Pressreleases / Communiqués / Pressemitteilungen 
(all in original language, en langue originale, in Originalsprache):

Next news

09.04.02: Kazakh fishing port haunted by ghost of dying sea

KAZAKHSTAN, ARALSK - Aralsk is the town that time forgot. Dilapidated factories stand silent and crumbling. Rusty cranes loom over a bleak landscape, which is littered with fragments of broken and abandoned machinery.

Its port, once the pride and joy of its residents, is dry and empty. No fish, cargoes or boats come through here anymore. Fishermen are an endangered species.
It is only the eerie, rusting hulks of ships and the salt-encrusted earth that are testament to a sea that once lapped at the very edges of the town.
People in Aralsk say it has been more than 25 years since they could see the Aral Sea, and now the once-thriving port resembles nothing more than a huge, rubbish-strewn sand pit.
Enquiries as to the whereabouts of the water are treated like a bad joke.
"The sea? What sea? We don't have a sea here anymore," said a man disembarking at Aralsk's train station. Behind him a huge mural shows how the people of Aralsk provided fish for a hungry nation on Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin's request.
The Aral Sea, which straddles the former Soviet Central Asian republics of Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, is dying. And the former fishing port of Aralsk is fading along with it.
The water-thirsty region has two great rivers, the Syr Darya and the Amu Darya, which used to feed the Aral Sea. But in the 1960s Soviet planners built a network of irrigation canals to divert their waters into cotton fields in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, starving the sea of its life blood.
Now a mere trickle reaches the sea, and the water that does is contaminated by the residues of pesticides, fertilisers and defoliants used on the cotton fields.
Once the world's fourth largest lake, the Aral has shrunk so much that it has now split into two separate bodies of water - the northern or 'little Aral Sea' and a larger southern body.
"We didn't realise what was happening at first," said local resident Gulzhikhan Abdulgaziyeva.
As a clanging metallic noise echoed across the port-turned-dust bowl, she sighed and said: "That used to be a repair shop for barges and boats. Now they only fix cars."
It is not only the fishing and shipping industries that have suffered from the sea's disappearance. Textile and electronics factories lie empty and the town mill does not work any more.
Desertification and high salt levels are damaging agriculture.
The town of Aralsk is home to around 39,000 people and the Aralsk region around 68,000. It has one of the highest unemployment levels in Kazakhstan.
"We have lots and lots of unemployment here. I myself sat for three years without work," Gulzhikhan said. She now does some work at the town's tiny, private guest house.
"But we have very few entrepreneurs like (the hotel boss). If we had more maybe we would have less unemployment."
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) has been running an Aral Sea Prgramme since 1995. It focuses mainly on water resources management, small business development, humanitarian assistance and a social and health programme.
For the ecological disaster of the dying sea has brought climate change - colder winters and hotter summers - to the region and a host of associated health problems.
UNDP says anaemia in women, tuberculosis and high infant mortality are among the major health issues. Incidences of cancer and respiratory diseases have also risen.
"We have lots of health problems now because of the ecological situation...deformed kids are born," Gulzhikhan said.
And everyone you meet in Aralsk warns of rising crime blamed on unemployment.
Aralsk's museum is like an obituary to the town's former livelihood. Curator Rysbek Akimov proudly shows off the seashell fossils and fish teeth stacked in glass cases and enormous pickled fish stare out of jars.
"Once upon a time people all over the Soviet Union bought our fish. They were very tasty fish even though it was a small sea," he said wistfully.
Sergei Sokolov, UNDP national project manager in Aralsk, says it is now around 90 kilometres (55 miles) from Aralsk to the sea.
Searching for what remains of the sea requires a bumpy ride in a four-wheel drive vehicle across a barren landscape reminiscent of a scene out of a science-fiction film.
Camels and horses wander along what used to be the seabed, picking occasionally at scrub. Mounds rise up in the distance giving the impression that the sea will be just behind the next one. But it never comes.
At the "ship graveyard", near a tiny former fishing village, ships of the desert mingle freely and uninterestedly among the rotting remains of their seagoing cousins.
Except during the summer months, it is impossible to reach the edge of the sea by car as the ground becomes boggy. But in the summer some Aralsk residents, particularly the older ones, make special trips "to see the sea for one last time".
Several projects to build a dike to channel some water back into the Little Aral Sea have been only partially successful, but despite the desolate air of the town, hope remains.
"Children are our future" reads the sign above the main school door.
"We hope for a much better future - that there will once again be fish in the sea, cattle in the fields, and that people will live much better than they do now. This is what we are working towards," said UNDP's Sokolov.

Story by Tara FitzGerald

09.04.02: Austria designates 11 th Ramsar site (Lafnitz river)

The Bureau is very pleased to announce that Austria has named Lafnitztal (2,180 hectares, 47°15'N 016°05'E) as its 11th Wetland of International Importance. The interesting new site, which includes EC Directives Special Protection Areas, is a length of the Lafnitz river, formerly the international frontier with Hungary until the 20th century and presently the border between the states of Burgenland and Styria in the eastern part of the country, comprising numerous natural and semi-natural stretches over three-quarters of its length and an excellent example of freely meandering river. The length of the river sides and associated seasonally flooded agricultural land support a high species diversity, including otter (Lutra lutra), Kingfisher (Alcedo atthis), and White Stork (Ciconia ciconia) and as much as 10% of the world population of fire-bellied toad (Bombina bombina) and yellow-bellied toad (Bombina variegata), as well a number of rare and endangered plant species. The Ramsar Centre Lafnitztal visitors' center offers school courses and field excursions.

04.04.02: International Rivers Network is offering a new information service.

Every month we'll compile and distribute a list of all the water and energy projects which are being considered for approval by the World Bank, African Development Bank, Asian Development Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank.
The projects come from various sectors including energy, water, environment, agriculture, sanitation, and others; and they include anything from hydro projects to water privatization, as well as renewable energy projects.
If you want to receive this update, please email
Please forward this message to others who may also be interested. Thank you.
In solidarity, Gila Neta International Rivers Network
P.S. If you have any comments or questions about this service, please email

04.04.02: Flood-taming US agency a threat to rivers-report

WASHINGTON - The flood-taming U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is a threat to rivers nationwide with its reliance on dams, levees and channel-dredging, environmental activists said this week in listing "America's Most Endangered Rivers."

The Missouri River, focus of a long-running squabble over its dams for flood control and barge traffic, was named the most endangered river for the second year in a row.
It was No. 2 in 1998, 1999 and 2000, according to American Rivers, a conservation group that compiles the annual list.
The Missouri River was traveled by American explorers Lewis and Clark, who traced it to its headwaters in Montana.
In the next few months, the Corps of Engineers was expected to issue a new operating manual that will answer the question of a return to more natural flows. Lawmakers from downstream states, notably Missouri, object to possible flooding.
American Rivers said the Missouri "is in sharp decline due to the operation of Corps' dams and reservoirs."
Three other rivers - Big Sunflower in Mississippi, White River in Arkansas and Apalachiacola in Florida - were placed on the list of 11 endangered rivers because of ongoing or proposed Corps projects.
"The Corps of Engineers' water projects have put more than 30 rivers on our endangered rivers list since 1986, sometimes more than once," said Rebecca Wodder, president of the 30,000-member organization.
Founded in 1973, American Rivers says its annual list identifies dangers to rivers that could be avoided if action was taken. It has sought protection for free-flowing scenic rivers, supported removals of dams and urged reform of river channel engineering and more floodplain protection.
Congress allots about $4 billion a year to the Corps for river and harbor projects. Flood control and development of navigation have been two of the leading roles for the Corps, created more than two centuries ago.
"The Corps' mission is not just to protect the environment but to strike a balance between economic development and the environment," said Corps spokesman Homer Perkins.
"It's been very successful" in preventing catastrophic flooding along the Missouri River, Perkins said.
American Rivers said flood control and navigation were laudable. But the Corps also needs independent review of costly or controversial projects or new rules requiring projects to do the least harm possible to wetlands and wildlife habitat.
In the case of the Missouri River, American Rivers said six upstream dams have meant a loss of plant and animal diversity. River flow is controlled to allow barge traffic, which returns less money than recreational use of the river would bring.
Other rivers on the list were:
- Big Sunflower River in Mississippi, where 200,000 acres of wetlands were proposed for drainage.
- Klamath River in California and Oregon, scene of a "fish versus farm" dispute last year when drought reduced river flows. American Rivers said fish populations would dwindle unless irrigation was reduced and wetlands restored.
- Kansas River in Kansas. American Rivers said agricultural runoff was polluting the river.
- White River in Arkansas, where the Corps of Engineers was constructing an irrigation project and proposed wing dikes along the lower river.
- Powder River in Wyoming. Federal and state regulators were to decide this year on water released from coal bed methane operations.
- Altamaha River in Georgia. American Rivers said it was in danger of over-use as a water source for Atlanta area.
- Allagash Wilderness Waterway in Maine. Some legislators want to remove protections of the river, American Rivers said.
- Canning River in Alaska. The river could be affected if oil and gas drilling was allowed in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
- Guadalupe River in Texas. Growing demand for water could imperil flows unless the state reserved water for the river, American Rivers said.
- Apalachicola River in Florida. American Rivers said Congress should de-authorize a Corps of Engineers-maintained shipping channel.
Story by Charles Abbott

04.04.02 : Réponse de SOS Loire Vivante /E.R.N. (European Rivers Network/Réseau Fleuves Europe) à l’article du Nouvel Obs “La guerre de l’eau aura-t-elle lieu ?” n° 1950 du 21 au 27.03.02**.

**Article de Gérard Petitjean, pp. 126-127 du Nouvel Observateur n° 1950 du 21 au 27 mars 2002.

Les opposants aux barrages ne méritent pas l’amalgame avec la caricature qu’en donne cet article.
G. Petitjean sous-entend que ceux-ci seraient soutenus par le lobby pétrolier, “d’après de mauvaises langues”. On ne le lui fait pas dire ! Ce qui est sûr, c’est qu'il nous sert, lui, sur un plateau, la langue de bois chère au lobby pro-barrage (distribution privée de l’eau, béton, irrigation, énergie, financements occultes).

Cet article n’est qu’un prétexte à promouvoir la politique, jusque là dominante, des aménagements hydrauliques lourds comme réponse à la “future” (mais déjà si présente) pénurie d’eau mondiale.
Après avoir longuement glosé sur l’expectative de conflits autour de l’eau, l’auteur arrive à l’idyllique conclusion que : ...”les conflits entre Etats sur ces questions se règlent de plus en plus à l’amiable, sur notre planète”. Nul doute que cette étrange constatation, dont personne ne sait si elle résistera longtemps à l’épreuve des faits lorsque les tensions seront encore accrues sur cette ressource vitale, soit à mettre à l’actif des multinationales de l’eau, à l’oeuvre partout dans le monde pour gérer et distribuer l’eau “pacifiquement”... mais selon leur logique de rentabilité avant tout...
Le vif du sujet, ce sont en fait les mouvements d’opposition à la construction de barrages supplémentaires, “sous l’influence des ONG écolos anglos-saxonnes”. La société civile n’a pas attendu les anglo-saxons, notamment en France, pour s’élever contre de nouveaux projets de barrages. Déjà, en 1988, l’association SOS Loire Vivante s’organisait contre un programme de 4 barrages sur la Loire et réussissait à le faire annuler, grâce à la valeur de ses arguments, par un gouvernement de gauche, puis par un gouvernement de droite. Cette victoire, qui a valeur d’exemple dans le monde entier, a notamment débouché sur l’innovant Plan Loire Grandeur Nature, toujours en application, qui vise à assurer la sécurité des biens et des personnes tout en améliorant la biodiversité et le fonctionnement de l’hydrosystème.
Mais revenons à cet article...
Oui, la construction de barrages depuis les années 50 a réellement impulsé un développement énergétique et économique énorme de nos sociétés.
Non, la “houille blanche” n’est pas une énergie propre, ni “verte”. Bien au contraire !
Non, la gestion des ressources en eau par les infrastructures hydrauliques lourdes n’a rien de commun avec le développement durable.
On ne peut déprécier la valeur des acquis que nous a offert cette technologie, on ne peut remettre en question tous les ouvrages construits. Et il n’est pas non plus question de condamner les Chinois à la bougie ou les Africains à l’eau saumâtre !

Ce que dénoncent les opposants aux barrages, c’est la continuation aveugle de cette politique, à un rythme toujours plus forcené (un peu plus de 5 000 barrages dans le monde en 1950 et 38 000 aujourd’hui) alors même que, avec 50 ans de recul, le bilan s’avère lourd, très lourd et que des alternatives existent enfin.
Les barrages sont dévastateurs à tous points de vue. Les dommages qu’ils infligent aux écosystèmes, dont les humains font partie intégrante et sont plus dépendants qu’ils ne le pensent, sont d’autant plus redoutables qu’ils sont difficiles à percevoir. Ainsi la dégradation d’une rivière, et ses conséquences, se déroule sur une échelle de temps différente de celle de nos sociétés. De même, l’amplitude géographique d’un fleuve, et de ses nombreux affluents, est difficile à appréhender, et ce, d’autant plus lorsque des régions, voire des pays, se partagent sa gestion de manière “tronquée”.
Mais les dégâts des barrages et des grands transferts d’eau sont également humains, sociaux et culturels. Ils sont aussi d’ordre purement économique, ce qui faisait déclarer, en 94, à Daniel P. BEARD, directeur du Bureau des Réclamations, sans doute la plus prestigieuse des institutions de l’eau nord-américaine, responsable de la construction des grands ouvrages hydrauliques en Californie et le reste des USA :

“Une des hypothèses de notre programme était que les coûts des projets soient remboursés. Maintenant, nous nous sommes rendus compte que les coûts de construction et d’activité des projets de grande envergure ne peuvent être récupérés...
De même, nous avons pris en compte qu’il existe différentes solutions alternatives pour les problèmes d’utilisation de l’eau, qui n’impliquent pas nécessairement la construction de retenues. Les alternatives non structurelles sont souvent moins coûteuses à mener à terme et ont un impact environnemental moindre... Le résultat est que l’ère de construction des barrages aux Etats-Unis a touché à sa fin...” (*)

En 1998, la Banque Mondiale et l’IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature) ont créé une commission indépendante composée de représentants de communautés affectées par les barrages, de gouvernements et de sociétés de construction : le WCD (World Commission of Dams). Son objectif était d’examiner l’efficacité des barrages en terme de développement énergétique et de ressource en eau, d’évaluer et de proposer des alternatives, d’élaborer des standards et critères internationaux pour la planification, la construction, l’exploitation et le démantèlement des barrages. E.R.N. y a d’ailleurs participé à l’échelon européen. Le rapport final du WCD a été publié en novembre 2000 et présenté par Nelson Mandela et le Président de la Banque Mondiale J. Wolfensohn. A la satisfaction des défenseurs de l’environnement, mais aussi des Droits de l’Homme, le rapport reprend la plupart de leurs arguments, fustige nombre d’actions passées et préconise des normes beaucoup plus sévères. Mais le 25 février 2001, 4 mois après la publication du rapport, dans un tollé général, la Banque Mondiale annonce qu’elle n’appliquera pas les recommandations de celui-ci ! On voit à quel point “ces opposants bigrement efficaces”, comme nous qualifie avec suspicion cet article, “ont su se faire entendre” auprès de la Banque Mondiale, qui reste le principal bailleur de fonds pour la construction de ces ouvrages dans les pays du Tiers-Monde, au bénéfice des multinationales qui privatisent la distribution de l’eau de ces gigantesques réservoirs.

Grâce au miraculeux cycle de l’eau, les réseaux hydrographiques en bonne santé sont les seuls garants d’une ressource en eau renouvelable, en qualité et en quantité.
Nous n’avons déjà que trop perturbé ces écosystèmes. Il est temps de gérer autrement nos besoins en énergie et en eau. Nous avons enfin conscience que l’eau n’est pas une ressource inépuisable. Il faut désormais composer avec cette idée de pénurie, s’y préparer et s’y adapter. La vraie modernité n’est pas de continuer à proposer des quantités toujours plus grandes d’eau en détruisant notre environnement, mais à gérer efficacement et parcimonieusement celle que nous avons déjà à notre disposition. Et il y en a beaucoup ! Les principes de bonne gestion passent à travers l’augmentation des installations de traitement et de réutilisation des eaux usées, une baisse de la consommation, le dessalement des eaux saumâtres, la réduction des pertes d’eau dans les réseaux (600 millions de m3 perdus chaque année dans le bassin Rhône-Méditerranée-Corse), des alternatives énergétiques locales, etc...
On ne dira jamais assez à quel point la logique des barrages est dépassée.
Et irresponsable, pour ne pas dire plus, envers les générations futures.

Le Plan Hydrologique National espagnol est l’exemple type d’une stratégie de l’offre totalement artificielle. L’Espagne est le pays du monde qui possède le plus de barrages par habitant et km². Dans les régions les plus arides (Andalousie), la moyenne d’eau disponible par jour et par habitant est de 3 000 litres (*). Mais depuis 98, la gestion des eaux urbaines a été privatisée en Espagne. Les marchés d’eau pour les villes sont devenus très importants et les grandes entreprises françaises sont fortement impliquées sur la côte méditerranéenne. Une loi toute récente permet maintenant à l’Etat espagnol de vendre l’eau à des tiers. Les subventions publiques européennes (qui remplacent là le rôle habituellement joué par la Banque Mondiale) devraient participer à hauteur de 30 à 50% au coût des 120 nouveaux barrages et au détournement de 1% du débit du Rhône vers Barcelone. Grâce à quoi, les multinationales françaises pourront acheter à bas prix des quantités énormes d’eau qu’elles revendront, juste en-dessous du prix de l’eau dessalinisée, au béton touristique et à l’agriculture intensive (pour la plupart illégale). Le coût humain de ce projet est énorme, sans parler des dégâts écologiques.

Pour terminer avec cet article, disons que le procédé qui consiste à retirer de son contexte une déclaration, comme celle de la “plus séduisante (?!!) des animatrices du mouvement anti-Narmada”, comparant les conséquences des grands barrages à celle de la bombe Hiroshima, il est connu pour être réducteur et déloyal. Il serait en fait intéressant de connaître l’argumentaire de cette conclusion, car la déclaration d’Arundhati Roy n’est certainement pas aussi éhontée qu’elle en a l’air au premier abord.
Mais heureusement,se rassure G. Petitjean : “en Chine, ... l’opposition a tout de même moins de latitude pour s’exprimer”. Ouf ! On a eu peur !
Au fait, lobby de l’eau et lobby des médias, en France notamment, ce n’est pas un pléonasme ?

Valérie Valette
S.O.S. Loire Vivante / E.R.N.

(*) source : Pedro ARROJO (Fondation pour une Nouvelle Culture de l’Eau

03.04.02: Ukraine: the Danube reserve is under threat

The transport ministry of Ukraine plans a ship canal through the Danube biosphere reserve. Under development more than 1,5 thousand hectares of reserved terrain will be lost.
The building of a channel will cause the destruction of unique animal and plants habitat (94 kinds brought in the Red book now dwell in the reservation), the migration pathes of several millions auks of 133 kinds will be broken. Also it can fully stop the breeding of the Danube herring (now the 95% of the Danube herring is reproduced in this area).
Despite of the negative conclusion of ecological expertise, the building project of the ship canal goes on. In spite of the Ukrainian and international legislations upsets, in the Ukrainian budget is already stipulated about $5 millions for building a channel.
The exit to the Black sea through Danube is especially profitable for the Ukrainian Danube shipping company and its ports - Ishmael, Kiliya, Reny, Ust-Dunaysk. However, the Danube delta is largest European aquatic and wetland ground of international value and therefore for preservation of a biological variety of a delta, its unique landscapes are protected by many of international legal acts.
The reservation is protected by the Ramsar convention, it is introduced in UNESCO's list, getting into a structure of the Ukrainian-Romanian cross-border biosphere reservation.
Although the Ukrainian National academy of sciences, nature protection society, Ukrainian ecological organizations offer alternative projects for the channal, the Transport Ministry of Ukraine failed to consider them. Since March, 6 ecological activists start a series of pickets against building a channel in Danube reserve.
"Even the single disturbance of a safety of reserved objects bring irreciprocal destructions of natural assemblages in these terrains. Even after the termination of obstructing and eliminations of the destabilizing factor the reserved object loses most of its value", - says the release of the Kiev ecology-cultural center and center of ecological enlightenment - "XXI century".
For more information:
Kiev Environment & Culture Center
APRIL 2002, Socio-Ecological Union International -Newsletter APRIL 2002, (Center for Coordination and Information),

02.04.02: Riverways create as much pollution as highways

Large riverside cities like Portland, St. Louis, Nashville and New Orleans should look beyond road traffic to an important but usually overlooked source of air pollution - river traffic.
Commercial marine traffic on rivers emits substantial pollution, according to a study reported in the March 15 issue of Environmental Science and Technology, a peer-reviewed publication of the American Chemical Society, the world's largest scientific society. The pollutants include nitrogen oxides, fine particulate matter and sulfur oxides.
Around riverside cities, nitrogen oxide pollution from shipping can equal that from a major freeway full of traffic, according to James J. Corbett, Ph.D., an assistant professor at the University of Delaware's College of Marine Studies, Newark, who conducted the study.
Corbett's findings are based on a detailed inventory of air emissions from commercial vessels - such as ships, tugs and towboats - in the Northwest United States. The results suggest the importance of boat and ship emissions in many regions of the country, he says.
The inventory is the first to detail the type of geographically detailed estimates that modelers need to determine how boat and ship emissions affect regional air quality, according to Corbett.
Corbett, a former U.S. Merchant Marine engineering officer, combined analyses of engine operations with trade data about the tons of cargo and vessel movements over specific segments of the major rivers in the Pacific Northwest to come up with his estimates.
The study was commissioned to find out if ship and boat emissions contribute to haze that occurs in the federally designated Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area in Washington and Oregon states, says Michael Boyer, an environmental scientist with the Washington Department of Ecology in Olympia, Wash., which helped fund the study.
"In the past all we had were rough estimates of marine vessel emissions and we couldn't specify where the pollution occurred," Boyer says. "This study means that we will be able to pin down the effects of ship emissions."
Two years ago, Corbett inventoried national emissions from commercial waterborne vessels and found emissions were double previous estimates. His research showed that, as a source of nitrogen oxides for the entire
country, unregulated waterborne commerce ranks higher than many regulated industries, including metals processing, petroleum industries and chemical manufacturing.
Waterborne commerce transportation is an essential element of the U.S. transportation infrastructure that often seems invisible to the U.S. public, according to Corbett. Ships and boats that carry very large loads for very long distances move between 22 percent and 24 percent of U.S cargo, measured in ton miles - comparable to truck transportation, which accounts for 25 percent to 29 percent, he said. Waterborne transportation can also be one of the most energy-efficient ways to move cargo, using about one-tenth of the energy consumed by the U.S. trucking industry, Corbett added.
(via European Water Management News, Wednesday 3 April 2002 )

02.04.02: The River Nile and its economic, political, social and cultural role. An annotated bibliography.

The book is the result of more than 15 years of academic work in the region, including visits to a great number of libraries both in the region and beyond. A few of the basic facts about the contents and focal points of the work may elucidate its importance for all interested in the region:

-541 pages -3486 books, articles and reports about the region -1532 of the entries with annotations -All disciplines and topics are covered

To read more about the work, views excerpts and to order the book, please go to CDS' pages on the bibliography at

Alternatively, contact us to receive order information by ordinary mail or fax.

Prospective readers and scope The book is a must for anybody interested in the River Nile in general and in its regional role. But is should also be of interest to anybody interested in resource management and the global issue of water control. To NGOs, UN organisations, politicians, and researchers, it is a unique mine of knowledge about the river valley and its hydrology, planning history, flora and fauna, travel literature, transport and history. No-one interested in the future of the river basin can do without this work containing references on close to 3500 books, articles and reports written about the river.

About the author The book is written by professor Terje Tvedt. Tvedt has done extensive research on the region, and has since 1997 been Research Director for development research at the Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Bergen. Tvedt has been President of the Norwegian Association for Development Research, and has served on a number of committees for the Norwegian Research Council. He has participated on a SIDA expert panel regarding water research in Southern Africa, and been the Norwegian representative in a number of international organisations, including the International Water Resources Association. Tvedt has lectured at numerous universities in Norway and abroad. Presently he is leader of a multi-disciplinary and comparative research program called 'Nature, Society and Water', which is a collaborative effort among Makerere, Tribhuvan, Birzeit and Norwegian universities and research institutions. He is also the chairman of the Norwegian research network on water and development, established by the Norwegian Research Council in 1999. Tvedt was also the chairman of the organising committee of the founding congress of the International Water History Association in 2001, and is elected Vice-President of IWHA. Professor Tvedt has published extensively; co-editor of The Sudan: a short-cut to decay (Uppsala 1994), editor of Conflicts in the Horn of Africa: human and ecological consequences of warfare (Uppsala 1993), author of An annotated bibliography on the Southern Sudan, 1850-2000 (Bergen 2000) and of The River Nile in the age of the British. Political ecology and water politics on a grand scale (London: I.B. Taurus, 2002), as well as a number of scientific articles. Professor Terje Tvedt has also won several national and international awards for excellent research and popularisation.

Costs and shipping Price: USD 120 / NOK 1100
Postage and packing per order: Norway: USD 8 / NOK 75 World:USD 24 / NOK 210

Address: Centre for Development Studies Strømgt. 54 5007 Bergen NORWAY E-mail: Webpage: Fax: +47 55 58 98 92

Older news


Back to the Homepage

These pages and their content are © Copyright of European Rivers Network.
For more information, remarks or propositions, send us a message !.


lign=ABSBOTTOM> Back to the Homepage

These pages and their content are © Copyright of European Rivers Network.
For more information, remarks or propositions, send us a message !.