related services can include producing agricultural products, supporting ecosystem functioning, regulating water flows, and providing cultural and recreational attributes. Pay presents how such services can be valued and measured and provides an overview of the various components of an effective payment scheme for watershed services.

Total Economic Value (TEV) is a common framework for valuing ecosystems. It uses two categories – use and non-use values. Use values can be:

Direct use value – mainly derived from goods that originate directly from the watershed

Indirect-use value – mainly derived from services that the surrounding ecosystem provides

Non-use values are derived from benefits from preserving the watershed and ecosystem in its natural state. These can be either keeping something in existence (existence value) or preserving the ecosystem or watershed for future generations (bequest value).

Valuations are an important basis for negotiations but in the end the values will be determined by negotiations between parties.

Designing a payment scheme should be centered on creating market-based incentives to change management choices that optimize the benefits of the watershed.

Like other documents in the WANI toolkit, Pay focuses on shared benefits and values of ecologic resources From a ecosystem perspective. It outlines how to identify and value watershed services, design a payment scheme, identify and engage stakeholders and negotiate agreements, establish rules and governance frameworks and monitor progress and share learning across different stakeholders.

Pay also describes the following payment schemes:

Private – direct payments to service providers, purchase of land or sharing of costs among private entities

Cap-and trade – trading of water permits among users with an overall cap of water withdrawal and pollution

Certification or eco-labeling – environmental and social attributes are included in the costs of a traded product

The needs and capacities of the various stakeholders must be recognized as well as clear linkages between upstream land and water use, and downstream benefits.

Pay outlines elements of an agreement – services provided, compensation, monitoring and compliance, and governance and management. It also presents the need for clear and enforceable rules and transaction mechanisms and that these must operate within a wider framework of laws, policies and customary arrangements.

Finally, Pay explains the importance of incorporating social learning to continually monitor progress and prioritize efforts. The social learning process should be accessible to all well-informed stakeholders and include a feedback loop that can lead to continuous improvement to the overall payment scheme.

To review the WANI toolkit and related documents please visit: http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/water/resources/toolkits/

The first WANI toolkit document that I presented in my December 21^st blog was Rule: Reforming water governance that provides guidance on understanding and developing basic principles of good water governance and necessary elements of a strong water governance program. My January 6^th blog on Negotiate: Reaching agreements over water presents practical steps on how to negotiate effective multi-stakeholder agreements on water rights and governance.

This blog discusses the WANI toolkit document Share: Managing water across boundaries that focuses on gaining the cooperation of several nations to establish water allocation and governance programs for international water bodies. As with the other WANI guidance documents, this piece stresses the benefits of engaging stakeholders with an interest in the subject water bodies throughout the process of establishing water rights, allocation and management plans.

It presents how an integrated water resource management approach - coordinating the management of water, land and related resources in the watershed basin - often leads to more sustainable, efficient and equitable agreements and programs.

Transboundary institutional and regulatory frameworks are the backbone of transboundary water management programs but national programs that work with other cooperative nations, are needed for implementation. This requires that each nation incorporate its obligations and objectives of the treaty into laws that are supported by monitoring and enforcement mechanisms. Strong governance overarching all parties is critical as is continuous knowledge sharing, monitoring and adjustments - if necessary - to ensure long-term success.

IUCN's guidance promotes focusing on benefit sharing - allocating the benefits derived from the various uses of water, rather than the water itself. While politics will often be intense during water sharing negotiations, focusing on the myriad of benefits can provide a framework for structuring costs and benefits in a flexible and fair manner. It can also provide a flexible framework that promotes the consideration of alternative use patterns and a range of possible cooperative agreements.

Share: Managing water across boundaries introduces four types of benefits from cooperative approach to negotiations:

• Type 1: Providing benefits to the river - cooperation enables better management of the watershed ecosystem.
• Type 2: Yielding benefits from the river - efficient cooperative management and development of shared rivers.
• Type 3: Reducing costs because of the river - lessens tensions between competing land owners that can have cost benefits.
• Type 4: Generating benefits from the river - greater overall cooperation among states beyond the boundaries of the water body.

Each type has its challenges and opportunities but they all focus on the positive outcomes that can lead to each party having a clear, vested interest in developing a benefit sharing agreement model and possibly avoiding unnecessary conflict.

Share: Managing water across boundaries provides case studies and discusses how best to develop a benefits sharing focus in practice. Some recommendations are to identify critical stakeholders and engage them at the right time during the process, focus on equity of beneficial outcome, and establishing of supporting mechanisms and institutions. Some benefit sharing mechanisms include knowledge sharing, developing a strong project design, revenue allocation and financial arrangements, and institution and policy development.

Share: Managing water across boundaries presents an approach to stakeholder mapping and engagement. Levels of engagement can range from information sharing, consultation, participation and development partners with agreed upon objectives, outputs and goals. It discusses the different stages of transboundary water management processes: initiating stage, institutional management, programme implementation and investment in water management works.

Share: Managing water across boundaries then discusses how to develop necessary legal frameworks and institutions and finally implementing cooperative transboundary water management programs.

To review the WANI toolkit and related documents please visit: http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/water/resources/toolkits/

 This is my second blog in a series to present highlights from the International Union for Conservation of Nature's (IUCN's) Water and Nature Initiative (WANI) toolkit. The WANI toolkit is aimed at helping communities improve water governance programs

My first blog on the WANI toolkit posted November 26^th presented Rule: Reforming water governance. It provides guidance on understanding and developing basic principles of good water governance and necessary elements of a strong water governance program.

The focus of this blog - WANI's Negotiate: Reaching agreements over water - builds on the basic principles of water governance and presents practical steps on how to negotiate effective multi-stakeholder agreements on water rights and governance.

Lasting and effective agreements that address complex water issues are best achieved through constructive engagement and open and cooperative forms of negotiations. The complexity of water governance issues can include identifying and determining the value of ecosystem services, creating incentives and financing mechanisms, what capacity exists versus what is ultimately needed, how to hold responsible parties accountable to the terms of the agreement, and establishing water allotments that sufficiently fulfill all stakeholders' needs, among other issues. Negotiate: Reaching agreements over water addresses the following concepts of local water governance negotiations:

• Competing priorities and uncertainties make water allocation decisions complex
• Environmental flows as a governance tool to support water allocation decisions
• Constructive engagement catalyses water solutions that are durable
• Good water governance generates adaptive capacity

Negotiate: Reaching agreements over water begins by making the case for consensus based, multi-stakeholder negotiations - primarily that engagement of all key stakeholders from the onset will likely create more workable solutions they would not otherwise achieve. It frames water agreement negotiations on the concept of 4Rs of negotiations - rewards, rights, risks and responsibilities. For example:

• The rewards associated with different options across all stakeholders.
• The involuntary and voluntary water-related risks.
• Water-related rights.
• The various water-related responsibilities of State and non-State actors.

By identifying the 4Rs for each stakeholder group that depends or has an interest in the water being negotiated, the importance of the subject water source is discussed and negotiated in a holistic manner. This helps all stakeholders understand the needs of and the importance of solutions that are mutually beneficial to all affected stakeholders.

Consensus-based negotiations are best conducted through a process that involves convening appropriate stakeholders, establishing responsibilities and objectives, deliberating and establishing agreement priorities and implementing and monitoring the agreement. The resultant strong and effective partnerships will improve the long-term implementation of the agreement.

Developing multi-stakeholder water governance is a long-term process that involves continued engagement and negotiations. It unpacks constructive approaches such as Multi-Stakeholder Platforms (MSPs) and Consensus Building, and finally focuses on the diversity of agreements that can be produced to create more effective long-term water allocation and use agreements. MSPs are forums that focus on

• Sharing knowledge, experiences and perspectives
• Generating and exploring options
• Informing and shaping negotiations and decisions

They create an open forum where differences are recognized and all parties gain a better understanding of complex issues. The MSPs are most effective when they are open to all vested stakeholders. This is best assured by mapping stakeholders who impact or are impacted by the allocation of rights to the subject water source.  These stakeholders can be prioritized by their influence on or impact related to the 4Rs of negotiation - e.g. entities who currently have direct responsibilities over or rights to the source of water and those who would be impacted by changes to water use or allocation.

The value of Consensus Building has many benefits including focusing on mutual gains by focusing on interests and negotiating across multiple issues, it often prioritizes scientific data over self-interests and is aimed at reaching mutually acceptable agreements that all parties can and will implement.

Water agreements will require continued monitoring and adjustments over time. The partnerships and processes developed through the above mentioned concepts will likely result in lasting positive exchange and cooperation among all participating stakeholders.