Capacity Development for Integrated Water Resources Management: Lessons Learned from Applied Research Projects

Water resources are of great importance for the sustainable development of the Arid and Semi-arid Areas of Northwest China. The theory of good water governance could provide inspirations for properly dealing with the water challenges of these areas. The integrated water resources management, the environmental water flow protection and the public participation are three major requirements of the good water governance. There are three major challenges for promoting the good water governance. The first is related to the clarification of the responsibilities of the water governance. The second is about balancing the diversified water needs. The third is about the optimal approach for improving the public participation. Three policy choices are proposed for promoting the good water governance. The integration of the water governance system, which emphasizes the four principles and the role of the basin management, could be a significant way of clarifying the responsibilities. Improving the water use efficiency could help the water supply for the ecological environment. The capacity building should be enhanced for facilitating the public participation.

An application of the participatory approach to develop an integrated water resources management (IWRM) system for the drought-affected region of Bangladesh

Water crises in Latin America are more a consequence of poor management than resource scarcity. Addressing water management issues through better coordination, identification of problems and solutions, and agreement on common objectives to operationalize integrated water resources management (IWRM) could greatly improve water governance in the region. Composite indices have great potential to help overcome capacity and information challenges while supporting better IWRM. We applied one such index, the Freshwater Health Index (FHI) in three river basins in Latin America (Alto Mayo, Perú; Bogotá, Colombia; and Guandu, Brazil) to assess freshwater ecosystem vitality, ecosystem services, and the water governance system in place. The approach included convening management agencies, water utilities, planning authorities, local NGOs and industries, community groups and researchers to co-implement the FHI. The results provide detailed information on the ecological integrity of each basin and the sustainability of the ecosystem services being provided. All three basins show very low scores for governance and stakeholder engagement, thus improving both in the region should be a priority. The results also shed light on how the FHI framework can help inform decision-making to improve IWRM implementation by facilitating stakeholder engagement while contributing to coordination, identification of problems and solutions as well as agreement on common objectives. Because implementation of IWRM is part of the solution for the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6.5 (“By 2030, implement IWRM at all levels, including through transboundary cooperation as appropriate”), our case studies can serve as examples to other Latin American countries to achieve SDG 6.5.

Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) is globally regarded as a suitable alternative to adapt to the effects of Climate Change. Chile, México, and Brazil are developing countries that are highly vulnerable to climate change and have different water management models, thus presenting the strengths and challenges for IWRM compliance. Our analysis aims to compare advances in terms of the achievement of SDG 6.5.1 in these countries, in relation to the degree of implementation of IWRM and their correlation to the OECD principles on Water Governance. We used IWRM Data Portal, UNEP-DHI, including 33 indicators, and we used the proposal of Bertule et al., (2018) to analyze the relationship among IWRM and governance. Our findings indicate that the Chilean model has low social involvement in water management due to a market-based water governance system with weak state regulation and lack of legal instruments to implement watershed management programs. In Mexico and Brazil, there is greater citizen involvement in watershed organizations, and ecosystems and aquifers have been incorporated to aid with water management. These three countries show a low performance of gender indicators, deficient financing, and information in terms of decision-making, and a lack of effective mechanisms for social participation, which are key aspects of governance.

The role and design of participation for the successful implementation of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) has been intensely discussed. However, in the specific context of applied IWRM research, benefits of participation and specific conditions to realize these benefits are often neglected. Such disregard is problematic when scientific driven IWRM concepts are increasingly interwoven with actual IWRM implementation. In order to discover specific benefits and challenges of conducting participation in applied research, both quantitative and qualitative interviews were carried out amongst 15 German IWRM research projects in emerging and developing countries and contrasted with hypotheses in the literature. Results show that researchers tend to agree with hypotheses in the literature, e.g. in terms of the positive role of participatory processes, its different functions and specific design principles in term of skills of researchers and frame conditions. However, researchers of the IWRM funding initiative especially highlighted challenges with regards to several prerequisites like skills of researchers to conduct participatory processes or structural conditions. For instance, hard skills are often missing, e.g. the knowledge on how to design participation processes in view of the respective research goal. Moreover, unlike practitioners, researchers are rarely trained in soft skills like intercultural competences for adjusting participatory approaches to different cultural contexts. In terms of structural conditions, the German BMBF research context shows temporal and financial restrictions. Furthermore, conditions within the target country such as political and social aspects are important and not easy to overlook if the project is based in Germany like it is the case in most of the research projects investigated.

This paper provides a synthesis of the main issues discussed at a conference (International Conference on Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) entitled: Lessons from Implementation in Developing Countries which took place from 10 to 12 March 2008 in Cape Town, South Africa, at the Cape Town International Convention Centre) which was coordinated to share experiences and lessons learned on the implementation of IWRM in developing countries. This paper discusses six themes that emerged from the conference. These themes provide a perspective on the current status of IWRM and assist in formulating the agenda for further research and implementation approaches based on lessons learned. Firstly, although there is considerable history and international acceptance of IWRM, there is still ongoing debate on how IWRM is defined. However, aside from these debates there is general agreement on the principles underlying IWRM and the potential it holds for managing complex systems that cannot be adequately achieved through the single-sector management approach of the past. To overcome past management paradigms, new capacity building approaches are required. Secondly, implementation of IWRM requires a balance between policy and institutional support and community level projects that have small-scale tangible results for the poor. Thirdly, IWRM involves integration across many spheres, specifically the integration of groundwater management into long-term water resource planning. Fourthly, although there is general endorsement of the importance of public engagement in supporting IWRM approaches, effective public engagement requires considerable strategic planning to ensure that efforts are both applicable and relevant to those involved. Fifthly, the conference highlighted the importance of developing appropriate economic methods and instruments to address the economic trade-offs and decisions that are apparent in water management. Finally, appropriate data, information systems and indicators are required to adequately monitor progress with IWRM implementation.Keywords: integrated water resource management, implementation, managing complex systems, poverty alleviation

Despite increasing awareness of the importance of wetland ecosystem services and an increase in the number of countries with policies aimed at preventing degradation and destruction of wetlands, effective protection and restoration is often constrained by the limited capacity of governmental and non-governmental organizations responsible for wetland management. This article defines capacity development in terms of the knowledge, skills and attitudes of people, and highlights the levels at which capacity development takes place: Individual, organisational and institutional. Capacity development is presented as a long-term, integrated process of collaborative and experiential learning by all stakeholders. A number of structured steps in the capacity development process is outlined: Assessment, during which gaps in capacity are identified; vision development, which describes the future goal of the capacity development effort; strategy development, which focuses on the specific interventions needed to achieve the vision; action planning and implementation; evaluation of impact, sustainability, relevance and effectiveness; and monitoring of the progress made. The article concludes with some recent examples of wetland capacity development initiatives.

Water crisis has been ranked amongst the top 10 global challenges with estimates predicting up to a 40 percent fall in freshwater resources by 2030. On top of that, water demand has far outpaced current population growth and experiencing water scarcity due to rising average global temperatures exacerbated by climate change. Hence, the environmental and sustainable management of water resources is a global imperative, and Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) has emerged as a key paradigm to address the multifaceted challenges associated with water management. This chapter discusses the dynamic interplay between IWRM and environmental governance through capacity developments emphasising their pivotal roles in promoting sustainable water resource management. In terms of the governance process, it is only possible to promote and apply IWRM through a well-defined policy for capacity development, ensuring transparency and accountability in water management and addressing inequality, gender biasness supported by available tools under Global Water Partnership (GWP).

Water shortage and management are crucial worldwide concerns affecting both wealthy and developing countries. Sustainable water management seeks to enhance water use while guaranteeing the enduring sustainability of water supplies. Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) has developed into a complete framework for tackling the complexity of water management by including environmental, social, and economic dimensions in a holistic manner. This study article evaluates the efficacy of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) in attaining sustainable water management. This study assesses the advantages and drawbacks of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) solutions using case studies from water-scarce areas and empirical research, emphasizing water governance, stakeholder engagement, policy integration, and ecosystem vitality. The findings underscore the crucial role of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) in reconciling conflicting water needs, mitigating disputes over water resources, and fostering sustainable behaviors, while also revealing problems in its execution. These results provide insights for enhancing Integrated Water Resources Management frameworks to more effectively tackle future water concerns.

‘Capacity development’ implies a promise of growing self‐reliance, national ownership and sustainability, yet practice seems consistently to fall short of this emancipatory promise. This introduction argues for a reframing of capacity development for emancipatory social change. Articles in this IDS Bulletin show how understanding and practice must engage with complexity, appreciate the importance of specific culture and context, and continually address the role of power in shaping relationships, understandings and practices. Values and leadership are fundamental drivers of capacity development processes. This IDS Bulletin argues against a deficit approach based on linear causal logic and replicable ‘best practice’. Instead, practitioners are encouraged to develop a detailed understanding of the culture and dynamics of specific contexts, to detect energies for positive change and work to connect and facilitate them. Learning is at the centre of the approach. Capacity development is understood as a collective process of learning in action for social change. Support for capacity development processes demands a critical development practice that implies mutual learning, with an emphasis on reflective and experiential approaches. However, this reframing implies enormous challenges for development practice, and therefore considerable personal and organisational commitment.

In rural north-western China, the tension between economic growth and ecological crises demonstrates the limitations of dominant top-down approaches to water management. In the 1990s, the Chinese government adopted the Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) approach to combat the degradation of water and ecological systems throughout its rural regions. While the approach has had some success at reducing desertification, water shortage, and ecological deterioration, there are important limitations and obstacles that continue to impede optimum outcomes in water management. As the current IWRM approach is instituted through a top-down centralized bureaucratic structure, it often fails to address the socio-political context in which water management is embedded and therefore lacks a complete treatment of how power is embedded in the bureaucracy and how it articulates through economic growth imperatives set by the Chinese state. The approach has relied on infrastructure heavy and technocratic solutions to govern water demand, which has worked to undermine the focus on integration and public participation. Finally, the historical process through which water management mechanisms have been instituted are fraught with bureaucratic fragmentation and processes of centralization that work against some of its primary goals such as reducing uncertainty and risk in water management systems. This article reveals the historical, social, political, and economic processes behind these shortcomings in water management in rural northwestern China by focusing on the limitations of a top-down approach that rely on infrastructure, technology, and quantification, and thereby advances a more holistic, socio-political perspective for water management that considers the state-society dynamics inherent in water governance in rural China.

Integrated water resources management (IWRM) assumes coherence between cognate aspects of water governance at the river basin scale, for example water quality, energy production and agriculture objectives. But critics argue that IWRM is often less ‘integrated’ in practice, raising concerns over inter-sectoral coherence between implementing institutions. One increasingly significant aspect of IWRM is adaptation to climate change-related risks, including threats from flooding, which are particularly salient in England. Although multiple institutional mechanisms exist for flood risk management (FRM), their coherence remains a critical question for national adaptation. This paper therefore (1) maps the multi-level institutional frameworks determining both IWRM and FRM in England; (2) examines their interaction via various inter-institutional coordinating mechanisms; and (3) assesses the degree of coherence. The analysis suggests that cognate EU strategic objectives for flood risk assessment demonstrate relatively high vertical and horizontal coherence with river basin planning. However, there is less coherence with flood risk requirements for land-use planning and national flood protection objectives. Overall, this complex governance arrangement actually demonstrates de-coherence over time due to ongoing institutional fragmentation. Recommendations for increasing IWRM coherence in England or re-coherence based on greater spatial planning and coordination of water-use and land-use strategies are proposed.

Integrated water resources management provides a set of ideas to help us manage water more holistically. However, these ideas have been formalized over time in what has now become, in capitals, Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM), with specific prescriptive principles whose implementation is often supported by donor funding and international advocacy. IWRM has now become an end in itself, in some cases undermining functioning water management systems, in others setting back needed water reform agendas, and in yet others becoming a tool to mask other agendas. Critically, the current monopoly of IWRM in global water management discourse is shutting out alternative thinking on pragmatic solutions to existing water problems. This paper explains these issues and uses examples of transboundary water governance in general, groundwater management in India and rural–urban water transfer in China to show that there are (sometimes antithetical) alternatives to IWRM which are being successfully used to solve major water problems. The main message is that we should simply get on with pragmatic politics and solutions to the world's many individual water challenges.

In the slipstream of the Rio + 20 Earth Summit in 2012 which articulated ‘The future we want’, on 29–31 May 2013, at the 5th Delft Symposium on Water Sector Capacity Development, UNESCO-IHE convened development practitioners, researchers, sector specialists, policy makers and capacity development specialists to examine who will take the lead in developing capacity ‘from Rio to reality’. This paper maps some of the major challenges and choices to increase water security in the 21st century, outlines trends and relevant models in leadership development, and explores how leadership can be nurtured and catalyzed through capacity development for individuals, organizations and networked communities to deliver on our shared visions, especially in developing countries. Leadership practice, by individuals and organizations, is examined in a range of short cases studies. The authors propose the adoption of modern approaches that will expand individual and collective leadership at all levels and combine cognitive competencies, including in-depth knowledge of integrated water resources management (IWRM), with transformational individual development.

Cambodia is currently embarked on a significant programme of irrigation development. The technical design of irrigation projects has generally improved, but there remain a number of challenges in the governance of irrigation that inhibit the schemes from working effectively, equitably and sustainably. This study investigates the extent to which the governance of irrigation matches the requirements of diverse irrigation schemes through detailed ethnographic study of three schemes: Rolous and Stung Chinit in Kampong Thom province and Damnak Ampil (DAP) in Pursat province. Specifically, it investigates (1) the degree of match between the governance arrangements and requirements imposed by the physical configuration of these schemes, and (2) ways in which stipulated governance arrangements have been modified in response to local requirements. The study found discrepancies between actual governance practices and the ideal governance principles, as outlined in Participatory Irrigation Management Development (PIMD) and Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM), and the spatial and infrastructural context of the schemes. Specifically, it was observed that the scale of the command areas is beyond the scope of Farmer Water User Community (FWUC) members and activists who do not have adequate technical knowledge or finances to repair, develop, and maintain irrigation infrastructure across their respective schemes. Second, the actual practice of irrigation management at the scheme and sub-scheme level diverges significantly from the principles of PIMD and IWRM. For example, the actual roles of the FWUCs fall short of those stipulated in their mandate and are not particularly well-executed. The strongest role of the FWUCs across different case-study schemes is that of a mediator between farmers and PDOWRAM, rather than their principal mandate of competently managing the schemes. The FWUCs also have a role in allocating water from primary and secondary canals, resolving minor conflicts between farmers within the community, and collecting Irrigation Service Fees; however, the execution of these tasks is inconsistent and often lacking. The findings conclude that the current governance arrangements deviate from both the requirements imposed by the physical configuration of the schemes and the idealised theoretical governance purported in the PIMD policies. The study then suggests that to fix the problems, changes need to be made to policy and FWUC mandates as well as to the governance structure to provide more support to FWUCs and to adapt them to be more closely aligned with existing governance frameworks.