Water for people.pdf - WHO Thailand Digital Repository

3 6 0 / M A N A G E M E N T C H A L L E N G E S : S T E W A R D S H I P A N D G O V E R N A N C EEnsuring the Knowledge Base: A Collective Responsibilitystudies sponsored by the Research and Development Forum forScience-led Development in Africa.The global economic context is ushering in a new frameworkthat is transforming the social institution of science and researchsystems. According to UNESCO’s regular World Science Report,science education at the post-secondary level is facing a severecrisis in many developing countries, marked by a growing perceptionthat science is failing to tackle acute problems associated withwater, sanitation, food security and the environment. Deterioratingworking conditions in laboratories and universities and wide salarygaps favouring scientists in the private sector are accentuating thetrend. This mostly holds true for non-water trades in which thetrained water professional has valuable transferable skills. Theimpact of privatization is being felt in several countries throughcutbacks in state funding, the closing of certain national researchfacilities and increasing dependence on foreign private and donorfunding. Universities are knitting tighter relationships with thecorporate world to become more responsive to the needs anddemands of industry, but will this serve the public good and theneeds of the poor? What are the consequences for researchexpenditure on achieving a finer understanding of basic waterprocesses and developing more efficient techniques for water useand extraction, whether in the domestic, agricultural or industrialsector?Assessments have pointed out that large numbers of technicaland scientific personnel lack sufficient knowledge about overallwater management and use. While important scientific andtechnological advances have been made – modelling capabilitystands out as an example – the specific needs of developingcountries in monitoring and managing their water resources are nothigh on the research agenda. Many barriers to the effectivemanagement and supply of water lie in the institutional andmanagerial sphere and will not be solved by improved technologiesalone. Research focused on effective institutional structures andmanagement techniques is required.A potential deadlock lies in the polarized standpoints within thewater research community. At this stage, there remains ample scopefor divergent policies and actions to evolve, all backed legitimatelyby the ‘knowledge base’. The nature of the journal process – a keymeasure of academic performance which holds the influence toattract financing – makes it all the more difficult to find an objectivemiddle ground. A vast array of academic papers exist. Two of themain bibliographic databases, Selected Water Resources Abstracts(1967–94) and Water Resources Abstracts (1994–present) identify370,000 papers or abstracts. The figure is probably conservativegiven the lack of access to some bibliographies (particularly non-English ones). This leaves the knowledge base with an outstandingproblem of consolidation. Conferences, thematic volumes, bestpractice documents and guidelines all attempt to streamline thisfragmented body of information. The Toolbox for Integrated WaterResource Management, released in 2001 by GWP, provides a rangeof tools that users can select or modify according to their needsand local circumstances. Launched at the Freshwater Conference inBonn in December 2001, the Tool Box draws together a wealth ofexperience and expertise in IWRM in one product. Divided into twomain sections, Policy Guidance and Operational Tools, the tool boxfeatures a wide variety of options related to the enablingenvironment (what it takes to make policy changes on the ground),institutional roles and management instruments. To complement thisinformation, case studies on IWRM practices are included. The ToolBox will continue to grow as users gain experience with it and startproviding feedback on the success or failure of a particular set ofactions in a given situation. 1This middle ground is reachable when a consensus, based on ashared vision, is sought by governments, the scientific communityand society. As Michael Gibbons, secretary general of theAssociation of Commonwealth Universities wrote in the magazineNature (Gibbons, 1999),Under the prevailing contract between science andsociety, science has been expected to produce ‘reliable’knowledge, provided merely that it communicates itsdiscoveries to society. A new contract must now ensurethat scientific knowledge is ‘socially robust’, and that itsproduction is seen by society to be both transparent andparticipative.If this is to hold sway in the water field, there is an urgency toclearly demonstrate the links between new knowledge and socioeconomicoutcomes, and to generate stronger demand for access toclean water. The explicit linking of water issues to humandevelopment and economic productivity is generally lacking both interms of national policy declarations and legislative andadministrative support.The traditional wisdom of applying general solutions to waterissues is being replaced by the idea of developing locally specificand applicable ideas. However, new investigations into specific localissues require increased investment or knowledge generation. Thecountries where the need for focused knowledge to achieve resultsis highest are often the countries with the lowest investment.1. For more details, see http://www.gwpforum.org.