Classic case of research-to-policy disconnect?  

This blog post was originally published as part of the 'Talking Science' Blog Competition. 

Is water cooperation included in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)?

The importance of fostering water cooperation across borders has received much attention in international literature and by international actors such as the United Nations. The proposed post-2015 SDGs acknowledge the importance of transboundary water cooperation in the context of Goal 6.5, which calls for the implementation of “integrated water resources management at all levels, including through transboundary cooperation as appropriate” by 2030.

The Niger River: pictured in Mali but the river travels through several West African countries. Photo: Jonathan Lautze/IWMI.

While the proposed SDG does not yet elaborate how progress toward this target will be measured, discussions during the SDG process nonetheless provide clues. Position papers from the Swiss Government and UN-Water both proposed a target of transboundary cooperation focused on the presence of a transboundary water agreement. The Global Water Partnership (GWP) consultations further proposed the creation of a transboundary basin organization. The degree to which these targets for water cooperation drew on past work was unclear.

What does research say about water cooperation targets and measures?

While not specifically responding to the SDGs, a fairly voluminous body of work in fact exists on measuring transboundary cooperation and the related topic of basin governance. For example, the work of Hooper in 2006 was extensive, producing 115 indicators for measuring basin governance in the United States. The Capacity Building Network (Ca in 2008 also did work which identified 22 indicators for measuring IWRM implementation at basin level. Hooper and Kranz then proposed 29 indicators for measuring adaptiveness of transboundary basins in Africa in 2009, and the Center for River Basin Organisation Management in Indonesia has developed a suite of 14 indicators to assess the capacity of a river basin organization to implement IWRM, as reported by Sungguh in 2009. Links between this work and the proposed SDG discussions surrounding water cooperation seem tenuous at best

So what did we do?

The authors did research to identify the best indicators for measuring transboundary water cooperation. To assess previous and current indicator work, we undertook a review of literature from journal articles, project reports and book chapters. We identified a ‘long list’ of 33 governance indicators. Further, we developed an approach to assess the suitability of these indicators in measuring transboundary cooperation, using the five criteria of: recognition, applicability at transboundary scale, logistical feasibility, applicability in a variety of institutional contexts, and objectivity

Filtering and applying indicators 

Applying the set of criteria above, we filtered the long list down to a subset of 10 indicators, which we pilot-tested on three transboundary basins in southern Africa: the Inkomati, Limpopo and Orange. Test results show a variation in levels of cooperation in the three basins despite the fact that agreements exist in all the three basins. On aggregate, application of the ten indicators suggests slightly stronger cooperation in the Inkomati, because of greater adoption of common units for measuring water, greater contribution of local funds to transboundary water issues, and greater incorporation of transboundary water issues into the national legislation of riparian countries.

Offering up six indicators

Following the application of indicators in the three basins, the meaningfulness and ease with which such indicators could be applied was assessed. This resulted in elimination of four of the 10 indicators, and a final list of six indicators which can be offered up as options for measuring progress toward the water cooperation target in the SDGs. Three of such indicators could be considered ‘paper-based’ (i.e. they measure what happens on paper), and three of such indicators could be considered ‘practise-based’ (i.e. they measure what happens in practise). It is believed that all of such indicators can be applied in logistically feasible manner, and communicate something about the strength of cooperation over water. The ‘final six’ are as follows:

• Conclusion of a basin-wide transboundary water agreement (Paper)
• Reference to transboundary cooperation in national legislation (Paper)
• Inclusive Completion of a Basin Plan (Paper)
• Evidence of Regular Data Exchange (Practise)
• Harmonised measurement and assessment methods (Practise)
• Degree of riparian financing for transboundary cooperation (Practise)

Promoting basin cooperation is important, but it is not enough. Similarly, presence or absence of a transboundary water agreement may not fully reflect the actual water cooperation taking place. While one can undertake a dissertation assessing the degree of cooperation in one basin, it is also appreciated that something is needed that can be applied in a time-sensitive, logistically feasible manner across many basins. It is believed that the six proposed indicators satisfy this need, and provide meaningful indication of level of cooperation in a transboundary basin. As such, the SDG process might wish to draw from this work to identify indicators to assess progress towards target 6.5.