top of page
This site was designed with the
.com
website builder. Create your website today.Start Now

Has data-sharing technology saved our water crisis? No, geopolitical tensions linger still.

Rebecca SE Tan | 20 April 2023


Introduction

Is sustainable development for water within reach? Optimists believe that a major piece of the puzzle is already in place: technological advancements in big earth data. Indeed, the recent groundbreaking advancements in technology have facilitated greater integration and consolidation of data, maximizing the ability of countries to adopt informed scientific approaches for sustainable development (Sarvajayakesavalu, 2015). Yet–notwithstanding its potential–technological advancements alone should not be hailed as the panacea for all our water troubles. Even if technology was served on a silver platter for all, looming geopolitical tensions can still block collaboration efforts. To fully capitalize on data-sharing technology, we must take special efforts to navigate these geopolitical landmines.



The Promise of Technological Advancement

Data deficit is a major roadblock in our progress toward achieving the 6th Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) of ensuring clean access to water for all (Kroll et al., 2019; United Nations, 2019). Technological giants have risen to the challenge, designing innovations to satiate this growing appetite for data and data processing. One such innovation is the Big Earth Data Science Engineering Program (CASEarth), which taps on big data, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence (CAS, n.d.; Ji et al., 2019). The platform integrates data of various scales, sources, and time frames to sharpen our understanding of the large-scale and periodic effects of human activities on Earth (Elsevier, 2020). In turn, this processed data empowers organizations, businesses, and governments to become more sustainable (Guo et al., 2021).


Specifically on sustainable water development, CASEarth contains a remote sensing algorithm to track water quality, as well as a computational feature to evaluate levels of water stress (CBAS, 2022). By applying these tools to investigate conditions at basins like the Shule River, policymakers can make appropriate recommendations on water management (CBAS, 2022).


Hence, the great potential of CASEarth and other similar technological advancements can hardly be denied. CASEarth has accumulated a stunning 8PB of shared data and attracted more than 29 million visits from 115 countries (Guo et al., 2021). This wealth of data is impressive, and yet the question remains: will this potential truly be realised?


The threat of geopolitical tensions

Despite these impressive leaps in technological advancement, the spectre of geopolitical tensions threatens to pull what collaboration we have apart. Commitments to global data sharing have often been thwarted by political and ownership-related concerns (Ndzabandzaba, 2015). National security clouds the judgment of riparian states (Boccaletti, 2022), and they begin to question: What would data sharing mean for my country and my adversaries? Will giving away data threaten my interests? With doubt and competition looming in their minds, data can become nationalized, fracturing the scientific agenda (Boccaletti, 2022).

Thereby, the primary barrier to sustainable water development is instead the underlying willingness of countries in sharing data. In the context of water-constrained economies, water insecurity can become equated to national security (Turton, 2008). Out of fear or in hopes of strategic advantage, countries may then choose to gatekeep data, in spite of agreed water protocols (Ndzabandzaba, 2015). In fact, United Nations (2022) reveals that a mere 32 countries have substantial cross-border arrangements on their transboundary waters.


Look, for example, at the recurring Mekong River conflicts. During the severe drought in 2010, China’s high regard for water for national security and development restricted their data-sharing arrangements with downstream members (Lin et al., 2023). This hardline stance impeded integrated responses along the Mekong River, further deteriorating precious water resources (Schmeier & Vogel, 2018). Although China eventually shared its hydrological information, thereby de-escalating the conflict, such mechanisms are not institutionalised and remain terribly limited (Schmeier & Vogel, 2018). The Mekong River conflict also resurfaced during the 2012 drought, an ode to the insufficient willingness to share data (Lin et al., 2023).


These underlying themes of reluctance characterise numerous contested water bodies, such as the Nile, the Jordan, the Indus, the Ganges, and the Tigris and Euphrates (Turton, 2008). Distrust and competition antagonise transboundary water cooperation (Chenoweth & Fetielson, 2001), exacerbating the conditions of humans and the environment ((Bullock & Cosgrove, 2009). Further, the lack of concrete data necessitates a reliance on assumptions and guesstimates (Schmeier & Vogel, 2018), which can hamper effective hydropower development and the capabilities of climate and water modelling (Khoza et al., 2022; Lin et al., 2023).


As seen, we cannot blindly count on technology as the be-all and end-all for sustainable water development. We all know what it is like to dislike or distrust people- even with the provision of a free and efficient mailing service, we are still unlikely to mail them a gift. Similarly, regardless of the ease or capability offered by data-sharing technology, we cannot presume its universal adoption.



Conclusion

Does this reservation then spell perpetual doom and gloom? Not necessarily. Data sharing does not have to be seen through the lens of a dog-eat-dog world, but rather as a public good that is mutually beneficial (Guo et al., 2021). Indeed, data sharing can ameliorate the conditions of each collaborating individual, by mapping the SDG for water to one’s national development priorities (UN & TPI, 2020). This benefit of collaboration is well-understood by riparian states, though they often struggle with their circumstances at hand (De Stefano et al., 2010).

As such, it is not that data sharing is impossible–its potential is now greater than ever before–but rather that tapping on this potential requires conscientious effort in overcoming geopolitical obstacles. It is my hope that the current momentum towards data sharing will continue to break through barriers, in order to design a more sustainable future for generations to come.



References

Bullock, A., & Cosgrove, W. (2009). Water in a changing world: the United Nations world water development report. In https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000181993.

Chenoweth, J. L., & Fetielson, E. (2001). Analysis of Factors Influencing Data and Information Exchange in International River Basins: Can Such Exchanges Be Used to Build Confidence in Cooperative Management?

Chinese Academy of Sciences. (n.d.). Big Earth Data in Support of the Sustainable Development Goals----Newsletter. Newsletter.cas.cn. Retrieved April 20, 2023, from http://newsletter.cas.cn/wap/Lead/202103/t20210306_4561064.html

De Stefano, L., Edwards, P., de Silva, L., & Wolf, A. T. (2010). Tracking cooperation and conflict in international basins: historic and recent trends. Water Policy, 12(6), 871–884. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2010.137

Elsevier. (2020). The Power of Data to Advance the SDGs Mapping research for the Sustainable Development Goals. https://www.elsevier.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/1058179/Elsevier-SDG-Report-2020.pdf

Guo, H. (2019). Big Earth Data in support of the Sustainable Development Goals (2019). https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/topics_665678/2030kcxfzyc/202009/P020210525474890736702.pdf

Guo, H. (2020). Big Earth data facilitates sustainable development goals. Big Earth Data, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/20964471.2020.1730568

Guo, H., Liang, D., Chen, F., & Shirazi, Z. (2021). Innovative approaches to the Sustainable Development Goals using Big Earth Data. Big Earth Data, 5(3), 263–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/20964471.2021.1939989

Ji, L. (2019). Data Sharing in CASEarth Project. Biodiversity Information Science and Standards , 3. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333879401_Data_Sharing_in_CASEarth_Project

Khoza, S., Niekerk, D. van, & Nemakonde, L. D. (2022). A Decade of Inaction in the SADC region? - disaster risk data gaps and inconsistencies on the Sendai Framework Monitor. Progress in Disaster Science, 16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdisas.2022.100250

Kroll, C., Warchold, A., & Pradhan, P. (2019). Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Are we successful in turning trade-offs into synergies? Palgrave Communications, 5(1). nature. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0335-5

Lin, J., Bryan, B. A., Zhou, X., Lin, P., Do, H. X., Gao, L., Gu, X., Liu, Z., Wan, L., Tong, S., Huang, J., Wang, Q., Zhang, Y., Gao, H., Yin, J., Chen, Z., Duan, W., Xie, Z., Cui, T., & Liu, J. (2023). Making China’s water data accessible, usable and shareable. Nature Water, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44221-023-00039-y

Ndzabandzaba, C. (2015). Data sharing for sustainable development in less developed and developing countries. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/615860-Ndzabandzaba-Data%20sharing%20for%20sd%20in%20less%20developed%20and%20developing%20countries.pdf

Sarvajayakesavalu, S. (2015). Addressing challenges of developing countries in implementing five priorities for sustainable development goals. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability, 1(7), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1890/ehs15-0028.1

Schmeier, S., & Vogel, B. (2018). Ensuring Long-Term Cooperation Over Transboundary Water Resources Through Joint River Basin Management. AQEC, 8.

Turton, A. (2008). A South African perspective on a possible benefit-sharing approach for transboundary waters in the SADC region. Water Alternatives, 1(2), 180–200. https://www.water-alternatives.org/index.php/all-abs/27-a1-2-1/file

United Nations. (2019). THE FUTURE IS NOW SCIENCE FOR ACHIEVING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GLOBAL SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2 19. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/24797GSDR_report_2019.pdf

United Nations. (2022). The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2022. Unstats.un.org; United Nations. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2022/

United Nations, & The Partnering Initiative. (2020). THE SDG PARTNERSHIP GUIDEBOOK. https://sdgs.un.org/sites/default/files/2020-10/SDG%20Partnership%20Guidebook%201.01%20web.pdf





6 views0 comments
bottom of page