It's an irony that is driven home with unfailing regularity every year. Like at present. Even as large parts of the country-including coastal Orissa, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, West Bengal and, of late, Mumbai-reel under excessive rains, there are other places (think interior parts of Rajasthan, Andhra, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Punjab) that remain bone dry. Here, growing a crop, feeding your livestock or even quenching your thirst is an everyday challenge.

The stark scenario is, of course, a pointer to everything that's wrong with the country's water management. Despite having more than 128 big and small rivers and four months of monsoon, India is a water-scarce nation. In most cities, municipal water supply to approved neighbourhoods is limited to a few hours every day, while those who live in slums or poorer boroughs must depend on private water tankers or tube wells. For farmers, water is an even bigger issue, since their livelihoods depend on it. The spate of farmer suicides in the drylands of Vidarbha, for instance, is largely due to failed rains and a lack of alternative water supply for irrigation.

Expect the situation to get worse. According to a Green India study done by TERI (The Energy & Resources Institute), the per capita availability of water in India has declined from 6,000 cubic metres in 1947 to 2,300 cubic metres in 1997 (the latest available figures). But TERI's Distinguished Fellow, Ashok Jaitly, says that it's almost certain the figure has come down further over the last nine years to around 1,800 cubic metres, simply because of population growth. Meanwhile, in contrast, the demand for water is soaring. Merely looking at the supply figures won't tell you the real story because, on paper, India's total annual supply of usable water stands at 1,086 billion cubic metres, which is enough to meet the growing demand as far into the future as 2040. The problem, however, lies in getting this water to consumer taps.

If the situation seems paradoxical in a country that has more rivers than most other countries, blame it on uneven distribution of water sources (see Water, Water Everywhere?). India receives around 4,000 cubic kilometres of precipitation annually, but 50 per cent of it is received in just 15 days and more than 90 per cent of the river flows take place in just four months. Poor storage facilities, then, make matters worse. For instance, India can store only 200 cubic metres of water per person, compared to 5,000 cubic metres in arid, but developed, countries such as the United States and Australia. Says Montek Singh Ahluwalia, Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission: "In the medium term, water is the single-most important resource for India. One can import oil if one runs out of oil, but you can't import water."

Privatise Water?

Ahluwalia says that water constraint is already affecting the Indian economy, and farmer suicides are happening because in the past there has not been enough investment in water infrastructure. Just to put things in perspective, agriculture accounts for a staggering 85 per cent of all water consumed in the country. Industry takes out just 7 litres out of every 100, and retail consumers even less at 4. Agriculture, unfortunately, is also one of the most inefficient users of water. Irrigation is still conducted through a canal system that is more than a century old, and since most of the canals in use are unlined, nearly 40 per cent of the water channeled into them is lost due to seepage, points out J.S. Samra of the Indian Council for Agricultural Research (ICAR).

INTERLINKING INDIA'S RIVERS It's an old idea stymied by ecological concerns and prohibitive costs.

Troubled waters: Everyone loves Ganga The idea of inter-linking India's major rivers was first mooted by Arthur Cotton way back in 1881, and has since been advocated sporadically by others, including engineer-statesman M. Visvesvaraya. The plan basically involves diverting water from surplus areas to deficit ones by harnessing rivers in the Himalayan basin and the Peninsular basin. The plan was recently revived when the Supreme Court in October 2002 ordered that the project be completed in the next 12-15 years. A task force formed to examine the feasibility of the project submitted its report in 2004. However, the estimated cost of Rs 5,60,000 crore is not the only prohibitive factor. The project will have an ecological impact that may be difficult to predict, believe some scientists. The hydrological, drainage patterns for the entire country could change. Besides, the project must address the concerns of neighbouring countries such as Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan, who fear that their rights to the rivers flowing through their territories may also be affected. For the moment, the UPA government has decided to go ahead with an inter-linking plan focussed on the peninsular rivers. But that's not to say India will have inter-linked rivers soon.

Supply crunch: The answer lies in rainwater harvesting

In cities and villages, the issues are different. In urban areas, the existing user charges are inadequate even to cover the operation and maintenance costs of the utilities, never mind the sunk cost. In other words, while water in itself may be free, consumers have to pay for the pipes that carry the water and the treatment plants that clean it. But since water is a politically-sensitive issue, no public utility dare raise charges. In rural India, drinking water problem is relatively small and more location-specific. Yet, rural schemes such as the World Bank-funded Swajaldhara are designed to pass on a part of the cost to the participating communities.

Normally, the answer to public sector ills is privatisation. Profit-driven corporations are better employers of capital than government agencies. So, is privatisation the answer to India's water woes? It doesn't seem so. Part of the problem stems from the fact that water, unlike cars or soaps, is seen as a fundamental right. Therefore, non-supply of water for non-payment of bills has health, safety and moral implications. Countries such as France have coped well with privatisation, but most others, including Bolivia, Argentina, and Mexico, have had dismal experiences. Why, Atlanta, in the thick of capitalist America, had to terminate a 20-year, $428-million water privatisation contract after four years of experimentation, marked by losses and supply problems. "Since private players are propelled by the profit motive, there is a legitimate debate about the possibility and opportunity for monopoly," says Ramesh Ramanathan of Bangalore-based NGO, Janaagraha.

Plenty around: Veolia Water (India)'s Mitroo is convinced that there's no shortage of water, but only skills

Some of the arguments against privatisation of water are no doubt valid. But often, such contentions pre-empt meaningful discussions over issues like water quality, maintenance of infrastructure and rational user charges. One example is Delhi Jal Board's (DJB) pilot project to supply pressurised water round-the-clock in two zones in Delhi. The project, called 24x7, was grounded last year by its opponents not because they thought it was a bad idea, but because the World Bank and some foreign advisors were involved in it.

Despite DJB's bad experience, efforts at privatisation are on elsewhere in the country. France's Veolia Water is doing a small pilot project in Chennai with some 1,500 households, and the Karnataka government is trying out a combined project in the three cities of Belgaon, Hubli-Dharwad and Gulbarga, with Veolia being responsible for 10 per cent of the water supply in each of the towns. Jamshedpur, where a Tata Group company manages water supplies, is possibly the best example of water privatisation in India. But then the township was always privately managed, making it easier for the Tatas to rope in Veolia (earlier Vivendi) as a partner. "There is no shortage of water. There is only shortage of skills, but the government can easily hire these," says Promod Mitroo, Director, Veolia Water (India). Purely public sector efforts by urban local bodies have proved inadequate because of their financial weakness. While the National Urban Renewal Mission is expected to help in this regard, the answer may well be public-private partnerships like in Tirupur (see Tirupur's Partnership Model).

TIRUPUR'S PARTNERSHIP MODEL The small town is experimenting with a public-private partnership model that has drawn both praise and flak.

Price is the key: NTADCL's Vyas has a tough job ahead of convincing industrial units to pay the agreed price Historically, Tirupur, the hub of India's knitwear industry, relied on groundwater and tankers to cope with its water deficit. However, partly due to industrial pollution (chemical dyes), the groundwater became more and more saline and contaminated. By the late 90s, the industry and Tirupur residents were sourcing water from a growing radius of 50 km. To tackle the problem, the Tamil Nadu Water Investment Co. (TWIC) was set up in 2001 as a joint venture between the state government and infrastructure finance institution, IL&FS. Around the same time, the New Tirupur Area Development Corp. Ltd (NTADCL) was formed as a special purpose vehicle and project sponsor. Tirupur municipality along with the Tirupur Exporters Association pitched in, apart from the World Bank and USAID. Eighteen wayside villages were also drawn into the project and, interestingly enough, the villagers were willing to pay from Day One. Today, the Rs 1,023-crore water project, which will ultimately supply 185 million litres of potable water, has brought some relief to the town. But there are hiccups. Some industrial units are refusing to pay the asking price of Rs 45 per kilolitre of water, since tankers cost only Rs 30 a kilolitre. (Under differential pricing, retail consumers in Tirupur pay Rs 5 and wayside villages, Rs 3.50. ) But Sameer Vyas, NTADCL's Managing Director, is hopeful: "The project will stabilise in another year or so." The project won't resolve the water problem for the whole of Tirupur and it may well continue to face resistance. But the fact is, it has demonstrated that even relatively poor consumers are willing to pay for water, as long as it is both safe and reliable. It's a matter of time before industry sees logic in it.

Numeric problem: TERI's Jaitly estimates the per capita figure has come down by a fifth in less than 10 years

Water Reforms

Water is a complex issue with many moving parts. Any attempt at reforms, say experts, must consider everything from the way a society treats its sources of water and the manner in which the resource is managed (see Interlinking India's Rivers) and then priced. Obvious gaps in the current policy include the role of groundwater mining, then the roles of various government agencies at the federal, state and local levels, and finally the role of the private sector in ensuring India's water security. But the fact that water is a state subject makes national-level plans such as the National Water Policy 2002 more a bland statement of intent than a blue print for water security.

Adding to the confusion is the fact that there are no dedicated regulatory structures for water. Ultimately, "there needs to be a good, solid policy that deals with water through the entire ecological cycle, and not just using water equitably between rural and urban users and then between the rich and the poor in urban areas", says Ramanathan. The sooner India puts such a policy in place the better. Otherwise, scenes like the ones coming out of Mumbai and Vidarbha will continue to mock at us and threaten our growth.