Kazakhstan 2017-18 Water Management Country Status Factsheet SDG Indicator 6.5.1: Degree of implementation of integrated water resources management (0-100) Kazakhstan 2017-18 Target 6.5 By 2030, implement integrated water resources management at all levels, including through transboundary cooperation as appropriate. SDG 6.5.1 implementation Country Background (WB 2017) Population: 18 million Area: 2.725 million km² Human Development Index rank/category: 58/Very high (UNDP 2017) Overview: Kazakhstan has a certain level of water stress. With 40% of its water resources originating outside the country, transboundary cooperation is critical, though financing for transboundary cooperation is generally insufficient. Water Governance Background National Institutions: Committee for Water Resources, Ministry of Agriculture (est. ?). National Policy: Exists, but not based on IWRM (2014 policy with IWRM elements abolished and incorporated into the agricultural policy). National Law: Water code (1993), revised 2003. In 2016, government adopted the scheme for the use and protection of water resources. National IWRM Plan: Initially developed in 2006 (through UNDP project), but never adopted by government. Basin Management: Each basin has a basin organization, but with limited capacity, and inefficient implementation of management instruments. Two basins have IWRM plans. Aquifer Management: Limited management instruments being applied for aquifers. IWRM dimension Score (0-100) Summary of implementation status 1. Enabling environment (policies, laws and plans) Low: 29 The policies, laws and plans in place do not necessarily incorporate IWRM principles. Basin-level arrangements are generally more effective than national level. 2. Institutions and Participation (institutional capacity, cross-sector coordination and stakeholder participation) Low: 24 Institutions exist but their level of influence and capacity to coordinate stakeholder involvement is generally low. There is generally open access to information, but stakeholder influence is relatively low. Consideration of gender objectives is low. 3. Management Instruments (management and monitoring programmes, data & information sharing) Medium-low: 40 The networks for monitoring water availability and water quality are generally limited in effectiveness and coverage. Management instruments for sustainable and efficient water use are relatively advanced (including planning, control, taxes, tariffs, standards). 4. Financing (budgeting and financing) Low: 28 Financing for ongoing costs of water management is insufficient (60% of infrastructure is degraded). IWRM implementation status (0-100) Low: 30 On average, arrangements for water resources management are generally in place, but capacity and influence limits effective implementation. Many critical elements of IWRM, including cross-sectoral coordination and stakeholder engagement, are at low levels of implementation. IWRM Implementation Very low Low Medium-low Medium-high High Very high Score range 0-10 11-30 31-50 51-70 71-90 91-100

Water Resources Background (source: Aquastat) Water availability: 6,150 m3/cap/yr (2014) Water withdrawal: 1,257 m3/cap/yr (2010) Renewable Surface Water: 101 10^9 m3/year (2014) Renewable Groundwater: 34 10^9 m3/year (2014) Envir. Flow Req. (EFR): 37 10^9 m3/year (2017) Water Services Background (source: International Benchmarking Network IBNET) Dam capacity per capita: 4,536 m3/cap (2015) (Aquastat) Water connection coverage: 83% (2016) Sewerage connection coverage: 62% (2016) Revenue to operation cost revenue: 1.09 (2009) Non-Revenue Water (NRW): 17% (losses) (2016) Investment in water and sewerage infrastructure with private sector participation: No data Financing - Generally sufficient state funding for most investment needs, but inadequate funding for ongoing costs for maintenance and IWRM activities. - Some processes in place for raising revenue but not implemented. Private sector: Limited examples of involvement in water projects (e.g. Talgar River, Borovoe Island), and some negative examples (e.g. Almaty-Traktibel, Dostyk Canal). SDG 6 indicators Status 6.1.1 Access to safely managed drinking water 92%1 (2015) 6.2.1 Access to safely managed sanitation 98%1 (2015) 6.3.1 Proportion of wastewater safely treated No data 6.3.2 Proportion of bodies of water with good ambient water quality 6.4.1 Water-use efficiency 6.9 USD/m3 (low) (2015) 6.4.2 Level of water stress (withdrawals / available freshwater resources) 28% (2014) 6.5.2 Proportion of transboundary basin area with operational water cooperation arrangements 72% (2018) 6.6.1 Change in extent of water-related ecosystems 1 ’At least basic’ service. Sectoral use % of total withdrawals1 Municipal (Domestic) 4% Agriculture 66% Industry 30% Energy Environment EFR 35% (2017) 1 Aquastat 2010 IWRM Implementation Very low Low Medium-low Medium-high High Very high Potential priority areas, constraints and enablers The main challenge is the weak status and capacity of the national water committee and basin organizations, and their dependence on the ministry of agriculture. Another challenge is the old technologies in water management and water use in all sectors: agriculture, communal and industry. At the regional (Central Asian) level there is no clear vision to restore the Aral Sea. For more information and support Including completed 6.5.1 country questionnaires: http://iwrmdataportal.unepdhi.org This factsheet has been produced by: UN Environment-DHI Centre www.unepdhi.org Financial support: Danida.