Transcript 06B_04_Duncan_Indicators Presentation STAR 2010

Measure Once and Report
Universally
27th STAR Session
David Duncan
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINABLE WATER RESOURCES AND WASTEWATER
MANAGEMENT IN PACIFIC ISLAND COUNTRIES
Developing an IWRM regional monitoring
programme that meets water resource
reporting requirements from the local to
the global level
Reporting Tools
Reporting Challenges
• What are the questions?
–
–
–
–
–
What matters? (policy question of values)
What changes matter?
Are things changing/not changing in the right way?
Are we making the right difference?
Could we do better?
Water Related Information Needs
• How do we get healthier?
– Access to improved drinking water and sanitation
– ~ 10% of all deaths in children under 5 due to
waterborne diseases
• How do we reduce poverty?
– Basic human rights with respect to water and sanitation
– Only ~ 50% have this in the Pacific
• How do we increase development opportunity?
– Removing water resource barriers to development
– e.g. Nadi tourism development
• How do we improve well-being?
– Improve equity through good governance
– One country with both national legislation and policy
Water Related Information Needs
• How much water do we have?
– No consolidated information – limited for four countries
• How much water do we need?
– No consolidated information – largely urban
• How good is the water?
• Does it meet our needs?
– Quantity – enough? Too much? Location?
– Quality? – meet human and ecosystem needs?
– How do we deal with stress? Disaster?
• Can we use it/do better?
• How will this change?
– Drivers & Climate change
Regional Reporting Needs
• MDGs
– Access to improved drinking water
– Access to improved sanitation
– 2ndary – reduce child mortality
• Treaties/Conventions
– E.g. Mauritius Declaration for sustainable SIDS
development
– UN Convention on Desertification (UNCCD)
– Convention on Wetlands (RAMSAR)
• Global/Regional Forums
– E.g. Asia Pacific Water Summit
Regional Reporting Needs
• Regional Organisational Reports
– ADB Asian Water Development Outlook (AWDO)
– UNEP Pacific Environment and Climate Change
Outlook (PECCO)
• Forum
• National Reporting and strategic decisionmaking
How well do we provide Information?
• AWDO 2007 – No Pacific Data
• AWDO 2010 – Data for five core indicators:
– Household access (MDGs supply & sanitation) 
– Urban development ?
– Production Efficiency [Agricultural (2), Industrial (2),
Energy (0), Environmental (2)) ?
– Environmental health 
– Disaster preparedness ?
•
•
•
•
Only able to report on 2 countries (PNG & Fiji)
Now likely to use “Expert Opinion”
No data available for poverty MDG for 1/3 PICs
Need for disaggregated data
Pacific Specific Indicators
• Productivity
–
–
–
–
$GDP/Water used
Typically efficient $23-25 USD/m3
Developing typically $2-15 USD/m3
PNG > $1M USD/m3
• Environmental Health
– Models based on developed temperate systems
• Disaster management capacity
– de facto indicators ignore key components missing in
Pacific
Global
Reporting
Water and sanitation access
Poverty reduction
Biodiversity
Equity
Regional
Reporting
Water and sanitation access
Equity
Biodiversity
Productivity
National
Reporting
Catchment
Reporting
Local
Participatory M&E
Water and sanitation access
Equity
Biodiversity
Productivity
Policy implementation
Water and sanitation access
Catchment health and productivity
Catchment Plan implementation
Water and sanitation access
Local ecosystem health/fishery catch
Local productivity
National Water Reporting
• National obligations
–
–
–
–
Biodiversity convention
MDGs
Mauritius Declaration
Desertification (UNCCD)
• National Strategic Plan
– Very limited national water reporting (Samoa)
• Legislated
– Very limited (Vanuatu)
• How to drive sustainable monitoring in-country?
Policy Engagement
• To provide adequate and appropriate
information to manage resources
• To ensure adequate funding is provided
• To provide a framework to support local
engagement
• Indicators must be meaningful at all levels
• Reporting must be meaningful at all levels
Reporting Needs
• What are the questions?
–
–
–
–
–
What matters? (policy question of values)
What changes matter?
Are things changing/not changing in the right way?
Are we making the right difference?
Could we do better?
• These questions are the same at all levels
• The answers can change at different levels
Reporting Cycles
•
•
•
•
MDGs
JMP – 2 years
MEAs – varying years
Regional Reporting
– ADB AWDO 3 years
– UNEP GEO 5 years
• National – annual
• IEA (e.g. State of Environment) – typically 5 years
often ad hoc
• Need to be able to report at any point in time, or
rely on old data
Drivers
Pressures
• Population growth
• Reducing water resources
• Economic development
• Increased rainfall variability
• Geographical constraints
• Land use change
• Climate change
• Pollution and waste disposal
State
• Reduced capacity to meet
demand
• Degraded ecosystems
• Increasing demand
Impacts
• Health impacts
• Economic barriers
Response
• Improved waste management
• Policy decisions
• IWRM
• Increased human and
ecosystem vulnerability
Indicator Framework
• Status / stress reduction / process
indicators
• High level indicators (AWDO / PWVA /
PECCO) focus on status and some stress
reduction
• Process indicators need to be incorporated
• Indicator timelines
0
Process
Stress
Reduction
Status
10years
20
30+
Expectations (values)
• Socio-economic status
–
–
–
–
Access to improved drinking water source
Access to improved sanitation
Ratio of rural to urban supply (%)
Equity
• Ecological status
–
–
–
–
Water flows and quality
Ecosystem health
Fish populations
Habitat
• Requires consultation
• What changes to status matters?
Early Indicators of Change
• Stress reduction
–
–
–
–
Reduction in wastewater discharges
Protection of catchments
Water allocation
Vegetation coverage
• Water Use Efficiency
– % of available water extracted
– % of captured and/or treated water reaching
households/crops
– $ value of volume use
Appropriate Process
• Catalytic indicators
– Leveraged co-funding
– Legislation/policy changes
• Governance
– Transparency of decisions
– Devolution of decision-making
– Gender balance / Engagement of vulnerable
stakeholders in decision-making process
How would it work?
• Aggregated reviews from local/project level
• Indicators appropriate at local and national level
• Regionally able to report on country and region
either on proportion of countries/ population
• Adaptable framework to incorporate relevant
indicators
• Presentation styles can be adapted to
accommodate target audiences
• Need to incorporate status, stress reduction and
process indicators
• Intuitive
Status
Very Low Degraded /
Stress
Uncontrolled
Process
Undeveloped
No systems /
Governance
Impacted
Moderate Urban / Rural
Systems /
Governance
Low
Controlled
High
Very
High
Protected
High for All
Reduced /
Removed
Implemented /
Regulated /
Transparent
Regional Indicator Framework
• Challenges
–
–
–
–
Engage policy makers
Develop enabling framework
Raise awareness of the need for indicators
Raise awareness of the interpretation of
indicators
– Logistical – coordination of country reporting and
inputs
– Resourcing challenges – money and skills
– Consensus on framework
Where to from here?
•
•
•
•
•
RTAG to take this forward
Develop for endorsement by RSC
RSC engage in-country
Iterative process
Work with country PCU and EU IWRM on policy
links
• Work with country APEX bodies on policy links
• Work with PCU on participatory aspects of local
monitoring
• Ultimately framework valued by countries, used
regionally and globally