Report on Water Sector Indicators, Monitoring, and Reporting

1. Indicators, Monitoring and Reporting, a UN-Water Task Force report to UN-Water members, 15/08/09 Olcay Unver and Domitille Vallée WWAP for the UN-Water Task Force Indicators, Monitoring and Reporting

2. Task Force IMR -Terms of Reference • Developing a methodology for monitoring water sector progress and performance at regular intervals, including a set of measurable indicators that support both national decision-makers and the international community; • Harmonizing water sector monitoring efforts at the global level to improve reporting of water sector progress and performance; • Identifying priority actions in support of country-level monitoring in terms of how the information should be collected, analysed and reported to be used in global assessments.

3. Results • a set of 15 quantitative ‘key indicators, defined and illustrated (8)’, • a representation of the water sector with a proposition for assessing water sector governance performance. • recommendations for harmonizing and improving monitoring to support indicators reporting. The key indicators set are at national level and of global significance. They can also provide a snapshot of world water issues. The set aims to inform UN-Water key clients and support a broader communication with the civil society and the public. It is clear that such a minimum set can only suggest an overall picture of the water sector and does not allow in-depth analysis leading to intervention. The set is country-based but could be calculated at other levels (river-basin level, as well as other sub-national units)

4. 1. Total Actual Renewable Water Resources (TARWR) 2. Storage capacity 3. National expenditure for WatSan* 4. Water use intensity 5. Use by sector 6. Δ Inland fish capture 7. Share of blue, green & virtual water in food production 8. % population w/ improved drinking water 9. % population w/ improved sanitation 10. Δ in water productivity in irrigated AG 11. Water productivity in industry 12. Δ in hydropower productivity* 13. Δ in quality of freshwater systems* 14. Urban wastewater treatment connection rates 15. Threatened freshwater species* *requires further development Proposing 15 indicators:

5. UN-Water “key indicators” Green: available data ; orange: challenge to follow trends but data improving red: important issue but incomplete data ; improved indicator possible in MT

6. UN-Water “key indicators” Green: available data ; orange: challenge to follow trends but data improving red: important issue but incomplete data ; better indicator possible in MT

7. Way forward –start on 3-yr work plan • I- at the global level, improving coordination, consistency and complementaritiesin international data collection practices with the objective of sharing quantitative data and country information among all parties, and in priority feeding the key indicators set. (outcomes: a joint monitoring strategy, with regular user surveys and federated information system based on existing systems). • II- at an operational level, improving monitoring approaches working with global information systems, with countries and with sectors in order to improve the quality of necessary global data sets for the key indicators.(outcomes: global, national and sub-national information terminology reconciled, innovative approaches to produce global information tested). • III- at the national and sectoral level, supporting country and sector efforts to develop needed water statistics and governance review (including data collection, data treatment, quality assurance, publication and dissemination). (outcomes: country capacity built, joint learning and experiences exchange on testing new approaches) .

8. DRAFT DECISIONS: A. TF-IMR has concluded its current term producing a set of key indicators for their relevance and measurability aiming to communicate the status and progress in the water sector. The recommendations for further work are proposed as: • Building the basis for a joint monitoring approach and a functional federated information system for the overarching goal of harmonization and standardization, • Working on an overall performance framework for the water sector –context, functioning and governance-, • Building the global compilation of key data sets in cooperation with countries, • Supporting country efforts in developing water statistics, and reviewing governance performance, in particular legal and regulatory framework.

9. DRAFT DECISIONS: B.WWAP EG-IMD, working in parallel with TF-IMR reported to TF-IMR that the principal challenge in water resource indicators is the systematic generation of a set of core data items that will allow a wide range of such indicators to be calculated to meet the many different needs of policy makers and managers. Currently, many of these data items are not reliably or systematically collected, which makes it difficult to generate indicators on a regular and comparable basis. This constrains the monitoring of significant dimensions of performance and of trends in the sector. It is therefore recommended that WWAP should, in execution of its mandate, undertake a programme of work, with appropriate partners, to generate a limited set of such data items on a regular and systematic basis. This should be done in collaboration with the relevant UN-Water members and with the work of the UN Statistical Division to standardise and systematise national water accounting and reporting systems. By adopting this strategy, WWAP would be emulating the successful approach of the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme which has transformed the approach to water supply and sanitation coverage information and generates information which is widely accepted and used by policy makers and managers at global, regional and national level.

10. DRAFT DECISIONS: C. A separate recommendation is made in respect of indicators of water resource governance at national level. The TF IMR and the WWAP EG-IMD noted that the highly context specific nature of water resource management, the greatly varying extent of water use and the necessarily different management responses within different systems of public administration render a “checklist” type of assessment of water governance inappropriate. It is therefore recommended that a country assessment approach be developed based on peer reviews undertaken at a regional level and that WWAP should work with partners to further pilot this approach which has already been applied in a number of regions. UN-Water TF on Country Level Coordination should also be involved.

11. Questions to members and partners Quantitative indicators • comments on the proposed key set of indicators? relevance, meaning • willingness to be involved in providing regular data sets to follow trends on these indicators? at global, national... • innovate : 5 years global survey, annual monitoring of “samples”, new approaches to estimate (earth science system...)... Governance indicators • comments on the proposed approach? relevance, meaning • willingness to be involved in developing a pilot program of country review of water governance, of regulatory framework performance Finance the improvement of the global monitoring

12. THANK YOU!

13. Four Indicators types Global Regional National Local Stocks Potential water resources storage Investments CONTEXT PERFORMANCE intensity ofuse WSS MDGs wetlands status Withdrawals Trends Costs Values FUNCTIONING sectors Water quality productivity mgt & Steering Capacity IWRM plans legal means GOVERNANCE

14. UN-Water “tableau de bord” of water sector Green: well managed or with signs or progress ; orange: challenge but mgt improving; red: issues not well managed, require urgent action

15. UN-Water “quantitative tableau de bord of water sector” Green: well managed or with signs or progress ; orange: challenge but mgt improving; red: issues not well managed, require urgent action

16. Essential global data sets very incomplete • Context/Water quantity/water balance: • Good country level coverage of Long term average (AQUASTAT), but lack ability to monitor climate change impacts on water resources (change in variability-WMO/GRDC) • Partial coverage of information on storage (only large dams, and estimates of total internal groundwater) (Aquastat/ICOLD/countries) • Functioning/ Water uses • improvements in estimates and regular updating of water use are needed (global-aquastat, Industries/UNIDO and WBCSD; irrigation-aquastat, cities/UN-Habitat and IWA) • Functioning performance/Water quality: • No systematic country-level information ; only region with data (OECD and EUROSTAT) • Governance/global, regional, national • ability to map the “existence” on international, regional commitments, as well as legal instruments relevant for IWRM objectives • no systematic assessment of governance performance, only scattered initiatives with different approaches • Key information still missing to assess performance medium term effort: • Water productivity/water use efficiency at national, but also local levels (cities, irrigation schemes) • Gender-related information • Wastewater production, treatment and reuse • Groundwater drawdown • wetlands status change (would include freshwater species status) • ...

17. Global monitoring to support indicators report in place but need revisiting and strengthening • 44 global initiatives to map, report, assess, synthesize but few compiling (17) and even less measuring (4). • Most of the global monitoring systems based on secondary data; compiled from country statistics and global surveys. Several cases of tertiary datasets. • Issues of synchronicity, consistency and property rights • Most global monitoring systems suffer from irregular updating • Metadata need to be streamlined: info needed on monitoring methodologies, sources of information, definitions, etc. • Inconsistencies between datasets held by different institutions • sources of data set in tertiary data compilation incomplete • Most global monitoring systems suffer from irregular updating • Metadata need to be streamlined: info needed on monitoring methodologies, sources of information, definitions, etc. • Country level, source of most international information but scattered among line institutions and poorly focussed, • Need for the development and adoption of standard methodologies, basic classifications, definitions, glossaries etc. • Need for strengthened national capacities to monitor the water sector (and related international goals)

18. Improve global monitoring & support country Directions of efforts Support at national level & sectoral information

19. Role of UN-Water in maximizing & coordinating improvements • Attributing prime responsibilities to specific agencies for each dataset • Harmonizing, and standardizing global data collection on water issues • Coordinating monitoring, data sharing and reporting with a joint monitoring strategy and federated data base • Strengthening at global level the main primary data source for the indicator set working to improve comparability and regularity: AQUASTAT, JMP, UNSD • Developing innovative global monitoring to improve coverage and regularity of important monitoring systems: WMO, IGRAC, Ramsar, UNEP/WMCC, UN-Habitat