Most Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) involve water, but integrated water resources management (IWRM) does not address them explicitly, especially the important health and sanitation goals. IWRM has structural problems and has been used mainly as a development tool rather than a way to manage water. There is no consensus among the professional communities about the methods and value of IWRM, and its inherent problems make assessment of its success difficult. It surveys national levels while most applications are at local levels. Efforts to improve and assess progress in the water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) sector faced similar obstacles, and a new approach based on household surveys was adopted. The mismatch between IWRM and WASH is caused by the polarization between communities of practice for public health and water management. Tools posted by the Global Water Partnership (GWP) do not address WASH explicitly, and the public health profession does not embrace IWRM. These problems can be mitigated by a new definition of IWRM that combines WASH with other water-related issues. To address its complexity, situational archetypes can be mapped to local levels and explained by case studies. To assess progress in IWRM implementation, a new approach should focus on results at local levels rather than methods at the national levels and address the polarization with WASH. SDG reporting relating to water should focus on local outcomes with WASH included, as well as key purposes that include water for food, flood control, drought resilience, and the sustainability of ecosystems. Progress could be assessed via outcome data collected by sector organizations. The GWP program could adopt a new definition of IWRM and new methods of assessment.
Neil Grigg (Sat,) studied this question.