A Climate Resilient Future through Water Storage

Almost half of the world’s population, an estimated 3.6 billion people, live in areas that are potentially water-scarce at least one month per year. With the devastating impacts of climate change, this number is expected to increase to almost 5.7 billion by 2050.

COP27 recognized this urgent need for water security as a priority response to climate change. Indeed, the majority of the investments from the much-heralded Loss and Damage Fund will likely be on water for the most vulnerable countries around the world. Countries must now seize this opportunity by identifying the investments with the greatest potential for transformational improvements in water security.

So, what are the priority investments that maximize the potential for water security? Among a country’s most important priorities is the urgent need to secure steady water supply for its population. Climate change’s increasing volatility of weather patterns have severely impacted countries with either too much water or too little water. These disruptions in water supply have enormous human and economic consequences. The drought in the Horn of Africa has devastated human lives, livestock, and crops that are essential for the survival. The 2021 drought in California is estimated to have cost $1.7 billion in losses and almost 15,000 jobs, and the current torrential rain and flooding, the highest in 30 years, has cost both human lives and severe damage. While the European Environment Agency (EEA) has for some time monitored the drought patterns which have become more severe in Europe since 2015, putting cultivation on the continent under pressure, the European floods of 2021 are estimated to have cost over 200 losses of lives and $12 billion in losses.

Few countries in the world have adequate water storage capacity for their water supply purposes. The great majority of countries suffer from water storage gaps and increasingly variable precipitation, threatening sustainable development and even societal stability. Some large-scale water storage investments have been controversial, resulting in reluctance to engaging in these very necessary investments. Given the recent droughts experienced all over the world, investing in a country’s water storage is an urgent priority. 

A recent perspectives paper by GWP, IWMI, and the World Bank makes the case for expanding water storage systems and assessing water storage as a service, rather than a facility.[1]  More than volumes of water stored behind a dam or in a watershed, what ultimately matters is the ability to provide different services at a particular time and place with a given level of assurance. Integrated storage systems should be developed and managed to deliver a targeted service standard. This will reduce the costs of new storage development and make the benefits more sustainable.

There is consensus that built and natural storage are fundamentally complementary; however, there is no clear methodology to guide future integrated water storage development. Strong political leadership is needed to ensure water security through large scale multi-purpose water security projects. As noted by the World Bank, a notable example for countries is how Republic of Korea has managed and developed its water resources.[2]

A half century of rapid economic growth and urbanization created significant water management challenges, and Korea’s climate and topography add to the complexity. 70 percent of the country’s annual rain occurs in a concentrated three-month timeframe, from June to September. Steep mountains in the Northwest and flat areas in the Southeast cause 74 percent of Korea’s annual rainfall to evaporate, encouraging floods and leading rainfall to flow directly into the ocean, leaving only 26 percet of rainfall available for use.

Since the 1960’s, Korea has identified water resources management as a core pillar of its national economic development plan. More recently, since the 1990s Korea’s integrated water resources management policies have reflected a new “green” climate resilient development path, combining multiple water security, social, and environmental issues with economic objectives. One of the most ambitious water resources projects the country embarked on under this framework was the Four Major River Restoration project (4MRRP), a multi-purpose, green-growth infrastructure initiative to secure quality water resources, decrease droughts and floods, manage rivers, and improve the environment and Korean quality of life.

The 4MRRP generated notable results, securing an extra 1.17 billion m3 of water, which largely mitigated the effects of droughts and water shortages in the country. Dredging 450 million kms of deposits and sediment along 530 kms widened and deepened waterways and secured flood-flow capacity for main rivers and tributaries at the once-in-200-year flood level. 4MRRP also restored the ecology and created public spaces and river-oriented community development, including the Chonggyecheon stream restoration which brought a vibrant new life and economy to downtown Seoul.

Before the 4MRRP project, emergency downstream requests for water release had occurred 20 times over the past 10 years, but there have not been requests for water release since completion of the project. When a severe, record-breaking drought occurred in 2012, over 4,898 hectares of agricultural land, and 5,160 people, required emergency water supply, and the government was able to maintain stable water supply to users near the four river basins, largely because of stored water in dams and weirs. Finally, 4MRRP project also generated significant economic benefits. Estimated flood damage costs in the four major rivers during the 2011 monsoon season of $8.52 million were less than one-tenth the damage costs caused by similar floods in 1998 ($1.1 billion) and 2006 ($1.6 billion).

Lessons drawn from Korea’s 4RRMP applicable to other countries facing water scarcity and management issues include:

  • Preventive water resources management—as opposed to prior damage recovery modes—is necessary to mitigate risks and uncertainties, including the increased risks stemming from climate change. Innovative approaches can be deployed to optimize water resources management. Korea uses Information and Communication Technology to enable authorities to easily monitor, share, and store hydro-meteorological data and operate facilities.
  • Water is a cross-cutting resource, requiring integrated water resources management. Although ministries have different functions and jurisdictions, coordinating their efforts optimizes project implementation and operation. Along with ministries, various stakeholders from academia, the public sector, the private sector, and from civil society united under Korea’s “4MRRP Promotion System”. Such a system enables collection of expertise and data to enhance effectiveness of complex and challenging water and environment multipurpose projects.
  • Consensus building and full stakeholder participating in decision-making is essential. Cooperative partnerships established in Korea involved politicians, experts, environmental organizations, local communities, and civil society organizations. These partnerships help negotiate conflicting needs and interests during the project.

What makes the 4MRRP a global best practice is the importance of appropriate institutional and governance. The project involved five ministries and 78 local authorities, using a comprehensive and integrated approach. To implement large-scale infrastructure efficiently and effectively involves overcoming institutional, legislative, and governance issues, in addition to technical and financial hurdles, requiring innovative approaches. While it is not the only model, a specialized water agency can play an important coordinating role. K-water, Korea’s state-owned water resources corporation, played a crucial role in implementing 4MRRP on the “hard” construction side of the project, but also on the “soft” coordination aspects.

As a Korean working in global sustainable development, I have seen how the 4 Major Rivers Restoration Project puts the country ahead of the climate curve by enabling a strong foundation for Korea’s water security. Korea has achieved what many other countries are still struggling to do, and can be a role model for these countries, with the essential know-how that these countries need. Multi-purpose water storage projects provide a buffer for managing uncertainty and variability and adds adaptive capacity, thereby enabling modern cities to access water on demand, farmers to grow crops in dry seasons, animals to survive between rains, rivers to flow all year round, hydroelectricity to be generated, and many other important benefits and services. Yet, like other countries, the job is not finished. Climate change has significantly increased the pressures on the world’s water resources. Korea must not lose the opportunity now to continue to strengthen its water security by using the water, rivers, and weirs to build carbon neutrality and a green transition. The Four Major River Restoration Project provides an excellent model for countries to move forward to strengthen water security and a strong basis for continued green growth.

Jaehyang So, GWC TEC Chair

Following a 30 year career at the World Bank Group, Ms. So serves as Senior Advisor to public and private organizations working on sustainable development. Ms. So is the Chair of the Global Water Partnership Technical Committee. The Global Water Partnership, a global network of over 3000 partners in over 80 countries, has championed an integrated approach to water resources management (IWRM), to ensure an equitable and transparent approach that would best support a water-secure world.

The views expressed below are the author’s own.

[1] “Storing water: A new integrated approach for resilient development”. GWP TEC, IWMI, World Bank Group.

[2] “Promoting Green Growth through Water Resources Management: The Case of Republic of Korea,” Green Growth in Action; Korea Green Growth Partnership, World Bank Group

Posted in Climate change | Leave a comment

Integrated Water Resources Management as a Key Foundation to Strengthen Water-Energy Nexus in Tajikistan

Hydro energy constitutes about 98 percent of the electricity in Tajikistan, making water the main source of energy.[1] The government of Tajikistan recognized the importance of the water-energy nexus and is implementing International Water Resources Management (IWRM) as a cornerstone of the country’s growth strategy. By creating a systematic and comprehensive policy framework, the government has prepared a promising base for the successful implementation of the IWRM, and at the same time, ensuring water is used efficiently. At the upcoming UN 2023 Water Conference, the government will share both the good experiences and lessons learned with others.

Tajikistan, a land-locked country in Central Asia, has historically been fortunate with abundant water resources due to its topography. Water has played and will continue to play a crucial role in a country´s socioeconomic development, especially in the energy sector.[2] However, the vulnerability to climate change exposes Tajikistan and its water resources, as well as all water-using sectors of the economy, to a great challenge. The gradually emerging changes in water flow could negatively affect hydropower infrastructure, impacting energy generation efficiency, reservoir management and seasonal water availability, including for agriculture, which is a mainstay of the country´s economy. To ensure continued growth as well as the multiple uses of water essential to society, the country has made important and concerted efforts to strengthen its integrated water resources management capacity.

The biggest window of opportunity constitutes the water-energy nexus, which is critically important as hydropower energy represents the majority of electricity production and the basis for economic development and social progress in Tajikistan. The enhancement of the water management system is therefore a top priority for national policymakers. At the same time, hydropower energy creates an integral part of the challenges as well as opportunities connected with the successful implementation of IWRM in Tajikistan. The main hydropower potential is concentrated in the basins of the Vakhsh and Pyanj rivers. Water and energy infrastructure was neglected and had become out-dated following the difficult situation related to the country’s establishment of statehood.[3] The government realized that significant investments were needed in the technical and economic development of water-energy sectors and existing hydropower companies in order to assure energy security for the population and the national economy.[4] Adopting a robust IWRM framework and process can both accelerate this process and make it sustainable.

Tajikistan embarked on promising water sector reform over the last few years, taking notable steps to strengthen the legal and regulatory framework for water resources management, approving a revised Water Code and enacting other laws on water-energy-related issues. Moreover, notable progress has been made in developing water resources sector strategies, such as National Development Strategy 2030 (hereafter NDS 2030). For instance, the NDS 2030 highlights the importance of IWRM in the energy sector to ensure energy security and efficient use of energy.

In addition, the government has also committed to extending the IWRM considerations at the global level, supporting the Dushanbe Water Process as a part of the International Decade on Water for Sustainable Development.

The changing climate in the region is expected to impact the water resources of the country, with significant potential impact on hydropower generation. Tajikistan’s population has already experienced these periods of energy insecurity, receiving only 4/5 hours of electricity per day.[5] The low water levels will create difficulties in providing electricity for the population. The changing water patterns will impact food security, and additionally, if energy is available in a lower amount it will further impact the livelihoods of the people. Perhaps this is one of the reasons that Tajikistan’s self-assessment on IWRM scores 46 for the 2020-21 round of data collection for SDG 6.5.1. indicator on the GWP Toolbox, showing that it has a medium-low status of IWRM implementation.[6] This is a self-assessed score provided by the UN and its SDG Index based on official and non-traditional statistics.[7]

Nonetheless, we believe that this score does not adequately reflect the hard work the country has already undertaken to set up a strong policy framework for IWRM. Policy frameworks are the glue that holds the entire system together, and to ensure that adequate consideration is taken from many perspectives, it takes some time to establish them. It is also the first question potential investors pose when assessing financing and investment opportunities in any country. By taking this important policy and legal framework step, the country has set up promising conditions for further progress, investment, and ultimately the positive outcome for the country’s energy-water security.

The Tajikistan Water Partnership, a member of the GWP global network, has supported the country’s progress through supporting IWRM implementation at the local government levels. Support has ranged from facilitating multi-stakeholder consultations; supporting knowledge sharing about IWRM at the community level; and sharing global best practices on IWRM. Knowledge and participation from the community level, through a multi-stakeholder framework, can significantly strengthen the sustainability of water resource management initiatives. For instance, in June 2022 the GWP took a part in the Second High-Level International Conference on the International Decade for Action “Water for Sustainable Development, 2018-2028” with the purpose to identify ways and mechanisms for implementing the goals and objectives of the new International Water Decade, striving to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) related to water. Under the framework of the conference, other side events were organized, such as the International Marathon under the slogan “Water for Sustainable Development,” as part of the Global Water Marathon #RUN BLUE, or the Dushanbe Water Festival held in the park “Navruzgoh”. The festival was organized by the local government with the aim of raising public awareness of the value of water as a vital resource which received very positive feedback from the participants and guests of the conference and improvement in the community’s awareness of the importance of prudent management of the water resource which surrounds them and supports all aspects of their lives. As a member of GWP Central Asia and Caucasus (CACENA), GWP will gladly continue to support the country’s IWRM progress to come.

[1] Ministry of Energy and Water resources Republic of Tajikistan. About the Ministry. Also available at: https://www.mewr.tj/?page_id=2


[3] Ronan Shenhav, Daler Domullodzhanov. The Water-Energy-Food Nexus in Tajikistan: The Role of Water

User Associations in improving Energy and Food Security. Also available at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/14k9XjpKA4fZSNyalMplPMdsjH9vmS9CK/view

[4] Katarzyna Kosowska, Piotr Kosowski (2022) Energy Security of Hydropower Producing Countries—The Cases of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. Also available at: file:///C:/Users/milen/Downloads/energies-15-07822-v2.pdf

[5] Rferl. Tajikistan Limits Power Due To Low Water At Hydroelectric Dam. Also available at: https://www.rferl.org/a/tajikistan-limits-power-due-to-low-water-at-hydroelectric-dam/30753912.html

[6] GWP Toolbox IWRM Action Hub (2022) Country Profile. Tajikistan. Also available at: https://www.gwptoolbox.org/country-info/TJ

[7] SDG Index. Sustainable Development Report. Also available at: https://dashboards.sdgindex.org/chapters/part-2-the-sdg-index-and-dashboards

By Dr. Barbara Janusz-Pawletta (GWP Technical Committee) and Milena Oravcová (DKU CRS Fellow)

Posted in Partnership | Leave a comment

Improved Riverfront Management through Water Sensitive Urban Growth and Inclusion

In 2007, the number of people living in urban areas equaled the number of people living in rural areas for the first time in history.  Today, 57 percent of the world population lives in urban areas with this set to increase to 68 percent by 2050, with urbanization growing most rapidly in the developing world. This astonishing growth is not surprising; cities offer increased access to services and amenities and importantly, cities offer more income opportunities. According to the World Bank, almost 80 percent of the world’s GDP is generated in cities.

This unrelenting urban growth poses substantial challenges to cities and their relationship with water, yet it also offers huge opportunities for urban growth. Achieving positive water outcomes for an increasingly global urban population will depend on good governance, community participation, and knowledge and capacity.

Source: UN

Building Water Security

How are the world’s cities coping with their intensive internal growth and influx of rural residents? And more specifically, how are they going to meet the water services needs of 7 billion people? In Asia, which is experiencing rapid urban growth in mega and secondary cities, this question is at the forefront of the minds of politicians, urban administrators and most importantly, urban residents. While affordable access to clean water and safe sanitation are essential to urban communities, cities also depend on effective management of the limited water resources on which their services depend.

Many of Asia’s cities, like metropolitan centers worldwide, are located along rivers that provide economic benefits through trade and transportation, municipal and industrial water supply, in addition to the social and environmental benefits that the water landscape provides. These benefits include improved health through enhanced water quality, reduced water related diseases and access to recreation; increased waterfront green spaces for leisure; the potential to soften heatwaves, flooding, and other climate related stresses; and safeguarding biodiversity for surrounding communities.

Indeed, river regulation and restoration are at the heart of Asia’s urban transformation. This is a theme recognized by Seoul, which aims to be one of the world’s top five cities. Experts from around the world were invited to the Water Seoul Conference in October 2022 to share lessons learned from water-sensitive urban design (WSUD), and more importantly, strategies to recognize and realize the full benefits of urban waterfront design as a core part of the city’s continued transformation. In the past, concrete channels and heavy regulation to keep waterways free of flooding and “under control” were common features in water management. This is changing, albeit slowly, around the world.

A notable example of river restoration is the Isar river in Munich. Like many cities, previous efforts to manage the river and its flow through surrounding cities included concrete water channels. Under a more comprehensive river restoration plan, emphasizing access to surrounding shoreline and its utilization for recreational purposes along with flood protection for densely urbanized areas, an 8km stretch of Isar was restored to a much more natural state at a cost of $35 million after 5 years of planning and 11 years of construction. The result is a highly popular recreational area that generates substantial income for local businesses and has boosted property values.

Experience from cities in Asia highlights the importance of building in climate resilience as a core attribute of urban waterfront design. The devastation caused by the 2011 floods in the lower Chao Phraya River in Thailand; the Zero Slums City Program in Indonesia; and the National River Care Fund in Malaysia all provide good lessons for cities wishing to address both social and environmental concerns through strengthened resilience and enhanced biodiversity as a core part of their urban water management. They embody the approach of Water-Sensitive Cities, or “Water-Wise Cities”, which follow these three principles: (i) cities act as water supply catchments; (ii) cities provide ecosystem services and a healthy natural environment; and (iii) cities comprise water-sensitive communities.

Thailand used this approach in the country’s recovery from the 2011 floods, where the 1,439 mm recorded rainfall was over 143 percent greater than recorded rainfall from the previous two decades, 1982 to 2002. The total water volume surpassed the 10 billion m3 storage capacity of the Bhumipol and Sirikit Dams in the Chao Phraya River. Thailand’s authorities significantly reviewed and revised the previous water masterplan for the areas surrounding the country’s capital, Bangkok, to include flood mitigation measures. Numerous structural measures were emphasized in several sub-projects following the initiation of the plan to prevent and mitigate the floods in the Chao Phraya River Basin with insufficient considerations of the impacts to the surrounding areas.

Future climate impacts were also incorporated into the city’s flood protection measures. Like most urban centers, most flood prone areas are inhabited by low-income populations in slums and unplanned communities that are unprotected from surging waters. Accordingly, redesigning for water resilient cities, poverty alleviation, and improving social welfare should be developed in unison.

Indonesia embarked on the innovative Zero Slums City Program in several major cities. The city government of Yogyakarta, for example, joined forces with the local community to move houses back from the Winogo riverbank by at least 15 meters and shifted their orientation so that the houses faced the river. This repositioning allowed space for road access and the development of green open space and social facilities. Most importantly, the community started to reduce pollution and increased care for the river as it had now become their front yard.

In Malaysia, the River Ranger Program was successful in establishing (i) strict water laws, (ii) a River Basin Authority to integrate and coordinate activities within a river basin, and (iii) the Integrated River Basin Management Program to encourage the public to participate in river stewardship projects. Malaysia (through Global Environment Centre) created the National River Care Fund where it provides seed funds (from 2,000 – 5,000 RM, equivalent to USD 440 – 1100) for 5 to 10 community-based river restoration and awareness raising activities twice a year to ensure sustainable program design to benefit people and nature strengthening biodiversity along the river.

These successful cases and programs highlight a few critical stakeholder and design considerations that are needed to achieve successful urban water outcomes:

  1. Political Leadership and Planning: A clear city-wide vision and options analysis is a critical first step. In addition, close coordination among community; municipal; and federal entities from the very beginning is an important part of the design and implementation success.
  2. Community Participation: Systematic and comprehensive consultation among civil society and citizen groups, as well as the private sector from small- to large-businesses that depend upon the healthy functioning ecosystem services of the water urban landscape is an essential input to the design as well as building ownership of the implementation and utilization of the restored spaces.
  3. Innovative Knowledge and Capacity Building: Factoring climate change considerations into multi-purpose water infrastructure development necessitates a different approach to the design of urban water environments, notably the consideration of future climate impacts and associated uncertainties from using historical data. Standard design manuals often do not include innovative design considerations such as nature-based solutions nor do they provide flexibility that will be needed with climate change. Finally, community engagement and local know how is critical. While national and international consultants can bring technical expertise and global experience, the knowledge and engagement of the local people and businesses that live with the urban water landscape is essential to ensure successful outcomes.

Throughout history, great cities have flourished next to rivers, lakes, and oceans. Well-managed climate-resilient cities are critical for the continued growth of the world’s population through the next century. Perhaps the most important and innovative approach to urban water landscape management is the systematic involvement of the people that live and work by the waterways to design and help both the water environment and communities to co-exist and thrive. The GWP network continues to support members in learning, knowledge-sharing, and identifications of good methods of inclusive climate-resilient water management.

Thomas Panella, Director – Environment, Natural Resources, and Agriculture Division – East Asia Department, Asian Development Bank

Jaehyang So, Chair, GWP TEC

Fany Wedahuditama, Regional Coordinator at GWP Southeast Asia and Executive Director, Water Stewardship Indonesia

The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Asian Development Bank, its management, it Board of Directors, or its members.

Posted in Partnership | Leave a comment

Using Social Media to Change Drought Responses

In March, the world will converge in New York for the first time in five decades to find ways to ensure water security. Innovation will be a key part of this discussion. GWP is forging new partnerships to bring innovation for drought and flood management.

The drought in the Horn of Africa has had devastating human and economic impacts. Large-scale loss of food and income over the past two years, due primarily to drought, has led to food insecurity for 21 million people across the region. More than 3 million people face emergency levels of food insecurity, which means they regularly go a day or more without eating and have sold their possessions to earn income for survival. In Somalia, the drought has forced over 1.3 million people to abandon their farms and migrate to displacement sites.[1]

In the US, the 2021 drought in California is estimated to have cost the state $1.7 billion in losses and almost 15,000 jobs. The cost of water in California continues to grow with restricted supply. The Nasdaq Veles California Water Index, which tracks the spot price for water in the state, has more than quadrupled over the past three years.[2]

In Europe, rivers that have been critical to commerce for centuries, contributing approximately $80 billion to the region’s economy just as a mode of transport, are now shriveled, threatening the global movement of chemicals, fuel, food and other commodities. And the Rhine — a pillar of the German, Dutch and Swiss economies — has been virtually impassable at times during 2022.[3]

Responding to water extremes, drought and flood, through business-as-usual is not enough. GWP and WMO’s joint Associated Programme on Flood Management (APFM) and the Integrated Drought Management Program (IDMP), support governments around the world in integrated flood and drought management and seek to deploy the latest innovations and technology to scale up momentum on flood and drought responses. Recent advancements in hydrological modelling and observation technologies, including from remote sensing, have allowed countries to develop or strengthen appropriate drought policies[4]. In agriculture, for instance, improved monitoring and assessment methodologies support better estimation of available resources and avoid over-allocation of water rights that may aggravate water shortages during drought periods[5].

GWP has recently embarked on a new effort to understand information flow related to drought. While both floods and droughts can cause significant damage to people, communities, and countries, the world’s awareness, attention, and action on floods and droughts are dramatically different. The information and attention on floods is instantaneous, but information, attention, and perhaps action, on droughts moves much more slowly because of its creeping nature as slow-onset event. This information imbalance also results in less attention, and possibly delayed and weaker responses to drought.

GWP is examining one specific information channel, social media, to see how social media on droughts can tell us about how people, communities, and governments communicate the perceived risk of an emerging drought and respond to drought along the drought propagation. In today’s world, information, and the speed at which this information is disseminated, is power, and social media is one of the most powerful methods to share and gain information. Social media has proven to be a powerful tool to share information in an intensely personal way, with immediate impact, particularly under the emergence of natural disasters such as flood, drought, and earthquake. In times of natural disasters, people tend to use social media for several reasons—to check on family and friends, seek support, gather news about the magnitude of the disaster and provide ground-zero first-hand accounts. For example, Facebook’s Safety Check was one of the ways that people in Nepal were able to locate and contact their families in the midst of one of the most devastating earthquakes to hit the country, which killed more than 4,800 people. The Safety Check feature was developed after Facebook’s Japanese engineers developed the Disaster Message Board to help people make contact during and after the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami.

The US-based Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) stated in its 2013 National Preparedness Report that during and after Hurricane Sandy, users sent more than 20 million Sandy-related Twitter posts with the help of broadband networks. New Jersey’s largest utility company, PSE&G, said that during Sandy they updated their Twitter feeds and used them to send information about the daily locations of their tents and generators.

While social media is global, analysis and access to social media data, is largely based on the US due to the availability of data and statistics on social media. To embark on this global analysis, GWP is partnering with leading institutions throughout the world, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), POSTECH (Korea’s #1 rated Engineering School), Bright Initiative of Bright Data , EU, Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Germany; Wageningen University, Netherlands; National Drought Mitigation Center, Nebraska, US; European Commission’s Joint Research Centre; University Freiburg, Germany; Imperial College London, UK, on a multi-national effort to examine how social media can help to identify and address responses to droughts.

This is important because even if a drought as a natural phenomenon can hardly be mitigated, its catastrophic impacts can be mitigated or even prevented. Droughts are caused by extraordinary meteorologic conditions, usually below-normal precipitation and if the agricultural production system is not prepared for such a situation, the drought will affect it negatively. Drought impacts are also amplified by the inability to manage water demand needs to ensure continuity of service throughout the year. California’s periods of drought are punctuated regularly by intense rain periods like the ones experienced during 2022, but the state was unable to retain and store the water to ensure continuity of service to the population and the farms that need the water. Water shortage caused by droughts has severe impacts on society and environment. And the longer the period of water shortage, the more severe are the drought’s impact can be, if not prepared. Therefore, fast moving information, such as social media, could have a direct impact on mitigating adverse effects of slow moving droughts.

Despite global, regional, and national efforts, the drought in the Horn of Africa continues. The prolonged and damaging impacts of the drought shows little sign of getting any better. A consortium of 16 international organizations issued an emergency statement in 2022, calling for immediate global action to save millions of lives in the Horn of Africa. But through a better understanding of fast-moving social media, the impacts and duration of droughts could be lessened to the world’s population in coming years.

Valentin Aich, Senior Water and Climate Specialist, Global Water Partnership (GWP) and World Meteorological Organization (WMO)

Professor Jonghun Kam, Assistant Professor, Division of Environmental Science and Engineering , Pohang University of Science and Technology

Jaehyang So, GWP TEC Chair

[1] UN High Commissioner for Refugees

[2] Wall Street Journal Editorial board, Jan. 18, 2023

[3] “The World’s Rivers, Canals, and Reservoirs are Turning to Dust”Brian K. Sullivan, August 26, 2022, Bloomberg

[4] Verbist et al., 2016

[5] FAO, 2012

Posted in Partnership | Leave a comment

Coming together to turn a triple crisis to a triple win: the 2022 Sector Ministers Meeting

Lesley Pories, GWP’s Coordinator for the Global Water Leadership Programme, participated in the 2022 Sector Ministers’ Meeting (SMM) in Jakarta, Indonesia, on May 18-19. The event, convened by the Sanitation and Water for All Partnership (SWA) in collaboration with UNICEF, was hosted by the Government of Indonesia. Lesley serves as Co-Chair of the SWA High Level Political Dialogue Working Group, which oversees content development for SWA high-level events. Here she offers reflections on the event.

This event was the first of its kind. I say that not because it was the first SMM – it definitely was not! – but because this SMM was the first to look outside the WASH sector and invite ministers from non-traditional sectors such as environment, climate, health and economy to join them in their discussions. United under the theme Building Forward Better for Recovery and Resilience, this SMM sought to engage a full array of ministerial stakeholders in discussing how to turn the triple crisis of a global pandemic, subsequent economic downturn, and ongoing climate change into a triple win.

350 people from 51 countries attended the meeting, including over 53 ministers and two vice presidents from 35 countries. Instead of focusing on WASH for traditional WASH goals of universal access and meeting SDG6 ambitions, the carefully crafted plenaries and intimate ministerial dialogues focused on topics that resonate across ministries – the role of political leadership in establishing national priorities, governance and finance reforms for recovery and long-term resilience, and accountability.

An essential feature of the SMM is always the Ministerial Dialogues, when ministers are divided into small breakout rooms and seated together at a roundtable with one facilitator and a few others. The roundtables are intentionally small and adhere to Chatham House Rules, enabling ministers to confidentially converse with each other about the issues (although some will always feel more inclined to share than others). While bringing the ministers together in this way is always beneficial for cross-country learning, in this case I sometimes observed ministers from 3-4 different ministries of the same country participating in a dialogue. When we think about how seldom these ministers might come together in their home country, much less talk about issues related to water and sanitation, you begin to see how invaluable this event really is.

The inter-related nature of our chosen topics was always known, but became increasingly apparent as the ministers spoke. “Transparency triggers trust,” observed one minister, “and trust triggers finance.”

The issue of reframing WASH came forward in a number of conversations. “How do we move as a society from treating WASH as an emergency into treating WASH as an economic enabler?” asked one minister. Techniques such as renaming key WASH programmes such as “One Borehole per Village” to the “Presidential Development Programme” help assign importance to initiatives – but of course depend on having national leadership that supports such efforts.

The intertwined reality of WASH with climate change was emphasized repeatedly, with multiple ministers indicating that they no longer talk about WASH without talking about climate change. This reflects the reality that many of the ministers present are experiencing at their respective homes: roughly 74 percent of all-natural disasters between 2001 and 2018 were water-related, and 40 percent of the global population is highly vulnerable to the impact of climate change (IPCC 6th Assessment Report).

One always leaves high-level meetings and events such as this one questioning whether the level of effort and resources that it took to produce it will lead to change on the ground. Among other things, ministers committed to increasing prioritization of climate-resilient water and sanitation in national budgets, and developing financing strategies and investment targets which support sustainable, safely managed, and resilient access to water and sanitation; and bringing these conclusions to key global processes in 2022 and 2023, such as the UNFCCC’s Conference of the Parties (COP) 27, the G20, the U.N. 2023 Water Conference, and the 2023 SWA Finance Ministers Meeting.

They will not be able to achieve these commitments alone – it will depend on the many partners that comprise SWA (and undoubtedly others!) to help them achieve these goals at the national and global levels. I’m proud to know that GWP is lending its bench strength to the fight, and that the Global Water Leadership Programme I coordinate has an integral role to play in connecting that local action to global stages.

Posted in Climate change, Development, Sustainable Development, United Nations, WASH, Water financing, Water resources management | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Running out of time

What motivates an international affairs student to dig into scientific data, learn how the climate works, and discover the disaster that sea level rise can cause? One word: people. The student, Luca Jendrek, earned her Master’s in International Affairs and Security Policy from Peter Pazmany University in Budapest, Hungary. She volunteered for a Mallorcan NGO protecting and conserving the Mediterranean before she joined the transboundary team at GWP. Here she outlines the connection between her studies and her traineeship at GWP.

Photo: Ernie Penaredo Ndo

We constantly bump into threatening news about climate change, natural disasters, record high or low temperatures, and ecosystem degradation. But we hear less about climate migrants or environmental refugees – hundreds of thousands of people who have already been forced to leave their homes because of climate change, or the millions who face the same destiny.

What migration patterns are provoked by sea level rise caused by climate change? Is there any national and international legislation to protect these people? These questions came to mind when I decided to write my Master’s thesis on this topic. I did not expect that one day I would combine this knowledge with my work at GWP.

Ninety-nine per cent of scientists agree that climate change is due to human activities. In the 20th century, we used more and more natural resources and slowly but surely overexploited our only planet, leading to the rise in emissions of the three most harmful gases (carbon dioxide, water vapor, and methane), resulting in global warming. One of the most alarming consequences is sea level rise which is happening at a faster pace than we expected.

According to the World Bank, 800 million people in 540 low-lying coastal or delta cities will be threatened by sea level rise by 2050, and this figure will likely increase. Most of these cities are in Asia – Mumbai, Kolkota, Dhaka, Bangkok, Ho Chi Minh City, Jakarta, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Beijing, Tokyo. However, other cities – New York, Los Angeles, Buenos Aires, Rio de Jainero, Rotterdam, Dar-es-Salam, to name a few – will also face rapid sea level rise in coming decades.

The 1951 UN Refugee Convention reached a milestone in the protection of refugees after World War II. Along with several regional and national treaties, it ensures protection and rights to people who are forced to flee because of various well-founded fears. However, the Convention does not consider environmental factors that trigger relocation. An extensive global framework is missing which would recognize, support, and protect climate migrants.

Nevertheless, legal frameworks are beginning to recognize and assist persons who flee because of climate change and natural disasters:

  • Internally displaced persons, according to the UN Guiding Principles and the Kampala Convention, give a wider interpretation of refugee and covers those fleeing natural or human-made disasters. The UNHCR established an Advisory Group on Climate Change and Human Mobility to work on solutions for climate refugees;
  • The Nansen Initiative addresses the needs of people displaced across international borders in the context of disasters and climate change effects;
  • The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) agreed to the Cancun Adaptation Framework which recognized climate-induced human migration;
  • For the first time, climate displacement was mentioned in the document at the climate conference in Paris in 2015;
  • The International Organization for Migration leads climate migration programs in more than 40 countries.

The UN Guiding Principles on internal displacement need to be expanded to cover these situations, the Nansen Initiative needs to be enhanced, and climate migrants need to be recognized as a category of people requiring protection and entitled to human rights, as suggested in the Paris Agreement.

When I joined GWP as a trainee in July 2021, I was assigned to work on the transboundary team. Here I discovered that because climate change and its effects are diverse and multidimensional, it affects transboundary water systems and poses challenges for every water user – citizens, industry, government, and nature. No state can deal with these challenges on its own; wider cooperation between stakeholders and countries is key.

As more regions experience water stress, uneven water distribution, lack of fresh water and sanitation, and climate change impacts, more people will opt for the immediate solution: migration, posing further socio-economic-political and environmental challenges and putting migrants in danger.

Another similarity between environmental migration and transboundary water management is the pace and extent of the development of new legislation, policies, and regulations: they happen much slower than the rate of environmental degradation or disasters.

Future sea level rise depends on three factors:

  1. greenhouse gas emissions;
  2. the response of air and sea surface temperatures greenhouse gases; and
  3. thermal expansion and the level of ice melt.

While sea level rise is less dramatic than disasters, and happens relatively slowly, time is not on our side given the slow pace at which we are making – or not making – changes to policies and laws. We need to hear the voices of those directly experiencing climate change, sea level rise, and water stress so we can take collective and urgent action on mitigation, adaptation, legal, infrastructural, and institutional measures, and do so with a broad, all of society participation.

Posted in Climate change, Oceans, Partnership, sea level rise, Transboundary | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The Wellspring: “Getting Hired: A Programme Associate’s Journey through the Hiring Process at the Global Water Partnership”

Getting hired is the ultimate goal shared by all jobseekers, no matter the particular job or path. While landing a new position is an exciting and necessary milestone in one’s career journey, how does it happen exactly? What is the mix of skills and circumstance that help people navigate this career step successfully? To help answer these questions and more, Josh’s Water Jobs collaborated with GWP to bring you the story of a recently hired staff member. From the observations and reflections of those directly involved, there are many transferable pieces of advice and valuable insights to anyone looking for a new job.

Sandra Bruehlmann recently moved from Peru to join the GWP team in Stockholm, Sweden, as a Programme Associate, dedicated to monitoring and facilitating progress on SDG 6. In this interview she tells her story on how she ended up with GWP, and we also hear from Colin Herron, Global Coordinator of Water Solutions for the SDGs and Sandra’s boss; from Jacqui Gogo, the GWP Human Resources specialist and administration focal point to Cap-Net, UNDP; from Darío Soto-Abril, the Executive Secretary and CEO of GWP; as well as from a member of the hiring panel, Rianna Gonzales, GWP’s Youth Engagement Specialist. Read their stories here.

Posted in SDGs, Youth | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Earth Day was my ‘Aha!’ Moment

Alessandra Giolo is completing Masters degrees in Global Environmental Politics and in Environmental Science at Sodertorn and Stockholm University. Her dissertation is on Transboundary Water Management. She is an intern at the GWP global secretariat, and this blog is her story of how Earth Day triggered her interest in the environmental sector.

Alessandra Giolo

My primary school was one of the first in Italy to have “Environmental Education” on its curriculum, thanks to a dedicated teacher who introduced us to what now is one of the most important and talked-about subjects in politics, society, and academia. In that class I wrote my first essay, “Earth Day: the relationship between humans and nature.” The essay was a collection of themes and works we had studied, and it was from this early age that my interest in the environment was born.

Nature and environmental politics took time to gather academic attention, but during my Bachelor studies in International Relations an inspiring professor taught us the limitations of the earth’s resources and her concern for the speed of degradation and exploitation humans were posing to the planet. That motivated me to pursue my first Master’s in Environmental Science and a second one in Global Environmental Politics, in order to have a comprehensive understanding from both the scientific and the political sides.

Today, in 2021, environmental awareness is very different, with most people having heard of environmental protection and restoration, mitigation of climate change, and the need to transition to clean energy sources. These are not only at the top of political and policy makers’ agendas, but there are targets that humanity must meet to ensure our survival. There is little doubt anymore that human interference on the planet has reached such invasive levels that we are officially living in the Anthropocene, the “unofficial” era where human activities have impacted the earth’s geology, climate, and ecosystem delivery.

The ongoing Coronavirus pandemic, which so far has claimed over 3 million lives and changed nearly every aspect of human life, shows us just how much nature is more in charge than we are. This invisible enemy put humans and their activities on pause and in some ways healed parts of the environment that we had exhausted. It also showed that recovery is possible.

How did it all start

The first Earth Day was held in 1970, eight years after Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring was published. The book exposed how destructive trends were affecting the sustainability of the planet, raising awareness for the first time of the link between pollution, public health, and every living organism. In 1969, Senator Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin (U.S.A.) took the environmental cause to heart, determined “to shake up the political establishment and force this issue onto the national agenda.” On April 22, 1970, millions of people gathered on the streets of Philadelphia, Chicago, Los Angeles, and other American cities, guided by the inspirational passion of Danis Hayes, a Stanford University student appointed as Earth Day’s national coordinator.

“Earth Day worked because of the spontaneous response at the grassroots level. We had neither the time nor resources to organise 20 million demonstrators and the thousands of schools and local communities that participated. That was the remarkable thing about Earth Day. It organised itself,” said Hayes.

Since that day, Earth Day went global. Activities range from a talking drum chain in Gabon, Africa, to a gathering of hundreds of thousands of people at the National Mall in Washington, D.C. The Earth Day Network (EDN) collaborates with more than 17,000 partners and organisations in 174 countries. According to EDN, more than 1 billion people are involved in Earth Day activities, making it “the largest secular civic event in the world.”

GWP is involved in raising awareness and enhancing the knowledge and skills of professionals and youth on water issues – after all, water makes up 70% of the earth! My internship has taught me so much about water and governance, about collaboration, mutual understanding, respect, and showed me how all of us – through hard work and a vision – can contribute to a better world. Global changes are needed to ensure a future for humanity. GWP is showing its dedication, passion, and commitment to enhance this sustainability. To extend our stay on the planet for as long as possible, ensuring the long-term sustainability of water resources is essential.

Earth Day was born because individuals understood that change was needed. Passion, leadership, and vision are key to making global change happen. Marking this day is an opportunity to bring millions of people together to discuss and share knowledge and solutions to problems that involve the whole of humanity without distinctions of color, country, and religion. As is often said, there is no Planet B. This earth is our only home, and our survival depends on making changes today to how we treat this home.

Click image to enlarge it
Posted in Climate change, Development, Earth Day, Ecosystems, GWP, IWRM, Partnership, Sustainable Development, Water resources management, Water security | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment


Monika Weber-Fahr

Monika Weber-Fahr penned these personal reflections before her last day as GWP Executive Secretary and CEO on June 30, 2020.

“So where is GWP going, now that you are leaving?” When announcing my departure from GWP, I got this question a lot, as well as three others: “Anything you regret?”, “What did you achieve?” and, my personal favorite: “You are leaving for family reasons. Does this mean women can’t hold leadership roles? Is it too much, leading an organization and being a Mum?”

GWP at extraordinary times.  I am writing these reflections at an extraordinary time.  The world is reeling in the pain inflicted by COVID – to people, families, lives, and to entire countries, both through the death sentences brought by the virus and through the economic fall-out from measures taken as we try to protect ourselves, particularly those most at risk.  The coming years will bring developments that we have never seen before:  enormous recovery packages that may or may not lead to more climate (and by extension: water) minded policies, the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, and dramatic changes across multiple sectors that we are only beginning to understand.  In the meantime, global temperatures keep rising, populations and their needs for water for drinking, hygiene, and for their food and other consumption keep growing, and industrial processes that waste and pollute water are changing way too slowly. Both the pressures on water – and the opportunity to negotiate a “re-set” of how we use it – are unprecedented. Never before have we seen as much attention to providing access to water to the poor. Will GWP partners around the world take advantage of this opportunity?  I would expect so!  Certainly, the regional and the global GWP teams stand ready to support with advice and input – wherever our partners and stakeholders will manage to engage in national or local decision making processes.

Where is GWP going?  Where we are going should be clear – we have a good, jointly developed, broadly consulted on and well owned strategy, with clear targets and relevant focus areas. “Mobilising for a Water Secure World” should enable us to effectively address global crises related to water security in the COVID-19 context.  Indeed, our Regional GWP Chairs and Coordinators have confirmed: our strategy gives us the right focus to act – in particular now.   As countries and industries begin to figure out how to “build back better”, our focus on water solutions for SDGs, on climate resilience through water, and on transboundary solutions all provide a solid framework to engage with the many non-water actors that will shape the post-COVID recovery.  Our unique value is in bringing ‘voices of water’ together and to the attention of political and economic decision-makers, while mobilising action that will address the ensuing water crises.  So let’s make sure we do this, with the continued help of so many enlightened donors: mobilise more and new partners, while valuing each other and our shared journey on this road, and find ways to negotiate water-relevant solutions even in uncomfortable spaces!

Anything you regret?  An obvious one first: I do regret leaving GWP way “before my time.” Leaving early means that I will not be able to be part of and support many initiatives and steps that I truly care for: The 25th Anniversary Year in 2021 – a fabulous opportunity for the entire Network to showcase what we have achieved and what we can do more of;  working with our regional teams to learn how we can be stronger in our regions and countries and building true “Network Effects” in how we connect GWP partners – making sure each and every partner who joins increases the value of the Network; and helping the Water ChangeMaker Awards grow – a unique mechanism to bring attention to the experiences and voices that make concrete and positive change for water happen, and bringing these into the GWP ToolBox.  My biggest personal regret though, is that I had to let people go, early on in my tenure, when GWP’s finances required retrenching.  And I am glad to say that we are now on better financial footings, enabling us to weather some of the storms ahead.  Finally, a regret that I am taking with me is that I did not get to spend as much time with the team in Stockholm as I would have wanted, getting to know my host country only cursorily, and leaving with only a few words of Swedish.  The Swedish art of Lagom is something I still have to learn about a lot.

What did you achieve?  Well, there is an official list of things, shared in the announcement, coming with kind words from our Chair, Ambassador Howard Bamsey,  noting “tireless efforts to put GWP on more secure footing” and the “energy and entrepreneurial leadership” with which I had been able to “turn the organisation around.”  And then there is my more personal list of things that I feel particularly blessed by: first and foremost the personal relationships and friendships with so many so wonderful people around the world and of course in Stockholm; the magic of the two “follow the sun” Network Meetings that more than ever connected our partners around the world; speaking to the climate community at CoP25 about the “Voices of Water” and how they should matter more;  bringing to GWP the notion that our work can support water security AND be gender transformative when launching the first fully-gender focused water, climate and development program, under the auspices of AMCOW and funded by ADA and SIDA; and, of course, signing the first grant agreement with the Green Climate Fund in support of Zambia’s GCF readiness, in a fully virtual environment, using media that some of my originally skeptical GWP colleagues now feel comfortable to use.

“You are leaving for family reasons: Does this mean women can’t hold leadership roles – is this just too much, leading an organization AND being a Mum?”  Some of the younger women on the global team asked this question quietly but quite immediately after I announced my departure – and also others seemed to wonder.  Indeed, it is true: I am leaving GWP so that I can re-join my family – my teenaged sons, my husband, and our dog – who live in Vienna, Austria, and whom I saw for much of the past two years only on weekends, if that.  Commuting between work and family – with separations of weeks or months at a time – is something that many parents do: anyone working in the military, in transport (shipping, trucking, aviation), in off-shore work or in construction would be all too familiar with this and know that it often can work just fine.  So, first to remember is that having the choice to step out and to do something else is a choice that not everyone needs – but also a choice that not everyone has. Contrary to what Foreign Policy Professor Ann-Marie Slaughter originally said in her then famous “Why Women Can’t Have it All” article:  For me the choice is not between career and family, and it is not about “stepping down” but about “stepping out” into something else.  Choices like this are about building the important and precious dimension of caring into one’s life, and there are times when this matters more or is specifically needed than at other times.  This is the same for anyone – whether you are a mother or father, daughter, or son.

One last observation: the Global Water Partnership is unique: We may not see this “from within” – but in its workings and design, as a partnership and network, GWP stands out among many other similar set-ups I have seen and worked with across multiple sectors in my professional past. And in this, we all stand on the shoulders of giants – the people who built this partnership and created its knowledge over the years.  Many stand out – Ismail Serageldin, Maggie Catley-Carlson, and Letitia Obeng, the early Global Chairs; the late and greatly missed John Briscoe; the Technical Committee Chairs Torkil Clausen, Roberto Lenton, Mohamed Ait Kadi, and Jerry Priscoli; the authors of influential Technical Background Papers, in particular No. 4, No. 14 and No. 22, and, of course, of the outstanding GWP Gender Action Piece – so many were part of shaping how the world sees and works on integrated water resources management, climate adaptation, and the SDGs.  This work is carried on now by the many leaders engaged in Regional Water Partnerships and Country Water Partnerships, in the global and regional Technical Committees, and in the Global Team.  As a network, we are as good as our relationships and values.  Together, with respect and solidarity with each other, we can and do get things done.

Oddly enough, no one has asked me what I am grateful for – when gratitude is the dominant feeling for me as I leave.  The list of people and experiences I am grateful for is long.  Most of all, I am grateful for – and humbled by – the opportunity that I had in being part of the journey of the many leaders that come together through this extraordinary Network.  So many of you are driving positive change, often with little or no means – but built on unique knowledge, relationships, and motivation. You are an inspiration – thank you all for this!

Posted in Partnership | 2 Comments

Mobilising the agriculture and water sectors to address climate change

GWP Technical Committee Chair Dr. Jerome Delli Priscoli attended and spoke at the Adaptation of African Agriculture (AAA) annual conference in Marrakesh, Morocco, on November 9, 2019. Here are his reflections.


The focus was on agriculture and adaptation policies necessary for meeting climate change. The overall purpose was to facilitate dialogue among the technical, Ministerial, and donor communities, and to identify relevant issues and to share experiences.

One of the sessions in the scientific advisory meeting was focused on water. Thankfully, it was clear that the panelists understood the importance of water management – perhaps not surprising since, globally, 70% of water withdrawals are taken by the agriculture sector.

Speakers elaborated on how soils need carbon and the role it plays in carbon sequestration. Other speakers called attention to soil degradation and its role in civic unrest. Other topics included:

·         the need for new maps of food insecurity and the need for world-level systems analysis

·         how Africa is facing the scourge of variability, esp. droughts and floods

·         a focus on eating habits and obesity and on how food is wasted along the value chain

Discussions on the use of precision technologies based on the digital revolution were most interesting. The presenters showed how such technologies and spatial temporal data is applicable even for the small farmer. The “Dry Arc” initiative of CGIAR was described and how it is attempting to inform decision makers. The countries in the Dry Arc will likely suffer the most from climate change.

Groundwater, water harvesting, and watershed management and their link to soil management was discussed, as well as the link to migration – a subject addressed by GWP and FAO.

Mark Smith of IWMI reviewed the new GCA paper “Climate Change and Water” and its five components: information and learning; action frameworks to build resilience; system diversity; infrastructure; and technology. FAO spoke of parallels of land tenure and water tenure and access to rights.

There was an excellent discussion on insurance. It seems French reinsurance companies have been partnering with local African insures of crop insurance in several countries. To meet tariff levels, countries must subsidize the gap between what people can pay and the required tariff. I asked: if governments are subsidizing, could that public money be better used on investing in prevention measures? This prompted the following response from the insurers: insurance will not solve the climate change problem. I highlighted the GWP Technical Committee Perspectives Paper “Climate insurance and water-related disaster risk management” which attracted interest: much of the discussion revolved around residual risk as the place where reinsurance fits.

The results of the scientific advisory groups and the donor’s groups were brought to the Ministers of Agriculture and to leaders of selected multinational and IFIs. I was most struck with several ministers who politely but explicitly said that there is too much focus on mitigation and what Africa and their countries really need is more focus on adaption: ‘the world must deal with the imbalance of mitigation and adaptation.’ From my own work on water and civilization, I would say they are on the right side of history. Thus, the great interest in infrastructure investment which of course is not a new theme in Africa. This observation was also backed by the World Bank. Some estimated a cost of around $200 billion will be necessary in next decade. The African Development Bank mentioned that 60% of employment in Africa is in agriculture even if urbanization is rapidly increasing.

The agriculture community is similar to those of us who work in water: they say agriculture is central to all the other SDGs, just like we say it about water! Same with wanting our respective sectors high on the political agenda; same with the need for training in the use of digital/smart technologies; same with the need for more research and knowledge sharing, esp. south-south; and that SDG 17 on partnership is essential. And finally, that Ministers of Finance should be at these meetings.

All that sounds like a call for an integrated (holistic) approach to solving the world’s development challenges!

Posted in Agriculture, Climate change, Food security, Water resources management | Leave a comment