TECHNICAL REPORT

Water Accounts and

Water Accounting
Michael J. Vardon1, Thi Ha Lien Le2,3, Ricardo Martinez-Lagunes4,
Ogopotse Batlokwa Pule5, Sjoerd Schenau6, Steve May7 and
R. Quentin Grafton8

Technical Report for the Global

Commission on the Economics of
Water. Convened by the Government
of the Netherlands. Facilitated by the
Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and Development (OECD)

February 2023
watercommission.org
Affiliations
Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University, Australia
1

School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Australia

2

3
Center for Agricultural Policy, Institute of Policy and Strategy for Agriculture and
Rural Development, Vietnam
Inter-American Development Bank, Mexico
4

Water Utilities Corporation, Botswana

5

Statistics Netherlands, The Netherlands

6

Australian Bureau of Statistics, Australia

7

Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University, Australia

8

Acknowledgements

We give our deepest respects to their Elders, past and present, who have been and always
will be the Traditional Custodians of Australia’s waters including its aquifers, streams, and
rivers. We acknowledge that Australia’s Indigenous nations have long-standing cultural, social,
environmental, spiritual, and economic values, rights and responsibilities with respect to their
Country.

Maurice Nevile provided copy editing of two drafts of the manuscript and formatting assis-
tance. Mai Nguyen greatly assisted with administrative support. Anna Normyle prepared the
figures. Support with the final formatting and proofing were provided by Cultivate Communi-
cations.

All errors and inconsistencies remain the responsibility of the authors alone.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-

ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License. To view a copy of this
license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Table of Contents
AFFILIATIONS 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

1 INTRODUCTION 4

1.1 Water accounting frameworks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

1.2 Aims and structure of report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

2 NATIONAL ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL

ACCOUNTING 7
2.1 The System of National Accounts (SNA) and SEEA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
2.2 Industries, sectors and products in the SNA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
2.3 SEEA goes beyond SNA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
2.4 Stocks and flows. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
2.5 Accounting and First Nations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

3 WATER VALUATION IN SNA AND SEEA 10

3.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.2 Water valuation methods and the SEEA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.3 Double counting water value. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

4 SEEA-BASED WATER ACCOUNTING 15

4.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.2 Terminology and definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.3 Scope of water accounting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.4 Types of water accounts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.5 Data sources and methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.6 Spatial outputs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.7 Time periods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.8 Ecosystem accounting and water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.9 Water accounting and SDG 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.10 Water accounting and ‘water budgets’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 1

5 WATER ACCOUNTING REVIEW 31

5.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.2 Data sources and methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.3 Results of review. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

6 COUNTRY EXAMPLES 41

6.1 European Water Framework Directive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

6.2 Botswana country experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
6.3 Colombia water accounts for setting water fees. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
6.4 Developing water accounting in the United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
6.5 Australia: An opportunity requiring resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
6.6 The pioneering Philippines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

7 REALISING THE POTENTIAL OF WATER ACCOUNTING 48

7.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.2 Strengths and weaknesses of water accounting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.3 Opportunities for water management and governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
7.4 Meeting the challenges for water accounting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

8 LESSONS AND BEST PRACTICE 54

8.1 Lessons. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
8.2 Towards best practice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

9 REFERENCES 60

ANNEX 1 SEEA WATER GLOSSARY 68

ANNEX 2 LIST OF WATER ACCOUNTING TABLES 73

1 Standard tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
2 Supplementary tables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
3 Indicator tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

ANNEX 3 FULL WATER SUPPLY AND USE ACCOUNT 75

ANNEX 4 DATABASE METADATA 79

ANNEX 5 LIST OF COUNTRIES AND REGIONS PRODUCING WATER ACCOUNTS 83

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 2

Executive summary

A range of different information is needed for water management and governance, but
this is often lacking or of poor quality. This is due to several factors including that: (1) the
socio-economic and environmental data related to water are held by a range of agencies; (2)
various professions have developed their own theories, practices and terminology, and (3)
resources available for data collection, curation and integration are limited. These factors are
compounded by the multiple values of water and a lack of consensus on the way, or even
if, these values can be represented by money. Water accounting can help overcome these
problems.

Water accounts are a framework for assembling multiple data sources into a coherent
information system. There are many types of water accounts covering the hydrological cycle,
water quality, the water supply and sewerage industries, water fees and charges, defensive
and restoration expenditures, and financing as well as for water-related ecosystem services,
like water purification, water regulation and flood control. Through the consistent application
of concepts, definitions, classifications and structures, water accounts can be linked to other
types of environmental information and in particular ecosystem accounts and the System
of National Accounts (SNA). The SNA is used by every country in the world for economic
management and policy. Water accounting can provide the integrated information that
can support water governance and management, just like the national accounts support
economic management and policy.

Water accounting has evolved over more than three decades, and this experience is brought
together in the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA). Nearly 100 coun-
tries use or are developing this system, and 73 countries and regions have produced water
accounts, using a range of data sources and methods, and with production growing steadily
over time. The production and use of water accounting is global and is undertaken in all types
of countries (e.g. low- to high-income, small to large, and at various levels of water stress).

This review of water accounts provides examples of their production and actual or potential
use in water governance and management. The review also assesses the strengths and weak-
nesses of water accounting, enabling best practices to be identified. Best practice includes: a
collaborative development process recognising the diversity of stakeholders and stakeholder
values to ensure the relevance of the accounts; comprehensive coverage of water resources
(surface, ground and soil water), industry and sectors (e.g. agriculture, mining, energy, water
supply and sewerage industries plus households); development of multiple account types
(stocks and flows, physical and monetary measurement units); regular, frequent and timely
production; clear statements of data quality (including limitation); and using a continuous
improvement process.

With water accounts, decision makers in water governance and management will have a rich
information source that can be used to balance the competing demands for water and can
ensure that water use is sustainable and equitable. In this, water accounts can feed into deci-
sion-making processes and be used to identify problems and to design, implement, monitor
and adapt solutions.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 3

1 Introduction
This report describes water accounts and water accounting with particular focus on the
System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA).1 It explains the key concepts of
water accounting, the structure of accounts and how water accounts can be used for water
management and governance, and for policymaking. Based on an assessment of countries’
experiences to date, the report outlines the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and chal-
lenges of water accounting and identifies the factors of success and the steps towards best
practice.

The report aims to increase the awareness and understanding of water accounting in
agencies and professionals involved in water economics, governance and management. A
better appreciation of the information within water accounts, how it relates to other envi-
ronmental and economic information, and how it can and has been used, should lead to a
greater uptake and use of water accounting.

While the uptake of water accounting has been growing, its use in decision-making is lagging.
This may be attributed to the relatively small water accounting community, the complexity of
the water accounts, the existence of several water accounting frameworks, the many types of
water accounts, differences in terminology between hydrology, other environmental sciences,
economics and accounting, and few examples of real-life applications. All of this creates
confusion, and decision makers are inclined to stick with traditional sources of water informa-
tion for water management and governance.

This report is one of several technical reports that will be inputs to the Midterm Comprehen-
sive Review of the Implementation of the Objectives of the International Decade for Action,
to be presented at the World Water Day Conference “Water for Sustainable Development”
2018–2028 (UN Water Conference). The UN Water Conference will be co-hosted by the Neth-
erlands and Tajikistan, and held 22–24 March 2023 in New York, United States of America
(US).2 The conference aims to provide:

“ . . . a greater focus on the sustainable development and integrated management of

water resources for the achievement of social, economic and environmental objectives,
the implementation and promotion of related programmes and projects, as well as on
the furtherance of cooperation and partnerships at all levels, in order to help to achieve
the internationally agreed water-related goals and targets . . .” (from UN GA Resolution
73/226).3

1.1 Water accounting frameworks

Water accounting is an information framework that systematically integrates hydrolog-
ical information from a range of data sources with other information on the economy and
https://seea.un.org
1

2
https://sdgs.un.org/conferences/water2023
3
https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N18/460/07/PDF/N1846007.pdf?OpenElement

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 4

environment. Water accounting is part of a broader accounting view that encompasses the
relationship between people, the economy and the environment. Such accounting is known
by several names, including natural capital accounting, ecosystem accounting, environmen-
tal-economic accounting and, in the corporate sphere, sustainability or environment and
social governance (ESG) reporting.

There are several water accounting frameworks. The focus on the SEEA is because it has been
adopted over time via United Nations (UN) processes as an international statistical standard.
The SEEA has several components, including the:

„ SEEA Central Framework (UN et al., 2014)

„ SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (UN et al., 2021)
„ SEEA Water (UN, 2012a)

The SEEA is an extension of the System of National Accounts (SNA) (EC et al., 2009). The SNA
is used by virtually every country in the world for economic management and policy, and its
best-known indicator is Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The main features of the SNA and
SEEA are described in more detail in Chapter 2.

Other water accounting frameworks are in use (Godfrey and Chalmers, 2012), for example
Water Accounting Plus4 (WA+) and are referenced within the document. In general, these
frameworks are aligned to different parts of the SEEA Water and use similar data sources and
methods (Vardon et al., 2012). Corporate water accounting is also used by businesses outside
of the water supply industry to inform organisational decisions, identifying, for example, their
dependence on water (Christ and Burritt, 2018).

The distinguishing features of SEEA Water are that:

„ it sets water within a broader set of environmental and ecosystem accounts which inte-
grates with the SNA (Chapter 2);
„ water valuation is in accordance with agreed concepts and methods that are coherent with
the SNA (Chapter 3);
„ it has been internationally agreed and standardised via UN processes (Chapter 4); and
„ it is the most used water accounting framework in the world (Chapter 5).

There are also other water information systems that have much in common with the SEEA,
or other water accounting systems with some of these features, but none have all of these
features.

Whichever water accounting or water information framework is used, the compilation of data
relies on the expertise, data sources and methods from a range of professions and agencies.
This includes hydrologists, economists, statisticians and accountants, and institutions of
government for water management, hydrology, economics, statistics, central planning, agri-
culture and energy (especially where hydroelectricity is imported). Non-government research
institutions, like universities, also have a role to play (Bagstad et al., 2021).

https://wateraccounting.un-ihe.org/
4

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 5

Water accounting, through the consistent application of concepts and the related definitions
and classifications, provides a fully integrated information resource. This supports transpar-
ency about the connections between water, the broader environment and the economy. This,
in turn, allows for comparisons between different industries and natural resources, over time
and between places. Accounts reveal how changes in, for example, water availability in one
part of the economy or environment, may affect other parts of the economy or environment.
Such information is needed for effective water governance and management. SEEA also
enables comparisons between countries to be made.

1.2 Aims and structure of report

The aim of this report is to increase awareness and understanding of water accounting
and how it may be implemented and used in decision-making for water economics, water
management and governance. This report also provides the impetus for the greater uptake
and use of water accounting, and will encourage the collection of the basic environmental
and economic data that underpin the accounts.

To increase awareness and understanding of water accounting, this report:

„ outlines the main features of water accounting;

„ reviews existing water accounts to determine current practices (e.g. institutional arrange-
ments, data sources and methods used for account production);
„ distils lessons from current practices, and examines the strengths and weaknesses of
water accounts for use in water-related decision-making;
„ investigates the opportunities and challenges for wider development and use of water
accounts for water economics and governance; and
„ identifies the steps towards best practice water accounting.

The report has nine chapters and five annexes:

1. Introduction
2. National and environmental accounting
3. Water valuation in SNA
4. SEEA-based water accounting
5. Water accounting review
6. Country examples
7. Realising the potential of water accounting
8. Lessons and best practice
9. References
Annex 1. Glossary of water accounting
Annex 2. List of water accounting tables
Annex 3. Full water supply and use account
Annex 4. Database metadata
Annex 5. List of countries and regions producing water accounts
Each chapter has multiple sections.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 6

2 National economic and environmental
accounting

2.1 The System of National Accounts (SNA) and SEEA

Water accounts are one group of environmental-economic accounts that sit within the SEEA,
which in turns links to the SNA (EC et al., 2009). The SNA is the framework used in macro-eco-
nomic statistics throughout the world for more than 50 years, and from which the accounting
identity Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is derived (Coyle, 2015).

In general, the SEEA shows the interactions of the economy with the environment. Figure 2.1
shows the extraction of natural resources and use of ecosystem services by the economy,
and the returns of emissions and waste. The economy is as defined by the SNA.

Figure 2.1 The environmental and economic context for accounting

The Environment

Labor,
produced
Natural resources capital Production
and ecosystem Economic Emissions
services sectors Consumption and waste
Household,
Public sector

The Economy

Source: After World Bank (2021)

2.2 Industries, sectors and products in the SNA

Within the economy, as defined by the SNA, a range of activities take place – the produc-
tion and consumption of various goods and services, and capital formation. The economy is
composed of economic units which are classified to industries (e.g. agriculture, mining, water
supply, manufacturing, education, health, etc.), using the International Standard Industry
Classification (ISIC),5 and sectors (e.g. private, public and households6).

https://unstats.un.org/unsd/publication/seriesm/seriesm_4rev4e.pdf
5

6
The official sector classification used in the SNA is financial corporations, non-financial corporations, government,
not-for-profit institutions supporting households, and households.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 7

The classification to industry is based on the production of goods and services which are clas-
sified according to the Central Product Classification (CPC).7 For example, if rice is produced
by an economic unit (e.g. a farm) then it is classified to the agricultural industry and,
assuming it is privately owned, the private sector. The rice may then be consumed by another
economic unit, which could be a household (a sector), or be used in the production process
of another unit. For example, the rice may be sold to a restaurant, which is an economic unit
classified to the food and beverage service industry, and the meal produced by the restaurant
is consumed by a household (a sector). In this, there is a chain of supply and use, with goods
and services, production, consumption and accumulation, and the industries and sectors are
defined, and transactions recorded, using standardised definitions and classifications.

Key industries, products and sectors for water accounting are:

„ Water collection, treatment and supply (ISIC division 36), the main supplier of the product
“Natural Water” (CPC 1800), often shortened to the water supply industry;
„ Wastewater treatment (ISIC division 37), often referred to as the sewerage industry
„ Agriculture (ISIC division 01), usually the biggest consumer8 (but not user) of water within
the economy;
„ Energy (ISIC division 35), a key user of the product “Natural Water” (CPC 1800), both for
hydropower as well as for cooling in thermal power plants. Where it occurs, hydropower is
usually the biggest user (but not consumer) of water;
„ Households (a sector), key users of the product “Natural Water” (CPC 1800) supplied by the
water supply industry (ISIC division 36).

2.3 SEEA goes beyond SNA

The SEEA extends beyond the SNA to cover natural resources and the ecosystem services
used in the economy, as well as the wastes, emissions and other return flows to the environ-
ment from the economy. For example, the SEEA records flows of water, timber and minerals
(indeed all natural resources), and ecosystem services (e.g. climate regulation, water purifi-
cation, cultural services), into the economy, and the return of CO2 emissions and water from
the economy to the environment. Expenditure on environmental protection and resource
management is also recorded.

While the scope of the SEEA is large, no country implements the entire system. Thus, while
there should be comprehensive coverage, in practice, most countries compile only a selection
of the environmental accounts linked to the SNA.

The strength of the SEEA stems from its consistent application of definitions and classifica-
tions for stocks, flows and economic activity across different types of environmental assets
and different environmental dimensions (e.g. across water, ecosystems, CO2 emissions and
energy). In this way, integrated information on the economy and environment is provided
and enables the analysis of different scenarios, for example, how the development of the
economy affects the environment, or how the degradation of the environment will affect

https://unstats.un.org/unsd/classifications/unsdclassifications/cpcv21.pdf
7

8
In the SEAA context, water consumption is all the water used by industries, which may be directly extracted from the
environment or supplied by the water supply industry, less all of that leaves the industry, which may be discharged to
sewerage or directly to the environment.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 8

the economy. This in turn enables the development and application of better policies that
consider the links between the environment and the economy.

While the SNA defines the economy and designates the economic units and their classifica-
tion, the SEEA defines and classifies the environment. Key classifications in the SEEA cover:

„ Environmental assets
„ Natural resource flows
„ Ecosystem assets
„ Ecosystem service flows

Environmental assets and natural resource flows are defined and classified in the SEEA-Cen-
tral Framework, while ecosystem assets and ecosystem service flows are defined in the
SEEA-Ecosystem Accounting.

2.4 Stocks and flows

Two key concepts essential to the SEEA are stocks and flows, which can be measured in
physical (e.g. m3, litres, acre-feet) or monetary (e.g. $, €, ¥) units.

Stocks are the quantity of a particular product or natural resource at a point in time. Assets
are usually associated with stocks that have economic values. In the SNA, natural resource
stocks are recorded in balance sheets in monetary terms. In the SEEA stocks are recorded
in the asset accounts in physical terms (e.g. the volume of minerals in the ground) and
monetary terms. The stocks at the beginning of a period are called the opening stocks, and
those at the end of the period (start time plus one year) are called closing stocks. The differ-
ence between opening and closing stocks is the result of flows (additions and subtractions) to
the stocks. Stocks and changes in stocks are recorded in asset accounts. These accounts are
described for water in Chapter 4.

Flows are the quantity that is added or subtracted from a stock during a specific period (e.g. a
year). Flows are also recorded in supply and use tables. These show the supply of a particular
natural resource to industries, for example, timber from a natural forest to the forestry
industry (ISIC 02). The flows are related to particular stocks and are also shown in the asset
accounts. So, in the asset account, the removal of the timber would be shown as a reduction
to the stock, but the reduction is not attributed to an industry. An example of integrated
accounts for water assets and supply and use is provided in Chapter 4.

2.5 Accounting and First Nations

How the values of First Nations can be expressed in environmental accounts, and how First
Nations might be able to use environmental accounting, are two questions that have received
little attention in the SEEA (Normyle et al., 2022a). Water plays a significant role in the culture
of First Nations, with water the second most common component addressed in studies of
Indigenous people (Manero et al., 2022). To date, no water accounts have been developed
with First Nations, nor for the use of water accounts by First Nations and their representative
organisations. Nevertheless, SEEA-based accounts have been developed for specific areas
(Normyle et al., 2022b) and the Indigenous Estate in Australia (Barnett et al., 2022).

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 9

3 Water valuation in SNA and SEEA
3.1 Introduction
The valuation of the environment, both the stocks and flows of natural resources like water,
and its relation to SNA and SEEA, are described by Obst et al. (2016). This chapter provides
an overview of the different conceptions of value, namely exchange and welfare values, how
exchange values are different from market prices, and how values apply to different water
stocks and flows recorded in the water accounts (which are described in Chapter 4). Chapter
12 of SEEA Ecosystem Accounting provides a detailed description of how exchange and
welfare values are related.

In the SNA, “market prices are the amounts of money that willing purchasers pay to acquire
goods, services or assets from willing sellers” (EC et al., 2009, para 3.119). In many cases, there is
not a market transaction, but a market price is estimated. For example, in the case of public
education, the users of the education service do not directly pay for that service, but the
value of these services is estimated via the cost of production, and a transaction between
households and government is imputed. Cost of production is based on the value of the
capital and goods and services used in its production, which are, in the case of education, the
school buildings, pay for teachers and administrative staff, cost of energy (e.g. for lighting and
temperature control), and other goods (e.g. books).

National accounts value water in the same way that they value all other assets and products
using the concept of exchange values and the SNA – “Exchange values are the values at which
goods, services, labour or assets are in fact exchanged or else could be exchanged for cash” (2008
SNA, para. 3.118). For most entries in the SNA, exchange values are measured using data
from observed transactions involving market prices. The 2008 SNA notes there are cases
where observed exchange values do not represent market prices, for example in situations
of transfer and concessional pricing (2008 SNA, para 3.131-3.134). This is usually the case for
water.

This situation arises because of several characteristics (After: UN, 2012a; Easter et al., 1997;
Young, 1996; Grafton et al., 2020):

„ Water is a heavily regulated product for which the price charged (if any) often bears little
relation to its economic value or even the cost of supply. This situation is sometimes
severe in water-scarce developing countries where water may be supplied to some users
at no charge. Administered prices occur, in part, because the natural characteristics of
water inhibit the emergence of competitive markets that establish economic value;
„ Water supply often has the characteristics of a natural monopoly because water storage
and distribution are subject to economies of scale;
„ Where and when water is scarce, water is rationed, or there are restrictions on particular
types of uses (e.g. parks and gardens are not permitted to use water);
„

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 10

„ Property rights, essential for competitive markets, are often absent and not always easy
to define when the uses of water exhibit characteristics of a public good (e.g. flood mitiga-
tion), a collective good (e.g. a sink for wastes), or when water is subject to multiple and/or
sequential use;
„ Water is a “bulky” commodity, that is, its weight-to-value ratio is very low, inhibiting the
development of markets beyond those in the local area;
„ Large amounts of water are abstracted for own use by industries other than those under
ISIC Division 36 (water collection, treatment and supply), such as agriculture, mining and
energy. Abstraction for own use is not recorded as an intermediate input of water; hence,
the use of water is underestimated and the value of water’s contribution, for example, to
agriculture, is not explicit but accrues to the operating surplus of agriculture.

Observed exchange values of water, and in particular the product “Natural Water” (CPC
1800),9 are not a representation of “true” exchange values, and hence are an inadequate
indicator of water’s economic value. As such, alternative valuation methods are needed, if the
objective is to maximise the economic value obtained from water use from investments in
the water sector and to assess issues of equity and environmental sustainability (GWP 2000).

The valuation of water using exchange values is useful for many policy areas (UN et al., 2014),
for example, to assess efficiency in the development and allocation of water resources.
Efficient and equitable allocation of water requires considering the value of water used by
competing end-users in the current generation, the current value of water supply and sani-
tation assets, the allocation of resources and the degree to which wastes discharged into
water are treated, and other activities that affect water quality (e.g. dissolved nutrients runoff
from agricultural land). Such valuation can also be useful in setting water pricing policy (e.g.
where water is supplied at cost of production) and in the design of economic instruments to
achieve better use of water resources. Economic instruments for water management include
property rights, tradable water markets, taxes on water depletion and pollution, and subsi-
dies for water demand management.

Accounts for water-related environmental protection and resource management expenditure

can also be used to judge the efficiency of expenditure on water quality maintenance and
catchment restoration activity (Lange, 1997).

3.2 Water valuation methods and the SEEA

The World Water Development Report notes that water “valuation is only of use if the deci-
sion-making process in question is based on a fair assessment of values”, and that “valuation
of water infrastructure is about good governance” (UNESCO, 2021:3).

This report recognises the multiple values of water and the difficulties of water valuation.
The report also identifies fours aspects of water value – hydrologic infrastructure (e.g. dams,
water and sewerage pipes), economic uses (e.g. drinking water, cooling water, irrigation
water, manufacture of food and beverages, etc.), cultural uses (e.g. significant water bodies
or water-dependent places), and value to the environment (this is the extent and condition of
ecosystems and the ecoservices they provide).
9
The Central Product Classification classifies and codes all production in the economy.
See https://unstats.un.org/unsd/classifications/Econ/cpc.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 11

The concept of exchange values can be applied to the four aspects, and they are recognised
in different parts of the SNA and SEEA. The value of hydrological infrastructure and the value
of economic uses are in the scope of the SNA, but while these values are included, they are
hidden and cannot directly be derived from the national accounts. The SEEA Water provides
the methodology to identify separately and report these values. The cultural values and
values to the environment of water are within the scope of SEEA Ecosystem Accounting and
can be measured using methods consistent with exchange values (UN, 2022). Non-monetary
metrics can also be used to assess change in value, for example and decline in the physical
condition of ecosystems (e.g. declines in water quality) can be interpreted as loss of environ-
ment value.

Values can be determined for water flows or stocks (assets). The asset value of water is often
calculated via the net present value approach, which is based on the depreciated values of
future flows. Water assets may also be valued via the licencing and trade of water rights.

Within the SNA and SEEA, the valuation of water flows included in the water accounting is
usually related to:

„ Water as an intermediate input to production (e.g. to agriculture)

„ Water as a final consumer good (e.g. use by households)
„ Water that underpins financial assets (e.g. tradable water rights)
„ Water-related ecosystem services (e.g. water purification and water regulation) and the
‘sink’ function of the environment (e.g. for wastewater).

These flows of water can be related to economic production and consumption within the
economy as defined by the SNA, or those flows of benefits to people but outside the SNA
definition of the economy.10 Ecosystem services may be used within and outside of the
economy as defined by the SNA. The SEEA notes that there is no consensus on water valua-
tion methods and does not make recommendations about methods suitable for valuation in
water accounts beyond those used for the SNA (UN et al., 2021: para. 8.4). While there is no
consensus, there are more than two decades of attempts to value water in accordance with
the concept of exchange value. For example, Lange (1997) made comparison of user fees,
costs of delivery and the economic contribution of water to different sectors of the economy,
as a first step toward estimating the opportunity cost of water.

There is also a long history of water pricing and valuation, with many reviews of water value
(e.g. Hirshleifer et al., 1960; Hanemann, 1997; Olmstead and Stavins, 2009; OECD, 2010; EPA,
2017; Siikamäki et al., 2021; Metcalfe, 2022) as well as databases of studies on ecosystem
services and environmental valuation11 containing studies on water. The consistency of these
methods with the principle of exchange value needs to be investigated, but many of the
methods used are likely to be consistent with exchange values.

10
Depending on the source and user of water, and the use in the economy, some ecosystem services are already
counted in the SNA, in particular, water abstracted from an artificial reservoir by a water supplier (Vardon, 2022).
11
E.g. Environmental Valuation Reference Inventory (https://www.evri.ca/) and Ecosystem Services Valuation Database
(https://www.esvd.info/home)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 12

The SEEA Ecosystem Accounting considers the relationship of exchange values to environ-
mental valuation methods, and recommends the following valuation methods, in the order of
preference (UN, et al. 2021: in para. 9.23).

„ Methods where the price for the ecosystem service is directly observable
„ Methods where the price for the ecosystem service is obtained from markets for similar
goods and services
„ Methods where the price for the ecosystem service is embodied in a market transaction
„ Methods where the price for the ecosystem services is based on revealed expenditures
(costs) for related goods and services
„ Methods where the price for the ecosystem service is based on expected expenditures or
markets.

Methods specifically for monetary valuation of the water-related ecosystem services are also
outlined by NCAVES and MAIA (2022). These include water provisioning, water filtration, water
regulation and peak flow mitigation services.

For the water provisioning service, four methods are provided:

„ Resource rent or residual method. Payments made for water supply are made for irriga-
tion, household, and industrial uses. These payments are for the water, its transport and
treatment. The transport and treatment costs (including labour and capital costs) can be
deducted from the total payment with the residual value being the value of the water. It is
usual for water to be provided ‘at cost’, that is, the payments made reflect only the capital
and running costs and no payment is made for the water. In many cases, water is provided
to use at less than cost. This results in zero or negative resource rents, implying no value
(e.g. Obst et al., 2016).
„ Productivity change. This is done using partial and general equilibrium models and looking
at the impacts of a reduction in the supply of water to the output in different sectors of the
economy (e.g. Calzadilla et al., 2013; Roson and Damania, 2016).
„ Replacement cost methods, where a source of water is valued based on the cost of obtaining
the water from the next lowest cost source (adjusted for water quality) (e.g. Edens and
Graveland, 2014; Keith et al., 2017). An example would be using the cost of providing water
through desalination.
„ Value of water rights, where they are separately identified (from land values) and trading in
water rights takes place such that a market is established. These rights are financial assets
(Comisari and Vardon, 2013).

For the water filtration service two methods are suggested:

„ Replacement cost method. This is the capital (i.e. infrastructure) and operational costs of
purifying water to the same level of water quality (e.g. La Notte et al., 2012; Schenau et al.,
2022).
„ Avoided damage costs. This is the reduction in water purification and treatment costs that
arises from having the ecosystem service.

The damage to human health from water pollution is another potential approach that has

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 13

been used in accounting (e.g. Angeles and Peskin, 1998) and might also be useful and in
accordance with the notion of exchange values (i.e. it is a type of avoided loss).

Water regulation and peak flow (or flood) mitigation services are not provided by water but
by certain ecosystems. These services are, for example, provided by upland and liner vegeta-
tion, and the value of this benefit can be calculated using avoided loss (Kramer et al., 1997).

3.3 Double counting water value

When deriving values for water accounts and water-related ecosystem services, care must be
taken to avoid double counting if the value of water is included as part of a total value of a
country’s assets. For example, the value of water as an intermediate input is already included
in the SNA, although it is rarely explicitly identified, for example:

„ For industries purchasing water from the Water collection, treatment and supply industry
(ISIC 36), the water value in the SNA is included in three components of an industry’s
production costs – the service charge paid, any additional current and capital costs
(purchases of equipment, energy, labour and other inputs) incurred by a company for the
treatment, storage or transport of water, and industry value added where any residual
water value accrues.
„ For industries abstracting water for own use, the value of water is split between the costs
incurred for the abstraction, transport, treatment or storage of water, and the industry’s
value added.
„ For households, water value in the SNA includes the portion paid to water utilities or
incurred by self-providers (e.g. the costs of people operating their own dams, wells,
pumps).

Similarly, for ecosystem services the value of water-related ecosystem services may be
embedded in the value of other ecosystem services, for example, in the value of agricultural
commodities, timber and non-timber forest products that all require water for production.

The SNA includes “Water associated with land” as part of the asset “land” and relates to “any
inland waters (reservoirs, lakes, rivers, etc.) over which ownership rights can be exercised
and that can, therefore, be the subject of transactions between institutional units” (2008 SNA,
para. 10.175.). While not specifically mentioned, soil water is also part of land in the context
of the 2008 SNA, and soil water can only be accessed via land, for example, by the growing of
rain-fed crops (Comisari and Vardon, 2012).

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 14

4 SEEA-based water accounting
4.1 Introduction
This chapter provides an overview of SEEA-based water accounting, including a brief history,
its scope, key concepts, the main types of accounts, and the data sources and methods
typically used to compile accounts. This chapter is an introduction to SEEA-based water
accounting and is not intended to be a detailed reference for the production or use of water
accounts. References to a variety of information sources are included within this chapter for
those interested in more detail.

The SEEA consolidates the experiences and practices of countries and international organ-
isations in the field of water accounts. The first UN environmental-economic accounting
guidance was produced in 1993 and updated in 2003 (UN et al., 2014). The SEEA Water (UN,
2012a) consolidated experiences of countries with water accounting and was adopted as an
interim international statistical standard in March 2007,12 pending the finalisation on the SEEA
Central Framework which occurred in 2012 (UN et al., 2014).

Two features distinguish SEEA Water from other water information systems that it directly
links: (1) Water information to the information in the SNA and (2) Water information to
the environmental and ecological information in the SEEA Central Framework and SEEA
Ecosystem Accounting.

Through the shared concepts, structures, definitions and classifications with the SNA and
broader SEEA framework, these linkages provide the means to integrate environmental-eco-
nomic analysis. This helps to overcome the tendency to divide analysis and management
along disciplinary lines, that is, where analyses of economic and environmental issues are
carried out independently of one another. This allows for multidisciplinary research and
management (e.g. Brandt et al., 2013).

This chapter provides an overview of the SEEA Water, including the terminology, main
concepts and features of the system, the types of accounts, and a brief synopsis of the data
sources and methods to compile water accounts.

4.2 Terminology and definitions

The terminology used in SEEA Water was developed by an Electronic Discussion Group
(EDG) and is presented as a glossary in Annex 1 of this report (SEEA Water: para. 1.67). The
glossary is needed as water accounting is multidisciplinary, spanning many fields, including
hydrology, economics, environmental sciences and national accounting. The terminology was
an agreement of the EDG, and at the time was considered the best alignment of the termi-
nology of each field. The EDG considered many sources, including the International Glossary
of Hydrology13 (WMO, 2012), the FAO’s Global Information System on Water and Agriculture

See section 37/108 of the Report of the 38th Session of the UN Statistical Commission.
12

https://library.wmo.int/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=7394#.Y3Fwe3ZxWUk
13

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 15

of Aquastat14, the UN Glossary of Environmental Statistics15, and the SNA and SEEA glossaries.
It should be noted that some of the glossaries have been updated since the adoption of SEEA
Water in 2007.

The glossary is important because some terms, such as “water use” and “water consumption”,
mean different things in different contexts. The glossary enables different communities,
countries, and international organisations to understand how their particular definitions
relate to those in the SEEA. Over time, understanding should increase and the terminologies
and related definitions should become better aligned.

4.3 Scope of water accounting

The scope of water accounting is presented in Figure 4.1. This figure is a simplified presenta-
tion of the physical stocks and flows of water within the hydrological system, which is a part
of the environment, and the economy, and the interactions between the two. Many of the
flows, and in particular those within the economy and between the economy and the inland
water resource system, have matching monetary flows.

The inland water resource system of a territory (e.g. a nation or river basin) is composed
of all water resources in the territory (surface water, groundwater and soil water) and the
natural flows between them. The economy of a territory is defined by the SNA and consists
of resident water users who: extract water for production and consumption purposes; put in
place the infrastructure to store, treat, distribute and discharge water; and discharge water
back to the environment.

Not shown in Figure 4.1, but within the scope of water accounting, are the discharge of
pollutants, water quality, spending on resource management and environmental protection
and water-related ecosystem services (e.g. water supply, water purification and water flow
regulation services). Again, some of the physical aspects of water accounting have associated
monetary values. Conversely, the monetary accounts for resource management and envi-
ronmental protection have associated physical actions (e.g. installation of water treatment
plants, water quality monitoring systems and catchment management).

The SEEA Water provides information on the:

„ Stocks and flows of water resources within the environment.

„ Pressures on the environment from the economy, including the volume of water extraction
and wastewater returned to the environment.
„ The supply and use of water and in production process and by households.
„ The reuse of water within the economy.
„ The costs of collection, purification, distribution and treatment of water and financing of
these costs (e.g. charges to the users of water supply and sanitation services).
„ Payment of permits for access to extract water from the environment or for the discharge
of wastewater to the environment.
„ The hydraulic stock in place, as well as investments in hydraulic infrastructure.

https://www.fao.org/aquastat/en/databases/glossary/
14

https://unstats.un.org/unsd/environmentgl/
15

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 16

„ Water quality and water pollution.
„ The economic valuation of water resources.

The inland water resource assets classes are surface water, groundwater and soil water.
Surface water is further disaggregated and includes artificial reservoirs, lakes, rivers, snow,
ice and glaciers. Changes in water stocks are due to flows of water within the environment
(for example between surface water and groundwater) or flows between the economy and
the environment (for example river water used for irrigation). Changes in stocks can also
result from increased knowledge regarding stocks (for example the discovery of new aquifers
or the reassessment of the volume of already identified groundwater resources).

Figure 4.1 The scope of water accounting

Atmosphere

Precipitation Evapotranspiration

Inland Water Resource System

Upstream Downstream
Surface water
basins & aquifers (reservoirs, lakes, rivers, Soil water basins & aquifers
outside territory snow, ice and glaciers) Natural transfers outside territory
of reference (e.g. infiltration, of reference
Inflows seepage, etc.) Outflows

Groundwater

Sea Collection of precipitation Abstraction Returns Evapotranspiration Sea

Abstraction Returns

Sewerage

Returns
Households

Other Industries
(incl. Agriculture)
Rest of Water collection,
the World Imports treatment, supply Rest of
Economy Exports the World
Economy
Economy

Source: After SEEA Water (UN, 2012a)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 17

Beyond the scope of water accounting are the damages caused by water (e.g. by floods).
Some of these damages would be recorded in the balance sheet of the national accounts as
a reduction in the value of produced capital (e.g. houses, bridges and roads) and the damage
to the environment would be recorded as a decline in ecosystem condition accounts. The
ecosystem services of water flow regulation and river flood mitigation services are also
included in ecosystem accounting, but these services are provided by upstream and riparian
vegetation which can moderate run-off, slow water flows, and contribute to maintenance
of riverbanks (e.g. by preventing their erosion) that provide a physical barrier to high water
levels.

4.4 Types of water accounts

The SEEA describes three general types of accounts:

„ Supply and use tables in physical and monetary terms, showing flows of natural inputs,
ecosystem services products and residuals
„ Asset accounts for individual environmental (including ecosystems) assets in physical and
monetary terms, showing the stock of environmental assets at the beginning and the end
of each accounting period and the changes in the stock
„ Accounts recording transactions about economic activities undertaken for environmental
purposes.

The SEEA Water identifies 22 different types of standard water accounting tables, 14
supplementary tables and five indicator tables (Annex 2). The main types of water accounts
compiled are:

„ Physical asset accounts

„ Physical flow accounts – supply and use tables
„ Monetary supply and use tables
„ Water emissions accounts
„ Ecosystem accounts containing water-related ecosystem services

Physical water asset accounts show stocks of water contained in the inland water resources
by class of asset and how they change from one time period to the next. The water asset
account is very closely aligned with a water balance (Vardon et al., 2012). The stocks of water
recorded in the accounts may be low in some classes of water assets. For example, the stock
level of a river is measured as the volume of the active riverbed determined based on the
geographical profile of the riverbed and the water level, which is usually very small compared
with the total stock of water resources for a nation or the annual flow of water in rivers. It
is also the case that not all water resources are relevant in accounts, for example, in areas
without snow, ice or glaciers, or groundwater. It is also the case that not all water resources
within a particular class will be reported. For example, soil water may only be reported for
the areas used for agriculture or forestry, and in such instances the scope of the reported
estimate must be clear. Table 4.1 is a real example of a water asset account from Australia.

Physical water flow accounts describe flows of water encompassing the initial abstraction
of water resources from the environment into the economy, to the water flows within the

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 18

economy in the form of supply and use by industries and households, and finally, flows
of water back to the environment. Such accounts are also known as water supply and use
tables. Table 2.2 is a real example of a water flow account, again from Australia.

The top half of Table 4.2 is the supply table. It records the abstraction of the natural input of
water from the environment, with environment shown in a column, according to the source
of water, which is shown in the rows as surface water (52,766 ML), groundwater (1,254 ML)
and rainwater tanks (1,100 ML). The use of the water from the environment is then recorded
in the lower half of the table, against seven industries (i.e. agriculture, mining, manufacturing,
etc.) and households in the columns. In this example, the water supply industry uses 49,958
ML of surface water from the environment which it then supplies to others as a product
(“Natural Water” CPC 180016) in the row labelled “distributed water” in the top half of the
table. The distributed water is in turn shown as used by the seven industries and households
in the lower half of the table. In this example (Table 4.2), agriculture is a very small user of
water, which is atypical as agriculture is usually the largest user of water in many countries
(Wada et al., 2013). However, the Canberra region is largely an urban region with regard to
water use. Agriculture water use is often shown by the type of agricultural production. For
example, the most recent Australian water accounts17 divide agriculture into the industry
classes: nursery and floriculture production; mushroom and vegetable growing; fruit and
tree nut growing; sheep, beef, cattle grain growing and other livestock farming; dairy cattle
farming; poultry farming; and, other crop growing.

Physical flow accounts can also show the supply and use of other types of water, for example,
by water quality (e.g. potable or non-potable), and desalinated water. In the case where water
is extracted from the oceans or seas for desalination, this is shown as an extraction from
the sea of saline water, which is then converted to the product (e.g. potable water) which is
then supplied to industries and households. It is also possible to show the supply and use
of other water-related products, like bottled water and manufactured beverages (CPC 243,
244 respectively), although at present no country includes these products (and the relative
volumes used are small). The flows of wastewater to the sewerage industry are also recorded.

Conceptually, the physical flow accounts record all flows back to the environment from
the economy. In practice, some return flows, such as the unused portion of irrigated water
that returns to groundwater or surface, are not recorded. This is mostly due to lack of data
and the resources required to make estimates. This issue can be addressed, but if it is not
then this has implications for the interpretation of the accounts and for determining water
consumption (all water into the economy less all water out of the economy). It is also often
difficult to split the flows to the sewers by type of industry and households, as the sewerage
service industry generally does not record this information.

Monetary accounts for the supply and use of water are aligned with the physical flow
accounts. They show the supply and use of water and sewerage service within the economy.
As with the physical flow accounts, different types of water and water-related products can
be recorded. Table 4.3 is a real example of a monetary supply and use table.

https://unstats.un.org/unsd/classifications/Econ/cpc
16

https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/environment/environmental-management/water-account-australia/2020-21
17

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 19

A range of other monetary accounts are part of the SEEA Water. These include accounts for
the:

„ Expenditure on the protection and remediation of water resources (which are a subset of
the environment protection and resource management expenditure accounts of the SEEA
Central Framework).

„ Financing of expenditure on the protection and remediation of water resources.

The SEEA Central Framework also includes accounts for environmental taxes and subsidies.

Emission accounts record the volume of water emitted by the economy, with or without
water treatment. In this account, the water flows from different industries and sectors of the
economy to the sewerage industry and directly to the environment are shown. Accounts can
also include the amount of sewerage sludge and record the pollutants (e.g. N, P, K) added
to water by economic activity - these emissions are expressed in terms of total weight (e.g.
kilograms or tons) or concentration. The accounts cover: pollutants added to wastewater and
collected in the sewerage network; pollutants added to wastewater discharged directly into
water bodies; and non-point source emissions, such as emissions from urban run-off and
agriculture.

Water quality or condition accounts show water by different quality classes for each type
of water resource or show water quality indicators by type of water resource or individual
water resources. A real example from Australia showing a range of water quality indicators
for different surface water bodies is provided in Table 4.4. SEEA Ecosystem Accounting also
provides a description of ecosystem condition indicators, with water quality being an indi-
cator of overall ecosystem quality.

Tables 4.1 to 4.4 are an example of an integrated suite of accounts - physical assets, the
supply and use of water in physical and monetary terms, and water quality tables for
Australia (ABS and BoM, 2019). The example presented do not show all the categories in the
SEEA water accounts. For example, snow, ice and glaciers do not occur in the region and so
are not shown in the asset account in Table 2.1, while information on water from water tanks
is included but is not shown in the SEEA Water asset account. These are cases of the standard
tables being adapted to local circumstances.

Table 4.1 is related to Table 4.2. Table 4.1 is the physical water asset account. In this table the
row “Abstractions/Drivers” records abstractions from surface water (52,766 ML) and ground-
water (1,254 ML). These entries correspond exactly to the physical supply and use table
(Table 4.2), with the supply of water from the environment from surface and groundwater
shown in the first two rows. A series of flows is then recorded within the economy. Industries
and households record water use. The water supply industry uses 49,958 ML of surface water
and other industries use 1,524 ML, which means total use of surface water is 52,766 ML. The
water abstracted by the water supply industry is then supplied to other water users in the
economy. The 49,958 ML is transferred back to the supply table and shows the supply of
distributed water by the water supply industry to other industries and households. Losses in
distribution are attributed to the water supply industry, and in this case equals 5,127 ML. The
flows of wastewater are also shown: industry and households supply 40,821 ML of waste-

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 20

 Table 4.1 Asset Account for Water Resources, Canberra region, ML, 2016-17
Surface water

Subtotal surface Ground- Urban water Total Canberra

Reservoirs (a) Lakes (b) Rivers
water water system region

Opening Stocks 235,971 39,324 5,416 280,711 na 966 281,677

Increases in stocks 347,995 196,573 1,336,144 1,880,713 4,079 90,779 1,975,571

Returns from the economy - - 36,971 36,971 4,079 40,821 81,871

Precipitation 9,776 5,080 6,184 21,041 - 21,041

Flood return - - 2,190 2,190 2,190

Runoff 94,161 22,269 566,467 682,897 682,897

Inflows

from upstream territories 262,309 262,309 na - 262,309

from other resources in the territory 244,058 169,224 462,023 875,305 na 49,958 925,263

Decreases in stocks 341,723 195,009 1,294,648 1,831,380 1,254 87,731 1,920,364

Abstraction/Diversions 49,958 na 2,808 52,766 1,254 54,020

Evaporation 15,230 9,521 6,332 31,083 na 31,083

Overbank flow - - 53,617 53,617 53,617

Outflows

to downstream territories 818,608 818,608 na - 818,608

to other resources in the territory 276,535 185,488 413,282 875,305 na 87,731 963,036

Other changes in volume -3,343 -1,719 -45,980 -51,042 -2,825 -3,048 -56,915

Net change 2,929 -154 -4,484 -1,709 na - -1,709

Closing Stocks 238,900 39,170 932 279,002 na 966 279,968

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING |

Source: ABS and BoM (2019)

21
 Table 4.2 Physical water supply and use table for the Canberra region, Australia, ML, 2016–17
Industry Households Environment Total

Other
Agricul- Manufac- Water Industry
Mining Energy Sewerage industries
ture turing supply Total
(a)

Natural inputs (flows

from the environment
to the economy)

Surface water 52,766 52,766

Groundwater 1,254 1,254

Rainwater tanks 1,100 1,100

Subtotal natural
55,120 55,120
inputs

Products (flows within

the economy)

Distributed water - - - - 49,958 - - 49,958 - 49,958

Reused water - - - - - 3,392 - 3,392 - 3,392

Wastewater 87 12 375 - 115 - 9,256 9,845 30,976 40,821

Subtotal products 87 12 375 - 50,073 3,392 9,256 63,195 30,976 94,171

Return flows (flows

from the economy to
the environment)

Surface water - np np - - 36,929 42 36,971 - 36,971

Groundwater - np np - 4,079 - - 4,079 - 4,079

Subtotal return flows - np np - 4,079 36,929 42 41,050 - 41,050

Total supply 87 12 375 - 54,152 40,321 9,297 104,245 30,976 55,120 190,341

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING |

Physical Use table (ML)

22
 Industry Households Environment Total

Other
Agricul- Manufac- Water Industry
Mining Energy Sewerage industries
ture turing supply Total
(a)

Natural inputs (flows

from the environment
to the economy)

Surface water np 742 np - 49,958 - 1,524 52,766 - 52,766

Groundwater np 4 np - - - 1,120 1,201 53 1,254

Rainwater tanks na na na na na na na na 1,100 1,100

Subtotal natural
615 746 3 - 49,958 - 2,644 53,967 1,153 55,120
inputs

Products (flows within

the economy)

Distributed water 96 13 np np 5,127 - 10,194 15,843 34,115 49,958

Reused water - np np np - 3,298 np 3,392 - 3,392

Wastewater - np - np - 40,821 np 40,821 - 40,821

Subtotal products 96 np 414 np 5,127 44,119 10,287 60,056 34,115 94,171

Return flows (flows

from the economy to
the environment)

Surface water 36,971 36,971

Groundwater 4,079 4,079

Subtotal return flows 41,050 41,050

Total use 711 760 417 - 55,085 44,119 12,932 114,023 35,268 41,050 190,341

Total Consumption
(Total Use less Total 624 748 41 - 933 3,798 3,634 9,778 4,292 -14,070 -

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING |

Supply)

23
Source: ABS and BoM (2019)
 Table 4.3 Monetary water supply and use table for the Canberra region, Australia, AUD, 2016–17
Industry
Total

Energy

Mining
Households

Sewerage
port margins

Agriculture
Water supply
Industry Total

Manufacturing
Other industries (a)
Taxes less subsidies on
Valuation of natural inputs (Ecosystem service of water products, trade & trans- 896.0
provisioning)
Supply of water and sewerage services ($m)
Distributed water - - - - 175.6 - - 175.6 0.4 - 176.0
Reused water - - - - - 0.1 - 0.1 - - 0.1
Total supply of water products - - - - 175.6 0.1 - 175.8 0.4 - 176.2
Sewerage Services - - - - - 120.2 - 120.2 0.7 - 121.0
Total supply of water products and sewerage services - - - - 175.6 120.4 - 296.0 1.1 - 297.2
Intermediate consumption and final use ($m):
Distributed water - - 0.4 - 0.2 - 51.0 51.6 - 124.5 176.0
Reused water - - - - - - 0.1 0.1 - - 0.1
Total use of water products - - 0.4 - 0.2 - 51.1 51.7 - 124.5 176.2
Sewerage Services - - - - - 34.2 - 34.2 - 86.8 121.0
Total use of water products and sewerage services - - 0.4 - 0.2 34.2 51.1 85.9 - 211.3 297.2
Source: ABS and BoM (2019)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING |

24
 Table 4.4 Water Quality Account, Canberra region, Catchment Health Indicator Program (CHIP) Score, 2013-14 to 2016-17

2016-17

Dissolved WB RARC CHIP

pH (a) Conductivity Turbidity Phosphorus Nitrate WQ Score
Oxygen Score Score Score

Lakes and Ponds

Lake Ginninderra 1.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 5.0 1.0 2.2 3.0 4.0 3.1

Yerrabi Pond 2.0 4.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 2.0 2.3 3.0 4.0 3.1

Lake Tuggeranong 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 5.0 2.0 5.0 4.0 3.7

Lake Burley Griffin (b) 1.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 na 1.0 2.2 na na 2.2

Rivers

Murrumbidgee River 1.0 2.8 1.0 1.0 3.0 1.5 1.7 2.6 3.8 2.7

Molonglo River 1.0 4.0 1.3 1.3 3.7 1.3 2.1 3.2 4.0 3.1

Cotter River 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.2 2.0 3.0 2.1

Catchment

Ginninderra 1.2 3.8 1.8 1.4 3.9 2.0 2.4 3.4 na 3.2

Molonglo 1.0 3.6 1.8 2.2 4.6 1.8 2.5 3.5 na 3.3

Southern region 1.3 2.1 1.3 1.1 3.0 1.4 1.7 3.1 na 2.8

Source: ABS and BoM (2019)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING |

25
water to the sewerage industry for treatment, and the sewerage industry then discharges
36,929 ML of water back to the environment.

The physical supply and use account (Table 4.2) is directly related to the monetary supply and
use account (Table 4.3). The value of the water abstracted from the environment is not shown
and only the supply and use of distributed water (water supplied by water suppliers/utilities)
is recorded. Here, the total value of the distributed water is AUD 176 million and sewerage
disposal value is AUD 121 million. These values are the amounts paid by users to producers.

The water quality account (Table 4.4) shows individual surface water bodies (lakes, ponds and
rivers) which is related to part of the water asset account (Table 4.1). The artificial reservoirs
are not shown in the water quality account (4.4), while the water asset account does not show
the stocks, abstractions and returns from and to individual surface water bodies. Such detail
could be added.

Other accounts could be added to the series to strengthen the linkages between the
economic and environmental information. Examples could be a water emissions account,
showing the pollution load in water returns from different parts of the economy to the water
resources, or an account of the ecosystem service of water filtration provided by the vege-
tation surrounding the artificial reservoirs. Accounts for the capital and operating costs of
the water supply and sewerage industry would help to understand the extent to which the
fees and charges for the use of distributed water and sewerage services cover the cost of the
production of these services.

4.5 Data sources and methods

Water accounts rely on many data sources and methods. A detailed examination of the data
sources and methods used is beyond the scope of this report. Readers are referred to the
International Recommendations for Water Statistics (UN, 2012b). Since the publication of
these recommendations, there have been advances in the use of remote sensing technolo-
gies, hydrological modelling (e.g. Karimi et al. 2013; Pedro-Monzonís et al., 2016a; Esen and
Hein, 2020; Kind et al., 2020), and an increase in computer power that has resulted in the
refinement and development of a range of tools for estimating various types of data needed
for water accounting (e.g. WA+18).

In general, the data fall into two distinct categories: physical data on the environment (e.g.
stocks and flows of water in the environment); and physical and monetary data regarding
water and economic units (e.g. flows of water between the environment and the economy
and flows of water within the economy, and the related financial information). The data
sources and methods used to produce the information needed depends on a range of
factors, including the institutional arrangements and level of human and financial resources
available.

Data on the physical environment are usually collected through direct (scientific) observa-
tion by agencies responsible for hydrological and meteorological monitoring and research.
Data from or about economic units (e.g. businesses and households) are usually collected
by two basic means: accessing data collected for administrative purposes (e.g. tax, annual

https://wateraccounting.un-ihe.org/welcome-water-accounting-plus-0
18

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 26

reports, water licensing registers, etc.); or by direct survey (e.g. by a national statistical office).
In many cases, the original providers of the data and the original sources of the data are the
same, namely, the economic units and the records kept by these units. Surveys are usually
conducted by the national statistical system, while administrative data may be held by a
range of government agencies and some industry associations, and individual companies
may produce annual reports with relevant information.

4.6 Spatial outputs

Information for water management is required at many geographic levels, from local govern-
ment areas to river basins, to the national and multinational levels. The choice of the spatial
reference for the compilation of water accounts ultimately depends on the data needed by
users and the resources available to data producers.

In general, four types of spatial boundaries are used in water accounts:

„ Physical boundaries associated with surface and groundwater, for example, river basins or
water catchments, and aquifers and other sub-surface boundaries including groundwater
provinces, and groundwater management areas
„ Administrative regions, for example, local, state/provincial and national governments
„ Water service areas
„ Accounting catchments, which are hybrid areas representing the best possible match of the
three other types of spatial boundaries

For physical boundaries, it is internationally recognised that river basins are the most appro-
priate spatial reference for IWRM, for example in the World Water Assessment Programme
(2009) and the European Water Framework Directive (European Commission 2000). This is
because the people and economic activities within a river basin will have an impact on the
quantity and quality of water in the basin, and also the water available in a basin will affect
the people and economic activities that rely on this water. As such, river basins are suggested
to be the most appropriate for compiling water accounts in SEEA Water. Nevertheless, in
areas where groundwater is an important source of water, aquifers may also be appropriate
for compiling water statistics.

Administrative regions usually correspond to a level of government, for example local, state/
provincial, or national. Administrative regions are usually responsible for planning and
economic policies within their jurisdiction, noting that different regions are likely to have
different laws, regulations, institutional arrangements and management practices relating to
water.

Water suppliers or sewerage service providers, which may be government or non-govern-

ment businesses, will often have service areas that are related to the physical infrastructure,
which they own or operate to supply water or sewerage services. For example, a particular
water supplier may supply water to more than one city or town, and these may be in two
different river basins or administrative areas (for example, two different local government
areas).

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 27

Accounting areas are an artificial construct of characteristics of the administrative regions
and river basins where there is a mismatch of physical, administrative and water service
areas (which is often the case). Accounting areas are used to provide the best possible match
of economic, environmental and social data, which use a variety of spatial references.

In practice, an accounting area is usually an administrative region, composed of all or parts

of several river basins, or a river basin composed of all or parts of several administrative
regions.19 Usually, whole administrative regions are added together to form the nearest
approximation of a river basin, or vice versa.20 In defining accounting areas, it is necessary to
compare river basins and administrative boundaries to determine the best possible match
based on practical considerations of data availability and data collection.

4.7 Time periods

When integrating or collecting water data, the reference periods for the water data must
align. In environmental statistics, the calendar year is often the reference period, while for
economic statistics it is usually the financial year. For water statistics, countries may use a
hydrological year. A hydrological year is a 12-month period such that the overall changes in
storage are minimal and carry over is reduced to a minimum.21 Financial and hydrological
years may be the same as or different to calendar years.

It is often the case that water accounts are developed for the period used in the national
accounts, which is usually a financial year. This allows direct temporal comparability between
economic and environmental aspects of water statistics. Many water statistics, like precip-
itation and other meteorological and hydrological data, are compiled more frequently (e.g.
weekly or monthly) than economic statistics, and hence they can usually be more easily
adapted to financial years than economic statistics can be adapted to hydrological or
calendar years.

4.8 Ecosystem accounting and water

In the SEEA, environmental assets are considered from two perspectives. In the SEEA Central
Framework, the focus is on individual components of the environment that provide mate-
rials and space to all economic activities. In the case of water, this would be water resources
(surface water, groundwater, or soil water). The focus is on material benefits from the
direct use of environmental assets as natural inputs for the economy by enterprises and
households. SEEA Ecosystem Accounting encompasses the same environmental assets but
focuses on the interactions between individual environmental assets within ecosystems, and
a broader set of material and non-material benefits that accrue to the economy and other
human activity from flows of ecosystem services.

In SEEA Ecosystem Accounting a distinction is made between ecosystem services (the contri-
butions of ecosystems to benefits used in economic and other human activity), abiotic flows
(contributions to benefits from the environment that are not underpinned by, or reliant on,
ecological characteristics and processes), and spatial functions, which are the benefits that

After SEEAW para. 2.90.

19

See Edens et al. (2007).

20

See UNESCO/WMO, International Glossary of Hydrology.

21

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 28

arise from the provision of space. These different contributions may be described in physical
terms (for example, how much water is extracted) and monetary terms. SEEA provides
detailed guidelines on how and with which methodologies these contributions may be valued
in a way that is fully consistent with values as reported in the SNA (see Chapter 3).

The SEEA Ecosystem Accounting covers water ecosystems, several water-related ecosystem
services, and water quality indicators that contribute to the assessment of ecosystem
condition. The water ecosystem assets (e.g. artificial reservoirs22, lakes, rivers and streams,
snow, ice and glaciers and groundwater) correspond to those described in the SEEA Central
Framework and SEEA Water but may also include other water related ecosystem types, such
as wetlands. Soil water is not included as a separate asset in ecosystem accounting. Water
quality and water availability are used as indicators of ecosystem condition.

The SEEA Ecosystem Accounting reference list includes several water-related ecosystem
services including:

„ Water supply
„ Water purification (retention and breakdown of nutrients and other pollutants, e.g. as
provided by the vegetation in water catchments)
„ Water flow regulation
„ River flood mitigation services (this is the riparian vegetation which provides structure and
a physical barrier to high water levels)
„ Nursery population habitat (e.g. for harvested fish)
„ Recreation-related services (e.g. canoeing on a river)
„ Visual amenity (e.g. views of a river or snow, ice and glaciers)
„ Spiritual, artistic and symbolic services (e.g. the Ganges River)

The ecosystem service of water supply is one of the most reported ecosystem services (e.g.
Keith et al., 2017; Ouyang et al., 2020). There is also the potential for double counting the
value of some water-related ecosystem services, and in particular water purification and
water supply (Vardon et al., 2019a).

There are also overlaps in the coverage of the SEEA Water and SEEA Ecosystem Accounting,
and a different term can be used for the same flow recorded in each system (Vardon, 2022).
For example, the water supply service in SEEA Ecosystem Accounting is equivalent to the
abstraction of water in SEEA Water.

4.9 Water accounting and SDG 6

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDG)23 are a universal call to action to end poverty,
protect the planet and ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity. SDG 6 is to “Ensure
availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all”. The SEEA can support
six indicators for SDG 6, including:

22
Human-created ecosystems, like urban settlements and agricultural landscapes, are all included in the SEEA
Ecosystem Accounting typology.
https://sdgs.un.org/goals
23

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 29

„ Proportion of wastewater safely treated
„ Proportion of bodies of water with good ambient water quality
„ Change in water-use efficiency over time
„ Level of water stress: freshwater withdrawal as a proportion of available freshwater
resources
„ Change in the extent of water-related ecosystems over time
„ Water- and sanitation-related official development assistance that is part of a govern-
ment-coordinated spending plan

Constructing all of these indicators would require data from several of types from the SEEA
Water, the SEEA Central Framework, the SEEA Ecosystem Accounting. The SEEA-based
accounts in combination with the SNA also can been used to produce a range of other indica-
tors. An example from the Philippines is presented later in the report (Section 6.6).

The advantage of SEEA-based indicators is that the water information can be linked to other
economic, social and environmental information, enabling, for example, integrated land and
water management (IWRM) (Meijer et al., 2020), and linked to SDGs 8 and 12, respectively on
sustainable economic growth and sustainable consumption and production.

4.10 Water accounting and ‘water budgets’

Water budgets are a tool for quantifying the flows of water into and out of a hydrological
system. They record all water stored and exchanged on the land surface (rivers, lakes),
subsurface (aquifer, groundwater) and atmosphere (precipitation, evaporation) (e.g. Healy et
al., 2007). In a water budget, the rate of change of water stored is balanced by the quantity
and rate at which water flows into and out of a hydrologically defined area. A water budget
closely resembles the physical water asset account (see Table 4.1).

By linking a water budget, which is largely equivalent to the physical water asset account, to
the physical and monetary supply and tables (Tables 4.2 and 4.3, respectively), the amount of
water abstracted and returned by human activity can be better understood. The SEEA Water
can record in greater detail the amount of water abstracted and returned by different indus-
tries and sectors. This enables water managers to allocate the available water to different
users and understand the impacts on both the hydrological and economic systems of
changes in water availability, water use and expected water demand (e.g. through increased
population or the growth of large water-using industries).

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 30

5 Water accounting review
5.1 Introduction
This chapter provides a global review of water accounting to establish the extent to which
water accounting is undertaken, and to summarise key features of the accounts. It presents
the data sources and methods, and then the results. The review follows reviews of water
accounts or environmental accounting more generally (e.g. Bagstad et al., 2020; Salminen et
al., 2018; Smith, 2020; World Bank, 2021). The scope of this water accounting review covers
all water accounting systems (not just SEEA) and the academic literature, and not just the
accounts published by governments.

5.2 Data sources and methods

This review drew from existing protocols for systematic literature reviews (e.g. Moher et al.,
2009; Woodcock et al., 2014; Sarkis-Onofre et al., 2021). A three-step process was employed
to scan and find the water accounts (Figure 5.1).

Figure 5.1 Search pathways for water account review

Step 1 List of countries

with water accounts
SEEA-UN 2021 National National/regional
global assessment links accounts
List of countries
SEEA-UN with EEA
website

Knowledge base NCAVES, NCA, ANCA Reviews

Step 2 WB WAVES National

knowledge base accounts

Google International FAO, IWMI, IHE

search organisations/projects Delft, WWAP Water accounting River basin
collaboration accounts
ADB

Step 3 National
accounts

Scopus Academic papers River basin

Literature review
search and reports accounts

Keywords: Reviews
(“Water account*”, “environmental-economic account*”+ water, “natural capital account*”+ water,
“ecosystem account*”+ water, “ecosystem services water”, “water provisioning service”)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 31

The first step was a search of the UN SEEA website24 and results of the 2021 Global Assess-
ment (which collected a wealth of information on the status and progress of implementa-
tion of the SEEA in countries). From this, a list of countries with water accounts was made.
Following the links provided on the SEEA website, or by searching the websites of responding
institutions, the water accounts were accessed and downloaded. A similar search was
expanded to other countries in the list which reported having environmental or ecosystem
accounts, but not specifically water accounts.

Some countries’ websites were easier to navigate because they had separate themes on
water accounts or environmental accounts, while others were more difficult due to language
barriers or because water accounts were embedded in various modules and in different
titles. In addition, the knowledge base in the SEEA-UN website was searched for related liter-
ature and project documents supported by the UN, including the “Natural Capital Accounting
and Valuation of Ecosystem Services” (NCAVES), the Enhance Natural Capital Accounting
Policy Uptake and Relevance (EnhaNCA), and Advancing Natural Capital Accounting (ANCA)
projects.

Step two was a Google search for initiatives of other international organisations. This led to
the knowledge base of Wealth Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Services (WAVES)
– a World Bank-led global partnership – and various water accounting initiatives led by the
Asian Development Bank (ADB), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in cooperation
with the World Water Assessment Programme (WWAP), the International Water Management
Institute (IWMI) and the IHE Delft Institute for Water Education (IHE Delft). While the WAVES
knowledge base provides access to project-based national water accounts, the others focus
more on water accounts for river basins. The Google search also helped the review to find
water accounts of some countries or regions, especially those having a highly visible webpage
for water accounts, such as Australia and Europe.

The final and third step was a systematic search in Scopus database and Google Scholar to
find water accounts and reviewed documents from academic and other sources. Scopus
was selected as the largest global database of published documents (Kilonzi and Ota, 2019)
ecosystem science domain has made tremendous progress in the study of ecosystem
services, but debates on neglected cultural ecosystem services (CES). The keywords used in
the search were: “water account*”, “environmental account*”+water; “environmental and
economic account*”+water; “economic-environmental account*”+water, “natural capital
account*”+water, “ecosystem account*”+water, “ecosystem services”+water, “water provi-
sioning service”, “SEEA”+ water”, “SEEA”+ecosystem. No other restrictions were set. As a
result, a total of more than 1800 journals and documents of all types were found, of which
approximately 200 had the key wording “water account*” in the title. These were scanned for
both the main text and the references to find water accounts.

After the water accounts were identified, a database was developed using Microsoft Access to
store and classify the accounts. The database was structured into eight groups connected to
each other by a unique letter account code as follows:

(i) General information: publishing agency, institutionalised status, search strategy,

sources of water account and reviewed documents with links

www.seea.un.org
24

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 32

 (ii) Boundaries and methodology: type of water accounts, adopted framework and method-
ology, and spatial boundaries

(iii) Sector and industry coverage: industries covered by ISIC classification, typical sector
split shown in agriculture, energy and mining industry, and agricultural commodities
covered

(iv) Timeframe: the publishing year, reference year, length of the time series and gaps

(v) Physical scope: the recording of some key physical indicators including import and
export of water, water sources, losses, evaporation, flows of water within the economy,
return of water and wastewater, types of produced water assets and split shown for
treated and untreated water for water treatment plants, wastewater treatment plants
and desalination plants

(vi) Economic scope: the recording of some key economic indicators including running cost
of water treatment, wastewater treatment and desalination, value of produced water
assets, and other economic information such as value of irrigated agriculture, rain-fed
agriculture, hydroelectricity, etc.

(vii) Region and income level: the classification of countries by regions and income level
follows the World Bank’s classification 2022–2023 (World Bank, 2022). Accordingly,
countries are divided among income groups according to 2022 Gross National Income
(GNI) per capita.

(viii) Water stress: the classification of water stress follows the World Resources Institute’
categories based on the ratio of total water withdrawals to available renewable surface
and groundwater supplies (WRI, 2019)

Annex 4 contains the database metadata.

5.3 Results of review

A total of 271 individual water accounts were identified, produced by 78 countries and
regions which are listed in Annex 5. The summaries of different aspects of the accounts
below reflect the fact that some countries have several editions of particular accounts, more
than one government agency produces water accounts, and that the accounts are produced
by organisations outside of government (international agencies and research institutions).
For example, Australia, has two national government agencies and two different state govern-
ments producing water accounts, in addition to academic publications of water accounts and
ecosystem accounts containing water-related ecosystem services. Because of these overlaps,
the summary information has different sample sizes for different aspects of the accounts.

The number of accounts produced has increased over time (Figure 5.2). The earliest water
account identified was in 1991 in the Philippines, for water emissions (pollution) accounts.

Accounts have been produced for all regions of the world. The largest percentage of accounts
have been produced in Europe and Central Asia (31%), and by high-, upper middle- or lower
middle- income countries (33%, 31% and 32%, respectively) (Figure 5.3). Accounts were

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 33

produced for all levels of water stress, with Middle East and North Africa, and South Asia
regions having the highest number of accounts, produced in countries of extreme water
stress (n=15 and 9, respectively) (Figure 5.4).

Accounts were published by a range of agencies and in academic journals (Figure 5.5). Many
accounts are collaborative exercises, so while they are published by one agency, one or more
other agencies were involved in their production. For the purpose of this review, in cases
where there is joint publication the account is included in the publication category of each of
the agencies involved.

The most common publishers of water accounts were academic journals (52%) and national
statistical offices (32%) (Figure 5.5). The production and publication of many SEEA-based
water accounts has been sponsored by international agencies, notably the World Bank

Figure 5.2 Cumulative number of water accounts produced

140

120

100

80
Accounts

60

40

20

0 1991 1997 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2007 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2021 2020 2022
First publication year

Figure 5.3 Number of accounts produced by region and income level

45
Low income
40 Lower middle income
Upper middle income
35 High income

30

25
Accounts

20

15

10

0
North Latin America South Asia Sub-Saharan Middle East & East Asia Europe &
America & Caribbean Africa North Africa & Pacific Central Asia

Regions

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 34

through the WAVES25 and GPS26 programs, and the UN through NCAVES27, with 27 accounts
published by international agencies.

Many accounts (n=106) were one-off exercises, with several countries not establishing an
ongoing program of account production (Figure 5.6). Only 17 accounts are in annual produc-
tion, and 13 of these are from national statistical offices (Figure 5.6). Only 9 water accounts

25
https://www.wavespartnership.org/en
26
https://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/global-program-on-sustainability
27
https://seea.un.org/home/Natural-Capital-Accounting-Project

Figure 5.4 Number of accounts by region and categories of water stress

45 Water Stress
Low
40
Medium low
35 Medium high
High
30 Extremely high

25
Accounts

20

15

10

0
North Latin America South Asia Sub-Saharan Middle East & East Asia Europe &
America & Caribbean Africa North Africa & Pacific Central Asia

Regions

Figure 5.5 Water accounts by type of publisher

80

70

60

50
Accounts

40

30

20

10

0
ce

cy

er

s
en

en

er
nc

rit

tio
at
en
offi

th
nm

tm
ho
ge

fW

za
ag

O
al

la

ut

ar
ni
iro
to
er
tic

ep
ta

ga
na

nv
at

en
tis

td
en

or
io
lw

fE
m
ta

at

em

en
ic
to
rt
na
ls

rn

em

m
pa

ag
na

te

en
tio

rn
ad
De

an
In
tio

m
Na

ve
Ac
tm
rt
Na

go
pa

en

er
De

hm

th
O
tc
Ca

Type of publisher

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 35

have been published more than 10 times, while 27 countries have a time series greater than
10 years (Figure 5.7).

The SEEA was the most common water accounting framework in use, being used in 55% of all
accounts produced, mostly by national statistical offices and academic organisations (Figure
5.8), and in 70% of countries (Figure 5.9).

Physical supply and use tables were the most common type of account produced (n=83),
closely followed by physical asset accounts (n=51) (Figure 5.10). Fifteen countries produced
monetary supply and use tables, and two countries produced monetary asset accounts. The

Figure 5.6 Accounts by publication frequency

140
Produced by National Statistical Office

Produced by academic organizations

120
Produced by international organizations
Produced by others
100

80
Accounts

60

40

20

0
Annual Biennial Triennial Quinquennial Occasional One-off

Figure 5.7 Number of countries with water accounts by time series

30

25

20
Countries

15

10

0
1 year > 1 - 5 year >5-10 year > 10 year
Time series

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 36

Figure 5.8 Number of accounts using each water accounting framework
90
Produced by National Statistical Office

80 Produced by academic organisations

Produced by international organisations

70 Produced by others

60
Accounts

50

40

30

20

10

0
SEEA Water Accounting Others
Plus

Figure 5.9 Number of countries using each accounting framework

60

50

40
Countries

30

20

10

0
SEEA Water Accounting Others
Plus

Figure 5.10 Types of accounts produced

90
Produced by National Statistical Office

80 Produced by academic organizations

Produced by international organizations

70 Produced by others

60

50
Accounts

40

30

20

10

0
s

n
ts

ts

ts

ts

n o ts

ts

rs
se

e
er
nt

ice
as

in

in

tio

io
un

un

un

un

un

he
at

ru
u

ou

at
on

n
b

rv
tra
fw

Ot
o
co

co

co

co

o
e

ce

ltr
cc

se
cc

Em acc

isi

isi
at

fil
ac

ac

ac

ac

r fi
ur
ea

ea

ov

ov

m
er
et

et

ic

ty

so

te
io

te
ht

pr

pr
us

us

at
ali
ss

ss

Re

a
iss

ys
rig

rw
o

er

er
d
la

ya

qu
lat con

os
an

an

at

at

or
ica

al

fo
ar

ec
er

rw
leg

sf
ly

ly

e
et
ys

es
at

or
p

pp

ed
ice
nd

fo
on
Ph

up

vic
W
ed

sf

lat
su

rv
a

s
M

ls

r
ice

ice
id

se

se

-re
y
ica

br

-re

rv

rv
ar

er
Hy

se

se
et
ys

er

ste

ste

at
on
Ph

at

rw
sy

sy
W

te

ste
M

co

co

he
s
sy

sy

le

ye

Ot
co

co

ica

ar
le

ye

et
ys
ica

on
ar

Ph
et
ys

M
on
Ph

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 37

number of accounts with the ecosystem services of water provision (n=30), water filtration
services (n=22), and other water-related ecosystem services (n=12), is not an accurate reflec-
tion of the amount of account work done in this space, with the salient word “water” absent
from the title, abstract, or keywords of many articles that produce accounts for multiple
ecosystem services.

Most water accounts (n=104) produced were at regional level based on physical bounda-
ries, mostly river basins or other hydrologically defined areas (Figure 5.11). The majority
of accounts at the river basin scale were in the academic literature, with the national level
accounts (n=60) mostly published by national statistical offices (n=37) (Figure 5.11).

Figure 5.11 Water accounts by spatial output and publisher

120
Produced by National Statistical Office
Produced by academic organizations
100
Produced by international organizations
Produced by others
80
Accounts

60

40

20

0
National level Administrative- Physical-
regional level regional level
Spatial boundaries

The level of detail in water accounts varied in terms of the number of industries, water
resources and water recorded. The number of industries ranged from four (e.g. water supply,
agriculture, other industries and households), to more than 30, including subdivisions of the
agricultural industry by, for example crop types (Figure 5.12). Agriculture was the industry
most often recorded (n=106), and the “other” category was also high (n=90) as this category
is used to represent all industries other than the 20 ISICv4 industries or in accounts that do
not use the ISIC classification. The water supply industry was explicit in just 57 accounts.
Water use by households28 (or domestic) was reported in 52 accounts. Australia, Denmark,
Guatemala, Namibia, Colombia, Finland, Guatemala and The Netherlands had the greatest
number of industries or subdivisions of industries (mostly agriculture). Surface water and
groundwater were the most common water resources recorded, with surface water often
split between reservoirs, rivers and streams, lakes and snow, ice and glaciers (Figure 5.13).
Soil water (e.g. the water used in rainfed agriculture), was recorded. Evaporation (n=83) and
return flows (n=78), were the most recorded flows (Figure 5.14).

28
In the SNA and SEEA households are a sector, not an industry

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 38

 Accounts 05
-W
at 01
er -A
su gr

0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
pp 04 icu
ly; -E ltu
se lec re
w t , fo
07 er ricit
ag 02 res Accounts
-W y, -M tr
e, ga
ho w in y &

0
20
40
60
120

80
100

water
les as s, st in

Ground
ale te ea g & fish
& m m in
re an & 03-M qua g
ta ag a r
il t em ir co anu ryin
ra
de en nd f g
t, r iti actu
; re e m
on r i

Soil
pa ng

water
ir ed ing
of iat su
m io pp
09 ot na ly
-A or 0 c
cc ve 6-C tivi
om 0 h i o n t ies
m 8-Tr cles str
od a & u
m ctio

water
at nsp
n

Surface
10 ion or ot
oc
-In & f tati yc
fo oo on les
11 rma d se & s
-F t
15 13 in tion rvic orag
e
-P -P an
ub ro cia & co act e
lic fe l& m iv

Others
in m itie
ad 14 ssio
m -A s u s
in dm nal, 12 ura nica
n
ist s - t
ra inis cien Rea ce a ion
tio t t l c

Water source
n & rativ ific esta tivi
de e & & te te a ties
fe ch ct
i

artificial
nc sup

Surface -
p ni

Figure 5.13 Number of water accounts including water resources

reservoirs
e; ca vitie
17 co ort la s
-H m s ct
um pu erv iv
lso ice ities
an ry a
21 h so ctiv
18 eal cia itie
-A -A th s

rivers,
a ls

streams
ct e

Surface -
ivi rts
, e nd 16 cur
tie
so nt s
er ocia -Ed ity
fe ta u
xt in l wo cat
ra m
te
rri 1 9-
en rk a ion
to Ot t an ctiv

lakes
ria he d r itie
s

Surface -
lo rs ec
rg e re
an rvic ati
iza e o n
tio act
ns ivi
Figure 5.12 Number of water accounts and the number of times industries and sectors appear

an ties
d
24 bo
d

glaciers
-H

Surface -
snow, ice,
ou 22 ies
se -O
ho th
ld e
s ( rs
se
ct
or
)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING |

39
Historically, most accounts were published as printed documents, made available on the
web via a PDF file (n=121), and several accounts have both a PDF file and downloadable
tables (n=18). Use of a PDF is still the case for low- and middle-income countries producing
accounts, like Botswana, while high-income countries like Australia and the Netherlands have
dispensed with printed and PDF documents and the text is now entirely online with down-
loadable tables (n=26) (Figure 5.15).

Figure 5.14 Number of accounts including water flows

90

80

70

60

50
Accounts

40

30

20

10

0
Abstraction Distributed Reused Wastewater Return flows Loss Evaporation
from water water to sewerage to the
environment environment
Recorded water flows

Figure 5.15 Water accounts access

140

120

100

80
Accounts

60

40

20

0
Online data Online pdf Online spreadsheet Others Webpage
portal for self that can be that can be
extraction downloaded downloaded
Availability for access

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 40

6 Country examples
Water accounts have been developed around the world in a variety of contexts. This chapter
presents a selection of case studies to highlight the ways in which water accounting has
developed and been used in countries. For example: in areas of high or low water stress; in
large, small, high- or low-income countries, and; with differing levels of capacity and data
availability.

6.1 European Water Framework Directive

The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) was adopted in 2000 and is an information
framework for water, enabling data analysis and assessment of current or possible inter-
ventions to effectively manage water resources in the European Union. Member States are
required to develop River Basin Management Plans which include a range of biological and
economic information at the catchment level, intended assess the status of inland waters
and to develop programs of measures to reduce pressure and to improve the health of such
ecosystems (Santos et al., 2021; Carvalho et al., 2019).

The WFD has increased demand for integrated hydro-economic information at the level of
river basins for decision-making. The use of the framework, and a lack of interdisciplinary
approaches, have led to water management actions that have, to date, yielded poor results
(Souliotis and Voulvoulis, 2021).

The Netherlands is one of the leading implementers of SEEA-based accounting and has
more than two-decades of experience with water accounting. It was one of the first nations
to use the SEEA Water to meet the needs of the WFD, and also the demand for integrated
hydro-economic information (Schenau and ten Ham, 2005). The Netherlands accounts
provide information about the interactions between the physical water system and the
economy at national and river basin scales (Brouwer et al., 2005). This includes the develop-
ment of physical and monetary flow accounts29 and emission accounts30 and valuation (Edens
and Gravland, 2014). The water accounts include physical data on water use and wastewater
supply, as well as economic data on production, value added and employment (van Berkel et
al., 2022).

One of the major challenges in the compilation of the accounts in the Netherlands (and
elsewhere) is matching the available data across spatial scales. The Dutch have also produced
ecosystem accounts including water-related ecosystem services, including water purifica-
tion, at a fine level of spatial detail.31 Data from the water accounts and System of National
Accounts are used by the Ministry of infrastructure and Water Management to report on the
WFD for the Netherlands every three years.

https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/figures/detail/82883ENG?q=environmental%20accounts
29

30
https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/our-services/methods/surveys/brief-survey-description/environmental-accounts-emis-
sions-to-water-origin-and-destination
https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/publicatie/2021/22/natuurlijk-kapitaalrekeningen-nederland-2013-2018
31

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 41

The SEEA Water has also been tested at the subnation level for WFD reporting in Spain for the
Guadalquivir river basin. Borrego-Marín et al. (2016) and Gutiérrez-Martín et al. (2017) found
that the SEEA Water methodology satisfies the requirements for the economic characterisa-
tion set out in Articles 5 and 9 of the WFD, and in particular to estimate cost-recovery for water
supply. Gutiérrez-Martín et al. (2017) also concluded that using the SEEA Water would increase
the comparability of information and knowledge-sharing between regions and countries.

To test if ecosystem accounting can meet the requirements of the WFD, Souliotis and Voul-
voulis (2021) examined the Evrotas River Basin in Greece and the Broadland Rivers catch-
ment in England to determine the asset value of two ecosystem services, and associated
these with changes in water condition due to policy instruments. They found that the asset
value of water for residential consumption and recreational purposes fluctuates from year to
year, influenced by current and future uses. They concluded that water management should
consider both current and emerging pressures when designing interventions to manage
water resources sustainably, and that ecosystem accounting could aid such considerations.

6.2 Botswana country experience

Botswana is one of a small group of countries in southern Africa, including Namibia and
South Africa, that has produced and used water accounts over many years (Lange et al.,
2007). More recently, Zambia has begun the production of accounts (GRZ, 2020).

The accounts produced in Botswana (e.g. DWS, 2021) show the available water resources,
their abstraction and utilisation, by industry and sector, as well as returns of wastewater via
the sewerage network (Figure 6.1). The value of water sales by the water supply industry is

Figure 6.1 Physical supply and use of water in Botswana 2018-19 (million m3)

0.03
Sewerage Water
5.6 21.7
supply
0.1 5.8 0.1 6.8
industry
1.8

1.4 0.1

0.2 10.8 11.2 0.1 13.1 41.9

Other
Agriculture Mining Government Electricity Households
industries

74.6 27.8 0.4 99.2 6.5

38.3
? ? ? ? ? ? 29.8

Environment (Water Resources) Imports

(South
Africa)
Key
Water Return flows Waste water Reuse water
Source: After DWS (2021)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 42

also included in the accounts. The volume of non-revenue water is also recorded. Information
of the return flows from several industries is not recorded in the accounts and is indicated in
Figure 6.1 as “?”. The absence of this information means that water consumption – all water
entering an industry, less all water returning to the environment – cannot be reliably calcu-
lated.

In Botswana’s accounts, the water used by the agricultural industry is split in several ways,
showing use in irrigation by different types of livestock and in horticulture. An estimate of the
water used by wildlife was also made, given the importance of wildlife for tourism (Vardon et
al., 2017). Indicators are derived by combining the water accounts with other information, for
example industry value added32 per m3 of water use, and GDP per capita per m3 of water use.
Return flows of water to the environment are only captured for the water supply industry,
meaning that “true” water consumption as defined in SEEA Water (and hydrology) is not able
to be calculated.

Setlhogile et al. (2017) noted that water accounting needs to be better integrated in the
national development planning of Botswana to better inform decision-making on water
allocation, water efficiency, water infrastructure and expansion of non-conventional water
resources, as well as water costs and savings opportunities. They noted that water accounts
reveal a range of opportunities for the implementation of Botswana’s IWRM-water efficiency
plan and water demand management efforts. Examples include increasing freshwater use
efficiency by using non-potable water for industries that do not require potable water, and
encouraging on-site water recycling and re-use.

The accounts also reveal a growing share of surface water abstraction, which alleviates
pressure on well fields, most of which currently have unsustainable withdrawal levels (Setl-
hogile et al., 2017). Self-providers abstract more than 50% of water resources (DWS, 2021)
but policy and water management are focused on the water service provider, pointing to the
need for additional management of self-providers (Setlhogile et al., 2017).

Data availability and data access are ongoing issues for Botswana. Pule and Galegane (2017)
note that the production of accounts helped to identify data gaps and deficiencies that are
being addressed. They also note that account production had led to greater collaboration
between different parts of government and the research community. Going forward, the
inclusion of information on water rights should improve the information within the water
accounts and make them more useful for water policy and IWRM (Kelebang, 2021).

6.3 Colombia water accounts for setting water fees

The Government of Colombia updated water use fees in 2016. The fee is used to fund the
management of water resources by national and regional authorities. As part of the deci-
sion-making process, the National Planning Department (DNP, 2016) built a social accounting
matrix using the national water accounts (DANE and IDEAM, 2016) to estimate the economic
impacts of increasing the minimum fees (Alvarez et al. 2016). The matrix was used to model
the impacts of different fee increases on industries. Seven industries were included in the
matrix: agriculture, electricity, mining, industry and commerce, services, others (use of water),
others (without information), plus “environmental government”. The inclusion of “environ-

Industry value add is the contribution of each industry to GDP.

32

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 43

mental government” allowed investigations of the use of the Water Use Fee to fund improve-
ments to the environment via government. According to the law, the fees must be used for
improving environmental conditions and water quality.

It has been proposed to establish a different minimum Water Use Fee for different industries
based on cost of production (COP): 0.8 COP to 3.0 COP per m3 for agriculture, and 0.8 COP
to 10.0 COP per m3 for other industries. To test the impact of different fees on industries, a
Computable General Equilibrium Model for Water was developed, with the Social Accounting
Matrix the main data input.

Both the analysis and water accounts were used in discussions leading up to the decision to
increase water fees, and to inform discussions between the government and the agriculture
industry (Romero et al., 2017). The representatives of the agriculture industry argued that an
increase of Water Use Fee would lead to the bankruptcy of some farmers, and that saving
water would require high investments in technology. The analysis was used to counter these
arguments and show that the fee increase was unlikely to bankrupt farmers.

The Colombia experience shows that accounts in combination with analytical tools can
have direct input to government decision-making processes. Regular updating of the water
accounts has occurred since then (e.g. DANE, 2022), and will allow ongoing analysis of the
impact of water use fees on the economy.

6.4 Developing water accounting in the United States

The United States recently released a draft strategy for the implementation of environmental
economic accounting for the nation (USDC, 2022). The strategy had a phased implementation
plan with water accounts part of the first phase. A feature of the water accounting plan was
the large number of organisations involved in the production of the accounts (Figure 6.2),
which emphasises that collaboration and cooperation are essential for the production and
use of accounts in decision-making processes.

This emphasis is unsurprising as the US draft accounting strategy has built on many years
of work involving collaboration between government and research institutions, identifying
data and developing methodologies to compile accounts. This collaboration resulted in the
production of experimental national- and state-level water accounts for the United States
(Bagstad et al., 2020). Four types of water accounts were produced: (1) physical supply and
use, (2) productivity, (3) quality and (4) emissions. Water use and emissions were attributed
to 10 industries and sectors, while emission accounts were attributed to 15. The inclusion of
a water emission account is a noticeable feature because few other countries have compiled
this type of account. Among many other things, the accounts showed a decline in the total
use of water in 44 states, although an increase in the use of groundwater in 21.

The experimental water account was the first research in the US to integrate the physical
water data and economic data from the SNA, and it demonstrated that accounts could be
produced with available data. While the study highlighted many data gaps and deficien-
cies, it also recognised that these could be addressed over time, and already more data has
been identified that will improve the quality of the accounts and their usefulness for deci-
sion-making.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 44

Figure 6.2 Implementation plan for water accounts in the United States

Pilot Phase I Water Account

Bio-physical Economic Compiling and Publishing

Monetization
Data Providers Data Providers Normalizing Data Data
Lead Agencies

• EPA • DOC-BEA • EPA • DOI-USGS • DOC-BEA

• DOI-USGS • DOL-BLS • USDA • EPA
• DOC-NOAA • DOC-Census • DOC-NOAA • DOC-NOAA
• USDA • EPA
Supporting Agencies

• NASA • USDA • DOL-BLS • USDA • DOI-USGS

• USACE • DOC-NOAA • DOC-BEA • DOC-BEA • USDA
• DOI-BOR • EPA
• DOE-EIA
• States & multistate
entities (e.g. WSWC)

Source: USDC, 2022

6.5 Australia: An opportunity requiring resources

There is considerable pressure on water resources in many parts of Australia, and water
abstraction for irrigated agriculture is a major pressure (Green and Moggridge, 2022). To
assist the management and governance of water, water accounts are written into law via the
Water Act 2007.33

Australia has a long history of collecting water resource data and has produced water
accounts dating back to 1996 (Vardon et al., 2007). Since 2008–09, two national government
agencies have produced water accounts; the Australian Bureau of Statistics34 (ABS) and the
Bureau of Meteorology35 (BoM). The ABS uses the SEEA, while the BoM uses a framework
developed by the Water Accounting Standards Board (2014). The BoM water account can
be aligned with the SEEA Water Account and is produced for 11 regions of Australia, while
the ABS produces national SEEA physical and monetary supply and use tables (Vardon et al.,
2012). Both agencies produce annual water accounts. The two accounts were integrated as
a one-off case study (ABS and BoM 2019) and some of the tables from this are used as an
example in Section 4.3.

The current ABS annual accounts do not include the use of soil water by rainfed agriculture,
nor the value or volume of water trades. Soil water was included in the ABS accounts from
2011–12 to 2016–1736 and water trading for 2004–05.37 BoM reports the volume and value of
water entitlements trade but not as part of the water accounts.38

33
See part 7 Water information of Water Act 2007. https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2021C00539
34
See https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/environment/environmental-management/water-account-australia
35
See http://www.bom.gov.au/water/nwa/2021/
36
https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4610.02013-14?OpenDocument
37
https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/PrimaryMainFeatures/4610.0.55.003?OpenDocument
38
http://www.bom.gov.au/water/dashboards/#/water-markets/national/state/at

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 45

A review of Australia water reforms by the Productivity Commission (2021) found: “Water
accounting is generally providing practical, credible and reliable information, but there is room
for improvement. Public demand for information and timely provision of it has increased over
time.” The Commission also recommended that more system integrity was required, in part to
strengthen water accounting which would provide credible information and support robust
institutional processes. This would help ensure that: water rights holders are operating
appropriately; water systems are being managed to best effect; it would improve under-
standing of potential risks and planning for the future.

Improved management of the Murray-Darling Basin, where a large proportion of Austral-

ia’s agricultural activity takes place, needs improved water accounting (Grafton, 2019). This
includes a governance process that allows management actions to be modified and updated
based on new information, understanding and decision-making processes that include
explicit consideration of natural and anthropogenic risks, as well as incorporating a genuine
participatory process involving all relevant stakeholders, not just irrigators who have domi-
nated the processes to date. Neither of these improvements guarantees the success of water
reform, be it in Australia or elsewhere, but they are necessary for delivering cost-effective
water reform that is in the public interest.

Australia has clearly recognised the potential of water accounting for water management and
governance, and is regularly producing water accounts. The challenge now is to improve the
scope and coverage of water accounts and to integrate them into decision-making processes.
The challenge is also to regularly produce fully integrated water accounting, covering the
economic and hydrological aspect of water.

6.6 The pioneering Philippines

The Philippines has an abundance of water resources but there is growing demand for water
due to population increases and economic demands, particularly in some areas (PSA, 2020).
The depletion and degradation of water resources has been a concern for many years (SEPO,
2011).

The global review of water accounting (Chapter 5) found that in 1991 the Philippines was
one of first countries to begin water account production. This was via the Environmental and
Natural Resources Accounting Project (ENRAP) (Angeles and Peskin, 1998). This, and subse-
quent projects, have resulted in a long time series of water accounts, from 1988 to 1998
for physical and monetary assets, and physical supply and use tables from 2010 to 2020.
Regional level ecosystem accounts, including accounts for water quality and water supply
for the Laguna de Bay Basin, which contains the largest inland water body in the Philippines,
have also been prepared, spanning the years 2001 to 2014 (LBTWG, 2016).

The Water Accounts of the Philippines (PSA, 2020) have been used to compute two indicators
for SDG 6 on water and sanitation, namely SDG 6.4.1 Change in Water Use Efficiency (WUE)
and SDG 6.4.2 Level of Water Stress (LWS).

WUE is defined as the value added of a given major sector divided by the volume of water
used.39 The three major sectors are defined as:

https://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals/indicators/641/en/
39

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 46

„ Agriculture, which comprises irrigated agriculture; forestry; fishing
„ “MIMEC”, which includes mining and quarrying; manufacturing; electricity, gas, steam and
air-conditioning supply; construction
„ Services, which covers all service sectors

The Philippines calculated three sectoral efficiencies and the overall water efficiency of the
nation using the SEEA Water physical supply and use tables, and the valued added from the
SNA (Figure 6.3).

The LWS40 is defined as freshwater withdrawal as a proportion of available freshwater

resources. It is computed as the ratio between total freshwater withdrawn by all major
sectors and the total renewable freshwater resources, after considering environmental water
requirements. This information comes from the SEEA Water supplementary physical asset
account (the supplementary account includes a line item for abstraction “of which sustain-
able”). The results are in Figure 6.4.

40
https://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals/indicators/642/en/

Figure 6.3 The Philippines water use efficiency by major industry, 2010–2019
1,600

1,400

1,200
PhP per cubic meter

1,000

800

600

400

200

0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Agriculture Industry Services Overall
Source: PSA (2020)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 47

Figure 6.4 The Philippines level of water stress, 2010-2019

100 29%
90
28%
80
70
27%
60
50 26%
40
30 25%

20
24%
10
0 23%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Total Freshwater Withdrawals (in bcm) Level of Water Stress (in percent)
Source: PSA (2020)

7 Realising the potential of water accounting

7.1 Introduction
Realising the potential of water accounting for water governance and management requires
an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of water accounting, as well as the chal-
lenges and opportunities for water accounting.

7.2 Strengths and weaknesses of water accounting

The strength of water accounting is that it provides a framework for integrating a wide range
of water-related data with other information on the environment and economy. However,
this conceptual strength underlines a weakness, because much of the data needed to
underpin the accounts remains a key challenge (see Section 7.4). This results in few types of
water accounts being produced, under-coverage of water resources (i.e. surface, ground and
soil water), and low levels of industry detail. The advantage of accounting is that it makes
clear the data gaps and deficiencies that can be addressed (Salminen et al., 2018).

A key data weakness is that although water consumption is reported in many accounts, there
is usually a qualification: while the amount of water abstracted from the environment and the
water user from the water supply industry are usually known, the flows discharged by indus-
tries and sectors to the sewerage network, or directly to the environment, are not known,
due to a lack of data. Thus, the accounts generally report water consumption based on the
incomplete data, so there is a chance that readers will incorrectly interpret the data. This
concern is supported by Weckström et al. (2020) who found that a lack of data meant that the
consumptive use of water cannot be reliably calculated at large scale for many industries.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 48

There is often a stop-start pattern in the production of water accounts. The Philippines
started producing accounts in the 1990s (Angeles and Peskin, 1998), but there was long gap
from these to the latest accounts (PSA, 2020). Similarly, while Namibia has a time series, albeit
incomplete, and which dates to 1980 (Lange, 1997), there was little activity until well into the
2000s (MET, 2015), and since then they have not been repeated. This pattern is a weakness
that points to a lack of capacity, resources and high-level commitment by government, which
are all key factors of success in the production of natural capital accounts (World Bank, 2021).

7.3 Opportunities for water management and governance

SEEA is recognised as providing a conceptual framework for organising hydrological and
economic information to support integrated water resource management (IWRM) and inte-
grated land management (ILM).41, 42 Unfortunately, this recognition has not yet translated into
the regular production and use of water accounts.

The opportunities to use water accounts are many and varied. The emphasis of water
management and governance in countries and regions depends on the specific characteris-
tics of each society, and the environment in which the water occurs. While there are differ-
ences, there are four basic objectives of water management and governance, which can be
grouped into four areas (Figure 7.1).

Figure 7.1 Broad grouping of water management and governance objectives

Providing drinking Balancing water

water and sanitation supply and demand
services

Objective 1 Objective 2
Maintaining
Water management Adapting to extreme
healthy water and governance hydro-meteorological
resources events

Objective 3 Objective 4
After: UNESCO-WWAP and UNSD 2011

41
See paragraph 22 of the Report of the Committee of Experts on Environmental-Economic Accounting, 38th Session of
the Statistical Commission.
42
For example, in the conclusions of the Data for All sessions of the 5th World Water Forum, and an OECD workshop
Improving the information base to better guide water resource management decision-making, on improving water informa-
tion.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 49

Objective 1 of providing drinking water and sanitation services, refers to all the governance
arrangements that ensure that the population has access to safe drinking water, and a
means of disposing excreta. Water and sanitation services are provided to population centres
through water supply and sewerage networks, and are operated by water utilities. Many
communities and households, especially in low- and middle-income countries, must provide
their own water and sewerage services as they are not connected to these networks.

Objective 2 of balancing water supply and demand, refers to all the governance arrangements
for water allocation to balance the demands for water by society with the physical availability
of water. Water demand and water availability change over time and within and between
different areas of society without compromising the needs of future generations and of the
environment.

Objective 3 of maintaining healthy water resources, refers to all the policies aiming to preserve
the quality of water resources and the aquatic ecosystems.

Objective 4 of adapting to extreme hydro-meteorological events, refers to all the governance

arrangements aiming to reduce the negative effects of droughts and floods on people, the
economy (and especially agricultural production) and the environment.

Each of these objectives can be linked to different types of water accounts, and examples can
be found in several countries (Table 7.1).

7.3.1 Water accounting and the SDGs

Water accounting directly addresses SDG 6. The Philippines has used water accounting to
construct some of the indicators related to SDG 6 (see Section 6.6). While the drinking water
and sanitation targets are aligned with Objective 1, the indicators for meeting these targets
do not directly emerge from the accounts. Nevertheless, the information from the accounts
can be used for the governance and management of water to help achieve the objective,
examining the amount available to be supplied and the amount used by households, as well
as the cost of supplying the water and the price paid for the water (the prices paid for water
do not usually reflect the cost of production). Analyses using the data from water accounts
can be used to estimate the cost of providing water to additional households, and to forecast
future demand.

7.4 Meeting the challenges for water accounting

There are two types of challenge in water accounting. The first is the technical challenge of
producing accounts, including data limitations and moving from experimental to regular and
ongoing production of accounts. The second is using accounting in water management and
policy, a challenge of awareness and understanding. This second type of challenge can be
framed as an opportunity, as seen in Section 5.3, and how to meet this challenge and realise
the opportunity is the focus of this section.

7.4.1 Technical challenges

Valuation of water that is not exchanged in markets is an ongoing conceptual and practical
challenge. The use of exchange values is embedded in the SNA and SEEA. Some exchange
values are observable, however because of the characteristics of water and water markets

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 50

Table 7.1 Links between natural capital accounts and key water policy areas and concepts
Policy area Key concept
Integrated water
Full cost recovery
resource management
• Physical and monetary water supply and
use tables
Providing drinking • SNA accounts (emphasis of the water • Physical and monetary water supply
water and sanitation supply and sewerage industries) and use tables
services • Environment protection expenditure • Land cover and land use accounts
accounts
• Water asset accounts
• Physical and monetary water supply and
use tables • Land cover and land use accounts
Managing water • Water asset accounts • Physical and monetary water supply
supply and demand • Land cover and land use accounts and use tables
• SNA accounts (emphasis on the water • Water asset accounts
supply and sewerage industries)
• Physical and monetary water supply and
use tables (emphasis on return flows and
operation on sewerage collection and • Land cover and land use accounts
treatment)
Maintaining healthy • Physical and monetary water supply
water resources • Land cover and land use accounts and use tables
• Water quality accounts • Water asset accounts
• Environment protection expenditure
accounts
• Land cover accounts
• Land cover accounts
• Water asset accounts
Adapting to • Water asset accounts
extreme hydro- • Environment protection
• Environment protection expenditure
meteorological expenditure accounts
accounts
events • Ecosystem service accounts (for
• Ecosystem service accounts (for flood
flood protection and regulation of
protection and regulation of water flows)
water flows)
Source: After Vardon et al. (2018)

(Chapter 3) this is not a “true” reflection of value. This is recognised in the SEEA (UN et
al., 2021), and a range of alternative methods have been used in accounting, for example
replacement cost (Edens and Graveland, 2014; 2013; Keith et al., 2017). Moreover, many
existing water valuation methods are consistent with exchange values.

After valuation, the two most common factors impeding the production of water accounts
are (1) data availability and (2) data quality (Vardon et al., 2012). Countries often have some
of the data needed for the water accounts, but no country has access to all the data needed
to produce the full suite of water accounts: physical and monetary supply-use tables, asset
accounts, environmental protection expenditure related to water, water quality and emis-
sions to water. Consequently, those producing accounts rely on a range of estimation
methods to populate different parts of the water accounts. In some cases, data may exist but
the agency or agencies producing the accounts may not be able to access the data for legal,
administrative, or technical reasons.

Based on the Finnish experience of water account compilation, Salminen et al. (2018)
provided a detailed analysis of data quality issues. They identify two potential sources
of error in the estimates of water use. The first is poor data coverage of some industries
resulting in unreliable estimates of the total water supply and use for these industries. The
second source of error is for industries with high coverage where the total amounts of water

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 51

are likely correct but cannot be reliably allocated to different sources of water (e.g. self-ab-
stracted vs. mains water or between industries).

In the analysis of data under coverage, Salminen et al. (2018) compared the water use and
data coverage for the 195 industries of the Finnish economy. Nine out of ten of the industries
with very high-water use (>380 million m3 per annum) had good data coverage, representing
75–90% of the economic activity of these industries, while half of the industries with very
limited data were industries with low or negligible water use (<38,000 m3 per annum). Six
industries with medium water use (38,000 to 4.2 million m3 per annum) and one of high-water
use were identified as priorities for additional data collection: metal product and machinery
repair, trade and repair of motor vehicles, wholesale trade excluding food and beverages,
transportation supporting activities, religious organisations, beauty treatment and restau-
rants. Salminen et al. (2018) suggested that additional surveys could provide the coverage
needed to provide more accurate data for these industries.

The misallocation of water supply and use is particularly relevant for the water supply and
agricultural industries. Misallocation can be due to the source of water (i.e. surface water,
groundwater, or soil water) or to industry and sector.

For the water supply industry, the total water supply is likely correct because that industry
usually has good data coverage, as has been quantified for Finland (Salminen et al., 2018).
Further, while total supply of the distributed water (“Natural Water” CPC 1800) is usually
known, its use by industries and households may not be. That is, while the overall water
balance is not affected (i.e. total supply equals total use of distributed water), the amount
used by each industry or sector may be incorrect. Water suppliers typically have registers
of customers. If the customers are coded to a particular type of industry or sector, then it is
usually at a high level, for example, residential, commercial and agricultural. The databases of
customers may be upgraded and include more codes of customers or samples of customers
used to estimate uses, as has been done Botswana where the Water Utilities Corporation
uses 10 customer codes (DWS, 2021).

The suppliers of water for irrigated agriculture may not know the commodities for which the
water is used, or of the water used for agriculture production how much is from distributed
water, self-abstracted water and soil moisture. Estimates of total agricultural use can be
made through information on the area used for agricultural production and the water use
coefficients for crops (e.g. for CropWat43) and livestock (e.g. WA+44). If agricultural production
is rain-fed agriculture, then all water use can be assigned to soil water. When irrigated, then
the amount of distributed water applied can be deducted and the residual assigned to soil
water. All of this requires assumptions, and the accuracy of estimates is ultimately difficult to
determine. Measurement is also required to estimate water consumption, which is less than
the water used.

Accuracy is often the focus of data quality in water accounting; however accuracy is just one
of several dimensions of data quality. Data quality frameworks are available from a range
of sources. For example, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS, 2009), Eurostat (2005),
IMF (2012), OECD (2012), Statistics Canada (2002), and Clarke et al. (2011). The frameworks
https://www.fao.org/land-water/databases-and-software/cropwat/en/
43

https://wateraccounting.un-ihe.org/welcome-water-accounting-plus-0
44

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 52

from national statistical offices and international organisations are all similar, and in general
describe six dimensions of data quality:

1. Relevance is how well the data meet the needs of users in terms of the concept(s)
measured, and the population(s) represented
2. Accuracy refers to the degree to which the data correctly describe the phenomenon
they were designed to measure
3. Timeliness is the delay between the reference period (the time to which the data
pertain) and the date at which the data become available (i.e. the release date)
4. Accessibility is the ease of access to data by users, including the ease with which the
existence of information can be ascertained, as well as the suitability of the form or
medium through which information can be accessed
5. Interpretability is the availability of information to help provide insight into the data
6. Coherence is the internal consistency of a statistical collection, product, or release, as
well as its comparability with other sources of information, within a broad analytical
framework and over time
Of these, the key challenges for water accounting are relevance, coherence and timeliness.

For relevance, accounts are often limited in scope, not including all water resources and using
highly aggregated industry classifications, valuation is uncommon, and accounts are irregu-
larly produced. Such factors mean that accounts’ relevance to decision makers is limited.

Coherence with other information sources is not always evident. Non-SEEA water accounting
cannot be directly linked to the information from the SNA, nor other types of environmental
accounts, for example due to the use of different definitions or classifications. A key reason
for using SEEA is to have a coherent and integrated information system. Lack of coherence
also means the water accounts are less relevant.

For timeliness, the review of water accounting (Chapter 4) found that most water accounts
were published well after the reference period. If accounts are to be built into decision-making
processes, then they will need to present current (timely) information on a frequent basis (e.g.
annually). Lack of timeliness again means the water accounts are less relevant.

7.4.2 Challenge of awareness and understanding

A key driver of this report is to raise awareness and understanding of water accounting. That
is, decision makers need to know how water accounting is relevant to their needs. This starts
with a mapping of their needs, which is framed as an opportunity in Section 7.3.

Improved communication of what accounting is, and how it can be used, is one way to meet
this challenge. At one level is briefing senior officials and providing summaries for policy
makers. This informs the decision makers but needs to be complemented by material for civil
society, and by engagement with the research and analytical community, requiring a range of
communication materials. This is also related to the education pathway for water accounting.
Environmental accounting is taught in a few universities45, either as a stand-alone course or

45
The Australian National University currently includes modules on environmental accounting in several undergrad-
uate and postgraduate courses, as well as a specialist professional development course (see https://fennerschool.anu.
edu.au/introduction-environmental-accounting)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 53

included with other subjects, like natural resource economics, environmental management,
public or sustainability reporting. Some online material is available,46 and the WAVES and
NCAVES programs both developed a suite of material and knowledge platforms, which were
used in the review (see Section 5.2).

There is need for acceptance and use of water accounting in research analysis. The water
accounts reveal what has happened, how water was used by whom, and what were the
economic and environmental outcomes. Decision makers need to have options assessed,
which means that the accounts alone are not enough. The information must be interpreted
and analysed. The data from water can and have been used for modelling and scenario fore-
casting (e.g. Lenzen and Foran, 2001; Wittwer, 2012; Pedro-Monzonís et al., 2016b; Baneerje
et al., 2019).

The research and analytical communities have a key role to play in raising the awareness
and understanding of water accounting, through using the accounts in research designed to
inform water management and policy. Such research needs to be encouraged and promoted
within agencies specifically responsible for water management and policy, as well as central
agencies responsible for overall environmental and economic management and policy.

8 Lessons and best practice

8.1 Lessons
For more than 30 years, the water accounting community has grown, and the number of
accounts being prepared and the number of people and organisations actively preparing
accounts is increasing. The community is diverse, with accountants, economists, hydrologists,
statisticians and others working together to create many accounts in many different contexts.
Yet the community, while diverse and increasing in size, remains small.

Our report highlights that production of water accounts is possible. Production requires
goodwill and cooperation between agencies and professions, and when this occurs data gaps
and deficiencies, and the difficulties of valuation in alignment with exchange values, can be
overcome. Experience has shown that water accounts are produced in a range of socioeco-
nomic and environmental circumstances, for low- to high-income countries (e.g. Zambia and
The Netherlands), in places of different water scarcity (e.g. Botswana and The Philippines),
and at different spatial scales, from river basins (e.g. Colombia) and small island states (e.g.
Palau) to large countries (e.g. Australia). Accounts have different levels of economic (e.g.
number of industries) and hydrological (e.g. number of water sources and water flows) infor-
mation recorded.

While there is increasing water accounting activity, in most cases it has remained in an
experimental phase, with short time series and irregular (stop-start) or one-off production.
Ongoing water accounts production occurs only in a handful of countries. Water valuation
beyond exchange value is still contentious. Many existing water valuation methods align with
exchange values, and examples of valuation are increasing.

https://seea.un.org/content/seea-e-learning-resources
46

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 54

There is recognition that water accounting is useful, and there are examples of water
accounting uses, but such use is not common and has yet to be embedded in the deci-
sion-making processes of water management and governance. This lack of embedding is
related to several factors, including the irregular and experimental nature of most accounts.

The lack of embedding in decision-making can be distilled to two interrelated problems:

„ Decision makers have little awareness or understanding of water accounts and rely on
existing water data sources.
„ Water accounts take resources and time to produce and are often seen as a threat to
existing water data providers, which can often lead to competition rather than collab-
oration. The problem is often exacerbated by misunderstandings on technical matters
between different disciplines and agencies.

To overcome these problems the process of account production is key. There are three
general models of account production, and each model has its strengths and weaknesses:

„ Production led by statistical agencies. This generally ensures close linking with other SEEA-
based accounts, the SNA and associated economic data, with a strong emphasis on
integration and a focus on ongoing account production. A downside is that accounts will
often take several years to produce and require substantial capacity building and technical
inputs and data from a range of water and research institutions, and this in an environ-
ment that is usually separated from account users and their needs.
„ Production led by government agencies concerned with water, natural resources or environ-
mental management and policy. In this model, the accounts are produced to suit the needs
of a particular agency. This ensures linkages to policy analysis and resource management
but can mean that water accounts are produced in a silo and not easily integrated into
other types of SEEA accounts or the SNA.
„ Production led by research agencies (e.g. universities). In these projects, the accounts are
generally produced relatively quickly (12–18 months) and use the latest knowledge and
information. Interpretation and analysis are prominent, but there is no view to ongoing
production as there is in government agencies.

The raison d’être for water accounting is integration of information for decision-making.
Taking the strengths of each production model should lead to better outcomes, with more
and better-quality data, easier integration of information, relevant, regular and timely
accounts and embedding in decision-making.

General factors of success for developing and using environmental-economic accounting

programs are identified by the World Bank (2021) and Ruijs et al. (2019) (Table 8.1). The keys
to success are:

„ Mandate: Continuing high-level support for developing and using environmental-eco-

nomic accounting is essential. Champions are needed, and without ongoing high-level
support accounting can be stuck in an experimental phase for years and be unable to
reach its potential.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 55

„ Engagement and communication: Few people are aware of environmental accounting,
and even fewer understand the information accounts contain or how it can be used.
Communication is needed to engage stakeholders, ensure that the accounts are visible
and understood, and target specific audiences.
„ Policy relevance: Environmental-economic accounts must be relevant to environmental
policy and management. For relevance, accounts need to be tailored, meeting the needs of
specific areas, which may be from local through to national, particular industries, or groups
within society (e.g. rural poor).
„ Cooperation and coordination: A process is needed effectively to organise environmen-
tal-economic accounting producers, users and quality assurers. This has strategic and
technical aspects, with high-level groups providing the former, and formal working groups
and a broader community of practice addressing technical aspects. Both the strategic and
technical areas are needed for developing and using accounts, ensuring accounts’ ongoing
production and use, and for embedding accounts in decision-making.
„ Continuous improvement: Data are seldom complete or perfect, but accounts can
usually be produced. Accounts can be improved over time, both in terms of increasing data
quality and in the policy relevance.

These five factors lead to credibility and trust in the accounts, and in turn the decisions
based on their information. The policy relevance is generally missing from most accounting
programs (Vardon et al., 2016).

8.2 Towards best practice

A key to water accounting success is cooperation and collaboration within and between data
providers and decision makers, and so best practice must support cooperation and collabo-
ration. This is achieved through processes that ensure the mutual understanding and respect
of knowledge, and the clear articulation of the aims and objectives of water accounting initia-
tives. That is it needs to go beyond that of account production and be part of decision-making
about water.

Best practice involves establishing water accounting processes aligned with the 10 princi-
ples for making environmental accounts fit for policy (Table 8.1). The approach aligns with
the process outlined by Batchelor et al. (2016) in Figure 8.1, i.e. focused on the biophysical
data. The application of a principles-based process is necessary as each region or country
has a unique set of stakeholders and institutional arrangements for water governance
and management that sits within a broader socioeconomic framework and environmental
context.

For the technical aspects of account production and use, best practices are more easily iden-
tified. Indicators that a country is moving towards best practice are presented in Table 8.2.

The experience of the past three decades has shown what can be done and how water
accounting can be improved. It has enabled best practices to be identified. Progress towards
best practice can be made with high-level support, allocation of sufficient resources, and by
recognising the usefulness of water accounting.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 56

Table 8.1 Ten principles for making environmental accounts fit for policy

Comprehensive:

Acknowledging the diverse stakeholders concerned with decisions affecting

1. Inclusive natural capital, responding to their information demands, respecting
different notions of value, and using appropriate means of engagement.

Linking the producers of environmental accounts the users of

environmental accounts for policy analysis, and the policy makers using the
2. Collaborative
environmental accounts’ results, and building their mutual understanding,
trust and ability to work together.

Adopting a comprehensive, multi/interdisciplinary approach to the

3. Holistic economic and environmental dimensions of natural capital, and to their
complex links with policy and practice.

Purposeful:

Providing relevant and timely information for indicator development and

4. Decision-centred policy analysis to improve and implement decisions with implications for
natural capital.

Providing information demanded or needed by decision makers at specific

5. Demand-led
levels.

Trustworthy:

Enabling and encouraging public access and use of environmental

6. Transparent and open accounts, with clear communication of the results and their interpretation,
including limitations of the data sources, methods and/or coverage.

Compiling, assessing and streamlining data from all available sources, and
7. Credible
deploying objective and consistent science and methodologies.

Mainstreamed:

With adequate, predictable resourcing over time; continuous application

8. Enduring
and availability; and building increasingly rich time series of data.

Learning focused, networked across practitioners and users, testing new

9. Continuously improving approaches, and evolving systems to better manage uncertainty, embrace
innovation, and take advantage of emerging opportunities.

Environmental account production and use becoming part of the

machinery of government and business, building capacity, improving
10. Embedded institutional integration for sustainable development, and incorporating
environmental accounts’ use in procedures and decision-support
mechanisms.

Source: Ruijs et al. (2019)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 57

Figure 8.1 Water accounting process

1. Detailed water accounting planning

• For the first iterative cycle, finalise planning activities started in the inception phase. For subsequent
iterative cycles take account of lessons from previous cycle(s) of water accounting and auditing
e.g. modify/adapt domains, strategies, methodologies etc;

• Stakeholder dialogue and concerted action leading to prioritisation of next cycle of activities assessments
and analysis;

• Agreement on expected outputs of next cycle of activities.

2. Biophysical information acquisition and management

• Combined biophysical and societal information needs assessment;

• Identification of secondary information sources for currenet cycle. If relevant, planning and implementing
a programme of primary information collection;

• Information acquisition, processing and quality control;

• Storage and sharing (e.g. data, metadata, maps, reports, photographs, etc).

3. Targeted biophysical assessments

• Plan and implement targeted assessments of current status of and trends in, for example: water resources
depletion; land management systems; water supply; storage and treatment; infrastructure etc;

• Compare/triangulate findings/outputs against information from independent sources;

• Share and discuss outputs/findings of each assessment with stakeholders. Resolve differences of opinion
and take account of feedback.

4. Multi-scalar analysis and modelling of water flows, fluxes and stocks

• Use outputs from targeted assessments as a basis for selecting, setting up, calibrating and validating
hydrological models;

• Use empirical data collected and models to support e.g. multi-scalar fractional and water balance analysis;

• Produce, tabulate and map multi-scalar estimates of water flows, fluxes and stocks under different
conditions;

• Consolidate, share and discuss findings and outputs with stakeholders.

Source: Batchelor et al. (2016)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 58

Table 8.2 Indicators of progress towards best practice water accounting

Aspect Indicator

Processes are established for:

• stakeholder engagement
• data exchange between agencies
Process • data management
• capacity building
• continuous improvement
• analysis of accounts, their use in decision-making processes and tools

Accounts are built into decision-making process. For example:

• water allocation
Relevance • water price setting
• water investment decisions
• water policies
• catchment management planning

Frequency Accounts are produced annually to a pre-determined schedule

The accounts are available within a year of the reference period (e.g. if the data are
Timeliness
for 2021, the account should be available by end of 2022)

Ongoing Accounts have ongoing resourcing

Accounts use SEEA-based classifications and standards enabling the integration

Coherence production of different types of water accounts and for water accounts to be
integrated with other SEEA and SNA accounts

Accounts are of sufficient accuracy to inform decision-making. Quantitative and

Accuracy
qualitive measures of accuracy are equally appropriate

Accounts:

Accessibility • are easily discoverable

• are available online
• provide summary descriptions (not just tables)

Accounts are accompanied by methodological and other material that enable the
Interpretability
information to be understood

Account should be produced for:

• physical supply and use

• physical assets
Comprehensive • monetary supply and use
• emissions
• quality
• water related environment protection expenditure

Accounts should include:

Water resource • all forms of surface water, groundwater and soil water
coverage • where applicable, desalinated and reuse water
• the product “Natural Water” (CPC 1800)
• where applicable, “Bottled Water” (CPC 243)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 59

 Aspect Indicator

Accounts should separately identify the main water suppliers and users, including:

• households
• water supply industry
Industry and • agriculture (split by major commodities)
sector coverage
• mining
• manufacturing
• energy (with hydroelectric power generation separately identified)
• service industries (health, education, etc.)

Scalable accounts. Coverage can be built up from regional level accounts to national
Spatial coverage
or multinational, or vice versa

Valuation Is done in accordance with the concept of exchange values

Water accounts are integrated with other accounts and information (e.g. SNA, land
Integration
accounts, ecosystem accounts

9 References
ABS (2009), Data Quality Framework, Admin. Cat. no. 1520.0., Australian Bureau of Statistics,
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/lookup/1520.0Main+Features1May+2009.
ABS and BoM (2019), Integrated Water Accounts for the Canberra Region, Australian Bureau
of Statistics and Bureau of Meteorology, Canberra. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/
environment/environmental-management/integrated-water-accounts-canberra-re-
gion/2013-14-2016-17.
Alvarez, C., et al. (2016), Construcción de la Matriz de Contabilidad Social de Agua Como Insumo
Económico, Departamento Nacional de Planeación, Colombia.
Angeles, M.S. and H.M. Peskin (1998), “Philippines: Environmental accounting as instru-
ment of policy”, in Environmental Accounting in Theory and Practice, pp. 95–111, Springer,
Dordrecht.
Bagstad, K.J. et al. (2020), “Integrating physical and economic data into experimental water
accounts for the United States: Lessons and opportunities”, Ecosystem Services, Vol. 45,
101182.
Bagstad, K.J. et al. (2021), “Lessons learned from development of natural capital accounts in
the United States and European Union”, Ecosystem Services, Vol. 52/C.
Banerjee, O. et al. (2019), “Evaluating synergies and trade-offs in achieving the SDGs of zero
hunger and clean water and sanitation: An application of the IEEM Platform to Guatemala”,
Ecological Economics, Vol. 161, pp. 280–291.
Barnett, R. et al. (2022), Baseline Study: Agricultural Capacity of the Indigenous Estate, Coopera-
tive Research Centre for Developing Northern Australia, ISBN: 978-1-922437-37-2.
Batchelor, C. et al. (2016), Water Accounting and Auditing Sourcebook, Food and Agriculture
Organization, Rome.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 60

Borrego-Marín, M.M., C. Gutiérrez-Martín and J. Berbel (2016), “Estimation of cost recovery
ratio for water services based on the system of environmental-economic accounting for
water”, Water Resources Management, Vol. 30/2, pp. 767–83.
Brandt, P. et al. (2013), “A review of transdisciplinary research in sustainability science”,
Ecological Economics, Vol. 92, pp. 1–15.
Brouwer, R., S.J. Schenau and R.J.H.M. van der Veeren (2005), “Integrated river basin
accounting in the Netherlands and the European Water Framework Directive”, Statistical
Journal of the United Nations ECE, Vol. 22, pp. 111–131.
Calzadilla, A. et al. (2013), “Climate change impacts on global agriculture”, Climatic Change, Vol.
120, pp. 357–374.
Carvalho, L. et al. (2019), “Protecting and restoring Europe’s waters: An analysis of the future
development needs of the Water Framework Directive”, Science of the Total Environment,
Vol. 658, pp. 1228–1238.
Christ, K.L. and R.L. Burritt (2018), “The role for transdisciplinarity in water accounting by
business: Reflections and opportunities”, Australasian Journal of Environmental Management,
Vol. 25/3, pp. 302–320, DOI: 10.1080/14486563.2018.1460631.
Clarke, N. et al. (2011), “Availability, accessibility, quality and comparability of monitoring data
for European forests for use in air pollution and climate change science”, iForest – Biogeo-
sciences and Forestry, Vol. 4, pp. 162–166, http://www.sisef.it/iforest/show.php?id=582.
Comisari, P. and M. Vardon (2013), “Valuation and treatment of water resource stocks”,
paper presented to the 19th meeting of the London Group on Environmental Accounting,
London. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/londongroup/meeting19/LG19_8_3.
pdf.
Coyle, D. (2015), GDP: A Brief but Affectionate History – Revised and Expanded Edition, Princeton
University Press.
DANE (2022), “Cuenta ambiental y económica de flujos de agua”, Departamento Adminis-
trativo Nacional de Estadística, Colombia, https://www.dane.gov.co/files/investigaciones/
pib/ambientales/cuentas_ambientales/cuenta-del-agua/Boletin-tecnico-cuenta-ambien-
tal-y-economica-del-agua-2020p.pdf.
DANE and IDEAM (2016), “Hacia la construcción de la cuenta del agua a nivel nacional”,
Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística y Colombia: El Instituto de Hidrología
y Meteorología y Estudios Ambientales, http://www.dane.gov.co/files/investigaciones/pib/
ambientales/PI-Hacia-la-construcci%C3%B3n-de-la-Cuenta-del-Agua-Nacional.pdf.
DNP (2016), Descripción de la Programación y de las Ecuaciones Matemáticas del Modelo de
Equilibrio General de Agua, Detallando la Estructura Productiva, Departamento Nacional de
Planeación, Colombia.
DWS (2021), Water Accounting Report 2017–19, Department of Water and Sanitation, Govern-
ment of Botswana, Gaborone, https://www.wavespartnership.org/sites/waves/files/kc/
Water%20Accounts%20Report_2017-19.pdf.
Easter, W. K., N. Becker and Y. Tsur (1997), “Economic mechanisms for managing water
resources: Pricing, permits and markets”, Water Resources: Environmental Planning, Manage-
ment and Development, edited by Asit K. Biswas, McGraw-Hill, New York.
EC (2009), System of National Accounts 2008, European Commission, International Monetary
Fund, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, United Nations, and
World Bank, New York.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 61

Edens, B. and C. Graveland (2014), “Experimental valuation of Dutch water resources
according to SNA and SEEA”, Water Resources and Economics, Vol. 7, September, pp. 66–81.
Edens, B., L. Lowe and M. Vardon (2007), Regional Water Accounts and the Transformation of
Spatial Data, paper presented to the 11th meeting of the London Group on Environmental
Accounting, 26–30 March 2007, LG/11/SSWA/2, Johannesburg, http://unstats.un.org/unsd/
envaccounting/londongroup/meeting11/LG11_SSWA_2a.pdf.
EPA (2017), Estimating the Value of Water Resources: A Literature Review, Environmental Protec-
tion Authority, Springfield, USA, https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2018-10/docu-
ments/estimating_value_of_water_lit_review.pdf.
Esen, S.E. and L. Hein (2020), “Development of SEEA water accounts with a hydrological
model”, Science of the Total Environment, Vol. 737/5, 140168.
Eurostat (2005), Statistics Code Of Practice, Eurostat, Luxemburg, http://www.dzs.hr/Eng/inter-
national/code_of_practice_en.pdf.
Godfrey, J. and K. Chalmers, eds. (2012), Water Accounting, International Approaches to Policy
and Decision Making, Edward Elgar Publishing, UK.
Grafton, R. Q. (2019), “Policy review of water reform in the Murray–Darling Basin, Australia:
The ’Do’s’ and”, Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Vol. 63/1, pp.
116–141.
Grafton, R. Q., L. Chu and P. Wyrwoll (2020), “The paradox of water pricing: Dichotomies,
dilemmas, and decisions”, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol. 36/1, pp. 86–107.
Green, J. and B. Moggridge (2022), Inland Water: Australia State of the Environment Report,
Australian Government, Canberra, https://soe.dcceew.gov.au/inland-water/introduction.
GRZ (2020), “Natural capital accounts for water, 2010–2016”, First Results and Next Steps.
Government of The Republic of Zambia, Lusaka.
Gutiérrez-Martín, C., M.M. Borrego-Marín and J. Berbel (2017), “The economic analysis of
water use in the water framework directive based on the system of environmental-eco-
nomic accounting for water: A case study of the Guadalquivir River Basin”, Water, Vol. 9/3,
pp. 180.
GWP (2000), Integrated Water Resources Management, TAC Background Paper 4, Global Water
Partnership, Stockholm.
Hanemann, W.M. (1997), “Price and rate structures”, in Urban Water Demand, Management
and Planning, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Healy, R.W. et al. (2007), “Water budgets: Foundations for effective water resources and envi-
ronmental management”, United States Geological Survey Circular 1308, https://water.usgs.
gov/watercensus/AdHocComm/Background/WaterBudgets-FoundationsforEffectiveWa-
ter-ResourcesandEnvironmentalManagement.pdf.
Hirshleifer, J., J.C. Dehaven and J.W. Milliman (1960), Water Supply: Economics, Technology, and
Policy, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
IMF (2012), Data Quality Assessment Framework – Generic Framework, International Monetary
Fund, Washington D.C., http://dsbb.imf.org/Pages/DQRS/DQAF.aspx.
Karimi, P. et al. (2013), “Basin-wide water accounting based on remote sensing data: An appli-
cation for the Indus Basin”, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, Vol. 17/7, pp. 2473–2486.
Keith, H. et al. (2017), “Ecosystem accounts define explicit and spatial trade-offs for managing
natural resources”, Nature Ecology and Evolution, Vol. 1/11, pp. 1683–1692.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 62

Kelebang, B. (2021), Analysis of Water Rights Applications in Botswana (2002–2020), Centre for
Applied Research, Botswana, https://policycommons.net/artifacts/1580386/analysis-of-wa-
ter-rights-applications-in-botswana-2002-2020/2270112/.
Kind, J. et al. (2020), Fresh Water Resources in the Changing Wealth of Nations, Deltares, Delft,
https://publications.deltares.nl/11205754_002.pdf.
Kramer, R. A. et al. (1997), “Ecological and economic analysis of watershed protection in
Eastern Madagascar”, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 49/3, pp. 277–295.
La Notte, A. et al. (2012), “Spatially explicit monetary valuation of water purification services
in the Mediterranean bio-geographical region”, International Journal of Biodiversity Science,
Ecosystem Services and Management, Vol. 8/1–2, pp. 26–34.
Lange, G.M. (1997), An Approach to Sustainable Water Management Using Natural Resource
Accounts: the Use of Water, the Economic Value of Water, and Implications for Policy, Ministry
of Environment and Tourism, Windhoek, Namibia.
Lange, G.M. et al. (2007), The Economics of Water Management in Southern Africa: An Environ-
mental Accounting Approach, Edward Elgar Publishing.
LBTWG (2016), Pilot Ecosystem Account for Laguna de Bay Basin, World Bank, Laguna de Bay
Technical Working Group, Washington, DC, https://www.wavespartnership.org/en/knowl-
edge-center/pilot-ecosystem-account-laguna-de-bay-basin.
Lenzen, M. and B. Foran (2001), “An input–output analysis of Australian water usage”, Water
Policy, Vol. 3/4, pp. 321–340.
Manero, A. et al. (2022), “A systematic literature review of non-market valuation of indige-
nous peoples’ values: Current knowledge, best-practice and framing questions for future
research”, Ecosystem Services, Vol. 54, 101417.
Meijer, J. et al. (2020), “Integrated Landscape Management and Natural Capital Accounting:
Working Together for Sustainable Development”, PBL Netherlands, The Hague, https://www.
pbl.nl/en/publications/integrated-landscape-management-and-natural-capital-accoun-
ting-working-together-for-sustainable-development.
MET (2015), Feasibility of Natural Capital Accounts in Namibia and Fast-Track Compilation of
Water Accounts, Ministry of National Education, Ministry of Environment and Tourism,
Windhoek.
Metcalfe, P.J. and A. Sen (2022), “Sensitivity to scope of water and wastewater service valua-
tions: A meta-analysis of findings from water price reviews in Great Britain”, Journal of Envi-
ronmental Economics and Policy, Vol. 11/1, pp. 21–38, DOI: 10.1080/21606544.2021.1984314.
Moher, D. et al. (2009), “Academia and clinic annals of internal medicine preferred reporting
items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses”, Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 151/4, pp.
264–9, DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135.
NCAVES and Maia (2022), Monetary Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Ecosystem Assets for
Ecosystem Accounting: Interim Version, 1st ed, United Nations, New York.
Normyle, A. et al. (2022b), “Land cover and fire accounts to support indigenous land
management: A pilot study of Yawuru country”, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol.
313,115003.
Normyle, A., M. Vardon and B. Doran (2022a), “Ecosystem accounting and the need to recog-
nise indigenous perspectives”, Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Vol. 9/1, pp.
1–7.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 63

Obst, C., L. Hein and B. Edens (2016), “National accounting and the valuation of ecosystem
assets and their services”, Environmental and Resource Economics, Vol. 64/1, pp. 1–23, DOI:
10.1007/s10640-015-9921-1.
OECD (2010), “Pricing water resources and water and sanitation services”, OECD Studies on
Water, OECD Publishing, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris,
DOI: 10.1787/9789264083608-en.
OECD (2012), Quality Framework and Guidelines for OECED Statistical Activities, Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/
displaydocumentpdf/?cote=std/qfs(2011)1&doclanguage=en.
Olmstead, S.M. and R.N. Stavins (2009), “Comparing price and nonprice approaches to urban
water conservation”, Water Resources Research Vol. 45/4.
Ouyang, Z. et al. (2020), “Using gross ecosystem product (GEP) to value nature in decision
making”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Vol.
117/25, pp. 14593–14601.
Pedro-Monzonís, M. et al. (2016a), “The use of AQUATOOL DSS applied to the system of
environmental-economic accounting for water (SEEAW)”, Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 533, pp.
1–14.
Pedro-Monzonís, M. et al. (2016b), “Water accounting in the Po river basin applied to climate
change scenarios”, Procedia Engineering, Vol. 162, pp. 246–253.
Productivity Commission (2021), Productivity Commission, National Water Reform 2020 [Inquiry
report], Productivity Commission, Canberra, https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/
water-reform-2020/report.
PSA (2020), Water Accounts of the Philippines, 2010–2019, Philippines Statistical Authority,
https://psa.gov.ph/sites/default/files/Water%20Accounts%20of%20the%20Philippines.pdf.
Pule, O.B. and D. Galegane (2017), “Water accounts and management in Botswana”, in Forum
on Natural Capital Accounting for Better Policy Decisions: Taking Stock and Moving Forward,
World Bank WAVES, Washington DC.
Romero, G. et al. (2017), “Using water accounts and modelling to help set water prices in
Colombia”, in Better Policy Through Natural Capital Accounting: Stocktaking and Ways Forward,
World Bank WAVES, Washington DC.
Roson, R. and R. Damania (2016), “Simulating the macroeconomic impact of future water
scarcity: An assessment of alternative scenarios”, IEFE Working Papers 84, IEFE, Center for
Research on Energy and Environmental Economics and Policy, Universita’ Bocconi, Milano,
Italy. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2737353.
Ruijs, A. et al. (2019), “Natural capital accounting for better policy”, Ambio, Vol. 48/7, pp.
714–725.
Salminen, J.M. et al. (2018), “Improving data quality, applicability and transparency of national
water accounts–a case study for Finland”, Water Resources and Economics, Vol. 24, pp.
25–39.
Santos, J. I. et al. (2021), “Challenges to water quality assessment in Europe–is there scope for
improvement of the current water framework directive bioassessment scheme in rivers?”,
Ecological Indicators, Vol. 121, 107030.
Sarkis-Onofre, R. et al. (2021), “How to properly use the PRISMA statement”, Systematic
Reviews, 10/1, pp. 13–15, DOI: 10.1186/s13643-021-01671.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 64

Schenau, S. and M. ten Ham (2005), “Water accounts and the water framework directive”,
Preliminary Meeting of the UN Committee on Environmental-Economic Accounting, 29–31
August 2005, United Nations, New York.
Schenau, S. et al. (2022), “Valuing ecosystem services and ecosystem assets for The Nether-
lands”, One Ecosystem Vol. 7, e84624, DOI: 10.3897/oneeco.7.e84624.
SEEA (2003), Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting 2003, https://unstats.un.org/
unsd/environment/seea2003.pdf.
SEPO (2011), Turning the Tide: Improving Water Resource Management in the Philippines, Senate
Economic Planning Office, http://legacy.senate.gov.ph/publications/PB%202011-08%20
-%20Turning%20the%20Tide.pdf.
Setlhogile, T., J. Arntzen and O.B. Pule (2017), “Economic accounting of water: The Botswana
experience”, Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C, Vol. 100, pp. 287–295.
Siikamäki, J. et al. (2021), Global Assessment of Non-wood Forest Ecosystem Services: A Revision of
a Spatially Explicit Meta-analysis and Benefit Transfer [Final report], World Bank, Washington
DC.
Smith, R. (2020), Users and Uses of Environmental Accounts: A Review of Select Developed
Countries, World Bank, Washington, DC, https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/
handle/10986/33316.
Souliotis, I. and N. Voulvoulis (2021), “Natural capital accounting informing water manage-
ment policies in Europe”, Sustainability, Vol. 13/20, 11205, https://doi.org/10.3390/
su132011205.
Statistics Canada (2002), Quality Assurance Framework, Statistics Canada, Ottawa, http://www5.
statcan.gc.ca/access_acces/archive.action?loc=/pub/12-586-x/12-586-x2002001-eng.pdf.
UN et al. (2014), System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Central Framework, United
Nations, New York.
UN et al. (2021), System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Ecosystem Accounting, United
Nations, New York.
UN (2012a), System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Water, United Nations, New York.
UN (2012b), International Recommendations for Water Statistics, United Nations, New York.
UN (n.d.), The SEEA and the SDGs, United Nations, https://seea.un.org/sites/seea.un.org/files/
sdg_one_pager_redone_12_alt.pdf.
UNECE (1992), The 1992 UNECE Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Water-
courses and International Lakes, https://unece.org/DAM/env/water/documents/brochure_
water_convention.pdf.
UNESCO (2021), World Water Development Report 2021: Valuing Water, United Nations Educa-
tional, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Paris, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/
pf0000375724.
UNESCO-WWAP and UNSD (2011), Monitoring Framework for Water, United Nations World
Water Assessment Programme and United Nations Statistics Division, New York, https://
unstats.un.org/unsd/nationalaccount/workshops/2013/Samoa/Apia-BG4.pdf.
USDC (2022), National Strategy to Develop Statistics for Environmental-Economic Decisions: A
U.S. System of Natural Capital Accounting and Associated Environmental-Economic Statistics,
Office of Science and Technology Policy Office of Management and Budget Department of
Commerce, Washington, DC.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 65

Van Berkel, J. et al. (2022), Compilation of Physical Supply and Use Tables, Asset Accounts and
Policy Indicators for Water 2018–2020, Eurostat grant report.
Vardon, M. (2022), “Distinguishing and valuing the water provisioning service, water as a
natural resource and the product ‘natural water”, (CPC 1800) Paper presented to the 28th
Meeting of the London Group, Siegburg, Bonn, Germany, https://seea.un.org/sites/seea.
un.org/files/vardon.pdf.
Vardon, M., G.M. Lange and S. Johansson (2016), Achievements and Lessons from the WAVES
First 5 Core Implementing Countries, World Bank WAVES, Washington, DC.
Vardon, M. et al. (2018), “How the system of environmental-economic accounting can improve
environmental information systems and data quality for decision making”, Environmental
Science and Policy, Vol. 89, pp. 83–92.
Vardon, M., O. B. Pule and D. Galegane (2017), “Accounting for water use by wildlife–concep-
tual and practical issues and a case study from Botswana”, Water Resources and Economics,
Vol. 20, pp. 31–39.
Vardon, M., P. Burnett and S. Dovers (2016), “The accounting push and the policy pull:
Balancing environment and economic decisions”, Ecological Economics, Vol. 124, pp.145–52.
Vardon, M. et al. (2012), “The System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Water:
Development, implementation and use”, in Water Accounting, International Approaches to
Policy and Decision Making, pp. 32–57, Edward Elgar Publishing, UK.
Vardon, M., H. Keith and D. Lindenmayer (2019a), “Accounting and valuing the ecosystem
services related to water supply in the central highlands of Victoria, Australia”, Ecosystem
Services, Vol. 39, 101004.
Vardon, M. et al. (2019), “Accounting for ecosystem services–lessons from Australia for its
application and use in Oceania to achieve sustainable development”, Ecosystem Services,
Vol. 39, 100986.
Wada, Y. et al. (2013), “Multimodel projections and uncertainties of irrigation water demand
under climate change”, Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 40/17, pp. 4626–4632, https://doi.
org/10.1002/grl.50686.
Water Accounting Standards Board (2014), Water Accounting Conceptual Framework for the
Preparation and Presentation of General Purpose Water Accounting Reports, Commonwealth
of Australia, Canberra.
Weckström, M. M., V. A. Örmä and J. M. Salminen (2020), “An order of magnitude: How a
detailed, real-data-based return flow analysis identified large discrepancies in modeled
water consumption volumes for Finland”, Ecological Indicators, Vol. 110, 105835.
Wittwer, G., (ed.) (2012), Economic Modeling of Water: the Australian CGE Experience, Vol. 3,
Springer Science & Business Media.
WMO (2012), International Glossary of Hydrology, 3rd ed, World Meteorological Organization
and United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, https://library.wmo.
int/doc_num.php?explnum_id=8209.
Woodcock, P., A.S. Pullin and M.J. Kaiser (2014), “Evaluating and improving the reliability of
evidence syntheses in conservation and environmental science: A methodology”, Biological
Conservation, Vol. 176, pp. 54–62, DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.04.020.
World Bank (2021), “From accounts to policy: WAVES closeout report – Wealth accounting

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 66

 and valuation of ecosystem services global partnership (2012–2019)” World Bank WAVES,
Washington, DC, http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/779351636579119839/
From-Accounts-to-Policy-WAVES-Closeout-Report-Wealth-Accounting-and-Valuation-of-Eco-
system-Services-Global-Partnership-2012-2019.
World Bank (2022), “World Bank Country and Lending Groups – Country Classification”, World
Bank, https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-
country-and-lending-groups.
WRI (2019), “Aqueduct 3.0 Country Rankings”, World Resources Institute, https://www.wri.org/
research/aqueduct-30-updated-decision-relevant-global-water-risk-indicators.
Young, R.A. (1996), “Measuring economic benefits for water investments and policies”, World
Bank Technical Paper, No. 338, World Bank, Washington, DC.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 67

Annex 1 SEEA Water Glossary

Source: SEEA Water (UN, 2012a)

Abstraction: The amount of water that is removed from any source, either permanently or
temporarily, in a given period of time for final consumption and production activities. Water
used for hydroelectric power generation is also considered to be abstraction. Total water
abstraction can be broken down according to the type of source, such as water resources and
other sources, and the type of use. (EDG)

Abstraction for distribution: Water abstracted for the purpose of its distribution. (EDG)

Abstraction for own use: Water abstracted for own use. However, once water is used, it can
be delivered to another user for reuse or for treatment. (EDG)

Actual evapotranspiration: The amount of water that evaporates from the land surface
and is transpired by the existing vegetation/plants when the ground is at its natural level of
moisture content, which is determined by precipitation. (EDG)

Actual final consumption of general government: The value of the government’s total final
consumption expenditure less its expenditure on individual goods or services provided as
social transfers in kind to households. It is thus the value of the expenditures that the govern-
ment incurs on collective services. (Based on 2008 SNA, paras. 9.103)

Actual final consumption of households: The value of the consumption of goods and
services acquired by individual households, including expenditures on non-market goods or
services sold at prices that are not economically significant, and the value of expenditures
provided by government and NPISHs. (2008 SNA, para. 9.81)

Aquifer: A geologic formation, group of formations, or part of a formation that contains

sufficient saturated permeable material to yield significant quantities of water to wells and
springs. (USGS)

Artificial reservoirs: Man-made reservoirs used for storage, regulation, and control of water
resources. (EDG)

Brackish water: Water with a salinity content between that of freshwater and marine water.
(EDG)

Catchment (synonym: river basin): An area having a common outlet for its surface run-off.
(UNESCO/WMO International Glossary of Hydrology, 2nd ed., 1992)

Cooling water: Water which is used to absorb and remove heat.

Determinand: Parameter, water quality variable or characteristic of water quality. Direct

use benefits: Benefits derived from the use of environmental assets as sources of materials,
energy, or space for input into human activities. (SEEA-2003, para. 7.36)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 68

Economic unit: A unit that engages in production and/or consumption activities.

Emission to water: Direct release of a pollutant into water, as well as its indirect release by
transfer to an off-site wastewater treatment plant. (Based on the European Commission,
2000)

Evapotranspiration: The quantity of water transferred from the soil to the atmosphere by
evaporation and plant transpiration. (EDG)

Exports: Water that exits the territory of reference through mains or other forms of infra-
structure. (EDG)

Final consumption expenditure of households: The expenditure, including imputed

expenditure, incurred by resident households on individual consumption goods and services,
including those sold at prices that are not economically significant. (2008 SNA, para. 9.94)

Fresh water resources: Naturally occurring water having a low concentration of salt. (EDG)

Glaciers: An accumulation of ice of atmospheric origin generally moving slowly on land over a
long period. (UNESCO/WMO International Glossary of Hydrology, 2nd ed., 1992)

Gross capital formation: The total value of the gross fixed capital formation, changes in
inventories and acquisitions less disposal of valuables for a unit or sector. (2008 SNA, para.
10.31)

Groundwater: Water which collects in porous layers of underground formations known as

aquifers. (SEEA-2003)

Groundwater recharge: The amount of water added from outside to the zone of saturation
of an aquifer during a given period. Recharge of an aquifer is the sum of natural and artificial
recharge. (EDG)

Hydroelectric power generation: Water used in generating electricity at plants where the
turbine generators are driven by falling water. (USGS, available from http://pubs. usgs.gov/
chapter11/chapter11M.html)

Hydrological cycle (synonym: water cycle): The succession of stages through which water
passes from the atmosphere to the earth and returns to the atmosphere: evaporation from
the land, sea or inland water, condensation to form clouds, precipitation, accumulation in
the soil or in bodies of water, and re-evaporation. (UNESCO/WMO International Glossary of
Hydrology, 2nd ed., 1992)

Imports: Water that enters the territory of reference through mains or other forms of
infrastructure. (EDG) Inflow: Water that flows into a stream, lake, reservoir, container, basin,
aquifer system, etc. It includes inflows from other territories/countries and inflows from other
resources within the territory. (EDG)

Intermediate consumption: The value of the goods and services consumed as inputs by
a process of production, excluding fixed assets, the consumption of which is recorded as

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 69

consumption of fixed capital; the goods or services may be either transformed or used up by
the production process. (Based on 2008 SNA, para 6.213)

Irrigation water: Water artificially applied to land for agricultural purposes. (UNESCO/ WMO
International Glossary of Hydrology, 2nd ed., 1992)

Lake: A generally large body of standing water occupying a depression in the Earth’s surface.
(EDG)

Mine water (synonym: mining water use): Water used for the extraction of naturally occur-
ring minerals including coal, ores, petroleum, and natural gas. It includes water associated
with quarrying, dewatering, milling and other on-site activities carried out as part of mining.
Excludes water used for processing, such as smelting and refining, or slurry pipeline (indus-
trial water use). (USGS, available from http://pubs.usgs.gov/chapter11/chapter11M.html)

Non-point source of pollution: Pollution sources that are diffused and without a single
point of origin or not introduced into a receiving stream from a specific outlet. The pollutants
are generally carried off the land by storm-water run-off. The commonly used categories
for nonpoint sources are agriculture, forestry, urban areas, mining, construction, dams and
channels, land disposal and saltwater intrusion. (UNSD, online glossary of environment statis-
tics)

Option benefits: Benefits derived from the continued existence of elements of the environ-
ment that may one day provide benefits for those currently living. (SEEA-2003, para. 7.37)

Outflow: Flow of water out of a stream, lake, reservoir, container, basin, aquifer system, etc.
It includes outflows to other territories/countries, to the sea and to other resources within
the territory. (EDG)

Perennial river: A river which flows continuously throughout the year. (Based on UNESCO/
WMO International Glossary of Hydrology, 2nd ed., 1992).

Point source of pollution: Emissions for which the geographical location of the discharge
of the wastewater is clearly identified, for example, emissions from wastewater treatment
plants, power plants and other industrial establishments.

Population equivalents: One population equivalent (p.e.) means the organic biodegradable
load having a five-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) of 60g of oxygen per day. (OECD/
Eurostat joint questionnaire on inland water).

Potential evapotranspiration: The maximum quantity of water capable of being evaporated

in a given climate from a continuous stretch of vegetation covering the whole ground well
supplied with water. It thus includes evaporation from the soil and transpiration from the
vegetation of a specified region in a given time interval, expressed as depth. (EDG)

Precipitation: The total volume of atmospheric wet precipitation, such as rain, snow, and
hail, on a territory in a given period of time. (EDG)

Recycled water: The reuse of water within the same industry or establishment (on site).
(EDG)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 70

Reused water: Wastewater delivered to a user for further use with or without prior treat-
ment. Recycling within industrial sites is excluded. (EDG)

Rivers and streams: Bodies of water flowing continuously or periodically in a channel. (EDG)

River basin (see also catchment): An area having a common outlet for its surface run-off.
(EDG)

Run-off: The part of precipitation in each country/territory and period of time that appears as
stream flow. (EDG)

Sewage sludge: The accumulated settled solids separated from various types of water, either
moist or mixed with a liquid component, as a result of natural or artificial processes. (OECD/
Eurostat joint questionnaire on inland water)

Social transfers in kind: Individual goods and services provided as transfers in kind to indi-
vidual households by government units (including social security funds) and NPISHs, whether
purchased on the market or produced as non-market output by government units or NPISHs;
the items included are: (a) social security benefits and reimbursements; (b) other social
security benefits in kind; (c) social assistance benefits in kind; and (d) transfers of individual
non-market goods or services. (Based on 2008 SNA, para 8.141)

Soil water: Water suspended in the uppermost belt of soil, or in the zone of aeration near
the ground surface that can be discharged into the atmosphere by evapotranspiration. (EDG)

Standard river unit (SRU): A river stretch of one kilometre with a water flow of one cubic
meter per second. (SEEA-2003, para. 8.128)

Supply of water to other economic units: The amount of water that is supplied by one
economic unit to another and recorded net of losses in distribution. (EDG)

Surface water: Water which flows over, or is stored on, the ground surface. It includes artifi-
cial reservoirs, lakes, rivers and streams, glaciers, snow, and ice. (EDG)

Trade margin: The difference between the actual or imputed price realised on a good
purchased for resale (either wholesale or retail) and the price that would have to be paid by
the distributor to replace the good at the time it is sold or otherwise disposed of. (2008 SNA,
para 6.146)

Transboundary waters: Surface or groundwaters which mark, cross or are located on

boundaries between two or more States; wherever transboundary waters flow directly into
the sea, these transboundary waters end at a straight line across their respective mouths
between points on the low-water line of the banks. (UNECE, 1992, available from http://www.
unece.org/env/water/pdf/watercon.pdf)

Transport margin: Transport charges payable separately by the purchaser in taking delivery
of goods at the required time and place. (2008 SNA, para. 6.141)

Urban run-off: That portion of precipitation on urban areas that does not naturally percolate
into the ground or evaporate, but flows via overland flow, underflow, or channels, or is piped
into a defined surface water channel or a constructed infiltration facility.

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 71

Use of water received from other economic units: The amount of water that is delivered
to an economic unit from another economic unit. (EDG)

Wastewater: Water which is of no further immediate value to the purpose for which it was
used, or in the pursuit of which it was produced, because of its quality, quantity, or time of
occurrence. However, wastewater from one user can be a potential supply of water to a user
elsewhere. It includes discharges of cooling water. (EDG)

Watercourse: A natural or constructed channel through or along which water may flow.
(UNESCO/WMO International Glossary of Hydrology, 2nd ed., 1992)

Water body: A mass of water distinct from other masses of water. (UNESCO/WMO Interna-
tional Glossary of Hydrology, 2nd ed., 1992)

Water consumption: That part of water use which is not distributed to other economic units
and does not return to the environment (to water resources, sea and ocean) because during
use it has been incorporated into products or consumed by households or livestock. It is
calculated as the difference between total use and total supply; thus, it may include losses
due to evaporation occurring in distribution and apparent losses due to illegal tapping as well
as malfunctioning metering. (EDG)

Water losses in distribution: The volume of water lost during transport through leakages
and evaporation between a point of abstraction and a point of use, and between points of
use and reuse. Water lost due to leakages is recorded as a return flow as it percolates to an
aquifer and is available for further abstraction; water lost due to evaporation is recorded as
water consumption. When computed as the difference between the supply and use of an
economic unit, it may also include illegal tapping. (EDG)

Water returns: Water that is returned into the environment by an economic unit during
a given period after use. Returns can be classified according to the receiving media (water
resources and sea water) and to the type of water, such as treated water and cooling water).
(EDG)

Water supply: Water leaving/flowing out from an economic unit. Water supply is the sum of
water supply to other economic units and water supply to the environment. (EDG)

Water supply to the environment: see water returns.

Water supply within the economy: Water which is supplied by one economic unit to
another. Water supply within the economy is net of losses in distribution. (EDG)

Water use: Water intake of an economic unit. Water use is the sum of water use within the
economy and water use from the environment. (EDG)

Water use from the environment: Water abstracted from water resources, seas and
oceans, and precipitation collected by an economic unit, including rainfed agriculture. (EDG)

Water use within the economy: Water intake of one economic unit, which is distributed by
another economic unit. (EDG)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 72

Annex 2 List of water accounting tables

Source: SEEA Water (UN, 2012a)

1 Standard tables
A1 1. Standard physical supply and use tables for water
J. Supply (physical units)
K. Use (physical units)

A1 2. Emission accounts tables

A. Gross and net emissions table (physical units)
B. Emissions by ISIC division 37 table (physical units)

A1.3. Hybrid supply and use tables

A. Hybrid supply table (physical and monetary units)
B. Hybrid use table (physical and monetary units)

A1.4. Hybrid account table for supply and use of water (physical and monetary units)

A1.5. Hybrid account table for water supply and sewerage for own use (physical and
monetary units)

A1.6. Government account table for water-related collective consumption services

A1.7. National expenditure account tables

A. For wastewater management (monetary units)
B. For water management and exploitation (monetary units)

A1.8. Financing account tables

A. For wastewater management (monetary units)
B. For water management and exploitation (monetary units)

A1.9. Asset account table (physical units)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 73

2 Supplementary tables

A2.1. Supplementary information to the physical supply and use tables (and expansion of the
standard physical supply and use, listed above)
A. Physical use table (physical units)
B. Physical supply table (physical units)

A2.1. Supplementary information to the physical supply and use tables

A. Physical use table
B. Physical supply table

A2.2. Matrix of flows of water within the economy

A2.3. Supplementary information to the emission accounts

A. Gross and net emissions
B. Emissions by ISIC division 37
C. Sludge indicators

A2.4. Supplementary information to hybrid and economic accounts.

A. Economic accounts—supplementary information
B. National expenditure accounts for the protection and remediation of soil, ground-
water, and surface water
C. Financing accounts for the protection and remediation of soil, groundwater, and
surface water

A2.5. Supplementary information to the asset accounts

A. Matrix of flows between water resources

A2.6. Quality accounts

A2.7. Supplementary information to the water accounts: social indicators

3 Indicator tables

A3.1. Selected indicators of water resource availability and pressure on water derived from
water accounts

A3.2. Selected indicators of water intensity and water productivity

A3.3. Indicators of opportunities to increase effective water supply

A3.4. Indicators of costs and price of water and wastewater treatment services

A3.5. Indicators of selected challenge areas from the United Nations World Water
Development Report 2

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 74

 Annex 3 Full water supply and use account

Source: SEEA Central Framework (UN, 2014); Grey cells are null by definition

Flows
from
Abstraction of water; Production of water;
Physical supply table for water the rest
Generation of return flows
of the
world

tries
ment

supply
supply

fishing
and air
Imports

Mining &
Manufac-
Sewerage

ment and

quarrying,
turing and
Electricity,
gas, steam
tion, treat-
Flows from

Households

Agriculture,
the Environ-
Total supply

forestry and
Other indus-

conditioning
Water collec-

Construction
(I) Sources of abstracted water

Inland water resources

Surface water 440.6 440.6

Groundwater 476.3 476.3

Soil water 50.0 50.0

Total 966.9 966.9

Other water sources

Precipitation 101.0 101.0

Sea water 101.1 101.1

Total 202.1 202.1

Total supply abstracted water 1169.0 1169.0

(II) Abstracted water

For distribution 378.2 378.2

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING |

For own-use 108.4 114.6 404.2 13.9 100.1 2.3 743.5

75
(III) Wastewater and reused water

Wastewater

Wastewater to treatment 17.9 117.6 5.6 1.4 0 49.1 235.5 427.1

 Flows
from
Abstraction of water; Production of water;
Physical supply table for water the rest
Generation of return flows
of the
world

tries
ment

supply
supply

fishing
and air
Imports

Mining &
Manufac-
Sewerage

ment and

quarrying,
turing and
Electricity,
gas, steam
tion, treat-
Flows from

Households

Agriculture,
the Environ-
Total supply

forestry and
Other indus-

conditioning
Water collec-

Construction
Own treatment 0.0

Reused water

For distribution 42.7 42.7

For own use 10.0 10.0

Total 17.9 127.6 5.6 1.4 42.7 49.1 235.5 479.8

(IV) Return flows of water

To inland water resources

Surface water 300.0 52.5 0.2 0.5 353.2

Ground water 65.0 23.5 47.3 175.0 0.5 4.1 315.4

Soil water

Total 65.0 23.5 300.0 47.3 227.5 0.7 4.6 668.6

To other sources 5.9 100.0 256.3 0.2 362.4

Total return flows 65.0 29.4 400.0 47.3 483.8 0.7 4.8 1031.0

of which: Losses in distribution 47.3 47.3

(V) Evaporation of abstracted water, transpiration and water incorporated into products

Evaporation of abstracted water 29.5 38.3 2.5 1.8 0.7 3.6 10.0 86.4

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING |

Transpiration 40.2 1.2 41.4

76
Water incorporated into products 6.5 3.7 10.2

TOTAL SUPPLY 267.5 314.8 812.3 442.6 627.3 55.7 250.3 1169 3939.5
 Physical use table for water

Final Flows to
Abstraction of water; Intermediate consumption; Return flows consump- the rest of
tion the world

Other

supply

fishing
Exports
Total use

industries

Sewerage

and supply
Households

Agriculture,
forestry and
conditioning

rying, Manu-
Water collec-

Construction
Environment

facturing and
steam and air
Accumulation

Mining & quar-

Flows from the

Electricity, gas,
tion, treatment
(I) Sources of abstracted water

Inland water resources

Surface water 55.3 79.7 301.0 4.5 0.1 440.6

Groundwater 3.1 34.8 3.2 432.9 2.3 476.3

Soil water 50.0 50.0

Total 108.4 114.5 304.2 437.4 0.1 2.3 966.9

Other water sources

Precipitation 1.0 100.0 101.0

Sea water 100.0 1.1 101.1

Total 0.0 0.0 100.0 2.1 100.0 0.0 202.1

Total supply abstracted water 108.4 114.5 404.2 439.5 100.1 2.3 1169.0

(II) Abstracted water

Distributed water 38.7 45 3.9 0.0 0.0 51.1 239.5 378.2

Own-use 108.4 114.6 404.2 3.1 100.1 2.3 10.8 743.5

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING |

77
 Final Flows to
Abstraction of water; Intermediate consumption; Return flows consump- the rest of
tion the world

Other

supply

fishing
Exports
Total use

industries

Sewerage

and supply
Households

Agriculture,
forestry and
conditioning

rying, Manu-
Water collec-

Construction
Environment

facturing and
steam and air
Accumulation

Mining & quar-

Flows from the

Electricity, gas,
tion, treatment
(III) Wastewater and reused water

Wastewater

Wastewater from other units 427.1 427.1

Own treatment 0.0

Reused water

For distribution 2.0 40.7 42.7

For own use 10.0 10.0

Total 12.0 40.7 0.0 0.0 427.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 479.8

(IV) Return flows of water

Returns of water to the environment

To inland water resources 668.6 668.6

To other sources 362.4 362.4

Total return flows 1031.0 1031.0

(V) Evaporation of abstracted water, transpiration and water incorporated into products

Evaporation of abstracted water 86.4 86.4

Transpiration 41.4 41.4

Water incorporated into

10.2 10.2
products

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING |

TOTAL USE 267.5 314.8 812.3 442.6 627.3 55.7 250.3 10.2 1158.8 3939.5

78
Annex 4 Database metadata
# Variable Name Description

I General information

Country_Code ISO-3 letter country code

Country_Name Name of the country or the region in the world

Account_Code Unique letter code assigned to the water account

Account_Label Label of the water account

Name of agencies or academic journals who are engaged in the production of the
Publisher
water account

Type of agency engaged in the production of the water account

Water_Type_of_publisher (National statistical office; National water; Scientific information agency; Economic
information agency; International agency; Department of Water; Department of
Environment; Other government department; Catchment management authority;
Water supply industry; Academic organisation; Others)

Responding_authority Authorities/authors in charge and take lead in producing the water account

Whether the account is published as a stand-alone water account or with other

Independence_status
accounts (Yes/No)

The accounts that include the water account if the water account is not published
Included_in_what_accounts
independently

Account_name_set_by_country Water account named by the country/authors

Whether water accounting has been institutionalised or still in project-based pilot

Insitutionalized_status (Yes/No). This is identified by the time series or if the water account is embedded
in official statistical system

Project_details Some details of the project (if any) that support the construction of water account

Applications Some highlight applications of water account in practice

Source from which the water account is found and accessed

Water_Source_of_account
(Original source; UN survey site; WAVES Knowledge Centre; UN Knowledge base;
Google search; Systematic Scopus search; Others)

Source_of_account_details Specify the source of the water account if it is not listed in the categories

Source from which the reviewed documents on the water account is found and
accessed
Water_Source_of_reviewed_
document
(Original source; UN survey site; WAVES Knowledge Centre; UN Knowledge base;
Journal website; Google search; Others)

Source_of_reviewed_document_
Specify the source of reviewed documents if it is not listed in the categories
details

Describe how the water account is found

Search_strategy
(Original source; UN survey site; WAVES Knowledge Centre; UN Knowledge base;
Scopus search; Google search; Others)

Search_strategy_details Specify other strategies if it is not listed in the categories

Link Links to the water account and reviewed documents

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 79

# Variable Name Description

The form that the water account is available for access

Availability
(Data portal for self-extraction; online pdf that can be downloaded; online
spreadsheet that can be downloaded; webpage; others)

Whether the water is found and compiled as claimed

(Claimed and complied: the water account is claimed by the country itself or in
Water_Compiled_account
reviewed documents and complied

Not found: the water account is claimed in reviewed documents but not found yet)

Classification of countries by region (East Asia and Pacific, Europe and Central Asia,
Water_Region_WB Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, North America, South
Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa) (WB, 2022)

Classification of countries by income level (WB, 2022): Countries are divided

among income groups according to 2022 gross national income (GNI) per capita:
Water_Income
low income, $1,085 or less; lower middle income, $1,086 to $4,255; upper middle
income, $4,256 to $13,205; and high income, $13,206 or more.

Classification of countries by water stress categories based on the ratio of total

water withdrawals to available renewable surface and groundwater supplies:
Water_Water_stress
Extremely high (>80%), High (40%-80%), Medium high (20%-40%), Medium low
(10%-20%), Low (<10%) (WRI, 2019)

II Boundaries and methodology

Whether the water account adopts the SEEA framework and methodology (Yes/
Application_of_SEEA_framework
No)

Application_of_SEEA_standard_
Whether the water account is produced in SEEA standard tables (Yes/No)
methodology

Year_of_SEEA_adoption The year that the SEEA framework and methodology is adopted (publishing year)

Other_framework/methodology Other framework and methodology adopted

Types of water account

(Physical supply and use accounts; Monetary supply and use accounts; Physical
Water_Account_types asset accounts; Monetary asset accounts; Water-related legal rights accounts;
Water quality accounts; Ecosystem services for water provisioning; Ecosystem
services for water filtration; Other water-related ecosystem services; Hybrid and
economic accounts; Emission of water; Others-Resource base; Others-Water use;
Others)

The spatial level that the water account is produced

Spatial_boundary
(National level; Regional administrative level; Regional physical level/river
catchment)

Spatial_boundary_details Details of regional level if any

Whether the water account’s spatial boundary is consistent across types of

Consistency_spatial_boundary
accounts (Yes/No)

III Industry coverage

Water_Industry_coverage Categories of industries in the water account (ISIC classification)

Specify other industries that are not listed in the categories or further details for
Water_Industry_coverage_details
attention

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 80

# Variable Name Description

The sector split shown in the water account

Water_Sectoral_coverage
(Rain fed-irrigated agriculture; water supply-wastewater treatment; hydropower;
mine dewatering)

Specify other sector split shown that are not listed in the categories or further
Water_Sectoral_coverage_details
details for attention

Agricultural_water_use_shown_
Whether the agricultural water use is shown by commodities (Yes/No)
by_commodity

Water_Agricultural commodity The agricultural commodities split shown in water account

Specify other commodities split shown that are not listed in the categories or
Agricultural_commodity_details
further details for attention

Whether the industry coverage and sectoral split is consistent across accounts
Consistency_sector_coverage
(Yes/No)

IV Timeframe

Frequency The frequency of publication of the water account

Number_of_times_published The number of publishing times

Year_first_published The first year of publication

Year_last_published The last year of publication

First_reference_year The first reference year

Last_reference_year The last reference year

Number_of_gaps The number of gaps in reference years

Years_of_publication List of years of publication

The length of the time series (difference between the last and the first reference
Length
year)

Time lags The difference between the last year of publication and the last reference year

Consistency_time series Whether the time series is consistent across accounts (Yes/No)

V Physical scope

Imports and exports of water counted in the water account

Water_Imports_and_exports_of_
water (Upstream flows (natural in-flows); Downstream flows (natural out-flows); Imports
of produced water (piped in-flows); Exports of produced water (piped out-flows)

Unit of imports and exports of water counted in the water account

Unit_of_imports_and_exports_
of_water
(By volume, by value in local currency)

Source of water in supply-use accounts and assets account

Water_Water_sources
(Surface water: Groundwater; Soil water; Surface-artificial reservoirs, Surface-
lakes; Surface-rivers and streams; Surface-snow ice and glaciers; Others)

Water_sources_details Further details on water source that need attention

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 81

# Variable Name Description

Type of losses recorded in the water account (by volume)

Water_Recording_of_losses (Evaporation from reservoirs and dams under control of water utilities; Leakage
from pipes; Leakage from irrigation channels; Loss in distribution as a whole;
Loss from pipes and irrigation channels attributed to water supply industry; Loss
recorded as return flows to environment)

Type of evaporation recorded in the water account

Water_Recording_of_evaporation (Evaporation generally; Evapotranspiration; Transpiration; Evaporation from water

distribution system; Evaporation, evapotranspiration and water incorporated into
products all together; Water incorporated into products)

Returns of water recorded in the water account (by volume)

Water_Returns_of_water
(To inland water resources, sea and ocean, environment generally, other sources)

Returns of wastewater recorded in the water account (by volume)

Water_Returns_of_wastewater
(To inland water resources, sea and ocean, environment generally, other sources)

Flows of water in the supply and use table account

Water_Recording_of_flows
(Abstraction from environment; Distributed water; Reused water; Wastewater to
sewerage)

Water_treatment_plants_(by Whether the data on water treatment plants split to treated and untreated water
treated/untreated) (by volume) (Yes/No)

Wastewater_treatment_plants_(by Whether the data on wastewater treatment plants split to treated and untreated
treated/untreated) water (by volume) (Yes/No)

Whether the data on desalination plants split to treated and untreated water (by
Desalination_plants
volume) (Yes/No)

Water_Produced_assets_type Type of water produced assets that is counted by physical number

Key_indicators Some physical indicators that are produced in the accounts

VI Economic scope

Whether the water account includes running cost of water treatment, either in
Running_cost_water_treatment
total or split down to categories or both (in local currency)

Running_cost_water_treatment_
The cost categories of running cost of water treatment (if any)
categories

Running_cost_ wastewater_ Whether the water account includes running cost of wastewater treatment either
treatment in total or split down to categories or both (in local currency)

Running_cost_ wastewater_
The cost categories of running cost of wastewater treatment (if any)
treatment_categories

Whether the water account includes running cost of desalination either in total or
Running_cost_desalination
split down to categories or both (in local currency)

Running_cost_of_desalination_
The cost categories of running cost of desalination (if any)
categories

Water_Assets_value Type of water produced assets that are valued in local currency

Other types of economic information included in the water account

Water_Economic_information
(Value of irrigated agriculture; Value of rain-fed agriculture; Value of rain-fed and
irrigated agriculture together; Value of hydroelectricity; Others)

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 82

Annex 5 List of countries and regions producing water
accounts

Afghanistan Germany Norway

Africa Greece Pakistan
Armenia Guatemala Palau
Australia India Palestine
Azerbaijan Indonesia Peru
Belarus Iran Philippines
Bosnia and Herzegovina Ireland Russia
Botswana Israel Rwanda
Brazil Italy Samoa
Cambodia Jordan South Africa
Canada Kazakhstan Spain
Central Asia Lebanon Sri Lanka
China Luxembourg Sweden
Colombia Madagascar Tajikistan
Costa Rica Malaysia Tanzania
Croatia Mauritius Thailand
Denmark Mexico Tunisia
Dominican Republic Middle East Turkey
Ecuador Moldova Uganda
Egypt Mongolia United Kingdom
Ethiopia Namibia United States of America
Europe Nepal Vietnam
Fiji Netherlands Zambia
Finland New Zealand World
France Nigeria

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 83

The Global Commission on the Economics of Water (GCEW) redefines
the way we value and govern water for the common good.

It presents the evidence and the pathways for changes in policy,

business approaches and global collaboration to support climate and
water justice, sustainability, and food-energy-water security.

The Commission is convened by the Government of the Netherlands

and facilitated by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD). It was launched in May 2022 with a two-year
mandate.

The GCEW is executed by an independent and diverse group of

eminent policy makers and researchers in fields that bring novel
perspectives to water economics, aligning the planetary economy
with sustainable water- resource management.

Its purpose is to make a significant and ambitious contribution to

the global effort to spur change in the way societies govern, use and
value water.

E: info@watercommission.org | W: watercommission.org

OECD Environment Directorate

Climate, Biodiversity and Water Division
2, rue André Pascal
75775 Paris Cedex 16
France

WATER ACCOUNTS AND WATER ACCOUNTING | 84