Communicating SDGs: The Role of Youth Employment?

Emilinah Namaganda from Uganda has been an intern with GWP in Stockholm, Sweden, since September 2016. As her internship comes to an end, she reflects on youth involvement in the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

 

30867038785_76cd83cf3b_z-1Photo: GWP youth event at COP22, Marrakech, Morocco, November 2016.

“Leave no one behind” is the principle on which the historic Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development is grounded. The Agenda sets out 17 sustainable development goals whose aim is to transform the world in areas ranging from poverty reduction to building sustainable cities and communities. The goals are intended to improve the livelihoods of people in all walks of life, including the richest of the developed countries to the poorest of the low-income countries. However, the President of the 71st Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, H. E. Mr. Peter Thomson, emphasized that SDGs can be successfully implemented only if the global public whose livelihoods are to be enhanced is fully aware of the commitments made by their governments in September 2015.

Hence, the role of raising the global public’s awareness of the importance of SDG implementation cannot be overstated. But with such a wide target group how can all relevant stakeholders – especially the “general public” – be reached?

The Office of the President of the General Assembly made several proposals including “inclusion of the SDGs on the school curricula of every country in the world, maximizing the use of traditional media and online communications to bring the message of the SDGs to a new global audience, engaging youth activists in communities around the world and by delivering high-level advocacy at SDG-related events and workshops”.

For me, this statement raises many questions. Will these initiatives be followed through all over the world, given the differences in governance systems, available resources, etc.? Will they be sufficient to reach EVERYONE? For instance, if SDGs are included in school curricula, are there enough people with sufficient knowledge of the SDGs to pass it along to students? In some places, maybe, but in many, perhaps not.

This is where youth come in. In Uganda, youth below the age of 30 years make up over 78% of the population. The country has been recognized as having the youngest population in the world. Although higher than the average for sub-Saharan Africa which stands at 43.2%, many sub-Saharan countries can relate to the opportunities and challenges of such a large youth population. When a large percentage of this population is unemployed and struggling to make a living, it creates a burden on the small sect representing the work force, which inhibits growth of national economies and also promotes low standards of living. On the other hand, young people are innovative, driven, energetic, increasingly more and more educated, and ready to make their world a better place. For instance, research in 2015 revealed Uganda as the most entrepreneurial country in the world.

This is what SDG implementation needs: people interested in making their future better than theirs today, and that of their parents. Youth are curious to find ways to contribute to this vision, and in numbers large enough to reach entire populations. In countries such as Uganda, where young people are almost the entire population, spreading the word of the Agenda 2030 to the general public becomes feasible.

But how can young people be engaged in this vision? There have been several global and regional initiatives where youth have come together to speak out, and communicate ways in which they can be and/or want to be involved. This is a good starting point and necessary to put a face to the desire of youth to be involved. However, this tends to be biased. It is likely that such groups will mostly involve a few, young people with access to platforms at such levels. This does not work, for example, for unemployed youth in Uganda and many from sub-Saharan Africa. It is difficult to spread the word of Agenda 2030 when you are struggling to survive through the month. Not that we are looking for a quick fix or financial help, but instead institutions and governance systems can provide opportunities to implement our innovations and an opportunity to participate in planning our future.

Youth have shown initiative in creating a brighter future for themselves which is in tandem with Agenda 2030. Hence, discussions on SDG communication and implementation should take advantage of this group. However, this can be done effectively only with employed and productive youth. SDG-related initiatives should therefore put a strong focus on how to reduce youth unemployment. More productive and employed youth can contribute substantially to Agenda 2030. No one will be left behind!

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

What about Droughts?

Droughts can be defined in various ways and the effects may differ from one country to another. GWP intern Lara Vrtovec reflects on this.

822744-sonnenblumenfeld-duerre-sunflower-field-drought-04

We are about to say goodbye to the hottest year on record. According to the WMO, global temperatures in 2016 were higher than the record-breaking temperatures in 2015[i]. But isn’t this déjà vu? Didn’t we already hear this last year? Floods and heatwaves are becoming more frequent. It may be true that the extreme climatological events that occurred this year were to an extent caused by the powerful El Niño; however, the heat will not stop pursuing us just because El Niño is slowly disappearing.

When I was asked how climate change will affect my community, the first thing that popped in my mind, given that I am a citizen of a European country rich in water resources, was not droughts. Of the 21 major droughts that hit Europe from 1950 to 2012, six occurred after 2000[ii]. Are we having a drought crisis in Europe? But wait a minute, our droughts were not as severe as, for example, the drought in the Horn of Africa during 2011- 2012, which affected more than 10 million people[iii]. Nor do our heatwaves reach exasperatingly high levels of temperature (51°C) as in the town of Phalodi, India, in May.

Still, droughts can be defined in various ways and its effects may differ from one country to another. Meteorological droughts relate to a deficiency in precipitation, whereas agricultural droughts arise as a consequence of this deficiency. Hydrological droughts result from long-term soil water deficiencies, and last, but not least, socio-economic droughts can emerge as a result of all the aforementioned drought types. The latter is characterized by water scarcity that leads to a reduction of water security and potential economic losses. The differences between meteorological, agricultural, and hydrological droughts include their duration, where the longest is the hydrological drought and the shortest the meteorological drought.

Droughts affect at least 11 % of Europeans and 17 % of EU territory annually[iv]. With the warming of temperatures over the past century, the prevalence and duration of drought has also increased. It is estimated that droughts cost an average of 6.2 billion €/year in the most recent years, with an exceptional cost of 8.7 billion € in 2003[v]. However, these estimates encompass only direct economic costs, such as the cost of maintaining hydropower plants on low water flows, the cost of maintaining water treatment plants or the cost to compensate for crop losses. Droughts can have social and environmental effects as well (e.g. loss of lives, impacts on ecosystems, prevalence for forest fires, etc.). Some say that droughts are an underlying cause of mass migration to Europe.

This brings us to the question of whether are we putting enough effort in limiting these negative effects. Most of Europe’s drought policy is crisis oriented and consists of post-impact interventions. Nevertheless, the above-mentioned numbers show us that these policies are not enough and often inadequately implemented.

To make sense of this, we should take into consideration Giddens Paradox: not all threats posed by global warming are tangible, immediate, and visible in everyday life. And because of this, no matter how harmful they seem, many will not do anything concrete to prevent them. On the other hand, when these threats become apparent and urgent, it is already too late to reduce their impact. The question is: how long will it take us to resolve this paradox?

Droughts have the potential to turn into disaster. We are not able to prevent them, but reducing the gap between the impact and the ability to prepare, manage, and adapt to such events should be approached with proactive policies. However, before policies can be drafted, relevant data should be collected.

There are many country specific drought monitoring systems intended for the public. On the European scale, there is the EDO- European Drought Observatory. These forecasting models not only require good data, they need proper governmental backup plans and knowledge from the bottom up to fully evaluate how drought impacts will affect local water and food supplies.

The complex interlinkages between meteorology–hydrology–government–people should be established in a proper manner, with the sole purpose of preventing a drought crisis in Europe. National drought action plans and strategies should be implemented, not because it is a request from the EU Water Framework Directive or the Flood Directive, but because it is the state’s interest to guarantee farmers a secure crop or ensure its citizens’ water safety. We should aim to utilize water supply assets effectively by galvanizing governments to adopt national drought management plans and educating society on how to prepare for droughts. Post-impact drought recovery plans should not be our priority – they only maintain the status quo. The GWP CEE Integrated Drought Management Programme offers methods on how to develop national drought policies and strategies and how to tailor them according to a country’s characteristics and needs.

Now, if you are ever asked how climate change will affect your community, maybe droughts will be the first thing to pop into your mind! And think of it as your opportunity to take action.

[i] http://public.wmo.int/en/media/press-release/provisional-wmo-statement-status-of-global-climate-2016

[ii] https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/news/european-droughts-set-become-more-prevalent-end-century

[iii] http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13944550

[iv] http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/quantity/scarcity_en.htm

[v] http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/quantity/pdf/comm_droughts/2nd_int_report.pdf

Posted in Climate change, Drought | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

How to Write an IWRM Teaching Manual

It takes a lot of coffee, innumerable flip charts, face to face meetings, long hours of concentration, textual analysis, and sharing experiences. Two GWP interns share their experience of the workshop that finalized GWP’s IWRM ToolBox Teaching Manual.

By Sarah Perrine and Mario Roidt

workshop

Over the past few years, GWP’s Knowledge Management Team conducted 12 workshops to show educators how to use the GWP IWRM ToolBox as a teaching resource. Over 170 university lecturers from 61 universities attended the workshops and completed a survey to help GWP improve the IWRM ToolBox. Three findings were unanimous: (i) The ToolBox is widely used in university education already, (ii) the most popular feature of the ToolBox are the case studies and (iii) there is a need for a manual to guide lecturers in using the ToolBox, specifically the Tools and Case Studies to complement curricula and teaching methods.

In response, GWP collaborated with five professors from GWP´s Partner network to create the IWRM ToolBox Teaching Manual. The professors involved come from universities in Panamá, Brazil, China, Zimbabwe, and Kazakhstan and have thorough experience teaching IWRM and using the ToolBox. The concept of the Teaching Manual was conceptualized within GWP, but it’s the professors that contribute their experiences, lessons learned, teaching anecdotes, and sample lectures. The purpose of the manual is to provide a handy, online source of study materials to lecturers teaching water-related courses.

The final Workshop (really, a writeshop) to put the manual together started on a snowy Sunday in Stockholm. We met the professors in the lobby of the hotel before sitting down to breakfast together. While socializing, the names we’d seen so regularly in emails and publications came to life as we connected professional biographies to faces and mannerisms. For the past four months, we had been in regularly contact with five professors to compile their expertise and experiences to create a teaching manual.

The day was long, with conversations on how to break down the complex concept of IWRM into tangible components. We decided on 6: The Environment and Climate Change, Social Aspects, Water Governance, Economics, Planning and Decision Making, and Technical Infrastructure. Within each component we included more detailed Teaching Subjects as diverse as “International Water Law”, “Ecology” or “Assessment Instruments” all connected to the IWRM components. Using this format, a lecturer will be able to easily choose a component and review the teaching subjects to determine what is most appropriate to add in their course. We then continued to review, discuss and adapt already written chapters of the Teaching Manual, streamlining and transforming it into a consistent product.

workshop2

On Monday, the concepts and texts where becoming clear and tangible. Because the professors are such an erudite group, we picked their brains on IWRM education during the afternoon. We invited GWP staff and external guests to listen to presentations – under the title “Can IWRM be taught?” – which showcased challenges and opportunities faced by professors when teaching IWRM.

workshop3

Dr. Jean-Marie Kileshye Onema showed how WaterNet creates the opportunity for students to study an IWRM Masters course in different countries in the SADC Region. After students complete their core module in Zimbabwe or Tanzania, students choose a specialized program that continues in one of the other 7 Universities in SADC countries that are part of the programme.

Prof. Dr. Barbara Janusz-Pawletta heads the IWRM Masters course at the German-Kazakh University in Almaty. She is on her way to linking academia, government, and private sector in a new learning philosophy by closing gaps between them.

Prof. Dr. Yiqing Guan provided an overview of Hohai University of China and their role in advancing research and the practice of Hydrology and Hydraulic Engineering.

Prof. Dr. Carlos Saito presented Concept Maps, a teaching approach that gives students the opportunity to understand different water related concepts such as IWRM, Water Security, or the Human Right to Water, by connecting them in concept maps.

Prof. Dr. José Fábrega, who is educating hydraulic engineers in Panamá, shared with us the importance of teaching engineering students that technical solutions are never isolated but are interconnected with institutional, political, and social issues – a challenge he solves by using the IWRM ToolBox.

The seminar was informative, providing information about the reality of teaching IWRM in five different contexts. We concluded the workshop with a quick wrap-up, a timetable for further tasks, and final goodbyes. Off we went our divergent ways into the snowy, dark cold of Stockholm with the warm contentment of having had a week’s worth of experiences – although it was only Monday.

Posted in IWRM, Partnership, Water resources management | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Eating Insects – Drinking Toilet Water

We need to increase water and food security. Eating insects and recycling wastewater can contribute to these goals. This blog, written by GWP intern Mario Roidt, draws parallels between the “yuck” factor of insects and the “ick” factor of recycled wastewater. Must we start eating worms, crickets and grasshoppers, and drink water that has passed through a treatment facility after it has been through our bodies and toilets?

Eating Insects

Insects: how are these little spiky, chirping, buzzing, often displeasing creatures supposed to help us improve food security and sustainable development and in addition increase water security?

15129626555_14e40b6ca7_m(Photo: Flickr – Neville Nel 2014) [1]

This discussion is necessary because the planet’s natural boundaries are being challenged and we need to look for solutions – even ones that seem odd. Population growth and living standards are leading to an increased demand for animal proteins. The livestock sector accounts for 70% of all agricultural land and is responsible for 18% of global greenhouse gas emissions. And let’s not forget about the effect of meat production on water resources: 1 kg of beef uses up to 15,400 liters of water mainly used for producing fodder for cattle. Vast amounts of freshwater are degraded in quality due to meat production. These environmental challenges, closely connected to the world’s protein needs could be addressed with insects.

Entomophagy – the consumption of insects – is one solution to meet the growing demand of animal protein. In my opinion, the joint work of FAO and Wageningen University in its 2013 report, Edible insects: prospects for food and feed securitymarks a milestone in the discussion about eating insects. Advantages of consuming insects include:

Feed Conversion: Insects are cold blooded and don´t need to maintain body temperature. Thus, they have a capacity to convert plants into animal protein in a much more efficient way. Crickets, for example, are 12 times more efficient than cattle in feed-to-meat conversion rates.

Organic Side Streams: Insects have the potential to be reared on organic side streams enabling a more sustainable conversion to insects as food or feed for livestock.

Greenhouse Gases: Unlike pigs and cattle, most insects hardly produce methane, urine, and manure. Greenhouse gas emissions of investigated insects is lower by a factor of 100 and production of ammonia is lower by a factor of 10 compared to pigs and cattle.

Water Use: Due to a much smaller volume of agricultural products to feed insects, the water footprint of insects is considerably lower. An example is the mealworm with a water footprint of 4,300 liters per kilo (remember that beef has 15,400 liters/kg).
(Source: FAO 2013)[2]

As an outcome of the FAO-Wageningen report, the first International Conference on “Insects to Feed the World” took place in 2014 in the Netherlands with 450 participants. In 2015, the “Journal of Insects as Food and Feed” issued its first volume. In 2016 the book “Insects as Sustainable Food Production” by Dossey et al. digs deeper into the topics on how to mass produce insects, process them, and include them into our diet.

October 23, 2016, is the second World Edible Insect Day, giving the impression it has reached global importance. Countless articles and cookbooks have emerged discussing the topic and offer menus on how to make insects a pleasurable dining experience. All over the western world – but in isolated cases – restaurants and online shops are offering edible insects. In California, the worm taco is available, restaurants fry grasshoppers, and online shops around the globe offer edible insects including suggestions how to cook them at home.

Over 2 billion people in Asia, Africa, and Latin America include more than 1,900 species of edible insects in their diet. It is common practice, culturally embedded with indigenous knowledge about the nutritious value of the different species.

Eating insects seems a logical solution towards more sustainability and would probably be a regular occurrence in the Northern world if it weren’t for one small thing – the yuck factor. We associate insects with filth and decay. When worms and cockroaches come to our mind, we squirm. At best, we think of a nice summer evening with the buzzing of bees, chirps of crickets, and the twinkling glow of fireflies. But eating them…………………………………………… NO WAY.

This reminds me of a topic that similarly triggers faces distorted with disgust – the reuse of wastewater into drinking water through a closed loop technical system known as recycled water.

Drinking Toilet Water

While technically and scientifically safe and rational, the practice of treating wastewater with the technical means to restore it to drinking water quality in order to increase water security in dry regions still attracts criticism and resistance. Like eating insects, there is nothing wrong with it, it just feels wrong. Many water users would argue that freshwater must come from nature to be perceived as clean.

Luckily, and unbeknownst to most water users, some countries have implemented the recycling and reuse of wastewater for years. Israel, the world’s water reuse champion, treats 70% of its sewage to reuse it. Spain is second with a sewage reuse rate of 17%. Other arid and semiarid areas, such as the southern USA, Australia, and MENA countries are reusing treated wastewater without discharging it to receiving waters. Most of this water is used for irrigation, but the potable use of treated wastewater is also discussed.

Even though technically safe and environmentally sustainable, recycled water is not welcome everywhere. Especially not for drinking. The people of Toowoomba, Australia, rejected the idea in a referendum in 2006.

More common is the concept of “indirect potable reuse” where treated wastewater is discharged into a reservoir before used as a drinking water source, for example in Virginia, USA, or recharged into the ground before being pumped up for drinking water, for example in California, USA.

newater_bottle_ndp_2014-jpegSingapore is one of the places where the ick factor of drinking toilet water becomes real. There, wastewater is purified and some of it finds its way in a bottled water called NEWater. Being aware of the treatment technologies and considering myself a supporter of water reuse in arid regions, I did feel the ick factor when I had my first NEWater bottle in my hand. I drank it and – no surprise – it tasted fine. But I do understand why large parts of society feel uncomfortable with the thought of drinking water that has left their house through the toilet.

(Photo: Wikipedia – Hz. Tiang 2014)[3]

In Portland, USA, the Oregon Brew Crew has started to produce beer entirely brewed with treated wastewater. Oregon State has approved the idea, allowing people for the first time to drink treated wastewater in the form of beer. However, the drink is only available at special events and is not yet allowed to be sold or served in bars.

Parallels in a changing society

It appears that human consumption of insects and drinking recycled water face similar challenges on their way to becoming a normal part of our consumption patterns:

  • Both can contribute to increasing water and food security around the globe;
  • For large parts of some societies, the concepts are outside of social norms and cultural practices;
  • Experts share the view that these concepts should challenge current practices;
  • Scientific understanding and knowledge have increased to a level ready to implement from a technical point of view;
  • Pilot projects – emerging in isolated cases – are starting to challenge common practices and preconceptions.

It is not the first time that behaviors have changed from disgust to common practice nor will it be the last. At first it did not seem acceptable to Western societies to eat raw fish and algae. Today sushi is widely accepted. In the United States, it was not common to eat organs such as liver, tripe, or kidney. But in the time of scarcity when World War II was ongoing, the US government decided to strategically introduce organs (waste from slaughter) into America’s kitchens – successfully. Today, livers, tongues, tripe, and kidneys are part of our diet and millions of people eat them without hesitation.

The American Committee on Food Habits concluded, based on more than 200 studies, that familiarity changes the way we consume. “To change peoples’ diets, the exotic must be made familiar,” Duhigg concludes in his book The Power of Habit. While researching this blog, it seems to me that we are starting to slowly challenge that ick factor through an increasing amount of literature, debates, and pilot projects helping us get familiar with a strange subject.

roidt(Photo: Roidt 2016)

I couldn’t wait until the first insect restaurant opened up around the corner so I ordered some online and fried them up with chili and lime: Grasshopper a la Mexicana. I still feel the yuck but it tastes better than I expected. If served by an experienced chef, I could get used to it. In fact, it would be a good idea to wash down that yuck factor with a recycled water beer the next time I am in Portland.

[1] https://www.flickr.com/photos/nevilleslens/15129626555/in/photolist-p3XhSg-gG5Ab-cYaTNY-boEV1r-panTao-boFo3F-5USc5D-o61uPX-feB2c2-gGrr1K-kpyL78-vpJVEK-dGN8D1-jgRdKH-gkERE-a2K2Bk-jgT4Dw-o4sGrk-nGmimA-6ttbh5-oj1AQe-7VjJSF-o2EY73-boENpZ-boF1oe-a38mfB-oxvFQY-oRLxeh-JZNXP-6LhXZC-8TgZ7T-ooicV4-e38wLF-jgRene-a2K2wK-44bS5t-aryk6d-9uzThJ-9LpUXC-fgFFrD-josWx-nexx95-a4KXkE-4jbZG-otFgMT-cKVDA-ajKhNH-d5v22-9V8vyi-51AppZ

[2] http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3253e/i3253e.pdf

[3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=37243671

Posted in Food security | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Youth Reflections on the Climate Chance Summit

Youth representatives were at the Climate Chance Summit, held in Nantes, France, on 26-28 September 2016. Vivien Deloge, a member of the World Youth Parliament for Water (WYPW), wrote down his thoughts on the event in a guest blog for GWP. He says that youth can move mountains with very limited means.

climate-change-conference

In Nantes, 20 young professionals and students showcased the recommendations they officially presented at the COY11 and COP21 last year. Gathered in a White Paper entitled “Un Paris pour l’Eau”, they focus on 4 thematic areas: agriculture, health, water sharing, and climate risks. These recommendations are stemming from national consultations conducted on water, climate and the role of youth in 17 Francophonie countries. Finalised in Paris, they were officially handed to French Ministers Mrs Ségolène Royal, Minister of the Environment and Mrs Annick Girardin, then Minister for Development and Francophonie, by 52 young representatives at the COP21. This process was made possible with the support of the Office Franco-Québécois pour la Jeunesse (OFQJ) and Global Water Partnership (GWP).

For example, in the White Paper youth is calling for a moratorium on the use of chemicals in production process; for the development of water treatment techniques to eliminate these chemicals residues; and for education and awareness-raising action to help younger generations to protect their health preventively and not only curatively.

Waiting for these recommendations to be taken over by decision makers, we have started to implement them within our own youth organisations, such as the World Youth Parliament for Water and its national chapters. For instance, do-it-yourself workshops were organised in France to show young people how to create chemical-free cosmetics having no impact on water quality. Youth-led reforestation actions are also taking place in Brazil, Togo and Burkina Faso, while youth and media awareness-raising was organised in Togo on water, poverty and climate change.

So what is the key intake from this? Well, youth can move mountains with very limited means! And young professionals can actively participate in decision-making process – in line with the philosophy of sustainable development – by making meaningful recommendations reflecting their concerns and priorities. However, in the Nantes Declaration (adopted at the end of the Climate Chance summit), the only reference to youth was made through education, awareness-raising and capacity building. With the support of GWP and OFQJ, we decided to convince the organisers to officially acknowledge in the Declaration the role we have to play in decision-making process. We conducted side negotiations to emphasise the need for the organisers to recognise the active role of youth, and we raised attention on social networks, calling for not letting youth behind.

Thanks to the amazing help of GWP and OFQJ, we were so successful that two of us were invited to be on stage during the whole session of the Closing Plenary! I was lucky enough to be one of the two selected, and I decided to take this opportunity to shake classical thinking and speeches up and publicly call for an addendum to the Declaration stating that involving us in decision-making is the way to ensuring transition. The organisers readily reacted and replied that they could not amend the Declaration by themselves. However, since all the signatories were in the room, he offered them to accept this addendum by acclamation. What came next? A tremendous round of applause!

I was thrilled to witness our success and to receive so many expressions of gratitude and congratulations after the plenary, which highlighted the need for youth inclusion and intergenerational cooperation to ensure a sustainable future for all. I am highly looking forward to the next developments at the Youth Forum of the Budapest Water Summit and at the COP22, to keep the momentum and highlight the meaningful role we have to play in tackling water and climate issues! #FutureIsNow

Watch video: Climate Chance – Side-event OFQJ

Posted in Partnership, Youth | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Harvesting Rainwater, Sustaining Life

Rainwater harvesting is not a modern practice. It has been practised since ancient times and it is still used to address current water challenges. Konstantina Toli, Senior Programme Officer with GWP Mediterranean, writes a blog post about lessons from the GWP regions.

Storm Clouds Over the Rockies

“When that I was and a little tiny boy,

With hey, ho, the wind and the rain,

A foolish thing was but a toy,

For the rain it raineth every day.”

Shakespeare, Twelfth Night  

Rain: a toy, a nuisance, a source of disaster, a source of life. It quenches the thirst of plants, crops and animals and sustains their life. When strong, it can cause flooding. When it starts, we run away to find shelter. When scarce, we plead for some more.  When wise, we harvest it.

Rainwater harvesting is not a modern practice. It has been practiced since ancient times. Elaborate water harvesting, conveyance and storage systems from as early as the Bronze Age can be found in the Minoan civilisation in Greece (from ca. 3500 BC); the Indus Valley Civilization (3000-1500 B.C.); the Mayan in Central America (from 2000 BC) or later the Incas in Peru (from 1200 AD). Sophisticated rainwater harvesting systems providing water to palaces, cities and villages can be found in each civilization. Some of these, like the water collection system in Tikal, Guatemala, built by the Mayas (200-900 AD) is considered a masterpiece of low-cost water engineering, which can offer significant lessons and can be replicated, adapted to modern needs, as people move to the highlands to farm nowadays.

Many areas around the world face water scarcity. Among these, numerous islands, mainly due to their small catchment areas and poor or seasonal rainfall. For them, rainwater has always been a valuable water resource.

Rainwater harvesting is part of the tradition in the Greek islands, where local materials are employed and expertise was developed. Santorini Island, a global landmark of natural beauty yet with very limited fresh water resources, boasts of its water management heritage, with ancient findings from as early as the Cycladic civilisation (ca. 3100-1600 BC). The island has a unique heritage of hand-crafted rainwater harvesting cicterns, constructed by local craftsmen and plastered using Theran soil from the volcano eruption. Hundreds of cisterns are scattered all over the island: in houses, communities and plots of land. Yet, as in most islands, in the past few decades, with the expansion of the water supply networks, rainwater harvesting has been abandoned, while the demand for water increases, resulting to unsustainable solutions to cover it.

Many Greek islands encounter water scarcity challenges due to their limited freshwater resources and impacts of emerging climate vulnerability, thus putting local water security at risk. This affects the local economic activities, which depend on seasonal tourism and small scale agriculture, as well as the ecosystems safety.

GWP Mediterranean, acknowledging the need to revive this traditional practice in the water scarce Greek islands, developed the “Rainwater Harvesting (RWH) Programme in the Greek Islands”, in 2008. Through a multi-stakeholder partnership, it brought together the local authorities of the islands, the private sector (Coca-Cola system and The Coca-Cola Foundation) and a regional organisation. The RWH Programme has a holistic approach and evolves around 4 pillars: rainwater harvesting applications in public building and areas showcasing various technologies available; educational programme for students and teacher trainings; capacity building for local authorities to manage their water resources efficiently and training for technicians on how to enhance local expertise on installing and maintaining RWH systems; and awareness raising on critical water challenges and the potential of rainwater harvesting to cover domestic secondary uses, as well as farming needs.

Due it is acknowledgement by the local communities for its contribution to change the mindset of water use to a more sustainable, mobilising also non-conventional water resources, The RWH Programme has since 2011 expanded to the Maltese islands, then in Cyprus and recently in Sardinia Italy. For its holistic approach and the contribution to local water security and climate change adaptation, GWP-Med received the second global award as a Water Showcase at the 7th World Water Forum (April 2015, Rep, of Korea) and continues its efforts to expand it in other water scarce areas around the Mediterranean.

Similar to the challenges in the Mediterranean, across the globe, Central America has experienced drought for the past 3 years, which has had a significant impact on the population at large, but particularly those who live in the Dry Corridor of Central America and the “Arco Seco” of Panama. GWP Central America has identified strategic allies to implement water harvesting pilot projects in the Dry Corridor of Honduras to provide an alternative to water scarcity in rural communities. Many communities in this area have no other water source and the responsibility of providing water for the homes usually falls on the most vulnerable: women and children.

Pilot projects implemented in the region included the installation and maintenance of rainwater harvesting systems in Honduras, with a geomembrane bag.  Going beyond installation, GWP Central America carried out a training for women who live in rural areas and are community leaders. These women were trained on how to install and maintain such a rainwater harvesting system at home. Empowering and training them to fit this low-tech system at home, made them more confident and positive. Having a water resource at home, provided through a water harvesting system, changes their lives. Following the success of the training on RWH, the training will be replicated in El Salvador and beyond.

The project also involved actors from the private sector (AMANCO-Mexichem-a private global company that manufactures plastic pipes), and CARE-PROSADE, a project that promotes food security in southern Honduras and allowed synergies with the academia (Zamorano University in Honduras). A demo system was installed in an agricultural plot, in order to showcase the potential of rainwater harvesting for agricultural use.

While water scarcity is not always the main challenge, in other areas, lack of water supply networks can be the driving force behind rainwater harvesting. In the Caribbean, several communities in various countries, such as Antigua and Barbuda; Barbados; The Bahamas; Dominica; Dominican Republic; Jamaica; Martinique; St. Lucia; St. Kitts and Nevis; St. Vincent and the Grenadines are not connected to a water supply network. For these communities, rainwater is a valuable source of water-sometimes, the only one available. GWP Caribbean saw its potential and started promoting and demonstrating modern rainwater harvesting practices that could be adopted by water scarce communities to secure water availability. They built a model rainwater harvesting system as an educational resource to enhance awareness of rainwater harvesting in the region and created the Rainwater Harvesting Toolbox. Since 2010, the model has toured the region in every possible event, demonstrating a safe way to harvest and reuse water for domestic use. At the same time, they created a resource kit the rainwater harvesting toolkit, where one finds all necessary information on how to build a rainwater harvesting system, health and safety regulations and tips, best practices and technologies available. This open source tool has been a valuable resource for the Caribbean, enabling the uptake of related technologies in the region.

In a changing world, with increasing population and needs for water, rainwater harvesting can provide a reliable source of water fit for secondary uses as well as for farming. GWP regions have taken various steps towards mobilising this resource, in their efforts to contribute to local water security and climate change adaptation. A number of technologies, from low-cost to high-end are available and able to cover all needs for rainwater harvesting, under various climatic and other conditions. Know-how and experience is accumulated and shared through the GWP network and beyond. All what is left, is our action to harvest water, It’s easy! Just try it out!

Learn more: GWP Mediterranean, GWP Central America, GWP Caribbean

Posted in Partnership | 1 Comment

Francophone Youth Ready to Present White Paper in Paris

Audrée Giard-Leroux is a marine biologist and has a master’s degree in maritime resources management. She is now studying international ecology at the University of Sherbrooke. She will be part of a group meeting in Paris to work on the White Paper of the Francophone youth for water project.

quebec

From October 5th to 7th, as part of the Francophone youth for water project, initiated by the OFQJ and GWP in collaboration with the International Secretariat for Water (ISW) and its World Youth Parliament for Water (WYPW), ten young Francophones from Canada, France, Haiti, Burkina Faso and Tunisia, met in the premises of LOJIQ in Montreal, in order to exchange national assessments results as well as prepare the drafting of a White Paper on the involvement of youth in the areas of water and food security for the Youth Conference (COY11) and the Paris Climate Conference (COP21).

During this highly rewarding multicultural meeting, the national assessments of Canada/Québec, France, Haiti, Burkina Faso, Tunisia, Togo, Cape Verde, Mali and Madagascar were presented by the young participants. These assessments were composed of the findings and recommendations from the youth of different countries about the effects of climate change on their territories.

Following this information sharing, the participants focused on identifying common themes from the different assessments. After numerous interventions by participants, reflecting on the complexity of integrating different realities and local issues related to climate change, four themes were selected to develop a framework of the White Paper.

It is following this decision that the Francophone youth for water, representing engaged youth from 18 countries, will meet in Paris starting November 24th in order to write the White Paper on the findings and recommendations over the themes of public health, agriculture and food security, the sharing of water resources, and adaptation and resilience to climate change.

Photo by: COP 21 La jeunesse francophone pour l’eau

Posted in Partnership | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Pre-Soviet Water Management Practices in Central Asia

Eva Kleingeld is currently doing a 6-month internship with GWP as part of her Master studies at Leiden University, The Netherlands. Her subject is Russian and Eurasian Studies, with a thesis on Hydro-politics and security in Central Asia. She will spend part of her internship with a GWP partner organization in Central Asia doing field studies.

Central Asia became the cotton producing center of the Soviet Union once the Bolsheviks seized power, however, in Pre-Soviet times, people of the region already had a quite impressive and integrated system to manage and distribute their water resources.

There is not very much known about how the water was regulated in pre-Soviet Central Asia, but Von Middendorf  (1882) gave a detailed description of the water management process in the Kokand khanate, which was located in the Ferghana Valley. There existed an extensive network of canals in the Ferghana Valley and in order to govern the use of these canals, there was an extensive set of rules and practices in place. The system of water rights was based on Sharia and according to Islamic traditions, water belonged to the whole community.

Water management functioned on local level, the so-called volost. The waters in the Kokand khanate were hierarchically governed. A local water master, the mirab, was responsible for the allocation and distribution of water resources and the construction and maintenance of canals. The mirab was elected by the farmers who were also responsible of paying his salary. They gave him a percentage of the crops they harvested and this payment was known as Kipsen; if the harvest was poor, the Kipsen was less. A comptroller figure, a village elder known as ariq aqsaqal, oversaw the mirab activities. The mirab was assisted by the ariq amin, who was responsible for the smaller canals. The so-called ketman was responsible for the allocation of water on the level of the village. Ketman were divided into smaller units, where they were responsible for the allocation of water of a few streets or a few families. The water management was thus executed by all stakeholders.

A lesson can be learned from this water management structure. Nowadays we are so much concerned with the management of our water resources on national level, while on local level the society is also needed to govern the resources. Involvement of all stakeholders in water management is of great importance. Sometimes looking to the past might be a way of improving the future.

Graph

Posted in Development | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

Buying Land

Dr. Danka Thalmeinerova, GWP’s Senior Knowledge Management Officer, attended GWP’s Coordinated Land and Water Governance workshop in Pretoria, South Africa, June 15-16, 2015. In this blog she shares highlights, and insights she gained. Land and water

An introduction by Madiodio Niasse of GWP’s Technical Committee set out key questions such as:

  • How can you integrate water and land if you mainly work from a water angle (risk of putting too much emphasis on water at the expense of land)?
  • The world has been managing land and water separately without major problems, why should we look at these resources simultaneously now?
  • How does coordinated governance of land and water contribute to food security?

The popular term is “land grabbing” but the participants did not like the negative connotation. Are all forms of “land investments” a case of “grabbing”?

Apparently there is a slowing down of such deals, but the most targeted region is Africa. The most frequent buyers come from the UK and the USA. Other big buyers include the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and China. The Land Matrix is an online tool that records all known deals.

Ward Anseeuw (CIRAD and University of Pretoria) emphasized that a rush for land is triggered by a range of drivers, food being the main one, but also biofuels production. Ruhiza Boroto (FAO-Africa) noted that from 2000-2012, a total area of approximately 3.4 million hectares (the size of the Netherlands) has been bought in Africa. Of this, 26% was acquired for growing food crops, 68% for biofuels, 3% for cotton, and 3% for livestock.

Interestingly, only about 25% of land deals include information about the water on or under the land. The volume of water to be extracted is not usually specified in contracts, and water pricing, where it exists, is not related to volume extracted. This has far-reaching implications, not only for the water sector which is impacted by land investments in a particular country, but for transboundary waters as well. Information about changes in land use are not mentioned in the UN Water Convention, and are rarely the subject of neighbor notification, said Anton Earle (SIWI).

Workshop speakers shared experiences on how coordinated land and water management contributes to food security. A case study from Burkina Faso, presented by Tiemtoré Mahamoudou (GWP West Africa), illustrated how small-scale irrigation works with both surface and groundwater resources and how farmers learned appropriate farming techniques to ensure production during dry seasons. The project began in 2001 and a strategy for sustainable development of irrigated agriculture was adopted in 2003. Currently, more than 120 billion Central African Francs have been mobilized for its implementation. Nevertheless, there are still constraints such as poor maintenance of irrigation devices and insecure land use rights.

Rudo Sanyanga (Oxfam) focused on campaigns in rural communities to help women obtain their fair share of water resources on which their livelihoods depend. An example from Malawi, by Robert Kafakoma (Training Support for Partners), showed how land monitoring and recording systems safeguard women’s land and water rights. Land dispute registers become a deterrent to corruption, and women are getting their land back. Water aspects may not be addressed specifically, but it is obvious that ‘when a local person has piece of land, they usually have water there.’

Governance is about power, access to information, and political economy. While a lot can be learned through pilot projects among the poor, a need for governance changes must be made at the top levels of government. How can we multiply and scale up small community examples to translate them into a common, national policy? The coordination and integration of land and water use is expensive, long-term, politically sensitive, and complicated – but must be done. Researchers should help policy makers identify the synergies between the two sectors so that they are not in conflict, but move together for positive human development.

The workshop, attended by 32 participants (15 women), was organized by the GWP Technical Committee in collaboration with the International Land Coalition (ILC) and the International Water Management Institute (IWMI). Presentations are online at SlideShare.

Posted in Africa, Food security | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

What better reason for a Sustainable Development Goal on water?

Water PollutionToday, January 15, 2015, the World Economic Forum’s Global Risk Perception Survey rated “water crises” as the #1 risk facing the world in terms of its potential impact. In terms of its likelihood, “water crises” is listed at #8.

This confirms what Global Water Partnership (GWP) and many others have been saying: if we are to ensure a sustainable and secure future for humanity, one of the top development priorities must be to improve the management of the world’s water resources.

Fortunately, the UN General Assembly, on September 8, 2014, adopted a framework for the Sustainable Development Goals which includes Goal #6: Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.

As this framework goes into a period of negotiation among the UN Member States, it is a crucial for governments to keep Goal #6 because the management of water resources is foundational to economic and social development. Are world leaders willing to risk humanity’s future by ignoring the #1 risk facing the world?

Steven Downey, GWP Head of Communications

Posted in Development, Sustainable Development, United Nations, Water resources management, Water security | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment