Difference between revisions of "Water Management, Environment and Self-determination in Catalonia, Spain"

From AquaPedia Case Study Database
Jump to: navigation, search
[unchecked revision][unchecked revision]
(Saved using "Save and continue" button in form)
 
(first edition (Saved using "Save and continue" button in form))
Line 9: Line 9:
 
|Water Project=
 
|Water Project=
 
|Agreement=
 
|Agreement=
|Topic Tags=
+
|Summary=The Generalidad of Catalonia is one of the 17 autonomous communities of Spain, with a strong cultural and political regional identity, born through history and strengthened by economic factors. The Ebro River Basin is one of the major basins in Spain, covering 85.362 km² of the territory and crossing several autonomous communities in Spain (Cantabria, Castilla-y-León, Rioja, Navarre, and Aragon) as well as a few hundred km² in Andorra and France before it flows finally into the Mediterranean Sea in Catalonia. Like other large rivers in Spain, the Ebro faces huge seasonal and annual variations, leaving hydroelectricity, agriculture and aquaculture and domestic users with a high degree of uncertainty. The flow in Tortosa, the last city before the Delta can vary from 32hm3 to 24000 hm3. To limit those effects, the Franco administration and later the Spanish Governments have decided to build several dams on the Ebro River, as well as canals and reservoirs to irrigate the dryer regions. It resulting in a decrease in quantity and quality of water flowing to the Ebro Delta, where “apart from problems with quantity, the river also suffers from quality questions due to industrial waste, agricultural run-offs, and salinization” (PDE, 2014) to the detriment of one of the ecologically richest wetlands in Europe, its economic activities and local livelihood. In parallel, the intensive real estate and tourism sector in Catalonia, especially along the Costa Brava becomes more and more water-consuming, in zones that are not naturally receiving water from the Ebro.
 +
 
 +
The conflict that came to a peak during the 2008 drought in Catalonia basically stands around water allocation and competition between environmental, energy, agriculture, domestic and industrial needs. Unlike other cases, the stakeholders involved are not only the river basin users, but also water users from all over Catalonia, and especially the tourism and industrial sector in the province of Barcelona (not connected to the Ebro), as well as agriculture users from all over Spain. In addition, those water issues take place in a highly debated political context of centralization versus self-determination for the Generalitat of Catalonia as well as the economic crisis in Europe. Although the innovative European Framework Directive for Water was the driver for institutions and processes to be developed to improve water protection and management from 2000,  the Ebro Hydrologic Confederation (CHE) and the Hydraulic Plan for the Ebro (PHE) did not prevent the conflict to be on-going. Indeed, the last PHE for the 2015-2021 period recently reactivated the conflict. Voted in February 2014 by the Central Government and expected to be implemented between 2015 and 2021, the PHE was rejected by the Catalan Parliament and opposed by environmental organizations. The new plan includes 30 new reservoirs and an extension of 40 000 hectares of irrigated lands, implying an increase of water use estimated to 10.000 hm3 per year. The plan also increases the quantity of water flow for environmental needs to the delta to 3300 hm3 per year, very far from the 7.000 to 12.000 hm3 need estimated by the Catalan water agency in order to restore the current ecologic situation in the delta.
 +
 
 +
After assessing the stakeholders involved and timeline of events related to the Ebro water management, environmental issues and self-determination context in Catalonia, this case study will zoom on the two open crisis mentioned of 2008 and 2014 to illustrate the complexity of the situation. Although some agreements were reached bilaterally during the different phases of the conflict, no consensus able to satisfy all the parties has been built until today and the case study rises two main questions. One major question challenges the gap between consultation and consensus-building: if a multi-stakeholder approach as required by the European Directive can enable sustainable management of the resource, it is not enough by definition, and the quality of the outcome depends on how the approach is conducted. The second reflection questions the interconnection between water management and internal political conflicts: if the 2 issues cannot be addressed separately, the process for building consensus around water should rather include the interests of the politically-driven parties. Those two questions will be addressed further with other analysis of the Water Diplomacy Framework applied to the Ebro and Catalan case in the last part of this paper.
 +
 
 +
|Topic Tags={{Topic Tag
 +
|Topic Tag=water allocation
 +
}}{{Topic Tag
 +
|Topic Tag=self-determination
 +
}}{{Topic Tag
 +
|Topic Tag=environmental flow
 +
}}
 
|External Links=
 
|External Links=
 
|Case Review={{Case Review Boxes
 
|Case Review={{Case Review Boxes

Revision as of 12:07, 15 May 2014

{{#var: location map}}


Case Description
Loading map...
Geolocation: 41° 35' 28.172", 1° 31' 15.1046"
Total Population 7.5717,571,000 millionmillion
Total Area 31 89531,895 km²
12,314.66 mi²
km2

Summary

The Generalidad of Catalonia is one of the 17 autonomous communities of Spain, with a strong cultural and political regional identity, born through history and strengthened by economic factors. The Ebro River Basin is one of the major basins in Spain, covering 85.362 km² of the territory and crossing several autonomous communities in Spain (Cantabria, Castilla-y-León, Rioja, Navarre, and Aragon) as well as a few hundred km² in Andorra and France before it flows finally into the Mediterranean Sea in Catalonia. Like other large rivers in Spain, the Ebro faces huge seasonal and annual variations, leaving hydroelectricity, agriculture and aquaculture and domestic users with a high degree of uncertainty. The flow in Tortosa, the last city before the Delta can vary from 32hm3 to 24000 hm3. To limit those effects, the Franco administration and later the Spanish Governments have decided to build several dams on the Ebro River, as well as canals and reservoirs to irrigate the dryer regions. It resulting in a decrease in quantity and quality of water flowing to the Ebro Delta, where “apart from problems with quantity, the river also suffers from quality questions due to industrial waste, agricultural run-offs, and salinization” (PDE, 2014) to the detriment of one of the ecologically richest wetlands in Europe, its economic activities and local livelihood. In parallel, the intensive real estate and tourism sector in Catalonia, especially along the Costa Brava becomes more and more water-consuming, in zones that are not naturally receiving water from the Ebro.

The conflict that came to a peak during the 2008 drought in Catalonia basically stands around water allocation and competition between environmental, energy, agriculture, domestic and industrial needs. Unlike other cases, the stakeholders involved are not only the river basin users, but also water users from all over Catalonia, and especially the tourism and industrial sector in the province of Barcelona (not connected to the Ebro), as well as agriculture users from all over Spain. In addition, those water issues take place in a highly debated political context of centralization versus self-determination for the Generalitat of Catalonia as well as the economic crisis in Europe. Although the innovative European Framework Directive for Water was the driver for institutions and processes to be developed to improve water protection and management from 2000, the Ebro Hydrologic Confederation (CHE) and the Hydraulic Plan for the Ebro (PHE) did not prevent the conflict to be on-going. Indeed, the last PHE for the 2015-2021 period recently reactivated the conflict. Voted in February 2014 by the Central Government and expected to be implemented between 2015 and 2021, the PHE was rejected by the Catalan Parliament and opposed by environmental organizations. The new plan includes 30 new reservoirs and an extension of 40 000 hectares of irrigated lands, implying an increase of water use estimated to 10.000 hm3 per year. The plan also increases the quantity of water flow for environmental needs to the delta to 3300 hm3 per year, very far from the 7.000 to 12.000 hm3 need estimated by the Catalan water agency in order to restore the current ecologic situation in the delta.

After assessing the stakeholders involved and timeline of events related to the Ebro water management, environmental issues and self-determination context in Catalonia, this case study will zoom on the two open crisis mentioned of 2008 and 2014 to illustrate the complexity of the situation. Although some agreements were reached bilaterally during the different phases of the conflict, no consensus able to satisfy all the parties has been built until today and the case study rises two main questions. One major question challenges the gap between consultation and consensus-building: if a multi-stakeholder approach as required by the European Directive can enable sustainable management of the resource, it is not enough by definition, and the quality of the outcome depends on how the approach is conducted. The second reflection questions the interconnection between water management and internal political conflicts: if the 2 issues cannot be addressed separately, the process for building consensus around water should rather include the interests of the politically-driven parties. Those two questions will be addressed further with other analysis of the Water Diplomacy Framework applied to the Ebro and Catalan case in the last part of this paper.



Natural, Historic, Economic, Regional, and Political Framework

Analysis, Synthesis, and Insight

What is an ASI?

Individuals may add their own Analysis, Synthesis, and Insight (ASI) to a case. ASI sub-articles are protected, so that each contributor retains authorship and control of their own content. Edit the case to add your own ASI.

Learn more

ASI:Applying the Water Diplomacy Framework

The Case of water management of the Ebro River Basin resources in Catalonia demonstrates the limit of a top-down process, as well as the limit of public consultation as a process. If stakeholders are consulted only, nothing says that they will be heard, and it does not mean that they will finally agree with the decision made. This is the main difference between consultation and consensus building, when the parties are ultimately bond by their position during the process. It does not mean that they are all happy with the final decision, but that being part of the negotiation and having been involved in trades, problem solving and joint analyzis, they understand the rationale behind the decision. They are “part” of the decision process.

Having a real consensus building approach is even more relevant when the political context is as present and freezing as in Catalonia today. Decisions are mainly made upon political considerations, as water is included in an overall game between the Central government and the Autonomous Community. Water becomes a pretext for disagreement rather than a problem to solve. It would be therefore useful to include the stakeholders in a regional consensus building process, allowing the political interests to be represented together with technical, legal, economic and environmental frames at the same table. This negotiation process would allow to build a consensus around water rights, environmental risks, self-determination expression and national solidarity through packages and technical as well as institutional innovation. In addition, different parties expressing their interests at the same time could lead to coalitions between specific interests, rather than polarization of positions through the media. Confidentiality could be a rule for such an instance of negotiation.

Finally, it will be interesting to see the position of the EU in a few weeks, as it may rise some further questions: how should the regulator react if a process that corresponds to the Directive theoretically (as the PHE elaboration process may well do), does not bring the expected outcomes as a result (PDE estimates that the environmental standard was not respected and that their position was not heard). Should the regulation (the Directive) be stricter? Should the EU support the capacity building of the organizations that are less heard so that they take ownership on their national process? Or should the EU support the existing PHE, for it is an actual improvement of water management in the Ebro compared to past policies? Giving time for opposing stakeholders to build more power for the next period, and hoping that the Delta ecology and other interests are not irremediably affected in the meantime?(read the full article... )

Contributed by: Aline Brachet (last edit: 11 July 2014)







Tagged with: water allocation self-determination environmental flow