The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands

37th Meeting of the Ramsar Standing
Committee

CONVENTION ON WETLANDS (Ramsar, Iran, 1971) 37th Meeting of the Standing Committee Gland, Switzerland, 2-6 June 2008

Agenda item 8.7

DOC. SC37-24

Wetlands and river basin management: consolidated scientific and technical guidance

Note by the STRP Chair and Ramsar Secretariat

1. The attached draft Resolution and annexed guidance has been prepared by the Scientific and Technical Review Panel's Working Group 4 on Water Resource Management and the STRP Chair as one of the Panel's high priority tasks for the 2006-2008 triennium.

2. Specifically this guidance responds to combined aspects of STRP's tasks 81, 82 and 83 in its 2006-2008 Work Plan, to: Develop in more detail an adaptation to the Ramsar context of the "Critical Path" approach for river basin management [as adopted by COP9 Resolution IX.1 Annex Ci] and (as appropriate) coastal zone management and prepare operational guidance, including for the application of CEPA techniques, skills and objectives that support Critical Path planning and implementation. Prepare revised Handbook and updated revised guidance on wetlands and RBM.

3. To address this, the STRP's Working Group has undertaken the following work:

i) collation and analysis of a range of case studies relevant to the RBM/critical path approach (to be published separately as a Ramsar Technical Report);
ii) preparation of expanded RBM/critical path guidance, including operational guidance based on case studies and CEPA guidance based on work with the STRP's CEPA thematic group; and
iii) consolidation of Ramsar's various guidance documents on river basin management, to bring together Wise Use Handbook 7 (3rd edition) and the COP9 guidance in Resolution IX1 Annex Ci, including additional guidance and information arising from the analysis of the case studies.

4. The guidance here provides this consolidation and elaboration of the Convention's earlier guidance on wetlands and river basin management.

5. In preparing this consolidated guidance, the STRP's Working Group has attempted to remain consistent, as far as possible, with the spirit and intentions of the guidance provided in the Annex to Resolution VII.18 and Resolution IX.1 Annex C(i), and to limit any substantive changes in the content of those documents to the inclusion of new material and information arising from the analysis of the river basin management case studies (3.i. above) in the 2006-08 triennium, and from work with the STRP's CEPA Working Group in the 2006-08 triennium.

6. Where there have been changes made to the original guidelines provided in the Annex to Resolution VII.18 and Resolution IX.1 Annex C(i), these have been limited to the following:

i) Some text in the original guidelines has been updated to reflect new research, knowledge and developments in other international processes such as the World Water Forum and the Global Water Partnership.

ii) The text in some guidelines has been modified slightly to clarify whether the guideline in each case applies to national level overarching policy or to more operational activities at river basin level. Where relevant, guidelines on certain specific issues (such as institutional development) has been included for both national and river basin levels, to reflect the need to consider these issues at both levels concurrently, in order to promote implementation of integrated river basin management approaches.

iii) The text of some guidelines has been modified to make them slightly less prescriptive regarding the use of certain techniques or approaches. This is appropriate since experiences in the last ten years have indicated that it is essential to promote flexibility in approaches used for river basin planning and management.

iv) In Resolution VII.18, the term "river basin management authority" is used widely. That term now has come to imply a quite specific legal status of the institution in question. The term "river basin management agency" is somewhat less prescriptive and allows Parties a fair degree of flexibility in how they design, establish, oversee and operate the institution at river basin level. This term is used instead in the consolidated guidance.

v) The "critical path" diagram from Resolution IX.1 Annex C(i) has been modified slightly to clarify the difference between the initial preparatory phase at national level and the preparatory phase at river basin level. In both cases, the preparatory phase addresses the provision of a supportive policy, legislation and institutional environment, but the guidelines for national level planning and actions are slightly different to those for river basin level. Experience has shown that the national preparatory phase is a very important factor in promoting successful implementation of integrated approaches at river basin level.

7. This new Consolidated Guidance has been designed to supersede and entirely replace the guidance contained in the Annex to Resolution VII.18 and in Annex C (i) to Resolution IX.1.

8. In addition to the guidance attached to this note, the STRP's Working Group has prepared a number of supporting "Information Boxes" explaining issues relevant to different aspects of the guidelines. It is planned that these will be provided as additional information to Parties at COP10 as a COP10 Information Paper, and that they will then be incorporated in the 4th edition of the Wise Use Handbook on wetlands and river basin management.

Draft Resolution X.00

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. WELCOMES the "Consolidated Guidance for integrating wetland conservation and wise use into river basin management" provided in the annex to this Resolution, and URGES 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, and in the context of sustainable development;

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. URGES 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 URGES 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 include in its priority tasks for the 2009-2011 triennium 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 COP11 consideration a new draft Resolution concerning water and wetlands issues; and

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.

Annex

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

[Secretariat Editorial Notes: References to Ramsar Technical Reports in preparation will be updated once these have been allocated a report number and publication date. References to Ramsar Wise Use Handbooks currently refer to the published 3rd edition (2007), but these will be updated and replaced in the final version of this guidance to be issued following COP10 with the relevant Handbook numbers for the 4th edition.]

Contents

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

2. Introduction

2.1 The importance of wetlands for water and water-related ecosystem services
2.2 Development of the Convention's guidance on river basin management
2.3 Understanding integration in the context of Ramsar, wetlands, and river basin management
Wetlands and Integrated River Basin Management
Ramsar and Integrated River Basin Management
2.4 Guiding principles for integrating wetlands into river basin management
2.5 Improving the integration of wetlands in river basin management

3. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: Overview of the scientific and technical guidance

3.1 The "Critical Path" approach
3.2 Synchronisation with the water sector and other sectors

4. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: Scientific and technical guidance at national level

4.1 Preparatory phase at national level
4.2 Policy and legislation at national level
4.3 Institutional development
4.4 Communication, Education, Participation and Awareness (CEPA)
4.5 Capacity for implementation of integrated river basin management

5. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: Scientific and technical guidance at river basin level

5.1 General sequencing in the preparatory and planning phases
5.2 Preparatory phase at river basin level
5.3 Planning phase at river basin level
5.4 Implementation phase at river basin level
5.5 Strategic phase at river basin level

6. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: International cooperation and partnerships

6.1 Special issues related to shared river basin and wetland systems
6.2 Partnerships with relevant conventions, organizations and initiatives

7. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: Getting started

8. List of Guidance Boxes

Notes

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 additional guidance 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. In addition to 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 (MEA, 2005 - Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Wetlands and Water Synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington DC), it is recognized in the Draft Strategic Plan for 2009-2014 that "increasing demands for water abstraction, and a lack of appreciation of the role and value of wetlands in the global hydrological cycle, are key contributing factors to the continued change, deterioration and loss of wetlands". The importance of wetlands as sources of freshwater is highlighted in both the MA Wetlands Synthesis and the introduction to the Draft Strategic Plan 2009-2014, and the need for ecosystem-based approaches to policy and decision-making is emphasised.

8. [Strategy 1.5 of the Draft Strategic Plan 2009-2014 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 marine zone planning, and adaptation/mitigation responses to climate change.] [Editiorial note: This paragraph will be updated, as necessary, once the final version of the Strategic Plan 2009-2014 has been approved and adopted by COP.]

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 (MEA, 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, but this importance has not been 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" (MEA, 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" (MEA, 2005). 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 can have very significant influences on the ecological character of wetlands.

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 ecosystems, requires that managers and planners focus at the river basin level in developing effective management strategies.

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.[1]

16. Yet awareness of the need for this integration has been growing for a long time in the environment and wetlands communities (see, for example, the Dublin Principles[2] and Agenda 21[3]). 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 (Res IX.1 Annex C, Vol. 6 in the 3rd edition of the handbooks) provided an overview of the relationships between wetlands, water 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[4]) 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 the Ramsar Technical Report [X]. 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 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). These two previous guidances have now been fully integrated and supplemented with additional information and guidance derived from the case studies in order to form this Consolidated Guidance.

2.3 Understanding integration in the context of Ramsar, wetlands, and river basin management

Wetlands and Integrated River Basin Management

22. 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 which 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.

23. 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.

24. Definitions of IWRM and IRBM are many and varied, and all reflect the principal philosophy of co-coordinated decision-making across multiple land and water use sectors on multiple, connected scales. Some sectors use descriptions of IWRM that reflect a narrower perspective, i.e., with a primary focus on managing the actual water component of water resources 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 IRBM 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.

25. For the purposes of the Ramsar Convention, the broader perspective offered by the term IRBM is more relevant, since this term includes both land and water aspects and allows management to address the role that wetland ecosystems play as the connecting links between land and water systems in a river basin.

26. It is important to note here that the term "river basin" encompasses the surface and subsurface water resources, soil and land resources, wetlands and associated ecosystems, including those coastal and nearshore 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.

27. Experiences from several countries have shown that poorly integrated or strongly single-sector water resources management frequently leads 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 Ramsar Technical Report [X].

28. 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.

29. 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. This first step can often catalyse development and application of IWRM and IRBM approaches, since wetlands themselves are integrative in two ways:

• 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.

  Ramsar and Integrated River Basin Management

30. It has long been recognized, and is incorporated in all of Ramsar's guidance on wetland management planning (notably through Resolution VIII.14 and Ramsar Handbook 16), 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.

31. Until recently, however, the equivalent water uses in, upstream of, and downstream of, a wetland have not always been given sufficient attention - rather they have been considered an external driving force more or less 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.

32. 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.

33. 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. 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.

34. 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:

• 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

35. 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 6, 3rd 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.

36. Parties should note the following guiding principles:

2.5 Improving the integration of wetlands in river basin management

37. 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.

38. 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.

39. In summary, to improve the integration of wetlands into river basin management, attention needs to focus on three major areas of activity, which are described in more detail in section 3 of this document:

• A supportive policy, legislative and institutional environment that promotes cooperation between sectors and sectoral institutions and amongst stakeholder groups;
• 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;
• Sequence 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

40. 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.

41. 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.

42. The Critical Path approach offers a "road map", which 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.

43. 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.

44. 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 strategic phase involving monitoring, reporting and review of objectives and plans (Steps 8 and 9).

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

3.2 Synchronisation with the water sector and other sectors

45. 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 management, assists in synchronizing the wetlands cycle with these other cycles, sharing of information between sectors, and avoiding duplication of work.

46. 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.

47. 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.

48. Specialist CEPA initiatives from the wetlands sector can support the building of links and synchronization between the wetlands Critical Path and other 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.

49. 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.

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

4. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: scientific and technical guidance at national level

4.1 Preparatory phase at national level

50. 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 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.

51. 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.

52. 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.

53. 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 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).

54. 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;
• mechanisms for ensuring adequate capacity (financial, human, technical) for implementation of river basin management processes.

55. 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.

4.2 Policy and legislation at national level

Sectoral and over-arching policy and legislation

56. 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 support of appropriate economic instruments such as water pricing policies (e.g., "user pays" and "polluter pays").

57. 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.

58. If integrated river basin management approaches are being formally introduced in a country for the first time, it is usually helpful to begin with 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).

59. 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.

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

• policies and laws from various national sectors (such as water, agriculture, environment, economic development, 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
• 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.

61. 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) Tariff policies for 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;
xi) Delegation of certain regulatory or enforcement responsibilities to appropriate institutions at river basin level;
xii) Application of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) tools for spatial planning and development initiatives which could impact on water resources and wetlands within river basins.

Cooperation and collaboration between sectors

62. 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.

63. 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.

64. 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.

65. 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.

66. The following guidelines should be noted:

4.3 Institutional development

67. 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, multisectoral 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 has to coincide with river basins' boundaries instead of political boundaries.

68. 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.

69. 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.

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

71. 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.

72. 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.

73. 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;
• 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.

74. The following guidelines should be noted:

4.4 Communication, Education, Participation and Awareness (CEPA)

CEPA and participation in river basin management

75. 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.

76. 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.

77. CEPA (Communication, Education, Participation and Awareness) is an essential underpinning aspect of effective participation in integrated river 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.

78. 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.

Vertical communication and participation: between institutions and local people

79. 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.

80. 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.

81. As Ramsar Handbook 5 on Participatory Skills says: "Stakeholders are taken to be bearers of separate interests and/or contributions for the management 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."

82. 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 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

83. 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.

84. 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 7 and 8 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.

85. 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.

86. 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.

87. 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.

88. 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 in the operational currencies of river basin management; and
ii) second, how to work with water managers to develop basin operating rules and flow regimes that represent the optimal allocation of water between multiple uses, including ecosystem maintenance.

89. 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 operational currencies in which ecosystem water requirements are generally described. The Ramsar Technical Reports on environmental water requirements being prepared during the 2006-2008 triennium by the Scientific and Technical Review Panel (STRP) will provide more detail and examples of these issues. [Editorial note: This reference to RTRs will be updated once publication information is available.]

90. The following guidelines should be noted:

4.5 Capacity for implementation of integrated river basin management

91. 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.

92. 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.

93. 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 networks, information systems 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 collection and curation 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.

94. 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.

95. The following guidelines should be noted:

5. Integrating wetlands into river basin management: scientific and technical guidance at river basin level

96. 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 strategic phase - Steps 8 and 9.

5.1 General sequencing in the preparatory and planning phases

97. 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).

98 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.

99. 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.

100. 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.

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

5.2 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 ?

102. 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.

103. 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.

104. 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.

105. 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 ?

106. 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 ?

107. 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.

108. 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.

109. 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

110. Refer to Handbooks 2, 3 and 7 (3d edition, 2007) for further detailed guidance, and see also Resolution VIII.23, Incentive measures as tools for achieving the wise use of wetlands.

111. The following guidelines should be noted:

Step 1b: Establishing appropriate institutional arrangements at river basin level

What is this step and why is it important ?

112. 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.

113. 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.

114. 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 ?

115. 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 ?

116. Experiences from the case studies (see Ramsar Technical Report [X]) 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. This can be a very effective approach for getting all the responsible organizations and groups together and beginning to work collaboratively.

117. However, in many cases, independent facilitation in the early stage of Step 1b is supported by 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

118. Refer to Handbooks 2, 3, 5 and 7 for further detailed guidance.

119. The following guidelines should be noted:

Step 2: Developing CEPA programmes and stakeholder participation processes at river basin level

What is this step and why is it important ?

120. 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
• 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 ?

121. 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.

122. 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.

123. 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 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.

124. 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 ?

125. 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 representivity, it is preferable for the lead agent to be a public sector 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

125. Refer to Ramsar Handboo