Project Deliverable: D10 - ess.co.at

Project Deliverable: D10.1 Comparative analysis of case studies

Programme name: Sustainable Management of Scarce Resources in the Coastal Zone

Program Areas: A3, (d)

Project acronym: SMART

Contract number: ICA3-CT-2002-10006

Project Deliverable: D10.1: Comparative analysis of case studies

Related Work Package: WP 10 Comparative policy analysis

Type of Deliverable: RE Technical Report

Dissemination level: Restricted

Document Author: EIAPT team: Nelson Lourenço, Luís Rodrigues, Carlos Russo Machado FEEM team: Carlo Giupponi, Jaroslav Mysiak, Gretel Gambarelli, Jacopo Crimi,

Edited by: EIAPT, FEEM

Reviewed by:

Document Version:

Revision history:

First Availability:

Final Due Date: 31.08.2005

Last Modification: October 2005

Hardcopy delivered to: Dr. Cornelia Nauen European Commission, Research Directorate General SDME 1/02 B-1049 Brussels, Belgium


TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Executive Summary .....................................................................................................................5

2 Objectives of the Work-Package..................................................................................................7

3 Policies for water resource management....................................................................................8 3.1 Legal and administrative framework ............................................................................................ 8

3.1.1 Egypt............................................................................................................................................................. 8 3.1.2 Jordan.......................................................................................................................................................... 10 3.1.3 Lebanon ...................................................................................................................................................... 12 3.1.4 Tunisia ........................................................................................................................................................ 13 3.1.5 Turkey......................................................................................................................................................... 14

3.2 Water management, irrigation and implementation policies .................................................... 16 3.2.1 Water Management..................................................................................................................................... 16 3.2.2 Water Policies ............................................................................................................................................. 18 3.2.3 Water Management for Irrigation ............................................................................................................... 20

3.3 Comparative analysis of water policies and WFD...................................................................... 25 3.3.1 The Catchment’s Planning Process............................................................................................................. 25 3.3.2 The importance of the international agreements ......................................................................................... 26 3.3.3 Catchment’s Management Strategies,......................................................................................................... 27 3.3.4 Types of measurements .............................................................................................................................. 28 3.3.5 Implementation of Policies and Measurements .......................................................................................... 28

3.4 Towards the sustainable water management .............................................................................. 29 4 Analysis of Water Indicators .....................................................................................................31

4.1 Socioeconomic aspects on Water Stress....................................................................................... 32 4.2 Suggested Water Indicators.......................................................................................................... 33

4.2.1 Human development Index ......................................................................................................................... 35 4.2.2 Water Poverty Index ................................................................................................................................... 40 4.2.3 Water Stress Index ...................................................................................................................................... 47 4.2.4 Social Water Stress Index ........................................................................................................................... 49

4.3 Concluding remarks about more advanced overview of indicators.......................................... 53 5 Qualitative Comparison of case studies ....................................................................................55

5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 55 5.2 Short summary of the Case Studies ............................................................................................. 56

5.2.1 D05 Turkey – Gediz river basin.................................................................................................................. 56 5.2.2 D06 Egypt – Abou Kir bay ......................................................................................................................... 56 5.2.3 D07 Lebanon – Abou Ali river basin.......................................................................................................... 56 5.2.4 D08 Jordan – Gulf of Aqba......................................................................................................................... 57 5.2.5 D05 Tunisia – Gulf of Hammamet ............................................................................................................. 58

5.3 Comparison of physical conditions .............................................................................................. 58 5.4 Comparison of water demand ...................................................................................................... 59 5.5 Comparison of water supply......................................................................................................... 60

6 Comparative Analysis of Case studies ......................................................................................63 6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 63 6.2 Conceptualisation of the Case Studies ......................................................................................... 63


2

6.2.1 Driving forces and Pressures ...................................................................................................................... 64 6.2.2 State and Impacts ........................................................................................................................................ 65 6.2.3 Policy options considered ........................................................................................................................... 66

6.3 Evaluation ...................................................................................................................................... 72 6.3.1 Transformation of the policy performance ................................................................................................. 72 6.3.2 Elicitation weights of criteria...................................................................................................................... 72 6.3.3 Aggregated performance............................................................................................................................. 78

6.4 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................... 82 7 References ..................................................................................................................................83

8 Annexes ......................................................................................................................................90 8.1 Annex I: Sustainability Indicators ............................................................................................... 90 8.2 Annex II: Weight elicitation ......................................................................................................... 92 8.3 Annex III: Final ranking............................................................................................................... 95


3

INDEX OF TABLES

Table 1 Renewable water availability per capita per year in SCSC.............................................. 19 Table 2 International river basins in the Middle East .................................................................... 23 Table 3 How the different Water Indexes correspond to each other............................................. 34 Table 4 Score correspondence of Water Indexes......................................................................... 34 Table 5 HDI and its components................................................................................................... 40 Table 6 Characteristics of WPI Components ................................................................................ 42 Table 7 Components of the WPI (with ranking) ............................................................................ 44 Table 8 Driving forces and Pressures for the Turkish CS............................................................. 65 Table 9 Water management responses........................................................................................ 66 Table 10 Criteria weights elicited by Simos procedure ................................................................. 77 Table 11 Final results of the CA.................................................................................................... 80 Table 12 Criteria separated ........................................................................................................... 92 Table 13 Criteria grouped ............................................................................................................. 92 Table 14 Correlation between the judgements of the experts ...................................................... 94 Table 15 Correlation between the judgements of criteria importance........................................... 94 Table 16 Jordan CS ...................................................................................................................... 95 Table 17 Lebanese CS ................................................................................................................. 95 Table 18 Lebanese CS ................................................................................................................. 96 Table 19 Similarities of final rankings across the case studies..................................................... 96


4

INDEX OF FIGURES

Figure 1 HDI dimensions .............................................................................................................. 35 Figure 2 Map of Human Development Index, 1999 ...................................................................... 36 Figure 3 WPI Pentagram .............................................................................................................. 43 Figure 4 Map of Access to Safe Drinking Water, 2000 ................................................................. 45 Figure 5 Map of Water Poverty Index, 2000/01 ............................................................................ 47 Figure 6 Map of Water Stress Index, 1995 ................................................................................... 48 Figure 7 Social Water Stress Index, 1995/99 ............................................................................... 52 Figure 8 On line OPTIMA questionnaires ..................................................................................... 55 Figure 9 Water Demand across the Case Studies........................................................................ 59 Figure 10 Water Supply across the Case Studies ........................................................................ 61 Figure 11 The DPSIR conceptual framework ............................................................................... 64 Figure 12 Value functions applied to the considered criteria ........................................................ 72 Figure 13 Example of the Simos methodology ............................................................................. 75 Figure 14 Variation in the experts’ judgement of the criteria importance...................................... 78 Figure 15 Final ranking of the options........................................................................................... 81


5

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The present document consists of 4 chapters, including the Executive Summary.

In chapter 2 Objectives of the Work-Package (WP), the content of the document is shortly presented with specific reference to the tasks and to the objectives of the WP, as described in the project’s proposal (part B - Description of the research Work).

In chapter 3 Policies for Water Resource Management, initially is presented a legal and administrative framework of each case study country. Supported with various sources of information the report fuscous the main institutions responsible for water management, mainly at national level. Next analysis introduces firstly some issues about water resources management and allocating this short available resource in the frame of irrigation needs; secondly, drawing water policies. In the last point of this chapter is about the analysis of differences between water policies of European Union Countries and case study countries.

In chapter 4 Analysis of National Water Indicators is developed a study of comparative international water indicators. This task would allow for the settings of case study countries. The main result of this chapter is highlighting the most extreme situations according the chosen indicators.

In chapter 5 Qualitative Comparison of case studies a short summary of the Case Studies (CS) is presented and a qualitative comparative assessment is performed in order to present the following Comparative Analysis, core of the present deliverable. The information available for this analysis comes from the 5 CS reports but is rather unequal across the report. In order to better understand the relative importance of the different issues across each case study, the information coming from an on line questionnaire developed for another European fund project (OPTIMA) has been used. The discussion provided enhance differences and commonalties between CS and follows the structure of those questionnaires: Physical condition, Water demand and Water supply, while the Water management section concerns the national context and is fully discussed in the previous sections.

The chapter 6 presents the Comparative Analysis (CA) of the CS with the support of a tool developed within an other EU funded project: Mulino-dss. This chapter is composed of two main sections: the first one addresses the conceptualisation of the case studies used for the purpose of our analysis while the second one is specifically dedicated to the evaluation of the case studies.

The DPSIR conceptual framework has been used to organise the CS results, allowing to manage coherently the different aspects under analysis: State of the environment, Scenarios, and Policy responses.

Before performing the CA of the chosen indicators, it also necessary to correctly elicit their weights to be assigned in the analysis: the weights elicitation has been performed during a Workshop held in Venice in June 2005, with the support of the Simos methodology. The results of this experts judgement exercise enhanced how problem of consistency or correlation have to be carefully handled before performing the CA. The aggregated performance of the different policy options across each CA has been performed using the Multiple-Criteria-Approach, resulting in a ranking from the most sustainable option to the less one.

The first noticeable result is that the preferred option is the same in two of the three analysed CS: Water Quality Management considered under the Optimistic Scenario. Interesting results can also be found while performing the Sensitivity Analysis, which highlights how slight changes in the weights assigned can change the final ranking.

Lastly, some critical consideration are discussed in chapter 6.4 Conclusions: the main findings of the analysis concern the gap of knowledge already noticed in D01 - Requirement and Constraints analysis which later on constrained the possibilities of a complete Comparative Analysis of the 5 case studies.

Nevertheless, the methodology originally developed for the Comparative Analysis demonstrated to be fully operational in those cases with limited data availability constraints. The conceptual


6

framework used as well as the multi-criteria analysis adopted concretely shows how participatory decision making can be handle and understood by non experts users, representing an operational approach for bridging scientific modelling and policy.


7

2 OBJECTIVES OF THE WORK-PACKAGE

The Work Package 10 - Comparative policy analysis builds upon analyses carried out in the previous WPs, for which a coherent conceptualisation of case studies, coordinated data acquisition and model implementation, as well as compatible sets of policy measures and scenarios were needed. The WP aimed at “the comparative analysis of the individual case study results, across the five case studies, against other comparable projects and against the relevant European policies in this domain”, which was the main objective of this WP defined in the project’s proposal (part B - Description of the research Work).

In more detail, the WP meant to

• identify commonalties and differences and relate them to the specific regional setting; • identify more generally applicable results that are invariant across the case studies; • organize these findings in terms of a comparative policy assessment and best practice

examples. These objectives were broke down into three tasks which can be seen as steps of the comparative analysis:

(i) First, the WP aimed to organize the individual case study results in a common conceptual framework, allowing to embody different indicators of sustainable coastal zone development and integrated resource management. This task built upon in the D04 series reporting all the indicators used and input of the models, and in the 5 Case Studies reports (D05 – D09) reporting the output of the models running as well as qualitative description of regions in which the case studies are situated.

(ii) Second, the WP aimed to compare the performance of a set of common policy options, in context of commonly defined scenarios. To follow this purpose, the WP starts to identify the key institutional framework and their water related policy framework. To help identifying main features of each country and ranking it in the framework of Mediterranean basin, this report gives also a comparative analysis of national water indicators.

(iii) Third, the WP intended to identify and report common trends with different perspectives at the level of: water policies; practices examples; and responsible institutions. To conclude, the results of the CA performed with the DSS tool will consist in a score ranking from the most to the least sustainable alternative for each case study, allowing to compare the results across the case studies.


8

3 POLICIES FOR WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

The Middle East and North African countries, where the SMART Case study Countries are located, are home to 300 million people. Making up about 5 % of the world total, they have a mere 1 % of the annual renewable water on the globe. In the Middle East freshwater problems have arisen from increasing demand for water generated by quick population growth increasing demand for basic needs of Human Beings (Myllylä, 1995).

Because of the aridity existing in the Middle East and North Africa region, this is one of the poorest in the world at water resources. However, the water resources distribution within this area is far from being balanced: relief, proximity to the sea, latitude and resulting hydro-climatic conditions, diversity in hydrographic and geological structures, and the existence of the very long river basins shared by many countries, all give rise to extremely different water situations.

Many countries in the region are characterized by long coastal boundaries on the Mediterranean Sea, as the example of four case studies in the SMART project (except Aqaba’s Jordan Case study with very small coast line of Sea of Aqaba). Several international rivers cross this region. The most important river is the Nile in North-eastern Africa, which originates outside the region in the Equatorial Lake. Smaller rivers, like the Jordan, Euphrates and the Orontes in the Middle East, also play a fundamental role in international relations regarding water resources.

The main water systems under dispute are the Nile River, the Tigris and Euphrates, the Jordan River valley (and its tributaries), and groundwater resources in the West Bank and Israel. In the past, there have been multiple attempts at reaching a water settlement, yet none have achieved a comprehensive agreement.

Political trouble is nothing new in the Middle East. In fact, many of the present-day disputes date back 100 years or more. But the increasing scarcity of renewable water resources and the simultaneous high population growth add new urgency to the need to devise a settlement (Josey, 2001).

To understand this complex situation the report will start to identify, by country, the key institutional framework and their water related policy framework. This part is completed with the individual analysis about the water management trends for the next future based on the recent policies, management projects and water structural plans at medium term.

3.1 Legal and administrative framework The role of institutions in water management has increased in importance significantly over the last decade, in line with the claim by (OSTROM, 1993) that “for the next several decades the most important question related to water resources development is that of institutional design rather than engineering design”. This is true in SMART Case Study Countries, where many of the Governments of water reform the water management institutions to achieve better performances with this short available resource.

3.1.1 Egypt There is a shortage of institutional powers for monitoring and land use changes. The main characteristics of water rules are set by Law 4/1994. This law deals with marine pollution in general and land based sources which need treatment before disposal. It sets limits on possible discharge in the marine environment.

The following ministries or institutions involved in the water sector in Egypt:

9


Source: adapted from FAO COUNTRY PROFILES (2005)

Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation water resources research, development and distribution, and undertakes the construction, operation and maintenance of the irrigation and drainage networks

Planning Sector responsible at central level for data collection, processing and analysis for planning and monitoring investment projects

Sector of Public Works and Water Resources

coordinates water resources development works

Nile Water Sector is in charge of cooperation with Sudan and other Nile River’s countries

Irrigation Department provides technical guidance and monitoring of irrigation development, including dams

Mechanical and Electrical Department in charge of the construction and maintenance of pumping stations for irrigation and drainage

The MWRI also represents Egypt in the meetings of the Nile basin countries on Nile water issues. There are several joint projects between those countries for to develop Nile water. Those projects, if completed, would increase the water shares of member countries significantly. Egypt would gain an added amount of 9 km3 of Nile water.

The Government has showed its intent to shift emphasis from its role as the central actor in developing and managing water supply systems, towards promoting participatory approaches in which water users will play an active role in to manage irrigation and cost sharing. Important institutional and legislative measures have been taken recently to promote to establish sustainable participatory irrigation management (PIM) associations. However, despite these measures, the development of water users’ associations (WUAs) as effective partners in irrigation management remains at an early stage. In the new lands, the concept of PIM is not yet effectively for various economic, financial and institutional reasons.

The Government of Egypt is mandated to plan, build, perform, manage, and preserve the water system. However, with the growing water demands oversupplies in the country, water management became a difficult task. This has led Egypt to reform policies, technologies, institutions, and development strategies to manage water more effectively. One of these strategies is the Irrigation Management Transfer (IMT) that has been a major strategy adopted to encourage farmers to play a more important role in irrigation management and related water services and share the cost of O&M of irrigation and drainages. IMT policy launched in Egypt as a pilot phase is to expand water users’ participation at secondary levels of the irrigation and drainage systems. Four pilot areas (5,000–8,000 acre) representing all categories and geographical locations of agricultural lands of Egypt were selected to carry out this policy (MOUSTAFA, 2004).

To improve the access of low-income groups to potable water and sanitation services on a sustainable basis needs a more effective use of available resources, technological improvements, capacity-building measures, and continued investment in human resources. There is, indeed, advancing research about including community and civil society organizations in decision-making related to water and sanitation issues.

In Egypt, to provide infrastructure has long been considered a public good. To improve the provision of services, recover costs and attract private investment, the government decided to reform the country’s water agencies by creating:


10

An interministerial “Infrastructure Committee” to adjust conflicting sectoral WWS policies; attract private sector involvement in the delivery of water and sanitation services. This infrastructure formulates new tariffs for consumption of WWS services subject to approval by the Prime Minister and the National Assembly. Further, is liaised with the National Democratic Party (NDP) to translate the needs of individual governorates into a new five-year financial plan.

A department to foster private sector involvement by co-ordinating between different public bodies, producing feasibility studies and providing technical and institutional information; a holding company (showed by Presidential Decree in April 2004) to decide a new tariff. This effort is based on the expenses in each governorate (corroborated by autonomous economical agencies and the newly showed joint-stock companies); to approve a five-year finance plan with expected recovery of expenditure; and to issue licenses for the operation of potable water and sanitary drainage.

In the long-term, the government also envisages creating the National Organisation for Potable Water and Sanitary Drainage with eight regional centres across the country to prepare a regional plan for water and sanitation, create regional facilities which eventually shall transferring to autonomous economic agencies; The restructuring outlined above illustrates the government’s commitment decentralization. However, restructuring government agencies alone will not be enough to upgrade poor communities in rural and peri-urban areas. Organizational reform should coupling with a policy of involving local government as well as non-governmental community organizations as well. Solutions to the water and sanitation crisis will require increased reliance on low-cost technologies adapted to local circumstances. Involving other actors will be necessary to avoid repeating the mistakes made by a centralized system in the past.

3.1.2 Jordan Of all the countries in the Middle East it is Jordan which faces the greatest water problems (Salameh & Bannayan, 1993).

The following ministries or institutions involved in the water in Jordan:

Ministry of Water and Irrigation (MOWI) Operational entity. Body responsible in Jordan for the formulation and implementation of water and wastewater development programmes

Water Authority of Jordan (WAJ) Operational entity

Jordan Valley Authority (JVA) Operational entity

Ministry of Agriculture Not directly operational entity

National Centre for Agricultural Research and Technology Transfer

Not directly operational entity

Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs and the Environment (MMRAE)


Water and Environment Research and Study Centre



A policy package, covering all aspects of the water sector, was in preparation in 1995. Municipal water use was made more systematic with creating the Water Authority in 1985. Before that, many agencies and municipalities were responsible for producing and distributing municipal water. A land and water settlement law was passed to share water among farmers. Water is distributed by shares, and occasionally, water is measured into time units known as fasl. The fasl allows the farmer to use the entire flow of water from a channel for a fixed time, usually 3, 6 or 12 hours.

The establishment of Aqaba Special Economic Zone Authority (law was passed by Parliament in August of 2000 and proves the Aqaba Special Economic Zone Authority (ASEZA) as a financially


11

and administratively independent authority) which will probably increase tourist and therefore water demand.

The Government of Jordan has adopted on a reform strategy in Jordan. A key initiative within in this strategy is establishes the Aqaba Special Economic Zone (ASEZ) as a liberalized: low tax, duty-free and mulit-sectoral development area. A simplified business environment has designed with streamlined administrative to attract investment and increase private participation. The project to choose Aqaba as a special economic zone governed by an autonomous Aqaba Special Economic Zone Authority (ASEZA), where the one-stop-shop principle is one part of our streamlined ethos (SHATANAWI, M., 1995).

The overall vision for Aqaba is to transform it into an environmentally friendly model for sustainable economic development. This could be achieved by allowing the city to become a leading tourist destination on the Red Sea, and enticing duty-free shopping centre, regional trading hub, multimode transport node, a base for value-added manufacturing, and a leading regional development centre for communication and information technology driven by a business friendly environment and a high standard of living.

The Jordan's past economical development plans reveal that surface water have been extensively developed by the Government. The priority was given to constructing dams and irrigation projects in the Jordan valley. Limited added untapped surface water resources could be developed in the Jordan valley side and in the Mujib, Zarqa, Ma'an and Zara basins, subject to specific conditions.

It is no surprise that future trends in irrigation are closely linked to water development possibilities. Aquifers in the Disi-Mudwara, Jafer and Hamad areas are prime freshwater sources, able to supply an additional 80 million m³/year of water for 100 years. Full use of these would need acceptable management practices to avoid salinisation and should be with reducing extraction from over-utilized aquifers. Plans are under way for a better assessment of the Hamad and Al-Sarhan basins' potential (RADWAN A., 2001).

Jordan, Israel and the West Bank are over-exploiting their water by between 10 and 20%. Water levels are dropping, groundwater resources are being mined, salinization and salt-water intrusion are viewed and the domestic water supply does not reach adequate standards. The following actions are envisaged to repair this crisis (FAO COUNTRY PROFILES, 2005):

• reduction of water demand for irrigation; • importation of water from water-rich countries like Turkey; • desalinisation of sea water.

As part of the efforts towards joint management of water resources, the Jordanian-lsraeli Peace Treaty includes the following arrangements:

• 20 million m³ of Yarmouk water will be stored by Israel in the winter and released to Jordan in the summer;

• 10 million m³ will be released from the Tiberias lake outside the summer season for Jordan until the construction of a desalinization plant;

• construction of storage facilities on the Yarmouk and Jordan rivers and groundwater potential in wadi Araba are under investigation;

• 50 million m of drinking water should be further allocated to Jordan through cooperation between both parties.

Although the potential for irrigation development in the highlands is great, a small increase in irrigated agriculture is anticipated because of the absence of water resources. The average water consumption for irrigation in the Jordan valley and southern Ghor is fewer than 10 000 m³/ha per year, which is much less than in the highlands where it reaches on average 16 000 m³/ha per year. This may be as in the highlands irrigation water is mostly groundwater pumped individually by farmers with less supervision than in the Jordan valley where the Jordan Valley Authority controls the water.


12

Some of the water which would be made available for irrigation purposes recycling water from municipal wastewater treatment plants. The total quantity of reused treated wastewater expected to grow from 50 million m³ in 1993 to about 89 million m in 2000 and 237 million m in 2020.

If the Jordan valley plans to improve water use efficiency through change from surface to pressurized irrigation networks, it is expected that this will increase the available water resources by 25 million m/year. Future development of water to meet the increasing demand for water for agriculture will need to implement expensive projects for developing water to the land. These projects would place a heavy burden on the national budget and would seriously affect the national economy.

Future projects include constructing storage facilities on major river and side wadis (the Wehdad, Karameh, Walah, Tannur, Mujub and Yabis dams) to reduce part of the water shortages for agricultural activities. The total yield of these darns for agricultural purposes will be about 200 million m³/year. The total cost of water development projects for the decade 1995-2005 estimating at $US 1 860 million, for an estimated yield of between 385 and 475 million m³ of water.

Water harvesting techniques have not yet been developed in Jordan. However, small research pilot projects are trying to see whether this technique would suit the country's characteristics.

A revision of the National Water Master Plan (NWMP), first prepared in 1977, began in 1993, with assisting GTZ.

3.1.3 Lebanon In general, water related legislation is mostly outdated and water rights frame a constant source of disputes. Groundwater is tapped by thousands of informal private wells with no licenses, no water metering and no charges or taxes for the tapped volumes.

Legislation concerned with land use and specific sectoral water management is lacking, as are laws concerned with preserving and protecting natural resources and pollution control. Institutional powers for monitoring and imposing laws are poor.

The institutions involved in the water development and management in Lebanon are:

Ministry of Hydraulic and Electrical Resources (MHER)

Decision-making authority

Council for Development and Reconstruction (CDR)

Te most powerful institution in irrigation rehabilitation and development (for rehabilitation and modernization; to implement irrigation schemes and for the on-farm support activities)

Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) Responsibilities for agricultural development

25 local irrigation authorities Each exploiting a small or medium irrigation project Source: adapted from FAO COUNTRY PROFILES (2005)

Many sectorial and regional water planning studies are under way by CDR and MHER. To establish the National Water Master Plan is also foreseen. The most important decree for regional water planning is the Decree No 14522 of 10 May 1970 which organizes to allocate the available water south of the Beirut river up to the southern international borders and up to the 800 meters elevation on the western skirts.

At the national level the policies could be adopted based on tools to carry out policy decisions include subsidies, taxes, market development, education, and research. Note that, this country with little history of private property rights not expected to set up a taxation and subsidy scheme, because the government controls significant part of the economy (Richards et al., 1997).


13

To develop potential future irrigation aims at increasing the area of 87 500 ha up to the potential soil and water ceiling of 177 500 ha, concentrated mainly in South Lebanon, the Bekaa Plain and the northern coastal areas (Akkar).

The irrigation potential in Lebanon is linked to the physical mobilization of water and to rehabilitating and modernizing irrigation infrastructures. An increase in the irrigated area can be achieved from surface water through building storage dams and interregional transfers, for example the Khardalé dam over the middle Litani river (now postponed) and the 'Canal 800' conveyor for irrigates 15 000 ha in South Lebanon. More than 83 sites for possible dam construction, with a total ability of 873 million m³, have already been prospected and recommended for further investigation.

Future drainage development involves completing and achieving to calibrate the Litani river and its seven tributaries in the South Bekaa Plain, to reclaim about 1 500 ha of the waterlogged area, and to simplify the drainage works in another risky area of 3 500 ha which is also exposed to frequent floods from rivers. Environmental issues, such as preserving marshy lowlands for migratory birds, should also be given consideration.

3.1.4 Tunisia Like the other SMART Case Study Countries Tunisia have a limited water supply and a constantly increasing water demand. To cope with water supply shortages crisis, Tunisia began to carry out a comprehensive and carried water demand management programme since 1991. However, this “new” programme rise in the framework on the other which beginning of the 60’s, a vast plan of alternative water sources, or non-conventional water, has been applied. The water code, published in 1975, decides all interventions in the water sector until today; this is one of the main issues to understand the main key institutional measurements which influencing water strategies.

The following ministries or institutions are involved in the water sector in Tunisia:

Ministry of Agriculture the main institution involved in the water sector

General Directorate of Water Resources (DGRE or Direction générale des ressources en eau)

is in charge of the monitoring and evaluation of water resources

General Directorate of Large Hydraulic Works (DGGTH or Direction générale des grands travaux hydrauliques)

construction of dams

General Directorate of Hydraulic Studies and Works (DGETH or Direction générale des etudes et travaux hydrauliques)

general hydraulics studies, construction of hillside dams, development of large-scale schemes and management of the dams.

General Directorate of Rural Engineering (DGGR or Direction générale du genie rural)

responsible for irrigation, rural equipment and for drinking water supply to the rural population

regional agricultural development offices (CDRA or Cornmissariat regional de développement agricole)

institutions responsible at regional level for develops public irrigation schemes


The strategy for the future use of water, adopted in 1991, aims at develops 90% of surface water and 100% of groundwater by the year 2010, with builds 21 dams, 235 hillside dams and 610 deep tube-wells. One of the objectives is the improvement in the control of water associated with the agricultural development of the irrigation schemes. The aims of the country are to encourage


14

adopting water saving techniques, to favour the reuse of treated wastewater for irrigation. The objective is to expand the irrigated areas and to set up the related activities necessary for agricultural development and a better use of irrigation schemes.

Tunisia water conservation strategy combines the following: Increasing water supply efficiency and controlling leakage; Universal water metering and pricing for conservation; Public awareness and education to create a water conservation culture. By 1999, major water saving was made (FAO COUNTRY PROFILES, 2005):

• Water losses in the distribution dropped from 24.1% to 14.5%. The resulting water savings from 1996 to 1999 were 66 million cubic meters equivalent to 20 % of the annual drinking water consumption and the capacity of a medium-size dam.

• 37% decrease in institutional and public water consumption which dropped from 1248 to 784 m3/year/connection

• 18% decrease in tourism consumption which dropped from 576 to 472 litres/day/bed • 5% decrease in the average domestic consumption which dropped from 137 to 130

m3/year/connection in 1991.

On the other hand, the Agriculture in Tunisia accounts for about 14% of total GDP. As with other countries in North Africa, to manage critical and limited water remains a key issue for economic growth and development of the economy. The cost of water to various sectors in the economy will surely rise in the future, either because of worsening of supplies leading to increased access costs or policy induced increases in water costs. However, producer associations oppose water cost increases (LARSON, 2001). The main concern is that any water cost increases will affect their competitiveness, with a resulting decrease in the production influencing the exports and employment and an increase in imports.

3.1.5 Turkey There are serious institutional, legal, social and economical drawbacks, which improve water share and environmental pollution problems. It is possible to identify some constraints to achieving basin management objectives.

The institutional evolution is slow in comparison to grows the water management problems. Legislation used in current management practices is too old and cannot meet current demands.

There are two governmental organizations involved in major irrigation and drainage development in Turkey:

State Hydraulic Works (DSI) Responsible for the planning, design, construction and operation of water development for various purposes like irrigation, flood control, swamp reclamation, hydropower development, navigation and water supply to cities with over 100 000 inhabitants

General Directorate of Rural Services (GDRS)

Responsible for the development of small-scale irrigation schemes and small reservoirs, rural roads and water supply to rural areas. It is also responsible for land consolidation and the on-farm development of all irrigation projects


Unlike most Middle East countries which are dependent on water from sources originating in other countries or on desalination, Turkey is naturally awarded with plentiful water. The Turkish government has assigned the highest priority to completing its massive $32 billion South-eastern Anatolia Project (GAP), consisting of 22 dams and 19 hydroelectric power plants on the Euphrates and Tigris rivers. Scheduled for completion in 2005, GAP will produce 27 billion kilowatt-hours of


15

hydroelectric power and will divert water from the Atatürk Dam in south-eastern Anatolia just north of the Syrian border.

For Turkey, GAP will not only provide food and energy for a growing population, but is the crux of a comprehensive and sustainable economic development plan designed to end instability and reduce out-migration by transforming the feudal economic and social structure of this poor and largely Kurdish inhabited region of the country (GRUEN, 2004).

Nevertheless, in several areas, problems are emerging as urban activities invade on to agricultural lands. There is an increasing interest in using the land as a vehicle for treating wastewater from agribusiness and urban activities. In particular there is current concern about the use of polluted water to irrigate agricultural lands, especially in western Turkey (where is including the case study area), which has been experiencing water shortages regularly in recent years.

Turkey is preparing to reform its tight policy on Transboundary Rivers and water to comply with EU criteria and international law. The country's foreign ministry has showed two working groups - one to prepare the new water legislation, considering Turkey's needs as well as the EU Water Framework Directive, and the other to carry out the necessary restructuring of institutions.

As an EU candidate, Turkey needing to harmonise its laws, including those governing environmental resources, with those of the Union. Ankara is hoping to start membership negotiations with the EU in 2005, provided the Union gives the go-ahead during its summit this month. The EU-Turkey Accession Partnership Agreement of 2003 urged Turkey to approve the Union's water standards.

At the same time, the country must balance its need to safeguard its with current interpretations of international law, which need countries to consider the impact of water policies on neighbouring countries. Transboundary rivers make up 40 % of Turkey's water potential. It has reporting the Middle East, and the Gulf States in particular, will face serious water shortages during the next 25 years. However, Turkey is likely to be one of the main sources for the transfer of freshwater.

The two important rivers originating in Turkey -- the Tigris and the Euphrates -- have long been the subject of disagreements with water-stressed Syria and Iraq, which traversing by both rivers. During the 1990s, while Syria and Iraq were calling on Turkey to release more water for agricultural use, the country instead decided to build dams to foster economic growth in its poorest regions. Under a protocol signed in 1987, Turkey releases 500 cubic meters per second of water to Syria, which would like to see this amount increased to 700 cubic meters. Once Ankara signs the recent international conventions on Transboundary Rivers, it will have to get Syria's approval if it wants to build a dam on the Euphrates.

Turkey also has its own long-term needs to consider. Many experts warn the country could face shortages by 2030, because of a growing population, combined with rapid urbanisation and industrialisation. Even as the foreign ministry sets about developing a more flexible policy, it is also seeking precautions. Ankara will likely push Syria and Iraq to accept the Tigris and the Euphrates as having one river basin, thus decreasing the needs under international law. In addition, Turkey will try to prevent interventions by third parties, demanding instead that only riparian states should involve in discussions about water rights.


16

3.2 Water management, irrigation and implementation policies Because of variations in water supply and demand characteristics in Middle East and North Africa countries, no individual case study may be a representative of an entire region. Some countries suffer problems of overexploitation of groundwater while others suffer from water quality degradation.

On the other hand, some have enough or plentiful water but lack institutional structures to manage water efficiently, while others have scarce and limited water and seek non-conventional water like desalination or importation of water.

In the light of these wide variations, which are represented also in SCSC, this part aims to achieve two broad objectives: first, it aims to introduce some issues about water resources management and allocating this short available resource; second, to draw water policies (by supply and demand) in SPSC.

3.2.1 Water Management The greater part of the SMART Case Study Countries (SCSC) could define as an arid or deserted climate. The exception is the strip along Mediterranean Sea that enjoys a lower temperature and higher humidity. Excluding Aqaba in Jordan, all the four of SCSC are in these circumstances: within the Arab country but near the Mediterranean Sea.

These countries have shortages in freshwater supplies. Even those countries with present enough water are likely to suffer shortages in the future due to increasing population and rising economic activity that demands more use. Therefore all these countries are preparing to adopt new technologies and techniques to augment their water supplies.

Many of the technologies exist for augmenting fresh water availability, but they are still expensive. The most effective way to augment freshwater supply in this region is trough the ideal allocation and sharing of water among the competing uses (domestic, industrial and agricultural). However, competing also trough water management based on proper water pricing policy and rationing.

Increasing water supplies to meet the increasing demand of the water uses wants both investments to develop new sources and contrition at the side of the water demand. In these countries that needs of capital to invest in the new water sources competes, for the scarce capital of the countries, with other sectors of economy (energy, transport). The next results of this competition are the decrease of water quantity and quality, which could have a serious environmental and health implication. The most effective policies for managing the water sector could leave from integrate the planning.

Integrating resource planning in the water sector involves an integrated approach which considers on one time all sources of water (fresh, groundwater and recycled) and all technologies, their costs and their environmental impacts.

The problem according the implementation of integrated resource planning in the SCSC is that most of the countries in North Africa and Middle East are short in both water resources and capital. Water allocations still historical practices of sharing most of the water to the agriculture, irrespective of other socioeconomic consideration. The present allocation of the limited water and other scarce resources among the competing sectors in the SCSC is not efficient, due to distortions caused mainly by traditional practices, subventions and some inefficient governmental management and planning.

The water demand management is absent from the water sector in almost of these SCSC due to cheap water prices that encourages wastes (for irrigation purposes), shortage of conservation and lack of knowledge among users of methods and techniques to use efficiently the water resources. All of this reasons encouraged by the low water prices policies in these countries has led to water shortages with environmental and health serious hazards to part of population.

There are many ways to price limited resources. As KAHTIB (1995) says these utilize costs, subsidies, recovery of costs, etc. and are influenced by the type and location of consumers and their extent of demand”, However the most important means of guiding water tariffs, particularly for


17

fresh water is that of the long run marginal cost of water. This author also says that cheap pricing will mean overuse and waste and leads to misallocation of. Therefore, prices of water should be set up at a figure that discourages overuse and squander.

The allocation and management of water Historically the agriculture is the main uses of water in Near East (today, the %age of use of water in agriculture is between 68% and 86% respectively in Lebanon and Tunisia).

Agriculture was in 1960 the major sector of the economy and the main employer in the CSCS (except Lebanon with a small %age of population in agriculture). However, during the last few decades’ important changes occurred. In these countries the contribution of agriculture to the GDP is decreasing. So, the importance of agriculture for the total GDP is lower in Jordan because of the short water availability.

Supply of water to the domestic sector has great importance also for humanitarian and environmental reasons which are priority according to any other activity (this regulating equally in these five countries).

Other important issue to consider is the population increasing at high rate and in some countries the pressure because that is high and it is necessary to develop new water sources, which is an expensive effort. The most significant example is Jordan: some important measures to find new resources are prepared but in this water short country can these extra water be the solution? The answer of the Jordan authorities is trough the incentive of augmenting freshwater and by economizing water use in other sectors particularly the agriculture.

Water management

In countries with scarcity of water, water management gains greater importance so demand is rationalized to reduce water pumping. The most important policies carried out by these countries to stress the demand side are: rationalizing demand for water and ensuring the efficient use of scare of fresh water; shifting water use from dry months; ensuring heath and environmental preservation; and finally lessening the losses.

To achieve these objectives one of the most important tool adopted by the governments is increasing the prices, until a value that restrict waste and promotes water conservation. On the other hand the low-income of domestic consumers and low-income of the farmers have to be protected by having low tariffs to cover their basic needs.

Part of these countries, especially in Jordan, the measurements acting more on rationing, trough restricting supplies of water (particularly in Summer), to one or more days and shutting supplies for the rest of the week. This is one of the most successfully management tools adopted by the Jordan water entities; however other of these countries are adopting this measure.

Other important class of measures is adopted by the water entities to follow the optimum allocation between competing sectors. It is not really evident the differences between countries according this subject.

Ideally, the public users and other stakeholders should involve in setting reference conditions and boundaries between the status classes. One more time, this is what European Directives consider as more accurate to involve local communities on water management. Local involvement reflects local knowledge of conditions and the wish to achieve a particular status; however, the authorities of SCSC now prove some lack of capacity to start this process. In the framework of SCSC the Egypt government shows theoretically more interest to involve stakeholders. Turkey has some compromises with EU and tries to incorporate this dimension in their process of water management.

However, usually in the SCSC if the capacity of authorities is not strengthened, the stakeholders will either skipped or addressed later with the help of NGOs, local governmental institutions (if good relations or agreements are made) or community leaders (if survey finds suitable ones). But capacity building and financial resources are necessary for any of these possible partners to be able to perform public involvement tasks. It has suggest that modest social capacity building efforts


18

early on will promote larger capacity building programs that governments will be ready to support because they see the positive results and the need for them.

3.2.2 Water Policies In the past, water policies in Middle East Region focused on the supply management of water resources (AHMED, 1993). Water policy was synonymous with irrigation policy, the objective being to expand irrigated areas through investments in irrigation and drainage systems. Water development projects included building dams, reservoirs, well fields, and canal or pipe networks.

In many countries, externalities in water sector activities resulted in the past, when large irrigation investment was undertaken without providing for adequate control of drainage, in water logging and salinity in sloping and downstream areas. Improper irrigation practices were the cause of an unsustainable rise in the water table in Egypt from a depth of 15-20 meters to 2-3 meters per year. The middle and lower Euphrates terraces and adjoining areas are composed of soils with more than 70 % gypsum. Whereas the expansion in the network of canals and water courses contributed to a rapid rise in agricultural production and yields, insufficient maintenance led to leakages and a gradual rise in the water table which, in turn, adversely affected yields in the long run (VAN TUIJL, 1993).

Demand management of water resources was not directly included in water policies in the past in most of the SCSC partly because the focus, initially, was on expanding the supply and partly because socio-culturally water was believed to be free. Lack of demand management practices in the past also contributed to low efficiency in water use and consequent water losses. In addition, improvements in water stemming from introduced high technology in the past diverted attention from demand management and reduced emphasis on low-cost alternatives such as improving efficiency, conservation and decline of losses through maintenance (AHMED, 1993).

Water charges in the agricultural sector, which uses about 50 % of the water in the SCSC, have keeping low to offset the controls on the price of the agricultural produce. The price of water is so low that in many countries it does not cover the process and maintenance costs. With increasing water scarcity leading to rising marginal costs of an added unit of water in the region, such a policy has not been sustainable in the long run.

Irrigated water charges were (and still are) typically well below full recovery levels. Subsidies on water are provided as a means of offsetting low farm incomes brought about by controlled producer prices and often overvaluation of the exchange rate.

Although other economic and social factors were responsible, water policies contributed to the trend in decreasing food security in many of the countries of the SCSC in the short run and to an overexploitation of the water resources. In addition, the pressure of population, which is growing has increased the vulnerability of the economies of most countries of the SCSC.

The lack of incorporation of the sustainability dimension in overall policies influenced the short term goals of food security and of maintaining the stock of water resources in the long run.

Although past water policies served to increase the cultivated area under irrigation in the SCSC, the long-term result of the rapid increase in water use contributed to water scarcity. Physical limits on mining of freshwater were reached quickly. Many countries in the Middle East region, including Jordan, have already exceeded the renewable limits (World Bank, 2003).

Groundwater in almost SCSC is being emptied at an alarming rate. To reduce the rate of continuous depletion, governments needs to developing measures such as taxes and assigning water rights.

The policies have contributed to a lowering of the water table beyond the minimum sustainable level. Often it has even made further pumping uneconomic. For instance in Egypt, non-renewable groundwater are already over-exploited (World Bank, 2003).

Groundwater depletion in many of the SCSC countries has contributed to desertification. Inappropriate technology; subsidized credit, which promoted to dig wells; water costs far below the


19

economic, or even the financial prices; and subsidies of electricity are some of the causes which contributed to over-extraction of groundwater. In many of the countries of the SCSC free access to groundwater is resulting in inefficient use of the resource.

Rapid population increases expect to reduce the renewable water available in the SCSC. Table 1 presents forecasts of the impact of rapid increases in population on renewable water per capita.

Table 1 Renewable water availability per capita per year in SCSC

Average Annual

Renewable Water

Resources

Renewable Water Per

Capita 1975

Renewable Water Per

Capita 2000

Renewable Water Per

Capita 2005

Renewable Water Per

Capita 2025 - Low Projection

Renewable Water Per

Capita 2025 -

Medium Projection

Renewable Water Per

Capita 2025 - High

Projection

Reduction since 1975 - High

Projection Countries

km 3 m3 m3 m3 m3 m3 m3 %

Egypt 58 1,475.36 855.66 774.59 607.98 562.21 523.01 -65

Jordan 1 516.34 198.6 173.91 132.94 123.21 114.75 -78

Lebanon 4 1,445.43 1,150.07 1,063.63 954.97 878.28 834.25 -42

Tunisia 5 882.22 525.28 497.92 452.2 415.4 383.94 -56

Turkey 229 5,582.64 3,353.79 3,124.08 2,797.17 2,573.18 2,380.38 -57

Source: International Population Action (2005)

The Table 1 shows that by the year 2025 in the “worst” projection, most of the SCSC will have only middle of water available to them in 1975. The situation with water-deficit countries, such as Jordan, is predicted to be water shortest than in others where the renewable water per capita expected to decline by around two thirds until 2025. For most of these countries, supplementing water from other sources will become an ever-increasing need.

Land and Water Resources: Current Issues and Policies In recent years, the focus of land and water policies in the SCSC has been increasingly on improving the following:

• efficiency; • conservation; • management of land and water resources.

The following Sections will talk to supply management issues and demand management choices in few Islamic countries.

Supply Management Issues Because of food shortages in many of the countries, reclamation of land has assumed new importance today. Coupled with scarcity of water, a conjunctive approach to land and water policies needed to minimize losses in SCSC land owing to soil erosion, desertification, waterlogging and salinity.

An integrated approach to land reclamation and soil conservation requires a strategy using economic incentives for land use patterns and technological improvements. This happen especially with drainage, which would improve the productivity and efficiency of land use to arise maximum returns without compromising future resources use. Such an integrated approach has been followed in Jordan since the late 1980s at an experimental area.


20

As the water supply increases, the cropping intensity increases but at a slower rate as farmers use more water per unit area. Overuse of water eventually raises the water table owing to lack of proper drainage. As the water table rises beyond the critical level, waterlogging reduces the crop yields. Finally, inadequate drainage and the consequent waterlogging begin to affect production, which falls below the level that could achieve with better management practices and design.

Water Resources Development

Desalination Many of the countries in Middle East and North African countries account for 60 % of world desalination capacity. Sometimes desalinized brackish water is blended with freshwater for domestic use. Desalinized water augments the renewable water mainly in Egypt, providing much more supplies per year.

Desalination remains an expensive way to augment water, especially for energy- shortage and low-income countries. However, given the water scarcity in the region in general, and the increasing degradation of renewable water in particular, the alternative is being exercised as one-way to augment scarce water resources.

A clearly defined institutional framework for the water sector should be available and laid down in a set of laws defining the role of the various actors in the water sector. This framework should leave limited doubt about the legal possibilities in developing water, mainly desalination infrastructure, and managing it. The legal framework should also cater for ease of a clear-cut co-operation between public and private partners (SCHIFFIER, 2004).

Wastewater reuse Reuse of treated urban wastewater is already in practice in many countries. The supply of water was augmented by domestic wastewater reuse in countries like Tunisia and Jordan. In water scarce countries of SCSC the contribution of wastewater reuse is large. The main reason for that is the cost of producing a unit of treated wastewater is estimated to be 8-18 % of that of desalinated sea water and 24-40 % of desalinised brackish water.

Reallocation of supplies Since irrigation accounts for about 80 % of the total water use in most developing countries, intersectoral allocation (from agriculture to domestic or industrial) could relieve water shortage in water scarce countries. The main reallocation country of SCSC is Jordan, which import significant part of their importing water from Turkey.

3.2.3 Water Management for Irrigation Different types of water management could distinguish between the SCSC. The part of the irrigated areas in national agricultural land varies between these five countries. This variable represents one of the main indicators of the national options according the water management policies. The part of the cultivated areas under irrigation is crucial for some countries, like Egypt, where the whole cultivated area is under irrigation. On the contrary, less than 20% of the cultivated area is under irrigation in Tunisia.

Details on the irrigation techniques used in full or partial control irrigation scheme. Surface irrigation is by far the most widely used technique, practiced in these counties. Sprinkler irrigation is by far the strongest in Jordan, where microirrigation is the most widely used technique, being practiced on over half of their full and partial control irrigation areas. In Lebanon sprinkler irrigation and microirrigation techniques together practiced on more than 37% of their full and partial control irrigation area. In particular the arid countries, without large rivers, choose to develop more intensively the microirrigation and sprinkler irrigation techniques to save water.


21

The source of irrigation waterThere are five possible sources of irrigation water: surface water, renewable groundwater, fossil water, treated wastewater and desalinated water. Spate irrigation areas, equipped wetland and flood recession cropping areas are all irrigated by surface water.

Two indicators are frequently used to assess irrigation intensity: the rate of use of land equipped for irrigation, which is that part of the equipped area actually used for production at least once a year, and the cropping intensity, which is the ratio between irrigated crops areas (where double or triple cropping areas are counted twice or three times respectively) and the physical areas equipped for irrigation. It was also difficult to get reliable information on cropping intensity. For some countries show a cropping intensity very high as the example of for Egypt (1.66), and for Jordan (1.07).

It was not possible to make a distinction between renewable and non-renewable groundwater use, but a large part of the groundwater used is fossil water, especially in the more arid countries. The large contribution of surface water in Middle East (Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey and Egypt) reflects the fact that these regions' hydrology is dominated by the presence of large rivers: the Nile, the Euphrates, the Tigris, the Orontes and the Jordan (


22

Table 2). Non-conventional water for irrigation is used in Tunisia and plays a fairly important role, in general, into drier regions.

The water resources of the Middle East are unevenly distributed and used, and every major river in the region crosses international borders. As shows Table 2 the extent to which major rivers and groundwater basins are shared by two or more nations makes the allocation and sharing of water a striking political problem and greatly complicates the collection and dissemination of even the most basic data on water availability and use. In northeast Africa and the Middle East, more than 50 % of the total population relies upon river water that flows across a political border. The major shared surface water supplies in the Middle East are the .Jordan, Tigris, Euphrates, and Nile Rivers. In the Middle East, actual water availability fluctuates dramatically both seasonally and from year to year. For many of the major rivers of' the region, flows in dry years may be as low as one-half to one-third the volume of the average yearly flows, and there is a long history of persistent and severe droughts.


23

Table 2 International river basins in the Middle East

River basin Total area of basin (km²)

Countries in basin

Area (km²)

Iran 220,000

Iraq 110,000

Turkey 48,000 Tigris 378,850

Syria 850

Iraq 177,000

Turkey 125,000

Syria 76,000 Euphrates 444,000

Saudi Arabia 66,000

Syria 9,700

Turkey 2,000 Orontes 13,300

Lebanon 1,600

Jordan 7,650

Syria 7,150

Israel 4,100 Jordan 19,850

Lebanon 950

Sudan 1,900,000

Ethiopia 368,000

Egypt 300,000

Uganda 233,000

Tanzania 116,000

Kenya 55,000

Zaire 23,000

Rwanda 21,500

Nile 3,031,000

Burundi 14,500

Source: FAO AQUASTAT (2005)

Demand Management Options According to the situation of the very high water pressure because of the water management irrigation option adopted by the SCSC, a list of policy option has to be adopted.

Demand management options resulting from the water policies offer new methods to preserve water against mainly the inappropriate use for the irrigated agriculture. Such options include increasing efficiency of land use, increasing water use efficiency and water pricing. Moreover, public awareness to educate the public to conserve water use and modify their behaviour and perceptions about water is considered as a tool of demand management. This problem and these solutions have to be implemented in SCSC with different timings and different ways.

• Increasing efficiency of land use: Demand management options include policies aimed to increase the cropped area and to improve the yield and the efficiency of cropping patterns.


24

• Increasing efficiency of water use: Measures to increase efficiency of water use include the application of technology to increase water desalination efficiency and on-farm efficiency in agriculture.

• Water pricing: Pricing of water to cover operation and maintenance costs has been a debatable issue for water resources managers. Several concepts are proposed to set and analyze water charges; these include using marginal or opportunity cost. Another approach is to price


25

3.3 Comparative analysis of water policies and WFD According to the water policies European Union Countries and Middle East have significant differences. The key difference stems from the fact the European countries have a duty under the European Union (EU) Water Framework Directive to achieve a “good water status” with a common strategy for all EU countries. The Middle East countries, on the other hand, don’t have any common water law and in this sense have more flexibility to choose objectives. There is also a more top-down approach to watershed management within the Europe countries.

The severity and the scope of the problems also differ between Europe and Middle East. The Europe countries mainly face quality problems, while the Middle East is concerned with quantity where a huge shortage of water and the decreasing groundwater resources are bothering people and governments. Thus, other environmental problems are of a low priority in these countries.

3.3.1 The Catchment’s Planning Process According the catchment’s management model, one of the common points between Europe and SCSC is the public involvement. Especially in the SCSC where, without public support, it is almost impossible to fulfil any policy needing, in almost all, planning and management steps involving the public power. Legal/Regulatory Aspects, Identification of Stakeholders and Assignment of Responsibilities As Water Framework Directive of the European Union defines it is important to define a responsible institution to elaborate the catchment management plan. At least, this institution should be responsible for coordination of this activity and its implementation for each watershed. This would ensure integrated efforts leading to the defined goals. For this purpose, it is necessary to identify the stakeholders, communities, authorities, their features, roles, capacity, responsibilities, works and the legal framework for water protection. With this information, it is possible to delegate responsibilities and appoint the most suitable actors to be responsible for coordination of efforts in watershed planning. In the given conditions, the most proper way for undertaking those analyses is to find funding sources and hire experts to do the job in consultation with the relevant authorities and stakeholders.

In Europe, for example, because of the EU imposed duty to undertake watershed management with assigning “Competent Authority”, it was necessary to appoint a governmental entity to take that responsibility as the most suitable way to advance meanwhile. The key issue is to develop the means for interacting successfully with municipalities, other ministries and other stakeholders in the process of spatial planning, regional development and other water affecting policies by performing cooperative networks. The solution here could be creates awareness-raising campaigns, seminars and meetings with the management objectives because of municipalities’ reluctance to act, or fail to coordinate efforts for reaching the objectives, they will share the blame.

Some tasks and responsibilities could be transferred to the communities and NGO’s in catchments. In this sense, there should be an analysis of stakeholders and the community profile. The tasks related to catchment’s management should share to those who are active, wish to play a role, and have enough organizational and business skills. If they lack capacity, proper strategies should be elaborated and carried out to develop it. The previous analyses already done in the generality of the European Countries are lacking in the SCSC.

The information integrating these plans is useful for identifying the most suitable strategies and working methods to use with the communities when trying to reach common visions, objectives and acceptable measures and their implementation. However, analysis of communities as well as the involvement in catchment’s planning and implementation of the plan will need strategies which will vary within the region. In some places, the surveys might undertake successfully by local people who claim about appearing strangers or even foreigners might be met with great distrust. In other places, people would not be willing to share their secrets with their neighbours and are more open with newcomers, especially if they expect help. If the enquirer is a state person, the outcome will depend on how they see the official – as someone who is there to help or as someone who might aggravate their lives. In either case, the general rule is to avoid property and money questions that usually lead to false information.


26

3.3.2 The importance of the international agreements After setting administrative arrangements at the national scale, it is important to define if the basin is shared with a neighbouring country. In this case, many of the SCSC are in these circumstances. It is also possible to compare with European river basins which many times the major River basin are shared by more then one country.

To become an agreement between neighbours, which countries can coordinate their activities, goals, and measures? How to form a common vision, while enabling the countries to achieve their respective management aims? The answer is especially important to the downstream country about pollution transfer and hydrologic regime. However, it is also important to the upstream party vulnerable to building obstacles downstream for river passage.

Before adopting treaties, it is advisable to explore existing agreements to find out if there is any legal basis for launching or asking cooperation. To agrees, the countries should start talking with each other and organize meetings which could be funded by external funds. Here it is important to present the problems and benefits for the countries of the agreement.

The agreements may be intergovernmental as well as interministerial or between regional (catchment) authorities or stakeholders. Depending on how big the basin is and how many countries are involved, the intergovernmental agreement may take the form of a Convention, finding out a Commission for coordination of cooperation.

The most effective cooperation could ensure by intergovernmental agreements, since this would be the most powerful instrument to recruit all sectors. The objective is to reduce the possibility of cooperation breakdown which might occur when the system relies only on potentially changeable transboundary human relations. This is especially true in the SCSC where cooperation will not happen without legal basis. Therefore, they require separate cooperative intergovernmental agreements. Except Tunisia, all the other four SCSC shared important river basins with other neighbourhood countries, and they had agreements to manage the water of each transboundary river (Table 2). The scope of the agreements differs, but the circumstance which in the past was in the source of conflicts is now more stable.

According to the EU countries, the most important river basin sharing treaties are official and intergovernmental. However, because of the WFD implementation, the EU promotes non-official contacts and networks of stakeholders to support legal cooperation.

Identification and characterization of pressures (stressors) One of the objectives of WFD is to identify and characterize the pressures under water. From the management perspective, it is important to identify only significant pressures that lead or suspecting to lead problems in water bodies. These pressures will be focus of measures to solve the problems and will considering when setting realistic water status objectives. Europe has almost completed this exercise according to the EU Water Framework. Directive needs that it performing this until the end of 2004. Nevertheless, the EU countries are struggling to define the proper criteria for identification of significant pressures. Anyway, the iterative approach or adaptive approach to catchment management should employ and the criteria should review and the analysis of pressures improved as experience shows.

Water assessment is understood differently in the EU countries than it is in the SCSC. European states have to develop a new water classification based on deviates existing status from “reference” (natural) conditions as imposed by WFD. The condition has to represent by total assessment of chemical, biological, hydrological and morphological-biophysical conditions. Even more complex is the need to develop the typology of water bodies in the watershed where different types would represent completely (or greatly) different natural (reference) conditions. This will result in several classification systems matching to the number of types identified.

In the SCSC, such a classification is not a need and could be considered for adoption only if the governments decide to choose this approach. However, adding such system would be expensive and it is not likely to happen, at least not soon (except for Turkey because of the potential entrance


27

in the EU). Assessments in the SCSC will continue to made by relying on the current national quality standards, especially for drinking water supply. The SCSC needs to assess whether there is enough data to typify water status there. The checking network is in general not dense and where data is lacking it could be expanded. This is one of the expectations of the SCSC government countries according to improve the assessment systems.

3.3.3 Catchment’s Management Strategies, About catchment management, the EU countries using the term “measures” rather than “management practices”. Developing catchment’s management strategies, setting objectives and selecting management practices are discussed together here in the frame of WFD. In EU, the process of working with these elements is driven by the clear compulsory end point the water status has to be good after the WFD are implementation. The catchment plan because of the WFD implementation is the way for setting objectives, elaborating strategies, and carrying out management practices in the each catchment region.

Assessment results allow identification of factors such as the current water status, the pressures causing status problems, the economic drivers causing those pressures, and the importance of the economic drivers for people. This information brings awareness of the current situation and realistic capabilities to achieve one or more goals, and makes it possible to set reasonable objectives.

Although those analyses are a good start to begin setting objectives, the data collected this way is not enough because it mainly reflects the responsible authorities understanding of problems. Public input is needed to supplement the analyses and to gain support for solving the problems in catchments.

This is also true in the SCSC. The public must express concerns that it sees as problems. In addition, the public may have its own vision of such considerations as watershed management, share and use of resources, and priorities. The key is to achieve a common opinion of problems and priorities.

In this case, the difference between the SCSC and EU is that the countries of the SCSC are not bound to any international duty to achieve certain objectives in their watersheds. This gives more influence to the public in managing water resources if the government does not decide to make decisions on its own. In contrast, with the EU obligation to achieve certain objectives which requires reliable data and the State monitoring must be an obstruction for the down-top management. Public opinion might even be more neglected if it does not pose good arguments that could justify any variations from the EU imposed objectives and requirements. Without consistent networks lobbying in order to enforce local/regional points of view it is not possible to see the influence of a stakeholders and local authorities.

In order to make people understand possible environmental objectives, their awareness should be raised. For instance, one of the best options for public awareness raising in Europe could be articles in local newspapers and seminars/meetings on local environmental issues prepared by professional journalists with the cooperation of the research community. This goal is very important to carry out the objectives of WFD. The Internet is not an effective tool at a very local level, especially in rural areas which have low internet connection rates.

The possible approach to achieving perception of common problems could start with a process of listening to public identification of problems. After arriving at common perceptions of problems and the desired catchments water use and development scenarios, it is possible to start drafting the common objectives in a basin.

The catchments responsible authority would have to present the costs and benefits of achieving the proposed objectives in terms of natural, economic and social implications in the river basin area. This should be done in a transparent way, including the use of background information which was the basis for deriving the conclusions. People will have to decide if the objective is to be confirmed, lowered or extended in time on the basis of the presentation of cost-benefit analysis. In EU countries, this is also the case unless the authority sees other conclusions from the analysis and the public views would not justify variations in front of the European Commission.


28

In the SCSC, the main problem acknowledged by both Government and the public is the scarcity of drinking water resources. Although the problem is recognized, local people are still exploiting the groundwater resources, rapidly bringing them close to complete depletion. Even licensing does not help because proper control is missing. Suitable actions in this case could be the creation of proper incentives and disincentives.

Incentives may take a form of providing cash advances for storing surface water, payments for installing checking meters, payments to farmers for unused water, etc. The promotion of benefits could also help when showing people that if they save water, more will be left for the future. Further, water storage enables year round farming and selling goods for higher prices during off-season. The most effective method in persuading the stakeholders is to show good examples. People should see benefits with their own eyes.

3.3.4 Types of measurements The measures themselves can be structural (construction of wastewater treatment plants), legal (limits on activities), allow issuing, controlling, economical (fines, taxes, subsidies), assessing environmental impacts of planned actions, or they can take the form of campaigns, voluntary agreements etc.

Clearly proper administrative capacity needs to perform analyses and the interactive work with the stakeholders. At this analysis, countries of SCSC lack that. It expecting the representatives of the main stakeholders in the Boards will represent their interests well and send the messages to the lower and wider scale. It seems now there are no other choices with current institutional capacities except for improving of capacities of NGOs and local governments, while making agreements with them on the work with the public.

Another important barrier to effective public involvement in water management is the public in the SCSC about their economic quality of life than the environment. Also, the people usually do not trust government and does not think it can influence anything.

3.3.5 Implementation of Policies and Measurements To carry out different measures may be the responsibility of different authorities and stakeholders depending on competencies. Implementation responsibility should agree on in meetings with governmental and nongovernmental stakeholders when discussing the objectives and possible measures, and when presenting cost-benefit analysis. The analysis of stakeholders should also settle measures and their implementation capacity, administrative structure and legal framework for water protection.

In elaborating and carrying out a catchments management plan builds the capacity of the parties involved as the “learning-by-doing idea” is used; however, some steps cannot undertaking without added targeted capacity building. Based on list of policies and management tools in SCSC the key measures to done (to build capacity of involvement of all the interested partners in catchment’s planning and implementation) are the following:

• Allocation of financial and human resources for responsible administrations (government prerogative). The countries’ administrations in the region have some shortages of human resources and funding to carry out the tasks necessary for proper catchment’s management. This shortage is also seen about knowledge and skills in the light of new EU perspective, although this kind of capacity is gradually improving;

• Assessment and collection of data needed for decision making by (re) designing monitoring programs, added scientific research and/or by analysing the results of international research projects, experiences, and all available national data;

• Involvement of national experts into water protection projects; • Design seminars for stakeholders with targeted relevant information (some general

information on watershed management) in an easily understood way with possible cooperative proposals (clear benefits should be stated). Of particular importance is the integration or coordination of spatial planning and basin management, which should discuss with the responsible institutions for spatial planning (municipalities, counties);

• Development of integrated GIS databases for decision making support;


29

• Assessment of technical equipment needs and filling the gaps; • Instructional courses for local and state managers, with experience exchange meetings. • Curriculum adjustment of academic programs to align contents with water management

needs. This will create national human resources and expertise needed for successful management of the water at the national and in catchments.

The policies for water management differ between EU countries and the SCSC, and the common planning model which was developed in EU can be adapted or could be the reference in slightly different way in the SCSC. In Turkey the adoption of some specific parts of the WFD is now one of the main tasks of the authorities. Nevertheless, the WFD in general could be adapted at some levels. In addition, the SCSC itself has differences since the Turkey that facing with EU duties for planning and goals, while the rest of the countries that are free to adopt and adapt part of the directive.

The severity and the scope of environmental problems also differ between EU and Middle East countries. EU countries mainly face quality problems, while the Middle East is mostly concerned with quantity where huge shortages of water and decreasing groundwater concern people and the government.

In this sense the policies fulfilled by Turkey to face the problems of water is more directly connected with the constraints typically EU (more directly related to the problems of quality). On the other hand, all the other four countries have severe differences, however they have one think that are in the centre of the concerns: lack of water is the main drive of all policies. Therefore, it is possible to see more connections between the model of performing water policies and the Middle East huge shortages and the SCSC without Turkey.

Water status assessment differs between SCSC. Turkey has to build a new water status classification system based on the status deviation from the reference (natural undisturbed) conditions and integrate chemical, biological and hydromorphological features into a common assessment as settle WFD. The other SCSC, on the other hand, no such debt exists and they can use the current system to avoid significant research investments.

Catchment’s planning is an objective based one in Turkey. The EU defined “good status” as the starting point for all planning activities which aim to pick the matching set of measures to reach that standard. Only the unfavourable outcomes of a cost/benefit analysis of EU objectives will allow changing the EU set objective and the similar program of measures.

The top-down versus the bottom-up approach is considered to be suitable for river basin planning in all SCSC. In Turkey as fix WFD, the approach is suitable because the government has to assure achieving EU objectives which might seem irrelevant to stakeholders. Failure to comply with EU needs results in penalties for the national government. Another reason for these penalties is the inadequate capacity of local stakeholders to assume the planning and their implementation. This is also the case in the other four SCSC, where it could be difficult to decentralize a decision power.

3.4 Towards the sustainable water management In the long-term the growing water demands of the SCSC can only meting from three sources. These are the use of unused renewable water sources; desalinating sea water; and reallocating irrigation water to more productive uses. For many countries the first alternative is no longer possible, and for many others it will provide water for only a decade or two. Desalination of sea water is a solution, but an expensive one. However, in the long-term it seems likely that it will become ever more important as other water sources are fully used. It does have the great advantage the amounts of water which can produce are limitless. Finally, the reallocation of irrigation water could be the most likely immediate solution to water demand problems over the next two decades, and just depends of a political response (BEAUMONT, 2000).


30

One of the main topics of this discussion is that irrigation water use for producing low-value crops is no longer proposition in the 21st century as pressure on water continues to grow. For continued economic prosperity all SCSC must ensure that their urban centres supplying with enough water, as it here that most of the wealth-creating capacity of the economy is founded. What this comparative analysis has shown clearly is there is not a general lack of good water political chooses which are in the source of the problem. Of all the countries of the SCSC only one, Jordan, can describe as facing severe water difficulties. Even here these problems can be overcome by introducing desalinated water production. Other country, Tunisia, will face severe water shortages over the next decade which almost will need that they commit themselves to programmes of desalinated water production before 2025. The other countries should be able to meet their predicted water demands by using new sources of water or by reallocating varying amounts of irrigation water to urban/industrial use.

The Egypt is a country that will still face an uncertain future, because is dependent for most of their water supply on upstream states. Equally, it can claim that these countries are already using large volumes of water which are not ‘equitable and reasonable’ when compared with those used by other riparian states. Both countries will almost have to learn to use less water once other states in their basins begin to make claims for greater access to water.

Although the SCSC will be able to cope reasonably well with water demands up to 2025, the situation beyond this point does need comment. The key point is population numbers. It is difficult to predict what numbers will be up to 2025, and almost impossible to make any sensible estimates beyond then. However, it is essential the governments of the region explore possible methods of reducing population growth so the ever-growing pressure on available resources can be reduced.

The continued advance of desalination technology means that people who enjoy ‘Western’ standards of living need never fear water shortages in the future for their urban systems. However, the danger does exist that in these countries the rapid growth of population may be so great that a country will difficult to make the transition to a modern service sector-based economy that support all this new needs.

A crucial test for all the governments of the region over the next two decades will be the provision of employment opportunities for the growing populations of the urban regions. It seems unlikely that industrial employment will be able to be provided for a large proportion, and so it will be left to the service sector, in both its formal and informal aspects, to sustain the majority of the jobs which will be needed. An encouraging fact from a water efficiency point of view is that such jobs require relatively little water.

The policies of SCSC governments trying to implement needs to face:

• A lack of tradition of public involvement and integrated work with other institutions trying to achieve common goals;

• A public more concerned for its well-being than for the environment, posing a challenge for environmental administrators, since raising economic welfare is beyond their jurisdiction;

• A some lack of capacity both for the administrations and the stakeholders to manage watersheds effectively;

• A lack of environmental awareness and responsibility among non-environmental and even some environmental administrations, as well as among stakeholders;

• A lack of data for identification of problems, assessment of the state of water resources and economic and stakeholder analysis in the generality of the SCSC.


31

4 ANALYSIS OF WATER INDICATORS Given the needs of the WP10 objectives as outlined above, a comparative analysis of water indicators presented in the next point. This analysis would allow for the settings of SMART Case Study Countries (SCSC), and support the identification of the main issues concerning water scarcity in each country.

This task is divided into three components:

• identifying and choosing Water Indicators

• collecting, mapping and analysing Water Indicators

• with the results, use it to verify water scarcity in these countries

Water Indicator Identification and Selection Process A suitable approach for selecting water indicators requires the identification of a core set of indicators based on water issues. This implies a limitation in the number of indicators and set and the need for test availability and quality of data. This selection was made through several steps. These involve:

• listing of the priority issues and many possible related indicators • consulting of studies to refine a controllable set of water indicators • using the first list of indicators as an approach to fulfil the purposes of the chapter • choosing the final list as the most comprehensive and understandable set of water

indicators • defining that data collected are scientifically acceptable and could support conclusions

about the state of the water in each case study country To support the systematic assessment of the water scarcity, it was necessary to refine the number of indicators to achieve a list of complex water indicators. From the first approach resulted a database including more than 20 indicators proper to hold up this analysis. As several authors describe, many water indicators are needed to classify water scarcity impacts. To use the example of Human Pressures, there is no single approach that is most sensitive to identify all points of view.

Another challenge is choosing a composite indicator of water scarcity is to find a common currency to describe different types of impacts. In answering many questions about water scarcity impacts, monetary values do not adequately describe non-market costs such as the loss of an individual life, disruption of an aquifer, future costs of current water overuse, or fulfil new water infrastructures. National Water Indicators The role of National Indicators reporting should be to distinguish differences in water conditions with an acceptable degree of resolution.

Three approaches to assembling water variables suitable for assessing and monitoring water can be recognised (Newton, 1998):

• model-based quantitative variables • comprehensive indicators • core indicators

Although many specific issues must be recognised and assessed in managing water quantity and quality, for simplicity, in this part of the study, it was considered that the main issues concerning water management would maintaining or improving quality of life.

Model-based quantitative approach If possible managing water to getting quality of life would build a model of the relationships between:


32

• social and economic activities that can cause environmental impacts • the resulting values of environmental variables • a multidimensional measure of the desirable quality of life outcome

Such a model would use to identify where the benefits from preserving or improving water availability matched the costs of changing environment. Extensive computer modelling would be need, at least as much as used in conventional national economic modelling.

In practice, this is not possible. There is no strict linkage between (most) individual environmental variables and quality of life. At best, such a relationship would define dependency on other reasons such as socio-economic dimensions.

Comprehensive-indicators approach Without necessary database and such complete modelling, an alternative is to identify water indicators that are known to be strongly correlated with determinants of quality of life. An indicator is a regularly measured value relevant to a particular purpose. For a comprehensive-indicators approach a detailed checking program would be necessary, which would be likely to need a large input of financial and human dimensions by sharing agencies.

A comprehensive WP10 report would use the identified set of water indicators to analyse if water availability is at acceptable levels. In addition, it would identify trends in indicator values to forecast future values and show threshold or action values or standards for deciding quality of life. While setting standards are essentially arbitrary, information and precedents are available from SCSC on which to base findings about water standards.

Core indicators approach The core indicators approach to WP10 reporting would concentrate on developing and presenting a core or reduced set of water indicators chosen according to some mentioned criteria. Unlike the model-based and comprehensive-indicators approaches that would have extensive and detail needs, such a core indicators approach is a feasible model for WP10 reporting to advance in SCSC analysis.

The criteria for choosing core indicators are that they should reflect priority water availability issues or critical water scarcity conditions. Deciding which priority water issues to cover is a precondition for fixing a core indicator set. The chosen set of core indicators must define the status of the priority issues as unambiguously as possible.

Concentrating on a set of current priority issues incurs the risk that an emerging issue may not be identified. Therefore, basic water conditions must continue to be researched. The selected core set of indicators needs to be subject to periodic review, which should also take account of the results of developments in settling monitoring indicators.

4.1 Socioeconomic aspects on Water Stress Below, the different WP2 tasks will be subject of an analysis to define the relationships between socio-economic and policy.

Water scarcity, when dealt with by societies and states, thus quickly surfaces as a scarcity of social adaptive capacity, which is what merits a take on to describe and delimit an idea of social resource scarcity (Ohlsson, 1998). When many countries are approaching or exceeding the limits of their renewable freshwater, the population of the five case studies is growing by larger increments than ever before. Population growth not only increases human water needs, it also helps speed up environmental disturbances that are reflected on water quality.

This fact contributes for limiting the water amounts that can be supplied. Falkenmark, the hydrologist pioneered a "water stress index”, based on an estimated minimum water needed per capita to preserve an acceptable quality of life in a moderately developed country in an arid zone.


33

Falkenmark began with the calculation that 100 litters per day (36.5 cubic meters per year) is a rough minimum for each person requires for basic household needs to argue good health. The experience even of water-efficient and moderately developed countries shows that roughly five to 20 times this amount needed to satisfy the needs of agriculture, industry and energy production. Based on these findings, Falkenmark suggests specific thresholds of water stress and water scarcity (Reuss, 2003).

The main purposes of SMART project are about water scarcity. The water scarcity is one of the biggest situations that influence the Water Stress. Other Indicators about to the socioeconomic dynamics are present on the base of water stress definition:

• Population, health and development; • Urban and coastal pressure • Population equal access to freshwater

4.2 Suggested Water Indicators The suggested indicators are based around several common themes that are relevant to approach Water Scarcity in order to valuate a more sustainable development. All the indicators analysed was created by International Authorities and are publicly available from different sources (referenced during the report).

Findings suggest that most indicators for checking the state of the water scarcity supporting Sustainable Development Indicator. Setting up a baseline and same classes of country ranking to which performance can be compared is a key to the analysis. Such a common range of classes usually takes the form of an early approach. Many water indicators play a monitoring role for sustainable development strategies and action plans.

The first suggest indicator is the UNDP Human Development Index (HDI); it is not a strictly water indicator, but a workable approach for the social adaptive ability of a society. The HDI is a finest available intermediate alternative, not only for institutional ability, but for the social resources in a country. Life expectancy would serve as an index for the general welfare and development; the educational attainment for institutional capacity.

Checking progress in the water sector requires an interdisciplinary approach that should involve both qualitative and quantitative assessment techniques. To see how a country is progressing overtime, it is necessary to examine the position as time passes. This monitoring needs to develop on simple indicators. An approach to do this is the Water Poverty Index (WPI), which design to provide a standardised frame for such an indicator, and for each country, suitable and available data for each part (presented below) can be identified.

Since earlier 1980, Falkenmark suggests specific approaches of water stress and water scarcity. Although weighting the water stress to account for ‘‘adaptive capacity’’ of a given population. The Water Stress Index (WSI) takes on to address measures of water stress focus on implications for water management, rather than the geopolitical considerations of resource scarcity (Ohlsson, 1998). The result is a hydrological index with the number of hundreds of people who has to share 1.000.000m3 of yearly available renewable water. As a concept of scarcity, the suggested WSI provides a useful tool for considering how changes in population can affect for each person water supply, and so plenty on country-wide scales.

Based on the Human Development Index, the Social Water Stress Index is an improvement to understand water-scarcity by country. The index builds by dividing standard hydrological indicators for water stress and water scarcity by the HDI. The insights gained can be recognised by comparing ranks of a specific country according to the suggested social water scarcity index (SWSI) with the ranking according to traditional water stress or scarcity index (WSI) or also Water Poverty Index (WPI).


34

How the suggested index compares to standard Water Indices The standard index for water stress and water scarcity is annual water availability of renewable water. shows how it relates with selected water indexes and a tentative distribution among classes.

Table 3 shows how it relates with selected water indexes and a tentative distribution among classes.

Table 3 How the different Water Indexes correspond to each other Category Annual per capita availability of

renewable water (m3/cap. Yr) 1WPI; WSI; SWSI (Ranking)

5. Water scarcity 1 < 500 Higher than140

4. Water stress 500-1000 110-139

3. Relative sufficiency 1000-1500 80-109

2. Sufficiency 1500-2000 50-79

1. Plentifully > 20000 Lower than 50

Source: adapted from Ohlsson, 1998

Judging from the results above and in the SCSC, it would seem as if some important insights of the order of magnitude of the social water stress encountered as a result of lack of adaptive capacity could be gained by using the index suggested here, or a refinement of it.

To better understand the meaning of this classification, the next table (Table 4) shows a country’s ranking correspondence in terms of indexes scoring. This also could be important to find more objective issues towards the analysis.

Table 4 Score correspondence of Water Indexes Indexes Score Category

WPI2 WSI3 SWSI4

5. Water scarcity 1 <39.4 <0.3 <1

4. Water stress 39.4-49.7 0.3-1.7 1-2

3. Relative sufficiency 49.8-56.2 1.8-3.6 3-4

2. Sufficiency 56.3-61.2 3.7-12.2 5-10

1. Plentifully >61.2 >12.2 >10

It should be remembered, however, that any use of an index is of illustrative value only. The result depends on how the bases of the index; and that construction must be supported on qualitative judgements of which factors are important.

This is a limitation that underlines the need for further deep qualitative studies, with the aim of refining the index only sketched on here. The socio-political, economic, legal and hydrological challenges facing different countries are so diverse that a closer study of the scarcity of water 1 Anual per capita availability of renewable water - standard indicator for water stress and water scarcity. 2 WPI values are the measure between 0-100 to express water scarcity impacts on human populations 3 WSI values are hundreds of persons per flow unit (one flow unit is 1.000.000m3 of renewable water) 4 SWSI values getting by dividing WSI by HDI

35


measures are best undertaken on a country-by-country basis. Existing water indexes will be able to play an important role in initiating such research, and for comparing experiences between countries.

4.2.1 Human development Index To measure the quality of life, the United Nations Development Program implemented the Human Development Index which is composed by Life Expectancy (1), Adult Literacy (2) and Gross National Product per capita (3). By combining these three elements and by pitting each country's indicators results a worldwide HDI. The advantage of HDI comparing with other development index reveals significant differences. For instance, some poor countries have remarkable progress in human development. These countries hitting for their development increase by giving their aid to the neediest people.

In the HDI rankings, the Arab countries come out poorly, mainly because of low literacy among women. Comparing with ex-communist countries comes out rather well because literacy is a priority and their GNP is usually low (UNDP and RBAS, 2005).

Components of HDI Since first published in 1990, the Human Development Report has developed and made several composite indices to measure different dimensions of human development (Figure 1). The human development index (HDI) measures average achievements in basic human development in one simple composite index and produces a ranking of all indicators. The HDI sets a minimum and a maximum for each dimension and then shows where each country stands about these scales (expressed as a value between 0 and 1). The scores for the three dimensions could averages in an overall index.

Figure 1 HDI dimensions

Source: UNDP, 2002

The Human development gains special importance in the Arab framework since it reflects two dimensions. The first is a materialistic one, about satisfaction of human needs as reflected in the HDI’s quantitative measures of income, education, and health. The second is a qualitative one in the sense of participation, democracy, freedoms, and rule of law which is consistent with the economic and social rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UNDP and RBAS, 2003).

36


Figure 2 Map of Human Development Index, 1999

Data source: UNDP, 2000

What does the HDI reveal? The HDI reveals the following state of human development: of all world countries for which the HDI is made, 46 are in the high human development category (with an HDI value equal to or more than 0.800). The rest of the countries are divided: 93 in the medium Human development category (0.500–0.790) and 35 in the low Human development category (less than 0.500).

The link between economic prosperity and human development is neither automatic nor obvious. Two countries with similar incomes can have different HDI values; countries with similar HDI values can have different incomes, as the example of Jordan and Egypt (


37

Figure 2). Of the 174 countries, 97 rank higher on the HDI than on GDP per capita, suggesting that they have converted income into human development very effectively. For 69 countries, the HDI rank is lower than the GDP per capita rank. These countries have been less successful in translating economic prosperity into better lives for their people.

Analysing SCSC, the lag between income levels and human development levels and the potential for using available income to raise human development is also obvious in the countries with lesser HDI. The HDI ranks of Egypt, Turkey and Tunisia (


38

Figure 2) are higher than their rankings according to a per capita GDP. This also shows the state of human development in these countries is still out of place with their income levels. Despite their water scarcity, these countries are developing other dimensions of human development, even within existing constraints. Levels of HDI of SCSC are higher than could be expected, given their per capita incomes. The imbalance reflecting in ranks according to HDI those are much lower than ranks according to per capita income.

In Egypt, for example, per capita GDP grew at 3.3% per year between 1960 and 2000, well above the world's average. Yet improvements in health and education were significantly below the world's average. Thus, in Egypt it was difficult to translate economic growth into broad-based education and health. Today nearly half of the adult population (47.3%) are illiterate. Furthermore, illiteracy rates are higher than in other SCSC. By the 1980s, the lack of broad-based human capital acted as an important brake on Egypt's growth. Economic reforms quickened growth rates in the 1990s. Experience shows that to run the Egyptian Government’s commitment to social development is needed to support growth (Al-Sayyid, 2003).

According to the HDI the main characteristics of SCSC are:

Egypt achieves an improvement of 49.6 % in its Human Development Index (HDI) between 1975 and 2001 where this index increased from 0.433 to 0.648 (UNDP and INPE, 2004). The increase was the outcome of a general upward trend drawing that human development is a self-sustained process. This steady improvement has pulled Egypt from the low to the medium category of human development, despite of the last position in the framework of SCSC.

Jordan invests significant resources in its pursuit of human development. However, its strategic position has made it vulnerable to certain causes that impede development in the region as a whole. To some extent the political, economic and social upheavals of the region exert pressures on all Arab countries. As a result, in the Arab world the pursuit of human development is essential but it is a pressing that also presents a constant challenge. Is one of the countries with higher conditions of Human Development comparing with GDP (UNDP and JHFHD, 2004).

Although Turkey has shown significant improvements in certain spheres (for example infant mortality) the country’s overall HDI performance has been erratic and at times even disappointing. For instance GDP-growth for the last half a century or so has been slower than that of many countries which had more or less similar for each person incomes at the start of the post-war period. Also, the country failed to achieve sustainable growth and experienced significant negative growth in some years. From a long-term perspective, Turkey’s GDP per capita annual growth rate between 1975 and 2001 was 2%. In Turkey the HDI is much lesser than GDP (UNDP and BU, 2004).

According to the HDI, Lebanon ranks at the top of the high medium human development category (ranking 80th). Ranks Lebanon has improved in the past few years, increasing from 97th in 1996 because of the fall in the GDP Index from 0.79 in 1997 to 0.63 in 2004. Even so, the present rank of the country is lower than where it could have been had there been no extended period of violence and instability. It reaffirms that much time and efforts will need to regain lost ground in the past period of the civil strife (UNDP and RBAS, 2003).

At difference parts of HDI, Tunisia has some interesting performances mainly in the framework of Arab World. These performances reveal Tunisia as the 75th world country increasing more than 10 positions during the last 5 years. At the technological point of view Tunisia is on 50 most developed countries in the world. However, improving education and qualifying the workers is one of the main issues of the governments of Tunisia (UNDP and MDE, 2002). This country, have the highest GDP of SCSC, and the most significant difference between HDI and GDP (


39

Table 5).


40

Table 5 HDI and its components

HDI Rank

Life Expecta

ncy Adult

Literacy

Gross Enrolment ratio GDP

Life Expectancy

Index Education Index

GDP Index HDI

GDP(r)-HDI(r)

83 Lebanon 73.3 86.5 76 4170 0.80 0.83 0.62 0.75 18

90 Jordan 70.6 90.3 77 3870 0.76 0.86 0.61 0.74 13

91 Tunisia 72.5 72.1 76 6390 0.79 0.73 0.69 0.74 -18

96 Turkey 70.1 85.5 60 5890 0.75 0.77 0.68 0.73 -16

120 Egypt 68.3 56.1 76 3520 0.72 0.63 0.59 0.65 -12

Data sources: UNDP, 2000

The high-level of Adult Literacy in Jordan is one of the most interesting indexes about Human Development in all SCSC. The 90.3 of Jordan contrast with 56.1 of Egypt, despite of the Egypt government are stressing in the education during the last three decades. Lebanon is on the top of the SCSC ranking mainly because of the Life Expectancy, which expose higher health conditions than in the other countries.

Turkey and Tunisia are two countries with the highest per capita income, however because of life expectancy in Turkey (just 0.75!), and adult literacy in Tunisia, the HDI is lesser than Jordan. Egypt is the SCSC with the poorest HDI, because of lesser values in all dimensions.

4.2.2 Water Poverty Index One of the advantages of the WPI is that it draws on information already available from several sources, including the United Nations Development Programme’s Human Development Index. This makes it easy to update without having to create new data gathering systems.

The international Water Poverty Index shows that it is not for water available that settle poverty levels in a country, but the effectiveness of how you use those resources (Sullivan, 2001).

Water Poverty Index (WPI) uses five standards (resource, access, use, capacity and environment) to build an index underlining. That it is not for water available that fix poverty levels in a country, but the effectiveness of how you use those resources (


41

Table 6).

The idea of a WPI is to combine measures of water availability and access with measures of people’s capacity for accessing water. In this way two key topics can be assumed to approach this subject: people can be “water poor” in the sense of not having enough water for their basic needs because it is not available; or people can also be “water poor” because they are “income poor”; although water is available (Laurence, 2002).

I

42


Table 6 Characteristics of WPI Components

Source: Laurence, 2002

The basic calculation, of a five WPI components, is based on the following formula:

x i – x min / x max – x min

Where xi, xmax and xmin are the original WPI component values for country i, the highest value country, and the lowest value country respectively. The indexes therefore show a country’s relative position and for any indicator this lies between 0 and 1. Within each of the five parts, subcomponent indices are five averaged to get the component index. Each of the five part indices multiply by 20 and then add together to get the final index score for the WPI, which is in the range 0 to 100.

WPI=[Resources]+[Access]+[Use]+[Capacity]+[Environment]

The same composite WPI framework was apply to national level data collected from public datasets, to create national WPI values for 170 countries. The spatial variability of water and people’s ability to access them does make national values rather meaningless. As with any national values, the usefulness of such data for internal policy use is limited. However, they provide a means of comparison of different countries, and can be of use to donor agencies and international organisations, about progress in the water sector, and towards development targets.

43


How the WPI values estimated nationally show the details of each component. In this approach, we have identified variables from existing datasets that are suitable for inclusion in the WPI framework. Applying Water Poverty Index to SCSC In Figure 3 is given an illustration of how the Water Poverty Index framework can be used in this study. The pentagram shows simultaneously different dimensions of WPI to examine the strengths and weaknesses of the water management. Figure 3 WPI Pentagram

0

5

10

15

20Resources

Access

CapacityUse

Environment

Egypt

Jordan

Lebanon

Tunisia

Turkey

Data Source: Lawrence, 2002

The analysis of the pentagram (Figure 3) reveals that (water) Resources item is the main difficulty of SCSC. Despite this, some countries have good Access to water for drinking, industry and agricultural use. The Access is one of the parts with higher range between countries because of different water management in SCSC. The Use of water reveal similar strategies on investment in physical and financial capital to promote more effective water use that could be productive, as would capacity building about human and social capital.

About Resources, the bottom countries in the world are all in desert areas with no major rivers bringing water from outside. Despite the scarcity of water in SCSC, mainly Turkey and Egypt as it is measured by the WPI, reflect their ability to overcome these shortages through effective management and use.

Capacity of SCSC is more or less the same in all countries and shows efforts of these governments to invest in the water sector. In SCSC, and particularly in Lebanon and Tunisia, Capacity is improved by the existence of laws and by the institution ability to buy, manage and lobby for improves water. The countries with lower capacity, Egypt and Turkey suffer more with inadequate health and education provision (For Environment, which provides a measure of ecological sustainability the bottom three are Jordan, Lebanon and Tunisia. The top SCSC presents also bad condition according developed environmental awareness and rule. Jordan is in a terrible situation. Lack of water or means to purchase has forced the decision-makers to adopt some measures that lead to decreased recharge of groundwater aquifers. As one of the Arab countries with the highest population increase, Jordan does not have the means to create


44

infrastructure enough to support all the water needs. This overuse of water is the main cause of the Environmental degradation (UNDP and JHFHD, 2004).

Table 7, Low-level of Life Expectancy Index in these two countries).

For Environment, which provides a measure of ecological sustainability the bottom three are Jordan, Lebanon and Tunisia. The top SCSC presents also bad condition according developed environmental awareness and rule. Jordan is in a terrible situation. Lack of water or means to purchase has forced the decision-makers to adopt some measures that lead to decreased recharge of groundwater aquifers. As one of the Arab countries with the highest population increase, Jordan does not have the means to create infrastructure enough to support all the water needs. This overuse of water is the main cause of the Environmental degradation (UNDP and JHFHD, 2004).

Table 7 Components of the WPI (with ranking)

Resources Rank Access R. Capacity R. Use R. Environment R.

Egypt 3.4 136 18.3 34 13.3 86 12.5 127 10.5 101

Jordan 0.4 144 13 82 14.9 63 10.8 97 7.3 143

Lebanon 6.1 117 15.7 56 15.8 45 10.5 88 7.7 140

Tunisia 3.2 137 12.4 85 15.3 55 12.2 123 7.8 137

Turkey 7.8 87 14.8 62 13.1 91 10.7 93 10.1 110

Data sources5 in Lawrence, 2002

The efficiency of a country Uses water for domestic, agricultural and industrial purposes reveal a great similitude between SCSC. The lowest ranking countries are Egypt and Tunisia, because of wasteful or inefficient water use practices, according mainly with irrigated agriculture and Tourism. For instance in Egypt, despite the enormous consumption of water in agriculture, contributes of this sector to the national GDP is not so relevant. The Egypt also practices high per capita domestic water use. In Egypt, however, improved access would benefit local communities. These advices would need to be further analysed to identify where such investments should be made (UNDP and INPE, 2004).

The WPI assigns a value of 20 points as the best score for each of its five categories. A country that meets the criteria in all five categories would have a score of 100. In SCSC all the values are below 60. The highest-ranking country, Egypt, scores a WPI of 58 points, while Jordan, the last, scores a WPI of 46. The Egypt scored 71

5 Resources: World Resources Institute, 2000; Gleick, 2000; Access: World Resources Institute, 2000; Capacity: GDP - HDR 2001; Under-5 mortality - World Resources Institute, 2000; Education - HDR 2001; Use: Gleick, 2000; World Resources Institute, 2000; World Bank, 2001; Environment: World Economic Forum, et al, 2001.

45


Figure 5 is a “sufficient water” country, it comes out surprisingly high. Despite Egypt is a developing country, it have great water source from Nile River. At same time, Egypt has good access to safe water and relatively good health and education provision. Egypt is high WPI even with scarcity of natural resources is considered, and the best access to water of all Middle east and North Africa (On the WPI measure, Jordan takes the 118th position is a “water stress” country. Jordan scoring low in resources and environment but earning 63 rank in capacity. This item shows the efforts of government to improve water management. About its low resources, Jordan’s access is relatively high, and it also well scored in use, at 123.

Figure 4). So, Egypt scores highly on access, including access to irrigation because it’s long cultural heritage of water management and benefit from important water infrastructures, as the example of Nasser Dam and the canals from them.

Turkey at 79 is another example of country that scores highly, but in this case because combined a list of items with mean values. No one part is excellent or bad, however combining all of them results a WPI moderately high corresponding to “sufficient water” country.

On the WPI measure, Jordan takes the 118th position is a “water stress” country. Jordan scoring low in resources and environment but earning 63 rank in capacity. This item shows the efforts of government to improve water management. About its low resources, Jordan’s access is relatively high, and it also well scored in use, at 123.

Figure 4 Map of Access to Safe Drinking Water, 2000

Data source: World Resources Institute, 2000 in Lawrence, 2002

Two countries sharing “water relative sufficiency” class, Tunisia and Lebanon, and have significant differences in amount of WPI components. The reasons for the closeness are partly because of Tunisia Environment item is a slightly better than Lebanon. Resources in Tunisia are fewer well-developed; because of fewer sources and infrastructure, and the people of the Lebanon have better access to water than those in Tunisia. The capacity score is the most significant characteristic of these countries. With high scores, the capacity suggests a healthy, well-educated


46

population with a reasonable financial base of Tunisia and Lebanon. In general terms of all aspects, Tunisia scores are much lower, reflecting a comparatively lower development in that country than in the Lebanon.

47


Figure 5 Map of Water Poverty Index, 2000/01

Data sources in Lawrence, 2002

4.2.3 Water Stress Index The water stress index represents the water availability by person, calculated as an average according both temporal and spatial scale and omits water shortages in dry seasons or in certain regions within special characteristics. It is the number of hundreds of people who has to share 1.000.000 m³ available renewable water yearly. Water availability of more than 1,700m³/capita/year defines the threshold above which water shortage occurs only irregularly or locally. Below this level, water scarcity arises in different levels of severity (Falkenmark, 1992).

The result of water availability by person is an average with both temporal and spatial scale and neglects water shortages in dry seasons or in certain regions within a country. It does not take the water quality into account nor does it give information about a country’s ability to use the resources. In fact, a country could have enough water (according with Falkenmark indicator), which cannot be used because of pollution or inadequate access to it.

48


Figure 6 Map of Water Stress Index, 1995

Data source: Ohlsson, 1998

The WSI also presents a threshold of water availability gives information about water demand that cannot be satisfied without taking measures. The


49

Figure 6 presents different ranks of the WPI for almost each part of Mediterranean basin. For example, West Europe ranks “sufficient” and “plentifully” and All North Africa is “water scarce”.

Grounded on WSI, it is possible to find an axis between North Africa and Middle East that represents the one of the most water stress regions in the world. In the east limit of the axis is Lebanon, “water stressed” country that represents a transition between water scarcity countries of Middle East and North Africa (MENA) and sufficiency of water in East Europe. “Water scarce” countries as Egypt, Tunisia and Jordan represent the most precarious situation even with different causes.

For instance, in Egypt, the Nile provides almost all the freshwater used by more than 60 million Egyptians. When few people living in a modern economic way, was a distant dream for the entire country saw, there’s no reason to worry about it. However, as the upstream population begin to strap up the Nile's waters to provide economic prosperity for their own growing numbers the water stress increased considerably. Egypt is raising the stakes with ambitious plans for its New Valley land reclamation project. Pressed by population growth within its own borders, the Egyptian government has begun a massive irrigation project in the country's western desert (UNDP and INPE, 2004).

The water stress or scarcity seems to be an overexploitation North African’s phenomenon, appealing to a deeper water scarcity analysis. Going through the map, it is possible to see that just one SCSC which are deemed hydrologically “sufficiency” (Turkey).

Turkey is ranked as best SCSC; and, as the only country in the region with great water surplus, is invariably named as a possible source of water imports. Despite this, is ranked just on 103 mainly because of country’s big area of and the balance between the location of water sources and population. However, government of Turkey launched massive Turkish dam building programme: Greater Anatolia Project (GAP). This project was designed to supply water and power enough to the development needs of Turkey's population. GAP is one of the most massive water projects in world history. When completed, it will provide Turkey with water supply capacity that could be the key to solve the problems of Turkey’s water stress (UNDP and BU, 2004).

4.2.4 Social Water Stress Index Social Water Stress Index (SWSI) represents a society’s social adaptive capacity in facing the challenges of physical water scarcity. To get it is necessary to divide Water Stress Index (WSI) by the Human Development Index (HDI) for each country. A higher value suggests a greater degree of social water stress.

As discussed above, a WSI would reveal on the adaptive capacity of a society according the use and management of this natural resource. Adaptive capacity is a most general and multifacetted concept that enters SWSI from HDI. However, HDI cover socioeconomic development, education, human rights, and general institutional ability. For water issues, it ought to include some measure of water legislation, and water management competence.

Without well worked-out consensus about building indicators, the use of HDI is an important approach. So, it is recognised that HDI have three important dimensions: life expectancy (as a proxy for general development); educational attainment (as a proxy for institutional ability); and real GDP per capita. Combining with water scarcity indicators the HDI is one of the SWSI sources.

Countries adaptive capacity An interesting set of countries are those that both display some degree of water stress or scarcity, according to either hydrological Water Stress/Scarcity Indices (WSI), or the calculated Social Water Stress/Scarcity Index (SWSI). These countries at the same time showing a significant difference between the WSI and SWSI.

Mediterranean countries that already are experiencing high water stress and present a significant low HDI (


50

Figure 2) are the biggest North African countries. As seem from the Jordan thus ranks as the most socially water stressed country of SCSC; with Tunisia and Egypt creating a cluster of most water challenging countries of SCSC. Comparing with WSI, Jordan and Tunisia increase substantially their ranking; however stay as “water scarcity” countries. Egypt is a water-scarce country, because of its reasonable social adaptive capacity, goes from “water scarcity” in WSI to “water stress” in SWSI, if HDI is taken into account.

Turkey is a country hydrologically “water stressed”, and according to the SWSI it will preserve the same class including adaptive capacity. However, Turkey jumps from 103 rank of WSI to 87 of SWSI. The case of Turkey is interesting for study these indices, because allows to arrive at the conclusion that has acceptable ability to manage water scarcities, even belonging to the class of “water stress”.

For Lebanon, the SWSI makes no significant difference. According to both indicators Lebanon is water stressed country, and strengthens of adaptive capacity was not enough to improve strongly SWSI.


51

Figure 7, WSI, SCSC are the most water-stressed countries considering their neighbourhood countries. But according to the SWSI suggested here, SCSC are less socially water-stressed. This is due to its relatively high social adaptive capacity, as measured in HDI.

Jordan thus ranks as the most socially water stressed country of SCSC; with Tunisia and Egypt creating a cluster of most water challenging countries of SCSC. Comparing with WSI, Jordan and Tunisia increase substantially their ranking; however stay as “water scarcity” countries. Egypt is a water-scarce country, because of its reasonable social adaptive capacity, goes from “water scarcity” in WSI to “water stress” in SWSI, if HDI is taken into account.

Turkey is a country hydrologically “water stressed”, and according to the SWSI it will preserve the same class including adaptive capacity. However, Turkey jumps from 103 rank of WSI to 87 of SWSI. The case of Turkey is interesting for study these indices, because allows to arrive at the conclusion that has acceptable ability to manage water scarcities, even belonging to the class of “water stress”.

For Lebanon, the SWSI makes no significant difference. According to both indicators Lebanon is water stressed country, and strengthens of adaptive capacity was not enough to improve strongly SWSI.

52


Figure 7 Social Water Stress Index, 1995/99

Data source: Ohlsson, 1998; UNDP, 2000

The socio-political, economic, legal and hydrological challenges facing different countries are so diverse that a closer study of the water scarcity are best approach to continue with this analysis. However, the SWSI thus seems to give a more nuanced view of water stress than merely hydrological indicators.


53

4.3 Concluding remarks about more advanced overview of indicators Throughout this chapter the value of the social dimension applied to water scarcity issues has been tried out. What becomes visible then, are efforts of SCSC governments, in some cases less well succeeded, to implements measures to reduce water scarcity. However, what is more evident is the population’s capacity to adapt to water scarcity.

Such adaptation always proceeds in several stages, each requiring a higher degree of social effort and organization:

• attempts to increase the available water (supply regulation) • attempts to increase the available amount by saving water and re-using it (demand

regulation) • balancing water use following a higher economic value (demand regulation with better

allocation) The first step mainly involves large-scale infrastructural projects (dams and irrigation canals). This is what SCSC are doing, namely in Egypt and Turkey, where larger amount of water is acquired by increased abstractions from water sources. These implementations are shown on the more explicit water indicators.

Other stage of adapting to water scarcity requires considerable amounts of social involvement, and institutional changes. Such institutional changes by definition will encroach on powerful vested interests. In SCSC the social adaptive capacity is considerably more than the physical conditions. Nevertheless, the HDI expose some weakness of those countries.

Another consequence of the water scarcity identified, is driving to reduce the adaptive capacity of a country to face a water uses. This feature is particularly pronounced in the water allocation efficiency measures which involve large-scale structural change. The SCSC needs to better adapt to water scarcity to increase they capacity to answer water scarcity. The efficiency of the measures to better allocate water available could be the key point to mitigate population needs. Part of SCSC have now some new important water infrastructures, however to decrease water stress need to follow sustainable strategies to manage this resource.

The SCSC presents, with different intensity, a complex economic and social situation with immediate needs for development and investment to reduce severe poverty and conserve the increasingly scarce common water. Successful water management in the SCSC begins with the acknowledgment that the task is complex. The SCSC countries are diverse, including differences in their history, religion, political stability and economic development levels.

Diverse social and economic realities reflect the difference in development and income. Nevertheless, these countries share common needs to produce food and energy, based on available water, towards sustainable development. Political realities are, on one hand related to a history of domestic instability and conflict in some of the SCSC. On the other hand, to overcome country competitiveness, some SCSC are aiming at optimizing national economies, which means also improving the use of water.

The SCSC suffers from an increasing scarcity of usable water and integrate one of the most water-stressed regions in the world: Middle East and North Africa (MENA). The World Bank has identified 22 countries that are below the water poverty line, estimating that, for the countries in MENA classification. Their average renewable water will fall from just above the 1,000m3/year-level in 1997 to 740m3/year by 2015. Several countries are already mining non-renewable sources (World Bank, 2001). Physical problems in water quality are caused by dumping pollutants into rivers and streams and by run-offs of agricultural chemicals.

A few reasons aggravate the water difficulties of the region, including the following:

• Except Tunisia, the other four SCSC share their total available water with at least one other country, either as riparians or by sharing a common aquifer. More powerful upstream and


54

downstream countries have been able to fix the water shares of the other riparian or aquifer-sharing countries. Equitable water-sharing is often compromised by politics.

• The rapid increase in population in the SCSC is putting increasing pressure on water availability per capita. Meanwhile, the persistently high share of water used in agriculture (including ambitious, intensive irrigation programmes) is starving other users, industrial and domestic with the latter, also helping to worsen health problems. Current shortages can only worsen, even without factoring in any impact of climate change.

• Conservation and reuse programmes are weak, and no country of SCSC has effective water-demand management systems and economic instruments to rationalize the use of water.

Comparison of Water Indicators nationally leads to the conclusion that large-scale aggregations result in too much information loss. More advance analysis is the optimal scale to detect the areas of water stress, because it allows more detailed data to shows rather than grouping all data together to produce an average. In SCSC the case studies doesn’t represent the national level. More obvious cases of this are Egypt and Turkey, which are biggest countries and case studies are representative of one smallest part of them. In the case of Turkey, Izmir is in the West Coast, and the most important river basins are in the East of country. In Egypt the case study is a smallest part of Nile’s Delta and more than 90% of Egypt is a desert.

55


5 QUALITATIVE COMPARISON OF CASE STUDIES

5.1 Introduction

The information available for an qualitative analysis of the similarities and differences across the case studies were taken from case study reports (deliverable D05 – D09). Since these reports described the issues faced at different levels of detail, this task could be fulfilled only to some extent. To overcome the gap in the available information, the representatives from each case study were asked to compile a questionnaire6 design to detect main characteristics and concerns. Unfortunately, only three out of five case study teams have compiled the questionnaire. In addition, the application of the same set of models, reported later in this report, has forced the teams engaged in different case studies to collect a common set of data (see D01: Requirement and Constraints analysis). Therefore, in this section we summarise, rather than repeat in full length, the main characteristics and issues handled in the case studies.

Figure 8 On line OPTIMA questionnaires

The questionnaires is divided in 4 sections, dedicated to physical conditions in the case studies, water management regimes, and information related to water demand and water supply. The questionnaire consists of 64 different questions. Some of the questions are purposely overlapping and redundant to test the consistency of the responses.

The description of the water management regimes (involving also description of the institutional and decision frameworks, and water pricing policies) goes beyond the case study regions; comparison of national policies is therefore comprehensively discussed in previous chapter.

6 The questionnaire was developed in context of the OPTIMA project (Optimisation for Sustainable Water Resources Management)


56

5.2 Short summary of the Case Studies

5.2.1 D05 Turkey – Gediz river basin The Turkish case study focuses on two major and closely related areas in western Anatolia, along the Aegean Sea: the first one is the Gediz River Basin while the second one is the neighbouring city of Izmir. In the basin, water scarcity is a significant problem, evidenced as water shortages due basically to competition for water among various uses. Main use is irrigation with a total command area of 110,000 ha followed by domestic and fast growing industrial demand in the coastal zone.

The second issue investigated is the sustainable management of water resources in the Izmir urban and rural area where coastal interactions are significant. This problem reflects not only a regional character but also national significance, as Izmir is the third largest city in the country and an important harbour along the Aegean. There are strong interactions between the basin and the Izmir rural area, as the Izmir metropolitan area consumes a significant portion of the groundwater resources of the Gediz Basin without feeding it back to the basin. There are also two important industrial areas in the Basin: the largest is in the Nif Valley immediately east of Izmir in Kemalpasa municipality while in the western edge of the city of Manisa is also growing an important industrial estate.

Moreover, the seaward fringe of the Gediz Delta is an important nature reserve and has recently been designated as a Ramsar site to protect rare bird species. Originally, the area received excess water from the Gediz River for much of the year, but since the ‘90s droughts, with restrictions on irrigation releases, the reserve suffers from water shortages.

This setting, coupled with difficulties to establish an appropriate and well coordinated control over the use of natural resources and pollution, brought in the region environmental degradation, resource depletion and pollution-related damages.

5.2.2 D06 Egypt – Abou Kir bay The Egyptian case study concerns the Abu Kir Bay Region, located at west of the Nile delta of Egypt where Rosetta branch of the River Nile delivers to the Mediterranean about 4-5 billion m3 of the Nile water yearly. The area also includes a large lake Idku (one of the less polluted lakes of the five northern lakes of Egypt) as well as important historic cities, including Rosetta city. This city populated by 200,000 people, mainly fishermen, is located at the north-eastern tip of Behaira Governorate, on the western bank of Rosetta branch.

The region is expected to experience soon a strong economical growth. The tourism activity should increase in the near future, especially after the discoveries of sunken cities in the bay and the recent official classification of Rosetta and Idku cities as potential tourist area. The government also declared Rosetta City among the group of monumental cities, covered by a plan of restoration of Egyptian cities. Lastly, the construction of an international coastal highway connecting Matruh and Alexandria cities (at the northwest of Egyptian Mediterranean coasts) to Sinai and Arish City to the east will facilitate the regional development and will link the city to the surrounding.

Rosetta region has been suffering from various aspects of mismanagement, neglect and deterioration in the past: coastal erosion, land based pollution to water resources and international water, urban encroachment in agricultural land, vulnerability to sea level rise, shortage of urban services and absence of planning. Losses of resources in the region have caused moreover a large-scale deterioration of socioeconomic conditions.

A significant loss of marine biodiversity due to increased load of dumped waste in the bay and of bird biodiversity due to deterioration of soil conditions and water quality in the region is also noticeable among the most important issues discussed in the case study.

5.2.3 D07 Lebanon – Abou Ali river basin The case study addresses an area stretching along the northern Lebanese coast covering Tripoli City to the north, the second largest in Lebanon, southward to the town of Batroun. The intersted


57

coastline length is about 30km while its width varies between 8-12km inland. The area typifies the Lebanese coast: it consists of a narrow plain followed inland by a series of foothills, plateau, then rising through steep slopes to the coastal mountain chain. It is crossed by a river (Abou Ali) passing in Tripoli and another minor one (like El-Jawz) near Batroun, with intermittent streams, dendrite drainage and dry wadis. The climate is hot sub- humid at the coast becoming milder inland.

The major urban complex is Tripoli, with about 300,000 people leaving in the city and 100,000 in the surroundings. It used to be a dominantly agricultural region, but the last three decades witnessed a rapid development of urban construction, including some industries, recreations and power plants at the expense of agriculture. The urban/rural interface around Tripoli has changed dramatically with great losses in prime land and resources: the immediate coastal foothills are highly urbanized close to cities but are cultivated outside. In the Chekka stretch and just north of Batroun there are heavy industries, phosphoric acid, asbestos tiles/pipes and cement. This is among the highest polluted areas in Lebanon, where quarrying, water, soil and air pollution is very noticeable.

Tourist pressure is a matter of concern in the area as it is typical of the Region, and there is a fairly dense road network for easy accessibility. There are many venues of significance, both in the cities, and scattered elsewhere including archaeological as well as scenic sites inland along the coastal valleys.

Precipitation essentially covers two ranges from coastline inward, 800- 950mm, and 900-1,000mm annually, though it falls within 3-4 months episodically and often torrential. Almost 50% of this water is lost through evaporation. Karst systems are rather well developed, and water wells are drilled abundantly and yet very loosely controlled: excessive water pumping resulted in salinisation of the ground and water that reflects on the secondary soil salinity and farmers income.

As there is neither a well-developed sewage network, nor wastewater control, nor proper solid waste collection and/or disposal, the major problem is the seepage of pollutants, leachates, and chemicals into the groundwater affecting its quality. Some major springs are treated and sparingly monitored, with clues that the treatment plant itself needs to be upgraded, as it happens in Tripoli.

The CS signal many problems for the area, which can be categorized as natural or human-made: the former include forest fires, strong erosion during heavy rains, droughts and some difficult inaccessible terrain with rock falls and landslides, as well as coastal floods and relative rise in sea level; human influence can be summarised as follows: chaotic urban sprawl, improper agricultural practices, and tourism.

5.2.4 D08 Jordan – Gulf of Aqba Jordan is located in the semi-arid to arid region where only about 10% of the total area (90,000 km3) receive above 350 mm of rainfall per year. The only coastal area in Jordan is the Gulf of Aqaba, populated by 150,000 people, where the shoreline amounts to about 45 km.

Aqaba area has been declared a special zone as a duty free area in order to attract new investors in trade and industry. This development will increase demand for water for the growing population and future industrial activities.

Water supply to Aqaba region are derived from the Red Sea Basin (5.0 MCM groundwater) and the adjacent Dissi aquifer system (20 MCM) plus a great part of treated wastewater. The current water consumption in the region is estimated 25 MCM where about 10 MCM is used for industrial purposes and 10 MCM for municipal purposes. Agriculture, street trees and parks receive only 3 MCM from fresh water and about 4 MCM treated wastewater.

On the water quality side, seepage from irrigated areas resulting from excess irrigation near the coast of Aqaba is already present while the planned industrial activities will soon certainly affect the water discharging in the gulf of Aqaba.

The total area is comparatively small, leading to a high concentration of economic activities potentially contradictory (ie. tourism vs industry) along the coast and thus competition for space in addition to the competition for water


58

5.2.5 D05 Tunisia – Gulf of Hammamet The case study site is the Gulf of Hammamet with its large tourist resorts.

The Tunisian coastline spans 1,300 km. and over the last two decades, a major shift of population growth, urbanization, industrialization and tourism towards the coastal zone could be observed. The emerging problems are typical, and usually involve a combination of rapid land use change, population growth driven to a large degree by migration from inland agricultural areas, depletion of water resources often accompanied by overexploitation of groundwater resources and consequent salt water intrusion in the immediate coastal zone, and pollution from unchecked economic development and insufficient waste and waste water management. These development conflict with the parallel development of tourism, which depends on the same resource basis but also on a clean and attractive environment, inland and coastal areas.

5.3 Comparison of physical conditions

Beside the Egyptian CS which regards an area with great availability of freshwater, the 3 other CS analysed are concerned with water scarcity issues, for really different reasons. The Turkish CS reports that this problem became relevant since the recent ‘90s droughts, mainly because of competition among different users, while the Jordan CS enhance how this is a structural problem due to the particular location of the gulf of Aqba which already relies on water transported from more than 100 km away. In the Lebanon CS, although Tripoli appears to be richly endorsed with freshwater availability, mismanagement and bad quality of the surface water leads to relevant problems, as it will be highlighted in the following.

Related to water scarcity issues, droughts appear to be relevant for the same CS, but only for the river Gediz basin some details are available on the last occurrences. Those events, occurred between 1989 and 1994, were due to an above average increase in urban and industrial demand; in addition slow institutional response has not kept up with the requirements for changing water allocation and management.

The occurrence of floods appears to be moderately relevant for two case studies Lebanon and Turkey, while the others do not give importance to this issue. Specific details are again available only for the Turkish CS which reports that the unfortunate last events (1995 and August 2001) were basically due to the mismanagement of the creeks neighbouring the city of Izmir and to an increased erosion favoured by the establishing of new up stream settlements for the ever-growing population.

The issues related to groundwater quantity are meaningful for all CS, due to a broad set of reasons: Egypt and Lebanon principally denounce the spread use of private wells, respectively because of local unavailability of fresh water and because of the non trustable quality of the surface water locally available. All Case studies globally signal the non sustainable use of the groundwater resources and the lowering of the water tables. Closely related, the groundwater quality in 3 CS areas is worsening and worrying (Turkey, Lebanon and Egypt). The last two signal this water is often not suitable for drinking purposes while all 3 highlight that monitoring is not widespread and the results are not publicly available, making it difficult to know if significant degradation of groundwater quality is occurring. Lastly, in the Jordan CS, the groundwater transported from the adjacent Disi Aquifer to the Gulf of Aqba is still of good quality. Those important issues will be better discussed in the upcoming section on water demand and supply.

No major information on watershed degradation is available from the reports while Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey agree on classifying this issue as moderately important among the others. As it is the project focus, the coastal interaction is always significant but its relative importance varies within each specific context.

The Egypt CS denounce that all sediments are being trapped and deposited in Lake Nasser (south of Aswan High Dam) instead of being delivered to the sea through the two promontories, leading to erosion of the coast partially mitigated by engineering structures. On the opposite, river Abou-Ali in the Lebanese CS seems to bring more and more loads of sediments, solid and liquid pollution in the years, leading to the building of sandy beaches mixed with debris. The Turkish CS finally

59


addresses only water quality problems for the bay, while the Jordan CS signal how return flow of irrigation may affect water quality and the incredibly rich and sensible coral reef present in the Gulf of Aqba. While referring to coastal interaction, the quantitative data available for the TELEMAC model have finally to be cited, remembering however that this analysis is foreseen in next chapter.

5.4 Comparison of water demand

As the water demand issues are closely related to the indicators collected for the running of the WaterWare model, the available information across reports is mainly quantitative and will therefore be fully analysed in the next chapter.

Figure 9 Water Demand across the Case Studies

Source: D01 - Requirement and Constraints

Analysing this figure and the related data, the agricultural sector is by far the major water demander in 4 of the case studies. In the Jordan CS, the main user is the industrial sector while in the other CS this sector use more or less as much water as the domestic one. Finally, the touristic sector is relevant for the gulf of Aqba and partially for North Lebanon (also depending on the political stability of the region).

Going more into details, the domestic sector critically threatens the groundwater principally because of the fast growing population which principally relies on this resource across all the analysed case studies. In addition, a major problem of non return flow is common to Turkish and Jordan CS, as water is currently abstracted to be transported to another basin. Only for the Lebanon CS the surface water abstraction for domestic purposes appears problematic because of its already mentioned bad quality. The absence of implemented waste collection is common to Lebanon, Egypt and Jordan CS areas while only Lebanon and Egypt report the absence of diffuse sanitation systems mainly in rural areas. In Jordan and Turkish CS area, sanitation is instead not a major problem but other domestic activities lead to a general worsening situation. Finally, the Jordan CS is the only one which presents a wide spread use of water saving technologies, with 3,2 MCM of treated wastewater reused annually in the region and important desalination plant to be built in the near future.

As expected from the preliminary assessment of the sectoral consumption, the agricultural sector is crucial for all the areas analysed, beside the Jordan one. In the Egyptian bay, traditional cropping agriculture is kept together with fruit and palm trees while in the Turkish CS area, agricultural land is now dominated by cotton and grapes which is almost replacing the rice once


60

grown in the area before the recent droughts. In the Lebanese plain, agriculture is mostly citrus and olives on grounds heavily terraced when necessary, while in the higher plateaus, greenhouses have spread dramatically. Egypt, Lebanon and Turkey CS signal the same scarce attention paid to the drainage systems and to the quality of the return flows leading to surface water contamination and groundwater salinisation.

Although the industrial demand issues are important for all the analysed CS and particularly for groundwater quantity and quality, a few details are given only for the Egyptian and Turkish CS. In the Turkish area, the two major industrial districts get a great percentage of the water needed from wells and although they need a permit their consumption rates and fixed costs for pumping are not monitored nor recorded and only rough estimates are available. For the Abou kir bay, only a summary of how the construction of the International road and the recent discovery of consistent gas reserves in the region may change the setting rapidly.

The water allocated for environmental demand, beside its relative scarce consumption, is considered particularly important in Turkey and in Jordan CS areas. The seaward fringe of the Gediz Delta is in fact an important nature reserve and has recently been designated as a Ramsar site to protect rare bird species. Originally, the area received excess water from the Gediz River for much of the year, but since 1990, with restrictions on irrigation releases, the reserve suffers from water shortages. Moreover, the Jordanian CS is concerned with some specific environmental issues as the gulf area is particularly rich in coral reef, as explained in the previous section Coastal Interaction.

5.5 Comparison of water supply

The water supply issues as the demand one are closely related to the indicators collected for the running of the WaterWare model and will therefore be fully analysed in the next chapter.

61


Figure 10 Water Supply across the Case Studies

Source: D01 - Requirement and Constraints

The sources for the water supply system is rather different across case studies as it can be noticed observing


62

Figure 10 In Egypt, beside the rare private wells all water is abstracted from the Nile while at the opposite in the Aqba bay all the water is transported from a nearby aquifer. In Lebanon, the mismanagement of surface water in the area leads to the already mentioned diffusion of private wells. This is affecting the local groundwater reserves forcing authorities to import the water from further localities, which implies higher costs on the citizen. In the Turkish CS, the source greatly varies according to use: for domestic and industrial sector almost all the needs are abstracted from groundwater while the intensive irrigation activities in the basin is mainly supported by three reservoirs and water pumped by cooperatives. Regarding the system chosen to irrigate, most of the farmers from the Egyptian and Turkish CS area prefer flooding methods while irrigation efficiency seems generally to be lacking in all areas, although no major details are provided.

As mentioned earlier, the overall water quality seems to be worrying across 3 of the 4 analysed CS: Egypt, Lebanon and Turkey. The quality of surface water in the Rosetta branch (Egypt) is generally high but the situation is worsening for the ground water. In the Tripoli area and surroundings water-related diseases recur on annual basis and almost all water sources (i.e. springs, wells, rivers) are polluted with a high amount of organics, bacteria and other pollutants because of non-existence of treatment plants, no control on flow of pollutants directly into a river or even in wells. In the Turkish case study, it is the unknown ground water quality which appears the major problem as most of the Basin’s population relies on it for supply.

Finally, for what concerns the infrastructures, beside the consistent losses due to old networks and bad maintenance noticed by all CS, 3 of the area analysed are concerned with reservoirs and all of them with heavy infrastructures. The Lebanese CS specifically refer about a problem of siltation of an upstream hydropower plant.

This short analysis of the qualitative information across case studies should rather be considered as a introduction of the upcoming Comparative Analysis of the case studies, as described in the DoW and summarised in Chapter 1.


63

6 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CASE STUDIES

6.1 Introduction

This section first summarises the choice and conceptual organization of the indicators, used for an comparative analysis across the case studies. Next, the methodology and tools applied to assess the performance of the policy options under consideration will be presented, alongside with the underlying assumptions. Finally, the policy options with highest performance in different case studies will be compared and conclusions will be drown.

The SMART project made use of two software packages in order to assess the water demand and supply on one side and the diffusion of pollutants in the coastal area on the other side: WaterWare and TELEMAC. The WaterWare Model7 considers the water network as demand and supply nodes, allowing to assess the needs, requirements and constraints of each case study. The TELEMAC Modelling system8 by the computation of flows, transport of contaminants and sediments allows to assess the quality of the water in the coastal domains. More details on those two software and on the data needed for their running is available in the project’s Deliverables D03.

These models have been implemented in each case study, yielding quantitative assessments of water supply and water quality. Three scenarios, based on different assumptions regarding future demographic trends, land use, climatic conditions, water demand and water pollution, have been defined to investigate potential variations in the model results.

To evaluate the total performance of the policy options, the MULINO-DSS (mDSS)9 has been applied. mDSS is a computerised decision support system that addresses complex decision problems dealt within water resource management. The system is based on the DPSIR framework, which guides problem structuring and exploration, and contributes to a better understanding of the problem. Simulation and modelling (hydrological models in particular) facilities help to analyse the causes and effects of environmental problems/conflicts and to derive the expected outcomes of the courses of actions proposed. The multi-criteria decision functionality implemented allows the system to model users’ preferences and to aggregate the performances of considered options with regard to the decision criteria.

6.2 Conceptualisation of the Case Studies

The conceptual framework, applied in all case studies, bases on the DPSIR framework (Driving forces – Pressures – State – Impact – Responses). The DPSIR approach was developed by the European Environmental Agency to aid understanding the cause-effect relationships between different interacting components of social, economic and environmental issues faced in the water resource management. In the MULINO-DSS context it is used to represent the conceptual procedures for understanding, modelling and managing the decisional issues associated with water resource management.

7 Developed by Environmental Software and Services - http://www.ess.co.at/ 8 Developed by Laboratoire National d’Hydraulique et Environment and distributed by SOGREAH - http://www.sogreah.fr/ 9 The methodology and software tool developed by the MULINO project is designed to support Competent Authorities in the development of RBMPs in all instances in which there are choices to be made between alternative options and with the involvement of stakeholders (Figure 1). The methodology facilitates the integration environmental, social and economic concerns and facilitates involvement of interested parties in the formulation of strategies and decisions. The MULINO-DSS software was coded in the Microsoft Visual Basic version 6.0 programming language. It can run on a personal computer with these minimum characteristics: Pentium II processor (equivalent or over) with at least 200 MHz (preferred 800 MHz and over); 64 MB RAM - (preferred 128 MB and over); 1 GB HDD”; 17” monitor; and OS: Windows 98 and following versions). The project results describing the methodology and the software tool are freely available at the project web site (http://siti.feem.it/mulino/)

64


Figure 11 The DPSIR conceptual framework

D

R

P

IS

The DPSIR consists of nodes representing different elements of the system: The Driving forces represent natural and social processes which lead to environmental problems, e.g. energy, agriculture, industry and waste management. The Pressure indicators are the outcomes of the driving forces, which influence the current environmental state. A common expression of this is the use of resources: representing an input for a variety of natural processes and leads to the changes of the environmental condition. The State indicators describe physical, chemical or biological phenomena in the given reference area. They may describe the land uses or their current condition (forest health). The Impact indicators refer to the consequence of an environment state change. The result of an impact, such as air pollution, is followed by many effects (global warming, loss of biodiversity) at various temporal and spatial scales (extinction of same animal species).

In a generic decisional context, the perception of the existence of relevant impacts in the catchment’s area induces decision-makers to develop Responses (R) which prevent, compensate, or mitigate the negative outcomes of state changes. Responses may be targeted to address the Driving forces, the Pressures or the State itself: either the Driving forces may be re-organised (prevention, changing behaviour, etc.), Pressure mechanisms may be altered (e.g. the introduction of new production systems), or the State of the environment may be restored or adapted to reduce its sensitivity to pressures.

6.2.1 Driving forces and Pressures The first set of indicators needed for the SMART project concerns the variables that had finally considered to be meaningful for characterizing sustainable management of water resources. These variables (see D04: Data compilation and analysis report for details), including their measurement units, have been agreed by the consortium and classified in 4 broad categories, i.e. Demography (population growth rate), Climate (precipitation and temperature), Water demand (Urban, Agriculture, Industry, Tourism, Environment) and Water pollution (flow and concentration of pollutants discharged). These variables, which have been translated into the key inputs of the WaterWare and TELEMAC models, have been varied according the expectation of their future development and thus built a basis for different scenarios.

In addition to the baseline conditions corresponding to the actual situation, for each case study three scenarios have been defined: BAU (business as usual), PESS (pessimistic) and OPT (optimistic). These scenario and their underlying variables (D and P indicators) have been calculated as % changes with respect to the numerical value indicating the actual situation, as shown in the table below which reports D and P indicators for the Turkish CS.

65


Table 8 Driving forces and Pressures for the Turkish CS

6.2.2 State and Impacts While indicators representing Driving Forces and Pressures have been transformed into input variables of the models TELEMAC and WaterWare, the model outputs were used to understand the changes in the state of the environment (thus state indicators), especially in terms of water quantity and quality. The models produce a range of information, which in order to give meaningful insights, have to be aggregated into comprehensive and interpretable indices. These indices have been considered as impacts in terms of the DPSIR framework.

The selection of final indices has been proceeded a thoughtful discussion in the project consortium. The general requirements for such indices agreed on included following characteristics: Indices have to be

• capable to provide a practical information on the single aspects of sustainability;

• cover different aspects of sustainability, including economic, social and environmental features, for any given scenarios;

• mutually independent in order to avoid duplicity, especially in course of decision analysis.


66

A set of 7 indices have been adopted by the Consortium as an example upon which a comparative analysis could be performed. These include:

• D/S ratio for agriculture, industry, tourism, environmental uses (%)

• Economic efficiency of the system (%)

• No. of days with restricted domestic supply (days/year)

• Global quality of coastal waters (I-IV)

The first 6 indicators can be calculated by aggregating the WaterWare outputs while last indicator on water quality is calculated with the support of a software developed by Sogreah for the specific purpose of this analysis.

• D/S ratio for agriculture, industry, tourism and the Economic efficiency of the system represent the Economical pillar

• No. of days with restricted domestic supply represent the Social pillar

• D/S ratio for environmental uses and the Global quality of coastal waters represent the Environmental pillar

6.2.3 Policy options considered Suitable policy options - responses in the DPSIR framework, can be very different for the five case studies. To facilitate a comparative analysis, a common set of measures was agreed on. These include Water Demand Management (WDM), Water Supply Management (WSM), Water Quality Management (WQM). Each case study selected different policy options per each of the 3 types, according to a draft list of possible responses, available in chapter 7 of Deliverable D04 and reported in table 10.

Table 9 Water management responses

WATER DEMAND MANAGEMENT

Code Responses set Definitions

WDM1 Water price (domestic)

WDM2 Water price (agriculture)

WDM3 Water price (industry)

WDM4 Water price (tourism)

This is the response that may be needed at the end of scenario simulations to adjust the cost of water consumed by household, agricultural, industrial and touristic activitieswithin the case study area.

The data should be in the same unit as that of the existing water price indicator; but this time, slight changes may occur in the price due to simulations performed under both the current and the future conditions. Thus, the price may have to be readjusted to keep predictions within acceptable limits.

WDM5 Water subvention (domestic)

WDM6 Water subvention (agriculture)

WDM7 Water subvention (industry)

WDM8 Water subvention (tourism)

Water subvention on household, agricultural, industrial and touristic water consumption indicates any reduction in the price of water consumed by agriculture.

The real rate of subvention should be given if a reduction exists only in the price of water supplied, rather than that in the economic cost of provided services for water distribution, which will exist in all conditions.

WDM9 Irrigation system

Any response to a change in the irrigation method will be very effective in increasing the overall efficiency of the irrigation. system.

One of the three ranking numbers (or more if other different


67

irrigation methods are considered), 1, 2 and 3, should be assigned for the response value such that it will represent flooding, sprinkling and dripping types of irrigation, respectively.

WDM10 Awareness for limiting uncontrolled abstraction

This is one of the most effective responses to increase awareness for limiting uncontrolled abstractions.

One of the three ranking numbers 0, 1 and 2, should be assigned for the response value such that it will represent low, partial and high awareness, respectively.

WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT


WQM1 Share of industrial wastewater treated on site

This is the proportion of wastewater produced by industry and subject to autonomous treatment that is adequate to allow it to be discharged into the environment without impacting human health or ecosystems.

The proportion of treated industrial water is restricted to the volumes treated by direct connection to an autonomous treatment plant on site. The response can be calculated as the following ratio:

% IWT = I2 / I1

where;

% IWT: the proportion of industrial wastewater treated on site

I1: total volume of wastewater produced by the industry

I2: volume of industrial wastewater treated by non-public treatment plants

WQM2 Solid waste management

Solid waste management covers several management issues for the final purpose of recycling and reducing the amount of wastes contaminated in landfills. Recycling means an efficient use of material and a decrease in pressures to the environment.

Local (ineffective) solutions, minimal separation, composting, recycling, rehabilitation of disposal sites, municipal waste disposal and limiting waste quantity at the source are among the possible managerial actions in solid waste management. All these actions are to be defined either as effective or not effective (local) solutions. Either 0 or 1 should be used for the response value to describe ineffective or effective management practices, respectively.

WQM3 Urban waste water treatment This response value expresses the amount of wastewater treated in urban treatment plants. The amount of treated urban wastewater can be directly obtained from the operational reports of treatment facilities


68

or from other sources like the municipal administrations.

WQM4 Water treatment investments

Investments on water treatment can be included among the responses to describe achievement of water quality management objectives. Water treatment investments can be grouped as local investments and extensive investments applied in all areas under water stress. Values of 0 or 1 should be selected to represent local or extensive investments, respectively.

WQM5 Awareness for limiting fertilization

Awareness for limiting fertilization can be given as one of the most effective responses with regard to the best management practices on water quality.

Either 0 or 1 should be selected to describe low or high awareness on limiting fertilization.

WQM6 Share of collected and treated wastewater

This response relates to the wastewater produced that has been subject both to collection from a collective network (from households, local authorities or industry) and has been adequately treated to allow its discharge into the environment without impacting human health or ecosystems.

The total volume of wastewater produced is equal to the sum of domestic wastewater and the industrial wastewater which is not directly treated on site. The volume of treated wastewater is the volume that is conveyed to other sites where it is treated. Then, the indicator represents the ratio of volume of treated wastewater to the total volume comprising domestic and industrial wastewaters.

WQM7 Limiting salinization through drainage systems

Salinization occurs in warm and dry locations where soluble salts precipitate from water and accumulate in the soil. Salts may also accumulate in soils as a result of salt water intrusion from the sea.

The efforts in limiting salinization should be considered either as low or high with their corresponding indications of 0 or 1, respectively.

WQM8 Existence of pollutant monitoring programs

This response value refers to the existence of a regional program for the operational monitoring of pollutants in the case study area. The program is meant to be a continuous program on monitoring of priority pollutants to determine the quality of the receiving environmental media.

The criteria to assess the monitoring program should be technical in nature (pollutants and validity measuring compartments / comparability of results), legal (existing regulations, or otherwise) and institutional (application and enforcement capability). Effectiveness of the monitoring programs should be assessed, based on the efficiency of the enforcement, availability of standards on the use of pesticides and fertilizers, availability of industrial pollution control regulations, etc. The response value should be selected either as 0 or 1, which will represent insufficient and full program controls, respectively.

WQM9 National regulations on wastewater

Besides the above responses defined, availability of national regulations on wastewaters can be considered as a stand-alone response, as well.


69

The response value should be selected either as 0 or 1, such that it will represent insufficient or full program controls, respectively.

WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT


WSM1 Domestic Water Distribution & Use Systems Investments

Together with the related indicator on domestic water distribution and use systems efficiency, this response is very important with respect to the effectiveness of water supply management practices.

The investment should be described either as an incomplete or complete investment, with the corresponding numbers 0 or 1, respectively.

WSM2 Agricultural Water Distribution & Use Systems Investments

WSM3 Reservoir Storage Investments

This response is used to identify investment levels for reservoir storages.

The investment should be described either as low or high investment, with the corresponding numbers 0 or 1, respectively.

WSM4 Efficiency in irrigation

This response comprises two efficiency values:

E1: The physical efficiency of networks for conveying and distributing irrigation water, measured as the ratio of the volume of water actually distributed to the land plots to the total volume of water allocated to irrigation, upstream of the networks, including losses in the networks.

E2: The efficiency of irrigation in each plot, calculated as the total efficiency (by plot) of each irrigation method (surface irrigation, sprinkler irrigation, micro irrigation, or other methods), weighted by the relative proportions for each approach in the country.

Irrigation efficiency is determined by the formula:

∑ ×

n

m

m

ESS

1 where:

n : the number of irrigation methods used

Sm : the area irrigated by the method “m”

Em : efficiency of the method “m”

S : total area irrigated in the case study region for all methods.

The efficiency E1 of irrigation networks can be estimated by management structures, when meters are available on the networks. This is specific to each network. It would nevertheless be possible to assess national average efficiency by averaging the efficiencies for each network, weighted for the volumes carried by the network each year.


70

Average efficiency per plot E2 can be defined as the ratio of the quantity of water actually used by plants to the quantity of water delivered to the plot. This will vary according to the irrigation method, and on average will be:

− 40 to 50% for gravity irrigation

− 60% for sprinkler irrigation

− 90% for micro-irrigation

WSM5 Efficiency in urban network

This is the ratio of the volume of running water invoiced and paid for by the user to the total volume of drinking water produced and distributed.

This efficiency can be computed as the following:

Efficiency Ratio = V1 / V2

where;

V1 = volume of running water invoiced and paid for by the user

V2 = total volume of running water produced and distributed.

The indicator measures both the physical efficiency of drinking water supply networks (rate of network losses) and economic efficiency that represents the ability of network managers to recover costs from the user. V1, which is the volume of drinking water invoiced and paid for by the users, takes into account: Volume V1d, which is the volume of water distributed to the user (measured by a metering system) which includes leaks at the user premises; the proportion Pf of that volume which is subject to invoicing; and lastly, the proportion Pr of that invoiced volume that is actually recovered from the user:

V1=V1d*Pf*Pr.

These three sub-indicators may also be considered separately. V2 is the volume of drinking water produced upstream of the distribution system; it includes distributed water + leaks in the conveyance and distribution network. An estimate by water distributors may be used.

This indicator may take urban and rural areas into account.

WSM6 Minimum flow for environmental purposes

As the amount of water allocated for environmental purposes relates to the water supply management, it should be determined carefully to allow decision makers to respond to management strategies when needed.

The required volume of water per second that should be reserved for the ecosystem should be provided.

WSM7 Water harvesting

Water harvesting is a term used to denote to all kinds of water storage systems within the case study area.

The average annual volume of water in all storage systems should be determined, based on the effective storages (between the maximum and minimum storage levels).


71

WSM8 Groundwater exploitation control

Groundwater exploitation is one of the key issues in water supply management, and an increased degree of control on groundwater extraction is desired to improve the management efficiency on budgetary issues.

The degree of control should be given in representative numbers, either as 0 or 1, which correspond to insufficient or full control on the extractions, respectively.

WSM9 Mobilization of surface water

This should be considered if there exist examples on the mobilization of water in the way of diverting some portion of the surface water to areas that require extra water when needed.

This response should be described as the volume of water transported in average per year.

WSM10 Water Export (Surface&Groundwater)

This should be determined if there exists water export from the case study area to close proximity, considering the total volume of surface and groundwater.

This response should be given as the ratio of exported volume of water to the available total water volume in the case study area for an average year.

WSM11 Water import

Similar to the basin-out water supply, this response represents the amount of water imported to the basin.

This response should be given as the ratio of imported volume of water to the available total water volume in the case study area for an average year.

WSM12 Recycling of wastewater

This issue is valid if the water supply is supported with an extra amount provided by the recycling of wastewater.

The recycled amount should be given as a percent of the total average water volume in an average year.

WSM13 Desalination

Desalination is valid if there is any support to the water supply within the case study area as a result of a desalination process.

The extra amount should be given as a percent of the total average water volume in an average year.

Each response impacts on a Driving force or Pressure indicator thus modifying models’ inputs. So, each CS specified how proposed responses are expected to affect models' inputs.

Summarising, each CS had to run the models for each of the broad set of 4 possible responses (Current, WDM, WSM, WQM) considered under each scenario (BAU, OPT, PESS) plus the current responses for the baseline scenario, this for the 7 sustainability indicator.

The final matrix is available for only 3 of the 5 case studies:

• Turkey CS: Gediz river basin

• Jordan CS: Gulf of Aqba

• Lebanon CS: Abou-Ali river basin

These matrixes are reported in the correspondent Case study reports, respectively D05.1, D07.1 and D08.1 as well as in Annex I of the present document.


6.3 Evaluation

6.3.1 Transformation of the policy performance The transformation of the policy options from absolute to preferential values was handled by value function (VF). The VF approach bases on the assumption that the preferential judgements may be substituted by a number of (‘value’) preserving the preference relations. Value function (VF) translates the performances of the options into value scores, which represent the degree to which a decision objective is matched. With other words, it maps the preference about two options a and b (a is preferred b) in a numerical relation u(a) > u(b). Figure 12 shows the share and the main parameters of the VF applied to individual criteria.

Figure 12 Value functions applied to the considered criteria

Value V() Value V()

6.3.2 ElicitationNot all criteria ideincorporate weigthe Simos proceduring a SMARTa set of cards wawere asked to rarank order of a ccriterion: the first 10 Smart Workshop workshop, mainly scsteering committee o

Value V()

20 4

1.0

0.1

.20 .40 .600 .80 .100

1.0

0.1

20 60 100 140 180

s

1.0

0.1

D/S Ratio

72

weights of criteria ntified in the case studies carry the same weight.

hts as an assessment of the relative importance dure (Simos, 1990a; Simos, 1990b; Figueira an

Workshop10, which took place in Venice in Junes given to the workshop participants, one card fornk these cards (or criteria) from the least importriterion expressed the importance a single partic

criterion in the ranking was the least important an was held on 23-24.6. 2005 in Venice, Instituto Artigianeientific partners from the Smart project. Besides the EU prf the Nostrum-DSS project (http://www.feem-web.it/nostrum

Value V()

I

1.0

0.1

0 600 80 100

Economic

II III IV
No. of days with restricted Global quality
Decision approach applied here of criteria. To elicit the weights, d Roy, 2002) has been applied 2005. Following this procedure each criterion. The participants ant to the most important. The ipant wanted to ascribe to that d the last criterion in the ranking

lli. Fourteen experts took part at the oject officer and two members of the ) were represented.


73

was the most important. In the case two criteria were found equally important, these were given the same rank position. In this way two successive criteria in the ranking held a similar importance. In order to allow participants to express strong preference between criteria, a new set of cards, white in order not to confuse the participants, were introduced. The participants were asked to introduce white cards between two successive cards, while the number of white cards was proportional to the difference between the importance of the considered criteria. The principle of the weight elicitation is explained in


74

Figure 13. In the above part of the figure four criteria are shown whereas their importance increases from left to right. The bottom part of the figure shows a case of equal importance of two criteria, “economic efficiency” and “D/S ratio tourism”, which are in addition ranked much less important than the criterion “D/S ration industry”. This is indicated by the white card put between these criteria. The criterion “D/S ration industry” is just less important than the criterion “D/S ratio agric”, ranked as the most important criterion in this example. Subsequently, the criteria weights are calculated using the rank positions attributed in the previous step. The rank positions are simply divided by the total sum of the positions of the considered criteria.

75


Figure 13 Example of the Simos methodology

Economic efficiency

D/S ratio D/S ratio D/S ratio

tourism industry agric

Economic efficiency

D/S ratio D/S ratio

industry agric D/S ratio

tourism

During the workshop, the participants were asked to perform the criteria ranking using the Simos methodology twice: first for the groups of macro-criteria (environmental, economic and social criteria groups) separately, and in succession, for all criteria together. The difference between the weights elicited in such a way would give a clue about a cognitive shortcoming, called splitting bias frequently reported in the literature. The existence of the splitting bias means in our case that different weights can be yielded, depending on the way criteria are organised. As expected, the criteria weights differed considerably. When all criteria were considered together, the weights of the economic criteria were generally overestimated and the weights of environmental and social criteria underestimated (


76

Table 10).


77

Table 10 Criteria weights elicited by Simos procedure

Macro-criteria Decision criteria Weights elicited separately ws

Weights elicited collectively wc

D/S ratio for agriculture 0,1 0.17

D/S ratio for industry 0,06 0.11

D/S ratio for tourism 0,06 0.09 Economic

Economic efficiency of the system 0,11 0.17

Social No. of days with restricted domestic supply

0,33 0.22

Global quality of coastal waters 0,14 0.09 Environmental

D/S ratio for environmental uses 0,19 0.15

A considerable inconsistency was observed between the two exercises of the weight elicitation. The inconsistencies can be generally classified into three classes:

i. strong inconsistency – the preference between two criteria a and b was opposite. For example, while the criterion a was preferred when considering the criteria groups separately; the criterion b was preferred when all criteria were handled together. There have been two cases (14%) of strong inconsistency.

ii. weak inconsistency – the relation between two criteria changed from indifference (a and b equally important) to a preference relation (a is preferred to /dominated by b).There have been three cases (21%) of a weak inconsistency.

iii. shift in the degree of preference – a relation between two criteria changed from simply preferred to strictly preferred (by inserting one or more white cards between the criteria a and b).

This inconsistency had no impact on the further comparative analysis across the case studies since only the criteria weights elicited in the hierarchical way (ws in the table 11) were applied to evaluate policy performance. For full detail about the intermediate and final results of the Workshop exercise, refer to Annex II: Weight elicitation.

As a result of the above described inconsistency, the variations of the experts judgements yielded by the Simos preference elicitation differed considerably. The most constant (robust) judgement of the importance of a criterion, in the case of non-hierarchical criteria arrangement, yielded the only social criterion – the “No. of days with restricted domestic supply”, followed by “economic efficiency” and “D/S agriculture”. The environmental criteria (especially “global quality”) showed the most varying preference judgements across the experts. In the case the criteria were organised hierarchically, “D/S agriculture” yielded the most stable judgement across the economic criteria, followed by “economic efficiency” and “D/S tourism”. The “D/S industry” did worst. Among the environmental criteria, once again “D/S environment” criterion yielded more stable judgements.

Both Spearman's rank correlation and Kendall's tau coefficient have been applied to analyse the relations between the criteria (see also Annex II: Weight elicitation.). A significant correlation was revealed only between four pairs of criteria. A negative correlation was revealed between some economic and environmental criteria, meaning that participants who assigned a high rank position (and resulting weight) to economic aspects of the problem, generally tended to see environmental issues one as less relevant and vice versa. However, this could not be generalised for all criteria in these sub-groups, indicating a rather complex preference system hardly reducible to stereotypes such as antagonism between economically and environmentally oriented people. The only significant correlation of this type was between criteria “D/S tourism” and “D/S environment”. A negative correlation was found also within economic sub-group, namely between the criteria “D/S industry” and “Economic efficiency”. More complex is the situation between the only social criterion and the other criteria. A significant positive correlation was revealed between “D/S tourism” and

78


“No. of days of restricted domestic use”. On the other hand a negative correlation characterised the relation between “D/S agriculture” and “No. of days”. In the case of the significant criteria the correlation coefficients varied between 0.34 and 0.41.

Figure 14 Variation in the experts’ judgement of the criteria importance

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

p1 p2 p3 p4 p5 p6 p7 p8 p9 p10 p11 p12 p13 p14

Experts

Sim

os w

eigh

ts

D/S agriNo. Of days

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

p1 p2 p3 p4 p5 p6 p7 p8 p9 p10 p11 p12 p13 p14

Experts

Sim

os w

eigh

ts

D/S indEcon effic

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

p1 p2 p3 p4 p5 p6 p7 p8 p9 p10 p11 p12 p13 p14

Experts

Sim

os w

eigh

ts

D/S tourismNo. Of days D/S envir

The correlations between the experts’ judgments of criteria importance give insight into the within-group variability of experts’ preferences. The correlation between the single experts ranges between -.48 (in the case of experts p4 and p13) and 0.9 (experts p12 and p14). Given the small sample size only 18 pairs of experts (out of n(n-1)/2 = 91) show a statistically significant correlation. The correlation in order to be statistically significant in our case must exceed 0.52, meaning that only positive correlations are statistically significant. Again, the correlation analysis does not allow a simple conclusion regarding the further differentiation of experts’ preferences. This is even more evident from the results of a cluster analysis, carried out on the rank positions attributed to the criteria by single experts (see Annex II: Weight elicitation.).

6.3.3 Aggregated performance The individual performance of the policy options under consideration were aggregated using multiple-criteria approach (MCA). The MCA methods implemented in MULINO-DSS are simple but robust and cover a range of decision-makers’ attitudes and decision-making styles. The methods implemented are designed to raise interest in a systematic approach to decision-making and to enhance users’ understanding of the MCA approach. Emphasis has been placed on supporting analytical thinking and exploring the problems. Several methods implemented allow the decision-maker to focus on various aspects of the decision problem and are useful for guiding thinking about the decisions. By simultaneously using a number of different decision methods, decision-makers are enabled to better understand the problems and to explore trade-offs between options’ achievements by reviewing the conclusions they arrive at (Bell et al., 2001). Since the MULINO project is aimed at assisting decision-makers to become more familiar with analytical ways of decision-making, the methods have been kept simple to avoid discouraging inexperienced users.

The total performances yielded by applying the additive averaging method based on the VF and weights described earlier are shown in the


79

Table 11.


80

Table 11 Final results of the CA Jordan Lebanon Turkey Options Score Rank Score Rank Score Rank ABAU 0,6653 1 0,5496 10 0,8297 8 AOPT 0,5737 6 0,7723 2 0,896 3 APESS 0,5269 10 0,4262 13 0,6356 16 CRB 0,6563 2 0,5626 9 0,6873 15 CRBAU 0,617 4 0,5642 8 0,7846 9 CROPT 0,5362 9 0,7543 4 0,8704 4 CRPESS 0,4476 13 0,4258 14 0,7285 13 WDMBAU 0,6466 3 0,613 6 0,8363 5 WDMOPT 0,5636 7 0,753 5 0,9092 2 WDMPESS 0,5264 11 0,4279 12 0,7437 11 WQMBAU 0,5242 11 0,8308 7 WQMOPT 0,8283 1 0,9169 1 WQMPESS 0,42 15 0,7266 14 WSMBAU 0,6031 5 0,5802 7 0,771 10 WSMOPT 0,5511 8 0,7678 3 0,8356 6 WSMPESS 0,5025 12 0,4067 16 0,7326 12

The situation in each case study is unique, nevertheless the same preferences – internalised in the value functions applied to transform the expected outcomes of the policy options and the criteria weights were the same in all case studies. The correlations between the rankings obtained in each of the case study. Kendall's tau coefficients (ranged between 0.18 and 0.63) are generally smaller than the Spearman Rank Correlations (0.28 – 0.83). In the Lebanon and Turkey the results show higher similarity. This is also the only statistically significant correlation regardless which type of correlation coefficient was used. Both case studies share the same policy option as the best preferred one – WQMOPT. It should be noted that this option could not have been considered in Jordan case study and thus this comparison is limited to the common policy options. The second best option in Lebanon CS is AOPT whereas this option is ranked third in Turkey. The second best option in Turkey is WDMOPT which is on the position 5 in Lebanon. Likewise, the lowest ranking options are similar, the differences in their rank positions are rather low and in any case do not exceed 6 rank positions. This explains the high correlation between both case studies.

In the Jordan case, the most preferred option is ABAU which ranks very low in other case studies. Similarly, the second best option (CRB) is the second worst in Turkey. The low ranked options on the other hand yield equally poor results in the other cases. Interestingly, the best results in Jordan CS are related to the BAU scenario, followed by the scenario OPT.

81


Figure 15 Final ranking of the options

02468

1012141618

ABAUAOPT

APESSCRB

CRBAU

CROPT

CRPESS

WDMBAU

WDMOPT

WDMPESS

WQMBAU

WQMOPT

WQMPESS

WSMBAU

WSMOPT

WSMPESS

JordanLebanonTurkey

Sensitivity or robustness of the results should be taken into consideration when comparing the rankings across the case studies. Sensitivity analysis deals with the investigation of potential changes and errors and their impacts on the results of underlying models. Sensitivity analysis, applied post-hoc to decision models, deals with uncertainties related to the decision outcomes and/or to the preferential judgements (i.e. value function and criterion weights). The objective is to find out how the options ranking changes by any modification made on the decision models. While the impact of uncertainties on the decision outcomes is mostly analysed by statistical modelling and simulation, the preferential judgements are object of uncertainty during the modelling of weights and value function. However, the sustainability analysis provides neither a explicit probabilistic measure of the risk to make a wrong decision nor an explicit treatment of the risk attitude of the DM.

In Jordan CS, the WDMBAU option, ranked third, may become the most preferred option by a slight changes in weight of the criterion “D/S ratio industry”. Since this option is ranked better also in Lebanon and Turkey case studies, through this change the final ranking of Jordan cs would become more similar to other CS. Further changes in the weight of the criterion “Global quality” would make the case studies even more similar, bringing the policy AOPT at the top of the ranking.

The results yielded in other case studies are more robust, especially in Lebanon only a significant change in the criterion “No. of days of restricted domestic supply” would bring a change at the top of the ranking. In the case of Turkey most sensitive criterion is “Economic efficiency”, which if moderately increased, would make AOPT policy the most preferred one.


82

6.4 Conclusions

Project’s Deliverable D01 - Requirement and Constraints analysis can be considered as the first step for the Comparative Analysis of the Case studies as it provided an effective basis of knowledge for the project and in particular for sharing information about the case studies. It demonstrated also since the beginning which where the main gaps of knowledge, which later on constrained the possibilities of developing the CS for a comprehensive CA. In fact, the unavailability or incompleteness of the requested data for 2 case studies in D01 led the same CS to incompleteness of the Sustainability Indicators agreed for the Quantitative Comparative Analysis.

When information was available, the integration of D01 and D10.2 provided a comprehensive comparative analysis of the case studies: in the first one the different regional settings and models’ input were compared while in the second one the comparison was focused on models’ output.

The methodology originally developed for the CA in WP 10 demonstrated to be fully operational in those cases with limited data availability constraints, providing a comprehensive assessment of the different policy options available for each case study. This comparison allowed moreover a further analysis across CS, highlighting how similar policy responses were preferable in different CS.

Furthermore, the research work carried on and presented in this document shows how the adopted methodology can represent an operational approach for bridging scientific modelling and policy making by integrating the model outputs in a conceptual framework that can be understood and utilised by non experts.

Lastly, the multi-criteria approach adopted also shows concrete potential for participatory decision making since it makes use of simple methods not requiring hi-tech facilities (i.e. Simos for knowledge elicitation) and of computer tools that are freely available through the Internet (i.e. mDSS).


83

7 REFERENCES Abahussain, A. (2002). Desertification in the Arab Region: analysis of current status and trends,

Journal of Arid Environments, Elsevier (ScienceDirect).

Ackerman, M. (1997). Principles of water management for people and the environment. IUCN Wetlands Programme Newsletter 15.

Ahmad, A.A. (1989). Jordan environmental profile: status and abatement. "State-of-the-Environment.

Ahmed, M. (1993). Land and Water Policies in the Arab Region, UNESCWA.

Allan, J. (1994). Overall perspectives on countries and regions. In Water in the Arab world: perspectives and prognoses, Virtual Water: An Essential Element in Stabilizing the Political Economies of the Middle East.

Allan, J. A. and Radwan, L. (1998). Perceptions of the value of water and water environments. GeoForum.

Allan, T. (2002). The Middle East Water Question: Hydropolitics and the Global Economy. London: I.B. Tauris Publishers.

Alnasrawi, A. (2001). Iraq: economic sanctions and consequences, 1990-2000. Third World Quarterly.

Al-Sayyid, M. (2003). Politics and Economic Growth in Egypt (1950-2000). Cairo University.

Al-Weshah, R. (2000). Optimal Use of Irrigation Water in the Jordan Valley: A Case Study, Water Resources Management, Kluwer Academic Publisher.

Amery, H. (1997). The role of water resources in the evolution of the and North Africa,

Aral, B. (2001). Dispensing with Tradition? Turkish Politics and International Society during the Özal Decade, 1983-93. Middle Eastern Studies.

ARC (1995). Water, food and trade in the Middle East. Proceedings of a conference in Cairo. Arab Research Centre and the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation.

Arif, S. (2002). Trade and environment and international competitiveness in the Mediterranean region: selected case studies, Harvard Institute for International Development.

Barbier, E. (2004). Water and Economic Growth. Economic Society of Australia. The Economic Record, Vol. 80.

Baskerville, G.L. (1997). Advocacy, science, policy, and life in the real world. Conservation Ecology 1.

Beaumont, P. (2000). The quest for water efficiency: Restructuring of water use in the Middle East,. Water, Air and Soil Pollution.

Beaumont, P. (2002). Water policies for the Middle East in the 21st Century: the new economic realities, Water Resources Development.


84

Beaumont, P. and Mclachlan, K. (1985). Agricultural Development in the Middle East. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Biswas, A. (1994). International Waters of the Middle East: From the Euphrates- Tigris to Nile. Water Resources Management Series: 2. Sponsored by United Nations University, International Water Resources Association, SPF and the UNEP, Oxford University Press.

Biswas, K. and Kolars J. (1997). Core and Periphery: A Comprehensive Approach to Middle Eastern Water. Water Resources Management Series: 5, Middle East Water Commission, (SPF) Sasakawa Peace Foundation. Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Carney, D. (ed.) (1998) Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: What Contribution Can We Make? DfID, London.

Chambers, R. (1995) Poverty and Livelihoods: whose reality counts? IDS Discussion Paper 347. IDS.

CIA Factbook. (2005). www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook.

Conway, D. (1993). The development of a grid-based hydrologic model of the Blue Nile and the sensitivity of Nile discharge to climate change. PhD thesis. Climate Research Unit, University of East Anglia.

Conway, D. and Hulme, M. (1993). Recent fluctuations in precipitation and runoff over the Nile sub-basins and their impact on Nile discharge. Climate Change.

Conway, D. and Hulme, M. (1996). The impacts of climate variability and future climate change in the Nile basin on water resources in Egypt. Water Resources Development.

Conway, D. et al. (1996). Future availability of water in 1996: the interaction of global, regional and basin scale driving forces in the Nile Basin. Ambio 25.

Cunha, L. (2003). Meio Século de percepções sobre a água na política internacional, in Soromenho-Marques (2003) O Desafio da Água no Século XXI, Editorial Notícias.

Daly, H (1999). Ecological Economics and the Ecology of Economics. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.

Deaton, A. (1999). The analysis of household surveys: A microeconomic approach to development policy.

Dolatyar, M. and Gray T. (2000). Water Politics in the Middle East: A Context for Conflict or Co-operation? New York: St. Martin’s Press, Inc.

Doraid, M. (2000). Human Development and Poverty in the Arab States. United Nations Development Program.

Dyson, T. (1994). Population growth and food production: recent global and regional trends. Population and Development.

El-Fadel, M. et al (1998). Land use, land use change and forestry related GHG emissions in Lebanon: economic valuation and policy options, Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Falkenmark, M. (1990). "Rapid population growth and water scarcity: the predicament of tomorrow's Africa".


85

Falkenmark, M. and C. Widstrand (1992). Population and water resources: A delicate balance. Population Bulletin, Population Reference Bureau.

Falkenmark, M., et al (1998). Water Scarcity as a Key Factor Behind Global Food Insecurity: Round Table Discussion’, Ambio 27, 148–54.

FAO (1995). The water resources of Africa. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization, Land and Water Development Division, Aquistat Programme.

FAO (1997). Water resources of the Near East region: a review. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization, Land and Water Development Division, Aquistat Programme.

FAO Aquastat (2005). Food and Agriculture Organization www.fao.org/ag/agl/aglw/aquastat/countries/index.stm.

FAO Country Profiles And Mapping Information System (2005). Food and Agriculture Organization. www.fao.org/countryProfiles.

Ferreira, L. (2003). Nilo: um complexo de segurança hidropolítico, in SOROMENHO-Marques (2003) O Desafio da Água no Século XXI, Editorial Notícias.

Figueira J., Roy B. (2002). Determining the weights of criteria in the ELECTRE type methods with a revised Simos’procedure European Journal of Operational Research 139: 317–326.

Giupponi C., J. Mysiak, A. Fassio and V. Cogan (2001).MULINO: Multi-sectroral, Integrated and Operational Decision Support System for Sustainable Use of Water Resources at the Catchment Scale - MODSIM Proceedings, Canberra, Australia, Vol. 3, p. 1183.

Giupponi C., J. Mysiak, A. Fassio and V. Cogan (2004). MULINO-DSS: a computer tool for sustainable use of water resources at the catchment scale Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 64, pp.13-24.

Gleick, P. (1993). An introduction to global freshwater issues. In Water in crisis, ed. by P. Gleick. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

Gruen, G. (2004). Turkish waters: source of regional conflict, International Population Action. http://www.populationaction.org.

Hassan, O. (1996). Water Resources in the Middle East in 1996, Contemporary Strategic Issues in the Arab Gulf. London: Gulf Centre for Strategic Studies.

Howard, G and J. Bartram (2003). Domestic Water Quantity, Service, Level and Health. World Health Organization, WHO/SDE/WSH/03/02.

IPA (2005). International Population Action. www.populationaction.org.

Jacobs, M. (1994). The limits to neoclassicism. Towards an institutional environmental economics.

Josey, J. (2001). Population Growth and Water Resources in the Middle East. The Defense Monitor, Center for Defense Information. Available on-line at: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Middle_East/PopGrowth_Water.html.

Khatib, H. (1995). Policies for augmenting freshwater sector: technologies and costs, in CEDARE (1995) proceedings of the regional seminar on: Options & Strategies for Freshwater


86

Development and Utilization in Selected Arab Countries, Centre for Environment and Development for Arab Region and Europe.

Kolars, J. and Mitchell W. (1991). The Euphrates River and the Southeast Anatolia Development Project. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.

Larson B. (2001). The impact of environmental regulations on exports: an overview and synthesis of the medpolicies case studies.

Larson, B., et al (2002). The Impact of Environmental Regulations on Exports: Case Study Results from Cyprus, Jordan, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia, and Turkey, Elsevier.

Lawrence, P. et al (2002). The Water Poverty Index: an International Comparison. Keele Economics Research Papers.

Lourenço, N. (2001). Equity, human security, and Environment: key elements of sustainable development. Coastin. A Coastal Policy Research Newsletter, 5. pp 2-5.

May, P. et al. (1996). Environmental Management and Governance. Routledge, London.

Meigh, J.R., et al. (1998). Assessment of globalwater resources – Phase II, Estimates of present and future water availability for Eastern and Southern Africa. DFID report 98/4, Institute of Hydrology, Wallingford.

MIMI, Z. (2003). A Decision Tool for Allocating the Waters of the Jordan River Basin between all Riparian Parties; Kluwer Academic Publishers;

Mohrmann, J.C.J. (1992). New approaches for environmental management. Development 2.

Moustafa M. (2004). “Can farmers in Egypt shoulder the burden of irrigation management?” in Irrigation and Drainage Systems, Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Myllylä, S. (1995). Cairo - A Mega-City and Its Water Resources. The third Nordic conference on Middle Eastern Studies: Ethnic encounter and culture change. Available on-line at: http://www.hf.uib.no/smi/paj/myllyla.html.

Nachmani, A. (1997). Water Jitters in the Middle East, Middle East Research Institute, University of Pennsylvania.

Newton, P., et al (1998). Environmental indicators for national state of the environment reporting – Human Settlements, Department of the Environment, Canberra.

Nielsen, T. (2005). Government policies and land degradation in the Middle East, Land Degradation & Development,Volume 16, Issue 2, Wiley Interscience (Wiley);

Oad, R. and Azim, R. (2002). Irrigation policy reforms for rice cultivation in Egypt, Irrigation and Drainage Systems.

Ohlsson, L. (1998). Water and Social Resource Scarcity. University of Göteborg. www.padrigu.gu.se/ohlsson/files/FAO98.pdf.

Ostrom, E. (1993). Design principles in long-enduring irrigation institutions, Water Resources Research.


87

Pearce, F. (1997). The real green revolution. New Scientist 155.

Pereira, L.S. (2002). Irrigation management under water scarcity Agricultural Water Management; Elsevier (ScienceDirect).

Pereira, P. (2003). Jordão: o eterno conflito pelas suas águas, in SOROMENHO-MARQUES (2003) O Desafio da Água no Século XXI, Editorial Notícias.

Peterson, S. (2000). Turkey’s ‘water for peace’ may lubricate ME tensions. Christian Science Monitor.

Postel, S. (1996). Dividing the waters: food security, ecosystem health, and the new policies of scarcity.

RAY, I. and GÜL, S. (2000). More from less: policy options and farmer choice under water scarcity, in Irrigation and Drainage Systems;

Richards, K. et al (1997). Consideration of country and forestry/land-use characteristics in choosing forestry instruments to achieve climate mitigation goals. Agricultural Water Management; Elsevier (ScienceDirect).

Reuss, M. (2003). Historical Explanation and Water Issues. in History and Future of Shared Water Resources. UNESCO – IHP. Technical Documents in Hydrology.

Rosen, S. and Vincent, J.R. (1998). Household Water Resources and Rural Productivity in Sub-Saharan.

Saad, M.B.A. (1995). The role of the 5th Phase of international hydrological programme (IHP) towards the development of the development of the water resources in Arab Countries, in CEDARE (1995) proceedings of the regional seminar on: Options & Strategies for Freshwater Development and Utilization in Selected Arab Countries, Centre for Environment and Development for Arab Region and Europe.

Schiffler, M. (2004). Perspectives and challenges for desalination in the 21st Century Desalination, Elsevier (ScienceDirect).

Schulz, M. (1995). Turkey, Syria and Iraq: A Hydropolitical Security Complex, In Ohlsson, Leif (ed) et al. 1995. Hydropolitics: Conflicts Over Water as a Development Constraint. Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Zed Books.

Scoones, I. (1998). Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Framework for Analysis. IDS Working Paper no.72.

Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford.

Serwan, M. et al (2003). Let the desert bloom: an overview of an attempt to promote sustainable development and environmental protection in the Jordanian Badia region; Wiley Interscience.

Shapland, G. (1997). Rivers of Discord: International Water Disputes in the Middle East. London: Hurst & Company, Ltd;

Shatanawi, M. (1995). Options for managing scare water resources in the long term in Jordan, in CEDARE (1995) proceedings of the regional seminar on: Options & Strategies for


88

Freshwater Development and Utilization in Selected Arab Countries, Centre for Environment and Development for Arab Region and Europe.

Simos, J. (1990a). L’évaluation environnementale: Un processus cognitif négocié. Thése de doctorat, DGF-EPFL, Lausanne.

Simos, J. (1990b). Evaluer l’impact sur l’environnement: Une approche originale par l’analyse multicritère et la négociation. Presses Polytechniques et Universitaires Romandes, Lausanne.

Soffer, A. (1992). Rivers of Fire: The Conflict of Water in the Middle East, Am-Oved.

Soromenho-Marques, V. (2003). A crise da política internacional de ambiente: balanço e perspectivas, in Soromenho-Marques (2003) O Desafio da Água no Século XXI, Editorial Notícias.

Streeten, P.P. (1996) Human Development The Debate about the Index. International Journal of the SocialSciences.

Strzepek, K. (2001). Responses and thresholds of the Egyptian economy to climate change impacts on the water resources of the Nile River; Water Resources Management; Kluwer Academic Publisher.

Sullivan, C. A. (2001). The Development of a Water Poverty Index: A Feasibility Study. The Centre for Ecology and Hydrology: Wallingford.

Sullivan, C. A. et al (2002). Derivation and Testing of the Water Poverty Index. CEH Wallingford.

Thompson, J. (2001). Domestic Water Use and Environmental Health in East Africa: Three Decades after ‘Drawers of Water’ Project Summary, IIED, London.

Uitto, J. and Duda. M. (2002). Management of Transboundary Water Resources: Lessons from International Cooperation for Conflict Prevention, The Geographical Journal.

UNDP (2000). Human Development Report 1999. United Nations Development Programme.

UNDP (2003). Human Development Report 2003:Millennium Development Goals: A compact among nations to end human poverty. United Nations Development Programme.

UNDP (2004). Human Development Report 2003. United Nations Development Programme.

UNDP and BU (2004). Turkey Human Development Report 2004: Information and Communication Technologies. United Nations Development Programme, and Bogaziçi Universitesi.

UNDP and INPE (2004). Egypt Human Development Report 2004: Choosing Decentralization for Good Governance. United Nations Development Programme, and The Institute of National Planning, Egypt.

UNDP and JHFHD (2004). Jordan Human Development Report 2004: Building Sustainable Livelihoods. United Nations Development Programme, and Jordanian Hashemite Fund for Human Development/ Queen Zein Al Sharaf Institute for Development, Jordan

UNDP and MDE (2002). Raport sur le Developement Humain en Tunisie 2001. United Nations Development Programme and Ministre du Développement Economique.


89

UNDP and RBAS (2005). Arab Human Development Report 2004: Towards Freedom in the Arab World. United Nations Development Programme, and Regional Bureau for Arab States: New York.

UNEP (2003). GEO Data Portal. United Nations Environmental Programme www.geodata.grid.unep.ch.

VAN TUIJL, Willem (1993). Improving Water Use in Agriculture: Experiences in Middle East; Irrigation and Drainage Systems.

Votrin, V. (2003). Transboundary Water Disputes in Central Asia: Using Indicators of Water Conflict in Identifying Water Conflict Potential. Master's thesis in Human Ecology. Vrije Universiteit Brussel.

Waterbury, J. and Richards, A. (1990). A Political Economy of the Middle East. Boulder CO: Westview Press.

WCED (1987). Our Common Future. World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

WHO (1995). Why Women Cannot Be Healthy Without Water and Sanitation. Rural Environmental Health Unit, WHO, Geneva.

Wichelns, D. (1998). Economic issues regarding tertiary canal improvement programs, with an example from Egypt, Irrigation and Drainage Systems.

Winckler, O. (2000). Rapid Population Growth and the Fertility Policies of the Arab Countries of the Middle East.

Wolf, A. (2002). Conflict Prevention and Resolution in Water Systems. The Management of Water Resources Series.Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.

Wolf, A. et al (1999). International Rivers Basins of the World, Water Resources Development.

World Bank (2001) World Development Report 2001/2002: Attacking Poverty, Oxford University Press.

World Bank (2003). A Strategy for Managing Water in the Middle East and North Africa, World Bank Technical Paper No. 201.

World Water Council (2003). Turkey: Country Report. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Department of Regional and Transboundary Waters, General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works, Southeastern Anatolia Project-Regional Development Administration.


90

8 ANNEXES

8.1 Annex I: Sustainability Indicators

LEBANON CRB CRBAU CROPT CRPESS WDMBAU WDMOPT WDMPESS WSMBAU WSMOPT WSMPESS WQMBAU WQMOPT WQMPESS ABAU APESSD/S ratio for agriculture 90 85 90 75 70 80 60 60 80 50 50 80 50 65 80 50,00D/S ratio for industry 85 75 95 60 80 90 70 65 80 55 50 80 40 65 75 45,00D/S ratio for tourism 80 70 90 70 90 100 80 70 80 60 75 90 70 75 85 65,00Economic efficiency of the system 0,55 0,55 0,70 0,40 0,65 0,75 0,50 0,75 0,85 0,40 0,95 0,98 0,93 0,70 0,80 0,60No. of days with restricted domestic supply 265 221 215 285 185 165 265 265 165 265 265 120 265 240 165 240,00

Global quality 3 3 1 4 2 1 4 2 1 4 2 1 4 3 1 4,00D/S ratio for environmental uses 80 70 90 70 50 60 70 80 70 80 50 80 50 75 85 60,00JORDAN CRB CRBAU CROPT CRPESS WDMBAU WDMOPT WDMPESS WSMBAU WSMOPT WSMPESS WQMBAU WQMOPT WQMPESS ABAU AOPT APESS D/S ratio for agriculture D/S ratio for industry 89,88 36,40 3,98 0,00 63,07 19,53 0,25 88,20 82,82 78,62 94,01 94,11 92,67D/S ratio for tourism 98,75 92,01 68,03 8,33 98,28 81,23 43,15 98,65 98,10 98,36 100,00 98,70 98,73Economic efficiency of the system 0,63 0,60 0,62 0,60 0,70 0,70 0,70 0,59 0,57 0,57 0,69 0,71 0,71No. of days with restricted domestic supply 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Global quality 1 1 2 3 1 2 2 2 3 4 1 3 4D/S ratio for environmental uses TURKEY CRB CRBAU CROPT CRPESS WDMBAU WDMOPT WDMPESS WSMBAU WSMOPT WSMPESS WQMBAU WQMOPT WQMPESS ABAU AOPT APESS D/S ratio for agriculture 35,3 97,9 99,2 52,0 99,9 99,9 64,8 88,7 90,8 55,9 98,1 99,3 49,5 97,7 98,9 67,2


91

D/S ratio for industry 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 99,9 99,9 97,4 100,0 100,0 100,0 99,6 97,1 82,4D/S ratio for tourism 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Economic efficiency of the system 0,50787 0,43780 0,79800 0,43120 0,49000 0,72000 0,45135 0,38317 0,51675 0,36800 0,44000 0,79000 0,44000 0,42570 0,60000 0,44000 No. of days with restricted domestic supply 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 124Global quality 3 3 2 3 2 1 3 3 2 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 D/S ratio for environmental uses 75,1 99,0 99,0 90,0 99,0 99,0 90,0 99,0 99,0 99,0 99,0 99,0 90,0 100,0 99,0 99,0


92

8.2 Annex II: Weight elicitation

Table 12 Criteria separated Scenario p1 p2 p3 p4 p5 p6 p7 p8 p9 p10 p11 p12 p13 p14

D/S agri 4 1,5 5 3 5 3 3,5 5,5 2,5 6 4 2 2 2,5D/S ind 1 1,5 4 2 1 1,5 3,5 3 1 2,5 1,5 3 2 1D/S tourism 2 4 2 1 2 1,5 1 1 2,5 2,5 1,5 1 2 2,5Econ effic 3 5 1 4 4 4 2 5,5 5 1 3 4 4 5Total 10 12 12 10 12 10 10 15 11 12 10 10 10 11 Global quality 1 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1,5 1D/S envir 2 1 1 1 3 3 2 3 1 2 2 2 1,5 2Total 3 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 Weights final of economic dimension

p1 p2 p3 p4 p5 p6 p7 p8 p9 p10 p11 p12 p13 p14 AverageWeight of pillar

Final weights

D/S agri 0,4 0,125 0,417 0,3 0,417 0,3 0,35 0,367 0,227 0,5 0,4 0,2 0,2 0,227 0,31642857 0,33 0,1D/S ind 0,1 0,125 0,333 0,2 0,083 0,15 0,35 0,2 0,091 0,208 0,15 0,3 0,2 0,091 0,18435714 0,33 0,06D/S tourism 0,2 0,333 0,167 0,1 0,167 0,15 0,1 0,067 0,227 0,208 0,15 0,1 0,2 0,227 0,17114286 0,33 0,06Econ effic 0,3 0,417 0,083 0,4 0,333 0,4 0,2 0,367 0,455 0,083 0,3 0,4 0,4 0,455 0,32807143 0,33 0,11 1 0,33 Weights final of environmental dimension

p1 p2 p3 p4 p5 p6 p7 p8 p9 p10 p11 p12 p13 p14 AverageWeight of pillar

Final weights

Global quality 0,333 0,75 0,75 0,667 0,25 0,25 0,333 0,25 0,667 0,333 0,333 0,333 0,5 0,333 0,43442857 0,33 0,14D/S envir 0,667 0,25 0,25 0,333 0,75 0,75 0,667 0,75 0,333 0,667 0,667 0,667 0,5 0,667 0,56557143 0,33 0,19Total 2 1,417 1,083 1,4 1,333 1,4 1,2 1,367 1,455 1,083 1,3 1,4 1,4 1,455 1 0,33

Table 13 Criteria grouped


93

Scenario p1 p2 p3 p4 p5 p6 p7 p8 p9 p10 p11 p12 p13 p14D/S agri 10 2,5 6 4 6 5 6,5 6 4 4 7 3 2 3 D/S ind 3 2,5 5 5 2 2,5 6,5 3,5 1,5 1,5 2,5 4 2 3D/S tourism 4 2,5 4 6 3,5 2,5 1 1 3 1,5 2,5 2 2 3Econ effic 5 6 3 3 ,5 6 4 6 7 ,5 5 6 4 3 6 6,5No. Of days 7 5 7 7 5 8 5 5 7 5 6 5 5 8, 8, 6, 3, 6, 5Global quality 1 ,5 2 1 1 1 3 2 7 4 1 1 ,5 8 6 1D/S envir 2 2,5 1 2 8,5 4 6,5 6 1,5 4 4 7 6,5 6,5Total 32 33 28 28 33 29 34 28 31 28 28 28 28 28

p1 p2 p3 p4 p5 p6 p7 p8 p9 p10 p11 p12 p13 p14 AverageWeights of the

pillars D/S agri 0,313 0,076 0,214 0,143 0,182 0,172 0,191 0,214 0,129 0,143 0,25 0,107 0,071 0,107 0,17 D/S ind 0,094 0,076 0,179 0,179 0,061 0,086 0,191 0,125 0,048 0,054 0,089 0,143 0,071 0,107 0,11 D/S tourism 0,125 0,076 0,143 0,214 0,106 0,086 0,029 0,036 0,097 0,054 0,089 0,071 0,071 0,107 0,09 Econ effic 0,156 0,182 0,107 0,107 0,106 0,207 0,118 0,214 0,226 0,232 0,179 0,214 0,143 0,232 0,17 0,54 economic No. Of days 0,219 0,258 0,25 0,25 0,258 0,276 0,191 0,125 0,226 0,232 0,214 0,179 0,179 0,179 0,22 0,22 social Global quality 0,031 0,258 0,071 0,036 0,03 0,034 0,088 0,071 0,226 0,143 0,036 0,036 0,232 0,036 0,09 0,24 environmental D/S envir 0,063 0,076 0,036 0,071 0,258 0,138 0,191 0,214 0,048 0,143 0,143 0,25 0,232 0,232 0,15 Total 1,001 0,774 0,464 0,464 0,652 0,655 0,588 0,624 0,726 0,75 0,572 0,679 0,786 0,679 1


94

Table 14 Correlation between the judgements of the experts p1 p2 p3 p4 p5 p6 p7 p8 p9 p10 p11 p12 p13 p14

p1 1 0 0,52 0,52 0,45 0,59 0,28 0,26 0,26 0,22 0,78 0,05 -

0,37 0,16

p2 0 1 0 -0,1 -0,1 0,24 -0,2 -0,2 0,78 0,6 0 -0,1 0,58 -0,1

p3 0,52 0 1 0,62 0,25 0,39 0,28 -0,1 0,16 0,11 0,39 -0 -

0,48 -0,1

p4 0,52 -0,12 0,62 1 0,25 0,29 0,17 -0,3-

0,05 -0,1 0,29 -0 -

0,48 0,05

p5 0,45 -0,12 0,25 0,25 1 0,62 0,47 0,39-

0,06 0,34 0,62 0,55 0,17 0,61

p6 0,59 0,239 0,39 0,29 0,62 1 0,35 0,43 0,33 0,67 0,8 0,49 0,05 0,6

p7 0,28 -0,21 0,28 0,17 0,47 0,35 1 0,56-

0,25 0,19 0,46 0,39 0 0,25

p8 0,26 -0,19 -0,1 -0,3 0,39 0,43 0,56 1-

0,06 0,42 0,54 0,58 0,06 0,59

p9 0,26 0,778 0,16 -0,1 -0,1 0,33 -0,3 -0,1 1 0,67 0,11 -0,2 0,29 -0,1

p10 0,22 0,601 0,11 -0,1 0,34 0,67 0,19 0,42 0,67 1 0,45 0,33 0,36 0,42

p11 0,78 0 0,39 0,29 0,62 0,8 0,46 0,54 0,11 0,45 1 0,29 -

0,16 0,38

p12 0,05 -0,12 -0 -0 0,55 0,49 0,39 0,58-

0,16 0,33 0,29 1 0,26 0,9

p13 -

0,37 0,583 -0,5 -0,5 0,17 0,05 0 0,06 0,29 0,36 -0,2 0,26 1 0,24

p14 0,16 -0,06 -0,1 0,05 0,61 0,6 0,25 0,59-

0,06 0,42 0,38 0,9 0,24 1

*Bold cells indicate significant correlation by p = 0.05

Table 15 Correlation between the judgements of criteria importance

Kendall's tau D/S agri

D/S ind

D/S tourism

Econ effic

No. Of

days Global quality

D/S envir

D/S agri 1 -

0,02 -0,02 0,23 -0,41 -0,14 0,14

D/S ind 1 0,1 -0,3 -0,17 -0,18 -0

D/S tourism 1 -0,3 0,378 -0,25 -0,4

Econ effic 1 -0,16 0,201 -0

No. Of days 1 0,027 -0,3

Global quality 1 -0,2

D/S envir 1

Spearman Rank Correlation

D/S agri

D/S ind

D/S tourism

Econ effic No.

Of

Global quality

D/S envir


95

days

D/S agri 1 -

0,02 -0,04 0,27 -0,53 -0,19 0,17

D/S ind 1 0,07 -0,5 -0,2 -0,33 -0

D/S tourism 1 -0,4 0,549 -0,39 -0,5

Econ effic 1 -0,23 0,255 0,02

No. Of days 1 0,042 -0,4

Global quality 1 -0,2

D/S envir 1

*Bold cells indicate significant correlation by p = 0.05

8.3 Annex III: Final ranking

Table 16 Jordan CS Rank Option Sensitivity Sensibile criteria1 ABAU 2 CRB 3 WDMBAU 0,06 D/S ratio for Industry4 CRBAU 5 WSMBAU 6 AOPT 0,14 Global quality of coastal water7 WDMOPT 8 WSMOPT 9 CROPT 10 APESS 0,14 Economic efficiency of the system11 WDMPESS -13,89 Economic efficiency of the system12 WSMPESS 13 CRPESS Table 17 Lebanese CS Rank Option Sensitivity Sensibile criteria 1 WQMOPT 2 AOPT -1,12 D/S ratio for environmental uses 3 WSMOPT 4 CROPT 0,28 No. of days with restricted domestic supply 5 WDMOPT -0,68 D/S ratio for industry 6 WDMBAU 7 WSMBAU 8 CRBAU -5,28 D/S ratio for agriculture 9 CRB -2,42 D/S ratio for agriculture 10 ABAU 11 WQMBAU 12 WDMPESS 13 APESS 14 CRPESS 15 WQMPESS


96

16 WSMPESS Table 18 Lebanese CS Rank Option Sensitivity Sensibile criteria 1 WQMOPT 2 WDMOPT 3 AOPT 0,11 Economic efficiency of the system4 CROPT 0,14 Global quality of coastal water5 WDMBAU 6 WSMOPT 7 WQMBAU 8 ABAU 9 CRBAU 10 WSMBAU 11 WDMPESS 12 WSMPESS 13 CRPESS 14 WQMPESS 15 CRB 16 APESS

Table 19 Similarities of final rankings across the case studies Kendall's tau

Jordan Lebanon Turkey

Jordan - 0,17948718 0,20512821

Lebanon - 0,63333333

Turkey -

Spearman Rank Correlation

Jordan Lebanon Turkey

Jordan - 0,38461538 0,28021978

Lebanon - 0,83235294

Turkey -

Project Deliverable: D10 - ess.co.at

Documents

Transcript of Project Deliverable: D10 - ess.co.at