The new draft National Water Policy (NWP) circulated by the Ministry of Water Resources to water experts suggests that the government is poised to withdraw from its responsibilities of water service delivery, and that multinational corporations and financial institutions might have too big a say in water allocation and policy.
At first glance, it appears as if the policy takes a holistic approach to water resources management, with a clear recognition of India's water woes. It accords pre-emptive priority for safe and clean drinking water and sanitation to all and prioritises meeting the water requirements for ecosystems.
However, a closer look shows that some important points are missing. To begin with, water is not articulated strongly enough as a fundamental human right in this draft. This is despite India voting in favour of the United Nations General Assembly resolution on Right to Water, in 2010. But there are various suggestions to institutionalise the treatment of water as an economic good. In addition, the draft NWP proposes to limit the role for government in public services. When in other parts of the world water services are being brought back into public realm due to negative experiences with private sector water provision, this policy suggests that the government should function simply as a service facilitator, and that service delivery should be handed over to local communities or the private sector.
Crisis and conservation
While such proposals are not new, what is new is that these policies are justified in the name of dealing with the water crisis and in the name of conservation!
The draft also recommends “full cost recovery” of water used as the means for achieving efficient use of water. While full cost recovery will help meet the costs of water delivery, it does not deter water use among those who can afford to pay. In that sense it works particularly against lower income groups, and groups that use water for activities that have low economic returns. Full cost recovery needs to be accompanied by protection of the right to water for basic needs, including that for basic livelihood strategies.
Moreover, in the area of water quality conservation, the important “polluter pays principle” has disappeared. It has been replaced with “incentives” for effluent treatment and for reuse of water. While reclaiming wastewater is necessary to bridge the water deficit, in the absence of strong regulations to limit polluting activities, such incentives to polluters (to treat effluents), might work as a perverse incentive to pollute more. These are also opportunities for some of the worst water polluters to profiteer: companies such as Dow Chemicals are developing patented water purification technology. If these policies are unlikely to protect the basic right to water, it begs the question: who are the advocates and beneficiaries of these policies?
New report
It is likely that a recent report, “National Water Resources Framework Study: Roadmaps for Reforms,” might have had some influence on this draft NWP. There are striking convergences between sections of this report and parts of the draft water policy. This report, by the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW), was commissioned at the request of the Planning Commission of India to the 2030 Water Resources Group (WRG), via the International Finance Corporation. The report was commissioned even while several Planning Commission constituted working groups were preparing reports on various aspects of water governance.
The CEEW is one of the main Indian partners of the WRG, a high profile public-private partnership housed in the International Finance Corporation (of the World Bank Group). Financed by multilateral banks and bilateral aid organisations among others, the WRG's strategic partners include the multinational firms Cargill, Coca Cola, Pepsi, Unilever and McKinsey & Company.
Influencing policy
The WRG is systematically trying to influence how the world's water will be allocated in future. It is seeking to influence the water policy in India, South Africa, Mexico, Jordan, China and Mongolia, where it is targeting public officials in water and environmental ministries. For India its targets were more ambitious: the states of Karnataka and Maharashtra, and “potentially the National Planning Commission.” In their efforts to make inroads into national and regional policy making arenas, they seem fairly successful. For example, in India, since 2010, the WRG has successfully been collaborating with the Confederation of Indian Industry and the CEEW to influence water policy in Karnataka, and now it appears, at the Centre.
The WRG is particularly interested in influencing agricultural policies, especially crop choices and agricultural water allocation in the countries they target. The reason for its focus on a “water-efficient,” “productivity-oriented” agriculture, and the importance they place on the role of food value-chain players is self-evident: the WRG is led by the transnational agriculture and food related businesses that constitute its main members. However, such water sector reforms will become yet another way to push already vulnerable peasant agriculturists further into poverty. Civil society groups in Karnataka are aware of and oppose the dangerous path their State is tempted to take.
But it is not going to be easy for them in Karnataka or elsewhere. For example, a quote ascribed to Secretary General of the United Nations Ban Ki-moon, suggests that he sees the WRG as an answer to the problems in international water governance: “The problem is that we have no coordinated global management authority in the U.N. system or the world at large. The World Economic Forum's effort to develop the economic and geopolitical forecast on water is essential. For the first time, all the different perspectives and expertise required to define the full dimension of the problem are brought together.”
In many ways the draft national water policy epitomises not only what is being advocated in the area of water governance, but also the problems with the initiatives being pursued around the world. Multinationals are no longer content with profiteering from their traditional areas of businesses: they want to play a larger role in the allocation of the world's natural resources, which have so far been in the public realm. The actual water users and their representatives are marginalised. In the context of the climate crisis that the draft policy seeks to address, it is important to remember that a large number of water users, farmers and local communities have been taking prudent decisions in the area of effective water management and adaptation. There is substantial practical knowledge that they can bring to the table that would completely change the way to look at issues. Rules governing the use of water, an essential part of life itself, must be the result of careful consultation with all stakeholders, especially the least powerful, and should not be driven by corporations and international finance. This is important not only in India, but for what it could mean for the future of water governance globally.
(The writer is a Minneapolis-based analyst working on global water policy initiatives at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, a U.S. NGO. Email: svarghese@iatp.org)
Keywords: National Water Policy, CEEW, Water Resources Ministry
this is an eyeopener article and in future water is going to be the
cause of conflict next to energy. how can any one try to control such
elements of basic need although restriction to waste of this natural
resource is mandatory and appreciated but not on the terms and
conditions of the pro-profit financial giants who are trying to
manipulate the policies to control natural resources. there should be
policies like air pollution control rather than like charging prices for
breathing fresh air.
water is a resource that gives lifes to life . it's efficient as well as sustainable management must be put in place to ensure it's efficient utilization.no policy is incorrect or malign intended in it's spirit instead it get these adjectives after it's flawed implementation. we can't afford to waste water and by the same time can't afford to put burden on poor people.progressive rates for water whereas rich pay more poor get subsidy kind of environment should be put in place to avoid any unintended outcome of NWP.overall in my views after the recommendation of ashok chawla committee on allocation of natural resources it's a good moveby GOI.
History is ofcourse a cycle. There were days in the first century when the Great Chola King had invaded the western Ghat region for getting undisturbed flow of Kavery water. It was inbetween the nations. Day by day the life has becoming miserable with the endorsement of policies and handling of public affairs by the Multi Nationals at the cost of the citizens and the Government fails to preserve its obligations and duty towards the welfare measures. Water,Food and education are the birth right of a citizen. It is right time to fight for the RIGHTS or else we will lose the merit of living citizens.
The Government cannot shun itself off from its responsibility to provide basic amenities like water, power. If these were to be privatized, the common public would be in more peril.
Matter of government or private sector being service provider is irrelevant till the time quality services are made available at a very low price.
If Govt has to shrug off the responsibility of providing basic
amenities to its people and if we have to take care of everything of
our own in the end then, what should we pay taxes for?
Governments are getting smarter now, in doing business. and they expect the private sector to serve people!! They want to withdraw from the responsibilities of water service delivery, else where we find Governments taking controls on 'coloured water' delivery, distrbution and sales! I mean the liquor! The comedy and irony is, we believe in these people's to take us and India forward!
I also thank Hindu for publishing such an article, which is non-sensational. I think this is ethical and will build public awareness.
As pointed out by Mahesh J above, if 90% water goes to agriculture, there is an urgent need to do something about it. In my experience, a lot of farmers are getting electricity for pumping water based on HP (horsepower) connection, and some farmers are getting electricity based on meter (showing usage for payments). The former is encouraged to use water mindlessly (I saw few farmers last month in water scarce area of Kutch wasting 80% of water in irrigation); and the latter are not because they have to pay electricity bill as per their usage indicated by meters. I think there is a need for the metered water policy for all farmers. On the other hand, irrigation water available from canal is very cheap, mostly not metered, and there is a huge wastage.The farmers need to participate in water policy, not only as "token participation", but real one.
Council for Energy, Environment and Water and Water Resource Group) should strongly look into the matter of right to water in National Water Policy and also to look into to avoid any type of bridling in providing this natural resource "water" to people. National Water Policy should be modified by taking international move towards water resource management aim in world. This policy must require transparency in execution to avoid lack in service.
Informative article. Hats off to the Hindu for publishing an article on Non-Sensational issue at this point of time. Water is an essential need and definitely any such legislation will affect everyone's life.
As Suggested in the article policy drafters should take help of local communities who implemented effective usage mechanisms. Policies driven by multinationals will be pro-profit making which can deprive the poor of their 'right to the good'. Right to water should be a compulsory part of the policy document along with the polluters pay principle. Govt cannot just shrug off responsibility in such issues. Instead it can form co-operative association(as like in the case of Milk supply) with selective local communities and make its usage effective.
This is a very important issue. Thanks to SV for analyzing this draft.
On every front, Energy, Food and Agriculture, Education, and now
water the GOI is backtracking! It is truly a robbery of land, water
and every natural resources!!
This is a day light robbery of India, facilitated by the government, corporates and industry. The fact that such a report was funded to be written is itself blasphemous. The report's right place is the junk bin.
Awesome artricle. This is a serious issue. This article is a bedrock and guide for tomorrow's possible Civil Society's protests if government decides to go ahead with NWP. While Government is free to decide policy, acts need to take route of Parliament and we have Rule of Law. I would be astonished if government could push such policies through Parliament act.
Whereas wastage of water is serious issue, we cannot charge that farmers are wasting it. They do not have money and technology to go for drip and sprinkling irrigation. So, we need monetary & technical infusion in irrigation to solve this issue (90% of water goes to farming).
Rich or poor, each one needs water for survival. There should be progressive tariffing based on income and usage pattern. Let rich pay more for per liter than poor. Because, its rich who waste it, not poor who even today are forced to wander miles for water.
Please Email the Editor