From Water Poverty to Water Prosperity—A More Participatory Approach to Studying Local Water Resources Management

Abstract

The Water Poverty Index (WPI), a tool designed for integrated analysis of water issues, was set-up in a community in Madhya Pradesh, India through a transparent and participatory process. Though the aim of the WPI is to primarily use existing statistical data, quantitative information from census and local records was combined with qualitative data from community interviews and participatory exercises. The inclusion of community chosen indicators and the adjustment of values so that higher numbers represent water prosperity rather than water poverty, led to the Water Prosperity Index (WPI + ). The WPI + score was contrasted with the WPI at community level. It was also calculated for two community areas with different caste and socioeconomic characteristics and weighted separately according to water issues prioritized by men and women. The WPI + revealed a great difference in water access between the two areas and in prioritized issues between men and women illustrated in the importance of appropriate spatial representation and gender sensitive assessment for revealing important disparities. Results also showed that highly aggregated data hide these differences making it more difficult to target the most vulnerable groups when planning measures to increase equitable water allocation. While quantitative data revealed an important perspective of the water situation, qualitative data about adequacy of resources, services or institutions, improved understanding of which issues to prioritize. A valid and useful community water index must be based on representative participation, transparency and local influence on the methodology and subsequent results.2

Opening Up the Water Poverty Index—Co-Producing Knowledge on the Capacity for Community Water Management Using the Water Prosperity Index

“…However, such efforts always struggle with the inherent drawbacks of using quantitative indices (Molle and Mollinga, 2003, Mayer, 2008, Wilk and Jonsson, 2008, Wilk and Jonsson, 2013. We now proceed to draw some conclusions from the process of co-production of knowledge about the capacity component.…”

“…Results in Table 3 demonstrate a large variability in the values between different indicators for the same sub-component. Thus, averages and aggregations of indicators can hide significant differences, by smoothing out the extremes, hide important distributional aspects related to spatial, socio-economic and gender conditions (Wilk and Jonsson, 2013), thus oversimplifying the assessment of intricate socio-economic and institutional management strengths and weaknesses. Thus, even for scanning and diagnosing, the WPI + must always be used with caution as important aspects, regional variations and vulnerable groups can easily be hidden (see also Komnenic et al, 2009, Garriga and Foguet, 2005, Molle and Mollinga, 2003.…”

“…The results from the explorative assessments of the five WPI components, including capacity, To enable a comparison between the WPI + and the WPI, these where then calculated according to the same principles (Wilk and Jonsson, 2013). As the WPI aims to use existing data whenever possible (Sullivan and Meigh, 2007), the WPI was calculated for the community using existing quantitative data at first hand, adding qualitative data collected during the study when needed.…”

Application of a DPSIR Modeling Framework to Assess Spatial–Temporal Differences of Water Poverty in China

“…Secondly, uncertainty about weight definition among variables can lead to inaccuracy and inefficient explanations (Wenxin et al 2018). Thirdly, the existing research (Komnenic et al 2009;Sujata et al 2012;Vishnu et al 2012;Wilk and Jonsson 2013;Guppy 2014) focused on specific time; however, it ignored the continuity in time. This may lead to the lack of explanatory power if indicators do not sufficiently reflect the subjective and objective relative importance variable (Wenxin et al 2018).…”

Trend Analysis of Water Poverty Index for Assessment of Water Stress and Water Management Polices: A Case Study in the Hexi Corridor, China

“…Water and poverty are inextricably related through the following aspects [2]: water for basic services, food production, job creation, sustainable environmental management, and for water rights and entitlements for poorer people. Wilk et al [3] suggested that a better understanding of poverty and prosperity is imperative to enforce strategic actions for the efficient management of water resources. Water plans and management can offer cost-competitive adaptation to sustainable development with the potential to meet both short and medium term targets for reducing water scarcity risks [4].…”