AQUEDUCT PROJECTED WATER STRESS COUNTRY RANKINGS

This technical note describes the methodology used by the World Resources Institute to create country-level projections of water stress for 2020, 2030, and 2040. By aggregating sub-catchment data using spatially weighted water-withdrawal grids, the tool provides rankings across three IPCC-based scenarios (optimistic, business-as-usual, and pessimistic). The results identify countries at extreme risk, while the authors caution that national averages can mask significant sub-national variations and do not reflect the impact of local water governance.

• The Aqueduct Projected Water Stress Country Rankings use a spatially weighted aggregation methodology to convert sub-catchment level water stress projections into country-level indicators. Water stress is defined as the ratio of total water withdrawals to available renewable surface water, measured on a scale from 0 to 5.
• The projections are based on three combined climate and socio-economic scenarios derived from the IPCC 5th Assessment Report: 'optimistic' (RCP4.5 and SSP2), 'business-as-usual' (RCP8.5 and SSP2), and 'pessimistic' (RCP8.5 and SSP3).
• The methodology employs gridded water-withdrawal datasets as weights to ensure that areas with the highest human demand for water are given greater importance in the national average. This allows for the calculation of sector-specific exposure for agricultural, domestic, and industrial users.
• Under the 2040 business-as-usual scenario, several countries are projected to reach the maximum water stress score of 5.00 across all sectors, including Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, San Marino, the United Arab Emirates, and Palestine.
• The authors highlight significant limitations in national aggregation, noting that large countries with high regional variation, such as Brazil, China, and the United States, may have their spatial differences 'averaged away.' Additionally, the indicators do not account for national governance or investment structures, citing Singapore as an example of a country with a maximum stress score that manages its water exceptionally well.
• The water stress thresholds are non-linear, meaning a numerical increase in the score does not represent a linear increase in the withdrawal-supply ratio. For instance, a jump from 3.9 to 4.5 is more significant than an increase from 1.9 to 2.5.

APA

Luo, T., Young, R., & Reig, P. (2015). AQUEDUCT PROJECTED WATER STRESS COUNTRY RANKINGS. World Resources Institute. https://wriorg.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/aqueduct-water-stress-country-rankings-technical-note.pdf

Chicago

Luo, Tianyi, Robert Young, and Paul Reig. AQUEDUCT PROJECTED WATER STRESS COUNTRY RANKINGS. World Resources Institute, 2015. https://wriorg.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/aqueduct-water-stress-country-rankings-technical-note.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Luo |first1=Tianyi |last2=Young |first2=Robert |last3=Reig |first3=Paul |title=AQUEDUCT PROJECTED WATER STRESS COUNTRY RANKINGS |publisher=World Resources Institute |date=August 2015 |url=https://wriorg.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/aqueduct-water-stress-country-rankings-technical-note.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{luo2015aqueduct, author = {Luo, Tianyi and Young, Robert and Reig, Paul}, title = {{AQUEDUCT PROJECTED WATER STRESS COUNTRY RANKINGS}}, institution = {World Resources Institute}, year = {2015}, month = aug, url = {https://wriorg.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/aqueduct-water-stress-country-rankings-technical-note.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }