CHAPTER 5. DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS
5.1 Socioeconomic
Framework
Socioeconomic frameworks for the Jericho regional development plan are first discussed in terms of population, employment, and then gross domestic product (GDP) in the region.
5.1.1 Population and Employment
The population of the West Bank and Gaza totals 3.76 million in 2005, according to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) estimation.1 Of this total, the West Bank has 2.37 million residents (see the table below). Population growth of the West Bank and Gaza between 1997 and 2005 was 3.3%, while that of the West Bank was slightly lower.
In the Jordan Rift Valley area, including refugee camps, there are 88,912 residents; 42,268 in the Jericho governorate and 46,644 in the Tubas district2. Population growth in the Jordan Rift Valley area is 3.7%, which is higher than that of the West Bank and Gaza.
Table 5.1.1 Population Trends (1997-2005)
(Unit: number)
Locality 1997 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 CAGR
West Bank and Gaza 2,895,683 3,275,389 3,394,046 3,514,868 3,637,529 3,762,005 3.3% West Bank 1,873,476 2,087,259 2,157,674 2,228,759 2,300,293 2,372,216 3.0% Jericho governorate 31,412 37,066 38,968 40,894 40,909 42,268 3.8% Tubas District 35,176 41,067 43,110 45,187 45,168 46,644 3.6% Study Area 66,588 78,133 82,078 86,081 86,077 88,912 3.7% Study Area (Excl. Camps) 56,344 66,107 69,443 72,828 72,823 75,221 3.7%
Source: PCBS
According to the socioeconomic survey conducted by the JICA Study Team, the average number of family members in the Jordan Rift Valley area is 7.8. Among the five target areas of the survey, households in the Jordan Rift Valley villages of Nablus have the largest number of family members, 9.3, while households in Jericho are the smallest with an average household size of 6.4 family members (see the following table).
1 Although there have been different estimations by other authorities, this Study follows the PCBS estimation. 2 The Jordan Rift Valley area contains 13,691 registered refugees.
Table 5.1.2 Average Family Size by Area
(Unit: number)
Area Family Size
Jericho 6.4
Al ‘Auja 8.5
Tubas 7.4
Area surrounding Tubas 7.6
Jordan valley villages of Nablus 9.3
Overall 7.8
Source: Socioeconomic Survey, JICA Study Team
Working age population (all persons aged 15 years old and over) in the total of the West Bank and Gaza and the West Bank alone constitute 53.7% and 55.6%, respectively. The Jordan Rift Valley area also has the same level as the West Bank with the ratio of 55.6%.
Based on the population projection for the West Bank by the PCBS, the natural increases in population in the Jordan Rift Valley area have been estimated at the local level up to 2015.3 The total population of the region (including refugee camps) is estimated to be about 103,000 in 2010 and 116,000 in 2015. The Jordan Rift Valley population is predicted to grow at an average annual rate of 2.7% in 2005-2015. The following table summarizes the population of each locality in the region.
Table 5.1.3 Population Framework in the Jordan Rift Valley area
(Unit: number)
Locality 2005 2010 2015 CAGR
WEST BANK AND GAZA 3,762,005 4,409,684 5,091,314 3.1% WEST BANK 2,372,216 2,736,899 3,110,489 2.7% Marj Na'ja 743 858 972 - Az Zubeidat 1,299 1,498 1,698 - Marj al Ghazal 373 431 488 - Al Jiftlik 4,264 4,921 5,575 - Fasayil 872 1,006 1,140 - Al 'Auja 3,886 4,484 5,080 - An Nuwei'ma 1,128 1,303 1,476 -
'Ein ad Duyuk al Foqa 789 910 1,031 -
'Ein as Sultan Camp 1,972 2,277 2,579 -
'Ein ad Duyuk at Tahta 937 1,081 1,225 -
Jericho (Ariha) 19,783 22,830 25,863 -
Aqbat Jaber Camp 6,147 7,093 8,035 -
Other Localities 75 85 96 -
JERICHO GOVERNORATE 42,268 48,777 55,258 2.7%
3 As argued in Section 5.4, PNA, notably MoP, considers that the Jordan Rift Valley area could be a possible location for further
migration intake at the time of future establishment of an independent Palestinian state. Indeed, the JICA Study Team estimates that allowable capacity of the population in the region is about 200,000 from the perspective of water availability. However, because of its highly political nature, the JICA Study Team does not consider this plan in preparing the population forecast. Consequently, the economic frameworks presented in the Table 5.1.6 have been formulated without consideration of
(Continued) Locality 2005 2010 2015 CAGR Bardala 1,528 1,764 1,998 - 'Ein el Beida 1,048 1,209 1,370 - Kardala 160 185 209 - 'Aqqaba 5,885 6,791 7,693 - Tayasir 2,323 2,681 3,037 - Al Farisiya 207 238 270 - Ath Thaghra 250 289 327 - Al Malih 200 230 261 - Tubas 15,591 17,992 20,382 - Ras al Far'a 679 784 888 - El Far'a Camp 5,572 6,431 7,285 - Wadi al Far'a 2,269 2,618 2,966 - Tammun 10,119 11,677 13,229 - Al Hadidiya 177 205 232 - Other Localities 636 734 831 - TUBAS DISTRICT 46,644 53,826 60,978 2.7% STUDY AREA 88,912 102,603 116,237 2.7% STUDY AREA (Excl. Camps) 75,221 86,803 98,337 2.7%
Note: 2005-2006: revised mid-year population projection, Small Area Statistics 2005 (website) 2007: revised mid-year population projection (website)
2008-2015: JICA study team estimation according to the PCBS projected growth rate of the West Bank
Source: PCBS; JICA Study Team Estimation
The rate of working age population will increase from 55.6% in 2005 to 58.6% in 2010 and 61.1% in 2015.
The West Bank and Gaza experienced a significant increase in the unemployment rate from 1999 to 2002 (see the figure). Although there has been modest improvement since 2002, it remains as high as 26.8% in the West Bank and Gaza (2004) and 23.8% in the West Bank (2003). The Jordan Rift Valley area appears to have more or less the same unemployment rate.
In terms of distribution of employed persons by economic activity, the tertiary industries, especially services, constitute the largest portion, both in the
total of the West Bank and Gaza and the West Bank (see the following table). Although there is not enough statistical data available at the governorate level, Jericho appears to have a similar distribution pattern of employed persons while Tubas appears to have a much higher proportion of agricultural population.
Source: PCBS
Figure 5.1.1 Unemployment Rate (1999-2004)
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 (Est.) West Bank and Gaza
Table 5.1.4 Distribution of Employed Persons by Economic Activity (2004)
Economic Activity West Bank
& Gaza West Bank
Bethlehem & Jericho
Jenin & Tubas
Primary Industry
Agriculture, Hunting & Fisheries 15.9% 16.9% 15.9% 35.4%
Secondary Industry
Mining, Quarrying, & Manufacturing 12.7% 14.0% 17.3% 8.6%
Construction 11.7% 13.0% 16.4% 10.3%
Tertiary Industry
Commerce, Hotels & Restaurants 19.4% 20.9% 14.0% 18.0% Transportation, Storage & Communication 5.4% 5.7% 6.3% 3.5%
Services & Branches 34.9% 29.5% 30.1% 24.2%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: PCBS
5.1.2 Economic Trends
The Palestinian economy has endured numerous economic distortions in the last four decades, becoming a captive market for Israeli goods and highly dependent on the export of unskilled labor to Israel. Since its outbreak in 2000, the Second Intifada—especially because of the heavy restrictions on movement—has been causing an economic catastrophe for the Palestinian economy. GDP has fallen by 15.4% in the West Bank and Gaza and 8.5% in the West Bank (see the table below). Likewise, GDP per capita in the West Bank and Gaza has declined by 24.7% and in the West Bank by 23.9%.
The Palestinian economy has stagnated to the heavy movement restrictions imposed. Many Palestinians stopped trying to return to jobs in Israel or to reach markets elsewhere in the West Bank. Smaller, less profitable businesses have been established in response to the closures, to serve communities which were no longer able to travel to urban centers.
Table 5.1.5 Macroeconomic Indicators (1999-2004)
Indicators 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
West Bank and Gaza
GDP (Mill. US$; 1997 Prices) 4,883.4 4,619.2 4,325.7 4,169.3 4,165.3 4,131.2
Real Growth Rate (%) 8.9% -5.4% -6.4% -3.6% -0.1% -0.8%
GDP per Capita (US$; 1997 Prices) 1,617.2 1,466.4 1,311.2 1,203.4 1,272.3 1,217.8
Real Growth Rate (%) 4.5% -9.3% -10.6% -8.2% 5.7% -4.3%
West Bank
GDP (Mill. US$; 1997 Prices) 3,113.9 2,933.0 2,747.6 2,647.4 2,874.0 2,850.5
Real GDP Growth Rate (%) 12.5% -5.8% -6.3% -3.6% 8.6% -0.8%
GDP per Capita (US$; 1997 Prices) 1,819.7 1,644.3 1,471.4 1,350.3 1,445.9 1,384.0
Real Growth Rate (%) 8.0% -9.6% -10.5% -8.2% 7.1% -4.3%
Source: PCBS
The following figure presents the structure of the Palestinian economy in 2004. The primary industry constitutes only 10% of the whole, while the secondary and tertiary industries contribute 19% and 71%, respectively. Although there is no statistical data available for the Jordan Rift Valley area, it seems that primary industry would occupy a greater proportion.
Mining, Manufacturing, Electricity & Water 14% Construction 5% Wholesale & Retail Trade 10% Transport 8% Services 25% Others 9% Financial Intermediation 3% Agriculture & Fisheries 10% Public Administration & Defense 16% Source: PCBS
Figure 5.1.2 GDP Contribution by Economic Activity (2004)
5.1.3 Macroeconomic Scenarios under Existing Plans
Formulated by MoP, the MTDP contains two contrasting macroeconomic scenarios for the West Bank and Gaza for 2006-2008, namely, “Status Quo” and “Permanent Resolution” scenarios. The former assumes that average annual GDP growth rates would be somewhere between 0.5% and 6.7%. The latter, on the other hand, forecasts that GDP growth rates would be as much as 12.3%. The MTDP explains that the “Status Quo” scenario is prepared based on the current complex political environment, while the “Permanent Resolution” scenario shows the possibility of Palestinian economic recovery with a much more favorable political situation.
The World Bank report, titled “Stagnation or Revival?: Israeli Disengagement and Palestinian Economic Prospects”, also includes the discussion of economic development, presenting three alternative scenarios, namely, “Status Quo,” “Disengagement Plus,” and “Economic Recovery” for 2005-2008. “Status Quo” assumes almost zero GDP growth, while “Disengagement Plus” and “Economic Recovery” envision 2-7% and 3-11% annual growth rates, respectively.
5.1.4 Regional Macroeconomic Framework for the West Bank4
With reference to the above scenarios for the national economy, the JICA Study Team would propose three alternative macroeconomic scenarios for the West Bank economy:
4 The unavailability of macroeconomic statistics at the governorate level has made it difficult to formulate specific
(i) High growth case: “Economic Recovery” scenario; (ii) Moderate growth case: “Pre-Intifada” scenario; and, (iii) Low growth case: “Status Quo Plus” scenario.
Selected macroeconomic indicators for each case are presented in the following table.
Table 5.1.6 Macroeconomic Frameworks for the West Bank
Scenario 2005 2010 2015
High Growth GDP (Mill. US$; 1997 Prices) 3,058.6 4,966.7 6,900.7 Real Growth Rate (%) 7.3% 8.4% 6.8% GDP per Capita (US$; 1997 Prices) 1,289.3 1,814.7 2,218.5 Real Growth Rate (%) 4.0% 5.5% 4.1% Moderate Growth GDP (Mill. US$; 1997 Prices) 3,011.6 3,817.3 4,461.0 Real GDP Growth Rate (%) 5.7% 4.4% 4.0% GDP per Capita (US$; 1997 Prices) 1,269.5 1,394.8 1,434.2 Real Growth Rate (%) 2.5% 1.6% 0.6% Low Growth GDP (Mill. US$; 1997 Prices) 2,936.0 3,174.5 3,411.3 Real GDP Growth Rate (%) 3.0% 1.5% 1.4% GDP per Capita (US$; 1997 Prices) 1,237.7 1,159.9 1,096.7 Real Growth Rate (%) -0.1% -1.2% -1.1%
Source: JICA Study Team Estimation
The high growth case has been formulated based on the “Permanent Resolution” scenario proposed in MTDP, while the low growth case has been based on the “Status Quo” scenario also in the plan. The moderate growth case has been prepared so as to recover the GDP level, which would have been attained around 2005 if the Second Intifada had not occurred and consequently the economic growth for 1994-1999 had continued. The average annual growth rates are to be 8.5% for the high growth case,
4.0% for the moderate case, and 1.5% for the low growth case.
In all three scenarios, GDPs per capita are to achieve lower growth rates than GDPs themselves, because of expected population increase. Indeed, the pre-Intifada level in 1999 can be recovered only with the high growth case.
The macroeconomic frameworks above were discussed in working group meetings and workshops and agreed to by the participants. However, since the establishment of the new Palestinian government in March 2006, a number of international donor activities have been held in abeyance and an even stronger closure has been imposed by Israel. This would negatively affect the Palestine economy. The minimum 2.7% GDP growth would be necessary in order to keep the same GDP per capita level in 2015.
5.2 Visitors
to
Jericho
Because of the historical and cultural heritages in the Jericho and Jordan Rift Valley area, as discussed in Chapter 2.1, any development plan of the West Bank and Jericho area cannot be formulated only on the basis of the socio-economic framework. Since visitors to Jericho have various impacts on regional
5.2.1 Regional Tourism
The tourism networks in the region have common cultural, historical and natural backgrounds. In fact, tour programs are composed of destinations in more than two countries. This is because the tourism in the region is regarded as one unit of a regional tourism network by tour operators and customers.
Source: MoTA and JICA Study Team
Figure 5.2.1 Regional Tourism networks
In the region, Egypt was a dominating tourism country until 2002. In addition to its rich archaeological assets, the seaside resort area in the Sinai Peninsula has been developed under the “New Tourism Development Strategy” of the Egyptian government since 1995, attracting resort tourist markets from the USA and Europe and accounting for nearly half of the total tourist visits into the region. The second largest tourism country in the region is Jordan, having rich tourism resources connected with the Old Testament, trade of Nabateans, battle of Salahdin and Crusaders and other assets attracting over 40% of tourist visits in the region.
Aqaba Amman Tiberius
Jericho
Karak Petra Eilat to Damascus Mediterranean Sea to Lebanon To Cairo Nazareth Jerash Gaza Bethlehem Jerusalem Tel Aviv Masada Dead SeaRed Sea To Mecca
Both Palestine and Israel suffered serious damage to tourism from the Second Intifada in 2000. After the Intifada, the tourist visits have dropped to one tenth in Palestine and less than half in Israel.
5.2.2 Tourist Arrivals in Palestine
Despite its uniqueness, Palestinian tourism is not playing a major role in the region, attracting only 8% of the tourist visits in the region even before the Second Intifada. This is due mainly to the political instability that threatens easy access of the tourists, especially Free Independent Travelers (FITs). The decrease in
the European tourists was notable, namely 1/30 after the Second Intifada.
Compared to the drastic decrease in foreign tourists, domestic tourists are recovering quickly. In 2003, domestic tourists recovered to the level before the Second Intifada, due to the efforts of the Palestinian people to promote educational excursions and association tourism. The following table shows the tourist arrivals in Palestine by nationality.
Table 5.2.1 Tourist Arrivals in Palestine by Nationality
(Unit: number)
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Americas 176,000 181,000 211,000 23,000 1,400 5,800
Europe 488,000 608,000 717,000 25,000 4,700 18,600
East Asia and Pacific 33,000 38,000 43,000 7,000 1,000 7,900
South Asia 13,000 17,000 21,000 2,000 100 600 Middle east 31,000 45,000 42,000 - - - Others 25,000 18,000 21,000 2,000 100 300 International Tourists 766,666 907,000 1,055,000 81,000 9,400 46,000 103,000 Palestinian Tourists 101,000 123,000 97,000 59,000 74,000 103,000 Grand Total 867,666 1,030,000 1,152,000 140,000 83,400 149,000
Source: WTO Compendium of Palestinian Tourism 5.2.3 Tourism Arrivals in Jericho
Jericho is located on the crossroads of the east-west tourist corridor from Jerusalem to Amman, and the north-south tourist corridor from Tiberias to Eilat, having an immense potential to attract tourists who have diversified tourism objectives, such as pilgrimage tourism, cultural tourism, resort tourism and nature tourism including eco-tourism.
The following table shows the number of visitors to Jericho for the period from 1998 to 2005. Before
0 5000 10000 15000 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Palestine Israel Jordan Egypt Total 2nd Intifada (Unit: 1,000)
Source: MoTA (Palestine), MoTA (Jordan), MoT (Israel), WTO Compendium of Tourist
after the Second Intifada. It gradually recovered to the level of around 100,000 in 2005. 0 100 200 300 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 year ('000) Foreigner Palestinian 300,000 1,000 100,000 2ndIntifada
Source: MoTA, Jericho Branch
Figure 5.2.2 Numbers of Visitors to Jericho
Tourism arrivals in Jericho have a strong seasonal fluctuation. This comes from the climatic reason and school season. Jericho is located 300 m below the sea level and the heat in summer is extremely high, over 40 degrees C, and is uncomfortable for tourists. On the other hand, the winter climate is mild and attracts many wintering domestic tourists from Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Nablus and Ramallah where they have cold highland winter climates. The seasonal fluctuation is shown in the following figure.
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Source: MoTA
Figure 5.2.3 Seasonal Fluctuation of Visitors in Jericho
5.2.4 Impacts of the Second Intifada
After the Oslo Accords, visitors to Jericho increased steadily, and 231,612 tourists visited Jericho in 2000 to enjoy cultural heritage sites, e.g., Tell es-Sultan, Hisham’s Umayyad Palace and the Ancient Synagogue. In 1999, the number of overnight tourists reached 30,800, and the average annual hotel accommodation occupancy rate in Jericho was 47.8%. Tourism supported about 190 restaurants and 50 souvenir shops. The tourism sector has been a leading industry to generate jobs and revenues for Jericho.
The Second Intifada has destroyed the favorable growth of the tourism industry in Jericho. The number of visitors suddenly fell to 1,385 in 2001 or 0.6% of the previous year. The estimated loss caused by the Second Intifada in the tourism sector is shown in the following table.
Table 5.2.2 Loss of Business in the Tourism Sector by the Second Intifada
(Unit: NIS) Governorate / District Accommodation Tour operators Tourism Transport Tour Guides Souvenir
Shops Restaurants Total Jerusalem 96,791,957 71,156,311 57,183,152 13,714,848 193,896,357 39,540,509 472,283,134 Bethlehem 47,886,547 22,236,347 1,485,277 12,752,402 77,558,543. 59,310,764 221,229,880 Jericho 17,943,304 - - - 5,721,532 34,597,846 58,262,682 Nablus 4,556,580 1,778,908 - - 1,868,284 17,298,973 25,502,745 Ramallah 22,047,057 7,116,631 - - 1,907,177 27,184,100 58,254,965 Hebron 3,056,588 1,778,908 - - 1,606,875 - 6,442,371 Jenin and Tulkarem 367,923 869,262 742,639 - - 9,885,127 11,864,951 Gaza 19,896,124 889,454 - - 1,271,452 34,597,945 56,654,975 Total 212,546,080 105,825,821 59,411,068 26,467,250 283,830,220 222,415,264 910,495,703 Source: MoTA
The following table also shows impacts of the Second Intifada on Jericho tourism. The sudden decrease in tourists seriously affected the employment in the tourism related industries, especially hotels and restaurants. It is estimated that the unemployment in the tourism sector reached 95% during the period from 2000 to 2003.
Table 5.2.3 Impacts of the Second Intifada on Tourism Related Sector in Jericho
(Unit: number.)
Employment (Staff Level) Period
Hotels Restaurants Souvenir Shops Cable Car Oasis Casino
Before the 2nd Intifada 301 189 50 75 1900
After the 2nd Intifada 72 29 9 15 0
Number of Visitors Period
Tell es-Sultan Hisham’s Palace Ancient Synagogue
Before the 2nd Intifada 232,973 36,738 4,837 After the 2nd Intifada 930
(0.4%) 316 (0/9%) 8 (0.2%) Source: MoTA
Recovery of the tourism sector started in 2003 with a recovery of domestic tourism. In 2004, the number of domestic visitors to the Hisham’s Palace completely recovered to the level of 1999. Although the arrival of foreign tourists to Jericho increased in 2004 and 2005, the number of foreign visitors still remains at the level of 10% of the arrivals in 1999.
5.2.5 Tourism Development Framework
A development framework for Jericho tourism has been discussed at the Tourism Working Group in the course of this Study, and the following three alternative development scenarios have been elaborated.
(1) Alternative I (Low Growth Scenario)
This scenario is based on the assumption that the tourism arrivals in Palestine would recover to the level of 2000 or before the Second Intifada (1,152,000). It is based on the picture that the basic political situation will remain unchanged, but reinforcement is expected in tourism promotion, upgrading of tourist sites, and certain relaxation of the restrictions and controls on the mobility of the domestic people. The targeted tourist arrivals are set to be 1,500,000 to Palestine and 200,000 to Jericho in 2010.
(2) Alternative II (Moderate Growth Scenario)
This scenario is based on the assumption that tourism development would be maximized within the prevailing political framework, but the restrictions and controls under the closure system would be relaxed by cooperation of the authorities concerned in the region for promotion of regional tourism. The targeted number of tourist arrivals is set to be 2,000,000 to Palestine and 400,000 to Jericho in 2010.
(3) Alternative III (High Growth Scenario)
This scenario is based on the assumption that tourism development would be maximized with the free mobilization of tourists, especially for Palestinian tourists, and improvements are attained in cultural heritages, beautification of Jericho town, investments in hotels, tourism relating industries and infrastructure. The cooperative regional tourism promotion would generate international and regional tourism to Jericho. The targeted number of tourist arrivals is set to be 5 million to Palestine and 1 million to Jericho in 2010.
Table 5.2.4 Alternative Tourism Scenarios in Palestine in 2010
2010 2000 2004
Alt. I Alt. II Alt. III Tourist Arrivals in Palestine 1,152,000 103,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 5,000,000
Overnight Tourists 278,767 268,695 450,000 700,000 2,000,000
Average Duration of Stay (nights) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4 4.5
Bed Nights 975,684 940,432 1,575,000 2,800,000 9,000,000
Hotel Rooms 1,572 1,515 2,540 4,475 14,500
Employment 5,715 n.a 6,000 10,000 25,000
Tourism Receipts US$ 226 mill. n.a US$ 300 mill US$ 400 mill US$ 1,000 mill
Source: MoTA and JICA Study Team
The following table shows summarized alternatives for visitors to Jericho in 2010 and 2015.
Table 5.2.5 Alternative Tourism Scenarios in Jericho in 2010 and 2015
2004 2010 2015
Actual Alt. I Alt. II Alt. III Alt. I Alt. II Alt. III Tourist Arrivals in Jericho 98,248 200,000 400,000 1,000,000 300,000 670,000 1,760,000 Overnight Tourists 33,000 125,000 240,000 600,000 187,500 402,000 1,056,000 Average Duration of Stay
(nights) 1.0 1.5 2.5 4 1.5 2.5 4
Bed Nights 33,000 187,500 600,000 2,400,000 187,500 600,000 2,400,000
Hotel Rooms 323 323 386 967 323 386 967
Employment 250 2,650 3,100 4,600 3,000 6,700 17,600
Tourism Receipts $ 12 mill $ 42 mill $ 101 mill $ 350 mill $ 68 mill $ 251 mill $ 1,056 mill
5.3
Limitation of Land Resources
The Jordan Rift Valley area has unique topography and environment, and land resources are rather limited, especially for agricultural use. The availability of land resources, therefore, constitutes one of the development frameworks in the region.
5.3.1 Current Land Use in Jordan Rift Valley
Figure 5.3.1 shows the present land cover condition in the Study area. The total area is 1,093 km2, covering all Jericho governorate, Tubas district and part of Nablus governorate. The agricultural area is concentrated in the Tubas highland area and scattered in the lower Jordan Rift Valley along the Jordan River. As noted in Chapter 2.3, rain-fed agriculture is almost impracticable in this area, except in the Tubas highland where the estimated annual rainfall is more than 350 mm. Agricultural areas in the lower Jordan Rift Valley exist where spring water or groundwater resources are available.
The built-up areas are generally located adjacent to the agricultural areas. Consequently, most communities in the Jordan Rift Valley are dependent on the agricultural sector for economic activities.
The current land use distribution is summarized as follows:
Table 5.3.1 Current Land Use Distribution of the Study Area
(Unit: km2)
Land Cover Area A Area B Area C Total
Agricultural areas 86 36 219 342 Palestinian Communities 16 2 47 65 Israeli Settlement 0 0 17 17 Military Base 13 3 67 84 Others 32 16 537 586 Total (13.5%) 148 (5.3%) 58 (81.2%) 887 (100.0%) 1,093 Source: MoP Source: MoP
Figure 5.3.1 Current Land Use in Study Area
Area A
Area B
5.3.2 Limitation in Land Development
The unused areas (586 km2) are sizable, or 53 % of the whole study area. However, it has limitations in development due to several constraints. The major ones are the topography, natural environment and political control.
(1) Topographic Limitation
Figure 5.3.2 shows the areas having steep slopes of more than 20° in gradient. Such sloped areas extend to the west of Jericho governorate, and are called the eastern slope of the Jordan Rift Valley. The slope is known for outlets of spring water from the eastern aquifer to the Jordan Rift Valley. Due to the topographic difficulties, no development activities would be considered in this sloped area that covers 131.5 km2 or 12 % of the whole Study area.
(2) Environmental Limitation
Figure 5.3.3 shows the natural reserve areas in the Study area, which have been selected by the Israeli government after its occupation in 1967 and agreed to by the concerned Palestinian representative in 1993. They cover a total area of 153 km2 or 14 % of the Study area.
The natural reserves are classified into the following.
- Mountain area along wadi basins for water resources conservation,
- River terraces along the Jordan River for conservation of flora and fauna,
- Some other reasons, which could not be specified.
Source: MoP
Figure 5.3.2 Location of Steep Slope Area
Source: MoP
The natural reserve areas would not be considered for further land development. However, it would be necessary to investigate and monitor the condition of natural reserve areas in the view of environmental conservation as well as wise use for sustainable human activities such as water resources development and soil conservation.
(3) Political Limitation
The Study area has been under occupation by Israel since 1967, and land development is strictly controlled. Three categories have been agreed under the Oslo Accords in 1993 in the following manner:
Table 5.3.2 Political Limitation of Land Development in the Study Area
Category Condition Area (km2/%)
Area A Under control of PNA both for administration and security 148 (13.6%) Area B Under control of PNA for administration, and Israeli Government for security 58 (5.3%) Area C Under control of Israeli Government both for administration and security 887 (81.1%)
Total 1,093 (100.0%)
Source: JICA Study Team, MoP
According to the agreement, about 81% of the Study area is fully controlled by the Israeli government. Any activity in Area C needs prior application and approval from the Israeli government. According to the local people, such activities as house renovation, school rehabilitation, well rehabilitation, road improvement and so on are not allowed or take a lengthy period for approval by the Israeli government. Under such conditions, it appears unrealistic for the Palestinian people in the Jordan Rift Valley area to formulate development plans in Area C.
5.3.3 Required Extension of Built-up Area
Average population density is relatively low or 86 persons/km2, which is 1/50 of the density in the Gaza Strip (3,523 persons/km2). The built-up areas in the Study area are generally small in size, reflecting the Palestinian regulations for urban planning. Under the regulation, an average built-up area is defined to be 212 m2/person, while the average density of build-up area in the Study area is estimated to be 206 m3/person.
Through discussions at the Spatial Planning Working Group in the course of the Study, the required build-up area in 2015 has been estimated based the existing and future population projections, the existing urban pattern (fabric), the existing and proposed urban densities, and the availability and suitability of land. The following table shows the population, existing built-up area, and proposed extension of the built-up area in 2015.
Table 5.3.3 Built Up Area and Required Land Extension in 2015 2003 2015 1 Al Jiftlik 3,966 4,949 5,557 121,000 31 70 388,990 267,990 2 Marg Na'ja 692 861 969 295,000 426 417 404,073 109,073 3 Az Zubeidat 1,208 1,504 1,692 905,000 749 701 1,186,092 281,092 4 Fasayil 811 1,010 1,136 222,000 274 283 321,488 99,488 5 Al' Auja 3,614 4,501 5,063 731,000 202 221 1,118,923 387,923 6 An Nuwei'ma 1,050 1,307 1,471 462,000 440 429 631,059 169,059
7 Ein ad Duyuk al foqa 734 914 1,028 404,000 550 526 540,728 136,728
8 Ein as Sultant Camp 1,835 2,285 2,571 1,030,000 561 536 1,378,056 348,056
9 Ein ad Duyuk at Tahta 871 1,084 1,220 509,000 584 556 678,320 169,320
10 Jericho 18,398 22,915 25,778 4,264,000 232 247 6,367,166 2,103,166
11 Aqbat Jaber Camp 5,716 7,120 8,010 1,912,000 334 337 2,699,370 787,370 Sub-Total 38,895 48,450 54,495 10,855,000 15,714,265 4,859,265 12 Bardala 1,430 1,781 2,004 353,000 247 260 521,040 168,040 13 'Ein el Beida 980 1,220 1,373 165,000 168 191 262,243 97,243 14 Kardala 150 187 210 20,000 133 159 33,390 13,390 15 'Aqqaba 5,505 6,857 7,713 680,000 124 152 1,172,376 492,376 16 Tayasir 2,173 2,706 3,044 300,000 138 165 502,260 202,260 17 Al Farisiya 193 241 271 8,000 41 80 21,680 13,680 18 Ath Thaqhra 235 292 329 83,000 353 354 116,466 33,466 19 Al Malih 187 233 262 37,000 198 219 57,378 20,378 20 Tubas 14,584 18,165 20,434 2,088,000 143 169 3,453,346 1,365,346 21 Ras al Far'a 636 792 891 4,000 6 49 43,659 39,659 22 El Far'a Camp 5,213 6,492 7,304 384,000 74 108 788,832 404,832 23 Wadi al Far'a 2,123 2,644 2,974 583,000 275 284 844,616 261,616 24 Tamun 9,466 11,790 13,263 1,652,000 175 197 2,612,811 960,811 Sub-Total 42,875 53,400 60,072 6,357,000 10,430,097 4,073,097 25 Albadhan 2,228 2,775 3,122 442,000 198 218 680,596 238,596 26 Annassariya 1,245 1,551 1,745 187,000 150 176 307,120 120,120 27 Alaqrabaniya 824 1,026 1,154 230,000 279 289 333,506 103,506 28 Ein Shibli 182 227 256 161,000 885 819 209,664 48,664
29 Frush Beit Dajan 1,066 1,328 1,494 240,000 225 242 361,548 121,548
30 Beit Dajan 3,301 4,112 4,626 416,000 126 154 712,404 296,404
31 Talluza 2,466 3,072 3,456 298,000 121 150 518,400 220,400
Sub-Total 11,312 14,091 15,853 1,974,000 3,123,238 1,149,238
Total 93,082 115,941 130,420 19,186,000 206 224 29,267,600 10,081,600 1,565,000
( including New Industry Area) 236 30,832,600
Jericho
Tubas
Nablus
Population Area (m2)Build-up Build-up area perperson in2003 (m2 / person)
No. Local Authority
as of 2003 2003 2010 2015 Governorate / District Additional Area for Industrial Purposes 1,565,000 Required Extension (m2) in 2015 Total Area Additional
Area
Source: JICA Study Team / MoP estimate
The current Palestinian built-up area is estimated to be 19.2 km2, accounting for 1.7% of the Study area. Based on the estimated population growth, the required built up area would be increased up to 29.2 km2 in 2015, or increase by 63% compared to the current condition.
Particularly, the following six municipalities/councils would require sizable extension of the built-up area:
Table 5.3.4 Priority Municipalities /Village Councils Requiring Extension of Built-up Area
No. Municipality / Council Population in 2015
Present Built-up Area (m2) Required Built-up area in 2015 (m2) Additional Built-up Area (m2) 1 Jericho 25,778 4,264,000 6,367,000 2,103,000 2 Tubas 20,434 2,088,000 3,453,000 1,365,000 3 Tammun 13,263 1,652,000 2,612,000 960,000
4 Aqbat Jaber Camp 8,010 1,912,000 2,699,000 787,000
5 ‘Aqqaba 7,713 680,000 1,172,000 492,000
6 El Far’a Camp 7,304 384,000 788,000 404,000
Tubas municipality will require a significantly wide area for expansion of the urban area. The municipality has prepared a new urban development plan in 1997 covering the area of 7.5km2, and they are waiting for approval by the high planning council of the national government.
Those communities located in Areas A and B would have fewer difficulties in extending the built-up area, but the villages located in Area C have difficulties in expansion. For instance, Al Jiftlik village is located in Area C and the existing built-up area is 0.12 km2 for the population of around 4,000 (2003), or equivalent to 30 m2/person (14% of the Palestinian regulation). The extension of the built up area requires prior application and approval by the Israeli government.
The MoLG is assisting the municipalities and village councils in formulating their urban development plans. For approval of the urban pans, three steps are required by the local planning committee, the regional planning committee and the high planning council. The respective municipalities and village councils should formulate their own development plan according to the urban planning regulation.
5.3.4 Potential Area for Agricultural Development
Based on the current land use, topography, soils and environmental considerations, three major areas are identified as potential areas for agricultural development. They are:
(i) Bardala/Kardala and Wadi Malih Area (ii) Wadi al Far’a Basin and Al Jiftlik Area (iii) Greater Jericho Area
12. Bardala 14. Kardala 13. Ein el Beida 15. Aqqaba 16. Tayasir 17. Al Farisiya 18. Ath Thaqhra 19. Al Malih 20. Tubas 22. El Far'a Camp 21. Ras al Far'a 23. Wadi al Far'a 24. Tammun 25. Al Badhan 26. An Nasiriya 27. Araqrabaniya 28. Ein Shibli
29.Frush Beit Dajan 1.Al Jiftlik 2. Marg Na'ja 3. Az Zubaidat 4. Fasayil 5. Al Auja 6. An Nuwei'ma 8. Ein as Sultan Camp 7. Ein Duyuk al Foqa
9. Ein Duyuk al Tahta
10. Jericho 11. Aqbat Jaber Camp
31. Talluza
Required Extesion more than 1km2 Required Extension less than 1 km2 No need of Extension Required Urban Development Area in 2015
30.Beit Dajan
Source: JICA Study Team, MoP
Figure 5.3.4 Location and Required Extension of Built-up Area
Bardala/Kardala and Wadi Malih Area is
located to the north of the Jordan Rift Valley. The population is sparse and sizable un-used land areas exist. Major parts of the un-used land areas are outside of the natural reserve areas. The available land for agricultural development is estimated to be 93 km2 or 34% of the total land, as calculated in Table 5.3.5. There are spring water resources in Bardala/Kardala and Wadi Malih basin.
However, all the area lies in Area C and is fully controlled by the Israeli government. In addition, there are few people living in this area and sizable migration would take a lengthy period. Bardala/Kardala and Wadi Malih Basin area is, therefore, identified as a future development zone.
Table 5.3.5 Current Land Use, Constrained Area, Area of Agriculture in Bardala/Kardala and Wadi Malih Basin
(Unit: km2)
Current Land Use
Land Cover Area A Area B Area C Total
Agricultural areas 0 0 21 21
Palestinian Communitie 0 0 12 12
Israeli Settlement 0 0 2 2
Military Base 0 0 52 52
Others 0 0 188 188 Biult-up area
Total 0 0 275 275 31.7%
Constrained Area
Limitation Area A Area B Area C Total
Slope 20% and over 0 0 0 0
Natural reserve 0 0 58 58 Constrained area
Total 0 0 58 58 21.1%
Area of Agriculture High Value
Agriculture Area A Area B Area C Total
Middle to High value 0 0 231 231 Agriculture Low Value
Low value 0 0 44 44 16.0% Total 0 0 275 275 B uilt-u p Ar ea C ons t raine d Ar ea
Existing Agriculture Area Steep slope Area (>20%) Natural Reserve Area Area A AreaB
Bardala / Kardara & Wadi Malih Area
Wadi Far'a Basin & Jiftlic Area
Greater Jericho Area
Source: JICA Study Team, MoP
Figure 5.3.5 Potential Area for Agricultural Development
Summary Unavailable for development = 181 km2 (66%)
Potential for Agricultural development = 93 km2 (34%)
Wadi al Far’a Basin and Al Jiftlik Area is identified to be a major agricultural area in the Study area.
Water resources are available along the Wadi al Far’a River, inclusive of potential water harvesting. However, most areas are within the natural reserve, and detailed investigation for environmental protection would need to be conducted. In addition, the major part of the Wadi al Far’a Basin and Al Jiftlik area belongs to Area C. The land development activities would therefore take time. The potential development area is estimated to be 40 km2, or 18 % of total land, as calculated in the following table.
Table 5.3.6 Current Land Use/Constrained Area/Area of Agriculture in Wadi al Far’a Basin and Al Jiftlik Area
(Unit: km2)
Land Cover Area A Area B Area C Total
Agricultural areas 19 36 55 110
Palestinian Communitie 2 2 7 12
Israeli Settlement 0 0 3 3
Military Base 3 3 10 16
Others 5 16 54 75 Biult-up area
Total 30 57 129 216 65.1%
Limitation Area A Area B Area C Total
Slope 20% and over 0 0 7 7
Natural reserve 15 0 9 24 Constrained area
Total 15 0 15 30 14.0%
Agriculture Area A Area B Area C Total
Middle to High value 30 57 100 187 Agriculture Low Value
Low value 0 0 29 29 13.4% Total 30 57 129 216 B uilt -u p Are a Con st ra in e d
Summary Unavailable for development = 176 km2 (82%)
Potential for Agricultural development = 40 km2 (18%)
The Greater Jericho area is located to the south of the Study area. Sizable un-used flat land extends to
the south of Jericho city as well as between Jericho city and Al ’Auja village. Most of the un-used land is outside of the natural reserve area, and some part belongs to Area A. There are several spring water resources in this area. On the other hand, development is expected in the Greater Jericho area for various activities such as tourism, agro-processing, industry, trades and so on. The land use for the Greater Jericho, therefore, needs to be planned, not only for agricultural purposes but for the broader needs. The total un-used land area is estimated to be 88 km2,or 25 % of the total land, of which 14 km2
Table 5.3.7 Current Land Use/Constrained Area/Area of Agricultural Low value in Greater Jericho Area
Land Cover Area A Area B Area C Total
Agricultural areas 32 0 56 87
Palestinan Communit 10 0 16 26
Israeli Settlement 0 0 6 6
Military Base 5 0 21 26
Others 22 0 180 201 Biult-up area
Total 69 0 278 347 42.0%
Limitation Area A Area B Area C Total
Slope 20% and over 12 0 16 28
Natural reserve 1 0 18 18 Constrained area
Total 13 0 34 46 13.3%
Agriculture Area A Area B Area C Total
Middle to High value 62 0 157 219 Agriculture Low Value
Low value 7 0 121 128 36.9% Total 62 0 157 347 C ons tr ain ed Ar ea B uilt-up Ar ea
Summary Unavailable for development = 259 km2 (75%)
Potential for Agricultural development = 88 km2 (25%)
5.3.5 Land Development/Management Framework
There are many constraints for land development in the Jericho and Jordan Rift Valley area. The most critical constraint is the occupational situation, by which about 81% of the total land cannot be developed under the current situation (refer to table 5.3.2).
Consequently, the land development plan in Area C appears to be unrealistic. It is, therefore, questionable whether development activities in Area C should be included in the master plan components or not.
Source: Compiled by JICA Study Team
Figure 5.3.6 Built-up Area in 3 selected areas
Source: Compiled by JICA Study Team
Figure 5.3.7 Constrained Area for Development in 3 selected areas
The agricultural development potential, in terms of land availability, is summarized in the following table:
Table 5.3.8 Development Potential for Agricultural Land Extension in Three Sub-regions
1 2 3 4 5 = 3+4 6
Sub-Region Area (km2) Agricultural Existing
Area (Km2) Potential Agricultural Development Area for future (Km2)
Total Area for Agricultural Development (Km2) Natural Reserve Area (Km2)
Area A & B Area C Total Bardala /Kardala and Wadi Malih 0 275 275 (7.6%) 21 (33.8%) 93 (41.4%) 114 (21.0%) 58 Wadi al Far’a and Al Jiftlik 87 129 216 110 (51.0%) 40 (18.5%) 150 69.4%) 24 (11.1%) Greater Jericho 69 278 347 (25.0%) 87 (25.3%) 88 (50.4%) 175 (5.1%) 18 Total 156 682 838 218 221 439 100
Source: JICA Study Team
It is estimated that the total existing agricultural land within the three sub-regions is 218 km2, accounting for 20% of the whole Jordan Rift Valley. In addition, 221 km2 of the total land classified into high or moderate values in land classification could be available for the future expansion of agricultural activities. Of this potential development land, 93 km2 is in the Bardala/Kadala and Wadi Malih area, and 88 km2 is in the Greater Jericho area. In Wadi Far’a valley and Al Jiftlik area, the available land for future agricultural expansion is limited to 40 km2.
Among three potential land development areas, the Greater Jericho area is the most realistic area for land development. Some parts of the un-used land are found within Area A. The development plan for this area should be prioritized in the future development.
For Wadi al Far’a valley and Al Jiftlik area, detailed investigation on the existing agricultural area and the natural reserve area should be conducted to realize land and water development. At the same time, discussions between the PNA and Israeli government would be continued for land utilization in Area C. Consequently, the following are proposed for the land development framework and strategy.
(1) Expansion of the built-up area should be planned on the basis of the further population growth. Respective municipality and village councils need to formulate their urban development plans in accordance with the urban planning law and in consultation with the MoLG.
(2) A detailed development plan for the Greater Jericho Area should be formulated. The area between Jericho city and Al ’Auja Village is a potential land development for agriculture. Some un-used land in Area A is found in the center of this development zone, and to the east and west spreads the un-used land in Area C. Agriculture, with some residential areas, would be developed with water conveyed from Jericho and ’Auja. Some agricultural activities (e.g. livestock) would be planned in the surrounding Area C.
(3) Land and Water development in the Wadi Far’a and Al Jiftlik are other priority subjects for land development. However, it is found that the land availability for future agricultural expansion is
limited in spite of its relatively high potential of water resources. In this area, improvement in the existing agricultural land would be planned for implementation at the initial stage. At the same time, a detailed investigation on the natural reserve area should be conducted. Major development components would include land and water management of the existing agriculture, improvement in Damiya-Tubas Road, construction of a large scale water harvesting scheme, and environmental conservation of Wadi al Far’a basin.
(4) Bardala/Kardala and Wadi Malih basin would be designated for future development. The area could be planned in combination with the immigration plan. A new urban/rural development plan should be formulated for that purpose.
5.4 Available
Water
Resources
With small rainfall, as noted in Chapter 2.3, the Jericho and Jordan Rift Valley area has a severe limitation in water resources. Availability of water resources, therefore, constitutes another framework to be taken into account in formulating a regional development plan.
5.4.1 Existing Water Resources in Jordan Rift Valley
(1) Groundwater
Available water resources in the Jordan Rift Valley are spring water and groundwater, which originate from the eastern aquifer. The figure shows the extent of the eastern aquifer, of which the basin boundary runs along the center of the West Bank from north to south through Nablus and Jerusalem. Under the Oslo II Accords on 28 September 1995, both Palestine and Israel recognized the need to protect the environment and utilize natural resources on a sustainable and environmentally sound basis, and to cooperate in sewage, solid waste and water issues. The agreement explicitly states that Israel recognizes Palestinian water rights, to be negotiated in the final talks without further elaboration on the nature of these rights, and the principles governing the rights and obligations of both parties. Article 12 expressly recognizes water as a natural resource.
Eastern Aquifer
Source: PASSIA
The Article 40, Annex III, Appendix 1 of the Accords deals with water allocation, referring to the immediate needs of the Palestinians. Water of 70-80 MCM/year has been allocated for the Palestinians, with 28.6 MCM/year from the eastern aquifer for immediate needs. The parties agreed to establish a Joint Water Committee (JWC) to serve as an institutional mechanism for the interim period, mainly to oversee the implementation of the Article 40. The following table presents the recognized water allocation under the Oslo II Accords.
Table 5.4.1 Water Allocation Recognized under Oslo II Accords
Aquifer Potential (MCM/yr) Used by Israel (MCM /yr) Used by Palestine (MCM /yr) Remaining Quantities (MCM /yr) Eastern 172 40 54 70~80 Western 362 340 22 - Northeastern 145 103 42 - TOTAL 679 483 118 70~80 % of share 100% 71.1% 17.4% 11.5%
Source: Document of Oslo II Accords, 28 September 1995
In the Jordan Rift Valley, 19 springs originate from the eastern aquifer and discharge to the eastern slope of the Valley. Total discharge is estimated to be about 42 MCM/year. For spring water, the water resources are generally located far from the demand areas. There are certain losses such as leakage, seepage and evaporation. The water conveyance loss is estimated to be about 30%, or 15 MCM/year according to the PWA.
For the extraction of groundwater, the eastern aquifer is the source of wells in the Study area except for part of Tubas district. As shown in Table 5.4.1 above, the Palestinian right of extraction from the eastern aquifer is 54 MCM/year, and 70-80 MCM/year for further development. Among them, the water extraction from the existing wells from the Jordan Rift Valley is estimated to be about 10 MCM/year. Accordingly, the currently available water resources in the Jericho and the Jordan Rift Valley area are assumed as summarized in the following table.
Table 5.4.2 Available Water from Easter Aquifer in Jordan Rift Valley
Water Resources (MCM/year) Springs (MCM/year) Wells (MCM/year) Total
Annual Available Volume 27 10 37
Source: JICA Study Team estimate (2) Surface Water
The only permanent surface water resource is the Jordan River. The Jordan River basin is the international basin shared by Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel and Palestine. An important benchmark of the agreement on international water allocation was made by four countries, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Israel in 1955, called the Johnston Agreement. At that time, the West Bank belonged to Jordan. The agreed water allocation of the Jordan River is summarized in the following.
Table 5.4.3 Water Allocation of Jordan River recognized under Jhonston Agreement in 1955
Syria Lebanon Jordan Israel Total
132 MCM/yr 35 MCM/yr 720 MCM/yr 400 MCM/yr 1,287 MCM/yr
10.3% 2.7% 55.9% 31.1% 100%
Source: PASSIA
Before 1967, Palestinians made use of water from the Jordan River through 140 pumping units for irrigation on the western terrace. However, these have been closed since 1967, and all pumping units have been demolished. The current utilization of the shared water of the Jordan River is summarized in the following table and illustrated in Figure 5.4.2.
Table 5.4.4 Current Water Utilization of the Jordan River
(Unit: MCM/year) Syria Lebanon Jordan Israel Palestine Total
160 0 320 640 None 1,120
14.3% 0% 28.6% 57.1% 0% 100%
Source: PASSIA
No surface water is currently extracted from the Jordan River by Palestine. The water allocation issues for the Jordan River are discussed between Jordan and Israel, and also between Jordan and Syria. There is no opportunity for Palestine to join the discussion on the international water allocation.
5.4.2 Potential for Water Resources Development
(1) New Water Resources
In the Jordan Rift Valley, three new water resources would be made available in the short and medium term. They are:
(i) Floodwater in Wadi basins in the Jordan Rift Valley,
(ii) Recycled water from wastewater treatments plants in major cities/towns, and (iii) Brackish water on the lower terrace of the Jordan Rift Valley.
Floodwater in wadis in the Jordan Rift Valley is the most probable new water resource in the future. The PWA estimates that the development potential would reach 28.5 MCM on an annual average (refer to Chapter 8.2 for further detail), which could be developed by means of conventional technologies. The captured floodwater would be recharged into the groundwater aquifer so that additional wells could be developed without additional extraction from the aquifer. It is also possible to have surface reservoirs with dams on wadis, though it would be dependent on the geological condition at the potential sites of dams and reservoirs. About 10 MCM/year of floodwater capture will be envisaged for the master plan formulation (see Chapter 8.2).
Water recycling from wastewater will be another water resource for irrigation purpose. Technologies have already been disseminated in Israel, in which about 40% of treated wastewater is currently utilized for irrigation. Wastewater from major cities on the central highland in the West Bank, such as Nablus, Ramallah, and East Jerusalem would flow down to the Jordan River basin. The availability of recycled water depends on development of the sewerage network and treatment systems in such major cities. By assuming further improvements in the sewerage network systems in Nablus, Ramallah, East-Jerusalem and Jericho, it is provisionally expected that about 15 MCM/year of recycled water might be made available for irrigation (refer to Chapter 8.2 for further detail).
(2) Potential Water Resources according to the Progress in Peace Building
Further development potential of water resources has been discussed on various occasions with a view to how to provide a stable water supply for Palestine, having quite limited water resources and being obliged to depend on the international water conveyance system in long term. The following schemes have been preliminary discussed in the academic circles.
(i) Water desalinization from the Mediterranean Sea and transport to the West Bank, (ii) Western Ghor Canal along the Jordan Rift Valley from the Lake Tiberias, and (iii) Peace water pipeline from Turkey.
Such international water conveyance schemes are future issues to discuss according to the progress in peace building in the Middle East, and not to be considered in this Study.
5.4.3 Demand Side Management of Agricultural Water
As discussed in detail in Chapter 8.2, out of available water resources of 41.6 MCM/year, including the Mekorot wells, 94% or 39.0 MCM/year are utilized for agricultural purposes. From the viewpoint of water management in the Jordan Rift Valley, water saving agriculture or demand side water management will be the most effective approach to water resource development in the Jericho and Jordan Rift Valley area (refer to Chapter 8.3 for detail).
On the other hand, agriculture is one of the major sectors to lead regional economy in the Jordan Rift Valley. Growth in the agricultural sector is needed for sustainable development of the Jordan Rift Valley, which would require more water for production. Water saving agriculture therefore would contribute to both water saving and production growth.
A water saving agricultural approach for Jericho has been studied. A cropping pattern is assumed in view of the production efficiency of land and water under the following assumptions:
(i) Tomatoes and cucumbers cultivated in open fields will be converted to green houses, (ii) Vegetables and fruits with low production
efficiencies like squash will be converted to high efficiency crops such as potatoes, cucumbers and cauliflower, and
(iii) Bananas, having low production efficiency will be converted to dates, which have the highest production efficiency by land and are highly tolerant to chloride concentration. Figures 5.4.3 through 5.4.5 compare the area, production and water requirements between the present cropping pattern and the assumed water saving cropping pattern.
0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 Present Future C ro ppi ng A re a ( dun um ) 65,310 100% 65,310 Fruits Vegetables Green House Field Crops
Source: JICA Study Team
Figure 5.4.3 Assumed Major Crops Areas under Water Saving Agricultural Cropping Pattern 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0 Present Future P roduc tion ( m il. N IS ) 118.8 238.9 Field Crops Fruits Vegetables Green House 201%
Source: JICA Study Team
Figure 5.4.4 Production of Major Crops under Water Saving Agriculture
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Present Future W at er R equi re m ent (M C M /y ea r) 39.0 50.8 130% Fruits Vegetables Green House Field Crops
Source: JICA Study Team
Figure 5.4.5 Water Requirement under Water Saving Agriculture
NIS 3.04/m3 to NIS 4.71/m3 in gross margin under the assumed water saving agriculture. Consequently, variation of cropping patterns could attain an increase in production as well as decrease in water requirements. This should be the first action to be taken for integrated water management.
5.4.4 Water Resources Development Strategy and Framework
The following development strategies are recommended for water resources development and management in the Jordan Rift Valley area. The Jericho regional development plan will be formulated under such a framework.
Strategy 1: The first priority should be accorded to domestic water supply in water allocation.
The target supply level in 2020 is 150 liters/capita/day, which is equivalent to the WHO and PWA standards.
Strategy 2: Promotion of water saving agriculture should be the first step for water
management, which could make it possible to allocate more water for domestic purposes.
Strategy 3: Activities on reduction of water conveyance losses and rehabilitation of the
existing water extraction facilities should be promoted as quickly as possible. At the same time, it is necessary to reform the water users committee to maintain the facilities and to manage water as a common asset of the Palestinian people.
Strategy 4: Practical water resource development, including floodwater capture along wadis
and water recycling through development of sewerage networks will be programmed for mid-term implementation. Technical feasibility, however, should be assessed as quickly as possible to implement such projects.
Strategy 5: International water carrier schemes would be considered as a future vision in line
with the progress in peace building. The assessment would be continued among the related countries at the academic level. Such schemes, however, will not be envisaged in the formulation of the master plan under this Study.
5.4.5 Water Demand in 2015
Based on the socio-economic framework, the population in 2015 is estimated to be 116,200 in the Jericho and Jordan Rift Valley area, without considering migration from outside of the Jordan Rift Valley.
Based on this estimate, the water demand, other than agriculture in the Valley, is estimated as summarized in the following table.
Table 5.4.5 Municipal and Industrial Water Demand in 2015
Municipal & Industrial Demand (MCM/yr)
Dom. Tour Public Livstck Indst. Total
Case Population(persons)
3% 10% 15%
Present Condition (2003) 86,081 3.1
Demand in 2015 116,237 5.4 0.2 0.2 0.8 1.2 7.8
Note: Details are discussed in Chapter 8.2. Source: JICA Study Team estimate
As proposed in the above Strategy 1, the water requirements for municipal and industrial use should be allocated prior to the agricultural water supply.
As noted above, promotion of water saving agriculture would create additional water available for irrigation. Agricultural water demand is estimated based on the assumed production efficiency of NIS 5.07/m3, which is equivalent to 202% of the present production efficiency (NIS 2.51/m3). This means that the water requirements in 2015 for the same production amount will be about half of the present water demand.
For the agricultural water demand, it is assumed that the growth rate of agricultural production would be the same as the GRDP growth rate in the West Bank, namely 4.4% per annum for 10 years from 2005 to 2015. On the other hand, agricultural production in the Jordan Rift Valley as of 2003 was estimated to be US$ 74.6 million. Taking the actual GRDP growth in the West Bank up to 200 and estimated future GRDP growth from 2005 to 2015, agricultural production is expected in the following manner.
Table 5.4.6 Assumed Agricultural Production in 2015
2003 2004 2005 2015
Agricultural Production (mil. US$) 74.6 74.0 80.8 156.3
Population 86,081 86,077 88,912 116,237
Per Capita Agri. Product (US$) 866.6 859.6 908.6 1,344.9
GRDP Growth Rate (%) -0.8 5.7% 4.4%
Water Demand (mil.m3)
(same cropping pattern 2005-2015) 39.0 - - 81.8
Water Demand (mil.m3)
(water saving agricultural approach) - - - 40.5
Note: The growth rate of agricultural products is assumed to be the same as the growth rate of GRDP Source: JICA Study Team
Along with the above estimation, assumed agricultural production in the Jordan Rift Valley in 2015 is calculated to be US$ 156.3 million, if per capita GRDP in agriculture grows at the same rate as the estimated GRDP growth rate. The agricultural water demand is then figured out based on the improved water efficiency of 202% (NIS 2.51/m3 in 2005 Æ NIS 5.07/m3 in 2015). The water allocation for agriculture is thus estimated as follows:
US$ 156.3 million / US$ 74.6 million x 39.0 MCM / 202%= 40.5 MCM
5.5
Inter-Regional Development Potential from Viewpoint of Water Resources
5.5.1 Population Distribution and Water Resources
Current population density in the Jordan Rift Valley is estimated to be 86 persons/km2, which is much smaller than the West Bank (394 persons/km2), and the Gaza Strip (3,523 persons/km2).
Table 5.5.1 Population Distribution in the West Bank and Gaza
Items Jordan Rift Valley West Bank Gaza Strip The West Bank and Gaza
Area (km2) 995 5,655 365 6,020
Population (2003) 86,081 2,228,759 1,286,009 3,514,768
Pop. Density
(persons/km2) 86 394 3,523 583
Source: JICA Study Team
The remarkable concentration of population in the Gaza Strip creates various social and economic issues, particularly the lack of land and water resources, while the Jordan Rift Valley is much less populated, or 1/40 of the population density compared to the Gaza Strip. The MoP contends the unbalanced population distribution in the West Bank and Gaza would eventually demand domestic migration from the Gaza and other places to the Jordan Rift Valley when a fully independent state of Palestine is realized. In this Section, therefore, a preliminary assessment of the allowable population capacity in the Jordan Rift Valley in terms of potential development of water resources is conducted from a wider viewpoint.
The Study on potential water resources development will be conducted later in Chapter 8.2. Along with the analysis, the potential volume of water resources in the Jordan Rift Valley is estimated as summarized in the following table. The maximum available water is estimated to be 82.6 MCM in the Jordan Rift Valley.
Table 5.5.2 Potential Water Resources in the Jordan Rift Valley (2015)
Source of Water Potential Development Capacity (MCM/year)
Considered in Master Plan (MCM/year)
Currently Available Water 41.6 41.6
Reduction for loss of water in conveyance for Spring water sources
10.4 10.4
Rehabilitation of agricultural wells 5.6 5.6
New Wells 0.2 0.2
Floodwater capture along Wadis 28.6 10.0
Water recycling of sewerage collection system 33.9 14.8
Total Water Resources Development 120.1 82.6
Note: - Promotion of water saving agriculture is not included in this table. - The currently available water includes the Mekorot wells
5.5.2 Allowable Population Redistribution Capacity in Jordan Rift Valley
Along with the water allocation policy of PNA, the priority for water allocation is for domestic purposes, and the remaining water is for agricultural purposes. Under such a principle, the allowable population capacity in the Jordan Rift Valley is provisionally assessed as summarized in the following table:
Table 5.5.3 Allowable Population Capacity of the Jordan Rift Valley
(in terms of potential water resources development)
Agricultural Water and Production Population Population Density
Potential Water Resources
M&I Water
Demand RemainingWater for Agriculture Assumed Production Per Capita Agri. Production (persons) (persons/km2) (MCM/yr) (MCM/yr) (MCM/yr) (mil. US$) (US$/capita)
86,081 86 56.5 3.1 53.4 116,237 117 82.6 7.8 74.7 288.5 2,482 200,000 201 82.6 14.5 68.0 262.6 1,313 300,000 302 82.6 21.8 60.8 234.6 782 400,000 402 82.6 29.1 53.5 206.6 516 500,000 503 82.6 36.3 46.3 178.5 357
Source: JICA Study Team estimate
Out of the potential water resources in the Jordan Rift Valley, only spring water is suitable for domestic use. Total available volume of spring water after rehabilitation of the water conveyance system would be about 40 MCM/year. Accordingly, the absolute upper limit of population in the Jordan Rift Valley would be around 500,000. However, the available water for agriculture would then be only 46.3 MCM/year, with the assumed agricultural production of US$ 357/capita. This amount is only 26.5% of the present agricultural product (US$ 1,345/capita). The regional economy should depend more on sectors other than agriculture in order to sustain the regional economy.
If the agricultural sector of GRDP needs to be maintained at the present level (US$ 1,345/capita of the annual product), the allowable population in the Jordan Rift Valley would be around 200,000. In this case, no drastic change in the GRDP share by sector would be required. Consequently, the allowable population capacity in the Jordan Rift Valley would be around 200,000, though this would be highly dependent on the future economic structure of the Jordan Rift Valley.
CHAPTER 6. INTEGRATED REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
6.1 Basic
Strategy
The following six basic strategies are proposed in formulating an integrated regional development plan for the Jericho and Jordan Rift Valley area:
Basic Strategy 1:
Jordan Rift Valley is treated as one cluster, strengthening linakges within the region
Basic Strategy 3:
Focal sub-regions are identified for efficient investments Basic Strategy 4:
Flexible development scenarios are set to be adjustable to future changes Basic Strategy 5:
Institutional set-up for program implementation Basic Strategy 6:
Capacity building is integrated into regional development and sector development activities Basic Strategy 2:
Inter-regional linkages are to be strengthened
Basic Strategies
Basic Strategy 1: Jordan Rift Valley is treated as one cluster, strengthening linkages within the
region
The Study area encompasses 26 local government units (LGUs) in Jericho governorate, Tubas district and Nablus governorate. The master plan is formulated in such a manner that the Jordan Rift Valley area is one cluster to seek the maximum regional benefit under the integrated regional development plan. Linkages in the region would be strengthened, for instance, through combining the agricultural and tourism activities. Farmers will provide tourists with fresh and/or processed agricultural products, as well as with the opportunity for agro-tourism, for their mutual benefits.
Basic Strategy 2: Inter-regional linkages are to be strengthened
The geographical uniqueness of the Jordan Rift Valley has various developmental potentials by strengthening the inter-regional linkages. The Study area is relatively well endowed with natural and
cultural resources such as land, water, favorable climate for agriculture, and archeological sites. On the other hand, the population in the Study area is relatively small and the development resources are not well developed yet. Strengthening the inter-regional linkages would make it possible to utilize the geographical advantages and abundant resources for economic development, particularly in the agricultural and tourism sectors. This, in turn, implies that a division of labor will be promoted among several regions in the West Bank and Gaza, making the utmost use of resources available in each region.
Basic Strategy 3: Focal sub-regions are identified for efficient investments
Although the master plan covers the entire region, some focal sub-regions are to be identified for the execution of development activities effectively and efficiently. The focal points should be highly populated areas, crossroads/hubs of transportation networks, water resources, and available land. In addition, the land administrative categories, “Areas A, B and C”, are to be considered. Only 13.6% of the Study area is so far classified as Area A, as noted in Chapter 5.3.2.
Given the above situations, three sub-regions are identified, i.e., (i) the Greater Jericho, (ii) Tubas Highland, and (iii)Wadi al Far’a Valley and Jiftlik.
In addition, (iv) the Bardala/Kardala area is identified as a future development zone with the possibility to develop new towns and agricultural areas.
The development direction in each sub-region is envisaged as follows:
Sub-region 1: The Greater Jericho
Æ Integrated urban development plan formulation (for International Tourism City) Æ Development of tourism infrastructures
Æ Urban environmental consideration (Solid waste, sewerage) Æ Reservation of archeological resources
Greater Jericho Tubas Highland
Wadi Far'a Valley and Jiftlic
Bardala/Kardara (Future)
Source: JICA Study Team / MoP
Figure 6.1.1 Proposed Development Centers in the Jordan Rift Valley
