**3. Institutional Roles**

Traditionally, water resources institutions have faced the challenge of inefficient workflows, low capacity, poor coordination across sectors and governance levels, poor integration with other kinds of institutions (e.g., academia, private sector), limited transparency, and inadequate alacrity in learning from global good practices. New technologies are enabling improvements in information interoperability [63] and institutional infrastructure that can be developed at reasonable cost (e.g., ecosystems of computers, tablets, and smartphones and related Apps; shared audio/videoconferencing, shared communication, and touchscreen access resources; dynamic physical-computer modeling approaches [e.g., [69]). These can be co-located in clusters such as water centers that allow for co-location of representatives from related organizations that need to work together (e.g., the National Water Center in the United States) to develop and use shared products (e.g., the National Water Model [70]). These approaches could be adopted in many countries and transboundary basins where shared personnel and tools could 'disrupt' traditional 'siloed' approaches.

New technologies are also fundamentally changing the notion of capacity-building, with services, automation, and interfaces reducing the need for laborious and time-consuming issues related to access restrictions, digitization, formats, fragmented desktop analysis, and dissemination on a case-by-case basis, all with only a few people having access to even view the data and products. New more automated systems enable wider access and a different kind of capacity development, avoiding the need for reinventing similar systems at great cost and with limited new functionality. These systems can increase levels of collaboration between agencies, through shared data, analytics, and visualization services. All stakeholders can leverage the learning and collaboration systems supported by the internet and high-speed connectivity, in order to learn rapidly from and contribute to global good practices. New technologies can help redesign stakeholder consultation, climate hazard insurance, payments for ecosystem services, by connecting stakeholders and by accessing new data analytics. Different institutions have different roles in this evolving world (Table 2).


**Table 2.** Institutional roles in the disruption process.

Water sector institutions have both management and governance roles [71] and both these roles can be enhanced through technology. For example, in the case of groundwater management in large areas, improved monitoring using in-situ sensors (e.g., for extraction, use, quality, recharge), Earth observations (e.g., for evapotranspiration estimates and gravity-based water equivalent changes) and improved models, could improve resource management through regulating groundwater pumping (volumes and timing) or determining bore spacings. Modern communication including for automated collection of fines, could improve governance to promote resource management goals of equity, efficiency, conservation, and sustainability. New technologies could be particularly useful in transboundary waters contexts, with multiple options now available for estimating resource extent and condition, and other key water resources variables.

A key constraint in reaching the potential the various technologies is data availability. This could be overcome by wider government adoption of an open data approach. For example, the California Open and Transparent Water Data Act requires the state Department of Water Resources to create, operate, and maintain an open-access state-wide integrated water data platform [72].

#### **4. Benefits, Risks, and Barriers to Adoption**

The technologies discussed herein offer important technical and governance benefits compared to traditional approaches. They can increase robustness in decision making, as decisions are more likely to be based on more complete information (e.g., from weather and other apps, portals, decision support systems). They can increase the timeliness and accuracy of real-time and near real-time decisions through greater use of automation and rapid and reliable communications. They can reduce the costs of basin planning and management (e.g., lower traditional hydromet monitoring costs, reduced redundancy, and increased economies of scale from online services). They benefit end-users through better information and decision-support and enhanced mechanisms to connect stakeholders and global good practice (e.g., through social media and packaged curated content). They provide enhance trust and cooperation across sectors and regions (including transboundary) and can support more democratic decision-making through open and equal access to data and information.

While disruptive technologies (even while often benefitting from centralized platforms and standards) are encouraging a move away from top-down centralized decision processes, their adoption does not guarantee this positive shift. There are many instances of the deployment of disruptive technologies in top-down or centralized decision making without adequate stakeholder consultation. Understanding the governance context for disruptive technology deployment is therefore critical, as is explicit consideration of how this context determines whether new technologies enhance or hinder processes of stakeholder participation and empowerment [73,74].

In addition to these potential negative consequences, there are significant barriers to widespread and rapid uptake of these technologies. Adoption requires a considerable range of new technical skills, many of which are not standard in university water management curricula. In addition to awareness-building, there is a need to improve the sector skill-base through training, recruiting/ insourcing appropriate cutting-edge technology skills, and building partnerships. As with any new technology, the need to invest in new infrastructure has budget implications, and while costs for many of the technologies are rapidly reducing, governments may be reluctant to invest in what may be perceived as non-standard equipment. As these technologies are evolving rapidly, there will be pressure to update and upgrade more frequently than in the past. With the accelerated risk of obsolescence, it will be important to move to new adaptable cloud-based approaches that allow rapid upgrading of systems. This highlights the need for changed mindsets to help water resource managers and decision makers step out of the 'comfort zone' to recognize this new world of rapidly evolving technologies.

As well as barriers to adoption, there are some significant risks. Effective management of privacy and cybersecurity risks requires good institutional policies, frameworks, and systems [71]. There are implications for professional employment, since as with any technological change, large numbers of employees will increasingly find there is diminishing need for traditional, manual jobs as these become

automated (e.g., gauge readers, analysts, desktop modelers, translators, etc.). Employers will need to recognize these trends and institute retraining or retrenchment/skill upgrading/replacement programs for effective workforce management. There is a risk that the digital divide will become greater—with many countries, and communities within countries, unable to access the disruptions that seem to be changing life for the better in other places and for other people. This will require increased emphasis on low-cost or free open public-domain systems and the ability to create and use more global platforms.
