J A A Jones & F Winde

Strengths of UNESCO-IHP Public respect for UNESCO(World Heritage Sites etc…..) Large global networks(larger than competing Global Water Initiatives) Weaknesses of IHP Heavy reliance on funds from Member States + carries inherent political vulnerability Proliferation of chairs & centres in the network + has extended chains of communication  difficulties for maintaining inspiration & control IHP has low visibility among both the public & water scientists Our own independent survey of water scientists indicated 22% not aware of IHP & only 27% considered it well promoted

One of the leading problems Loss of US support impacted IHP-VII & some associate programmes Hopes of restoration seem slim given restrictions imposed by US Public Law (1990) (despite US public & president in favour) Possible solutions Reduce number & range of programmes Increase contributions from other Member States Raise more extrabudgetary funds Our recommendations Adopt a professional approach to fund raising - appoint a fund-raiser - to woo donors, assist staff with applications & joint applications with partners Increase staff capacity with non-funded appointments - graduate internships, academic sabbaticals, industry/government secondments

Second problem limiting effectiveness of IHP Bureaucracy is perceived as too heavy both by members of Secretariat & other GWIs - taking up to 70% of staff time Management of staff & institutions needs improving - disparity between some written reports & verbal report - long delays in many procedures affect motivation Recommendations Serious consideration be given to reducing bureaucracy both in UNESCO & the Division Review operational procedures in IGC and Bureau - to improve inclusivity in decision-making, engaging Member States that currently feel excluded, whilst increasing efficiency Review methods of assessment of staff & network institutions – to make them more effective & less burdensome Restructure Secretariat to increase flexibility

Also limiting perceived effectiveness Length & breadth of Strategic Plans more ambitious than any other GWI - stretch management resources & potentially reduce capacity to address emerging issues Success of activities is often difficult to assess Key Recommendations The Secretariat should review all aspects (especially given reduced funding) - length of Phases, range of Themes, even whether Phases are the best mechanism Objectives & benchmarks should be formulated to be more testable & more amenable to quantitative evaluation

Motivation needs to be improved in many areas Evidence of a number of individuals & institutions falling away (notably National Committees & Chairs) A number of good collaborations outside UNESCO, but also some falling away (through neglect or disillusionment) Recommendations Foster stronger personal relations with all elements in the network – give feedback & praise good work, take active interest in progress, involve more in decision-making Actively engage more with & motivate National Committees Make more use of willing collaborators – fostering old links & actively seeking new ones with appropriate capacities

IHP does not present itself well Visibility is low Website is muddled & a poor advertisement Recommendations Remodel the website - make more attractive, better search facilities & presentation of publications, news, upcoming events & showcase active Chairs & Centres, videos & interactive maps Consider an information portal linking to databases of other GWIs – eg GRDC etc, as well as IGRAC, FRIEND et al Insist on wider use of the Logo Focus publishing on both the general public & specialists (next)

Work needs to be more visible - to inform & inspire public, students & donors - to give collaborators & donors incentive Lack of collected end-of-phase reports is one of the most frequent criticisms Recommendations Publish end-of-phase reports (in print & on web) Publish & advertise work in a variety of international journals (from popular - eg National Geographic – to scientific & management journals)

Our core messages for the future are:  Substantial issues need addressing to stop UNESCO-IHP loosing ground - It is not just a question of presentation & marketing  We are POSITIVE about the future of IHP - our report is critical but constructive We leave you with this wake-up call from our report: “This is a critical time for UNESCO-IHP. Funds are much reduced, the number of competitors has increased rapidly, and there are issues with lack of motivation in some areas. The Secretariat has run Phase VII relatively well, given limited means and some obstacles. But unless some quite drastic changes are implemented, IHP will continue to cede ground to competitors and lose its global prestige. This is also an opportunity. But it is one with a limited timeframe.”