Principles of

Water Resources Management

Pieter van der Zaag

Delft, November 2020

 Principles of
Water Resources Management
Concepts and definitions

Pieter van der Zaag

Table of contents

Concepts and definitions 1

1. The water cycle 1
2. Three characteristics that make water special 2
3. The uses and value of water 3
4. Integrated water resources management 6
5. Policy principles 9
6. Sustainability of water resources 11
7. Historical developments: towards IWRM 13
8. Outstanding issues of debate 20
9. Exercises 22
10. References 23
Irrigators repairing a canal in Mexico
Principles of Water Resources
Management - Concepts and definitions

1 The water cycle

The annual water cycle from rainfall to runoff is a complex system where several
processes (infiltration, surface runoff, recharge, seepage, re-infiltration, moisture
recycling) are interconnected and interdependent with only one direction of flow:
downstream. A catchment is therefore one single system and more than the sum of a large
number of subsystems (Figure 1).

Figure 1: The water cycle (Pallett, 1997: 20)

Our water use is embedded in the hydrological system. It is therefore important that we
consider the hydrological system and locate our water use in it.

The hydrological system is the source of water. Whereas water is finite, it is also
renewable through the water cycle. The hydrological system generates the water that we
need for drinking and other domestic use, for agricultural production (both rainfed and
irrigated), for industrial production, for recreation, for maintaining the environment, etc.

1
The hydrological system also receives return flows from human water use. This can be in
a form not often recognised, namely as water vapour from transpiration of crops and
evaporation from natural and man-made lakes (so-called moisture feedback). “Grey”
return flows normally are more conspicuous, such as sewage water from cities and
industries that flow back into rivers. Such flows may also percolate into aquifers, often
carrying with it pollutants (e.g. from irrigation). In heavily committed catchment areas,
downstream users may depend on return flows as the source of their water.

Water use therefore influences the flow regime and has impacts downstream, both in
terms of water quantity and water quality. My water use always implies “looking
upstream” in order to assess water availability, and “looking downstream” in order to
assess possible third party effects of my activity. Most people, however, forget the last
part and tend to look only in the upstream direction, concerned as they are with securing
the supply of water… (Figure 2)

my
upstream water downstream
use

Figure 2: Everybody lives downstream..., and looks upstream

2 Three characteristics that make water special

Water has at least three important attributes with a bearing on management:

• Fresh water is vital to sustain life, for which there is no substitute. This means that
water has a (high) value to its users.

• Although water is a renewable resource, it is practically speaking finite. Many uses of

water are therefore subtractible, meaning that the use by somebody may preclude the
use by somebody else.

• Water is a fugitive resource. It is therefore difficult to assess the (variations in) stock
and flow of the resource, and to define the boundaries of the resource. This complicates
the planning and monitoring of withdrawals as well as the exclusion of those not
entitled to abstract water. Its fugitive nature makes it also more costly to harness,
requiring the construction of reservoirs, for example.

The vital nature of water gives it characteristics of a public good. Its finite nature confers
to it properties of a private good, as it can be privately appropriated and enjoyed. The
fugitive nature of water, and the resulting high costs of exclusion, confers to it properties
of a common pool resource.

Water resources management aims to reconcile these various attributes of water. This is
obviously not a simple task. The property regime and management arrangements of a
water resources system are therefore often complex.

2
It should be noted that there is no other natural resource with the same combination of
these three characteristics (Table 1)! Water resources management aims to reconcile these
various attributes of water. This is obviously not a simple task. The property regime and
management arrangements of a water resources system are therefore often complex.

Table 1: Aspects of water and how they apply to other goods (after Savenije, 2002)
Vital, no substitute Finite, scarce Fugitive
Air + +
Land + +
Water + + +
Fuel + +
Food + +
...

3 The uses and value of water

Water use

There are a large number of types of

water use. Among these are:
• Rainfed agriculture
• Irrigation
• Domestic use in urban centres
and in rural areas
• Livestock
• Industrial and commercial use
• Institutions (e.g. schools,
hospitals, government buildings,
sports facilities etc.)
• Waste and wastewater disposal
• Cooling (e.g. for thermal power
generation)
• Hydropower
• Navigation
• Recreation
• Fisheries
• The environment (wildlife, nature
conservation etc.)

Figure 3: Water use in Southern Africa in 1995

and 2020 (Pallett, 1997:38)

3
Demand for, and use of water

Demand for water is the amount of water required at a certain point. The use of water
refers to the actual amount reaching that point.

We can distinguish withdrawal uses and non-withdrawal (such as navigation, recreation,

waste water disposal by dilution) uses; as well as consumptive and non-consumptive uses.
Consumptive use is the portion of the water withdrawn that is no longer available for
further use because of evaporation, transpiration, incorporation in manufactured products
and crops, use by human beings and livestock, or pollution.

The terms “consumption”, “use” and “demand” are often confused. The amount of water
actually reaching the point where it is required will often differ from the amount required.
Only a portion of the water used is actually consumed, i.e. lost from the water resource
system. Return flows from a city, for example, may amount to as much as 20-40% of the
amount of raw water abstracted. Return flows from irrigated fields may involve similar
fractions of return flows. In both cases the water quality of these return flows may make
them unfit for re-use without further treatment or dilution.

A similar confusion exists when talking about water losses. It depends on the scale
whether water is considered a loss or not. At the global scale, no water is ever lost. At the
scale of an irrigation scheme, a water distribution efficiency of 60% indeed means that
slightly less than half of the water is “lost”, i.e. does not reach its intended destination
(namely the roots of the plants). Part of this water, however, may return to the river and
be available to a downstream user. At the scale of the catchment, therefore, it is the net
consumptive use, i.e. the transpiration of crops (60% in this example) plus the evaporation
part of the “water losses” that can be considered really lost (Figure 4)!

100.0

72.0

35.0
7.0 44.0

35.0
7.0 16.0

35.0
7.0 3.2
water demand = 35.0
irr. efficiency = 60% 16.0
return flows = 50% of losses 3.2

Figure 4: A cascade of inefficient irrigators; what is the total basin efficiency?

4
While the total available freshwater is limited (finite), demand grows. Hence the pressure
on our water resources increases. If we also consider the possible implications of climate
change, namely an increase in the variability of particular drought and flood events, the
usable part of the water may actually decrease, further increasing the pressure on, and
competition for, water. Hence the importance of the field of water resources management.

The value of water

The various uses of water in the different sectors of an economy add value to these sectors.
Some sectors may use little water but contribute significantly to the gross national product
(GNP) of an economy (see Table 2). Other sectors may use a lot of water but contribute
relatively little to that economy. The added value of some uses of water is difficult, if not
impossible to measure. Consider for instance the domestic use of water: how to quantify
the value of an adequate water supply to this sector? And what is the value of water left
in rivers in order to satisfy environmental water requirements?

Table 2: Contribution of various sectors in the economy of Namibia to Gross National

Product (GNP), and the amount of water each sector uses (Pallett, 1997: 102)
Sector Water use Contribution to GNP
(Mm3 yr-1) (%) (%)
Irrigation 107 43.0 3
Livestock 63 25.3 8
Domestic 63 25.3 27
Mining 8 3.2 16
Industry & Commerce 7 2.8 42
Tourism 1 0.4 4

Total 249 100.0 100

The damage to an economy by water shortage may be immense. It is well known, for
instance, that a positive correlation exists between the Zimbabwe stock exchange index
and rainfall in Zimbabwe. The drought of 1991/92 had a huge negative impact on the
Zimbabwean economy (Box 1).

Box 1: The impact of drought in Zimbabwe

During the drought of 1991/92, Zimbabwe’s agriculture production fell by 40% and 50% of its
population had to be given relief food and emergency water supplies, through massive deep
drilling programmes, since many rural boreholes and wells dried up. Urban water supplies were
severely limited with unprecedented rationing. Electricity generation at Kariba fell by 15%
causing severe load shedding. As a result Zimbabwe’s GDP (Gross Domestic Product) fell by
11%.

The value, and the pricing, of water is a hotly debated issue. Often, the focus is on the
value, and price, of a specific water service, such as urban water supply. Although being
part of one and the same hydrological cycle, the value of water differs, depending when
and how it occurs. Whereas rainfall is generally considered to be a free commodity, of all
types of water it has the highest value. This is because rainfall represents the starting point
of a long path through the hydrological cycle (infiltration, recharge of groundwater,

5
transpiration, moisture recycling, surface runoff, seepage, re-infiltration) (Hoekstra et al.,
2001). Rainfall therefore has many opportunities for use and re-use: in rainfed agriculture,
irrigation, for urban and industrial use, environmental services etc.

Water flowing in rivers has a lower value than rainfall. But also this “blue” water has
different values, depending on when it occurs. Water flowing during the dry season (the
base flow resulting from groundwater seepage) has a relatively high value, because it is
a fairly dependable resource just when demand for it is highest. In contrast, peak flows
during the rainy season have a lower value, although these peaks provide many important
services, such as recharging aquifers, water pulses essential for ecosystems and filling of
reservoirs for later use. The highest peak flows occur as destructive floods and have a
negative value.

Generally, water can provide different types of value, including adding value to the
economy, adding value to livelihoods and communities, and adding value to the
environment. Thus, the value of water has different dimensions, including, but not limited
to, the economic value, the social value, the cultural value and the ecological value. These
different types of value cannot easily be compared as they are expressed in different
metrics, and some may be difficult or impossible to quantify. But, as the saying goes, “not
everything that counts can be counted.”

4 Integrated water resources management

There is growing awareness that comprehensive water resources management is needed,
because:
• fresh water resources are limited;
• those limited fresh water resources are becoming more and more polluted, rendering
them unfit for human consumption and also unfit to sustain the ecosystem;
• those limited fresh water resources have to be divided amongst the competing needs
and demands in a society
• many citizens do not as yet have access to sufficient and safe fresh water resources
• it is increasingly realised that there is a huge potential to increase crop production and
achieve food security through more efficient use of rainfall through improved soil and
water conservation and harvesting techniques
• structures to control water (such as dams and dikes) may often have undesirable
consequences on the environment
• there is an intimate relationship between groundwater and surface water, between
coastal water and fresh water, etc. Regulating one system and not the others may not
achieve the desired results.

Hence, engineering, economic, social, ecological and legal aspects need to be considered,
as well as quantitative and qualitative aspects, and supply and demand. Moreover, also
the ‘management cycle’ (planning, monitoring, operation and maintenance, etc.) needs to
be consistent.

Integrated water resources management, then, seeks to manage the water resources in a
comprehensive and holistic way. It therefore has to consider the water resources from a
number of different perspectives or dimensions. Once these various dimensions have been

6
considered, appropriate decisions and arrangements can be made. The following are the
four dimensions that integrated water resources management takes into account (Savenije
and Van der Zaag, 2000; see also Figure 5 and Box 2):
1. the water resources, taking the entire hydrological cycle into account, including
stock and flows, as well as water quantity and water quality; distinguishing, for
example, rainfall, soil moisture, water in rivers, lakes, and aquifers, in wetlands and
estuaries, considering also return flows etc.
2. the water users, all sectoral interests and stakeholders
3. the spatial dimension, including
• the spatial distribution of water resources and uses (e.g. well-watered upstream
watersheds and arid plains downstream)
• the various spatial scales at which water is being managed, i.e. individual user,
user groups (e.g. user boards), watershed, catchment, (international) basin; and
the institutional arrangements that exist at these various scales
4. the temporal dimension; taking into account the temporal variation in availability
of and demand for water resources, but also the physical structures that have been
built to even out fluctuations and to better match the supply with demand.

Figure 5: Three of the four dimensions of Integrated Water Resources Management

(Savenije, 2000)

Integrated Water Resources Management therefore acknowledges the entire water cycle
with all its natural aspects, as well as the interests of the water users in the different sectors
of a society (or an entire region). Decision-making would involve the integration of the
different objectives where possible, and a trade-off or priority-setting between these
objectives where necessary, by carefully weighing these in an informed and transparent
manner, according to societal objectives and constraints (Savenije and Van der Zaag,
2000; Loucks et al., 2000). Special care should be taken to consider spatial scales, in terms
of geographical variation in water availability and the possible upstream-downstream
interactions, as well as time scales, such as the natural seasonal, annual and long-term
fluctuations in water availability, and the implications of developments now for future
generations.

7
Box 2: The four dimensions of IWRM (Savenije, 2000)

Dimension 1: Water Resources

The water resources include all forms of occurrence of water including salt water and fossil
groundwater. An interesting distinction which can be made is between blue and green water.
Blue water, the water in rivers, lakes and shallow aquifers, has received all the attention from
water resources planners and engineers. Green water, the water in the unsaturated zone of
the soil responsible for the production of biomass has been largely neglected but it is the green
water that is responsible for 60% of the world food production and all of the biomass produced
in forests and pasture. It is this resource which is most sensitive to land degradation. Fossil
water, the deep aquifers that contain non-renewable water, should be considered a mineral
resource which can only be used once at the cost of foregoing future use.

Dimension 2: Water Users

There are many different users of water and its functions. Functions can be split into
production functions (for economic production activities), regulation functions (for maintaining
a dynamic equilibrium in natural processes), carrier functions (to sustain life forms) and
transfer functions (as a contribution to culture, religion and landscape). The uses include:
households, industries, agriculture, fisheries, ecosystems, hydropower, navigation, recreation,
etc. Water users consist of consumptive and non-consumptive (often in-stream) users.
Besides on quantity, the users depend largely on the quality of the resource. With regard to
the consumptive use an important concept is that of “virtual” water, where products are
expressed in the amount of water required for its production. This concept is both useful as a
measure for efficiency and for the discussion on food security

Dimension 3: Spatial Scales

Water resources issues are apparent at different levels: the international level, the national
level, the province or district level and the local level. Parallel to these administrative levels
are hydrological system boundaries such as river basins, sub-catchments and watersheds.
Hydrological boundaries seldom concur with administrative boundaries. River basins seem
appropriate units for operational water management but present problems for institutions that
have a different spatial logic.

Different decisions on water resources management belong at different levels, meaning that
the concept of subsidiarity (decision making at the lowest appropriate level) needs to be a
guiding principle in the development of IWRM. Interests and decisions at lower levels need to
be carried upward to be taken into consideration at higher levels, particularly to the national
and international level. An important element in this process is the participation of stakeholders
in decision-making processes at all levels.

Dimension 4: Temporal Scales and Patterns

Both the water resources themselves and the water uses have distinct temporal patterns. The
temporal distribution of water resources is crucial (floods, droughts, base flows, flooding
patterns) and so is the distribution over time of the demands (peak demands, constant
requirements, cropping patterns, etc.). In water resources assessments the total amount of
water available depends strongly on the possibility to capture flood flows. The staging of
demands (simultaneous or staggered demands) can have a large influence on the
development required.

8
We can now summarise our definition as follows:

Integrated Water Resources Management seeks to manage water resources in

a comprehensive and holistic way, taking account of the entire water cycle
and the interests of all water users, while acknowledging the temporal and
spatial variability in availability and the interactions with water quality and
ecology.

Managing water resources then requires transparent and participatory

decision-making procedures that carefully weigh societal objectives and
constraints, integrate these where possible and set priorities where necessary.

An alternative definition of Integrated Water Resources Management, which is widely

cited, is the one proposed by the Global Water Partnership:

Integrated Water Resources Management is a process which promotes the

coordinated development and management of water, land and related
resources, in order to maximise the resultant economic and social welfare in
an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital
ecosystems (GWP, 2000).

There are, however, many more definitions on IWRM. See Jonker (2007) for a review.

To accomplish the integrated management of water resources, appropriate legal,

institutional and financial arrangements are required that acknowledge the four
dimensions of IWRM. In order for a society to get the right arrangements in place, it
requires a sound policy on water.

5 Policy principles
For a country to change its water management towards a more holistic and integrated
management system, it will require to review its water policy. This is currently on-going
in many countries world-wide. A water policy often starts with the definition of a small
number of basic principles and objectives, such as the need for sustainable development
and desirable socio-economic development.

Three key policy principles are known as the three 'E's as defined by Postel (1992):

a) Equity: Water is a basic need. No human being can live without a basic volume of
fresh water of sufficient quality. Humans have a basic human right of access to
water resources (see Gleick, 1999). This policy principle is related to the fact that
water is often considered a public good. Water is such a basic requirement for
human life and survival that society has to defend the uses of the water resources in
the public interest. From here a number of other issues can be derived, such as
security (protection against floods, droughts, famine and other hazards).

b) Ecological integrity: Water resources can only persist in a natural environment

9
 capable of regenerating (fresh) water of sufficient quality. Only sustainable water
use can be allowed such that future generations will be able to use it in similar ways
as the present generation.

c) Efficiency: Water is a scarce resource. It should be used efficiently; therefore,

institutional arrangements should be such that cost recovery of the water services
should be attained. This will ensure sustainability of infrastructure and institutions,
but should not jeopardise the equity principle. Here comes in the issue of water
pricing, and whether or not water should be priced according to its economic value.

Much of water resources management deals with finding suitable compromises between
these policy principles that sometimes are conflicting with each other and with the
different aspects (dimensions) of IWRM (Savenije and Van der Zaag, 2002). In order to
emphasise the consistency of policies, despite the contradictions that will inevitably
emerge, policy statements often are summarised in a “vision” statement that define a
desired future that the policy contributes to.

An example is the Southern Africa Vision for Water. The Southern African vision has
been formulated as a desired future that is characterised by:
Equitable and sustainable utilisation of water for social, environmental
justice, regional integration and economic benefit for present and future
generations.

A wider public is more likely to identify with, and remember, vision statements that are
simple and short. An example is the South African water policy, which has been
summarised in the South Africa white paper on water resources as follows:
"Some for all forever."

Both examples from Southern Africa clearly demonstrate that there are two overriding
issues that cut across IWRM however the latter is understood, namely: sustainability and
the public interest.

Related to sustainability are: the maintenance of environmental quality (including water

quality), financial sustainability (cost recovery), good governance (effective democratic
control mechanisms) and the institutional capacity (capacity building, human resources,
management instruments, appropriate policy and legal frameworks).

Related to the public interest are: equity (the basic right of access of people to water
resources), poverty alleviation (the responsibility of society to nurture the interests of the
least advantaged), gender (the central role of women in managing water; at the local level
and beyond), security (protection against floods, droughts and hazards), food security and
health, and, at a regional level, good neighbourliness and regional peace.

10
6 Sustainability of water resources (Savenije, 2000)
Since the appearance of the Brundtland report "Our Common Future" (WCED, 1987),
sustainable development has been embraced as the leading philosophy that would on the
one hand allow the world to develop its resources and on the other hand preserve non-
renewable and finite resources and guarantee adequate living conditions for future
generations. Brundtland defined sustainable development as “Development that meets the
needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs.” Former president of Botswana, Sir K. Masire, stated:
"Our ideals of sustainable development do not seek to curtail development.
Experience elsewhere has demonstrated that the path to development may
simply mean doing more with less (being more efficient). As our population
grows, we will certainly have less and less of the resources we have today.
To manage this situation, we need a new ethic, one that emphasises the need
to protect our natural resources in all we do." (cited in Savenije, 2000)

Sustainable development is making efficient use of our natural resources for economic
and social development while maintaining the resource base and environmental carrying
capacity for coming generations. This resource base should be widely interpreted to
contain besides natural resources: knowledge, infrastructure, technology, durables and
human resources. In the process of development natural resources may be converted into
other durable products and hence remain part of the overall resource base.

Water resources development that is not sustainable is ill-planned. The American Society
of Civil Engineers has recognised the importance of sustainability and has given the
following broad definition of sustainable water resource systems (ASCE, 1998):
Sustainable water resource systems are those designed and managed to fully
contribute to the objectives of society, now and in the future, while
maintaining their ecological, environmental and hydrological integrity.

In the remainder of this section three types of sustainability are briefly introduced:
physical, economic and institutional.

Physical sustainability

Physical sustainability means closing the resource cycles and considering the cycles in
their integrity (water and nutrient cycles). In agriculture this implies primarily closing or
shortening water and nutrient cycles so as to prevent accumulation or depletion of land
and water resources: Water depletion results in desertification. Water accumulation into
water logging. Nutrient depletion leads to loss of fertility, loss of water holding capacity,
and in general, reduction of carrying capacity. Nutrient accumulation results in
eutrophication and pollution. Loss of top-soil results in erosion, land degradation and
sedimentation elsewhere. Closing or shortening these cycles means restoring the dynamic
equilibriums at the appropriate temporal and spatial scales. The latter is relevant since at
a global scale all cycles close. The question of sustainability has to do with closing the
cycles within a human dimension.

11
Economic sustainability

Economic sustainability relates to the efficiency of the system. If all societal costs and
benefits are properly accounted for, and cycles are closed, then economic sustainability
implies a reduction of scale by short-cutting the cycles. Efficiency dictates that cycles
should be kept as short as possible. Examples of short cycles are: water conservation,
making optimal use of rainfall where it falls (and not drain it and capture it downstream
to pump it up again); water recycling at the spot instead of draining it off to a treatment
plant after which it is conveyed or pumped back over considerable distances etc.

Strangely enough, economic sustainability is facilitated by an enlargement of scale

through trade in land- and water-intensive commodities (the "virtual" water concept). The
use of virtual water is an important concept in countries where the carrying capacity of a
society is not sufficient to produce water intensive products itself.

The closing of cycles should be realised at different spatial scales:

• The rural scale, implying water conservation, nutrient and soil conservation,
prevention of over-drainage and the recycling of nutrients and organic waste.
• The urban scale, both in towns and mega-cities, implying the recycling of water,
nutrients and waste.
• The river basin scale, implying: soil and water conservation in the upper catchment,
prevention of runoff and unnecessary drainage and enhancement of infiltration and
recharge, flood retention, pollution control and the wise use of wetlands.
• The global scale, where water, nutrient and basic resource cycles are integrated and
closed. The concept of virtual water is a tool for an equitable utilisation of water
resources. This requires an open and accessible global market and the use of
resource-based economic incentives such as resource taxing ("Green tax" which
taxes the use of non-renewable or finite resources), as opposed to taxing renewable
resources such as labour, which is the general practice today.

Institutional sustainability

In order to ensure sustainability, the right decisions have to be made. This requires that
the relevant institutions are in place which can facilitate the proper decision processes.
Moreover, institutions need to adequately respond to changing requirements and a
changing environment in which they operate. They should have the capacity to adapt to
emerging circumstances. Their adaptive capacities indicate whether they will prove to be
sustainable institutions. According to Costanza (1994),
A sustainable system is active and able to maintain its structure
(organisation), function (vigour) and autonomy over time and is resilient in
stress.

Integrated water resources management requires strong institutions; sustainable systems

in Costanza’s sense. Sustainable institutions require good governance; while institutions
that are governed wisely are likely to retain their resilience and will be sustained over
time. Thus it appears that sustainable institutions and good governance go hand in hand.
They need and presuppose each other.

12
7 Historical developments: towards IWRM
International awareness for the importance of water resources management issues is
growing. Originally, the approach was typically sub-sectoral, mostly in relation to water
supply, sanitation, irrigation and energy (hydropower). Engineers would predict the
demand for water and the need for projects and subsequently provide in those needs.
There was often a lack of coordination between sectors, and the needs of the environment
were ignored. Recently, however, there is a growing consensus about the need for
integrated approaches. Box 3 gives an overview of these developments.

Tony Allan has described the evolution of water resources management according to five
water management paradigms, from (1) the pre-modern to (2) the industrial paradigm
with its “hydraulic mission” of dam construction, followed by (3) the “green” paradigm
that acknowledged the need to respect the environment, and (4) the “economic” paradigm
which emphasised the scarcity value of water and the role of economic instruments in
resolving some of the challenges, to finally (5) the IWRM paradigm which attempts to
take a holistic perspective (see Figure 6).

Figure 6: The evolution of water resources management according to Allan (2003),

with the five water management paradigms

13
Box 3: From water resources development towards IWRM
1. Water resources development (1960s-1970s)
- Dominant paradigm: water is a resource to be exploited
- The engineering approach of “predict and provide”
- Emphasis on infrastructure
- Individual projects
2. Water resources management (1980s-1990s)
- Recognition that water can be ‘overexploited’
- Accounting for ecological and social constraints
- Regional and national planning instead of a project approach
- Demand-side measures come into focus
3. Integrated water resources management (1990s-present)
- Water management embedded in an overall policy for socio-economic
development, physical planning and environmental protection
- Public participation
- Focus on sustainability

Box 4: Chronology of important international meetings and developments

1965-1974 International Hydrological Decade
1966 ILA adopts the Helsinki Rules on the Uses of the Waters of International Rivers
1977 UN Water Conference, Mar del Plata
1981-1990 International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade
1987 World Commission on Environment and Development submits Brundtland report
1992 International Conference on Water and the Environment, Dublin
1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro
1994 UN Conference on Population and Development, Cairo
1996 Global Water Partnership
1996 World Water Council
1997 Commission on Sustainable Development submits water assessment report
1997 UN General Assembly adopts the Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational
Uses of International Watercourses
1997 First World Water Forum, Marrakech
2000 Second World Water Forum, The Hague
2000 World Commission on Dams submits final report
2000 United Nations Millennium Summit
2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development, Johannesburg
2003 Third World Water Forum, Kyoto
2004 ILA adopts the Berlin Rules on Water Resources
2006 Fourth World Water Forum, Mexico City
2008 International Year of Sanitation
2009 5th World Water Forum, Istanbul
2010 UN General Assembly adopts a resolution that declares access to clean water
and sanitation a fundamental human right
2012 6th World Water Forum, Marseille
2012 Rio+20; development of the Sustainable Development Goals
2013 International Year of Water Cooperation
2014 The UN Watercourses convention comes into force with Vietnam’s ratification
2015 The UN adopts the Sustainable Development Goals

14
During the last two decades, water has gradually received more and more attention during
international meetings. Box 4 provides a chronology of important international meetings
and developments.

At the UN Conference in Mar del Plata (1977), the emphasis was still on water supply
and sanitation. The Brundtland Report of the World Commission on Environment and
Development (1987) only mentioned the word “water” in relation to pollution and water
supply. It was during the preparatory conferences for the UN Conference on Environment
and Development (UNCED) that the concepts underlying Integrated Water Resources
Management were widely debated.

The International Conference on Water and the Environment (ICWE) in Dublin (1992),
led to the Dublin Principles (Box 5). The Dublin Principles formed in important input
into Rio 1992 which culminated into the adoption of the Fresh Water Chapter (Chapter
18) of Agenda 21 (UN, 1992).

Chapter 18 (“Protection of the quality and supply of freshwater resources: application of

integrated approaches to the development, management and use of water resources”) of
Agenda 21 emphasised the need for an integrated approach to managing water resources:

“18.3. The widespread scarcity, gradual destruction and aggravated pollution of

freshwater resources in many world regions, along with the progressive
encroachment of incompatible activities, demand integrated water resources
planning and management. Such integration must cover all types of interrelated
freshwater bodies, including both surface water and groundwater, and duly
consider water quantity and quality aspects. The multisectoral nature of water
resources development in the context of socio-economic development must be
recognized, as well as the multi-interest utilization of water resources..”

Chapter 18 in fact gave the first definition of IWRM (Box 6).

In 1993, the World Bank published the influential policy paper on Water Resources
Management (World Bank, 1993), which emphasises the need for IWRM, economic
pricing, cost recovery, decentralisation, privatisation, management of international river
basins and incorporation of environmental criteria in planning and management. The
Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) has put IWRM high on the international
agenda, when in 1997 it published the first comprehensive assessment of global water
resources.

In the same year the UN adopted the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International
Watercourses. This UN Convention is not yet in force, but is a landmark development in
international water law.

After Dublin, with the call for integrated management, the high degree of fragmentation
of the water sector in the international community, and in particular the UN family,
became strongly felt. The water interest is fragmented over many different organisations,
such as WMO, WHO, FAO, UNESCO, UNDP, UNEP and UNICEF.

15
Box 5: Dublin Principles (ICWE, 1992)
• Water is a finite, vulnerable and essential resource which should be managed in an
integrated manner
• Water resources development and management should be based on a participatory
approach, involving all relevant stakeholders
• Women play a central role in the provision, management and safeguarding of water
• Water has an economic value and should be recognised as an economic good, taking into
account affordability and equity criteria.
Associated key concepts:
• Integrated water resources management, implying:
- An inter-sectoral approach
- Representation of all stakeholders
- Consideration of all physical aspects of the water resources
- Considerations of sustainability and the environment
• Sustainable development, sound socio-economic development that safeguards the
resource base for future generations
• Emphasis on demand driven and demand oriented approaches
• Decision-making at the lowest possible level (subsidiarity)

Box 6: Integrated water resources management (UN, 1992)

18.8. Integrated water resources management is based on the perception of water as an
integral part of the ecosystem, a natural resource and a social and economic good, whose
quantity and quality determine the nature of its utilization. To this end, water resources have to
be protected, taking into account the functioning of aquatic ecosystems and the perenniality of
the resource, in order to satisfy and reconcile needs for water in human activities. In developing
and using water resources, priority has to be given to the satisfaction of basic needs and the
safeguarding of ecosystems. Beyond these requirements, however, water users should be
charged appropriately.

18.9. Integrated water resources management, including the integration of land- and water-
related aspects, should be carried out at the level of the catchment basin or sub-basin. Four
principal objectives should be pursued, as follows:
(a) To promote a dynamic, interactive, iterative and multisectoral approach to water
resources management, including the identification and protection of potential sources
of freshwater supply, that integrates technological, socio-economic, environmental and
human health considerations;
(b) To plan for the sustainable and rational utilization, protection, conservation and
management of water resources based on community needs and priorities within the
framework of national economic development policy;
(c) To design, implement and evaluate projects and programmes that are both economically
efficient and socially appropriate within clearly defined strategies, based on an approach
of full public participation, including that of women, youth, indigenous people and local
communities in water management policy-making and decision-making;
(d) To identify and strengthen or develop, as required, in particular in developing countries,
the appropriate institutional, legal and financial mechanisms to ensure that water policy
and its implementation are a catalyst for sustainable social progress and economic
growth.

16
Important steps in the process towards more coordination have been the formation of the
Global Water Partnership (GWP) and the World Water Council (WWC), who both have
the aim to coordinate the implementation of IWRM principles and practices worldwide.
Although there is undoubtedly some overlap between the two organisations, the WWC
concentrates on awareness raising at political levels, whereas GWP aims at the
implementation of IWRM concepts at the operational level. Together they have been the
driving force behind the second, third and fourth world water forums.

At the United Nations Millennium Summit in September 2000 world leaders placed
development at the heart of the global agenda by adopting the Millennium Development
Goals, which set clear targets for reducing poverty, hunger, disease, illiteracy,
environmental degradation, and discrimination against women by 2015.

By 2015, some good progress towards achieving some of the MDGs has been made, but
some targets have not been met. In response, the UN General Assembly adopted in
September 2015 the Sustainable Development Goals, that replace the MDGs and that hold
for all countries of the world. The Sustainable Development Goals constitute an ambitious
agenda to eradicate poverty by 2030 (Box 7). Water runs through several of the 17 (!)
goals, one of which is specifically dedicated to it.

During the 2nd World Water Forum, held in The Hague in March 2000, delegations of
113 countries met in the parallel ministerial conference, and adopted unanimously the
concept of IWRM.

In November 2000, the World Commission on Dams submitted its final report. This
Commission led an independent, international, multi-stakeholder process that addressed
the controversial issues associated with large dams. It provided a unique opportunity to
bring into focus the many assumptions and paradigms that are at the centre of the search
to reconcile economic growth, social equity, environmental conservation and political
participation in the changing global context. The final report (www.dams.org) provides a
wealth of information. One of the conclusions was that the benefits and costs of dam
developments should be much better estimated before constructing them, including the
social costs (e.g. displacement of people living in the area to be flooded by the reservoir)
and environmental costs. Follow-up activities can be found on
http://www.unep.org/dams.

The World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2002 called for

countries to “develop Integrated Water Resources Management and Water Efficiency
Plans by 2005”. By end of 2007, a survey among 53 developing countries and countries
in transition found that 38% (20) had indeed formulated IWRM/WE plans and were in
the process of implementing them (UN Water, 2008).

17
Box 7: The Sustainable Development Goals of the UN 2030 Development Agenda

Goal 1 End poverty in all its forms everywhere

Goal 2 End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote
sustainable agriculture
Goal 3 Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
Goal 4 Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning
opportunities for all
Goal 5 Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
Goal 6 Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
Goal 7 Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
Goal 8 Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and
productive employment and decent work for all
Goal 9 Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization
and foster innovation
Goal 10 Reduce inequality within and among countries
Goal 11 Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
Goal 12 Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
Goal 13 Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
Goal 14 Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for
sustainable development
Goal 15 Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems,
sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land
degradation and halt biodiversity loss
Goal 16 Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide
access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions
at all levels
Goal 17 Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for
sustainable development

Goal 6 Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for
all

Targets
6.1 By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking
water for all
6.2 By 2030, achieve access to adequate and equitable sanitation and hygiene for all
and end open defecation, paying special attention to the needs of women and girls
and those in vulnerable situations
6.3 By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and
minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials, halving the proportion of
untreated wastewater and substantially increasing recycling and safe reuse globally
6.4 By 2030, substantially increase water-use efficiency across all sectors and ensure
sustainable withdrawals and supply of freshwater to address water scarcity and
substantially reduce the number of people suffering from water scarcity
6.5 By 2030, implement integrated water resources management at all levels, including
through transboundary cooperation as appropriate
6.6 By 2020, protect and restore water-related ecosystems, including mountains,
forests, wetlands, rivers, aquifers and lakes
6.a By 2030, expand international cooperation and capacity-building support to
developing countries in water- and sanitation-related activities and programmes,
including water harvesting, desalination, water efficiency, wastewater treatment,
recycling and reuse technologies
6.b Support and strengthen the participation of local communities in improving water
and sanitation management

Source: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/topicsttp://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-
development-goals/

18
A significant number of experts who attended the 2nd World Water Forum in The Hague
wanted access to water to be declared a human right. This did not materialise. However,
two years later UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights defined the right
to water in General Assembly Comment No. 15 (2002) as the right of everyone “to
sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible and affordable water for personal and
domestic uses.” It further specifies that signatory states should ensure access to “a
minimum essential amount of water [and] adequate sanitation,” develop and implement
a national water strategy and monitor progress made on realizing the right to water. The
primary responsibility for the implementation of the right to water falls upon the States
and their national governments (Box 8).

On 28 July 2010, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a non-binding resolution,
sponsored by Bolivia, which declares that access to clean water and sanitation is a
fundamental human right. The resolution also called on member states and international
organizations to offer financial and technical assistance, in particular to developing
countries, in order to provide clean, accessible and affordable drinking water and
sanitation for everyone. The resolution invited the UN Independent Expert on the issue
of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation, to
report annually to the General Assembly. The resolution received the support of 122
member states, while 41 countries abstained.

Box 8: General Comment on Right of Water by the Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights, November 2002
The General Comment notes that water is a limited natural resource and a public commodity
fundamental to life and health. The Committee has been confronted continually with
widespread denial of the right to water in developing as well as developed countries. Over 1
billion persons lack access to a basic water supply, while several billion lack access to adequate
sanitation, a primary cause of water contamination and diseases linked to water, the comment
states. The continuing contamination, depletion and unequal distribution of water resources is
exacerbating existing poverty. States parties have the duty to progressively realize, without
discrimination, the right to water.
The human right to water entitles everyone to sufficient, affordable, physically accessible, safe
and acceptable water for personal and domestic uses, the text states. While those uses vary
between cultures, an adequate amount of safe water is necessary to prevent death from
dehydration, to reduce the risk of water-related disease and to provide for consumption,
cooking, personal and domestic hygienic requirements.
The right to water contains both freedom and entitlements; the freedoms include the right to
maintain access to existing water supplies necessary for the right to water; and the right to be
free from interference, such as the right to be free from arbitrary disconnections or
contamination of water supplies, the text states. The elements of the right to water should be
adequate for human dignity, life and health. The adequacy of water should not be interpreted
narrowly, by mere reference to volumetric qualities and technologies. Water should be treated
as a social and cultural good, and not primarily as an economic commodity. The manner of the
realization of the right to water should also be sustainable, ensuring that the right can be
realized for present and future generations.
Further, the General Comment notes that States parties have a constant and continuing duty,
in accordance with the obligation of progressive realization, to move expeditiously and
effectively towards the full realization to the right to water. Realization of the right should be
feasible and practicable, since all States parties exercise control over a broad range of
resources, including water, technology, financial resources and international assistance, as
with all other rights in the Covenant.
Source: Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Geneva; http://www.unhchr.ch/

19
8 Outstanding issues of debate
The developments since Rio demonstrate the global community’s increasing concern with
water. One can also discern a growing convergence about most of the concepts underlying
Integrated Water Resources Management. There is hardly anybody who would disagree
with the first three Dublin principles, namely that water management requires an
integrated and participatory approach and that women should play a key role in all aspects
of water management. There is also an emerging consensus that in terms of water
allocation, basic human needs should receive priority; and that other uses should be
prioritised according to societal needs and socio-economic criteria. The river basin is
accepted as the logical unit for water resources management.

However, a number of important issues remain unresolved. These include:

➢ What does it mean if water is considered an economic good?
➢ Is there indeed water scarcity?
➢ Why is it so difficult to provide access to sufficient safe water and adequate
sanitation services to the entire global population?
➢ How can we ensure that the private sector plays its - positive - part in the water
sector, without the possible negative consequences?
➢ Should we aim for food self-sufficiency or for food security?
➢ Can we improve the efficient use of rainfall to increase food production?
➢ What institutional arrangements are required to implement IWRM? What does it
mean if we say that we need good water governance?
➢ Should catchment institutions have executive functions, or should they only be
platforms of coordination, with line institutions implementing decisions?
➢ Will the increasing pressure on the water resource inevitably lead to an increase in
conflicts over water, locally and between riparian countries?
➢ How can be formalise upstream-downstream linkages, and positively deal with the
fundamental asymmetry in water resources management?
➢ How much water does the environment require? Which priority should
environmental water have?
➢ Do we need more dams?
➢ What may be the implications of climate change for water resources management?
➢ How does the Water-Energy-Food Nexus approach (Beson et al., 2015; Wichelns,
2017) relate to the IWRM concept?

There is also an emerging criticism of the IWRM concept (see e.g. Biswas, 2004; Shah
and Van Koppen, 2006; Mollinga, 2008; Molle, 2008). There are many points of critique,
but the following three stand out:
1. IWRM as a concept is ill-defined, and means different things to different people
and audiences. It therefore lacks analytical clarity. To make things worse, the
concept often is used with a certain “normative” connotation: IWRM is seen as
“good”. People are therefore tempted to (ab-)use it, and re-frame the things that
they are used to be doing in new ways, but without fundamentally changing their
approach (e.g. the dam, irrigation, drinking water, etc. sectors).
2. IWRM is the embodiment of a trend for the water sector to claim uniqueness, and
therefore a special institutional space (see also section 2 above!). This has,
however, created a problem of “institutional fit” with other sectors and

20
 institutions, and also may have enhanced competition over scarce institutional
resources. In all this may have decreased the capacity for an integrated approach
of water and related development (think of spatial planning).
3. Many development countries point at the fact that what they need is water
resources development before they can focus on water resources management –
without hardware there is no way that water resources can be adequately managed
(see e.g. Grey and Sadoff, 2007). Whereas in our reading the IWRM concept
encompasses both the hardware and the software, many donors indeed tend to
favour support for soft measures (e.g. institutional development) compared to hard
measures (e.g. infrastructure development).

9 Exercises
1a What are in your opinion the main policy issues for the water sector in your
country?
1b Which objectives for the management of water resources can be derived from
these?
1c What would be suitable performance criteria for these objectives?
1d Which institutions should be responsible for the implementation of these
objectives?
1e Which should the tasks and responsibilities be for these institutions?

2 What is the basin efficiency depicted in figure 4?

3 Which of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) require proper water

resources management?

4 Read two articles about water pricing: the paper by Rogers et al. (2002) and the
paper by Savenije and Van der Zaag (2002). Describe the debate with respect to
pricing of water. What does it mean that water is an economic good?

5 Read some of the following articles on IWRM: Biswas (2004), Van der Zaag
(2005), Shah and Van Koppen (2006), Grey and Sadoff (2007), Mollinga (2008)
and Molle (2008). Describe the different interpretations of current developments
with respect to IWRM. What are the current key challenges? Which are, in your
opinion, the most important and why?

21
10 References
Allan, T., 2003. IWRM/IWRAM: a new sanctioned discourse? Occasional Paper 50. SOAS Water
Issues Study Group. School of Oriental and African Studies, King’s College, London.
ASCE, 1998. Sustainability criteria for water resource systems. Division of Water Resource
Planning and Management. Task Committee for Sustainability Criteria. ASCE, Reston Va.
Benson, D., A.K. Gain, and J.J. Rouillard, 2015. Water governance in a comparative perspective:
From IWRM to a 'nexus' approach? Water Alternatives 8(1): 756-773
Biswas, A.K., 2004, Integrated water resources management: a reassessment. Water International
29(2): 248-256.
Costanza, R., 1994, Environmental performance indicators, environmental space and the
conservation of ecosystem health. In: Global change and sustainable development in
Europe.
Gleick, P., 1999, The Human Right to Water. Water Policy 1(5): 487-503.
Grey, D., and C. Sadoff, 2007, Sink or swim? Water security for growth and development. Water
Policy 9: 545-571
GWP, 2000. Integrated water resources management. TAC Background Paper No. 4. Global
Water Partnership, Stockholm.
Hoekstra, A.Y., H.H.G. Savenije and A.K. Chapagain, 2001. An integrated approach towards
assessing the value of water: A case study on the Zambezi basin. Integrated Assessment 2:
199-208.
ICWE, 1992, The Dublin Statement and Report of the Conference. International conference on
water and the environment: development issues for the 21st century; 26-31 January 1992,
Dublin.
Jonker, L, 2007. Integrated water resources management: The theory–praxis–nexus, a South
African perspective. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 32: 1257–1263.
Loucks, D.P., E.Z. Stakhiv and L.R. Martin, 2000, Sustainable water resources management.
Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 126(2): 43-47.
Molle, F., 2008. Nirvana concepts, narratives and policy models: insights from the water sector.
Water Alternatives 1(1): 131-156
Mollinga, P.P., 2008. Water, politics, and development: framing a political sociology of water
resources management. Water Alternatives 1(1): 7-23
Pallett, J., 1997, Sharing water in Southern Africa. Desert Research Foundation of Namibia,
Windhoek.
Postel, Sandra, 1992, Last oasis, facing water scarcity. W.W. Norton, New York.
Rogers, P., R. de Silva and R. Bhatia, 2002, Water is an economic good: how to use prices to
promote equity, efficiency and sustainability. Water Policy 4: 1-17.
Savenije, H.H.G., 2000, Water resources management: concepts and tools. Lecture note. IHE, Delft.
Savenije, H.H.G. 2002. Why water is not an ordinary economic good, or why the girl is special.
Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 27: 741-744.
Savenije, H.H.G., and P. van der Zaag, 2000, Conceptual framework for the management of
shared river basins with special reference to the SADC and EU. Water Policy 2 (1-2): 9-
45.
Savenije, H.H.G., and P. van der Zaag, 2002, Water as an economic good and demand management,
paradigms with pitfalls. Water International 27 (1): 98-104.
Shah, T., Van Koppen B., 2006. Is India ripe for integrated water resources management: fitting
water policy to national development context. Economic and Political Weekly August 5,
3413-3421.
Shiklomanov, I.A., 2000. Appraisal and assessment of world water resources. Water International
25(1): 11-32
UN, 1992. Agenda 21; Chapter 18: Protection of the quality and supply of freshwater resources:
application of integrated approaches to the development, management and use of water
resources. UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, New York; URL:

22
 http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/english/agenda21chapter18.htm
UN Water, 2008. Status report on Integrated Water Resources Management and Water Efficiency
Plans. Report prepared for the 16th session of the Commission on Sustainable Development
– May 2008. United Nations, New York; 45 pp.
Van der Zaag, P., 2005, Integrated water resources management: relevant concept of irrelevant
buzzword? A capacity building and research agenda for southern Africa. Physics and
Chemistry of the Earth 30: 867-871.
WCED, 1987, Our common future. Report of the Brundtland Commission. Oxford University
Press, Oxford.
Wichelns, D., 2017. The water-energy-food nexus: Is the increasing attention warranted, from
either a research or policy perspective? Environmental Science & Policy 69: 113-123.
World Bank, 1993, Water resources management; a World Bank Policy Paper. World Bank,
Washington DC.

A water point and a small reservoir in southern Zimbabwe

23