Ramsar

Handbooks
4th edition

Handbook 9

River basin management

About the Convention on Wetlands
The Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971) is an
intergovernmental treaty whose mission is “the conservation and
wise use of all wetlands through local, regional and national actions
and international cooperation, as a contribution towards achieving
sustainable development throughout the world”. As of October
2010, 160 nations have joined the Convention as Contracting Parties,
and more than 1900 wetlands around the world, covering over 186
million hectares, have been designated for inclusion in the Ramsar
List of Wetlands of International Importance.

What are wetlands?

As defined by the Convention, wetlands include a wide variety of
habitats such as marshes, peatlands, floodplains, rivers and lakes,
and coastal areas such as saltmarshes, mangroves, and seagrass beds,
but also coral reefs and other marine areas no deeper than six metres
at low tide, as well as human-made wetlands such as waste-water
treatment ponds and reservoirs.
Copyright © 2010, Ramsar
About this series of handbooks Convention Secretariat
This series has been prepared by the Secretariat of the Convention
Citation: Ramsar Convention
following the 7th, 8th 9th, and 10th meetings of the Conference of
Secretariat, 2010. River basin
the Contracting Parties (COP7, COP8, COP9 and COP10) held,
management: Integrating wetland
respectively, in San José, Costa Rica, in May 1999, Valencia, Spain,
conservation and wise use into
in November 2002, Kampala, Uganda, in November 2005, and
river basin management. Ramsar
Changwon, Republic of Korea, October-November 2008. The
handbooks for the wise use
guidelines on various matters adopted by the Parties at those and
of wetlands, 4th edition, vol. 9.
earlier COPs have been prepared as a series of handbooks to assist
Ramsar Convention Secretariat,
those with an interest in, or directly involved with, implementation
Gland, Switzerland.
of the Convention at the international, regional, national, subnational
or local levels. Each handbook brings together, subject by subject, Reproduction of material from
the various relevant guidances adopted by Parties, supplemented this publication for educational
by additional material from COP information papers, case studies and other non-commercial
and other relevant publications so as to illustrate key aspects of purposes is authorized without
the guidelines. The handbooks are available in the three working prior permission from the
languages of the Convention (English, French, and Spanish). Ramsar Secretariat, providing full
acknowledgement is given.
The table on the inside back cover lists the full scope of the subjects
covered by this handbook series at present. Additional handbooks Series Editor: Dave Pritchard
will be prepared to include any further guidance adopted by Series Supervisor: Nick Davidson
future meetings of the Conference of the Contracting Parties. The Design and layout: Dwight Peck
Ramsar Convention promotes an integrated package of actions to
ensure the conservation and wise use of wetlands. In recognition of Cover photo: Floodplain
these integrated approaches, the reader will find that within each restoration, Isar River, Germany
handbook there are numerous cross-references to others in the series. (Tobias Salathé / Ramsar)
 Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands
4th edition, 2010

River basin
Handbook 9

management
Integrating wetland
conservation and
wise use into river
basin management

This 4th edition of the Ramsar Handbooks replaces the series published in 2007. It includes
relevant guidance adopted by several meetings of the Conference of the Parties, in particular
COP7 (1999), COP8 (2002), COP9 (2005), and COP10 (2008), as well as selected background
documents presented at these COPs.
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Table of Contents
Getting the most out of this Handbook 4

Acknowledgements 6

Foreword 6

Consolidated Guidance for integrating wetland conservation and wise use into river 7
basin management

1. Guidance given by the Convention text and previous decisions of the 8

Conference of the Contracting Parties

2. Introduction 9
2.1 The importance of wetlands for water and water-related ecosystem services 9
2.2 Development of the Convention’s guidance on river basin management 10
2.3 Understanding integration in the context of Ramsar, wetlands, and river basin 12
management
2.4 Guiding principles for integrating wetlands into river basin management 16
2.5 Improving the integration of wetlands in river basin management 17

3. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: overview of the scientific 19

and technical guidance
3.1 The “Critical Path” approach 19
3.2 Synchronisation with the water sector and other sectors 20

4. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: getting started 22

5. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: scientific and technical 25

guidance at national level
5.1 Preparatory phase at national level 25
5.2 Policy and legislation at national level 27
5.3 Institutional development 31
5.4 Communication, Education, Participation and Awareness (CEPA) 36
5.5 Capacity for implementation of integrated river basin management 42

6. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: scientific and technical 45

guidance at river basin level
6.1 General sequencing in the preparatory and planning phases 45
6.2 Preparatory phase at river basin level 46
6.3 Planning phase at river basin level 54
6.4 Implementation phase at river basin level 69
6.5 Review phase at river basin level 70

7. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: international cooperation and 76

partnerships
7.1 Special issues related to shared river basin and wetland systems 76
7.2 Partnerships with relevant conventions, organizations and initiatives 80

8. References 82

2
 Handbook 9: River basin management

Guidelines for Contracting Parties:

A: Principles for integration of the conservation and wise use of wetlands into river basin 16
management
B: Guidelines for Contracting Parties relating to national policy and legislation for 30
integrated river basin management
C: Guidelines for Contracting Parties for the establishment of river basin management 35
institutions and strengthening of institutional capacity for integrated river basin
management
D: Guidelines for Contracting Parties on national policy and programmes for CEPA 41
related to integrated river basin management
E: Guidelines for Contracting Parties on national policy related to stakeholder 42
participation in integrated river basin management
F: Guidelines for Contracting Parties for establishing adequate implementation capacity 44
for integration of wetlands into river basin management
G: Guidelines for Contracting Parties on establishing supporting policy, legislation and 47
regulation at river basin level
H: Guidelines for Contracting Parties on establishing appropriate institutional 49
arrangements at river basin level
I: Guidelines for Contracting Parties on developing CEPA programmes and stakeholder 54
participation processes at river basin level
J: Guidelines for Contracting Parties relating to inventory, assessment and enhancement 58
of the role of wetlands in river basin management
K: Guidelines for Contracting Parties relating to the identification of current and future 60
supply and demand for water
L: Guidelines for Contracting Parties for prioritizing the protection and restoration of 63
wetlands and their biodiversity
M: Guidelines for Contracting Parties relating to the maintenance of natural water 64
regimes to maintain wetlands
N: Guidelines for assessing and minimising the impacts of land use and water 68
development projects on wetlands and their biodiversity
O: Guidelines for Contracting Parties for the management of shared river basins and 81
wetland systems, and partnership with relevant conventions, organizations and
initiatives

Relevant Resolutions

Resolution IX.3: Engagement of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands in ongoing multilateral 83

processes dealing with water
Resolution X.19: Wetlands and river basin management: consolidated scientific and technical 85
guidance

All Resolutions of the Ramsar COPs are available from the Convention’s Web site at www.
ramsar.org/resolutions. Background documents referred to in these handbooks are available
at www.ramsar.org/cop7-docs, www.ramsar.org/cop8-docs, www.ramsar.org/cop9-docs, and
www.ramsar.org/cop10-docs.

3
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Getting the most out of this Handbook

The Handbooks in general
The purpose of the Ramsar Handbooks is to organize guidance material from relevant decisions
adopted by the Contracting Parties over the years, according to subject themes. This helps
practitioners to implement the internationally-agreed best practice in a way that is convenient to
handle and more naturally matches their own everyday working environment.

The intended readership includes national and local staff of the government departments,
ministries and agencies that act as Administrative Authorities for the Ramsar Convention in each
country. Equally important users in many cases are managers of individual wetland areas, as some
aspects of the guidance relate specifically to site management.

The Ramsar guidance has been adopted by member governments as a whole, and increasingly it
addresses itself to the crucial roles of other sectors beyond the “environment” or “water” sectors. It
is thus very important that these Handbooks should be used by all whose actions may benefit from
or impact upon the wise use of wetlands.

A vital first step in each country therefore is to ensure adequate dissemination of these Handbooks
to all who need or can benefit from them. Copies are freely available in PDF format from the
Ramsar Secretariat in three languages on CD-ROM or by download from the Convention website
(www.ramsar.org).

Other early steps would be, in each particular context, to clarify lines of responsibility and actively
check how to align the terms used and approaches described with the reader’s own jurisdiction,
operating circumstances, and organizational structures.

Much of the text can be used in a proactive sense, as a basis for framing policies, plans and
activities, sometimes by simply importing relevant sections into national and local materials. It
can also be used in a reactive sense as a source of help and ideas for responding to problems and
opportunities, navigating subjects by the need of the user.

Cross-references, original sources, and further reading are liberally cited: the Handbooks will often
not be the “last word”, but they provide a helpful “route-map” to further sources of information
and support.

Strategic direction in the Ramsar Convention is provided by the Strategic Plan, the latest version
of which was adopted by COP10 in 2008 for the period 2009-2015. All thematic implementation
frameworks, including the Handbooks, sit within the context of the goals and strategies of this Plan
and the priorities it highlights for the period covered.

In this fourth edition of the Handbooks, additions to and omissions from the text of the original
guidelines, required by the results of COP8, COP9 and COP10, are shown in square brackets […].

The Handbook series is updated after each meeting of the Conference of the Parties, and feedback
on user experience is always appreciated in helping to refine each new edition.

4
 Handbook 9: River basin management

This Handbook (River basin management)

Strategy 1.7 of the Strategic Plan 2009-2015 is to “ensure that policies and implementation of
Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM), applying an ecosystem-based approach,
are included in the planning activities in all Contracting Parties and in their decision-making
processes, particularly concerning … catchment/river basin management”, and includes the Key
Result Area (to be achieved by 2015) 1.7.ii, as follows: “All Parties, in their water governance and
management, to be managing wetlands as natural water infrastructure integral to water resource
management at the scale of river basins”.

Strategy 3.5 on “Shared wetlands, river basins and migratory species” includes KRAs 3.5.i: “Where
appropriate, all Parties to have identified their shared wetlands, river basins and migratory species,
and Parties to have identified collaborative management mechanisms with one another for those
shared wetlands and river basins” and 3.5.ii: “Where appropriate, Parties with shared basins and
coastal systems to consider participation in joint management commissions or authorities”.

The text in this Handbook is drawn mainly from Resolution X.19 and its Annex, and the substance
of it thus reflects formal decisions adopted by the Conference of Contracting Parties. The
Handbook also brings together additional information relevant to this issue. The views expressed
in this additional information do not necessarily reflect the views of the Ramsar Secretariat or the
Contracting Parties, and such additional materials have not been endorsed by the Conference of
the Contracting Parties.

A peat-lined tributary of the Yarghoon River near Lashkargahaz, North West Frontier Province, Pakistan
(elevation 3,649 meters). Photo: Hassan Zaki / WWF Pakistan.

5
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Acknowledgements
The effort to prepare the guidelines in this Handbook was enormous and would not have been
possible without the collaboration of many individuals and institutions who shared both their
knowledge and their ideas.

The Ramsar Secretariat gratefully acknowledges the work of Mr Faizal Parish and Ms Suzana
Mohkeri of the Global Environment Network and members of the Task Force that developed
the original 1999 Guidelines, which have been incorporated into this Handbook. The original
Guidelines were adopted as the Annex to Resolution VII.18 at the 7th meeting of the Conference
of the Contracting Parties (COP7), San José, Costa Rica, in 1999, with the version presented here
now including updates and revisions adopted by subsequent COPs. That project was financially
supported by the Secretariat with additional funding from the Department for International
Development (DFID) of the U.K.

The Secretariat also gratefully acknowledges the contributions of the Water Research Commission
of South Africa, WWF South Africa, and the Living Waters Programme of WWF International, with
funding from DGIS Netherlands, in supporting the project to develop the “Critical Path” approach
on which the additional guidance was based. The additional guidance was presented in Resolution
IX.1 Annex (Ci). The Secretariat and the Scientific and Technical Review Panel (STRP) extend
their thanks to the project leader, Dr Chris Dickens of Umgeni Water, and the project team, to the
members of the STRP working group on water for the 2003-2005 triennium, as well as to STRP
members and Ramsar International Organization Partners for their valuable comments and advice
during the development of the additional guidance. Special thanks go to Heather Mackay, then of
the Water Research Commission of South Africa, for leading the preparation of several parts of this
Handbook.

Foreword
The Convention on Wetlands formally identified the need to integrate wetlands into river basin
management at the 6th meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties (COP6) in 1996 through
Resolution VI.23 on Ramsar and water. This Resolution recognized “the important hydrological
functions of wetlands, including groundwater recharge, water quality improvement and flood
alleviation, and the inextricable link between water resources and wetlands” and realised “the need
for planning at the river basin scale which involves integration of water resource management and
wetland conservation”. The Strategic Plan for 1997-2002, approved at COP6, urged the Contracting
Parties to “to integrate conservation and wise use of wetlands into decision-making on land use,
groundwater management, catchment/river basin and coastal zone planning”. However, no clear
guidelines were available at that time to assist the Parties in this direction until the 7th meeting of
the Conference of the Contracting Parties in 1999, in which was adopted Resolution VII.18 Guidelines
for integrating wetland conservation and wise use into river basin management and its associated Annex.
Following the adoption of Resolution VII.18 and its Annex, the STRP was requested to “review case
studies ... and prepare additional guidance (as necessary) on integrating wetlands, biodiversity and
river basin management” (Strategic Plan 2003-2008: Operational Objective 3.4.3).

Additional guidance contained in Resolution IX.1 Annex C(i) provided more detail on sequencing
river basin management activities. During the 2006-2008 triennium, further work was carried out by
the Scientific and Technical Review Panel (STRP) to collate and analyse case studies of integration
of wetlands into river basin management against the analytical framework presented in Resolution
IX.1 Annex C(i). COP10 in 2008 then adopted Resolution X.19, which updated and consolidated all
of the earlier guidance material, drew in aspects of the “lessons learned” from the analysis of case
studies, and entirely superseded and replaced the guidance adopted by the earlier Resolutions.
Further case study material has now been incorporated into the 4th edition of this Handbook.

6
 Handbook 9: River basin management

Consolidated Guidance for integrating wetland conservation and wise

use into river basin management
(adopted as the Annex to Resolution X.19 by the 10th meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties,
Changwon, Republic of Korea, 2008)

Relevant implementation commitments made by Contracting Parties in COP

Resolutions
Resolution IX.3: Engagement of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands in ongoing multilateral
processes dealing with water

THE CONFERENCE OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES

13. AFFIRMS that the conservation and wise use of wetlands is critical for the provision of water for
people and nature, and that wetlands are a source, as well as a user, of water, in addition to
supplying a range of other ecosystem benefits/services;

15. CALLS on Contracting Parties to bring Resolutions VI.23, VII.18, VIII.1, and COP9 Resolution
IX.1 Annex C and its appendices and the “Guidelines for the allocation and management of
water for maintaining the ecological functions of wetlands” (Ramsar Handbook 12) to the
attention of national, regional and local authorities in charge of water management for their
integration into, and their multisectoral implementation through, national Integrated Water
Resources Management plans so as to include an ecosystem approach consistent with the
Ramsar Convention.

Resolution X.19: Wetlands and river basin management: consolidated scientific and
technical guidance

THE CONFERENCE OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES

5. NOTES the “Consolidated Guidance for integrating wetland conservation and wise use into river
basin management” provided in the annex to this Resolution, and INVITES Contracting Parties
to make good use of it as appropriate, adapting it as necessary to suit national conditions
and circumstances, within the frameworks of existing regional initiatives and commitments, in
the context of sustainable development and in accordance with national institutions and legal
frameworks;

7. INVITES Contracting Parties to draw this “Consolidated Guidance for integrating wetland
conservation and wise use into river basin management” to the attention of all relevant
stakeholders, including inter alia government ministries, departments and agencies, water and
basin management agencies, non-governmental organizations, and civil society, and FURTHER
INVITES Contracting Parties to encourage these stakeholders to take these guidelines into
account, together with those of the Ramsar Toolkit of Wise Use Handbooks, in their decision-
making and activities that relate to the delivery of the wise use of wetlands through the
maintenance of their ecological character.

Explanatory Note: The terms “shared river basins” and “transboundary river basins” have both
been used in previous Ramsar Resolutions, and both are in wide usage in different parts of the
world. For the purposes of this guidance, the term “shared” is used to refer to river basins in which
ground water and surface water flow across or between two or more countries. However, the term
“transboundary” river basins is also commonly used to describe river basins whose management is
shared by different administrative units, for example between two or more local authorities, within
the same country. In this guidance, it is used in this sense. The use of these expressions and the
aforementioned explanation does not imply acceptance by all Parties [and differs from the use in

7
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

designating Transboundary Ramsar Sites]. The reading of this guidance shall be in accordance with
Principle 2 of the Rio Declaration.

1. Guidance given by the Convention text and previous decisions of

the Conference of the Contracting Parties
1. The critical linkage between wetlands, water and river basin management is
emphasized in the text of the Convention on Wetlands and in the decisions
of the Contracting Parties at the triennial conferences. Notably the second
paragraph of the Preamble of the Convention text states: “Considering
the fundamental ecological functions of wetlands as regulators of water
regimes”, and the 6th meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties
(COP6, 1996) confirmed through Resolution VI.23 on Ramsar and Water that
Contracting Parties “RECOGNIZE the important hydrological functions
of wetlands, including groundwater recharge, water quality improvement
and flood alleviation, and the inextricable link between water resources
and wetlands, and REALIZE the need for planning at the river basin scale
which involves integration of water resources management and wetland
conservation.”

2. Resolution VI.23 further called upon Parties, in promoting the integration

of water resource management and wetland conservation, to undertake a
range of actions (including the establishment of hydrological monitoring
networks on wetlands, studies of traditional water management systems,
and economic valuation methods) to involve National Ramsar Committees
and local stakeholders in river basin management, support multidisciplinary
training, and work in partnership with water-related organizations.

3. Resolution VII.18 (1999) on Guidelines for integrating wetland conservation

and wise use into river basin management noted the increasing demands being
placed upon freshwater resources in many parts of the world, highlighted
the importance placed on freshwater resources by the United Nations
Commission on Sustainable Development, and recognized that “wetlands,
because of their ecological and hydrological functions, are an intrinsic part of
the overall water resource system and should be managed as such”. Parties
were urged to apply, through integrated approaches, the guidance annexed
to Resolution VII.18 within river basins in their own territories as well as in
those river basins shared with neighbouring countries.

4. Resolution IX.1 Annex C(i) (2005), Additional guidance and a framework for the
analysis of case studies, provided further advice on sequencing some of the
actions set out in Resolution VII.18 related to integration of wetlands into
river basin management. During the 2006-2008 triennium, further work
was carried out by the Scientific and Technical Review Panel (STRP) to
collate and analyse case studies of integration of wetlands into river basin
management against the analytical framework presented in Resolution IX.1
Annex C(i). The “lessons learned” from the analysis of case studies have
been drawn into the consolidated guidance (this document) to provide
additional detail and refinement of some aspects of the existing guidance.

5. The Framework for Ramsar’s water-related guidance was adopted in 2005 as

Annex C to Resolution IX.1 (also available as Ramsar Wise Use Handbook
[8, 4th edition], Ramsar Convention Secretariat, [2010]). In addition to

8
 Handbook 9: River basin management

providing an overview of the full suite of Ramsar’s water-related guidance,

the Framework contains detailed discussion of the role of wetland
ecosystems and wetland management in Integrated Water Resources
Management (IWRM). The Framework also contains a set of principles for
the development and implementation of Ramsar’s water-related guidance,
which apply, inter alia, to the guidance related to river basin management.

6. Operational Objective 2.2 of the Strategic Plan 1997-2002 approved at

COP6 urged Parties “to integrate conservation and wise use of wetlands . .
. into national, provincial and local planning and decision making on land
use, groundwater management, catchment/river basin and coastal zone
planning and all other environmental management”. This was reiterated
in Operational Objective 3.4 of the Strategic Plan 2003-2008. Operational
Objective 12.1 of the 2003-2008 Strategic Plan also urged Parties to apply
the guidelines in Resolution VII.18 in international cooperation related to
management of shared wetlands.

7. Following on from the findings of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

(MA, 2005), it is recognized in the Ramsar Strategic Plan for 2009-2015 that
[increasing demands for water abstraction, and a lack of appreciation of
the value of wetlands (including their role in the global hydrological cycle),
are key contributing factors in the continued change, deterioration and loss
of wetlands and their services. The importance of wetlands as sources of
freshwater is highlighted in both the MA (2005) Wetlands Synthesis and the
Strategic Plan 2009-2015, and the need for ecosystem-based approaches to
policy and decision-making is emphasised.

8. Strategy 1.7 of the Strategic Plan 2009-2015 addresses the need to ensure that
policies and implementation of Integrated Water Resource Management,
applying an ecosystem-based approach, are included in the planning
activities in all Contracting Parties and in their decision-making processes,
particularly concerning groundwater management, catchment/river basin
management, coastal and nearshore marine zone planning, and climate
change mitigation and/or adaptation activities.

9. This Consolidated Guidance supersedes and entirely replaces the guidance

contained in the Annex to Resolution VII.18 and in Annex C(i) to Resolution
IX.1.

2. Introduction
2.1 The importance of wetlands for water and water-related
ecosystem services
10. Wetlands provide a wide range of ecosystem services that contribute to
human well-being, such as fish and fibre, water supply, maintenance of
water quality, climate regulation, flood regulation, coastal protection, and
recreation and tourism opportunities (MA, 2005). Wetlands are also critical
for the conservation of biological diversity. There is increasing recognition
of the value of these functions and other ecosystem services provided by
wetlands. In particular, wetlands are vitally important for providing the
regulating and supporting ecosystem services that underpin water resources
management, and can thus be considered as essential components of overall

9
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

water infrastructure (Emerton & Bos, 2004). However, this importance

was not always adequately reflected in water resources planning and
management in the past.

11. The degradation and loss of wetlands is more rapid than that of other
ecosystems. Primary direct drivers of degradation and loss of wetlands
include “infrastructure development, land conversion, water withdrawal,
eutrophication and pollution, over-harvesting and over-exploitation, and
the introduction of invasive alien species” (MA, 2005). Degradation and loss
of wetlands, and rapid changes in the river basins of which these wetlands
are integral elements, has led to the disruption of natural hydrological
cycles. In many cases this has resulted in greater frequency and severity of
flooding, drought and pollution. The degradation and loss of wetlands and
their biodiversity imposes major economic and social losses and costs to
the human populations of these river basins through the loss of previously
accessible wetland ecosystem services.

12. Demands on water resources continue to increase, as do the levels of

pollutants. Water scarcity and limited or reduced access to water for
domestic, agricultural and industrial uses are “key factors limiting
development in many countries” (MA, 2005; CA, 2007). Global climate
change is likely to exacerbate these problems. Water resource developments
intended to address such problems can negatively impact on other services
provided by wetlands. Proper consideration of the role and importance
of wetlands in river basin management can greatly assist in securing safe,
reliable sources of water and meeting sustainable development objectives
such as the Millennium Development Goals. Hence the integration of
wetland conservation and wise use into river basin management, as
promoted by the Ramsar Convention, is essential to sustain the important
ecosystem services associated with both wetlands and river basins and the
benefits they provide to human populations.

13. River basins or river catchments (the land area between the source and
the mouth of a river, including all of the lands that drain into the river)
and coastal and marine systems influenced by catchment discharges are
important geographical units for considering the management of wetlands
and water resources. Wetlands play critical roles in river basin management
and, conversely, land and water-related human activities within river basins
can have very significant influences on the ecological character of wetlands
in those basins.

2.2 Development of the Convention’s guidance on river basin

management
14. The Convention’s guidance for integrating wetlands into river basin
management is intended to help wetland managers to participate in and
influence river basin planning and management, in order to ensure that
the values and needs of wetland ecosystems are adequately integrated into
river basin processes. While this guidance is intended primarily for the
Contracting Parties to the Ramsar Convention, it will be of use to anyone
with an interest in the ‘holistic’ approach to the management of wetlands.
This approach, recognizing that wetlands are integral parts of river basins,
requires that managers and planners focus at the river basin level in
developing effective management strategies.

10
 Handbook 9: River basin management

15. The move towards the integration of wetlands and wetland water
requirements into water sector planning and activities has only been
initiated formally in most countries since the mid-1990s, concurrently with
wider adoption and application of Integrated Water Resources Management
(IWRM) approaches, as advocated in, for example, the Implementation
Plan of the 2002 Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development
(United Nations, 2002).

16. Yet awareness of the need for this integration has been growing for a
long time in the water, environment, and wetland communities (see, for
example, the Dublin Principles (Dublin Statement on Water and Sustainable
Development, 1992) and Agenda 21 (United Nations, 1993)). This awareness
was reflected in Resolution VI.23 (Ramsar and water) and was taken up in
several Operational Objectives in the Convention’s 1997-2002 Strategic
Plan. In order to support implementation of Resolution VI.23 and the 1997-
2002 Strategic Plan, Contracting Parties then requested the preparation of
scientific and technical guidance for integrating wetlands into river basin
management, resulting in the adoption of Resolution VII.18 (Guidelines for
integrating wetland conservation and wise use into river basin management).

17. The Integrated Framework for the Convention’s water-related guidance

See also Handbook
(Resolution IX.1 Annex C; Ramsar Wise Use Handbook [8, 4th edition,
8, Water-related
2010]) provided an overview of the relationships between wetlands, water
guidance
resources management, and river basin management. The Framework
described in some detail:

• the links between wetland ecosystems and water resources

management, through the hydrological cycle;
• the importance of integrating the protection and wise use of wetlands
into both river basin and water resources planning and management;
and
• the role of the Ramsar Convention’s Contracting Parties in
implementing IRBM and IWRM approaches.

18. The guidance in Resolution VII.18 described, in some detail, the different
policy, planning, and management activities that are needed at national and
river basin levels in order to support more effective integration of wetlands
into river basin management.

19. Subsequent review of recent experiences of wetland management and

protection in the context of river basin management has led to the growing
recognition that there is a certain degree of sequencing required between
planning and management activities at river basin level and at individual
wetland or site level. A generic sequence based on an approach called the
“Critical Path” (Dickens et al, 2004) was described in the additional guidance
on integration of wetlands into river basin management, adopted as
Resolution IX.1 Annex C(i) in 2005.

20. After COP9 in 2005, the STRP undertook a project to collate and analyse
a range of case studies related to integration of wetlands into river basin
planning and management. The results of this project are described in [a
forthcoming] Ramsar Technical Report. Not all of the case studies covered in
that Ramsar Technical Report explicitly described examples of application
of the Convention’s river basin management guidance, since the guidance

11
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

was still relatively new. However, the case studies did provide valuable
examples and learning related to:

• specific activities covered in the Convention’s river basin management

guidance, and
• typical obstacles to implementation that can arise if the sequence of
activities is not adequately addressed.

21. The Convention’s pieces of existing guidance related to river basin

management (Resolution VII.18 and Resolution IX.1 Annex C(i)) were
included together in Volume 7 of the Wise Use Handbooks, 3rd edition,
2007. These two previous guidances have now been fully integrated and
supplemented with additional information and guidance derived from the
case studies, and they form this Consolidated Guidance.

22. It is important to note that, in this Consolidated Guidance, the term “river
basin management” encompasses planning as well as implementation
activities. Both kinds of activities are critical to successful river basin
management, and both are usually undertaken at various levels, including
national level (and international level in shared river basins), river basin
level, and local or community levels. Planning activities may include
assessment, modeling and scenario generation, negotiation, decision-
making, scheduling, budgeting and programme design. Implementation
activities may include management actions such as modified agricultural
practices, restoration of ecosystems, cleanup and rehabilitation of
contaminated sites, operation of dams and water storage facilities, regulation
and enforcement of laws, monitoring and reporting.

2.3 Understanding integration in the context of Ramsar, wetlands,

and river basin management
Wetlands and Integrated River Basin Management

23. Wetlands are the primary resources from which water and all its benefits
for humans are derived, and they are a major and critical component of the
hydrological cycle that keeps us supplied with water. The protection and
wise use of wetlands, and recognition of their role and value, are essential
aspects of water resources planning and management.

24. Recent development and application of Integrated Water Resources

Management (IWRM) and Integrated River Basin Management (IRBM)
approaches, while initially being led by water sector policy in order to
ensure the protection and sustainable development of water resources, has
offered a significant opportunity for the wetlands sector to engage with the
water sector and land use sectors at river basin level.

25. Definitions of IWRM and IRBM are many and varied, but most reflect the
principal philosophy of coordinated, collaborative decision-making across
multiple land and water use sectors on multiple, connected scales, in order
to ensure that the social and economic benefits of land and water resource
use can be sustained and shared equitably, while still protecting vital
ecosystems and their services.

26. Some descriptions of IWRM reflect a narrower perspective, i.e., with a

primary focus on managing the actual water component of water resources

12
 Handbook 9: River basin management

Additional Information
Definitions of Integrated Water Resource (IWRM) and Integrated River
Basin Management (IRBM)
World Bank definition of IWRM:
An integrated water resources perspective ensures that social, economic, environmental and
technical dimensions are taken into account in the management and development of water
resources. Source: http://web.worldbank.org/.

CAPNet definition of IWRM:

The UN Programme on Capacity Building for Integrated Water Resources Management
describes IWRM as a “systematic process for the sustainable development, allocation and
monitoring of water resource use in the context of social, economic and environmental
objectives.” Source: CAPNet Tutorial on Integrated Water Resources Management, http://
www.archive.cap-net.org/iwrm_tutorial/p_2_1.htm.

Global Water Partnership definition of IWRM:

The GWP says that Integrated Water Resources Management may be defined as: a process
which promotes the coordinated development and management of water, land and related
resources in order to maximise the resultant economic and social welfare in an equitable
manner without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems. Source: Integrated Water
Resources Management - GWP Technical Committee (TEC) Background Paper No. 4, cited in
http://www.gwpforum.org/gwp/library/TEC10.pdf.

World Water Forum description of IWRM:

IWRM is described as an incremental and adaptive policy approach that seeks the coordinated
development and management of water, land and related resources. Source: 4th World Water
Forum Synthesis Report http://www.worldwatercouncil.org/fileadmin/wwc/ World_Water_
Forum/WWF4/synthesis_sept06.pdf.

WWF description of IRBM:

The WWF describes Integrated River Basin Management as the process of coordinating
conservation, management and development of water, land and related resources across
sectors within a given river basin, in order to maximise the economic and social benefits
derived from water resources in an equitable manner while preserving and, where necessary,
restoring freshwater ecosystems. Source: http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/what_we_do/
freshwater/our_solutions/ rivers/irbm/index.cfm.

within a catchment or basin, while still recognizing the need to consider

land use influences on the quantity, quality and reliability of water supplies.
The concept of integrated river basin management, on the other hand, offers
a somewhat broader perspective, i.e., considering the need to protect and
manage the ecosystem services provided by both land and water resources
within a river basin, and also recognizing the interdependence of these land-
based and water-related ecosystem services as they are linked through the
hydrological cycle.

27. For the purposes of the Ramsar Convention, the broader perspective offered
by use of the term IRBM is more appropriate, since this term clearly includes
both land and water aspects and allows management to address the role that

13
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

wetland ecosystems play as the connecting links between land and water
systems in a river basin.

28. It is important to note here that the term “river basin” encompasses the
See also Handbook
surface and subsurface water resources, soil and land resources, wetlands
11, Managing
and associated ecosystems, including those coastal and nearshore marine
groundwater
systems that are hydrologically or ecologically linked to the river basin. The
catchment areas of groundwater resources in the river basin may not always
coincide with the boundaries of surface water catchment areas, and this
should be considered in defining the extent of a river basin for management
and administrative purposes.

29. In this guidance, references to “the water sector” include those institutions,
groups, agencies and organizations, public or private, that are responsible
for regulatory, operational and institutional aspects of water policy,
planning and regulation; water infrastructure development, operation
and maintenance; water allocation and permitting; water treatment and
supply; wastewater management, treatment and discharge; water quality
management; CEPA [(Communication, Education, Participation and
Awareness)] and extension services.

30. References to “the wetlands sector” generally include those institutions,

groups, agencies and organizations, public or private, that are involved
in some way in promoting or implementing wise use of wetlands. Their
responsibilities and interests may encompass regulatory, operational
or institutional aspects of wetland management, such as conservation,
restoration, oversight and enforcement of compliance with regulations
related to protection and management of wetlands, CEPA, policy and
planning.

31. Experiences from several countries have shown that poorly integrated
or strongly single-sector approaches to water resources management
frequently lead to significant degradation of wetland ecosystems within
a river basin, which in turn affects the productivity and accessibility of
land and water resources in the basin, as well as the associated ecosystem
services. This observation is also applicable to the case studies described in
[the forthcoming Ramsar Technical Report on river basin management case
studies].

32. While it is not essential for a Contracting Party to be formally and actively
implementing IWRM or IRBM approaches in order to be able to integrate
wetland conservation and wise use into river basin management, it does
help a great deal to have enabling national policy or legislation in place that
supports implementation of IWRM or IRBM approaches.

33. Just the commitment, however, to consider wetland water requirements

in water resources management can be a significant first step in moving
towards more integrated approaches that encompass land, water and
wetlands within the management of river basins. This first step can often
catalyse development and application of IWRM and IRBM approaches, since
wetlands themselves are integrative in two ways:

14
 Handbook 9: River basin management

• The nature of wetlands as connectors between land and water

systems means that considering wetlands in water management is an
integrative step.

• The critical importance of wetlands to all sectors of society through

the provision of water-related ecosystem services means that people
will need to share the benefits of wetlands, and so will need to come
together over wetlands, whether in conflict or in consensus, and this
offers opportunities for integration between different sectors and
interest groups.

Ramsar and Integrated River Basin Management

34. It has long been recognized, and is incorporated in all of Ramsar’s guidance
on wetland management planning, notably through Resolution VIII.14
(2002) and Ramsar Handbook [18, 4th edition 2010] (Managing wetlands), that
land uses in and around a wetland should be managed and planned in a
way that is consistent with wise use objectives for the wetland itself.

35. Until recently, however, the equivalent water uses within, upstream of, and
See also Handbook
downstream of, a wetland have not always been given sufficient attention
10, Water allocation
– rather they have been considered an external driving force more or less
and management
beyond the control of wetland managers. Ramsar Contracting Parties
adopted Resolution VIII.1 (Guidelines for the allocation and management
of water for maintaining the ecological functions of wetlands) in 2002, which
provided guidance for wetland managers to engage more formally with
the water sector in determining and assuring water allocations for wetlands
ecosystems, and this represents a significant step forward in the process of
integrating wetland needs into water resources planning and management.

36. Ultimately, in order to support the wise use of wetlands, management of

wetlands must be undertaken within the context of their larger surrounding
“waterscape” (the river basin or catchment, including the hydrological
processes and functions within the basin or catchment) as well their larger
surrounding landscape.

37. In the longer term, it is not sufficient to integrate wetland management

objectives into land use management plans; they should also be integrated
into water resource management plans. In turn, land and water resource
management plans need to be integrated to ensure that these plans reflect
common, agreed objectives for the wetlands in a river basin. Water-related
management objectives for wetlands in a river basin should preferably be
“hard-wired” into the business plans and operational plans of the relevant
water and land management agencies, to ensure that wetland objectives are
fully realized. The aim should be to match water resources strategies with
land use strategies, so that these can be implemented jointly to support the
maintenance of healthy, functional wetlands that provide a full range of
benefits and services for people, including water supply.

38. Ramsar’s water-related guidance is not intended to lead or drive the

formulation and implementation of core water sector policy regarding water
allocation, water supply and water resources management. Nevertheless,
Contracting Parties should apply this guidance:

15
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

• at international level, to promote the integration of wetlands into the

management of shared river basins;
• at national level, to establish processes for cross-sectoral planning and
harmonization of policy objectives and to raise awareness about the
role and value of wetlands in river basin management;
• in their water sector institutions, to establish a supportive policy,
legislative and institutional environment for implementing RBM that
properly integrates wetlands; and
• in their wetlands sector institutions, to ensure that the wetlands
sector has the capacity, resources and information to participate
meaningfully in river basin management planning, decision-making,
and implementation.

2.4 Guiding principles for integrating wetlands into river basin

management
39. A set of guiding principles was set out in the guidance annexed to
Resolution VIII.1 (Water allocation and management for maintaining the ecological
functions of wetlands) and in the Integrated Framework for Ramsar’s water-related
guidance (Ramsar Handbook [8, 4th edition]). These principles have been
defined not only through analysis of previous policy documents adopted by
the Ramsar Convention, but also by reference to IWRM principles developed
by other international organizations and initiatives.

40. Parties should note the following guiding principles:

Guidelines Box A. Principles for integration of the conservation and wise

use of wetlands into river basin management
Contracting Parties should apply these guiding principles in initiating and implementing river
basin management approaches into which wetland conservation and wise use are integrated.

A1. Sustainability as a goal. Adequate protection from the impacts of land and water uses
within and beyond a river basin should be provided in order to sustain the functioning
of wetland ecosystems, respecting their natural dynamics for the benefit of future
generations. This protection includes the provision of water allocations for wetland
ecosystems.

A2. Clarity of process. The process by which decisions are made on the management of river
basins, including the allocation and management of water and wetlands, should be clear
to all stakeholders.

A3. Equity in participation and decision-making factors. There should be equity for
different stakeholders in their participation in river basin management, including in land
use, water allocation, and water management decisions related to wetlands.

A4. Credibility of science. Scientific methods used to support land use and water
management decisions related to wetlands, including water allocations to meet
environmental water requirements of wetlands, should be credible and supported by
review from the scientific community.

16
 Handbook 9: River basin management

A5. Transparency in implementation. Once plans and procedures for river basin
management, water allocation and water management decisions related to wetlands have
been defined and agreed, it is important that they are seen to be implemented correctly.

A6. Flexibility of management. Like many ecosystems, wetlands are characterized by

complexity, changing conditions and uncertainty. It is essential that an adaptive
management strategy be adopted, which requires plans that can be changed as new
information or understanding comes to light.

A7. Accountability for decisions. Decision-makers should be accountable. If agreed

procedures are not followed or subjective decisions can be shown to be contrary to the
spirit of the above principles, then decision-makers should provide a full explanation.
Stakeholders should have recourse to an independent body if they feel that procedures
have not been followed.

A8. Cross-sectoral cooperation in policy development and implementation. All of the

public sector agencies with responsibilities for activities or policies that influence land,
water and wetlands within river basins should commit themselves to cooperative
processes of consultation and joint setting of policy objectives, at national level as well as
at river basin level.

Source: Resolution VIII.1 and Ramsar Wise Use Handbook Vol [8, 4th edition (2010)]

2.5 Improving the integration of wetlands in river basin management

41. As mentioned above, the aim of river basin management should be to
match water resources strategies with land use strategies, so that these can
be implemented jointly to support the maintenance of healthy, functional
wetlands that provide a full range of services for people, including water
supply.

42. A clear, understandable and sequential process for river basin management
planning and implementation provides opportunities for wetland managers
to formulate their inputs appropriately and to engage with civil society,
land and water users, water resource planners and managers as well as with
their counterparts in land use sectors. The exact sequence is perhaps less
important than the fact that there is a formal, organized and transparent
process established, with which all relevant sectors and groups can engage.
The Convention’s guidance on integrating wetlands into river basin
management is set out in the framework of such a sequential process, the
so-called “Critical Path” approach, described in detail in this Consolidated
Guidance.

43. In summary, to improve the integration of wetlands into river basin

management, attention needs to focus on three major areas of activity:

• A supportive policy, legislative and institutional environment that

promotes cooperation between sectors and sectoral institutions and
amongst stakeholder groups;

• Communication, education, participation and awareness (CEPA)

programmes to support communication of policy and operational
needs and objectives across different sectors, primarily the water and
wetlands sectors, and amongst different stakeholder groups;

17
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Additional Information
Challenges associated with integrating wetlands into river basin
management
Whilst several countries have achieved good results in integrating wetland management
and water resources management at the local, site or sub-basin level, successful upscaling
of these approaches to the basin level has generally proved difficult, though not impossible.
Experiences based on a range of recent case studies, including those in the [forthcoming]
Ramsar Technical Report on RBM case studies, have provided some useful lessons and
insights into the generic challenges of upscaling and implementing river basin management
approaches into which wetlands are integrated.

Difficulties in implementation of wetland management plans often occur when higher-

level water resources planning, management and water allocation issues have not been
addressed adequately prior to the design and implementation of wetland management plans.
Conversely, some problems in river basin management, such as deteriorating water quality
or changes in flooding patterns, can have their origins in a failure to adequately address the
importance of wetland ecosystems in the early stages of river basin planning.

Obstacles to upscaling (i.e., from local to river basin level) can arise from insufficient attention
to:

• providing an enabling policy, legislative and institutional environment at national

and river basin levels, and
• establishing and promoting mechanisms for cross-sectoral and multi-stakeholder
dialogue, decision making, and setting of policy objectives.

Obstacles to implementation of management plans can arise from:

• insufficient attention to sequencing the river basin management activities described

in Resolution VII.18 (1999).

Obstacles to both upscaling and implementing wetland or river basin management plans can
arise from:

• weaknesses in multi-stakeholder processes of consultation, consensus-seeking and

decision-making. Such weaknesses generally arise when communication, education,
participation and awareness (CEPA) programmes are not properly designed
into river basin management planning and ongoing implementation, or are not
adequately supported by funding and technical resources.

At river basin level, some challenges are related to operational issues such as local zoning,
water allocations, and land use practices. Planning and management need to be flexible, with
implementation mechanisms that allow responsible sectoral agencies to respond to local river
basin priorities while remaining consistent with national policy and planning frameworks.

It is also important to ensure that connections between national and river basin levels can
operate in both directions. In some cases, national level policy, legislation, regulation and
institutions are needed in order for river basin management initiatives to begin and to proceed
at basin level. In other cases, plans and decisions made at basin level may need policy or
regulatory responses at national level to support implementation, for example, declaration of

18
 Handbook 9: River basin management

certain wetlands as national or international protected areas in order to protect these

wetlands and their services for the river basin.

Individual land and water users as well as communities may be reluctant to participate
in implementation of management plans if they have not previously participated in the
development of these plans and had some say in the setting of their objectives. At sectoral
level, insufficient communication among various responsible agencies and institutions,
allied with weak bureaucratic processes for cross-sectoral cooperation, can lead to conflicting
sectoral policies at river basin and national levels, again creating obstacles to implementation
of river basin management plans and wetland management plans.

Source: forthcoming Ramsar Technical Report on RBM case studies

• Sequencing and synchronization of planning and management

activities in different sectors responsible for land use, water resources
and wetlands.

3. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: overview of

the scientific and technical guidance
3.1 The “Critical Path” approach
44. The cyclical, so-called “Critical Path” approach to integrating wetlands into
river basin management evolved out of many experiences of the obstacles to
implementation of the protection, management and wise use of individual
wetlands at site level. Additional experience from implementation of
environmental flows concepts and policies has also brought the recognition
that there is a certain degree of sequencing required, between planning
and management activities at river basin level and between management
and user activities at individual wetland or site level. Activities need to be
progressively initiated and completed, in time and through scales from basin
scale down to site scale, in order to ensure the successful management and
wise use of wetlands.

45. These obstacles and issues are common to many countries and many
wetland situations. It appears from experience that failure to implement
management plans, and thus to achieve wise use objectives for individual
wetlands, has often occurred when broader water resources planning,
management and water allocation issues have not been adequately
addressed in management plans for individual wetlands or groups of
wetlands. Achievement of wetland management objectives will continue to
be difficult until broader land use and water resources management plans at
river basin level fully integrate the management and wise use objectives for
the wetlands in question.

46. The Critical Path approach offers a “road map” that can help Contracting
Parties to apply the existing suite of Ramsar’s wise use guidance in a
systematic, sequential way to support integration of the conservation and
wise use of wetlands into river basin management.

19
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Additional Information
The “Critical Path” concept
The general “Critical Path” sequence was not a new idea: rather, it evolved implicitly
from observing and listening to the experiences of people and groups around the world in
implementing integrated river basin management, integrated water resources management,
and management of wetlands. From those experiences, an emerging common thread was that
the sequence of various river basin management activities can be almost as important as the
activities themselves.

Source: Resolution IX.1 C(i)

47. A generic version of the Critical Path approach is provided in Figure 1.

For further information on how the Critical Path approach can be further
developed to suit a specific national or river basin situation, readers may
consult the report of the original project on which the “Critical Path”
approach was based, available in Dickens et al. (2004). Figure 1 also shows
the cross-references from steps in the critical path to existing, more detailed
Ramsar guidance that is applicable for each of the steps.

48. The Critical Path cycle consists of a series of 10 steps, arranged within
several phases:

i) A preparatory phase at national level (Step 0), providing an enabling

and supportive policy, legislative, and institutional environment
for river basin management that can be adequately integrated the
conservation and wise use of wetlands;

ii) A preparatory phase at river basin level that involves review and
possible revision of policy, legislative and institutional aspects related
to river basin management (Steps 1 and 2);

iii) A planning phase involving hydrological, biophysical and socio-

economic surveys, assessments and decision-making activities (Steps 3
to 6), leading to the development of a river basin management plan;

iv) An implementation phase, involving parallel implementation of the

river basin management plan and any related wetlands management
plans (Steps 7a and 7b);

v) A review phase involving operational review activities (monitoring,

data analysis, reporting and response – Step 8) as well as more strategic
review of longer-term progress against objectives and plans (Step 9),
leading to further development or revision of policies, objectives and
plans.

3.2 Synchronisation with the water sector and other sectors

49. The Critical Path approach is focused on wetlands and their role in a basin:
this wetland-focused cycle should be recognized as being nested within
or closely linked to other spatial and economic planning and management
cycles. Understanding the status and progression of these other cycles,
particularly the water sector’s cycle of water resources planning and

20
 Figure 1. Generic version of the “Critical Path” approach, modified from the same figure in Resolution IX.1 Annex C(i) (2005). Note that
stakeholder participation and CEPA processes should continue throughout the entire cycle.

Ideal start
Ramsar Handbooks 2, 3, 6, 7, 9,
10, 15, 17, & 18 Ramsar Handbooks 2, Ramsar Handbooks
3&9 2, 3, 6, 7, 9 & 20

9. Review,
reflect, revisit 1. Policy, 2. Design & initiate
priorities & plans regulatory & stakeholder
institutional participation
Ramsar contexts process
Handbooks 13, 15
& 18 Ramsar
Handbook 15
8. Monitor &
report: 3a. Inventory
Basin level of wetlands in
Wetland level the basin
Ramsar Handbooks 9 & 10
Ramsar Handbooks 9,
Ramsar Handbooks 18 3b. Water resource 10, 15, 17, 18
& 19 function of
wetlands
7b. Implementation at
7a. Implementation basin level: 3c. Assessment
- Water resources
at wetland level: of current status
management
- Management plan & trends
- Operating rules
- Wise use
- Water allocations
- Restoration
Ramsar Handbooks
13, 15, 17 & 18
4. Set relative
Primary priorities for
bottleneck 5. Set quantitative wetlands in basin
6. Water & land
management
use management
objectives for Ramsar Handbooks 9, 10, Ramsar Handbooks
plan for basin 11, & 18
Ramsar Handbooks wetlands (wise 1, 7, 9, 10 & 16
1, 6, 10, 12 & 15 (includes water
allocation plan) use)

21
Handbook 9: River basin management
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

management, assists in synchronizing the wetlands cycle with these other

cycles, sharing of information between sectors, and avoiding duplication of
work.

50. Ideally, the Critical Path cycle should be started at the beginning (Step 1 in
Figure 1) in a river basin, and completed in full and in sequence, but basins
and situations are different and flexibility should be promoted. In many
cases, larger-scale water and land management at basin level may have
been going on for some time in parallel with, or more or less independently
from, wetland management at site level, and the wetland level cycle may
not be synchronized with river basin management cycles. Hence the most
practical approach is to identify where each sector is in its planning and
management cycle, and start from there in a process of gradual integration
and synchronisation.

51. If other sectoral processes are well-structured but perhaps significantly

ahead of the wetlands sector’s planning and management process, then
rapid or desktop execution of steps in the Critical Path should be considered
in order for the wetlands sector to “catch up” and at least get wetland needs
and values onto the water agenda in the basin. Critical Path steps can be
executed more fully in the second iteration of the cycle.

52. Specialist CEPA initiatives from the wetlands sector can support the building
See Handbook 6,
of links and synchronization between the wetlands Critical Path and other
Wetland CEPA
sectoral processes. If the other sectoral processes are not well-structured,
then focused CEPA initiatives could help to identify and clarify current
processes in other sectors, in order for the wetlands sector to link with them.

53. Figure 2 provides a graphical representation of generic water sector

planning and implementation processes for water resources management
at river basin level, and how these are generally related to the wetland
management planning and implementation cycle indicated in the Critical
Path approach. Contracting Parties should consider ways to identify the
various sectoral processes that are already in place or should be put in place
in the future at national and river basin levels. The sectoral cycles shown in
Figure 2, and the connections between these cycles, can then be adapted to
suit local river basin situations.

4. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: getting started

54. It is likely that almost every new initiative to integrate wetlands into
river basin management will involve some degree of “retrofitting” of
wetland-related aspects into existing river basin management activities.
In these cases, it will be necessary to take into account ongoing river basin
management activities, review them, resolve the most acute obstacles, and
gradually begin integrating wetlands through revision of land use and water
resources management plans, programmes and regulations.

55. Existing river basin management activities may have led to significant
structural modifications that affect river basins and water resources within
basins, such as large dams, flood controls, and other modifications of
the natural hydrological regime. Where possible, the operation of such
structures should be adapted in order to take into account the protection

22
 Figure 2: Synchronisation of planning and management processes in the wetlands and water sectors

23
Handbook 9: River basin management
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

and management of wetlands, particularly in terms of environmental water

requirements.

56. The critical path approach is a cyclical one, because it is also an adaptive
approach to management: learning and new understanding gained in the
first cycle should be fed back into improving future application. Several
of the case studies documented in the Ramsar Technical Report [on river
basin management] demonstrate that moving towards integrated river basin
management is a long-term, iterative process, one that requires patience and
commitment from all stakeholders and sectors.

57. An integrated river basin management initiative can arise from an urgent
need to resolve serious local water management problems, or it might
arise from the desire to take a more inclusive, integrated approach to the
early stages of planning for water resources developments in a relatively
unimpacted river basin. It might be a bottom-up process, having been
initiated at a local or sub-basin level as people try to solve local water and
wetland problems, or it might be a top-down process of national policy
implementation. In all likelihood, all of these factors might be present to
some degree. The key to improving integration of wetlands into river basin
management is to recognize the wide range of interests, concerns, local
situations and possible solutions, and to take a progressive, step by step
approach to implementation that builds commitment and willingness from
all parties.

58. If a process seems blocked, perhaps due to inability of stakeholders to

agree on priorities, then two key places to revisit are Steps 2 and 4 (see
Figure 1). In these steps, the priorities for wetlands are identified, discussed
and decided. If the stakeholder process has not been sufficiently inclusive
or participatory, this could lead to perceived failure of the legitimacy of

Tonle Sap, Cambodia. Photo: Taej Mundkur.

24
 Handbook 9: River basin management

objectives. If the priorities that are set for wetlands in a basin are not
practical or feasible, for example in terms of the amount of water that must
be released from a dam, then this will probably lead to failure to recognize
the wetland objectives and hence failure to implement them.

59. Although it appears to be a strongly sequential and thus constraining

process, in fact the maxim of the Critical Path is “Start anywhere, just get
started”. The value of applying this approach is that, even when a specific
implementation process seems to have broken down completely, either
at individual wetland level or at river basin level, it may not be necessary
to stop and begin the process from scratch again. In cases such as this, the
Critical Path can be used as an analytical tool to identify gaps, obstacles and
bottlenecks related to water or river basin management issues, solve the
most acute of these, and hopefully get implementation back on track and
progressing again.

5. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: scientific and

technical guidance at national level
5.1 Preparatory phase at national level
60. The national preparatory phase shown in Figure 1 is not strictly part of the
Critical Path at river basin level, but this national preparatory phase is an
essential factor for successful implementation of river basin management
plans. In this phase, Parties need to be concerned with primarily national-
level policy, legislative and Communication, Education, Participation and
Awareness (CEPA) initiatives related to integrated river basin management.
It is in the preparatory phase that a supportive, enabling environment
is established at national level, one that can ensure a relatively smooth
transition from planning to implementation at river basin level.

61. In general, national initiatives in the preparatory phase should be consistent

with the guiding principles set out in Box A, Principles for integration of the
conservation and wise use of wetlands into river basin management, particularly
with regard to flexibility. National policy and legislation should support the
development of solutions, objectives and plans at river basin level that are
best suited to local conditions and can meet the needs of local people.

62. National policy and legislation should be enabling, providing frameworks

for:

• consistency in processes for setting river basin management objectives

in different river basins;
• equity in access to ecosystem services associated with land and water
resources in river basins; and
• strategic direction that recognizes national interests which may extend
beyond river basin boundaries, such as biodiversity, water allocation,
agricultural production, and economic development.

63. Reviewing policy and legislation can be a lengthy process, especially if

substantial reform is indicated. Although such review can be undertaken in
parallel with the other implementation steps 1 to 5 at river basin level (see
Figure 1), implementation of a river basin management plan and associated

25
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Additional Information
Why is the national preparatory phase important?
In many cases, including some of those described in the forthcoming Ramsar Technical
Report on case studies of river basin management, specific projects may have been initiated
to address localised problems associated with water or wetlands through participatory,
integrated processes. These projects may have commenced in the absence of existing national
policy to support integrated river basin management. Sometimes, once the initial localised
problem has been addressed, these initiatives continue to evolve from the “bottom up” into
broader and more inclusive processes, which could be considered as prototypes of integrated
river basin management initiatives. Without a supportive and enabling environment in place
at the national level, however, many bottom-up river basin management processes do not
get beyond the planning phase, since there is no formal regulatory or institutional context
within which the plans can be implemented, even though there may be broad commitment to
implementation from the stakeholders in the river basin itself.

For example, environmental water requirements for wetlands in the river basin can be
assessed with the help of specialists, but without the ability to convert these assessments
to actual water allocations that are enforceable within the existing legal framework (which
may be conventional or customary), the assessed environmental water requirements are
not likely to be fully implemented. In addition, there should be a public institution in
place with the mandate and authority to implement plans that may require oversight and
possibly enforcement, for example, of water abstraction. Also, there will be little possibility
of funds and resources being available for implementation of river basin management plans
if there is no national supporting programme, or no legal mechanism for raising funds for
implementation within the river basin.

The national preparatory phase does not have to be completed before any initiatives can begin
at river basin level. Indeed this national attention to more integrated river basin approaches
is often triggered as a result of successful localised initiatives or projects at sub-basin or
small basin level. Equally often, however, the national attention is focused on institutional
development for more integrated river basin management approaches only after serious water
management problems have become evident (Cap-Net tutorial, http://www.archive.cap-net.
org/iwrm_tutorial/ p_20_1.htm).

Sometimes it is helpful to take a more iterative “learn-by-doing” approach and allow national
policy, legislation and institutional arrangements to be developed in parallel with a phase of
pilot implementation of integrated river basin management in one or two selected river basins.

Source: Information for this box contributed by Heather MacKay

wetland management plans will probably be compromised if this step is not

sufficiently advanced, and preferably substantially completed, by the time
implementation begins in the river basin (Step 7b in Figure 1).

64. There are four issues to be addressed in the national preparatory phase of
the Critical Path:

• policy and legislation in the relevant sectors, including processes for

cross-sectoral planning and harmonization of policies;
• institutional development;
• CEPA;

26
 Handbook 9: River basin management

• mechanisms for ensuring adequate capacity (financial, human,

technical) for implementation of river basin management processes.

65. These same issues are also addressed within the preparatory phase (Steps
1 and 2) at river basin level, but the focus at river basin level is much more
local.

5.2 Policy and legislation at national level

Sectoral and over-arching policy and legislation

66. The water sector is arguably the most important place to begin when
introducing policy shifts to promote and support integrated river basin
management. Water policies need to be harmonized with related policies
where they exist, such as National Wetland Policies, National Environment
Plans, National Biodiversity Strategies, international agreements and
legislative frameworks. The shift towards integrated water resources
management on a river basin scale also requires the development of
appropriate supporting economic instruments, incentives and tools that are
suited to particular national and river basin situations.

67. Complete revision of existing laws and policies is not always necessary for
initiating integrated river basin management approaches. More substantive
sectoral reform of policy and legislation can be undertaken in an incremental
manner later, but should be considered before river basin management
institutions are significantly advanced in the planning phase of their work.

68. If integrated river basin management approaches are being formally

See also Handbook 3,
introduced in a country for the first time, it is usually helpful to begin with
Laws and institutions
a desk-top review of existing sectoral policies and legislation, in order to
ensure that there is sufficient policy and legislative support for river basin
level initiatives to proceed and to resolve the most significant conflicts where
these are evident. Parties should ensure that relevant existing institutions are
given a mandate to commence the planning phase at river basin level (steps
1 to 6 of the Critical Path as shown in Figure 1).

69. The principles of identifying the supporting and conflicting elements of

policy and law apply equally to statutory as to customary law, although the
challenges of integrating statutory and customary systems and providing for
a pluralistic legal environment can be significant.

70. Initial desktop review of national policy and legislation should cover:

• policies and laws from various national sectors (such as water,

agriculture, environment, economic development, forestry and
forest management, social development) that positively support the
integration of wetland management with river basin management, and
that generally contain shared principles and objectives;

• policies, laws and regulations from various national sectors that conflict
with the objectives of integrating wetland management and wise use
into river basin management, and where revision or reform may be
necessary; and

27
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Additional Information
New trends in water legislation
South Africa

In 1994, South Africa embarked on a process of major reform of the water sector, including
water services as well as water resources management. The National Water Act of 1998 has far-
reaching implications for the protection and management of wetlands, as does the legislation.
South African water law recognizes riverine, wetland, estuarine, and groundwater ecosystems,
which must be protected in order to ensure maintenance of the desired goods and services that
water resources can provide.

A key legal measure for protection

of water resources and their
associated aquatic ecosystems
is the Reserve – defined in the
National Water Act as the quantity
and assurance of water, as well
as the quality of water, required
to fulfil basic human needs and
protect aquatic ecosystems to
secure ecologically sustainable
development. The water required
to meet the Reserve is the only
right remaining under South
African law – all other water use
is authorized through schedules,
general authorizations, or limited-
period licenses with various South Africa’s water law recognizes the need to use water
conditions attached. The Reserve resources sustainably for the benefit of people; subsistence
cultivation at the Kosi Bay Ramsar Site in South Africa. Photo:
for a water resource must be Donovan Kotze
determined and taken into account
before any water use can be considered for authorization.

For the protection of wetlands, the South African water legislation provides an immensely
valuable tool which complements environmental and conservation policy by ensuring
priority and protection for the water-related aspects of wetlands, and by formally recognizing
the important role that wetland ecosystems play in maintaining the full suite of goods and
services associated with water, not just water for abstraction and offstream use.

(Contributed by Heather MacKay, Water Research Commission, South Africa)

Tanzania

Tanzania’s National Water Policy of 2002 details the national strategy for sustainable
management of water resources and provision of water services. It includes among its
objectives the improved management of ecosystems and wetlands, integrated planning and
management of water resources, environmental flows, and the need for these in order to
maintain riparian biodiversity, wetland systems and aquatic life. Water is first allocated to
basic needs, followed by the environment and then the economy.

(Contributed by Petro Masolwa, WWF-Tanzania Programme Office)

28
 Handbook 9: River basin management

Scotland

The Scottish Parliament from its inception has had a keen interest in the water environment,
and an awareness of the need to reform various aspects of water law. In approaching the
transposition of the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD), two particular issues were the
lack of any statutory or comprehensive framework for river basin management and the lack
of any comprehensive abstraction control regime. The overall objective of the WFD is to
achieve “good” water quality, as defined, with the focus on ecological water quality as well as
chemical water quality.

The Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) is the environmental regulator and the
lead authority charged with taking forward the RBM process in Scotland, and there was a
view within SEPA that Scotland should be at the forefront of implementing the WFD. It was
decided to use primary legislation to implement the WFD, not Ministerial regulation as has
happened in England, and also to take the opportunity to reform water pollution control
legislation and move towards a “state of the art” regime. All uses of the water environment –
abstractions, impoundments, discharges, and river works – are now controlled in one set of
integrated rules, the Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2005
(CAR). The definition of “the water environment”“ in Scots law includes wetlands. This will
mean that water uses affecting wetlands will be controlled by CAR, just as they will where
they affect surface and ground waters.

(Contributed by Sarah Hendry, University of Abertay Dundee, Scotland)

• policies, laws and regulations that can be used for sanctions or

enforcement purposes during the implementation phase if necessary,
such as pollution prevention, land use planning controls, and resource
exploitation limitations.

71. The following specific issues should be considered and addressed in national
sectoral policy and legislation. In formulating effective overall policies on
these issues, Contracting Parties should consider the options for promoting
flexibility at river basin level where this is administratively feasible and
technically appropriate:

i) Determination, allocation and delivery of water for the maintenance

of all ecosystems, including meeting the requirements of marine and
coastal ecosystems;
ii) Issuance of permits for individual and bulk water abstraction and use;
iii) Domestic and industrial water use, treatment of effluent and the safe
discharge of effluent;
iv) Agricultural water use, mitigation of effects of large water management
structures, return of water, limitations of pesticide and other
agrochemical use;
v) Determination of water quality standards for use for various purposes;
vi) Rules and regulations regarding abstraction and use of groundwater;
vii) Economic and financial policies and instruments related to drinking
water supply, agriculture, industrial and other water uses;
viii) Land and water conservation;
ix) Integration of water and wetland biodiversity conservation imperatives
within the national socio-economic development agenda;
x) Invasive species that might have an impact on water or wetlands;

29
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

xi) Delegation of certain regulatory or enforcement responsibilities to

appropriate institutions at river basin level;
xii) Application of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA),
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), and Social Impact Assessment
(SIA) tools for spatial planning and development initiatives which
could impact on water resources and wetlands within river basins.

Cooperation and collaboration between sectors

72. Providing an enabling environment for collaboration, integration and joint

planning between the water and wetlands sectors, and indeed with other
sectors such as agriculture and land use, requires attention to the policy and
regulatory contexts in all related sectors.

73. Conflicting policy objectives should be resolved and mechanisms provided

in the policies and regulations of each sector to allow better integration of
decision-making and operational procedures, whether through consultative
or statutory processes.

74. Ideally, all the relevant sectors should coordinate their strategic planning at
national level around sets of shared policy objectives. These shared policy
objectives could include identification of specific river basins, sub-basins, or
wetlands that are essential for meeting national biodiversity conservation
targets, for sustaining rural livelihoods, or for urban water supply.

75. River basin organizations can be effective focal points for achieving both
the necessary vertical integration from basin level down to site level and the
horizontal integration between different agencies, land and water users, and
interest sectors. However, significant institutional reform or restructuring
is not a prerequisite for ensuring effective cross-sectoral cooperation at
national level, since much can be achieved through less formal means such
as the facilitation of cross-sectoral communication and agreement between
different sectors on how overlapping responsibilities will be shared or
assigned. It is essential that such agreements regarding cooperation and
coordination are formalised within the national governance system, for
example in joint White Papers or cross-sectoral Memoranda of Cooperation.

76. The following guidelines should be noted:

Guidelines Box B. Guidelines for Contracting Parties relating to national

policy and legislation for integrated river basin management
B1. Review national policy and legislation in all key sectors to identify the key barriers at
national level to integrated river basin management and promotion of integrated land
and water use planning/management, and work to overcome those barriers.

B2. Develop consultative processes at national and river basin level which involve
the various sectors and institutions responsible for, at least, water management,
environmental protection, agriculture, and forestry and forest management programmes.

B3. Develop a comprehensive national water policy or national river basin management
policy for integrating wetland conservation into river basin management to benefit
management goals, such as water supply, flood management, pollution mitigation and

30
 Handbook 9: River basin management

the conservation of biological diversity. Ensure that this policy addresses the regulation
of activities within river basins and the integration of wetland management into local
policies and strategies/action plans, and that where appropriate, the policy addresses
the need to avoid, minimize or compensate (for example, through conservation offsets)
possible negative effects on wetlands of activities within river basins.

B4. Incorporate wetland management issues into existing water or river basin management
policies and also into National Wetland Policies and similar instruments (see Resolution
VII.6 (also available in Ramsar Handbook 2, [4th] edition) and Resolution VIII.1 (Ramsar
Handbook [10, 4th edition])).

B5. Review existing legislation and, as appropriate, develop new legislation to facilitate
the implementation of key policy issues related to integrated river basin management,
including introduction of economic incentives and disincentives and regulation of
activities which may negatively affect water management. (See Resolution VII.7 on Laws
and Institutions in Ramsar Handbook 3, [4th] edition.)

B6. Develop policy and legislation as needed to support the application of appropriate
economic instruments and incentive measures (see Resolutions VII.15 and VIII.23), to
promote water demand management, water conservation and more efficient and socially
acceptable allocation of water resources.

B7. Develop mechanisms to facilitate the transfer of resources from downstream beneficiaries
to the protection and management of upper catchments and other critical areas.

B8. Ensure that water allocations for wetland ecosystems are addressed in national
water policy and legislation and in policy and regulation for Environmental Impact
Assessments related to water resource developments. (See Resolution VIII.1 and Ramsar
Handbook [10, 4th edition].)

B9. Review national policy relating to protected areas in order to strengthen the options for
protection of headwaters, upper catchments and critical wetland areas through their
inclusion in protected area systems.

B10. Review national policy relating to the needs of marine and coastal wetland ecosystems,
particularly in relation to their freshwater requirements and the potential for inclusion
in protected area systems, to ensure that these needs can be incorporated into river basin
management where appropriate.

5.3 Institutional development

77. One of the key challenges in implementing integrated approaches to river
basin management is the division of management responsibilities for
one river basin between different administrative authorities, resulting in
fragmented approaches to water resources planning and management. It
is important to realise that water resource planning and management is a
multidisciplinary, multi-sectoral process and it has therefore to be promoted
as a collaborative framework among all the relevant agencies operating
nationally and those involved within the river basin itself, as well as local
communities. The development of institutions and administrative units in
water resource management should preferably coincide with river basins’
boundaries instead of political boundaries.

31
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Additional Information
A single system of water management in the European Union: the Water
Framework Directive
On 23 October 2000, the European Union (EU) adopted its operational tool for a modern water
policy: Directive 2000/60/EC, commonly referred to as the “Water Framework Directive”
(WFD). The Directive has the following key aims:

• expanding the scope of water protection to all waters, surface waters and
groundwater,
• achieving “good status” for all waters by a set deadline,
• water management based on river basin management,
• “combined approach” of emission limit values and quality standards,
• getting the prices right,
• getting citizens involved more closely,
• streamlining legislation.

Since these objectives must be integrated for each river basin, the coordination of a number
of existing measures to tackle particular pollution problems at EU level is required. To this
end, detailed objectives are
established for the river basin.
Subsequently, an analysis of
human impact is conducted
to determine how far from
the objectives each body
of water is. At this stage, if
full implementation of the
existing legislation will solve
the problem, the objective
of the WFD is attained. If it
will not, then the Member
State must identify additional
measures to satisfy all
established objectives. These
might include stricter controls
on polluting emissions from
industry and agriculture or
urban waste sources. Floodplain restoration along the Isar River, Germany, pictured here, was
carried out by the Bavarian Water Management Agency and is very much
Historically, there has been a in line with the aims of the EU Water Framework Directive. Photo: Tobias
Salathé / Ramsar
dichotomy in approaches to
pollution control, with some
controls concentrating on what is achievable at source, through better technology, and some
dealing with the needs of the receiving environment, in the form of water quality standards.
A consensus has developed that both are needed in practice, and the WFD formalizes this
combined approach. It requires all source-based controls to be implemented as a first step,
and sets out a framework for developing further such controls. On the effects side, the WFD
coordinates all the environment objectives in existing legislation and provides the new overall
objective of good status for all waters. In some cases this may require additional measures. All
the elements of this analysis must be set out in a detailed account of how the objectives for the

32
 Handbook 9: River basin management

river basin (ecological, quantitative and chemical water status, protected area objectives) are
to be reached within the required timescale.

The River Basin Management Plan will include the results of the above analysis, specify
the river basin’s characteristics, and provide a review of the impact of human activity on
the status of waters in the basin, as well as an estimation of the effect of existing legislation
to meet the “good quality” objectives, and a set of additional measures, where needed. An
economic analysis of water use within the river basin must be carried out. This is to enable a
rational discussion on the cost-effectiveness of the various possible measures. Member States
are required to ensure that the price charged to water consumers reflects true costs, although
in less-favoured areas, deviations from this may be possible so that basic services are provided
at an affordable price.

It is essential that all interested parties are fully involved in preparatory discussions and in
the preparation of the River Basin Management Plan. The greater the transparency in the
establishment of objectives, imposition of measures, and reporting of standards, the greater
the care Member States will take to implement the legislation in good faith.

The Water Framework Directive rationalizes the EU water legislation by replacing earlier
Directives on a broad range of water issues. For more information, visit http://ec.europa.eu/
environment/water/index_en.htm.

Following extensive consultations, Water Framework Directive River Basin Management

Plans should have been available in all River Basin Districts across the EU by December 2009.
While there are delays in some parts of the EU, and in several countries consultations are still
ongoing, or the river basin management plans have not yet been established, the plans that
are available can be downloaded from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/participation/
map_mc/map.htm.

A number of international River Basin Districts (including the Danube, Elbe, Rhine, Ems,
Meuse, Scheldt/l’Escaut and Odra) have also published River Basin Management Plans, which
can be downloaded from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/participation/map_mc/map.
htm.

78. Realignment of administrative water resource management units to coincide

with river basin boundaries in this way may require substantive changes to
national policy in the water sector and also in the local government sector.
It may be more useful to take an incremental approach at national level,
which starts with enabling cooperative governance arrangements in order to
improve alignment of administrative boundaries and responsibilities with
river basin boundaries.

79. Initially, the relevant institutions and agencies can work out locally
suitable arrangements for cooperation and coordination, with input from
a consultative forum or fora composed of local stakeholders and interest
groups. This may suffice until such time as national policy and legislation is
in place to allow the formal constitution of river basin management agencies
within each river basin.

80. A formal river basin management agency would ideally be a public

sector institution with executive responsibilities for river basin planning
and management, to which certain agreed powers and duties have been

33
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Additional Information
Use of the terms “river basin management institutions” and “river basin
management agencies”
Integrated river basin management requires institutional development at levels from
international (for transboundary and shared river basins) down to highly localised. At
international level, institutions may include Joint Commissions, River Basin Authorities or
Boards. At local level, there may be a need for highly localised organizations responsible for
everyday operations and management within a sub-area of a basin, or for highly localised fora
through which stakeholders can interact with and participate in river basin management.

In this Guidance, the term “river basin management institutions” is a broad term covering
the full range of institutional structures and processes that might be involved in river basin
management, from international to local. When the text refers to a formally constituted
public organization whose mandate covers management of a single river basin, then the more
specific term “river basin management agency” is used.

Source: Information for this box contributed by Heather MacKay, STRP

delegated, for example to allocate water within the basin or to enforce local
water quality discharge standards.

81. Institutional development can be encouraged to progress gradually from

consultative fora to fully functional river basin management agencies in a
“bottom-up” way, or river basin management agencies can be established
through a more “top-down” process initiated and supported from national
level. In practice, countries have taken different approaches, depending
upon their capacity for implementation and on the degree of political
support for the development of river basin management institutions.

82. It is important for national policy and legislation to support flexibility in

institutional arrangements at river basin level, to allow for variability in
local conditions. Certain issues need to be considered in national policy and
legislation in order to ensure that river basin management institutions are
designed and established in a way that reflects local needs, priorities, and
biophysical and socio-economic situations, while also operating in a manner
that is consistent with national policy, planning, regulatory and fiscal
frameworks.

83. As noted in the previous section, establishing formal river basin

management organizations is not a prerequisite for success, but the lack
of some form of coordinating body can complicate the implementation of
integrated land and water management at basin level.

84. Parties should work towards national policy and legislation that:

• recognizes the critical role of wetlands in water resources management

and river basin management and the need to integrate the wise use of
all wetlands into river basin management;

• supports meaningful participation of local and national stakeholders in

planning, decision-making and implementation at river basin level;

34
 Handbook 9: River basin management

• promotes and ensures equity amongst stakeholders in planning and

decision-making related to access to land and water resources and
associated ecosystem services;

• describes the range of river basin management institutions that will

be needed to support integrated river basin management and clarifies
their roles, responsibilities and relationships with one another;

• ensures that river basin management institutions will have the

technical, infrastructural and human resource capacity to undertake the
necessary technical work programmes to support integrated river basin
management;

• ensures that river basin management institutions will have the

administrative capacity to discharge certain delegated powers and
duties, including for example setting and enforcement of regulation,
collection and management of revenues, fees and penalties associated
with water management within the basin;

• provides for accountability and adequate oversight of river

basin management agencies in the execution of their duties and
responsibilities;

• provides for the establishment of an independent body to consider

and adjudicate appeals in cases where stakeholders feel that agreed
procedures have not been followed.

85. The following guidelines should be noted:

Guidelines Box C. Guidelines for Contracting Parties for the establishment

of river basin management institutions and strengthening of institutional
capacity for integrated river basin management
C1. Promote the establishment of appropriate mechanisms to bring together all major
groups involved in river basin management such as government, municipalities, water
regulatory bodies, academic institutions, industries, farmers, local communities, NGOs,
etc., to participate in the management of river basins.

C2. Review existing legislation and, as appropriate, develop new policy and legislation to
facilitate the establishment of the necessary coordination and collaboration mechanisms
and river basin management institutions (See Resolution VII.7 on Laws and Institutions in
Ramsar Handbook 3, [4th] edition).

C3. Make multi-stakeholder river basin management institutions responsible for preparing
river basin management plans.

C4. Develop national policies and programmes to strengthen the capacity of river basin
management institutions (see also Guidelines Box F related to implementation capacity
and Guidelines Box D related to CEPA).

35
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

5.4 Communication, Education, Participation and Awareness (CEPA)

CEPA and participation in river basin management

86. The role of communication and awareness initiatives, at various levels from
policy and technical through to the general public, cannot be overestimated.
A free flow of information, appropriately packaged, greatly reduces
resistance to change and helps people to see the benefits of working towards
multiple social, environmental and economic objectives in a river basin.

87. An important element within the concept of integrated river basin

management is that planning and management institutions work with
and for the entire community of water users in a river basin, including
wetland users and wildlife, as well as relevant stakeholders outside the river
basin. In order to identify the needs and concerns of all water users, broad
participation in the planning and management of water resources is an
important goal.

88. This participation has “vertical” and “horizontal” aspects. Both need to be
addressed in the preparatory and planning phases of integrated river basin
management.

• Vertical participation refers to the structured participation of

representative stakeholder agencies, organizations, groups or
individuals in river basin management activities at different levels, i.e.
between the central river basin management institution at basin level
and stakeholders “on the ground”, and between the central river basin
management institution at basin level and national sectoral agencies, as
well as international bodies in the case of shared river basins.

• Horizontal participation refers to the structured participation of

agencies, organizations, groups or individuals across all the relevant
sectoral boundaries to develop shared objectives for river basin
management. Horizontal participation could occur, for example,
between the water, wetlands, agriculture, biodiversity and health
sectors, whether the participation is at village level between individual
citizens, at local government level between departments, at national
level between ministries, or at international level between missions.

89. CEPA (Communication, Education, Participation and Awareness) is an

See also Handbook 6,
essential underpinning aspect of effective participation in integrated river
Wetland CEPA
basin management by public sector institutions, interest groups, government
and non-government organizations, and local stakeholders. All Parties are
expected to have national wetlands CEPA programmes in place, and these
programmes should be reviewed to ensure that specific CEPA issues related
to effective integrated river basin management are addressed.

90. In the preparatory phase, it is necessary to consider what national policy,

programmes and possibly legislation might be needed to enable effective,
broad-based and equitable participation in river basin management.
Parties should ensure that both vertical and horizontal participation
and collaboration are formally supported in the mandates, planning
and decision-making processes and budgets of the various institutions
responsible for or participating in integrated river basin management.

36
 Handbook 9: River basin management

Vertical communication and participation: between institutions and local

people

91. The importance of consultation and participation in river basin management

and water resource planning is now widely recognized and accepted. A
management shift has taken place with a greater role being provided for
civil society. Recent experience has shown that effective collaboration
between agencies and local people increases the chance of success in
achieving and implementing effective river basin plans. Early consultations
with the public can also help identify previously unknown uses and values
of resources in the basin and help determine the relative importance of
different values.

92. The understanding of what consultation and participation mean in practice

differs however, and so does related terminology. In the context of IRBM,
stakeholder participation is considered the most widely accepted and most
inclusive term, as this can range from individuals and associations of
individuals up to (public and private) sectors, governments and government
institutions, to international organizations.

93. As Ramsar Handbook 5 on Participatory Skills says: “Stakeholders are taken

See also Handbook 7,
to be bearers of separate interests and/or contributions for the management
Participatory skills
of a wetland, with a particular focus on interest groups within local and
indigenous communities. By the same token, the government agencies
responsible for wetland management and local authorities may also be
considered as stakeholders.”

94. The Ramsar Handbook also provides the following guiding principles for
stakeholder participation:

• Incentives for local and indigenous people’s involvement and wise use
are essential: everyone must benefit in the long term (refer to Section
II, Chapter 2.1 of Ramsar Handbook [7, 4th edition] for more detailed
information)
• Trust among stakeholders is essential and must be developed (refer to
Section II, Chapter 2.2)
• Flexibility is required (refer to Section II, Chapter 2.3)
• Knowledge exchange and capacity building are fundamental (refer to
Section II, Chapter 2.4)
• Continuity of resources and effort is important (refer to Section II,
Chapter 2.5)

Horizontal communication and participation: across sectoral boundaries

95. In the past, there has been a general lack of awareness of the cross-sectoral
nature of water problems and the need for a new development paradigm
towards integrating the technical, economic, environmental, social and
legal aspects of water management. Awareness has significantly improved
recently, due in part to intensive communication and education efforts in
the water and wetlands sectors at global, national and local levels. However,
it is still challenging to work across sectoral boundaries, whether this is
at international level in a shared river basin, at national level between
the relevant policy sectors, or at river basin level between local sectoral
stakeholder groups.

37
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Additional Information
What is CEPA in river basin management ?
CEPA is an umbrella term that stands for Communication, Education, Participation and
Awareness. In most international cooperation agreements, CEPA is recognized as the set of social
instruments that is required to build understanding, support, and participation of different
stakeholders for policy issues and interventions.

The need for wetland CEPA was first recognized by the Ramsar Convention in the wise use
guidelines adopted at COP4 in 1990, and the first CEPA Resolution, Resolution VI.19, Education
and public awareness, was adopted at COP6 in 1996. Resolution VII.9, The Convention’s Outreach
Programme 1999-2002: Actions to promote communication, education and public awareness to support
implementation of the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971), adopted at COP7, recognized
CEPA as a central element in implementing the Convention, and its annexed guidelines assisted
Parties in developing a strategic approach to wetland CEPA during the triennium. See more
information in Ramsar Handbook 6: Wetland CEPA.

What role does CEPA play in river basin management?

• CEPA is strategic and effective when it supports policy, and should therefore be
planned as an integral aspect of any project, programme or policy, preferably from the
beginning.
• CEPA is a process and requires flexibility and commitment for long periods of time.
• CEPA is not just education or information provision (although these are part of it): it
is about building trust and relationships, networks, which may last much longer and
serve multiple purposes when other wetlands or river basin management issues arise.
• CEPA is not a panacea and never functions effectively as a standalone intervention in
river basin management – it should always be planned and used in combination with
other instruments, such as economic, legal or technical.

Ramsar Handbook 7, 4th ed., in Section II, demonstrates how both local and indigenous people
and government can benefit from participatory management arrangements. Development of trust
among stakeholders is essential. The Okavango case study [Ramsar Technical Report on river
basin management case studies] provides good demonstration material on this, as stakeholder
consultation and dialogue have been a cornerstone of the planning in the Okavango River Basin.
Without it and without the proper tools, the objectives of planning and the following of the
principles of accountability and ownership would have been difficult to achieve.

Further reading on CEPA and stakeholder participation:

Ramsar CEPA Planning Tool. Ramsar is currently developing new guidance on planning for
CEPA interventions. This new tool should provide authorities as well as wetland site managers
with support on how to develop the most effective approach for wetland CEPA. The tool is
available on the Ramsar Web site at http://www.ramsar.org/pdf/outreach_actionplanning_guide.
pdf.

CEPA Toolkit. IUCN’s Commission on Education and Communication (CEC) recently

developed a CEPA toolkit for the Convention on Biological Diversity. While primarily targeted
at professionals charged with implementing National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans, the
toolkit is a dynamic resource for local adaptation and many lessons can be learned for the water
and wetlands sectors as well (www.cepatoolkit.org).

IWRM Tutorial. Cap-Net is an international network for capacity building in Integrated Water
Resources Management. It is made up of a partnership of autonomous international, regional

38
 Handbook 9: River basin management

and national institutions and networks committed to capacity building in the water sector.
CAP-Net provides a tutorial on IWRM, freely accessible at: www.archive.cap-net.org/iwrm_
tutorial/ mainmenu.htm.

The Cap-Net site provides links to several other resources, such as on Change and Stakeholder
participation. Just two examples:

Electronic learning guidebook on Participatory Irrigation Management http://www.cap-net.org/

captrainingmaterialsearchdetail.php?TM_ID=13>

Gender Mainstreaming in Integrated Water Resources Management - Training of Trainers

Package http://www.cap-net.org/captrainingmaterialsearchdetail.php?TM_ID=101

Source: Information for this box contributed by Gwen van Boven, SPAN Consultants

96. Cross-sectoral communication is particularly important for the water and

wetlands sectors. Ramsar’s water-related guidance, particularly on river
basin management and water allocation and management (see Ramsar
Handbooks [9 and 10] and the forthcoming Ramsar Technical Reports on
environmental water requirements), is aimed at providing supporting
material for the Ramsar implementing authorities in each Contracting Party
to use in persuading or influencing the water sector to change the way they
do, or have done, river basin management so as to better maintain and
protect wetland ecosystem services.

97. Most wetland managers at site or country level, however, may not be fully
familiar with such daily operational practices of river basin management,
and they will have difficulty assisting the water managers to integrate the
water requirements of wetland ecosystems into water resources planning
and to implement these requirements in water management practices.

98. Frequently the two sectors fail to find common ground due, not to a
mismatch in values or intentions, but rather to an inability to describe,
quantify and communicate interests, objectives and operational
requirements. In order to ensure understanding and foster collaboration
and cooperation between sectors, wetland managers and water resource
managers must find a common language in which to set shared objectives
for water resources and wetlands.

99. Bridging this particular communication gap between sectors often requires
specialist communication, education and public awareness efforts at
technical and policy levels, in addition to ongoing CEPA initiatives aimed at
general awareness amongst the public and broad stakeholder groups.

100. Wetland managers need sufficient understanding of the technical and

operational aspects of water resources management to understand:

i) first, how to articulate and quantify the requirements of wetland

ecosystems using scientific and hydrological parameters which are
compatible with those used in river basin management; and

ii) second, how to work with water managers to develop basin operating
rules, including location of new water infrastructure and water offtakes,

39
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Additional Information
Cross-sectoral collaboration and participation in river basin management
“If you want to do it fast, do it alone; if you want to do it well, do it together”.

If the process is managed well, participation can bring benefits to all involved parties, both
government and non-government, at international level or among local interest groups.
Whichever extent of participation is chosen, some guidelines apply that will help streamline the
process as effectively and efficiently as possible.

Be pro-active. Often, project design does not include details about which people or institutions
will be involved, at what stages, or what their roles and responsibilities will be. However, in
every RBM context, which should by nature be integral and cross-sectoral, any project or policy
will benefit from a careful planning of the participatory process, so that it will optimally support
the key moments in that project or policy. Planning ahead will allow for pro-active inclusion
of people and institutions, help bring their knowledge and experiences on board from an early
stage onwards, and ensure that their needs and interests are integrated in the final design of the
approach, thus avoiding surprises during its implementation. In other words, the benefits of
pro-active design of participatory processes are plentiful. The Okavango case study illustrates the
effects of participatory approaches being part of the project design [see Ramsar Technical Report
on river basin management case studies].

Communicate. Consider the following situations. While the wetland manager may expect to
fully take part in decisions on water management, the water authorities may have planned
to consult him only on the ecological needs and then to take their decisions by themselves. A
provincial government may announce a participatory approach in groundwater management,
until it appears that the farmers want something else than is planned in the provincial capital.
The Ministry of Environment may wish to integrate water- and environment-related issues,
only to find out that the Ministry of Water has already concluded its next five-year plan, and no
further changes can be made.

In all cases, we may assume that all parties worked with good intentions, but they started out
with different expectations about the extent to which different stakeholders could participate
in planning and decision making. This created misunderstandings and disappointment, and a
loss of trust in the possible outcome of the cooperation. Integration of issues is not achieved, and
beyond that, this misunderstanding may lead to a deterioration of relationships at a broader scale
as well.

Managing expectations is just as important as the participatory process itself. Communicate

clearly about the process that is envisioned: who will be involved at which stage, and what will
be each party’s power of decision-making? Here we find ourselves at the crossroads of CEPA and
participation. With CEPA, we can make sure that people know when they can influence decision-
making and when they cannot. As long as everyone understands the possibilities as well as the
limitations of their involvement, the risk that conflicts will arise over different expectations will
be minimal, and the acceptance of these limitations will often be surprisingly high.

Participate across sectors. Most frequently, stakeholder participation is organized along vertical
lines: national governments consulting with regional management boards, or water associations
with their local members. Often these types of participation focus on technical and operational
matters. However, participation may also refer to horizontal lines: integrating cross-sectoral
competencies would require such cooperation, as would mainstreaming of environment in water
management policy. Initially this often relates more to managerial and diplomatic levels that need
to ensure joint decision-making across sectors or departments, as a prerequisite for cross-sectoral

40
 Handbook 9: River basin management

implementation of integrated approaches in water and wetlands management. Organizing

such cross-sectoral stakeholder participation often requires the establishment of mechanisms to
bring people together, as these usually do not traditionally exist. These mechanisms could take
the form of a joint working group, a cooperation platform, or others.

Participate internally. Internal institutional operations greatly influence coordination with

external partners. For example, when one of the participating stakeholders keeps sending
new representatives to project meetings because of internal problems with continuity, it could
become very difficult for the project to build up joint approaches and experiences. Also, when
a representative comes without a mandate from his organization, his contribution may not be
as constructive. Likewise, if the representative finds his colleagues and bosses uninterested in
what he has agreed during the meeting, it is unlikely that his organization will act according to
these agreements. These examples show how internal commitment and internal communication
is essential for external success. Good exchange, learning and sharing within each participating
institution or organization is therefore required for successful communication and cooperation
with partners.

Source: Information for this box contributed by Gwen van Boven, SPAN Consultants

as well as flow regimes that represent the optimal allocation of water

between multiple uses, including ecosystem maintenance.

101. Similarly, water managers, particularly those working at the river basin
scale, require knowledge and quantitative understanding not only of the
water resource functions and ecosystem services of wetlands, and how to
deliver the water required to maintain these services, but also of [the ways
in which various scientific parameters are used to describe ecosystem water
requirements, in terms of the quantity, quality, timing and geographic
location in the watershed of those water requirements]. The Ramsar
Technical Reports on environmental water requirements being prepared by
the Scientific and Technical Review Panel (STRP) will provide more detail
and examples of these issues.

102. The following guidelines should be noted:

Guidelines Box D. Guidelines for Contracting Parties on national policy

and programmes for Communication, Education, Participation and
Awareness (CEPA) activities related to integrated river basin management
(Refer also to Resolutions VII.8 and [X.8])

D1. Promote the protection and restoration of wetland areas, and their biodiversity, within
river basins.

D2. Design and implement communication, education, participation, and awareness

programmes on the importance of wetland conservation to support water resources
management, consistent with the guidelines set out in the Convention’s CEPA
Programme 2009-2015 (Resolution X.8).

41
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

D3. Provide training for water resources managers and wetland managers at all levels to
understand and implement the concepts of integrated water resource management and
integrated river basin management, including the importance of wetlands in river basin
management.

D4. Develop awareness campaigns to minimise activities that lead to the degradation of river
systems, such as excessive and incorrect use of inappropriate pesticides and fertilisers,
poor sanitation, drainage of wetlands, and clearance of forests in the river basin.

D5. Identify, design and implement community-based demonstration projects and provide
additional economic incentives to the local communities to encourage river basin
management practices that integrate wetland conservation and wise use.

D6. Document and promote sustainable wetland and river basin management practices
developed through traditional knowledge and skills.

D7. Promote appropriate communication, education, participation, and awareness

programmes as effective tools for integrated management of river basins. (See Resolution
X.8 on the Convention’s CEPA Programme 2009-2015.)

D8. Support capacity building of community-based organizations and NGOs to develop

skills for participating in monitoring and management of resources within river basins.

Guidelines Box E. Guidelines for Contracting Parties on national policy

related to stakeholder participation in integrated river basin management
(Refer also to Resolution VIII.36: Participatory Environmental Management as a tool for
management and wise use of wetlands)

E1. Develop consultative processes which involve the various sectors and institutions
responsible for water management, environmental protection, and agriculture (at least)
in harmonization of their policies and national sectoral plans to address the conservation,
utilization and management of water resources and wetlands.

E2. Ensure that national water policy provides mechanisms to identify and involve
stakeholders in planning and management of river basins and their wetlands, including
review of land tenure arrangements where this might be necessary.

E3. Develop appropriate national policies and programmes to support and facilitate: i) the
active participation of stakeholders; ii) responses by river basin management institutions
to the particular needs of stakeholders; and iii) sharing of authority and responsibility for
resource management according to arrangements that are agreed by all parties.

5.5 Capacity for implementation of integrated river basin

management
103. If river basin management agencies and wetland management institutions
do not have sufficient capacity to undertake planning and implementation
activities, there could be significant delays between the end of the planning
phase and the start of the implementation phase at river basin level.

42
 Handbook 9: River basin management

104. The longer such implementation is delayed after the planning has been
substantially completed, the greater will be the risk of failure of a river basin
management initiative, and the greater the dissatisfaction of people who
have a stake in the implementation.

105. The following are aspects of overall capacity for implementation which
should be considered in the preparatory phase at national level and in the
planning phase at river basin level (Step 6 in Figure 1):

• Infrastructural capacity includes the physical infrastructure such as

pumps, pipes, dams, treatment works, gauging stations, monitoring
equipment and networks, and other tools for managing land, water
resources, and wetlands in river basins.

• Institutional capacity includes not only the establishment of the

necessary institutions, the granting of their mandates, powers and
duties, and inter-institutional arrangements, but also the necessary
administrative infrastructure such as buildings, communication
networks, administrative procedures, and business processes.

• Competency includes principally the human resources needed

to implement integrated river basin management, as well as the
integration of wetlands specifically into river basin management.
Development of competency should address not only the skills,
knowledge and attitudes of personnel but also longer term training and
capacity building needs in the relevant education sectors. (Also see the
relevant sections and guidelines related to CEPA.)

• Information and knowledge capacity includes information systems

for collection and management of data collected through international,
national and river basin monitoring networks; the use of this data
to generate information for management purposes as well as for
increasing general awareness; and the application of knowledge to
develop, adapt and refine river basin management activities and the
way in which wetlands are integrated into such activities.

• Financial capacity for implementation is essential and underpins the

preceding aspects of implementation capacity. Early consideration
should be given to how river basin management activities, and
the integration of wetlands into these activities, will be supported
financially, and how the financial sustainability of river basin
management institutions will be assured. Decisions on which
mechanisms will be used to provide long-term financial support for
activities and institutions, at both national and river basin levels,
will significantly determine the design of river basin management
institutions; their administrative, infrastructural and human resources
capacity; the scope of their operations, powers and duties; and
ultimately the state of wetlands, land and water resources in the river
basins for which these institutions are responsible.

106. In planning for implementation, it is necessary to consider all the aspects

of implementation capacity described in the preceding paragraph. Lack
of these capacities, or weak capacity in one or more of these aspects, can

43
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

pose severe constraints to wetland management, particularly in developing

countries.

107. Public sector capacity can potentially be complemented by empowering

local people to plan, manage and control the wetlands in their own
landscape. This requires the building of awareness of wetland values and
the roles of wetlands in the wider river basin, and also requires willingness
on the part of local people to take responsibility for their wetlands and for
the land and water use practices that can affect wetlands. Strong CEPA
programmes, with extension support in the field, are essential for sustaining
such local capacity. (Also see the relevant sections and guidelines related to
CEPA).

108. The necessary enabling policy, legislation and financial mechanisms should
be put in place at national level to support the development of capacity for
implementation. These mechanisms should be agreed upon and established
in good time, so as not to delay implementation at river basin level.

109. The following guidelines should be noted:

Guidelines Box F. Guidelines for Contracting Parties for establishing

adequate implementation capacity for integration of wetlands into river
basin management
F1. Develop supporting policy or initiatives to secure adequate financial resources for
ensuring effective operation of organizations charged with planning and management of
water resources, river basin management and wetland conservation and, as appropriate,
seek resources from alternative sources and financial arrangements.

F2. Recognizing that socio-economic development is often critically dependent on the

protection of aquatic ecosystems, encourage different sectors (such as conservation,
water, economic development) to collaborate in allocating or securing sufficient resources
to implement policies and legislation for integrated water resources management and
integrated river basin management.

F3. Establish national policy and regulatory mechanisms so that where appropriate,
river basin management institutions can raise or have access to the funds needed for
integrated river basin management, or alternatively they can seek these resources from
the development assistance community.

F4. Assess the competency and human resources requirements for implementation of
river basin management and wetland sectors, and ensure that appropriate training
and capacity-building programmes and policies are established in order to meet these
requirements in a timely manner.

F5. Promote the inclusion of staff within river basin management institutions who have
expertise in the ecological functions of wetlands.

F6. Strengthen and maintain the capabilities of local institutions (universities, research
institutions, and water management agencies) to undertake comprehensive water
demand assessments which include ecological water demands, as well as to undertake
other scientific and technical studies needed to support integration of wetland
conservation and wise use into river basin management.

44
 Handbook 9: River basin management

6. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: scientific and

technical guidance at river basin level
110. This section provides descriptions and explanations of each of the major
components of the Critical Path at river basin level (see Figures 1 and 2) and
covers:

• the preparatory phase - Steps 1 and 2,

• the planning phase - Steps 3, 4, 5 and 6,
• the implementation phase - Steps 7a and 7b, and
• the review phase - Steps 8 and 9.

6.1 General sequencing in the preparatory and planning phases

111. The activities in Steps 1 (policy, regulatory and institutional contexts), 2
(CEPA and stakeholder participation process), 3 (inventory, assessment and
technical studies), 4 (setting priorities) and 5 (setting objectives) are arranged
in a general sequence of initiation. However, in practice most of these steps
can be undertaken in parallel, as long as all are at an adequate level of
completion prior to Step 6 (water and land use management plan for the
basin).

112. An obstacle can arise if the activity of agreeing on, and setting priorities for,
wetlands in a basin (Step 4) does not include all the relevant stakeholders,
including water and land users, as well as responsible agencies or
authorities, in a legitimate decision-making process. Thus it is essential that
policy, regulatory and institutional issues be resolved such that the relevant
authorities can work together, and that a credible, inclusive stakeholder
participation process can be established and sustained, with stakeholders
having been helped to understand the relevant technical and strategic issues.

113. Inventories and specialist desk and field studies, covering ecological,
hydrological, economic and social aspects (Step 3), can commence at an early
stage in the process. It should be recognized, however, that the level of detail
and resolution required in these studies will be influenced by the processes
of determining priorities and quantitative objectives in Steps 4 and 5, which
in turn will require a certain degree of numerical confidence, depending
on the sensitivity and importance of the wetlands and the associated water
resources. If the priorities that are set for wetlands in a basin are not practical
or feasible, for example in terms of the amount of water that must be
released from a dam, then this will probably lead to failure to recognize the
wetland objectives and hence failure to implement them. Hence there may
be some iteration required between Steps 3, 4 and 5.

114. If some or all of Steps 1 to 5 have not been addressed sufficiently before
commencing the development of a management plan for the basin in Step
6, then it is likely that wetland requirements, particularly for water quantity
and water quality, will not be recognized adequately. This could prove an
obstacle to implementation of wetland management plans at site level.

115. This obstacle can be overcome by returning to undertake Steps 1 to 5 and

then coming back to Step 6. However, this does not necessarily mean
stopping the whole planning process in order to fill in the missing steps:
rather, the missing steps can be addressed by desktop or rapid field study,

45
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

on the understanding that the necessary detail can and will be provided in
the next iteration of the Critical Path cycle.

6.2 Preparatory phase at river basin level

Step 1a: Establishing supporting policy, legislation and regulation at river
basin level

What is this step and why is it important?

116. The purpose of this step is to ensure that any policies, legislation and
regulation that may be relevant at river basin level, such as those
administered by local governments, are aligned in such a way as to support
integration of wetlands into river basin management and the collaborative
management that is required for successful implementation.

117. As is true for the national preparatory phase, complete revision of all local
policy and regulation related to wetlands, land use and water resources
is not necessary in order to initiate planning for integrated river basin
management. However, there should be adequate supporting policy and
regulation to ensure that all elements of the agreed river basin management
plan can be implemented once the planning phase has been completed.

118. As a minimum, an initial desktop review should be conducted of all the

relevant overlapping policy and regulation that is operative in the river
basin, ranging from national to local, including customary practices at
community level if relevant, and any relevant international agreements in a
shared river basin. The review should also include existing spatial planning
policies, land use plans and water resource management plans for parts of
the basin or the entire basin.

119. Inconsistent or conflicting policy and regulatory elements should be

identified, so that these can be revised in time to ensure a smooth later
transition from the planning phase to the implementation phase. As the
planning phase progresses, and especially in Steps 4, 5 and 6, the emerging
elements of the integrated river basin management plan should be checked
once more against the review of local policy and regulation in order to
ascertain whether any additional revision of local policy, regulation and
planning procedures may be needed to support implementation of the
proposed river basin plan.

How does this step relate to others in the Critical Path?

120. Step 1 at river basin level can proceed before the national preparatory
phase has begun, or the two may be undertaken in parallel. However, at
least some attention to the national policy and legislative environment is
likely to be necessary, to ensure that all the necessary aspects of a river
basin management plan can be implemented and that suitable institutional
arrangements (including funding) can be established at river basin level to
support such implementation.

Who is involved in this step?

46
 Handbook 9: River basin management

121. This step may be initiated by a national government agency, if the river
basin management process is being led by a national policy initiative or if a
river basin management agency has not yet been established.

122. Alternatively, this step is sometimes initiated by a responsible agency

at river basin level, such as a local government concerned about the
management of the river basin or a wetland management agency or
organization concerned about the management of a specific wetland or
wetlands in the river basin.

123. In some cases, this step may be initiated by a non-government organization,

a community organization, a particular interest group or a research group,
possibly with external donor support. However, more formal revisions to
legislative, regulatory, planning or administrative procedures will require
the participation and commitment of the responsible local and national
government agencies.

Additional information and guidance related to this step

124. Refer to Handbooks 2, 3 and [9] ([4th edition, 2010]) for further detailed
guidance, and see also Resolution VIII.23, Incentive measures as tools for
achieving the wise use of wetlands.

125. The following guidelines should be noted:

Guidelines Box G. Guidelines for Contracting Parties on establishing

supporting policy, legislation and regulation at river basin level
Parties should also refer to guidelines in Box B for national policy and legislation.

G1. Review all relevant sectoral plans, policies and regulations that are in effect at local and
river basin level, including local customary practices and laws, and review land tenure
arrangements where this might be necessary, in order to identify the key barriers to
integrated river basin management and promotion of integrated land and water use
planning/management, and work to overcome those barriers. (See also Guideline B1.)

G2. Develop consultative processes which involve the various sectors and institutions within
the river basin who are responsible for water management, environmental protection,
agriculture, and land use. (See also Guideline B2.)

G3. Incorporate wetland management issues into existing management plans, policies and
regulations relevant to the river basin, and also incorporate water resource management
issues into management plans and policies for wetlands in the river basin. (See also
Guideline B4.)

G4. Within an appropriate national policy framework, develop and implement locally
applicable incentive measures to promote water conservation and more efficient
and socially acceptable allocation of water resources within the river basin. (See also
Guideline B6.)

G5. Within an appropriate national policy framework, develop and implement mechanisms
to facilitate the transfer of resources from downstream beneficiaries to the protection and
management of upper catchments and other critical areas. (See also Guideline B7.)

47
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

G6. Ensure that water allocations for wetland ecosystems are addressed in water resources
plans and water allocation schedules for the river basin. (See also Guideline B8.)

G7. Ensure that the needs of marine and coastal wetland ecosystems, particularly in relation
to their freshwater requirements, are addressed in river basin management plans and
water allocation schedules where appropriate. (See also Guideline B10.)

Step 1b: Establishing appropriate institutional arrangements at river basin

level

What is this step and why is it important?

126. The purpose of this step is to ensure that appropriate institutional capacity
is established within the basin to plan for and implement integrated river
basin management, whether through the formation of an entirely new
organization or through a collaborative arrangement between existing
organizations and groups with overlapping responsibilities and interests.

127. New institutional arrangements, at international, national or local levels,

are sometimes politically difficult to implement from scratch, and it is
necessary and generally better to begin working with the existing range
of responsible and interested institutions. Memoranda of cooperation, or
cooperative policy, can be used to formalize relationships when necessary.
As relationships and understanding grow, the structure and function of new
institutions, which would be more effective for implementing integrated
river basin management, should become clear. Subsequent institutional
reform and restructuring will then have more support.

128. Since every river basin is different in its socio-economic, biophysical and
governance aspects, there is no single “right” institutional arrangement
for river basin management. Ideally, there should be a consistent national
framework and policy for establishment, oversight and operation of river
basin management institutions at river basin level, but local flexibility
should be encouraged.

How does this step relate to others in the Critical Path?

129. Much of the planning phase in the Critical Path can be undertaken
without a river basin management agency necessarily being in place, since
collaborative agreements, memoranda of cooperation and other cooperative
processes can suffice. However, before the implementation phase (Step 7b)
commences, a suitable institution or group of collaborating institutions
should preferably be in place at river basin level, with delegated authority
where appropriate, and with the necessary resources (including human
resources, infrastructure, and funding) having been secured, to ensure the
viability and sustainability of these institutions.

Who is involved in this step?

130. Experiences from the case studies (see Ramsar Technical Report on river
basin management) indicate that a common strategy when initiating
this step is for an independent agent to act as a facilitator amongst
all the relevant institutions at basin and local levels, to assist them in
communication and collaboration across sectoral boundaries. Typically, an

48
 Handbook 9: River basin management

independent agent might be a contracted consultant, a non-governmental

organization representative, a donor agency staff person or consultant,
or a civil society or community organization representative. Using an
independent agent can be a very effective approach for getting all the
responsible organizations and groups together and beginning to work
collaboratively.

131. However, in many cases, independent facilitation in the early stage of

Step 1b is supported by time-limited grant funding through the national
government, an external donor, or a community-based group. While
this provides significant flexibility and efficiency, it can also leave
implementation very vulnerable if the river basin management plan has
not been taken up formally into the policy mandates and business cycles of
the existing responsible institutions, or if suitable public sector institutional
capacity has not been firmly established, once the grant funding ceases.

Additional information and guidance related to this step

132. Refer to Handbooks 2, 3, [7 and 9] [4th edition, 2010] for further detailed
guidance.

133. The following guidelines should be noted:

Guidelines Box H. Guidelines for Contracting Parties on establishing

appropriate institutional arrangements at river basin level
Parties should also refer to guidelines in Box C related to national policy and programmes for
establishment of river basin management institutions.

H1. Establish appropriate mechanisms to bring together all major relevant groups, such as
government, municipalities, water regulatory bodies, academic institutions, industries,
farmers, local communities, NGOs, etc., to participate in the management of the river
basin. (See also Guideline C4.)

H2. Develop and implement programmes to strengthen the capacity of river basin
management institutions (see also Guidelines Box F related to implementation capacity;
Guidelines Boxes D and I related to CEPA).

Step 2: Developing Communication, Education, participation and

Awareness (CEPA) programmes and stakeholder participation
processes at river basin level

What is this step and why is it important?

134. The purpose of this step is to design, plan and initiate a broad programme
of stakeholder participation at river basin level, supported by a range of
targeted as well as ongoing CEPA activities and products. The objectives of
such a programme would be:

• to ensure that stakeholder interests, particularly those related to

wetlands and wetland services, are identified and addressed in river
basin management policy, planning, decision-making, implementation,
monitoring and review; and

49
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Additional Information
Task Force on Integrated River Basin Management for the Yangtze River
The Yangtze is the third longest river in the world, with a length of 6,300 kilometres and a
catchment of 1.8 million km2. It runs through eleven provinces of China, and more than 400
million people depend upon it for their livelihoods and well-being.

Nonetheless, the Yangtze is undergoing serious threats from a number of directions. The key
issues include the loss of natural wetland functions due to fragmentation and degradation;
upstream erosion leading to accelerated downstream siltation; lack of knowledge amongst
decision-makers about the functions and values of wetlands; the failure of development and
land-use policies; and various institutional conflicts.

After the devastating floods of 1996 and 1998 (in 1998 alone, more than 4,000 people lost their
lives and damage reached an estimated US$ 25 billion), the Chinese government issued the so-
called ‘32 character policy’ aimed at reducing flood threats by working with nature rather than
fighting it. Interventions include:

• A ban on logging in the upper catchments;

• Returning cultivated steep slopes to forest;
• Relocating settlements from flood-prone areas to higher ground safe from flooding;
• Restoring wetlands in the Yangtze floodplain;
• Reinforcing embankments;
• Maintaining river courses, e.g. by dredging.

River systems are by nature integrated systems, but too frequently they have been managed
by many isolated stakeholders. Cross-sectoral and cross-boundary conflicts are often the main
obstacles to river basin management. The Yangtze is a good example, because there are four river-
wide authorities: the Yangtze River Resource Commission, the Yangtze Fishery Management

Ensuring the wise use of the montane Sanjiangyuan Wetlands, pictured here, one of several sources
of water for the Yangtze river, will contribute to the integrated management of the Yangtze Basin.
Photo: Yang Xing.

50
 Handbook 9: River basin management

Commission, the Yangtze Navigation Commission, and the Yangtze Water Resource Protection
Bureau.

In order to remedy this situation, in 2002 the Government of China established an Integrated
River Basin Management Task Force for the purpose of promoting the public welfare of
river basins in China through better governance of water resources, ecosystem management
and biodiversity conservation, and environment management through information sharing,
demonstration and public participation.

The IRBM Task Force, composed of six national and six international experts in relevant subjects,
was given a number of priority tasks intended to reach this goal – 1) assess existing laws and
regulations and make recommendations to state legislation authorities; 2) review existing river
basin management practices and assess their coordination, and report both at the national level
and on the Yangtze River basin in particular; 3) promote relevant economic tools such as water
rights, water pricing, subsidies, compensation, tradable permits, and green taxation; 4) promote
stakeholder participation and community involvement; 5) provide a platform for information
sharing, and finally, 6) establish and promote communication tools including workshops and
publications.

The approach to coordination that emerges from this IRBM Task Force will be an important test
of China’s capacity for institutional change. Elsewhere in the world IRBM has been a decades-
long undertaking to break down institutional barriers and address system-wide management
needs, and most countries are just beginning to take the kind of ecosystem-based approach being
encouraged by this Task Force. This is a path-breaking effort within China, and hopes are very
high for its success.

At the end of 2004, the task force concluded its mission by making four recommendations to
the State Council calling for: institutional and legislative development; public participation in
decision-making; financial incentives; and innovation in technology development. To facilitate
the implementation of the recommendations, the Yangtze Forum was established. This provides a
platform for all major stakeholders to consult with each other on the recommendations as well as
to share information and knowledge on the development of the river basin.

• to promote, facilitate and support the meaningful participation of

stakeholders in all aspects of river basin management.

How does this step relate to others in the Critical Path?

135. Although, for convenience, this is noted as a single discrete step in Figure 1,
in fact the participation of interested, affected and accountable stakeholders
is a process that should continue throughout the cycle of the Critical Path.

136. At different steps, different stakeholders may need to be involved, and

the process may take various forms from awareness-raising through
participatory appraisal, consultation, participation and formal negotiation.
For example, in Steps 1a and 1b, the principal stakeholders may be the
relevant government and regulatory agencies, perhaps also including
concerned non-governmental and community groups. In Step 4, individual
water users and landowners may be involved, along with sectoral agencies
and conservation groups, in negotiation and consensus-seeking processes.

137. Participation is included in Step 2 because the participatory process should

be designed early in the cycle and properly resourced. Training, as well as
the preparation of information and learning materials, may be needed well

51
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Additional Information
CEPA in the river basin management cycle
Policy or project making at basin level is a cyclical, iterative process of – generally – four main
stages. These stages could be linked to the Critical Path steps as follows:

1. Identification phase / Agenda setting - refer to Critical Path Steps 1, 2 and 3

2. Formulating policy - CP Steps 4, 5 and 6
3. Implementation - CP Steps 7a and 7b
4. Management and control - CP Steps 8 and 9

During each stage, CEPA can play a different role to support the specific requirements at that
moment in the project or policy. The managers of the project can use this cycle to decide which
CEPA techniques or approaches would be best to use. This can be done from the beginning of the
process, but if one has already progressed to a later stage, this cycle could still provide guidance.

Phase 1: Identification of the issue: agenda setting (Critical Path Steps 1, 2, 3)

CEPA serves to identify problems early by listening to people. Is the issue equally important
to all stakeholders? How do they perceive the challenges ahead? Does everyone share the
same interests or may issues arise over conflicting interests? During this phase, CEPA can help
create awareness of a problem and draw attention both to the need for solutions and to the
limitations of the context in which any solutions will have to be implemented. When linking
this to the Critical Path flow, we see that CEPA could support setting the policy, regulatory and
institutional context (CP step 1), help to design and initiate the stakeholder participation process
(CP Step 2), and support inventory work (CP Step 3).

CEPA methods used:

• Bringing stakeholders together
• Stakeholder consultations
• Surveys (opinion, attitude)
• Media analysis
• Information meetings and briefings

Phase 2: Formulating the policy or project (Critical Path Steps 4, 5 and 6)

At this stage, CEPA can serve to raise awareness or understanding of the policy proposals and
the issues. Based on the scientific and social assessments that have been done, objectives can be
set and solutions proposed. CEPA can help explain why certain interventions are not possible
and others are necessary, explain what the implications of selected approaches will be, and help
identify the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders. In this way, CEPA would support
priority setting (CP step 4), management objective setting (CP step 5), and the development of
water and land use management plans (CP step 6).

Methods:
• KAP (Knowledge, Attitude, Practice) surveys
• Consensus negotiation
• Communication strategy design
• Integration of communication in mix of policy instruments

Phase 3: Implementing the policy or project (CP Steps 7a and 7b)

The aim of communication is now to inform target groups on how to proceed, to communicate
the core message of the policy (or project) and accompanying measures. CEPA would here

52
 Handbook 9: River basin management

support CP Step 7a (Implementation at wetland level) as well as CP Step 7b (implementation

at basin level). The CEPA strategy that was designed under phase 2 would assist that
implementation by keeping people informed of progress, and it would fill gaps in knowledge
(which were identified through the KAP surveys in the formulation phase) by communicating
the core of the measures that are being implemented. It continues the stakeholder participation
process and enlists the assistance of NGOs, unions, and other organizations that may function as
intermediaries between government and larger sections of society.

Methods:
• Information campaigns
• Development of specific materials
• Marketing, education
• Training
• Stakeholder communication, networking
• Cross-sectoral dialogue

Phase 4: Management and control (CP Steps 8 and 9)

At this stage communication serves to sustain changed attitudes and behaviour by providing
feedback on how the implemented policy or project has been understood and perceived by
partners and the public. As such it will support CP Step 8: monitoring and reporting and CP Step
9: review, reflect, and revisit priorities & plans for wetlands. It helps explain and consolidate the
achievements or, alternatively depending on the situation, needs for further continuation and
(renewed) commitment.

Methods:
• Networking
• Information monitoring
• Information provision
• KAP surveys

This last stage is something that may continue alongside all other stages, providing the feedback
loops that will help monitor the quality of the project or policy. It will also feed directly into the
new agenda-setting phase in response to a concluded cycle that will need following up.

Source: Information contributed by Gwen van Boven, SPAN Consultants

ahead of the key planning step of setting priorities (Step 4). In addition, it is
important to allow enough time to identify all the relevant stakeholders, well
before key implementation decisions are taken.

138. Ensuring that stakeholders can participate fully in river basin management
is particularly important when the protection and wise use of wetlands,
land and water resources in the basin depend upon the commitment and
willingness of those stakeholders to implement agreed actions within the
river basin management plan, such as maintenance of riparian vegetation,
compliance with limits on resource utilisation, compliance with water
quality standards, or implementation of agreed management practices.

Who is involved in this step?

139. This step can be undertaken or initiated by an independent facilitator or

expert group supported by external or grant funding. However, partly to
ensure long-term stability of the process, and partly to ensure its legitimacy
and representativity, it is preferable for the lead agent to be a public sector

53
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

institution or organization responsible for river basin management. This

does not necessarily require a river basin management agency to have
been established prior to initiating the CEPA step, but there should at least
be collaborative institutional arrangements in place at river basin level, in
order to provide a legitimate framework and official support for stakeholder
participation.

Additional information and guidance related to this step

140. Refer to Ramsar Handbooks [6, 7 and 9] ([4th edition, 2010]) for further
detailed guidance.

141. The following guidelines should be noted:

Guidelines Box I. Guidelines for Contracting Parties on CEPA programmes

and stakeholder participation processes at river basin level
I1. Apply the Guidelines in Box D relating to CEPA programmes, incorporating wetlands,
water resources and land use information specific to the river basin, in order to develop
tailored CEPA materials, campaigns, programmes, and training initiatives.

I2. Apply the Guidelines in Box E relating to sectoral cooperation and stakeholder
participation in river basin management, ensuring that i) consultative processes
are suited to the local socio-economic conditions in the river basin and that ii) the
participation of stakeholders is supported where necessary by appropriate funding,
capacity building, consensus-building, and conflict resolution mechanisms.

6.3 Planning phase at river basin level

Step 3: Undertaking wetland-related inventories and assessments to
support river basin planning

What is this step and why is it important?

142. This step involves the collation, collection and preparation of appropriate
information related to the biophysical, ecological and socio-economic aspects
of the river basin. The purpose of this step is to provide a sufficient basis
for agreeing on priorities (Step 4) and management objectives for the river
basin (Step 5), particularly those objectives related to wetlands and wetland
ecosystems within the basin.

143. This step has three components that are specifically wetland-related:

i) Step 3a: Inventory of wetlands, including wetland-related services in

the river basin;

ii) Step 3b: Assessment of the functions and values of wetlands and
wetland-related services in the river basin, including assessment of the
hydrological and water resource functions of wetlands, the ecological
functions of wetlands within the broader ecoregion, and the socio-
economic functions and values of wetlands (such as those related
to human health, food and water security, livelihood and poverty
reduction, adaptation to climate change, and cultural practices);

54
 Handbook 9: River basin management

Additional Information
Sources of data on world watersheds
There now exists a wealth of freely available geographic data on many aspects of river basins,
such as relief, hydrology, land cover, vegetation, soils and population. Examples of some sources
of data are provided here.

Water Resources eAtlas: Watersheds of the world

The Water Resources eAtlas presents information about issues in water resources management
in an easy and comprehensible way. Produced in 2003 by IUCN, the International Water
Management Institute (IWMI), the Ramsar Convention Secretariat and the World Resources
Institute (WRI), it was launched at the 3rd World Water Forum in Japan. The eAtlas, available on-
line and in hard copy, provides vital water resources information for 154 basins and sub-basins
around the world. Basin profiles include land cover and land use variables (such as percentage
cover of wetlands, forests, irrigated cropland, urban and industrial areas etc.), basin indicators
(such as basin area, average population density, number and size of dams etc.) and biodiversity
information and indicators (such as number of Ramsar Sites, number of fish species, number of
endemic bird areas, percent protected area etc.). The CD is available on-line here: http://www.
wri.org/publication/watersheds-world-cd.

CIESIN

The Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) provides interactive
data access and mapping tools via the Internet. CIESIN was established in 1989 as an
independent non-governmental organization to provide information that will help scientists,
decision-makers, and the public better understand the changing relationship between human
beings and the environment. See http://www.ciesin.columbia.edu/index.html.

African Water Resources Database

The African Water Resource Database (AWRD) is a set of data and custom-designed tools,
combined in a geographic information system (GIS) analytical framework aimed at facilitating
responsible inland aquatic resource management with a specific focus on inland fisheries and
aquaculture. The AWRD data archive includes an extensive collection of datasets covering the
African continent, including: surface waterbodies, watersheds, aquatic species, rivers, political
boundaries, population density, soils, satellite imagery and many other physiographic and
climatological data. The AWRD was designed based on recommendations of the Committee on
Inland Fisheries for Africa (CIFA) and is both an expansion and an update of an earlier project led
by the Aquatic Resource Management for Local Community Development Programme (ALCOM)
entitled the “Southern African Development Community Water Resource Database” (SADC-
WRD). The database can be accessed here: http://www.fao.org/fishery/collection/awrd/en.

iii) Step 3c: Assessment of current status and trends in the wetlands and
wetland-related services, as well as the degree to which the wetlands
are potentially fulfilling their identified functions.

144. Wetlands can be managed in ways that deliver not only a range of water
resource management objectives, such as maintaining the reliability and
quality of water supplies, recharging groundwater supplies, reducing
erosion, and protecting people from floods, but also a range of services
considered valuable in other sectors, such as health, agriculture, tourism and
fisheries.

55
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

145. It is important to have good information on where the wetlands are in

the river basin, what their functions are, what services they provide, and
what the values are of those services and functions to people in the basin
and outside the basin. Having this information available makes it possible
to assess the role that wetlands could play in the management of water
resources within the basin, as well as in other related sectors.

146. Numerous studies throughout the world have shown that it is almost always
more cost-effective to maintain natural wetlands than to drain or convert
the wetlands to other (often marginal) uses and then try to provide the same
services through structural control measures such as dams, embankments,
water treatment facilities, etc. In many cases it has also been found cost-
effective to restore or even create wetlands to provide these services and
functions rather than to create expensive engineering structures.

147. There are various methodologies in use for systematically addressing the
See also Ramsar
roles and values of wetlands in spatial planning, land use management, and
Technical Report 3,
river basin management. Parties can review these for suitability in the case
Valuing wetlands
of each river basin, depending on the local situation in terms of complexity
of land use, size of the basin, data availability, and technical capacity within
the institutions responsible for the planning phase.

How does this step relate to others in the Critical Path?

148. This is a step that can be initiated relatively early, and it can run in parallel
with the preparatory phase (policy and institutional development as well
as initiation of participation and consultation processes). The scope of
work and the level of technical detail required for these studies is partly
influenced by priority-setting in Step 4 - while rapid assessment techniques
are often appropriate to determine the relative importance and functions
of wetlands within a river basin, it may be necessary to return to Step 3
to undertake more detailed or intensive field studies on specific wetland
ecosystems that are considered priorities within the river basin due to their
importance or sensitivity. Nevertheless, Step 3 can begin with desktop
studies if necessary, later progressing to much more detailed field work,
according to a fieldwork and measurement programme that is informed by
planning priorities.

149. An important component of the technical studies in Step 3 is to consider

the water quantity and quality requirements of wetland ecosystems within
the river basin, since this information will be needed in Step 4 for setting
relative priorities within the basin, particularly for water resources planning
purposes. Initial estimates and assessments of Environmental Water
Requirements should be undertaken in Step 3 if this information is not yet
available. Later, more intensive studies and detailed field work may be
required in order to refine these assessments for conversion to formal water
allocations in Step 5.

150. There is an important point of synchronisation and integration with broader

water sector planning and management cycles at this point in the cycle
(see Figure 2). Ideally, the wetlands-related inventory and assessment
steps should be undertaken at the same time as a broader water resources
situation assessment and hydrological yield analysis or yield estimation
for the river basin. This provides opportunities for information about the

56
 Handbook 9: River basin management

water quantity and quality requirements of wetlands, as well as the water

resources functions and values of wetlands, to be fully integrated into water
resources planning studies and the preparation of water use and water
demand scenarios. These scenarios will then reflect more accurately the true
costs and benefits of various water management options, particularly in
relation to water allocations for maintaining wetland ecosystems and their
associated ecosystem services.

151. Specialised and highly targeted CEPA processes and products may be
required, in order to bridge any technical gaps between the two sectors
at this point (see discussion on communication between the water and
wetlands sectors). For example, there may be a need to ensure that spatial,
hydrological and geographic data are easily transferable and that the scale
and resolution of information from both sectors are compatible.

152. In Step 3, Parties should consider initiating a Strategic Environmental

See also Handbook
Assessment (SEA) process for the river basin. If SEA is initiated early in Step
16, Impact
3, then the information requirements of the SEA process can be addressed
assessment
when developing the scope and terms of reference for the technical studies
that are part of Steps 3a, 3b and 3c. The SEA process can complement and
support the river basin planning process by providing a basis for decisions
regarding priorities and objectives for the basin. SEA can also help to
provide a planning baseline against which to evaluate project-specific
Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) and Cost-Benefit Analyses (CBA)
in the implementation phase (Steps 7a and 7b). Guidance on EIA and SEA
can be found in Ramsar Handbook [16] ([4th edition]).

Who is involved in this step?

153. This step is primarily a technical task and should involve suitably qualified
scientific and technical specialists in the gathering and preparation of the
information. However, it is important also to involve stakeholders in this
step in order to ensure that as much local knowledge as possible is made
available, whether that knowledge is traditional or from other scientific
studies. Involvement of local universities, research organizations, and
technical personnel from local government departments will enhance
the breadth and value of information collected, and it will help to ensure
credibility as well as providing opportunities to build capacity for future
collaboration in the implementation phase.

Additional information and guidance related to this step

154. For more information on inventory and assessment of wetlands, refer to

Ramsar Handbooks ([4th] edition) [13] (Inventory, assessment and monitoring);
[15] (Wetland inventory); and [12] (Coastal management).

155. For more information on understanding and quantifying groundwater-

wetlands interactions, see Ramsar Handbook [11, 4th edition] (Managing
groundwater).

156. For more information on valuation of wetlands and their associated services,
see Ramsar Technical Report no. 3 (Valuing wetlands).

157. For more information on determination of environmental water

requirements, see Ramsar Handbook [10, 4th edition] (Water allocation and

57
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

management), the forthcoming Ramsar Technical Reports on Determination

and implementation of environment water requirements, Determination of
environmental water requirements for estuaries, coastal and nearshore wetlands and
Determination of environmental water requirements for rivers; and Resolution
VIII.2 (Recommendations of the World Commission on Dams).

158. For more information on Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), see

Ramsar Handbook [15] (Impact assessment) and Resolution X.17 on EIA and
SEA.

159. The following guidelines should be noted:

Guidelines Box J. Guidelines for Contracting Parties relating to inventory,

assessment and enhancement of the role of wetlands in river basin
management
J1. Review information on functional and biodiversity assessment methodologies and the
ways in which these can be applied to improve integration of wetlands into river basin
management; adapt these to local situations.

J2. Undertake studies to identify the ecosystem services and the functions and benefits to
water management that are provided by the wetlands within each river basin, ensuring
that such studies address interactions between groundwater and wetlands as well as
environmental water requirements of wetland ecosystems.

J3. Based on the findings of inventory and assessment of wetlands, protect urgently through
appropriate actions the remaining wetland areas that contribute to water resource
management. (See also Guideline B9 relating to protected areas.)

J4. Consider the rehabilitation or restoration of degraded wetlands, or the creation of

additional constructed wetlands within river basins, to provide services related to water
management (refer to Resolutions VII.17 and VIII.16).

J5. Ensure adequate consideration in river basin management programmes of non-structural

flood control methods that take advantage of the natural functions of wetlands (for
example, restoring floodplain wetlands or creating flood corridors) to supplement or
replace existing flood control infrastructure.

Assessment of current and future supply and demand for water

160. An essential component of decision-making in river basin management is

knowledge of both current and future supply of and demand upon water
resources in a river basin, taking into consideration the possible impacts
of climate change. Current and future assessments of the resource need to
focus on the human uses of water (such as irrigation, hydro-electricity, and
domestic or industrial water supply) as well as the water required to sustain
wetland ecosystems within different parts of a river basin. Water demands
and environmental water requirements should be defined in terms of water
quantity as well as water quality.

161. Environmental water requirements can be more complex to quantify

than human demands, and consequently they have often been ignored
or underestimated in projected water demands. Ignoring environmental

58
 Handbook 9: River basin management

Additional Information
Economic instruments, including Payment for Ecosystem Services in
Watersheds
Economic instruments have become important tools to support implementation of river basin
management plans. Previously, economic tools focused mostly on negative incentives to enforce
or change behavior, such as the imposition of fines or penalties for pollution or non-compliance
with regulations. More recent developments in this field have led to a range of tools which
provide for incentive-based measures to change water use and behaviour as well as to affect
policy.

These include tools to quantify and assess the value of ecosystem services associated with
wetlands and water, and tools to incentivize restoration of watersheds and wetland ecosystems.

Some further reading and sources of information on such tools include, inter alia:

Emerton L & Bos E (2004). Value: Counting ecosystems as water infrastructure. Downloadable
from http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/2004-046.pdf

Katoomba Group, United Nations Environment Program, Forest Trends (2008). Payments for
Ecosystem Services: Getting Started. A Primer. UNEP, Nairobi, Kenya. http://www.unep.org/
pdf/PaymentsForEcosystemServices_en.pdf

Smith, de Groot, Perrot-Maitre & Bergkamp (2006). Pay: Establishing payments for watershed
services. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Downloadable from http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/
edocs/2006-054.pdf

United States Environmental Protection Agency Ecosystem Services Research Program:

Wetlands Research http://www.epa.gov/ecology/quick-finder/wetlands-research.htm

UNECE Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International
Lakes (2007). Recommendations on Payments for Ecosystem Services In Integrated Water
Resources Management. http://www.unece.org/env/water/publications/documents/PES_
Recommendations_web.pdf

Website for The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB), which includes links to case
studies and additional information. http://www.teebweb.org/

water requirements may lead to major environmental, economic and social

problems associated with loss of ecosystem services, such as collapse of
fisheries or downstream saline intrusion. It is also important to recognize
that the greatest damage to the environment may occur during extreme
events rather than from the average situation.

162. Socio-economic systems are constantly changing, and therefore it is

often necessary to develop a range of future demand scenarios and to
develop flexible sustainable use strategies that can be adapted to a range
of circumstances. Linked to the assessment of water demands is the
identification and resolution of the significant water-related problems
arising from the demand patterns identified in the scenarios. These problems
should not be restricted to issues related to human activities but should also
include ecological problems such as adaptation to reduced water supply or
quality within certain ecosystems.

59
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

163. Water demand, in excess of the water required to meet basic human needs
for drinking, cooking and personal hygiene, can be significantly influenced
by incentives for sustainable water and wetland use. Provision of incentives
for practising environmentally sustainable water use can help to minimise
the impacts on wetland areas. Such incentives should recognize the
importance and value of other ecosystem services supplied by wetlands,
services that might be lost or reduced as a result of abstracting water to meet
demands for water supply or allowing waste discharges in order to meet
demands for waste disposal options.

164. Water demand management policies should encourage the optimization of

water use, while also recognizing the significant public health-related value
of access to safe, reliable water. Within a sectoral policy context, incentives
for sustainable use of water resources need to be provided. Equally,
environmentally unsound or inequitable incentives that are encouraging
unsustainable practices need to be identified and removed. (Refer to
Resolution VII.15 and Resolution VIII.23.)

165. The following guidelines should be noted:

Guidelines Box K. Guidelines for Contracting Parties relating to the

identification of current and future supply and demand for water
K1. Undertake assessments of current and potential future water supply and demand for
water resources within the river basin to meet both ecological and human requirements
and identify areas of potential shortage or conflict.

K2. Undertake assessments to establish the economic and social costs that are likely to result
if the ecological water demands are not met. (See also Handbook [10] (Water allocation and
management); Resolution VIII.1 and Resolution VIII.2.)

K3. Based on the above assessments, develop mechanisms to solve problems and conflicts
over water quantity and quality at both national and river basin levels within the
country. (See also Guidelines E1 and I2.)

K4. Within an appropriate national policy framework, develop appropriate water demand
management strategies to assist in sustaining the ecological functions and values of water
resources and wetlands in the river basin. (See also Guideline B6.)

K5. Review relevant incentive/perverse incentive measures and consider removing those
measures that lead to destruction/degradation of wetlands in the river basin; introduce
or enhance measures that will encourage restoration and wise use of wetlands. (Refer to
Resolutions VII.15, VII.17, VIII.16 and VIII.23.)

Step 4: Setting agreed priorities for wetlands in the basin

What is this step and why is it important?

166. This step involves consideration of all the wetlands and wetland ecosystems
in the river basin, including their interconnections with each other and
with water and land resources in the basin. This should be a broadly
consultative process, based on the information gathered during Step 3 on
biophysical, ecological and socio-economic processes and priorities in the

60
 Handbook 9: River basin management

basin, to identify the relative importance of the range of ecosystem services

currently or potentially provided by all the wetlands in the river basin. Such
consultation may need to extend to international level, particularly in the
cases of shared river basins or where particular wetland ecosystems in the
river basin are important for regional or global conservation purposes (such
as wetlands on international flyways or wetlands on the Ramsar List).

167. Some wetlands might be afforded a higher protection status than others,
due to their importance in conservation, hydrological, economic, social or
cultural terms, their sensitivity, or the dependence of local populations upon
their services. The protection status of a wetland is likely to influence the
development of water and land use objectives not only in the immediate
surrounding area of the wetland, but possibly also in the broader river basin.
Hence, it is necessary to take a strategic view of the whole river basin and
the wetlands within the basin in order to reconcile and integrate sectoral
needs and demands with the needs for protection and management of the
basin’s wetlands.

168. The protection and restoration of wetlands is an important element of

strategic planning within each river basin, not only because the wetlands
provide services that can assist with water management, but also because
wetlands are critical ecosystems that deserve protection and restoration in
their own right. (Refer also to Resolutions VII.17 and VIII.16.)

169. Many wetland-dependent species require management in the river basin

context to ensure their survival. In most countries, the protection of habitats
and wildlife is conducted according to administrative boundaries and not
river basin boundaries. This can lead to protection measures for one site or
species being nullified by activities elsewhere in the river basin which, for
example, block migration of the fish species or water flow to the wetland
site. The restoration of degraded wetlands is one of the most important
possibilities for reversing the trend of declining biological diversity within
river basins.

170. The List of designated Ramsar sites provides a tool for recognizing and
agreeing on wetlands of international importance, which in turn will
convey a high protection status in the river basin management plan, but
similar tools are needed to recognize wetlands of regional, national or local
importance, or those of hydrological importance within a basin. Note also
that not all wetlands which qualify as internationally important have as yet
been designated by Contracting Parties, and the importance of any such sites
not yet designated should also be taken into account.

171. Several planning approaches and frameworks have been developed and
applied in structured planning processes that facilitate the integration of
wetland services, functions and values into river basin management. Parties
are encouraged to review those that are available and assess their suitability
for local situations and different river basins.

How does this step relate to others in the Critical Path?

172. Step 4 is an essential precursor to Step 5. Outcomes of Step 4 should provide

information on relative priorities, qualitative management objectives, and
management strategies for wetlands in the river basin. This information

61
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Additional Information
Spatial planning approaches to facilitate the integration of wetlands into
river basin management
Various spatial planning approaches are available which can be applied to develop structured
planning processes and to facilitate the integration of wetland services, functions and values
into river basin management.

These approaches include, amongst others:

• the “ecosystem approach” which has been adopted by the Convention on Biological
Diversity, and which is a strategy for the integrated management of land, water and
living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way. See
http://www.cbd.int/ecosystem/

• the “Mountains to the Sea” implementation planning framework which was

commissioned by WWF for the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity
(CBD) to assist them adopting a ‘mountains to the sea’ or ‘ridge to reef’ approach
for applying, through one integrated platform, the convention’s thematic and
cross-cutting programmes, and, to do so within the framework of the ecosystem
approach. See http://wwf.panda.org/about_our_earth/about_freshwater/freshwater_
resources/?uNewsID=57580

• Systematic conservation planning for aquatic biodiversity, which has been applied in
several countries. (For a review of this topic, see Nel et al. (2008). Progress and challenges
in freshwater conservation planning. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater
Ecosystems Vol 19(4), pp474-485).

should reflect a multisectoral, multi-stakeholder agreement on how the river

basin and its resources will be managed to meet, in a sustainable manner,
sectoral needs and demands. The qualitative objectives developed in Step
4 form the basis for derivation of quantitative and detailed river basin
management objectives in Step 5.

173. The relative priorities for protection and restoration of wetlands in the river
basin should also inform the prioritisation of implementation actions later
in the implementation phase (Steps 7a and 7b). Ensuring that activities in
Step 4 are formalized, participatory and well-informed will greatly assist
in prioritizing implementation actions later, including the use of financial
resources as well as the allocation of water.

Who is involved in this step?

174. In order to facilitate the achievement of consensus on the river basin

management plan in Step 6, it is important that this step 4 includes all
stakeholders and that it is well structured and formalized, with appropriate
records of decisions on the relative priorities of all wetlands in the river
basin.

175. The following guidelines should be noted:

62
 Handbook 9: River basin management

Guidelines Box L. Guidelines for Contracting Parties for prioritizing the

protection and restoration of wetlands and their biodiversity
L1. Assess the status of wetlands and their biodiversity in each river basin and, where
indicated, undertake the actions needed to provide better protection measures, taking
into account the importance and value of the ecosystem services provided by these
wetlands as well as the need for protecting wetlands whose functions and services are
important for water resources management. (See also Guidelines B9 and J3.)

L2. In assessing the status of wetlands in each river basin, consider the inclusion of key sites
in the List of Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar List).

L3. Ensure that management plans for Ramsar sites and other wetlands are prepared taking
into consideration the potential off-site impacts from within the river basin, as well as the
site-specific issues. (Refer to Resolution 5.7, Ramsar COP5.)

L4. Review and, where necessary, adjust regulations and procedures for conservation of
wetland-related biodiversity, especially for fish and other aquatic species, to protect rare
species and prevent over-exploitation of more common species.

Step 5: Setting quantitative management objectives for wetlands in the

basin

What is this step and why is it important?

176. In this Step 5, the priorities agreed for wetlands in the preceding Step
4 should be translated into practical, measurable, implementable and
enforceable management objectives for wetlands in the river basin. The
wetland objectives should address all of the aspects necessary for protection,
management and wise use of wetlands in the river basin, including water
quantity and quality, land use, habitat protection, resource utilisation and
exploitation, restoration, and biodiversity conservation.

177. The wetland objectives arising from Step 5 should then be integrated into the
broader river basin management plan (Step 6) through the development of
specific targets, timelines, action plans and operating rules for the river basin
that can give effect to the wetlands objectives.

178. In setting quantitative management objectives for wetlands in the river basin,
it is particularly important to maintain the natural characteristics (water
quantity and water quality) of water regimes as far as possible. Wetland
ecosystems depend on the maintenance of the natural water regimes
such as flows, quantity and quality, temperature, and timing to maintain
their biodiversity, functions and values. The construction of structures
that prevent the flow of water, and of channels that carry water out of the
floodplain faster than would occur naturally, result in the degradation of
natural wetlands and eventual loss of the services they provide. In this
respect, Parties should note Resolution VIII.1, Guidelines for the allocation and
management of water for maintaining the ecological function of wetlands.

How does this step relate to others in the Critical Path?

179. The quantitative management objectives provide the baseline against

which to assess environmental impacts of current and future land and

63
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

water developments (in implementation Step 7). These objectives also need
to be integrated into the business planning of the responsible land, water
and wetlands management agencies, as well as into any community or
customary use agreements and into other sectoral policies.

Who is involved in this step?

180. This is primarily a scientific task, but it requires the participation of

responsible agencies as well as affected stakeholders.

Additional information and guidance related to this step

181. Refer to Ramsar Handbooks [9, 10 and 18, 4th edition], and Ramsar Technical
Report (in prep.), Determination and implementation of environment water
requirements, for further detailed guidance. See also Handbook [10] (Water
allocation and management) and Resolution VIII.2.

182. The following guidelines should be noted:

Guidelines Box M. Guidelines for Contracting Parties relating to the

maintenance of natural water regimes to maintain wetlands
M1. Undertake studies to determine appropriate flow regimes for meeting the environmental
water requirements of wetland ecosystems in the river basin, including water quantity
and water quality, considering minimum flows, taking into account natural seasonal and
inter-annual variability and allowing for an adaptive approach to implementation and
refinement of these flow regimes.

M2. With this information, establish the optimum flow allocations and regimes in the river
basin to maintain key wetlands and other key ecological services and functions of river
basins.

M3. In situations where available information on biological parameters and physical habitat
is inadequate for a definitive determination of the environmental water requirements of
wetlands, use the precautionary principle to maintain the natural situation as closely as
possible.

M4. Develop sustainable water allocation plans for the various resource users within the river
basin, including allocating water to maintain wetlands.

M5. Regulate and monitor the impacts of land use in the river basin (agriculture, urban
development, forestry, mining) and major infrastructure developments (levees,
embankments, roadways, weirs, small dams and cuttings) undertaken within river and
flood corridors and near wetlands.

Step 6: Preparing an integrated land and water management plan for the
basin

What is this step and why is it important?

183. This step involves the development of an integrated plan for management
of wetlands, land and water resources in the river basin, according to the
priorities and needs agreed upon in Steps 4 and 5. Whether this is an initial
concept plan (based on desktop studies and containing limited detail) or a

64
 Handbook 9: River basin management

comprehensive operational plan for land, water and wetland management

in the basin, ideally there should be a formal plan, signed off by all the
responsible sectoral agencies, and with one institution formally accepting
the lead role in implementation.

184. There is no single best way to set out such an integrated plan, and each
country or basin should consider what format and structure would be most
appropriate for its own situation. If a statutory river basin management
institution has been established, and has been given the responsibility for
preparation of the river basin management plan, then that institution may
prepare a single plan that addresses the roles and responsibilities of all the
relevant sectors. Alternatively, each sector might prepare a plan for its own
activities and responsibilities, but these sectoral plans should be coordinated
at river basin level.

185. A river basin management plan, whether simple or detailed, should include
certain elements in order to facilitate later implementation:

• The plan should clearly set out targets, timelines, action plans,
operating rules and responsibilities, based on the outcomes of Steps 4
and 5.

• The plan should include an appropriate monitoring and reporting

programme for the basin that is designed to deliver information related
to the actual management objectives that have been agreed upon for the
river basin.

• The plan should provide specific information on how the responsible

institutions and agencies will respond to information arising from the
monitoring and reporting programme.

• The plan should indicate how resources and funding will be made
available to support ongoing river basin management activities, both
for institutional coordinating functions as well as for on-the-ground
implementation such as habitat restoration projects.

• There should be a clear statement regarding the process of review of

the plan: how often the overall basin plan will be reviewed and the
processes to be followed for review and revision when revision is
indicated.

186. The river basin plan should include a plan and programme for
implementation. This is particularly important, to avoid subsequent delays
between the planning and implementation phases. See also the section 5.1
above on the preparatory phase at national level.

187. Many technically sound river basin management initiatives do not get
beyond the planning stage into implementation. While it is recognized that
some of the obstacles to implementation are political, and some are technical,
a significant factor in promoting successful transition from planning to
implementation is to have a practical implementation programme in place
before the end of the planning phase. This implementation programme
should be realistic and designed to be feasible within the constraints of the
human resource capacity, technical capacity, and financial capacity of the
river basin management institutions at national and river basin levels.

65
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

188. The implementation programme should take account of possible needs for
phased implementation, especially in basins that are very large, or where
institutional capacity is limited, or where significant problems must be
addressed that are associated with long-term degradation of wetlands, land
and water resources. Implementation could be phased geographically, i.e.,
at different times in different sub-basins, or it could be phased sectorally,
i.e., addressing certain sectoral priorities before others, depending on the
priorities agreed in Step 4.

How does this step relate to others in the Critical Path?

189. This is a step at which it is essential that the different sectoral planning
and management processes are synchronized and integrated, or at least
coordinated. This is another key step at which specialist CEPA programmes
and products may be needed, to support cross-sectoral communication,
collaborative planning, and harmonization of sectoral objectives.

Who is involved in this step?

190. This step should be led by the river basin management institution who has
the mandate for preparation of the integrated river basin management plan.
While technical specialists may be needed to assist in drawing up the plan,
the responsible institution should “own” the plan and should coordinate
with the other sectoral agencies and institutions that will give effect to the
integrated plan through their own sectoral implementation programmes.

Additional information and guidance related to this step

191. Refer to Ramsar Handbooks 1, [9, 12, 15 and 18, 4th edition], for further
detailed guidance. See also Guidelines Box F above.

Planning for implementation: assessing and minimising the impacts of land

use and water development projects on wetlands and their biodiversity

192. The impacts of existing land use and water development projects on river
systems and wetlands in a river basin need to be monitored and controlled
through the coordination and integration of regulations and guidelines
on forestry, agriculture, mining and extraction, urban development and
water management, and water use. In many cases the implementation of
such regulations and guidelines may lead to advantages for the land and
water users themselves - through improved economic efficiency, enhanced
production, and better health and quality of life.

193. It is necessary to ensure that appropriate enforcement and compliance

mechanisms are in place and are being effectively implemented in support
of the integrated river basin management plan.

194. Proposed new land use and water development projects should be
considered against the integrated management objectives for the river
basin, to ensure that the agreed river basin management objectives are
not compromised by the impacts of new projects and developments. In a
number of cases it has been found that the social and economic losses as a
result of degradation of wetlands due to land use and water development
projects have been significantly greater than the benefits gained from the
projects themselves.

66
 Handbook 9: River basin management

Additional Information
Impacts of land use and water development projects
Almost all land uses and development projects, through their use of water, their production of
pollutants, or changes to the land surface or soils in the river basin, will have some impact on
water quantity and quality and hence could affect wetlands. Water development projects can also
have significant impacts, primarily through changes to the hydrological regime in a river basin.

The land uses that can impact most significantly upon rivers and wetlands are forestry,
agriculture, mining and extraction activities, industry, and urbanisation. Inappropriate forestry
practices, especially in the upper watershed, can lead to increased soil erosion and reduced
water retention capacity. Agricultural activities can also cause significant levels of pollutants
from agro-chemicals and agricultural wastes. Upland agriculture through land clearing and
subsequent operation can have a major negative impact on water quality and can also lead to
significant changes in flood and dry season flows. Lowland agriculture can lead to the drainage
or conversion of floodplain wetlands, resulting in a loss of biodiversity and natural functions and
benefits. In many developing countries, irrigation is the main justification for abstracting water
from rivers.

The impact of mining and industrial activities is mainly through the release of pollutants, some
of which may be highly toxic and may persist in the environment for very long times, even after
the original mining or industrial activity has ceased. In addition, industrial activities or mining
can instantly jeopardise entire river basins and all the associated wetlands and biodiversity
through accidental spills. Mining and extraction activities can also have very significant impacts
on groundwater hydrology and surface water hydrology through modifications to local
topography and soils.

Urban areas have impacts through encroachment on wetlands, either directly or through
associated infrastructure such as roads, ports, water supply and flood control. In addition the
human populations they support bring increased demands on resources and direct pollution.

Water resource development projects are generally aimed at modifying the natural water
flows in a river basin for purposes such as storing water through drought periods, preventing
floods, transferring water to irrigated agricultural areas, providing industrial and domestic
water supply, improving navigation, and generating electricity. Such projects have frequently
been developed through the construction of engineered structures such as dams, diversion
canals, channelisation of rivers, flood levees, etc. Many such projects, by modifying the natural
conditions that have allowed wetlands to develop, have had a significant negative impact on
wetlands and associated biodiversity.

Some of the most significant impacts of such projects include: reduction in river flows, blocking
of pathways for migratory fish and other aquatic species, increased water pollution levels,
disruption of timing of natural floods which maintain wetlands; reduction of sediment and other
nutrient input into floodplain wetlands, drainage or permanent inundation of riverine wetlands,
and salinisation of surface and groundwater.

Source: Ramsar Handbook 7, 3rd edition.

195. A range of assessment techniques is available to identify social and

environmental costs of land use and water development projects and
activities. These include Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Social
Impact Assessment (SIA), Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA), and Participatory
Rural Appraisal (PRA). It is important that the relevant assessment

67
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

techniques be applied within a regulatory or formal context and in broadly

consultative processes involving all stakeholders. The assessments should
provide all the information necessary for approval or refusal of a project,
including the information needed to determine appropriate licence
conditions and mitigation requirements, including the periods before,
during and after the project lifespan.

196. In order to fully assess the costs and benefits of proposed new projects, it
is important to have good information on the values of wetlands and their
services, as well as the potential social and economic costs of losing those
services. Some of this information should have been gathered during the
studies described in Step 3.

197. Another very helpful framework against which to assess potential project
impacts is a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for an entire river
basin (see also Step 3). If the SEA framework is in place, this can greatly
facilitate the consideration of project proposals, definition of the scope of
work for project-specific EIA, SEA and CBA.

Additional information and guidance related to this aspect

198. Refer to Handbook [10] (Water allocation and management), Handbook [11]
(Managing groundwater), Resolution VIII.2 (Report of the World Commission on
Dams) and Resolution X.17 (Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic
Environmental Assessment: updated scientific and technical guidance).

199. The following guidelines should be noted:

Guidelines Box N. Guidelines for assessing and minimising the impacts of

land use and water development projects on wetlands and their biodiversity
N1. Develop integrated land use plans for each river basin as a means to minimise the impact
of different activities and land uses on the river and wetland systems as well as local
residents. (See also Guidelines B3 and B9.)

N2. Develop and enforce appropriate regulations to control land uses, especially forestry,
agriculture, mining or urban waste management, so as to minimise their impact on river
and wetland ecosystems. (See also Guideline B3.)

N3. Carry out Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA)
studies for land use or water development projects which may have significant impacts
on rivers and wetlands, using independent multidisciplinary teams and in consultation
with all stakeholders, and consider alternative proposals including the no-development
option.

N4. Disseminate the findings of any EIA and CBA in a form that can be readily understood
by all stakeholders.

N5. Ensure that there are adequate control and mitigation measures to minimise or
compensate for impacts if land use or water development projects are allowed to
proceed.

68
 Handbook 9: River basin management

N6. Ensure that proposals for water development projects are carefully reviewed at their
initial stages to determine whether non-structural alternatives may be feasible, possible,
and desirable alternatives.

N7. Take all necessary actions in order to minimise the impact of land use or water
development projects on wetland biodiversity, ecosystem services, and socio-economic
benefits during the construction phase and longer-term operation.

N8. Ensure that the project design/planning process includes a step by step process to
integrate environmental issues, especially initial biodiversity/resource surveys and post-
project evaluation and monitoring.

N9. Incorporate long-term social benefit and cost considerations into the process from the
very initial stages of project preparation.

6.4 Implementation phase at river basin level

Step 7: Implementation at river basin and wetland levels

What is this step and why is it important?

200. Step 7 addresses parallel, coordinated implementation of the river basin

management plan at two levels: river basin level (Step 7b) and wetland
level (Step 7a). At wetland level, the responsibility for implementation
may lie with a single sector (the wetlands sector), and possibly even with
a single agency or institution. At river basin level, the lead institution may
be a statutory river basin management agency or an institution or group of
institutions working in collaboration. Whatever institutional arrangements
are in place, implementation of the management plan at basin level will
require coordination and integration among all the relevant sectors.

201. It can be very challenging to implement two kinds of instruments, a basin-

level plan and a wetland-level plan, in parallel and in a way that ensures
integration, consistency and synchronisation of activities at the necessary
times and places.

202. Typical problems arising in implementation include:

• Sectoral spatial and temporal planning scales are often very different,
depending on the sector and the objectives, and separate agencies may
be responsible for the lead in each case.

• Business planning and budget cycles amongst the sectoral agencies

may not be matched.

• Effective communication channels for data, information, policy and

responses to problems may not have been established.

203. These problems are amongst the aspects that should be considered in the
preparatory phase at river basin level, and appropriate solutions should
be developed during the planning phase to facilitate coordination of
implementation activities later.

69
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

How does this step relate to others in the Critical Path?

204. This step is dependent on the preparatory and planning phases having been
completed to an appropriate level of detail. Three critical gaps in particular
that can lead to problems in this step are:

• inadequate provisions for implementation capacity (see section 5.5

above);

• failure to establish adequate institutional arrangements within the

public sector to give effect to aspects of the river basin management
plan (such as enforcement of discharge permits, operation of dams and
other hydrological control structures, or collection of fees and tariffs)
(see section 5.3 above and Step 1b);

• inadequate attention in the planning phase to the design and support

for an appropriate implementation programme (see Step 6).

205. Implementation is more likely to progress, especially in the early stages, if

a realistic and clear implementation programme has been included in the
river basin management plan, and has been taken up into the plans and
programmes of all the relevant sectors whose activities influence land, water
and wetlands within the basin.

Who is involved in this step?

206. Sometimes the day-to-day problems of working in parallel can be addressed

through a joint working group that is fully inclusive of the various agencies
and interest groups. This could have the status of, for example, the
governing board of a river basin management agency if one is in place, or
it may be a much less formal working group of technical officials who meet
often to discuss and resolve operational problems.

207. Whatever the level at which the joint working group is established, it
needs political support from the highest levels of all the organizations and
agencies that are members of the working group. If this political support is
not forthcoming, then committed technical field officials can often address
most operational problems, but their work may be greatly hampered by
legal challenges (for example, related to water allocations) and lack of
organizational policy guidelines.

Additional information and guidance related to this step

208. Refer to Ramsar Handbooks [9, 10, 16 and 18, 4th edition], and Ramsar
Technical Report (in prep.) on Determination and implementation of
environment water requirements for further detailed guidance.

6.5 Review phase at river basin level

209. There are two levels of review:

• At the operational level (Step 8), monitoring results can and should
feed back very quickly into refined management objectives or remedial
actions, without necessarily requiring substantive review of the formal
basin and wetland management plans.

70
 Handbook 9: River basin management

• Formal strategic review (Step 9) of wetland and basin management

plans should be conducted on a regular basis. Five to ten years is an
appropriate time period, but it can be matched to business planning
cycles as appropriate. As a result of this review, management priorities
and objectives may be substantively revised (rather than just refined) to
take account of changing ecological, social or economic conditions.

Step 8: Operational review activities: Monitoring and reporting

What is this step and why is it important?

210. The long-term sustainability of monitoring networks, the management

and storage of the data, and the preparation and dissemination of reports
are critical issues for implementation. Adaptive ecosystem management
approaches generally rely on the inclusion of explicit monitoring and
reporting steps to close the cycle. This step provides the “glue” which holds
the whole Critical Path together. Yet monitoring and reporting activities are
often those for which the least time and money is budgeted, and they are
often the first to be cut back when budgets are tight.

211. It is likely that some of the management objectives will be social or

economic, related to livelihood protection and enhancement. Monitoring
programmes will then also need to provide information to track progress
on these objectives, as well as on more widely-understood hydrological and
ecological objectives. Performance criteria against which to evaluate the
progress and management of planning and implementation activities are
also necessary.

212. Reports presenting information on status, trends and progress may need
to be packaged in different ways for different audiences such as politicians,
agency managers, stakeholders, and community interest groups. Here,
CEPA processes and products play an important role in preparing
information for consultation, decision-making and planning at various levels
in the river basin.

How does this step relate to others in the Critical Path?

213. Monitoring programmes need to be designed against the priorities and

objectives set in Steps 4 and 5. There is little value in monitoring if the
resulting information cannot be used to assess achievement of or progress
towards the agreed management objectives for the river basin and for the
wetlands within the basin.

214. Information will also be needed in the more strategic part of the review
phase (Step 9) to guide review and possible revision of plans and objectives.
The design of reports to support this activity should be considered as an
important aspect of the monitoring and reporting programme.

215. Monitoring of the responses of ecosystems in the river basin to management

interventions (such as the implementation of flow regimes to deliver
environmental water requirements) is essential in order to follow an
adaptive management philosophy successfully. The scientific understanding
gained from monitoring these responses is critical in refining and optimizing
management interventions during the strategic review in Step 9.

71
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Additional Information
Involving local communities in monitoring wetlands within river basins
Many programmes to involve community groups in wetland and river basin management
already exist, and they provide not only valuable data but also excellent opportunities for
education at all levels, from school children to politicians. Some examples are:

• The GREEN programme http://www.earthforce.org/GREEN offers resources for

community education and monitoring, and promotes an action-oriented approach to
education based on a successful watershed (river basin) education model.

• The Water Monitoring Alliance (www.watermonitoringalliance.net/) is made up of

organisations involved in the collection, analysis, reporting and dissemination of
information on water in all its uses. The Alliance is a cooperative partnership among
organisations working at the international, regional, national and local levels.

• Ribbons of Blue/Waterwatch aims to provide teachers and their students with practical,
hands-on learning experiences focusing on the sustainability of local waterways,
wetlands and their ecosystems. http://www.ribbonsofblue.wa.gov.au/.

Who is involved in this step?

216. It is possible that some of the necessary data might already be collected
on a routine basis by one or more of the responsible sectoral agencies at
river basin, national, regional or even international level. In such cases,
the need at river basin level might be to identify who is monitoring, where
they are monitoring, what they are measuring and how often, and then to
initiate a process of coordination and collaboration to enhance the sharing
and transferability of relevant information wherever possible. In other
cases, there might be few or no other relevant monitoring programmes in
place, and the river basin management institution will need to develop and
implement its own programme.

217. It is important to identify, as early as possible but at least in the river basin
management plan (Step 6), who will take on the responsibility for managing
data and information for the river basin as a whole. This function could be
undertaken by, for example, a local university on behalf of the river basin
management institution, or by a dedicated department within the river basin
management institution. Whoever takes on the responsibility should have
adequate long-term technical, infrastructural, and competency capacity to do
so, and the necessary human and financial resources should be secured.

218. The local community can also play an important role in managing and
monitoring wetlands and rivers. Community-based monitoring programmes
have the potential to generate very useful information for river basin
management, and they can be excellent for early warning of potential
problems. However, the greatest value of community-based monitoring
programmes may be in raising awareness and interest amongst communities
and individuals, which can lead to behavioral changes that can significantly
benefit wetlands and water resources in a river basin.

Additional information and guidelines related to this step

72
 Handbook 9: River basin management

219. Refer to Handbooks [9, 11, 13 and 18, 4th edition], for further information.

Step 9: Strategic review activities: Review, reflection and revisiting of plans

and priorities

What is this step and why is it important?

220. Like monitoring, this is an essential step whose importance is generally

greatly underestimated.
221. If carried out properly at both operational and strategic levels, this review
step supports effective “learning-by-doing”, which is the foundation
principle of adaptive management of ecosystems.
How does this step relate to others in the Critical Path?
222. This step relates to the Critical Path in two ways.
• First, this step closes the cycle when undertaken as a retrospective
review of a full cycle of river basin management. Having adequate and
appropriate information available for a strategic review step depends
upon all the preceding steps having been undertaken to a level that is
sufficient to inform dialogue and decision-making on future priorities
for the river basin.

• Secondly, this step opens the cycle when undertaken as the starting
point for “retrofitting”, i.e., attempting to begin integrating wetlands
for the first time into an already existing river basin management
process.
223. In a case where such “retrofitting” is planned, it is often helpful to begin
with as full a strategic review (Step 9) as is possible with the available
information. All available information related to management of the river
basin, past and current, should be gathered and synthesised for such an
assessment. This should include biophysical, ecological, socio-economic
and institutional, as well as relevant information on the activities, plans and
information held by other sectoral agencies.
Who is involved in this step?
224. The preparation of a situation assessment can often be undertaken by an
independent individual or organization, possibly with external support or
with support from a relevant sectoral agency intending to lead the initiation
of river basin management planning. Most often, this would be a water
sector agency or institution, at national or river basin level.
225. In a strategic review, the responsible river basin management institution
should lead the dialogue and decision-making activities associated with
this step. Preparation of the information required to support dialogue
and decision-making could be carried out with assistance from external
specialists if the institution does not have sufficient capacity.
Additional information and guidance related to this step

226. Refer to Ramsar Handbooks 2, 3, [6, 7, 9, 10, 15, 17 and 18, 4th edition], and
Ramsar Technical Report (in prep.), Determination and implementation of
environment water requirements, for further detailed guidance.

73
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

Additional Information
A century of managing the Grand River Basin
“The scope and thrust of watershed management has evolved significantly since Ontario’s first
conservation authorities were created in the late 1940s. In the 1950s, ‘watershed management’
usually meant single-issue flood management programs. Today, ‘watershed management’ means
integrated, ecosystem-based watershed management initiatives that include consideration of
stream morphology, groundwater, terrestrial habitat, wetlands, woodlots, and environmentally
significant or sensitive areas” (Conservation Ontario, 2003).

A timeline of events in the Grand River catchment is presented below, showing some of this
evolution.

Early 1900s: Severe water problems associated with flooding, drought and degraded water
quality experienced in southern Ontario, particularly in Grand River basin.

Grand River Improvement Association formed as flood prevention alliance and lobby group to
appeal to province for aid in controlling river.

1930s: Report on Grand River Drainage (Finlayson Report) recognizes low flow as health hazard
and considers problems of water supply, sewage disposal and flood control.

Grand River Conservation Commission (GRCC) formed, to carry out studies and undertake
projects to ensure sufficient supply of water for municipal, domestic and manufacturing purposes
and to control floods.

1940s: Province of Ontario passes Conservation Authorities Act, which states that best unit
for conservation work is watershed. Grand Valley Conservation Authority (GVCA) formed,
composed of 69 watershed municipalities which focus on activities not covered by GRCC (e.g.
land acquisition, stewardship programmes, reforestation, erosion control, etc.).

1950s: The Grand River Conservation Report - Hydraulics produced, a watershed-wide management
plan.

1960s: Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) results from amalgamation of GRCC and
GVCA. Adopts resource management plan to integrate land and water projects, with initial
emphasis on water control through multi-purpose dams and channel works.

1970s: Ontario Treasury Board report – “Review of Planning for the Grand River Watershed”
– helps further cooperative watershed management among provincial ministries, agencies and
municipalities and recommends carrying out comprehensive water management plan.

Ontario Ministry of the Environment leads multi-agency team to deal with water quality, water
supply and flooding issues in Grand River basin.

1980s: Grand River Basin Water Management Plan complete. Cooperative planning project so
successful that municipalities and Conservation Authority fully implement plan, resulting in 75%
reduction in average annual flood damages, return of self-sustaining sport fishery to the river,
and a water supply strategy.

Review of Conservation Authorities Program in Ontario recognizes overlapping responsibilities

among provincial agencies and Conservation Authorities, without recommending substantive
changes.

74
 Handbook 9: River basin management

1990-1993: Participatory process produces The Grand Strategy for Managing the Grand River as a
Canadian Heritage River. Advocates adaptive, on-going and flexible collaborative approach, based
on consensus, commitment, co-operation and community involvement.

Provincial funding cuts announced.

Association of Conservation Authorities produces discussion paper acknowledging fragmented

nature of resource management in Ontario and need to reduce overlapping institutional
structure. Recommends that Province focuses on strategic planning aspects of resource
management, and that Conservation Authorities coordinate and implement integrated watershed
management.

1994-1997: The Grand Strategy accepted by Canadian Heritage Rivers Board making Grand River a
Canadian Heritage River. Strategy’s initial focus on management of human heritage features and
recreation broadens to more holistic approach to address pressing watershed resource issues.

Given political realities, GRCA commences organizational and administrative restructuring

reducing general membership to 26, leading to better direction for Conservation Authority
activities, and greater participation and communications among municipalities. Strategic
planning process also undertaken, keeping with The Grand Strategy values, beliefs and principles
and focusing on improving watershed health and addressing cross-boundary issues.

Province reduces its funding support to Conservation Authorities by 70% following elections of
Progressive Conservative Party.

1997-2002: Under umbrella of The Grand Strategy, GRCA works with partners to address
approaching issues and determine priorities for action, including pollution, wastewater
treatment, wise use of water, groundwater protection, Fisheries Management Plan, community-
based plans for forest, wildlife and natural heritage management, etc.

Today, the Grand River watershed is one of the fastest growing areas in Canada. Associated
threats are rising costs for treating wastewater, agricultural intensification and industrialization
leading to diminishing health and resiliency of the natural environment. To deal with these
critical issues, The Grand Strategy has evolved into a collaborative process that identifies
problems, develops creative solutions, pools resources, implements action, monitors results and
evaluates progress on an ongoing basis. It includes participation from federal and provincial
governments, municipalities, First Nations, business, organisations, educational institutions and
the general public. While the issues of fragmented jurisdictions and funding still exist, a spirit of
cooperation and joint problem solving assists in surmounting institutional barriers and making
things happen “on the ground”. Within The Grand Strategy network, information is shared and
resources are pooled. Progress is documented and celebrated through monthly newsletters,
special events and an annual Registry of Accomplishments.

Based on: Conservation Ontario. 2003. Watershed Management in Ontario: Lessons Learned and
Best Practices http://www.conservation-ontario.on.ca/projects/pdf/reports/PHASE%20I/lessons_
learned_best_practices.pdf.

Veale, Barbara. 2004. “Watershed Management in Grand River Watershed” in Towards a Grand
Sense of Place: Writing on changing environments, land-uses, landscapes, lifestyles and planning
of a Canadian Heritage River. pp. 261-276. Gordon Nelson (ed.), Environments Publications:
Heritage Resources Centre, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario. 331 pages.

Veale, Barbara (2004). A review of the Grand Strategy 1994-2004. Grand River Conservation
Authority, Cambridge Ontario. 52pp + appendices. http://www.grandriver.ca/chrs/10YearReport.
pdf

75
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

7. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: international

cooperation and partnerships
227. All of the principles, guidelines and information provided in the preceding
sections, dealing with the phases of integrated river basin management, are
applicable to shared and/or transboundary river basins. Transboundary
river basins include those basins that are shared by two or more countries,
and also those basins whose management may be shared between different
administrative units, for example between states in a federal system. In the
context of this guidance, transboundary basins are not limited to rivers and
can include transboundary aquifers and lakes.

228. Section 7.1 addresses special issues related to internationally shared river
basins, i.e. those which are shared between one or more countries. Section
7.2 deals with international partnerships for implementing integrated river
basin approaches more generally, whether the river basins themselves are
shared or not.

229. The challenges associated with communication, participation, collaboration

and institutional arrangements in the management of shared river basins,
and in the management of wetlands within shared river basins, are more
complex but not very different in nature to those same challenges in river
basins that lie entirely within a single political or administrative boundary.

230. In a shared river basin, more time and attention might be needed to
effect harmonization of laws and policies, as well as other international
agreements, in the preparatory phase. CEPA and participatory processes
may need to consider multiple languages and cultures within a shared basin.
Sectoral planning processes will need to take account not only of the needs
and priorities of other sectors, but also of other countries that share the
basin.

231. Even though it is challenging, collaborative management of shared river

basins has the potential to be a “catalyst for cooperation” (WWAP, 2006)
rather than a source of conflicts.

7.1 Special issues related to shared river basin and wetland systems
232. In cases where a river basin is shared between two or more Contracting
See also Handbook
Parties, the Ramsar Convention’s Article 5 makes it clear that these Parties
20, International
are expected to cooperate in the management of such resources.
cooperation
233. The declaration of the Second World Water Forum, in Paris in March 1998,
emphasized that riverine countries need to have a common vision for the
efficient management and effective protection of shared water resources. The
Africa Water Vision 2025 (UN Water/Africa, undated) takes the view that
“water basins serve as a basis for regional cooperation and development,
and are treated as natural assets for all within such basins”.

234. There is a range of possible institutional arrangements that might facilitate

cooperation between countries that share a river basin. The most formal
arrangement might be the establishment of an international river basin
organization or commission, created by several basin countries to facilitate

76
 Handbook 9: River basin management

Additional Information
Implementation of the Ramsar Convention at basin scale: building a
partnership to save Lake Chad Basin
Lake Chad is located in the eastern part of the Sahel region of
Africa at the southern edge of the Sahara desert. The lake and its
active hydrological basin constitutes an immensely important
freshwater resource, being Africa’s fourth largest lake (in surface
area) after Lakes Victoria, Tanganyika and Nyassa, and its
importance for human development is intensified by the fact that
the lake lies in a dry area with temperatures exceeding 45°C from
April to June in some parts of the basin.

Since 1972, due to the drought in the Sahel, there has been a
serious reduction in the size of the lake, with devastating consequences for the Lake Chad
ecosystem which have yet to be fully assessed.

Fortunately, right after the independence of the countries sharing the Basin, the Lake Chad
Basin Commission (LCBC) was created by the Fort Lamy (now N’Djamena) Convention signed
on 22 May, 1964, by the Heads of State of the four countries which share the lake, namely
Cameroon, Chad, Niger and Nigeria. In 1994 and 2000, the Member States increased to five
and six with the admission of Central African Republic and Sudan respectively. The major
purpose of the Lake Chad Basin Commission is to promote an integrated management of the
resources of the basin through continued support of regional cooperation, coordination of
regional programmes, planning, mobilization and follow-up of national projects with regional
implications.

Integrated Management Solution of the Lake Chad Basin Ecosystem

As part of its mandate of fostering regional cooperation through ensuring the wise, efficient
and sustainable exploitation of the resources of the conventional basin, the LCBC has embarked
on a number of projects in partnership with international organizations and national and
local stakeholders aimed at integrated management of the Lake Chad Basin. The project of the
Global Environment Facility (GEF) on the “Reversal of Land and Water Degradation Trends
in the Lake Chad Basin”, [which began] in September 2003, offer[ed] opportunities for the
enhancement of integrated river basin management efforts in the Lake Chad basin and perhaps
a model for other regional initiatives.

In addition, the agreed “Lake Chad Vision 2025” is consistent with the “Action Plan for
Managing Africa’s Wetland” as part of the Environmental Initiative of New Partnership for
Africa’s Development (NEPAD). In order to help in realizing this Vision, in November 2002 the
LCBC signed a Memorandum of Cooperation with the Secretariat of the Ramsar Convention
that will advance the decision of the Tenth Summit of the LCBC Heads of State in July 2000, to
designate the entire Lake Chad as a Transboundary Ramsar Site under the Ramsar Convention
in a partnership between the LCBC, Ramsar, and WWF Living Waters Programme.

The progress of the LCBC shows a sophisticated recognition of the interdependence between
the sustainable use of freshwater resources and the conservation and sustainable management
of freshwater ecosystems (wetlands), one which may provide a model for the work of other
basin commissions in Africa and beyond.

For more information, visit http://lakechad.iwlearn.org/

77
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

consultation, negotiation and broad coordination, with appropriate statutory

and regulatory powers delegated to it by the member countries.

235. Less formal arrangements might include bilateral and multilateral joint
technical groups, established for the purpose of sharing information about
the basin and its management and for cooperating on implementation at
technical levels, such as in joint monitoring programmes.

236. As a minimum, countries sharing a river basin are encouraged to establish

frequent specific contacts in order to exchange information on wetlands
and river basin management. Opportunities for information exchange and
collaboration include:

• establishing networks for monitoring and exchanging data on the water

quality and quantity in the basin;
• a joint analysis of information on the quantity and type of water used
for various purposes in each country;
• exchange of information on protection measures for groundwater,
upper catchments and wetlands;
• sharing of information on structural and non-structural mechanisms for
regulating flow for navigation and flood prevention;

Additional Information
The Danube Commission and its River Basin Management Expert Group
The Danube River is a source of life for 83 million people living in its 800,000 sq km basin,
covering 18 European countries. The river irrigates the fields along its course, feeds the
surrounding population on fish, and carries people and goods along its 2,857 km long course.
Its natural beauty inspires poets, painters and composers – for centuries, it has attracted
conquerors and influenced the course of history. However, recent times have been dominated
by cooperation. On the basis of the UN-ECE Convention on the Protection and Use of
Transboundary Waters (Helsinki Convention), a corresponding agreement, the Danube River
Protection Convention (DRPC), was developed and signed in Sofia in 1994. DRPC was designed
to encourage the Contracting Parties to intensify their water management cooperation in the
field of water protection and use. It became the overall legal instrument for cooperation and
transboundary water management in the Danube River basin.

With the entry into force of DRPC in 1998, the International Commission for the Protection
of the Danube River (ICPDR) was established as the main decision-making body under the
Convention. It represents a common platform for the sustainable use of the basin’s resources
in relation to its aquatic ecology and for a coherent and integrated river basin management.
The ICPDR, through its River Basin Management Expert Group, has coordinated the
development of a comprehensive management plan for the entire Danube river basin using the
principles of the EU Water Framework Directive. Of the 13 main Danube states, a majority are
currently EU Member States; they cooperate with four additional states in the lower Danube
basin, thus assuring the best ways of transfer and exchange of technology and know-how.
ICPDR is providing a basin-wide platform for the coordination necessary to develop a River
Basin Management Plan (RBMP) which provides a programme of measures to ensure that
environmental objectives (such as the achievement of good water status by 2015) are met on
time. The Roof Report, containing information on issues of multilateral importance and the
basin-wide coordination arrangements, was submitted to the EC in 2004 and an analysis of river
basin characteristics, pressures and impacts in 2005.

78
 Handbook 9: River basin management

• joint planning related to regional protected area systems covering

inland as well as coastal wetland ecosystems;
• development of scientific programmes to address migration of aquatic
biota such as mammals and reptiles within and between river basins;
• establishment of programmes to support equitable sharing of water
resources.
237. The aim should be the preparation of technical reports on the river basin,
including information on the needs of the local inhabitants in each part of
the basin as well as existing or potential problems in parts of the river basin
that require separate or collaborative efforts to deal with them.

238. In some cases, several countries within a region may wish to collaborate on
issues and programmes of regional interest, such as equitable allocation of
water, power generation, protected area networks or transport planning,
that affect or are affected by conditions in a number of neighbouring river
basins, even if these basins themselves each lie entirely within one country.
In such cases, the guidance on international cooperation and partnerships is
equally relevant.

In 2000, the ICPDR established an

Ecological Expert Group to support
activities related to the conservation
and sustainable management of
riverine ecosystems in the Danube
basin, as well as those terrestrial
and wetland ecosystems directly
depending on them. Some of the
ecological experts participating in this
group are also Ramsar focal points at
national level. Where this is not the
case, mutual exchange of information
between the Danube experts, often
coming from the water management
sector, and Ramsar focal points, often
representing the nature conservation
sector, is crucial. It has identified
The Ecological Expert Group of the ICPDR supports activities
local wetland pilot projects to be related to the conservation and sustainable management of riverine
submitted to the UNDP/GEF Danube ecosystems in the Danube basin, as well as those terrestrial and
Regional Project and raised awareness wetland ecosystems directly depending on them. Some members
among local NGOs about available of the Expert Group are pictured here on a visit to the Danube
grants and training material. With the Floodplain National Park, Austria, 2002, during the 5th meeting of
the group. Photo: Tobias Salathé/Ramsar.
reorganization of work of the ICPDR
in 2006, the Ecological Expert Group’s mandate was not renewed. It is therefore important that
the River Basin Management Expert Group fully integrates the ecological and wetland aspects in
their work; the Ramsar National Focal Points in Danube basin countries need to engage actively
with them. Furthermore, experts of WWF International’s Danube-Carpathian Programme,
the International Association for Danube Research (IAD), and others support the work of the
national experts substantially.

For more information visit www.icpdr.org.

79
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

7.2 Partnerships with relevant conventions, organizations and

initiatives
239. In order to undertake an effective approach to promoting the integration
of wetland conservation and wise use into river basin management, it is
important that the Contracting Parties to the Ramsar Convention be aware
of, and take into consideration, the related activities of other international
conventions, organizations and initiatives.

240. The sustainable use of freshwater has been identified as a critical component
of Agenda 21 and as such has been the focus of a series of meetings
under the auspices of the United Nation’s Commission on Sustainable
Development and other UN agencies. Other relevant recent and current
international initiatives include:

• the Global Water Partnership, which provides a framework to

coordinate efforts to promote integrated water resource management,
especially in developing countries;
• the Vision for Water, Life and the Environment, developed under the
auspices of the World Water Council;
• the establishment of the United Nations Decade of Water (http://www.
un.org/waterforlifedecade/index.html);
• the outcome of the World Summit on Sustainable Development in
Johannesburg in 2002, which called for the development of integrated
water resources management and water efficiency plans in all countries
by 2005, with support to developing countries;
• the Transboundary River Basin Initiative (TRIB) project, initiated by the
United Nations Development Programme.

241. It is important that guidelines and activities under the framework of the
Ramsar Convention serve as a linkage and input to other relevant initiatives
at the international level.

242. Several other conventions and agreements are relevant in terms of these
Guidelines at the global and regional level:

• The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), which has identified

the conservation of the biodiversity of inland waters as a particular
priority. CBD has adopted a Joint Work Programme with the Ramsar
Convention to address this matter. CBD decision IX/19, paragraphs 2
and 3, refers specifically to the importance of improved international
cooperation regarding the allocation and management of water and
urges its Parties to strengthen relevant international cooperative
arrangements for this.

• Various international or transboundary watercourse conventions and

agreements exist that require states to avoid, eliminate or mitigate
significant harm to other watercourse states. These assist states to
establish rules with regard to the changes in use of an international
watercourse and cover issues such as EIA, consultation, joint protection
of watercourse ecosystems, pollution control, introduction of alien
species, prevention of erosion, siltation, and salt water intrusion. These
are general frameworks for the protection and ecologically sound
management of transboundary surface waters and groundwaters in

80
 Handbook 9: River basin management

both lakes and rivers. Further details of the relevance, utility and legal
nature of two important United Nations watercourse conventions are
provided by the CBD (Brels, Coates and Loures, 2008).

• The Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine

Environment from Land-based Activities (GPA) and the Washington
Declaration were adopted in 1995 and UNEP was tasked to lead the
coordination effort and hosts the GPA Coordination Office. It addresses
the linkages between freshwater and the marine environment. The
comprehensive, multi-sectoral approach of the GPA also reflects the
desire of Governments to strengthen the collaboration and coordination
of all agencies with mandates relevant to the impact of land-based
activities on the marine environment, through their participation in a
global programme.

243. At the regional and river basin level there are a great number of multilateral
and bilateral agreements which provide a basis for cooperation in the
management of shared water resources. UNEP (2002) [has] conducted a
review of such agreements.

Guidelines Box O. Guidelines for Contracting Parties for the management

of shared river basins and wetland systems, and partnership with relevant
conventions, organizations and initiatives
O1. Identify and describe shared river basins, document the key issues of common concern
in the basin (diagnostic study), and develop formal joint management arrangements or
collaboration for development and implementation of action plans to deal with such
issues.

O2. Where appropriate, establish or strengthen bi- or multi-state river basin management
commissions to promote international cooperation for shared water resources and
wetland management.

O3. With regard to shared river basins, Contracting Parties should inform the Ramsar
Secretariat of the establishment of any joint management arrangements and also of
actions by other party or non-party states which may lead to changes in the ecological
character of sites included in the List of Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar
List) in their own portion of the basin.

O4. Ensure that these guidelines, and other related guidelines under the Ramsar Convention,
are brought to the attention of the relevant international conventions, organizations and
programmes, with a view to ensuring that the objectives of the Ramsar Convention are
reflected in the activities of these other initiatives.

O5. Ensure close coordination at the national level between the Ramsar Administrative
Authorities and the focal points for other international conventions and agreements
related to these subjects.

O6. Ensure, as appropriate, adequate consideration of wetland-related issues in the operation

of any regional agreements related to shared river basins and water resources.

81
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

8. References
Brels, S., Coates, D., and Lourdes, F. (2008). Transboundary water resources
management: the role of international watercourse agreements in
implementation of the CBD. CBD Technical Series no. 40, 48 pages. Secretariat
of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal, Canada. Available at:
http://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/cbd-ts-40-en.pdf)

CA (2007). Water for Food, Water for Life: A Comprehensive Assessment of Water
Management in Agriculture. Earthscan, London and International Water
Management Institute, Colombo. 645pp. http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/
assessment/

Dickens, C., Kotze, D., Mashigo, S., MacKay, H. and Graham M. (2004). Guidelines
for integrating the protection, conservation and management of wetlands into
catchment management planning. Water Research Commission Report Number
TT220/03, Pretoria, South Africa. Available on request from the Water Research
Commission www.wrc.org.za.

Dublin Statement on Water and Sustainable Development (1992). Proceedings of the

International Conference on Water and the Environment (ICWE) in Dublin, Ireland,
January 26-31, 1992.

Emerton, L. and Bos, E. (2004). Value. Counting ecosystems as water infrastructure.

IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, United Kingdom. 88pp. http://data.
iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/2004-046.pdf

Millennium Ecosystem assessment (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Wetlands

and Water Synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington DC. http://www.
maweb.org/documents/document.358.aspx.pdf

Ramsar Convention Secretariat (2007). Water-related guidance: A framework for the

Convention’s water-related guidance. Ramsar Handbooks for the wise use
of wetlands, [4th] edition, vol. [8]. Ramsar Convention Secretariat, Gland,
Switzerland. Available at:www.ramsar.org/pdf/lib/hbk4-08.pdf.United
Nations (1993). Agenda 21: Earth Summit - The United Nations Programme of
Action from Rio. United Nations, New York. http://www.unep.org/Documents.
Multilingual/Default.asp?documentID=52

United Nations (2002). Report of the World Summit on Sustainable Development,

Johannesburg, August 2002. United Nations Publication A/CONF.199/20, United
Nations, New York. http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/publications/publications.
htm .

UN Water/Africa (undated). The Africa Water Vision for 2025: Equitable and
Sustainable Use of Water for Socioeconomic Development. http://www.uneca.
org/awich/African%20Water%20Vision%202025.pdf

UNEP (2002). Atlas of International Freshwater Agreements, published in cooperation

with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) (http://www.
transboundarywaters.orst.edu/publications/atlas/), contains a detailed listing
of more than 300 international freshwater agreements.

WWAP (2006). Water – A shared responsibility: 2nd United Nations World Water
Development Report. UNESCO, Paris. http://www.unesco.org/water/wwap/
wwdr/wwdr2/table_contents.shtml

82
 Handbook 9: River basin management

Relevant Resolutions
Resolution IX.3
(adopted by the 9th Conference of Parties, Kampala, Uganda, November 2005)

Engagement of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands in ongoing multilateral

processes dealing with water
1. ACKNOWLEDGING the United Nations “World Water Development Report”, showing the
worsening water crisis due to water mismanagement and RECOGNIZING that global climate
change and variability are likely to exacerbate this crisis;

2. RECALLING the commitments made by governments in the United Nations Millennium

Declaration and at the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development to reduce by half
by the year 2015 the proportion of people who are unable to reach or to afford safe drinking
water and the proportion of people without access to basic sanitation; to develop by 2005
integrated water resources management and water efficiency plans; and to achieve by 2010 a
significant reduction in the current rate of loss of biological diversity;

3. ALSO ACKNOWLEDGING the vital contribution that wetlands make to the protection,
purification, retention and provision of water resources for water and food supplies and
their key role in groundwater recharge and flood control on which the well-being of people
and their livelihoods depend, and AWARE of the decision adopted by the Commission on
Sustainable Development at its 13th session (CSD13) in April 2005, which emphasized the
same themes;

4. FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGING that CSD13 decided on a follow-up on water and sanitation

by devoting, in 2008 and 2012, a separate segment of CSD review sessions to monitoring and
following up the implementation of decisions taken at CSD13 on water and sanitation and
their interlinkages;

5. AWARE of the Global Water Partnership and the range of tools and technical guidance it
provides on integrated water management;

6. WELCOMING the outcome of the FAO-Netherlands conference on “Water for Food and
Ecosystems – Make it Happen” on the implementation of actions for an integrated approach
to balancing water resources for food production and proper ecosystem functioning, which
highlighted the necessary components of such an approach, viz. scientific knowledge base,
enabling environments, and valuation methodologies for water ecosystem benefits/services;

7. AWARE of the findings of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) that global wetlands
account for almost half of the total value of all ecosystems combined, but that wetland
ecosystems seem to be deteriorating at a faster rate than any other ecosystem, and aware of
the MA conclusions that the survival of wetlands and related ecosystems and their important
contributions to global development depend upon the achievement of a balance between
the human need for ecosystem benefits/services and the need for continued functioning of
wetland ecosystems;

8. RECOGNIZING that wetland ecosystems play a critical role in water management;

9. RECOGNIZING the crucial role wetlands play in relation to poverty reduction and natural
disaster preparedness, mitigation and adaptation as reflected in Resolutions IX.9 and IX.14;

83
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

10. RECALLING the analysis of all regional COP9 preparatory meetings of the Parties to the
Ramsar Convention of the possibilities and limitations for regional cooperation in the
management of transboundary / cross-border water resources and of Ramsar sites and the
migratory species and populations which depend upon them;

11. RECOGNIZING the momentum provided by the international organizations associated

globally with the Ramsar Convention, whose initiatives aim at achieving the wise use of
wetlands with the involvement of all sectors; and

12. ALSO RECOGNIZING the contributions to the global and regional water debates/meetings/
sessions of the three World Water Forums held in Marrakech, Den Haag and Kyoto, and
PLEASED by the prospective celebration of the Fourth Water Forum in Mexico in March 2006;

THE CONFERENCE OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES

13. AFFIRMS that the conservation and wise use of wetlands is critical for the provision of water
for people and nature, and that wetlands are a source, as well as a user, of water, in addition
to supplying a range of other ecosystem benefits/services;

14. ALSO AFFIRMS that priorities for water management should reflect the goals of safekeeping
and maintaining water resources, as well as maintaining the ecological character of wetlands;

15. CALLS on Contracting Parties to bring Resolutions VI.23, VII.18, VIII.1, and COP9 Resolution
IX.1 Annex C and its appendices and the “Guidelines for the allocation and management of water
for maintaining the ecological functions of wetlands” (Ramsar Handbook 12) to the attention of
national, regional and local authorities in charge of water management for their integration
into, and their multisectoral implementation through, national Integrated Water Resources
Management plans so as to include an ecosystem approach consistent with the Ramsar
Convention;

16. UPHOLDS the principle that governments should commit to informing and organizing the
meaningful participation of all sectors of society in decision-making on the conservation,
distribution, use and management of water at local, regional and national levels;

17. RENEWS its call to governments and institutions at all levels to ensure that the maintenance
of wetlands and their functions are fully taken into account in the design, planning and
implementation of water-related projects, poverty reduction strategy papers, and coastal zone
planning;

18. CONFIRMS the need to consider an enhanced focus on collaboration amongst Contracting
Parties to the Ramsar Convention on the issue of wetland conservation for the wise
management of water resources;

19. REQUESTS the Ramsar Secretariat to cooperate with the Secretariat of the Fourth World
Water Forum (Mexico, 2006) and other relevant global and regional water initiatives in
the future in order to ensure that the importance of wetland ecosystem benefits/services is
recognized in the Forum outputs as a key element to effectively managing water resources
whilst maintaining the ecosystem functioning of wetlands;

20. INSTRUCTS the Ramsar Secretariat to promote and implement, with Contracting Parties,
relevant and key elements of the decision taken at CSD13 on Integrated Water Resources
Management, including inter alia enhancing the sustainability of ecosystems that provide
essential resources and benefits/services for human well-being and economic activity and
developing innovative means of financing their protection; protecting and rehabilitating
catchment areas for regulating water flows and improving water quality, taking into
account the critical role of ecosystems; and supporting more effective water demand and

84
 Handbook 9: River basin management

water resource management across all sectors, especially in the agricultural sector; and
ALSO INSTRUCTS the Secretariat to report to the 34th meeting of the Standing Committee
on an action plan for the Convention in promoting these themes in order for the Standing
Committee through the Secretary General to provide input to the CSD report-back session in
2008; and

21. FURTHER INSTRUCTS the Secretariat to prepare a report for COP10 on the Convention’s
activities in promoting these themes.

Resolution X.19
(adopted by the 10th Conference of Parties, Changwon, Republic of Korea, 2008)

Wetlands and river basin management: consolidated scientific and technical

guidance
1. AWARE of the suite of technical and scientific guidelines and other materials prepared by
the Scientific and Technical Review Panel (STRP) to support Contracting Parties in their
implementation of wetland conservation and wise use;

2. NOTING that the 9th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties (COP9) instructed
the STRP to prepare further advice and guidance for consideration by Contracting Parties at
COP10, focusing on the immediate and high priority tasks set out in Annex 1 to Resolution
IX.2;

3. THANKING the STRP for its work in preparing the advice and guidance annexed to this
Resolution, as well as for the supporting technical reviews and reports being made available
to Contracting Parties and others as COP Information Papers and Ramsar Technical Reports;
and

4. ALSO THANKING the government of Sweden for its financial support to the Panel and
Working Groups for the preparation of this advice and guidance and the technical reports,
and EXPRESSING GREAT APPRECIATION to the many organizations and individuals
that have provided significant in-kind support to the work of the Panel, including through
supporting the time and work of its members and observers and through providing to the
Panel information and case studies related to river basin management;

THE CONFERENCE OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES

5. NOTES the “Consolidated Guidance for integrating wetland conservation and wise use into
river basin management” provided in the annex to this Resolution, and INVITES Contracting
Parties to make good use of it as appropriate, adapting it as necessary to suit national
conditions and circumstances, within the frameworks of existing regional initiatives and
commitments, in the context of sustainable development and in accordance with national
institutions and legal frameworks;

6. CONFIRMS that the “Consolidated Guidance for integrating wetland conservation and
wise use into river basin management” in the annex to this Resolution updates and wholly
supersedes the earlier guidance on this matter adopted as the annex to Resolution VII.18 and
as Annex Ci to Resolution IX.1;

7. INVITES Contracting Parties to draw this “Consolidated Guidance for integrating wetland
conservation and wise use into river basin management” to the attention of all relevant
stakeholders, including inter alia government ministries, departments and agencies, water

85
Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands, 4th edition

and basin management agencies, non-governmental organizations, and civil society, and
FURTHER INVITES Contracting Parties to encourage these stakeholders to take these
guidelines into account, together with those of the Ramsar Toolkit of Wise Use Handbooks,
in their decision-making and activities that relate to the delivery of the wise use of wetlands
through the maintenance of their ecological character;

8. INSTRUCTS the Scientific and Technical Review Panel to undertake, as a priority task
during the next two triennia, a review of the operative paragraphs of all adopted Resolutions
concerning water and wetlands interactions; to make recommendations concerning
consolidation, updating and retirement of aspects of these Resolutions in relation to recent
developments; and to prepare for COP12 consideration a new draft Resolution concerning
water and wetlands issues;

9. INSTRUCTS the Ramsar Secretariat to disseminate widely the “Consolidated Guidance for
integrating wetland conservation and wise use into river basin management” annexed to this
Resolution, including through amendment and updating of the Ramsar Wise Use Handbooks
as well as through a proactive approach towards other relevant multilateral environmental
agreements (MEAs), especially the Convention on Biological Diversity and the UNECE
Water Convention, as well as the secretariats of regional and sub-regional bodies involved
in management of shared river basins1, and to build the capacity, especially in developing
countries, of National Focal Points to use and widely mainstream this guidance in their
countries; and

10. REQUESTS the Secretariat to invite the relevant MEAs, subregional and regional bodies
mentioned in paragraph 9 above to report on actions taken in relation to this Resolution and
the annexed guidance.

1 Note: The terms “shared river basins” and “transboundary river basins” have both been used in previous Ramsar
Resolutions and are both in wide usage in different parts of the world. For the purposes of this Resolution and its
annexed guidance, the term “shared” is used to refer to river basins in which groundwater and surface water flow
across or between two or more countries. However, the term “transboundary” river basins is also commonly used
to describe river basins whose management is shared by different administrative units, for example between two or
more local authorities, within the same country. In this guidance, it is used in this sense. The use of these expressions
and the aforementioned explanation do not imply acceptance by all Parties [and differs from the use in designating
Transboundary Ramsar Sites]. The reading of this Resolution and its annexed guidance shall be in accordance with
Principle 2 of the Rio Declaration.

86
 The Ramsar Convention ‘toolkit’ for the conservation and wise use of
wetlands, 4th ed. (2010)
Convention pillar 1: Wise Use
Handbook 1 Wise use of wetlands
Concepts and approaches for the wise use of wetlands
Handbook 2 National Wetland Policies
Developing and implementing National Wetland Policies
Handbook 3 Laws and institutions
Reviewing laws and institutions to promote the conservation and wise use of wetlands
Handbook 4 Avian influenza and wetlands
Guidance on control of and responses to highly pathogenic avian influenza
Handbook 5 Partnerships
Key partnerships for implementation of the Ramsar Convention
Handbook 6 Wetland CEPA
The Convention’s Programme on communication, education, participation, and public
awareness (CEPA) 2009-2015
Handbook 7 Participatory skills
Establishing and strengthening local communities’ and indigenous people’s
participation in the management of wetlands
Handbook 8 Water-related guidance
An Integrated Framework for the Convention’s water-related guidance
Handbook 9 River basin management
Integrating wetland conservation and wise use into river basin management
Handbook 10 Water allocation and management
Guidelines for the allocation and management of water for maintaining the ecological
functions of wetlands
Handbook 11 Managing groundwater
Managing groundwater to maintain wetland ecological character
Handbook 12 Coastal management
Wetland issues in Integrated Coastal Zone Management
Handbook 13 Inventory, assessment, and monitoring
An Integrated Framework for wetland inventory, assessment, and monitoring
Handbook 14 Data and information needs
A Framework for Ramsar data and information needs
Handbook 15 Wetland inventory
A Ramsar framework for wetland inventory and ecological character description
Handbook 16 Impact assessment
Guidelines on biodiversity-inclusive environmental impact assessment and strategic
environmental assessment
Convention pillar 2: Ramsar sites designation and management
Handbook 17 Designating Ramsar Sites
Strategic Framework and guidelines for the future development of the List of Wetlands
of International Importance
Handbook 18 Managing wetlands
Frameworks for managing Ramsar Sites and other wetlands
Handbook 19 Addressing change in wetland ecological character
Convention pillar 3: International cooperation
Handbook 20 International cooperation
Guidelines and other support for international cooperation under the Ramsar
Convention on Wetlands
Companion document
Handbook 21 The Ramsar Convention Strategic Plan 2009-2015
Goals, strategies, and expectations for the Ramsar Convention’s implementation for
the period 2009 to 2015
Ramsar
Handbooks
4th edition

Handbook 9
River basin management

Ramsar Convention Secretariat

Rue Mauverney 28
CH-1196 Gland, Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 999 0170
E-mail: [email protected]
Web: http://www.ramsar.org