World Water Forum
The Hague 2000
Introduction
The 2nd World Water Forum and Ministerial Conference were held from March 17 to 22, 2000, in The Hague, The Netherlands. Following the inaugural Forum in Marrakesh (1997), the Hague event was a crucial stepping stone, significantly elevating water issues on the global political agenda.
The Forum was a massive international event that brought together over 5,700 participants, including a large number of international water specialists, politicians, officials, and journalists. The accompanying Ministerial Conference was particularly influential, convening 114 ministers and officials from 130 countries, making it one of the most diverse and powerful water-related gatherings of its time. The event was also supported by an extensive preparatory process, the “Vision to Action” exercise, which involved 15,000 people in pre-Forum discussions globally.
2nd World Water Forum: “From Vision to Action”
The central theme of the 2nd World Water Forum was “From Vision to Action,” marking a shift from the conceptual work of the 1st Forum toward practical implementation. The Forum served as the primary platform for presenting and debating the results of two key global documents:
- “The World Water Vision for the Future”: this document outlined the desired state of water resources for the 21st century.
- “Towards Water Security: A Framework for Action”. Prepared by the Global Water Partnership (GWP), this framework provided the overarching structure, initial steps, and milestones needed to achieve the Vision.
The core goal of the Forum was to introduce and solidify the concept of “Water Security” as the central, unifying objective for future global water management. This term was introduced as a “shorthand” to capture the complex concept of holistic water management, balancing resource protection with human development needs.
Highlights of the 2nd World Water Forum
Foundation for the MDGs
The commitments and targets discussed and agreed upon in The Hague became key inputs for the subsequent Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which were adopted later that year (2000). The Forum’s focus directly informed the MDG target to halve the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation by 2015.
Mobilisation of partnerships
The event successfully mobilised resources and people to an extent previously unseen in the water domain, generating significant involvement and debate among a broad range of actors, including NGOs and the private sector.
Follow-Up Process
The Ministerial Declaration established a commitment to review progress periodically, linking directly to future events, including the 2002 meeting in Bonn and the 10-year review of Agenda 21 (Rio+10), ensuring the Forum’s impact was enduring and monitored.
What can we remember from this forum?
The Ministerial Conference, convened by the Dutch Government, culminated in the “Ministerial Declaration of The Hague on Water Security in the 21st Century”. This document was the key element to remember from the 2000 The Hague World Water Forum. It was groundbreaking because it successfully generated a high level of political commitment and consensus among national governments, officially moving water management from a purely technical domain into a clear political priority.
The Declaration was a keystone in the politicisation of water for several reasons:
- Elevating water security: it formally established Water Security as the common, central goal for the 21st century, defined as ensuring that “every person has access to enough safe water at an affordable cost to lead a healthy and productive life, while ensuring that the natural environment is protected and enhanced.” This shift implied that water issues were no longer merely environmental or infrastructural problems, but were fundamental to political stability, development, and human life.
- Acknowledging the water crisis and poverty link: the declaration explicitly stated that “business as usual is not an option”. It strongly emphasised the clear link between water threats and poverty, noting that “it is the poor who are hit first and hardest”. This forced governments to acknowledge the social justice dimension of water access.
- Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM): the actions advocated were founded on the principle of IWRM, which requires integrating the planning and management of surface water, groundwater, and ecosystems, while considering social, economic, and environmental factors. This represented an official shift in policy direction for most signatory governments.
- Mobilising political will: Paragraph 10 of the Declaration noted that it “reflects the determination of our governments and represents a critical step in the process of providing water security for all.” By having ministers formally sign a high-level declaration, the Forum mobilised political will and created a mechanism for public accountability to review progress periodically.
The Declaration identified seven key challenges and the corresponding resolutions that governments committed to pursuing:
- Meeting basic needs: Ministers committed to recognising that access to safe and sufficient water and sanitation are basic human needs essential to health and well-being. This represented an incremental step towards defining a “human right to water” and committed governments to empowering people, especially women, through participatory water management.
- Securing the food supply: the resolution was to enhance food security, particularly for the poor, by committing to the more efficient mobilisation and use, and the more equitable allocation of water for food production. This acknowledged the massive consumption of water by agriculture and demanded policy reform for efficiency and equity.
- Protecting ecosystems: governments resolved to ensure the integrity of ecosystems through sustainable water resources management, recognising that healthy ecosystems are vital for providing and sustaining freshwater resources. This formally linked water policy with conservation policy.
- Sharing water resources: the commitment was to promote peaceful co-operation and develop synergies between different water uses, within countries and, crucially, between states (trans-boundary waters) through sustainable river basin management. This directly addressed the political challenge of international water conflict.
- Managing risks: Ministers were committed to providing security from water-related hazards, including floods, droughts, and pollution. This placed the responsibility for disaster and pollution management firmly in the hands of the government.
- Valuing water: this was the most contentious and widely debated point, representing a victory for the concept of private sector involvement. The commitment was to manage water in a way that reflects its economic, social, environmental and cultural values for all its uses, and to move towards pricing water services to reflect the cost of their provision. This push for full-cost pricing was, for many critics, an endorsement of privatisation and deregulation, as it framed water as an economic good rather than solely a social good.
- Governing water wisely: the commitment was to develop, implement, and operate efficient, transparent, and participatory water governance systems. This included institutional, technological, and financial innovations to move beyond “business as usual” and pay special attention to the poor and the role of women.
Why the declaration was groundbreaking and its implications
The Declaration was a keystone in the politicisation of water for several reasons:
- Elevating water security: it formally established Water Security as the common, central goal for the 21st century, defined as ensuring that “every person has access to enough safe water at an affordable cost to lead a healthy and productive life, while ensuring that the natural environment is protected and enhanced.” This shift implied that water issues were no longer merely environmental or infrastructural problems, but were fundamental to political stability, development, and human life.
- Acknowledging the water crisis and poverty link: the declaration explicitly stated that “business as usual is not an option”. It strongly emphasised the clear link between water threats and poverty, noting that “it is the poor who are hit first and hardest”. This forced governments to acknowledge the social justice dimension of water access.
- Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM): the actions advocated were founded on the principle of IWRM, which requires integrating the planning and management of surface water, groundwater, and ecosystems, while considering social, economic, and environmental factors. This represented an official shift in policy direction for most signatory governments.
- Mobilising political will: Paragraph 10 of the Declaration noted that it “reflects the determination of our governments and represents a critical step in the process of providing water security for all.” By having ministers formally sign a high-level declaration, the Forum mobilised political will and created a mechanism for public accountability to review progress periodically.
Concrete commitments of the Declaration
The Declaration identified seven key challenges and the corresponding resolutions that governments committed to pursuing:
- Meeting basic needs: Ministers committed to recognising that access to safe and sufficient water and sanitation are basic human needs essential to health and well-being. This represented an incremental step towards defining a “human right to water” and committed governments to empowering people, especially women, through participatory water management.
- Securing the food supply: the resolution was to enhance food security, particularly for the poor, by committing to the more efficient mobilisation and use, and the more equitable allocation of water for food production. This acknowledged the massive consumption of water by agriculture and demanded policy reform for efficiency and equity.
- Protecting ecosystems: governments resolved to ensure the integrity of ecosystems through sustainable water resources management, recognising that healthy ecosystems are vital for providing and sustaining freshwater resources. This formally linked water policy with conservation policy.
- Sharing water resources: the commitment was to promote peaceful co-operation and develop synergies between different water uses, within countries and, crucially, between states (trans-boundary waters) through sustainable river basin management. This directly addressed the political challenge of international water conflict.
- Managing risks: Ministers were committed to providing security from water-related hazards, including floods, droughts, and pollution. This placed the responsibility for disaster and pollution management firmly in the hands of the government.
- Valuing water: this was the most contentious and widely debated point, representing a victory for the concept of private sector involvement. The commitment was to manage water in a way that reflects its economic, social, environmental and cultural values for all its uses, and to move towards pricing water services to reflect the cost of their provision. This push for full-cost pricing was, for many critics, an endorsement of privatisation and deregulation, as it framed water as an economic good rather than solely a social good.
- Governing water wisely: the commitment was to develop, implement, and operate efficient, transparent, and participatory water governance systems. This included institutional, technological, and financial innovations to move beyond “business as usual” and pay special attention to the poor and the role of women.
Saudi Arabia