Let me describe a scenario which has become typical of my life in the development sector. "They never finish what they start", is the answer that I hear for most of my questions about public water supply projects (also for many other infrastructure projects), in most parts of India. A little more exploration of the place would yield at least be one odd NGO working in that region with programs (that are implemented by them)largely aligned with the funding agency's priorities or at best would be some stop gap solution to problems like toilet construction for sanitation, hand wash campaigns for hygiene or may be drilling deep bore wells. 

While I have nothing against anyone of these measures, I believe a majority of institutions designing and implementing such programs are missing the woods for the trees. More than a decade after Rio Earth Summit and the Dublin Principles, we still are a long distance from achieving any improvement in our water management. The Dublin Principles outlined the importance of several critical aspects, to be considered while implementing action programs.

Principle No. 1 - Fresh water is a finite and vulnerable resource, essential to sustain life, development and the environment.

Principle No. 2 - Water development and management should be based on a participatory approach, involving users, planners and policy-makers at all levels. 

Principle No. 3 - Women play a central part in the provision, management and safeguarding of water.

 Principle No. 4 - Water has an economic value in all its competing uses and should be recognized as an economic good.

An evaluation of the implemented programs would show how many of them have clearly missed the gender focus and the inclusive approach involving users, planners and policy makers at all levels. 

Yet another perspective emerges when we explore the water situation through the hydrological point of view. Hydrology matters for a nation. The amount of rainfall it receives, the percentage of water it harvests from the surface runoff, its dependence on groundwater resources, and the overall water balance play a critical role in ascertaining its water security. Yet, we do not see programs having a comprehensive approach inclusive of the hydrological factors. 

John Briscoe in his paper titled Water Security: Why it Matters and What to do About It suggests "A central challenge for many developing countries facing the 'bad hydrology' is to devise and implement a set of interventions that will mitigate the effects of hydrological variability on the lives of their people."

A typology of the interventions outlined by him is:

Type 1 interventions are broad-based water-resources interventions, including dams and canals, that provide national and regional economic benefits to all, including the poor.

Type 2 interventions improve water-resources management, such as watershed projects in degraded environments, in ways that directly benefit poor people. 

Type 3 interventions improve the performance of water-service utilities, which benefits everyone, including the poor. 

Type 4 interventions provide targeted services, including water and sanitation, irrigation and hydropower, to the poor.

 For a detailed account on it, please see:

Water Security: Why it Matters and What to do About It

Water for Growth and Development

A tiered interventional strategy such as this, can also simplify the complex and often broad based approach of Integrated Urban Water Management (IUWM). IUWM since its early days has meant different things to different people. IUWM as an approach to water management is still not understood well. There has been a lag in the actual effect and the desired effect that it could bring in, when practiced in its conceptual fullness. In such a scenario, we might take some help from other strategies which have had a demonstrated effect and are practicable. Together, these can help us achieve significant improvement in water management and water security!