Background
The 40th UN-Water Meeting was held at UN Headquarters in New York, from 4-5 November 2024. UN-Water is the coordination body which brings together more than 30 United Nations entities which implement water and sanitation related programmes with the intention to 'deliver as one'  in response to water and sanitation related challenges.

The 40th meeting was significant for a number of reasons: firstly, it was the first meeting at which the UN Secretary General’s newly appointed Special Envoy on Water, Ms Retno Marsudi, attended, as she assumed her duties on the 1st of November. The appointment of the Special Envoy has been highly anticipated and is seen as providing the sector with an ambassador who can serve as a champion and high-level advocate on water and sanitation issues.

Ms Marsudi was formerly the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Indonesia, a role which she performed from 2014 until October 2024. In her role as Minister of Foreign Affairs, she presided over Indonesia’s role as host country of the 10th World Water Forum which took place in Bali in May this year, leading to consensus on the resulting Ministerial Declaration.

In her role as Special Envoy on Water, she is expected to work to strengthen partnerships and collective work to advance the global water agenda, including following up on the outcomes of the UN 2023 Water Conference. She is expected to draw on these outcomes, especially in the lead up to various global water processes, and in particular the 2026 UN Water Conference which will take place from 2 to 4 December 2026 in the United Arab Emirates. 

She is also tasked with enhancing the synergy between international processes to support international water targets, including Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG 6) from the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. In doing so, she will work with UN-Water to support the implementation of the UN System-wide Strategy for Water and Sanitation. 

A second reason for the importance of the 40th UN Water meeting was that it was the first time that UN entities met on water after the launch of the UN System-wide Strategy for Water and Sanitation in July this year.  The Strategy is intended to provide a comprehensive approach for United Nations entities with a water-related mandate to work collaboratively and holistically to address the interrelated cross-sectoral aspects of water and sanitation. One agenda point for the 40th meeting was the development of the Strategy’s collaborative implementation plan. At the meeting, participants attended breakout sessions to discuss priority actions within this implementation plan.

Thirdly, the UN-Water meeting took place immediately after the 16th Conference of Parties (COP 16) to the Convention on Biological Diversity and immediately before the 29th Conference of Parties (COP 29) of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Water is increasingly featuring as a topic in the context of these Conventions. Events and discussions were held at COP 16 on the incorporation of water into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans, and similarly, at COP 29 discussions were held on the increasing incorporation of water into Nationally Determined Contributions and National Adaptation Plans.  

To delve deeper into the events at the 40th UN Water Meeting, The Water Diplomat caught up with Federico Properzi, UN-Water Chief Technical Adviser to ask the following questions: 

The Water Diplomat: This was the first UN-Water Meeting at which the new Special Envoy on Water, Ms Marsudi, was present. To what extent has it been clarified yet how the communication and collaboration between herself and UN-Water will proceed as she strives to follow up on both the outcomes of the UN 2023 Water Conference and the mechanisms to accelerate the implementation of SDG 6? 

Federico Properzi: The UN Secretary General’s Special Envoy on Water was very clear about her role as a political advocate for water. Having been the Indonesian Foreign Minister for 10 years, she of course is in a position that allows her to reach out at the highest political level - and she is already doing so. She is very communicative and active on social media such as on Instagram, where she posted on World Toilet Day. She is a unifying figure, not only talking to Member States but also talking to civil society and the private sector.  

As part of that, she is also supporting the UN system-wide coordination on water as well as the delivery of the System-wide Strategy. She is a high-level advocate and is helping to get the messages out, while at UN-Water we are working more on the operational side of things. 

The Secretary General has asked the United Nations Department for Economic Social Affairs (UN-DESA) to provide the main support for the Special Envoy. So, in the coming period one could expect the necessary staff positions to be filled. She will still be posted in Jakarta, so there will be colleagues in New York on the one hand, but also possibly colleagues in Jakarta. 

At UN-Water, we will be working as one team to support her. For example, every time she speaks she will need the latest data and messages, and depending on the topic it will be different agencies providing support, but providing that support as a team. We are building this support structure around her so that she can be our ambassador. We care for her, and we provide the technical support from the whole UN system. That is how it was designed from the beginning. In these first months she is in ‘listening mode’. The UN-Water meeting was her first public appearance as UNSG Special Envoy, which allowed her to connect with many of the relevant actors, who were all in the room. So that was a very good start for her and for us.  

The Water Diplomat: This was also the first meeting of UN-Water since the launch of the UN System-wide Strategy for Water and Sanitation. During the meeting, some preliminary thoughts were shared on a collaborative implementation plan for the Strategy. To what extent is there already a draft implementation plan, and when could one reasonably expect this process to be completed?     

Federico Properzi: It is a process that has been long in the making, and it is still ongoing. At the previous UN-Water meeting in Rome in March, we started developing the implementation plan for the Strategy, but of course it is happening in different steps. The first step was to draft an annotated outline of the implementation plan, which was completed by July. The Strategy itself was launched on the 16th of July at the High-Level Political Forum. 

On the same day, we had the UN-Water Principals’ Meeting, where the heads of many agencies discussed the outline of the implementation plan, and we needed that in order to get the go-ahead or green light. Then between July and now, we engaged with our Members and Partners individually and collectively through a series of online meetings to discuss and to structure the implementation plan. 

Now, it has been decided that the implementation plan will have two types of actions: the Priority Collaborative Actions, and the Contributing Actions. The former are actions which can only be achieved at UN system-wide level: they can only be achieved in ‘together mode’. They have also been selected with the idea that if we have limited resources, what are the things that we really should do, forgetting about everything else. Of course, a lot of discussions and dialogues took place in order to define these priorities. 

Ultimately, by coincidence, we ended up having six Priority Collaborative Actions for SDG 6: this was not by design, it just happened to be the case. At the UN-Water meeting, the Senior Programme Managers approved the Priority Collaborative Actions, their success criteria, the means of verification and who will be responsible for delivering – that is, the results framework. We will be announcing these publicly and they will be part of the full implementation plan, which we currently plan to present in July 2025 at the High-Level Political Forum. 

Between now and the next UN-Water meeting, we will be developing the activity plans and budgets for each Priority Collaborative Action, working towards approval at the meeting in April in Rome. Of course, we are also writing the narrative part of the implementation plan. This will also include what we call the Contributing Actions: these are actions which are implemented by UN agencies and partners in accordance with their own mandates, but which do not necessarily need system-wide coordination. In terms of the accountability of the Contributing Actions, each agency is accountable to its governing body, whereas for the Priority Collaborative Actions it is UN-Water as a whole which is accountable. 

The process of collecting the Contributing Actions is still ongoing: before the UN Water meeting, we already had about 100, but it's still ongoing, so this will replace what we already have online, which is referred to as the UN-Water Inventory. This will be integrated into the Strategy as a part of the results framework. This is a document which needs updates at regular intervals – it is a living document. 

The Water Diplomat: Can we say that – in terms of delivering as one - these six Priority Actions can be seen as a bit of a flagship of delivering as one? 

Federico Properzi: Yes, absolutely they are, and it is important to note that the implementation plan – the first one – stretches over a period of four years. This means that we are talking about the implementation of these actions in the period between 2025 and 2028. And of course, as we get closer to 2028, we will think about the next four years, and the priority actions that are specific to that context. This will take us beyond 2030, knowing that many of the upcoming discussions will lead to negotiations on a possible post-2030 framework. 

The Water Diplomat: At the UN-Water meeting, ideas were shared at the meeting for the upcoming 2026 UN Water Conference hosted by Senegal and the United Arab Emirates, as well as for the next Water Conference in 2028, presumably based on the UN resolution in the modalities for both conferences. What are the next steps in this process and how best can stakeholders engage to work together towards the successful planning and execution of these conferences?

Federico Properzi:  Right now, there is a lot of momentum for water and sanitation overall at the global political level, and in this sense it is great to have the conferences in 2026 and 2028, which will help to boost the profile of the sector. It is also very important because it is the right moment to position water and sanitation in a possible post-2030 framework, because we certainly cannot predict at this stage what is going to happen afterwards.

The Water Diplomat: Just to comment on that, the 2023 Water Conference was almost historic in that it was the first such conference in 46 years – so now to have this luxury of UN-Water Conferences almost biannually is a luxury, and alongside that the appointment of the Special Envoy and adoption of the System-wide Strategy for Water and Sanitation… 

Federico Properzi:  Absolutely. And especially, it testifies to the willingness of the United Nations, meaning the Member States, to finally reclaim this political space in the global arena which had been left aside for about 2-3 decades. And now they want it back, because they need it. And so it is a great moment, as you say. 
Now having said that, I also think that we have to make something good out of this conference, because the importance of 2023 was that we were finally having a conference again. But now, we really must have a vision for 2026. And I think that Senegal and the United Arab Emirates are working on that and have the vision to use the Conference in a very political way. So, this is something that we can all support, but there will also obviously need to be a strategic link with the 2028 Conference because 2028 will also be the conference towards the end of the 2030 period and there will be questions on what to do next.  So, these conferences and the next four years will be extremely important to shape the next 15 or maybe 20 years.

The Water Diplomat:  Exactly, but to what extent is that road map clear already? Let's say for 2026 Conference? 

Federico Properzi:  The road map is clear to the extent that there are clear milestones towards December 2026. So, there will be an organisational session in New York in in 2025 - probably at the beginning of 2025 - which is preparatory to a later session, which will be convened by the President of the General Assembly – of course, again in New York. So, there will be these two major events in New York, and the main objective will be to decide on the themes of the six interactive dialogue (this time, we have six instead of five). 

The good thing is that we will know the topics in advance - I would say six months earlier in comparison with the last time [i.e, 2023]. So, there will be almost one year, and this leaves time for the co-hosts to work together, first of all, to select, as soon as possible, the co-chairs of the dialogues. 

So, we will have two co-hosts and twelve co-chairs that can really shape the political vision for the future, and this is a good critical mass of countries which can influence what is coming. You know, last time was limited: the themes were decided at the end of October 2022. And then of course it takes time to select the co-chairs, and in the end the co-chairs had not even two months before the conference to really engage politically.

Another good thing about the 2026 conference is that the outcome of the conference will be the summary of proceedings by the Presidents of the Conference, so that that means Senegal and UAE, and not by the President of the General Assembly, like last time. So, this is good in my view because it really means that the Member States really want ownership. And so the two co-hosts will take into consideration what the other Member States think, especially the opinion of the co-chairs. 

So, you can see that it was designed to make a real impact, and in this process there will also be a high-level international meeting in Dakar in 2025 - which means possibly at the end of 2025. Then, at the High-Level Political Forum in July 2026 there will be the in-depth review of progress in SDG6, which will possibly be the last one in the 2030 Agenda. This in-depth review is very well placed before the conference in December 2026. Finally, as UN-Water, we will publish - as we usually do - the SDG 6 Synthesis Report before the in-depth review. This will provide the latest data, but also our policy recommendations moving forward.

The Water Diplomat:  Federico many thanks for this very useful update, it is certainly very useful for readers and other stakeholders to remain informed of the global water agenda as it moves forward! 

Federico Properzi: My pleasure  
 

On the 5th of November, at the 12th session of the World Urban Forum held in Cairo, Egypt, the European Commission, in partnership with UN-Habitat, announced the launch of the second phase of the European Union’s Water Operators' Partnerships Programme (EU-WOP). The second phase of this programme will be implemented from 2025 to 2030 with an additional € 14 million in funding – representing a significant expansion relative to the first phase, which had a budget of € 9 million. 

The EU-WOP programme responds to current global challenges in providing access to water and sanitation services through utilities’ peer-to-peer partnerships for capacity-building and performance improvements. Water is seen as central to the EU’s partnerships around the world: European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has previously stressed the importance of operators in the realisation of Sustainable Development Goal 6 on water and sanitation, as well as in the achievement of the Paris climate goals.

More specifically, the EU-WOP initiative aims to increase access to water and sanitation services, improve operators’ capacity and performance, and mobilise financial resources for utilities. Given the significant financial resources that are required to achieve Sustainable Development Goal 6 on water and sanitation, the EU-WOP Programme aims to strengthen utilities’ financial sustainability and facilitate access to finance for service improvements or extensions. The programme also aims to strengthen WOP know-how such that more operators can enter into productive partnerships. 

“This new phase the EU-WOP will build on the successes of Phase I by establishing new partnerships and enhancing existing ones, focusing on strengthening the linking of partnerships with investments, improving digitalisation, and advancing the human rights to water and sanitation”, said Sergio Oliete Josa, Head of Unit Sustainable Transport and Urban Development of the European Commission Directorate-General for International Partnerships (DG INTPA), at the programme launch press conference of the 12th World Urban Forum. The call for proposals under this programme is expected to be launched in the second quarter of 2025.

The EU-WOP programme will be implemented by the Global Water Operators’ Partnerships Alliance (GWOPA) hosted by UN Habitat.  

Current Trends in Water Operators’ Partnerships 
A Water Operators’ Partnership (WOP) can be described as long term, not-for-profit peer support partnership between water operators. The WOP concept emerged in 2006 within the Hashimoto Action Plan drafted by the United Nations Secretary General’s Advisory Board on Water and Sanitation (UNSGAB). This plan recognised that publicly owned water operators provide more than 90% of the world’s piped water, and proposed capacity building support through peer-to-peer partnerships. 

Currently, the GWOPA database has registered at least 475 WOPs which are in operation around the world. Essentially, in a WOP, peer to peer knowledge and experience is provided and exchanged between water and sanitation operators in order to improve peer utilities’ operations and extend their service. Although the general objective is usually to improve performance, the way in which this is achieved tends to vary quite a lot from one project to the next. 

Starting with the budgets and timeframes, the project costs can vary from several thousand USD to several million USD and can typically last between one and five years (in the case of the EU-WOPs, there is a commitment to longer term partnerships lasting between 3 to 5 years). In many countries, the options available to water operators to mobilise economic resources for international cooperation projects can be limited by law, which means that alternative options to mobilise resources towards the improvement of utility performance need to be explored. In this sense, it is very important to mobilise supplementary funding from for public institutions such as the European Union.

In addition, WOP budgets are not purely financial in nature: typically, they feature a combination between direct financial support - or the leveraging of financial support – with indirect, in-kind support. Usually, because of the peer-to-peer nature of a WOP, the value of the in-kind support is greater than the value of the direct financial support. In the case of the EU-WOPs, the project budget during the first phase varied between USD 109,000 and 703,000, whereby the in-kind contribution that is leveraged typically accounts for some 75% of the budget.   

Secondly, within a WOP, the areas in which expertise is shared also varies quite considerably from one project to the next. Projects may involve the provision of technical expertise, such as approaches for the maintenance of water distribution systems and reduction of internal water losses. They may also involve efforts to achieve organisational improvements, e.g. in the areas of leadership and management, financial planning, human resources, and professional customer communication. 

The Results from Phase I of the EU-WOPs
In the first phase of the EU Water Operators’ Partnerships programme, which has been running since 2020, providing funding and technical support to 22 Water Operators’ Partnerships supporting 35 utilities in developing countries aimed at improving the capacity and performance of partner utilities. These partnerships -each of them between two or more utilities - operate usually for a period of 36 months.

The projects were selected from a total of 140 proposals received under the EU-WOP programme call, and they were launched at the 4th Global WOPs Congress in October 2021. In Phase I, of the 22 WOPs within the EU-WOP programme, 14 were on the African continent, 4 were in South Asia, 2 in Latin America, 1 in Oceania and 1 in the Middle East. 

Because WOPs tend to differ from one another in terms of important aspects such as their project objectives, scale, and duration, it is difficult to draw simplified conclusions about their impact. Nevertheless, some general observations can be made. Thus, in the first phase many WOPs reported contributing to the improvement of their key performance indicators, most notably the expansion of active water and sanitation connections in their service areas as well as the reduction of non-revenue water (i.e. reduced commercial and physical losses). Many utilities also experienced improved efficiency in the collection of service bills, improved customer relations and improved gender balance in decision making. All utilities also experienced improved organisational capacities because of the partnerships, with more than 400 staff members having received training during the first phase. 

It should be mentioned also that the improvements that are or can be achieved by a WOP are dependent on the state of the infrastructure that is being managed. Although a lot of WOP projects involve peer to peer learning and are focused on capacity development, whether improvements are achieved in the existing infrastructure depends to a large extent on whether the funds can be mobilised to achieve this.  

Example: Strengthening Capacity of Luapula Utility in Zambia

In Zambia, the Luapula Water Supply and Sanitation Company (LpWSSC) identified capacity gaps that affect its performance in service provision. As a project in the first phase of the EU-WOPs, the LpWSSC entered into a WOP with the Märkischer Abwasser- und Wasserzweckverband (MAWV), a German utility in Königs Wusterhausen, with the support of a second German utility, the Dahme- Nuthe Wasser- und Abwasserbetriebsgesellschaft. MAWV was later replaced by the Stadtentwässerung Dresden GmbH (SEDD), and an agreement between LpWSSCC and SEDD was signed in August 2023, effective until December 2024. 

The aims of the WOP were to support the implementation of an infrastructure improvement programme by strengthening the institution and building staff capacities both in terms of technical know-how and in terms of managerial skills. The key focal areas of the WOP were the reduction of non-revenue water, attention for operation and maintenance processes, the management of company assets, customer relations and organisational development. The expected outcomes of the partnership included the improved financial viability of the LpWSSC, improved cost recovery, and improved provision of safe drinking water services to low-income communities in urban and peri-urban areas of Luapula Province.

The project had a total budget of USD 349,911 USD, with an additional 87,786 USD which is provided in the form of in-kind support.  In the area of water production, a new laboratory has been established and staff has been trained on testing procedures to ensure adequate water quality. In the area of water distribution, work has been done to ensure systematic leakage detection and pressure management to reduce network losses. In the area of human resources development, the staff has been trained in areas such as operations, maintenance, and customer relations. 
Currently, one key area in which results have been achieved through the partnership include improved water production and quality. LpWSC has increased the number of active water connections from 9,000 in 2021 to 20,000 by 2024, thereby improving access to reliable and safely managed water for the beneficiary communities. In addition, the quality of water has significantly improved, with 93% of required checks for E.Coli being successfully carried out.

In the area of leakage management, systematic leak detection has been implemented, resulting in the reduction of physical water losses and contributing to a more solid understanding of commercial losses. In the area of infrastructure development, the LpWSSC has a new wastewater treatment plant which has become operational, enabling biological treatment of wastewater. Currently the connection of households to the wastewater treatment facility is ongoing. 

Example: Pro-Poor WASH Access in Kenya 
In another EU-WOP project during Phase I, Kisumu Water and Sanitation Co. Ltd (KIWASCO), located in Kisumu, Kenya, partnered with five beneficiary utilities in Kenya: KACUWASCO in Kakamega County, MOWASCO in Mombasa City, Amatsi Water Water and Sewerage Co. in Vihiga County, Kiambu Water and Sewerage Co. in Kiambu County, and Oloolaiser Water and Sewerage Services Co. in Kajiado County. The central aim of this partnership was to ensure the realisation of the right to Water, Sanitation and Hygiene by extending services to some 250,000 people in lo-income areas in the various Counties.  

This required a focus on water distribution and the management of water services in low-income areas, with attention for other issues such as gender mainstreaming and social inclusion. Amongst others, this included governance issues such as the representation on the board of representatives from low-income areas as well, the embedding of pro-poor structures within the organogram of the WOP, and joint monitoring of service delivery through community consultations and the establishment of feedback mechanisms.

The costs of connections to lower income areas were reduced by introducing a social connection policy that included a revolving fund to support connections in low-income areas. For the mentee utilities, benchmarking and inclusion of pro-poor indicators were included in their operations, including a pro-poor business model, a well-resourced budget for poorer areas, and the incorporation of lower income area investment plans into corporate planning. 
This WOP had a total project budget of USD 752,676, of which USD 355,049 was provided by the counterpart and USD 397,627 was provided through an EU grant. This WOP has provided instrumental support to investments which extended services to an additional 239,925 people to be reached with WASH services since the commencement of the project. 
 

On November 19, World Toilet Day (WTD) was observed at an in-person event at UN headquarters in New York. The theme of WTD 2024 is “Sanitation for Peace”, highlighting the essential role of safe toilets and sanitation systems in building a fairer, healthier, and more peaceful world. The event was used to kick-start a robust discussion and advocacy initiatives on climate resilient sanitation, as well as to mobilise Member States in the context of the UN System-Wide Strategy for Water and Sanitation. The initiative also strives to generate momentum for sustained political and financial support to accelerate progress on safely managed and climate resilient sanitation towards achieving Sustainable Development Goal 6.2 targets. 

The WTD 2024 campaign ‘Toilets – A Place for Peace’, highlights the importance of access to safe, private, dignified, and hygienic toilets, washing facilities and menstrual hygiene management (MHM) and advocates for faster action to improve and protect people’s access to safely managed sanitation. The campaign calls on governments to ensure that sanitation and water services are resilient, effective, accessible to everyone and shielded from harm. 

A central theme for this year’s WTD is WHO and UNICEF’s advocacy in favour of placing sanitation at the heart of climate action. Toilets are vital to peace, but a vicious negative cycle is also possible,  in which  inadequate sanitation contributes to instability, and instability undermines sanitation. Unless sanitation and water systems are made climate-resilient, climate change is likely to slow-, undermine-, or reverse progress on access to safely managed sanitation. This is the focus of the Practical guidelines for designing climate-resilient sanitation projects, which were designed with input from WHO and UNICEF.

Today, 3.5 billion people are still living without access to safe toilets, and across the world, sanitation is under threat from violence, climate change, disasters and neglect. Having a safe, secure, hygienic facility to use several times a day is more than a convenience – it is a human right. However, the human right to sanitation along with many other social, cultural, civil and political rights for refugees, Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) and those devastated by conflicts, natural disasters and extreme weather events are often caught within power vacuums of governance as reflected in an important scientific reflection on WTD published this month.

Amongst others, this reflection points to the Emergency WASH knowledge portal which offers a compendium of sanitation technology solutions in different emergency settings and methodologies for planning and decision-making processes. The article underlines the challenges of providing safe water, sanitation and hygiene in refugee camps and similar humanitarian settings, which are frequently hampered by geo-political wrangling and subject to structural underfunding – quite apart from the operational challenges of distributing relief funds and providing services on the ground. The reflection also highlights the fact that sanitation systems face increasing challenges in the context of climate change, whereby climate risks can aggravate the vulnerability of low-income communities.

In 2013, the UN Deputy Secretary-General issued a call to action on sanitation that included the elimination of open defecation by 2025. The world is on track to eliminate open defecation by 2030, if not by 2025, but historical rates of progress would need to double for the world to achieve universal coverage with basic sanitation services by 2030. Since 2000, the number of people who practice open defecation has reduced by 68 percent. Despite this progress, 3.5 billion people still lack safely managed sanitation services today. 

In 2022, around 420 million people, that is 5% of the global population, were defecating in the open in fields, forests, bodies of water or other open spaces. This poses a serious risk on public health as it can contaminate sources of drinking water. This contamination can lead to the spread of diseases such as cholera, diarrhoea, and dysentery. Also, people — particularly women and girls who practice open defecation — experience feelings of shame, loss of personal dignity, and increased safety risks. 

It should be emphasised must be noticed that the targets of SDG 6 were not designed for conflict zones, refugee camps and the aftermath of natural disasters or extreme climate events. This leaves gaps in data about the human right to sanitation for vulnerable populations. As the author of the reflection, Marcus Erridge argues: “The concept of ‘Toilets - A Place for Peace’ calls for urgent and climate resilient sanitation. With an estimated 1.4 million people dying each year from inadequate WASH, primarily in low- and middle-income countries, diarrhoeal diseases account for 564,000 of these deaths. Most deaths associated with unsafe water and sanitation are preventable.  Push your  policymakers  and politicians to find ways to reduce these numbers and protect WASH rights before, during and beyond times of crisis. If you can, donate to the WASH humanitarian organisations working on the ground. Or simply spread the word about this underreported human rights crisis.”
 

Between October 2019 and January 2024, more than 100 attacks by Turkish air forces reportedly took place on oil fields, gas facilities and power stations in the Kurdish-held Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES).

These attacks have added to the humanitarian crisis in a region reeling from a years-long civil war and four years of extreme drought exacerbated by climate change. Ensuring water supplies had already been a challenge in the region, but attacks on electricity infrastructure in October last year interrupted the power supply to the region’s main water station in Alouk, which has been out of order since then.

A situation report prepared by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA) further documents the disruption caused to civilian life by Turkish airstrikes in northern Syria. UNOCHA estimates that fuel, electricity and water supplies have been disrupted in a total of 11 towns and 2,750 villages, affecting more than 1 million people and underlines that systematic attacks on basic services have worsened the region’s humanitarian crisis.

On 24 November last year, the UN Security Council was briefed on the humanitarian situation in Syria by UNOCHA, on behalf of Mr. Tom Fletcher, the UN Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief. UNOCHA urged interventions in the health, water, education and energy sectors, all of which have been strongly undermined by years of conflict and crisis. More than five million people, most of them displaced, live in areas outside government control in Syria's north and northwest, the UN says, and many rely on aid to survive. A lack of international funding has severely undercut the provision of basic services such as water, waste disposal and sanitation in displacement camps in northwest Syria, according to the United Nations.

A new BBC investigation provides arguments to the effect that Turkey’s attacks on the region are a “severe violation of international law”. The need to strengthen the protection of water infrastructure during armed conflicts emerged during a roundtable in 2016 convened by the Geneva Water Hub to feed the work of the Global High-Level Panel on Water and Peace. Led by the Geneva Water Hub, a broad consultative group of university research centres, UN agencies and (international) Non-Governmental Organisations took the initiative to draft ‘The Geneva List of Principles on the Protection of Water Infrastructure’.

This document, published in 2019, aims to systematise the rules applicable to the protection of water and water-related infrastructure, and incorporates good practices of States and other actors. The list addresses both international and non-international armed conflicts and makes further recommendations to improve the protection of water infrastructure. Principle 3 of the Geneva List of Principles states that: “Everyone has the right to water and sanitation, which is essential for the full enjoyment of all human rights”. Principle 4 states that parties to a conflict should refrain from using water infrastructure and water-related infrastructure as a means of warfare. Principle 6 states that water infrastructure and water-related infrastructure are presumed to be civilian objects and, in such case, must not be attacked. 

Furthermore, Principle 15 relates to causing significant damage to the environment : “Water infrastructure and water-related infrastructure should not be made the object of attack, even when these are military objectives, if such attack is intended, or may be expected, to cause significant damage to the environment”. Organisation such as Pax have studied and documented the environmental effects of conflict in Syria. 

From May to September of this year, researchers at the Institute for Water Education (IHE Delft), funded by the Water and Development Partnership Programme, carried out research on the Jebel Aulia Dam (JAD), situated near Sudan’s capital Khartoum. In the recently published report, researchers draw the attention to the threat of collapse of the dam, also examining the potential impact of the ongoing conflict on the operation of the dam and drawing attention to the potential  flood risks of the current situation.

According to Article 54 of the additional protocol to the Geneva Conventions, it is prohibited to attack infrastructure indispensable to the civilian population, with specific reference to water and food. Nevertheless, water infrastructure often is targeted in war. In a recent news update, IHE Delft has shared the results of research into the safety of the Jebel Aulia Dam (JAD) in Sudan, drawing a comparison to the Mosul Dam in Iraq, the two dams near the city of Derna in Libya, and Ukraine’s Karhovka Dam.  The researchers call for international monitoring of the risks of dam failure in war zones and rapid intervention where necessary. 

In their report, published on November 14, IHE Delft’s researchers explore the compounded impacts of climate change and socio-political instability on dam failures in conflict zones. Sudan is one such region , and it is facing heightened flood risks due to the convergence of conflict and climate variability. The JAD is an important dam in Sudan built on the White Nile near Khartoum in the 1930’s which has been significantly affected by ongoing military conflicts since April 2023. The dam has become a focal point of the conflict due to its strategic location linking Khartoum to Omdurman and its proximity to key military bases. The dam still serves to control water levels so as to enable abstraction for irrigation abstraction for the White Nile projects, as well as to control floods. In addition, the dam was fitted with 80 turbine generator units for hydroelectricity generation with a total capacity of 30 MW. Moreover, the dam plays a role in the fishing and tourism industry. With its operators abandoning the dam during attacks, the water release mechanisms have remained fixed, raising concerns about flood risks both upstream and downstream. 
The researchers use the example of the collapse of Sudan’s Arbaat dam in August 2024 in the eastern part of Sudan, to underscore the heightened vulnerability of critical infrastructure during wartime, especially in regions already strained by socio-political instability and climate change. The failure of the Arbaat dam led to a severe water shortage in Port Sudan, one of the country’s largest cities, which depends on the dam for its water supply, as well as numerous fatalities and missing persons. On top of that Port Sudan is home to internally displaced persons fleeing the violence. In the current situation, with dam operators forced to abandon their posts due to the conflicts, the dam’s water release mechanisms are assumed to remain fixed at their last operational settings. Without appropriate adjustments to the gate settings at JAD, there is the risk of flooding, and in an extreme case, of dam collapse. 
The study employs water balance modelling and scenario analysis to simulate the potential impacts of fixed gate settings on reservoir levels and downstream flooding. Being the main core of the study, a water balance equation is used to estimate the JAD releases and the reservoir water level changes for a fixed gate setting for the years 2024 and 2025. Historical data from 1983 to 2020 and recent altimetry information were used to validate the model. Various inflow scenarios, including extreme weather events, were analysed to predict flood risks, emphasizing the vulnerability of this critical infrastructure during wartime. For the research, broad consultation with the JAD operators, engineers, and experts was carried out, ensuring the correct implementation of the model and its components.
The results of this study underscore the significant risks posed by fixed dam gate settings under varying inflow and downstream conditions. The researchers find that it is important to recognize that this analysis, based on 10-day averaged data, may smooth out extreme daily variations. Actual conditions during peak inflows may present even more severe risks than modelled here. 
The report concludes by highlighting the need for enhanced disaster preparedness strategies and adaptive management of dam operations in conflict-prone regions. The researchers warn for the complex relationship between the JAD and the Blue Nile dams, particularly the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) and the Sennar Dam. Changes in release patterns from these dams directly affect downstream water levels at the JAD, complicating 37 flood management efforts. The backflow effect from the Blue Nile River places additional strain on the JAD, especially during periods of high discharge from these dams. 
The findings of this study provide crucial insights for policymakers and contribute to the broader understanding of the interplay between climate change, conflict, and water security.
 

At COP 29 in Bakoe, the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) presented the 2024 edition of its State of Climate Services report. This report, which is an update of its 2023 report, analyses the state of climate services across the world - with a particular focus on the progress made in support of climate adaptation and mitigation actions around the world. Because climate extremes are becoming more frequent and intense, the need for accurate and timely information from climate services to inform decision making is becoming ever more important. In 2018, the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) had called on WMO to report regularly on the state of climate services. In response, from 2019 onwards, WMO has published annual global updates on the state of global climate services. 

The 2024 report sets out by underlining the current challenges: the year 2023 was the warmest year on record, following a string of eight previous years which showed similar high average temperatures. The number of reported weather-related disasters has been increasingly steadily, effectively tripling since the 1970’s. Of these, water-related disasters such as floods, droughts, storms and landslides predominate – followed by fires, cold waves and heat waves.  Floods remain the most commonly reported disaster. 
Looking at policy responses, the report signals that there is an increasing recognition of the importance of integrating climate services into national adaptation strategies for vulnerable sectors and geographic areas. Looking at National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), 83% of the 53 countries that have developed a NAP have recognised the importance of climate services to inform decision making. Similarly, climate services are recognised as an important underpinning for the elaboration of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) – countries’ climate action plans. Looking at existing NAP’s, it is interesting to note that among the measures identified by countries to reduce vulnerability to climate change, water features as the third most cited priority after agriculture and food security and health and well-being. 

Within NDC’s, water has clearly moved to the top priority area for action on adaptation. In the first WMO report published in 2019, water was the second highest ranked adaptation priority by countries after agriculture and food security.  By May 2024, water had moved to the top of the agenda and was ranked as the highest priority item by 134 countries of the 174 NDCs submitted. 
Progress in improving climate services  

The WMO categorises the quality of national climate services on a five point scale ranging from ‘less than basic’ at the lower end of the scale, through ‘basic’, ‘essential’, ‘full’ and finally ‘advanced’ at the upper end of this scale. Across the whole scale, the report finds that substantial improvements have been made in climate services. On the one hand, on the higher end of the scale, there has been a rapid increase in the number of countries with ‘full’ or ‘advanced’ climate services: in five years, the number of countries with ‘full’ services has increased by 54%, while the number of countries with ‘advanced’ services has increased by 87%. On the other hand, at the lower end of the scale,  the number of countries with ‘less than basic’ services has halved while the number of countries with ‘basic’ levels of climate services  has declined by 32%. 

Looking at the picture from a regional perspective, certain regions stand out: notable progress has been made in upgrading climate services on the African continent, in Asia, North and Central America, the Caribbean and Oceania. This picture broadly corresponds with investments made in climate services: Asia accounted for 53% of investments in climate services globally, Africa for 23% and Oceania for 12%. 

Global Standards and Capacity Building
The WMO is moving forward with establishing a set of benchmarks for weather and climate observations. In 2021, WMO established the Global Basic Observing Network  which sets the minimum set of basic weather and climate observations that countries need to generate and exchange internationally. At this point in time, only 28 countries comply with these standards. To follow climate developments, WMO recommends a Global Climate Observing System which tracks 55 variables that are needed to understand the climate system and monitor its changes. 
Another initiative is the National Framework for Climate Services: this is a mechanism for strengthening collaboration among national climate services institutions. By pooling the strengths of national climate systems, countries can mutually integrate their climate services and information activities, including seasonal and long-term climate forecasts, risk assessments, historical climate data analysis and real-time climate monitoring. Currently there are still gaps in climate services, as 44% of national services still only provide these services at a ‘basic’ level. The WMO sees regional cooperation as a key ingredient for the upgrading of these services, and at this point in time there are 26 designated WMO Regional Training Centres (RTCs) which serve as hubs for educating and equipping national climate service personnel with the necessary competences and knowledge to develop and deliver weather, climate and hydrological services. 
 

On November 13, Nature Water published an article in which the authors argue for a ‘portfolio approach’ to sanitation, in order to enhance the outcomes of sanitation solutions beyond their traditional focus on public health and environmental protection. Because the reality of current day urban living spaces is diverse, with different kinds of neighbourhoods and combinations of sewered and non-sewered sanitation solutions, a portfolio approach supports a diversity of solutions that are adapted to local conditions, and each have their own advantages and disadvantages. 

The fact that many urban areas feature combinations of sanitation systems is mostly not the result of conscious planning. However, there is potential for the coordination of different sanitation sector stakeholders in a city who are working on different solutions that are adapted to particular needs, and this holds the potential of balancing different kinds of desires outcomes with each other. The authors therefore propose moving away from the idea of a master plan for centralised sanitation systems and towards support for the design and implementation of multiple sanitation systems in parallel, including centralised sanitation systems, on-site sanitation systems, various types of onsite blackwater and greywater treatment, and household-level treatment. By doing so, resilient, accessible and resource-efficient sanitation solutions can be provided through a diversity of systems at various scales to optimise benefits including economic value, resource efficiency, climate resilience and human dignity.

Achieving the sanitation targets of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) currently seems increasingly unlikely, with nearly three billion people predicted to be living without safely managed sanitation in 2030. Recent findings highlight sanitation’s interconnections with the economy, climate change, resource recovery and service equity, serving us with an opportunity to enhance the outcomes of sanitation. This, the authors claim, offers a paradigm shift from the conventional approach which relies on centralised systems, an approach which is widespread in the industrialised North, but which currently has limited coverage or effectiveness in the Global South. 

Rather than pursuing centralised systems, the authors argue for the coordinated design and implementation of multiple sanitation systems. Individually, these systems are unlikely to achieve the speed or scale required to address the global sanitation crisis effectively. By contrast, a portfolio approach integrates different sanitation systems along a continuum, allowing for hybrid or combined forms, such as the co-treatment of faecal sludge from onsite storage or household in situ treatment with centralised systems. However, the portfolio approach goes further by optimising the integration of these systems, to achieve multiple outcomes, including public health, environmental protection, climate resilience, resource recovery and equity.

The article lists the many benefits for both the North and South. For example, in terms of cost and distribution, centralised systems offer economies of scale, while on-site systems are associated with low capital costs but do involve costs later in the life cycle. Combining these solutions offers flexibility in relation to available resources and in response to urban growth patterns. From the perspective of the circular economy, the inflow of carbon, phosphorus and nitrogen into collection systems offer the opportunity for resource recovery. From the point of view of climate resilience, centralised systems may be vulnerable to disruptions that result from unpredictable water flows or energy supplies. 

The article touches on the challenges arising from the approach, concluding that in order to implement the portfolio approach, there is a need for broad collaboration among actors involved in various aspects of diverse sanitation service models.

The portfolio approach builds upon concepts such as ‘citywide inclusive sanitation’, which promotes a systematic consideration of diverse sanitation systems. At a workshop in Altanta in 2016, a number of key stakeholders in the sector met to discuss the relative lack of progress in the provision of sanitation services in 36 lower income countries. Out of this discussion emerged the concept of citywide inclusive sanitation, which was described as a situation in which: 

Everyone benefits from adequate sanitation service delivery outcomes; human waste is safely managed along the whole sanitation service chain; effective resource recovery and re-use are considered; a diversity of technical solutions is embraced for adaptive, mixed and incremental approaches; and onsite and sewerage solutions are combined, in either centralized or decentralized systems, to better respond to the realities found in developing country cities.

Since 2018, the World Bank’s Water Global Practice, in partnership with sector development partners (including The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Emory University, The University of Leeds, WaterAid and Plan International) are working jointly on the implementation of the Citywide Inclusive Sanitation (CWIS) Initiative.

Citywide Inclusive Sanitation (CWIS) aims to shift the urban sanitation paradigm, aiming to ensure everyone has access to safely managed sanitation by promoting a range of solutions—both onsite and sewered, centralised or decentralised—tailored to the realities of the world's burgeoning cities. CWIS means focusing on service provision and its enabling environment, rather than on building infrastructure. CWIS indicators are mapped to the six areas of the CWIS Service Framework—Equity, Safety, Sustainability, Responsibility, Accountability, and Resource Planning and Management. 
 

In November, the UN-Water Expert Group on Water and Climate Change published the UN-Water Analytical Brief on Water for Climate Mitigation. The UN-Water Expert Group supports cooperation and coordination of UN-Water Members and Partners on water and climate change-related issues. 

The analytical brief discusses the dependency of climate mitigation on the use of water and the effective management of water resources and of water and sanitation services. ‘Water’ in this report refers to terrestrial inland water (which may be surface water or groundwater), and for some uses could be desalinated seawater. 

The report refers in its structure to the listed measures of The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)  that has assessed that limiting global warming to 1.5 or 2°C requires limiting the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This can be done by reducing the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases such as methane and nitrous oxide and/or by increasing the ‘sinks’ – anything that removes carbon from the atmosphere faster than it is released – such as through replanting of degraded areas. Actions to achieve this reduction are grouped by IPCC into ‘climate mitigation measures’, taken up in the report in Annex 1. The measures are based on findings of the The International Universities Climate Alliance (IUCA) 2024, which has estimated the water requirements of a number of the climate mitigation measures assessed by the IPCC, tabulated in Annex 2 in the IPCC report. 

The Role of Water in Mitigation
Water is a necessary input to many of the clean energy measures (such as hydropower or geothermal energy) that are needed for the energy transition away from fossil fuel-based energy, as well as for measures to ensure carbon dioxide removal from the atmosphere. These measures need sufficient water supply to achieve climate mitigation and other benefits required from them. Effective water and wastewater management can also contribute directly towards emission reduction targets as poorly managed wastewater and sanitation systems, and some wetlands, reservoirs, and irrigation systems, are sources of emissions of greenhouse gases, especially methane and nitrous oxide. Their emissions can be reduced through improved management of water and sanitation services, providing multiple social, economic, and environmental benefits which can add value to any climate finance contribution.

The implementation of many mitigation measures required to limit global warming to 1.5 or 2 degrees Celsius will affect demand for water and its availability for other purposes and in different places. For example, the phasing out of fossil fuels will reduce water demand by thermal coal power plants, enabling water in their locations to be redeployed to support other objectives. However, many alternative low emission energy sources will increase water demand and will need assured water supply in their locations for their successful implementation.

Water availability may influence which climate mitigation measures to implement, how and where, and inform decisions on how to secure and sustain the necessary water supply. Identifying and reducing water-related risks by applying integrated water resources management (IWRM) and sustainable wastewater management approaches should facilitate financing while contributing to successful climate mitigation and limiting further global warming.

The IPCC has advised  that the sustainable development framework can be used to evaluate the long-term implications of climate mitigation actions on sustainable development and vice versa, and that the feasibility of implementing different sectoral mitigation options depends on how societies prioritise mitigation actions relative to other products and services. While progress in achieving the SDGs differs greatly between regions and countries, and within countries, current global data show that none of the SDG 6 targets are currently within reach globally: 2.2 billion people lack safely managed drinking water; roughly half of the world’s population experiences severe water scarcity for at least part of the year; and 3.5 billion people lack safely managed sanitation. The report states that indeed, less progress is being made on SDG 6 than on any of the other SDGs. Ideally, the report states, planning and implementation of nationally determined contributions  (NDCs) will be closely aligned with planning and implementation of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 with its water and sanitation targets.

Climate mitigation actions involving trade-offs with other water uses will require substantial consultation and engagement, particularly in cross-border systems. Regional and transboundary cooperation can help with optimizing the use of water resources for many kinds of climate action. Aligning climate mitigation and water objectives requires that water availability and usage is considered in all climate related planning, particularly in the preparation of NDCs, and that climate change is considered in all water, sanitation and hygiene strategic planning, including for shared transboundary water resources. 

Many global and regional organisations can support country-wide planning for the climate mitigation options and IWRM and sustainable wastewater management, necessary for securing the water requirements of mitigation actions. This includes UN system-wide support to developing countries for the preparation of their next NDCs.
According to the authors, the way forward entails that as countries review and update their NDCs, now is the time to understand how action on water and sanitation can contribute to climate solutions.
 

The 29th Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change ended on the 24th of November with a new finance goal to support countries to protect their economies and populations from the impacts of climate change as well as to implement the transition to renewable energy. Climate finance was the dominant theme at COP 29, and a last-minute agreement was reached to triple the volume of financial flows to developing countries, from the previous goal of USD 100 billion annually, to USD 300 billion annually by 2035. It was also agreed that all actors would work together to scale up finance to developing countries from public and private sources to the amount of USD 1.3 trillion per year by 2035.

However, this agreement has been met with disappointment by many developing countries which have expressed the opinion that this amount falls far short of the amounts needed to ensure climate mitigation and adaption. In 1992, within the framework of the UNFCCC, major industrialised countries which are responsible for the greater part of historical greenhouse gas emissions agreed that they were obliged to provide climate finance. However, both determining the amount required and agreeing on a framework for payments has proven to be very challenging. 

On the one hand, a ‘climate finance gap’ remains in place: the impacts of climate change continue to accumulate, and the urgency of raising sufficient capital to avert these impacts is equally building up.  There are many different definitions of climate finance, but the UNFCCC defines it as the collection of “local, national or transnational financing—drawn from public, private and alternative sources of financing—that seeks to support mitigation and adaptation actions that will address climate change”. 

A study by Allen & Overy and the Climate Policy Initiative have estimated that USD 6.2 trillion is required annually until 2030 to transition to net zero  emissions. Beyond this, UNEP’s 2024 adaptation gap report has pegged the gap in adaptation finance at between USD 187-359 billion per year. Seen in this context, the USD 300 billion commitment falls short of needs both for mitigation and adaptation. 

A recent study by Peter Newell has argued that alongside a finance gap, there is also a production gap and a governance gap in approaches to financing climate action. The production gap refers to the fact that while efforts are underway to mobilise public and private funding for climate action, both governments and the private sector plan to produce more than double the amount of fossil fuels in 2030 than would be consistent with limiting global warming to 1,5°C. According to a recent report, the 60 largest banks globally invested USD 705 billion in fossil fuel companies in 2023.  To resolve the contradiction between the mobilisation of capital towards climate goals and the mobilisation of capital for fossil fuel development, measures need to be introduced to redirect finance away from fossil fuels and towards measures that are in line with the global climate goals. 

This issue speaks to a third gap mentioned in the study, i.e. the governance gap, which refers to the need to regulate the financial sector in order to achieve these goals. Investments in carbon intensive sectors need to be deterred, while financial measures need to be put in place to encourage investment to flow towards areas where it is most needed. The governance gap also touches on an issue of redistribution, as the financial flows for finance for mitigation currently far outweigh the financial flows for climate adaptation. Newell cites examples from 2020, finance for mitigation activities amounted to USD 586 billion, against USD 49 billion for adaptation.

The last-minute agreement on climate finance is being seen as a testimony to the functioning of multilateralism, as the volume of financial commitments have in fact tripled.  However, representatives of the Alliance of Small Island States and the Least Developed Countries have expressed their disappointment at the agreement, stating that the amount agreed to falls far short of what is needed.  
 

On the 4th of November, at COP 29 in Azerbaijan, the Asian Development Bank, with the support of the Green Climate Fund, launched a new regional programme to promote water and food security in Central Asia, the South Caucasus and Pakistan.  The programme, titled Glaciers to Farms, seeks to protect water security and livelihoods in the context of accelerated glacial melt due to climate change. The programme takes a regional approach to address transboundary issues related to water scarcity, agricultural productivity, and the vulnerability of local communities.  
Regional Water Towers undergoing change  
Depending on the subregion, between 30%-60% of the region’s water comes from snow and glaciers. This water supports the provision of potable water, irrigation water and energy as well as the livelihoods of an estimated 480 million people in the region. For the lowlands of Central Asia, ice and snowmelt are principal water sources and are critical to the livelihoods of mountain communities.

One researcher has found that the Aral and Chu/Issyk-Kul basins, for example, produce some 7.5 km³ of meltwater in an average year, which is equivalent to ten months of municipal and industrial demand for Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. The glaciers and snow also slow down the release of water from the mountains, enabling agricultural production in the summer months.  These water sources are particularly at risk currently: while glaciers globally have lost 7% of their icepack since 1961, the rate of loss in Central Asia is up to threefold that of the global average. 

In the Caucasus, rising temperatures have caused glaciers to retreat by more than 600 m over the past century and it is estimated in a recent study by UNEP that more than 11 billion tonnes of freshwater have been lost as a result of glacial melt. More than 600 Greater Caucasus Glaciers have dropped by approximately 16%: over a period of some three decades, the area covered by glaciers in this region has decreased from 692km² to 590km².  This has begun to affect the physical and economic security of the population living in the region, as the frequency of natural disasters such as mudslides and floods has increased, and water sources across the region are diminishing.   
Pakistan has surveyed more than 3000 glacial lakes, of which 36 were found to be potentially dangerous and at high risk of outburst. The country is highly vulnerable to the effects of climate change: as reported in The Water Diplomat, in  2022, the country suffered heavy floods which affected 33 million people, disproportionately affecting regions in which poorer communities are located.  

The Programme  
With the support of the Green Climate Fund’s (GCF) Project Preparation Facility, ADB will conduct risk assessments of glacial melt in Azerbaijan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan—forming the scientific and technical basis for the Glacier to Farms program.

The GCF and ADB will work together with countries in the region to increase the resilience of economies to climate change across a range of sectors, including energy, agriculture, infrastructure, transport and health. Some of the key initiatives revolve around water, focusing on the reduction of water losses and boosting watershed protection through integrated water resource management systems. This is expected to enhance the efficient and equitable sharing of water resources across river basins, develop and improve water storage and management systems, and identify appropriate investments based on climate risk vulnerability assessments. 

Similarly, in the agricultural sector which is a key sector in the region’s economies, climate  adaptation and mitigation measures are envisaged to increase agricultural productivity and boost food security, amongst others through a transition to climate-smart agricultural systems and more efficient irrigation systems.     
The proposed actions under the programme are anchored in the Climate Action Roadmap for Central and West Asia and the CAREC Climate Change Action Plan.

Project Preparation Facility 
The food and water security programme is being supported by the Green Climate Fund (GCF) through its Project Preparation Facility (PPF). This facility has been established in recognition that the development of climate-related project proposals requires specific capacities which may not be readily available. Therefore, the GCF provides support to accredited entities in each country in preparing full proposals based on a concept note which has been cleared for project preparation support. A range of types of support can be provided, such as support for pre-feasibility and feasibility studies, risk assessments, environmental, social and gender impact studies, and so forth. 
The GCF provides funding of up to USD 1.5 million for each application to the PPF, in proportion to the size of the funding proposal being developed and to the activities included in the PPF application. 
 

On Tuesday morning 12 November, the Daily Maverick reported that an operation by technicians of Johannesburg Water utility to cut connections had to be aborted, due to a standoff between the Johannesburg Metropolitan Police Department (JMPD) and residents from Phumla Mqashi informal settlement in Lenasia South (a suburb south of Soweto). Phumla Mqashi, home to an estimated 13,000 to 17,000 households, lacks formal water infrastructure, just like four other informal settlements in Lenasia. Kagiso Manganye, Johannesburg Water regional manager of the Deep South said on the day of the standoff that at least 23,000 households are estimated to be using illegally connected water in the informal settlements of Lenasia. 

Phumla Mqashi was initially served by water tanks, on a directive from the Department of Human Settlements. By law, informal settlements must be provided with water and sanitation services through water tanks and chemical toilets. Johannesburg Water says that due to ongoing land grabs and subsequent illegal water connections, these tanks were vandalised, leading to increased strain on the local water supply network. 

The November 12th cutoffs are part of Johannesburg Water’s initiative to address what spokesperson Nombuso Shabalala referred to as “substantial challenges posed by unauthorised connections to the city’s water network”. According to Shabalala, these connections are a major contributor to water losses in the city, and Johannesburg Water plans to disconnect all unauthorised connections in the area and restore water tank services for essential water provision.”

Bulk water provider Rand Water’s board chairperson Ramateu Monyokolo said at a briefing on November 11, that at its maximum, Rand Water provides 5.2 billion litres of per day water to municipalities in the province of Gauteng – South Africa’s industrial heartland. Of this, municipalities lose 2.5 billion litres (48%) a day, through leaks, ageing infrastructure, high temperatures and theft. According to the Mayor of Johannesburg, the city currently spends R 1 billion (€ 53 million) a year fixing leakages in the system  

Several communities in Gauteng, including Midrand, Winchester Hills, Soweto and parts of Tshwane (formerly Pretoria), have now been without water for several weeks, a situation which is a repeat of the problems experienced throughout Gauteng last summer. 
The City of Johannesburg’s water reservoir levels are dropping dangerously low and authorities are implementing restrictions to manage dwindling supplies, the Citizen reports. The Vaal Dam, the main supply dam for Johannesburg and an essential part of the Integrated Vaal River System (IVRS), recorded a capacity of approximately 31.5% of its full storage capacity (FSC) of 2.5 billion cubic metres, this week. The department’s comparison noted that it went down from 33.1% the previous week, while it stood at 72.8% last year.

As the city of Johannesburg has experienced increasingly frequent interruptions to daily water supply, level 1 restrictions (a prohibition of garden watering, car washing, and the filling of swimming pools) have been implemented since September, as well as restricted water supply from November 14 onwards, between 21:00 and 04:00 daily. The last measure enables the reservoir levels to recover overnight and will be implemented continuously until the system has fully recovered. 

Water and Sanitation Minister, Pemmy Majodina, reported on November 11 at a media briefing, that they have reached a unanimous agreement on the causes of the water supply interruptions and what needs to be done to restore a stable water supply to residents of Johannesburg. Majodina said reducing water losses requires a multi-pronged approach by the city. This includes amongst others, improving billing and revenue collection to increase the funds available for maintenance and to provide better incentives for water to be used efficiently, improving pressure management and replacing ageing pipes which burst frequently.

These developments are taking place in the context of a national audit of municipal water supply published by the Department of Water and Sanitation – the 2023 No Drop Report in June 2023. This report analysed the status of water losses, non-revenue water (NRW) and water use efficiency in South African municipalities as of June 2022. The report devotes significant attention to the performance of the mandated Water Service Authorities (WSA), which may provide water directly as a public municipal service or form a joint venture with a Water Service Provider to ensure that services are delivered. WSA’s are required, through legislation, to measure and monitor performance related to water use targets, Non-Revenue Water (NRW), water losses and water use efficiency. The Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) is tasked with regulating the WSAs’ performance. 

In the 2023 No Drop Report, provinces and their municipalities are listed and compared through their performance on a ‘No Drop Score’ - a measure used to assess a WSA’s status on key performance indicators and related business operations, water conservation and demand management, their WC/WDM strategies and budgets, and implementation of WC/WDM projects. Across the country, the No Drop Report found that non-revenue water increased from 37% in 2014 to 47% in 2023.

The No Drop 2023 Report’s audit attributes a score of 72% for the City of Johannesburg, indicating ‘average performance’ by national standards. Compared to Johannesburg, the city of Cape Town performs better, with the audit attributing the City of Cape Town with an ‘excellent score’ of 92%. 
 

In September of this year, Euronews reported a surge in sinkholes in Turkey’s fertile Konya Plain, dubbed "the country’s granary". Specifically, the districts of Cihanbeyli, Yunak, Kulu, Sarayönü and Kadınhanı are affected, which are known for high grain production. The latest count of sinkholes surpasses the number of 2,600. According to Phys.org , this part of Central Anatolia has known sinkholes for centuries, but the recent rise in numbers are caused by increasing droughts that led to the overuse of groundwater for irrigation. Many of the sinkholes are as deep as 50 metres and are invisible from a distance in the large fields of corn, beetroot, wheat, and clover that dot the Konya plain, causing accidents that have led to death. 

Konya Technical University has established the  Sinkhole Application Research Centre (SARC), dedicated to the study of sinkholes. These sinkholes develop under natural conditions in regions where there are carbonate, sulphate, and chloride rocks suitable for dissolution. Groundwater dissolves the bedrock beneath the surface, causing the earth above it to sink in. The spread of sinkholes poses a danger to primarily residential areas and human life, agricultural areas, pastures, energy investment areas, transportation networks such as roads and railways, oil and natural gas pipelines, electricity, water, and other infrastructure investments. The Disaster and Emergency Management Authority (AFAD) and SARC are currently closely monitoring the situation to seek preventative measures.

Research carried out in Karaman, a city located in the southwest of the Konya Plain, finds that population growth and increased agricultural activities in Karaman and its surrounding region, have led to increasing water demand in recent years. Karaman's drinking- and irrigation water needs are also almost entirely met from groundwater. According to the results, there is a strong correlation between subsidence rates and groundwater levels over the analysed period, indicating that subsidence in the area is most likely driven by excessive groundwater withdrawal.

According to Nationmaster’s ranking of groundwater abstraction for agricultural purposes, Turkey's agricultural groundwater abstraction increased by an average of 3.1% per year since 1990, reaching 10,670 million m³ in 2019. As such, Turkey ranks as the third highest consumer of groundwater for agriculture in the world after the United States and Mexico.  

UNDP ‘s support programme for climate change adaptation in Turkey reports that the country is highly vulnerable to climate change. As part of the southern belt of Mediterranean Europe, the country is already facing an observed warming trend in temperatures and a decreasing trend in precipitation. This is having a major negative effect on water availability for food production and rural development, further exacerbating the social and regional disparities in a country characterized by a wide (and widening) gap between the eastern and southeastern provinces and the rest of the country.