Marie et al. Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:15
http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/15
RESEARCH
Open Access
Water quality legislation in Palestine over the
past century
Amer Marie1, Saed Khayat2* and Muna Dajani
Abstract
Background: This paper deals with the water quality legislation that has been enforced in Palestine over the past
century, from the Ottoman era through the British Mandate and Jordanian reign, to the Israeli occupation and
current Palestinian autonomy.
Results: The study reveals that, due to the instability and the short interrupted spans of these regimes, apart from
the Ottoman era, the successive ruling administrations were unable to draft water legislation in the interest of the
Palestinian population, though the more stable Jordanian rule is an exception to this. Moreover, the study shows
that the subject of the enacted legislations has depended on the circumstances that the population is subjected to
or simply as reaction that deals instantly with a certain problem without taking into account any planning or future
socioeconomic development. However, major concerns over the quality of accessible water gained momentum
with an ever-increasing demand for limited water resources and the need for water treatment.
Conclusions: Investments in legislation and its enforcement will lead to significant economic development and
public health and environmental quality enhancement through equitable and reasonable management of shared
water resources and community empowerment and awareness.
Keywords: Water quality legislation, Ottoman era, British Mandate, Jordan and Egypt span, Israeli military orders
Background
Water is the basis for life. Without it, human life would
cease; ecosystems would fail and disintegrate. Clean, safe
and adequate freshwater is essential for the functioning
and viability of ecosystems and communities, and development of society. Historically, water and civilizations
have been strongly interlinked. Water has shaped societies and impacted the status of many civilizations [1-3].
In fact, creation or collapse of civilizations is interrelated
to availability of water or deterioration of its quality, rendering it unsuitable for agricultural and domestic uses.
For example, the Nile has sustained and flourished civilizations on its banks, while Akkadian cultures' collapse
more than 4,500 years ago is attributed to the low quality of Tigris River water [4]. The capture of water
resources has been the reason why such civilizations and
societies have been described as hegemonic and have
maintained their existence and survival.
* Correspondence: saed.khayat@gmail.com
2
Technical and Applied Research Centre, Palestine Technical University,
Tulkarm 7, Palestine
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
Nomadic communities are constantly moving in search
for water and pastureland, both being their source of life.
Over centuries, these communities have been consequently unable to build meaningful civilization due to
unsustainable usage of water resources in arid area which
deteriorated quickly with continuous utilization.
Contamination of natural water resources by agriculture, population growth, industry, urbanization and
waste disposal requires proper legislation to contain and
safeguard humans and their surrounding environment.
With the rapid urbanization of countries worldwide, the
need to control the externalities of such urbanization is
essential. Much legislation was designed to regulate the
water use and water quality aspect with an aim to sustain water resources in terms of quality and quantity,
where civilization centers have continued access to the
water resources [5].
Since the industrial revolution in the eighteenth century,
there has been increased demand on natural resources including water. Conflicts over water resources can occur at
multiple levels and scales, whether national (e.g., between
farmers and domestic users) or international (between
© 2012 Marei et al.; licensee Springer. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction
in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Marie et al. Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:15
http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/15
countries and entities sharing a water body). Thus, water
scarcity can stir up regional conflicts over control of water
resources. Where resources become scarce because of natural reasons, including long periods of drought or due to
water quality deterioration, such conflicts particularly intensify. Endeavors have, therefore, been made to prevent
disputes among such groups and segments. Designing
water laws and legislation, ratifying multilateral environmental agreements and enhancing water institutions are
among the steps taken to manage shared water resources
and ensure sustainable and equitable use of the resources.
These factors have resulted in enactment of water legislations aiming at organizing relations between the different populations in conflict over water resources.
Nevertheless, water quality, which is as significant and
important as quantity, has been overlooked for decades
in terms of legislation, investment and public awareness.
Additionally, global data on groundwater quality has
been very limited due to the cost of monitoring and analysis; thus, water quality is often neglected in international agreements that deal with shared waters in
addition to national legislation [6].
Results and discussion
Legislation review
The Ottoman era (mid-nineteenth century–1917)
The Ottoman Empire was a Turkish empire inspired
and sustained by Islam and Islamic institutions. Thus,
its legislations relating to water use and preservation
were highly influenced by Islamic teachings and laws.
The Qur'an asserts that water is the sole basis for the
emergence of life: We have made every living thing out
of water. (Sura 21, The Prophets, verse 30). The Qur'an
also calls for proper governance of water and the equitable sharing of this vital resource: Announce to them
how water must be shared among them; each will have
his own special time to drink (Sura 54, The Moon, verse
28). The Ottoman era analyzed, observed and continued the implementation of prevailing legislations and
community-adopted norms, i.e., practices recognized in
the Palestinian rural areas still in use today that were
highly influenced by religious and cultural beliefs.
However, in more urbanized regions (mainly in cities),
responsibility for organizing, supplying and safeguarding
water resources formed part of the tasks assigned to the
Wali (Islamic ruler or governor). The Wali issued decrees in the name of the Ottoman Sultan or his representative rendering such directives binding. This being
the case, the water administration can be regarded as
centralized and urban-specific. These laws included legislations governing the processes of water disposal and
conservation of water, including organizing and bringing
drinking and Wudu (ritually pure/ablution) water into
urban concentrations.
Page 2 of 13
Distribution of water within the city was the responsibility of ‘water carriers’ who received instructions given
directly by the Wali. The water carriers were in charge
of distributing water to cities and entrusted with the task
of delivering drinking water to houses and shops in return for a specific fee determined by mutual agreement
with the Wali. These water carriers were chosen by an
official directly appointed by the Wali. They performed
their work in accordance with directives issued by him,
defining their working methods and hours [7]. During
this period, no clear laws or legislations were issued
dealing with drinking water quality. However, stipulation
of water's potability and ritual purity was theoretically a
sufficient testimony of its good quality. Confirmation of
water potability involved both observations made using
the various sense (relevant to color, smell and taste) or
ascertainment whether water is polluted with materials
of visible qualities.
This period was characterized by special measures
taken to improve and maintain the quality of water
resources. Sabils (public drinking fountains) supplied
with water through open or closed ducts for public use
(or brought from places of collected rain water) were
developed and repaired. This period also witnessed the
construction of rain and spring water gathering ponds to
be used in summer. An illustrative example of such a
pond is Suleiman ponds lying near Al-Khader village to
the southwest of Bethlehem. The main objective of constructing these ponds in that area was to collect the
water of a number of springs which were particularly
abundant with water during winter and spring. The
ponds got their name from the Ottoman Sultan
Suleiman who ordered them to be built. The springs
were chosen because of their conspicuous height of
800 m above sea level, which is 63 m higher than the
holy Aqsa Mosque of Jerusalem. Thus, water easily flowed to that sanctuary, owing to the difference in altitude, and supplied the mosque with potable and
ablution water. These ponds were supervised by officials
who were entrusted with their maintenance and protection from pollution. Accordingly, further measures were
taken to keep this water source clean. Throwing any dirt
around and in the pool, watering livestock there, or
doing anything that may cause water quality deterioration was strictly banned.
The Ottoman Empire's keenness on quality water
coming to Jerusalem is manifested through the examination of the Contract concluded by and between the
Karl-Frank German Firm and Musa Al-Alami, mayor
of Jerusalem at that time, for drinking water supply
of Jerusalem from the springs of Ein Farah and Fawwar near Hezma Village northeast of Jerusalem.
Clause 6 of this contract reads: ‘if water is intended
for human consumption it must be lab-tested by the
Marie et al. Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:15
http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/15
Municipality to make sure that it is duly usable for
such purpose’ [8].
This era also saw both the construction of numerous
pools near water springs in villages and assignment of
guards to protect these constructions against misuse or
pollution of their waters. One typical example is Ein Battir pool in Battir Village northwest of Bethlehem. The
dimensions of the pool were 10 × 10 m with a depth of
4 m. The spring's water was used for domestic and agricultural consumptions. Parts of the ducts leading to the
pool were roofed in order to maintain the quality and
quantity of the water. To further conserve this resource
and avoid any conflicts among users, the elder of the
clan used to distribute the rationed water according to a
certain quota. The share of the beneficiary was determined in accordance with the irrigated land area [9]. At
the middle of the pool's floor, there was a point which
represented the level of the water. A graded scale rod
was placed at this point, and each grade was equivalent
to a particular share. The water shares of the beneficiaries were distributed over throughout the week. One day,
for example, was allotted to one benefiting clan. One of
the clan members was assigned on that day to divide
water among his clansmen. One and a half shares were
allotted for each 20–30-m2 plot of irrigated land. The
landowner could either directly use the water or store it
up in supplementary pools for use on waterless days.
This system is still operative in many Palestinian villages
(personal interview).
British Mandate period (1917–1948)
The British Mandate period in Palestine is viewed as a
qualitative shift with regard to the enactment of legislation concerning quantitative and qualitative water
resources. This legislation was based on scientific, geological and hydrological grounds. A number of plans to
design and implement water systems were proposed by
researchers who had carried out studies before the British occupation in Palestine. They had envisioned a water
situation in Palestine and had attempted to gain a clear
idea about both ground and surface waters. Pursuant to
recommendations made under these studies, legislation
was enacted to deal with surface as well as ground
waters.
Other legislation was initiated which provided for the
tasks of the agency that managed water resources and
the legal procedures governing its work. This legislation
included topics not addressed in detail in the past, such
as defining areas of surface water drainage, laws that
govern them and the agencies responsible for implementation. Laws were also promulgated dealing with pollution and various uses of water like cleaning the sewages
and digging of toilet facilities away from municipality
area. Other topics addressed included how to deal with
Page 3 of 13
water as a commodityit was to be sold in return for a
certain price which would be dependent on the water
consuming sector. Finally, a penalty fee was initiated for
violations of water laws. Sources of laws and legislation
during the British Mandate may be confined to the following two levels: (1) the High Commissioner who is the
top military and civil functionary representing the British
mandatory power, and (2) Local and municipal councils
where the first law was enacted by the Bersheba Local
Council in 1934.
Laws promulgated by these two levels indirectly dealt
with the quality of water through definition of powers
entrusted to every agency concerned with water
resources. Some important points may be summarized
as follows:
1. Restriction of supervision of water installations to
municipalities and local councils. Responsibilities of
such institutions were confined to conveying water
to beneficiaries, collection of dues, doing
maintenance work and safeguarding water resources.
This is manifested in Article 3 of a law promulgated
by the Head of Bni Brak Local Council which
provides that, ‘the Water Administration shall be
charged with guard and administration of the water
project installations for which it was appointed. It
shall also assume responsibility for both the water
existent in such installations and the management
and supervision of water supply with due observance
to the general powers of the Local Council’ [10].
This article reflects decentralized distribution of
water and leaves municipalities and local councils
free to fix the price of water delivered to
beneficiaries.
2. The right to supervise water projects including
water networks is given to the water department
which administratively and financially reports to the
municipality, local council or their deputizing
agency. This was stated in Articles 4 and 16 of the
aforesaid law [11] and in Article 4 of the regulation
issued by Al-Bassah Local Council [11]. Here,
Article 4 provides that ‘the Water Administration or
anyone it would assign may, after giving a
reasonable notice to the same effect, enter any real
property at any time between 8 am and 5 pm to
inspect any water pipe that belongs to the Water
Administration to repair or remove it’ [11]. Thus,
responsibility for water network maintenance and
removal of illegal connections or stopcocks, if any,
was determined pursuant to Article 17 of Al-Bassah
Local Council Regulation. It explicitly provided that
‘a resident in any real property provided with water
shall not waste water through a defected connection
or neglectfully leaving a connection or a tap open.
Marie et al. Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:15
http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/15
All damages caused to pipes must be immediately
reported to the Water Administration. Pipes, taps
and other equipment shall, at the consumer's
expense, be repaired or removed by people duly
authorized by the Water Administration’ [12].
3. The High Commissioner is the source of
legislations related to surface water drain according
to Article 4 of the Water Drain Law. This Article
provides that ‘the High Commissioner may declare
any area to which this article applies as a water
drain area’ [12]. Clause 1 of Article 5 of the same
Law provides that ‘the water supervisor may
prevent establishment of any barrier or practice
agriculture in any of these areas’ [12]. Article 4 of
the aforesaid law indicates that a barrier in a
watercourse includes any agricultural activity such
as any excavations, irrigation ditches or drainage of
stream banks and riverbanks. It also includes
different aspects causing hygienic hazards or
disturbing public peace as this land may be
declared as water drain area [12].
4. Public Water Projects Protection Law: Any public
water project at any particular area endows it with
certain specificity and defines the actions and
activities that cannot be exercised within the bounds
of such a project. This was stated in Articles 4 and 5
of the Public Water Projects Protection Law. Article
4 provides that ‘once a public water project is
announced in a certain area, construction of a new
well, or changing the dimensions of an already
existent one whether in terms of depth or other
dimensions, must be done under an additional
license given by the District Commissioner’. These
protection laws included the farmers' rights. In cases
where each farmer had been allocated a particular
share of water, such a share was entered in a special
register with the Water Department. The use of this
water was exclusively restricted to the owner of the
land or whoever deputizes for him in its cultivation.
It should not be used in any other field or diverted
to other lands. This comes under Article 8 of a
bylaw issued in accordance with Article 3 of
Emergency Powers Decree for 1939 [13].
5. Enactment of legislations which urged for
rationalized water consumption. This meant the
restriction of water use to allotted fields and
recommendation that water's wasteful use be
banned for either agricultural or domestic purposes.
These laws regarded wastage resulting from water
network damage too serious a matter to be
postponed. Accordingly, the Water Administration
must be immediately notified of the need for repair.
Article 17 of Al-Bassah Local Council's Regulations
provided that ‘A resident in any real property
Page 4 of 13
6.
7.
8.
9.
receiving water supply shall not waste water because
of a damaged connection or stopcock or leaving
open a connection or a tap. Any damage of the
equipment must be immediately reported to the
Water Administration’ [11].
Enactment of legislations showing various uses of
water. Such water uses were defined and entered
into registers. Domestic water use was restricted to
prevent its transfer to other purposes such as
agriculture or industry. Cases of compulsory uses for
other purposes were defined in Article 20 of Bni
Brak Local Council Regulations which requires for
an additional permit for utilization of domestic
water for other purposes like agriculture or industry
[10].
Construction of any cesspit, lavatory, cesspool or
polluted pool near water systems was banned in
accordance with Articles 18 and 22 of Bni Brak
Local Council Regulations [10]. Bathing humans and
animals, and washing clothing in water sources were
also banned together with adding any potential
pollutants. The same applied to construction of pits,
wells, canals or cisterns near a main or subsidiary
pipeline of drinking water networks [11].
A number of articles in relevant legislations
provided for the protection of water resources in
agricultural areas. Passage of animals was also
regulated across water installations such as pools
and canals as provided for in Article 19 of the
Surface Water Drain Law No. 15 for year 1942. ‘The
Water Drain Official may regulate, through banning
or any other means, animal or vehicle passage or
crossing through special constructions of water
drain conduits or their brims or canals’ [12].
Penal regulations for violators of water laws were
initiated. To implement these laws and to fulfill
conditions resulting thereof, penalties of
imprisonment and/or fine were imposed. Article 21
of the Surface Water Drain Law No. 15 for the year
1942 provided for a penalty not exceeding 1-month
imprisonment and/or payment of 10-£ fine as a
maximum [12].
Jordanian rule in the West Bank (1948–1967)
Relevant laws in force during the British Mandate were
not annulled but amended and detailed under Jordanian
rule. Clarification of the relation between the supervising
authority and the service beneficiaries of the water authority, both farmers and other users, was underlined.
Thus, these legislations were formulated in a clearer and
more accurate way. To settle all water-related issues, the
‘Water Settlement Court’ [14] was created with jurisdiction to consider objections to rights to water. The term
first appeared in Article 8, Chapter 2 of the Water
Marie et al. Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:15
http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/15
Settlement Law No. 38 for the year 1948 [14]. The Court
is comprised of one judge appointed in accordance with
the general rules of personnel regulations.
Jordanian laws added several new articles that led to
water resources conservation. The Pollution Law was
added and defined as any change, which befalls water
physical, chemical or biological properties to a degree
that actually or potentially reduces its intended usability.
Topics addressed by additional Jordanian laws may be
summarized as follows:
Agricultural uses Sectors that use water and the rights
present on each sector were enumerated. Agricultural
uses, for example, were regarded to be a farmer's property rights according to detailed tables in the Water
Authority Register which prevents the transfer of allocations to another sector. This was clearly stated in
Article 13 of the Water Settlement Law [10]. Article 11
of the Water Control Law provided that, if any agricultural land or part thereof is used for non-agricultural
purposes, this particular land forfeits its right to use
the water allocated for it and will receive material compensation in return [15]. But if surplus water is available, it will become a state property as provided for in
Article 12 of the Water Control Law [15].
Because of its importance at the early days of the
Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, the agricultural sector
enjoyed priority in water projects. This was quite natural
as over 60% of the population at the time worked in this
sector. Where it was necessary to modify the quantities
allocated to any particular sector, this fell under the jurisdiction of the Water Authority director or officer as
provided for under Articles 15 and 21 of the Water
Settlement Law [14], Article 7 of the Water Control Law
and Article 10 of the Water bylaw ‘East Ghor Canal Project Draft Law No. 89 for the year 1966. According to
this Draft Law, the director general may adjust the water
quantities assigned for a certain use as he may deem fit,
following a study of the water situation of the area [12].
Prerequisites for planting certain crops were also laid
down stipulating preliminary approval before plantation
starts. This would help in making planted crops such as
bananas, rice, and sugarcane, in addition to pisciculture
and perennial fodder plants [16], commensurate with
available water quantity as provided for in Article 7 of
the Water bylaw East Ghor Canal Project. Accordingly,
the supervising agency could adjust the water situation
according to the state's priorities, a procedure that virtually placed water consumption under its control.
Industrial uses For water to be used in the industrial
sector, Article 27 of the Water Settlement Law provided
for obtaining the approval of the Council of Ministers
and detailed the allocated quantities and the area of the
Page 5 of 13
project (to be attached to the plans) [14]. Moreover, it
was stipulated by Article 32 of the Water Settlement
Law that the public right shall not be prejudiced in
benefiting from water used for drinking and domestic
and animal watering purposes [14]. This procedure was
confirmed by the provisions of Article 17 of the Water
Control Law which provided that permission to use
water from any source for industrial or mechanical purposes shall be subject to the approval of the Council of
Ministers in consultation with the director where
required water exceeds 50 m3 daily [15].
Groundwater New legislation related to groundwater
was initiated. Clauses of this legislation emphasized the
necessity of obtaining a license from competent authorities for utilization of groundwater. Quantities to be
extracted or utilized were duly restricted to any area
which had groundwater with a flow of more than 5 m3/
h. By this means, the legislation covered groundwater
wells and implicitly excepted small springs [17] as
demonstrated by Article 4 of the Groundwater Control
Bylaw for the year 1966, which says: ‘If groundwater
appears with an output of more than 5 m3/h—while
constructing a reservoir or cistern (irrespective of the
depth thereof ) for water storage, or while making excavation for any purpose whatsoeverthe concerned party
must immediately report the same to the deputy director. Failing to do that: the party would be considered
as having violated the Law’ [18]. Article 6 of the same
bylaw openly provides that ‘no person may, without license, start or continue extracting groundwater at a daily
average of more than 5 m3/day from one well or two
wellswhere the distance separating one another does not
exceed fifteen meters. Nor may he do so from any group
of wells lying within a land area not exceeding five
donums’ (one donum equals 1,000 m2.) [18].
Penalties The Project cautiously noticed the necessity of
implementation of laws and bringing to account those
violating them. Therefore, it created a strict penal system
to call to account anyone who partially or totally mishandles or damages water projects irrespective of the
cause of damage. Article 35 of the Water Settlement
Law provided for the same, explaining that the penalty
will be not more than 1-year imprisonment or a fine not
exceeding 90 £, or both [14]. Article 37 of the same law
detailed a number of practices and acts that would
intentionally or otherwise cause damage to water projects. Within the same context, article 27 of the Water
Control Law No. 31 for the year 1953 definitively
addressed the topic of violation. The fine was raised to
100 £ [15]. This manifests that penalties were mainly laid
down for safeguarding water projects.
Marie et al. Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:15
http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/15
The following are some legislations dealing with water
resource protection in the West Bank until 1967:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Defense Regulations No. 6 for the year 1936
Municipalities Law No. 29 for the year 1955
Penal Code No. 16 for the year 1960
Cities, Villages and Buildings Temporary Zoning
Law No. 79 for the year 1966.
Egyptian administration: Gaza Strip (1948–1967)
While the Jordanian government ran the West Bank as a
part of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Egypt administered the affairs of the Gaza Strip including its water
resources. Accordingly, the Egyptian government promulgated laws regulating the use of water resources including imposition of special water duties and fees
which were detailed in regulations issued by Gaza Municipal Council [18].
Water quality, conservation and rational use were
dealt with under Article 19 of the Regulations issued by
Rafah Village Council providing as follows: ‘Squandering
water in any manner and form constitutes a violation of
the law.’ These regulations urged for the protection of
water projects. Clause 2 of Article 20 of the same regulations made illegal the pollution of project water or any
utilized water. Clauses 1 and 3 urged for avoidance of
mishandling or causing damage to water installations
[19].
Israeli occupation period (1967–present)
From its very beginning, Zionism primarily espoused the
idea of seizing land and forging a firm linkage between
settlers and such seized land to develop and implant
values in the minds of Zionist pioneers, making land the
cornerstone of these values. Thus, the embryonic Jewish
state in Palestine had a primarily agricultural structure.
Zionists viewed water ideologically and were able to
demonstrate their power over the Arab inhabitants
through several schemes [2].After the 1967 war, Israel
declared all water resources in the region (West Bank,
Gaza and Israel Proper) as state properties [20]. Since
then, Israel has controlled, managed, allocated and sold
water to the Palestinian population, paying little heed to
the needs of the population it occupies [21].
The outcome of the 1967 war produced what Eran Feitelson identified as a ‘hegemonic era’ with military superiority effectively preventing the Arab side from
challenging Israel's water plans or use [22]. The Israeli
occupation of the West Bank territories which are rich
in groundwater has led to a series of military orders governing and controlling water use and abstraction, thus,
hindering the development of the agricultural sector and
complicating the plans to meet the demand of the increasing population in the territories [23]. This
Page 6 of 13
consequently led to the issuance of numerous military
ordinances since the Israeli occupation of Gaza Strip
and the West Bank in June War of 1967. These ordinances served as substitutes for laws and provided easy
and smooth control of water resources in the occupied
Arab territories after 1967 on which a fait accompli was
imposed.
This situation enabled Israel to extract more and more
groundwater with impunity while restricting or even
banning the land owner from utilization of this source.
To perpetuate control over water resources, continued
military measures and ordinances were taken and issued
under the pretext of safeguarding the quantity and quality of water. The following are the key points addressed
by these military ordinances:
The water appropriation right Authority to dispose of
water resources was given to the military governor. Ad
hoc military ordinances restricted the freedom of water
appropriation in particular the water used for agriculture. Military Ordinance No. 498 for the year 1975
issued with regard to water in Gaza Strip says, ‘Water
extraction, supply or even consumption in the Gaza
Strip area is forbidden unless pursuant to a license
issued by the Israeli Defense Army’ [24]. Clauses (a) and
(b) of Article 5 of the Military Ordinance amending the
Water Control Law provided for the same effect, adding
that it is forbidden to establish any water corporation or
any water installations except in accordance with a license given by competent agencies.[25]. Article 24
Clauses (a) and (b) of the Military Ordinance No. 498
for the year 1974 reinforced Israeli control of water
resources as it forbids digging groundwater wells without a special permit, which fixes the quantity of water to
be used and shows the means to be employed in digging
such a well [25].
Thus, it is clear that the early years of Israeli occupation, first and foremost, concentrated on expropriation
of the water projects as guaranteed by the Jordanian
Law and indirectly vested the military governor with
such powers. Secondly, restrictions were imposed on the
quantity of extracted water in case a license was given to
dig or renovate an artesian well. Rationalized water consumption was another important theme specifically dealt
with military ordinances. The interlinkage system was
initiated, giving better incentives and more effective consumption of agricultural water. The term ‘intermesh’
was used in the water ordinance issued in 1980 by the
Agricultural Affairs officer [26].
Protection of quality Military ordinances were explicitly and comprehensively issued following the drop in
the groundwater aquifer level. These ordinances
addressed reducing the water rations given to farmers to
Marie et al. Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:15
http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/15
avoid rising salinity rate. This is particularly clear in the
Water Ordinance issued in 1986 by Zakarya Hazan, the
Administration officer of Agricultural Affairs in the Gaza
Strip. He ordered that water allocations shall be reduced
by 10% regardless of the quantities stated in the extraction licenses issued to farmers [27].
Definition of water pollution The term ‘water pollution’ was mentioned in Israeli military laws in Article 1
of the Military Ordinance No. 498 for the year 1974.
According to this definition, water resource pollution is
‘Any change which occurs in the chemical, physiological,
bacteriological, radiation, biological or organoleptic
properties through adding solid, liquid or gaseous materials to or adjacent to the water source; or extracting the
aforesaid materials therefrom, which adversely affects or
likely affects water as regards the safety and health of
the public, or is likely to adversely affect the animals or
plants therein, or makes the water less suitable for the
uses it was intended for, regardless of whether the water
was used for a particular purpose or it was previously
polluted’ [25]. According to this definition, pollution is
multilateral, multidimensional and is being dealt with on
a scientific and legal basis.
Relying on this definition, Article 10 of the same ordinance detailed the actions that may cause water pollution since the article has encompassed industrial and
agricultural materials and their effects. In addition, it
showed the effect of means of transports near water
sources and, finally, the effect of the equipment used in
water extraction on water quality. Clause (a) of Article
11 of the same military ordinance also empowered the
competent authority to force the local authority to issue
regulations forbidding water pollution in its own area
[25].
Division of irrigation water Regulations finalized during this period addressed the division of the irrigation
system in Jericho area where water was divided into two
categories:
1. Horticultural water which is a public property and
can be divided according to the land area. Its
beneficiary, however, cannot sell, rent or mortgage
such water. In case the land is sold, its water
allocation will devolve on the new owner. If the land
is not cultivated, its water allotment will be held in
trust by the government until it is cultivated, but
buildings on land will forfeit its share of water [28].
2. Cultivation water which means the water is regarded
to be a personal property. Such water is divided as a
bequest (in case the first owner dies) to be properly
divided between inheritors according to inheritance
legislations. Sale of the land does not mean selling
Page 7 of 13
this water, but the owner of this water may sell,
lease or mortgage the water according to its value
and may divert it from one watercourse to another
[28].
The Israeli occupation enhanced water management
and legislation by registering all wells in the West Bank
and Gaza Strip with a code number and a specific quota
with a biannual monitoring of these wells. This has created a quantitative database on groundwater quality that
is still in use today.
The Palestinian authority period (1996–present)
The Palestinian Water Authority (PWA) was established
following the Oslo interim agreement between Israel and
the Palestinian authority (PA). With that, came the establishment of the Joint Water Committee (JWC) compromising of equal numbers of Palestinian and Israeli
water experts whose role is to cooperatively manage the
West Bank's water and wastewater systems and
resources development. Nevertheless, any development
water project in the West Bank requires prior approval
from the JWC in addition to the approval of the higher
authority of the Israeli Civil administration which is an
Israeli military body which has been controlling the
West Bank since 1967. Therefore, Israel has a veto
power and has hindered and constrained the Palestinian
proposals for development of water infrastructure projects and even well construction and rehabilitation [20].
The Palestinian water law, enacted on 17 July 2002,
aims to develop and manage water resources, increase
their capacity, improve their quality and preserve and
protect them from pollution and depletion (Article 2).
Article 3 of the law clearly stated that water resources in
Palestine are a public property.
Clause 2 of Article 5 of the Water Authority Draft
Law urged for the development and management of
water resources in terms of search and exploration for
groundwater. This also includes construction of dams
on valleys or development of the existent projects to
raise their efficiency. Clause 4 of the same article points
out to the necessity of benefiting from the water projects
of surface and ground waters, rainwater and desalination
of seawater. Clause 5 of the aforesaid article urges for
organization and supervision of private and public artesian wells and observation of springs and wellsprings or
any other resources. Article 6 of the same aforesaid
source restricts the powers of using ground and surface
waters and organizes distribution of water in a manner
that serves only the interests of the concerned authority
in order to curb misuse, wastage or deterioration of the
quality of water [29]. Also, Palestinian laws defined pollution in Article 1 of Water Law No. 3 of the year 2002
as any change that occurs to the quality and constituents
Marie et al. Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:15
http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/15
of water which leads to harm to the health of humans
and to the environment, therefore, adapting to the previous laws on pollution set forth by the Jordanian and Israeli authorities [30].
Owing to the major importance of water in peace
treaties, several clauses have been included in that interim agreement to maintain the good quality of water.
This may be summarized as follows:
1. Article 40(3a) mentions the commitment and
agreement of both parties to prevent ‘the
deterioration of water quality in water resources’.
Paragraph (e) emphasizes the importance of ‘taking
all necessary measures to prevent any harm to water
resources, including those utilized by the other side’.
2. Maintaining the continuity of currently available
water resources in terms of quality and quantity, and
owing to the importance of information about water,
exchange of hydrological and other information is
essential for conservation of water quality.
In essence, Article 40 recognized the water right of the
Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, while responsibility for managing this water will be transferred
to the Palestinian authority. Nevertheless, the level of Israeli control over water resources did not change, and
Israel still maintains a strong grip on current water
utilization and management in the West Bank [20].
The PWA inherited a system (from the Israeli occupation) with weak infrastructure. With around 160 residential communities without water supply networks and
approximately 90% of these residents without sewage
networks, the PWA has had to overcome many challenges to meet the increasing demand for water supply,
infrastructure development and sector reform with limited control over resources, weak water institutions and
conditional funding. Notwithstanding the short period of
time of the establishment and the transfer of limited
control of the water resources in the West Bank and
Gaza Strip, the PA has undertaken to establish new
water policies which reflect the existing water conditions, making the increasing demand on water one of its
priorities. These policies include establishment of a
water system capable of accommodating the agricultural,
population and industrial needs in a manner that enables
the PA to address the political challenges and geographical entanglements with Israel [23].
According to the World Bank, the failure to develop
wastewater systems in the West Bank and Gaza Strip is
the more damaging because water supply quantities and,
hence, wastewater quantities have gone up. Additionally,
no new sources have been officially developed in Gaza,
and acute over drafting of groundwater has led to
groundwater quality decline and seawater intrusion [31].
Page 8 of 13
Additionally, Israel has not only failed to support Palestinian attempts to advance solutions for wastewater
treatment, it has delayed them. To this day, Israel has
not approved Palestinian requests to build wastewater
treatment facilities [23]. In addition, untreated waste is
being produced by the illegal Jewish settlements in the
West Bank.
Nevertheless, the PWA is designing and investing in
creating the Palestinian water sector reform plan. This
plan developed five strategic goals for the years of
2011–2013, one of which is to provide water sources
with adequate quantity and quality in addition to activating systems of monitoring water quality [30].
Comparative review
This section aims to present a comparative analysis of
the pros and cons of the legislation issued during the
different regimes by focusing on five aspects that governed the water management sector as shown in
Table 1:
In terms of spring water protection and use, it is noted
that the Ottoman management mechanisms are still in
use today. Ottoman era focused on spring water quality
from a societal and religious angle and used it as a rule
for water quality protection. The springs have never
been regarded as state property but, rather, their ownership was given to the families owning the land where the
spring originated from. Thus, it fell on the members of
the community to maintain the quality and protection of
these water resources. The lack of proper water quality
preservation regulations could be explained by the limited water resources at that time where the Ottoman regime itself was dependent on springs as the only water
sources available. Accordingly, the efforts were focused
on the spring's cleanness and sustainability.
It is noted that the successive governing bodies have
also maintained this social mechanism for spring water,
but their efforts were more focused on other sources of
water, mainly groundwater and new water sources development. The water resources varied during the British
Mandate period, reducing concern for the springs' preservation and, consequently, increasing the problems and
possibility of springs' pollution. The effects of these problems continue to be felt today.
The best characteristic of the British Mandate period
was the linkage between water quality legislation and
scientific findings where all the water pollution regulations were based on scientific data. Although most of
laws and legislation were meant to assert the British
control on water resources and aquifers in Palestine and
were also a means of gathering taxes from water usage,
the British employed scientific and systematic methods
for regulating the relation between the executive power
and the water services' beneficiaries.
Legal administration
Water
resources
Community involvement
Adaptations to
growing knowledge
Enforcement mechanisms
Ottoman era
Focus on religious
rulings about water protection
Spring water
Lowcentralized
Low
Low
British Mandate
Linkage between
water quality legislations
and scientific findings
Spring/surface
(limited concern)
and groundwater
High- local authorities
and municipalities
High
Penalty system
Surface water and
groundwater
High- decentralization
High
Penalty system
Enacted based on previous laws
Groundwater
High- decentralization
Military orders
Groundwater
Highly controlled and centralized
High
Penalty system, military orders
Groundwater
High-decentralization
High
Low enforcement of law
Marie et al. Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:15
http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/15
Table 1 Comparative analysis of the water governance structure during different administrations
Wastewater disposal
Jordanian administration
(West Bank)
First definition of
pollution (1955)
Penalties for violations
Egyptian administration
(Gaza Strip)
Israeli occupation
Penalty system
Extension of pollution definition
Groundwater wells database
and quotas
Palestinian authority
Developing a legal framework
for water protection
and management
Page 9 of 13
Marie et al. Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:15
http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/15
The local community was given a degree of responsibility for water quality, and the role of decentralization
in the decision making relating to water quality control
was emphasized. Many approaches and regulations were
undertaken by local councils and municipalities, especially in relation to water resource protection which was
more flexible than that of the Ottoman era when everything was to be reported back to the Wali. The other
main criterion tackled by the British Mandate was the
wastewater disposal, in contrast with the Ottoman era
which provided less attention to the wastewater issue, its
treatment and disposal. The British Mandate has set the
rules related to the wastewater disposal systems in the
region and issued the appropriate legislation to illustrate
the role of wastewater effluent on the deterioration of
fresh water quality.
During the Jordanian reign over the West Bank, most
of the British water legislation was maintained. The Jordanians continued to use the scientific-based regulations
to control the water quality and maintained the
decentralization of the role of municipalities and local
governments in relation to the water resource protection
and control. The first definition of pollution was set by
the Jordanians in 1955, and the aspects of water usage,
in all sectors, were also identified according to different
water quality and aspect of use. The Jordanian period
also supported water legislation by setting up a punishment system which instilled in communities a respect
for those rules and legislation.
After 1967, when Israel assumed its control over the
water resources in the occupied Palestinian territories
(OPT), military orders were implemented rather than
state legislation. Previous legislations issued during the
British Mandate period were kept as it was or modified
according to the new situation to fortify the Israeli control over the water resources. One of the main military
orders in connection with water quality is the quota system which was implemented to prevent the groundwater
deterioration caused by over exploitation. The inhabitants of the OPT suffered from the high demand but
low supply of water. It is important to point out that,
regardless of the attempts of Israel to control water,
the legislation lead indirectly to protect the quantity of
groundwater resources in the OPT. The Israeli authority redefined the concept of water pollution by adding
to the Jordanian definition of pollutions caused by radiation and organic infection. They also maintained and
upgraded the scientific-based laws generated during the
British Mandate period. Moreover, they defined the activities that can lead to pollution and connected these
activities to the appropriate legislation and punishment
regulations.
During the PA period and today, and according to the
Oslo Agreement, any changes or modifications in the
Page 10 of 13
status quo are not permitted. Therefore, Israeli legislation is still implemented in the OPT. The PWA has to
keep using the Israeli legislation accordingly and refer
any urgent request related to water to the Joint Water
Committee. Current Israeli water policy hinders effective
regional solutions to trans-boundary water and wastewater issues [32]. The advantages and disadvantages of
each administrative period is summarized in Table 2.
Conclusions
The prevalence of the interests of the occupying powers
over the needs and interests of the Palestinian population is reflected in most of the administrations that have
occupied Palestine. The laws, therefore, often contradict
the interests of the indigenous people. This is most evident and restricting under the Israeli military occupation. Furthermore, the laws currently in effect are
antiquated and out of touch with current socioeconomic
development. The burden and responsibility of the PWA
is to reform and update the existing laws to reflect the
needs of the people and protect the natural environment
and resources [21].
From a theoretical as well as applied analysis point of
view on water legislation in general and those concerned
with water quality in particular, this study has come to
the following conclusions: the Palestinian territory is still
subject to the regulations and laws of the British
Mandate, and there is no actual Palestinian sovereignty
which controls and runs natural resources including
water resources. The period of the British occupation of
Palestine may be seen as a beginning of the promulgation of water legislation which embodied laws for quality
protection. Investment and research were focused on
developing water plans in the Palestinian cities with a
focus on water quotas, taxation and fees collection and
disregarding water quality legislation and proper drainage and utilization.
The Jordanian rule in the West Bank and Egyptian administration of the Gaza Strip maintained many of the
laws and regulations set by the British, with a focus on
water pollution and quality. More efforts were put into
development of supply networks to Palestinian cities in
addition to investment in the development of the agricultural sector. However, the various water legislation,
which preceded the Israeli occupation of the West Bank
and Gaza Strip, did not attach due importance to water
quality. This was due to several reasons, including giving
primary attention to providing the required quantities of
water, not to mention the paucity of pollutants during
the first half of the twentieth century, a situation completely different from the present time. Finally, competent scientific institutions did not exist at that time to
analyze and develop effective water quality monitoring.
Marie et al. Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:15
http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/15
Page 11 of 13
Table 2 Advantages and disadvantages of different administrations of water resources
Advantages
Ottoman era
Disadvantages
Cities: centralized pure water
Only visual inspection, no scientific-based for water quality
Villages: distribution and protection
community decision making
No enforcement and control over water laws
Water for social purposes
British Mandate
Detailed and scientific-based legislation
(geology and hydrogeology)
No water laws fully endorsed and implemented
Linking water with health,
infrastructure development
(strategic thinking and planning)
Penalty
Pricing
Water allocation
Establishing a water law
Municipality laws
Jordanian administration
Adaptation of British water
legislation and amendment (water court)
Centralized institution (natural resources authority)
Definition of pollution
No independent water department
Israeli occupation
Efficient institutional building (central):
support of civil administration
Centralized and militarized institution and control
(linking water department with civil administration
and Mekorot water company)
Regulation of quotas
No improvement of water infrastructure
Spring distribution left intact
Palestinian authority
First authority to work for the benefit
of the Palestinian people
Laws and articles are characterized as general
and lack proper enforcement mechanisms
and not thoroughly detailed
Adaptation of Israeli groundwater quotas
Limited control over the water resources
Maintaining the database system
Degradation of water resources increased
Moreover, Israel is held accountable for the pollution
of surface and ground waters because of its deliberate
neglect of developing the infrastructures in the West
Bank as well as in the Gaza Strip throughout its years of
occupation. It is necessary to issue water legislation concerned with water quality since overlooking this vital
part of legislation could lead to a serious crisis and is
economically very costly. Legislation implemented during various periods in Palestine is extremely important
for researchers and lawmakers since it will prove useful
in the enactment of a Palestinian legislation that conforms to national requirements of economic and sustainable development. The alternative solution in this regard
is a better management of binational water wastewater
resources that could establish sustainable transboundary resources and sanitation facilities [32].
Re-enhancing the role of the springs as permanent and
high quality water resources for drinking purposes, conserving and redeveloping these springs and setting the
proper legislation to keep the springs clean is very important. Local communities should be held accountable
again with responsibility at a personal and community
level. Decentralization in water quality control and distribution of these responsibilities to the local bodies is
still needed rather than centralizing the control in the
hands of the PWA. The role of the PWA is very important in regulating water utilization and management;
however, the distribution of local monitoring and regulatory responsibilities, including legislation for water quality control, should be empowered to the municipalities
and local bodies.
The political situation further complicates the current
situation related to the water sector. Therefore, the Oslo
Interim Agreement's sections on water need to be
reconsidered in order to allow for the development of
new regulations in Palestine, taking into account previous successful legislation over the last century and the
equitable and just distribution of water resources.
Based on the historical development of water quality
legislation in Palestine throughout the last hundred
years, policy recommendations are as follows:
Investment into legal research and development of
studies and policies on water quality legislation
To utilize previous advantageous laws and
regulations to develop the Palestinian legislation and
adjust them to accommodate present and future
socioeconomic development policies taking into
Marie et al. Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:15
http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/15
consideration equitable and fair utilization of shared
water resources
Due to the strong linkage between water quality
preservation and the community, efforts must be
focused on increasing the awareness of communities
and empowering local bodies and municipalities to
act as guardians of their water resources.
Methods
Throughout the last century, many unstable regimes
have ruled over Palestine, and these successive ruling
administrations were unable to draft water legislations in
the interest of the Palestinian population. Thus, there
was a sequence of legislation that extended or was
revised form the Ottoman era. Other laws were newly
legislated during the short ruling periods of the different
regimes that controlled the area. The history of the legislations related to the water quality in Palestine as well as
the modifications of this legislation by the different
regimes is reviewed below.
The old legislation beginning from the Ottoman era
was collected from previous literature and library
archives, especially from the Palestinian Centre for
Archive and Culture in Abu-Dis, Jerusalem. British
Mandate legislation and Jordanian-Egyptian legislation
was found in the archive of Birzeit University at the Institute of Law. The positive and negative impacts
throughout these periods were evaluated from the
aspects of suitability and validity. Additionally, this paper
aims to show some roles that can be reactivated today
and the necessity for this reactivation according to the
current political and socioeconomic situation.
Competing interests
No support from any organization for the submitted work; no financial
relationships with any organizations that might have an interest in the
submitted work in the previous 3 years; no other relationships or activities
that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. The authors
declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors' contributions
We alone take full responsibility for the content and analysis herein. AA.
M and SK collected the whole necessary historical material, analyzed the
legislations, and wrote together this analytical study. MD had reviewed the
content carefully, including the technical English, and helped in reforming
the article. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Acknowledgments
Funding was provided by United States Institute of Peace for a project on
‘Water as a Source of Cooperation’. Special thanks for the numinous
reviewers for their valuable comments.
Author details
Environmental Research Lab, Faculty of Science and Technology, Al-Quds
University, Beit Hanina, Jerusalem 20002, Palestine. 2Technical and Applied
Research Centre, Palestine Technical University, Tulkarm 7, Palestine.
1
Authors' information
AM is an Associated Professor at Earth and Environmental Sciences Section
in Al-Quds University Abu Dees. SK is an Assistant Professor in Technical and
Page 12 of 13
Aplied Research Centre in Palestine Technical University Kadorie. MD is an
independent researcher from East Jerusalem, Palestine.
Received: 24 May 2011 Accepted: 27 April 2012
Published: 27 April 2012
References
1. Movik S: Return of the Leviathan? ‘Hydropolitics in the developing world’
revisited. Water Policy 2010, 12:1–13.
2. Dinar A, Dinar S, McCaffrey S, McKinney D: Bridges Over Water:
Understanding Transboundary Water Conflict, Negotiation and Cooperation.
Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.; 2007.
3. Wolf A: Shared waters: conflict and cooperation. Annu Rev Environ Resour
2007, 32:241–269.
4. Brooks N: Cultural responses to aridity in the Middle Holocene and
increased social complexity. Quat Int 2006, 151(1):29–49.
5. Palaniappan, M., Gleick P. H., Allen L, Cohen MJ, J. Christian-Smith J, and C.
Smith C: Clearing the waters: a focus on water quality solutions. N. Ross.
(Ed.). In United Nations Environment Programme. Edited by Ross N.
UNNairobi: UNON Publishing Services Section; 2010. ISO 14001:2004certified. ISBN: 978-92-807-3074-6.
6. Shumeli D, Shamir U: Application of international law of water quality to
recent Middle East water agreements. Water Policy 2001, 3:405–423.
7. Questions of the Waqf in the Ottoman period. Bulletin by Islamic Center for
Archive and Cultural Heritage, 2005, Abu Dis Jerusalem.
8. Municipality of Jerusalem: Concession contract between Karl-Frank
Company in Germany and the Mayor Al-Alami to provide water to
Jerusalem. Translated form Turkish. File No. 44/1052/325/13. 1914.
9. Barghouth JM, Al-Sa'ed RMY: Sustainability of ancient water supply
facilities in Jerusalem. Sustainability 2009, 1:1106–1119.
10. Bani Brak Local Council: Local Councils Law. Al-Waqa'i Al-Filastiniyyah 1947
(a), 1104(002):119.
11. Al-Bassah Local Council: Law of Local Government for the year 1941.
Al-Waqa’i Al-Filastiniyyah 1947(b), 1575(002):119.
12. The Palestinian Ministry of Justice: Surface Water Drain Law. No. 15.
Al-Waqa'i Al-Filastiniyyah 1942, 1204(001):92.
13. The Palestinian Ministry of Justice: Article 3 of the Decree of Emergency
Low Defense of Colonies for the year 1939. Al-Waqa'i Al-Filastiniyyah 1944,
1373(002):132.
14. The Palestinian Ministry of Justice: Water Arbitration Law No. 8. Al-Waqa'i
al-Filastiniyyah 1946, 880:143.
15. The Palestinian Ministry of Justice: Water Monitoring Law No. 31. Al-Waqa'i
al-Filastiniyyah 1953, 1134(000):163.
16. The Palestinian Ministry of Justice: Water Law for East Ghor Canal Project
No. 89. Al-Waqa'i al-Filastiniyyah 1966(a), 1943(000):143.
17. The Palestinian Ministry of Justice: Groundwater monitoring Law No. 88.
Al-Waqa'i al-Filastiniyyah 1966(b), 1943(000):143.
18. Municipal Council of Gaza: Municipalities Law for the year 1934. Al-Waqa'i
al-Filastiniyyah 1966(c), 0281(000):143.
19. Rafah Village Council: Villages Administration Law No. 23 for the year
1964. Al-Waqa'i al-Filastiniyyah 1964, 0241(000):89.
20. Husseini H. The Palestinian Water Authority: developments and
challenges involving the legal framework and capacity of the PWA. In
Proceedings of the 2nd Israeli-Palestinian International Conference, Water for
Life in the Middle East, 10–14 October 2004, 2 vols; Antalya, Turkey. IPCRI;
2004:112–127.
21. Zeitoun M: Power and water in the Middle East: the hidden politics of the
Palestinian-Israeli water conflict. New York: L.B.Tauris; 2008.
22. Feitelson E: The ebb and flow of Arab-Israeli water conflicts: are past
confrontations likely to resurface?. Water Policy 2000, 2(4):343–363.
23. Hareuveni E: Foul play: neglect of wastewater treatment in the West
Bank. B'Tselem 2009, 1:7–45.
24. Israeli Defense Army: Decree of water (Gaza Strip-No. 498 for the Year
1975). Al-Waqa'i al-Filastiniyyah 1982, 0048(000):92.
25. Israeli Defense Army: Ordinance No. 498 concerning water for the year
1974. Al-Waqa'i al-Filastiniyyah 1977(a), 0039(000):132.
26. Israeli Defense Army: Ordinance concerning water in Gaza Strip No. 498
for the year 1974. Al-Waqa'i al-Filastiniyyah 1983, 0053(000):97.
27. Israeli Defense Army: Ordinance concerning water in Gaza Strip No. 498
for the year 1975 and ordinance concerning water (reducing of water
quotas for agriculture). Al-Waqa'i al-Filastiniyyah 1987, 0079(000):122.
Marie et al. Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:15
http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/15
Page 13 of 13
28. Municipality J: Regulation of irrigation water fees in Jericho area. Jericho
Municipality 1977, 1:31–38.
29. Palestinian Water Authority: Internal order No. 66. Al-Waqa'i al-Filastiniyyah
1997, 00018(000):88.
30. Palestinian Water Authority: Water Law No. 3. 2002.
31. World Bank: Assessment of restrictions on Palestinian water sector
development Report. Washington: USA; 2009.
32. Al-Sa'ed R: Wastewater issues along the green line, the Israeli–Palestinian
border. Int J Environ Stud 2010, 67(6):937–995.
doi:10.1186/2190-4715-24-15
Cite this article as: Marie et al.: Water quality legislation in Palestine
over the past century. Environmental Sciences Europe 2012 24:15.
Submit your manuscript to a
journal and benefit from:
7 Convenient online submission
7 Rigorous peer review
7 Immediate publication on acceptance
7 Open access: articles freely available online
7 High visibility within the field
7 Retaining the copyright to your article
Submit your next manuscript at 7 springeropen.com