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.

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.