Planning effective joint development programs in shared river basins is thought to become better when such programs are preceded by integrated studies. This paper aims to provide such a study through a situation analysis with regard to the vulnerability of water resources systems in the Eastern Nile Basin (ENB). The focus was on using internationally recognized indicators and indices that can provide an insight about the situation in the region in a concise and illustrative fashion. A framework for assessing vulnerability of water systems was outlined and applied to the region. Based on a careful survey, a list of 31 indicators used for vulnerability assessment were identified and categorized to separate hydro-physical indicators from other indicators of socio-economic or political nature. The identified indicators were evaluated for the three ENB countries and illustrated in radar diagrams. Interpretations were drawn describing the vulnerability situation in each country. The main findings are: (1) vulnerability of water resources is highest in Sudan, followed by Ethiopia and then Egypt; (2) while vulnerability in Egypt stems mainly from hydro-physical factors; in Sudan and Ethiopia it is directly related to poverty and underdevelopment; (3) Higher stresses on available water resources in Egypt are due to increases in total withdrawals; while in Sudan and Ethiopia it is mainly due to water mal-distribution and quality deterioration; (4) governance factors in the three countries hinder the proper management of the available water resources.

Vulnerability Assessment of Water Resources Systems in the Eastern Nile Basin

This paper presents a study where sustainable development indicators (SDIs) for sludge handling and wastewater treatment systems were constructed in co-operation with a large Swedish water company. Results from a life cycle assessment, a risk assessment, an economic assessment and an uncertainty assessment were used as inputs for ranking technical options of sludge handling by use of multi-criteria analysis (MCA). The MCA included assessment of the different technical options, valuation of different, and often conflicting, aspects of sustainability and weighting of various criteria. On basis of the preferences expressed in the MCA, a number of SDIs and, when possible, targets for sustainable development, were formulated. The resulting SDIs reflected economic, environmental, technical and social aspects of sustainable development of sludge handling systems. Where possible, the coverage of the indicators was extended to the entire wastewater system.

Sustainable development indicators for wastewater systems – researchers and indicator users in a co-operative case study

Development of spatial water resources vulnerability index considering climate change impacts

This study develops a framework to quantify the flood risk vulnerability in South Korea by considering climate change impacts. On the basis of the concept of exposure-sensitivity-adaptive capacity, 21 proxy variables are selected and screened, and their weights are determined for their objectivity by using the Delphi technique. The data from 16 provinces of South Korea and the weighting values of all proxy variables are fuzzified to consider uncertainty. In addition, the National Center for Atmosphere Research Community Climate System Model 3 (CCSM3) in conjunction with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on Emission Scenario (SRES) A1B, A2, B1, A1T, A1FI, and B2 are used for future climate data (2020s, 2050s, and 2080s). Therefore, 19 flood risk vulnerabilities of South Korea, including present conditions, are quantitatively evaluated and compared. Three Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) techniques - Weighted Sum Method (WSM), Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Situation (TOPSIS), and fuzzy TOPSIS - are used to quantify all spatial vulnerabilities. As a result, some fuzzy TOPSIS rankings are quite different to those of WSM and TOPSIS, and the ranking patterns of the 19 climate change scenarios are also derived in a dissimilar way. In addition, if the variances of the provinces' rankings are considered, some provinces showing low values can plan their climate change adaptation strategies by taking into consideration their relatively certain rankings. In the end, the vulnerability assessment for climate change should consider not only various MCDM techniques but also the uncertainty of weighting values and proxy variable data.

A fuzzy multi-criteria approach to flood risk vulnerability in South Korea by considering climate change impacts

Fuzzy VIKOR approach for assessing the vulnerability of the water supply to climate change and variability in South Korea

This paper addresses the issue of indicators for water management by considering why we need them, what the characteristics of a good indicator should be, how they can add value to policy and decision-making, and what are their limitations. There are a vast quantity of data available on water in Europe from which a range of basic trend indicators has been derived. Most of these indicators address "what is happening?"-type questions. Some indicators go further and address "does it matter?" questions by assessing trends against prescribed standards and targets. There have been some interesting developments in indicators which help to understand the demand side of water management and to assess the relative efficiencies of resource usage in different socio-economic sectors. More effort is needed to bring together relevant social, economic and environmental information interactively to define indicators that address questions about the sustainability of water use and the contribution of the water environment to our overall quality of life. The development of indicators to date has concentrated on making the best use of available information. However, we now need to move from a position of "best available information" towards "best needed information". This will require better communication between information users and providers. It will also require a rethinking of exactly what our priority knowledge needs are to support policy-making and environmental management. This is essential if we are to obtain the best value from limited monitoring resources by eliminating the current redundancy in reporting requirements and refocusing programmes to deliver priority information needs.

J. Seager

Papers

Perspectives and limitations of indicators in water management