Essential Guide: Water Positive

So, what is Water Positive?

In answer to the question: What is Water Positive, Sturniolo, told Aquatech Online: “Water positivity is not a metric; it's a mindset. It means going beyond reducing water use to actively restoring and regenerating water systems. It's about giving back more than we take.”

He added: “In short, it's the shift from "do less harm" to "do net good" with water as the leading indicator of resilience.”

For Sturniolo, Water Positivity means rethinking water, moving away from seeing it as a ‘cost’ to understanding it as a source of value.

He added: “It is a strategy where companies generate more water than they consume by restoring natural cycles, improving access to safe water and sanitation, and strengthening community health and ecosystem resilience.”

Water positivity is not a metric; it's a mindset

The World Wildlife Foundation (WWF), however, has urged caution over the term Water Positive and the associated Net Positive Water. One of the reasons, as Morgan explains, is that there is no singular definition of what it is, or what it means. He told Aquatech Online: “It is a rather open term, which can be understood (or misunderstood) by anyone. Not unlike ‘sustainability’, it can be both useful and harmful (sometimes even at the same time).”

He added that, generally, it tends to fall into two categories: Water positivity as a vision (a very general aim); and Water positivity as a target (a specific metric-based approach to go beyond ‘water neutral’).

Water positive or water stewardship, what's the difference?

What is the difference between water stewardship and water positive? The terms might at first seem confusing, and there is overlap between them. Often, they are entirely linked, sometimes used interchangeably, and the outcomes of both are deemed beneficial to both company/corporation and the environment.

The Alliance for Water Stewardship defines water stewardship as ‘the use of water that is socially and culturally equitable, environmentally sustainable and economically beneficial, achieved through a stakeholder-inclusive process that includes both site- and catchment-based actions’.

The goals of water stewardship are often seen in the work of corporations in watersheds and catchments, engaging with local stakeholders, including community groups to improve environmental conditions in areas where those companies are large users of water.

Water positive on the other hand refers to a company’s attempts to return more water than it takes in the location in which it operates. As such, it is sometimes seen as one part of the wider stewardship approach. But water positive is more than simply a volume or number, it has also become a movement.

Where did the water positive movement come from?

The water positive movement first emerged in the construction industry in the 2000s. According to the Water Positive website, it emerged as the response to minimizing the use of freshwater through rainwater harvesting, forming part of the definition ‘zero impact buildings’.

Spreading to other industries, it became analogous to the more widely used ‘carbon neutral’ movement. The idea of managing water to achieve a net positive impact, i.e. give back more than you take from the environment.

Other key drivers behind the water positivity movement are the UN Sustainable Development goals, established in 2015.

Sturniolo explained: “Approximately 90 per cent of water use is embedded in the production and consumption of goods, directly linking water to SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production. This goal is about ensuring sustainable patterns of resource use.”

Water Positive turns responsible consumption into measurable progress toward global water security

He added: “Water Positive acts as a bridge between SDG 12 and SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation, which focuses on ensuring availability and sustainable management of water for all. By aligning these two goals, Water Positive turns responsible consumption into measurable progress toward global water security.”

The UN goals echo the growing social awareness of the need to conserve freshwater supplies with many countries around the world facing ongoing drought conditions, stress and scarcity, and severe climate events. This has led many corporations big and small to reconsider water use and the environmental impact of their operations.

Companies such as Meta, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and global beverage giants, such as Diageo and PepsiCo, and more, began to include water in their sustainability goals, and many set ambitious water-related targets, such as replenishment and reuse, for 2030 and beyond. Apple, for example, has recently committed to addressing water use in its supply chain.

Why do we need a Water Positive movement

As Sturniolo stated above, water was always essential, it’s just that we haven’t been trained to see it that way, especially with the dominance of carbon in the sustainability narrative.

He calls it a blind spot: “And that blind spot is precisely where the most powerful opportunity of this century emerges: building markets and models around what was once ignored. Water is not only foundational. It is the unclaimed territory of global sustainability strategy.”

Whereas the movement gained momentum from the SDG, Sturniolo said that Water Positive has moved beyond ticking sustainability boxes. He added: “The sustainability era has evolved, it’s about redesigning business models to stay viable in a climate-stressed world. Traditional indicators no longer tell the whole story.”

The rise of corporate sustainability reports have highlighted that the greatest risk to water reserves comes from the production footprint of businesses, rather than general consumption. The true difference is as much as 10 times, according to The United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO).

Do we need to raise our ambition on water, unquestionably, as we're desperately failing to meet SDG6

Sturniolo explained the importance of this statistic: “Any production system that fails to return water to nature simply breaks the equation. We’ve already depleted more than 40 per cent of our global freshwater reserves. That creates a hidden bubble in the food production market, a structural risk. If we don’t reverse it, the collapse will be irreversible.”

This, according to Sturniolo is a reason why there is a need for the Water Positive movement. “It isn’t a response. It’s a necessary reset. The new green is blue, and water is the missing link in the carbon-centered narrative.”

Morgan is not convinced that focusing on Water Positive, as distinct from stewardship, is beneficial. However, he acknowledges that there is a need for action: “Do we need to raise our ambition on water, unquestionably, as we're desperately failing to meet SDG6.”

What problems will it solve?

Rather than solving individual problems in the way a new technology might, Water Positivity addresses the blind spot Sturniolo mentioned above. Water connects the Sustainable Development Goals and a positivity mindset helps drive accountability for those goals ahead of future regulations. It also helps to add value to water by seeing it as a design element as companies begin to address their water usage.

Sturniolo highlighted the work of Amazon Web Services in the Aragón region of Spain. “Just look at the scale of investment pouring into regions like Aragón, where Amazon Web Services is deploying a vast network of hyperscale data centers powered by renewable energy and reliant on stable water supply.”

He continued: “From circular cooling systems that reduce thermal impact while supporting aquifer recharge, to urban planning that manages flood risk and enhances ecological function, water is no longer a constraint, it’s a design variable. Regenerative agriculture that restores soil moisture, or products that return more to nature than they take, are not fringe innovations. These are market signals of a transition already underway.”

What are some of the main challenges to Water Positivity?

Despite the increase in companies introducing water targets into their sustainability strategies, too many still undervalue water or underestimate what it takes to be sustainable. Or, as Sturniolo points out: “Legacy thinking and governance gaps.”

Water, in this respect, is still far behind carbon in the global consciousness. Water Positivity can, therefore, give value to water, but there are still large parts of the world that are not ready or able to take advantage of the benefits this mindset can afford.

Morgan believes that Water Positive programs are not broad enough in scope: “Many focus on operational water use, which typically represents only 10-20 per cent of total water use (supply chain being where the greatest impacts and water use sit).”

Many focus on operational water use, which typically represents only 10-20 per cent of total water use

He added: “Furthermore, ‘water positive’ often focuses on volumetric issues, ignoring major stakeholder concerns on water quality, or bigger issues of water governance and freshwater ecosystems.”

Public perception may also present a challenge, especially when it comes to corporates reporting on Water Positive metrics. A GlobeScan/WWF Future Water Agenda report found that among both public and water experts the term water positive failed to resonate. It should be noted that ‘net positive water impact’ resonated better with experts.

Another term that failed to resonate is replenish, which is used frequently in corporate water reporting. Instead, terms like water friendly, restores ecosystems and protects water proved popular.

And while perception of a term does not diminish its value in terms of impact and importance, it makes it more challenging for companies to engage the public and communities in which they operate.

How are companies incorporating Water Positivity?

One of the benefits of the Water Positive movement is that it has led to direct, practical action, as Morgan explained: “Water positivity has led to a growth in funding for nature-based solutions, and that is a good example of how it can have benefits. Coca-Cola’s efforts to engage in replenish work (which tends to link to water positivity) has restored wetlands and done great things for species and people and business alike.”

As an example of what being Water Positive means for a business or company, Sturniolo shared with Aquatech Online how Aqua Positive has approached its own journey.

“We didn’t just embrace water positivity, we operationalised it. We brought together a top-tier interdisciplinary team in sustainability, water stewardship, finance, and tech architecture to build the most advanced ESG platform on the market. It measures integrated environmental footprints and translates water impact into business value, generating auditable reports aligned with global standards.”

It measures integrated environmental footprints and translates water impact into business value

He continued: “Our algorithm validates additionality, tracks outcomes across entire supply chains, and ensures alignment with key regulatory frameworks like Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), and Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD).”

Before explaining: “It also incorporates a proprietary model, validated by SCS Global Services, which quantifies each project’s contribution to the SDGs based on its connection to water. This enables us to measure, simulate, and optimise impact across all 17 Goals.”

It also changed the way the company understood ROI. It was no longer seen as a purely financial output, but instead as a ‘systems input that reshapes how value is created and distributed. The mindset aspect of Water Positive led to regeneration being embraced as a strategy that integrated water, carbon, and biodiversity into a unified equation of impact.

What does the future hold for Water Positivity?

Water Positivity has a number of advantages for future-focused companies. The global green and sustainability tech market is projected to grow by 23 per cent annually to reach nearly €73 billion by 2032, according to research conducted by Global Market Insights. But, as Sturniolo points out, market growth won’t be distributed evenly.

“Only companies with credible, verifiable sustainability strategies will capture the upside,” he said. “In the age of transparency, accountability is not optional. It’s the baseline. Consider these data-driven hooks:

• The World Bank estimates every $1 (€0.88) invested in WASH (Water, Sanitation and Hygiene) yields $4 (€3.52) in economic return.
• Water-related disasters accounted for 74 per cent of all natural disasters between 2001 and 2018, according to the UN.
• Supply chain disruptions from water scarcity are projected to cost global businesses over €264 billion annually by 2030 (CDP).

While Morgan acknowledged that many companies are embracing the term he wonders whether it will “stick around and grow robust”, or whether it will fade “as many other terms have”, perhaps running the risk of being seen as greenwashing.

Conclusion: Is Water Positivity here to stay?

As with any emerging term or movement, there are both benefits and challenges to the term Water Positive. There is no doubt that the movement has gained significant support and momentum, and that the mindset involved in Water Positivity has led to positive action.

However, it can be difficult at times to distinguish Water Positivity from stewardship, especially, where action naturally extends into collaboration and into watersheds and across communities. Stewardship is more established, with standards like AWS and SDC, but Water Positivity certainly has momentum behind it, and can help drive measurable, actionable and aligned corporate action as part of the wider stewardship and UN sustainability goals.