At the international level, the term “water security” (WS) has gained increasing attention in recent decades. At the operational level, WS is assessed using tools that define the concept using a variety of dimensions and sub-dimensions, with qualitative and quantitative indicators and parameters. The breadth of tools and concepts is an obstacle to the operationalization of the concept of water security (WS). Clearly we need a range of diverse data to evaluate water security (WS). However, there are several barriers to designing an optimal Data Gathering Strategy (DGS). Such a strategy must strike a balance between a wide range of competing and overlapping data requirements and characteristics including: resources, information, and impact. The conceptual aim of the framework can be summarised as shifting the focus of the DGS from a “data to information approach” to a “data to action approach”. The specific aims of this paper are to: identify the key issues that should be addressed in designing a Data Gathering Strategy for Water Security (DGSxWS); communicate the key issues with a clear conceptual framework; and suggest approaches and activities that could help water practitioners in dealing with the issues identified.

Over the last two decades, several datasets have been developed to assess flood risk at the global scale. In recent years, some of these datasets have become detailed enough to be informative at national scales. The use of these datasets nationally could have enormous benefits in areas lacking existing flood risk information and allow better flood management decisions and disaster response. In this study, we evaluate the usefulness of global data for assessing flood risk in five countries: Colombia, England, Ethiopia, India, and Malaysia. National flood risk assessments are carried out for each of the five countries using global datasets and methodologies. We also conduct interviews with key water experts in each country to explore what capacity there is to use these global datasets nationally. To assess national flood risk, we use 6 datasets of global flood hazard, 7 datasets of global population, and 3 different methods for calculating vulnerability that have been used in previous global studies of flood risk. We find that the datasets differ substantially at the national level, and this is reflected in the national flood risk estimates. While some global datasets could be of significant value for national flood risk management, others are either not detailed enough, or too outdated to be relevant at this scale. For the relevant global datasets to be used most effectively for national flood risk management, a country needs a functioning, institutional framework with capability to support their use and implementation.