1. WANA water information systems to cope with
water scarcity & drought
Jauad El Kharraz, Information Manager of the Technical Unit at the Euro-Mediterranean
Information System on Know-how in the Water Sector (EMWIS), France
The objective of this chapter is to highlight the role of water information systems to cope
with water scarcity and drought across WANA countries. Policy measures that should be
taken by WANA countries to face such phenomena should benefit from existing water
information systems and available water data/indicators.
WANA Forum as a “Think Tank” body should be able to give recommendations for an action
plan to provide a coherent and comprehensive set of information, policy and international
advice and technical support to WANA countries and stakeholders that enables them to
better address water scarcity issues at local, river basin and national levels. A
multidisciplinary approach is needed in order to consider the social, economic, cultural, legal
and institutional constraints relevant to local communities, urban centers, rural areas, user
groups and administrative, public and private organizations. When reconsidering
development schemes at local and national level, due consideration must also be given to
societal and cultural changes that induce the transformation of related water management
scenarios.
Data availability and reliability are of essential for the national water master plans. However,
adequate data are generally not available for efficient water planning in most countries of
the WANA region, and the reliability of some of the data available can often be questioned.
In addition, absence of an accessible information system means that even some of the data
that were collected in the past are not available to the planners. Good planning depends on
the availability of reasonable amount of correct data. Thus every planning must give
considerable thought to what type of data are necessary, how they will be used and for what
purposes.
This chapter will also highlight the existing gaps in data items necessary to produce the
identified aggregated indicators, which are very essential for water scarcity and drought
monitoring and management.
During the last years, many organizations & initiatives around WANA region (ESCWA,
EMWIS, UNU-INWEH, FAO, CEDARE, ICARDA, CIHEAM, ACSAD, etc.) made an effort to
establish regional water databases and/or information systems. Lessons learned and
experiences gained indicate clearly that the absence of a developed accessible information
system is the main cause of being not capable to govern the water resources, its efficient
allocation as well as the mismanagement and the inefficient water use. One of those lessons
is fruit of the works carried out by the Mediterranean Working Group on Water Scarcity &
Drought, led by EMWIS (Euro-Mediterranean Information System on know-how in the Water
sector). This chapter is highlighting parts of it.
Finally, this chapter provides some recommendations to improve the provision of the
necessary data items in the WANA region.
1- WANA context
In the WANA region, most of the countries are facing water scarcity and the high risk of
water shortage is generally ascribable to increasing demand despite the limited renewable
1
2. water resources (which are often of high spatiotemporal variability and affected by climate
change). In some places it is exacerbated by poor water quality. To analyze in depth the
drought and water scarcity occurrence and its extended impacts, one needs to look at the
Drivers, Pressures, State, Impacts, and Response –DPSIR- associated with these phenomena.
The figure 1 provides a schematic representation of the DPSIR (Driving Forces-Pressures-
State-Impacts-Responses) framework depicting their cause-effect relations.
Since decision-making must be based on high-quality information, knowledge and data
collection need to be improved. An information system on water scarcity and drought
throughout WANA region should be developed, based on the existing water information
systems in WANA countries, on an annual WANA assessment using appropriate indicators,
and on information obtained from other regional initiatives & information systems (e.g.
ESCWA, EMWIS, ICARDA, UNU-INWEH, FAO, ACSAD, CEDARE, COWFS-Arab League, etc.).
Research and technological development opportunities should also be encouraged, for
instance by promoting development and research activities, by widely disseminating the
results of these activities and by facilitating their exploitation in WANA region.
Figure 1: DPSIR framework for Water Scarcity and Drought
Water Scarcity and Drought produce a complex mix of economic, social and environmental
impacts that are very difficult to assess in quantitative and monetary terms (data may exist
2
3. in a number of countries, decentralized in different agencies, thus making it difficult to
collected and assess). While it may be easy to obtain figures on impacts for drought events
(because they are limited in time and impacting specific sectors), the impacts and the costs
associated with scarcity are largely more difficult to obtain.
On the other hand, the environmental impacts of water scarcity and drought affect directly
the plant and animal species (loss of biodiversity), the wildlife habitat, the air and water
quality, while increase the risk of forest fires, soil erosion and the degradation of landscape
quality. Some of the effects are only short-term and normal conditions are quickly re-
established. Other environmental effects linger for some time or may even become
permanent. For example, the degradation of landscape quality, including increased soil
erosion, may lead to a permanent loss of biological productivity of the area. The socio-
economical impacts (either direct or indirect) occur in agriculture and related sectors
(industry, tourism etc.) which depend on the surface and groundwater supplies. In addition
to obvious losses in yields in crop, livestock and industrial production, associated work loss,
migration of drought-hit rural people in urban areas, conflicts between users etc. cause
additional chained effects e.g. on water pricing, credibility and reliability of country’s
exports, political stability especially for transboundary water resources (Water scarcity and
drought could be a source of both conflict and cooperation in the Middle East). Finally,
adverse impacts occur on domestic hygiene, public health (e.g. increase in insect infestation)
and safety.
2- Indicators as tools to assess and manage scarce water resources
2.1- Why collecting data and using common indicators
The main objective of collecting data and formulating common indicators is to ultimately
provide a basis for the harmonized assessment of Drought and Water Scarcity conditions
taking into account both demand, supply and availability issues (i.e. both socioeconomic and
environmental dimensions). It is important to include the socio-economic dimension Water
Scarcity is a socio-environmental problem par excellence. The process of using common data
and indicators reinforces exchange of experiences between the WANA countries, allows
clear understanding at operational level and thus facilitates the communication between
stakeholders (indicators simplify a complex reality), provides a basis for integrated water
management at river basin scale, and furthermore allows assessing mitigation strategies in
those countries. Moreover, Common indicators (or Benchmark indicators) could help
efficiently in monitoring the impact of an eventual WANA Water Strategy or the Arab Water
Strategy to be adopted this year and related projects and in setting priorities by identifying
the key influencing factors, as well as in raising public awareness on the specific problem.
Based on the EEA (European Environment Agency) Typology for Indicators (Smeets, E.,
Weterings, R., EEA, 1999), indicators can be classified into 4 simple groups, which are related
to key underlying policy questions, as shown in the following table:
3
4. Type of Key policy question Functionality
Indicator
Descriptive What is happening to They describe the actual situation with
Indicators the environment and to regard to the main specific issue
(Type A) humans?
Performance Does it matter? They compare the actual conditions with a
Indicators specific set of reference
(Type B) Conditions, allowing thus a “distance to
target” assessment
Efficiency Are we improving? They provide insight in the efficiency of
Indicators products and processes. Most relevant for
(Type C) policy-making are the ones that relate
environmental pressures to human
activities
Total Welfare Are we on the whole They measure the total sustainability
Indicators better off?
(Type D)
2.2- Water scarcity and drought indicators
Several hydro-meteorological indicators and indices have been developed and it is always
necessary to select a combination of the most suitable ones in order to describe in a
synthetic and efficient manner the evolution of drought in time and space over the
affected socio-economical-environmental systems, taking in account the different drought
characteristics (meteorological, agricultural, hydrological, socio-economic) and basing the
selection on specific criteria (e.g. robustness, data availability, reproducibility, capacity of
integration of the indicators etc.). For water scarcity, it is also necessary to monitor the
water availability per sources, the water abstraction, and the water uses & demands for
the different economic sectors involved, in order to evaluate and individuate the reasons
of the imbalances and activate proper measures. In both cases, characterization of the
events should include preliminary analysis of the sources of information, including data
reliability, and selection of the appropriate spatial and temporal time scale. Achieving a
solid proactive management highly depends on the selected indices for the events
identification and the adopted thresholds for preventing and mitigating impacts.
Dozens of drought indicators are actually used in the WANA region and in the world:
Percent of Normal; Deciles; Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI); Palmer Hydrological
Drought Severity Index (PHDI); Palmer Moisture Anomaly Index (Z-Index); Surface Water
Supply Index (SWSI); Standardized Water Index (SWI), Standardized Precipitation Index
(SPI); Rainfall Anomaly Index (RAI); Reconnaissance Drought Index (RDI); Run Analysis;
Crop Moisture Index; Soil Moisture Anomaly Index; Normalized Difference Vegetation
Index (NDVI); water deficit index, ‘Socio-economic vulnerability to drought’ Index; Water
scarcity Index, field monitoring and remote sensing systems and the socio-economic
indicators, etc. Drought indices assimilate long time-series of data on rainfall, snowpack,
streamflow etc. into a comprehensible and easy to communicate output. A drought index
value is typically a single number, far more useful than raw data for decision making.
Although none of the major indices is inherently superior to the rest in all circumstances,
some indices are better suited than others for certain uses. The current trend in the
4
5. monitoring and early warning centers is to utilize a range of different drought indices in
the context of a public information system on the hydro-meteorological variables and on
the state of the water resources.
However, few indicators are today available to correctly illustrate the extent of water
scarcity at river basin or national level and its characteristics. Used indicators include a
combination of simple indicators such as water use per economic sector, water balance,
reservoir storage etc., while some complex indices exist in literature such as the Water
Availability Index (WAI), the Integrated Sectoral Water Stress Index (ISWSI), and the
Aquastress Water Stress Index (AWSI), etc. One of the mostly used ones in the WANA region
is the Water Exploitation Index (WEI), defined as the total annual freshwater abstraction of a
country divided by its long term annual freshwater availability (LTAA) (see Figure 2). It
illustrates to which extent the total water use puts pressure on the water resource.
Figure 2. Water Exploitation Index (WEI %) in some WANA countries
Data Sources / ref. year of abstraction data: Algeria: Eurostat/2008, Egypt: Eurostat - 2008, Morocco: Eurostat –
2003, Tunisia: Eurostat – 2007, Lebanon: Eurostat – 2005, Jordan: Eurostat – 2007, Syria: Eurostat – 2007,
Palestine: Aquastat - 2007
The warning threshold for WEI which distinguishes a non-stressed from a stressed country is
around 20 %. Severe water stress can occur where the WEI exceeds 40 %, indicating
unsustainable water use. Yet, since WEI is calculated at country level, a water rich area may
leverage a water stressed area biasing the national output and covering the regional
problem. By using this index at river basin scale (disaggregated level), water saving efforts
can be focused in areas of water stress and take account of the success of existing measures
and resource developments. The WEI although it does not allow for the identification of the
drivers of the problem or of the main users, it has the advantage of using for its calculation
consistent information which is collected periodically by the statistical services across the
WANA countries (among Mediterranean countries).
It should be noted that in the context of the DPSIR framework and for the in-depth
assessment of the water scarcity and drought aspects, indicators which take into account
the socio-economic dimension are also very important (Iglesias et al., 2009). These
indicators can depict the main drivers (helping to understand the underlying causes of risks)
and assess the effectiveness of the adopted response, evaluation thus the societal
vulnerability to drought and water scarcity and its ability to anticipate, cope and respond to
such phenomena.
5
6. Drought definitions differentiate based on the analyzed effects, meteorological, agricultural
and socioeconomic and therefore there is a need to combine indicators and indices used up
till now to observe and monitor drought with socio economic indicators that will identify
drivers, pressures and impacts of the phenomenon. Furthermore, the common indicators
help in the benchmarking exercises and monitoring those phenomena.
The selection of the indicators is subject to data availability limitations. They should require
data that can be retrieved from stakeholders and used to support decision making.
Indicators are a dynamic system that can represent the evolution of Drought & Water
Scarcity conditions over time and at the appropriate temporal and spatial resolution, thus
their reproduction needs to be easily feasible.
2.3- Data management and sharing in WANA region
The timely collection of data entered for instance into a socio-economic drought early
warning system requires multi-tiered data coordination at the local, district/municipal, and
national levels. Central coordination is necessary to ensure standardization of field data
collection, while significant communication and collaboration between the relevant drought-
monitoring and disaster-planning bodies is essential for the timely flow of information.
Moreover, drought early warning systems require the participation of meteorological,
agricultural, natural resource networks and professionals, as well as policy planners to best
determine how to act on the information they receive about water availability and drought
effects. Drought information exchange in the WANA region should be institutionalized and
greatly enhanced since it often occurs on ad hoc basis and not as a matter of policy. Drought
early warning would benefit greatly from enhanced collaboration between responsible
ministries and institutions within a country, as well as within the region. In addition,
insufficient communication and collaboration between relevant drought-monitoring and
disaster-planning bodies hinder the timely flow of information essential to early warning and
vulnerability assessments. Easy and unlimited access to data is crucial to effective early
warning; it could be enhanced by the use of the web to facilitate information delivery for
both national and regional information exchange.
Many countries have also worked to enhance their GIS technical capacity for drought
monitoring and other purposes. Recent efforts have led to the establishment of new
regional drought networks, such as the ICARDA NEMEDCA. The Network services several
countries from the WANA region: Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Bahrain,
Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Yemen. Although some
countries possess well-equipped meteorological networks and systems, a lack of adequate
drought monitoring institutions, tools, and information production and sharing on a region-
wide basis has severely limited national capacities to predict and prepare for drought.
Data management is a main issue and an essential one for making reliable prediction of
supplies to formulate allocation strategies. Modern computerized data processing systems
need to be installed, with the training and manpower development programmes that they
imply, for water data base development, for water management, and for timely
dissemination of information. An integrated information system is needed to regularly
record and disseminate climatic data, including rainfall, and data from hydrological networks
and river gauging stations as well as those of groundwater and land use planning. It would
be a benefit for the WANA region to establish an institutional framework for conventional
remote-sensing data program and the use of geographic information system (GIS)
technology to set up the required data base for hydro-meteorology and water use.
6
7. The ICARDA NEMEDCA, EMWIS, the Arab Database on shared water resources and other
regional networks, can be used as examples to build on in meeting a crucial need. There
must be support for regional drought networks and information exchange to streamline the
flow of information on monitoring tools and technologies, on assessment methodologies
and early warning data. Networks also serve to build national capacity by promoting
professional contacts, study tours, expert group meetings and training courses. Thus,
networking provides opportunities to share experiences and lessons learned. In addition,
networks can serve as focal points for regional drought monitoring, vulnerability
assessment, and early warning, thereby supporting national drought-monitoring institutions
in WANA countries.
3- Conclusions and recommendations
Water scarcity & drought monitoring is an essential element in the decision making process
for planning proper measures of prevention and mitigation of the impacts, giving the
information about the possible duration, intensity and extension of the events. The
distinction between water scarcity and drought events is not an easy task due to the
difficulties in differentiating the natural impact of drought from the anthropogenic pressure
and the improper management of water.
There is a gap of knowledge and tools at WANA region level on the demand side of the
Water Scarcity and a lack of reliable information, thus the formulation of an adequate
indicators’ framework could provide a powerful tool for building a common basis for policy
and decision making. In addition, data collection may be challenging. Yet, it is essential not
only to fortify the process of data collections, but the validation and quality assurance as
well, since reliable information is the basis for all assessments. Water quantity monitoring is
often undertaken on a project approach with external implementing agencies financed by
Technical and Financial Partners. It is necessary to move from a project approach to a sector
approach for more efficient investments and water management. Data collection, analysis
and dissemination are necessary for water master planning, identification of programme of
measures and their monitoring. It is not an easy task to reach an agreement on common
indicators between all the countries, as further exploration is necessary through pilot
exercises. But the necessity to use indicators is recognized, as well as the fact that different
types of indicators are necessary to respond to the needs of stakeholders’ categories, e.g.
politicians, managers, famers. Based on the various end users and purposes we need simple
descriptive indicators that relate to monitoring and assessment of drought and water
scarcity conditions and can easily communicate a message, but we also need more
elaborated operational indicators that can trigger response and mitigation actions. Indices
which relate to vulnerability may be more difficult to result with, since they may require
data not readily available in several WANA countries.
In the WANA region, efforts must be intensified to gather fundamental water data, organize
them into usable and accessible forms, and disseminate them to all who need them.
Regional data collection and sharing is an important part of the rational management of any
resource. Basic water resources data must be considered, classified or withheld from other
nations. Unless, nations share hydrological data, no satisfactory agreements on allocation,
responses during shortages, flood management, or long-range planning can be reached.
The WANA Forum members (Environmental Track) are aware of the importance of
associating indicators with simulation tools (real-time models) and Decision Support Systems
to improve user participation in planning or during scarcity periods. Indeed, end users and
farmers are the real actors that can contribute directly to the improvement of water use
efficiency. We believe also in the necessity of taking into account climate change impact at
7
8. long term, as well as considering water quality and political issues especially in the Middle
East countries. Finally, the economic, social and environmental impacts need to be better
quantified. Impacts due to water scarcity and droughts have been hardly estimated so far.
Recommended actions under the framework of WANA Forum should focus on:
• Setting-up a range of indicators (including vulnerability indicators) related to the
extent and impacts of water scarcity and drought, agreed by the WANA countries,
• Encouraging WANA countries to organise the collection of information, according to
the set indicators,
• Testing these indicators at local and pilot basin levels, and demonstrating the
usefulness in decision making process, mitigation and preparation plans and
participatory approaches,
• Enhancing the knowledge-base regarding climate change impacts and the
vulnerability to them so that appropriate policy responses can be developed based
on reliable data and information on the likely effects of the phenomenon and the
costs and benefits of different adaptation options,
• Facilitating the creation of an experience-sharing regional platform/network and
start working towards the establishment of an effective WANA drought information
system by discussing the steps and (financial & human) resources needed, to offer a
framework for integration of vulnerability and hazard information for planners and
decision makers,
• Identifying and monitoring impacts of water demand management measures in
terms of environmental, social and economic consequences, and
• Increasing regional and transboundary cooperation and assistance to cope with
emergency situations arising from those phenomena.
References:
Smeets, E., Weterings, R., (1999). Environmental indicators: typology and overview.
Technical report no. 25. European Environment Agency, 19 pp
Mediterranean working group on water scarcity and drought, EMWIS/SEMIDE, (2010);
“State of the art on Drought & Water Scarcity in the Mediterranean: Monitoring water
scarcity and drought in the Mediterranean - Synthesis note”:
http://www.emwis.net/topics/WaterScarcity
International Centre for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA), (2007).
Drought in the Arab World.
Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA), (2005). Water
Development Report 1: Vulnerability of the region to socio-economic drought.
Iglesias, A., Moneo, M., Quiroga, S. (2009). Methods for Evaluating Social Vulnerability to
Drought. In: A. Iglesias et al. (eds.), Coping with Drought Risk in Agriculture and Water
Supply Systems, Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research, 2009, Vol. 26,
Part II, 153-159, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4020-9045-5 11, C
Abdullah Droubi, (2006), Integrated water resources management is a tool for ensuring
Arab water security.
Munther J. Haddadin, (2001). Water Scarcity Impacts and Potential Conflicts in the
MENA Region, Water International, Volume 26, Issue 4 December 2001, pp. 460 – 470.
8
