The PPP (Polluter Pays Principle) among states (upstream and downstream states) does not achieve justice and equity, because the principle imposes on the party who is unable to financially and technically solve the problem within his border, nevertheless, solving the problem outside its borders. Addresings the measures undertaken by the stronger party and associated effects on solving the transboundary pollution as well as touching on the procedures that must be followed by the weaker party in order to resolve the problem (Palestine , New Mexico =Weak Party),(Israel, United States= Strong Party)
Dr.Rashed Al-Sa’ed ,Dr.Eyad Yacoub,Eng.Beesan Shonnar,
Environmental conflict, effluent reuse, regional wastewater treatment, Transboundary wastewater, Israel-Palestine boarders
Technical , Policy
Environmental problems between the countries have deep historical roots and consequences for several reasons. The most environmental Transboundary problems are not resolved until now, because the solutions that were developed respond to the pressures of political, media and environmental NGOs, and did not respond to the needs on the ground.
Discussion on how the application of the Polluter Pays Principle (PPP) through unilateral measures or through bilateral cooperation to solve the problem of transboundary wastewater pollution. In addition to tackle how to apply the PPP (Pay money to the strongest party) by the related party, financially unable to provide the cost for required technical capabilities and technology to solve the problem within his boundary.
Based on the state above the PPP among states (upstream and downstream states) does not achieve justice and equity, because the principle imposes on the party who is unable to financially and technically solve the problem within his border, nevertheless, solving the problem outside its borders. Mexico and Palestine were case studies addressed and both located in downstream. Mexico has bi-national cooperation with United States and Palestine imposes to unilateral action from Israel and in the both cases the application of the principle fails.
Addresings the measures undertaken by the stronger party and associated effects on solving the transboundary pollution as well as touching on the procedures that must be followed by the weaker party in order to resolve the problem (Palestine , New Mexico =Weak Party),(Israel, United States= Strong Party)
University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA, Birzeit University, Birzeit, Palestine , University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA.
Most of the collected wastewater in the West Bank is discharged untreated into the environment. The effluent of 70.25% of the public sewage networks flows untreated into open areas, while the effluent of 16% of the sewage networks is treated or pre-treated in wastewater treatment plants. The effluent of the remaining percentage (13.75%) of the sewage networks is treated in Israeli treatment plants and reused for irrigation purposes, and the other flows untreated in an open area. This situation is aggravated by the impact of untreated wastewater that is disposed of by the 257 Israeli settlements which are in the West Bank region affecting the neighboring Palestinian villages and agricultural land. The major wastewater stream flow is in Wadi Zeimar, Wadi el-Sajour (Nablus), Wadi Beitunia (Ramallah), Wadi en-Nar (Bethlehem) and Wadi as-Samen (Hebron).
The problem of transboundary pollution between the Palestinians and the Israelis has extended for more than 60 years and until now no sustainable solution has been found. Mainly, the problem is summarized by the fact that about 1.6 million Palestinians are living in the west mountainous region [in the West Bank within a watershed area, which has a topography and nature where dry and seasonal valleys carry wastewater into Israel. Other sources of pollution to the valleys are the Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Recent data indicated that almost 500,000 Israeli settlers are live in the watershed area, where raw wastewater is being discharged on Palestinian land and streams. This current wastewater disposal from both sides lead to the destruction of farmland, pollution of water resources and pose public health hazards. The Palestinian per capita consumption is 70 liters per day and the consumption of an Israeli settler, 280 liters per day because of Israel’s control of water sources.
This might mobilize the international community to place pressure on the Israeli government to solve the transboundary problem based on international law. In doing so, Israel must cooperate to protect shared water resources and the environment from pollution, thus achieving environmental justice towards the Palestinian and environment.
The position of the donor countries is an understanding of the conflict and they are trying to use their political and economic power to fund wastewater projects and coordinate joint meetings between the two parties to talk about the problem and find the best solution.
 UNDP (2006) The Millennium Development Goals Report.
 Giordano, M. A. and Wolf, A. T. 2003. Sharing waters: Post-Rio international water management. Natural Resources Forum. 27: 163-171.
 Dinar, Shlomi (2009). Treaty principles and patterns: Negotiations over international rivers. Johns Hopkins University, 2009, 463 pages; 3357178
 Tobey, James and. Smets, Henri (1996). The polluter-pays principle in the context of agriculture and the Environment. World Economy; Vol. 19 Issue 1, 63-25.
 Aickin, R., 1987. The polluter pays principle, the theory of enterprise liability and the concept of insurability. Chemistry and Industry, 22, 785–788.
 Just, R.E. and Netanyahu, S., 2004. Implications of ‘victim pays’ infeasibility for interconnected games with an illustration for aquifer sharing under unequal access cost. Water Resources Research, 40, 1–11.
 Carraro, C., 1997. Introduction. In: C. Carraro, ed. International environmental negotiations: strategic policy iss