A. BACKGROUND
Water is a prerequisite for life. Water underpins almost all human activities from food production to manufacturing, energy production and transport. It has been well known for millennia that human survival and ecosystem conservation depend on the reliable availability of adequate water of appropriate quality . Water is used for agriculture, industry, domestic and recreational purposes.Water is finite and vulnerable from the threat of population growth, scarcity, pollution, mismanagement and climate variability. Currently more than 1 billion people do not have access to clean drinking water. It is expected that by 2015, three billion people will live in water-stressed countries .
Climate change will affect the water cycle, seal level and rainfall variability, and thus crop production and the frequency and scale of floods and droughts .
Water also destroys. Many countries regularly suffer droughts, floods, hurricanes and other disaster that destroy lives, drain economies and hinder growth. Water is crucial for food security and human well-beings and it has been the subject of increasing international concern and debate. UN system have sponsored several international conferences on water such as International Conference on Water and Environment in 1992, Millenium Summit in 2000, the World Summit on Sustainable development in 2002, etc. The Year 2003 was declared the International year of Freshwater by the UN General Assembly in an effort to raise awareness and initiate action on managing and protecting global freshwater resources.
Countries in Southeast Asia region, with relatively high rate of population growth, urbanization and industrialization face a situation of increasing demand on finite and already stressed water resources. Without an integrated approach to management of water supply and demand, including the difficult issue of allocation planning associated with national socio-economic goals, physical water stressed in increasingly being accompanied by societal conflicts.
B. IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROBLEM
Population growth in Southeast Asia is straining the ecological system that provides water fro drinking, agriculture and other life-sustaining services in the region. As the per capita use increases due to changes in lifestyle and as population increases as well, the proportion of water for human use is increasing. This, coupled with spatial and temporal variations in water availability, means that the water to produce food for human consumption, industrial processes and all the other uses is becoming scarce; therefore, countries in any region make efforts to strengthen cooperation on water. Some initiatives are launched to avoid crises and foster co-operation among states and stakeholders.
C. FORMULATION OF THE PROBLEM
Water access is no longer simply a global health and development issue; it is a mortal and long-term threat that is increasingly becoming a national security issue. In the developing world, 5,000 children die every day from easily preventable water-related illnesses such as cholera, typhoid, and malaria, diseases that have been all but eradicated in wealthier nations. Access to clean water and adequate sanitation is a cornerstone for sustainable development around the world. Improving access to safe water will not only reduce mortality from waterborne illness, but will help provide long-term stability in countries that suffer from population pressures due large population growth from high total fertility rates.
The world must work toward ‘water security’ as an overarching goal as endorsed by the World Water Commission. Water security means that every person has access to enough safe water at affordable cost to lead a clean, healthy and productive life, while ensuring that the natural environment is protected and enhanced .
Water security is global issue including in the Southeast Asia region. Much of the water in the region is polluted, the region inland water bodies is also affected by the presence of pathogenic agents. Major river carry enhanced nutrient and pollutant as a result of change in land use, industrialization and urbanization .
Water need to be considered at local, national and regional level. Regional cooperation is expected to have a crucial role to achieve water security. The paper on “Regional Cooperation on Water Resource Management to Achieve Water Security in Southeast Asia Region” will be aimed to discus the following research question:
a. How does the regional mechanism on water management prevail in the region work in achieving the security of water supply in the region?
b. What are the regional efforts in the ASEAN framework to strengthen water resource management to achieve the security of water supply in the region?
D. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The research is qualitative research and it uses secondary data analysis. The paper will give description on how regional cooperation strengthens the effort to achieve the security of water supply as well as the assessment on the regional mechanism on water management prevail in the region.
E. SIGNIFICANCE
The paper hopefully will be functional in improving the insights of the Indonesia diplomat on matter related to water, the cooperative mechanism to secure the water access as well as the regional cooperation prevail to increase the sustainability of water in the region. It is expected also that the findings in this paper will deepen the knowledge on how to improve the regional cooperation especially in ASEAN in furthering out the water related issues in the region.
THE CONCEPT OF SECURITY, WATER SECURITY,
WATER MANAGEMENT AND REGIONAL COOPERATION
A. REDEFINING THE CONCEPT OF SECURITY
The concept of security is elusive and open to many different interpretations, but one of its most noticeable characteristics in international relations theory is identification with national security. One of the broadest and the most abstract definitions is summed up succinctly by Arnold Wolfers: “…security, in our objective sense, measures the absence of threats to acquired values, in a subjective sense, the absence of fear that such values will be attacked ”
Since international relations theory has been built upon the premise of relationships among nations, the term generally connotes “national security.” Wolfers also pointed out the ambiguity of the notion of national security. He warns us about the use of such notions as “national security” and “national interest,” observing that, “while appearing to offer guidance and a basis for broad consensus, they may be permitting everyone to label whatever policy he favors with an attractive and possibly deceptive name”
Another common meaning of security in international relations theory is in the narrow sense of military strategy dominated by the realist perspective. As a subfield of strategic studies, security studies have been closely linked with the development of military technology such as defensive and offensive weapon systems. Similarly, strategic studies have been associated with military strategy, theory of deterrence, and arms control. In this context, security studies in international relations theory are closely related to military security. Of course, at the opposite end of the ideological spectrum, idealists have presented different world views regarding security, but these are commonly referred to as “peace studies” rather than realism-oriented “security studies” because the latter were “far too war-prone”.
Buzan explains that the security of human collectivities is affected by factors in five major areas: military, political, economic, societal, and environmental . Military security concerns the two-level interplay of the armed offensive and defensive capabilities of a state, and a state’s perceptions of other states’ intentions. Political security pertains to the organizational stability of states, their systems of government, and the ideologies that give them legitimacy. Economic security involves access to the resources, finances, and markets necessary to sustain acceptable levels of social welfare and state economic power. Societal security entails the sustainability of traditional patterns of language, culture, religious and national identity, and customs. Environmental security, finally, concerns the maintenance of local environments and the planetary biosphere as the essential support systems upon which all other human enterprises depend. While these five factors are closely linked to each other, each “defines a focal point within the overall security problematique, and a way of ordering priorities” (Buzan: 18-19). In this way, Buzan attempted to broaden the scope and domain of the concept of security in order to include non-military concerns in the lexicon of security.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY, RESOURCE-BASED CONFLICT AND WATER
There exists a clear conceptual link between expanding the concept of security to include environmental security and the inclusion of resource-based conflict as one of the main threats to the survival of humankind.
It is this conception that underpinned the report of the Independent Commission on International Development Issues (1980): "Our survival depends not only on military balance but on global co-operation to ensure a sustainable biological environment and sustainable prosperity based on equitably shared resources." The June 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro also made a significant contribution towards creating an awareness of the need for a re-conceptualisation of security.
In the 1970s and 1980s, resource-based security problems revolved primarily around three issues, namely Middle Eastern oil, Soviet natural gas and Southern African strategic minerals. The 1990s were ushered in by a resource-based Gulf War (1990-91) an unequivocal demonstration of the US and the West's commitment to safeguard access to oil.
Further, Rogers predicts that four resources will be sources of possible future conflict: energy oil reserves in the Middle East; strategic minerals for instance in Central and Southern Africa, the High Andes, Amazonia and Eastern Asia; food reserves US and European Union grain surpluses; and water resources .
C. WATER SECURITY
Water resources are receiving global attention, as human population growth and development wreak significant changes to the earth system. Water security is a key element of human security. But water is threatened in many places around the world from growing demand, scarcity, mismanagement and increasing climate variability. Yet society's new and growing awareness of water insecurity is spurring many opportunities for change and development, for increasing cooperation among various stakeholders at the local, national, regional and international level, and for highlighting water as a key strategic area for investment .
The 2003 Commission on Human Security defines human security as a demand-driven process that focuses on individuals and communities and seeks to promote a comprehensive view of how to improve overall well-being . In the same way, water security emphasizes the health and wellbeing of individuals and of communities. It places the focus on the protection of the most vulnerable groups in society, which are often women and children. Women usually take on the responsibility of providing water for their families, and thus it is vital for more women to be involved and included in decision-making processes regarding water. Where water is degraded and dangerous to health, where it is becoming ever more inaccessible, or where it is priced out of reach, poor people's suffering increases. Rising temperatures related to climate change add to the hardship. The poor need protection, especially in times of economic turmoil, and concern for the well-being of the vulnerable is an important indicator of equity and social justice in society. The poor need to have their voices heard. A comprehensive view of water security involves taking into account the water needs of all the sectors that consume or harness water, including industry, agriculture, and energy, and domestic water use in both urban and rural settings.
Ensuring water security both now and in the future must also entail taking an in-depth look at the environmental sustainability of systems and solutions, through preserving and maintaining aquatic ecosystems. Building resilience within communities and within ecosystems both to the destructive forces of water and to water scarcity is needed to face climate change. Water security is a technical issue, an environmental issue, and primarily a social issue involving different concerned stakeholders.
Water security can provide a starting point for innovative discussions and more integrated and inclusive decision-making. Multi stake holder processes are critical elements in tackling water problems and ensuring water security, precisely because more than technical options are involved. Many of the people who need to be present in the vital debate over water security are not primarily water experts but represent diverse interests ranging from geopolitical, business, and community considerations. Participation, public involvement and transparency are essential for the ongoing success of such processes and negotiations.
D. INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) is a process which promotes the coordinated development and management of water, land and related sources in order to maximize the resultant economic and social welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystem . Integrated management goes beyond the sectoral approach which means that all the different uses of water resources are considered together.
Sectoral approach to water resource management have dominated in the past and still prevailing. This lead to fragmented and uncoordinated development and management of the resources. Moreover, water management is usually in the hands of top down institutions, the legitimacy and effectiveness of which have increasingly been questioned. Thus, increased competition for the finite resource is aggravated by inefficient governance. IWRM brings coordination and collaboration among the individual sectors, plus fostering a stakeholder participation, transparency and cost effective local management.
E. REGIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER RESOURCE
The cooperation of countries in the region on water management is driven by certain interest and reason. To explain why countries do so, can be viewed from the neo realist. Cooperation in water resource emerged as self interest actors, coexisting in an anarchic environment, reach autonomous and independent decision that lead to mutually desirable cooperative outcome. Utilizing the river and ameliorating scarcity often require joint actions especially when unilateral efforts are not deemed efficient. Such a requisite constitutes the riparian’s mutual interest in cooperation and coordination. The ability of state to attain mutually satisfying outcome, thus makes cooperation more common. Countries are able to realize joints gains and pursue cooperation arrangement when it is in their national interest to do so .
ACHIEVING WATER SECURITY
THROUGH REGIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT : A CASE STUDY IN THE SOUTHEAST ASIA REGION
A. The State of Water Security in Southeast Asia
In Asia, the availability of water per capita declined by 40%-60% between 1955 and 1990 . Asia has the lowest per capita availability of freshwater in the world, with parts of Southeast Asia already well above the threshold of ‘high-water stress’ condition, which occur when the ratio of use to availability exceeds 40%. Currently it is estimated that the Asian industry swallows some 10% of the region freshwater . As a result, acute water shortage will limit future economic growth and industrial expansion .
Southeast Asia is one of water-rich regions of the world. It is also one of the most populated regions, with about 522 million in 2002 and annual population growth of 2.1%. Nearly 33% of the total population lives in urban areas, and urban population is further expected to increase by about 3% annually.
Southeast Asia has an average annual water resource of about 6,476 km 3 (1.45 m 3 per square meter of land area), about 15% of the world total, with Indonesia having by far the biggest amount (ASEAN, 2001). More than 90% of total freshwater withdrawals in the region go to agriculture, while the rest go to household and industrial uses. This proportion of water for agricultural uses is much higher than the global average of 70%. The volume of water actually available per person to use in 2000 was 4,900 m 3 , which is considerably lower than the potential resource of 12,900 m 3 , but is considerably higher than most of the Asia/Pacific Region (ASEAN, 2001).
The renewable suppy is an important constraint to the sustainable use of water within the region because it is limited by the dynamics of the hydrological cycle. Apart from human use, water is also needed to sustain ecosystems. Pumping water from underground aquifers faster than they can be recharged or the diversion of water from wetlands or rivers to the point where freshwater ecosystem fail, are clearly unsustainable practices. Excessive withdrawals are also causing intrusions of seawater into deltas and coastal aquifers. In Vietnam, the uncontrolled flow of sewage and fertilizer runoff is hastening eutrophication in lakes and various coastal seas. In Thailand, the rapid lowering of the water table due to excessive extraction of groundwater has lead to the contamination of the shallow aquifers in Bangkok by seawater. The over withdrawal of groundwater reserves has caused land subsidence in cities such as Bangkok and Jakarta.
Several additional factors contribute to the potential for regional water shortage by limiting the availability supply. Among the most serious is the pollution of water stemming from a wide variety of industrial, municipal and agricultural sources. Durig the past 30 years, water has contributed considerably to the Asian Green revolution in general (1968-11978) and to the rice production in particular. However, this has been achieved at a high price for the environment. A proportion of the chemicals applied as fertilizer and as pest and weed control pollutes rivers and lakes through runoff and groundwater through leaching.
For the Mekong River riparian countries of ASEAN (Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Thaliand, Vietnam), the water availability situation is quite complex. Four of these countries (Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand and Vietnam) are signatories to the 1995 Agreement on Cooperation for the Sustainable Development of the Mekong River Basin. Although the agreement provides for the members to agree on such things as the minimum acceptable monthly natural flows along the mainstream, it contains no specific provision for volumetric water sharing. Instead, it relies on the principle of international water law known as ‘reasonable and equitable utilization” and specifies a range of agreed cooperative actions such as data exchange ad notification and prior consultation concerning various water uses. The net result of all this dynamic approach to Mekong river water sharing is that it is not possible to state with certainty the annual volume of water available to these countries.
The special cases of Vietnam is worthy of mention. Whilst it is true that 22 % of sovereign or internal resources are currently used, Vietnam in addition to having part of its territory in the middle reaches of the Mekong Basin (and from whence Vietnam contributes some 11 % of the total Mekong flows) is also the most downstream nation and occupies the majority of the Mekong Delta where the Mekong river system enter the South China Sea. This means that subject to the environmental flow requirements, including the control of salinity intrusion, Vietnam in effect has access to all of the flows leaving southern border of Cambodia. When these flows are taken into account, current water demands in Vietnam fall to well below the 22% of internal supplies mentioned above. Whilst Myanmar is not a signatory to the Mekong Agreement, international water law applies, including the principle of reasonable and equitable utilization and thus Myanmar also has access to an undefined portion of the flow of the Mekong river, in addition to its own internal water resource.
All ASEAN Member Countries experience wet and dry seasons typical of the region, localized water stress in the dry season is widespread. Much of the stress can be attributed to agricultural extractions (irrigation) which commonly represent 70 – 90 % of total demand. However, many urban areas including major cities in the region are subject to increasing water stress in varying degrees`, sometimes severe.
According to International Water Management Institute, of the 10 ASEAN Member countries, only Singapore, constrained by its small size and limited catchment area, lies in the group of water scarce countries whose estimated water withdrawal exceeds 50 % and who have a high growth of demand. Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia and Myanmar lie in a group of countries with adequate water resources, but projected rates of increase in withdrawal of 100 % or more. The Philippines, Vietnam and Thailand also have adequate water and are grouped with countries whose expected water withdrawal will increase between 25-99 % for the Philippines and Vietnam and less than 25 % for Thailand. Brunei has adequate water, but rates of increase of extraction lie in the 25-99% range whilst Lao PDR utilizes about 2 % of its currently available water. The detail of the water availability and demand for ASEAN Countries can be seen in the table 1-3 in the Annex of this paper.
Averaged across ASEAN as a whole, increases in water extraction are expected to increase by about one-third over the next 20 years. Except Singapore, the water resource base in ASEAN Member Countries is sufficient to enable this to occur without major environmental impact, the cost associated with infrastructure development will be considerable.
Much of the drinking water in Southeast Asia is polluted because lack of wastewater disposal, adequate sanitation and proper management or sewage. As a consequence, the problem of pathogenic pollution is widely spread. Pathogen generally come from domestic sewage discharge untreated into watercourse. Of the lakes in Southeast Asia, 54% are suffering from eutrophication problems . The region inland water bodies are also affected by the presence of pathogenic agents. Many rivers carry enhanced nutrient and pollutant loads as a result of changes in land use, industrialization and urbanization. Discharge of mine tailings and development of industrial areas with direct discharge pollutants into neighboring river systems have resulted in hot spot of heavy metal pollution.
Water supply difficulties of the tropical wet/dry season cycle are exacerbated in many ASEAN Member Countries by the short, steep nature of many rivers which results in characteristic short, sharp hydrograph. Dry season water supply difficulties in such situation are typically accompanied by wet season flooding problems. Consequence of watershed deforestation, including resultant bed-load changes and siltation which alter river channel capacities and degrades water quality, all add to the problems of surface water supply.
Groundwater resources availability is typically in the range of 10-20% of the magnitude of internal surface water resources. Unfortunate, in a global familiar way, when cities cannot access sufficient surface water or when reticulation coverage is limited and reliability is poor, consumers turn to groundwater resource (legally or illegally) and overdraft are common around major ASEAN cities. Ground water resource management is sometimes not as well developed as surface water management and progress is sometimes hindered by the fact that it may be managed by a mining agency rather than water resource agency. This tend to hide the reality that water, whether in rivers or aquifers, is all part of a unitary water cycle and a “one resource’ policy is not usual in ASEAN Member countries in such circumstances. Achieving reduction of groundwater extraction to match sustainable yields levels remains a common challenge.
Population growth rates in some ASEAN Member Countries are relatively high, urbanization an industrialization are accelerating and it is common for national food security policies to have an emphasis on irrigate food production. These factors all contribute to a situation of increasing demand on finite and already stressed water resources. In addition, the realization of the benefits of maintaining ecological health of aquatic system is leading to demands for environmental flows – sometimes merely as dilution flows for water quality purposes, but increasingly for ecosystem maintenance of both riverine and estuarine system. Without integrate approach to management of water supply an demand, including the difficult issue of allocation planning associated with national socio-economic goals, physical water stress is increasingly being accompanied by societal conflicts. Furthermore, even if water us available for increasing irrigation, it is also important that land suitable for irrigation is available. This may encroach on rainfed agriculture and other lan uses an so-trade off to assess net benefits from increasing irrigation are also requires.
B. RESPONSES TO THE SUPPLY-DEMAND IMBALANCE CHALLENGES FOR ASEAN
Individual country response to inadequate supplies to meet local demands range from a traditional ‘engineering’ response (lets build mode dams and reservoirs) which merely spreads the problems over a wider geographical areas, to highly sophisticated demand management techniques and recycling technology. Best practices response consists of a well-thought out mix of all available methodologies – physical, technical, and economic (incentives and market-based methodologies). ASEAN contains some world’s best practices in supply-demand management and this represents an excellent opportunity for other ASEAN Member Countries to learn and to benefit from not repeating the mistakes of the past.
Other responses within ASEAN include reformed institutional mechanism such as embracing integrated water resource management (IWRM) principles and experimenting with new institutional arrangement such as river basin organization (RBO). However none of these worthy initiatives will succeed unless they are designed to address specific actual problems. The IWRM and RBO are being prematurely and unsuccessfully applied as amorphous concept, while failing to address real fundamental underlying problems, such as poor data, inadequate human resources, lack of modern water allocation and water sharing system
THE REGIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
A. ASSESSMENT OF THE PREVAILING REGIONAL MECHANISM ON WATER MANAGEMENT
The scarcity of water may act as a factor creating conflict as well as cooperation between the sides. However, histories have shown that the interdependence between the parties and the necessity to preserved shared water resources encourage the parties from a zero sum game to a win-win situation.
In Southeast Asia, there is regional cooperation on water resource management, namely, Mekong River Commission (MRC). The Mekong River Commission constitutes a coordinating mechanism between Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand and Vietnam with the aim to develop large scale water resource. This objective was never realized. Now it includes hydropower, irrigation, flood control, collection and distribution of hydrological data. The Mekong River Commission also serves as focal point for donor organization and countries. The MRC member countries agrees to cooperate in all fields of sustainable development, utilization, management and conservation of water and related sources of the Mekong River Basin, such as navigation, flood control, fisheries, agriculture, hydropower and environmental protection.
MRC program and project is to promote, support, cooperate and coordinate in the development of the full potential of sustainable benefits to all riparian states and the prevention of wasteful use of Mekong river basin waters, with emphasis and preference on joint and/or basin-wide development project. The MRC member cooperate on the basis of sovereignty and territorial integrity in the utilization and protection of the Water resource of the Mekong River Basin
Unfortunately, the MRC does not perform as it wishes to be. The MRC cannot claim to have decisive impact on the members’ management of the basin’s natural resources. The member states are claimed to prioritize national interest above trans-basin cooperation. Although there are clear indications that the regime has matured since its inception in 1957, it has not evolved into a regulatory organization for the river basin and cannot be considered very effective if regarded as regime. The 1995 Agreement is not reflected in the Commission’s members’ respective laws and the regime has largely been driven by donor funding and non-riparian leadership in the Secretariat. Nonetheless, the Mekong River Secretariat has gathered substantial amounts of information and technical knowledge on the basin and its resource. It has; however, so far not been willing “to apply this knowledge more proactively to decision-making on appropriate river basin management and the development of a flow regime based on agreed regulations has been painstakingly slow and difficult. In other words, the impact of the mechanism is quite limited.
Some countries in the region have also implemented IWRM but not successful enough and even considered quite premature . The condition is caused by that after some 70 years of existence, There are no good examples as to how the concept of IWRM can be implemented and also under what conditions, so as to make water management more efficient, especially for large development project. There are indeed many successful examples of water management in the region, but these have not followed the IWRM model. Also, many important issues have not been considered when implementation of IWRM has been attempted.
The concept of river basin as basic unit for water management has not been easy to apply where the principle of IWRM and the sovereignty of states do not necessarily coincide. Countries members tend to prioritize their own national interests building commitment to ensure the mechanism work. Furthermore, with increasingly inter-basin water transfers, the earlier concept of management by a single river basin is becoming increasingly absolute and irrelevant. While conceptually the IWRM is attractive, its application in term of integration of various issues from within and outside the water sector has proved to be immensely difficult. The reality is that fragmentation and uncoordinated management predominate within the sector and between sector and that issues as basic as participation and decentralization are still in infancy, not mention the increasing urgency for information dissemination, awareness, education, capacity building and governance both within and outside the sector.
In addition, before any integration take place, the knowledge base of water resource still has to improve significantly in term of needs, uses and abuses by different users and sectors. Another constraint has been that in many cases water resource and environment management have often focused on infrastructure development. It seem to be there is a necessity to make modification on the presents IWRM suitable with the geography and the condition in the region.
Another arrangement is water pact between Indonesia and Singapore and Singapore with Malaysia. The Water agreement between Singapore and Malaysia was signed in 1961 and 1962 and are in force up to 2011 and 2061 respectively. The Tebrau and Scudai Water Agreement was signed in 1961, while the Johor River Water Agreement was signed in 1962. The 1961 agreement allows Singapore to draw up to 86 million gallons of water per day(mgd) from the Pontian and Gunung Pulai Reservoir as well as the Tebrau and Skudai Rivers, while the 1962 agreements allows up to 250 mgd of water to be drawn from the Johor River. The water issue is often seen as a “thorn in the flesh” in two countries relation. It has been alleged that water is used as political leverage by one party whenever other party is seen to have impinged on its interests and rights . The two parties are often in disagreement to set the water price.
Due to the stall in water negotiation with Malaysia, Singapore has attempted to strengthen its position by looking for alternative sources of water. Indonesia has presented itself a very viable option due to the proximity to Singapore. The idea of tapping water from Indonesia originated from the then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew in 1987. Subsequently, on 28 August 1990, Indonesia and Singapore signed agreement to facilitate cooperation on the sourcing, supply and distribution of water to Singapore . In 1991, the two countries signed Water Agreement in which Indonesia will supply 1000 gallons of water a day from the Province of Riau to Singapore for a hundred years.
C. EFFORT TO STRENGTHEN THE WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN THE REGION
All ASEAN member Countries are displaying an internationally familiar scenario of localized, sometimes severe stress, coupled with an increasing inability of traditional water sharing system to cope with growing demand, with new users and with competition between sectors and between individual users. The need for new approach to water allocation and sharing is clear. Most ASEAN countries today recognize their water resource as being in the public ownership with governments having the overall responsibility for management. In some countries the Constitution makes this explicitly clear. The national Government does not ‘own’ the water, the people do. What government has is the right to control the use, control and flow of water. It can grant or delegate these rights to individuals or corporations, who may use the water under conditions set by the government . A significant challenge for ASEAN is to improve water allocation and sharing so as to achieve equity, sustainability and economic efficiency. There is real opportunity for ASEAN Member countries to work together on development of principles and in the sharing of experience.
ASEAN Vision 2020 has outlined the commitment to develop cooperation on water. To create a stable, prosperous and highly competitive ASEAN Economic Region in which there is a free flow of goods, services and investment, a freer flow of capital, equitable economic development and reduces poverty and socio-economic disparities, ASEAN resolves to undertake, among others, establish interconnecting arrangement in the field of energy and utilities for electricity, natural gas, and water within ASEAN through the ASEAN Power Grid and a Trans-ASEAN Gas Pipeline and Water Pipeline and promote cooperation in energy efficiency and conservation as well as the development of new and renewable energy sources.
The vision for water resource in ASEAN was initially defined in the ASEAN Long Term Strategic Plan for Water Resource Management endorsed by ASEAN environmental ministers in 2003. The Strategic lan was initiated by the ASEAN Working Group on Water Resource Management (AWGWRM). The vision for water in Southeast Asia by 2025 is the attainment of sustainability of water resources to ensure sufficient water quantity of acceptable quality to meet the needs of the people of Southeast Asia in terms of health, food security, economy and environment. The vision stipulates concern for four aspect of water management: access to safe, adequate and affordable water supply, hygiene and sanitation; provision of sufficient water that will ensure food security in the region; provision of sufficient water to spur and sustain the economies of the region; and protection of the water environment to preserve flow regime, biodiversity and cultural heritage as well as the mitigation of water-related hazards.
The 2nd meeting of AWGWRM which was held on 21-22 November 2003 in Chiang Mai, Thailand noted the Declaration of the 1st Southeast Asia Water Forum. The Forum recognizes the strength of the ASEAN framework as a driver for development, and recommends specific actions to be taken to further improve and advance better practices for water management in the region. The 2nd meeting of AWGWRM further noted the Chiang Mai Ministerial Declaration on Managing Water Resources in Southeast Asia which was adopted at the First Ministerial Declaration on Managing Water Resource in Southeast Asia. The Forum recognize the need to integrate the management of water sectors and issues including water supply, sanitation, floods and droughts, degradation of environment, food security, livelihoods of the poor and that increasing variability due to human intervention and changes in climate. There are some principles that need to be espoused by ASEAN with respect to integrated water resource planning and management. They are sustainable development, effective governance of water resource. The strategic plan proposes activities to water resource management that are priorities for ASEAN, among others:
a. develop a set of guide line for Integrated Water Resource Management at country level,
b. enhance information and compile good practices and policies/sharing information;
c. develop appropriate water quality monitoring standards, water, water monitoring strategies;
d. develop appropriate reporting system;
e. develop best-practices data storage and retrieval system.
The strategies and actions to improve governance and capacity building includes efforts to conduct exchange program, provide awareness creation, increase community participation in water resource management decision making, increase the role of women to participate, develop strategies to educate communities.
From the efforts, it is expected the improved understanding and management of water demand and thus enhances capacity to deliver environmental flows, a potential consistent set of ASEAN country IWRM strategies as a basis for future water resource planning in the future, a uniform classification system and standard of monitoring, long-term data base for planning and strategic management of river across ASEAN, more rapid and efficient response to water stress issue through the adaptation of best-management practices, greater awareness of common ASEAN integrated water management issue.
The ASEAN Socio Cultural Blueprint on promoting the Sustainability of Freshwater Resource has also draw up actions to be taken to promote the sustainability of water resource to ensure equitable accessibility and sufficient water quantity for people of ASEAN, which include: continue the implementation of the ASEAN Strategic Plan of Action on Water Resource Management, endeavor to reduce by half the number of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water by 2010, manage water resource efficiently and effectively in order to provide adequate and affordable water services by 2015, promote the implementation of integrated river basin management by 2015, promote public awareness and partnership to enhance integrated water resource management and promote regional cooperation on water conservation measures and program as well as scientific and technological innovations in water quality improvement and supply.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
A. CONCLUSION
There is no single way forward for countries in Southeast Asia to ensure their water security in the future. Because of differing climatic, physical, physical, social, economic, environmental and institutional conditions, because countries and even parts of countries are at different stages of development, there are simply no universal solutions. In addition, because the national, regional, and global conditions that affect water are changing rapidly, there is also a time dimension to the solutions. What may have been a viable solution a decade ago may not be so a decade from now. This means that water policies need to be updated periodically so that they reflect the changing requirements.
On the basis of current assessment of water resources, expected water demands, available technology and experience, countries in Southeast Asia shall be able to avoid to experience the physical scarcity of water. There is now enough knowledge, technology and expertise available to solve all existing problems. If some of the countries in the region face a water crisis in the future, it will now because of physical scarcity of water but because of inadequate or inappropriate water governance, including management practices, institutional arrangements, sociopolitical conditions.
Major and fundamental changes in water governance practices are needed in nearly all Southeast Asian countries. There is success story in the region of very significance improvement in the water governance. Therefore countries in the region shall develop mechanism to share best practices on water management and capacity building with the aim to secure water for the future.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Waster security is the concern of all. To achieve it need a commitment of all stakeholders including governments, private sector and communities as a whole. Governments have a very crucial role to design water management policy tailored to achieve the water security. In doing so, they shall involve the participation of people. What is needed is the political will and commitment.
In relation to regional cooperation on water management in ASEAN, governments in the region shall be committed to realize the ASEAN Strategic Plan of Action on water resource management by allocating enough will and resource. Several Member Countries have best practices that can be shared with all to build capacity to deal with water security challenges in the region.
The issue of water security will become more and more crucial in the future in the region and in the world due to the decreasing water resource amidst the increasing demand; therefore, Indonesia diplomats need to equip themselves with the knowledge on the issues in order to be able to play role in securing the water resource.
References
Bitwas, Asit K. “ New Insights on Water Security”
UNESCO (2003), “Water for people, Water for Life”, The United Nations World Water Development Report, UNESCO Publishing, Paris, Berghan Books
Global Water Partnership Technical Committee, “Climate Change Adaptation and Integrated Water Management,” 2006.
Global Water Partnership, “ Toward Water Security: A Framework for Action” , Sweden, 2000.
Prof. Yue Choong Koy, University of Singapore, “Water Security in Southeast Asia”
Wolfers, Arnold. Discord and Collaboration: Essays on International Politics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1962.
Buzan, Barry. People, States and Fear: The National Security Problem in International Relations. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1983.
____. People, States and Fear: An Agenda for International Security Studies in the Post-Cold War Era, Second Edition. Boulder, CO: Lynne Reiner Publishers, 1991.
World Commission on Environment and development, “Our Common Future”, Oxford University Press.
P. Roger, A Jungle Full of Snakes? Power, Poverty and International Security in Tansey et all, A World Divided: Militarism and Development after Cold War, Earthscan Publication, London, 1994.
Ania Grobicki, “Water Security: Time To talk Across Sector” Global Water Parnership.
Final Report of Commission on Human Security,” Human Security Now”, Mew York, 2003.
Global Water Partnership. 2000,”Integrated Water Resource Management,”, TAC Background Paper No. 4, Stockholm: GWP Secretariat.
International water Treaties: Negotiation and Cooperation along trans-boundary river, Shlomi Dinar, Routlede Taylor and Francis Group
Spurgen, David,” Water: Looming Crisis”, International Rice Research Institute, http:www.cgiar.org/IRRI/Looming.html
World Meterological Organization (WMO), “Comprehensive Assessment of the Freshwater Resources of the World, Geneva, 1997
Asian Development Bank, “Asian Environment Outlook 2001”, Asian Development Bank Annual Meeting Seminar’Win-win Policies for a Better Environment’ Discussion Draft, May 2000.
UNEP, “Environmental Data Report 1993-1994”, United nations Environment Programme, Oxford, 1994
ASEAN Secretariat,”State of Water Resource Management in ASEAN”, October 2005.
Tan, A, “ Malaysia-Singapore Relations: Troubled Past and Uncertain Future?”, Monogrpaghs on South-East Asian Studies and Institute of Pacific Studies, The University of Hull, 2001 at http://www.iseas.edu.sg/f12003pdf.
Kok, Y.C. “Natural Resource Management and Environmental Security in Southeast Asia: A case Study of Clean Water Supplies to Singapore in IDSS Working paper No. 15, May 2001
