A Comparative Analysis with Special Consideration of the River Basin Level
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Integrated Water Resources Management and Institutional Change in Vietnam and Poland – A Comparative Analysis with Special Consideration of the River Basin Level I n a u g u r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades doctor rerum naturalium (Dr. rer. nat.) an der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universität Greifswald vorgelegt von Steffen Grothe geboren am 26.01.1978 in Eberswalde-Finow Greifswald, 22.04.2009 Dekan: ....................................................................................Prof. Dr. Klaus Fesser 1. Gutachter: ................................................................Prof. Dr. Wilhelm Steingrube 2. Gutachter: ...........................................................................Prof. Dr. Harro Stolpe Tag der Promotion: .................................................................................11.09.2009 „It is possible to live without oil, but not without water” Peter Brabeck-Letmathe Summary In 1992, the international regime ‘Agenda 21’, which amongst others established the Dublin Principles, was agreed upon. Accordingly, countries worldwide have been undergoing reforms in their water management into a more holistic approach known as Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM). The implementation is promoted by international actors such as the Global Water Partnership, the European Commission, and other international donor agencies. The main institutional aspects of IWRM are the river basin approach, clear property rights allocation, and application of economical instruments. In former centrally planned economies, the process of IWRM implementation has been coincided with transformation for the market economy. Countries undergoing such transition are under the pressure to catch western countries up, often compromising environmental protection and social equality. The implementation of institutional aspects of IWRM in countries under transition is most likely connected with high transaction costs. Against this background, the comparative empirical study was initialised in order to analyse institutional change of water management towards IWRM in Vietnam and in Poland. Two models of river basin organisations were examined. Consequently, pros and cons of decentralised polycentric and hierarchical unicentric river basin organisations have been evaluated. For a profound analysis of institutional settings, the study applied SCHARPF’S approach of actor-centred institutionalism coupled with the present scholars’ discussions on governance. Formal institutions were studied with the use of an in-depth review of legislation regarding water management and its public administration in Vietnam and in Poland. The EU Water Frame Directive (EU WFD) and other international policies were also examined. For the empirical study in Vietnam and in Poland, actors who play active roles in water management were interviewed as experts. The results of the study on both countries were discussed separately, and conclusions were drawn in a comparative manner. The different states of water management systems in Vietnam and in Poland at the beginning of IWRM implementation were considered due to their particular development paths. They have been examined from the 1960s to date. Water management reforms towards IWRM in Vietnam and in Poland have been generating multi-level governance processes including international, national and sub- national levels. The implementation of IWRM in Vietnam is supported by international donor agencies. In Poland, the implementation of the EU WFD is coordinated by the European Commission in a hierarchical manner. In comparison to international joint- development projects in Vietnam, the European Commission enforces international IWRM policy more effectively. Since the resumption of ODA in early 1990s, water resources management has been institutionalised in Vietnam by international support. In 1998, a Water Law was established in Vietnam for the very first time. The intended separation of water resources management from water service provisions caused fragmentation between the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, and the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, respectively. This ‘silo-effect’ has been intensified by the competition for international ODA. The power struggles affect even agencies within ministries. Polycentric river basin committees have been established as entities subordinated to the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, as well as the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. However, because of weak property rights allocation and the absence of administrative powers, the river basin organisations work ineffectively. The river basin has not yet been established as a sub-national area of political action. Decisions sustained to be made at central level and are affected by the information problem due to largely centralised organisations of Vietnamese water management. The sub-national level is characterised by very low planning and management capacities. In Poland, unicentric river basin organisations were established in 1991. They are aligned with hydrological borders. Water resources planning and management are carried out according to river basins and water regions in order to implement the EU WFD. The river basin has been established as a new area of decision-making. The hierarchical tier of water management boards ranges from the central level, working according to river basins, to water region and sub-catchment levels. It resulted from deconcentration of administrative powers. Conflicts between local-governments, mainly on the basis of problems between upstream and downstream owners, have been resolved after the reforms. Nevertheless, spatial management planning, environmental protection planning, water service delivery, etc., are further carried out by local self-governments. To integrate water resources planning and management with these services, horizontal coordination is of critical importance. However, this is hampered by problems of ‘spatial fit’. Moreover, a high degree of horizontal cross-border communication increases information problems in hierarchical organisations. Thus, features of polycentric governance models become increasingly important in order to fully implement the EU WFD in Poland. Zusammenfassung Das internationale Regime ‛Agenda 21’, in welchem unter anderem die Dublin Prinzipien verankert sind, wurde 1992 verabschiedet. Dementsprechend unterliegt die Wasserwirt- schaft von Staaten weltweit Reformen in Richtung eines holistischen Ansatzes, bekannt als integriertes Wasserressourcen-Management (IWRM). Die Umsetzung von IWRM wird von internationalen Akteuren wie der Globalen Wasserpartnerschaft (Global Water Partnership), der Europäischen Kommission oder internationalen Geberorganen vorangetrieben. Hauptaspekte des integrierten Wasserressourcen-Managements aus institutioneller Sicht sind der Flussgebietsansatz, klare Zuweisung von Eigentumsrechten sowie die Anwendung von marktwirtschaftlichen Instrumenten. In ehemaligen Planwirt- schaften überschneiden sich die Prozesse der IWRM Umsetzung und der Trans-formation zur Marktwirtschaft. Diese Transformationsländer stehen unter dem Druck westliche Volkswirtschaften einzuholen, wobei Umweltschutz und soziale Gerechtigkeit beeinträchtigt sind. In solchen Ländern ist die Umsetzung institutioneller Aspekte eines IWRM sehr wahrscheinlich mit hohen Transaktionskosten verbunden. Vor diesem Hinter- grund wurde eine vergleichende Studie initialisiert, um den institutionellen Wandel in den Wasserwirtschaften von Vietnam und Polen zu untersuchen. Zwei Modelle von Flussgebietsorganisationen einer genauen Betrachtung unterzogen. Entsprechend wurden Vor- und Nachteile von dezentralisierten polyzentrischen und hierarchischen unizentralen Organisationsmodellen untersucht und bewertet. Für eine tiefgründige Analyse von institutionellen Kontexten stützte sich die Studie auf SCHARPF’S Ansatz des ‛Akteurszentrierten Institutionalismus’ in Zusammen- hang mit aktuellen Diskussionen bezüglich Governance. Formale Institutionen wurden an Hand tiefgründiger Studien von rechtlichen Texten zu Wasserwirtschaft und öffentlicher Verwaltung in Vietnam und Polen untersucht. Darüber hinaus wurden die EU Wasserrahmenrichtlinie und weitere internationale Richtlinien und Strategien studiert. Im Rahmen empirischer Untersuchungen in Vietnam und Polen wurden Akteure, welche eine aktive Rolle in der Wasserwirtschaft spielen, in Experteninterviews befragt. Die Resultate wurden für jedes Land diskutiert, Schlussfolgerungen wurden aus dem Vergleich gezogen. Den unterschiedlichen Ausgangssituationen der Wasserwirtschaftssysteme in Vietnam und Polen wurde durch die Darstellung von entsprechenden Entwicklungspfaden Rechnung getragen. Diese reichen zurück bis in die 1960er Jahre. Die Reformen der Wasserwirtschaft in Richtung eines IWRM haben in Vietnam und Polen Governance-Prozesse in Mehrebenensystemen ausgelöst, welche die internationale und nationale Ebene, sowie sub-nationale Ebenen umfassen. Internationale Geberorgane treiben die Umsetzung von IWRM in Vietnam voran. In Polen wird die Umsetzung der EU WRRL durch die Europäische Kommission hierarchisch koordiniert. Verglichen mit den gemeinschaftlichen Entwicklungshilfeprojekten in Vietnam, fördert die EU Kommission internationale Richtlinien zu IWRM auf deutlich effektivere Art. Seit der Wiederaufnahme der Entwicklungshilfe in der frühen 1990er Jahren wurde das Wasserressourcen-Management in