Integrated Water Resources Management

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 12

Integrated Water Resources Management: Theoretical Concepts, Basis, Responsibilities,

and Challenges of IWRM

Introduction

Water is constantly in motion in our planet, passing from one state to another, and from one
location to another, which makes its rational planning and management a very complex and
difficult task under the best of circumstances (Biswas, 2004). Water may be everywhere, but its
use has always been constrained in terms of availability, quantity, and quality. Population increase
in cities with accelerating economic activities has been increasing water demand, energy
production, and food, creating further pressures on the water resources (Setegn and Donoso, 2015).
These factors of pressure are a source of conflicts that can vary significantly from one region to
another or among season or even within a country. In addition, other drivers that put pressure on
water availability include globalization of world economy, climate change, land use, demography,
and urbanization. All these drivers have caused demand for water to increase drastically over the
past century. The world population tripled during the twentieth century, while water withdrawals
increased by a factor of seven (GWP, 2000a). It is estimated that the world’s population will
increase by about three billion people by 2050. Much of this growth will take place in developing
or middle-income countries like Brazil, South Africa, China, and India, with all challenges that
carry in terms of investment needs for water supply and water treatment. Other developing
countries already suffer water scarcity problems and lack the infrastructure and institutions needed
to provide water services and manage water conflicts. Conflicts also exist among various water
use sectors and societies, urban and rural water users, hydropower demand, environment, and
irrigated agriculture, between upstream and downstream areas, and even between the same water
sectors such as agriculture. Current and past approaches of water resources management have been
proving inadequate to solve water conflicts and/or even for the global water challenges. These
approaches are mostly sectoral management, where each sector (domestic use, agriculture,
industry, sanitation, environmental protection, etc.) has been managed separately, with limited or
inexistent coordination among sectors. These approaches lead to the fragmented and
uncoordinated development of water resources. Thereby, integrated water resources management
(IWRM) has appeared as a way of addressing local and global water problems to obtain a
sustainable water management.

1|Page
Mistaken Approaches to Water Resources Management

Water resources management (WRM) has been subjected over many years to an inadequate
approach, considering the major challenges already foreseen for all sectors (domestic use,
agriculture, industry, environmental protection, etc.). In most cases, these sectors presented
management without a relation to each other, thus completely independent. This approach has
resulted in a fragmented and uncoordinated development of water resources and has generated
conflicts in many parts of the world. Water must be thought across the various sectoral boundaries,
recognizing the interdependencies over the use of water in these sectors. As water becomes scarcer,
it becomes increasingly inefficient to manage water without recognizing sectoral
interdependencies, and even considering priority uses, conflicts can become difficult to solve (Xie,
2006). Central governments, over the years, have adopted top-down approaches, centrally without
prior consultation with water users or society. Such approaches dominate the processes of water
resources management in many countries throughout the world and had questionable effectiveness.
Central governments emphasized increasing supply relative to demand management, leading to an
inefficient development project. The low efficiency and quality of water supply services result in
a vicious circle where dissatisfied users refuse to pay water charges, limiting the ability of these
service providers to maintain infrastructure effectively causing a decline in quality of service. Poor
service quality in turn exacerbates poor productivity of water and leads to the depletion of aquifers
and pollution of water bodies. Artificially low water prices fail to encourage conservation and
efficiency and allow wasteful practices and inefficient operations to continue. When water
resources management started to be considered, supply management has been predominant.
Disregarding demand management as a priority, it has led to supply management to cause negative
externalities, increasing the opportunity cost of water to unsustainable levels. The growth of
activities that require a lot of water, allied with the increase of the concentration of populations in
cities, put pressure on already scarce water resources. As a result, new water sources need to be
obtained, and larger reservoirs need to be built, resulting in greater ecological and social
consequences. The problem of water scarcity is often the result of a crisis of management or
governance rather than to consider only an imbalance between input and output of water into the
physical system. Failure to meet social and environmental demands, the ineffectively regulated
pollutant load, the inefficiency of water service providers, and the fall of allocation of scarce water
resources are examples of this crisis of governance of water resources. Only a change in the way

2|Page
water resources are managed can prevent an even worse water crisis. The shortcomings mentioned
above with traditional WRM approaches triggered the development of an IWRM framework that
has emerged as a means of addressing global water problems and working toward a sustainable
future for water management (Xie, 2006).

Definition of Integrated Water Resources Management

Certainly, to improve the water resources management process, there is recognition of the need to
implement a more holistic approach to water management than has been practiced in the past.
However, there is no consensus on the definition of IWRM and what implies the implementation
of an IWRM approach (Bateman and Rancier, 2012). Some few members of the water profession
started to realize during the 1980s that the water resources management throughout the world is
not as good as they appeared. This feeling intensified during the 1990s when many in the
profession began to appreciate that the water problems have become multidimensional,
multisectoral, and multiregional and filled with multi-interests, multi-agendas, and multicauses,
which can be resolved only through a proper multiinstitutional and multi-stakeholder coordination
(Biswas, 2004). An international organization dedicated to promoting sustainable management of
water resources, the Global Water Partnership, defined the term integrated water resources
management (IWRM) as “a process which promotes the coordinated development and
management of water, land and related resources, in order to maximize the resultant economic and
social welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems”
(GWP, 2000b). In a survey about IWRM of more than 600 professionals in the United States, it
was described as “a process that strives to balance regional economic growth while achieving wise
environmental stewardship by encouraging the participation of seemingly disparate interests”
(Bourget, 2006). The position statement of the American Water Resources Association (AWRA)
(Bateman and Rancier, 2012) identifies IWRM as “The coordinated planning, development,
protection, and management of water, land, and related resources in a manner that fosters
sustainable economic activity, improves or sustains environmental quality, ensures public health
and safety, and provides for the sustainability of communities and ecosystems.” Based on results
from research during a series of regional conferences, the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
defined IWRM as “IWRM aims to develop and manage water, land, and related resources, while

3|Page
considering multiple viewpoints of how water should be managed (i.e. planned, designed and
constructed, managed, evaluated, and regulated). It is a goal-directed process for controlling the
development and use of river, lake, ocean, wetland, and other water assets in ways that integrate
and balance stakeholder interests, objectives, and desired outcomes across levels of governance
and water sectors for the sustainable use of the earth’s resources” (USACE, 2010).

The IWRM shouldn’t be seen as an end but as a means to achieve three strategic targets:

• Efficiency in the use of water and other related natural resources.

• Equity in the allocation of water resources among different socioeconomic groups.

• Social, economic, and environmental sustainability to protect water resources and associated
ecosystems

IWRM at the Policy Level

Water: Scarcity or Mismanagement?

Most of water managers throughout the world know that water scarcity results from a crisis of
governance. The lack of water policies or even inadequate water management sometimes results
in tragic effects on poor populations around the world. In seeking to implement IWRM, it is
necessary to recognize some key criteria that consider social, economic, and natural conditions.

The Watershed as Environmental Spatial Units

Watersheds are spatial units of varied dimensions where the water resources are organized as a
function of the relations between the geomorphological structure and the climatic conditions.
IWRM considers the watersheds as the basic water management unit to be a conjunction of
environmental factors. Watersheds are understood as basic cells of environmental analysis, where
the systemic and integrated view of the environment is implicit. The environmental components
such as rocks, relief, soils, water, vegetation, and climate could no longer be understood separately,
but it would be fundamental to recognize their interfaces and interconnections to understand the
environmental dynamics and propose a sustainable planning and management of the ecosystems.
The international agreements and processes relative to climate change; desertification;
biodiversity; arid, semiarid, and humid zones; etc. could be the basis for the introduction of new
environmental action policies; but their efficient implementation requires that they be viewed in

4|Page
the context of the sustainable management and regeneration of all-natural resources. It follows
from the systemic conception that water should not be managed without considering its close
interrelations with the other components of the environment, e.g., climate, soils, geology,
vegetation, relief, and anthropic action, that changes the working conditions of natural systems,
producing changes that can directly affect the quality and quantity of water available in a basin.

Social and Institutional Aspects: Participation and Decentralization

To ensure the sustainability of water resources, IWRM underlines the importance of involving all
stakeholders within watershed: the governmental authorities, public and private institutions, public
and private sectors, and civil society, with a special focus on women and marginalized groups.
Decentralized participation is understood as an instrument to enable and legitimize public policies
that intervene in the water management system. In principle, the participation of different segments
of civil society, representing interests of different water users and citizens, from the elaboration to
the implementation of plans and projects, would tend to generate more equitable, effective, and
legitimate decisions, plans, actions, and projects. The structure of this framework should
correspond to local sociocultural, ecological, and economic conditions. Local participation should
be backed by close cooperation at higher institutional levels: between the agencies, departments,
and ministries that administer water, agriculture, the environment, industries, etc. In this way
participation and decentralization can maintain the priorities of the majority over some isolated
interests, even economically preponderant.

The Economic Aspect

How can rentability be increased without penalizing the poor? International organizations such as
the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) propose to privatize the water sector,
arguing that this would eliminate monopolies and abusive prices. The issue is controversial
however if on the one hand the privatization could give rise to new forms of power and
dependencies linked to a service that the population cannot live without it and on the other hand
the lack of control of this trade for social control may jeopardize an essential human right, that is,
the access to drinking water by the poorest population. Some ideas have been formulated: free
provision of the quantity of water for living (30–50 liters per person per day according to the World
Health Organization) and adjusting water rates to income, a price that would be inversely
proportional to the distance people must cover to meet their water needs. This subject is of great

5|Page
complexity, and much must be discussed before deciding on the marketing of water. Local and
regional aspects should be considered in this discussion.

The Dublin Principles

In 1992, the International Conference on Water and Environment (ICWE) held in Dublin, Ireland,
more than 500 participants representing 100 countries and 80 international and nongovernmental
organizations, according to the level of policy of WRM, recommended four principles to guide
global effort management and development (these four principles were adapted from Cap-Net
(2010), GWP (2017), and Xie (2006))

Principle 1: “Ecological” – Fresh water is a finite and vulnerable resource, essential to sustain
life, development, and the environment.

Water sustains life in all its forms, being a necessary resource for different purposes, functions,
and services. It is for this reason that holistic and integrated water management must consider the
demands and threats on resources (in this case not only water but everything related to it).
Integrated management involves not only the management of natural resources but also involves
coordination between different human activities that need water for different uses, linking social
and economic development with protection of natural systems. In addition, it is necessary to
determine the different uses of the soil and identify those that produce waste that can contaminate
the water. It should be stressed that the creation of a political system sensitive to water issues
requires the coordination of policies and institutions at all levels (from national ministries to local
authorities or the community). There is also a need for mechanisms to ensure that decision-makers
consider the costs associated with water use when making domestic production and consumption
decisions. The development of an institutional framework covering all aspects mentioned above
and capable of integrating human, economic, social, and political resources presents a considerable
challenge. This principle recognizes the watershed or river basin as the most appropriate unit for
water governance and calls for coordination across the range of human activities that use and affect
water in a given river basin. IWRM approaches incorporate this principle into its emphasis on
integration between all concerned water sectors.

Principle 2: “Institutional” – The development and management of water resources must be


participatory, involving at all levels those who plan, use, and decide.

6|Page
We are all stakeholders when it comes to water use. Effective participation in water resources
management only happens when everyone is part of the decision-making process. It is to raise
awareness of water issues among policymakers and the public. Management decisions should be
taken at the lowest appropriate level. This can happen at the local level as communities come
together to make decisions about water supply, planning, management, and water use.
Participation may be at the regional level with the democratic representation of people elected by
stakeholder groups. In any case, the type of participation in decision-making in water management
will depend on the magnitude of the project or program, the technical knowledge, the necessary
investments, and the economic and political system concerned. This principle advocates increased
accountability of management institutions and full consultation and involvement of users in the
planning and implementation of water projects. The capacity of certain disadvantaged groups may
need to be enhanced through training and targeted pro-poor development policies for full
participation.

Principle 3: “Gender” – Women play a central role in water supply, management, and
safeguarding.

This principle emphasizes the important synergy that exists between gender equity and sustainable
water management. It is well known that in many countries women play a key role in collecting
and safeguarding water, for various purposes, mainly for domestic and agricultural purposes.
However, in many societies, women are excluded from water management decisions. To consider
gender as a crosscutting objective in the development of water policy requires recognition of the
role of women, their ideas, and their interests and needs, in the same way that men’s views are
recognized. Development policies, particularly water management, should support equal rights
and responsibilities between women and men. It is for this reason that gender must be considered
when developing or updating the legal framework to ensure that policies, programs, and projects
address different experiences and situations between women and men. Equitable participation in
social and political aspects means that women have the same right to express their needs and
interests as well as their vision of society, shaping the decisions that affect their lives. One way to
enhance the capacity for equitable participation is through community organizations and related
institutions. IWRM includes an emphasis on empowering women in its focus on participatory
management and capacity building.

7|Page
Principle 4: “Economic” – Water has an economic value in all its competing uses and should be
recognized as an economic and social good.

Water has a value as an economic good as well as a social good. Many failures of water resources
management in the past may be related to the nonrecognition of water with economic value.
Having access to safe drinking water and sanitation at an affordable price is a basic right of all
human beings, and this should be recognized by everyone. The nonobservance or recognition that
water has economic value has led to inappropriate uses of this resource and harmful to the
environment with very high water waste by stakeholders. Water management as an economic good
is an important means of achieving efficient and equitable use, as well as encouraging the
conservation and protection of water resources. Value and price are two distinct concepts. The
value of water for alternative uses is important for the rational allocation of water as a scarce
resource, either by regulatory or economic means. On the other hand, the price of water is related
to the application of an economic instrument to achieve multiple objectives: supporting
disadvantaged groups, influencing water conservation, increasing and stimulating the efficiency
of water use and demand management, and securing costs and consumers willing to pay additional
investments in water services. Managing water as an economic good is also a key to achieving
financial sustainability of water service provision, by making sure that water is priced at levels that
ensure full cost recovery. IWRM emphasizes on economic and financial sustainability.

IWRM Tools

There is no specific model to be adopted for the implementation of the IWRM due to the high
degree of complexity and specificity existing in the water management of each country. Thus, the
Global Water Partnership has created an IWRM ToolBox designed to support the development
and application of IWRM in many situations. These tools will help in the adequacy of the
implementation of the IWRM according to the specific situation analyzed and according to their
needs. The tools fall into three overarching pillars: (a) enabling environment, (b) institutional roles,
and (c) management instruments. Each pillar has several subcategories, which, in turn, consist of
several tools, with 62 tools in total, but below is shown the first two levels of each pillar (GWP
2017).

8|Page
(a) Enabling environment: This pillar is subdivided into three subcategories that must be
established to achieve a sustainable balance between the social, economic, and
environmental needs of water:

(a1) Policies that define national and regional objectives incorporating the concepts of integration,
decentralization, participation, and sustainability of the IWRM, to establish water use, protection,
and conservation goals

(a2) Legislative framework to translate water policy into law covering water ownership, licenses,
and water use rights and the legal status of water user groups.

(a3) Funding/incentives: Financing and incentive structures are needed to fund capital-intensive
water projects, support water service delivery, and provide other public goods such as flood control
and preparedness for period of water scarcity or severe drought. This source of funding can be
resources from the public sector, private finance, and joint public-private partnership. The enabling
environment facilitates all stakeholders to play their respective roles in the sustainable and
management of water resources.

(b) Institutional arrangements. This pillar consists of four subcategories:

(b1) Regulation and compliance: Constituted by the set of agencies and governmental and private
institutions for the execution of the policy, through an organizational structure to be adopted
aiming at integrated, decentralized, and participatory management. These organizations need to
have well-defined rights and responsibilities and allow integration among them.

(b2) Water supply and sanitation services: Institutions of water supply and sanitation services can
be public, private, or cooperatively owned and managed entities but can also result from
collaborations between these sectors, such as public sector water utilities, private sector water
service providers, and community-based water supply and management organizations.

(b3) Coordination and facilitation: The main role of the coordination and facilitation bodies is to
articulate and harmonize the actions and visions of the many entities involved in water
management by putting the actors involved around the same table and guiding them toward a
collective goal and vision.

9|Page
(b4) Building institutional capacity: All actors that are an integral part of the water resources
management process must be capacitated and trained in the skills and instruments of effective
water management and in accordance with IWRM principles. Human resources development
through training, education, and provision of information is a key dimension of capacity building

(b) Management instruments. Once the proper enabling environment and institutions were
implemented and have been working, these instruments address specific management
problems adopting detailed methods that enable decision-makers to make rational and
informed choices between alternative actions when it comes to water management. These
choices should be based on agreed policies, available resources, environmental impacts,
and the social and economic consequences. Quantitative and qualitative methods are being
combined with a knowledge of economics, hydrology, hydraulics, environ mental
sciences, sociology, and other disciplines pertinent to the problem in question, for defining
and evaluating alternative water management plans and implementation schemes.

(c1) Understanding water endowments: Management of water resources requires understanding


resources and needs, demands, and supplies, identifying and listing priority areas, monitoring and
evaluating systems, and involving data collection and analysis to inform decision-making with a
holistic view of water resources and its interaction with societal use in a country or region.

(c2) Assessment instruments: Help to understand the connections between water resources and
their multiple users as well as to calculate the impacts of uncertain events or policy measures on
the resource and its users. The aspects considered are risk and vulnerability, social structures and
effects, ecosystems, environment, and economics.

(c3) Modeling and decision-making: Sustainable management of water resource requires a good
understanding of the distribution and quantities of that resource. Thus, information is very
important, but it can be hard to obtain and to manage. A good management of water resources
requires a huge and reliable amount of spatially and temporally varying data from many different
sectors: the quality and quantity of water resources; the geography of the area; land use, soil, and
local geology; and the human communities. Analytical tools are needed to interpret the data in a
way that makes it usable for decision makers. Models as geographic information systems (GIS)
and decision support systems (DSS) do exactly that.

10 | P a g e
(c4) Planning for IWRM: IWRM plans are one of the key pillars of integrated water management,
identify actions and a set of management instruments that are embedded in a wider framework of
policies, legislation, financing structures, and capable institutions with clearly defined roles and
should involve social participation in its building process.

(c5) Efficiency in water management: Water demand management and water supply management
constitute an important instrument of IWRM. Efficient use of water, improving supply and demand
efficiency, increasing of water reuse as well subsidies, and the regulation to encourage technology
improvements are important strategies in IWRM implementation/practice.

(c6) Communication means exchanging information, and this instrument is fundamental to the
success in IWRM. Communication allows different sec tors that use water resources to share
information and collaborate on management issues. Communication allows involvement of
stakeholders in the decision-making and implementation process. All parties involved should
maintain effective communication in relation to water management.

(c7) Economic instruments: Are one way to promote changing the behavior of water users toward
more sustainable practices. Economic incentives involve the use of prices and other market-based
measures to improve the way water is managed and used. They provide incentives to rational water
use, efficiently and in a manner consistent with the public interest. They have both positive and
negative effects, rewarding users that recognize the true value of water and penalizing profligate
and antisocial use.

(c8) Social inclusion of the most deprived social groups, promotion public awareness for water
issues, stakeholder participation in water planning and operating decisions, teaching more
sustainable water use practices for children and youth in school, and externalization of water
footprint or virtual water are important tools for social change and a necessary step in achieving
water security.

The IWRM tools shown above illustrate the multifaceted approach by IWRM and how hard it is
to put the Dublin Principles into practice. The implementation of the IWRM at the national,
regional, and local level requires application of some or many of these tools in a manner
complementary and simultaneous application of several other tools. Before the implementation of
tools, they should be carefully evaluated and selected those which fit each context. It is advisable

11 | P a g e
to monitor and evaluate changes as tools are adopted to prevent unintended or undesirable
consequences.

12 | P a g e

You might also like