Analysis

Integrated Water Management (IWM) is a comprehensive approach that considers the entire water cycle, from source to sea, including the human interactions along the way. It integrates environmental, economic, and social factors to deliver coordinated and resilient water management solutions. IWM is vital for several reasons:

1. IWM takes a holistic approach: IWM addresses water management challenges comprehensively, considering the interconnectedness of water systems. This approach ensures that solutions are sustainable and resilient, addressing not only immediate issues but also long-term impacts.
2. Collaboration and partnerships: IWM fosters collaboration among stakeholders, including government bodies, local councils, water companies, regulators, non-profit organisations, and community groups. By working together, these entities can develop, implement and fund effective water management strategies.
3. Adaptation to climate change: IWM provides a framework for adapting to the increasing frequency and severity of climate-related events such as flooding and drought. It promotes the use of nature-based solutions, circular economy and innovative technologies to help ensure resilience in our response to these events.
4. It offers social and environmental benefits: IWM addresses water management issues and delivers broader social and environmental benefits. The use of nature-based solutions can enhance biodiversity, improve water and air quality, create recreational spaces, therefore contributing to the overall well-being of communities.

How Integrated Water Management works

IWM operates on the principle of systems thinking. A real-world example of IWM can be seen in the Copenhagen Cloudburst Management Plan.¹

This initiative is a key element of Copenhagen’s green infrastructure strategy, aimed at efficiently managing rainfall close to its point of impact. The plan requires cross-sector cooperation and new ways of thinking to manage water on the surface, in its intended location.

This approach could bring together various stakeholders, like the Environment Agency, water utilities, local councils, Natural England, rivers trusts, and drainage boards, to address water management challenges holistically. This ensures that different components of the water cycle, such as surface water, groundwater, and stormwater, are managed in an integrated manner, considering their interdependencies.

Interestingly, the success of the Copenhagen initiative inspired the New York City Cloudburst programme,² with members of the teams who delivered the Copenhagen plan supporting the New York delivery.

Currently, water management in England is characterised as sophisticated but separated and governance is fragmented. The non-stationarity of data, climate change, urban creep and growth, over-abstraction and pollution, flooding and economics mean that the implicit assumptions are no longer valid. There are no specific regulatory or legislative drivers to join up siloed functions, and the Government’s Plan for Water recognises that the legal framework for water and floods has developed incrementally over time, leading to more than 15 different plans and frameworks. It is also necessary to implement Schedule 3 of the Flood & Water Management Act 2010³ – sustainable drainage, along with better pollution management from highway runoff. There are several key elements that make IWM effective:

1. Systems thinking: IWM adopts a systems thinking approach, recognising the interconnections between different elements of the water cycle. This approach helps in identifying root causes of issues and developing comprehensive solutions, avoiding unintended consequences.
2. Stakeholder engagement: Engaging stakeholders from the initial stages of planning to develop an IWM Plan and maintaining dialogue throughout the delivery process is crucial. Taking an Engage-Deliberate-Decide approach ensures that all perspectives are considered, and solutions are co-created, co-funded and co-delivered.
3. Nature-based solutions: IWM emphasises the use of nature-based solutions (NbS) and blue-green infrastructure (BGI) to manage water sustainably. These solutions provide multiple benefits, including flood management, water quality improvement, amenity and cooling effects during periods of hot temperatures and enhanced biodiversity.
4. Innovative technologies: Leveraging digital tools and technologies is a key aspect of IWM. For instance, WSP has developed an Opportunity Mapping Tool to identify collaborative advantages and reduce issues such as flooding, storm overflow spills and water scarcity.

Roundtable Discussions on Integrated Water Management

In 2023-2024 WSP led IWM roundtable discussions nationwide. These included the Midlands and Wales, North East, and South West roundtables, and World Water Tech.⁴ London co-hosted with the Greater London Combined Authority (GLA), covering the London and the South East. WSP brought together experts from across the water industry. Attendees included water companies, local authorities, rivers trusts, internal drainage boards and government organisations, to address climate change and urbanisation challenges through IWM. Each half day roundtable had around 10-15 attendees and the agenda covered a cloud burst case study presentation from WSP-Denmark, discussions on IWM aspirations in the UK, an introduction to nature finance by WSP, open roundtable discussions on barriers and solutions, and plans for future collaboration. These provided valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities associated with IWM. Some key themes and findings drawn out by WSP include:

1. Nature financing and digital technology: Discussions highlighted the importance of nature financing and leveraging digital technology to overcome regulatory barriers and deliver IWM. Stakeholders acknowledged the need for strategic funding and innovative financing mechanisms to support IWM projects.
2. Overcoming regulatory barriers: A complex policy and legal framework hinders the implementation of IWM. Participants emphasised the need for regulatory reforms to facilitate timely integrated water management.
3. Collaboration and partnerships: The roundtables underscored the importance of collaboration among various stakeholders. Successful IWM requires breaking down silos and fostering partnerships across sectors. For example, the Copenhagen cloudburst (an intensive, localised period of rainfall that typically causes flash floods) plan involved extensive cross-sector collaboration (see below).
4. Social value and community engagement: Capturing social value and engaging communities were recurring themes in the discussions. Participants stressed the importance of involving communities in the planning and implementation of IWM projects to ensure their success and sustainability.

Case studies

To illustrate the practical application of IWM principles, here are some notable case studies that WSP have been involved in:

1. Copenhagen Cloudburst Plan

In response to a severe cloudburst in 2011, which resulted in damages for an expense of approximately €1 billion, Copenhagen developed a city-wide cloudburst plan involving over 350 projects and 65 hydraulic masterplans at a cost of €2 billion. The plan brought together ten municipalities and four water companies to deliver a comprehensive set of solutions. This plan demonstrates the effectiveness of cross-sector collaboration and the use of nature-based solutions to manage urban flooding.

2. Somerset Rivers Authority 10-year Strategy and Flood Action Plan

Somerset Rivers Authority (SRA) was launched in January 2015 as a response to the devastating floods of winter 2013-14. WSP worked with the SRA to develop a revised 10-year Strategy and Flood Action Plan 2024-2034.⁵ This was 10 years following the devastating flooding in Somerset during the winter of 2014. The new plan was shaped through wide-ranging consultation and engagement with key stakeholders, including National Park Authorities, the National Farmers Union, the National Trust, environmental groups, and landowners. It was crucial for these stakeholders to contribute to the revised plan, which was discussed in facilitated workshops. Given the SRA’s funding through the council tax precept, public engagement was vital. A series of in-person and online activities, along with an interactive platform, allowed Somerset residents to provide input. The revised plan reflects these priorities and aims for flood resilience. The SRA Flood Action Plan is now a dynamic, evolving document, incorporating feedback, and adapting over time. This approach ensures comprehensive, effective flood management and resilience for Somerset.

3. Midlands and Wales Roundtable

These covered topics such as cloudburst management and nature finance. The meeting highlighted the need for collaborative partnerships and the importance of nature finance in expanding investment opportunities. As well as the advantages of having Schedule 3 of the Flood and Water Management Act (FWMA) enacted in Wales since January 2019, allowing the SuDS Approval Body (SAB) to take on SuDS Adoption and Maintenance. The SAB has been essential in achieving water neutrality and utilising surface water runoff as an asset. This initiative has been supported by various funding sources, including local authorities and environmental organisations, to ensure the successful implementation and maintenance of sustainable drainage systems. This is still yet to be enacted in England.

4. York and North Yorkshire Local Investment in Natural Capital (LINC) programme⁶

LINC aims to develop an investable pipeline of projects leveraging the region’s natural capital. Currently, natural capital supports 11% of the region’s Gross Value Added (GVA), with a goal to increase this by 31% by 2050. The programme is a partnership between North Yorkshire Council, York & North Yorkshire Combined Authority, City of York Council, and the two National Park Authorities (Yorkshire Dales and North York Moors). In the first phase, WSP and Great Yellow collaborated with programme partners to create a Land Use Assessment, investment proposition, and recommendations for positioning North Yorkshire. The second phase focuses on establishing enabling structures like a self-sustaining Accelerator Programme, a local knowledge-sharing forum, and an investment vehicle through pilot projects. These pilots will test mechanisms for private investment and include interventions such as regenerative agriculture, peatland restoration, and natural flood management through to nature-based solutions in urban centres. The aim is to scale these pilots across the region. The buyers’ consortium will be structured in line with demand for ecosystem service type and volume of demand and is likely to consist of a mix of institutional investors and local businesses from whom we are beginning to gather interest.

Conclusion

Integrated Water Management is needed to address the complex challenges of water management in the 21st century. The roundtable discussions and case studies provide valuable insights into the practical application of IWM principles and emphasise the need for continued efforts to overcome barriers and implement sustainable water management solutions.

The recent changes to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and planning policies in England have introduced several updates that could enable a more integrated approach to water management. For example, NPPF around flooding⁷ modifications include the revision of Para. 182, which now requires SuDS to be considered by all development proportionate to the scale and nature of the scheme. This avoids development of fewer than 10 dwellings not including any SuDS provisions – something of concern to Lead Local Flood Authorities (LLFAs) – and recognises that multiple smaller developments can contribute to significant surface water impacts. Additionally, the updated NPPF emphasises the importance of integrating water and flood planning by reforming River Basin Management Plans and flood risk management planning. This integration ensures alignment with water company plans and promotes the use of nature-based solutions.

The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee (EFRA) of the UK Parliament has launched a long-term inquiry into reforming the water sector. This inquiry aims to address several high-profile threats to UK water bodies, including agricultural and sewage pollution, weak resilience of water supply systems, and future water security. The Government has also established an Independent Commission expected to report in mid-2025, separate from the Cunliffe Commission, which focuses specifically on regulating water companies.

There is a desire to change the industry, making it a dynamic, exciting industry to be part of. By embracing IWM, we can create a more resilient, adaptive, and sustainable future for our communities and the environment.

---

Richard Behan is a seasoned professional in the water sector, he is a technical lead in integrated water management (IWM). With experience across regulatory bodies, local government, and consultancy, Richard is known for his innovative approach and collaboration skills. He engages senior stakeholders and contributes to national research and development initiatives, adapting strategies to meet evolving project demands.

---

FWR Analysis Articles are designed to provide a view on topical issues across the water sector. This is an opinion article and does not necessarily reflect the views of the FWR, IES or the author’s current or past affiliated organisations.

---

References

¹ WSP (2023) Copenhagen Climate Adaptation Project. https://www.wsp.com/en-gb/projects/copenhagen-climate-adaptation-project (Accessed: 3 March 2024)

² NYC Environmental Protection (2022) Cloudburst management in NYC for long-term resilience https://www.nyc.gov/assets/dep/downloads/pdf/whats-new/programs-initiatives/cloudburst-management-in-nyc-for-long-term-resilience.pdf (Accessed: 3 March 2024)

³ UK Government (2010) Flood and Water Management Act 2010 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/29/schedule/3 (Accessed: 3 March 2024)

⁴ WSP (2024) 5 Key Lessons from our Integrated Water Management Roundtables https://www.wsp.com/en-gb/insights/5-lessons-from-integrated-water-management  (Accessed: 3 March 2024)

⁵ Somerset Rivers Authority (2024) Somerset Rivers Authority (SRA) Strategy 2024-34 https://www.somersetriversauthority.org.uk/about-somerset-rivers-authority/sra-strategy-2024-34/ (Accessed: 3 March 2024)

⁶ York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority. Local Investment in Natural Capital https://yorknorthyorks-ca.gov.uk/project/local-investment-in-natural-capital/ (Accessed: 3 March 2024)

⁷ UK Government (2012) National Planning Policy Framework https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-planning-policy-framework/14-meeting-the-challenge-of-climate-change-flooding-and-coastal-change (Accessed: 3 March 2024)

---

Featured Header Image: View across Rutland Water, Leicestershire © RW Jemmett | Adobe Stock