Policy analysis demonstrates the utility of doughnut economics for water management in England, highlighting a path toward balancing social needs with ecological limits.
Impact statementEngland's water system is under intensifying pressure from scarcity, flooding, pollution, biodiversity loss and climate change, yet the prevailing model of water cycle management remains fragmented, resource-intensive and too often focused on managing symptoms rather than causes.This paper argues that doughnut economics offers a timely and practical framework for reform.By bringing together social foundations such as clean and affordable water, wastewater services, flood resilience, public health and access to blue-green space, with ecological ceilings such as freshwater limits, nutrient loading, chemical pollution, climate emissions and biodiversity loss, it provides a coherent basis for whole-system decision-making.The impact of this paper is to reframe water management in England as the stewardship of a social-ecological system that must deliver human wellbeing within environmental limits.It highlights why existing regulatory and investment approaches are insufficient to secure long-term resilience.In doing so, it supports current policy momentum created by the Cunliffe Review and the Government's New Vision for Water, while pushing further towards a genuinely integrated, catchment-based and cross-sectoral approach.Its practical contribution is to translate doughnut thinking into the water context through clear operating principles, measurable outcomes and indicative targets.This creates a language through which regulators, utilities, planners, local authorities and environmental stakeholders can align investment, governance and public expectations.At a time when England needs both renewed public legitimacy and more effective delivery, the paper offers a strategic framework for achieving a safe and just water future that restores rivers, reduces demand, improves resilience and enables prosperity within planetary boundaries.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Will McBain (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: