2. How to interpret the results IWRM survey and reporting process: Countries
Calculating the indicator score: Question scores
report on the indicator every three to four years.
in each dimension are averaged to give four
Most countries undergo comprehensive, multi-
dimension scores, which are then averaged to
stakeholder processes to complete the survey,
give the indicator score.
which are vital to working towards the target (Annex III). Thirty-three survey questions cover
IWRM implementation levels: Six
the four main dimensions of IWRM:7 (1) Enabling
implementation levels have been defined,
Environment (laws, policies and plans); (2)
from “very low” to “very high”, with general
Institutions and Participation; (3) Management
interpretations and score thresholds given
Instruments; and (4) Financing. Each question
below.
is scored on a scale of zero to 100, guided by specific threshold descriptions.
Table 2.1. IWRM implementation levels and their interpretation
7
5
Level
Score range
General interpretation for overall score, and dimension scores
Very low
0–10
Development of elements of IWRM has generally not begun or has stalled.
Low
11–30
Implementation of elements of IWRM has generally begun, but with limited uptake across the country, and potentially low engagement of stakeholder groups.
Mediumlow
31–50
Mediumhigh
51–70
Capacity to implement elements of IWRM is generally adequate, and elements are generally being implemented under long-term programmes.
High
71–90
IWRM plan and programme objectives are generally met, and geographic coverage and stakeholder engagement is generally good.
Very high
91– 100
Elements of IWRM are generally institutionalized, implementation is under way.
The vast majority of IWRM elements are fully implemented, with objectives consistently achieved, and plans and programmes periodically assessed and revised.
See Annex I for a survey summary. The full survey is available at http://iwrmdataportal.unepdhi.org.
PROGRESS ON INTEGR ATED WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT - 2021
