The flood is coming: Water security issues at COP27

CCB • November 21, 2022

Credit: Photograph by Joseph Eid / AFP / Getty & Pexels-2886921 from pixabay

21 November 2022, Sharm el-Sheikh (Egypt) - Although water is not included in the architecture of the Paris Agreement, it's a key topic in the climate agenda as more and more countries and regions are facing the negative consequences of climate change related to water resources. The water crisis is global: droughts, floods, and lack of fresh and clean water are among the negative effects caused by the imbalance of the climate system, already leading to huge infrastructural, financial, and social losses and issues. 


Therefore, COP27 paid much attention to water security, such as sustainable access to clean water to maintain human health, well-being and socio-economic development, protection from water-borne pollution and water-related disasters. There was a Water Pavilion and Ocean Pavilion at the COP venue, and November 14th was declared Water Day as the daily theme of the Conference. But how do these formal acts of attracting attention lead to results and to help solving problems related to water security?

Loss and damage

For the first time in 30 years of UN climate negotiations, thanks to persistent demands from vulnerable countries and the civil society, the discussion on loss and damage  took center stage at COP27, and negotiations were focused on agreeing on the creation of a financing mechanism. As a result, they reached a milestone agreement and a Loss and Damage Fund was established for vulnerable countries.


Civil society activists have been constantly drawing attention to the consequences of climate change and the need for urgent assistance to those who suffer the most from them. On 11 November, a civil society actions -- #FloodTheCop - directly symbolized the floods that many regions are facing. 7 women wearing blue dresses with the slogans “The flood is coming” and “Pay now” carried a simple and understandable message: the G7 and other rich nations have a moral and legal responsibility to tax and wind-down fossil fuel companies based in their territories, and to redirect those finances to people in countries who are suffering the most losses and damages due to climate change. 


Credit: Bianka Csenki (Artivist Network), Instagram @8iank4 (@artivistnet)

Water in the 6th IPCC Assessment Report

Not only the countries of the global south are facing water issues. Water safety is relevant for everyone and the evidence for this is given in the 6th IPCC Assessment Report. During the side the event “IPCC AR6 water security conclusions & launch of the Expanded Water Tracker for National Climate Plans" held on 12 November, Richard Betts, from the University of Exeter and the Met Office and a Lead Author on the IPCC Water chapter, presented the conclusions of the chapter 4 of the report: 

  • 4 billion people experience severe water scarcity for at least one month per year;
  • The total mass of ice is decreasing in all glacial areas;
  • Hundreds of millions of people face changing precipitation patterns: 163 million people face drier conditions, 498 million face wetter conditions.
  • Cases of heavy precipitation are increasing all over the world, which leads to floods
  • Changes in river flows are also observed in many regions (for example, a reduction in hydro energy generation in Northeastern Brazil caused by a 30% reduction in the flow in Sobradinho Dam)
  • The number of droughts is increasing in many regions. And extreme droughts are projected to become more likely with increasing climate change in many regions.

From global changes to real local consequences

Examples of frightening trends are happening all over the world today and directly affect the health and well-being of people, as well as the economic stability of countries. For example, droughts lead to huge damage on food safety. The drought in May-June 2019 in the southwestern of China led to the drying up of more than 100 rivers, and more than 640,100 hectares of crops were destroyed. Direct economic losses amounted to 2.8 billion yuan ($400 million).


This proves that until now we cannot predict the local consequences of climate change and its risks. There is a huge gap between scientific data on the global situation and the local adaptation measures of cities, regions and countries. Rosalind Conforth, from the Walker Institute, shared the approach of the My Climate Risk initiative, which aims to develop and implement a bottom-up approach to regional climate risks. It helps to narrow the gap between massive climate models and apply locally the decision-making practices.

AWARe: Action on Water, Adaptation and Resilience

The new initiative for Water Adaptation and Resilience (AWARe) has been presented at COP27, reflecting the importance of water as both a key climate change problem and a potential solution.  The AWARe initiative, which was drafted by the COP27 Presidency with the support of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), was launched on the Water Day held on 14 November. It is a collective effort, with inputs from many stakeholders and UN agencies.


The AWARe initiative has three main aims:

  1. Decrease water losses worldwide and improve water supply;
  2. Propose and support implementing mutually agreed policy and methods for cooperative water-related adaptation action and its co-benefits;
  3. Promote cooperation and interlinkages between water and climate action in order to achieve Agenda 2030, in particular SDG 6.


It seeks to support promotion of sustainable waste-water management, sanitation policies and strategies, and water-wise energy pathways besides working on improving early warning systems for extreme weather events. It will also work towards linking water resources policies with national climate action to reflect climate change long-term impacts on water resources and demand, and to support preparedness and adaptation measures.


As stated by Dr Elena Manaenkova, WMO Deputy Secretary-General: “[...] WMO supports AWARe as an initiative complementary to the Early Warning for All and the Water and Climate Coalition. AWARe can be a practical vehicle to implement Early Warnings for All, and the Water and Climate Leaders Call to improve water data and information for a climate ready world”.

Consideration of water issues in national climate plans

Another “bottom-up'' approach tool for developing practical measures is the Water Tracker. It helps countries to independently assess and improve water security through the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and National Adaptation Plans (NAPs). They usually ignore the strategic role of water in solving climate problems, although water is necessary both for efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and for adaptation to climate change.


The tool should also help with the distribution of funding among the most vulnerable countries. Dr Amgad Elmadi from the Green Climate Fund (a fund established under the UNFCCC as an operational body of the Financial Mechanism to assist developing countries in adaptation and mitigation to counter climate change) believes that the Water Tracker can affect the quality of climate finance and play a big role in its distribution. 


Today, 10 countries around the world are already involved in the Water Tracker project: Costa Rica, Egypt, Malawi, Somalia, Uganda, Rwanda, Nepal, Palestine, Panama and Uruguay. Ms Nicole Franciso,from the Ministry of the Environment of Panama, said that they are already using this tool to understand how their NDCs will lead to their planned goals. Panama has not yet developed a National Adaptation Plan and claims that with the experience of using the Water Tracker, the development will definitely become more successful. Already now they have realized that data and indicators on water should be included in different sectors of the NDCs, including the energy sector.

Hydropower continues to be the main focus of interest

Rivers play a vital role in carbon sinks and increasing resilience to climate change, but hydroelectric power plants (HPPs) do not allow rivers to perform these essential functions. Despite the proven harm, large-scale hydropower is still considered by some decision-makers as an effective and just solution that helps reduce the greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). At the same time, dams and reservoirs can be a major source of methane: in the case of flooding of areas with rich vegetation (which happens extremely often), the rotting of the biomass trapped under water begins. The larger the water surface formed is, as a result of flooding, the greater methane emissions are released.

Credit: Elizaveta Merinova, Friends of the Baltic, Friends of the Earth Russia

Ahead COP26 in Glasgow, 300 organizations from 69 countries issued the Global Declaration "Rivers for Climate", calling on governments and leaders participating in the UN climate negotiations to protect river ecosystems and stop using scarce climate funds to finance false climate solutions such as hydropower. At COP27, the organizations that signed the declaration, as part of the “Centering the protection of Rivers and rights in Achieving Climate Justice” event, spoke about ongoing projects in the field of large hydropower and shared cases of destruction of local ecosystems by HEPPs. Indigenous peoples are being displaced from the territories where their ancestors have lived for many centuries, biodiversity is declining, and flora and fauna are being lost. One of these projects is the Grand Inga, the world's largest hydropower scheme on the Congo River, in Africa. Erick Kassongo, Director of Centre Congolais pour le Développement Durable (CODED), who is working against this project, was right on point saying: “A clean energy source cannot harm the environment and the indigenous peoples of the territory!".

In conclusion

It is difficult to say unequivocally how much the world community is moving forward in solving problems related to water resources and water related disasters. On the one hand, the struggle continues dealing with the consequences of the problem and not with the cause, the promotion of false solutions (such as large hydroelectric power plants), the infringement of indigenous peoples, the degradation of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. On the other hand, there is progress in identifying tools and measures that will lead to ensuring water security. The key components are the analysis and study of the consequences of climate change related to water; improvement of water management; conservation of aquatic ecosystems, including measures to reduce anthropogenic impacts on the climate and on the purity of natural waters. The most important thing is that these measures must lead to a fair solution to problems and be primarily aimed at supporting people and their communities who suffer most from water problems.


The COP27´s final decision is definitely a step forward for the vulnerable countries with the establishment of the Loss and Damage Fund. It also further acknowledges the role of ocean and “the critical role of protecting, conserving and restoring water systems and water-related ecosystems in delivering climate adaptation benefits and co-benefits, while ensuring social and environmental safeguards”, but it's still not enough for other actions needed to keep the 1.5C goal and fight the global climate crisis. 



***

Article written by Elizaveta Merinova and Anna Ushakova, Friends of the Baltic, Friends of the Earth Russia

By CCB March 30, 2026
Brussels, 30 March 2026 - Today, Fisheries Ministers from EU Member States meet with the European Commission for the AGRIFISH Council. On this occasion, Oceana, BLOOM, ClientEarth, Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB), Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF), Seas At Risk and WWF EU, handed a symbolic ''Pandora’s Box'' to the EU Commissioner Costas Kadis, sending a clear message as the European Commission prepares its 2026 evaluation of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The box represents the risks of revising EU’s main fishery policy framework: once opened, competing demands from Member States, industry, small-scale fishers, and coastal communities could quickly spiral into division, regulatory delays and uncertainties. This would put at risk the hard-won progress made in restoring Europe’s fish populations and improving the profitability of the fishing sector. NGOs urge decision makers to build on the progress made to date and to prioritise the full and timely implementation of the existing rules. Reopening the CFP and its related provisions would undermine ocean health and the long-term future of Europe’s fishing communities. '' Europe's fisheries policy is facing a credibility test. The law is already there. The tools to rebuild our seas already exist. What's missing is the political will to deliver. Overfishing should have ended by 2020 at the latest. Reopening the CFP would signal that missed deadlines carry no consequences, erode trust, revert the progress made, and put the future of our fisheries and coastal communities at stake ’’, said the NGO coalition. *** Oceana: Vera Coelho, Executive Director and Vice President in Europe BLOOM: Claire Nouvian, Founder and General Director ClientEarth: John Condon, Lead of Marine Ecosystems Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB): Ida Carlén, Co-Chair Environmental Justice Foundation: Steve Trent, CEO/Founder Seas At Risk: Dr Monica Verbeek, Executive Director WWF EU: Ester Asin, Director
By CCB March 10, 2026
Uppsala, March 2026 - CCB has closely worked with the implementation of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) ever since its adoption and welcomed the opportunity to give feedback to this crucial directive for marine biodiversity and ocean health through the EU Call of Evidence . Evaluations conducted by the EU Commission previously found many positive effects for EU marine waters stemming from the directive, but also that the directive has some shortcomings. CCB however, maintains that the largest obstacle to fully implementing the directive and achieving Good Environmental Status (GES) is the lack of political will among Member States to do so. This forthcoming revision must therefore result in a framework directive that is more easily enforceable, measurable and implementable, accompanied by sufficient funding to carry out the measures. Furthermore, in order to achieve GES as fast as possible other key pieces of EU legislation must also support reaching it and focus on achieving the goals of the MSFD in their objectives. Seeing that European seas generally are in poor condition and under mounting pressure from human activities and that in the Baltic Sea the situation is especially dire there is an urgent need for truly ecosystem-based management of our seas and for reaching GES. The revised MSFD can help us achieve this, but only if it includes the points outlined below and the directive is fully and swiftly implemented: *** [Short version]*** Operationalise the overarching GES goal: EU sea areas were supposed to reach GES already in 2020, but due to low political ambition, sadly did not do so. Member States should therefore strive to reach GES as fast as possible now. Setting a new overall deadline for when to reach GES is not the answer on how to achieve this goal most efficiently, instead tools that address pressures and measure progress and ensure actual, timely implementation of ambitious measures must be included in the revised directive in order to operationalise achieving the overall GES goal. CCB therefore recommends making the existing and forthcoming threshold values for the descriptors and their criteria legally binding and part of the main directive. Improving regional coordination and implementation: To improve the coherence, coordination and effectiveness of MSFD implementation, assessment of GES, monitoring and the national PoMs the role of the Regional Seas Conventions (RSCs) must be clarified. CCB would welcome collating all the national PoMs into one regional PoM for the Baltic Sea, which should be aligned with, in addition to reaching the goals of the MSFD, with achieving the goals of the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP). Land-sea interface: For the Baltic Sea to achieve GES it is key that land-based pressures, primarily nutrient runoff from agriculture causing severe eutrophication, is also addressed and that implementation of the MSFD goes hand in hand with the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The goals of the MSFD and achieving GES should also be included when implementing and shaping the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), as well as any synergies with implementing the EU Zero Pollution Action Plan which are also important to identify and utilise. The Baltic Sea also has a too high prevalence and level of other pollutants and hazardous substances affecting marine life. Fisheries and aquaculture: As one of the main pressure factors on the marine environment in general, as well as in the Baltic Sea, fisheries and aquaculture and the effects they have on the marine ecosystem and its biodiversity must be addressed in order to achieve GES. This is especially crucial when considering the MSFD descriptor for Biodiversity (D1), Fish and Shellfish (D3), Food webs (D4) and the one for Seabed integrity (D6). Climate change: Climate change is also affecting the Baltic Sea faster than other marine regions and must be factored in when managing the sea area and its resources to ensure EBM and the full implementation of the MSFD and achieving GES. The effects of the climate crisis should be accounted for when setting pressure reduction targets and threshold values for the descriptors and their criteria, in a way that when an effect cannot be measured nor predicted the precautionary principle must be used. Revising Art. 14 of the MSFD: Article 14 in the MSFD outlines the acceptable exceptions when reaching GES is not possible. The article needs to be revised in the forthcoming revision, since it contains too many and too broad in scope possibilities for exemptions (e.g. in Art. 14(4)), which jeopardise the implementation and fulfilment of the directive as a whole. A possible way of modifying it would be to introduce an obligation for Member States to demonstrate that they have taken all measures within their control nationally and that they have tried to address the problem and advance solving it on a regional level through cooperating with other Member States, before they can apply for a possible exemption. Make the Programme of Measures contain ambitious & concrete measures: One of the cornerstones of the MSFD is the national PoMs that are published every six years and are precluded by an assessment of GES in national waters and a monitoring programme. Unfortunately, the current approach to PoMs where Member States freely can choose measures has led to an overall too low level of ambition in the PoMs, and to large differences within regions and between neighboring countries in terms of which measures are included. In order to fully implement the directive and to achieve GES it is of paramount importance that the national PoMs have a high level of ambition and contain concrete, implementable measures and that there is regional coordination. Easing the reporting burden: One of the results from the evaluation of the MSFD was that the current reporting burden is considered to be too high and a possible way to address this is to align the reporting obligations of the MSFD to more reassemble those of the WFD, that has a more simplified 6-year cycle compared to the MSFD. The implementation cycle however should not be revised or at least not in a way that delays reaching GES. Improve coherence with other legislation: To ensure that the revised MSFD is fully implemented it is essential that coherence with other relevant legislation is improved. The MSPD (foundation for the forthcoming Ocean Act) is also currently being revised and to reach the goals for both the directives achieving GES needs to be a cornerstone of the Ocean Act. This is the only way to deliver truly ecosystem-based management of our seas, and the revision of both directives should therefore be coordinated and focused on achieving GES. CCB looks forward to continuing to provide input to the revision process of the MSFD as well as working with the implementation of the MSFD, especially in the Baltic Sea. CCB expects that the revision will result in a more enforceable directive that leads to the fast implementation of ambitious measures to improve the state of the Baltic and European Sea areas and to the achievement of GES. The full text of the submission is available here . *** Links to supplemental documents supporting our positions: CCB’s submission to the Call for Evidence for the Ocean Act Guiding Recommendations for Source-to-Sea Restoration in Riverine, Coastal, and Marine Ecosystems (Coalition Clean Baltic, 2025) Position Paper on Marine Protected Areas (Coalition Clean Baltic 2024) Don’t sink the Common Fisheries Policy – fulfil its potential (joint NGO Briefing 2025) Blue Manifesto (joint NGO paper)