In all the blogs I have written so far I have
talked a lot about water in terms of surface water, in particular river flows
and basins have been the water related topics of my blog. Nevertheless there
are of course other water resources that people use. One of those
resources is an aquifer. This blog will discuss, arguably one of the most
important resources of water in North East-Africa: the Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System (NSAS). This
blog will try to address the importance of the NSAS for the countries that can
benefit from it. Furthermore it will exemplify the agreements the NSAS states
have made as well as criticising these agreements.
Figure 1: a map of the NSAS
The definition of an aquifer is rather complex
but Mazor (2015) gives us a simple definition of the natural phenomenon.
According to Mazor, an aquifer is: “a
body of a permeable rock that contains water in all its pores and can sustain
producing wells". Because this blog mainly focusses on the way the
Nubian Sandstone Aquifer is managed by its riparian states and the importance
of the aquifer for their population, a simple definition like Mazor’s is
enough.
The NSAS is the world’s largest knows fossil
aquifer and underlies the North-African countries of Chad, Egypt, Libya and
Sudan (see figure 1) and is therefore home to approximately 136 million people in
an area of 2,2 million square kilometres. As I have addressed before in my blog
about the GERD, Egypt as well as the other NSAS countries have little water
resources and are therefore highly dependent on the Nile river and the Nubian
Sandstone Aquifer (NSA) to fulfil in their needs. In fact, the aquifer is vital
to the survival of the Egyptians, Libyans, Sudanese and Chadians. Not to
mention the populations that are supported by crops and livestock dependent on
the aquifer’s water (IAEA; Bakhbakhi, 2006; Maxwell, 2011; Nijsten et al., 2018).
One would understand why the aquifer is so valuable for the North African
countries and why it’s disputed.
The amount of water that is extracted from the
aquifer has increased rapidly in the past decades due to population growth,
food demand and economic growth (Bakhbakhi, 2006). Mainly Egypt and Libya rely
on the NSAS for agricultural as well as domestic water supply. The aquifer sounds
like a gift from god to the thirsty and water scarce countries in the region,
however there are some downsides to it. The NSAS is, in some places, confined while in others it’s not. Besides,
the quality of the water varies due to salinity differences. Therefore the
aquifer should be regulated and exploited very carefully. Until 2013, the NSAS-countries
had no binding multilateral treaty that governed the usage of the NSAS whatsoever.
This was very outstanding and rare in international water law (Maxwell, 2011; Nijsten
et al., 2018; Daily Maverick, 2018).
The
necessity of binding agreements
The NSAS region is politically very unpredictable.
Under constant political instability water scarcity issues become even more important.
To illustrate, the fighting in Darfur in 2011 and the independence of South Sudan
was largely due to water access issues. Another example of a previous conflict
in the NSAS region is about the Aouzou Strip in the border area of Chad and
Libya. The Aouzou strip contains a part of the NSAS. Chad and Libya have spent
years in an armed conflict about who could exercise sovereignty over the strip.
A binding agreement of cooperation could acknowledge the culture of struggle
the NSAS states face and start solving sovereignty problems the region faces
(Maxwell, 2011).
Furthermore, Maxwell (2011) argues that the
economic/wealth disparities between the NSAS states have the potential to influence
the stability of the NSAS. Along with deep-seated political instability and the
disadvantages in natural resources this demonstrates the high necessity of binding
agreements between the NSAS states.
Agreements
Despite not having a binding multilateral
treaty between the NSAS States, the states have been cooperating through
agreements from 1992 until present day. The Joint Authority for the Study and
Development agreement, dating back to 1992, was the first step in cooperation.
This agreement, amongst later agreements between the NSAS riparian states, includes
increased levels of engagement and intensified cooperation. The only instrument
the Authority was able to record is an “internal regulation” which set out the
internal structure, functions, decision-making and funding of the Authority. Therefore,
the agreement carries no provisions regarding the
management of the aquifer or groundwater stored in it (Nijsten et al., 2018).
Eight years later, in 2000, two agreements
were made to advance the cooperation process among the NSAS countries. These
agreements acknowledged and captured the need for regular monitoring, updating
and sharing data and information about the NSAS to assure a sustainable use of
the aquifer’s water resources. This need of sharing is recorded in the “Programme
for the Development of a Regional Strategy for the Utilization of the NSAS”. An
even more deepening process of cooperation was recorded in the “Regional Action
Programme for the Integrated NSAS Management”. This project aims to develop
a regional strategy for integrated NSAS Management and a sustainable
long-term usage of the aquifer.
The latest agreement, dating back to 2013, is
the so-called Strategic Action Plan (SAP). This agreement binds the NSAS states
to take actions for sustainable aquifer management at a later stage and an
equitable usage of it (Nijsten et al., 2018).
False
hope?
The first binding agreement between the
NSAS states might be a big step forward in managing the Nubian Sandstone
Aquifer, after all agreements were signed, resulting in an increasing cooperation and equitable
usage of the aquifer. However, the agreement is more like a vague aim rather than a well-established
measure to keep the NSAS states in line. Therefore the agreements might not be ambitious
and affective enough to prevent conflict from happening. Besides that,
dependency on the NSAS is likely to increase as a consequence of population and
economic growth and Egypt’s water conflict with Ethiopia concerning the Grand
Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) (discussed in two of my former blogs).
Moreover, since water is such a valuable
resource as well as very scarce in the NSAS region, and because the population
of the NSAS is dependent on the aquifer to even be alive, the possibility that
disputes arise is realistic. As I have argued in my first blog of the GERD,
Egypt is prepared to go to war over its water resources. The NSAS is such a valuable
resource, Egypt, Sudan, Libya and Chad are likely to get in a conflict with
each other if access to it diminishes or restricts.
Thank you for introducing me to an area i have limited knowledge of! You stated that 'The NSAS is, in some places, confined while in others it’s not' In which areas is the NSAS confined and what is the impact of the confinement on water scarcity and potentially the cleanliness of the water? You concluded conflicts are likely to rise as result of the NSAS, has there been evidence in the news or other publicly available literature?
ReplyDeleteHey Marie,
ReplyDeleteI am glad I could introduce you to something new! Also thanks for the questions. First of all, the confinement of the aquifer. The mostly unconfined part of the aquifer can be found in the southern part of it. The largely confined part can be found in the north.I will upload a picture of the area of the aquifer with a red and a yellow area. The yellow area is largely unconfined, the red part is largely confined.The impact of the confinement is of course the renewability. Areas where the aquifer is renewable are more likely to benefit from the aquifer in the long run as these parts of the aquifer are being recharged, however recharging might not be very fast, exploitation of the aquifer must therefore be managed carefully. Areas where the aquifer is confined are more vulnerable for running out of water. These areas are not recharged and therefore, eventually will dry up. Adequate management of this part of the aquifer might therefore even be more important than for the unconfined part of it.
In the recent history there have not been conflicts between the NSAS countries over the aquifer. However when scanning the news about the NSAS there is a lot written about the possibility of conflict concerning water from the NSAS. Basically these sources make the same statement I did. Because of the immense importance of the aquifer there will be a risk of conflict. Due to the rising population pressure on water resources is increasing. I don't want to say conflict is going to happen in the future, but we can't exclude the possibility of it. As I have addressed in my blog about the GERD, Egypt has explicitely mentioned it would go to war over water.