INTERNATIONAL VIEWPOINT AND NEWS

Integrated water resources management and the Mexicanprospects

Rene Alberto Davila Porcel1 • Gabriela Consuelo Covarrubias Perez1

� Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Introduction

Nowadays global warming is the most alarming environ-

mental threat that affects all water resources worldwide.

Climate is changing across the planet due to the burning of

every kind of fossil fuel, and we can see the melting of

polar ice and glaciers as evidence.It has been predicted that

rain patterns would change, thus affecting global agricul-

tural activities and water supply for all human activities.

CO2 absorption by plants is reduced due to increasing

deforestation, and at the same time, global warming is

killing forests, which are considered as natural water fac-

tories. Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM)

is an adaptation tool to deal with global warming because it

helps communities to have access to freshwater under

changing climate conditions that limit the availability of

water or cause excessive floods and droughts (Indij and

Schreider 2011).

IWRM helps to achieve and ensure the sustainable

development of available water for humanity, for agricul-

tural production and for protection of global ecosystems

because water is an essential resource for human and other

species development. IWRM is vital in many regions of the

world to conserve good water quality and know how to

properly manage its use. Water stress is the consequence of

the incorrect use of water resources and at present it exerts

a constant global pressure. The implementation of an

IWRM shall consider the different uses of the water

resource in an integrated way. This helps us make correct

decisions in search of optimum management of water

resources, and to cover the social, economic and environ-

mental needs that are required to reach the aspired ‘‘sus-

tainable development’’ (Rascon 2012; GWP and INBO

2009).

The IWRM involves a political framework and linea-

ments that facilitate decision making oriented on the

administration of water resources, which helps in wise

planning of water usage. IWRM works as a system of

interaction and consultation with stakeholders, so improv-

ing ways of using and managing water today will reduce

the challenges of tomorrow (GWP 2008).

Until now the implementation of an IWRM in Mexico

has been achieved in an indirect way by a system of

obtaining profit from the efficient use of water, where such

tools as water prices and tariffs, the introduction of

appropriate incentives and subsides and the elimination of

wrongly considered ones, inside and outside of the water

sector. The effective use of the large group of indirect

reassignment tools requires the cooperation between sec-

tors. The forced or strategic implementation of an IWRM

to improve the use of water resources normally is not

achieved through administrative regulation (GWP 2004;

Murillo Lopez 2012).

To help comprehend the vision that IWRM should have,

Table 1 outlines the different definitions of IWRM used by

important organizations internationally and nationally.

In the attempt to decontextualize or globalize the con-

cept of an IWRM, we can define Integrated Water

Resources Management as the system that permits the

management of water, merged with other natural, social

and economic resources oriented to the promote the sus-

tainable development and the preservation of water

& Rene Alberto Davila Porcel

rene.alberto.davila@gmail.com

1 Facultad de Ingenierıa Civil (FIC), Universidad Autonoma de

Nuevo Leon (UANL), Av. Pedro de Alba s/n. Cd.

Universitaria, C.P. 66455 San Nicolas de los Garza,

Nuevo Leon, Mexico

123

Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390

DOI 10.1007/s12665-017-6633-6

resources to increase their use and guarantee the social and

economic welfare based on the application of most realistic

scientific and technologic knowledge with participation of

the interested parts of society.

Initial implementation of IWRM in Latin America

Throughout the world there are global institutional move-

ments that promote putting IWRM into practice. Many of

them are oriented to the achievement of the sustainable

development goals. Amid the most important institutions

that finance IWRM implementation are: Global Water

Partnership, United Nations, International Water Manage-

ment Institute, and World Bank Group, among others. As a

result of implementing these policies in Latin America,

there are success cases:

• In Guatemala, projects that focus on IWRM have made

great progress in successfully supplying potable water

and providing sanitation. The experience made by these

projects shows that community participation in the

planning and implementation of actions in the operative

strategies contributes to the sustainability of the project.

At the same time, the construction of water and

sanitation systems is an incentive for the beneficiaries.

Community organizations manage the water systems

with efficiency and transparency. Also, the establish-

ment of strategic alliances between organizations

allows efficient use of the available resources (Perez

et al. 2010).

• In Mexico, IWRM has a perspective of public policy

approach, increasing and adaptive, that follows the

coordinated management of water, land and the related

natural resources. Public policy promotes that the use of

water resources leads to the achievement of national

economic and social development objectives, prioritiz-

ing equity and environmental sustainability (Valencia

et al. 2007).

Basic concepts and purpose of IWRM in Mexico

IWRM shall be a systematic process to achieve sustainable

development of water resources in social, economic and

environmental contexts. This is based on the multiple uses

of the water resource that are independent (Taylor et al.

2005). IWRM is based on the Dublin principles, which are:

(1) Freshwater is a finite and vulnerable resource, essential

to sustain life, development and environment. (2) Water

development and management should be based on a par-

ticipatory approach, involving users, planners, and policy-

makers at all levels. (3) Women play a central part in the

provision, management, and safeguarding of water. (4)

Water is a public good and has social and economic value

in all its competing uses. (5) IWRM is based on the

equitable and efficient management and sustainable use of

water (SRE and SEMARNAT 2008).

IWRM is used to solve water-related problems such as

droughts, floods, overexploitation of groundwater, water-

borne diseases, degradation of water and soil, several

damages to ecosystems, poverty in rural areas and is used

for the identification or instrumentation of effective solu-

tions (Murillo Lopez 2012).

It is possible to avoid investments that are inappropri-

ately and unduly prioritized, resulting in costly mistakes

arising from poor decisions. IWRMs are based on a long-

Table 1 Integrated water resource management (IWRM) definitions, compiled by Davis (2007)

Organization IWRM definitions and concepts

World Bank Perspective that ensures that social, economic, environmental, and technical dimensions are considered in

the management and development of water resources. (World Bank 2003)

World Conservation Union No universally agreed definition exists. a) The integrated management of all water resources (i.e. surface

water, groundwater, marine waters, etc.). b) The integration of water with the management of other

natural resources (such as soil and native vegetation and even dealing with related management issues

such as alien invasive species). The IUCN asserts that only through the integration of conservation into

IWRM can one ensure ongoing maintenance of the wide range of services provided by ecosystems and

the livelihoods that depend upon them (IUCN 2003a, b)

Global Water Partnership (GWP) A process that promotes the coordinated development and management of water, land, and related

resources to maximize the resultant economic and social welfare in an equitable manner without

compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems (GWP 2000)

U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (USEPA)

A watershed approach is a flexible framework for managing water resource quality and quantity within

specified drainage areas or watershed, includes stakeholder involvement and management actions

supported by sound science and appropriate technology (USEPA 2008)

U.S. Corps of Engineers (USACE) The coordination of activities in pursuit of a set of common goals for water resources development and

maintenance (Cardwell et al. 2004)

390 Page 2 of 12 Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390

123

term cost-benefit assessment that helps to adequately

address water management issues. To implement IWRM,

the macroeconomic context and macroeconomic policies

should be considered that affect the integration of water

into Mexico’s sustainable development. IWRM could build

awareness of environmental impacts from its very con-

ception. For this reason, it is a key tool for social devel-

opment and can help avoid the associated losses by

unsustainable development and the high cost of remedia-

tion processes or the implementation of environmental

sanitation programs that are very costly (GWP 2004;

Murillo Lopez 2012).

IWRM is important for the planning, designing and

managing of infrastructures to guarantee maximum social

and economic profitability of the investments. It must work

synergistically by integrating strategic water use into more

global planning; this approach can produce greater returns

to society and the environment (GWP 2004; Murillo Lopez

2012).

The Mexican IWRM structure and content

In Mexico, IWRM is based on the French model. This

model involves the implementation of important instru-

ments such as:

• Water Management Plans that guide the management

actions and responsibilities of the Watershed

Committee.

• Planning and Water Management Plans that are the

head plans of the local water commissions and aim at

ensuring the interests of local stakeholders. These

commissions can propose works and studies that

consider those interests (Rojas et al. 2013).

The methodology used in Mexico is structured accord-

ing to the precepts of Participatory Strategic Planning

(PEP). The stages of the cycle are described in Fig. 1

(Start, Vision, Analysis, Strategies, IWRM, Implementa-

tion and Evaluation). PEP is a continuous process that

involves inter-institutional articulation as one of its criteria.

It helps identify desired future positions or it requires the

establishment of performance conditions in critical areas of

results where the challenge is to be efficient, timely and

effective (Dıaz-Delgado and Esteller 2010).

Planning is a logical process and is most effective when

viewed as a continuous cycle:

Initiation

Activate the process of planning by obtaining institutional

and governmental commitments. A work team or facilita-

tor group must be created, which is responsible for

organizing, coordinating and consulting continuously with

the interested groups (Dıaz-Delgado et al. 2009; Taylor

et al. 2005).

Stakeholder participation and work planning

The IWRM approach requires political will and leadership,

as well as a strong commitment by leaders who are

responsible for the approval of the plan, and by stake-

holders because joint effort and behavioral changes are the

only ones that can have a significant influence on water

management (Dıaz-Delgado et al. 2009; Taylor et al.

2005).

The central points of the planning process are: (1) pro-

cess management, (2) maintaining political commitment,

(3) ensuring effective stakeholder participation, and (4)

creating awareness of IWRM principles (Dıaz-Delgado

et al. 2009; Taylor et al. 2005).

Vision/policy

It is necessary to build a future vision of water. This vision

should provide principles of guidance and direction for

future actions in relation to water resources. Strategic

planning areas should be identified to build a conceptual

model and form the interdisciplinary unit of the work. It is

necessary that this vision must include sustainable use of

the water resource (Dıaz-Delgado et al. 2009; Taylor et al.

2005).

Situation analysis

The current situation of water resources must be deter-

mined to indicate actions required to achieve the vision.

This phase shows the strengths and weaknesses in the

management of water resources, defines the spatial and

temporal trends of social–economic–environmental

aspects, and identifies specific goals as these identify the

problems, the issues to be resolved and the priorities of the

nation or region (Dıaz-Delgado et al. 2009; Taylor et al.

2005).

Water management strategies

The IWRM plan should be strategically designed, estab-

lishing the goals and identifying the most appropriate

strategies for each of them. Establishing the plans will

give guidelines for undertaking the most efficient and

effective actions for recovery and sustainable develop-

ment of water resources, as well as it will identify priority

areas for action (Dıaz-Delgado et al. 2009; Taylor et al.

2005).

Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390 Page 3 of 12 390

123

IWRM plan

Based on the above, an IWRM plan should be developed,

in which stakeholders and politicians agree on the multiple

concessions and decisions that need to be made. It is

necessary to establish standards and guidelines for the

strategies to be implemented through specific programs,

projects, and actions. The plan must identify the direct

actors, involved groups, time and resources for its execu-

tion. Government approval is important for the mobiliza-

tion of resources and their correct implementation (Dıaz-

Delgado et al. 2009; Taylor et al. 2005).

Implementation

This stage refers to the implementation of agreed programs,

projects and actions together with the operation of insti-

tutional coordination mechanisms. This stage is achieved

when there is a political commitment, a real planning and

when the resources are already available (Dıaz-Delgado

et al. 2009; Taylor et al. 2005).

Evaluation

Once the plan is implemented, it is necessary to monitor

and evaluate progress and results obtained. Also incorpo-

rate experiences and adapt the process to achieve a better

impact on the population’s quality of life (Dıaz-Delgado

et al. 2009; Taylor et al. 2005).

The basic structure of an IWRM should contain five

types of instruments: the volunteer mechanisms, the com-

mand and control instruments, the economic instruments,

government expenditures and the initiatives of collective

interest supported by the law. The following five aspects of

making IWRM effective should be considered:

• Define the study area that should be a watershed,

• The organization of the community that will participate

in the IWRM,

• Establish regulatory, economic, control and penaliza-

tion instruments,

• Generate the technical mechanisms to plan and guar-

antee the flow of information, and

• Define the institutional framework of the co-responsi-

ble managers and users of the management (Rojas et al.

2013).

These principles establish that water is an economic and

social property. Its value varies according to its quality,

availability and the expected benefit through the smart and

equitable allotment to achieve social goals. The IWRM

utilizes watershed management instruments, which are

detailed in Table 2.

The Mexican Watershed Councils

The Watershed Councils (WC) are a mechanism estab-

lished in the National Waters Law to incorporate citizen

participation in decision making on water. These are a

Fig. 1 Implementation process

of integrated water resource

management in Mexico. Source:

modified from Dıaz-Delgado

et al. (2009), GWP and INBO

(2009), Taylor et al. (2005)

390 Page 4 of 12 Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390

123

space for concerted action in which institutions and orga-

nizations associated with IWRM can make their priorities

known in order to plan and manage the sustainable use of

water within their watershed area (CONAGUA 2016a, b;

Olivares 2014).

The National Waters Law defines WCs as: ‘‘Collegiate

organs of mixed integration, which shall be an instance of

coordination, agreement, support, and advice between ‘the

Commission’, including the corresponding Watershed

Technical-Administrative-Legal Unit (‘Organismo’ in

Spanish) with its autonomous character, and federal, state or

municipal entities, the representatives of the water users and

societal organizations, of the hydrological watershed or

group of hydrological watersheds’’ (CONAGUA 2014a, b)

(see Fig. 2).

In 1989, the Lerma-Chapala Watershed as a first WC

was created and in 2009, the last WC was put into place.

Since that year, the entire territory of the country is covered

(CONAGUA 2016a, b; Lopez 2015). There are 26 WCs

throughout the country (Fig. 3), 215 auxiliary bodies, 36

watershed commissions that work at the sub-watershed

level, 50 watershed committees whose scope is the micro-

watershed, 88 groundwater technical committees (COTAS)

that manage aquifers, and 41 clean beaches committees

that promote water management in coastal areas (CON-

AGUA 2016a, b).

The structure to be followed by the WC is shown in

Fig. 4. The objectives of the WC are to:

• Encourage water sanitation and monitor its quality,

• Improve the distribution and use of water,

• Promote the efficient use of water,

• Promote the social and economic environmental value

of water, and

• Promote the conservation and improvement of

ecosystems.

In Article 13 BIS 3 of the Law of National Waters, the

25 functions assigned to the WC are established. The fol-

lowing outlines the most important tasks:

• Specify water use priorities,

• Participate in the definition of the general objectives

and criteria for the formulation of water management

programs in the watershed,

Table 2 Instruments of water management at the theoretical level. Source: Rojas et al. (2013)

Classification tools Types of instruments

Mechanisms volunteers Environmental education

Saving water

Responsible consumption

Water reuse

ISO to improve business management

Information (information systems)

Command and control Permissions

Licensing

Water concessions

Watershed management plans

Creation of committees of watershed (when it is compulsory)

Economic instruments Water use charges

Rates by discharges of water waste

The water concession fees

Subsidies

Funds for the promotion of cleaner processes and technologies

Water markets

Government budget Institutional strengthening

Infrastructure works

Provision of public services or meritorious goods

Collective initiatives covered by the law Popular shares

Guardianships

Environmental committees/organizations of monitoring and control/user associations

Referendums

Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390 Page 5 of 12 390

123

Fig. 2 Watershed Councils in Mexico. Source: Los Consejos de Cuenca, CONAGUA (2016b)

Fig. 3 The structure of Watershed Councils in Mexico. Source: Los Consejos de Cuenca, CONAGUA 2016b

390 Page 6 of 12 Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390

123

• Contribute to sanitation of watersheds and bodies

receiving waste water,

• Contribute to economic, environmental and social

assessment of water,

• Support financing of regional water management,

• Know information and documentation regarding avail-

ability in quantity and quality, uses of water and

registered rights,

• Promote efficient and sustainable use of water, encour-

age reuse and recirculation of water, and

• Promote the establishment of subsidiary bodies:

groundwater technical committees, watershed commit-

tees (at the micro-watershed level), watershed com-

mission (at sub-watershed level) and beach committees

in coastal areas (CONAGUA 2016b).

Water reality and perspectives of Mexico

It was discussed in 1946 that environmental management

should be carried out using a watershed approach but this

did not apply to water management. In 1982, Article 115 of

the Constitution was reformed to decentralize the man-

agement of potable water, sewage and sanitation services.

Since this reform, the municipalities along with the states

took care of these services. In 1989, the ‘‘Comision

Nacional del Agua’’ (CONAGUA) was created as a

decentralized and normative entity to preserve and manage

the national waters. As a result of its work, the National

Waters Law was approved in 1992, and thereafter in 1998,

the implementation of IWRM was initiated and the

hydrological-administrative regions were defined in the

federal official journal Diaro Oficial de la Federacion. In

2004 after the reform of the National Waters Law, the

IWRM approach was formally recognized. The operational

management authorities at the regional level are the

Watershed Organizations (WO) and for community par-

ticipation, the WCs were created. The entity that manages

the IWRM at the regional level is the CONAGUA, which is

responsible for monitoring and managing it through 13

WOs (Fig. 4). To do this, one of the strategies was to

regulate the uses of water in the geographical limits of

watersheds and aquifers. At a national level the National

Water Program is overseen by the ‘‘Secretaria de Medio

Fig. 4 Water stress on the

water resources per hydrologic-

administrative region Source:

Modified from CONAGUA and

SEMARNAT (CONAGUA

2016a)

Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390 Page 7 of 12 390

123

Ambiente y Recursos Naturales’’ (SEMARNAT) along

with CONAGUA (Sosa-Rodriguez 2015a; CONAGUA

2017; Rolland and Vega Cardenas 2010).

Water use in Mexico is distributed as follows: 76.7%

agricultural sector, 14.2% private households, urban and

public, 4.2% industry and 4.9% electric power generation.

Mexico is in the seventh place in the world in respect to its

irrigation area at 6.4 million ha and 35.5% of its agricul-

tural water is from groundwater sources (CONAGUA

2015).

In 2015, the coverage of private homes that had the

service of drinking water was 94.6% and 92.8% had access

to the sanitary drainage service (INEGI 2016). Approxi-

mately 9 million people lack potable water services and

about 11 million people do not have sanitary drainage

service. Minority ethnic groups and women, mainly from

rural areas and peri-urban areas, are the most affected by

the shortage of drinking water and sanitation (CONAGUA

2014b). The supply of drinking water and sanitation is a

significant factor in the health of the population, its access

reduces mortality and morbidity, and the most affected

group is infants (CONAGUA 2014b). Currently, there are

2639 industrial wastewater treatment plants. Basic services

coverage is good, however, approximately 10 million

Mexicans do not have safe access to water and are exposed

to illnesses due to the shortage of sanitation systems

(CONAGUA 2015).

According to FAO, about 70% of freshwater with-

drawals worldwide are made for irrigation in agriculture.

On the other hand, the crop production index increased

from 100 in the period from 2004–2006 to 107.5 in 2010

(FAO 2014). This situation corresponds with the Mexican

reality and is the reason why IWRM makes it possible to

ensure water for food production. In the next 25 years,

another 2–3 billion people will need secure food supplies

around the globe (Tomando Con-Ciencia al Agua, project

of 2015).

Water challenges in Mexico

Water management under the comprehensive approach

does not occur frequently, due to the fact that the envi-

ronmental–economic–social aspects that influence the

watersheds are not considered. In most cases, problems are

solved as they are presented and it is because of this that no

comprehensive solutions are given (Santacruz de Leon

2007).

The challenges that Mexico faces in terms of water

resources management and development cannot be

addressed in a fragmented and uncoordinated way. IWRM

in Mexico faces major challenges in the coming decades

that involve:

• High environmental deterioration,

• High deforestation rates. According to the National

Forestry Program 2014–2018, Mexico has an annual

deforestation rate of 0.24% (SEGOB 2014),

• Changes in land use. According to SEMARNAT for

2011, Mexico had transformed about 55.9 million ha of

natural vegetation to other land uses, which involves

about 29% of its territory (SEMARNAT 2014),

• Accelerated and chaotic urbanization process. The

World Bank reported in 2015 that 79.2% of the

Mexican population lived in urban areas (The World

Bank 2015),

• Proliferation of illicit human settlements,

• Unsustainable water management practices. In Mexico,

sustainable water management requires the participa-

tion of both civil society and government (Murillo

Lopez 2012), and

• Some irreversible impacts on water resources. In

Mexico, 16% of the aquifers are overexploited, 73%

of surface water is contaminated and heavily polluted

by human activities, 4.9% of groundwater is affected by

marine intrusion (Sosa-Rodrıguez 2015a, b).

National Water Program 2014–2018 and Agenda2030

Mexico has a system of concessions and allocations of

surface and groundwater governed by the National Water

Law. However, in terms of water resource administration,

mechanisms and instruments to effectively implement

public policies on water have not been consolidated.

It can be observed that the distribution of water per

capita in the year 1950 compared to the year 2013 has

decreased by 80%. This means that per inhabitant in 1950

there were 18,035 m3 available water per year, whereas

3982 m3 were available in 2013. Presently, 35 million

Mexicans are in a situation of low availability of water in

terms of quantity and quality. Three key aspects were

identified within this problem that Mexico faces: overex-

ploitation, over-concession and contamination of water

resources (CONAGUA 2014b). The biggest issues that face

Mexico are water pollution and wastewater treatment

(Perevochtchikova and Arellano-Monterrosas 2008). In

Mexico, 77% of the national population is concentrated in

regions where only 31% of the average naturally available

water is accessible.

The Agenda 2030 establishes a working method for the

consolidation of a water sustainability policy and is part of

the water management plan of the country. At the same

time, it provides fundamental input for making adjustments

of a structural nature in Mexico’s national water

390 Page 8 of 12 Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390

123

management system. The objective of this Agenda is to

define a strategy to achieve the sustainability of the water

resources from four thematic axes:

1. Watersheds in balance The main challenges are

presented in the Lerma, Bravo, Fuerte, Mocorito,

Presidio-San Pedro, Tula, Balsas and Valle de Mexico

Watersheds. To achieve an equilibrium in watersheds

and aquifers, attention must be paid to increasing

modernization and technification in districts and irri-

gation units for parcels of land, improving and

constructing more infrastructure, as well as boosting

the efficiency of drinking water and sanitation systems.

2. Clean rivers Guarantees are required for the quality of

wastewater discharged in order to design actions that

mitigate the pollution generated by sources like

agricultural returns and to maintain riverbeds that are

free of waste.

3. Universal coverage This refers to the extent to which

the population is provided with drinking water and

sewage systems, as well as the construction of wells,

rainwater harvesting and the implementation of low-

cost technologies for the collection and treatment of

wastewater in rural areas.

4. Safe settlements in the event of catastrophic flooding

Investment projects of 107 billion Mexican pesos (over

5 billion USD) have been identified to minimize the

risk of flooding. These aimed at the construction of

stormwater drainage works and the flood control to be

carried out (CONAGUA 2011).

The vast majority of watersheds in the country are in an

unsustainable situation where water demand increases due

to population growth and needs (CONAGUA 2014b).

Nowadays water shortages at the level of watersheds is one

of the biggest challenges that Mexico faces. These chal-

lenges should be addressed more in the administrative and

political area. Two examples may illustrate the point: (1)

Limits of the watersheds and aquifers are not well estab-

lished and the difficulties of their coordination are associ-

ated with government structures related to water

management. (2) Water scarcity is related to inequity in

access to water and to poverty, rather than shortage of the

same vital resource. It is estimated that by 2025 the water

shortage in Mexico will be a function of the absence of

water infrastructure (Perevochtchikova and Arellano-

Monterrosas 2008).

IWRM benefits in Mexico: successful cases

IWRM has social and economic benefits; these include

food production, energy, and drinking water, among others.

Currently, it is more important and difficult to evaluate the

relative value of these benefits in an acceptable way

(Montenegro 2013).

Water has an important economic, environmental and

social value, so to implement IWRM, it is essential to

incorporate the value of water in all its uses and to rec-

ognize water as an economic resource and a human right.

The economic value of water is associated with the benefits

generated by its use and conservation, the costs associated

with its storage, treatment, distribution, purification and

return to natural ecosystems. Water valuation promotes its

management as an economic resource, where efficient and

equitable use is sought, contributing to achieving sustain-

able development goals that are closely related to the

reduction of poverty, equity, and health (GWP 2015).

From the social point of view, the supply of drinking

water and sanitation coverage are determining factors in

the population health and can prevent the exposure of

pathogens and chemical components such as arsenic,

nitrates and fluoride reducing mortality and morbidity

caused by disease transmission.

Despite the complex legal, administrative and technical

situation facing Mexico, it is possible to find existent cases

where the application of IWRMs provide a better projec-

tion to optimize the use and administration of water in

Mexico.

IWRM of the Lerma–Chapala–Santiagowatershed

The Lerma-Chapala watershed reflects the most advanced

case in IWRM in Mexico. Parts of the territory of the states

of Guanajuato, Jalisco, Mexico, Michoacan and Queretaro

constitute this watershed of 55,019 km2. In addition to

having important agricultural activities, this area is one of

the most industrialized in the country. The Lerma and

Chapala Basin Committee already has an official document

about the ‘‘General rules for the integration, organization,

and operation of the Lerma-Chapala account council’’ that

stipulates the responsibilities of the different stakeholders

to optimize water management. The diagnosis of water in

this watershed has considered variables such as agriculture,

urban public supply, industry, water availability and water

quality. The key problems of the watershed are scarcity,

contaminated surface waters, contamination and overex-

ploitation of aquifers, erosion of soils and deforestation in

the high areas of the watershed. Surface water and

groundwater supplies were determined as insufficient.

Chapala Lake shows eutrophication, sedimentation and

contamination by agricultural, industrial and urban wastes.

Aquifer overexploitation is mainly due to the water use in

cultivated areas. Priority actions were taken that involved

surface-water distribution, a sanitation program, payments

Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390 Page 9 of 12 390

123

for hydrological environmental services, the definition of

general rules of operation, and a special energy tariff for

wastewater treatment plants (CONAGUA 2012; CON-

AGUA 2010; Dıaz-Delgado et al. 2009; Juarez 2011).

IWRM of the Watershed Rıo Bravo

The international Rıo Bravo watershed (USA–Mexico) is

the second most advanced IWRM case in Mexico and the

biggest watershed of Mexico. Its area of 226,275 km2

comprises parts of the territory of the states of Coahuila,

Durango, Chihuahua, Nuevo Leon and Tamaulipas. This

area is one of the most industrialized in northeastern

Mexico and ranks as the third most industrialized area in

the country. The Rio Bravo Committee already has an

official document on the ‘‘General rules for the integration,

organization, and operation of the Rıo Bravo account

council’’, where the responsibilities of the different stake-

holders are designated. The application of this directive on

this watershed will define, implement and improve the

knowledge of the hydrologic system. This information will

help to define water management policy; at the moment no

more information is available.

UNAM’s water management, use and reuseprogram

A singular success case is oriented to water use optimiza-

tion in an overpopulated urban area in Mexico City. As a

result of the interdisciplinary debate and the definition of

concrete actions that seek to benefit human beings and

ecosystems, an effective solution emerges to the problems

of use and conservation of water resources at the facilities

of the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico

(UNAM). In order to create viable and adequate mecha-

nisms to analyze and solve water problems, UNAM

established the UNAM Water Network (RAUNAM) in

2006. This is an interdisciplinary network of knowledge

that links all interested members of the university com-

munity. One of RAUNAM’s main multidisciplinary pro-

jects is the ‘‘UNAM’s Water Management, Use and Reuse

Program’’ (PUMAGUA). The objective of this program is

to implement an integral program of management, use and

reuse of water at the UNAM with the participation of the

entire university community. To realize this, three goals

were defined: (1) reduce consumption of drinking water by

50%, (2) improve water quality for human consumption

(potable and treated water) to meet Mexican standards, and

(3) encourage university community participation in the

responsible water usage (PUMAGUA 2016; Val-Segura

and Arriaga-Medina 2015).

The activities performed to achieve these goals are

organized into three action areas:

• Water balance to design and implement actions to

significantly reduce water supply,

• Periodic controls and analysis of water quality, and

• Social participation.

As a consequence, some significant results emerged.

Campaigns were created to boost water saving on the

university campus. By 2015, water consumption was

reduced by 23%. Drinking water and reused water were

improved by installing automated disinfection systems and

renewing the treatment plant with an ultrafiltration mem-

brane system. Thirteen students involved in this research

and proposals attained university degrees. Thanks to the

success of PUMAGUA, its principles were recognized as

essential for IWRM by UNESCO’s International Hydro-

logical Program (PUMAGUA 2016; Val-Segura and

Arriaga-Medina 2015).

Highlights

Integrated Management of Water Resources and the man-

agement of water in Mexico faces many challenges.

Nowadays IWRM takes a political approach favoring the

use of water resources towards economic objectives and

putting less emphasis on social and environmental aspects.

In reviewing the main concepts and structuring to imple-

ment an IWRM plan, it is evident that IWRM in Mexico

should incorporate approaches from social and environ-

mental perspectives within the framework of sustainable

development and avoid purely technical approaches.

From the three success cases analyzed, it is clear to see

how international directives refer to a watershed manage-

ment vision with important advances to improve water

management, how the policy of organization and operation

including all the interested sectors of the society is being

defined, and how a singular project has been developed to

reduce, recycle and optimize water consumption at the

largest university in Mexico—a project that shows another

face of IWRM in an overpopulated area of the biggest

urban settlement of Mexico. The innovative vision of this

project and its results made it possible for it to be recog-

nized with an UNESCO award. Faced with problems like

aquifer overexploitation, pollution of surface water and

groundwater, water deficits in many areas and climate

change, IWRM in the Mexican context will develop a key

role in optimizing water knowledge and improving water

use to reach sustainable development of its population. It is

390 Page 10 of 12 Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390

123

important to change the vision we have of water, from an

inexhaustible resource to a scarce and expensive resource

to manage. This vital resource needs to be managed in a

responsible beneficial way for future generations. It is

necessary include the participation of universities, research

centers, societal organizations and governments at all

levels to apply a proper policy in water issues, to guarantee

future water access and to reduce the pollution and water

lost.

Acknowledgements The authors are grateful for the support and

information provided by the National Water Council (CONAGUA),

in particular, to the Rio Bravo Watershed Organization.

References

Cardwell H, Cartwright L, Martin L (2004) Integrated water resource

management: definitions and principles, impediments, and

solutions. Draft version 3. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Institute for Water Resources, Alexandrıa

CONAGUA (2010) Reglas Generales de Integracion, Organizacion y

Funcionamiento del Consejo de Cuenca Lerma-Chapala. Grupos

Relaciona. Comision Nacional del Agua

CONAGUA (2011) Agenda del Agua 2030. In: Comision Nacional

del Agua (ed) Secretarıa del Medio Ambiente y Recursos

Naturales, Tlalpal, p 70

CONAGUA (2012) Informacion Basica del Consejo de Cuenca

Lerma Chapala 2012. Consejo de CUenca Lerma Chapala,

pp 1–26

CONAGUA (2014a) Ley de Aguas Nacionales y su Reglamento.

Diario Oficial de La Federacion, pp 1–107. Retrieved from

http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/16.pdf

CONAGUA (2014b) Plan Nacional de Desarrollo 2013–2018:

Programa Nacional Hıdrico. In: Comision Nacional del Agua

(ed) Programa Nacional Hıdrico, 2014 edn. Mexico, DF, p 142

CONAGUA (2015) Estadısticas del Agua en Mexico, edicion 2015.

In: Comision Nacional del Agua (ed) Mexico, 2016, p 298

CONAGUA (2016a) Estadısticas del Agua en Mexico, Edicion 2016.

In: Comision Nacional del Agua (ed) Mexico, 2016, p 282

CONAGUA (2016b) Los Consejos de Cuenca. Retrieved from http://

www.gob.mx/conagua/documentos/consejos-de-cuenca

CONAGUA (2017) Conoces la Relacion entre las Montanas y los

Organismos de Cuenca? Retrieved from http://www.gob.mx/

conagua/articulos/conoces-la-relacion-entre-las-montanas-y-los-

organismos-de-cuenca?idiom=es

Davis MD (2007) Integrated water resource management and water

sharing. J Water Resour Plann Manag 133(5):19. doi:10.1061/

(ASCE)0733-9496(2007)133:5(427)

Dıaz-Delgado C, Esteller M V (2010). Desarrollo de Capacidades

para la GIRH en America Latina: Impacto y Avances. LA-

WETnet, Red Latinoamericana de Desarrollo de Capacidades

Para La Gestion Integrada de Los Recursos Hıdricos; PNUD.

Programas de Las Naciones Unidas Para El Desarrollo, p 78

Dıaz-Delgado C, Esteller MV, Velasco A, Martınez J, Arriaga C,

Vilchis A, Pena A (2009) Guıa de planeacion estrategica

participativa para la gestion integrada de los recursos hıdricos

de la cuenca Lerma-Chapala-Santiago, Capıtulo Estado de

Mexico, 1st edn. Centro Interamericano de Recursos del Agua,

Facultad de Ingenierıa de la Universidad Autonoma del Estado

de Mexico y Red Interinstitucional e Interdisciplinaria de In-

vestigacion, Consulta y Coordinacion Cientıfica para la

Recuperacion de la Cuenca Lerma-Chapala-Santiago (RED

LERMA), Mexico

FAO (2014) FAO Statistical Yearbook 2014: Asia and the Pacific

food and agriculture. In: Food and Agriculture Organization of

the United Nations (ed) Asia and the Pacific food and

agriculture, Bangkok

GWP (2000) Integrated water resource management: TAC Back-

ground Paper. In: Global Water Partnership (ed), 2000 edn.

Global Water Partnership, Stockholm

GWP (2004) Catalyzing Change: A handbook for developing

integrated water resources management (IWRM) and water

efficiency strategies. In: Global Water Partnership (ed), 2004

edn. Stockholm, Sweden, p 56

GWP (2008) Principios de Gestion Integrada de los Recursos

Hıdricos: Bases para el Desarrollo de Planes Nacionales. In

Global Water Partnership (ed), 2008 edn. Global Water

Partnership, Svensk Information, p 12

GWP (2015) Hablemos sobre el Agua. Retrieved from https://

gwpcam.wordpress.com/2015/07/24/girh-reconoce-el-valor-del-

agua/

GWP, INBO (2009) Manual para la Gestion Integrada de Recursos

Hıdricos en Cuencas. In: Global Water Partnership and Interna-

tional Network Of Watershed Organizations (eds), 2009 edn.

Printed Matter, Inc., New York, p 112

Indij D, Schreider M (2011) Gestion Integrada de los Recursos

Hıdricos (GIRH) y su Aprovechamiento para la Agricultura

frente al Cambio Climatico en la Region Andina. In: Programa

AACC—Adaptacion de la agricultura y el aprovechamiento de

aguas de la agricultura al cambio climatico en los Andes (ed),

digital edn. Peru, p 76

INEGI (2016) Estadısticas a Proposito del Dıa Mundial del Agua (22

DE MARZO). In: Instituto Nacional de Estadıstica y Geografıa

(ed). Aguas Calientes, Mexico, p 10

IUCN (2003a) Watershed management and devolution of authority.

In: The World Conservation Union (ed) Water law series, Issue

3. IUCN Environmental Law Centre, Gland, Switzerland

and Cambridge, UK

IUCN (2003b) Conservation and integrated water resource manage-

ment. In: The World Conservation Union (ed) Water law series,

Issue 4. IUCN Environmental Law Centre, Gland, Switzerland

and Cambridge, UK

Juarez A (2011) Planeacion para el Manejo Integral de la Cuenca

Lerma–Chapala 2008–2011: aplicacion del enfoque MICCA

(componentes de gobernanza). Corazon de La Tierra, pp 1–7

Lopez J A (2015) Estudios de Gestion Hıdrica: Los Consejos de

Cuenca en Mexico. Retrieved from http://sitios.colson.edu.mx/

baam/los-consejos-de-cuenca-en-mexico-platica-con-el-ing-

julio-alfonso-lopez-hernandez/

Montenegro S (2013) La importancia de la GIRH para la gestion de

cuencas transfronterizas. In: Ciudad de Guatemala, Guatemala:

Global Water Partnership Central America

Murillo Lopez F (2012) El enfoque de la gestion integral en el uso de

los recursos hıdricos ante la problematicca de la escasez, calidad

y saneamiento del agua en Mexico, Universidad de Sonora

Olivares R (2014) Los Consejos de Cuenca en la Gestion del Agua.

Consejo de Cuenca del Valle de Mexico, Mexico

Perevochtchikova M, Arellano-Monterrosas JL (2008) Gestion de

cuencas hidrograficas: experiencias y desafıos en Mexico y

Rusia. Revista Latinoamericana de Recursos Naturales 4:13

Perez S, Orozco JA, Miron A, Tabora F (2010) Experiencias de Agua

Potable y saneamiento con Enfoque de Gestion Integrada de

Recursos Hıdricos (GIRH) en Guatemala. In: Global Water

Partnership Central America (GWP Centroamerica) & La

Alianza por el Agua (eds). Tegucigalpa, M.D.C., Honduras, p 26

Proyecto: Tomando Con-Ciencia al Agua (2015) Introduccion a la

Gestion Integrada de los Recursos Hıdricos

Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390 Page 11 of 12 390

123

PUMAGUA (2016) Gestion Integrada de Recursos Hıdricos: el

ejemplo de PUMAGUA

Rascon O (2012) El sector agua en Mexico: Situacion actual y

estrategias para su desarrollo sustentable. In: Los retos y las

oportunidades de la ingenierıa en la gestion del agua en Mexico.

Academia de Ingenierıa de Mexico, Mexico, p 106

Rojas J, Perez M, Malheiros T, Madera C, Prota M, Dos Santos R

(2013) Analisis comparativo de modelos e instrumentos de

gestion integrada del recurso hıdrico en Suramerica: Los casos

de Brasil y Colombia. Revista Ambiente y Agua 8:25

Rolland L, Vega Cardenas Y (2010) La gestion del agua en Mexico.

Polis 6(2):155–188. Retrieved from http://biblio.juridicas.unam.mx

Santacruz de Leon G (2007) Hacia una gestion integral de los

recursos hıdricos en la Cuenca del Rıo Valles, Huasteca, Mexico.

(Doctor en Ciencias Ambientales), Universidad Autonoma de

San Luis Potosı

SEGOB (2014) Programa Nacional Forestal 2014–2018. Secretaria de

Gobernacion Diaro Oficial de la Federacion (official journal of

the Ministry of the Interior) Retrieved from http://www.dof.gob.

mx/nota_detalle.php?codigo=5342498&fecha=28/04/2014

SEMARNAT (2014) El Medio Ambiente en Mexico 2013–2014:

Ecosistemas Terrestres. Secretarıa del Medio Ambiente y

Recursos Naturales (Ministry of the Environment and Natural

Resources) Retrieved from: http://apps1.semarnat.gob.mx/dgeia/

informe_resumen14/02_ecosistemas/2_2.html

Sosa-Rodrıguez F (2015a) Los retos de la gestion del agua ante el

cambio climatico

Sosa-Rodriguez F (Producer) (2015b) Evaluacion de la gestion integral

de los recursos hıdricos en la cuenca de Mexico. Retrieved from

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxD9J5VhR8w

SRE, SEMARNAT (2008) Declaracion de Dublın sobre el agua y el

desarrollo sostenible. Paper presented at the international

conference Sobre el Agua y el Medio Ambiente: El Desarrollo

en la Perspectiva del Siglo XXI

Taylor P, Jonker L, Donkor E, Guio D, Mbodji I, Mlingi C, Lopez D

(2005) Planes de Gestion Integrada del Recurso Hıdrico: Manual

de Capacitacion y Guıa Operacional. In: Red Internacional para

el Desarrollo de Capacidades en la Gestion Integrada del

Recurso Hıdrico Cap-Net, Global Water Partnership GWP, and

United Nations Development Programme UNDP (eds) Manual

de Capacitacion y Guıa Operacional, p 107

The World Bank (2003) Water resources sector strategy: Strategic

directions for World Bank engagement, 2003rd edn. The World

Bank, Washington, DC

The World Bank (2015) Base de datos mundial: Indicadores del

desarrollo mundial. Retrieved from http://databank.bancomun

dial.org/data/reports.aspx?source=2&series=SP.URB.

TOTL.IN.ZS&country=MEX

USEPA (2008) Handbook for developing of watershed plans to

restore and protect our waters. In: US Environmental Protection

Agency (ed) USEPA, Washington, DC

Valencia JC, Dıaz JJ, Vargas L (2007) La Gestion Integrada de los

Recursos Hıdricos en Mexico: Un nuevo paradigna en el manejo

del agua. Gestion y polıtica de cuencas, p 46

Val-Segura R, Arriaga-Medina J (2015) Chapter 6: water resources

management and sustainability in Mexico. In: S. International

(ed) Sustainability of integrated water resources management:

water governance, climate and ecohydrology, Switzerland,

pp 87–99. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-12194-9

390 Page 12 of 12 Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390

123