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 operationalisation 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 proposed framework aims at filling the existing gaps, not by providing a strict procedure, but instead acting as a “compass”: five interfaces between data and context are identified to orient practitioners towards an optimal DGS. 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,” therefore stressing the importance of reaching key stakeholders with information. 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.

Addressing water use efficiency in the Middle East is challenging due to the geopolitical complexity, climatic conditions and a variety of managerial issues. Groundwater is the dominant water resource for Palestinians, while aquifers are shared with their neighbours. We assessed in this study the efficiency of the agricultural water use in Jericho, which we defined as the Water Use System (WUS), and its impact on the main source, the Eastern Aquifer Basin (EAB), using the Sustainable Efficiency (Sefficiency) method. The assessment considered the objectives’ difference between the farmers in the region and the water managers. As Sefficiency requires, the analysis also considered in addition to the quantities of the different water path types within our WUS, their quality and beneficial weights. The results highlighted efficiency improvement potentials, a substantial number of unreported abstractions and an impact of the use of chemical substances on the main source. In addition, through hypothesizing four scenarios, we demonstrated that: 1. Improving the quality of returns has a great positive impact. 2. Increasing water abstractions is not beneficial if it is not linked to an increase in yield production. 3. Precipitation rates can influence water use efficiency. 4. More careful treatment of the unwanted plants and a selection of high socio-economic value crops would enhance Sefficiency.