In your view, what exactly makes the Global Programme so special and significant?
The programme brings together water, sanitation and hygiene work in 13 countries with a clear focus: environmental and climate protection are systematically integrated into the planning of humanitarian measures, rather than being treated as an afterthought. Together with ASB, we have established a global framework for this – namely, an approach to environmental mainstreaming, tailored training and joint learning formats. These have been adapted in each country to suit the specific context, risks and measures. The significance lies in the fact that projects address immediate needs whilst simultaneously strengthening communities’ resilience to the impacts of climate change.
Why are (more) funds needed for programmes of this kind?
Climate risks such as droughts, floods and extreme weather particularly affect communities that already face difficulties in accessing clean water and sanitation. Without targeted funding, climate adaptation in humanitarian work quickly remains an additional task that is the first to be cut when budgets are tight. More funding is therefore needed for training and capacity-building within partner organisations, for regional learning initiatives, for climate risk assessments in new projects, and for ensuring that lessons learnt are sustained beyond the end of the project. Our experience also shows that climate protection and adaptation can often be combined with improvements that are necessary anyway. This does not automatically make them more expensive, but it does require them to be planned for from the outset.
What has been your personal highlight over the last three years?
My personal highlight was the regional workshops. Seeing colleagues from different countries share their experiences and observe concrete measures on the ground during field visits was particularly valuable to me. The discussions went far beyond mere presentations. I was also particularly moved by the growing understanding that a climate-sensitive approach does not have to be an additional burden.
Is there anyone who has particularly stayed in your memory?
During a project visit to Nicaragua, I met a young woman who told me that, for the first time in her life, she had running water right at her front door. She spoke about it with such joy that this conversation has stayed with me ever since. This was made possible by the community itself: the people there worked together for eleven days straight, digging the pipes from the well to the water tank and from there to the individual households. The project provided the materials; the labour came from the community. To me, this story shows just how much of an impact can be achieved when technology and collective commitment come together.
What are your hopes for the project regions you’ve been supporting?
I hope that the communities in the project regions will be able to face climate change with growing resilience. This includes ensuring that water supply and sanitation systems are planned and maintained in such a way that they continue to function even during droughts, heavy rainfall and floods. It is equally important that knowledge and responsibility remain within the communities: The strengthened disaster response committees and the jointly developed emergency plans should remain active even after the project ends, be regularly reviewed and adapted to new climate risks. And I hope that the partner organisations will continue to develop the approaches to climate protection and adaptation independently and incorporate them into their own work, so that climate resilience becomes a natural part of water management and disaster preparedness.
