Table of contents
DOI: https://doi.org/10.58248/HS86
Overview
Water quality and availability are linked to climate, the wider environment, agricultural practices, sewage and waste disposal,[1],[2] urban and transport systems, drainage and energy generation (PB 40, PB 26, PN 661, PN 710).
Evidence suggests that a broader risk-based systems approach to understanding the interconnections and trade-offs between these pressures at different scales could improve freshwater and marine environments, secure nature recovery and increase UK water security.[3],[4],[5],[6]
Water security refers to the reliable supply of clean, safe water for wellbeing, livelihoods and economic development as well as for healthy aquatic ecosystems, while also protecting against flooding and other water-related hazards. It encapsulates complex and interdependent vulnerabilities and challenges.[7],[8],[9],[10]
For example, horizon scan contributors noted the interconnections between the health risks of rising antimicrobial resistance (when the organisms that cause infection evolve ways to survive treatments) and untreated sewage and livestock waste release into waterways.1,[11],[12],[13],[14]
The Water Environment Regulations 2017 require restoring “77% of waters to good ecological status by 2027” (getting as close to a natural condition as possible). The Environmental Improvement Plan 2023 Goal 3 is “clean and plentiful water”. The 2023 Plan for Water set objectives of:[15]
- Transforming management of the whole water system.
- Deliver a clean water environment for nature and people.
- Securing a plentiful supply of water.
The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) and the Environmental Audit Committee have stated that England was not on course to meet these objectives.[16],[17] In 2024, the OEP indicated that there was little overall positive change in the state of England’s 4,658 water bodies and some apparent regression, with “only 21% where [the previous Government] have more than low confidence in achieving these Environmental Objectives”.[18],[19]
Challenges and opportunities
Freshwater habitats, such as rivers and wetlands, provide major benefits to society through services such as flood risk reduction.[20] Many of these habitats are in a poor condition due to human activities including physical modification and pollution,[21] but could be restored by addressing the causes of degradation and enhancing or extending existing habitat (PN 709).
Over 3,000 projects are listed on the National River Restoration Inventory (NRRI),[22] and there is a growing evidence base for the success of nature-based restoration techniques in reducing the impacts of floods and droughts.[23] However, contributors suggested there is a lack of long-term monitoring evidence to evaluate all the benefits of restoration, which can be challenging as there may be a lag in response of natural processes to interventions.[24]
Contributors to the scan stated that excessive nutrients arising from agricultural activities, housing development, and sewage discharge (CBP-10027) will need to be reduced to maintain freshwater resources for humans and nature.[25],6 Livestock and soil management, including manure and fertiliser use, are the leading agricultural activities contributing to degradation of freshwater ecosystems and coastal environments (PN 661, PN 710, House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee).5,[26]
It was suggested that targeted habitat restoration across river catchments may help restore water quality and provide other benefits. For instance, wetland creation can be used to mitigate soil erosion, remove pollutants and reduce flood risks.[27],[28],[29] Constructed wetlands can also be used as part of wastewater treatment to filter out industrial pollutants and pharmaceutical contaminants, as well agricultural nutrients.[30],[31],[32],[33],[34] Contributors suggested there is also evidence restored habitats can reduce the impacts of climate change on water resources, such as increased frequency of heavy rainfall events and extended periods of drought.[35],[36]
For example, sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) mimic natural drainage regimes and allow water to soak into the ground, helping recharge groundwater resources (the water present within fractures and pore spaces of rocks). They capture rainwater for re-use, as well as improving water quality by removing pollutants and reducing flood risks.[37],[38],[39],[40],[41]
Approaches could include building designs combining green roofs and rainwater harvesting systems to reduce the volume of stormwater entering the drainage system.[42],[43],[44],[45] Contributors stated the need for integrated urban water management to recognise all urban water supplies as resources – surface water, groundwater, stormwater, and wastewater.[46],[47]
Strategic water resource management for agriculture to improve efficiency of water use for irrigation and reduce water pollution includes on-farm water storage of increasing winter rainfall and mapping of groundwater resources resilient to climate change (PB 40).[48],[49],[50],[51] Increased risks of floods could be mitigated through nature-based solutions such as leaky dams or wetlands,[52],[53],[54],[55] but increasing damage to crops may discourage actions by farmers to slow the draining of land unless appropriate financial incentives are in place.[56],[57]
It is estimated that 85% of the world’s chalk streams are in England and around 29% of these are in East Anglia (House of Lords Library, In focus). Contributors stated managing pressures such as pollution (from road run-off, construction, agriculture and sewage), to low flow resulting from abstraction for public water supply and physical modification of watercourses, will be critical for recovering the ecology of chalk streams.[58],[59]
The UK Government’s 25 Year Environment Plan sets out a target to reduce water abstractions that damage the environment: the Environment Agency initially updated abstraction licencing in the six most challenging catchments, but licencing strategies in all catchments will be updated by 2027.[60] Tools used include introducing controls on more licences to protect the environment, particularly at low flows, capping licences to prevent abstraction damaging the environment, and water trading between abstractors (PB 40).[61],[62]
Contributors to the scan suggested water markets may be required as means of governance to manage the impacts of climate change.[63],[64],[65],[66],[67] The Global Commission on the Economics of Water is calling for radical change in how water is valued, governed and used, to ensure its allocation and use is efficient, equitable, and sustainable.20 New pressures on water resources may also emerge such as use of water resources for hydrogen production.[68]
The 2021 National Framework for Water Resources for England states if no action is taken between 2025 and 2050, around 3,435 million extra litres of water per day will be needed for public water supply from 2050.[69] The Climate Change Committee and the National Infrastructure Commission state planned climate adaptation actions are insufficient.[70],[71]
Key uncertainties/unknowns
- Whether water companies have sufficient resources to upgrade sewerage and drainage infrastructure to curtail the illegal discharge of sewage. It will also need to be adapted to future climate change, such as a higher frequency and intensity of flooding, in conjunction with the built and natural environment.[72],11,[73],[74]
- How to integrate management of water issues that are location specific, such as flooding, drought and water quality, with those that are not as location specific, such as carbon storage, across whole catchments.[75],6
- How can water pollutants not previously monitored be monitored and tackled. These include contaminants of emerging concern (such as antibiotics and other pharmaceutical and veterinary substances), antimicrobial resistant organisms, microplastics (PN 724) and some persistent organic pollutants, such as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) (PN 579).6,[76],[77],[78],[79],[80],[81],[82],[83],[84],[85]
Key questions for Parliament
- Whether implementing the recommendations of the Independent Commission into the water sector and its regulation will deliver “a strategic spatial planning approach to the management of water across sectors of the economy, tackling pollution and managing pressures on the water environment and supply at a catchment, regional and national scale”?[86]
- How can the 106 catchment-based approach partnerships covering the whole of England be sufficiently resourced to deliver nature-based solutions at the scale required (PN 623)?[87],[88],[89]
- How should evidence of the success and value for public money from river restoration for delivering government targets for natural flood management (PN 623) and habitat restoration (PN 678) be gathered?
- What level of public and private incentives are required for the uptake of targeted habitat restoration by landowners (PN 661)?
- What penalties, guidelines or measures will be sufficient to halt nutrient pollution from all sources and encourage nutrient capture and recycling (PN 710)?[90]
Relevant Documents
House of Lords Library, Chalk Stream Restoration Strategy, In focus
House of Commons Library, Sewage discharge
House of Lords Library, Sewage pollution in England’s waters
Water supply resilience and climate change, POSTbrief 40
Urban Green Infrastructure and Ecosystem Services, POSTbrief 26
Reducing agricultural pressures on freshwater ecosystems, POSTnote 661
The future of fertiliser use, POSTnote 710
Freshwater habitat restoration, POSTnote 709
Reducing plastic waste, POSTnote 724
Persistent chemical pollutants, POSTnote 579
Natural mitigation of flood risk, POSTnote 623
The habitat restoration target, POSTnote 678
References
[1] Environment Agency (2023). Storm overflow spill data shows performance is totally unacceptable. GOV UK
[2] Water Briefing. (2024). Tougher regulation on the cards – new Environment Agency report shows water and sewerage companies underperforming
[3] Dahlin, K., et al. (2021). Linking Terrestrial and Aquatic Biodiversity to Ecosystem Function Across Scales, Trophic Levels, and Realms. Front. Environ. Sci., Sec. Freshwater Science, Volume 9
[4] Maltby, E., et al. (2019). Wholescape Thinking Guidance Note: Towards integrating the management of catchments, coast and the sea through partnerships. Natural Capital Initiative
[5] Michels-Brito, A. et al. (2023). Source-to-sea, integrated water resources management, and integrated coastal management approaches: integrative, complementary, or competing? Journal of Coastal Conservation, Volume 27, article number 66
[6] Stephenson, I., et al. (2024). Delivering biodiversity: priority actions for fresh water. British Ecological Society, London, UK.
[7] Conway, D. (2023). What is water security and how is it impacted by climate change? Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and Environment.
[8] UN Water. (2013). Water Security & the Global Water Agenda. A UN-Water Analytical Brief. UN-Water Task Force on Water Security
[9] Gunda, T., et al. (2019). Water security in practice: The quantity-quality-society nexus. Water Security, Volume 6, 100022
[10] Green-Morgan, J. et al. (2024). UK Water Security. DODS Political Intelligence
[11] Albini, D. et al. (2023). The combined effects of treated sewage discharge and land use on rivers. Global Change Biology, Volume 29, Issue 22
[12] House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee. (2024). Oral evidence: Water quality and water infrastructure: follow-up, HC 721
[13] House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee. (2022). Water quality in rivers. Fourth Report of Session 2021–22
[14] Wasley, A. (2022). Swimming in superbugs: MRSA and E coli found in British rivers. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism.
[15] Defra. (2023). Policy paper. Plan for Water: our integrated plan for delivering clean and plentiful water. GOV UK
[16] UK Parliament. (2024). Environmental Audit Committee scrutinises Government’s water quality plan
[17] Office for Environmental Protection. (2024). A review of implementation of the Water Framework Directive Regulations and river basin management planning in England.
[18] Office for Environmental Protection. (2024). Dame Glenys Stacey’s speech at the Westminster Energy, Environment & Transport Forum policy conference
[19] Defra. (2024). Policy paper. Government response to the Office for Environmental Protection report on the implementation of the Water Framework Directive Regulations and River Basin Management Planning in England. GOV UK
[20] Global Commission on the Economics of Water. (2024). The Economics of Water Valuing the Hydrological Cycle as a Global Common Good
[21] Bannatyne, L., et al. (2024). The Great UK WaterBlitz September 2024. Earthwatch Europe
[22] The River Restoration Centre. National River Restoration Inventory (NRRI)
[23] Wohl, E., et al. (2015). The science and practice of river restoration. Water Resources Research, Volume 51, Issue 8, pg 5974-5997
[24] Cortina-Segarra, J., et al. (2021). Barriers to ecological restoration in Europe: expert perspectives. Restoration Ecology, Volume 29, Issue 4, e13346
[25] Wang, M. et al. (2024). A triple increase in global river basins with water scarcity due to future pollution. Nature Communications volume 15, Article number: 880
[26] Environment Agency. (2024). Indicative catchment statistics for nutrient pollution. GOV UK
[27] Bohorquez, P. et al. (2023). Nature-Based Solutions for Flood Mitigation and Soil Conservation in a Steep-Slope Olive-Orchard Catchment (Arquillos, SE Spain). Appl. Sci., 13(5), 2882
[28] Constructed Wetland Hub. Designing for Nutrient Neutrality
[29] WWT Wetland Data Explorer
[30] Waly, M., et al. (2022). Constructed wetland for sustainable and low-cost wastewater treatment: review article. Land, vol. 11, no. 9, 1388
[31] Hassan, I., et al. (2021). Wastewater Treatment Using Constructed Wetland: Current Trends and Future Potential. Processes, 9(11), 1917
[32] Parde, D., et al. (2021). A review of constructed wetland on type, treatment and technology of wastewater. Environmental Technology & Innovation, Volume 21, 101261
[33] Biswal, B., et al. (2022). Constructed Wetlands for Reclamation and Reuse of Wastewater and Urban Stormwater: A Review. Front. Environ. Sci., Sec. Water and Wastewater Management, Volume 10
[34] Swarnakar, A., et al. (2022). Various Types of Constructed Wetland for Wastewater Treatment-A Review. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Volume 1032
[35] Otto, F. (2023). Attribution of Extreme Events to Climate Change. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, Volume 48
[36] Clarke, B., et al. (2022). Extreme weather impacts of climate change: an attribution perspective. Environmental Research: Climate, Volume 1, Number 1
[37] McClymont, K., et al. (2020). Towards urban resilience through Sustainable Drainage Systems: A multi-objective optimisation problem. Journal of Environmental Management, Volume 275, 111173
[38] Rentachintala, L. et al. (2022). Urban stormwater management for sustainable and resilient measures and practices: a review. Water Sci Technol, 85 (4): 1120–1140
[39] British Geological Survey. Sustainable drainage systems
[41] The Flood Hub. (2021). An Introduction to Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS)
[42] Almeida, A., et al. (2023). Combining green roofs and rainwater harvesting systems in university buildings under different climate conditions. Science of The Total Environment, Volume 887, 163719
[43] Cristiano, E., et al. (2023). How much green roofs and rainwater harvesting systems can contribute to urban flood mitigation? Urban Water Journal, Volume 20, Issue 2, pg. 140-157
[44] Cristiano, E., et al. (2021). The role of green roofs in urban Water-Energy-Food-Ecosystem nexus: A review. Science of The Total Environment, Volume 756, 143876
[45] Cristiano, E., et al. (2023). The effects of multilayer blue-green roof on the runoff water quality. Heliyon, 9(11):e21966
[46] La Vigna, F. (2022). Review: Urban groundwater issues and resource management, and their roles in the resilience of cities. Hydrogeology journal, Volume 30, pg. 1657–1683
[47] Whaley, M., et al. (2024). Implementing a systemic approach to water management: piloting a novel multi-level collaborative integrated water management framework in east London. AQUA – Water Infrastructure, Ecosystems and Society, 73 (6): 1113–1134
[48] Knox, J. (2013). Water for UK agriculture – key challenges and opportunities. The Institute of Engineering and Technology.
[49] Holman, I., et al. (2023). Research and policy priorities to address drought and irrigation water resource risks in temperate agriculture. Cambridge Prisms: Water , Volume 1 , 2023 , e7
[50] Hess, T, et al. (2020). Resilience of Primary Food Production to a Changing Climate: On-Farm Responses to Water-Related Risks. Water, 12(8), 2155
[51] Shrestha, S. et al. (2020). Mapping groundwater resiliency under climate change scenarios: A case study of Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. Environmental Research, Volume 183, 109149
[52] Muhawenimana, V., et al. (2023). Field-based monitoring of instream leaky barrier backwater and storage during storm events. Journal of Hydrology, Volume 622, Part A, 129744
[53] West Country Rivers Trust. Channel Payments for Ecosystem Services
[54] Nature Friendly Farming Network. Slowing The Flow: Flooding On Farms
[55] Defra, RPA and FC. (2022). Funding for farmers, growers and land managers
[56] The Flood Hub. (2023). Flood Planning and Flood Recovery Advice for Farmers and Landowners: A Short Guide
[57] Defra. Block drains in grassland
[58] Catchment Based Approach. (2021). Chalk Stream Restoration Strategy 2021. Main Report.
[59] Environment Agency. (2021). New strategy launched to protect chalk streams
[60] Defra. (2021). Policy paper. Water abstraction plan: Environment. GOV UK
[61] Defra. (2019). Abstraction reform report Progress made in reforming the arrangements for managing water abstraction in England. GOV UK
[62] Environment Agency. (2023). Guidance. Trade water abstraction rights. GOV UK
[63] Breviglieri, G., et al. (2018). Understanding the emergence of water market institutions: learning from functioning water markets in three countries. Water Policy, 20 (6): 1075–1091
[64] Moore, M. (2024). Water trading markets: Facilitating financial flows through the hydro-social cycle? Geoforum, Volume 150, 103977 1
[65] Wheeler, S. (2021). Water Markets. A Global Assessment. Edward Elgar Publishing
[66] World Meteorological Organisation. (2024). State of Global Water Resources 2023. WMO-No. 1362
[67] OECD. (2024). The economics of water scarcity
[68] Beswick, R., et al. (2021). Does the Green Hydrogen Economy Have a Water Problem? ACS Energy Lett., 6, 9, pg. 3167–3169
[69] Environment Agency. (2020). Policy paper. Meeting our future water needs: a national framework for water resources – accessible summary. GOV UK
[70] Climate Change Committee. (2024). Independent Assessment of the Third National Adaptation Programme (NAP3)
[71] National Infrastructure Commission. (2023). The Second National Infrastructure Assessment
[72] EU Climate Adapt database. Water management
[73] Ofwat. (2022). Ofwat’s 3rd Climate Change Adaptation Report
[74] UK Climate Risk. (2023). Water
[75] CPES. (2022). Conclusions of the Interreg CPES project
[76] Perkins, R., et al. (2024). Down-the-drain pathways for fipronil and imidacloprid applied as spot-on parasiticides to dogs: Estimating aquatic pollution. Science of The Total Environment, Volume 917, 170175
[77] Sumpter, J., et al. (2022). Environmental Occurrence and Predicted Pharmacological Risk to Freshwater Fish of over 200 Neuroactive Pharmaceuticals in Widespread Use. Toxics, 10(5), 233.
[78] Rowley, K., et al. (2020). London’s river of plastic: High levels of microplastics in the Thames water column. Science of The Total Environment, Volume 740, 140018
[79] Spit, T. et al. (2022). Removal of Antibiotic Resistance From Municipal Secondary Effluents by Ozone-Activated Carbon Filtration. Front. Environ. Sci., Sec. Water and Wastewater Management, Volume 10
[80] Al-Wasify, R., et al. (2023). The Efficiency of Wastewater Treatment Plants for the Removal of Antibiotics. In: Water Purification – Present and Future.
[81] OECD. (2023). Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals in Freshwater. Monitoring and Regulating Water Quality. OECD Studies in Water.
[82] Watershed. The Watershed Pollution Map
[83] Drinking Water Inspectorate Guidance to water companies. (2024). Guidance on the Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2016 (as amended) for England and Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2018 for Wales specific to PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) in drinking water
[84] Royal Society of Chemistry. Cleaning up UK drinking water
[85] Neill, P. (2024). REVEALED: The Environment Agency was warned of the ‘chronic threat’ posed by PFAS foams twenty years ago – why did nothing happen? ENDS Report
[86] Defra. (2024). Policy paper. Independent commission on the water sector regulatory system: terms of reference. GOV UK
[87] Catchment Based Approach. Working together to improve the water environment
[88] House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee (2024). Oral evidence: Water quality and water infrastructure: follow-up, HC 721
[89] Nieuwaal, M. (2024). Nature-based solutions can work for the water sector – but it takes a step-change in thinking. CIWEM
[90] Tompkins, D. (2024). WSP and water: Re-imagining our approach to a precious resource. Water Briefing.
Photo by: Benjamin Cheng, via Unsplash
