Global Water Partnership

Scary figures have been quoted at the WorldSummit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) inJohannesburg August/September 2002: 1.1billion people lack access to safe drinkingwater and 2.4 billion people have no access toadequate sanitation. 5000-6000 people indeveloping countries - most of them arechildren under five - die every day from

diarrhoea closely linked to inadequate access to safe water andsanitation. Water table has fallen by 50 metres in parts of North-China plain during recent decades. Many rivers no longer reachthe sea several months in a year. On top of that it is estimated thathuman water use will increase by 40% in the next two decadesbecause of population growth and the increasing demand of foodproduction. At the same time the inappropriate use of fertilisersand pesticides results in pollution of surface and ground watermany parts of the world.

Industrialised continues are not except from water relateddisasters. Examples include disastrous floods in USA, France,Germany, UK, The Netherlands. The record floods of 2002 inCentral Europe are still fresh memory of the people living there.Baia Mare (a Rumanian city) has become a frequently used termby the international water community since the cyanide spill of2000, poisoning Szamos and Tisza rivers.

Since many felt that the looming water crisis is rather dueto bad water governance than the lack of resources the issue hasbecome increasingly prominent in the international debate onwater in recent years. The recommendations from the BonnConference on Freshwater (December 2001) singled out Actions inthe field of Governance as one of three major themes. At theWorld Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburggovernance was highlighted and the Plan of Implementationstates explicitly: Good governance within each country and at theinternational level is essential for sustainable development.

Regarding all these no wonder that the United NationsGeneral Assembly (in resolution 55/196) proclaimed the year 2003as the International Year of Freshwater (IYFW). The UN resolutionwas initiated by the Government of Tajikistan and supported by148 other countries. It calls upon governments, national andinternational organizations, NGOs and the private sector to makevoluntary contributions and to lend other forms of support to theinitiative. The Year provides an opportunity to accelerate theimplementation of the principles of integrated water resourcesmanagement.

The IYFW received its official launch at a ceremony at theUnited Nations in New York on December 12, 2002. In a messageissued at the ceremony, UNESCO Director-General KoïchiroMatsuura said that "water can be an agent of peace, rather thanconflicts, and UNESCO is looking at ways that will allow thiscentury to be one of 'water peace' rather than 'water wars'. Bydeveloping principles and methods to manage this resourceefficiently and ethically, while respecting related ecosystems, wemove a step closer to the goal of sustainable development."

One of the main events of the International Year ofFreshwater will be the 3rd World Water Forum, to take place inKyoto, Osaka and Shiga (Japan), March 16-23.

The Forum will not be a platform for presenting technicalpapers, defining theoretical concepts, or discussing researchresults. Instead it invites participants to share their experience withproven actions and best practices that have facilitated sustainablesolutions to water problems. Sessions will comprise major themes,controversial topics, special programs and major groups'discussions. Regional days for Africa, the Americas, Asia andPacific, Europe (see the programme separately), the Middle Eastand Mediterranean will highlight critical water issues, drawingglobal attention to local, national and regional perspectives onproblems and best practices. The central theme of the Europe dayis the EU Water Framework Directive which will reshape waterprotection and water management of the continent, based oncomparable principles and objectives.

One of the prioritised themes discussed in the Forum is theinterrelationship among "Water, Food and Environment" (WFE).The Dialogue on WFE launched two years ago will reach amilestone event in Kyoto in the pursuit of finding satisfactorytradeoffs between two imperatives: to feed present and futuregenerations and to preserve the natural resources of our planet.

As stated before effective water governance is necessaryto solve the water crisis. The results of the Water GovernanceDialogue (established by GWP, UNDP and ICLEI) will be presentedand global and local governance issues will be further explored inorder to share knowledge and experience.

GWP-CEE contributed to both dialogues mentioned abovewith commendable results and the relevant reports will bepublished for the Forum. Summary of the CEE findings can be seenon the posters published in this issue of Water Talk.

Although originally the flood session of the WWF3 has notbeen given priority it will probable receive marked interest afterthe disastrous events of the last year.

During the Forum the GWP will be further involved in theAction through Partnership and the IWRM ToolBox sessions, andthe World Panel on Financing Water Infrastructure. The latter issuehas been also addressed by GWP-CEE last years and the results arealso presented in a poster below.

The first edition of the World Water Development Report(WWDR) is scheduled for submission to the 3rd World WaterForum. The Report will be a periodic review, updated every thirdyear, to give an authoritative picture of the state of the world'sfreshwater resources and our stewardship of them. The WWDRwill be the major component of the UN World Water AssessmentProgramme. It will contain indicators and analysis that willidentify, diagnose and assess:

• the effectiveness of societal stewardship of global freshwaterresources;

• the supply, demand and uses for water and the challenges ofextreme events;

• current critical problems and emerging threats to freshwaterecosystems and their management.

Ministers in charge of water (expectedly more than 120)will meet the last two days of the Forum to discuss solutions toglobal water issues. Senior officials of the interested countries arealready busy with the preparation of the Ministerial Declaration.

The Water Fair and Festival (Mizu-En in Japanese) will beorganized in Osaka, as a commercial exhibition open to all visitors,focussing on such topics as water and cities, industry andtechnology, and lifestyle.

World Water Day is celebrated every year on 22 March andthe celebration is one of the main attractions of the Forum. Thetheme for this year's event is "Water for the Future", calling on oneand all to observe sustainable approaches to water use for thebenefit of future generations. The goal for World Water Day 2003is to inspire worldwide political and community action andencourage greater global understanding of the need for moreresponsible water use and conservation.

During the International Year of Freshwater the WorldWetlands Day has received particular attention. It marks the dateof the signing of the Convention on Wetlands on 2 February 1971,in the Iranian city of Ramsar. The theme chosen this year is 'Nowetlands-no water!', in support to the IYFW initiative. Wetlandscover 6% of the Earth's land surface and are found in all countriesand in all climates. They include swamps, marshes, mangroveforests and wet prairies. Wetlands are a main component inhelping to maintain the water cycle, capturing and holding rainfalland snowmelt, retaining sediments, and purifying water. Aroundthe world 50% of the world's wetlands have been lost since 1900and more than 80% of the wetlands along the Danube River havebeen destroyed since that date. Initiatives need to be taken inorder to reverse the destruction of these essential ecosystems.

A global water movement has gradually gathered pacesince the 1990s especially since the 1992 Rio Earth Summit andthrough milestone events like the First and Second World WaterForum in Marrakesh 1997 and The Hague 2000, the Bonnconference in 2001 and the WSSD in 2002 it raised awarenessworldwide and helped put water high on the political agenda. Itbecame generally accepted that water is a key for sustainabledevelopment. The present year 2003 as the International Year ofFreshwater and the 3rd World Water Forum in Japan might furtherhelp find the right direction to solving the looming global watercrisis. The Year is expected to follow up onagreements reached at the WSSD and shouldhave an impact far beyond the year 2003.

József Gayer

CE

E ISSUE no.

1/2003Marc 2003

t h e n e w s l e t t e r o f t h e C e n t r a l a n d E a s t e r n E u r o p e a n w a t e r s t a k e h o l d e r s

Coordination Group of the Day ofEurope:

EU Commission, DG Environment(Friedrich.Barth@cec.eu.int) and GlobalWater Partnership (CEE and Med)

Preliminary Agenda

Arrival of participants

Opening

Overview of the Water FrameworkDirective (EU Commission)

Presentation on crosscutting themes:

River Basin Management

Flooding

Ecology

Water Pricing

Enlarging the impact of the EU WaterFramework Directive

GWP-CEE part

River Basin Management and publicparticipation (keynote speech)

3 short statements

Short Debate: Panel discussion with theaudience

GWP-Med part

River Basin Management and Waterpricing (keynote speech)

3 short statements

Short Debate: Panel discussion with theaudience

13.30 Ministerial Panel on the EU WaterInitiative

International Year of Freshwater, water as the big issue atthe beginning of the 21st century

3rd World Water Forum

"Day of Europe"

MARCH 21, 2003 (FRIDAY)

8.45 - 15.45

Kyoto, Takaragaike Prince Hotel,

Prince Hall

2

Dialogue on water governance in CEE

One of the principal challenges recog-nised in the CEE region after the HagueWorld Water Forum was to work towardseffective water governance. Water gover-nance is the framework of political, social,economic and legal structures withinwhich societies choose and accept tomanage their water-related affairs. Itincludes governments, the market forcesthat help to allocate resources, and anyother mechanism that regulates humaninteraction.

The efficient water governance cannot beachieved by governmental or intergovern-mental activity alone. It requires co-oper-ation or even better partnership betweengovernment and civil society, includingNGOs which represent the broad diversityof interests in any given society. Equallykey is the network of links between civilsociety and economic system prevailing ina given country. The efficient governancerequires transparency and accountability,participatory mechanisms appropriate tolocal realities, needs and wishes, andrespect for the law and contractual obli-gations. Water governance encompassesmany interlinked social players and mustbe responsive to citizen's needs and to thelong-term sustainability of the naturalresource base of the country and region.

Within this context, the GWP CountryWater Partnerships of the CEE region, inresponse of the initiative of the globalGWP, embarked in the spring of 2002 onthe dialogue how to make water gover-nance more effective in their countriesand in the entire region. To take properlyinto account all national and basin-wisesimilarities and differences, it was decidedthat the dialogue must have a solid basein the national consultations throughworkshops, roundtables, seminars, meet-ings - whatever is appropriate in eachcountry. To evaluate the present status ofgovernance a questionnaire based surveywas made.

The national dialogues performed in 2002have shown that numerous similaritiesexist between the countries in the region.They all have long histories and an abilityto adjust to changes; there is a high levelof knowledge and competence amongwater professionals; river basin authori-ties are already established in severalcountries; all the GWP-CEE countries areprepared to join the European Union (andthey recognise that getting all the policiesand legislation in place is an expensiveprocess); there are vibrant although gen-erally underfinanced local (municipal)government structures and there is fairlygood level of understanding what themain water problems are. But someimportant dissimilarities were also identi-fied. There are large differences betweenthe CEE countries in size, population, cli-mate, hydrologic conditions, and econo-my. Institutional arrangements at thelocal (municipal) level are often quite dif-ferent because of large differences in themunicipality size.

The transboundary water issues are quitecharacteristic for the region. In all coun-tries an assessment of current water gov-ernance systems was made as initialphase of consultations. At the same timeit was recognised that one of the principalquestions for the dialogue consultationsis how to measure the efficiency of gover-nance arrangements and structures.

CE

E

The document published for the WWF3presents the main themes and highlights ofthe national dialogues. By doing so the doc-ument takes stock and identifies a numberof critical issues that can take the discussionon effective governance for integrated waterresources management forward. The last 12years of political, economic and social tran-sition in the CEE countries clearly demon-strated that governance arrangements keepchanging and this process certainly will con-tinue after the 3rd World Water Forum.

TASK FORCE LEADER: LÁSZLÓ SOMLYÓDY

Participating countries:

Bulgaria Estonia Hungary

Latvia Lithuania Poland

Romania Slovakia

Regional report can be downloaded from: www.gwpcee.org

CE

EC

EE

3

Dialogue on Water, Food and Environment in the CEE countries

In the CEE countries of economical transi-tion one of the most critical issues is howto develop the weak agricultural sector inan environment-friendly way, while build-ing market economy and preparing tojoin the European Union. It has becomeevident that the CEE countries need todevelop a science-based consensusbetween all stakeholders - including gov-ernments, NGO's, research specialists andfarmers' organizations - which will helpenhance agricultural production and envi-ronmental security, through sustainablewater management. In short there is aneed for a Dialogue on Water, Food andEnvironment, which follows most directlyfrom:

the utmost necessity to help the agri-culture get modernised and stabilized,the danger of further environmentaldegradation.

The main focus of the Dialogue in the CEEregion is the implementation of the WaterFramework Directive (WFD) in the hopethat by achieving good ecological statusof waters the objectives of the Dialogueprocess will be reached in the agriculturalregions as well.

A Knowledge Base for the country dia-logues has been compiled including:

• EU Water Framework Directive• Common EU and National Strate-

gies on the Implementation ofWFD

• Draft Guidelines for WFD imple-mentation in EU – CIRCA network(approx. 900 documents)

• Other international and nationaldocuments.

The National Dialogue processes in theten GWP-CEE countries (all candidates tothe EU) were based on the outputs of theNational Dialogues Design Workshop inBonn and the CEE WFE Dialogue Kick-offMeeting held in Bled April 2002.

For a successful Dialogue committed part-ners are needed from both ends of thepolitical palette. In CEE the unique politi-cal situation of historic reunification ofthe European continent helps to gainpolitical support for the Dialogue process.

To meet WFD requirements is not enough.A delicate balance has to be reached bymeeting EU water and common agricul-tural policies and by being competitivewithout increasing the burden on theenvironment under harsh conditions oflimited subsidy (average 15% comparedwith 40-60% in EU). To raise the relativelylow living standards typical in agriculturein all CEE countries reconsideration ofsubsidiary policy is needed.

The CEE Dialogue Project is foreseen as adecentralised, multi-year process, withmilestones at the 3rd and 4th WorldWater Forum in Kyoto and Montreal. TheCEE Dialogue Project is co-ordinated withother relevant activities of the GWP CEE,ERWG ICID, WWF Danube Carpathian Pro-gramme and WWF Europe.

TASK FORCE LEADER: ISTVÁN IJJAS

Participating countries:

Bulgaria Czech Republic Estonia

Hungary Latvia Lithuania

Poland Romania Slovakia

Slovenia

Regional report can be downloaded from: www.gwpcee.org

CE

E

4

Financial Flows Study in CEE

In the past ten years the countries of Cen-tral and Eastern Europe continued theirefforts to address water managementproblems in the very unique context of atransition from the centrally planned tomarket economies. Although the prob-lems, which need to be dealt with, are stillmany, there are clear signs of a rethinkingof water policies in the region. Countriesare at differing stages of the EU accessionprocess and are studying on how toimplement the freshly issued EU WaterFramework Directive (WFD). To under-stand better the key financial issues andopportunities in water resources manage-ment a consultation process with keystakeholders at regional, national andlocal levels was carried out across theregion with the objectives:

• To estimate investment outlays,OMR costs and total financialneeds to meet objectives of the EUaccession and objectives of theWater Vision presented at theWWF2;

• To analyze different, existing finan-cial flows (payments from and topublic sources, payments from andto private sector, activities of banksand international financial institu-tions, impact of the pre-accessionand cohesion funds, and selectedforms of financing investments inthe water sector - own sources,subsidies and commercial loans);

• To analyze overall affordability ofthe society

• Develop strategies and tools onhow to close the gap during theextended period of implementa-tion of EU directives.

The study considered three time horizons,namely the present situation, 2015 forwhich the implementation of the EU WFDand associated directives should be com-pleted for most of the CEE countries and2025 being the target of realizing theWater Vision. The study relied upon aclassification of cost and source cate-gories, questionnaire type of additionaldata collection and a unified evaluation ofdata obtained. The study incorporatedthe evaluation of the present situationand analysis of past trends, estimation oftime flow of costs for the period consid-ered, estimation of sources, analysis ofgaps and affordability via scenarios and adiscussion on options to handle gaps.

Major findings can be briefly summarizedas follows:

• Integration of the water cycle andfinancial flows is still missing andrequires an integrated approach;

• Financial flow related informationare poorly available (even reliableOMR costs are missing for most ofthe countries) and this situationshould be improved;

• EU accession: trends are positiveand plans exist. Their efficientimplementation is a must;

• Future expenditures should be sig-nificantly higher than today

• In principle financial sources arethere. However, closing the gapwill require significant EU funds aswell as the involvement of privatecapital;

• Growth of economy plays a crucialrole;

• Affordability can be handled, but itwill not be easy.

TASK FORCE LEADER: LÁSZLÓ SOMLYÓDY

Participating countries:

Bulgaria Estonia Hungary

Latvia Lithuania Poland

Romania Slovakia

Regional report can be ordered from GWP-CEE Secretariat

gwpceetac@vituki.hu but it will not be available before May 2003.

CE

E

5

The Forum brought together some 60 partic-ipants from the ten countries of the regionand invitees from GWP regions Central Amer-ica and South East Asia, WWC-Water ActionUnit, GTZ of Germany, France and the GWPSEC and Wallingford Resource Centre includ-ing also two GWP Steering Committee mem-bers.

The event was opened by Pavel Puncochar,head of department of Ministry of Agricul-ture of the host country, Czech Republic. TheForum was attended by Árpád Göncz formerpresident of Hungary, the patron of GWP-CEEwho addressed the audience. In his speechhe emphasised the importance of regionalcooperation in the field of water manage-ment to ensure sustainability.

The progress of the region was reported byJanusz Kindler, chair of GWP-CEE, who high-lighted the major programmes and milestoneevents of the last one and half years with ref-erence to the long term water vision andframework for action of the region. As hestated most of the foreseen actions had beenstarted or completed and the region is on theright track to achieve the vision statement for2025.

The programme of the RWF focussed on thepresently running dialogues in the light ofthe preparations for the third World WaterForum. Presentations on financing waterinfrastructure, water governance and dia-logue on water food and environment out-lined the present situation, trends, priorities,comments from grass-root stakeholders inthe different CEE countries, likely scenarios,implications etc. in the context of the immi-nent accession to the European Union, themajor driving force in the region.

The regional reports will be completed in thenear future, considering the Forum feedbackand experiences and delivered to contributeto the Kyoto process.

A special session was devoted to a case studycompetition. After a pre-selection process sixhave been presented to the Forum partici-pants, who voted for the best three with theunderstanding that they would be consid-ered for the CEE sub-session at WWF3. Win-ners are:

• Tomasz Okruszko: The Narew River basin (Poland) - national level case

study from Poland

• János Fehér: Tisza River Basin (Hungary) Environmental Pro-

gramme Initiative

• Margit Sare: Transfer of experience (Estonia) on East-East coopera-

tion of transboundarylakes /Strategies forPublic Participation inManagement of Trans-boundary Waters inCountries in Transition:Lake Peipsi (Estonia-Rus-sia) and Lake Ohrid(Macedonia-Albania)Case Study

The major success of the competition wasthe high interest and the involvement of newstakeholders into the water movement ofGWP-CEE. All cases have been offered toIWRM ToolBox as well as to the Water ActionUnit of WWC.

The Forum was ended by a slide show indi-cating different aspects of EU Water Frame-work Directive the requirements of which areto be met by the countries. The slide showserves as a template for the CEE countriespreparing a regional film to be presented atthe WWF3.

The Forum proved to be a successful stock-taking event with clear indications on therole GWP-CEE is playing in the promotion ofIWRM.

GWP-CEE Regional Water ForumPrague, 10 November 2002

CE

E

VITUKI • 1095 Budapest Kvassay út 1.• HungaryTel./Fax: +36 1 215 6047

E-mail: gwpceetac@vituki.huhttp://www.gwpcee.orgcommunication officer: Ms. Mónika JetzinC

EE

At the international conference on "Prevention of flood hazards by integrating socio-economic and environmentalconsiderations" held in Budapest, 30 November - 1 December 2002 the heads of delegates including prime ministers,ministers and other high level decision makers from the Danube, Odra and Elbe basins adopted the statement below.As a follow up GWP-CEE has initiated a Task Force on flood management led by Katarina Hajtasova (Slovak Hydrome-teorological Institute) with the mandate to start programs on general public flood awarness raising, historical floods

with emphasis to antecedent synoptic situation and establishing a network of flood experts in the region.

BUDAPEST INITIATIVE ON STRENGTHENING INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIONON SUSTAINABLE FLOOD MANAGEMENT

Joint Statement by the Heads of Delegations

The recent floods, in particular the floods of August2002, caused casualties, made thousands of peoplehomeless and caused a damage amounting to sever-al thousand million Euros in many countries acrossEurope. These severe events called for immediateresponses from the political leaders. High-level repre-sentatives of the most affected European countriesand key representatives of the European Commissionmet in Berlin this August and agreed to strengthenthe future efforts to cope with such hazards.

Apparently, this concern is shared by many Europeancountries where such emergencies, especially, in rela-tion to the major international watercourses are well-known and studied, and significant efforts havetaken place to cope with these hazards. Relevantnational mechanisms are in place in these countries,moreover, important multilateral and bilateral instru-ments have been developed for the past decades. Butthe recent extreme events clearly demonstrated thatwe should further improve our management sys-tems, harmonize our actions, enhance our coopera-tion.

We are also aware that the causes and the implica-tions of such natural disasters should be consideredin a broader sustainable development framework bytaking into account the interrelated environmental,social and economic dimensions, and the relevantscientific results. In this regard, we acknowledge theimportance of the principles of sustainable develop-ment, precaution and prevention, partnership andsolidarity.

Guided by these objectives and principles, and

Bearing in mind that these disasters do not respectnational borders, and for their averting in anintegrating Europe it is inevitable to take intoconsideration the regional coherence of preven-tive and mitigation actions,

Recognizing that only concerted actions canstrengthen our abilities and opportunities tocope with these hazards,

Acknowledging the importance of internationalcooperation based on common responsibilitiesand mutual interests,

Taking into consideration the existing networks, pro-grammes, initiatives and achievements in rele-vant bilateral and multilateral cooperativeframeworks on these issues,

We have agreed as follows

1. Taking into account the recent severe floods dev-astating large areas of Europe and the environmentalconditions influencing the frequency and severity ofsuch extreme events, the international cooperationshould be strengthened, in particular on flood man-agement and combating adverse socio-economicand ecological impacts, especially in the most vulner-able regions.

2. We believe that understanding the necessity ofreflecting the recent scientific and technologicalresults and the changing requirements of the societyin relation to the environment is the very first step.Also the potential, human-induced climate changeand the socio-economic conditions affecting themanagement of freshwater resources raise newaspects, which will have to be considered when mak-ing and implementing new water management andland use policies.

3. The better understanding of the climatological,hydrological, ecological and landscape context offloods is also of utmost importance in flood man-agement and especially in the flood preventionstrategies. Consequently, a new comprehensiveapproach is needed to flood management at inter-national level, implying better harmonization of thewater policies and land-use practices, as well as, envi-ronmental protection and nature conservation.

4. Considering all these tendencies and require-ments, it is necessary to promote changes in the con-cepts and practices in order to improve flood man-agement in the frame of Integrated River Basin Man-agement, which promotes the coordinated develop-ment, management and conservation actions regard-ing water, land and related resources.

5. We recognize that there are already effectiveregional and bilateral institutional mechanismsincluding multilateral co-operation platforms such asinternational river basin commissions. Our present ini-tiative is built on these existing frameworks and itsupports the preparations of action plans for sustain-able flood protection, which are available or underpreparation in particular river basins. We stronglybelieve that the enhanced overarching regional coop-eration will be of substantial added value and willreinforce the present activities in this area for the ben-efit of all participating countries and organizations.

6. The cooperation in this field has substantiallydeveloped for the recent decades, inter alia, in theframework of the Convention on the Protection andUse of Transboundary Watercourses and Internation-al Lakes (Helsinki, 1992), the legal instruments orcooperative programmes on such watercourses andtheir river basins as the Danube, Elbe, Odra and Tisza,the UNECE Guidelines on Sustainable Flood Protec-tion, Global Water Partnership, 2nd World WaterForum, Joint Ukraine-NATO Project on Flood Pre-paredness and Response in the Carpathian Region,International Hydrological Programme of UNESCO,UNDP/REC Sustainable Development Programme forthe Tisza River Basin, Tisza River Basin Forum on FloodControl etc. Based on these broad mechanisms andinstruments, multi- and bilateral agreements havebeen elaborated and particularly deal with waterrelated risk management. The process of Europeanintegration will offer improved conditions for moreeffective concerted actions (e.g., the Water Frame-work Directive), likewise the broader pan-Europeancooperation in the area of sustainable developmentgenerally, and specific problems of environmentalprotection, nature conservation and sustainable useof natural resources. The Plan of Implementationadopted by the World Summit on Sustainable Devel-opment (Johannesburg, 2002) made also evidentthat an "integrated, multi-hazard, inclusive approachto address vulnerability, risk assessment and disastermanagement, including prevention, mitigation, pre-paredness, response and recovery, is an essential ele-ment of a safer world in the twenty-first century" andcalled for actions at all levels, among others, in orderto reduce the risks of flooding in vulnerable zones.

7. Further cooperative efforts to improve prepared-ness, preventive policies, operational and long-termrisk management and restoration measures shouldbe planned in various topics, including the following:

(a) Assessing factors influencing flood generation,propagation and spreading including climatechange, land use, ecology, morphology and floodplain alterations;

(b) Enhancing the development of a holistic floodmanagement strategy as a part of integrated riverbasin management planning with due regard to theimprovement of the security of human life and to themitigation of damages caused by floods on the onehand, but also to gain advantageous impacts offloods on biodiversity on the other hand;

(c) Increasing mutual efforts in the development anddistribution of advanced technologies and method-ologies applied in meteorological and hydrologicalmonitoring, forecasting and warning, includinginternational data exchange and information tech-nology developments to disseminate early warningsby and for the organisations concerned, as well as,for the public,

(d) Development and dissemination of flood riskassessment and mapping combined with decisionsupport tools, such as Strategic EnvironmentalAssessment, for cost-benefit and scenario analysis asan essential tool in the formulation of appropriatepolicies and measures in relevant fields (such as landuse and spatial planning; development of buildingcode; determination of the level of services; design,appraisal and prioritisation of flood alleviation proj-ects; preparation of effective insurance mechanisms);

(e) Fostering local, regional and international cooper-ation in the following fields: organisational and tech-nological development of flood emergency meas-ures; disaster management and civil emergency man-agement planning, with special regard to decisionsupport systems; methods of assessment and com-pensation of flood damages and the role of interna-tional assistance;

(f) Enhancing decentralised solutions and good prac-tices in the field of local damage mitigation and man-agement in improvement of preparedness;

(g) Raising public awareness and public participationin flood prevention and management decision-mak-ing, and supporting cooperation with all stakeholdergroups;

(h) Assessing the economic tools and financialrequirements to prevent and minimise impact offloods concerning construction and maintenance ofdefence structures, rehabilitation of natural ecosys-tems and recompensation of damages caused byflood by establishing an effective system of insurancemechanisms to reduce the burden to individual citi-zens and enterprises, as well as to nationaleconomies.

8. For the sake of further identification of the mostpromising areas of cooperation and specific coordi-nated actions, we welcome the joint initiative of theEuropean Commission and water directors on man-agement of flood protection and prevention (Copen-hagen, 21-22 November 2002) to elaborate a bestpractice document on particular issues. Based onthese outputs, decisions will be taken to organisethematic workshops on (i) long-term socio-economicand environmental tendencies and outlooks, (ii)strategic planning, technical and other innovativesolutions to prevent and mitigate these hazards, and(iii) the relevant governance mechanisms, includinginstitutional coherence, education, awareness raisingand public participation. Further decisions will betaken at a policy-makers' meeting to be held at theend of 2003 or early 2004.

9. We agree to inform the various internationalorganizations and bodies on this cooperation, in par-ticular, the EU, NATO, OECD, UNDP, UNECE, UNEP,UNESCO, WMO, ISDR, CEUDIP, OCHA, standing bod-ies of the relevant conventions, regional and sub-regional organisations. We also underline the opencharacter of our cooperation, thus inviting new part-ners to join our common endeavours.

Adopted in Budapest, on December 1, 2002

Global Water PartnershipCentral and Eastern Europe

GWP Slovak Water ClubWorkshop on PP Partnership

in Water SectorIn November 21, 2002, a workshop on Public PrivatePartnership in Municipal Water Sector was held inBratislava, Slovakia. The workshop was a contributionto series of the activities supported by GWP CEE (inFebruary 2002, the Estonian Water Club conductedthe same activity).

The Slovak Water Club followed this initiative dueto the fact that the process of privatization of waterservices in Slovakia is in its final stage. The first phase,called transformation and decentralization of waterworks started in 1996. From that time, variety of pro-posals how to transfer responsibilities from central tolocal level were developed. However, only a limitedattention is devoted to discuss, to maintain a dialogueor at least to prepare municipal representatives for a"new business" arrangements with private sector. Theworkshop was organized by GWP Water Club Slova-kia with the aim to bring both private and publicstakeholders to develop the discussion on several sen-sitive issues:

• will privatization improve the performance ofwater works companies

• are legal and administrative rules sufficient toprovide for protection of water consumers andthe environment

• will private involvement mean more investmentsfor water infrastructure.

The workshop was facilitated by Ms. DankaThalmeinerova from Academia Istropolitana Nova, apost-graduate institution in environmental policy.

Water experts from Czech Republic were invited tothe workshop. This was very important element, as aprevious Czechoslovakia had the same history in thedevelopment of state owned water companies, cen-trally managed, controlled and financed. While theprivatization in Czech Republic was launched tenyears ago, in Slovakia the process was postponed dueto political reasons. So, speakers from the CzechRepublic brought the experience and several lessonslearnt. In order to provide an independent platform,the organizer invited speakers who represented allvariety of interests and views:

• J. Králik, Vivendi Water Slovakia• J. Šverma, SÈVK Teplice (public-private water

company in Czech Republic)• I. Fekete, KVS Komárno (Slovak municipal water

company)• A. Pokorný, Ondeo, Slovakia (majority shares in

Slovak water company)• R. Havlíèek, CEPA Ponická Huta (Slovak NGO with

the main mission to promote and support publicparticipation)

• D. Pech, Citizens for their rights, Plzeò (CzechNGO representing a high opposition to privatecompanies entering the Czech water sector).

More than 50 participants attended at the work-shop. They came from municipal sector, representa-tives of water companies, NGOs, and environmentaldepartments of local authorities. All of them highlyappreciated the opportunity to address this issue andshared the same concerns:

• too little information is available on this topic,• unclear decisions taken on character and forms

of private involvement,• the situation with the privatization (or munici-

palisation) of water services is complicated by theapproximation process of Slovakia to the EU,

• subsidies to water sector fallen to minimum, and • the Slovak government (after painful discussion)

agreed on liberalization of water prices.

Not all aspects could be discussed in details atthe workshop, however, the feedback from partici-pants showed that the workshop met its objectives.Unfortunately, neither speakers nor participants camefrom the Ministry of Soil Management or Ministry ofEnvironment. Absence of Ministry of Soil Manage-ment is even more surprising as it is a responsibleministry for managing the transformation process ofwater works companies in Slovakia. All participantsagreed that setting of legal rules for future PP part-nerships and post-privatization regulatory regime willbe the critical elements in order to protect publicinterests, to avoid the exploitation of water resources,and to secure sustainable development of water serv-ices.

Danka ThalmeinerovaEmail: dankajt@ainova.sk