Opinion Feroze Varun Gandhi on cities’ flooding: Perils of unplanned urbanisation

Most Indian cities are situated beside a river, with extensive floodplains and wetlands. In an ideal world, such areas would have been left untouched — instead, India has lost 40 per cent of its wetlands in the past 30 years. For instance, Baroda lost 30 per cent of its wetlands between 2005 and 2018. Delhi had 1,000 waterbodies in 1997, but now has just 700. With such a loss of natural “blue infrastructure”, flooding risks have increased. Delhi has seen four major flooding events between 2005 and 2023. Similar patterns exist for other cities. Solving this requires action on multiple fronts.

First, we need to understand the problem better — studies must be conducted in all cities to understand the catchment area and flooding risk associated with urban water bodies (including rivers) and land use. This can then be tied up with short, medium and long-term measures to rejuvenate water bodies. Lake and river management plans should be defined and include the participation of the local citizenry in upkeep and a push to remove encroachments (Misra, Nidhi, Oct 2011). Geographic information systems (GIS) may be used to tag local water bodies, to help keep track of encroachments and understand their seasonality.

Investments are required in more early warning systems (including Doppler radar) to enable real-time updates on changing weather patterns locally. Beyond this, local rainfall data can be integrated with the Central Water Commission and regional flood control efforts (Prakash, Anjal, Goswami, Aishani, Aug 2020). As rainfall patterns change, simulations will be required, particularly for flooding hotspots. Ideally, this can be linked with flood risk maps and insurance products. We should also invest in city-wide databases that enable the provision of immediate relief in the event of a flooding-related disaster (Prakash, Anjal, Goswami, Aishani, Aug 2020).

Second, we must revamp and expand drainage and stormwater networks across our cities — most of India’s 5,000 plus cities and towns don’t have a well-functioning sewerage network. Delhi’s drainage network can carry a maximum of 50mm in 24 hours, with significant parts requiring repair (Chandra, Bhushan, July 2023). Its stormwater drains are very old. In Delhi, several areas have drains which have been incorrectly sloped against gravity. Other areas have no distinct drains for drainage and stormwater, often leading to overflowing.

Most cities need to develop drainage master plans — even Delhi is yet to have one (despite a pre-existing plan developed by IIT Delhi in 2018, which was later shelved for not being actionable). Additionally, existing pipelines need to be surveyed (whether drain or stormwater), and water-logging locations identified. We must not skimp on building this infrastructure — stormwater networks should be kept separate from the drainage network.

Third, over the medium-to-long term, urban planning has to improve. In Delhi, a range of civic agencies manage the city’s drains, leading to coordination challenges — often, information is not shared or shared with delay, leading to a lack of transparency (Dixit, Kushagra, Aug 2022). Coordination between agencies/institutions must improve. Delhi, with its Jal Board, seeks to revive 155 water bodies in such a piecemeal manner. All this when most water bodies are regulated by institutions ranging from DDA, to Delhi Jal Board, Public Works Department, and municipal corporations (Jainer, Shivali, Jan 2020; Misra, Nidhi, Oct 2011).

Additionally, awareness about wetland/water body conservation must be improved. The Wetland Authority of Delhi recently received requests to delist 232 (of 1,045) waterbodies from institutions like the Delhi Development Authority, highlighting limited awareness (Babu, Nikhil, May 2023). It is heartening to see the progress made by the Centre — the push for the National Mission for Clean Ganga, Census on Pan-India water bodies, guidelines for conserving water bodies, and increasing Ramsar sites are welcome steps. However, we require a well-defined urban water policy. Regulatory bodies like the Central Wetland Regulatory Authority can be granted statutory powers, while participation of local communities is welcome.

We must identify and replicate local examples. Until the mid-2000s, in Mangalore, wastewater from urban consumption would flow through open drains and into the city’s water bodies, polluting the freshwater sources (Majumder, Sourav & Dasgupta, Saugata, Jun 2017). The Mangalore City Corporation (MCC) then established wastewater treatment plants with end-user linkages, with industries set up within the Mangalore Special Economic Zone Ltd (MSEZL) that faced a limited and erratic supply of water and, consequently, ended up spending significantly on water sourcing. The MCC offered to supply treated effluent to MSEZL to meet its industrial need, with MSEZL-based private players pitching in with sourcing for 70 per cent of operations and maintenance costs of the pumps and the sewage treatment plant (Majumder, Sourav & Dasgupta, Saugata, Jun 2017). Increasing demand for input water led to a ramp-up of two additional tertiary treatment plants, with the network expanding to cover 350 km of pipelines.

We must also encourage civic participation. Consider the case of the Kaikondrahalli Lake in Bengaluru. It suffered from severe sewage inflow, with silting and land formation due to eutrophication. Meanwhile, encroachment on the lake bed was a cause for concern, along with the dumping of debris and waste. BBMP sought to adopt a community-driven approach to reviving the lake in a phased manner as funds came by. Between December 2009 and March 2011, BBMP sought to demarcate the lake’s boundaries with a push to identify and stop encroachments. Encroachers were served eviction notices, and the lake was secured. Then, BBMP decided to tackle pollution, with sewage inflow diverted away via a tapping pipeline. Desilting of the lake was conducted, with a push to remove vegetation growing in the lake and to increase the lake’s depth by 1m (also its storage capacity by 54 per cent).

Further restoration was carried out by developing inlets and outlets for the lake and creating embankments and a pathway around the waterbody. All of this was done with local participation. The original DPR was rather engineering-focused, pushing for creating gardens and fencing off the lake from the local underprivileged communities (Ahluwalia, Isher Judge, Apr 2018). Citizen engagement ensured that the DPR was modified, with a push for improving the local ecology, instead of mere aesthetics — the plan was modified to ensure the watershed area of the lake was preserved while indigenous trees were planted (Ahluwalia, Isher Judge, Apr 2018).

As we advance, our cities must lead on climate change, rather than simply reacting to untoward events. Instead of pursuing smart cities, we should invest in rainwater harvesting and better drainage. It’s time we get the basics right.

The writer is a BJP MP