This paper was presented to the Congreso CARA "Hydrogeology and Water Resources Management: Working together for the future", carried out on March 9-11, 2005 in Managua, Nicaragua. CARA (www.caragua.org) is the Central American Water Resources Management Network.
Introduction
Water is a vital element for the survival and wellbeing of ecosystems and humans alike. The continuous depletion and degradation of water resources, together with greater demand for more water, are factors that cause social and political instability. Water is probably the most important natural resource in order to achieve sustainable development in the XXI century; without water there is no life. The ‘70s saw a rise in the awareness of the natural world, specifically with the resurgence of world conferences dedicated to water and environmental issues. Besides identifying the problems, such conferences had the goal to develop a model for the sustainable management of resources, such is the case with the Agenda 21. The integrated management of water resources was promoted worldwide with a conference of the United Nations held in Mar del Plata in 1977, as an alternative solution to water resources management. However, at present there is no consensus on what an integrated approach really means, hence there is no model or strategy for its implementation.
This study proposes a model for the sustainable management of water resources. The model proposes sixteen axes of work that when implemented in conjunction result in the sustainable management of water resources. These axes are: Investment and financing, Scientific research and technology, Education and awareness, Communication networks and coordination, Protection of the quality of natural resources and Pollution prevention, Food security and Industrial development, Health and equality, Social involvement, Water appreciation, Risk auditing, Flexible management, Management of transboundary watersheds, Management of demand, Capacity building, Water governability, and the Integrated management of water resources.
Methods
Since models cannot always be applied to real life, this study uses the model proposed in a case study. The Sustainable management of water resources model was used as a tool
to evaluate the integrated watersheds management model being used by the Mexican government. The study is divided in two parts, a practical and a theoretical one, using different analytical methods. The methodology of analysis of content was applied to seven documents in water policy in Mexico, using 105 variables as proxies to establish the presence of the sixteen axes that make up the model. Later, the study included an in situ component in the Lerma-Chapala watershed, in order to identify the level of implementation that the water policy has achieved in the integrated management of water program. With interviews and surveys, information was gathered about water users, representatives of the three levels of government and of researchers involvement in the management of water resources in the states of Jalisco, Queretaro and Guanajuato. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to evaluate the perceptions of the stakeholders for this study. Two axes of the model were tackled during the field work: Capacity building and Social involvement; However, all sixteen axes were approached indirectly, since all of the axes are interconnected.
Lerma - Chapala Basin
The Capacity building axis was selected due that this component is essential in the successful development of the other components contained in the model. It is hard to imagine that a process towards sustainable management of water resources could be successfully implemented without focusing first in the capacity building of individuals and institutions responsible at each and every level of responsibility for this matter (Dourojeanni and Jouravlev, 2001). Four aspects were considered in terms of Capacity building:
| Human Resources Development |
Strengthening of management systems and theoretical knowledge of staff to perform their activities efficiently (Education and awareness axis) |
| Legal Environment and Environmental Policy |
Development of legal structures and transparent and efficient justice solicitor for the implementation of the integral management of water resources process (Water governability axis). |
| Institutional structures and networks |
Clear definition of structures and organizational ranks and responsibility at the institutional and inter-institutional level. Also, inter-institutional communication conducts and interaction mechanisms have to be establish, as well as financial and decision making mechanisms (Communication and coordination networks axis; Investment and financing axis; and Social involvement axis). |
| Goods and Technological Resources |
The requirement of resources varies depending on the functions and activities of each institution. The lack of these resources can limit the capacity of the institution in its activities and achievement of its goals. |
The Social involvement axis was selected for this study because the capacity of institutions and organizations to effectively implement their projects, programs and/ or policies, depends in a great way to the degree of social involvement. Many projects have failed for not considering the population’s needs, limitations and costumes (Mitchell, 2002; Young et. al., 1994). Therefore, social involvement is crucial in any planning and decision making procedure in order to maximize the chance of success during implementation (UN, 1992; Young et. al., 1994; World Water Council, 2000).
An eight step ladder participation scheme was used, which was proposed by Arnstein (1969) to evaluate the level of implementation of Social involvement in the Lerma-Chapala Basin. The steps are structured in a progressive manner beginning on the base as illustrated in table 1.
Table 1 – Steps of the Ladder in Public Participation
| Steps |
Nature of Involvement |
Degree of Involvement |
| 8. Public control |
Citizens are in charge of policy and management aspects |
Levels of Public Empowerment |
| 7. Delegation of Power |
Citizens are given some management powers in selected sections or the whole plan or program |
| 6. Association |
Compensations are negotiated, there are no unilateral changes |
| 5. Appeasement |
Citizens give advice, but follow up does not necessarily occur |
Degrees of tokenism |
| 4. Consultation |
Citizens are listen to, but not necessarily considered |
| 3. Inform |
Citizens rights, responsibilities and options are identified |
| 2. Therapy |
Groups of power educate and take care of citizens |
Non-Involvement |
| 1. Manipulation |
Consultive committees “Finger lifting” |
Source: Arnstein, 1969
Results & Discussion
The results of content analysis show that Mexico has the theoretical capacity to implement a strategy for the sustainable management of water resources. However, good intentions and theoretical knowledge have to lead to concrete actions in order to implement strategies and produce the desired results in the real world. The results of the qualitative and quantitative analysis show that the strategies being used in the implementation of capacity building and social involvement in the Lerma-Chapala Basin are not efficient. The need and importance of capacity building in Mexico has been documented in several evaluations in the years 1992, 1995, 1996 and 2000; however, long term capacity building programs are still not available today (Tortajada, 2001).
Social involvement is building its own momentum, particularly in some areas of the states of Guanajuato. Although in the present participation can be classified as “non-participation” with “degrees of tokenism”, according to Arnstein’s classification (1969), though water users are pushing there way to the next level of involvement.
During 2004 the Lerma-Chapala Basin Committee did not have a sustainable management of water resources process. Besides the deficiencies in the areas of Capacity building and Social involvement, the Lerma-Chapala Basin Committee dealt mainly with issues regarding surface waters, with emphasis in the distribution and pollution. In a significantly lower degree, the committee dealt with some aspects of groundwater, though issues related to natural resources are not included in the Lerma-Chapala Basin Committee’s agenda. Lately, the political aspects have surpassed the technical ones and it is not possible to find simple solutions in the water management of the Lerma-Chapala Basin.
Conclusions
The intentions of the Mexican government to reach a sustainable management of its water resources is not being developed in a systematic approach; there is a lack of social, technical and research work, among other aspects, besides the political will needed to give the necessary conditions to establish a sustainable management program of water resources in the Lerma-Chapala Basin.
References
Arnstein, S.R. (1969), A Ladder of Citizen Participation. Journal of
the American Institute of Planners, 35: 216-224.
Dourojeanni, A. and A. Jouravlev (2001), Crisis de Gobernabilidad en
la Gestión del Agua, Desafíos que Enfrenta la
Implementación de las Recomendaciones Contenidas en el Capitulo
18 el Programa 21. Natural Resources and Infrastructure Division,
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, Serie Recursos
Naturales e Infraestructura 35: pp.83.
Mitchell, B. ed. (2002), Resource and Environmental Management, 2nd
ed. Toronto: Pearson Education Limited.
Tortajada, C. (2001), Capacity Building for the Water Sector in
Mexico: An Analysis of Recent Efforts. Water International 26 (4):
490-498.
UN (1992). The Dublin Statement on Water and Sustainable
Development. Retrieved on June 24, 2003, from the Global Development
Research Centre Web page:
http://www.gdrc.org/uem/water/dublin-statement.html
World Water Council (2000), Second World Water Forum: Declaration of
The Hague. Retrieved on June 25, 2003, from the Second World Water
Forum Web page: http://www.worldwaterforum.net/index2.html
Young, G.J, J.C.I Dooge and J.C. Rodda (1994), Global Water Resource
Issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Country: Mexico
E-mail: lfsilvaj@fes.uwaterloo.ca
Web: http://
|
