No abstract

In 2015, UN Member States adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, including Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG 6): “Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all”. Commonly known as the ‘water goal’, SDG 6 went well beyond the limited focus on water supply and sanitation in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and recognized the importance of all aspects of the water cycle in development and that water was embedded directly and indirectly in all 17 SDGs. In 2018, the UN published a report: “Sustainable Development Goal 6 Synthesis Report on Water and Sanitation 2018” (referred to in this paper as ‘the report’) that reviewed progress with SDG 6 at global and regional levels. Overall, the report concluded there was progress, but it was too slow, and the world was not on track to achieve SDG 6 by 2030 without a significant change of gear. The report was written primarily for those working in sustainable development to guide finance and resource allocation, but there was much embedded in the report that was of value to those engaged in research and in developing the much-needed capacity to plan and manage water resources, particularly in developing countries. This paper attempts to distill these issues and to ask how those involved in education, training, and research could contribute to enabling and accelerating progress towards achieving SDG 6. Three key areas of engagement were identified: the urgent need for more data and improved monitoring to assess SDG 6 progress and to enhance decision-making, the need to address the serious lack of human and institutional capacity that was constraining progress, and the challenge of taking research into policy and practice. Note: This paper is a review of selected aspects of the report (in which production the authors were chiefly involved as coordinators and editors), and as such most of the facts, figures, and discussion in this review are taken from the report. For this reason, we have not continually attributed them to the report to avoid repetition. However, in some cases, we have attributed report material to the primary sources where we considered it important to do so. We have also attributed material we have included, and which is not cited in the report. A review inevitably depends, to some extent, on the views of the reviewers and as such we have tried to make it clear where we are expressing our personal views rather than those expressed in the report. The report contains full references to all the primary sources.

No abstract

Agriculture is central to the food security and economic growth of developing countries, providing the main source of livelihood for three out of four of the world's poor. Yet it is the poorest farmers who are most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. This paper briefly reviews the potential impact of climate change on food crops in the context of the wider debate on future food and water security in the developing world. The authors ask whether we should wait or act now to tackle the anticipated future problems.

Developing farmers' institutional capacity to defend their water rights is central to sustaining irrigation farming in the UK. Increasing demand and competition for water and the introduction of new water regulations have led many farmers to re-evaluate the security of their water rights. As a consequence, some have formed water abstractors groups, a trend which is strongest in eastern England, where irrigation is most concentrated and water resources are most stressed.''Collective choice'' theory attempts to explain how institutions evolve to share common resources and what key elements are needed for them to endure over the long term. This paper compares the characteristics of four existing water abstractors groups against those of ''collective choice'' theory. It concludes that it is applicable in the UK context and relevant when addressing a range of emerging water management challenges.The approach taken offers a means of analysing capacity at an institutional level and suggests a way of supporting the development of existing water abstractors groups as well as developing new ones. It is argued that this approach to developing institutional capacity could be used elsewhere where problems between resource availability, environmental protection and the sustainability of agricultural production are evident. Copyright RÉ SUMÉDévelopper les capacités institutionnelles des agriculteurs pour défendre leurs droits d'eau est essentiel pour le maintien de l'agriculture irriguée au Royaume-Uni. L'augmentation de la demande et la compétition pour l'eau, ainsi que l'introduction de nouvelles réglementations, ont conduit de nombreux agriculteurs à réévaluer la sécurité de leurs droits d'eau. En conséquence certains ont formé des groupes de préleveurs, une tendance forte dans l'Est de l'Angleterre où l'irrigation est la plus concentrée et les ressources en eau les plus limitées.La théorie du «Choix Collectif» tente d'expliquer comment les institutions évoluent pour partager les ressources et quels sont les éléments clés pour durer sur le long terme. Cet article compare les caractéristiques de quatre groupes de préleveurs avec les éléments de la théorie du «choix collectif». Il conclut qu'elle est applicable dans le contexte britannique et pertinente lorsqu'on aborde un éventail de nouveaux défis de gestion de l'eau. L'approche retenue offre un moyen d'analyser les capacités au niveau institutionnel, et suggère une manière de soutenir le développement des groupes de préleveurs existants ou nouveaux. Il est montré que cette approche du développement des capacités institutionnelles pourrait être utilisée ailleurs, là où existent des problèmes entre la disponibilité des ressources, la protection de l'environnement et la durabilité de la production agricole.