SOURCE WATER PROTECTION AND DIVERSIFICATION FOR RESILIENT URBAN WATER SUPPLY

The report analyzes planning frameworks, negotiation methods, and financing models used by city water authorities (CWAs) in LMICs to secure resilient water supplies. It identifies that while tools like Scenario Analysis, Robust Decision Support (RDS), and Climate Risk-based Decision Analysis (CRIDA) exist, their implementation is often hindered by low technical capacity, data gaps, and reactive planning driven by crises. Successful negotiation often relies on incentivization, trusted intermediaries, and public buy-in, while financing varies from traditional tariffs and grants to innovative mechanisms like Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) and water funds. Case studies from cities such as São Paulo, Cape Town, and Amman illustrate the practical application and challenges of these strategies.

• Four planning frameworks are identified for managing urban water supply uncertainties: Scenario Analysis, Robust Decision Support (RDS), Dynamic Adaptive Policy Pathways (DAPP), and Climate Risk-based Decision Analysis (CRIDA). Scenario Analysis is the most common but often lacks robustness, while DAPP is frequently inaccessible in low-resource settings due to high computational and technical requirements. CRIDA and RDS are better suited for LMICs as they explicitly consider gender and social inclusion.
• City water authorities (CWAs) in LMICs often struggle with a lack of data and technical capacity, leading to a reliance on outdated information or donor-driven 'projectized' activities. This often results in reactive planning, where long-term resilience strategies are only prioritized after a crisis occurs.
• Successful negotiation for water security across multiscale institutional frameworks typically employs three methods: incentivization (financial or behavioral), the use of trusted intermediaries to ensure equitable representation, and securing public buy-in, which is especially critical for demand management and wastewater reuse.
• Financing for urban water resilience varies by project type: large infrastructure (reservoirs, pipelines) is typically funded via loans, bonds, public-private partnerships (PPPs), or grants, whereas source water protection (SWP) is most effectively funded through innovative mechanisms like Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) and water funds.
• Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) and water funds require high levels of stakeholder trust, political commitment, and long-term timeframes (often 10 years or more) to achieve results and build community trust.
• In many LMICs, power dynamics often favor national institutional actors over local CWAs, and sectoral conflicts—particularly between residential water supply, agriculture, and hydroelectric interests—can hinder the implementation of diversification and protection measures.
• Transboundary water conflicts create significant institutional uncertainty for cities. While legally binding agreements are difficult to enforce, 'soft-law' instruments and the work of intermediaries like the Internationally Shared Aquifer Resources Management (ISARM) can facilitate cooperation.
• Non-revenue water (NRW) is a major financial and physical barrier to water security in LMIC cities, as high leakage and theft reduce the available water supply and undermine the financial viability of utilities.

APA

Huber-Lee, A., Forni, L., Mautner, M., Williams, S., Salazar, D., Otoo, M., Kendall, L., Ghosh, E., & Cord, C. (2023). SOURCE WATER PROTECTION AND DIVERSIFICATION FOR RESILIENT URBAN WATER SUPPLY. Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/fa3-desk-report-revised-dec2023-clean.pdf

Chicago

Huber-Lee, Annette, Laura Forni, Marina Mautner, Sally Williams, Doreen Salazar, Miriam Otoo, Liz Kendall, Emily Ghosh, and Caleb Cord. SOURCE WATER PROTECTION AND DIVERSIFICATION FOR RESILIENT URBAN WATER SUPPLY. Stockholm Environment Institute, 2023. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/fa3-desk-report-revised-dec2023-clean.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Huber-Lee |first1=Annette |last2=Forni |first2=Laura |last3=Mautner |first3=Marina |last4=Williams |first4=Sally |last5=Salazar |first5=Doreen |last6=Otoo |first6=Miriam |last7=Kendall |first7=Liz |last8=Ghosh |first8=Emily |last9=Cord |first9=Caleb |title=SOURCE WATER PROTECTION AND DIVERSIFICATION FOR RESILIENT URBAN WATER SUPPLY |publisher=Stockholm Environment Institute |date=December 2023 |url=https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/fa3-desk-report-revised-dec2023-clean.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{huberlee2023source, author = {Huber-Lee, Annette and Forni, Laura and Mautner, Marina and Williams, Sally and Salazar, Doreen and Otoo, Miriam and Kendall, Liz and Ghosh, Emily and Cord, Caleb}, title = {{SOURCE WATER PROTECTION AND DIVERSIFICATION FOR RESILIENT URBAN WATER SUPPLY}}, institution = {Stockholm Environment Institute}, year = {2023}, month = dec, url = {https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/fa3-desk-report-revised-dec2023-clean.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }