LITMIR.BIZ

Скачать книгу

      Need for an integrated way of thinking is critical while implementing water related targets. An integrated approach to the implementation of SDG6 would significantly boost the opportunities for achieving long‐term sustainable development. However, an integrated vision is lacking for implementing water related SDGs, including the Goal 6, despite the fact that there is a long history, scientific backing, and repeated calls to pursue a coordinated water resources management. Since SDG6 was built on Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) target on drinking water and sanitation (7c), interpretation of the goal is still skewed towards drinking water and sanitation (Targets 6.1 and 6.2). In fact, it is estimated that 2.2 billion people still lack access to safely managed drinking water services and staggering 4.2 billion people lack safely managed sanitation services (UN‐Water 2019). For the achievement of SDG6 and to realize the vision of 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda, addressing the fundamental human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation is indispensable. From that viewpoint, SDG6 could be viewed an expansion of MDG 7.c to accommodate the shortcomings in the indicators for safe water and basic sanitation (Weststrate, et al. 2019).

      It is quite imperative that the implementation of the SDG6 and other water relevant targets have to build upon the progress made on water resource management as well as on the achievements of MDG, in particular, the target on drinking water and sanitation (Target 7.c). Beyond drinking water and sanitation, it is also equally important to balance weightage on the rest of the water related targets, which are yet to draw enough traction. A paradigm shift is needed to recognize that Goal6 targets are wider in scope, highly interdependent, and will require considerably more effort to achieve (UN‐Water 2016b).

      There are calls to revitalize the role of integrated water resource management (IWRM) to implement SDGs, while Target 6.5 stresses the implementation of IWRM at all levels (Smith and Clausen 2018). While criticisms on MDG 7.c regarding the need for IWRM are covered or complemented by Target 6.4, 6.5 and 6.6 (Weststrate, et al. 2019), it is hard to conclude if IWRM could be viewed as a means to co‐achieve SDG6 targets or an end to assess the effectiveness of implementation of the goal or both.

      The objective of this chapter is to critically assess the relevancy of pursuing an integrated approach for implementing SDG6 and other water‐relevant targets. This chapter argues that promoting a basin‐wide collaborative mechanism could be an effective entry point not only for sustainable water resource management but also for generating synergistic outcomes across multiple targets of SDGs. It takes an example of the Lower Mekong Basin to examine the complexities, opportunities, and potential way forwards for a river basin approach for implementing SDG6 along with other water related targets of SDGs.

2.2. IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORKS FOR SDGS

      Even after five years since the adoption of SDGs in 2015, there are ambiguities on the implementation framework from the angle of institutional setup, mobilization of resources, ensuring participation, and for tracking progress. The approaches adopted by countries are diverse not only because of their local circumstances but also due to the loose governance of SDGs adopted during its foundation. Monitoring and accountability frameworks for SDGs exist (Fonseca et al. in this publication; Chapter 9), however, due to its non‐binding nature, there is no strict compliance on the countries which can formally submit voluntary national reviews (VNRs) to the High Level Political Forum for follow‐up and review of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (UNDESA 2019). By the means of VNR, countries take stock of and assess progress – and shortcomings – in implementation of the goals and targets. In that regard, many national governments have set up SDG implementation structures and are taking steps to integrate SDGs into national planning (Elder and King 2018). Some countries have tasked their planning commission to coordinate and track implementation SDGs, while in some cases a new institutional setup for SDGs has been created. For overwhelming countries, a pragmatic strategy is to mainstream existing developmental programs and actions and then juxtapose the outcomes with the relevant SDG targets. However, at worst, and contrary to the spirit of integrated and indivisible SDGs, the countries may end up selecting a few of the SDGs as priority goals that fit current national agendas, ongoing data collection, and resource constraints (Elder and King 2018). There is also a growing tendency among the donors, development partners, and international organizations to incorporate contributions to SDGs while developing plans, programs, and actions. Despite considerable hope and enthusiasm raised by the SDGs, many governments and stakeholders have little idea on how to proceed with concrete actions (Elder and King 2018).

In the absence of clear guidance, self‐innovation is also happening on several fronts including local government, cities, private sector and business, youth group, etc. For instance, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBSCD) provides a platform for their member companies to strategically integrate and contribute to a wide variety of SDGs. While, SDG Business Hub captures and packages latest insight, developments and emerging trends on the SDGs to support business in navigating this dynamic agenda. Local bodies or regional governments have adopted Voluntary Local Reporting (VLR) for an assessment of their progress of SDGs implementation and subsequently fed into the VNR. At the sectoral or thematic level of each SDG or target, some specialized UN agencies are involved as per their core mandate such as UNHABITAT for SDG11, FAO for SDG2, WHO for SDG3, and UN Water for SDG6.

      SDG6 has the most positive interaction (indivisible, reinforcing, enabling) with all SDGs (UNU/UNOSD, 2013). However, outcomes could be counteracting, in particular, on ambient water quality (Target 6.3), water availability (Target 6.4) and ecosystems (Target 6.6) if care is not taken to reduce pollution, use water sustainably and protect ecosystems during the implementation of SDGs (UN‐Water 2016b). Besides, further analysis will be necessary to understand and assess the complex interactions among multiple SDGs. For instance, a nexus approach helps to understand and balance the competing sectors such as water, food, and energy. A study on the interaction between SDG2 (food), SDG6 (water), and energy (SDG7) has found that SDG 6 has the highest synergies, 124 positive interactions, and SDG 2 has the most negative interactions (Fader et al. 2018).

      Developing an ability to utilize the strategic role of water in the implementation of SDGs are sure to result in multiple dividends while avoiding counteracting outcomes (Shivakoti and Bengtsson 2015, UN‐Water 2016a). However, an integrated approach is indispensable for the co‐implementation of these targets not only due to synergies or trade‐offs on the outcomes but also from the perspective of resources and finance. Enormousness of the scope of all 17 SDGs means that resources will be in high demand and challenging to secure for each SDG. Sooner or later, an integrated framing will be obvious choice to find an economically rational way to finance water related SDGs, effective mobilization of resources, and cross‐coordination.

2.3. INTEGRATED APPROACH FOR WATER RELATED TARGETS OF SDGS

The concept of an integrated approach to water resource management has been around for at least 60 years (Biswas 2008). It has been firmly on the international policy agenda since the historic Mar del Plata UN Wáter Conference in 1977 and subsequently under the broader call for sustainable development in the First Rio Summit in 1992 (Figure 2.1). Since the adoption of 2030 Agenda and SDGs, the relevancy of integrated approach of water resources management has re‐surfaced strongly. An integrated approach to implementing SDGs will allow more cohesive monitoring (including coordination between existing frameworks), maximize available resources for implementation, and ensure that certain goals are not achieved at the detriment of others (Schuster‐Wallace and Sandford 2015).

IWRM is a conceptual framework meant to describe the complexity of water decisions, including planning, organising, and operating water systems, and to balance views and interests of relevant stakeholders (Grigg 2008). IWRM reflects a holistic attempt to co‐manage sub‐sectors (water supply, irrigation, storm water and flood management, sanitation and water quality) and their interaction with other cross‐cutting sectors (industry, energy, agriculture, ecosystem, and bio‐diversity, etc.). Despite its merits, the concept of IWRM, as well as the vision of sustainable development, confront similar

Скачать книгу