Difference between revisions of "Water Quality Control of the South-to-North Water Diversion (SNWD) Middle Route Project (MRP)"
| [checked revision] | [checked revision] |
| (29 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
}}{{Link Water Feature | }}{{Link Water Feature | ||
|Water Feature=Danjiangkou Reservoir | |Water Feature=Danjiangkou Reservoir | ||
| − | }}{{Link | + | }} |
| + | |Riparian={{Link Riparian | ||
| + | |Riparian=China | ||
| + | }} | ||
|Water Project={{Link Water Project | |Water Project={{Link Water Project | ||
|Water Project=South-North Water Transfer Project | |Water Project=South-North Water Transfer Project | ||
| − | + | }} | |
|Agreement= | |Agreement= | ||
|REP Framework===Introduction== | |REP Framework===Introduction== | ||
| Line 92: | Line 95: | ||
|Stakeholder Type=Federated state/territorial/provincial government, Sovereign state/national/federal government, Community or organized citizens | |Stakeholder Type=Federated state/territorial/provincial government, Sovereign state/national/federal government, Community or organized citizens | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | |Contributor=Kelly DeAngelis (Boston University) | + | |Key Questions={{Key Question |
| − | | | + | |Subject=Urban Water Systems and Water Treatment |
| + | |Key Question - Dams= | ||
| + | |Key Question - Urban=How can costs for water quality projects be distributed between polluters and beneficiaries? | ||
| + | |Key Question - Transboundary= | ||
| + | |Key Question - Desalination= | ||
| + | |Key Question - Influence= | ||
| + | |Key Question - Industries= | ||
| + | |Key Question Description=The Payment for Water Quality Services (PWQS) scheme discussed in the case synthesis provides background and information for investigation of ways that Water Source Area and Water Receiving Area can value and share the costs associated with the project. | ||
| + | }}{{Key Question | ||
| + | |Subject=Desalination | ||
| + | |Key Question - Dams= | ||
| + | |Key Question - Urban= | ||
| + | |Key Question - Transboundary= | ||
| + | |Key Question - Desalination=What types of benefit sharing models can be used to make desalination more economically feasible and beneficial in water-scarce regions? | ||
| + | |Key Question - Influence= | ||
| + | |Key Question - Industries= | ||
| + | |Key Question Description=In gravida ultricies accumsan. Ut eget ante lorem, auctor iaculis augue. Vestibulum ullamcorper magna eget lectus porta a tincidunt tellus sodales.In gravida ultricies accumsan. Ut eget ante lorem, auctor iaculis augue. Vestibulum ullamcorper magna eget lectus porta a tincidunt tellus sodales.In gravida ultricies accumsan. Ut eget ante lorem, auctor iaculis augue. Vestibulum ullamcorper magna eget lectus porta a tincidunt tellus sodales.In gravida ultricies accumsan. Ut eget ante lorem, auctor iaculis augue. Vestibulum ullamcorper magna eget lectus porta a tincidunt tellus sodales. | ||
| + | }}{{Key Question | ||
| + | |Subject=Transboundary Water Issues | ||
| + | |Key Question - Dams= | ||
| + | |Key Question - Urban= | ||
| + | |Key Question - Transboundary=What mechanisms beyond simple allocation can be incorporated into transboundary water agreements to add value and facilitate resolution? | ||
| + | |Key Question - Desalination= | ||
| + | |Key Question - Influence= | ||
| + | |Key Question - Industries= | ||
| + | |Key Question Description=Ut eget ante lorem, auctor iaculis augue. Vestibulum ullamcorper magna eget lectus porta a tincidunt tellus sodales. Nulla facilisi. | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | |Summary=This case study addresses the issues of cost-benefit sharing between Water Source Area (WSA) and Water Receiving Area (WRA) in a large-scale water transfer project in China. The proposed water quality control projects in the WSA of China’s South-to-North Water Diversion (SNWD) Middle Route Project (MRP) affects industrial and agricultural sectors in the relatively poor WSA, but also benefits residential users in both the WSA and WRA in terms of water quality and ecosystem improvements. Since the unemployed industrial workers, farmers, and the general population of the WSA have made sacrifices to provide clean water to the WRA, we propose a mechanism to redistribute the expenses of water quality services among the stakeholders in an equitable and effective manner. The mechanism is termed “Payment for Water Quality Services (PWQS)”. Possible means to implement it within the current governance structure is also discussed. | ||
| + | ==Questions and Wisdom== | ||
| + | Central to this case are questions of water quality: 1) how can stakeholders place economic value on efforts to enhance water quality and, most importantly, 2) how can stakeholders distribute the costs of water quality projects amongst polluters and beneficiaries? Here we find that hierarchical structures and limited stakeholder involvement in water projects can lead to unbalanced distribution of costs and benefits. The issues in the SNWD MRP demonstrate the need for cost-sharing mechanisms as part of an institutional governance structure in water quality projects. When stakeholders have disproportionate costs and benefits associated with enhancing water quality, a financing instrument can help to place economic value on environmental and social factors. | ||
| + | |External Links= | ||
| + | |Case Review={{Case Review Boxes | ||
| + | |Empty Section=Yes | ||
| + | |Clean Up Required=Yes | ||
| + | |Expand Section=Yes | ||
| + | |Add References=No | ||
| + | |Wikify=No | ||
| + | |connect to www=No | ||
| + | |Out of Date=No | ||
| + | |Disputed=No | ||
| + | |Mpov=No | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | |ASI={{ASI | ||
| + | |Contributor=Kelly DeAngelis (Boston University), Rose Wang (Tufts University) | ||
| + | |ASI=====Problem Definition==== | ||
The SNWDP presents the challenge of ensuring water quality in a long-range inter-basin water transfer. In order to enhance the quality of water in the Water Receiving Area (WRA), there must be improvements in the Water Source Area (WSA). The thousands of proposed pollution control projects require billions of dollars in the short and long term. Having the relatively poorer Water Source Area contribute water and pay for the water quality control projects is unjustifiable. Therefore, in this case study, we analyzed the affected stakeholders and proposed a mechanism to share benefits and costs between WRA and WSA. | The SNWDP presents the challenge of ensuring water quality in a long-range inter-basin water transfer. In order to enhance the quality of water in the Water Receiving Area (WRA), there must be improvements in the Water Source Area (WSA). The thousands of proposed pollution control projects require billions of dollars in the short and long term. Having the relatively poorer Water Source Area contribute water and pay for the water quality control projects is unjustifiable. Therefore, in this case study, we analyzed the affected stakeholders and proposed a mechanism to share benefits and costs between WRA and WSA. | ||
| − | ===Issue Analysis=== | + | ====Issue Analysis==== |
The major issue in this case study is how to achieve the water quality standard required by the Plan in an equitable way. In this section, we analyze some sub-issues, relevant stakeholders of the sub-issues, and the variables linked to the sub-issues and stakeholders. | The major issue in this case study is how to achieve the water quality standard required by the Plan in an equitable way. In this section, we analyze some sub-issues, relevant stakeholders of the sub-issues, and the variables linked to the sub-issues and stakeholders. | ||
| Line 118: | Line 165: | ||
<ref name=" Li et al 2012"> Li, W., Liu, J. & Li, D. Getting their voices heard: three cases of public participation in environmental protection in China. Journal of environmental management 98, 65-72 (2012). </ref> | <ref name=" Li et al 2012"> Li, W., Liu, J. & Li, D. Getting their voices heard: three cases of public participation in environmental protection in China. Journal of environmental management 98, 65-72 (2012). </ref> | ||
<ref name="Zhao et al 2010 "> Zhao, Y. Public Participation in China’s EIA Regime: Rhetoric or Reality? Journal of Environmental Law 22, 89-123 (2010). </ref>.If a long-term mechanism were to be proposed and implemented, how can we involve the stakeholders (county governments, farmers, unemployed workers) in the design and implementation of the mechanism? This is another issue of interest in this case. | <ref name="Zhao et al 2010 "> Zhao, Y. Public Participation in China’s EIA Regime: Rhetoric or Reality? Journal of Environmental Law 22, 89-123 (2010). </ref>.If a long-term mechanism were to be proposed and implemented, how can we involve the stakeholders (county governments, farmers, unemployed workers) in the design and implementation of the mechanism? This is another issue of interest in this case. | ||
| − | + | ||
| + | ===Synthesis=== | ||
| + | ===Payment for Water Quality Services (PWQS)=== | ||
After analyzing the issues and the affected stakeholders, we propose implementing a scheme of Payment for Water Quality Services (PWQS). Water Quality Services are any measures taken to enhance water quality, including pollution control, land-use changes, technical investments, etc <ref name ="Kemekes et al 2010"> Kemkes, R.J., Farley, J. & Koliba, C.J. Determining when payments are an effective policy approach to ecosystem service provision. Ecological Economics 69, 2069-2074 (2010).</ref>. | After analyzing the issues and the affected stakeholders, we propose implementing a scheme of Payment for Water Quality Services (PWQS). Water Quality Services are any measures taken to enhance water quality, including pollution control, land-use changes, technical investments, etc <ref name ="Kemekes et al 2010"> Kemkes, R.J., Farley, J. & Koliba, C.J. Determining when payments are an effective policy approach to ecosystem service provision. Ecological Economics 69, 2069-2074 (2010).</ref>. | ||
| Line 125: | Line 174: | ||
Payments for Watershed Services (PWS)<ref name="Forest Trends 2008"> Forest Trends and the Ecosystem Marketplace Payments for Ecosystem Services: Market Profiles. (2008). </ref> is another scheme on which PWQS is based. PWS involves reducing poverty by using payment systems to maximize watershed services. Because of the ability of PWS to address poverty reduction in addition to environmental concerns, these schemes have been designated “pro-poor.”<ref name="Pagiola 2007"> Pagiola, S. Guidelines for “Pro-Poor” Payments for Enviornmental Services. (2007).</ref> The PWQS scheme we proposed is specialized to combine environmental, economic, and social benefits by incentivizing PES measures to enhance water quality and PWS methods to provide other societal benefits to a disadvantaged and affected population. Pro-poor benefits are integral to the societal aspect of PWQS. | Payments for Watershed Services (PWS)<ref name="Forest Trends 2008"> Forest Trends and the Ecosystem Marketplace Payments for Ecosystem Services: Market Profiles. (2008). </ref> is another scheme on which PWQS is based. PWS involves reducing poverty by using payment systems to maximize watershed services. Because of the ability of PWS to address poverty reduction in addition to environmental concerns, these schemes have been designated “pro-poor.”<ref name="Pagiola 2007"> Pagiola, S. Guidelines for “Pro-Poor” Payments for Enviornmental Services. (2007).</ref> The PWQS scheme we proposed is specialized to combine environmental, economic, and social benefits by incentivizing PES measures to enhance water quality and PWS methods to provide other societal benefits to a disadvantaged and affected population. Pro-poor benefits are integral to the societal aspect of PWQS. | ||
| − | ==Evaluation, Collection and Distribution of PWQS== | + | ===Evaluation, Collection and Distribution of PWQS=== |
In order to ensure the success of a PWQS scheme, the payments must be valued correctly<ref name="Farley et al 2010"> Farley, J. & Costanza, R. Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global. Ecological Economics 69, 2060-2068 (2010). </ref>, and the collection and distribution must be transparent and equitable so that they are acceptable to both buyers and sellers of water quality services. | In order to ensure the success of a PWQS scheme, the payments must be valued correctly<ref name="Farley et al 2010"> Farley, J. & Costanza, R. Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global. Ecological Economics 69, 2060-2068 (2010). </ref>, and the collection and distribution must be transparent and equitable so that they are acceptable to both buyers and sellers of water quality services. | ||
| Line 144: | Line 193: | ||
In order to distribute costs equitably, stakeholders should create cost-sharing mechanisms to lessen the burden of creating water quality services. Public funding is likely to be a major source of resources for PWQS. Financing can come from the central, provincial, county, or local level. Capital can flow through top-down transfers between government levels, or horizontal transfers along the same government levels. However, initial costs are often high, and public funding is often limited. Therefore, there are great opportunities for mutual investment of public and private funding. Companies that can maintain water quality standards may have interest in bidding for the privilege to operate in the water source areas. This will lessen the burden to the public sector and encourage investment and clean development. All water quality schemes should consider raising support and funding from outside investors, such as NGOs. | In order to distribute costs equitably, stakeholders should create cost-sharing mechanisms to lessen the burden of creating water quality services. Public funding is likely to be a major source of resources for PWQS. Financing can come from the central, provincial, county, or local level. Capital can flow through top-down transfers between government levels, or horizontal transfers along the same government levels. However, initial costs are often high, and public funding is often limited. Therefore, there are great opportunities for mutual investment of public and private funding. Companies that can maintain water quality standards may have interest in bidding for the privilege to operate in the water source areas. This will lessen the burden to the public sector and encourage investment and clean development. All water quality schemes should consider raising support and funding from outside investors, such as NGOs. | ||
| − | ==Implementing PWQS – the Intervention Point== | + | ===Implementing PWQS – the Intervention Point=== |
The above proposed PWQS is, by any means, a negotiation process. The implementation of the scheme requires a neutral organization to facilitate and mediate between WSA and WRA. In other words, there must be an intervention point in the existing governance structure. We propose creating a sub-committee under the SNWD Project Office to coordinate the negotiation processes between the water source and receiving areas. This sub-committee will facilitate the joint fact finding process to evaluate the costs of water quality enhancement. It can work with both regions to develop a detailed plan for the collection and distribution of payments for water quality services. Additionally, the sub-committee would design a conflict resolution mechanism to deal with problems as they arise and allow for flexibility within the new PWQS system. | The above proposed PWQS is, by any means, a negotiation process. The implementation of the scheme requires a neutral organization to facilitate and mediate between WSA and WRA. In other words, there must be an intervention point in the existing governance structure. We propose creating a sub-committee under the SNWD Project Office to coordinate the negotiation processes between the water source and receiving areas. This sub-committee will facilitate the joint fact finding process to evaluate the costs of water quality enhancement. It can work with both regions to develop a detailed plan for the collection and distribution of payments for water quality services. Additionally, the sub-committee would design a conflict resolution mechanism to deal with problems as they arise and allow for flexibility within the new PWQS system. | ||
| + | |ASISummary=Here, we provide analysis of benefits in the water receiving area (WRA) and costs to the water source area (WSA). We propose a system for "Payments for Water Quality Services" as a solution to the issue of rebalancing the burden and the benefits of providing clean water. | ||
|User=Kelly DeAngelis | |User=Kelly DeAngelis | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
}} | }} | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
|Figure 6: Water Source and Receiving Area of MRP_ See image for base map source info | |Figure 6: Water Source and Receiving Area of MRP_ See image for base map source info | ||
| Line 186: | Line 224: | ||
Table 2 Breakdown of water quality control projects and their costs <ref name="Water Pollution 2005"/> | Table 2 Breakdown of water quality control projects and their costs <ref name="Water Pollution 2005"/> | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | |||
Revision as of 09:36, 9 January 2013
| Geolocation: | 32° 36' 0", 111° 35' 60" |
|---|---|
| Total Population | 11.9811,980,000 millionmillion |
| Total Area | 9500095,000 km² 36,679.5 mi² km2 |
| Climate Descriptors | temperate |
| Predominent Land Use Descriptors | agricultural- cropland and pasture, industrial use, urban |
| Important Uses of Water | Agriculture or Irrigation, Domestic/Urban Supply, Industry - consumptive use, Industry - non-consumptive use |
| Water Features: | Han River, Danjiangkou Reservoir |
| Riparians: | China |
| Water Projects: | South-North Water Transfer Project |
Contents
Summary
This case study addresses the issues of cost-benefit sharing between Water Source Area (WSA) and Water Receiving Area (WRA) in a large-scale water transfer project in China. The proposed water quality control projects in the WSA of China’s South-to-North Water Diversion (SNWD) Middle Route Project (MRP) affects industrial and agricultural sectors in the relatively poor WSA, but also benefits residential users in both the WSA and WRA in terms of water quality and ecosystem improvements. Since the unemployed industrial workers, farmers, and the general population of the WSA have made sacrifices to provide clean water to the WRA, we propose a mechanism to redistribute the expenses of water quality services among the stakeholders in an equitable and effective manner. The mechanism is termed “Payment for Water Quality Services (PWQS)”. Possible means to implement it within the current governance structure is also discussed.
Questions and Wisdom
Central to this case are questions of water quality: 1) how can stakeholders place economic value on efforts to enhance water quality and, most importantly, 2) how can stakeholders distribute the costs of water quality projects amongst polluters and beneficiaries? Here we find that hierarchical structures and limited stakeholder involvement in water projects can lead to unbalanced distribution of costs and benefits. The issues in the SNWD MRP demonstrate the need for cost-sharing mechanisms as part of an institutional governance structure in water quality projects. When stakeholders have disproportionate costs and benefits associated with enhancing water quality, a financing instrument can help to place economic value on environmental and social factors.
Natural, Historic, Economic, Regional, and Political Framework
Introduction
China’s water resources are extremely unevenly distributed. While the South China Plain is relatively water abundant, the Huang-Huai-Hai (3H) river basins in the North are rather dry. The North China Plain has half of China’s total national area, 45% of total cultivated land and 36% of the total population, but possesses less than 12% of the total water resources1. Per capita annual water availability in the North is about 500 m3 and can fall below 400 m3 in Beijing and Tianjin2. This is much lower than the 1000 m3 per capita threshold of water scarcity defined by the UN. In 1952, the late Chairman Mao first came up with the idea of “borrowing” water from the South to meet the demands of the North. Over the next several decades, scientists and engineers debated about the technical and economic feasibility of Mao’s vision. In 2002, the plan of the magnificent South-to-North Water Division Project (SNWDP), which will divert 44.8 billion cubic meters of water from the Yangtze River Basin to the northern river basins, was approved. It consists of three water division routes that connect the Yangtze River Basin to the other three major river basins: Huang River (Yellow River), Huai River and Hai River. Up to now, the Eastern and Middle Routes are under construction and the Western Route is under planning.
As the construction of the projects proceeds, one question appears on the agenda: will the water delivered to the north be of good quality? If the water quality were too bad, it would increase treatment cost and reduce its economic value. The return on the huge investment made on the planning and construction of the projects would be uncertain. Therefore, “assuring water quality is essential to the success of the SNWDP”, as quoted in many of the recent official Chinese media reports today. This case study will focus on the water quality control on Middle Route, though the analysis and policy recommendations will also apply to the other two routes.
The middle route will be completed by the end of 2014. It is designed to supply 9.7 billion cubic meters of water annually along a 1,432 km canal to Beijing and 20 other municipalities and cities along the route (Figure 1). The route starts from the Danjiangkou Reservoir, which is formed by the impoundment of the convergence of the Han River and the Dan River (Figure 2).
Figure 1: Map of the Middle Route Project and Han River Watershed. See file for source information.
Figure 2: Satellite Image of Danjiangkou Reservoir
Governance Framework
To understand the political framework of the topic of interest, we need to first take a look at the political framework of Chinese government system, as shown in Figure 3. The top administrative organization is called the State Council, followed hierarchically by provinces and Municipalities, cities, counties or districts, and villages. There are also Autonomous Regions (e.g. Xinjiang and Tibet), as well as Special Administrative Regions (e.g. Hongkong and Macau), which are at the same level as provinces. Ministries, such as Ministry of Environmental Protection, Ministry of Finance, and Ministry of Water Resources, etc., are executive bodies under the direct lead of the State Council. Departments of similar functions (environmental protection, water resources, etc.) take responsibility at the provincial, city, and even district level; they report to their superior organizations up to ministry level.
As an inter-basin water transfer project, SNWDP involves a number of provinces and municipalities. To coordinate among different provinces, an institutional body – the South-to-North Water Diversion Project Office (SNWD Project Office) was created in 1979 to oversee the planning, design, construction and operation of the SNWDP. A committee led by the Vice Prime Minister sets the goals and policy of the Project Office. The board members of the committee include all relevant ministers, provincial governors, and municipality mayors. There are also sub-offices at the provincial and municipal levels in charge of the construction projects within their jurisdictional boundaries. In short, the central government endorses SNWD Project Office to perform a coordinative role in all issues related to the South-to-North Water Diversion Project.
Water Quality Related Regulation
To assure good water quality the SNWD Project Office created the Reservoir, the Water Pollution Control & Soil and Water Conservation Plan (hereafter referred to as “the Plan”) in 2005. According to the Plan, the Danjiangkou Reservoir and main Han River should achieve water quality of Category II, and the tributaries flowing into Danjiangkou Reservoir should be better than Category III [1]. Eighteen control zones were created at the watershed of the reservoir (Figure 4). These control zones span across Shaanxi, Hubei and Henan Provinces. Three of the eighteen zones are within 5km of the Reservoir peripheral and are therefore defined as the Water Source Area Security Zone. Three zones on the far left side are the sources of Han River. The soil and water conservation in these zones are essential to the water quality in the Reservoir, so together these zones are defined as the Ecological Conservation Zone. The other eleven zones in between are collectively called the Water Quality Impact Zone (Figure 5). The Plan computed the environmental capacity of each control zone, based on the water quality condition of the river stretch in that particular zone. By comparing the current pollution loadings with the environmental capacity of the control zones, the Plan computed the amount of loading reduction needed for each control zone.
Issues and Stakeholders
Government expenditure on water quality related infrastructure projects. How will the required water quality standard be met in an equitable way?
NSPD: Water Quantity, Water Quality, Assets
Stakeholder Types: Federated state/territorial/provincial government, Non-legislative governmental agency
The cost to finance this project both in terms of short term construction and long term maintenance is very large. The economic reality for the counties in the water source country varies significantly and in some locations the tax revenue is not sufficient to cover infrastructure project costs associated with the Plan.
Stakeholders
- SNWD Project Office (ministerial level government)
- Ministry of Environmental Protection, Ministry of Water Resources, Ministry of Finance
- Water Source Area governments and their levels
- Henan Province (河南省)
- Nanyang City (南阳市):Xixia County (西峡县), Xichuan County (淅川县)
- Luoyang City (洛阳市): Luanchuan County (栾川县), Sanmenxia City (三门峡市), Lushi County (卢氏县)
- Hubei Province (湖北省provincial government)
- Shiyan City (十堰市): Zhangwan District Bailin Town (张湾区,柏林镇), Zhuxi County (竹溪县), Zhushan County (竹山县), Yun County (郧县), Fang County (房县), Yunxi County (郧西县)
- Xiangyang City (襄阳市): Xiangzhou District Huanglong Town (襄州区,黄龙镇)
- Danjiangkou City (丹江口市)
- Shaanxi Province (陕西省, provincial government)
- Ankang City (安康市, city government): Shiquan County (石泉县), Hanyin County (汉阴县), Ziyang County (紫阳县), Langao County (岚皋县), Xunyang County (旬阳县), Pingli County (平利县), Zhenping County (镇坪县), Baihe County (白河县), Ningxia County (宁峡县)
- Shangluo City (商洛市): Shangzhou District (商周区), Zhen’an County (镇安县), Zuoshui County (柞水县), Danfeng County (丹凤县), Shangnan County (商南县), Shanyang County (山阳县)
- Hanzhong City (汉中市): Hantai District (汉台区), Ningqiang County (宁强县), Lueyang County (略阳县), Mian County (勉县), Liuba County (留坝县), Nanzheng County (南郑县), Chenggu County (城固县), Yang County (洋县), Xixiang County (西乡县), Foping County (佛坪县), Zhenba County (镇巴县)
- Baoji City (宝鸡市): Taibai County (太白县)
- Hebei Province (河北省)
- Henan Province (河南省)
- Water Receiving Area
Population affected by water quality control in the water source area
NSPD: Water Quantity, Water Quality, Governance, Values and Norms
Stakeholder Types: Federated state/territorial/provincial government, Non-legislative governmental agency, Development/humanitarian interest, Environmental interest, Industry/Corporate Interest, Community or organized citizens
Certain farmers will be required to cease farming their land upstream from the reservoir to preserve water quality (mitigation of runoff). A rough estimation is in the hundreds of thousands. Manufacturing plants in the area will also be displaced.
Stakeholders
- Yellow Ginger Industry
- Paper manufacturing industry
- Chemical production industry
- Metal smelting industry
- Ecological migration of farmers
- General population in water source area
Costs and benefits sharing between WRA and WSA
NSPD: Governance, Assets, Values and Norms
Stakeholder Types: Federated state/territorial/provincial government, Non-legislative governmental agency, Industry/Corporate Interest, Community or organized citizens
Due to forced ecological migration of farmers and the shut-down of factories in the Water Source Area, the WSA will be bearing the greatest social and economic burden of the Plan. The Water Receiving Area will enjoy the benefit of water delivery, without the burdens borne by the WSA.
Stakeholders
- Water Receiving Area (WRA)
- Water Source Area (WSA)
- SNWD Project Office
Involving stakeholders in decision making process
NSPD: Water Quality, Assets, Values and Norms
Stakeholder Types: Federated state/territorial/provincial government, Sovereign state/national/federal government, Community or organized citizens
Analysis, Synthesis, and Insight
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 moreASI:Alternative Solutions to the Water Demand of Northern China
Concerning the ultimate problem of imbalance water demand distribution in the Northern and Southern China, scholars suggest implementations that will further consider China's water sustainability other than water diversion.(read the full article... )
Contributed by: Samuel Hsiao (last edit: 1 August 2013)
ASI:Determining Fair Payment for Ecosystem Services
Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES), a voluntary exchange of a defined environmental service for a fee, has been previously implemented in China there is no consensus on criteria for fair compensation. Planned water quality control actions require capital investments and restrict development options for the water source area. For this reason, the receiving area is expected to compensate the source area for their conservation efforts. How should PES payments be determined?(read the full article... )
Contributed by: Margaret Garcia (last edit: 19 March 2013)
Key Questions
Urban Water Systems and Water Treatment: How can costs for water quality projects be distributed between polluters and beneficiaries?
The Payment for Water Quality Services (PWQS) scheme discussed in the case synthesis provides background and information for investigation of ways that Water Source Area and Water Receiving Area can value and share the costs associated with the project.
In gravida ultricies accumsan. Ut eget ante lorem, auctor iaculis augue. Vestibulum ullamcorper magna eget lectus porta a tincidunt tellus sodales.In gravida ultricies accumsan. Ut eget ante lorem, auctor iaculis augue. Vestibulum ullamcorper magna eget lectus porta a tincidunt tellus sodales.In gravida ultricies accumsan. Ut eget ante lorem, auctor iaculis augue. Vestibulum ullamcorper magna eget lectus porta a tincidunt tellus sodales.In gravida ultricies accumsan. Ut eget ante lorem, auctor iaculis augue. Vestibulum ullamcorper magna eget lectus porta a tincidunt tellus sodales.
Transboundary Water Issues: What mechanisms beyond simple allocation can be incorporated into transboundary water agreements to add value and facilitate resolution?
Ut eget ante lorem, auctor iaculis augue. Vestibulum ullamcorper magna eget lectus porta a tincidunt tellus sodales. Nulla facilisi.
- ^ Water Pollution Control & Soild and Water Conservation Plan Drafting Committee Water Pollution Control & Soil and Water Conservation Plan of Danjiangkou Reservoir and Upstream. (2005).
