Suggested Citation: White, C. (2013), Integrated Water Resources Management: What is it and why is it used?, GWF Discussion Paper 1324, Global Water Forum, Canberra, Australia. Available online at: http://www.globalwaterforum.org/2013/06/10/integrated-water-resources-management-what-is-it-and-why-is-it-used/

Integrated Water Resources Management: What is it and why is it used? Chris White URS, London Discussion Paper 1324 June 2013 This article looks at the use of the Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) framework in water management. The author looks at the successes and challenges of implementing IWRM in practice, arguing that its flexibility is both an advantage and a disadvantage.

The Global Water Forum publishes discussion papers to share the insights and knowledge contained within our online articles. The articles are contributed by experts in the field and provide: original academic research; unique, informed insights and arguments; evaluations of water policies and projects; as well as concise overviews and explanations of complex topics. We encourage our readers to engage in discussion with our contributing authors through the GWF website. Keywords: Integrated Water Resource Management, successes, challenges, flexibility In order to deal with the complexity of water

management issues, discussion over water

resources is typically separated into distinct

topics such as Economics, Water Quality, and

the Environment. In reality, however, each of

these issues are interconnected; subsidised

water prices, for example, can lead to rising

water demand which may reduce the quantity

of water in the environment thereby leading to

an increase in the concentration of pollutants

and a decline in water quality.

Due to the interrelated nature of water issues,

the use of particular economic or policy

instruments can create trade-offs. Purchasing

water access rights to secure environmental

flows, for example, may be a cost-effective

method of increasing the amount of water in

the environment, but reduced water

extractions may also negatively impact small

towns and communities dependent on

irrigated agriculture.

In order for water security to be managed

effectively, the use of economic and policy

instruments cannot be considered in isolation,

Integrated Water Resources Management: What is it and why is it used?

but rather should be considered in terms of

their wider impact on society and the

environment. Effective water security

management therefore requires planners to

take into account the triple bottom line and

evaluate policies in terms of their economic,

environmental, and social impacts. In order to

deal with this complexity and coordinate

policy effectively, it is often argued that

economic and policy instruments should be

used as part of a wider integrated water

resource management (IWRM) framework.

IWRM is a framework designed to improve

the management of water resources based on

four key principles adopted at the 1992 Dublin

Conference on Water and the Rio de Janeiro

Summit on Sustainable Development. These

principles hold that: (1) fresh water is a finite

and vulnerable resource essential to sustain

life, development, and the environment; (2)

water development and management should

be based on a participatory approach,

involving users, planners, and policy makers

at all levels; (3) women play a central part in

the provision, management, and safeguarding

of water; and (4) water has an economic value

in all its competing uses and should be

recognized as an economic good.1

IWRM is not, therefore, a prescriptive

description of how water should be managed,

but rather it is a broad framework in which

decision makers can collaboratively decide the

goals of water management and co-ordinate

the use of different instruments to achieve

them.2 Given that each country differs in

terms of history, socio-economic conditions,

cultural and political context, and

environmental characteristics, there is no

single blueprint for IWRM and it can be

adapted to resolve the problems faced in each

local context.3

As a result, the goals of IWRM vary across

countries and different weights are placed on

the importance of economic, environmental,

and social impacts: Chile, for instance,

typically emphasises the importance of

economic efficiency, whereas South Africa and

the Netherlands tend to place more emphasis

on social and environmental goals respectively.

It should not, however, be thought that there

are always trade-offs between these goals, and

a more integrated approach to water security

management can help in achieving win-win

outcomes which promote more than one goal.

Implementing a well-designed scheme for

pricing water resources, for example, can

promote economic efficiency, create

environmental benefits due to decreases in

water demand, and generate social benefits if

the funds are used to expand service provision

or are combined with subsidy schemes for

low-income households.

Integrated Water Resources Management: What is it and why is it used?

While the differences in implementation

across countries can make IWRM difficult to

define, it can be broadly characterised by a

number of key trends. Firstly, there has

tended to be a move away from command-

and-control instruments which focus on

supply-side water management, such as large-

scale water infrastructure, towards

incorporating demand side management

though the use of economic instruments. This

shift in focus has created a more flexible

approach to water management and has

encouraged the development of a variety of

innovative instruments to resolve local water

security problems.

Secondly, IWRM has led to an increased

awareness of the importance of sustainable

development and the incorporation of social

and environmental considerations into water

management.

Thirdly, IWRM has also tended to lead to a

move away from top-down, centralised

approaches to water security towards more

flexible, decentralised approaches which

involve a variety of diversified governance

structures at a local, basin, national, and

transnational level.2

Finally, under the IWRM framework there has

been increasing emphasis on stakeholder

collaboration and the involvement of local

communities in decision-making. Some of the

benefits of wider collaboration include:

incorporating specialised knowledge;

encouraging more innovative solutions to

problems due to greater diversity of

viewpoints; encouraging co-operation and

reducing the risk of conflicts over water

resources; and developing solutions which are

more open, inclusive, and democratic, thereby

generating wider support and leading to more

sustainable outcomes.4

However, the lack of a clear definition of

IWRM or a prescribed a list of instruments

that can be adopted to resolve water issues has

lead to criticism of the concept. Common

criticisms include: the lack of a clear,

prescriptive definition means that it is often

difficult to implement and schemes can have

very different results; collaboration is often

time-consuming and resource intensive; the

level of co-ordination required for large

projects may make IWRM too complex to

undertake, particularly for developing

countries which lack the necessary institutions;

and the flexibility of implementation means

that it is difficult to evaluate the performance

of IWRM itself compared to the particular

choice of instruments.2,3,5

Despite these criticisms, the flexibility of

IWRM is also an advantage in that it allows

policies to be developed for the particular local

Integrated Water Resources Management: What is it and why is it used?

challenges. Due to the complexity of water

issues within and between countries, any

policy framework with clearly defined and

prescriptive solutions is likely to struggle to be

applicable across all situations,2,3 and there is

growing evidence that implementing IWRM

can offer substantial, long-term benefits to

water security and water management.2,3

An example of where IWRM has been

successful is the Lerma-Chapala River Basin

one of worlds most water-stressed basins.

Rapid population growth combined with

industrial and agricultural development have

lead to serious imbalances between water

withdrawals and availability. Further, the

increasing competition over water resources

in the basin, combined with poor governance,

has led to over-exploitation of surface and

ground water resources, increasingly frequent

conflicts over water allocations, and

considerable levels of water pollution and soil

degradation. As a result, during the period

from 1981 to 2001, Lake Chapala lost 90% of

its natural volume and the remaining water

was left heavily contaminated.6

Recently, however, due to a move towards

IWRM and subsequent improvements in

water governance, the situation has begun to

improve: the natural capacity of the lake has

been restored; water quality is improving with

around 60 per cent of discharges eliminated;

irrigation efficiency has risen; and finance has

been secured to invest in water sanitation and

treatment programs.

The improvement in water governance is due

to reforms beginning in the 1970s which

started a move away from centralised

governance in Mexico towards IWRM. By the

early 1980s, six regional water resources

offices were set up, including the newly

created Lerma-Chapala River Basin Regional

Management agency which was given the

responsibility of gathering information and

designing a Basin Plan. Further reforms in

1992 and 2004 strengthened the

decentralisation process and set up Basin

Councils with formal powers to implement the

proposed water reallocation policies.

The Lerma-Chapala Basin Council carried out

a hydrological study of the Basin and

developed a model to evaluate the impact of

various water reallocation policies according

to economic, social, technical, political, and

environmental criteria. This model was then

used as a basis for water reform in the Basin.

The Council also encouraged extensive

collaboration with stakeholders in the Basin

and took steps to communicate their work as

transparently as possible which reduced the

level of conflict over reallocations.

Integrated Water Resources Management: What is it and why is it used?

While the move towards IWRM in the Lerma-

Chapala Basin has been a long and difficult

process, after 30 years, the benefits are

starting to be realised.

Such case studies highlight the fact that

IWRM can lead to more economically, socially,

and environmentally sustainable solutions to

complex water issues, however, it is important

to note that this will not always be the case.

IWRM based schemes can be unsuccessful5

and critical evaluation of the successes and

failures of such schemes is crucial to

understanding how water management can be

improved. As such, while people may want a

set of prescriptive solutions to resolving water

issues, in reality, complex issues require

complex solutions and one of the main

reasons for adopting IWRM may be that its

flexibility embraces and accounts for the

challenges of complexity.

References

1. 1. International Conference of Water and the Environment (ICWE) (1992), The Dublin Statement on Water and Sustainable Development, http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/hwrp/documents/english/icwedece.html. 2. Lenton, R. and M. Muller (eds.) (2009), Integrated Water Resources Management in Practice: Better Water Management for Development, Earthscan Publications, London. 3. Pahl-Wostl, C., P. Jeffrey and J. Sendzimir (2011), Adaptive and Integrated Management of Water Resources, in R.Q. Grafton and K. Hussey (eds.), Water Resources Planning and Management, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 4. Loux, J, (2011), Collaboration and Stakeholder Engagement, in R.Q. Grafton and K. Hussey (eds.), Water Resources Planning and Management, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 5. Biswas, A.K. (2008), Integrated Water Resource Management: Is it Working?, Water Resources Development, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 5-22. 6. Hidalgo, J. and H. Pena (2009), Turning Water Stress into Water Management Success: Experiences in the Lerma-Chapala River Basin, in Lenton, R. and M. Muller (eds.), Integrated Water Resources Management in Practice: Better Water Management for Development, Earthscan, London.

About the author(s)

Chris White is the Editor of the Global Water Forum. Chris read Philosophy, Politics and Economics at Oxford University; completed a Masters degree in Environmental and Resource Economics at the Australian National University; and now works as an Environmental Economist at URS in London.

About the Global Water Forum

The Global Water Forum (GWF) is an initiative of the UNESCO Chair in Water Economics and Transboundary Governance at the Australian National University. The GWF presents knowledge and insights from leading water researchers and practitioners. The contributions generate accessible and evidence-based insights towards understanding and addressing local, regional, and global water challenges. The principal objectives of the site are to: support capacity building through knowledge sharing; provide a means for informed, unbiased discussion of potentially contentious issues; and,

Integrated Water Resources Management: What is it and why is it used?

provide a means for discussion of important issues that receive less attention than they deserve. To reach these goals, the GWF seeks to: present fact and evidence-based insights; make the results of academic research freely available to those outside of academia; investigate a broad range of issues within water management; and, provide a more in-depth analysis than is commonly found in public media.

If you are interested in learning more about the GWF or wish to make a contribution, please visit the site at www.globalwaterforum.org or contact the editors at editor@globalwaterforum.org.

The views expressed in this article belong to the individual authors and do not represent the views of the Global Water Forum, the UNESCO Chair in Water Economics and Transboundary Water Governance, UNESCO, the Australian National University, or any of the institutions to which the authors are associated. Please see the Global Water Forum terms and conditions here.

Copyright 2013 Global Water Forum.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivative Works 3.0 License. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ to view a copy of the license.