1. Thesis: An integrated nexus-perspective on water, energy and food security requires new inter-sectoral institutions.
Pros:
There is a need for inter-sectoral coordination of sectoral master plans.
Cons:
Many institutions would consider cross-sectoral implications of their decisions if they would work properly.
Recommendations:
Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) provides a model for integrated approaches — other sectors have to be included more intensively in IWRM-processes.
2. Thesis: Water, Energy and Food Security are mainly endangered by bad water governance rather than by shortage of water resources.
Pros:
Recognition of the role of water governance; Inter-sectoral nexus perspective on challenges.
Cons:
Thesis is less applicable to the energy sector. Availability of water resources is a boundary condition.
Recommendations:
Given the stress on water resources (climate change, population growth), we cannot afford to have bad water governance if we want to achieve water, energy and food security for ourselves and future generations.
3. Thesis: Sectoral incentives (namely subsidies) discourage inter-sectoral thinking and action.
Pros:
There are many incentives for only one sector. Subsidies for e.g. access to energy can have negative impacts on water consumption (more water is being pumped etc.). Sometimes subsidies also have negative impacts on several sectors (e.g. cheap water leads to water wastage which is at the same time a waste of energy that is needed to treat and transport the water).
Cons:
Sectoral incentives can be structured in a participatory and multi-sectoral way.
Recommendations:
Develop concepts of cross-subsidization to achieve efficiency (with benefits for other sectors) and ensure access for the poor at the same time (social pricing, rising block tariffs). We need a multi-sectoral conception of subsidies (integrated planning) to encourage research and development rather than mono-sectoral investments.
4. Thesis: Using wastewater as a resource requires a change in values and behavior which will take generations. As change is urgently needed, appropriate regulatory measures combined with strong enforcement are imperative.
Pros:
Education and behavior change needs time.
Cons:
Increased understanding and education is key for a behavior change. Regulatory measures can only be properly enforced by conviction. A mixture of incentives, pricing and regulation is needed to succeed. Regulation without conviction is expensive (enforcement and monitoring).
Recommendations:
Wastewater reuse requires awareness raising and an increased understanding. Value local knowledge. Establish standards. Research must give scientific basis to end existing prejudices. Penalties are needed to facilitate behavior change. Invest in research. Build in more flexibility.
5. Thesis: We do not need to worry about the availability of water resources — in the past, mankind was always able to cope with the challenges by technical innovations.
Pros:
Technical innovation is necessary and important.
Cons:
Technical innovation alone is not sufficient. No consideration of important leveraging effects (influencing consumption patterns etc.). The importance of knowledge sharing is not recognized in the thesis. The human factor is particularly important in the management of water resources — people, not technical innovations, should be in the centre of approaches to better manage water resources for the nexus.
Recommendations:
Technical innovations work better when they are simple and easily understood by the users — we should always keep in mind that technology is for the people and not people for the technology. Technical innovations need to be accompanied by economical, social, political and environmental frameworks that give direction to innovations.