Drenched in subsidies

So, what is driving the crisis in water? The 2006 Human Development Report found that the source of the problem lies in poverty, inequality and the institutions that regulate access to water. The limited coverage of water utilities in slums means that the poorer one is, the more one pays for water, sometimes five to ten times what people even in New York would pay. The costs of connecting to the water mains average 41 in South Asia, a significant barrier for poor households. As a result, those who are rich enough to have piped water in the house benefit from the low cost of water. In Bangalore, the richest 20 per cent of residents get about 30 per cent of the water subsidies, while the poorest fifth get only 10 per cent.

What is worse is that we remain too polite about the lack of sanitation 8212; and our politeness costs lives. Even as India will meet the Millennium Development Goals of halving the number of people without water, only one in three Indians has access to any form of improved sanitation. Poor sanitation is the main reason for the transmission of diseases. Even basic forms of sanitation have a dramatic effect in reducing the risk of disease. In Bangladesh access to a pit latrine can reduce the risk of diarrhoea by over 20 per cent.

The Bangladesh example is illustrative. Since 1990 Indian incomes have risen faster. But the rate of sanitation coverage is now higher in Bangladesh than in India. This owes largely to the Total Sanitation Campaign, spearheaded originally by NGOs and now part of a national strategy. West Bengal8217;s investments in sanitation, particularly in Midnapur district, have resulted in two million additional toilets and sanitation coverage of 40 per cent compared with 12 per cent in 1991.

Community organisations have also shown initiative in India. The National Slum Dwellers Federation, in conjunction with other NGOs, pioneered a new approach to design and manage public toilet blocks in response to the inability of poor households to install latrines in Mumbai. The model has since been adopted in Pune through collaboration with municipal authorities. As these examples highlight, it is not the lack of technology or awareness that is the problem.

Driving the crisis in water for livelihoods is often policy-induced scarcity. Unregulated groundwater mining, thanks in large part to electricity subsidies, has resulted in a groundwater overdraft in India of 56 per cent. If financial institutions were used as an analogy, few banks would endorse cash withdrawals to this extent. We fail to remember that the environment is not just the provider of water resources but its banker.

Inequalities are to blame as well. In India about 13 per cent of the population has access to irrigation. Within this group the richest one-third of farmers receives 73 per cent of the subsidy. Richer farmers, who can afford to dig deeper tube wells, draw on groundwater reserves while small and marginal farmers suffer. In northern Gujarat falling water tables pose a direct threat to the smallholder dairy industry.

Tail-end farmers suffer a twin disadvantage: less water and more uncertainty. In India and Pakistan it is typical for tail-end producers to receive less than a third of the water for farmers at the head of the canal. Little surprise, then, that poverty among tail-end farmers in India is typically about 11 percentage points higher.

But water stress can be managed 8212; and again there are examples from within India. Every 1 invested in 10,000 check-dams in Gujarat has yielded 1.5 in returns over three years. Scaling this up to a national level can result in a five-fold increase in the monsoon crop. Low-cost drip irrigation in Andhra Pradesh has doubled output for the same amount of water. In arid parts of Madhya Pradesh and Maharastra, micro-irrigation kits are in use.

What should be the priorities then? There is no blueprint, but several principles are applicable. First, make water a human right 8212; and mean it. This means a coherent national strategy for water. It means targeting inequalities and a regulatory structure that holds utilities accountable for increasing access to the poor. Second, rethink tariff structures so that those lucky enough to have connections do not waste water and that the additional revenues are used to cross-subsidise the poor. Third, sanitation is critical and lagging behind, yet it has the greatest potential for reducing the risk of disease. Fourth, regulate groundwater usage both to protect the environment as well as small farmers. Fifth, substantially increase community participation, particularly of women and marginal farmers, in making decisions on water infrastructure.

Being born poor, or as a girl, or in a slum is not choices people make. But where we are born has implications for access to a basic resource like water 8212; and our life chances. As a fast-growing economy, and emerging world power, the choice to improve the life chances of the most vulnerable is one that India has to make.

The writer, a policy specialist with UNDP, is one of the authors of the just-released 8216;Human Development Report 20068217;