256
The responsibilities of the Israel Water Authority include the preservation and regulation of the water resources. This includes the production (from seawater), the
supply and use of water, the design and implementation of water supply schemes
and the allocation and price setting for all water sectors (private households, agricultural and industrial) (OECD 2011 ). The Israel Water Authority intervenes in the
sphere of withdrawal from the natural sources. Withdrawal without a permit is not
possible. The Israel Water Authority issues permits at the beginning of each year
according to hydrological considerations. Therefore, these permits differ from year
to year (Kislev 2011 ). The users are required to present their requirements for the
next year to the Israel Water Authority.
The Israel Water Authority Council has the primary responsibility for taking the
water- related decisions. The council consists of eight elected members: the head of
the Israel Water Authority as chairperson of the Israel Water Authority Council; one
representative each from the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, the
Ministry of Environmental Protection, the Ministry of Interior and Management of
Local Authorities, the Ministry of Finance, and the Ministry of Infrastructure; and
two delegates of the public. The public representatives are appointed by the Minister
of National Infrastructure. Kislev ( 2011 , p. 136) criticised that the public representatives “cannot be taken as a realisation of public involvement”.
With the creation of the Israel Water Authority, operations for managing waste
and wastewater services were gradually transferred to water and sewerage corporations according to the Water and Sewage Association Law of 2001. This transfer of
responsibility from the municipalities to the corporations was supposed to boost the
construction of wastewater treatment plants. Before the reform, the fi nancial
resources required for the construction of wastewater treatment plants were not
made suffi ciently available to the municipalities (Hophmayer-Tokich 2010 ). As part
of the reform, all revenues from water tariffs have now to be reinvested in water
infrastructure (OECD 2011 ). The Israel Water Authority lists 55 corporations,
which provide services for 6.2 million citizens in 147 local authorities (out of 187
local authorities bound by law). The law does not apply to the West Bank, regional
councils and water associations. The largest corporation serves 415,000 residents in
Tel Aviv; the smallest serves only 14,000 residents. The Israeli public criticises the
number of the corporations as too many, and plans for merging corporations exist.
The government cut fi nancial assistance and imposed restrictions on the use of
water revenues for those municipalities that did not form corporations, while it provided fi nancial assistance to those municipalities which formed corporations (Kan
and Kislev 2011 ).
The partial privatisation of Mekorot and the shift to call for bids, as one of the
results of the governmental market liberalisation efforts, opened up a new fi nancing
mechanism in Israel (public–private partnership, PPP) and started the era of large
desalination projects.
One of the major achievements of the political reforms in the water sector was
the introduction of the full cost recovery principle. In 2002 the agricultural ministry
accepted that subsidies for the agricultural sector were shifted from water to land
subsidies, which allowed raising prices for agricultural water uses (Menahem and
C. Bismuth et al.
The responsibilities of the Israel Water Authority include the preservation and regulation of the water resources. This includes the production (from seawater), the
supply and use of water, the design and implementation of water supply schemes
and the allocation and price setting for all water sectors (private households, agricultural and industrial) (OECD 2011 ). The Israel Water Authority intervenes in the
sphere of withdrawal from the natural sources. Withdrawal without a permit is not
possible. The Israel Water Authority issues permits at the beginning of each year
according to hydrological considerations. Therefore, these permits differ from year
to year (Kislev 2011 ). The users are required to present their requirements for the
next year to the Israel Water Authority.
The Israel Water Authority Council has the primary responsibility for taking the
water- related decisions. The council consists of eight elected members: the head of
the Israel Water Authority as chairperson of the Israel Water Authority Council; one
representative each from the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, the
Ministry of Environmental Protection, the Ministry of Interior and Management of
Local Authorities, the Ministry of Finance, and the Ministry of Infrastructure; and
two delegates of the public. The public representatives are appointed by the Minister
of National Infrastructure. Kislev ( 2011 , p. 136) criticised that the public representatives “cannot be taken as a realisation of public involvement”.
With the creation of the Israel Water Authority, operations for managing waste
and wastewater services were gradually transferred to water and sewerage corporations according to the Water and Sewage Association Law of 2001. This transfer of
responsibility from the municipalities to the corporations was supposed to boost the
construction of wastewater treatment plants. Before the reform, the fi nancial
resources required for the construction of wastewater treatment plants were not
made suffi ciently available to the municipalities (Hophmayer-Tokich 2010 ). As part
of the reform, all revenues from water tariffs have now to be reinvested in water
infrastructure (OECD 2011 ). The Israel Water Authority lists 55 corporations,
which provide services for 6.2 million citizens in 147 local authorities (out of 187
local authorities bound by law). The law does not apply to the West Bank, regional
councils and water associations. The largest corporation serves 415,000 residents in
Tel Aviv; the smallest serves only 14,000 residents. The Israeli public criticises the
number of the corporations as too many, and plans for merging corporations exist.
The government cut fi nancial assistance and imposed restrictions on the use of
water revenues for those municipalities that did not form corporations, while it provided fi nancial assistance to those municipalities which formed corporations (Kan
and Kislev 2011 ).
The partial privatisation of Mekorot and the shift to call for bids, as one of the
results of the governmental market liberalisation efforts, opened up a new fi nancing
mechanism in Israel (public–private partnership, PPP) and started the era of large
desalination projects.
One of the major achievements of the political reforms in the water sector was
the introduction of the full cost recovery principle. In 2002 the agricultural ministry
accepted that subsidies for the agricultural sector were shifted from water to land
subsidies, which allowed raising prices for agricultural water uses (Menahem and
C. Bismuth et al.