Compiled by Nitya Jacob, Resource Person and Sunetra Lala, Research Associate
From Archana Vaidya, Indian Environment Law Offices (IELO), New Delhi
Posted 23 November 2011
I work with the Indian Environment Law Offices (IELO). We are a natural resource management and environmental law firm and are currently working on a project, exploring options for creating a model national institutional framework in the form of National Bureau of Water Efficiency for the Industry/commercial and domestic sectors to enhance water efficiency.
In India , the industrial sector is the second highest user of water after agriculture and its usage is growing very rapidly due to the rapid pace of economic development. Given the enormity of the prospect of water scarcity and to maintain inter-generational equity, all sectors need to be accountable for water use and ensure that they operate on some standards of systemic efficiency.
Enhancing Water Use Efficiency (WUE) is closely tied in with energy consumption, and the water and carbon footprints of users. Since energy is a critical input in the anthropogenic water cycle, right from procurement of water including extraction, distribution and treatment, all being energy intensive processes, a regulation to enhance WUE will also result in enhanced energy efficiency and optimum use of available energy in these sectors.
There is no comprehensive central or state legislation in India that treats water as a resource, rather than merely an input, it conservation or efficient use by industry or the urban domestic sector. There is no legal mandate about the norms or standards of water usage by the industry. The only mention is in the National Water Mission under National Action Plan on Climate Change which has identified a 20 per cent increase in water use efficiency by 2017 as one of the five goals by adopting conservation and use based mechanisms under different strategies.
Therefore, we feel the need of the hour is to have an institutional mechanism to set norms for water usage in the industry and urban domestic sector and ensure they are adhered to. Efficiency of water usage must become central in any industry planning process and that is possible only if there is a legal mandate.
In this context, we request member of the Community to share examples and experiences on the following:
1) What kind of policies and legal regulations are required at the national or state level to enforce and enhance WUE in the industrial/commercial and urban domestic sectors?
2) What should be the criteria for fixing normative standards for water consumption in these sectors? Please share any experience where WUE is already in use.
3) What kind of institutional framework at the national level would be needed? For example, would setting up of an institution on the lines of Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) be appropriate?
The information gathered will be extremely valuable in guiding the implementation of this Project and would be disseminated amongst all stakeholders who are working on the issue of water use efficiency. Contributions by members would be suitably acknowledged.
Responses were received, with thanks, from
1. Ramakrishna Nallathiga, Centre for Good Governance, Hyderabad
2. Tapan Padhi, National Institute for Development, Bhubaneswar
3. Jürgen Tümmler, ECHO, New Delhi
4. Dinesh Kumar, Institute of Resource Analysis and Policy (IRAP), Hyderabad
5. Jyoti Sharma, FORCE, New Delhi
6. Sunetra Lala, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), New Delhi
7. Srinivas Chary Vedala, Administrative Staff College of India , Hyderabad
8. Abhinandan Das, APC-Water Resource, Deepak Foundation, Varoda
9. K. Ananth Mani, Independent Water Resources Consultant, Hyderabad
10. P K Kurian, Department of Extension & Continuing Education, Karunya University , Coimbatore
11. S A Hirudia Raj, Consultant – Water, Hyderabad
12. Dunu Roy, Hazards Centre, New Delhi
13. Samala Govardhan Das, Consultant – Water Management, Hyderabad
14. Jayati Chourey, SACIWaters, Hyderabad
15. A J James, Pragmatix Research and Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon
16. Depinder Kapur, India WASH Forum, New Delhi
Summary of Responses
In times of crisis, there is increased talk of efficiency. Talk of more efficiency in water use is welcome, but needs to be tempered with caution – on equal access to this life-resource, on how to price it, and the quantities that are a person’s by right. This is because along with efficiency come water rights, closely followed by a market for those rights. Most market-based systems end up being dominated by those with the most rights or the money to buy them.
Industry is the fastest growing consumer of water, both in terms of the water is needs for its processes and to process waste water. In fact, industry needs more water to process its waste water than it uses in production. This vastly increases the water use by industry in both quantity and time (the time it takes for natural remediation processes to bring down or eliminate pollutants in industrial discharge). The most water-intensive industries tend to be sited along rivers or similar water courses, so their exact water requirements are unknown. Water use by these industries tends to be priced ridiculously low, and forms an insignificant part of the cost of the final product. Industry, therefore, has little incentive to use water more efficiently.
Urbanization is the other sector where water use growing rapidly. Cities have vast appetites for water, and the government norms for per capita supply are higher. Cities also produce huge quantities of waste water that, like industry, need huge quantities of water for processing to a safe level.
Both cities and industry have a very bad record of treating their effluents. The installed capacity of all sewage treatment plants is 6,000 million litres per day (mld) but estimated sewage generation from cities is about 30,000 mld. Reports from the Central Pollution Control Board show that the common effluent treatment plants (CETPs) in most states do not work satisfactorily. What this means is the ‘water footprint’ of the domestic and industrial sectors is far larger than their direct water consumption. Therefore, the need for greater water use efficiency assumes importance.
To move towards water use efficiency, it is necessary to calculate the amount of an industry or town uses and to establish a baseline. Water accounting can help establish the amount of water a town or industry needs both in terms of consumption and for processing its waste. A water footprint covers blue water (ground and surface water), green water (rainwater) and grey water (the volume of freshwater that is required to assimilate the load of pollutants given natural background concentrations and existing ambient water quality standards). It helps determine the amount of water from different sources an industrial process or urban water utility uses, and the volume of water needed to handle the effluents. It can be applied to either a single unit or an entire supply chain. The Water Footprint Assessment Manual can guide companies or public utilities in calculating their water footprints.
The government can encourage industries or municipalities (or their water supply organizations) that use water more efficiently through tax breaks or other financial incentives. This approach should be the basis of any policy to encourage water use efficiency (WUE) rather than legislation since laws to regulate the use of groundwater in several states, including Andhra Pradesh, have not been enforced. The danger is laws, as in the case of the Andhra Pradesh Water Land and Trees Act, end up over-regulating natural resources and become unenforceable. This has also happened abroad, as in the case of the Murray-Darling basin Australia . If a legal framework is adopted, it should focus on governance and not technical details, and support urban local government institutions.
In South Africa, the National Water Act sets out a comprehensive agenda for water resource management based on the principle of integrated management in order to achieve sustainability, equity and efficiency in a decentralized and participatory manner. In Brazil, the 1997 Law on Water Resources (Law 9433) recognizes water as a public good, as well as a limited natural resource with economic value, and it gives priority to human consumption in cases of water scarcity. These are two pointers on how a legal framework can support governance.
The other consideration is to exclude water for life, as envisaged under the United Nations Right to Water. For urban water utilities, this means ensuring all the people in that town get water for drinking and cooking even at the cost of systemic inefficiency. They can apply WUE principles to any water supplied over and above this amount.
WUE is linked to energy used in the water sector for constructing water systems, from the impoundment at source to the pipelines at the consumers’ end, pumping costs and energy used for maintaining the system. In Kerala, the state electricity board fixed power tariffs for Jalanidhi (the state water supply programme) that were higher than domestic tariffs. These were soon brought down due to political considerations and the amount of water utilities were pumping nearly doubled in many cases. In households, WUE is also a factor of what people pay for water, that is usually less than 10 per cent of the cost of procuring, processing and distributing water, and processing wastewater.
There are no clear directions on fixing normative standards for industry or domestic use. The only guideline for households is the 135 lpcd norm the government has set for water supply. The Water Footprint Assessment Manual has some pointers towards evolving criteria for normative standards for water efficiency that can be adapted for use in India . Evolving normative standards have to make allowances for varying levels of use by small, medium and large units. Otherwise using the same normative standards and criteria for different capital intensive industry will be detrimental to small and medium industry.
Any institution to promote WUE is welcome but given the nature of water governance in India , a central organization will only be able to recommend, not enforce, standards. To be effective, this institution will need state counterparts that factor in local conditions while recommending or setting WUE standards. The moot point, again, is enforcement of these standards and this takes the argument back to the need for WUE in the first place, that is a lack of accountability on the part of urban local government bodies and industry and the weakness of existing institutions to hold them accountable.
The points that come across strongly from this are (1) water is a public commons to be held and managed in trust. This means equitable distribution of water for life; (2) determining water rights in an equitable manner so market mechanisms do not swamp the poor; (3) WUE has to consider water holistically and while it is nice to have industry and domestic use under its ambit, it has to extend to agriculture as well and; (4) laws to punish WUE norms will not work given the weakness of enforcement agencies.
Comparative Experiences
Kerala
Jalanidhi shows that reduced power tariff leads to higher water consumption (from P K Kurian, Department of Extension & Continuing Education, Karunya University, Coimbatore)
When community managed water supply schemes were commissioned under Jalanidhi, the power tariff rate was based on the principle of higher charges for higher use. However, there was a plea for power tariffs for the scheme to be at the lowest rate. Higher water consumption was observed as a result of lowering electricity charges for pumping water. There were instances where the pumping rate increased by around 200 per cent compared to the previous tariff rates.
International
Brazilian legislations ensure recognition of water as a public good and a limited resource, Brazil (from Sunetra Lala, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), New Delhi)
Brazil has increasingly adopted measures to reduce the water and sanitation deficit. In 2007 a Law on Sanitation was approved, which is complementary to the 1997 Law on Water Resources, which recognizes water as a public good, and a limited natural resource with economic value. Improved legislation has resulted in stronger entitlements for vulnerable groups; accountability of policy makers and services providers and priority for investments in water and sanitation.
South Africa ensures constitutional recognition of the right of access to water, South Africa (from Sunetra Lala, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), New Delhi)
South Africa has adopted a progressive law and policy framework for water and sanitation, predicated on the constitutional recognition of the right of access to water and, implicitly, sanitation. The state is obliged to take legislative and other measures within its available resources to achieve the progressive realization of this right. This has ensured constitutional protection of the right in subsequent legislations, policies, frameworks and strategies.
Related Resources
Recommended Documentation
Water resource accounting as a tool for urban water management: an illustration in NCT-Delhi (from Ramakrishna Nallathiga, Centre for Good Governance, Hyderabad)
Article; by . Ramakrishna Nallathiga; Centre for Good Governance; Journal of Indian Water Works Association; Hyderabad; 2006; Permission Required:
Available at ftp://ftp.solutionexchange.net.in/public/wes/cr/res-23111101.pdf (PDF; Size: 205KB)
This paper argues for using water accounting as an appropriate tool for decision-making in water resource management through an illustrative case study of NCT-Delhi
From Jyoti Sharma, FORCE, New Delhi
Paani ka jugaad: water management
Video; by Jyoti Sharma; FORCE; New Delhi; Publication date;
Available at http://force.org.in/2011/11/28/paani-ka-jugaad-water-management/
Documents the many ways in which the city’s poor 'arrange' for their daily water needs through informal water markets
Delhi water project on PPP model
Article; by The Times of India; New Delhi; 2011;
Available at http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/S-Delhi-water-project-on-PPP-model/articleshow/10911593.cms
Paper on how the Delhi Jal Board has received clearance for starting a project on public-private partnership model for water distribution in certain areas
Guide to Preparing Urban Water-Use Efficiency Plans (from Sunetra Lala, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), New Delhi)
Guide book; by United Nations, Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific; 2006;
Available at https://unp.un.org/Details.aspx?pid=16676
This guide provides guidelines on preparing plans for the efficient use of water in residential, municipal and commercial sectors
Tools for water use and demand management in South Africa
Technical Report; by P.W. Herbertson and E.L. Tate; World Meterological Organisation; Geneva ; 2001;
Available at http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/hwrp/documents/TD73.pdf (PDF; Size: 170KB)
These tools highlight elements required to manage water use and demand effectively and to be of practical application in regions with an approaching water resources crisis
From Sunetra Lala, Research Associate
Policy Insights on User Charges from a Rural Water Supply Project: A Counterintuitive View from South India
Article; by Vibhu Nayar and A. J. James; TN-IAMWARM Project and Pragmatix Research and Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd; International Journal of Water Resources Development; UK; September 2010;
Available at http://tandfprod.literatumonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/07900627.2010.491973 (PDF; Size: 153KB)
Traces the process of change with regard to O&M, driven by democratization of governance undertaken along with engineers in the south Indian state of Tamil Nadu
Flowing Upstream: Empowering Women through Water Management Initiatives in India
Book; by Sara Ahmed; Centre for Environment Education and Foundation Books; Cambridge University Press India; New Delhi; 2005; Permission Required: Yes, paid publication;
Presents case studies of civil society interventions on issues of women's participation in community based water management systems
Users as Managers: Facilitating local self-governance for drinking water supply
Book; by Water and Sanitation Management Organization; Ahmedabad; 2006.
Available at ftp://ftp.solutionexchange.net.in/public/wes/cr/res-29071105.pdf, (PDF, 4 Mb)
Describes the rationale, process, challenges and systems for fixing and collecting water tariffs in Gujarat
Recommended Organizations and Programmes
From P K Kurian Department of Extension & Continuing Education, Karunya University, Coimbatore
Kerala Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project-Jalanidhi, Kerala
PTC Towers , SS Kovil Road , Thampanoor, Thiruvanthanpuram, Kerala 695001; Tel: 91-471-233700; Fax: 91-471-2337004; mis@jalanidhi.com; http://jalanidhi.com/
This is the state-level project, assisted by the World Bank, and implemented jointly with the state government to provide water and sanitation services
World Bank, New Delhi
70 Lodi Estate, New Delhi 110003; Tel: 91-11-24617241; Fax: 91-11-24619393;
smozumder@worldbank.org; http://www.worldbank.org.in/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/
Source of financial assistance to developing countries, including India and has evolved participatory approaches for water management in both rural and urban areas
Kerala Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Agency (KRWSA), Kerala
PTC Towers , S S Kovil Road , Thampanoor, Thiruvananthapuram 695001, Kerala; Tel: 91-471-2337002; Fax: 91-471-2337004; mis@jalanidhi.com; http://jalanidhi.com
Autonomous institution, whose objective is to improve the quality of rural water supply and environmental sanitation, including through well recharging programmes
Andhra Pradesh Farmer Managed Groundwater Systems (APFMGS), Andhra Pradesh (from Samala Govardhan Das, Consultant – Water Management, Hyderabad)
Block No. A-2(c), First Floor, Huda Commercial Complex, Tarnaka, Hyderabad 500007, Andhra Pradesh; Tel: 91-40-27014730; Fax: 91-40-27014937; info@apfamgs.org;
http://www.apfamgs.org/Default.aspx
Equips groundwater farmer users with the necessary data, skills and knowledge to manage groundwater resources available to them in a sustainable manner
Responses in Full
Ramakrishna Nallathiga, Centre for Good Governance, Hyderabad
This is a very interesting line of viewing and working towards water resource conservation. It is rightly said that water is not viewed holistically as a resource with various functions (consumptive and non-consumptive uses as well as direct and indirect functions) and one that supports various living organisms within it. In the process, the value of it gets lost. In economics, one makes use of the methods to elicit/bring out these values in money terms so that they stand out as representative values to decision makers. But, decision makers are less concerned about these figures and rather are concerned about the spatial and sectoral distribution and management systems. In their operational apparatus rights and values of water do not enter, as these can be changed through legislation and administration. Without the support of decision makers and/or by not taking them on board, it is very difficult to achieve water use efficiency.
Water accounting is perhaps an approach by which one can monitor water consumption across sectors, spatial locations and time periods so that one can examine the trends and patterns and call for the right kind of policy interventions or management changes to correct the anomalies. The attached paper is an attempt to highlight it and demonstrate the use of it for one area/region in India .
To some extent, this can be addressed in the green buildings, which have focus on the energy conservation as the main objective. On other hand, development of buildings that achieve water use efficiency during and post construction as well as in the operations and maintenance can be a starting point (leaving aside rain water harvesting) and closing the cycle with waste water recycling/reuse. There can be several interventions that lead to it - including the devices (now termed as smart devices) that make this process automatic (by sensor based operation or programmed operation) or by the use of technologies (such as waste water treatment systems). This benefit is already being factored into the price of building with a premium by those companies that are offering it through concepts of 'smart living' or 'smart community'. In Hyderabad , at least a couple of them have taken such path.
It may be difficult to fix a ceiling on consumption (economists tell you that it does not work in administration but only breeds corruption so better it is to charge price or tax). What some communities (particularly, those on high-end of consumption) are doing is to adopt water audit - which is an attempt to compare the consumption shown by utility meter reading to that of individual meters installed by themselves. This has a financial resource conservation motive and pure consumption reduction motive may not emerge from such attempts. It requires greater understanding on the use and adoption of right set of devices that give the results. Perhaps it requires better promotion of adoption of such end devices (for plumbing, water taps and sanitation) just like the ICL/FLs are giving a way to CFL/LEDs.
For more details please read ftp://ftp.solutionexchange.net.in/public/wes/cr/res-23111101.pdf (205 KB)
Tapan Padhi, National Institute for Development, Bhubaneswar
Thanks a lot for initiating this discussion on water use efficiency. This posting is not exactly an input for the queries you have posted. Before getting into that I think we should be very clear as to why only the industrial, commercial and urban supplies are being considered whereas the agricultural sector is the largest user of water.
Enhancing the water use efficiency in the agricultural sector will greatly enhance the irrigation coverage which has already been recognised by the Planning Commission. We are only at 35 per cent on the canal irrigation front. In my humble opinion we should consider the whole sector rather than focusing only on the commercial sector.
Thanking you and looking forward to a very meaningful discussion on this issue. I will get back with my feedback on your queries very soon.
Jürgen Tümmler, ECHO, New Delhi
The base of all legislation should be the understanding of water as a renewable resource. Therefore, legislation in water issues - national, state and district wise - should be water management plans: water is a renewable resource and water management plans describe how much of it is built up annually per region (watershed), state and countrywide. This volume or these volumes (for each region) describes how much is available at all.
Drinking water supply must have priority over all other users. Agriculture should have second and industry third priority. All three need water of a certain quality; the highest standards are required by potable water. All sectors must contribute to maintain water clean and legislation must be enforced.
The big consumers are agriculture and industry, together they consume at least 80 per cent of a country's water supply; therefore, they must be obliged to use a technology that enables them to execute their businesses while not using more water, than absolutely necessary. This means a permanent innovation in technology, which costs money (for investments/modernization). Therefore, a taxation of water and income/gains from agriculture and industry must punish misuse and promote wise use of the resource 'water'. I always suggest tackling this on 2 sides: water must have a price per volume consumed and investments in technology to use less water must be tax-deducible, at least in part.
Drinking water must have a price, too. It should not only be paid by the users at the end of the tap, but communities should contribute as well: the bigger the city, the higher the consumption of water per capita. The drinking water losses through over-aged and damaged piped distribution systems are enormous (~ 40 per cent in New Delhi), so communities must be punished for operating outworn systems and be rewarded for renovation of their distribution system and technology – direct contributions to the central Government or receiving benefits from them may be the right way to steer behaviour of administrations and administrators (e.g., promotion of career based upon improvements). The final user must pay a contribution, too, because there are losses on his side too; the idea of 'free water' must be abandoned, if a sustainable management of the resource water shall be reached.
Finally, more research on water is needed in India , from rural water supply, through hydrology and hydrogeology to technical innovation and quality standards.
Dinesh Kumar, Institute of Resource Analysis and Policy (IRAP), Hyderabad
The only legal framework one can think of to encourage water use efficiency is a comprehensive law which recognizes water rights or water entitlements of different use sectors, and users within each sector. The law should also provide for creation of institutions (at the level of river basins/sub-basins), which can allocate water volumetrically between and amongst users within sectors, and enforce water rights through monitoring mechanisms. This is an enormous task in itself. Maharashtra seems to be thinking in the right direction, with the Water Resources Regulatory Authority Act (2005) in place. Volumetric water entitlements or rights would encourage users to use water most efficiently.
Fixing normative standards for allocating water rights would depend on the overall water availability situation in a river basin, against the competing water demands. Greater degree of scarcity would ideally mean lesser volumes of water for economic activities such as industries, with priority allocation for domestic use, followed by water for agriculture which is essential for meeting the livelihood needs of millions of rural people.
Refined institutional models such as River Basin Organizations do exist in many developed and a few developing countries, which also allocate water at the level of the basin, amongst competing water uses - France, Australia, Portugal, Brazil and the United State to name a few, based on well defined water rights. In many of these countries, there is a clear distinction between water resources management and service provisioning, wherein resource management function lies with the RBOs. The transaction cost is manageable when there are a few users within the basin - like in Australia . The transaction cost will be huge, when there are too many tiny users of water within the basin (like in India ). The water quality management is the responsibility of the RBOs in most cases.
Now, if we consider pollution of freshwater bodies as a water use (which in fact it is), then water use efficiency improvement in industries and urban areas would also cover mechanism to reduce pollution from industrial and trade effluents. We already have pollution control acts and agencies mandated for this at the central and state level. The Act provides for monitoring water quality and use of judicial instruments for checking pollution, if effluent discharge norms are violated by industries etc. A more pragmatic approach will be to use economic/market instruments such as pollution tax, tradable rights to pollute, etc. But they have to be applied on the basis of situation. This would encourage them to invest in effluent treatment technologies and wastewater recycling. This is a huge subject in itself (environmental economics).
A pollution tax might be a good idea, if there are too many small units of the same type of manufacturing in one locality. Deciding on effluent quality, including that for each type of effluent would work when there are a few large industries in a locality. Here, the agency responsible for pollution control will have to work with the industries, to make sure that the right technology is used and pollution level of effluent is brought to the permissible levels.
Jyoti Sharma, FORCE, New Delhi
The concept of water use efficiency comes up because of water being increasingly viewed as an ‘economic’ good and hence the need for rationalization of use, depending on marginal utility at different utilization levels. Developing a legal framework to help operationalise this smoothly is a welcome step.
However, it also needs to be legally recognized that water below a certain inelastic base level, is a survival necessity. Unless adequate legal provisions are made to protect the right of every person to that base level of water, the search for efficiency in water use can actually have disastrous social results.
In the byelaws of urban utilities supplying water, the liability to supply drinking water is a ‘limited liability’ i.e., limited by the legal status of the dwelling unit. This is not to say that they do not provide water to the unauthorized areas – they do. However, a consumer in such areas cannot hold a utility responsible for poor quality of supply or non-supply. In such a case, the only legal protection to the consumer comes from the interpretation by the courts of the ‘Right to Life’ as including the ‘Right to Water’.
As long as the urban utilities are largely government managed, the urban poor (the largest chunk of unauthorized dwellers) are relatively protected by the political necessities of the state. For example, Delhi has as much as 52 per cent non-revenue water. Almost 2/3 of this is water is ‘taken’ by poor settlements (please view this clip 'Paani ka jugaad' to see how the poor ‘arrange’ for their water). However, utilities are increasingly outsourcing water distribution to private companies (Please read this newspaper report on the start of privatization in Delhi http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/S-Delhi-water-project-on-PPP-model/articleshow/10911593.cms). This poses a very real danger to the water availability for the poor.
There is a need to create a strong legal framework, over-riding any efficiency concerns, that protects the ‘Right to Safe Drinking Water’ for all. This need not be a limitless right, that is, it may be applicable only for drinking water (15-40 lpcd), it may even have a minimal tariff or a distance from household limit (that is it need not be supplied in every house) or anything else that urban water planners (in consultation with the users) deem fit.
The point I would like to stress on is that a strong law that gives ‘Right to Safe Water’ to all is essential in the current water scenario, regardless of whether the person is a legal dweller or a squatter, rich or poor, and that too a law that is a legal pre-requisite for utilities to arrange for, before they implement any rules/practices for increasing efficiency.
Sunetra Lala, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), New Delhi
The current trend in water sector reform is that water is being viewed as an economic good. This is a complete policy reversal from the earlier standpoint that water is a public trust. It paves the way for the introduction of water rights and the possibility of trading water entitlements. The new concept brought in by the reforms is that water rights are now created in favour of water users. These rights are necessary for participation in managing water resources, for setting up water user associations and introduction of trading in entitlements. Water related rights themselves are not new and there is already a vast corpus of law related to control over water. This includes, for instance, the absolute rights that the state may claim over water as well as rights and privileges that common law gives to landowners.
These reforms provide a framework for decentralising decision-making and allow ‘beneficiaries and other stakeholders’ to be involved from the planning stage. The state is to change its role from service provider to regulator. In the case of irrigation, for instance, this implies transferring control of irrigation systems to users by both allowing them and forcing them to take responsibility for the upkeep of irrigation systems as well as for the financial costs involved and for sharing the water allocated among themselves.
UNESCAP has brought out a Guide to Preparing Urban Water-Use Efficiency Plans (please visit https://unp.un.org/Details.aspx?pid=16676), which details out the importance attached to increasing water-use efficiency in urban areas. It highlights the importance of sound institutional and legal frameworks to incorporate water-use efficiency policies and mandates into water resource planning and development. The Guide draws attention to the preparation of water efficiency plans that could be required through a legislative mandate specifying a deadline, an element of national/regional water resources management plans, a condition of monetary grants and loans for water supply projects, or a condition of a permit for a new water supply project.
It also suggests how to prepare a water efficiency plan such as knowledge transfer on water-use efficiency measures, evaluation of successful pilot projects and utilization of water-use efficiency networks of country experts. It has guidelines on locally specific plan content and technical assistance, communication among agencies working on water resources management, and a list of “Best Management Practices”.
There is a need to accord higher priority to urban water-use efficiency and the following can serve as a process for fixing normative standards:
∙ Designation of a responsible agency as the national focal point on water-use efficiency
∙ Establishment of a legal framework and related standards for developing higher efficiency water supply systems
∙ Establishing of water-efficient standards for consumer devices and fixtures
∙ Metering water service and rationalization of charges based on actual cost of service taking into account the real value of water to facilitate efficient water use
∙ Allocation of more funds for water efficiency measures, and placing a higher priority on funding water supply projects which include water-use efficiency plans or considerations
∙ Promoting the private sector’s involvement in water-use efficiency projects and activities
∙ Establishment of a database on water consumption patterns, breakdown by sector, as a prerequisite for drawing up effective water efficiency plans
∙ Development and implementation of communication models and strategies that promote sustained public awareness and education programmes
∙ Documenting and disseminating information on successes and lessons learned from pilot and full-scale schemes, to refine future water-use efficiency planning and possible replication.
Below are case studies demonstrating how different countries adopted a human rights approach to improve its legal and policy framework concerning water and sanitation and serve as examples of the institutional framework needed.
South Africa
South Africa has adopted a progressive law and policy framework for water and sanitation, predicated on the constitutional recognition of the right of access to water and, implicitly, sanitation. The 1996 Constitution is the ‘supreme law of the Republic; law or conduct inconsistent with it is invalid, and the obligations imposed by it must be fulfilled.’ Section 27(1) b stipulates that, “Everyone has the right to have access to sufficient water”. The state is obliged to take legislative and other measures within its available resources to achieve the progressive realization of this right. This constitutional protection of the right has been amplified and given content in subsequent legislations, policies, frameworks and strategies all aimed at realizing the right of access to water and sanitation services.
The National Water Act 1998 (NWA) sets out a comprehensive agenda for water resource management based on the principle of integrated management in order to achieve sustainability, equity and efficiency in a decentralized and participatory manner. The Water Services Act 1997 (WSA) creates a developmental regulatory framework within which water services can be provided. It establishes water service institutions and defines their roles and responsibilities. It also provides for accessibility of water by domestic users and secures the right of access to basic water supply and basic sanitation, giving effect to the constitutional guarantee. The Free Basic Water policy sets out the framework for the implementation of the free 6,000 litres of safe water per household per month. More recently, the draft Regulatory Strategy for the water and sanitation sector has outlined how the government intends to achieve effective regulation of the sector in order to fulfill its constitutional obligations.
For more details on this and the case of Zimbabwe please visit http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/hwrp/documents/TD73.pdf(PDF; Size: 170KB)
Brazil
Brazil has experienced different trends in the management of water and sanitation services. Throughout the dictatorship (1964-1985), water and sanitation services were extremely centralized and usually provided by state utilities. During the 1990s, economic difficulties stalled public investment in the sector, which remained stationary and was opened to a small number of private investments.
However, with the substantial support of civil society actors, the country has increasingly adopted measures to reduce the water and sanitation deficit through legislation and policies. In 2001, the City Statute (Law 10257) was approved, an innovative legal framework that took the local experiences on popular decision-making to a national level.
In 2007, a Law on Sanitation (Law 11445) was approved as a result of these discussions, applicable to the supply of adequate drinking water, sanitary sewage collection, urban garbage collection, solid waste management and urban rainwater drainage. The discussions on the cities’ main problems have shown the necessity of a regulatory framework for water and sanitations services. Because it is a law developed on the basis of a multi-stakeholder dialogue, it sets out the basis for the development of the water and sanitation sector with a rights based approach. Some of its principles are: universal access to services; transparency; public health and environmental preservation; public participation; safety, quality and regularity of services; the use of cross-subsidies policies; the development of national and local plans of action; and the creation of regulatory bodies when services are provided by third-parties.
This Law is complementary to the 1997 Law on Water Resources (Law 9433), which recognizes water as a public good, as well as a limited natural resource with economic value, and it gives priority to human consumption in cases of water scarcity. It also assures the participation of multiple stakeholders in water resources management and seeks to balance current water availability with the needs of future generations by licensing and charging industrial and agricultural water uses. Based on this law, the National Water Resources Plan was approved in 2006, a product of a participative consultation process with several sectors of society and experts.
Improved legislation has resulted in: (a) stronger entitlements for vulnerable and marginalized groups; (b) improved accountability over policy makers and services providers and (c) priority for investments in water and sanitation. As a result of this, the level of investments in the water sector is increasing substantially, in most of the cases coming from municipalities, the federal government and also public water companies. Further to this, the investments are being carried out, generally, in a pro-poor manner, expanding water and sanitation services in deprived areas, including in informal settlements.
The National Programme on Growth Acceleration (PAC), commenced in 2007, planned investments of R$ 40 billion until 2010 in water and sanitation, considerably higher than the R$ 6 billion spent from 2003 to 2006. The programme, however, faced many challenges. Mechanisms of social control to ensure accountability over it were weak, which resulted in many irregularities in its implementation.
Conclusion
With the trend towards decentralization of responsibility for water resources management comes the need for revised institutional structures and responsibilities. This leads to the need for capacity building of staff for these new institutions and clearly defining their roles and responsibilities.
These new institutions need the power to uphold and enforce policy and legislation not only within each sector, but also in a manner that promotes integrated water resource management across sectors. Institutional structures benefit from local backing, particularly that of user associations and local politicians. An integrated reference framework, with a reference and monitoring system or advisory service, is a valuable institutional resource.
Finally, it must also be noted that education and marketing are essential tools for enabling policy to be implemented. The training of communities in simple, practical skills is a cost-effective way to ensure sustainable, well-maintained systems; for example, skilled plumbers ensure water-efficient distribution networks with minimum leakage. An appropriate toolbox of skills necessary to understand and apply water demand management can be used in parallel with long and short-term training and support.
Srinivas Chary Vedala, Administrative Staff College of India , Hyderabad
The project initiated by Archana is of great relevance and timely. My quick response is given below:
What kind of policies and legal regulations are required at the national or state level to enforce and enhance WUE in the industrial/commercial and urban domestic sectors?
Water is a state subject, particularly urban domestic usage. The National Sustainable Habitat Mission articulates the need for water conservation and also encourages states to put in place policies and regulatory framework for efficient water usage. However, these recommendations are not mandatory. National government should come up with standards /guidelines /model legal framework for water conservation /efficiency and should encourage states to adapt them through fiscal incentives. National government can also play a role in promoting appliance standards with regard to water usage.
What should be the criteria for fixing normative standards for water consumption in these sectors? Please share any experience where WUE is already in use.
There are several attempts made in the past. I can share with you separately.
What kind of institutional framework at the national level would be needed? For example, would setting up of an institution on the lines of Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) be appropriate?
Instituting a ‘Bureau of Water Efficiency’ is appropriate for promoting standards, undertake research and offer technical advice to state governments on a demand responsive way. I suggest you form a working group/advisory group of like-minded experts to guide your important project.
Abhinandan Das, APC-Water Resource, Deepak Foundation, Baroda
This project will create a great impact to the country. Here I am presenting my responses:
What kind of policies and legal regulations are required at the national or state level to enforce and enhance WUE in the industrial/commercial and urban domestic sectors?
Primarily we still do not have enough research performed to measure the amount of emission or pollution of water bodies by the industries or even domestic sectors. Although there are researches being done in western countries but it may not be applicable in Indian context. The emission/pollution status of different sectors will surely differ in both physical and chemical matter content. Therefore, a broad research work must be conducted for every sector to create a “Water Emission Index” of different sectors. This will be used for formulating policies and legal regulation for the emission. Apparently financial penalties is a commonly used practices for the violators but it alone may be not solved the problem. So creating “Trading Index for Clean Water” just like carbon trading would be a probable solution. This will not only reduce pollution but also help to create more clean water bodies. Industries would be incentivized for higher index and creating water treatment plants. Urban domestic sector could be taxed for crossing certain index limit applicable for domestic sector. Even for agriculture sector bore wells must be checked and suitable area wise allocation of bore well limits must be created according to the status of ground water level.
What should be the criteria for fixing normative standards for water consumption in these sectors? Please share any experience where WUE is already in use.
The industry sector has their own fixed water requirement according the capacity of plant and products varieties. The water requirement could be fixed according the standard and capacity of the sector and over consumption would be strictly panelized. This over consumption could be linked with water emission index i.e. over consumption as directly proportional to water emission .In household sector also the same thing could be done. All for them we need a strong monitoring and accurate measuring unit of all sectors. In agriculture sector also crop wise water requirement could be prepared and that would be followed for irrigation because in some places over irrigation is a matter of concern. Over irrigation not reduces WUE but also approaches others share of water (groundwater) which is not considered.
What kind of institutional framework at the national level would be needed? For example, would setting up of an institution on the lines of Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) be appropriate?
BEE for WUE is a good choice but for more precision and increasing effectiveness of the programme micro level monitoring unit is the best solution. It could be block level, or district or could be fixed by any other parameter like water emission level, etc.
K. Ananth Mani, Independent Water Resources Consultant, Hyderabad
I have the following points to offer with regard to developing a legal framework for Water Use Efficiency. WUE should target urban, industrial, irrigation water use and look at the most appropriate frame work that encompasses all. The legal framework should as far as possible stay out of technical issues while focusing on governance.
∙ Agriculture accounts for over 80 per cent of the total water use. There are nearly 30 million groundwater structures of various types most of which use pumps to draw the water from the ground.
∙ The ever-increasing urban demand of water is leading to re-allocation of irrigation water from major projects for urban use. This in turn has led to increased drilling of more and more new wells.
∙ Transfer of water from dams/projects to urban centers is burdened with huge losses (efficiency and financial) for which no one is accountable.
∙ Conveyance losses apart such transfers consume huge amounts energy at several stages of pumping, treatment and conveyance. There is no agency that is held accountable today for such low performance efficiencies.
∙ No legislation can improve efficiency as this has more to do with an assessment of the true value. Today water supply for urban use is considered to be of a higher value although water use efficiencies adopted by urban users are very poor. Additionally, urban water use is accompanied by huge power consumption followed by pollution of the environment.
∙ Water treatment processes adopted in urban/areas involve tertiary treatment (involving many pumps, chemicals) with very low performance efficiencies as compared to low energy consuming technologies.
∙ Agriculture use of water is at very low efficiency levels. Efficiency loses are seen in well design, poor performance of pumps, foot valve, placement of pumps (depth of suction), frictional losses, conveyance losses and thereafter with the handling of the water.
∙ No single legislation can be comprehensive enough to cover all these aspects. Additionally independent legislation for each of the different categories is untenable.
∙ Today we have several legislations for sustainable groundwater development, prevention of water pollution, ensuring quality of bottled water, and disposal of industrial effluents, and all these pieces of legislations have failed miserably.
∙ Legislation involves policing and putting in place several authorities who need to be well-trained to understand all the technicalities.
∙ Given these serious deficiencies in implementing legislation in a large democratic country like India as compared to the west, home grown indigenous approaches need to be seriously considered.
∙ Local democratic institutions (urban housing societies, gram panchayats, industrial association, co-operatives and their likes) need to be partnered and supported through legislations to be help in local governance of use of water and improving water use efficiency. Federations of these institutions need to be sustained to help evolve several independent successful models to scale.
∙ Government agencies and supporting organizations should be mandated to support local institutions with capacity, skills, technology to manage and improve efficiency locally.
∙ Local innovations should be fully supported.
∙ The focus should shift from penalty to behavioural change for responsible behaviour.
∙ Such models are being tested in several situations and the responses are highly encouraging.
∙ The need is to be bold enough to think differently and evolve sustainable governance models that respect local institution’s authority.
P K Kurian, Department of Extension & Continuing Education, Karunya University , Coimbatore
The query from Ms. Archana Vaidya is very relevant. I want to share an instance in this regard.
While working with Jalanidhi in Kerala I came across some instances regarding water use efficiency and energy use. When the Community managed water supply schemes were commissioned under Jalanidhi (World Bank Supported Rural Water Supply Project in Kerala), the tariff rate fixed by Kerala State Electricity Board for energised Community Water Supply schemes was based on a principle higher charges for higher use. However, given the 'political' hand in development in the State, community based water supply schemes took an initiative to submit a memorandum to the KSEB/Minister and pleaded for power tariffs for community water supply schemes at the lowest rate. The Minister responded positively. He ordered reducing the charges to basic (primary power slab) applicable to the household level for the community water schemes. We were on a consultancy those days for the Jalanidhi project, concurrently monitoring the sustainability of commissioned schemes.
In the next round of sustainability evaluation exercise, we found that the water use/pumping rate had made quantum jumps across the schemes subsequent to the lowering of the power tariffs. The Community began to act politically, trying to please every member of the water supply scheme by pumping and supplying more water, as it became cheaper in terms of energy cost. There must be similar experiences elsewhere in India , which corresponds to groundwater level and energy rates. Tamil Nadu also has some experiences in this regard. Community water supply institutions responded that lower energy cost for pumping water was the major reason for higher water consumption. There was large number of instances, where the pumping rate increased from 150% to 200% when compared to the previous power tariff rate. Another interesting observation is that similar tendencies of water pumping was observed when the energy meter was faulty or not working and the resultant lower billing of energy charges by KSEB.
Though it is a populist measure to bring down the energy cost, it did not favour the resource sustainability, in this instance, water. Therefore, there is a need to arrive at a legal framework which addresses the water and energy use together from the resource sustainability point of view and not from the socio-populist political point of view. Mr. Terry Thomas may have more insights on this issue and I hope he will respond. I am only responding to query -2 and 3.
What should be the criteria for fixing normative standards for water consumption in these sectors? Please share any experience where WUE is already in use?
Fix Per Capita Water Consumption (LPCD) (Jalanidhi scheme followed 40 LPCD in water scarce areas and 70 LPCD in normal areas of water availability. This can be taken as reasonable levels of water requirement in the State of Kerala . Each State may have a level already fixed such as this).
The Electricity/Energy consumption should be linked to the rate of water pumping, following normal rates for pumping as per normative standards. When the rate of pumping increases, the power tariff also should increase commensurately. Bonus can be given to those communities or individual households for lower consumption / pumping of water with a lower energy cost, considering it as a contribution to environmental and resource sustainability.
The most important role in administering this aspect should come from the Energy / Electricity Board, with integrated understanding at Ministry or Department or Board levels with the Water Resources Board or Ministry. Given the kind of information technology advances today, simple programmes can be designed to calculate tariff. Community water supply schemes and others must be compelled to keep logbook on pumping, again following carrot and stick policy for maintenance and non-maintenance of log books.
What kind of institutional framework at the national level would be needed? For example, would setting up of an institution on the lines of Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) be appropriate?
Though BEE for WUE sounds fine at National levels, the responsibility of administering the same should be left to Communities at ground level, according governance roles to Gram Panchayaths.
S A Hirudia Raj, Consultant – Water, Hyderabad
Laws to govern water use or make water use more efficient may not work. For example, in Andhra Pradesh the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and Trees Act (APWALTA) has been passed to establish institutions/committees at the state, district and block (mandal) levels, but it has not been effective due to many reasons. One is that a farmer has to secure permission from the block before drilling a tube wells. This involves several visits to the office, and bribing officials of the committee. The committee has to assess the groundwater level and take a decision. The borewells sanctioned like this are insured against failure and the government gives compensation if it fails. But the number of registered tube wells is negligible compared to the total number of borewells. The committee also discourages registration to reduce the burden of field verification.
As it was proved in APFAMGS project although there are several gaps or failures but the results from participatory groundwater management were relatively better. Yes, the Agriculture department has to conduct field level trainings to educate the farmers regarding crop water requirement and comparative statistical data/information on crop returns. For example, rice can be replaced with alternative crops which give the same returns as rice does, or farmers can adopt water use efficiency methods such as SRI for paddy, drip irrigation system for banana & vegetables, sprinklers for groundnut, etc. These have to be done in a Campaign mode to bring in drastic changes.
As my experience goes I feel Laws to govern water use will not work in practical. According to Jyoti Sharma, controlling water especially groundwater through laws may be a Herculean task. It may be better to have a mass awareness drive. As everyone knows agriculture is major consumer of groundwater, and awareness should focus on the farming sector. a database should be created and the analysed for crop water requirements and alternative cropping, which gives them equal returns, should be incorporated in the awareness campaign material. The farming community should be educated on water use efficiency.
Social regulations or water governance should be effected by establishing water based institutions. I feel this would be workable model.
Dunu Roy, Hazards Centre, New Delhi
All the expert (and experienced) commentators so far have made some excellent points but I fear they overlook one thing in common. They do not ask the question "Why is Water Use Inefficient?" I would submit that before proposing a solution, it is important to first understand the problem.
Ms. Vaidya originally proposed that accountability was at the core of the problem and, therefore, advanced the argument that legislation for regulation was required. Mr. Kurian responded that lower power tariffs seemed to increase pumping rates and hence fixing norms was the key. Mr. Raj identified water-intensive agriculture as the culprit and so suggests mass awareness campaigns for alternative cropping patterns. And Mr. Mani also thinks that accountability is part of the problem but better governance, not legislation, is the answer.
Why is it that nobody goes beyond the obvious and asks why there is lack of accountability (in spite of laws); what will ensure that the norm for water will be obeyed (when the norms for power have been flouted); what has led to water-intensive agriculture (for which massive mass awareness campaigns were carried out during the 1960s); and how governance is subject to legislation that never gets implemented (such as the 73rd and 74th Amendments)?
May I humbly submit, as a lay person, that our experts try and answer these questions before coming up with solutions to problems that may not exist?
Samala Govardhan Das, Consultant – Water Management, Hyderabad
I read the write-up of Ms. Archana with lot of interest. I have following points to make:
1. Our experience with legislation and other regulatory approaches to curb indiscriminate use of water (especially groundwater) is not encouraging.
2. Before one thinks of water use efficiency, one should have a fair estimate of water availability and present water use (for irrigation, industrial and domestic uses). This is possible only when we have a functional system of monitoring, similar to that of Participatory Hydrological Monitoring, successfully tried by APFAMGS. When we have the needed data, we can carry out a fair estimate, using another tool - Water Budgeting, again successfully tried out by APFAMGS. Though APFAMGS used this tool to allocate water to different agricultural uses, I think the industrial and domestic sectors can be included.
3. The water allocation to different sectors should be in hands of local communities. APFAMGS organized communities at Hydrological Unit (drainage basin) level, which is the most suitable unit for water allocation. If HU level institutions allocate water, it is easier to monitor the use through social fencing.
4. Water Use Efficiency should not be limited to industrial sector only but applied across all sectors.
5. As a blind rule no industrial use of water should be permitted in blocks where overdraft is reported or likely.
6. Bottling companies use copious amounts of water and should not be allowed to use groundwater, anywhere in the country.
7. More than the quantity, industries are known for their notoriety of polluting surface/ground waters. The present mechanism is not effective and involvement of people’s institutions in regulation could help.
Hope these quick points are useful.
Jayati Chourey, SACIWaters, Hyderabad
The agriculture, industrial and domestic sectors are three main areas of water usage in India . Although still considered an agrarian economy, India ’s rapid economic progress post-liberalisation since the 1990’s has seen water usage shoot up exponentially in its manufacturing sector as well. Also, given its distinction of being the second most populous nation in the planet, pressures on domestic water usage heighten each day.
Post-Independence and following the Green Revolution of the 1970’s, water laws have always inclined towards distribution and availability of water in agriculture through various irrigation and hydro-power projects. Also, the Ministry of Water Resources, which came into being in 1985 following the bifurcation of the Department of Irrigation has promulgated policies towards water usage rather than efficiency.
It’s perhaps only from the past decade that policy makers have acknowledged issues of water scarcity, water management, inclusion of socio-economic aspects in water resources projects, improvement in water efficiency, through the Eleventh Five Year Plan (2007-2012) and National Water Policies (1987, 2002). One can also observe aspects of water quality, watershed management being considered. Water efficiency has been discussed in a broader context and also specifically in areas of irrigation, conservation of water and private sector participation.
But for effective implementation of policies in the area of water use efficiency, local laws need to be in place as water is very much a state subject in India . In this regard, several states and cities have initiated institutions in the realm of Participatory Irrigation Management (Pani Panchayats, Water User Associations-WUAs), mandating rain water harvesting (Himachal Pradesh, Chennai, Ahmedabad), etc. Besides, there have a plethora of initiatives like the Accelerated Irrigation Benefits Programme; Hydrology Project; Water Quality Assessment Authority; Command Area Development and Water Management Programmes; National Project for Repair, Renovation and Restoration of Water Bodies directly linked to Agriculture, Flood Management and; River Basin Organizations.
All this has led to growth of numerous institutions in the private, public and not-for-profit domains with their own objectives. There is lack of cohesiveness and little or no consensus among these institutions on the kind of programmes being implemented and the resultant chaos.
Although bringing together all these stakeholders to create an institutional framework towards water efficiency that actually works would be a humungous task, it should not be confined only to the areas of industrial and domestic water use but inclusive of all sectors using water. Perhaps it would be a step in the right direction.
A J James, Pragmatix Research and Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon
I am afraid I must add a skeptical note to this discussion. Water use efficiency is a reflection of the value attached by users to water – and what it produces. The 'cost of water' is an economic measure of the true value of water (which may well be infinite!). In other words, people will use water more carefully, avoiding wastage, when there is a cost attached to it. And there are numerous examples of this.
When the Manali Industrial Estate outside Chennai was banned from using groundwater by the Tamil Nadu State Pollution Control Board, two public sector units (Madras Refineries and Madras Fertilizers) took up the challenge and became zero-discharge units, recycling ALL their water – and even began purchasing raw sewage from Metrowater to use in their reverse osmosis water treatment plants!
Farmers have historically responded to reducing quantities of water, by changing the crop mix, using drop and sprinkler irrigation systems and carrying out only critical irrigation.
Households in dry districts like Bikaner in Rajasthan have been recycling domestic water for a long time – using a basin to collect their own bath water, using the bath water to wash the floors, and squeezing the water from the wash cloth back into the basin to finally pour it in their kitchen garden. Why? Because they realized the water had a 'cost': their wives, mothers and sisters had spent time and energy, walked miles to distant water sources, to carry this precious water back on their heads.
Why then are we wasting or polluting water now? Because the 'price' or 'cost' of water is not high enough to make people conserve.
Misguided policies are partly to blame – crores being spent on constructing new drinking water supply schemes and not enough on their operation and maintenance; 'free' electricity to pump ground water for irrigation, larger quantities of urban water coming at a lower unit cost ... the list is long. These do not let users face the real cost of water supply – for agriculture or industry or drinking water.
But making users face the 'real cost' of water supply does not only mean water pricing. Legal and institutional measures can also work.
If legal punishment was a credible threat – as in the case of Australia 's famed IWRM policies in the Murray-Darling Basin – then also efficiency could increase. Also, if bureaucratic punishment (e.g., disconnection of wells, confiscation of pumps, closure of polluting industries, etc) was effective and widespread, it could also increase the 'cost' users would face of inefficient use of water. Unfortunately, in India , as many others have argued, our legal institutions do not provide a credible threat to those who use water inefficiently (or for private as opposed to public good). Bureaucratic control has been notoriously fickle (changing with personalities, buckling under political pressure).
Judicial activism seems to have worked – most recently, in the case of all government schools being forced to provide water and sanitation facilities.
Regulatory institutions – like the suggested Bureau of WUE – have only worked in certain cases, most notably, telecom and electricity. But these are very different from the water sector. In both those sectors, the measurement of services provided – and therefore deficiency in services – is easier, the number of service providers (and hence defaulters) is smaller, and improved service delivery has an immediate and palpable effect. The Maharashtra Water Resources Regulatory Authority is a good case in point.
The water sector, unfortunately, is particularly susceptible to political influence – used by vested interests to preserve their share of the locally finite resource. This is true of urban dwellers, as much as large land holders or industrial power houses. If they allow a Bureau of WUE to be formed, they will do their best to see that its powers are diluted, its rulings are disputed or dragged on and that it is staffed by incompetent people. All this is without considering the inherent difficulty of agreeing on a common formula or definition of water use efficiency!
My humble submission is that, given all this, there is little hope of the users being faced with the real 'cost' of water through an institutional measure like the BOWUE - and therefore, of improving water use efficiency. That said, I also believe that more is being accomplished to improve water use efficiency by recurring drought and the threat of climate change!
Depinder Kapur, India WASH Forum, New Delhi
What kind of policies and legal regulations are required at the national or state level to enforce and enhance WUE in the industrial/commercial and urban domestic sectors?
Policies in the industrial and domestic sector could be the same. Regulation regime will be different for the industrial/commercial sector and for the urban domestic sector. Issues like what is water efficiency in domestic sector, for which category of consumers, what it takes to improve efficiency – perhaps need to be addressed at the Municipal Resource Management including town planning and conserving water resources of the city, again at the Water Utility Level of service delivery and private sector if that is engaged in water treatment and supply for drinking water purposes - rather than at the consumer level.
What should be the criteria for fixing normative standards for water consumption in these sectors? Please share any experience where WUE is already in use.
Criteria for normative standards for water consumption will be the Human Right to Water and Sanitation will be the dominant feature of urban domestic water use efficiency (WUE). It means, water use up to a basic minimum level, will be guaranteed by law as a right and not subject to water pricing based standards regulation.
Criteria for normative standards for water consumption in the urban industrial and commercial sector – will need to make allowance for varying standards for small, medium and large industry. Same normative standards and criteria for different capital intensive industry, will lead to large capitalized industry eating away the small and medium industry – as was witnessed in the Pollution control initiatives in Delhi .
What kind of institutional framework at the national level would be needed? For example, would setting up of an institution on the lines of Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) be appropriate?
New institutions that strengthen water use efficiency are always welcome. However, the important thing is how will these new institutions be governed and what will be their mandate. The mandate of powers should not supersede the other institutions already in place. It should be a vibrant knowledge based institutional set up that serves the major gap in our existing institutional set up – lack of public scrutiny and institutional accountability for different water user institutions. We live today in the age of Jan Lokpal and Peoples movements demanding accountability from institutions. Institutional Governance for any new institution, specially relating to Resource Use, needs to have a relative independence from the major influencing institutions – large industry, commercial sector and major utilities. To ensure its relative independence from government control, majority of its Governance Positions could be from different public and other institutions – universities, CAG, Trade Unions, International UN Bodies, Civil society/NGOs, Journalists, etc. Independent experts can get co-opted or the new BEE type of water use efficiency standards body can become another bureaucratic set up. There is a need to think hard therefore on the Governance aspect, not just the institutional set up.
As a process in suggesting any alternative institutional mechanism, IELO can follow an open process of consultation with representatives of academic institutions, civil society, industry and others.
Disclaimer: In posting messages or incorporating these messages into synthesized responses, the UN accepts no responsibility for their veracity or authenticity. Members intending to use or transmit the information contained in these messages should be aware that they are relying on their own judgment.
Copyrighted under Creative Commons License “Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5”. Re-users of this material must cite as their source Solution Exchange as well as the item’s recommender, if relevant, and must share any derivative work with the Solution Exchange Community.
Solution Exchange is a UN initiative for development practitioners in India. For more information please visit www.solutionexchange-un.net.in. Please note that some of the links in these discussions maybe defunct.
