Who's doing what kind of water stewardship, where?

Many organizations work on water stewardship and play many different roles. But how much do they overlap, and where?

Tomorrow I head off for Stockholm this year's annual gathering of water advocates at World Water Week. This event, which involves a few thousand people meeting and chatting on all things water & development/sustainability/stewardship/etc. is always an exciting week, highlighting an array of efforts to try to address the world's various water challenges.

This year, one of the sessions I've been involved with seeks to unpack the question of how some of the larger, influential, global water stewardship "convening organizations" are overlapping and/or coordinating. As I joined discussions for the session (Weds, Aug 30th at 11am for those attending), being a geographer, I was particular interested in our geographic overlap. In my years working in the space, I was keenly aware of the fact that certain places (e.g., South Africa, Tanzania, India, Peru, etc.) came up again and again. For me, this begs several questions:

• Where are we overlapping? Do these places share certain basin characteristics? Hint: they do.
• Where are we ignoring? Do these places not face water risk? Hint: they do.
• In places where we overlap, are we collaborating or competing? Hint: a bit of both.

The figure below gives you a picture of where some of the major players in the water stewardship space are active (by country). Simply put, the darker the colour, the more of us there are that are active in that country.

Here were my quick take-aways:

1. We have a high degree of overlap in central South America, East Africa, & South Asia (and a water scarcity bias). This means that combined platforms, guidance & tools in (A) Brazil/ Peru/Colombia, (B) Uganda/Kenya/Tanzania/ Zambia/South Africa, and (C) Pakistan/India/Bangladesh would make a lot of sense.
2. We are ignoring much of the Middle East & North Africa (MENA), as well as sub-Saharan/West Africa, and the former Soviet countries. I suspect security challenges are a part of this, but it also points to a water pollution blind spot as a whole.
3. We need a stronger push for water stewardship in Eastern Asia (e.g., Indonesia, Myanmar, China, Malaysia, Thailand, etc.). This is tied to the pollution point above, but also likely relates to the colonial ties to the Americas and Africa that are not as strong in East Asia.

I know that WWF is increasingly trying to combine platforms (e.g., linking the upcoming re-launch of the Water Risk Filter to not only CDP, but also Ceres, CEO Water Mandate, AWS, the SDGs, etc.), but also expanding our water stewardship efforts in Asia. Indeed, our work in the Mekong and the Irrawaddy represent some of the most exciting efforts we're engaged in and initial signs of interest and uptake are promising.

In short, there are not only opportunities to consider how we work together better in some of the places where we work, but also a massive opportunity to fill gaps: be it water scarcity challenges in MENA or water quality challenges in West Africa and East Asia. WWF, as one of many organizations advancing water stewardship, is keen to collaborate and plug the gaps.

We have a long way to go to build out the necessary capacity to deliver water stewardship across the planet, but at least we are starting to get a sense of the global picture. Hopefully by the time I leave Stockholm, I will have an even better sense.

And if you'll be joining in Stockholm, come join us next Wednesday morning to find out more!