Amman Water Intelligence

Methodology

How Amman Water Intelligence measures where development pressure and water constraints overlap across Greater Amman.

Research Framework

Eight standardized pilot locations

The project compares eight standardized Greater Amman pilot locations using identical 2 km study zones, so that development-pressure and water-risk indicators are measured on the same spatial basis at every site.

Abdoun
Khalda
Shafa Badran
Abu Nseir
Marj Al-Hamam
Airport Road
Naour
Sahab
Core Components

Three inputs, measured independently

Each pilot location is scored on three independent components before being combined into a single integrated measure.

01

Historical Development Pressure

Measures relative historical development pressure across the standardized study zones.

02

Projected Development Pressure

Measures projected development pressure across the 2020–2030 study period.

03

Underlying Water Risk

Represents the broader water-stress context surrounding each study location.

Integrated Exposure Model

Combining pressure and risk into one score

Equal weighting is used as a transparent starting rule. It does not claim that the three factors have identical real-world causal importance — it is a neutral baseline that the sensitivity tests below then stress-test.

⅓ Historical Development Pressure
+
⅓ Projected Development Pressure
+
⅓ Underlying Water Risk
=
Integrated Exposure Score
Sensitivity Testing

Testing whether the ranking depends on one weighting choice

The project tests five weighting scenarios to check whether the priority ranking is an artifact of the equal-weighting rule, or holds up under different assumptions about relative importance.

Balanced thirds
Current-oriented
Forward-oriented
Risk-oriented
Development-oriented

Shafa Badran and Abu Nseir remain the stable top-two priorities across all tested weighting scenarios.

How to Read the Score

What the Integrated Exposure Score does — and does not — tell you

This means

A higher Integrated Exposure Score means development pressure and water constraints overlap more strongly, relative to the other pilot areas.

It does NOT mean
  • The neighborhood is unsafe.
  • It will necessarily experience more water outages.
  • It has poor water quality.
  • It is a bad real-estate investment.
Model Boundaries

What this model does not do

01

Does not predict household water outages.

02

Does not measure building-level water pressure.

03

Does not measure water quality.

04

Does not replace site-level engineering or utility due diligence.

05

Is not an investment recommendation.

Methodology Flow

The analytical process, end to end

1

Standardize Locations

2

Measure Development Pressure

3

Add Water Risk

4

Integrate Scores

5

Test Sensitivity

6

Identify Priorities

Amman Water Intelligence

Methodology

How Amman Water Intelligence measures where development pressure and water constraints overlap across Greater Amman.

Research Framework

Eight standardized pilot locations

The project compares eight standardized Greater Amman pilot locations using identical 2 km study zones, so that development-pressure and water-risk indicators are measured on the same spatial basis at every site.

Abdoun
Khalda
Shafa Badran
Abu Nseir
Marj Al-Hamam
Airport Road
Naour
Sahab
Core Components

Three inputs, measured independently

Each pilot location is scored on three independent components before being combined into a single integrated measure.

01

Historical Development Pressure

Measures relative historical development pressure across the standardized study zones.

02

Projected Development Pressure

Measures projected development pressure across the 2020–2030 study period.

03

Underlying Water Risk

Represents the broader water-stress context surrounding each study location.

Integrated Exposure Model

Combining pressure and risk into one score

Equal weighting is used as a transparent starting rule. It does not claim that the three factors have identical real-world causal importance — it is a neutral baseline that the sensitivity tests below then stress-test.

⅓ Historical Development Pressure
+
⅓ Projected Development Pressure
+
⅓ Underlying Water Risk
=
Integrated Exposure Score
Sensitivity Testing

Testing whether the ranking depends on one weighting choice

The project tests five weighting scenarios to check whether the priority ranking is an artifact of the equal-weighting rule, or holds up under different assumptions about relative importance.

Balanced thirds
Current-oriented
Forward-oriented
Risk-oriented
Development-oriented

Shafa Badran and Abu Nseir remain the stable top-two priorities across all tested weighting scenarios.

How to Read the Score

What the Integrated Exposure Score does — and does not — tell you

This means

A higher Integrated Exposure Score means development pressure and water constraints overlap more strongly, relative to the other pilot areas.

It does NOT mean
  • The neighborhood is unsafe.
  • It will necessarily experience more water outages.
  • It has poor water quality.
  • It is a bad real-estate investment.
Model Boundaries

What this model does not do

01

Does not predict household water outages.

02

Does not measure building-level water pressure.

03

Does not measure water quality.

04

Does not replace site-level engineering or utility due diligence.

05

Is not an investment recommendation.

Methodology Flow

The analytical process, end to end

1

Standardize Locations

2

Measure Development Pressure

3

Add Water Risk

4

Integrate Scores

5

Test Sensitivity

6

Identify Priorities

Amman Water Intelligence

Methodology

How Amman Water Intelligence measures where development pressure and water constraints overlap across Greater Amman.

Research Framework

Eight standardized pilot locations

The project compares eight standardized Greater Amman pilot locations using identical 2 km study zones, so that development-pressure and water-risk indicators are measured on the same spatial basis at every site.

Abdoun
Khalda
Shafa Badran
Abu Nseir
Marj Al-Hamam
Airport Road
Naour
Sahab
Core Components

Three inputs, measured independently

Each pilot location is scored on three independent components before being combined into a single integrated measure.

01

Historical Development Pressure

Measures relative historical development pressure across the standardized study zones.

02

Projected Development Pressure

Measures projected development pressure across the 2020–2030 study period.

03

Underlying Water Risk

Represents the broader water-stress context surrounding each study location.

Integrated Exposure Model

Combining pressure and risk into one score

Equal weighting is used as a transparent starting rule. It does not claim that the three factors have identical real-world causal importance — it is a neutral baseline that the sensitivity tests below then stress-test.

⅓ Historical Development Pressure
+
⅓ Projected Development Pressure
+
⅓ Underlying Water Risk
=
Integrated Exposure Score
Sensitivity Testing

Testing whether the ranking depends on one weighting choice

The project tests five weighting scenarios to check whether the priority ranking is an artifact of the equal-weighting rule, or holds up under different assumptions about relative importance.

Balanced thirds
Current-oriented
Forward-oriented
Risk-oriented
Development-oriented

Shafa Badran and Abu Nseir remain the stable top-two priorities across all tested weighting scenarios.

How to Read the Score

What the Integrated Exposure Score does — and does not — tell you

This means

A higher Integrated Exposure Score means development pressure and water constraints overlap more strongly, relative to the other pilot areas.

It does NOT mean
  • The neighborhood is unsafe.
  • It will necessarily experience more water outages.
  • It has poor water quality.
  • It is a bad real-estate investment.
Model Boundaries

What this model does not do

01

Does not predict household water outages.

02

Does not measure building-level water pressure.

03

Does not measure water quality.

04

Does not replace site-level engineering or utility due diligence.

05

Is not an investment recommendation.

Methodology Flow

The analytical process, end to end

1

Standardize Locations

2

Measure Development Pressure

3

Add Water Risk

4

Integrate Scores

5

Test Sensitivity

6

Identify Priorities