*1.2. Assessment Frameworks for Sustainable Water Resources Management*

To improve the sustainability of any WRM system, it is crucial to have an appropriate amount of different related indicators (i.e., quantitative and qualitative), metrics, and benchmarks contained within an assessment framework or index in order to help decisionmakers and concerned stakeholders determine the current level (or performance) of their SWRM and improve it accordingly, should it be underperforming [43,44]. (N.B. The terms framework or index are used interchangeably within the literature; however, in this paper, they are considered to be one and the same.) The advantage of forming an indicatorbased framework is its ability to help evaluate and elucidate multi-dimensional factors or thoughts that cannot be measured directly [45] and cannot be understood by only one component or indicator [46].

Indeed, collaboration among different stakeholders in developing a WR index is (and should always be) significant to ensure the index is acceptable [45]. By developing and using a suitable framework, all interested parties can understand the main issues that threaten sustainability in their system, and work co-operatively toward mitigating them. These issues can be simplified within the framework to a single number representing the general sustainability level of the whole WRM system. In most cases, having a quantifiable number would have a more substantial effect on the ability of the public/decision-makers to understand and therefore act in a more helpful way [47].

Furthermore, it is both beneficial and necessary to build any indicator-based framework based on a wide array of indicators [41] that have been widely vetted and endorsed and that can guide the assessment and improvement of the sustainability credentials for WRM systems [48]. Moreover, from a policy-making and management perspective, considering both water availability and access indicators is likely to be more emphasized (and therefore carry a higher weighting) for frameworks adopted in developing and water-poor countries than those in developed and water-rich countries [49]. Similarly, this would apply in countries in ASAR where appropriate "bespoke" frameworks are needed to improve or reform their WRM systems.

On the other hand, this study aims to review research published in the last two decades related to assessment frameworks for SWRM, focusing on checking to what extent they can be applicable for ASAR. Key objectives in the form of questions for the research include:


By answering these questions, it would be possible to ascertain whether a bespoke SWRM framework were needed within the context of ASAR.

The paper is divided into six sections. In Section 2, the methodology used to answer these questions is outlined. In Section 3, some general definitions of SWRM, along with criteria and related guidelines for making indicator-based frameworks are subsequently presented. In Section 4, the main elements of the indicator-based sustainability assessment framework of the WRM system are briefly illustrated. Section 5 provides the search results based on the criteria given in Section 2. These results include overviewing and analyzing the existing Sustainable Water Resources Management Assessment Framework(s) (SWRM-AF) developed since the turn of the century. A critique is provided that includes the advantages and disadvantages of each framework, followed by a brief comparative analysis. Section 6 discusses the results with a final evaluation of all frameworks included in this review to check their applicability for ASAR. Finally, conclusions are provided in Section 7, along with recommendations for future research.
