Drawing from three phases of a social research programme between 2002 and 2008, this paper proposes a framework for underpinning the development of urban water transitions policy and city-scale benchmarking at the macro scale. Through detailed historical, contemporary and futures research involving Australian cities, a transitions framework is proposed, presenting a typology of six city states, namely the ‘Water Supply City’, the ‘Sewered City’, the ‘Drained City’, the ‘Waterways City’, the ‘Water Cycle City’, and the ‘Water Sensitive City’. This framework recognises the temporal, ideological and technological contexts that cities transition through when moving towards sustainable urban water conditions. The aim of this research is to assist urban water managers with understanding the scope of the hydro-social contracts currently operating across cities in order to determine the capacity development and cultural reform initiatives needed to effectively expedite the transition to more sustainable water management and ultimately to Water Sensitive Cities. One of the values of this framework is that it can be used by strategists and policy makers as a heuristic device and/or the basis for a future city state benchmarking tool. From a research perspective it can be an underpinning framework for future work on transitions policy research.

Humans create vast quantities of wastewater through inefficiencies and poor management of water systems. The wasting of water poses sustainability challenges, depletes energy reserves, and undermines human water security and ecosystem health. Here we review emerging approaches for reusing wastewater and minimizing its generation. These complementary options make the most of scarce freshwater resources, serve the varying water needs of both developed and developing countries, and confer a variety of environmental benefits. Their widespread adoption will require changing how freshwater is sourced, used, managed, and priced.

With the widespread realisation of the significance of climate change, urban communities are increasingly seeking to ensure resilience to future uncertainties in urban water supplies, yet change seems slow with many cities facing ongoing investment in the conventional approach. This is because transforming cities to more sustainable urban water cities, or to Water Sensitive Cities, requires a major overhaul of the hydro-social contract that underpins conventional approaches. This paper provides an overview of the emerging research and practice focused on system resilience and principles of sustainable urban water management Three key pillars that need to underpin the development and practice of a Water Sensitive City are proposed: (i) access to a diversity of water sources underpinned by a diversity of centralised and decentralised infrastructure; (ii) provision of ecosystem services for the built and natural environment; and (iii) socio-political capital for sustainability and water sensitive behaviours. While there is not one example in the world of a Water Sensitive City, there are cities that lead on distinct and varying attributes of the water sensitive approach and examples from Australia and Singapore are presented.

Sustainable urban water management (SUWM) requires an integrated, adaptive, coordinated and participatory approach. Current urban water policies are beginning to reflect this understanding yet the rhetoric is often not translated to implementation. Despite the ‘new’ philosophy, urban water management remains a complex and fragmented area relying on traditional, technical, linear management approaches. Despite widespread acknowledgement of the barriers to change, there has been little systematic review of what constitutes the scope of such barriers and how these should be addressed to advance SUWM. To better understand why implementation fails to occur beyond ad hoc project interventions, an extensive literature review of observed and studied barriers was conducted. Drawing on local, national and international literature from the field of integrated urban water management and other similar fields, 53 studies were assessed, resulting in a typology of 12 barrier types. The analysis revealed the barriers are largely socio-institutional rather than technical, reflecting issues related to community, resources, responsibility, knowledge, vision, commitment and coordination. Furthermore, the meta-analysis demonstrated a paucity of targeted strategies for overcoming the stated institutional barriers. Evaluation of the typology in relation to capacity building suggests that these systemic issues require a sophisticated programme of change that focuses on fostering social capital, inter-sectoral professional development, and inter-organisational coordination.