In recent years, the escalating frequency of droughts due to climate change has made the prospect of more frequent droughts increasingly tangible. Effective water management during these periods is paramount, as it involves balancing water demand with limited supply. Water distribution models are instrumental in this regard, aiding decision-makers in preparing for and mitigating the impacts of drought and water scarcity.

This study aims to investigate how water distribution models align with the interests of key stakeholders, particularly during droughts. Using the Quick Water Allocation Scan Tool (QWAST) by Deltares as a case study, the research explores how water is allocated during droughts in the Netherlands. Through literature review and stakeholder interviews, the study examines the values underlying stakeholders' water demands and their perspectives on water-related issues.

Four main sectors with distinct water demands are identified: agriculture, inland shipping, drinking water, and nature conservation. While efforts are made to balance water demand across these sectors, challenges arise during droughts when each stakeholder seeks to protect its interests. Despite the expectation of value conflicts, stakeholders generally acknowledge the need for balance.

However, closer examination reveals challenges in water allocation during droughts, particularly regarding the adequacy of QWAST. The tool primarily focuses on surface water, overlooking groundwater, which is crucial during droughts. Each sector has specific water quality and quantity requirements, leading to a complex set of claims and challenges in water allocation.

While stakeholders share overlapping values, QWAST is considered incomplete in addressing drought management and water distribution effectively. Stakeholders question its relevance as a water allocation tool, especially considering its limited coverage of groundwater. Instead, there's a call to prioritize groundwater management directly, particularly during drought situations.

Recognizing the disparity in perspectives, the study recommends integrating economic considerations and policy implications into QWAST. By quantifying the impact of drought on sectors, the tool's value for stakeholders can be enhanced. Additionally, initiating comprehensive discussions on water allocation, covering both surface and groundwater, is suggested to reach a consensus on addressing water scarcity effectively.

In conclusion, while water distribution models like QWAST offer valuable insights, they fall short in addressing the complexities of drought management and water allocation, particularly regarding groundwater. Integrating economic perspectives and policy considerations can enhance the effectiveness of such models in guiding decision-making during periods of water scarcity.