You are on page 1of 7

Sokhem Pech and Kengo Sunada

Population Growth and Natural-Resources


Pressures in the Mekong River Basin
The Mekong River Basin possesses the regions largest
potential water source and related resources, which
support ongoing economic development and basin community livelihoods. It is currently witnessing a major
demographic transition that is creating both opportunities
and challenges. An analysis of the complex relationship
between demographic changes and impacts on the
natural-resource base confirms that resource exploitation
is occurring not only to meet growing domestic needs but
also for other vested interests. Population, together with
other major drivers, such as institutions, markets, and
technology, will have a very strong bearing on the way in
which the rich resources of the Mekong River Basin are
developed and distributed in the present and future. The
Mekong River Basins rich resources, and the benefits
derived from them, are unevenly distributed both in time
and geographically. Moreover, since the causes and
impacts do not respect political boundaries, the Mekong
countries need to jointly develop alternative management
strategies to meet projected demands within the sustainable capacity of the Mekong River Basin natural-resource
base.

INTRODUCTION
The Mekong countries have a complex, but interesting, mosaic
of demographic attributes and trends. The population of the
Mekong regionwhole of Yunnan Province of China, Myanmar, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnamis nearly 300
million, and over 70 million people live in the Mekong River
Basin (1). The Mekong Basin possesses the regions largest
potential water source and related resources. These resources
are fundamental to ongoing economic development in terms of
irrigation and agricultural production, fisheries and aquaculture, energy and forest products, navigation and other modes of
transport, domestic and industrial water supply, and tourism
(2). Levels of dependency on the rivers water and related
resources are very high, particularly among the rural poor, who
rely on subsistence livelihoods and moral economy (3).
Recent socioeconomic development has begun to slow
population growth rates in China, Thailand, and Myanmar,
while Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam are expected to experience
further positive growth well beyond 2050 (4). It is also true that
the population growth rates vary considerably across the
Mekong River Basin, within and between the basin countries
(2). For example, Yunnan population density has doubled since
the 1950s, reaching the current level of 103 people km2, but in
the Lancang/Mekong part, the population density is only 62
people km2 due to the rugged and inhospitable landform (5).
On the other hand, Yunnan population growth rate has
declined slower than other parts of China (present level of
1.3% y1 compared to less than 0.7% annually for all of China)
(5).
Accordingly, the overall Mekong populations are projected
to increase well beyond 2050. The population growth and
expected demographic changes in these countries create both
opportunities and challenges.
Ambio Vol. 37, No. 3, May 2008

Population size and its composition have significant implications for pressures on natural resources. Growing populations
require more or different food, which typically requires land
and water or other forms of production (6). This paper
examines population growth and its likely impacts on food
demand and land and water resources in the Mekong River
Basin in a systematic and integrated manner. As a first step, we
present a clear overview of demographic trends in the Mekong
River Basin. Next, we conduct a comprehensive analysis to
explore the complex relationship between demographic change
and impacts on the natural-resource base in the Mekong River
Basin.

Purpose and Methodology


The main purpose of this paper is to stimulate policy debate
over the current national focus on food self-sufficiency and a
broader national and regional development agenda in the
Mekong River Basin. We provide the context, empirical
evidence, and an analysis of the demand (real or perceived)
associated with population growth. We also present a comparison of demand forecasts with the sustainable potential of the
natural-resources base of the Mekong River Basin in order to
contribute to a better understanding of this immense and
complex Mekong River Basin environment.
Population growth, food and water demands, and their
impacts on water resources in both the Mekong River Basin and
other river basins around the world have been discussed in a
number of studies (e.g., 610). While the approaches used and
information provided by these studies give a good indication of
annual food and water demands, they generally do not provide
information about water and other related resources necessary
for meeting food demand at finer timescales, such as during
critical dry-season months, or at more specific geographical
scales.
This paper reviews conditions and trends in the Mekong
River Basin through both quantitative and qualitative analysis.
It examines both underlying opportunities for and threats to
sustainable water-resources management in the Mekong River
Basin at critical time periods and at key locations along the
Mekong main stem as shown in Figure 1. To this end, the study
makes use of a systematic assessment framework that allows for
identification of both key issues and appropriate management
responses to balance environmental and socioeconomic development objectives. The study tests the hypothesis of a complex
multidimensional relationship among key demographic attributes and other intervening factors, such as institutions, policy,
technology, culture, and the natural environment.

DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS IN THE MEKONG RIVER


BASIN
Overcoming Different Population Growth Rates
The Mekong River Basin population is over 70 million and is
expected to increase rapidly (1). Projections of population
growth in the Mekong River Basin differ widely as a result of
both different methods of enumeration and poor reporting (1, 8,
10). To address this problem, this study derives the Mekong

Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2008


http://www.ambio.kva.se

219

Mekong River Basin population is expected to grow by another


60%, while under scenario Bconstant growthit will double
its 2005 values. Empirical evidence suggests that future
population growth in the Mekong Basin is likely to follow the
trends projected under scenario A (4).
While these figures are only indicative, they do point to the
complexity associated with policy debate around population
growth as metajustification for natural-resources exploitation in
Mekong River Basin. Most, if not all, Mekong countries have
argued that to fulfill the resource requirements (perceived or
real) of a growing population, some form of water and/or landuse change will be required to support increasing human
numbers (1, 11, 12, 13).

FOOD DEMAND GROWTH PROJECTION IN THE


MEKONG RIVER BASIN
Selecting a Method for Projecting Food Demand

Figure 1. Mekong River key monitoring stations (27).

River Basin population growth rate from the national


population growth rates of each country represented in the
Mekong River Basin adjusted to the specific conditions of the
Mekong River Basin. United Nations (UN) data (4) on key
population statistics for China, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand,
Cambodia, and Vietnam were analyzed. The rate of natural
increase was estimated for each country from 1970 to 2050 as
the birth rate less the death rate, assuming that the rate of net
migration is zero. Population growth in the basin over a 50 y
period is projected based on two scenarios: scenario Awhere
the natural population increase rate changes over time as
estimated above; and scenario Bwhere the rate of natural
increase is kept constant at year 2000 levels as estimated by the
Mekong River Commission (MRC) (1).

Discussion of Population Growth Outlook


The projections estimated by the present study show that the
Mekong River Basin population grew from 63 million in 1995
to over 72 million in 2005. This is in good agreement with the
observed/estimated data (1). Under scenario A, by 2050, the

220

Total food demand projections usually depend on three crucial


factors: i) population size; ii) increase in per capita consumption and life style; and iii) changes in the composition of diet
(10). Data on the Mekong River Basin population size is
available (as shown previously), and changes in per capita
consumption can be estimated from Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO) food balance sheets (14). An analysis of
the data on the composition of average daily diet (1990, 1995,
and 2000) of all six Mekong countries shows that more than
65% of the daily calorie supply is provided by cereals (rice and
wheat), both directly as cereal products and indirectly through
animal products (14). It is therefore assumed in this study that
such a change in lifestyle would be minimal over the next 40 y,
and that cereal products and rice will remain the major staple
foods in the Mekong River Basin in the coming decades.
Some early Mekong River Basin studies applied a method
for calculating food demand that built on an assumption of per
capita demand of 300 kg y1 of paddy or equivalent across all
Mekong countries (see, e.g., 9). An analysis of the FAO food
balance sheets (14) (1990, 1995, and 2000) shows that method
was overgeneralized because food composition and availability
differ from country to country. The food balance sheets also
provide information about average per capita food supplies,
which can be used to measure long-term trends in national food
demand and diet composition. In this study, domestic food
demand is considered as the sum of a countrys demand for
food and other uses from available supplies, such as seed use,
livestock feed, food manufacturing, and farm and market waste
(postharvesting, transport, and retail losses).

Discussing Food Demand Estimates


Year 2000 cereal (rice, maize, and wheat) demand in the
Mekong River Basin was estimated to be around 20.65 million
t. Based on the constant population growth in scenario B, total
cereal demand in the basin will more than double to around
44.1 million t by 2050. Under scenario A, cereal demand is
projected to increase by nearly 60% (roughly 11 million t more
than 2000 values), as shown in Figure 2.
Comparing this demand with the 2000 paddy rice production
of 30.64 million t in the Lower Mekong Basin (15), and
assuming no changes in paddy production levels or farming
practices, the Mekong River Basin is likely to produce enough
rice to feed its basin community until 2030 or 2040 (see Fig. 3).
Northeast Thailand and the Vietnamese Deltamajor rice
producers and exportersare likely to produce rice surplus
even after 2050. However, malnutrition remains in many of the
least-developed parts of the basinMyanmar, Laos, and
Cambodia (2). This is mainly due to problems of distribution

Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2008


http://www.ambio.kva.se

Ambio Vol. 37, No. 3, May 2008

Figure 2. Mekong Basin cereal demand projections comparing with


2000 cereal production (option A: population growth rate declining;
option B: population growth constant).

and nonaffordability by some low-income groups, rather than


of an absolute lack of food (1). As far as the expansion of food
production in the future is concerned, the Mekong countries
have different potentials and constraints. These are discussed in
the next section.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN POPULATION


GROWTH AND AGRICULTURAL LAND EXPANSION
IN MEKONG COUNTRIES
An analysis of long-term population (4) and cropping-area
changes in all countries in the Mekong region during the past
four decades (19602004) (16) does not produce a uniform
relationship between population growth and land-use change.
All Mekong countries except for Myanmar experienced
cropping land area increases in proportion to the increase of
population until 1995, whereafter agricultural land expansion
has been much slower than population growth. This result
suggests that although population size is an important
determinant of agricultural land-use change, its form and the
intensity of change in the Mekong River Basin in a particular
locale are influenced by other factors, including land-tenure
policies, international markets for forest and agricultural
products, land resource availability and the level of competition
for it, technological factors, and development impacts (16).

Food Demand Growth and Impacts on Land Use


Numerous studies have highlighted the major influence of land
and water productivity on overall food production (e.g. 16, 17).
This study applies a Crop Area Production Model to evaluate
crop-area demands by taking into account not only food
demand and population change, but also land and water

Is a human being an aquatic or terrestrial species? This question


occasionally comes to the mind in the Mekong context. Floating
settlements on the shores of the Bassac River in Phnom Penh,
Cambodia (Photo: O. Varis).

productivity levels (16). For this study, the year 2000 yield was
assumed to grow at the rate observed between 1987 and 1997.
Figure 3 shows the increase in the crop-area demand in the
whole Mekong River Basin projected by this study as compared
against the 2000 observed paddy area data in the Mekong parts
of Yunnan, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnam (16, 17).
In a moderate scenario (A), the harvested area demand is likely
to increase to 9 million ha (i.e., an increase of 2 million ha from
2000 values). Similar trends are found at each individual
Mekong River Basin country level. If we compare crop
production area demand with the 2000 paddy areas (roughly
7 424 000 ha or 11 597 000 ha, if double- and triple-cropping
areas are counted), the projected paddy crop-area demand
would exceed existing paddy crop areas by 2020 or 2045,
respectively (16, 17). Given these findings, crop-area expansion
appears to be inevitable in the Mekong River Basin. This leads
to the question about whether there is any more room for this
expansion. This is discussed next.

Any More Room for Agricultural Land Expansion in the


Mekong River Basin?

Figure 3. Mekong River Basin growth in crop-area demand vs. 2000


harvested crop area (option A: population growth rate declining;
option B: population growth constant) (land-use data source: 16).

Ambio Vol. 37, No. 3, May 2008

At first glance, the future crop-area demand seems to be less


than the land area available. However, out of the Mekong River
Basin total catchment area of over 795 000 km2 (795 million
ha), only about 227.5 million ha is classified as Class Aland
areas suitable for upland or irrigation agriculture (18).
Furthermore, much less than half of this is available due to

Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2008


http://www.ambio.kva.se

221

Table 1. Summary of Agricultural Potential and Constraints of the Mekong River Basin.
Basin area

Areas for
upland agriculture

Area
used (%)

Area suitable
for irrigation (ha)

Area
used (%)

Irrigation
ratio

Cambodia

2 941 300

11 242 700

31

7%10%

Laos

3 051 400

25

2 317 100

35

7%10%

Vietnam Highlands
Vietnam Delta

1 131 300
10 100

51
68

360 900
3 256 200

36
88*

12%
60%

Thai NE

3 600 500

75

12 156 600

95

12%

n.a.

n.a.

Yunnan

233 333

n.a.

566 366

Constraints
Management and low inputs;
poor access to market and high loss;
landmine and small landholding; and
low irrigation efficiency.
Poor access to market; high operation
cost and low return; and low
irrigation efficiency.
Water shortage, salinity, acid sulfate soil;
low irrigation efficiency; and high
postharvest losses.
High labor cost; low-quality soil; salinity;
and low irrigation efficiency.
Flat and gentle slope area is about 6%,
and irrigation potential is marginal;
41.8 is high slope greater than 258;
and high erosion.

* Around 300 000 ha grow three crops of rice each year; 1 080 000 ha are double cropped (source: 16). Pasture land. z Farmland: 93% for single-rice cropping and 3% for double-rice cropping.

high levels of degradation, remoteness, poor soil quality, landtenure issues, lack of access to water, and competition with
forestry, human settlements, industrial uses, and infrastructure
development, as shown in Table 1 (16, 19).
Vietnam and Thailand use their arable land in the Mekong
River Basin almost to its full extent for producing paddy rice
and other crops for both domestic consumption and export (16,
17). To meet growing needs beyond 2015, Cambodia and Laos
will have to increase the paddy production or develop an
alternative food-security strategy with clear actions and
appropriate mechanisms for implementing it. While these
countries still have potential for paddy area expansion, they
need substantial investment in irrigation systems, transport
infrastructure, and market access (15).

as a result of future population increases, changes in flow


regimes due to built structures and irrigation diversions, and
climate-induced change.

Assessing Hydrological Impacts Due to Irrigation


It is understood that a series of large-scale economic activities in
the Mekong subregion are at various stages of planning and
development (3, 13, 21). The main source of major future
impacts, both positive and negative, on the communities and
natural resources of the Mekong River Basin is the development
and operation of major hydropower schemes, other large
infrastructure projects, and increased irrigation water diversion
in different parts of the basin (22).
Water abstraction from the Mekong is limited during the wet
season when flow levels are high and rainwater is available.
However, there are many constraints on water utilization during
the dry season, especially in drought years (23, 24). The dry
seasons pose the most water challenges. Therefore, we studied
the changes to the minimum daily flows due to the expansion of
irrigated paddy areas to the maximum potential of arable land
in the Lower Mekong Basin parts of Laos, Thailand,
Cambodia, and Vietnam (15).
In examining the hydrological impacts of irrigation, for the
purposes of this study, crop types were assumed to remain the
same, and therefore existing proportions between different crop
types within an irrigation area were retained. The scenario
limited the analysis to those crops associated with an increase in
total water demand as a result of additional dry-season
irrigation areas. The paddy area of 2000 (in thousands of ha)
and percentage assumed increase, crop irrigation lifetime and
cropping calendar, the crop water unit requirement of irrigation
water per hectare, and the return flow fraction are presented in
Tables 2 and 3.
We estimated the flow changes at Pakse and the CambodiaVietnam border (see Fig. 1 for locations) and compared the

ASSESSMENT OF POPULATION GROWTH AND


WATER AVAILABILITY ISSUES
Long-Term Per Capita Water Availability Trends in the
Mekong River Basin
According to the World Resource Institute, a basin reaches
water stress when per capita water supply is less than 1700 m3
y1 (20). Compared to other river basins across the world in
term of actual renewable water resources per capita, the
Mekong Basin is not yet considered to be water-stressed. An
average Mekong river flow of 474 932 MCM each year
theoretically can service the irrigation requirements of all
Mekong Basin countries many times (17). However, the region
still faces a series of water issues, including floods and drought
in many parts of the basin at different times of the year,
degradation of many key fish species and other important
habitats, and intensification of sectoral competition within and
among the Mekong countries (2). These water issues are closely
related to the unequal geographical and temporal distribution
of flow. Furthermore, these issues are likely to intensify further

Table 2. Paddy area of 2000 and percentage of assumed increase (in thousands of ha), crop irrigation lifetime, and cropping calendar.
Dry season, 3.5 mo, FebMay

Recession, 4 mo, JanApr

Basin country

2000

2040

2000

2040

Cambodia
Vietnam Delta
Thailand
Laos

55 150%

137.5

200 150%

500

155.9 * 10%
131.8 * 250%

171.5
461.3

0
0

0
0

Spring/summer, 4 mo, AprJul

Winter/spring, 4 mo, DecMar

2000

2040

2000

2040

1500
0
0

1879
0
0

1237
0
0

1581
0
0

(Data source: 16)

222

Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2008


http://www.ambio.kva.se

Ambio Vol. 37, No. 3, May 2008

Table 3. Estimated crop irrigated-water requirement and return


flow fraction.

Activity

Noncritical period, Crop Critical period,


FebApr
MayJan
irrigation
Return
(m3 ha1)
(m3 ha1 mo1) life (mo)
fraction

Lowland rice
Upland crops
Fruit trees
Coffee
Recession rice

2074
1555
1037
1100
1037

3.5
4
4
4
3

7258
6221
4147
4400
3110

0.3
0.3
0.0
0.3

(Source: adapted from 16)

impacts of irrigation expansion on the Mekong Delta at low


flow to 19962000 average monthly flow volumes at Pakse and
Cambodia-Vietnam border, as estimated by the World Bank
(23).
Above Kratie, the total dry-season irrigation withdrawal is
projected to remain lower (in term of percentage) than the areas
below Kratie and in Vietnams Mekong Delta. The 2000
estimated irrigation water demand in the Mekong River Basin
parts of Thailand and Laos was only 30% of the total average
flow volume at Pakse. However, with an increase in irrigated
areas to 250% and 10% in Laos and Thailand, respectively, the
total irrigation demand would be close to 80% of total average
flow volume during the critical months of February and March.
The dry-season flow change would be even more remarkable
with the projected increase of the dry-season irrigation in the
area further downstream of Kratie (Fig. 1). It will further
exacerbate an issue of competing demands from other uses,
including in-stream environmental uses and critical habitat
maintenance for endangered species, which are known to
require water of a certain depth.
The comparison of the irrigation volumes of 2000 with
average flow volumes in April and May shows that the
irrigation demand constituted 76%81% of the flow availability.
The results of irrigation volume estimates for downstream of
Kratie and in the Mekong Delta during the dry-season period
from December to July show an increase of 47% from the 2000
value of 32 096 MCM. The average value and the actual flow
volumes may be higher or lower, since the baseline standard
deviation of wet and dry years is estimated to be around 23% on
average (24). This incident of dry-season shortage is confirmed
by the report of severe incidence of seawater intrusion in the
Mekong Delta area of Vietnam in very dry years. With a
projected growth in irrigation water use, the critical dry-season
monthsApril and Maywill face more serious water shortages and more competition among water users, as irrigation
demand alone will surpass flow availability (21).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION


Population, together with other major drivers, such as
institutions and organizations, markets, and technology, will

have a very strong bearing on the way in which the rich


resources of the Mekong River Basin are developed and
distributed, both at present and in the future. Levels of
dependency of people on the rivers water and related resources
are very high, particularly among the rural poor, who depend
heavily on subsistence livelihoods. However, the rich resources
and the benefits derived from them are unevenly distributed
both in time and space (3). They are exploited not only for
meeting growing domestic needs but also for export demands,
further demonstrating the high level of dependency on the rich
natural resources of the Mekong River Basin as a source of
economic growth. The Mekong leaders maintain that the
requirements of a growing population ultimately require some
form of land-use change to provide for the expansion of food
production, or to develop the infrastructure necessary to
support increasing human numbers (1, 13, 14).
At first glance, the projected crop-area demands appear to be
lower than the land available in the basin. However, in reality,
much less than half of this land is available due to high levels of
degradation, remoteness, poor soil quality, land-tenure issues,
lack of access to water and markets, and competition with other
land-use activities, e.g., forestry, human settlement, industry,
and infrastructures. Some cash-trapped riparian countries need
to carefully assess land suitability, address irrigation viability
(cost, access, and effectiveness), and market prices and access.
Furthermore, for these countries, securing and allocating
substantial investment in irrigation systems, transport infrastructure, and market access is often very challenging.
Water abstraction from the Mekong River Basin is limited
during the wet season when flow levels are high and rainwater is
available; however, there are many constraints on water
utilization during the dry season, especially in drier years. It is
true that good water-resource management practices can
increase the availability of water during critical periods, and
that integrated planning that optimizes the benefits derived
from waters can clearly increase the overall productivity of a
river system. Major (joint or several) development, such as the
construction of dams and major abstractions for irrigation,
presents special challenges due to the need to assess options and
trade-offs and to apply environmental and social safeguards
effectively and equitably across international borders and
jurisdictions.
The results of this study suggest that, in order to satisfy the
requirement for further irrigation expansion in the Lower
Mekong Basin and to prevent seawater intrusion into the
Mekong Delta, a dry-season flow needs to be generated during
the critical dry months, either from the points above Kratie or
from Tonle Sap Great Lake (25, 26). Modeling results generated
by the MRC (2004) show that the development of Chinese dams
(two existing dams and two larger planned dams) and six dams
on Laotian tributaries will have the effect of reducing flows
beyond even the standard deviation of wet and dry years
(estimated to be around 23%) at Kratie (which is used as a
control point to monitor flow patterns and flow distribution in

Figure 4. Total irrigation demand


and average monthly flow volume
at Pakse and Cambodia-Vietnam
border.

Ambio Vol. 37, No. 3, May 2008

Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2008


http://www.ambio.kva.se

223

Cambodias floodplains and in Vietnams Mekong Delta) (23).


The generation of additional flow with major structural
measures in the Lower Mekong Basin floodplains is technically,
financially, and even ecologically challenging (27).
The issues described here are compounded by many factors,
such as:
Each Mekong country tends to take an independent course
of action, often ignoring external and indirect effects. This
represents one of the largest challenges to overcome, since
the asymmetry of causal responsibility, power/capacity, and
distributional problems are highly prevalent in the subregion.
An effective and truly Mekong-wide institution for negotiating cooperative development is lacking, and there is no
commonly accepted knowledge base or tools for impact
assessment and monitoring.
There is a lack of reliable data and knowledge, which leads to
a failure to fully understand and correctly evaluate impacts
and identify the causal mechanisms at work in large,
dynamic systems, and to consider and integrate multiple
risks and vulnerabilities.
Inadequate attention is given to the cumulative impact of
activities. As the number of development projects in an area
increases, the incidence and importance of cumulative
impacts also increase. Better approaches, guidelines, and
conventions for carrying out cumulative and cross-sectoral
impact assessment and monitoring are needed.
In summary, growing food demand requires one or more of
i) further expansion of crop and irrigation areas; ii) increasing
crop and land-use intensities, diversity, and productivity levels;
iii) demand-side management, iv) a limit on irrigation
abstractions, significant improvements in irrigation efficiency
(i.e., adoption of a more crop per drop approach), or
diversification of crop types toward those requiring less water;
and v) virtual water trade.
Vietnam presents an interesting case. Statistically, it has
lowest ratio of water availability per person, but it has been
successful in increasing food production for domestic consumption through high crop productivity and water- and land-use
intensity.
References and Notes
1. Mekong River Commission (MRC). 2006. The MRC Basin Development Plan:
Completion Report for Phase 1. Mekong River Commission Secretariat, Vientiane,
Laos PDR, 104 pp.
2. MRC. 2003. State of the Basin Report. Mekong River Commission Secretariat, Phnom
Penh. 316 pp.
3. Sokhem, P. and Kengo, S. 2006. The governance of the Tonle Sap Lake, Cambodia:
integration of local, national and international levels. Int. J. Wat. Res. Dev. 22, 299416.
4. United Nations. 2005. World Population Prospects: The 2004 Revision. Population
Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations
Secretariat, United Nations, New York, dataset on CD-ROM.
5. Esa Puustjarvi. 1999. Review of Policies and Institutions Related to Management of Upper
Watershed Catchments. Report of Greater Mekong Subregion Watershed Project (Phase
II): Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management in Remote Greater Mekong
Sub-region. Yunnan, China, 28 pp.
6. Boberg, J. 2005. Liquid Assets: How Demographic Changes and Water Management
Policies Affect Freshwater Resources. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, 107 pp.
7. Molden, D., Amarasinghe, U. and Hussain, I. 2001. Water for Rural Development.
Background paper on water for rural development. Working Paper 32. International
Water Management Institute, Colombo, 91 pp.
8. Rosegrant, M.W., Cai, X. and Cline, S. 2002. World Water and Food to 2025: Dealing
with Scarcity. International Food Policy Research Institute, Colombo, and International
Water Management Institute, Sri Lanka. (http://www.ifpri.org/srstaff/rosegrantm.asp)
9. Hoanh, C.T., Guttman, H., Droogers, P. and Aerts, J. 2003. Water, Climate, Food, and
Environment in the Mekong Basin in Southeast Asia. Final Report ADAPT Project.
Adaptation Strategies to Changing Environment, Amsterdam, 52 pp.

224

10. Davis, T. (ed). 2003. Mekong River Basin and Yangtze River Basin. In: Water Use for
Agriculture in Priority River Basins, Section 4. World Wide Fund for Nature Publication,
Living Water Programme, Netherlands, 32 pp.
11. Asian Development Bank (ADB). 2002. Key Indicators 2002: Population and Human
Resources Trends and Challenges. ADB, Manila. (http://www.adb.org)
12. GMS Summit Declaration. 2005. A Stronger GMS Partnership for Common Prosperity.
2nd Greater Mekong Sub-region Summit, Kunming, Yunnan, China, 45 July 2005.
ADB, Manila, 5 pp.
13. World Bank and ADB. 2006. Future Directions for Water Resources Management in the
Mekong River Basin. Joint Working Paper. World Bank and the Asian Development
Bank, Vientiane, Lao PDR, 65 pp.
14. FAO. 2005. AQUASTAT Information System on Water and Agriculture. Online
database. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Land and
Water Development Division, Rome. (http://www.fao.org/waicent/faoinfo/agricult/agl/
aglw/aquastat/dbase/index.stm)
15. Papademetrieu, M.K. (ed). 2000. Bridging the Rice Yield Gap in the Asia-Pacific Region.
FAO RAP Publication, 219 pp.
16. BDP. 2002. Basin Development Planning Regional Sector Overview: Agriculture and
Irrigation Report. MRC Secretariat, Basin Development Plan Programme, Phnom Penh,
Cambodia, 32 pp.
17. BDP. 2003. Water Used for Agriculture in Lower Mekong Basin. Mekong River
Commission Secretariat, Basin Development Plan Programme, Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 56 pp.
18. Molden, D., et al. 2007. Pathways for increasing agricultural water productivity. In:
Water for Food, Water for Life. Molden, D. (ed). Earthscan, London, and International
Water Management Institute, Colombo, 280 pp.
19. UNEP/GIWA. 2006. Global International Waters Assessment: Mekong River. GIWA
Regional Assessment 55. University of Kalmar for United Nations Environment
Programme, Bangkok, 75 pp.
20. Ravenga, C. 2000. Will There Be Enough Water? World Resources Institute. (http://
www.earthtrends.wri.org)
21. Ratner, B.D. 2003. The politics of regional governance in the Mekong River Basin. Glob.
Change 15, 5976.
22. Lazarus, K. 2003. Lancang-Mekong: A River of Controversy. Mekong Watch, Southeast
Asia Rivers Network (SEARIN), and International Rivers Network (IRN), Chiang Mai,
Thailand, 75 pp.
23. World Bank. 2004. Mekong Regional Water Resources Assistance Strategy: Modelled
Observations on Development Scenarios in the Lower Mekong Basin. World Bank,
Vientiane, Lao PDR, 126 pp.
24. Halcrow Group Ltd. 2004. Development of Basin Modelling Package and Knowledge
Base (WUP-A). DSF 650 Technical Reference Report Appendix A 16. Halcrow Group
Limited, for Mekong River Commission Secretariat, Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 260 pp.
25. SMEC. 1998. Water Utilization Programme Preparation Project. Final Report, SMEC/
MRC Secretariat, Bangkok, Thailand, 194 pp.
26. Daming, H. 1997. Sustainable development of Lancang-Mekong River Basin and
integrated multi-objective utilization research of water resources. J. Chin. Geogr. 7, 921.
27. Sarkkula, J. and Koponen, J. 2003. Modelling Tonle Sap for Environmental Impact
Assessment and Management Support. Final Report. Finnish Environmental Institute
and EIA Ltd., Helsinki, 110 pp.

Sokhem Pech is a senior international river basin governance


specialist, Hatfield Group, Vancouver, Canada. He has broad
and multidisciplinary experience in water law; water and
natural-resources management; institutional and organization
development with specific focus on the Mekong subregion;
regional policy formulation and hydrodiplomacy; multistakeholder dialogue and consultation; water-resources strategic
assessment; water dispute management; and development of
intercountry data- and information-sharing mechanisms. His
address: Natural Resources & Policy Researcher, 46DE0, 118
Street, Tuk La Ak I, Toul Kork District, Phnom Penh,
Cambodia.
E-mail: speech@hatfieldgroup.com.
Kengo Sunada is a professor at the Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, Interdisciplinary Graduate School
of Medicine and Engineering. He is currently a leader of the
Japan Science and Technology Agencys research project
Sustainable Water Policy Scenario for River Basins with
Rapidly Increasing Populations and is developing countermeasure strategies to global hydrological variations in monsoon Asia. His address: Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department, University of Yamanashi, Takeda 4-3-11, Kofu,
Yamanashi 400-8511, Japan.
E-mail: sunda@yamanashi.ac.jp

Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2008


http://www.ambio.kva.se

Ambio Vol. 37, No. 3, May 2008

You might also like