ICWC - Interstate Commission for Water Coordination
From WaterWiki.net
Name of Organization | Interstate Commission for Water Coordination (ICWC) |
Part of / Sub-organizations | |
Focus Areas | TYPE SUBJECT FOCUS AREA HERE
|
Geographic Scope | TYPE FOCUS AREA HERE
|
Contacts | TYPE ADDRESS HERE
Telephone TYPE NUMBER HERE
|
Organization Websites | |
|
Contents |
Mission/Mandate
As stated above, there is no real alternative to the IFAS / ICWC / BVO structure as a whole, though there are some significant problems with it. ICWC is considered politically weak with limited ability to make (or possibly even influence) decisions about allocation and sharing of water, despite the fact that its membership is ministers of water resources or their equivalent. This view has gained ground since the failure to implement the 1998 Syr Darya Agreement.
An additional problem is that both BVOs and the SIC are based in Uzbekistan and are staffed by people from Uzbekistan, a country which has shown reluctance to involve itself in regional initiatives. In short, outside of Uzbekistan the BVOs and SIC are seen as Uzbek organisations run by Uzbeks for Uzbeks. There will be no real support for these organisations from other countries until the situation is resolved.
Nevertheless, it remains the official body for agreeing water allocations between the countries and it governs the Syr Darya and Amu Darya BVOs. As such it is essential as the platform on which to build and improve regional water management. To accomplish this it does require the right support from the regional organisations and the international community as well as capacity building and strengthening, and there is an important role for UNDP to play.
ADB is already supporting ICWC through redrafting the 1998 Syr Darya Agreement. The first draft was completed in January 2006 and the English version should be available soon. Discussions I have had with people who are commenting on the draft have not been favourable. The main complaint is that it is more vaguely worded in many instances than the original and that clauses for penalties for non-compliance have still not been included. These criticisms are important because they are considered the main causes of the failure of the original agreement. Despite the criticisms the redrafting and the ensuing discussion are very positive steps forward and may eventually result in a good, implementable agreement. This work should be supported in every way.
With a joint effort between well coordinated international organisations and ICWC a clear direction for them may be developed and the structure may become a functional water management organisation.
Key Resources
Work on the Ground
See also complete list of WaterWiki-documented ICWC - Interstate Commission for Water Coordination-Projects
References
See also
- Capacity Building of Water Users for Sustainable Development in the Aral Sea Basin
- Suitable Water Saving Strategies for Bozkol Village in the Aral Sea Basin of Kazakhstan
- Aral Sea Basin Capacity Development Project
- Aral Sea Basin Water Projects
- IFAS - International Fund for Saving the Aral Sea
- Aral Sea Basin Initiative
