Tárcoles River Basin Costa Rica Background Paper Maureen Ballestero July 2003 This paper is a product of the study, “Integrated River Basin Management and the Principle of Managing Water Resources at the Lowest Appropriate Level – When and Why Does It (Not) Work in Practice?” The Research Support Budget of the World Bank provided major funding. The project was carried out by the Agriculture and Rural Development Department at the World Bank. The Water Resources Management Group and the South Asia Social and Environment Unit at the World Bank have provided additional support. The study core team includes Karin Kemper and Ariel Dinar (Co-Task Team Leaders, World Bank), William Blomquist and Anjali Bhat (consultants, Indiana University), and Michele Diez (World Bank), William Fru (consultant), and Gisèle Sine (International Network of Basin Organizations). Basin case study consultants include Maureen Ballestero (Tárcoles - Costa Rica), Ken Calbick and David Marshall (Fraser - Canada), Rosa Formiga (Alto Tietê and Jaguaribe - Brazil), Consuelo Giansante (Guadalquivir - Spain), Brian Haisman (Murray Darling - Australia), Kikkeri Ramu and Trie Mulat Sunaryo (Brantas - Indonesia), and Andrzej Tonderski (Warta - Poland). The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and should not be attributed to the World Bank.
Transcript
Tárcoles River Basin Costa Rica
Background Paper
Maureen Ballestero
July 2003
This paper is a product of the study, “Integrated River Basin Management and the Principle of Managing Water Resources at the Lowest Appropriate Level – When and Why Does It (Not) Work in Practice?” The Research Support Budget of the World Bank provided major funding. The project was carried out by the Agriculture and Rural Development Department at the World Bank. The Water Resources Management Group and the South Asia Social and Environment Unit at the World Bank have provided additional support. The study core team includes Karin Kemper and Ariel Dinar (Co-Task Team Leaders, World Bank), William Blomquist and Anjali Bhat (consultants, Indiana University), and Michele Diez (World Bank), William Fru (consultant), and Gisèle Sine (International Network of Basin Organizations). Basin case study consultants include Maureen Ballestero (Tárcoles - Costa Rica), Ken Calbick and David Marshall (Fraser - Canada), Rosa Formiga (Alto Tietê and Jaguaribe - Brazil), Consuelo Giansante (Guadalquivir - Spain), Brian Haisman (Murray Darling - Australia), Kikkeri Ramu and Trie Mulat Sunaryo (Brantas - Indonesia), and Andrzej Tonderski (Warta - Poland). The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and should not be attributed to the World Bank.
ii
ACRONYMS
AyA Costa Rica Institute for Aqueducts and Sewers ABT ABT Associates, Inc. ALIDES Alliance for Sustainable Development ARESEP Public Service Regulatory Agency ASOTEM Association for the Management of the Tempisque River Basin CATIE Center for Tropical Agronomic Research and Education CCAD Central American Environmental and Development Commission CEDARENA Center for Environmental Law and Natural Resources CNFL National Power and Light Company CNP National Production Council COMCURE Revantazón River Basin Management Commission
Conservation Area CRAC Regional Committees for Conservation Areas CRGT Coordinating Commission for the Grande de Tárcoles River Basin ESPH Public Service Company of Heredia FAO Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations FECON Costa Rican Federation of Environmental Groups FONAFIFO National Fund for Forestry Financing FUDEU Foundation for Urban Development FUNDECOR Foundation for the Development of the Central Volcanic ICE Costa Rican Institute of Electricity ICT Costa Rican Tourism Institute IDB Inter-American Development Bank IFAM Institute for Municipal Promotion and Consultancy ITCR Technological Institute of Costa Rica INEC National Statistics and Census Institute INVU National Housing and Urbanization Institute JICA Japanese International Cooperation Agency MAG Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock MIDEPLAN Ministry of Planning MINAE Ministry of Environment and Energy MINSA Ministry of Public Health MIRENEM Ministry of Natural Resources, Energy and Mines ONG Non-Governmental Organization PIB (GDP) Gross Domestic Product PLAMA VIRILLA Improvement Plan for the Virilla River Basin PLAMAGAM Environmental Improvement Plan for the Greater Metropolitan Area SENARA National Groundwater, Irrigation and Drainage Service SETENA National Environmental Technical Service SINAC National System of Conservation Areas SNE National Electricity Service (defunct) UCR University of Costa Rica UNA National University of Costa Rica
iii
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................1 1. NATIONAL INFORMATION.....................................................................................................................3
1.1 GEOGRAPHICAL CONTEXT................................................................................................................3 1.2 BRIEF HISTORICAL ANALYSIS .........................................................................................................5 1.3 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT .....................................................................................7 1.4. SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT............................................................................................................10
2. CONTEXT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT PARTICIPATION...............................................................12 2.1 THE DECENTRALIZATION IN THE COUNTRY.............................................................................12 2.2 MUNICIPAL JURISDICTION IN MATTERS OF TERRITORIAL REGULATIONS .....................13 2.3 MUNICIPAL JURISDICTION IN WATER RESOURCE MATTERS ...............................................14
2.3.1 The County Water Inspector ............................................................................................................................. 14 2.4 MUNICIPAL JURISDICTION IN MATTERS OF POLLUTION.....................................................15 2.5 MUNICIPAL JURISDICTION IN MATTERS OF PROTECTION ...................................................15
3. THE CONDITION AND GENERAL PROBLEMS OF WATER RESOURCES IN COSTA RICA ...17 3.1 WATER AVAILABILITY ......................................................................................................................17 3.2 WATER DEMAND ................................................................................................................................18
3.3 PRINCIPAL WATER USERS...............................................................................................................25 3.4 LEGAL FRAMEWORK THAT REGULATES WATER MANAGEMENT ........................................26 3.5 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK ......................................................................................................29 3.6 RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT..........................................................................................................31
3.6.1 Efforts To Establish River Basin Management And/Or River Basin Institutions............................................ 31 3.6.2 Origin Of The Efforts To Form River Basin Organizations ............................................................................ 39
3.7 CONTEXT FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES............................................42 3.7.1 Decentralization Efforts Of Natural Resources Developed In The Country...................................................... 42 3.7.2 The Payment For Environmental Services ........................................................................................................ 44 3.7.3 Decoupling Payments For The Water Environmental Component From Other Forest Environmental Service 45
4. GRANDE DE TÁRCOLES RIVER BASIN ..............................................................................................49 4.1 GEOGRAPHICAL CONTEXT.............................................................................................................49 4.2 INTERNAL PHYSICAL STRUCTURE OF THE RIVER BASIN ......................................................51
4.2.1 Upper Basin .................................................................................................................................................... 52 4.2.2. Middle River Basin ......................................................................................................................................... 54 4.2.3 Lower River Basin .......................................................................................................................................... 55
4.3 CITIES AND PROVINCES LOCATED IN THE RIVER BASIN.......................................................56 4.4 HYDROLOGICAL REGIME ...............................................................................................................58
4.4.1. Description Of Aquifers .................................................................................................................................. 59 4.5 SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT..........................................................................................................63 4.6 LAND USE .............................................................................................................................................65 4.7 CAPACITY OF LAND USE IN THE GRANDE DE TÁRCOLES RIVER BASIN ............................67 4.8 AVAILABILITY AND DEMAND FOR WATER IN THE RIVER BASIN.........................................68
4.8.1 Use For Human Consumption........................................................................................................................... 70 4.8.2 Hydroelectric Uses............................................................................................................................................ 71 4.8.3 Use For Tourism And Recreation ................................................................................................................... 73 4.8.4 Industrial Use .................................................................................................................................................... 74 4.8.5 Agricultural Use................................................................................................................................................ 75
4.9 CONFLICTS OVER WATER USE.......................................................................................................75 4.10 PROBLEMS WITH WATER QUALITY, SOURCES AND EXPANSION OF THE DEGRADATION IN WATER QUALITY .................................................................................................................................76
4.11 SOURCES OF AGRICULTURAL POLLUTION...............................................................................82 4.12 RESERVOIRS CONSTRUCTED TO CONTROL RIVERS OR WATER RESERVES OF NATURAL LAKES WITHIN THE RIVER BASIN.......................................................................................................85
iv
5. RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT ..............................................................................................................86 5.1 PERIOD PRIOR TO DECENTRALIZATION ....................................................................................86 5.2 THE REFORM PROCESS TOWARD DECENTRALIZATION.........................................................87 5.3 EVOLUTION OF A RIVER BASIN ORGANIZATION ......................................................................91
5.3.1 Constitution (Awareness-Raising, Creation Of Capacities And Generation Of Information) ........................... 91 5.3.2 Strengthening Of The Organization (Execution Of Programs And Projects) .................................................... 91 5.3.3 Invisibilization: Gradual Diminution Of Functions.......................................................................................... 94
5.4 DEVELOPMENT OF WATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS IN THE TÁRCOLES RIVER BASIN WITHOUT THE PARTICIPATION OF THE CRGT................................................................................96
5.4.1 Plan For The Environmental Improvement Of The Upper Part Of The Virilla River Basin (PLAMA-Virilla).96 5.4.2 El Plama-Mora .................................................................................................................................................. 96 5.4.3 Commission For The Rehabilitation Of The Ciruelas River ............................................................................. 96 5.4.4 Commission For The Rehabilitation Of The Segundo River............................................................................. 97 5.4.5 Commission For The Foothills Of Monte Sur................................................................................................... 97
Figures & Tables Figure 1 Map Of Costa Rica .......................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2 Costa Rica: River Basins, By Slopes............................................................................... 5 Figure 3 Costa Rica Domestic Waste Water Disposition 1999 ................................................... 21 Figure 4 Costa Rica Energy Production By Sector, 2002............................................................ 22 Figure 5 Electricity Production From Fossil Fuels In Central America ...................................... 24 Figure 6 Costa Rica: Map Of Basins And Conservation Areas Of MINAE ............................... 38 Figure 7 Costa Rica: Conservation Areas Of MINAE. 2002....................................................... 43 Figure 8 Costa Rica: Location Of The Grande De Tárcoles River Basin................................... 49 Figure 9 Map Of The Watersheds Of The Grande De Tárcoles River Basin .............................. 51 Figure 10 Participation Of The Watersheds Within The Grande De Tárcoles River Basin ........ 52 Figure 11 Tarcoles River Basin: Number Of Canton Within Basin ............................................ 57 Figure 12 Map Of Cantons In The Río Grande De Tárcoles River ............................................. 58 Figure 13 Rain System In The Grande De Tárcoles River Basin ................................................ 59 Figure 14 Potential Of The Aquifers In The Grande De Tárcoles River Basin........................... 60 Figure 15 Current Land Use ........................................................................................................ 66 Figure 16 Composition of the Río Grande de Tárcoles River Basin Coordinating Commission. 89 Figure 17 Current Design Of The Ecological Banner ................................................................. 93 Table 1 Estimated Population In Central America In 2002............................................................ 8 Table 2 Population Growth In Costa Rica From 1984 To 2000 Census ....................................... 8 Table 3 Contribution Of The Main Sectors Of Economic Activity To Employment And
Production: 1992 And 2000 ................................................................................................... 9 Table 4 Costa Rica: Principal Economic Variables..................................................................... 10 Table 5 Potential Water Availability In Costa Rica..................................................................... 17 Table 6 Availability And Utilization Of Water ........................................................................... 18 Table 7 Water Extraction Indicators, Per Capita ......................................................................... 18 Table 8 Water Coverage For Human Consumption By Type Of Administrator......................... 19 Table 9 Treatment, Purification And Water Quality In Aqueducts In Costa Rica, According To
Operating Agencies, 2000-2001 ........................................................................................... 20 Table 10 Domestic Sewage Services, By The Administrative Agency 1995 - 1998 .................. 21 Table 11 Hydroelectric Capacity In MW (2002)......................................................................... 22 Table 12 Agriculture Under Irrigation......................................................................................... 24 Table 13 Principal Laws And Decrees That Regulate The Use Of Water Resources ................. 28 Table 14 Tariffs In Colons By Usage Canon, July 2003 ............................................................. 31 Table 15 Costa Rica: Protected Areas By Management Category, 2000 ................................... 42 Table 16 Grande De Tárcoles River Basin: Most Important Protected Areas. 2003.................. 50 Table 17 Grande De Tárcoles River Basin: Characteristics Of Its Watersheds ......................... 56 Table 18 Distribution Of Cantons In The Grande De Tárcoles River Basin, By Province ......... 57 Table 19 Principle Governmental Users Of Groundwater In Grande De Tárcoles River Basin . 61 Table 20 Grande De Tárcoles River Basin: Water Use In Barva Aquifer By Category Of Use 62 Table 21 Grande De Tárcoles River Basin: Water Use in La Libertad and Colima Aquifers by
Category of Use .................................................................................................................... 62 Table 22 Tárcoles River Basin: Population Density By Watershed ............................................ 64 Table 23 Tárcoles River Basin: Land Use In 1992 And 2000.................................................... 66 Table 24 Grande De Tárcoles River Basin: Classes Of Capacity For Land Use........................ 67
vi
Table 25 Grande De Tárcoles River Basin: Kind Of Land Use ................................................. 68 Table 26 Availability And Demand For Water In The Grande De Tárcoles River Basin (Millions
Of M3 Annually) ................................................................................................................... 69 Table 27 Percentage Of Distribution For Consumption Measured By Type Of User For Some
Water Supply Systems Within The River Basin................................................................... 71 Table 28 Tárcoles River Basin: Situation Of Hydroelectric Generation .................................... 73 Table 29 Tourism Offer In The Grande De Tárcoles River Basin Region.................................. 74 Table 30 Tarcoles River Basin: Domestic Waste Disposal: Estimate Of BOD, Nitrogen And
Phosforous Load By Watershed, 1997.................................................................................. 78 Table 31 Tarcoles River Basin: Estimated Load of Pollution by Urban Runoff*in Kg/ day. ..... 80 Table 32 Tarcoles River Basin: Estimate of Pollution from Coffee Processing.......................... 81 Table 33 Tarcoles River Basin: Estimate of Industry Pollution .................................................. 82 Table 34 Estimate of the Nutrient Load and BOD Dumped in the Environment Agricultural
Activities ............................................................................................................................... 83 Table 35 Estimate of Herbicides and Fungicides Applied to Coffee and Sugar Cane Crops
The four million people who live in Costa Rica enjoy a stable democracy. This democracy, which developed during a long period of transition, has a presidential form of government, with a highly centralized government, a strong judicial system, a stable electoral system, a bi-party political system and the institutional protection of the rights and freedoms of its citizens.
For many years the Costa Rican state has been dedicated to transforming its structure and composition in an effort to respond to complaints from many sectors about the need to decentralize governmental functions, as well as to achieve the participation of local government (municipalities, regional environmental councils, and others) in the decision-making process. However, these attempts have not resulted in a state policy over time but have been characterized by isolated or transitory efforts. The need to advance toward decentralization in such a small country has been questioned; the country is only 464 km at its longest point and 199 km wide at its narrowest point, between the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean.
Costa Rica has achieved significant advances in environmental sustainability and is recognized as a pioneer in many areas, such as the sale of certificates for carbon dioxide exchange, payment of environmental services, and the protection of natural heritage sites. A series of regulations and norms have been put into effect, and a diversity of institutions have been created to protect natural resources, particularly those that traditionally have been considered basic to life, such as water, air, trees, and soil. Thus, water resources have been given great importance in the last decade, bringing about changes in laws and institutionalism that have affected the direct or indirect management of the resource. It is fair to say that water is playing a bigger role on the political agenda of the country with every passing day.
An unprecedented water crisis exists in Costa Rica. Among the causes are: chaotic growth and lack of city planning, particularly in the Greater Metropolitan Area; increased pollution in aquifers and rivers; increase of migratory tendencies from rural areas to the city; penetration of a development model whose production is based on unsustainable methods of water utilization; in addition to a complex and disarticulated judicial-institutional framework that has not taken into consideration mechanisms for effective management or prevention that avoid water resource depletion and general environmental degradation.
At the international level, the Johannesburg World Summit Meeting on Environment and Development, the World Water Forums, the accords of the Central American Presidents (ALIDES; the XIX, XX and XXI Central American Presidential Summit Meetings), and international treaties and conventions, among others, have defined new guidelines, focal points, and even commitments on which Costa Rica should base the adoption of new strategies that will resolve the serious water situation that has been created. Among these strategies, one stands out:
2
the management of water starting with the water basin, which seeks a form of management based in local agencies as a model that is efficient, equitable and sustainable. Although this principle seems simple and logical at first glance, its implementation has made little or no progress, not only in Costa Rica but in the rest of Central America as well. In this context, analyzing specific situations related to establishing the principle of integrated water management and extracting the lessons learned becomes vitally important in the development of new water management programs to achieve a more sustainable development model for the country.
Included in these experiences is the need to evaluate the political measures, projects, and activities developed in Costa Rica to conduct integrated water management of a particular river basin. Creating the Coordinated Commission of the Río Grande de Tárcoles was the country’s first attempt to form a structure for river basin management, and it typefies the successes and failures of the process.
This analysis seeks to make it possible for the new institutional reform attempts to create judicial frameworks and policies to be implemented in the country, to rectify the limitations and deficiencies of previous actions, and to reinforce the positive results that are achieved in this river basin.
Recognizing that the Río Grande de Tárcoles experience reflects, in large measure, the situation that exists in the other Central American countries, the following analysis deals with not only the national context but extrapolates some information to the Central American regional level, in order to create an added value to this case study.
3
1. NATIONAL INFORMATION
1.1 GEOGRAPHICAL CONTEXT
Costa Rica is located in the Central American isthmus in a tropical zone of the northern hemisphere. It has a land area of approximately 51,100 km2, with a mountainous topography. It is bordered on the north by the Republic of Nicaragua, on the east by the Caribbean Sea, on the southeast by the Republic of Panama, and on the west by the Pacific Ocean (see Map 2). The marine territory of Costa Rica (its oceanic patrimony), including part of the Caribbean Sea, covers more than 573,000 km2, which is more than ten times its land territory (MIDEPLAN, 1999).
Figure 1 Map of Costa Rica
Costa Rica has a humid tropical climate with average temperatures between 18º and 27ºC during the entire year throughout the various zones of the country. The average rainfall ranges between 1,200 and 7,500 mm a year, which places Costa Rica among the countries with the largest availability of fresh water in the world (Ballestero, et al, 2002).
4
The distribution of precipitation in the atmosphere varies between the two seasons, one rainy and the other dry. The rainy season is from May to November and is interrupted by a short dry period that usually occurs in July, but that varies according to changing patterns in the macro-climate, such as the phenomena known as “El Niño” and “La Niña.” There are very different climate zones in the country, from the tropical dry forest to the cloud forest, as well as a variety of local climates due to the different altitudes and the width of the territory, which makes it very vulnerable to the influence of oceanic systems.
The country is divided into 34 river basins, with well-defined characteristics that are associated with rain systems (see Figure No.2 and annex No 1). The Tarcoles River basin is number 24 in this classification.
The presence of the Caribbean and Pacific slopes allows water to drain into both oceans. The Caribbean slope river basins have longer rivers with abundant flows throughout most of the year, so there is usually no water shortage.
In the Pacific slope river basins there is a marked reduction in the river flow during the dry season; these rivers are short and have small basins that reach the coast abruptly. These characteristics make it difficult to capture water for human use, and there is a high level of loss from surface run-off. The lower areas of the Pacific basins are susceptible to flooding when there is heavy rainfall in the higher areas of the watershed. Some of the water from the rivers in the northeast of the country drains toward the San Juan River or the northern slope (Ballestero, et al, 2002).
Despite living in a region blessed with so much rain, the Costa Rican population is beginning to experience pressure on its water resource. For many years there was abundant rainfall during six or more months of the year, and there was confidence that the streams and rivers would provide this resource during the entire year.
However, in recent decades Costa Rica experienced an accelerated process of agricultural expansion, in which a great deal of forest land was converted to agricultural and livestock use, which caused a transformation in the natural environment that broke the basic environmental balance. This has generated another series of problems, such as erosion, loss of ecosystems, and a reduction in the capacity of the soil to retain water, making it susceptible to floods during the rainy season and to a loss of water flow during the dry season.
5
Figure 2 Costa Rica: River Basins, By Slopes.
1.2 BRIEF HISTORICAL ANALYSIS
Costa Rica’s development has been different from that of the other Central American countries since the middle of the 20th century. Its economic growth has been accompanied by a stable political system and by significant social advances, thanks to continued investment in educating the population (State of the Nation, 1999). From the middle of the 19th century until 1950, Costa Rica had the typical characteristics of an underdeveloped country: an out-of-date productive structure; little diversification (almost exclusively coffee and banana exports); and a weak, limited industrialization that was based on the craft industry. The internal market was meager and not very dynamic. The distribution of income and property was markedly unequal, with little possibility for social mobility, and in addition, there was high unemployment and low salaries. Up until 1940, the average infant mortality rate was 132/1000, and Costa Rican life expectancy was only 47 years (Garnier and Hidalgo, 1991).
Liberal democracy operated in a restricted manner, both as a consequence of economic and social inequalities and because of the limitations of its institutionalization. For example, women did not have a right to vote or to be elected, the black population did not have the right to free exercise of citizenship, and the electoral processes were usually marked by fraud.
6
In 1948, with a population of only 800,875 and with extreme socio-economic backwardness, a civil war broke out that resulted in the breakdown of the old, worn-out Liberal State and the emergence of the so-called Second Republic with a social-democratic character, through which was consolidated a developmental and interventionist state. A representative democracy was institutionalized, and a process of change was initiated, with economic, social and political reforms, such as abolishing the army, nationalizing the banking system, and creating institutions like the Costa Rican Electricity Institute (ICE), the National Production Council (CNP), and the University of Costa Rica (UCR), among others.
The economy grew strongly from 1950 to 1980, helped by the post-war economic boom. The productive transformation was one of the pillars on which this growth phase was constructed, based on four main principals: a) financial demand for investments; b) improvement of the productive infrastructure (transportation and communication), c) human capital and, d) expansion of the domestic market.
Between 1950 and 1980 GDP grew at an average rate of 6.5% in real terms, and its dynamism surpassed the average growth of developing countries as well as industrialized countries. These years were distinguished by expanding health and sanitation services throughout the country, by making primary education available to everyone, and by increasing access to secondary and university education, and by high social mobility, which created a largely middle-class population (Garnier and Hidalgo, 1991).
According to the Citizens Audit (2001), the main occurrence of the last quarter of the 20th Century was the country’s economic recession between 1979 and 1982, during which : GDP dropped by nearly 15% in real terms; the external situation worsened rapidly; the terms of exchange decreased by more than 20% between 1980 and 1982—exports not only stopped growing but decreased; the government indiscriminately resorted to foreign funds to maintain levels of internal expenditure and consumption; inflation reached 82%; and the fiscal deficit absorbed nearly 70% of the export income. It is estimated that the number of families living in poverty conditions rose from 15% to 37%. Those years of crisis originated in the accumulated and growing trade imbalance and in the petroleum crisis of the 1970s.
From 1982 until 1990 there was a gradual and broad economic adjustment program, with fiscal, monetary, and tariff measures that tended to expand exports. An economic stabilization program was carried out with a minimal social cost, but which showed that the development model followed since the 1950s was exhausted and created distortions in the current period. The country’s narrow economic base was no longer able to sustain its development model.
Costa Rica entered the 1990s with economic policies oriented toward a new development strategy based on liberalizing markets, reducing the size of the state and of its functions,
7
promoting nontraditional exports, and liberalizing the economy. This new strategy promoted a reform of the interventionist state that had been created in previous decades, a reduction of public expenditures and payroll, and the break up or privatization of state monopolies. Between 1985 and 1995 the country signed three Structural Adjustment Programs with the World Bank.
What stands out in this process is that, in less than 60 years, Costa Rica systematically reduced its poverty level, nearly doubled its life expectancy rate (in 2000 it was 77.49 for both men and women), reduced infant mortality by ten times (10.2/1000 in 2000), saw its population grow by 500%, increased real GDP per person by four times, and constructed a democratic state of law that has helped the country has live in peace, even in times of acute conflict and war in the rest of the Central America.
1.3 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
The change process that has taken place in Costa Rica and in the rest of Central America (countries with a majority rural population), one of being transformed into growing urban societies (60% of the Costa Rican population), is one of the most relevant socioeconomic phenomena in the region. This influences the design of all development policies, both in the area of growth as well as in environmental themes, particularly as related to sustainable use of water resources in the region, given that this tendency of change in the area of economic activity and in the population is irreversible and will become more accentuated in the next five-year period.
It is expected that by the year 2015, 65% of the population in Central America will live in urban areas (Central American Commission on Environment and Development—CCAD, April 2003). The following table shows the situation of the seven Central American countries.
The Costa Rican population has increased nearly 500% in the last 50 years, from 800,875 inhabitants in 1950 to 3,824,593 in 2000 (INEC, 2000 Census). The population growth rates of men and women were not significantly different. The Census shows a 2.8% annual growth rate and confirms the process of urbanization in the central region of the country, as well as an increase in the intermediate cities. With the majority of Costa Rica’s population concentrated in the Central Valley’s four provinces, 60% of the total population is urbanized. In addition, it indicates that the concentration of population in Costa Rican urban areas is related to the difference in employment opportunities and in the access to social and educational services compared to the surrounding areas of the country (i.e., rural areas). The agricultural and fishing crises have contributed to this situation.
8
Table 1 Estimated Population in Central America in 2002
Source: Estimates of the Central American Population Center for April 2002. For Belize and Costa Rica the statistics are from the 2000 Census.
Table 2 Population Growth in Costa Rica from 1984 to 2000 Census
Source: INEC, 2000
Historically, the Costa Rican economy has been based development on the agricultural sector, particularly coffee, bananas, sugar cane, and cattle. However, a sustained process of change has occurred in the economic structure of the Central American countries, including Costa Rica, because of a growing lack of relative importance of the agricultural sector in generating the GDP.
In 1960, the agricultural sector generated 25% of the GDP, followed by the business sector with 20%, the service sector with 19%, and the industrial sector with only 14%. In 1970 the industrial sector surpassed the service sector, and in 1980 it became the most important GDP sector. This
situation remained the same until the 1990s and was consolidated in 2000, when it produced 24% of the GDP (State of the Nation 2001 Report and INEC: 2000).
Beginning in the 1980s, a process of diversification of exports was fomented, and in the 1990s policies were developed to strengthen the sectors that created wealth, tourism, and micro-electronic components (Intel began operations in the country in 1997).
Table 3 Contribution of The Main Sectors of Economic Activity to Employment and Production: 1992 and 2000
Percentage of the population occupied
Percentage of the GDP Activity
1992 2000 1992 2000 Agriculture, hunting and fishing Industry Commerce Social, community and personal services Transportation, warehousing and communications
24.1 18.9 16.6 24.1
4.7
20.4 14.4 20.2 25.6
6.0
11.7 21.3 18.7 11.7
7.6
10.7 24.0 18.2 10.5
9.4
TOTAL 88.4 86.6 71.0 72.8
Sources: Statistics from INEC and the Central Bank. 2002.
The results of the Costa Rican economic analysis in 2000 are shown in Table 3, and a review of figures for that year shows that the increase was not sufficient to compensate for population growth, even though the GDP grew by 1.7% compared to 1999, which resulted in a reduction of per capita GDP. Economic growth in Costa Rica was the lowest in Central America, and it is worth pointing out that in the 1990s the GDP growth averaged 6% in Costa Rica. This was a product of lower economic growth worldwide and of a drastic reduction in the price of commodities, which adversely affected exports, as well as of the high local interest rates, which had limited internal demand.
Although the unemployment rate decreased, the change was not enough to counteract the decrease in disposable national income per capita (-2.3% compared to 1999). The economically active population is nearly 1.4 million people.
Growth in the external sector has tended to stagnate in recent years, precisely when there has been a proliferation of trade agreements (free trade agreements with Mexico, Chile, Canada, and the Dominican Republic), which were supposed to improve access to those respective markets. The Costa Rican economy is facing serious obstacles in the supply of products to take advantage of these negotiations. Currently, the country is participating in negotiations for a free trade agreement between Central America and the United States, which is the main market for its national products (56% of exports).
10
Table 4 Costa Rica: Principal Economic Variables
Variables
1990
1999
2000
GDP (millions of colons 1991) GDP per capita (colons 1991) GDP per capita in dollars (US$) Real growth in disposable national income per person (%) Export growth in current dollars Annual inflation rate (%) Open unemployment rate (%)
876,910 278,898
2,284 5.7
31.2 27.3
4.6
1,400,538 363,192 4,079
-3.7
19.4 10.1
6.0
1,423,834 361,085
4,028 -2.3
-11.71 10.2
5.2
Source: State of the Nation 2001 Report.
1.4. SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT
Costa Rica is a free, sovereign, and independent republic. Its political system is a representative democracy, with a division of powers (legislative, executive, judicial), and which exercises a system of checks and balances.
Every four years during the last five decades, executive branch, legislative branch, and municipal representatives have been elected in an open process.
Costa Rica is a highly centralized state, characteristic of its 19th century governments. The executive branch is composed of the president and his cabinet. The president is directly elected every four years, and he appoints the cabinet members (ministers). There are currently 16 cabinet (ministerial) positions.
Autonomous institutions, which provide the majority of public services, are part of the central government and have functional and budgetary autonomy. Their functions are of a sectoral nature and there is little coordination between them and between the institutions and the ministries. The Costa Rican Electricity Institute (ICE) and the Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (AyA) are two of the most important institutions.
The legislative branch is a very complex body, composed of the Legislative Assembly and two auxiliary institutions—the General Accounting Office of the Republic, and the Ombudsman Office, which provide quality control for the democracy.
The legislative assembly has the power to legislate; it has one chamber, with 57 legislators who represent the seven provinces and are elected every four years in a general election. Their functions include the approval of laws and naming the members of the judicial branch and the controllers for governmental agencies.
The judicial branch interprets the Constitution and the law. It is responsible for all matters relating to the administration of justice. The judiciary is organized into chambers, tribunals, and
11
lower courts (one judge, territorial). There are four chambers: Chamber 1, civil and administrative matters; Chamber 2, criminal matters; Chamber 3, labor and family matters; Chamber 4, constitutional matters. The tribunals and lower courts are decentralized and are located in regions throughout the country.
The political forces in the country are organized into various political parties, which participate in democratic national elections. After the Civil War of 1948 and until 1962, there was a transition and consolidation process toward representative democracy in the political system. From 1962 until 1986, there was a long march toward political pluralism and a bipartisan political system. From 1986 forward, bipartisan politics were in full operation, with centrist ideological tendencies, which means the two parties were not far apart (Rovira, 2001).
On one side there is the National Liberation Party (PLN), “the historical party,” with a social democratic ideology, to which the majority of economic and social reforms are attributed during this period and which has governed the most since 1948. On the other side is the Social Christian Unity Party (PUSC), created in 1983, with Christian democratic tendencies, formed by an array of parties that had previously opposed the PLN.
The PLN governments (1948, 1953, 1962, 1970, 1974, 1982, 1986, 1994) were characterized as being directed toward institutional and social reforms, and greater state investment in education, health, housing, and social infrastructure. In 1974 the first national park was created and a process of buying land for protected and conservation areas was initiated, which has become what is today the national System of Conservation Areas. In the last PLN government, its actions were strongly directed toward introducing the model of sustainable development in the country.
The PUSC governments (1990, 1998, 2002) have been directed toward seeking economic growth, fiscal balance, and the reduction of public sector participation in governmental management and provision of services. In recent years, however, there has been a tendency toward reducing the differences that have existed between both parties. This has been noticed by the population, above all in the execution of proposals for structural adjustment from international financial organizations, public sector investment, and open market policies.
According to Rovira and Leimbach (2001), creating a two-party system has guaranteed stability to Costa Rican society. However, the degree of satisfaction with the political system, its performance and its institutions has been deteriorating, which has been made clear at the level of electoral politics. Voter abstention has increased from 30% in the 1998 elections to 39% in 2002, and the number of political parties represented in the legislative assembly has also increased.
12
2. CONTEXT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT PARTICIPATION
2.1 THE DECENTRALIZATION IN THE COUNTRY Costa Rica is divided into seven provinces, and each province is divided into counties, of which there are a total of 81 throughout the country. The Constitution establishes a municipal regimen and local governments exercise jurisdiction in the cantons. Currently, there is no government authority at the provincial or regional levels.
In conformity with Article 169 of the Constitution, the municipalities are autonomous from every other state agency and have complete authority to administer their territory as well as their local interests and services. However, the political reality is that the municipalities have been relegated to a secondary level, historically, as a product of the centralized model that was established in the country.
The country’s 81 counties are far from homogenous, and their diversity is, without a doubt, one of the greatest challenges of decentralization. This diversity is reflected in the territorial differences (three cantons have less than 10 km2 of territory, and sixteen of them have less than 50 km2), in population density, in their fiscal base, and in the level of human development (Gutiérrez, et al, 2001).
Due to Costa Rica’s degree of centralization, the municipalities face major limitations in exercising their duties since the responsibilities given to them have not been accompanied by fiscal mechanisms and, above all, by the finances to implement them. By the beginning of the 21st century, Costa Rica had experienced nearly 20 years of formal discussion about the processes of decentralization and strengthening local governments, including various legislative proposals that were presented in the Legislative Assembly.
Recently these discussions have resulted in small achievements, such as the establishment of a new Municipal Code in 1998, which, among other things, provided for the direct election of mayors, something that occurred for the first time in December 2002. In January 2001 a reform to Constitutional Article 170 was approved, which assigned 10% of the regular budget revenue to the municipalities.
It is important to point out that until 2002 the income of the municipalities represented less than 1% of GDP and less than 2% of total public expenditure, despite the importance that they were given by the legal ordinances. These reforms can be seen as an advance in the process of the long-term strengthening of local governments.
13
However, this is clearly an unfinished process that needs more thorough reforms than those made so far by the central government and its political actors. In the short term the following challenges exist: specifying the transfer of resources and powers (tributary, fiscal, administrative, financial, and electoral) to the municipalities; putting into practice the constitutional reform mentioned above; and developing a decentralization proposal for the Costa Rica.
The Constitutional Court has issued a series of resolutions reinforcing this view:
“Municipal autonomy, as provided for in the Constitution, essentially originates in the representative character of local government (the only decentralized territory in the country), responsible for administering the local interests, so that the municipalities can define their development policies (plan and agree on programs), in an independent manner and in exclusion of any other state institution, a power that carries with it the ability to determine its own budget. This political autonomy implies, of course, that of issuing internal regulations, as well as regulations for providing public services. This is why it has been said, in local theory, that this deals with a true decentralization of the public operation in local matters” (Volio, 1996).
As Volio points out, constitutional jurisprudence has been the instrument that has clarified in each concrete case the limits of this autonomy and, currently, it can be affirmed that Costa Rica is in “an intermediate state between the unitary state and the Spanish state of regional autonomy, which recognizes municipalities as having originating and exclusive powers in the area of taxation and urban planning, as inseparable elements of local life.”
The Constitution and the Municipal Code assign some services and powers to local governments in matters of territorial management in its cantons, through which they can intervene in all aspects and themes that are of local interest. Additionally, other norms give specific responsibilities and attributes to the municipalities in environmental matters, such as the Organic Environmental Law, Forestry Law and its regulations, the Highway Law, the Water Law, the Coastal Area Law, and the General Health Law.
The provisions contained in some of these norms will be analyzed in this study.
2.2 MUNICIPAL JURISDICTION IN MATTERS OF TERRITORIAL REGULATIONS
Municipal jurisdiction in terretorial regulation matters is one of the most complex subjects in the area of municipal powers: on one hand, because of the diversity of standards that regulate municipalities and, on the other hand, because of the inexperience and lack of ability in the majority of local governments in this area.
14
Municipalities have exclusive powers urban planning and regulating land use in the counties, but at the national level, the authority of the national agencies prevails, in this case, that of the National Institute of Housing and Urbanization (INVU). The mechanism used to plan and control urban development within its terretorial boundaries is the introduction of regulatory plans in which zoning, among many other aspects, can be determined for housing, commerce, industry, education, recreation, public use, and whatever other relevant use. The Constitution provides for urban planning to be carried out by the municipalities.
Because the law authorizes INVU to prepare these plans in case the municipalities do not, it has assumed this function, claiming that the municipalities lack the technical or financial capacity to do so.
The 1995 Organic Environmental Law, No. 7554, deals with the land use regulations and includes an environmental variable that should be considered when defining policies and programs.
2.3 MUNICIPAL JURISDICTION IN WATER RESOURCE MATTERS
Article 41 of the General Water Law (1942) establishes the possibility that the municipalities manage the “actual water supply system for the population”. Additionally, Article 70 states that local governments are required to supervise and control concessions to exploit materials (sand, rock, gravel, and others) from rivers, beaches, and deposits of public domain, as well as to demand that the concessionaire provide documentation that authorizes the respective concession or license.
In Costa Rica, many water supply systems that supply drinking water, especially in the country’s outlying areas, are in the hands of the municipality. However, there has been a tendency toward the centralization of the service in AyA, because of the poor service provided by the municipalities, which became evident when there were serious contamination accidents, service interruptions, leaks, and little infrastructure development.
2.3.1 The County Water Inspector
A water inspector is an important figure that could be converted into an instrument to collaborate with the municipalities in water management. According to the reform introduced to the Water Law when the Public Service Regulating Authority (ARESEP) was created, the water inspector should be named by the Water Department of the Ministry of Environment and Energy (MINAE) from a list of candidates presented by the municipality (Article 194). However, the marked centralist bias of the Law can be appreciated, given that municipalities name their own water inspector without intervention from the central government.
15
The water inspector has interesting functions, since in addition to watching over the conservation and appropriate use of the resource, the inspector intervenes in the administrative resolution of differences and conflicts regarding water use that arise between individuals. The inspector’s resolutions, of a preventive and conciliatory nature, are in force until they are revoked or modified judicially or by the corresponding MINAE authority.
Currently, inspectors have been named in 62 of the 81 municipalities; however, in very few do they adequately perform their functions. The actions of the county inspectors vary considerably. Some are very proactive and participate in analyzing water problems, resolving conflicts, and raising awareness in the canton; this is true of the inspector in the municipality of Alajuela. In others, the functions are minimal, such as in the municipality of Alfaro Ruíz. This might be a matter of financial recognition for their services; in some municipalities they do not receive any payment for their services. In a few municipalities their services are remunerated, or the functionaries are salaried, as is the case of the municipality of Grecia. In some of the municipalities an inspector has not been named because they are unaware that this possibility exists, which is the case in the municipality of Liberia.
2.4 MUNICIPAL JURISDICTION IN MATTERS OF POLLUTION
Municipal jurisdiction over pollution matters traditionally has been limited to the collection of solid waste. However, Article 60 of the Organic Environmental Law broadens these functions by establishing that the municipalities must prevent and control pollution, giving priority, among other things, to the establishment and operation of adequate services in the basic areas of environmental health, such as drinking water supply, solid and liquid waste disposal, waste collection and management, and controlling atmospheric pollution, among others. These services will be provided by involving the population.
2.5 MUNICIPAL JURISDICTION IN MATTERS OF PROTECTION
The Municipal Code that was repealed gave power to the municipalities to “protect the natural resources of all kinds, joining forces with national actions relating to forestry matters, in order to protect the water sources, forests and wildlife through founding or promoting national parks, forestry reserves and animal shelters.” The new Code eliminated all reference to that clause, an action that was completely unwarranted since the limitations of the ministries to provide adequate protection are well known. However, this does not mean that the municipality cannot establish some measures of protection for natural resources in its territory or in those that are under its administration.
To summarize this section on local jurisdiction, it is important to emphasize that the degree of municipal autonomy and the exclusivity of municipal jurisdiction in matters of urban planning and land use regulation should be important management mechanisms used by municipalities,
16
which could potentially exercise a great influence in river basin management. However, some municipalities do not take advantage of this authority, exercising it only partially or ceding their rights to national agencie. The lack of technical ability to generate such plans and a lack of efficiency to put them into practice is often the cause. In addition to this deficiency, the regulatory plans that are in effect have not incorporated variables of river basin management, and some do not even include water management as a secondary theme (Mora, 2001).
17
3. THE CONDITION AND GENERAL PROBLEMS OF WATER RESOURCES IN COSTA RICA
3.1 WATER AVAILABILITY
Costa Rica continues to have enviable water availability; however, there is more pressure every day for water to satisfy diverse demands. The country does not have an up-to-date National Water Assessment; the last one was done at the beginning of 1990. In addition, there is no water budget that facilitates disbursement of the resource. The majority of the conflicts arise from questions of authority to access the resource and a lack of knowledge about the real availability of water, a situation that becomes more serious in the case of groundwater (Chacón, J., 2002).
The eighth report on the State of the Nation (2001) identifies Costa Rica’s greatest environmental concern as the vulnerability of its water resources and water quality. It emphasizes that 75% of the available sources are rated as highly vulnerable, especially rivers, lakes, and springs. There is also a total lack of control over the use of groundwater, which is extracted through wells for use in agricultural irrigation, agribusiness activities, industry, tourism, and for local consumption, which places the most important aquifers that supply water to the main population centers at serious risk.
As shown in the following table, Costa Rica receives between 169 and 172 km3 of rainfall annually. Of this, 75 km3 runs off the land into rivers, 37 km3 recharges the aquifers, and about a third of the rain returns to the atmosphere through evaporation and transpiration.
Table 5 Potential Water Availability in Costa Rica
Parameter Measurement km3 Percentage Rainfall 169.0 -172.0 100 Evaporation/transpiration 59.60 35.6 POTENTIAL AVAILABILITY km3 Surface run-off 75.1 44.9 Aquifer Recharge 37.3 22.3 Source: Reynolds, Evaluation of Water Resources: Availability and Utilization, 1997 As a result of the above, it is estimated that there is potential annual water availability in Costa Rican soil of 112.4 km3. As a result of that potential, each inhabitant has a water capital of 29,973 m3.
The variables in the national precipitation patterns, in addition to meteorological phenomena such as El Niño and La Niña, affect the annual water availability in some regions. Likewise, the available water is reduced by the deforestation that has taken place in the country, by pollution of surface and groundwater, by domestic and industrial waste, and by agricultural chemicals.
18
3.2 WATER DEMAND
Of the total water utilized in different human activities, 93.8% comes from lakes and rivers. Most of this water is used for electrical energy production (82%), irrigation (8.3%), drinking water supply (6.3%), industry and recreation (3.4%) as can be observed in the following charts:
Table 6 Availability and Utilization of Water
Use Thousands of m3 per year
Groundwater Surface Water Subtotal Human 391,983 235,250 627,233Agricultural 82,150 734,176 816,326Industrial 122,889 212,640 335,529Electrical energy NA 8,085,020 8,085,020Other 14,786 18,180 32,966TOTAL 611,808 9,285,266 9,897,074
Source: Evaluation of Water Resources in Costa Rica: Availability and Utilization, CCT-CINPE, 1997.
Table 7 Water Extraction Indicators, Per Capita
QUANTIFICATION OF THE EXTRACTION
Domestic
Industrial
Tourism
Agricultural
HydroelectricYear of the extrac-tion
Extrac-tion per capita per year (m3/p/yr)
%
m3/p/ year
%
m3/p/ year
%
m3/p/ year
%
m3/p/ year
%
m3/p/ year
2002 6,896.2
2.6 157.95 1.3 76.4 0.5 2,802.0
19.4 1,187.2 76.3 4,682.4
Source: Evaluation of Water Resources in Costa Rica: Availability and Utilization, CCT-CINPE, 1997.
3.2.1 Human Consumption
In terms of human consumption, 97.4% of Costa Ricans had access to water in 2001. AyA provides water to 43.2% of the population, 24.4% by rural water supply systems and users associations, 17.1% is provided by municipalities, 4.7% by Public Services of Heredia (ESPH), and 9% from private wells or communal sources, as shown in table 8.
19
Table 8 Water Coverage for Human Consumption by Type of Administrator
Population Covered Drinking Water Coverage Operator
* ESPH: Empresa de Servicios Públicos de Heredia. ** CAAR/ASADAS: Comités de Acueductos Rurales /Asociaciones de Usuarios. Source: Water Laboratory, AyA (2002).
Despite the country’s excellent water provision coverage, challenges remain in the areas of water quality and quality of service provided by some water supply systems administrators. The 2001 AyA report states that nearly 25% of the population (nearly one million inhabitants) depends on 1,005 water supply systems that still do not have safe drinking water, as shown in table 8, which shows that although the drinking water coverage increased favorably (from 72.5% to 75.8% from 2000 to 2001), the percentage of coverage is still low. This is one of the major tasks confronting AyA and other water providers. The provinces with the lowest coverage of quality drinking water are Cartago, Puntarenas and Alajuela. Of the water coverage in the country, 41.7% is not subject to any quality control. Although, in general, the country’s water sources have few physiochemical problems, approximately 31.1% of the population receives untreated water. This is considered to be a health risk for the users. Of all these administrative agencies, only ESPH provides 100% of its population with drinking water.
Table 9 shows that although only 46.9% of the 2,058 water supply systems registered in the country provide drinking water, these cover the majority of the population and are mainly located in the Greater Metropolitan Area and in urban centers. Only 19% of the water supply systems receive treated (chlorinated) water; 88.2% of the population receives water from supervised programs; and 51.5% receive water that is not of adequate quality. AyA has intervened in the administration and operation of many municipal water supply systems; however, there are still approximately 1,600 small rural and communal water supply systems that are directed by associations called ASADAS, which are administered independently, under the supervision of AyA. A large number of these are in the sectors of the population that receive water of poor quality (see table 9). From the point of view of public services and public health, the prevalence of these systems without quality control and/or quality supervision is a cause for
20
concern. In general, the management and financial capacity of the ASADAS to pay for improving the infrastructure in order to improve the water quality and service is questionable.
Table 9 Treatment, Purification and Water Quality in Aqueducts in Costa Rica, According to Operating Agencies, 2000-2001
(1) Treatment: refers to a combination of physical, chemical, and biological processes conducted to improve the quality of the water to which it is applied.
(2) Purification: elimination of infectious agents; chlorine is the most common disinfectant in the world; it has a relatively low cost, is effective, and is easily measured.
Source: State of the Nation #8, 2001. The search for new water sources to meet the demands of the population is being expanded to new areas that are farther from the population centers, which implies enormous distribution and maintenance costs combined with the need for more expensive treatment methods because of the contamination process.
The situation with wastewater varies significantly and is one of the greatest challenges the country faces. Table 10 below gives an overview of the sewage and drainage system from 1995 to 1998. Although services increased by 3.5%, the percentage of the population served decreased from 23.9% to 21.1%.
According to the National Water Laboratories of AyA, the principal urban inner cities of the country have simple sewerage systems, which reach 21.1 % of the served population. 16.1% of the waste water is untreated and just 5% is treated. The non-treated wastewater is channeled through the sewer system to the rivers without any kind of treatment.
The Greater Metropolitan Area (GAM), specifically, is characterized by the absence of sewer systems; this is why septic tanks are widely used (68.5%). The remainder of the population uses latrines (8.6%) or has “no sanitary service” (1.9%).
21
Table 10 Domestic Sewage Services, by Administrative Agency 1995-1998
(1). Administrative Committees for Rural Water Supply Systems Source: Department of Systems Operations of AyA, 1999.
Figure 3 Costa Rica Domestic Waste Water Disposal 1999
Costa Rica: Domestic wastewater disposition.1999.
Tanque séptico
AlcantarilladosimplePozo o letrina
AlcantariladosanitarioSin servicio
In summary, Costa Rica does not have adequate waste treatment plants and, therefore, a great quantity of wastewater is deposited directly into rivers. On the other hand, the extensive use of septic tanks might be a factor that contributes to the pollution of the groundwater, the main source of water supply in the GAM.
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY 1995 1998 AVERAGE GROWTH %
AyA (rural and urban) 144,773 157,717 2.98 CAAR1 5,399 6,402 6.19 Urban Municipality 7,451 8,846 6.24 ESPH Urban 10,011 12,364 7.83 Private Urban 36 36 0 TOTAL SERVICES 167,670 185,365 3.52 Population Served (%) 23.9% 21.1% -2.80
22
3.2.2 Hydroelectricity
Costa Rica has great hydroelectric potential. Its theoretical potential is 25,500 MW, but exploitation of this large potential is not totally possible for infrastructure, economic, and technical reasons. Most of the target projects are situated in protected areas such as national parks. Because of this, the hydroelectric potential that is economically, technically, and environmentally viable has been estimated by the Costarrican Institute of Electricity (ICE) to be approximately 8,185 MW.
In 2002, the country’s installed electrical capacity was 1,756 MW, of which 1,247 MW (71%) came from water generation, as is shown in the chart below. Of that, ICE has installed 81% of the hydroelectric infrastructure, the private sector 12,4%, and the remainder was installed by the CNFL, a company that belongs, nearly totally, to ICE.
Table 11 Hydroelectric Capacity In Costa Rica (in MW) (2002) Total Electrical Capacity installed 1,756 Hydroelectrical Capacity installed 1,247 Hydroelectrical Capacity Installed by ICE 81.0% Private generators (including rural electricity cooperatives) 12.4% CNFL 6.6% Source: National Development Plan 2002-2006
Figure 4 Costa Rica Energy Production By Sector, 2002
Costa Rica: energy production, by sector. 2002. Porcent.
There are hydroelectric projects in 13 of the country’s 24 river basins, belonging either to ICE, CNFL, or to private generators. This sector represents the major demand on water at the national level, although it is not consumptive use.
23
General Water Law No. 276 of August 26, 1942, which modified the first regulation of 1884, regulates water resources. The objective was to regulate ownership and utilization. At present, ICE is constructing the Cote hydroelectric project, which will generate 6 MW. In addition, ICE plans to construct a series of projects between now and 2010 that will provide approximately 400 MW to the electricity system.
It should be highlighted that the 1,247 MW of installed capacity that is water generated represents only 15.2% of the 8,185 MW of potential hydroelectric energy that could be utilized in the country. This shows that the country could further develop its hydroelectric infrastructure and also demonstrates the possibility for the country to generate electricity for export to the Central American market. This will be possible due to the existence and operation of the Interconnection System between the countries in the region that is to begin in 2006.
The present structure of electricity production in each Central American country depends on two major sources: hydropower and fossil fuels. Hydropower is well developed in Central America and has been made possible thanks to the richness of the rainfall and easy accessibility to sizeable hydro resources in the region. However, fossil fuels are imported (gas, charcoal, and oil) and becoming more important sources of electricity production due to a long period of cheap oil prices and first evidence of changes in rainfall patterns and other climatic events (Castro and Cordero, forthcoming).
Figure 5 below shows the percentage of electricity production in Central America based on fossil fuels. The figure clearly shows that between 1994 and 1998 there was significant growth in fossil fuel dependence, particularly in Nicaragua, Panama, El Salvador, and Honduras. Most of the oil used in Central America is imported. For example, net oil imports as a percentage of commercial energy use have increased in Panama from 69% to 73%, in Nicaragua from 35% to 45%, and in Honduras from 38% to 43%. Only in Costa Rica and, on occasion Guatemala, has the reverse occurred, with net oil imports for electricity use diminishing. Costa Rican policy is based on favoring renewable sources based on the assumption that increasing dependence on oil for the supply of electricity and other uses is not the best economic bet for Central America considering the unreliability of supply, long term oil price volatility and the uncertainty this situation causes for the final cost of electricity.
It is expected that by the year 2006 the emerging regional electricity market will be fully operative and will include a second transmission line making electricity exchanges more reliable. As a result, the Costa Rican electricity surplus could be exported to other countries in the region (Table 11). Costa Rica’s current plans estimate that by 2007 annual exports will be around 358 GWh (see Table 11) primarily to El Salvador, Panama, and Honduras (countries that are expected to be net importers). On the other hand, these plans show Nicaragua and Guatemala as net exporters of electricity, the former based on fossil fuels and the latter using a mix of sources.
24
Figure 5 Electricity Production from Fossil Fuels in Central America
Electricity production from fossil fuels in Central Am erica(% of total)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998Years
Perc
enta
ge
Costa R ica G uatem ala H onduras Panam a El Salvador N icaragua
Source: World Bank. World Development Indicators Database, 2000.
3.2.3 Irrigation
It is estimated that there are nearly 525,000 ha of irrigable land in Costa Rica; however, only 17.5% of that land has some type of infrastructure and is currently irrigated. It is estimated that 418,802 ha were used for agricultural activities, which means that the production achieved by using irrigation covered 21.9% of the agricultural land (Astorga, 2002).
Table 12 Agriculture under Irrigation
Area irrigated (ha)
% total area irrigated
Number of properties
Intensity of
planting Irrigation systems in participation with the public sector
22,172 24.1 1974 75%
Communal irrigation systems (associations/cooperatives)
98 0.1 56 90%
Private irrigation systems 69,730 75.8 ND 90% TOTAL 92,000 100
Sources: Department of Operations of Groundwater and PRAT Department. 1998.
The majority of the irrigation systems operate using gravity and are inefficient. There are no instruments to measure water flow in the canals or in the pipelines at the plots. The water billing is based on the area irrigated, rather than on the volume of water used, which tends to cause a high demand and little efficiency.
25
3.3 PRINCIPAL WATER USERS
Among the principal users are state institutions that provide various public services related to water use, from providing drinking water to electricity to irrigation, namely:
The Costa Rican Water Supply and Sewerage Company (AyA)
Created by Law No. 2766 on April 14, 1961, its objective is to set policies, establish standards, and conduct and promote planning, financing, administration and operation of water supply and sewer systems, in addition to regulating rainwater drainage in urban areaa. This law gives AyA the right to design, operate, and maintain water supply systems created after 1961. It is responsible for the San José metropolitan area and those systems for which it has financial responsibility. It can delegate the administration of the systems to mixed administration boards, such as rural water supply systems, and may intervene and assume the operation of inefficient or irregular systems.
One interesting aspect is that, historically, AyA has been both the supervisory and operating agency (because the agency that was assigned this function by the Law was deficient). Overseeing and controlling its activities has been difficult, to the point that the institute currently represents one of the major pollution sources in the Río Grande de Tárcoles river basin due to the deficient wastewater treatment of its sewage system.
The Costa Rican Electricity Institute (ICE)
ICE was created on April 8, 1949 by Law No. 449, to develop, in a rational manner, the country’s energy sources, in particular its hydraulic resources. It did not request a concession from the state and did not register the water sources to be used to generate electricity.
The National Groundwater, Irrigation, and Drainage Service (SENARA)
This agency is regulated by Law No. 6877 (July 4, 1983) and later reforms. It was created to foment agricultural development through the establishment and operation of irrigation, drainage, and flood control systems, in order to achieve optimum and equitable utilization of surface and groundwater resources. It requested a concession for water use in order to comply with the goals of the Law.
Municipalities
The municipalities are responsible for the administration of the water supply systems under their authority that existed prior to the creation of AyA, as long as they maintain a minimum level of quality and efficient service. The municipal water supply systems that existed before AyA was
26
formed can be administrated independently but are under the control and supervision of that institution. They are required to solicit a concession to use water for their purposes.
The Public Service Company of Heredia, S.A. (ESPH)
This company was created in 1976 by Law No. 5889, which was reformed in 1996. It is a private company that provides the public service of water and electricity. It has jurisdiction over the central canton and other neighboring cantons in the province of Heredia. It must request a concession for water use.
The Public Service Administrative Board of Cartago (JASEC)
This board was created to provide electricity to the cantons in Cartago Province. It must request a concession to use the water resources.
Some cooperatives provide the public service of electricity in some of the country’s regions and must request a concession to utilize water to generate electricity.
Finally, every individual and every company is a potential water user and, as such, must request a concession to use water for any permitted use in conformity with the Water Law in force.
3.4 LEGAL FRAMEWORK THAT REGULATES WATER MANAGEMENT
Legal rights in Costa Rica are observed according to a hierarchical order: the Constitution, international agreements, laws, and regulations. In regard to environmental matters, general legal principles are recognized as the primary source of law. Apart from the Constitution and international treaties, there are two kinds of judicial norms that protect water resources: laws (Legislative Branch) and executive decrees and regulations (Executive Branch).
Water resources are regulated by General Water Law No. 276 of August 26, 1942, which modified the first norm of 1884. The objective was to regulate the domain, utilization, and supervision of water. It gave directives for granting concessions for hydroelectric, transportation, irrigation, and other uses. It also defined two forms of water domain, public and private.
Laws governing other sectors regulate the public services of water, such as the AyA law relating to the provision of water for human consumption, the law that created ICE regarding hydroelectric generation, and the law that created the National Groundwater, Irrigation, and Drainage Service (SENARA), which is the institution responsible for everything that relates to irrigation and drainage.
27
With the publication of the 1982 Mining Code, all water resources were declared to be under public domain, and with the exception of AyA and ICE, all individuals and public or private companies must obtain a concession from the state through MINAE’s Department of Water for temporary water use. The current legislation sets a maximum term of 30 years for the concessions, which cannot be extended, although it is possible to extend its use through a new concession. Despite the stipulated term, the state of Costa Rica has not given concessions for terms longer than 20 years. The standard utilized by the Water Department is that for hydroelectric projects and for human consumption, the term for utilization of the resource is 20 years. For other uses (such as irrigation, tourism, fish-farming) the terms have been for 10 years. In 2003, for the first time, and in a river basin with serious allocation problems, such as the Tempisque River, the state defined concession terms of only three years.
28
Table 13 Principal Laws and Decrees That Regulate the Use of Water Resources
Administration and Uses (surface and groundwater) General Water Law (No. 276), 1942 General Law for Drinking Water (No. 1634), 1953 Law that Created the National Aqueduct and Sewer Institute (No. 2726), 1961 General Health Law (No. 5395), 1973 Law that Created the National Groundwater, Irrigation and Drainage Service (No. 6877) 1983 Law of the Regulatory Authority of Public Services (No. 7593), 1996 when this was transferred the water rectory to MINAE. Decree (No. 26237), 1997: Functions of the Water Department of MINAE and creation of the Advisory Body Regulatory Decree for the Quality of Drinking Water (25991-S), 1997 Regulatory Decree for Drilling and Exploitation of Groundwater, 1988.
Hydroelectricity and Public Services
Law that Created the Costa Rican Electricity Institute (No. 449), 1949 Law that Created the Public Service Company of Heredia (No. 5889), 1976 and1996 Law for Co-Generation of Electricity (No. 7200/ No. 7508), 1990 and 1996 Law of the Regulatory Authority for Public Services (No. 7593), 1996 Municipal Code (No. 7794), 1982
Land Use Regulations, River Basins, Protection and Impact Organic Law of the National Institute of Housing and Urbanization (No. 1788), 1954 Urban Planning Law (No. 4240), 1968 Coastal Zone Law (No. 6043), 1977 Mining Code (No. 6797), 1982 Wildlife Conservation Law 1994, (Article 132) Organic Environmental Law (No. 7554), 1995 MIRENEM Decree (24652), Creation of the National System of Conservation Areas Forestry Law (No. 7575), 1996 Law of Conservation, Management and Soil Use (No. 7779), 1998 Decree (No. 26042), Waste Disposal and Reutilization of Waste Water, 1997 Biodiversity Law (No. 7788), 1998 Law to Regulate and Manage the upper Reventazón River Basin (No. 8023), 2000
Source: Ballestero, 2003 The obsolescence of the Water Law has provoked the emergence of numerous regulations and norms that intend to resolve its deficiencies. There is a tendency toward what is called “normative pollution,” which hinders development, causes atrophy in institutional management systems, and becomes a real obstacle in developing economic activities.
The principal laws that regulate water resources are presented inTable 13. This shows that the main legal changes that directly affect the administration, use, and protection of water resources were made in the period 1995 to 2000. That period coincides with the increase in the creation of structures to manage river basins.
29
3.5 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
The current situation in the administration of Costa Rican water resources are characterized by fragmentation and dispersion of responsibilities in a large number of institutions that have a centralized form of operation (see Annex 3).
At least 15 agencies are involved in local and national water administration as a result of the large variety of legal and judicial instruments listed above. As a result, there are serious problems in the distribution of responsibilities, with overlaps in some areas and vacuums in others. There is no coordination between these institutions and, in addition, their administrative systems are decentralized or widely distributed.
These agencies were created to fulfill a specific objective in water use (irrigation, drinking water supply, hydroelectric generation, sanitation, etc.) and lack an outlook that envisions an integral approach to water resource management.
It is clear that the main factors that contribute to this fragmentation are the absence of a supervisory agency and a national water resource policy. Even though the law designates the supervision of this resource to MINAE,1 this agency limits its responsibility to granting concessions, to giving permits to exploit surface and groundwater, and to establishing and collecting fees for such use.
MINAE was created in 1986 as the Ministry of Natural Resources, Energy, and Mines (MIRENEM) and was transformed into the Ministry of Environment and Energy in 1995 by the Organic Environmental Law (Law 7594). From its creation until 1996, its activity related to water resources was limited to promoting conservation projects and the protection of rivers, areas of recharge, and springs through the Department of River Basins and Forest Reserves. That was first handled through the Forestry Department and later by the National System of Conservation Areas (SINAC). It also granted permits to extract materials from rivers.
When Law 7593 was approved in 1996 and created the Regulatory Authority of Public Services (ARESEP), the Water Department of the old National Electricity Service (SNE) was transferred to MINAE. That agency was, and continues to be, in charge of defining national policy for water resources; it exercises water control and management, processes concession and drilling permits, and is also responsible for control and supervision. However, at present the country does not have a National Water Policy or a Water Assessment that would make it possible to make the best decisions.
1 General Water Law, Organic Environmental Law, Regulatory Law for Public Services, Biodiversity Law, Regulation of Procedures of SETENA, Forestry Law 7575.
30
If the Water Department was a small agency for its purposes while part of SNE, with a deficient level of capacities, technology, and efficiency, one could say that the transfer to MINAE gave it another dimension and placed it at the national level, with some improvement in the exercise of its functions. However, it continues to have insufficient personnel and instruments for management and control, and it has not been able to exercise political control over other agencies relating to water because of its leadership vacuum. Its limited financial resources mainly come from the National Budget and the collection of usage “canon”. The charge of this “canon” is set by the permit or concession granted by the state to the concessionaires for the utilization of the resource, according to the different uses of the resource. However, this charge clearly does not correspond to the real value of the resource and does not permit covering the cost for an efficiently operated administrative system. By 2003, it is estimated that the total amount that will be collected by the state, through the Water Department, for water use by private citizens will be about 200 million colones2.
Despite the fact that MINAE is responsible for supervising water resources, in 2002 the National Water Council was formed by Executive Decree No. 30653-S-MAG-MINAE-MEIC, and charged with the “harmonization of water legislation and the coordination of research, uses, development, utilization, and conservation of water in the different departments and institutions of the state.” The Ministry of Public Health, an agency with responsibility for water quality, pollution, and health3, was appointed to coordinate this Council, which has created distortions and overlapping roles for both ministries. The Council’s formation is a political problem and a product of the leadership vacuum created by MINAE as the supervisory agency. However, this is not the solution to having an adequate institutional framework for integrated water resource management and is only one more temporary measure.
One key factor is the application of adequate economic instruments that would give an economic value to water, and thereby give an incentive for efficient use, or for activities that conserve the resource. Also, the application of economic instruments can generate enough financial resources to permit reinvestment in and strengthen operation and administration of the national or local system.
As we pointed out previously, the usage canon that is currently charged is extremely low and does not reflect the real cost of operation and administration, much less provide the resources needed to control, monitor, research, and decentralize water services. Table 14 shows the amount of the canon for usage that is currently collected.
2 Rate of exchange: US$1.00 per ¢394 (colones) 3 General Health Law, Wildlife Conservation Law.
31
Table 14 Tariffs in Colons by Usage Canon, July 2003
Type of Activity
Surface Water Colons/ m3
Groundwater Colons/ m3
Domestic use 0.5 0.7187 Population use1 0.0088 0.0109 Hydroelectricity use2 0.001 n.a. Irrigation use 0.017 0.1304 Industrial use 0.025 0.1928 Other uses 0.0075 0.3224
1. Refers to the charge to companies that provide drinking water: municipalities, ESPH, JASEC. AYA does not pay for the value of the water it uses. 2. Refers to private cogenerators: ESPH, JASEC and CNFL. ICE does not pay for the value of the water it uses. Source: Water Department. MINAE, 2003
Hoping to increase its financial resources, MINAE began 2003 by promoting a process to implement an environmental canon for waste disposal and an adjustment in the usage canon.
One of the matrixes in the Appendix describes the principal agencies with responsibilities for water resources as well as their legal attributes, in order to illustrate the existing level of dispersion.
The national institutional framework for water resources is characterized by:
absence of supervision absence of a national policy structural and operational centralization emphasis on subsectoral work uncoordinated institutions, fragmented roles that are isolated from the context of river basins lack of information needed to make decisions
3.6 RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT
3.6.1 Efforts To Establish River Basin Management And/Or River Basin Institutions
In Costa Rica the regulatory judicial framework for water management is centralized in the Ministry of Environment and Energy, in the Ministry of Health, and in some autonomous state institutions.
The Water Law of 1942 did not contemplate the formation of any regional structure for river basin management. Costa Rica’s characteristics in those years, with a population of less than 500,000 and only slight development in the rural areas, made this unnecessary. It was not until
32
nearly 30 years later that some activity for river basin management began. In those 30 years we can identify four stages:
Stage One
In the 1970s the Ministry of Agriculture (MAG) formed the General Forestry Department because of the need to regulate massive deforestation, to detain or reverse the drastic changes in land use, and to improve conditions for those living in poverty in rural areas.
This led to initiating several actions with area farmers to regulate land use and soil management, and to setting up activities within the geographic area of a micro basin. With the cooperation of the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the first project of “management and regulation of river basins” was executed in 1974 in the Uruca River (Central Valley).
By 1976 this concept had broadened, and with generous funding from the U.S. Agency of International Development (USAID), Program 032 was initiated in rural micro basins. These were determined to be priorities particularly because of the level of poverty, productive marginalization, and degradation (deforestation, soil erosion, and loss of fertility). In general, the communities were not consulted about the objectives and components of the projects that were executed in a centralized manner by MAG (top down), with little involvement by the beneficiaries.
While it is true that the focus was soil management within a river basin, with practices of soil conservation, crop rotation, and farm planning, it can also be said that these first actions tended to create an awareness of the importance of the river basin as a planning unit. Within Program 032 the two river basins where most of the resources were invested were the Parrita River basin and the Nosara River basin. In both of these a Management and Resource Regulation Plan was developed (Solórzano, R., 2003, personal communication).
In 1979 the Unit of River Basins was created in AyA. A broad search and survey of hydro-environmental information it needed to fulfill its mission of providing high-quality drinking water to the country was initiated by AyA. This information included basic hydrologic information and a study that refers to the main drainage areas at the national level, and was needed in order to determine the potential sources of drinking water, recharge areas, watersheds that must be protected, and points for measurement of pollution in some of the river basins, among other variables. The information has been compiled for a limited number of the river basins or microregions that AyA has prioritized.
Stage Two
33
In the 1980s several variables appeared that influenced a transformation from the initial period. First, the environmental movement gained importance in Latin America, and Costa Rica was not an exception,. Secondly, in 1986 MIRENEM was created, and the Forestry Department was transferred to it. Within it the Department of River Basins was created. Likewise, a number of non-governmental organizations (national and local) emerged that were interested in environmental issues.
Due to the crisis that the country was experiencing during those years, poverty increased, the disparity between development in rural areas and cities grew, and a change in the productive structure left many farmers without alternatives. This meant that environmental degradation continued and in some regions, such as the Atlantic, it increased.
In the face of this, the government promoted “Projects of Integral Rural Development,” and within those were included components that gave attention to “Integrated River Basin Development” and “River Basin Conservation.” The investment projects and programs are negotiated with donors and cooperating agencies by government agencies that need a great deal of support in training, strategic planning, transfer of productive technology and conservation, for application at the level of farms, microbasins, watersheds, and river basins.
While the focus was on promoting the application of agricultural practices of soil conservation and dependent resources, as well as agricultural diversification, environmental variables were also included, such as the protection of springs and recharge areas and reforestation, for which the state offered economic and fiscal incentives (Certificates for Forestry Payment).
Although these initiatives were promoted by the government there was an increased level of participation by the beneficiaries, and some opportunity for their participation was created within the projects (Local Councils).
In 1988 the Ministry of Agriculture issued a decree that established an inter-institutional agreement for river basin management, which was signed by MAG, MIRENEM (MINAE), AyA, SNE, SENARA, and CATIE. The objective was to form a coordinating group among all the public agencies involved in water resources to define, promote, and direct policies and actions directed towards the integrated management of priority river basins that were of interest to the country; to elaborate regulatory plans for these river basins; and to seek financial resources. In practice, this agreement was not implemented, and the executive group functioned for only a very short time.
34
Stage Three
Without a doubt, this was the most active period. Because of the influence of external factors such as the Río Summit, the Dublin Conference, the Central American Alliance for Sustainable Development (ALIDES), in the 1990s Costa Rica began to implement policies that would lead to a model of sustainable development.
It was in that decade that environmental NGOs, and even some communities and municipalities, demanded opportunities for greater participation, and several steps toward deconcentration in public management were taken. In the last half of the decade the principal legal changes of the last 30 years were made in environmental matters, for water resources and for strengthening local governments—changes, however, that were not able to modify the old law of 1942.
The vision followed to that point was transformed, and a focus of “integrated management of natural resources” was promoted, using the river basin as the central theme. Within these “resources,” water was included as an important, but not central, factor. This approach to management created, in some cases, organizations (forums for discussion) in the river basins or microbasins, under the modality of committees, associations, or commissions.
It should be understood that these were not real organizations for river basin management, but rather spaces for discussion and meeting together to analyze and seek solutions to environmental problems or natural resource management; and its action did not specifically refer to integrated water resource management. There was no budget assigned to these organizations, and when they had any funding it was primarily from international cooperation agencies. Another important element is that these participative structures did not assign responsibilities or concrete powers for decision-making about management in their territories.
Likewise, public institutions such as ICE, AyA, CNFL, and MINAE began to invest resources and to develop projects or programs of “sustainable management of natural resources” in specific river basins: Virilla, Tempisque, Arenal, and Bananito, among others. These actions were taken because of the presence of specific problems in sectoral areas of action (generation, supply, sanitation, protection, and conservation). Clear examples are sedimentation, changes in river flow into dams for hydroelectricity generation, lack of drinking water sources, and pollution in rivers and aquifers.
An executory structure was created for these institutional projects, and other actors working in river basin issues became involved; the inclusion of these actors also validated the policies of those institutions. Those actors usually worked with other public institutions, a few NGOs, municipalities, and the academic world. A common denominator in all these groups is the limited participation of direct water users (irrigators, industry, service companies, etc.).
35
A few interesting experiences emerged at the local level. One of the first was the Coordinating Commission of the Río Grande de Tárcoles River Basin, which was created in 1992. This commission emerged within the municipality of San José and had a marked interest in environmental management activities, especially in the first few years. Also, there was a case of a local organization that worked in the middle and upper basin of the Quebradas River in San Isidro de Pérez Zeledón.
Major advances were made between 1994 and 1998 when the Minister of the Environment at the time became strongly interested in this theme, and connected it to a series of reforms in the environmental regulatory framework. There was progress toward institutional modernization and an active interest in establishing participative organizations to discuss and define policies and activities in some river basins. This was a part of the national decentralization process that was slowly, but progressively, being implemented.
That decision was reflected in various policy measures: Executive Decree No. 26635-MINAE, which divided the country into five watersheds and created a favorable atmosphere for the deconcentration of services in them; a decree to form organizations in the Tempisque, Bananito and Savegre rivers as well as providing technical, financial, and logistical resources for the operations of some of those organizations, among which was the Coordinating Commission of the Tárcoles River Basin.
Also, in 1995 by Executive Decree 30077-MINAE, the River Basin Program was created as part of the National System of Conservation Areas to determine guidelines for MINAE regulations regarding river basins and to formulate national policies for river basins. Another objective of the decree was to elaborate a Master Plan for River Basins and to approve an order of priorities by river basin region for water use by public sector organizations, which was oriented to the integrated and rational utilization of the resource. However, despite the apparent importance of the responsibilities and functions assigned to that program, it never played the role that would have been expected.
Stage Four
The last stage began five years ago and continues to the present. This stage is characterized by a lack of interest of the supervisory institution, MINAE, in giving decisive upport to the creation or strengthening of river basin organizations.
The great proliferation of distinct river basin organizations that took place in the previous stage ended and many either disappeared or were minimized when they lost government support; they were unable to achieve financial sustainability. There is now discussion about whether or not the management of water resources should be decentralized in a country as small as Costa Rica,
36
while in the previous stage this principle was not questioned. Likewise, there is discussion about whether river basins should be considered as a basic unit for work or if other operational systems, such as the System of Conservation Areas, should be used.
In this context and on the framework of the FAO-sponsored Latin American River Basin Network, the Nation River Basin Network was created by MINAE decree number 29238 on November 20, 2000, with the following objectives: provide policy guidelines within the framework of river basin management; identify the needs for cooperation according to priority levels; promote the creation of a database and information exchange at the national and regional levels; and encourage activities directed to raising awareness in civil society about the importance of conservation the protection of river basins, among other things. This network is integrated by representatives from the following agencies: CATIE, CEDARENA, CNFL, Costa Rican Federation of Environmental Groups (FECON), AyA, ICE, IFAM, ITCR, MAG, MINAE, MIDEPLAN, Ministry of Health, SENARA, UCR, and UNA.
Most of the actors believe that until now actions in the use and management of water and river basins have been uncoordinated and only for taking care of immediate situations, and that the country should change that paradigm to one of integrated resource management. This modifies the operation of several of the river basin structures formed in the previous period, including that of the Commission of the Río Grande de Tárcoles River Basin.
The ineffectiveness of creating this kind of structure without a solid legal basis and financial support was assessed and, consequently, in 2000 a law was issued creating the first river basin organization: Commission for the Regulation and Management of the Río Reventazón River Basin.
There is a consensus that it is necessary to have a legal framework to regulate water, and in 1998 a process was begun, and promoted by diverse sectors, to approve a new General Water Law. Different actors (MINAE, Ombudsman’s Office and others) have presented various proposals for this law to the Legislative Assembly; and all of these included, to varying degrees and with various approaches, the decentralization of water administration and the formation of local structures. Currently, there is a single text in discussion by the current legislature.
Even though these changes are recent, they are being felt. They were born out of the heavy pressure placed on water resources, which motivated adjustments in water management, to find a balance between conservation and development. And last, but not least, there has been strong promotion of the “integrated water management in river basins” approach by various organizations and cooperating agencies.
37
An evaluation of these four stages shows a slight advance toward integrated river basin management. Even though there has been concern about the subject, it has not been crystallized into a model of river basin management. In general, the population, municipalities, and governmental agencies do not have a concept of the relevance of river basins, and these are not recognized as units of work and planning in natural resources, or of water resources, which continues to be conducted based on administrative criteria that does not coincide with river basins. This situation is aggravated because the state agencies that participate in these structures have different administrative divisions, which makes coordination difficult in areas that do not correspond to those divisions.
For example, SINAC has divided the country into eleven Conservation Areas to implement their objectives, but these do not coincide with the river basin boundaries or with the provincial divisions. When MINAE was restructured and the Conservation Areas were defined, the possibility of setting the borders of those areas based on the borders of the main river basins was suggested, but that did not happen because of a lack of consensus among the political actors at that time. Figure 6 shows the country's division in terms of Conservation Areas and Main River Basins; note that they do not match one another.
38
Figure 6 Costa Rica: Map of Basins and Conservation Areas of MINAE
Source: MINAE, 2003.
Another example is the drinking water sector, which AyA operates with six administrative regions (Metropolitan, Huetar Atlantic, Chorotega, Central, Brunca and Central Pacific) with no connection to the river basins or other administrative divisions.
Lastly, the Ministry of Health (MINSA) and the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MAG) have their own administrative divisions and regional agencies that do not coincide with the previous divisions or with the river basins.
39
3.6.2 Origin Of The Efforts To Form River Basin Organizations
As has already been shown, the experiences of creating river basin organizations (committees, commissions, councils, etc.) in the country are not the fruit of an organized decentralization process promoted by the central government, but a product of independent actions taken under dissimilar parameters, some by public institutions and others by civil society (particularly NGOs). The direct users did not show interest in either case, although once the agencies were formed, they did participate.
In the case of the Coordinating Commission for the Río Grande de Tárcoles River Basin, the initiative came from the municipality of San José in 1992, with involvement of other municipalities and some NGOs. It was not until after that process had begun in 1994 that it was accepted and encouraged by MIRENEM, which today is MINAE. More information about that is below.
In 1995, after several protests by communities in Guanacaste about the improper use of water from the Tempisque River and its tributaries by the agricultural sector, the extraction of materials from the river, and several episodes of pollution and deforestation in the upper part of the river, MINAE decided to establish an Executory Unit. This was financed by the Government of the Netherlands for the purpose of implementing a “project for the sustainable management of the Río Tempisque River Basin” and a partnership was formed with a local NGO (ASOTEM) for this purpose. An Action Plan defined priorities for intervention in the river basin and for funding.
A “Civil Council for the Río Tempisque River Basin” was created by Executive Decree No. 24767 to be a permanent deliberative agency to serve the public, and oriented to formulating policies, promoting activities, supporting public and private institutions that develop plans, programs, and projects for sustainable development in the river basin. The decree did not provide for an administrative organization or define who would compose the Council, which was established by the Executory Unit of the project. It also did not define a method of financial sustainability, which meant that the Council was dependent on funds distributed by the Executory Unit.
This Council operated effectively for three years and then disappeared, after which the Executory Unit was completely taken over by ASOTEM since MINAE decided not to continue supporting the initiative. ASOTEM has continued to carry out projects in the river basin, with support from agencies of international cooperation and the sale of services.
Another experience emerged in 1995 at the local level in San Isidro de Pérez Zeledón. In the middle of the river basin in the upper part of the Quebradas River, the community and a local NGO named FUDEBIOL initiated activities in a watershed to attempt to protect the water
40
resources. They involved AyA, the municipality, and CARE Costa Rica; conducted basic studies of the river basin; bought land with local funds to protect water sources; and carried out environmental education.
In 1996, MINAE, with the support of the Canadian Agency for Cooperation (CIDA) and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), developed a Management Plan for the Lake Arenal River basin. There was already an interest in trying to resolve stability problems in the river basin, deforestation, and possible early sedimentation in the lake. Lake Arenal is the largest reservoir in the country (8,300 ha) and was created to produce energy and supply water for irrigation. To implement the Management Plan a “Commission for the Sustainable Management of the Lake Arenal River Basin” was created in 1977.
There was an attempt made to bring together all of the interested parties: MINAE, ICE, SENARA, AyA, a local NGO, and a priest who represented the community. However, there were deficiencies in the legislation because of the lack of participation by the producers or local development associations and the omission of a financial mechanism to keep the commission operating (Echeverría, 2002).
In the upper basin of the Reventazón River hydroelectric energy is generated by a waterfall. There are three plants operating in that system, which produces 32% of the country’s hydroelectric energy (a total of 397 MW). The plants in operation are Río Macho (120 Mw), Cachí (100 Mw), and the newest, Angostura (177 Mw), which was inaugurated in December 2000 (IDB US$300 million). From the El Llano reservoir, which was built to generate hydroelectricity (Río Macho), water is diverted to the Río Grande de Tárcoles, to which approximately 2.5 m3/s is transferred to supply the city of San José, the capital of the country.
The initiative to create the Commission for the Regulation and Management of the Reventazón River Basin (COMCURE) initially came from ICE, an entity that was interested in protecting the hydroelectric investments in the high and medium river basin because of water and wind erosion in the agricultural area, and together with landslides, takes about one million tons of sediment into the Cachí reservoir and 1.5 to 2 million tons into Angostura every year. In addition to soil, the erosion also drags along fertilizers and pesticides, converting the sediment into polluted material.
COMCURE is the only river basin organization that has been created by Law (No. 8023, September 13, 2000), against the wishes of the Minister of Environment at that time. The arguments brandished by the opposition were based on the fear that laws would begin to appear for different river basins in the country, which would have generated legal chaos for the country. The alternative, which avoided the Minister of Environment’s opposition, was to consider that
41
law to be a pilot project, which would permit the passing of a framework law for the management of the country’s river basins; it has been considered in that way ever since.
The Law defines COMCURE as a very deconcentrated body within MINAE, with instrumental legal representation; it is composed of institutions, municipalities, academic institutions, users, and civil society representatives.
COMCURE’s principal objective is to plan, execute, and control water conservation activities, both of quality and quantity, as well as the rest of the natural resources of the the Reventazón River’s upper basin. However, even with a legal framework, COMCURE has not managed to become a true river basin organization, primarily because the initiative and leadership have been held by one institution (ICE), which has not allowed the rest of the members to internalize river basin management as an activity that gives financial benefits and the degree of responsibility expected by their participation. Representation in COMCURE has been very institutionalized, and there has not been opportunity for participation by other users. Because of this COMCURE has not been able to obtain financing to improve its technical and operational capacity and has to depend on the resources distributed by ICE.
Other experiences in forming smaller river basin structures (Siquirres, Banano, Bananito, Barranca, etc.) have been the result of institutional programs, such as the Environmental Monitoring Program in Recharge Areas of the above-mentioned river basins that were promoted by AyA. From that program, organized groups emerged and were formed by other sectors, including NGOs and local community organizations. However, with the lack of financial resources to operate and with so little management capacity, the majority of those groups are inactive.
An evaluation of these experiences points to various common aspects that they have impeded the establishment of these organizations:
Because of the lack of a legal framework, these agencies were created without being oriented to their functions and responsibilities.
There is not a clear will on the part of the public institutions to decentralize functions and responsibilities in these agencies.
They do not define a mechanism to fund their operation. There is a lack of identification and participation of all the actors located in the river basin, and
there is a bias toward the institutional sector. The key actors were not involved from the conception of the idea to create an organization; neither
are they involved in the elaboration of the River Basin Management Plan. There is not a vision of integrated water management.
42
3.7 CONTEXT FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
3.7.1 Decentralization Efforts Of Natural Resources Developed In The Country
As can be observed in the following table, 25.3% of Costa Rica’s territory is under some category of protection. For an undeveloped country, the appropriate administration of the natural capital is an enormous challenge. Until 1995 the protected areas were managed independently, under the Department of National Parks and with a concept of pure protection. There was no tie to the other departments of Wildlife or Forestry. They all operated as part of MINAE, as administrative islands, with the further problem that they were centered in offices in San José.
Table 15 Costa Rica: Protected Areas By Management Category, 2000
Management Category
Quantity Land Area (Ha) Percentage of the
National Territory
National Parks 25 624,098 12.2 Biological Reserves 8 21,674 0.4 Protected Areas 32 155,829 3.0 Forest Reserves 11 227,834 4.5 Wildlife Reserves 56 178,189 3.5 Wetlands 14 66,359 1.3 Others 1 13 17,306 0.3 TOTAL 2 159 1,291,289 25.3 (1) Includes absolute natural reserves, natural monuments and farms outside of protected areas that were purchased to protect conservation. (2). Protected Marine Areas are not included. Source: MINAE/SINAC, 2001. In 1995, by Executive Decree 24652-MIRENEM, the National System of Conservation Areas (SINAC) was created as a department of MINAE; this integrated the old Forestry Department, Wildlife Department and National Parks. In April 1998, the publication of the Biodiversity Law, No. 7788, gave a maximum degree of deconcentration to SINAC and broadened its powers and responsibilities. However, the previous Minister of Environment moved that this was unconstitutional, and this law is awaiting a judicial resolution before taking effect.
SINAC is composed of a Superior Department of Natural Resources, and there are Regional Departments in each of the Conservation Areas, which are defined as territorial units for the management of natural resources through the interaction of the protected and unprotected areas. Included in the functions of the Conservation Areas are: integrated and holistic execution of its territorial responsibilities, all actions needed to comply with its constitutional orders, and international agreements and laws of the Republic to foment sustainable development of the natural resources in the respective Conservation Areas. Currently, the country is divided into 11 Conservation Areas (see Figure 7).
43
A general assessment of SINAC’s performance shows ups and downs. The system has managed to operate a high percentage of the national territory that is protected and has used innovative environmental management methods, both in terms of use and knowledge as well as in such activities as bioprospecting and payment of environmental services. However, incongruities and a lack of policies exist that hold back consolidation of the system. It is clear that, even though the country has an excellent network of public and private protected areas, these are not the result of an explicit policy of territorial regulation, but on the contrary in many cases, they were designated as protected areas because of expediency and opportunity.
Figure 7 Costa Rica: Conservation Areas of MINAE. 2002
To date SINAC has not achieved a real administrative decentralization of environmental management and has only achieved a partial administrative deconcentration, which causes
44
problems of financial sustainability in some of the Conservation Areas. By not being totally deconcentrated, the income generated by these Areas goes into the National Treasury. Then the Areas have a problem getting these funds returned.
The Conservation Areas are not recognized judicially and have had to resort to the creation of specific NGOs that act as their “financial arms,” for example, FUNDACA for the Arenal Conservation Area; FUNDECOR for the Central Volcanic Mountain Range; and National Park Foundation for the Guanacaste Conservation Area.
3.7.2 The Payment For Environmental Services
Since 1996 a series of efforts to preserve water have been implemented. For example, the country’s new forestry law recognized the application of the forests’ hydro-environmental services (HES) for the proprietors. This service includes water catchments, protection, and recovery of the water resources.
Originally, the function of the forest in protecting water catchment areas was not well understood but still was included in the law as certain; hence the measures taken to reduce deforestation were also assumed to protect water resources.
More recently, in 1999, a charge recognizing the value of the water itself was approved, based on an initiative of a small utility in the Heredia Province (ESPH, the Spanish acronym). This initiative included the value of water as a production input that can be applied for by the communities from which it comes and which could possibly use it in their productive processes. (See Annex 2.)
In 1997, the national program of payments for Forest Environmental Services (FES) officially started. Costa Rican forestry law defines environmental services as those provided by the natural forest and forest plantations that directly impinge on the protection and improvement of the environment. Even though the Costa Rican legislation identified four environmental services that may be compensated, the mechanism that prevails in the country is primarily based on forestry criteria, which do not guarantee the protection of water (Castro, René, 2003)
From 1995 to 2001, the FES funds came mainly from one-third of a fuel tax (according to article 69 of Forestry Law No. 7575). Usually the Ministry of Finance, citing fiscal constraint, disbursed less. In 2000, the Ministry of Finance collected more than 15 billion colones for the FES but transferred only about 4 billion colones4 (US$10.4 million). As expected, the Ministry of
4 In 2000, FONAFIFO received from the Ministry of Finance 2.09 billion colones for the new forest environmental payments and 1.3 billion colones for pending disbursements for the last group of subsidized reforestation projects. The 1996 forestry law allotted ten years for small farmers (with 300 ha or less) to move from a subsidized system to fully market-based commercial reforestation and logging practices and established that after that period all money will go to FES.
45
Finance introduced a special clause in the last law for fiscal reform in 2001 (Law No. 8114) reducing the FES transfers to 3.5% of the fuels sales tax. In 2002 the money collected and transferred totaled approximately US$11.4 million (FONAFIFO personal communication). The second source of funds comes from selling global services such as emission reduction credits5 (e.g., US$2.0 million from Norway in 1997) and GEF payments for biodiversity conservation (e.g., US$1.8 million per year for five years from GEF).
Additionally, in 1997, FUNDECOR, FONAFIFO, and a private hydroelectric company signed an agreement stating that the private company would pay for the protection and conservation of the forests in the watershed that supplies the hydroelectric project. The agreement, although small in magnitude, set a precedent for other voluntary accords with private companies for payment of environmental services attempting to preserve the Water Environmental Component (WEC).
3.7.3 Decoupling Payments For The Water Environmental Component From Other Forest Environmental Service
Initially, from 1948 to 1996, the National Electricity Service (Servicio Nacional de Electricidad, SNE), the predecessor of the regulatory agency, was in charge both of approving permits to exploit water resources and setting prices at each level of consumption. The new regulatory agency that was created in 1996, ARESEP, is in charge only of approving the different fees for the use of water resources, and the other responsibilities were transferred to MINAE. It is important to mention that the Law on the Regulatory Agency for Public Services (No. 7593, 1996) allows environmental considerations (values) to be included in estimating water fees that will be charged for the different uses of the resource.
Currently, ARESEP recognizes payment for a WEC may actually come from two sources: concessionaires and those who use water as an intermediate good, and final users. Among the concessionaires are the municipalities, ESPH (the Public Utility of Heredia), SENARA (Servicio Nacional de Aguas, Riego y Avenamiento), and in general all those that provide water services. Among the final users are the beverage companies like Coca-Cola and the beer company Cervecería Costa Rica.
As late as February 2003, the Ministry of the Environment and Energy (MINAE) has pressured ARESEP and public and private utilities to include some sort of environmental payment for other water uses such as bottling water, used water going to rivers, and water to produce energy for
5 Costa Rica was a leader during the pilot phase that ended in 2000, after that expectations of collecting money from these services were sharply reduced when the successive conferences of the parties (COPs) , the governing body, of the United Nations Climate Change Convention failed to set clear rules for emissions transactions especially for those emissions reductions based on forestry and changes in the use of land. Moreover, the 8th COP, held in India in 2002, did not resolve the forest debate and it is still pending issue.
46
both domestic and regional use. One early result of this pressure expanded the number and the area subject to volunteer agreements that are already benefiting some Costa Rica’s watershed owners, both public and private. They are beginning to be rewarded for providing water, whether for drinking or for generating electricity.
Since 1998, the pioneer Biodiversity Law (No. 7788) authorized the SINAC that now encompass all other forms of protection such as coasts and wetlands, to charge consumers a rate (added to their water bill) for the environmental services received. This law was constitutionally challenged. In February 2003 the constitutional body (in Spanish known as Sala IV) rejected the challenge, and it will become effective6. Meanwhile, MINAE issued a decree that established a user's fee for private fresh water concessions that included only direct administrative costs. It is currently under consideration to be updated and include some form of WEC payments (Castro, René, personal communication).
Local Instances of Participation for Natural Resource Management
Parallel to these partial efforts of administrative decentralization in natural resource management, a process to achieve greater citizen participation from the ground level has been put into motion in the analysis and discussion of the policies that affect natural resources in the country’s different regions, while seeking to adapt to the transformation tendencies of the state and to valid, efficient management methods.
The kinds of formal citizen participation in natural resource management that have been identified during the last 10 years in Costa Rica are:
Local Environmental Councils: These were the first forms of participation established in the country in the early 1990s, and responded to a model of organization in which SINAC did not yet exist and, therefore, they had a very limited outreach.
Regional Environmental Councils: These were established in the first years of SINAC (1966-1998). They were structures created by the Organic Environmental Law, but with a limited framework of action for their operations and with very little possibility to make decisions. Later, the Forestry Law of 1996, No. 757, broadened some of their powers and assigned them an “active” participation in conceptualizing and formulating regional policies to encourage reforestation, follow up on the advance and compliance of regional policies for forestry development, and recommend priorities in the conservation areas to benefit from forestry incentives and conservation.
6 Vote #2003-01113, file # 98-06524-0007-CO
47
The functions that were given to the Regional Environmental Councils included: promotion to achieve greater citizen participation in the analysis and discussion of environmental policies that affect the region through activities, programs, and projects; attention to complaints about environmental matters; the possibility of negotiating with relevant organizations about their respective activities; the development of educational activities to foment a new attitude toward environmental problems; and the establishment of a foundation on which to build an environmental culture.
Regional Councils in the Conservation Areas (CRAC): These were created through the Biodiversity Law issued in 1998. They replaced the previous councils and had broader attributes and representation.
The new structure represented a qualitative difference with respect to the previous one; it gave them important decision-making powers. The new law designated these councils as the principal administrative bodies in the Conservation Areas. Their functions include: supervising the integration of the communal needs for planning and activities in the Conservation Areas; encouraging participation of the various sectors in the Areas for analysis, discussion and seeking solutions to regional problems related to natural resources and the environment; and approving budgets and work plans for the Conservation Areas.
There are 10 CRAC operating to date, at various levels of development. The only area without a CRAC is Coco Island.
Management Committees in Protected Areas: These are established parallel to the two previous councils and work only in areas where there is some level of protection.
There are four areas where management committees are working with varying degrees of development:
Management Committee of Cahuita National Park Management Committee of the Gandoca-Manzanillo Wildlife Refuge Marino Ballena Park Association Manuel Antonio National Park Trust Fund
Volunteer Programs: One of the most important programs is the Natural Resource Vigilance Committees (COVIRENAS), which respond at the local level to accusations of disrespect for environmental law; the volunteers work as guards to protect and restore natural resources. COVIRENAS began in 1992, as a result of a norm stipulated in Wildlife Law No. 7317. They were created to support the state’s work to protect and conserve natural resources, with people who want to voluntarily collaborate in these committees. The experience during these years indicates that the success or failure of these committees depends on the motivation of the
48
members and in their accompaniment by the official agencies. The geographic area of action varies a great deal; in some cases it is in small areas, in others it is in sectors bordering protected areas, and in others wider areas are covered, such as administrative districts.
An assessment of these first experiences shows some positive results for both the communities and the state: fewer conflicts, a decrease in illegal hunting and the felling of trees in protected areas, community support for control and protection endeavors, incorporation of social variables in the definition of environmental agendas, and creation of opportunities for meetings between civil society and the state so that they can work together to determine community activities.
However, the transfer of power, responsibilities, and decision-making about distinct environmental matters is just beginning, and this has not been accompanied by a sufficient transfer of technical and financial resources or the legal and political recognition as legitimate decision-making structures.
Last, but not least important, is that no uniform state policy exists that makes it possible to clearly define the scope of the different kinds of citizen participation in environmental management. On the contrary, depending on the correlation of powers present in the government, to a greater or lesser degree, citizen participation is accepted or rejected as a new form of state management. For example, between 1994 and 1998 the national political authorities believed it was important to support the process of civil society participation in environmental matters and transferred responsibilities to that sector. The Biodiversity Law issued in 1998 demonstrated that political interest and gave legal backing to SINAC and to CRAC.
However, in that same year (1998), the opposition party won national elections, and changed environmental authorities. Those new authorities believed, contrary to the former government, that the government should return to the traditional system of state management (without citizen participation) to define policies relating to the environment and natural resources, as well as to reclaim its exclusive authority and responsibility over the use of public funds. Thus, among other actions, they introduced a lawsuit in the Constitutional Court claiming that the Biodiversity Law is unconstitutional, eliminated the decree that allowed indigenous communities to manage the forestry resources in their territories, and modified the Forestry Law to eliminate municipal authority in forestry matters.
Everything seems to indicate that the government that took power in 2002 expects to continue efforts to consolidate the Conservation Areas and CRAC.
These are the main deficiencies in the current management plan for natural resources in Costa Rica. There is a long way to go to consolidate a real form of decentralized management.
49
4. GRANDE DE TÁRCOLES RIVER BASIN
4.1 GEOGRAPHICAL CONTEXT
The Grande de Tárcoles River basin is located in the west-central sector of Costa Rica’s central valley and extends to the Pacific Coast. Five of Costa Rica’s seven provinces are located in this river basin: San José, Alajuela, Heredia, Cartago, and Puntarenas. The northeastern part the river basin is bordered by the central volcanic mountain range, where the volcanic cones of Irazu, Poas, and Barva stand out.
The river basin has a total area of 2,155.5 km2, which represents 4.2% of the national territory. The river basin is relatively small, with a maximum length of 88 km and a maximum width of 36 km. Due to the river basin’s large area, it has a wide variety of climates; this is because of the different altitudes that vary from zero meters were it flows into the Pacific Ocean, to 3,062 meters above sea level in the central volcanic mountain range. The median altitude of the river basin is 1,038 meters.
The temperatures in the river basin range between 15ºC and 33ºC, with an annual average of 27ºC. These variations are due to the changes in altitude and not to seasonal changes, which represent no more than 5ºC.
Figure 8 Costa Rica: Location of the Grande De Tárcoles River Basin
50
Geomorphologically, most of the river basin is a vast depression that includes the entire western section of the Central Valley. Costa Rica’s two main watersheds (the Virilla and the Río Grande) are located in this river basin. There are numerous rivers, most of them begin in the south slope of the volcanic quaternary of the central mountain range. The river basin slopes slightly to the southeast, which originates a subparallel drainage connection in that area, while in the rest of the river basin there are dendritic drainage patterns.
This river basin displays a great natural beauty, which is characterized by mountain and volcano systems in the high area and by coastal plains in the low area. Due to the biodiversity of the region, several areas that are protected by SINAC and MINAE are found in the river basin. These areas are relatively small with extremely valuable ecological ecosystems such as the Carara National Park, which protects the dry transition forest, swamps in the coast zone, and sections of cloud and rain forest ecosystems, which are located in the high parts of the volcanic cones.
According to the information provided by MINAE, the majority of Costa Rica’s protected areas are located around the periphery of the river basin, mainly in the upper river basin area, of the central volcanic mountain range, although there are also areas of ecological importance in the lower river basin. The most important protected areas located in the river basin are shown in the following table.
Table 16 Grande De Tárcoles River Basin: Most Important Protected Areas. 2003
Protected Area
Size (Ha)
Comments
NP1 Poás Volcano 5599 Predominately cloud forest.
NP Braulio Carrillo 44099 Contains 5 ecological zones, only a fraction is in the river basin. BR2 Carara 4700 Humid forest (44%) and transition to PM and BPM.
PZ3 El Rodeo 2350 Premontaine Humid Forest. Founded in 1976.
PZ La Carpintera . 2000 Located in SO. Founded in 1976.
PZ Río Grande-Atenas 2200 Río Grande (1,500 Has) and Atenas (700 Ha). Founded in 1976. PZ Tiribí 650 Founded in1976. PZ Escazú Hills 7060 Founded in 1976 with 3,600 Ha, increased to 7,060 in 1983.
PZ Turrubares Hills 161 Founded in 1983.
PZ Quitirrizí N.A. Founded in 1982. Indigenous zone.
1. National Park 2. Biological Reserve 3. Protected Zone Source: ABT, 1998
51
4.2 INTERNAL PHYSICAL STRUCTURE OF THE RIVER BASIN
The Río Grande de Tárcoles River basin has a land surface of 2,121 km2, which is 4.6% of the national territory. The river basin is formed by the confluence of the Virilla and Grande rivers that forms the Río Grande de Tárcoles, which is 111 km long.
The northeast border of the river basin is the central volcanic mountain range where the Irazú, Poás, and Barva volcanoes stand out. The highest point is on Irazú Volcano at 3,062 meters above sea level, going down to zero meters where it flows into the Pacific Ocean. The average altitude in the river basin is 1,038 meters above sea level.
Figure 9 Map Of The Watersheds Of The Grande De Tárcoles River Basin
Source: ABT, 1997
The river basin is subdivided in the following manner:
Upper Basin: This area corresponds entirely to the Virilla River watershed, which extends to the middle of the river basin. It is 40% of the total river basin area and is the watershed where 80% of the country’s population lives.
52
Middle Basin: This corresponds to the Rio Grande watershed, which covers 34% of the total river basin area. It is primarily a semi-rural area with secondary population centers.
Lower Basin: This corresponds to the Río Grande de Tárcoles watershed and is principally a rural area; its land surface covers 26% of the river basin.
Figure 10 Participation of the Watersheds within the Grande De Tárcoles River Basin
0
10
20
30
40
Upper Basin Middlebasin
Lower Basin
Tárcoles River Basin: Percentage of Total Area
Source: ABT, 1998 4.2.1 Upper Basin
Beginning at the connection formed by the Virilla River, the area is divided into two watersheds: the south watershed, formed by the rivers that drain the borders of the Talamanca mountain range and the foothills of the Irazú Volcano, and the north watershed, which drains the hillsides of the central volcanic mountain range.
Southern Sector of the Upper Basin
The southern sector is located between the canyon of the Virilla River and the Talamanca mountains. The hills that divide the waters extend between Irazú Volcano and the hills of Alto de Ochomogo and Carpintera toward the east and southeast, and to the hills of Tablazo and Cedral in the south, and the Alto de las Palomas on the west of the river basin.
The country’s major cities are located in this area, among them San José (the capital of the country), Desamparados, La Union, Curridabat, San Pedro, Moravia, and Guadalupe. It is characterized by dendritic drainage system that flows east to west, with permanent important rivers (ABT, 1998).
Some of the most important rivers in the southern upper basin are:
53
Virilla River
This river begins in the foothills of Irazú Volcano in the Coronado canton and extends for 25 km in an east-to-west direction throughout the central valley, and is the natural border that separates the provinces of San José and Heredia.
It is marked by a deep river in the form of a gorge, which makes urban development along its borders difficult. This facilitates the dumping of rubbish and waste products, making it one of the most polluted rivers in the basin, and therefore the country, because of its high flow rate and because it is the river into which the three hydrographic systems of the upper basin flow.
Due to the extent of its course, the Virilla River is rich in biodiversity, which is characterized in the upper river basin by the presence of single cell organisms and plankton, in addition to insect larvae and amphibians that begin the nutrition chain in that ecosystem. This biodiversity tends to diminish as the waters flow downstream.
María Aguilar River
With a length of 25 km this river is purely urban (despite the fact that it begins in the central volcanic mountain range). It has serious pollution problems because of urban development along its course and the nearly total elimination of trees. Some tributaries such as the Ocloro River have even been channeled through pipes in different areas of San José.
Torres River
This river is very similar to the previous one in that it originates in the foothills of Irazú Volcano and is also about 25 km long. This river cuts across the northern part of the capital city, from east to west. Because this river flows through a highly industrialized and urbanized region, it is extremely polluted by industrial and domestic waste, and there is very little biodiversity in its water. The zone is characterized by large neighborhoods of low-income and shanty towns in very deteriorated environmental and socioeconomic conditions.
Tiribirí River
This river is 30 km long and flows from the hillsides of Irazú Volcano through secondary population areas in the southeast sector of the GAM, through Aserrí, La Unión, Tirrases, Paso Ancho, Alajuelita, and Desamparados. The latter two have a large population density of mostly middle-low and low income families. This is one of the most polluted rivers in the basin. The three main pollutants are: fecal coliform from cattle that are still in the river basin area; rubbish and waste produced by coffee processing; and domestic waste. This situation presents many of
54
the parameters of the most serious pollution in the river basin, as will be analyzed below in the section relating to that matter.
Northern Sector of the Upper River Basin
This zone shows very marked differences from the south. It is mainly a rural area, and until very recently there was little urban development, but this has been increasing in the last few years. On the mountain slopes there are still remnants of primary forest.
There are three main rivers in this sector:
Bermúdez River
This river begins in the northern part of the Central Valley, near Monte de la Cruz in the province of Heredia, and runs to the south. This region is traditionally a dairy farm area However it is currently being converted into an important center for tourism development. Several hotels, guesthouses, and restaurants have been built to take advantage of the extraordinary beautiful scenery in the area.
Segundo River
This river originates in Barva Volcano, flowing to the south through the province of Heredia, crossing the cantons of Barva and San Joaquín to San Rafael of Alajuela where it finally joins the Virilla River. During its course it picks up a great amount of pollution that is produced by agricultural and livestock activities as well as by domestic waste.
Ciruelas River
This river also flows into the Virilla. It runs parallel to the Segundo River but closer to the city of Alajuela. It also suffers serious pollution problems, mainly because of domestic waste.
4.2.2. Middle River Basin
The two principal rivers in this basin are the Alajuela and the Grande. They extend from the western sector of the river basin, from the hillsides of Poás and Barva volcanoes, until they join the Virilla River in the area of Atenas, Alajuela, at which time the Río Grande de Tárcoles is formed.
In the upper area of this watershed some of the most important national parks of the country are located, such as Poás and the Barva sector of Braulio Carillo. Its principal rivers are:
55
Alajuela River
This river has maintained its course even under a system of rural development. It does not, however, present features similar to the rivers in the upper basin. There are low pollution levels from domestic waste, but the levels are high from agricultural pollution given the coffee production on its borders.
Grande River
This river originates in the foothills of Poás Volcano and is formed by the confluence of several tributaries. There has been low-intensity rural development in the area, although there are some secondary population centers of relative importance such as Grecia, Naranjo, Sarchí, San Ramón, and Palmares, all in the province of Alajuela.
Despite limited urban development, the intensive agricultural activity has brought about the disappearance of the forest cover, with only remnants of forest in what are now the protected areas in Grecia, Caraigres, and Turrubares.
4.2.3 Lower River Basin
The lower Grande de Tárcoles River basin is characterized by the presence of a large number of rivers and intermittent streams, due to the effects of droughts in this zone during the dry season. The low, coastal land is alluvial and colluvial. These have few problems with pollution because of the low population density.
Near the mouth of the Grande de Tárcoles River, between the Tárcoles and Playa Azul beaches, there are high levels of pollution because the rivers from the upper and middle basins drain into that area.
The principal characteristics of the above watersheds are described in the following table.
56
Table 17 Grande De Tárcoles River Basin: Characteristics of Its Watersheds
Source: ABT, 1998.
4.3 CITIES AND PROVINCES LOCATED IN THE RIVER BASIN
There are 36 municipalities in the river basin’s five provinces mentioned previously (San José, Alajuela, Heredia, Cartago, and Puntarenas). Their distribution among the provinces is described in figure 11 and table 18.
Figure 11 Tarcoles River Basin: Number of Cantons within Basin
0
5
10
15
San JoséAlajuelaHeredia Cartago Puntarenas
Table 18 Distribution of Cantons in the Grande De Tárcoles River Basin, by Province
SAN JOSÉ ALAJUELA HEREDIA CARTAGO PUNTARENAS San José Alajuela Heredia La Unión Garabito Aserrí Orotina San Rafael Montes de Oca San Antonio de Belén Santo Domingo Santa Ana Atenas Barva Curridabat San Mateo San Joaquín de Flores Escazú Poás Santa Bárbara Mora San Ramón San Isidro Puriscal Palmares San Pablo Coronado Naranjo Alajuelita Grecia Turrubares Valverde Vega Moravia Tibás Goicoechea Desamparados
Source: ABT, 1998 The previous table shows the principal population centers that are found in the Río Grande de Tárcoles River Basin, which correspond to the provinces of San José, Alajuela, andHeredia; incidentally, these are the three provinces where the majority of the country’s population lives. The following map shows the distribution of counties in the Río Grande de Tárcoles River basin:
58
Figure 12 Map of Cantons in the Río Grande De Tárcoles River
Source: ABT, 1998 4.4 HYDROLOGICAL REGIME
The hydrological regime of the Grande de Tárcoles River basin is characteristic of the Pacific slope. There are two clearly defined seasons: a dry period that lasts from December to April, and a rainy period between May and mid-November, which is characterized predominantly by convective rain. In general, the greatest rainfall is in September, and the driest month is February.
The river basin has an annual precipitation rate of 2,363.88 mm, with a standard deviation of 446.1 mm. The range of rain varies from 948 mm to 5,409 mm annually. Total water availability in the Tarcoles river basin is calculated to be 5,093.3 million cubic meters a year.
Of the total runoff, the expected hydrologic recharge is of 352.37 million m3 of water a year, or, less than 1.0 million m3 of water a day. This will be analyzed in more detail in the section about availability and demand. 7
7 Annual precipitation rate, total water availability, hydrologic recharge have been calculated by Barrantes, et al, 2002.
59
SENARA has calculated the annual volume of recharge in the Colima aquifer in the Central Valley to be about 0.17 km3, a figure that was modified by Tahal in 1990 to about 0.26 km3 (8200 l/s).
Figure 13 Precipitation Pattern in the Grande De Tárcoles River Basin
Source: ABT, 1998
For this and the other river basins in the country, few detailed studies exist about the specific flows in the distinct rivers that conform the river basins. The existing information concentrates on the rivers in which ICE has conducted studies for hydroelectric generation projects.
4.4.1. Description Of Aquifers
The country’s most important aquifer layers are located in the river basin’s upper part. This is also the area of major utilization of groundwater.
There are two very important aquifer systems in this river basin with high potential, known as the Barva Aquifer and the Colima Aquifer. The Barva Aquifer is subdivided into the Bermúdez,
60
Bambinos and Los Angeles Aquifers the latter two being the smallest. This group of aquifers is located on the slopes of the Barva Volcano. Underneath these is the Colima aquifer system, composed by three aquifers called La Libertad, Upper Colima and Lower Colima.
Below is a map that shows the potential of the aquifers in the river basin, the Barva and Colima aquifers are emphasized in black.
Figure 14 Potential of the Aquifers in the Grande De Tárcoles River Basin
Source: ABT, 1998
The Colima and Barva aquifers are the most urbanized in the country and supply more than 66% of the population concentrated in the GAM. Water is drawn from the resources of the Barva, Libertad and Upper Colima aquifers to supply the population. The Lower Colima aquifer is considered by AyA as a reserve that will provide drinking water to the Central Valley population in the future.
61
Sixty-four percent of the groundwater extracted in the Grande de Tárcoles River basin comes from the Barva and Colima aquifers. Ten years ago the rate of extraction was estimated to be 2,600 l/s. However, the State of the Nation Report, No. 7, points out that the current demand is higher than the estimates and is expected to reach between 5.5 and 6.0 m3/s by 2001. Of this, 80% is destined for human consumption, 15% for industry, and 5% for irrigation.
This estimate could be low if the ABT statistics shown in its 1998 Diagnostic of the River Basin are analyzed. Those show a domestic and non-domestic consumption of groundwater, which is offered by governmental agencies, determining an average flow of groundwater utilized annually only by those agencies, of approximately 5.585 l/s, of which 60% corresponds to water directly extracted from natural springs and the remaining 40% drawn from wells (ABT, 1998).
Table 19 Principle Governmental Users Of Groundwater In Grande De Tárcoles River Basin
Average Flow l/s
AyA 3,504 ESPH 900 Municipality of Alajuela 353 Municipality of Santa Bárbara 119 Municipality of Flores 59 Municipality of Barva 129 Municipality of Santo Domingo 94 Municipality of de La Unión 131 Municipality of de Naranjo 51 Municipality of Valverde Vega 45 Municipality of Grecia 40 Municipality of Poás 82 Municipality of Belén 78 TOTAL 5,585 Source: ABT, 1998 Some other more specific studies conducted by the National University (Reynolds, 1997) about the Barva, La Libertad, and Colima aquifers, located in the Virilla River watershed have demonstrated the percentages of the groundwater flow utilized by the various human activities.
The table below shows the extraction from these aquifers, according to the public supply, domestic use, irrigation, and industrial uses. It also shows that the majority of water is provided for human and industrial use, with irrigation and direct domestic use representing less utilization.
62
Table 20 Grande De Tárcoles River Basin: Water Use in the Barva Aquifer By Category Of Use
CATEGORY OF USE FLOW L/S % OF TOTAL
Public Supply 88.7 51.6 Domestic Use 7.4 4.3 Irrigation 14.1 8.2 Industrial 61.8 35.9 TOTAL 172 100 Source: J. Reynolds, 1997.
Table 21 Grande De Tárcoles River Basin: Water Use In La Libertad & Colima Aquifers By Category Of Use
CATEGORY OF USE FLOW L/S % OF TOTAL
Public Supply 2,370.0 84.0 Domestic Use 30.0 1.1 Irrigation 120.0 4.3 Industrial 300.0 10.6 TOTAL 2,820.0 100
Source: J. Reynolds, 1997. At the beginning of the 1990s the effect of the impermeability on the land in the GAM was studied in relation to the diminishing capacity of recharge in the aquifers in the river basin. At that time it was concluded that an increase in urban occupation of 100% with respect to the previous decade would produce a reduction of the recharge in the aquifers of 2.8 m3/s. To look at lower numbers, if 60% of the area becomes impermeable, a deficit of 819 l/s will result, which could mean that all the private wells and some of the public supply would be out of operation (National Report on Costa Rica, 1991, quoted by Barrantes, 2002).
Although the groundwater pollution is not as critical as in the case of surface water, strong nitrate content has been found in some wells and springs in the Virilla watershed. This is principally due to: intensified use of nitrogenous fertilizers in coffee and sugar cane production, with concentrations of over 50 mg/l, when the established norm is a maximum of 19 mg/l; massive installation of septic tanks because of the lack of sanitation drainage systems throughout the area; poor condition of the older septic tanks, leading to leaks and filtration; and entrance of contaminated surface water into the groundwater (Reynolds, 1998).
The Barva aquifer contains the largest concentration of nitrates because of its superficial character and because more than a half-million people live above it. With an extension of 180 km2, there are currently 1,700 wells in operation, of which only 500 are duly registered in the Water Department of MINAE. The 80% of the population located over this aquifer and its
63
recharge zones do not have sewer drainage but use septic tanks; filtration from these tanks is a serious threat to the wells (Reynolds, 2003).
It has been determined that the Colima aquifer is less affected by bacteriological contamination than the Barva aquifer, which has problems with fecal coliform that makes the water undrinkable in some areas. This theme will be dealt with in more detail in the section on water quality in the river basin.
4.5 SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT
Most of the country’s population and the principal productive and economic activities are concentrated in the Grande de Tárcoles River basin. About 1.8 million people live throughout the river basin, which represents nearly 50% of the national population. In addition, 80% of the country’s industry, commerce, and services are located there, and 80% of the country’s vehicular traffic circulates there. More than 50% of the coffee production is processed in the river basin, and the agricultural and cattle activity is the most important per unit of area (Rodríguez, 1992).
The Grande de Tárcoles River basin sustains socio-productive development of great importance for Costa Rica in general. It has a dense highway network that connects it with the other regions of the country and those regions to each other. There are a large number of industries concentrated in the river basin, which for the past five years has included high-technology industries such as Intel; industries for drinks, chemicals, agribusiness, metallurgy; the principal international airport; the greatest number of tourist visits; participation in hydroelectric generation; and other activities that make this the productive center of the country.
The population is concentrated in the middle part of the river basin, in the west-central sector, especially in the watersheds of the Tiribí, María Aguilar, Bermúdez, Torres, and Virilla rivers.
The most highly populated counties of the country are located in a land area that equals 9% of the river basin: San José with 309,672 inhabitants, Desamparados with 193,478 and Goicoechea with 117,532, for a total of 620,682 inhabitants.
The following table shows the density of the population by watershed. The table’s population information is from 1996, when the total population was 1,642,000. The population growth projections were added to that and are shown in the chart, ending in 2005. For the current year the population in the river basin is expected to be nearly 2.0 million people. Although a National Census was conducted in 2000, with statistics shown by district and canton, those boundaries do not coincide with those of the river basin.
64
Table 22 Tárcoles River Basin: Population Density By Watershed
TOTAL 766 418,502 496,434 1,642,532.06 Source: ABT, 1998 In the colonial period, the first human settlements of any importance were established in the middle part of the river basin, known as the Central Valley. This was due to a number of ecological conditions such as the fertility of the soil, the good health conditions relative to the rest of the country, the agreeable climate, and the abundance and quality of the water resources. When coffee cultivation began in the early part of the 19th century, with a stable economy, the Central Valley became the most attractive place for human settlements in the country, thus, forming the principal cities: San José, Heredia, Alajuela, and Cartago.
Due to the development of coffee cultivation, a series of highways that connected the different sectors of the river basin were built, usually converging in San José, which converted this into the country’s main urban center.
With the opening of international commerce, in addition to the infrastructure in the Central Valley, connecting roads were built between San José and the ports of Puntarenas in the Pacific
65
and Limón in the Atlantic, forming a hub of rail and auto transportation between Puntarenas-San José-Limón.
In the middle of the 19th century, the Inter-American Highway was built, which connected San José and the Central Valley with the borders of Nicaragua and Panama and, therefore, with the rest of Central America. This created not only an incentive for human development in the middle part of the river basin, but also pushed the growth of urban expansion toward the lower river basin (populations such as Atenas, San Mateo, Orotina, and others emerged throughout the river basin, from San José to the Pacific Ocean) and the same occurred toward the east and west of the river basin.
The cities in the Central Valley showed a tendency to forming one single urban conglomeration with a fast growth rate and without any kind of planning or regulation, which has caused great imbalance in the location of these activities: for example, the concentration of business and services in the center of San José that causes permanent traffic congestion, the location of large residential communities on the periphery of the city that are dependent on services, and a general, spontaneous occupation of land area.
The GAM urban structure forms a spoked wheel, radiating outward from a single center. This structure has a number of negative social, economic, and urban implications, such as the huge territorial imbalance with respect to service provision, work opportunities, and areas for recreation. This has led to the formation of large poverty zones around the major cities.
4.6 LAND USE
According to existing information and the digital map generated by FUNDECOR and CATIE, the actual land use in the river basin shows a notable reduction of forests, which declined from 66,096 ha in 1992 to only 38,384 ha in 2000; this includes the categories of “natural, intervened, and secondary” in 1992. These 27,712 ha are greater than the difference between criteria used in the classification of what was considered to be a forest between one year and another. The combination of pastures and trees grew by 30,000 ha, while the cultivation and pastures diminished in a 15,000 ha area in order to make way for urban development. The urban areas increased land use from a rate of 6.4% in 1992 to 13.1% in 2000. In percentage terms, the pasture land represents 28.7% of the total river basin land and the forests another 17.8%. There are implications of competition for the forest areas and the potential effect on the water resources in the recharge areas, for quantity as well as quality. It is necessary, therefore, to define policies to achieve the conservation of the existing forest and the restoration of important forest areas that have been degraded.
66
Table 23 Tárcoles River Basin: Land Use In 1992 And 2000
Source: Barrantes, et al., with information from FUNDECOR and CATIE, 2000
Figure 15 Current Land Use
Source: ABT, 1998
Category of land use 1992 2000 Percentage of the
river basin
Primary forest 26,132 12.1Secondary forest 66,096 12,252 5.7Pasture and trees 31,992 61,848 28.7Crops and pasture 95,563 80,362 37.3Scrubland 6,883 42 0.0Open land (urban) 13,789 28,270 13.1Bodies of water n.d 404 0.2Reforestation and recuperation n.d 3,449 1.6
Clouds and shadows 0 2,699 1.3Others 1,107 6 0
TOTAL 215,430
215.464 100
67
4.7 CAPACITY OF LAND USE IN THE GRANDE DE TÁRCOLES RIVER BASIN
A classification of the capacity for land use is established in Costa Rica by Decree No. 23214 MAG-MIRENEM, 1995, which consists of eight classes in which a progressive increase in limitations for the development of agricultural, livestock, and forestry activities is presented. Classes I, II, and III permit the development of any kind of activity, including the production of annual crops, depending on the selection of socioeconomic criteria. In Classes IV, V, and VI use is restricted to development of semi-permanent and permanent crops, with exception of Class IV, which permits the occasional development of annual crops. Class VII has such strict limitations as only permitting the management of natural primary and secondary forests. Class VIII is dedicated to the protection of the ecosystem and its services.
Upon applying this methodology to the Grande de Tárcoles River basin, the results show a high percentage of Classes II, II and IV (65.7% of the total), which demonstrates that this river basin has excellent conditions for agricultural development. Class V is not represented. Class VI covers 11.4% of the river basin, and the areas with the most restricted forestry capacity cover 15.0%, which is primarily distributed on the sides of the mountains and hills.
Table 24 Grande De Tárcoles River Basin: Classes Of Capacity For Land Use
Classes of Capacity for Use Hectares Percentage ASP no information 17,110 7.9Class II 2,668 1.2Class III 49,867 23.1Class IV 89,306 41.4Class VI 24,552 11.4Class VII 10,319 4.8Class VIII 21,729 10.1Total 215,551 100%Source: Acón and Associates, 1984, quoted by Barrantes, 2002 Conflict about land use in the river basin occurs when the land is used for purposes that the land, climate, and vegetation together cannot support without suffering a considerable amount of deterioration. The result can be seen when comparing the map showing the classification of uses and the conflicts of use (Barrantes: 2002).
From table 25 below it is clear that there are conflicts of use in nearly one-fourth of the river basin (51,455 ha), presenting activities on the land that it cannot withstand or endure, mainly because of the limitations caused by being on a slope, by erosion, or by its effective capacity. This overuse mainly refers to cattle, which extend toward steep areas with fragile soil.
68
Table 25 Grande De Tárcoles River Basin: Kind of Land Use
Type of use Hectares PercentageTo capacity 129,929 60.3Over use 51,455 23.9Under used 14,871 6.9No information 19,296 8.8TOTAL 215,551 100 Source: Barrantes, 2002 4.8 AVAILABILITY AND DEMAND FOR WATER IN THE RIVER BASIN
Because the Grande de Tárcoles River basin is the region where the country’s principal economic and productive activity are concentrated, the development model historically promoted in Costa Rica has been intimately linked to the utilization of water in the river basin for all possible uses, from population supply and irrigation of agriculture to hydroelectric generation, recreation, and tourism. However, one of the main uses that has been made of the river basin’s water has been to dump rubbish and industrial, agricultural, and domestic waste. The untreated wastewater obstructs an increase of the availability and reduces the use of surface water in the lower part of the river basin.
The inadequate or inexistent environmental sanitation systems that have characterized the development in Costa Rica’s central region, and generally in the entire country, cause the concentration of great quantities of solid waste that not only upsets the physiochemical composition of the water and spoils the scenery, but also forms real barriers that hinder natural drainage, which cause serious flooding problems.
Agricultural, agribusiness, and industrial activity, and to a lesser degree, tourism activities, are responsible for the biggest part of GDP. Activities such as sugar cane, coffee, and vegetable cultivation and dairy farms require the use of large water flows for their development, and have modified the flow system of the Tárcoles River.
The total water availability in the river basin is the quantity of available water for the hydrological cycle by means of rain. The water availability refers to the inclusion in the total availability of variables such as evapotranspiration, surface draining or run-off, and aquifer recharge.
The water demand in a river basin refers to the quantity of water that is used in the different economic and human activities in general. This demand is for consumption, which depends in part on population growth and the growth and dynamism of the economy.
Table 26 below shows the relationship between the water availability in the river basin and the total current demand (Barrantes, 2002). To calculate the availability, the median precipitation
69
was estimated at 2,363.88 mm, projected over all the area in the river basin, which establishes a total availability of 5,093.3 million m3 a year and an evapotranspiration of 2,405.53 million m3 annually. In addition, the volume of water supplied by the transfer of water from the Reventazón River basin is added, which supplies a good part of the population located in the Central Valley.
For the demand, the factor of evapotranspiration is also considered, as is the water consumed by the different sectors of the economy, obtained by the concessions requested from MINAE and the available information in SENARA.
Of the volume of water demanded, 96% is taken from surface water and 6% from groundwater. In September 2002, the Water Department of MINAE had 1,157 wells registered in the Tárcoles River basin, while SENARA had an additional 3,460 wells registered, which represents 52% of the total number of wells registered in the country. The water extracted from these wells goes directly to supplying the population and to industry and tourism activities. The flows assigned by the Water Department of MINAE for the wells varies from a range of 0.01 l/s to 72.4 l/s, with an average flow of 2.27 l/s (Barrantes, 2002). There are a large number of wells that are not registered by either MINAE or SENARA that operate illegally, and the exact amount of water they extract is unknown. The results obtained are shown in table 26.
As shown in the table below, demand for surface water exceeds the water availability of 103.12 million m3 of water a year, showing the overexploitation that exists.. Despite the apparent gain in groundwater, the estimate is not accurate due to lack of information on the large amount of illegally extracted water.
Table 26 Availability and Demand for Water in the Grande De Tárcoles River Basin (Millions of M3 Annually)
Volume
Millions m3/year
Total Availability 5150.1 Available* 2744.55 Surface Water 2390.24 Natural Surface 2335.41 Transfer from Orosi 56.76 Potential Recharge 352.37 Total Demand 5150.1 Evapotranspiration 2405.53 Human Activity 2643.83 Surface Water 2493.36 Groundwater 150.47 Surplus Available** 100.72 Source: Barrantes, et al., 2002 (*) Water Availability: from precipitation, transfer from Orosí, potential recharge (**) Surplus available: the difference between the water availability and the use for human activities.
70
As can be seen, the current demand is estimated at 2,643 million m3 a year, which equals 8.4 m3/s (Barrantes: 2003), but with the unfortunate circumstance that approximately half of the water that is distributed through the drainage systems is not accounted for. Additionally, the projections for the demand in 2005 are for 10 m3/s, which considers a reduction of water not accounted for in accordance with the current projections.
The demand for 10 m3/s could be supplied with the capacity of the Barva and Colima aquifers with a known potential of up to 8m3/s and the Orosí water supply system that supplies 1.8 m3/s. However, if there is no reduction in the percentage of water not accounted for, the demand could exceed the 10 m3/s in 2005, which would possibly require seeking other water sources outside of the Tárcoles River basin (ABT: 1998).
While the following section addresses the demand and type of demand for the river basin’s water resources by type of use, it is conflicting information, depending on the source, and in some cases there is no available information.
4.8.1 Use For Human Consumption
ABT’s Diagnostic of the Grande de Tárcoles River Basin find that supply for human consumption is the principal use for water. This is supplied through a series of water supply systems administered by AyA, municipalities, and some Associations for Rural Water Supply Systems (ASADAS). The main water supply system is the Metropolitan Aqueduct of San José, which has seven more water systems that supply drinking water to the communities located in the GAM, in the east part of the river basin.
In the other counties, drinking water is supplied through municipal water supply systems and ASADAS, which experience serious deficiencies, not only in their coverage, but also with the quality of water and the quality of their infrastructure, which in some cases is old and outdated, having existed for 40 or 50 years. This is accompanied by the problem of constant leaks, as well as pollution because of filtration of wastewater and sewage.
The table below shows the coverage of the river basin drinking water supply systems that are property of AyA; ABT did not have systematized information from the municipalities and ASADAS.
The table shows the percentage of distribution in each water supply system, between domestic and non-domestic consumption. The non-domestic consumption refers to all other uses such as for industry, commerce, and in the institutional sector, which accesses water through pipes.
71
In all AyA water supply systems, domestic consumption exceeds 79%, with the only exception being that the Metropolitan Aqueduct shows domestic consumption of 73.9% and non-domestic of 26.1%.
Table 27 Percentage of Distribution for Consumption Measured by Type of User for Some Water Supply Systems in the River Basin
Water Supply System
Domestic Use (Percentage)
Non domestic Use (Percentage)
San José, Metropolitan Aqueduct
73.9 26.1
ESPH Water Supply Systems
79.6 20.4
El Pasito, Alajuela (AyA)
89.4 10.6
Santiago, Puriscal (AyA)
81.4 18.2
Atenas (AyA)
88.4 11.6
Ciudad Colon (AyA)
90.4 9.6
Palmares (AyA) 90.5 9.5
San Ramón (AyA)
83.3 16.7
Source: ABT, 1998 4.8.2 Hydroelectric Uses
As was indicated in the previous section, one of the principal uses of this river basin’s flows has been the production of hydroelectric energy, whether by using reservoirs or through plants on the edge of the water which take advantage of the fall of the river and its flow directly. The principal users of water for hydroelectricity production are ICE and CNFL, which is a subsidiary of ICE. Neither agency requests a water concession from the state and, therefore, no concession is granted or registered in the Water Department of MINAE for its use (non-consumptive).
Within the river basin’s reservoirs the projects are small, many of the plants are at water’s edge, and they have only reservoirs with the regulations necessary for operation. For this study the following stand out:
La Garita Plant. Located in the central canton of Alajuela in the districts of Garita and Turrúcares. A dam was built over the San Ramón River to take advantage of the water from the
72
east and from the Alajuela River. It is 19 meters high and 59 meters long, with water utilization capacity of 17 m3/s. This plant began operating in 1958 and currently has a total installed capacity of 30,000 kw.
Virilla River Dam. This dam has a storage capacity of 10,000 m3 of water. It is 10 meters high and 54 meters long, and supplies the Ventanas plant in Turrúcares with a capacity of 515 GW/h annually. It is fed by the Virilla and Ciruelas rivers.
San Miguel Reservoir. This reservoir regulates the flows of the Virilla and Ciruelas rivers; it has a capacity of 600,000 m3, and feeds the Ventanas plant in Garita.
Los Anonos Reservoir Plant. This is located in the central canton of San José and has a maximum generating capacity of 2.4 MW.
Brasil Reservoir Plant. This is located in the canton of Santa Ana and was built in 1912. It has a maximum capacity of 3 MW, but beginning in 1996 several improvements and expansions were made, which increased production to 27 MW. It uses water from the Virilla and Uruca rivers.
The country’s first hydroelectric projects are located in this river basin, where the greatest installed capacity is concentrated. It currently has 10.8% of the country’s generating capability and is no longer one of the most important river basins for this activity. In 2000 there were 13 projects operating in this river basin and six more in different stages of study. While ICE has three projects in operation, which concentrate the largest capacity, the same three have the largest dimensions. CNFL has seven small hydroelectric plants in operation and one more in study. The unexploited potential in the Tárcoles River Basin is estimated to be 543.9 MW.
It is important to point out that the publication of Laws No. 7200 and No. 7508 authorized private generation of electricity in Costa Rica through private companies and cooperatives. They are allowed to build hydroelectric plants to generate up to 50 MW; the state is required to buy that energy since it controls the transmission of electricity.
These laws brought about a significant increase in the construction of private hydroelectric projects in all the country’s river basins, especially in the rivers on the Atlantic slope (San Carlos and Sarapiquí). There was not a sharp increase in the Tárcoles River Basin where only two of the 31 private projects in operation are located.
73
Table 28 Tárcoles River Basin: Situation of Hydroelectric Generation
Source: Department of Energy Sector, 2003 4.8.3 Use For Tourism And Recreation
The strategy for future tourism includes increasing the number of tourists visiting Costa Rica to two million international visitors a year (goal for 2010). This will necessitate increased construction of infrastructure and support services (ICT-JICA, 2000). Water resources play an important role in tourism, both for consumption as well as for the scenic element that forms a part of the promotional campaigns of the Costa Rican image.
Water consumption for this kind of development in the Grande de Tárcoles River Basin must deal with availability for human consumption, swimming, irrigation of gardens, and golf courses. The latter demands the most water, but does not represent a significant amount of water because of the conditions of the river basin, rainwater can be counted on during a large part of the year, and there are few hotel developments with golf courses in the river basin. Most of the tourist industry development in the capital city and surrounding areas is in the upper basin, on the hillsides of Poás, Irazú, and Barva volcanoes; there is little tourism development in the middle river basin, and even less in the lower river basin because of the degree of pollution at the mouth of the Grande de Tárcoles River, which has impeded that coastal area from developing tourism in a similar manner to that in Guanacaste Province.
PROJECT LISTING PLANTS POTENCY ENERGY STAGE OWNER (In operation) MW GWh Poás 44.3 213.0 Identification ICE
Río Segundo 0.7 2.9 Operation Private Total in Operation 195.3 920.3
74
However, there are two important tourist projects in the river basin; one is “Punta Leona,” in Playa Blanca, and the other is “Los Sueños” in Playa Herradura. Even though Playa Tárcoles and Plaza Azul were two important tourist sites in the 1960s and 1970s, the expansion of other sites such as Jacó, Parrita, and Quepos, together with the pollution problems already mentioned, produced a decrease in the tourism industry in those areas.
There are no statistics that show the exact number of tourist installations in the Grande de Tárcoles River Basin, and there is only slight information available. The following table shows the type and number of installations located in the central region of the country and surrounding areas, according to statistics from the Costa Rican Tourism Institute.
Table 29 Tourism Offer In The Grande De Tárcoles River Basin Region
NUMBER
NUMBER ROOMS OR VEHICLE
CITY
MOUNTAIN
BEACH
HOTELS OFFER
196 10,056 85 28
83
CAR RENTAL AGENCIES
38 2,941 branches 38 branches 5
TRAVEL AGENCIES 180 - 0 - branches 180 Branch 1
Source: Department of Statistics and Research, ICT.
No information about the implication for the river basin of water usage by this activity was discovered. There is a lack of specific databases for this activity; on one hand, consumption is not revealed because the concessions given by the Water Department of MINAE categorizes it as “human consumption”, or if the water is used to irrigate a golf courses, it is categorized as “agricultural.” On the other hand, this sector uses different sources (wells, municipal water supply systems, water supply systems of AyA), which makes it just one more user of the respective agencies (AyA and municipalities). Lastly, it is important to point out that there is considerable illegal use of Groundwater.
4.8.4 Industrial Use
As mentioned previously, the greatest number of industries and agribusinesses (about 80%) are concentrated in the Grande de Tárcoles River Basin and, within that, in the GAM. These are located either in random form in the rural and urban areas of the river basin, or in industrial concentrations, or “industrial zones.” The major concentrations of the randomly located industries in urban areas are mainly in the Virilla, Torres, María Aguilar, and Tiribí watersheds, with a significant concentration of chemical and alcohol industries (29 of these). On the other hand, the river basins of the Bermúdez and Grande rivers contain 25% of the 39 coffee
75
processing plants. Included in the industrial activity, the agribusiness companies represent 37% of the total number of registered businesses (ABT, 1998).
Among the main industries that are located in the river basin are: metal products, wood and carBODard pulp, slaughter houses, food, mills, soft drinks and alcohol, textile, chemical and petrochemicals, coffee processing, ceramics, sugar refineries, leather, skins and similar activity, and electronics. Because of their activities, these industries exert high pressure on water resources, not only by their demand for a large quantity of water (surface and ground) for the processes, but also a large quantity of contaminants are thrown into the water in the river basin. This will be analyzed below in the section on water quality.
It is worth pointing out that industrial activity has created a strong dependence on water use from aquifers, and even though it is clear how much of the water flow the concessionaires use, it is not clear how much is really extracted from the aquifers.
4.8.5 Agricultural Use
The land in the watershed of the Virilla and Grande rivers is used for the cultivation of coffee, sugar cane, fruit trees, vegetables, ornamental plants, and dairy cattle. There are also some steep areas that are used for beef cattle grazing.
In the watershed of the Tárcoles River, a lot of land is used for dairy farms, fruit trees (mango, citrus), and annual crops (tubers, corn, beans, rice, etc.). However, a large part of the land is also used for pastures and is on steep hillsides that are not appropriate for that use.
The main use for water in the agricultural sector is to irrigate crops, and it is one of the activities that requires the highest water consumption. The principal irrigation system uses gravity, with little water efficiency. In recent years other more efficient systems have been incorporated such as irrigation by micro-aspersion and drip irrigation, but the adoption of these systems has been limited because of the high investment cost. The Water Department estimates that the real amount of water utilized by this sector in the river basin is 60% (personal communication, Zeledón). As is the case with other water uses, this sector uses water illegally.
4.9 CONFLICTS OVER WATER USE
Numerous conflicts in the Grande de Tárcoles River basin are directly related to the use of its water. The fact that the majority of the population as well as the majority of industrial and productive activity in the country are found in this river basin is an indicator of the serious challenges that water distribution represents.
These conflicts have to do with the demand caused by the accelerated growth in the GAM as compared to other users, and because other economic activities are impeded from using the water
76
due to the impacts they cause, not only to the flow of the principal rivers and tributaries of the middle and lower river basin, but because they began to threaten the underground aquifer layers and the recharge areas in the upper part of the river basin.
The agricultural expansion and the demand for water in the upper and lower river basins represent another source of conflict about water use between the agricultural sectors and the communities, which are demanding better access to drinking water.
The conflicts related to the high concentration of industrial and agricultural activities, as well as the expansion of urban sprawl, have their greatest impact on the growing infeasibility of water use for other uses (recreation, fishing, tourism, population supply, etc.).
The main evidence of inappropriate water use in the river basin is the high pollution level in the water. This is the product of dumping untreated waste (household wastewater and agricultural and industrial waste) into the rivers; of the sediment that is produced by mining exploration and carried downstream; and, in general, of the rapid demographic growth and urban expansion and inadequate land use.
A recent example of this situation occurred in 2001 when the Colima Aquifer that supplies the San José Metropolitan Aqueduct was polluted by the outflow of Puente Mulas spring (in the Virilla River), which was seriously affected by filtration.
4.10 PROBLEMS WITH WATER QUALITY, SOURCES, AND EXPANSION OF THE DEGRADATION IN WATER QUALITY
The Grande de Tárcoles River basin is Costa Rica’s most contaminated basin and receives approximately 67% of the country’s organic waste. None of the domestic or industrial wastewater collected is dumped into this basin is treated in any way. Every day, about 250,000 m3 of wastewater are dumped into the Virilla River alone. It takes about 24 hours for that water to reach the Gulf of Nicoya, where the pollution results in the death of fish populations as well as the frequent outbreak of a condition called “red tide” (State of the Nation, 2001).
Generally, the most critical river basin situation is that of the surface water; however, it is estimated that the groundwater is equally threatened by urban and agricultural expansion and is starting to become polluted, particularly by nitrates from fertilizers used in coffee cultivation, by the wide use of septic tanks, and by the filtration of polluted water in the aquifer layers. In 2002 a severe episode of contamination took place in a Puente de Mulas area aquifer.
In regard to surface water, high concentrations of fecal coliforms are found that limit the use of rivers for recreation or other water activities. This type of contamination originates in the dumping of untreated domestic waste both by companies that clean septic tanks as well as by
77
AyA’s sewage drainage systems. The presence of heavy metal is also notable (BOD, CDO, and suspended solids) in the majority of the rivers in the basin.
4.10.1 Urban Pollution
The origin of urban pollution can be divided into three main sources: untreated domestic waste, solid and leached waste, and urban runoff
Liquid Domestic Waste
Untreated liquid domestic waste is one of the biggest pollution problems in the Tárcoles River basin. The sewage system covers only 37% of the river basin’s population, whose untreated waste reaches the basin’s rivers. The other 63% (approximately 1,148,000 inhabitants) are connected to septic tanks, although there may be some direct discharge into the rivers from areas without sewer drainage.
The following table shows the estimated amount of organic waste and nutrients that are produced by domestic waste. It is obvious that the major organic burden is in the tributaries of the upper water basin (the Tiribí, María Aguilar, Torres, and Virilla rivers), which pass through the principal urban centers of the capital.
78
Table 30 Tarcoles River Basin: Domestic Waste Disposal: Estimate Of BOD, Nitrogen And Phosphorous Load By Watershed, 1997.
The lack of an adequate solid waste treatment system is one of the river basin’s main water pollution sources; the rivers are converted into a deposit for this waste.
Limited resources have hindered the municipalities from employing personnel and constructing adequate systems to collect the waste in their municipalities, as well as conducting a planning process for waste management that would resolve the situation in the medium or long-term.
Among the main reasons for the pollution problems caused by waste in the river basin, the following stand out:
Tariffs inadequate to cover cost of the public service. Waste transport extremely deficient. Public awareness about waste management is poor. Recycling not used by industries or in the home.
79
Urban Runoff
Urban runoff is a major source of pollution in the river basin in its entirety because it carries contaminated particles and waste. In addition, the hydrological response in these urban areas to heavy rain is more rapid because they are significantly impermeable. Because of the impermeability, the volume, and the peak, the runoff is higher and more rapid in the rivers, which causes erosion and dragging of waste, and the river floods its banks.
Table 31 below shows the estimated pollution load by watershed. These loads have been calculated by ABT in its diagnostic of the river basin, based on the factors of typical pollution from urban sources (Novotny and Olem, 1994). These average factors vary according to the local conditions and types of urban land use (high and medium residential, commercial and industrial density), and are used here to illustrate the magnitude of the pollution from urban areas.
80
Table 31 Tarcoles River Basin: Estimated Load of Pollution by Urban Runoff in kg/day
Basin Pollutant
BOD
Nitrogen
Phosphorous
SuspendedSolids
Cadmium
Chrome
Copper
Mercury
Nickel
Lead
Zinc
Alajuela
59.918
7.456
2.264
239.671
0.011
0.019
0.033
0.029
0.021
0.1
0.419
Siquiares
348.411
43.358
13.162
1393,644
0.062
0.10X
0.190
0.166
0.124
0.674
2.439
Ciruelas
172.356
21.449
6.511
689.425
0.031
0.054
0.094
0.082
0.061
0.333
1 .206
Macho
0.740
0.092
0.028
2.959
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.005
Para
1.726
0.215
0.065
6.904
0.000
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.003
0.012
Segundo
52.767
6.567
1.993
211.068
0.009
0.016
0.029
0.025
0.019
0.102
0.369
Tibás
3.699
0.460
0.140
14.795
0.001
0.001
0.002
0.002
0.001
0.007
0.026
Tizate
4.438
0.552
0.168
17.753
0.001
0.001
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.009
J.031
María Aguilar
507.452
63.150
19.170
2029.808
0.090
0.158
0.276
0.242
0.180
0.981
3.552
Tiribí
699.288
87.022
26.418
2797.151
0.124
0.218
0.381
0.334
0.249
1.352
4.895
Torres
398.219
49.556
15.044
1592.877
0.071
0.124
0.217
0.190
0.142
0.77C
2.788
Virilla
344.712
42.898
13.022
1378.849
0.061
0.107
0.188
0,165
0.123
0.666
2.413
Cacao
7.151
0.890
0.270
28.603
0.001
0.002
0.004
0.003
0.003
0.014
0.050
Colorado
87.288
10.862
3.298
349.151
0.016
0.027
0.048
0.042
0.031
QAK
0.611
Grande
147.452
18.350
5.570
589.808
0.026
0.046
0.080
0.070
0.052
0.28.'
1.032
Poás
36.000
4.480
1.360
144.000
0.006
0.011
0.020
0.017
0.013
0.071
0.252
Q. Valverde
37.726
4.695
1.425
150.904
0.007
0.012
0.021
0.018
0.013
0.07:
0.264
Rosales
3.699
0.460
0.140
14.795
0.001
0.001
0.002
0.002
0.001
o.oo:
0.026
Jaris
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
o.txx
0.000
Picagres
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
O.OOÍ
0.000
Q. Honda
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
Om
0.000
U ruca
13.315
1.657
0.503
53.260
0.(K)2
0.004
0.007
0.006
0.005
0.026
0.093
Carara
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.00(
0.000
Tárcoles
16.274
2.025
0.615
65.096
0.003
0.005
0.009
0.008
0.006
0.031
0.114
Turrubares
1.726
0.215
0.065
6.904
O.(XK)
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.00?
0.012
Total (kg/day)
2944.4
366.4
111.2
11777.4247
0.5234
0.9160
1.6030
1 .4067
-1.0469
5.6924
20,610
Source: ABT, 1998
81
4.10.2 Industrial Pollution
One of the most significant sources of pollution in the Tárcoles River Basin is industrial contamination. Despite the current legislation that requires the treatment of industrial waste, the majority of the industries still do not have primary treatment facilities at their installations.
Coffee Processing
By comparing the registry of pollution between the PLAMAGAM studies (1989) and those of Geotechnic (1997), an obvious reduction in the contamination caused by coffee processing is observed due to: the Voluntary Plans promoted, initially by the municipality of San José and the Chamber of Industries in 1992; the technological changes in the industrial process (less biological load in the water); reduction in the use of water; recirculation and reutilization of water in the different process; and installation of wastewater treatment plants.
Table 32 Tarcoles River Basin: Estimate of Pollution from Coffee Processing
Watershed
BOD (kg/day)
Nitrogen (kg/day)
Alajuela 636 16
Bermúdez 5,163 133 Cacao 2,270 58 Colorado 11,403 294 Grande 6,665 172 María Aguilar 1,248 32 Poás 3,103 80 Q. Valverde 3,074 79 Segundo 5,215 134 Tiribí 5,119 132 Virilla 6,031 155 Total 49,926 1,286
Source: ABT, 1998
Despite this, the industry continues to be one of the river basin’s main pollution sources, currently contributing about 45% of the total industrial waste dumped there. In 1989 the potential pollution of coffee processing was 77% of the total in the river basin.
The previous table illustrates the amount of pollution dumped by the coffee processors, taking into consideration two parameters (BOD and nitrogen), which shows results of 49,926 kg of BOD and 1,286 kg of nitrogen daily, a figure that continues to be very high.
82
Other Industrial Liquid Waste
The statistics regarding the most significant industries outside of coffee processing refer to agribusiness (sugar mills), the chemical industry, and the food processing industries. There is no measurement or monitoring of these wastes in the diagnostic produced by ABT, and the available data are not current.
Table 33 Tarcoles River Basin: Estimate of Industry Pollution
Source: ABT, 1998. 4.11 SOURCES OF AGRICULTURAL POLLUTION
Pollution caused by agricultural activities comes from three main sources:
Mistreatment of waste that results from productive, cattle, swine, and poultry activity. Excessive application of agrochemicals (fertilizer and pesticide). Erosion produced by various activities.
Table 34 below shows an estimate of the nutrient and BOD loads dumped in the Río Grande de Tárcoles river basin caused by agricultural activities. The activities included are coffee and sugar cane production, pigs, dairy and beef cattle, and poultry and the estimate of pesticides applied to coffee and sugar cane crops.
Subsequently, the information in table 34 reinforces what was indicated by showing the quantity of agrochemicals (herbicides and fungicides) that were applied to the two main crops planted in the Tárcoles River river basin: coffee and sugar cane. It should be made clear that this is an estimate, based on the recommended technological packets, but it is even possible that these values could be substantially increased.
83
Table 34 Estimate of the Nutrient Load and BOD Dumped in the Environment by Agricultural Activities
In summary, analysis of the above information shows that the waste disposal from domestic and industrial water use represents the major cause of pollution in the river basin.
As one way to resolve this situation, MINAE has designed and initiated the practice of taxing for rubbish disposal, to be applied in all points that are a source of pollution, and initiating its application in the Tárcoles River basin. The Decree that created this economic regulatory instrument was signed by the Minister of MINAE and the President of the Republic, and put in force in 2004.
In conformity with Article 4 of this Decree, an environmental tax for waste disposal as an economic regulatory instrument founded on the principle of “whoever contaminates pays” has the social objective of achieving a healthy environment that is ecologically balanced, as provided for in Article 50 of the Constitution. This will be funded by charging a tax to compensate for the use of environmental services or water bodies, even of public domain, for transportation, dilution, or elimination of liquid waste originating in the specific dumping, which can generate harmful effects on water resources and their related ecosystems, human health, and productive activities.
For the application of this tax, two parameters of pollution have been taken into account, which are calculated by kilogram of contaminant load dumped of chemical demand for oxygen (CDO) and of total suspended solids (SST), the parameters for selected pollutants, taking into account the following elements:
The equivalent cost to remove a kilogram of the parameters utilized by using the appropriate technology available.
The cost of damage associated with water pollution, calculated by the economic assessment techniques defined by MINAE.
This decree has set a tax amount of US$0.22, or the equivalent in colons, for a period of six years, for every kilogram of CDO that is dumped, and of US$0.19, or its equivalent in colons, for every kilogram of SST dumped.
4.12 RESERVOIRS CONSTRUCTED TO CONTROL RIVERS OR WATER RESERVES OF NATURAL LAKES WITHIN THE RIVER BASIN
No large artificial lakes or reservoirs have been built in the Grande de Tárcoles River basin to control the water flow or reserves. In general, the infrastructure constructed in different rivers has been for the production of hydroelectric energy or small reserves for water storage in agricultural businesses.
86
Both the Costa Rican Electricity Institute (ICE) and the National Power and Light Company (state institutions) have constructed a series of reservoirs to develop projects for hydroelectric generation in various rivers in the basin. However, it should be pointed out that ICE’s principal mega-projects are being developed outside of the Grande de Tárcoles River basin.
5. RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT
5.1 PERIOD PRIOR TO DECENTRALIZATION
As was indicated previously, water resource management in Costa Rica has been centralized through a series of agencies with different responsibilities. The Tárcoles River basin and the management of its water has not been an exception.
The actions promoted in the country relating to the creation of the Coordinating Commission of the Río Grande de Tárcoles River Basin (CRGT) set the guidelines for the development process to follow. This included a series of initiatives intended to improve resource management at the national level and, above all, permitted the identification of possible elements that the new model should contain in order to facilitate a new model for management that focuses on river basins.
Before CRGT’s creation in 1993 and until 1996, water management was the responsibility of the National Electricity Service (SNE) by authority given in the Water Law. When that Law was passed in 1942, hydroelectric generation was the principal economically significant utilization of water in the country; and, therefore, it was believed that water management should be under the responsibility of that sector.
Although the reality was changing, there was no reform in that administration until SNE became the Public Service Regulatory Authority, and it was decided that all matters relating to water resources should be transferred to MINAE, while continuing to maintain a concentrated and centralized management plan.
SNE’s operations that related to water matters were very limited, restricted to granting concessions for utilization of water, some control over its use, mainly in regard to accusations, and conflict resolution. It never established a water policy at the national level, had supervisory responsibilities, or coordinated relevant activities.
When the municipality of San José decided to tackle the theme of river basins and water resources, it received no opposition or support. However, it did have to break a stereotype about the work of municipalities because it was unusual for municipalities to enter that field.
87
5.2 THE REFORM PROCESS TOWARD DECENTRALIZATION
Even though the country had made some effort to carry out actions in the sphere of river basins, those analyzed in section 3.7.1, these were not well formulated and did not follow a governmental policy designed to strengthen decentralization mechanisms. Instead, these activities have concentrated on formulating programs and projects developed because of the perceived need for land use regulations.
In 1991 the municipality of the Central Canton of San José—the strongest municipality in the country—began to pay attention to the serious environmental problems that were apparent in the capital city, particularly in reference to: water quality; the use of rivers as a partial solution to solid and liquid waste produced in the urban centers; industrial and agricultural activities; and the continuous problem of rivers and streams overflowing their banks, which has often caused serious tragedies.
To follow through with that interest, the municipality of San José carried out a series of actions seeking to play a more active role in water resource management. Among those actions, the following stand out:
In 1991 it proposed, in the framework of the CIUDAGUA Program, the Recuperation of Río Torres Project (the river cuts through the northern part of the capital city).
In the same year, in an unusual activity for a municipality, a municipal accord was issued that gave the industries located in the canton 24 months to begin treating their liquid waste.
As a result of that accord, a pilot plan was initiated between the municipality and the Chamber of Industry with a group of businesses, which, according to AyA studies, were the primary polluters. This plan terminated in 1994 with a significant reduction in industrial waste (Rodríguez, 1997). There is a consensus that because of this action Article No. 132 was included in the Wildlife Law.
In 1992, the municipality of San José designed and carried out an Urban Control Plan for the purpose of regulating land use and the city growth, which contemplated a series of environmental variables that were designed to protect the aquifers, recharge areas and surface water.
By that time the municipality had recognized that the problems could not be resolved by actions in only one canton and that it had to approach the situation with a broader vision; therefore, it determined that the Tárcoles River basin would be the area of focus. Visits were made to each of the other 35 municipalities in the river basin area to promote the participation of each local government and to set priorities.
In August 1992, the municipality of San José organized a seminar, entitled “The Río Grande de Tárcoles River Basin: Looking Toward the Future,” in which a huge audience discussed the aspects related to the theme and defined the basic guidelines for coordination to confront the immense task of recuperating the river basin. But the most important achievement was being
88
able to involve other actors, including many of the municipalities, institutions, and private businesses.
After the seminar, with continual, strong support from the municipality of San José, negotiations regarding the conditions for forming the CRGT were begun. The Commission finally became official on April 29, 1993 by Executive Decree No. 22156-MIRENEM.
The original members of the commission were:
A representative from each of the following municipalities: San José, Heredia, San Rafael de Heredia, Orotina, Alajuela, and Curridabat.
A representative from each of the following ministries: MINAE, National Planning and Economic Policy, Health, and Science and Technology.
A representative from each of the following autonomous agencies: National Power and Light Company, ICE, and AyA.
A university representative. A representative from the following private sector agencies: Chamber of Industry, Costa Rica
Chamber of Agriculture and Agribusiness, and the Federation of Livestock Chambers. Later, in December 1993, Decree No. 22712-MIRENEM was published, which incorporated as permanent members the Municipal Institute for Promotion and Consultancy (IFAM) and the Foundation for Urban Development (FUDEU). With these additions, the commission had 19 members, of which five were non-governmental agencies and six were municipalities (Figure 16).
One of the special features of the CRGT is its formation, which from the beginning had an interinstitutional, interdisciplinary, and participative character. This can be observed in figure 16 below, which shows the attempt to connect the most important actors in water resource matters, but which has a series of deficiencies that will be discussed later.
89
Figure 16 Composition of the Río Grande de Tárcoles River Basin Coordinating Commission
COMPOSICION DE LA COMISION DE CUENCA DEL RIO TARCOLES
MINAEMIDEPLAN
MIN. SALUD
INSTITUCIONESGUBERNAMENTALES
ICAAICE/CNFL
UCRIFAM
INSTITUCIONESAUTONOMAS
INDUSTRIALESGANADEROS
AGRICULTORES
ORGANIZACIONESDE LA EMPRESA
PRIVADA
FUDEUFECON
CEDARENA
ORGANIZACIONESNO GUBERNA-
MENTALES
ALAJUELA/OROTINAHEREDIA/SAN RAFAEL
SAN JOSECURRIDABAT
GOBIERNOSLOCALES
COMISION DE CUENCARIO TARCOLES
In conformity with its operating regulations, the CRGT has a General Assembly, which comprises all of the members, and a coordinator, assistant coordinator, secretary and treasurer, who are elected to serve two-year periods and can be reelected. There is also a technical support committee, which has an inter-institutional character but is not permanent.
A number of weaknesses and incongruities in the decree that created the CRGT and its operating regulations became a burden to the commission after it began to function. The most important of these are:
These was a gap between the objectives for which CRGT was created and the structure that was set up to reach those objectives. The structure did not provide the needed flexibility and vision for the future. Because of this, the CRGT found it necessary to operate through an executor, which meant that it was unable to consolidate institutionally.
CRGT’s constitution, did not define the responsibilities, functions, and roles of the various agencies that compose CRGT. Irregular support by public and private officials was the result, and to a large measure, the commission depended on their good will. Likewise, the representatives of the public sector did not have decision-making power and could not make major commitments.
The representation was not the most appropriate. For example, by determining that one permanent position from the NGO sector would be permanently occupied by FUDEU and that six representatives (always the same people) would represent the 36 municipalities, without any rotation or election of those representatives, a lack of interest, distrust, and criticism ensued in the rest of the municipalities and NGOs. For example, the Neotropical Foundation, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the Tropical Science Center, and many other
90
organizations established in the river basin could have been incorporated on a rotational basis, which would have guaranteed their technical contributions and a higher level of commitment by a significant number of NGOs. Likewise, the municipalities that were not incorporated in CRGT’s constitution did not internalize the activities that were conducted or did not know about them. It is important to point out that municipalities such as San Antonio de Belén, which have been pioneers in environmental actions and particularly in water themes, never knew about the projects that were being conducted by the CRGT and in an isolated or independent manner have developed integrated water activities that could have been included in the CRGT’s program. In addition, according to the ABT evaluation (1998), there were no, and are no, channels for feedback or adequate coordination with the municipalities and NGOs that did not have representation, with this being the region of the country with the largest number of such organizations. This meant that many actors, although they were aware that there was a commission, did not become a part of the process.
CRGT’s legal character does not respond to the ambitious objectives defined at the time of its creation; the decree defined it as a “support agency of MIRENEM” (now MINAE). Since it lacks legal capacity, it cannot officiate at any kind of legal ceremony or sign contracts in its own name, and it cannot directly manage its resources. This reduces its autonomy, as well as its operational capability, and seriously limits its scope as a river basin organization.
To resolve these deficiencies, CRGT has had to count on an “executory arm” that gives it greater operational capability, such as the search for and channeling of resources and the execution of projects. Two NGOs close to the commission have given that support. The first is ASOCUENCAS, an association consisting of members of the commission, and since 1996, FUDEU.
The Decree does not set a budget for the commission’s operations and does not define any other method of funding or of providing resources. This becomes a major obstacle to assuming a leading role in river basin management.
The Decree, by being an instrument of lower rank than a law, cannot confer management responsibilities to CRGT. In practice, CRGT constitutes a space for meeting and discussion to coordinate the actions that different institutions and social sectors are conducting in the river basin.
From the time it was created in 1993 until the beginning of 1999, the CRGT had one coordinator, which permitted continuity for the process but at the same time hindered the organization’s evolution and growth by incorporating new actors. Many of the interested actors believed that CRGT decision-making was excessively centralized, and that it was extremely difficult to influence the definition of policies.
91
5.3 EVOLUTION OF A RIVER BASIN ORGANIZATION
The evolution that CRGT has followed can be detailed in the following phases:
5.3.1 Constitution (Raising Awareness, Creating Capacity, And Generating Information)
During this phase the most relevant actor was the municipality of San José, which created and promoted the CRGT’s operation. From the time it began until 1994, CRGT began an awareness-raising campaign about river basin management. There were motivational activities in the municipalities and with contacts in private business to involve them in the process.
A project was conducted for Local Participation to Control Liquid and Solid Contaminants in the Río Grande de Tárcoles River basin, which was sponsored by the Government of the Netherlands.
A series of events were organized (seminars, workshops, meetings) that guaranteed substantial participation by municipalities, NGOs, and private and public sectors. These were held to create a framework for debate about common themes and were an endeavor to give clear information to all the actors. Some of the activities were:
A Seminar: “Towards Integrated Management in the Río Grande de Tárcoles River Basin” in March 1993.
A Seminar: “Institutional Tasks in the Río Grande de Tárcoles Bain” in October 1993. A Workshop: “Legislation and Water” in March 1994. A Seminar: “The Río Grande de Tárcoles River Basin: In Search of Sustainable Development” in
August 1994. A Workshop: “Protected Areas in the Río Tárcoles River Basin” in May 1997.
Likewise, the necessary institutional arrangements were made to make the CRGT operational. In those two years, it was physically located in the offices of the municipality of San José, where it was assigned the basic personnel to be able to work. CRGT members and executive personnel participated in training activities.
Information related to water quality and the precise sources of pollution in the river basin, studies referring to the characteristics of the river basin, and institutional and legal analyses were compiled and systematized.
5.3.2 Strengthening The Organization (Executing Programs And Projects)
CRGT was consolidated in 1994 and began conducting activities in the river basin. That was its most productive phase and, coincidentally, there was wide support from MINAE for this and other river basin structures. MINAE, in addition to logistical and economic support, gave CRGT
92
a number of functions that were usually performed by other centralized agencies of MINAE. Therefore, MINAE’s predominant role was its support of the executory agencies.
CRGT’s headquarters were transferred to installations offered by MINAE, which were shared by other dependencies of that ministry.
During this phase the CRGT was very active and demonstrated great leadership on the national and international (regional) levels; it became a management “model” to be reproduced. CRGT was incorporated as a founding member of the International Network of River Basin Organizations in France in 1994, and into the Latin American Network of River Basin Organizations in Brazil in 1997. With the support of IDB and Government of France, the First Meeting on River Basin Organizations in Central America and the Caribbean was organized on May 1, 1997.
There were four main programs executed during that stage:
The Volunteer Plan Program
This was formed in the context of the approval of the Wildlife Conservation Law in October 1992, particularly of Article 132, which prohibits throwing contaminated substances into bodies of water and set a 24-month deadline (December 1994) for all “polluters” to comply. That program invited businesses to present a voluntary plan to establish a waste treatment system, in search of a framework for coordination with the businesses through agreements with different business sectors. Those agreements endeavored to establish action plans for the industrial and agribusiness sectors. The biggest success was with coffee processors, sugar cane mills, and pig farms.
It is important to mention that, in this context, Executive Decree No. 24156 MIRENEM-SALUD was issued, which established for the first time in the country, maximum and minimum parameters for throwing contaminated substances into bodies of water. That Decree was revised and updated, and a new version was presented on June 19, 1997 (Executive Decree No. 26042 SALUD-MINAE).
The Program for Volunteer Plans was born in CRGT and grew beyond its expectations—about 100 businesses joined the program. Because of the extent and national projection, the program was taken up again by MINAE, to be executed by them, in 1988. However, the MINAE has not been able to maintain the initial interest. At this time, the program is operating at its lowest level.
93
The Ecological Banner Program
The Ecological Banner Program was established by CRGT in 1994, first to stimulate volunteer work in the communities and then to recognize the efforts of manufacturing companies, service agencies, or public institutions that were developing activities to protect and rescue natural resources in the Río Grande de Tárcoles River basin.
CRGT began to recognize the efforts of private businesses in preserving the environment and controlling pollution when it decided to give this award for the first time, in February 1995, to companies that had successfully completed the pilot plan, which was developed in the municipality of San José and the Chamber of Industry in July 1991. Very soon, the initiative went beyond the borders of the river basin and acquired national coverage. However, it was momentarily paralyzed in 1996 because of a lack of resources and technical equipment to follow up on its work.
By 1997, with the support of the Dutch government, it was decided to change the Ecological Banner into a “seal of environmental quality.” After four years of operation, MINAE transferred the program to the Office of Civil Society in the same ministry, which is currently the entity in charge of the program’s administration, application, and operation in the entire country and is responsible for its operation.
Figure 17 Current Design of the Ecological Banner
Reforestation Programs
CRGT determined its priority to be the need to promote the protection of riverbanks, streams, springs, and forest land that are being threatened by landslides or erosion. It conducted promotion and awareness-raising programs in elementary and high schools, in community
94
organizations, and with environmentalists in the different cantons that have jurisdiction in the Tárcoles River basin.
The program—as it was originally proposed—is divided into three stages: cleanup, reforestation, and maintenance. They were able to plant more than 150,000 trees. It is important to mention that the program uses native species that are produced in a tree nursery that belongs to ICE, which has an agreement with CRGT for the donation of trees for the program.
Currently, the Reforestation Program is being taken up by the municipality of San José through the Program to Rescue the María Aguilar River Basin, where a recreational park has been constructed that, among other things, has a butterfly farm and a nursery of native Costa Rican tree species, which serves not only as an open classroom for environmental education, but also as a reproduction area for trees to be planted in reforestation programs.
Other entities that form a part of CRGT have developed, and are currently developing, reforestation programs in various watersheds. That is the case of the National Energy Company and of some municipalities.
Program for Integrated Management of Natural Resources in the Río Grande De Tárcoles River Basin
CRGT elaborated and presented to IDB for funding a program for Integrated Management of Natural Resources in the Río Grande de Tárcoles River Basin, with the special feature that even though the proposal was approved by MINAE and the Ministry of Planning, it was presented to IDB by the CRGT in 1994, and not directly by a governmental agency.
In addition, in the process of negotiation—that lasted nearly three years—the CRGT was selected to be the national counterpart, which was the first time that IDB in Costa Rica worked with an agency of this kind. IDB gave to CRGT the responsibility to supervise and use US$1.0 million to design the “concept” of the program and to fund the development of feasibility studies. Those studies were elaborated by the North American company, ABT Associates, Inc. together with its local partners, CATIE, the Neotropical Foundation, and the COSESA Group. This began in October 1997 and concluded at the end of 1998.
5.3.3 Invisibilization: Gradual Diminution Of Functions
At the beginning of 1999, a number of factors converged that began to make the normal operation of CRGT difficult. On one hand, immediate situations such as the policies made by MINAE, particularly by the Minister at the time, directly interfered in CRGT’s coordination and decisions, and above all, did not want to support the process that had been undertaken. For example, a new president was named “without consultation,” primarily because he was the
95
MINAE representative, and without having any previous involvement in the CRGT or familiarity with similar processes. His appointment was thus primarily political.
When Mr. Salas left the presidency of CRGT, it was assumed by the representative of the Union of Local Governments, Mr. Luis Fernando Chacón, who had been providing some leadership in CRGT activities. In late 2001, MINAE again decided to take control of CRGT and named Ms. María Guzmán, an MINAE official as president, again, without any kind of consultation with the Assembly. Ms. Guzmán is the National Environmental Director, and since that time, in addition to her functions and without any additional resources, she has filled the presidency and has, with great effort, kept the CRGT alive, making it clear that it is functioning at a minimum level. In the name of the CRGT, some research and actions with a nod toward the implementation of economic instruments and pollution control measures have been performed, but the members themselves do not know that these are actions of the CRGT.
On the other hand, structural matters, such as the mistakes made when creating CRGT’s internal structure, led to its exhaustion and its loss of credibility and the lack of commitment by other actors. Lastly, the lack of a legal and institutional framework hindered effective decentralization and, therefore, the formation of real structures for river basin management.
In addition, the obstacles encountered by attempts to decentralize during 1998-2002 were debilitating to CRGT’s position as one of the principal actors in the river basin. That debilitation was obvious from the moment that CRGT was excluded from following up with IDB for the Program of Integrated Management of Natural Resources in the Río Grande de Tárcoles River Basin. Even though the CRGT did not approve the study, the financial agency decided to approve the study and completed payment to the consulting company without CRGT’s approval.
After that study was completed, which as mentioned above, had an investment of US$1.0 million, there was no interest by MINAE or of any other institution in following up on the study or initiating its implementation, even partially.
Currently, there are new conditions to reverse the debilitating process: first, an ongoing process to reform the legal and institutional water framework in the country; second, the weaknesses and strengths of the organization are well known, as are their failures and successes; third, the different actors have accumulated experience in water resource management and can encourage a process of integrated management in this river basin.
For its part, the Office for Scientific and Technical Cooperation of the Ministry of Foreign Relations of France has fully supported the CRGT’s activities, which has made it possible for the it to disseminate the experience internationally and to join the river basin networks mentioned above.
96
The German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GtZ) also provided financial assistance, and the Dutch government financed some of the workshops and other activities.
Undoubtedly, the strongest international cooperation was from IDB, which chose this Central American initiative to receive its backing, possibly because it believed that this experience would be duplicated in other river basins in Central America.
5.4 DEVELOPMENT OF WATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS IN THE TÁRCOLES RIVER BASIN WITHOUT THE PARTICIPATION OF THE CRGT
Parallel to the activities developed by CRGT and recognizing the limitations that made CRGT’s work difficult, many entities that participated in the it, and some others that did not, developed a series of plans, programs, and projects related to water resources, but only in watersheds, microbasins, and sections of the basin rather than in the entire river basin. CRGT did not assume a leadership role in the entire river basin.
Many of these projects and programs are nearly as old as the CRGT itself. Among the more outstanding programs are:
5.4.1 Plan For The Environmental Improvement Of The Upper Part Of The Virilla River Basin (PLAMA-Virilla).
The idea of the PLAMA-Virilla program began in 1991, but it was actually founded three years later as the “Project for the Improvement of Water Quality in the Virilla River.” A decentralized structure was not developed nor was there wide participation (Committee, Council, etc.). This program was designed and promoted by CNFL to improve the environmental quality in the upper part of that watershed through the involvement of communities and the other public institutions in the area. Specifically, the program developed in the microbasins of the Durazno Villa rivers, the Macho River, and the Pará-Paracito rivers and has three main components: reforestation and protection of forests; environmental education, and management of solid waste.
5.4.2 El Plama-Mora
By 1996, through the initiative of CNFL, the PLAMA-Virilla program had extended to the watersheds of the Quebrada Honda, Jarís, and Picagres rivers, tributaries of the Virilla located near Mora canton. By an agreement between CNFL and the University for Peace, the PLAMA-Mora program was established in an area of 162 km2. As in the case of PLAMA-Virilla, an agency for river basin management was not created. Three areas of work were defined: Program for Natural Resource Management, Program for Clean Technology, and Program for Communication Regarding Sustainable Development.
5.4.3 Commission For The Rehabilitation Of The Ciruelas River
97
This commission was created in 1995 at the request of the regional offices of MINAE and the Health Ministry in the area of Santa Barbara of Heredia for the purpose of rehabilitating the Ciruelas River basin, where about 45,000 people live. Later, representatives of the Agriculture and Education ministries joined the commission.
The commission designed its work around three lines of action: Environmental Education; Legal Aspects (checking out accusations, control and supervision); and Foment a Private Sector Awareness through specific projects on pig and dairy farms where waste treatment plants have been installed.
The Ciruelas River Commission had some contact with CRGT; however, it was decided that they were different parallel processes and were never integrated. The Ciruelas experience developed from its own bases while the Tarcóles program resulted from institutional arrangements.
5.4.4 Commission for the Rehabilitation of the Segundo River
This commission was created for the purpose of rehabilitating the upper basin of the Segundo River, a tributary of the Virilla River. The communities of Barva and San Rafael of Heredia participate in the commission, which is coordinated by the National University.
Among its objectives is to facilitate the incorporation of civil society groups in the rehabilitation of the river basin, to train community leaders in themes related to the management of river basins, and to formulate, promote, and execute community action plans. This is one of the oldest programs in the river basin; its first phase began in 1987 and lasted until 2001. In 1995 it was taken over by an initiative of the Barva municipality.
It has three areas of action: educating children on environmental issues, through workshops given in schools of the area and taught by personnel from the National University; generating information, beginning with research projects by the students and professors; and funding projects directed to promoting environmental management, from small engineering works to campaigns for education and environmental awareness-raising.
5.4.5 Commission for the Foothills of Monte Sur
This commission emerged from the initiative of the Central Volcanic Conservation Area of MINAE to create a space for coordination and cooperation between the programs and projects that were developing in the northeast area of the Monte Sur mountain range. Later, other public agencies and civil society organizations were integrated. In addition to the state institutions such as MINAE, MAG, INVU, and ARESEP, the Ciruelas River Commission and the Segundo River Commission are members.
98
As with the others, this commission has defined three lines of action, among which is the developing environmental education programs, defining important physio-geographical areas, and establishing a database with information about the zone. The active participation in this commission by municipalities in the region has been impressive; they have shown interest in participating in the programs that will eventually benefit them.
In general terms, all of these local and subregional initiatives are directed toward promoting education and an awareness-raising process, most of them through environmental education programs.
Likewise, they are carrying out reforestation and forest protection programs, as well as compiling information and generating databases.
However, with the exception of the Ciruelas Commission, programs directed toward installing waste treatment plants for pig and dairy farms such as PLAMA-Virilla and PLAMA-Mora, which are focused on clean technology, none of the other initiatives are aimed at directly improving water quality.
None of these initiatives has been able to go beyond programs that meet immediate needs to the elaboration of plans for integrated water resource management in the watersheds where they are working.
This shows the need to generate processes to create watershed organizations where these types of programs can be coordinated and connected in the function of integrated river basin management.
99
BBIIBBLLIIOOGGRRAAPPHHYY Abt Consultants. Programa De Manejo De La Cuenca Del Río Tárcoles: Estudio De
Factibilidad, Volume 1. Costa Rica. Abt Consultores, 1998.
Abt Consultants. Programa De Manejo De La Cuenca Del Río Tárcoles: Estudio De
Factibilidad, Volume 2. Costa Rica. Abt Consultores, 1998.
Abt Consultants. Programa De Manejo De La Cuenca Del Río Tárcoles: Estudio De
Factibilidad: Diagnostico Integrado. Costa Rica. Abt Consultores, 1998.
Abt Consultants. Programa De Manejo De La Cuenca Del Río Tárcoles: Estudio De
Factibilidad, Informe De Alternativas. Costa Rica. Abt Consultores, 1998.
Aguilar, Alejandra Et Al. Manual De Regulaciones Jurídicas Para La Gestión Del Recurso
Hídrico En Costa Rica. CEDARENA, 2001.
Ballestero, Maureen. Situación De Los Recursos Hídricos En Los Países Del Istmo
Centroamericano. Costa Rica. Gwp-Centroamérica, 2001.
Castro Córdoba, Rolando. Estudio Diagnóstico Sobre La Legislación De Plaguicidas En Costa
Rica. CEDARENA, 1995.
Castro Salazar, René. The Water: Moving From A Free Good To A Tradable One. Case Study
For Day Of Americas, World Water Forum. Kyoto, Japan. March,2003.
CCAD/PROSIGA. Programa De Modernización De Los Sistemas De Gestión Ambiental En
Centro América: Desarrollo De Una Base Metodológica Para El Cálculo De Un Canon
Ambientalmente Ajustado Por Aprovechamiento De Agua En La Cuenca Del Río Grande
Tárcoles, Final Report. Costa Rica. CCAD/Prosiga, 2002.
Chacón, José Joaquín. Costa Rica: Estimación Del Capital Hídrico Y Su Aprovechamiento.
Costa Rica. CRRH/CNMH, 2002.
Espinoza E. Lisbeth Et Al. Guía De Regulaciones Jurídicas Para La Fiscalización Y Tutela De
Actividades En Las Cuencas Hidrográficas. CEDARENA, 1995.
Garnier, Leonardo. Costa Rica Entre La Ilusión Y La Desesperanza. San José, Costa Rica,
Ediciones Guayacán, 1991.
Gwp-Centroamérica. Régimen Del Recurso Hídrico: El Caso De Costa Rica. Costa Rica.
Gwp-Centroamérica, 2003.
La Cuenca Del Río Tárcoles (1992). Seminario: La Cuenca Del Río Tárcoles, Con Miras
Hacia El Futuro. Lecture 6-8. San José, Costa Rica. La Cuenca Del Tárcoles.
100
López, Alexander. Conflicto Y Cooperación Ambiental En Cuencas Internacionales
Centroamericanas: Repensando La Soberanía Nacional. San José, Costa Rica. Editorial
Funpadem, 2002.
Mora Portuguez, Jorge And Arguedas M. Mercedes. Análisis Jurídico Institucional Del
Funcionamiento De Talleres De Enderezado Y Pintura En El Área Metropolitana De San José.
FUDEU, 2000.
Mora Portuguez, Jorge And Salas V. Seidy. Análisis De La Participación Ciudadana En La
Gestión Del Sinac. FUDEU-MINAE, 2000.
Mora Portuguez, Jorge. “Legal Institutional Analysis Of Environmental Management Of Water
Resources In Costa Rica” In Proyecto Sistemas Integrados De Gestión Y Calidad Ambiental,
Componente Costa Rica. CCAD-SICA, 2000.
Mora Portuguez, Jorge. “Legal Institutional Analysis Of Environmental Management Of Water
Resources In Proyecto Sistemas Integrados De Gestión Y Calidad Ambiental, Componente Costa
Rica. CCAD-SICA, 2000.
Mora Portuguez, Jorge. “Municipal Responsibilities In Environmental Matters” In Gestión
Ambiental Descentralizada. Gobiernos Locales Y Sociedad Civil En La Experiencia Del Área
De Conservación Amistad Caribe. FUDEU, 1999.
Regional Center For Studies In Ecological Economy. Informe Sobre La Situación Actual Del
Uso Y Manejo Del Recurso Hídrico En Costa Rica: Marco Institucional Y Legal Para El Manejo
Integrado De Los Recursos Hídricos En Costa Rica, Phase I. Costa Rica. CRESEE.
Rodríguez, Alejandro. Políticas Institucionales Sobre Cuencas Hidrográficas: Memoria Del I
Encuentro Sobre Organismos De Cuenca De Centro América Y El Caribe. San José De Costa
Rica. Cuenca Del Río Grande De Tárcoles, 1997.
Rovira, Jorge. La Democracia De Costa Rica Ante L Siglo Xxi. San José, Costa Rica. Edit.
Universidad De Costa Rica, 2001.
Salazar Roxana. Marco Jurídico Y Administrativo De La Aguas En Costa Rica. Sinadaes,
Mideplan, 1998.
Salazar Roxana. Normativa Ambiental Sobre La Contaminación De Las Aguas. Ambio, 1993.
Solano, Ronald. La Cuenca Del Río Grande De Tárcoles. Legislación Ambiental, Competencias
Y Autoridad En El Control Ambiental, 1994.
State Of The Nation Project. Informe De La Auditoría Ciudadana Sobre La Calidad De La
Democracia: Volumes 1 And 2. San José, Costa Rica. Proyecto Estado De La Nación, 2001.
101
State Of The Nation Project. Estado De La Nación En Desarrollo Humano Sostenible, Report
5. San José, Costa Rica. Proyecto Estado De La Nación, 1999.
State Of The Nation Project. Estado De La Nación En Desarrollo Humano Sostenible, Report
6. San José, Costa Rica. Proyecto Estado De La Nación, 2000.
State Of The Nation Project. Estado De La Nación En Desarrollo Humano Sostenible, Report
7. San José, Costa Rica. Proyecto Estado De La Nación, 2001.
State Of The Nation Project. Estado De La Nación En Desarrollo Humano Sostenible, Report
8. San José Costa Rica. Proyecto Estado De La Nación, 2002.
System For Central American Integration. Plan Centroamericano Para El Manejo Integrado
Y La Conservación De Los Recursos Del Agua. Guatemala. Sistema De Integración Centro
América, 2000.
Tropical Science Center. Plan De Acción Para La Cuenca Del Río Tempisque: Diagnostico
Funcional, Volume IV. Costa Rica. Tropical Science Center, 1998.
102
ANNEX 1: Some Environmental Characteristics of Costa Rica’s Principal River Basins ANNEX 2: RECEIPT SHOWING A WATER MONTHLY BILL INCLUDING THE N° Name Area
CHARGE TO PROTECT WATER RESOURCES IN HEREDIA COUNTIES SERVED BY ESPH
104
ANNEX 3: LEGAL INSTITUTIONAL MATRIX ACCORDING TO DIFFERENT WATER USES DOMESTIC-RESIDENTIAL USE
RESPONSIBLE
AGENCY
RESPONSIBILITIES
SPECIFIC POWERS
REQUIREMENTS
SANCTIONS
REGULATIONS CO-
REQUIREMENTS AGREEMENTS
MINAE WATER DEPARTMENT
Define policies and administer the water resources in all the national territory. Grant Concessions and authorizations for utilization and discharge.
Grant concessions and use permits to individuals, users associations and rural associations. Grant authorizations for utilization to public agencies; SENARA, ESPH and Municipalities. Process and authorize permits to drill wells and permits for discharge of water from human consumption in rivers under public domain.
Fill out application, indicate rivers to be used, pay utilization tax. Environmental Impact Study when determined by SETENA.
- Concession can be revoked for noncompliance or dishonesty. - Expiration of the Concession granted according to Article 26 of the Water Law.
Water Law No. 276, of 1942. Organic Environmental Law, Article 50,51,64-67, of the 1995. Internal Regulations of MINAE, 1997
See Proposed Law for Water Resources of MINAE. Law of Soils, Article 22, of 1998 Law of ARESEP, Article 16, 1996.
105
RESPONSIBLE
AGENCY
RESPONSIBILITIES
SPECIFIC POWERS
REQUIREMENTS
SANCTIONS
REGULATIONS CO-
REQUIREMENTS AGREEMENTS
MUNICIPALITIES
Administration of municipal water supply systems and municipal sewer systems.
- Billing and collection for water service. - Maintenance of the service and its infrastructure. - By means of regulatory plans they are in charge of protecting the aquifer layers. - Nominate the water inspector of the canton by means of a nominating list presented to ARESEP.
By meter or by presumption of volume, some municipalities administer their own water supply systems. Some have drainage and sewer systems and charge for those services on the municipal billing. Adapt to dispositions of ARESEP and the Health Ministry.
Concession from the Water Department for a municipal water supply system.
Can begin an embargo process for noncompliance; cut off the water supply. Can prohibit certain human activities in protected areas.
- Water Law, Art. 41, of 1942 - Law No.1634 General Drinking Water Law of 1953 and following, - Municipal Code, of 1982, Articles 4, 6, 13, 79 and 81 - Internal Regulations
- Water Law, Articles 176, 177 - See regulatory plans if they exist.
106
RESPONSIBLE
AGENCY
RESPONSIBILITIES
SPECIFIC POWERS
REQUIREMENTS
SANCTIONS
REGULATIONS CO-
REQUIREMENTS AGREEMENTS
COSTA RICA INSTITUTE AQUEDUCTSS AND SEWERS
Direct and set policies, establish and apply norms, conduct and promote planning, funding and development, and resolve everything related to the provision of drinking water. Use, take advantage of, govern or supervise, depending on the situation, all the water under public domain that is related to the provision of drinking water; collection and disposal of waste water, the same as the normative aspects of rain drainage.
Approval of all construction projects, reform, expansion of water supply systems, both public and private. Administration and operation of water supply systems and sewers in the entire country. Make agreements with local organizations for the administration of these services, with the exception of those located in the metropolitan area, or for those that AyA has financial responsibility. Elaboration of rates and tariffs.
Presentation of projects related to water supply systems and sewers to the Institute for approval before being sent to the Water Department of MINAE. All tariff and rate projects must be presented to AyA, which it will approve or modify before the project is published in the congressional record.
AyA can cancel permits, set fines and begin embargo processes for noncompliance, and can cut off the water supply.
- Law to Create the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers of 1961. - Water Law. Of 1942 - Law No.1634 General Drinking Water
- See General Health Law, 1973, Article 289. - Law of ARESEP, of 1996, Article 16.
107
RESPONSIBLE
AGENCY
RESPONSIBILITIES
SPECIFIC POWERS
REQUIREMENTS
SANCTIONS
REGULATIONS CO-
REQUIREMENTS AGREEMENTS
MINISTRY OF HEALTH
Quality control of drinking water for human consumption. Control de activities that pollute.
- Monitor the water quality for human consumption, that it is in conformity with established regulations for drinking water quality.
- Intervene in drinking water supply systems if it presents any danger to human health. - Set quality standards for water. - Issue norms for waste dumping.
- Adapt to the dispositions on structure and operation of water supply systems that are set by specific techniques dictated by the Executive Branch and by AyA.
The Ministry will dictate special measures for anything from prevention to orders for closure.
General Health Law, 1973, Article 266. Regulation for Quality of Drinking Water, 1953, Articles 7 and 8.
Organic Environmental Law., 1995.
ARESEP
Regulation of water supply system and sewer services in harmony with the interests of users and supplies.
- Fix tariffs after consulting with the interested parties. - Quality control of the service, establishing norms for quality. - Expert opinions, processing complaints, correct anomalies.
- Submit to the needs and dispositions established by regulations. - Adapt to the dispositions of Article 14 of the Law of ARESEP regarding the obligations of those who provide services.
Fines of up to five to ten times the value of the damage caused, fines for late payment, revoking the concession or permit (Articles 38 and following of Law 7593 of ARESEP)
Article 29 of Law 7593 of the Regulatory Authority for Public Services (ARESEP), 1996 Law No. 7593 of ARESEP, 1996
Organic Environmental Law, Articles.17-24.
108
AGRIBUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL USE
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY
RESPONSIBILITIES
SPECIFIC POWERS
REQUIREMENTS
SANCTIONS
REGULATIONS
CO-REQUIREMENTS AGREEMENTS
MINAE WATER DEPARTMENT
Define policies and administer water resources in the entire national territory.
Grant Concessions and authorize permits for water use or discharge in rivers of public domain.
Process and authorize permits for wells for water extraction, conduct works in rivers under public domain. Process and authorize the discharge from agricultural and industrial drainage in rivers under public domain. Collect taxes.
Fill out application. Pay use tax. Environmental Impact Study when required by laws or regulations.
- Can revoke the concession in case of incompliance or dishonesty. - Charge for harming the environment according to Article 98 of the Organic Environmental Law.
Water Law No. 276, 1942, Articles 16, 29 Organic Environmental Law, 1995, Articles 50, 51, 64-65-66-67-69. Internal Regulations of MINAE
See Law Project for Water Resources of MINAE. Conservation, Management and Use of Soil Law,1998, Article 22.
MUNICIPALITIES
Management and administration of the resource. Authorization, control and regulation of activities conducted in the area of its jurisdiction.
- Control of activities that cause pollution in the canton by granting business licenses. - Has authority through regulatory plans to protect certain areas considered as protected areas.
Present application for license and patents to the Council.
Fines and closing of businesses or of the respective activity. Deny or cancel business license. Can obstruct certain human activities in zones declared as protected areas.
Water Law, 1942 Municipal Code, 1982 Regulatory Plans Law of Urban Planning, 1968
Organic Environmental Law, 1995, Articles 50 and 99.
109
RESPONSIBLE
AGENCY
RESPONSIBILITIES
SPECIFIC POWERS
REQUIREMENTS
SANTIONS
REGULATIONS CO-
REQUIREMENTS AGREEMENTS
MINISTRY OF HEALH
Control of water pollution Quality control of water for industrial or agribusiness use.
Supervision of the prevention and control of dumping solid and liquid waste into national water (in coordination with SINAC and others). Authorize drainage or discharge of solid and liquid waste that could pollute surface, ground or marine waters. Authorize reutilization of wastewater. Approve systems of disposal for excrement and wastewater. Approve installations for the purification of wastewater and industrial waste. Authorize treatment plants for wastewater. Approve use of techniques for sewage disposal in the ocean.
Application for Permit from the Ministry of Health, Department for the Protection of Human Environment. Adapt to the dispositions, techniques and regulations issued by the Ministry.
Cancellation of authorizations and/or permits. The Ministry dictates special measures that can range from prevention to orders for closure.
General Health Law, 1973, Articles 275, 276, 277, 283, 284, 285, 291-292, 298-307. Water Law, 1942, Article 33. Regulation for Dumping Waste and Reutilization of Wastewater, Decree 21518 of August 1991. Regulation for the Management of Dangerous Industrial Waste, No. 27001 and Regulation for the characteristics listed in the Dangerous Industrial Wastes, No. 27000.
Law for Wildlife Conservation, 1994, Article 132. Organic Environmental Law, 1995, Articles 51-52,60, 64.
110
RESPONSIBLE
AGENCY
RESPONSIBILITIES
SPECIFIC POWERS
REQUIREMENTS
SANCTIONS
REGULATIONS CO-
REQUIREMENTS AGREEMENTS
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE
Aspects related to soil conservation and recuperation.
Issue criteria about the impact of water concessions for agricultural use on soil resources.. Dictate measures for the management of residues of fertilizers and toxic agrochemicals. Design soil management plans for river basins together with MINAE and civil society. Control of dangerous agrochemical products.
Elaborate Management Plan for River Basins. Application for registry and permit to use toxic agrochemicals.
Art. 52 establishes payment for environmental and social damage and injury. Art. 51 Refers to criminal legislation.
Law for Soil Use, Management and Conservation. 1998, Articles 6, 19, 21, 28, 31 Articles 15, 16, 34.
Coordinate with MINAE, according to Article 7 of the Law for Soil Use, Management and Conservation, and with Ministry of Health, according to Articles 28 & 33 of the Health Ministry’s Regulations, 1973. Article 4, SENARA creation Law. 1983 Organic Environmental Law, 1995, Art. 6.
AQUEDUCTS AND SEWERS
Management of wastewater dumped in water bodies or in sewer systems.
Receive and approve reports from generating agencies. Establish physiochemical and bacteriological parameters for wastewater. Establish minimum sample frequency. Establish average maximum limits.
Presentation of projects for dumping waste in sewage systems. Presentation of operational reports. Adapt to the technical dispositions of AyA and the Ministry of Health.
Fines of between five and 10 times the value of the damage caused, fines for late payment, revocation of the concession or permit according to Article 26 de Law 2726 for the creation of AyA.
- Law for Creation of AyA,1961, Articles 21, 26 - Regulation for dumping waste and reusing wastewater, 26042-S-MINAE, Articles 3, 7, 10, 32, 33.
General Health Law 1973, and the Law 132 for Wildlife Conservation Law of 1994.
111
AGRICULTURAL AND IRRIGATION USE
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY
RESPONSIBILITIES
SPECIFIC POWERS
REQUIREMENTS
SANCTIONS
REGULATIONS
CO-REQUIREMENTS AGREEMENTS
MINAE WATER DEPARTMENT
Concession for utilization for irrigation
Grant concession to utilize water for irrigation.
Fill out application, indicate river, pay use tax, indicate techniques for soil conservation.
Revocation of concession in case of noncompliance.
Water Law, 1942, Articles 17-29 Organic Environmental Law, 1995, Articles 50 y 51. Law for Soil Use, Management and Conservation,1998, Articles 22 and 63
Law for Creation of SENARA, No.6877, of 18-07-83, Article 4. Law of ARESEP, 1996, Article 5 (paragraph included in Article 63 of the Law for Soil).
MAG DEPARTMENT OF SOILS
Regulate aspects relative to conservation and recuperation of soil.
Issue criteria about impact of utilization of water on soil. Make soil management plans according to river basin together with MINAE and civil society.
Elaborate a management plan for river basins.
Art.52, Establishes payment for environmental and social damage and injury. Art.51, Refers to criminal legislation.
Law for Soil Use, Management & Conservation, 1998, Art. 6, clause (g), Art. 19, clauses (c) & (g) Article 21 Articles 15 and 16,34
Article 4, Law for Creation of SENARA, 1983 Organic Environmental Law,1995, Art. 6.
SENARA
Administers supply of water by Irrigation Districts in coordination with MAG. Elaborate Irrigation Plan.
Elaborate plans for irrigation districts.
Must coordinate management, conservation and recuperation of soil activities with MAG. Need MINAE water concession.
Cancellation of the authorization.
Law for creation of SENARA, 1983, Article 4, clauses (a) and (g).
Water Law of 1942, Organic Environmental Law, 1995, Articles.51, 64-67 See: MINAE Project for Law for Water Resources. Law for Soil Use, Management and Conservation,1998, Articles 21 and 62.
112
RESPONSIBLE
AGENCY
RESPONSIBILITIES
SPECIFIC POWERS
REQUIREMENTS
SANCTIONS
REGULATIONS CO-
REQUIREMENTS AGREEMENTS
MINISTRY OF HEALTH
Quality of water for irrigation.
Oversee that the water used for irrigation meets established quality standards.
Know irrigation plans of SENARA Approve tariffs to be charged by SENARA for its service. Listen to complaints and claims.
Fix tariffs and approve irrigation plans, through prior consultation with the interested parties. Process complaints about the service. Establish irrigation and drainage as a Public Service when it is provided by a public agency or by means of a concession or permit.
Demand an environmental impact study for concessions of public services granted by the responsible agency.
Close the companies that do not provide services as agreed. Revoke permits or concessions of those who provide services that do not comply with environmental law or environmental impact studies.
Law of ARESEP, 1996, Article 5, clause (e) Article 44. Article 41, clauses (j), (k) and (l) Article 5, clause (e)
Law for creation of SENARA, 1983, Article 63. Organic Environmental Law, 1995, Articles 17-24.
MUNICIPALITIES
Local government that is responsible for regulation of interests and services in the canton.
Propose nomination for the Water Inspector of the canton of ARESEP.
Design plan for distribution of water uses.
Do a census of uses. Resolve conflicts for use.
Process information before ARESEP
Propose utilization plans.
None directly established for irrigation or agricultural use.
Water Law, 1942, Articles186-198.
Municipal Code, 1982, Article 3.
113
HYDROELECTRIC AND HYDRAULIC USE
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY
RESPONSIBILITIES
SPECIFIC POWERS
REQUIREMENTS
SANCTIONS
REGULATIONS
CO-REQUIREMENTS AGREEMENTS
MINAE WATER DEPARTAMENT
Concession to utilize water when it is for private operators to generate hydroelectricity or hydraulic power.
Grant concession to utilize water that is indispensable to generate hydroelectric energy or to utilize the hydraulic power of water.
In the case of hydroelectricity: Request declaration of eligibility from ICE. Process authorization with the Energy Sector of MINAE. Process Water with Water Department. Request concession from ARESEP to generate.
Cancellation of concession in the case of noncompliance.
Articles 227 and 226 Penal Code Law of ARESEP, 1996
See: MINAE Project of Law for Water Resources. Private generation is currently on hold in the Constitutional Court, claiming the absence of a framework law. Electrical Co generation Laws #7200 and #5008 (1990 and 1996)
MINAE SECTORIAL DE ENERGÍA
National energy planning.
Permit for operation.
Must present environmental impact study and ICE eligibility.
Without authorization from the Energy Sector it is impossible to continue with processing the permit/concession.
Decree 24652-MIRENEM And Decree 14434-MIRENEM
Laws #7200 of 1990, and Law #5008 of 1996
MINAE SETENA
Environmental Impact Studies.
Request environmental impact studies.
Issue specific regulations with requirement of environmental impact study and require a declaration for eligibility from ICE.
Not having the environmental impact study will obstruct following through with the process.
Regulation of Evaluation Environmental Impact
Organic Environmental Law, 1995, Articles 17-24.
MUNICIPALITIES
Municipal license for private operators.
Charge for municipal license. Give license. Give certificate for agreed use.
If there is a Regulatory Plan in force, must observe the zoning and regulations of that.
No license issued. Revocation of Business License.
Organic Environmental Law, 1995, Articles 28-31. Municipal Code, 1982
Law for Urban Planning 1968
114
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY
RESPONSIBILITIES
SPECIFIC POWERS
REQUIREMENTS
SANCTIONS
REGULATIONS
CO-REQUIREMENTS AGREEMENTS
ICE
National Energy Plan
Does not require water concession since it has one by law. Has power to reserve rivers. Issue declarations of eligibility. Required to buy private electricity.
Issues declaration of eligibility when requested by private parties.
Impossible to operate legally.
Law # 7200 of 1990, Organic Law of ICE #5961 Law #7508 of 1996
Law of ARESEP, 1996, Article 5.
ARESEP
Regulate aspects related to tariffs and conditions for providing service.
Fix tariffs. Receive complaints. Establish conditions for providing service.
Issue specific regulations for conditions of providing service. Request Environmental Impact Studies.
Revocation of concession of permit.
Law of ARESEP, 1996, Article 5, clause (a) Law of ARESEP, 1996, Article 41, clauses (j), (k) and (l) Article 16
