This month, we had the pleasure of interviewing Peter Simpson, President, IWA Glasgow 2026 and Alex Plant, Chief Executive of Scottish Water. Peter and Alex are co-Presidents of the IWA World Water Congress & Exhibition 2026 taking place from 4–8 October in Glasgow.
Could you briefly tell us a few words on the IWA World Water Congress & Exhibition, and the IWA Summit?
Peter Simpson: We are determined to make this the most successful conference that IWA has held. For this, we’ve involved a lot of people in developing the structure to ensure the academic content aligns with all other contributions, avoiding disconnected papers and workshops and helping to focus on key cross-cutting policy issues.
We created a manifesto to guide the Congress, under the strapline “Water action: the path to resilience and prosperity.” This reflects a stronger focus on action, recognising both the need to build resilience to challenges like climate change and population growth, and the opportunities to create prosperity for the environment and society.
The Congress is built around key themes, including partnering with nature and adapting to extremes, the water cycle and long-term resilience, and water and health, alongside an exhibition bringing together countries and companies, and forums such as the regulators’ forum and the utility leaders’ forum. The delegates’ experience also matter. We want to make sure people can enjoy, learn, and leave with an action-orientated agenda.
Alex Plant: The programme has been arranged so participants can follow these themes in a logical and coherent way. This makes it easier for delegates to engage with specific topics of interest without having to choose between overlapping sessions, giving a clear route through the Congress.
We expect to bring together up to 10,000 delegates, making it the largest ever global water event, with a wide range of activities including fringe events, cultural events and technical tours. The scale of interest highlights the increasing importance of water for the economy and society as a whole, and it positions Glasgow as the key place to be this October for anyone interested in water.
Peter Simpson: As for the IWA Summit, this is invitation-only, held on the first day, and designed to bring together decision-makers and provoke new thinking, encouraging them to leave with a commitment to act differently. A key aim is to involve a broader group than at previous Congresses, including senior civil servants, finance ministries and investors. The focus of the summit is on progress towards UN Sustainable Development Goal 6 and the growing financial gap, particularly in light of reductions in overseas development aid. The intention is to help shift the discussion towards how we overcome this barrier, and mobilising more investment, especially private finance. We are developing a report -designed to be a living document – which will evolve between now and the Congress through engagement with organisations such as the World Bank, the United Nations and the OECD.
The Congress itself will then contribute further to the thinking, gathering input from the Summit to build a strong, globally supported output that can feed into the UN Conference planned for December this year, and beyond.
We also plan to bring this work to life through real case studies, aiming to demonstrate practical solutions and inspire decision-makers and investors by showing what has worked and what can be replicated.
How do you define the success of the Congress? What difference will it make compared to previous editions?
Alex Plant: The congress focuses on SDG 6, where progress of late has been patchy and is currently slowing, with traditional sources of Government development finance falling away.
Success would mean helping to reverse that trend, bringing things back in the right direction, particularly by attracting more private finance to complement public funding and enable countries to move closer to achieving SDG 6.
A key difference is the ambition to develop a “Glasgow framework”, a practical, actionable tool that helps countries put in place the right conditions to attract investment. This goes beyond financing alone, incorporating elements such as sector structure, regulation, and user arrangements.
Another important contribution is bringing the practitioner voice to the forefront. With thousands of water professionals involved, the Congress can provide practical insights into what actually works on the ground, helping to shape solutions that are implementable rather than theoretical.
Peter Simpson: What is different is the way the work has been developed, with two main outputs. The first is understanding the investor perspective, directly engaging with investors to identify what they need to see in order to invest, rather than making assumptions. The second is focusing on how countries can position themselves to attract external finance, by developing national water strategies that create the right enabling conditions, tailored to their particular circumstances. It also provides investors with a clear framework to use when engaging with countries.
This has been informed through workshops with both financiers and countries, as well as learning from examples where approaches have worked in practice. Success, therefore, is about making this practical, drawing clear conclusions, illustrating them with real case studies, and providing something that can genuinely help move things forward.
What are the key challenges in mobilising finance for water, and how can they be addressed?
Alex Plant: A central challenge is that progress on SDG 6 is slowing while the financing gap is widening. This means there is an urgent need to bring in private finance alongside public funding. However, attracting that finance depends on creating the right conditions. If the sector has clear governance, stable regulation and well-structured systems, then water can become an attractive investment, offering relatively low risk and stable returns within a broader investment portfolio. The key is to get those fundamentals right so that investment can scale.
Peter Simpson: One of the main challenges is ensuring that finance is used in the right way. In some cases, public funding and development aid are being directed towards areas that could potentially attract private finance, while more difficult contexts, such as rural and dispersed systems, continue to struggle. There is a need to better target public funds, using them where they are most needed, while creating the conditions for private investment to flow into areas where it is viable. This requires a clearer understanding of different system types and how financing approaches should vary between them.
Another challenge is the structure of investment itself. Many water projects are relatively small and do not meet the scale required by major financial institutions, making it harder for them to access funding. Addressing these challenges involves combining projects into programmes, better allocation of public funds, clearer sector structures, stable regulation, and stronger engagement with investors, ensuring that financing approaches are practical, targeted and capable of unlocking investment at scale.
Why should water resilience be a higher priority for investment and economic policy?
Peter Simpson: A key point is recognising the role and importance of water security and resilience for countries and their economies. This is not a “nice to have”—if done right, it puts countries in a better position to prosper, from an economic, social and environmental perspective. Traditionally, water, especially in the context of SDG 6, has been viewed mainly through the lens of a human right. While that remains fundamental, this perspective alone can be limiting. Water security and resilience should also be seen as critical enablers of economic success for countries and companies. If investment is not made, the costs will be felt elsewhere. But if it is made in the right way, it can unlock wider potential and prosperity.
Alex Plant: There is also an important link between investment in water and broader economic performance. High environmental standards and economic competitiveness are not contradictory, they are closely interconnected. Getting investment in water right, alongside strong environmental standards and circular economy approaches, can actually drive competitiveness. This reflects a growing recognition that sustainability and economic performance go hand in hand.
What are the biggest barriers caused by silo thinking in the water sector, and what actions are needed to overcome them and build a Water Smart Society?
Alex Plant: The core issue is the need to move away from silo thinking towards system thinking. If this is done properly, societies can deliver better outcomes at a lower overall cost than if sectors continue to operate separately. This requires first recognising the problem, and then demonstrating through case studies what can be achieved when thinking system-wide. A key approach is to look at water in the context of catchments or river basins, natural systems where different sectors interrelate. By doing so, it becomes possible to design policy frameworks that connect energy, agriculture, transport, local government and water, leading to more sustainable outcomes at lower cost.
The consequences of getting this wrong are significant. Lack of access to clean water and sanitation marginalises large parts of society, particularly women and girls, limiting education and economic opportunities. Conversely, getting it right delivers major social and economic benefits. Addressing this
requires cross-governmental, cross-sectoral thinking, and a stronger recognition of the economic and societal value of water. This challenge exists globally, in both developed and developing countries.
Peter Simpson: There are practical examples that show what is possible. One is Water Resources East in the UK, which takes a multi-sector approach to planning by considering flood risk, water supply, navigation, the environment and agricultural demand within a single system. This approach also brings together different funding streams. When these are combined, it creates a much larger overall resource, enabling better solutions at lower societal cost. However, this is not typically how countries or regions currently operate. Examples like this demonstrate that moving beyond silos is achievable and can deliver more effective outcomes.
What role do governance and data play in enabling better water management and investment decisions?
Alex Plant: Governance is key. If systems are too centralised, it becomes very difficult to manage water effectively. The natural level for decision-making is at the regional or catchment level; empowering decision-makers at that level drives better outcomes and can unlock wider benefits. It is also now more feasible than in the past because digital tools allow us to make visible what was previously difficult to understand. This helps demonstrate that there is a bigger opportunity if stakeholders work together.
Providing clear and reliable information is also essential for investment decisions. For example, long-term visibility on water availability is necessary for major investments, such as data centres, which depend on water security over decades. Better data allows for more informed and sensible decisions, including where infrastructure should be located.
Peter Simpson: A critical element is having a common basis for data and information. Bringing stakeholders together around shared data, developing common scenarios, and turning data into usable information can open up planning opportunities that did not previously exist. Making this information transparent is key, as it helps shift the dialogue and supports better decision-making.
How will the Congress ensure that discussions translate into real action and impact?
Peter Simpson: The Congress is fundamentally action-orientated. The guiding principle throughout has been “Water Action: the path to resilience and prosperity,” and this has been the touchstone for the Congress itself. However, this is only the initial document which will be followed by an extensive period of consultation up to and including the congress itself, shortly after which a final version will be produced ready for the UN conference.
Alex Plant: The focus is on making things feasible in practice. The aim is to combine two perspectives: understanding the investor mindset, what barriers prevent investment, and aligning that with what national water strategies need to deliver. This creates a more practical approach, where the outcomes can actually be taken forward, rather than just setting out another set of policy considerations.
The intention is to move from knowing what needs to happen to enabling it to happen on the ground. The Glasgow Framework is designed as a usable tool, supported by case studies that show what is possible in different contexts. Solutions are not one-size-fits-all, what is needed in one country may differ significantly from another, so approaches must be adapted accordingly. In the end, there are fewer more important issues facing the world than ensuring everyone has access to safe clean drinking water and effective sanitation. In Glasgow, this October, we have the chance to make a positive difference.
