Soetrisno, S.
Freelance Groundwater Advisor,
Jln. Awiligar Raya No.8, Bandung 40191, Indonesia,
E-mail:[email protected]
URL:www.geocities. com/Eureka/Gold/1577

Abstract: Following the change of political regime in 1998, reform has realigned the role of central government. To conform to Article 10 Paragraph (1) of LawNo. 22, 1999 concerning regional autonomy and decentralization, local governments were assigned responsibility to manage those water resources, including groundwater, within their jurisdiction.
As Indonesia consists of 30 provinces (regional government level) and over 300kabupatens/kotas (local governments), the transfer of water resources administration and responsibility to the local governments makes management more complex, since each local government has its own interest. Experience shows that regional and local governments are more concerned with revenue from water fees than with its conservation. Excessive groundwater abstraction in some basins such as Jakarta and Bandung has created negative impacts to groundwater and the environment, such as declining piezometric head (from 2 to 4.6 m year -1), salt water intrusion (6 to10 km inland), and land subsidence (maximum recorded of 34 cm year -1)
Since water resources ignore administrative boundaries, local governments should also consider other local, regional and national interests in groundwater management. Therefore a clear role-sharing of competency and responsibility at all government levels, and networking between kabupaten/kota, provincial and central government are indispensable. Ignoring the nature of water occurrence will lead eventually to further degradation of the groundwater resources environment.
Trans-boundary aquifers are now commonplace due to decentralization. They should therefore be managed by co-operation amongst the basin local governments. The respective basin local governments should recognize that the best means to achieve the rational management of their trans-boundary groundwater resources and protection of the environment is to adopt, in principle, an integrated approach including, where appropriate, the conjunctive use of surface and groundwater, balancing water budgets and the practice of conservation within the basin.

Key Words: decentralization, groundwater management, Indonesia.

INTRODUCTION
In Indonesia since the beginning of the Dutch colonial era, groundwater has had a significant role in providing water supply. After independence , economic development and increased population have sharply increased water needs for all purposes. As water resources management was formerly the responsibility of central government, with management dispersed among different agencies for surface and groundwater, there have been numerous problems related to water supply and conflict of use in such a large country. The rising demand for water supply, combined with both scarcity and continuous or periodic excesses, have resulted in some negative impacts. Water resources management has so far been unable to respond to demand and to overcome those negative impacts. Therefore water resources reform is indispensable, and must be adjusted to new paradigms and to the decentralization policy, such as to deliver regional governments with the role of water resources management within their jurisdiction.
Reform has realigned the role of central government. Indonesia consists of 30 provinces (regional governments) and more than 300 kabupaten/kotas (local governments) within those provinces. The political changes of 1998 triggered the demand for regional and local governments to manage their own natural resources through decentralization.Law No. 22 of 1999 on Regional Government Administration assigned to local governments the management of water resources, including groundwater, within their areas. This law entered into force on January 1st, 2001, and is expected to provide greater fairness in natural resource development, as well as more prosperity at local and regional levels.
There is however concern that decentralization will create greater fragmentation in water resources management and ultimately result in the degradation of groundwater resources and the environment.
This paper discusses the challenges to be faced in implementing regional/local autonomy, the principal concepts related to the decentralization of groundwater management, negative impacts that may be expected, and how to avoid further degradation of resources. The paper draws ideas from international groundwater experts on how to improve groundwater management at the local level.

PRE-DECENTRALIZED SITUATION
According to the Dutch administrative system, surface water and groundwater were the responsibility of the central government and were managed by differentinstitutions. Surface water was under the minister responsible for public works, while groundwater was under the minister of mines. Each ministry has its own provincial office, such that each province had two offices dealing with surface and groundwater respectively to support the central government in water resources management in the province. As defined in Paragraph (2) Article 5 of Law No. 11 of 1974 on Water Resources, and Article 6 of Act No. 22 of 1982 on Water Resources Management, underground water resources and hot springs were considered to be mineral and geothermal resources, and were administered by the minister responsible for mines. Abstraction of water for certain purposes was, however, subject to licensing. Surface and ground water licences were issued by the Governor of the province after having obtained a technical recommendation from the minister responsible for public works and the minister responsible for mines respectively.
It was quite obvious that water resources management was fragmented. Commonly, complex bureaucratic procedures resulted from the lack of co-ordination amongst water agencies at both the national and regional level. This fragmented management ignored the nature of water occurrence. This type of management implementation in a vast country led to poor practices regarding the utilization and conservation of water resources. Conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater, which absolutely demands an integrated management of both, has been difficult to implement in Indonesia.
This lack of conjunctive use had the potential to create overexploitation of groundwater, particularly in urban areas. Excessive groundwater abstraction has occurred in several major urban basins, such as Jakarta, Bandung, and Semarang. Declining piezometric head, salt water intrusion and land subsidence are all evidence of negative impacts due to excessive abstractions.
Such degradation of groundwater has been monitored by Directorate of Environmental Geology in Bandung basin, where many textile industries are located. The Bandung basin has one of the highest population densities in the country. Here, the groundwater basin and its aquifer extend across the borders of three local governments. Most deep industrial wells tap a Quaternary volcanic aquifer. It has been recorded that during the last decade periode, piezometric head has declined in all years except 1998 when national economic conditions worsened. Increasing total dissolved solids and electric conductivity indicate the deterioration of groundwater quality. Such a condition is typical in most urban areas, particularly in Java, Sumatra, and Bali. In Jakarta for instance, during 1996, piezometric head declined 4.6 m , salt water intrusion reached 6 to 10 km inland, and the highest land subsidence recorded was 34 cm year -1.

PRESENT SITUATION
To comply with Law No. 22 of 1999, starting January 1st, 2001, central government transferred its responsibility in water resources management to the local governments. Central government is still responsible to provide standards and capacity building for water resources management to local governments.
As stipulated in Article 7 of that law:

1. Responsibility of autonomous regions includes all fields of government administration, except in foreign policy, defense and security, justice, monetary and fiscal policy, religious affairs, and in certain other fields of government affairs.
2. Other fields as mentioned in paragraph 1) consist of policy for national planning and macro national development, financial budget balancing, state administration and economic institution system, building and empowering of human resources, utilization of strategic natural resources and high technology, conservation, and national standards.

Furthermore, Article 10, Paragraph (1) states that autonomous regions have responsibility in managing national resources within their area and are responsible for sustainability of environment according to existing regulations. So far as groundwater is concerned, the bottom line of those paragraphs is that regional and local governments have authority to manage groundwater resources independently within their areas, instead of assisting the central government.
According to that law, Government Act No 25 of 2000 was proclaimed to clarify the roles of central and regional governments in all fields of public administration, including water resources management. Regarding groundwater, the act stipulates that the central government has the responsibility:

1. To define standards of general investigation and groundwater management;
2. To arrange basic surveys of groundwater in scale of equal or less than 1 : 250.000;
3. To create and supervise the implementation of regional autonomy by delivering guidelines, advice, training, direction, and supervision;
4. To define guidelines of management and protection of natural resources (including groundwater);
5. To define standards of licensing by local government;
6. To define policy for a national (groundwater) information system.

1. To provide support for developing and utilizing of groundwater;
2. To provide training and research within the provinces.

Despite the existing law and act, role conflicts often have occurred due to differing interpretations. Therefore role sharing and clear authority at each government level in water management is still required. Generally, central government should deal with steering, while local governments deal with rowing.
In order to have a comprehensive national system of water resources management, The Government of Indonesia is pursuing a long-term strategy under the World Bank funded Water Sector Adjustment Loan (WATSAL). This strategy has as a major objective the reform of national policy in the water resources sector. Goals are to create a new national water law to replace the now obsolete Law No 11 of 1974 on Water Resources, review requirements for a national water council to coordinate national water resources policy, develop a national hydrology management system, and implement a water resources management information system.
The implementation of groundwater management at the local level may face the following challenges:

• regional/local governments lack experience, since in the past, most management activities were conducted by central government
• shortages in suitably skilled human resources and lack of local sources of finance and equipment
• ignorance of the nature of water occurrence which crosses administrative boundaries
• local administration is often more concerned with earning revenue from water taxes than with its conservation
• management becomes more complex, particularly in co-ordination, since aquifers are dissected by different local administrations.

• decision making may be conducted quickly since it is closer to the user and local need
• more fairness and prosperity should result for local users of water resources
• more possibility of grass-roots involvement of stakeholders
• administration may be more effective, since control is within a relatively small area

CHALLENGES IDENTIFIED
Challenges related to water management should be identified at the beginning of the changeover of the system and during implementation of the new system. Failure to resolve these at the outset might lead to further degradation of water resources. Therefore it is best to recognize them as early as possible.
Following are the challenges identified.

1. Fragmentation of water management reflected in the existence of different agencies which manage surface water and groundwater.
2. Each local government has its own area of responsibility, but aquifers generally extend over several local areas, thus creating a potential conflict of interest.
3. The existing legal framework fails to define the authority and role of each agency in water management, both nationally and locally.
4. Local government authority's responsibility is limited to its own administrative boundaries. However, due to the nature of water resources, responsibility for water resources management will often cross those boundaries.
5. The multiple function of existing water resources institutions as regulator,operator and data provider has led to the ineffective and inefficient performance of those institutions. Decisions taken may be biased, since it is difficult to be neutral when institutional self-interest is involved.
6. Limited local resources (personnel, facilities and financing).are available to local government to carry out their responsibility in water resources management
7. Centralized planning and implementation of water resources activities fails to accommodate local interests. Local people were seldom consulted in water resource-related projects, which were designed and developed by the central government.

MAIN PRINCIPLES OF DECENTRALIZATION
Learning from past experience, the current situation, and from existing and potential problems, it is important to elucidate during the early stages of decentralization the main principles for improving groundwater management, as discussed below:
Following the decentralization of government administration policy, a new paradigm for water resources management should be introduced for its reform.
This paradigm should include as a minimum:

• integrated management of surface water and groundwater, and a holistic approach related to ecology
• decentralization instead of centralization of management, in which local government has authority for natural resources (including water resources) present within its area
• realignment role of central government, transferring implementation of the policy and decision-making of the management to local government, involving stakeholders at the grassroots level in the region and including the private sector
• assured water availability for the prosperity of the people

Based on the fact that the country consists of many provinces and kabupatens covering a vast area, decentralization of water management is indispensable and must be implemented. The principle is that nothing should be done at higher level of government that can be done satisfactorily at a lower level. (Anonymous 1993). It does not mean that management should be devolve into disjointed decision-making at the kabupaten level. Wherever a trans-boundary aquifer exists, groundwater management should be conducted in close co-operation with the neighbouring local governments. Referring to the nature of water, groundwater management should be integrated with surface water management within river basin systems. Integrated management is not only limited to unifying all policies, but also bringing physically all types of water resources into a single institution.
Learning from past experience where there was a lack of co-ordination between the two central agencies responsible for surface and groundwater, a single organization with consistent policies and purposes is essential to implement conjunctive use, and to unify management of surface water and groundwater. Insofar as possible, all water resources at each level of government should be administered under one single organisation with the same consistent policies and purposes.
Decentralization does not mean that authority is assigned to the kabupaten/kota exclusively, since both the center and provinces also have responsibilities,as stipulated in Law No. 22 of 1999. Whenever disputes or conflicts arise related to trans-boundary arrangements, then the central and/or provincial government is obliged to become involved and to help to resolve them.
Referring to the decentralization principle, water resources administration should be established at the lowest possible level, with participation of all possible stakeholders as partners in its management. Since a kabupaten covers a relatively small area, involvement of stakeholders at the grass-roots level is important in all functions of management, from planning to implementation. This will ensure fairness in groundwater allocation for all and the poverty alleviation program could be implemented in a realistic way.
Act locally (in kabupaten, or kota, or province level), think nationally. The authority of a province, kabupaten or kota is limited to its own area, while the nature of water resources ignores administrative boundaries. Therefore, any decisions on local water utilization which may lead to mismanagement of resources, must also consider national or regional interests. This will overcome narrow locally-oriented ideas which fail to consider other regions or national interests. Co-operation between regions as allowed by the law would implement groundwater management based on the nature of water.
In accordance with the implementation of decentralization, aquifers (or rivers) may dissected by the boundaries of two or more local administrations. Trans-boundary aquifers are now a common occurrence in term of local boundaries due to decentralization, and should be managed by co-operation amongst the basin local governments. The respective basin local governments should acknowledge that the best means to achieve the rational management of their trans-boundary groundwater resources and the protection of it's the environment is to adopt, in principle, an integrated approach including, where appropriate, the conjunctive use of surface and groundwater. Since the country includes more than 300 kabupatens , one can imagine the complexity of groundwater management should several kabupatens establish independent management plans for the same aquifer. The island of Bali is a good example to illustrate this situation. With an area of less than 5,000 km2 , this island is one single province consisting of 9 kabupatens. It has many rivers but they are short and a single prominent aquifer exists of Quaternary volcanic origin. To permit each kabupaten to manage its own surface and groundwater program would result in chaos. Therefore, it is more reasonable to assign decentralization to the provincial level.
Cooperation between basin local governments, as allowed by the law, would implement groundwater management based on nature of water. Basin local governments should provide for the utilization, protection and control of trans-boundary groundwater on an equitable basis and, to that end, for creation and maintenance of an adequate data base. The optimum and efficient use of their trans-boundary groundwater resources is essential to their long-term interest.
In order to establish strong, effective and an efficient local institutions, adequate supporting resources are required. Therefore, a local legal framework is indispensable. It would clearly and precisely regulate the need of supporting resources, particularly an adequate allocated budget. However, learning from past experience that local government is more interested in revenues from groundwater taxes than in its conservation, local regulation should ensure that providing such a budget for water management does not sacrifice sustainability of groundwater and its environment.
Water resources data and information from a given area is the foundation for effective water resources management, decision support and policy making. Therefore, local government should understand the importance of that data and information. Since collection of data and information yields no revenue, local government will tend to make data collection and data base management a low priority. An awareness of the importance of data and information should form the basic of the concepts of local/regional policy makers.
Since the diversion of surface water can affect the availability of groundwater, and the pumping of groundwater may affect the base-flow of streams, it is essential that licensing procedures be fully co-ordinated to maximize their beneficial use and economic benefits, and to maintain sustainability. All revenue collected from groundwater abstraction must be attributed to its conservation.
Management of water resource diversions should take into account not only the licensing mechanism, but also the possible effects on land use, forestry, flood protection, erosion control, fisheries, recreation, environmental protection of wetlands, etc. Therefore, integrated management that involve all stakeholdersis indispensable.

IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT
Decentralization gives an unique opportunity to local government to involve stakeholders at the grass-roots level in close co-operation to manage their common groundwater resource. Since they are involved in the management, they will have a sense of belonging to the resources and this will facilitate their detecting any activity which may negatively impact the resource and its environment. It will also increase awareness of the need of sustainability of groundwater resources.
Any conflict which may arise concerning water allocation could be solved by all parties in an early stage. In the case of trans-boundary aquifers, where each local government realises the need for mutual co-operation, proper management will ensure a positive impact on the resources and its environment.
Alternatively, decentralization of groundwater management may create a negative impact to the environment. With local autonomy, local government must provide their own budget as there is minor financial support available from central government. In order to raise an adequate local budget, particularly in poor local areas, revenue may be raised from groundwater abstraction fees. Previous experience shows that most local administrations will tend to increase water abstraction in order to increase revenue, rather than to conserve it. Lack or shortage of skilled local people and equipment may create mismanagement of groundwaterat the local level and exacerbate the deterioration of the environment.
There is no a comprehensive report on groundwater in such trans-boundary aquifers as of writing this document, as just six months have elapsed since the beginning of decentralization.

CLOSING REMARKS
Decentralization of groundwater management to local governments is still in a very early stage. Support from central government is still required.
Decentralization has the potential to deliver more prosperity and more equitable water allocation for local people. However, improper groundwater management due to inadequate local resources, locally oriented thinking and greater interest in revenue than conservation may exacerbate degradation of groundwater and environment.
Since trans-boundary aquifers are now a common occurrence, co-operation amongst basin local governments is indispensable. However, it is obvious from the past experience that establishing such co-operation is difficult, since many localinterests are involved. Therefore, it may be wiser if decentralization of water management is devolved to the provincial level rather than to the kabupaten level.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author wishes to thank to the Organizing Committee, particularly Mr. Peter Jolly, the Chairman, for giving him an opportunity to present this paper and for providing financial support, hence, permitting him to attend this conference. The author also sincerely thanks his colleagues for reviewing and making comments on this paper.

REFERENCES
Anonymous (1993) Water Resources Management, A World Bank Policy Paper, Interna tional Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank, Washington.
Anonymous (1999) Groundwater: Legal and Policy Perspectives, World Bank Technical Paper No. 456, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/ The World Bank, Washington.

© Copyright @wiligar SOHO All rights reserved. Permission to use, distribute, and copy this document is hereby     granted, as long as credit to the author is given. MCMXCVIII