X-RAY OF REGIONAL PRESSURE 
Quantitative data compiled in the technical report provides compelling information on the magnitude of the challenges the region faces:

• Until May 2025, more than 39 thousand active water concessions were registered in the peninsula, with the state of Yucatan concentrating most of them.
• Between 2019 and 2023, the annual forest loss (deforestation) was alarming: Campeche lost more than 29 thousand hectares per year, Yucatan more than 27 thousand, and Quintana Roo more than 14 thousand.
• The total population of the three states went from about 2.39 million in 1990 to an estimated 5.57 million by 2025, doubling the pressure on water extraction.
• The average cost per cubic meter of water has increased significantly, from between five and eight pesos in 2003 to between 12 and 20 pesos in 2023.
• Hurricanes play a dual role: while they cause disasters, they are vital for recharge, as observed with Tropical Storm Cristobal in 2020, which raised the water table by five meters in just six days.

A COLLABORATIVE AND TRANSDISCIPLINARY APPROACH
The development of the APY Report Card was not an isolated process, but the result of a collective effort that brought together 89 key actors (32 from academia, 30 from government, 21 civil society organizations, and six from the private sector). The methodology used was based on the framework proposed by Costanzo et al. (2017), adapted by LANRESC to include a field validation phase to ensure that data was representative. This process was structured in six fundamental technical steps that allowed the transition from geographical delimitation to the effective communication of the results.

The process began with Step 0, which consisted of the delimitation and regionalization of the study area, ensuring that the aquifer recharge, flow, and discharge zones were included. Subsequently, in Step 1, the essential values that need to be protected (such as water quality and cultural heritage) and the threats that degrade them (such as agrochemical pollution and uncontrolled urbanization) were identified. In Step 2, specific indicators were selected, looking for measurable metrics relevant to the system. Step 3 involved the technical challenge of defining scientific or legal thresholds for each indicator, establishing the boundaries between a “Good,” “Fair,” or “Poor” condition. In Step 4, data was standardized on a scale from zero to 100 to allow calculation of final scores and grades. Finally, Step 5 focused on communicating results through visual formats and extensive technical reports for public dissemination.

REGIONALIZATION: THE TERRITORY’S DIVERSITY
To avoid simplistic diagnoses based on overall averages, the technical team divided the APY into nine study subregions. This subdivision was based on the Planning Units proposed in the Regional Water Program 2021-2024 of the National Water Commission (CONAGUA, 2022). The regions identified reflect the hydrogeological and socio-economic particularities of the peninsula: 

• Yucatan: includes northern Yucatan (with the strategic Cenotes Ring), eastern Yucatan (characterized by fractures and cenotes), and southern Yucatan (area of high permeability in the Ticul mountain range). 
• Quintana Roo: includes northern Quintana Roo (with high tourist pressure and the Holbox fracture), central Quintana Roo (connected to Sian Ka’an), and southern Quintana Roo (linked to the Rio Hondo region). 
• Campeche: includes Norte Campeche (urban pressure and Los Petenes Reserve), Sur Campeche (network of hydrological basins), and Candelaria Campeche (critical recharge area in the southwest). 

In addition, a 10 kilometer coastal and marine area of influence was established to monitor the interaction between continental freshwater discharges and the health of reef ecosystems. 

SOCIO-ECOSYSTEM DIAGNOSIS
The final APY assessment yielded an overall rating of “C. Regular,” indicating a moderate socio-environmental health condition that requires immediate attention to avoid irreversible deterioration. This rating considered seven thematic clusters [Box 1].

For each thematic axis, indicators were identified from a transdisciplinary approach; 23 in total, as shown in the box. Each was analyzed individually. The results of the analysis are presented below, organized into four groups. 

1. Hydrological Resources 
This group evaluated the availability and quality of water and obtained worrying nuances. While the “Average Annual Groundwater Availability” was rated “good” (due to current withdrawal not exceeding 40 percent of natural availability in many areas), “Percentage of Treated Wastewater” received a “poor” rating, evidencing a critical deficit in sanitation infrastructure. Water quality and vulnerability to saline intrusion remained at “regular” levels, reflecting the gradual degradation of the resource in coastal and urban areas. 

2. Biodiversity and Ecosystems 
The indicators on this axis show a system under tension. Knowledge about freshwater fish species and stygobionts (cave fauna) was rated as “regular signaling the need for greater scientific monitoring efforts. On the other hand, the coverage of natural vegetation and wetlands also obtained a “regular” grade, impacted by the change in land use and the fragmentation of the landscape. 

3. Climate Change and Economy 
Vulnerability to climate change was rated as “good” in terms of overall adaptive capacity, but variability in maximum temperatures and precipitation patterns show “regular” trends that could compromise future recharge. In the economic sphere, the “Poverty Situation” was described as “bad,” since in many municipalities, more than 60 percent of the population faces social deprivations that limit their access to basic water and sanitation services. 

4. Water governance and culture  
Legislation updating and the level of chlorination of drinking water are at a “regular” level. However, environmental education faces a greater challenge: both the number of “Spaces for Water Culture” in operation and the potential population served by these centers received a “bad” rating, indicating a lack of communication between institutional management and citizen awareness.