**1. Introduction**

286 Current Issues of Water Management

Marques, R.C. & De Witte, K. (2007). Towards a benchmarking paradigm in the European

Newberry, D. M. (2003). Privatising Network Industries, CESifo Working Paper No. 1132,

Picazo-Tadeo, A.J., Sáez-Fernández, F.J. & González-Gómez, F. (2009). The Role of

Sumiscid AB (2007). Development of benchmarking models for German electricity and gas

Walter, M., Cullmann, A., von Hirschhausen, C., Wand, R. & Zschille, M. (2010). Quo Vadis

from Spanish Companies, Applied Economics, 41, pp. 615 628.

distribution, Project Gerner/AS 6 – Final Report, 1.1.2007.

*Utilities Policy*, Vol.17, No. 3-4, pp. 225-232.

Environmental Factors in Water Utilities' Technical Efficiency. Empirical Evidence

Efficiency Analysis of Water Distribution? A Comparative Literature Review.

https://www.econ.kuleuven.be/ew/academic/econover/Papers/Benchmarking

public water and sewerage services, available from:

%20paradigm%2023-03.pdf

February 2003.

In water management today, there are two primary ways of meeting water-related needs, or two "paths". One path can be called the "hard" path which relies almost exclusively on centralized infrastructure and decision making: building dams and reservoirs, pipelines and treatment plants, and establishing water departments and agencies. It delivers water, mostly of potable quality, and takes away wastewater. The second path or the "soft" path may rely on centralized infrastructure, but complements it with extensive investment in decentralized facilities, efficient technologies, and human capital. It delivers diverse water services matched to the users' needs and works with water users at local and community scales. –

The purpose of this chapter is to present the "Soft Path Analysis" as an approach that improves the overall productivity of water use, rather than the business as usual approach with the endless search of new sources of water supplies.

The water soft path is modelled on the highly successful approach to energy known as the soft energy path. The "soft path" planning approach for fresh water differs fundamentally from supply focused planning. It starts by changing the conception of water demand. Instead of viewing water as an end product, the soft path views water as the means to accomplish certain tasks. The role of water management changes from building and maintaining water supply infrastructure to providing water related services, such as new forms of sanitation, drought-resistant landscapes, urban redesign for conservation and rainfed ways to grow crops (Brandes et. al, 2005)

What calls for new approaches are also the inadequacies by which water planners and policymakers are addressing the new challenges that are further complicating the traditional approaches to solving the water problems. Issues such as regional and international water conflicts, the dependence of many regions on unsustainable groundwater use, the growing threat of anthropogenic climate change, and our declining capacity to monitor critical aspects of the global water balance are all currently inadequately addressed by water planners and policymakers. If these challenges are to be met within ecological, financial, and social constraints, new approaches are needed (Gliek, 2003).

### **1.1 Concept of soft paths**

Soft paths can be defined briefly as approaches to natural resources management that rely on a multitude of distributed, relatively small-scale sources of supply coupled with ultra

Water Soft Path Analysis – Jordan Case 289

However, instead, total water withdrawals began to stabilize in the 1970s and 1980s in , and construction activities began to slow. More recently, the economic costs of the traditional hard path have also risen to levels that society now seems unwilling or unable to bear.

Similarly, as large-infrastructure solutions have become less attractive, new ideas are being developed and tried and some old ideas are being revived, such as rainwater harvesting and integrated land and water management. These alternative approaches must be woven

Soft path analysis as a detailed and rigorous method was initially developed around energy alternatives. Soft path analysis as a methodology was initially developed in the 1970s in a search for alternatives to conventional energy policy by Lovins. Its normative base was clear from the start. The early work was done within Friends of the Earth USA, partly as a way to

By the end of the 1970s, articles on soft energy paths were appearing in professional journals, and several books had been published. By the middle of the 1980s, the methodology could be considered proven; some 35 soft energy path studies had been published for various nations or regions of the world. Canadians were among the leaders in seeing the potential for soft energy paths, and Friends of the Earth Canada provided the base for some of the developmental work and later for four iterations of soft energy path analysis on Canada, including a 12 volume report by Brooks, Robinson and Torrie in 1983, and a more popular book by Bott, Brooks and Robinson in 1983. Methodological guides

Though no nation or state whole heartedly accepted soft path conclusions as guiding principles, their impact was quite evident in policies that began to lean toward soft technologies and in results that showed more "new" energy coming from gains in energy

In comparing and contrasting energy and water we can notice water and energy exhibit many analogies, not just as physical substances, but also in the ways in which human beings have developed them as resources. The gradual shift from simple to combined to highly complex technologies, and from individual to local to highly centralized systems, has typified these two key resources for human development. However, the shift has proceeded much further for energy than it has for water. In many respects, water systems and water policies are not so far from the soft alternative today as energy policies and systems already were 25 years ago. Water supply is, for example, typically municipal or at most national in scope, and much of it is publicly owned; energy supply is commonly global in scope, and much of it is privately owned (Brooks, 2003). But looking at water or energy as a bundle of services, rather than as a commodity, many more options can be conceived to satisfy

From the first, analysts agreed that the soft path methodology could be applied to other natural resources, but analytical models have only appeared for energy, and, more recently

together to offer a comprehensive toolbox of possible solutions (Gliek, 2003).

counter the then-growing drive to build nuclear power plants (Brooks, 2005).

efficiency than from all new sources of supply together (Brooks, 2005).

**1.3 Experiences with actual soft path analyses** 

were also made available (Brooks, 2004).

demands (Brooks, 2005).

**1.4 Water soft path analyses** 

efficient ways of meeting end-use demands (Brooks et al, 2004). Gleick (in Brooks ,2004) provides a more comprehensive definition:

What is required is a "soft path," one that continues to rely on carefully planned and managed centralized infrastructure but complements it with small-scale decentralized facilities. The soft path for water strives to improve the productivity of water use rather than seek endless sources of new supply. It delivers water services and qualities matched to users' needs, rather than just delivering quantities of water. It applies economic tools such as markets and pricing, but with the goal of encouraging efficient use, equitable distribution of the resource, and sustainable system operation over time. In addition includes local communities in decisions about water management, allocation, and use.

### **1.2 Twentieth century policy and planning**

The predominant focus of water planners and managers has been identifying and meeting growing human demands for water. Their principal tools have been long-range demand projections and the construction of tens of thousands of large facilities for storing, moving, and treating water. The long construction times and high capital costs of water infrastructure require that planners try to make long-term forecasts and projections of demand. Yet these are fraught with uncertainty. Three basic futures are possible: (i) exponential growth in water demand as populations and economies grow, (ii) a slowing of demand growth until it reaches a steady state, and (iii) slowing and ultimately a reversal of demand (Figure 1).

Fig. 1. Scenarios of future water use. (Gliek, 2003)

The three curves represent continued exponential growth in demand (A), a leveling off of demand to steady state (B), and declining demand (C).

Reviewing the last several decades of projections shows that in the developing world planners consistently assumed continued, and even accelerated, exponential growth in total water demand. Some projections were that water withdrawals would have to triple and even quadruple in coming years, requiring additional dams and diversions on previously untapped water resources in remote or pristine areas once declared off-limits to development (Gliek, 2003).

efficient ways of meeting end-use demands (Brooks et al, 2004). Gleick (in Brooks ,2004)

What is required is a "soft path," one that continues to rely on carefully planned and managed centralized infrastructure but complements it with small-scale decentralized facilities. The soft path for water strives to improve the productivity of water use rather than seek endless sources of new supply. It delivers water services and qualities matched to users' needs, rather than just delivering quantities of water. It applies economic tools such as markets and pricing, but with the goal of encouraging efficient use, equitable distribution of the resource, and sustainable system operation over time. In addition includes local

The predominant focus of water planners and managers has been identifying and meeting growing human demands for water. Their principal tools have been long-range demand projections and the construction of tens of thousands of large facilities for storing, moving, and treating water. The long construction times and high capital costs of water infrastructure require that planners try to make long-term forecasts and projections of demand. Yet these are fraught with uncertainty. Three basic futures are possible: (i) exponential growth in water demand as populations and economies grow, (ii) a slowing of demand growth until it reaches a steady state, and (iii) slowing and ultimately a reversal of

0 6 10 16 20

The three curves represent continued exponential growth in demand (A), a leveling off of

Reviewing the last several decades of projections shows that in the developing world planners consistently assumed continued, and even accelerated, exponential growth in total water demand. Some projections were that water withdrawals would have to triple and even quadruple in coming years, requiring additional dams and diversions on previously untapped water resources in remote or pristine areas once declared off-limits to

Time

A

B

C

communities in decisions about water management, allocation, and use.

provides a more comprehensive definition:

**1.2 Twentieth century policy and planning** 

demand (Figure 1).

Measure of Water Use

development (Gliek, 2003).

Fig. 1. Scenarios of future water use. (Gliek, 2003)

demand to steady state (B), and declining demand (C).

Similarly, as large-infrastructure solutions have become less attractive, new ideas are being developed and tried and some old ideas are being revived, such as rainwater harvesting and integrated land and water management. These alternative approaches must be woven together to offer a comprehensive toolbox of possible solutions (Gliek, 2003).

hard path have also risen to levels that society now seems unwilling or unable to bear.
