Water Security in Sub-Saharan African Cities: City Blueprint Assessment of Abuja, Bangui, Harare, Libreville, Windhoek and Yaoundé

Water Security in African capital cities is extremely challenged by rapid growth and urbanisation, amplified by effects of climate change. In this chapter we describe the baseline assessment of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) and governance capacity of six African capitals: Abuja, Bangui, Harare, Libreville, Windhoek, and Yaoundé. The assessment was done by local young professionals, as part of the internship and/or consultancy at UNESCO field units in these capitals, using the City Blueprint Approach (CBA). The young professionals were trained to collect data, interview important stakeholders and interpret the results. The CBA assesses external trends and pressures, performance of IWRM, and the governance capacity in a city. Furthermore, the project led to the development of an unofficial network of young professionals that empowered them through peer-to-peer learning of best practices in the different cities. After the assessment, the young professionals presented the outcome at workshops with city stakeholders to identify and prioritise the most pressing challenges in the cities. Common issues found in the six cities were: 1) challenging water supply and lack of wastewater treatment, 2) lack of adequate solid waste handling, 3) high burden of disease and flood risk, 4) economic pressure and political instability, 5) lack of data and monitoring constrains the capacity of these cities to address water-related challenge

Position Paper on Water, Energy, Food and Ecosystem (WEFE) Nexus and Sustainable development Goals (SDGs)

The EU and the international community is realising that the Water, Energy, Food and Ecosystem components are interlinked and require a joint planning in order to meet the daunting global challenges related to Water, Energy and Food security and maintaining the ecosystem health and in this way, reach the SDGs. If not dealt with, the world will not be able to meet the demand for water, energy and food in a not too far future and, in any case, in a not sustainable way. The strain on the ecosystems resulting from unsustainable single-sector planning will lead to increasing poverty, inequality and instability. The Nexus approach is fully aligned with and supportive of the EU Consensus on Development. Key elements of the Consensus will require collaborative efforts across sectors in ways that can be supported/implemented by a Nexus approach. In this way, transparent and accountable decision-making, involving the civil society is key and common to the European Consensus on Development and the Nexus approach. The Nexus approach will support the implementation of the SDG in particular SDG 2 (Food), SDG 6 (Water) and SDG 7 (Energy), but most SDGs have elements that link to food, water and energy in one or other way, and will benefit from a Nexus approach. The SDGs are designed to be cross-cutting and be implemented together, which is also reflected in a WEFE Nexus approach. A Nexus approach offers a sustainable way of addressing the effects of Climate Change and increase resilience. The WEFE Nexus has in it the main drivers of climate change (water, energy and food security) and the main affected sectors (water and the environment). Decisions around policy, infrastructure, … developed based on the WEFE Nexus assessments will be suitable as elements of climate change mitigation and adaptation. In fact, it is difficult to imagine solutions to the climate change issue that are not built on a form of Nexus approach. The Nexus approach is being implemented around the world, as examples in the literature demonstrate. These examples together with more examples from EU and member state development cooperation will help build experience that can be consolidated and become an important contribution to a Toolkit for WEFE Nexus Implementation. From the expert discussions, it appears that because of the novelty of the approach, a Toolkit will be an important element in getting the Nexus approach widely used. This should build on experiences from practical examples of NEXUS projects or similar inter-sectorial collaboration projects; and, there are already policy, regulation and practical experience to allow institutions and countries to start applying the Nexus concept.JRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resource

Taking stock of decentralized disaster risk reduction in Indonesia

The Sendai Framework, which outlines the global course on disaster risk reduction until 2030, places strong importance on the role of local government in disaster risk reduction. An aim of decentralization is to increase the influence and authority of local government in decision making. Yet, there is limited empirical evidence of the extent, character and effects of decentralization in current disaster risk reduction implementation, and of the barriers that are most critical to this. This paper evaluates decentralization in relation to disaster risk reduction in Indonesia, chosen for its recent actions to decentralize governance of DRR coupled with a high level of disaster risk. An analytical framework was developed to evaluate the various dimensions of decentralized disaster risk reduction, which necessitated the use of a desk study, semi-structured interviews and a gap analysis. Key barriers to implementation in Indonesia included: capacity gaps at lower institutional levels, low compliance with legislation, disconnected policies, issues in communication and coordination and inadequate resourcing. However, any of these barriers are not unique to disaster risk reduction, and similar barriers have been observed for decentralization in other developing countries in other public sectors

Taking stock of decentralized disaster risk reduction in Indonesia

The Sendai Framework, which outlines the global course on disaster risk reduction until 2030, places strong importance on the role of local government in disaster risk reduction. An aim of decentralization is to increase the influence and authority of local government in decision making. Yet, there is limited empirical evidence of the extent, character and effects of decentralization in current disaster risk reduction implementation, and of the barriers that are most critical to this. This paper evaluates decentralization in relation to disaster risk reduction in Indonesia, chosen for its recent actions to decentralize governance of DRR coupled with a high level of disaster risk. An analytical framework was developed to evaluate the various dimensions of decentralized disaster risk reduction, which necessitated the use of a desk study, semi-structured interviews and a gap analysis. Key barriers to implementation in Indonesia included: capacity gaps at lower institutional levels, low compliance with legislation, disconnected policies, issues in communication and coordination and inadequate resourcing. However, any of these barriers are not unique to disaster risk reduction, and similar barriers have been observed for decentralization in other developing countries in other public sectors

Regional perspectives

In UNESCO World Water Assessment Programme (WWAP). The United Nations World Water Development Report 2023: partnerships and cooperation for water. Paris, France: UNESC