Learning Log 2: WASH Governance for a Resilient Future

Fraser Goff, WaterAid Australia 

Water for Women is a unique program driving innovation and sharing knowledge for climate-resilient, equitable and socially inclusive WASH. By combining research and implementation, the Fund generates evidence-based practices and empowers partners to collaborate on sustainable solutions.

Central to this approach is our Learning Agenda, fostering learning, knowledge exchange, and collaboration among partners. In the final year of the Fund, we've set out to address a critical evidence gap in climate-resilient development by answering two fundamental questions:

1. What does climate-resilient, inclusive WASH development look like?
2. How does inclusive WASH contribute to climate resilience?

We recently spoke with Fraser Goff, Regional Technical Lead - System Strengthening at WaterAid Australia, who co-leads Learning Group 1.2. This group, a collaboration between WaterAid, the International WaterCentre, Plan International, the International Water Management Institute, Thrive Networks, World Vision, SNV Netherlands Development Organisation, UTS-Institute for Sustainable Futures, and the Water for Women Fund, is exploring how WASH governance systems commonly integrate climate risk considerations and how we can enhance these systems to support the transition to climate-resilient, inclusive WASH development.

Fraser shares the group's learning journey and reflects on early insights.

Why does governance matter?

Governance encompasses the systems, structures, and processes essential for delivering water and sanitation services that benefit everyone. It’s vital for ensuring the sustainable delivery of WASH (Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene) services over the long term. When we address climate risk and resilience, we must not only implement programmes that consider climate risk, but also integrate climate considerations into existing governance processes—whether at the government or community level. This integration helps maintain resilience beyond project lifecycles, ensuring that communities continue to benefit from WASH services in the face of climate challenges.

How does governance fit within the broader theme of the learning agenda regarding climate-resilient, inclusive WASH development?

Governance is critical in two main ways. First, it relates to sustainability. Defining climate-resilient WASH is not just about identifying risks; it’s about ensuring that risk-based approaches are practical and implementable for those responsible for WASH services. We want to embed climate resilience into existing planning, monitoring, and regulatory processes. Second, it ties to inclusion. Many barriers to inclusive services stem from governance systems that do not prioritise the participation of marginalised or vulnerable groups, and we know that vulnerability to climate change is not evenly distributed among community members. As we work on integrating climate resilience, we therefore need to shift governance structures to be more inclusive, ensuring equitable access to WASH services.

Can you elaborate on the methods and approaches your group is using to answer these questions?

We began by focusing externally to understand what frameworks and guidelines our Water for Women partners already utilise to address climate risks and resilience. We reviewed 28 frameworks and guidance documents, narrowing it down to nine for in-depth analysis to assess how they incorporate governance and climate considerations. The second part of our process involved engaging with our partners to understand their practices and identify gaps in literature. This dual approach—external and internal—helped us create a comprehensive understanding of how to integrate climate resilience into WASH governance.

Without resilient systems that can withstand and adapt to crises, the fundamental functions of WASH services—like monitoring and management—are at risk. Therefore, understanding the systems in place is critical for achieving climate-resilient and inclusive WASH.

- Fraser Goff, WaterAid Australia

What key trends or findings have emerged from this process?

One significant finding is that existing guidance often focuses on entry points for integrating climate risk into WASH processes, such as planning and monitoring. However, there’s a gap in understanding how these processes interconnect. Simply integrating climate risk isn’t enough; integration must prioritise sustainability and inclusivity in governance systems. We also found that many stakeholders lack a fundamental understanding of climate risk in the WASH sector. Initiating discussions about these concepts is crucial for building a shared understanding.

Have you gained any personal insights or lessons from this process?

A key reflection has been on the intersection of climate finance and governance. Many projects are engaging with governance structures that are not robust, and we must strengthen these systems to effectively integrate climate risks. It’s vital to ensure that climate resilience initiatives address broader governance needs and not just focus on climate-specific interventions. Strengthening existing governance systems is essential for ensuring effective integration of climate resilience into WASH.

How do your findings contribute to our understanding of climate-resilient, inclusive WASH development?

There are parallels between resilience and sustainability. Just as strong governance systems are crucial for sustainable WASH services, they are equally important for climate resilience. Without resilient systems that can withstand and adapt to crises, the fundamental functions of WASH services—like monitoring and management—are at risk. Therefore, understanding the systems in place is critical for achieving climate-resilient and inclusive WASH.

Can you provide examples of effective governance systems contributing to climate resilience and inclusive development?

One notable example is a project in the Solomon Islands where the International WaterCentre and Plan International are engaging communities in water safety planning. Communities are identifying and addressing risks to their water services in community water governance mechanisms using indigenous knowledge and traditional practices, which enhances ownership and sustainability.

Another example comes from Papua New Guinea, where WaterAid integrates climate risk into district WASH planning processes. By also incorporating climate and water resource indicators into national monitoring systems and ensuring that decision-makers have the necessary training, they strengthened data-informed, data-driven approaches at both national and sub-national levels to prioritise investments based on climate vulnerability.

How can we translate these insights into practical actions for development practitioners?

Our learning process has focused on identifying promising practices. We’ve documented several practical principles, such as: integrating climate risk into existing WASH processes rather than creating separate climate-focused ones. Strengthening community participation can improve accountability in climate governance. Using both scientific and local customary climate data is also essential for local buy-in. These principles can guide practitioners in designing projects that are sustainable and impactful.

Finally, what does climate-resilient, inclusive WASH look like?

Climate-resilient, inclusive WASH means that WASH services are planned, delivered, and regulated in a way that builds on the existing strengths and processes within the local governance system while also incorporating climate risk and response into these steps, ensuring that services are designed to respond to risks and optimise resilience. Additionally, all plans, investments, and management of those services must consider climate risk at every step of the process.