Abstract
Overemphasizing technological solutions in water management without considering the broader systems perspective can result in unintended consequences. For example, infrastructure interventions for drought adaptation may inadvertently increase flood risk, illustrating a socio-hydrological phenomenon. Here we propose a systems meta-model that reveals the complex mechanisms and feedback loops underlying the critical human–water interactions. We show that the unintended outcomes of water management decisions result from the lack of integration and coordination of the feedback loops. The insights highlight the importance of considering environmental capacity in water management, as well as the necessity for integrated assessment and coordinated solutions for long-term sustainability.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Dodson, J. The global infrastructure turn and urban practice. Urban Policy Res. 35, 87–92 (2017).
Leck, H. & Simon, D. Fostering multiscalar collaboration and co-operation for effective governance of climate change adaptation. Urban Stud. 50, 1221–1238 (2013).
Di Baldassarre, G. et al. Sociohydrology: scientific challenges in addressing the sustainable development goals. Water Resour. Res. 55, 6327–6355 (2019).
Kandasamy, J. et al. Socio-hydrologic drivers of the pendulum swing between agricultural development and environmental health: a case study from Murrumbidgee River Basin, Australia. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 18, 1027–1041 (2014).
Celio, M., Scott, C. A. & Giordano, M. Urban–agricultural water appropriation: the Hyderabad, India case. Geogr. J. 176, 39–57 (2010).
Meadows, D. H. Thinking in Systems: A Primer (Chelsea Green Publishing, 2008).
Bahaddin, B. et al. in World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2018: Watershed Management, Irrigation and Drainage, and Water Resources Planning and Management (ed. Kamojjala, S.) 130–140 (American Society of Civil Engineers, 2018).
Cumming, G. S. et al. Implications of agricultural transitions and urbanization for ecosystem services. Nature 515, 50–57 (2014).
Han, S., Tian, F., Liu, Y. & Duan, X. Socio-hydrological perspectives of the co-evolution of humans and groundwater in Cangzhou, North China Plain. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 21, 3619–3633 (2017).
Di Baldassarre, G., Kooy, M., Kemerink, J. S. & Brandimarte, L. Towards understanding the dynamic behaviour of floodplains as human–water systems. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 17, 3235–3244 (2013).
Kreibich, H. et al. Adaptation to flood risk: results of international paired flood event studies. Earths Future 5, 953–965 (2017).
Di Baldassarre, G., Martinez, F., Kalantari, Z. & Viglione, A. Drought and flood in the Anthropocene: feedback mechanisms in reservoir operation. Earth Syst. Dyn. 8, 225–233 (2017).
Kates, R. W., Colten, C. E., Laska, S., Leatherman, S. P. & Clark, W. C. Reconstruction of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina: a research perspective. Cityscape 9, 5–22 (2007).
Gohari, A. et al. Water transfer as a solution to water shortage: a fix that can backfire. J. Hydrol. 491, 23–39 (2013).
Zhang, Z., Hu, H., Tian, F., Yao, X. & Sivapalan, M. Groundwater dynamics under water-saving irrigation and implications for sustainable water management in an oasis: Tarim River Basin of western China. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 18, 3951–3967 (2014).
Müller, M. F., Müller‐Itten, M. C. & Gorelick, S. M. How Jordan and Saudi Arabia are avoiding a tragedy of the commons over shared groundwater. Water Resour. Res. 53, 5451–5468 (2017).
Costanza, R. et al. Quality of life: an approach integrating opportunities, human needs, and subjective well-being. Ecol. Econ. 61, 267–276 (2007).
Jaffee, D. Levels of Socio-economic Development Theory (Greenwood Publishing Group, 1998).
Seppelt, R. & Cumming, G. S. Humanity’s distance to nature: time for environmental austerity? Landsc. Ecol. 31, 1645–1651 (2016).
Cumming, G. S. & von Cramon-Taubadel, S. Linking economic growth pathways and environmental sustainability by understanding development as alternate social–ecological regimes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 9533–9538 (2018).
Garrick, D. et al. Rural water for thirsty cities: a systematic review of water reallocation from rural to urban regions. Environ. Res. Lett. 14, 43003 (2019).
Collados, C. & Duane, T. P. Natural capital and quality of life: a model for evaluating the sustainability of alternative regional development paths. Ecol. Econ. 30, 441–460 (1999).
Hoekstra, A. Y. & Wiedmann, T. O. Humanity’s unsustainable environmental footprint. Science 344, 1114–1117 (2014).
Foster, S. et al. Impact of irrigated agriculture on groundwater-recharge salinity: a major sustainability concern in semi-arid regions. Hydrogeol. J. 26, 2781–2791 (2018).
Keesstra, S. et al. The superior effect of nature based solutions in land management for enhancing ecosystem services. Sci. Total Environ. 610, 997–1009 (2018).
Whyte, J. et al. A research agenda on systems approaches to infrastructure. Civ. Eng. Environ. Syst. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286608.2020.1827396 (2020).
Di Baldassarre, G. et al. An interdisciplinary research agenda to explore the unintended consequences of structural flood protection. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 22, 5629–5637 (2018).
Hamann, M., Biggs, R. & Reyers, B. Mapping social–ecological systems: identifying ‘green-loop’ and ‘red-loop’ dynamics based on characteristic bundles of ecosystem service use. Glob. Environ. Change 34, 218–226 (2015).
Puchol-Salort, P., Boskovic, S., Dobson, B., van Reeuwijk, M. & Mijic, A. Water neutrality framework for systemic design of new urban developments. Water Res. 219, 118583 (2022).
Liu, L., Dobson, B. & Mijic, A. Optimisation of urban–rural nature-based solutions for integrated catchment water management. J. Environ. Manag. 329, 117045 (2023).
Dobson, B. et al. Predicting catchment suitability for biodiversity at national scales. Water Res. 15, 118764 (2022).
Liu, L., Dobson, B. & Mijic, A. Hierarchical systems integration for coordinated urban–rural water quality management at a catchment scale. Sci. Total Environ. 806, 150642 (2022).
Dobson, B. & Mijic, A. Protecting rivers by integrating supply–wastewater infrastructure planning and coordinating operational decisions. Environ. Res. Lett. 15, 114025 (2020).
Stip, C. et al. Water Infrastructure Resilience: Examples of Dams, Wastewater Treatment Plants, and Water Supply and Sanitation Systems (World Bank, 2019).
Cassivi, A., Johnston, R., Waygood, E. O. D. & Dorea, C. C. Access to drinking water: time matters. J. Water Health 16, 661–666 (2018).
Dickens, C. et al. Evaluating the global state of ecosystems and natural resources: within and beyond the SDGs. Sustainability 12, 7381 (2020).
Rogge, N. Undesirable specialization in the construction of composite policy indicators: the Environmental Performance Index. Ecol. Indic. 23, 143–154 (2012).
Seekell, D. et al. Resilience in the global food system. Environ. Res. Lett. 12, 25010 (2017).
Freistein, K. Effects of indicator use: a comparison of poverty measuring instruments at the World Bank. J. Comp. Policy Anal. Res. Pract. 18, 366–381 (2016).
James, S. L., Gubbins, P., Murray, C. J. L. & Gakidou, E. Developing a comprehensive time series of GDP per capita for 210 countries from 1950 to 2015. Popul. Health Metr. 10, 1–12 (2012).
Wackernagel, M., Lin, D., Evans, M., Hanscom, L. & Raven, P. Defying the footprint oracle: implications of country resource trends. Sustainability 11, 2164 (2019).
Mekonnen, M. M. & Hoekstra, A. Y. The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and derived crop products. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 15, 1577–1600 (2011).
Acknowledgements
We thank J. Giambona for improving the readability of the paper. This research was funded by the CASYWat (Systems Water Management Framework for Catchment Scale Processes) UK Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) project (grant NE/S009248/1) awarded to A.M. The President’s PhD scholarships provided by the Imperial College London funded L.L. B.D. acknowledges financial support from the CAMELLIA (Community Water Management for a Liveable London) NERC-funded project (NE/S003495/1).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
A.M. conceived the idea and designed the meta-model. A.M., L.L., J.O’K., B.D. and K.P.C. designed and carried out analysis and developed proposed principles. A.M. and L.L. wrote the paper. All authors discussed the findings and contributed to the paper.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review
Peer review information
Nature Sustainability thanks Giuliano Di Baldassarre, Elisabeth Krueger and Fuqiang Tian for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Mijic, A., Liu, L., O’Keeffe, J. et al. A meta-model of socio-hydrological phenomena for sustainable water management. Nat Sustain 7, 7–14 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-023-01240-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-023-01240-3
- Springer Nature Limited