Urban Water Management in India:

Recommendations for the 12th Five

Year Plan Approach Paper

Final Report of the national consultation on urban water management

Submitted to Planning Commission of India

1/13/2011

By

2

CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... 3

PREFACE ....................................................................................................................... 4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 8

Overarching principles emerging from the Consultation .............................................. 9

Recommendations at a glance ................................................................................... 10

DETAILED RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................. 16

Thematic Group 1: Urban poor .................................................................................. 16

Thematic Group 2: Infrastructure ............................................................................... 19

Thematic Group 3: Governance ................................................................................. 23

Thematic Group 4: Water sources ............................................................................. 25

Thematic Group 5: Beyond Watsan ........................................................................... 27

Annexure: List of participants ................................................................................... 28

3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Firstly, we would like to thank the Planning Commission, particularly its Members, Mr. Arun

Maira and Dr. Mihir Shah, for seeking to make the planning process broad-based and

consultative and giving civil society organisations space to be heard. We note with appreciation

that Mr. Maira and Dr. Shah spent significant time at the consultation with the participants

sharing their thoughts and feedback.

The consultation process was made possible in such a short timeframe due to the efforts of a

large number of people and organisations working together. We thank Mr. Depinder Kapur of

India Wash Forum for all his inputs.

We thank all the participants for agreeing to spare valuable time for this process, often

rearranging their schedules in order to attend and contribute. We take this opportunity to place

on record our sincere thanks and appreciation for several participants who took additional effort

and time to prepare the draft recommendations based on the presentations from the thematic

group discussions on December 15, 2010.

WaterAid would like to thank Mr. Chittoor Krishnan, Consultant, Jal Seva Charitable Foundation

who helped to co-ordinate the activities on their side.

We thank the Planning Commission for hosting the consultation at the Commission's office. In

particular Mr. A K Chakrabarti and Mr Deepak of the Commission helped a great deal with the

logistics.

Arghyam and WaterAid

4

PREFACE

The Planning Commission is in the process of preparing the approach paper for the 12th Five

Year Plan. As a part of the process, the Planning Commission convened a meeting of the civil

society organisations in October 2010 expressing its desire to deepen the channels of

communication with NGOs/CBOs working with vulnerable sections, in diverse regions of the

country. The belief is that through such a wide process, the input gathered from conversations

will be wholesome and valuable to the planning process.

In the area of urban drinking water and sanitation, the Commission requested Arghyam and

WaterAid to organise civil society consultations. This was perceived as a great opportunity for

the collective experience of grassroots organizations to be tabled and conveyed to the highest

policy-making body of the Government of India such that important modifications and inclusions

are made in the 12th Plan to mainstream civil society efforts.

Accordingly the national consultation on urban water management was organised on December

15, 2010 in the Planning Commission of India at New Delhi. The objective was to have an

inclusive and representative national consultation process to yield collective recommendations

for the 12th Plan on Urban water. The programme was designed to accommodate and include

different perspectives in addressing the needs of the deprived and vulnerable sections of

society. The costs and resource support for the exercise was borne by Arghyam and WaterAid.

The Water Community of UN-Solution Exchange was the network and documentation partner

for the consultation.

Participants:

A wide range of participants covering organisations working on different thematic, geographical

and socio-economic areas took part in the day long consultation. The sixty participants

represented diverse stakeholder groups in urban water management spectrum. They included

NGOs, right based groups, community based organisations, slum community, policy analysts,

researchers and academics, engineers and municipal functionaries and government officials.

(See annexure 1: List of participants)

Themes for discussion

In the management of water in urban India, issues of universalisation of access to water, equity,

guaranteed water supply of good quality, treatment and recycling of industrial and commercial

wastewater, and safe sanitation have prominence. These issues continue to remain as focal

points in equalizing the platform for water and sanitation services.

The distribution and management of urban water and collection and disposal of wastewater

function under a structured process. There are State level urban water utilities or departments

that plan and execute water supply and sewerage projects. The costs incurred and the financing

5

for various projects flows from various Central Government schemes, development banks, State

Governments etc. With the exception of large cities and metros, urban local bodies run and

maintain these systems with their meagre funds and capacities. Regulatory systems are non-

existent or weak, and there is little visibility into decision-making process of the responsible

entities. More importantly, the space for citizens‘ engagement and interaction with these bodies

is minimal leaving large gaps in understanding and administering services to a cross section of

society.

It is important to recognize that the entire urban water scenario is linked not just to

infrastructure, finance, and governance, but to urban developmental choices. The urban

population is expected to increase from 340 million (2008) to 590 million in 20301. The pressure

in managing demand, supply and equity in distribution of water will be immense. The present

systems are crumbling, and the need to cater to industrial water need in addition to universal

individual water security will further strain the water procurement cycle, and impose limits on the

amount of water available to fulfil the needs of an urban environment. At present, cities are

promoting water-intensive developments, while a more sustainable trajectory is essential.

Given this context, the consultation held in New Delhi on the December 15, 2010 was organized

around five themes – Urban Poor, Urban Infrastructure, Governance, Water Sources and

Beyond Watsan. A list of thematic areas with some indicative issues was presented to the

participants initially in order to provide a structure for the discussions and these are reproduced

below.

1. Urban poor:

Accessibility: Poor access for certain groups; absence of clear system or benchmarks for

measuring access; intermittent supply at public standposts; poor maintenance of systems.

Quality: Poor quality of water. Lack of knowledge and awareness in community on water

quality and health linkages. Increasing incidences of waterborne diseases. Not enough

demand or interest in addressing water quality issue.

Schemes: Lack of proper implementation and integration of schemes

Access/Usage of toilets: open defecation; lack of access to individual toilets; non- availability

of community toilets.

Pro-poor policy & universal coverage: lack of proper framework to tackle the basic needs of

urban poor (inequities), including migrant population; water as right

Sample Discussion points: What are non-negotiable elements of a pro-poor policy? How do we

ensure that every last citizen today and in the future has access to water for her basic needs?

Are community toilets a workable alternative for space-starved urban slums?

2. Infrastructure:

Lessons from JNNURM & UIDSSMT: what is the road ahead?

1 India‘s urban awakening: building inclusive cities, sustaining economic growth, McKinsey Report, April

2010

6

Water supply, wastewater/UGD, drains, Solid Waste Management: ailing infrastructure; lack

of framework to institutionalize change; integration to augment recharge of ground aquifers

and for sustainable re-use of wastewater

Viable small-scale, decentralized options for all stages of urban water management

Planning & design, O&M, financing

Demand management/ water use efficiency

Lack of capacities and skills at the local level to run and maintain supply and treatment

systems.

Sample Discussion Points: How to promote source-to-sink, closed loop (integrated)

approaches. What steps can be taken to bridge the water distribution gap between urban

and peri-urban areas?

3. Governance:

Planning, policy, (National and State) pricing: Limited awareness on planning process. Not

much role or little scope for community participation/voice.

Overlapping institutions & jurisdiction, institutional capacity & effectiveness, role of

community, responsiveness, accountability, transparency & PPP

Regulation, decentralization, fund flows: create an enabling environment and framework for

debate and engagement between urban bodies and community

Role of state agencies, utilities. Interaction with local level bodies and water managers

Information and data availability: Lack of data on basic indicators and status of the present

system.

Institutionalizing stronger regulatory practices to mitigate pollutions levels at the local level

Absence of contingency planning: For conflicts, disasters, growth, migration, pollution

Sample Discussion points: Crossing the last mile to reach the community especially the

marginalized involves peeling away social and caste barriers; building awareness and

strengthening demand; addressing the sometimes uneven distribution of local political and

power balance. Does the private sector have the skills, interests and capability to do so?

Can water be considered as a fundamental right for every human being and whose

management must ensure reliable access for all as non-negotiable?

What are the challenges urban local bodies/involved entities face in implementing schemes and

programs?

4. Water Sources:

Sustainability: sources dry up or available quantity fluctuates significantly in time; absence of

skilled manpower and finances; low awareness amongst community for importance of

protection of sources.

water quality issues: ailing infrastructure of storm and sewerage drains

7

Ground water, rainwater, lakes & ponds: drinking water source protection, poor regulation

and implementation of groundwater laws; institutionalization of rainwater harvesting

Recycling & reuse: Propagating alternate sources of water such as rainwater harvesting, re-

use of wastewater for potable and non-potable purposes, in the urban context

Sample Discussion points: Regulation of groundwater by the State has been discussed for a

long time now, but is not very feasible due to the high transaction costs and political costs

associated with regulating wells in the country. However a small number of examples have

shown how social regulation can work where the legal one is difficult. Is this feasible? What

mechanisms can be instituted to recharge groundwater?

5. Beyond watsan:

Land titles, land use planning: land use and acquisition remains an opaque, murky process

Public health, peri-urban agriculture, industry, pollution control, education, role of RRAs,

scheme linkages, RBAs

Climate change: lack of available alternate options to the end user/ community. No proper

government body to facilitate/ institutionalize the adoption of adaptive strategies

Ever-increasing conflicts between different stakeholders – rural–urban, industry-agriculture-

domestic, rich-poor, upstream-downstream, competing users of common resources, etc

Process

Based on the above the five groups met separately and came up with a set of issues to be

addressed and a set of recommendations for the 12th Five Year Plan approach paper. This was

presented in a plenary followed by a discussion. During the consultation, two to three

participants from each group volunteered to draft the recommendations to be submitted to the

Planning Commission. The same was then circulated to the entire group of participants for

comments and inputs. Based on these inputs recommendations from each of the thematic

groups were finalised.

8

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Overview: The national consultation on urban water management organised on December 15,

2010 was one of its kind as it brought together a diverse group of stakeholders. Unlike the rural

water and sanitation space where such multi stakeholder consultations are common, similar

initiatives in the urban water management space is few and limited. The sixty odd participants at

the national consultation represented slum dwellers, community organisations, NGOs, right

based groups and activists, researchers and academicians, engineers and municipal

functionaries and government officials. Coming from different geographical and socio-economic

backgrounds there was a rich diversity in the discussions.

To facilitate detailed discussion, the meeting was organized around five themes – Urban Poor,

Urban Infrastructure, Governance, Water Sources and Beyond Watsan. Each of the groups

came up with a set of issues to be addressed and a set of recommendations for the 12th Five

Year Plan approach paper. This was presented in a plenary followed by a discussion. During

the consultation, two to three participants from each group volunteered to draft the

recommendations to be submitted to the Planning Commission. The same was then circulated

to the entire group of participants for comments and inputs. Based on these inputs

recommendations from each of the thematic groups were finalised.

It is very important to note here that at the national consultation and during the continuing discussions there was consensus on many issues and divergent views on others. For instance, creation of spaces for proactive community participation, strengthening governance by deepening of 74th Constitutional amendment, capacity building of urban local bodies directed towards decision making, implementation of right to water and sanitation, replacing parastatals and corporate bodies without accountability by democratic and transparent structures, stopping PPP model for any projects and the need for dealing with externalities that impact drinking water security were agreed upon. On the other hand the issue of 24/7 water supply drew diverse opinions as articulated in chapters on detailed recommendation from each group. Also, while going through this report, it can be noticed that there are some recommendations/remarks which may seem to differ. However, this was inevitable as the very idea of the consultation was to capture voices of different stakeholders.

Some of the recommendations are at a high level (principles and ideas) to promote

participation, equity and sustainability in urban water management. These principles and ideas

are important as the urban water space do not have an operational framework (unlike the

national rural drinking water guidelines or Total Sanitation Campaign guidelines by the ministry

of rural development, Government of India which forms the basis of funding of rural drinking

water programmes) to implement its water and sanitation programmes. These ideas need

further detailing to make it actionable/implementable. Given the rich and diverse experience of

the participants, this group would be happy to engage with the Planning Commission in future to

work out the details.

9

Overarching principles emerging from the Consultation

The consultation on urban water and sanitation to facilitate the Planning Commission in

developing its approach paper for the 12th Five Year Plan brought together a diverse group of

institutions and individuals working in the urban water and sanitation sector from all across

India.

The overarching issues that emerged during the discussions were:

The ECOLOGICAL issue – the need to systematically work to protect the ecosystem which

delivers water, either as surface water or groundwater, and ensure sustainable quantity and

quality of the flow of the resource. The need also to prevent overexploitation for water-intensive

uses and to prevent pollution of water was brought out.

The concept of using the ecological footprint for water or the water footprint to ensure that

cities stay within limits of the ecological availability of resources and do not overstretch

themselves was a clear concern expressed. Master plans and land use plans for cities need to

recognise the fragility of the water ecosystem within and plan for protecting the resource. The

carrying capacity of the city from a resources availability point of view should be a constraint

imposed on urban growth.

The SOCIAL EQUITY issue – the need for universal access to water as a human right

irrespective of the ability to pay for it was clearly highlighted by the group. That there should be

no denial of water simply on the basis of lack of payment for it was brought out. That the

inequity in access to water and sanitation in our cities needs to be addressed quickly and a pro-

poor approach should be adopted was the consensus.

The GOVERNANCE issue – the group felt that people‘s participation in policy, programme and

project formulation in water and sanitation was abysmal. They represented a strong need for

consultation with the communities on all aspects of water and sanitation programmes and in the

approach adopted to deliver water and sanitation services. There is an urgent need to have new

practices and policies to enhance public engagement and to create a politics and culture of

inclusiveness in urban water management. Making institutions democratically accountable and

including stakeholders in all aspects of projects was highlighted.

The hurried and non-consultative formulation of City Development Plans in schemes under

JNNURM and the like was pointed out as needing correction.

The choice of technology and economic paradigm for cities in future should be governed by the

above considerations.

10

Recommendations at a glance

Urban poor: There is a lack of reliable data, definition and understanding of who constitutes

urban poor (is it only the below the poverty line group or people who live in slums, pavements,

migrant workers?). The group pointed out that urban poor does not refer only to the people

living in approved slums only. There was also a discussion on implementing right to water and

sanitation and on the issue of free Vs paid services.

1. The government shall do a survey to make a clear and reliable database of urban poor.

2. Watsan services to urban poor should be delivered without demanding for various

identities in both authorized and unauthorized slums. Service delivery should be made

available to the people who live in the communities irrespective of land tenure. Proof of

residence could be used as adequate proof as in the case of Gujarat, Agra and

Bhubaneswar.

3. There should be norms on provision for water and sanitation services for different kinds

of urban poor settlements; (availability of watsan infrastructure per capita population of

slums and availability per square kilometer of public spaces(alongside roads), integrated

toilets-water-bathing and washing complexes). Existing policies and programmes are

inadequate in addressing equity and right to water and sanitation in the urban context.

This shall be implemented in letter and spirit. There shall be no denial of minimum basic

services to all, on grounds of affordability. Water to the urban poor shall be free.

4. Options for services, designing and development of infrastructure location operation and

maintenance of water and sanitation services (community toilets) to be done in

consultation with the community members especially women groups. Important to

relocate stand posts which are close to drains and relay drinking water mains (wherever

needed) to avoid pollution of drinking water distribution. Establishing water quality testing

labs for testing the individual and public water sources by the community at a low-cost.

5. A subsidy of Rs.9000 available in Karnataka for the construction of individual household

toilet is not available in other states. Such a subsidy would encourage people to

construct individual toilets, thereby reducing open defecation in urban areas. End to

manual scavenging by focusing on rehabilitation of manual scavengers, in place to

targeting closure of dry latrines.

6. Establishing appropriate technology for connecting individual household toilets and

community managed toilet to UGDs will enable all citizens in the urban poor to be linked

to UGD and not to open drains. As a progression, municipalities shall promote

community toilets with decentralised waste water treatment systems.

7. There was no consensus on the issue of free versus paid service in the group. One

suggestion was that electricity and water charges to be charged in domestic tariff in the

case of community managed toilets. A universal reduction of charges for UGD is

recommended or the subsidy amount shall enable them to pay minimum charges as in

the case of a state like Orissa (reduced from Rs. 3,500 to Rs. 800). The deposit charges

for individual water connection and toilet construction are to be made minimum and

11

through an installment system rather than a onetime payment. While the others in the

same group felt that these should be free.

8. To provide for annual maintenance charges to Community Based Organisations (CBOs)

to maintain community toilets for better operation and maintenance instead of once in

three years. Capital infrastructure of community toilet buildings will require capital

investment in up gradation, motor & other major repairs and maintenance(new toilet

blocks, overhead water tanks, septic tanks or sewerage connectivity and major

repairs of doors and flooring that occur once in 7-10 years) - should also be

supported by Municipal Corporation/Utility.

9. Community management alone can sustain the capital infrastructure through timely

operations and management by relying on members and users as participants in this

effort and not simply as clients for a business opportunity. This level of community

participation and management of slum infrastructure cannot be attained from contracted

out public works to private parties, corporate houses or NGOs. Institutionalising

community participation requires support and involvement of local NGOs.

10. There is a need for a social development unit (SDU) to be established within the

Municipal Corporations for better provisioning of watsan services to urban poor. The

experience of Bangalore (BWSSB) demonstrated that this can go a long way in

making the predominantly engineering focused utility to adapt to the social

responsibility

Infrastructure: One of the key issues identified by this group is the absence of community

participation in infrastructure planning. The group pointed out that under Jawaharlal Nehru

National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) and Urban Infrastructure Development Scheme for

Small and Medium Towns (UIDSSMT), the comprehensive development plans are prepared in

an adhoc manner (based on inaccurate data) in haste. Since there is no community involvement

these plans do not reflect the needs and aspirations of the local community. This practice need

to change.

1. Every city/town should develop participatory comprehensive development plans

based on sound data to ensure feasibility of infrastructure plan. This plan shall integrate

aspects of sustainability at all levels—social, technical, environmental, institutional and

financial based on source to sink (closing the loop) approach. It was suggested that the

―carrying capacity‖ of town must be calculated and used as an input into the planning

process.

2. CDPs must be based on the principle of minimum resource dependence outside the

planning area for critical needs. For e.g. if additional infrastructure for water is to be built,

the CDP must start with infrastructure for maximizing use of local water resources

(surface, ground, rain and recycled water) potential. Only the balance requirement may

be planned for from outside the plan area.

3. Sustainability planning should include demand management to reduce consumer end

demand. There should be incentives/rebates for efficient resource saving

gadgets/systems such as water-saving gadgets, dual water supply systems, sewer

mining‖; solar energy panels etc. These may be at the level of consumer or the producer

of the products.

12

4. Decentralized systems in sewage treatment (and in solid waste management &

composting) shall be promoted/facilitated. It is imperative to define norms and

standards (for quantity and quality) for different uses/re-uses of water (e.g. toilet

flushing to use only 6-8 litres of water – recycled water wherever possible). There is a

need to support and facilitate research on sustainable technologies.

Governance: One of the primary issues flagged by the group was the absence of or limited

space for community participation in urban water management. It was observed that the policies

pertaining to urban water and sanitation are largely developed with limited closed-door

consultations and almost no inputs from the third tier of the government, civil society groups,

and citizens at large. It is also observed that the policies are influenced by bilateral and multi-

lateral agencies such as the World Bank and Asian Development Bank. Such policies expect

the local governments to merely follow them without considering local needs, requirements and

available resources and do not empower local decision makers and elected representatives to

have a say in designing and driving policies. There was a lot of discussion the need to create

voice mechanisms in urban areas and on deepening the provisions of the 74th amendment and

thereby democratic decision making in cities and towns. The group also recommended making

water and sanitation as a basic right, stopping of PPP model, replacing parastatals and

corporate bodies without accountability by ULBs, capacity building directed towards decision

making etc.

1. The process for setting the policies must be more democratic, transparent and open to

contributions from civil society, citizen groups, and local governments. Further the

policies should set a macro perspective and refrain from carrying conditionalities and

reforms that have not been subjected to wide public consultation and may lead to

uncalled for obligations on the local government and the citizens at large.

2. The provisions of the 74th Amendment have to be deepened and further elaborated; and to what extent the states will adopt them in the State Acts which can pave the way for policies that promote social accountability, transparency, and distributive effectiveness in service delivery of Watsan services at the local level.

3. The group emphasized on the urgent attention for capacity building at State and Local levels for affective and just service delivery. The capacity building has to be based on realistic data collection, appropriate technical knowledge, and decentralized local body planning and decision making.

4. Water must be recognized as a basic right of every citizen as enunciated by the Supreme Court and mandatory provisions must be made to ensure supply of minimum sustenance water to all without any cost.

5. Sanitation must also be recognized as a basic right and sufficient provisions must be made to provide toilet facilities to all poor citizens who cannot afford such costs as well as to meet other costs of availing water and sanitation services such as sewer or water connection charges

6. While a large part of technical operations remain in the purview of the ULB staff, it is

essential to involve the user and citizen groups in setting priorities for the ULB to

improve service delivery. The group suggests participatory and disaggregated budgeting

for allocating and costing water and sanitation services for the city in a transparent and

consultative manner, setting up a tripartite body of citizens as consumers, service

13

providers, and independent technical experts to set norms for supply, distribution‘

collection, and disposal etc.

7. Parastatals and corporate bodies without accountability have to be replaced by democratic and transparent structures. It is imperative to strengthen local bodies to deliver the provisions in the 74th amendment. It is essential to create a necessary institutional incentive scheme at both state and local levels, which will enable effective delivery of watsan services. These institutional incentives are to be set within the framework of accountability faced by the ULBs.

8. To stop using PP model for any projects. Adoption of PPP mode, particularly in water

supply has been resisted by the citizens across the nation. These projects create

unaffordable burdens particular on poor. If city governance and the capacities of ULBs

for data collection, planning, decision-making, implementation, and providing effective

services are improved, most projects could be led and implemented by the ULBs. It is

recommended that PPP mode is not adopted at all in water supply and sanitation,

whether in metros or small and medium towns. The involvement of groups such as rag

pickers, resident welfare associations, CBOs and NGOs is strongly recommended for

sustainable municipal solid waste management and for creating and protecting livelihood

opportunities of informal sector workers.

Water sources: This group discussed in detail about how lack of data and urban planning

without considering water resources availability is threatening the urban water security.

To address these, the following recommendations are made:

1. Providing water security through provision of minimum of 100 litres per capita per

day (lpcd) for all inhabitants should be articulated as a priority that overrules all

other allocation targets. This implies that out of total available usable water, only

surplus water that is over and above the livelihood needs of entire population (floating

and permanent) can be made available for other uses as per city‘s requirements.

2. Cities with huge water footprints are unsustainable. Big cities are making heavy drafts on

the natural resources of their rural hinterland and generate immense quantities of waste

and cast a heavy burden of pollution and contamination on soil, water and air. A major

objective moving forward has to be the reduction of this water footprint of cities.

Each big city must aim at becoming self-sufficient in water.

3. To enable informed decision making, each city requires preparation of a detailed and

comprehensive assessment of watsan situation—mapping existing water resources

(rain, ground and surface (river, lakes etc) water) both quantitative and qualitative,

wastewater, solid and liquid waste, etc. This shall be the basis of diagnostic exercise

for each city that must precede designing of strategic action for rehabilitation of

city’s watsan as per conditions of ecological sustainability, social equity & urban

growth.

4. Baseline water audit for cities and towns – diagnostic analysis, followed by

regular audits shall also be made mandatory. Such a reference data will help analysis

of existing water use and expose the imbalance in access and its distribution that can

then be rectified to restore balanced/ equitable water availability to all constituencies of

water users.

14

5. Urban integrated water management institution was recommended as a strategic,

statutory planning body which will consult public and will be socially responsive. It will

coordinate with all water agencies in the city/town as well as catchment agencies like

MOWR. It will also undertake, water resources assessment, demand and consumption

analysis. The details regarding the legal status and composition need to be worked out.

6. Citizen Platform for City for WATSAN should be encouraged, nurtured and recognized

as an institutionalized mechanism to carry grass root voice of the urban citizens into

policy, planning and programs of urban water and sanitation issues that affect

communities.

Beyond watsan: This group listed the issues like land use planning and externalities namely

pollution, climate change and water use by industry that impact the urban water security. It

came up with suggestions to deal with externalities caused by to industrial water use.

1. The group observed that industrialization works as a great negative externality for

sustainable urban water management, as it has impacts on urban population growth,

urban water use, degree of pollution and urban population density. It suggested

reduction of water footprint for industries through clear volumetric water

entitlements and volumetric taxes. Development of benchmarks against which

progression towards the most desirable level of water use efficiency in different

industries could be monitored was one of the action points suggested by the group.

2. In order to address larger externalities, it was also suggested to create new

institutions or reform existing institutions to address the externalities that have a

negative impact on water in the city context and its immediate region and also to

facilitate planning at the basin/sub-basin level so that the ecological considerations are

used to determine the extent of economic activities in a region. Such a river basin

organisation (RBO) at a hydrological unit shall comprise representatives of

various stakeholders and professionals from different disciplines. These RBOs will

also function as negotiating platforms for different competing uses.

Cross cutting issues

1. The land use policy of the city needs integration with constraints of watsan plans that are

derived from water sources management. Urban growth requires to work within limits of

water resources availability. Any violation of limits dictated by these constraints need to

be excluded through suitable planning. (Suggested by water sources group)

2. Given the fact that water management issues are much more complex than those in

rural areas, there is a need to create a special institution for generating knowledge about

urban water management, which can also document and disseminate data about best

urban water management practices and undertake training/capacity building activities for

urban local bodies. [Suggested by Beyond Watsan group]

Issues of contention

1. 24/7 supply: In the infrastructure group, a section of the participants suggested 24/7

water supply to achieve equity in water supply & distribution. Though the group agreed

15

with the need to achieve equity, it did not agree with the 24X7 formula being the right

strategy to ensure the same – especially with the poor/unauthorized settlements.

2. O&M charges and full cost recovery: Infrastructure group discussed poor O&M as the

root cause of inefficiency and poor service delivery by Infrastructural projects. A

suggestion was made that the beneficiary community should pay entirely for the O&M

(full cost recovery) whatever the cost may be or whatever the paying capacity of the

beneficiary segment may be. Though the group agreed with the importance of providing

for O&M costs, it felt that a generalized approach for community bearing the cost cannot

be taken. It was broadly agreed that lifeline water should be free. In the urban poor

group too there was difference in opinion on free Vs paid services.

16

DETAILED RECOMMENDATIONS

Thematic Group 1: Urban poor

(Compiled by J Geetha (Gramalaya) and Depinder Kapur (India Wash Forum))

The group came up with a list of prioritised issues that need immediate attention if the urban

poor were to be provided with sustainable and equitable water and sanitation services.

1. Poor quality of data: Lack of reliable data, definition and understanding of who constitutes

urban poor (is it only the below the poverty line group or people who live in slums,

pavements, migrant workers? It is important to realise that urban poor does not refer only to

the people living in approved slums only) affects the access to services to the urban poor.

The group felt that this is as much a definitional issue as about reliable collection. So there

is a need for both improving the definition and the process for collection of national data on

the poor and to use the data to make a smart analysis for planning. The government shall

do a survey to make a clear and reliable data base of urban poor.

2. Gaps in legislation and laws that guarantee access and quality of services to the

poor:

Existing policies and programmes are inadequate in addressing equity and right to water

and sanitation in the urban context. This shall be implemented in letter and spirit. There

shall be no denial of minimum basic services to all, on grounds of affordability. Water

to the urban poor shall be free.

Service delivery should be made available to the people who live in the communities irrespective of land tenure. It is important to simplify the administrative procedures for water and sanitation services. Watsan services to urban poor should be delivered without demanding for various identities in both authorized and unauthorized slums— as in the case of Gujarat, Agra and Bhubaneswar, proof of residence shall be considered as an adequate proof for provisioning watsan services.

3. Water infrastructure for urban poor:

Options for services to be decided in consultation with communities, preference to be for individual household facilities but in case of community based facilities, only till houses are connected to individual services. Designing and development of infrastructure, its location, operation and maintenance of water and sanitation services (community toilets) to be done in consultation with the community members especially women groups.

The Ministry of Urban Development and Poverty Alleviation, State Government urban

departments, health and public works, Municipalities and utilities should invite

representatives of communities, women self-help groups and NGOs in developing designs

and norms for community infrastructure development, maintenance and management.

In case of resettlement colonies for slum dwellers, urban local bodies should plan and

provide for quality infrastructure. This has to be provided upfront in case of new resettlement

colonies.

17

The deposit charges for individual water connection and toilet construction are to be made

minimum and through an installment system rather than a onetime payment. Presently, the

Tiruchirapalli Municipal Corporation is charging Rs.9000/- for watsan connection ((individual

household water connection (Rs 3000) or house hold latrine (Rs 6000)) from everyone

including urban poor in the city. Same is the case with other municipalities. There is a need

for targeted subsidies for the urban poor.

Total Sanitation Campaign for urban poor (similar to TSC in rural areas) need to be

launched in 12th FYP. An appropriate design and cost should be estimated as per price of

raw materials (Bricks, cement etc) and at least 75% should be subsidy to urban poor.

A universal reduction of charges for underground drainage (UGD) is recommended or there

shall be a provision to subsidise the urban poor to enable them to pay a minimal charges as

in the case of a state like Orissa (Rs.3500 to Rs.800).

A subsidy of Rs.9000 is available in Karnataka for the construction of individual household

toilets. This subsidy model if implemented in other states would encourage people to

construct individual toilets, thereby reducing open defecation in urban areas.

Establishing appropriate technology for connecting individual household toilets and

community managed toilet to UGDs will enable all citizens in the urban poor to be linked to

UGD and not to open drains. It is recommended that the community toilets with septic tanks

should be connected to UGDs without additional cost. As a progression, municipalities shall

promote community toilets with decentralised waste water treatment systems.

Community Complexes require large amounts of water to maintain hygiene. (More water is

required at complexes where bathing and cloth washing facilities are available). In such

cases, water is drawn from bore wells using electric motors, incurring substantial electricity

costs. [A participant from women‘s federation in Tiruchirappalli pointed out that the

average monthly expenditure on electricity is about Rs.1,200 (ranging from Rs.120 to

Rs.5,150)]. One section in the urban poor group felt that the communities should not be

asked to pay electricity and water charges and user fees. While the other group felt that

electricity charges and water charges should be subsidised in accordance to the domestic

tariff in the case of community managed toilets.

There is a need to put an end to manual scavenging by focusing on rehabilitation of manual

scavengers, rather than the current practice of targeting closure of dry latrines. There is a

need to identify alternatives for rehabilitating the scavenging community by employing them

in solid waste management (garbage clearance).

To set standards for toilets with bathing and washing section, integrated sanitation complex-

child friendly toilets, menstrual hygiene, disabled friendly. PWD (Person with Disability) are

the most marginalized section amongst the urban poor and proper attention for fund

allocation and disabled friendly design for their access to water and sanitation should be

inbuilt in the policy. As per existing PWD Act 1995, it is a legal binding too to allocate at

least 3% of the fund for PWDs development.

Fund for proper drainage system in all the authorized and un-authorized slums in every town

and metros need to be allocated. Relocation of stand posts which are close to drains and

relaying of drinking water mains to avoid pollution of drinking water shall be undertaken as a

priority.

18

There is a need to allocate funds to establish water quality testing labs for testing the

individual and public water sources used by the community at a low-cost.

Community participation alone can guarantee a cost effective, well designed and user

friendly urban slum infrastructure. [Community participation does not mean that 100 % of

any urban slum community will at any one time to agree to be a member of a slum user

group or self-help group managing the infrastructure of a slum. This should be taken up in a

campaign mode with adequate time allocated for behaviour change and IEC]

Similarly community management alone can sustain the capital infrastructure through timely

operations and management. This can be achieved by relying on community members and

users as participants in this effort and not simply as clients in a business. Such level of

community participation in management of slum infrastructure cannot be attained when

public works are contracted out to private parties, corporate houses or NGOs. In order to

institutionalise community participation support and involvement of local NGOs may be

sought.

Government shall provide for annual maintenance charges to Community based

organisations to maintain community toilets for better operation and maintenance instead of

once in three years. Capital infrastructure of community toilet buildings will require capital

investment in up gradation, repairs and maintenance (new toilet blocks, overhead water

tanks, septic tanks or sewerage connectivity and major repairs of doors and flooring

that occur once in 7-10 years). This should also be supported by Municipal

Corporation/Utility.

4. Developing norms and improving the service delivery for community managed public

toilets and toilets in public places: Norms shall be developed in a participatory manner on

the following:

a. availability per capita population of slums and availability per square kilometre of

public spaces (alongside roads),

b. integrated toilets-water-bathing and washing complexes as a norm,

c. delinking provision of watsan services from tenure,

d. subsidised electricity and water,

e. in peri-urban areas there is a need for removal of APL/BPL targeting for services of

urban poor,

5. Strengthening capacities of the utilities and municipalities for providing better watsan

services to the urban poor:

There is a need for establishment of a social development unit (SDU) within

Municipal Corporations to respond to and work with the urban poor Experience of

Bangalore (Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board on this can go a long way

in making the predominantly engineering focused water utilities to be socially

responsible and responsive to the needs of the poor. This dedicated desk in the

utility will go to a long way in providing connectivity and good services to urban poor.

In addition to formally setting up of SDUs, the field staff of the utility should be given

19

some recognition and rewards for working in slum areas. It is important that a senior

person with adequate experience is selected and appointed to manage the slum and

urban poor development issues as in the case of Bangalore BDU.

There is a shortage of staff dedicated to slum/resettlement colonies and this needs to be

increased especially sanitary workers. The present level of staff at ward level (Junior

engineer, Sanitary Inspector, Supervisor, Sanitary workers) is overburdened and they are

unable to offer good services. There is a need to provide capacity building to Municipal

officials for promoting the proper solid waste management system in the cities

There is a need for convergence of programs (like health, education, housing, water etc)

and inter and intra departmental coordination inter and intra department.

Thematic Group 2: Infrastructure

(Compiled by Lucas Dengel (Eco-Pro) & Jyoti Sharma (FORCE))

Urban infrastructure projects envisaged under JNNURM appear to suffer from a few common

problems:

1) City Development Plans (CDP) prepared (a mandatory condition to access JNNURM fund)

is not specific and seem to be largely ad-hoc. This is attributable to the lack of adequate

time and effort spent on the CDP – it which is usually prepared in the last minute by the

agency applying for JNNURM assistance with the help of consultants. This in turn means

that it is not based on current information about resource availability, lacks a long term

vision and is not integrated with other developmental projects in the area.

2) There is no community participation in the preparation or implementation of CDPs.

3) Sanctioned funds tend to lapse because of gap between project conceptualisation and its

actual implementation. This is usually because of unavailability of land, inability to integrate

the project with existing infrastructure or difficulty in access to natural resources (such as

water for a water treatment plant project). All these can in turn be linked with improper

planning of projects as discussed above in point 1.

The following recommendations are suggested in order to tackle these challenges in urban

infrastructure:

a. Recommendations related to contents of infrastructure planning

1) ULBs to carry out a rigorous planning exercise and develop detailed and accurate

comprehensive development plans (CDP) irrespective of whichever scheme they seek to

avail such as JNNURM or UIDSSMT. This will help ensure the feasibility of the infrastructure

plan with regard to availability of land and technical capacity, and financial, institutional,

environmental and social sustainability. Such a rigorous planning exercise will also help avoid

conflicts with existing infrastructure (water supply, sewerage, electricity, telecommunication,

20

etc.). It should be based on source-to sink (closing the loop approach) which integrates water

sources, water usage, sanitation, wastewater management (treatment, disposal and reuse).

2) CDPs must be based on sound data and must be made available in the GIS format. This

must include:

a) GIS maps of existing infrastructure including reservoirs, pipelines etc.

b) Information about city developmental plans and land ownership status

3) Public Participation must be sought at this stage itself in order to assure completeness of

data and subsequent equity in use of infrastructure. Community can contribute to:

a) data required for GIS mapping by Resource Mapping of their areas. Information can

be gathered with the help of civic societies and local welfare organizations.

b) needs assessment—detailing the infrastructure requirements of the area, detailing out

the issues related to equity, access and economic viability

4) CDPs must be based on the principle of Minimum resource dependence for critical needs

outside the Plan area. For instance, if any additional infrastructure for water is to be built, the

CDP must first ensure the creation of infrastructure which can be employed for maximizing the

use of all available local water resources (such as surface, ground, rain and recycled water).

Only the additional requirement may be planned to be sourced from areas that lie outside the

plan area.

5) The above point also includes internal use of resources generated as a by-product of the

primary infrastructure being created. For e.g. in case of a solid waste disposal system, the

electricity that may be generated by the gas output expected from the plant, must be used

before making additional estimates for electricity requirement,

6) CDPs must integrate aspects of sustainability at all levels - technical, environmental, social,

institutional and financial:

a) The ―carrying capacity‖ of town must be calculated and used as an input into the

planning process.

b) Sustainability planning would also include demand management to reduce consumer

end demand for the scarce resource.

c), funding for preventive maintenance must be envisaged to provide for O & M

services.

b. Recommendations on infrastructure related norms at town/city level

1) The town size that is obligatory CDPs needs to be defined, e.g. all towns between 1 and 5

lakh population. Phasing of implementation for differently-sized towns must also be defined.

21

2) Decentralized systems in sewage treatment, solid waste management & composting to be

promoted to avoid costs of long-distance pipe systems, facilitate on-site/ area-wise re-use of

treated wastewater, minimize dependence on energy and high-skilled engineering for O&M, and

to assure decentralized management of O&M. Government of India must also look at further

developments of affordable and sustainable technologies in this area.

3) There is a need to define norms and standards (quantity and quality) for water use and

re-use (e.g. since toilet flushing uses only 6-8 litres of water – recycled water wherever

possible).

a) This would also include re-defining by-laws for industries, hotels, institutions etc. to

include a percentage of self-generated resources (such as recycled water) in

accordance with size and water needs. Such self generated resources should then be

subtracted from the additional infrastructural provisions being made for these institutions.

4) There is a need to incentivise efficient resource use through the use of appropriate gadgets

/ systems such as water-saving gadgets, dual water supply systems, sewer mining; solar energy

panels etc. These can be both at the level of the consumer or the producer of the products.

c. Recommendations related to process of planning & implementation

1) Ensure Participatory planning of infrastructure & participatory development of

CDPs to address the above-mentioned issues, to be phased as follows:

a) Stage 1 – Infrastructure demand and needs assessment for each area (to be

prepared by ward committees / residents welfare associations/CBOs);

b) Stage 2 – Pre-feasibility study i.e. preparation of a list of options of infrastructure

types and availability of resources with community cost / benefit / responsibility analysis

for each. For e.g. if additional infrastructure for water supply has to be created for a

community, then the pre-feasibility study would identify a tubewell based, remote surface

water source (dam / river) or neighborhood sources such as lake based water

distribution system. For each option identified it would then give the total cost, cost to

community, O&M costs, additional costs (such as environmental costs) ; benefits such

as quantity and quality of water, security of source and responsibilities of the community

such as precautions for catchment protection.

c) Stage 3 - Public hearing to share the Pre-feasibility study options with potential

beneficiaries. Collection of inputs and suggestions from public;

(d) Stage 4 - Integration of public suggestions, development of preferred plan, feasibility

study; integration of capacity building and training requirements;

(e) Stage 5c - Public hearing of final plan, definition of deliverables.

22

2) Make all papers (translated in local language) and studies available to public; this

should include a list of tentative options (pre-feasibility), reports of hearings, etc.

3) Citizen and civil society monitoring of deliverables of CDPs and development plans. The

following should be carried out to enable this:

a) Making contract details of service providers publicly available and transparent, independent of status of service provider, PPP or not.

b) Facilitation of long-term contracts with local / regional service providers.

4) Capacity building and training of:

a. infrastructure planners and implementation partners. This will help bridge the gap

between concept development and implementation caused by of lack of technical /

strategic planning capacity of area specific town planners and implementing agencies.

b. staff in-charge of maintaining infrastructure projects. This is important because, in

many cases, an infrastructure project is conceptualized, designed and built by a central

government / institutional agency. It is then handed over to the ULBs for operations and

maintenance. The ULB staff is therefore not kept abreast of system requirements or on

methods to maximize its performance capacities. In many cases, since they have not

been consulted in designing the projects, there are gaps in project design which make it

difficult for the staff to operate &maintain the system. Infrastructure planning must

include this aspect.

d. Other points discussed but not unanimously agreed upon

1) Full cost recovery of O&M charges: One section of the group felt that water supply,

sewerage and sewage treatment, SWM need to be made financially self-sustainable at level

of local government service provider organization. It was discussed that poor O&M is the root

cause of inefficiency and poor service delivery by Infrastructural projects. A suggestion was

made that the beneficiary community should pay entirely for the O&M whatever the cost may be

or whatever the paying capacity of the beneficiary segment may be. Though the group agreed

with the importance of providing for O&M costs, but it felt that a generalized approach for

community bearing the full cost cannot be taken.

2) 24/7 for achieving equity in water supply & distribution– Though the group agreed with the

need for equity, it did not agree with the 24X7 formula being the correct method to ensure the

same – especially with poor/ unauthorized settlements.

23

Thematic Group 3: Governance

(Compiled by Pramod Dabrase (MP Government), Chandan Chawla (CEPT), Vinay Baindur

(Urban Researcher, Bangalore) and Dunu Roy (Hazard Centre) based on the discussions in the

group comprising Sitaram Shelar (YUVA), Rajendran Prabhakar (People‘s Campaign for Right

to Water), Gaurav Dwivedi (Manthan), Jammu Anand (Nagpur Municipal Corporation

Employees Union), Khatibullah Sheikh (PRIA), Lourdes Baptista (WaterAid) and Vijay Krishna

(Arghyam))

The following are the recommendations on Governance issues in Urban Water and Sanitation Sector for Approach to 12th Five Year Plan, as arrived at after extensive consultation and circulation within group members.

1. Policies have to be driven democratically The policies pertaining to urban water and sanitation are largely developed with limited closed-door consultations and almost no inputs from the third tier of the government, civil society groups, and citizens at large. It is also observed that the policies are influenced by bilateral and multi-lateral agencies such as the World Bank and Asian Development Bank. Such policies expect the local governments to merely follow them without considering local needs, requirements and available resources and do not empower local decision makers and elected representatives to have a say in designing and driving policies. The process for setting the policies must be more democratic, transparent and open to contributions from civil society, citizen groups, and local governments. Further the policies should set a macro perspective and refrain from carrying conditionalities and reforms that have not been subjected to wide public consultation and may lead to uncalled for obligations on the local government and the citizens at large. The policies should empower local decision makers (including accountable elected representatives and officials) to plan for their own cities and towns reducing dependency on external agencies, consultants, funders and parastatals.

2. The provisions of the 74th Amendment have to be deepened and further elaborated;

and to what extent the states will adopt them in the State Acts While discussing aspects pertaining to water supply and sanitation delivery, the mode of planning for delivery of these services assumes critical importance. It should become mandatory to look at the 74th Amendment provisions and enable State Governments to set mechanisms to proactively adopt them in their Acts, which can pave the way for policies that promote social accountability, transparency, and distributive effectiveness in service delivery of Watsan services at the local level. 3. Capacity-building has to be directed towards decision-making The group emphasized on the urgent attention for capacity building at State and Local levels for affective and just service delivery. The capacity building has to be based on realistic data collection, appropriate technical knowledge, and decentralized local body planning and decision making. This essentially means inclusive planning by the local planners and decision makers on type and level of distribution of services with active involvement of user groups, civil society groups, service providers, and citizens.

24

4. Incorporated within this is the right to water as enunciated by the Supreme Court. This group recommends similar right to basic sanitation as well

Water must be recognized as a basic right of every citizen and mandatory provisions must be made to ensure supply of minimum sustenance water to all without any cost. Water resource allocation must be mandatory in all cities and towns ensuring priority to drinking water supply followed by other uses as may be appropriate locally. Sanitation must also be recognized as a basic right and sufficient provisions must be made to provide toilet facilities to all poor citizens who cannot afford such costs as well as to meet other costs of availing water and sanitation services such as sewer or water connection charges.

5. As to how this water and sanitation is to be made available (tech specs, how to treat

water, manage solid waste, sanitation) While effective and just governance of water resources and tackling sanitation and SWM challenges will require detailing institutional matters and institutions that deliver this service, one cannot ignore the technical aspects related to adhering to the benchmarks for such services. While a large part of technical operations remain in the purview of the ULB staff, it is essential to involve the user and citizen groups in setting priorities for the ULB to improve service delivery. Some of the aspects can pertain to:

- Participatory and disaggregated budgeting for allocating and costing water and sanitation services for the city in a transparent and consultative manner

- Setting up a tripartite body of citizens as consumers, service providers, and independent technical experts to set norms for supply, distribution‘ collection, and disposal

- Decision making to be supported by authentic data collected locally with the involvement of users

- Adequacy and technical capacity of the existing staff has to be supplemented with additional recruitment as required

6. Parastatals and corporate bodies without accountability have to be replaced by democratic and transparent structures

In order to implement the provisions made in 74th Constitutional Amendment, it is imperative to strengthen local bodies to enable them to deliver the assigned responsibilities. Currently there are few incentives or a limited framework of ‗rewards and punishments‘ linked to service delivery in most ULBs. It is essential to create a necessary institutional incentive scheme at both state and local levels, which will enable effective delivery of Watsan services. These institutional incentives are to be set within the framework of accountability faced by the ULBs. The gaps in accountability framework with local government should not be an excuse to create and promote parastatal or corporate bodies.

7. To stop using the PPP model for any projects Adoption of PPP mode, particularly in water supply, has been resisted by the citizens across the nation. The projects create unaffordable financial burdens, particularly for the poor. If city governance and the capacities of ULBs for data collection, planning, decision-making, implementation, and providing effective services are improved, most projects could be led and implemented by the ULBs. It is recommended that PPP mode is not adopted at all in water supply and sanitation, whether in metros or small and medium towns. The involvement of groups such as rag pickers, resident welfare associations, CBOs and NGOs is strongly recommended for sustainable municipal solid waste management and for creating and protecting livelihood opportunities of informal sector workers.

25

Thematic Group 4: Water sources (Compiled by Ajit Seshadri (Vigyan Vijay Foundation) and Jasveen Jairath)

Background: Basic sources supplying water to urban areas are of two types: internal i.e. within

the urban precincts, and from external sources, coming from other states or a jurisdiction

beyond the urban boundary. In each of these revenue divisions water sources (WS) again

branch into two categories, namely surface water and groundwater, both being connected

through the hydrological cycle.

Further, each of these physical sources exists under different proprietary systems; some are

private, some are public, while in some cases public sources are appropriated through private

agencies.

Recommendations:

Any form of planning requires a commitment of goals and statement of an objective that

defines the end points of a planning exercise. This ought to be articulated clearly as

providing water security (with a minimum provision of100 lpcd) for all inhabitants is a priority

that overrules all other allocation targets. This implies that out of the total available usable

water, only surplus water that is over and above the livelihood needs of entire population

(floating and permanent) can be made available for other uses as per city‘s requirements.

Each city requires the preparation of a detailed and comprehensive assessment of watsan

situation. The basis of such a diagnostic exercise for each city must precede the designing

of a strategic action plan for rehabilitation of the city‘s watsan taking into account ecological

sustainability, social equity & urban growth. (Examples can be sourced from studies done

for Mulbagal town, Karnataka done by ARGHYAM). The comprehensive assessment

exercise would include mapping of existing sources (quantitative and qualitative);

generation of wastewater and its treatment; systems of solid and liquid waste generation

and management; data on rainwater harvested as against the potential; condition of urban

water bodies and their capacity for storing rain water; protection from polluted water; in flows

& recharging of ground water; the systematic practices of destroying or preserving water

bodies that affect their water support capacities etc.

Preparation of a Comprehensive Water Consumption Database on the basis of per capita

consumption, measuring also purpose of usage and quantity utilised. Such reference data

will help in analysis of current water usage and reveal the imbalance of water access, such

that its distribution can be rectified to restore equitable water availability to all constituencies

of water users. This will be especially vital in identifying if water is in fact a scarce

commodity, or if scarcity has been caused artificially for some sections of users due to over

use or misuse by a few privileged set of users. Such data, when collated, will become an

essential planning tool for a city and subsequently aid in planning other cities as well.

26

For appropriate management of Water Sources (WS), it is recommended to create an

Urban Integrated water management institution (UIWMI) at town/city level with the

following mandate:

1. Assessment of city‘s WS as above- one time as well as on an ongoing basis.

2. Planning for protection and conservation of water sources as an integrated hydro

cycle – rain, surface, ground, waste water – and, instituting legal/ administrative laws/

rules/ regulatory systems.

3. The institution would function as a statutory planning body as well carry out strategic

management of city‘s Water Sources

4. It will carry out public consultations and be socially responsive to diverse interest groups

with special consideration for ensuring water security for low income groups

5. Carry out water audits on an ongoing basis for sustained monitoring of water supply,

use and access with regard to quality (including timing of supply) and quantity of water

supplied.

6. UIWMI should gather all citizen platforms, for addressing civic, water and sanitation

issues and evolve necessary solutions for each issue area.

7. Community organizations, urban local bodies, political institutions and groups,

academia, R&D institutions will have a combined interaction with an UIWMI.

Citizen Platform for a City for WATSAN: Such a platform should be encouraged, nurtured

and recognized by (UIWMI) as an institutionalized mechanism to absorb and incorporate the

voice of grassroots urban citizens into policy, planning and programs of urban water and

sanitation issues that affect different communities. Such a forums can adopt community

regulation of public assets related to watsan as well as monitor a set of social practices by

user communities that often aggravate maintenance challenges of watsan services at

terminal level that depend on community cooperation. Such a platform will also support the

facilitation of effective governance of watsan through an ongoing citizen-administration

dialogue.

Adequate emphasis needs to be given to build capacities of line departments, UIWMI,

citizen platforms for playing their respective roles, and equipping them to address problems

encountered by areas not served by service delivery.

Pro-active communication and dissemination of city‘s watsan information, plans, service

availability, local problems, and actions proposed needs to be evolved and put in place for

wider involvement of the community, including for an assessment of the impact to water

sources in the larger context of development plans for the city.

Land use policy of the city needs to incorporate the constraints of watsan plans that derive

from WS management. Urban growth needs to be restricted to limits prescribed by supply of

water, and include feasible drainage/ rain water harvesting projects to the extent possible.

Any violation of limits dictated by these constraints need to be excluded through suitable

planning.

27

Thematic Group 5: Beyond Watsan (Compiled by Prashant Hedao (Auroville) and S Vishwanath (Arghyam))

Some ―Externalities‖ have a strong impact on the water situation in the city context. Based on

prioritization, the group that discussed issues on the topic ―beyond water and sanitation‖ came

up with the following as critical items to be examined: –

Land Use Planning – Does not take into account water requirements and/or availability

Water for Agriculture and Industry – these sectors are easily the largest users of

water. The group decided to take up ―Water for Industry‖ as the main theme where

intervention is crucial as it is a large user of the resource. Industrialization poses a grave

threat to sustainable urban water management, as it impacts population growth and

density; water use and pollution.

Climate Change – is predicted to have a strong impact on water situation, especially in

coastal cities, in the near future

Pollution – due to natural (garbage, untreated sewerage) and anthropogenic fertilizers

& pesticides, industrial waste, etc.) pollutants. Pollution creates a strong negative impact

on water in cities.

Recommendations:

1. IMPROVING WATER USE BY INDUSTRY:

The following are the recommendations of the group to ensure sustainable water use by

industry:

o Improvement in economic efficiency of water use through continuously

minimizing the water footprint of the industries through measures such as imposition

of clear volumetric water entitlement and taxes based on quantity of consumption.

o Allocate water to economically more efficient production processes

o Benchmarking to monitor progress towards achieving the most desirable level of water

use efficiency in different industrial processes

2. OVERARCHING INSTITUTIONAL REFORMS / CREATING NEW INSTITUTIONS

There is a need to create new institutions or reform existing institutions to tackle the externalities

that have a negative impact on water within the city and also to facilitate planning at the

basin/sub-basin level to ensure that ecological considerations are used to determine the extent

of economic activities in a region. This could be done by:

28

Creating river basin organizations (RBOs) for water resource planning at the level of

hydrological units, comprising of professionals from disciplines, representatives of

various stakeholders

o These RBOs can also be agencies for allocation of both surface water and

groundwater within the basin amongst different sectors of water use, and also

play the role of monitoring and enforcement of these allocations

o The RBOs can also function as negotiating platforms for different competing

users

Creating knowledge and dissemination centres - Given the fact that water

management issues in the urban context are much more complex than those in rural

areas, there is a need to create a special institution for generating knowledge about

urban water management, which can also document and disseminate data about best

urban water management practices and undertake training/capacity building activities for

urban local bodies

Annexure: List of participants

Name of participant NGO/Org

1 J Geetha Gramalaya

2 Jyoti Sharma FORCE

3 Basanta Jena PRAGATI

4 Satish Girija Nav Bharat Jagriti Kendra

5 Shri Om MYRDO

6 Jasveen Jairath Chetana

7 Sandeep Khare Vigyan Foundation

8 Ajay Mehta National Foundation for India

9 Barsha Parischa National Foundation for India

10 Ranjan Kumar Nidan, Bihar

11 Bijal Bhatt Mahila Housing Trust

12 Basant Jena PRAGATI

13 Arpita De Freshwater Action Network, South Asia

14 N. Rajathi Womens' Federation Member, Tiruchirapalli

15 Vimla CFAR/ Mahila pragati manch

16 Snehlata Bhardwaj CFAR/ Mahila pragati manch

17 Shivakant Gorakhpuri Samajik Sadbhaw Niyaye Manch

18 Isaac Arul Selva People's Campaign for Right to Water

19 Rajendran Prabhakar People's Campaign for Right to Water

20 Surabhi Mehrotra JAGORI

21 Dunu Roy Hazards Center

22 Suchi Pandey Parivartan

29

23 Sitaram Shelar Yuva

24 Jammu Anand Nagpur Municipal Corporation Employees Union

25 Gaurav Dwivedi Manthan

26 Depinder Kapur India WASH Forum

27 Vinay Baindur Urban Researcher

28 Renu Khosla CURE

29 Prashant Hedao Auroville

30 Lucas Dengel Eco-Pro

31 Avinash Krishnamurthy Biome Environmental Solutions

32 Ajit Seshadri Vigyan Vijay Foundation

33 Jogendra Bisht Lok Chetna Manch

34 Chandan Chawla CEPT University

35 Dr. Khatibullah Sheikh PRIA

36 Pramod Dabrase MP State Urban Sanitation Programme

37 M. Dinesh Kumar Institute for Resource Analysis and Policy

38 Subhas Andey National Environment Engineering and Research

Insititute

39 Anshuman The Energy And Resources Institute

40 Vikram Soni National Physical Laboratory

41 Shekar Muddu Indian Institute of Science

42 Ramswamy Iyer Center for Policy Research

43 S. Nayak Confederation of Indian Industry

44 M.N. Thippeswamy Bangalore Water Supply And Sewerage Board (Retd)

45 O. P. Chadda WAPCOS (Retd)

46 Rakesh Ranjan Planning Commission

47 L. P. Sonkar Planning Commission

48 Harsh Shrivastava Planning Commission

49 Vinod Kumar Mishra Uttrakhand Academy of Administration

50 Vishwanath S. Arghyam

51 Manjunath Prasad Arghyam

52 Vijay Krishna G Arghyam

53 Suresh Babu S.V. Arghyam

54 Rohini Nilekani Arghyam

55 Sunita Nadhamuni Arghyam

56 Lourdes Baptista WaterAid

57 Kamal Gupta WaterAid