Water is making newz these dayzzz ..administratively ,politically ,socially .....letz see wat is in the minds of the Govt. of India these dayz !!!!
Recent Development !
Some terms related to Water !!!
Government mulls using water footprint as a tool to measure
water consumption by farming and industrial processes,
experts warn of its limitations
Viewz of Ramaswamy R. Iyer is a former Secretary, Water Resources, Government of India | National water policy |
Why a national
water framework
law
(1) Under the Indian Constitution water is primarily a
State subject, but it is an increasingly important national concern in the
context of:
(a) the judicial recognition of the right to water as a part
of the fundamental right to life;
(b) the general perception of an imminent water crisis, and
the dire and urgent need to conserve this scarce and precious resource;
(c) the severe and intractable inter-use and inter-State
conflicts;
(d) the pollution of rivers and other water sources, turning
rivers into sewers or poison and contaminating aquifers;
(e) the long-term environmental, ecological and social
implications of projects to augment the availability of water for human use;
(f) the equity implications of the distribution, use and
control of water;
(g) the international dimensions of some of India’s rivers;
and
(h) the emerging concerns about the impact of climate change
on water and the need for appropriate responses at local, national, regional,
and global levels.
It is clear that the above considerations cast several
responsibilities on the Central government, apart from those of the State
governments. Given these and other concerns, the need for an overarching
national water law is self-evident.
(2) Several States are enacting laws on water and related
issues. These can be quite divergent in their perceptions of and approaches
to water. Some divergences from State to State may be inevitable and
acceptable, but extreme and fundamental divergences will create a very
muddled situation. A broad national consensus on certain basics seems very
desirable.
(3) Different State governments tend to adopt different legal
positions on their rights over the waters of a river basin that straddles
more than one State. Such legal divergences tend to render the resolution of
inter-State river-water conflicts extremely difficult. A national statement
of the general legal position and principles that should govern such cases
seems desirable.
(4) Water is one of the most basic requirements for life. If national
laws are considered necessary on subjects such as the environment, forests,
wildlife, biological diversity, etc., a national law on water is even more
necessary. Water is as basic as (if not more basic than) those
subjects.
(5) Finally, the idea of a national water law is not something
unusual or unprecedented. Many countries in the world have national water
laws or codes, and some of them (for instance, the South African
National Water Act of 1998)are widely regarded as very enlightened. The
considerations behind those national codes or laws are relevant to India as
well, although the form of a water law for India will clearly have to be
guided by the nature of the Indian Constitution and the specific needs and
circumstances of this country.
|
Highlights of the draft
national water policy is
given below
|
- Ministry of Water Resources had constituted a Drafting Committee under the Chairmanship of Dr. Y.K. Alagh to draft Water Framework Law as an umbrella statement of general principles governing the exercise of legislative and /or executive (or devolved) powers by the Centre, the States and the local governing bodies.
- The Centre on Wednesday (May-end ) unveiled the proposed National Water Framework Law, and National Guidelines for Inter-State Water Sharing and River Basin Authorities, but the agenda was so heavy and controversial that the meeting of National Forum of (select) State Water Resources Minsters decided to “study” the documents and “discuss” them at a meeting attended by all the States.
- Secondly, the report by the T.S. Daobia Committee, which was asked to suggest a legal framework to constitute an Inter-State River Basin Organisation, has recommended that the defunct River Boards Act, 1956 be replaced with a River Basin Management Act under which River Basin Authorities for different inter-State river basins may be constituted. The earlier plan to have a National River Basin Authority was abandoned as it was apprehended that States will oppose it as an infringement upon their rights.
- The Justice Daobia Committee has therefore proposed a two-tier structure for River Basin Authority for each basin, namely, an upper layer of Governing Council with membership of Chief Ministers of co-basin States, and an Executive Board under it. An authority will prepare a River Basin Master Plan and ensure compliance. In case of inter-State dispute the Council shall try for reconciliation, failing which, refer the dispute to a tribunal for adjudication under the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956.
- Thirdly, the meeting looked at the Draft National Policy Guidelines that are being evolved for sharing and distributing inter-State waters on the principle of “equity.” This will not cover sharing of waters of trans-boundary river basins.
********************************************************************************* |
Some terms related to Water !!!
used direct or in the form of goods and services
embodying water, by an individual or community or
country as a whole, or by an industry or business in
its production or other commercial activity;
|
conserving rainwater or retarding run-off through
various structures either for the direct use of the
stored waters or for re-charging groundwater aquifers
|
separating two areas such that rainwater falling on
one side of the line drains on that side and cannot
pass to the other side; by extension, the area
bounded by the ridge; generally used to denote a
small local area bounded by low ridges, but
sometimes also a large area bounded by high hills,
including a river-basin.
|
and its tributaries, that is, the total area within which whatever precipitation or runoff occurs will, except for evaporation and seepage into the ground, eventually find its way to the river or one of its tributaries.
|
Government mulls using water footprint as a tool to measure
water consumption by farming and industrial processes,
experts warn of its limitations
- The most common use of the water footprint is to calculate the quantity of water used to grow a unit (kilogram) of food or produce a specified weight of a product. Calculations by WFN show it takes 822 litres of water to grow a kilo of apples. For a kilo of beef, it is 15,415 litres, and 5,521 litres for a kilo of mutton. Rice needs 2,497 litres while potatoes need 287 litres a kilo. However, these are global averages.
- According to WFN’s Water Footprint Manual, there are two ways to calculate a footprint: the Chain Summation Approach and the Stepwise Accumulative Approach. The former is used for particular cases while the latter is a more generic approach.
- In the Chain Summation Approach, water footprints associated with the process can be fully attributed to the product.
- The water footprint is the sum of water consumed by each individual process that constitute the production without double accounting.
Now what is the criticism w.r.t. WATER FOOTPRINT ?
- WF is a uni-dimensional tool as it only considers water as an input without accounting for other factors.
- Critics point out the footprint is not politically neutral as it influences a country’s agriculture, industry and livelihoods. In fact, the use of just one tool can impact food security if it is the only way to measure if a country should or should not grow a particular crop. For example, a country facing shortages of water and food will grow or import the kind of food its population requires regardless of its water footprint.
- water footprints do not describe the role and relative importance of water in production; it is a quantitative measure. They do not cover water scarcity or sustainability of the source of water nor the productivity or livelihoods.
- farm A may grow wheat using 1,100 cubic metre (cu. m) of water per tonne and farm B using 900 cu. m. However, A may be more mechanized while B may have got more timely rainfall. Thus, there are farm-to-farm fluctuations that have little to do with water use.
- Another problem, relates to the components of the footprint – blue, green and grey water. There is no scientific basis for this separation and the opportunity cost for soil moisture (green water) can be quite large. The grey water does not give any information about the kind of pollution.
Despite its limitations, the water footprint can possibly be one tool to measure water consumption by farming or industrial processes, but not the only one. India has other compulsions – livelihoods and health – that may outweigh a uni-dimensional and context-specific approach. While it is desirable to have a yardstick to assess water use, it needs to be wielded in the local development context and not in isolation that may lead to erroneous conclusions.