Hi Amita, thanks for starting this topic.
Broadly speaking, definitions can be put into two categories: theoretical and operational. Theoretical definitions comprise existing concepts (that themselves often need defining) and are usually “visionary” or strategic in nature. Operational definitions are measureable and can be monitored and put into practice.
Theoretical definitions are often one line long, like the Bhakta definition or the IPCC glossary definition of resilience.
The SWA definition of climate-resilient WASH gets closer at an operational definition.
To speak of putting a definition into practice or making it work, as your latter two questions ask, we need to operationalise an inclusive, climate-resilient WASH definition through putting it into observable terms. To some extent, this involves asserting the magic ingredients that will make services inclusive and climate-resilient. However, this is probably impossible to do fully – after all, the WASH sector has never found the magic ingredients for sustainability (an equally amorphous concept) after talking about it for decades, although we have lots of useful principles.
The Water for Women Fund has many good resources that explore the meaning of inclusion in climate-resilient WASH. Creating an operational/practical definition that more explicitly addresses inclusion could involve synthesising lessons learned into measureable terms. I think an interesting question (maybe for another topic) is whether inclusion for climate-resilient WASH is different than “conventional” WASH or is it just the same principles?
Hi Amita, thanks for starting this topic.
Broadly speaking, definitions can be put into two categories: theoretical and operational. Theoretical definitions comprise existing concepts (that themselves often need defining) and are usually “visionary” or strategic in nature. Operational definitions are measureable and can be monitored and put into practice.
Theoretical definitions are often one line long, like the Bhakta definition or the IPCC glossary definition of resilience.
The SWA definition of climate-resilient WASH gets closer at an operational definition.
To speak of putting a definition into practice or making it work, as your latter two questions ask, we need to operationalise an inclusive, climate-resilient WASH definition through putting it into observable terms. To some extent, this involves asserting the magic ingredients that will make services inclusive and climate-resilient. However, this is probably impossible to do fully – after all, the WASH sector has never found the magic ingredients for sustainability (an equally amorphous concept) after talking about it for decades, although we have lots of useful principles.
The Water for Women Fund has many good resources that explore the meaning of inclusion in climate-resilient WASH. Creating an operational/practical definition that more explicitly addresses inclusion could involve synthesising lessons learned into measureable terms. I think an interesting question (maybe for another topic) is whether inclusion for climate-resilient WASH is different than “conventional” WASH or is it just the same principles?
Amita has reacted to this post.
