PROCEEDINGS
Developing regional collaboration in river basin
management in response to climate change
2 - 4 June 2015
Canberra, Australia
www.monash.edu/sustainability
ABOUT THE MONASH SUSTAINABILITY INSTITUTE
The Monash Sustainability Institute’s (MSI) mission is to solve the climate change and environmental
sustainability challenges facing our world. The problems are complex. To find the answers, we have to
work very differently.
That’s why we bring together the best minds from multiple fields of endeavour. We pull together
scientists, lawyers, economists, psychologists, biologists, engineers, health professionals, and more to
nut out the ‘wicked’ problems. Together, the world-leading experts from the Monash Sustainability
Institute and Monash University, combine with the best industry and academic know-how from around
the world to help create the world of the future.
For more, visit: www.monash.edu/sustainability
ABOUT OUR DEVELOPING ASIA PROGRAM
Our Developing Asia program brings together the multidisciplinary research expertise of Monash
University with international teams of experts to link research and policy on adapting and mitigating
climate change in South Asia and Southeast Asia. The program is assisting efforts to reduce poverty in
the region through sustainable development of natural resources.
National economics and politics tend to overshadow science when it comes to negotiations over
shared resources. Under the leadership of Dr Paul McShane, MSI is heading up an international,
multi-disciplinary effort to provide governments and their agencies with research-backed data to
facilitate more informed policies and agreements. MSI’s Chief Research Officer, Dr McShane, and his
team have been working across Asia and the Australia-Pacific region for the past few years. They have
built up considerable expertise in pulling together multi-disciplinary teams to identify appropriate
courses of action that provide mutual benefit.
For more on our Developing Asia Program, visit:
www.monash.edu/sustainability/programs-initiatives/developing-asia
August 2015
Table of contents
Introduction 1
Developing systemic models of the Teesta and Koshi River Basin 2
Table 1: What do stakeholders value in the Teesta River Basin 3
Table 2: Values, threats and adaptive responses
3
Fig 1 - 3: Conceptual models4
The Teesta Basin: Project impacts of climate change & options for adaptation
6
Knowledge perspectives of the Koshi Basin 7
Fig 4: Development cycles of hydro-electricity development project in Nepal 7
The Koshi Basin program: Closing the knowledge and competency gap
9
A knowledge management framework for the Teesta and Koshi Fig 5: A knowledge management framework for the Teesta
Fig 6: Information pathways responsive to river basin management
Fig 7: A knowledge management framework for the Koshi
10
10
11
11
Introduction
Dr Paul McShane, Chief Research Officer, Monash Sustainability Institute
This workshop is part of a Public Sector Linkage
Program (PSLP) funded by Australian Aid (Federal
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade). It brings
together public sector institutions from Nepal,
Bangladesh, India, and Bhutan.
The workshop follows previous workshops and
in-country activity examining opportunities and
barriers to developing regional collaboration in
trans-boundary river management in South Asia.
The program addresses an emerging challenge in
the region with the nexus of demography, energy,
and water causing potential water scarcity.
Compuonded by likely climate change, this
increasing demand for energy - - to support
continuing economic growth in Asia, particularly in
China and India - is placing further pressure on
already scarce groundwater and surface water
resources.
Water, used primarily for agriculture, is now being
used to generate electricity, either directly through
hydropower (dams) or indirectly through cooling
of nuclear and coal-fired power stations
(particularly in India). The concentration of human
populations in dense urban settings and changing
water consumption patterns could result in major
cities like Mumbai running out of water.
Further to this, countries with monsoonal climates
face extremes of water availability with damaging
floods in the wet season and crippling droughts in
the dry season. This dichotomous situation may
become worse with climate change. Yet necessary
poverty reduction strategies require sustainable
economic development.
This PSLP program addresses the fate of
Himalayan-sourced rivers given the need to
sustainably manage available water resources.
We focus on two exemplar trans-boundary river
basins: the Koshi (Nepal/India) and the Teesta
(India/Bangladesh). Our aim is to promote regional
collaboration in South Asian river management
based on identification of mutual benefits among
riparian states responsive to impacts of climate
change and human development.
Past workshops in this program have focused on
benefit sharing. Here we examine knowledge
management to inform systemic approaches to
river basin management.
Knowledge management - the systematic
collection and sharing of information to inform
policy - involves government and non-government
organisations influential in water resource
management. The harmonisation of approaches to
water management is a necessary prerequisite to
sustainable trans-boundary management of
Himalayan-sourced rivers.
We also develop and present systemic models of
the exemplar river basins to capture biophysical
and socioeconomic issues influential in the
governance of major river basins.
Yet successful trans-boundary management is
frustrated by longstanding conflict among states
on water access. Power asymmetries exist with
influential populous countries like India and China
driving access to major trans-boundary rivers. This
will affect water resource allocation strategies
including the provision of water to support
agriculture, energy generation, industrial
development and human well-being in major
cities. Prioritisation, conservation, and sustainable
water management strategies will be required,
together with effective trans-boundary river
management, to avert severe water shortages in
the region.
1
Developing systemic models of the Teesta and
Koshi River Basins
Dr Terry Chan, Research Fellow, Monash Sustainability Institute
Bayesian network models provide an opportunity
to link biophysical and socioeconomic models of
river basins. They present linkages among key
variables and provide a framework for examining
the consequences of policy interventions (e.g.
dams) on water availability.
They also can assist examination of likely climate
change impacts (e.g. glacial and snow melts) on
river flows.
Past workshops have presented basic models
which identify issues influential to water
availability for human well being, such as quantity
and quality. In this session, workshop participants
were asked to identify:
ff local adaptation plans of action (LAPA);
ff the status in the Koshi and Teesta basins;
ff cross LAPA communication between countries;
and
ff research priorities for trans-boundary river
management.
In Nepal, district planning involves District
Development Committees and District Village
Committees. They meet at least annually. LAPAs
have been piloted in more than 60 districts by the
Ministry of Science Technology and the
Environment. This involves translating mechanisms
to integrate LAPAs into local district plans.
NGOs play an important role to implement actions
at community level from the LAPAs. However, in
Nepal, it is difficult to integrate NAPA actions into
district level plans. Capacity building is needed to
improve the planning process and to translate
adaptation plans to local level. This and the
problem of agency staff continuity (qualified and
experienced staff that leave create gaps in
capacity).
This is further complicated by the many layers of
government, ministries and departments that have
input into NAPAs and are involved in translating
regional priorities into action. This is particularly
important when examining consequences for the
Koshi Basin given climate change (e.g. glacial lake
outburst floods, extreme floods/droughts) and
human intervention (storage and hydro dams).
Stakeholder engagement revealed several issues
for the Teesta river basin. (See Table 1)
Workshop participants also presented current
values, threats and adaptive responses. (See Table
2)
Although qualitative, this information can assist in
identifying common values and a shared response
to water resource allocation in the region given
current threats to the Teesta basin.
Conceptual models are also presented in the
following pages (including the Koshi Basin).
The Ministry of Environment co-ordinates the
National Adaptation Plans of Action (NAPAs)
involving six sectors (including Health and
Agriculture).
2
TABLE 1
What do stakeholders value in the Teesta River Basin?
What do they want to improve/protect/manage?
• Equitable/fair allocation of
water
• Water for irrigation/irrig agric
• Water for hydropower
• Environmental flows to
preserve the life of the river
• Transit/transport
• “Productivity” (E.g. Hh net
Income)
• Livelihoods
• Char livelihoods
• Provisional services
• Regulatory services
• Habitat
• Flood control
• Reliability
Quality
Fisheries
Sediment
Salinity (not as sig in Teesta)
Public health/health services
Erosion
Groundwater table/piezo levels
Household domestic use of water
Sanitation
Subsistence agriculture
Flood recession agriculture?
Cultural meanings/value (esp upper
reaches/Sikkim)
• Beneficiaries/equity?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
TABLE 2
Values:
Threats:
Adaptations:
What does the community value? What do
they want to improve/preserve/protect?
What are the threats to this/these values?
What adaptation/interventions occur to
respond/manage changes/threats?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Water provision
Water quantity
Water quality
Gender equity (in water provision)
Education/schools
Access to water resource
Local institutions for NRM mgmt
Water management
Tourism (environmental water/flow)
Supply – regularity/reliability
Proximity to WR
Ownership of wells (officially needs a
licence even on private land)
Infrastructure development (e.g.
Roads v high on agenda, esp rural –
important for trucking water in)
Village development
Electrification
Health
Income
Uses: Irrigation, industry, drinking,
household needs, livestock, sanitation
A good crop (Panchkal as “vegetable
bowl” of Kathmandu)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Water scarcity/droughts
Increased demand (ID) from migration/pop’n increase
ID from change in lifestyle
ID from new uses, e.g. Biogas production at Hh level,
new industries, e.g. Selling water to city
ID from multicropping, change in crop patterns,
increasing cropping
Climate change -> change in rainfall pattern (e.g.
Intensity, shift of monsoon, )
Encroachment of GM seeds
Use of chemical fertilizers, amount, new techniques,
pesticides, poor knowledge/application
Lack of government extension services
/capacity/manpower to manage above
Deep boring bec of ID and deeper water table
(recharge issues?)
Contamination issues? (As, Fe?)
Rising price for water extraction
Money for improving/changing water source
New non-engineered/designed rds
Trouble with pumps /electricity
Lack of local elections (last 15 years) -> poor
institutional function, lack of local accountable
authority
Allocation of funds given poor inst function
Poor governance at local level
Surface water reduction -> affects irrig esp
Periurban?
Small dams? (sometimes “Check dams” to control
erosion in headwaters , but none here)
Drying of streams/surface sources (observed by locals
last 20 years)
Landslides (heavy rainfall/CC, haphazard road
construction)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Tanks/ rainwater harvesting
Overflow from harvest used for irrig
Drip irrigation, other alt irrigation than
free flow
Deep boring for drinking water (cost
of extraction -> minimise times/period
used)
Informal community
governance/regulation, amount each
Hh is allowed to collect and/or times
allowed (not actual Water User Group,
small comm)
Reduction in Hh livestock to available
water
Storage
Migration to urban areas, remittances
(low in this area – 10%?)
Community Forest User Group
(official, last 20 years)
Water User Group (should be there?
Overlap w CFUG)
Nat Fed Ed Wat Irrig Group? (Rep for
Panch region?)
Innovative agric practices: e.g. Mosaic
ploughing to conserve water, less
water intensive crops (Current v water
intensive veg), change cropping
practice/patterns
Other factors: What other
factors impact the values?
•
•
•
•
Income
Culture? (Little
variation in P case
Gender issues,
responsibility solely
with women
Services from
external agencies
3
FIGURE 1
FIGURE 2
Koshi: merging conceptual models
Greenhouse
Gases/CO2
Emissions
Climate
Change
Crop Types
Crop Cycle
Agricultural
Practices, Methods
Topography
Soil Types
Livestock
Climate
Variability
Land use/
cover
Agriculture
Household
Use
Rainfall/
Precipitation
Lifestyle,
migration
Water
Sources
Infrastructure
Development
Social
Structure/
Practice
Access to
Water
Education
Water Demand
Access to
Power, Social
Strata
Population
Recharge
Groundwater
Availability
Income
Level
Education level
Economic level
Quantity
Provision Policy
Priority
Sedimentation
Waste
Management
Water
Quality
Research
Learning
Outcomes
NAPA
LAPA
Technology
Water
Management
Other Use:
-School
-Industry
-Tourism
Water Provision
Village Development
Committee
Water Users
Group, FMIS,
Institutional
Setup
Uses
Health
Nat Fed Water
Irrigation Group
Line Agencies,
Utility
Supply
Management
Gender
Equity
4
FIGURE 3
Teesta: merging conceptual models
Governance
Policy
Influence
Climate Variability
Governance and
Information Exchange
Power/Diesel
Subsidy
Allocative
Institutions
BWDB
Farmer Field Schools
and Agricultural Extension
Seasonality especially
dry season flow
Infrastructure and
Water Diversion
Barrage
Ministry
of Land
Landuse
Patterns
Water Markets
and
Water Lords
Quantity
Lack of Capactiy
for Storage
Surface
Sedimentation Water
Water
Quality
Agro-ecological
Conditions (soil etc.)
Nutrient Imbalance
and Loss
Crop
Type
Arsenic in Crop
Yield
Crops
Economics of Energy
(Electricity & diesel)
Groundwater
Water
Quality
Water
Efficiency
Intensity
of Crops
Agricultural
Policy
Cost
Salinity
Intrusion
Water
Availability
Water for
Irrigation
Livelihoods
These conceptual models presented above clearly
do not present the regional complexity
characteristic of trans-boundary river basins.
Rather, they illustrate the process of integrating
biophysical and socio-economic variables through
participant interaction to examine the
consequences for water availability (given human
interventions and differences in policy positions
among states). Importantly, exercises such as these
(which result in conceptual models for exemplar
river basins) allow dialogue among actors
responsive to water resource management and
water allocation policies among states.
As more information comes to hand, model
synthesis can become more detailed and more
expansive reflective of a systemic approach to river
basin management and regional collaboration. In
this way an integrated approach can be developed
which takes into account likely climate change
impacts (e.g. on river hydrology) and policy
interventions (e.g. dams). Such an exercise requires
much more input to fully integrate bio-physical
and socio-economic variables which influence
water availability to communities in the region..
5
The Teesta Basin: Projected impacts of climate
change and options for adaptation
Dr Shresth Tayal, The Energy Resources Institute (TERI), India
The upper Teesta Basin in India is glaciated (more
than 400 glaciers).
Most of the Teesta basin (>80%) lies in India (Sikkim
and West Bengal) with the remainder in
Bangladesh.
Glacial retreat is evident in the upper basin
reflecting global warming. Climate change is likely
to present other impacts including loss of
economic, ecological, cultural amenities. Changes
to monsoonal climate patterns may also increase
extremes of flood and drought.
Even so, projections suggest a shortage of 460
billion cubic metres by 2030. Further improvement
in water conservation may result from improved
irrigation practices (e.g. drip irrigation) but further
savings will need to be identified to avert a water
scarcity crisis (particularly in Bangladesh).
This reinforces the need for regional collaboration
in rivers such as the Teesta which are vital to the
well being of communities in India and in
Bangladesh.
Increasing demand for energy, particularly in India,
has promoted proposals for damming the Teesta
for hydro-power generation. Such proposals create
conflict particularly given the potential ecological
and economic impacts of dams.
Attempts at collaborative trans-boundary
management of the Teesta river have been
frustrated by a trust deficit between India and
Bangladesh, a failure to ratify a water sharing
treaty, and lack of data sharing. Potential solutions
include additional supply of water to downstream
regions in Bangladesh and sharing of benefits (e.g.
agriculture).
More troubling is the projected increase in demand
for water (at least 2.85% p.a.) with declining or
static supply. Supply side improvements (e.g.
improved reticulation) suggest about 0.1% p.a. in
water savings.
6
Knowledge perspectives of the Koshi Basin
Professor Narendra Raj Khanal, Department of Geography, Tribhuvan University,
Kathmandu, Nepal
The Koshi Basin derives from the Tibetan Plateau.
It includes the input of rivers draining the high
Himalayas including the Melamchi, Indrawati,
Tamakoshi, Likhu, Dudhukoshi, Arun, and Tamor
River feeding the Sunkoshi river which flows via
Nepal into India. Traditionally, wood and
agricultural residue are the main energy source
(88%) for Nepal.
Yet demand for hydropower from energy-hungry
India and the relatively low water storage
availability for Nepal has prompted exploration of
hydropower potential in Nepal.
Development of Nepal’s water resources, including
those in the Koshi basin, offer benefits in power
generation, irrigation, and flood management. The
Sapta Koshi high dam has been in the planning
stage since 1946 and many more dams are
planned.
However, government instability in Nepal and an
uncertain planning process has forestalled further
development. There are also concerns in relation to
inundation of fertile land, and the ecological
impacts of restricted water flows through dams.
Within Nepal, several Ministries have input into
planning for water resource development.
These include the Ministry of Energy (Department
of Electricity Development), the Ministry of
Irrigation (Department of Water Induced Disaster
Prevention), the Ministry of Science, Technology
and Environment, the Ministry of Home Affairs.
The approval process for hydropower development
in Nepal is illustrated below.
FIGURE 4
Development Cycle of Hydro-electricity Development Project in Nepal
Preliminary selection of projects
based on Master Plan and Field
Investigation
Submission of application and proposal with
relevant materials/documents to DoED for
Survey License
Review of proposal by DoED . If
found appropriate it recommends
to issue survey license to MoE
Submission of relevant
materials/documents for making
agreement for the purchase of
hydropower with NEA
Submission of feasibility (technical, economic
and environment) and environmental (EIA) study
reports for approval for construction licenseMoE/MoSTE
Review of proposal by MoE. If
found appropriate, issue survey
license
Agreement with NEA for hydroelectricity purchase after
evaluation/reevaluation of the
documents, technical reports
Submission of application for license for
hydropower generation with documents such as
feasibility study report, environmental impact
study report, preliminary financial investment
scheme, copy of agreement of hydro-electricity
purchase with NEA
Recommendation by NEA after
reviewing documents to MoE for
approval
Preparation of detailed design by
proprietor and beginning of
construction work. Submission of
half early progress report during
construction period to DoED
Guarantee of financial provision within one year
after receiving generation license
Issue of license by MoE by
reviewing the documents and
recommendation forwarded by
DoED
Production of electricity as per production license issued
Handing over project without any cost to the government
after ending the date mentioned in the production license
7
Other modifications to rivers including earthen
embankments, ring bunds, gates and barrages can
cause inundation during the wet season. This is
problematic for southern Nepal. Joint initiatives
India and Nepal include:
Challenges to manage joint water resources remain
given likely climate change and its impact on
glacial/snow melts for Himalayan-sourced rivers.
ff The Standing Committee on inundation
problems (Director General Department of
Water Induced Disaster Prevention and the
Chairperson of the Ganga Flood Control
Commission India) which meets twice a year
before and after the Monsoon.
ff Bi national committee on flood forecasting.
ff Joint committee on water resources.
ff High level Technical committee on Inundation
problem (Executive Director Water and Energy
Commission Secretariat, Nepal; and
Commissioner of Water Resources India).
8
The Koshi Basin program: Closing the
knowledge and competency gaps
Dr Shahriar Wahid, International Centre for Integrated Mountain Developmen (ICIMOD),
Kathmandu, Nepal
As a downstream riparian state, India seeks to
manage potentially catastrophic floods emanating
from the Koshi basin. Access to information on
trans-boundary water resources in a timely manner
is crucial.
Key steps in knowledge management include:
ff strengthening the system of monitoring (river
heights);
GLOFs also have severe economic consequences
with damage to infrastructure (e.g. roads, dams,
buildings).
The recognition of upstream/downstream linkages
is important in developing local water use master
plans for the basin. Such linkages are important in
facilitating knowledge management and regional
collaboration for the Koshi Basin.
ff establish and technically support face-to-face
and electronically-mediated learning
exchanges; and
ff facilitate the integration, exchange and
accessibility of data and information.
During heavy rainfall events, landslides are also
problematic in the Koshi basin. Susceptibility maps
can assist in managing landslide risks. Climate
change will affect rainfall patterns although
prediction of regional rainfall remains coarse.
Warming will increase the likelihood of Glacial Lake
outburst floods (GLOFs) which can be catastrophic
to exposed communities in Nepal.
9
A knowledge management framework for the
Teesta and Koshi
Dr Jeremy Aarons, Monash Sustainability Institute
In the context of collaborative river basin
management, knowledge management is the
systematic approach to collecting, sharing and
integrating knowledge to inform policy and
support decision making.
Top down policies that govern a national
approach to water resource management
intersect with bottom up community-level
responses (e.g. in water consumption patterns).
This is illustrated below for the Teesta basin.
FIGURE 5
10
Information pathways between the various actors responsive to river basin management (India,
Bangladesh) are shown below.
FIGURE 6
Similarly, for the Koshi Basin, information systems and knowledge transfer involve multiple agencies
responsive to international, national, and local community needs.
FIGURE 7
11
This includes an understanding of their ownership
Yet current (state-led) approaches to data sharing
are limited.
For the Teesta, India and Bangladesh have
established a Joint Technical Committee but this
has not worked effectively as a joint body with
poor collaboration, ad hoc meeting schedules, a
lack of strategy and unresolved Teesta treaty
negotiations between the two countries.
For the Koshi, there has been limited progress
improving data collection and sharing via
implementation of Nepal’s National Water Plan
(2005) including the Koshi River Basin
Management pilot program. ICIMOD’s current
Koshi Basin Program aims to develop a more
collaborative information sharing approach
consistent with integrated water resource
management and effective trans-boundary river
management.
Issues which require resolution in a knowledge
management framework include:
ff Who are the principal actors in water allocation
decisions?
Knowledge management including information
sharing can stimulate co-operation/collaboration,
developing a common factual basis for policy
making and promoting other forms of
co-operation.
Knowledge is not just technical data but also
includes stakeholder information (including
indigenous knowledge), economic incentives,
market mechanisms, and information systems
which can assist develop understanding among
stakeholders engaged in river basin management.
The role of the private sector is more difficult to
contextualise in trans-boundary river
management. National governments do not
engage the private sector in water management
plans.
Yet governments are also encouraging investment
by the private sector (e.g. in hydroelectricity
development).
This includes public private partnerships. However,
private sector interest does not include basin-wide
approaches. Rather, they will examine projects
through relatively narrow regional perspectives.
ff What forms of infrastructure are involved
(dams, irrigations) and how are final designs/
decisions made?
ff Is the priority electricity or water and how is
this decided across state boundaries?
ff How is the private sector involved and how
does it interface with government?
12
FURTHER INFORMATION
Monash Sustainability Institute
8 Scenic Boulevard, Clayton Campus
Monash University, Victoria, 3800, Australia
T: +61 3 9905 0124
E: enquiries@msi.monash.edu
W: www.monash.edu/sustainability
T: www.twitter.com/MonashMSI