New forms of governance focusing on process-oriented societal co-steering through, for example, formal and informal networks, partnerships and dialogue, have emerged within the water sector. The governance transformation is intrinsically linked to the increasing focus on the complexity of water management and the multifunctional character of water and the search for alternative forms of organisation. The emergence of concepts like integrated water resources management and river basin management should be seen in the light of the governance transformation. The full potential of the governance transformation for improved management of water resources and services is yet to be fully realised. Water decision-makers and managers are currently not prepared to fully realise the development potentials of new forms of governance, such as facilitating inclusive decision-making processes, coordination and negotiated outcomes. There is thus a need for additional sociocratic knowledge and capacity development that, for example, puts the emphasis on the management of people and processes, diversity of organisation and knowledge sharing. As a part of this it is paramount to treat politics as a part of the problem as well as of the solution and to broaden water issues outside the water sector itself.

No abstract

Improved water resources governance supports important social, economic, and environmental objectives. The 2030 Agenda recognizes improved water governance to be critical for achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and commits to monitor the progress of implementation of integrated water resources management (IWRM). This paper critically reviews the approach to monitoring SDG indicator 6.5.1 on implementation of IWRM. Firstly, the paper places the indicator monitoring within the context of other initiatives to measure water governance. Secondly, it analyzes experiences of application of the SDG indicator 6.5.1 methodology to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the indicator and presents the key findings of the 2017/2018 global baseline assessment of IWRM implementation. Baseline reporting shows that degree of IWRM implementation globally is 49%, though country scores range from 10 to 100%. Disaggregating the data by country and by aspect of water resources governance provides a diagnostic tool to identify areas of high and low progress, and, therefore, where increased resources and attention are required. The article concludes by suggesting how the next iteration of SDG indicator 6.5.1 monitoring cycle can be made into a tool for advancing the IWRM implementation and improved governance practices on the ground. It also proposes how the methodology can be strengthened to address current limitations, including aspects relating to integrity, accountability and transparency.

No abstract

No abstract