Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390
DOI 10.1007/s12665-017-6633-6
INTERNATIONAL VIEWPOINT AND NEWS
Integrated water resources management and the Mexican
prospects
René Alberto Dávila Pórcel1 • Gabriela Consuelo Covarrubias Pérez1
 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
& René Alberto Dávila Pórcel
rene.alberto.davila@gmail.com
1
Facultad de Ingenierı́a Civil (FIC), Universidad Autónoma de
Nuevo León (UANL), Av. Pedro de Alba s/n. Cd.
Universitaria, C.P. 66455 San Nicolás de los Garza,
Nuevo León, Mexico
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’’ (Rascón 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 México
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 López 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
123
390 Page 2 of 12 Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390

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

World Bank
World Conservation Union
Global Water Partnership (GWP)
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA)
U.S. Corps of Engineers (USACE)
Perspective that ensures that social, economic, environmental, and technical dimensions are considered in
the management and development of water resources. (World Bank 2003)
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)
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)
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)
The coordination of activities in pursuit of a set of common goals for water resources development and
maintenance (Cardwell et al. 2004)

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.
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).

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 (Pérez
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
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 López 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-

123
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390
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 López 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 López
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 (Dı́az-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
Page 3 of 12 390
organizing, coordinating and consulting continuously with
the interested groups (Dı́az-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 (Dı́az-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 (Dı́az-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 (Dı́az-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 (Dı́az-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 (Dı́az-Delgado et al. 2009; Taylor et al.
2005).
123
390 Page 4 of 12
Fig. 1 Implementation process
of integrated water resource
management in Mexico. Source:
modified from Dı́az-Delgado
et al. (2009), GWP and INBO
(2009), Taylor et al. (2005)
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 (Dı́az-
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 (Dı́az-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 (Dı́az-Delgado
et al. 2009; Taylor et al. 2005).
123
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390
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
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390 Page 5 of 12 390

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

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; López 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,

123
390 Page 6 of 12 Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390

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

123
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390
Fig. 4 Water stress on the
water resources per hydrologic-
administrative region Source:
Modified from CONAGUA and
SEMARNAT (CONAGUA
2016a)
• 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
Page 7 of 12 390
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 ‘‘Comisión
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 Federación. 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
123
390 Page 8 of 12
Ambiente y Recursos Naturales’’ (SEMARNAT) along
with CONAGUA (Sosa-Rodriguez 2015a; CONAGUA
2017; Rolland and Vega Cárdenas 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 León
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:
123
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390
• 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
López 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-Rodrı́guez 2015a, b).
National Water Program 2014–2018 and Agenda
2030
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
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390
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 México
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
Page 9 of 12 390
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–Santiago
watershed
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
123
390 Page 10 of 12
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; Dı́az-Delgado et al. 2009; Juárez 2011).
IWRM of the Watershed Rı́o Bravo
The international Rı́o 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 León 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 Rı́o 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 reuse
program
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 Autónoma de México
(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
123
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390
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
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390
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, Alexandrı́a
CONAGUA (2010) Reglas Generales de Integración, Organización y
Funcionamiento del Consejo de Cuenca Lerma-Chapala. Grupos
Relaciona. Comisión Nacional del Agua
CONAGUA (2011) Agenda del Agua 2030. In: Comisión Nacional
del Agua (ed) Secretarı́a del Medio Ambiente y Recursos
Naturales, Tlalpal, p 70
CONAGUA (2012) Información Básica 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 Federación, pp 1–107. Retrieved from
http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/16.pdf
CONAGUA (2014b) Plan Nacional de Desarrollo 2013–2018:
Programa Nacional Hı́drico. In: Comisión Nacional del Agua
(ed) Programa Nacional Hı́drico, 2014 edn. México, DF, p 142
CONAGUA (2015) Estadı́sticas del Agua en México, edición 2015.
In: Comisión Nacional del Agua (ed) México, 2016, p 298
CONAGUA (2016a) Estadı́sticas del Agua en México, Edición 2016.
In: Comisión Nacional del Agua (ed) México, 2016, p 282
CONAGUA (2016b) Los Consejos de Cuenca. Retrieved from http://
www.gob.mx/conagua/documentos/consejos-de-cuenca
CONAGUA (2017) Conoces la Relación entre las Montañas 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)
Dı́az-Delgado C, Esteller M V (2010). Desarrollo de Capacidades
para la GIRH en América Latina: Impacto y Avances. LA-
WETnet, Red Latinoamericana de Desarrollo de Capacidades
Para La Gestión Integrada de Los Recursos Hı́dricos; PNUD.
Programas de Las Naciones Unidas Para El Desarrollo, p 78
Dı́az-Delgado C, Esteller MV, Velasco A, Martı́nez J, Arriaga C,
Vilchis A, Peña A (2009) Guı́a de planeación estratégica
participativa para la gestión integrada de los recursos hı́dricos
de la cuenca Lerma-Chapala-Santiago, Capı́tulo Estado de
México, 1st edn. Centro Interamericano de Recursos del Agua,
Facultad de Ingenierı́a de la Universidad Autónoma del Estado
de México y Red Interinstitucional e Interdisciplinaria de In-
vestigación, Consulta y Coordinación Cientı́fica para la
Page 11 of 12 390
Recuperación de la Cuenca Lerma-Chapala-Santiago (RED
LERMA), México
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 Gestión Integrada de los Recursos
Hı́dricos: 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 Gestión Integrada de Recursos
Hı́dricos 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) Gestión Integrada de los Recursos
Hı́dricos (GIRH) y su Aprovechamiento para la Agricultura
frente al Cambio Climático en la Región Andina. In: Programa
AACC—Adaptación de la agricultura y el aprovechamiento de
aguas de la agricultura al cambio climático en los Andes (ed),
digital edn. Perú, p 76
INEGI (2016) Estadı́sticas a Propósito del Dı́a Mundial del Agua (22
DE MARZO). In: Instituto Nacional de Estadı́stica y Geografı́a
(ed). Aguas Calientes, México, 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
Juárez A (2011) Planeación para el Manejo Integral de la Cuenca
Lerma–Chapala 2008–2011: aplicación del enfoque MICCA
(componentes de gobernanza). Corazón de La Tierra, pp 1–7
López J A (2015) Estudios de Gestión Hı́drica: Los Consejos de
Cuenca en México. 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 gestión de
cuencas transfronterizas. In: Ciudad de Guatemala, Guatemala:
Global Water Partnership Central América
Murillo López F (2012) El enfoque de la gestión integral en el uso de
los recursos hı́dricos ante la problemáticca de la escasez, calidad
y saneamiento del agua en México, Universidad de Sonora
Olivares R (2014) Los Consejos de Cuenca en la Gestión del Agua.
Consejo de Cuenca del Valle de México, México
Perevochtchikova M, Arellano-Monterrosas JL (2008) Gestión de
cuencas hidrográficas: experiencias y desafı́os en México y
Rusia. Revista Latinoamericana de Recursos Naturales 4:13
Pérez S, Orozco JA, Mirón A, Tábora F (2010) Experiencias de Agua
Potable y saneamiento con Enfoque de Gestión Integrada de
Recursos Hı́dricos (GIRH) en Guatemala. In: Global Water
Partnership Central America (GWP Centroamérica) & La
Alianza por el Agua (eds). Tegucigalpa, M.D.C., Honduras, p 26
Proyecto: Tomando Con-Ciencia al Agua (2015) Introducción a la
Gestión Integrada de los Recursos Hı́dricos
123
390 Page 12 of 12
PUMAGUA (2016) Gestión Integrada de Recursos Hı́dricos: el
ejemplo de PUMAGUA
Rascón O (2012) El sector agua en México: Situación actual y
estrategias para su desarrollo sustentable. In: Los retos y las
oportunidades de la ingenierı́a en la gestión del agua en México.
Academia de Ingenierı́a de México, México, p 106
Rojas J, Perez M, Malheiros T, Madera C, Prota M, Dos Santos R
(2013) Análisis comparativo de modelos e instrumentos de
gestión integrada del recurso hı́drico en Suramérica: Los casos
de Brasil y Colombia. Revista Ambiente y Agua 8:25
Rolland L, Vega Cárdenas Y (2010) La gestión del agua en México.
Polis 6(2):155–188. Retrieved from http://biblio.juridicas.unam.mx
Santacruz de León G (2007) Hacia una gestión integral de los
recursos hı́dricos en la Cuenca del Rı́o Valles, Huasteca, México.
(Doctor en Ciencias Ambientales), Universidad Autónoma de
San Luis Potosı́
SEGOB (2014) Programa Nacional Forestal 2014–2018. Secretaria de
Gobernación Diaro Oficial de la Federación (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 México 2013–2014:
Ecosistemas Terrestres. Secretarı́a 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-Rodrı́guez F (2015a) Los retos de la gestión del agua ante el
cambio climático
Sosa-Rodriguez F (Producer) (2015b) Evaluación de la gestión integral
de los recursos hı́dricos en la cuenca de México. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxD9J5VhR8w
123
Environ Earth Sci (2017) 76:390
SRE, SEMARNAT (2008) Declaración de Dublı́n 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, López D
(2005) Planes de Gestión Integrada del Recurso Hı́drico: Manual
de Capacitación y Guı́a Operacional. In: Red Internacional para
el Desarrollo de Capacidades en la Gestión Integrada del
Recurso Hı́drico Cap-Net, Global Water Partnership GWP, and
United Nations Development Programme UNDP (eds) Manual
de Capacitación y Guı́a 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, Dı́az JJ, Vargas L (2007) La Gestión Integrada de los
Recursos Hı́dricos en México: Un nuevo paradigna en el manejo
del agua. Gestión y polı́tica de cuencas, p 46
Val-Segura R, Arriaga-Medina J (2015) Chapter 6: water resources
management and sustainability in México. 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