Managing Asia’s Urbanization

Asian cities are growing at a rate of roughly 100,000 people each day. Due to this and other factors officials are having to re-plan city management so that they are socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable. Financing such changes is a bigger obstacle than simply recognizing where the problems lie and how to address them. The World Cities Summit, held in Singapore, is a series of conferences that addressed this and several related issues. The President of the Asian Development Bank, Haruhiko Kuroda, discussed the need for reform and financial issues in the most detail at The World Cities summit on June 25^th.Kuroda announced “I am proud to say that the Asian Development Bank (ADB) is working very successfully with Singapore in both the water and urban management sectors, with the aim of spreading best practices throughout developing Asia and the Pacific.”

Kuroda mentioned the changes needed are on a  “magnitude never before attempted by humanity” and that “cities in Asia have populations and economies the size of nation states…for most major cities in Asia, growth rates are too rapid for their infrastructure to keep up.” Karuda mentioned a $30 billion shortfall in urban infrastructure investments is recorded every year, which of course makes efforts all the more challenging.

Kuroda announced the efforts made, in his own words “our joint initiatives include the Asia Training and Research Initiative on Urban Management (ATRIUM) ; a regional network of knowledge hubs on water, under the auspices of the Asia Pacific Water Forum (APWF); and the Asian Water Development Outlook 2007, which was featured prominently at the 1st Asia-Pacific Water Summit held in Beppu City, Japan last December. We have translated the report in Chinese, Russian, Japanese, and Vietnamese to reach a wider audience.” Kuroda stated one of the most important messages in the report is that water is crucial to larger development agendas such as energy, food, environment, and industrial policy. Policies in all related areas will be influenced by the factors of demographic transitioning, advancement of technology and communication, free trade, social activism, and globalization. New approaches are also needed on energy use, the management of household rubbish and other solid waste, sewage, water supply and other urban infrastructure issues. The report outlines a new financial structuring the will allow cities to gain access to over $1.5 trillion in available savings and will encourage private sector participation as well as local capital markets.

The Asian Development Bank (ADB) also published a report entitled “Managing Asian Cities” that outlines how the cities can meet the goals to overcome their problems. According to the report the biggest obstacles are coordination, finance, and capacity as opposed to technology, money, and skills. Energy use and waste management are other issues that need to be addressed. The report states “Effective urban management is needed to counter this unparalleled growth but it is lacking, and the results are clearly evident in pollution, no drinkable water for over 50% of urban residents, half a billion slum dwellers and crippling traffic congestion.”

Kuroda outlined other efforts in his speech which lasted approximately 15 minutes during the early part of the third day of the conference. “Our urban lending, at around $1 billion per year on average, is becoming more flexible and responsive through, among others, the use of multi-tranche and local currency finance…As a partner in the Cities Development Initiative for Asia, we help city governments coordinate and integrate the many activities involved in implementing urban investments, including funding for environmental infrastructure. With Singapore, we are implementing the Asian Training and Research Initiative for Urban Management, and we have recently established the Asia Infrastructure Project Development Company, together with the Singapore Cooperation Enterprise and 3 Singaporean water companies.” His final comment on financing was ” It is our hope that the annual Singapore International Water Week and the bi-annual World Cities Summit will advance the debate on urban issues in Asia and address the financing needs for urban infrastructure.”

Thousands of delegates from all over the world attended the World Cities Summit, which went from June 23^rd to 25th, to continue discussing sustainable development and “livable and vibrant cities.”

The Asia Tomorrow newsgroup conducted an interview with another high level official on this topic. Ms. Ursula Schaefer-Preuss, Vice President of Knowledge Management and Sustainable Development of the Asian Development Bank answers key questions in the following.

The Asia Tomorrow: To start off, in your opinion, what are the few topmost pressing problems of growth and urbanization in emerging economies, in particular Asia?

Schaefer-Preuss: Well, as we have discussed here, one real problem is that the mega cities are already very big, but they are becoming more attractive, too attractive for the people in the countryside so more and more come (into the cities) at even higher speeds until the cities cannot absorb allthese people anymore and the water supply and (adequate) transportation is not available.

The energy system/supply is not really conducive, and there are many problems with the infrastructure. One other pressing problem is the stress on the environment, the climate change-related aspect.

AT: In a session which you chaired here at the World Cities Summit, you’ve highlighted issues of inadequate environmental infrastructure*. How would its development will impact resource sustainability and clean water access in poorer Asian regions?
* (such as  transport, solid waste management and sanitation)

SP: In many cities, for example Bangkok, the water level is going down because of the need of additional water supply, so you have to dig deeper and deeper into the earth to get the water needed for the growing number of people living in the city. Then water pollution is increasing because the drainage system cannot absorb all the waste water coming.

AT: In some parts of Asia, the drainage problem might not be wholly infrastructural, but due to a lack of cleanliness. For instance, people littering and cluttering the drains, sewage not disposed properly. What are your thoughts on that?

SP: Well you will have to invest more into the sewage and drainage systems… into energy systems, water pipes, and when the communities do not have the funds available, what to do?

AT: Could you cite us a recent significant example whereby the ADB  has advised an Asian developing economy on improving its environmental infrastructure, in particular one that has made major changes.

SP: We’ve got big programs, for example in China. There, we’re looking into river basins, studying the situations of water quality in these river basins, and advising how to improve water quality, how to invest in infrastructure in order to clean up the water using all that is available.

AT: China is such a huge country, wouldn’t it take a long time to complete those projects?

SP: Yes, that is true, that is true.

AT: In that case, what do you believe private companies in the Asian region could embark on to address the environmental infrastructure issues and improve the whole situation?

SP: Well, private companies first look into what they’ll get out of their investment. That means, they could partner with a public organization. For example, the Asian Development Bank could do a public-private partnership arrangement with public funds and then match them with private funds to increase investments (in environmental infrastructure), and get private companies involved in the investment. The private companies will have more interest in investing through joint ventures.

AT: Do you think private companies have done too little in this respect? Or how much do you think they have done to help?

SP: Private companies, for sure, could do more… but normally they’re not so prepared to bear increasing risks.

— The rate of growth in Asia is unparalled by other nations. London took 130 years to grow from 1 million to 8 million residents. Dhaka, the Bangladeshi Capital, is expected to grow from 12 million to 22 million in the next ten years.

The Future of Asia- Will Water be the New Oil?: Discussions at Singapore International Water Week

Singapore International Water Week, which ended June 27^th, ended with $270 million US dollars worth of deals. Governments, water companies, and utility providers were among those signing the 27 agreements.
Environment and Water Resources Minister Yaacob Ibrahim describes the focus of the meeting as an effort to develop into a platform for water solutions on a global scale. Ibrahim referred to the figures resulting from the meeting as encouraging.
New ground was broken in the meeting. Perhaps one of the most crucial is the development of a water fund which will bring $320 million US dollars worth of investment for water projects in Asia. The Asian Development Bank is predicted to raise this figure higher, as they have pledged to help regional states raise their investments in water security to $20 billion US dollars.

Singapore water companies also won significant contracts. A consortium comprising PUB and CPG Consultants as well as Pico Art International secured a contract to design the King Abdullah Water Centre in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Other significant contracts were signed for Singapore. The King Abdullah Watre Centre was proposed to be built in Ridyah, Saudi Arabia, and was signed by PUB and CPG Consultants as well as Pico Art International. Yaacob further commented the interest in the meeting was better than expected. Regarding Singapore, he commented “we’re holding this for the first time. Hopefully, more will realise that there’s value in coming to Singapore. We were pleasantly surprised that more companies wanted to come on board for the exhibition… they see there is a scope for making business deals.”

Of course, solutions are still actively being saught in addition to the new projects. Yaacob states “going forward, we are looking for new technological solutions… how can we lower some of the energy costs in terms of desalination? We will mine the papers that have been presented and see whether there are new ideas of achieving some of these water solutions.”

Delegates from overseas discuss Singapore’s NeWater technology in the meeting. Singapore’s minister says “I spoke to some of the ministers from the Middle East. Recycling is now on the top of their mind. For them, water is the new oil… They all ask about recycling.  “‘How do you do it?’ they ask. We told them briefly that you need an ecosystem, you need a demand, you need a technical system to help you recycle water. They are keen. “So, for the average Singaporean, I think you have to feel proud that Singapore has been able to achieve something that we can share with the rest of the world.”
Over 8,500 delegates and other visitors attended the meeting, which spanned over five days. The Singapore International Water week will be an annual event. Next year’s meeting is scheduled to focus on the significance of infrastructure in water management, supply, and environment sustainability.

Challenges loom for Southeast Asian Climate Change

Southeast Asia is possibly one of the most vulnerable areas in the global-climate-change scenarios now being put forward by scientists. Many of the region’s estimated 500 million people live in either low-lying river deltas or far-flung islands that will be inundated if waters rise significantly.

Some idea of the damage that climate change could cause over time was witnessed in the tsunami that inundated and destroyed coastal settlements on Indonesia’s Sumatra island in December 2004. While the tsunami was a sudden shock that came without warning, it gave a geographic perspective to what could be anticipated under model scenarios of a more gradual increase in sea and river-delta water levels caused by climate change.

The international climate-change spotlight has not yet fallen on Southeast Asia. With the key question now being addressed - what will succeed the present Kyoto Accord when it expires in 2012 - attention is focused more on the industrializing giants - China, India and Brazil - and how they should be incorporated under a successor framework. But Southeast Asia’s 500 million people arguably should not be overlooked.

To date, concern and debate over greenhouse-gas emission and climate change remain muted in Southeast Asia. Eight countries in the region, namely Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam, have ratified the 1997 Kyoto Accord to the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Landlocked Laos has not, nor has the tiny petroleum-rich Islamic sultanate of Brunei. As developing countries - including Singapore, which retains this status formally in international organizations despite its developed-world per capita income - none face any mandatory obligations to reduce gases that contribute to the so-called greenhouse effect, the trapping of the sun’s heat within the atmosphere.

The region can take advantage of the Kyoto Accord’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), whereby developed countries having to meet targets under Kyoto can gain credits by funding projects in non-compliance countries that reduce greenhouse emissions. But as of mid-November 2006, of the 173 CDM projects established or seeking registration in East Asia, 70% were in India, 14% in China and only 12% in Southeast Asia.

Despite Kyoto and the climate-change debate elsewhere, energy production and consumption in Southeast Asia remain business as usual. Individual governments and the regional Association of Southeast Asian Nations often make assertions about the desirability of greater energy efficiency, cleaner energy technologies and greater reliance on renewables. But at the moment there is no major departure from the region’s 1990s trends in energy use.

The Singaporean government appears to be positioning itself for what it must see as the need for greater regional efforts over climate change. After ratifying Kyoto late last year, Singapore recently announced a new program to promote research and development, test-bedding and undertaking pilot projects in clean energy on the island.

Public concern in the region is not especially strong compared with the situation in, say, Western Europe, the United States and Australia (even though the latter two countries are not signatories to the Kyoto Accord). The public focus on the issues varies from country to country. In Thailand, for example, community and non-governmental opposition to plans to build coal-fired power plants have historically been strong, forcing the government to postpone projects indefinitely in 2002.

The smog ahead
Yet projections by the Asia-Pacific Energy Research Center (APERC) in Tokyo, a body operating under the auspices of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, show a fourfold increase in total carbon-dioxide emissions - the major greenhouse gas - from 2002 to 2030 produced by energy production and consumption in Southeast Asia.

The total will be twice that of Japan in 2030, nearly a third of the US total, and a quarter that of China (China and the US will be the world’s largest and second-largest emitters of greenhouse gases in 2030). Note, though, that these projections in APERC’s 2006 APEC Energy Demand and Supply Outlook, Projections to 2030, assume no major departure from existing energy production and consumption patterns as a result of policies on greenhouse gases and climate change.

One major Southeast Asia-related negative impact on international greenhouse-gas reduction efforts comes from the ongoing destruction of the region’s forests and jungles, especially in Indonesia’s Kalimantan and Sumatra, in the Malaysian states of Sarawak and Sabah on Borneo island, and in the Mekong region in the mountains in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, as well as in Myanmar and Thailand. Southeast Asia’s extensive wet rice agriculture also results in the release of another greenhouse gas, methane.

There are also increasing efforts both commercially and promoted by government to develop and expand biofuel production - bio-diesel from palm oil is especially favored. This drive has been sparked by both high global petroleum prices and the region’s increasing reliance on petroleum imports, particularly from the Middle East.

Although biofuel is often pitched as a sustainable energy source, there is concern that the rush to develop it results or will result in more destruction of old forests to clear the way for oil-palm plantations. The large-scale expansion of palm-oil production in Indonesia’s Sumatra and in Kalimantan on Borneo, which has been ongoing for the past decade, is already responsible for another major environmental problem - the haze that affects Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia when land is burned to prepare for clearing.

There is a regional shift under way toward more natural gas, which is desirable in terms of its lower carbon-dioxide emissions, though it is sometimes forgotten that upstream production often releases carbon dioxide unless engineering measures are taken to re-inject the gas. And natural gas continues to face obstacles due to delays in constructing pipelines.

Moreover, gas will no time soon replace cheap but greenhouse-gas-emitting coal in the region. Coal-fired generation is planned to grow fast in Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam. More hydropower is likely to be used, especially in the Mekong region, but again there are environmental concerns as to the impact of damming rivers on downstream river life and communities vulnerable to drought.

Vietnam in particular is finding this a major problem, with exceptionally dry seasons in the past two or three years leading to low water levels in reservoirs behind hydro dams in the north. There has been competition between supply for farmers downriver for rice irrigation and for power generation. This in turn has made Vietnam’s power planners look to coal-fired generation as well as natural gas as means of reducing reliance on hydropower.

Nuclear power has also emerged in the past 18 months or so as a serious possibility in several countries. Vietnam and Indonesia propose large-capacity generation plants, possibly coming into operation at the end of the next decade. And most recently, the governments of Thailand and Myanmar have put forward the idea. Again, there are many issues here, ranging from whether the plants would really be economic to safety and weapons-proliferation concerns.

Motor vehicles - another major source of carbon-dioxide emissions - are set to keep filling Southeast Asia’s roads. In per capita terms, car ownership is still low. But at the same time, in large urban areas, growing car ownership continues to congest cities and harm the atmosphere and community health through vehicle exhaust. Better public-transport systems - from buses to rail overhead and underground systems - are clearly critical but are generally only planned for the region’s more affluent countries.

Emission analysis
Not all the news is bad, however. For instance, Singapore has for decades been exemplary in its attention to urban planning and mass transport, including extensive use of greenbelts and tree-lined gardens. Bangkok, notorious in the past for traffic jams and exhaust pollution, is also now benefiting from its light rail and more recent underground rail system, as well as stricter standards and controls on gasoline quality. In Vietnam, the fastest-growing economy in the region, there are plans for mass-transit systems for the large and fast-growing cities of Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh. Whether they can be put in place ahead of the expected huge growth in vehicle numbers remains to be seen, however.

Southeast Asia, which justifiably prides itself on the great progress the region has made in terms of both political stability and economic development since the late 1970s, still faces many pressing socioeconomic challenges. As such, concerns over greenhouse-gas emission and climate change do not yet seem as pressing as they are now in the developed world.

Southeast Asia’s defenders will point - and rightly so - to the region’s low per capita emissions of carbon dioxide. And over the medium term, these will still be low compared with the developed world. By 2030, APERC projects 4.2 tons per capita in Southeast Asia, compared with 6.7 in China, 10.8 in Japan, 21.9 in Australia and 23.0 in the United States. These low per capita figures are consistent with still low per capita income levels compared with more developed countries, apart from China.

The popular argument is - and will continue to be - that Southeast Asia’s economic development should not be penalized through a disproportionate burden of greenhouse-gas reduction measures. Further strengthening this perspective is the fact that much of the atmosphere’s existing carbon-dioxide content has been produced by the West and Japan over the past century. This also points to another problem with carbon-dioxide mitigation: it can take a century or more for carbon dioxide to break down naturally.

However, the comparison of per capita output on a national basis is arguably not sufficiently focused. Looking at national averages does not give a sharp enough picture of energy-use patterns and how they might be improved. When comparing major urban areas, say Bangkok or Jakarta, with comparable cities in the developed world, the per capita emission figures in many cases are not that different. Singapore is a case and point. Its per capita carbon-dioxide output was a high 12.2 tons in 2002 and is projected by APERC to reach 18.8 tons by 2030.

Future analysis would be better based on scientific and economic geography rather than nation-states - although national governments clearly remain critical and indispensable as far as policy development and implementation are concerned. This in turn points to Southeast Asia’s particular greenhouse-gas challenges.

Energy use by the region’s cities is often extravagant and wasteful, which could be improved through better building design, electrical-product standards, and transport systems. Set against this are rural areas where millions of people live in virtual energy poverty with little or no access to electricity. Hence Southeast Asia faces the unique global-warming challenge of both the modern urbanized and industrialized world and the agriculture-based developing world. And it is increasingly important that it is addressed as such.

Grip of Climate Change on Vietnam

World Bank officials said Tuesday the agency’s new Global Monitoring Report underlines the risks that environmental damage and climate change pose to the gains made by developing countries in recent years, even development success stories such as Vietnam. The report, issued Monday and entitled “Millennium Development Goals and the Environment,” singles out Vietnam as both one of the models for successful development by Third World countries and one of the countries that will be most harmed by climate change.

Vietnam, one of the world’s poorest countries 20 years ago, is likely to become a middle-income country by the year 2012, and is on track to achieve all of the Millennium Development Goals it set in 2000. Yet at the same time, it is the developing country most threatened by rising sea levels due to global warming, which threaten to submerge the heavily populated Mekong Delta.

“If the sea level rises ten centimetres over the next ten years, which is not impossible, you would start to see impacts immediately,” said Douglas Graham, who manages conservation projects at the World Bank’s Hanoi office. “An increase in storm surges, for example, as extreme weather events become more common, which many models believe they will.”

The report cites studies last year which found that a one-metre rise in global sea levels, considered moderately likely by early next century, would affect over 10 per cent of Vietnam’s population, GDP, and urban area, making it the most vulnerable developing country in the world in each category.

For the most part, the report concentrates on Vietnam’s development successes, including cutting its poverty rate from 58 per cent in 1993 to 16 per cent in 2006. The country has benefited from trade, investment and economic growth of over 7 per cent per year since 2000.

Meanwhile, unlike many other countries experiencing rapid economic growth, inequality in Vietnam did not increase sharply. The country’s Gini coefficient, a measurement of income inequality, rose from 0.34 to 0.36 between 1993 and 2006, a modest rise in comparison to other developing countries.

That has shown up in a raft of positive statistics. Marjatta Tolvanen, a health expert at UNICEF in Hanoi, said the country had met or was well on its way to meeting its Millennium Development Goals in infant mortality, maternal health, and overall nutrition at the national level, though pockets of inequality remained.

“Stunting, which is low height for age, is still over 30 per cent,” Tolvanen said. That represents a dramatic improvement from the 49 per cent stunting rate of 1995, “but now for the last couple of years the rates have not been decreasing anymore. When they produce the reference numbers from the 1990s, they have halved them, but still you can’t say that it’s acceptable.”

Overall, Vietnam has enjoyed an improvement in living standards that is the envy of many other developing nations, building thriving industries in agriculture, aquaculture, garments, furniture, and more recently manufacturing, semiconductors and electronics. But climate change and rising sea levels pose a threat to Vietnam’s most productive regions, the Mekong Delta in the south and the Red River Delta in the north.

Richard McNally of the environmentalist organization WWF’s Hanoi office is coordinating a study of the environmental and economic impacts of climate change on the Mekong Delta province of Ca Mau, notably increasing salinity, which threatens water for irrigation and human consumption. The study models changes to 2020 and 2050 based on different sea-level models developed by the International Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC.

“The study highlights the fact that current water management systems are unable to deal with the impacts of climate change,” McNally said. He said there could be “major impacts of salinization on the population.”

Another issue of concern is the disappearance of most of Vietnam’s mangrove forests, which have been cleared for land to use in agriculture and aquaculture. Clearing of mangrove forests has been cited as a major factor in the devastation wreaked by Hurricane Nargis in Myanmar in early May, as the forests would normally have provided a partial barrier against storm surges.

Vietnamese officials said they were aware of the threat of climate change and were taking measures to address it.

“Vietnam is one of the countries hardest hit by global climate change,” said Tran Thuc, Director of Vietnam’s Institute of Hydrometeorology. “Climate change definitely causes stronger storms and floods.”

Thuc said a national plan to minimize the impact of climate change will be submitted to the National Assembly in October.

Water Issues In South Asia

If there is any single most important issue that mars bilateral relations among the countries of the subcontinent, it is water. The issues of cross-border water distribution, utilisation, management and mega irrigation/hydro-electric power projects affecting the upper and lower riparian countries are gradually taking centre-stage in defining interstate relations as water scarcity increases and both drought and floods make life too often miserable.Thanks to its location, size and contiguous borders with other South Asian countries, it is India, in its capacity as both upper and lower riparian, that has come into conflict with most of its neighbours, except Bhutan, on the cross-border water issues. Given an atmosphere of mistrust, an upper riparian India has serious issues to resolve with lower riparian Pakistan and Bangladesh and, despite being lower riparian, with the upper riparian Nepal. This, however, does not mean that India is solely responsible for certain deadlocks, even though its share of responsibility may be larger than other countries which have their own physical limitations and political apprehensions.

As elsewhere in the world, and more particularly in the subcontinent where population explosion continues and environmental degradation worsens, water resources, like energy, are going to be much lower than the increasing demand, even if they are harnessed to the most optimum. Given the depleting resources of water, the issues of human security, and water security as its most crucial part, are going to assume astronomical proportions. The issues of water distribution and management are bringing not only countries of the region, but also states and regions within provinces into conflict since they are not being settled amicably within a grand framework of riparian statutes respecting upstream and downstream rights.

What is, however, quite appreciable is that the countries of the subcontinent have made certain remarkable efforts to resolve their differences over water distribution through bilateral agreements. India and Pakistan signed the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) in 1960 allocating three eastern rivers (Ravi, Sutlej and Beas) to India and three western rivers (Indus, Jehlum, Chenab) to Pakistan. The IWT has remarkably survived the ups and downs of Indo-Pak relations, and despite wars the parties upheld the Treaty, although serious differences persist over various projects being undertaken by India over Jehlum (2 projects) and Chenab (9 projects) rivers. Similarly, the Ganges Water-Sharing Treaty (GWST) was signed between India and Bangladesh in 1996 and resolved the dispute over Farakha Barrage, although differences continue on Bangladesh’s share of water during the lean period. Nepal and India also signed the Mahakali Treaty in 1996, but despite ratification by the Nepalese parliament, the Treaty has remained stalled.

Despite these treaties, serious differences over water sharing, water management and hydropower projects continue to spoil relations between India, on the one hand, and Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal, on the other. Differences between India and Pakistan continue to create ill-will between the two on around 11 large hydroelectric projects India plans to construct, including the Baglihar Project over which Pakistan has sought the appointment of a neutral expert by the World Bank after the failure of talks. More than the dispute over Jammu and Kashmir, the issue of the waters of Jehlum and Chenab has the potential to once again provoke people in Pakistan against India and push the two countries to war.

Bangladesh, which shares 54 rivers with India as a lower riparian, has serious differences with New Delhi that hinder agreement on eight rivers, besides the continuing complaints by Dhaka over sharing of water of Ganges. The Indian plan, which is now under review, to build a big river-linking-project that includes diversion of water from Ganges and Brahmaputra, has become yet another source of antagonism between the two countries who have not been able to sort out their differences over a whole range of issues that continue to fuel political tension which, in turn, does not allow the resolution of differences over water.

As an upper riparian, Nepal has a different relationship with India and faces many problems in constructing its dams due to opposition by the lower riparian and has serious doubts about the projects proposed by India. Nepal’s mistrust, beside other factors, has been reinforced by what it perceives to be various unequal treaties — starting from Sharada Dam construction (1927), 1950 Treaty and Letters of Exchange of 1950 and 1965, Koshi Agreement (1954), Gandak Agreement ((1959), Tanakpur Agreement (1991) and the Mahakali Treaty (1996). Since 400 million people live in the Ganges, Brahmaputra and Meghna region, India needs Nepal to meet its energy needs and for management of water.

Besides many issues of water sharing among the countries of subcontinent, there are huge water and energy related issues that are critically affecting the food security, environment and agriculture. Above all, projections of scarcity of water in the future present a doomsday scenario. There are serious differences over water-sharing within different states/provinces in India (Ravi-Beas dispute between Punjab and Haryana and Cauvery dispute among the states of Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Pondicherry) and Pakistan (water sharing dispute and construction of dams over Indus between Punjab and Sindh and also NWFP). Rigorous exploitation of groundwater in India and Pakistan is rapidly depleting aquifers which is a cause of great concern. Contamination of water and presence of arsenic in groundwater has become a major concern, especially, in Bangladesh and some parts of India and Pakistan.

Climatic changes that are being forecasted and low-water discharges need to be addressed collectively. India should, as SAFMA’s Delhi Declaration says, ‘make more efforts to discuss bilaterally with its neighbours problems relating to river waters. A new regional understanding of the riparian issues is essential to resolve Indo-Nepal, Indo-Bangladesh and Indo-Pakistan water issues’. Some way out should be found on the Baglihar issue between India and Pakistan to keep the sanctity of Indus Water Treaty. Regional Riparian Statutes must be obligatory to resolve the bilateral water disputes. RRR statute model, respecting Helsinki Convention proposes 8K upstream and downstream rights, should guide the countries of subcontinent to avoid conflict over water and reach a lasting understanding for the collective good of our people. Lastly, the ‘middle-path’ adopted by Bhutan should guide the planners for sustainable development that is environment friendly and is not carried by supply-side approach of the big dam lobbies.

Vietnam: Climate Change Threatens Economic Progress

When Hai Trai was growing up in Vietnam’s Mekong Delta, his family eked out a living on collective farms under the socialist system. While the soil was rich, Trai’s family, like most Vietnamese, lived in poverty.Today, Trai, who is reaping the benefits of free market reforms and rapid economic development, owns 10 hectares of rice paddy in Dong Thap province and produces three crops a year, which he sells to the highest bidder. He has a house, a new motorcycle, sends his children to school and puts a little money in the bank. But as the country braces for a new typhoon season, Trai fears all he has worked for could be blown away. 

Above: Truong Thi Nha takes a brief rest from hoeing a section of a cornfield in Xuan Canh, Vietnam

Across Vietnam, farmers such as Trai are feeling the effects of climate change. The typhoon season is lasting longer and storms are stronger. Flooding last year killed nearly 500 people and submerged 215,000 hectares of agricultural land, according to the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. Low-lying fields have been inundated with salt water, destroying crops. Rising temperatures have even encouraged a plague of pests. 

“The warm weather has favoured the growth of the brown plant hopper,” said Trai, referring to the tiny insect that feasts on rice seedlings. “The pests have eaten up the plants and destroyed the crops.” 

Flood damage 

Flooding, contaminated fields and pests are increasingly making life difficult for farmers in the Mekong Delta, said Nguyen Chuoc Minh, director of natural resources and the environment in Dong Thap province. There have been dramatic shifts in weather patterns in the country’s rice bowl, said Minh. The rains are coming earlier and staying longer. The annual flooding is necessary to bring in alluvia and enrich the fields, he said, but now water levels are rising to dangerous levels because the land cannot drain fast enough. Ponds throughout the entire Mekong region are polluted, affecting food production. 

“Vietnam is one of the countries hardest hit by natural calamities and global climate change,” said Minh. “We need to have a plan.” 

This week, President Nguyen Minh Triet warned the population to prepare for the effects of global warming. He called for better dyke and flood management and ordered all ministries to beef up infrastructure to mitigate the damage. Officials in the 34 coastal provinces were also told to step up disaster preparedness, including stockpiling food and medicines. 

Development agencies are also sounding the alarm. 

 

A Vietnamese rice paddy worker….

Threatening progress 

In its new Global Monitoring Report issued on 19 May in Vietnam, the World Bank warned that climate change, and the environmental damage it wreaks, threatened to undo many of gains achieved over the past two decades. Vietnam has made breathtaking progress on everything to improving literacy to lowering infant mortality. The poverty rate fell to 16 percent in 2006, down from 58 percent in 1993, according to the report, Millennium Development Goals and the Environment. In a single generation, some 34 million people have been lifted out of poverty. 

Despite these gains, the report named Vietnam as the developing country most vulnerable to rising sea levels and changing weather patterns. With its low-lying deltas and 3,200km of coastline, a 1m rise in sea levels would render agricultural land unusable and flood coastal communities. “[W]ithout adaptation efforts, more than 10 percent of Vietnam’s population would be affected, and the country would lose 10 percent of its GDP and 29 percent of its wetlands.” 

While scientists forecast different environmental scenarios - some far more ominous than the World Bank’s - all are in agreement that poor countries such as Vietnam will suffer the effects of climate change disproportionately. 

Softening the blow 

The science is incontrovertible, said Koos Neefjes, senior adviser for sustainable development with the UN Development Programme (UNDP) in Hanoi. Neefjes said now was the time to step up efforts to mitigate the impact of climate change on the most vulnerable populations. 

International aid agencies have started to work with governments to help communities analyse risk levels and brace for extreme weather, particularly typhoons and flooding. Communication systems are being beefed up so villagers get enough notice to reach permanent shelter or evacuate to higher ground. UNDP has distributed thousands of radios to fishermen so they can receive storm warnings. Programmes are under way to improve housing construction along the coastline and elevate schools and homes in the Mekong Delta so they are less vulnerable to flooding, said Neefjes. 

“The fact that Vietnam is one of the most affected countries is not in doubt,” says Neefjes. “We can see the effects. [We know that without swift measures] Vietnam’s human development - education, income, health - will be undermined by these vulnerabilities.”