Water Environment
Partnership in Asia (WEPA)

Fourth Phase Final ReportWater Environment
Partnership in Asia (WEPA)

Fourth Phase Final ReportWater Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report
Copyright © 2024 Ministry of the Environment, Japan. All rights reserved.
No parts of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage andretrieval system, without prior permission in writing from Ministry of the Environment Japanthrough the Institute for Global Environment Strategies (IGES), which serves as the WEPA
Secretariat.
ISBN: 978-4-88788-272-0
This publication is created as a part of WEPA and published by the Institute for Global
Environmental Strategies (IGES).
Although every effort is made to ensure objectivity and balance, the publication of study results
does not imply WEPA partner country’s endorsement or acquiescence with its conclusions.
Ministry of the Environment, Japan
Environmental Management Division
1-2-2 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-8795 Japan
Tel: +81-(0)3-3581-3351
http://www.env.go.jp/en/
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)
Adaptation and Water Area
2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Kanagawa 240-0115 Japan
Tel: +81-(0)46-855-3700
http://www.iges.or.jp/
The team for WEPA Fourth Phase Final Report includes the following IGES members:[Editors]
Inamura, Yukako Research Manager, Adaptation and Water Area
Kumar, Pankaj Senior Policy Researcher, Adaptation and Water Area
Kanazawa, Sui Policy Researcher, Adaptation and Water Area
[Authors]
Inamura, Yukako Research Manager, Adaptation and Water Area
Kanazawa, Sui Policy Researcher, Adaptation and Water Area
Kumar, Pankaj Senior Policy Researcher, Adaptation and Water Area
Mitra, Bijon Kumer Research Manager, Adaptation and Water Area
Mizuno, Osamu Programme Director, Adaptation and Water Area
Ngoc Bao, Pham Research Manager, Adaptation and Water Area
Shivakoti, Binaya Raj Senior Policy Researcher, Adaptation and Water Area
[Support]
Fushimi, Emma Editing Manager, Strategic Management Office
Culshaw-Ishii, Miyako Project Officer, Strategic Management OfficeKitamura, Eiko Publication Manager, Strategic Management OfficePrinted in Japan

Table of Contents

Preface1

Message from Ministry of the Environment, Japan3

1. Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)

4

2. Summary of the Fourth Phase of WEPA

6

3. Looking back at 20 years of WEPA

8

3.1. Overview

8

3.2. Reviewing Action Program in the third phase

11

3.3. Changes in policies and institutions for water environment governance:
Review of survey in FY2019 and cases of policy revisions in thePhilippines and Republic of Korea

4. WEPA Action Programs in the Fourth phase  

15
25

4.1. Overview

25

4.2. WEPA Action Program in Cambodia

27

4.3. WEPA Action Program in Myanmar

29

4.4. WEPA Action Program in Lao PDR

34

5. Feedback, expectations, and messages from WEPA Focal Points
and Advisory Board
38
5.1. FY2022 Survey Results

38

5.2. Feedback in FY2023 and expectation from WEPA Focal Points

39

WEPA Focal Points

48

WEPA Advisory Boards

50

List of Activities and Publications

51

Preface

Asia is one of the most important regions for the global economy. The region
saw economic growth of about 5.5% from 2018 to 2019, along with major progressin industrialization and urbanization. The COVID-19 pandemic, which began in
2019, hampered the global economy, and according to World Bank, average GDP
growth was -3.1% in 2020. By 2022, global growth had recovered to 3.1%. The
Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA) was initiated in 2004 by the
Ministry of the Environment, Japan to strengthen water environment managementin the Asian region and is made up of 13 partner countries. Out of these, eight
countries — Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines,
Thailand, and Viet Nam — are also ASEAN member countries. These countries
experienced an average GDP growth of 5.4% in 2022, showing a higher recovery
than the global economy.
The population of the WEPA partner countries accounted for 29% of the world’s
population in 2022, with many people living in urban areas. Economic development
and an increase in the regional population have led to increased discharges ofindustrial and domestic wastewater, placing a heavy burden on the water environment in the region. Addressing this problem requires appropriate wastewater
management.
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, including its 17 Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs), was adopted by the UN member states in 2015. SDG6
aims to improve water quality through wastewater treatment, implement integrated
water resources management, and protect and restore water-related ecosystems.
The progress report on SDG6 published by the United Nations in 2021 stated thatapproximately 35% of domestic wastewater was discharged without proper
treatment in the East and Southeast Asia region. However, the report also indicatedthat the percentage of this untreated water varies widely among countries in theregion, from less than 10% to over 75%. The deterioration of the water environmentis affecting our water use and ecosystems, and considering the impacts of climatechange on water resources in the future, the water environment management is
one of the most urgent issues in many countries.
Once a water environment has been polluted, it takes a huge amount of time andmoney to restore it. Furthermore, water environment governance requires theinvolvement of government officials from all levels of government and multisector
stakeholders. It is also essential to gain the cooperation of a diverse range of actors
across society. Under such a complicated governance framework, central government officials play an important role as they have the primary responsibility forformulating and implementing water environment management policies. It is vital

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report1to improve their capacity to establish a good water environment governanceframework. For this reason, since the first phase, WEPA has been promoting
knowledge sharing through a platform that includes a network of policymakers
and a database on the water environment, in order to establish a governanceframework and implement the necessary water environment management toconserve water resources in the partner countries.
Through WEPA Action Programs, which began in the third phase, we have further
strengthened our support to the partner countries to address water environment
issues in their respective countries. In the fourth phase, which began in 2019, the
WEPA Action Program was implemented in Myanmar, Cambodia and Lao PDR,
aiming to establish autonomous and appropriate water environment governancethrough the PDCA cycle. This involves understanding the current situation, identifying pollution sources, and formulating, implementing and evaluating policies.
The aim is to ensure compliance with regulations that are essential for water
environment management.
This year marks the end of the fourth phase of the WEPA project and is also the20th anniversary of the establishment of WEPA. As we look back on our past
activities, I hope that we can use our achievements, experiences and evaluations
over the past 20 years, and ensure that WEPA continues to evolve, thereby further
strengthening and improving water environment governance and managementin the Asian region.
March 2024

Mitsumasa Okada
Chairperson of the WEPA Advisory Board

2

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final ReportMessage from the Ministry of
the Environment, Japan
The Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)

summary of the Action Programs completed in thewas launched in 2004 under an initiative of thethird phase and investigated how the programs

Ministry of the Environment, Japan, as it was realized

supported the partner countries to solve issues

that developing better water environment gover-and develop the capacity of government officials.

nance was essential to solve water environment

Following this, we present an outline and results ofproblems in the Asian region.

APs during the fourth phase in Cambodia (capacity
building of administrative officers on understanding

Each WEPA project phase is set for five years. During

the pollution load in Tonle Sap Lake), Myanmar (devel-

the first phase (FY2004-2008), WEPA established aopment of national surface water quality standards),

human resource network of government officials

and Lao PDR (development of legal systems andinvolved in water environment management in theguidelines for sewage treatment).

Asian region. In addition, we developed an information
database on the water environment of the partner

We conclude the report with issues on water envi-

countries. In the second phase (FY2009-2013),

ronmental governance in partner countries, expec-

through workshops and bilateral meetings, we encour-tations and suggestions by FPs, and messages fromaged information and knowledge-sharing to explore

WEPA Advisor Dr. Motoyuki Suzuki and WEPA Focal

solutions to regional priorities such as “domestic

Points, Dr. Vicente B. Tuddao, Jr., Director, Department

wastewater management” and “climate change andof Environment and Natural Resources, and Dr.

water environment.” In the third phase (FY2014-2018),

Ratnayake Mudiyanselage Sanjaya Kumara Ratnayake,based on the information and knowedge-sharing

Deputy Director General, Environment Protection

platform, we implemented the WEPA Action Program

Division, Central Environmental Authority, Sri Lanka,(AP) scheme, to support partner countries to solve

who have long been involved in WEPA.

their water environment issues under collaboration.
Following this, the fourth phase (FY2019-2023)

Last but not least, we would like to express ourstarted focusing on “compliance with regulations.”

gratitude to our partners for their great contribution

The objectives were to analyze governance frame-to the publication of this report and their support overwork for domestic and industrial wastewater and to

the last 20 years of WEPA activities from the first to

provide support to establish soft infrastructures in

the fourth phases.

each country.
It is our sincere hope that many more people will
The purpose of this report is to introduce the activ-

become interested in WEPA’s activities through thisities implemented by WEPA and present the results

report.

we have obtained in the fourth phase. The report isalso an opportunity to reflect on WEPA’s activities
over the past two decades, as 2024 marks the 20th
anniversary of WEPA.

March 2024

Seiji Tsutsui
Director, Environmental Management Division,

First, as a review of the past 20 years, we have

Environmental Management Bureau,

included a summary of past activities, as well as policy

Ministry of the Environment, Japanrevisions in the partner countries. Next, we give a

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report31

Water Environment Partnership in
Asia (WEPA)

The Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA) was launched to improve water
environment in Asia by strengthening governance and public administration related
to the water environment through sharing knowledge and experiences. The partnershipaims to raise the well-being of people and conserve aquatic ecosystems.

WEPA FACTS
When did it start?
2004

The First Phase

2009

The Second Phaselaunched in 2004. WEPA follows a 5-year cycle, and2014

The Third Phasethe fourth phase started in April 2019.

2019

The Fourth Phase

WEPA was proposed by the Ministry of theEnvironment, Japan, at the 3rd World Water Forum
held in Kyoto, Shiga and Osaka in 2003, and was

Who are the partner countries?

13 Asian Countries

Currently, WEPA comprises 13 Asian
countries. Eleven partners — Cambodia,
China, Indonesia, Japan, Republic ofCambodia

Korea, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar,

China

Indonesia

Japan

the Philippines, Thailand, andViet Nam — joined in the first phase,and two partners — Nepal and Sri Lanka— joined in the second phase.

Republicof Korea

Lao PDR

Malaysia

MyanmarPhilippines

Each partner country appoints a Focal
Point who actively participates inand facilitates WEPA activities in thepartner countries.

How is it governed?
The plan of activities under WEPA is discussed
and endorsed at the WEPA Annual Meeting.
According to the plan, the WEPA Secretariat
implements activities in close collaboration
with partner countries.

4

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report

Thailand

Viet Nam

Nepal

Sri Lanka

What is the mission of WEPA?
Based on partnerships between policymakers and relevant stakeholders in Asia, especially throughthose of WEPA Focal Points, WEPA makes efforts to:• enhance capacity for problem identification, policy planning and implementation, monitoring, as well
as evaluation of central government officials, mainly via the WEPA Focal Points, through sharing
knowledge and organizing dialogue on water environmental management in the partner countries• identify critical water environmental issues and institutional issues for management thereof,
support such efforts in resolving them, and share the lessons learnt from these activities withWEPA partner countries and related stakeholders• enhance cooperation within WEPA partner countries and with international organizations anddonor agencies to resolve existing water environmental issues and to improve water
environmental governance

WEPA website and database— an information platform for water environmental management
Developed in collaboration with the partner countries, the WEPA database storesinformation on the status of the water environment, related policies, and water
management practices, as well as links to other resources in the partnercountries. The WEPA website was developed during the first phase, and it was
renewed in March 2023. Information from the former database can be found in
the Archives on the new website. The website also stores the bulk of WEPA
meeting presentation material and publications.

WEPA Action Programs
To promote concrete actions for improving water governance in each country, a
new scheme to implement “WEPA Action Programs” was introduced in the third
phase. The WEPA Action Program scheme sets out actions to resolve specificproblems on water governance in partner countries, with support provided by
WEPA. Practical lessons learnt from the programs are shared with other WEPA
partner countries.
Over two phases, six action programs were implemented to address various
water environment related issues in partner countries.

WEPA Outlook on Water Environmental Management in Asia
Considering the importance of a common understanding among stakeholders tosolve water quality issues in the region, the “WEPA Outlook on Water
Environmental Management” has periodically been published. The Outlook is
prepared based on accumulated information and knowledge, using the humanresources network developed under this initiative. It aims to provide themost up-to-date and useful information on the water environment and its
management in Asia.

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report5

2

Summay of the Fourth Phase of
WEPA

FY2019
Year

Month

2019

Dec

Bilateral Meeting with Cambodia (Phnom Penh, Cambodia)

2020

Feb

15th Annual Meeting and International Workshop(Bangkok, Thailand)

OthersEvent• Implemented WEPA Action Program (AP) “Pollution Load Management inCitarum River, Indonesia” (Continued from the 3rd phase)• Developing WEPA AP in Cambodia• Conducted a survey on water environment governance updates

FY2020
Year

Month

2021

Mar

OthersEvent
16th Annual Meeting and International Workshop (Online)• Implemented follow-up activities for the WEPA AP on Pollution Load Managementin Indonesia• Planned to implement WEPA AP in Cambodia (Continued)• Developing WEPA AP in Myanmar

6

Site visit at the 15th Annual Meeting andSite visit at the 19th Annual Meeting andInternational Workshop (February 2020)

International Workshop (January 2024)

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report

FY2021
Year

Month

Event
9th World Water Forum (Dakar, Senegal)

2022

Mar

• Paticipated in Setting up an Action Group on Water Quality
Improvement• Exhibited WEPA’s Activity in Japan’s booth• Conducted WEPA Action Program on Identifying Major Pollution Sources inTonle Sap Lake in Cambodia
Others• Conducted WEPA Action Program on Establishing Surface Water Quality
Standards in Myanmer (Continued)• Conducted WEPA Action Program on Development of an Appropriate Domestic
Wastewater Management System in Lao PDR• Published WEPA Outlook on Water Environmental Management in Asia 2021

FY2022
Year

Month

Event
17th Annual Meeting (Kumamoto, Japan ・Online (Hybrid))

2022

Apr

2023

Feb

4th Asia-Pacific Water Summit in Kumamoto, Japan• Paticipated in Parallel Thematic Session No.5, entitled“Toward the realization of appropriate wastewater management
to contribute to sustainable development”
18th Annual Meeting and International Workshop (Siem Reap,
Cambodia・Online (Hybrid))• Conducted WEPA Action Program on Identifying Major Pollution Sources inTonle Sap Lake in Cambodia (Continued)
Others• Conducted WEPA Action Program on Development of an Appropriate Domestic
Wastewater Management System in Lao PDR (Continued)• Conducted WEPA Action Program on Establishing Surface Water Quality
Standards in Myanmer (Continued)• Conducted a survey on water environmental gavernance

FY2023
Year

Month

Event

2024

Jan

19th Annual Meeting and International Workshop (Hayama, Japan
Online (Hybrid))

Others• Conducted WEPA Action Program on Development of an Appropriate Domestic
Wastewater Management System in Lao PDR (Continued)• Published WEPA 4th Fourthp Phase Final Report

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report7

3

Looking back at 20 years of WEPA

3.1. Overview(EIA) are basic and established practices in most WEPA
countries, particularly in terms of industrial and devel-

Asian countries continue to face serious water

opment activities, and these are ways to avert any

pollution problems, leading to degradation of the living

potential high environmental impact and pollution ofenvironment, decrease in available water, and loss ofwater environment. Currently, there is a robust moni-

aquatic ecosystem services. Recognizing the criticaltoring framework supported by information andsituation of water quality in Asia, the Water Environ-communication technology, and many partner countries

ment Partnership in Asia (WEPA) was proposed byhave adopted automatic monitoring stations, although

the Ministry of the Environment, Japan at the 3rd

not at full scale in all countries. These achievements

World Water Forum in 2003. Formed in 2004, WEPA

are truly inspirational when compared to the state ofaims to strengthen water environmental governancewater environment in those early days of WEPA.

in Asia through the collection and dissemination of
information, and the capacity development of relevantOver the last 20 years, the environmental and devel-

stakeholders, in partnership with 13 partner countries

opmental context has also changed significantly asin the region, namely Cambodia, China, Indonesia,

Asia has taken center stage in terms of dynamic

Japan, Republic of Korea, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar,

economic growth. The size of the economy in each

Nepal, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Vietpartner country has expanded impressively, along

Nam. Deterioration of water quality is one of the mostwith the capacity to deal with pollution, wastewaterpressing environmental problems threatening humantreatment, and to address the effects of environmental

health and sound economic development in WEPA

changes on water security. The Millennium Develop-

countries. It remains a critical problem in many WEPA

ment Goals (MDGs) (2000-2015) and the Sustain-

partner countries despite significant progress madeable Development Goals (SDGs) (2015-2030) areby these countries.

two major initiatives at the global level during thisperiod that have tremendously shaped the discourse

WEPA as a partnership allows partner countries toof water management, including for WEPA. Estab-discuss their experiences and identify potential

lishment of WEPA itself happened just four years

solutions to improve the water environment. Over theafter the inception of the MDGs, which included alast 20 years, the partner countries have significantly

goal on environmental sustainability that aimed toadvanced the development of their own policies, envi-

address safe water supply and sanitation as a majorronmental laws, and acts, and formulated guidelines,

target in MDG7. A similar target has become theregulations, and directives. They have issued ambient

main focus of SDG6, the goal for clean water andwater quality and effluent standards, and implemented

sanitation for all. The WEPA database was developed

measures to combat the growing threat of waterin collaboration with the partner countries during

pollution in critical areas, as well as working to avoid

the first phase of WEPA (2004-2008) and it contains

future pollution risks in other areas. However, institu-

comprehensive information on related policies,

tions for monitoring, evaluating, and regulating ambienttechnologies, NGO and CBO activities, as well aswater quality and effluents among WEPA partner

links to useful resources including the bulk of WEPA

countries are in different stages of development andactivities and publications. The WEPA database of

implementation. Evaluating environmental status quo

the 13 partner countries has been a vital source ofand conducting Environmental Impact Assessment

information on water environment that is critical for

8

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Reportassessing the status of both MDGs and SDGs. The

water sector of the region. Outlook 2009 and 2012

database also opened a new window for sharing

were published during the second phase. In Outlook

information among the stakeholders on water envi-

2009, unclear demarcations of responsibility between

ronment, and helped to build a strong human network,

different levels of government and insufficient capacity

including policymakers, experts, and practitionersof staff responsible for water environmental manage-

dealing with water environmental management inment were identified as challenges. In addition,

the Asian region.

conducting regular water quality monitoring andimplementing proper operation and management

Beyond the database, in the second phase (2009-(O&M) of wastewater treatment facilities were major

2014), WEPA promoted information and know-

issues in some partner countries. Considering water

ledge-sharing in two key priority areas  —  domestic

quality and quantity issues simultaneously as well as

wastewater treatment, and impacts of climate change

raising awareness to promote law enforcement wereon the water environment  — to find feasible solutions.

challenges for many countries. In Outlook 2012, in

WEPA started sharing regular updates on water

addition to the issues mentioned in the previous

environment management by organizing regularoutlook, organic pollution in rivers traversing throughmeetings such as the annual meeting, carrying out

populated areas, eutrophication in closed water bodies,

questionnaire surveys, and conducting expert inter-and issues related to domestic wastewater particularly

views. WEPA initiated more focused discussion to“grey water” management were raised as problems

foster deeper exchange of information and findin the partner countries.

solutions on the two priority areas. To bolster information exchange between partner countries withIn the third phase (2014-2019), WEPA continued thesimilar policy interests and challenges, workshops

exchange of information and experiences throughwere organized covering discussions on policy, tech-workshops, bilateral dialogues, and participation in

nologies, and practices as well as site visits on theseimportant forums, as well as bringing out key publi-

priority areas. Through close communication between

cations. Additionally, the “WEPA Action Program” (AP)the partner countries, WEPA also responded byscheme was launched based on requests from WEPA

providing support on industrial wastewater manage-

partner countries to resolve specific problems in thement (particularly, enforcement and implementationwater environment. The action programs wereof pollution control measures) which remains adeveloped and implemented by WEPA partnercommon management issue among the partnercountries and in the process, they shared knowledge,

countries. In the process, WEPA promoted its close

experience, and lessons with other partner countries.

collaboration with organizations and initiatives, by

APs were designed by considering the needs, sustain-

holding training sessions on water environmental

ability, relevance/lessons for all partner countries, andgovernance in Japan, collaborating with the Network

feasibility (completion and generation of output/of Asian River Basin Organizations (NARBO) secre-

impacts). The first AP was implemented in Viet Nam

tariat to share their activities during WEPA Inter-to determine the pollution load in wastewater

national Workshops and Annual Meetings, and also

generated from pig farms. Results from the study wereorganized several events including side events at theutilized in the establishment of an effluent standard

World Water Forum, Asia-Pacific Water Summit,

for livestock wastewater (QVCN622016/BTNMT).

and the IWA-ASPIRE Conference and Exhibition in

The second AP was implemented in Sri Lanka toTokyo. Furthermore, WEPA launched the publication

develop and improve policies related to industrialof its flagship report “WEPA Environmental Outlooks”

settings and waste/wastewater disposal to prevent

which provides the most up-to-date and useful infor-

groundwater pollution. At the final workshop for themation on the state of water environment, its

AP in Sri Lanka, findings were shared with all stake-management, progresses and initiatives, and chal-holders, and the Central Environmental Authority usedlenges in the 13 partner countries in Asia, with a target

these findings in the development of wastewater

audience of policymakers, experts, and others in the

discharge standards for these point sources. The

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report9standards have been already published and dissem-

Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE) further

inated to all stakeholders. Practical lessons learnedplans to develop national guidelines based on theand knowledge accumulated from the action programs

output from the AP. During the fourth phase, Outlook

are shared not only among partner countries but also

2021 was published. The key challenges discussedwith a wider audience through open access WEPA

in this latest outlook were selecting and customizing

databases. WEPA has significantly strengthened

water management solutions or wastewater treatment

interactions with other like-minded networks, inter-

technologies based on the local environmental

national organizations, and donor agencies to explore

contexts, socio-economic conditions, and data avail-opportunities to maximize the impacts of WEPA

ability on water quality. It also looked at the need for

activities. During this phase, the WEPA Outlook wastechnical innovation to improve wastewater treatment

published in 2015 and 2018. Issues such as climate

efficiency, and how to formulate policies based onchange, pollution source and loads, financial sustain-

scientific evidence, financial sustainability in waste-ability in wastewater and sludge management, andwater and sludge management. Inclusiveness of

inclusiveness were mentioned in Outlook 2015. Subse-

diversified stakeholders in management, and compli-

quently, issues including water reuse and recovery ofance with laws and regulations were also mentioned

useful by-products, and selection of wastewaterin Outlook 2021. The WEPA database also got a newtreatment technologies accounting for natural andlook with a focus on enhancing accessibility andsocioeconomic conditions and development level,navigation for users. The fourth phase was marked

were considered in Outlook 2018.

by the COVID-19 pandemic that grew into a global
health crisis with cascading implications to economies,

During the fourth phase (2019-2024), regularsocieties, and the water environment. Safe and acces-

programs continued, including the implementation

sible water was a life-saving commodity that wasof new APs in Cambodia, , Lao PDR, and Myanmar,

used for drinking, cooking, washing, and sanitation,in addition to the program in Indonesia that wasamong countless other uses required to fight thestarted in the third phase. The WEPA Outlook 2021

pandemic. The pandemic heightened the importance

was also published. The AP in Indonesia was imple-of a clean and healthy water environment, which ismented at the end of the third phase to improve thecritical for public health.

water quality of the Citarum River and this program
was completed in the fourth phase. The program

Universal access to clean, safe, and adequate fresh-provided opportunities to government officers inwater, improved sanitation and safe wastewaterIndonesia to obtain key knowledge to bolster theirtreatment is crucial for human well-being, minimizing

respective actions for improving the water quality ofany detrimental impacts on human health, and is

the Citarum River, such as determining the load or

required for healthy ecosystems. Asia has seen rapid

quality and quantity of pollutants to allocate to each

population growth, urbanization, and industrialization

sector or industry. The AP in Myanmar was imple-

along with changing lifestyles, including shifting diets

mented to support the establishment of National

toward highly water-intensive foods such as meat.

Surface Water Quality Standards (NSWQS). The

The region has also been hit by the severe impacts

program ended in FY2022, and the final version ofof climate change which have serious implications

NSWQS went through the public review in October

for the water environment and for the achievement

2023, just one step before submitting the standardsof the sustainable development agenda. How toto the National Standard Council for their approval.

develop appropriate infrastructure and improve water

The AP in Lao PDR started in FY2022 aiming toenvironment governance is still a major challenge. As

address domestic wastewater management. By

a result, unabated discharge of untreated wastewater

utilizing baseline water quality data collected throughand pollutants and deterioration of water quality

field surveys, the program aimed to develop training

across the region is still a serious problem. WEPA willmaterials for O&M of septic tanks and decentralized

continue to strive to provide better management

wastewater treatment systems. The Lao Ministry ofsolutions and cross-learning among the partner

10

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Reportcountries as well as in the wider community. Somefunding for activities. Practical lessons learned throughkey areas that could be relevant are: exploring theimplementation and outputs are shared with othernexus of water-food-health-climate; promoting a

WEPA partner countries. In the third phase, threecircular approach to water quality and wastewater

action programs were implemented: Viet Nam frommanagement; improving the monitoring and collec-

2014 to 2017, Sri Lanka from 2015 to 2019, andtion of reliable and timely data for decision-making

Indonesia from 2018 to 2020. This section presents

including the use of hydrological simulations, digitalsummaries of these action programs. Action programs

tools for big data mining, and modern advances in

implemented in the fourth phase are briefly introduced

sensors and information technologies; and carrying

in the following section.

out scenario analysis for answering what-if questions
for the decision-makers. Backed by the necessary
infrastructure, tools and technologies, WEPA countries
will be able to use scientific evidence-based

Summary of WEPA Action Programs
Implemented in the third phaseknowledge in formulating effective water quality

WEPA implemented the first action program (a)legislative frameworks to implement policies and“Waste and Wastewater Management of Pig Farms”

regulations, to enhance human and institutional

in Viet Nam, the second one (b) “Groundwater Moni-

capacity, and to influence political will to enforce

toring for Industrial Effluent Management” in Sriregulations and penalties.

Lanka, and the third one (c) “Pollution Load Management in the Citarum River” in Indonesia. Table 1 shows

3.2. Reviewing Action Programs in
the third phasethe objectives and outcomes of these three action
programs. In (a), the program provided support toestimate the pollution load units from swine wastewater. This AP acted as a catalyst for the government

The WEPA action program (AP) scheme is one of thein Viet Nam to establish effluent standards for livestock

key activities of WEPA. These action programs aim

wastewater in 2016. In (b), the program worked on

to conduct a stock take of emerging issues related

developing and improving policies and guidelines

to the water environment in partner countries andrelated to industrial sites and waste disposal to prevent

take collaborative/integrative actions to co-design

groundwater pollution. The water quality of ground-and co-deliver sustainable solutions. These solutions

water from 96 wells were measured over four seasons,will cover strategies on all technical, institutional, andand several wells located near industrial sites showed

governance fronts. APs were introduced in the third

correlations between distance from the industry andphase of WEPA to address issues and take actions

the concentration of different contaminants. The

in each partner country to improve water governance.

results were used to develop wastewater discharge

Each program is developed by a partner country

standards for on-land discharge in Sri Lanka. In (c),(beneficiary) that needs to address water environment

the program assisted in the development of guidelines

issues, and WEPA provides supports to the benefi-

on implementing Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL)

ciary, considering the following aspects:

to improve the water quality of the Citarum River. The• Needs of the country

Ministerial Decree on TMDL has been drafted by• Feasibility

Indonesia but has not yet been enforced.

• Sustainability of the actions• Replicability in the other areas and countries
Each program is implemented by the beneficiary,
supported by experts from the WEPA partner countries
including Japan and the WEPA Secretariat. The WEPA
Secretariat also supports the coordination between
the beneficiary and experts as well as providing

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report11Table 1. Objectives and outcomes of action programs
Country

Title of Action Program

Objectives

Outcomes(a)Viet Nam

Waste and Wastewater
Management of Pig Farms

To determine pollution load
units in pig wastewater inViet Nam

Establishment of effluent
standards for the livestockindustry(b)
Sri Lanka

Improving Industrial Waste
and Wastewater
Management in Gampaha
District

To develop/improve policy/
guidelines related toindustrial siting and waste/
wastewater disposal toprevent groundwaterpollution

Development of wastewater
discharge standards foron-land discharge(c)Indonesia

Application of Total
Maximum Daily Loads(TMDLs) for Effluent
Discharge Permit andCapacity Building for Local
Officials to Implement the
TMDLs

To improve the water qualityof the Citarum River

Establishment of new
regulations for TMDLs in
Indonesia (planned)

Program review

helped government officials in these three countries
in policy formulation, we asked 10 questions to current

The main objective of the third phase was “Actions

and former Focal Points (FPs), as seen in Table 2.

for Issue oriented Solutions”. WEPA aimed to act toQuestions 1-5 were mainly intended to gather opinions

solve water environmental issues in partner countries.

and perspectives about the effectiveness and signif-

Although it is hard to quantify the contribution of

icance of the APs implemented in their countries,

WEPA AP, a list of outcomes from (a) – (c) are men-whereas questions 6 – 10 were more general questions

tioned in Table 1. To understand how the programs

to get their feedback to improve APs in the future.

Table 2. Questions to FPs in Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and Viet Nam
Q1

Do you think the AP was helpful?

Q6

What do you suggest us so that WEPA
becomes a more useful network?

Q2

Could you highlight how the program helped?

Q7

What subject/issue/problem would you expect
WEPA to work on in the future?

Q3

More specifically, which part of the program
would you think the program helped
government officials?

Q8

In your country, what are water environmental
issues that need to be addressed in next 5
years?

Q4

Do you have any suggestions to disseminate
outcomes within your ministry?

Q9

Can you share any good practices addressing
the water environmental issues mentioned in
Q8? Please briefly explain how the problem has
been addressed.

Q5

Would it be better if WEPA could haveprovided more support in other topics/areas
during the project implementation?

Q10

In general, what are the difficulties forgovernment officials in your country to form
policies, implement them, and have people
comply?

12

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final ReportKey findings

environment in Asia. Being an information hub, it aims

How the action programs helped to address

to disseminate and share knowledge through FPs invarious issues related to water governanceeach country, which is also important to strengthen

and management

capacity in the relevant organizations. However, insome cases, converting this skill development to

All three countries responded that the AP was helpful

ensure practical usage on the ground is a challenge

to strengthen governance in their country and provided

because there are frequent changes among theopportunities for capacity development of relevant

responsible government officials in the relevant

staff members (Q1 and Q2). The program particularly

ministries/institutions in the recipient countries. We

helped to strengthen the following points: problem

asked FPs to suggest better ways to disseminate therecognition and identification, getting ideas forknowledge gained from implementing APs andnecessary elements to be considered during policy

received the following suggestions: sharing theformulation/planning, policy implementation, andoutputs/outcomes with colleagues at the internal

policy revision for robust water environment manage-bulletin board, preparing a policy brief/guidebook

ment (Q3). Considering general public policy

internally, organizing workshops and training sessions

formulation in the Plan-Do-Check-Action (PDCA)

at the relevant ministries, creating a platform internally,

cycle, the program supported: “Plan” (generating andsetting up partnerships with local governments, andsharing ideas for conserving the water environment

implementing a similar pilot project (Q4). Figure 1

through problem recognition and identification), “Do”

summarizes the responses on this issue. Dissemi-(implementation of management plans/policies in thenating knowledge further after completing the

ground), and “Check/Action” (revising policies).

program is an important topic in the future to achieve
the objectives of WEPA.

WEPA is a platform for creating various ideas throughsharing practical knowledge to improve the water

Disseminating knowledge
Internal knowledge sharing• bulletin board• policy brief• workshop and training• internal platform

Further independent action• partnerships with local government• implementing a similar pilot project

Figure 1. How to disseminate knowledge within the organization after completing AP

APs were planned and implemented based on thementation of APs are: (i)gather more detailed infor-

needs of recipients, and we asked FPs if they wanted

mation on how to customize the existing successful

further support during implementation (Q5 and Q6).

technologies to fit local conditions; (ii) decide the

They responded that the program would have been

rationale behind selecting indicators to determine themore helpful if the following activities such as “tech-status of water resources in the local context; and (iii)

nology transfer and innovation” and “research and datafind ways to carry out performance analysis for any

analysis” training were included (Figure 2). Some

implemented technologies.

specific suggestions on how to improve policy imple-

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report13

technology transfer and innovation

More support needed

training on research and data analysis
Figure 2. Components of AP that need more support

Future key issues for WEPA activities in line withissues; plastic pollution; extreme weather conditions

challenges/difficulties for government officials inand hydrometeorological hazards like flooding,partner countries

saltwater intrusion, and land subsidence. Figure 3
summarizes the responses. AP topics suggested by

We asked about what water environmental issues are

FPs would help to address problems that may arise

likely to arise in partner countries over the next fivein the near future. We also asked about subjects andyears (Q7). Responses included: estimating pollution

issues that they would like WEPA to work on in thestatus at river basin scale for hotspots in respective

near future (Q8). FPs gave the following list of issues:countries; domestic wastewater treatment andadvanced water treatment technologies; cost effective

management in urban areas; construction andtreatment technologies; better monitoring andmanagement of WWTPs in rural areas with limited

reporting systems; sustainable agricultural and storm-

resources; advancing domestic wastewater treatment/water practices; water reclamation (reuse andmanagement systems in combination with renovating

recovery); nature-based solutions; industries with aand restoring lakes, ponds and canals in urban areas;high risk of causing environmental pollution (textile,

best practices for water quality management for rivers

garment, steel, and fisheries); formulation of regula-and lakes; estimating pollution load capacity for sometions on emerging environmental contaminants likerivers; management of increasing pollutant loads toantibiotic resistance substance and microplastics;

water bodies (unpermitted discharge and non-point

more effective stakeholder involvement in river basinssource); roadmaps for clean drinking water guidelines;

for better water resource management; emerging

over-extraction of groundwater and associated risks

issues of water securities in urban areas; and manage-

like land subsidence; water sanitation and healthment plans for non-point source pollution.

Issues in the future

Water environmental issues
in next 5 years• Increasing domestic WW in urban areas• Increasing pollutant loads (unpermitted discharge and non-point source)• Estimating load capacity for some rivers• Planning water quality management for rivers and lakes• Clean drinking water and sanitation• Over-extraction of groundwater• Plastic pollution• Flooding, saltwater intrusion, and land subsidence.

AP topic suggested• Advance WWT technologies• Monitoring system• Sustainable agriculture andstorm-water practice• Water reclamation (reuse)• Industries causing degradation• Antibiotic resistance substance• Stakeholder involvement in thebasin• Microplastic pollution• Issues in urban areas• Non-point source pollution

Figure 3. Issues that may arise in next five years and AP topics suggested by FPs

14

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final ReportGovernments often face difficulties to put policies inlack of guiding principles and assessment frameworks

practice. We asked FPs what are some of the difficul-

for policy formulation; and enabling industries andties facing government officials when working tostakeholders to participate in water environment

implement policies (Q10). Responses included: unclear

management (Figure 4). When implementing APs in

definition of terms in legislations; data scarcity; diligent

the future, it is important to make sure that any diffi-

monitoring of both point and non-point sources;

culties raised by FPs are well supported.

assessing the load-carrying capacity of waterbodies;

Difficulties for government officials• policy formulation• unclear definition of terms• data collection• guiding assessment of carrying capacity of waterbodies• facilitating industries and stakeholders
Figure 4. Difficulties for government officials in water environment governanceGood practices to address issues and improving

suggested to extend the network beyond the current

water environment in Asia

partners, to implement joint research projects andbuild capacity, as well as upgrading the network to

As well as ascertaining problems and issues, we also

include higher rank officials and encourage more

asked about good practices in participating countries

MOUs.

(Q9). In Viet Nam, the government issued a circular
to control pollution from point sources by assessing
capacities of receiving water bodies (No. 76/2017/
TT-BTNMT). In Sri Lanka, the Surakimu Ganga(conserve river) program was implemented, whereby
many projects to reduce plastic and solid wastes
litters were initiated. It contributed to a significant
reduction in the amount of solid waste in water bodies.

3.3. Changes in policies andinstitutions for water environment
governance: Review of Surveys in FY2019
and FY2020, and cases of policy revisions in thePhilippines and Republic of Korea

In Indonesia, the government implemented stricter

Water security is very important to achieve sustain-

regulations and enforcement measures to control

able and comprehensive growth. Water security

industrial wastewater discharges in addition to regularliterally means a world where everyone has safe,monitoring and inspection by environmental agencies,

affordable, and clean water to live a healthy andresulted in improving water quality in affected areas.

productive life. It also promotes environmental protec-

The government also developed a plan to manage

tion and social justice, and deals with thegroundwater and regulate overexploitation by setting

consequences of poor water management (ADB,

limits for groundwater extraction and promoting water2016). In lieu of rapid social and environmental

conservation practices. It contributed to slowing downchanges (land use land cover changes, urbanization,

groundwater depletion and preventing saltwater

population growth, industrialization, and so on), it isintrusion in coastal regions.

important for environmental authorities to revise
policies based on the social and environmental status

WEPA is a regional network to improve the water

for achieving long term sustainability in any region

environment in Asia, and 13 countries are currently

or country. WEPA’s main mission is to improve water

involved. To encourage better networking, FPs

environment through better governance. Knowledge

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report15

sharing, capacity development, and technology
transfer among partner countries are the main activ-

Key findings:

ities of this partnership. In the last 20 years, WEPA

Regulatory framework (Basic legislation on

has initiated and hosted meetings and programs,

environmental protection and water quality

which directly or indirectly helped to improve thestandards)

water environment by strengthening governance inthe partner countries. Moreover, the best way to seeFirst of all, we asked about the status of basic legis-changes in governance, is to analyze its critical vehicle

lation on environmental protection. In this context,(i.e. changes in national or regional policies or ordi-

the environment consists of all elements such asnances) while considering new drivers and pressureswater, air, biodiversity, and ecosystems. We then asked

with time to make it more robust for managing theif amendments were made to these legislations

water environment. This section strives to understandafter enactment. Finally, we considered whether there

how water policy and governance have changed overwere existing water quality standards (surface, ground,the last 20 years in WEPA partner countries and whichand effluent) developed to support legislation in theareas or gaps need further discussion and support.

partner countries. A summary of the results is

More precisely, the key objectives are: (i) To under-

presented in Table 3. It was found that 10 out of 13

stand the progress/status of the water governance

WEPA countries had enacted basic environmentalof the WEPA partner counties including monitoring

legislation before 2004 (the year WEPA was estab-the status of setting environmental and effluent

lished), while three countries enacted it after 2004.

standards as well as compliance, and enforcing

Again, many WEPA countries (10 out of 13 countries)

related legal systems; (ii) A detailed analysis from two

have amended legislation according to the state ofcountries (Philippines and Republic of Korea) on

the water environment (Figure 5).

revising policies; and (iii) To examine and identify
feasible areas of support to further improve water

Legislation, can only be enforced if a country sets up

governance in WEPA countries.

and implements water quality standards are. Almost

Semi-structured questionnaire surveys were

all WEPA countries have established water quality

conducted between WEPA focal points in each country

standards for surface water, groundwater, and effluent,

in 2019 and 2020. We summarized the responses to

except Myanmar which has no standards for effluent

these surveys and updated the information FPs

water, and Nepal which has not set standards forprovided at the annual meetings. Questions weregroundwater. Myanmar has not formulated ambient

prepared in accordance with the broad framework ofwater quality standards yet, but deliberations are now

the water environment governance:

underway as mandated by the Environmental Conser-• Legal framework

vation Law passed in 2012. The National Surface• Monitoring framework

Water Quality Standards (NSWQS) are expected to• Enforcement framework

be published soon. Nepal sets different water quality• Institutional framework

guidelines according to the objective (e.g., for recreation, and for protection of the aquatic ecosystem) or

A detailed list of questions is shown in Appendix X.

according to each sector.

In addition, based on the preliminary questionnaire
survey results, another set of questions were targetedMoreover, for managing effluents based on their source

at FPs in the Philippines and Republic of Korea toof origin such as from the industrial or domestic sector,

understand the rationale behind making such changes

different countries are making additional efforts.

in the water policies in their countries.

Currently, eight out of 13 countries (Cambodia,
Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Philippines, Republicof Korea, Thailand, and Viet Nam) have separate
effluent standards for domestic as well as industrial
effluent. Nepal has also set different effluent standards
for specific industries.

16

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final ReportTable 3. List of key legislation for environmental protection, their enactment and Umbrella Act/Regulations forwater environment conservation, and state of ambient water quality standard in WEPA countries
Basic legislation on
environmental
protection

Enactment/
Amendment of
the basic law

Law onEnvironmental
Protection andNatural Resource
Management

1996

China

Environmental
Protection Law

1989/2014

Indonesia

Law Concerning
Environmental
Protection andManagement

2009

Japan

Basic EnvironmentLaw

1967/1993/
2012/2013/2016/2021

Lao PDR

Environmental
Protection Law

1999/2012

Malaysia

Environmental
Quality Act

1974/2012

MyanmarEnvironmental
Conservation Law

2012

Nepal

Environmental
Protection Act

2019

Philippines

The Philippine
Environmental Code

1977/2004**

Republic of
Korea

Framework Act on
Environmental Policy

1978/1981/
1983/1989/
1991/2006/
2012***

Sri Lanka

National
Environmental Act
No. 47

1980/1988/
2000

ThailandEnvironment andConservation of
National
Environmental
Quality Act

1992/2018

Law onEnvironmental
Protection

2014/2020

Country
Cambodia

Viet Nam

Surface water
qualitystandards

Groundwater
qualitystandards

Effluent water
qualitystandards

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

△*

–

–

〇

–

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

〇

*: As of December 20, 2023, in the process of approval by the National Standards Council, **: The Philippine Environment Code of 1977
(PD 1152) for the protection of water environment was updated with the enactment of the Clean Water Act of 2004 (Republic Act No.
9275), ***: The Framework Act on Environmental Policy comprises a variety of media in the environment such as air, water, waste, andsoil. These years are when revisions were made for water.

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report17China established its water quality monitoring
framework in 2017, while Myanmar still does not have

Not
Revised23%

a water quality monitoring framework. It is envisaged
that Myanmar will establish a monitoring framework
after the adoption of ambient water quality standards
in the near future, as the country is in the middle of

Revised77%

the administrating process.
WEPA countries have also strengthened their efforts
to monitor water quality by increasing the number

Figure 5. Number of countries where umbrella lawsof water quality monitoring stations (Figure 6). As

have been revised since being enactedof 2020, China has the highest number of monitoring
stations (11,888). Frequency of monitoring varies

Monitoring framework and enforcement
mechanism

from twice in year in Indonesia to 24 times in a year
in Sri Lanka.

Status of water quality monitoring framework
Out of 13 countries, 12 countries have water quality
monitoring frameworks. Six countries establishedtheir water quality monitoring framework before 2004.
Before 2004

1160
1353

10000

6625

10263

11888

In 2019

350
375

500

1000

24

17

11

am
tN
Vi
e

ila

nd

*
Th
a

La

nk
a

*
S
ri

Re
p.
K
or
e

a

*

ar
ya
n
M

M

m

ia

*
al
ay
s

os

*
La

pa

n

*
Ja

es

ia

*
In
do
n

di
a
C
am
bo

na

*

1

C
hi

10

18

27

100

8

Number of water quality monitoring points

100000WEPA partner countries
Figure 6. Number of water quality monitoring stations in selected WEPA countries (* denotes no data available)

18

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report

Enforcement Framework

Indonesia, Japan, Philippines, Thailand and Viet Nam
to 3-4 times per year in Cambodia. In different WEPA

Here we present the summary of enforcement mech-countries, different agencies are given mandates toanisms by looking into effluent monitoring systems,

control the effluent quality. Most WEPA countries

reporting systems and frequency, implementing

except Cambodia, China, Republic of Korea, andagencies, and provision of penalties as shown in Table

Thailand have introduced penalty provision for viola-

4. All WEPA partner countries have effluent quality

tions of effluent quality standards. Some partnermonitoring standards. Out of these, nine member

countries have introduced mandatory effluent moni-countries established an effluent quality-monitoring

toring reports for industries, and frequency varies

framework before 2004. Frequency of reporting thefrom annually/biannual to quarterly submission.

monitoring results varies from once per year in

Table 4. Status of effluent quality monitoring framework and its enforcement mechanisms in WEPA countries
Penaltyprovision

Reporting

Note

Department of
Pollution
control, MoE

No

Quarterly* MoE has been promoting online
monitoring system and pushed
polluters to install it for real timeeffluent data (quality and quantity);
Industries (categorized bysub-decree) need to acquire
discharge permits, and Departmentof Water Quality Management needs
to monitor or take samples for lab
analysis before providing the permit.;
Inspection teams exist for regularmonitoring of the industrial sector.

Regularmonitoring*

Local ecologicalenvironment
agencyNo

Frequency
differs
depending on
the situation* Depending on local agency** Depending on types of industry

Indonesia

Regularmonitoring*

Local Environmental Agency,
Provincial
Environmental
Agency and
MOEF

Yes

Semiannually* All industries are required to send
wastewater samples to registeredlaboratories once a month or more
frequently depending on theiractivities, with the analysis reports
then submitted every six months tolocal authorities and the MOEF.

Japan

Regularmonitoring

Local
governments

Yes

Annually

Lao PDR

Regularmonitoring

Department of
NaturalResources andEnvironment
Inspection and
Department of
Water
Resources,
MONRE

Yes

Six monthand Annually*

Diligent
monitoring

Implementation
agencyCambodia

Regularmonitoring*

China

Country* MONRE inspection based on
Environment Impact Assessment(EIA) and Environmental Management
Monitoring Plan (EMMP) once a year.
Local governments monitors based on
Initial Environment Examination (IEE)
twice a year and investment projects
to monitoring is daily, weekly, ormonthly and then submitting thereport to the central and local
governments

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report19Diligentmonitoring

Implementation
agencyMalaysia

Regularmonitoring*

Department ofEnvironment

Myanmar

Regularmonitoring*

Nepal

Country

Penaltyprovision

Reporting

Note

Yes

Monthly forindustry* “Competent person/owner/
occupier” samples discharged
effluent weekly, submits themonitoring records once a month,and conducts performancemonitoring based on industrial
effluent treatment system (IETS);
DOE inspects effluent compliance
1-4 times a year

Environmental
Conservation
Department

Yes**

–

* Local and regional offices of ECD
are responsible for regular monitoringof effluent quality** Issuing operation suspension

Regularmonitoring*

Department ofEnvironment

Yes–* Annually but as per the workload ofavailable environment inspector* provision of self-monitoring reportby the industries

Philippines

Regularmonitoring*

Environmental
Management
Bureau (DENR)

Yes

Quarterly* Annually and/or upon receiving
complaint

Republic of
Korea

Regularmonitoring*

Localgovernments–

Annually* By May: Industrial facilities analyze
samples, and submit data withjustifications; By July: Regional
Environmental Agencies review andverify reports, and take/analyze
samples; By December: National
Institute of Environmental Research
confirms the data and conducts
metadata analysis; By following
March: Ministry of Environment
discloses data to the public

Sri Lanka

Regularmonitoring*

CentralEnvironmental
Authority

Yes*** High polluting industries: once a
year in general, but the frequency
increases if the industry is a criticalone; Medium & low polluting
industries: once in 3 years or less** Depending on the frequency ofmonitoring

Thailand

Regularmonitoring*

Pollution
Control
Department–

Monthly*** Inspection by PCD once a year** Mandatory provision to submit
effluent quality monitoring report by
the business operators every month

Viet Nam

Regularmonitoring

Viet Nam
Environmental
Administration

Yes*

Annually/biannual depends on typeof company

Source: Presentations at the 18th WEPA Annual Meeting and WEPA Outlook 2021

20

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final ReportInstitutional framework

also varies, and is mainly based on local environmental and socio-economic conditions. For example,

Having effective institutional arrangements is one of

Cambodia mandates its ministries to take care of

the key factors for achieving sound water environ-environmental impact assessment, inventory devel-

ment governance. A summary for existing institutional

opment for pollution, development of sub-decrees

frameworks (key agencies responsible for waterto prevent and reduce pollution, executing manage-

environmental governance and their responsibilities)

ment and conservation plans.

is shown in Table 5. This indicates that key ministries
or agencies responsible for water governance inIn this section, we reviewed the framework of the

WEPA countries range from one agency (Republic

water environment management in the WEPA partnerof Korea, Lao PDR, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Viet Nam)countries. In addition, the stories behind the change

to many agencies (remaining eight countries). The

of water and environmental policies in the Philippines

scope of responsibilities among these key ministries

and Republic of Korea are presented at the end.

Table 5. List of key ministries responsible for water environment governance in WEPA countries
Country

List of key ministries/agencies

Responsibilities

Cambodia

Ministry of Environment;
Ministry of Water Resources andMeteorology;
Ministry of Public Work and Transport;
Tonle Sap Authority

Environmental impact assessment (EIA);
inventory development, developing
sub-decrees to prevent and reduce pollutions;
MRV (monitoring, reporting, and verification)of water pollution; executing management
and conservation plans

China

Ministry of Ecology and Environment;
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs;
Ministry of Water Resources; Ministry of
Natural ResourcesSupervision and management of water
environmental protection;
Supervision and management of rural
environment

Indonesia

Ministry of Environment and Forest;
Ministry of Public Works and Housing;State Ministry of National Development andPlanning

Water quality management, pollution control

Japan

Ministry of the Environment;
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport
and Tourism

Water quality management;
Wastewater management

Republic of
Korea

Ministry of Environment

Water quality management of public water,
sewerage and wastewater

Lao PDR

Ministry of Natural Resources andEnvironment

Protection of natural resources (including
water)

Malaysia

Ministry of Environment and Water;
Ministry of Health

Water quantity and quality management

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report21Country

List of key ministries/agencies

Responsibilities

MyanmarMinistry of Natural Resources andEnvironmental Conservation;
Ministry of Planning, Finance and Industry

Formulation of national water quality
standards, water quality monitoring,
enforcement;
Regulate industrial water use and discharge

Nepal

Ministry of Forests and Environment;
Ministry of Water Supply;
Ministry of Energy, Water Resources andIrrigation;
Water and Energy Commission Secretariat

Environmental protection;
Water supply, sewerage management;
Water quality monitoring; Water policy andprogram and vision formulation

Philippines

Department of Environment and Natural
Resources;
National Water Resources Board;
Department of Public Works and Highways

Prevention and control of pollution;
Coordinate/manage water resources;
National sewerage and septage management

Sri Lanka

Ministry of Environment

Environment and natural resourcesmanagement

Thailand

Ministry of Natural Resources andEnvironment

Management of water resources

Viet Nam

Ministry of Natural Resources andEnvironment

Management of water resources

Based on the facts and information presented above,different customized solutions are required based on

it is evident that all WEPA countries are making every

the local hydro-meteorological, geographical, andeffort to renew and renovate their policies, institutions,socio-economic situation of each country. Therefore,

and other instruments, and thereby upgrade their

it is vital to continue to work in more collaborative

management strategies to deal with the complex andways and codesign robust management plans forevolving issue of sustainable management of water

the future.

environment. Since there is no “one solution fits all”,

22

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report

1. The Philippines
The Department of Environment and Natural

effluent discharge. Table A shows the water quality

Resources of the Republic of the Philippines

standards for class C water bodies (Fisheryamended its Department Administrative Orderwater for the propagation and growth of fish and(DAO) 1990-34, and DAO 2016-08 was approved

other aquatic resources; Recreational Water Classand went into effect in June 2016. Under the new

II for boating, fishing, or similar activities; andorder, Water Quality Guidelines (WQG) and three

agriculture, irrigation, and livestock watering).

additional water quality parameters (Color, Fecal

Modification of the WQG can be requested as long

Coliform, and TSS) were added to protect surface

as there is clear and scientifically valid evidence towater quality, the standard value of temperaturedemonstrate that such modification is consistent

was revised, and surfactant, oil & grease, and total

with Republic Act 9275 (Philippine Clean Water

coliform were dropped. The WQG is applicable

Act of 2004), in which the State shall pursue ato all water bodies such as freshwater, marine

policy of economic growth in a manner consistentwater, and groundwater, and it is used as a basiswith the protection, preservation, and revival of thefor taking action for improvement and to control

quality of fresh, brackish, and marine waters.

Table A. Comparative values between the revised Water Quality Guidelines (DAO – 1990 – 34) and thepresent (DAO – 2016 – 08) for Class C water bodies
PARAMETERSUNIT

DAO – 1990 – 34

DAO – 2016 – 08

Color

PCU*

–

75

Temperature

°C

3**

25 – 31pH

Range

6.5 – 8.5

6.5 – 9.0

DO

mg/L

5

5

BOD

mg/L

7 (10)***

7

Surfactant

mg/L

6.5

–

Oil & Grease

mg/L

2

–

Nitrate as N

mg/L

10

7

Phosphate as P

mg/L

0.02

0.5

Total Coliform

MPN/100ml

5000–

Fecal Coliform

MPN/100ml–

200

Chloride as Cl

mg/L

350

350

Total Suspended Solid

mg/L

–

80

*: PCU (Platinum -Color Unit) A measure of color using platinum cobalt standard for visual comparison. DAO-1990-34 indicates
no abnormal discoloration from unnatural causes (Footnotes of Table I, DAO-1990-34 Water Quality Guidelines).
**: This is the temperature rise. A 3 °C rise is the allowable temperature increase over the average ambient temperature foreach month. The rise shall be based on the average of the maximum daily temperature reading recorded at the site but
upstream of the mixing zone over a period of one (1) month. In DAO-2016-08, the natural background temperature determinedby EMB shall prevail if the temperature is lower or higher than the water quality guidelines: provided that, the maximum
increase is only up to 10% and that it will not cause risk to human health and the environment (Footnote (b) of Table 3, DAO
2016-08 Water Quality Guidelines for primary parameters).
***: The numerical limits of BOD in table 1 of DAO-1990-34 is yearly average values. Values enclosed in parenthesis are
maximum values.

The water quality management area (WQMA) has

the stakeholder collaboration, and 10 areas werebeen designated by the Environmental Manage-

newly designated in 2016, in addition to thement Bureau (EMB) since 2006 to maintain theexisting 20 areas. As of October 2023, 40 areas

water quality within the criteria in WQG throughare designated as WQMA.

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report23

2. Republic of Korea
The Republic of Korea continues to update its

drine, Toluene, Xylene; 2016: Pentachlorophenol,

water environment conserving policies such as

Styrene, Bis-adipate, Antimony). The reason why

monitoring framework and standards. Below arethese substances were introduced as industrial

some major revisions to these policies:

effluent standards is exactly the same as forambient WQS. After the candidate substances

1. Ambient surface water quality standards

were chosen for investigation, the chemicals were

(WQS)—Korea makes occasional changes to themonitored at the end of pipe from factories, as

ambient water quality standards such as adding

well as in ambient water near those pipes. Basedseveral new parameters in 2006 and 2012 (2006:

on the results of this monitoring, the substances

Carbon tetrachloride, 1,2-dichloroethane, PCE,

were prioritized, taking into consideration thebenzene, chloroform, dichloromethane, DEHP,

toxicity and detection frequency of chemicals.

antimony; 2012: Total organic carbon, chlorophyll-a,

These priority substances are candidate chemicals

1,4-dioxane, formaldehyde, hexachlorobenzene).

for effluent quality standards. According to the

The reason behind introducing TOC is that in major

process of establishing industrial effluent

rivers, the concentration of BOD has been stable,

standards, the substances mentioned above have

while COD concentrations have gradually

become industrial effluent standards in Korea.

increased, probably due to the increase of unbio-

Several years ago, two standards were introduced

degradable substances in water. However,separately, which caused a problem. There wereexperiments to estimate COD use toxic chemicals

more industrial effluent standards than WQS, andlike silver and sulfuric acid. Studies have been

so to fix this problem, some substances for indus-

carried out to seek an alternative to COD totrial effluent standards were selected from themeasure the amount of organic matter in the water.

monitoring results on ambient water. In this way,

Consideration has been given to analyzing organic

two standards of chemical substances have beenmatter in the water and thus TOC has been intro-aligned with each other.

duced as an alternative to COD. In addition, there
has been investigation carried out into a number

3. Introduction of ecotoxicity to the domesticof other organic chemical substances across theeffluent standards — The ecological toxicity

country. Based on the results of this monitoring,

testing method in Korea is designed to evaluate

these substances have been prioritized in terms

the potential harmful effects of pollutants onof the toxicity and detection frequency of chemicals.

aquatic organisms and ecosystems using Daphnia

These priority substances are candidate chemicals

magna. It is not possible to regulate all the toxic

for water quality standards. According to thechemicals by establishing industrial effluent

process of establishing WQS, the substances

standards, but by introducing this ecotoxicity,

mentioned above have become part of the WQS

toxic chemicals can be detected in water, whichin Korea.

could affect Daphnia magna movement or life.

2. Effluent standards — Extra effort has been
made to revise industrial effluent standards
several times by adding new elements/parameters(2006:1,2-Dichloroethane, Chloroform; 2008:
1,4-Dioxane, Bispthalate, Vinyl chloride, Acrylonitrile, Bromoform; 2010: Nickel, Barium, Acrylamide;
2013: Naphthalene, Formaldehyde, Epichloroph-

24

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report

4

WEPA Action Programs

4.1. Overview

Workshops and Annual Meetings. This information
is included in the WEPA database. During the third

WEPA Action Programs (APs) were introduced in thephase, APs were implemented in Viet Nam, Sri Lanka,

third phase to support addressing water environment

and Indonesia, and a summary and review can be

related issues in WEPA partner countries. APs havefound in the previous section. During the fourth phase,

been implemented in six countries since they started,APs were implemented in Myanmar, Cambodia, andand practical information and lessons learned in the

Lao PDR as shown in Table 6. This section provides

implementing countries have been shared with othergeneral information on WEPA AP and details of these

WEPA partner countries at WEPA International

three action programs.

Table 6. Overview of WEPA AP in the fourth phase
Country

Term

Title of AP

Objectives

Outputs/Outcomes

Cambodia20202022

Capacity buildingof the officers at
Sub-national
level onidentifying major
pollution sourcesand estimating
pollution in Tonle
Sap Lake

Developing methodologies on
estimating pollution loads frommajor sources, developing a
guidebook for local
environmental staffs, andfacilitating formulation of draft
strategies of water quality
management of TSL through aco-design and co-production
approach, and capacity building
training programs.

• Guidebook for
sub-national
environmental officers
on methodologies ofidentifying major
pollution sources andpotential policy actions
in TSL• Capacity building
workshop for local andnational officers

Myanmar20202022

Establishing
surface water
quality standards
including rivers,
lakes and marine
water

Stipulating National Surface
Water Quality Standards(NSWQS) and Enhancing
capacity of ECD in water quality
monitoring and assessment• NSWQS needs to go
through the National
Standard Council (NSC)
for final approval. (as of
15 January)• Offered training onwater quality
monitoring (63 people)
and surface waterclassification (108people)Lao PDR

20212023

Development of
An Appropriate
Domestic
Wastewater
Management
System in Lao
PDRDeveloping training materials formaintenance and operation of
septic tanks and decentralized
wastewater systems, andstrengthening the capacity of
relevant agency’s officers for law
enforcement• Training materials forcapacity building• Offered a capacity
building training
sessionWater Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report25

4.1.1. Program development• WEPA partner countries• In accordance with requests from the WEPAThe AP is planned and developed by a partner country

Secretariat, the partner countries will support

with assistance from the WEPA Secretariat, consid-

the program by sharing relevant information,

ering the following aspects:

participating in meetings, and introducing• Needs of the country• Feasibility

experts.
• The partner countries will provide advice at• Sustainability

the WEPA annual meetings, considering their• Replicability

experiences and conditions. If the ongoing AP
appears to be feasible in their own country, they

The results and lessons learned from implementing

will convey the information to relevant personnel.

AP are shared with other WEPA partner countries.

4.1.2. Implementing structure of WEPA
Action Programs• WEPA Secretariat• Liaising and coordinating with the country implementing the Action Program and the support
team; and• Implementing agency• The WEPA Focal Points or designatedadministrative agency at the local level• Support team• Experts from WEPA partner countries• Experts from Japan including researchers, local
government officials, and representatives fromthe private sector• WEPA Secretariat

26

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report• Providing financial support for implementing
activities

4.2. WEPA Action Program in
Cambodia

4.2.2. Background and Objective

4.2.1. Overview

with its wide-ranging and diverse ecosystems. It

Tonle Sap Lake (TSL) is the beating heart of Cambodia
supports the livelihoods of more than one million

Official Title of Action Program

people, and it is a major source of protein for

Facilitating comprehensive water quality

Cambodian people, and a source of water for various

management plan in Tonle Sap Lake throughusers. However, anthropogenic pressure together withcapacity building of officers at sub national levelclimate change impacts have led to the degradationin Cambodiaof the lake’s water environment. Manmade threats
include the increasing discharge of untreatedTerm of the Action Program

domestic and industrial wastewater, and pollution

2019-2022

loads from chemical intensive agricultural practices
etc.. In order to control the pollution in TSL, it is

Location of Action Program

essential to have effective collaboration among key

Tonle Sap Lake (Cambodia)

stakeholders surrounding the TSL (sub basins).
Therefore, capacity development of sub-national level

WEPA Focal Person(s) responsible for program

officials in the relevant agencies so that they can carryPhin Radyout pollution load inventory is critical to formulate

Directorpriority policies and actions towards a sound water

Department of Water Quality Management

environment management. The WEPA Action

General Directorate of Environmental Protection

Program was designed to support capacity building

Ministry of Environmentof officers at sub-national level to enable them toidentify major pollution sources and estimate pollution

Him Chandathin Tonle Sap Lake. The wider aim is to facilitate the

Deputy Director

development of a comprehensive water quality

Department of Air Quality, Noise and Vibration

management plan for TSL planned by the MinistryManagementof Environment under the umbrella of National Strat-

General Directorate of Environmental Protection

egies on water quality management, which will be

Ministry of Environment

formulated in the very near future.

Floating villages
Run-off

Tonle Sap Lake

CroplandLand-based villages

Run-off

Urban activities

Animal farmIndustrial activities

Figure 7. Major sources of pollution in Tonle Sap Lake

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report27

4.2.3. Description

sample collections, and laboratory analysis. Based on
the results of the pilot survey, a simplified method-

WEPA action program activities in Cambodia

ological approach was developed to conduct a

consisted of identifying pollution sources and load

pollution load inventory from the major identified

by conducting pilot field surveys in the target area,

sectors with full consideration of the TSL. This hasdeveloping a guidebook for national and sub-national

been turned into in a Guidebook on Water Pollution

level officials, and providing capacity development

Loading Inventory in Tonle Sap Lake, which wastraining to the relevant agencies on “Water Pollution

officially adopted by the Ministry of Environment inInventory Development in the Tonle Sap Lake

February 2023 (available at https://wepa-db.net/

Catchment”. A pilot survey was conducted in Chhnok

wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Guidebook-on-

Trou and Phat Sanday villages, located in the Tonle

Water-Pollution-Loading-Inventory-in-Tonle-Sap-

Sap catchment to identify major pollution sources,

Lake-V_English.pdf). Under the WEPA action program,including from the domestic, industrial, farming, andtwo capacity building workshops were organizedlivestock sectors. The pilot survey activities include

to transfer knowledge of the pollution load inventory

a questionnaire survey, interviews, field visits, effluent

to the key stakeholders.

Figure 8. WEPA Action Program activities in Cambodia

4.2.4. Outcomes• A Guidebook on Water Pollution Loading Inventoryin Tonle Sap Lake was developed and adopted by

The outcomes of the WEPA Action Program are as

the Ministry of Environment of Cambodia, which

follows:

will facilitate the development of a comprehensive• A local context-based methodological framework
was developed for pollution load inventory in the
major identified sectors.

28

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Reportwater quality management plan for TSL.

• WEPA action program provided capacity building

WEPA Focal Person(s) responsible for program

training to the staff of MOE, inviting experts to

Tin Aung Win

explain how to design and conduct surveys to

Director, Environmental Quality Standard

develop a pollution load inventory through active

Division, Environmental Conservation Depart-

participation in field activities.

ment, Ministry of Natural Resources and• National and subnational level officials were given

Environmental Conservation

capacity-building training using the adopted
guidebook.

4.2.5. Policy recommendations

4.3.2. Background and objective
Myanmar has been facing considerable challenges inmanaging the environment due to increasing domestic• In order to achieve sound water environment

and international investments in industrial and urban/

management in Tonle Sap Lake, it is essential torural development sectors. In order to establish a legal

develop a pollution load inventory. This will provide

and institutional framework to manage environmental

the scientific basis to set short-term, medium-term

issues, the Government of Myanmar enacted theand long-term targets for pollution load control

Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) in 2012, estab-and restoration goals.

lished the Environmental Conservation Department• The guidebook can be used to establish a pollution(ECD) under the Ministry of Environmental Conser-

load inventory at the sub-basin level.

vation and Forestry (MOECAF, from 2016 Ministry•
The capacity development program on theof Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation

pollution load inventory in TSL catchment can be(MONREC)) in the same year, and issued the Environ-designed for the relevant department at the provin-mental Conservation Rules in 2014. For the protection

cial level, and then used in all provinces locatedof human and ecosystem health, MOECAF notified

in the catchment.

the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Procedure• Inter-agency collaboration and integrated efforts

and the National Environment Quality (Emission)

are critical to develop a pollution load inventory

Guidelines (EQEG) in 2015. Although the environ-for Tonle Sap Lake. Therefore, the guidebook

mental standards such as surface water quality

should be disseminated to other relevant Minis-standards, underground water quality standards, andtries and agencies, as well as academic andeffluent standards are supposed to be stipulated underresearch institutes.

the ECL, those standards have not been stipulated,
except for guidelines values of effluents notified in the

4.3. WEPA Action Program in
Myanmar
4.3.1. Overview

EQEG.
The lack of standards has made it difficult to properly
evaluate the current status of the water environmentand develop control measures against water quality
degradation. While effluent quality data exists in the

Official Title of Action Program

EQEG, evaluation of the surface water quality is not

Establishing surface water quality standards

possible without standards. ECD made efforts toincluding rivers, lakes and marine water

establish ambient water quality standards, withtechnical assistance from the Asian Development

Term of the Action Program

Bank (ADB) between 2015 and 2018, and assistance

July 2020 – February 2023

from an ADB resource person was provided between
May and June of 2019 to finalize the EQS and advise

Location of Action Program

ECD on their adoption. Consultations based on the

Myanmar

ADB assistance results had been made for the
proposed standards in the Environmental Quality

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report29Standards Technical Development Sub-Committee

ECD received support from WEPA to get advice tochaired by the Director General of ECD and consistingdevelop surface water quality standards from theof officials from relevant line ministries. However,aspect of water qualities and laboratories’ capacity

further review was required to finalize the standards

in Myanmar through the WEPA Action Program fromand lay a foundation for better water environmental

2020 to 2023. The program includes development

governance. The JICA advisor for environmentalof NSWQSs and its related documents as well as

management policy has been dispatched since January

meeting support with other relevant ministries. The

2020 to enhance ECD capacity. Furthermore, ECD

development of NSWQS with international support

requested WEPA to support the proposed activities

is shown in Figure 9.

in the WEPA Action Program in Myanmar.

ADB CDTA 8786: Environmental Safeguard Institutional Strengthening(2015-2018)

ADB Resource Person Assistance(May-June 2019)

Project for Capacity Development in Basic Water Environment Managementand EIA System (JICA)(January 2020-January 2022)

WEPA Action Program in Myanmar(2020-2023)
Figure 9. Development of NSWQA with international support

4.3.3. Descriptionof Cabinet or Parliament after the approval stage,endorsement of NSC is a final step and the standards

As for the development of NSWQS, the formulation
requires four steps — proposal stage, preparatory
stage, committee stage, and approval stage. It should

will be issued after that.

4.3.4. Outputs

be noted that the enquiry stage is not necessary fornationwide standards development because there

As NSWQS will be published in the national language,

are relevant ministries, technical working group andthe draft version of NSWQS has been prepared in

National Standard Council (NSC). Currently, NSWQS

both English and Myanmar versions. The draft

development is in the Committee Draft (CD) stageNSWQS (English version) was prepared first by

in which the standard values, parameters and analyt-revising in accordance with the comments andical methodologies are being drafted amongsuggestions from WEPA advisors. After that, the final

Environmental Quality Standards Technical Devel-

draft version of NSWQS was translated. As of

opment Sub-Committee members. Once the final

February 2023, the final draft version of NSWQS

draft standard is prepared and confirmed by the(both English version and Myanmar version) weresub-committee members, it will be submitted to NSC

distributed to the technical sub-committee members,

for approval. Since it is not necessary to get approvaland feedbacks from sub-committee members were

30

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Reportcollected. NSWQS applies to 36 parameters, which

As for future steps, NSWQS will be revised again,

fall under two categories — priority parameters

and the finalized NSWQS will be submitted to NSC.

(parameters for human health and parameters for

NSC will distribute the final draft version of NSWQS

environmental conservation) and monitoring param-

to all the ministries, and post the draft on their website

eters. EQSD had already reflected any editorial

for public review. After receiving any comments,

comments, especially in the translation of the NSWQS

NSWQS will be revised and resubmitted to NSC as

Myanmar version. The final technical sub-committee

necessary. Once all comments are reflected, NSC will

meeting was held on 15 February, 2023, where thegive approval, and the NSWQS will be disclosed totechnical sub-committee members provided their

the public. The tables below set out the tentative

final comments and suggestions.

standards.

Table 7. National Surface Water Quality Standards for Human HealthParameter

Unit

Class IClass IIClass IIIClass IVClass V

Chemical Parameter
Boron

mg/L

2.4

Cyanide

mg/L

0.07

Fluoride

mg/L

1.5

Nitrate nitrogen

mg/L

10

Nitrite nitrogen

mg/L

1

Benzene

mg/L

0.01

Phenolmg/L

0.05

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB)

μg/L

0.5

Arsenic

mg/L

0.05

Cadmium

mg/l

0.003

Chromium (Hexavalent)

mg/L

0.05

Lead

mg/L

0.01

Mercury

mg/L

0.001

Nickelmg/L

0.07

Selenium

mg/L

0.04

Organics

Heavy Metals* Standard values are expressed as annual average concentrations.
Source: Draft National Surface Water Quality Standards in Myanmar (as of February 2023)

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report31

Table 8. National Surface Water Quality Standards for Human Health for Environmental Conservation
Parameter

Unit

Class IClass IIClass IIIClass IVClass V

mg/L

25

50

75

100

150

BOD

mg/L

2

3

8

25

30

COD

mg/L

5

8

13

50

100

DO

mg/L

>6

>5

>4

>3

>2

pH

-

6.5-8.5

6.5-8.5

6-9

5-9

–

mg/L

0.2

0.3

0.5

0.8

0.9

Physical Parameter
Total Suspended Solids
Chemical Parameter

Ammonium nitrogen
Organics
Oil & Grease

No noticeably seen

Biological Parameter
Escherichia Coli (E. coli)

MPN/100mL (or)CFU/100mL

20

300

1000

1000

–

mg/L

0.1

0.3

0.5

–

–

Heavy Metals
CopperTable 9. Waterbody classification and water use of surface water
Water Class

Water use

Class I

(1) Conservation of the natural environment(2) Water supply Grade 1 (conventional treatment)(3) Water uses listed in Class II to V

Class II

(1) Water supply Grade 2 (pre-treatment and conventional treatment)(2) Fisheries Grade 1(3) Bathing & swimming(4) Water uses listed in Class III to V

Class III

(1) Water supply Grade 3 (advanced treatment)(2) Fisheries Grade 2(3) Industrial water Grade 1(4) Agricultural water Grade 1(5) Water uses listed in Class IV to V

Class IV

(1) Industrial water Grade 2(2) Agricultural water Grade 2(3) Water uses listed in Class V

Class V

(1) Navigation/Transportation(2) Environmental Conservation

Note: Water supply Grade 1: applicable for water supply with sedimentation, filtration and other comparable means
Water supply Grade 2:
applicable for water supply with pre-treatment, sedimentation, filtration, and other comparable means
Water supply Grade 3:
applicable for water supply with pre-treatment, and other advanced means
Fisheries Grade 1: 		
applicable for fisheries of oligotrophic species
Fisheries Grade 2: 		
applicable for fisheries of semi-eutrophic species
Industrial water Grade 1:
applicable for industrial use with sedimentation and other comparable means
Industrial water Grade 2:
applicable for industrial use with chemical additives and other advanced means
Agricultural water Grade 1: applicable for agricultural use with ordinary means
Agricultural water Grade 2: applicable for agricultural use with advanced means
Environmental conservation: maintained to the extent of not causing discomfort to citizens
Source: Draft National Surface Water Quality Standards in Myanmar (as of February 2023)

32

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final ReportTable 10. National Surface Water Quality Standards
Parameter

Unit

Class IClass IIClass IIIClass IVClass V

ColourTCU (or)mg Pt/L

15

25

50

100

150

Conductivity

dS/m

1

1.5

1.5

3

6

Total Dissolved Solids

mg/L

500

1000

1000

1500

2000

Turbidity

NTU

5

25

25

50

100

mg/L

250

250

250

350

350

Physical Parameter

Chemical Parameter
Chloride
Pesticides
Atrazine

μg/L

100

Carbofuran

μg/L

7

Chlorpyrifos

μg/L

30

Fenitrothion

μg/L

3

Glyphosate

μg/L

370

Permethrin

μg/L

300

Thiramμg/L

6Source: Draft National Surface Water Quality Standards in Myanmar (as of February 2023)

4.4.4. Next steps

Quality Management Initiative over the next few
years, together with PCD-ECD, to fulfil its role as a

MONREC-ECD is preparing a National Environ-primary environmental regulator and preventer ofmental Master Plan (Draft, 2020), including air, water,

environmental pollution and degradation, and toand other environmental fields. Additionally, Myanmar

be in line with emerging national and international

has a National Environmental Policy (2019), andfocus and priorities. Accordingly, this Initiative will

National Environmental Strategic Framework (draft).

set up and roll out ambient water quality guidelines,

In order to implement policies and plans, the functions

monitoring systems across the nation, and manage-of EQSD-ECD are more regulatory in nature.

ment programs.

Therefore, EQSD-ECD will conduct a National Water

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report33

4.4. WEPA Action Program in Lao
PDR

other hand, conventional septic tanks struggled to

4.4.1. Overview

cities had sludge treatment facilities, and illegal

meet the new, stricter effluent standards, and fecal
sludge management remained a challenge. Only fivedisposal is an ongoing problem.

Official Title of Action Program
Development of an appropriate domestic

Additional challenges were the lack of design

wastewater management system in Lao PDR

standards for septic tanks, insufficient monitoring
systems, and weak enforcement mechanisms ofTerm of the Action Program

policies/regulations. To address these, it was crucial

April 2022 – March 2024

to collect baseline water quality data, develop training
materials for domestic wastewater management,

Location of Action Program

particularly focusing on proper operation and main-

Lao PDRtenance (O&M) of existing and future septic tanks anddecentralized wastewater treatment systems, as well

WEPA Focal Person(s) responsible for programas strengthening the capacity of relevant agencies.

Sengkeo Tasaketh
Department of Natural Resources and Environ-Considering the aforementioned knowledge gaps

ment Inspection Ministry of Natural Resources

and challenges, the WEPA Action Program (AP) was

and Environment

developed in response to a request from the Ministry

4.4.2. Background and Objectiveof Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE) of
Lao PDR, with the following objectives: (i) identify
legal, institutional, financial, and technical hurdles for

The socio-economic landscape of Lao PDR has seen

improving domestic wastewater management

significant growth since joining ASEAN in 1997. Thissystems; (ii) investigate the quality of domestic waste-

also results in rapid urbanization with the urban

water in public canals and the performance of

population rising from 15% in 1990 to 38% in 2022.

decentralized wastewater treatment facilities andHowever, this unsustainable growth has been exag-sludge disposal in three cities (Vientiane, Luang

gerated by inadequate governance and thus has put

Prabang, and Khammouan province); (iii) develop

an unprecedented amount of pressure on naturaltraining materials for the operation and maintenanceresources, in particular water resources. The popu-

of septic tanks and decentralized wastewater

lation in Lao have become highly vulnerable, in terms

treatment facilities, including de-sludging, transpor-of water pollution, waste management, and associatedtation, and disposal; and (iv) enhance the capacity ofhealth risks.

relevant officers for the successful implement of the
management plans.

To address this emerging environmental crisis, theGovernment of Lao PDR has taken legislative steps

Between 2022-2024, a number of activities (fieldand enacted its first environmental protection law insurvey, water quality analysis, stakeholder meetings)

1999 (revised in 2012), and established national envi-

were carried out, to create a baseline dataset on theronmental standards in 2009 (revised in 2017). Everycurrent situation of wastewater management, and to

five years, the National Socio-Economic Development

evaluate the performance of existing septic tanks andPlan (NSEDP) sets targets for pollution control anddecentralized wastewater treatment systems. Training

waste management. Moreover, 29 decentralizedmaterials were also developed to help MONRE draft

wastewater treatment facilities were installed in nine

the technical guidelines on the operation and manage-

provinces between 2009 to 2020, with 15 morement of septic tanks and decentralized wastewater

currently under construction. However, data on theirtreatment systems.

removal efficiency and performance is limited. On the

34

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report4.4.3. Description

4.4.4. Detailed outputs

The following actions were taken in order to achieve

During the field survey, the key findings were as

the objectives:

follows: (i) several wastewater facilities lacked regularmonitoring and maintenance; (ii) several operators(i) and (ii) Baseline study to understand the status

lacked technical knowledge; and (iii) the majority ofquo of wastewater management:

facilities lacked a budget and budget plan for proper•Literature review including scientific peer

and sustainable operation and maintenance.

reviewed papers, government reports, technicalreports, project reports, and other grey literature

Several outputs have been achieved under this WEPA

was conducted to understand up-to-date

Action Program in Lao PDR so far, including:knowledge on legal, financial, and technicalissues regarding wastewater management.

(i) Baseline Report• Field surveys were carried out in three cities/

In order to assess the current domestic wastewaterprovinces to collect water samples and analyze

treatment systems for future regulations and policies,different physico-chemical parameters and flow

the team conducted a comprehensive baseline study

rates. and to identify the pollutants of key

in Lao PDR. The legal, financial, and technical aspects

concern.

of wastewater management data were compiled• Questionnaire survey, Key Informant interviews

through literature reviews and actual field surveys. In

were also conducted to gain deep insight about

addition, the study investigated potential drivers andthe existing challenges and opportunities

barriers for implementing decentralized wastewater

regarding wastewater management

treatment at the community level and standard septic
tanks in homes. To gain insight, various consultation(iii) Development of Training Materials:

meetings were held with various relevant departments• Training materials were developed for the(Figure 10), including the water supply department,

maintenance and operation of septic tanks andministries of public work and transport, as well as

decentralized wastewater treatment facilities .

international organizations such as JICA and KOICA.

The materials reflected the key findings andidentified challenges from the baseline
investigation.
• Technical guidelines for proper O&M of septic
tanks and decentralized wastewater treatment
systems will be drafted by Lao MONRE, basedon the above training materials.
(iv) Capacity Building:• Annual workshops were held to share the results
and information obtained from the WEPA Action
Program among ASEAN experts and local
authorities.

Kick-off Meeting for FY2023 at NREI, MONRE• Seminars and training sessions were organized
for relevant agencies, local authorities andFigure 10. A series of consultation meetings

private companies to strengthen their technicalconducted with relevant governmental agencies andcapacities in water sector.

Johkaso in Luang Prabang

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report35

(ii) Field surveys, questionnaire, and interviewsfor both dry and wet seasons to gain information

A series of field surveys were conducted in threeabout spatio-temporal variation in the water quality

Laotian provinces—Vientiane Capital, Luang Prabang,(Figure 11). The dry season survey was conducted

and Khammuoane — in order to collect informationfrom November 2022 to January 2023, and the wet

on water quality and wastewater pollution. The teamseason survey was done in July and August 2023.

comprised technical officers from MONRE as well

In-situ analysis of physical parameters such asas faculty members and students from the Faculty

temperature, pH, conductivity, and DO was supportedof Natural Sciences, National University of Laos. The

with laboratory analysis of chemical parameters suchoperators of the decentralized wastewater treatment

as TSS, BOD, COD, and numerous nitrogen andfacilities were given a questionnaire and then they

phosphorous contents to understand the performance

were interviewed. The water quality was assessedof decentralised wastewater treatment plant andon-site, and samples were taken for laboratorywater quality in the public canal.

analysis. Water samples were collected and analyzed

Figure 11. Field survey and water sampling at decentralized wastewater treatment facilities in Vientiane Capital(iii) Training materials

various stakeholders, such as central and local

It was expected that these training materials would

governments, owners (residents or managers), andhelp in equipping stakeholders in Lao PDR with thethe private sector, in ensuring effective O&M. These

necessary knowledge and skills for effective manage-comprehensive training materials are vital resources

ment of domestic wastewater and fecal sludge. Firstfor improving wastewater management in Lao PDR,

the materials make the reader aware of the current

as they address the country’s unique challenges andsanitation landscape, practices, and challenges inregulatory environment. Target trainees included

Lao PDR. Then they explain the characteristics ofpublic administrators responsible for domestic waste-domestic wastewater and fecal sludge, including

water management and planning (e.g. Provincial

health risks, current policies, water quality regula-

Government (UDDA), Department of Natural

tions, and reporting requirements and the importance

Resources and Environment (DONRE), etc.).

of onsite and decentralized wastewater treatment
systems. Finally, the materials provide operational(iv) Capacity Development

and maintenance (O&M) guidelines for these systems,

A Consultation Workshop including several presen-

including protocols for waste collection, transporta-tations on wastewater treatment was held in FY2022

tion, and disposal, as well as inspection and reporting

to disseminate the results of WEPA AP and sharemechanisms. The final section of the training

information about wastewater related projects in Laomaterials outline the roles and responsibilities of

PDR (Figure 12). The meeting, presided over by the36

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final ReportDirector-General of MONRE’s Department of Natural

The capacity development workshops are planned to

Resources and Environment Inspection, included overbe held in November 2023 and January 2024 with

32 in-person and online participants. Technicalthe completed training materials.

officers, experts, and representatives from various
departments and organizations, including DNREI,WEPA Secretariat, JICA, and private companies, werein attendance.

Figure 12. Consultation meetings on 3 February 2023 (left) and 21 November 2023 (right).

4.4.5. Next steps

The second training workshop is anticipated to take

MONRE is making preparations in collaboration withof the training material will be distributed. MONRE

the WEPA Secretariat for two technical capacity

will also initiate the discussion and consultation

training workshops, which are scheduled to take place

process for an early draft of Technical Guidelines foraround the middle of November 2023 and in January

proper O&M of septic tanks and decentralized waste-2024.

water treatment systems at the Final Workshop forplace in January 2024, during which the final version

this project, which will be held concurrently with theRelevant governmental agencies and stakeholders (e.g.

second training workshop.

UDDA, DONRE, etc.) from three studied cities andprovinces, as well as from other provinces, will be

Upon completion of WEPA AP, MONRE plans toinvited to participate in the meeting and the onsite

develop national guidelines on O&M of septic tanks

training course, which will include both lectures andand decentralized wastewater treatment systems,

onsite visits to the sampled decentralized wastewater

utilizing the training materials developed in WEPA AP.

treatment systems and onsite sanitation systems, suchas septic tanks. It is anticipated that the first draft of
the training material will be distributed to participantsin order to solicit their comments and feedback forfurther development.

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report37

5

Feedback, expectations, and messages fromWEPA Focal Points and Advisory BoardIn FY2022, we conducted an online survey at the

B. Partner Country Suggestions for Future WEPA

annual meeting to evaluate WEPA activities during

Activities

the year, and the responses are presented in 5.1. In

Furthermore, we asked for any suggestions withaddition, to understand the general challenges andregards to WEPA activities to further improve water

expectations faced by government officers involved

governance in WEPA partner countries going forward.

in water resource governance, we requested WEPA

One suggestion was to share knowledge and skills

FPs to respond to three questions in FY2023, and theon strategies to comply with water governance andresults from nine countries are presented in 5.2.

water environment conservation, and another pointed
to the use of various state-of-the-art tools and tech-

5.1. FY2022 Survey Results

nologies to achieve this aim. Other respondents
expressed their hope that WEPA would continue its
work in the future and requested more opportunities

A. Evaluation of overall WEPA’s Activities

to build capacity. On the other hand, we also received

In the survey, we first asked FPs to rate WEPA’s activ-

a comment saying that there is often not enough timeities in general. The results are shown in Figure 13,

at annual meetings to discuss detailed pressing issues

with 44% of the respondents (4 countries) rated

related to water governance and what support

activities as “very good” or “good,” and another 44%

partners countries actually need. We would like torated them as “medium,” thus confirming a mainly

find ways to ensure that there is sufficient time

favorable evaluation by the partner countries. However,allocated at meetings in the next phase so that more

one country gave a low rating for WEPA’s contribution

active discussions can take place. Some of the otherto improving water environment governance. Duringcomments for future topics included:

the fourth phase, WEPA’s main focus was industrial• Providing training and conducting research studies

and domestic wastewater management. However,on specific wastewater management issues;

based on existing diverse issues related to water• Providing support to establish a monitoring frame-environment management in partner countries, theywork for industrial and domestic wastewater;

expect WEPA to work on diversified problems.

• Conducting studies on specific topics such aspollutant removal technologies, and impacts ofclimate change on water quality and quantity;• Indicating methods to apply polluter’s pay principle

Low
11.1%

Medium44.4%

to control major polluters such as convincing
Very good/
Good
44.4%

business operators; and• Broadening the scope of engagement with appropriate personnel other than FPs in partner countries
in line with WEPA activities and topics of meetings
and workshops.
C. Water environment issues in WEPA partner

Figure 13. Rating of WEPA’s activities during

countries

the fourth phase

Lastly, we asked if partner countries would like tohighlight any particular issue about their water envi-

38

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Reportronment. WEPA partner countries had a variety ofvarious WEPA activities, we are looking to makeresponses, including water quality governance andfurther improvements. In order to complement the

microplastics, which have been the focus of global

survey in FY2022, we created a questionnaire

attention in recent years. Other pressing issues aretargeting partner countries, to discover what would

listed below:

make WEPA a better platform, and how to better• Trace contaminants in the aquatic environment

understand the needs of policymakers in partner• Application of total maximum daily load (TMDL)

countries so that they could work on improving theirin water resources management

respective water environments. To this end, we asked•
Wastewater treatment and management inall partner countries three questions:centralized sewage treatment systems

Q1.	What are the challenges faced by policymakers• Wastewater treatment using nature-based solu-

in WEPA countries?
Q2.	What are the benefits of being involved astions on islands and in rural areas• Water pollution from industrial waste

WEPA partners and its activities?

• Sharing best practices on water environment

Q3.	What are your hopes and expectations for

projects and programs that can be implemented

WEPA in the future?

in each country• Damage assessment related to water pollution

The following section shows a summary of the
responses provided by the WEPA focal points. For

5.2. Feedback in FY2023 andexpectation from WEPA Focal Points

more detailed answers, please refer to the Annex.
First of all, to understand existing difficulties related
to water governance, we asked WEPA partner

WEPA is a partnership that envisions better and morecountries to list the key challenges that policymakers

sustainable water environment governance acrossare currently facing. We received a diverse range ofAsia, with countries collaborating and sharing good

responses and categorized them into three types:

practices. WEPA has maintained solid cooperation

policy-related, capacity-related, and institutional

since its establishment in 2004. After 20 years of

issues as shown in Figure 14.

Institutional issues• Overlapping roles among government ministries/agencies• Lack of coordination and legal arrangement• Multiple ministries enforce water-pollution related legislation

Policy related

Capacity related• Conflicting interests among diversified stakeholders
as well as between different laws
• Uncertainty of introducing a new policy (due to lackof feasibility analysis)• Lack of environmental centric policies• Lack of policies balancing economic development
and environment• Necessity of comprehensive planning considering
multi disciplines• Facing opposition to environmental policies byagencies responsible for economic development• Lack of budget, human resources, public awareness,monitoring and analysis systems, proper
technologies in industries to treat wastewater,awareness and skills of employees at the
subnational level, enforcement officers, willingness
to comply, and training opportunities• Limited laboratories and experts in terms oftechnical capacity• Low interest in environment

Figure 14. Challenges faced by policymakers in WEPA countries

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report39

Since the first phase, WEPA has evolved as a platform
for sharing information related to water governanceand networking among partner countries. In the third
phase, the Action Program (AP) scheme was added
as one of WEPA’s activities to strengthen the capacityof policymakers in partner countries. Eleven countries
Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea,
Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines,

Capacitybuilding
36%

Accumulatingknowledge
64%

Thailand, and Viet Nam, joined in the very first phase,and two countries — Nepal and Sri Lanka, joined in
the second phase. These 13 partner countries gave

Figure 15. Benefits being involved in WEPA

similar examples of challenges for institutional issues
and policy related issues, but had different capacity-related challenges. Some felt the need to develop

The objectives of WEPA are to enhance capacity fortechnical capacity to carry out observation of the

public policymaking including problem identificationwater environment, both by installing state of the art

and evaluation, to identify institutional issues andtechnologies, as well as by having more experts. Since

support local efforts in resolving them, and to enhancecapacity-related challenges affect various aspects ofcooperation with partner countries, by using thewater resource management, WEPA implemented

platform for information-sharing and networking.

APs in those countries requiring technical capacity

From the responses to the question on benefits, it is

to develop necessary policies for water conservation.

evident that while the platform has achieved its objec-

Many institutional and policy-related issues arise

tives, it seems to be perceived by the partner countries

from the political setup of a particular country, andmore as a platform for information acquisition rather

WEPA provides a platform to learn about cases inthan for capacity building. APs have been imple-

partner countries. In this way, countries with similarmented mainly due to collaboration between the

problems can learn from each other to find a solution.

recipient country and the WEPA Secretariat, and so

Going forward, WEPA can continue conducting APs

far only six countries have gained any benefit fromto close capacity gaps and organize workshops toAPs. It was pointed out that if the programs werefind mutual ways to deal with challenges, in addition

implemented multilaterally and the results wereto the current international workshop.

disseminated among partner countries as initiallyplanned, more partners would have benefitted fromThe second question asked countries what theyAPs. Training to build capacity of government officials

thought were the benefits of being a WEPA partner

is often provided by international organizations andand participating in WEPA activities. We implemented

donor agencies; however, this is not enough in many

six APs during the third and fourth phases. Responses

cases and the government officials in WEPA partner

to this question varied among countries, but we werecountries would like increased capacity to improveable to group them into two categories: capacity

the water environment. WEPA should consider

building and accumulating information as shown inmodifying its current activities and providing more

Figure 15.

opportunities in the future for capacity development,
if partner countries express a preference for morecapacity building rather than information sharing.
Lastly, we asked what kind of activities FPs would
like WEPA to consider and implement in the future.
The question was slightly similar to that of question“C” in section 5.1, but we received more answers.
Subsequently, we classified them into four different

40

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Reportgroups: awareness-raising to wider groups of stake-one suggestion would be to invite all relevant FPs toholders; continuing similar efforts being carried out

attend such trainings/workshops in future phases.

at present; (further) capacity development of manage-

In this way, partner countries could suggest ideas toment system considering additional elements; andovercome capacity shortages seen in some countries.

expanding networking and making further efforts,
as seen in Table 12. WEPA has engaged in capacity

Some partner countries also suggested that WEPA

building for government officials in charge of water

should expand the current network of 13 countries toenvironment management since the first phase. FPs

include more countries and also other sectors such

would like WEPA to continue its current activities

as businesses, NGOs, and communities as these are

and they also think that it should further broaden theimportant stakeholders in sustainable water resource

umbrella for capacity building as the need arises,management or achieving sustainable water environ-such as in cases of managing emerging contami-

ment. Moreover, other countries want to extend theirnants, extreme weather conditions, and water-humanefforts to cover a broader range of subjects, as thereinteractions. Furthermore, the network should be

are many new and emerging challenges related to

expanded to handle the complex issue of conserving

the water environment. In the current phase, WEPA

the water environment in Asia. In addition, it is criticalfocused on industrial and domestic wastewater

to have the understanding and cooperation of the

management, but managing non-point source

general public to ensure environmental conservation,

pollution, emerging pollutants, and issues related to

FPs would like WEPA to be more proactive in raisingclimate change and extreme weather conditions are

public awareness in the next phase.

common problems in WEPA countries. Partnercountries also want to transform and disseminate theFrom the first to fourth phases, WEPA’s capacity

results and information collected from APs into

building has focused on problem identification andcost-effective solutions to improve the water envi-

policy development, which are the major tasks ofronment. Some of the above requests may be difficult

officials in central government. In addition to theseto handle by a small group; however, the Secretariat

topics, some FPs want support on data integration,

together with partner countries would be able tomanagement, modeling, and advanced methodolo-provide relevant suggestions.

gies for water quality analysis, which are topics thathave not been covered in the four phases to date.

Ideally, WEPA will continue its current efforts toTraining workshops are often organized in current

support the needs of partner countries and enable

APs, but they are generally organized only in thethem to collaborate when dealing with emerging

country implementing the AP. Moreover, these shortissues. We hope our platform will be further strength-

training courses/workshops do not generally extend

ened in the future.

an invitation to all FPs, and as such, there are very
few opportunities that include all FPs. Considering
this gap, and WEPA’s objectives of mutual learning,

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report41

Table 12. FPs’ future expectations for WEPA
Awareness raising

Extending network and efforts• Citizen′s education• Opening for business sector, NG(P)O, and community• Raising awareness at the subnational
levels• Strengthening communication and information sharing among
member countries, particularly in water ecological environmental
management of technology

Continuing current efforts• Continuation of WEPA activities• Sharing best practices for achieving
sustainable water governance fromJapan in depth through field visits or inother formsMore flexible supports forAP• More flexible support for AP• Sharing information from APs to themember countries so that they candetermine their institutional gaps andgovernance deficiencies to help them
improve• Starting thematic information sharing• Extending the network system• Information sharing on non-point source pollution management• Cost-benefit analysis of implementing policies• Developing and adopting of cost-effective technologies,
methodologies and protocols, regulation and enforcement• Transforming results of AP into technologies and disseminate itin the member countries• Further capitalizing information from member countries to show
a picture of the region• Highlighting climate change and economic development• Regular updating and consolidating
WEPA website and policy brief• Changing platform to higher level and creating an interactive
database for decision-making

Capacity development• Providing support to researchers in water environment andassociated issues• Supporting data information andManagement system• Providing capacity development for
staff involved in WQ analysis anddeveloping related guidelines andprocedures• Providing support to WEPA countries to develop necessary
strategy, regulations, and institutional frameworks• Providing technical equipments to promote water quality
monitoring• Conducting short training sessions

42

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final ReportMessage from Dr. Vicente B. Tuddao, Jr., Director, Departmentof Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Quezon City,
Philippines (WEPA FP since the first phase)

Established in 2004, the Water Environment Part-

The evolution of WEPA towards the next phase of its

nership in Asia (WEPA) was organized under theoperations should focus on further intensifying its

leadership of the Ministry of Environment, Japan, androle in strengthening institutional and policy devel-

has grown into the current network of 13 nation-states

opment and water environment governance throughin Asia sharing similar water environmental issues

an improved platform for information and knowledge/

and concerns ranging from water pollution to weaktechnology sharing, strategic building of capacities

institutional arrangement and ineffective water envi-

among governments towards better water environ-ronmental governance. These problems have been

ment governance, support for institutional and policy

affecting the quality of the water environment in Asia

development, identification of technology gaps infor decades, bringing with it health hazards to thewastewater treatment technologies, and engagement

region’s population, and damaging ecological integrity.

in a broader multi-stakeholders participation among

Conceived as a network with an established paradigm

WEPA partner-countries. It is only through theto share information and knowledge with partner

engagement of the players, stakeholders, and users

countries, WEPA has evolved further by incorporatingof a clean water that practical and economical

in situ problem identification and finding solutions insolutions to water environment issues can be achieved.

its agenda through the implementation of appropriate

It is crucial that updated information can be sharedand specific action programs in selected partner

more broadly by maintaining and improving thecountries, aimed at providing technological and/or

database and the websites for faster and easier accessinstitutional responses.

by users.

I have participated in WEPA activities since the first

I would like to commend WEPA for its continuingphase of its operation. I have witnessed four contin-

collaborative work with the WEPA Asian part-uous phases as the partnership implements plans andner-countries. The economies of these Asian countries

priorities to be more agile in achieving its objectives

continue to grow amidst the increasing threat ofin view of the emerging risk factors such as industrial

climate change, and if this threat remains, the water

development, population growth and climate change.

environment will be at higher risk of degradation. We

The increasing volume of wastewater generated fromneed to further solidify our efforts by strengthening

industries and households and the disposal of

our commitment and resolve in achieving WEPA

untreated wastewater into the environment has

objectives and responsibilities to improve the quality

persistently posed a challenge which requires insti-

of our water environment for the present and future

tutional, technological, and governance solutions.

communities of nations in the region.

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report43Message from Dr. Ratnayake Mudiyanselage Sanjaya Kumara
Ratnayake, Deputy Director General, Environment Protection
Division, Central Environmental Authority, Sri Lanka (WEPA
FP since the second phase)

Sri Lanka has been a partner country of WEPA since

While Sri Lanka strives to implement and improve2009 from the second phase and we participated in

its water governance practices, inadequate data on

the 6th Annual Meeting and International Workshop.

water environment management is a common

I would like to commend the activities conducted byproblem faced by implementing agencies and poli-

WEPA and emphasize that the partnership is widely

cymakers. The WEPA website was able to fulfil thisrecognized and has continuously improved withneed and because information gathered from partner

suggestions and comments from participants in the

countries is continuously updated, the website is anregion. WEPA programs in the initial stage were

extremely useful resource where all partner countries

mostly focused on fresh water resources and manage-

in the region can share data & information.

ment. While expanding its horizon, we also witnesseda change in the focus to other areas of interest such

Considering the current environmental problems, andas domestic and industrial wastewater management.

trying to find solutions, it is high time to focus on

This timely topic was discussed at the 2012 WEPA

other areas such as ground water pollution, conser-

dialogue on industrial & domestic wastewater

vation of ground water resources and data on groundmanagement, hosted by the Central Environmental

water quality, and pollution of water from microplas-

Authority, Sri Lanka, with the participation of stake-tics. These are some topics that we can discuss andholder organizations in water environment governance.

share information in future WEPA meetings. It would
also better if WEPA could enhance and expand its

In 2015 we had the opportunity of organizing the 10th

focus area to include capacity building programs for

WEPA International Workshop and annual meeting

officers engaged in the water environment sector inin Sri Lanka where international participants werepartner countries. I very much hope that we canable to experience water environment management

continue this globally important program to help

from a Sri Lankan context. The WEPA Action Programprotect and manage water environment management

2017 granted to Sri Lanka included a collaborativein Asian countries.

study on “Improving Industrial Waste and Wastewater
Management in Gampaha District, Colombo, Sri
Lanka”. The study was successfully implemented andidentified critical water environment issues withrespect to ground water. The outcomes of the program
have been translated into good water governance,
and the experience gained from these activities andcollaborative work has enhanced a trustworthy cooperation which was also expanded to other Sri Lankan
projects. The outputs of this action program wereapplied when we amended the regulations for industrial effluent discharge on land for agricultural
applications.

44

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final ReportMessage from Dr. Motoyuki Suzuki, Professor Emeritus, The
University of Tokyo (Special Advisor of WEPA Advisory Board)

Looking Back on 20 Years of WEPA — The Riseof WEPAand later Mr. Tetsuo Kuyama must have had manydifficulties. However, at the same time, the overallvalue of the network that has been created over the

In March 2003, the 3rd World Water Forum (WWF3)

past 20 years through the changing forms andwas held in Kyoto, Japan. Three years earlier, WWF2

changing attitudes of the people in charge of the

had been held in The Hague, the Netherlands, with

network has become a great asset that cannot be

the participation of Dr. Hans van Ginkel, Rector of theeasily created.

United Nations University (UNU, Headquarters: Tokyo)
and myself as Vice-Rector at that time, and we

Some of WEPA’s ideas and achievements were alsosuggested that Kyoto, which was to host the forum

introduced at WWF, and one of the most memorable

three years later, should have a session to discuss

opportunities for me was at WWF4 (Mexico City,

water issues in the Southeast Asian region. After2006), where I gave a lecture titled “The Importance

returning to Japan, we received a great deal of supportof Information for Water Environment Conservation”

from the Ministry of the Environment, Japan (MOEJ),

on WEPA activities at the start of the conference. The

and we called on Southeast Asian countries to jointhen Crown Prince of Japan attended the conference,

us in holding a session at WWF3.

and I was impressed by the interest shown by the
Mongolian Minister of Environment and others in theThis meeting became the impetus for a preparatory

WEPA exhibition booth.

meeting for the establishment of Water Environment
Partnership in Asia (WEPA) in Jakarta the following

What to expect from WEPA in the future

year, led by MOEJ, and they continued to support thisinitiative.

The activities of WEPA over the past 20 years havebeen more or less in line with the global trend of the

WEPA’s focus is on water environment governance,

time, with each partner country aiming to become aparticularly the establishment and management of

typical developed country, and to share among thewater quality standards, as each country and admin-

partner countries methods of wastewater treatment

istrative body responds to the issues, but it was(domestic and industrial) and water quality manage-

meaningful to see how the participating countries

ment of natural water (rivers, lakes, etc.) in residential

deepened their mutual understanding of each other’senvironments, with the goal of economic growth andgovernance systems, the environmental conditionsindustrialization. The goal is to share the methodsof each region, the diversity of the relationshipof wastewater treatment (domestic and industrial)

between water and society, and national character-and water quality management of natural water

istics with each passing session, as well as the(rivers, lakes, etc.) in residential environments amongprosperity of each country’s long-standing culture.

partner countries.

The Institute for Global Environmental Strategies

The summer of 2023 experienced a heat wave. Natural(IGES), which had just been established, took up thedisasters resulting from climate warming, which has

responsibility of managing the project, with the

become more pronounced in recent years, have

exception of a period of time, and I am sure that Ms.

appeared in diverse forms in various parts of the world,

Yatsuka Kataoka, who was in charge in the early days,

including large-scale forest fires, localized heavy rains,

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report45and more frequent outbreaks of zoonoses and other

People will have to work to rapidly restore theinfectious diseases presumably caused by changes

degraded natural environment around human activ-

in wildlife habitats, all of which are believed to haveities, including forests, mountains, rivers, and otherbeen brought about by outbursts of human activity.

waterbodies. We will have to develop a new wayof life in which the natural environment and human

From about 12,000 years ago, after the most recent

life, which has become so dense, share the sameice age in the 200,000-year history of Homo sapiens,

place. It will also be necessary to consider a shift

humans have been spreading across the globe duringfrom the past approach that has been hostile to nature

the Holocene, a geological period that began about

and aimed at mechanization, industrialization, and200,000 years ago. During most of this time, theurbanization, to a way of life that is based on the logic

increase in the global population was estimated toof nature.

be about 0.05%/year, but after the Industrial Revolution began in around 1750, its impact has rapidly

In relation to water, it will be important to shift fromexpanded, especially in the last 70 years since 1950,

a narrow perspective of optimizing water use inwhich has seen a population explosion and theindustrialized areas to a truly comprehensive andexpansion of economic activity at a different rate than

optimal concept that focuses on the function of water

before. It is estimated that the global population grewin the natural environment (green water). It is also

at a rate of 1.5%/year during this period (30 times

important to return to the restructuring and devel-

faster than in the Holocene), tripling the earth’s popu-

opment of sustainable systems by learning fromlation in 70 years and increasing economic activity

natural circulation pathways, rather than relying onby about 13 times during that period. It is believedenergy-intensive artificial systems in the nutrientthat the destruction of nature by mankind during thatcycling by water. To this end, it would be effective toperiod has progressed so rapidly that it has far

seek the participation of a wide range of researchers

exceeded the scope of nature’s ability to recover,from various countries and to promote discussions

including the ecosystems on the planet. The termwith the private sector and citizens in the local“Anthropocene” has been under consideration in thecommunity.

field of geochronology for the period after 1950.
Concepts such as “Nature-Based Solutions” andIf we continue to develop and alter nature in accor-“Nature Positive” are now emerging. How to evaluate

dance with the values we have held in the past, we

nature as a whole involves many difficult issues, butwill sooner or later greatly exceed the estimatedI hope that WEPA activities in the future will focus

tolerance limits for some functions of Earth activity,

on how to position the water environment in Asia

and we will deviate from the stable state on which

within the context of nature, to present new solutions

the Earth depends today. Thus, we must be aware

to this problem, and to uplift the region to a world-that we will repeat the experience of the great extinc-leading mindset.

tions that the Earth experienced hundreds of millionsof years ago.
The way to deal with this may be found in culturesthat have been nurtured and developed in the naturerich Asian region since ancient times.

46

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report

WEPA Focal Points(April 2019 – March 2024)

Cambodia

Koutaro Kawamata (2020-2022)

Rady Phin

Director, Water Environment Division,

Director, Department of Water Quality

Environmental Management Bureau,

Management, General Directorate of

Ministry of the Environment

Environmental Protection, Ministry of Environment
Seiji Tsutsui (2019-2020)
China

Director, Water Environment Division,

Yang Xiaoming (2021-)

Environmental Management Bureau,

Division Director, Division of General Affair Issues,

Ministry of the Environment

Policy Research Center for Environment andEconomy (PRCEE)

Fumiaki Hasegawa (2022-)
Deputy Director,

Li Liping (2019-2021)

Environmental Management Division,

Division Director,

Environment Management Bureau,

Policy Research Centre for Environment andMinistry of the Environment

Economy (PRCEE)
Hiroyasu Kawashima (2019-2022)
Indonesia

Deputy Director, Water Environment Division,

Nety Widayati (2022-)

Environment Management Bureau, Ministry of the

Director, Water Pollution Control,

Environment

Ministry of Environment and Forestry
Lao PDR
Herry Hamdani (2019-2022)

Sengkeo Tasaketh (2020-)

Deputy Director of Water Pollution Control,

Deputy Director of Minning Inspection Division,

Ministry of Environment and Forestry

Department of Natural Resources and Environment
Insection, Ministry of Natural Resources andJapan

Environment (MONRE)

Seiji Tsutsui (2022-)
Director, Environmental Management Division,

Phengkamla Phonvisai (2019-2020)

Environmental Management Bureau,

Deputy Director General,

Ministry of the Environment

Department of Pollution Control and Monitoring,
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

Michihiro Oi (2022)
Director, Water Environment Division,

Malaysia

Environmental Management Bureau, Ministry of

Ir Mohd Zaki bin Mat Amin (2022-)

the Environment

Director General of National Water ResearchInstitute of Malaysia (NAHRIM),
Ministry of Natural Resources,
Environment and Climate Change (NRECC)

48

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final ReportShin Ying Ang (2019-2022)

Philippines

Research Officer, Water Treatment Technology

Vincente B. Tuddao Jr.

Research Unit, Water Quality and Environmental

Career Executive Service Officer IV, Director III

Research Centre, National Water Research

Designated Director, Internal Audit Service,

Institute of Malaysia (NAHRIM),

Department of Environment and Natural Resources

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment(DENR)

Myanmar

Erlinda A. Gonzales

Tin Aung Win (2021-)

Technical Officer as Environmental Consultant,

Director, Environmental Quality Standard Division,

Environmental Management Bureau,

Environmental Conservation Department,

Department of Environment and Natural Resources

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental(DENR)

Conservation
Republic of Korea
Thin Thin Soe (2020-2021)

Taejin Park

Director, Environmental Quality Standard Division,

Senior Researcher, Water Environmental

Environmental Conservation Department,

Engineering Research Division,

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental

Water Environment Research Department,

Conservation

National Institute of Environmental Research(NIER)

Tin Tin Thaw (2019-2020)
Deputy Director,

Sri Lanka

Environmental Quality Standard Division,

Ratnayake Mudiyanselage Sanjaya Kumara

Environmental Conservation Department,

Ratnayake

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental

Deputy Director General, Environmental Pollution

Conservation

Control, Central Environmental Authority

Nepal

ThailandJaya Ram Prajapati (2023-)

Chaiyo Juisiri

Senior Divisional Engineer, Social, Economic andDirector of Inland Water Sub-division,

Environment Division, Water and Energy

Pollution Control Department,

Commission Secretariat (WECS)Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

Surya Dev Gupta (2020-2023)

Viet Nam

Senior Divisional Engineer, Social, Economic andPham Van Loi (2022-)

Environment Division, Water and Energy

Director, Institute of Environmental Science,

Commission Secretariat (WECS)

Viet Nam Environment Administration (VEA),
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

Madhav Dev Acharya (2019-2020)
Senior Divisional Engineering Geologist,

Nguyen Minh Cuong (2019-2022)

Water Resources Division, Water and Energy

Deputy Director,

Commission Secretariat (WECS)

Department of International Cooperation,
Science and Technology,
Viet Nam Environment Administration,
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment(MONRE)

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report

49

WEPA Advisory Boards
Special Advisor of WEPA Advisory Board

Yoshitaka Ebie

Motoyuki Suzuki

Senior Researcher,

Professor Emeritus,

Centre for Material Cycles and Waste Management

The University of Tokyo

Research,
National Institute for Environmental Studies

Chairman of WEPA Advisory Board
Mitsumasa Okada

Ikuro Kasuga

Professor Emeritus,

Associate Professor,

Hiroshima University

Research Center for Advanced Science andTechnology,

Advisory Members

The University of Tokyo

Koichi Fujie
Vice President,

Yoshihiko Matsui

Chiba University

Professor Emeritus,
Hokkaido University

Kensuke Fukushi
Director, Institute for Future Initiatives,

Masaaki Hosomi*

The University of Tokyo

Professor emeritus at Tokyo University of

So Kazama*Professor Hosomi passed away in September 2020

Agriculture and Technology
Professor,
Graduate School of Engineering,Tohoku University

50

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final ReportList of Activities and Publications
Annual Meeting
Month

Year

City, Country

15th Annual Meeting

Feb

2020

Bangkok, Thailand

16th Annual Meeting

Mar

2021

Online17th Annual Meeting

Apr

2022

Hybrid (Kumamoto, Japan and Online)

18th Annual Meeting

Feb

2023

Hybrid (Siem Reap, Cambodia and Online)

19th Annual Meeting

Jan

2024

Hybrid (Hayama, Japan and Online)

Month

Year

City, Country

WEPA Workshop on Industrial
Wastewater Management

Feb

2020

Bangkok, Thailand

WEPA Workshop on Domestic
Wastewater Management

Mar

2021

OnlineWEPA Workshop on Industrial
Wastewater Management

Feb

2023

Hybrid (Siem Reap, Cambodia and Online)

WEPA Workshop on Water
Environmental Policy Revisions

Jan

2024

Hybrid (Hayama, Japan and Online)

Month

Year

City, Country

9th World Water Forum Thematic
Session “Water Quality Improvement”
and Exhibition at the Japan’s booth

Mar

2022

Dakar, Senegal

4th Asia-Pacific Water Summit inKumamoto, Japan

Apr

2022

Kumamoto, Japan

3rd Asia Wastewater Management
Partnership General Meeting

Aug

2023

Sapporo, Japan

International Workshops

Other WEPA Activities at International Events

Publication
Title

Month

Year

Toward the Establishment of Sustainable Faecal Sludge Management (English)

Mar

2021

WEPA Outlook on Water Environmental Management in Asia 2021 (English)

Dec

2021

WEPA Outlook on Water Environmental Management in Asia 2021 (Japanese)

Dec

2024

WEPA Fourth Phase Final Report (English)

Mar

2024

WEPA Fourth Phase Final Report (Japanese)

Mar

2024

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Fourth Phase Final Report51

Ministry of the Environment, Japan
Environmental Management Division
Environmental Management Bureau
1-2-2 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 100-8975, Japan
TEL: +81 3 3581 3351, FAX: +81 3 3593 1438
https://www.env.go.jp/en/index.html

WEPA Secretariat

Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)
Adaptation and Water Area
2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Kanagawa, 240-0115, Japan
TEL: +81 46 855 3700, FAX: +81 46 855 3709
E-mail: wepa_secretariat@iges.or.jp
https://wepa-db.net/