 |
|
Integrated
Water and |
|
SHORT COURSE ON MANAGEMENT OF TRANSBOUNDARY WATER RESOURCES Course Description and Results
Preliminary planning for the meeting took place in early June 1999 in meetings held with the Water Sector Coordination Unit in Maseru, Lesotho and the Regional Center for Southern Africa of USAID in Gaborone, Botswana. It was decided that the following issues would be addressed in the course:
The course took place over a five-day period, with two days devoted to a basin simulation exercise and extensive discussions of river basin management issues in southern Africa. The course also included short exercises, presentations on various subjects relating to water resource issues in southern Africa, and a field trip to the Harare water works and Lake Chivero led by Dr. Ngone Moyo of the University of Zimbabwe. The course was opened by the Honorable Minister Joyce T.R. Mjuru of the Ministry of Rural Resources and Water Development (MRRWD) of the Government of Zimbabwe. An introductory address was made by Gilbert Mawere, Senior Hydrologist in the Ministry of Rural Resources and Water Development. Welcoming remarks were made by Phera Ramoeli, Chief Engineer and Sector Coordinator for the SADC Water Sector Coordination Unit and Pat Foster-Turley on behalf of the Regional Center for Southern Africa of USAID. The participants in the course included senior water professionals from all of the SADC countries with the exception of Mauritius and the Seychelles. There were also representatives of non-government organizations that deal with environmental and water resource issues in southern Africa. A total of 29 participants took part in the course. A pre-course evaluation was given to the participants on the first day of the course. Questions on this evaluation included ones relating to issues of concern relating to water in the various countries of southern Africa (e.g. water scarcity, pollution, and competition for water among various sectors such as agriculture and industry), methods of conservation, strategies for dealing with water resource allocation, and the economics of water. Participants were asked to identify topics that they wished to hear more about during the course. The issues that were identified included (1) demand management, (2) water pricing and ways to deal with water from an economic perspective, and (3) principles for sharing rivers among countries. Efforts were made by the instructors in the course to address these issues during the discussions during the week.
When asked about whether sufficient time was devoted to the various topics in the course, the participants mostly said yes, but there also were comments to the effect that the time went too quickly and that more time could have been devoted to certain topics, notably the economics of water. A number of the participants told the instructors that they thought that this was the best course that they had been involved in. One participant noted that after hearing about the importance of water quality and the need to safeguard a portion of the water in a river in order to maintain environmental integrity that he was going to urge his ministry to consider renegotiating the treaty between his country and other countries sharing a river basin. Another participant said that she was gratified to learn that the principle of equity was viewed as being of such importance in deliberations over the sharing of water from a river basin and that she hoped that future negotiations over water in southern Africa would place equity of access high on the agenda. The participants outlined and prioritized some of the topics that they wanted to see addressed in future courses on transboundary water resources management both in their discussions during the course among themselves and with the instructors and on the course evaluation. The topics that they identified were resource economics, demand management, conflict resolution and negotiation, integrated basin management, social analysis of water projects, and international water law. Some participants said that they wanted to know more about environmental and social impact assessments and about how in-stream flow requirements (IFRs) are calculated. Particular mention was made by a number of participants about how much they learned in the exercises and discussions on negotiation skills and the processes of reaching agreement. A question was asked about the manual used in the course, and the participants responded that they thought that the manual was useful and that it provided additional information that they could use in their jobs. The case studies in the manual and the ones presented in the course (the Jordan, Mekong, and Nile cases) were cited as being very helpful in terms of providing people with perspectives on the issues that faced both southern Africa and other parts of the world. The participants noted that they liked the variety of ways in which material was presented in the course—the manual, the handouts, the overheads, slides, and especially the powerpoint presentations. The instructors were rated highly by the participants. The handling of the arrangements for getting the participants to the course, which was carried out by DAI, was viewed very favorably by the participants. Many of the participants expressed their appreciation to Susan Pietrzyk and Cindy Kushner for their hard work and the trouble that they went to in order to ensure that their needs were met. Virtually all of the participants said that they felt that they were better equipped to handle watercourse agreement negotiations after this course than they were before. They felt that they now have a better idea of what to look for in watercourse agreements and that they would be able to provide better advice to their ministries and organizations after having heard discussions about such issues as environmental management and principles of social justice and equity in the allocation of benefits from water resources. The overall impression of the course, judging from the comments made by participants and the results of the post-course evaluation, was very positive. Virtually all of the participants said that they would like to take part in future courses on transboundary water resources. They also said that they hoped that they hoped to be able to learn more about integrated basin management and to gain negotiation and other skills that they could use to deal effectively with water resource issues. The instructors in the course were gratified with the tremendous efforts put forth by the participants in the course not only in the simulation and other exercises but also in offering cogent insights during the discussions. |
A
course on management of transboundary water resources was held for Southern
African Development Community (SADC) water professionals in Harare,
Zimbabwe from July 26-30, 1999. The topics that were addressed in this
course were ones that were identified as potentially useful for people
in SADC water ministries and the SADC Water Sector Coordination Unit
(WSCU) by representatives of the SADC countries in meetings held over
the past year in southern Africa. Planning and implementation of the
course was the responsibility of Development Alternatives, Inc. (DAI).
The
post-course evaluation, which the participants filled out on Friday,
July 30, revealed that the course was viewed as having addressed important
topics. In general, the evaluations indicated strong satisfaction with
the ways in which the course was presented and with the subject matter
offered. Some of the participants said that they learned skills that
they could take back to their jobs, such as negotiation and conflict
resolution skills. They also felt that the training course generated
stimulating discussions. The exercises used in the course received high
marks, particularly the simulation exercise on the Sandus River Basin,
where participants represented various countries and deliberated on
national and international river basin management strategies.
|
