## 3 Water Security Assessment Framework
### Normalization and Range of Water Security Indicators  
Various sub-indicators are used worldwide for water security assessments, and various indicators for water security assessments are collected from a variety of sources (Table 6). For the effective evaluation of water security, a normalization method with a range of 0 to 1 was applied to convert the results of each component of different units to a common scale and comparable units. For indicators that can be expressed as some distorted results, the range and scale of each indicator were set to be dimensionless in the range between 1 and 5. Table 6 below shows the scores of the scale water security index of 1 to 5 for each variable. The Water Security Index (WSI) was calculated to fall into the range from 1 to 5 using Equation (1) through the result values obtained using sub-indicators for each core area. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Water** & & & & & & & \\
**Security** & **Indicators** & **1.** & **2.** & **3.** & **4.** & **5.** & **Ref.** \\
**Core Area** & & & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{\begin{tabular}{} \end{tabular} } & Improved drinking water & \multirow{2}{*}{\(<\)60} & \multirow{2}{*}{60–70} & \multirow{2}{*}{70–80} & \multirow{2}{*}{80–90} & \multirow{2}{*}{90–100} & Authors \\  & supply rate & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & Renewable water & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & resources per person & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & Sewerage rate & \(<\)60 & 60–70 & 70–80 & 80–90 & 90–100 & Authors \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & Diarhend diseases & \(<\)25 & 25–50 & 50–75 & 75–100 & 100–300 & Authors \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{\begin{tabular}{} \end{tabular} } & Value of industrial water & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.0\)–\(0.2\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.2\)–\(0.4\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.4\)–\(0.6\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.6\)–\(0.8\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.8\)–\(1.0\)} & Authors \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & consumption & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & Value of agricultural & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & energy consumption & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & GDP (gross domestic & \(<\)8300 & 8300–19,900 & 19,900–33,190 & 33,190–54,910 & \(>\)54,910 & Authors \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & product) & & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{\begin{tabular}{} \end{tabular} } & Drought frequency & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.0\)–\(0.2\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.2\)–\(0.4\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.4\)–\(0.6\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.6\)–\(0.8\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.8\)–\(1.0\)} & Authors \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & Areas vulnerable to drought & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & Flood frequency & \(0\)–\(1\) & \(1\)–\(2\) & \(2\)–\(3\) & \(3\)–\(4\) & \(4\)–\(5\) & AQUASTAT \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7} water-related & Areas vulnerable to flood & \(0.0\)–\(0.2\) & \(0.2\)–\(0.4\) & \(0.4\)–\(0.6\) & \(0.6\)–\(0.8\) & \(0.8\)–\(1.0\) & Authors \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & Irrigation area ratio & \(0.0\)–\(0.2\) & \(0.2\)–\(0.4\) & \(0.4\)–\(0.6\) & \(0.6\)–\(0.8\) & \(0.8\)–\(1.0\) & Authors \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & Flood control ability & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{\
\begin{tabular}{} \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{River Health Index} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.78\)–\(1.00\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.64\)–\(0.78\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.46\)–\(0.64\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.29\)–\(0.46\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.0\)–\(0.29\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.0\)–\(0.29\)} \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{} \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\(-\)2.5\(\sim\)–\(1.5\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(-\)1.5\(\sim\)–\(0.5\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(-\)0.5–\(0.5\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(0.5\)–\(1.5\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(1.5\)–\(2.5\)} & Authors \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{5-7}  & & & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Thresholds of each class for water security indicators.