Statement on Water, Sanitation, and Human Settlements

Over the past several days we have heard a number of very sound policy options. This discussion has been extremely useful and has generated precisely what our chairman has requested -- namely a broad collection of policy options that can advance implementation.

The United States believes that at this IPM, we could perhaps go one step further on the road to implementation by starting to identify not only what we want to do, but also how we will hope to do it, and who might be involved.

Articulating this level of specificity for implementation requires a fair bit of advance work. First, one must identify precise goals and objectives. Second one must consult repeatedly with interested governments, international organizations and non-governmental actors to further refine actions and possible steps. And third, this group of actors must on their volition then commit themselves to act, ideally, in concert and cooperation.

All of this takes time to develop the trust and common understanding for action.

IWRM

Since the start of this CSD cycle, the United States has been working in this manner with a number of interested countries, international organizations, and non-governmental organizations to bring forward such an approach for IWRM. For us, IWRM is particularly important in that, if done well, it brings all stakeholders to the table in a participatory, decision-making mode and thereby makes institutions accountable to their constituents.

After many months of work, we have seen a group of actors come together around the Global Water Partnership. The Partnership has become a focal point for parties interested in supporting the development and implementation of IWRM plans in developing countries.

Several donor countries are working through this effort and we expect that 18-20 countries throughout the world will receive support through this mechanism. In addition to donors, other key actors -- such as UNDP, the GEF, and -- most importantly -- the recipient countries themselves -- are involved.

This is not a substitute for traditional bilateral programs. Instead, it complements these programs by allowing us to overcome problems that we alone could not solve. By working together, we raise the profile of IWRM, enhancing its importance, and hopefully, other parties willingness to work on it with us. Also, by working through a common framework, it makes it possible to conduct a more comprehensive "gap analysis" identifying those countries that might need particular help -- something we alone could not do.

We believe that it is particularly appropriate to bring forward this kind of multilateral approach, one that allows us not only to achieve results but also measure broader progress, here at the CSD.

To take our policy options on implementing the JPOI’s call for IWRM plans one step further, the United States would suggest that interested countries come to CSD-13 prepared to commit themselves to work with this partnership to support developing country efforts to develop and implement IWRM plans.

We would further suggest that the Global Water Partnership, in consultation with its partners, plan to convene a meeting at CSD 13 to discuss and explore next steps in this effort. We also request the Secretariat provide the space for this event to occur at CSD-13. This will require further work over the next five weeks in preparation for CSD. In so doing, we could send a powerful and visible message about the CSD’s ability to deliver results.

Shared Water

Another area where it might be possible to take a similar step is in strengthening institutions for the management of shared waters where the riparian countries have clearly indicated that such assistance would be welcome and needed.

Yesterday, we were very encouraged by the lunchtime discussion hosted by UNDP to explore another practical measure that would bring together multiple donors working with multiple developing countries to build the capacity of countries and regional institutions addressing shared water.

We applaud UNDP for its leadership yesterday. UNDP has been working on this issue for many years now and over that time, has developed close ties and bonds of trust with both riparian countries and donors.

During the discussion, riparian countries noted that in some shared river basins, the riparian countries are seeking assistance from donors and international organizations. We all know that such issues are politically sensitive, and no action can be taken without the clear expressed desire of the riparians themselves.

In such cases where the riparians want it, it would be useful to have a mechanism by which outside expertise, whether in capacity building, institution building or facilitation, could be provided.

There may be a value in having a multi-donor process in concert with relevant international organizations where the limits of any one donor could be offset by pooling the capacity building strengths contained within the broader group.

In some cases, bilateral assistance might be best.

In others, an international organization -- such as UNDP or the World Bank -- might be more appropriate. In yet others, some combination of actors might be needed. Having a place where riparians can go to seek such assistance when they are ready could be a useful service.

Through such a mechanism, we can collectively be responsive to requests from riparians, while simultaneously learning about best practices on the complicated aspects of river-basin management.

To take our efforts on implementing policy options on strengthening the capacity of riparians to advance basin level planning to the next step -- if the riparians so desire, the United States would suggest that interested countries might come to CSD-13 prepared to commit themselves to work with UNDP, perhaps along with the World Bank and the GEF, on capacity building for shared river basin management among riparians who request such help.

We would further suggest that UNDP organize at CSD an opportunity for discussion among interested riparians and donors to explore specific options and next steps that might be undertaken.

A number of countries standing together with relevant international organizations would send a powerful message about the CSD’s ability to deliver concrete results

Water and Health

Finally, another area where a similar approach is possible is water and health.

We have listened closely over the past few days to the many countries that have cited the sobering health impacts related to unsafe water and the lack of sanitation. We have also heard a number of very good policy options that we can act on to address these issues. An important next step on the road to implementing the many policy options in this area would include the identification of a focal point through which interested parties can work to address these issues.

Over the past many months we and several other countries have had explored the idea of developing a mechanism with the WHO, UNICEF. Not a new institution, but a partnership that would allow us to work more effectively and encourage greater activity.

This partnership could undertake three types of concrete activities. First, it could conduct the analytical work to demonstrate the economic and health costs of unsafe drinking water and lack of sanitation. Such analyses will be particularly useful in helping countries convince relevant decision-makers of the value of investing in water and sanitation infrastructure as part of a broader developmental effort.

Second, it could help provide immediate, short-term water purification technologies at low-cost to allow countries or municipalities with acute problems to address their urgent needs. A range of household and community based disinfection technologies could be used.

Third, it could explore longer-term options for ensuring the safety of water supplies by identifying catchment, storage, and conveyance vulnerabilities, the water safety plans several mentioned yesterday.

I would note that all three of these approaches were identified during our discussions of policy options this past week.

As a practical measure, the United States would suggest that interested countries, along with the WHO and UNICEF come to the CSD-13 prepared to commit themselves to working in partnership to implement many of the water and health related policy options.

We would further suggest that WHO along with interested partners organize an event at CSD 13 to explore specific technologies, programs, and regions in which this effort might operate.

Having a number of countries standing together with relevant international organizations on this critical topic of health and water would send a powerful message about the CSD’s ability to deliver concrete results.