Читать книгу Water, Climate Change, and Sustainability - Группа авторов - Страница 28

The LMB is a transboundary river basin in Southeast Asia shared by Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam (Figure 2.2). Ranked as 12th longest river at about 4800 km and 8th in terms of mean annual discharge at about 475 km3, the Mekong River is one of the world’s largest river systems (MRC, 2016a). About 65 million people living in the LMB are heavily dependent on the river for irrigation, fishing, hydropower, transportation, and many other socio‐economic activities. The largest freshwater lake in Southeast Asia – the Tonle Sap Lake (TSL) – is an integral part of the LMB. The TSL is an important water resource for people and aquatic ecosystem in the Cambodian floodplains.

Figure 2.2 The Lower Mekong Basin boundaries shared by four countries (Cambodia, Myanmar, Lao PDR, Thailand, and Vietnam).

Source: Google LLC.

The headwaters of the Mekong River, originating in the Tibetan Plateau, is vital for maintaining flows accounting 18% (China, 17%; Myanmar 1%) of annual flow and 40% of the dry season flow in the mainstream river. Tributaries flowing in Lao PDR are the largest contributor of the annual flow accounting over 40%, while remaining three countries contribute below 20% each.

Lao PDR, Thailand and Vietnam have jointly established the Mekong River Commission (MRC) – an inter‐governmental organization – in 1995 by the signing of the Mekong Agreement (MRC, 2016a). The MRC aims to jointly manage the shared water resources and the sustainable development of the Mekong River. China and Myanmar, the upstream countries, are dialogue partners of the MRC. Since its establishment, MRC has emerged as a regional hub on information sharing, providing advice, and a platform for policy dialogue and engagement with private sector and civil society to address sustainability issues in areas such as fisheries, agriculture, navigation, hydropower, disasters, ecosystems, and climate change (floods, droughts, sea level rise). Along with the rapid pace of development in the region, pressures on the LMB water resources have also surged substantially such as upstream‐downstream tensions caused by planned and ongoing construction of a cascade of hydropower dams, competition for water withdrawal for irrigation and drinking water supply, fishing, disaster (droughts and floods), climate change (including sea level rise in the delta areas), and loss of natural water‐related ecosystem (Table 2.1).

Table 2.1 Country specific issues related to water resource management in the LMB.

Issues	Impacts/ Results
Cambodia	Lao PDR	Thailand	Vietnam
Hydropower dam development in China, Lao PDR and Cambodia	‐Changes in river flow regime and TSL water level ‐Reduced sediment deposition and nutrient flow ‐Fish migration and water ecosystem	‐Revenue from the hydropower (internal use and export) and potential flood control ‐Water for irrigation	‐Import of electricity ‐Water supply	‐Change in river flow regime ‐Dam operation to control flood and release water to maintain minimum flows (potential) ‐Storm surge due to reduced flow in dry season
Water withdrawal	‐Low flows in the river due to water abstraction by Thailand and Lao PDR	‐Irrigation and drought mitigation	‐Irrigation and drought mitigation	‐Low flow in river due to water abstraction in the upstream
Climate Change, El Nino, disasters	‐Changes in monsoon rainfall and river runoff (too high or below average flow condition in wet season) ‐Inundation floods and limited flash floods ‐Inadequate inundation and sedimentation in TSL and rice fields ‐Prolonged drought	‐Changes in monsoon rainfall and river runoff ‐Flash floods and some inundation types ‐Impact on irrigation and hydropower generation ‐Prolonged drought	‐Changes in monsoon rainfall and river runoff ‐Flash floods ‐Impact on irrigation and hydropower generation (imports) ‐Prolonged drought	‐Changes in monsoon rainfall and river runoff ‐Inundation floods ‐Prolonged drought ‐Sea level rise and storm surge during dry season
Economic development and land use changes	‐Soil erosion and runoff of agro‐chemicals ‐Pollution due to discharge of wastewater, pollutants and toxic leaks during water navigation	‐Soil erosion and runoff of agro‐chemicals ‐Pollution due to discharge of wastewater, from mining and toxic leaks during water navigation	‐Soil erosion and runoff of agro‐chemicals ‐Pollution due to discharge of wastewater, pollutants and toxic leaks during water navigation	‐Soil erosion and runoff of agro‐chemicals ‐Pollution due to discharge of wastewater, pollutants and toxic leaks during water navigation

SDGs offer a fresh perspective to priorities and could address water resource management issues in a systematic manner in the LMB. Since each country has been impacted disproportionately by changes in the LMB, SDGs could be a useful framework for these countries to manage trade‐offs choices while reinforcing a spirit of cooperation that was built over the past 20 years through the Mekong Agreement and MRC. To be sustainable, SDGs should not be pursued in a way that achieving goals in one riparian country would incur high trade‐offs in other countries.

Table 2.2 summarizes the most recent state of SDG 6 implementation in the LMB countries. Drinking water and sanitation are two major targets for which all countries have achieved a remarkable progress in terms of improving access, financing, and monitoring. In the LMB countries, over 75% of the population now have access to improved drinking water, and over 70% in case of access to improved sanitation (except in Cambodia where it is slightly over 42%). Apart from WASH related targets, state of other targets (including on hygiene) have not been frequently updated mainly due to lack of recent data or state of the progress is limited. For instance, water stress was not really high for most of the country (<14%) but the reference data is over a decade old. Although the LMB countries have fairly higher per capacity water availability (3303 m3/person to 27992 m3/person in 2014) when compared to just over 1100 m3/person in India, per capita water availability has been subsided by 2–19% between 2002 and 2014 (ADB, 2017). On the other hand, water productivity (used as a proxy of water use efficiency in this paper) is quite low (<7 US$/m3) when compared to global average of over 18 US$/m3 in 2014. Less than 5% of generated wastewater are treated in case of Vietnam, Lao PDR, and Cambodia while in Thailand the treatment ratio is around 20% (WEPA, 2015). There has been a rapid loss of original natural wetlands although data are limited to verify the most current state (MRC, 2016a). In case of pollution control, there are standards for ambient water quality but state of water quality are not readily accessible except for some sites monitored on monthly basis by MRC and published annually. In case of IWRM implementation, it is well integrated in both national policies as well as in MRC basin management plans. Transboundary cooperation exists through MRC as well as bilaterally, such as hydropower generation between Lao PDR and Thailand. Community participation is often promoted as a part of specific projects or programs.

An assessment by Asian Development Bank (ADB) finds that score of National Water Security Index (0–100) of all four countries ranges between 37.5 and 54, which means these countries are engaged in improving water security and shown modest improvement when compared to hazardous state of water security (i.e. score below 36) (ADB, 2016). This leaves a wide challenge space for these countries to improve water resources management while implementing SDG6.

Observations in Table 2.2 on the status of SDG 6 reveals that all four countries seriously lack adequate data required for monitoring the progress. Except for WASH, most of the shown data are not from recent dates and thus do not reflect current situation. The situation is also reflected in the VNR submitted by four LMB countries to UN’s High‐Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development². In fact, Asian countries in general do not have existing data collection systems for Goal6 targets especially those related to water quality, efficiency of use, water resource management, and protection and restoration of water‐related ecosystems (ADB, 2017).

Each country in the LMB is in early preparatory stage of mainstreaming SDGs into the national policy. Although UN has agreed on official indicators, they are not necessarily readily monitored and countries will have to innovate nationally appropriate approaches to monitor the progress of each target. In this sub‐region, countries have adopted an approach of localizing SDGs in line with national circumstances and developmental priorities. Vietnam has adopted Vietnam SDGs (VSDGs) in its draft action plan for 2030 Agenda, while Thailand is proposing the Sufficiency Economy Philosophy (SEP) for the implementation of SDGs. Cambodia Sustainable Development Goals (CSDGs) are the nationalized framework to localize Global SDGs into Cambodia’s context. Similarly, Lao PDR also stresses on localising SDGs from the early stage of implementation. For instance, both Cambodia and Lao PDR has introduced additional SDG 18 on addressing negative impacts from unexploded ordnance (UXO), explosive remnants of war (ERW) or landmines.

In the case of MRC, SDGs are not explicitly reflected in IWRM‐Based Basin Development Strategy 2016–2020 or Strategic Plan 2016–2020 (MRC, 2016a, MRC, 2016b). However, MRCs mandate, procedures and programmes already addresses multiple SDGs, and SDG6 in particular. The MRC Strategic Plan 2016–2020 has identified four basin wide result areas (basin wide perspectives, regional cooperation, better monitoring, and efficient organizations) that directly complement Targets 6.5 and overall monitoring of SDG6. Similarly, MRC has approved a set of procedures (and guidelines) on data and information exchange and sharing, water use monitoring, maintenance of flow in the mainstream, notification, prior consultation and agreement for water utilization and inter‐basin diversions, and water quality (MRC, 2011). Further, MRC Indicator Framework, consisting of 15 Strategic Indicators across 5 dimensions, provides a direction on monitoring and evaluation of changes on MRC by adopting a consistent and streamlined approach of data collection (MRC, 2019). The MRC Indicator Framework, already incorporated into Basin Development Strategy and Strategic Plan, is also aligned with key water‐related aspects of SDGs such as water security, water‐related health security, ecological health, and compliance of water quality or benefits derived from cooperation to total economic value of all LMB water‐related sectors. Although it is still early to figure out a detail strategy on SDGs, the LMB could be a model case, with obvious role of MRC, for implementing SDGs, SDG6 in particular, by following a basin‐wide approach. MRC is one of the few international organizations that is governed by a specific set of rules developed to coordinate technical cooperation among its members centred on water related issues. Important question however is how and in what areas MRC role should be strengthened?

Table 2.2 The most recent state of SDG6 in the Lower Mekong Basin (LMB) countries.

Issues	SDG 6 Targets	Indicator and units!	Lower Mekong Basin Countries	Data Source
Cambodia	Lao PDR	Thailand	Vietnam
USE	Access to improved drinking water sources (6.1)	% population	75.54 (2015)	75.66 (2015)	97.81 (2015)	97.61 (2015)	SD, 2017
Access to improved sanitation facilities (6.2)	% population	42.43 (2015)	70.89 (2015)	92.97 (2015)	77.99 (2015)	SD, 2017
Hygiene (6.2)	Diarrhea DALYs per 100,000 people	35 (2012)	83.9 (2012)	2.9 (2012)	9.5 (2012)	WHO, 2017
Water use efficiency (6.4)	US$/m3 withdrawal1	7 (2014)	3 (2014)	7 (2014)	2 (2014)	ADB, 2017
Water Stress (6.4)	% withdrawal from the total available	0.5 (2006)	1 (2005)	13.1 (2007)	9.3 (2005)	ADB, 2017
MANAGEMENT	IWRM implementation (6.5)		Yes3	Yes3	Yes3	Yes3
Transboundary cooperation (6.5)	% transboundary basin under water cooperation2	100%	100%	100%	100%	MRC, 1995
International cooperation and capacity building support (6.a)	Annual WASH expenditure, million US$ (% external contribution) (year)	180 (98%) (2016)	90 (61%) (2015)	1406 (total, 2016)	1690 (18%) (2015)	WHO, 2017
Community participation (6.b)		Yes4	Yes4	Yes4	Yes4
ENVIRONMENT	Wastewater treatment (6.3)	Treated wastewater (% sewerage treatment coverage)	<5 (2015)	<5 (2015)	~20 (2015)	<5 (2015)	WEPA, 2015
Pollution control (6.3)	# of ambient water quality (WQ) standards monitored	9	30	8	36	WEPA, 2015
Water‐related ecosystem (WRE) (6.6)	% of lost original natural wetland areas	45 (2003)	30 (2003)	96 (2003)	99 (2003)	MRC, 2016a

Notes: ^!: Not necessarily corresponds exactly to official indicators of SDG6; ¹: Water productivity used as proxy indicator and does not correspond to proposed indicator for the Target 6.4; ²: Only considers the MRB; ³: IWRM is integrated in national water/river basin policy as well as MRC Basin Action Plan; ⁴: Community participation are common but not necessarily mandatory or effectively implemented

Foremost condition for that could be a close collaboration among agencies, such as planning bodies, in four countries dealing with SDGs. In fact, the VNR submitted by all four countries highlights on the strengthening cooperation on water resources through MRC for implementing water related SDGs (RTG, 2017; GoLaoPDR, 2018; SRV, 2018; KOC, 2019). In fact, Cambodia’s VNR credit MRC for the improvement in surface water quality (KOC, 2019). So MRC as a common platform could be further capitalized to explore where collaboration brings higher synergies. As opposed to embracing multiple reforms at once, MRC can adopt a pragmatic approach of mainstreaming SDG planning in a step‐wise manner and transform itself as a change agent to support implementation of water related targets in an integrated manner. This could be initiated in those low hanging areas where progresses are already in good shape (such as WASH targets, water related disasters) but need extra effort not only to retain momentum but also accelerate improvements such as improving WASH in rural areas. Another entry point could be collaboration on monitoring and evaluation such as enhanced partnership on implementing MRC Indicator Framework which already complement most of SDGs water related indicators. Considering the existence of policy framework and needed institutional setup prioritising IWRM or IRBM in each country, SDGs could act as a leverage for upscaling implementation. MRC could set up a mechanism for countries to share their progress on water related SDGs (as relevant along with other SDGs) before submitting to UN. Obviously it helps countries to identify areas for transboundary cooperation (as relevant to Target 6.5), but more importantly MRC then could fill the information gaps relating to the LMB that are difficult to assimilate or need a collective response. After establishing a collaborative mechanism on SDGs, the MRC could facilitate to address those issues incurring high trade‐offs such as climate change, protection of aquatic ecosystem or more thorny ones on water sharing and construction of upstream dams. Solving these issues by building path for collaboration could be a unique advantage MRC has at this moment to show to the whole world. Given the global scope of SDGs the implication of success cases will be very valuable. So the readiness and first mover advantage that MRC possess could be best utilized to turn challenges into opportunities for the implementation of water related SDGs in an integrated manner.