Lawmakers often overlook groundwater as it is, "out of sight and unfortunately, all too often out of
mind.” For example, while international agreements for surface water bodies have been in place
since the 1960’s, only recently has a legal framework for TBA’s been looked into. Groundwater is
the only missing link in creating an integrated system for the management of transboundary water
sources.
With such a large body of water you would assume that there would be a significant agreement for the management and equitable division of the resource between the four states. Maxwell (2011) suggests that enacting “a binding agreement to govern NSAS usage,” was of the upmost importance. Finally, in 2013 progress began to be made in the governance of the NSAS through the Strategic Action Programme (SAP). SAP commits the Nubian states to ensure that, “rational and equitable management,” of the NSAS occurs. Globally only four TBA’s have an interstate agreement, with SAP being one of them, as demand for water continues to grow - ensuring TBA’s have a secure framework is vital if conflicts are to be averted.
Modelling of the NSAS shows that although the transboundary impacts are considered minimal, there are still issues to be wary of. For example, the significant amount of uncertainty about the future of the NSAS is clear in predictions of its longevity, with estimates ranging from a century to a millennium. With so much uncertainty comes unexpected conflicts and problems that could lead to a variety of very different outcomes for the Nubian states and the NSAS. Recognising the NSAS as a ‘common pool’ resource to be governed by a joint cooperation will secure a more stable future for the aquifer. More must be done to build on the momentum created by this primary agreement to set an example for other transboundary aquifers around the world. The NSAS is in a unique position as it is still in its early stages of development and there is the opportunity to, “prevent rather than mitigate resource impairment.” Consequently, it will prove to be an interesting case to watch in the coming years.
With such a large body of water you would assume that there would be a significant agreement for the management and equitable division of the resource between the four states. Maxwell (2011) suggests that enacting “a binding agreement to govern NSAS usage,” was of the upmost importance. Finally, in 2013 progress began to be made in the governance of the NSAS through the Strategic Action Programme (SAP). SAP commits the Nubian states to ensure that, “rational and equitable management,” of the NSAS occurs. Globally only four TBA’s have an interstate agreement, with SAP being one of them, as demand for water continues to grow - ensuring TBA’s have a secure framework is vital if conflicts are to be averted.
Modelling of the NSAS shows that although the transboundary impacts are considered minimal, there are still issues to be wary of. For example, the significant amount of uncertainty about the future of the NSAS is clear in predictions of its longevity, with estimates ranging from a century to a millennium. With so much uncertainty comes unexpected conflicts and problems that could lead to a variety of very different outcomes for the Nubian states and the NSAS. Recognising the NSAS as a ‘common pool’ resource to be governed by a joint cooperation will secure a more stable future for the aquifer. More must be done to build on the momentum created by this primary agreement to set an example for other transboundary aquifers around the world. The NSAS is in a unique position as it is still in its early stages of development and there is the opportunity to, “prevent rather than mitigate resource impairment.” Consequently, it will prove to be an interesting case to watch in the coming years.
No comments:
Post a Comment