2.3.4. Étude de cas : L’aquifère transfrontalier du Genevois (Suisse-France)

Loading...

En provenance du cours de University of Geneva

Droit International de l'Eau Douce

16 notes

University of Geneva

Droit International de l'Eau Douce

16 notes

Au cours des dernières décennies, le droit international a connu des développements majeurs afin de tenir compte des multiples facettes que revêt la gestion et la protection des eaux douces. L’adoption d’instruments universels, régionaux et de bassins souligne l’importance d’étudier l’évolution de la réglementation internationale relative à l’eau et d’identifier les grands principes en ce domaine. Aussi, ce cours vise à offrir les bases nécessaires pour appréhender et examiner la régulation qui s’applique eaux douces transfrontières notamment aux fleuves, aux lacs et aux aquifères. Il présente les principes et les normes juridiques qui régissent l’utilisation, le partage, la gestion et la protection de ces ressources. Le MOOC est composé de 5 modules pouvant être visualisés dans un ordre quelconque, car abordant chacun un thème différent. Cependant, l’ordre des modules suit une certaine logique pédagogique et facilite la compréhension du MOOC pour des personnes ne connaissant pas le sujet. Chaque module s’accompagne d’un questionnaire d’évaluation/quiz. Le MOOC suivra un parcours unique donnant droit à un certificat pour les apprenants ayant obtenu une moyenne supérieure à 80% aux quiz. A la fin du cours, l’apprenant sera à même entre autres : 1) de décrire les enjeux liés à la régulation des eaux douces transfrontières ; 2) d’expliquer l’évolution de la réglementation internationale relative aux eaux douces transfrontières ; 3) de rappeler et d’interpréter les principes et les règles qui régissent la régulation des ressources en eau ; 4) de comprendre le rôle des mécanismes de règlement des différends liés aux eaux douces transfrontières dans le développement du droit international de l’eau douce (ou de comprendre le rôle des cours et tribunaux internationaux dans la résolution des conflits sur l’eau douce) Ce MOOC a été développé par la Plateforme pour le droit international de l’eau douce qui fait partie du Pôle Eau de Genève. Il a été accompagné par la Cellule MOOC de l’Université de Genève. A côté des chercheurs et des enseignants de la Plateforme, plusieurs experts internationaux ont également participé. Ce MOOC fait partie des trois cours soutenu par le Pôle Eau Genève et l’Université de Genève en compagnie des MOOCs en « Gestion et politique de l’eau » (www.coursera.org/learn/gestioneau) et en « Services écosystémiques : une méthode pour le développement durable » (www.coursera.org/learn/ecosystem-services). Ce cours est financé par le Programme Global Eau de la Direction du développement et de la coopération suisse (DDC).

À partir de la leçon

Module 2: Évolution de la réglementation internationale de l’eau douce

Ce module retrace les grandes étapes qui ont jalonné l’évolution de la règlementation internationale de l’eau douce. La portée et l’apport de la Convention des Nations Unies sur le droit relatif aux utilisations des cours d’eau internationaux à des fins autres que la navigation (Convention de 1997) et de la Convention sur la protection et l’utilisation des cours d’eau transfrontières et des lacs internationaux de la Commission économique pour l’Europe des Nations Unies (CEE-ONU) de 1992 (Convention de 1992) y sont examinés. La contribution des organisations internationales, des sociétés savantes internationales ainsi que de la société civile dans l’élaboration et la promotion de ces instruments est mise en relief. La spécificité de la règlementation relative aux eaux souterraines est également abordée avec une description des principales caractéristiques du Projet d’articles de la Commission du droit international (CDI) sur le droit des aquifères transfrontières de 2008. L’exemple de bonne pratique de la Convention relative à la protection, à l’utilisation, à la réalimentation et au suivi de la nappe franco-suisse du Genevois de 2008 est enfin présenté. Un quiz clôturera ce module et équivaudra à 20% de la note finale. Pour le réussir, vous devez avoir au moins 80% de réponses correctes.

2.3.1. Les défis liés à la régulation des eaux souterraines7:24

2.3.2. Les travaux de la Commission du droit international sur le droit des aquifères transfrontières9:41

2.3.3. Spécificités du droit relatif aux aquifères transfrontières10:28

2.3.4. Étude de cas : L’aquifère transfrontalier du Genevois (Suisse-France)16:50

Rencontrer les enseignants

Laurence Boisson de Chazournes
Professor
Department of Public International Law and International Organization, Faculty of Law
Makane Moïse Mbengue
Professor
Faculty of Law and Institute of Environmental Sciences
Mara Tignino
Reader
Department of Public International Law and International Organization, Faculty of Law
Komlan Sangbana
Associate Researcher
Faculty of Law and Institute of Environmental Sciences

[MUSIC]

[MUSIC] Hello,

Today we are joined by Mr. Gabriel De Los Cobos.

Gabriel is a hydrogeologist within the

Geology, Soil and Waste Service of the canton of Geneva.

Welcome Gabriel.

Could you describe the Geneva aquifer

and tell us about the challenges related to the management of this aquifer?

>> So we let us start by talking about

where the drinking water for the canton of Geneva comes from.

So there are two main resources. First there is the lake

which has two collecting stations.

And then there is a large layer of groundwater that extends from

the lake to the far west of the canton. This is known as the Genevese aquifer.

About 80% of drinking water comes from the

lake, and only 20% comes from the aquifer.

But we will soon see that

this aquifer has great potential.

This aquifer crosses a border: it is shared

between Geneva and neighbouring France.

There are ten wells on the Geneva side, and four wells

on the French side, so it is really a cross border aquifer.

If we go back several decades,

we know that this aquifer was discovered in about 1885,

and this is when the first wells were constructed

and then basically, as knowledge increased,

more wells were constructed. This

did not create a particular problem until the early 1960s.

In fact, since the 1960s,

the aquifer has been so exploited

that it has actually caused a decrease in its level.

So the aquifer dropped about 10 metres on average

in less than 20 years.

10 metres is not much when considering the average level,

but for this aquifer

in certain places the level dropped more than 10 metres.

That is to say, as a consequence, some wells have dried up.

That is to say that the pumps could no longer pump this water since

the level of the aquifer was below the level of the pumps.

So at the end of the early 1970s,

it was necessary to make arrangements to either try to save the aquifer,

or to make arrangements to have an additional resource

to ensure enough water in the future.

So two choices had to be made about this overexploited aquifer.

Either build a new station for pumping

and water treatment or

save the Geneva aquifer and make good use of the existing wells

and to try to raise the level

by incorporating an artificial replenishment system.

At the time, replenishment systems

for aquifers were not as developed as they are today.

Today it is a fairly recognized tool in the world of hydrogeology,

but at the time it presented a big challenge.

And finally the choice was made to

replenish the aquifer and to try to

increase the level in order to be able to achieve a coherent

management of the resource and to be able to use it all times.

So, this solution

entailed a great deal of technical work to try to

demonstrate that replenishment could work,

and to ensure that it worked as a long term solution.

There was much discussion between the State of Geneva

and the French parties using the same groundwater,

in order to establish an institutional base,

where all the administrative,

financial, legal and political aspects which are

part of the management of this common resource,

that its management works in the long term.

So what are the existing institutional arrangements for

the management of this resource?

Discussions lasted, I think, about eight years,

before this could be put in place.

The discussion were very very long and not always easy because

the two parties did not always agree on certain points.

I will not go into the details but eventually, in the late 1970's,

the situation was as follows. Geneva had decided to

set up an artificial replenishment system.

Field trials in the previous years had shown that

this type of tool had potential.

On the other hand, the French side was indecisive.

They wanted

to develop other resources on their own before

participating with Geneva

in the construction of this replenishment station.

In the end,

the French did not want to finance the station,

but they wanted to take advantage of the effect of this replenishment

to be able to pump water easily since the objective

was to raise the level of the water table so that

it could be used throughout the year,

as part of a coherent management of the resource over several years.

So in the end, this was what was done.

A written agreement was signed which detailed

all the technical aspects of the aquifer, and also the duties

of the various parties and, (particularly

for the French who didn't participate in the construction)

the financial contribution

to the construction of the replenishment station.

They had to agree on a right to water.

Above a certain quota, they had to pay a

replenishment tax in order to benefit from quantities

of water that would exceed a quota of two million cubic meters per year.

So this agreement was signed in June 1978,

(so it has been signed for 30 years) and

the construction took place at this time.

And in 1980, the station was inaugurated, and from the first year,

in the first two or three years of operation, the

water table rose from about eight to ten meters,

and this level can be maintained as a result of the replenishment station.

So, based on the first few years, even though there were adjustments, we can say that

the station performed well.

In fact, the choice to replenish

was indeed a very good choice.

So how did we get to the point

where both parties were willing to sign the agreement?

Well, this was because the people

in charge of this work relied on pragmatism.

Above all, the goal was to save this resource

shared by both the Swiss and the French, so there was this pragmatic side.

The other important point is that

attempts were made to manage this at the local level.

And then there was the creation of a transboundary commission

which was detailed in the agreement

and once the regulations were in place,

it took over all the cross border management of the groundwater.

And this is shared.

There is a Geneva part and a French part

and this is

a cross border commission.

And the elements established within this commission

and in particular its duties, were intended to

determine which flow would be replenished and

how the

water rights and the different flows between Switzerland and France

and the quality of water should be shared.

So this is how

Franco-Genevan cooperation began.

Since then, there have been further developments. After

30 years (in 2007), it was necessary to renew this agreement.

The agreement was essentially the same as in 1978

but there was a working group which undertook

all the work related to this renewal

and to frame it within the international agreements

which did not exist in 1978.

So this agreement became more like a convention and

it is recognised as such today.

And we see that, as it was signed again for a period of 30 more years,

this this is indeed an excellent example of

transboundary management of an aquifer and I believe that this is the

the first in the world to have a transboundary agreement.

>> What are the lessons learned from the management of this aquifer and

how would you appraise the management of the

Geneva aquifer?

>> So after almost 40 years of management,

we can see that, at the purely technical level, the system works very,

very well - it has been possible to infiltrate more than 300 million

cubic meters since 1980.

At the shared management level of the aquifer,

it is important to look at the lessons learned,

and we decided to focus on

above all, to focus on the aquifer.

We wanted to save the aquifer without taking into account

of all problems linked to sovereignty.

So this is extremely important and I believe that is the principal element.

All the problems that could be

linked to each party or country were put aside.

We decided to work in order to save the aquifer.

The first goal was to save the groundwater body and then to achieve

the best possible management of the aquifer so that it would never be

overexploited as it was in the 1960s and 1970s.

If I want to highlight the lessons learned,

it is the aquifer, above all.

This was the case at the working level of the decision-makers, everything was done locally.

I think it's important that these actors were local and

were able to work on their problems. Even if information was subsequently passed on,

I really think it is important to do this at the local level.

As a result, both the decision-maker,

the politician or the consumer, everybody knows what he is talking about.

To be able to talk about an aquifer, I think you need

detailed knowledge of its hydrogeological aspects,

one must have the best possible knowledge

in order to know what one is talking about. If plans for the future are made

then we know where we are going and how to do it.

And then, here, this is my most important point.

This is local management, pragmatism, technical knowledge.

Today, almost 40 years later, we see

that at the technical level, the system still works very, very well.

And then, at the management level, in relation to the

transboundary commission, it works very,

very well and as such has been renewed for another 30 years.

We can see this as a success

and I hope it can be an example for other cases.

>> Thank you very much, Gabriel, for sharing

this beautiful example of cooperation and I am sure that

the participants will have appreciated your contribution.

[MUSIC]

Explorer notre catalogue

Rejoignez-nous gratuitement et obtenez des recommendations, des mises à jour et des offres personnalisées.

Coursera propose un accès universel à la meilleure formation au monde, en partenariat avec des universités et des organisations du plus haut niveau, pour proposer des cours en ligne.

© 2018 Coursera Inc. Tous droits réservés.

Télécharger dans l'App Store

Disponible sur Google Play