In our first article for l’express (26 August 2026), we argued that the Hindu Kush Himalayan region and Mauritius share the same structural dynamics, even though they look nothing alike on a map. Our team of six regeneration experts, who met through the Regeneration Intelligence Fellowship (USA), examined five interlocking crises in the Himalayan region: water, livelihoods, governance, waste and energy.

We urged the Mauritian delegation heading to COP31 to treat these as connected problems rather than separate files. The first article closed with the view that there’s value in governance systems recognising community knowledge, redistributing decision-making power and ensuring inclusive participation in climate infrastructure and policy decisions, and that Mauritius can show a different path.

This second article expands that thinking under a focused theme of water, the built environment and livelihoods, based on the team’s new Regeneration Plan research, and ends with renewed recommendations for the COP31 delegation.

Mauritius is running out of water on a rainy island

This sounds like a contradiction, and it is a central problem we address. On 8 October 2026, Mareaux-Vacoas, the largest reservoir, was 35.7% full, against 88.6% a year earlier (Mauritius Government Portal, govmu.org). On 5 October 2026, residents of Vacoas and Phoenix blocked roads after days without tap water (l’express, 6 October 2026). The problem is rarely the sky. It is what happens to the water once it reaches the ground and the pipes.

The Himalayas show the same lesson in a harsher form. Kathmandu, the capital of Nepal, sits in an old lake bed, where rivers stay trapped and pollution builds up. Its municipal grid loses more than 40% of its water supply to leakage, and most of its sewage enters the rivers untreated. (Source: Dialogue Earth, “The Dead Rivers of Kathmandu”)

Mauritius has its own version of this. The Central Water Authority, according to assessments reported by l’express, loses 58 to 62% of treated water before it reaches a consumer, through about 1,500 km of pipes aged 50 to 80 years (l’express, June 2026). We argue that a city’s water supply is only as strong as the pipes, catchments and institutions that hold it. When those are leaking, sealed or unmanaged, every new source adds pressure to a system that is already failing, a vicious whirlpool in the making.

What the Himalayas teach us, and what does not transfer

Our regenerative plan for Kathmandu proposes three approaches. We acknowledge that they have not yet been tested or proven in Kathmandu. We humbly present them as hypotheses that follow in-depth and sound research for Mauritius to test, not as proven results.

The first is the equity guardrail. Our plan proposes a simple test for every intervention: it should proceed only if its cost per household for the lowest-income group is lower than that of the private substitute it replaces, whether that is a private tanker, a borehole or a concrete structure. Mauritius already faces this dilemma. Households that cannot afford private supply bear the cost of shortages most heavily, and a funded water project should pass this test before it is approved.

Jovin Hurry

The second is the sponge principle. Our plan treats the built environment as a water-capture system rather than a runoff accelerator. Permeable surfaces, rooftop harvesting and recharge catchments become standard requirements rather than optional extras. Mauritius can test this in new construction and in the growing developments in the north of the country.

The third is the community-held asset. Our plan argues that a water system works best when local cooperatives manage distribution, instead of leaving it to private operators who profit from scarcity. The whispered Mauritian debate over camionsciternes (tanker trucks) and tariffs raises exactly this question.

Seeking long-term, sustainable solutions and not a watered-down version

Mauritius is planning large solutions. The Marshall Water Plan, which the government presents as a long-term framework for water management, is directed largely at new supply. Cabinet approved a memorandum of understanding with Morocco on seawater desalination on 3 July 2026 (NewsMoris, citing Défi Media, 3 July 2026).

The Central Water Authority’s director general has said desalination will become a reality but is not a silver bullet, and that storage, leak reduction and wastewater reuse must come alongside it (NewsMoris, citing Défi Media, 3 July 2026).

Taniya D’silva

Now, a pipe that leaks more than half its water will leak desalinated water too. Repairing the network is a faster and cheaper source of supply than most new plants, and it should come first in the funding conversation. The government’s own nationwide restriction plan, announced on 20 April 2026 because Mare-aux-Vacoas then stood at 51% and was falling (Government Information Service, 20 April 2026), shows that restrictions can buy time but do not fix leaks.

Can the built environment be made to hold water?

Buildings and paved surfaces shed rainwater straight into drains rather than letting it soak into the ground. Our plan for Kathmandu describes the city as a runoff accelerator that needs to become a sponge. (Source: Overview of Land Use and Land Cover Change and Its Impacts on Natural Resources) Mauritius faces a version of the same problem, as urban growth and tourism development concentrate in areas where surfaces are increasingly sealed.

The tools are practical and known. Rainwater harvesting, permeable surfaces and grey-water reuse can be written into building rules for new developments, and existing buildings can be encouraged through incentives.

Our plan’s “Sponge-for-Space” idea, in which developers gain extra height only if they fund on-site water capture, is one model worth testing. A similar model that has been tested in Portland, Oregon, USA, through the Portland Stormwater Management Manual has seen success. It mandates that all new development, redevelopment or improvements creating 500 square feet or more of impervious surface must capture, filter and infiltrate rainwater on-site (Source: 2025 Stormwater Management Manual). However, the cost of such systems varies widely by building type, and we have not verified a national estimate for Mauritius. That is why the first step should be a pilot that produces the evidence.

From water scarcity to shared stewardship: paying communities to protect water resources

When water is cut, the people who feel it first are often those with the least voice.

Smallholder farmers, fishing communities and informal workers hold practical knowledge of water, yet formal systems rarely use it. Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) offer an alternative: compensating communities for protecting watersheds, restoring catchments, maintaining wetlands and supporting sustainable water management practices that benefit the wider population. Mauritius could explore a decentralised, community-led water stewardship model in which cooperatives of farmers, fishing communities and other local stakeholders are contracted and compensated for measurable ecosystem services.

Balmoi Abe

Municipalities and water utilities could provide stable, performance-linked payments for activities such as watershed restoration, catchment protection and monitoring water quality, creating livelihood opportunities while safeguarding water resources.

Kathmandu Valley has a similar PES system for water management, whereby the downstream drinking water management committee pays upstream watershed stewards to protect water sources (Source: PEStype practices and schemes in Nepal).

However, the model’s success depends on equitable benefit-sharing, secure funding and transparent mechanisms to measure ecosystem outcomes. Communities must be fairly compensated for their contributions, rather than expected to shoulder additional conservation responsibilities without adequate support.

The central opportunity is to make ecosystem protection a viable livelihood, aligning the economic interests of local communities with the long-term sustainability of Mauritius’ water systems, while ensuring that the poorest households are better served than they are now.

Keep calm and carry on linking

The above three areas form one causal chain. Leaking pipes lose water. Sealed surfaces stop rain from being stored. Households with the least capacity to adapt, such as those relying on tankers or informal supply, pay the highest price. A plan that fixes one link without the others will fail. A plan that addresses the whole chain can reduce losses, store more water and spread the costs more fairly.

Fluid thinking: why this is not just another plan

A sceptical public official might reasonably ask: Mauritius already has the Marshall Water Plan and a desalination agreement, so what does this plan for Mauritius add?

The answer lies in sequencing.

Our plan for Kathmandu proposes a clear order: prove, codify, price, scale.

Prove means testing an approach on a small scale with published data. Codify means writing it into rules once it works. Price means attaching financial value to performance, such as credits for water captured or losses avoided. Scale means rolling it out only after the first three steps are done.

The Marshall Water Plan has many of the right components, but it is not yet sequenced in this way. Desalination is a large, expensive commitment that will take years to commission, and its benefits are uncertain while losses remain high. Starting with leak reduction and local capture gives the government results it can show within a single budget cycle, and it builds the evidence needed to justify larger investments later. That is the difference we see between a list of projects and a plan that can be defended.

COP31 water tight recommendations for Mauritius

1. Link adaptation finance to measurable loss reduction. Ask that adaptation finance discussed under the climate-resilient cities and adaptation agenda be linked to a published plan to reduce water losses, with targets the public can check. The delegation should argue that each cubic metre saved is cheaper than each cubic metre desalinated, and that donors should reward verified savings.

2. Pilot a sponge incentive and rainwater capture in one district.

Propose a single-district pilot that combines rainwater harvesting, permeable surfaces and an incentive for developers who fund on-site water capture in exchange for extra building height. Choose a district with known flood and drought exposure, such as Plaines-Wilhems, so that the results are relevant.

3. Recognise local cooperatives as implementers of water resilience.

Ask COP31 partners to support a pilot PES mechanism in Mauritius that compensates upstream communities and landholders for protecting watersheds, restoring catchments and maintaining ecosystems essential to water security.

Drawing on Nepal’s experience in linking downstream water users with upstream conservation communities, the pilot could establish a transparent arrangement between water utilities, municipalities and ecosystem stewards, with predictable payments tied to measurable conservation outcomes.

Start with one priority area. Designate a civil society partner. Clarify a framework for financing, monitoring and equitable benefit-sharing. Demonstrate how investment in ecosystem protection can strengthen water resilience while creating sustainable livelihood opportunities.

Building the road to Antalya

Mauritius does not need to become a Himalayan nation to learn from the Himalayas. Kathmandu’s story is a reminder that water systems fail when they leak, when surfaces are sealed, and when the people who bear the cost of failure have no say in the fix.

Mauritius has the plans, the partners and the data. What it needs to take to Turkey is a sequence that starts with the pipes, captures the rain where it falls, and gives its people a real role in the solution. Before the next dry season arrives and evaporates whatever hope is left…