From Stockholm to COP 29: A conversation with Bapon Fakhruddin and Henk Ovink

The Water Diplomat: What does Stockholm World Water Week represent to you, and how does the World Water Week help to deepen your understanding of water challenges and solutions?

Bapon Fakhruddin: To me, World Water Week is important because it brings global convergence of forward-thinking nations dedicated to addressing critical water issues. Sweden, renowned for its water-friendly policies and sustainable practices, serves as an inspiring host, fostering an environment of innovation and collaboration. The presence of national diplomatic leaders enables discussion around our common challenges, and we bring commitment and exchange knowledge on cutting-edge research and emerging technologies. One of the most valuable aspects of World Water Week is the opportunity it presents for private sector engagement and country collaboration. What remains a challenge is that World Water Week just convenes water people, so the question how we can pass this information to non-water people is quite important.

The Green Climate Fund has been instrumental in designing groundbreaking water projects that drive paradigm shifts and climate action. These initiatives not only tackle existing water challenges but also pave the way for resilient and adaptive solutions in the face of climate change. World Water Week provides a unique platform to showcase such innovative projects, highlighting the synergies between public initiatives and private sector opportunities.

Stockholm World Water Week not only deepens my understanding of global water challenges and innovative solutions but also reinforces the critical role of international cooperation and private sector involvement in achieving sustainable water management and climate resilience.

The Water Diplomat: So you are linking it to Sweden's national policies as well. And what about you, Henk, how did you experience the Stockholm World Water Week?

Henk Ovink: This was a different Water Week for me because it was the first one after my nine years as water ambassador. I attended with two hats on: as a member of the Scientific Programme Committee, I play an organising role together with the team, and I was also there as the Executive Director of the Global Commission on the Economics of Water. For the latter we were ‘feeling the waters’ to understand how the water world would respond to the findings of our then still upcoming report.

About Stockholm: It is this convening place where we spend time with all our international partners, it feels like a homecoming. You bring friends, but also meet new partners. You can have this dialogue in a ‘safe space’ on the challenges, new ideas and how to progress, which is necessary, because you can be candid: express worries, listen to other voices and bring new perspectives in – and that is valuable. So, we used that convening capacity for the [Global] Commission. And it is about connecting, exploring possibilities of action and partnerships. All in all, a fruitful week.

It was worrisome as well, because we heard the rumours prior to the World Water Week - and as a member of the Scientific Programme Committee I heard more rumours - that the ambition of the Board was to get rid of the majority of the personnel, and with that, a majority of the mission of SIWI as an Institute. That would mean losing this international convening space, the international partner to spur water action, and only retain a business sector party and a prize, and this made me realise that we need to give voice to that.

I was really challenged by the fact that there was little clarity - either from the board or the government- everybody knew that it was going to happen, but it was not out in the open. So instead of them using this safe space to explore together with the world what’s next, we had this worrisome situation of silence and uncertainty, and the question was what to do about it. It would have been an opportunity for the Board to say, we have a problem, whatever the causes may be, we want to reinvent ourselves, we have all these people together in Stockholm. We could have maximised that capacity by having everyday sessions on the future of SIWI and that was not organised, so I decided to give voice to that both in the opening and in the lunch time sessions discussions, to get a conversation going about the future. This was also to give voice and support to the SIWI staff, because they were going through a very uncertain time. A week after Stockholm, close to 80 people got a letter that they were fired in the coming months, so SIWI is now left with that.

Despite that, it was an amazing week. We used it for the Scientific Programming Committee and the Global Commission and at the same time, I thought it was super challenging for the global water agenda and the global water community to see that SIWI takes a big step back on the global stage.

The Water Diplomat: Thanks, Henk. You’re probably right that Stockholm always has been seen as a convening space and maybe a safe space as well, for the exchange of thoughts - and that's a very valuable thing and it takes me to another question, which is that while SIWI and Stockholm Water Week are under pressure right now, paradoxically, at the same time, we have quite some openings on the global agenda. We have the appointment of the Special Envoy, we have the confirmation of the modalities of the UN 2026 Water Conference, there is a system wide strategy on water across UN institutions. So, on the one hand there are openings for the global water space and the global water dialogue, at the same time SIWI is under pressure.

What is the best way forward to make use of these opportunities to reconvene and bring people back together in the water space and engage with these opportunities as they approach us. Can I start again with you Bapon?

Bapon Fakhruddin: Absolutely. I think that it is a very good point you raised, actually. Aligning with the GCF’s Water Sector Strategy, I believe the best way forward involves a multifaceted approach that leverages country ownership, proactive coordination, innovation, and inclusive engagement. Each country possesses unique challenges and opportunities, and solutions must be tailored to fit these specific contexts. By fostering country ownership, we ensure that water initiatives are sustainable, culturally appropriate, and aligned with national priorities. This approach not only enhances accountability but also builds local capacity, making communities resilient in the long term.

I had some discussions with UN Water about it and I think current water governance often grapples with fragmented regulatory frameworks and isolated project implementations, which hinder cohesive and strategic progress. Empowering nations to take the lead in their water management strategies is fundamental. I can draw an example of Disaster Risk Reduction field, which also has a Special Representative to the UN Secretary-General to facilitate global coordination mechanism or knowledge products at the global level while empowering regional and national DRR institutions. We are not actually doing that in the water space. Although we have a Water Envoy, strengthening her role and integrating it effectively within the UN Water framework is essential for coherent and unified action.

I would be happy if we could come up with a systematic and programmatic solutions for future water management and coordinated governance of water management. If it is a question of resources challenge, together we can mobilize and fill those gaps. However, we need someone who can anchor all the water partners and connect all these dots. Each entity currently operates within its specialized domain, contributing to the broader system, we must advance towards a more coordinated approach to ensure cohesive and efficient water management. By fostering an ecosystem of inclusive and sustained engagement, we can harness the full potential of these opportunities, bringing together diverse stakeholders to drive meaningful progress in water management.

Engaging the private sector is pivotal in driving innovation and scaling sustainable water solutions. By fostering public-private partnerships, we can leverage the expertise and resources of the private sector to develop cutting-edge technologies and efficient water management practices. Encouraging investment in areas such as water recycling, smart irrigation systems, and data-driven water monitoring can lead to more effective and sustainable outcomes. Additionally, creating incentives for businesses to adopt sustainable water practices and invest in water infrastructure will enhance overall sector resilience and efficiency.

The Water Diplomat: I'm hearing you say that much more proactive approaches are needed to bring people together, moving towards co-production and a programmatic approach on water at the at the global level, and if it is resources that are needed, then the GCF is willing to support, to catalyse that. What do you think, Henk? How can we use these opportunities that are out there to the best of our abilities, to move the water sector forward?

Henk Ovink: It is something that is building up. We had a high-level panel working between 2016 and 2018 and that High Level Panel, of course, was not our salvation – this is not how it works - but it really helped to elevate water on the global agenda, and I think that was also the intent. How can we ensure that we start to think differently about water, not as a sector that is ignored, but literally as an enabler, something that is cross cutting, because we find it in everything in our society?

If water is local, regional and global, it plays out on all these layers. If it is cutting across sectors and silos and interests, you need capacity on all those levels and across all those dimensions. That is, of course, individual expertise, government, academics, everything - but also institutional, and at all these levels. And at the global level, there was nothing yet. Already in 2016/2018, we said that there should be UN conference on water. In 2018, the world was not ready yet, and then in 2020 during the pandemic we tried it tried it again, knowing that we were heading for the mid-term review of the Water Action Decade, which would be in Tajikistan. We could not let this go and we needed to figure out how to do this and finally we got the world together.

Every country signed up and we got a resolution on the modalities for the 2023 water conference and got everybody behind the resolution, to say that after 46 years we will do this again. But this was to be without negotiation, so the question was what could the ambition look like? And we knew it had to be granular: if we are looking at local issues, we will deal with it, while underlining that we share water, we share blue water, we share green water, we share water for our economy, for our health, and for our environment. So, it's a complex process. So, for the 2023 UN Water Conference, the expectations were high and at the same time, it was only a building block.

The aftermath of 2023, of course, was this Water Action Agenda with its ambitions, but the world has changed since then: we now have more conflict, so the geopolitics are challenging, but nevertheless, in September 2023 we agreed to do 2 more conferences and ask the UN to come up with a system wide strategy, and the UNGA agreed that we did need another conference.  

Going forward, continued commitment is needed, and secondly, the understanding that the UN system needs to up its game on institutional capacity: this was needed, as was the appointment of a Special Envoy.

So where are we now? A year later, Ms Marsudi has been appointed and she starts on November 1st.  She is a well-respected high-level Minister of Foreign Affairs and her capacity to navigate the UN system, and the world are, I think, fantastic. She will need all the support of the world at the individual level but also institutional - like the GCF and others – to rally behind her agenda. She has two years, together with the UAE and Senegal and the rest of the world, to set our sights on a more ambitious target for the UN Water Conference in 2026. We are spearheading this Global Commission on the Economics of Water to provide substance to her agenda. Substance about the full hydrological cycle, linking it to biodiversity, climate change and every SDG. This is not about the WASH agenda only - this stretches way beyond. Beyond siloed thinking and technological solutions only. This will demand a missions driven, whole-of-society approach safeguarding and rebalancing the water cycle as the foundation for action, capacity and governance at all levels: it is not only about the process and about the politics. Right now, there really is something both to lose and to gain: it is a special moment in time.

So we got 2023, we got our resolution, we have 2026, we have an Envoy, a global mission from the Global Commission on the Economics of Water: water is getting a stronger position in the climate space, and the links between water, climate and biodiversity are key, as is our global connectivity through waterflows and the way the water-cycle is foundational for achieving the 2030 Agenda, every one of those SDGs. The water cycle must be valued and governed as a global common good, and that means concerted action on all levels, from local, to systems, to regional and global. So, the stars are beginning to align, and the responsibility lies with us to capitalise on that. Joining forces with Ms Marsudi as well as other champions in the institutional sphere is going to be of critical importance and that takes us back to the first question: the space and capacity of SIWI will be missed. But I'm pretty sure others will pick up on that, because we need it. There is no escape, and, in the end, we will find a way forward because the need is massive and the opportunities and the will to act to. The need has never been  greater, but nor has the commitment around the world. I think we find ourselves in a very fortunate time when we think about water across the full development agenda. So, I feel really very sorry for the SIWI staff, this was totally unnecessary. But replicating a past SIWI under the current circumstances will be an opportunity missed. This is not about SIWI, this is about the economics of water and beyond.

The Water Diplomat: Well, exactly, thank you, and since you mentioned providing the Special Envoy with substance, I think this is a good moment to talk about, and to congratulate you with the report of the Global Commission, a very important moment in time for this to come out, very interesting content so far. So, I'd like to talk maybe about the concept of valuing water for a minute - and the report underlines the fact that for the first time in history, the hydrological cycle has been disrupted, and stresses that we need to think about how we value water much more profoundly.

One could link that to the ideas of the Green Climate Fund which is advocating for water to be treated as a separate asset class and to be considered as an asset which is valued in economic terms, I'd really like to get your ideas about how. Valuing water and leveraging investment for water can be inserted into this agenda in the coming period. Perhaps I can start with Henk this time because your report has come out today, Henk. To give some responses on how the economics of water and leveraging investment for water can be approached going forward.

Henk Ovink: Yes, it's a good question. I think with the Global Commission on the Economics of Water we do a couple of things, knowing that we come in at a special time –the first thing is that we really need to take fresh look at the hydrological cycle.

There has been a lot of emphasis historically on blue water: water in our rivers, lakes and aquifers, and there are other aspects that have not been emphasised, such as green water: water in soils, plants and forests, and transpiring into the atmosphere. We need to unpack how important green water is in our policy, but also in science. I am not saying that blue water is not important: it is very important, so it’s not one or the other, but because one is much less appreciated in our understanding, in our policy and investment, we need to put the spotlight on that.

We see that the hydrological cycle is out of balance, and that is undermining the achievement of everything: blue and green water underpin every aspect of equitable sustainable development. Secondly, we are impacting negatively the source of freshwater in three ways. Firstly, we over-abstract and pollute, meaning that there is less water, and the quality of the water we have is rapidly worsening. Secondly, close to half of the rainfall on land comes from green water, but bad and unjust land use planning and simplified economic development cuts away at that source of green water. Thirdly, climate change makes everything worse in the context of diminishing biodiversity and water.

That magnifying glass of climate change also has two sides in the context of the hydrological cycle. Water plays a role in mitigation, because of the emissions, the waterflows are supercharging freak events and it is implicated in securing carbon sinks and storage. And on the other hand, we feel climate change impacts predominantly through water with floods, droughts, sea level rise, undermining food and energy security and destabilising societies and economies.. These interdependencies are important in our world, because water in the atmosphere and in rivers make the world an interconnected space. The Congo rains come from Brazil, water flows from Africa to Europe, from Europe to Asia, and so forth. We are all interconnected through waterflows.

This global interrelationship of water, permeating the SDG's, linking water, biodiversity, and climate change, and linking economies around the world, shows us that the hydrological cycle itself should be valued as a global common good, and this demands also that water – the water-cycle - needs to have a place at the global stage, on a multilateral level. That is one part of the agenda. Secondly, water has a strong role in the economy, and it is underpinning our GDP's. A destabilised water-cycle is projected to reduce GDP by between 8 to 15% in the near future, undermining food security, energy security and a healthy environment, so it is really impacting our economies and societies writ large, so we have to do something about it now.

Our report starts by addressing the science of the functioning and importance of the hydrological cycle, and the state of the cycle in its relationship to everything else. Secondly, we explore the importance if this for our economies, across the world. And thirdly we sketch the need and possibilities for concerted action, our perspective going forward, for which we identified 5 missions and critical enablers. Mission 1 is to launch a revolution in food systems, 2 is to conserve and restore natural habitats critical to protect green water, 3 is to establish a circular water economy, 4 is to enable a clean-energy and AI-rich era with much lower water intensity, and 5 is to ensure that no child dies from unsafe water by 2030.

This is no rocket science of course, and finance, data, partnerships and governance – local to global – are key enablers that we need to accelerate inclusive and impactful action. This means going beyond the financial perspective only: we need different money, money that is patient, that is long term, that is public and private. We also need the pipelines, policy packages and the programmatic approach to set this up. This is critical part: the way we validate and evaluate our business cases for investing in sustainable development, climate action and water writ large – is too short term, too much single focuses and often only aimed at short gains, instead creating value for our societies.

It is very easy to fund stupidity: because there is a short-term profit it becomes hard to fund something that has long term value and cuts across society with benefits for water, better health, greater prosperity, equity, climate mitigation and adaptation, sustainability, and food security. This is way too complex to fit into the current validation models. But we must start to convince our financial partners that the complexity of the challenge must be dealt with through comprehensive, holistic, long-term approaches. Capturing these benefits and values in our business models will be key to develop pipelines that demonstrate an alternative. Our report provides ingredients and pathways, but by the same token, it also requires fundamental change. So, there is a long way to go but I'm pretty sure we are in a super relevant and interesting moment in time where the urgency becomes an opportunity, and the insights show that pathways forwards really matter for everyone and also that we have no other choice. So, in that sense I'm hopeful.

The Water Diplomat: Exactly. Thank you very much, Henk, for this detailed unpacking of the report, its mission, and the analysis behind it. One could link this to the work of the GCF because there are some pretty bold steps that the Climate Fund is taking in the sense of their argumentation that water should be seen as asset class, and to begin to operationalize how the bankable solutions for water can be produced. In some ways, the GCF is running ahead of the game, putting money into new concepts and ways of seeing, which is quite bold in comparison to the approaches of a traditional bank. One could argue that there is a link to what the Global Commission is doing. Bapon, I don't know if you see this link, but maybe we can have a conversation around how you see water as an asset class and how you see leveraging finance for water and investing in water in the context of a changing climate, and in connection to what Henk has just said.

Bapon Fakhruddin: I wholeheartedly concur with Henk’s observations. While the discourse on water as an asset class and leveraging finance is recurrent, the critical challenge lies in structural implementation- specifically the ‘how’. How can we actually do these things and establish an enabling policy environment? The GCF provides innovative financial instruments that de-risk investments and encourage private sector participation, playing a pivotal role in this transformation.

However, the critical question remains: How do we implement these solutions effectively? The GCF’s blended finance instruments are designed to create this enabling environment and fulfill the necessary regulatory functions. As Henk mentioned, intervention is key. The GCF operates with a high-risk appetite and flexible financial instruments to support critical water challenges and market creating. But our challenge is to catalyse and convince our partners to use those. Our goal is to persuade our partners to adopt these tools, ensuring that the identified problems are addressed with appropriate solutions and technologies.

At the core of our strategy is the recognition that improved and expanded water and sanitation systems are not just necessary but urgent. The GCF is poised to play a pivotal role in this transformation through its two main components: a public-private partnership structuring component and a concessional finance component. The public-private partnership component is designed to fund project preparation, structuring, and transaction advisory activities for both national and subnational beneficiaries. This ensures that projects are not only well-conceived but also strategically aligned with local and national priorities. Simultaneously, the concessional finance component provides eligible projects with concessional co-investments, bridging the viability gap that often hinders the implementation of climate-resilient infrastructure.

Recently, our Board approved the first GCF-funded water project in Iraq, a region fraught with conflict and complex water dynamics. Investing in climate resilience in such settings may seem incongruous, as immediate concerns like water scarcity often overshadow long-term climate considerations. In Iraq, water is a critical and sometimes contentious resource, with approximately 80% of its water sourced from transboundary rivers shared with neighboring countries like Turkey, Iran, and Syria. This dependence exacerbates tensions and complicates water management efforts. The challenge lies in ensuring equitable access to water for farmers, who are the backbone of Iraq's agricultural sector. To address this, we are introducing a pre-metering water system. While it may appear risky to ask farmers to pay for water in a conflict setting, our strategy is to demonstrate the system's efficacy through early adopters. We anticipate that initially, around some 5% of farmers will embrace the scheme. These pioneers will achieve optimal production levels supported by market creation, serving as a proof of concept. Over time, as the benefits become evident, we expect broader participation, gradually transforming behaviours and mindsets. This process may take up to a decade, but initiating change now is imperative for sustainable outcomes.

Our approach is to leverage the GCF’s financial instruments and technical support to overcome the multifaceted challenges posed by the climate crisis. By focusing on innovative financing, public-private partnerships, and capacity building, we aim to create sustainable, scalable, and replicable solutions that not only address immediate water and sanitation needs but also build long-term resilience against climate impacts. This holistic and collaborative strategy is essential for transforming water management into a cornerstone of global climate action.

The Water Diplomat: Thanks Bapon, and that looks like quite an exciting process in Iraq. I hope it goes well. I would like to go towards the thinking around COP 29, so water has found itself in the climate agenda quite prominently beginning with the water pavilion at COP 26 in Glasgow, where we had the first water pavilion and with the help of Egypt, water actually entered into the negotiating text at COP 27. So water has now become quite prominent on the COP agenda. I'm wondering what your thoughts are in the run up to COP 29, and what your hopes and aspirations are for the outcomes of water in the context of the next COP. Can I start with you again, Henk?

Henk Ovink:  Sure. I think there’s no need to convince me of the importance of the relationship between climate and water. It's been part of my life for quite a bit, but I think also with our report, we are starting to unpack, not only how important this is, but also what the opportunities are. The climate space is such a contested political space. From the Paris Agreement and beyond, it is not so easy to deliver on the promises we made, and I think here water can play a key role. We need to show the world that what we promised and what we need to do, also what can be done, and I think being able to show these possibilities, showing the opportunities and the benefits they create, is way more convincing, than fighting one another over disagreements.

And who pays or who suffers most? I think that the water space in the climate world presents that opportunity, because both through mitigation and adaptation, we manage a healthy environment, food security, and the energy transition with a stable water-cycle. We need to think across the board, creating more stability at community and societal level both in a social and economic sense. And this is not magical, it is common sense, but often that common sense is lacking, because the negotiations are about vested interests or the loss of political capacities or other values.

I think turning that around with opportunities often can help. So, I hope that now, and with the report and in in the coming months, that we focus more on what it is that we can do, and less so on where we disagree. If you are in a conversation, there is a library of things on which on which you agree, and just a few things on which you disagree. But still, negotiations are about the disagreement, and it's a funny cultural misconception about negotiation. It should not be about the disagreement - a negotiation should be about finding a common ground for collaboration, because this is where you can find and achieve your collective goals. I think we lost that a bit and, in that sense, and I see that this really is an amazing opportunity to forge partnerships, just water partnerships.

Water anchors us in opportunities and less so in the conflict of disagreement. And of course we will make mistakes, it is part of life, but that is all right, and we will learn, and we'll reinvest.

But predominantly we will deliver and implement those opportunities, get them to scale, see them as alternatives - and this is across North and South - everywhere. I live in New York, the city I worked in rebuilding after Hurricane Sandy. When Hurricane Sandy hit, things really went wrong and, in the aftermath, President Obama established the Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Task Force. I set up a program, Rebuild by Design in the Task Force where we developed alternatives that did not fit within existing policy, but together with a massive coalition of partners we found ways to develop ánd implement them. One example of such a program we developed for the Staten Island coast, investing massively in ecological structures that help increase biodiversity and water quality, and unlock recreational potential, and at the same time serve as eco-barrier reefs for coastal protection, and wave reduction. We proved the world that the alternative to singe focused, hard infrastructure not only works, but it’s also cost effective, creates a myriad of additional benefits – carbon offsets, recreational potential, environmental and water quality – and does the job faster. Everybody happy. The Governor of New York recently quadrupled the funding to scale these projects along the whole coastline of Staten Island. It is a very small example, but it shows that in the global North and South, policy frameworks often don’t fit with the solutions we need. The future needs are not embedded in our policies and regulations, in our validation and financing mechanisms. We must escape these lock-ins, create safe spaces for innovation, partnerships, and implementation. we must create that opportunity to make them the mainstream and start to scale and replicate. I will stop: I can talk about this forever!

The Water Diplomat: This is a very interesting idea, Henk, about water as an opportunity in the climate space and focusing on the common ground rather than focusing on the differences. I think that the GCF has been doing that quite a lot in co-production, rather than having a sort of box office, where people can submit their requests, the GCF is moving towards a much more proactive approach of working together, entering into dialogue and proposing ideas based on its experience, and looking for the common ground between different people, at opportunities for investments, in responding to climate change. Bapon, how are you looking forward towards the COP, in thinking about what Henk has just said about opportunities and commonalities and working on what we have in common, rather than our differences?

Bapon Fakhruddin: If you recall the last COP in Dubai, where water issues gained unprecedented attention, and we need to utilise that momentum in this upcoming COP 29 how we actually bring this more upfront of climate action in an innovative and transformative way. I am inspired by Henk's emphasis on leveraging water as a catalyst for positive change, we recognize that water can unify stakeholders and transcend traditional disagreements. Instead of focusing on contentious upstream-downstream dynamics in transboundary water management, we aim to create collaborative market opportunities that prioritize water balance, security, and supply, with a critical focus on glacier protection. This approach aligns with the idea of escaping policy lock-ins and fostering partnerships that can implement solutions at scale, delivering multiple co-benefits for communities and ecosystems alike..

In this spirit, we are excited to see several public sector water projects at COP 29 with large ticket size for several water stressed countries. These projects embody the transformative potential that Henk described by integrating sustainable farming practices with water security measures, enhancing storage capabilities, and adopting an ecosystem-based approach that contributes to both food security and environmental health. By thinking across the board and creating stable water cycles, we are not just investing in infrastructure but in the social and economic stability of communities. This initiative demonstrates how innovative, partnership-driven solutions can break free from outdated policies, unlock new opportunities, and serve as a model for effective climate action that benefits all stakeholders.

The Water Diplomat: A big thank you to you both, Bapon and Henk for this enriching discussion!