Ministry of the Environment

Water Environment
Partnership in Asia

Second Phase Final ReportWater Environment
Partnership in Asia

Second Phase Final Report
Ministry of the Environment, Japan
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report
Copyright © 2014 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 and retrieval system, without prior permission in writingfrom Ministry of the Environment Japan through the Institute for Global
Environment Strategies (IGES), which serves as the WEPA secretariat.

ISBN: 978- 4 -88788 -168-6
This publication is made as a part of WEPA and published by the Institute for
Global Environmental Strategies (IGES). Although every effort is made toensure 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
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)
2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Kanagawa, 240-0115, Japan
Tel: +81-(0)46-855-3700
http://www.iges.or.jp/en/

The research team for WEPA Second Phase Final Report
includes the following IGES members:[Drafting team]
Yatsuka Kataoka, Senior Coordinator (Networking and Outreach), Programme Management OfficeTetsuo Kuyama, Manager (Water Resource Management), Natural Resources and Ecosystem Services Area
Pham Ngoc Bao, Policy Researcher, Natural Resources and Ecosystem Services Area
[Supporting team]Rina Hirano, Assistant Staff, Natural Resources and Ecosystem Services Area
Maiko Yoshizawa, Assistant Researcher, Natural Resources and Ecosystem Services Area

Printed in Japan

Table of Contents
Introduction

1

Message from Ministry of the Environment, Japan

3

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)

4

Summary of the 2nd phase of WEPA

6

Situation Analysis on Water Environmental Management

8

Domestic Wastewater Treatment in Asia

14

Messages from Partners

22

Industrial Wastewater Management

28

Climate Change and the Water Environment

32

Messages from Partners

37

Sri Lanka/Nepal

38

Philippines

40

Korea/Cambodia

42

Lao PDR/Malaysia

44

Indonesia/Thailand

46

Lao PDR/Thailand

48

Viet Nam/China

50

Japan

52

Appendix

55

WEPA Focal Points and Partners

56

WEPA Advisory Committee

57

List of Activities and publications of the 2nd phase

58

Introduction
Over the past two decades, Asia has seen remarkable growth, demonstrating a 120% increase
in GDP. The region has also accounted for 60% of the world’s population. According to “TheMillennium Development Goals (MDGs) Report 2013” published by the United Nations, it isreported that Asian countries might be able to achieve many of the targets set by the MDGs in2000 by 2015, although it might fail to meet some targets. Currently, Asia is a focal point for
rapid global economic growth. On the other hand, there has also been a negative environmental
impact behind this Asian growth. Rapid urbanisation, a sharp increase in population andoverdevelopment of industry have resulted in intense pressure on water resources both inquantity and quality, which may become an obstacle for sustainable development. The United
Nations Environment Programme reported in 2004 that more than 85 % of wastewater isdischarged without treatment in both South Asia and East Asia. Significant time and cost must be
invested to improve water quality and restore aquatic ecosystems. Therefore, it is of the utmost
importance to manage water environment appropriately before it is destroyed.
There are various actors involved in water environmental management, including officers ofcentral and local governments, water experts, private sector, non-governmental organisations(NGOs) and citizens. Among these actors, officials in central government play an importantrole as they are primarily responsible for the planning and implementation of policies on waterenvironment management in each country. It is therefore important to build their capacity forbetter water environment management. Officials in central government need to conduct planningand implementation of policies based on appropriate information regarding methods andtechnologies of water environment management suitable for the Asian region, but there is a lackof such information in most developing countries in Asia.
Recognising this trend in Asia, the Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA) was
proposed by the Ministry of the Environment, Japan in 2004 to strengthen water environmental
governance in the Asian region. WEPA conducts its activities on a 5-year cycle. Utilising theknowledge accumulated and the human network developed in the first phase, the second phase of
WEPA focused on knowledge-sharing to find solutions to water environment problems. It would
certainly be a pleasure for me if we can find some “Asian Wisdom” in the shared knowledge,
which will contribute to sustainable development in the region.

March, 2014

Mitsumasa Okada
Chair of WEPA Advisor Meeting

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

1

2

Water
Wa
Wate
W
te
er En
E
Environment
viro
iro
ro
onme
nmen
n
e tP
Pa
Partnership
rtne
rt
n rsh
rshi
shi
hip in
hi
in As
A
Asi
Asia
s a (WEPA
WEPA)
Sec
Seco
ond
nd Phase
Phas
hase
ase
e FinalFi al Report
Fin
Repor
Repor
po
ort
SecondMessage from Ministry of theEnvironment, Japan
Recognising that the improvement of water environmental governance is essential to solve waterpollution problems in the Asian region, the Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
was launched in 2004 by the Ministry of the Environment, Japan. The first phase of WEPA ran
until 2009, and during this time, it was realised that information sharing among stakeholders isa key point for better water environmental governance. To this end, WEPA developed a human
network which was made up of policymakers dealing with water environmental management in
the Asian region, and at the same time created an information platform on water environment
in the region. Subsequently, the second phase of WEPA promoted knowledge sharing forfinding solutions through workshops and dialogues, a process which contributes to the water
environmental governance in respective WEPA countries.
This report aims to introduce the highlights of activities and the outcomes obtained in thesecond phase of WEPA. First, it presents a summary of the outcomes obtained from activities
in the second phase tackling common issues in Asian region such as “Situation Analysis on
Water Environmental Management”, “Domestic Wastewater Treatment”, “Industrial Wastewater
Management” and “Climate Change and the Water Environment”. Second, it compiles themessages from WEPA partners, which shows how their views reflect the activities in the second
phase. They also mention the current water pollution problems that WEPA countries are facing
as well as WEPA’s contribution to solving them. The report puts particular focus on how WEPA
partners utilised the knowledge and information obtained from WEPA for the improvement of
the water environmental management in their countries. Moreover, their expectations for future
WEPA actions are also stated in the report.
Finally, I would like to extend my deepest appreciation to the WEPA partners who contributed
to activities in the second phase of WEPA including writing messages for this report. It is mysincere wish that many more people will take an interest in WEPA thanks to this report.

March, 2014

Masaaki Kobayashi
Director General
Environmental Management Bureau, Ministry of the Environment, Japan

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report3

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
A sound water environment is the key to securing access to safe water and ahealthy environment. In this context it is the mission of the Water Environment
Partnership in Asia (WEPA) to strengthen water environmental governance inAsia via information and knowledge sharing.

WEPA FACTS
When did it start?

WEPA was proposed at the third World Water
Forum held in Kyoto Shiga, and Osaka in 2003
by Ministry of the Environment, Japan, and waslaunched in 2004; activities follow a 5-year cycle,
the first phase of which comprised 11 countries;
phase two started in April 2009.

China

Partnership of
13 Asian Countries
13 countries in Asia
participates in WEPA
including Japan

Nepal

Who’s in it?

MyanmarLao PDR
Viet Nam

ThailandCurrently, 13 Asian countries; Nepal and Sri Lanka
joined for the second phase; each member country
appoints focal points who actively participate in
WEPA activities and facilitate the same in theirrespective countries.

Japan

Republic of Korea

Philippines

Cambodia

Sri Lanka

Malaysia

Indonesia

How is it governed?

The plan of activities under WEPA is discussed and endorsed by WEPA partnercountries at the WEPA annual meeting. According to the plan the WEPA Secretariat
implements activities in close collaboration with partner countries.

The WEPA Database – an information platform
for water environmental management
Developed in collaboration with the partner countries, thisfour-part database holds information on the related policies,
technologies and NGO & CBO activities, as well as links toother resources.

Technology
Database
Wastewater treatment
facility underoperation in Asia

Policy Databasewww.wepa-db.net
db

The database also holds the bulk of WEPA meeting
presentation material and publications.
Activities by
NGOs and CBOs
Water environmental
conservation
activities

4

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

Information
SourceLinks to useful sites onwater environmental
management-State of water
environment-Legislative
framework, etc.

The Second Phase of WEPA
Based on the knowledge accumulated and the networks developed in the first phase, the second
phase (from 2009) aimed at further knowledge sharing and promotion via workshops and bilateraldialogue between partner countries and Japan, the process of which has contributed to ongoing water
environmental management in the respective WEPA partner countries.

What’s new in phase two?

Water Environmental Management in Partner Countries; Progress Update
Progress in water environment management in the partner countries was ascertained (throughregular meetings such as annual meeting, questionnaire surveys, and expert interviews),
the results of which are published in a three-yearly publication, WEPA Outlook on Water
Environmental Management, launched at the World Water Forum. This is a key WEPA publication
informing of developments taking place on a country-by-country basis.

More Focused Discussion
To foster deeper discussion and information exchange, WEPA chose “domestic wastewater treatment” and“climate change and the water environment” as focus themes. The on-line based WEPA policy briefs were
published on these topics.
To bolster information exchange between partner countries with similar policy interests and challenges, WEPA
organised a group workshop focusing on decentralised wastewater treatment in Indonesia, which reaped
discussions on policy, technologies and practices as well as site visits.

New Focus: Industrial Wastewater Management
Through close communication between the partner countries, industrial wastewater management (particularly,
enforcement and implementation of pollution control measures) has emerged as a common management issue.
WEPA responded from 2012 onwards by focusing on this problem in its ongoing discussions.

Collaboration with other organisations and initiatives
With support from the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), WEPA conducted training over three
years (2009-2011) on the topic of water environmental governance in Japan. The training aimed at enabling thesharing of experiences of participating countries as well those of Japan.
As a part of collaboration with the Network of Asian River Basin Organisations (NARBO), NARBO secretariat staff
participated in WEPA International Workshops and Annual Meetings. From WEPA, Dr. Okada, a WEPA advisor and asecretariat staffer joined the 4th General Meeting at Makassar, Indonesia in 2010. Dr. Okada gave a keynote
presentation in the session on water quality.
WEPA co-organised an international workshop with the Science Council of Japan at the fourth IWA-ASPIRE
Conference and Exhibition in Tokyo, 2011

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report5Summary of the 2nd Phase of WEPA
YEAR

MONTH

Organised a dialogue in Indonesia (Jakarta)

Oct

2009
Nov

2010

OTHERSYEAR

6Organised the 1st International Workshop“Coping Strategies for Water EnvironmentalChallenges in Asia”
and the 5th Annual Meeting (Hanoi, Viet Nam)

MONTH

EVENT

Sep

Conducted a JICA training and dialogue programme“Workshop for Enhancement of the Governmental Capacity on
Water Environment in Asia Countries” (Yokohama, Japan)

Nov

Participated in the NARBO Meeting (Makassar, Indonesia)

Dec

Organised a dialogue in Nepal “State and Challenges of theWater Environment in Nepal” (Katmandu)

Feb

Organised the 2nd WEPA International Workshop focusing on“Climate Change Impacts to the Water Environment” andthe 6th Annual Meeting (Tokyo, Japan)

Interviews, site visits and questionnaire survey for domestic wastewater treatment
Questionnaire survey on the topic of climate change and the water environment

MONTH

Aug

2011

Conducted a JICA training and dialogue programme“Workshop for Enhancement of the Governmental Capacity on
Water Environment in Asia Countries” (Yokohama, Japan)

Questionnaire survey on climate change impacts to the water environment

2011

YEAR

Dec

Mar

2010

OTHERS

EVENT

Sep

EVENT

Conducted a JICA training and dialogue programme“Workshop for Enhancement of the Governmental Capacity on
Water Environment in Asia Countries” (Yokohama, Japan)

Sep

Organised the 3rd International Workshop on the progress of water
environmental management and domestic wastewater treatment andthe 7th Annual Meeting (Manila, Philippines)

Oct

Co-organised “International Workshop on Water Environment Partnershipin Asia for Sustainable Water Resources Management” with the Science
Council Japan at the 4th IWA-ASPIRE Conference & Exhibition (Tokyo, Japan)

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

2012

OTHERS

Mar

Registered “WEPA” as a solution for the
6th World Water Forum
Launch of WEPA Outlook on Water
Environmental Management 2012 at the
6th World Water Forum (Marseille, France)

Interviews and site visit for the topic of domestic wastewater treatment
Interviews and site visit for water environmental management overall

YEAR

MONTH

2012

Aug

Organised a dialogue in Sri Lanka“Industrial Wastewater Management in Sri Lanka” (Colombo)

2013

Feb

Organised the 4th International Workshop“Decentralized Domestic Wastewater Treatment in Asia –how to promoteand manage?” and the 8th Annual Meeting (Siem Riep, Cambodia)

OTHERS

YEARInterviews, site visits for domestic wastewater treatment
Interviews and site visits on the topic of industrial wastewater managementmanagement

MONTH

OTHERS

EVENT

May

Organised a session “Voice from
Asia for Better Water Quality – fordiscussion toward Post-2015
Development Goals on water”
at the 2nd Asia-Pacific Water
Summit (Chiang Mai, Thailand)

Nov

Organised WEPA Group Workshop on “Decentralized Domestic Wastewater
Treatment in Asia” (Jakarta, Indonesia)Jan

Organised the 9th Annual Meeting (Hayama, Japan) and WEPA Seminar“Current Situation and Future Prospect of Water Environment Governancein Asia” (Tokyo, Japan)

2013

2014

EVENT

Interviews and site visit on industrial wastewater management
Launched WEPA policy briefs on-line

Annual Meeting and Workshop/Seminar -- WEPA facilitate partnership
WEPA has conducted its annual meetings in different WEPA countries, together with international workshops or
seminars. These meetings, held on a regular basis, facilitated partnerships among partner countries and contributed
to capacity development of WEPA partners though information exchange. In addition to these meetings, WEPA
dialogues were conducted to deepen understanding and encourage information exchange between Japan andpartner countries. Local stakeholders were invited to WEPA international workshops and dialogues to share theirviews and information, which contributed to facilitating stakeholder interaction in host countries.

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report7Situation Analysis on
Water Environmental Management‘‘ Over the past few decades, Asia has been a focal point for the world’s rapid growth, demonstratinga 120% increase in GDP in the region and accounting for 60% of the world’s population. Rapid
urbanization and the swift increase in population and economic development that are associatedwith unsustainable development practices have resulted in intense pressure on water resources bothin quantity and quality, as well as on aquatic ecosystems in the region.

’’

Low water quality is one of the most pressing
environmental problems threatening human healthand sound economic development and still remains
a critical problem even in some areas of WEPA
partner countries that have mitigation or preventive
measures in place, especially urban areas. The partnercountries have each unilaterally developed policies
and measures both to combat the growing threat ofwater pollution in critical areas and to avoid future
outbreaks in other areas.
Certain aspects of water environmental
management differ across the partner countries – due
to contextual factors such as the duration, gravity,
cause and level of socio-economic development – but
some, such as pollution source control, are common
to all as basic measures. Conducting reviews ofwater environmental management in the partnercountries is useful in order to gauge what progresshas been made and to identify common management
challenges, as well as to promote more knowledgesharing for future WEPA activities. To this end thissummary of discussions on water environmental
management in the WEPA second phase gives
an overview of the state of water environmental
management and some of the common challenges
facing WEPA partner countries.

Goals and Targets of Water
Environmental Management
It is important to set clear policy objectives andtargets. Clear goal-setting enables actions taken(WEPA Message 2012*)

by governments and managers of facilities thatdischarge pollutants to be reviewed at a laterstage. Most WEPA countries have set out a basic
environmental law stipulating protection ofhuman health, ensuring a safe human environment
and protection of the environment as a basis forsustainable development, and these objectives
also apply for water environmental management.
Myanmar has no such basic law but did pass the“Environmental Conservation Law (2012)” in 2012.
More detailed definitions of water environmental
management objectives are laid out in laws or acts
specific to water pollution control in some countries,
such as the Sub-Decree on Water Pollution Control(Cambodia), Water Pollution Control Law (Japan)
and Clean Water Act (the Philippines).
Ambient water quality standards are theadministrative targets dictating the levels of water
quality that need to be maintained. The following
table shows the status of standard-setting for ambient
water quality in each partner country. While most
WEPA countries have established such standards
for rivers, few have done so for groundwater, andthe standards set are mostly based on the domestic
conservation objectives of each country (i.e., health,living environment, and ecosystem conservation).
Drinking water quality standards are used toevaluate water quality in countries that have not set
ambient quality standards. No ambient water quality
standards exist in Myanmar, but deliberations are
now underway as mandated by the Environmental
Conservation Law passed in 2012. Sri Lanka sets

* WEPA Message 2012=”Message from WEPA: Water Quality Challenges in Asia for a Sustainable Future” from WEPA Outlook on Water Environmental
Management (http://www.wepa-db.net/pdf/1203outlook/01.pdf) pp.6-8.

8

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

Ambient water quality standards
For surface water*1

For marine and coastal
watersFor groundwater

Cambodia
China*2
Indonesia

*3

Japan

*4

Republic of Korea*35etc. *

Lao PDR
Malaysia
Myanmar
Nepal*6
Philippines*7
Sri Lanka*8
Thailand
Viet Namnote:*1 Rivers and lakes and reservoirs.
*2 There are additional parameters for surface water serving as drinking water sources.
*3 A parameter for the aquatic ecosystem conservation is included under the living environmental standard.
*4 Water quality by grade & biological features of aquatic ecosystem.
*5 Groundwater standards are set for agricultural water, industrial water.
*6 Nepal sets water quality standards for different water use objectives. Standards for recreation and those for aquatic ecosystems were established.
*7 There are two types of standards for surface water- standards for toxins and other conventional parameters.
*8 Awaiting for approval of ambient water quality standards.

Legend:Human health

Living environment

Ecosystem/Biodiversity

One typeetc.

OthersWater Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report9

no ambient water quality standards either, but its
Central Environment Authority (CEA) has set forth
proposals, which are also used for water quality
evaluation.
Time-bound specific targets are set out in China,
Indonesia, Republic of Korea, and Viet Nam, andperiodical reviews are conducted. Cambodia, Sri
Lanka and Thailand have developed national water
environmental (or pollution control) plans andstrategies with specific time spans (Sri Lanka andIntroduction of Environmental
Impact Assessment
in Partner Countries

1970s: Japan, Malaysia, the Philippines
1980s: China, Indonesia, Korea
1990s: Cambodia, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Viet Nam
2000s: Lao PDR

Measures to ensure implementationand compliance
Monitoring of ambient water quality is essential
to knowing whether quality standards are being met
and also to evaluate policy and any measures taken.
Ambient water quality monitoring is conducted on a
project basis or for specific purposes (e.g., irrigation
or drinking water) such as in Nepal, Myanmar and
Sri Lanka. Other countries have regular monitoring
systems especially for rivers but the number ofmonitoring points, parameters and monitoring
frequency differ from country to country dependingon needs and institutional and financial capacity.
The factors of capacity and finances for monitoring,storage and maintaining ambient water quality data
are often pointed out as key challenges.

‘‘ Bolster the scientific basis of policy making,such as through effective monitoring systems
within limited budgets and improvements to’’data storage systems.

(WEPA Message 2012*)

In many countries the state of water quality is mainly
reported to the general public via annually published10

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

Thailand), but not necessarily with specific numericaltargets. In Japan, which has no specific plans or
strategies for water environmental management,
time-bound and specific targets are established forcertain water bodies under a total pollution load
control system.
The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is
used in most countries, particularly for industrial
and development activities with potentially highenvironmental impact, to prevent pollution.

environmental quality reports. The Water Quality
Index (WQI) is used for evaluation of overall statusof water quality in some countries, such as China,
Malaysia and Thailand and the methods used for
WQI calculation are decided by each country. Other
countries performing annual assessments of water
quality (Japan, Republic of Korea, Philippines andViet Nam) use specific parameters to represent water
quality (e.g., BOD or COD for organic pollution).
In some countries, such as China, Republic ofKorea and Thailand, the public can view real-timemonitoring data on a website, which is updated bylive feeds from monitoring stations.
All countries have set national effluent standards:
China, Lao PDR, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Thailand andViet Nam have set industrial effluent standards
according to the type of industry; Cambodia’s vary
according to proximity of pollution sources tosensitive environmental or ecosystem conservation
areas; those of China, Indonesia, Lao PDR,
Malaysia and Sri Lanka were introduced or revised
since 2000 to strengthen effluent management;
Japan and Republic of Korea introduced a system
to control total pollution loads in specific water
bodies in addition to effluent control via pollutant
concentration; and Myanmar has effluent guidelines

for the industrial sector but has no standards for
effluent from domestic and agricultural sectors at thenational level.

‘‘ Review laws, regulations, and setting ofstandards in consideration of socio-economic
conditions and the current state of the water
environment, such as effluent standards taking
into account the structure of industries andquality of effluents.

’’(WEPA Message 2012*)

In the implementation stage, various measures toensure compliance are used. The introduction of
economic instruments such as Viet Nam’s wastewater
discharge fee is an area of growing interest for many
partner countries.

‘‘ Stipulate ‘the polluter pays’ principle in water
quality management and utilise market-based’’

instruments as an incentive for compliance.
(WEPA Message 2012*)

Inspections and penalties play an important role inaddressing non-compliance. Systems for inspection,
governmental guidance and penalties are in place incountries which set effluent standards. Monitoringof effluent quality is necessary to check on levelsof compliance with standards. Despite obligations
on owners or managers of pollution sources andwastewater treatment facilities to monitor effluent
quality, this is not comprehensively carried out inall countries and results sometimes do not reach theintended authorities. In Cambodia and Sri Lanka
the central government conducts monitoring at sites
suspected of discharging high concentrations ofeffluent; in Republic of Korea, centralised monitoringof effluent using tele-metering was introduced
for pollution sources (industries and domestic
wastewater treatment facilities) exceeding certain
volumes; Malaysia introduced an on-line reporting
system for industry to self-report effluent monitoring
results through a website; and in Japan, recordingof monitoring results became mandatory under arevision to the Water Pollution Control Law in 2010.

Institutional Arrangements
Roles of national and local government in water
quality management differ in respective WEPA
partner countries. In general, national government
sets overall goals, targets and rules and local
government implement them. Duplication and weak
coordination among relevant ministries and line
agencies in different sectors but related to water
quality management are ongoing issues for thepartner countries. Capacity development of local
governments is also a common challenge.
Local government is assumed to handle local
water environmental management in many countries.
Now a new concept termed ‘basin management’ isincorporated in water environmental management
in some countries. In Viet Nam, for example, abasin level management plan covering water quality
aspects in three major river basins is underway; in
the Philippines, “water quality management areas”(under the Clean Water Act) have been created,which are designated by hydrological instead of
administrative boundaries.

‘‘ Promote institutional and technical capacity
building of organizations in charge of water
environmental management at national andlocal levels. Strengthen local managementof the water environment such throughthe establishment of water environmental
management strategies and action plans at’’

the basin level.

(WEPA Message 2012*)

To incorporate the basin management concept andfurther raise the water quality of water bodies,
all countries identified the need for stakeholder
participation and awareness raising, and somealready include stakeholder participation in theirpolicy processes.

‘‘ Promote participation of the private sector,
civil society and communities in water
management and improve environmental’’

awareness.

(WEPA Message 2012*)* WEPA Message 2012=”Message from WEPA: Water Quality Challenges in Asia for a Sustainable Future” from WEPA Outlook on Water Environmental
Management (http://www.wepa-db.net/pdf/1203outlook/01.pdf) pp.6-8.

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report11Recent Developments andFuture Challenges
All WEPA countries have attempted to strengthen
their water environmental management systems
over the past decade. The “WEPA Outlook on
Water Environmental Management 2012 (WEPA
Outlook 2012)” (refer to http://www.wepa-db.net/
pdf/1203outlook/01.pdf ) identified the following key
developments common to all partner countries:
1) Strengthening of effluent management,
including setting up and revisions to effluent
standards and introduction of wastewater
charges2) Attempt to Introduce of a framework for river
basin management embracing aspects of water
quality conservation)
3 Incorporation of concerns surrounding
ecosystem conservation
In terms of developments over the past decade, allcountries have taken up the challenge of dealing withwater quality management issues at the domestic
level. In sum, a framework for water environmental
management has already been established in mostof the WEPA partner countries, leaving the issue of
how to ensure implementation to be resolved. The

following points were identified by WEPA Outlook
2012 as implementation challenges requiring further
information and exchanges of knowledge.
1) Legislation and Organisation: Detailed systems,
rules and capacities to implement a legislative
framework should be developed.
2) Data and Information: Ensuring monitoring of
ambient water quality and effluent, and keeping
records of the results. Capacity development ofstaff and budget issues are challenges. Sharing
mechanisms among different organisations arecommon issues.
3) Organisational arrangements: Coordination
among relevant water related organisations andcapacity of management at the local level are
key issues for effective management.
4) Water quality management at the basin
level: Conventional water environmental
management is based on administrative
boundaries, but many countries in the region
now incorporate the new concept of river basin
management into water policy or strategies.
Therefore, managing the water environment at
the basin level is an important challenge in thenear future. Stakeholder involvement is also
key in this field.

‘‘ Significant time and resources must be invested to improve water quality and restore aquatic
ecosystems once destroyed. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance to strengthen water quality
management in areas where water environmental deterioration has been observed, and to promoteand ensure development and implementation of water environmental management at regional,
national and local levels without delay in order to minimize the impacts of human activities on’’

the water environment. The key to our sustainable future is ensuring a sound water environment.
(WEPA Message 2012*)* WEPA Message 2012=”Message from WEPA: Water Quality Challenges in Asia for a Sustainable Future” from WEPA Outlook on Water Environmental
Management (http://www.wepa-db.net/pdf/1203outlook/01.pdf) pp.6-8.

12

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final ReportDomestic Wastewater Treatment in Asia

Why Treat Domestic Wastewater?
Along with population growth and improvement inquality of life in the WEPA countries, there has beena remarkable increase in the amount of water used
for domestic purposes. In primarily urban areas in the
Asian region, there have been numerous examples
reported of untreated or improperly treated domestic
wastewater being discharged into public reservoirs,
causing water pollution. As the domestic sector
accounts for the greater part of the BOD load in mostcountries and catchment areas, there is an urgent
need in the region to prevent such water pollution via
treatment of domestic wastewater.
BOD load of domestic wastewater
Figure 1 shows the distribution of pollution
sources of BOD in domestic wastewater in Japan.
Accordingly, the per capita daily amount of BOD

load discharged from the laundry and kitchen isapproximately 70% of the total BOD load. It isevident that the impact of grey water on the water
environment is considerable – hence the demand in
the Asian region to prevent water pollution throughtreatment of domestic wastewater.

Current Situation of Domestic
Wastewater Treatment in Asia
Asian countries, particularly in urban areas, tend tofavour centralised treatment under aerobic conditions
by sewerage treatment plants, or individual treatment
under anaerobic conditions via septic tanks. In
answer to this, many countries, especially thosewith urgent needs and with low sewerage treatment
coverage, are establishing national plans to develop
domestic wastewater treatment facilities withspecific targets.

Other 23%

total BOD
40g/day

Kitchen 45%

Toilet 32%

Figure 1. BOD load from different sources of domestic wastewater in Japan(Source: See References)

14

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final ReportSewerage Treatment Coverage（％）

Centralised approach
Aerobic sewerage treatment is typically the method
used to treat domestic wastewater, particularly inurban areas of Asian countries. Figure 2 shows
the latest sewerage treatment coverage rates fordomestic wastewater in WEPA countries. As a resultof investment, the sewerage treatment coverage in

the Republic of Korea and Japan currently exceeds
75%; the rate in Malaysia (peninsular Malaysia andmunicipalities only) and urban areas of China falls in
the 60–70% range and Thailand’s coverage rate falls
in the vicinity of 20%. In comparison, the seweragetreatment coverage rate is less than 5% in other
WEPA countries.

100
80

Sewerage Treatment Coverage(Black Water and Grey Water)

60* Chinese data is only for urban area**Except in Saba h and Sawawak province

40
20
0

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)*
**
of )
08
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
0)
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
ic 009
1
l
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
b (2
(2
l(
( 20
a
a
d
ia
ar
es
pu a
a
an
DR
di
pa
am
nk
an
es
m
in
in
P
e
l
o
sia
Re ore
a
i
N
ap
n
n
p
h
y
b
J
L
N
a
o
C
K
i
et
ya
m
do
ilip
La
Th
ala
Sr
Vi
M
In
Ca
M
Ph

Country (Year)

Figure 2. Service coverage rates of sewerage treatment in WEPA countries(Source: See References)On-site treatment (Septic Tank)
In areas without access to sewerage treatment
services, on-site treatment using individual septic
tanks is common, especially in urban areas. Table 1
illustrates the coverage rate in selected countries andcities. While data is not complete for all countries,
in general it can be seen that in countries where
coverage rates of sewerage treatment are low, thecoverage rate for septic tanks is particularly high inurban areas.
Treatment using individual septic tanks has issues
in the respect of prevention of water pollution.
One issue is the BOD removal rate of septic tanktreatment, which is 30-60% based on results fromseveral studies. This rate is lower than the removal

rate of sewerage with aeration. In addition, septic
tanks in some Asian countries treat only black water;
grey water, which has a high BOD pollution load, isdischarge untreated.
Table 1. Septic tank coverage rate in selectedareas/countries
Country

Viet Nam

Year

2008

Area

Coverage Rate (%)

National Average

41

Urban Area

79

Rural Area

26

Malaysia

2010

National Average

21

Philippines

2010

Manila71

Sri Lanka

N/A

Kandy

87
(Source: See References)

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report15Issues Surrounding Centralised
Approach for Domestic Wastewater
Treatment in Asia

plants, which are more costly than septic tanks, is notan economically feasible option in these countries.

Huge construction cost
In order to mitigate and prevent water pollution,
domestic wastewater, including both grey water andblack water, should be adequately treated by highperformance treatment processes with effective
pollution removal rates, especially in areas without
access to sewerage treatment. However, according toUnited Nations data (UNDP 2006), the constructionof sewage treatment plants is two to three times morecostly than the installation of septic tanks. In fact, anexamination of the relationship between the coverage
ratio for sewerage treatment in WEPA countries
and per capita GDP (see figure 3) reveals a certain
positive correlation. In most Asian countries where
the coverage ratio for sewerage treatment is still low,
the per capita GDP remains below 4,000 USD, thus
the construction of large-scale sewage treatment

Operational issues of centralised system
Operational issues of sewerage treatment plants
following construction and entering operational stages
have been reported in some Asian countries. Cases
have been observed where residents not wishing to
pay sewage fees do not connect to the service despite
living in the coverage area. Accordingly, inflow
falls short of the treatment capacity. Moreover, theinability to collect sewage treatment fees from mosttreatment plant users in Thailand has resulted in theuse of public finances from local governments tocover operational costs. In recent years, more regional
governments have called for more to be done forthe collection of sewage treatment fees, and central
governments are working on setting regulations on
procedures to enable such to take place. Nevertheless,many difficulties remain in the actual collection ofthese fees.

Sewerage Treatment ratio (%)
100
Republic of Korea
80

China*Japan
Malaysia**

60

40
Thailand20

Philippines, Indonesia, Viet Nam, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka
0

10,00020,00030,00040,00050,000GDP per Capita (curent-USD)* Sewerage treatment ratio of China is only for urban area**Sewerage treatment ratio of Malaysia is except for Sabah and Sawawak province

Figure 3. Relationship between sewerage treatment coverage rate and GDP per capita in WEPA countries(Source: See References)

16

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final ReportPotential of Decentralised
Approach as Alternative toCentralised Treatment
It should be noted that a decentralised approach is
being actively employed in WEPA countries as analternative to centralised treatment. While smallscale decentralised sewage treatment plants are
generally constructed in regions with low population
densities, as is common in Japan and rural areas ofChina, a decentralised approach is being employedeven in Malaysia and Manila in the Philippines. In
addition to governmental sectors, there are various
actors involved in decentralised domestic wastewater
management in the Asian region, including individual
households, communities and the private sector.
On-site management by individual households(Johkasou)
In Japan, an on-site treatment system named
Johkasou is widely used for domestic wastewater
treatment, especially in regions with low population
densities. The system is currently used by 10% of
the population. Because it was realised that grey
water had a negative on the environment, making
new installations of Johkasou that only treat black
water is now prohibited by law. An anaerobic filter
contact aeration process is utilised in most current
Johkasou systems, which is designed to reduce BOD
load in inflow by 90% and produce effluent of lessthan 20mg/L BOD level. In principle, individual
households have the responsibility to install andmanage the systems; however, due to limitationsof individual households in terms of technologicalcapacity and finances, Japan has established agovernmental support system. This is comprised ofstructural standards and technological guidelines forconstruction and operation, and a subsidy system
for installation, as well as an outsourcing system for
installation and management. This governmental
support enables individual households to install andoperate the Johkasou system properly.

Community-based management
In many regions of Asia, due to social conditions
such as low household income levels and little
public awareness, the necessary preconditions fordomestic wastewater treatment facilities are lacking,which has resulted in issues such as the previously
mentioned low sewerage connection and service feecollection rates coming to light. In order to addressthese problems, Indonesia has attempted to improve
public awareness by garnering participation fromlocal residents from the planning stages in regions
where domestic wastewater treatment facilities
are planned. A programme entitled SANIMAS has
been in operation since 2006. Participation fromresidents is elicited from planning stages, and theselection of project sites and technologies, alongwith creating community action plans, is conductedalong with local residents. Engaging in construction
and operational management based on this planis designed to prompt voluntary participation ofresidents in domestic wastewater management.
Communities participating in the project havesteadily increased; domestic wastewater treatment
facilities have been constructed in 395 locations in
22 provinces over the four-year period from 2006
to 2009 and are being operated and managed byresidents.

Photo: Community involvement in construction of small-scaledomestic wastewater treatment plant in Indonesia (SANMAS)(source: BORDA)

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report17

Private sector involvement in decentralised
domestic wastewater management
Private companies in the Philippines and Malaysia
carry out the operation of sewage treatment plants
to ensure they are operating efficiently. In 1997, theMetropolitan Water Works and Sewerage System(MWSS) in the Philippines, which has jurisdiction
over waterworks and sewerage projects in the Manila
metropolitan area, entered a concession agreementwith the private companies of Manila Water andMaynilad Water Services for the construction andmanagement of domestic wastewater treatment in
the eastern and western districts of this area. In 1993,
the Sewerage Services Act was enacted in Malaysia
to give jurisdiction to the central government for
sewerage services which had hitherto been managed
by the state governments. Concurrently, the privatecompany of Indah Water Konsortium (IWK)
was established to operate the sewerage projects,
and in that same year the government entered aconsignment contract with IWK for the operationof sewage treatment plants in the country. Thus,
nearly all public sewage treatment plants on the
Malay Peninsula are operated by IWK. Furthermore,a private company called Majaari Services wasestablished in 2009 in the state of Kelantan on the
Malay Peninsula to conduct operations of sewage
treatment plants. Currently, the operation of sewage
treatment plants by private companies in Manila
and Malaysia is progressing smoothly. At thetime of its establishment in 1993, the Indah Water
Konsortium (IWK) was a self-sustaining privatecompany. However, it failed to collect sufficientsewage treatment fees to run the company, thus sevenyears later in 2000 the company was nationalised

18

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Reportand operations are presently conducted with funds
from the Ministry of Finance. The 2009 financial
report of IWK shows that of the 723 million MYR
annual income, income from sewage treatment fees
was limited to approximately 60%, or 434 million
MYR. Funding from the Ministry of Financeaccounted for approximately 35%, or 250 million
MYR. In this manner, for other regions of Asia as
well, considerable potential may exist in the option
to operate sewage treatment plants by involving
private companies. However, there is the potential
for dilemmas to arise that cannot be dealt with byprivate companies alone, particularly in the grey area
between appropriate general sewage treatment fees
and those that take into account the financial statusof residents. As is evident in the case of Malaysia,
ensuring sufficient operational costs are coveredand securing funding from a public institution are
indispensable to the sustained operation of sewage
treatment plants.
Lessons Learnt from Practices of Domestic
Wastewater Treatment in Asia
Appropriate technologies should be chosen basedon natural and socio-economic conditions and levelof development, etc. at the site.
In order to encourage proper installation andoperation, regulations alone are not sufficient.
Governmental support for technologicalstandardisation, financing, outsourcing andeducation is needed.
Proper operation and maintenance, including
charging and periodical monitoring, are required
for sustainable management of domestic
wastewater treatment systems.

References
Boyer, James A., and C.A. Rock. 1992. “Performance of Septic Tanks.” Proceedings of 7th Northwest On-Site Wastewater
Treatment Short Course and Equipment Exhibition. Seattle.
DENR-EMB (Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Environmental Management Bureau) et al.. 2005.
Philippines Sanitation Sourcebook and Decision Aid. http://esa.un.org/iys/docs/san_lib_docs/Philippines_sanitation.
pdf. Accessed 18 February 2012
Indah Water Konsortium Sdn Bhd. 2009. Sustainability Report 2008-2009. http://www.iwk.com.my/pdf/CSR%20
2009%20.pdf. Accessed 14 March 2014
Japan Sewage Works Association. 1984. Gesuido Shisetsu Keikaku Sekkei Shishin to Kaisetsu 1984 nenban (Guideline forPlan and Design of Sewerage Works, 1984). Tokyo.
Seabloom, Robert W., D.A. Carlson, and J. Engeset. 1982. “Septic Tank Performance, Compartmentation, Efficiency
and Stressing.” Proceedings of 4th Northwest On-Site Wastewater Disposal Short Course. University of Washington,
Seattle.
UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 2006. Human Development Report 2006. New York.
WEPA (Water Environment Partnership in Asia). 2012. WEPA Database of technologies in operation. http://www.wepa-db.
net/technologies/top.htm, Accessed 18 February 2012
Figure 1. BOD load from different sources of domestic wastewater in JapanMoEJ (Ministry of the Environment of Japan). (n.d.). Night Soil Treatment and Decentralized Wastewater Treatment
System in Japan. Tokyo.
Figure 2. Service coverage rates of sewerage treatment in WEPA countries

China
Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of China.2012. Report on the State of the Environment in
China 2010 (in Chinese). http://zls.mep.gov.cn/hjtj/qghjtjgb/201201/t20120118_222703.htm. Accessed 18 February 2012.
Japan
Ministry of the Environment of Japan. 2010. Heisei 21 Nendo no Shorishisetsu betsu Osui Shori Jinko Fukyuu Jyokyo(Population Coverage with Access to Domestic Wastewater Treatment Facility at the end of FY 2009 by Type of Treatment
Facility. Tokyo.
Republic of Korea
Ministry of Environment of Republic of Korea.2009. ECOREA Environmental Review 2008. Gyeonggi-do.
Malaysia
The Malaysian Water Association.2011.Malaysia Water Industry Guide 2011. Kuala Lumpur
Thailand
Wangwongwatnana, Supat. 2010. “Presentation at International Conference on Construction and Environment” Tokyo,
Japan, 4 February
Other Countries
Estimated by the WEPA Secretariat based on the information provided by each WEPA country.

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report19

Table 1. Septic tank coverage rate in selected areas/countries

Malaysia
The Malaysian Water Association. 2011. Malaysia Water Industry Guide2011. Kuala Lumpur.
Philippines
Leonor C. Cleofas. 2011. “Pollution Reduction Program in Metro Manila: Sewerage and Sanitation Master Plan of
MWSS.” Presentation at 6th Regional Training Workshop on Integrated River Basin and Coastal Area Management,
Dalian, China. 20 May.
Sri Lanka

Hidenori Harada. 2001. Asia 9 Toshi ni Okeru Mizu Eisei Kankyo Kanri Seiyaku Joken no Ruikeika to Kaizen Tejunno Sakutei ni Muketa Torikumi (Categorization of Constraint Conditions for Management of Sanitation and Water
Environment in nine Asian cities and Formulation of Improvement Strategies). Gekkyan Jokasou. No. 424: 21-24.
Viet Nam
General Statistics Office of Viet Nam. 2008. Results of the survey on household living standards 2008. http://www.gso.gov.
vn/default_en.aspx?tabid=515&idmid=5&ItemID=9647. Accessed 18 February 2012.
Figure 3. Relationship between sewerage treatment coverage rate and GDP per capita in WEPA countries[Data for GDP per capita]
Word Bank. 2012. World Bank Indicators. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator. Accessed 18 February 2012.
[Data for sewage treatment ratio]
China
Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of China.2012. Report on the State of the Environment in
China 2010 (in Chinese). http://zls.mep.gov.cn/hjtj/qghjtjgb/201201/t20120118_222703.htm. Accessed 18 February 2012.
Japan
Ministry of the Environment of Japan. 2010. Heisei 21 Nendo no Shorishisetsu betsu Osui Shori Jinko Fukyuu Jyokyo(Population Coverage with Access to Domestic Wastewater Treatment Facility at the end of FY 2009 by Type of Treatment
Facility. Tokyo.
Republic of Korea
Ministry of Environment of Republic of Korea.2009. ECOREA Environment Review 2008 Korea. Gyeonggi-do.
Malaysia
The Malaysian Water Association.2011.Malaysia Water Industry Guide 2011. Kuala Lumpur
Thailand
Wangwongwatnana, Supat. 2010. “Presentation at International Conference on Construction and Environment.” Tokyo,
Japan, 4 February.
Other Countries
Estimated by the WEPA Secretariat based on the information provided by each WEPA country.

20

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

21

Domestic Wastewater Treatment in Asia

Messages from Partners

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?
My major direct responsibilities areto formulate policy planning, action
planning, monitoring, and also to seek
appropriate technologies and conduct
or suggest research on new pollution
control technologies. I am in charge ofdeveloping appropriate methods andmeans to promote and maintain water
quality, including control, prevention
and solution to environmental problems
caused by domestic wastewater, as well as
establishing effluent standards in order tocontrol domestic wastewater discharge.

Q2. How do you observe the impactof domestic wastewater to water
environment and the state of domestic
wastewater treatment in your country?
In Thailand, water pollution is a major
pollution problem which has become
more severe due to an increase inpopulation and industrial factories inline with economic growth. Deteriorationof water quality in major rivers, such as
Chao Phraya River, still remains. Based on
important parameters indicating water
quality, the major cause of deteriorated
water conditions was an increase in the
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) value,
mainly due to municipal sewage as wellas wastewater from other activities suchas industrial and agricultural activities.
Wastewater from these activities was
released into water resources without
treatment.
The main cause of deteriorated water
quality was municipal wastewater thatwas not sufficiently treated because there
were only 100 wastewater treatment
plants around the country. Promotion ofwastewater treatment plants is still oneof the challenges in domestic wastewater
management in Thailand. There are many
problems related to financial support
for the construction, operation andmaintenance of wastewater treatment

22

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Reportfacilities, including collected wastewater
treatment fees. Presently government
policy is promoting a decentralized
system by enhancing the installation ofeffective on-site system to treat both
black and grey water, and increasing
the construction of cluster wastewater
treatment systems because construction
costs are lower and management is easier.

Q3. What is the benefit of WEPA for
you or your country to be a partner?
WEPA is a good forum which allows
partner countries to share and discuss
their experiences on technology andwastewater management situations
through workshops and site visits,
including identifying potential solutions
to improve domestic wastewater
management system in Asian countries.
WEPA is also the best source to provide a
database on the status and managementof domestic wastewater in each WEPA
partner country and knowledge to all
those interested in water environmental
issues.

Q4. How do you think WEPA
contributed to the improvement ofdomestic wastewater treatment
in your country?
A series of WEPA workshops on domestic
wastewater treatment enhanced theknowledge on domestic wastewater
management and administration,
including wastewater treatment facility

installation through sharing othercountries’ experiences. The lessons
learned such as management framework,
technology, law enforcement strategies
and economic instrument (incentives),
helped us to develop the Domestic
Wastewater Management Plan in Thailand.
The plan is currently under preparation for
the improvement of water environmental
management in Thailand.

Q5. What is your expectation for
WEPA?
I would like to expect that WEPA will
be of great help in the area of sharing
experience, ideas for solutions andextending collaboration on domestic
wastewater management including
other environmental issues among thepartner countries. I further expect thatWEPA will be a very good venue forpartner countries to discuss thoroughlyon the feasibility approach and how
we can improve domestic wastewater
management by setting up and using
frameworks/guidelines to guide
administrative actions and decisions ineach country. Knowledge-sharing forsolutions should be further promoted
under WEPA through issue-based groupmeetings among countries with similar
problems. I also expect that my knowledge
will be enhance to develop good insight in
the field of technology and management
strategies and I hope that this will leadto formulating the Domestic Wastewater
Management Plan for Thailand.

Wilasinee Saktaywin
Environmentalist
Pollution Control Department
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

ThailandQ4. How WEPA contributed to theimprovement of domestic wastewater
treatment in your country?

Mark Tom Mulingbayan
Department Head
Environment Department
Manila Water Company

Philippines

Mark Tom Mulingbayan is an expert who participated in the WEPA meetings as anexpert on domestic wastewater and shared the experiences of Manila Water Company
in domestic wastewater management.

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?
Our office attends to environmental legal
compliance of all projects and operating
facilities of the company (including
subsidiaries) and takes an active role inplanning and implementing environmental
sustainability initiatives whose objectives
align with business goals while developing
the environmental champion in all ourinternal and external stakeholders.

Q2. What is benefits to participate in
WEPA?
WEPA allows us to benchmark our current
performance with our industry peers
across the region, and allows us to pickup best practices and lessons learned
from them, while at the same time, it
gives us the opportunity to share our own
learnings and successes in implementing
our own water quality improvement andwastewater management program.

24

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

Q3. How do you observe the impactof domestic wastewater to water
environment and the state of domestic
wastewater treatment in your country?
Numerous studies on the total organic
pollution in the Philippines indicate that
more than 50% of the total pollution
originates from domestic sources.
Majority of the cities and municipalities
in the country currently have very low
service coverage in terms of sewerage,
and the investments in sanitation aredisproportionately low compared
to investments in water supply. The
typical sanitation scheme in Filipino
households uses septic tanks for black
water with literally no capture andtreatment of greywater. It is no surprisethat many waterways, not just in theurbanized areas, suffer from excessive
organic pollution and coliform levels.
The Clean Water Act of 2004 requires
local governments and water utilities todevelop their own sewerage and septage
management plans but currently very few
cities have an actual master plan with realprojects in the pipeline.

Our involvement in WEPA allowed us aclose look into the details of wastewater
service expansion challenges of our peers
across the region and validated some of
the challenges we faced in Metro Manila.
For example, Thailand encountered low
BOD in their influents to their sewage
facilities and in the early years of operation
suffered from underutilization – key
issues that we in Manila also encounteredand have had difficulty explaining toregulators. This has led us to commission
full blown studies to adequately
investigate these phenomena with theintention of either avoiding the sameplanning issues again, or at the very least
understand the localized fundamentals
in the wastewater scene in Southeast
Asia that may be different from that ofWestern countries. In the discussions wehave had with our peers, it also became
apparent that the way public utilities are
regulated is pretty much the same as thatof private industries; the unique nature of
public water utilities obviously needs to betaken into consideration especially whenit comes to performance expectations andtechnical regulation.

Q4. What is your expectation for
WEPA?
It is our wish that the partnerships
established within WEPA be sustained foryears to come, that we welcome morestrategic partners into the fold in the near
future, and that the program be expanded
to incorporate more capacity building
and benchmarking initiatives that result
in better, more responsive policies withparticular focus on the public water utility
sector, and out-of-the-box approaches thatyield measurable improvements on the
ground in the communities that we serve.

Q1. How have you been involved in
WEPA activities?

practice to solve the water environmental
problems in the future for Thailand.

I conducted a study on the management
framework of decentralized domestic
wastewater treatment system in Thailand.
The study aims to assess the current
situation of decentralized domestic
wastewater treatment system appliedin the country. The study included
three main tasks, which are collectionof baseline information, field surveys
including questionnaire surveys with local
residence, and interviews with relevant
stakeholders, such as governmental
agencies, local government and NGOs
responsible for decentralized domestic
wastewater management. I then presented
the output of the study at the WEPA
international workshop in Cambodia heldin 2013.

Q3. What are the good points of
WEPA for you or your country?

Q2. How do you observe the impactof domestic wastewater on the water
environment and the state of domestic
wastewater treatment in your country?
Canals and rivers in Thailand are receiving
pollutants from industrial, agriculturaland domestic wastewater. The highest
proportion of wastewater quantity and
BOD loading is from the domestic sector.
Based on my own observation of canals
located in urban areas, where I could
still see that wastewater is being directly
discharged into the canals, the water
quality is worse than in previous years.
This trend is endorsed by a report by
the Pollution Control Department. If weconsider high construction costs andlimited land availability for centralized
wastewater treatment systems,
decentralized domestic wastewater
treatment will be the best available

For me, WEPA really opened my eyes
to another point of view. Technicalresearchers, including myself, usually focus
on how to develop advanced treatment
technologies. However, the management
aspect is also significantly important.
I have learnt that, even if advanced
technology is developed and put to use inwater environmental management, it will
not produce the maximum benefit without
good governance. For my country, beinga partner of WEPA is beneficial in termof knowledge sharing across the region
through databases.

Q4. How did you utilize theknowledge/information/network you got
from WEPA for the improvement of thewater environmental management
in your country?
WEPA databases provide useful
information related to policy andtechnologies adopted in the Asian region.
Government officials can share and learn
for improvement of their strategies.

For me, it was also beneficial to get
information about decentralized domestic
wastewater management system in Japanthat was shared through WEPA activities.
If we can set up both the technology
and management appropriate for eachcountry, and then provide a condensed
form of this information to the public, we
can achieve a better water environment.
It is vital to raise public awareness andconcern on these issues to ensure theysucceed.

Q5. What is your expectation for
future activities of WEPA?
The data or information provided in
the WEPA database is only one form ofcommunication. Since users may wantto access the desired information faster,
there needs to be a system to filter orscreen information. A system to transfer
the information into knowledge is also
important. I believe that WEPA could be
one of the most important driving forces
to encourage governments to move
forward and take further actions for rapid
improvement of the water environment,.
This could be achieved if the WEPA
mission went beyond information andknowledge sharing through the WEPA
database.

Suwanna Kitpati Boontanon
Assistant Professor
Civil and Environmental Engineering
Faculty of Engineering, Mahidol University

ThailandWater Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report25

Leonor C. Cleofas
Deputy Administrator for Engineering and Operations
Engineering and Operations Department
Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS)

Philippines

The mandate of my organization is toprovide potable water, sewerage andsanitation services to the whole Metro
Manila, Province of Rizal and portion of
the Province of Cavite with a populationof about 15 million, and to do it in anaffordable and equitable manner. In
1997, MWSS invited the private sector tohelp with the delivery of these services.
I am mainly responsible for overseeing
the implementation of the MWSS Master
Plan by the two concessionaires of
MWSS, Manila Water Company for the
East Zone and Maynilad Water Services
for the West Zone. I am also responsiblefor developing policy directions forapproval by the Board of Trustees.
Based on reports, domestic
wastewater is the biggest source of water

26

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

pollution of water bodies especiallyin urban areas. In the Philippines,
the focus for the past few years had
been the provision of water supply.
For wastewater, the Sanitation Coderequires that households should haveon-site treatment facility, in the form of
septic tanks. However, implementationof this requirement has not been fully
effected, resulting in some households
directly discharging wastewater into theenvironment. In addition, most septic
tanks are improperly designed and not
regularly emptied, thereby reducing
their treatment efficiency. As theeffluent from even the well-constructed

and well-maintained septic tanks still
does not meet the effluent standards
imposed by the regulatory body, theDepartment of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR), additional treatment
is necessary. In the case of Metro Manila
and its neighboring areas, the strategy
is to install interceptor pipes to convey
wastewater from the drainage pipes(which collect/receive the effluent
from the septic tanks) and divert thewastewater to sewage treatment plants
prior to discharge to water bodies. A
master plan to cover the entire service
area with sewage treatment plants is
expected to be implemented. In addition,
desludging or removal of the solids
of septic tanks especially in areas still
unserved by sewage treatment plants
is continuously undertaken through theseptage management program. The
septage (highly polluted wastewater
removed from septic tanks) is thenprocessed/treated in septage treatment
plants.

For areas outside Metro Manila, theirrespective water service providers and/or
the local government units are mandated
to undertake domestic wastewater
management programs/projects. A
national master plan has already beendrafted and a government subsidy forpriority areas has been made available.
Capacity building to implement projects
and determining local counterpart fundsources are steps in the initial stages for
implementation.
With the enactment of the Clean
Water Act in 2004 and the Supreme
Court of the Philippines mandamus
decision in 2008 requiring that thedifferent agencies that have a mandate
for maintaining the water quality of Metro
Manila should perform their functions,focus is now given to addressing not only
the domestic source of pollution, but theother sources as well.
Being part of WEPA reinforces
commitment for water pollution
prevention. WEPA convenes partners to
get together and exchange/share policies
and best practices and technology.
The sharing of regulations and policies
results in a domino effect, becauseof the tendency to keep up with theother member countries in terms ofenvironmental protection. WEPA binds/
unites the partner countries to advancewater pollution strategies for the benefitof the succeeding generations.

I expect that WEPA can get thecommitment of member countries
towards water pollution prevention. It
can assist other countries to implement
regulatory frameworks and to develop
the technical capability to identify andimplement solutions/strategies. It canserve as a catalyst to harmonize or
standardize environmental policies,
regulations and standards of the partnercountries in Asia, similar to what theEuropean Union is doing. If possible,
WEPA can manage funding from donors
to financially and technically assist in
project development and implementationof pilot projects.

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report27Industrial Wastewater Management

Industrial wastewater has been identified as oneof the major causes of water pollution in WEPA
countries, although its load on water bodies differsfrom country to country. With the aim of preventing
or mitigating such water pollution, all WEPA
countries have established management systems inefforts to enable control over wastewater discharged
from industry. However, challenges remain in
implementation for many of the countries. A review
of water environmental policies and management
through WEPA second phase activities has identified
the need for information exchange to better facilitate
implementation and ensure enforcement of laws,
regulations and rules with the aim of controlling
the quality of wastewater emitted by the industrial
sector as a whole. Responding to this call, the
WEPA secretariat has conducted a literature review,
sent questionnaire surveys to the WEPA focal
points and also held interviews with policy makers
and water experts on the topic in selected partnercountries since 2011. Findings therefrom have been
disseminated through WEPA meetings.

State of Industrial Wastewater
Management
Industrial wastewater in the region – The
industrial sector is not always the largest contributor
in terms of organic pollution load in WEPA partnercountries such as China, the Philippines, Malaysia
and Thailand (refer to “WEPA Outlook on Water
Environmental Management 2012 (WEPA Outlook2012)”: http://www.wepa-db.net/pdf/1203outlook/01.
pdf ). This is partly because these countries started totackle industrial wastewater from the late 1970s andinto the 80s, by which wastewater from factories –
especially large scale factories and those in industrial
zones – was treated to comply with pollution
control regulations. However, industrial wastewaterremains a major source of water pollution in certain

28

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Reportbasins, where wastewater is emitted without proper
treatment. In addition to organic pollutants, toxic
substances contained in industrial wastewater are ofhigh concern to policymakers in the region.
The Chinese National 11th Five-Year Plan (20062010) has set an obligatory target of reducing COD
emissions by 10% from that of 2005 levels. Since
2006, Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) for
822 construction projects failing to satisfy water
quality control regulations were rejected or suspended.
Also, more than 20,000 firms that have discharged
wastewater not meeting the requirements of theenvironmental protection law were closed down.
(WPEA OUTLOOK 2012)

Laws and regulations – To prevent or mitigate
pollution from untreated or only partly treatedindustrial wastewater, all WEPA partner countries
have legislation in place; most countries have set
up effluent standards that the industrial sector mustcomply with. As different pollutants from different
industrial clusters are involved, some countries
classify effluent standards by type of industry. In
general the environmental line agency (environment
ministry) is in charge of pollution control. However,
the responsibility to control industrial wastewater isalso vested in industrial and economic development
sector agencies in some countries, and this leads tooverlapping responsibilities. For industrial zones or
special economic zones containing agglomerationsof factories, different laws and regulations are often
applied, and instalment of centralized wastewater
treatment facilities is mandated under such laws or
regulations. Different agencies, such as industrial
estate authorities, handle water pollution control insuch special zones in many countries.
In most countries industries are required toprovide notification to designated authorities (atthe national or local level) or apply for approval orpermits therefrom before commencing operations
that discharge effluent, the requirements for whichvary by type and size of industry. The Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) is a tool used to prevent
pollution before the start of operations. For example,
all industries are required to obtain the Environmental
Compliance Certificate, which is issued under the
Decree of Environment Impact Assessment (No112/
PM) for their operations. Cambodia’s Sub-Decree
on Environmental Impact Assessment also requests
all development activities and investments that
require approval from the Council of Development of
Cambodia (CDC) and industries that have obtained
the certificate to follow the monitoring and reporting
requirement of the EIA related guidelines.
For the cases of non-compliance, all countries
already introduced systems for inspection,
governmental guidance and penalties to correct them.
However, such measures against non-complianceare not always effectively implemented for various
reasons, including but not limited to taking a longtime because of procedural deficiency, uncooperative
attitude of companies, and weak penalty. To improveand strengthen deficiency of current non-compliancemeasures, Indonesia, Japan and Viet Nam recently
revised laws/regulations.
The new law (Environment Protection Management
Law No.32 of 2009 of Indonesia) stipulates stricter
administrative and criminal penalties for noncompliance with provisions stipulated in relevantlaws, including environmental standards/criteria andeffluent standards. (WPEA OUTLOOK 2012)

Effluent monitoring – Monitoring of effluent quality
is a key tool to check compliance with effluent
standards at factories. In principle, all owners ofpollution sources are obligated to monitor effluent
quality throughout the WEPA partner counties. In
Korea and Thailand, on-line monitoring of effluent
was introduced for pollution sources with certain
volumes of effluents. On the other hand, monitoring
is not always conducted by the owners or managers
though it is their obligation, and results are notalways stored for easy access or do not reachthe intended authorities. This means authorities

can neither assess the state of compliance nor
effectiveness of any measures taken. Keeping records
of monitoring results was not an obligation placed on
business entities in Japan until a revision to the Water
Pollution Control Law in 2010 mandated the duty ofrecording and storing results, with penalties applied in
the event of non-compliance.

BOX. Questionnaire Survey on Inventories ofIndustrial Wastewater
WEPA discussions have identified that one of
the biggest barriers for effective planning andimplementation of pollution control measures isinsufficient inventory data, including information
or data on the water usage of manufacturing
processes, identification and characteristics ofwastewater sources, corresponding chemicalcompositions, quantities, variations, dischargefrequencies, pollution control measures, complianceinformation and other factors. This data isnecessary not only for effective management but
also to enable choice of appropriate treatment
technologies, and can be used as a baseline for
evaluating the effects of changes in production,water conservation or regulations and even for
national greenhouse gas inventory development.
To assess the extent of such inventory data
developed in the respective countries, WEPA
conducted a questionnaire survey (10 of the 13
countries answered the questionnaire – Cambodia,
China, Laos, Indonesia, Republic of Korea, Nepal,
the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Viet Nam)and interviews (in Indonesia and Thailand). Resultsfrom the survey show that many countries do nothave inventories at the national level, but do forcertain basins or projects. China and Republic ofKorea were able to provide detailed information
based on their records. Nepal and Sri Lanka do
not have inventories of industrial wastewater, but
Sri Lanka’s Central Environment Authority (CEA)
has conducted an industry survey to identify thetypes of industries, location and types of waste
and categorised 44,351 industries depending on
the amounts of pollution they create – high levels,
medium levels and low levels.

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report29

Encouraging industry to comply withregulations – Penal systems are sometimes
ineffective in promoting compliance; instead,governments attempt to do this using other measures.
One of such measures is the PROPER programme(Corporate Environmental Performance Rating
Programme) in Indonesia, which encourages
industries to comply with environmental regulations
by publishing their environmental performance,
including whether they meet designated effluent
qualities or not.
Japan has introduced provisional effluent
standards that are less strict than the original effluent
standards, which are applied to specific industrial
type not meeting the original standards in orderto encourage technical improvements over certain
periods of time. Malaysia also has rules to exempt
the immediate need for compliance with effluent
standards for treatment facilities that are underconstruction or upgrading.

Common challenges – areas requiring
intra-country sharing among
WEPA partners
Through surveys and interviews the following
common challenges among many countries wereidentified, with particular focus on the stage of
implementation affected. The figure on the following
page also shows challenges identified by partnercountries in the procedures to regulate industrial
wastewater.
Deficiency of laws, lack of detailed rules for
implantation: In some cases, different laws andregulations related to industrial wastewater
management have different obligations, which canlead to confusion on the ground. Some countries
need detailed rules or guidelines for
implementation; for example, if there are no
guidelines and industry uses different effluent
monitoring procedures and analytical methods thatmake the assessment of effluent quality data lessreliable and less comparative, and this will create
problems in proving non-compliance.
Weak coordination among agencies: There are aminimum of two ministries (covering

30

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Reportenvironmental and industrial sectors) at thenational level related to industrial wastewater
management, which creates overlapping
responsibilities, weak coordination and conflicts ofinterest (i.e., industrial development vs.
environment conservation) that may negatively
affect implementation in some countries.
Availability of information: Information ofindustries and their wastewater – not only number
and type of industries but also wastewater volume
and quality data – is insufficient in partnercountries, especially in terms of institutionalarrangements covering pollution control only
recently formulated or in countries with as-yet low
levels of industrial activity. In particular,
information of small and medium-sized industries
is difficult to obtain despite the high likelihoodthat they pollute local water bodies. The lack ofsystematically organised and stored inventory data
may prevent effective or strategic planning andimplementation of control measures.
Accessibility of information: Lack of willingness
to share information, as well as lack of
information itself are also barriers for planningand implementation due to the sensitivity
surrounding industrial wastewater management, as
witnessed by the WEPA secretariat in its industry
sector interviews. There is a sense of distrust andparanoia concerning how data will be used, i.e., aworry that data thought confidential may be usedto ‘name and shame’. Further, data sharing
between governmental agencies takes place, which
illustrates weak coordination and can also
complicate data collection by WEPA focal points
in partner countries, as they have to go throughseparate sectoral ministries to obtain it.
Lack of human resources: Lack of humanresources in national and local government toenforce regulations is often pointed out by partnercountries, not only in terms of staffing levels but
also implementational capacity.
Lack of finances: In particular, finances are needed
to establish databases and inventories, as well as
to conduct effluent or ambient water monitoring tocheck on the state of compliance.

Low awareness on environmental
conservation of industries/local people

Duplication of laws andregulations/no detailed rules/
weak punishment systemagainst non-complianceWeakpunishments
Capacity of person in charge inindustrial estates/economic zones
sometimes delays or stalls progress

Weakcoordination
betweenagencies indifferent sectors

Insufficient number
and capacity of
persons in charge

Insufficient numberof staff, technicalknowledge of staff,
or monitoring
facilities

No standards/
official methods tomonitor/measure

Punishment

regulations
No monitoring,no reporting

Notification/
Registration/
Requests for
permits orlicences

Difficult to knowwhether all targetedindustries areregistered (esp. SMEs)

Receive
document/
Approval

Maintainandrecord theinformation/data

No systematicrecords or database

Monitoring
andreporting

Maintainorrecord theinformation

Check/
verificationofreport/effluent

No systematicrecording of theinformation

Improvement
plan

Maintainorrecord theinformation

Guidancefor
noncompliance

Lack ofcooperation
at company

Inspection
Insufficient
staff

Complaints fromlocal people

Action by
government
Action byindustries

Duplication of responsibilities,
weak coordination, etc.

Regulatory Authorities (governments)

Figure. Challenges in Industrial Wastewater Management based on the Interviews and Literature Review

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

Climate Change and the Water Environment

Climate change is one of the drivers of change inwater resources and poses challenges to existingwater management practices (Connor 2009). In the
Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
Panel for Climate Change (IPCC), Working Group II
concluded that “higher water temperatures, increased
precipitation intensity, and longer periods of low
flows exacerbate many forms of water pollution, with
impacts on ecosystems, human health, water system
reliability and operating costs (high confidence)”(Kundzewicz et al. 2007).
In the Asia-Pacific region, events assumed to
be influenced by climate change have alreadyoccurred, and climate change may render a deep,
multi-pronged impact on the water environment.
However, there is not necessarily enough policy
response to address this. In recognition of this,WEPA selected “climate change and the water
environment and possible adaptation options” as
one of its priority topics in the second phase of its
activities, which started in 2009. Specifically, WEPA
initiated information exchange and discussions on
the potential impacts of climate change on water
environments (water quality and aquatic ecosystems)
through WEPA workshops; it also conducted
literature reviews, fact-finding and surveys on the
topic, all of which are publically available on the
WEPA database’s new archive – climate change andthe water environment.

Impact of Climate Change on Water
Quality and Aquatic Ecosystems in
WEPA Countries
The impacts of climate change include higher
water temperatures, which reduce the amount ofdissolved oxygen (DO) in water and thus its ability
to self-purify. The potential increase of water use
for cooling purposes due to atmospheric warming in
the energy sector is also considered another cause of

32

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Reporthigher water temperatures.
Furthermore, changes in patterns, intensity andduration of precipitation also affect water quality.
Intense rainfall over short periods increases theamount of sediment, nutrients and other toxins
in water bodies due to heavy runoff. Changes inpatterns can lead to sporadic supplies of surface
water, raising our reliance and possibly exhausting
supplies of potable groundwater, and also create
health hazards due to arsenic and fluorine in the
groundwater. Rising sea levels is another threat, as
this leads to salt water infiltrating surface and groundfreshwater systems. The impact on human healthand water quality due to flooding of polluted water isalso identified as a potential risk. Aquatic ecosystems
don’t escape either; for example, warmer climates
may threaten wetlands, one of the key habitats for avariety of species, and also lead to blooms of exotic
aquatic species at the expense of indigenous species.
The following figure shows examples of changes
in water environments anticipated to result from or
be escalated by climate change from literature andnews items. Although not all have been scientificallyverified, we have already witnessed some of them.
Studies covering Lake Biwa (Japan) and Lake
Fuxian (China) imply that an increase in wintertemperature may have a higher impact on the water
environment. As reported in the studies, high wintertemperatures reduce the extent of winter mixing,
causing DO depletion in the bottom layer of water
bodies (Kumagai et al. 2003), which leads to ananaerobic state under which the release of pollutantsfrom bottom sediments may be accelerated. Highlevels of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in the
Mekong River and Brantas River (Indonesia) in therainy seasons were reported and attributed to theincreased intensity of precipitation. Increased runoff
due to heavier precipitation carries more pollutantsfrom the land to surface water bodies, resulting in
assimilation of biodegradable organic matter byClimate change impacts
on inland water quality
Exotic tropical fish species appeared in
Korean marine water, such as a large stingray
with a wingspan greater than previously
witnessed, while traditional winter fishes suchas pollack are disappearing. (Jung, 2005).
The Momoge Wetland in theSongnen Plain dried up due tothe recurrent droughts from 1999
to 2001, as well as construction
upstream and improper use ofgroundwater. (Cruz. et al. 2007)

243 lakes in the northern
China disappeared due toclimate change and humanactivities. (Ma et al. 2010)

Republic of
Korea

Japan

Increased water temperature may
hamper winter mixing in Lake Biwa,
causing dissolved oxygen depletionat the bottom layer. Population of anendemic fish species, Chaenogobius
isaza (Isaza) has decreased as a result.
(Kumagai et al. 2003)

China
Severe damage to seaweeds in thewestern coastal area of Kyushu wereobserved, due to longer periods ofactivity of herbivorous fish with recent
rise in winter ocean temperatures.
(Yamaguchi et al. 2010)

Nepal

In Pong River water temperature
showed a similar increasing trendwith ambient temperature.
(Wirojanagud et al. 2007)

MyanmarLao PDR

Philippines

Thailand

Viet Nam

Cambodia

Reduced growth rate of catfish andareas for catfish culture observed in
the mekong delta due to changes inwater level and precipitation patterns.
(Minh et al. 2009)

Sri Lanaka
Malaysia
Massive coral bleaching due tohigher temperature in the Andaman
Sea. (Wapatayotin, 2010)

Almost 90% of corals died in shallow
water near to Jakarta due to anincrease of Java sea temperature.
(Hoeksema and Cleary, undated)Indonesia

In Brantas River, high depth of rainfall
has caused high TSS in the wet
season. (Sarjiya and Nurleili, 2009)aerobic microorganisms using DO.
The expansion of human activities in Asian
countries places more pressure on aquatic ecosystems
and exacerbates climate change. We are also likely
to witness the extinction of a number of species
in tropical areas and semi-enclosed seas by 2050
(McMullen 2009).

Adaptation to the Impacts of
Climate Change – the Necessity ofAmassing Scientific Data
Many participants in the WEPA workshops argued
that insufficient data and information, especiallythe lack of time-series data, presents a barrier to

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

incorporating climate change concerns into water
environment policies. Thus, in 2010, the WEPA
secretariat conducted a survey on the state of longterm data for atmospheric/water temperature andwater quality, which are key to studying climatechange impacts on the water environment. Thissurvey was conducted through WEPA focal points
to reveal both how many monitoring points haverecorded data on atmospheric/water temperature andwater quality for over 10 years to date and the typesof parameters used for water quality (refer to “WEPA
Outlook on Water Environmental Management2012” for more details: http://www.wepa-db.net/
pdf/1203outlook/01.pdf )Results from survey show that many WEPA
partner countries have insufficient (i.e., less than
10 years) long-term data on water temperature
and water quality, which are needed to understandtrends and correlations in changes thereof; and little
data especially on lakes/reservoirs and estuaries/
coastal areas. Moreover, the survey found that watertemperature/quality monitoring is not conducted
regularly in some WEPA partner countries, and manyof the partner countries do not implement regularwater quality monitoring for basic quality parameterssuch as DO, BOD and COD. In addition to thesefindings, the survey reveals that different data
regarding water quality is held in different ministries
and organisations in some countries, which is an
obstacle to systematic data management.
Systems to monitor water quality regularly should
also be established, not only to assist in formulating
countermeasures to climate change, but also tocomprehend the state of water quality for current andfuture policy responses to water quality problems.
From the results of the survey we can see that WEPA
partner countries have attempted to strengthenwater quality monitoring in recent years; however,the data collected is insufficient for evaluation ofclimate change impacts on water temperature andwater quality. Both water quality monitoring and data
management are insufficiently implemented in some
WEPA partner countries. Therefore, comprehensive

34

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Reportwater quality monitoring must be ensured so thatdata can be used for forming policy related to water
quality improvements and adaptations to the impactsof climate change.
In Japan, for example, the Ministry of theEnvironment initiated a study to investigate theimpact of climate change on the water environment
and possible adaptation options. As a part of the
project, the relationships among atmospherictemperature, water temperature and organic waterparameters were analysed based on 30 years ofmonitoring data. It is often difficult to determine
to what extent climate change contributes to theobserved environmental changes since other stressors(e.g., population growth, urbanisation and economic
growth) also significantly affect the region’s water
environment, something all WEPA partner countries
are only too familiar with.

Policy Responses: Adaptation
policies/strategies of WEPA partnercountries
Policy responses to the potential impacts of climatechange vary from country to country. To determine
how each partner country has prepared or ispreparing for the potential impacts on the water
environment in both climate change adaptation andwater resource/management policies, the WEPA
Secretariat surveyed relevant policy documents in
WEPA partner countries in 2009 through WEPA
focal point organisations. The WEPA Secretariat also
reviewed policy documents covering climate change
adaptation and the water environment available on
the Internet.
The results of this survey and review show thatwater shortage and natural ecosystems, including
coastal and marine ecosystems, are often addressedin national climate change adaptation policies,
strategies, and other related government documents,
but the aspect of water quality is often lacking inpolicy documents. The potential impacts of climatechange and adaptation actions are also not included,

while climate change per se is sometime included, in
policy documents related to management of the water
environment. The fact that insufficient knowledge
and scientific data acts as a barrier to developing
adaptation policies in water environmental
management was also pointed out by several water
experts at a WEPA international workshop.

Future Action of WEPA
The above discussion has revealed the very limitedscientific knowledge of climate change impacts
on the water environment (water quality andaquatic ecosystems) WEPA countries have. Since
developing countries generally lack time-series
data of water quantity, quality and temperature,required research facilities and human resources, it
is very important that each country establishes orstrengthens their systems to collect and accumulate
data via monitoring. For future actions, methods orschemes by which the data can be shared or utilised
between relevant parties and countries also need tobe considered.
It is predicted that overall, water resources will be
subject to a continued negative, rather than positive
impact at the global level, and that this will have aknock-on effect on other sustainable agenda, such as
food security and poverty (Bates et al. (ed.) 2008).
Therefore, it is crucial to continue efforts to promotestudies and actions by both the scientific community
as well as policy makers.
In addition, in view of the increasingly serious
impacts of natural disasters – such as the 2011 floodin Bangkok and hurricane Haiyan in the Philippines
in 2013 – it is imperative to deliberate on how toenhance preparedness and resilience against suchextreme events. This includes measures to minimise
the risks of water pollution which could easily result
from increases in sediments and suspended solids
due to heavy precipitation, as well as health risks
arising from overflows of untreated wastewater andcompromised wastewater/water treatment facilities
due to disasters.

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report35References
Bate, Bryson. C., Z. W. Kundzewicz, S. Wu and J.P. Palutikof, eds.. 2008. Climate Change and Water. Technical Paper of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva: IPCC Secretariat.
Connor, R., Galloopin. G, Hellmuth M, and Rast, W. 2009. Climate Change and Possible Futures, Chapter 5 of The United
Nations World Water Development Report 3: Water in a Changing World. World Water Assessment Programme. 2009.
Paris: UNESCO, and London: Earthscan
Cruz, R.V., H. Harasawa, M. Lal, S. Wu, Y. Anokhin, B. Punsalmaa, Y. Honda, M. Jafari, C. Li and N. Huu Ninh, 2007.
Asia. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J.
van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 469-506.
Hoeksema, B.W. and D.F.R. Cleary. (n.d.) “ Climate change and Indonesian coral reef biota.” http://www.nwo.nl/nwohome.
nsf/pages/NWOA_79NMMP. Accessed 13 June 2011.
Jung. Eun. 2005. “Global Warning Impacts Korean Fisheries Industry.” Ariang News. 6 November. http://english.chosun.
com/site/data/html_dir/2005/11/07/2005110761004.htm. Accessed 23 June 2011.
Kumagai, Michiko, K. Ishikawa, and N. Ishiguro. 2003. “Impacts of global warming on large lakes.” In Water Resources
System? Water availability and global change. Franks, S., G. Bloschl, M. Kumagai, K. Musiake, D. Rosbjerg. Eds.,
IAHS Res Book 280: 65-69.
Kundzewicz, Z.W., L.J. Mata, N.W. Arnell, P. Döll, P. Kabat, B. Jiménez, K.A. Miller, T. Oki, Z. Sen and I.A.
Shiklomanov. 2007: Freshwater resources and their management. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and
Vulnerability”. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds., Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK, 173-210.
Ma, Ronghua, H.Duan, C. Hu, X. Feng, A. Li, W. Ju, J. Jian, and G. Yang. 2010. “A Half-century of changes in China’s
Lakes: Global Warming or Human Influence?” Geophysical Research Letters 37(24): 2-7.
McMullen, Catherine, P. (Eds.). 2009. Climate Change Science Compendium 2009. United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP).
Minh, T.H., N.T. Phuong, N.V. Hai, N.V. Hao, S. Jumnongsong, V. Dulyapurk, U.S. Nagothu, P. White, N.W. Abery and
S.S. De Silva. 2009. Perception of Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation of Catfish Farming in the Mekong Delta,
Vietnam: Focus Group Discussions and Stakeholder Workshop Report. http://library.enaca.org/emerging_issues/climate_change/2010/aquaclimate-report-2010-annex7.pdf. Accessed 14 March 2014.
Ministry of the Environment, Japan. 2012. “WEPA Outlook on Water Environmental Management 2012 (WEPA Outlook2012)”. http://www.wepa-db.net/pdf/1203outlook/01.pdf. Accessed 27 March 2014.
Park, Ji-Hyung. 2009. “Regional Collaborative Research on Climate Change Impacts on Surface Water Quality in Eastern
Monsoon Asia: Towards Sound Management of Climate Risks”. Asia-Pacific Network for Global Change Research(APN). http://www.apn-gcr.org/newAPN/resources/projectBulletinOutputs/finalProjectReports/2008/ARCP200804CMY-Park-Final%20Report.pdf. Accessed 14 March 2014.
Sarjiya, A and Dwi Agustiyani, Nurleili. 2009. “Regional long-term data monitoring of Brantas River-Indonesia: trendof water quality and its implication.” Presentation at the 2nd International Workshop on Climate Change Impacts on
Surface Water Quality in East Asian Watersheds. Sabah, Malaysia, 18-20 Feburary, 2009.
Wipatayotin, Apinya. 2010. “Andaman Sea coral reefs hit by bleaching.” Bangkok Post. 8 May. http://www.bangkokpost.
com/news/local/36984/andaman-sea-coral-reefs-hit-by-bleaching. Accessed 18 June 2011.
Wirojanagud, Wanpen, Suwannakom, S. and Sthiannopkao, S. 2007. “Impact of Ambient Temperature Change on Water
Quality: A Case Study of the Pong River, Northeast, Thailand.” Presentation at the 1st International Workshop on
Climate Change Impacts on Surface Water Quality in East Asian Watersheds. Chuncheon, Republic of Korea, 7-10
October
Yamaguchi, Atsuko, K. Furumitsu, N. Yagishita and G. Kume. 2010. Biology of herbivorous fish in coastal areas of westernJapan. Costal environmental and ecosystem issues of the East China Sea. A. Ishimatsu and H. J. Lie. Eds., pp. 181-190

36

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final ReportMessages from Partners

R.M.S.K. Ratnayake
Director (Environmental Pollution Control)
Central Environmental Authority

Sri Lanka

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?
The Central Environmental Authority (CEA)
is the sole authority for implementationof the National Environmental Act (NEA).
NEA covers protection, management,
and education and awareness of theenvironment sector in Sri Lanka. I belong
to the Environmental Pollution Control(EPC) Division which is responsible for theenvironmental protection of the country.
Under this responsibility we mainly focus
on industrial pollution control sector due
to its high contribution to the pollution
and rapid industrial development of
the country. This is done by adopting

38

Q2. How do you observe the state ofwater environment in your country?

several strategies such as implementing
the Environmental Protection Licencing(EPL) system for industrial activities andcompliance monitoring as an regulatory
mechanism as well as providing facilities
for compliance by assisting them in

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?

Q2. How do you observe the state ofwater environment in your country?

I am a Senior Divisional Hydrologist, inthe basin study section, Water Resource
Division of Water and Energy Commission
Secretariat (WECS). Currently, I am working
as head of the project implementing unitof Bagmati River Basin Improvement
Project. The major tasks under myresponsibility are to lead and coordinate
the implementation of the Integrated
Water Resource Management (IWRM)
principle in the Bagmati river basin
and prepare an integrated river basin
development master plan. I am also incharge of upgrading the existing flood
forecasting and early warning system inthe Bagmati basin. My responsibilities
include establishing a center for water
resource information system including
decision support system and carrying
out legal and institutional strengthening
for IWRM and formation of a river basinorganization.

The natural environment has beenchanging due to adverse impacts of
population growth and migration,
urbanization, industrialization,
deforestation, modernization, use ofpesticides and lack of awareness of thepeople. Because of these human activities,
water pollution is increasing in both ruraland urban areas of Nepal. Surface water
bodies are commonly used as sinks forsolid waste, and untreated municipal
and industrial wastewater. Disposal of
untreated sewage from rapidly growing
urban areas and discharge of untreatedindustrial effluents, as well as excessive
use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides
in cultivation are the major contributors
to pollution of water bodies, whichis in an increasing trend all over thecountry. Water pollution has a wide
range of adverse impacts on aquatic
life and ecosystem services, agricultural
productivity, human health, in-stream

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

pollution control. Also we continue to
conduct awareness programmes on
pollution control for industrialists. Acts,
regulation amendments and preparationof pollution control guidelines for different
industrial sectors are other main duties of
the EPC division.

The industrial sector in Sri Lanka hasdeveloped rapidly since the 1980s, which
has resulted in a drastic increase in thelevel of water pollution.. NEA was enacted
in 1980 and CEA was established in 1981
for the effective implementation of the
NEA.
The main water pollution source in the
country is from the industrial sector. Most
large-scale industries have compliancebut this is not the case in the small andmedium enterprises. The number ofindustries in the SME sector is very large inour country, and therefore the cumulative
effect is bigger. On the other hand,domestic and agricultural activities also
contribute significantly to water pollution.
Non-point sources in the agriculture

water uses, and water availability todownstream users. Similarly, the Churerange and its southern foot, the Bhabarzone, are the recharge areas of thegroundwater aquifers in the Terai Belt
(low land in the country). However,this critically important recharge area
is being destroyed by deforestation,
human settlements, industrialization andextraction of sand and boulders fromthe river bed resulting in groundwaterpollution and an overall degradationof the environment. The Terai region
contains sedimentary layers of sand andgravel deposits interlocked with flood
plains carried by rivers and groundwaterin the region is extremely vulnerable toarsenic contamination.

Q3. How WPEA contributed
to the improvement of the water
environmental management
in your country?
Unfortunately, we were not able toparticipate in WEPA activities as regularlysector and domestic activities are difficult
to regulate and this is causing an increasein water pollution from these sectors.

Q3. What is the most beneficial pointof being a partner of WEPA?
Sri Lanka joined WEPA in 2009. Most Asian
countries have similar environmental
issues and they are trying to overcome
them by applying different strategies
and measures. Some of them have been
more successful in some particular sectors
than others. WEPA is a forum for member
countries to discuss and share successful
practices in the environment sector,
especially with regards to water. It is
hoped that the system can be improved ineach country with best practices which canbe applied to other partner countries.

discharge standards by sharing bettersystems applied in other Asian member
countries. Sri Lanka is at a very successfulstage in this process.
Small and medium enterprises make amajor contribution to the water pollutionin Sri Lanka and CEA is looking forlow-cost treatment systems for themconsidering financial state and existing
pollution control technologies. In thisprocess we learned a great deal from the

WEPA programme.
In 2012 a WEPA dialogue wasorganized in Sri Lanka with theparticipation of all relevant stakeholders
in relevant sectors. This resulted inincreased coordination between relevant
institutions in the water sector and led
to the development of contributions forwater pollution control and managementfrom other relevant institutions.

WECS as a central water planning
agency has primary responsibility to assist
different ministries and other related
departments/agencies associated towater resources of the Government of
Nepal in the formulation of policies andplanning of projects in the water andenergy resources sector. Hence, as per
my expectation, both WECS and WEPA
can work together to identify the areasthat need intervention at the policy levelto improve the water environment in thecontext of Nepal and the overall Asia.

Such areas may include implementationof results/findings analyzed in theenvironmental study regarding
development projects utilizing water
resources; Ecosystem based approach towater resources management; and Issue
and Impact of climate change on water
environment and adaptation to climatechange in water environment sector.

Q4. How WPEA contributed to theimprovement of the water environmental
management in your country?
The legal framework greatly contributes
to the water environmental managementin our country, and WEPA contributes tothe preparation and review of wastewateras other countries, and could not makefull use of the knowledge that WEPA has.
However, we would like to make betteruse of this very necessary and relevant
information because what WEPA has
done so far is of utmost importanceto countries like Nepal to achieveenvironmentally conductive balanced
development approach for water resource
management in sustainable manner.

Q4. What is your expectation for
WEPA?
WEPA is a partnership program on water
quality management improvement in
Asian countries, with the aim to develop
an information platform, and share data,
knowledge and experiences in the region
among countries with similar natural andsocioeconomic conditions. We expectthat WEPA will make contributions
to the capacity building of partnercountries, focusing on government
officials in charge of water environment
conservation.

Kamal Ram Joshi
Senior Divisional Hydrologist
Water and Energy Commission Secretariat

Nepal

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

39Vicente B. Tuddao, Jr.
Director for Governance and Enforcement
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)

Philippines

Erlinda A. Gonzales
Technical Officer as Environmental Consultant
Environmental Management Bureau
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)

Philippines

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?
Tuddao: I am presently tasked to work as
Director for Governance and Enforcementof the DENR Field Operations based at
the DENR Central Office, Quezon City,
Philippines. In line with my current duties,
I am taking the lead and facilitating thereview, implementation and monitoringof Environment and Natural Resources(ENR) policies and programs and monitor
compliance of field operations to theexisting laws, rules and regulations
pertaining to ENR plans and programs.
In the water sector, I am responsible
to review, recommend and enforce
governance policies, laws and programs
pertaining to water resources and river
basin management and conservation in
the field offices of the DENR.
As head of the Field Operations
Governance and Enforcement of ENR, I am
representing the DENR field operationsin preparation for holding the Philippines
2nd International River Summit to be heldin 2014, as well as serving as WATER AND
RIVER BASINS/WATERHED environmental
lecturer in various international andnational symposia and seminars, and I
am also the official representative of thenational government in the Global Water
Partnership-Philippine Water Partnership.
Gonzales: I have held the position

40

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Reportof Chief Environmental Management
Specialist at the Environmental Quality
Division for the past 20 years and also
served as Director of Region IV-A of theEnvironmental Management Bureau. I
have been engaged in the formulationof policies, plans and programs forenvironmental management andpollution control. At present, I am
working as an environmental consultant
for rehabilitation and managementof Manila Bay. The Environmental
Management Bureau plays a leadingrole to meet 10 priority targets set under
the Operational Plan for the Manila Bay
Coastal Strategy (OPMBCS) that addresses
water pollution control and generaland hazardous waste management,
and we need collaboration with otheragencies in implementation of thestrategy. In relation to the activities under
the strategies, I established a working
arrangement with concerned agencies
to review existing policies and prepare acomprehensive action plan to ensure theeffective management and protectionof the Bay. The action plan included key
points that could achieve implementation
by local government units (LGUs) andother national government agencies.
Trainings and workshops on sewerage andsanitation management were organized
for LGUs and those on environmental
laws for pollution control officers at
industrial and commercial establishments.
Other activities for protection of theenvironment of the Manila Bay include
supervision and technical assistants toindustrial establishments related to water
quality monitoring, mapping of industrial
establishment, and determination ofindustrial pollution load from them.

Q2. How do you observe the state ofwater environment in your country?
Please explain very briefly about thestate of water environment?
Gonzales: Water environment in thePhilippines varies from high level ofpollution in the highly urbanized centersto relatively low pollution in the municipal
or less urbanized cities, and relatively goodquality water environment in the upstream
watershed or upstream river basin areas.
On average, domestic waste makes
up 33 % of the total waste generation
followed by livestock (29%) and industrial
sources (27%). Non-point sources ofpollution account for 11% of the organic
load contribution to water bodies. Thisdata showed that domestic waste is amajor cause of pollution of the water
bodies in the country.

Tuddao: The major pollution sourcesof rivers, lakes and bays in highly
urban centers such as Metro Manila,
Cebu, Davao are domestic sources (e.g.
household wastes), with major pollutants
identified as total coliforms/E-coli, organic
wastes, nutrients and silts/sediments.
Solid wastes also pose a major threat tothe degradation of water resources due
to indiscriminate dumping, improper
solid waste management at source andinadequate solid waste disposal sites/
sanitary land-fills. Traces of heavy metals
were also detected and significantly
observed in areas such as in MarilaoMeycauayan-Obando (MMO) Riversystems in the Province of Bulacan due totanning and jewelry-making activities andsmall- scale mining activities (hydraulicmining) at the Iponan river in Misamis
Oriental, and Campostela river systems
in Mindanao. Heavy siltation of rivers is
also considered a major problem in many
river systems as a result of extensive
land development, agriculture anddeforestation that do not give due regard
to proper measures to control soil erosion
and soil movement/detachment. On theother hand, depletion of groundwater
resources is very evident in Metro Manila,
Metro Cebu, Iloilo, Cagayan De Oro, andMetro Davao.
Our country gives priority toaddressing domestic waste that emanatesfrom domestic sources, as 70% to 80%of the pollution loadings of Pasig Riverand its river systems/estuaries are being
blamed on this kind of pollutants.

Q3. What is the most beneficial pointof being a partner of WEPA?
Tuddao: WEPA’s most beneficial support ofbeing a partner to our country is its role asinstitutional support catalyst in identifying
and assessing the state of the country’s
water environment and in its guidanceon how we can deal with the issues ofwater environment, in consonance withthe current initiatives being undertaken
within the country and initiatives being
undertaken in other Asian countries.
WEPA has evolved into a linchpinof strong partner where the process,approaches and strategies of addressing
water environmental issues and concerns
and in generating a common platform
and framework of standards andcriteria on water management towards

institutional integration is very laudable.

Q4. How has WEPA contributed to theimprovement of the water environmental
management in your country?
Tuddao: WEPA as a partner has provided
its best contribution to this country
in terms of the promotion of effective
water governance, support for our
educational and information campaign
to improve management of the water
environment in terms of planning,
program implementation and policy
review and orientation. It has also helpedin establishing the understanding ofwater environment issues and concerns
through a network of water resourcesmanagement approaches and strategies
in Asian countries with its regular
workshops and annual meetings, andtraining support program. Its official
website and publication of databases
are very accessible and informative,
espousing the state of the water
environment not only in the Philippines
but also among Asian countries--- despite
differences in socio-cultural, economic
development and institutional levels
aimed at harmonizing standards andcapacities.
Specifically, WEPA has introduced
the benefits of effective wastewater
management through municipal or smallscale waste water treatment facilities
in containing pollutants from domestic
sources instead of a highly centralized
wastewater treatment plants which isconsidered very expensive and requires
high maintenance cost. Moreover, WEPA
has continuously advocated the benefits
and advantages of water resourcesmanagement through basin approach
which the Philippines has maintained
as a core framework or platform in thesustainable management and governanceof its 18 priority river basins not only
to ensure sustained good quality watersupply for the stakeholders but also
equally importantly, to address theburgeoning issues of flooding as a resultof climate change.

Q5. What is your expectation for
WEPA?
Tuddao: WEPA is expected to further
strengthen its partnership with thePhilippines on various fronts such as incapacity building and technology transfer,
generation of appropriate informationand methodologies appropriate for
efficient and effective management ofwater resources, and in the developmentof common standards and criteria inaddressing water environment concernsand problems towards harmonizing theapproaches and strategies, platform/
framework, policies and program supportand implementation guidelines to achieve
the objectives of improved water quality
and in achieving improved water supply
and quality of the environment.
With the current fragmented
approaches and outmoded technologies
being utilized to improve water
environment in some Asian countries likethe Philippines, WEPA may serve as a lead
institution/organization in setting themode for improving practices, creating
improved capacities and technicalcapability and governance strategies inmanaging water resources.
WEPA is expected to further trail-blaze
the integration of databases related tothe state of water environment in ASEAN
countries and may have embarked on
the formulation of capacity development
program to equip the Philippines withthe advances in the improvement ofwater quality in the face of economic
development and social progress.
WEPA as an organization is expected
to elevate the campaign for Asiancollaborative and coordinated action onwater environment issues and framework
for action in the global arena, and hence
ventilate the current initiatives of WEPA
member-countries that address the issues
and concerns of water environment andwater resource management as well as
seek international support for global
action in the face of transboundary issuesof pollution movement.

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report41Q2. How do you observe the state ofwater environment in your country?

Taegu Kang
Senior Researcher
Water Quality Control Center
National Institute of Environmental Research (NIER)

Republic of Korea

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?
I am in charge of managing water
environment information and operating

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?
My responsibility assigned by our ministry
covers a broad range of policy areas,
including review and development ofpolicies, guidelines and programs related
to the assessment of environmental
pollution and also provision ofrecommendations on environmental
quality reflecting the environmental
strategic plan of the country. Checking
and follow-ups of activities implemented
by responsible departments is also
one of my responsibilities. As the vice
chief of Mekong Unit of the Ministry, I
am in charge of reviewing and making
recommendations to Mekong River’s
documents/strategies/action plans (MRCS/
CNMC), including attending the meetings,
negotiations, and others. I am also in theworking group to review Environment
Impact Assessment (EIA) reports andEnvironmental Management Plans (EMPs)
which are submitted by development
investors (for private and public project
investments). I am also working as a focal
point of international programs including
WEPA and environmental cooperation
with the Ministry of Environment of Korea.

Q2. How do you observe the state ofwater environment in your country?
With reference to the water quality
monitoring and analysis of public water
areas1 – those have been done monthly

42

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

the water quality monitoring network
program in Korea. Since 2014, I havebeen working on the environmental
radioactivity survey especially in surface
water.

by officials of the Ministry of Environment(MoE), and officials of the Ministry of
Water Resources and Meteorology(MoWRAM)2, and we can conclude thatwater quality at most of controlling
stations are still in good condition3, but wesometimes observed very few parameters
exceed the standards at a few stations in
the dry season. Water quality samplings
are regularly taken at designated points in
the Mekong River, Bassac River, Tonle Sap
River and Tonle Sap Great Lake. Generalparameters of water quality monitoring
are observed including: pH, Temperature,
TSS, BOD, DO, Conductivity, Total
Nitrogen, Total Phosphorus, including
parameters of a few heavy metals.
Although water quality at some main
observed areas is good, we are concernedthat water quality would be degraded inboth surface and ground waters if the
management is undertaken carelesslyin parallel to a high acceleration of
population growth, urbanization, industrial
development and other development
activities.
As an observation, water quality
degradation/pollution may occur resulting
from industrial and agricultural sectors
including slaughterhouses and livestock;urban sewage systems; anarchic/squattersettlement,floating houses, floating
restaurants,floating business areas;
gemstone mining activities; fresh and

The water quality of surface water andreservoir has improved largely due tothe implementation of Comprehensive
Water Quality Management Measures in
1996, Master Plan for Water Environment
Management (2006-2015). However, COD
levels did not show any improvement
due to non-degradable organic
pollutants from non-point source.

Q3. What is the most beneficial pointof being a partner of WEPA?
WEPA is a solid platform to deal withmarine aquaculture practices, and so on.
Industries, residential areas and otherdevelopment projects – these sources
are taken into account as causes ofserious negative impacts to the water
environment and human health, andtherefore these sources are being
regularly controlled and monitored inaccording with the existing legislations.
The industrial sector has been requested
to properly treat wastewater to meetnational standards, and the MoE monitor
the quality of effluent to be discharged
into receiving waters. Urban wastewater
treatment system should be improvedor facilities need to be constructedin major cities and provinces to treat
effluents from residential areas properly.
Lastly, all investment projects need tobe elaborately evaluated and monitored
through implementation of EIA and EMP.

Q3. What is the most beneficial pointof being a partner of WEPA?
Cambodia has been a partner in
WEPA since 2004, and since then, I
think Cambodia has closely carriedout networking with other WEPA
partner countries, especially with the
MoE of Japan and IGES. Through theinternational/annual WEPA meetings andnational dialogue, Cambodia has beenable to learn and exchange experiences

1 Ref. to the Sub-Decree on Water Pollution Control (e.g. rivers, lakes, streams, seas, and groundwater)
2 Under the Water Quality Monitoring programme of MRCS
3 Comparing to the water quality standard of the Sub-Decree on Water Pollution Control

our water environmental issues andsolutions, especially concerning domestic
and industrial wastewater and water
environment management policies. WEPA
also has been a contributor to give achance to deal with water-related issues
and solutions which the partner countries
have.

Q4. How did you utilise the knowledge
and network you got from WEPA?
It has been useful to find andshare information regarding recent
governmental activities and water quality
problems and their management. For
the past 5 years, WEPA has provided

with other WEPA partner countries
in the context of water environment
management, wastewater/night-soil
treatment, climate change, relevant
policies/strategies implementing, etc.,
and indeed all lessons learned from WEPA
activities have been the most beneficial
points to improve national capacity todevelop policies/strategies and plans inrelation to water environment and climatechange response/adaptation, and its
implementation as well.
As briefly mentioned above, thenational dialogue among Cambodia
and WEPA/MoE of Japan provided more
opportunities to learn from lessons to line
institutions of Cambodia in terms of bothgovernment officials and NGOs in relation
to legal and institutional frameworks,
especially the technical knowledge
towards water environment management.
It is suggested to have further dialogues
with WEPA and successful WEPA partnercountries including exposited field visits.

Q4. How did you utilise the knowledge/
information/network you got fromWEPA for the improvement of the water
environmental management
in your country?
As indicated before, WEPA provided
some knowledge and awareness on water
environment management. I have certainly
utilized them in several ways within
my work and at regional meetings andseminars.

information or know-how to theinternational community such as bilateraland multilateral environmental cooperation
with the MOE in Korea. Also, WEPA
played an important role in developing
sustainable joint efforts to improve thewater environment. The good example is
TEMM. We think WEPA-based information
could be a powerful data bank to provide
a cooperative tool to improve water
environment for us specifically about water
use and adaptation for climate change.

more issues concerning basic water
management infrastructure in Asia andto offer international cooperation forenvironmental technology and training(education) that can broaden experienceand information.

Q5. What is your expectation for
WEPA?
We hope WEPA will contribute to develop

taken by Dr. Young Hun JIN

I also utilised the knowledge andawareness gained from WPEA when I
made recommendations towards theproper management of water environment
and wastewater treatment to avoid waterpollution during the review of the reportof EIA and EMP submitted from various
public and private development projects.
I sometimes shared the awareness/knowledge during the discussions at
national and regional meetings andseminars mostly within the Lower
Mekong River Basin (for the Mekong River
Commission Secretariat – MRCS). During
the process of developing the Procedure
on Water Quality (PWQ) of MRCS including
technical guidelines (for implementing thePWQ) for protecting human health andaquatic life, I provided ideas and comments
towards WEPA based experiences, e.g. water
quality parameters toward human healthand aquatic life protection, water quality
monitoring, and etc. Such awareness andknowledge is expected to be used while
I am still a member of several working

groups of the Cambodia National MekongCommittee (CNMC) and MRCS, and I will
carry out reviews of the EIA report and
EMP as I have before.

Q5. What is your expectation for
WEPA in the future?
I think that WEPA dialogue is a very
appropriate way to address problems
and seek solutions including provisionof recommendations based on specificcountry needs, and such dialogue shouldbe held at least once per year according tonational and local requirements. Exposure
visit to WEPA and/or experienced
WEPA partners is another crucial way to
exchange experience and lesson learned.
I expect that the next phase of WEPA will
promote the transfer of technologies
and capacity building to government
officials at national and sub-national levels
towards the “problem-solving”, “pollution
prevention”, and “pollution assessment –risk management”.

Sokha Chrin
Deputy Director General
General Directorate of Technical Affairs
Ministry of Environment

Cambodia

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

43Souphasay Komany
Director of Technical Division
Nam Ngum River Basin Committee Secretariat
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

Lao PDR

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?
My responsibility is to supervise thetechnical matters of the Nam Ngum River
Basin Committee Secretariat (NNRBCS)

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?
My primary responsibility as Director–
General of National Hydraulic ResearchInstitute of Malaysia (NAHRIM) is to leadthe institute in research in water andits environment. I am responsible forthe direction of my research teams andthe quality of the research outcomes inorder to achieve NAHRIM’s vision as anational focal centre in the field of waterand environment by 2030. I oversee theoverall management of the Institute.
This position requires me to manage theinstitute in accordance with the policy
directions of Malaysia Ministry of Natural
Resources and Environment as well asother country’s policies. On top of that,with help from my fellow researchers I
provide technical advice to the relevant
departments and agencies to ensure
sound and sustainable water quality
management in the country. Lastly, I workthrough exemplary leadership to mark
NAHRIM as an established institute bypracticing and ensuring transparency andaccountability at all levels of operations/functions.

Q2. How do you observe the state ofwater environment in your country?
According to the Environment Quality
Report 2012 by the Department ofEnvironment Malaysia, out of 473
monitored rivers, 278 (59%) were found to

44

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Reportin linkage with the national IWRM andapplication to the basin based level in the
Nam Ngum River Basin (NNRB). Major
tasks include implementation of nationwater sector policies, strategies andlegislation to formulate the NNRB plans,

be clean, 161 (34%) slightly polluted and34 (7%) polluted. The pollution sources
are categorised in point sources (specificdischarges point that entering water body)and non-point sources (diffuse sources).
Major pollutants for Malaysia’s rivers
are Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD),
Ammoniacal Nitrogen (NH3-H) and
Suspended Solids (SS). High BOD canbe attributed to inadequate treatment
of sewage or effluent from agro-based
and manufacturing industries. The main
sources of NH3-H were livestock farming
and domestic sewage. The sources of SS
were contributed by improper earthwork
and land clearing activities. These threeparameter’s loading also have significant
impact on river quality. Klang river basin(Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur)
recorded the highest loading for BOD, SS
and NH3-H in 2012.
As for groundwater quality, there
are 79 monitoring wells in Peninsular
Malaysia, 13 wells in Sarawak as well as
15 wells in Sabah. In 2012, 361 water
samples were taken from these active
monitoring wells and analyzed for volatileorganic compounds (VOCs), pesticides,
heavy metals, anions, bacteria (coliform),
phenolic compounds, total hardness, total
dissolved solids (TDS), pH, temperature,
conductivity and dissolved oxygen(DO). The results are compared with the
National Guidelines for Raw Drinking
Water Quality (NGRDWQ) (Ministry of
Health (Revised December 2000)). In 2012,
all the monitoring results were within

and implementation, management andcoordination of data and informationand database in the NNRB at thenational level, involvement in conflict
resolution and disaster managementin the NNRB, facilitation of technicalcapacity development, coordination
with international, regional and nationalorganizations in relevant matters to theabove-mentioned tasks.

Q2. How do you observe the state ofwater environment in your country?
The water environment has been
observed by a group of publicagencies and local counterpart in linewith developers and localities. The

NGRDWQ except for arsenics (As), iron(Fe), manganese (Mn), total coliform andphenol.
The marine water quality monitoring
aims to identify the marine water quality
status and to determine the degree ofpollution from both the land-basedsources as well as the sea. In 2012,
water quality were monitored at about
168 coastal, 78 estuary and 76 islands
monitoring stations. A total of 579
samples from coastal, 325 samples fromestuary and 190 samples from island
monitoring stations were collected foranalyses based on a newly developed
Marine Water Quality Index. The index wasdeveloped based on 7 main parameterswhich are Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Nitrate(NO3), Phosphate (PO4), UnionizedAmmonia (NH3), Faecal Coliform, Oil andGrease and Total Suspended Solids (TSS).
Management of lakes and reservoirs in
Malaysia falls under different jurisdictionsof different agencies and department,
while monitoring is carried out by theowners or operators of the lakes andreservoirs. There are no comprehensive
inventories of lake resources in Malaysia,
but a preliminary assessment listingsuggests that there are over 90 lakes in
the country covering an area of at least
100,000ha and hold about 31 billion cubic
meters of water. It is found that 56 (62%)
were in eutrophic conditions, while thebalance were mesothrophic (A Study on
the Status of Eutrophication of Lakes in
Malaysia, 2004 ).

major key players are Department of
Water Resources which is in charge ofnational water environment strategy
development, and the Department of
Pollution Control which is in chargeof issuing and implementing of water
environment management tools, suchas water quality standards. There is also
the Natural Resources and Environment
Institute which is in charge of water
environment, especially water quality
monitoring. These agencies work closelywith their local counterparts and otherrelated agencies at national and local
levels, including those in the agriculture,industrial and service sectors. Recent
observation of the water environmentshows that trends of water pollution haveQ3. What is “good” (or “the best”)
point of WEPA for you or your country?
WEPA provides a great platform forknowledge and information-sharing
as well as exchange of ideas. Member
countries are able to share various kindsof management experiences ranging
from, but not limited to, water quality
management, policy response andgovernance, climate change, domestic& industrial wastewater treatment andmanagement. The partnership also helps
to strengthen the water environment
management network within the country
as well as internationally.

Q4. How did you utilise theknowledge/information/network you got
from WEPA for the improvement of thewater environmental management
in your country?
There are three useful topics addressed in
WEPA, namely:a) Monitoring – Paradigm shift from basin
to sub-basin water quality monitoring
to pollutant loading is helping a more
effective and insightful monitoring
activities on the river healthiness.
b) Governance & Enforcement on
domestic and industrial wastewater
management– Better enforcement
approach to address the waterpollution issues. Policy references help
to ensure country’s regulation and acts
are up-to - date and relevant to thesignificantly intensified due to a sharp
increase in the level of private investment,
whilst the level of management capacity
falls farther behind. Most of the pollution
is wastewater from agricultural, mining,industrial, domestic sources.

Q3. How WPEA contributed to theimprovement of the water environmental
management in your country?
WEPA is a forum where we can share
information and good practices onwater environment management thatcan be applied and adapted to the local
situation of our country. As Lao PDR is alesser developing country in Asia, WEPA
outcomes can provide us with a relative

current water environment.
c) Climate change and water quality
environment – adaptation measures toaddress the impact of climate change
on water quality and its environment.
WEPA database is also useful as agood platform for researchers fromgovernment institutions, universities andimplementing agencies in Malaysia tohave a better view or approach of thepartner countries initiatives which can beadapted in the research design or during
implementation for better efficiencies,
higher performances and environmental
integrity.

Q5. What is your expectation for
WEPA?
I expect that WEPA will compile
publications, documentations or articles
on technology and water quality
management framework in Asia, andstreamline water quality data on WEPA

comparison on water environment
management of other Asian countries
and elsewhere. It can provide a guidelineof how to manage water environment
effectively and efficiently in the future.

Q4. What is your expectation for
WEPA?
We expect that WEPA will be a good
platform for Lao PDR as well as other
Asian countries in the long run so that we
can share knowledge and experiences onwater environment management for themutual benefit of our region.

database to share different technologies
for water and wastewater treatments in
Asia. I would like to see WEPA organizing
various types of twining programs topromote capacity building for member
countries in order to develop more
knowledge- based human resources,and hope that it will share more specifictopics and examples on environmental
management in Asia including detailed
information/articles on pollution loading
control and monitoring, decentralized
water and domestic wastewater
treatment, and climate change adaptationin water quality environment. WEPA is also
expected to provide technology transfer
and knowledge sharing, and create a
database on list of resource persons ofpartner countries including corresponding
contacts, emails, addresses, expertise. By
doing this, it will increase the networking
among partner countries and cultivate
more collaborations between partnercountries.

Ahmad Jamalluddin
bin Shaaban
Director General
National Hydraulic Research Institute of Malaysia (NAHRIM)
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Malaysia

Malaysia

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report45

pollution issue will be the priority of the
Ministry of Environment to put into thestrategic plan 2015-2019.

Yun Insiani
Head of Infrastructures and Services
Ministry of Environment

Indonesia

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?
My responsibilities are stipulated
based on the Ministerial Degree No.18,
and I am in charge of the tasks andfunctions related to pollution control
manufacturing infrastructure services anddomestic waste. These include preparing
policy deliberation material, coordinating
policies implementation, implementationof technical functions, and monitoring,
reporting, evaluation and analysis about
issues and activities.

46

Q2. What new development is
expected in water environmental
management in your country?
Water is viewed as the resource in favorof economic growth, so it is critical toconserve its quality as well as quantity.
In Indonesia, efforts to mainstream theenvironment are still in progress. As
the current presidency period will end
next year, so Indonesia will have a new
cabinet, and at present a 5 year work
plan is being formulated. It is a big
challenge to put environment quality
improvement into the newly elected
President’s work program, where water

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?

Q2. How do you observe the state ofwater environment in your country?

The planning division is responsible
for the formulation of water quality
management including master plans
and action plans for water pollution
control. It is also in charge of preventing
and mitigating pollution problems andpreparing an annual report entitled“The State of Water Quality in Thailand’s
Pollution”. This division is the coordinator
for formulation of water pollution control
zones and also acts as the secretariat for
the Water Quality Management Bureau
and its various subcommittees. It also
draws up a yearly budget for water
quality monitoring and management.
The planning division deals with otherorganizations to plan solutions to waterpollution problems, and also cooperates
internationally to learn the appropriate
methods and good practices usedin other countries for environmental
planning and evaluation.

Water Quality Management Bureau,
Pollution Control Department conducts
water quality monitoring in the 48 mainrivers. It was found that most of thewater is of good and fair quality at 74%
whereas water with deteriorated andsevere deteriorated quality is 23%.
Holistic information from the analysis
of wastewater quantity and dirt in formof organic substances in the main river
basins revealed that approximately
134.8 million m2 of wastewater per day
and 6190 ton BOD of dirt per day was
released from different sources. The main
pollution sources come from community
consumption, especially from households
and buildings which have no primary
wastewater treatment system or havejust septic tanks which are not capableof sufficiently treating wastewater tomeet effluent standards. There are many
parameters such as BOD,COD,FCB andheavy metals that still exceed the Water
Quality Standards cause by discharging

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

Q3. What is the most beneficial pointof being a partner of WEPA?
Indonesia, like other ASEAN members,
has the responsibility to maintain stability
in the Southeast Asian region, and by
participating in WEPA, we can measure
what level of success in controlling thequality of the environment we haveachieved, especially with respect tothe status of water quality for rivers inIndonesia compared to other ASEAN
members. We also benefit from theexchange of data and information ontechnology of wastewater treatment
applied in some developed countries andother developing countries in Southeast
Asia. Through WEPA activities, Indonesia
has also seen the importance of data
management source polluters from either
industry or households and small-scale
activities as a basis for drafting regulations
as well as the refinement of policy
especially in the control of water pollution.

untreated wastewater.

Q3. What is the most beneficial pointof being a partner of WEPA?
WEPA is one of the international programs
that links many countries, thereby sharing
a considerable amount of information.
We also receive more knowledge, data
and lesson-learned from many cases inmember countries of WEPA. The Pollution
Control Department (PCD) receives further
information and databases through
WEPA’s website, which are helpful todetermine guidelines for implementing
integrated water resources management ,focusing on water quality.

Q4. How did you utilise theinformation and network you got
from WEPA for the improvement of thewater environmental management
in your country?
First of all, we have learned lessons fromWEPA member countries, based on which
we try to identify our problems in waterWe were also able to learn from other
WEPA partner countries about theimportance of maintaining the quality ofwater --- maintaining good water quality
will directly impact the cost of living
communities considering that access to
obtain clean water is increasingly easy
and inexpensive. The cost of treating raw
water for drinking water should be borneby the Government. Such costs havebecome cheaper and the reach of theclean water services for the community
has become more widespread.
WEPA serves as a hub among Asian
countries in water quality improvement.
Each country has its own different
strategy in dealing with water pollution.

However, the basics that can be drawn
up from those who have successfully
overcome water pollution problems in
respective countries, due to the strong
political will from the country leaders.
Their commitment is the key to successso that the environment can get alongwith industrial growth to reach economic
improvement.

quality management. We found that
Thailand is still not making sufficient
efforts in formulating policies and plans
for water quality management as well
as not carrying out enough practicalactions. A national vision and solution
policy have been set up but there havebeen no strategies and implementation
plan for either nation or river basins thatare acceptable and have been efficiently
enforced. The current institutional
structure for water quality management
has made no progress over the past
few years, which has led to nonstandardized and inefficient operations.
The government agencies responsible
for water quality are fragmented, andthe various water quality regulations andcommittees, including obsolete laws,
come under different ministries,
For databases and knowledge baseson water quality management, it isfound that existing information and data
are scattered across various agencies,
sometimes resulting in conflict with regards
to information references. This results
in an inevitable lack of connection andlinkage of comprehensive information.
Finally there is the problem of trying tointegrate participation in managementof stakeholders in public, private sectors,
local government and people.
Water Quality Management Bureau
tries to use WEPA’s module to set new
targets for sustainable water resourcesmanagement with participation fromstakeholders, such as establishingand developing river basins instead of
focusing solely on rivers. It also is trying
to develop mechanisms for encouraging
participation in river basin management

Q4. What is your expectation for
WEPA?
As a forum of communication, I expect
WEPA to have five functions to promotewater environmental protection inIndonesia. First, WEPA is expected tofacilitate the evaluation of the existing
policy frameworks in Indonesia andprovide input to strengthen the ruleof law in accordance with the waterpollution issues that are being faced by
the national government. By including
local governments, we expect WEPA
to facilitate information exchange of
local actions. WEPA is also expected to
be a bridge to bring together partnercountries with private parties interested

in investing in the improvement of water
quality. An example is related to the
procurement of infrastructure for urban
waste water treatment in particular to
local governments that already havea master plan sewage treatment. It is
expected that institutional forms andpatterns of public private partnershipcan be developed for the operation ofsewerage systems in the metropolitan
area and other large cities. We hope
to facilitate a meeting between theentrepreneurs in the member countries
of WEPA with entrepreneurs in Indonesia
to exchange information about
wastewater treatment technologies andthe opportunities for cooperation interms of technology transfer.

in an integrated manner.

Q5. What is your expectation for
WEPA?
WEPA is expected to continue to serve
as a center for contact and support forwater-related information/data sharing
among member countries. It is also
expected that WEPA will develop a GIS
database related to water resources
for management support. We would
also request WEPA to conduct training
courses for all member countries.

Thiparpa Yolthantham
Director of Planning
Pollution Control Department (PCD)
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

ThailandWater Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report47

Phengkhamla Phonvisai
Director of Legislation and Information
Pollution Control Department
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

Lao PDR

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?
My responsibility is developing andamending of the legislation for pollution
control activities and also developing a
database/information system in Lao PDR
as the central government. Currently, I
am coordinating the technical working
group to develop four main regulations

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?
My responsibilities are to develop
environmental strategies and action plans,
pollution management, green growthstrategy development and international
cooperation on environment issues.
The water pollution is one of the major
environmental problems in Thailand. Thus,
the new Ministry strategy is also to pay
attention to water pollution problems
including the establishment of wastewater
treatment facilities, to promote waterreuse and recycling in various sectors, aswell as to encourage public participationin water management. Since 2011, I
have served as a member (director) of
the Wastewater Management Authority
Board to supervise the administration of
the Wastewater Management Authorityof Thailand and served as Chairman of
Corporate Governance Sub-committee.

Q2. How do you observe the state ofwater environment in your country?
In Thailand, the Pollution Control
Department (PCD) under the Ministryof Natural Resources and Environment(MNRE) has monitored 48 major rivers.
MNRE-PCD has monitored 600 water
quality sampling stations on tri-monthly

48

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Reportfor pollution control from now to 2015,
namely.
Pollution control Regulation (proposal
to control air, noise, and soil and waterpollution); Hazardous Waste Management
Regulation (propose to management thehazardous waste from industrial, mining,
hospital activities) and managementof hazardous waste trans-boundary
movement; Hazardous Chemicalbasis and operated 70 sampling stations
in major river basins of the country. The
results of the water quality monitoring
system showed that most natural receiving
waters are in a fair condition. Somereceiving water courses such as the lower
Chao Praya, Tha Chin, Pangpakong in
the central basin, Lam Takhong in thenorthern basin and Songkhla Lake in thesouthern basin were polluted, particularlyin the areas where receiving pollutants
over carrying capacity were discharged
from various sources of pollution such as
in industrial, agricultural and community
areas. Similarly, the coastal water in the
Inner Gulf and certain highly populatedareas of the Outer Gulf of Thailand showpoor quality, particularly in the areas into
which the four main rivers flow (Mae
Klong, Tha Chin, Chao Phraya and Bang
Pakong Rivers). Despite the current goodcondition of the coastal water quality, highlevels of significant pollutants are closely
monitored in many densely-populated
and/or tourist areas of the Andaman Sea.
The main water quality problems are fromexcessive organic and bacteria loading
which reflects the insufficient wastewater
treatment facilities in the country.
Domestic wastewater is still a major
source of pollutants contributed to waterpollution problem in the country. The
existing wastewater treatment facilities

Management Regulation (propose to
management the import, using, disposal
and exporting); and Amendment the
National Environmental Standard(Ambient and Emission Standard).

Q2. How do you observe the state ofwater environment in your country?
My organization is the focal point ofenvironmental management for thewhole country. The water environment in
Lao PDR remains in a deteriorated state,
and a major cause is considered to be
insufficient implementation of wastewater
management in community areas aswell as the discharging of water fromurban industrial and agricultural usages
without treatment. Groundwater quality
in Lao PDR is good in general, and it isconsidered potable according to drinking
water quality standards. Groundwater

cover only 22 % of the total amount (15million m3 /day) of domestic wastewater.

Q3. What is the most beneficial pointof being a partner of WEPA?
The major aims of WEPA are to encourage
cooperation among member countries
and to promote good governance inwater environment management by
providing necessary, relevant informationand knowledge, through a series of
databases. Information collected through
WEPA annual workshops and otherrelated activities is shared by the WEPA
Database via the website and during theworkshops. The database is a good sourceis utilized in every region of Lao PDR
both for the agricultural and industrial
consumption. Sources of pollution varyfrom point source (Domestic Wastewater,
Commercial Wastewater, Industrial
Wastewater, Mining wastewater andLivestock Wastewater) to non-point
sources (Agriculture originating frompaddy, vegetable fields and forest area).
Among these sources, effluents frommining activities and industrial wastewaterand urban wastewater are critical pollution
sources in Lao PDR.

Q3. How do you think that WPEA
contributed to the improvement of thewater environmental management
in your country?
Lao PDR is a developing country andstill needs capacity to work on its water
environment. WEPA serves to contributeof information on water environment interms of policies, environmental soundtechnologies, public participations in water
environment, and NGO and CBO activities.
This is a good forum for partner countries
to use for exchanging information
especially about best practices on water
quality management in the region andamong 13 partner countries in Asia.
As mention earlier, WEPA supports
the member countries with technicalassistance on water governancemanagement. WEPA is a good forum forpartner countries to share experience andbest management in water environment
issue. At the same time, it provides agood chance for developing countries
like Thailand to learn from the experienceof developed countries like Japan andRepublic of Korea.

to the improvement of the water
environment management in Lao PDR by
conducting surveys and analysis, and thensharing information on water environment
management.
In the near future, I would like to use
information related to policy planningfrom WEPA as baseline data to support thedevelopment of a master plan for waterpollution control or the water environment
for Lao PDR. The important informationthat is needed now is a database of
surface and ground water quality fromWEPA to support amendments to theambient water and effluent standards that
I am now in charge of.

strengthening water environment
conservation efforts in Lao PDR
as well as in other WEPA member
countries. WEPA can also contribute
further to staff capacity building for
Lao PDR’s government to improvewater environment management andconservation in the future.

Q4. What is your expectation for
WEPA?
I expect WEPA to be a good information
platform that will contribute toactivities under the national water
quality management plan. Wastewatertechnologies from developed countries
have been utilized and applied to suit thesituation in Thailand.

Q5. What is your expectation for
WEPA?
I have been involved in WEPA activities
since its establishment in 2004. I would
like to see to progress of the activities
especially implementation on the groundas well as clear policy on the water
environment. The database has beendeveloped and used for quite sometime.
To make it more useful, an evaluation isneeded at this stage. Lessons learned
from member countries serve as very
crucial information and knowledge. Thus
the information provided should be

sufficient for the country to learn andutilize. The database should be regularly
updated and also allow the focal pointfrom member countries to modify andinput current data. Various media should
be developed and included for example,
VDOs, e-learning etc. The outcomeof each annual workshop shouldsummarized and produce in these typesof format. For future cooperation, I would
suggest that WEPA should work on a pilot
scale and focus on areas that the member
countries can share and learn from eachother. The theme of each workshop
should come from common problemson the water environment of the partnercountries. Training sessions could beheld back to back with the workshop sothat partner countries can learn fromdeveloped countries. This will suit the aimof technology transfer.

Q4. How did you utilize theknowledge and information you got fromWEPA for the improvement of the water
environmental management
in your country?
We have developed our water quality
management plan based on public
participation of all stakeholders.
Stakeholders’ involvement activities onwater environment in various member
countries were applied as project

Wijarn Simachaya
Deputy-Permanent Secretary
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

ThailandWater Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report49

Q3. What is best point for your country
by being a partner of WEPA?

Nguyen The Dong
Deputy Director-General
Vietnam Environment Administration
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

Viet Nam

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?
I am responsible for the International
Cooperation and Science Technology
Department, Biodiversity Conservation
Agency, Centre for Environmental
Technology Consultancy, and the Instituteof Science on Environment Management.

Q2. How do you observe the state ofwater environment in your country?
Wastewater from industrial facilities
and industrial zones is the major
source of pressure in inland surface

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?
My position in the Institute forInternational Environmental Policy
is senior engineer of international
environmental management policy
research. We provide technical support
to bilateral environment cooperation.
Based on this, we have done a lotof research on laws, regulations andmanagement strategy of drinking waterand groundwater, not only on the stateof water environmental managementin China, but also on the experiences ofdeveloped countries or other regions.
Through our research work, we contributeto our Ministry’s decision-making bypresenting policy recommendations andinternational experiences.

Q2. How do you observe the state ofwater environment in your country?
Water quality plays a key role inhuman health. Water resources and water
environment have become the key factors

50

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Reportwater environment. Wastewater frommechanical engineering and metallurgy
contains heavy metals, oil and gas;
textile and paper industry wastewatercontains suspended solids, organic
substances and persistent colorings;
food industry wastewater contains ahigh concentration of organic matter, as
well as nutrients such as nitrogen andphosphorus. Untreated sewage fromresidential and tourism areas is a major
cause of water pollution. Surface waterpollution problems caused by untreatedwastewater discharges into the river
basin are becoming more serious.

affecting the quality of development,so the government in China attaches
great importance to this problem. MEP
in China has carried out a lot of work toprotect China’s water resources and water
environment, and we have made great
progress in water legislation, economic
policy and water treatment technology
and so on.
As a researcher, I receive information
about the state of the water environment
through academic journals, academic

Vietnam Environment Administrationin particular and Vietnam in general
gained so many things by becoming a
WEPA partner. One of the best points isthat through WEPA, Vietnam could learn
best experiences on water environment
management, as well as technologies
and tools of water pollution treatment
from other partner countries, and suchknowledge was useful to improve
the water environment in Vietnam.
Furthermore, Vietnam was able to havemore opportunities to share informationand develop cooperation with otherconferences, media and relevant
websites. Furthermore, as an international
environmental management policy
researcher, I prefer to focus more on
hot topics and key problems on waterin China, by comparing experiences andlessons from U.S.A, Europe and othercountries through the international
academic communication platform. We
provide related policy proposals to MEP,
and promote good governance of water
environment management in China.

countries to adapt to the impacts ofclimate change to the water environment,
and can then develop a variety ofadaptation practices, design better ways
to conserve our water supplies, improvewater recycling, and develop alternative
strategies for water management.

countries in water environment
management through the WEPA
workshops and dialogues.

Q4. How can WEPA contributeto the improvement of the water
environmental management in yourcountry?
We have gained so much informationand knowledge related to water issues
such as:sustainable urban water management,
wastewater management in urban areas,water quality control, decentralized
domestic wastewater treatment, andclimate change impacts to the water

Q3. What do you think is the benefitof WEPA for the improvement ofwater environmental managementin the region?
WEPA provides a good communication
platform on water environment
management, and also provides
opportunities for neighboring countries
to share their experiences and learn fromeach other. I believe that Asian countries
have good potential for cooperation inthis field. In the future I am willing to
invite more experts to join the academic
exchanges and cooperative activities
under WEPA.

Q4. How has WEPA contributed to theimprovement of the water environmental
management in your country?
I think the information and knowledge
from WEPA conferences and seminars
can help us to realize the experiences
and lessons of water environmental
management in other Asian countries.
This information can provide reference

Q3. What is your expectation for
WEPA?
environment and adaptation options.
Vietnam is one of the most vulnerable
countries to climate change . The impactsof climate change on water availability
and water quality will affect many
sectors, including energy production,
infrastructure, human health, agriculture
and ecosystems. Climate change impacts
on water supply and quality will also
affect tourism and recreation. The qualityof lakes, streams, coastal beaches, andother water bodies that are used forswimming, fishing, and other recreational
activities can be affected by changes inprecipitation, increases in temperature,and sea level rise. Vietnam must look at
the experiences, knowledge and lesson
learnt on policies and tools from other

for China’s water environment
management. At the same time,knowledge, information and networking
can strengthen international exchanges
and cooperation on the issue of water
between Asian countries.

In the coming years, water environment
will become one of the main concerns
for the whole world, especially in thecontext of the impact of climate change.
In order to protect the water environment,
it is necessary to make efforts and becooperative on water management at
the regional and global level. We arehighly appreciative of the support fromthe Japanese Government, the Ministryof the Environment and the Institute for
Global Environmental Strategies throughthe initiative of creating WEPA. We hopethat WEPA can continue to boost further
cooperation between Vietnam, Japan andother countries in water environment
management.

Q5. What is your expectation for
WEPA?

management. We want to exchange
and communicate with WEPA countries
regarding policies, regulations, pollution
control measures, advanced technologies
and management concepts on drinking
water and groundwater. It would bebetter if WEPA held more communication
seminars or specific training programs tocover these hot issues in the future.

As mentioned, my major is international
environmental policy research, inparticular international policies ondrinking water and groundwater* All the above comments are my personal
opinions and conclusions, and do not
represent any other person or organization!

Chen Gang
Senior Engineer
Institute for International Environmental Policy
Policy Research Center for Environment and Economy (PRCEE)
Ministry of Environmental Protection

China

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

Q3. What are your expectations for a
future WEPA?

Masanobu Miyazaki
Director
Water Environment Division
Environmental Management Bureau
Ministry of the Environment

Japan

Q1. Could you briefly describe yourresponsibility?
As Director of the Water Environment
Division, I deal with overall water
environment management in Japan. My
responsibility covers different aspectsof water environment management
such as the establishment or revisionof ambient water quality standards andeffluent standards, the accumulationand publication of national monitoringdata for ambient water quality, anddiscussions about domestic wastewater
management and measures for lake
conservation. Moreover, in order to shareexperiences and technologies on water
environmental management obtained
from past activities in Japan with Asian
countries, our division has initiatedvarious international cooperation
projects to support other countries in
improving their water environment, suchas WEPA, as well as Water Environment
Improvement Projects in Asia and theJapan-China Water Environmental
Cooperation Project.

Q2. What is your opinion on thesecond phase of WEPA?
Based on the knowledge accumulated
and the human network developed in thefirst phase, we used the second phaseof WEPA to address situation analysis
on water environmental governance inAsia. We promoted knowledge sharing

52

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Reporton priority topics such as “Domestic
Wastewater Treatment” and “Climate
Change and the Water Environment” sothat solutions can be found for water
environmental problems in Asia. In
the second phase, we shared “Good
Practices” and facilitated discussion
on future actions required for eachcountry among WEPA partners throughinternational workshops/symposiums
and WEPA dialogues. Through these
activities, I believe that we were able
to share a diverse range of goodpractices in the Asian region such ascommunity based domestic wastewater
management. The information obtained
from WEPA activities were summarised
into a report entitled “WEPA Outlook
2012” and also used as input ininternational discussions such as theWorld Water Forum.
On the other hand, it was pointed outthat all Asian countries faced different
levels of water environmental problems.
Taking domestic wastewater treatment
as an example, some countries havedifficulty in the construction phase oftreatment facility, while others face
problems in the operational phase.
Because there is no single solution todeal with these different problems facedby various countries, we learned that
we have to take a different approach foreach issue. This is the lesson that we
can take from the second phase of WEPA
and use for future WEPA activities.

We believe that the networking thatWEPA does is beneficial for solving water
environmental issues in Asia, because we
can share a range of knowledge to findregional solutions. Therefore, we would
like continue to support this partnership.
We would like to try to develop a schemewithin WEPA to discuss and implement
possible solutions for specific issues
in each country on the basis of thepartnership that has been establishedin the first and second phases of WEPA,
taking into consideration commentsfrom WEPA partners. I hope that WEPA
partners will join in this partnership more
actively than ever. I would like to workon future WEPA activities to strengthen
the partnership so that we can solve
water environment problems in the Asian
region by improving water environmental
governance.

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report53

Appendix

WEPA Focal Points and Partners* Current Focal Person (as of March 2014)* Former Focal Person (last known position)( )Cambodia
Sokha Chrin*, Deputy Director General, General
Directorate of Technical Affairs, Ministry ofEnvironment
China
Chen Gang*, Senior Engineer, Institute forInternational Environmental Policy, Policy ResearchCenter for Environment and Economy, Ministry ofEnvironmental Protection (PRCEE) (April 2010 - )Guo Jinlong(*), Deputy Director, Department of
Pollution Prevention and Control, Ministry ofEnvironmental Protection (April 2009 - March 2010)

Nobuo Yoshida, Director, Water Environment
Division, Environment Management Bureau,
Ministry of the Environment (April 2010 - March 2012)
Yoshiaki Morikita, Director, Water Environment
Division, Environment Management Bureau,
Ministry of the Environment (April 2009 - March 2010)
Masahiro Yasuda*, Deputy Director, Water
Environment Division, Environment Management
Bureau, Ministry of the Environment (April 2013 - )Takatoshi Wako(*), Deputy Director, Water
Environment Division, Environment Management
Bureau, Ministry of the Environment (April 2010 March 2013)

Indonesia
Laksmi Dhewanthi*, Assistant Deputy Minister for
Environmental Data and Information, Ministry ofEnvironment (January 2013 - )Dionysius Johny Kusmo(*), Assistant Deputy
Minister for Environmental Data and Information,
Ministry of Environment ( - December 2012)
Yun Insiani, Head of Infrastructures and Services,
Ministry of Environment
Lao PDR
Souphasay Komany*, Director of Technical
Division, Nam Ngum River Basin Committee
Secretariat, Department of Water Resources, Ministryof Natural Resources and Environment
Phengkhamla Phonvisai, Director of Legislation
and Information, Department of Pollution Control,
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment
Japan
Masanobu Miyazaki, Director, Water Environment
Division, Environment Management Bureau,
Ministry of the Environment (April 2013 - )Tadashi Kitamura, Director, Water Environment
Division, Environment Management Bureau,
Ministry of the Environment (April 2012 - March 2013)

56

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

Shu Nishi(*), Deputy Director, Water Environment
Division, Environment Management Bureau,
Ministry of the Environment (April 2009 - March 2010)
Republic of Korea
Taegu Kang*, Senior Researcher, Water Quality
Control Center, National Institute of Environmental
Research (NIER)
MyanmarTint Zaw*, Deputy Director General, Irrigation
Department, Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation
Khon Ra, Directior, Hydrology Branch, Irrigation
Department, Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation
Mu Mu Than, Assistant Engineer, Planning andWorks Branch, Irrigation Department, Ministry ofAgriculture and Irrigation
Malaysia
Baba Bin Hassan, Division Secretary, Water
Resources, Drainage and Hydrology Division,
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment
Ahmad Jamalluddin bin Shaaban*, Director
General, National Hydraulic Research Institute of
Malaysia (NAHRIM), Ministry of Natural Resources
and Environment

Hoo Huey Ching, Research Centre for Water
Quality & Environment, National HydraulicResearch Institute of Malaysia (NAHRIM), Ministryof Natural Resources and Environment
Nepal
Kamal Ram Joshi*, Senior Divisional Hydrologist,
Water and Energy Commission Secretariat (2013 - )Sunil Malla, Joint Secretary, Water and Energy
Commission Secretariat

Mark Tom Mulingbayan, Department Head,
Environment Department, Manila Water Company
Thailand
Wijarn Simachaya, Deputy-Permanent Secretary,
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment
Thiparpa Yolthantham*, Director of Planning,
Pollution Control Department (PCD), Ministry of
Natural Resources and Environment

Gautam Rajkarnikar(*), Chief, Koshi River BasinManagement Cell, Water and Energy Commission
Secretariat (2009 - 2012)

Viet Nam
Nguyen The Dong*, Deputy Director General,
Vietnam Environment Administration, Ministry of
Natural Resources and Environment

Philippines
Vicente B. Tuddao Jr., Director for Governanceand Enforcement, Department of Environment andNatural Resources (DENR)Do Nam Thang, Deputy Director, Institute of
Science for Environmental Management (ISEM),
Vietnam Environment Administration, Ministry of
Natural Resources and Environment

Erlinda A. Gonzales*, Technical Officer as
Environmental Consultant, Environmental
Management Bureau, Department of Environment
and Natural Resources (DENR)

Wilasinee Saktaywin, Environmentalist, Pollution
Control Department, Ministry of Natural Resources
and Environment

Sri Lanka
R.M.S.K. Ratnayake*, Director (Environmental
Pollution Control), Central Environmental Authority

Suwanna Kitpati Boontanon, Assistant Professor,
Civil and Environmental Engineering, Faculty ofEngineering, Mahidol University

Leonor C. Cleofas, Deputy Administrator forEngineering and Operations, Engineering andOperations Department, Metropolitan Waterworks
and Sewerage System (MWSS)WEPA Advisory Committee
Motoyuki Suzuki, Professor emeritus at the
University of Tokyo
Mitsumasa Okada, Professor, the Open Universityof Japan
Kaoru Takara, Professor, Disaster Prevention
Research Institute (DPRI), Kyoto University

Kensuke Fukushi, Professor, Integrated Research
System for Sustainability Science, The University ofTokyo
So Kazama, Professor, Graduate School ofEngineering, Tohoku University

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report57

List of Activities and Publicationsof the 2nd phase
Annual Meetings
Month, Year

City, Country

Number of Participants(Number of Countries)

5th Annual Meeting

March, 2010

Hanoi, Viet Nam

29 ( 2 )6th Annual Meeting

February, 2011

Tokyo, Japan39 (15)

7th Annual Meeting

September, 2011

Manila, Philippine

35 (13)8th Annual Meeting

February, 2013

Siem Riep, Cambodia

35 (12)

9th Annual Meeting

January, 2014

Hayama, Japan34 (11)

International Workshops/Seminars/Training Programmes
Month, Year

City, Country

Number of Participants(Number of Countries)

JICA training and dialogue programme: Workshop for
Enhancement of the Governmental Capacity on Water
Environment in Asia Countries

November-December,
2009

Yokohama, Japan8(4)1st WEPA International Workshop “Coping Strategies for
Water Environmental Challenges in Asia”

March, 2010

Hanoi, Viet Nam

56 (12)

JICA training and dialogue programme: Workshop for
Enhancement of the Governmental Capacity on Water
Environment in Asia Countries

September, 2010

Yokohama, Japan7(4)2nd WEPA International Workshop “Climate Change Impacts
to the Water Environment”

February, 2011

Tokyo, Japan47 (14)

JICA training and dialogue programme: Workshop for
Enhancement of the Governmental Capacity on Water
Environment in Asia Countries

August-September,
2011

Yokohama, Japan7(4)3rd WEPA International Workshop “The Progress of Water
Environmental Management and Domestic Wastewater
Treatment”

September, 2011

Manila, Philippine

74 (13)

International Workshop on Water Environment Partnershipin Asia for Sustainable Water Resources Management(Co-host with the Science Council of Japan at the 4th IWAASPIRE Conference & Exhibition)

October, 2011

Tokyo, Japan

Approximately 40

4th WEPA International Workshop “Decentralized Domestic
Wastewater Treatment in Asia –how to promote andmanage?”February, 2013

Siem Riep, Cambodia

58 (12)WEPA Group Workshop “Decentralized Domestic
Wastewater Treatment in Asia”

November, 2013

Jakarta, Indonesia

Approximately 30 ( 4 )WEPA Seminar “Current Situation and Future Prospect ofWater Environment Governance in Asia”

January, 2014

Tokyo, Japan

Approximately 170

Title of Workshops/Seminars/Trainings

58

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

WEPA Dialogues
Month, Year

City, Country

Number of Participants

Dialogue in Indonesia

October, 2009

Jakarta, Indonesia

49

Dialogue in Nepal “State and Challenges of the Water
Environment in Nepal”

December, 2010

Katmandu, Nepal

38

Dialogue in Sri Lanka “Industrial Wastewater Management
in Sri Lanka”

August, 2012

Colombo, Sri Lanka

40

Title of the Events

Month, Year

City, Country

WEPA Side Event at the 6th World Water Forum“Water Environment Partnership for a Sustainable Future”

March, 2012

Marseille, France

Session at the 2nd Asia-Pacific Water Summit “Voice from Asia for Better Water Quality –for discussion toward Post-2015 Development Goals on water”

May, 2013

Chaing Mai, Thailand

Year

Note

Other WEPA Activities at International Events

Publications
Title
ReportWEPA Outlook on Water Environmental Management 2012 (English)

2012

WEPA Outlook on Water Environmental Management 2012 (Japanese)

2013

WEPA Policy Briefs
Decentralized Domestic Wastewater Management in Asia – Challenges andopportunities
Community-based Sanitation – Lessons Learned from SANIMAS Program in Indonesia
On-site Management for Domestic Wastewater in Thailand
Privatization of Sanitation and Sewerage Services – Lessons Learned from The
Philippines

2014

Available on-line only

Urban Domestic Wastewater Management in Vietnam – Challenges and Opportunities
Working for Better Water Quality – The State of Water Quality Management in WEPA
Partner Countries
Water Environment and Climate Change – Policy Challenges

Water Environment Partnership in Asia (WEPA)
Second Phase Final Report59Ministry of the Environment, Japan
Water Environment Division
Environmental Management Bureau
1-2-2 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 100-8975, Japan
TEL: +81 3 3581 3351, FAX: +81 3 3593 1438
URL: http://www.env.go.jp/en/

WEPA Secretariat

Institute for Global Environmental Strategies [ IGES]
Natural Resources and Ecosystem Services Area
2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Kanagawa, 240-0115, Japan
TEL: +81 46 855 3700, FAX: +81 46 855 3709
E-mail: contact@wepa-db.net, URL: http://www.iges.or.jp/

www.wepa-db.net