Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM)
An Integrated Water Resources Management approach 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.
This includes more coordinated development and management of:
• land and water,
• surface water and groundwater,
• the river basin and its adjacent coastal and marine environment, and
• upstream and downstream interests.
But IWRM is not just about managing physical resources, it is also about reforming human systems to enable people—men and women—to benefit from those resources.
For policy-making and planning, taking an IWRM approach requires that:
• policies and priorities take water resources implications into account, including the two-way relationship between macro-economic policies and water development, management, and use,
• there is cross-sectoral integration in policy development,
• stakeholders are given a voice in water planning and management, with particular attention to securing the participation of women and the poor.
• water-related decisions made at local and river basin levels are in-line with, or at least do not conflict with, the achievement of broader national objectives, and
• water planning and strategies are integrated into broader social, economic, and environmental goals.
In practice, this means giving water an appropriate place on the national agenda; creating greater “water awareness” among decision-makers responsible for economic policy and policy in water-related sectors; creating more effective channels for communication and shared decision-making between government agencies, organizations, interest groups and communities; and encouraging people to think “outside the box” of traditional sectoral definitions.
Advantages of an IWRM approach
Solving problems: Many countries are experiencing water-related problems that are proving intractable to conventional, single-sector approaches. Some possible examples: drought, flooding, groundwater overdraft, water-borne diseases, land and water degradation, on-going damage to ecosystems, chronic poverty in rural areas, and escalating conflicts over water.
The solutions to such problems may fall outside of the normal purview of the agencies tasked with addressing them, and usually require cooperation from multiple sectors. In such cases, an IWRM approach makes identifying and implementing effective solutions much easier. It also avoids the all too common situation where solving one problem creates another.
Avoiding poor investments and expensive mistakes: Decision-making based on a short-term, sectoral view is rarely effective in the long-haul and can result in some very expensive mistakes—in terms of unsustainable gains, unforeseen consequences, and lost opportunities. Investment decisions need to be based on an evaluation of costs and benefits that is both wide-ranging and long-term. They need to consider the economic implications of infrastructure maintenance, water services and potential for cost-recovery, and both short- and long-term environmental impacts. Decision makers also need to consider the prevailing macroeconomic environment, and the way in which macroeconomic policies such as interest and exchange rates affect the insertion of water into development and the sustainability of water utilities. Chile is a good example of how sound macroeconomic policies foster the incorporation of water into developmental processes and the affordability of water utility services.
In short-sighted or sectoral thinking, it is often the environment that comes out the loser—with negative consequences for both social and economic development. For example, in the Aral Sea disaster, where irrigation development resulted in the loss of valuable fisheries, regional climate change, and on-going problems due to the drying up of the sea. An IWRM approach promotes considering environmental impacts from the outset. This avoids the losses associated with unsustainable development and the high costs of undoing the damage later.
Getting the most value for money from investments in infrastructure: Planning, designing and finally managing infrastructure using an IWRM approach ensures maximum returns—both social and economic—on investments. Infrastructure development on its own has limited payoffs; often other ingredients are needed for people to benefit. To take a very simple example, imagine the situation of one of the growing numbers of female farmers in sub-Saharan Africa, trying to produce food for her children and a basic income from the family plot. She can take advantage of the opportunity provided by irrigation infrastructure only if she and her family are in good health, she is able to enforce her rights to water and reliable irrigation service, and she has access to agricultural inputs, knowledge, markets, credit, and the means to plough, harvest and transport her crops. Integrating water development into larger development planning processes helps insure that investments work together synergistically, producing greater returns than possible through a single-sector approach.
An IWRM approach in designing and managing infrastructure also makes it possible to capitalize on potential synergies. For example, combining fisheries and irrigation systems or developing water supply schemes that provide people with water for domestic and productive uses.
Allocating water strategically: Many countries upon examining their current approach to water have found:
1) that they have not been considering allocation strategically enough, in the light of national goals,
2) that water allocation, while left to the lowest appropriate level, needs to be guided by a framework that is conceived at the river basin or national level; and
3) that the links between allocation decisions and national development and economic planning processes are weak or missing.
Strategic allocation requires subordinating the needs of individual sectors and user groups to the larger goals of the society. An IWRM approach frees countries to look at allocation in the context of the “big picture” of sustainable development goals.
Strategic allocation is rarely accomplished through administrative fiat. More commonly it is achieved indirectly—often through gains in water efficiency—using tools such water pricing and tariffs, the introduction of appropriate incentives and subsidies, and the removal of ill-considered incentives and subsidies both inside and outside the water sector. In northern China, the government was able to transfer water out of agriculture to meet the needs of growing cities and industries through an integrated program of water pricing, incentives, and the introduction of technological innovation. Making effective use of the range of “indirect” reallocation tools requires cooperation across sectors.
