Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 1
SHARED MANAGEMENT OF TRANSBOUNDARY HIDRIC
RESOURCES IN SOUTH AMERICA: The impact of information in
the emergence and evolution of regional institutions
By Letícia Britto dos Santos, Master student in International Relations*
Carla Roberta Ferreira Valle, Undergraduating student in International Relations**
Department of International Relations
Pontifical Catholic University of Minas Gerais
Paper prepared for ISA, San Diego, 2012
ABSTRACT
This paper aims to discuss the shared management of transboundary hydric resources
in South America - focusing in Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay – analyzing
the impact of information in the creation of institutions to cope with this theme.
Nowadays, information spreads quickly and is stored especially in the internet
contributing to a higher level of transparency and accessibility. Nonetheless, countries
such as Uruguay and Paraguay, for instance, lack an effective system of water
information management what may lead to obstacles to cooperate regionally. This
article evaluates how the new media may impact on the evolution of regional norms
and rules making use of the Neoliberal Institutionalist Theory of International Relations
to light up this issue. This theory will serve as a tool to think about ways of solving the
collective action dilemmas through the creation and development of institutions.
Therefore, it will be analyzed the benefits of centralizing the information of the four
countries in one institution and at what extent it may contribute to the effectiveness of
the shared water management.
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 2
1- Introduction
The present work emerges from a current necessity in addressing the global
water issue and finding solutions for the collective action dilemmas raised by the need
to adequately govern this public good in order to avoid conflicts and promote
cooperation among actors. This paper deals especially with the transboundary hydric
resources shared between Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay focusing in the
international dynamics developed to govern it.
The research question which guides this study is concentrated in “How does
information encompassed in the new media era impact in a more effective water
management?”. Important to highlight is that the central objective is to understand the
role of information in the creation of a more effective water management pointing out
specific cases in South America between Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay
where this is observed.
The hypothesis consists in that information shared and stored in the internet
through the development of National Water Information System allows countries to see
clearly the politics and actions of others in the use and management of water resources
increasing transparency what reduces the shadow of the future and offers incentives to
cooperation between actors. The cooperation will tend to develop under signatures of
treaties, conventions and creation of mixed commissions which will guide a better
governance of the water in the countries by promoting a better dialogue between them
and estipulating norms and rules to solve specific problems over the resources. The
Neoliberal Institutionalist Theory of International Relations will be used as a tool for
understanding how those collective action dilemmas are solved via institutions and the
ways cooperation is possible to be achieved.
The methodology consisted in a qualitative data analysis and a comparative
method which intended to elucidate the similarities and differences in the management
of water between Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay and also analyze the joint
cooperation between them taking into consideration the existence of a national
information system about water – a) between countries with a national water
information system; b) between countries without a national water information system
and c) between countries with a countries without a national water information system.
The technique used was the documental analysis and research in official websites of
governments, international organizations, water networks and institutions related to
water management in and between the countries in study.
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 3
The article is divided in four parts. The first section is the present one and
intends to introduce the readers to the object of study. The second part presents the
theoretical approach to be used – the Neoliberal Institutionalism – and the important
premises. The third part is subdivided in five different sub-sections: the first explains
the management of water in the four countries in order to understand the possible
obstacles to a joint cooperation or an adoption of equal norms and rules to govern
water, the second analyzes the existence of a national water information system in
each of these countries which it is believed to facilitate cooperation, the third analyses
the coordinated management of water between the actors, the fourth analyses
International and Regional Water Information Systems and the existence of a regional
institution between the four countries for sharing information on water use and
management and the importance of these institutions for the effectiveness of
coordinated management of shared water. Finally, the last part verifies the
corroboration or not of the hypothesis, shows the final considerations and proposes the
creation of a regional institution between Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay for
sharing information on water.
2. Neoliberal Institutionalism
The complexity of the international relations which exists nowadays is a result of
the advance of globalization determined by: the scientific and technological advances,
the simultaneity of events and reciprocity, the expansion of the governmental and non-
governmental actor’s interaction in the international system, the decreasing of the
borders and the state autonomy level. All of those factors, led to the formation of a truly
global society and the increase of the contacts between the international actors. All of
those elements are called complex interdependence by NYE & KEOHANE (2001).
They criticize realist’s analyses pointing out that they focus only in power and security
between States relations and what is being proposed then is a broader view of
international reality which includes those transnational forces which make the
international system more complex.
Although the international system is anarchic there is a possibility of States
living in a pacific relation. According to AXERLROD & KEOHANE (1985) the
international politics are not always in a war state and cooperation happens. The
rational tendency is that States are approximated by interest, noting that international
cooperation is advantageous. According to KANT (2004) the States cooperate because
they are selfish, not altruistic. NYE & KEOHANE (2001) point to the growing
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 4
interdependence between states, which would allow more cooperation, necessary to
survival in the international system.
It is important to remember that cooperation is no equivalent to harmony.
Harmony requires complete identity of interests. Cooperation exists only when there
are situation of conflicting and complementary interests. According to KEOHANE
(1982) States enunciate their shared goals to cooperate by institutions which they have
incentives to coordinate their behavior to achieve collective benefits. So, where the
interdependence exists, opportunities will arise for the development of institutions.
The Neoliberal Institutionalist Theory of International Relations has many
arguments about institutions. They believe actors work due to their rational calculation
to acquire one possible benefit to maximize the effective of the institutional action (?
Nao entendi). Thus one individual rational action implies one collective action. In case
of the shared water resources management, the action of one country to another can
implies in big collective changes with others countries and might demand new
institutions in order to solve the common problem. Considering the preference of each
other, the countries might cooperate to maintain the international order and reduce the
risks and uncertainty in the environmental arena.
According to KEOHANE (1989) institutions are rules, agreed between the
governments which are relevant to specific groups of subjects in international relations.
According to PETERS (1999) institutions are rules to determine who and what is
included in the decision-making process, how to structure the information, what steps
can be taken and how to integrate individual and collective actions. Institutions are
also means to produce stable results and solve the problem of the collective action
between the rational actors. Because they have many rules unanimously acceptable
which allow converting preferences in the decisions and control the actors giving the
certainly of they will fulfill all requirements of the rules.
Institutions for the rational choice theory influenced the Neoliberal
Institutionalism Theory and they are also designed to overcome weaknesses identified
in the political system and are systems of rules and the basis to the behavior, they
emerge to satisfy the necessity of the socials and economics demands and ensure the
balance. AXERLROD & KEOHANE (1985) emphasized that States are rational and
self-interested actors and institutions can change the pay off structures for actors and
can also prolong the shadow of the future.
According to CACAIS (2009) ´Cooperation means operating simultaneously,
collaborating, paying attention, working together, helping, participating. Cooperation is
a coordinated effort to achieve common goals.` A state helps the other, working
together on a particular topic of interest in one or both States, which does not imply in a
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 5
loss of their sovereignty. ´International cooperation on environmental matters, is
nothing more than a living reflection of the acknowledgement of the transboundary and
global activity degrading exercised under the jurisdictions` which consequences may
reach far beyond the expected.`
According to HALL and TAYLOR (2003) `in practice institutions solve a large
part of the collective action dilemma`. These dilemmas are set in situations where
individuals act to maximize the satisfaction of their preferences, with the risk of
producing a sub-optimal out come for the community. Thus, there could be another
result that satisfies the best actors, unless they are dissatisfied. Usually the collective
action dilemma happens due to the absence of institutional arrangements, which
prevent each actor, adopts a course of action that would be best and most preferably
by the collective. In this situation, there is the Prisoner´s Dilemmas and the Tragedy of
the Commons.
For the Tragedy of the Commons, HARDIN (1968) present the situation that the
population grew while the natural resource necessary to survival were finite, leading to
a shortage of them. Thus, we would live in a situation of the `tragedy of the commons`,
as the individual interest would conflict with the common good. To solve the problem of
collective action, the author suggests the common good regulation with some
strategies necessaries to cooperation by the actors whose have the participation into
the institutions and ensuring greater stability.
OSTROM (1999) analyzes the issue of common resources management from
the perspective of the State. The author believes in good governance instead of one
solution to the problem, there are several solutions to solve the collective action
dilemmas. It is expected that the rational actors act on behalf of the community,
although they aim to maximize their objectives, especially when this is their highest
goal. In most of the cases, they have not an absolute, but a relative gain, but it is
satisfactory for what that actor expected of that group can be a solution to the collective
action dilemmas.
So, the institutions with rules and norms could help to the management of water
and reduce the uncertainty between the countries. In this sense, the institutions and
organs created in Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay for the administration of
water will intend to have a better efficiency in its management.
The discussion of organizations is also crucial in the discussion of institutions
since it constitutes an instrument for taking demands into the greater institutional
structure. The basic characteristic of organizations is to promote the common interests
of individuals, and groups are organizations built by individuals and therefore seek to
accomplish these goals. However they can not be achieved alone.
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 6
According Haftendorn (1999), the concept of water is based on three basic
features:
1) Essential to human life
2) Finite and scarce
3) Common and divided
The fact that water is essential to human life turn attention especially to the
importance of water for human consumption and that the poor quality or lack of this
feature directly impacts people's health and may even lead to death. In this sense, this
is a feature demanded by the world's population and should be fitted to all. However,
the second and third assumptions indicate that this resource is not infinite and that is
divided among several actors, implying the need for a water quality control and proper
management to preserve the good and avoid conflicts (HAFTENDORN, 1999).
In the case of transboundary waters, such management must take into account
the fact that several countries are sharing this good and that, therefore, have the right
of its use. The big problem is that each State within its domestic jurisdiction can
manage and use their resources as well as suits you, but in this case its use may result
in negative externalities for other states, creating a political problem that can lead to
serious conflicts. One way to avoid conflict and seek peaceful solutions is through this
cooperative interaction between these countries.
Thus, it become necessary to adopt international standards that maintain the
order and the balance in the Environment for the establishment of bilateral and
multilateral measures establish conditions for the international cooperation and solve
the Dilemma Collective Action.
3- Impacts of Information in the Coordinated Management of Shared Hydric
Resources in South America
3.1 Water Management
In order to understand how the management of hydric resources occurs at a
domestic level it is necessary to analyze the legal and institutional framework for water
management in each country. This is also relevant for understanding the difficulties
encountered in internationally cooperating in shared hydric resources due to
differences in water legislation and management considering the States have the right
to manage following its own parameters the resources in their jurisdiction. Many
international conventions and conferences such as the Mar del Plata Conference
(1977), Nova Deli Conference (1990), Dublin Conference (1992), Paris Conference
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 7
(1998) among others defend the integrated, decentralized and participative
management of water resources and it is being noted efforts of the states in adapting
their legislation to its principles.
3.1.1 Argentina
Argentina is making efforts in the development of an integrated, decentralized
and participative water management. The Constitution of 1994 delegates to the
provinces the original domain of the hydric resources located in their territory.
Argentina does not have a National Water Law and the legislation on water comes from
different other laws and norms. However, there are many projects to the creation of a
National Water Law being considered. At the provincial level, most of the provincial
constitutions have still not well developed principles and integration of water and
environment are not further considered. The provincial laws are varied with provinces
with a more developed normative on water than others. Also, there is not a National
Water Authority. The responsible organ for the hydric resources management in the
country is the National Hydric Resources Suboffice which depends on the Public Work
Office of the Planning, Public Inversion and Services Ministry. There are other
important organs related to the management of water such as the Federal Hydric
Council, Regional Hydric Councils, Environmental and Sustainable Development Office
among others. The management at the provincial level is diversified and there is
proliferation of institutions generating superposition of mission and functions and the
water management models adopted by the provinces are varied. In 2000, the National
Hydric Resources Suboffice contributed to the definition of a set of principles which
would guide the hydric politics and it was agreed that a bottom-up methodology would
be adopted. In this sense, provinces are responsible for formulating their hydric politics
and State would act helping to solve possible conflicts. Posteriorly, in 2006, the Hydric
Resources National Plan was developed by and initiative of the National Hydric
Resources Suboffice and the Federal Hydric Council which intends to promote an
integrated management of the hydric resources. The hydric resources management in
Argentina is institutionally and sectionally fragmented, however the National Plan
intends to promote a decentralized, participative and integrated management. In
Argentina is in development the water basin conception as the most adequate unit
planning and there are some experiences in this pattern. It is important to note the
country has a National Hydrometric Network and the National Plan is implementing this
Network with Monitoring Networks of ground water, coastal zone water and limnology
studies in integration with other institutions.
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 8
3.1.2 Brazil
In Brazil the hydric resources management is more developed compared to the
other three countries and has already advanced significantly towards a more
integrated, decentralized and participative management with the creation of Basin
Committees and interinstitutional dialogue with other thematic spheres. The National
Constitution of 1988 delegates to the states the property of superficial water and
groundwater. The Nation has domain over all water resources in its territories of
domain or which encompasses more than one state or country as well as marginal
territories and fluvial beaches. In cases in which State is omissive, states may develop
norms for water resources protection. Also, compete to the Union legislate on water
matters. In Brazil there is a National Water Law, the Law Nº 9344/97 and a Water Code
of 1934. In respect to the state, significant part of the states possesses their state laws
on water which establishes criteria for hydric resources management. The
municipalities, by its turn, have a limited political roll since it is only acknowledged by
the Constitution the state and federal water domain. Nonetheless, they act on the
Water Basin Committees and may supplement existed norms. Municipalities have the
obligation to fiscally control the water use grants in its territory jointly with the state and
union. In Brazil, the National Water Authority is the Water Institute, created in 2007,
and dependent of the Territorial System, Regional Development and Environmental
Ministry. There are also other institutions related to water management such as the
National Hydric Resources Council, the state Hydric Resources Council among others.
The National Water Law instituted the National Hydric Resources Politics which
highlights the importance of a joint water management with other sectors and its
connection with the management of other resources. The National Hydric Resources
predicts a National Water Plan as an instrument to the effective water management.
Brazil has already developed the conception of water basin as the adequate planning
unit and has advanced towards an integrated, decentralized and participative water
management. Water is considered a good of public domain and an economic good.
3.1.3 Uruguay
Despite many efforts must be done in order to concretize the development and
improvement of the legal and institutional framework in the country, Uruguay counts
with a National Water Authority, has a National Water Politics under development and
counts with a National Water Code. The advances are towards an integrated and
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 9
decentralized management. The art. 47 of the Constitution states that the Union has
the domain over the hydric resources of the country and the Law Nº 14859/78 institutes
the Water Code of Uruguay. The State is the National Water Authority and the National
Water Directory and the Environmental Water Directory are the administrative water
organs according to the Constitutional Reform of 2004. Other organs related to the
management of water are the Housing, Territorial System and Environmental Ministry,
the Water, Environment and Territorial National Council among others. The
management at the regional level is composed of eight regional offices created since
1970 and is constituted as local representatives of the National Water Directory. It
develops an important role in the water use for irrigation. Nonetheless, there are still
few interinstitutional coordination which is though being improved. The Law Nº 18610
establishes a National Water Politics, in 2009, and the formulation of an Integrated
Hydric Resources Management National Plan is foreseen to help its development. The
hydric resources management in Uruguay is fragmented; however it is following
towards a more integrated management. There are efforts in the adoption a water
basin as planning unit and water is seen as a public good according to the
constitutional reform of 2004.
3.1.4 Paraguay
In Paraguay the legal and institutional framework is much less advanced. The
National Constitution does not make any explicit reference about water only stating that
all liquid in their natural state are from state domain. The Civil Code Law Nº 1183/85
consideres of state domain the superficial water and there is no reference of the
groundwater. Also, there is no General Water Law even though there is a Water Law
Project. The normative background is less effective and is sectorial, there is
superposition among the laws and they are obsolete. Also, there is no water integrative
principle. The creation of the General Directory of Hydric Resources Protection and
Conservation is advancing in the legal and institutional framework of water
management in the country. The Law Nº 1248/31 of the Rural Code establishes criteria
for the water use in rural areas and the Decrete-Law Nº 3729 establishes norms for
public water management as well as states institutional basis and water use grants.
Paraguay lacks a National Water Authority and the hydric resources legal mark is in
development. The Law Nº 1561/2000 creates the Environmental Office which
establishes the structure of the General Directory of Hydric Resources Protection and
Conservation which is the maximum instance of the hydric sector in the country. The
other organs related to the water management are Regulatory Institution of Sewerage
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 10
System Service, for instance. The municipalities perform the local water management
functions. In Paraguay there is no National Hydric Resources Politics, water is
considered an economic good, the water basin conception is still not formally
incorporated in the national politics and the water management is fundamentally
sectorial and fragmented.
As a result, it is noted that the hydric resources management is more developed
in Brazil than in Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay. There are important differences not
only in the advances of the legal and institutional framework for water management in
each country, but also in the legal and institutional framework itself. The water basin
concept as a planning unit is still under development in the other countries and was not
even formally incorporated in the legislation of Uruguay. In addition, the development of
water basin committees in Brazil is not a common management politic between the
other three countries. Despite the recent efforts towards an integrated, decentralized
and participative water management in the countries, there are still weak legal
instruments and domestic institutions to permit an effective water management.
3.2. National Water Information System
The Hydric Resources National Plan and the Hydric Resources National Politics
can only be effectively implemented if monitoring and information is available. Public
politics and solutions for domestic water conflict and environmental and water
management problems can only be achieved if exists a monitoring network to measure
from time to time the quantitative and qualitative aspects of water systems such as
quotes, flow rates, evaporation, river profile, water quality and sediments. In this sense,
it is crucial the development and implementation of a National Water Information
System to centralize and turns public via internet all information of water bodies in the
country. Here it will be analyzed the existence or not of a National Water Information
System in the countries in order to understand the level of transparency in the use and
management of hydric resources each country possesses as well as the control of
water regimes in its water bodies and the water quality.
3.2.1 Argentina: SNIH (National Hydric Information System)
Recent efforts exist in the development of a National System of Hidric
Information in Argentina. Information in the country is collected by different public –
institutions which depend on the National Government, authorities of application on
water issue, basin organisms and committees, international programs and cooperation
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 11
agreements) - and private organisms – organisms which concentrate interest on
agriculture, farming, climatic and environmental activities). These organizations have
generally hydric information acquired by their own Hydric Sensors Network and they
turn available part of this material via internet. There is still not a Central Bank of Hydric
Information in Argentina which shows the hydric parameters daily and that is why it is
being developed a National Water Information System which aims to integrate and
exchange hydric information between those actors and organisms.
The National Hydric Information System is part of the Project of Integrated
Management of Hydric Resources and is being encouraged the implementation of a
Monitoring System of Hydric Resources and a National Water Information System.
The National Hydric Information System of Argentina aims to recollect process
and store basic data acquired in the National Hydrological Network. It is considered
crucial for the Hydric Resources Suboffice to know the state and dynamics of hydric
resources with precision, in quantity and quality, to correctly engage on infra-structure
building and also acquire an efficient use, being essential to all the planning and
management process of water in a sustainable approach.
Lately, it is being elaborated the Integrated Hydrological Data Basis which will
possibly to be accessed on the internet and aims to add to the recent measurements
the number of measurement stations and the all national and provincial network
facilitating the exchange of information.
In addition it was developed the Digital Cartography and Georeferenciated
Systems Project which uses techniques and technologies to manage and structure the
hydric national information. It is also being celebrated agreements on technical
cooperation between different organisms including international organisms aiming to
constitute this network of hydric information and improve the national system.
The Hydric Resources Suboffice also turns available hydrometeorological
publication each year with information on meteorological, hydrological, nivometric
statistics. Also it continues the action of the Basic Network on Hydric Information as
responsible for the generation of precise and trustable hydrological information. It
recollects and process basic data in quality and quantity of superficial water. All
information is intended to be available at the National System of Hydric Information.
3.2.2 Brazil: SNIRH (National System of Hydric Resources Information)
The National System of Hydric Resources Information is an instrument of the
National Policy of Hydric Resources instituted by the Law Nº 9433/97 and it has the
following objectives:
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 12
Encompass, gives consistency and disseminate data and information about the
qualitative and quantitative situation of the hydric resources in Brazil.
Update, permanently, information about availability and demand of hydric
resources.
Provide subsidies for the elaboration of the Hydric Resources Plans
The ANA (National Water Agency) is responsible for organizing, implementing
and managing the National System of Hidric Resources Information (art. 4°,
inciso XIV, of the Law N° 9984/2000)
The National System of Hydric Resources Information is composed by 6
integrated and interdependent subsystems. The Use Regulation Subsystem (REGLA)
which centralized information about the uses of hydric resources in the whole country.
The processes associated with this are: users registration, granting use, charge for
use, inspection, collection and declaration and certificates. There is a National
Registration of Hydric Resources Users which relates the different uses and
information about it made by a specific water system and the physical characteristics of
this system.
Also, the SNIRH is composed by the Management and Planning Subsystem
which has the function of turning visible the planning processes and water
management as well as allow the follow up of the situation of the hydric resources in
the country in relation to the quality and quantity of water and the follow up of the
implementation degree of the National Plan of Hydric Resources (PNRH).
In addition, there is the Quali-Quantitative Subsystem. It allows the collection,
storish, treatment, consistence and dissemination of fluviometric, pluviometric,
evaporimetric, sedimentometric and of the water quality data. Also, it stores and
processes all hidrometeorologic data and supports the management, mantainance and
operation of the country hidrometeorologic monitoring network
Beyond those subsystems there are the Hydric, Documental and Geographical
Intelligence Subsystem. The Hydric Intelligence incorporates all the processes
necessary for the generation of hydrological information. The Geographical Intelligence
allows the provision of geospatial data and information of support to water
management as has a integrative function with the other subsystems. The Documental
Intelligence which intends to elaborate a data basis of documents related to the
decentralized management of hydric resources in Brazil and which will be available in
the internet.
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 13
3.2.3 Paraguay
There is no existence of a National System of Hydric Resources Information in
Paraguay. There are some initiative and projects such as the Environmental and
Hydrological Monitoring Centre which is a cooperative project between France and
Paraguay to support the development of monitoring networks for hydric information
process.
3.2.4 Uruguay
The country does not own a National Water Information System. Nonetheless,
there is an Integrated Hydric Resources Management National Plan which predicts the
creation of a National Hydric Resources Monitoring Plan contemplating the quantity
and quality of water and to achieve this one of the main objectives is the creation of a
national water information system.
Uruguay has some official institutions which measure the conditions of
atmosphere and the water systems (DNM, DINAGUA, SOHMA, DINAMA, OSE, INIA,
UTE, etc.). Considering this, it is also noted that in general terms the main variables for
the hydrological cycle are being object of programs of systematic observation.
Nevertheless, there are other variables which are not considered by those institutions
such as parameters which were studied only on scientific and technological
researches. It is perceived a deficit in the integration between information monitoring
on water quality and water quantity.
In Uruguay there is a Meteorological Service (DNM-MDN) created in the 1940s
with a national network of meteorological stations with 25 stations in the country.
However it is passing through a hard period with lack of personal and adequate
equipment. Also, there is a Hydrologic Service (DINAGUA-MVOTMA) which is
nowadays incorporated in the Hydric Resources Management National System.
Uruguay also counts with an Use Inventory (DINAGUA-MVOTMA) in which users must
legally demand their private use rights for water for the Water Authority. Finally, there is
the Quality Evaluation and Monitoring of Water (DINAMA-MVOTMA). The Users
Monitoring Network are OSE, UTE among others. Despite the country possesses
credible institutions which collect and monitor important information on water, it still
lacks a national water information system to process and integrate all this information
and turns it available to the public in general.
Therefore, it is observed that only in Brazil the National Water Information
System can be considered relevantly developed. Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay still
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 14
lack an effective monitoring of their hydric resources as well as integration between the
institutions which realize these measurements and centralization of this information in a
national system to turn it public available and concised. Therefore, according to our
hypothesis it is supposed to be noted the existence of few bilateral agreements and
cooperation between Brazil and the other countries before 1997, when the National
Water Information System in Brazil was created. In respect to the other countries, since
the National Water Information System is still in process of creation, it is supposed to
be observed few initiatives and cases of cooperation, bilateral and regional agreements
and emergence of institutions for shared water management between them.
3.3. Coordinated Management of Shared Hydric Resources
In this section it is expected to see a low level of cooperation between
Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay expressed in treaties, conventions, institutions and
norms for shared water management before 1997 and an increase of cooperation after
1997 between Brazil and the other countries. Considering Brazil is the only country
which effectively possesses a National Water Information System it will be suppressed
the analyzes a) between countries which possess a National Water Information
System.
3.3.1 Between Brazil and Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay
In this section it was expected to see which was upright by the hypothesis that
the new media in Brazil the National Water Information System created in 1997
impacted on the evolution of regional norms and rules between Argentina, Paraguay
and Uruguay. What it was expected is that the initiative cooperation emerge after 1997,
which was the legal and institutional framework of the creation of the National System
of Hydric Resources Information.
Although, most of the agreements, treaties, commission and institutions have
emerged for managing shared waters between these countries were before 1997. So,
we have treaties of Brazil with Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay since the last century
without internet and complex interdependence. Brazil cooperated with others before of
1997 with a highest number of Treaties in 60´s and 70´s; in this way their agreements
were probably made by letters and others kinds of communications.
If institutions as KEOHANE affirm are rules, agreed between the governments
which are relevant to specific groups of subjects in international relations, there was a
emergence of institutions before the National Water Information System. Despite NYE
& KEOHANE (2001) pointed the growing interdependence between states allow more
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 15
cooperation, necessary to survival in the international system, the National System of
Hydric Resources Information was not essential to Brazil cooperate with those
countries. After 1997, Brazil had only one ‘Additional Protocol for the Agreement for the
Aquatic Fauna Conservation in the Bordering causes` in 2002. The table below shows
those observations:
Source: COSTA, LARISSA. Report of the Working Group on Transbordary Water Resources Management- GT guidelines. Technical Chamber of resource management and cross-border water –CTGRHT of the National Hydric Resources Council – CNRH. Brasilia, February 2012
3.3.2 Between Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay (Inexistence of a National Water
Information System)
According to the tables of the most important agreements signed it is observed
that Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay cooperate in the management of shared hydric
resources. Although it was expected a low index of coopertation, there are treaties and
created commissions to manage somehow aspects related to the hydric resources
shared by these countries. This shows that the inexistence of a National Water System
has not imposed significant obstacles to the elaboration of treaties, conventions and
Country Agreement/ Protocol/ Treaty Year
Brazil and Uruguay
Agreement about the Principles which must regulate the
Fluvial Navigation between the two countries 1857
Brazil and Paraguay Agreement about Paraguay River Navigation 1927
Brazil and Paraguay
Agreement for the Constitution of Mixed Comissions
encharged of studying the Navigation Problems of Paraguay
River 1941
Brazil and Paraguay
Agreement for the Sudy of the Hidraulic Energy Use of Acaraí
and Mondaí River 1956
Brazil and Paraguay Cataratas Act (Iguazu Act) 1966
Brazil and Uruguay Agreement of Fishery and Living Resources Preservation 1969
Brazil and Argentina
Agreement, by note exchanges, about the characterization of
the thalweg of the Uruguay River in the area of the Garabi
Project 1970
Brazil and Paraguay
Treaty for the Hidroeletric Use of the River Paraná Hydric
Resources, belonged to both countries since and inclusive the
Salto Grande de Sete Quedas or Salto de Guairá until Foz of the 1973
Brazil and Uruguay Agreement refered to the Fluvial Transportation 1975
Brazil and Uruguay Jaraguão River Protocol 1977
Brazil and Uruguay Mirin Lagoon Basin Treaty 1977
Brazil and Argentina
Treaty for the Shared Hydric Resources Use in the Limit Areas
of Uruguay River and its affluent 1980
Argentina and Paraguay
Agreement by exchange of notes about the Fishery and Water
Quality 1989
Brazil and Paraguay Agreement on Techical Cooperation in Matter of Water Quality 1993
Brazil and Paraguay
Agreement for the Aquatic Fauna Conservation on the
bordering rivers course 1994
Brazi and Argentina
Agreement about Fuvial Transversal Bordering Transport of
Passangers, Vehicles and Load 1997
Brazil and Paraguay
Addittional Prottocol for the Agreement for the Aquatic Fauna
Conservation in the bordering river courses 2002
BILATERAL AGREEMENTS ON WATER MANAGEMENT BETWEEN BRAZIL AND THE OTHER COUNTRIES
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 16
creation of institutions for coordinated hydric resources management. Therefore,
cooperation is the preferred choice of the countries in solving their conflicts in this
issue.
Source: COSTA, LARISSA. Report of the Working Group on Transbordary Water Resources Management- GT guidelines. Technical Chamber of resource management and cross-border water –CTGRHT of the National Hydric Resources Council – CNRH. Brasilia, February 2012
3.4. International and Regional Water Information Systems
The previous item of the comparisons of Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and
Paraguay analyses the National Water Systems information and its impact on the
creation of institutions. Although to a complete comprehension of the cooperation
between those countries, it is necessary to analyze the existing information system
in regional and international level, what is the legal and institutional framework of those
Countries Agreement/Treaty Institution Created Date of Ratification
Argentina and Uruguay
Agreement and Addittional
Protocol between Uruguay and
Argentina for the Use of the
Uruguay Riverr in Salto Grande
Area
Salto Grande Mixed Technic
Comission 1946
Brazil and Uruguay Mirin Lagoon Basin Treaty
Mixed Brazilian-Uruguayan
Comision for the Lagoon Mirin
Basin Development (Brazilian
Section and Uruguayan
Delegation) 1963
Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil,
Paraguay and Uruguay Plata Basin Treaty
Coordinator Intergovernamental
Committee 1969
Argentina and Paraguay
Agreement for the Study of the
Use of the La Plata River
Resources
COMIP (Argentina-Paraguay
Mixed Comission of the Paraná
River) 1971
Argentina and Uruguay
Plata River Basin and Maritime
Side Treaty
CARP (La Plata River
Administrative Comission 1973
Argentina and Paraguay Yacyretá Treaty Yacyretá Binational Entity 1973
Brazil and Paraguay Itaipú Treaty Binational ITAIPU 1973
Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil,
Paraguay and Uruguay
Convention for the constitution
of the FONPLATA
FONPLATA (Financial Fund for La
Plata Basin Development 1974
Argentina and Uruguay Statute of the Uruguay River
CARU (Uruguay River
Administrative Comission) 1975
Argentina and Brazil
Exchange of Notes for the
construction of a Mixed
Comission for the Construction
of a Iguazu River Bridge
Argentina-Brazil
Mixed Comission for the
Construction of a Iguazu River
Bridge Argentina-Brazil 1980
Brazil and Uruguay
Treaty for the Quaraí Basin
Water Resources Use and
Development
Mixed Brazilian-Uruguayan
Comission for the Quaraí River
Basin Development 1991
Argentina, Bolivia and Paraguay Formosa Declaration Pilcomayo Trinational Comission 1994
Argentina and Paraguay
Binational Administrative
Comission of the Inferior 1996
Brazil and Paraguay
Cooperation Agreement
between Brazil and Paraguay for
the Sustainable Development
and Integrated Management of
the APA River Basin
Mixed Brazilian-Paraguay
Comission for the Sustainable
Development and Integrated
Management of the Apa River
Basin (CRA) composed of Brazilian
and Paraguayan Section 2006
Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and
Uruguay
Agreement about Guarani
Aquifer
Creation of a Comission to
coordenate the principles of the
agreement 2010
EMERGENCE OF INSTITUTIONS FOR COORDINATED MANAGEMENT OF SHARED HYDRIC RESOURCES
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 17
and if there are institutions which was influenced by them. Internationally and regionally
there are some water information systems that help the transparency in water
management between the countries.
In the international level there are:
1) The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) created the Global Water
Quality Database and Information Enhance 1 accessibility to credible data
Promote interoperability with other environmental information systems;
2) The Water Monitoring Alliance 2 , an initiative of the World Water Council, is
made up of organizations involved in the collection, analysis, reporting and
dissemination of information on water in all its uses;
3) The International Water Association 3 (IWA) has the Hydroinformatics and
Communications Technologies (ICT) to water resources, hydraulics or
hydrology.
4) The Water Date Portal4 of the International Water Management Institute (IWMI)
the system also supports data management in IWMI’s research projects.
Those International Water Information Systems aim to enhance a greater
exchange and sharing of information amongst the organizations and programmers to
dissemination the information for the decision makers, the media and the public at
large. They have a cooperative partnership among organizations working at the
international, regional, national and local levels.
Regionally, In South American the Water Information Systems there is
Iberoamerican Information System on Water (SIAGUA) that includes countries from
Latin American, Portugal and Spain. It was created in 2001, initiated and promoted by
the American Conference of Water Directors. SIAGUA is designed to develop a useful
and effective exchange of information, knowledge, technologies and management
experiences on water resources in Iberoamerican countries over the Internet. SIAGUA
is organized as an open and decentralized system supported by National Focal Points
(NFP), which act as National Information Systems and International Focal Point (IPP)
which coordinates and back bone network.
According to the website of SIAGUA5, the system aims to:
• Engage the countries in a framework of common action for decision-making and
integrated management of water resources.
1 For more information access: <http://www.unep.org/gemswater/Home/tabid/55762/Default.aspx>
2 For more information access: < http://www.watermonitoringalliance.org/>
3For more information access: <http://www.iwahq.org/7s/networks/specialist-groups/list-of-
groups/hydroinformatics.html> 4 For more information access: < http://waterdata.iwmi.org/>
5 For more information access: <http://www.siagua.org/>
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 18
• Encourage the implementation of an Information System on Water in each
Iberoamerican country and connect in a network with structured information, reliable
and timely, for many sectors of society.
• Promote education of the Iberoamerican community in sustainable water use and
encourage their participation in planning and management of water resources.
• Establish new mechanisms for cooperation in Iberoamerican in relation to technology
and knowledge transfer and sharing of information and documentation in the field of
sustainable management of water resources
There is one specific Local Information System in South American that is called
Inter- American Water Resources Network (IWRN)6. It was created in 1994, as the
main recommendation of the First Inter- American Dialogue on Water Management,
which produced the Miami Declaration. The IWRN aims are: build and strengthen water
resources partnerships among nations, organizations, and individuals; to promote
education and the open exchange of information and technical expertise; and to
enhance communication, cooperation, collaboration and financial commitment to
integrated water and land resources management within the context of environmental
and economic sustainability in the Americas.
Regional Nodes are generally regional organizations that can assist the
Advisory Council IWRN in information sharing and coordination of activities with
organizations IWRN water in your area. In 2003, Members of the Executive Committee
took the decision during the Sub-Regional Dialogues, to provide each region with an
Americas regional hub website to ensure easier and faster means of disseminating
information among members of IWRN. These regional websites are built to
international standards established collectively for the Water Information Summits and
should become the most efficient search mechanism for quality information on water
resources in the Americas. They are powerful search engines, with an excellent
environment for discussion and a good means of disseminating information on water.
The database created according to metadata tables has a close relationship
with the websites of the Water Portal of the Americas, the World Water Portal and IW-
LEARN. The Central Node of IWRN has the ability to store information and also find
other information on any of the other regional nodes IWRN, displaying results on any
matter, in Americas, regions and countries. IWRN is the best way to exchange the
lessons learned from practices in the field. It has organized six Inter- American
Dialogues on Water Management, the regional nodes are:
6 For more information access: < http://www.iwrn.org/>
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 19
1) Node in the Southern Cone 7 - Based in Argentina, this node will gather
information on water resources of all Southern Cone countries of Spanish language:
Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Paraguay and Bolivia.
2) Node Brazil - Based in Brazil, this node is responsible not only for the collection of
information on water resources in Brazil, but also for Portuguese translations of the
major affairs of other nodes. It is the only Network Node in Portuguese.
3) Node Amazon - South Pacific - Based in Peru, this node will gather information
from all countries that are in the Amazon River Basin and the South Pacific Basin:
Bolivia, Paraguay, Peru, Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela, Suriname.
4) Node Caribbean - will gather information mainly on water resources in the
Caribbean islands.
5) Node Central America8 - will gather information on water resources in all Central
American countries.
6) Node North America - will gather information on water resources of all the
countries of North America.
In order to evaluate the existence of a regional institution between the four
countries for sharing information on water use and management it was founded the
Network for Cooperation in Integrated Water Resource Management for Sustainable
Development9 of Economic Commission for Latin America Caribbean (ECLAC).
It is a technical mechanism consisting of institutions of water management and
public, private or autonomous member countries of ECLAC. This Network aims to
improve the capacity of multiple use management of water resources in its various
dimensions (institutional, administrative, economic, financial, legal and technological)
as well as projects and services associated with this management, based on the
exchange of knowledge and direct cooperation between their members. The Division of
Natural Resources and Infrastructure, public since July 1994, the circular letter of the
network twice a year, in Spanish and English. There are many conventions` studies
and cooperation agreements between the countries of Latin America and the
Caribbean in relation to water systems and transboundary waters.
The legal mark of Inter- American Water Resources Network was 1994 almost
in the same time the Network for Cooperation in Integrated Water Resource
Management for Sustainable Development of Economic Commission for Latin America
7 For more information access:
<http://crrh.cathalac.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=102&Itemid
=470> 8For more information access: <http://crrh.cathalac.org//>
9 For more information access: <http://www.eclac.org/drni/noticias/circulares/0/23080/Carta23es.pdf>
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 20
Caribbean (ECLAC) was created. So, the Regional International Water Information
System had an impact and an influence to create new regional institutions.
In conclusion, the Regional and International Water Information System has
been important for the improvement and effectiveness of cooperation´s agreement to
enhance the management of the new institutions shared.
4. Final Considerations
The new media era, especially internet, leaded to a higher information
transparency and also assured higher confidence between the actors diminishing
uncertainty in their actions. Information is exchanged in a quick way and travels in real
time to any part of the world permitting better monitoring and effectiveness in the
management.
Considering the question which guided this study: “How does information
encompassed in the new media era impacts in a more effective water management?” it
was predicted that “Information shared and stored in the internet through a National
Water Information System allows countries to see clearly the politics and actions of
others in the use and management of water resources increasing transparency what
reduces the shadow of the future and offers incentives to cooperation between actors.
The cooperation will tend to develop under signatures of treaties, conventions and
creation of mixed commissions which will guide a better governance of the water in the
countries by promoting a better dialogue between them and stipulating norms and rules
to solve specific problems over the resources.”
Throughout this study it was concluded that our hypothesis was partially correct.
Information stored and shared through a National Water Information System had not
impacted expressively in the creation of institutions for shared water management.
Paraguay and Uruguay still lack a National Water Information System for centralizing
information and also do not have an adequate monitoring system of their hydric
resources. Argentina, even though possesses a National Water Information System in
development, it was not effectively implemented until now. Brazil is the only of the four
countries which was observed to have an adequate monitoring system, especially in
quantitative terms, in most of its transboundary water systems. However, it still has a
weak quality monitoring system. Brazil also has a National Water Information System
institutionalized in 1997 which centralizes all hydric information via web. Nonetheless,
this system has not clearly impacted in the creation of institutions for water
management. Analyzing the most relevant cooperative initiatives with neighboring
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 21
countries it is noted most of the bilateral and regional agreements as well as shared
water commissions were created before 1997.
In addition, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay, have signed many cooperation
agreements for shared water management despite their lack of a national water
information system and availability of much important hydric resources information.
In this terms, information may seem to impact weakly in the creation of
institutions understood as rules, agreed between the governments which are relevant
to specific groups of subjects in international relations (KEOHANE, 1989).
Nonetheless, an analysis that was not made here in details and that is crucial in
understanding the information role in the shared water management is the pre-
existence of information although precarious which was somehow shared between
countries by personal contact, telephone, telegram, letter, etc. Argentina, for instance,
although does not have a consolidated National Water Information System has counted
with a variety of disperse institutions which measured quantitative aspects of water
systems. This precarious information was sufficient for the establishment of
cooperation between the countries and the improvement of the existing ways to acquire
and process information.
This way, the development of National Water Information Systems may be seen
as being impacted by cooperation with other countries in shared hydric resources
issue. As observed, they were not essential for international cooperation on shared
water management, however they are considered strongly relevant to the effectiveness
of these cooperative initiatives. The lack of quantitative and qualitative information on
water monitoring imposes obstacles to concretely follow and observe the signed
agreements. If a country does not possesses information about the quotes, water flow
rates, water quality, sediments among other water aspects, it is not able to measure
and completely know the externalities it is imposing to other countries which share that
river or water basin. However, in order to a monitoring system and a National Water
Information System be successful in transboundary water resources it requires
coordinated efforts between countries that share a particular water body. Monitoring
requires an intense exchange of information with neighboring countries, reason why
many cooperation agreements are being developed between countries. This type of
cooperation finds obstacle not only in political and diplomatic order but also of
technical, technological and institutional order. These types of cooperation aims
beyond information exchange the creation of capacity and financing viability. The
exchange information between countries also depends of harmonization of
measurement criteria. Brazil possesses a hidrometeorological monitoring network via
satellite and monitoring stations throughout the country and in almost all transboundary
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 22
water courses to monitor the entrance and exit of water, however many neighboring
countries does not count with this information what imposes difficulties in coordinately
managing it. Exchange with Argentina and Uruguay is following good paths, however
there is a need for greater articulation with Paraguay. Regarding quality monitoring
there are few advances and there is a need to intensify physical, chemical and
biological monitoring aspects of water resources. In Amazonia monitoring encounter
difficulties due to illegal activities such as narcotrafic and mining prospection activities.
Cooperation is the most viable and adequate solution to overcome it as well as with
national organs such as the national defense organ. Lately all the agreements being
concretized predicts the elaboration of projects to develop and improve
hidrometeorological monitoring.
Another point this study allowed to think is the importance of information in the
domestic management of water resources. Paraguay specifically has a precarious
water management in the country. The lack of available information imposes obstacles
to the formulation of public policies and the execution of studies and projects to
improve water management domestically. Also, the lack of information hampers the
implementation of the national and state plans of hydric resources and water basins
and the bilateral and regional agreements.
Important to highlight is that there are two cases in which it is possible to see
the role of information in shared water management: the Guarani Aquifer case in the
creation of institutions and the Lagoon Mirin Basin Agreement in the improvement of
shared water management. In the first case the Environmental Protection Project and
the Sustainable Development Guarani Aquifer System collected and centralized
technical and scientific studies during seven years related to the Guarani Aquifer
System, shared between Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. The project was
important to produce information about the region and necessary actions needed so
that the countries would have success in the system management. The Aquifer
Guarany System is structured in a Cooperation Council, Management National Units,
Information System Committee, Monitoring Committee, Local Managament Supportive
Committee, Capacitation Committee and Articulation Office. The accumulation of
information leaded to the Guarani Aquifer Agreement, in 2010, which predicts a
consolidation of a commission for the system management between the four countries.
By its turn, the Lagoon Mirin Basin Agreeement of 1977 regulated the coordinated
management of the Lagoon Mirin Basin between Brazil and Uruguay. The established
mixed commission for its coordinated management as well as the treaty leaded to the
activation of three monitoring stations in the Lagoon Mirin Basin in the Brazilian side
and an efficient management of the quotes, water flow rates and other aspects of the
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 23
water which improved the dialogue between Uruguay and Brazil and the elaboration of
projects and initiatives for better managing the system.
The importance of information is also visible by the emergence of information
networks as instruments for a better management of water. These systems have
influenced cooperation and the emergence of institutions. However, they are cause and
consequence of cooperation between the countries. The International and Regional
Water Information Systems are examples of cooperation and an improvement of the
institutions that already exist. The problem of this networks is that they are intensily co-
related with advances in the institutional and legal framework for water management in
the countries and the development of National Water Information Systems, since they
depend on domestic institutions to turn available important information on water
systems.
Consequently, the hypothesis error is in considering the ‘impact of information`
as an independent variable and `the creation of institutions` as a depended variable.
The “impact of information” is also a depended variable, it is part of the process of
innovation`s institutional. They both are interfering to have a more effective water
management in South America between Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Brazil. Those
variables should be analyzed as co-existing and co-influencing each other.
In conclusion, information shared in internet contributes to transparency in
politics and action between those countries and it is contributing to the effectiveness of
pre-existed cooperative initiatives by turning possible the fiscal control and monitoring
of water systems and therefore the implementation of public policies and bilateral and
regional agreements and projects developed. Nonetheless, an effective exchange and
role of information will only be possible through the development of domestic normative
and institutional frameworks for water management and a National Information Water
System as well as the consolidation of regional and international networks of water
information.
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 24
REFERENCES
AXELROD, Robert e KEOHANE, Robert. "Achieving Cooperation Under Anarchy: Strategies and Institutions". World Politics, vol. 38, nº 1, pp. 226-254, 1985. HALL, P. A.; TAYLOR, R. C. R. As três versões do Neo-institucionalismo. Lua Nova, São Paulo, n° 58, p. 193-223, 2003. Available at: <www.scielo.br/pdf/ln/n58/a10n58.pdf> Access in July 11th, 2011.
HARDIN, Garret. The tragedy of the commons. In Science, Nº 162, 1968. Available at:< http://www.dhushara.com/book/multinet/trag.htm> Acess in May 2nd, 2011
KANT, Imamanuel. Para a Paz Perpétua. In: GINSBURG, J. (org.). A Paz Perpétua: Um Projeto para hoje. São Paulo, Perspectiva, 2004
KEOHANE, R.O. The demand for international regimes. International Organization,v. 36, n. 2, International Regimes (Spring, 1982), pp. 325-355, 1982
_______________Neoliberal Institutionalism: A Perspective on World Politics. IN: KEOHANE, R.O. (ed), International Institutions and State Power: Essays in International Relations Theory, p. 1-20. Boulder: Westview Press, 1989 _______________International Institutions: Two Approaches. In DERIAN, James Der. International Theory: Critical Investigation. Nova York: University Press, 1995.
_______________ Robert O; NYE, Joseph S. Power and Interdependence. 3rd ed. New York: Logman, 2001.
OLSON, Mancur. A lógica da ação coletiva. Sã9.o Paulo: EDUSP, 1999.
OSTROM, Elinor. Governing the commons. The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 199
Peters, b. Guy (1999) El nuevo institucionalismo. Teoria institucional en ciencia política. Barcelona: Editorial Gedisa
ISA Annual Convention, San Diego-CA, 2012 25
Websites: <http://www.ana.gov.br/portalsnirh/> Access in February 15th, 2012 <http://www.hidricosargentina.gov.ar/InformacionHidrica.html> Access in February 1st, 2012 <http://www.seam.gov.py/direccion-general-de-proteccion-y-conservacion-de-los-recursos-hidricos.html> Access in February 14th, 2012 <http://www.ssme.gov.py/CMMAH/resumen.html> Access in February, 11th, 2012 <http://anterior.mvotma.gub.uy/dinagua/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=155< Access to 14 of March 2012 <http://alm.bolsacontinental.com/?file=kop4.php> Access in February 15th, 2012 <http://www2.mre.gov.br/dai/b_parg_193_5817.htm> Access in February 15th, 2012 <http://www.cnrh.gov.br/sitio/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=73:gt-do-rio-apa&catid=30:grupos-de-trabalho&Itemid=84> Access in March 15th, 2012 <http://www2.mre.gov.br/dai/m_67084_1970.htm> Access in February 1st, 2012
