The wicked problems of water quality governance

This is the first special issue prepared on behalf of the International Water Resources Association (IWRA) under the aegis of its Science, Technology and Publications Committee. These IWRA special issues are intended to complement existing IWRA initiatives. Currently there are three of these: (1) improving understanding of what water quality is sufficient for different uses; (2) promoting smarter water technologies and management practices; and (3) helping bridge the often yawning gaps between science and policy. Here we begin with the first of these, water quality, but with a view to setting the stage for dealing with the others in future issues.

IWRA recognizes the need to take action within the three areas listed above and has put them at the core of the organization’s activities. First, in collaboration with the former French Commission for Water and the Aquatic Environment (ONEMA, now part of the French Agency for Biodiversity) and the World Water Council, IWRA is producing the report Developing a Global Compendium on Water Quality Guidelines: Which Quality for Which Use? To support this effort IWRA has formed a water quality thematic group consisting of experts in this field among its members. IWRA was the thematic champion for water quality at the 7th World Water Forum in Daegu, Korea, in 2015 and the topic lead for water quality under the biodiversity theme at the 8th World Water Forum in March 2018. Second, in Collaboration with K-Water, the Korean water authority, IWRA is producing a report describing 11 case studies of smart water management around the world. And finally, in collaboration with ONEMA, IWRA produced a report on the science–policy interface in 2016 based on an extensive survey of organizations operating in this interface. IWRA continued to work in this area by making Bridging Science and Policy the overarching theme of its XVI World Water Congress, held in Cancun, Mexico, in May 2017. One of the major outputs of the Congress was the Cancun Declaration (Water International 42(7), 925–927), a call for action to bridge science and water policy-making for sustainable development.

This special issue on water quality governance is a continuation of IWRA’s work and forms part of its contribution to the 8th World Water Forum, in Brasilia, Brazil, March 18–23, 2018. In the first paper of this volume, Heather Bond provides a more detailed record of IWRA’s work in this area and summarizes the results and findings from the report Developing a Global Compendium on Water Quality Guidelines: Which Quality for Which Use?

Water managers face a variety of complex and interconnected problems. Continued population and economic growth, coupled with increased pollution of scarce freshwater sources and climate change, creates multiple wicked problems for water managers. Hence, there is an urgent need to implement drastic measures, if we are to meet future demands for human consumption, economic use and ecosystem health. Continue business as usual, supplying new freshwater, treated for human consumption, to meet all domestic, municipal, agricultural and industrial needs is not an option. Increased demand for and pollution of freshwater have also made this option economically impossible. One obvious measure is to reuse water several times and use water of different characteristics to meet the needs for which each quality is suitable. This will increase available supply, reduce demand on new freshwater and reduce the cost of water for each use.

To set the scene for this issue we invited six world water experts who are IWRA members to each identify one wicked problem of their choice that is likely to beset water quality management over the next 20 years and provide a brief elaboration. The results represent the range of the challenges presented by water quality: (1) defining water quality parameters for each water use; (2) putting each water quality to its most beneficial use; (3) the soil and water nexus; (4) pharmaceuticals in waters; (5) how to monitor and enforce water quality standards; and (6) balancing economic development and water protection.

Lymer et al. then provide a useful exploration of water quality management in the context of the core theme of the forum Ensuring Water Quality from Ridge to Reef. Freshwater, marine waters and coastal zones are most often separate analytical and policy domains – yet they are interconnected in reality, as coastal dead zones and floating continents of detritus have clearly illustrated. The authors draw on experiences from the Danube River and Black Sea, East Asian seas, and the Baltic Sea to identify issues that need addressing when implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in order to achieve water quality objectives for fresh, coastal and marine waters.

Tan and Humphries also look at the importance of ensuring water quality from ridge to reef, in the context of the Great Barrier Reef in Australia, a World Heritage Site. This reef has great economic and cultural values for Queensland in particular and Australia in general. The reef is under threat due to diffuse water pollution from a complex set of land uses in the catchment, especially agricultural activities resulting in runoff of nutrients, pesticides and sediment. As a result, the World Heritage Committee has threatened that it may deem the reef a World Heritage in Danger. The paper examines the range of environmental, social, political and legal conditions that have enabled or hindered the success of diffuse water quality governance associated with managing the impacts of nonpoint-source pollutants on the reef.

Market-based instruments have often been promoted as effective tools to manage water pollution in a catchment and thus to help manage water quality ‘from source to sea’, as discussed by Lymer et al. and Tan and Humphries, but their use for the management of nonpoint-source pollution has been scarce and their success even scarcer. Kerr and Bjornlund explore the reasons for this lack of success in the context of an intensive livestock-producing region of southern Alberta, Canada. They identify four distinct discourses representing groups of stakeholders: incentive orienteers, rural advocates, honest brokers and progressive producers – each providing a unique perspective and advice that the government of Alberta needs to consider when integrating market-based instruments into water management.

Point-source pollution of coastal waters, especially when toxic, can have long-term blowback effects. Hikaru Kobayashi, retired administrative vice minister, Ministry of Environment, Japan, provides a unique insider’s view of the policy, legislative and judicial processes associated with managing the impact of water quality issues in relation to industrial pollution and its effect at the end of the system. The paper explains the drawn-out and complex process of settling compensation claims associated with Minamata disease caused by consuming fish and shellfish with a high mercury content due to industrial pollution and resulting in significant multiple-generational human suffering.

Policy implementers need consistent laws to manage water quality across jurisdictions. Vystavna et al. examine the complex issues of adapting the water laws of three countries, which previously were part of the Soviet Union, into the EU water legislation framework, with a focus on water quality, pollution and management. They identify three areas in which significant discrepancies exist between the current water laws of the three countries and the EU framework, which need to be addressed in future law revisions: (1) fragmentation resulting in poorly defined responsibilities; (2) different laws on property rights and natural resource users’ responsibilities; and (3) outdated water quality standards. These discrepancies are not simply an issue of terminology but more conceptually about how to organize and protect water resources.

Robak and Bjornlund explore another wicked water quality issue facing many small suppliers of potable water. These suppliers face two contradictory pressures: increasingly stringent water quality guidelines, which amplify the cost of potable water supply; and more and more pressure to provide affordable supply of portable water. This raises two issues: (1) Would it be economically more efficient to lower the quality of service, with respect to water quality parameters not affecting human health, and leave it to households to take actions to customize their water quality to their desired level? (2) Is there a difference in the extent to which richer and poorer households are burdened by levels of service that are lower than desired? The findings suggest that there is a high level of willingness to customize supply, so that it might be viable to improve affordability by lowering quality standards. However, the actions taken by poor households to customize their water quality are cheap in the short term but much more expensive in the long term, as they cannot afford the up-front cost of options that are less costly in the long run. Hence, a government wanting to pursue this option might need to consider subsidizing such investments for poor households.

As a final contribution, Dare and Mohtar address the issue of acceptability in the use of treated wastewater for irrigation. Both irrigators and consumers often perceive such use to be undesirable and unsafe. This study confirms that users generally view treated wastewater as unsafe for agricultural uses and perceive existing monitoring and oversight to be insufficient. The authors suggest that to improve this view and develop the use of treated wastewater for irrigation, more extensive information is needed about the real risk and benefits of this practice. Improving the transparency of wastewater management will increase the success and safety of future use of treated wastewater.

We hope that the material that follows contributes to improved understanding of the complex issue of water quality management, and that it informs the debate over these critical issues. We hope the reader finds this introduction to some of IWRA’s work of interest and value, and we welcome your constructive feedback.