As the Mediterranean prepares to go through a major series of international summits on water, climate and biodiversity, Doha Zamel, an expert on water and sustainable development in the Mediterranean, emphasizes the importance of a profound transformation of water governance. Between digitization, artificial intelligence and regional cooperation, it deciphers the levers of an essential resilience in the face of water stress that has become multidimensional. Interview.
How do you define water stress today, beyond the mere decrease in the level of reserves in dams?
Today, water stress can no longer be evaluated only through the level of dams. It reflects a structural imbalance between the real availability of the resource, the needs of different uses and the ability of ecosystems to continue functioning.
Indicator 6.4.2 of the Sustainable Development Goals also defines water stress as the ratio between freshwater withdrawals and available renewable resources, after taking into account the flow rates necessary to maintain ecosystems. But I think that today we must go further and consider water stress as a multidimensional phenomenon: quantitative, qualitative, ecological, economic and institutional.
A territory can theoretically have water and yet be in a situation of water stress if its water tables are overexploited, if the quality of the water deteriorates, if salinity increases, if a significant part of the resource is lost in the networks or if the institutions do not have the necessary information to allocate it effectively.
The temporal dimension must also be integrated. An annual average can mask an extremely severe shortage for several months, which is particularly important in Mediterranean regions.
This is where the concept of Water 4.0 becomes particularly interesting. It corresponds to the integration into the water sector of the tools of the fourth industrial revolution: connected sensors, Internet of things, smart meters, remote sensing, artificial intelligence, automation and digital twins.
These technologies allow us to gradually move from a static photograph of the resource to a dynamic, predictive and almost real-time vision of the water cycle.
The question is therefore no longer only: how much water do we have? but rather: what water do we have, where is it, in what state, who uses it, how quickly does it renew itself and how can we allocate it sustainably?
What do you think are the main factors that aggravate the scracity of water resources: climate change, overexploitation of water tables, losses in networks, irrigated agriculture or inadequacies in governance?
I don’t think we should oppose them. These factors work as a system and reinforce each other.
Climate change acts as a risk multiplier: rising temperatures, increased evapotranspiration, longer and more frequent droughts, heat waves, forest fires, but also torrential precipitation, floods and sudden floods.
But we must not make climate change an explanation that masks our own management failures. In many territories, we continue to pump groundwater faster than it recharges, to lose water into networks or to discharge wastewater that could be treated and reused.
Agriculture is obviously at the heart of the challenge since it accounts for more than 70% of the world’s fresh water withdrawals. But it must also be at the heart of the solutions. That’s why I prefer to talk about water productivity rather than simply water saving: how much food, economic, social or environmental value do we produce with each cubic meter used?
Water quality must also be integrated. Water contaminated by nitrates, salts or other pollutants exists physically, but it is not necessarily available for all uses.
Water 4.0 can allow us to go even further. By combining hydrological data, satellites, sensors, smart meters, weather forecasts and artificial intelligence, we can better understand where, when and why water is consumed, lost or degraded.
Our challenge is therefore not only to find new resources. It is to better know, protect, reuse and regenerate those we already have.
How to reconcile the universal right to access to drinking water with the need to control consumption and preserve available resources?
The human right to water must remain non-negotiable. In 2010, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 64/292, explicitly recognizing the right to safe and clean drinking water and sanitation as a human right essential to the full enjoyment of life and all human rights.
However, guaranteeing this right does not mean considering water as an unlimited resource.
Each person must be guaranteed an essential foundation for access to safe, accessible and affordable drinking water, while implementing policies that encourage sobriety and protect resources.
Progressive pricing can be part of the solutions: protect basic needs and vulnerable households, while sending an economic signal when consumption becomes very high or concerns non-essential uses.
But it would be unfair to put all the responsibility on the citizens.
We often ask households to reduce their consumption when much larger volumes can be lost in networks or used ineffectively in certain sectors.
Water 4.0 can also contribute to this transformation. Smart meters allow operators and consumers to better understand consumption, quickly detect anomalies and identify certain leaks.
Finally, it is necessary to move from a logic of restriction to a logic of intelligent sobriety: use the right quality of water, in the right amount, in the right place and for the right use.
To what extent can digitization contribute to the monitoring of withdrawals, the detection of leaks and a better allocation of water resources?
It is precisely here that the concept of Water 4.0 makes sense. We are gradually moving from reactive water management to predictive management.
Connected sensors can continuously measure flow, pressure, water quality, water level or soil moisture. Smart meters make it possible to track consumption. Satellites make it possible to observe crops, soils, droughts and certain resources on a territorial scale.
Artificial intelligence can then analyze these millions of data to detect an anomaly, anticipate a leak, predict the evolution of demand or help optimize irrigation.
Another particularly interesting technology is that of digital twins. It is a question of virtually reproducing the operation of a water network, a treatment plant or even, eventually, a hydrological system in order to test different scenarios before making a decision.
For example, we can simulate a prolonged drought, an increase in demand, a pipe breakdown or different resource allocation strategies.
This evolution is also at the heart of the European strategy for water resilience, which explicitly identifies the acceleration of digitization and artificial intelligence among its main areas of action.
But I would like to insist on one point: artificial intelligence does not create water. If the data is bad, if the institutions do not share it or if the allocation rules are ineffective, we will have simply digitized bad governance.
That’s why I prefer to talk not only about Smart Water, but about Smart Water Governance: using technology to make decisions more transparent, predictive, participatory and reliable data-driven.
The Mediterranean still suffers from a lack of coordination, shared data and regional cooperation. How to strengthen integrated responses to water scarcity?
I think we are at a particularly important time to rethink the place of water in regional and international cooperation. The year 2026 is quite exceptional for the global water and environmental agenda.
We had in August the COP17 of the United Nations Convention on Combating Desertification in Mongolia, with a day specifically devoted to water and drought resilience.
Then we will have the Euro-Mediterranean Water Forum in Rome, from 29 September to 2 October; the COP17 on biodiversity in Yerevan, from 19 to 30 October; the COP31 on climate in Antalya, from 9 to 20 November; then the United Nations Water Conference in Abu Dhabi, from 8 to 10 December.
This calendar sends us a very clear message: water can no longer be treated as an isolated environmental sector. It is the operational link between climate, biodiversity, soils, agriculture, energy, health and food security.
COP17 on desertification illustrated it very well. A drought is not simply a lack of rain. It simultaneously affects water resources, soils, ecosystems, agriculture, rural communities and sometimes migration dynamics.
COP17 Biodiversity is another major opportunity. We still talk too often about water as a resource to be taken and distributed. Yet wetlands, rivers, soils and aquifers are true natural infrastructure. Restoring ecosystems can help improve water retention, water recharge, water quality and resilience to droughts and floods.
COP31 Climate in Antalya should also be an opportunity to strengthen the place of water in climate adaptation, as a large part of the impacts of climate change manifests itself precisely through water: droughts, floods, salinization, rainfall changes or pressure on agriculture.
For the Mediterranean, the Euro-Mediterranean Water Forum in Rome is particularly strategic. It can serve as a bridge between the realities of the Mediterranean territories and the major international processes.
We need a true Mediterranean water intelligence, capable of connecting data, policies and investments on both sides.
Imagine a regional platform capable of crossing Copernicus satellite data with water tables, agricultural samples, water quality, soil moisture, droughts and climate projections.
Artificial intelligence could transform this information into early warning systems and decision-making tools.
Water 4.0 could thus become in a way the digital layer of the Water-Energy-Power-Ecosystems Nexus, the one that allows us to better understand the interactions between these different resources. But again, technology is not enough. Artificial intelligence does not create water and a digital twin does not replace cooperation between countries.
We need common standards for data, information sharing mechanisms, cooperation between basins, financing, capacity building and much stronger involvement of the territories.
I also strongly believe in Mediterranean living labs, where farmers, researchers, companies, communities and authorities can together test the reuse of treated wastewater, intelligent irrigation, controlled refilling of aquifers, nature-based solutions, desalination powered by renewable energies or nutrient recovery.
Structures such as the Finnova Foundation can help create this bridge between innovation, territories, European policies and financing instruments.
Finally, the United Nations Water Conference in Abu Dhabi should bring these various discussions together and accelerate the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 6.
I think we need to get to Abu Dhabi not just with new declarations, but with measurable, fundable and replicable solutions.
For the Mediterranean, the challenge is therefore to transform this succession of events into a real trajectory: Rome to strengthen the Euro-Mediterranean dialogue, Erevan to reconnect water and biodiversity, Antalya to place water at the heart of climate adaptation and Abu Dhabi to transform commitments into concrete actions.
The Mediterranean should no longer be presented only as a hotspot for climate change. It can become a global laboratory for water resilience.
Should the choices of crops be reviewed according to their water footprint and their ability to adapt to climate change?
Yes, but I think we must go beyond the simple notion of water footprint.
To say that a crop consumes a lot of water is not enough. A cubic meter used in a basin with abundant resources does not have the same impact as a cubic meter pumped in an overexploited aquifer in an arid area.
We must therefore gradually move from a simple water footprint to a local risk-adjusted water footprint. It is also necessary to consider the nutritional, economic and social value produced by each cubic meter.
The question then becomes: what agriculture do we want to maintain in each territory with the water that will actually be available in twenty or thirty years?
Water 4.0 can significantly improve this analysis.
Thanks to satellites, soil moisture sensors, weather data, evapotranspiration estimation and artificial intelligence models, we can better determine when a plant really needs water and in what quantity.
We can thus gradually move from irrigation based on a schedule to precision irrigation based on the real need of the plant.
But technology must be combined with agronomic solutions: drought- and salinity-resistant varieties, agroecology, improvement of soil organic matter, controlled deficit irrigation, safe reuse of treated water and better nutrient management.
It is also necessary to remain vigilant against the rebound effect: improving the efficiency of irrigation does not automatically guarantee a reduction in withdrawals if the water saved is then used to increase irrigated surfaces. The real indicator must therefore remain the measurable reduction of pressure on the resource at the basin level.
What are the main risks of water stress to food prices, rural employment and food security?
Water is one of the main mechanisms by which climate change becomes an economic and social risk.
When a drought reduces yields, farmers may be forced to pump deeper, pay more for energy, invest in new irrigation infrastructure or modify their crops.
These costs affect agricultural margins and can then be reflected in food prices. But one of the most important risks is volatility. A water shock in a large agricultural region can quickly become a production shock, then a market, import and food security problem.
For Mediterranean rural territories, the stakes are even deeper. If agriculture is no longer economically viable due to lack of water, we may see a loss of jobs, abandonment of land, a weakening of rural communities and an acceleration of the rural exodus.
By combining climate, hydrological, agricultural and economic data, we can develop early warning systems that allow us to anticipate certain risks before they become crises.
This is also where the Nexus approach is essential: food security depends on water security, but also on energy, soil health and ecosystem functioning. We must therefore stop considering water policy only as environmental policy. Water security is also a policy of food security, economic stability, employment and territorial cohesion.
What water-related projects are you currently working on? What are their main objectives and expected impacts?
Currently, as part of my collaboration with Finnova, I contribute to several European proposals and initiatives, including the framework of the European Union’s LIFE programme, which is one of the main European funding instruments dedicated to the environment and climate action.
We are working on various innovative solutions: atmospheric water recovery, treatment and reuse of agricultural water, salinity and nutrient management, use of microalgae and photobioreactors to contribute to water treatment while producing recoverable biomass, as well as the integration of solar energy to reduce the energy footprint of certain technologies.
There is also an important dimension of Water 4.0, with the use of sensors and data to track water quality, salinity, nutrients, available volumes or the performance of the different solutions. The idea is to gradually move from reactive management to more intelligent, circular and predictive water management.
My role with Finnova focuses in particular on LIFE support and management, consistency between the design of proposals and their future implementation, as well as the dissemination, exploitation of results, replication and their adoption at European level.
And replication is particularly important. For example, some solutions developed or tested in Spain could then be adapted to Tunisia, since the two countries face several similar challenges: water stress, drought, salinity and high demand for agricultural water. It is not a question of copying a technology, but of adapting it to local realities.
For me, this is precisely one of the major current challenges: we already have many innovations in the water sector. Now, we must succeed in moving from the pilot project to the change of scale, linking innovation, territorial needs, public policies and financing.
This is also what makes Euro-Mediterranean cooperation particularly interesting: we share many water-related challenges, but we can also share, adapt and replicate solutions.
