wle-mekong.cgiar.orgriver!basin.!water,!food!and!energy!are!all!essential ... ecosystems! •...

1

Introduction The CGIAR Challenge Programme on Water and Food had the pleasure to co-‐host the 3rd Mekong Forum on Water, Food and Energy with the Institute of Water Resources Planning, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Viet Nam; and the Mekong Programme on Water, Environment and Resilience. The Forum explored the relationships between water, food and energy. More particularly, it considered these relationships in the light of the rapid development of hydropower within the Mekong River Basin. Water, food and energy are all essential resources in the development of the Mekong countries, both now and in the future. How can we manage these relationships sustainably, to make sure that the development goals and aspirations of the Mekong people are met? This year, the Forum coincided with results emerging from CPWF Mekong and its network of partners. The Forum focused on dialogues surrounding water, food and energy, and presented and debated CPWF Mekong research results and ideas. It is built around three themes:

§ What has the CPWF achieved through its work in the Mekong Basin? § Based on current trajectories, what will the Mekong Basin look like in the future? § How do we want the Mekong Basin to look like in the future, and how would we achieve

this? 237 delegates attended, representing 92 different institutions. 34% of participants were based in Lao PDR; 3% in China, 24% in Viet Nam, 8% in Thailand, 14% in Cambodia, and 17% were based outside the region. Representation was highly diverse. The largest proportion of participants (18%) came from regional universities, followed by CGIAR representatives (15%). 13% came from regional NGOs, 10% came from private regional consulting agencies, 9% from government ministries and agencies, 7% from international NGOs, 6% from international universities; 5% from international and regional organisations (UN, MRC etc), 5% from hydropower development and operating agencies, 5% from government research institutes, 3% from donor agencies, 1% from the press and the remainder were community representatives.

Forum messages

• Relatively modest adjustments to reservoir and dam operation can yield significant multiple use benefits

• There exist many technical applications – particularly agricultural and water-‐related – that can contribute to livelihoods restoration and enhancement

• Cumulative impact assessment remains a significant challenge for the system as a whole • Impacts on the system are not all due to hydropower alone – e.g. fishing pressure, urban

pollution etc • Ecological productivity of reservoirs can be improved and increased • Costs of dams are unevenly distributed -‐ economic feasibility studies fail to account for the

true costs of dams • Governance remains a significant HP challenge, especially at scale

2

Forum Themes Water-‐Energy-‐Food

• Need better understanding of the correlation between water, energy and food • Water-‐Food-‐Energy will be interlaced forever and it is unavoidable that hydropower

development will impact human life • Learning more to balance in water-‐food-‐energy thinking as well as to strengthen IWRM in

Mekong • The Mekong is unique for its food-‐energy trade-‐off • Need to lessen the focus on hydropower and keep water-‐food-‐energy • Ecosystem service “thinking” provides a useful framework for considering dam management

and the link between dams and local livelihoods

Engagement for shared benefits and sustainable development

• Cooperation and participation among involved stakeholders should be increased in order to get equal share benefits

• Impacted communities are under represented • Meaningful participation is key to better hydropower • Participation will benefit to livelihoods and protect environment for next generation

(specifically for ASEAN countries) • It is clear from this Forum that good governance on hydropower requires productive and

effective participation of all stakeholders especially affected people from the outset • Engagement community to involve the consultation process of HP pre-‐post development • There is still scepticism amongst the scientific community of the value that traditional and

locally generated knowledge has. Bit of an issue for not just stakeholder engagement/involvement in decision-‐making but also for building trust

• Transboundary partnerships bring added value and learning • Engage community to involve the consultation process of HP pre-‐post development • Cooperation and participation among involved stakeholders should be increased in order to

get equal share benefits • Science without constructive engagement is not going to benefit anyone • Learn and see different opinions, aspects and perspectives regarding sustainable

development • Concerns of and impact on communities are being considered within the same projects but

there is still much more that can be done basin-‐wide, not only for those people who are directly impact but also for those who suffer downstream and upstream impacts

Sustainable hydropower

• The same vision for hydropower development but different approaches and outcomes … These can be learned and shared

• Adequate sustainable hydropower tools for dam developers. It’s good but have to keep available time for them to think/reflect and adapt. But don’t put much pressure on dam developer… or they will not take in our tools and messages.

3

Resettlement

• More can be done to help resettled communities and dam affected communities to rebuild their lives in a sustainable way

• Output-‐based requirements for resettlement works better than input-‐based requirements

Alternative energy paradigms

• Lack of alternative paradigm to hydropower development • There are many solutions for energy in the future • Renewable energy and hydropower are more complementary than substitutes • The challenge of meeting growing energy demand in the region cannot be ignored.

Sustainable use of water resources is part of the solution. Alternative sources of energy such as renewables can improve livelihoods while also addressing the regions responsibility to sustainable development and climate change

• New technology can enhance the food security, water efficiency and energy security

The environment and biodiversity

• Hydro-‐biology • Biodiversity needs more attention in water, food and energy debate • Focus is often very human-‐centric with a lack of consideration for wildlife and biodiverse

ecosystems • Ecosystem service “thinking” provides a useful framework for considering dam management

and the link between dams and local livelihoods • Ecological productivity of reservoirs can be improved and increased

Research and knowledge into development

• Development is often viewed in one-‐dimensional view of economics without enough consideration of social development and other well-‐being indicators

• Research is most effective when developers are also involved • Refine mechanism, tools and capacity for improving knowledge of reservoir to communities • I think if we read the research reports it’s good for understanding and communication. We

hope some companies introduce their practice and experience • Good research findings are not well translated into simple messages to spread to wider

audiences • There is much that can be done to build off the work and knowledge of those who have

conducted research before us but the existence of trust and networks that can help create those linkages cannot be underestimated

• Development and research are like physics and mathematics: the first chooses its level of error and the second ignores it?

Governance

• Governance is a key issue. Better understanding of how the current political landscape systems, mechanism, work is needed

• Governance remains a significant hydropower challenge, especially at scale • Still need to normalize deliberative water governance • Translating research results and models into real change on the ground requires much more

work on governance and institutions at all levels: local, central and regional

4

Private sector and market-‐based approaches

• Private sector companies managing individual dams is a major constraint to “integrated management” / benefit sharing in dam cascades

• The shift to market-‐led hydropower development and BOT (buy-‐own-‐transfer) has entrenched weak transparency but it also offers new opportunities for rapid improvements in environmental and social impacts.

Enforcement and compliance

• The role of civil society and responsible NGOs in putting constant pressure and acting as watchdogs to keep both hydropower companies and governments on their toes for equitable benefits, especially to the affected communities

• We don’t need a lot of new tools but need enforcement of existing tools • Agree to hydropower development but developers must respect laws of compensation and

resettlement Technology and design

• More can be done to design and operate hydropower projects that are less destructive to the ecosystem and more productive for fisheries

• Design of dams needs to provide flexibility for future multiple use. For example, install irrigation off-‐take gates (?) at the time of construction. Too expensive to make changes to existing dams

• Ecological productivity of reservoirs can be improved and increased Feedback on Forum and CPWF -‐ Positive

• The Mekong Forum is still an excellent mechanism to explore more ideas to join together how best to utilize water for food and energy

• Useful meeting. There are many things challenge for learning and exchange • Country ownership is excellent • True multi-‐stakeholder forums • Platform for building a network and trust among stakeholders • Great the community research is recognized and Forum provides a way to promote the

research • The key to improving reservoir management to meet water, food and energy objectives is to

create a discourse between the decision makers to reach a negotiated compromise on the way forward; the CPWF provides the beginning of a scientific basis for this negotiation and compromise

• I will apply knowledge that I have learned from this Forum. It is very important Forum that should continue in the future; it creates a platform for key stakeholders to dialogue and learn from each other

• CPWF has made a wonderful contribution and has remained neutral and balanced • Great job! I hope there are and will be many CPWFs in this region • It seems that there has been great progress made overall (and also including China to the

discussion) • Possibilities to meet a diversity of people to exchange views and opinions or clarify issues

related to sustainable development

5

Feedback on Forum and CPWF – Constructive comments

• Presentations need to have more participation • I wonder about the practicality of a lot of this Forum; we really are preaching to the

converted; many discussions are very abstract and I don’t know whether it is resulting in any change; need to engage with more decision makers

• CPWF did not attract enough hydropower representatives to interact with the program • Need to lose the over-‐focus on the Mekong Basin and ‘formalise’ our focus on the Mekong

Region

Other Feedback

• Impacts on the system are not only from hydropower • Bulk of the work focused on mitigating what seems to be an inevitable scenario • Flood prediction and flood control needs much better coordination, especially in cascades of

dams • Compensation policy on resettlement needs to take into account in order to ensure that

equal benefit sharing to all stakeholders • Need more economics and finance • Complexity provides numerous entry points to improve livelihoods and poverty reduction

6

The Forum at a Glance

Day 1 -‐ November 19, 2013 08.30-‐10.00 Opening ceremony 10.30-‐12.30 Special Session: Teaching Hydropower

Governance

10.30-‐12.30 1: Strengthening the Participation of Local Communities in Resettlement, Compensation, Livelihood and Grievance

2: Cross Border Dialogue: Understanding How to Best Manage the Transboundary Benefits and Costs of Hydropower Development Within the Water-‐Food-‐Energy Nexus

13.30-‐15.00 3: Extending the Benefits of Hydropower: Clever Suggestion or Realistic Goal? (Part 1)

4: M-‐POWER Solutions for Mekong Region Governance (Part 1)

15.30-‐17.00 5: Extending the Benefits of Hydropower: Clever Suggestion or Realistic Goal? (Part 2)

6: M-‐POWER Solutions for Mekong Region Governance (Part 2)

Day 2 – November 20, 2013 08.00-‐10.00 7: Restoring Livelihoods: Opportunities

for Sharing the Benefits of Water for Resettled Communities

8: What We Have Learned Over the Last Year About Balancing the Gender Scales in Hydropower Development

10.30-‐12.30 9: Managing the Impacts of Dams Across Cascades

10: Private Sector Policies for Contributing to Environmental and Social Sustainability

13.30-‐15.00 11: The Basins of the Future: Planning and Managing Basins for a Sustainable Tomorrow (Part 1)

12: Alternative Electricity Sources and Planning for the Mekong (Part 1)

15.30-‐17.00 13: The Basins of the Future: Planning and Managing Basins for a Sustainable Tomorrow (Part 2)

14: Alternative Electricity Sources and Planning for the Mekong (Part 2)

Day 3 – November 21, 2013 08.00-‐10.00 15: Better Dams for Food and

Livelihoods 16: Processes of Catchment Management

10.30-‐12.30 17: Governance, Institutions and Decision-‐Making About Dams

18: Understanding Changes to Water and Food at the Local Level Through Thaibaan Research

13.30-‐15.30 19: Advancing Sustainability in the Mekong Region: the Role of Assessment Tools, Standards and Safeguards

20: Is the Nexus Secure … and for Whom? Unpacking Nexus Discourses on Food, Water, and Energy Security in South and Southeast Asia

16.00-‐17.00 Closing ceremony

7

Opening Remarks Opening remarks by Dr. Hoang Van Thang, Vice Minister and Director, Directorate of Water Resources, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Socialist Republic of Viet Nam. DIỄN VĂN KHAI MẠC DIỄN ĐÀN MEKONG LẦN THỨ 3 VỀ NƯỚC, LƯƠNG THỰC VÀ NĂNG LƯỢNG Hà Nội, ngày 19 tháng 11 năm 2013 Kính thưa Ngài (nếu có): Thưa quí vị đại biểu, các chuyên gia và các vị khách quý,

Thay mặt cho Tổng Cục Thủy lợi – Bộ Nông nghiệp và PTNT Việt nam, cơ quan đối tác của Chương trình Thách thức Nước, Lương thực và Năng lượng khu vực Mê Kong, tôi xin nhiệt liệt chào mừng sự hiện diện của các vị lãnh đạo, các vị đại biểu, các chuyên gia và các vị khách quý tại Diễn đàn lần này.

Thưa quý vị, Lưu vực sông Mê Kông là điểm nhấn địa chính trị – kinh tế – văn hoá – xã hội rất quan trọng của châu Á. Đây là nguồn sống, nguồn tài nguyên và nôi văn hoá, văn minh phương Đông của nhiều cộng đồng dân tộc thuộc sáu quốc gia gồm Trung Quốc, Miến Điện, Thái Lan, Lào, Campuchia và Việt Nam.

Con sông Mê Kông với tổng lượng nước 475 tỉ mét khối hàng năm, đứng thứ 12 thế giới, là nguồn sống của khoảng 60 triệu người dân sống trong lưu vực. Con sông xuyên quốc gia này giúp Thái Lan và Việt Nam giữ vai trò là hai nhà cung cấp lúa gạo hàng đầu cho thế giới, bên cạnh việc đảm bảo an ninh lương thực cho hàng chục triệu người. Nguồn cá và các thủy sản khác của sông Mê Kông cũng là nguồn dinh dưỡng quan trọng hàng đầu đối với người dân sống trong lưu vực, trong đó có tới hơn 1.500 loài cá với hơn 120 loài có giá trị thương mại cao.

Đồng bằng sông Cửu Long có diện tích khoảng 5 triệu hecta, bao gồm 4 triệu hecta ở phía Việt Nam và 1 triệu hecta ở Campuchia. Theo Tổ chức Nông lương Thế giới (FAO), Đồng bằng sông Cửu Long của Việt Nam cung cấp khoảng 20% lượng gạo xuất khẩu của thế giới.

Những năm vừa qua, dòng sông Mê Kông đã chứng kiến nhiều sự đổi thay, đối mặt với nhiều thách thức mới từ sức ép phát triển kinh tế. Quản lý nguồn nước ngày càng đối mặt với nhiều thách thức do nhu cầu sử dụng nước ngày càng nhiều cho các lĩnh vực khác nhau nhằm đáp ứng nhu cầu ngày càng tăng của loài người về nước, lương thực và năng lượng. Vấn đề này càng phức tạp và nhiều thách thức hơn đối với các lưu vực xuyên biên giới, đòi hỏi sự phối hợp và hợp tác toàn diện của các bên liên quan. Lưu vực sông Mê Kông là một trong số lưu vực sông quốc tế đang phải đối mặt với vấn đề quản lý nguồn nước và các hoạt động phát triển kinh tế trên lưu vực.

Tại Việt Nam trên lưu vực sông Sê San, Srêpôk, cũng như hầu hết các lưu vực sông khác, đang đứng trước những thách thức rất lớn, yêu cầu phát triển kinh tế ngày càng cao trong khi các nguồn tài nguyên là hữu hạn. Chỉ riêng tài nguyên nước, mùa kiệt năm 2013 vừa qua tại Tây Nguyên đã xảy ra những đợt hạn hán vô cùng khốc liệt trên diện rộng, đe doạ nghiêm trong cuộc sống người dân cũng như các diện tích cây trồng như cây cà phê, các cây công nghiệp và nông nghiệp khác. Trong khi đó vào mùa mưa lũ thì tình trạng ngập úng, lũ lớn xảy ra liên tục, đe doạ tính mạng và tài sản của nhân dân. Các hồ chứa và các công trình thủy lợi khác còn bộc lộ nhiều bất cập trong vai trò điều hòa nguồn nước.

Thưa quí vị đại biểu, Bài toán phát triển kinh tế xã hội đi đôi với bảo vệ và phát triển, khai thác bền vững các nguồn tài nguyên thiên nhiên đòi hỏi chúng ta phải có những nghiên cứu kỹ lưỡng, phải có nhiều nguồn hỗ trợ kỹ thuật và đầu tư kinh phí. Trong đó, sự hỗ trợ từ các tổ chức quốc tế là một giải pháp rất hữu hiệu giúp cho các tổ chức của Việt Nam cũng như các nước trong khu vực có điều kiện thực hiện các nghiên cứu cần thiết, mang lại hiệu quả cao.

8

Trong bối cảnh đó, Diễn đàn về Nước, Lương thực và Năng lượng lần thứ ba diễn ra tại Hà nội trong 3 ngày 19, 20 và 21 tháng 11 năm 2013 sẽ đặt lên bàn thảo luận tất cả các vấn đề liên quan đến phát triển kinh tế, sản xuất nông nghiệp, ổn đ ịnh sinh kế của người dân, bảo vệ nguồn tài nguyên nước cũng như môi trường sinh thái trên lưu vực.

Diễn đàn này cũng là cơ hội rất tốt để Chương trình Thách thức Nước và Lương thực Mê kông cùng với các cơ quan đối tác giới thiệu các kết quả triển khai hoạt động trong thời gian vừa qua, xin ý kiến đóng góp của quý vị đại biểu để hoàn thiện thêm các kết quả nghiên cứu, cùng đề xuất các giải pháp góp phần phát triển bền vững và khai thác hiệu quả nguồn tài nguyên vùng lưu vực sông Mê kông.

Chúng tôi cũng rất làm tiếc là Chương trình Thách thức Nước và Lương thực Mê Kông hiện nay sẽ kết thúc vào cuối năm 2013. Tuy nhiên kết quả và kinh nghiệm từ các hoạt động hợp tác trong những năm vừa qua sẽ có những đóng góp rất lớn trong các hoạt động khai thác, sử dụng và bảo vệ nguồn tài nguyên nước vùng Mê Kông. Cũng vì lý do đó, tôi mong muốn và tin tưởng rằng Chương trình sẽ tiếp tục phát triển trong những giai đoạn tiếp theo, để hỗ trợ các quốc gia Mê Kông, và cũng để hàng năm chúng ta lại có một diễn đàn như thế này để cùng nhau trao đổi, chia sẻ vì một mục tiêu phát triển bền vững dòng sông này tươi đẹp này. Kính thưa quý vị, Một lần nữa tôi xin chân thành cảm ơn sự hiện diện và đóng góp của quý vị vào Diễn đàn lần này.

Tôi xin tuyên bố khai mạc Diễn đàn lần thứ ba về Nước, Lương thực và Năng lượng khu vực Mê Kông. Xin chúc sức khỏe các quý vị đại biểu, Chúc Diễn đàn thành công và chúc quý vị đại biểu sẽ có một thời gian lưu lại Hà Nội thật ấn tượng. Xin trân trọng cảm ơn./. Summary translation of Dr. Hoang Van Thang’s opening address: Ladies and gentlemen, I extend a welcome to all international experts. The Mekong Forum is one of the focal points of research in the region and attracts experts from all over.

The Mekong has millions of cubic metres of flow annually and provides rice, fish and other nutrition to millions of people; the Mekong Delta provides 20% of rice exports to the world. Over the years there have been many challenges and changes, the greatest of which is increasing demands for the human needs for energy and food. There is also a major challenge in coordination along the river.

The Mekong region is one of many areas in the world facing issues of water management. Economic growth, resource management, threats to livelihoods and floods are all significant issues. The achievement of both economic growth and environmental sustainability needs an enormous amount of cooperation and resources.

This Forum will put on the table all the issues of food production, livelihoods, biodiversity, natural resource and water resource management. It is a good opportunity for the Challenge Programme to share their work. It is a shame that the programme will end but their contribution in terms of research has been very valuable and we hope that it will continue in some way and that there will be some similar forums in the future for sharing information and research. Good luck, and I wish you all every success for the Forum.

9

Opening remarks by Dr Bui Nam Sach, Director, Institute of Water Resources Planning, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. DIỄN VĂN KHAI MẠC DIỄN ĐÀN LẦN THỨ 3 VỀ NƯỚC, LƯƠNG THỰC VÀ NĂNG LƯỢNG KHU VỰC MÊ CÔNG Thưa. Thưa Ông Vũ Văn Thặng, Phó Tổng cục trưởng Tổng cục Thủy lợi, Bộ Nông nghiệp và PTNT. Thưa Thưa các quý vị đại biểu, Thưa quý bà, quý ông, Tôi rất lấy làm vinh hạnh được mời tham dự và phát biểu trong buổi lễ khai mạc Diễn đàn Nước, Lương thực và Năng lượng khu vực Mê Công lần thứ 3. Thay mặt cho Viện Quy hoạch Thủy lợi, Bộ Nông nghiệp và PTNT, cơ quan đồng tổ chức Diễn đàn, tôi xin chào mừng sự hiện diện của các vị lãnh đạo các cơ quan, tổ chức Chính phủ, các quý vị đại biểu, các chuyên gia và các vị khách quý Việt Nam và Quốc tế đang có mặt tại đây hôm nay.

Tôi nhận thấy có rất nhiều gương mặt thân quen của quý vị, những người đã có mặt ở đây, tại chính căn phòng này 1 năm trước trong Diễn đàn lần thứ 2. Điều đó chứng tỏ rằng Diễn đàn của chúng ta đã thu hút được sự quan tâm rất lớn của các nhà hoạch định chính sách, các tổ chức trong và ngoài nước và của các nhà khoa học trong lĩnh vực tài nguyên nước, lương thực, nông nghiệp và năng lượng.

Tôi xin nhiệt liệt chào mừng các quý vị, xin cảm ơn sự đóng góp và ủng hộ không ngừng của quý vị đối với Diễn đàn.

Thưa các quý vị đại biểu, các vị khách quý, Phối hợp sử dụng một cách hài hòa nguồn nước trên lưu vực sông Mê Công, mà cụ thể hơn là giải bài toán tối ưu của 3 trụ cột an ninh Nước - Lương thực - Năng lượng, đã và đang là một thách thức lớn đối với các quốc gia trong khu vực. Chương trình Phát triển Lưu vực do Ủy hội sông Mê Công Quốc tế khởi xướng đã nhấn mạnh đến các giải pháp tổng thể trên phạm vi toàn lưu vực, đề cao việc hợp tác giữa các quốc gia trong cộng đồng nhằm cùng nhau xây dựng một cộng đồng phồn vinh về kinh tế, công bằng về xã hội và bền vững về môi trường. Có thể thấy yếu tố hợp tác liên quốc gia chưa bao giờ được đề cao và nhấn mạnh đến như vậy, phản ánh từ thực tế rằng, các nỗ lực trong phạm vi từng quốc gia là chưa đủ. Đây là lúc chúng tôi rất cần sự giúp đỡ từ tất cả các bạn bè Quốc tế.

Kinh nghiệm của các bạn, nhiệt huyết của các bạn và các hoạt động tài trợ về mặt tài chính của các bạn đã giúp chúng tôi rất nhiều trong việc giải quyết các vấn đề phát triển và quản lý nguồn nước xuyên biên giới. Các nghiên cứu được bảo trợ bởi CPWF là một trong những minh chứng cụ thể cho những giúp đỡ và hợp tác đó. Chúng đã góp phần không nhỏ vào việc giải quyết mối tương quan của tam giác phát triển nước, lương thực và năng lượng, không chỉ giúp Việt Nam có giải pháp với các vấn đề tồn tại trước mắt mà còn phục vụ việc đưa ra những chiến lược dài hạn nhằm thúc đẩy việc quản lý và sử dụng tài nguyên thiên nhiên một cách hợp lý. Tôi có thể khẳng định, không có nhiều Chương trình nghiên cứu quan tâm và giải quyết một cách hiệu quả các vấn đề kỹ thuật liên quan đến quản lý và sử dụng nguồn nước ở Việt Nam nói riêng và ở vùng Hạ lưu sông Mê Công nói chung, đặt trong mối quan hệ với cơ sở hạ tầng kỹ thuật và sinh kế của người dân như những nghiên cứu được khởi xướng và bảo trợ bởi CPWF.

Các dự án Mê Công thuộc Chương trình thách thức Nước và Lương thực (CPWF) tiến hành ở lưu vưc Se San và Srepok tại Việt Nam đã tập trung nghiên cứu, đánh giá và tư vấn cho chính quyền, các cơ quan quản lý Nhà nước từ Trung ương đến địa phương và cộng đồng về các vấn đề quản trị nước liên quan đến việc sử dụng tối ưu nguồn nước của các hệ thống thủy điện bậc thang; vấn đề quản lý đất đai, môi trường, sản xuất nông nghiệp và sinh kế người dân, đặc biệt là đối với đồng bào dân tộc bản địa ở vùng tái định cư.

Dự án đã tạo điều kiện cho các cơ quan khoa học, quy hoạch, các nhà khoa học ở các vùng miền và quốc gia khác nhau cùng với người dân bản địa có điều diện cùng làm việc, giao lưu, học tập kinh nghiệm lẫn nhau đ ể khắc phục những vấn đ ề còn bất cập trong việc sử dụng tài nguyên nước, tài nguyên đất; vấn đề về sinh kế nhằm hướng đến một viễn cảnh tốt đẹp hơn đối với đời sống cộng động

10

vùng lưu vực cũng như bảo vệ được môi trường, sinh thái trên quan điểm khai thác và sử dụng một cách hợp lý tài nguyên thiên nhiên, trong đó quan trọng nhất là tài nguyên nước.

Một số kết quả nội bật của các dự án MK tại Việt nam có thể kể ra đây như việc đánh giá sự biến đổi, xu thế sử dụng nước và thay đổi nguồn nước trên lưu vực sông (MK17); nâng cao hiệu quả sử dụng đất bán ngập và cải thiện sinh kế người dân, trong đó đề xuất canh tác các giống cây trồng ngắn ngày, năng suất cao và nhận được sự ủng hộ rất lớn của người dân cũng như sự đánh giá cao của các chuyên gia quốc tế (MK1); đưa ra cơ sở khoa học và đánh giá được giá trị của tài nguyên nước trên lưu vực (MK2); phân vùng sinh thái, tính toán bồi lắng lòng hồ, đề xuất giải pháp sử dụng nước đa mục tiêu (MK3); đánh giá và khuyến cáo về thể chế, chính sách và vai trò, sự tham gia của người dân trong quản trị nước (MK4)… và còn rất nhiều các dự án MK nữa đang đạt được những kết quả nghiên cứu rất khả quan. CPWF, thông qua các dự án MK đã cho thấy sự quan tâm và tầm nhìn chiến lược đến việc giải bài toán cân bằng giữa Nguồn nước – Nguồn lương thực và Nguồn năng lượng. Điều đó đã được chứng minh là đúng đắn. Vì Nước – Lương thực – Năng lượng là 3 yếu tố không thể tách rời trên lưu vực sông Mê Công và phát triển bền vững chỉ đạt được khi chúng ta tìm ra cách cân bằng và phát triển hài hòa giữa 3 yếu tố này.

Tôi tin rằng mặc dù còn một chặng đường dài trước mắt, nhưng với những nền móng được đặt ra qua những nghiên cứu đó, chúng ta hoàn toàn tự tin để đạt được mục tiêu.

Tôi có hân hạnh biết Tiến sỹ Kim Geheb và nhiều đồng nghiệp tại CPWF kể từ những ngày đầu thực hiện các chương trình CPWF tại các nước khu vực Mê Công. Nếu như tôn chỉ và mục đ ích của các bạn chỉ gói gọn trong những: “hỗ trợ giảm nghèo, bảo trợ cho phát triển bằng những hoạt động nghiên cứu về tối ưu hóa sử dụng hồ chứa nước”, thì thực tế cho thấy những việc các bạn đã làm được hoàn toàn vượt xa những mục tiêu này. Báo cáo Mục tiêu phát triển Thiên niên kỷ (MDG) năm 2010 của Việt Nam cho thấy, tỷ lệ nghèo đã giảm 75%, xuống còn 14,5% vào năm 2008. Phần lớn các mục tiêu phát triển kinh tế và đảm bảo bền vững về môi trường đều bằng hoặc vượt kỳ vọng. Góp phần lớn để đạt được thành tựu này là sự đóng góp của các tổ chức nghiên cứu, các nhà tài trợ quốc tế, trong đó có một phần đóng góp của chương trình CPWF tại vùng lưu vực sông Se San và Srepok. Tuy còn tồn tại nhiều thách thức, đặc biệt trong giảm đói nghèo, đảm bảo đa dạng sinh học và thích ứng với biến đổi khí hậu, chúng tôi vẫn hoàn toàn tự tin ở những gì đã đạt được và sẵn sàng cho những thử thách tiếp theo.

Tôi cho rằng, trong bức tranh tổng thể về những tiến bộ trong sử dụng hài hòa nguồn nước trong các hồ chứa và trên lưu vực sông, phục vụ phát triển kinh tế xã hội và cải thiện sinh kế của người dân trên lãnh thổ Việt Nam và các quốc gia khác thuộc vùng hạ lưu sông Mê Công, Chương trình Thách thức nước và Lương thực đã đóng một vai trò đáng trân trọng trong suốt thời gian các bạn có mặt với chúng tôi.

Tôi tin rằng sẽ có rất nhiều các đồng nghiệp của tôi ở Lào, Thái Lan, Cam Pu Chia và các bạn quốc tế cũng như Việt Nam cùng chia sẻ những ý kiến đó.

Qua bài phát biểu này, tôi mong muốn được gửi tới thông điệp rằng: Hãy tiếp tục song hành cùng chúng tôi trên con đường của sự phát triển, phồn vinh và thịnh vượng của cộng đồng Mê Công.

Kính thưa các quý vị đại biểu, Một lần nữa, tôi xin được chân thành cảm ơn sự hiện diện và đóng góp của quý vị vào Diễn đàn.

Chúc các quý vị đại biểu có những ngày thật vui tại thủ đô Hà Nội.

Chúc sức khỏe quý vị đại biểu.

Chúc Diễn đàn thành công tốt đẹp. Xin trân trọng cảm ơn ./.

11

Summary translation of Dr Bui Nam Sach’s opening address. "Partnering with the CPWF: IWRP's experience".

Distinguished colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, I am very honoured to be invited and to give an opening speech at the Forum on behalf of the Directorate of Water Resources, the host of this Forum. I would like to extend a welcome to the representatives of international agencies, delegates, and all other participants. I have seen a lot of familiar faces from last year and this shows that this Forum is attracting a lot of interest from policymakers and international experts as well as government officials in water and energy. I would like to express my thanks for your contributions.

Using the water in the Mekong in an appropriate manner and solving the issues of water, food and energy is a priority. The MRC has already put these issues on top of the agenda for all nations involved. Never before has this coordination been given such priority in each country. We need hands from the international community – your experience and financial support have already helped us solve a lot of problems. Research sponsored by CPWF is evidence of this. This research has helped us solve not only immediate but also long-‐term issues in water, food and energy.

There is no other Programme that can be compared to this project, especially on livelihoods for poor people, with its broad focus on research, evaluation and coordination in water management and the best use of water in cascades, land management, and livelihoods, especially for indigenous people in resettlement areas. It has provided a platform for local authorities and people to share experiences and lessons learned in water and land use. For the future of all people in the Mekong Basin learning the best and most efficient use of water resources is very important.

We have changed the way we use water and are improving the efficiency of use of wetlands as a result of some the CPWF research. International experts have given a lot of scientific indicators on the best plants and how to use water efficiently. Various projects are now achieving a lot of gains through the MK projects, which are helping us to solve the problems of using water resources and other resources in the region.

Water, food and energy are interwoven and working out how to use them properly is important. We have made good progress. Poverty reduction and the best use of reservoirs is a good start, but we have gone much further and the original plan. Socioeconomic development goals have been achieved beyond expectations. Part of that is due to CPWF research contributions. There are still challenges in poverty reduction but we are ready to face the coming challenges. The programme has made a significant contribution to improving livelihoods of local people in the river basin, and I believe the other countries of the basin would share this view. I am very pleased to have the opportunity to express my sincere thanks for its contribution to this Forum.

12

Opening remarks by Michael Wilson, Minister Counsellor, Development Cooperation Mekong & Regional Programmes, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australian Embassy, Hanoi.

Excellencies, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, I am very pleased to be making some opening remarks at the 3rd Mekong Forum on Water, Food and Energy.

The Australian Government, through the Australian aid programme, is proud to be supporting this event again this year. Issues of food, energy and water security are of course crucial everyday concerns for every human being, but they have a particular relevance for the over 260 million people that live in the Mekong region -‐ because the three issues are so closely bound together by this region’s geography.

Added to this closely integrated environment, with the river systems at its heart, is the fact that the region is transforming and developing at an unprecedented rate and with such big changes come big challenges. The population continues to grow and poverty is declining. Economic growth in Asia has been trending well above the global average for many years, with Asia expected to be responsible for 50 per cent of the world’s gross domestic product by 2050.

But despite this growth, many people in the four Lower Mekong countries continue to fall seriously short on key poverty indicators. Many do not have access to clean water, and malnutrition and under-‐nutrition among rural populations will continue to leave indelible marks on the lives and potential of the current generation and future generations unless these deficits are given a real policy focus, backed by real resources.

Natural river flows are being altered by new infrastructure such as the Upper Mekong hydropower dams in China and other new dams on major rivers and tributaries, especially in Laos and Viet Nam. These dams are certainly important contributors to the region’s economic growth. But – individually and collectively – these pieces of infrastructure have the potential (if not carefully designed and managed) to affect fisheries and trap sediment that communities in the delta rely on for sustainability of their livelihoods and their very survival.

Land use is also changing, driven by, for example, surging rubber prices and demand for biofuels. These changes are in turn having impacts on water quality and water flows right across the Mekong river system.

Regional food demand is expected to double by 2050. To meet future food needs, agriculture must be transformed to deliver food security, economic growth, and resilient rural communities while preserving the natural resource base on which its sustainability depends. Achieving these goals will demand changes to farming methods and technologies, more efficient use of water, action to protect and restore delicate ecosystems, plus greater opportunities for the poor to access these resources, new jobs and markets.

And with economic development demand for energy of course continues to rise. The challenge of meeting growing energy needs, for industry and the people of the Mekong, will require careful planning and strengthened cooperation between Mekong countries.

Climate change is also set to have a big impact on the region. By 2050, projected impacts of climate change include decreasing water availability, increasing temperatures and flood events, decreasing food production capacity, and rising sea levels that could partly inundate productive coastal areas and displace large populations. Given that the Delta in Viet Nam produces 25 per cent of the country’s gross domestic product, the potential economic impacts on the country are obvious. It is also likely that extreme events such as the 2013 Typhoon Haiyan will become more regular.

13

Here in Viet Nam, the Australian Government is pleased to be supporting the Government of Viet Nam’s efforts to work with communities in the Mekong Delta to reduce the risks of natural disasters, adapt to the impacts of climate change and protect food security and livelihoods.

The complex interaction of these drivers -‐ demographic shifts, energy and food security concerns, increasing investment and trade, deterioration of the natural environment and climate change – all exist within the context of a move towards regionalism. In other words, states, markets, corporations, international NGOs and civil society are seeing their interests increasingly bound up with regional opportunities, regional threats, regional cooperative efforts and a regional projection to the outside world.

We recognize the regional character of these issues, and the importance of regional measures to address them which are led by those who live in and depend on the Mekong region. Australia’s Mekong Region Water Resources Programme embodies this approach, supporting regional cooperation on water resources by strengthening regional institutions, building and disseminating reliable knowledge and supporting regional water decision-‐making processes. We’re also supporting the sustainability of important freshwater fisheries in the Lower Mekong Basin, on which an estimated 60 million people rely for their livelihoods.

Australia is helping to connect Basin producers to markets – and connect populations to essential services – through support for targeted infrastructure projects that improve connectivity and trade, exemplified in Viet Nam by our support for the Cao Lanh bridge project. This project will better connect the Mekong Delta, a key agricultural and industrial centre for Viet Nam, to the rest of the mainland and maritime south-‐east Asian region, providing new opportunities for trade and investment.

And we are providing assistance to help this region meet its energy needs: cleanly, efficiently and at least cost. Australia recognizes the efforts of Mekong leaders to guide and support water resources management, food production, environmental protection and energy production. For example, Australia is very pleased to be providing financial support to the Government of Viet Nam’s Delta Study on the impacts of upstream water developments on the Mekong Delta. These efforts to map and identify the impacts of economic development in the region will help countries and the people of the Mekong respond effectively and decisively.

As the impact of the Mekong region’s economic, social and environmental changes – both positive and negative – become more apparent, the need for this already strong regional cooperation will become even more crucial. This regional cooperation is already happening through various regional forums, such as ASEAN, the GMS Forum and of course the Mekong River Commission, but it is also happening in other ways, such as through this Forum that brings together government officials, NGO representatives, scientists and business people from across the Mekong region.

Forums like this allow us to debate and discuss our different perspectives, share our ideas on needs and priorities – and will be crucial to helping decision makers manage the risks associated with great transformation. I think we are all here today because we share some broad objectives no matter what we do or where we come from. We share the objective of supporting continued economic growth for the region. We also share the objective that economic growth should happen in a way that reduces poverty and improves the livelihoods of all the people of the Mekong region.

And lastly, I hope we share the objective of ensuring that economic growth is sustainable and protects the region’s natural heritage. All this requires an acknowledgement of how decisions on water, food and energy cannot be made in isolation from each other. It also requires consideration of the regional and transboundary implications of our planning and decisions. This takes courage and foresight and a long-‐term view of sustainable economic growth in the region.

14

Opening remarks by Professor Andrew Campbell, Head, School of Environment; Director, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods; Director, Centre for Renewable Energy, all at Charles Darwin University in Australia. Professor Campbell has followed the CPWF with interest over the past seven or so years, and delivered a presentation that considered the strengths and benefits of research for development.

Key points: • We live in one of the most dynamic parts of the world • Food, water, energy and land are intricately interconnected • Long-‐term security concerns, amplified by climate change, affect all • The CPWF Mekong project is leading in many areas • You know far more than me about your own context • The science – policy interface is crucial • How can we build durable institutions while responding adaptively to unfolding events and

shifting priorities?

Water, food, energy and health issues are amplified by climate change. I believe the CPWF programme has been leading our thinking on these issues for many years and I have been delighted to follow the initiatives of the programme for the last seven years. I want to focus on how to strike a balance between getting durable institutions and adapting to changing conditions. How can we achieve that balance in the long term?

I come from a farming family in Victoria, Australia. My background includes work in forestry and rural sociology, working for the government, and working as a consultant. I thus have a perspective from government, the private sector and academia. The converging insecurities of our time are water, food, energy and climate change. These are all technical challenges that interact and affect each other.

Adapting to climate change means thinking decades ahead about many issues, one of the most crucial of which is the need to increase food production by 70% by 2050, while using less land, water, fossil energy and nutrients and taking into account sea level rises and temperature rises. This will entail changing the plumbing and the wiring of the landscape. Our planning and approaches to infrastructure need to incorporate long-‐term thinking, and it is crucial to involve the community in these changes. Today’s decisions must account for how long their effects will be felt.

Governance – one of the themes of this Forum – is how society shares power, benefit and risk. How can we respect and honour past and present local values but without letting them constrain us? This will require new ways of thinking and new ways of distributing governance. This will not be easy, but to discover new lands one must be prepared to lose sight of the shore for a very long time. Leadership is critical at all levels, as is the role of new technologies. As everything becomes more interconnected, better governance becomes more vital and more difficult, but investing in good governance brings one of the best returns you can get.

The relationship between science and policy is contested, crowded and very contextual. The stakes are high so we cannot put off decisions, but the facts on which those decisions are based are often hotly disputed. It’s important to understand the nature of the knowledge needs in order to make those decisions, and equally important to understand not just what information is needed but how best to deliver it. The facts won’t necessarily be enough – you need to understand the politics and economics as well.

Policy issues are ‘should’ questions – what should we do about this? These types of questions require a choice and science has a role in providing the information on which those decisions will be based, but as scientists we must recognize that ultimately it is politicians who will make the decisions.

15

Durable relationships between scientists and decision makers, based on mutual trust and respect, are therefore critical.

‘The future is not some place we are going to, but one we are creating. The paths to it are made, not found.’ This is the greatest challenge of our age and the nexus of food, water, energy and climate change must be dealt with holistically.

After the presentation the audience was invited to ask questions. The first question asked was how to persuade policymakers of the importance of engaging with these issues. Professor Campbell answered that we need to remind policymakers that it’s not going to be possible to do nothing so it’s better to get ahead of it and offer leadership on these issues because doing nothing is in fact a greater risk.

Another questions asked was where there is enough good governance and leadership in the Mekong region. Professor Campbell answered that he believes enormous strides have been made and the way the six countries are working together is very promising for the future. However, people outside official structures need to create the room for the officials to move – push the boundaries so that leaders can move forward.

A final question raised was how civil society can be given more confidence in its decision makers. Professor Campbell confessed that this was a difficult one to answer, and that he believed it would only be achieved through those decision makers being able to demonstrate that decisions have been made based on good information and a robust process. The new technologies that are enabling civil society to share information rapidly will help to keep leaders and politicians honest. It makes it more difficult for leaders to act contrary to the interests of civil society. The internet and social media are powerful tools for keeping leaders accountable and should not be underestimated.

Professor Campbell’s presentation can be downloaded from here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/opening-‐remarks-‐andrew-‐campbell Things people said: An amazing opening ceremony! I like the messages put across by the guest speakers.

16

SESSION 1 – STRENGTHENING THE PARTICIPATION OF LOCAL COMMUNITIES IN RESETTLEMMENT, COMPENSATION, LIVELIHOOD AND GRIEVANCE

Date: 19 November 2013

Lead planner(s): Damdouane Khouangvichit, National University of Laos and Palikone Thalongsengchanh, Prime Minister’s Office (Vientiane).

Facilitator(s): Palikone Thalongsengchanh, Prime Minister’s Office (Vientiane).

The Session: As dam development across the Mekong proceeds and accelerates, it is important to ensure that it is based on the participation of and benefit to affected communities, and is regulated by safeguards, legislation and policy to ensure that these developments are sustainable in the long run. This session explored communication and knowledge gaps and the ways in which social safeguards and benefits are achieved and how this process can be improved and strengthened.

Representatives from MK10 and MK11 each presented on their respective projects, focusing on community participation and the policy implementation gap. The presentations delivered were:

“Bridging the Hydropower Policy Implementation Gap – BPIG: Communications and Feedback Mechanisms to improve participation in Decision-‐Making for Local land and water use”, presented by Hongthong Sirivath and Yhoksamay Lathsavong (VFI). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/bridging-‐the-‐hydropower-‐policy-‐implementation-‐gapbpig-‐mk11

Knowledge and institutional systems in the management and coordination of hydropower social safeguards”, presented by Damdouane Khouangvichit (NUOL). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/knowledge-‐and-‐institutional-‐systems-‐in-‐the-‐management-‐and-‐coordination-‐of-‐hydropower-‐social-‐safeguards

Presentations were followed by John Pilgrim’s summary of similarities between MK10 and MK11. His presentation “VFI and NUOL Common Outcomes”, is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/vfi-‐nuol-‐common-‐outcomes

A short Q & A session followed, and then breakout table discussions. These table discussions looked at different approaches (among Mekong countries) to closing the policy implementation gap. Major takeaways from three presentations:

§ Communication tools are integral to raising awareness and improving understanding of policy among the local community.

§ Grievance mechanism can also help not only improve coordination among local community and the government sector but also incentivize them adhere to regulations.

§ Indigenous knowledge and skills are an asset that is currently underutilized and they play a huge role in the context of natural resource management.

What people said: I was pleasantly surprised by the interaction we had to do -‐ people kind of expected just to drop in and listen what the presenters had to say. But the audience were put into four groups and discussed four questions on tools we use to enhance understanding of policies, practical approaches to fill policy implementation gap, means to strengthen policy understanding and implementation and systems that help us move towards sustainability. Doing those group discussions at the end of the session is a nice way to get people together and give them an opportunity to share their experiences from their respective countries. I would like to even encourage to do more of these discussions in sessions.

17

SESSION 2 – CROSS BORDER DIALOGUE: UNDERSTANDING HOW TO BEST MANAGE THE TRANSBOUNDARY BENEFITS AND COSTS OF HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE WATER-‐FOOD-‐ENERGY NEXUS


Lead planner: Nate Matthews, King’s College, London

Facilitator(s): Nate Matthews, King’s College, London

The Session: With the significant and rapid development of dams across the Mekong, their potential benefits and costs across borders and within the water-‐food-‐energy nexus raises challenges. How can Mekong countries work together to manage these benefits and impacts? The session sought to answer the following questions:

§ What are the security, economic and diplomacy issues associated with regional/ transboundary water resources development in the Mekong region?

§ Who are the key actors? § What is the theory and practice of Mekong procedures for notification, consultation,

maintenance of flow, transboundary impact assessment, decentralization and how can these be improved?

§ What are the limits of “legal” recourse vis a vis the need for cooperation and trust? § How can we make regional water governance more inclusive and effective?

The following presentations were delivered:

“Transboundary water management: water, food and energy”, presented by Zha Daojiong (Peking University), and is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/trans-‐boundary-‐water-‐management-‐zha-‐daojiong “Cambodian perspectives: the transboundary notification process of hydropower on the Sesan River”, presented by Ham Kimkong (Royal University of Phnom Penh). The presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/cambodian-‐perspectives-‐ham-‐kimkong “Mekong transboundary water governance context: key issues and challenges”, presented by Diana Suhardiman (International Water Management Institute), and is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/mekong-‐transboundary-‐water-‐governance-‐context-‐diana-‐suhardiman

What people said: The idea of a Mekong region is a political construct.

Talk about transboundary governance is all very well but the fact on the ground is that hydropower projects are going ahead because they’re driven by developers.

How can we bring the private sector into the debate?

What is the meaning of the MRC and how can they carry out their mandate? If even one government rejects it, its role is questionable.

Some more examples of best practice in the communications and what works would have been welcome.

18

SPECIAL SESSION – The ABC of Hydropower Governance Training Modules


Lead planner: Lilao Bouapao (Mekong Program on Water, Environment and Resilience).

The Session: This workshop was the latest in a series of meetings and workshops that began in June 2013. Initiated by M-‐Power, the training modules are intended to provide “integrated knowledge about hydropower governance with a focus on energy options, livelihoods, institutions and assessment tools.” The current modules were developed in partnership with Ubon Ratchathani University, National University of Laos, Can Tho University, Royal University of Phnom Penh, Chulalonghorn University and the Asian Institute of Technology. The presenters outlined the five modules and engaged in discussion with the audience about content, process, management and future plans. The session sought feedback from participants on the usefulness of, and gaps in, current designs.

Introduction to the modules: Why the ABC has been introduced? What is it? What has been done? What are the challenges?

Feedback on objectives, discussion on participants' needs, current module designs and gaps, recommendations on future direction of the training modules by five groups: lecturers, CSOs, government partners, private sector.

Report back at the plenary, summary and wrap up.

Things people said: It’s good to see someone pulling together this much needed body of knowledge in a form that could be used by university lecturers, NGOs, government and others.

The current version seems to be a good start on the content. What you probably need to do next is think about management, maintenance, dissemination, things like that. SESSIONS 3 and 5 – EXTENDING THE BENEFITS OF HYDROPOWER: CLEVER SUGGESTION OR REALISTIC GOAL?


Lead planner(s): Chu Thai Hoanh (International Water Management Institute).

Facilitator(s): Chu Thai Hoanh (International Water Management Institute); Andrew Noble (CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems).

Chair(s): John Ward (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Institute); Diana Suhardiman (International Water Management Institute).

The Session: The social costs of hydropower dams and reservoirs are well known. So too are the benefits of electricity. Less well known are the potential benefits to residents of hydropower watersheds, who might be allowed to share in hydropower revenues or obtain payments for improving land and water management practices. This session examined empirical evidence regarding the potential for implementing benefit sharing programmes and payments for ecosystem services in the Mekong Region.

Four presentations were delivered, and looked at projects in Viet Nam that aim to blend forest protection and livelihood improvement (in the context of deforestation). They focused on Payment for Ecosystem Services pilot programmes in Viet Nam: in Lam Dong, Son La and Bac Kan provinces. To some degree, each project showed income improvement and poverty reduction for local communities. There were, however, significant governance, environmental and social challenges. The four presentations were followed by a long, quite impassioned Q&A session.

19

The second half of this session featured presentations with both Lao and Viet Namese examples. They covered process issues such as selecting appropriate households for participation, defining clear responsibilities for households, the complexity of money flow in these programmes, and the diversity of informal institutional arrangements.

The presentations delivered were as follows:

“Payments for Ecosystem Services in Viet Nam: Market-‐based Incentives or State Control of Resources”? By Diana Suhardiman (International Water Management Institute). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/day-‐1-‐session-‐32-‐payments-‐for-‐ecosystem-‐services-‐in-‐Viet Nam-‐diana-‐suhardiman

“Evaluation of the Pilot Payments for Forest Environmental Services: Case study in Lam Dong Province, Viet Nam”, by Tran Van Giai Phong (Hue University). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/day-‐1-‐session-‐31-‐evalutions-‐of-‐pilot-‐payments-‐for-‐forest-‐environmental-‐services-‐phong-‐tran

“Is Fair Benefit Sharing in PES Realistic? A Case Study in Bac Kan Province, Viet Nam”, by Dam Viet Bac and Delia Catacutan (World Agroforestry Center). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/day-‐1-‐session-‐33-‐is-‐fairness-‐in-‐benefit-‐sharing-‐realistic-‐case-‐study-‐dam-‐viet-‐bac-‐delia-‐catacutan

“Transaction Cost of Smallholder Farmers’ Participation in Forest Management: Policy Implications on PES Schemes in Viet Nam” by Florence Milan (International Water Management Institute). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/day-‐1-‐session-‐34-‐transaction-‐cost-‐of-‐smallholder-‐farmers-‐participation-‐in-‐forest-‐management-‐florence-‐milan

“Local Participation on Benefit Sharing in Nam Lik 1-‐2 Hydropower Dam in Lao PDR”, by Phoukeo Saokhamkeo (National University of Laos). http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/day-‐1-‐session-‐51-‐benefit-‐sharing-‐on-‐nam-‐lik-‐1-‐2

“The Five Million Hectare Reforestation Program in Viet Nam: An Analysis of its Implementation and its Transaction Costs”, by Tran Thi Thu Huong (University of Hohenheim). http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/day-‐1-‐session-‐52-‐five-‐million-‐hectare-‐reforestation-‐program-‐in-‐Viet Nam

“Direct or Indirect PES: Could Microcredit be an Option?” by Le Ngoc Lan (University of Rome -‐ Tor Vergata). http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/day-‐1-‐session-‐53-‐direct-‐vs-‐indirect-‐pes-‐could-‐microcredit-‐be-‐an-‐option

“Sharing Experiences on Dam Project for Tourism” by Outhoumphone Sanesathid (National University of Laos). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/day-‐1-‐session-‐54-‐sharing-‐experiences-‐on-‐dam-‐project-‐for-‐tourism-‐outhoumphone-‐sanesathid

“Challenges in managing PFES Fund – Lam Dong case”, by Vo Dinh Tho (Lam Dong PFES Fund).

What people said: I don’t know much about payment for environmental services but this was very interesting.

These issues are a challenge for the Mekong River Commission. There is a difference between benefit sharing and compensation.

It is important to ask the long-‐term questions. What happens when the developer sells the dam to someone else?

20

SESSIONS 4 and 6 – M-‐POWER SOLUTIONS FOR MEKONG REGION GOVERNANCE


Lead planner(s): Babette P. Resurrección (Mekong Program on Water, Environment and Resilience).

Facilitator(s): Lu Xing (Yunnan University).

The Session: The M-‐POWER-‐CPWF Fellowships programme awarded 60 fellowships across the Mekong Region. The initiative has focused on governance, and this session explores what the key messages from all of this work are and what they can teach us about governing the water resources of the Mekong Region.

This session consisted of nine individual studies from around the region, mostly focused on small communities – villages, etc. – and how individuals and communities are involved in water governance and solving the problems of water scarcity and water usage for livelihood sustainability. How do communities manage their water resources?

The following presentations were delivered:

“Institutional Arrangements for domestic water governance from Mekong mainstream: a case study from Baan Dongna, Nam Taeng Sub-‐district, Srimuangmai, Ubon Ratchatani, Thailand”, by Surasak Witoon and Pariwat Somnuek. This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/5-‐institutional-‐arrangements-‐for-‐domestic-‐water-‐governance-‐from-‐mekong

“The role of narratives in shaping Sesan transboundary water resources management and governance”, by Worowan Sukraroek. This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/1-‐role-‐of-‐narratives-‐in-‐shaping-‐sesan-‐transboundary-‐water-‐management-‐and-‐governance

“Vulnerability analysis on community health impacts: relocation and water resource deprivation in Irrawaddy valley”, by Su Su Yin. This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/2-‐vulnerability-‐analysis-‐on-‐community-‐health-‐impacts-‐irrawaddy-‐valley-‐su-‐su-‐yin

“Local participation in agricultural water management in Red River Delta of Viet Nam: a case study in Que Vo District, Bac Ninh Province”, by Nguyen Mau Dung (Hanoi University of Agriculture). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/4-‐local-‐participation-‐in-‐agricultural-‐water-‐management-‐in-‐the-‐red-‐river-‐delta

“Development policies for lake settlements: dynamics, water-‐ and migration-‐based local livelihoods, Tonle Sap Lake, Cambodia”, by Borin Un. This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/3-‐dynamics-‐of-‐the-‐water-‐and-‐migrationbased-‐local-‐livelihoods-‐tonle-‐sap-‐lake

“The role of social capital in water management and adaptation to water scarcity in Srepok River Basin in Dak Lak Province, Viet Nam”, by Nguyen Thi Thiem. This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/6-‐role-‐of-‐social-‐capital-‐in-‐water-‐mgmt-‐and-‐adaptation-‐to-‐water-‐scarcity-‐in-‐srepok-‐river-‐basin

“Cooperation through IWRM for better water governance: a case study of Chi River Basin of the Northeast Thailand”, by Pechladda Pechpakdee (Mahasarakham University). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/7-‐cooperations-‐through-‐iwrm-‐for-‐better-‐water-‐governancenortheast-‐thailand-‐pechladda-‐pechpakdee

21

“Water, farming governance and adaptation to climate change for ‘dike compartments’: a case study in An Gian Province, Mekong Delta, Viet Nam”, by Nguyen Van Kien (Research Centre for Rural Development, An Giang University). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/8-‐water-‐faming-‐governance-‐and-‐adaptation-‐to-‐climate-‐change-‐for-‐dike-‐compartments-‐kien-‐van-‐nguyen

“Urban water governance: institutional factors affecting water supply management in Yangon, Myanmar”, by Soe Thethan. This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/9-‐institutional-‐factors-‐affecting-‐water-‐supply-‐management-‐in-‐yangon-‐myanmar-‐soe-‐thethan

What people said: These case studies are all very well, but how they inform the bigger picture of water governance? What impact can they have at the national level or even district/province level?

Very interesting session – they’ve done a lot of good work. We should use some of these opportunities to challenge cultural norms, especially about gender and power relationships.

It has been a great project in the sense of bringing younger people into the equation and getting them involved in these issues. SESSION 7 – RESTORING LIVELIHOODS: OPPORTUNITIES FOR SHARING THE BENEFITS OF WATER FOR RESETTLED COMMUNITIES


Lead planner(s): Yumiko Kura (WorldFish) and Sonali Senaratna Sellamuttu (International Water Management Institute)

Facilitator(s): Yumiko Kura (WorldFish)

Chair(s): Vu Xuan Nguyet Hong (Central Institute for Economic Management, Hanoi).

The Session: It is by no means easy for resettled communities to fully restore the full range of livelihoods activities. This session considers the role of natural resources access, such as forests and water bodies, during the transition period, and technical and institutional solutions that can contribute to the recovery of the resettled communities, and also explore new opportunities for improving their livelihoods.

The following presentations were delivered during the session:

“Potential benefits of sharing water from the Yali Hydropower Reservoir, Viet Nam”, by Vu Xuan Nguyet Hong (Central Institute for Economic Management, Hanoi). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/potential-‐benefits-‐of-‐sharing-‐water-‐from-‐the-‐yali-‐hydropower-‐reservoir-‐Viet Nam

“Retention of swidden and NTFP in relocated villages in Attapeu”, by John Pilgrim. This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/retention-‐of-‐swidden-‐and-‐non-‐timber-‐forest-‐products-‐in-‐relocated-‐villages-‐in-‐attapeu

“Sharing benefits of the Yali Hydrpower Reservoir: farming in drawdown area” by Tran Duc Toan and Nguyen Duy Phuong (Soils and Fertilizers Research Institute). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/sharing-‐benefits-‐of-‐the-‐yali-‐hydropower-‐reservoir

“Water valuation, benefits and trade-‐off after resettlement – case study on upstream of Nam Gnouang Hydropower Reservoir”. Unknown presenter. This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/water-‐valuation-‐benefits-‐and-‐trade-‐off-‐after-‐resettlement

22

What people said: The second presentation said that households had become less secure in rice, and I think we focus too much on rice as a food source. Rice is of low nutritional value and there are other crops which are of much greater nutritional value that we could focus on instead. There are other farming systems with greater biodiversity that we should be promoting. The Lao government, for example, tends to focus on rice but is that really the direction we want to go?

I don’t dispute any of the points made about swidden agriculture. I do wonder if there is a place for swidden in world approaching a population of nine billion people.

It was an interesting session – interesting presentations, lots of detail. Some of the analysis could have been taken further – especially comparing the value of water versus electricity: this was too simplified an analysis. You need to look at the costs involved in getting electricity to the community. SESSION 8 – WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED OVER THE LAST YEAR ABOUT BALANCING THE GENDER SCALES IN HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT


Lead planner(s): Pauline Taylor-‐McKeowan (Oxfam Australia) and Damdouane Khouangvichit (National University of Laos).

Facilitator(s):

The Session: Like any other large-‐scale intervention, dam development affects different groups of people in different ways. How do dams affect the relationships between men and women? And what can be done to ensure that these developments can contribute towards improving gender relations in affected communities?

Coinciding with the launch of the Oxfam “Gender and Justice in Hydropower” manual, this session featured two presentations on gender and hydropower development – one on MK13 and one on MK10. This was followed by a half an hour interactive ‘world café’ intended to assist ‘research into action’ and next steps. In the world café, each table explored different issues in the context of gender and hydropower such as ethnic minorities, resettlement approaches for effective participation, and how to better incorporate gender research into hydropower planning.


“Gender in hydropower” by the MK13 team. This presentation can be found here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/gender-‐and-‐hydropower

“Women in the process of hydropower development project in Attapeu and Sekong provinces” by Damdouane Khouangvichit (National University of Laos). This presentation can be found here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/women-‐in-‐the-‐process-‐of-‐hydropower-‐development-‐attapeu-‐and-‐sekong-‐provinces

What people said: Encountering the combination of these two issues in one session opened my eyes and broadened my horizons. The key message I picked up was that incorporating gender considerations into hydropower development projects is not hard at all and we all can improve the lives of affected men and women as long as we set aside proper resources for gender assessment studies and integrate findings into action and implementation plans.

I think all sessions should be more like this – interactive.

We need to remember that gender is not just about women. It is men and women, and the dynamics between them.

This was such a creative way to do small group discussion.

23

SESSION 9 – MANAGING THE IMPACTS OF DAMS ACROSS CASCADES


Lead planner(s): Peter John Meynell (International Center for Environmental Management) and Bui Nam Sach (Institute of Water Resources Planning)

Facilitator(s): Peter John Meynell (International Center for Environmental Management)

The Session: Along river reaches where there are cascades of dams, how can these be collectively managed to maximize benefits from them? What kinds of benefits might be generated, and what are the possible positive impacts of these?

Where do we want to go with cascades and sustainability? Once we agree on the destination we can then work on the technical and design details. This is the basic principle of sustainability: one river, one plan, one authority. It’s an idealistic principle, but that’s what’s coming out of all of our discussions.


“The Se San and Nam Theun/Nam Kading hydropower dam cascades” by Jeremy Carew-‐Reid, Peter Ward and Peter John Meynell (International Center for Environmental Management). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/the-‐se-‐san-‐and-‐nam-‐theun-‐nam-‐kading-‐hydropower-‐dam-‐cascades

“Exploring environmental flow regimes in the Lower Sesan in Cambodia” by Jeremy Carew-‐Reid, Tarek Ketelsen, Peter John Meynell (International Center for Environmental Management), Timo A. Räsänen (Aalto University) and Simon Tilleard (International Center for Environmental Management). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/exploring-‐environmental-‐flow-‐regimes-‐in-‐the-‐lower-‐sesan-‐in-‐cambodia

“Impacts of land use change on sediment transport in the Yali Reservoir catchment” by Tarek Ketelsen, Luke Taylor (International Center for Environmental Management) and Truong Hong (Western Highlands Agroforestry Scientific and Technical Institute). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/impacts-‐of-‐landuse-‐change-‐on-‐sediment-‐transport-‐in-‐the-‐yali-‐reservoir-‐catchment “Managing fish passage through large dams: from Itaipu (Brazil) to Lower Sesan 2” by Eric Baran, Pelle Gätke (World Fish Center), and others. This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/managing-‐fish-‐passage-‐through-‐large-‐dams “Water availability, use and trends in the Srepok River Catchment (Viet Nam)” by Tuan Nguyen Van (Institute of Water Resources Planning). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/water-‐availability-‐use-‐and-‐trends-‐in-‐the-‐srepok-‐river-‐catchment-‐Viet Nam What people said: I think there need to be two fish passes in the Sesan, one for Sesan 1 and another for Sesan 2. How do we get fish to use the passes? Is it a learning process? Fish capacity-‐building?

The paper on fish passes has huge potential for application. This session was the most interesting for me so far.

The impacts of land use changes on sediment transport is a topic of considerable importance and much neglected.

24

SESSION 10 – PRIVATE SECTOR POLICIES FOR CONTRIBUTING TO ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY


Lead planner(s): Stew Motta and Kim Geheb (CPWF)

Facilitator(s): Dipak Gyawali (Nepal Water Foundation)

Chair(s): Rachel Jolly (AusAID)

The Session: Many dam developers in the Mekong have social and environmental policies; many have implemented successful social and environmental policies and strategies. What can different dam developers learn from each other in the implementation of these policies, and why do they make sense to pursue?

This session generated enormous interest and extra chairs had to be brought in. The session centered on social and environmental standards regarding hydropower in the Mekong region (and the costs of not having them.) The first session was about Don Sahong, exploring myths and measures for success. The second session looked at hydropower resettlement in China – both successes and failures. The third looked at environmental and social risk management regarding dam development from the perspective of the International Finance Corporation. These sessions were followed by a half an hour Q&A session with the expert panel and presenters.


“Hydropower development in Laos: Don Sahong experience in addressing social and environmental issues” by Peter Hawkins (Don Sahong Power Company). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/hydropower-‐development-‐in-‐laos-‐don-‐sahong-‐experience-‐in-‐addressing-‐social-‐and-‐environmental-‐issues

“Working together: helping clients solve environmental and social issues using the Sustainability Framework” by Kate Lazarus (International Finance Corporation). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/helping-‐clients-‐solve-‐environmental-‐and-‐social-‐issues-‐using-‐the-‐sustainability-‐framework

“Successful or Failure? Perspective from Hydropower Resettlement”, by Shi Guoqing (Hohai University). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/success-‐or-‐failure-‐perspectives-‐from-‐hydropower-‐resettlement

What people said: Transparency is key.

Independent evaluation is a missing link. This is lacking in the Mekong region.

Host governments need to develop transboundary risk management strategies.

25

SESSIONS 11 and 13 – THE BASINS OF THE FUTURE: PLANNING AND MANAGING BASINS FOR A SUSTAINABLE TOMORROW


Lead planner(s): Alex Smajgl and John Ward (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation)

Facilitator(s):

Chair(s):

The Session: What will the Mekong look like in the future? How will it be managed? What will the hydro-‐politics of the basin look like? Will countries cooperate over water resources, or will tensions arise? How would the Mekong like to look?

Alex Smajgl from CSIRO introduced a role playing game in which a fictional basin authority must deliberate on the presentations made by representatives of the next generation. Members of the audience played the role of ‘Mekong Council’ members who represented fictional ‘countries’ based on hydrological characteristics (e.g. Upland Headwaters, Central East, Central West, Floodplains and Lakes, Delta).

Students from the UN International School of Ha Noi read a statement of their ‘desired future basin’ to groups of Council Members. Discussions revolved around two topics: energy and flood control.

John Ward (CSIRO) and Tarek Kettlesen (Alto University) played visiting experts who presented some of the issues surrounding energy issues. Following discussion, members voted on how to distribute funds amongst six energy options:

1. Maximizing hydropower 2. Minimal impact hydropower 3. Coal fired power plants

4. Small scale biomass plants 5. Renewable 6. Nuclear

Following the vote, ‘countries’ had to explain the reasoning behind their choices.

The next issue, flood control, followed the same pattern. At the end, the Council had to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on the following proposition: “The Mekong Council will introduce regulation that requires all high risk hydropower development to include flood mitigation controls in planning and operations.” In the final phase of the role-‐play, Alex ‘zoomed’ ahead to 2030 and presented some likely scenarios based on the Council’s choices. Examples:

• Increased irrigation potential is mainly used for energy corps. • Food security drops across the region: Less fish and less agriculture. • Food imports need to increase. • Food prices increase, disadvantaging the poor even more.

The ‘members’ were then asked if they would reconsider their choices in light of the new information. The students were well informed and articulate despite having only one meeting prior to the role-‐play. They held their own amidst a roomful of highly opinionated adults. There were no presentations delivered during this session.

What people said: I think the participants in this session enjoyed being members of the Mekong Council, sharing and proposing to the chair of the Council. Giving the young generation from the international school in Hanoi a chance to participate and air their views about the future of the Mekong was very creative. I was impressed by their gravity and the concerns they raised.

26

SESSIONS 12 and 14 – ALTERNATIVE ELECTRICITY SOURCES AND PLANNING FOR THE MEKONG


Lead planner(s): John Sawdon (International Center for Environmental Management) and Oudom Phonekhampheng (National University of Laos)

Facilitator(s): John Sawdon and Tim Suljada (International Center for Environmental Management).

Chair(s):

The Session: Hydropower is cheap and produces very few greenhouse gases; but large dams also have significant social and environmental problems. Should the Mekong consider additional or alternative energy sources? Can these alternatives produce as much electricity as large-‐scale hydro, and at the same or better price? What are the best alternative energy options, and why are these the best ones?

Four presentations were made on renewable sources of energy and their potential for use in the Mekong region, with a final presentation on fish passages. Major points that emerged were that the cost of renewable energy has reduced dramatically and it is therefore beginning to approach being competitive with hydropower on price; that solar energy has the most potential in this region; that cost is not the only consideration; and that as countries in the region industrialise energy consumption per capita will increase and consideration needs to be given to how to ameliorate the effects of that.

Presentations delivered during the session were:

“Thailand’s country case study. Review of renewable energy laws: lessons for Thailand”, by Sopitsuda Tongsopit (Energy Research Institute) and Chris Greacen (Paland Thai). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/a-‐review-‐of-‐of-‐renewable-‐energy-‐laws-‐lessons-‐for-‐thailand

“Gap analysis of renewable energy generation in the Lower Mekong Basin” by Alex Kenny (International Center for Environmental Management). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/gap-‐analysis-‐of-‐renewable-‐energy-‐generation-‐in-‐the-‐lower-‐mekong-‐basin

“Putting hydropower renewables in context” by John Sawdon (International Center for Environmental Management). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/putting-‐hydropower-‐and-‐renewables-‐in-‐context

“Technology Review” by Tim Suljada (International Center for Environmental Management). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/technology-‐review-‐28623677

“Solar PV in Viet Nam: power sector benefits, costs and policy” by Nguyen Quoc Khanh (International Center for Environmental Management). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/solar-‐pv-‐in-‐Viet Nam-‐power-‐sector-‐benefits-‐costs-‐and-‐policy

What people said: Renewables are not a panacea.

Are all these different technological trajectories for renewable energy socially neutral or will they have different impacts and help poor people in different ways?

We need to think about the niches that renewables can fill in the region.

27

SESSION 15 – BETTER DAMS FOR FOOD AND LIVELIHOODS


Lead planner(s): Sonali Senaratna Sellamuttu (International Water Management Institute)

Facilitator(s):

Chair(s):

The Session: Can dams be operated in ways that address livelihoods goals without sacrificing electricity generation? In what ways can reservoirs be managed to increase food production without sacrificing electricity generation? This session presented research results and debated their relevance to dam management and operation in the Mekong.

This session drew on the research results generated by the CPWF MK1 project on optimizing reservoir management for livelihoods. The project aims to develop strategies for optimizing the benefits of reservoirs and increase the ways in which water can be utilized to support the livelihoods of local communities around reservoirs and downstream.

The session drew on some different aspects of MK1: for example, looking at the decision support systems that can assist in providing information on reservoir operational rules and land use optimization to accommodate local livelihoods; pilot testing of a few livelihood options; and trying to get a better understanding of the decision-‐making process at the household level and how this determines whether or not individuals/households in resettled villages will be willing to engage in certain livelihood options presented.

The following presentations were delivered during the session: “Optimizing fish-‐friendly criteria for incorporation into the design of mini-‐hydro schemes in the Lower Mekong Basin”, by Oudom Phonekhampheng (National University of Laos), Douangkham Singhanouvong (Living Aquatic Resource Research Centre) and Garry Thorncraft (National University of Laos). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/optimising-‐fish-‐friendly-‐criteria-‐for-‐incorporation-‐into-‐the-‐design-‐of-‐minihydro-‐schemes

“Assessing livelihood piloting experiences associated with hydropower development: key outcomes and broad lessons learned” by Olivier Joffre (World Fish Center). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/assessing-‐livelihood-‐piloting-‐experiences-‐associated-‐with-‐hydropower-‐development

“Gender, livelihoods and decision-‐making” by Nireka Weeratunge, Olivier Joffre (World Fish Centre), Sonali Senaratna Sellamuttu (International Water Management Institute), B. Bouahom and A. Keophoxay (National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute – Laos). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/gender-‐livelihoods-‐decision-‐making

“How hydropower can accommodate local livelihoods?” by Guillaume Lacombe (International Water Management Institute). This presentation can be found here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/how-‐hydropower-‐operations-‐can-‐accommodate-‐local-‐livelihoods

What people said: Altering dam operations to complement livelihoods is not realistic. Better to adapt to the new hydrological reality that prioritizes hydroelectric generation. Today’s livelihoods are sustained by lacustrine fisheries. And tomorrow: off farm activities.

Constructed wetlands around reservoirs are extremely useful.

28

SESSION 16 – PROCESSES OF CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT


Lead planner(s): Archana Datta, Jasmine Mason (Hatfield Consultants) and Panomsak Prompurom (Chiang Mai University).

Facilitator(s): Archana Datta (Hatfield Consultants) and Panomsak Prompurom (Chiang Mai University).

The Session: All over the Mekong, river basin organizations or committees are being established, usually with the aim of implementing integrated water resource management (IWRM). But its application for catchment management is a relatively novel approach within the Mekong basin. In this session, a panel discussion will be held about catchment-‐level strategies for managing water resources. In addition, to highlight its complexity, a debate will be held on the pros and cons of IWRM.

This session began with a presentation on IWRM, which was followed by a mock panel discussion with three panellists taking a ‘pro’ IWRM stance and three taking an ‘anti’ IWRM stance. The audience asked questions and made comments, getting involved in the discussion to the point where some seemed to forget that those on the ‘anti’ side were only playing a role.

The following presentation was delivered during the session:

“Integrated Water Resource Management” by Mao Hak (Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology, Cambodia). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/integrated-‐water-‐resource-‐management

What people said: IWRM is not a single, remedial blueprint but rather a way of seeing.

There is a water crisis in the world and we don’t have the luxury to sit around yakking over cups of latte and talking our way out of poverty.

Is water separate from water users?

There are conflicting interests in the community – farmers, fishers, urban users – so is IWRM really possible?

The main thing to do is to get community representation within that strong central government structure. IWRM should not just be a place where stakeholders come and talk but where they can learn about other water users and uses. Turn competing demands into cooperation through communication.

29

SESSION 17 – GOVERNANCE, INSTITUTIONS AND DECISION-‐MAKING ABOUT DAMS


Lead planner(s): Nate Matthews (King’s College, London)

Facilitator(s): Bui Lien Phuong

The Session: Making decisions about dams is no easy business. Thousands of variables need to be considered, hundreds of interests addressed, design features need to be assessed, contracts negotiated, resettlement planned, EIAs and SIAs need to be implemented, etc. How can decision-‐making and associated institutions be crafted to best address this complexity?

Three case studies were presented – one from Laos, one from Cambodia and one from China – which looked at the decision-‐making processes around hydropower and the impacts they had. This was followed by a panel Q&A session. Questions revolved around the issue of whether centralised or decentralized decision-‐making was preferable, as well as how to ensure equitable distribution of benefits from hydropower.

The Thai team then showed the first of five short videos they have made on hydropower decision-‐making processes in Thailand (all the videos are available on YouTube). There was then a table discussion. Five guiding questions were given out and tables were asked to pick one question, discuss it for 20 minutes, and then come up with a 25 word answer.

Presentations delivered during the session were as follows:

“Chinese studies on impacts of dams” by Xing Lyu (Yunnan University). This presentation can be downloaded from here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/chinese-‐studies-‐on-‐impacts-‐of-‐dams

“Decision-‐making on hydropower development in Lao PDR” by the Lao MK8 research team (National University of Laos). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/decision-‐making-‐on-‐hydropower-‐development-‐in-‐lao-‐pdr “Lessons learned about hydropower decision-‐making processes in Cambodia” by the Royal University of Phnom Penh Team. This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/lessons-‐learnt-‐about-‐hydropower-‐decision-‐making-‐processes-‐in-‐cambodia

What people said: Can claimed national interests transcend local interests?

Is it fair to make one group of people suffer so that others can benefit?

I’ve been listening to the presentations over the last two days and I’ve come to realise that we can’t stop hydropower, but we need to share information and knowledge and work hard together to make people understand the impact of hydropower and how to mitigate it.

Everybody knows the issues very well, so what is this adding to the debate? Isn’t there a way we can get beyond these trite responses? Perhaps things just move forward very slowly and there’s nothing to be done about that.

30

SESSION 18 – UNDERSTANDING CHANGES TO WATER AND FOOD AT THE LOCAL LEVEL THROUGH THAIBAAN RESEARCH


Lead planner(s): Phoutthasinh Phimmachanh (Lao Water Resources Network)

Facilitator(s): Phoutthasinh Phimmachanh (Lao Water Resources Network)

The session: How do local people experience changes to their food and water resources? Drawing on the experience of an innovative CPWF project, implemented across three Mekong countries, and using a participatory research methodology called ‘thaibaan’, this session will explore how small communities experience and respond to change.

What people said: It was actually rather difficult to follow the opening explanation.

I couldn’t read the captions on the film. Blue is not a good color for captions. I really had no idea what the films were about. SESSION 19 – ADVANCING SUSTAINABILITY IN THE MEKONG REGION: THE ROLE OF ASSESSMENT TOOLS, STANDARDS AND SAFEGUARDS


Lead planner(s): Kate Lazarus (International Finance Corporation), Lilao Bouapao (Mekong Program on Water, Environment and Resilience), Amphavanh Sivouvanh (International Finance Corporation), and Donna Brown (Mekong River Commission) Facilitator(s): Kate Lazarus (International Finance Corporation) and Donna Brown (Mekong River Commission)

The Session: The purpose of this session is to discuss methods and approaches to advancing the sustainability of the hydropower sector in the Mekong region. The session will draw on two assessment tools piloted, the HSAP and RSAT as well as other standards and safeguards being applied or which have potential in the region. A diversity of views is envisaged from government, private sector, financier, and practitioners and regional networks. Specifically we will: (a) discuss how sustainability is addressed/considered by different stakeholder groups and what opportunities and challenges exist. (b) Provide examples of practical application or efforts using different assessment tools and approaches. (c) Explore options for advancing sustainability.

Some of the key messages conveyed in this session were:

§ Creation of knowledge is essential to building awareness and understanding. § Fostering neutral multi-‐stakeholder dialogue spaces on critical aspects of sustainable

hydropower is fundamental. § Pilot testing and using unofficially contributes to greater understanding of multiple uses of the

Protocol. § Building constituents for improved hydropower governance in Mekong Region gets the word

out and more likely to lead to greater use. § In rivers with cascades of hydro or in transboundary situations, taking a basin-‐wide approach is

necessary to addressing cumulative impacts and identifying management options.

Participants were then asked to consider the following questions: § What have been the Mekong’s experiences with sustainability assessment tools (e.g. HSAP and

RSAT), and how do they contribute to sustainability?

31

§ How do the methods and approaches employed in these assessment tools along with internationally accepted environmental and social standards contribute to advancing sustainability of the hydropower sector in the Mekong region…or not?


“Advancing sustainability in the hydropower sector in the Mekong” by Kate Lazarus (International Finance Corporation). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/advancing-‐sustainability-‐in-‐the-‐mekong-‐region-‐role-‐of-‐assessment-‐tools-‐and-‐standards

“Efforts to employ sustainability in hydropower development”, by Rodolfo Azanza (SN POWER). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/sustainability-‐tools-‐in-‐hydropower-‐development-‐operations

“Efforts to apply the Rapid Sustainability Assessment Tool in the Mekong tributary sub-‐basins under the MRC ISH”, by Donna Brown (Mekong River Commission). This presentation is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/efforts-‐to-‐apply-‐to-‐rsat-‐in-‐mekong-‐tributary-‐sub-‐basins-‐under-‐the-‐mrcish-‐program-‐since-‐2010

What people said: SN Power says these tools work.

Why does everybody seem to want to develop their own tool?

Useful, yes. The challenge is to keep the tools relevant. SESSION 20 – IS THE NEXUS SECURE … AND FOR WHOM? UNPACKING NEXUS DISCOURSES ON FOOD, WATER, AND ENERGY SECURITY IN SOUTH AND SOUTHEAST ASIA


Lead planner(s): Dipak Gyawali (Nepal Water Conservation Foundation), Jeremy Allouche (Institute of Development Studies), and Carl Middleton (Chulalongkorn University)

Facilitator(s): Dipak Gyawali (Nepal Water Conservation Foundation)

The session: Attaining water, energy and food security – in the context of climate change -‐ is widely perceived as necessary for ensuring sustainable and just development. Simultaneously, water, energy, and food security are also often framed to be within a complex trade-‐off -‐ or nexus -‐ relationship that, even if not a zero sum game, is also contested between divergent actors. Water storage is usually seen as a solution to hydrological uncertainty and water and climate (in) security, and therefore is also considered integral to the Water-‐Food-‐Energy-‐Societal nexus.

Drawing from an ongoing comparative research project on Laos-‐Thailand and Nepal-‐India and the conceptual framework of “dynamic sustainabilities”, this panel will ask critical questions of the relationship between different types of water storage and the WEF-‐Societal nexus. Questions that we will address include:

§ Who is promoting the food-‐water-‐energy-‐climate nexus in Southeast Asia, how and why? § What have been the intended and unintended outcomes to date? § How is food, water, energy, and climate security both defined and operationalized within the

nexus in Southeast Asia? § Is there a growing convergence (or divergence) between how these various securities are

understood within the Nexus? § Which types of risk and uncertainties are formally recognized, which remain unrecognized -‐ how

and why? § Is the nexus replacing or complementing the IWRM paradigm?

32

§ What is new about nexus that did not exist in previous knowledge and approaches?

The session began with a presentation entitled ‘Comparing the Nexus along the Mekong – Ganga’. It drew parallels between the situations of Laos and Nepal – both landlocked, both with transboundary rivers (Mekong/Ganga) which subsequently flow into a bigger, more developed country (Thailand/India). The issues being investigated were water storage and water/energy/food/climate security. The presentation was followed by a panel discussion/Q&A with several experts on the panel.

The following presentation was delivered during the session:

“Companing the nexus along the Mekong – Ganga: the need for a more dynamic approach to water, energy and food security”, by Jeremy Allouche (Institute of Development Studies), Dipak Gyawali (Nepal Water Conservation Foundation) and Carl Middleton (Chulalongkorn University). The presentation can be downloaded from here: http://www.slideshare.net/CPWFMekong/session-‐20-‐comparing-‐the-‐nexus-‐along-‐the-‐mekong-‐ganga What people said: Is ‘the nexus’ just another passing fad? Is ‘dynamic sustainability’ just the latest buzzword? It takes a long time to get governments focused on an issue and often just when they get all their ducks in a row, the focus changes to the latest buzz term.

A lot of governments view water, food and energy separately and the challenge is to get them to understand the interplay and connections between the three.

Frames imposed from the outside – even with the best intentions – are going to run into problems with local realities.

All of the frameworks we’re using are supposedly ‘participatory’, but none of them were generated in this region. They’ve been imposed, so how can they be classified as participatory?

There should be more than just a discussion of a concept. There should be some concrete suggestions about how to apply this concept to actually make a difference to the poor and needy.

33

Directory of Attendees Title and Contact Details Alain Vidal Director

CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food c/o IWMI 127 Sunil Mawatha Pelawatte, Battaramulla Sri Lanka

Alex Kenny Economist International Center for Environmental Management 6A Lane 49, To Ngoc Van Tay Ho Hanoi Viet Nam

Alex Smajgl Research Scientist CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences -‐ Townsville Davies Laboratory University Drive, Townsville QLD 4814 Australia

Ame Trandem Southeast Asia Program Director International Rivers Bangkok Thailand

Amphavanh Sisouvanh Associate Operations Officer Sustainable Business Advisory Program, IFC International Finance Corporation 90 Phonexay Road Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Andrew Campbell Head, School of Environment Director, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods Director, Centre for Renewable Energy Charles Darwin University Darwin, NT 0909 Australia

Andrew Noble Andrew Noble Program Director CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems International Water Management Institute 127 Sunil Mawatha Pelawatte Battaramulla Sri Lanka

Andy Bullock Consultant CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems International Water Management Institute 127 Sunil Mawatha Pelawatte Battaramulla Sri Lanka

Andy Hall

Consultant CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems International Water Management Institute 127 Sunil Mawatha Pelawatte Battaramulla

34

Title and Contact Details Sri Lanka

Anousith Keophoxay Researcher Officer International Water Management Institute C/o National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute Ban Nongviengkham, Xaythany District Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Archana Datta Environmental Specialist Hatfield Consultants #200 -‐ 850 Harbourside Drive North Vancouver, BC V7P 0A3 Canada

Arun Parameswaran Water and Climate Change Engineer International Centre for Environmental Management No. 6A, Lane 49 To Ngoc Van Street Tay Ho District Hà Nội Việt Nam

Audrey Nepveu de Villemarceau

International Fund for Agricultural Development Via Paolo di Dono, 44 00142 Rome Italy

Aurelie Phimmasone Managing Director Lao Institute for Renewable Energy House No. 366, Unit 16 Ban Watnak Lao-‐Thai Friendship Rd. Sisattanak District Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Babette Resurreccion Senior Research Fellow Stockholm Environment Institute 15th Floor, Witthyakit Building Chulalongkorn University Chulalongkorn Soi 64 Phyathai Road, Pathumwan Bangkok 10330 Thailand

Bo He Journalist China Economic Herald Information Building No. 315 Guanganmen Inner Street Xuanwu District Beijing Peoples’ Republic of China

Borin Un WorldFish Center No. 35 St. 71 12302 Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Bounmee Maokhamphiou

Communication and Administration Consultant International Water Management Institute C/o National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute Ban Nongviengkham Xaythany District Vientiane

35

Title and Contact Details Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Bounthanom Bouahom National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute Ban Nongviengkham Xaythany District Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Bounthanom Chamsinh Bounthieng Phommachanh Vice Dean

Faculty of Law and Political Science, National University of Laos Donnokhoum Campus Lao-‐Thai Friendship Road, P.O. Box 822, Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Bounthong Sengvilaykahm Acting Dept. Director Office of General Affairs and External Relations Savannakhet University Naxeng Campus Savannakhet Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Bui Lien Phuong Centre for Water Resources Conservation and Development Suite 801 HACISCO Building No. 15 Lane 107 Nguyen Chi Thanh Street Hanoi, Viet Nam

Bui Nam Sach Director Institute of Water Resources Planning Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development 162A Tran Quang Khai Hanoi, Viet Nam

Bun Narith Deputy Director General Hydroelectricity Dept. Ministry of Energy and Mines #45 Norodom Blvd. Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Caitlin Grady National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellow School of Civil Engineering Purdue University 550 Stadium Mall Dr, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA

Calvin Sambo

Institute for Agricultural Engineering Agricultural Research Council 141 Cresswell Road Silverton Private Bag X134 Pretoria, 0001, South Africa

Carl Middleton Lecturer Masters Program of International Development Studies Faculty of Political Science Chulalongkorn University Phayathai Rd., Pathumwan, Bangkok 10330 Thailand

Chanseng Phongpachith Natural Resources & Environment Institute Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment PMO Building#100; 3rd Floor Nahaidieo

36

Title and Contact Details Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Chanthaboun Sirimantham Director Planning and Cooperation Division Dept. of Livestock and Fisheries Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Khounta Village Sikhottabong District Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Chay Keartha Researcher Center for Development Oriented Research in Agriculture and Livelihood Systems Khan Tuol Kork Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Chea Narin Director of Hydroelectricity Department General Department of Energy Ministry of Industry, Mines and Energy Kingdom of Cambodia

Chheng Phen Senior Officer Inland Fisheries Research and Development Institute Fisheries Administration Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Chhuon La Advocacy Coordinator Oxfam Australia #68 St. 135, Tuol Tumpong 1, Chamcarmon Phnom Penh, Kingdom of Cambodia

Chy Chanrasmey Chief of Hydroelectricity Planning Office, Ministry of Energy and Mines #45 Norodom Blvd. Phnom Penh, Kingdom of Cambodia

Dam Viet Bac Research Officer World Agroforestry Center No.1, Lot 14A, Trung Yen Street Yen Hoa Ward, Cau Giay District Hanoi, Viet Nam

Damdouane Khouangvichit Associate Professor Faculty of Social Sciences Dongdok Campus National University of Laos Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Dao Quang Minh

Oxfam, Viet Nam

Dao Trong Tu Executive Director Center for Water Resources and Adaptation to Climate Change c/o Institute of Water Resource Planning 162A Tran Quang Khai Street Ha Noi, Viet Nam

David Clayton Finance and Compliance Coordinator CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food Naga House

37

Title and Contact Details House 87, Unit 7, Mixay Village Chantabouly District Vientiane Capital Peoples Democratic Republic of Laos

Diana Suhardiman Researcher -‐ Social Scientist International Water Management Institute C/o National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute Ban Nongviengkham Xaythany District Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Dipak Gyawali Nepal Water Conservation Foundation Baluatar Kathmandu Nepal

Do Thi Hai Linh

Communication Manager People and Nature Reconciliation (PanNature) Office: No. 6 N8B, Trung Hoa – Nhan Chinh, Nguyen Thi Thap Road Nhan Chinh Quarter, Thanh Xuan District, Hanoi, Viet Nam PO Box 612, Hanoi GPO, Viet Nam

Donna Brown Hydro Tasmania 4 Elizabeth Street Hobart Tasmania 7000 Australia

Dương Thu Hằng Center for Water Resources Conservation and Development Room 801 HACISCO Building No. 15 Lane 107 Nguyen Chi Thanh, Dong Da, Hanoi Viet Nam

Ed Grumbine Kunming Institute of Botany Chinese Academy of Sciences Kunming, China

Edsel Sajor Associate Professor Urban Environmental Management School of Environment, Resources and Development Asian Institute of Technology KM 42 Paholyothin Highway Klong Lung Pathumthani 12120, Thailand

Emma Coats Research and Communications Consultant CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food Naga House House 87, Unit 7, Mixay Village Chantabouly District Vientiane Capital Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Eric Baran Research Scientist WorldFish Center No. 35 St. 71 12302 Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Florence Milan Post-‐Doctoral Fellow – Economics International Water Management Institute C/o National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute Ban Nongviengkham

38

Title and Contact Details Xaythany District Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Garry Thorncraft Faculty of Agriculture National University of Laos Nabong Campus Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Guillaume Lacombe Researcher -‐ Hydrologist International Water Management Institute C/o National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute Ban Nongviengkham, Xaythany District Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Ha Thanh Lan

Institute of Water Resources Planning Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development 162A -‐ Tran Quang Khai Hanoi Viet Nam

Ha Thi Hang Hai

GreenID Suite 1504, 15th Floor, Tower B 173 Xuan Thuy Cau Giay, Ha Noi Viet Nam

Ham Kimkong Senior Researcher and Lecturer Department of Environmental Sciences Royal University of Phnom Penh Russian Federation Boulevard Toul Kork Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

He Shiyou

Nam Ou Project Manager Sinohydro Corporation Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Ho Cong Hoa Central Institute for Economic Management # 68 Phan Dinh Phung, Ba Dinh Dist., Ha Noi, Viet Nam

Hoang Thanh Binh

Program Coordinator GreenID Suite 1504, 15th Floor, Tower B 173 Xuan Thuy Cau Giay, Ha Noi Viet Nam

Hoang Tu Oanh Viet Nam Rivers Network c/o Centre for Water Resources Conservation and Development No. 15 Lane 107 Nguyen Chi Thanh Street Hanoi Viet Nam

Hoanh Chu Thai Principal Researcher -‐ Water Resources International Water Management Institute C/o National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute Ban Nongviengkham Xaythany District Vientiane

39

Title and Contact Details Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Hongthong Sirivath Coordinator for Land and Livelihood Program Village Focus International House 207, Unit 14, Ban Phonsavan Tai Sisattanak District Vientiane Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Ilse Pukinskis

CPWF Global c/o CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food Naga House House 87, Unit 7, Mixay Village Chantabouly District Vientiane Capital Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Im Phallay Environment Program Manager NGO Forum for Cambodia # 9-‐11 Street 476 Toul Tompong, P.O. Box 2295 Phnom Penh 3 Kingdom of Cambodia

Jasmine Mason Environmental Specialist Hatfield Consultants #200 -‐ 850 Harbourside Drive North Vancouver, BC V7P 0A3 Canada

Jeremy Carew-‐Reid Director International Center for Environmental Management 6A Lane 49, To Ngoc Van Tay Ho Hanoi Viet Nam

Jeremy Sung

International Center for Environmental Management 6A Lane 49, To Ngoc Van Tay Ho Hanoi Viet Nam

John Dore Senior Water Resources Advisor Mekong Water and Infrastructure Unit Development Cooperation Section AusAID Australian Embassy, KM 4, Thadeua Rd P.O. Box 292 Vientiane, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

John Pilgrim Visiting Professor of Applied Anthropology Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities Royal University of Phnom Penh Russian Federation Boulevard Toul Kork Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

John Sawdon International Center for Environmental Management 6A Lane 49 To Ngoc Van, Tay Ho, Hanoi, Viet Nam

40

Title and Contact Details John Ward Ecological and Natural Resource Economist

CSIRO Ecosystem Services c/o Naga House, House 87, Unit 7, Mixay Village, Chantabouly District Vientiane Capital, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Judith Seopa

Institute for Agricultural Engineering Agricultural Research Council 141 Cresswell Road Silverton Private Bag X134 Pretoria, 0001 South Africa

Juha Sarkkula Advisor in Integrated Modelling and Assessment The World Bank Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic Country Office South East Asia Unit Patou Xay, Nehru Rd. Vientiane, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Kabmanivanh Phouxay Associate Professor Faculty of Social Science National University of Laos Dongdok Vientiane Peoples’ Democratic Republic of Laos

Kate Lazarus Senior Operations Officer, Program Manager Lao Hydro Advisory Services International Finance Corporation 90 Phonexay Road Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Kate Ross Mekong Program Associate 2150 Allston Way, Suite 300 Berkeley, CA 94707-‐1378 USA

Kergkeart Kumarasingha Director, Upper Mun River Basin Coordination and Management Division Water Resources Regional Offices Department of Water Resources 47 Ratchasima-‐Chokchai Rd. Nong Bua Sala, Muang Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand

Kesa Ly Research and Development Advisor Life With Dignity #37, Street 592 Khan Tuol Kork, P.O. Box 37 Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Khamphet Roger Director, Agriculture and Forestry Policy Research Center National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute Ban Nongviengkham Xaythany District Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Khamphoui Saythalat Director Participatory Development Training Center 180 Ban Nakham (off Luang Prabang Road) Sikhottabong District Vientiane Capital

41

Title and Contact Details Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Khamphouvong Vongsinnasone Village Representative Ban Phuckfeaur

Khampoun Keokongmany Deputy Sport and Culture Unit District Education and Sport Office Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Khean Sovannara Chief of Farming System and Economic Office Department of Agricultural Extension Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries # 200, Preah Norodom Blvd Sangkat Tonie Basac, Khan, Chamkar Mon P.O. Box 1239, Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia.

Khim Sophanna Senior Program Advisor Cambodian Center for Study and Development of Agriculture #119 Street 257 Sangkat Teuk La-‐ak I Khan Toul Kok Phnom Penh, Kingdom of Cambodia

Khumbulani Dhavu

Institute for Agricultural Engineering Agricultural Research Council 141 Cresswell Road Silverton Private Bag X134 Pretoria, 0001 South Africa

Kim Geheb Mekong Basin Leader CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food Naga House House 87, Unit 7, Mixay Village Chantabouly District Vientiane Capital Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Kris Chan Department of Geography King's College London K7.49 Strand Campus London WC2R 2LS United Kingdom

Kyungmee Kim Programme Officer -‐ Knowledge Services Stockholm International Water Institute Drottninggatan 33 SE – 111 51 Stockholm Sweden

Lalita Rammont Programme Manager Water Programme, Asia IUCN Asia Regional Office 63 Sukhumvit Soi 39 Sukhumvit Rd. Wattana Bangkok 10110 Thailand

Le Ngoc Lan University of Rome Tor Vergata Via Orazio Raimondo 18 -‐ 00173 Roma

42

Title and Contact Details Italy

Le Thi Gam

Oxfam, Viet Nam

Lilao Bouapao

Multi-‐Stakeholder Platform Coordinator CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food Naga House House 87, Unit 7, Mixay Village Chantabouly District Vientiane Capital Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Lorvang Xorcheng Group and Infrastructure Officer Helvetas Ban Phonsavanh Neua Sisattanak District Vientiane Capital, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Lu Xing Director GMS Study Center Institute of Southeast Asian Studies School of International Studies Yunnan University No.2 Cuihu North Road Kunming Yunnan Province, 650091 Peoples' Republic of China

Lucie Pluschke

Asosociate Professional Offcier Land and Water Division Food and Agriculture Organization Rome Italy

Maarten Jan Akkerman

Researcher GreenID Suite 1504, 15th Floor, Tower B 173 Xuan Thuy Cau Giay, Ha Noi, Viet Nam

Mai Ky Vinh


Mak Soeun Director Department of Agricultural Extension Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries # 200, Preah Norodom Blvd Sangkat Tonie Basac, Khan, Chamkar Mon P.O. Box 1239 Phnom Penh, Kingdom of Cambodia.

Malichanh Srithirath Project Officer CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food Naga House House 87, Unit 7, Mixay Village Chantabouly District Vientiane Capital Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Mao Hak Deputy Director General of Technical Affairs Director of Hydrology and River Works

43

Title and Contact Details Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology #47 Norodom Blvd. Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Mao Saret Village Representative Strung Treng Province

Marianne Gadeberg CPWF Global c/o CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food Naga House House 87, Unit 7, Mixay Village Chantabouly District Vientiane Capital Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Marnie McDonald Consultant -‐ Chief Rapporteur Matthew McCartney Head, Vientiane Office

International Water Management Institute C/o National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute Ban Nongviengkham Xaythany District Vientiane, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Mia Signs International Water Management Institute C/o National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute Ban Nongviengkham Xaythany District Vientiane, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Michael Jones Michael J. Jones Farmer Livelihoods Consultant, Advisor to VFI P.O. Box 6933 Vientiane, Lao PDR.

Michael Simon Manager People, Infrastructure and Environment Program Oxfam Australia Head Office Melbourne Head Office 132 Leicester Street, Carlton VIC 3053 Australia

Michael Victor Communications Coordinator CRP on Water Land and Ecosystems c/o CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food Naga House House 87, Unit 7, Mixay Village Chantabouly District Vientiane Capital Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Michael Wilson Minister Counsellor Mekong and Regional AusAID, Australian Embassy 8 Dao Tan Street, Ba Dinh District Hanoi, Viet Nam

Morakot Tossabanyad Research Assistant Energy Research Institute Chulalongkorn University Bangkok, Thailand

Napassadol Sinkerdsuk Department of Sociology & Anthropology Faculty of Political Science

44

Title and Contact Details Chulalongkorn University Phatumwan Bangkok 10330, Thailand

Nate Matthews Department of Geography King’s College London Strand, London WC2R 2LS United Kingdom

Ng Minh Thong Center for Water Resources Conservation and Development Suite 801, HACISCO Building No. 15 Lane 107 Nguyen Chi Thanh Street Hanoi, Viet Nam

Nga Dao Executive Director Centre for Water Resources Conservation and Development Suite 801 HACISCO Building, No. 15 Lane 107 Nguyen Chi Thanh Street Hanoi, Viet Nam

Nguy Thi Khanh Executive Director GreenID Suite 1504, 15th Floor, Tower B 173 Xuan Thuy Cau Giay, Ha Noi, Viet Nam

Nguyen Minh Thong Advisor to CPWF MK9 Mekong Delta Viet Nam

Nguyen Duy Phuong Soil and Fertility Research Institute Dong Nga Tu Liem Hanoi, Viet Nam

Nguyen Hoang Long Advisor Centre for Water Resources Conservation and Development Suite 801 HACISCO Building, No. 15 Lane 107 Nguyen Chi Thanh Street, Hanoi, Viet Nam

Nguyen Mau Dung

Hanoi University of Agriculture tt. Trâu Quỳ, Gia Lâm Hanoi, Vietnam

Nguyen Thi Hien Thuan Director Dept. of Science, Training & International Cooperation Institute of Meteorology, Hydrology and Environment No.23 -‐ 62 Alley Nguyen Chi Thanh Road Dong Da District, Ha Noi, Viet Nam

Nguyen Thi Hoa

GreenID Suite 1504 15th Floor, Tower B 173 Xuan Thuy Cau Giay Ha Noi, Viet Nam

Nguyen Thi Hoang Lien Vice Dean Faculty of Environmental Science VNU University of Science 334 Nguyen Trai Thanh Xuan, Hanoi, Viet Nam

Nguyen Thi Lan Anh

GreenID Suite 1504, 15th Floor, Tower B

45

Title and Contact Details 173 Xuan Thuy Cau Giay, Ha Noi, Viet Nam

Nguyen Thi Ngoc Lan Centre for Water Resources Conservation and Development Suite 801, HACISCO Building No. 15 Lane 107 Nguyen Chi Thanh Street Hanoi Viet Nam

Nguyen Thi Thiem

Asian Institute of Technology KM 42 Paholyothin Highway Klong Lung Pathumthani 12120, Thailand

Nguyen Thu Hao

World Agroforestry Center No. 8 lot 13A, Trung Hoa street Yen Hoa ward, Cau Giay district Ha Noi, Viet Nam

Nguyen Thu Thuy Hang People and Nature Reconciliation No. 6 N8B, Trung Hoa – Nhan Chinh Nguyen Thi Thap Road Nhan Chinh Quarter, Thanh Xuan District Hanoi, Viet Nam

Nguyen Thuy Hang International Cooperation Dept. Institute of Energy Ministry of Industry and Trade 6 Ton That Tung, Hanoi, Viet Nam

Nguyen Tru Trang

GreenID Suite 1504 15th Floor, Tower B 173 Xuan Thuy Cau Giay, Ha Noi, Viet Nam

Nguyn Van Kien

Research Centre for Rural Development An Giang University M� Xuyên, tp. Long Xuyên An Giang, Vietnam

Nireka Weeratunge Starkloff Anthropologist/ Gender Consultant 2910 North Joya Towers, 28 Plaza Drive, Rockwell Center, Makati City 1200 Metro Manila Philippines

Olivier Joffre WorldFish Center Greater Mekong Regional Office #35 Street 71 Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Oudom Phonekhampheng Dean Faculty of Agriculture National University of Laos Nabong Campus Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Ounheuan Saiyasith Program Officer Development Cooperation Australian Embassy KM4 Thadeua Road PO Box 292 Vientiane

46

Title and Contact Details Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Outhailak Sophanthalop Outhoumphone Sanesathid Department of Water Resources

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Vientiane Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Palikone Thalongsengchan Public Relations Department Prime Minister’s Office Vientiane Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Panomsak Promburom Research Scientist Center for Agricultural Resource Systems Research Chiang Mai University 239 Huay Kaew Road Muang District, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand

Paolo Campo c/o Naga House House 87 Unit 7, Mixay Village Chantabouly District Vientiane Capital Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Paradis Someth Information and Knowledge Management Programme Mekong River Commission Office of the Secretariat in Phnom Penh 576 National Road # 2 Sangkat Chak Angre Krom Khan Menachey Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Patrick Dye Government Affairs & Corporate Communications Director Nam Theun 2 Power Company, Ltd, PO Box 5862 Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Pauline Taylor McKeown Mekong Regional Program Manager Oxfam Australia #68 St. 135 Tuol Tumpong 1 Chamcarmon Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Pech Sokhem Senior International Governance Specialist Hatfield Consultants #200 -‐ 850 Harbourside Drive North Vancouver, BC V7P 0A3, Canada

Pechladda Pechpakdee

Faculty of Architecture, Urban Design and Creative Arts Mahasarakham University Mueang Maha Sarakham District Maha Sarakham 44150 Thailand

Penny Beames Executive Director Confluvium 377 Brock Avenue, Toronto, ON M6H3N5 Canada

Peter Hawkins Senior Environmental Manager

47

Title and Contact Details Don Sahong Hydropower Project Office No. 15 Bekit Ledang Off Jalan Duta 50480 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia

Peter John Meynell Chief Scientist International Centre for Environmental Management 6A Lane 49 To Ngoc Van, Tay Ho, Hanoi, Viet Nam

Peter McCornick Deputy Director General (Research) International Water Management Institute 127 Sunil Mawatha Pelawatte Battaramulla Sri Lanka

Peter Ward Adjunct Professor Department of Civil Engineering University of British Columbia Vancouver Canada

Pham Hung Cuong WB Senior Water Resources Specialist, Viet Nam Sustainable Development Unit

Pham Thanh Tu Institute of Water Resources Planning Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development 162A Tran Quang Khai Hanoi, Viet Nam

Phan Thanh Toan Center for Water Resources and Adaptation to Climate Change Phingsaliao Sithiengtham Department of Water Resources

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Vientiane Lao Peoples Democratic Republic

Phoukeo Saokhamkeo Faculty of Agriculture National University of Laos Nabong Campus Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Phousavanh Win Phout Simmalavong Faculty of Social Sciences

National University of Laos Dong Dok Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Phoutthasinh Phimmachanh Coordinator Lao Water Resources Network c/o Helvetas Ban Phonsavanh Neua Sisattanak District Vientiane Capital Lao Peoples' Democratic Republic

Piseth Chea Initiative on Sustainable Hydropower Mekong River Commission Secretariat Office of the Secretariat in Phnom Penh 576 National Road # 2 Sangkat Chak Angre Krom Khan Menachey Phnom Penh

48

Title and Contact Details Kingdom of Cambodia

Piyaporn Wongruang News Reporter Bangkok Post Sunday Bangkok Post Building 136 Na Ranong Road Klong Toey Bangkok 10110 , Thailand

Poh-‐Ling Tan Professor for Water Law and Governance International Water Center Level 16, 333 Ann Street Brisbane QLD 4000 Australia

Praivan Limpanboon Participatory Planning and Institutional SpecialistBasin Development Plan Programme/Planning DivisionMekong River CommissionOffice of the Secretariat in Vientiane184 Fa Ngoum Road,Vientiane, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic.

Prathapar Sanmugan Theme Leader – Productive Water Use International Water Management Institute 127, Sunil Mawatha, Pelawatte Battaramulla, Sri Lanka

Rachel Jolly First Secretary (Development Cooperation) Australian Embassy KM 4, Thadeua Rd P.O. Box 292 Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Rinna Takudrua Department of Sociology & Anthropology Faculty of Political Science Chulalongkorn University Phatumwan Bangkok 10330 Thailand

Robin Narciso Information & Communication Officer Oxfam Australia # 94, Russian Blvd Teuk Laork I, Toul Kork Phnom Penh., Kingdom of Cambodia

Robyn Johnstion

Senior Researcher – Water Resources Planner International Water Management Institute 127, Sunil Mawatha, Pelawatte Battaramulla, Sri Lanka

Rodolfo Azanza Country Representative SN Power Holding Singapore Pte.Ltd. Philippine Representative Office 3rd floor Herco Center 114 Benavidez St. Legaspi Village Makati City, Metro Manila 1229 Philippines

Ruedi Luthi Director, Environment and Social Division Nam Theun 2 Power Company Unit 06, 23 Singa Rd. Ban Nongbone Xaysetha District Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Ruth Bottomley Research Coordinator Oxfam-‐Monash Partnership Research on Community Driven

49

Title and Contact Details Accountability Equitable Cambodia Phnom Penh 12305 Kingdom of Cambodia

Rutmanee Ongsakul Programme Manager School of Environment, Resources and Development Asian Institute of Technology KM 42 Paholyothin Highway Klong Lung Pathumthani 12120 Thailand

Sackmone Sirisack Associate Professor Faculty of Science National University of Laos Dong Dok Campus Vientiane Lao Peoples' Democratic Republic

Sam Nuov Deputy Director General Fisheries Administration Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries #186 Norodom Blvd. Sangkat Tonle Basac Khan Chamcar Mon Phnom Penh, Kingdom of Cambodia

Samchan Hay Researcher Dept of Environmental Science Faculty of Science Royal University of Phnom Penh Russian Federation Boulevard Toul Kork, Phnom Penh, Kingdom of Cambodia

Sameng Keo Monine Deputy Director Dept. of Agricultural Extension (DAE) Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Samonn Mith WorldFish Center No. 35 St. 71 12302 Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Sarah Ransom First Secretary (Development Cooperation) Regional Civil Society Specialist Australian Embassy Hanoi, Viet Nam

Saysi Sayaseng

Relationship Manager ANZ Bank Lane Xang Branch 33 Lane Xang Avenue PO Box 5001 Vientiane, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Seng Sophak Institutional Advisor Irrigation Service Centre c/o Cambodian Center for Study and Development of Agriculture #119 Street 257 Sangkat Teuk La-‐ak I Khan Toul Kok Phnom Penh

50

Title and Contact Details Kingdom of Cambodia

Sengdara Kattignasack Freelance Hydropower Consultant Vientiane Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Sengsamay Punkeo

CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food Naga House House 87, Unit 7, Mixay Village Chantabouly District Vientiane Capital Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Seth Westra Senior Lecturer School of Civil, Environmental and Mining Engineering The University of Adelaide Adelaide Australia

Sharon Perera Secretariat Manager CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food 127, Sunil Mawatha, Pelawatte Battaramulla, Sri Lanka

Shi Guoqing Director National Research Center for Resettlement School of Public Administration Hohai University 1 Xikang Rd. Nanjing Peoples' Republic of China

Simon Tilleard Water Resources Engineer International Center for Environmental Management 6A Lane 49 To Ngoc Van Tay Ho, Hanoi, Viet Nam

Sipho Sibanda

Institute for Agricultural Engineering Agricultural Research Council 141 Cresswell Road, Silverton Private Bag X134 Pretoria, 0001, South Africa

So Nam Programme Coordinator Fisheries Programme Mekong River Commission Secretariat P.O. Box 623 National Road # 2 Sangkat Chak Angre Krom, Khan Meanchey Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Sokkheang Lay Researcher Supreme National Economic Council #208A Preah Norodom Blvd. Khan Chamkarmom Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Somboun Souphimanichanh Technical Officer Participatory Development Training Center 180 Ban Nakham (off Luang Prabang Road) Sikhottabong District Vientiane Capital, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Sonali Senaratna Sellamuttu Senior Researcher -‐ Livelihood Systems

51

Title and Contact Details International Water Management Institute C/o National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute Ban Nongviengkham Xaythany District Vientiane, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Sonephet Phosalath Assistant to the Director General, Project Coordinator Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Nam Thuen-‐Nam Kading River Basin Committee Secretariat Bolikhamxay Province, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Sophan Kanhchna Agriculture Policy Monitoring Project Coordinator of the NGO Forum on Cambodia #9-‐11 Street 476Toul Tompong P.O. Box 2295 Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Sopitsuda Tongsopit Researcher Energy Research Institute Chulalongkorn University Bangkok, Thailand

Souksavanh Sengthahuanghung Policy Research Center National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute Vientiane Lao Peoples Democratic Republic

Sounthone Phommasone Director of Research and Academic Services Faculty of Law and Political Science National University of Laos Donnokhoum Campus Vientiane Lao People’s Democratic Republic

Srin Boonyoung (Ms) Program Officer, Development Section of the Embassy,The Embassy of Finland Amarin Tower, 16th Floor 500 Ploenchit Road,, Bangkok 10330, Thailand

Stewart Motta c/o CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food Naga House House 87, Unit 7, Mixay Village Chantabouly District Vientiane Capital Peoples Democratic Republic of Laos

Su Su Yin Asian Institute of Technology KM 42 Paholyothin Highway Klong Lung Pathumthani 12120 Thailand

Suan Pheng Kam WorldFish Centre Jalan Batu Maung Batu Maung 11960 Bayan Lepas Penang, Malaysia

Suon Seng Executive Director Center for Development Oriented Research in Agriculture and Livelihood Systems #71-‐D St. 186 Sangkat Toek Laok III Khan Tuol Kork

52

Title and Contact Details Phnom Penh, Kingdom of Cambodia

Suparerk Janprasart Institute for Social and Environmental Transition 948 North Street, Suite 9 Boulder, Colorado 80304, U.S.A

Surapha Viravong Deputy Manager Social and Environmental Division Theun-‐Hinboun Power Co. Let. 2nd Floor, Simeuang Commercial Center Fa Ngum Road Ban Phia Vat Sisattanak District Vientiane, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Surasak Witoon Thammasat University Khlong Nueng, Khlong Luang Pathum Thani, 12120 Thailand

Sypha Chanthavong Faculty of Law and Political Science, National University of Laos Donnokhoum Campus Lao-‐Thai Friendship Road, P.O. Box 822 Vientiane, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Tarek Ketelsen Technical Director International Center for Environmental Management 6A Lane 49 To Ngoc Van Tay Ho Hanoi Viet Nam

Tep Bunnarith Executive Director Culture and Environment Preservation Association #51F St. 210 Sangkat Toek Laok 3 Khan Toul Kork, Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Terry Clayton Communications Coordinator CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food Naga House House 87, Unit 7, Mixay Village Chantabouly District Vientiane, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Thanasak Poomchaivej Environmental Engineer Xayaburi Power Company Ltd 215 Lanxang Avenue Ban Siang Yuen Kam Paeng Nakorn Vientiane, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Thea Sok Researcher Dept. of Environmental Science Faculty of Science Royal University of Phnom Penh Phnom Penh, Kingdom of Cambodia

Thethan Soe

Center for Southeast Asian Studies Kyoto University Yoshidahonmachi

53

Title and Contact Details Sakyo Ward Kyoto, Kyoto Prefecture 606-‐8501, Japan

Thuon Try Tian Hao Tim Suljada International Center for Environmental Management

6A Lane 49 To Ngoc Van Tay Ho Hanoi, Viet Nam

Tonya Schuetz IFAD Grant and Knowledge Manager CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food 127 Sunil Mawatha Pelawatte, Battaramulla, Sri Lanka

Toru Konishi Senior Economist and Task Team Leader East Asia and Pacific Region 8th Floor, 63 Ly Thai To Hanoi Viet Nam

Tran Bich Phuong

PanNature No. 6 N8B, Trung Hoa – Nhan Chinh Nguyen Thi Thap Road Nhan Chinh Quarter, Thanh Xuan District Hanoi, Viet Nam

Tran Duc Toan Deputy Director General Soil and Fertility Research Institute Dong Nga Tu Liem Hanoi Viet Nam

Tran Thi Thu Huong Researcher Hanoi University of Agriculture tt. Trâu Quỳ Gia Lâm Hanoi Viet Nam

Tran Van Giai Phong Hue University 3 Lê Lợi Thành phố Huế Viet Nam

Trinh Le Nguyen Executive Director People and Nature Reconciliation No. 6 N8B, Trung Hoa – Nhan Chinh Nguyen Thi Thap Road Nhan Chinh Quarter, Thanh Xuan District Hanoi, Viet Nam

Trinh Thi Truc Huong Village Representative Vam Nao Village, An Giang Province Viet Nam

Truong Hong Deputy Director Western Highlands Agroforestry Scientific and Technical Institute Hoa Thang Commune Buon Ma Thuot City Daklak Province, Viet Nam

Tuan Nguyen Van Institute of Water Resources Planning Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development

54

Title and Contact Details 162A Tran Quang Khai Hanoi, Viet Nam

Viet Nguyen


Vilaivanh Thongmanivong Technical Officer Law Division Department of Water Resources Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Vientiane Capital Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Virawan Sombutsiri Environmental Advisor Xayaburi Power Company Ltd 215 Lanxang Avenue, Ban Siang Yuen Kam Paeng Nakorn, Vientiane Lao Peoples' Democratic Republic

Vo Dinh Tho Director Viet Nam Fund for Forest Development and Protection Lam Dong Province Viet Nam

Vo Thanh Trang Village Representative Vam Nao Village, An Giang Province Viet Nam

Voradeth Phonekeo Coordinator Initiative for Sustainable Hydro Power Office of the Secretariat in Vientiane Mekong River Commission Unit 18 Ban Sithane Neua Sikhottabong District Vientiane Peoples' Democratic Republic of Laos

Vu Hai Linh Center for Water Resources Conservation and Development Room 801 HACISCO Building No. 15 Lane 107 Nguyen Chi Thanh, Dong Da Hanoi Viet Nam

Vu Xuan Nguyet Hong Deputy Director Central Institute for Economic Management 68 Phan Đình Phùng Ba Đình Hà Nội Việt Nam

Wang Dacai

Dateng International Vientiane Peoples’ Democratic Republic of Laos

Wannipa Soda Thailand Environment Institute 16/151 Muang Thong Thani Bond Street Bangpood, Pakkred Nonthaburi 11110 Thailand

Worawan Sukraroek Regional Policy Officer People Protecting their Ecosystems in the Lower Mekong

55

Title and Contact Details Jointly managed by Oxfam Australia and Oxfam America #94, Russian Blvd Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Xaythong Phongsisatanak Deputy of Sport and Culture Section Provincial Education and Sport Office

Yeong Chee Meng General Manager Don Sahong Hydropower Project Office No. 15 Bekit Ledang Off Jalan Duta, 50480 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia

Yhoksamay Lathsavong Water Management and Land Entitlement Research Facilitator Village Focus International House 207, Unit 14, Ban Phonsavan Tai Sisattanak District Vientiane, Lao Peoples’ Democratic Republic

Yumiko Kura Regional Program Manager WorldFish Center No. 35 St. 71 12302 Phnom Penh Kingdom of Cambodia

Yuntao Zhao Worldwide Fund for Nature Beijing Office Kunming Programme Office Room 606 Science Hall Yunnan University No. 2 Cuihu Beilu Kunming Yunnan 650091 Peoples' Republic of China

Zha Daojing Professor Center for International and Strategic Studies School of International Studies Peking University Haidian District Beijing 100871 Peoples' Republic of China

wle-mekong.cgiar.orgriver!basin.!water,!food!and!energy!are!all!essential ... ecosystems! •...

Documents