[The current water policy of the Government of India as well as the state governments is governed by provisions and guidelines envisaged in the National Water Policy adopted in April 2002. Since 2002, much has changed in water sector both within India and at the global level, particularly in the wake of impact of climate change. There is reported move by the Union Government to formulate a new water policy which can meet new demands and challenges confronting the water sector.]
Until the middle of the 1980s, the lack of a national policy on water was regarded a major hindrance to the development of coherent water policies because water was largely a state subject. Accordingly, Government of India adopted in 1987 a National Water Policy (NWP).1 A host of issues and challenges that subsequently emerged in the development and management of water resources led Union Government to review, update and revise water policy which culminated in the adoption of the National Water Policy in April 2002.
National Water Policy 2002
The 2002 National Water Policy deals with the availability of surface and ground water and utilizable water resources as per assessment, estimated requirement of food grain production by the year 2025, water resources planning by conventional and non-conventional means, institutional mechanism, water quality, water allocation priorities, resettlement and rehabilitation, participatory approach to water resources management, water sharing and distribution amongst the states, and maintenance of minimum flow requirement in the streams for maintaining ecology and social considerations.2
Viewed in a broad spectru, the national water policy documents of 1987 and 2002 present many similarities like focusing on developing a data bank, estimating the available water, prioritizing water (with access to drinking water accorded priority), developing roundwater rules, meeting drinking water needs, developing irrigation facilities, encouraging the participation of stakeholders in water management, monitoring water quality, promoting conservation consciousness, developing a flood control and management system, using cost effective measures to minimize erosion, maintenance and modernization of water works, ensuring the safety of structures built on water bodies, developing relevant science and technology, and training of personnel.
However, the National Water Policy 2002 moves a step further as it focuses on the development of an improved institutional framework with a focus on improving the performance of the institutions, promotion of rehabilitation schemes for the displaced, enhancing participation by private parties in water management, developing an effective monitoring system, and ensuring that states share the waters of a joint river.3
In the aftermath of Centre’s National Water Policy 1987, many state governments had also adopted state water policies. The national and state policies were based almost on similar principles: water as a natural or economic resource that can be harnessed to foster the productive capacity of the economy, from irrigation water for agricultural production to water for hydropower; and priority of use that should be allocated in the following order: drinking water, irrigation, hydropower, ecology, agro-industries and non-agricultural industries, navigation and other uses.4 Paramount priority has been accorded to domestic uses of water in water allocation.
On the other hand, water policies of some states also provide that change can take place in this priority list if circumstances so require, thus ensuring that there is little substance in the prioritization.5 Broadly speaking, existing water policies generally provide for the involvement of beneficiaries and other stakeholders from the project planning stage.
The policies generally promote the use of ‘incentives’ to ensure that water is used ‘more efficiently and productively.’ This entails increased involvement of private sector in water control and use from planning to development to administration of water resources projects. Rajasthan’s water policy has singled out urban water supply for private sector participation.
It is interesting to know that the introduction of water rights has been proposed in the water policies of some states. The Uttar Pradesh Water Policy 1999 asserts the state’s ‘sole ownership’ of the water resources, even while it proposes to create water rights in favour of users.6 The Maharashtra Water Policy 2003 reportedly makes these rights to be the necessary premise for participation in the ‘management’ of water resources, for the setting up of water user associations, and for the introduction of trading in entitlements.
The 2002 National Water Policy has ben criticised for emphasizing on continued government control over water resources, ignoring pleas by environmental groups to involve local communities in order to overcome looming shortages. It has also been criticised for ignoring the potential of rainwater harvesting and the importance of involving local communities in simple methods to ensure that rainwater is trapped and refills natural aquifers in the ground. As one expert has opined: “The National Water Policy will remain inert and ineffectual because it is far removed from the two simple but important challenges of water management today – rainwater harvesting and community management in this initiative.”7
According to L.C. Jain, a former member of India’s Planning Commission, India has over the last 50 years spent $50 billion on developing water resources and another $7.5 billion on drinking water with little to show for the money — much of which was siphoned out through a corrupt contractor system. Apart from big dams and irrigation systems, the government has encouraged the digging of millions of tubewells and borewells energized by electric and diesel-driven pumps that now provide half of the country’s irrigation.8
Framework for New Water Policy
In the wake of myriad problems confronting water sector in India, especially in the light of recent unprecedented floods, torrential rains and landslides, the National Water Policy 2002 has to be reviewed and revised to meet the new emerging problems taking place in view of climate change. Hydrological, engineering and other technical aspects of the policy are being looked after by the concerned official departments and institutions, we intend to briefly take up general policy issues that concern every one. These issues inter alia include convergence, corporate social responsibility, public-public partnership, sensitizing the people, establishing National Water Hub etc. Before dwelling on these aspects, it seems pertinent to briefly refer to India Water Vision 2025.
India Water Vision 2025
The India Water Vision 2025 was initiated by Global Water Partnership and by the South Asia Technical Advisory Committee of the GWP in 2000. The report is based on consultations and meeting with the various stakeholders at the zonal as well as at the national level to identify the themes, scenarios, and key drivers governing the water vision.
India Water Partnership (IWP) idetified during 2000 various vision elements and key drivers through many consultations. Using the vision elements and key drivers, two scenarios have been developed for 2025 for ensuring food security, livelihood security, health security and ecological security. A total water demand of 1027 billion cubic meters and an investment of Rs. 5,000 billion have been estimated to meet the water demand in 2025. Such massive investments in new projects should be planned within the framework of integrated scheme for river basin development plan. Further, development of water resource projects would require explicit assessment of environment and social impacts.9
Need for Convergence
Presently, the subject of water is looked after at the Centre by Ministry of Water Resources, Drinking Water Department of Ministry of Rural Development, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Urban Development and Ministry of Agriculture. Besides, ministries of Shipping, Power, and Atomic Energy are also involved in water-related issues. There is no proper coordination between and among these various ministries on issue of water. Besides, heavy budgetary allocations are made in each ministry in water sector.
Each ministry envisages its own programmes on water-related issues without the knowledge and coordination of as to what water-related programmes are being pursued by other ministries or departments. This results in loss of valuable man-hours put in by the bureaucrats in different ministries, squandering away of financial resources, replication of plans etc.; without achieving any positive tangible outcome.
With a view to bring convergence in water sector, the present author in a letter to Prime Minister of India in the last week of April 2010 suggested for the establishment of a new ministry at the Centre under the name “Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources” or any other name under a Union Cabinet Minister and four/five Ministers of State. He also suggested for the merger of the Ministry of Water Resources, Ministry of Environment & Forests, Ministry of Earth Sciences, and Ministry of Disaster Management into the proposed new ministry. Besides, departments dealing with water sector in other ministries like Ministry of Rural Development, Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Urban Development etc., could also be merged into the proposed new Ministry. Such a move will help in envisaging convergence, better coordination, smooth functioning and saving of at least one-third of revenue presently expended on water in different ministries. This mechanism of convergence between and among various ministries of the Central Government as well as state government has to taken note of while formulating new Water Policy to make the policy more effective and result-oriented.
Corporate Social Responsibility
The idea of corporate social responsibility (CSR) entails the notion under which business organizations and commercial establishments regard the interests of society by assuming responsibility for the impact of their activities on consumers, suppliers, employees, shareholders, communities and other stakeholders as well as the environment.
This onus or obligation can be construed in terms of extending beyond the legal binding to abide by legislation and ensuring that the business organizations devise further measures by volition to improve the quality of life for employees, their families, the local community and society at large.
Viewed in broad perspective, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is defined by Business for Social Responsibility, as “achieving commercial success in ways that honor ethical values and respect people, communities, and the natural environment.”10 According to Jeremy Moon, Professor of Corporate Social Responsibility at Nottingham University, “Business social responsibility…refers to the voluntary contribution of finance, goods or services to community or governmental causes. It excludes activities directly related to firms’ production and commerce. It also excludes activity required under legislation or government direction.”11
Present author has been vigorously espousing the cause of CSR in water sector so that both public sector and the private sector discharge their respective responsibilities in tackling the water-related problems. The proposed Water Policy should take into consideration to make it mandatory for the corporate sector to play role in water sector under the CSR.
Public-Public Partnership
The vast majority of public service operators in the world are in the public sector and 90 per cent of all major cities are served by such bodies. In other words, the largest pool of experience and expertise, and the great majority of examples of good practice and sound institutions, are to be found in existing public sector. Because they are public sector, however, they do not have any natural commercial incentive to provide international support. Their incentive stems from solidarity, not profit. Since 1990, however, the policies of international donors and development banks have focused on the private companies and their incentives. The vast resources of the public sector have been overlooked, even blocked by pro-private policies.
Out of sight of these global policy-makers, however, a growing number of public sector companies have been engaged, in a great variety of ways, in helping others develop the capacity to be effective and accountable public services. These supportive arrangements are now called “public-public partnerships” (PUPs). A public-public partnership (PUP) is simply collaboration between two or more public authorities or organisations, based on solidarity, to improve the capacity and effectiveness of one partner in providing public water or sanitation services. They have been described by Lobina and Hall as: “a peer relationship forged around common values and objectives, which exclude profit-seeking.”12 Neither partner expects a commercial profit, directly or indirectly.
This makes PUPs very different from the public–private partnerships (PPPs) which have been promoted by the international financial institutions (IFIs) like the World Bank. A great advantage of PUPs is that they avoid the risks of such partnerships: transaction costs, contract failure, renegotiation, the complexities of regulation, commercial opportunism, monopoly pricing, commercial secrecy, currency risk, and lack of public legitimacy.
PUPs are not merely an abstract concept. According to conservative estimates, there are over 130 PUPs in around 70 countries in water sector, which shows that far more countries have hosted PUPs than host PPPs in water – according to a report from PPIAF in December 2008, there are only 44 countries with private participation in water. These PUPs cover a period of over 20 years, and been used in all regions of the world.
In the Indian context, the PUP should be encouraged to utilize the existing experience and expertise along with the resources of the Public Sector for the better and efficient delivery of services, specifically in the water sector. The participation of Private Sector should be limited to certain sectors where Public Sector lacks resources or latest technology. The new Water Policy should not ignore this aspect.
Sensitizing the People
In order to elicit local population’s support for implementation of water-related programmes, it is essential to sensitize or make people aware of the gravity of the water-related problems and seek their cooperation and involvement in tackling those problems.
The best way to sensitize the people is through educating them about water-related problems. There exists a close relation between water and education. Water is most vital for our existence and education is of great importance for our development. Education is required for the development and prosperity of the society, to better understand each other and the world, for our personal development and for many other reasons. The intimate relationship between water and education is based on the need for information: People need to be educated about water in order to know how to deal with all kinds of water-related problems. There is also need to know how to best manage the systems once they are implemented. Information is the first step to solutions and more generally to make people aware of the need for improved water management in the world.
People also need water to be able to educate their children. Providing clean water and adequate sanitation in schools improves community health standards and enables children, especially girls, to attend classes instead of having to walk far to fetch water. The relationship between water and education can thus be seen in two ways: We need to be educated on water- related issues and on water management but we also need to have access to water to receive education.
Youth is important as a target-group for raising awareness around water and sanitation. The old adage ‘children are our future’ can more modernly be translated into ‘today’s children are tomorrow’s leaders’. They will be the ones to make decisions on how to manage water resources in a sustainable way. Donna L. Goodman of UNICEF has stated that it is imperative to make the next generation fully aware of safe hygiene practices, environmental sanitation and local governance in order to meet the Millennium Development Goals in water and sanitation.
The results of education can often be very positive. In the part of the world that has access to water, education contributes to a better understanding of what can be done to slow down the escalating water crisis. Children get a deeper understanding of how to handle water related issues in the future.
To impart education on water-related issues can have positive long term effects for the whole community. Moreover, to have access to the information on how to manage water systems independently, can provoke a feeling of empowerment, which in turn can lead to relative economic success. It is essential for the success of proposed Water Policy to devote adequate attention on incorporating provision for sensitizing the people about water-related issues. People’s involvement and participation in water related issues will help in realizing objectives of water policy.
National Water Hub
In view of the fact that a vast number of Central and State institutions are involved in various water-related activities, there is a dire need of augmenting their capacities towards sustainable water resource development and management in an integrated manner. In this regard the capacities of the stakeholders on the demand side viz. Panchayats; WUAs including civil societies are also required to be enhanced. Science and technology and training have to play important roles in water resources development and management in general. For this, dissemination, knowledge sharing and studies are a must. There is lot of traditional wisdom in the water sector which needs to be absorbed keeping in view the regional perspective. Many national and international organizations are working in the water sector which has, to their credit some or the other success stories/ best practices which could enhance the knowledge base to be disseminated to the stakeholders.
There is, therefore, an urgent need of a National Water Hub where the data/ information, technological advancements, knowledge, best practices/ success stories in the water sector could be networked and disseminated to stakeholders. It would also be a learning place for the people of various age groups. Emphasis would be, not to duplicate the work being done by other organizations but to have a holding structure with uniqueness to bring technology, learning and networking in the water sector under one roof which should be able to attract the planners, scientists, engineers and all other stakeholders i.e. farmers, industries, NGOs, VOs, WUAs etc.
Besides, the character of the National Water Hub should be apolitical in order to make it more credible, effective and accountable in water sector. The bureaucratic hold over the Hub should be minimal. In an era of coalition governments, different sets of political dispensation are expected at the Centre and the States. The ruling dispensation in the state being different from the ruling dispensation at the Centre may not like to negotiate with the later on water-related issues under political compulsions. Thus apolitical nature of the National Water Hub can prove instrumental in removing such administrative-cum-legal/political bottlenecks in water sector.
Conclusion
Recent havoc wreaked by incidents of cloud bursts in Leh area of Ladakh and by torrential rains, flash floods and landslides in Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Punjab and other parts of country etc., has spurred by the need to look at impact of climate change on water resources. These developments call for revision of National Water Policy 2002 which is seemingly inadequate to deal with new ecological challenges impacting upon water sector. The New Water Policy needs to be prepared in consultation with the States and other stakeholders to ensure basin-level management strategies to deal with variability in rainfall and river flows due to climate change.
The need is also felt for looking at amendment to the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, and the River Boards Act for time-bound clarificatory/supplementary orders of tribunals on inter-State water disputes and for setting up Inter-State River Basin Authority within National Water Hub for overall coordination of watershed agencies under inter-State basins. The proposed new Water Policy should take on board crucial issues such as demand management of water, equitable distribution, water pricing, stringent regulatory mechanism and allocating priority to water for life-support and ecology over industry. The new Water Policy ought to take into consideration the proposal for making water budgeting and water auditing as mandatory.
The time seems appropriate to establish National Water Hub which can be entrusted the task of holding consultations with the States and other stakeholders on various aspects of the proposed New Water Policy with a view to reconcile various points of view. The National Water Hub can be entrusted with the task of sensitizing and incentivizing the people about water-related issues with the cooperation of civil societies already engaged in water sector.
Notes
- National Water Policy 1987, available at http://cgwb.gov.in/documents/nwp_1987.pdf .
- Full text of National Water Policy 2002 is available at http://www.wrmin.nic.in/writereaddata/linkimages/nwp_20025617515534.pdf .
- For details on differences between the National Water Policy of 1987 and 2002, see K.S. Murty, India’s national water policy and water management, available at http://iahs.info/redbooks/a281/iahs_281_233.pdf .
- See National Water Policy 2002: §5; and Rajasthan State Water Policy 1999: §8; in 2005 Rajasthan adopted revised water policy. See Government of Rajasthan, State Water Policy (Draft), vailable at http://waterresources.rajasthan.gov.in/StateWaterPolicy/StateWater%20Policy%20Eng.htm .
- See Maharashtra State Water Policy 2003: §4; available at http://www.indiawaterportal.org/sites/indiawaterportal.org/files/e0306.pdf . Also see Rajasthan Water Policy 1999: §8.
- Uttar Pradesh State water Policy 1999: §17 (1) (d); available at ielrc.org/content/e9904.pdf .
- Cited in “A Flawed National water Policy: Bypassing Community Rights”, 5 April 2002, available at http://www.indiatogether.org/environment/water/nwp.htm
- Adapted from Water Policy Issues of India: Outcomes and Suggested Policy Interventions, New Delhi, August 2005, available at icid.org/cpsp_report3_web.pdf.
- Business for Social Responsibility, “Overview of Corporate Social Responsibility”, 17 March 2003, available at http://www.bsr.org/BSRResources/IssueBriefDetail.cfm?DocumentID=48809 .
- Lobina and D. Hall, “Public-Public Partnerships as a catalyst for capacity-building and institutional development: Lessons from Stockholm Vatten’s experience in the Baltic Region”, PSIRU Reports, p. 16, August 2006, available at http://www.psiru.org/reports/2006-09-W-PUPs.doc .
Dr. Arvind Kumar: Article published in Third Concept November 2010/Vol.24/No.285/P.No.7/
