# Explaining and Measuring Social-Ecological Pathways: The Case of Global Changes and Water Security
## 3 SES Evolution and Measurement: Insights from the Case of Water Security  
In Section 2, we propose a model to understand the dynamics of SES, which is crucial in a context of global transformations. In this section, we elucidate key methodological limitations that prevent reliable tests of the institutional and cognitive model of change of SES and knowledge accumulation. We put forward recommendations to tackle these methodological issues. We use the case of water security as an illustration of SES measurement. Water security makes for a good illustration given its high-priority in the political agenda, its fundamental social-ecological essence, and its multi-level and multi-uses perspective. Limitations to General Knowledge about Water Security: Measurement Heterogeneity and Time-Limited Analyses  
Over the past decade, water security has emerged as a new currency of the international water community [59]. It can broadly be seen as an extension of sustainable development thinking to water resources with the focus on the quantity and quality of water supply for societal and ecological needs [3]. There is an extensive and growing body of scholarship examining the adoption of and application of water security in a wide array of journals and from a diverse set of authors across diverse geographic regions and scales around the world [60; 61]. In bridging both the environmental and social spheres, water security can be seen as a tool for the adaptive management of an institutional water regime and contributes to improved governance [2]. However, knowledge accumulation is limited in that area of research. Figure 3: An institutional and cognitive model of change for SES. We argue that there are three primary factors that limit knowledge accumulation around water security and, thereby, hinder its ability to serve as a tool for adaptive management of SESs: large diversity of methodology, case specificity, and cross-sectional studies. The two first limitations prevent comparability and thus the external validity of findings. The former is a matter of internal validity: dynamic mechanisms are not properly observed or tested, which prevents inferential and causal claims. The first limitation that prevents knowledge accumulation around water security is heterogeneity of measurement of water security. There has been an explosion of assessments of water security. The analysis of the 124 empirically-based studies recorded in Scopus between 2010 and 2015 highlights that indicators to operationalize water security vary considerably around the world [60]. The authors report the use of 15 sub-indicators, and that the majority of the studies use only two of them: sufficient quantity (91% of the studies) and acceptable quality (51% of the studies). This large methodological diversity is also characterized by a diversity of conceptual frameworks, which serves to limit comparison. Indeed, they are generally characterized by a high subjectivity which can reduce the relevance of their normative use [2]. For instance, water security scores of Vietnam, Thailand, the Philippines, and Kyrgyzstan are contradictory in the literature, being good or weak depending on the study [2]. This heterogeneity is consequential considering the current evidence-based policy-making paradigm. What does \"evidence-based\" mean regarding such an extensive range of appraisal? In addition, it actively prevents the growth of a common scientific knowledge because opposing measures of common observation units are shared with the same label--without mentioning this diversity. The second limitation is case specificity in terms of how we study and understand water security. There is a growing body of place-based research that investigates how water security is adopted, engaged, and implemented in various environmental and social contexts around the world. Twenty-one percent of peer-reviewed studies published between 2010 and 2015 dealing with water security are place-based cases [60].