The Trans-Path-Plan International Project. Interview with Anamika Barua

Marisa Mazari: Could you describe the Water Transformation Pathway Planning (Trans-Path-Plan https://trans-path-plan.com/output) for UNAM Inter-nacional readers?
Anamika Barua: This project, the Trans-Path-Plan, or Water Transformation Pathways Planning, is a very large international research initiative, funded under the DUPC3 program of the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs. And the best thing about this project is that it brings together a global consortium of academic institutions, non-governmental organizations, and several policy partners to explore how we can support long-term inclusive and sustainable transformations in the water sector. The core of the project is about how we can make projects and the water sector more inclusive and sustainable by developing tools, approaches, and planning frameworks that help societies navigate complex water challenges.

This is particularly relevant because now, in the context of climate-stress, climate change, and resources-stress, water that seems to be a local resource has very strong transboundary dynamics. So that is what the Trans-Path-Plan project is trying to do: to come up with much more inclusive and sustainable ways of managing water resources across many different continents.

Trans Path Plan Project Map.

 Water Transformation Pathways Planning

MM: What is the main objective of the international project?
AB: The main objective of this project is to develop and support what we call transformational pathways, e. g. structured ways of moving from current systems. If you look at the way water resources are managed across the world today, it seems to be very unsustainable. So, how can we move from the current unsustainable system to a more inclusive and sustainable one? This is what we call transformation pathways. More specifically, we aim to:

• Develop practical public policy and planning tools for decision-makers, making processes more inclusive and participatory. 
• Work with different stakeholders to strengthen their capacities in the face of new challenges and uncertainties, especially in the water sector. 
• Connect science with real-world practice, with the aim of using the knowledge generated and achieving a real impact in the water sector. 

IN MEXICO, UNAM LEADS RESEARCH ON URBAN WETLANDS, FOCUSING ON RESILIENCE, LIVELIHOODS, AND ECO-URBAN INTERACTIONS

Nile River Basin Node

 Fredrick Mugira. Water Transformation Pathways Planning

Carlos Maza: In which countries is it being implemented and how is this global work carried out?
AB: This is one of the project’s main strengths: its global and well-balanced nature. We have institutions from both the Global South and the Global North, with more than 20 partners involved, including local collaborators. For example:

• In India, the project is led by the Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, where I come from, which also coordinates much of the work in the Brahmaputra River Basin. 
• In the Netherlands, IHE Delft provides key expertise in water management policy and interdisciplinary research. 
• In Mexico, UNAM leads research on urban wetlands, focusing on resilience, livelihoods, and urban ecological interactions. 
• In Kenya, institutions such as Egerton University and Kaimosi Friends University College participate, working on wetland systems with a transboundary and community-based management approach. 
• Vietnam also participates through the Institute for Circular Economy Development, which leads work on circular water use, agriculture, and sustainability in the Mekong Delta. 
• In the Nile Basin, organizations such as the Nile Basin Capacity Building Network and InfoNile contribute. Both play an important role in bridging the gap between science and the real-world context, and in re-framing water narratives. 
• In Sudan, the University of Khartoum participated as a key partner; however, due to the political situation in the country, the project was not able to continue.

Mekong Delta, Viernam Node.

 Water Transformation Pathways Planning, Nodo Vietnam

CM: It seems that the project focuses on regions with high biodiversity and on issues related to global health. Is this an objective you had planned?
AB: Yes. One of the reasons we have a larger number of partners in the Global South is that water challenges go beyond technical solutions. It is not only about efficiency, but also about rethinking how water is governed, accessed, and valued. A key component is equity and justice. In many regions access to water is unequal: some communities face severe scarcity while others have more secure access. For this reason, we aim to ensure fair and inclusive access, taking into account inequalities related to class, gender, and geography.

That is why the Global South plays an important role in our study. For example, in India, Kenya, and Mexico, we are working to develop adaptive and flexible approaches—solutions that can be adjusted to different contexts.

Brahmaputra River Basin, India and Bangladesh Node.

 Water Transformation Pathways Planning

MM: As the main researcher and project leader, how do you envision the evolution of the project since 2022, considering the different perspectives of the various nodes?
AB: That’s a very interesting question, because each node addresses a different component of water systems: agriculture, transboundary contexts, or wetlands. The project has evolved in both an organic and a structured way:

• Initial phase: During the first year and a half, the emphasis was on developing a deep understanding of the problem. We worked very closely with key stakeholders, local communities, and policy makers. The first annual workshop took place at UNAM, bringing together all teams to present the identified problems. It was a shared space to discuss and define the next steps. 
• Second phase: We focused on co-designing and testing interventions through participatory methods, exploring possible pathways grounded in real contexts. The challenge was to engage communities in identifying together ways to reduce these problems. The second workshop was held in India. 
• Current phase: We are now focused on learning, reflecting, and scaling results. We will meet mid-year in Kenya, in a kind of summer-school setting. The idea is to share experiences, methods, and lessons learned so they can be applied in other water-related contexts. 

The project is not only about delivering results within five years, but also about building long-term capacities.

Transformación de sistemas agrícolas, Nodo Viernam

 Water Transformation Pathways Planning

CM: How do you organize your everyday work on the project?
AB: We have a very interesting setup. At the project kickoff meeting in the Netherlands during the initial phase, the main challenges were the different time zones we are working across and the different administrative systems. As a result, it was decided that we would have a monthly meeting, scheduled at the most coordinated time possible. The meeting is recorded and a summary is shared afterwards. The goal is to stay engaged with each other’s projects. We also implemented a series of webinars, where teams have up to 45 minutes to present what they have been working on. 

In addition, we have a PhD and Postdoctoral Forum, where only early-career researchers participate. In each monthly meeting, they report back on what they have discussed and what they want to share.

CM: How is community participation involved?
AB: Webinars are open so that communities can join, and they have also been invited to present. For example, during field visits—such as the UNAM workshop—we went with the team to meet stakeholders in the wetland and held direct conversations with them. Since this is a trans-disciplinary project that goes beyond academic disciplines, we work with non-academic stakeholders such as policy makers, local communities, and practitioners. They participate in problem identification and in shaping policy perspectives.

Wetlands in the Wadden Sea, Netherlands Node

 Water Transformation Pathways Planning

MM: So, this is an interdisciplinary and trans-disciplinary research approach?
AB: Absolutely. When we talk about transboundary research, it allows us to connect science, public policy, and society. At the same time, we come from different areas of knowledge—some from the social sciences and others from the natural sciences—which brings in an interdisciplinary dimension. We are all addressing the same problem, water, but from different perspectives. So, the level of understanding is interdisciplinary, and that is also where trans-disciplinary work comes in.

CM: Sometimes the dialogue between academia and those who make decisions may not be very fluid. How has this dialogue with authorities been within the project?
AB: Indeed, it is not very fluid, and there are challenges in getting them involved. To a large extent, this is because the work we do does not produce immediately measurable results. These are long-term processes, whereas policy makers often look for short-term benefits. It has helped to involve them in certain activities, such as workshops, consultation meetings, or presentations where we share the progress of our work. In addition, we reach out to them directly to share knowledge and what we are developing within the project. This has been an important channel of communication.

In particular, I can tell you about the Brahmaputra case, in which I am involved. After two years of emphasizing the importance of the project and inviting authorities to participate, we recently received confirmation from some ministries that are willing to take part in our upcoming workshop. The project is planned for almost five years; however, if we could have an extension of at least two or three more years, we could achieve much stronger results, given the progress that is currently being made.

MM: Regarding the difficulties of coordinating a consortium of diverse institutions across four continents, with cultural, logistical differences and also different ways of doing science, what do you consider to be the main challenges?
AB: We have faced these three types of challenges—logistical, cultural, and scientific—especially because this is an interdisciplinary team. 

• First, there are the logistical challenges I mentioned earlier, related to multiple time zones and different administrative systems. Even now, we are still adapting to them. However, what is interesting is that there has always been a shared understanding: what works in a simple or straightforward way in one institution cannot necessarily be replicated in the same way in another. In addition, we have several members from the Global South consortium, where administrative and financial systems tend to be more hierarchical and require more processes and validations. This can sometimes make things more difficult. It may not be as complex for some institutions, such as IHE Delft, but what is important is that there is patience and flexibility among everyone, understanding that the work will get done, even if it takes more time.
• Regarding cultural differences, I actually do not see them as a challenge, but as a great richness. It has been very interesting to collaborate with consortium members from different parts of the world. During monthly meetings and in-person workshops, we have learned a great deal from one another. For example, in my case, it was the first time I worked with colleagues from Mexico, and when I visited the country, it was very enriching to experience its culture and every-day life. I believe the same happened when other colleagues visited India—perhaps the same happened to you, Marisa. In fact, I personally think that at the end of the project we should write something about this cultural exchange that has been made possible through collaboration.
• Finally, regarding scientific challenges, these arise from the need to integrate diverse disciplines and perspectives. The project includes economists, hydrologists, social scientists, policy experts, among others. This diversity is very valuable, but it also requires a conscious effort to respect each discipline. Rather than imposing one over another, it is essential to create spaces where all can express themselves. That is why we implemented the webinar series, so that each team has more opportunities to present their work and so that we can all better understand the different areas. In that sense, I would say that, overall, it has been a very enriching experience.

Brahmaputra River Basin, India and Bangladesh Node. 

 Water Transformation Pathways Planning

AT THE CASE STUDY LEVEL, UNAM LEADS THE WORK ON THE WETLAND SYSTEM IN MEXICO, PARTICULARLY ON URBAN WETLANDS

MM: What role has UNAM played in the international consortium?
AB: UNAM plays a very important, multidimensional role within this consortium, both at the case study level and at a broader methodological and conceptual level. UNAM was heavily involved in the development of the proposal from the very beginning, particularly because we had a strong component on transformation pathways and transformative change [see box]. This was something new for many institutions, including IIT Guwahati. For this reason, I believe UNAM played a significant and important role from the moment we began building the idea and developing the proposal.

Then, of course, at the case study level, UNAM leads the work on the wetland system in Mexico, particularly on urban wetlands, which is also a highly complex socio-ecological landscape. There have been major changes: urban expansion, livelihood transformation, and ecological degradation. In this context, UNAM’s role is to work closely with local communities and stakeholders to understand these challenges and co-develop pathways toward more resilient wetland management.

Delta del Mekong, Nodo Vietnam.

 Water Transformation Pathways Planning

At the same time, the findings from UNAM’s work are also replicable and scalable in other wetlands, particularly in the Global South. If one looks at the problems identified in the wetlands studied by UNAM, they are very similar to those observed in Kenya and India.

So, I believe this is UNAM’s main scientific contribution: the methods used and the strong trans-disciplinary approach that integrates ecology, society, and urban systems. I would say UNAM has helped strengthen the conceptual and methodological foundation of the entire project.

AT THE CASE STUDY LEVEL, UNAM LEADS THE WORK ON THE WETLAND SYSTEM IN MEXICO, PARTICULARLY ON URBAN WETLANDS

CM: Speaking of the similarities you mentioned in Mexico, Kenia, and India, do you think that the water problems faced by each country and each community are similar, or are you finding very different problems in each country?
AB: There is an underlying problem that is similar in the sense that there is fragmented, non-inclusive governance, and an approach that prioritizes water use for economic growth rather than understanding its ecological relevance. In that sense, there are similarities.

Trans Path Plan group at the workshop held in C.U. and Xochimilco, June 2023.

 Water Transformation Pathways Planning, Nodo México

However, what changes is who is involved and the scale of the problem. The problem is similar, but the scale and depth vary. In some places, we find a higher level of understanding and better capacity—even among policymakers—to recognize these problems, although not necessarily to act on them, but at least to acknowledge them. In contrast, there are places that even lack recognition; that is, it is not even considered an issue that should be discussed. Therefore, there are different levels of intensity of the problem, but in general the underlying issue is similar.

In this sense, one of the most interesting outcomes of the project has been a policy brief that was recently published and jointly developed by three countries, integrating three different types of policies. This allowed us to clearly show both similarities and differences. This has been possible thanks to the project.

MM: Anamika, I think the experience of the field visits has been incredible for the project.
AB: Absolutely. I think it was a very good idea to identify different sites and not concentrate everything in a single place. The annual workshops and the associated field visits have been key. One of the insights is that we all work in our own contexts, in our own familiar fields. But when someone working in another part of the world comes to your field site and observes your reality, they bring new perspectives and great diversity, which has enriched each case study in the project. Moreover, field visits bring us much closer to the culture of the place we are visiting. Normally, what happens is that you go from the hotel to the conference and then back to your room at night without really experiencing the place. But in field visits it is different.

I remember very clearly when we went to the wetland in Mexico: we also tried local food, which was prepared there, and we could see how what we were eating was cooked. I think field visits have been a very important component that has brought us much closer as a group, to the point that now we feel we would like to write another project together and not break the relationship we have built. That is how I would describe it, Marisa: a very valuable and interesting field experience.

MM: And another thing is that the scale of each project is different. For example, the Brahmaputra is a huge river related to the Himalayas, crossing two countries, and it is enormous.
AB: That is true. The scales are very different. In fact, we asked ourselves during the proposal development and when we presented our first report after the kickoff meeting: How are we going to integrate all of this if it is so different? At the scale of a transboundary basin, a very local site, or even between two states… So how do we do it? At that moment, we discussed it and also felt that the idea was not to bring everything into a single solution, because each problem is so different and complex that it is not possible to merge multiple scales and contexts into one single solution. So the idea is: Can we use the concept of transformation, or transformation pathways, across multiple scales, multiple contexts, and diverse environments? I think that is exactly the main contribution of the Trans-Path-Plan project.

MM: It has been very interesting to hear how you connect the whole project. Each country does what they consider best, and everyone is open to listening to what others are doing. It has been a very interesting project and we have learned a lot.
CM: About the culmination of the project, it is scheduled to close in 2027 but, what happens after that? Is there a possibility of continuing into another phase?
AB: Yes. Leon Hermans, co-principal investigator of the project, and I, have had some meetings. We are trying to find out whether by March 2027 there will be additional funding from DUPC. We understand that there may be some funds available, and in that case Leon and I believe we will try to apply for at least a one-year extension. Within the team, we are also looking for calls for proposals, because we already have a significant amount of data and a strong consortium. The intention is to apply jointly.

---