Journal of Environmental Management 321 (2022) 115974

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jenvman

Research article

A disaggregated assessment of national water security: An application to

the river basins in Thailand
Mukand S. Babel a, *, Kaushal Chapagain a, Victor R. Shinde a, Somkiat Prajamwong b,
Somkiat Apipattanavis b
a
Water Engineering and Management, Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand
b
Office of the National Water Resources, Bangkok, Thailand

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Achieving water security is a global concern in the age of changing climate, population increase, urbanization,
Disaggregated assessment intensive socio-economic development, and land-use change. Addressing water security challenges is most
Indicator framework appropriate at the river basin scale since hydrological boundaries at which water flows differ from administrative
Policy implication
boundaries, and it can provide policymakers and decision-makers key insights to better support water man­
River basins
Thailand
agement practices. This study carries out a disaggregated assessment of national water security by applying an
Water security indicator-based framework to evaluate water security conditions in all twenty-five river basins of Thailand from
2007 to 2015. The framework comprises five broad dimensions and eleven indicators. The study results revealed
that the overall water security condition in Thai river basins has improved during this period. However, a fine-
grained analysis at the dimensions and indicator level of water security shows that water productivity and the
watershed health dimension are of concern in most river basins. The agricultural water productivity and the
wastewater treatment capacity have deteriorated over the years in most basins. Likewise, it emerged that basins
need to enhance their water resource management plans to account for future water challenges. The water se­
curity assessment framework presented in this study links well to the plans, policies, visions, and strategies
developed for water resource management in Thailand. Thus, it can act as a decision-support tool to monitor the
effectiveness of these plans and policies developed and arrive at interventions to enhance Thailand’s water
security.

Credit author statement have increased the stress on water resources and thus, making it more
vulnerable, due to which water security is emphasized as a pressing
Mukand S. Babel: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, concern of the twenty-first century (Srinivasan et al., 2017; Liu et al.,
Writing – review & editing. Kaushal Chapagain: Conceptualization, 2017).
Methodology, Formal Analysis, Data Collection, Writing – original draft. Water security has been defined in several ways in literature, which
Victor R. Shinde: Methodology, Validation, Writing – review & editing. has evolved through time (Global Water Partnership, 2000; Grey and
Somkiat Prajamwong: Validation, Data collection, Writing – review & Sadoff, 2007; Norman , 2010; Cook and Bakker, 2012; UN-Water, 2013;
editing. Somkiat Apipattanavis: Validation, Data collection, Writing – Scott et al., 2013, among others). A widely accepted definition by
review & editing. UN-Water, 2013 defines water security as “The capacity of a population
to safeguard sustainable access to adequate quantities of acceptable
1. Introduction quality water for sustaining livelihoods, human well-being, and
socio-economic development, for ensuring protection against
Water is one of the paramount resources vital to humans and nature water-borne pollution and water-related disasters, and for preserving
(Oki and Kanae, 2006). Several drivers like the proliferation of popu­ ecosystems in a climate of peace and political stability”.
lation, increasing demand, climate change, pollution of water resources Researchers have widely accepted the water security concept as a

* Corresponding author. Water Engineering and Management, Asian Institute of Technology, P. O. Box 4, Klong Luang, Pathum Thani, 12120, Thailand.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (M.S. Babel), [email protected] (K. Chapagain), [email protected] (V.R. Shinde), [email protected]
(S. Prajamwong), [email protected] (S. Apipattanavis).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115974
Received 24 December 2021; Received in revised form 5 August 2022; Accepted 5 August 2022
Available online 23 August 2022
0301-4797/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.S. Babel et al. Journal of Environmental Management 321 (2022) 115974

framing device and applied it in diverse research areas (e.g., Octavianti National Water Resource (ONWR) was established in 2017 as a central
and Staddon, 2021; Gerlak et al., 2018; Zeitoun et al., 2016; Huai and agency to integrate, communicate and oversee the country’s water
Chai, 2016; Cook and Bakker, 2016; Gerlak and Mukhtarov, 2015; resource management. Along with this, a 20 Year Water Management
Lawford et al., 2013; Cook and Bakker, 2012). At global scale, Vor­ Master Plan and The Water Resources Act was promulgated and
osmarty et al. (2010) carried out a threat to human water security and managed by ONWR. One of the objectives of this study is to evaluate if
biodiversity considering an extensive suit of stressors under four themes: the water security framework at the basin scale presented can reflect
“watershed disturbance”, “pollution”, “water resource development”, upon the activities and targets incorporated in the recently developed
and “biotic factors”. Likewise, the multilateral bank such as Asian master plan and act.
Development Bank (ADB) has developed a comprehensive framework at The study thus introduces the study area, the twenty-five river ba­
a national scale from five key water security dimensions: “household sins, the organizational structure of Thailand’s water resource man­
water security”, “economic water security”, “urban water security”, agement, development of the frame, calculation approach, and data
“environmental water security”, and “resilience to water-related di­ sources in Section 2. The result of the overall water security situation in
sasters” (Asian Water Development Outlook (AWDO), 2013; Asian twenty-five river basins and fine-grained analysis at dimensions level
Development Bank ADB, 2016). At the urban scale, Babel et al. (2020) has been presented in Section 3, followed by the policy implications and
framed water security from five dimensions: “water supply and sanita­ research prospects and limitations discussed in Section 4. Finally, the
tion”, “water productivity”, “water-related disasters”, “water environ­ research findings and contribution to water security literature are syn­
ment”, and “water governance”. A recent study by Chapagain et al. thesized and concluded in Section 5.
(2022) has carried out a comparative assessment of urban water security
in diverse developing countries of Asia. Thus, water security has been 2. Materials and methods
understood as the integration of multidisciplinary matters at many
spatial scales (from local to global) (D’ Ambrosio et al., 2020). 2.1. Study area
Regardless of the attention received, implementing and managing
the concept of water security is still a challenge due to its broad spec­ Thailand, with latitudes ranging from north 5◦ 35′′ to north 20◦ 30′′
trum (Cook and Bakker, 2012). The first step to managing or enhancing and longitudes ranging from east 97◦ 30′′ to east 105◦ 27′′ , is in the south-
water security is to measure it. Thus, policymakers are interested in eastern region of Asia continent. It stretches 1500 km from the North to
seeking answers to key questions like how to assess and determine water the South and 800 km from East to West. The country is bordered by Lao
security? What shall we quantify and measure? (Global Water Partner­ People’s Democratic Republic (Lao PDR) in the North, in the east by
ship, 2014; Garrick et al., 2020; Aalirezaei et al., 2021). Cambodia and Lao PDR where the Mekong River forms a natural
Several studies have developed and applied different approaches for boundary, in the southern region by the Gulf of Thailand and Malaysia,
measuring water security at different spatial scales. Water footprint and in the western region by the Andaman Sea and Union of Myanmar.
method (D’ Ambrosio et al., 2020; Mikosch et al., 2020; Haida et al., Thailand falls under the tropical climatic zone and has a land cover area
2019; Liu et al., 2017; Hoekstra et al., 2012), water resources modeling of 513,115 km2.
(Naderi, 2020; Degefu et al., 2019; Gain et al., 2016), indicator method Thailand is subjected to a repeated pattern of flooding and drought
(Chang and Zhu, 2021; Babel et al., 2020; Aboelnga et al., 2020; Jensen that results in significant casualties and economic disruption. Moreover,
and Wu, 2018; Asian Development Bank, 2013, Asian Development the chaotic expansion of urban areas, agriculture intensification, and
Bank ADB, 2016) and so on are examples. Indicators and indices are depletion of watershed forests have reduced flood retention areas, and
useful for identifying problems, monitoring progress toward a goal, and flood plains, whilst water consumption practices, industrial and agri­
informing decisions. Moreover, indicators function to trim up the com­ cultural land development, rapid urbanization, and population increase
plex phenomena into easily communicable quantitative forms and are are responsible for droughts (OECD, 2018). Similarly, the deterioration
beneficial to bridging the science-policy gap. From an operationalizing of water quality is another concerning aspect that needs an urgent
viewpoint, the indicator method can help quantitatively evaluate the response in the country. Urbanization, population growth, industriali­
water system conditions (Wang et al., 2019; Babel et al., 2020; Aalir­ zation, and intensive agriculture have put enormous pressure on water
ezaei et al., 2021). Moreover, the specific values of indicators obtained resources’ quantity and quality. While there has been a gradual
can assist stakeholders and decision-makers in better understanding improvement in surface water health, almost 23% is still of poor quality
their water resource systems and formulating and monitoring plans to (OECD, 2018). It is mainly due to insufficient wastewater treatment
improve water security. facilities, failure to comply with existing regulations, and lack of
The scale of the assessment is equally important for understanding financial penalties for polluting (OECD, 2018).
the water security condition (Vorosmarty et al., 2010). The basin-scale is The 25 river basins of Thailand were taken as the study area of this
often considered an appropriate scale for water security assessment as study, as shown in Fig. 1, with an aim to perform a disaggregated
water would be managed considering the hydrological boundaries at spatiotemporal assessment of water security respecting the hydrological
this scale. In line with Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) boundaries of water bodies that envisage the nation’s water security
principle, the water resource management at hydrological boundaries is condition as a whole and enable practitioners and decision-makers to
an integrative approach as it encompasses the interaction of formulate the water-related strategies, plans and policies accordingly.
air-land-water, rationalizes competing water use among sectors, takes Administratively, Thailand is divided into 77 provinces, four main
account of upstream and downstream effect, monitoring water quality, geographical regions which are: a) the northern region consisting of
flood control, protecting environmental integrity and maintaining river basins like Salawin, Kok, Ping, Wang, Yom, and Nan; b) the
environmental flows (Cervoni et al., 2008). Moreover, any management northeast region has large basins like the Mekong, Chi, Mun and other
action at a local or administrative scale often induces the responsible basins like Prachinburi and Tonle Sap; c) the central region is considered
authorities to prioritize the water supply source within its area and lose an extensive plain which is prone to flooding and it consist of the basin-
sight of the larger issue (or transfer issue downstream) (Jasper, 2003). like Chao Phraya, Sakae Krang, Pasak, Tha Chin, Mae Klong, Bang
Thus, water resource management at basin scale is beneficial for effec­ Pakong and Phetchaburi river basin and d) the southern region consist of
tive, equitable and integrative decision-making. mainly peninsula which includes river basins like West coast, East coast
This study, therefore, carries out an assessment to evaluate the water gulf, Southeast coast, Tapi, Songkhla, Pattani, and Southwest coast.
security situation in all twenty-five river basins of Thailand, with a view Thailand’s average annual rainfall and runoff were observed to be
to assist in formulating and monitoring strategies, plans, and policies for 1282.83 mm and 193,629.23 MCM, respectively, in 2015. The detailed
water resource management at the national scale. The Office of the catchment characteristics of all the river basins for 2015 are presented in

2
M.S. Babel et al. Journal of Environmental Management 321 (2022) 115974

Fig. 1. The 25 river basins of Thailand.

supplementary table ST.1. framework. The driving forces reflect the major demographic and socio-
economic development and the corresponding changes it drives in the
overall consumption and production pattern of water resources. The
2.2. Development of the framework for water security assessment driving forces identified in the study include population growth, Gross
Domestic Product (GDP), climate change, and land-use change. The
2.2.1. Selection criteria for dimensions, indicators, and variables pressures induced due to the effect of driving forces are the factors that
The DPSIR (Driver – Pressure – State – Impact – Response) approach cause changes to the water resource in the basin. This study considers
has been employed to build the basin-scale water security assessment

3
M.S. Babel et al. Journal of Environmental Management 321 (2022) 115974

pressure to be the increased competing water use among different sec­ an appropriate approach to conduct water security assessments by
tors. It is reflected by the domestic, agricultural, and industrial sectors’ several works of literature (Hoekstra et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2019;
water usage. The state refers to the condition of the water resource Octavianti and Staddon, 2021; Babel and Shinde, 2018; Bertule et al.,
system under the pressure of the driver. In this study, the per capita 2017). The approach has gained popularity since it investigates the
water availability and economic value of water reflect on the state cause-and-effect relationships between socio-economic drivers to envi­
component. Impact refers to the positive and negative consequences in ronmental outcomes. In their review, Hoekstra et al. (2018) identify the
the water resource system caused by the drivers and pressures. The DPSIR framework as a system perspective approach to evaluate urban
water-related disasters and watershed health reflects the impact water security. The framework’s architecture comprises the water se­
component in this study. Response describes the capacity or measures curity index, dimensions, indicators, and variables. The framework
adopted by the governing bodies (decision-makers) to solve the prob­ yields a water security index (WSI) encompassing several water security
lems based on the impacts identified. The overall water resource man­ dimensions. These dimensions form the diverse independent domains of
agement in the basin and its potential to adapt to future changes in this water security that include water availability, water productivity,
study measures the response component. DPSIR has been emphasized as water-related disaster, watershed health, and water governance,

Fig. 2. Components of water security assessment framework for basin scale.

4
M.S. Babel et al. Journal of Environmental Management 321 (2022) 115974

capturing the driving elements that impact water security. The di­ (CVM) has been used to remove the effects of inflation and evaluate the
mensions are measured using one or more indicators that reflect what is dollar value of economic growth driven by change in quantities (i.e.,
to be measured in the dimensions. The selection of indicators is set using physical volume of consumption and production). These two variables
the widely used SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, and have been used in the Asian Water Development Outlook (AWDO, 2013,
Time-bound) criteria. It is regarded as the best practice for screening and 2016) to evaluate the water productivity dimension at the national level
developing, monitoring, and evaluating indicators and is a widely used assessment. This study considers both of these variables to evaluate the
set of criteria for measuring indicator quality (Bertule et al., 2017). Each economic value of the water indicator, reflecting on the water produc­
indicator is measured using specific variables. Variables are used to tivity dimension.
quantify indicators, mostly carried out through mathematical equations
or data. 2.2.4. Water-related disasters
One of the unique features of the framework is that the dimensions The dimension is designed to exhibit the impact of floods and
and indicators are kept fixed while the variables are flexible and can droughts in the basin. Two indicators, “Drought factor” and “Flood
vary, as represented by the two shaded areas in Fig. 2. The dimensions factor” are used to reflect on this dimension, which evaluates the impact
and indicators are fixed to make the framework generic and cross-scaled of both drought and flood in the basin as well as the mitigation measures
to any river basins around the globe (as shown by the blue shaded adopted. Several potential variables have been proposed in (Babel and
portion). At the same time, the selection of variables can vary upon the Shinde, 2018) to measure the “drought factor” indicator such as
user’s choice and the data availability, and it should capture the site- “drought damage”, “proportional area of drought”, “drought occurrence
specific nuances of the river basin (as shown by the red shaded frequency”, and “ratio of irrigated area to arable area”. Due to data
portion). The components of the water security assessment framework constraints, the variable “drought damage” was employed in this study,
for basin-scale are shown in Fig. 2. A detailed description of each which accounts for the economic loss caused by the effect of drought on
dimension is provided in sub-sections to follow. the basin. Likewise, potential variables proposed to measure the “Flood
factor” indicator include “flood damage”, “flood occurrence frequency”,
2.2.2. Water availability “proportional area of flooding”, “percentage of population living in
This dimension is associated with the most fundamental aspect of hazard-prone areas”, and “flood control capacity” as suggested by (Babel
water available in the basin to support different human activities such as and Shinde, 2018). Due to lack of data, the variable “flood damage” was
domestic, agricultural, commercial, recreational, among others. The selected in this study to quantify the economic losses caused by the effect
first indicator of “sustainable basin exploitation” represents this of floods on the basin.
dimension, which sheds light on the volume of water available in the
basin for carrying out different activities in a sustainable manner. Based 2.2.5. Watershed health
on the data available, this study used Falkenmark (1989)’s most often This dimension encapsulates the environmental perspective of water
used variable, “per capita water availability”, which determines the total security in the river basin. Four indicators represent the dimension. The
annual renewable water resources per capita (m3/capita/year) in the first is the “health of water bodies” which, as the name suggests, sheds
basin. It is estimated as the ratio of surface runoff to population. Thus, it light on the state of health of the basin’s major water bodies. Potential
results in the total volume of water available in the basin by natural variables to evaluate this indicator are “surface water quality factor”,
processes (surface runoff) potentially to be used for different human “groundwater quality factor”, “average river class based on water
activities in the basin (Babel and Shinde, 2018). provide two additional quality” and “biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)” as suggested by
potential variables of “water scarcity” and “water variation” that can (Babel and Shinde, 2018). This study uses a single variable of “surface
measure this indicator and depict the state of water availability in the water quality factor” to estimate the indicator, measured through the
basin. dissolved oxygen level in the water bodies, which provides information
In 2018, around 3.6 billion people in the world had insufficient ac­ on the health condition of the water bodies in the river basin. It is
cess to water for at least one month per year, and this number is antic­ essential to understand that groundwater is also a significant source and
ipated to rise to more than 5 billion by 2050 (World Meteorological contributes to several activities in the river basin. Thus, the concentra­
Organization, 2021). Thus, the “proportion of population using safely tion of pollutants in groundwater essentially reflects on the watershed
managed drinking water services” is the second indicator used to health of the basin; however, due to data constraints, only the “surface
represent the water availability dimension. The notion behind using this water quality factor” variable has been considered in this study. Hence,
indicator is to take into account not only how much water is available for the study emphasizes taking account of both surface water and
humans but also how much water is available within their premises, groundwater quality factor variables to obtain an accurate value of the
quantified by the variable of “population access to improved drinking indicator.
water source”. Moreover, this indicator is also one of the Sustainable The second indicator used to represent the dimension is “vegetation
Development Goal (SDG) 6 indicators to reflect upon the 2030 devel­ cover” which estimates the proportion of the basin area covered by
opment agenda. natural vegetation. The rationale for incorporating this indicator is that
land-use changes have a considerable impact on the health of water
2.2.3. Water productivity bodies, especially in this era driven by rapid urbanization and economic
The dimension primarily focuses on the economic factors and dem­ activities. It is measured through the variable of “natural vegetation
onstrates the river basin’s ability to value water as an economic good. A factor” which is the ratio of vegetation coverage area to the total area in
sole indicator, “economic value of water”, represents this dimension. the river basin.
This indicator is used to provide perspective on how prudently water is The third indicator is the “proportion of population using safely
used with respect to the economic benefit generated through it. Two managed sanitation services” used in the study to represent the dimen­
variables measure this indicator. The first “industrial and commercial sion. The premise for considering this indicator is to capture the inherent
revenue per unit of water” variable estimates the total revenue gener­ relationship between human health and watershed health. Thus, facili­
ated by water use in the industrial/commercial sector (USD/m3). tating the basin population with adequate sanitation services could
Similarly, in the river basin where agriculture is the dominant sector, significantly reduce fecal bacterial pollution and contamination of water
the variable “agriculture, aquaculture and livestock revenue per unit of sources and improve human health and hygiene. The variable of “pop­
water” estimates the total revenue generated by water use in the agri­ ulation access to improved sanitation facility” is used to measure this
culture sector. In order to quantify these two variables, the Gross Pro­ indicator. Moreover, this indicator is also one of the Sustainable
vincial Product (GPP) value obtained through Chain Volume Measures Development Goal (SDG) 6 indicators to reflect upon the 2030

5
M.S. Babel et al. Journal of Environmental Management 321 (2022) 115974

development agenda target of adequate and equitable access to sanita­ assesses the basin’s ability to cope with the looming pressure on water
tion and hygiene for all. security. It is measured through the “adaptability factor” variable, which
The fourth indicator used to represent this dimension is the “pro­ is also measured through a questionnaire to examine whether the
portion of safely treated wastewater” in the study. The rationale for long-term drivers of water security have been taken into account in
incorporating this indicator is that untreated wastewater flows into water sector development plans and policies. The questionnaire pre­
water bodies is the principal cause of deteriorating watershed health. pared for evaluating the institutional and adaptability factor is tabulated
Hence, this indicator assesses the basin’s ability to safely treat the in Table 1.
amount of wastewater generated. Furthermore, untreated wastewater is The dimensions, indicators, and selected variables comprising the
one of the major sources of methane gas; thus, wastewater treatment overall water security assessment framework at the basin scale in this
also contributes to climate change (UN-Water, 2020). It is estimated study are presented in Table 2. The framework consists of five di­
using the “percentage of treated to total wastewater generated” variable mensions and eleven indicators.
in the river basin. This indicator is also one of the SDG 6 indicators
considered to reflect upon the target of improved water quality,
2.3. Organizational structure and legislation for water resource
wastewater treatment, and safe reuse. Thus, evaluating these four in­
management in Thailand
dicators provides an overview of the watershed pollution landscape, its
sources, and directives on efforts required to address pollution concerns.
Since 2002, Thailand had adopted river basin-based water resources
development and management systems, when the country was divided
2.2.6. Water governance
into 25 river basins, 254 sub-river basins, and over 5000 small basins
Despite being crucial to the basin’s judicious water resources man­
(Mekong River Commission, 2005). Water resources management has
agement, this dimension is often overlooked in the past water security
been structured at three levels; National level – composed of the Na­
assessment. One possibility is that water governance is implicitly
tional Water Resources Committee (NWRC) chaired by Deputy Prime
considered while assessing all aspects of water security. However, we
Minister and Secretary of nine ministries, River basin level – managed by
opted to make this key component explicit in this study by assigning a
River Basin Sub-Committee (RBSC), and Tributary river basin level –
dedicated dimension to water governance. Water governance in itself is
managed by local working groups at provincial, amphoe and tambon
complicated for water security enhancement as it requires interdisci­
level. The river basin planning process in Thailand, as shown in sup­
plinary and multi-sectoral interplay (Babel et al., 2020). Due to its
plementary figure SF1, is congruent with Integrated Water Resource
complex nature, the study does not try to deal with the whole spectrum
Management (IWRM), with the clear vision set by the National Water
of the water governance challenges. In order to capture the quantifiable
Resources Committee that “Within 2025, Thailand will have adequate and
characteristics of water governance, this dimension is evaluated to
good quality water for use by having effectively managed organization and
measure the government’s ability to manage the water sector and plan
policies for water utilization which are sustainable and fair and promote
for future anticipated changes. Two indicators represent this dimension.
quality of life with active participation of stakeholders at all levels”. How­
The first is the “overall management of the water sector” which portrays
ever, with duties and responsibilities distributed to more than 38
the basin’s overall management of the numerous water sector elements.
agencies (departments) from 9 major ministries, Thailand’s water
It is measured through the “institutional factor” variable, which is
resource management was highly fragmented. It led to a lack of con­
measured based on a questionnaire that evaluates the management
nectivity among the agencies, resulting in duplication, budget waste,
practices of the basin’s primary water-related institutions. Likewise, the
and a disintegrated effort to manage its water challenges (OECD, 2018).
second indicator is the “potential to adapt to future changes” that
To address this issue, the Office of the National Water Resources

Table 1
Questionnaire estimating the variables of institutional factor and adaptability factor.
Questions Not yet Under Consideration/ In place but not yet Partially Mostly
considered development implemented implemented implemented

1 2 3 4 5

Institutional factor
1. Does the basin have an Integrated Water Resources Management
(IWRM) plan?
2. In your opinion, how actively are the plans and projects carried
out in the river basin?
3. Is there any effective water allocation mechanisms in place in
the basin?
4. Is there a mechanism in place to encourage water conservation
in the basin?
5. Is there a provision in the basin to incentivize the protection of
water sources?
6. When designing water-related plans and initiatives, is public
opinion sought?
7. Are the decisions for approval of plans and projects and the
investment required taken place at the basin level?
Adaptability factor
1. Is there a centralized database of the river basin’s water-related
data??
2. Is there a system in place to alert people in the basin in the event
of a water-related disaster?
3. When establishing long-term RBC plans and projects, are future
drivers of change (such as climate change) taken into account?
4. Is there a mechanism for RBC members and employees to
improve their knowledge?
5. Is it possible to adjust the water allocation quotas for different
users as needed?

6
M.S. Babel et al. Journal of Environmental Management 321 (2022) 115974

Table 2
Water security assessment framework for river basin scale analysis.
Dimension Indicator Variable Unit Measures to estimate the variables
3
Water Sustainable basin exploitation 1. Per capita water availability m / Surface runoff/Population
Availability capita/
year
Proportion of population using 1. Population access to % (Population using an improved drinking water source (piped water; public
safely managed drinking water improved drinking water source taps or standpipes; boreholes or tube wells; Rainwater or protected
service streams)/Total population) X 100
Water Economic value of Water 1. Commercial/Industrial US$/m3 Non-Agricultural GPP/Non-Agricultural water use in the basin
Productivity revenue per unit of water
2. Agricultural, aquaculture and US$/m3 Agricultural, aquaculture and livestock GPP/Agricultural, aquaculture
livestock revenue per unit of and livestock water use in the basin
water
Water- related Drought factor 1. Drought damage 106 US$ Total damage (farmland, livestock) caused due to effect of drought in the
Disasters river basin
Flood factor 1. Flood damage 106 US$ Total property damage, infrastructure damage, loss of lives caused due to
effect of flood in the river basin
Watershed Health of Water bodies 1. Surface water quality factor mg/L Dissolved Oxygen concentration level of rivers in the basin
Health Vegetation cover 1. Natural vegetation factor % (Natural vegetation area/Total basin area) X 100
Proportion of population using 1. Population access to % (Population using an improved sanitation facility (flush or pour flush
safely managed sanitation improved sanitation facility toilets to sewerage systems, septic tanks or pit latrines, improved pit
services latrines and composting toilets/Total population) X 100
Proportion of safely treated 1. Percentage of treated to total % (Total wastewater treated (m3/day)/Total wastewater generated (m3/
wastewater wastewater generated day)) X 100
Water Overall management of the water 1. Institutional factor – Questionnaire survey
Governance sector
Potential to adapt to future 1. Adaptability factor – Questionnaire survey
changes

(Source: Babel and Shinde, 2018).

(ONWR) was established in 2017 as a central agency to integrate and planning, budgeting, and water resource management follow-up and
oversee water resources management of the entire country. Its duties evaluation to formulate management policy on water resources and
include serving as an integrated agency for intercommunication, project presenting to the National Water Resources Committee (NWRC) for

Fig. 3. Institutional arrangements for Thailand’s water resource management.

7
M.S. Babel et al. Journal of Environmental Management 321 (2022) 115974

approval. It also acts as the National Water Resources Committee productivity or economic value of water. While the commercial/indus­
(NWRC) secretariat, with the regional ONWR offices serving as the River trial water productivity for Thai river basins is up to the mark, agri­
Basin Committee secretariat. The detailed institutional arrangements for cultural water productivity is of grave concern in all the basins. The
Thailand’s water resources management is shown in Fig. 3. concerned authorities could emphasize capacity building for farmers
Several acts have been enacted for water resource management and enhance proper water resource management plans and adaptation
under the responsibility of 38-line agencies, and they play significant for future water challenges in the agriculture sector. It is also observed
roles in shaping Thailand’s existing water resource situation. Some of that very few acts enacted for water resource management focus on
the major acts enacted for water resource management with their pur­ disaster prevention and mitigation. As tabulated, there are limited acts
pose and concerning ministries are given in supplementary table ST.2. concerning the water governance dimension, specifically from the po­
Table 3 presents the various acts enacted for water resource man­ tential to adapt to future water challenges, which is vital to improving
agement in Thailand and how they are reflected by the indicators of the national water security.
basin-scale water security assessment framework (Table 2). It can be From Table 3, it is evident that a single indicator of the framework is
observed that most of the acts enacted show concern about the health of associated with several acts enacted for water resources management
river bodies. However, based on the results obtained in Section 3.2.4, and their purpose. For example, the health of water bodies indicator can
surface water quality is still an issue in basins lying in the central re­ be monitored with compliance to the Enhancement and Conservation of
gions. Due to poor compliance with existing regulations, lack of the Quality of the National Environment (NEQP) act, Royal Irrigation act,
wastewater treatment facilities (only 15% of municipal wastewater is Conservation of Public Water Supply Canals act, among others. However,
treated), and absence of financial disincentives to pollute, a significant the line agencies and ministries responsible for monitoring the imple­
improvement in the watershed health is held back (OECD, 2018). Con­ mentation of these acts are different. The NEQP act is governed by the
cerned authorities must step up efforts to enhance the wastewater Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE) and its line
treatment capacity in order to improve the water quality in Thai river agencies; the Royal Irrigation act by the Ministry of Agriculture and Co­
basins. operatives (MOAC) and its line agencies. Likewise, the Conservation of
Likewise, several acts enacted are associated with enhancing the Public Water Supply Canals act is governed by the Ministry of Interior
(MOI) and its line agencies. This could lead to conflicting policy agendas
due to several ministries competing in similar policy spaces, across
Table 3 central government bodies and local administrations, thus impeding
Acts enacted for water resource management in Thailand and their relationship implementation (OECD, 2018). Furthermore, there are three types of
with the indicators of the basin-scale water security assessment framework. water systems atmospheric, surface and groundwater. The Royal Irriga­
Act tion Department (RID) has duties and responsibilities to manage water
(1) Canal Maintenance Act of (13) The Groundwater Act, (1977) and authority to grant permission to use water for irrigation. Likewise,
Ratanakosin Era 121, (1902) the Department of Groundwater Resources (DGR) is in charge of managing
(2) The Conservation of Canals Act, (14) The Industrial Estate Authority of underground water and has the jurisdiction to provide authorization to
(1903) Thailand Act, (1979) dig and utilize it. However, there is no law granting any agencies duty or
(3) The Conservation of Public Water (15) The Control of Building Construction
authority to allow the use of surface water outside of irrigation areas,
Supply Canals Act, (1913) Act, (1979)
(4) The People’s Irrigation Act, (1939) (16) The Provincial Waterworks Authority which is one reason Thailand’s water system cannot yet be managed as
Act, (1979) an integrated system.
(5) The Act Governing the Right to (17) Bangkok Metropolis Regulation on In order to address this overlapping of roles and responsibilities
Fish in Thai Waters, (1939) Drainage Control, (1991)
among organizations and have an integrated system, the Office of the
(6) The Royal Irrigation Act, (1942) (18) The Act governing the Enhancement
and Conservation of the Quality of the
National Water Resources (ONWR) was developed in 2017 as the central
National Environment (NEQP), (1992) agency to integrate coordination among the line agencies related to
(7) The Sanitation Act, (1952) (19) The Factories Act, (1992) water. The agency is also in charge of setting the policy, work plans, and
(8) The Municipality Act, (1953) (20) The Public Health Act, (1992) project budgets at the national and river basin levels. Likewise, a “20
(9) The Fisheries Act, (1954) (21) Navigation in Thai Waterways Act,
Year Master Plan on Water Resource Management (2018–2037)” was
(1992)
(10) The Public Cleanliness and (22) The Act Governing the Development established, which is seen as a cornerstone in Thailand’s water resource
Orderliness of the Country Act, and Promotion of Energy (1992) management reform. The Plans objective is to serve as a framework and
(1960) guideline to address the development approach in the National Strate­
(11) The Metropolitan Waterworks (23) The Electricity Generating Authority
gies in the sector of economic and social issues, as well as the develop­
Authority Act, (1967) Act, (1992)
(12) National Executive Council (24) The Water Resources Act, (2018)
ment of river basin management to increase water security in the
Announcement, (1972) country. Six strategies under the plan include – management of water for
Indicator Acts related to indicator consumption; achieving water security in the production sector; flood
Sustainable basin exploitation (3), (4), (6), (8), (11), (13), (15), (16), (24) management; water quality and water resources conservation; preser­
Population using safely managed (3), (6), (8)
ving watershed and forest degradation and protection against soil
drinking water services
Economic value of water (4), (5), (6), (9), (11), (13), (16), (22), (23), erosion; increasing management efficiency. The indicators presented in
(24) this study’s water security assessment framework are in line to reflect
Drought factor (4), (6), (24) upon these strategies.
Flood factor (4), (6), (7), (21), (24) Similarly, “The Water Resource Act” in 2018 was introduced as the
Health of water bodies (1), (2), (3), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11),
(12), (14), (15), (17), (18), (19), (20), (21),
first law on water resources in Thailand. The Act focuses on eight scopes
(24) of enforcement - allocation, usage, development, organization, mainte­
Vegetation cover (10), (12), (21) nance, recovery, conservation of water resources, and water rights. It focuses
Population using safely managed (7), (10), (15), (20) on formulating the rules for the basic rights of people to access public
sanitation services
water resources. The Act is also concerned with systematizing water
Proportion of safely treated (12), (14), (15), (17), (18), (19), (20)
wastewater resource management by covering water resources in irrigation areas,
Overall management of the water (4), (6), (7), (8), (13), (18), (24) outside irrigation areas, and underground water. It also focuses on
sector creating a water management organization at the national, river basin,
Potential to adapt to future changes (6), (24) and enterprise levels. It also includes formulating preventive measures
(Source: Office of the National Water Resources (ONWR)) and protection plans and solving the drought and flooding conditions by

8
M.S. Babel et al. Journal of Environmental Management 321 (2022) 115974

integrating with the National Disaster Prevention and Mitigation plan. appropriate and reflective of the basin-specific conditions. In order to
Based on the organizational structure and legislations for water capture the local context, stakeholders’ involvement would be beneficial
resource management discussed above, the indicators presented in this in determining the appropriate weightage for the variables, indicators,
study of the water security assessment at the basin scale are in line with and dimensions.
the scopes of the Water Resource Act enacted. Thus, the framework can
Ixy = (wxy1 * Vxy1 + wxy2 * Vxy2 + …. + wxyz * Vxyz)
be used to support decision-making processes and monitor the enact­
ment of different plans and policies in river basins. / (wxy1 + wxy2 + …. + wxyz) (Eq. 2.1)

Dx = (wx1 * Ix1 + wx2 * Ix2 + …. + wxy * Ixy)

/ (wx1 + wx2 + …. + wxy) (Eq. 2.2)
2.4. Quantifying water security
And WSI = (w1 *D1 + w2 *D2 + …. + w5 *D5)
2.4.1. Normalization of variables / (w1 + w2 + …. + w5) (Eq. 2.3)
The normalization process involves transforming the variables with
Where.
different measurement units to a standard scale. It is an essential step for
determining the overall water security index (WSI). The variables are
represents the variable number in each indicator,
usually normalized to a score of 0–1 based on empirical formulas (Chang “z”
represents the indicator number in each dimension,
and Zhu, 2021; Shrestha et al., 2018; Rowley et al., 2012) or 1–5 based “y”
“x” represents the dimension number,
on reference literature (Babel et al., 2020; Khan et al., 2020; Assefa et al.,
“w” is the weights provided to variables, indicators, and dimensions,
2019). This study uses reference values from literature to normalize the
“V” represents the value of variables quantifying the indicator
selected variables, as shown in Table 4.
“I” represents the value of indicators measuring the dimension
“D” represents the value of dimensions
2.4.2. Weightage and aggregation
“WSI” is the overall water security index in the basin
The weightage assigned to variables, indicators, and dimensions
plays a critical role in determining the river basin’s Water Security Index
For example: In the above case, “I12” would aggregate the score for
(WSI). Several methods, such as Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) by
the second indicator of the first dimension, i.e., “Proportion of popula­
(Wind and Saaty, 1980), Criteria Importance Through Inter-criteria
tion using safely managed drinking water service” indicator of “Water
Correlation (CRITIC) by (Diakoulaki et al., 1995), Equal weightage
Availability” dimension. Likewise, “D1” aggregates the score for the first
(Babel et al., 2020; Khan et al., 2020), among others have been used in
dimension, i.e., “Water Availability”. Similarly, “WSI” aggregates the
water security assessment literature. Equations (2.1), (2.2) and (2.3)
overall water security index score for the river basin. In this study, the
below show the common form used to aggregate the variables, in­
weightage w1, w2, …, wxyz remains the same in all the above equations.
dicators, and dimensions to obtain the water security index. It can be
observed that, the choice of the weights is entirely dependent on user’s
2.4.3. Interpretation of WSI
preference at any or all three levels, i.e., variables, indicators, and di­
The interpretation of the magnitude of the water security index from
mensions. The weights can also be arrived at using one of the
1 to 5 is described in Table 5 below.
above-mentioned methods. In this study, equal weights are provided to
variables, indicators, and dimensions to avoid the subjective aspects of
determining weights and biases among variables, indicators, and di­ 2.5. Data source
mensions. Moreover, one may want to assume all variables, indicators
and dimensions are of equal importance. However, it is recommended The data collected are primarily from secondary sources for con­
that weights assigned to variables, indicators, and dimensions be ducting this study except for the questionnaire survey that was carried

Table 4
Normalization of variables using reference values.
Dimension Indicator Variable Reference values Reference

1 2 3 4 5

Water Sustainable basin exploitation Per capita water availability (m3/ 500–800 800–1180 1180–1440 1440–1700 >1700 Falkenmark
Availability capita/year) (1989)
Proportion of population using Population access to improved <60 60–70 70–80 80–90 >90 UNICEF
safely managed drinking water drinking water source (%) (2017)
service
Water Economic value of water Commercial/Industrial revenue 0–24 24–27.3 27.3–30 30–33.3 >33.3 WB (2010)
Productivity per unit of water (US$/m3)
Agricultural, aquaculture and 0–0.51 0.51–0.95 0.95–1.4 1.4–1.84 >1.84 WB (2010)
livestock revenue per unit of water
(US$/m3)
Water-related Drought factor Drought damage (106 US$) >0.1 0.08–0.1 0.05–0.08 0.03–0.05 0–0.03 *This study
Disasters Flood factor Flood damage (106 US$) >1 0.75–1 0.5–0.75 0.25–0.5 0–0.25 *This study
Watershed Health of water bodies Surface water quality factor (mg/ 0–3 3–4.1 4.1–5.1 5.1–6 >6 WHO (2017)
Health L)
Vegetation cover Natural vegetation factor (%) 0–14 14–19 19–25 25–30 >30 FAO (2020)
Proportion of population using Population access to improved <60 60–70 70–80 80–90 >90 UNICEF
safely managed sanitation sanitation facility (%) (2017)
services
Proportion of safely treated Percentage of treated to total 0–26 26–40 40–52 52–64 >64 UNICEF
wastewater wastewater generated (%) (2017)
Water Overall management of water Institution factor Corresponding to Likert scale interpretation Babel et al.
Governance sector (2020)
Potential to adapt to future Adaptability factor Corresponding to Likert scale interpretation Babel et al.
changes (2020)

9
M.S. Babel et al. Journal of Environmental Management 321 (2022) 115974

Table 5 Table 6
Water security index (WSI) interpretation. Sources of data required for the study.
WSI State Explanation Data Type Year Source Spatial
boundary
<1.5 Poor Water The river basin is highly insecure from a
Security dimensional perspective. It is confronted with a River basin map – Royal Irrigation Basin
number of water-related challenges. Furthermore, Department (RID)
appropriate institutional management and Demographic data 2007–2015 Department of Provincial Provinces
preparedness for future water concerns are • Population Administration (DOPA)
important. • Population accessible National Statistical Office
1.5 - Fair Water From a dimensional perspective, the river basin is to improved drinking (NSO)
<2.5 Security water insecure. It is confronted with some water- water and sanitation
related challenges. Institutional management and Economic data 2007–2015 Office of the National Provinces
preparedness for future water concerns are both in • Agricultural GPP Economic and Social
need of improvement in the basin. • Non- agricultural GPP Development Board
2.5 – Good Water The river basin is water secure with some (NESDB)
<3.5 Security dimensional aspects and insecure with others. It Meteorological data 2007–2015 Thai Meteorological Basin
faces fewer water-related challenges. The basin has • Rainfall Department (TMD) (station)
some institutional management in place, as well as • Evaporation rate Royal Irrigation
plans to address future water issues. Department (RID)
3.5 – Very good Water From a dimensional perspective, the river basin is Hydrological data 2007–2015 Department of Water Basin
<4.5 Security quite water secured. It has relatively few water- • Discharge Resources (DWR) (station)
related challenges. The basin is well-managed • Surface Runoff
institutionally, with proper plans in place to address Water use data 2007–2015 Metropolitan Waterworks Provinces
future water concerns. • Water use in the Authority (MWA)
≥4.5 Excellent Water The river basin is highly secure from a dimensional commercial and Provincial Waterworks
Security perspective. There are no water-related challenges industrial sector Authority (PWA)
in the basin. Institutional management in the basin • Water use in Royal Irrigation
is excellent, and it is well-prepared to address the agricultural sector Department (RID)
future water concerns. Area data 2007–2015 National Statistical Office Provinces
• Agricultural, (NSO) Basin
aquaculture area Fisheries statistics of
out to evaluate the variables of the water governance dimension. The • Natural vegetation Thailand report
area Royal Forest Department
resolution of the collected data is yearly for the analysis period of
• Basin area (RFD)
2007–2015 (Table 6). The data collected at the provincial scale were Royal Irrigation
processed to the basin scale in the Geographical Information System Department (RID)
(GIS) tool (Arcmap) using the area-weighting method (Qiu et al., 2012). Land development
In this method, the ratio of overlapping area between provincial and department (LDD)
Water-related disaster 2007–2015 Department of Disaster Provinces
basin boundary is used as weights to estimate the data value for the
data Prevention and
basin. Although the area-weighting method is a straightforward and the • Flood and drought Mitigation (DDPM)
most popular choice, it’s assumption of spatial homogeneity of data at damage data
provincial scale brings in some uncertainty to data processed at basin Water quality data 2007–2015 Pollution Control Basin
scale. Thus, reference data at both provincial and basin scale is necessary • Dissolved oxygen Department (PCD) (station)
(DO) level Provinces
and to take account of the uncertainty, the error measures such as mean • Wastewater generated
absolute percent error (MAPE), value weighted MAPE (VWMAPE), root and treated
mean squared error (RMSE), and adjusted RMSE (ARMSE) is recom­
mended (Qiu et al., 2012; Zhang and Qiu, 2011). Due to lack of de­
mographic, socio-economic data at basin scale, the error measurement only four dimensions excluding the water governance dimension as it
could not be evaluated in this study. It is suggested to investigate the was estimated through a questionnaire survey only in 2015. It is
effect of area-weighting method on the accuracy of the results in the observed that, in general, the water security conditions in Thai river
future research. basins have enhanced during 2007–2015. During 2007, fourteen basins
The questionnaire survey was carried out with the river basin com­ had their water security condition in a “good” state, ten basins had a
mittee members (RBC’s) for all river basins in 2015. About 31% of the “very good” state, and one basin had an “excellent” state. While in 2015,
river basin committee members have responded to the questionnaire the situation shifted to twenty-two basins with water security conditions
survey carried out. The highest response received was from the Chi river in a “very good” state, and only three basins had a “good” state. Despite
basin, while the lowest was from the Tapi river basin. Detail regarding this enhancement of water security conditions in most basins, the Tapi
the responses received for the questionnaire survey of each basin has river basin had its water security condition deteriorated from a “very
been tabulated in supplementary table ST.3. good” state in 2007 to a “good” state in 2015. Similarly, the water se­
curity condition in the South Coast basin deteriorated from an “excel­
3. Results lent” state in 2007 to a “very good” state in 2015. The Wang, Mun, Chao
Phraya, Prachinburi, Phetchaburi, Bang Pakong, East Coast Gulf, West
This section shows the overall water security index trend of the Coast, Southeast Coast, Songkhla Lake, and Pattani river basins had no
twenty-five river basins of Thailand (Section 3.1) and an in-depth change in their water security condition from 2007 to 2015. However,
analysis of indicators and variables (Section 3.2). after taking account of the water governance dimension score to esti­
mate the water security index (WSI), the water security condition in
2015 for all river basin except Salawin and Chao Phraya decreased as
3.1. Water security index (WSI) trend of twenty-five river basins shown by the water security index (WSI) value in parenthesis in sup­
plementary table, ST 4. Basin such as Mekong, Chi, Sakae Krang and
According to the calculation procedure (see Section 2.4), a single Bang Pakong had their water security condition reduced from “very
water security index is obtained to describe the water security condition good” state to “good” state after evaluating WSI from all five dimension
for the twenty-five river basins of Thailand. Firstly, Fig. 4 compares the as shown in Fig. 4. The details of water security index and dimension
water security conditions in Thai river basins obtained by aggregating

10
M.S. Babel et al. Journal of Environmental Management 321 (2022) 115974

Fig. 4. Water Security Index (WSI) of the twenty-five river basins.

scores for twenty-five basins are tabulated in supplementary table ST.4. 3.2. Fine grained analysis of water security of the river basins in Thailand
The water security index presented in Fig. 4 is obtained by aggre­
gating variables, indicators, and dimensions. Thus, it is heavily influ­ This section presents an in-depth assessment of the five dimensions
enced by the equal weightage provided and the scores of the variables, of water security during 2007–2015 in the following subsections. The
indicators, and dimensions. Furthermore, the selection of variables to raw values for all selected variables that quantify the indicators of five
quantity the indicators also play a vital role in determining the water dimensions for the above-mentioned period have been presented in
security index of the basins, which is primarily driven by the data supplementary table ST.5 to ST.16. Likewise, the detailed assessment at
availability for the basin (Octavianti and Staddon, 2021). The study the dimension and indicator level is shown in supplementary figures SF2
acknowledges these limitations, and to address these issues, the study to SF.15.
recommends stakeholders’ involvement for appropriate selection of
variables and providing appropriate weightage to these selected vari­ 3.2.1. Dimension 1: water availability
ables (Aboelnga et al., 2019, 2020; Sullivan et al., 2003). Although the The water availability dimension is measured through two indicators
WSI is helpful to portray the general picture of water security conditions sustainable basin exploitation and proportion of the population using safely
in river basins, practitioners and decision-makers are recommended not managed drinking water services.
to jump to conclusions based on the WSI score of the basin. Further Almost all the basins have performed well against this dimension as
in-depth analysis of the dimensions and indicators is required to shown in supplementary figure SF2. It can be observed that some river
pinpoint the water security areas of concern within the basins, as pre­ basins have their condition shifted from “excellent” to “very good”
sented in Section 3.2. categories from 2007 to 2015. However, the water availability situation

11
M.S. Babel et al. Journal of Environmental Management 321 (2022) 115974

is still favorable for these river basins. The change in the water avail­ set up after the 2011 floods, with the responsibility for developing plans
ability situation in these basins is primarily governed by the change to prevent future floods. Several structural measures to divert flood­
observed for the proportion of population using safely managed drink­ water under the plan were emphasized to prevent or mitigate floods in
ing water services indicator as shown in supplementary figure SF6. the Chao Phraya River Basin (Singkran, 2017). Similarly, in the North­
east region, the government has emphasized increasing water storage
3.2.2. Dimension 2: water productivity capacity to reduce flood and improve the water availability in dry sea­
The water productivity dimension is measured by a single indicator son, especially for agriculture purposes (Prabnakorn et al., 2021).
of the economic value of water. Two variables were used to measure this Thailand suffered a great loss during the “Great Flood of 2011”, the
indicator: commercial/industrial revenue per unit of water and agri­ impact of flood damage in most basins is captured in supplementary
culture, aquaculture, and livestock revenue per unit of water. figure SF10.
Fig. 5 shows that water productivity has generally improved in the
basins from 2007 to 2015. The overall water productivity dimension 3.2.4. Dimension 4: watershed health
score is obtained by aggregating the economic value of the water indi­ The watershed health dimension is measured through four indicators
cator, which is measured through two variables of commercial water health of water bodies, vegetation cover, proportion of population using
productivity and agriculture water productivity. Due to this aggrega­ safely managed sanitation services, and proportion of safely treated
tion, the overall water productivity in basins has relatively improved wastewater. Each of the four indicators is measuring by a single variable,
over time. However, in the individual sector, the agricultural water surface water quality factor, natural vegetation factor, population access
productivity has deteriorated in 2015 compared to 2007 in most river to improved sanitation facility, and percentage of treated to total
basins, as shown in supplementary figure SF8. wastewater generated, respectively.
Fig. 6 shows the state of watershed health in all river basins of
3.2.3. Dimension 3: water-related disasters Thailand. The overall watershed health ranges from “good” to “very
The water-related disaster dimension is measured through two in­ good” condition in most basins. However, the indicator related to the
dicators drought factor and the flood factor. A single variable, drought health of water bodies and proportion of safely treated wastewater is a
damage, and flood damage were used to measure these two indicators, concern in most basins, as shown in supplementary figures SF11 and
respectively. SF.14. The major cause of the deteriorating quality of water is the failure
This dimension was a major cause of concern from 2007 to 2011. The of the sewage system, discharge of domestic wastewater, industrial
water-related disaster condition was poor in basins located in the central wastewater, and agriculture runoff into the river. Currently, only 27% of
and northeast regions as shown in supplementary figure SF3. However, the total domestic wastewater generated are treated, the rest are directly
there has been a significant improvement from 2012 onwards. The discharged into natural water source (Pollution Control Department,
Strategic Committee for Water Resources Management (SCWRM) was 2019). Moreover, with increasing population, there is a need to address

Fig. 5. Water productivity condition of twenty-five river basins.

12
M.S. Babel et al. Journal of Environmental Management 321 (2022) 115974

Fig. 6. Watershed health condition of twenty-five river basins.

the coverage and inadequate wastewater treatment capacity to meet the central and northeast regions. This low agriculture productivity is
rising rate of wastewater generation and enhance watershed health in because the regions have been severely affected by periodical flooding
the basins. It shows that Thailand needs to accelerate its effort to achieve and drought, respectively (Pavelic et al., 2012). Droughts have become
the target for SDG 6.3.1. more common as a result of climate change, with considerable seasonal
fluctuation in rainfall leading to widespread crop failure in these regions
3.2.5. Dimension 5: water governance (Prabnakorn et al., 2018). Moreover, rice is the major water-intensive
The water governance dimension is measured by two indicators crop grown in the country. The majority of rice fields rely on tradi­
overall management of the water sector and potential to adapt to future tional agricultural methods and local rainfall, making them extremely
changes. A single variable institutional factor and adaptability factor vulnerable to climate change, which results in low yield in these basins
were used to measure these two indicators, respectively. As shown in (Prabnakorn et al., 2021). Although several acts enacted for water
Table 1, a questionnaire survey was carried out with all the river basins resource management are associated with the economic value of water
committee members in all river basins to quantify these two variables. indicator (Table 3), it is evident that significant coordinated effort is
About 31% of responses were received from all the river basin’s com­ required among authorities to enhance the water productivity in the
mittee members, as presented in supplementary table ST.3. river basins. Moreover, the concerned authorities could emphasize ca­
Based on the responses received, the water governance state in all pacity building for farmers and enhance proper water resource man­
twenty-five river basins of Thailand is shown in supplementary table agement plans and adaptation for future water challenges in the
SF4. While basins have reasonable water governance, there are hardly agriculture sector to improve agricultural water productivity.
any basins with “excellent” or “very good” water governance. The state Likewise, watershed health in terms of the health of water bodies and
of overall management of the water sector and potential to adapt to wastewater treatment is a major issue in most of the basins. The major
future changes indicators is shown in supplementary figure SF15. cause of the deteriorating quality of water in the north and northeastern
basins is due to agricultural runoff into the river. At the same time, the
4. Discussion failure of the sewage system, discharge of domestic wastewater, and
industrial wastewater are the cause in basins in the central region
4.1. Water security assessment in Thai basin’s and policy implications (Pollution Control Department, 2019). It is important to note that while
the largest number of acts are linked to addressing water quality issues
The water security assessment results carried out in this study for (Table 3), there seems to be poor compliance with existing regulations in
Thai river basins show that water productivity, watershed health, and practice. The lack of coverage, inadequate capacity of wastewater
water governance are the key dimensions where significant improve­ treatment facilities (only 15% of municipal wastewater is treated), and
ment needs to be made. In terms of water productivity, agricultural absence of financial disincentives to pollute highlight the urgency to
water productivity is the lowest in all the basins located in the north, address the watershed health in most basins (OECD, 2018). The central

13
M.S. Babel et al. Journal of Environmental Management 321 (2022) 115974

apex bodies such as ONWR should step up efforts as a central agency to essential for the basins to improve from the water governance
implement stringent measures to improve the water quality in Thai river perspective.
basins. In terms of water governance, the basins hardly have very good It can be concluded that the indicators of the framework presented in
to excellent condition in their overall management of the water sector this study are in line to reflect on the plans, policies, visions, and stra­
and adaptation to future changes. The reason behind this is the dis­ tegies developed for water resource management in Thailand. Thus, the
connectivity across central government bodies and local administrations framework can be used as a decision-support tool for apex bodies of
to address the water-related issues leading to these bodies competing in water resources management in Thailand to monitor the effectiveness of
similar policy spaces, thus impeding implementation. With the new these plans and policies developed and arrive at some interventions to
twenty-year master plan, the water resource act of 2018, and the Office enhance the nation’s water security.
of the National Water Resources (ONWR) developed as the central The study will also help monitor how the water security policies will
agency”, the water governance is expected to have significantly play out on the ground and engage decision-makers to arrive at in­
improved in the future, thus enhancing the national water security of terventions to enhance water security. Moreover, the framework is also
Thailand. useful for determining Thailand’s progress on the SDG 6 goals.

4.2. Research prospects and limitations

Declaration of competing interest
This section highlights some prospects for future work on the water
security topic. First, we observe that when water security is looked at The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
holistically, it is always challenging to address the concerns of multiple interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
competitive users and sectors. There will always be trade-offs- notably the work reported in this paper.
between agriculture and other sectors. Thus, research is needed to
address these contentious trade-offs and improve synergies between Data availability
competitive users. Authors have attempted to address this by going
beyond the water-centric approach to the multi-centric approach, Data will be made available on request.
termed the “nexus approach” (Albercht et al., 2018; Cai et al., 2018;
Hoff, 2011). However, the nexus of resources involves a complex Acknowledgments
interaction among itself and thus needs careful understanding before
evaluation. The authors would like to express their sincere thanks to the Royal
Similarly, several tools have been developed for water security Irrigation Department (RID), Thai Meteorological Department (TMD),
assessment at different scales (Octavianti and Staddon, 2021). There is a Department of Water Resources (DWR), Metropolitan Waterworks Au­
need to shift from an assessment framework to an action-based frame­ thority (MWA), Provincial Waterworks Authority (PWA), Land Devel­
work. Research on quantifying the impact of water security policies to opment Department (LDD), Pollution Control Department (PCD), Land
arrive at sustainable interventions for water security enhancement is Development Department (LDD), Department of Disaster Prevention
required. Likewise, the inclusion of citizen science into water security and Mitigation (DDPM) for providing the necessary data required for
studies could bring the operational aspect of research into practice. this study.
There is a need for an effective communication strategy to encourage
citizens to advocate for water security and share the responsibility of Appendix A. Supplementary data
action. Similarly, the need for validation tests on indices, specifically for
generic or universal frameworks applicable in any context, is an Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
emerging issue. In order to ensure the results produced are credible, org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115974.
validation of the scientific approach taken during the framework
development is essential. This is often a key limitation of studies as there References
is always some uncertainty embedded while applying the framework, as
the selection of different indicators could lead to the variation of results Aalirezaei, A., Khan, M.S.A., Kabir, G., Ali, S.M., 2021. Prediction of water security level
for achieving sustainable development objectives in saskatchewan, Canada:
(Chang and Zhu, 2021). Thus, such studies should develop a measure to
implications for resource conservation in developed economies. J. Clean. Prod.,
quantify such uncertainty. 127521 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127521.
Aboelnga, H.T., Ribbe, L., Frechen, F.B., Saghir, J., 2019. Urban water security:
5. Conclusions definition and assessment framework. Resources 8 (4), 178. https://doi.org/
10.3390/resources8040178.
Aboelnga, H.T., El-Naser, H., Ribbe, L., Frechen, F.B., 2020. Assessing water security in
This research study is one of the pilot studies that carry out a water-scarce cities: applying the integrated urban water security index (IUWSI) in
desegregated assessment of water security conditions in all twenty-five madaba, Jordan. Water 12 (5), 1299. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12051299.
Albrecht, T.R., Crootof, A., Scott, C.A., 2018. The Water-Energy-Food Nexus: a systematic
river basins of Thailand that can assist in designing or reforming review of methods for nexus assessment. Environ. Res. Lett. 13 (4), 043002 https://
water policies on the national scale. This study contributes to developing doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaa9c6.
a basin-scale water security assessment framework and the applications Asian Development Bank (ADB), 2013. Asian Water Development Outlook 2013:
Measuring Water Security in Asia and the Pacific. http://hdl.handle.net/11540/742.
of the temporal and spatial comparison of the water security situation in Asian Development Bank (ADB), 2016. Asian Water Development Outlook 2016:
river basins. Moreover, the findings from the study can help concerned Strengthening Water Security in Asia and the Pacific. Asian Development Bank,
authorities pinpoint the areas of concern from the five-dimensional Manila, Philippines, p. 136.
Assefa, Y.T., Babel, M.S., Sušnik, J., Shinde, V.R., 2019. Development of a generic
perspective of water security. domestic water security index, and its application in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Water
The study findings indicate that overall the water security index in 11 (1), 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11010037.
Thai river basins is satisfactory over the nine years (2007–2015). Babel, M., Shinde, V.R., 2018. A framework for water security assessment at basin scale.
APN Science Bulletin 8 (1), 27–32. https://doi.org/10.30852/sb.2018.342.
However, based on the fine-grained analysis at the dimensions and in­
Babel, M.S., Shinde, V.R., Sharma, D., Dang, N.M., 2020. Measuring water security: a
dicators level, it was observed that water productivity, specifically the vital step for climate change adaptation. Environ. Res. 185, 109400 https://doi.org/
agricultural water productivity and watershed health, specifically the 10.1016/j.envres.2020.109400.
wastewater treatment capacity in Thai river basins, are two major areas Bertule, M., Bjørnsen, P.K., Costanzo, S.D., Escurra, J., Freeman, S., Gallagher, L.,
Kelsey, R.H., Vollmer, D., 2017. Using Indicators for Improved Water Resources
of concern where urgent effort is required. Likewise, water resource Management - Guide for Basin Managers and Practitioners, ISBN 978-87-90634-05-
management plans and adaptation for future water challenges are also 6, p. 82.

14
M.S. Babel et al. Journal of Environmental Management 321 (2022) 115974

Cai, X., Wallington, K., Shafiee-Jood, M., Marston, L., 2018. Understanding and Mikosch, N., Becker, R., Schelter, L., Berger, M., Usman, M., Finkbeiner, M., 2020. High
managing the food-energy-water nexus–opportunities for water resources research. resolution water scarcity analysis for cotton cultivation areas in Punjab, Pakistan.
Adv. Water Resour. 111, 259–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Ecol. Indicat. 109, 105852 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105852.
advwatres.2017.11.014. Naderi, M., 2020. Assessment of water security under climate change for the large
Cervoni, L., Biro, A., Beazley, K., 2008. Implementing integrated water resources watershed of Dorudzan Dam in southern Iran. Hydrogeol. J. 28 (5), 1553–1574.
management: the importance of cross-scale considerations and local conditions in https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-020-02159-1.
Ontario and Nova Scotia. Can. Water Resour. J. 33 (4), 333–350. https://doi.org/ Norman, E., 2010. Water Security: A Primer. Program on Water Governance. University
10.4296/cwrj3304333. of British Columbia.
Chang, Y.J., Zhu, D., 2021. Water security of the megacities in the Yangtze River basin: Octavianti, T., Staddon, C., 2021. A review of 80 assessment tools measuring water
comparative assessment and policy implications. J. Clean. Prod. 290, 125812 security. WIREs Water 8 (3). https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1516.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.125812. Oki, T., Kanae, S., 2006. Global hydrological cycles and world water resources. Sci. 313
Chapagain, K., Aboelnga, H.T., Babel, M.S., Ribbe, L., Shinde, V.R., Sharma, D., Dang, N. (5790), 1068–1072. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1128845.
M., 2022. Urban water security: a comparative assessment and policy analysis of five Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2018. Initial
cities in diverse developing countries of Asia. Environmental Development 43, Assessment, OECD Development Pathways. In: Multi-dimensional Review of
100713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2022.100713. Thailand, ume 1. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/
Cook, C., Bakker, K., 2012. Water security: debating an emerging paradigm. Global 9789264293311-en.
Environ. Change 22 (1), 94–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.10.011. Pavelic, P., Srisuk, K., Saraphirom, P., Nadee, S., Pholkern, K., Chusanathas, S., et al.,
Cook, C., Bakker, K., 2016. Water security: critical analysis of emerging trends and 2012. Balancing-out floods and droughts: opportunities to utilize floodwater
definitions. In: Handbook on Water Security. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi. harvesting and groundwater storage for agricultural development in Thailand.
org/10.4337/9781782548010. J. Hydrol. 470, 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.08.007.
D’Ambrosio, E., Ricci, G.F., Gentile, F., De Girolamo, A.M., 2020. Using water footprint Pollution Control Department (PCD), 2019. Booklet on Thailand State of Pollution 2018.
concepts for water security assessment of a basin under anthropogenic pressures. Sci. Accessed on March 2022. http://www.oic.go.th/FILEWEB/CABINFOCENTER3/DRA
Total Environ. 748, 141356 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141356. WER056/GENERAL/DATA0001/00001462.PDF.
Degefu, D.M., Liao, Z., He, W., Yuan, L., An, M., Zhang, Z., Xia, W., 2019. The impact of Prabnakorn, S., Maskey, S., Suryadi, F.X., de Fraiture, C., 2018. Rice yield in response to
upstream sub-basins’ water use on middle stream and downstream sub-basins’ water climate trends and drought index in the Mun River Basin, Thailand. Sci. Total
security at country-basin unit spatial scale and monthly temporal resolution. Int. J. Environ. 621, 108–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.11.136.
Environ. Res. Publ. Health 16 (3), 450. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16030450. Prabnakorn, S., Ruangpan, L., Tangdamrongsub, N., Suryadi, F.X., de Fraiture, C., 2021.
Diakoulaki, D., Mavrotas, G., Papayannakis, L., 1995. Determining objective weights in Improving flood and drought management in agricultural river basins: an
multiple criteria problems: the critic method. Comput. Oper. Res. 22 (7), 763–770. application to the Mun River Basin in Thailand. Water Pol. 23 (5), 1153–1169.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0548(94)00059-H. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2021.011.
D’Ambrosio, E., Gentile, F., De Girolamo, A.M., 2020. Assessing the sustainability in Progress on Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene: 2017 Update and SDG Baselines,
water use at the basin scale through water footprint indicators. J. Clean. Prod. 244, 2021. World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Children’s Fund
118847 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118847. (UNICEF), Geneva. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.
Falkenmark, M., 1989. The massive water scarcity now threatening Africa: why isn’t it Qiu, F., Zhang, C., Zhou, Y., 2012. The development of an areal interpolation ArcGIS
being addressed? Ambio 112–118. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4313541. extension and a comparative study. GIScience Remote Sens. 49 (5), 644–663.
FAO, 2020. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020: Main Report. https://doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.2747/1548-1603.49.5.644.
10.4060/ca9825en. Rome. Mekong River Commission (MRC), 2005. The MRC Basin Development Plan. Training and
Gain, A.K., Giupponi, C., Wada, Y., 2016. Measuring global water security towards Capacity Building, vol. 15. BDP Library.
sustainable development goals. Environ. Res. Lett. 11 (12), 124015 https://doi.org/ Rowley, H.V., Peters, G.M., Lundie, S., Moore, S.J., 2012. Aggregating sustainability
10.1088/1748-9326/11/12/124015. indicators: beyond the weighted sum. J. Environ. Manag. 111, 24–33. https://doi.
Garrick, D., Iseman, T., Gilson, G., Brozovic, N., O’Donnell, E., Matthews, N., et al., 2020. org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.05.004.
Scalable solutions to freshwater scarcity: advancing theories of change to incentivise Scott, C.A., Meza, F.J., Varady, R.G., Tiessen, H., McEvoy, J., Garfin, G.M., et al., 2013.
sustainable water use. Water Security 9, 100055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Water security and adaptive management in the arid Americas. Ann. Assoc. Am.
wasec.2019.100055. Geogr. 103 (2), 280–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2013.754660.
Gerlak, A.K., Mukhtarov, F., 2015. ‘Ways of knowing’water: integrated water resources Shrestha, S., Aihara, Y., Bhattarai, A.P., Bista, N., Kondo, N., Futaba, K., et al., 2018.
management and water security as complementary discourses. Int. Environ. Development of an objective water security index and assessment of its association
Agreements Polit. Law Econ. 15 (3), 257–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-015- with quality of life in urban areas of developing countries. SSM-population Health 6,
9278-5. 276–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2018.10.007.
Gerlak, A.K., House-Peters, L., Varady, R.G., Albrecht, T., Zúñiga-Terán, A., de Singkran, N., 2017. Flood risk management in Thailand: shifting from a passive to a
Grenade, R.R., et al., 2018. Water security: a review of place-based research. progressive paradigm. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduc. 25, 92–100. https://doi.org/
Environ. Sci. Pol. 82, 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.01.009. 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.08.003.
Global Water Partnership, 2000. Towards Water Security: A Framework for Action. GWP Srinivasan, V., Konar, M., Sivapalan, M., 2017. A dynamic framework for water security.
Secretariat. Water Security 1, 12–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasec.2017.03.001.
Global Water Partnership, 2014. Assessing Water Security with Appropriate Indicators. Sullivan, C.A., Meigh, J.R., Giacomello, A.M., 2003 August. The water poverty index:
Global Water Partnership. development and application at the community scale. In: Natural Resources Forum,
Grey, D., Sadoff, C.W., 2007. Sink or swim? Water security for growth and development. vol. 27. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Oxford, UK, pp. 189–199. https://doi.org/
Water Pol. 9 (6), 545–571. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2007.021. 10.1111/1477-8947.00054. No. 3.
Haida, C., Chapagain, A.K., Rauch, W., Riede, M., Schneider, K., 2019. From water Un-Water, 2013. UN-water analytical brief on water security and the global water
footprint to climate change adaptation: capacity development with teenagers to save agenda. https://www.unwater.org/app/uploads/2017/05/analytical_brief_oct201
water. Land Use Pol. 80, 456–463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 3_web.pdf. Accessed on1152021.
landusepol.2018.02.043. UNESCO, UN-Water, 2020. United Nations World Water Development Report 2020:
Hoekstra, A.Y., Mekonnen, M.M., Chapagain, A.K., Mathews, R.E., Richter, B.D., 2012. Water and Climate Change. UNESCO, Paris.
Global monthly water scarcity: blue water footprints versus blue water availability. Vorosmarty, C.J., McIntyre, P.B., Gessner, M.O., Dudgeon, D., Prusevich, A., Green, P.,
PLoS One 7 (2), e32688. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0032688. et al., 2010. Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature
Hoekstra, A.Y., Buurman, J., Van Ginkel, K.C., 2018. Urban water security: a review. (Lond.) 555–561.
Environ. Res. Lett. 13 (5), 053002 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaba52. Wang, K., Davies, E.G., Liu, J., 2019. Integrated water resources management and
Hoff, H., 2011. Understanding the Nexus: Background Paper for the Bonn 2011 Nexus modeling: a case study of Bow river basin, Canada. J. Clean. Prod. 240, 118242
Conference. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118242.
Huai, C., Chai, L., 2016. A bibliometric analysis on the performance and underlying Wind, Y., Saaty, T.L., 1980. Marketing applications of the analytic hierarchy process.
dynamic patterns of water security research. Scientometrics 108 (3), 1531–1551. Manag. Sci. 26 (7), 641–658. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.26.7.641.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2019-x. World Bank (WB), 2010. The world bank annual report 2010: year in review. World
Jaspers, F.G., 2003. Institutional arrangements for integrated river basin management. Bank. Accessed on March 2022 https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/h
Water Pol. 5 (1), 77–90. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2003.0004. andle/10986/5906/WorldBank-AnnualReport2010.pdf?sequence=1.
O. Jensen H.Wu 2018 Urban water security indicators: Development and pilot. World Health Organization (WHO), 2017. Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality, fourth
Environmental Science & Policy, 83, 33-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ed. WHO, Geneva, Switzerland, ISBN 978-92-4-154995-0. 2017.
envsci.2018.02.003. World Meteorological Organization (WMO), 2021. State of Climate Services report:
Khan, S., Guan, Y., Khan, F., Khan, Z., 2020. A comprehensive index for measuring water Water.
security in an urbanizing world: the case of Pakistan’s capital. Water 12 (1), 166. Zeitoun, M., Lankford, B., Krueger, T., Forsyth, T., Carter, R., Hoekstra, A.Y., et al., 2016.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w12010166. Reductionist and integrative research approaches to complex water security policy
Lawford, R., Bogardi, J., Marx, S., Jain, S., Wostl, C.P., Knüppe, K., et al., 2013. Basin challenges. Global Environ. Change 39, 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
perspectives on the water–energy–food security nexus. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. gloenvcha.2016.04.010.
5 (6), 607–616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.11.005. Zhang, C., Qiu, F., 2011. A point-based intelligent approach to areal interpolation. Prof.
Liu, W., Antonelli, M., Liu, X., Yang, H., 2017. Towards improvement of grey water Geogr. 63 (2), 262–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/00330124.2010.547792.
footprint assessment: with an illustration for global maize cultivation. J. Clean. Prod. Zhang, Z., He, W., An, M., Degefu, D.M., Yuan, L., Shen, J., et al., 2019. Water security
147, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.072. assessment of China’s one belt and one road region. Water 11 (3), 607. https://doi.
org/10.3390/w11030607.

15