1. Reducing Trans-boundary Degradation of the Kura-Aras River Basin UNDP/Sida United Nations Development Programme Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency Presented by: Mariam Shotadze, Programme Analyst

2. Reducing Trans-boundary Degradation of the Kura-Aras River Basin Overall objective: ensure the quality and quantity of water resources of the Kura-Aras meets short and long-term needs of ecosystems and communities using the ecosystem Immediate objectives: foster regional co-operation; increase national and regional capacity; address water quality and quantity problems; promote changes in the economic sectors causing pollution, water shortages and habitat degradation

3. Reducing Trans-boundary Degradation of the Kura-Aras River Basin

4. Program phases: Phase I, Design phase (PDFA) Phase II, Planning Phase (PDF B); Phase III, Implementation Phase (full-size project) Current Phase: Phase II - Planning Phase (PDF B) Two Components: Leading GEF & Suplementary Sida Funding: GEF ….. + Sida: USD 690,000 Duration: Sida: October 2003-December 2005 (2.5 years); GEF 2005 October-March 2007 (1.6 years)

5. Reducing Trans-boundary Degradation of the Kura-Aras River Basin Objectives of the Sida Component: Identification of National Legal-Institutional and Policy needs for Integrated Management of the Kura River Basin; Background Analyses of the Kura River Basin (feedback to TDA): Water quality and quantity; Major ecosystems; Socio-economic trends, driving forces and pressures on the basin’s degradation; Existing water infrastructure Identification of Optimal Institutional arrangement for the management of the Basin; Development of National Action Plans

6. Reducing Trans-boundary Degradation of the Kura-Aras River Basin Geographic Scope: Armenia; Azerbaijan; Georgia

7. Project Organization UNDP Georgia Executing Manager Tbilisi Office NTL Support staff Yerevan Office NTL Support staff Baku Office NTL Support staff Chief Technical Advisor Three National Advisory Committees

8. Reducing Trans-boundary Degradation of the Kura-Aras River Basin Progress Achieved : Policy, Legal and Institutional needs report; Pre-cursory gender study report; Background Analyses; National objectives for IRBP&M identified and prioritized; Overview of existing basin management institutional models made and several options applicable for the Kura Basin developed; National needs and priorities for IRBP&M identified; Preparation of National Action Plans started

9. Reducing Trans-boundary Degradation of the Kura-Aras River Basin Progress Achieved (cont.): Study Tour arranged in Hungary to learn the cooperation within Danube river basin; As a technical assistance to the project focal point agencies: trainings of representatives of water-related agencies in Access database and GIS applications conducted; Basic office equipment purchased; High-speed internet access provided to the Georgian hydromet Preparation of national and regional GIS maps started

10. Reducing Trans-boundary Degradation of the Kura-Aras River Basin Major Achievements, Challenges, Weaknesses: Achievements, positive sides: Good basis prepared for SAP and NAPs; Good national channels established; Roster of national consultants developed; Regional network of technical experts further developed and strengthened; Cross-sectoral approach used through contribution from Advisory Committees; Incetive-based approach proved successful for effective functioning of advisory committees; Once fully operational DEX proved very quick and effective mechanism for project delivery and controling expenditures

11. Reducing Trans-boundary Degradation of the Kura-Aras River Basin Major Achievements, Challenges, Weaknesses: Challenges and Weakness: Assumtion of two components to go in parallel didn’t work that hindered start-up of Sida component and Iran’s involvement; No/weak involvement of other UNDP country offices; focus on national-level needs and keeping of low political profile; Thin market of national experts and difference in national expertise; Problems with data availability and quality, especially in Georgia; Poor project QA/QC: none of the offices had project coordination function, project assurance role was unclear; Poor risk management; Focus mostly on water resources and very weak/no consideration of other resources; No involvement of all major sectors, i.e. hydropower.

12. Reducing Trans-boundary Degradation of the Kura-Aras River Basin Thank you!!!