[MUSIC] [MUSIC] [MUSIC] Ladies and gentlemen. Hello. During this sequence, we will identify how States benefit from the shared management of transboundary freshwater resources. We will aim to highlight the importance of water as a resource and how cooperation is essential to maximise its benefits. We all agree that fresh water is essential to human life. As long as can be remembered, humans have benefited from the resource to ensure survival and to improve their well-being. However, the quantity and quality of benefits that can be derived from freshwater resources depends on how the resources are managed by users. In a transboundary watercourse, the water is shared by several riparian States and as a result, cooperation and coordination between States is necessary to to maximize the benefits that these water resources can offer. A question is raised: namely what are the benefits for States sharing the management of an international watercourse? It has to be said that the benefits derived from managing an international watercourse are extremely varied. However, a classification of these benefits has been provided by the authors Claudia Sadoff and David Grey. They distinguish four categories of benefits. These are: the benefits for the shared watercourse itself, the benefits to be derived from the shared watercourse, the benefits in terms of cost reduction due to shared management and finally, benefits beyond the shared watercourse. Benefits to the shared watercourse itself relate to the environmental benefits for States because they cooperate to preserve the aquatic environment. For example, this might include the provision of safe drinking water or perhaps, good quality water for recreational activities such as bathing. Benefits from the shared watercourse can include economic benefits that can be derived from the development of the watercourse. Examples that come to mind here are hydroelectric power generation or the impact of irrigation on agriculture. But we can also mention the benefits of navigation. Benefits in terms of cost reduction due to shared river management could be derived from improved flood management or alerts about pollution. Finally, the benefits beyond the watercourse include, for example, a stronger economic integration of peacekeeping and regional security. The wide range of benefits to be gained from cooperation shows the importance of the resource for the concerned riparian States. However, it is important to note that identification of the benefits alter according to each basin. Each basin has its own specific characteristics and this determines the benefits that can be derived. In other words, not all basins offer the same benefits. It is therefore necessary to identify the benefits which are relevant for the riparian States for each basin. A second question is raised: how are these benefits identified? In 2015, a very informative guidance note produced by the secretariat of the 1992 Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Waters and International Lakes recommended an approach to identify the benefits of cooperation within the field of transboundary watercourses. Here are the key elements of the identification process. Firstly, the importance of involving a wide range of parties and experts in the identifying process is highlighted. The interest here lies in the information provided by the different stakeholders in the identification of the potential benefits offered by the basin under consideration. If cooperation of transboundary water resources is generally the responsibility of the national authorities, it is important to include local authorities and other local actors both State and non-State. The involvement of experts from different disciplines, for example hydrologists, political scientists, economists or sociologists is also a definite asset in identifying the benefits of the basin under consideration. A second element to be emphasized is the identification of the costs and risks of cooperation on the international watercourse. A third element, similar to the second, concerns the identification of beneficiaries and stakeholders. This approach allows different options to be formulated to determine compensation for affected actors. And finally, it is necessary to identify the negative effects of inaction. If cooperation has a cost, inaction also has costs. The balance between the two allows benefits to be identified for States operating good faith cooperation over transboundary water resources. Following on from the discussion of the way in which benefits are identified, a final question relates to the tools used by States to achieve these benefits. Conventional practice shows that agreements provide mechanisms for the production of benefits on a shared watercourse which are generally based on institutional mechanisms for cooperation for their implementation. In practice, how production is managed and how the benefits are shared by institutions or commissions takes on different forms. In some cases, management is limited to the coordination of the activities of the riparian States, whether this be joint activities, or those carried out by the organisation itself or by the member States. In both cases, the management and the distribution of benefits are designed to protect interests. One illustration of how the activities of the riparian States are coordinated is seen in the facilitation of negotiations between States to put in place arrangements to manage and protect the resource. This was the case with the Rhine. Pollution in the river had worsened during the 1960s and this led the riparian States to grant the International Commission for Protection of the Rhine in 1972 with the task of preparing the agreements between governments that dealt with pollution (chloride, chemical or thermal). On the basis of this mandate, the International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine facilitated the 1976 adoption of two major instruments: the Convention on the Protection of the Rhine against Chemical Pollution and the Convention for the Protection of the Rhine against Chloride Pollution. These two conventions played a very important role in cleaning-up the Rhine, bringing both socio-economic and environmental benefits to the States concerned. This type of management (where joint activities are led by the organization) is demonstrated in the way that pollution alert systems were coordinated. This is the case of the warning system for accidents or emergencies managed by the secretariat of the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube. Every time there is a risk of pollution or the concentration level of hazardous substances exceeds the authorised thresholds, the system is activated. The alert system transmits alert messages to countries downstream. This allows authorities to activate measures to ensure public security and to protect the environment. There are other cases where the management of and the sharing of benefits by basin organizations enable the development of the shared water resource. This is the case when the basin body is assigned primary responsibility for the economic and sustainable development of the basin. For example, the 1977 Agreement for the Establishment of the Organization for the Management and Development of the Kagera River Basin between Burundi, Tanzania and Rwanda details in Article 2 that the organization will handle all matters relating to the activities carried out in the Kagera river basin including benefits such as the development potential of hydroelectric power or the development of agriculture, livestock and fisheries. Similar provisions can be found in agreements which establish joint institutional mechanisms on the Amazon, the Plate, the Senegal River or the Niger River. In conclusion, cooperation on transboundary watercourses offers a variety of benefits for riparian States (according to the basin under consideration). However, the quality and quantity of the benefits of cooperation on transboundary watercourses relies on meticulous work to identify the benefits most relevant for the basin under consideration and on enhanced coordination. Producing benefits from transboundary water resources is a complex process that can not be realized unilaterally. ​[MUSIC]
