I think this question represents a misunderstanding of climate and hydrology. Water is not usually produced and destroyed, it is purified and used and thereby contaminated.
There are serious concerns, in many places of the world, of regional shortages of clean, healthy water for drinking and agriculture. This could be because the water is available but dirty, or because it is regionally not available (think of a desert). If water is no longer available when it used to be there in recent times, it must have stopped coming in (changes in prevailing winds, people upriver taking more out of the river, ...) or it must have increased the outflow (degraded soil unable to hold moisture, flash floods carrying the water away after each rain ...).
One possible approach is to increase the price of water. This assumes most people get water out of metered taps. As it gets more expensive, people change their habits (buy more efficient toilets, take showers instead of bathing in a tub) or industry/agriculture (plant more drought-resilient crops). In theory this could reach a point where the poor die of thirst, but the middle classes being unable to take a shower would force political action at some point.
The other possible approach is to regulate the market and ban certain uses. A couple of years ago, California banned swimming pools. And here are current restrictions.
To produce water, one would oxidize some hydrogen-containing material. To destroy it, the hydrogen must be separated from the oxygen, e.g. by electrolysis. That's not done on a global scale.