Y. Alexander Northern

November 13, 2002

Over the past decades, citizens and Nongovernmental Organizations (NGO's) have played an essential role in developing and implementing environmental resource laws at local and national levels.  This role has extended more recently into the international arena.[2]   This editorial will provide an initial introduction to types and benefits of public involvement at the international level, and the role of NGO's in the management of international watercourses.

I. Introduction

There are various ways in which the public can become involved in the management of international rivers and lakes. These mechanisms range from making information available through governmental transparency, public consultation, and empowering the public to file complaints.[3]   These mechanisms are available in both domestic and international forums.[4]  

Some commentators categorize public participation into two general approaches. In the "cost-sharing" approach, people donate their expertise, time, and finances, particularly when there is a close relationship between the affected community and the decision to be made or project to be undertaken.[5]   Thus, regional inhabitants will frequently be involved in decisions regarding the uses of international rivers and lakes, and will become involved in the implementation of development projects regarding the watercourse in question.[6]   This cost-sharing approach, however, can become unwiedly with large scale projects.  In addition, many of these projects have a significant risk of adversely impacting poor people, who traditionally have been both disenfranchised and the most impacted by watercourse development projects.[7]  

Thus, the second approach, the "empowerment approach," seeks to affirmatively include those who would not otherwise have a voice in the decision making process.[8]   This approach garners information about those who would be affected by watercourse development projects, provides them with information about the potential project, and allows them to become involved in shaping the project's outcome.[9]  

II. Benefits of Public Involvement

At its most basic level, public involvement builds awareness.[10]   Governmental entities and the business community learn about the public's concerns and priorities, and about the environmental and social impacts of the proposed decisions regarding watercourse development.  This knowledge can then substantially improve decision-making.  The public, in turn, gains insight into the multitude of concerns regarding the management of international waters.[11]   This insight can build the public's capacity to participate and also their respect and support for the decision making process.  

Public involvement also improves the quality of decision-making.  Public input can supplement scarce government resources for developing norms and standards, as well as for monitoring, inspecting, and enforcing applicable laws.[12]   This is particularly true of cost-sharing public involvement, but also of the empowerment approach.  People in local communities frequently know the local environmental, agricultural, and social conditions affecting watercourse development projects.[13]   By allowing a wide range of the public to express their views regarding a proposed project or an unresolved issue, decision-makers can expand their knowledge base and incorporate valuable disparate points of view when reaching policy decisions.[14]  

Public involvement can also identify and address potential problems at an early stage of a watercourse development project.  Allowing the public to have access to information about a proposed project and related decisions reduces the chance of a project being opposed or rejected by a particular community.  Involving the public in managing international watercourses can also improve the credibility, effectiveness, and accountability of the related governmental decision-making process.[15]   Public participation at the outset defuses opposition by allowing the public to have a voice and allows time to find a solution acceptable to all parties.  Public involvement ultimately helps build broad-based consensus and lessens impediments regarding any final watercourse development project decisions.[16]  

III. The Role of NGO's in the Management of International Watercourses

In the last decade, a proliferation of global and regional NGO's have expanded and solidified public involvement in watercourse development project decisions.[17]  In addition, international institutions that conduct or support activities affecting watercourses have opened up their processes to members of the public.[18]  

Accordingly, initiatives by NGO's that are familiar with regional ecosystems can facilitate the watercourse development project decision-making process.  When negotiations over international watercourses become polarized, regional NGO's with local perspectives can assist in breaking through barriers associated with traditional diplomacy.[19]  NGO expertise can also provide important information that may not be available to government negotiators.[20]  

Examples of specific NGO instruments and their impacts on local watercourse development projects include the 1997 United Nations (U.N.) Convention on the Law of Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses.[21]  This convention sets forth basic principles for deciding on how to allocate water as well as other non-navigational water uses.[22]  

Another example of a specific NGO instrument is the 1992 UN/ECE Convention on Watercourses and Lakes and the accompanying 1999 London Protocol, which further elaborated the establishment norms for public involvement in the management of international watercourses in the UN/ECE region.[23]  This convention seeks to reduce, control, and prevent trans-boundary water pollution and the release of hazardous substances into aquatic environments.[24]  

Perhaps the most universally agreed upon international declaration, the 1992 Rio Declaration, substantially contributed to the crystallization of public involvement norms.  Principle 10 of the Declaration states:

Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens at the local level.  At the national level, each individual [stakeholder] shall have appropriate access to information concerning the environment that is held by public authorities...States shall facilitate and encourage public awareness and participation by making information widely available.

Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, U.N. Conf. on Econ. Dev., 47th Session.[25]  A contemporaneous outcome of these international instruments is that citizens and NGO's continue to play an essential role in developing and implementing environmental resource laws at local and national levels.

Since the Rio Declaration, regional initiatives have elaborated on the general principles contained within Rio.  These general principles now serve as a foundation for other international instruments that seek to promote public participation in developing watercourse policy.  Public participation continues to be a focus in the management of international watercourses.

______________

[1] See Carl Bruch, Charting New Waters: Public Involvement In The Management Of International Watercourses, 31 ENVTL. REP. 11389 (2001). (international watercourses include rivers and lakes).

[2] Id. at 1; see e.g. Dinah Shelton, The Participation of Nongovernmental Organizations in International Judicial Proceedings, 88 AM. J. INT'L. L. 611 (1994); Chiara Giorgetti, The Role of Nongovernmental Organizations in the Climate Change Negotiations, 9 COLO. J. INT'L ENVTL L. & POL'Y 115 (1998); Celia R. Taylor, The Right of Participation in Development Projects, 13 DICK. J. INT'L. L. 69 (1994). For a history of international instruments incorporating public participation, see Stephen Stec & Susan Casey-Lefkowitz, The Aarhus Convention: An Implementation Guide 10-14 (Regional Envtl. Center, Budapest 2000), available at http://www.unece.org/env/pp/acig.htm (last visited Oct. 20, 2002).

[3] Bruch, supra note 1, at 2.

[4] Id., see generally Narendra Sharma, et. al., African Water Resources: Challenges and Opportunities for Sustainable Development 53 (1996) (World Bank tech. Paper No. 331).

[5] Id., see generally Mingsarn Kaosa-ard, et. al., Towards Public Participation in [the] Mekong River Basin Development 20 (1998).

[6] Id.

[7] Id.

[8] Id.; see also Mingsarn, supra note 5, at 20-21.

Id.

[10] Id.; see also Carol Shumway, Forgotten Waters: Freshwater and Marine Ecosystems in Africa, 86-87 (1999).

[11] Id.

[12] Id., see also Sharma, et. al., supra note 4, at 27-30 (detailing the lack of governmental capacity and the need for civil society to supplement the scarce governmental resources devoted to managing water).

[13] Id.

[14] Id.

[15] Id. at 3.

[16] Id.

[17] Id. at 8.

[18] Id.

[19] Id. at 3.

[20] Deborah Sandler et. al, Protecting the Gulf of Aqaba: A Regional Environmental Challenge, 470 ENVTL. L. INST. 470-71 (1994).

[21] Bruch, supra note 1, at 7.

[22] Id.

[23] Id. (this region includes Europe, the newly independent states of the former Soviet Union, Canada, and the U.S.)

[24] Id.

[25] See U.N. Doc. A/CONF.151/REV.1 (1992); reprinted in 31 ENVTL. L. REP. 11389, 8 (2001).