The World Economic Forum
Global Risks study highlighted water supply as one of the top three risks affecting future economic growth. With water
scarcity generating significant problems for human health, social stability,
ecosystems and businesses, there’s a compelling requirement for business to
take action, but it’s a highly complex issue covering quantity, access and
quality. So how can corporates be sure that their programs are
delivering meaningful water outcomes?
When planning a programme it’s important not to consider water in
isolation. An integrated approach to carbon and water management avoids
potential trade-offs between these two crucial environmental activities and can
uncover synergies. Without that aligned thinking, activities such as
sourcing commodities more locally to save carbon could have a negative impact
on water stress in the local area, outweighing the carbon benefits.
There are of course, some areas where water and carbon are fundamentally
different: greenhouse gases have a similar impact wherever they are emitted,
while water impacts vary greatly at a local level, and the concept of
‘neutrality’ is not as relevant to water management. However many of the
approaches learned through the corporate carbon management journey are relevant
for a water programme, for instance, the need to have both an internal
operational focus and an external focus. With water, the internal operational
focus is called water management and covers the sustainable use of water
resources within corporate operations. While the external value chain
focus is termed ‘water stewardship’ and concerns the protection and enhancement
of water resources for people and nature.
For corporates who understand their impacts and want to get involved in
activities that deliver water stewardship outcomes, accessing such initiatives
can be a challenge. Even if they share the same ambition, few corporates have
the resources of Coca-Cola when it comes to developing water stewardship
strategies. However, a carbon offset programme can offer a logical access point
for corporates who want to reduce and manage their environmental impacts
through a combined water and carbon approach. By adding water focused
carbon projects to the portfolio a corporate can deliver water stewardship
outcomes through the established results-based framework of the carbon
market.
Water focused carbon projects typically fit within three methodology
groups (1) water purification (2) water productivity and (3) watershed
protection.
Water purification is focused on clean drinking water for humans,
primarily through domestic water filtration devices where the carbon saving
comes from avoided fuel burned to boil water, for example the Gold Standard
methodology: low GHG emitting water purification systems. Water productivity
concerns efficient water use, through devices such as solar hot water or
aerated shower heads. The carbon saving comes from avoiding energy to heat
water, for example, the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) methodology focused on
energy efficiency from shower aeration technology. Watershed protection is
about the enhancement and protection of natural water ecosystems through
conservation and active land management. Here the carbon benefit comes from
biogenic carbon sequestration, as under the Climate Action Reserve methodology
focused on tidal wetlands restoration.
For corporates who want to demonstrate a commitment to delivering water
stewardship impacts, a water co-benefit carbon project portfolio gives the
assurance that the expected outputs of the programme are delivered, be that the
purification of a certain volume of water for human consumption, saving a
volume of water through efficiency, or restoring or protecting a specific area
of watershed.
But why look to the carbon market to achieve this? Because of the
results-based finance framework whereby the funds are only delivered to
projects which are performing. Carbon projects have their outcomes
independently audited on a regular basis, and each successful audit leads to
the issuance of credits sold to provide ongoing finance to the project. This
approach provides incentives for sustainable project operation and the
achievement of outcomes. This is in stark contrast to the traditional approach
of financing water projects. As an example, the organisation
Sustainable WASH
(water, sanitation, and hygiene), estimates that over the last 20 years, around
800,000 hand pumps have been installed in Sub-Saharan Africa, of which some 30%
are known to fail prematurely, less than five percent of projects are revisited
after project conclusion and less than one percent have any long term
monitoring.
This power of the carbon market to link funding to measurable and
verifiable water outcomes is what enables corporates to ensure they are
delivering impact. And there are already moves within the carbon market to
apply the results-based finance model to generate dedicated water outcomes in
addition to the water co-benefits from some carbon projects. The Gold
Standard’s Water Programme has developed a whole new currency: the
Water Benefit Certificate and this will be the subject of my next blog. In the
mean-time start to think about the water stewardship outcomes you want your
carbon project portfolio to deliver.

The Guatemala Water Treatment and Cookstoves Project
© 2013 Rodney Rascona for The Paradigm Project
Read about filtration in Guatemala, delivering clean water to
households and reducing indoor air pollution through efficient cookstoves.
Written By: Oliver Crouch, Head of Strategic Development, The CarbonNeutral Company