Emerging Water Insecurity in India : Lessons from an Agriculturally Advanced State [1 ed.] 9781527526082

Citation preview

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

“Sustainability of water use at the present level is under great strain particularly in Punjab where ground water is over exploited and is getting increasingly polluted. The overall policy environment mainly with elements like free electricity for water extraction and free/subsidised water for domestic use is totally insensitive to the macro outcomes of the behaviour of water users involving huge wastages and inefficiencies. The wheat rice dominant cropping pattern which greatly contributed to the food self sufficiency of the nation has become unsustainable. This book dwells upon all these issues with insightful analysis of data and facts. The strongest point of the work is a comprehensive field survey of water use behaviour of farmers, industrial units and households. This book by Ranjit Singh Ghuman and Rajeev Sharma is a very valuable contribution to the study of water economy.” —Dr. S. R. Hashim Ex-Member Secretary, Planning Commission, Government of India; Director, IEG, New Delhi; and Ex- Chairman, National Commission for Integrated Water Resources Development Plan, Government of India. “The water security in this book has been viewed in the form of sustainable use of water and maintenance of its fair quality. The emergence of water scarcity in an agriculturally advanced region have been analysed in a development process based on private profiteering sans social concerns. Apathy of public policy through free power for agriculture and lack of rain water harvesting has been brought out and lessons from development experience have been made through empirical analysis. The book will be very useful reading for all those concerned with sustainable development and having stake in the water sector.” —Dr. Sucha Singh Gill Professor of Economics and former Director General Centre for Research in Rural and Industrial Development Chandigarh, India “Punjab represents a classic case of overexploitation of water resources driven by the nexus of technology and policy. The authors demonstrate how a blessed region is heading towards dreadful future not due to any natural factors but due to absence of suitable regulation and measures essential for sustainable use of natural resource. I hope the book will awaken the society to collectively decide future course of action to save Punjab from reckless over-exploitation of water resources.” —Professor Ramesh Chand, Member, NITI Aayog, Government of India

Emerging Water Insecurity in India: Lessons from an Agriculturally Advanced State By

Ranjit Singh Ghuman and Rajeev Sharma

Emerging Water Insecurity in India: Lessons from an Agriculturally Advanced State By Ranjit Singh Ghuman and Rajeev Sharma This book first published 2018 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2018 by Ranjit Singh Ghuman and Rajeev Sharma All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-5275-1144-8 ISBN (13): 978-1-5275-1144-6

With lots of love and affection for my grandchildren Annika, Ritwik and Arjit who I hope do not have to face water scarcity Ranjit Singh Ghuman

CONTENTS

List of Tables .............................................................................................. xi List of Figures.......................................................................................... xvii List of Appendices .................................................................................. xviii Acknowledgements ................................................................................... xx Preface ..................................................................................................... xxii Chapter One ................................................................................................. 1 Global Water Scenario: An Overview Introduction............................................................................................ 1 Global Response to Water Scarcity ....................................................... 5 Sector-Wise Water Requirement ........................................................... 7 Chapter Two .............................................................................................. 14 Development and Usage of Water Resources in India Water Resources in India ..................................................................... 14 Irrigation and Flood Control in India ................................................... 19 State-wise Irrigation Potential and Groundwater Resources ................ 24 Rainfall and Weather in India .............................................................. 30 Rising Population and Increasing Urbanisation in India ...................... 34 Chapter Three ............................................................................................ 38 Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab Water Availability in Punjab ............................................................... 40 Average Annual Rainfall in Punjab ..................................................... 49 District-wise Water Table in Punjab .................................................... 55 Extent of Ground Water Exploitation in Punjab .................................. 61

viii

Contents

Chapter Four .............................................................................................. 69 Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab: A Temporal Analysis based on Secondary Data Land Use Pattern in Punjab: From Diversification to Nondiversification ................................................................................. 70 Cropping Pattern in Punjab .................................................................. 72 Irrigation Pattern in Punjab: Increasing Dependence on Ground Water .............................................................................................. 77 Holding Size-wise Area under Various Sources of Irrigation ........ 83 Green Revolution and Number of Tube-wells: What a Nexus! ........... 88 Water Use Efficiency in Irrigation across States ............................ 96 Increasing Consumption of Energy in Irrigation................................ 100 Growth of Submersible and Higher BHP Motors ........................ 104 Green Revolution and Increasing Tractorisation ............................... 111 Chapter Five ............................................................................................ 114 Water Use Pattern in the Agricultural Sector in Punjab: Evidence from Primary Data Operational Holdings ......................................................................... 114 Sources of Irrigation .......................................................................... 121 Harvesting and Conservation of Water .............................................. 128 Chapter Six .............................................................................................. 131 Water Usage in the Industrial Sector in Punjab: Evidence from Primary Data Small-Scale Industrial Units .............................................................. 131 Nature of Processing and Production ........................................... 132 Employment and Working Hours in the Sampled Small-Scale Units ....................................................................................... 134 Sources of Water of Small-Scale Industrial Units ........................ 137 Consumption of Water in Small-Scale Industrial Units ............... 138 Medium and Large-Scale Industries .................................................. 140 Employment in the sampled Medium and Large-Scale Units ...... 144 Source of Water Supply in Medium and Large-Scale Industrial Units ....................................................................................... 146

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

ix

Chapter Seven.......................................................................................... 153 Domestic Water Usage in Punjab: Evidence from Primary Data Rural Water Usage Pattern................................................................. 153 The Sources of Water in the Rural Households ........................... 156 The Pattern of Water Use in Rural Households ........................... 160 Urban Water Usage Pattern ............................................................... 162 Sources of Drinking Water ........................................................... 168 Chapter Eight ........................................................................................... 185 Awareness about Water Scarcity: Users Response Awareness Level of Water Consumers in the Agricultural Sector..... 185 Educational Attainment and Level of Awareness among Farmers ................................................................................... 187 Disenchantment with Agriculture................................................. 189 Awareness about Organic Farming .............................................. 192 Sources of Awareness: Print and Electronic Media ..................... 194 Awareness about Depleting Water Table ..................................... 196 Awareness in the Industrial Sector..................................................... 199 Small-Scale Industrial Units ......................................................... 199 Awareness Level among the Medium and Large-Scale Industrial Units ....................................................................................... 204 Domestic Sector ................................................................................. 209 Awareness about Water Conservation and Rain Water Harvesting among Rural Households........................................................ 209 Respondents’ Perception about Quality of Water ................... 212 Urban Sector................................................................................. 214 Perceptions regarding Need to Save Water ............................ 214 Chapter Nine............................................................................................ 221 Water Governance and Policy Response Constitutional Status of Water in India and Some Initiatives at the National Level .................................................................... 223 Policy Response by Government of Punjab ....................................... 226 Resource Conservation Technologies and Innovations...................... 230 Micro-Irrigation in Punjab: The Ground Reality ............................... 231 Diversification and Free Electricity to Farm Sector: An Antithesis to Judicious Use of Water ............................................................ 235

x

Contents

Chapter Ten ............................................................................................. 239 Summary and Policy Recommendations Summary ............................................................................................ 239 Indian Water Scenario .................................................................. 241 Water Availability and Usage in Punjab ...................................... 242 Validation by Primary Data .......................................................... 246 Policy Response by the Punjab Government................................ 250 Recommendations .............................................................................. 253 Appendices .............................................................................................. 257 References ............................................................................................... 290

LIST OF TABLES

1.1 Global projection for irrigation water withdrawals (cubic kilometres) . 8 1.2 Water withdrawal by sectors, around 2010 ........................................... 9 1.3 Country-wise comparison of total water withdrawal by sectors (2003–2011) ......................................................................................... 11 2.1 Estimates of water resources in India (billion cubic metres) ............... 14 2.2 Future water requirement for various sectors in India (bcm)............... 16 2.3 Plan-wise expenditure on irrigation and flood control in India: 1951–2012 ........................................................................................... 20 2.4 Plan-wise proliferation of schemes in major and medium sector in India ................................................................................................. 22 2.5 Plan-wise irrigation potential created and utilised in India.................. 24 2.6 State-wise ultimate irrigation potential created in India (‘000 hectares) ............................................................................................... 25 2.7 State-wise percentage share of ultimate irrigation potential created in India ................................................................................................. 26 2.8 State-wise status of ground water resources in India (2013) ............... 28 2.9 Rainfall and weather details in India: 1951 to 2012 ............................ 30 2.10 Season-wise distribution of rainfall in India: 1992–1993 to 2014– 2025 ..................................................................................................... 32 2.11 Growth of population in India: 1951 to 2011 .................................... 35 2.12 Proportion of population using improved water supplies .................. 37 3.1 Details of culture-able command area (CCA) of canal system in Punjab .............................................................................................. 41 3.2 Ground water resource potential of Punjab State 33 ........................... 42 3.3 Assessment of dynamic ground water resources in various districts of Punjab .............................................................................................. 45 3.4 District-wise gross ground water draft as percentage of net ground water availability.................................................................................. 47 3.5 Net annual ground water availability for irrigation development in Punjab .............................................................................................. 49 3.6 District-wise annual average rainfall in Punjab: 1970–2015 ............... 50 3.7 District-wise trend of annual rainfall in Punjab 1975 to 2013 ............. 52 3.8 District-wise pre-monsoon (June over June) ground water level in Punjab: 1996–2016 .......................................................................... 56

xii

List of Tables

3.9 District-wise post-monsoon (October over October) ground water level in Punjab: 1996–2016 .......................................................................... 58 3.10 District-wise annual average change in water table in 2016 over 1996 ............................................................................................. 60 3.11 Extent of ground water exploitation in Punjab: 1984–2013 .............. 62 3.12 District-wise distribution in the number of over-exploited (Dark) and critical (Dark) blocks in Punjab: 1984–2011 (only sampled districts) . 63 3.13 Assessment of dynamic ground water resources across the districts in Punjab .............................................................................................. 64 3.14 District-wise comparison of ground water development in some selected districts of Punjab: 1984 to 2013 (sampled districts) ............. 66 4.1 Land use pattern in Punjab: 1960–2016 (‘000 hectares)...................... 70 4.2 Percentage share of land under different uses in Punjab: 1960–2016 .... 71 4.3 Shift in cropping pattern in Punjab: 1960–2016 .................................. 73 4.4 Distribution of irrigated area under principal rabi crops in undivided Punjab: 1939–1941 .............................................................................. 76 4.5 Distribution of irrigated area under principal kharif crops in undivided Punjab: 1939–1941 .............................................................................. 76 4.6 Net sown area under irrigation in Punjab through canals and tubewells: 1960–2015 (‘000 hectares) ........................................................ 78 4.7 Share of power subsidy to agricultural sector in Punjab: 2002–2017 .. 80 4.8 District-wise area under canal and tube-well irrigation in Punjab: 1995–1996 and 2010–2011.................................................................. 82 4.9 Holding size-wise area under various sources of irrigation in Punjab: 1995–1996 ........................................................................................... 84 4.10 Percentage share of area under different sources of irrigation in Punjab: 1995–1996 .......................................................................... 85 4.11 Holding size-wise area under different sources of irrigation in Punjab: 2010–1011 (‘000 hectares) ................................................. 86 4.12 Percentage share of area under different sources of irrigation in Punjab: 2010–2011 .......................................................................... 87 4.13 Tube-wells (diesel & electric operated), area, production and yield of rice in Punjab: 1970–1971 to 2015–2016 ........................................ 90 4.14 Correlation between no. of tube-wells and area under rice, production of rice and yield of rice in Punjab: 1970–1971 to 2014–2015 ............. 92 4.15 Trend growth rate of tube-wells, area, production and yield of rice in Punjab: 1970–1971 to 2014–2015 ................................................... 95 4.16 Water productivity of rice in major rice-producing states in India .... 96 4.17 Water consumption in rice production in Punjab .............................. 98 4.18 District-wise consumption of electricity in agriculture in Punjab (Million Kilo Watt-mkw) ................................................................... 101

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

xiii

4.19 Compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of electricity consumption in agriculture in Punjab: 1974–75 to 2015–16 ................................... 102 4.20 Number of tube-wells energised/ operated in the sampled districts of Punjab (as on 31 March) ................................................................ 103 4.21 Trend of mono-block tube-wells and submersible motors in agriculture in Punjab: 2009–2017 ...................................................... 105 4.22 Distribution of submersible and mono-block electric tube-well motors in agriculture in sampled districts of Punjab in 2010 ......................... 106 4.23 Distribution of submersible and mono-block electric tube-well motors in agriculture in sampled districts of Punjab as on 31 March 2017 ... 107 4.24 District-wise change in the number and share of submersible and mono-block electric motors in agriculture in 2017 over 2010 in sampled districts of Punjab ............................................................ 108 4.25 BHP-wise break-up of electric motors in agricultural sector in Punjab: 2010–2017 ........................................................................ 109 4.26 Number of tractors per 1000 hectares in rural Punjab: 1981–2010 . 112 5.1 Number & proportion of sampled farmers in various agro-climatic zones of Punjab (sampled farmers) .................................................... 115 5.2 Average area of operational holdings in different zones of Punjab (sampled farmers) .............................................................................. 115 5.3 Percentage share of area under different crops in Punjab (sampled farmers) .............................................................................................. 117 5.4 Percentage share of area under different crops in central plain zone (CPZ) of Punjab (sampled farmers) ................................................... 119 5.5 Percentage share of area under different crops in south-west zone (SWZ) of Punjab (sampled farmers) .................................................. 119 5.6 Percentage share of area under different crops in sub-mountainous zone (SMZ) of Punjab (sampled farmers) .......................................... 120 5.7 Main source of irrigation in sampled villages across the zones in Punjab (no. of villages) ...................................................................... 122 5.8 Distribution of sampled farmers according to source of irrigation across the zones in Punjab (no. of farmers) ....................................... 124 5.9 Mean depth of tube-wells owned by the sampled farmers across the zones in Punjab ............................................................................ 125 5.10 Operation of tube-well during kharif & rabi season (Days) ............ 126 5.11 Methods of sowing paddy & irrigation across zones in Punjab ....... 127 5.12 Rain water harvesting, conservation and efforts to save water ........ 128 5.13 Farmer's perception about quality of subsoil water & advice from Agriculture Department & Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) ... 129 6.1 Classification of the sampled small-scale industries ......................... 132 6.2 Employment in the sampled small-scale industries ........................... 134

xiv

List of Tables

6.3 Average number of hours the unit works across small-scale sampled industries ............................................................................................ 136 6.4 Average depth of tube-well & horse power of motors and water delivery across sampled small-scale industries .................................. 137 6.5 Average number of days tube-well runs per month and capacity of water storage tanks (in litres) across sampled small-scale industries. 139 6.6 Average monthly consumption of water by sampled small-scale industries (in litres) ............................................................................ 140 6.7 Classification of the sampled medium & large-scale industries ........ 141 6.8 Number and percentage of employees engaged in sampled medium & large-scale industries of Punjab ..................................................... 144 6.9 Average number of hours the units work across sampled industries in Punjab ............................................................................................ 145 6.10 Source of water supply across medium & large-scale industries in Punjab ............................................................................................ 146 6.11 Source of water supply across sampled medium & large-scale industries in Punjab (%) ..................................................................... 147 6.12 Average depth of tube-well, depth & HP of motor and water delivery across sampled industries in Punjab................................................... 148 6.13 Average number of days tube-well runs per month across medium & large-scale industries in Punjab ..................................................... 149 6.14 Average monthly consumption of water across medium & large-scale industries in Punjab (in litres) ............................................................ 150 6.15 Average capacity of water storage tanks in different medium & largescale industries in Punjab (in litres) ................................................... 151 6.16 Average expenditure incurred on installing tube-wells across sampled industries in Punjab ............................................................................ 152 7.1 District-wise growth of rural population in Punjab: 1991 to 2011 .... 154 7.2 District-wise number of rural households by main source of drinking water in sampled districts of Punjab .................................................. 157 7.3 District-wise percentage share of rural households by main source of drinking water in sampled districts of Punjab................................ 158 7.4 Source of drinking water in rural households in sampled villages in Punjab ............................................................................................ 159 7.5 Source of drinking water in rural households in sampled villages in Punjab ............................................................................................ 159 7.6 Use of water in rural households in sampled villages in Punjab ....... 161 7.7 Use of water in rural households in sampled villages in Punjab (%). 161 7.8 District-wise growth of population in urban Punjab: 1991 to 2011 ... 163 7.9 District-wise number of urban households by main source of drinking water in sampled districts of Punjab .................................................. 164

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

xv

7.10 District-wise percentage share of urban households by main source of drinking water in sampled districts of Punjab................................ 165 7.11 Sampled distribution of urban respondents in Amritsar and Sangrur across locations .................................................................................. 166 7.12 Average household size, plot size and total covered area across respondents by locations .................................................................... 167 7.13 Plot size possessed by urban households across various categories ... 168 7.14 Sources of water during summer season across the selected urban locations in two cities of Punjab ........................................................ 170 7.15 Sources of water during winter season across the selected urban locations in two cities of Punjab (%) ................................................. 171 7.16 Activity-wise daily average consumption of water by urban households during summer season across the selected locations in two cities of Punjab (in litres) ........................................................ 173 7.17 Activity-wise average consumption of water by urban households during summer season across the selected locations in two cities of Punjab (%) ..................................................................................... 174 7.18 Activity-wise average consumption of water by urban households during winter season across the selected locations in two cities of Punjab (in litres)................................................................................. 176 7.19 Activity-wise average consumption of water by urban households during winter season across the selected locations in the districts of Punjab (%) ..................................................................................... 179 7.20 Deficiency/surplus in consumption of water on BIS norms in Punjab (lpcd) .................................................................................................. 182 7.21 Average duration of water supply across urban households in the selected locations of Punjab (hours) .................................................. 183 7.22 Number of urban households willing to pay for improved water supply in the selected districts of Punjab (Rs. per month) ................. 183 8.1 Educational level of the household heads (HHs) in Punjab (sampled farmers) .............................................................................................. 188 8.2 Percentage share of willingness to continue in agriculture among the sampled farmers in Punjab ........................................................... 191 8.3 Awareness about organic farming and area under it (sampled farmers) .............................................................................................. 193 8.4 Percentage share of television viewers and newspaper readers in Punjab (sampled farmers) .............................................................. 195 8.5 Awareness about declining water table and source of awareness across zones in Punjab ....................................................................... 197 8.6 Awareness about higher water consumption by paddy & crop diversification .................................................................................... 198

xvi

List of Tables

8.7 Reported reasons for efficient use of water by the respondents across sampled industries in Punjab................................................... 202 8.8 Misuse and scarcity of water and waste disposal............................... 203 8.9 Perceptions of medium & large-scale industrial units on water conservation and pollution in Punjab ................................................. 204 8.10 Reported reasons for efficient use of water by the respondents across sampled industries in Punjab (%) ............................................ 205 8.11 Some perceptions of the respondents across sampled industries in Punjab (%) ..................................................................................... 208 8.12 Awareness about water conservation among rural households in sampled villages and rain water harvesting (%) ............................ 209 8.13 Awareness about scarcity of water and water use efficiency among rural households in sampled villages (%) .......................................... 211 8.14 Satisfaction about quality of water and duration and timing about tap water supply in rural households in sampled villages (%) ........... 212 8.15 Water storage facility and use of waste water in rural households among sampled villages (%) .............................................................. 213 8.16 Perceptions of urban households regarding water supply in Amritsar and Sangrur cities (%)........................................................................ 215 8.17 Treatment of unsafe water across urban households in Amritsar and Sangrur cities (%)........................................................................ 216 8.18 Perceptions of urban households regarding cleaning of drains in Amritsar and Sangrur (%) .............................................................. 218 8.19 Periodicity of cleaning of drains in Amritsar and Sangrur of Punjab (%) ..................................................................................... 219

LIST OF FIGURES

1.1 Global population and water withdrawal over time ............................... 5

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendixes to Preface A.P.1 Level of development and distance from the nearby town/city of the sampled villages across the selected districts A.P.2 Village-level data of the sampled villages of Punjab in 2001 Appendixes to Chapter 3 A3.1 Criterion for the classification of the development blocks in Punjab A3.2 Decline of water table in central Punjab Appendixes to Chapter 4 A4.1 Water requirement of various crops A4.2 Crop wise water saving and resultant yield increase with the adoption of sprinkler and drip irrigation Appendixes to Chapter 6 A6.1 Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: textile and dyeing A6.2 Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: food product and beverages A6.3 Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: manufacturing of basic metal A6.4 Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: chemical industry A6.5 Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: paper and paper products A6.6 Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: rubber & plastic products A6.7 Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: hosiery and garments A6.8 Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: leather and leather product A6.9 Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: hotel & restaurants A6.10 Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: cold storage

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

xix

A6.11 Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled medium and large-scale textile units A6.12 Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled food product and beverage units (medium and large units) A6.13 Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled basic metal units (medium and large units) A6.14 Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled motor vehicle manufacturing units (medium and large units) A6.15 Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled chemical units A6.16 Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled manufacturing paper units (medium and large units) A6.17 Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled rubber and rubber product units (medium and large units) A6.18 Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled metal product units (medium and large units) A6.19 Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled hosiery units (medium and large units) A6.20 Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled leather product units 209 Appendixes to Chapter 9 A9.1 Potential of water conservation technologies for water saving and cost reduction in Punjab agriculture (farm level estimates) A9.2 Potential of water conservation technologies for water saving and cost reduction in Punjab agriculture A9.3 Reasons for drip irrigation in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib Districts (as reported by respondents) A9.4 Reasons for sprinkler irrigation in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib Districts (As reported by respondents) A9.5 Area under drip irrigation in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib Districts (sampled farmers) A9.6 Area under sprinkler irrigation in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib Districts (sampled farmers) A9.7 Respondents responses with respect to drip irrigation system in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib Districts A9.8 Respondents responses with respect to sprinkler irrigation system in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib Districts A.9.9 District-wise number of ponds in Punjab A9.10 Proposed alternative crop choices for diversification in Punjab

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This book is the outcome of our concern for sustainable development and the requirements of future generations—that are bound to face water insecurity—for fresh water. A sizeable portion of the book is based on the improved and extended version of the major research project on ‘Water use efficiency in Punjab: The question of sustainability’ commissioned and funded by the Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR), New Delhi. We gratefully acknowledge the financial support and cooperation given by the ICSSR. We express our gratitude to Professor S.S. Johl, Dr. G. S. Kalkat, Mr. Rashpal Malhotra and Professor H.S. Shergill as their concern and views regarding agriculture and irrigation have been a great source of inspiration to work in this area. Our special thanks to Professor Sucha Singh Gill with whom we always have vigorous dialogues about Punjab’s decelerating growth, agrarian crisis and depleting water table. Our frequent discussions with him inspired us to undertake research on water concerns of Punjab. We are also thankful to Dr. Dipinder Singh, IAS, for sharing his deep understanding about the rural economy of Punjab which has been very useful in articulating our views. Mr. H. S. Bedi from the Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission deserves our thanks for providing us with relevant data and for sparing his time to discuss the issues from time to time. We would be failing in our duty if we did not acknowledge the contribution of Mr. Sarbjit Singh Dhaliwal, a senior journalist who has always been worried about the deteriorating social, economic and political health of Punjab. Our thanks are also due to our colleagues and friends from Punjabi University, Patiala and Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, whose research work has been very useful for this study. We would like to make a special mention of Professors M.S. Sidhu, P. S. Rangi, A.S Joshi, R.S. Sidhu, Sukhpal Singh, V.K. Arora and Kamal Vatta. The authors are also thankful to Dr. Rajesh Sharma, Professor of English at the Punjabi University, Patiala.

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

xxi

The formal and informal support of all our colleagues at CRRID, Chandigarh, is also thankfully acknowledged. Professors Sukhpal Singh, Satish Verma, Dr. Krishan Chand, Dr. Sukhwinder Singh, Dr. Jatinder Singh, Dr. Kulwant Nehra and Dr. Vikash deserve a special mention. An enormous amount of secondary and primary data has been utilised in this study. Here we wish to express our thanks to various central and state agencies, especially the Central Ground Water Board and the Water Resources and Environment Directorate, Punjab. We are also obliged to all the respondents from agriculture, industry and households for happily giving us the relevant information and data which have been very useful for reaching meaningful findings. All the field investigators also deserve our appreciation for collecting the secondary and primary data and other relevant information. Last, but not the least, the authors gratefully acknowledge the unconditional support and cooperation extended by their respective better halves throughout this trying period despite facing an unpardonable neglect. Ranjit Singh Ghuman Rajeev Sharma

PREFACE

Human demand for water, mainly originating out of its requirement for food, energy, and industry, is continuously rising and resulting in an everincreasing gap between its demand and supply. The increasing world population and modern-day development paradigm are raising the demand for food, energy and industrial produce which, in turn, is leading to an ever-rising demand for fresh water which is not only limited in supply but also has alternative and competing usages. The major portion of demand for water comes from agriculture and subsoil water is becoming very handy as it is the most reliable source of irrigation. It is essential for stabilising and increasing the incomes and livelihoods of farmers and agricultural labourers. However, in most of the countries, water availability for agriculture is not only limited but also uncertain. It has also been estimated that by 2050, the number of countries with water scarcity will be greater than fifty and India will be on that list. About 2 billion people will be living under conditions of high water stress by 2050. This necessitates efficient management and governance of water. The global community is responding to the emerging scarcity and insecurity of water through various international agencies. After independence in 1947, ground water emerged as the most preferred source of irrigation and for other uses in India. Irrigation accounts for 92 percent of total ground water use. About 55 percent of irrigation requirements, nearly 85 percent of domestic and other water requirements in rural areas and 50 percent of requirements in urban areas and of industries are met through ground water The aggregate scenario of net water availability and the net draft seems to be quite comfortable. And there is quite a high scope for ground water development in the case of a large number of states in India. This is also an indicator that in many of the states, groundwater for irrigation and other purpose can be further developed as the ground water development level is substantially below 100 percent. However, the wide geographical and regional variations in the water resources and very high proportion of rainfed agriculture in the country do not support such a scenario. The rising needs for water coming from the rapidly increasing population and

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

xxiii

consequent developmental needs would further lead to higher demand for water. The Indian Punjab is located between North latitudes 29o 32’ and 32o 28’ and East longitudes 73 o 50’ and 77 o 00’. It is surrounded by Himachal Pradesh in the northeast, Jammu and Kashmir in the North and Haryana and Rajasthan in the south and southwest, respectively. The state also shares an international border with Pakistan and a number of its districts are in the border region. At the time of independence from the British Empire in 1947, the territory was divided into India (Hindustan) and Pakistan and Punjab was the worst victim of partition. A very large proportion of undivided Punjab went to Pakistan and a smaller part of Punjab remained in India. The undivided Punjab was known as the food basket of the undivided country and that was mainly because of the canalirrigated agriculture in that part of Punjab which went to Pakistan after partition. The state lies in the Punjab basin of the great Indo-Gangetic Plain and has three perennial rivers (Sutlej, Beas, Ravi and one ephemeral river Ghaggar). It has a vast network of canals. With the advent of the green revolution and emerging predominance of wheat-paddy crop rotation, demand for ground water registered a phenomenal increase as agriculture is the largest consumer of water. It led to over-exploitation of ground water resources, and the water table consequently suffered a serious depletion. Out of a total population of 27.74 million of Punjab, 17.34 million people live in rural areas and the remaining 10.40 million people are in urban areas. About 76 percent of people are literate. Out of the total 9.90 million workers, 1.94 million are cultivators, 1.59 million agricultural labourers and the remaining 6.37 million are engaged in the non-farm sector. For administrative purposes the entire state is divided into 22 districts and 149 development blocks. The state has three major agro-climatic zones, namely, central, south-west and sub-mountain. Mjaha, Doaba and Malwa are its three cultural zones. With 1.53 percent of the total geographical area of India, the state has come to be known as the food bowl of India. The total geographical area of the state is 50,362 sq. km. out of which 48,265 sq. km. is rural and 2,097 sq. km. is urban. The state is mainly a flat alluvial plain. The area occupied by the mountains (Himalayan Foothills) in the northeast is about 1,243 sq. km. Approximately 83 percent of the total area is under cultivation. With 100 percent irrigation intensity, nearly all the arable land

xxiv

Preface

is under double cropping. The success story of the green revolution of Punjab helped India to become a food sufficient from a food deficient country. In fact, optimality and rationality are the two fundamental assumptions of economics and use efficiency of resources is closely connected with the happening or non-happening of these two assumptions. Human behaviour, however, is not always governed by rationality and optimality. As such, people do not always make rational choices. It is equally applicable to their behaviour towards the consumption of natural resources despite the fact that such resources are non-renewable. Unfortunately, the greed and market-driven growth model has always been at loggerheads with these fundamental assumptions of economics as far as the use of natural resources is concerned. Nevertheless, it is assumed that every economic agent is rational and uses the resources in an optimum and rational manner. Of course, this is true as far as profit is concerned but it has put a serious question mark over the question of sustainable use of resources, especially natural resources. Punjab is no exception to this. To provide the much-needed food security to the country, the state of Punjab has used its subsoil water in such a manner that optimality and rationality have been put on the back burner. Since the mid-1970s, Punjab has been virtually exporting its subsoil water to other states of India in the form of rice. It has been contributing between 25 percent and 45 percent of its rice and between 40 percent and 75 percent of its wheat to the central pool of the country for more than four decades. And in the process, its water table has gone down drastically. The excessive use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides has not only contaminated its subsoil water but also damaged the soil health beyond repair. As a result, poisons have entered into the whole food and fodder chain and have started adversely affecting both human and animal health, along with the flora-fauna and the environment. Such a scenario has brought to the fore the issue of sustainability of the present water use pattern. In order to examine the main objectives of the study and validate and cross-check the secondary data, we undertook a field survey of the pattern of water use in agricultural, industrial and household sectors of Punjab. In the case of agriculture, the primary data pertain to 300 cultivators belonging to 30 villages located in 10 blocks of 10 districts of Punjab. The list of the villages and districts is given in appendix A.P.1. The basic village-level data of all the 30 sampled villages is given in appendix A.P.2.

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

xxv

The blocks were selected out of the list prepared by the Economic and Statistical Organisation of the Punjab according to their level of development in descending order. Out of all the 22 districts, 10 districts were selected in such a manner that they represent the three main agroclimatic zones as well as all three of the cultural zones of Punjab. Besides, these districts represent the main cropping patterns, wheat-paddy and wheat-cotton, prevalent in the state. From each of the sampled districts, we selected one block from each district in such a manner that they represent various levels of development. The sampling of 30 villages also represents the relative level of development. In the sample, 10 villages are less developed, 10 are moderately developed and 10 are highly developed. For collecting primary data, we have selected seven districts (Gurdaspur, Amritsar, Ferozepur, Jalandhar, Ludhiana, Patiala and Sangrur) from the central plain zone (CPZ); three districts (Bathinda, Mansa and Muktsar) from the south-west zone (CWZ) and one district (Hoshiarpur) from the sub-mountain zone (SMZ). Thus, in all there are 21 villages from CPZ, six villages from SWZ and three villages from SMZ. The CPZ and SMZ are mainly the wheatpaddy zones whereas the SWZ is a cotton-wheat zone as well as a wheatpaddy zone as the area under paddy in the SWZ is quite substantial. The study can thus be claimed to be a representative one. In the case of the industrial sector, we have randomly selected 50 smallscale industrial units, covering ten major industries, located in six districts of Punjab. In the case of medium and large industries, we have sampled 100 industrial units, covering ten industries, located in eight districts of Punjab. Care has been taken to include all the major water-consuming industries, both in the small-scale sector and in the medium and large-scale sector. In the household sector, we have studied the water use pattern in 300 rural households and 200 urban households. The rural households belong to 30 villages in 10 districts and include both agricultural and non-agricultural households. The urban households belong to two cities namely, Amritsar and Sangrur. The primary data from all the sectors have been collected with the help of specially designed and pre-tested questionnaires. It has been found that the prevailing water use pattern is not sustainable in view of the depleting water table and deteriorating quality of available water balance especially in Punjab. The water users (agriculture, industry and households) in Punjab are not observing water use efficiency and,

xxvi

Preface

hence, are ignorant about the wastage of water resources mainly because of their low level of awareness. The ever-depleting water table due to continuous over-exploitation of ground water is a threat to the sustainability of the existing cropping pattern in Punjab. There is almost no rain water/surface water harvesting in Punjab. Free electricity in the agricultural sector and the paddy crop have led to an irrational use of ground water. The free supply of water for domestic use to a large number of rural and urban households and/or very low charges from other households is not only a serious drag on the state exchequer but it also results in an injudicious use of water. The public policy response to the water crisis and demand-supply management is too weak and casual. However, the book offers a number of lessons emerging from the experience of Punjab, an agriculturally advanced state of India. This book is the outcome of our concern about the fast-depleting water table, shrinking water balance and near absence of a public policy response. The main objectives of the study were to examine the water consumption pattern in Punjab across all sectors and among all sections of water users, namely, agriculture, industry and rural and urban domestic consumption. In view of the limited quantity of fresh water and poor quality, water use efficiency has also been studied, though to a limited extent. An effort has also been made to identify more efficient ways and means to use this scarce natural resource in an optimum manner. Besides Punjab, we have also discussed the global and Indian water scenario in the first and second chapters, respectively. The rest of the chapters dwell on the pattern of water use in Punjab across all sectors and users. Chapters 3 and 4 are based on secondary data and discuss the development of water resources and irrigation patterns in Punjab. Chapters 5 to 7 dwell on primary data pertaining to the pattern of water use in agricultural, industrial and household sectors. Chapter 8 is also based on primary data and discusses the level of awareness and sensitivity about water usage in each sector. Policy response and water management is the subject matter of chapter 9. The last chapter gives the summary and policy recommendations.

CHAPTER ONE GLOBAL WATER SCENARIO: AN OVERVIEW

‘Water is the Driving Force of Our Nature’ —Leonardo da vinci ‘Pavan Guru, Pani Pita, Mata Dhart Mahat’ (Air is teacher, water is father and earth is mother) —Guru Nanak Dev, founder of the Sikh Religion

1.1 Introduction Though water has been the essential life supporting system ever since the inception of life on the planet Earth, it has become a rather more critical input in modern-day life. The issues of water use efficiency and sustainability of livelihood and life on earth are thus, closely interdependent. However, in the mad pursuit of material wealth, modern man is using this scarce resource in a reckless manner. In the name of growth and development, we are even consuming the water meant for our future generations and are putting the very sustainability of water and development at risk. Out of the total available water at the global level 97.5 percent is salt water. Thus, global fresh water reserves are only 2.5 percent. The further breakdown of fresh water reserves is: glaciers—68.70 percent, groundwater—30.10 percent and others—1.2 percent. Thus, ground and surface water amount to only 0.76 percent of the total water resources on the planet Earth. Fresh and renewable water is not only limited in supply but has numerous alternative and competing usages. It is in this context that Lionel Robbins’ scarcity definition of economics has become all the more relevant in the case of water. In view of the ever-increasing demand for water the global groundwater extraction rate has at least tripled over the past 50 years and continues to increase at an annual rate of 1 to 2 percent (UN, 2012). Despite this, about 92 percent of rain water is lost due

2

Chapter One

to surface run off and evaporation etc. More than one billion people in the world who are living in developing countries are water stressed (UN, 2015). Human demand for water mainly originates from their requirements for food, energy, and industry. Significantly, all these requirements have been on the rise, especially since the advent of the Industrial Revolution. The continuously increasing world population and modern-day development paradigm are raising the demand for food and other agricultural produce which, in turn, is leading to an ever-increasing demand for water. The world demand for water in agriculture and domestic sectors is expected to increase 1.5 times in 2030 as compared to 2010 and in the industrial sector it is expected to double. This, along with the impact of climate change, has led to serious uncertainties about the amount of water required to meet demand for food, energy and other human uses. It is significant to note that the right to adequate food was recognised by the UN General Assembly as long ago as 1966 in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). Most of the demand for water comes from agriculture. Agricultural water withdrawal accounts for 44 percent of total water withdrawal in OECD countries that rely heavily on irrigated agriculture. In the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China), agriculture accounts for 74 percent of water withdrawals, but this ranges from 20 percent in Russia to 87 percent in India. In less developed countries LDCs, the figure is more than 90 percent. However, in most of the countries water availability for agriculture is not only limited but also uncertain. According to Food and Agricultural Organisation FAO (2009), out of 311 million hectares of land under irrigation in the world, 281 million hectares (about 84%) are actually being irrigated. This corresponds to only 16 percent of all the cultivated land that contributes nearly 44 percent of the total global crop production. This means 84 percent of the arable land is still not under assured irrigation but 56 percent of the global demand for food is being met by this land. This implies that the world has the potential to take care of food and other needs for agricultural produce coming from the increasing population and the industrial sector provided we can bring the additional area under irrigation. Certainly, that would require additional water for irrigation. At the global level irrigation is by far the largest user of water. It used about 252 billion cubic metres (bcm) of surface and ground water withdrawals in 2013 which is equivalent to 6.5 percent of the global renewable fresh water resources flows (HLPE, 2015).

Global Water Scenario: An Overview

3

Just imagine, if we were to bring all the arable land under cultivation, what amount of water would we need? Would the world be able to meet the huge demand for water from the agriculture sector? But to feed the everincreasing population, the world will have to increase food production and, hence, bring a matching area under irrigation. Certainly, that would put an enormous additional burden on the already stressed water resources. At the same time, reliable irrigation is also essential to increase and stabilise incomes and provide livelihoods for a large number of marginal and small farmers and agricultural labourers. Besides agriculture, approximately 20 percent of the world’s freshwater withdrawals are used by industry, although this varies across regions and countries. The domestic water use is about 10 percent (UN, 2012). Significantly, global water demand has been projected to increase by 55 percent by 2050, mainly due to the growing demand for water from manufacturing, energy and domestic usages (UN, 2017). It has also been estimated that by 2050, the number of countries with water scarcity will be more than 50 and India will be on that list. About 2 billion people will be living under conditions of high water stress by 2050 (UNEP, 2001). Two-thirds of the world’s population are currently living in areas that experience water scarcity for at least one month a year (UN, 2017). About 40 percent of the global population living in river basins may experience severe water shortage especially in North and South Africa and South and Central Asia. It is estimated that manufacturing, thermal electricity and domestic demand will rise by 400 percent, 140 percent and 130 percent, respectively, by 2050. In such a scenario, there is little scope for increasing irrigation water use (HLPE, 2015). In view of the ever-increasing pressure on water and the emerging scarcity, it is often said that a future world war may be fought over water. Let us hope that sanity prevails, and water is used, harnessed, conserved and managed in an efficient, judicious and sustainable manner and the above prophecy does not come true. Besides, there is an urgent need to reduce; recycle and reuse the water in every usage of water across the globe. Sustainable development also depends on the extent and manner in which we use our water and other natural resources, especially those which are non-renewable. The judicious use of fresh water is, thus, a compulsion and not a choice. In this context the nexus between water, land, energy and food is rather a bigger challenge.

4

Chapter One

The poor people living in slums and illegal settlements have little access to improved sources of water as compared to others who live in planned and formal settlements (WHO, 2017). In fact, access to safe drinking water and improved sanitation continues to be a serious challenge in most of the developing countries (Bain et al., 2014). As a consequence, 80 percent of illnesses are linked to unsafe drinking water and unhygienic sanitation conditions (UN, 2003). Approximately, 50 percent of hospital beds are occupied by patients suffering from water-related diseases. As a matter of fact, the poor are subject to multi-pronged vulnerability and risk and do not have adequate access to improved drinking water and they often face food insecurity. Their water and food insecurity are not simply because of the shortage of water and food but mainly because of unaffordability. In the absence of adequate access to water, even their livelihood is at risk. Such people are often victims of macro-economic policies and the market-driven development model in which without adequate earnings and purchasing power they cannot afford, even to purchase the basic necessities of life. Significantly, 83 percent of the world population, living in the low-income countries, is below the poverty line (head count ratio) and 48 percent of people in the lower middle-income countries are earning $2.50 PPP daily (World Bank, 2014). In order to manage the macro-economic risks, the world would have to build stronger institutions for better policy outcomes. “The increasing complexity of macro-economic management necessitates continuous strengthening of institutional capacity” (WDR, 2014: 243). The occurrence of natural hazards (droughts, earth quakes, floods and storms) has increased from 2,561 during 1993–2002 to 3,132 during 2003–12 (World Bank, 2014a). Increasing urbanisation also puts a lot of pressure on water resources. A significant proportion of the population is still without safe drinking water, electricity and improved sanitation facilities. Between 2009 and 2050, the world population is expected to increase by 2.3 billion, from 6.8 to 9.1 billion (UNDESA, 2011). The rising proportion of the urban population would also lead to a higher and higher demand for water. Out of the total world population of 7,346.7 million in 2015, 54 percent were living in urban areas. About 11 percent of urban people did not have access to improved drinking water and 36 percent were without access to improved sanitation (World Bank, 2017). There is a positive and high correlation between size of the population on the one hand and demand for agricultural and industrial produce, energy and water use in other activities. Most of the demand for water is, thus, an indirect demand.

Globaal Water Scenarrio: An Overvieew

5

The relationnship betweenn population an nd water conssumption show ws a very high correlaation as is eviident from the long-term ttrend for the period of 110 years (1900–2010), as depicted in i figure 1.1. The populattion trend growth rate between 19000 and 1950 was w also upw ward but not that t high. During thesse 50 years of o the 20th cen ntury, the waater withdraw wal varied between 600 and 1700 cubic kms per year. As ccompared to it, water withdrawal increased froom about 1,4 400 cubic km ms per year to around 4,300 cubicc kms, an incrrease of abou ut 3 times, duuring the sam me period. Thus, the w water withdraawal growth rate has beenn higher than n that of population. Interestingly,, it is equally y true about tthe period 1900–1950. During this period, the population p in ncreased by aaround 1.87 times and world waterr increased by around 2 timees. Figure 1.1: Global popu ulation and water withdraw wal over timee

Source: FAO. 2016 (AQUASTAT databasee. http://www.faao.org/nr/water//aquastat/data/q query/index.htm ml?lang=en, rettrieved on 29-09-2017).

1.2 Globall Response to Water S Scarcity In recognitioon of the eveer-increasing demand d for w water and the emerging threat of w water insecuritty, the United d Nations deeclared 22nd March M as World Wateer Day. The United U Nation ns Conferencee on Environm ment and Developmennt (Rio Earthh Summit, 199 92) decided tto observe this day as World Wateer Day. The same was adop pted by the U UN in its 1993 3 General

6

Chapter One

Assembly Session. Since then this day of the year has been observed as World Water Day. This is one of the important responses of the global community to conserve the scarce and precious natural resource which is the lifeline of every living being on the planet Earth. The major objective of the United Nations was to generate awareness and sensitise people about the non-renewability of fresh water and, hence, conserve, harvest, reduce, recycle and reuse this precious natural resource. On 20th December 2000, the UN General Assembly proclaimed that the year 2003 would be observed as the International Year of Fresh Water. The Rio Earth Summit of 1992 and the UN Millennium Declaration of 2002 led to the publication of the World Water Development Report. On 23rd December 2003, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution to observe 2005–15 as the International Decade for Action and adopted the motto: “Water for Life”. Again, in July 2010, the UN General Assembly adopted another resolution recognising the Human Right to Water and Sanitation. The year 2013 was declared as the International Year of Water Cooperation; maybe because of the increasing inter-country and intracountry water disputes. Perhaps this is the reason the UN is taking a serious note of the importance of water. The essence behind it is to sensitise the global community to the importance of water and its judicious use. “Caring for our Water Resources is Everybody’s Business” was the theme of the 1994 World Water Day. In 1998, it was “Groundwater—The Invisible Resource” and in 2000, it was “Water for the twenty-first century”. “Water for Development” was the motto in 2002. In 2007 the slogan was “Coping with Water Scarcity”, “Water and Food Security”, “Water and Sustainable Development” and “Water and Jobs” were some of the other very important slogans coined by the UN for some of the other World Water Days. The theme of the “World Water Day,” for 2015 was “Water and Sustainable Development”, “Safe Water for Communities” was the theme of the 2016 World Water Day. According to the UN (2015), water is at the core of sustainable development. Water resources, and the range of services they provide, underpin poverty reduction, economic growth and environmental sustainability. From food and energy security to human and environmental health, water contributes to improvements in social well-being and inclusive growth, including the livelihoods of billions of people across the world. The main message of the UN (2017) World Development Report is:

Global Water Scenario: An Overview

7

“Improved wastewater management generates social, environmental and economic benefits, and is essential to achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”. The report further reveals that over 80 percent of the world’s waste water and 95 percent in some least developed countries is released to the environment without treatment. This has serious negative consequences for the marine environment. On the contrary, improved waste water management generates enormous social, environment and economic benefits essential for achieving the 2030 sustainable development agendas (UN, 2017).

The global scientific community is also in search of life on other planets and the first sign of life is considered to be water. The ancient civilisations, too, settled and developed around rivers and other water bodies. In fact, water is a prerequisite for every type of security, especially food security. Interestingly, demand for food and water go hand in hand. The so-called green revolution owes much to the adequate and assured supply of water. It is mainly because of the assured supply of water that the high-yielding varieties of seeds give a higher yield. The everincreasing demand for water is also coming from the non-agricultural sector in a big way. Rapid industrialisation, increasing urbanisation, changing lifestyle, decreasing arable land and intensive agriculture have put even more pressure on water. Globally, 263 trans-boundary lakes and water bodies account for an estimated 60 percent of fresh water flows. Besides, 300 ground water aquifers are trans-boundary. About 700 bilateral, regional or multilateral water agreements in more than 110 basins are already in existence. They cover various types of activities and objectives, from regulation and development of water resources. There are strong conflicts and clash of interests among the riparian and non-riparian territories. Even the multinational companies are strongly eyeing the fresh water resources across thecontinents and countries. The scramble for water and other natural resources (especially oil) has generated a large number of inter-continent, intra-continents, inter-countries, intra-country and intra-regional conflicts over water. Certainly, water governance and management will have to go beyond national boundaries.

1.3 Sector-Wise Water Requirement The global projection for irrigation by various agencies and individuals provides a mixed scenario for irrigation water withdrawals. The OECD estimates show that the global demand for irrigation is expected to decline from 2,874 cubic kilometres in 2000 to 2,631 cubic kilometres in 2030.

Chapter One

8

Alcamo et al. (2007) have also projected a moderate decline in demand for irrigation water withdrawals. However, all other estimates indicate higher water withdrawals for irrigation in 2030 as compared to 2010 (Table 1.1). Table 1.1: Global projection for irrigation water withdrawals (cubic kilometres) Source

2000

2030

OECD (2008b) Shen et al (2008) IWMI (2007) Alcamo et al (2007) Shiklomanov (2000) Seckler et al (2000) Alcamo (2000) IFPRI (2008)

2874 2658

2631 3388–36652

Change 2000– 2030 (%) -8.45 +27 to +38

2630 2498

2800–34002 2341–23664

+6 to +29 -5 to -6

2488

3097

24

2469

2915

18

24653,4 2245

2292–25592 2491– 25941,2

-7 to +14 +11 to +15

Source: OECD-FAO: (2009) Agricultural Outlook 2009–2018. 1. Projection year is 2030 instead of 2025. 2. Projections show data for a range of different scenarios. 3. Base year is 1995 instead of 2000. 4. Projections include total agricultural water withdrawals (including water for livestock).

Out of the world’s total 42,810 cubic kms internal renewable fresh water resources (IRWR), 9 percent (3,853 cubic kms) is abstracted per annum. The share of fresh water withdrawals in total internal renewable fresh water resources (IRWR) is 20 percent in Asia. North America, with 10 percent withdrawal, comes next to Asia. Africa, Europe and Central America are the distant neighbours of Asia and North America in terms of fresh water withdrawal. Out of the total global water withdrawal of 4,001 cubic kms, 3,835 cubic kms (95.85%) is fresh water withdrawal. Clearly, the share of direct use of treated municipal wastewater and direct use of agricultural drainage water is too small. The recycling and reuse of water is also a very small (rather negligible) proportion of the total water withdrawal (Table 1.2).

23

17

21

8

36

69

33

234

5

464

Africa

Asia

Oceania

World

768

4

253

9

181

26

6

Km3/ year 289

19

15

10

4

54

12

18

47

%

Industrial

2769

16

2069

184

84

154

20

Km3/ year 241

69

65

81

81

25

71

59

40

%

Agricultural

4001

25

2556

227

334

216

33

610

Km3/ year

Total water withdrawal *

3853

25

2421

220

332

216

33

605

Km3/ year

Total fresh water withdrawal

9

3

20

6

5

2

5

10

%

Freshwater withdrawal as % of IRWR

42810

902

11865

3931

6576

12724

735

6077

100.0

2.1

27.7

9.2

15.4

29.7

1.7

14.2

5829

29225

2697

3309

8895

30428

8397

12537

Internal renewable freshwater resources (IRWR) Volume % of Per per year world capita in fresh year water 2015 resource Km3 % m3

9

Source: FAO, 2016 (AQUASTAT databasehttp://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/data/query/index.html?lang=en., retrieved on 2909-2017). *Includes use of desalinated water, direct use of treated municipal wastewater and direct use of agricultural drainage water.

12

20

9

15

13

NorthAmerica Central America and the Caribbean South America Europe

%

Municipal

Total withdrawal by sector

Km3/ year 79

Continent (s)

Table 1.2: Water withdrawal by sectors, around 2010

Global Water Scenario: An Overview

10

Chapter One

Significantly, 69 percent of the total water withdrawal is used by the agricultural sector. This share is 81 percent each in Asia and Africa. In South America, agriculture accounts for 71 percent of the total annual withdrawal of water. The corresponding share in Oceania and Central America is 65 percent and 59 percent, respectively. As regards the industrial sector, the world average is 19 percent of the global total withdrawal of water per annum. The corresponding share in Europe and America is 54 percent and 47 percent, respectively. The industrial sector in Central America and Oceania account for 18 percent and 15 percent, respectively, in the total water withdrawals. In South America and Asia, this share is 12 percent and 10 percent, respectively. As regards the municipal sector share in the total global annual withdrawal of water, it is 12 percent globally. Across the continents, it varies from 15 percent in Africa to 23 percent in Central America. In another set of continents, it ranges between 9 percent in Asia and 13 percent in North America. The per capita per annum availability of fresh water was 5,829 cubic metres in the world in 2010. It was highest (30,428 cubic metres) in South America and followed by Oceania (29,225 cubic metres). North America comes next, with 12,537 cubic metres. Asia, with only 2,691 cubic metres per annum, stands at the lowest rank (Table1.2). The 12 counties listed in table 1.3 abstract more than 70 percent of the global groundwater extraction. India, with 251 cubic kms groundwater extraction in 2010, ranked first; it is more than double than the combined withdrawals of China and the USA. Pakistan and Iran abstracted groundwater to the tune of 65 cubic kms and 60 cubic kms in the year 2010. In the case of Bangladesh and Mexico, it was 35 cubic kms and 29 cubic kms, respectively. It is mainly because of low water use efficiency that water withdrawal in India is much higher than many other countries. The water use efficiency in India is only around 38 percent as compared to 45 percent in Malaysia and between 50–60 percent in Japan, China, Taiwan and Israel (GoI, 2013b). Across the countries, agriculture is the largest consumer of water, as is evident from table 1.3.

160 996

127 017

79 109

Bangladesh

Mexico

Iran

14

14

23

60

29

35

64

15

13

112

112

251

Km /Year

3

Extraction

33.37

81.88

88.00

92.37

76.69

87.82

93.98

66.83

73.82

36.06

64.61

90.41

Agricultural

24.46

11.59

9.00

6.66

14.25

10.04

5.26

18.92

15.46

12.79

12.19

7.36

Municipal

42.17

6.53

3.00

1.18

9.07

2.15

0.76

14.25

10.72

51.15

23.20

2.23

Industrial

Total Water Withdrawal (%)

Source: FAO. 2016 (AQUASTAT database. http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/data/query/index.html?lang=en, retrieved on29-09-2017). Note: Agriculture (Irrigation + Livestock).

59 798

188 925

Pakistan

Italy

126 573

Japan

31 540

78 666

Turkey

257 564

321 774

United States

Indonesia

1 407 306

China

Saudi Arabia

1 311 051

(in,000s)

Population 2015

India

Country

Table 1.3: Country-wise comparison of total water withdrawal by sectors (2003–2011)

Global Water Scenario: An Overview 11

12

Chapter One

During 2003–2011, agriculture accounted for 90.41 percent of total water withdrawal in India. The corresponding withdrawals in the case of Pakistan and Iran were 93.98 percent and 92.37 percent, respectively. The share of agriculture in water withdrawal in the case of Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and Bangladesh varied between 82 and 88 percent. Agriculture in Mexico and Turkey accounted for 76.69 percent and 73.82 percent, respectively. The share of agriculture in China in total water withdrawal is 64.61 percent while in Japan it is 66.83 percent. The corresponding figures for the USA and Italy are 36 percent and 33.37 percent respectively. It is, thus evident that though agriculture is the major consumer of water; there is wide variation across the countries. The industrial sector, too, is an important consumer of water in many of the developed countries. Its share in the USA is 51.15 percent and in Italy it is 42.17 percent (Table 1.3). Significantly, industry’s share in total water withdrawal in China is 23.20 percent. The share of the industrial sector in water withdrawal in Mexico, Turkey and Japan is between 9 percent and 14 percent; in the rest of the countries the share of industry is quite low. The share of the municipal sector ranges between 5 percent (Pakistan) and 24 percent (Italy). It is between 10 percent and 19 percent in Bangladesh, Indonesia, China, USA, Mexico and Turkey. It is, thus, evident that the industrial and municipal sectors, too, are emerging as significant consumers of groundwater withdrawal. This is bound to increase further as the world population, especially the urban population, is increasing at a fast rate. It is significant to note that surface water has been the major (rather only) source in many parts of the world for,000s of years and ground water remained a negligibly developed resource until the late 19th century. However, there occurred an unprecedented silent revolution in ground water extraction in the twentieth century (Leams and Martínez, 2005; aVaidyanathan, 2013). The intensive ground water extraction began in the first half of the twentieth century in a limited number of countries including Italy, Mexico, Spain and the USA, and then expanded worldwide since the mid-1960s (Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agricultural, 2007). This fundamentally changed the role of ground water in human society, particularly in the irrigation sector where it triggered an agricultural groundwater revolution (Giordano and Vilholth, 2007). One of the significant factors behind the increasing use of groundwater is its reliability as a source as compared to surface water. This is likely to result in higher economic returns per unit of water used, as

Global Water Scenario: An Overview

13

demonstrated by studies in Spain (Leamas and Garrido, 2007) and India (Shah, 2007). The boom was mainly driven by population growth and the consequent increasing demand for water and food (UN, 2012). Nonetheless, it must be remembered that all the water resources/aquifers are non-renewable and hence they need to be managed properly. In the arid and semi-arid zones numerous water systems are not resilient enough to accommodate storage under intensive groundwater development. This applies as well to many aquifers currently being recharged (Foster and Loucks, 2006). In the absence of comparable recharge there may occur a progressive depletion of groundwater. Konikow and Kendy (2005) estimated that about 700 to 800 cubic kms of groundwater has been depleted from aquifers in the USA during the 20th century. “Increased global trade in agricultural commodities has boosted fresh water consumption. The export of ‘virtual water’, embedded in products sold abroad, has increasingly affected local communities and ecosystem, especially in the arid regions. Recent initiatives to certify agricultural production are showing a rapidly growing interest in considering water issues within schemes of quality assurance, sustainable production and fair trade… Private standards in general reinforce the political and market power of local water user communities and national governments. However, sustainability certification could also potentially enable local regional, national and international organisations of user communities to stake claims and negotiate to protect their water resources and livelihood” (Jeroen and Boelens, 2014: 1). Ground water is crucial for the livelihoods and the food security of 1.2 to 1.5 billion rural households in the poorest regions of Africa and Asia (Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture, 2007). It is evident from the details given above that the demand for water for various purposes is bound to increase in future. The multiplicity of problems in real life, shrinking freshwater availability and sustainability of water resources has raised many water issues on global scales. In fact, water is not “a” sector; it is the central thread across all the sectors and also the backbone of all types of developments. These issues are equally relevant at the regional and local levels. Certain key issues have been highlighted with respect to India in the next chapter.

CHAPTER TWO DEVELOPMENT AND USAGE OF WATER RESOURCES IN INDIA

2.1 Water Resources in India India had developed the practice of irrigation during the Indus Valley Civilisation (2500 BC). However, it got a real boost only after the severe famine in 1858 when the government took up construction of canal works on an extensive scale. Major river diversion works were undertaken in Uttar Pradesh, Punjab and South India. The report of the First Irrigation Commission, submitted in 1903, led to the execution of major irrigation works in India (Prasad, 2015). The 20th century; these are shown in table 2.1. Table 2.1: Estimates of water resources in India (billion cubic metres) Agency

Estimate in bcm

First Irrigation Commission (1902–03) Dr. A.N. Khosla (1949) Central Water and Power Commission (1954– 66) National Commission on Agriculture Central Water Commission (1988) Central Water Commission (1993)

1443 1673 1881

Deviation from 1869 bcm* -23% -10% +0.6%

1850 1880 1869

-1% +0.6% -

Source: Government of India, Planning Commission (2008) Eleventh Five-Year Plan 2007–2012, Agriculture, Rural Development, Industry, Service and Physical Infrastructure, Vol. III, p. 44. * 1869 bcm is the currently accepted estimate; bcm: billion cubic metres

The Central Water Commission of India in 1993 came up with the estimate of 1869 billion cubic metres (bcms) of water resources which has

Development and Usage of Water Resources in India

15

been accepted as the near real estimate. The First Irrigation Commission (1902–03), estimated the water resources in India to be 1443 bcms. This was 23 percent less than the accepted estimates. Dr. A.N. Khosla (1949) Commission’s estimates were 1673 bcms; 10 percent less than the accepted estimates. The Central Water and Power Commission (1954–66) estimated that the water resources in India were 1881 bcms, very close to the accepted estimates. The Central Water Commission of India in 1988 estimated that there were 1880 bcms of water resources in India. The inadequacies in the scope, coverage and availability of data, collected by various state and central government agencies is, however, a serious constraint in estimating the ground water development and management (GoI, 2013b). The per capita availability of fresh water in India declined from 3450 cubic metres in 1951 to about 1250 cubic metres in 1999 and is predicted to reduce to 760 cubic metres in 2015 GoI, 1999). Currently, the per capita availability of renewable fresh water resources in India is 1146 cubic metres whereas the world average is 5926 cubic metres (World Bank, 2017). The fresh water withdrawal in India, however, was 33.9 percent of the total renewable water resources during 2005–2014 as compared to 6.9 percent of the world average (UNDP, 2016). The South Asia average was 23.9 percent. After independence in 1947, ground water emerged as the preferred source of irrigation and other purposes in India. Irrigation accounts for 92 percent of total ground water use. About 55 percent of the irrigation, nearly 85 percent of domestic and other water requirements in rural areas and 50 percent of requirements in urban areas and of industries are met through ground water (Prasad, op.cit). In order to improve water management and governance, the Government of India formulated national water policies in the years 1987, 2002 and 2012. According to National Water Policy of India (NWP, 2002), “Water is a prime natural resource, a basic human need and a precious national asset.” In its 2012 water policy, besides so many other important issues, the government laid a specific emphasis on the deteriorating quality of water and the declining water table in India (GoI, 2012). Although water is a state (provincial) subject in India, the central government has every right to guide and manage the inter-state water disputes. Even the Easement Act of 1882 provides enough scope for state intervention and control over water. As per the Supreme Court of India’s land mark judgement of 10 December 1996 the state control of ground water is covered under the

Chapter Two

16

Environment (protection) Act of 1986. The setting up of the Central Ground Water Authority in January 1997 for regulating water extraction was also under the purview of the above cited judgement of the Supreme Court (Prasad, op.cit). The sector-wise water requirement, as per the estimates generated by MoWR and NCIWRD, is given in table 2.2. The requirement of water for various sectors has been assessed on the assumption that the irrigation efficiency will increase to 60 percent from the present level of 35–40 percent (GoI, Planning Commission, 2008). Compared to the year 2010, the share of water requirement for irrigation has been on the decline. Irrigation accounted for 84.62 percent and 78.45 percent of the water in India in 2010 according to MoWR and NCIWRD estimates, respectively. The respective estimated share of irrigation in 2025 would be 83.26 percent and 72.48 percent. In the year 2050, the respective estimates for irrigation are 74.08 percent and 68.39 percent. Table 2.2: Future water requirement for various sectors in India (bcm) Sector

Standing Sub-Committee of NCIWRD MoWR 2010 2025 2050 2010 2025 2050 Irrigation 688 910 1072 557 611 807 (84.62) (83.26) (74.08) (78.45) (72.48) (68.39) Drinking 56 73 102 43 62 111 Water (6.88) (6.68) (7.05) (6.06) (7.35) (9.41) Industry 12 23 63 37 67 81 (1.47) (2.10) (4.35) (5.21) (7.95) (6.86) Energy 5 15 130 19 33 70 (0.61) (1.37) (8.98) (2.68) (3.91) (5.93) Others 52 72 80 54 70 111 (6.39) (6.59) (5.53) (7.60) (8.30) (9.41) Total 813 1093 1447 710 843 1180 (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) Source: Government of India, Planning Commission (2008) Eleventh Five-Year Plan 2007–2012, Agriculture, Rural Development, Industry, Service and Physical Infrastructure, Vol. III, p. 44. MoWR: Ministry of Water Resources NCIWRD: National Commission on Integrated Water Resource Development Note: Figures in parenthesis represent percentage share

Though, the estimates of MoWR are significantly higher than that of the NCIWRD, both the sources have projected a decline in the percentage

Development and Usage of Water Resources in India

17

share of water for irrigation over the period of time. The absolute quantity of water required for irrigation is, however, higher for 2025 and 2050 as compared to 2010. According to MoWR estimates, irrigation would require 1072 bcms of water in 2050, as compared to 688 bcms in 2010. The corresponding estimates of the NCIWRD are 807 bcms and 557 bcms. The share of drinking water would increase from 6.88 percent (56 bcms) in 2010 to 7.05 percent (102 bcms) in 2050, as per the MoWR estimates. The corresponding estimates by the NCIWRD are 6.06 percent (43 bcms) and 9.41 percent (111 bcms). Despite the fact that there is a significant difference in both the estimates, both in terms of relative share and absolute quantity, there would be higher demand for drinking water in 2050. Industry’s water requirement would be significantly higher in 2025 and 2050, according to both the estimates. However, the MoWR’s estimates are much lower than that of the NCIWRD estimates. According to the MoWR, the water share of industry would increase from 1.47 percent (12 bcms) in 2010 to 4.35 percent (63 bcms) in 2050. In contrast NCIWRD’s estimates put the corresponding share of industry at 5.21 percent (37 bcms) and 6.86 percent (81 bcms). Despite a significant difference in both the sources both have projected a higher demand for water in the industrial sector during the next 30 years or so. The energy sector is another important consumer of water. According to MoWR, the energy sector would require 8.98 percent (130 bcms) of water in 2050 as compared to 0.61 percent (5 bcms) in 2010. According to NCIWRD the energy sector’s requirement for water would be 5.93 percent (70 bcms) in 2050 as compared to 2.68 percent (19 bcms) in 2010. Interestingly, the two estimates on the energy sector’s requirement for water differ significantly. Nonetheless, this sector, too, would be requiring a very high amount of water during the next 30 years or so. In addition to above-mentioned sources of demand for water, there are other (miscellaneous) uses of water. According to the MoWR estimates, water requirement in such uses would increase to 80 bcms (5.53%) in 2050, from 52 bcms (6.39%) in 2010. The corresponding estimates by the NCIWRD are 9.41 percent (11 bcms) and 7.60 percent (54 bcms). According to the former source, the relative requirement of water for miscellaneous use would decline by 0.86 percentage points in 2050 as compared to 2010. On the contrary NCIWRD’s estimates say that the relative share of water requirement for miscellaneous use would increase by 1.81 percentage points. Nevertheless, the water requirement for miscellaneous use, in the absolute sense, is bound to rise in the foreseeable

18

Chapter Two

future. It is significant to note that untreated waste water in Indian cities is also a serious concern. About 70 percent of water in class-I and class-II cities goes untreated (GoI, 2013b, Vol. 1: 163). This could have been recycled and reused had it been treated. In turn, it would have reduced the pressure on fresh water. In other words, it would have been a virtual increase in water supply. Given the expanding size of the Indian economy and population and the higher GDP growth rate, the increase in demand for water is only natural. The ever-increasing demand for food, industrial goods and energy would lead to higher and higher demand for water in the country. The estimates generated by the MoWR and the NCIWRD have also made it clear that the demand for water will be significantly higher in the near future as well. According to MoWR estimates, the total demand for water in the country will rise to 1447 bcms in 2050 from 813 bcms in 2010; an increase of 77.98 percent. However, the NCIWRD has put the demand for water at 1180 bcms in 2050 as compared to 710 bcms in 2010; an increase of 66.20 percent. Despite the higher requirement for water in future, the estimated water resources of India are much higher than the requirement (see Table 2.1 and 2.2). The estimated amount of water resources (1869 bcms) exceed the projected demand for water which is 1447 bcms (MoWR) and 1180 bcms (NCIWRD). In the case of the former, the water resources would be higher by 24.02 percent while in the case of the latter, the water resources would be higher by 36.86 percent even in the year 2050. This indicates that India is in a comfortable position as far as aggregate availability of water and aggregate projected demand for water is concerned. In other words, the picture is very rosy and there is no need to worry or panic. However, given the geographical size of the country and wide regional variations in water resources this may not be the situation. According to Vaidyanathan and Sivasubramanian (2004), the increasing demand for water in agriculture and rapidly growing demand for non-agricultural sectors is likely to push the total water requirements near to the of limits of utilisable supply by 2025 and the potential may well be exhausted by 2050. Nonetheless, the demand and supply gap is increasing rapidly. Some regions and states are already facing an acute shortage of water, even crisis like situation. The country is confronting with many inter-state water disputes, such as Cauvery in the southern part and SYL in the northern part of the country. Many states have recently witnessed an acute shortage of even drinking water.

Development and Usage of Water Resources in India

19

The interlinking of rivers and transfer of surplus water has been championed by many experts over time. The Union Ministry of Water Resources has identified 30 such links and pre-feasibility studies have also been completed for 10 such links. The total amount of water that can be transferred is estimated to be around 220 bcms. However, there are serious apprehensions about the actual availability of surplus water for many basins as future generation shall actually need all the water. There is also a question mark about the economic viability of such ambitious and large projects (GoI, Planning Commission, 2008). The Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal was constructed to transfer Sutlej River’s water from Punjab to Yamuna River in Haryana. The political leadership and people of Punjab, however, did not allow the flow of water in the canal and it is lying in a defunct and dilapidated condition for well over the decades. A lot of bad blood and ill will has been created between the states of Punjab and Haryana during this period (Ghuman, 2017). The political parties in both the states and parties in power at the centre have been doing politics over the division of river water ever since the reorganisation of Punjab on November 1, 1966. This has the effect of dividing people on the regional and communal lines with the object of attaining weightage in its favour in electoral politics (Dhillon, 1988 and Mann, 2003). The conflict over the division of Cauvery River’s water has also generated a lot of ill will between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu states of India. Many of the conflicts have taken a serious turn and pose a significant threat to the economic growth, social stability and health of the ecosystem. The worst victims are likely to be the poorest of the poor as well as rivers, wetlands and aquifers (Gujja, and Shaik, 2006, Gujja et al., 2006).

2.2 Irrigation and Flood Control in India India started implementing its first Five-Year Plan in 1951 focusing on multipurpose development of major and medium irrigation projects for the purpose of irrigation and generation of power. India invested an amount of Rs. 376 crore on the development of major and medium irrigation projects, and Rs. 66 crore on minor irrigation and command area development programmes during the 1st Five-Year Plan period. During the 2nd FiveYear Plan an amount of Rs. 542 crore was spent on irrigation, of which Rs. 380 crore on major and medium irrigation projects and Rs. 162 crore on minor irrigation and command area development programmes. Out of the First Plan’s total outlay, irrigation got 22.55 percent. Clearly, development of irrigation got the top-most priority in the 1st Five-Year Plan of the country. Though the share of irrigation in the total plan outlay

Chapter Two

20

of the second and third five-year plans was between 11.60 percent and 11.88 percent, yet, the absolute amount was much higher than that in the first five-year plan (Table 2.3). Table 2.3: Plan-wise expenditure on irrigation and flood control in India: 1951–2012 (Rs. in crore) Plan Period

Major & Medium Irrigation

MI & CAD

Total Irrigation

Flood Control

Percent Share of Irrigation

13

Total Plan Outlay for all Sectors 1,960

I Plan (1951– 56) II Plan (1956– 61) III Plan (1961–66) Annual Plans (1966–69) IV Plan (1969–74) V Plan (1974– 78) Annual Plans (1978–80) VI Plan (1980–85) VII Plan (19859–0) Annual Plans (1990–92) VIII Plan (1992–97) IX Plan (1997–2002) X Plan (2002– 07) XI Plan (2007–12) (Projection) Total

376

66

442

380

162

542

48

4,672

11.60

576

443

1,019

82

8,577

11.88

430

561

991

42

6,625

14.96

1,242

1,173

2,416

162

15,779

15.31

2,516

1,410

3,926

299

28,653

13.70

2,079

1,345

3,424

330

22,950

14.92

7,369

4,160

11,529

787

1,09,292

10.55

11,107

7,627

18,734

942

2,18,730

8.56

5,459

3,650

9,109

461

1,23,120

7.40

21,072

13,885

34,957

1,692

4,83,060

7.23

49,289

13,760

83,049

3,038

9,41,041

8.82

83,647

16,459

1,00,106

4,344

16,18,460

6.18

1,65,350

46,350

2,11,700

20,100

36,44,718

5.81

3,50,892

1,11,051

4,81,944

32,340

72,27,637

6.67

22.55

Source: Government of India, Planning Commission (2013) Twelfth Five-Year Plan 2012–2017, Faster, More Inclusive and Sustainable Growth, Vol. I, p. 181. MI: Minor Irrigation, CAD: Command Area Development

Development and Usage of Water Resources in India

21

The subsequent two five-year plans, though allocated quite a higher amount to the irrigation sector; the share of irrigation in the total outlay was between 13.7 percent and 15.31 percent. The three-year period (1966– 69) of the annual plans also allocated 14.96 percent of the plan outlay to irrigation. The irrigation accounted for 10.55 percent in the sixth five-year plan (1985–90). Thereafter, irrigation slid down to a lower priority as far as relative share in the plan outlay was concerned, but the absolute amount spent on irrigation was quite high. During the first 11 five-year plans (1951–2012), India spent Rs. 4, 81,502 crore on the development of the irrigation sector. Another Rs. 32,327 crore was spent on flood control (Table 2.3). The physical outcome of the expenditure on irrigation during the various five-year plans (1951–2007) is shown in table 2.4. Prior to the first five-year plan (1951–56), India had completed 74 major projects and 143 medium projects. The country completed 5 major projects (out of 44 taken up) and 35 medium projects (out of 165 taken up) during the first plan. Till the end of the 11th Plan, India had taken up 488 major projects, out of which 305 were completed. In the case of medium projects, 1,023 out of 1,282 were completed. Thus, the country has developed a large number of major and medium irrigation projects and generated a large capacity for irrigation and hydro-power. As a result of these projects, the country is now having a large irrigated area under canals and tube-wells. However, about 66 percent of the area under agriculture is still without assured irrigation. The gross irrigated area in India is only 87.23 million hectares (MH). With an average irrigation intensity of 140 percent, the actual net irrigated area is likely to be 62.31 million hectares, which is around 44 percent of the net sown area (142 MH). Even after achieving the ultimate irrigation potential of 139.89 MHs (considering the average irrigation intensity of 140 percent), the ultimate irrigated area in the country would be only 70 percent of the net sown area (GoI, Planning Commission, 2008, p.46). This means 30 percent of the cultivated area would remain without irrigation even after exploiting the ultimate irrigation of the country.

Chapter Two

37 24 0

138 137 12

4 15 8

4 1 2

157 71 2

114 391 69

172 166 27

81 77 22

Total Projects Taken Up Completed 217 217 221 42 140 110 83 79 39 51

(Rs. in crore)

48 30 22 121 79 66 27 13 97 109 40 46 30 179 102 66 42 5 130 116 1023 261 122 2031 1450 Twelfth Five-Year Plan 2012–2017, Faster, More Inclusive and

7 20 3

ERM Projects Taken Up Completed 0 0 12 3 5 5 7 7 1 3

62 70 18

Medium Projects Taken Up Completed 143 143 165 34 102 85 44 61 27 43

Pre-Plan I Plan II Plan III Plan Annual Plans (1966–69) IV Plan 33 15 74 V Plan 68 6 303 Annual Plans 11 2 55 (1978–80) VI Plan 31 30 89 VII Plan 11 14 36 Annual Plans 2 7 0 (1990–92) VIII Plan 19 9 72 IX Plan 32 30 38 X Plan 49 32 84 XI Plan 38 45 50 Total 488 305 1282 Source: Government of India, Planning Commission (2013) Sustainable Growth, Vol. I, p. 181.

Major Projects Taken Up Completed 74 74 44 5 33 20 32 11 11 5

Table 2.4: Plan-wise proliferation of schemes in major and medium sector in India

22

Development and Usage of Water Resources in India

23

It is clear from the foregoing consideration/view that there is an urgent need to bring more and more area under irrigation. This would be possible by bridging the gap between the actual utilisation and the ultimate irrigation potential. For this the surface rain water or run off water need to be harvested as despite the construction of dams and a CAD, very large proportion of surface water flows as waste to the sea. On the eve of the first five-year plan (1951), out of the total annual flow of surface water equivalent to 1,356 million acre feet (maf), only 76 maf (5.6%) was being used for irrigation (Government of India, 1953). The situation has not improved much even now (WRIS, 2015). The per capita availability of surface water in India declined from 2,309 cubic metres (cums) in 1991 to 1,902 cums in 2001 and further to 1,588 cums in 2010. It may further decline to 1,401 cums in 2025. It is really alarming to note that the per capita water availability in India has decreased from 5,200 cums in 1951 to 1588 cums in 2010 (WRIS, 2015). However, India created irrigation potential for 90.98 million hectares of agricultural land during the period of first 11 five-year plans (1951–2012), whereas on the eve of the first five-year plan it was 22.60 million hectares. Significantly, the major irrigation potential was created by developing the major and medium irrigation projects after independence, as is evident from table 2.5. The potential created by the minor irrigation projects was split into surface water and ground water potential. The potential created by developing ground water was for 49.40 million hectares. The utilisation of potential created has, however, been on the decline over the period of time (Table 2.5). The utilisation of the potential was 100 percent on the eve of the first fiveyear plan. During the period of the first five-year plan, it was 93.3 percent. The potential utilisation remained between 93 percent and 96 percent during 1955–78. Since, the 6th five-year plan, it started declining and remained between 85 percent and 90 percent till the 10th plan. During the 11th Plan period (2007–12), the utilisation of the potential was 79.4 percent. Thus, underutilisation of the irrigation potential is emerging as a serious challenge for the country. It has an adverse impact on the agriculture sector in general and total factor productivity in particular. Besides, being a national loss, it is resulting in inefficient water usage and hence a drag on the agricultural development and overall development of the economy. Such a scenario is not good for the livelihood of the rural poor.

Chapter Two

24

Table 2.5: Plan-wise irrigation potential created and utilised in India (In million hectares) Plan

Up to 1951 Pre-Plan I Plan (1951–56)

Potential Created (Cumulative) Major Minor Total & S.W. G.W. Medium 9.70 6.40 6.50 22.6 12.20 6.43 7.63 26.26

Potential Utilised (Cumulative) Total Percentage 22.60 25.04

100.0 93.3

II Plan (1956–61) 14.33 6.45 8.30 29.08 27.80 95.6 III Plan (1961–66) 16.57 6.48 10.52 33.57 32.17 95.8 Annual Plans 18.10 6.50 12.50 37.10 35.75 96.4 (1966–69) IV Plan (1969–74) 20.70 7.00 16.50 44.20 41.89 94.8 V Plan (1974–78) 24.72 7.50 19.80 52.02 48.46 93.2 Annual Plans 26.61 8.00 22.00 56.61 52.64 92.1 (1978–80) VI Plan (1980–85) 27.70 9.70 27.82 65.22 58.82 90.2 VII Plan (1985–90) 29.92 10.90 35.62 76.44 68.59 89.7 Annual Plans 30.74 11.46 38.89 81.09 72.85 89.8 (1990–92) VIII Plan (1992–97) 32.95 12.51 40.80 86.26 77.21 89.5 IX Plan (1997– 37.05 13.60 43.30 93.95 81.00 86.2 2002) X Plan (2002–07) 41.64 14.31 46.11 102.77 87.23 84.9 XI Plan (2007–12) 47.41 15.72 49.40 113.24 89.94 79.4 Source: Government of India, Planning Commission (2013) Twelfth Five-Year Plan 2012–2017, Faster, More Inclusive and Sustainable Growth, Vol. I, p. 181. S.W-Surface Water, G.W—Ground Water Note: The underutilisation of the potential led to the command area development and water management programme (CADP) in 1974–75

2.3 State-wise Irrigation Potential and Groundwater Resources The state-wise irrigation potential indicates that Uttar Pradesh has irrigation potential equal to 29,635,000 hectares, followed by Madhya Pradesh (16,214,000 hectares), Andhra Pradesh (11,260,000 hectares) and Bihar (10,888,000 hectares). The irrigation potential ranges between 5,128 and 8,952,000 hectares in the states of Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Punjab, Karnataka, Gujarat and West Bengal (Table 2.6). It has been observed that

Development and Usage of Water Resources in India

25

barring a few states, major and medium irrigation potential accounts for a larger share in the total irrigation potential in many of the states in India. Punjab, the grand success story of the green revolution, is highly dependent on the potential created by the major & medium irrigation potential as well as ground water. As regards surface water, there is irrigation potential only for 50,000 hectares in Punjab. Haryana, too, is mainly dependent on the major and medium irrigation potential. Only 50,000-hectare irrigation potential is coming from surface water. It may be due to non-harnessing and non-harvesting of the surface water, especially rain water, which may be going as waste to the sea. Table 2.6: State-wise ultimate irrigation potential created in India (‘000 hectares) States/UTs

Major & Medium Irrigation Projects

Andhra Pradesh Arunachal Assam Bihar Chhattisgarh Goa Gujarat Haryana Himachal Pradesh Jammu & Kashmir Jharkhand Karnataka Kerala Madhya Pradesh Maharashtra Manipur Meghalaya Mizoram Nagaland Odisha Punjab Rajasthan Sikkim Tamil Nadu Tripura Uttar Pradesh Uttrakhand West Bengal

5000 0 970 5224 1147 62 3000 3000 50 250 1276 2500 1000 4853 4100 135 20 0 10 3600 3000 2750 20 1500 100 12154 346 2300

Minor Irrigation Projects Surface 2300 150 1000 1544 81 25 347 50 235 400 354 900 800 2111 1200 100 85 65 70 1000 50 600 50 1200 100 1186 14 1300

Ground 3960 18 900 4120 490 2756 1462 68 708 830 2574 879 9250 3652 369 63 5 5 4203 2917 1778 0 2832 81 16295 504 3318

Sub-total 6260 168 1900 5664 571 25 3103 1512 303 1108 1184 3474 1679 11361 4852 469 148 70 75 5203 2967 2378 50 4032 181 17481 518 4618

Total 11260 168 2870 10888 1718 87 6103 4512 353 1358 2460 5974 2679 16214 8952 604 168 70 85 8803 5967 5128 70 5532 281 29635 864 6918

Chapter Two

26 All States All UTs All-India

58367 98 58465

17317 20 17337

64066 26 64092

81383 46 81429

139750 144 139894

Source: Water and Related Statistics, Central Water Commission, Water Resources Information System Directorate, April, 2015.

This has been further substantiated by the percentage share of each source of irrigation across the states of India (Table 2.7). The share of major and medium irrigation potential in the total irrigation potential is more than 50 percent in the case of six states. In another 12 states, this share varies from 30 percent to 50 percent. The share of ground water potential in the total potential is more than 50 percent in six states; whereas in another 13 states, it varies from 30 percent to 50 percent. The share of groundwater potential in Punjab is 48.89 percent in the total irrigation potential of the state. The data in tables 2.6 and 2.7 also reveals that both at the all-India level and also across the states the share of surface water is quite low in the total irrigation potential. There is, thus, a need to have authentic estimates of the surface water and then chalk out a strategy to increase the share of surface water in the total irrigation potential. Table 2.7: State-wise percentage share of ultimate irrigation potential created in India States/UTs Andhra Pradesh Arunachal Assam Bihar Chhattisgarh Goa Gujarat Haryana Himachal Pradesh Jammu & Kashmir Jharkhand Karnataka Kerala Madhya Pradesh Maharashtra Manipur Meghalaya Mizoram

Major & Medium Irrigation Projects 44.40 0.00 33.80 47.98 66.76 71.26 49.16 66.49 14.16 18.41 51.87 41.85 37.33 29.93 45.80 22.35 11.90 0.00

Minor Irrigation Projects Surface Ground Sub-total 20.43 35.17 55.60 89.29 10.71 100.00 34.84 31.36 66.20 14.18 4.71 28.74 5.69 1.11 66.57 29.46 14.39 15.07 29.86 13.02 13.40 16.56 50.60 92.86

37.84 28.52 45.16 32.40 19.26 52.14 33.74 43.09 32.81 57.05 40.80 61.09 37.50 7.14

52.02 33.24 28.74 50.84 33.51 85.84 81.59 48.13 58.15 62.67 70.07 54.20 77.65 88.10 100.00

Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Development and Usage of Water Resources in India Nagaland Orissa Punjab Rajasthan Sikkim Tamil Nadu Tripura Uttar Pradesh Uttrakhand West Bengal All States All UTs All-India

11.76 40.90 50.28 53.63 28.57 27.11 35.59 41.01 40.05 33.25 41.77 68.06 41.79

82.35 11.36 0.84 11.70 71.43 21.69 35.59 4.00 1.62 18.79 12.39 13.89 12.39

5.88 47.75 48.89 34.67 0.00 51.19 28.83 54.99 58.33 47.96 45.84 18.06 45.81

88.24 59.10 49.72 46.37 71.43 72.89 64.41 58.99 59.95 66.75 58.23 31.94 58.21

27 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Source: Computed from table 2.6.

Across the various states of India, there is wide range of variation in the replenishment of ground water resources, net availability and net draft. Table 2.8 reveals that the amount of ground water replenishment ranges from two billion cubic metres (bcms) in Uttrakhand to 76.34 bcms in Uttar Pradesh. This wide variation among the states may be due to the differences in geographical area in addition to the amount of water resources. The net availability of various ground water resources varies from 1.97 bcms to 71.58 bcms across the states. At the all-India level, out of 440.14 bcms of gross availability, 410.65 bcm is the net availability. Out of it, the net draft is 252.87 bcms, which comes out to be 61.58 percent. Across the states, Punjab, Rajasthan and Haryana are abstracting ground water at a much higher rate than the replenishment level. The respective level of ground water development in these three states was 149 percent, 140 percent and 135 percent in 2013. Incidentally, Punjab and Haryana are the success stories of the green revolution and paddy has been a major crop in these states. Rajasthan, though a much larger state in terms of geographical area, has much lower net availability of water as compared to Punjab and Haryana.

Chapter Two

28

Table 2.8: State-wise status of ground water resources in India (2013) Billion Cubic Metres (bcm) State

Andhra Pradesh Assam Bihar Chhattisgarh Gujarat Haryana Jammu & Kashmir Jharkhand Karnataka Kerala Madhya Pradesh Maharashtra Odisha Punjab Rajasthan Tamil Nadu Uttar Pradesh Uttrakhand West Bengal Other States Total

Annual Replenishment of Ground Water Resources 20.39

Net Availability

Net Draft

18.48

8.10

State of Ground Water Development (%) 44

32.11 31.31 12.80 20.85 11.36 5.25

28.90 28.49 11.90 19.79 10.30 4.82

4.74 12.73 4.40 13.44 13.92 1.18

16 45 37 68 135 24

6.56 17.00 6.27 35.98

5.99 14.83 5.66 34.16

1.35 9.76 2.63 19.36

23 66 47 57

33.19 17.78 25.91 12.51 20.65 76.34 2.00 29.33 28.88 446.14

31.48 16.69 23.39 11.26 18.59 71.58 1.97 26.56 25.81 410.65

17.07 5.02 34.81 15.71 14.36 52.76 0.99 11.84 8.7 252.87

54 30 149 140 77 74 50 45 34 62

Source: Central Ground Water Report (2006 and 2017), Ministry of Water Resources, River Development & Ganga Rejuvenation, GoI, Faridabad

The aggregate scenario of net water availability and the net draft is, however, quite comfortable. And there is considerable scope for ground water development in the case of a large number of states in India. This is also an indicator that in many of the states, groundwater for irrigation and

Development and Usage of Water Resources in India

29

other usages can be further developed as the ground water development level is substantially below 100 percent. Going by the above criterion, Punjab, Rajasthan and Haryana have already entered into the over-exploited stage. However, in three other states, the ground water development level is below 25 percent. Still in eight other states, the ground water development level is between 26 percent and 50 percent. In six other states, the ground water development level is between 51 percent and 90 percent. Thus, out of the 20 states, (Table 2.8) 17 states are within the safe limits of ground water development and there is high potential to raise the ground water development in such states. It would certainly help in raising the level of their development. Nonetheless, the expert group on Ground Water Management and Ownership constituted by the Planning Commission in 2007 (GoI, 2013b) had reported that 28 percent of India’s blocks (a rural geographical unit known as a development block) were showing an alarmingly high level of ground water use. A recent assessment by NASA revealed that during 2002–2008, India lost about 109 cubic kilometres of water leading to a decline in the water table to the extent of 0.33 metres per annum (GoI, 2013b, p.154). In seven states (Rajasthan, Odisha, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Kerala and Assam) between 70 and 86 percent of the area under agriculture is rain fed. In another five states (Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Bihar and Andhra Pradesh) between 32 and 60 percent of the area under agriculture is rain fed (GoI, Planning Commission, 2008: 4). Such heavy dependence on rain water for irrigation puts a serious constraint on the rural development and large number of people in the rural area. In fact, Central and Western India are core dry land areas which are located on elevations of more than 300 metres above mean sea level. This needs to be addressed as a priority by formulating suitable policies. It is clear that at the aggregate level, India seems to be in a comfortable position in water resources from the supply side. However, the wide geographical and regional variations in the water resources and very high proportion of rain-fed agriculture in the country do not support such a scenario. The rising needs for water coming from a rapidly increasing population and consequent developmental needs would further lead to higher demand for water. The decline in the mean rainfall and emerging changes in the weather would also impact the future availability of water.

30

Chapter Two

2.4 Rainfall and Weather in India Rainfall is a significant source of water for irrigation in India as about 66 percent of agricultural land does not have any assured source of irrigation; hence, it is largely dependent on rainfall. However, the quantum, spatial spread and duration of rainfall are subject to wide variations across the regions. There has also been a significant temporal variation in the mean rainfall in the country. The mean annual rainfall during 1951–52 and 1967–68 was 122.5 centimetres (cms). During 1968–69 and 1980–81, the annual average rainfall was 118.7 cms. In the following decade the annual average rainfall was 120 cms. During 1991–92 and 1996–7, the corresponding figure was 121 cms. Again during 1997–98 and 2001–02, the average annual rainfall was 118.5 cms. It was 113.7 cms during 2002– 03 and 2006–07 and 111.7 cms during 2007–08 and 2011–12. It is significant to note that out of the 60-years’ period, the average annual rainfall remained between 120 cms and 122.5 cms for about 32 years. In another 16 years, it was 118.5 cms. In about 10 years the annual average rainfall was between 111.7 cms and 113.7 cms respectively. Interestingly, the average annual rainfall during the first decade of the twenty-first century was significantly lower than that in the 2nd half of the twentieth century (Table 2.9). This indicates a decline in the average rainfall and hence a constraint for rain-fed agriculture. Table 2.9: Rainfall and weather details in India: 1951 to 2012 1951/ 1968/ 1981/ 1991/ 1997/ 2002/ 2007/ 52 to 69 to 82 to 92 to 98 to 03 to 08 to 1967/ 1980/ 1990/ 1996/ 2001/ 2006/ 2011/ 68 81 91 97 02 07 12 Annual Rainfall (cm) Mean 122.5 118.7 120.1 121.0 118.5 113.7 111.7 Standard 12.5 10.2 11.5 7.2 8.3 9.4 10.0 Deviation Monsoon Rainfall (cm) Mean 91.9 88.8 88.8 90.0 87.8 83.9 86.6 Standard 10.1 9.6 11.0 6.5 5.5 7.9 9.7 Deviation Annual Temperature (qC) Mean 0.04 -0.03 0.09 0.19 0.34 0.56 0.65 Standard 0.28 0.24 0.03 0.10 0.22 0.11 0.26 Deviation Source: Government of India, Meteorological Department Climate bulletins and other publications of India, New Delhi.

Development and Usage of Water Resources in India

31

A very high proportion of annual rainfall takes place during the monsoon season as is evident from table 2.9. The mean annual monsoon rainfall during the second half of the twentieth century oscillated between 88 cms and 92 cms. It was, however, between 84 cms and 87 cms during the first decade of the twenty-first century. In addition to the temporal variation in the average annual rainfall, there is quite a significant intra-period variation, irrespective of the annual average rainfall. Significantly, the periods during which the average annual rainfall is higher, the dispersion is also higher as has been reflected by the respective standard deviations. The period of 1991–92 and 1996–97 is an exception as the mean rainfall is quite high but the standard deviation is the lowest among all the periods. As far as dispersion from the mean in monsoon rainfall, the situation is somewhat different. The periods with high mean rainfall during the monsoon season have, however, high intra-period variation but for 1997– 98 and 2001–02 in which the variation is the least. The period between 1991–92 and 1996–97 is also an exception as the mean rainfall is quite high but the variation is quite low. It is clear from the foregoing discussion that though there has been high average rainfall for a good number of years, the inter-year rainfall has witnessed quite a high variation; meaning thereby that in some years, the rainfall has an uneven spread across the regions and over different periods. Table 2.10 reveals season-wise distribution of rainfall in India from 1992– 93 to 2014–15. The data highlights that out of 23 years, during only 4 years the rainfall has been deficient during pre-monsoon season.

Chapter Two

132.3

123.1

128.8

129.7

1997–98

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

161.6

124.7

139.9

112.8

2003–04

2004–05

2005–06

2006–07

121.5

118.9

1996–97

107.7

94.9

1995–96

2002–03

123.5

1994–95

2001–02

116.5

106.1

1993–94

133.6

134.6

134.5

129.6

131.7

132.0

129.3

129.5

130.6

128.3

123.2

123.9

123.2

123.3

121.3

-15.6

4.0

-7.0

24.7

-18.2

-8.0

0.3

-0.5

-5.7

3.1

-3.5

-23.4

0.2

-13.9

-4.0

Pre-monsoon Season (March-May) ActNormal % ual Departure

1992–93

Year

886.6

879.3

779.6

947.3

737.1

826.0

833.7

866.9

945.2

927.4

927.6

904.5

999.2

902.1

830.7

892.2

892.5

893.3

902.7

911.7

901.1

902.3

903.2

903.6

908.6

905.7

904.7

906.8

908.9

899.2

-0.6

-1.0

-12.7

4.9

-19.2

-8.3

-7.6

-4.0

4.6

2.1

2.4

0.0

10.2

-0.7

-7.6

Monsoon Season (June-September) Actual Normal % Departure

99.3

138.4

111.8

134.6

83.4

137.7

64.1

144.7

178.8

187.7

128.0

117.8

121.5

131.6

106.5

125.9

125.8

125.7

125.0

123.7

121.7

121.7

121.8

121.8

119.5

120.8

119.9

119.6

119.6

114.1

-21.1

10.0

-11.1

7.7

-32.6

13.1

-47.3

18.8

46.8

57.1

6.0

-1.8

1.6

10.0

-6.7

Post Monsoon (October-December) Actual Normal % Departure

Table 2.10: Season-wise distribution of rainfall in India: 1992–93 to 2014–15

32

1133.0

1017.7

891.4

1278.0

981.4

1120.2

1043.7

1183.5

1275.5

1291.5

1195.5

1154.6

1297.3

1184.3

1091.6

1195.5

1018.3

1019.0

1196.5

1205.4

1196.0

1195.5

1197.0

1198.8

1198.3

1190.3

1189.3

1190.7

1192.6

1175.6

-5.2

-0.1

-12.5

6.8

-18.6

-6.3

-12.7

-1.1

6.4

7.8

0.4

-2.9

9.0

-0.7

-7.1

Overall Rainfall (June-May) Actual Normal % Depar -ture

(In millimetres)

114.4

90.3

101.9

130.0

2009–10

2010–11

2011–12

2012–13

2013–14

131.3

131.3

131.3

131.3

133.7

134.5

133.5

-1.0

-22.4

-31.2

-12.9

-8.1

-32.3

-13.5

936.7

819.5

899.9

912.8

689.8

873.2

936.9

886.9

886.9

887.5

893.2

892.2

892.2

892.2

5.6

-7.6

1.4

2.2

-22.7

-2.1

5.0

149.5

100.6

65.7

153.2

135.5

87.2

85.4

127.2

127.2

127.2

126.3

125.9

125.9

125.9

17.5

-20.9

-48.3

21.3

7.6

-30.7

-32.2

1262.4

1073.4

1094.7

1212.3

972.8

1075.0

1180.2

1186.3

1186.3

1186.9

1191.7

1195.6

1196.4

1194.8

6.4

-9.5

-7.8

1.7

-18.6

-10.1

-1.2

33

2014–15 181.5 131.5 38.0 777.5 886.9 -12.3 85.2 127.2 -33.0 1081.8 1187.0 -8.9 Source: Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India, New Delhi. [Note: Excess = +20% or more, Normal = +19% to-19%, Deficient = 20% to -59%, Scanty = -60% or less.]

91.0

122.9

2008–09

115.3

2007–08

Development and Usage of Water Resources in India

34

Chapter Two

In one of these years, it was in excess of the normal. During the monsoon season, the average rainfall has been normal except for two years i.e. 2002–03 and 2009–10, when rainfall was deficient. However, during the post-monsoon years, in seven years (2000–01, 2002–03, 2006–07, 2007– 08, 2008–09, 2011–12, 2012–13 and 2014–15), the average annual rainfall was deficient. In three other years, the rainfall was in excess of the normal. Thus, out of 23 years, the rainfall was normal or more in 16 years during the post-monsoon period. The overall average annual rainfall was, however, normal during 1992–93 and 2014–15. Thus, India did not experience any year with abnormal rainfall. Nonetheless, there have been a number of years when the country experienced deficient rainfall, excess rainfall and a near deficient rainfall. The uneven spread of rainfall along with deficiency and excess has been leading to periodic droughts, floods and has been causing a huge loss to agriculture, animals, men and material, flora and fauna. It is true that at the aggregate level, the rainfall seems to be normal over the period of time, yet the regional variations are quite large and hence at the regional level there has been deficient rainfall in many years. Almost every year many states of the country (especially, Bihar, Assam and Uttar Pradesh) suffer from floods while at the same time a good number of states have been facing a drought-like situation. Under such a scenario, states like Punjab and Haryana, along with western Uttar Pradesh, had to depend on more and more groundwater for irrigation.

2.5 Rising Population and Increasing Urbanisation in India The first population census of independent India revealed that the country’s total population in 1951 was 361 million. Out of that 298.64 million was rural and 62.44 million was urban. In 1961, total population increased to 439.23 million while the rural and urban population was 360.30 million and 78.94 million, respectively. The population continued to increase at a very high rate of growth as is evident from table 2.11. In 2001, India’s population rose to 1,028.61 million; out of that 742.59 million was rural and 286.02 was urban. The total population increased to 1,210.57 million in 2011 and the rural and urban population was 833.46 million and 377.11 million, respectively. According to various national and international estimates, India’s population is expected to stabilise between 1,450 million and 1,600 million by 2050.

Development and Usage of Water Resources in India

35

Significantly the decadal growth rate of the population has been very high during the second half of the twentieth century, as is evident from table 2.11. The decadal growth rate of population in India was 21.64 percent during 1951–1961. It rose to 24.80 percent in 1961–71. Thereafter, it started declining, but at a very slow pace. It was only during 1991–2001 that there was a perceptible decline in the decadal growth rate of population. In the following decade the decadal growth rate of population was 17.69 percent. The declining decadal growth rate is a positive sign and is a strong indicator for stabilisation of India’s population by the middle of the twenty-first century. It is worth noticing that the size and growth rate of the urban population has increased at an increasing rate. The decadal growth rate of the urban population in India was 26.41 percent during 1951–61. It was 38.23 percent and 46.14 percent, respectively, during the following two decades. Thereafter, it started declining. However, it stuck to 31.48 percent during 1991–2001 and 2001–2011. The share of urban population in total population has also increased at quite a high rate since 1951. In 1961, the share of urban population in India was around 18 percent. It rose to 23.34 percent and 25.71 percent during the subsequent two decades. The share of urban population in India was 31.15 percent in 2011. The high proportion of urban population may be attributed to the growth rate of the urban population and migration from rural to urban areas. Table 2.11: Growth of population in India: 1951 to 2011 Year

Population (Million)

Decadal Growth (%)

Total

Rural

Urban

Total

Rural

Urban

1951

361.09

298.64

62.44 ࡳ

ࡳ

ࡳ

1961

439.23

360.30

78.94

21.64

20.64

26.41

1971

548.16

439.05

109.11

24.80

21.86

38.23

1981

683.33

523.87

159.46

24.66

19.32

46.14

1991

846.30

628.69

217.61

23.85

20.01

36.47

2001

1028.61

742.49

286.12

21.54

18.10

31.48

2011

1210.57

833.46

377.11

17.69

12.25

31.80

Source: Computed from Census of India (Various Years), Government of India, New Delhi.

36

Chapter Two

The rising population, with very high growth rate, has put great pressure on the natural resources of the country, including water. According to the 2011 population census, 6 percent (72.63 million) of Indian people were not covered by the water supply. On the positive side the share of such population decreased from 22 percent in 1981 to 6 percent in 2011. The number of people, not covered by water supply was 150 million in 1991 and 113 million in 2001. So, both the number and share of people, not covered by water supply, are decreasing. This is very encouraging and in the due course of time, India is going to cover its entire population with water supply. Nevertheless, access to improved water supply continues to be a serious challenge as is reflected by the data in table 2.12. Piped water supply covered only 43 percent of the total population in India in 2015. Significantly this proportion was the same in 2000. However, the proportion of population covered by non-piped water supply increased from 42 percent in 2000 to 48 percent in 2015. Another serious challenge is availability of improved water supply on one’s premises. The data shows that 43 percent of people did not have access to improved water supply at their premises. The situation is even worse in rural India as the corresponding share was 51 percent. This means 51 percent of the rural people have to devote a lot of their time and energy to fetching water. They had to travel a few kilometres to bring water to their homes/habitations. Women in particular are the worst sufferers as fetching water is generally their responsibility. Thus, non-accessibility of water on one’s premises is a serious drag on the time and energy of rural people, especially women. Furthermore, 20 percent of the Indian population does not have access to improved water supply when needed. This proportion in the urban area is 14 percent. As regards the quality of water, only 64 percent of rural people are getting water free from contamination. Quality of water and water-borne diseases are a serious challenge for India (Bedi, et al., 2015). Significantly, the access to improved water supplies is also a serious challenge to the entire world, especially in the developing and poor countries.

Total 2000 2015 38 57 75 80 43 43 42 48

India Rural 2000 2015 29 49 29 49 71 77 64 64 31 31 49 59 Urban 2000 2015 61 73 85 86 74 69 21 26

Total 2000 2015 61 71 62 74 73 79 69 73 57 64 27 28

World Rural 2000 2015 41 55 41 60 62 72 52 55 32 41 40 45

Source: (2017) Progress on Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene: 2017, World Health Organisation, 2017.

Safely managed Accessible on premises Available when needed Free from contamination Piped Non-piped

Indicators

Table 2.12: Proportion of population using improved water supplies

Development and Usage of Water Resources in India

Urban 2000 2015 85 85 86 86 85 85 90 89 85 83 12 14

37

CHAPTER THREE DYNAMICS OF WATER RESOURCES IN PUNJAB

Historically, Punjab has never been a water deficit state. It had five perennial rivers (Ravi, Chenab, Jhelum, Beas and Sutlej) prior to the partition and independence on 15 August 1947. Punjab, the food bowl of pre-partitioned British India, not only faced a mass exodus of population (from East to West Punjab and vice-versa) and large-scale massacre (it is estimated that about one million people of all communities were killed at the time of partition) but also lost two and a half of its rivers (Jhelum, Chenab and half Ravi) to Pakistan. Thus, Punjab was left with three perennial rivers and a couple of seasonal (mainly during rainy seasons) rivers. The vast network of canals1 was also divided between the two Punjabs. A major part of canal-irrigated area and canals went to the Pakistan Punjab. Out of the total irrigated area of 63,00,187 hectares in undivided Punjab on the eve of independence, the Indian Punjab was left with 1,773,242 hectares (28.15%). The remaining 71.85 percent (4,526,945 hectares) went to Pakistan Punjab (GoP, 1964). After Punjab’s reorganisation in 1966, the water of these rivers is being shared by Haryana. Rajasthan was sharing Punjab’s water even before 1966. The Sutlez-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal, too, is in limbo and time and again Haryana rakes up this issue to get its share from the rivers of Punjab. Punjab’s right as riparian state is also being challenged by Haryana and Rajasthan. There is, thus, a deep-rooted political economy of Punjab’s water resources and all the regional political parties of Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan in particular and the national-level parties in general have been playing politics over it for decades. The issue still remains unresolved. The moot questions are:

1

There were 14 major canal works in the undivided Punjab. They were (1)Western Jamuna (2) Sirhind (3) Upper Bari Doab (4)Lower Bari Doab (5) Upper Chenab (6) Lower Chenab (7) Upper Jhelum (8) Lower Jhelum (9) Haveli (10) Rangpur (11 & 12) Ferozepur Canals (Dipalpur and Eastern) (13) Pakpattan (14) Mailsi

Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab

39

1. Who will do the exercise of a fresh assessment of the available water in the rivers of Punjab? 2. Is the distribution formula evolved decades ago still relevant? 3. Is the amount of water flowing through the rivers of Punjab the same (assessed decades ago) or has it changed? and; 4. What is the present size of the cake to be distributed? Much water has flowed down the rivers since the enactment of the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966. The validity of sections 78–80 of this act was challenged in the Supreme Court in 1977 by the then Chief Minister of Punjab. The petition was, however, withdrawn from the Supreme Court in 1981 by the then Chief Minister of Punjab. In July 2004, the Punjab Legislative Assembly enacted the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act (PTAA) 2004 and the fate of the SYL is still in the doldrums. It is often argued that agreements once entered into cannot be terminated or revoked unilaterally. This may be a debatable issue, but one thing is certain, Punjab was not only forced to withdraw the case from the Supreme Court in 1981 but was also pressurised to sign the agreement with Haryana and Rajasthan. It was under that agreement that Punjab, though a riparian state was forced to take only a residual of the total 17.17 million acre feet (maf) of the Ravi-Beas water assessed on the basis of pre1981 availability. Significantly, the annual average rainfall in Punjab has also decreased whereas its water requirement has gone up since then. Rajasthan’s claim on Punjab’s water is based on the proceedings of a meeting chaired by the then Union Irrigation Minister Mr. Gulzari Lal Nanda, on January 29, 1955. This, of course, cannot be treated as an agreement in the true sense of the word as the issue involved is too complex. Later on, sometime around 2004, it was estimated that the available divisible pool of water was 14.37 maf. If Haryana, Rajasthan, Delhi and J&K are given their respective shares (3.5 maf, 8.6 maf, 0.2 maf and 0.65 maf) then Punjab is left with (residue) only 2.8 maf instead of 4.22 maf as stipulated in the 1981 Agreement (Ghuman, 2004). There is, thus, a need to have fresh estimates of the divisible pool along with recognising the riparian rights of Punjab. The detailed discussion on the water sharing issue is, however, not within the scope of this study. As such we shall now focus our discussion on the present water scenario in Punjab. The subsequent sections of this chapter will discuss the water balance, rainfall trends, water draft and recharge and the water table.

40

Chapter Three

3.1 Water Availability in Punjab The system of irrigation by canal water has been in place long before independence and partition of the country into India and Pakistan in 1947. The joint Punjab could boast of a wide and well-planned canal irrigation system. The British Empire, after annexing Punjab, (after the death of Maharaja Ranjit Singh in 1839) developed a canal system in the then West Punjab (now in Pakistan) and managed to settle a large number of Punjab farmers (mainly from the then East Punjab) in the West Punjab. Those farmers, with their hard labour, agricultural skills and availability of canal water, developed the barren land and rain-fed agriculture into a developed and irrigated agriculture. It is mainly because of the above-mentioned reasons that productivity of Punjab agriculture increased manifold and the pre-independence undivided Punjab came to be known as the food bowl or granary of the country. It is significant that during 1887–88 the canal-irrigated area in undivided Punjab (British Territory) was 137,000 hectares which increased to 1,099,000 hectares in 1888–89, a spectacular increase. The canal-irrigated area increased to 2,400,000 hectares in 1900–01 and further increased to 4,109,000 hectares in 1920–21. In 1945–46, 6,300,000 hectares were under canal irrigation. In 1946–47 (before partition) the Indian Punjab had 1,793,000 hectares under canal irrigation. The area under canal irrigation in Indian Punjab in 1947–48 (after partition), however, declined to 1,591,000 hectares (Govt. of Punjab, 1964). Table 3.1 presents the details of cultivable command area (CCA) of the post-independence canal system of Punjab. Presently, there are nine canals/canal systems in Punjab, as shown in the table. The total CCA of these canals is 3,153,000 hectares. The Sirhind canal system has the greater share (43.10%), followed by the Upper Bari Doab Canal (UBDC) system (18.36%), the Bhakra Canal System (12.08%) and the Sirhind Feeder System (11.42%). It is significant to note that the Sirhind Canal System and Sirhind Feeder System together account for 54.52 percent of the total CCA. The share of the Eastern Canal and Bist Doab system in the CCA is 6.85 percent and 6.31 percent, respectively. The Shah Nehar has 1.05 percent of the CCA while the Makhu canal has less than one percent share in CCA.

Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab

41

Table 3.1: Details of culture-able command area (CCA) of canal system in Punjab Canal System Sirhind Canal System Sirhind Feeder System Eastern Canal UBDC System Bhakhra Canal System Bist Doab System Shah Nehar Makhu Canal Kaina Wali Total

CCA (Thousand hectare) 1359

% Share

360

11.42

216 579 381

6.85 18.36 12.08

199 33 23 03 3153

6.31 1.05 0.73 0.10 100

43.10

Source: Govt. of Punjab, Dept. of Irrigation of Punjab (1964).

As regard ground water, the state had 2,339,000 hectare metres (hams) net ground water availability in March 2013 (table 3.2). The rain water recharge during the monsoon season was 574,000 hams and recharge from other sources during the monsoon season was 1,321,000 hams. The quantity of recharge from other sources (during non-monsoon season) was 564,000 hams. Thus, the total annual ground water recharge was 2,591,000 hams. Out of this, natural discharge of water was 252,000 hams in 2013. It is significant to note that the rainfall recharge of ground water was 22.17 percent of the total quantity of ground water recharge. One might like to construe that there is ample scope for rain water recharging, harvesting, and management in Punjab. The provision for natural discharge of water accounts for 9.73 percent of the total ground water recharge.

Chapter Three

2 Amritsar Barnala Bathinda Faridkot Fatehgarh Sahib Fazilka Ferozpur Gurdaspur Hoshiarpur Jalandhar Kapurthala

1

6 7 8 9 10 11

5

1 2 3 4

District

S. No.

20520 17728 40050 48129 36029 21525

3 31505 12048 27287 12423 16051

Recharge From Rainfall

45701 101830 102020 28410 73150 45859

Recharge From Other Sources 4 105098 38649 63805 38807 35729

Monsoon Season (hams)

3239 5275 10846 12080 8248 5835

5 8276 2261 5024 2169 3631

Recharge From Rainfall

34232 26383 28731 12010 27473 9741

Recharge From Other Sources 6 49958 15396 61883 14883 9852

Non-Monsoon Season (hams)

Table 3. 2: Ground water resource potential of Punjab State

42

103693 151215 181648 100629 144900 82960

7 194837 68354 157998 68281 65263

Total Annual Ground Water Recharge (hams) (3+4+5+6)

10369 13716 17175 9523 14490 8296

8 19484 6835 13823 6828 6526

Natural Discharge during NonMonsoon Season (hams)

93323 137499 164473 91106 130410 74664

9 175354 61518 144175 61453 58737

Net Annual Ground Water Availability (hams) (7–8)

(As on 31.03 2013)

Ludhiana Mansa Moga Muktsar Nawan Shahr Patiala Pathankot Ropar Mohali Sangrur Taran Taran Total

47978 17805 21767 20742 20792 43509 14456 18105 19373 39861 26846 574527

128976 55495 84416 28362 32784 88156 9214 14211 6173 107177 87490 1321512

10154 3548 4225 3859 4903 9210 4240 4265 4231 8902 7185 131607

49196 38062 19114 31619 16002 29245 6170 9337 2404 36856 35168 563716

236305 114911 129522 84583 74481 170120 34081 45918 32181 192796 156689 2591363

23630 11491 12952 8458 7448 17012 2121 3845 3218 19280 15669 252191

212674 103420 116570 76125 67033 153108 31959 42073 28963 173517 141020 2339172

43

Source: Dynamic Ground Water Resources of India (2017), Central Ground Water Board, Ministry of Water Resources, River Development & Ganga Rejuvenation, Government of India, Faridabad.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab

44

Chapter Three

Given the geographical area of 5,036,000 hectares in Punjab, the per hectare net ground water availability comes out to be just 0.40 hams. The per hectare total annual ground water recharge is 0.45 hams. The per hectare rain water recharge is only 11.56 hams. This is an indication that there is an urgent need to enhance rain water recharge so as to catch hold of the run-off water. Table 3.2 also highlights the recharge of ground water and the net annual ground water availability by district. In view of the wide range of interdistrict variation in area and amount of rainfall, the total recharge and per hectare recharge, too, has a noticeable inter-district variation. The lowest amount of ground water recharge from rainfall was in Barnala (12,000 hams) and the highest in Hoshiarpur (48,000 hams). As regards the total ground water recharge, it was lowest in district Mohali (32,000 hams) and highest in district Ludhiana (236,000 hams). The net annual ground water availability was lowest in Mohali (28,000 hams) and highest in Ludhiana (213,000 hams). The district with the smallest geographical area of 111,670 hectares, i.e., Fatehgarh Sahib, however, had 0.58 hams per hectare annual recharge while the district with the largest geographical area of 544,190 hectares (Firozepur) had 0.28 hams per hectare annual recharge. It is, thus, clear that recharge of ground water does not depend only on the size of the district but on many other factors, such as the amount of rainfall and water harvesting, etc. The per hectare net annual ground water availability in Fatehgarh Sahib was 0.53 hams whereas in Firozepur it was 0.25 hams. Here, too, there are multiple factors responsible for net availability of water. The status of ground water availability and draft across the various users is extremely worrying as draft is much higher than recharge (table 3.3). The gross ground water draft was 3481,000 hams while the net availability was 2339,000 ham in 2013. This highlights that the draft is 1142,000 hams higher than the availability. The comparison of table 3.3 with 3.2 also reveals that the total draft exceeds the total recharge by 8,900,000 hams. The data in table 3.3 also highlights that there is a huge gap between ground water discharge for irrigation on the one hand and net availability and recharge. In fact, irrigation accounts for the greater share in the draft because of the highly water responsive cropping pattern in Punjab. The net annual ground water availability for future irrigation development highlights a huge deficit of 1,163,000 hams. Clearly, the situation is quite alarming and needs to be handled as a matter of emergency. Table 3.3 also shows that in some of the districts, the situation is too bad as far as ground water draft is much higher than the recharge.

1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

S.No .

2 Amritsar Barnala Bathinda Faridkot Fatehgarh Sahib Fazilka Ferozpur Gurdaspur Hoshiarpur Jalandhar Kapurthala Ludhiana Mansa Moga Muktsar

District

3 175354 61518 144175 61453 58737 93323 137499 164473 91106 130410 74664 212674 103420 116570 76125

Net Annual Ground Water Availability (hams)

4 214857 117876 130255 94880 109995 85719 196392 198971 85840 264505 148991 333230 143197 239509 51061

Existing Gross Ground Water Draft for Irrigation (Hams)

5 5758 1323 3123 3313 2034 2807 1935 4466 4403 7425 3806 10605 13 1855 2460

Existing Gross Ground Water Draft for Domestic & Industrial Water Supply (Hams) 6 220615 119200 133378 98193 112028 88526 198327 203437 90242 271930 152797 343835 143210 241363 53521

Existing Gross Ground Water Draft for all uses (4+5) (hams)

7 7888 1758 4467 3730 2412 3882 2588 5301 4966 9404 4183 13512 13 2360 2460

Provisio n for Domestic and Industrial Requirement Supply to 2025 Years (Hams) 8 -47391 -58117 9453 -37157 -53670 3722 -61481 -39799 301 -143499 -78511 -134069 -39791 -125299 22604

Net Annual Ground Water Availability for Future Irrigation Development (34–-7) (Hams)

45

9 126 194 93 160 191 95 144 124 99 209 205 162 138 207 70

Stage of Ground Water Development 6/3*100 (%)

Table 3.3: Assessment of dynamic ground water resources in various districts of Punjab (As on 31.03.2013)

Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab

Nawan Shahr Patiala Pathankot Ropar Mohali Sangrur Taran Taran Total

Source: Same as in table 3.2.

16 17 18 19 20 21 22

46

67033 153108 31959 42073 28963 173517 141020 2339172

69991 285530 18497 43686 23323 362759 185665 3404726

1457 4332 1827 2425 5051 3668 2531 76617

Chapter Three 71448 289862 20324 46111 28374 366426 188196 3481343

1612 6381 2173 2752 6735 4795 3736 97110

-4570 -138803 11288 -4365 -1095 -194037 -48381 -1162664

107 189 64 110 98 211 133 149

Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab

47

Table 3.4 presents the sector-wise distribution of draft and the overall proportion of draft to the net ground water availability. At the aggregate level, Punjab is drafting 149 percent of the net ground water availability. Irrigation contributes to this high level of over-draft of water. The draft for irrigation is 146 percent of the net ground water availability. Across the districts, Sangrur’s draft is 211 percent of the availability, followed by Jalandhar (209%). In four of the 22 districts, the draft is more than double the availability. These districts are in the central plain zone, where paddy is the main crop during kharif season. There are another five districts whose draft varies from 160 percent (Faridkot) to 194 percent (Barnala). In another seven districts, the draft ranges between 107 percent (SAS Nagar) and 144 percent (Firozepur). Muktsar, Fazilka, Bathinda, Pathankot and Hoshiarpur are the five districts where draft is less than 100 percent and ranges between 64 percent (Pathankot) and 99 percent (Hoshiarpur). Both these districts have a hilly and sub-mountain terrain. Table 3.4: District-wise gross ground water draft as percentage of net ground water availability (As on 31 March 2013) District Amritsar Barnala Bathinda Faridkot Fatehgarh Sahib Fazilka Firozepur Gurdaspur Hoshiarpur Jalandhar

Draft For Irrigation (%) 123 (97.39) 192 (98.89)

Draft For Domestic And Industrial Water (%)

Total Draft (%)

3.3 (2.61)

126

2.2 (1.11)

194

90 (97.66) 154 (96.63) 187 (98.19)

2.2 (2.34)

93

5.4 (3.37)

160

3.5 (1.82)

191

3.0 (3.17)

95

1.4 (0.98)

144

2.7 (2.20)

124

4.8 (4.88)

99

5.7 (2.73)

209

92 (96.83) 143 (99.02) 121 (97.80) 94 (95.12) 203 (97.27)

Chapter Three

48

Kapurthala Ludhiana Mansa Moga Muktsar SBS Nagar Patiala Pathankot Ropar Mohali Sangrur Taran Taran Total

200 (97.56) 157 (96.92) 138 (99.99) 205 (99.23) 67 (95.40) 104 (97.96) 186 (98.51) 58 (91.01) 104 (94.74) 81 (82.20) 209 (99.00) 132 (98.66) 146 (97.80)

5.1 (2.49)

205

5.0 (3.08)

162

0.01 (0.01)

138

1.6 (0.77)

207

3.2 (4.60)

70

2.2 (2.04)

107

2.8 (1.49)

189

5.7 (8.99)

64

5.8 (5.26)

110

17.4 (17.80)

98

2.1 (1.00)

211

1.8 (1.34)

133

3.3 (2.20)

149 (100)

Source: Computed from table 3.3. Note: The figures in brackets indicate the share of the respective sectors in the total ground water draft.

The share of irrigation in the total ground water draft is highly alarming, as reflected by the figures in brackets in Table 3.4. At the aggregate level, irrigation accounts for 97.80 percent of the total ground water draft while domestic and industrial sector together have only a 2.20 percent share. Across the districts, Mansa, with 99.99 percent share of irrigation in total draft, is at the top of all the districts. In another 7 districts, irrigation accounts for more than 98 percent of the total ground water draft. The corresponding proportion in another six districts is between 97 and 98 percent while in four districts it ranges between 95 and 97 percent. In another three districts it is around 95 percent. Mohali is the only district in which the share of irrigation in draft is 82.20 percent.

Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab

49

The long-term ground water availability for irrigation in Punjab has been on the decline (table 3.5). It was 302,000 hams (2.44 maf) in 1984, but declined to 68,000 hams (0.55 MAF) in 1989. It increased to 103,000 hams but dwindled to 27,000 hams in 1999. The net annual ground water availability for irrigation was minus 989,000 hams in 2004 which further declined to minus 1457,000 hams in 2009. However, in 2013 it was minus 1163,000 hams. The gap between demand and supply has been increasing at a fast pace over the period of time. The overall demand supply gap increased from 234,000 hams in 1989 (over 1984) to 1,163,000 hams in 2013 over. As compared to 1984, the demand supply gap increased by 1,163,000 hams in 2013. In percentage terms, it increased by 285 percent in 2013 over 1984. Table 3.5: Net annual ground water availability for irrigation development in Punjab Year

Hams

1984 1989 1992 1999 2004 2009 2011 2013

301929 67914 103177 27101 (-) 988926 (-) 1457475 (-) 1483189 (-) 1162664

Absolute change over the previous period

Percent

maf

-234015 +35263 -76076 -988926 -1457475 -1483189 - 1162664

-78 +52 -74 -3649 -247 -202 -178

2.44 0.55 0.84 0.22 (-) 8.01 (-) 11.81 (-) 12.02 (-) 11.63

Absolute change over the previous period -1.89 +0.29 -0.62 -8.01 -11.81 -12.02 -11.63

Source: Same as in table 3.3 Hams —hectare per metres; maf-million hectare feet

3.2 Average Annual Rainfall in Punjab It is significant that the average annual rainfall in Punjab has been fluctuating a great deal over the years, as is evident from table 3.6. In 1970, the average annual rainfall was 672 millimetres (mm) which increased to 739 mm in 1980 and to 755 mm in 1990. From 2000 onwards, the average annual rainfall was far less than the earlier decades. In 2000, the rainfall in Punjab declined to 392 mm. It, however, registered an

Chapter Three

50

increase to 620 mm in 2013. In 2015, the average annual rainfall again declined to 547 mm. The data also show a wide range of intra and inter-district variation in rainfall across the years (table 3.6). In 1970, Hoshiarpur district had the highest (999 mm) and Jalandhar had the lowest (171 mm) rainfall. Gurdaspur attained first place in 1980 (1155 mm) whereas Ludhiana received the lowest (38 mm) rainfall. Gurdaspur continued to have its highest rainfall in 1990 and 2000. But in 2010 Rupnagar, with 897 mm rainfall captured the highest place from Gurdaspur. However, the longterm trend in average rainfall showed that Gurdaspur recorded the highest rainfall during 2013–2015. As far as lowest rainfall is concerned, it varies across the districts and over the years. However, most of the districts with low rainfall are from the south-west Punjab. Table 3.6: District-wise annual average rainfall in Punjab: 1970–2015 (Millimetres) District Gurdaspur Amritsar Tarn Taran Kapurthala Jalandhar S.B.S Nagar Hoshiarpur Rupnagar S.A.S Nagar Ludhiana Ferozepur Faridkot Mukstar Moga Bathinda Mansa Sangrur Barnala Patiala

1970 926 595 Aaa 545 171 Aa

1980 1155 870 aaa 683 874 aa

1990 1215 651 Aaa 781 1196 Aa

2000 830 208 Aaa 542 364 699

2010 546 679 542 555 560 605

2013 1499 686 398 697 594 836

2014 1048 324 352 606 311 568

2015 1167 563 451 653 379 825

999 983 Aaa

906 759 aaa

1076 1092 Aaa

658 793 Aaa

636 897 398

586 958 646

508 623 611

594 822 832

757 232 @ Aa Aa 490 522 Aaaa 556

38 956 511 aa aa 356 521 aaaa 836

524 422 568 Aa Aa 342 527 Aaaa 663

437 130 257 358 175 136 77 202 Aaaa 641

604 203 459 351 399 253 121 416 412 484

555 300 798 554 606 593 260 325 276 504

360 205 396 412 396 336 184 270 123 395

622 171 490 373 435 391 152 493 326 514

Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab

Fatehgarh Sahib Punjab Average

51

-

-

-

155

422

695

264

686

672

739

755

392

472

620

385

547

Source: Govt. of Punjab, Statistical Abstract of Punjab (Various Years). a : Data included in Firozepur and Bathinda Districts. - : Districts Mansa and Fatehgarh Sahib were created in April 1992. Data for those districts is included in Bathinda Patiala. aa: Districts Mukatsar, Moga, Nawansheher created in 1996. Data for Moga, Mukstar is in Faridkot, Nawan Shahr in Jalandhar. aaa: Taran Taran, S.A.S. Nagar, Barnala were created in 2006, Data is in Amritsar, Rupnagar and Patiala

Table 3.7 presents the periodic trend of rainfall in various agro-climatic zones of Punjab. The Kandi or the sub-mountain zone (SMZ) received an annual average of 907.34 mm rainfall during 1975–85. It increased to 994 mm rainfall during 1985–86 and 1994–95. During the next 10 years the annual average rainfall in this zone was 745 mm, a significant decrease. It was almost the same during 2006–10. Clearly for about 15 years (1996– 2010) this region received 162 mm rainfall as compared to 1975–85 and 250 mm less rainfall compared to 1986–95. The average annual rainfall, however, increased to 837 mm during 2009–13. The long-term average rainfall during 1971–2005 was 869 mm in the sub-mountain zone. Across the three districts of the SMZ, there was a considerable amount of variation with regard to average annual rainfall, as has been indicated by the coefficient of variation (table 3.7). The variation was higher during 1995–2005 than 1975–85 and 1985–95. Clearly, the inter-district rainfall was more unequal during the former period than that during the latter two periods. The long period (1971–2005) dispersion is even more prominent than the sub-periods. The average annual rainfall during 1975–1985 in the central plain zone (CPZ) was 685 mm which declined to 673 mm during the following 10 years and further decreased to 507 mm during 1996–2005. Clearly, there is a downward trend of average annual rainfall in the central zone (which is the main paddy zone of Punjab). It received nearly 185 mm less rainfall on an annual average basis during 1996–2005 as compared to 1975–1985 and about 176 mm less rainfall compared to 1986–95. This is a significant decline, and that, too, in the main paddy zone. The long-term (1971–2005) annual average rainfall in this zone was 593 mm which is 276 mm lower than the sub-mountain zone during the same period. The average annual

52

Chapter Three

rainfall in the CPZ further decreased to 449 mm during 2006–2010 but increased to 549 mm during 2009–2013. The inter-district variation is quite large as is reflected by the coefficient of variation (table 3.7). Significantly, it has been higher and higher in every successive period. The coefficient of variation was 15.79 during 1975– 1985, increased to 25.98 during the next decade and further increased to 39.66 during 1996–2005. The long-term (1971–2005) variation is also quite high as the coefficient of variation is 45.03. Such a higher degree of variation in the CPZ must be a cause of concern for policy makers and the government. As compared to it, the coefficient of variation in the SMZ is 28.09 for the same period. Table 3.7 also shows the rainfall trend for the south-west zone (SWZ), a mainly cotton zone. Among all the three zones, SWZ receives the lowest amount of rainfall. The average annual rainfall in SWZ during 1976–1985 was 427 mm but declined to 314 mm during the next 10 years. It further dwindled to 265 mm during 1996–2005. The average of 1971–2005 was 306 mm. The average annual rainfall, however, increased to 306 mm higher than 1996–2005, but lower than the preceding two decades. During 2009– 2013, the rainfall again decreased to 285 mm. The region has witnessed a continuous decline in the average annual rainfall during 1971–2013. Table 3.7: District-wise trend of annual rainfall in Punjab 1975 to 2013 (Millimetre, avg.) Districts

Gurdaspur Hoshiarpur Roopnagar Average

1975– 1985– 1995– 1971– 2006– 1976 to 1986 to 1996 to 2005 2010 1984– 1994– 2004– (Overall) 1985 1995 2005 KANDI ZONE (SUB-MOUNTAIN ZONE) 1050 1005 881 960 743 (14.44) (28.52) (19.09) (22.34) 857 1066 671 851 615 (13.73) (34.67) (27.56) (32.61) 815 910 683 796 846 (24.23) (28.28) (19.97) (26.67) 907 994 745 869 744 (13.77) (7.92) (15.89) (28.09)

2009– 2013

1033 613 867 837

Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab

Amritsar F.G. Sahib Jalandhar Kapurthala Ludhiana Moga SBS Nagar Patiala Sangrur Average Bathinda Faridkot Firozepur Mansa Muktsar Sahib Average PUNJAB

CENTRAL PLAIN ZONE (CPZ) 742 568 426 571 (32.73) (32.07) (43.30) (41.01) 803 370 494 (32.22) (42.57) (55.03) 809 924 472 721 (27.15) (39.29) (36.15) (42) 546 594 534 553.57 (23.22) (17.14) (45.54) (45.54) 691 607 507 599 (18.60) (42.04) (22.06) (30.37) 278 278 (59.07) (59.07) 897 897 (49.32) (49.32) 758 800 703 730 (21.69) (44.94) (23.78) (32.23) 562 416 299 429 (22.22) (50.43) (49.08) (42.58) 685 673 498 593 (15.79) (25.98) (39.66) (45.03) SOUTH-WEST ZONE (SWZ) 341 244 221 291 (21.69) (53.05) (64.12) (46.12) 445 432 324 400 (21.54) (38.09) (41.77) (34.95) 494 394 142 339 (28.24) (29.07) (84.78) (54.41) 187 138 152 (39.89) (56.67) (51.19) 498 498 (38.97) (38.97) 427 314 265 334 (18.25) (37.29) (57.07) (51.76) 673 652 473 598 (16.07) (31.08) (24.93) (28.01)

53

412

491

457

368

528

539

475

638

464

523

307

418

490

726

540

574

370

362

449

549

308

382

507

393

226

181

122

177

356

293

306

285

438

496

Source: Govt. of Punjab, Statistical Abstracts, Punjab (various years). Note: Figures in parentheses represent coefficient of Variation; average is interdistricts and other figures in brackets indicate temporal intra-districts variation.

54

Chapter Three

The inter-district variation in SWZ is also very high as is clear from the coefficient of variation (table 3.7). For the period 1976–1985, the coefficient of variation was 18.25. It increased to 37.29 during 19861– 1995. The variation for 1996–2005 was extraordinarily high (56.67). The coefficient of variation for the 1971–2005 periods was also very high (51.76). This shows that the SMZ is not only receiving less amount of rainfall but there is a high degree of inter-district variation across various sub-periods. The overall average rainfall in Punjab also depicts a decline in each successive period. The average annual rainfall declined to 652 mm during 1986–1996 as compared to 673 mm in 1975–1985. It further decreased to 473 mm during 1986–2005. However, during 2006–2010 and 2009–2013, the annual average rainfall was slightly higher than the average annual rainfall during 1996–2005 but was lower than that in the previous two subperiods. The intra-district temporal variation of average rainfall is also shown in table 3.7. In the Kandi zone, Roopnagar has the highest variation and Hoshiarpur the lowest during 1975–1985. During 1986–1995, Hoshiarpur shows the highest variation and Roopnagar the lowest. During the following decade, Hoshiarpur again shows the highest variation but Gurdaspur has the lowest variation. During the entire period of 1971–2005 the highest variation is within Hoshiarpur while the lowest is in Gurdaspur. The intra-district variation in the average annual rainfall is higher in the central plain zone (CPZ) than that in the SMZ. Amritsar has the highest variation for 1975–1985 and Ludhiana the lowest variation. In the following decade, Sangrur has the highest and Kapurthala the lowest variation. During 1996–2005, Moga shows the highest and Ludhiana has the lowest variation. Over the long period (1971–2005), too, Moga has experienced the highest and Ludhiana the lowest variation in rainfall. In the case of SWZ, the highest variation in the average annual rainfall during 1975–1986 was in Ferozepur district whereas the lowest was in Bathinda. During the following decade, the highest dispersion was in district Bathinda and lowest in Firozepur district. However, it was highest in Ferozepur and lowest in Muktsar district. Over the period of 1971– 2005, the intra-district variation was highest in Firozepur and lowest in Faridkot.

Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab

55

The high dispersion of intra and inter-district average annual rainfall exposes some parts of the district to drought and some to a flood-like situation. The high degree of intra and inter-zone variation in rainfall also creates such situations. Out of the three agro-climatic zones, though the sub-mountain zone seems to be in a comfortable position as far as the average annual rainfall is concerned, the long-term trend is downward even in this zone. The paddy-dominated central plain zone (CPZ) is facing a more serious problem, both on the rainfall and water table front. The long-term rainfall trend is decreasing and extraction of subsoil water is increasing. Most of the over-exploited blocks fall in this zone. The southwest zone faces the problem of plenty and scarcity at the same time. The area under water logging is facing the problem of plenty whereas the other area is facing the problem of shortage of water. This is really a situation of a dancing water table.

3.3 District-wise Water Table in Punjab The status of the ground water table has much to do with the average annual rainfall (and of course to its temporal spread and the cropping pattern). Table 3.8 presents the pre-monsoon ground water table across the districts in Punjab. The minimum pre-monsoon water table varies from 0.25 metres in Ferozepur to 5.75 metres in Sangrur in 1996. In 2006, it ranges between 0.60 metres (Muktsar) and 11.50 metres (Moga). In 2016, it varies between 0.83 metres (Ferozepur) and 22.95 metres (Barnala, earlier part of Sangrur). This information clearly demonstrates that even the minimum water table over the period (1996–2016) has gone deeper in almost all the districts, except for a couple of districts. In some of the districts, it has gone down significantly. However, in a couple of districts, it has either remained nearly the same or it has improved. The intra-district minimum water table level has generally declined during 1996–2016. The water table in Gurdaspur declined by one metre during 1996–2006 but increased by 1.41 metre during the period 2006–2016. In Ludhiana, it declined during the former period but remained the same during the later period. Patiala witnessed a significant increase in the water table during 2006–2016, but during 1996–2006, its depth increased by 1.37 metres. The minimum water table in Bathinda, however, came up in 2006 as compared to 1996 but increased in 2016. Mansa experienced a significant decline during 1996–2006 but a rise in 2014 (table 3.8).

Chapter Three

56

Table 3.8: District-wise pre-monsoon (June over June) ground water level in Punjab: 1996–2016 (Depth in metres) District Gurdaspur Amritsar Tarn Taran Jalandhar Kapurthala Ludhiana Ferozepur Sangrur Barnala Patiala Fatehgarh Sahib SAS Nagar Moga Bathinda Mansa Faridkot Muktsar Hoshiarpur SBS Nagar (Nawan Shahr) Roopnagar (Ropar)

1996 2.06 3.82 3.89 1.52 3.00 0.25 5.75 2.39 2.17

Minimum 2006 3.11 6.26 7.10 4.66 4.06 1.40 11.00 3.76 3.76

2016 1.70 12.60 7.30 7.70 9.92 4.06 0.83 22.50 22.95 2.26 4.00

1996 21.93 17.10 18.60 12.50 14.43 12.94 15.20 16.71 18.49

Maximum 2006 18.75 23.65 28.81 26.15 24.83 9.00 29.00 28.01 28.68

2016 19.12 23.70 21.10 36.20 28.20 21.15 9.80 32.50 33.20 38.76 37.10

-

4.95

4.10

-

21.45

11.00

5.05 3.68 1.70 1.34 0.63 0.44 2.86

11.50 2.65 4.00 2.15 0.60 1.66 6.25

20.58 3.80 3.95 4.10 1.10 3.99* 10.15*

14.15 22.25 6.41 7.55 12.71 66.50 54.53

29.15 15.61 15.50 13.27 7.28 70.99 51.58

28.20 25.80 20.96 14.20 5.25 23.82* 18.00*

1.15

1.05

1.05

28.18

28.90

31.89

Source: Govt. of India, Statistical Abstract of Punjab, 2006 and 2016. *Well changed.

A number of districts experienced a decline in the minimum water table level during 1996–2016. In Amritsar, the depth of the water table increased from 3.82 metres in 1996 to 12.60 metres in 2016, a significant decline. Sangrur experienced a water level depth of 22.50 metres in 2016 compared to 5.75 metres in 1996. The depth of the minimum ground water level in Moga increased from 5.05 metres in 1996 to 20.58 metres in 2016. Jalandhar and Kapurthala also witnessed a significant decline in water

Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab

57

table during 1996–2016. Incidentally, all these five districts are mainly under paddy crop during kharif season (table 3.8). The maximum pre-monsoon ground water level has also witnessed significant decline across the districts (table 3.8). Amritsar’s water table declined to 23.70 metres in 2016 as compared to 17.10 metres in 1996. In the case of Jalandhar, it was 36.20 metres in 2016 and 18.60 metres in 1996. In Kapurthala, the water table declined to nearly 28.20 metres in 2016 from 12.50 metres in 1996. The corresponding figures for Ludhiana are 21.15 metres and 14.43 metres, respectively. In the case of Sangrur, the water table declined to 32.50 metres in 2016 from 15.20 metres in 1996. Significantly, Mansa’s water table decreased to 20.96 metres in 2016 compared to 6.41 metres in 1996. Muktsar, perhaps, is the only district in which the water table rose to 5.25 metres in 2016 as compared to 12.71 metres in 1996. But this is the district where water logging is the highest and the subsoil water is not fit for irrigation. Ferozepur’s water table also increased by 3 metres in 2016 compared to 1996. However, SBS Nagar (Nawan Shahr) displays a mixed trend as far as water table is concerned. Table 3.9 displays the post-monsoon (October over October) ground water scenario across the districts. As far as minimum water level of ground water depth is concerned, 10 districts have shown an increasing trend in depth. Amritsar, Jalandhar, Kapurthala, Sangrur and Moga are the prominent districts in this category. Some of the districts present a mixed trend while in Gurdaspur and Patiala, the water table has increased to 1.29 metres and 1.66 metres in 2016 as compared to 1996, respectively. The maximum depth of post-monsoon ground water level has also declined in most of the districts as is shown in table 3.9. Jalandhar, Ludhiana, Sangrur, Patiala, Fatehgarh Sahib and Moga are the worst hit districts in this respect. Strangely, the three south-west districts Bathinda, Mansa and Faridkot also witnessed a significant decline in water table during 1996–2016. In Bathinda, the water table went down to 25.60 metres in 2016, compared to 12.25 metres in 1996. The corresponding figures for Mansa are 24.01 metres and 6.41 metres, respectively, and for Faridkot 14.35 metres and 7.55 metres. Muktsar, however, witnessed a rise in water table during this period, of course for the reasons mentioned above.

Chapter Three

58

Table 3.9: District-wise post-monsoon (October over October) ground water level in Punjab: 1996–2016 (depth in metres) District Gurdaspur Amritsar Tarn Taran Jalandhar Kapurthala Ludhiana Ferozepur Sangrur Barnala Patiala Fatehgarh Sahib SAS Nagar Moga Bathinda Mansa Faridkot Muktsar Hoshiarpur SBS Nagar (Nawan Shahr) Roopnagar (Ropar)

1996 2.06 3.82 3.89 1.52 3.00 0.25 5.75 2.39 2.17

Minimum 2006 3.11 6.26 7.10 4.66 4.06 1.40 11.00 3.76 6.23

2016 1.29 11.95 7.5 7.80 8.91 3.85 0.79 30.00 25.20 1.66 3.40

1996 21.93 17.10 18.60 12.50 14.43 12.94 15.20 16.71 18.49

Maximum 2006 17.19 21.06 28.50 24.04 24.94 8.15 29.90 26.90 30.18

2016 19.17 23.40 21.90 37.25 30.47 22.70 9.80 33.50 34.00 37.16 30.92

5.05 3.68 1.70 1.34 0.63 0.44 2.86

4.95 11.50 2.65 4.00 2.15 0.60 1.66 6.25

2.10 20.35 3.55 3.75 3.85 1.00 2.89* 10.40*

14.15 12.25 6.41 7.55 12.71 66.50 54.53

22.40 29.40 16.00 16.55 14.02 7.18 70.61 52.28

11.45 32.50 25.60 24.01 14.35 5.20 24.22* 14.80

1.15

1.05

0.95

28.18

22.49

31.49*

Source: Govt. of Punjab, Statistical Abstract of Punjab, 2006 and 2016. *Well changed.

The district-wise annual average change in water table, both for premonsoon (June over June) and post-monsoon (October over October) is shown in table 3.10. The post-monsoon minimum average annual decline in water table varies from 2.4 cms (Firozepur) to 106.7 cms (Sangrur). The increase in water table varies between 0.8 cms (Roopnagar) and 3.4 cms (Gurdaspur). Significantly in 13 out of 17 districts, the post-monsoon minimum level of water table has declined. In the case of post-monsoon maximum depth of water table, the annual average increase in depth varies from 24.6 cms (Amritsar) to 79.8 cms (Patiala) during 1996–2016. In

Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab

59

twelve of the seventeen districts, the water table has significantly declined. The post-monsoon average annual rise in water table (maximum) ranges from 10.8 cms (Gurdaspur) to 29.3 cms (Muktsar). In Hoshiarpur and SBS Nagar, the wells were changed (hence problem of comparability creeps in). Many of the districts also experienced a very significant decline in water table during the pre-monsoon (June over June) period during 1996–2016. The average annual decline in water table (minimum) varies from 0.5 cms (Bathinda) to 70.4 cms (Sangrur). Besides, Muktsar, Hoshiarpur and SBS Nagar (not comparable), there are nine more districts in the category of declining pre-monsoon water table. Three districts (Gurdaspur, Patiala and Roopnagar) experienced an annual average increase in water table during 1996–2016. The maximum rise and fall of water table for June over June is shown in the last two columns of table 3.10. In terms of annual average decline in water table, twelve districts experienced deterioration of water table. It varies from 11.4 cms (Bathinda) to 70.6 cms (Patiala) during 1996–2016. Leaving aside Muktsar, Hoshiapur and SBS Nagar, there are two more districts which experienced a rise in water table during this period. The annual average rise in Gurdaspur and Firozepur is 9.0 cms and 10.0 cms, respectively. It is significant that during the pre-monsoon period, the total minimum decline in water table varied from 12 cms (Bathinda) to 1,675 cms (Sangrur) during 1996–2016. Moga (1553 cms), Amritsar (878 cms), Kapurthala (840 cms), Jalandhar (381 cms), Hoshiarpur (355 cms), Faridkot (276 cms) and Mansa (225 cms) come next in the descending order during 1996–2016. But for Mansa, all other districts are mainly paddy growing. According to the Water Resource Estimation Committee (1997) when the annual average decline in the water table is more than 10 cm to 20 cm per year, for a period of ten years or more, it is characterised as a significant decline in the water table. Going by this criterion, 11 districts of Punjab have experienced a significant decline in water table during 1996–2016 (table 3.10). Besides, any water use (water abstracted minus return flows) at any point, weather surface or ground water, reduces the availability at some other point in space and time. Thus, over-exploitation of ground water poses a serious threat to food, water and livelihood security (Srinivasan and Lele, 2017).

Chapter Three

October over October (Post-monsoon) Minimum Maximum Total Annual Total Annual Average Average -77 -3.4 -276 -10.8 +813 +35.8 +630 +24.6 +391 +17.2 +1865 +72.7 +739 +32.5 +1797 +70.1 +85 +3.7 +827 +32.3 +54 +2.4 -314 -12.2 +2425 +106.7 +1830 +71.4 -73 -3.2 +2045 +79.8 +123 +5.4 +1243 +48.5 +1530 +67.3 +1835 +71.6 -13 -0.6 +1335 +52.1 +205 +9.0 +1760 +68.6 +251 +11.0 +680 +26.5 +37 +1.6 -751 -29.3 +245 +10.8 -4228 -164.9* +754 +33.2 -3973 -154.9* -20 -0.9 +331 +12.9

(depth in cms) June over June (Pre-monsoon) Minimum Maximum Total Annual Total Annual Average Average -36 -1.5 -281 -9.0 +878 +36.9 +660 +21.1 +381 +16.0 +1760 +56.3 +840 +35.3 +1570 +50.2 +106 +4.5 +672 +21.5 +58 +2.4 -314 -10.0 +1675 +70.4 +1730 +55.4 -13 -0.5 +2205 +70.6 +183 +7.7 +1861 +59.6 +1553 +65.2 +1405 +45.0 +12 +0.5 +355 +11.4 +225 +9.5 +1455 +46.6 +276 +11.6 +665 +21.3 +47 +2.0 -746 -23.9 +355 +14.9 -4268 -136.6* +729 +30.6 -3653 -116.9* -10 -0.4 +371 +11.9

Source: Computed form tables 3.8 and 3.9. Note: Minus (-) indicates that water table has come up and plus (+) means water table has gone down. *Well Changed.

Gurdaspur Amritsar Jalandhar Kapurthala Ludhiana Ferozepur Sangrur Patiala Fatehgarh Sahib Moga Bathinda Mansa Faridkot Muktsar Hoshiarpur SBS Nagar (Nawan Shahr) Roopnagar (Ropar)

District

Table 3.10: District-wise annual average change in water table in 2016 over 1996

60

Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab

61

In the case of total maximum pre-monsoon decline in water table, Patiala registered 225 cms (highest) and Bathinda 355 cms (minimum). Fatehgarh Sahib (1,861 cms), Jalandhar (1,760 cms), Sangrur (1,730 cms), Kapurthala (1,570 cms), Mansa (1,455 cms), Moga (1,405 cms), Ludhiana (672 cms) and Faridkot (665 cms), come next in the descending order (table 3.10). In the case of total (minimum) decline in water table in the post-monsoon season, the highest decline was 2,425 cms in Sangrur district and the lowest decline was 37 cms in Muktsar district, during 1996–2016. Moga, Amritsar, Kapurthala, Jalandhar, SBS Nagar and Faridkot are other districts in which the water table declined in the range of 251 cms and 1,530 cms, during 1996–2016. During the post-monsoon season, the total maximum decline in water table was highest (2,045 cms) in Patiala and lowest (331 cms) in Roopnagar, during 1996–2016. The water table declined in the range of 1,760 cms and 1,865 cms in Mansa, Kapurthala, Moga, Sangrur, and Jalandhar, during the same period, in the post-monsoon (maximum category) season. In another five districts the water table declined in the range of 630 cms (Amritsar) and 1,335 cms (Bathinda). It is clear from the foregoing discussion that Punjab has suffered a serious depletion in water table, especially in the paddy zone. The decline in water table involves a significant social cost and also reduces productivity. A one-metre decline in ground water table leads to around 8 percent reduction in food production (Sekhri, 2011). Poverty rate increases by around 11 percent as ground water depth falls beyond 8 metres (Sekhri, 2012).

3.4 Extent of Ground Water Exploitation in Punjab As per the criterion, appendix (table A3.1), developed by the Central Ground Water Board and the Directorate of Water Resources and Environment, Punjab (CGWB and WRED, 2013) if the water draft (extraction of underground water) is less than or equal to 90 percent of the recharge it is considered to be within safe limits. It will be in a semicritical stage if the draft is greater than 70 percent but less than or equal to 100 percent. If the draft is greater than 90 percent but less than or equal to 100 percent, then it is in the critical stage. If the draft is more than 100 percent, then the region will be in the category of over-exploited. The decline in water table over the years (1973–2010) in central Punjab is shown in table A3.2.

Chapter Three

62

Going by the above criterion, the extent of ground water exploitation in Punjab presents a very grim picture as is evident from table 3.11. The number of over-exploited blocks increased from 53 (44.92 percent) in 1984 to 105 (76.09 percent) in 2013. Thus, over the span of 29 years, the number of over-exploited blocks has increased by nearly 31 percentage points. Table 3.11: Extent of ground water exploitation in Punjab: 1984–2013 (no. of blocks) Time 1984 1986 1989 1992 1999 2004 2009 2011 2013

OverExploited (Dark) 53 (44.92) 55 (46.61) 62 (52.54) 63 (53.39) 73 (52.90) 103 (75.18) 110 (79.71) 110 (79.71) 105 (76.09)

Critical (Dark) 7 (5.93) 9 (7.63) 7 (5.93) 7 (5.93) 11 (7.97) 5 (3.65) 3 (2.17) 4 (2.90) 4 (2.90)

Semicritical (Grey) 22 (18.64) 18 (15.25) 20 (16.95) 15 (12.71) 16 (11.59) 4 (2.92) 2 (1.45) 2 (1.45) 3 (2.17)

Safe (White)

Total

36 (30.51) 36 (30.51) 29 (24.58) 33 (27.97) 38 (27.54) 25 (18.25) 23 (16.67) 22 (15.94) 26 (18.84)

118 118 118 118 138 137 138 138 138

Source: 1. State-Level Committee on Ground Water Resource Estimation, Govt. of Punjab Central Ground Water Board North-Western Region, and Water Resources & Environment Director, Punjab, Chandigarh (2013): Dynamic Ground Water Resources of Punjab State. 2. Dynamic Ground Water Resources of India (2017), Central Ground Water Board, Ministry of Water Resources, River Development & Ganga Rejuvenation, Government of India, Faridabad. Note: No. of development blocks in 2013 was 145 but data are for 138 blocks.

Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab

63

Many of the blocks which were earlier in the critical zone of ground water exploitation entered into the category of over-exploited blocks as has been reflected. The number of critically over-exploited blocks increased from seven (5.93%) in 1984 to nine (7.63%) in 1986, remained at seven till 1992, increased to eleven in 2004 but declined to four in 2013. Clearly, some of the blocks in the critical zone have become over-exploited blocks. More significantly, the number of semi-critical (grey) blocks declined from twenty-two (18.64%) to three (2.17%) in 2013. Throughout this period the trend has been downward. The ever-declining number of safe (white) blocks is another issue of serious concern. The number of such blocks was thirty-six (30.51%) in 1984 but decreased to twenty-six (18.84%) in 2013; a decline of about 12 percentage points (table 3.11). Punjab faces an acute problem of water quality due to the high concentration of fluoride and arsenic. The areas of Patiala, Sangrur and Fatehgarh Sahib are badly affected with fluoride and Amritsar and Taran Taran belt with arsenic (Anonymous, 2017). Table 3.12: District-wise distribution in the number of over-exploited (Dark) and critical (Dark) blocks in Punjab: 1984–2011 (only sampled districts) (number) District Gurdaspur Hoshiarpur Roopnagar Amritsar Jalandhar Kapurthala Ludhiana Pataiala Sangrur Bathinda Faridkot Firozepur

1984 1 (8) 4 6 (40) 11 (92) 4 (100) 9 (90) 8 (89) 7 (70) 3 (30) -

1997 4 (29) 2 (29) 11 (69) 12 (92) 5 (100) 8 (73) 11 (79) 12 (92) 1 (8) 4 (40) 3 (27)

2004 7 (54) 2 (17) 2 (29) 16 (100) 13 (100) 5 (100) 10 (83) 13(100) 12 (100) 8 (67) 7(100) 7 (70)

2009 7 (54) 4 (40) 3 (60) 16 (100) 13 (100) 5 (100) 11 (92) 13 (100) 12(100) 8 (67) 7(100) 8 (80)

2011 8 (57) 4 (40) 3 (60) 16 (100) 13 (100) 5 (100) 11 (92) 13 (100) 12(100) 8 (67) 7(100) 8 (80)

Figures in parentheses indicate percentage to total number of block in respective district. Source: Same as in table 3.11 Bathinda includes Mansa, Faridkot includes Moga, Patiala includes Fatehgarh Sahib, Sangrur includes Barnala, Amritsar includes Tarn Taran, Jalandhar includes Nawan Shahr (SBS Nagar) and Firozepur includes Muktsar.

Chapter Three

64

The district-wise distribution of over-exploited blocks reveals that the situation has gone from bad to worse in most of the districts, especially in the central zone (paddy zone) during 1984–2011. In six districts (Amritsar, Jalandhar, Kapurthala, Patiala, Sangrur and Faridkot), all the blocks were in the over-exploited category in 2011. As compared to this, in 1984, the proportion of over-exploited blocks in these districts varied between 30 percent (Faridkot) and 92 percent (Jalandhar). In Kapurthala, all the blocks were in the over-exploited category even in 1994. It is significant to note the proportion of over-exploited blocks varied between 40 percent (Hoshiarpur) and 92 percent (Ludhiana) in 2011 (Table 3.12). Table 3.13 presents the district-wise number of over-exploited, critical, semi-critical and safe blocks, along with the quality of water. Out of the 138 blocks in Punjab, 105 (76.09%) were in the category of over-exploited blocks as on 31st March, 2013. Amritsar, Fatehgarh Sahib, Firozepur, Jalandhar, Ludhiana, Mansa, Moga, Patiala, Sangrur, Barnala and Tarn Taran are the worst victims of over-exploitation of ground water. In 10 of the 20 districts, all the blocks were over-exploited in 2013. In the remaining districts, the extent of over-exploitation, varied between 40 percent and 88 percent. Clearly, all the districts are witnessing an overdraft of groundwater. The districts in the central zone or paddy zone are the worst hit. Such a scenario must be a cause of concern for the government, policy makers and farmers as the very sustainability of agriculture and Punjab’s water balance is under great stress. Table 3.13: Assessment of dynamic ground water resources across the districts in Punjab (as on 31.03.2013) S. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

District Amritsar Barnala Bathinda Faridkot Fateh Garh Sahib Firozpur Gurdaspur Hoshiarpur Jalandhar Kapurthala

Total Blocks 8 3 7 2 5

OverExploited 7 (88) 3 (100) 3 (43) 2 (100) 5 (100)

Critical

Safe

1 -

SemiCritical -

10 14 10 10 5

5 (50) 8 (57) 4 (40) 10 (100) 5 (100)

1 -

1 1 -

4 5 5 -

4 -

Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Ludhiana Mansa Moga Fazilka Nawan Shahr (SBS Nagar) Patiala Ropar (Roopnagar) Mohali (SAS Nagar) Sangrur Taran Taran Total

65

12 5 5 4 5

11 (92) 4 (100) 5 (100) 2 (50) 2 (40)

1 1

-

1 2 2

8 5

8 (100) 2 (40)

-

1

2

3

2 (67)

-

-

1

9 8 138

9 (100) 8 (100) 105 (76)

4

3

26

Source: Dynamic Ground Water Resources of India (2017), Central Ground Water Board, Ministry of Water Resources, River Development &Ganga Rejuvenation, Government of India, Faridabad. * Firozepur also includes Mukatsar district. **Gurdaspur also includes Pathankot district.

The district-wise long-term situation of draft (extraction) and recharge of ground water is given in table 3.14. In 1984, there were five districts in which draft was more than 100 percent of the recharge. Jalandhar and Kapurthala had 188 percent and 191 percent draft of the recharge. The corresponding figures for Patiala, Sangrur and Ludhiana were 165,149 and 134 percent, respectively. In 1989, Amritsar also entered into this category though with a draft of 109 percent of the recharge. In 1989 the extent of draft, increased in Kapurthala and Ludhiana as compared to 1984. On the other hand, there was a marginal decline in draft in Jalandhar, Patiala and Sangrur. The number of over-drafting districts remained confined to 6 in 1992 but three districts had a marginal increase while 2 districts had a marginal decline in draft. Kapurthala had a significant decline in draft but still remained the highest over-drafting district. The number of overdrafting districts rose to 8 in 2004 and further to 12 in 2009. The overdrafting rate ranged between 104 percent (Hoshiarpur) and 264 percent (Sangrur). In 2011 also all the 12 (table 3.14) districts reported overdrafting ranging from 102 percent (Hoshiarpur) to 283 percent (Sangrur). Significantly, in 5 districts over-draft increased in 2011 as compared to 2009. In the remaining districts the draft rate declined marginally. In the year 2013, the over-drafting reported by the districts varies from 93 percent (Bathinda) to 211 percent (Sangrur).

66

Chapter Three

Table 3.14: District-wise comparison of ground water development in some selected districts of Punjab: 1984 to 2013 (sampled districts) (Draft as a percentage of recharge) District 1984 1989 1992 1997 2004 2009 2011 2013 Gurdaspur 51 71 67 71 98 126 127 124 Hoshiarpur 50 50 46 44 84 104 102 99 Ropar 40 57 50 52 100 110 110 110 Amritsar 92 109 107 112 149 179 180 126 Jalandhar 188 172 178 176 248 229 231 209 Kapurthala 191 303 259 251 204 235 234 205 Ludhiana 134 140 123 136 152 170 167 162 Patiala 165 136 138 128 164 195 196 189 Sangrur 149 144 150 155 192 264 283 211 Bathinda 36.5 50 48 52 96 124 119 93 Faridkot 42.5 69 65 76 106 159 160 160 Firozepur 44 58 64 64 101 141 147 144 Source: Same as in Table 3.11. Note: District Moga and Mukatsar have been included in Faridkot, Mansa in Bathinda, Fatehgarh Sahib in Patiala, and Nawanshehar in Jalandhar and Hoshiarpur in study years 1997.

It emerges out of the data in table 3.14 that the number and extent of overdrafting in almost all districts has increased during 1984–2013. This is a clear indication that Punjab has moved to a stage where draft of ground water is much higher than that of recharge. Consequently, we are heading towards a precarious problem of water table depletion. In other words, net recharging level is much below the draft of water. In such a scenario in Punjab, water crisis and insecurity are written on the wall. Not taking note of this ‘wall-notice’ will be an invitation to a serious and multi-pronged crisis, not just the water crisis. Such a scenario has not emerged overnight. Interestingly, the state of Punjab turned into mono-crop agriculture towards the late 1970s; paddy during kharif season and wheat during rabi season (Ghuman, 2001) but the government became aware of the depleting water table during the 1980s. The Government of Punjab constituted a committee on diversification of agriculture (GoP, 1986) which recommended crop diversification in favour of crops other than paddy and wheat. Another committee (GoP, 2002) reiterating the position of the earlier committee vehemently argued for shifting a sizeable area from under paddy to other crops. Paradoxically, the area under paddy has increased over the period of

Dynamics of Water Resources in Punjab

67

time. Another study (Ghuman, et al., 2009) also argued for crop diversification but nothing happened on the ground. There were four main reasons behind such a scenario. First, the governments (Punjab as well Union Government) did not make any serious efforts to remedy the situation. The country needed to maintain food security and the governments were rather extending their implicit and explicit support to the wheat-paddy cropping system in Punjab. This is amply reflected in the assured market clearance for paddy (by the govt. agencies) at the minimum support price (MSP). Second, there was no major breakthrough in the R & D of alternative crops. As such there did not come up any alternative cropping system which could give at least the same amount of per hectare net return and an assured market (Romana, 2006). Third, the farmers are also happy with the wheat-paddy rotation as this gives them assured market clearance and income. The physical infrastructure, machinery and the skill to husband the wheat-paddy crop further acted against the much-needed diversification. Fourth, the MSP regime was either not in place for alternative crops or it was not being implemented properly. The government and policy makers occasionally advise the farmers, but without any policy or road map, to go in for alternative crops. Clearly, the objective conditions have not been created to change the ground realities in favour of crop diversification. It is significant to note that the so-called green revolution (mainly the wheat-paddy revolution) became a success story because of the multi-dimensional public policy intervention (public investment in agriculture and irrigation, MSP regime, high-yielding seeds of wheat and paddy and assured supply of water and chemical fertilisers) during the 1960s and 1970s. It needs to be noted that the farmers of Punjab do not have any emotional attachment to paddy but government policies (of course driven by the need for food security, drying up of food aid under PL-480 and pressure of global agri-business) pushed them into paddy cultivation (Ghuman, 1983). Now the government wants to dissuade them from paddy without creating the enabling environment. A couple of years back the then Union Minister for Agriculture (Mr. Sharad Pawar in UPA-2) and very recently the Union State Minister in the present NDA-led Union Government advised the government and farmers of Punjab to do away with paddy cultivation; without of course giving any viable alternative crop combination. The farmers feel beleaguered in the wheat-paddy cobweb and are caught in a predicament of decelerating growth rate of net per hectare return from the present cropping system. All this has pushed the farmers into committing suicide. During 2000–2016,

68

Chapter Three

approximately 16,000 farmers and agricultural labourers have committed suicide in Punjab. This figure is based on the survey commissioned by the Government of Punjab and conducted by the three state universities (Punjab Agricultural University; Punjabi University; and Guru Nanak Dev University). The foregoing discussion has amply established that the state of Punjab is in for grave water shortage and water insecurity. The over-exploitation of groundwater and the consequent wheat-paddy cropping pattern and downward trend of rainfall over a long period of time have led to a continuous depletion of the water table. We have been over-exploiting the subsoil water, mainly for irrigating the paddy fields for well over four decades. The over dependence on subsoil water for irrigation and the decreasing role of canal water have been the main reasons for it.

CHAPTER FOUR GREEN REVOLUTION AND IRRIGATION PATTERN IN PUNJAB: A TEMPORAL ANALYSIS BASED ON SECONDARY DATA

The availability of an adequate quantity of water for irrigation is undoubtedly important, yet equally important is how we use the available water. Efficient, optimal and sustainable use of any resource, water in this context, is a prerequisite to sustainable agriculture and of course sustainable development. Punjab, perhaps, has yet to learn this lesson. The sooner that the government, the policy makers and the farmers recognise that water scarcity is going to be one of the major constraints on agricultural productivity and growth in the state the better. Already the state has been experiencing a deceleration in agricultural, as well overall growth rate, for about the last three decades. The situation has reached the stage where the GDP growth rate of Punjab is not only lower than the national average but also lowest among the 17 non-special category states of India. In the previous chapter, we noted that there has been a continuous decline in the average annual rainfall, increasing the area under tube-well irrigation, over-exploitation of water and depletion of the water table at a fast rate. Consequently, the marginal cost of production has gone up and the real per hectare net return is shrinking and suicide among farmers and agricultural labourers is on the rise (Singh, 2000; Gill, 2002; Singh et al., 2016; Singh and Ghuman, 2016). Clearly, the judicious use of water is not a choice, but it is the need of the hour. The state needs to learn from this, otherwise the future will teach this lesson in a hard-hitting manner. It is in this context that this chapter dwells on the cropping pattern and irrigation system in Punjab that emerged out of the “success story” of the green revolution. However, consideration of land use pattern would also

Chapter Four

70

be appropriate before discussing the cropping pattern and irrigation system.

4.1 Land Use Pattern in Punjab: Diversification to Non-Diversification Table 4.1 revealed that Punjab’s total reporting area is 5,033,000 hectares at present. It registered an increase of only 11,000 hectares since 1960–61. It is significant to mention that Punjab accounts for 1.53 percent of India’s geographical area. The area under forests increased from a meagre 35,000 hectares in 1960–61 to 295,000 hectares in 2010–11 but declined to 256,000 hectares in 2015–16. The cultivable waste has decreased to 16,000 hectares in 2015–16 from 255,000 hectares in 1960–61. However, the current fallow land is still 77,000 hectares, down from 313,000 hectares in 1960–1961. Table 4.1: Land use pattern in Punjab: 1960–2016 (‘000 hectares) Purpose Reporting Area Forest Culturable Waste Current Fallow Net Sown Area Area Sown more than once Gross Cropped Area (GCA) Cropping Intensity

1960– 1961 5022

1970– 1971 5031

1980– 1981 5033

1990– 1991 5036

2000– 2001 5036

2010– 2011 5036

2015– 2016 5033

35 255

123 92

216 41

222 35

280 15

295 2

256 16

313

139

45

82

40

33

77

3757

4053

4191

4218

4250

4158

4137

975

1625

2572

3284

3691

3724

3734

4732

5678

6763

7502

7935

7882

7872

126

140

161

178

187

190

190

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

71

Gross 4080 4242 5781.3 7054 7647 7724 7765 Irrigated Area Irrigation 54 71 81 93 94 97.9 99.9 Intensity (%) Source: Govt. of Punjab, Statistical Abstracts Punjab (Various Years). Net sown area increased from 3,757,000 hectares in 1960–1961 to 4,250,000 hectares in 2000–2001, but declined to 4,137,000 hectares in 2015–2016. Clearly net sown area has decreased by 113,000 hectares during 2001–2016. It is significant to note that the state has only 1,245,000 hectares of land left for all uses other than agriculture. The small decline in net sown area has been compensated with an increasing cropping intensity which increased from 126 in 1960–1961 to 190 in 2015–2016. In other words, 90 percent of Punjab’s net sown area is sown more than once. The area sown more than once increased from 975,000 hectares in 1960–1961 to 3,734,000 hectares in 2015–2016. As a result, the gross cropped area increased from 4,732,000 hectares in 1960–1961 to 7,935,000 hectares in 2000–2001 but declined to 7,872,000 hectares in 2015–2016; a decline of 63,000 hectares in a span of 16 years. Clearly, both the net sown area and gross cropped area are on the decline and there is hardly any possibility to increase net sown area. Theoretically, there is always the possibility to increase the gross cropped area by increasing the cropping intensity. However, availability of water is a major constraint. The significant increase in area sown more than once and the resulting increase in gross cropped area have been mainly possible by the ever-increasing irrigation intensity. It is clear from table 4.1 that irrigation intensity increased from 54 percent in 1960–1961 to 99.9 percent in 2015–2016, a noteworthy increase, but at a very heavy cost of subsoil water and a significant decline in water table. It must be noted that there is a high and positive correlation between irrigation intensity and the cropping intensity, the former being the explanatory variable. Table 4.2: Percentage share of land under different uses in Punjab: 1960–2016 Purpose Forest Colourable Waste

1960– 1961 0.70 5.08

1970 –1971 2.44 1.83

1980 –1981 4.29 0.81

1990 –1991 4.41 0.69

2000 –1 5.56 0.30

2010 –2011 5.86 0.04

2015 –2016 5.09 0.32

Chapter Four

72 Current Fallow Net Sown Area Area Sown more than once* Gross Cropped Area

6.23

2.76

0.89

1.63

0.79

0.66

1.53

74.81

80.56

83.27

83.76

84.39

82.57

82.20

25.95

32.30

61.37

77.86

86.85

89.56

90.26

94.23

112.86

133.78

148.97

157.57

156.51

156.41

Source: Computed from Table 4.1. * Percent of net sown area.

The percentage share of all significant uses of land is given in table 4.2. The area under forest increased from 0.70 percent in 1960–1961 to 5.86 percent in 2010–2011 but declined to 5.09 percent in 2015–2016. It is significant to note that the area under forests in Punjab is not only precariously lower than the required forest cover but is also below the national average. The share of net sown area increased from 74.81 percent in 1960–1961 to 84.39 percent in 2000–2001 but declined to 82.20 percent in 2015–2016. Significantly, less than 18 percent of area in the state is under non-crop uses. In other words, we already have the maximum area possible under crops and the alternative uses of land are competing fiercely with each other. The share of gross cropped area and that of the area sown more than once too reached its plateau in 2000–2001 and 2010–2011, respectively.

4.2 Cropping Pattern in Punjab The cropping pattern in Punjab has undergone a sea change since the 1960s, especially since the advent of the green revolution in the mid-1960s (table 4.3). Wheat, cotton, pulses and maize were the principal crops in 1960–1961. About 37.26 percent of area was under wheat, 24.04 percent under pulses and 11.90 percent under cotton and 8.70 percent under maize in 1960–1961. Paddy accounted for a mere 6.04 percent of the area in 1960–1961. However, the area under paddy started increasing from 1970– 1971. It has never looked back since then and speedily spread its tentacles over the vast area. In 1980–1981, its share increased to 28.23 percent, to 47.77 percent in 1990–1991 and further to about 61.46 percent in 2000– 2001. Its share in area further increased to more than 71.79 percent in

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

73

2015–2016. The area under paddy registered an increase of 65.75 percentage points in 2015–2016 over 1960–1961. In acreage terms, the area under rice increased from 227,000 hectares in 1960–1961 to 2,970,000 hectares in 2015–2016, a 13.08 times increase. Clearly, paddy has emerged as the principal crop in Punjab. Significantly, paddy needs 22 irrigations whereas no other crop uses and consumes such a large volume of water. Astonishingly, the area under paddy registered a steady increase, in spite of the recommendations of various expert committees for shifting the area from under paddy. What a predicament indeed! It is equally true that recommendations were confined to only the sermonic level and the necessary and sufficient conditions to achieve diversification were never created. Hence, the much-needed diversification, too could not take place. Table 4.3: Shift in cropping pattern in Punjab: 1960–2016 (‘000 hectares) Crops

1960– 1970– 1980– 1990– 2000– 2010– 2015– 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 2011 2016 Paddy 227 390 1183 2015 2612 2826 2970 (6.04) (9.62) (28.23) (47.77) (61.46) (67.96) (71.79) Wheat 1400 2299 2812 3273 3408 3510 3506 (37.26) (56.72) (67.10) (77.60) (80.19) (84.41) (84.75) Cotton 447 397 649 701 474 483 335 (11.90) (9.80) (15.49) (16.62) (11.15) (11.62) (8.10) Sugarcane 133 128 71 101 121 70 92 (3.54) (3.16) (1.69) (2.39) (2.85) (1.68) (2.22) Maize 327 555 382 188 164 133 127 (8.70) (13.69) (9.11) (4.46) (3.86) (3.20) (3.07) Total 185 297 238 104 86 56 48 Oilseeds (4.92) (7.33) (5.68) (2.47) (2.02) (1.35) (1.16) Total 903 414 341 143 55 20 20 Pulses (24.04) (10.21) (8.14) (3.39) (1.29) (0.48) (0.48) Potatoes 9 17 40 23 64 64 92 (0.24) (0.42) (0.95) (0.55) (1.51) (1.54) (2.22) Source: Govt. of Punjab, Statistical Abstracts Punjab (various issues). Note: 1. Figures in parentheses indicate percentage share to net sown area. 2. Paddy, cotton, maize are kharif crops; wheat is rabi season’s crop; oil seeds and pulses pertain to both the seasons. Sugarcane is a year-round crop.

The area under wheat increased from 37.26 percent in 1960–1961 to 56.72 percent in 1970–1971 and further to 77.60 percent in 1980–1981. Its share in area increased to 80.19 percent in 2000–2001 and further to 84.75

74

Chapter Four

percent in 2015–2016; an increase of 47.49 percentage points. Clearly, wheat is the most predominant crop of the rabi season. In acreage terms, the area under wheat increased from 1,400,000 hectares in 19606–1961 to 3,506,000 hectares in 20151–2016; a 2.5-fold increase. The area under cotton declined to 9.80 percent in 1970–1971 from 11.90 percent in 1960–1961. Its share in area, however, increased to 15.49 percent in 1980–1981 and further to 16.62 percent in 1990–1991. Thereafter, its share started declining and oscillated between 11.15 percent (2000–2001) and 8.10 percent (2015–2016). The area under sugarcane also started reducing from the 1960s. Its share decreased to 3.16 percent in 1970–1971 from 3.54 percent in 1960–1961. The area under sugarcane decreased to 1.69 percent in 1980–1981 but increased to 2.85 percent in 2000–2001. However, it declined to 1.68 percent in 2010–2011 but again picked up to 2.22 percent in 2015–2016 (table 4.3). Clearly, the long-term trend was downward as for as the share of area under sugarcane is concerned. The area under maize increased during the 1960s but decreased during the 1970s. The decade of the 1980s witnessed a sharp decline in the area under maize. Its share in the area sharply dropped to 3.86 percent in 2000–2001 from 13.69 percent in 1970–1971. In 2015–2016, maize accounted for 3.07 percent of the total cropped area; a decline of 10.62 percentage points over 1970–1971. In acreage terms, the area under maize decreased from 555,000 hectares in 19707–1971 to 127,000 hectares in 2015–2016; a 4.37-fold reduction (table 4.3). Oilseeds accounted for 7.33 percent of area in 1970–1971 which declined to 5.68 percent in 19808–1981. During the 1980s and 1990s, their share in area remained between 2.41 percent and 2.02 percent. In 2015–2016, oilseeds accounted for only 1.16 percent of the area; a decrease of 6.17 percentage points as compared to 1970–1971. In acreage terms, the area under oilseeds decreased from 297,000s hectares in 1970–1971 to 48,000 hectares in 2015–2016, a 6.19-fold decrease (table 4.3). The share of potatoes accounted for 0.24 percent (9,000 hectares) in 1960– 1961 and it increased to 0.95 percent (40,000 hectares) in 1980–1981. After declining to 0.55 percent in 1990–1991, it had shown a significant increase up to 2.22 percent in 2015–2016. In absolute terms, the area under potatoes increased from 9,000 hectares to 92,000 hectares during 1960–2016; a 10.18-fold increase.

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

75

Pulses became the serious victim of the green revolution as is evident from table 4.3. Maize, oilseeds and sugarcane, too, were victims of the green revolution. During the very first decade of the green revolution the share of area under pulses decreased from 24.04 percent to 10.21 percent, a decline of 13.83 percentage points. During the 1970s (the second decade of the green revolution), the share of area under pulses further declined to 8.14 percent. It declined to 3.39 percent in 1990–1991 and further to 1.29 percent in 2000–2001. In 2015–2016, the share of area under pulses dwindled to less than half a percent, a decline of 23.56 percentage points as compared to 1960–1961 (table 4.3). In absolute terms, the area under pulses showed a 45.15-fold decrease. It is amply clear that Punjab’s agriculture was highly diversified on the eve of the green revolution. A major shift of area from pulses, oilseeds and maize has taken place since then (table 4.3). Sugarcane, too, suffered a setback. The crop and agricultural diversification which we had during the 1960s became victims to the green revolution and Punjab emerged as a mono-crop (paddy during kharif season and wheat during rabi season) state. After, say, 20 years (in 1986) from the beginning of the green revolution, the first expert committee report on diversification was handed over to the Government of Punjab. Another expert committee report (incidentally under the same chairman, S.S Johl) was submitted to the Government of Punjab in 2002. Though three decades have passed since the first report and much water has gone to the fields of paddy, the state did not take any substantial policy measures to achieve the much-needed crop diversification and hence could not arrest the continuous decline in the water table. It is significant to mention that historically the state of Punjab (preindependence, undivided Punjab); ever since the development of canal irrigation by the British Empire (since the 1880s) has never been a paddy growing area (tables 4.4 and 4.5). It is clear from table 4.4 that in the 1939–1940 rabi season nearly 55 percent of irrigated area was under wheat which increased to 55.36 percent in 1940–1941. In terms of absolute figures, this was 1,533,000 hectares and 1,545,000 hectares, respectively. It was followed by grams, which covered 8.78 percent of the area. Oilseeds closely followed grams with an area of 225,000 hectares (8.06%) in 1939–1940.

Chapter Four

76

Table 4.4: Distribution of irrigated area under principal rabi crops in undivided Punjab: 1939–1941 Crop Wheat Barley Oilseeds Mixed Grain Gram Other Crops Total

1939–1940 '000 hectares % share 1533 54.93 77 2.76 225 8.06 127 4.55 233 8.35 596 21.35 2791 100.00

1940–1941 '000 hectares % share 1545 55.36 70 2.51 217 7.77 133 4.76 245 8.78 581 20.82 2791 100.00

Source: Government of Punjab, Public Works Department, Irrigation Branch (1964), Administrative Reports for 1940–1941.

The other miscellaneous crops accounted for 21.35 percent of the area in 1939–1940 and 20.82 percent in 1940–1941. The mixed grams and barley shared an area between 4.76 percent and 2.51 percent (70,000 hectares and 133,000 hectares, respectively). Thus, during the rabi season wheat was the major crop in the undivided Punjab. Table 4.5: Distribution of irrigated area under principal kharif crops in undivided Punjab: 1939–1941 Crop Paddy Sugarcane Cotton Maize Indigo Jowar, Chari and Bajra Other Crops Total

1939 '000 % hectares share 237 9.03 77 2.93 973 37.07 136 5.18 04 0.15 858 32.69 340 2625

12.95 100.00

1940 '000 % hectares share 230 8.7 110 4.2 998 37.8 129 4.9 02 0.1 836 31.6 339 2644

12.8 100.0

Source: Government of Punjab, Public Works Department, Irrigation Branch (1964), Administrative Reports for 1940–1941.

During the kharif season, cotton was the major crop covering an area of 998,000 hectares (37.8%) of the irrigated area in 1940 (Table 4.5). jowar, chari and bajra together accounted for 32.60 percent of the area (858,000

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

77

hectares) in 1939 and 31.6 percent (836,000 hectares) in 1940. Paddy accounted for 9 percent of the area (237,000 hectares) in 1939 and 8.7 percent (230,000 hectares) in 1940. The share of maize in area was 5.18 percent (136,000 hectares) in 1939 and 4.9 percent (129,000 hectares) in 1940. The share of other crops was between 12.8 percent and 12.95 percent in 1940 and 340,000 hectares in 1939, respectively. Thus, paddy was never a major crop of undivided Punjab. Incidentally, in the present Indian Punjab, paddy too was not a major crop till 1970–1971. After successive failures of the cotton crop, during the mid-1990s; paddy also got a foot hold in south-west Punjab.

4.3 Irrigation Pattern in Punjab: Increasing Dependence on Ground Water The success story of the green revolution and the consequent cropping pattern led to an excessive use of ground water and tube-wells emerged as the main source of irrigation in Punjab. In 1960–1961, out of the total irrigated area of 2,020,000 hectares, 1,173,000 hectares (58.07%) was under canal water and 829,000 hectares (41.04%) was under tube-wells and wells. The irrigation intensity was 54 percent in 1960–1961. With the advent of the green revolution, the area under irrigation increased to 2,888,000 hectares in 1970–1971, out of which 1,286,000 hectares (45.47%) was under canal irrigation and 1,591,000 hectares (56.26%) was under tube-well irrigation. The areas under canal irrigation increased by just 113,000 hectares while the area under tube-wells increased by 762,000 hectares in one decade. The area under canal irrigation (1,660,000 hectares) reached its plateau in 1990–1991 and thereafter it started declining, both in the absolute and relative sense. The additional area under irrigation after 1990–1991 was being served by tube-wells and hence the share of tube-wells irrigated area registered a continuous increase since the 1960s as the high-yielding varieties of seeds (especially paddy) were highly responsive to water. Hence, an assured supply of water was not a choice but a necessity. Interestingly, subsoil water became very handy for the farmers. In 2000–2001 the share of tube-well irrigated area increased to 76.45 percent (3,074,000 hectares) and thereafter its share remained around 72 percent.

Chapter Four

78

Table 4.6: Net sown area under irrigation in Punjab through canals and tube-wells: 1960–2015 (‘000 hectares) Year

Government Canals

Tubewells & Wells

1960–61

1173 (58.07)

1970–71

1286 (45.47)

1980–81

1427 (42.19)

1990–91

1660 (43.50)

1996–97

1620 (40.15)

1997–98

1296 (32.37)

2000–01

1002 (24.92)

2010–11

1113 (27.35)

2011–12

1113 (27.24)

2012–13

1113 (27.05)

2013–14

1160 (28.01)

2014–15

1175 (28.53)

829 (41.04) 1591 (56.26) 1939 (57.33) 2233 (58.52) 2408 (59.68) 2705 (67.56) 3074 (76.45) 2954 (72.58) 2970 (72.69) 2982 (72.47) 2981 (71.99) 2943 (71.47)

Total Irrigated Area of the State 2020

Irrigation Intensity

2888

71

3382

81

3816

93

4035

95

4004

94

4021

94

4070

98

4086

99

4115

99

4141

99

4118

99

54

Source: Govt. of Punjab, Statistical Abstracts of Punjab (various years). Note: 1. Figures in brackets indicate percentage share; the total may not add up to 100 percent as there are other sources of irrigation also though only a very small area is under those. 2. The total irrigated area may exceed the sum total of area under canal and tubewell irrigation as the difference is under some other sources (less than half a percent) of irrigation.

It is understandable that more water was required for the wheat-paddy crop rotation system, but the moot question is why did the absolute area under canal irrigation decline from 1,620,000 hectares in 1990–1991 to

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

79

1,175,000 hectares in 2014–2015? In 2000–2001 the canal-irrigated area was exceptionally low. Instead of increasing the area under canal irrigation it witnessed a significant decline. This needs a plausible explanation from the government, policy makers and farmers. In the initial years of the green revolution era ground water became very handy and a most reliable source of irrigation (Dhawan, 1975 and 1982; Singh and Joshi, 1989; Kaul and Sekhon, 1991). The technological shift and the policy directions revolving around food security of the country led to wide development of ground water in Punjab (Sarkar, 2011). As a matter of fact, ground water played a significant role in making Punjab a success story of the green revolution. It reduced the risk of the adverse impact of drought on yield, as high-yielding varieties of wheat and paddy are highly responsive to assured irrigation sources. The higher yield led to private installation of tube-wells as higher yield outweighed the initial increase in cost. The public support and global agri-business had also encouraged the installation of private tube-wells for irrigation (Ghuman, 1982; Dhawan, 1988). Table 4.6 also highlights that along with the area, the irrigation intensity also increased from 54 percent in 1960–1961 to 94 percent in 2000–2001, and further to 99 percent in 2014–2015. In other words, almost the entire net sown area in Punjab was under assured irrigation in which the share of tube-well irrigation was 71.47 percent. In June 2015, the Union Government had rolled out a plan to spend Rs. 50,000 crore for the provisioning of irrigation in certain states of India. The availability of subsoil water and the appropriate soil-texture will always be a constraint as many parts of India may not have subsoil water. In certain areas there is near absence of subsoil water. The provision of free electricity with effect from 1st January 1997 (as per the Punjab Electricity Board Memo No. 50196 dated 27.12.96) to agricultural tube-well consumers, with a land holding of up to 7 acres provides a partial explanation for the fast increase in area under tube-well irrigation. The above orders were superseded by PSEB Memo No. 95/845 dated 8th March 1997 and the facility of free electricity was extended to all agricultural consumers with effect from 14 February 1997. Nonetheless, the area under tube-well irrigation started increasing from the 1970s. This was mainly necessitated by the emerging cropping pattern and facilitated by the rural electrification programme of Punjab and the central government. Under the rural electrification programme liberal electric connections were given to the agricultural sector. The public investment and bank loans (for capital investment) also encouraged the installation of

Chapter Four

80

tube-wells. For about the last three decades even the wells have been filled in and there are now only diesel and electric-operated tube-wells. Because of the provision of free electricity, the total amount of power subsidy to the agricultural sector in Punjab adds up to Rs. 413532 million during 2002–2003 and 2016–2017 (table 4.7). The share of agricultural sector subsidy in total power subsidy (including subsidy to SC and weaker section households) during this period was 87.5 percent. This share varied from 82 percent to 96 percent across the years mentioned above. Table 4.7: Share of power subsidy to the agricultural sector in Punjab: 2002–2017 (Rs. Crore) Year

Agriculture

SC Consumers

Fishery etc.

Total

50

Non-BPL DS Consumers -

2002– 03 2003– 04 2004– 05 2005– 06 2006– 07 2007– 08 2008– 09 2009– 10 2010– 11 2011– 12 2012– 13 2013– 14

900

-

950

807

50

-

-

587

906.27

50

-

-

956.27

1065.18

50

-

-

1115.18

1744.03

63.99

0.02

-

1808.04

2011.17

206.73

1.27

-

2219.17

2021.8

243.62

1.98

-

2267.4

2804.99

335.62

3.64

-

3144.25

2679

260.18

9.1

-

2948.28

3456.28

327.76

16.94

-

3800.98

4436.27

585.91

31.48

-

5053.66

4007.53

803.08

54.4

-

4865.01

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

2014– 15 2015– 16 2016– 17 Total

81

4454

616

38

-

5108

4862.9

869.71

67.41

0.53

5800.55

5196.77

1089.06

77.96

0.7

6364.49

41353.19

5601.66

302.2

1.23

47258.28

Source: Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Chandigarh Tariff Orders, (Various years). Note: One crore= 10 million.

Table 4.8 shows the district-wise and zone-wise area under different sources of irrigation. In the central plain zone (CPZ), there was a decline of 68,000 hectares of area under canal irrigation in 2010–2011, compared to 1995–1996. Sangrur is the only district in CPZ which registered an increase of 56,000 hectares under canal irrigation during this period. On the other hand, the area under tube-well irrigation in CPZ increased by 305,000 hectares during the same period. Significantly, except for Sangrur district, all the other districts in the CPZ registerd an increase in area under tube-well irrigation in 2010-2011 as compared to 1995-1996. In the south-west zone (SWZ), there was an increase of 10,000 hectares under canal irrigation during 1995–2011. Muktsar district registered a decline of 21,000 hectares area under canal irrigation, which may be attributed to water logging. However, the area under tube-well irrigation in the SWZ increased by 209,000 hectares during the same period. In Hoshiarpur (sub-mountain zone-SMZ), there was a decline of 8,000 hectares under canal irrigation during this period. The area under tube-well irrigation, however, increased by 48,000 hectares. It is quite interesting to note that per tube-well area increased in 2010– 2011 as compared to 1995–1996, with Gurdaspur, Amritsar and Jalandhar as an exception. Thus, in 4 of the 7 districts in the CPZ, per tube-well area increased and in 3 districts it decreased. In SWZ districts, per tube-well area in Mukatsar district has shown a significant decline (-7.95 hectares) while Bathinda registered a decline of 1.98 hectares per tube-well area during 1995–2011. In Hoshiarpur (SWZ), per tube-well area decreased from 3.28 hectares to 2.65 hectares during the same period.

Chapter Four

02 03 09 122 370 148 217 365 12

59 0.1

0.1 93 40 02

04 05 14 66 438 169 186 355 20

75 02

02 134 49 03

-02 -41 -09 -02

-15 -02

-02 -02 -05 56 -68 -21 31 10 -08

Area under canal irrigation (‘000 ha) 1995– 2010– change over 96 11 1995–96 47 11 -36 94 25 -69 208 198 -10

147 48 96 79

45 91

220 273 300 385 2015 37 94 131 143

117 108 129 61

76 100

296 310 336 341 2320 85 255 340 191

-30 60 33 -18

31 09

76 37 36 -44 305 48 161 209 48

Area under tube-well irrigation (‘000 ha) 1995– 2010– change over 96 11 1995–96 199 212 13 347 381 34 291 444 153

Source: Govt. of India, Agricultural Census, 2005–2006 and 2010–2011.

Jalandhar Ludhiana Patiala Sangrur Total CPZ Muktsar Bathinda Total SWZ Hoshiarpur (SMZ) Other Districts Faridkot Fathegarh Sahib Kapurthala Mansa Moga Ropar

Gurdaspur Amritsar Ferozepur

District

2.65

3.28

2.83 1.22 1.52 2.05

2.13 1.22 1.90 2.21

1.54 2.49

2.98 3.25

10.93 5.23

1.51 1.24

2.01 2.35 2.96 3.22

2010– 11 2.16 2.57 3.03

2.23 2.17 2.61 1.68

1995– 96 3.70 3.35 2.92

-0.70 0.00 0.38 0.16

0.03 1.25

-0.63

-7.95 -1.98

-0.22 0.18 0.35 1.54

Change over 1995–96 -1.54 -0.78 0.11

Area (ha) per tube-well

Table 4.8: District-wise area under canal and tube-well irrigation in Punjab: 1995–1996 and 2010–2011

82

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

83

Table 4.8 also indicates that in six other districts (Faridkot, Fatehgarh Sahib, Kapurthala, Mansa, Moga and Ropar), the area under canal irrigation has decreased during 1995–2011. Coming to the area under tube-well irrigation, except for Kapurthla and Ropar, 4 districts in this category have shown an increase during the same period of time. Further, barring Kapurthla and Mansa, per tube-well area increased in the rest of the districts (Faridkot, Fatehgarh Sahib, Moga and Ropar) during 1995– 2011. It is clear from the data in table 4.8 that the per hectare intensity of tubewells increased in Gurdaspur and Ludiana (CPZ) and in Mukatsar and Bathinda (SWZ). Given the problem of water logging, increasing intensity of tube-wells in Mukatsar, is really beyond comprehension.

4.3.1 Holding Size-wise Area under Various Sources of Irrigation The land-holdings wise area under different sources of irrigation in Punjab during 1995–1996 presents an interesting picture (table 4.9). As the holding size increases, per tube-well area is also increasing. In the case of marginal farmers, per tube-well area is 1.40 hectares. It is slightly higher than the size of small holdings. This means that a good number of marginal farmers do not have their own tube-wells. In the case of small farmers per tube-well area is 1.40 hectares. The semi-medium farmers have 1.98 hectares per tube-well while it is 2.93 hectares for medium farmers. The above argument is also applicable here. In the case of large farmers, per tube-well area is 5.55 hectares. The overall average is 2.78 hectares per tube-well. Clearly, per tube-well overhead cost is higher in the case of marginal and small farmers. As we move to higher holding size, this cost is declining. In fact, it is the average holding size which explains this situation. The average holding size is just 0.6 hectares and 1.3 hectares in marginal and small holdings. In the case of semi-medium farmers, the average holding size is 2.6 hectares. Significantly the average land holding size in all the above-mentioned holding sizes is much lower than their respective upper-class limits. The same is true about medium-size class.

Chapter Four

84

Table 4.9: Holding size-wise area under various sources of irrigation in Punjab: 1995–1996 Holding Size Class

Total Holdings

No. Area Under Different Sources Of Of Irrigation (‘000 Hectares) Tube- Tube- Canals Others Total Number Area wells (‘000) (‘000 wells Hectares) (‘000) Marginal 204 122 87 81 28 02 111 (0.60) * (1.40) [0.43] Small 183 240 172 176 42 04 222 (1.31) * (1.40) [0.94] Semi320 833 420 624 166 10 800 Medium (2.60) * (1.98) [1.31] Medium 306 1754 599 1245 442 14 1700 (5.73) * (2.93) [1.96] Large 80 1198 216 741 404 08 1152 (14.98) * (5.55) [2.70] Total 1093 4147 1494 2866 1081 38 3985 (3.79)* (2.78) [1.37] Source: The Govt. of India, Agricultural Census 1995–1996. Notes: 1. Figures are rounded up to ‘000s. As such the grand total is likely to differ from the actual total. 2. Other sources of irrigation also include wells and tanks. 3. Figures in small brackets indicates area (hectares) per tube-well. 4. Figures in capital brackets indicate the number of tube-wells per holding. 5. Marginal: ” I ha; small: > 1 ha ” 2 ha; semi-medium: > 2 ha ” 4 ha; medium: > 4 ha ” 10 ha; large:10 ha. x Average holding size in hectares.

The number of tube-wells per holding also increases with the size of holdings, i.e., there is a positive correlation between size of holding and the number of tube-wells. In the case of marginal and small holdings, the average number of tube-wells per holding is 0.43 and 0.94, respectively. It is 1.31 and 1.96 tube-wells for semi-medium and medium holdings. For large holdings the average number of tube-wells per holding is 2.70. The overall average is 1.37 tube-wells per holding. Table 4.9 also reveals the

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

85

area under different sources of irrigation. Out of the total area under irrigation 2,866,000 hectares (71.92%) are under tube-well irrigation and 1,081 (28.08%), 000 hectares are under canal irrigation. Out of the total area under canal irrigation, medium farmers have 43.44 percent, followed by the large farmers (25.85%). The semi-medium farmers account for 21.77 percent while the share of small and marginal farmers is just 6.14 percent and 2.83 percent, respectively. Interestingly as regards holding size-wise share in area and share in tube-well irrigated area, there is no significant difference between the two proportions. Like tube-well irrigated area, the highest share of canal-irrigated area is also with the medium farmers (40.89%). The large farmers have 37.37 percent of canal-irrigated area, while the share of semi-medium farmers is 15.36 percent. The marginal and small farmers account for 2.59 percent and 3.89 percent of the canal-irrigated area, respectively (table 4.10). Table 4.10: Percentage share of area under different sources of irrigation in Punjab: 1995–1996 Holding Size Class

% of holdings and area Number

Area

Marginal

18.66

2.94

Small

16.74

5.79

SemiMedium Medium

29.28

20.09

28.00

42.30

Large

7.32

28.89

Total

100

100

Share Of Area Under Different Sources Of Irrigation TubeCanals Others wells 2.83 2.59 5.26 (72.97) (25.22) (1.80) 6.14 3.89 10.53 (79.28) (18.92) (1.80) 21.77 15.36 26.32 (78.00) (20.75) (1.25) 43.44 40.89 36.84 (73.24) (26.00) (0.82) 25.85 37.37 21.05 (64.32) (35.07) (0.69) 100 100 100

% of tubewells 5.82 11.51 26.11 40.09 14.46 100

Notes: 1. Computed from table 4.9, the percentage may not exactly be 100 as figures in table 4.9 are rounded up in ‘000s. 2. The figures in brackets indicate percentage share of intra-size class area under different sources of irrigation. The total is likely to be below 100 percent as the remaining area (a fraction of the total area) may be un-irrigated.

Chapter Four

86

In comparison to the share in area, the marginal, small and semi-medium farmers have a higher share in tube-wells in 1995–1996. The marginal farmers have 2.88 percentage points more tube-wells than their area. The corresponding difference in the case of small and semi-medium farmers is 5.72 and 6.02 percentage points. Contrary to this, the proportion of area with medium and large farmers, respectively, is higher by 2.21 and 14.43 percentage points. Clearly, the medium and large farmers enjoy large-scale economies in the case of tube-wells as their share in tube-wells is smaller as compared to their share in area (table 4.10). Table 4.11: Holding size-wise area under different sources of irrigation in Punjab: 2010–2011 (‘000 hectares) Holding Size Class

Total Holdings

No. Area Under Different Sources Of Of Irrigation (‘000 Hectares) Tube- Tube- Canals Others Total Number Area wells (‘000) (‘000 wells Hectares) (‘000) Marginal 164 101 95 79 17 01 97 (0.62)* (1.06) [0.58] Small 195 269 171 223 40 01 264 (1.38)* (1.57) [0.88] Semi325 855 364 708 139 05 852 Medium (2.63)* (2.35) [1.12] Medium 299 1713 556 1369 333 07 1709 (5.73)* (3.08) [1.86] Large 70 1029 253 745 279 03 1027 (14.7)* (4.07) [3.61] Total 1053 3967 1439 3124 808 17 3949 (3.77)* (2.75) [1.37] Source: The Govt. of India, Agricultural Census 2010–2011. Notes: 1. Figures are rounded up to ‘000s. As such the grand total is likely to differ from the actual total. 2. Other sources of irrigation also include wells and tanks. 3. Figures in small brackets indicates area (hectares) per tube-well. 4. Figures in capital brackets indicate the number of tube-wells per holding. The number of marginal, semi-medium and large holdings declined in 2010– 2011, compared to 1995–1996. *Average holding size in hectares.

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

87

Table 4.12: Percentage share of area under different sources of irrigation in Punjab: 2010–2011 Holding size class Marginal

Holdings Number Area 15.57

2.55

Small

18.52

6.78

SemiMedium Medium

30.86

21.55

28.40

43.18

Large

6.65

25.94

Total

100

100

Area irrigated by TubeCanals Others wells 2.53 2.10 5.88 (81.44) (17.53) 7.14 4.95 5.88 (84.47) (15.15) 22.67 17.20 29.41 (83.10) (16.31) 43.82 41.22 41.18 (80.11) (19.49) 23.85 34.53 17.65 (72.54) (27.11) 100 100 100

% of tubewells 6.60 11.88 25.30 38.64 17.58 100

Sources: The Govt. of India, Agricultural Census 2010–2011. 1. Notes: Computed from table 4.11, the percentage may not exactly be 100 as figures in table 4.11 are rounded up in,000s. 2. The figures in brackets indicate percentage share of intra-size class area under different sources of irrigation. The total is likely to below 100 percent as the remaining area may be un-irrigated.

Tables 4.11 and 4.12 present the holdings size-wise area under different sources of irrigation during 2010–2011. Out of the total area of 3,967,000 hectares, 3,949,000 hectares (99.55%) is under irrigation. Out of the irrigated area, 3,124,000 hectares (79.11%) is under tube-well irrigation and 20.46 percent is under canal irrigation. Out of the total area under tube-well irrigation in 2010–2011, 2.53 percent is with marginal farmers (table 4.12) which is lower than that in 1995–1996 (table 4.10). The share of small farmers under tube-well irrigation was 7.14 percent and that of semi-medium farmers is 22.67 percent in 2010–2011. The medium and large farmers had 43.82 percent and 23.85 percent share in canalirrigated area, respectively. In the case of canal-irrigated area 41.22 percent is with medium farmers while 34.53 percent is with large farmers in 2010–2011. The share of semi-medium, small and marginal farmers was 17.2, 4.95 and 2.10 percent, respectively (table 4.12).

88

Chapter Four

The inter-class wise share in tube-well and canal-irrigated area in 2010– 2011 presents an interesting picture. Significantly, the small and semimedium farmers have more area under tube-well irrigation (in their respective irrigated area) as compared to other categories of farmers (table 4.12). The share of marginal farmers is lower than that of small and semimedium farmers but higher than the medium and large farmers. The large farmers have 72.54 percent of their irrigated area under tube-well irrigation and 27.17 percent under canal irrigation. The small farmers have 15.15 percent of their total area under canal irrigation; while the corresponding proportion of marginal, semi-medium and medium farmers is 17.53, 16.31 and 19.49 percent, respectively. Clearly, the farmers with higher holding size have the higher proportion of canal water. As regard percentage share of tube-wells across various holding sizes, 38.64 percent were owned by the medium farmers, in 2010–2011. Semimedium and large farmers accounted for 25.30 percent and 17.58 percent, respectively. Nearly 12 percent of tube-wells were owned by the small farmers whereas 6.60 percent were owned by marginal farmers. It is significant to note that the percentage share of tube-wells as compared to share of area is significantly higher in the case of marginal and small farmers but marginally higher in semi-medium farmers. Contrary to this, the share of area with medium and large farmers is significantly higher than their respective share in tube-wells. Thus, in 2010–2011 also, the medium and large farmers were enjoying large-scale economies in terms of the number and proportion of tube-wells (table 4.12). Going back to table 4.10, we find that the per tube-well area is moving to the higher side as we move from the smaller holding size to the large holding size in 2010–2011. However, there is a variation in 2010–2011 as compared to 1995–1996 (tables 4.9 and 4.11). Per tube-well area has declined in the case of marginal farmers in 2010–2011, compared to 1995– 1996. In the case of all other categories, it has gone up in 2010–2011 as compared to 1995–1996. The large-scale decline in the number of marginal holdings from 204,000 in 1995–1996 to 164,000 in 2010–2011 and the decline in area with marginal farmers (from 122,000 hectares in 1995–1996 to 101,000 hectares in 2010–2011) explains the per tube-well decline in area.

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

89

4.4 Green Revolution and the Number of Tube-Wells: What a Nexus! The number of tube-wells in Punjab increased from 6 lakh in 1980–1981 to 14.19 lakh in 2015–2016. Compared to this the cropped area increased from 67.63 lakh hectares to 78.72 lakh hectares during the same period. Clearly the cropped area increased by 14.92 percent, while the number of tube-wells increased by 136.51 percent during the period under reference. This is mainly because of the cropping pattern which emerged out of the green revolution. As a consequence of the green revolution in Punjab, the diversified cropping system was translated into a mono-crop system (wheat during rabi season and paddy during kharif season). This new cropping system led to higher and higher dependence on groundwater for irrigation. The rapidly rising number of tube-wells was mainly due to the emergence of such a cropping system, especially because of paddy. The number of tubewells increased from 1.92 lakh in 1970–1971 to 6 lakh in 1980–1981, to 8.00 lakh in 1990–1991, and further to 10.73 lakh in 2000–2001. This number increased to 14.06 lakh in 2014–2015. The area under paddy increased from 359,000 hectares in 1970–1971 to 1,178,000 hectares in 1980–1981, to 2,024,000 hectares in 1990–1991 and further to 2,611,000 hectares in 2000–2001. The area under paddy reached 2,831,000 hectares in 2010–2011 and further to 2,895,000 hectares in 2014–2015 (table 4.13). The increase in area under paddy (mainly because of an assured supply of water in the form of groundwater) and the improved variety of highyielding varieties of seeds resulted in higher yield and much higher production of rice. The production of rice increased from 535,000 tonnes in 1970–1971 to 3,223,000 tonnes in 1980–1981, to 6,535,000 tonnes in 1990–1991 and further to 9,154,000 tonnes in 2000–2001. The total production of rice went up to 10,837,000 tonnes in 2010–2011 and further to 11,111,000 tonnes in 2014–2015. Significantly, production of rice oscillated between 10,138,000 and 10,489,000 tonnes during 2004–2008. During the subsequent seven years, it was between 10,542,000 and 11,390,000 tonnes. Looking at the yield of rice, it increased to 2,736 kg/hectare in 1980–1981 from 1,490 kg/hectare in 1970–1971. It increased to 3,229 kg/hectare in 1990–1991 and to 3,506 kg/hectare in 2000–2001. The yield of rice reached 3,974 kg/hectare in 2014–2015 (table 4.13).

Chapter Four

1970– 1971 1971– 1972 1972– 1973 1973– 1974 1974– 1975 1975– 1976 1976– 1977 1977– 1978 1978– 1979 1979– 1980 1980– 1981

Year

359

450

476

499

569

567

674

831

1052

1167

1178

1.92

2.00

2.00

2.04

4.56

4.56

5.00

5.35

5.85

6.00

Area ('000 hectares)

1.92

Tubewells (Lakhs )

3223

3041

3091

2494

1741

1450

1179

1140

955

920

535

Rice* Production ('000 tonnes)

2736

2606

2938

3001

2583

2535

2071

2287

2007

2045

1490

Yield (Kg/ hectare) 19931– 994 19941– 995 19951– 996 19961– 997 19971– 998 19981– 999 19992– 000 20002– 001 20012– 002 20022– 003 20032– 004

Year

11.44

11.33

11.09

10.73

9.25

9.15

9.25

8.95

8.75

8.6

8.5

Tubewells (Lakhs)

2614

2530

2487

2611

2604

2519

2281

2159

2161

2277

Area ('000 hectares ) 2179

9656

8880

8816

9154

8716

7940

7904

7334

6768

7703

7642

Rice Production ('000 tonnes)

3694

3510

3545

3506

3347

3152

3465

3397

3132

3383

3507

Yield (Kg/hectar e)

Table 4.13: Tube-wells (diesel & electric operated), area, production and yield of rice in Punjab: 1970–1971 to 2015–2016

90

1270

1319

1481

1644

1714

1809

1720

1778

1908

2024

2074

2065

6.10

6.23

6.35

6.47

6.62

6.73

6.83

7.42

7.65

8.00

8.12

8.21

7002

6755

6535

6697

4925

5442

6022

5449

5052

4536

4147

3755

3391

3257

3229

3510

2770

3164

3329

3179

3073

3063

3144

2957

2004– 2005 2005– 2006 2006– 2007 2007– 2008 2008– 2009 2009– 2010 2010– 2011 2011– 2012 2012– 2013 2013– 2014 2014– 2015 2015– 2016 14.19

14.06

14.05

13.85

13.83

13.82

13.76

12.76

12.46

12.32

11.93

11.68

2975

2895

2849

2849

2818

2831

2802

2735

2610

2621

2642

2647

11823

11111

11259

11390

10542

10837

11236

11000

10489

10138

10193

10437

3974

3974

3838

3952

3741

3828

4010

4022

4019

3868

3858

3943

91

Source: Statistical Abstract of Punjab (various years); The Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, Government of India (eands.dacnet.nic.in/, retrieved on 25–09–2017). Note: *Figures of 1969–1970 for area, production and yield of rice used for the year 1970–1971 because of non-availability of data for 1970–1971.

1981– 1982 19821– 983 1983– 1984 1984– 1985 1985– 1986 1986– 1987 1987– 1988 1988– 1989 1989– 1990 1990– 1991 1991– 1992 1992– 1993

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

Chapter Four

92

The close relationship between the number of tube-wells and the area under rice has also been substantiated by the significantly high correlation coefficient between the two. During 1970–1971 and 1980–1981, the correlation coefficient between the two variables was 0.90. In the following decade, it was 0.89. It declined to 0.83 during 1990–1991 and 2000–2001. During 2000–2001 and 2014–2015, it was 0.94. The correlation coefficient was 0.96 during 1970–1971 and 2014–2015 (table 4.14). Table 4.14: Correlation2 between no. of tube-wells and area under rice, production of rice and yield of rice in Punjab: 1970–1971 to 2014–2015 Between Tubewells & Area Under Rice Correlation Coefficient(࣋ሻ

Between Tubewells & Production of Rice Correlation Coefficient (࣋ሻ

0.90*

0.93*

Between Tube-wells & Yield of Rice Correlation Coefficient (࣋ሻ 0.85*

0.89*

0.84*

0.45

0.83*

0.87*

0.38

0.94*

0.89*

0.63**

0.96*

0.98*

0.94*

Period

1970–71 to 1980–81 1980–81 to 1990–91 1990–91 to 2000–2001 2000–2001 to 2014–15 1970–71 to 2014–15

Source: Calculated from table 4.12. Note: *indicates significance level at 1%, ** significant at 5% level.

Significantly, the correlation coefficient between the number of tube-wells and the area under paddy during 1970–1971 and 2014–2015 and during all 2

The following formula is used for calculating the correlation coefficient ሺߩሻ for the period 1970–1971 to 2014–2015. ࣋ൌ

σࡺ ࢏ ૚ሺࢄିࣆሻሺࢅିࣆሻ ሺࡺି૚ሻ࣌ࢄ࣌ࢅ

= 124812.3/ (45–1)*(3.65)*(809.85) = 0.96. Likewise, the

correlation coefficient for the rest of the periods has been computed.

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

93

the sub-periods is statistically significant at 1% level of significance. The correlation coefficient between number of tube-wells and the total production of rice is 0.98 during the entire period under study. During the sub-periods, the correlation coefficient varied from 0.84 during 1980–1981 and 1990–1991 to 0.93 during 1970–1971 to 1980–1981 (table 4.14). The significantly high correlation between number of tube-wells and area under rice production is because of the assured supply of water being abstracted by the large number of tube-wells. The correlation between tube-wells and the yield of rice also turns out to be positive and highly significant at the 1% level (0.94) over the span of 45 years (1970–1971 to 2014–2015).Though correlation is also positive in all the sub-periods and varies between 0.38 (1990–1991 to 2000–2001) and 0.85 (1970–1971 to 1980–1981), it was moderate during 1980–1981 to 1990–1991 and 1990–1991 to 2000–2001, as is evident from table 4.14. Clearly, the excessive supply of water has not led to a corresponding increase in the yield. This is a classic case of the application of the laws of diminishing returns in agriculture. Even the correlation coefficient between yield of rice and free electricity to the farmers is 0.35 during 2002–2003 and 2014–2015, which is not that high. During 2002–2003 and 2007–2008, the correlation coefficient comes out to be 0.62—fairly significant. However, during 2008–2009 and 2014–2015, the correlation coefficient between yield and free electricity is minus 0.10. Thus, the free electricity did not have any significant impact on the yield of rice. Interestingly none of the above correlations (between yield and free electricity) is statistically significant. Clearly, the increasing number of tube-wells in Punjab was demand driven and the demand originated from increasing area under rice. However, the unprecedented rise in the area under paddy was also supply driven, supply of groundwater with tube-wells. The country’s increasing demand for food grains (especially cereals) and the Union Government’s “push to grow more food” also led to more and more area under paddy in Punjab. Significantly, the correlation coefficient between tube-wells and the total production of rice was also very high. It is beyond doubt that the contribution of area to the increase in total production of rice has been very significant, though the contribution of yield, too, cannot be ignored. But the yield’s contribution to total output since 1990 declined. Thus, eventually, it was the increasing area under paddy, which led to higher production of rice in the state.

94

Chapter Four

Interestingly, the trend growth rates of tube-wells, area under rice, production of rice and yield of rice also lend support to the fact that the increase in the number of tube-wells and area under rice went side by side. The overall trend growth rate of the number of tube-wells during 1970– 1971 and 2014–2015 was 4.0 percent per annum while it was 4.1 percent in the case of area under rice. It is statistically significant at a 1 percent level of significance. It is very interesting to note that the annual trend growth rate of tube-wells during 1970–1971 and 1980–1981 was as high as 14.4 percent and that of area under rice was 12.1 percent. This very decade was the period during which paddy emerged as a popular crop in Punjab and helped the state to be the “grand” success story of the green revolution and the state wore the crown of an agriculturally advanced state of India. During 1980–1981 and 1990–1991, the annual trend growth rates of number of tube-wells and the area under production were 2.7 percent and 5.1 percent, respectively. The higher trend growth rate in the area under paddy is a clear response to the provision of reliable irrigation which was made possible by the tube-well irrigation. During the following decade, the annual trend growth rates of tube-wells and area under paddy were 2.2 percent and 2.6 percent, respectively. During 2000–2001 and 2014–2015, the annual trend growth rate of tube-wells was 2.1 percent while it was 1.0 percent in the area under rice. This was mainly because of the fact that there was practically no more scope to bring any additional area under paddy on the one hand. At the same time, it was due to the declining contribution of incremental water units to the increase in marginal production. Nonetheless, the annual trend growth rates during all the sub-periods, both of tube-wells and area under paddy were significant at the 1 percent level of significance (table 4.15). The annual trend growth rate of rice production has also been very high during the period under study, as is evident from table 4.15. It was 5.6 percent during 1970–1971 and 2014–2015, higher than the growth rate of tube-wells and area under rice. This shows that the improvement in per hectare yield growth has also made a significant contribution to the total production of rice. It is also supported by a very high trend growth rate (17.5%) of production of rice during 1970–1971 and 1980–1981. In the following decade, the difference between the trend growth rate of production and that of area under rice was not very high, as in the former it was 5.1 percent and in the latter it was 6.2 percent. The difference between the two further narrowed (2.6% and 2.8%, respectively) during 1990–1991 and 2000–2001. However, the trend growth rate of rice production was higher by 0.70 percentage points than that of area under rice, during 2000–

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

95

2001 and 2014–2015. It is quite clear that the number of tube-wells and area under rice mutually supported each other. Table 4.15: Trend growth rate of tube-wells, area, production and yield of rice in Punjab: 1970–1971 to 2014–2015 Period

1970–71 to 1980– 81 1980–81 to 1990– 91 1990–91 to 2000– 2001 2000–2001 to 2014–15 1970–71 to 2014– 15

Trend Growth Rate (%) TubeArea Production wells Under of Rice Rice 14.4* 12.1* 17.5*

Yield of Rice 5.4*

2.7*

5.1*

6.2*

1.2*

2.2*

2.6*

2.8*

0.3

2.1*

1.0*

1.7*

0.7**

4.0*

4.1*

5.6*

1.4*

Source: Calculated from table 4.12. Note: *indicates significance level at 1%, ** significant at 5% level.

Taking the entire period into consideration (1970–1971 to 2014–2015), the yield of rice increased at an annual growth rate of 1.6 percent. In terms of yield growth of rice in different periods, it is evident that there is a deceleration in growth during 1980–1981 to 1990–1991 (1.2% per annum) as compared to 1970–1971 to 1980–1981 (5.4% per annum), which further dwindled to 0.3 percent per annum (1990–1991 to 2000–2001). However, a marginal revival has been observed in the growth of yield of rice in the recent period (2000–2001 to 2014–2015), which was growing at the rate of 0.70% per annum (table 4.15). Interestingly, the deceleration in the yield growth rate started in the decade of the 1980s, which continued during the decade of the 1990s also. In fact, the growth rate during the 1990s was insignificant. Even during the first 15 years of the 21st century, the growth rate of yield was not very high. The decelerating growth rate of rice yield offers only a partial explanation for the ongoing agrarian crisis and farmers’ distress in Punjab as a very high proportion of area is under rice and as farmers’ incomes depend highly on rice. In other words, the rising marginal cost and the diminishing marginal return led to the shrinkage of per hectare net income. The annual trend growth rate of per hectare return, over variable costs, in wheat, paddy and cotton was minus 0.35 percent,

Chapter Four

96

minus 2.83 percent and minus 14.24 percent, respectively, during the 1990s (Ghuman, 2001). The increasing development of ground water and rising cost of water extraction for irrigation have also contributed to the increasing cost of cultivation (Singh, 1991; Bathala, 1997). This, along with stagnating yield and shrinking per hectare net return, are the other explanatory factors for the agrarian distress and farmers suicides in Punjab (Chand, 1999; Singh, 2000; Sidhu, 2002; Ghuman, 2008).

4.4.1 Water Use Efficiency in Irrigation Across States Table 4.16 reveals that not only is the extraction of groundwater, through a large number of tube-wells, high the consumption of water in Punjab to produce one kilogram (kg) of rice is highest among all the major riceproducing states of India. The all-India average consumption of water per kg of rice is 3,875 litres, while it is 5,337 litres in Punjab. Table 4.16: Water productivity of rice in major rice-producing states in India State West Bengal Karnataka Assam Andhra Pradesh Bihar Tamil Nadu Chhattisgarh Odisha Haryana Uttar Pradesh Punjab All India

Water productivity of Rice, TE 2013–2014 Water Litres/kg of Efficiency Gap (%)* rice required 2605 0.0 2797 6.8 2783 6.4 3145 17.2 3178 18.0 3345 22.1 4197 37.9 4219 38.2 4232 38.4 4564 42.9 5337 51.2 3875 32.8

Source: Price Policy for Kharif Crops, CACP, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, 2015. Note: *Efficiency Gap= (1-water productivity of the state/highest water productivity)*(100).

The consumption of water to produce one kg of rice is lowest in West Bengal, where it requires 2,605 litres. The water consumption varies from

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

97

4,197 litres (Chhattisgarh) to 4,564 litres in (Uttar Pradesh) across other states. In another five states it ranges from 2,783 litres (Assam) to 3,345 litres (Tamil Nadu). Thus, there is a wide variation of water consumption per unit of rice. Taking water consumption in West Bengal as the norm, the water use efficiency gap at the all-India level is 32.8 percent. Punjab has the largest efficiency gap (51.2%). The efficiency gap in some of the other states (Tamil Nadu, Chhattisgarh, Odisha, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh) varies between 22 percent and 43 percent. In Assam, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Bihar, the water use efficiency gap ranges from 6.4 percent to 18 percent (table 4.16). As a matter of fact, Punjab has consumed a lot of its subsoil water in producing and contributing rice to the central pool of the country as is evident from the calculations for selected years (table 4.17). During the triennium ending (TE) 1980–1981, rice production in Punjab consumed 16,643 billion litres of water out of which the component of contribution of rice to the central pool accounts for 13,449 billion litres which comes out to be nearly 81 percent of the total water consumption on rice production. The corresponding figures for the TE 1990–1991 were 32,301 and 25,724 billion litres. The share of water consumption for the central pool component was 79.6 percent. During the TE 2000–2001, the total water consumption on rice production was 45,916 billion litres, of which about 37,039 (80.7%) billion litres went to the central pool. During TE 2013–2014, the water consumption on rice production was 59,047 billion litres, of which 43,262 billion (73.3%) went to the central pool. The water consumption on total rice production in Punjab increased 3.55 times during 1980–1981 and 2013–2014. During the same period, the contribution of water to the central pool (in the form of rice) increased by 3.22-fold. Clearly, most of the rice production of Punjab went to the central pool. Consequently, between 73 and 81 percent of the water consumption in rice produce was virtually meant for the central pool. This is a case of virtual water export from Punjab to the rest of India.

Chapter Four

98

Table 4.17: Water consumption in rice production in Punjab Year (TE)

Production (in tonnes)

Water consumption in total rice production (in Billion litres)

1980–81

3,118,333.3

1,6642.5

Water consumption on rice production contributed to central pool (in Billion (in %) Litres) 13,449.2 80.8

1990–91

6,052,333.3 32,301.3 25,724.3 79.6 (6.86) (6.86) (6.70) 2000–01 8,603,333.3 45,916.0 37,038.8 80.7 (3.58) (3.58) (3.71) 2013–14 11,063,666.7 59,046.8 43,261.7 73.3 (1.95) (1.95) (1.20) Source: Computed from tables 4.12 and 4.15; TE= triennium ending. Note: 1. The water productivity of rice (5,337 litres/kg of rice), as mentioned in Table 4.15, for Punjab has been used for previous periods also. Going by the above-mentioned water productivity, 5.337 million litres of water is required to produce one ton of rice in Punjab. 2. Figures in brackets indicate compound annual growth rate (%).

Water consumption in total rice production in Punjab has registered a higher growth rate from 1980–1981 to 1990–1991 than during the subsequent periods (1990–1991 to 2000–2001 and 2000–2001 to 2013– 2014). For instance, it was growing at the rate of 6.86 percent per annum during 1980–1981 to 1990–1991 as compared to 3.58 percent (1990–1991 to 2000–2001) and 1.95 percent per annum (2000–2001 to 2013–2014). A similar pattern of growth has been observed with respect to water consumption on rice production contributed to the central pool by Punjab across the sub-periods. During the period 1980–1981 to 1990–1991, 1990– 1991 to 2000–2001 and 2000–2001 to 2013–2014, it was growing at a rate of 6.70 percent per annum, 3.71 percent per annum and 1.20 percent per annum, respectively (table 4.17). In contrast to the all-India average, the agriculture (irrigation) sector in Punjab consumes nearly 98 percent of water, whereas industry and household sectors consume the remaining 2 percent of water. Paddy, being the water-guzzling crop, is the major consumer of water. According to Punjab Agricultural University’s norms, paddy needs 22 irrigations whereas sugarcane needs 14 irrigations. Significantly, paddy takes 100 to 120 days to ripen whereas sugarcane is a whole year crop. Moreover, paddy’s consumptive use of water is much higher than the other seasonal

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

99

crops (Vaidyanathan and Sivasubramaniyan, 2004). Despite the fact that no other crop consumes so much water, there are some studies (Shergill, 2012) which argue in favour of the existing wheat-paddy crop combination as they are trying to prove that paddy is not responsible for the falling water table of Punjab. Another study (Benbi and Brar, 2009) argues that the rice-wheat cropping combination had no adverse effect on Soil Organic Carbon (SOC). They further argue that paddy is a kharif season crop during which the maximum rainfall (owing to monsoon) takes place in Punjab, as compared to rabi season. Wheat and maize require 4 to 6 irrigations. Cotton and rapeseed and mustard oils need 4 irrigations each. According to Nehra (2016), the farmers in Haryana (a state of India, carved out of Punjab in 1966) are indulging in excessive irrigation of paddy crop. On average, they apply 46 irrigations to paddy fields by electric motors, while the optimum number of irrigations (notified by the Department of Agriculture, Government of Haryana) is between 15 to 20. This means, they apply 26 extra irrigations which are leading to more than double the number of groundwater extractions than is required as per the norms. Interestingly, Haryana farmers also get free electricity, like the Punjab farmers. Even in the case of sugarcane, they do 22 irrigations, as against the optimum number (12–14) of irrigations. Clearly, there is a huge amount of misuse and wastage of ground water by the farmers in Haryana. Though there is no such study in Punjab, it has been found from the interaction with the farmers during the field visits that they also indulge in an excessive number of irrigations (more than the optimum—22 irrigations) mainly because of free electricity and lack of awareness. However, the difference between the actual number and the optimum number of irrigations is much smaller as compared to Haryana. In Punjab the farmers apply between 25–30 irrigations to the paddy fields. This is an indication that Punjab farmers also misuse water by way of its overuse. The water requirement of various crops is given in the appendix (table A 4.1). It has been found that a good number of crops consume far less water than paddy. The crop wise water saving and resultant yield increase with the adoption of sprinkler and drip irrigation is given in the appendix (table A 4.2). As for evapo-transpiration (ET), it is quite high in paddy (650 mm), followed by cotton (600 mm), maize (480 mm), wheat (380 mm). The ET in the case of sugarcane is 1,350 mm, but it is a whole year crop. Largescale cultivation of paddy-wheat rotation has been a major factor of overexploitation of ground water (Arora, et al., 2008).

100

Chapter Four

Significantly, the widespread problem of smog and pollution in the postharvest months (mainly in the month of November every year) in the National Capital Region and adjoining northern states of India, is being mainly attributed to stubble burning in the fields of paddy in Punjab, Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh. Every year it causes a number of health hazards and road accidents due to poor visibility. By taking cognizance of this problem the National Green Tribunal and the Supreme Court of India often direct the governments of the concerned states to take appropriate measure but nothing tangible has emerged so far.

4.5 Increasing Consumption of Energy in Irrigation The fast-depleting water table is compelling the Punjab farmers to substitute submersible motors (tube-wells) in place of centrifugal motors (mono-block motors). In 2002 an expert committee estimated that during the next 15 to 20 years, a huge investment of Rs. 30000 million would be required for deepening the existing tube-wells if the decline of ground water was not arrested (Govt. of Punjab, 2002). Most of the farmers had to deepen their tube-wells between 6 to 8 times during 1975–2005. The average additional depth of tube-wells was around 60 feet during that period (Romana, 2006). In such a situation, 65 to 70 percent of the Punjab farmers may not be in a position to afford the additional cost of deepening the bore and the cost of installing the submersible motors. The falling water table also necessitates the installation of motors with higher and higher horse power, in turn, resulting in additional cost and higher energy consumption. Such a fast depletion in water table, along with the degrading quality of water, will have a negative effect on the environment. That, in turn, would have a negative impact on the total factor productivity in agriculture. The negative contribution of environmental factors–of which water depletion and degradation are the most prominent—to total factor productivity in rice increased from 1.42 percent during 1982–1990 to 5.04 percent during 1990–1997. In the case of wheat, the corresponding figures were -0.74 percent and -1.58 percent, respectively (Singh and Hossain, 2002). With the increasing number of electricity-operated tube-wells, the electricity consumption in the agricultural sector also registered an exponential increase in Punjab (tables 4.18 and 4.19). Across the districts, it varied from 0.1 million kilowatt (mkw) in Bathinda to 1.2 mkw in Amritsar in 1974–1975. In 1984–1985, it jumped significantly and ranged from 68 mkw (Bathinda) to 353 mkw in Amritsar. In 1994–1995, it

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

101

increased even further and varied from 50 mkw (Mukatsar—a very small district carved out of Firozepur) to 883 mkw in Amritsar. In 2004–2005, the electricity consumption in agriculture varied from 78 mkw (Mansa— again a small district, carved out of Bathinda) to 998 mkw in Sangrur. Amritsar, with 845 mkw, stood second. During 2015–2016, electricity consumption across the districts ranged between 71 mkw (Pathankot—a small district, carved out of Gurdaspur district) and 1610 mkw in Sangrur, followed by Amritsar (including TaranTaran, as it was carved out of Amritsar), Patiala, Ludhiana, Jalandhar, Moga, Bathinda and Firozepur. Table 4.18: District-wise consumption of electricity in agriculture in Punjab (Million Kilo Watt-mkw) Districts

1974– 75 0.81 1.20 0.36 0.88 0.47 0.24 0.82 0.46 0.49 0.17 0.36 0.71 -

1984– 85 202.90 353.10 111.30 276.10 125.40 69.70 264.30 220.50 142.70 68.00 249.30 275.70 -

1994– 95 501.10 882.90 293.50 504.50 241.10 132.50 564.90 670.80 129.20 74.80 655.70 472.60 145.10

Gurdaspur Amritsar Kapurthala Jalandhar Hoshiarpur Rupnagar Ludhiana Firozpur Faridkot Bathinda Sangrur Patiala NawanShehar (SBS Nagar)* Muktsar* 50.00 Moga* 199.40 Mansa* 50.30 Fathegarh Sahib* 166.80 Pathankot* TaranTaran* SAS Nagar* Fazilka* Barnala* Source: Statistical Abstract of Punjab (various years). Note: *indicates that these districts were carved out of the Punjab.

2004– 05 400.26 845.18 301.44 518.06 227.65 165.60 535.06 449.61 158.34 242.52 997.78 697.50 139.73

2015– 16 355.16 493.49 412.54 740.56 449.03 191.92 942.97 642.45 274.58 650.97 1609.81 1138.63 284.39

122.78 382.12 78.41 206.40 -

198.12 717.45 361.16 304.28 70.50 784.31 225.26 116.05 550.24

existing districts of

Chapter Four

102

Significantly, the consumption of electricity was very high in those districts where paddy was the major crop. These districts are Gurdaspur, Amritsar, TaranTaran, Kapurthala, Jalandhar, Ludhiana, Firozepur, Sangrur, Patiala, Moga and Barnala (a small district carved out of Sangrur). Table 4.19: Compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of electricity consumption in agriculture in Punjab: 1974–1975 to 2015–2016 (%) Districts

Gurdaspur Amritsar Kapurthala Jalandhar Hoshiarpur Rupnagar Ludhiana Firozpur Faridkot Bathinda Sangrur Patiala NawanShehar (SBS Nagar) Muktsar Moga Mansa Fathegarh Sahib Pathankot TaranTaran SAS Nagar Fazilka Barnala

1974– 75/ 1984– 85 73.73 76.55 77.43 77.69 74.83 76.32 78.17 85.38 76.37 82.06 92.33 81.52 -

1984– 85/ 1994– 95 9.46 9.60 10.18 6.21 6.76 6.63 7.89 11.77 -0.99 0.96 10.15 5.54 -

1994– 95/ 2004– 05 -2.22 -0.44 0.27 0.27 -0.57 2.25 -0.54 -3.92 2.05 12.48 4.29 3.97 -0.38

2004– 05/ 2015– 16 -1.08 -4.77 2.89 3.30 6.37 1.35 5.29 3.30 5.13 9.39 4.44 4.56 6.67

1984– 85/ 2015– 16 1.82 1.09 4.32 3.23 4.20 3.32 4.19 3.51 2.13 7.56 6.20 4.68 3.26*

-

-

9.40 6.72 4.54 2.15 -

4.45 5.89 14.90 3.59 -

6.78* 6.29* 9.84* 2.90* -

Source: Computed from Table 4.18. Note: *indicates CAGR for period 1994–1995/2015–2016.

The compound annual growth rate (CAGR) reveals that the consumption of electricity in agriculture registered an extraordinary high growth rate

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

103

during 1974–1975 and 19848–1985 (table 4.19). Incidentally this was the period during which both the area under paddy and the number of tubewells registered showed a manifold increase. The CAGR of electricity consumption varied between 73.73 percent in Gurdaspur to 92.33 percent in Sangrur, during 1974–1975 and 1984–1985. During 1984–1985 and 1994–1995, the CAGR, across the districts, varied between 0.96 percent (Bathinda) and 11.77 percent (Firozepur). The lower CAGR during this period was mainly because of the liberal connection giving policy of the Punjab government during the 1970s and early 1980s. The CAGR declined further during 1994–1995 and 2004–2005. In many of the districts, the CAGR was even negative. The number of tube-wells in the districts under study is presented in table 4.20. In seven districts in the central plain zone (CPZ), the number of tubewells increased from 962,000 in 1976 to 6,440,000 (a 6.7-fold increase) in 2015. Every decade registered a substantial increase in the energised (electric) tube-wells. In the two districts of the south-west zone, the number of tube-wells increased from 1,000 in 1976 to 120,000 (a spectacular 120 times increase). In the Hoshiarpur district of the submountain zone, the number of energised tube-wells increased from 104,000 in 1976 to 482,000 (a 4.63-fold increase) in 2013. Thus, there are 812,000 tube-wells in these 10 districts. Table 4.20: Number of tube-wells energised/operated in the sampled districts of Punjab (as on 31 March 2015) (Thousands) District Gurdaspur Amritsar Ferozepur Jalandhar Ludhiana Patiala Sangrur Total (CPZ) Bathinda Muktsar Total (SWZ) Hoshiarpur (SMZ)

1976 15.7 23.0 11.3 21.0 14.5 10.7 96.2 1.0 1.0 10.4

1981 27.1 41.7 25.0 36.1 34.6 31.6 26.9 223.0 4.3 4.3 15.5

1991 51.2 69.9 70.0 66.5 65.3 63.6 66.9 453.4 13.4 13.4 29.0

2001 68.8 122.4 77.1 66.2 78.1 63.4 93.0 569.0 14.0 10.1 24.1 33.0

2011 89.2 80.7 103.6 76.4 98.3 80.1 105.4 633.7 49.7 55.6 105.3 43.5

2015 89.2 81.2 92.2 80.0 105.5 84.4 111.5 644.0 58.0 62.1 120.1 48.2

Chapter Four

104

Punjab CPZ Share (%) SWZ Share (%) SMZ Share (%)

146 65.89

283 78.80

601 75.44

794 71.66

1143 55.44

1236 52.10

0.68

1.52

2.23

3.04

9.21

9.72

7.12

5.48

4.83

4.16

3.81

3.90

Source: Govt. of Punjab, Statistical Abstracts of Punjab (various issues). Note: Gurdaspur also includes Pathankot; Amritsar includes. Tarn Taran; Ferozepur includes Fazilka, Patiala includes Fatehgarh Sahib and Mohali; Bathinda includes Mansa; Sangrur includes Barnala. Thus, the statistics above pertain to 17 districts out of the 22 districts (other than the 10 districts written in the table) were earlier part of these 10 districts. Adding the data of these 7 districts was necessary to make the figures comparable.

A major share (65.89%) of the energised tube-wells in Punjab was in the CPZ in 1976 while only 0.68 percent of tube-wells were in SWZ. The SMZ accounted for 7.12 percent of the total tube-wells. The share of CPZ increased to 78.80 percent in 1981 and thereafter its percentage share started decreasing and reached 52.10 percent in 2015. The share of SWZ registered a spectacular rise as its share increased to 9.72 percent in 2015 from just 0.68 percent in 1976. During 1981–1991, its share was between 1.52 percent and 2.23 percent in total energised tube-wells in Punjab. Its share increased to 4.16 percent in 2001 and further to 11.80 percent in 2011. The share of Hoshiarpur (SMZ) in total energised tube-wells of Punjab decreased from 7.12 percent in 1976 to 3.90 percent in 2015. Its share in 1981, 1991 and 2001 was 5.48, 4.83 and 4.16 percent, respectively (table 4.20). It is significant to note that SWZ’s increase in the share of total tube-wells of Punjab was mainly due to shift in cropping pattern; from cotton to paddy during kharif season.

4.5.1 Growth of Submersible and Higher BHP Motors Table 4.21 gives us the break-up of tube-wells into mono-block and submersible motors. This information is important as the declining water table necessitates the shifting from mono-block motors to submersible motors. In fact, with the depletion of the water table, tube-wells were to be deepened and mono-block motors became irrelevant. The number of electric tube-wells increased from 1,092,412 in 2009 to 1,351,692 in 2017 (an increase of 259,280 in a span of eight years). During this period the

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

105

number of mono-block motors declined from 473,215 to 372,818 (a decline of 100,397). Table 4.21: Trend of mono-block tube-wells and submersible motors in agriculture in Punjab: 2009–2017 Year

Sept 2009 Sept 2010 March 2011 March 2012 Sept 2013 Sept 2014 March 2017 Change over 2009

Total No.

Monoblock

Submersible

Submersible as % of Total

Monoblock as % of Total 43.32 37.34 36.75 35.58 33.54 31.66 27.58 -15.74*

1092,412 473215 619197 56.68 1132778 422960 709818 62.66 1143267 420177 723090 63.25 1163274 413933 749341 64.42 1210313 405969 804344 66.46 1235214 391026 844188 68.34 1351692 372818 978874 72.42 (+) (-) (+) 359677 + 15.74* 259280 100397 (58.09) (23.73) (21.21) Source: Punjab State Power Corporation Limited. Note: Figure in brackets indicates percentage change;*Percentage point change.

On the contrary, the number of submersible motors increased from 619,197 in 2009 to 978,874 in 2017 (an increase of 359,677, 58.09%). The share of submersible motors, increased from 56.68 percent to 72.42 percent (an increase of 15.74 percentage points) and that of mono-block motors declined by 15.74 percentage points during 2009–2017. Among the sampled districts, the highest number of tube-wells was in Sangrur district and the lowest in Jalandhar district in 2010 (table 4.22). Gurdaspur had the highest number of mono-block motors whereas Sangrur had the highest number of submersible motors. This is mainly because of the relative depth of the water table being less in Gurdaspur and more in Sangrur.

Chapter Four

106

Table 4.22: Distribution of submersible and mono-block electric tubewell motors in agriculture in sampled districts of Punjab in 2010 District

Gurdaspur Amritsar Ferozepur Jalandhar Ludhiana Patiala Sangrur Total (CPZ) Bathinda Muktsar Total (SWZ) Hoshiarpur (SMZ) Punjab

Total

Monoblock

Submersible

Submersible as % of Total

84281 70405 84353 23796 106815 79608 130722 579980

81900 22031 47510 855 29512 1195 9274 192277

2381 48374 36843 22941 77303 78413 121448 387703

2.83 68.71 43.68 96.41 72.37 98.50 92.91 66.85

Monoblock as % of Total 97.17 31.29 56.32 3.50 27.63 1.50 7.09 33.15

76564 76421 152985

35826 72437 108263

40738 3984 44722

53.21 5.21 29.23

46.79 94.79 70.77

47792

15573

32219

64.42

32.58

1132778

422960

709818

62.66

37.34

Source: Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (various issues). Note: Gurdaspur includes Pathankot; Amritsar (suburb); Ludhiana (suburb) includes Khanna and Sangrur includes Barnala. Patiala includes Fatehgarh Sahib.

The selected 7 districts of the central plain zone (CPZ), accounted for 66.85 percent of the submersible motors (table 4.22). Among the three zones, the lowest share of submersible motors was in the south-west zone (SWZ). The number of submersible motors increased in all the sampled districts in 2017 as compared to 2010 (table 4.23). In Patiala, all the motors are submersible as on 31 March 2017. Next to Patiala was Sangrur district, where 99.30 percent of the motors were submergible. Interestingly in Jalandhar, 97.60 percent motors were submersible. In the CPZ, the proportion of submersible motors increased to 72.80 percent in 2017 from 66.85 percent in 2010. The corresponding figures for the SWZ were 46.57 percent and 29.23 percent. Clearly, in some of the districts, almost all the motors are submersible and the proportion of such motors is very high in

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

107

other districts. Gurdaspur is the only district in which the share of submersible motors was just 15.37 percent as in March 2017. It is significant to note that the cost of a submersible motor is significantly higher than that of the mono-block motor and a very large majority of Punjab farmers (marginal, small and semi-medium farmers who constitute 65 percent of all the farmers) would not be able to afford the cost of deepening the bore wells and the costs of submersible motors. If they raise a loan for this purpose, there is a very high probability that they (especially marginal and small farmers) may not be able to repay loan out of their income from agriculture. This would further accentuate their indebtedness and crisis. Table 4.23: Distribution of submersible and mono-block electric tubewell motors in agriculture in sampled districts of Punjab as on 31 March 2017 District

Total

Monoblock

Submers ible 15656 86198 50711 25179 121026 75223 165289 539282 93007 6416 99423

Monoblock as % of Total 84.63 42.76 43.63 2.40 3.76 0.00 0.70 27.20 17.33 93.65 53.43

Submersi ble as % of Total 15.37 57.24 53.37 97.60 96.24 100.00 99.30 72.80 82.67 6.35 46.57

Gurdaspur Amritsar Ferozepur Jalandhar Ludhiana Patiala Sangrur Total (CPZ) Bathinda Muktsar Total (SWZ) Hoshiarpur (SMZ) Punjab

101854 150600 95020 25799 125757 75223 166462 740715 112501 100989 213490

86198 64402 44309 620 4731 0 1173 201433 19494 94573 114067

95086

43766

51320

46.03

53.97

1351692 372818 978874 27.58 72.42 (77.63) (96.36) (70.49) Source: Same as in table 4.21. Note: Gurdaspur includes Pathankot; Amritsar (suburb); Ludhiana (suburb) includes Khanna and Sangrur includes Barnala. Here, Fatehgarh Sahib is not included in Patiala. Figures in brackets indicate the share of the above-mentioned 10 districts in the respective total of Punjab.

Table 4.24 shows the district-wise change in the number of submersible and mono-block motors during 2010–17. The total number of submersible

Chapter Four

108

motors increased by 9.86 percentage points while that of mono-block motors decreased by 3.8 percentage points during this period. The number of submersible motors increased by 269,056 while that of mono-block decreased by 50,142 during this period. Across the agro-climatic zones, the maximum increase in the number of submersible motors, an increase of 5.95 percentage points during this period was in the CPZ (151,579). Table 4.24: District-wise change in the number and share of submersible and mono-block electric motors in agriculture in 2017 over 2010 in sampled districts of Punjab Mono-block District Gurdaspur Amritsar Ferozpur Jalandhar Ludhiana Patiala Sangrur Total (CPZ) Bathinda Muktsar Total (SWZ) Hoshiarpur (SMZ) Punjab

Total

Number

Submersible

17573 80195 10667 2003 18942 -43.85* 35740 160735

4298 42371 3201 -235 -24781 -1195* -8101 9156

% age points change 12.54 -25.95 -9.69 -1.19 -23.87 -1.50 -6.39 -5.95

Number 13275 37824 13868 2238 43723 -3190* 43841 151579

% age points change 12.54 25.95 9.69 1.19 23.87 1.50 6.39 5.95

35937 24568 60505

-16332 22136 5804

-29.46 -1.14 -17.34

52269 2432 54701

29.46 1.14 17.34

47294

28193

+10.45

19101

-10.45

218914

-50142

-9.86

269056

9.86

Source: Same as that in Table 4.21; Computed from tables- 4.22 and 4.23. Note: Fatehgarh Sahib district was included in Patiala in 2010 whereas it was excluded from Patiala in 2017.

The corresponding figure for the SWZ was 17.34 percentage points and in the SMZ it was minus 10.45 percentage points. Thus, except in SMZ there is an increasing trend towards the installation of submersible motors. This has been necessitated by an ever-depleting water table.

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

109

With the increasing number of submersible motors, the number of high horsepower (BHP) motors also increased, as shown in Table 4.25. Table 4.25: BHP-wise break-up of electric motors in agricultural sector in Punjab: 2010–2017 BHP/Year Up to 3 BH P 3 to 5 BH P 5 to 10 BH P 10 to 15 BH P 15 to 20 BH P 20 to 25 BH P 25 to 45 BH P

Sep-10

Mar-12

Sep-14

Mar-17

Mono-block

92239

88484

84487

85374

Change in 2017 over 2010 -7.44

Submersible

9036

7718

7982

7842

-1.29

Mono-block

198858

209983

201643

210484

5.85

Submersible

108077

104545

116992

167585

55.06

Mono-block

115774

107276

98003

96930

-18.87

Submersible

338929

365039

493347

452260

33.44

Mono-block

13539

7886

6586

15875

17.25

Submersible

177762

189824

221632

243715

37.10

Mono-block

1456

215

217

3664

151.65

Submersible

77472

78792

98722

148280

91.40

Mono-block

26

25

26

996

373.08

Submersible

2738

2449

2490

2833

3.47

Mono-block

67

64

64

221

256.67

Submersible

659

683

722

719

9.10

Chapter Four

110 45 to 60 BH P Mor e than 60 BH P Source:

Mono-block

0

0

0

0

0.00

Submersible

235

233

242

258

9.79

Mono-block

0

0

0

296

-

Submersible

98

60

62

71

-27.55

Same as in table 4.21.

The number of mono-block motors with three BHP declined from 92,239 in 2010 to 85,374 in 2017. The number of such submersible motors also decreased from 9,036 to 7,842 during the same period. The number of mono-block and submersible motors between 3 to 5 BHP, however, increased from 198,858 to 210,484 and from 108,077 to 167,585, respectively, during the same period. As we move towards higher BHP, the number of mono-block motors decreases at a fast rate and that of submersible motors increases at a high rate. In the case of 5 to 10 BHP motors, the number of mono-block motors declined from 115,774 in 2010 to 93,930 in 2017. Compared to this, the number of submersible motors increased from 338,929 to 452,260 during the same period. In the category of 10 to 15 BHP motors, the number of mono-block motors, however, increased from 13,539 in 2010 to 15,875 in 2017 whereas in the case of submersible motors, the number increased from 177,762 to 243,715. Surprisingly, between 15 to 20 BHP, the number of mono-block motors increased from 1,456 in 2010 to a mere 3,664 in 2017. The number of submersible motors also increased from 77,462 to 148,280 during this period. Incidentally, the number of mono-block motors between 20 to 25 BHP increased from 26 in 2010 to 996 in 2017 and that of submersible motors registered a marginal increase from 2,738 to 2,833. In the category of 25 to 45 BHP motors, the number of mono-block motors increased from 64 to 221 and that of submersible motors marginally increased from 659 to 719 during the same period. The number of submersible motors in the case of 45 to 60 BHP registered a meagre increase; from 235 in 2010 to 258 in 2017. Contrary to this the number of submersible motors decreased from 98 in 2010 to 71 in 2017. The existence of higher BHP mono-block motors may be due to the use of these motors for not extracting subsoil water. Also, in some of the districts, where the water table is not so deep farmers are still using mono-block motors.

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

111

It is very clear from the foregoing discussion that there is a positive correlation between the depth of the water table and the number of submersible motors. In other words, with increasing water table depth the number of submersible motors increases, as has been revealed in tables 4.21 and 4.24. There is also a positive correlation between increasing water table depth on the one hand and the increasing number of higher and higher BHP motors, on the other. Furthermore, the number of mono-block motors decreases with increasing water table depth. However, the BHP of mono-block motors also increases with the increasing water table depth. Nonetheless, as we move from lower to higher BHP the number of mono-block motors decreases and that of submersible motors increases but only up to a certain level of BHP. Beyond that the rate of growth of the number of submersible pumps increases at a very slow rate. With the depth of the water table increasing, the cost of extracting subsoil water, for both installation and energy, also increases. Both the recurring and non-recurring costs increase with the increasing depth of the water table and the BHP of the motors also increases. This puts an additional burden on farmers’ budgets and adds to their marginal cost of production. In addition, it also adds to electricity consumption.

4.6 Green Revolution and Increasing Tractorisation Though it is not directly related to water consumption, a brief discussion on tractorisation would not be out of place as tractors are also used to run the tube-wells when electricity supply is not available. There has been a significant increase in the number of tractors registered since the advent of the green revolution in Punjab. It increased from 289,000 in 1990–1991 to 434,000 in 2000–2001 and further to 519,000 in 2011–2012 (GoP, 2012). The number of tractors per thousand hectares increased from 32 in 1981– 1982, to 47 in 1989–1990, and to 79 in 1999–2000 (table 4.26). In 2009– 2010, it was 72 per hectare. The net sown area in Punjab increased from 4,191,000 hectares in 1980–1981 to 4,250,000 hectares in 2000–2001, but declined to 4,119,000 hectares in 2013–2014. The respective figures for total cropped area were 6,763, 7,941 and 7,857,000 hectares. Clearly, the number of tractors has increased at a rate higher than the net sown area and the total cropped area (GoP, 2017).

112

Chapter Four

Table 4.26: Number of tractors per 1000 hectares in rural Punjab: 1981–2010 District Gurdaspur Amritsar Tarn Taran Kapurthala Jalandhar SBS Nagar Hoshiarpur Rupnagar SAS Nagar Ludhiana Firozepur Faridkot Muktsar Moga Bathinda Mansa Sangrur Barnala Patiala Fatehgarh Sahib Punjab

No. of Tractors per 1000 hectare (Net area sown) in rural area 1981–82 1989–90 1999–2000 2009–10 17 28 53 61 21 38 43 44 54 31 48 70 78 43 60 65 73 48 82 18 28 40 50 15 37 71 113 83 49 74 88 96 30 38 40 40 39 66 100 93 75 73 97 95 30 41 53 74 44 50 29 46 76 94 71 39 53 82 89 101 109 32 47 79 72

Source: Statistical Abstract of Punjab (various years).

Significantly, most of the farmers’ tractors in Punjab are highly underutilised. According to the norms laid down by Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, a tractor must be used in the fields for at least 1,000 hours in a year. Around 34 percent of the holdings are of up to two hectares; another 31 percent are between two and four hectares (GoP, 2017). As such the capacity utilisation of tractors in these 65 percent of operational holdings is grossly underutilised. Even in the case of medium farmers, the tractor is highly under-utilised. Furthermore, the tractors are used to run diesel-operated tube-wells as well as for transportation purposes.

Green Revolution and Irrigation Pattern in Punjab

113

As regards the number of tractors across the districts, a significant increase over the period of time was registered. The number of tractors per hectare varied from 15 in Rupnagar to 49 in Ludhiana in 1981–1982. It should be noted that the net sown area and total cropped area vary across the districts, and hence the variation in the number of tractors. In 1989–1990, the number of tractors per hectare varied between 28 (Gurdaspur and Hoshiarpur) to 74 (Ludhiana). In 1999–2000, the number of tractors ranged between 40 in Hoshiarpur and Firozepur to 100 in Faridkot (a relatively small district). In 2009–2010, the number of tractors varied from 40 in Firozepur to 113 in Rupnagar. Thus, the number of tractors also increased with the green revolution, as did the number of tube-wells. In fact, the cropping area increased mainly because of the increased cropping intensity, which became possible only by way of assured irrigation from groundwater. This also led to a higher and higher mechanisation of various agricultural operations.

CHAPTER FIVE WATER USE PATTERN IN THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR IN PUNJAB: EVIDENCE FROM PRIMARY DATA

The cropping system is one of the most important determinants of the demand for water in the agricultural sector. Of course, the method(s) of irrigation also impact the demand for water. Gross cropped area, net sown area, cropping intensity and irrigation intensity are other important factors which determine the extent of water consumption in the agricultural sector. In view of an increasing area under paddy and the consequently increasing demand for water, ground water becomes the main source of irrigation. Thus, cropping pattern and demand for water are closely connected with each other. We have examined the secondary data-based macro scenario of irrigation pattern in chapter 4. To validate the secondary data, we collected primary data from 300 cultivators (farmers) from 30 villages located in 10 districts of Punjab. The names and location of selected villages are listed in the appendix (table A.P.1 and table A.P.2). This chapter analyses and discusses the primary data and information.

5.1 Operational Holdings Table 5.1 presents the share of various size class holdings of 300 farmers across three agro-climate zones of Punjab, namely central plain zone (CPZ), south-west zone (SWZ) and sub-mountain zone (SMZ). The major crops of the CPZ and the SMZ are wheat and paddy while that of the SWZ is cotton. However, following frequent failure of the cotton crop during the 1990s, the paddy has also cropped up in this zone. Out of the 300 sampled farmers a little more than 22 percent of farmers are in the category of marginal holdings. The proportion of small farmers is 18.67 percent. The semi-medium and medium farmers account for 24.67 percent and 24.33 percent, respectively. The share of large farmers is only 10 percent. The holding size-wise proportion of various farmers is slightly different from the secondary data. Among the three zones the share of

Water Use Pattern in the Agricultural Sector in Punjab

115

large farmers is higher in the south-west zone (SWZ) (16.67%), followed by the sub-mountain zone (SMZ) and the central plain zone (CPZ). The share of medium farmers is also higher (38.33%) in SWZ, followed by CPZ (21.90%) and SMZ (13.33%). The trend is almost similar in the case of semi-medium farmers, across the three zones (table 5.1). Table 5.1: Number & proportion of sampled farmers in various agroclimatic zones of Punjab (sampled farmers) Size Class (Hectare) (Operational Holdings) Marginal (” 1 ) Small (> 1 ” 2) Semi-Medium (> 2 ” 4) Medium (> 4 ” 10) Large (>10) Total

No . 55 40 52

CPZ % 26.19 19.05 24.76

No . 4 7 16

SWZ % 6.67 11.67 26.67

No . 8 9 6

SMZ % 26.67 30.00 20.00

No . 67 56 74

Total % 22.33 18.67 24.67

46 21.90 23 38.33 4 13.33 73 24.33 17 8.10 10 16.67 3 10.00 30 10.00 21 100.0 60 100.0 30 100.0 30 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Source: Field survey, 2013–2014. Note: Central Plain Zone (CPZ)—Gurdaspur, Amritsar, Firozpur, Jalandhar, Ludhiana, Patiala, Sangrur; South-West Zone (SWZ)—Muktsar, Bathinda; SubMountainous Zone (SMZ)—Hoshiarpur.

The average area of operational holdings across the various size classes ranges from 0.67 hectares (marginal) and 16.33 hectares (large), as is evident from table 5.2. Table 5.2: Average area of operational holdings in different zones of Punjab (sampled farmers) Size Class (Hectare) (Operational Holdings) Marginal (” 1 ) Small (> 1 ” 2) Semi-Medium (> 2 ” 4) Medium (> 4 ” 10) Large (>10) Total Source: Same as table 5.1.

CPZ

SWZ

SMZ

Total

0.65 1.58 3.12 6.60 15.58 3.97

0.90 1.34 3.29 6.07 18.60 6.52

0.65 1.62 2.77 5.15 13.07 3.21

0.67 1.56 3.13 6.35 16.33 4.39

116

Chapter Five

Across the three zones, it ranges from 0.65 hectares (marginal) to 15.58 hectares (large) in the CPZ, 0.90 hectares (marginal) to 18.60 hectares (large) in the SWZ and 0.65 hectares (marginal) to 16.33 hectares (large) in the SMZ. The average holding size of all the zones is 4.39 hectares. Among the marginal farmers, across the three regions, it ranges from 0.65 hectares (CPZ) to 0.90 hectares, (SWZ). In the case of small holdings, it ranges from 1.34 hectares (SWZ) to 1.62 hectares (SMZ). The average holding size of semi-medium farmers, across the three zones spans from 2.77 hectares (SMZ) to 3.29 hectares (SWZ). It varies from 5.15 hectares (SMZ) to 6.60 hectares (CPZ) in the case of medium farmers and in the case of large farmers; it ranges from 13.07 hectares (SMZ) to 18.60 hectares (SWZ). The above data reveal that the average size of operational holdings in all the size classes and across all the regions is quite below the upper-class limit of the respective class. It is more so in the sub-mountain zone, especially in the case of marginal, semi-medium and medium-size holdings. In view of the low level of average holdings, the economic viability of the marginal and small holdings is really questionable. Table 5.3 presents the share of area under different crops among the sampled farmers across the three zones. In the kharif season, about 69 percent (paddy and basmati) of area is under rice and the remaining 31 percent of area is under other crops. In the case of rabi season, 71.27 percent of area is under wheat and 28.73 percent of area is under other crops.

Paddy 97.09 86.80 74.87 68.33 50.08 64.89

Kharif Season (%) Basmati* Cotton Others 0.00 1.79 1.12 0.00 5.51 7.69 1.90 9.67 13.56 5.78 8.71 17.18 4.41 18.49 27.02 4.01 12.07 19.03

Source: Same as table 5.1. * Fine variety of rice.

Size Class (Hectare) (Operational Holdings) Marginal (” 1 ) Small (> 1 ” 2) Semi-Medium (> 2 ” 4) Medium (> 4 ” 10) Large (>10) Total Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

117

Rabi Season (%) Wheat Others Total 88.59 11.41 100.00 92.31 7.69 100.00 79.10 20.90 100.00 75.28 24.72 100.00 58.45 41.55 100.00 71.27 28.73 100.00

Table 5.3: Percentage share of area under different crops in Punjab (sampled farmers)

Water Use Pattern in the Agricultural Sector in Punjab

118

Chapter Five

A reasonable level of crop diversification is visible at the aggregate level. It is, however, confined to large and medium farmers, followed by semimedium farmers, both in the kharif as well as rabi seasons. This is an indication that crop diversification is viable mainly in the higher holding sizes. Hence, this section of farmers can be the target group for crop diversification in future. At the zone level the situation is, however, different (table 5.4) In the CPZ the proportion of area under rice is much higher than that of the average of all three zones (tables 5.3 and 5.4). There is no diversification of crops during kharif season in the case of marginal farmers as 100 percent area is under paddy. The extent of diversification is quite low in the case of small and semi-medium farmers as about 92 percent of their area is under paddy. The medium and large farmers, however, grow other crops on an area between 20 percent and 21 percent. During rabi season, the marginal and small farmers grow wheat on an area between 92 percent and 95 percent, respectively. In the case of semimedium farmers, the area under wheat is about 87 percent whereas it is nearly 77 percent in the case of medium farmers. The large farmers grow crops other than wheat on nearly 39 percent of area. The proportion of paddy, cotton and other crops in the south-west zone shows that nearly 41 percent of the area is under crops other than cotton and paddy. The latter two crops account for 39 percent and 20 percent, respectively, of the total area in the kharif season. During rabi season, wheat accounts for 58.38 percent and the share of other crops is 41.62 percent. Interestingly, marginal, small, semi-medium and medium farmers display a lower degree of diversification compared to large farmers (table 5.5). The percentage share of area under different crops in the sub-mountainous zone is shown in table 5.6. The information shows that 85.24 percent of the area is under rice in the SMZ during kharif season whereas a similar percentage of area is devoted to wheat crop (85.24%) in the rabi season in this zone.

119

Paddy 100.00 92.55 92.36 78.63 79.68 83.64

Kharif Season (%) Basmati Cotton Others 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.54 4.91 2.71 0.99 3.94 8.83 0.66 11.88 8.16 0.00 12.16 6.36 0.63 9.37 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Rabi Season (%) Wheat Others Total 91.92 8.08 100.00 95.09 4.91 100.00 86.82 13.18 100.00 76.72 23.28 100.00 60.95 39.05 100.00 75.42 24.28 100.00

Source: Same as table 5.1.

Size Class (Hectare) (Operational Holdings) Marginal (” 1 ) Small (> 1 ” 2) Semi-Medium (> 2 ” 4) Medium (> 4 ” 10) Large (>10) Total

Paddy 55.56 31.91 17.11 43.27 1.72 19.84

Kharif Season (%) Basmati Cotton Others 0.00 22.22 22.22 0.00 34.04 34.04 0.00 39.54 43.35 0.00 27.51 29.23 0.00 48.71 49.57 0.00 39.31 40.85

Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Rabi Season (%) Wheat Others Total 61.11 38.89 100.00 65.96 34.04 100.00 52.85 47.15 100.00 70.49 29.51 100.00 50.43 49.57 100.00 58.38 41.62 100.00

Table 5.5: Percentage share of area under different crops in south-west zone (SWZ) of Punjab (sampled farmers)

Source: Same as table 5.1.

Size Class (Hectare) (Operational Holdings) Marginal (” 1 ) Small (> 1 ” 2) Semi-Medium (> 2 ” 4) Medium (> 4 ” 10) Large (>10) Total

Table 5.4: Percentage share of area under different crops in central plain zone (CPZ) of Punjab (sampled farmers)

Water Use Pattern in the Agricultural Sector in Punjab

Chapter Five

Source: Same as table 5.1.

Size Class (Hectare) (Operational Holdings) Marginal (” 1 ) Small (> 1 ” 2) Semi-Medium (> 2 ” 4) Medium (> 4 ” 10) Large (>10) Total

Paddy 84.62 97.26 86.75 86.41 79.59 85.24

Kharif Season (%) Basmati Cotton Others 0.00 0.00 15.38 0.00 0.00 2.74 0.00 0.00 13.25 0.00 0.00 13.59 0.00 0.00 20.41 0.00 0.00 14.76 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Rabi Season (%) Wheat Others Total 84.62 15.38 100.00 97.26 2.74 100.00 86.75 13.25 100.00 86.41 13.59 100.00 79.59 20.41 100.00 85.24 14.76 100.00

Table 5.6: Percentage share of area under different crops in the sub-mountainous zone (SMZ) of Punjab (sampled farmers)

120

Water Use Pattern in the Agricultural Sector in Punjab

121

5.2 Sources of Irrigation It is clear from the above that the wheat-paddy (wheat during rabi and paddy during kharif season), across all the zones of Punjab is a predominant cropping pattern. However, in the south-west zone (SWZ), cotton is the predominant crop during kharif season and wheat in the rabi season. As a result of wheat-paddy rotation, subsoil water (extracted through tube-wells) has emerged as the major source of irrigation in most of the area under crops. The use of chemical fertilisers and chemical pesticides has also increased manifold due to this cropping pattern. The provision of free electricity to the farm sector has also encouraged this cropping pattern. As a result, not only has the water table gone deeper and deeper but the quality of subsoil water has also deteriorated and in many regions of Punjab, especially in south-west Punjab the quality of subsoil water has become contaminated to such an extent that the incidences of serious ailments, such as cancer, have increased at an alarming level. With this background, the following sub-section discusses the main sources of irrigation and declining water table. It is clear from chapter 4 that tube-wells have emerged as the main source of irrigation in Punjab. The primary data of 300 farmers spread across 30 villages of 10 districts in Punjab also supports such a scenario, as is evident from table 5.7. In 27 of the 30 villages under study, tube-well irrigation is the dominant source of irrigation. In all the 21 villages of the CPZ tube-wells are the main source of irrigation. In 3 of the 6 villages of the south-west zone, the tube-well is the dominant source. As regards the sub-mountain zone, in all the three studied villages, tube-well is the main source of irrigation.

Chapter Five

Electric Tube-well

0 3 3 6

DieselOperated Pump set

CPZ 21 SWZ 3 SMZ 3 Total 27 Source: Field survey 2013–2014.

Zone

3 6 0 9

Canal Water

Canal Water/ DieselOperated Pump set 0 1 0 1 3 5 0 8

Canal Water/ Electric Tube-well

Canal Water/ Electric Tubewell/ DieselOperated Pump set 0 1 0 1

DieselOperated Pump set/ Electric Tube-well 2 2 2 6

Table 5.7: Main source of irrigation in sampled villages across the zones in Punjab (no. of villages)

122

21 6 3 30

Total Villages

Water Use Pattern in the Agricultural Sector in Punjab

123

As it is a state that is one hundred percent electrified, it is the electric tubewells which are used for extracting ground water (Table 5.7). In the central plain zone (CPZ), all the 21 villages have electric tube-wells and there are no wholly diesel-operated pump sets. However, farmers do use tractors or diesel-operated engines to extract water when there is shortage of electricity, particularly during kharif season, to irrigate the paddy crop. During a drought-like situation, farmers do resort to such practices as electricity supply is confined to 8 hours a day during kharif season and between 4 to 6 hours a day during the rabi season. In the south-west zone (SWZ) canal water is the main source of irrigation in all the 6 villages under study (Table 5.7). Electric tube-wells, along with diesel engines, are being used in 3 villages for irrigation. A combination of canal and electric tube-wells has also been reported by the farmers of 5 villages in this zone. It is significant to note that some of the districts in this zone are facing a serious problem of water logging and the subsoil water is not fit for irrigation due to salinity and alkaline water (Kulkarni and Shah, 2013). The people are facing a problem even for potable water. The water is not even fit for animal consumption. Consequently, canal water is the main source of irrigation and drinking. However, the excessive use of canal water and the flowing of various canals through this region have aggravated the problem of water logging in this region. In fact, the water table has risen in this region and the problem of salinity and alkalinity has also increased. In the sub-mountain zone (SMZ) the main source of irrigation, however, is the subsoil water which is being extracted through electric as well diesel-operated pump sets. Canal irrigation is almost negligible in this zone. The sub-mountainous topography is one of the significant reasons for such a situation. Table 5.8 reveals the zone-wise sources of irrigation of the sampled farmers. Out of the 210 farmers in the central plain zone 89 percent use electric tube-wells as the main source of irrigation. About 7 percent of farmers use a combination of canal and electric tube-wells. Only 3.33 percent of farmers use only canal water. Clearly 97 percent farmers in this zone use subsoil water for irrigation. Contrary to this, nearly 57 percent of farmers in the south-west zone use canal water for irrigating their fields. About 12 percent use diesel-operated pump sets and 10 percent use electric tube-wells. Nearly 13 percent use a combination of canal and electric tube-wells. Though canal water is the major source of irrigation in this zone, more than 40 percent of farmers use subsoil water in a substantial manner (table 5.8).

Chapter Five

187 (89.05) 6 (10.00) 15 (50.00) 208 (69.33)

CPZ

0 (0.00) 7 (11.67) 11 (36.67) 18 (6.00)

DieselOperated Pump set

7 (3.33) 34 (56.67) 0 (0.00) 41 (13.67)

Canal Water

Source: Field survey 2013–2014. Note: Figures in brackets are row-wise percentages.

Total

SMZ

SWZ

Electric Tube-well

Zone

0 (0.00) 1 (1.67) 0 (0.00) 1 (0.33)

Canal Water/ DieselOperated Pump set 14 (6.67) 8 (13.33) 0 (0.00) 22 (7.33)

Canal Water/ Electric Tube-well

Canal Water/ Electric Tube-well/ DieselOperated Pump set 0 (0.00) 2 (3.33) 0 (0.00) 2 (0.66) 2 (0.95) 2 (3.33) 4 (13.33) 8 (2.67)

DieselOperated Pump set/ Electric Tube-well

300

30

60

210

Total No. of Farmers

Table 5.8: Distribution of sampled farmers according to source of irrigation across the zones in Punjab (no. of farmers)

124

Water Use Pattern in the Agricultural Sector in Punjab

125

In the sub-mountain zone, almost all the sampled farmers use underground water for irrigation. Electric motor is the single most important source of irrigation as 50 percent of farmers are solely dependent on this source. A sizeable proportion (36.67%) of farmers use diesel-operated tube-wells. A little more than 13 percent use a combination of diesel-operated and electric tube-wells. It is clear from the foregoing discussion that underground water has emerged as the main source of irrigation in Punjab. As a consequence, the number of tube-wells has witnessed a manifold increase over the period of time. This, in turn, has resulted in an over-exploitation of subsoil water and to an ever-declining water table. The mean depth of the tube-wells has been continuously increasing. In the central plain zone, it has gone down to 128 feet during 2001–2013, from 49 feet during 1960–1970. Interestingly the 1970s witnessed a marginal increase in water table as the mean depth of tube-wells came up by 5 feet. This, however, needs further investigation. When paddy cultivation assumed a full bloom revolution, the mean depth of tube-wells went down to 113 feet during 1991–2000, a decline of 37 feet in a decade. A really mind-boggling decline in the water table took place in the 1990s. The mean depth of tube-wells in this zone went down to 128 feet during 2001–2013, from 113 feet in the 1990s (table 5.9). Table 5.9: Mean depth of tube-wells owned by the sampled farmers across the zones in Punjab Zones Years CPZ SWZ SMZ

1960–70 49 NA NA

Initial Depth (Feet) 1971–80 1981–90 1991–2000 44 74 113 100 71 93 87 145 101

200–13 128 74 67

Source: Field survey 2013–2014. NA: Not available

It is surprising that the mean depth of tube-wells in the south-west zone came up by 29 feet during the 1980s as compared to the preceding decade. However, it went down to 93 feet in the 1990s, from 71 feet during the 1980s. It again came up to 74 feet during 2001–2013. This is a classic example of the dancing water table in the south-west Punjab (Singh, Karam, 2007). The non-irrigation worthy subsoil water and the massive use of canal water not only led to such a situation but also resulted in a large-scale disturbance of the water table in this region of Punjab.

Chapter Five

126

Interesting, this traditionally non-paddy zone turned into a paddy zone over the period of time. This is clearly an unusual and strange phenomenon and also points out to the poor policy response of the government. The phenomenon of dancing water table is also visible in the submountain zone (table 5.9). The mean depth of tube-wells went down to 145 feet during the 1980s from 87 feet in the preceding decade. Strangely, it came up to 101 feet in the 1990s and to 67 feet during 2001–2013. This again is a mystery and needs further investigation. Table 5.10 displays the operation of tube-wells during kharif and rabi seasons. At the aggregate level, farmers operate tube-wells for 256 days a year—188 days during kharif and 69 days during rabi season. It is limitation of the data that farmers could not tell how many hours (average) a day they operate tube-wells. However, it is possible to make an estimate as electricity supply for irrigation is normally for 8 hours a day during kharif season and four to six hours during rabi season. Table 5.10: Operation of tube-well during kharif & rabi season (Days) Zones CPZ SWZ SMZ Total

Kharif 78 30 80 188

Rabi 27 16 26 69

Total 105 46 106 256

Source: Field survey 2013–2014.

In the central plain zone, farmers operate tube-wells for 105 days a year whereas in the south-west zone tube-wells are only operated for 46 days a year and in the sub-mountain zone for 106 days a year. In CPZ a tube-well is operated for 78 days during kharif season, while in the south-west zone and the sub-mountain zone the tube-wells are operated for 30 days and 80 days during the kharif season, respectively. During rabi season, tube-wells are operated between 16 days (SWZ) and 27 days (CPZ). Clearly, duration of tube-well operation is much higher during the kharif season; because of paddy crop. It is important to note that there is a significant difference in tube-well operation during kharif and rabi seasons. During kharif season, too, there is a significant difference in tube-well operation between the paddy zones (CPZ and SMZ) and non-paddy zone.

Water Use Pattern in the Agricultural Sector in Punjab

127

The age-old and traditional method of plantation of paddy also supports the above observation. Puddling is still the main method of paddy plantation among the farmers who are cultivating paddy and flooding is the only method of irrigating paddy (table 5.11). Table 5.11: Methods of sowing paddy & irrigation across zones in Punjab Zones

Sowing Paddy Puddling

CPZ SWZ SMZ Total

177 (84.29) 24 (40.00) 30 (100.00) 231 (77.00)

Without Puddling 16 (7.62) 6 (10.00) 0 (0.00) 22 (7.33)

Not Sowing Paddy 17 (8.09) 30 (50.00) 0 (0.00) 47 (15.67)

Irrigation Method Flooding 210 60 30 300

Source: Field survey 2013–2014. Note: Figures in brackets are percentages.

At the aggregate level 77 percent of paddy growers in Punjab use the puddling method. About 16 percent do not cultivate paddy and only 7 percent use the non-puddling method. In the CPZ, 84 percent of farmers use the puddling method, 8 percent do not cultivate paddy and nearly 8 percent do not go in for the puddling method. In the sub-mountain zone too, all the paddy growers use the puddling method. As compared to this, 50 percent of farmers in the south-west zone do not husband paddy crop, but of the remaining 50 percent, 40 percent of farmers use the puddling method and 10 percent grow paddy without the puddling method. Significantly, among the paddy growers, the proportion of those who grow paddy without the puddling method is very low. This needs to be noted so that the non-puddling method is promoted among the farmers. It is, thus, clear from table 5.11 that we have a long way to go to discourage the puddling method and promote the non-puddling method. Besides, the farmers use flood irrigation method to irrigate these fields and during the first one month of plantation of paddy, they keep water standing in the fields. An alternative to the flood irrigation method, thus, needs to be

Chapter Five

128

encouraged. This would require a very high sensitivity quotient among the government, policy makers and farmers.

5.3. Harvesting and Conservation of Water Harvesting and conservation of water are significant measures to enhance the supply of water. Saving water by using it optimally and efficiently works both on the supply and demand side of management. In fact, availability of water does not depend solely on its supply; water saved also adds to the quantity of available water and hence enhances the supply. The information in table 5.12, however, does not present an encouraging picture regarding harvesting, conservation and saving of water. About 89 percent of farmers were neither harvesting any rain water nor conserving water. Out of the three zones not a single farmer in the south-west zone is doing rain water harvesting and conservation. In the central plain zone only 13.33 percent are making some efforts in harvesting and conservation of water. In the sub-mountain zone 80 percent of the respondents do not do any rain water harvesting and conservation. The picture on the water saving front too, is far from satisfactory. A little more than 78 percent of farmers (respondents) are not making any effort to save water. At the zone level, 93.33 percent of farmers in the south-west zone do not use any water saving measures. In the central plain zone, this proportion is 75 percent while in the sub-mountain zone 70 percent of farmers fall in this category. Clearly, there is much to be done on harvesting, conserving and saving water. Table 5.12: Rain water harvesting, conservation and efforts to save water Zones CPZ SWZ SMZ Total

Rain Water Harvesting Yes No 28 182 (13.33) (86.67) 0 60 (0.00) (100.00) 6 24 (20.00) (80.00) 34 266 (11.33) (88.67)

Source: Field survey 2013–2014. Note: Figures in brackets are percentages.

Saving Water Yes No 52 158 (24.76) (75.24) 4 56 (6.67) (93.33) 9 21 (30.00) (70.00) 65 235 (21.67) (78.33)

Water Use Pattern in the Agricultural Sector in Punjab

129

The quality of subsoil water, according to farmers’ perception seems to be good, as is evident from their responses (table 5.13). At the aggregate level, 87 percent of farmers perceived the quality of water as fairly good. Only 13 percent said that water is not of good quality. The perception about quality of water in the central plain zone is quite high as nearly 97 percent of respondents said that the quality of water is good. In the submountain zone, all the sampled farmers’ perceptions about the quality of water is good. However, 53.33 percent of respondents in the SWZ said that the quality of water is bad. In fact, in some of the districts in the south-west the subsoil water is saline and there is a serious problem of water logging (Romana, 2006; Kulkarni and Shah, 2013). The extension services in agriculture have been a significant medium for carrying the research findings from the lab to the end users. Unfortunately, the physical extension services have been almost missing and the expert advice available to farmers is mainly through print and electronic media. However, media-led extension services are a poor substitute for the physical extension services as farmers are not fully tuned in to the former mode of extension. Illiteracy and low level of educational attainment are other reasons for such a scenario. Table 5.13: Farmer's perception about quality of subsoil water & advice from Agriculture Department & Punjab Agricultural University (PAU)

Zones

CPZ SWZ SMZ Total

Quality of Water Good 203 (96.67) 28 (46.67) 30 (100.00) 261 (87.00)

Bad 7 (3.33) 32 (53.33) 0 (0.00) 39 (13.00)

Advice from Agriculture Department Yes No 25 185 (11.90) (88.10) 3 57 (5.00) (95.00) 0 30 (0.00) (100.00) 28 272 (9.33) (90.67)

Advice from PAU Yes 22 (10.48) 1 (1.67) 0 (0.00) 23 (7.67)

No 188 (89.52) 59 (98.33) 30 (100.00) 277 (92.33)

Source: Field survey 2013–2014. Note: Figures in brackets are percentages.

Table 5.13 highlights that farmers receive hardly any direct advice from the Department of Agriculture in Punjab. Only about 9 percent of farmers

130

Chapter Five

said that they received advice from the officials of agriculture department of the Government of Punjab. Nearly 91 percent of respondents answered negatively. In the sub-mountain zone 100 percent of respondents said that there was no advice from the agriculture department. The respective respondents in the south-west Punjab and central plain zone are 95 percent and 88 percent. The advice or extension services from the Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) are also at a very low level. At the aggregate level 92.33 percent of farmers said that they did not receive any extension services from the university. In the case of the sub-mountain zone, no sampled farmer received extension services from the PAU. About 98 percent of farmers in the south-west zone and 90 percent of farmers in the central plain zone were not getting any extension services from the PAU. Clearly, extension services in the agricultural sector have almost collapsed. It is clear from the foregoing that the findings of the primary data collected from various agro-climatic zones of Punjab substantially support the secondary data. It was found that the cropping pattern is largely the same as was revealed by the secondary data. The sources and pattern of irrigation also reveal that the results of the primary data support the secondary data.

CHAPTER SIX WATER USAGE IN THE INDUSTRIAL SECTOR IN PUNJAB: EVIDENCE FROM PRIMARY DATA

Availability of water for industry is very important as the industrial sector needs a lot of water for processing and manufacturing. Some industries consume a higher quantity of water than others. Nearly 60 percent of the industries are of the view that availability of water is impacting their business (FICCI, 2011). The discussion has been divided into two sections. The first section deals with water usage in small-scale industrial units while the second section discusses water usage in medium and largescale industries. In addition to water usage, some basic information about the sampled small, medium and large-scale units have also been included. Such information may not have a direct bearing on water consumption by the sampled units. However, the nature of economic activity, number of employees and the duration of work in a unit do have a significant bearing on the water use pattern of industrial units.

6.1 Small-Scale Industrial Units Small-scale industries (SSIs) are making a significant contribution to employment and output in all the states and union territories of India. For the purpose of empirical analysis, we randomly selected 50 industrial units from 10 SSIs located across six districts of Punjab. The composition of various sampled industrial units is given in table 6.1.

Chapter Six

132

Table 6.1: Classification of the sampled small-scale industries3 Name of the Industry Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing of Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Hosiery & Garment Leather & Leather Product Hotel & Restaurant Cold Storage Total

Sampled No. 15 8 6 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 50

% 30.00 16.00 12.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 100.00

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Out of the 50 industrial units, 15 (30%) are textile, dyeing and spinning mills. Another 16 percent (8 No.) are food products and beverages. Six units (12%) belong to manufacturing of basic metal. Four units (8%) are each from the chemical and chemical products; paper and paper products; and rubber and plastic products. Three (6%) units have been taken from hosiery and garments. Leather and leather products, hotel & restaurant and cold storage, account for 2 units (4%) each. These are the main water intensive industries.

6.1.1 Nature of Processing and Production Industry-wise activity, use of raw material and nature of processing across the sampled industrial units is given in the appendix to chapter 6 (Tables A6.1 to A6.10). Table A6.1 gives details about the textile, dyeing and spinning units. The main economic activity in all these units is dyeing and finishing while two 3

Out of 50 small-scale industrial units, 26 are from Ludhiana district, 7 from Amritsar, 6 from Jalandhar, 5 from Sangrur, 4 from Mohali and 2 from Fathegarh Sahib District. Spatial distribution of sampled units shows that 68 percent (34) of them are located in urban areas of the state whereas 32 percent (16) are in the rural areas of Punjab. Note: Ludhiana is a highly industrialised city.

Water Usage in the Industrial Sector in Punjab

133

are manufacturing units. Chemical die and yarn are the main raw materials across the units. The main nature of processing is washing, dyeing and finishing. Similar information about food products and beverages is given in table A6.2. Processing and manufacturing of various products, such as milk products, tomato ketchup, biscuits, packaged drinking water, ice-cream, soda, vegetable oil and cattle feed are the main economic activities of these units. Significantly the raw material comes mainly from agriculture. The various stages of processing from raw material to manufacturing for each industrial unit are given in the last column of table A6.2. There are five manufacturing units from basic metal, as shown in table A 6.3. They manufacture wire drawing, bicycle rims, bicycles and parts, and fabrication and reactor tanks, etc. Their main raw material is wire rod, CR strip, iron scrap, sponge iron and stainless steel. Their main products are wire, bicycle and bicycle parts, melting-cutting machining and finishing of certain tools and machines. Table A6.4 presents the list of chemical-based products. They manufacture allopathic drugs, laundry soaps, fertilisers and Ayurveda medicines. The economic activity, type of raw material and processing/manufacturing of paper and paper products are shown in table A 6.5. Their main raw material is waste paper. The economic activities and manufacturing of rubber and plastic products are presented in table A6.6. They manufacture rubber sports goods, conveyor belts and some other plastic products. Their major raw material is rubber and related chemicals. The nature of processing is shown in the last column of this table. The economic activities and the nature of manufacturing and processing of hosiery and garments units are given in table A6.7. These units mainly manufacture knitted garments, cloths and embroidery fabrics. Fabric cloth, dyed acrylic yarn and other types of yarn are their main raw material. The details about leather and leather products are shown in table A6.8. Wet blue leather and raw hides are their main raw materials. The nature of processing is given in the last column of this table. Hotels and restaurants mainly do processing and cooking of food products (table A6.9). Food-based items and vegetables and livestock are their main raw materials. Washing, cleaning, cooking and packing are various stages of processing. The details of cold storage are given in table A6.10. In fact, the last two fall under the category of the services sector.

Chapter Six

134

6.1.2 Employment and Working Hours in the Sampled Small-Scale Units The 50 sampled units employed 4,656 workers in all. Textile, dyeing and spinning are the major employers, as is obvious in table 6.2. Nearly 54 percent of workers are in these units. The next major employer is basic metal manufacturing units. About 17 percent of employment is in these units, whereas 11 percent of workers are employed in the food and beverage industry. All the remaining sub-sets of industrial units employ between 1.72 percent (hosiery) and 3.46 percent (leather and leather products) of the total workers in the sampled units. Hotels and restaurants and cold storage employ less than one percent of the total workers in all these 50 units. In the case of employment, it should not be construed that employment share of the various small-scale industries in Punjab is essentially the same, as given in table 6.2 since the number of small-scale units in Punjab is very large. Table 6.2: Employment in the sampled small-scale industries Name of the Industry Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Hosiery & Garment Leather & Leather Product Hotel & Restaurant Cold Storage Total

(Average) of Employees 2520 519 805

Percent

96 180 255 80 161 40 20 4656

2.06 3.87 5.48 1.72 3.46 0.86 0.43 100.00

54.12 11.15 17.29

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Table 6.3 reveals the average working hours in the various industrial units. It is significant that no unit works for even two shifts a day, except hotels and restaurants. The basic metal, chemical based, leather-based and cold storage units only work for one shift per day. The average number of shifts in textiles and spinning is 1.20, which means that for a certain number of days in a year they run for more than one shift in a day. The remaining

Water Usage in the Industrial Sector in Punjab

135

units run between 1.50 (food products & beverages) and 1.75 (paper and paper products; and rubber products) shifts in a day. The overall average is 1.34 shifts in a day. In terms of hours, the maximum duration of the working day is 24 hours and that is in the hotel and restaurant sector. The working day’s length in cold storage is 18 hours (table 6.3). Some other types of units work for 14 (rubber units) and 17.33 (hosiery & garments) hours a day on average. The average length of the working day for some other units is between 10.67 hours (basic metal) and 12 hours (food products & beverages). Two types of industrial units, namely, chemical products and leather products, work for an average of 8 hours a day. Table 6.3 also reveals the unit-wise average working hours in a week which range from 54 hours (chemical products) and 98 hours (rubber & plastic). Another set of units was working between 105 hours (paper and papers products) and 168 hours (hotel and restaurants) in a week. The annual average working hours accordingly ranges between 2,828 hours (chemical and chemical products and 6,326 hours (hosiery and garments), hotel and restaurants work for 8,760 hours in a year while cold storage works for 6,570 hours in a year.

Chapter Six

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Hosiery & Garment Leather & Leather Product Hotel & Restaurant Cold Storage Total

Name of the Industry

1.20 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.75 1.75 1.67 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.34

No. of shifts in a day (Average)

Unit works per day (in hrs) 11.20 12.00 10.67 7.75 15.00 14.00 17.33 8.00 24.00 18.00 12.54 78.40 84.00 74.67 54.25 105.00 98.00 121.33 56.00 168.00 126.00 87.78

Unit works per week (in hrs)

Table 6.3: Average number of hours the unit works across small-scale sampled industries

136

4088.00 4380.00 3893.33 2828.75 5475.00 5110.00 6326.67 2920.00 8760.00 6570.00 4577.10

Unit works per year (in hrs)

Water Usage in the Industrial Sector in Punjab

137

6.1.3 Sources of Water of Small-Scale Industrial Units It is significant that subsoil water extracted by owned tube-wells is the only source of water in all the sampled small-scale units in Punjab. In contrast, 35 percent of the industries in India use ground water through their own tube-wells (FICCI, 2011). The average depth of tube-wells and submersible motors is given in table 6.4. Table 6.4: Average depth of tube-well & horse power of motors and water delivery across sampled small-scale industries Name of the Industry

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Hosiery & Garment Leather & Leather Product Hotel & Restaurant Cold Storage Total

Year of Installation

Depth of Submersible motor (feet)

HP of motor

Range

Depth of Tubewell (Feet) Mean

Mean

Mean

Water delivery (in inches) Mean

2006–1983

259.0

130.7

10.47

2.90

2011–2007

230.0

100.0

6.44

2.50

2012–1993

203.3

121.7

3.17

1.42

2013–2008

262.5

100.0

1.75

1.00

2009–1989

150.0

60.0

8.13

3.00

2010–2006

166.3

68.8

2.00

2.00

2007–2000

250.0

110.0

1.50

1.83

2011–2006

225.0

140.0

5.00

2.50

2013–2005

350.0

200.0

3.00

1.50

2004–1998 2013–1983

175.0 230.2

110.0 112.7

3.50 6.1

2.00 2.3

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014 (as reported by the respondents).

138

Chapter Six

The average depth of tube-wells is 230 feet. Across the units, it ranges from 150 feet (paper & paper products) to 350 feet (hotels & restaurants). The average depth of tube-wells in the case of textiles, food products, basic metals, chemicals and chemical products, hosiery and garments, leather & leather products is between 203 feet (basic metals) and 259 feet (textiles). They together constitute 38 units. The hotel & restaurants units in the sample have an average depth of 350 feet for their tube-wells. The average depth of the tube-wells in the remaining 10 units ranges from 150 feet (paper and paper products) to 175 feet (cold storage). The mean depth of submersible motors is 112.7 feet. It ranges from 60 feet (paper and paper products) to 200 feet (hotel & restaurants). There are 28 industrial units that have a mean depth of submersible motors between 110 feet and 131 feet. In another 12 units the mean depth of submersible motors is 100 feet. The mean depth of submersible motors in another 8 units is between 60 feet and 68 feet. The average horse power of the motors in all the 50 units is 6.1. In textiles it is 10 horsepower and in the case of food products it is 6.44 horsepower. It is 8.13 horsepower in the case of paper and paper products. In the case of leather products, the average horsepower of tube-well motors is 5. The average horsepower of motors in the case of basic metals, hotel and restaurants, cold storage ranges from 3 to 3.5 horse power. The remaining units have an average horse power of between 1.5 to 2 horsepower. The water delivery in inches ranges from 1.00 inch to 3 inches (table 6.5). As reported by the respondents the period of installing the existing tube-wells ranges from 1983 to 2013.

6.1.4 Consumption of Water in Small-Scale Industrial Units The average operating hours of the tube-wells across the units range from 24 to 28 hours, except for basic metal units (8 hours) and paper and paper product units (13 hours). The water storage capacity of the tanks in various units ranges from 2,250 litres (rubber & plastic products). It ranges from 2,5000 litres (leather & leather products) to 41,733 litres (textiles units). It is exceptionally large (99,250 litres) in the case of paper and paper products (Table 6.5).

Water Usage in the Industrial Sector in Punjab

139

Table 6.5: Average number of days tube-well runs per month and capacity of water storage tanks (in litres) across sampled small-scale industries Industrial category Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Hosiery & Garment Leather & Leather Product Hotel & Restaurant Cold Storage Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

No. of days tube-well runs 24 27 24 8

Capacity of water storage tanks 41733 29688 27500 2250

26

99250

13 27 25 30 28

8250 2333 25000 6500 7500

Table 6.6 shows the average monthly consumption of water across the sampled industrial units. The consumption has been recorded in the primary and secondary use of water. Primary use is the use of water in processing and manufacturing activities, while secondary use denotes the use of water for other activities such as drinking, washing and bathing, etc. Significantly, there is no primary use of water in the case of hosiery and garment units. The minimum primary use of water is in chemical and chemical products (2,450 litres) and the maximum is 17,25,000 litres (leather and leather products). The textile and spinning mills used 53,01,667 litres of water in primary use, whereas 7,20,000 litres are used by paper and paper products while it is 9,57,344 litres in food and beverages.

Chapter Six

140

Table 6.6: Average monthly consumption of water by sampled smallscale industries (in litres) Industrial category Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Hosiery & Garment Leather & Leather Product Hotel & Restaurant Cold Storage Total Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Primary Consumption 5301667

Secondary Consumption 177258

Total (Average) 547825

957344 110833 2450

103037 101097 8261

1060381 211930 10711

720000

188584

908584

8700 0 1725000 127500 54500 9007994

32602 50361 52084 212709 52209 978202

41302 50361 1777084 340209 106709 9986196

As regards secondary use, it is much below the quantity of primary use in all the units, but for hotel and restaurants, chemicals and chemical products, rubber and plastic products and hosiery and garments (table 6.6). The minimum amount of secondary use of water (8,261 litres) per month is in chemical and chemical products. It varies from 32,602 litres in rubber and plastic products) to 52,209 litres in cold storage. The secondary use of water ranges from 101,097 litres in basic metals to 212,709 litres in hotel and restaurants per month. The average monthly consumption of water of all the 50 small-scale industrial units came out to be very high (9,986,196 litres), as is shown in table 6.6. About 90 percent of this quantit is used in the primary activities, related to processing and manufacturing activities. Since there were 158,655 small-scale industrial units in Punjab in 2014–2015 (http://www.punjabstat.com, retrieved on 04–10–2017), the aggregate amount of water consumption in these industrial units would certainly be very high.

6.2 Medium and Large-Scale Industries There were 454 medium and large-scale industrial units in Punjab in 2014–2015 (http://www.punjabstat.com, retrieved on04–10–2017). Out of

Water Usage in the Industrial Sector in Punjab

141

these, 100 units have been studied. The list and number of the studied industrial units is given in table 6.7. It is worthwhile mentioning here that we have selected the number of firms in such a manner so that various types of industries could be fairly represented in the sample. It was almost a proportionate random sampling. The highest share is that of textile, dyeing and spinning units, followed by food products and beverages and so on. Table 6.7: Classification of the sampled medium & large-scale industries4 Industrial Category Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Motor Vehicle Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Fabricated Metal Products except Machinery and Equipment Hosiery & Garment Leather & Leather Product Total

Sampled No. % 29 29.00 20 20.00 11 11.00 4 4.00 9 9.00 7 7.00 8 8.00 4 4.00 5 3 100

5.00 3.00 100.0 0

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

The economic activity, the type of raw material and the nature of processing of all the 10 industrial groups have been given in tables A6.11 to A6.20. Table A6.11 presents these features in the case of textile, dyeing and spinning units. Processing and manufacturing, spinning and dyeing of cotton, yarn and woollen are the major economic activities of all the 29 units. Cotton, wool, polyester yarn, chemical and chemical dyes are the major raw material used by these units. As regards the various stages of processing, these include washing, drying, finishing and dyeing. Carding, 4

Out of 100 medium and large-scale industrial units, 32 are located in Ludhiana district, 15 in Sangrur, 13 in Amritsar, 12 in Jalandhar, 10 in Mohali, 7 in Bathinda, 6 in Hoshiarpur and 5 are located in the Fatehgarh Sahib district. Spatial distribution of sampled units shows that 51 percent (51) of them are located in urban areas and 49 percent (49) fall in the rural areas of Punjab.

142

Chapter Six

ginning, spinning, dyeing and packing are the stages of processing in a good number of industries. Table A6.12 presents the economic activities of food and beverages units. There are, in all, 20 units in the sample. Most of them are dairy-based and use milk as raw material. There are two sugar-canes and alcohol-based units and three units use paddy and rice as their raw material. One unit each uses vegetables and water as their raw material. The nature of processing and the economic activities are mainly based on the type of raw material used in the industrial unit. In the case of milk-based units, testing, boiling, condensation, manufacturing and packing are the various stages of processing. In sugarcane-based units, washing, evaporation, boiling, grinding, centrifuging, drying and packing are the main stages of processing. Accordingly, processing and manufacturing of milk and milk products and sugar are the major economic activities of the milk and sugar based industrial units. The economic activities of basic metal industrial units are mentioned in table A6.13. Almost all the sampled industrial units are iron, scrap and steel based and hence these are their major raw materials. In all, there are 11 units that are engaged in casting, grinding and machine making. Some of the units however did not provide information about the various stages of processing but as can be worked out from the nature of the raw material; their processing stages are most likely the same as of other units in this industry. Manufacturing auto parts, tool, steel billets, valves, fasteners, etc., are the major economic activities of these units. Table A6.14 presents the nature of the raw material and processing of the motor vehicle manufacturing units. All the four units in this group are based on steel and manufacture of motor vehicles. Non-ferrous metal is also being used by one unit. Their major economic activities are related to manufacturing of tractors, engines, bus bodies and hydraulic breaks, etc. Machining, cleaning, conditioning, fabrication and processing are the main processing stages of these units. Still one of them does washing, assembly, testing and inspection. The activities and processing stages of the chemical units are highlighted in table A6.15. Almost all the units make use of some sort of chemical to manufacture the final products. Chemical and solvent, solid and liquid gas, pesticides, caustic soda, methyl, etc., are the main raw materials being used by these units. Grinding, mixing and packing are the stages of processing in some of these units. Three of these units manufacture

Water Usage in the Industrial Sector in Punjab

143

pesticides. Most of the remaining units are engaged in the manufacture of pharmaceuticals and medicines. Table A6.16 presents the processing stages and main economic activities of paper and paper product units. In all, there are 7 units in the sample and 5 of them use waste paper as the main raw material. Two units use agricultural waste and residue as their main raw material. It is without any justification that hardly any unit shared their processing stages. Manufacturing of paper and paper board are the major economic activities of these units. The economic activities of rubber and rubber products are presented in table A6.17. In all there are 8 units in the sample and 6 of them use rubber and chemicals as raw material. One unit uses hydro carbon oil and another one uses rubber compound and metal parts as raw material. The main processing stages include compound mixing, chemical mixing, cutting, die moulding, finishing and packing. These units mainly manufacture rubber tubes and tyres for bicycles and rickshaws. One unit manufactures rubber soles. One of these units manufactures auto parts and another one manufactures black carbon. Table A6.18 depicts the nature of processing and manufacturing of the fabricated metal products. Out of the 4 units, 3 units use steel rod and one unit uses MS steel and chemical paint as the raw material. The main stages of processing are cutting, machining, finishing painting, assembly and inspection. Three of the units manufacture auto parts while one is manufacturing bicycles. The economic activities of the hosiery and garments units are shown in table A6.19. Three of the four units use cotton fabric and one uses fabric and yarn as the raw material. Cutting, stitching, finishing and packing are the main stages of processing. Three units prepare readymade garments and one prepares embroidery works. Table A6.20 presents the economic activities of leather and leather product units. Two of the three units use raw hides as their raw material while one unit uses wet blue leather as raw material. The main stages of processing in all the four units are washing-dyeing, fat liquoring-dyeing and finishing. All the three units manufacture finished leather with all the stages of manufacturing.

Chapter Six

144

6.2.1 Employment in the Sampled Medium and Large-Scale Units Table 6.8 gives the number and percentage share of employees in the sampled units across the industries. The textiles industry employs the largest number of workers; leather the smallest. However, from the data in this table it is difficult to conclude which industry gives more employment and which gives less as it presents simply the employment in the sampled units. Moreover, the number of textiles units in the sample is much higher than that of leather units. Table 6.8: Number and percentage of employees engaged in sampled medium & large-scale industries of Punjab Industrial Category

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Motor Vehicle Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Fabricated Metal Products except Machinery and Equipment Hosiery & Garment Leather & Leather Product Total

Number of Employee s 23474 5420 4864 4466 4987

Percent

3973 6170 5581

6.42 9.97 9.02

2572 350 61857

4.16 0.57 100.00

37.95 8.76 7.86 7.22 8.06

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

The working hours of the units in a day are shown in table 6.9. Significantly, textile, food products, chemical, rubber and fabricated metal products work between 20 hours and 24 hours, on average in a day. Clearly, they work for more than two shifts in a day. Motor vehicle and paper & paper product units work for 16 hours and 19 hours on average in a day. Hosiery and basic metal units work from10 hours to 13 hours on average in a day, thus, working for more than one shift but less than one

Water Usage in the Industrial Sector in Punjab

145

and a half shifts in a day. Leather and leather product units work for 8 hours or one shift per day on average. Table 6.9: Average number of hours the units work across sampled industries in Punjab Industrial Category

No. of Shifts

Unit works per day (in hrs) 21.24 22.00 13.09 16.00 20.44

Unit works per week (in hrs) 148.69 154.00 91.64 112.00 143.11

Unit works per year (in hrs) 7753.10 8030.00 4778.18 5840.00 7462.22

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Motor Vehicle Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Fabricated Metal Products except Machinery and Equipment Hosiery & Garment

2.59 2.80 2.00 2.00 2.78 2.71

19.43

136.00

7091.43

2.63 3.00

21.00 24.00

147.00 168.00

7665.00 8760.00

1.40

10.40

72.80

3796.00

Leather & Leather Product

1.00

8.00

56.00

2920.00

Total

2.48

19.24

134.68

7022.60

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

At the aggregate level all the units work for 19.24 hours or 2.48 shifts in a day, on average. It is, thus, clear that the products of these units are in quite high demand. On average, the units work for 134.68 hours in a week and 7,022.60 hours in a year. Across the units, there is a large variation in weekly and yearly working hours. The weekly working hours vary from 56 hours (leather & leather products) to 168 hours (fabricated metal products). It is also revealing that most of the units work for 7 days a week. Similarly, the yearly working hours of these units range between 2,920 hours (leather & leather products) and 8,760 hours (fabricated metal products). The units which work for 7 days a week might have their employees working on a week on-week off rotation basis.

Chapter Six

146

6.2.2 Source of Water Supply in Medium and Large-Scale Industrial Units The water requirements of industry and their water use pattern largely depend on the nature of their economic activities. Accordingly, the water use pattern varies from industry to industry. Some industries use a large quantity of water while the others use less. As regards source of water supply, most of the industries prefer to have an assured supply of water and generally have their own captive sources of water. Table 6.10 presents the sources of water in each of the sampled industries and across the industrial units. Out of the 100 industrial units, 97 have installed their own tube-wells, two have deep wells, and one used canal water. Thus, all have their own source of water. Both the deep wells are owned by textile industrial units. Table 6.10: Source of water supply across medium & large-scale industries in Punjab Industrial Category Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Motor Vehicle Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Fabricated Metal Products except Machinery and Equipments Hosiery & Garment Leather & Leather Product Total Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Tubewell 26

Deep Well 2

Canal Water 1

Total

20 11

0 0

0 0

20 11

4

0

0

4

9

0

0

9

7

0

0

7

8 4

0 0

0 0

8 4

5 3 97

0 0 2

0 0 1

5 3 100

29

Water Usage in the Industrial Sector in Punjab

147

Across the industries, 97 units are wholly dependent on their own tubewells for their water needs. In the case of textiles, nearly 90 percent have tube-wells. Only 3.45 percent of units also meet their water demand from canals and about 7 percent (textile units) have deep tube-wells to meet their water requirement. Significantly, 99 percent of the sampled units across the 10 industries use underground water to meet their water needs (table 6.11). Table 6.11: Source of water supply across sampled medium & largescale industries in Punjab (%) Industrial Category

Tubewell 89.66

Deep Well 6.90

Canal Water 3.45

100.00

0.00

0.00

Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Motor Vehicle Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product

100.00

0.00

0.00

100.00

0.00

0.00

100.00

0.00

0.00

100.00

0.00

0.00

100.00

0.00

0.00

Fabricated Metal Products except Machinery and Equipment Hosiery & Garment

100.00

0.00

0.00

100.00

0.00

0.00

Leather & Leather Product

100.00

0.00

0.00

Total

97.00

2.00

1.00

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages

Total 100.0 0 100.0 0 100.0 0 100.0 0 100.0 0 100.0 0 100.0 0 100.0 0 100.0 0 100.0 0 100.0 0

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

The average depth of tube-wells and their year of installation are given in table 6.13. The units under study installed their tube-wells during the year 1964 and 2014.

Chapter Six

148

Table 6.12: Average depth of tube-well, depth & HP of motor and water delivery across sampled industries in Punjab Industrial Category

Year of Installation

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Motor Vehicle Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Fabricated Metal Products except Machinery and Equipment Hosiery & Garment

2012– 1964 2014– 1973 2014– 1992 2010– 1995 2014– 1980

Leather & Leather Product Total

Depth of Tubewell (Feet) 318.28

Depth of submersible motor (Feet) 118.10

HP of motor 18.78

Water delivery (in inches) 3.47

354.00

142.50

17.58

3.98

272.73

169.09

15.82

2.55

344.50

167.50

19.13

3.25

589.56

198.22

26.78

3.61

2012– 1981

413.86

121.57

27.86

4.43

2013– 1982 2005– 1983

398.13

184.38

17.63

3.44

300.00

152.50

10.63

4.00

2000– 1987 2012– 1997 2014– 1964

184.00

104.00

12.40

3.00

250.00

146.67

5.00

2.33

349.46

144.85

18.43

3.50

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

The average depth of the tube-wells across the industrial units is 349.46 feet while the average level of submersible pumps is 144.85 feet deep. In the case of textile units, the tube-well installation year falls in the range from 1964 to 2012 and in the case of food and beverage units it is from 1973 to 2014. Manufacturers of chemical and chemical products, rubber and rubber products, paper and paper products, fabricated metal products and hosiery units have installed their tube-wells from the 1980s to 2014 (table 6.12). The maximum average depth (590 feet) of tube-wells is in the case of chemical and chemical products units, followed by paper and paper

Water Usage in the Industrial Sector in Punjab

149

product units. In the case of textiles, food and beverages, motor vehicles, rubber products, and metal products the average depth of tube-wells ranges between 300 feet and 398 feet. The range of depth for basic metal units and leather products is between 250 feet and 273 feet. In the case of hosiery, it is 184 feet (table 6.12). As they are large and medium industrial units and in view of the depth of the tube-wells, most of the units have installed high horse power (HP) motors. The average horse power for all the industrial units is 18.43 HP. However, it ranges from 10.63 HP (fabricated metal products) to 27.86 HP (paper and paper products). The average horse power of electric motors in the case of leather and leather products for extracting ground water is, however, 5 HP and in the case of chemical and chemical products it is 26.78 HP. It ranges from 15.82 HP (basic metal units) to 19.13 HP (motor vehicles). In fabricated metal and hosiery units the average horse power of electric motors is 10.63 HP and 12.40 HP. The average water delivery for all the units is 3.50 inches. It ranges from 3 inches (hosiery and garments) to 4.43 inches in paper and paper product units. The average water delivery is 2.33 inches in leather and leather product units (table 6.12). On average the various industrial units run their tube-wells for 25 to 28 days in a month (Table 6.13). Table 6.13: Average number of days tube-well runs per month across medium & large-scale industries in Punjab Industrial category Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Motor Vehicle Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Fabricated Metal Products except Machinery and Equipment Hosiery & Garment Leather & Leather Product

Average 28 28 28 26 28 28 25 26 25 25

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

As regards consumption of water across the industrial units, this is of two types: primary consumption and secondary consumption, as shown in

Chapter Six

150

table 6.14. In the case of hosiery and garments, the primary consumption is negligible. The maximum monthly average of primary consumption is in paper and paper products and that is 1,100 lakh litres. The average primary consumption of water in the textiles, dyeing and spinning units is 204 lakh litres per month. This is followed by fabricated metals (127 lakh litres), food products and beverage (111 lakh litres) and paper and paper products (110 lakh litres). For other industrial units, it varies between 20 lakh litres (basic metals) and 98 lakh litres (chemical and chemical products). Table 6.14: Average monthly consumption of water across medium & large-scale industries in Punjab (in litres) Industrial Category Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Motor Vehicle Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Fabricated Metal Products except Machinery and Equipment Hosiery & Garment Leather & Leather Product Total

Primary Consumption 20415830

Secondary Consumption 2779984

Total (average) 23195814

11189050

3038850

14227900

2010909

559773

2570682

2843750

2596125

5439875

9852167

2537333

12389500

110063107

1170506

4221375

706875

11123361 3 4928250

12703750

1566600

14270350

negligible 2291667

234000 121000

234000 2412667

175591605

15311046

19090265 1

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Water Usage in the Industrial Sector in Punjab

151

The maximum secondary consumption of water (30 lakh litres) is in food products and beverage units on average in a month. This is followed by textiles units, motor vehicle units and chemical and chemical products units. The average monthly secondary consumption of water in these units varies from 25 lakh litres to 28 lakh units. For the paper industry this average is 12 lakh litres while for fabricated metals it is 16 lakh litres. In the case of hosiery and garments it is 2.34 lakh litres, while for basic metals it is 6 lakh litres per month. The average monthly consumption of water in leather and leather product units is 24 lakh litres. Together, the 100 studied units across the 10 industries consume 1909 lakh litres of water on average in a month (table 6.14). Every industrial unit stores water to ensure a continuous supply of water. In the case of the units under study, the water storage capacity ranges from 33,750 litres (fabricated metal products) to 90,182 litres (basic metal units). The water storage capacity of textile units is very high at 1,203 lakh litres. In the case of paper and paper products the water storage capacity is 192,593 litres. In the case of food and beverages it is 168,500 litres. Hosiery and garment units have the lowest water storage capacity (table 6.15). Table 6.15: Average capacity of water storage tanks in different medium & large-scale industries in Punjab (in litres) Industrial Category Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Motor Vehicle Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Fabricated Metal Products except Machinery and Equipment Hosiery & Garment Leather & Leather Product

Average 120303500 168500 90182 78250 177889 192593 69125 33750 13300 65000

Source: Field Survey, 2013–2014.

The average expenditure incurred on installing tube-wells across the units ranges from Rs 51,667 (leather & leather products) to Rs 94,2857 (paper & paper products), as is clear from table 6.16. On average the textile units have incurred an expenditure of Rs 306,745 for installation of tube-wells

152

Chapter Six

and in the case of food product & beverages unit it is Rs 595,250. The basic metal units, too, incurred a high amount in installing the tube-well. Table 6.16: Average expenditure incurred in installing tube-wells across sampled industries in Punjab Industrial Category Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Motor Vehicle Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Fabricated Metal Products except Machinery and Equipment Hosiery & Garment Leather & Leather Product

Average (Rs.) 306745 595250 538636 176250 565444 942857 530625 217500 277000 51667

Source: Field Survey, 2013–2014.

It is evident from the foregoing discussion that the water use pattern across the industries varies according to the nature of the product. Some industries consume much larger quantities of water than others. Similarly, water consumption also varies according to the size of the industrial unit. The amount of water consumption in medium and large-scale units is much higher than that in the small-scale units. However, all the industrial units under study are using subsoil water extracted by way of tube-wells. Thus, there is quite a serious pressure both on the water table and electricity.

CHAPTER SEVEN DOMESTIC WATER USAGE IN PUNJAB: EVIDENCE FROM PRIMARY DATA

With the increase in population and the rapid economic development, the domestic demand for water, in both rural and urban areas, has also been on the rise. The rapidly increasing urbanisation and the rising proportion of urban population put a higher pressure on demand for water in the domestic section. The increasing use of household gadgets and water purifying instruments are also contributing to an increasing demand for water. The deteriorating quality of water is giving a push to more and more use of water purifying gadgets by households. Most of these modern gadgets result in wastage of water as well. Such a problem is more serious in developing countries than t in the developed countries as the tap/running water in most of the developed countries is fit for human consumption. This chapter dwells on the domestic water use pattern in the rural and urban areas of Punjab based on the primary data.

7.1 Rural Water Usage Pattern This section discusses and analyses the domestic water consumption pattern in rural households in Punjab. The study is based on 300 rural households. These sampled households are spread over 30 villages, located in the 10 districts of Punjab (The list of the villages is given in appendix A.P.1 to the preface). The selected districts have been classified into three agro-climatic zones of Punjab, namely central plain zone (CPZ), south-west zone (SWZ) and sub-mountain zone (SMZ). For the purpose of this study, we have selected 7 districts from CPZ, 2 districts from SWZ and one district from SMZ. Further, three villages have been sampled from each of the 10 selected districts. However, before discussing the water usage pattern, it is important to have a look at the rural population across districts in Punjab (table 7.1).

Chapter Seven

Gurdaspur Amritsar TaranTaran Kapurthala Jalandhar NawanShehar Hoshiarpur Rupnagar SAS Nagar Ludhiana Firozpur Faridkot Muktsar Moga Bathinda Mansa Sangrur Barnala Patiala Fathegarh

Districts

1991 1371396 1651203 N.A. 480042 978850 460340 1076047 669309 N.A 1183562 1084820 301501 501317 625091 719511 479057 1256769 N.A 1050296 354141

2001 1568788 1046209 826593 507994 1030717 506402 1188662 487633 427044 1339178 1295382 357321 578929 716214 831541 546329 1048990 366364 1039248 386950

Rural 2011 1643882 1154831 978611 532296 1021388 488857 1247969 505529 442112 1425201 1474592 400494 650004 768499 888943 605356 1137633 405675 1130279 414649

Rural Population (% to total population) 1991 2001 2011 78.02 74.56 71.50 65.92 48.50 46.36 ࡳ 88.02 87.37 74.24 67.33 65.10 59.35 52.52 46.82 86.65 86.20 79.57 82.89 80.28 78.85 74.23 77.54 73.98 ࡳ 61.15 44.83 48.78 44.16 40.86 74.44 74.19 72.75 66.79 64.86 94.84 76.60 74.46 72.01 80.77 80.04 77.45 73.02 70.27 64.01 83.36 79.32 78.74 74.57 71.20 68.76 ࡳ 69.53 68.03 69.01 63.61 59.73 76.73 71.92 69.13

Table 7.1: District-wise growth of rural population in Punjab: 1991 to 2011

154

1991/2001 14.39 -36.64* ࡳ 5.82 5.30 10.01 10.47 -27.14* ࡳ 13.15 19.41 18.51 15.48 14.58 15.57 14.04 -16.53* ࡳ -1.05* 9.26

2001/2011 4.79 10.38 18.39 4.78 -0.91 -3.46 4.99 3.67 3.53 6.42 13.83 12.08 12.28 7.30 6.90 10.80 8.45 10.73 8.76 7.16

Decadal Growth Rate (%)

14243252

16096488

17316800

70.23

66.08

62.51

13.01

7.58

155

Source: Director, Census Operation, Punjab (Various Years); N.A. = Not available. * The negative growth rate is because of the fact that some new districts were carved out of some existing districts. Taran Taran, SAS Nagar, Barnala and Fatehgarh Sahib are some of the new districts.

Sahib Punjab

Domestic Water Usage in Punjab

Chapter Seven

156

The rural population in Punjab declined from 70.23 percent in 1991 to 62.51 percent in 2011. This decline is corroborated by the decadal growth rates as well. The rural population grew at the rate of 7.58 percent during 2001–2011 as compared to 13.01 percent during 1991–2001. The lower growth of the rural population during 2001–2011 is mainly attributed to the overall decline in Punjab’s population growth and rural to urban migration. A similar trend is visible in almost all the districts of Punjab during 1991–2001, except Rupanagar and Faridkot districts, where a nonuniform trend in the proportion of rural population has been observed. In terms of growth of the rural population, all the districts have shown a decline in their growth rates during 2001–2011 as compared to 1991– 2000, except four districts of Punjab (Amritsar, Rupnagar, Sangrur and Barnala).

7.1.1.

The Sources of Water in the Rural Households

The district-wise number and percentage share of rural households in sampled districts by main source of drinking water is given in tables 7.2 and 7.3. The variation in the usage of sources of water is evident across the sampled districts of rural Punjab. For example, most of the households residing in the districts of Jalandhar, Patiala, Sangrur, Muktsar, Bathinda and Hoshiarpur use tap water as the main source of drinking water; whereas the households in the districts of Gurdaspur (22.69%), Amritsar (12.67%), Ferozpur (16.00%) and Ludhiana (12.63%) have hand pumps as the main source of drinking water (tables 7.2 and 7.3).

157

309898 212566 271536 213390 278323 209720 215367 122957 170853 258523 2263133

Gurdaspur Amritsar Ferozepur Jalandhar Ludhiana Patiala Sangrur Muktsar Bathinda Hoshiarpur Punjab

45922 22677 53517 46454 54157 66225 42499 42411 50920 109493 534275

Treated 11447 6049 30283 32880 22405 24342 30188 22862 30096 10771 221323

Untreated

Tap water

Source: Govt. of India, Census of India, 2011.

No. of Households

District 981 442 1970 506 488 390 381 270 510 674 6612

Covered 1157 135 562 191 227 253 245 162 255 1617 4804

Uncovered

Wells 185778 103744 131017 61926 103421 20651 28730 51363 46423 85664 818717

Hand pump 61334 74377 41617 67319 92928 90150 105645 1421 35977 46308 617076

Tubewell

3279 5142 12570 4114 4697 7709 7679 4468 6672 3996 60326

Other Sources

Table 7.2: District-wise number of rural households by main source of drinking water in sampled districts of Punjab

Domestic Water Usage in Punjab

Chapter Seven

13.69 9.39 12.00 9.43 12.30 9.27 9.52 5.43 7.55 11.42 100.00

Gurdaspur Amritsar Ferozepur Jalandhar Ludhiana Patiala Sangrur Muktsar Bathinda Hoshiarpur Punjab

Source: Computed from table 7.2.

No. of Households

District

8.60 4.24 10.02 8.69 10.14 12.40 7.95 7.94 9.53 20.49 100.00

Treated 5.17 2.73 13.68 14.86 10.12 11.00 13.64 10.33 13.60 4.87 100.00

Untreated

Tap water 14.84 6.68 29.79 7.65 7.38 5.90 5.76 4.08 7.71 10.19 100.00

Covered 24.08 2.81 11.70 3.98 4.73 5.27 5.10 3.37 5.31 33.66 100.00

Uncovered

Wells 22.69 12.67 16.00 7.56 12.63 2.52 3.51 6.27 5.67 10.46 100.00

Hand pump 9.94 12.05 6.74 10.91 15.06 14.61 17.12 0.23 5.83 7.50 100.00

Tubewell

5.44 8.52 20.84 6.82 7.79 12.78 12.73 7.41 11.06 6.62 100.00

Other Sources

Table 7.3: District-wise percentage share of rural households by main source of drinking water in sampled districts of Punjab

158

Domestic Water Usage in Punjab

159

The various sources of drinking water in the villages of the three studied zones are given in table 7.4. At the aggregate level, 55.33 percent of households use tap water, 23.00 percent use tube-wells, 11.00 percent use stand post, 7.33 percent use hand pumps and 3.34 percent households borrow water from neighbours (table 7.5). Table 7.4: Source of drinking water in rural households in sampled villages in Punjab (Number) Zone

Tap water

Hand pump

Tube-well

Stand post

Borrow from others 6 4 0 10

Total

CPZ 86 17 69 32 210 SWZ 55 0 0 1 60 SMZ 25 5 0 0 30 Total 166 22 69 33 300 Source: Field survey, 2013–2014. Note: Central Plain Zone (CPZ) - Gurdaspur, Amritsar, Firozpur, Jalandhar, Ludhiana, Patiala, Sangrur; South-West Zone (SWZ) - Muktsar, Bathinda. ; SubMountainous Zone (SMZ) – Hoshiarpur. Table 7.5: Source of drinking water in rural households in sampled villages in Punjab (%) Zone

Tap water

Hand pump

Tube-well

Stand post 15.24

Borrow from others 2.86

CPZ

40.95

8.10

32.86

SWZ

91.67

0.00

SMZ

83.33

Total

55.33

Total 100.00

0.00

1.67

6.67

100.00

16.67

0.00

0.00

0.00

100.00

7.33

23.00

11.00

3.33

100.00

Source: Same as table 7.4.

In the CPZ nearly 41 percent of households use tap water while 33 percent use tube-well water. The share of households which use stand post and hand pumps is 15.24 percent and 8.09 percent, respectively. About 3.00 percent of the households borrow water from a neighbour in the village. As compared to this, the share of households who use tap water is very high in the SWZ and the SMZ. The percentage share of such households in these two zones is 91.67 percent and 83.33 percent, respectively (table

Chapter Seven

160

7.5). In the SWZ, most of the shallow-subsoil water is not fit for human consumption due to salinity and alkaline water. As such they are supplied with tap water coming from very deep tube-wells installed by the government department. Lately, some of the villages are being supplied with water cleaned by reverse osmosis (ROs) plants installed by the government. In the SMZ region, it is mainly because of the submountainous topography. The cost of installing one’s own tube-well is almost prohibitive and hence again it is the tap water being supplied by government sources.

7.1.2

The Pattern of Water Use in Rural Households

The pattern of water use in the sampled rural households across the three zones is given in table 7.6. Bathing, washing of clothes, cleaning of utensils and drinking are the main uses of water in the households. Another significant use of water is for livestock. At the macro level, every household uses 281 litres of water for animals per day. Bathing also consumes 178 litres in a day. Next major use is washing clothes, which consumes 142 litres of water per day. Cleaning utensils also uses 96 litres per day. Drinking is the least water consuming use. Thus, the total is 730.31 litres per day per household. The pattern of water use for various purposes, across the three zones, is almost the same, as is evident from table 7.6. In the CPZ most of the water is used for animals, followed by bathing, washing, cleaning utensils and drinking. Exactly the same pattern is followed in the SWZ and the SMZ. The per day average household water consumption across the CPZ, SWZ and SMZ, respectively, is 773 litres, 757 litres and 735 litres. Significantly, per household water consumption is quite low in the SMZ, compared to the other two zones; perhaps this is due to smaller household size and fewer animals. Table 7.7 presents the relative share of water being used by each of the activities. At the aggregate level, 38.49 percent of water is used for animals, while 24.38 percent is used for bathing. Washing clothes and cleaning utensils account for 19.47 percent and 13.12 percent, respectively. Drinking water accounts for only 4.54 percent. The share of all these activities in the CPZ is 38.87 percent, 24 percent, 19.66 percent, 12.62 percent and 4.77 percent, respectively. In SWZ nearly, 40 percent of water is used for animals and 25.26 percent for bathing. Washing and cleaning utensils account for 18 percent and 13.45 percent, respectively. The smallest share goes to drinking. In the SMZ nearly 28 percent of water

Bathing 186.29 191.33 94.00 178.07

Washing clothes 152.07 135.17 87.67 142.25

Cleaning utensils 97.57 101.83 71.67 95.83

Drinking 36.88 27.80 17.67 33.14

Zone Bathing CPZ 24.08 SWZ 25.27 SMZ 25.09 24.38 Total Source: Same as table 7.4.

Washing clothes 19.66 17.85 23.40 19.48

Cleaning utensils 12.61 13.45 19.13 13.12

Drinking 4.77 3.67 4.72 4.54

Table 7.7: Use of water in rural households in sampled villages in Punjab (%)

Source: Same as table 7.4.

Zone CPZ SWZ SMZ Total

Table 7.6: Use of water in rural households in sampled villages in Punjab

Domestic Water Usage in Punjab

Animals 38.87 39.75 27.67 38.48

Animals 300.67 300.92 103.67 281.02

Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Total 773.48 757.05 374.68 730.31

(Litres per day per HH)

161

162

Chapter Seven

is used for animals and 25 percent for bathing. Washing clothes and cleaning utensils account for 19.47 percent and 13.12 percent, respectively. About 5 percent is used for drinking purposes (table 7.7).

7.2 Urban Water Usage Pattern According to the 2011 Census, Punjab’s urban population accounts for 37.49 percent in 2011 as compared to 33.92 percent in 2001 and 29.77 percent in 1991. This clearly depicts the rising trend of urbanisation in Punjab. Nonetheless, the growth rate of the urban population was higher in 1991–2001 (36.83%) against 2001–2011 (25.72%). Significantly, the growth rate of the urban population is much higher than that of the rural population. This may be mainly because of rural to urban migration, in addition to the natural growth rate of the urban population. This rising trend in urbanisation is visible across all districts of Punjab (table 7.8). In view of the ever-increasing number and proportion of urban population in Punjab, the supply of and demand for water is emerging as an important issue. As such there is a need to study this aspect of urban life in a systematic manner. Often there are unauthorised colonies in the cities and towns in addition to slums. The supply of and demand for water in the unauthorised colonies and slums is a very serious and challenging job for the urban local self-government. It involves a number of issues pertaining to demand and supply of water in urban areas, in addition to water use pattern of urban domestic water consumption. This section, thus, dwells on the urban water use pattern in Punjab. The number of urban households with respect to the different sources of drinking water across the selected districts of Punjab is shown in table 7.9. Table 7.10 reveals that nearly 77 percent of urban residents in Punjab are using tap water but 11 percent of these use untreated tap water. Across all the sampled districts the majority of households are using treated tap water except Gurdaspur. The proportion of such households ranges from 47.47 percent (Gurdaspur) to 73.54 percent (Jalandhar). The other sources of drinking water are hand pumps and tube-wells.

Urban % of urban population 1991 2001 2011 1991 2001 2011 Gurdaspur 386412 535223 655144 21.98 25.44 28.50 Amritsar 853831 1110811 1336060 34.08 51.50 53.64 TaranTaran N.A 112464 141459 ࡳ 11.98 12.63 Kapurthala 166605 246527 285372 25.76 32.67 34.90 Jalandhar 670355 931983 1160365 40.65 47.48 53.18 NawanShehar 70913 81066 125505 13.35 13.80 20.43 Hoshiarpur 222138 292074 334824 17.11 19.72 21.15 Rupnagar 232317 141213 177820 25.77 22.46 26.02 SAS Nagar N.A 271273 544035 ࡳ 38.85 55.17 Ludhiana 1242781 1693653 2062681 51.22 55.84 59.14 Firozpur 372419 450725 552239 25.56 25.81 27.25 Faridkot 149905 193571 21794 33.21 35.14 5.16 Muktsar 153117 198564 252698 23.40 25.54 27.99 Moga 148798 178640 223790 19.23 19.96 22.55 Bathinda 265790 351754 499916 26.98 29.73 35.99 Mansa 95605 142429 163452 16.64 20.68 21.26 Sangrur 428680 424252 516775 25.43 28.80 31.24 Barnala N.A 160567 190619 ࡳ 30.47 31.97 Patiala 471672 594631 762003 30.99 36.39 40.27 Fatehgarh Sahib 107379 151091 185165 23.27 28.08 30.87 Punjab 6038717 8262511 10387436 29.77 33.92 37.49 Source: Director, Census Operation, Punjab (Various Years). N.A. = Not available. * This is because of the reasons mentioned in table 7.1.

Districts

Table 7.8: District-wise growth of population in urban Punjab: 1991 to 2011

Domestic Water Usage in Punjab

Decadal Growth Rate (%) 1991/2001 2001/2011 38.51 22.41 30.10 20.28 ࡳ 25.78 47.97 15.76 39.03 24.50 14.32 54.82 31.48 14.64 -39.22* 25.92 ࡳ 100.55 36.28 21.79 21.03 22.52 29.13 -88.74 29.68 27.26 20.06 25.27 32.34 42.12 48.98 14.76 -1.03* 21.81 ࡳ 18.72 26.07 28.15 40.71 22.55 36.83 25.72

163

Chapter Seven

District

No. of Households Treated 9713 11142 18941 40842 48052 14844 12320 4261 14074 5555 179744

Untreated

Tap water

1 Gurdaspur 121314 57828 2 Amritsar 267737 178542 3 Ferozepur 102631 58645 4 Jalandhar 240683 177007 5 Ludhiana 437781 313841 6 Patiala 152020 102250 7 Sangrur 98663 65515 8 Muktsar 49835 25050 9 Bathinda 95182 56569 10 Hoshiarpur 71171 51483 Total Punjab 1637017 1086730 Source: Govt. of India, Census of India, 2011.

S. No

1352 269 103 104 311 69 62 98 146 268 2782

Covered

Wells Uncov ered 415 156 40 89 332 108 30 25 65 104 1364 23026 21804 17693 8445 39097 4726 4190 18192 15235 6777 159185

Hand pump (No.) 28177 53292 6050 13363 34260 28904 15333 1476 7753 6520 195128

Tubewell (No.)

803 2532 1159 833 1888 1119 1213 733 1340 464 12084

Other Sources

Table 7.9: District-wise number of urban households by main source of drinking water in sampled districts of Punjab

164

165

Gurdaspur

Amritsar

Ferozepur

Jalandhar

Ludhiana

Patiala

Sangrur

Muktsar

Bathinda

Hoshiarpur

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

66.38

72.34

59.43

50.27

66.40

67.26

71.69

73.54

57.14

66.69

47.67

10.98

7.81

14.79

8.55

12.49

9.76

10.98

16.97

18.46

4.16

8.01

Untreated

Tap water

Treated

Source: Computed from table 7.9.

Punjab

District

S. No

0.17

0.38

0.15

0.20

0.06

0.05

0.07

0.04

0.10

0.10

1.11

Covered

0.08

0.15

0.07

0.05

0.03

0.07

0.08

0.04

0.04

0.06

0.34

Uncovered

Wells

9.72

9.52

16.01

36.50

4.25

3.11

8.93

3.51

17.24

8.14

18.98

Hand pump

11.92

9.16

8.15

2.96

15.54

19.01

7.83

5.55

5.89

19.90

23.23

Tubewell

0.74

0.65

1.41

1.47

1.23

0.74

0.43

0.35

1.13

0.95

0.66

Other Sources

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

100.00

Total

Table 7.10: District-wise percentage share of urban households by main source of drinking water in sampled districts of Punjab

Domestic Water Usage in Punjab

166

Chapter Seven

For the purpose of primary data-based evidence, two cities of Punjab, namely, Amritsar (district Amritsar) and Sangrur (district Sangrur) were selected. There were a number of reasons behind the selection. Firstly, Amritsar is a big city with a Municipal Corporation and Sangrur is a small city with a Municipal Committee. Culturally, Amritsar is located in Majha region whereas Sangrur represents Malwa region. Amritsar is relatively more developed and quite advanced in education whereas Sangrur is not that advanced a city and it is also backward in education. For the purpose of data collection, we selected five locations/colonies from each of the two cities as listed in table 7.11. The number of households from these colonies was selected randomly. One hundred households from each of the two cities were sampled. In Amritsar, the number of households across the locations varies from 8 to 26. This is 4 percent to 13 percent of the sampled households. In Sangrur, it ranges from 6 to 34 and comes out to be 3 percent and 17 percent of the sampled households. Table 7.11: Sampled distribution of urban respondents in Amritsar and Sangrur across locations Urban Locations Indra Colony New AbadiFaizpura Ranjit Avenue Guru Harkrishan Nagar Satguru Ram Singh Colony Sub-total Capt. Karam Singh Nagar (Posh colony) Sardar Colony (Upper middle area) Mann Colony (Upper middle area) Sangrur City, District Nabha Gate Area (Middle group Sangrur area) Dr. Ambedkar Colony (Lowest area) Sub-total Total Source: Field survey, 2013–2014. Amritsar City, District Amritsar

Numbe r 25 26 26 8 15 100 20

Percen t 12.5 13.0 13.0 4.0 7.5 50.0 10.0

15 6 25

7.5 3.0 12.5

34

17.0

100 200

50.0 100.0

The main criterion for the selection of these colonies was the size of plot (in yards) and covered area of the house. The plot size of the sampled

Domestic Water Usage in Punjab

167

households in Amritsar varies from 92.20 square yards to 183.12 square yards and that in Sangrur from 94 square yards to 242 square yards (table 7.12). The average plot size of the sampled households in Amritsar is 120.97 square yards while in Sangrur it is 135.18 square yards. The covered area of the houses in Amritsar varied from 391.73 square feet to 1651.54 square feet. In Sangrur the covered area ranged from 633.38 square feet to 2033 square feet. The average size of the households in Amritsar across colonies is between 4.31 members and 5.50 members, while in Sangrur it varies from 3.5 to 5.0. Table 7.12: Average household size, plot size and total covered area across respondents by locations Urban Locations Unit Amritsar

Ranjit Avenue Satguru Ram Singh Colony Guru Harkrishan Nagar New AbadiFaizpura Indra Colony Sub-total Mann Colony Capt. Karam Singh Sangrur Nagar Sardar Colony Nabha Gate Area Dr. Ambedkar Colony Sub-total Total Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Household Size No.

Plot Size

Area Covered Sq. Ft

4.31 5.23

Sq. Yards 183.12 114.40

4.50

109.25

988.13

5.50 5.20 5.00 5.00 3.50

93.88 92.20 120.97 242.17 201.25

391.73 537.20 887.00 2033.33 1559.25

4.20 4.08 4.62 4.22 4.61

128.33 116.76 94.00 135.18 128.08

784.00 962.80 633.38 1007.50 947.25

1651.54 949.33

The overall average size of the sampled households is 5 members per household in Amritsar whereas it is 4.61 members per households in Sangrur (Table 7.12). The average plot size and average covered area in Amritsar is smaller than that in Sangrur and the average household size is larger in Amritsar than that in Sangrur. Clearly, Amritsar is more densely populated than Sangrur.

168

Chapter Seven

Table 7.13: Plot size possessed by urban households across various categories Category Total Sample Unit (sq. yards) No. % Less than 100 125 62.5 100.1 to 250 67 33.5 250.1 to 400 6 3.0 More than 400 2 1.0 Total 200 100.0 Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Amritsar No. % 67 67.0 28 28.0 5 5.0 0 0.0 100 100.0

Sangrur No. % 58 58.0 39 39.0 1 1.0 2 2.0 100 100.0

In the total sample of 200 households, 125 (62.5%) households own a plot of less than 100 square yards (table 7.13). The plot size of another 67 (33.5%) households is between 100 and 250 square yards. Six (3%) households have plot size between 250 square yards to 400 square yards. Two (1%) households own plot size of more than 400 square yards. In Amritsar 67 percent of the sampled households have a plot size below 100 square yards as compared to 58 percent households Sangrur in this category. Between 100 and 250 square yards, there are 28 percent households in Amritsar and 39 percent households in Sangrur. There are 5 percent households in Amritsar who own a plot size between 250 and 400 square yards as compared to only one percent in Sangrur. However, 2 percent of households in Sangrur own plots higher than 400 square yards whereas there is no such household in Amritsar. It is important to note that urban land prices are much higher in Amritsar than in Sangrur.

7.2.1 Sources of Drinking Water Municipal water is the main source of water supply in both the cities under study. This means tap water supplied by the Municipal Corporation and improvement trust in Amritsar and by the Municipal Committee and improvement trust in Sangrur. Out of 100 households in Amritsar 95 (95%) households get tap water from the Municipal Corporation and improvement trust. The same proportion of households gets the municipal supply of water in Sangrur also. However, 21 households (21%) in Amritsar and 10 households (10%) in Sangrur have also installed their own submersible motors, mainly to supplement the municipal supply (table 7.14). The proportion of households covered by municipal water supply is higher than what has been revealed by the secondary data (table 7.10), perhaps because of the time lag as the secondary data pertains to the

Domestic Water Usage in Punjab

169

year 2011.The supply of water by tankers is not there in both the cities. This is also the case with the purchase of mineral water. In fact, the households do not need mineral or bottled water as most of them have installed aqua-guard or ROs. The location wise picture also depicts that the Municipal Corporation/ Committee/Improvement Trust is the main source of water supply for the majority of the households as is evident from tables 7.14 and 7.15. In Indira Colony, 88 percent (Amritsar) of the households have a municipal water supply and 36 percent of the households have also installed submersible motors. In New Abadi Faizpura (Amritsar) 92 percent of the households get water from the municipal supply while 23 percent have also installed submersible motors. In the remaining three colonies in Amritsar, 100 percent of households get water from the municipal supply. However, between 7 to 15 percent of households have also installed submersible motors. Most of the households use these submersible motors to supplement the municipal supply. In the case of various colonies in Sangrur, the situation is almost similar to the colonies in Amritsar. In three of the sampled colonies in Sangrur, 100 percent of households get water from the municipal supply and Dr. Ambedkar Colony has not installed any submersible motor (table 7.15). In one colony (Nabha Gate Area), 96 percent of households get water from the municipal supply while 16 percent of households have also installed submersible motors. In one colony, two-thirds (66.7%) of households do not get water from the municipality. Incidentally, 66.7 percent of the households in this colony have installed submersible motors to meet their water requirement.

Chapter Seven

170

Table 7.14: Sources of water during summer season across the selected urban locations in two cities of Punjab Sources Locations Ranjit Avenue Satguru Ram Singh Colony Guru Harkrishan Nagar New AbadiFaizpura Indira Colony Sub-total Locations Mann Colony Capt. Karam Singh Nagar Sardar Colony Nabha Gate Area Dr. Ambedkar Colony Sub-total Total

M.C/Improvement Submersible Trust motors Yes No Yes No Amritsar 26 0 4 22

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

15 8 24 22 95

1 1 6 9 21

14 7 20 16 79

2 20

0 0 2 3 5 Sangrur 4 0

4 1

2 19

15 24 34 95 190

0 1 0 5 10

1 4 0 10 31

14 21 34 90 169

Domestic Water Usage in Punjab

171

Table 7.15: Sources of water during winter season across the selected urban locations in two cities of Punjab (%) Sources Locations Ranjit Avenue Satguru Ram Singh Colony Guru Harkrishan Nagar New AbadiFaizpura Indira Colony Sub-total Locations Mann Colony Capt. Karam Singh Nagar Sardar Colony Nabha Gate Area Dr. Ambedkar Colony Sub-total Total

M.C/Improvement Submersible Trust motors Yes No Yes No Amritsar 100.0 0.0 15.4 84.6 100.0 100.0 92.3 88.0 95.0

6.7 12.5 23.1 36.0 21.0

93.3 87.5 76.9 64.0 79.0

66.7

0.0 0.0 7.7 12.0 5.0 Sangrur 33.3

66.7

33.3

100.0 100.0 96.0 100.0 95.0 95.0

0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 5.0 5.0

5.0 6.7 16.0 0.0 10.0 15.5

95.0 93.3 84.0 100.0 90.0 85.5

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Tables 7.16 and 7.17 present activity-wise use of water during summer in both the cities. It is clear that the maximum amount of water is used for bathing, followed by washing of clothing, toilets, cleaning of house and dishes. On average every household in Amritsar use 471.3 litres of water daily, while this is 449.4 litres in Sangrur. Across the colonies in Amritsar, the daily average water consumption varies between 352.5 litres (Guru Harkrishan Nagar) and 542.2 litres (Indira Colony). The daily per household water consumption in the sampled colonies in Sangrur varies from 319 litres (Sardar Colony) to 684.2 litres (Mann Colony). The percentage share of water consumption, in various activities in both the cities and across the colonies, is given in table 7.17. At the aggregate level about 46 percent of the total consumption of water in Amritsar is used for bathing while the corresponding figure in Sangrur is 42.3 percent. The average of both the cities is 44.4 percent. Washing of clothes is the second largest consumer of water. This activity consumes 21.3 percent of

172

Chapter Seven

water in Amritsar while it is 22.3 percent in Sangrur. The average of both the cities is 21.7 percent (table 7.17). The use of toilets accounts for 8.9 percent of the total household consumption of water at the aggregate level in both the cities. In Amritsar, it accounts for 11.2 percent of the total consumption of water while in Sangrur this average is 6.3 percent. The difference in both the cities is quite significant. The average share of water use in washing of utensils in both the cities is the same; 8.3 percent in Amritsar and 8 percent in Sangrur. The average share of this activity in both the cities is 8.1 percent. House cleaning also consumes 8.8 percent of the total consumption of water on average. However, the share of this activity in Amritsar (5.5%) is significantly lower than that in Sangrur (12.5%). The aggregate average household consumption of water for drinking and cooking, accounts for 6.4 percent. In Amritsar, the share of this activity is 5.9 percent whereas in Sangrur it is 7 percent. Watering the lawn/kitchen garden, accounts for 1.2 percent of the total consumption of water. In Amritsar, its share is 0.7 percent while in Sangrur it is 1.6 percent. This difference may be attributed to varying plot size and the covered area in both the cities. Incidentally, car washing accounts for merely 0.1 percent of the total water consumption by a household. It is 0.2 percent in Amritsar, but no household reported the use of water for car washing, which seems a bit strange. The use of water in other activities is almost negligible. Bathing and washing of clothes are the main consumers of water as these two activities account for 66.1 percent of the total consumption of water across the households. About 32 percent of water is consumed by toilet, washing utensils, cleaning house and drinking and cooking (table 7.17). In fact, the above-mentioned activities are the main users of water in every household.

173

229.6 254.0

171.5 124.7

31.3

72.8

53.0 35.0

26.3

19.3

Sub-total Mann Colony

Capt. Karam Singh Nagar Sardar Colony

Nabha Gate Area Dr. Ambedkar Colony Sub-total Total

165.0

28.1

221.2 155.9 180.8 199.4

24.6

27.1 40.0

217.9 325.0

33.8

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Sangrur

Amritsar

155.3

72.7

Satguru Ram Singh Colony Guru Harkrishan Nagar New AbadiFaizpura Indira Colony

223.8

51.7

Ranjit Avenue

Bathing

Toilets

Urban Locations

95.2 97.7

94.0

106.0

98.0

80.0

100.3 100.0

113.6

100.8

87.5

86.7

98.8

Washing clothes

34.0 36.6

22.9

46.0

29.0

38.0

39.2 45.8

50.4

41.7

22.5

31.3

35.4

Washing utensils

30.1 28.9

22.4

38.4

21.3

36.0

27.6 41.7

29.0

28.7

19.4

24.7

Drinking & cooking 29.4

7.0 5.3

1.8

1.6

3.3

12.5

3.5 50.0

1.2

0.0

1.3

3.3

Watering the lawn 10.0

53.3 39.6

22.2

88.8

22.0

75.0

25.9 86.7

17.6

13.5

26.3

42.7

36.3

Cleaning house

0.0 0.6

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

1.1 0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

4.2

Washing car

0.0 1.2

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

2.3 0.0

3.6

4.2

2.5

0.0

0.4

Others

427.6 449.4

343.7

535.8

319.0

439.3

471.3 684.2

542.2

449.8

352.5

416.7

492.5

Total

Table 7.16: Activity-wise daily average consumption of water by urban households during summer season across the selected locations in two cities of Punjab (in litres)

Domestic Water Usage in Punjab

Chapter Seven

37.3 46.8 51.0 46.8

39.0 39.1 41.3 45.4 42.3 44.4

17.4

8.0

7.0

13.4

11.2 5.1

6.0

6.1

6.3

7.1

6.3 8.9

Sub-total Mann Colony

Capt. Karam Singh Nagar Sardar Colony Nabha Gate Area Dr. Ambedkar Colony Sub-total Total

46.2 47.5

45.5

10.5

Ranjit Avenue Satguru Ram Singh Colony Guru Harkrishan Nagar New AbadiFaizpura Indira Colony

Bathing

Toilets

Urban Locations

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Sangrur

Amritsar

22.3 21.7

27.3

19.8

30.7

18.2

21.3 14.6

21.0

22.4

24.8

20.8

20.1

Washing clothes

8.0 8.1

6.7

8.6

9.1

8.7

8.3 6.7

9.3

9.3

6.4

7.5

7.2

Washing utensils

7.0 6.4

6.5

7.2

6.7

8.2

5.9 6.1

5.3

6.4

5.5

5.9

Drinking & cooking 6.0

1.6 1.2

0.5

0.3

1.0

2.8

0.7 7.3

0.2

0.0

0.4

0.8

Watering the lawn 2.0

12.5 8.8

6.5

16.6

6.9

17.1

5.5 12.7

3.2

3.0

7.4

10.2

7.4

Cleaning house

0.0 0.1

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.2 0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.9

Washing car

0.0 0.3

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.5 0.0

0.7

0.9

0.7

0.0

0.1

Others

100.0 100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0 100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Total

Table 7.17: Activity-wise average consumption of water by urban households during summer season across the selected locations in two cities of Punjab (%)

174

Domestic Water Usage in Punjab

175

In comparison to summer, in winter the average household consumption of water is much lower. The average household consumption of water during summer is 449.4 litres (table 7.16) per day as compared to 384.9 litres per day (table 7.18) in winter. The main difference is in bathing as it accounts for 59.3 litres less consumption of water during winter as during summer people generally bathe twice a day due to hot weather and in winter they bathe once a day. The difference between the aggregate average consumption of water in a household per day during summer and winter is 64.5 litres. Bathing accounts for the main consumption of water even in winter, though less than in summer (table 7.18). Next to this comes washing of clothes (95 litres per day), toilets (40 litres), cleaning house (39 litres), washing utensils (36 litres) and drinking and cooking. The water use pattern is, thus, the same both in winter and summer seasons. The inter-city and inter-colony difference in the quantity of water being consumed by various activities displays some differences. As regards inter-city difference, household average consumption of water in Amritsar is 406.6 litres in a day as compared to 363.2 litres in Sangrur. In the case of bathing, it is 162 litres in Amritsar and 118.3 litres in Sangrur. Washing of clothes consumes 97.8 litres in Amritsar but 93 litres in Sangrur. Average consumption of water in toilets and washing utensils is also higher in Amritsar than in Sangrur. The situation, however, is reversed in the case of house cleaning, drinking & cooking and lawn watering (table 7.18). As regards intra-colony pattern of water consumption, it is also compatible with the aggregate pattern of water consumption. Bathing, followed by washing of clothes, consumes the highest quantity of water across the colonies, in both the cities. Toilets and utensil washing come next in line. Then come drinking and cooking and house cleaning. The other activities consume a very little amount of water. Inter-colony but inter-activity use of water, however, displays some significant differences (table 7.18). Among the colonies of Amritsar, the water consumption for bathing varies from 117.3 litres to 202 litres per day per household. The washing of clothes consumes between 75.3 litres and 114.4 litres per day. The water use in toilets also varies from 28 litres to 73 litres per day. Similar variation is viewed in other activities across the colonies in Amritsar.

Chapter Seven

142.9 117.3 118.8 181.5 202.0 162.0 191.7 97.5 86.0 142.0 114.3 118.3 140.1

72.0

28.1

31.3

72.8 52.9 35.0 26.3

19.3

33.8

24.6

27.1 40.0

Bathing

51.7

Toilets

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Ranjit Avenue Satguru Ram Singh Colony Amritsar Guru Harkrishan Nagar New AbadiFaizpur a Indira Colony Sub-total Mann Colony Capt. Karam Singh Nagar Sardar Colony Sangrur Nabha Gate Area Dr. Ambedkar Colony Sub-total Total

Urban Locations

93.0 95.4

94.3

100.0

96.0

114.4 97.8 91.7 80.0

100.8

87.5

75.3

95.0

Washing clothes

34.0 36.2

22.9

46.0

29.0

48.0 38.4 45.8 38.0

41.7

22.5

30.0

35.4

Washing utensils

30.1 28.8

22.4

38.4

21.3

28.6 27.5 41.7 36.0

28.7

19.4

24.7

Drinking & cooking 29.4

6.8 5.0

1.8

1.6

3.3

1.2 3.2 46.7 12.5

0.0

1.3

3.0

Watering the lawn 8.8

52.8 39.0

22.2

88.8

22.0

17.6 25.3 78.3 75.0

13.5

21.3

41.3

36.3

Cleaning house

0.0 0.6

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

4.2

Washing car

0.0 1.2

0.0

0.0

0.0

3.6 2.3 0.0 0.0

4.2

2.5

0.0

0.4

Others

363.2 384.9

305.3

450.6

277.7

472.6 406.6 530.8 366.3

401.7

301.3

363.7

405.0

Total

Table 7.18: Activity-wise average consumption of water by urban households during winter season across the selected locations in two cities of Punjab (in litres)

176

Domestic Water Usage in Punjab

177

In the case of various colonies of Sangrur, the variation in water consumption for bathing ranges from 86 litres to 191.7 litres, a huge difference; this may be due to variation in household size. The washing of clothes uses from 80 litres to 100 litres of water per day per household. The water consumption in toilets varies between 19.3 litres to 35 litres per day. Washing of utensils uses between 23 litres to 46 litres of water per day. In the case of drinking and cooking the consumption of water ranges from 21.3 litres to 41.7 litres per day. There are almost similar differences in water consumption in other activities in Sangrur. In Amritsar, it varies from 301.3 litres (Guru Harkrishan Nagar) and 472.6 litres (Indra Colony) per day per household. This variation in Sangrur ranges from 277.7 litres (Sardar Colony) to 530.8 litres (Mann Colony) per day per household (Table 7.18). The activity-wise percentage share of water consumption during winter is given in table 7.19. As is clear from the absolute quantity of water use in different activities, a little more than 36 percent of the total quantity of water goes to bathing, the average of all the sampled colonies of both the cities. The corresponding share in Amritsar is 39.8 percent and 32.6 percent. The washing of clothes accounts for 24.8 percent in both the cities, while it is 24.1 percent in Amritsar and 25.6 percent in Sangrur. The water use share of toilets and house cleaning, accounts for almost an equal share in water consumption—10.4 percent in the former and 10.1 percent in the latter city. However, the inter-city difference in the relative share of two activities is huge. In Amritsar, 13 percent of the total water consumption goes to toilets while it is only 7.4 percent in Sangrur. Contrary to this, the share of house cleaning in Sangrur is 14.5 percent while it is only 6.2 percent in Amritsar. Dish washing and cooking and drinking account for 9.4 percent and 7.5 percent, respectively, of total household consumption of water as an aggregation of both the cities. Significantly, the share of the former activity in Amritsar and Sangrur is exactly the same. Compared to this, the share of the latter activity in Amritsar is 6.8 percent while it is 7.5 percent in Sangrur. The share of car washing is just 1.3 percent for both the cities, 1.9 percent for Sangrur and 0.8 percent for Amritsar. The share for car washing and other activities is almost negligible, if we take a macro view of both the cities (table 7.19). The inter-colony situation regarding the share of various water uses also presents an interesting picture. The share of water use in toilets in Amritsar varies from 7.8 percent (New AbadiFaizpura) to 19.8 percent

178

Chapter Seven

(Satgur Ram Singh Colony) in Amritsar. It varies from 32.3 percent in the latter colony to 45.2 percent in the former colony as far as bathing is concerned. The variation in the share of washing of clothes is from 20.7 percent (Satguru Ram Singh Colony) to 29 percent (Guru Harkrishan Nagar). The share of utensil washing varies from 7.5 percent (Guru Harkrishan Nagar) to 10.4 percent (New Abadi Faizpora) and that of drinking and cooking varies between 6.1 percent and 7.3 percent. House cleaning’s share ranges from 3.4 percent to 11.4 percent. The inter-colonyintra-activity use of water has also registered a wide variation, as is evident from table 7.19. The intra-colony-inter-activity variation in the water use is also presented in table 7.19. The share of water use in toilets varies from 6.6 percent to 8 percent across the colonies in Sangrur. This variation ranges between 26.6 percent and 37.4 percent in bathing. The variation in the share of water for washing clothes is from 22.2 percent to 34.6 percent. The share of washing utensils varies from 7.5 percent to 10.4 percent across the colonies. In the use of drinking and cooking, the share ranges from 7.3 percent to 9.8 percent and for house cleaning it varies between 7.3 percent and 20.5 percent, a wide variation.

179

Sangrur

Amritsar

Ranjit Avenue Satguru Ram Singh Colony Guru Harkrishan Nagar New AbadiFaizp ura Indira Colony Sub-total Mann Colony Capt. Karam Singh Nagar Sardar Colony Nabha Gate Area

Urban Locations

39.4 45.2 42.7 39.8 36.1

26.6 31.0 31.5

7.8

15.4 13.0

6.6

7.2

7.0

7.5

32.3

19.8

9.3

35.3

Bathing

12.8

Toilets

22.2

34.6

21.8

17.3

24.2 24.1

25.1

29.0

20.7

23.5

Washing clothes

10.2

10.4

10.4

8.6

10.2 9.4

10.4

7.5

8.2

8.7

Washing utensils

8.5

7.7

9.8

7.8

6.1 6.8

7.1

6.4

6.8

7.3

Drinking & cooking

0.4

1.2

3.4

8.8

0.3 0.8

0.0

0.4

0.8

2.2

Watering the lawn

19.7

7.9

20.5

14.8

3.7 6.2

3.4

7.1

11.4

9.0

Cleaning house

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0 0.3

0.0

0.0

0.0

1.0

Washing car

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.8 0.6

1.1

0.8

0.0

0.1

Others

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0 100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Total

Table 7.19: Activity-wise average consumption of water by urban households during winter season across the selected locations in the districts of Punjab (%)

Domestic Water Usage in Punjab

Dr.Ambedk ar Colony Sub-total Total

8.0 7.4 10.4

37.4 32.6 36.4

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

180 30.9 25.6 24.8

7.5 9.4 9.4

7.3 8.3 7.5

Chapter Seven 0.6 1.9 1.3

7.3 14.5 10.1

0.0 0.0 0.1

0.0 0.0 0.3

100.0 100.0 100.0

Domestic Water Usage in Punjab

181

It is clear from the foregoing that there is wide variation in the share of various activities, both inter-colonies and inter-activities and within and between both the cities. Though a complete explanation of such a situation may not be feasible on the basis of the given data, the plot size and the location of a house and the human attitude, awareness and sensitivity towards water use may be some of the reasons for this variation across colonies and cities. The household size, too, may not be an important determinant of water use variation as there is not a significant difference in the average number of members in the household. The comparison of water consumption in terms of litres per capita per day (lpcd) across various household activities against the norms suggested by BIS has been made in table 7.20. The comparison with the norms highlights that there is deficiency of water consumption in all the activities except washing clothes in Punjab. This is true for both the districts: Amritsar and Sangrur. It is also evident that the severity of water deficiency is more in the consumption of water in toilets among other activities. It is highly deficit in Sangrur (-23.58) and Amritsar (-19.40). Significantly, the overall deficiency, the aggregate of all the activities, shows a significant deficiency, 42.22 lpcd less in Amritsar and 35.36 lpcd less in Sangrur. For both the cities, the sampled households use on an average 39.08 lpcd less water as compared to BIS norms.

Chapter Seven

5.18 92.78

10 135

*BIS standards

7.84 5.52

10 10

Washing utensils Drinking & cooking Cleaning house Total

20.06

20

Washing clothes

Actual 10.60 43.58

30 55

Norms*

Toilets Bathing

Activities

-4.82 -42.22

-2.16 -4.48

+0.06

Amritsar Difference -19.40 -11.42

12.63 99.64

8.06 7.13

22.56

Actual 6.42 42.84

2.63 -35.36

-1.94 -2.87

+2.56

Sangrur Difference -23.58 -12.16

Table 7.20: Deficiency/surplus in consumption of water on BIS norms in Punjab (lpcd)

182

8.59 95.92

7.94 6.27

21.19

Actual 8.68 43.25

-1.41 -39.08

-2.06 -3.73

+1.19

Total Difference -21.32 -11.75

Domestic Water Usage in Punjab

183

As regards duration of water supply, it is available for 11.35 hours a day on average (table 7.21). In Amritsar it is 10.89 hours and in Sangrur it is for 11.89 hours per day. Across the sampled colonies of Amritsar, the duration of water supply varies from 10 hours to almost 12 hours a day. In the case of the sampled colonies of Sangrur, the duration of water supply is between 3.83 hours and 12.94 hours a day. Thus, with the exception of one colony, the duration of water supply is reasonably good, both in Amritsar and Sangrur. Table 7.21: Average duration of water supply across urban households in the selected locations of Punjab (hours) Urban Locations Ranjit Avenue Satguru Ram Singh Colony Guru Harkrishan Nagar Amritsar New AbadiFaizpura Indira Colony Sub-total Mann Colony Capt. Karam Singh Nagar Sardar Colony Sangrur Nabha Gate Area Dr. Ambedkar Colony Sub-total Total Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Water supply per day (in hours) 11.25 11.93 11.75 10.43 10.09 10.89 3.83 12.00 12.80 11.46 12.94 11.81 11.35

Interestingly, out of the 200 sampled households 155 (77.5%) are not willing to pay for the water supply, as is evident from table 7.22. Table 7.22: Number of urban households willing to pay for improved water supply in the selected districts of Punjab (Rs. per month) City/ District Amritsar Sangrur Total

25–30 35 (35.0) 6 (6.0) 41 (20.5)

Willingness to pay (Rs per month) 30–50 50–75 Not willing Total 3 (3.0) 0 (0.0) 62 (62.0) 100 (100.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (1.0) 93 (93.0) 100 (100.0) 3 (1.5) 1 (0.5) 155 (77.5) 200 (100.0)

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014. Note: Figures in parenthesis are percentages.

184

Chapter Seven

This shows that a majority of households want their supply of water free of charge. This is somewhat strange and also unsustainable. Competitive political populism in Punjab by successive governments and by the major political parties may be one of the significant reasons behind such an attitude. Another study (Bedi, et al., 2013) also reveals a similar psyche of the urban water consumers in Ludhiana city of Punjab. Significantly the Government of Punjab is already supplying free water to households with plot size up to 125 square yards. The proportion of such households is 93 percent in Sangrur and 62 percent in Amritsar. As regards those who are willing to pay for water supply they do not wish to pay beyond a certain limit. The maximum amount they wish to pay is up to Rs. 50 per month and that applies to only 3 households in Amritsar. In Sangrur no household is willing to pay even Rs. 50 per month. There are only 41 (20.5%) households out of the 200 sampled households that are willing to pay up to Rs. 30 per month for the water supply. Out of these 41 households, 35 are from Amritsar and 6 are from Sangrur (table 7.22). It is evident on the basis of the above consideration that there is a wide variation in the water use pattern between rural and urban households. But most of the households are not willing to pay for water supply. Even the relatively better off households want to enjoy the facility free of any charge.

CHAPTER EIGHT AWARENESS ABOUT WATER SCARCITY: USERS RESPONSE

The awareness level of people about water scarcity and the depleting ground water is an important indicator of people’s level of consciousness and it determines their water use habits and patterns. The optimum and efficient use of water is directly dependent on users’ awareness level and the degree of sensitivity about this scarce and non-renewable source. This, in turn, would impact the supply of and demand for water. The efficient and optimum use of water would minimise and rationalise demand wastage, and hence virtual increase in the supply of water. It is in this context that we have tried to inquire into water users’ awareness level on the basis of primary data and information provided by the respondents. The discussion and analyses encompass peoples’ response across agricultural, industrial and domestic sectors. As has been discussed in chapters 5, 6 and 7, the field data and information were collected from 300 cultivators and 300 rural households spread over 30 villages; three villages from each district. The responses of urban water users were collected from 200 urban households located in two cities of Punjab, namely, Amritsar and Sangrur. In the case of respondents from industry, we have collected responses from 50 small-scale and 100 medium- and large-scale industrial units located in 8 districts of Punjab. In view of the above, this chapter has been divided into three sections. These sections discuss the awareness levels in the agricultural, industrial and domestic sectors.

8.1 Awareness Level of Water Consumers in the Agricultural Sector The water table in northern and central Punjab has been depleted at a rate of 60 centimetres per year during roughly the last 30 years. In some of the districts (where paddy is the main crop) the water table has declined at an

186

Chapter Eight

annual average of one metre during the last 10 years approximately. Nearly 80 percent of the area in such districts is over-exploited. Paradoxically, the water table in the south-west Punjab has risen during this period and led to water logging of 200,000 hectares (Kulkarni and Shah, 2013). Waterlogging has made the subsoil water unfit for crops, and human and animal consumption. There is a high concentration of arsenic in the water (more than 50 u g/1) in Muktsar, Bathinda, Mansa and Sangrur districts (Arora, et.al 2008 and Jain & Kumar, 2007). The high salinity level in ground water is another serious issue in these districts. Contamination of ground water with uranium, arsenic and heavy metals has adversely affected Punjab’s subsoil water (in a number of districts, especially in south-west Punjab), hence rendering it unfit for consumption—both for irrigation and drinking. Furthermore, out of the 1686 samples across Punjab, 261 have uranium exceeding the permissible limit (GoI, 2013a). In 16 out of the 22 districts of Punjab5, excess nitrate is also found in the ground water which is harmful for human, animal and crop health. The rice crop has been the main culprit for the rising water table in the south-west Punjab and depleting water table in the central Punjab, a reflection of the dancing water table (Singh, Karam, 2007). The area under water logging increased from 36.81 square kilometres (kms) in 2005–2006 to 46.32 sq. kms in 2008–2009 in Muktsar. Gurdaspur (40 sq. kms) and Hoshiarpur, (9.23 sq. kms) are the other districts that have some area under water logging (GoI, 2013a). On average the ground water is fit for consumption in 53.31 percent of Punjab and is at the margin in 22 percent of the area; whereas in 25 percent of the area it is unfit. This means if we did not take any remedial measures, water in an additional 22 percent of the area of Punjab, in addition to the 25 percent categorised as unfit, would become unfit for consumption (Chopra and Krishna, 2014). As regards awareness about water scarcity and quality, most farmers depend on other progressive farmers, media (including radio, TV, newspaper) and private commercial agents to learn about the latest technology and other related issues. In view of this, we have tried to gauge the respondents’ awareness regarding water use in agriculture from all 5

These districts are: Bathinda, Mansa, Ludhiana, Moga, Ferozepur, Muktsar, Faridkot, Gurdaspur, Hoshiarpur, Jalandhar, Kapurthala, Nawan Shahr, Patiala, Fatehgarh Sahib, Rupnagar, Sangrur, Pathankot and Barnala.

Awareness about Water Scarcity

187

these aspects. One of the most important prerequisites for awareness level is the educational level of respondents.

8.1.1 Educational Attainment and Level of Awareness among Farmers Level of education and awareness play a significant role in every walk of life, including the resource use pattern in agriculture. Since agriculture in Punjab is highly mechanised, capital intensive and skill-oriented, an educated person is expected to use the inputs in an efficient and rational manner. Not only production but also the marketing can be better handled by an educated person. A person with a reasonable level of education and skill can be better aware of the weather and the new techniques, seeds and R & D in the region and country. Given the withdrawal symptoms of the government (even in agricultural activities) from the extension services and media being entrusted the main responsibility, the educated farmer is better placed to get and analyse the information. The information and awareness about the conservation, harvesting and management of water can be better absorbed by an educated farmer. However, the educational attainment in the rural area is still very low. According to a study (Ghuman, et.al., 2007), nearly 69 percent of the rural households in Punjab do not have even a single member with matriculation (10th class). The recent caste and socio-economic survey (by the Union Govt.) of the villages in India also reveals a dismal picture about the education level of rural people. The share of rural students (those who completed 10th or 12th class from rural schools) in the universities of Punjab was 4 percent in 2006 (Ghuman, et al., 2006). In higher professional education the share of rural students in 2008 was 3.71 percent (Ghuman, et al., 2009). It is clear from table 8.1 that a majority of the household heads (HHs) within the various size holdings and across holdings have a very low level of educational attainment. At the aggregate level, 20 percent are illiterate, 16 percent have studied up to 5th class. About 18 percent have studied to between 6th and 8th class, 31 percent to between 9th and 10th class and 8 percent to between 11th and 12th class. Nearly 7 percent are graduates and above. The data in table 8.1 thus, reveal that a very high proportion of household heads (HHs) have a low level of educational attainment. Since the level of awareness is directly correlated with the level of education, one can expect a low level of awareness among the farmers. Among marginal farmers nearly 27 percent of the household heads are illiterate, about 15 percent have studied up to 5th class. Another 18 percent

Chapter Eight

188

are educated to between 6th and 8th class and 28 percent to between 9th and 10th class. About 7 percent have studied between 11th and 12th class. Interestingly 4.48 percent HHs are graduates and above. In the case of small farmers, nearly 20 percent of household heads are illiterate, 23 percent have studied up to 5th class, 21 percent to between 6th to 8th class and 27 percent to between 9th to 10th classes. Nearly 9 percent have studied to between 11th and 12th class. Table 8.1: Educational level of the household heads (HHs) in Punjab (sampled farmers) Size Class (operational holdings in hectares) Marginal (” 1 ) Small (> 1 ” 2) Semi-Medium (> 2 ” 4) Medium (> 4 ” 10) Large (>10) Total

Illiterate

Up to 5th

6th to 8th

9th to 10th

11th to 12th

Graduate & Above

18 (26.87) 11 (19.64) 14 (18.92) 8 (11.11) 8 (26.67) 59 (19.73)

10 (14.93) 13 (23.21) 10 (13.51) 14 (19.18) 2 (6.67) 49 (16.33)

12 (17.91) 12 (21.43) 15 (20.27) 13 (18.06) 3 (10.00) 55 (18.39)

19 (28.36) 15 (26.79) 21 (28.38) 30 (41.67) 7 (23.33) 92 (30.77)

5 (7.46) 5 (8.93) 5 (6.76) 6 (8.33) 2 (6.67) 23 (7.69)

3 (4.48) 0 (0.00) 9 (12.16) 2 (2.78) 8 (26.67) 22 (7.36)

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014. Note: Figures in brackets indicate row percentage.

The level of illiteracy declines with the increasing size of holdings except for large farmers. Among the semi-medium farmers 19 percent of HHs are illiterate, 14 percent have educational attainment only up to 5th class. The incidence of illiteracy is quite low among the HHs of medium farmers. Nearly 19 percent have studied up to 5th class and 18 percent to between 6th and 8th class. Astonishingly, about 27 percent of HHs among the large farmers are illiterate. The educational level of the household heads (HHs) across the three zones—central plain zone (CPZ), south-west zone (SWZ), and submountain zone (SMZ)—also reflects a similar situation. In the CPZ nearly 20 percent of HHs are illiterate, 16 percent have finished primary education, and about 40 percent have studied to between 6th and 10th class. In the SWZ, 15 percent of HHs are illiterate and 28 percent have finished

Awareness about Water Scarcity

189

primary education. Nearly 43 percent have education to between 6th and 8th class. In the SMZ, 13 percent are illiterate, and 10 percent have finished primary education. About 40 percent have education to between 6th and 10th class. The proportion of graduates is much higher in SMZ. In fact, farmers in the SMZ are relatively better equipped with education. Comparing the overall average of CPZ with that of the average of all the zones, the illiteracy incidence is higher in the CPZ. However, the proportion of HHs in the CPZ that has studied up to 5th class is lower than the overall average whereas the proportion of HHs with education between 6th and 10th class is higher than the overall average of all the zones. Similarly, the proportion of HHs between 11th and 12th class is higher in the CPZ than the overall average. However, the proportion of HHs having educational qualificatons of graduation and above is lower in the CPZ than the overall average of all the zones. As compared to the average illiteracy rate of all the zones, the SMZ has a lower incidence of illiteracy. The proportion of farmers in the SMZ having a lower level of education (up to 8th class) is quite lower than the overall average of all the three zones. Also, the proportion of farmers having an education level beyond 12th class is higher in SMZ than the overall average of the three zones.

8.1.2 Disenchantment with Agriculture Though this section is not directly related to the awareness about water use, it is relevant in the sense that when a person is unwilling to continue in agriculture, he/she will not be interested in finding out the best water use practices in agriculture. The National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO) data and various other studies have revealed that quite a large number of farmers are not willing to continue with agriculture, given the option. Already a large number of farmers have either gone out of agriculture or have been pushed out of agriculture (Singh, 2000). This is mainly because of the shrinking of net per hectare return and nonavailability of adequate work agriculture (Gill, 2002; Ghuman, 2001 and 2005). The deceleration of agricultural growth rate and prevalence of highly disguised unemployment and under employment are the other reasons for disenchantment with agriculture. The high concentration of workforce (nearly 55 percent in agriculture) in India and ever-declining share of agricultural income in national GDP (about 14%) have led to a lower real per capita income (both in the relative and absolute sense) for the workforce engaged in agriculture and a population dependent on agriculture. According to Census 2011, the proportion of agricultural

190

Chapter Eight

workforce in Punjab is nearly 35 percent whereas the share of agriculture (including livestock) in the state’s income is around 24 percent (GoP, 2017). It is in this context that we have tried to look into farmers’ disenchantment with agriculture on the basis of a field survey. Table 8.2 highlights that 11 percent of sampled farmers are not willing to remain in agriculture. An almost similar scenario is seen across the three agro-climate zones. The proportion of such farmers varies from 8.33 percent in SWZ to 13.33 percent in SMZ. However, 50 percent of the marginal farmers in the SWZ zone do not want to remain in agriculture. Significantly, this is the zone from where most of the suicides by farmers have been reported during the last 15 years and more than 70 percent of them were marginal farmers. Clearly, farmers’ disenchantment with agriculture is already there, though it is higher among the marginal farmers in the south-west zone. However, farmers are no longer interested in keeping their offspring in agriculture or their offspring is not willing to remain in agriculture, as is evident from table 8.2. Out of the 300 sampled farmers, nearly 56 percent of farmers are not willing to retain their children in agriculture. Across the three agro-climatic zones, this proportion varies between 35 percent (SWZ) and 61 percent (CPZ). Significantly, in the educationally and socially backward south-west zone (SWZ), 65 percent of the farmers want to retain their children in agriculture. It is likely that the low level of education and skill and low level of awareness are the reasons behind such a response. Given the fact, that the majority of the farmers are no longer interested in keeping their children in agriculture; the children would no longer be interested in raising their awareness level about agriculture.

Source: Same as table 8.1.

Total

Large (>10)

Medium (> 4 ” 10)

Semi-Medium (> 2 ” 4)

Small (> 1 ” 2)

Marginal (” 1 )

Size Class (operational holdings in hectares)

CPZ Self Children Yes No Yes No 89. 10. 30. 69. 09 91 91 09 85. 15. 37. 62. 00 00 50 50 90. 9.6 46. 53. 38 2 15 85 89. 10. 39. 60. 13 87 13 87 88. 11. 47. 52. 24 76 06 94 88. 11. 39. 60. 57 43 05 95

SWZ Self Children Yes No Yes No 50.0 50. 50. 50. 0 00 00 00 100. 0.0 28. 71. 00 0 57 43 100. 0.0 62. 37. 00 0 50 50 86.9 13. 78. 21. 6 04 26 74 100. 0.0 70. 30. 00 0 00 00 91.6 8.3 65. 35. 7 3 00 00

SMZ Self Children Yes No Yes No 87.5 12. 25.0 75.0 0 50 0 0 77.7 22. 44.4 55.5 8 22 4 6 100. 0.0 50.0 50.0 00 0 0 0 75.0 25. 0.00 100. 0 00 00 100. 0.0 100. 0.00 00 0 00 86.6 13. 40.0 60.0 7 33 0 0

191

Total Self Children Yes No Yes No 86. 13. 31. 68. 57 43 34 66 85. 14. 37. 62. 71 29 50 50 93. 6.7 50. 50. 24 6 00 00 87. 12. 49. 50. 67 33 32 68 93. 6.6 60. 40. 33 7 00 00 89. 11. 44. 55. 00 00 33 67

Table 8.2: Percentage share of willingness to continue in agriculture among the sampled farmers in Punjab

Awareness about Water Scarcity

192

Chapter Eight

8.1.3 Awareness about Organic Farming The discussion about organic farming is relevant because it is often argued that organic farming consumes fewer resources, including water. Though organic farming is being propagated by some NGOs and experts in the government and universities, this has not yet taken off in Punjab. This is mainly because of low yield, relatively low return and non-patronization by the government and agricultural universities (Romana, 2006). Our empirical data also present a low level of awareness about organic farming and a negligible area under organic farming. Table 8.3 highlights the area under organic farming as well as the awareness about it. The data reveal that out of the 300 sampled farmers only 7 were aware of organic farming. Not even a single farmer from among the marginal and small farmers knew about organic farming. Only one semi-medium farmer, 4 medium farmers and 2 large farmers were aware of organic farming. Because of the low level of awareness about organic farming, the area under organic farming was just 0.17 hectares (out of the total area of 1,317 hectares). This is a mere 0.01 percent of the total area of all the sampled farmers.

203

2

7

Large (>10)

Source: Same as table 8.1.

Total

15

4

Medium (> 4 ” 10)

42

51

1

Semi-Medium (> 2 ” 4)

55 40

No

0 0

Yes

Aware

CPZ

Marginal (” 1 ) Small (> 1 ” 2)

Size Class (operational holdings in hectares)

0.14

0.05

0.17

0.00

0.00 0.00

Area (Hectare)

0

0

0

0

0 0

Yes

60

10

23

16

4 7

No

Aware

SWZ

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00 0.00

Area (Hectare)

0

0

0

0

0 0

Yes

Aware

30

3

4

6

8 9

No

SMZ

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00 0.00

Area (Hectare)

Table 8.3: Awareness about organic farming and area under it (sampled farmers)

Awareness about Water Scarcity

7

2

4

1

0 0

Yes

28

69

73

67 56

No

293

Aware

Total

0.17

0.03

0.11

0.00

0.00 0.00

Area (Hectare)

193

194

Chapter Eight

Across the various zones, out of 210 farmers in the central plain zone, only 7 were aware of organic farming. In the other two zones (SWZ and SMZ), no farmer knew about organic farming. Out of the 7 farmers, who were aware of organic farming, no one was from the category of marginal and small farmers.

8.1.4 Sources of Awareness: Print and Electronic Media Electronic media has penetrated deeply in the rural area and the agricultural households are no exception to this, as is evident from table 8.4. Out of the 300 households, only 8 (2.33 percent) do not view television (TV). Significantly, these 8 households come from marginal, small and semi-medium farmers. In other words, 97.33 percent of rural households have access to TV. As regards newspapers, 73.33 percent do not read any newspaper. The newspapers are, thus, the least used source of information and awareness. A low level of educational attainment may be the reason for this. However, given that 80 percent of household heads are literate, a large number of the literate people also do not read newspapers. Across the regions, the central plain zone (CPZ) had the highest percentage (29.67%) of newspaper readers; followed by the south-west zone (SWZ) and the sub-mountain zone (SMZ). Interestingly, the literacy rate is the highest in the SMZ, but newspaper readership is the lowest. Across the land holdings, the proportion of newspaper readers increases, as we move from marginal (16.42%) to large (36.67%) farmers. Significantly, radio and TV are the main sources of awareness. At the aggregate level, 43 percent listen to radio and 54 percent view TV. Some farmers may be viewing TV as well as listening to the radio, but they told us that their main source of information is radio. Across the zones, viewership of TV ranges from 93 percent in SMZ to 98 percent in CPZ. However, it is a matter of concern that the majority of respondents (57%) do not listen to radio, 46 percent do not watch TV and 74 percent do not read any newspaper among the farmers. This becomes all the more serious in the face of the near absence of in-person extension services in agriculture by the public agencies.

TV Yes 100. 00 100. 00 92.3 1 100. 00 100. 00 98.1 0

Source: Same as table 8.1.

Total

Large (>10)

Medium (> 4 ” 10)

Semi-Medium (> 2 ” 4)

Small (> 1 ” 2)

Marginal (” 1 )

Size Class (operational holdings, hectares)

CPZ Newspaper No Yes No 0.0 18. 81. 0 18 82 0.0 20. 80. 0 00 00 7.6 32. 67. 9 69 31 0.0 48. 53. 0 89 33 0.0 29. 70. 0 41 59 1.9 29. 70. 1 67 81 Yes 100. 00 85.7 1 93.7 5 100. 00 100. 00 96.6 7

TV

SWZ Newspaper No Yes No 0.0 0.0 100. 0 0 00 14. 42. 57.1 29 86 4 6.2 6.2 93.7 5 5 5 0.0 17. 82.6 0 39 1 0.0 60. 40.0 0 00 0 3.3 23. 76.6 3 33 7 Yes 75.0 0 100. 00 100. 00 100. 00 100. 00 93.3 3

TV

SMZ Newspaper No Yes No 25. 12. 87.5 00 50 0 0.0 11. 88.8 0 11 9 0.0 16. 83.3 0 67 3 0.0 25. 75.0 0 00 0 0.0 0.0 100. 0 0 00 6.6 13. 86.6 7 33 7 TV Yes 97.0 1 98.2 1 93.2 4 100. 00 100. 00 97.3 3

195

Total Newspaper No Yes No 2.9 16. 83. 9 42 58 1.7 21. 78. 9 43 57 6.7 25. 74. 6 68 32 0.0 36. 63. 0 99 01 0.0 36. 63. 0 67 33 2.6 26. 73. 7 67 33

Table 8.4: Percentage share of television viewers and newspaper readers in Punjab (sampled farmers)

Awareness about Water Scarcity

196

Chapter Eight

Furthermore, farmers are not sensitised to the depleting water table, waterrelated problems and the emerging water scenario. The sensitivity level of the government and its machinery, too, is very low, as reflected by free power supply and near absence of in-person extension services in the agricultural sector (table 8.4).

8.1.5 Awareness about Depleting Water Table As regards awareness about declining water table, 79 percent of farmers are aware of it and the remaining 21 percent expressed ignorance about it (table 8.5). The farmers in the CPZ the are highly aware of this problem, as about 90 percent responded positively. In fact, this is the zone where water table has gone down significantly. The farmers of the SMZ are rather more aware as 93.33 percent of respondents said that they are aware about the declining water table, though the pace of decline is much slow in this region, as compared to the CPZ . The level of awareness is much lower in the SWZ as only 35 percent of respondents are aware about it, though the water table has significantly depleted in some of these districts in this zone. In the case of water -related problems, the level of awareness is quite high in the SMZ (93.33%), followed by the CPZ (84.29%). The respondents in the SWZ have a low awareness (35%) of the water-related problems, despite the fact that water-related problems are much higher in this zone, including the water-related diseases. At the aggregate level, nearly 75 percent of respondents are aware, and the remaining 25 percent are not aware about water-related problems. Farmers are also aware of their emerging future water requirements in future as two-thirds of respondents answered in the affirmative. However, it should be a matter of concern as one-third of respondents have no awareness about it. Across the regions, the farmers in the SWZ have a very low level of awareness, as only 32 percent of the respondents said ‘yes they are aware about the future water needs’. In other words, 68 percent are still unaware about the emerging water scarcity in their region. Incidentally, the general level of education is also low in this region. One may attribute this to the educational backwardness or low level of educational attainment in the region. However, in an educationally advanced region of the SMZ, 40 percent of the farmers are not aware about their future water needs. The farmers in the CPZ, however, are more aware as nearly 77 percent of respondents expressed awareness about future demand for water (table 8.5).

Yes 188 (89.52) 21 (35.00) 28 (93.33) 237 (79.00)

No 22 (10.48) 39 (65.00) 2 (6.67) 63 (21.00)

Water Table Yes 177 (84.29) 21 (35.00) 28 (93.33) 226 (75.33)

No 33 (15.71) 39 (65.00) 2 (6.67) 74 (24.67)

Water Problem

Source: Same as in table 8.1. Note: Figures in brackets are percentages.

Total

SMZ

SWZ

CPZ

Zones Yes 161 (76.67) 19 (31.67) 18 (60.00) 198 (66.00)

No 49 (23.33) 41 (68.33) 12 (40.00) 102 (34.00)

About Future

197

Source of Awareness Radio T.V. Yes No Yes No 88 122 112 98 (41.90) (58.10) (53.33) (46.67) 38 22 39 21 (63.33) (36.67) (65.00) (35.00) 3 27 11 19 (10.00) (90.00) (36.67) (63.33) 129 171 162 138 (43.00) (57.00) (54.00) (46.00)

Table 8.5: Awareness about declining water table and source of awareness across zones in Punjab

Awareness about Water Scarcity

198

Chapter Eight

In response to our question regarding awareness about higher consumption of water by paddy, nearly 59 percent of respondents answered affirmatively, while 41 percent expressed ignorance about it (table 8.6). Across the three zones, the awareness level is as low as 10 percent in thye SWZ to as high as high as 76 percent in the CPZ. In the SMZ only onethird of the respondents were aware about it. Such a scenario is really distressing as, leaving aside the CPZ, large numbers of farmers are not even aware that paddy is a high water-consuming crop. It needs to be remembered that awareness is the prerequisite to sensitivity. If awareness is a necessary condition, sensitivity is a sufficient condition to address a problem. As such there is an urgent need not only to raise the awareness but also to sharpen it so as to sensitise the farmers to the emerging water scarcity and insecurity. Table 8.6: Awareness about higher water consumption by paddy & crop diversification Zones CPZ SWZ SMZ Total

About Paddy Yes No 160 50 (76.19) (23.81) 6 54 (10.00) (90.00) 10 20 (33.00) (67.00) 176 124 (58.67) (41.33)

Crop Diversification Yes No 84 126 (40.00) (60.00) 5 55 (8.33) (91.67) 1 29 (3.33) (96.67) 90 210 (30.00) (70.00)

Source: Same as in table 8.1. Note: Figures in brackets are percentages.

Diversification of cropping pattern is a much talked about issue but nothing on the ground has taken place, in spite of the fact that two reports by government- appointed committees have been submitted quite a long time ago (GoP, 1986 and 2002). Our field-level findings and observations, too, support this fact. Even after about four decades, since paddy emerged as a major crop in Punjab, 70 percent of the farmers are not aware about the need for diversification, not to talk of actual diversification. Significantly, 96.67 percent of farmers in the sub-mountain zone are not aware about the importance of diversifying the cropping pattern. This proportion in the south-west Punjab is 91.67 percent and in the central zone 60 percent (table 8.6). This is in spite of the fact that both the Union

Awareness about Water Scarcity

199

and State governments are advising the Punjab farmers to decrease the area under paddy and diversify the cropping pattern. The government, policy makers and farmers, however, need to understand that the production of cereal crops (particularly rice) has started increasing in other states of India. The declining share of Punjab’s rice in the central pool is a major indicator that Punjab needs to shift area from under paddy in a significant manner. For the last about 40 years, Punjab has been exporting its underground water in the form of supplying rice to the central pool and other states of India. It is, thus, high time that we read the writing on the wall and make diversification of cropping pattern a success. It is clear from the foregoing discussion that the level of awareness of farmers is quite low and hence there is hardly any sensitivity about water conservation and harvesting. Underground water, extracted by tube-wells, is the predominant source of irrigation. As a consequence, the mean depth of tube-wells has increased manifold during the last three decades. The duration (days) of tube-well operation is also quite high. The farmers are not finding any alternative to paddy and hence will continue to grow paddy even if the free power facility is withdrawn. Out of the 300 sampled farmers 59 percent said that they would continue to cultivate paddy even if the facility of free power is withdrawn. The proportion of such farmers is 70 percent in the paddy zone (CPZ), 20 percent in SWZ (mainly cotton zone) and 53 percent in the SMZ. Besides, the method of irrigation is mainly flooding the fields. Puddling is still the main method of paddy plantation. Significantly, a sizeable proportion of farmers are not aware that paddy is the main source of depleting water.

8.2 Awareness in the Industrial Sector Since the industrial sector is also a significant water consumer, the awareness level of consumers and workers of the industrial sector is very relevant for the judicious use of water. Many of the industrial units are high water-consuming units. In view of this, we have done a field survey of small, medium and large industrial units in Punjab.

8.2.1 Small-Scale Industrial Units Reasons for the efficient use of water, as reported by the respondents, across the industries are given in table 8.7. The respondents mentioned that they use water in an efficient manner because of the scarce supply of

200

Chapter Eight

water, higher cost of extracting underground water as well as that of installation of tube-well. Nearly 87 percent of textiles, dyeing and spinning units revealed that they believe in efficient use of water because of it being a scarce resource. The proportion of such responses in the use of food industry is 62.5 percent. In the case of basic metal manufacturing units, 50 percent of the respondents mentioned this reason. The producers of chemical products and paper products also have the same proportion. Three-fourth of the rubber and plastic producers also believe in saving water because of the same reason. Significantly all the sampled units in the hosiery and leather industry offer the same reason for efficient use of water. In the case of hotel and cold storage units the proportion of such responses is 50 percent. It is clear from the preceding discussion that barring hosiery and leather units, in 5 of the remaining industries, 50 percent of the respondents do not believe in efficient use of water as in their view water is not a scarce resource. In the case of food and beverages nearly 38 percent of units assign importance to scarcity for efficient use of water. This proportion is 25 percent in rubber and rubber products (table 8.7). Significantly, cost is not a significant factor for water saving or efficient use of water, as has been responded by the industrial units (table 8.7). It negates one of the major assumptions of economics, namely, rationality. In four of the 10 industries (rubber, hosiery, leather and hotel), cost is absolutely not a reason for efficient use of water. In the textile and spinning industry only 13 percent of respondents said that cost is a reason to use water in an efficient manner. The proportion of such respondents in chemical units is 25 percent. In the case of basic metals and food products, only 33.3 percent and 37.5 percent of the respondents attach any significance to cost for efficient use of water. Paper and cold storage industries are such where 50 percent of the units reported that cost determines the efficient use of water. The awareness about sustainable use of water is the least across the sampled industrial units. In six industries, the respondents do not attach any reason for efficient water use or for making any effort to use water in an efficient manner. In the hotel and restaurant industry 50 percent of the units agree that they should make an efficient use of water because it is a scarce and non-renewable resource. In the case of basic metals, the proportion of such respondents is only 16.7 percent. Exactly one-fourth of the units in the chemical industry and the rubber and plastic industry are

Awareness about Water Scarcity

201

aware of the importance of the sustainable use of water. The last column of table 8.7 reveals information about the installation of water saving device(s) to save water across the industries. Astonishingly, in the case of textile units, 93.33 percent did not install any water saving device. This proportion is 62.50 percent in the food products and beverages units. Nearly 67 percent of the basic metal manufacturing units, too, did not install any water saving device. Nor have any of the units in the chemical and chemical products, leather product units, hosiery units and cold storages used them. However, 50 percent of respondents in the paper product units and in the rubber product units remarked that they have installed some water-saving devices in their units (table 8.7). From the data regarding penalization for misuse of water and waste disposal, it seems that the industrial units do not misuse or waste water (table 8.8). None of the units, except 2 textile units, were ever penalized for misuse of water. The situation is similar in the case of water disposal. Only one unit in the textile industry faced penalization for violating the waste disposal rules. This shows that small-scale industries neither misuse water nor violate the waste disposal rules. The field observations and ground realities, however, do not support this reported situation as the cases of violations are grossly under reported. Either the responding firms have concealed information or the Punjab Pollution Control Board (PPCB) is not performing its duty in detecting the violation of rules in the case of waste disposal and also misuse of water. Water Pollution due to violating the waste disposal rules has been frequently reported by various studies (Bedi, 2013 and 2015). As regards scarcity of water and losses incurred due to it, all the respondents said that they are facing the problem of water scarcity and are also suffering losses due to the shortage of water. They, however, did not spell out any specific losses being suffered by them.

Chapter Eight

3 (100.0) 2 (100.0) 1 (50.0) 1 (50.0)

Hosiery & Garment

Leather & Leather Product Hotel & Restaurant

Cold Storage

Total 35 (70.0) Source: Field survey, 2013–2014. Note: Figures in brackets represent percentage to total.

2 (50.0) 2 (50.0) 3 (75.0)

13 (86.7) 5 (62.5) 3 (50.0)

Scarce Resource

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product

Name of the Industry

Reasons for interested in efficient use of water Installed any device to Functional save water Cost sustainability Yes No factor of water Total 15 14 2 (13.3) 0 (0.0) (100.0) 1 (6.7) (93.3) 3 (37.5) 0 (0.0) 8 (100.0) 3 (37.5) 5 (62.5) 2 (33.3) 1 (16.7) 6 (100.0) 2 (33.3) 4 (66.7) 4 1 (25.0) 1 (25.0) 4 (100.0) 0 (0.0) (100.0) 2 (50.0) 0 (0.0) 4 (100.0) 2 (50.0) 2 (50.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (25.0) 4 (100.0) 2 (50.0) 2 (50.0) 3 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 3 (100.0) 0 (0.0) (100.0) 2 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 2 (100.0) 0 (0.0) (100.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (50.0) 2 (100.0) 2 (100.0) 0 (0.0) 2 1 (50.0) 0(0.0) 2 (100.0) 0 (0.0) (100.0) 50 38 11 (22.0) 4 (8.0) (100.0) 12 (24.0) (76.0)

Table 8.7: Reported reasons for efficient use of water by the respondents across sampled industries in Punjab

202

.

8 (100.0) 6 (100.0) 4 (100.0) 4 (100.0)

0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)

Rubber & Plastic Product

Hosiery & Garment

Leather & Leather Product

Hotel & Restaurant

Cold Storage

0 (0.0) 1 (2.0)

Total 2 (4.0) 48 (96.0) Source: Same as table 8.7. Note: Figures in brackets represent percentage to total.

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

1 (6.7)

Yes

49 (98.0)

2 (100.0)

2 (100.0)

2 (100.0)

3 (100.0)

4 (100.0)

4 (100.0)

4 (100.0)

6 (100.0)

8 (100.0)

14 (93.3)

No

Penalised for violating the waste disposal rules

2 (100.0)

2 (100.0)

2 (100.0)

3 (100.0)

4 (100.0)

13 (86.7)

No

2 (13.3)

Yes

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product

Name of the Industry

Penalised for misuse of water

Table 8.8: Misuse and scarcity of water and waste disposal

Awareness about Water Scarcity

50(100.0)

2 (100.0)

2 (100.0)

2 (100.0)

3 (100.0)

4 (100.0)

4 (100.0)

4 (100.0)

6 (100.0)

8 (100.0)

15 (100.0)

No

Face scarcity of water for industrial use

50(100.0)

2 (100.0)

2 (100.0)

2 (100.0)

3 (100.0)

4 (100.0)

4 (100.0)

4 (100.0)

6 (100.0)

8 (100.0)

15 (100.0)

No

Facing any loss due to scarcity of water

203

Chapter Eight

204

In view of their own sources of water (tube-wells) and the large storage capacity, it does not seem plausible that they may be facing any serious scarcity of water. Consequently, the vague reporting of losses due to shortage of water is also beyond comprehension.

8.2.2 Awareness Level among the Medium and Large-Scale Industrial Units The water harvesting scenario in the units under study is not very encouraging as is clear from table 8.9. Only 5 percent of the units, across various industries, adopted water harvesting practices while 95 percent of units do not follow such practices. However, 45 percent of units reported the installation of some water-saving devices in their units. Significantly, 39 percent of the units did not feel any need to have an effluent treatment plant (ETP). Table 8.9: Perceptions of medium & large-scale industrial units on water conservation and pollution in Punjab Yes

Perceptions Practice water harvesting Need Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP)

No

Total %

No.

%

No.

%

No.

5

5.0

95

95.0

100

100.0

61

61.0

39

39.0

100

100.0

61.0

39

39.0

100

100.0

67.0

33

33.0

100

100.0

45.0

55

55.0

100

100.0

61 Have you built ETP Obtain certificate from 67 pollution control board Installed any device to 45 save water Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

On the other hand, all those units (61 percent) who agreed with the need to have ETP have built ETP. Interestingly, 67 percent of the units have obtained a certificate of installing ETP from the Punjab Pollution Control Board (PPCB). However, operation of ETPs was actually very low. It also came to the notice of our field investigators that most of the units were throwing untreated water/effluent in the drains. Some of the factories, it was learnt, were even pouring the liquid effluent into the soil by way of bore wells.

Awareness about Water Scarcity

205

Table 8.10: Reported reasons for efficient use of water by the respondents across sampled industries in Punjab (%) Reasons for interested in efficient use of water Industrial Category

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Motor Vehicle Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Fabricated Metal Products except Machinery and Equipment Hosiery & Garment Leather & Leather Product Total

Scarce resource

Cost factor

Functional sustainability of water

Total

Installed any device to save water Yes

No

69.0

6.9

24.1

100.0

48.3

51.7

55.0

30.0

15.0

100.0

45.0

55.0

81.8

18.2

0.0

100.0

45.5

54.5

75.0

25.0

0.0

100.0

25.0

75.0

33.3

0.0

66.7

100.0

44.4

55.6

28.6

57.1

14.3

100.0

71.4

28.6

62.5

25.0

12.5

100.0

50.0

50.0

50.0

50.0

0.0

100.0

75.0

25.0

100.0

0.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

60.0

22.0

18.0

100.0

45.0

55.0

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

As regards efficient use of water, the respondents reported that water is a scarce resource, so they use water optimally and efficiently. The cost factor and functional sustainability are the other factors behind the water use efficiency. Sixty percent of the units revealed that scarcity of water as a resource is the main reason behind its efficient use. Only 22 percent are making efficient use of water because of the cost of water. Another 18 percent said that the functional sustainability of water is also the reason for an efficient use of water.

206

Chapter Eight

Across the industries, about 69 percent of the textile units are giving weightage to the scarcity of water while 24 percent are bothering about the sustainable use of water. Contrary to this, all the sampled hotel and restaurants are giving high priority to the scarcity factor for efficient use of water. In the case of basic metals, the response rate was nearly 82 percent of the respondents. In the case of chemical and chemical product units, 75 percent are bothered about scarcity of water as a resource. Half of the leather and leather units accepted that water scarcity is an important determinant behind efficient use of water. As regards rubber and plastic producers nearly 29 percent are convinced that scarcity of water has much to do with water use efficiency (table 8.10). As regards the cost factor, hotels and restaurants and paper manufacturing units do not attach any importance to it for making efficient use of water. In contrast, all cold storage units attach a very high importance to cost for water use efficiency. For textile units, cost is not an important factor for using water in an efficient manner. Less than 25 percent of the respondents in basic metal units, chemical product units and hosiery said that cost is an important determinant for the efficient use of water. In the case of the food and beverage industry, 30 percent of units responded in a similar fashion. Between 50 to 57 percent of respondents in leather and leather products and rubber and plastic products accepted cost as an important factor for water use efficiency. The concern about sustainable use of water, too, is not very high. Out of the 10 industries none of the respondents showed any concern for the sustainable use of water. Between 12 to 15 percent of the units in hosiery, rubber and food product units said that sustainability of water is important. A similar response was received from 24 percent of the textile, dyeing and spinning units. However, 68 percent of respondents in the paper and paper product units are bothered about sustainable use of water (table 8.10). It is, thus, clear that there is a long way to go for industrial units to be concerned and sensitive about the water use efficiency. This necessitates raising the level of awareness and sensitisation. The governance and regulating and monitoring agencies would have to be firmed up. The installation of water saving devices is also very important for saving and the efficient use of water. Here, too, the picture is not very encouraging. Only 45 percent of the units under study installed one or other water saving device. The remaining 55 percent did not install any such device. Industry wise, too, the situation is almost the same. But for paper and paper product and fabricated metal product units, less than 50

Awareness about Water Scarcity

207

percent of the units installed any water saving device. Not a single unit in the hosiery and leather industries installed any water saving device. Among the remaining industries, between 25 percent and 46 percent of units have installed any device to save water. Clearly, industrial units are yet to realise the importance of saving and conserving water and thereby installing water saving devices. Perceptions of various respondents regarding misuse of water and disposal of waste water are given in table 8.11. Going by the rate of penalization, misuse of water by the industrial units does not seem to be an issue. Only 3 percent of the units (one in the textiles industry and two in the leather industry) reported the incidence of penalization for misuse of water. There was no penalization for 97 percent of units on account of misuse of water. As regards, disposal of waste water, there was no penalization. Scarcity of water is also not a problem for 97 percent of the units across the industries under study. Consequently, 97 percent of the units are not facing any loss due to scarcity of water.

Chapter Eight

208

Table 8.11: Some perceptions of the respondents across sampled industries in Punjab (%)

Industrial Category

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Food Product & Beverages Manufacturing of Basic Metal Manufacturing of Motor Vehicle Manufacturing of Chemical & Chemical Product Manufacturing Paper & Paper Product Rubber & Plastic Product Fabricated Metal Products except Machinery and Equipment Hosiery & Garment Leather & Leather Product Total

Penalised for misuse of water

Penalised for violating the waste disposal rules

Face scarcity of water for industrial use

Facing any loss due to scarcity of water

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

3.4

96.6

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0)

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

66.7

100.0)

100.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

3.0

97.0

100.0

3.0

97.0

3.0

97.0

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

It is clear from the above that the industries in Punjab are mainly dependent on their own sources of water which is ground water. They have installed their own tube-wells and constructed big storage tanks to ensure an uninterrupted supply of water. As far as harvesting and conservation of water is concerned, a large number of them are aware but have not made any significant efforts to make an optimum, rational and

Awareness about Water Scarcity

209

efficient use of water. No respondent is undertaking a water audit in their unit. Compared to this, 62 percent of respondents are undertaking water audits in their industries (FICCI, 2011). The policy intervention is also very weak. As regards the policy of adopting three R’s—reduce, recycle and reuseņin the case of water hardly any industrial unit is adopting this approach. This needs to be re-emphasised so that the virtual supply of water is increased and demand for water is decreased. As compared to this 80 percent of the industries at the all-India level have reported to have undertaken waste water treatment and reuse in their companies (FICCI, 2011).

8.3 Domestic Sector The domestic or municipal sector is another significant water consumer. Here, too, awareness about the importance and scarcity of water is equally important for its judicious use. It is in this context that we did a field survey to understand and comprehend the awareness level and sensitivity of the domestic water users, rural as well as urban. The educational level of domestic users has already been discussed in chapter 7. This section dwells on the findings of the field survey pertaining to awareness level of the respondents.

8.3.1 Awareness about Water Conservation and Rain Water Harvesting Among Rural Households Table 8.12 reveals that out of the 300 sampled households in 30 villages located in 10 districts, 90 percent of the households are not aware about water conservation and rainwater harvesting. Table 8.12: Awareness about water conservation among rural households in sampled villages and rain water harvesting (%) Use of water saving technique

Aware

Zone

Rain water harvesting

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

CPZ

7.14

92.86

8.10

91.90

5.71

94.29

SWZ

15.00

85.00

6.67

93.33

8.33

91.67

SMZ

23.33

76.67

16.67

83.33

23.33

76.67

8.67

91.33

8.00

92.00

10.33 89.67 Total Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

210

Chapter Eight

Across the three regions, the highest level of un-awareness (93 percent) is in the CPZ despite the fact that this zone has the highest number of dark blocks. The educational level is also higher in this region than the southwest zone, though lower than the sub-mountain zone. Thus, it is difficult to explain why the lowest level of awareness for water conservation is in the central plain zone. It is followed by the SWZ (85 percent) and the SMZ (77 percent). Regarding use of water saving techniques nearly 91 percent of rural households in Punjab are not aware about any water saving technique. In the CPZ this percentage is 92 and in the SWZ it is 93 percent. Even in the SMZ (with the highest literacy rate) 83 percent of households are not aware about any water saving techniques. Clearly, the awareness level about water saving techniques is rather low. The awareness level about rain water harvesting is also very low. Interestingly, 92 percent of households are not aware about rain water harvesting in Punjab. Significantly, in the CPZ the share of such households is 94 percent while 92 percent in the SWZ are unaware about the rain water harvesting. The proportion of such households in the SMZ is nearly 77 percent. Not only is the awareness level low, very few among them actually apply any techniques to save water or to enhance the supply of water. This observation is equally true of water conservation and rain water harvesting. As regards rain water harvesting, hardly any rural household does any harvesting. A few of the households make some efforts to conserve and save water, but their impact is grossly insignificant. In fact, it has been observed that the water supply taps in rural households are rarely turned off. Most of the households leave the main tap open and it stops running only when water supply is off. Thus, wastage of water is quite high in the rural households. A minuscule proportion of the rural households take care of water conservation and saving. The lack of awareness is directly related to insensitivity about the importance and scarcity of water. The low or no user cost, and that too on a flat rate and ineffective implementation, is also responsible for such irresponsible behaviour. The awareness about water scarcity and efficient use of water is revealed in table 8.13. Out of the 300 sampled households, 66 percent are aware that water is a scarce resource and hence must be used in a judicious manner.

Awareness about Water Scarcity

211

Table 8.13: Awareness about scarcity of water and water use efficiency among rural households in sampled villages (%) Zone

Aware about scarcity

In favour of rational

Yes

No

Yes

No

CPZ

68.57

31.43

53.81

46.19

SWZ

65.00

35.00

46.67

53.33

SMZ

50.00

50.00

46.67

53.33

Total

66.00

34.00

51.67

48.33

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Significantly, a majority of the households across the three zones under study are aware of this hard reality. At the aggregate level, 66 percent of the households are aware of water scarcity. The proportion in the CPZ is 68.57 percent; while in the SWZ and the SMZ the share of such households is 65 percent and 50 percent, respectively. However, it is really disappointing that a very high proportion of rural households is still not aware about the hard fact that ground water is a scarce and non-renewable resource in Punjab. Table 8.13 also highlights how rationally the water is being used. Out of the 300 households nearly 48 percent are not in favour of efficient use of water. About 46 percent of households in the CPZ do not believe in the efficient use of water. This proportion is 53 percent in each of the other two zones. It has been highlighted by the data that although a majority of the households are aware of the scarcity of water, those who use water in an efficient manner are in a minority. Two inferences may safely be drawn from this analysis. One, there is an urgent need to raise the awareness level of people that water is a scarce and non-renewable resource and its conservation, saving and efficient use is not a choice but a necessity. Two, being aware of the scarcity of water may not automatically lead to its efficient use. Awareness is a necessary but not a sufficient condition. A significant natural implication of such a discussion and analysis is that there is a dire need to raise the level of awareness among those who are aware and those who are yet not aware but must be made aware about the scarcity of water. They must be convinced that efficient and sustainable use of water is not only in their enlightened self-interest but should also be in the interest of their future generations. This is neither a choice nor an option but it is must-do act.

Chapter Eight

212

8.3.1.2 Respondents’ Perceptions about Quality of Water The satisfaction level of the households about the quality of water is given in tables 8.14. At the aggregate level 77.33 percent of households are satisfied with the quality of water. The proportion of such households is much higher in the CPZ than in the other two zones. Table 8.14: Satisfaction about quality of water and duration and timing about tap water supply in rural households in sampled villages (%) Quality of water

Timing of tap water

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

CPZ

88.10

11.90

41.43

58.57

42.38

57.62

SWZ

40.00

60.00

68.33

31.67

71.67

28.33

SMZ

76.67

23.33

70.00

30.00

66.67

33.33

Total

77.33

22.67

49.67

50.33

50.67

49.33

Zone

Duration of tap water

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

The proportion of satisfied households is the lowest (40%) in the SWZ. This seems to be their natural response as the subsoil water in the southwest Punjab is affected with salinity and alkalinity. Unfortunately, this is the region in which the incidence of cancer and cancer deaths is very high. As regards the timing and duration of tap water supply, there is a mixed set of responses, as is clear from table 8.14. At the aggregate level 49.67 percent of households are satisfied with the timing of water supply. Across the regions, 58.57 percent of households in the CPZ are not satisfied with the timing of the water supply. In contrast, the majority of the households in the other two zones are satisfied with the timing and of water supply. As regards the duration of tap water supply, the proportion of satisfied and dissatisfied households is almost the same at the aggregate level. Those who were not satisfied, their main demand was to enhance the duration of water supply, at least by one hour, each in the morning, noon and evening times. Across the regions, 42.38 percent of households in the CPZ are satisfied with the duration of water supply. As compared to this, 71.67 percent of households in the SWZ and 66.67 percent of households in the SMZ are satisfied with the duration of water supply (table 8.14).

Awareness about Water Scarcity

213

Table 8.15 shows the water storage capacity and the use of waste water in rural households of Punjab. Significantly 74.33 percent of households have some type of storage capacity. The households in the CPZ zone have the highest proportion of such households. In the SWZ, 66.67 percent of households have water storage capacity, while in the SMZ such households are 40 percent. It has been generally observed that storage of water results in low wastage besides fulfilling the need even when the water supply is not there. Some of those households who did not have the storage capacity, perhaps, do not have the necessary finances to construct storage tanks, etc. However, even these households do have a limited storage capacity, such as buckets or other small containers. The situation on the use of waste water is really very pathetic, as is evident from the data given in table 8.15. It is really disappointing that 95 percent of households do not use or recycle the waste water. Out of the three regions, the CPZ has the lowest proportion (3.33 percent) of the households who make use of waste water. In the SWZ 93.33 percent of households do not make any use of the waste water. In SMZ, the proportion of such households is about 87 percent. Table 8.15: Water storage facility and use of waste water in rural households among sampled villages (%) Zone

Storage facility

Use of waste water

Yes

No

Yes

No

81.43

18.57

3.33

96.67

SWZ

66.67

33.33

6.67

93.33

SMZ

40.00

60.00

13.33

86.67

Total

74.33

25.67

5.00

95.00

CPZ

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Clearly, there is a long way to go as far as the use of waste water is concerned. In fact, a large number of rural households are not even aware of the use of waste water. Besides, they do not know how to make use of waste water; and where to make use of waste water. Their level of awareness and sensitisation is almost negligible in this regard. And it is here we need the extension services to spread awareness among the people and sensitise them about the importance of water, especially ground water.

214

Chapter Eight

8.3.2 Urban Sector Urban water consumers’ level of awareness about water scarcity and quality is discussed in this section. This is relevant as it impacts the virtual demand and supply of water. 8.3.2.1 Perceptions regarding Need to Save Water Despite the fact that a majority of the households want a free supply of water, their expectation about the quality of water supply seems to be very high. Out of the 200 sampled households in both the cities, 89 percent are not satisfied with the supply of water as they feel that water supply is quite erratic and irregular. The proportion of such households in the city of Sangrur is 89 percent and in Amritsar city it is 82 percent. However, 95.5 percent of households are in favour of saving water. The proportion of such households in Sangrur and Amritsar is 98 percent and 93 percent, respectively (table 8.16). As regards the perception about the irregular supply of water across the colonies, it varies between 73 percent and 100 percent in Amritsar. In Sangrur, it is from 67 percent to 100 percent. The proportion of households favouring saving of water varies from 84 percent to 100 percent across the sampled locations of Amritsar while it is between 96 percent and 100 percent in Sangrur. Despite the fact that a very high proportion of households is in favour of saving water, the efforts to save water have been negligible. Hardly any urban households covered in the sample are aware of the policy of reducing, recycling and reusing waste water. As such they are not making efforts to reduce, recycle or reuse the water (table 8.16).

Awareness about Water Scarcity

215

Table 8.16: Perceptions of urban households regarding water supply in Amritsar and Sangrur cities (%) Urban Locations

Do you face an irregular water supply Yes

No

Need to Save Water Yes No

Amritsar Ranjit Avenue

92.3

7.7

100.0

0.0

Satguru Ram Singh Colony Guru Harkrishan Nagar New Abadi Faizpura

80.0

20.2

93.3

6.7

100.0

0.0

87.5

12.5

73.1

26.9

96.2

3.8

Indira Colony

76.0

24.0

84.0

16.0

82.0

18.0

93.0

7.0

Sub-total

Sangrur Mann Colony

66.7

33.3

100.0

0.0

Capt. Karam Singh Nagar Sardar Colony

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

93.3

6.7

100.0

0.0

Nabha Gate Area

96.0

4.0

96.0

4.0

Dr. Ambedkar Colony

100.0

0.0

97.1

2.9

Sub-total

96.0

4.0

98.0

2.0

Total

89.0

11.0

95.5

4.5

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

Most of the households use a device to treat and purify water before using it for drinking purpose (table 8.17).

Chapter Eight

216

Table 8.17: Treatment of unsafe water across urban households in Amritsar and Sangrur cities (%) Urban Locations

Ranjit Avenue Satguru Ram Singh Colony Guru Harkrishan Nagar New Abadi Faizpura Indira Colony Sub-total

Boiling Yes No

Filtering by cloth Yes No Amritsar

Yes

R.O. No

Aqua-guard Yes No

3.8

96.2

0.0

100.0

76.9

23.1

3.8

96.2

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

60.0

40.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

50.0

50.0

0.0

100.0

7.7

92.3

3.8

96.2

19.2

80.8

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

20.0

80.0

0.0

100.0

3.0

97.0

1.0

99.0

43.0

57.0

1.0

99.0

Sangrur Mann Colony Capt. Karam Singh Nagar

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

83.3

16.7

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

0.0

100.0

80.0

20.0

0.0

100.0

Sardar Colony Nabha Gate Area Dr. Ambedkar Colony

13.3

86.7

0.0

100.0

40.0

60.0

0.0

100.0

4.0

96.0

8.0

92.0

48.0

52.0

4.0

96.0

11.8

88.2

2.9

97.1

14.7

85.3

0.0

100.0

Sub-total Total

7.0 5.0

93.0 95.0

3.0 2.0

97.0 98.0

44.0 43.5

56.0 56.5

1.0 1.0

99.0 99.0

Source: Field Survey, 2013–2014.

Significantly, the traditional methods of water purification are no longer being practised. In all, 5 percent of households boil the water for drinking and 2 percent filter the water with a cloth. The number of such households is less in Amritsar than that in Sangrur. Only 2 households use aqua-guard. The ROs are being used by 43.5 percent of the sampled households in both cities. The proportion of such households is 43 percent and 44 percent, respectively, in Amritsar and Sangrur. Thus, in all 51.5 percent of households use one or the other method to treat water for drinking. This means the remaining 48.5 percent of households do not treat water before drinking. They either do not have the means to install ROs and aquaguards or think that even the untreated water is safe for drinking. Some of

Awareness about Water Scarcity

217

these households also think that aqua-guard and the RO filter useful minerals out of the water (table 8.16). Across the locations, the proportion of those households that use ROs varies from 19.2 percent and 76.9 percent in Amritsar. The corresponding proportion in Sangrur is between 14.7 percent and 83.3 percent (table 8.17). Clearly, in certain colonies (localities) in the cities of Amritsar and Sangrur, the proportion of households who treat water with ROs is very high while in some others it is quite low. The awareness level about the quality of water and non-affordability are reasons for not using aqua-guard or ROs. Another important factor for not using these gadgets may be the understanding of the people that use of water treated by aqua-guard and RO reduces the resistance level of the body. Some households also revealed that they do not use these gadgets because treated water is not always available, particularly when you are away from home. Thus, there are multiple reasons for using or not using these modern devices to purify the water. While collecting information from the respondents about water and related issues we also enquired about their perception of the cleanliness of the drainage system. Table 8.18 presents the perceptions of the sampled urban households in both cities. All the 200 respondents said that the drains are cleaned by the municipal corporation in Amritsar and the municipality in Sangrur. As regards their satisfaction level only 8.5 percent of households are fully satisfied. Another 55 percent of households are partially satisfied whereas 36.5 percent are not satisfied with the cleanliness of the drainage system. It is significant to note that only 10.5 percent of households are making any payment to the municipalities towards cleaning. The remaining 89.5 percent are not making any payment. However, the respondent households are willing to pay around Rs. 11 per month, on average, towards cleaning the drainage system. This is too meagre an amount. Most of the respondents were of the view that since they are paying income tax or some other taxes they should not pay for the cleaning of drains.

Chapter Eight

218

Table 8.18: Perceptions of urban households regarding cleaning of drains in Amritsar and Sangrur (%) Urban Locations

Who cleans the drains? Municipality

Level of Satisfaction Fully Some Satisfied what Not

Payment for cleaning drains Yes

No

Amritsar Ranjit Avenue Satguru Ram Singh Colony Guru Harkrishan Nagar New Abadi Faizpura

100.0

15.4

69.2

15.4

11.5

88.5

100.0

6.7

73.3

20.0

0.0

100.0

100.0

62.5

25.0

12.5

0.0

100.0

100.0

15.4

57.7

26.9

0.0

100.0

Indira Colony

100.0

0.0

60.0

40.0

4.0

96.0

Sub-total

100.0

14.0

61.0

25.0

4.0

96.0

Sangrur Mann Colony Capt. Karam Singh Nagar

100.0

0.0

33.3

66.7

0.0

100.0

100.0

15.0

45.0

40.0

5.0

95.0

Sardar Colony

100.0

0.0

53.3

46.7

13.3

86.7

Nabha Gate Area Dr. Ambedkar Colony

100.0

0.0

68.0

32.0

16.0

84.0

100.0

0.0

38.2

61.8

29.4

70.6

Sub-total

100.0

3.0

49.0

48.0

17.0

83.0

Total

100.0

8.5

55.0

36.5

10.5

89.5

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

The periodicity of cleaning drains is given in table 8.19. Out of 200 households, 86 percent revealed that there is no specific periodicity of cleaning drains. According to them, the municipality cleans the drainage system only when there is some complaint about blocked drains or they are too dirty and filthy. The proportion of such respondents in Amritsar and Sangrur is 77 percent and 95 percent, respectively. It is clear from table 8.19 that the position of cleanliness of drains is very poor. This is mainly the result of disorientation of the municipal corporations and municipalities. The public pressure was also observed to be almost negligible.

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

4.0 0.0

50.0

61.5

88.0

77.0

100.0

95.0

93.3

92.0

97.1

95.0 86.0

Indira Colony

Sub-total

Mann Colony Capt. Karam Singh Nagar

Sardar Colony

Nabha Gate Area Dr. Ambedkar Colony

Sub-total Total

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014.

0.0

93.3

1.0 0.5

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Weekly

80.8

Complaint basis

Ranjit Avenue Satguru Ram Singh Colony Guru Harkrishan Nagar New Abadi Faizpura

Location

0.0 4.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Sangrur

8.0

0.0

3.8

50.0

6.7

7.7

Monthly Amritsar

1.0 1.5

0.0

4.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

3.8

0.0

0.0

0.0

Quarterly

1.0 1.5

0.0

0.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

3.8

0.0

0.0

0.0

Half yearly

Table 8.19: Periodicity of cleaning of drains in Amritsar and Sangrur of Punjab (%)

Awareness about Water Scarcity

0.0 1.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

3.8

0.0

0.0

3.8

Annually

2.0 5.5

2.9

0.0

6.7

0.0

0.0

9.0

4.0

23.1

0.0

0.0

7.7

Others

100.0 100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Total

219

220

Chapter Eight

It is clear from the foregoing discussion that the awareness level of water use and saving of water is quite low across all three sectors, namely, agriculture, industry and rural and urban households. Negligible understanding about the quality of available water, low education level, low level of sensitivity towards misuse of water, subsidised supply of water or free supply of water are the main reasons for such behaviour. Absence of any social pressure to make judicious and efficient use of water may also be significant reasons for such behaviour. The role of governance and the lack of a compatible public policy are also responsible for the low level of awareness, of sensitivity, and for non-judicious and inefficient use of water, especially ground water. Almost similar set and sub-sets of reasons are responsible for non-conservation and nonharvesting of water. Reduced consumption of water, recycling of used water and reusing of such water are also not visible; mainly because of the above-mentioned reasons.

CHAPTER NINE WATER GOVERNANCE AND POLICY RESPONSE

Governance, institutions and policies go hand in hand. Institutions not only decide the rules of the game and governance but also act as checks and balances on the executive. Political will, on the other hand, is a prerequisite to evolve consensus and raise the level of awareness and sensitivity among all the stakeholders—government, farmers, industry and business and households. These are the significant determinants of governance and optimum and efficient use of natural resources, including water. Thus, the existence of robust institutions and their effective functioning has much to do with governance. In the absence of properly functioning institutions, there cannot be respect for any rules of the game and, hence, for the rule of law and governance. The existence of wellfunctioning institutions is, however, a necessary but not a sufficient condition. Perhaps it is in this context that Amartya Sen (2009) wrote: “The need for an accomplishment-based understanding of justice is linked with the argument that justice cannot be indifferent to the lives that people can actually live. The importance of human lives, experiences and realization cannot be supplanted by information about institutions that exist and the rules that operate. Institutions and rules are, of course, very important in influencing what happens and they are part and parcel of actual world as well, but the realized actuality goes well beyond the organizational picture, and includes the lives that people manage or do not manage-to live.”

It is in the above context that we need institutions and policies and policy response for water governance conservation, harvesting and management. There must be a synergy between the policies, objectives and strategy. As a matter of fact, water governance is the sine qua non for effecting efficiency, equity, sustainability, conflict resolution and economic and financial viability (Ballabh, 2008). The increasing energy prices and the escalating cost of extracting ground water, due to energy-intensive ground water for irrigation, may pose a serious threat to the livelihoods of resource-poor farmers, agricultural labourers and food security. Such a scenario may lead to direct adverse impact on some of the largest bread

222

Chapter Nine

bowls like the Indo-Gangetic Plains, Northern China and Western United States (Zhu, et al., 2007). The study finds that though the higher energy cost for ground water pumping is not yet affecting the total quantity of food production, prices may still increase. But impact on net farm incomes could have been more severe if a large share of crops would have relied on ground water pumping. The higher costs will certainly hurt small farmers. In fact, there is a positive correlation between energy costs to extract underground water and the water table depth. As the water table deepens, the unit cost of energy to extract ground water also increases. In view of the fact that water is essential for Food Security and Nutrition (FSN), there is always a need to use water in the most judicious manner. To ensure continuous FSN, assured and adequate availability of water is essential. This, in turn, requires conservation and sustainable management of the ecosystem, adoption of an integrated approach towards harvesting and management of water. Nations should develop an integrated water resources management strategy and integrate it with food and nutrition security. They must ensure coordinated policy development and implementation of water and FSN strategies across sectors and hold sectors accountable for their impact on water for FSN (HLPE, 2015). There must be an evidence-based stocktaking of the present and future water needs of all sectors. Policies need to be in place to encourage and involve the civil society organisations and other stakeholders. At the same time, the policy and strategy need to take care of the water needs of the vulnerable and marginalised sections of the population as a priority. Policy must ensure equal treatment for women and prioritise treatment for the vulnerable and marginalised. These policies must address the specific needs of women and girls of these sections. These sections should be an integral part of water governance which may include water users’ associations, ministries and other national institutions. No water-related policy should go against the interest of the vulnerable and marginalised peoples (HLPE, 2015). As agriculture is the single largest consumer of water, there is also a need to formulate suitable policies and strategies to improve water management in agriculture so as to improve water use efficiency and water productivity. It needs to be mentioned that crops need moisture and not the unnecessary use of water by way of the flooding method of irrigation. As such there is a need to strengthen water storage infrastructure, including improving soil moisture retention capacity. It is also being accepted at the global level by countries and international agencies that every country should set up water

Water Governance and Policy Response

223

regulatory bodies. Within the country, there should be regional/state-level water regulatory bodies. Furthermore, there is also a need to ensure a rights-based approach to governance of water for FSN and other needs. The world is implementing policies for recovering the user cost of water from the user. This is the case in all the developed and many developing countries. The Water Framework Directive (WFD) of the European Union (EU) has become a milestone in this respect. The Directive aims to achieve good ecological status of water bodies in the EU countries. To achieve this aim, it calls for the application of economic principles to the provision of water which inter-alia should be based on the estimation of resource and environment costs (Martinez and Perni, 2011). The resource costs are considered as the costs of foregone opportunities due to the depletion of the resource beyond its natural rate of recharge or recovery (WATECO, 2003). This is of great significance to use water in a judicious manner and, hence, regulate over-exploitation of aquifers so as to check the depletion and deterioration of water resources.

9.1. Constitutional Status of Water in India and Some Initiatives at the National Level Under the Constitution of India, water is primarily a state subject but it is also an increasingly important national concern in the context of the following: x the right to water is a part of the fundamental right of life; x the emergence of a water crisis because of the mounting pressure on a finite resource; x the inter-use and inter-State conflicts that lead to, and the need for a national consensus on water-sharing principles, and on the arrangements for minimising conflicts and settling them quickly without resort to adjudication to the extent possible; x the threat to this vital resource by the massive generation of waste by various uses of water and the severe pollution and contamination caused by it; x the long-term environmental, ecological and social implications of efforts to augment the availability of water for human use; x the equity implications of the distribution, use and control of water: equity as between uses, users, areas, sectors, states, countries and generations; x the international dimensions of some of India’s rivers; and

224

Chapter Nine

x the emerging concerns about the impact of climate change on water and the need for appropriate responses at local, national, regional, and global level (Government of India, Planning Commission, 2013b, pp. 178–179.) In the early 1970s, the Government of India put forward a model bill to regulate ground water use for adoption by the states. This model bill was revised in 1992, 1996 and 2005 but the basic scheme has been retained. The model bill to regulate and control the Development and Management of Ground Water, 2005 only introduced a limited regulatory framework to address ground water depletion and pollution (GoI, Planning Commission, 2013b, p. 176). The 12th Plan has drafted a new Model Bill for the Protection, Conservation, Management and Regulation of Ground Water. This is based on the idea that while protection of groundwater is a key to the long-term sustainability of the resource, this must be considered in a framework in which livelihoods and basic drinking water needs to be of central importance (GoI, Planning Commission, 2013b, p. 177). Subsequently, the ground water resource was re-estimated on the basis of the methodology proposed by the Ground Water Overexploitation Committee, 1977. The Government of India constituted a ground water Estimation Committee in 1982. The mandate of this committee was to suggest a methodology to assess and estimate the ground water resources. This committee came up with a methodology, namely: Ground Water Estimation Methodology-1984 (Government of Punjab, 2012). Independent Regulation Agencies (IRAs) and independence of the state are new governance mechanisms introduced at the state level in the Indian water sector. The special laws enacted to create the IRAs were expected to bring fundamental changes in the water governance sector. However, a study by Wagle and Warghade (2010) reveals that the IRA laws effectively disenfranchise non-dominant sections of society. The new water entitlement regime, under the IRA laws would almost quash hopes of non-dominant sections getting access to water. The Government of India has directed all the states of India to set up water regulatory bodies (Dhaliwal, 2014). A number of states have already set up such bodies. It is significant to note that the 13th Finance Commission of India had made it obligatory for every state to set up such a body by the end of March 2012. The Commission had earmarked special grant-in-aid for the medium and minor irrigation schemes for the state that would set up a water regulatory authority. One of the significant implications of

Water Governance and Policy Response

225

setting up such a regulatory authority would be that a water tariff can be charged on surface and sub-surface water used for irrigation, domestic, agricultural and other purpose. The authority can also determine and regulate the entitlement of water for various sectors. The Planning Commission has also advocated for a comprehensive audit of water usage across the sectors and it should be made a recurring feature of industrial and agricultural activity. Before initiating an audit, there must be a benchmark for specific water uses in different industries. The industries and companies must include details of their water footprint in their annual reports. Levying of charges for water use and incentives for water conservation are equally important. Currently, the only available instrument with the government for this purpose is the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977. This Act needs to be reexamined so as to make it more effective. This is particularly important where industrial units use subsoil water and do not pay municipalities and water utilities for water use (GoI, Planning Commission, 2013b, pp. 167– 168). Public validation of the water audit of each industry or water-using activity is equally important. This is necessary for building public confidence and inculcating behavioural change in the end users. As per the Model Bill for State Water Regulatory System, every state is under an obligation to have a State Independent Water Expert Authority (SIWEA). The SIWEA is to be a multi-disciplinary body of independent professionals and is supposed to prepare the Action Plan for Preparation of Regulations etc. The areas to be covered include water access, extraction and use; execution of projects and programmes; water service provisioning; environmental sustainability; disaster management; and preparation of integrated state water plan, etc. The Supreme Court of India in 1996 issued directions to the Government of India for setting up the Central Ground Water Authority (CGWA) under the Environment Protection Act, 1986 (EPA, 986) for the purpose of regulation and control of ground water development. The Court also directed the CGWA to regulate indiscriminate boring of tube-wells and with drawl of ground water in the country and issue necessary directions so as to preserve and protect the ground water. Under Article 253 of the Indian Constitution, the provisions of EPA 1986 would override the states, though the states are competent to make their own laws pertaining to ground water and constitute state ground water authorities (Pandey, 2014).

226

Chapter Nine

Several states in India have enacted their own ground water acts to regulate the over-exploitation of ground water use. However, in a number of cases, their application is yet to take place as they remain on paper. Kerala is one such example of Ground Water Control and Regulation Act, 2002 where in spite of the act, ground water governance is almost zero (Raphael, 2015). Significantly, Punjab, facing a serious over-exploitation of ground water, is yet to formulate a ground water policy, enact any ground water act or establish a water regulatory authority.

9.2. Policy Response by Government of Punjab It is clear from the foregoing discussion that the Government of India and its other agencies are aware of the depletion of the groundwater table and the need to have a framework and mechanism for water and related issues—including environment and climate change. As a consequence, some of the Indian states have constituted their state-level water regulation bodies and also formed water user associations. However, many states are to yet to move in that direction. Punjab state is one of them. Punjab has neither a water policy, nor a water regulatory body and as such does not have any agricultural policy. Many states have formed Water User Associations (WUAs) for managing the issues related to the irrigation. Out of the total of 55,501 WUAs, Punjab had only 957 WUAs (GoI, Planning Commission, 2013b, p. 59). Out of the total area covered by these WUAs (10,230,000 hectares), Punjab’s WUAs have covered only 117,000 hectares (just 2.8 percent of the net sown area of the state). The over-exploitation of ground water has been mainly due to paddy cultivation and the flooding method of irrigation. The net deficit of water resources increased from 234,000 hectare metres (ham) in 1989 to 1,163 ham in 2013. The diversified cropping pattern (before the 1960s, especially before the green revolution) has been transformed to almost a mono-crop agriculture; wheat in rabi and paddy in kharif (cotton in kharif in some of the south-west districts of Punjab). Such a scenario has cropped up mainly due to non-existence of water policy or due to the policies adopted by both the central and state governments. The country needed food security and Punjab, along with Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) provided the same by developing the wheatpaddy cropping system. The policy set (R&D in agriculture, high-yielding variety seeds, market clearing regime at minimum support price and procurement by public agencies, public investment in agriculture; subsidy on chemical fertilisers; and even extension services) promoted the present-

Water Governance and Policy Response

227

day wheat-paddy cropping system in Punjab, Haryana and western U.P. Over the period of time, farmers have not only developed skills in such a cropping pattern and made a huge investment in the purchase of relevant machinery (of course at a high cost) but have also become accustomed to such a cropping pattern. Due to the national food security interest, the Union Government of India was comfortable with this cropping pattern in Punjab. The successive governments in Punjab, too, did not give any serious thought when the colour of the green revolution started fading and culminated in suicides by farmers and agricultural labourers. The agri-business (domestic as well as global) and lending agencies (both institutional and non-institutional) have their own vested interest in maintaining the status quo. Due to the heavy deterioration of soil health (micro and macro nutrients) fertility of land has suffered a serious loss. This, in turn, led to an excessive use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides. And now the soil has become addicted to water and chemical fertilisers and the farmers of Punjab have also developed an addiction to the wheat-paddy cropping pattern, though under compulsion as no alternative crops (which could give at least the same level of income that they are getting from wheat-paddy crop combination) have been made available either by the agricultural scientists or by the government. The farmers, however, are being given ceremonial advice to go in for diversification by shifting a sizeable area from under paddy to other crops which may consume comparatively less water. Even the recommendations of the expert committees on crop diversification have lain buried in the files for decades. The Government of India, too, is also giving advice without recognising the fact that Punjab is caught in the wheat-paddy cobweb because of the policy mix aimed at meeting the food scarcity of the country. The compatible policy mix for promoting an alternative cropping pattern, however, is missing. Responding to the serious depletion of water table in Punjab, especially in central Punjab, the Government of Punjab has of late thought of certain policy measures to address the problem. It was, perhaps, for the first time that in the 1980s that the Government of Punjab realised the need to address the declining water table in Punjab. It was in 1986 that an expert committee was constituted to examine the scope and potential for crop diversification and shifting area from under paddy to alternative crops so that the depletion of water table could be stopped (GoP, 1986). Another committee (GoP, 2002) also submitted its report in 2002. These committees made significant recommendations for crop diversification and shifting area from under paddy to other crops. A book edited by Johl and

228

Chapter Nine

Ray (2002) contains, inter alia, a number of suggestions and policy recommendations regarding crop diversification and rejuvenation of Punjab agriculture. The Government of Punjab constituted a state-level committee on ground water resources estimation (2004)6 under the chairmanship of its then Principal Secretary for irrigation to examine the irrigation water scenario. This was quite a broad-based committee with 12 members, including the chairperson.7 The only output of this committee after five years was the constitution of a technical sub-committee to finalise the report on groundwater assessment (GoP, 2009).8 The technical sub-committee in its meeting held on 6th November 2012 (after three years) under the chairmanship of the Director Water Resources and Environment Directorate, Punjab discussed the dynamic ground water report (as on 31st March 2011) brought out by the Central Ground Water Board (CGWB). It also reviewed the total ground water resources of the earlier period (as on 31st March 2009). The statelevel committee submitted its report to the state government in 2012. The findings of the committee revealed that out of the 138 development blocks assessed for estimation, 110 were over-exploited blocks. The number of such blocks in 1984 was 53. It further revealed that net annual ground water availability in Punjab was (-) 12.02 million acre feet (maf) in 2011, as compared to (+) 0.84 maf in 1992 and (+) 2.44 maf in 1984 (GoP, 2012). It was expected that this committee would come up with some sound recommendations, but the chapter on Conclusions and Recommendations (chapter 6 of the report), contained only five findings and virtually no 6 This committee was constituted as per the guidelines of the Central Ground Water Board. 7 The terms of reference of this committee were: (i) to estimate ground water potential and irrigation potential of Punjab State in accordance with the methodology recommended by the Ground Water Estimation Committee set up by the Government of India; (ii) to estimate the present level of development and utilisation of this resource in the State of Punjab; (iii) to estimate ground water recharge from rainfall and other resources separately in the State of Punjab; and (iv) to assess the present and future requirements of ground water for agriculture, public health, industrial uses and other diverse purposes. 8 This committee had four members-(i) Director, Water Resource Punjab (Chairman), (ii) Director, Central ground Water Board, Chandigarh, (iii) representative of M.D, PWD RDC Ltd, Chandigarh; and (iv) Geologist/Hydrologist, Ground Water Cell, Agriculture Department, Punjab (member secretary).

Water Governance and Policy Response

229

recommendation. Even the data, which has been given in the form of findings, is that of the Central Ground Water Board (CGWB) and the Directorate of Water Resources and Environment (DWRE). In other words, the State-Level Committee on Ground Water Resource Estimation took 8 long years to reproduce the ground water resource estimation prepared by the CGWB. This speaks volumes about the sensitivity, sincerity and commitment of the government towards the rapidly depleting water table in Punjab, and hence, about the sustainability of the agricultural sector and farmers. As if this was not enough, the Government of Punjab (through its utility— the erstwhile Punjab State Electricity Board and now the Punjab State Power Corporation) gave the facility of free electricity to agricultural consumers having up to 7 acres of land with effect from 1st January 1997. With effect from 14th February 1997, the facility of free electricity was extended to all agricultural tube-well connections. With effect from 1st October 2002, the facility of free electricity was withdrawn and remained till 31st August 2005. However, this facility was again restored with effect from 1st September 2005 and is in operation since then. Though the government is well within its rights to extend a subsidy to the needy and deserving sections of the people, it may be understood that subsidies are normally a short-term measures to address certain crisis situations or to introduce and promote some new technology. However, this was not the situation in this case. The introduction of free electricity to the agricultural consumers in 1997 was a popular measure to win the State Assembly elections. It, however, became a permanent feature and now in the atmosphere of competitive political populism no political party is willing to become unpopular among the framers. Over-exploitation and misuse of underground water are serious. The state could save about Rs. 40000 million in the financial year 2017/18, if the provision of free electricity were restricted up to 7.5 acres and a higher amount in the subsequent years. The detailed analysis has been given in chapter 4. This popular measure has, however, serious side effects for education, health and infrastructure in the rural areas of Punjab (Ghuman, et al., 2006 and 2009). However, to check the falling water table, the Government of Punjab issued an ordinance “The Punjab Preservation of Subsoil Water Ordinance, 2008”. It provides for the prohibition of sowing nursery of paddy before 10th May and transplantation of paddy before 15th June. Subsequently the Punjab Legislative Assembly enacted “The Punjab Preservation of Subsoil Water

230

Chapter Nine

Act, 2009” (Punjab Act No. 6 of 2009). Fortunately, this act is effectively in operation. Consequently, the water table in Punjab has been favourably impacted. Actually, the one and half month period (before 15th June) is very hot and dry and if you start transplanting paddy during this period with water (mainly ground water) continuously standing in the paddy fields there will be very high degree of evapo-transpiration. So, the 2009 Act has at least postponed the extraction of subsoil water for about a month. It, however, did not lead to shifting area from under paddy. Interestingly, Punjab is yet to enact any comprehensive ground water legislation which should have been there since long. The state also has not established any water regulatory authority for which the central government gives incentives. Paradoxically, the state has neither any water policy nor any agricultural policy.

9.3 Resource Conservation Technologies and Innovations The state has been trying its hand at a couple of resource conservation techniques (RCTs) aimed at water saving in the agriculture sector, during recent years. These are: micro-irrigation, use of laser leveller, planting crops on permanently raised beds, zero tillage, use of tensio-metres, delayed transplanting of paddy nursery and direct seeding of paddy. These measures have a lot of potential to save the water in irrigation (Kaur et al., 2015). Laser levelling was introduced in the state around 2008 and is becoming popular among farmers but its high cost is becoming a hindrance to its widespread use. Group or cooperative farming and custom-hiring can help its larger use. This technique levels the field and the entire field gets water at a uniform level. It has been empirically estimated (at the farm level) that it saves water in paddy by 36.19 cubic metres, improves yield by 0.78 tonne/ha and reduces electricity consumption by 213.35 kwh/ha and thus brings a cost saving of Rs. 610 per hectare of paddy (Sidhu, et al., 2010). The detailed impact of the RCTs is given in appendix (table A9.1 and A9.2). The estimates clearly reveal that there could be substantial savings in ground water and energy along with a higher yield. As per the estimates, use of laser leveller can save 0.99 million hectare metres (mhm) water in Punjab in a year. Permanently raised beds in wheat would save 0.28 mhm water; permanently raised beds in rice 1.64 mhm, happy seeder 0.30 mhm, and the use of a tension-metre would save 1.01 mhm of water.

Water Governance and Policy Response

231

Delayed transplantation of paddy would save 0.63 mhm and 1.15 mhm of water, respectively. The data in table A9.2 further highlights that there are significant savings in electricity (as used by electric motors) which would result in a substantial reduction in the power subsidy (borne out by the government, eventually the tax payers’ money). There could be a number of other benefits in the form of higher yield and higher returns. At the aggregate level, the farmers and state would save quite a substantial amount of money by adopting the water-saving techniques. Paddy plantation on raised beds, however, is the only technique which gives loss of yield to the tune of 0.85 tonne/ha which comes out to be quite significant. At the aggregate level (the whole of Punjab) it would result in a total production loss of 2.32 million tonnes and reduce farmers’ income by Rs.1566.33 crore. Of course, food security of the country may also be adversely impacted. This technique may, thus, not be adopted by the farmers. Nonetheless, the state and farmers would reap substantial benefits by adopting water saving techniques, both in terms of resources and in monetary terms as has been shown in table A9.2. The story of water savings techniques and the consequent savings in water energy and environment and higher marginal returns should certainly not stop here. It needs to be extended to the study of opportunity cost of the saved resources (explicitly water and energy and implicitly a number of other benefits in terms of the environment, human and animal health, subsoil water and of course sustainable agriculture and sustainable development). To reap all the direct/indirect and explicit/implicit benefits all the stakeholders would have to join hands with government (state as well as Union governments) in the lead role. This needs further research and investigation. The next section has tried to provide a reality check on the micro-irrigation programme.

9.4 Micro-Irrigation in Punjab: The Ground Reality Since 2008, the Government of Punjab has initiated a project for promotion of micro-irrigation in the entire state of Punjab.9 During the 6

9

The project was assisted by the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) and the implementing agency is the Department of Soil

232

Chapter Nine

years’ period (2007–2008 to 2012–2013) the project was aimed to cover an area of 12,776 hectares out of the total net sown area (NSA) of 41,50,000 hectares; this is just 0.31 percent. Even the projected area of 15,505 hectares comes out to only 0.37 percent of NSA. Clearly, the targeted area was just a small fraction of the total net sown area. It has been estimated that the farmers could save about 40 percent on water used for irrigation through this method. Besides, irrigation efficiency could be increased by 80 percent and yield by 20 percent. The implementing agency also claims a number of other benefits of micro-irrigation, such as saving in labour component, less salt accumulation in soils, almost nil weeds; high and constant supply of nutrients; high fertiliser efficiency; suitable for all types of land. Further during 2011/12 and 2012/13, 14,873 hectares were under microirrigation in Punjab, across the districts, while the number of beneficiaries was 5,367, as claimed by the implementing agency (GoP, 2014). Though the project was to be completed by 1st March 2013, it was completed by 30th September 2014. The main instruments of micro-irrigation in Punjab are the drip irrigation system and sprinklers. The horticulture fruits and vegetables were the main crops irrigated by the micro-irrigation system.10 It needs to be noted that drip irrigation is ideally suited for horticultural crops such as pomegranate, grapes, mango, banana, guava, coconut, amla and cash crops such as sugarcane. It saves between 25 to 60 percent of water and leads to an up to 60 percent increase in yield (GoI, Planning Commission, 2013b: 59). However, Punjab has very little area under these crops. Sprinklers, however, can be more useful in Punjab as they were useful in undulating land with cereals crops and save 25 to 33 percent of water. Nonetheless, the area under drip irrigation and sprinklers varies between 0.5 million hectares and 0.7 million hectares in India. Maharashtra has 46 percent of the area under drip irrigation in the country (GoI, Planning Commission, 2013b). In order to check the ground reality, a field survey was conducted covering 34 farmers (12 using drip irrigation and 22 using sprinklers) who have & Water Conservation, Punjab. The programme covered 20 districts, i.e. entire Punjab. 10 The crops are: Mango, Leechi, Ber, Amla, Peach, Guava, Kinnow, Citrus, Pear, vegetables under horticulture, sugarcane, cotton, cereals, pulses, oilseeds etc. were the main crops under non-horticulture.

Water Governance and Policy Response

233

installed a micro-irrigation system, in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib Districts; randomly selected. The sample included 9 farmers from Hoshiarpur district who had opted for drip irrigation. The number of such farmers in Fatehgarh Sahib was 3. In the case of sprinkler irrigation, the number of sampled farmers in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib Districts was 11 in each district. The findings of the field study are given in tables A9.3 to A9.8 in the appendix. Table A9.3 shows the respondents’ response sand perception about the various benefits of drip irrigation in both the districts under study.11 All the respondents in both the districts have admitted that because of drip irrigation, there is a reduction in labour cost, saving in water and electricity and also on diesel consumption. They, however, could not quantify the extension of savings on various counts. As regards increase in yield, only one respondent in district Hoshiarpur answered ‘yes’, all the remaining 8 respondents, along with all the respondents in Fatehgarh Sahib district said that there is no increase in yield because of drip irrigation. All the respondents, however, were unanimous on two counts, namely, priority in electric connection12 for tube-well motors and disbursement of subsidy.13 All of them said that adoption of drip irrigation gives them priority to get electric connection for tube-wells. All of them also revealed that they received the stipulated component of the subsidy as part of the total installation cost of the drip irrigation system. It is clear from the condition of a minimum 2.5 acres area for getting priority connection that it rules out the marginal farmers, who own less than 2.5 acres. By implication, the marginal farmers are not entitled to the subsidy available under the micro-irrigation project. As regards sprinkler irrigation, almost all the respondents in both the districts expressed similar reasons for opting for sprinkler irrigation. 11 In Hoshiarpur district, the data pertains to three blocks: Hoshiarpur-1, Hoshiarpur-2 and Garhshankar. In Fatehgarh Sahib District the data pertains to two blocks: Khera and Chuni Kalan. 12 The programme/project of the micro-irrigation system entitles the farmer to get electricity connection for the tube-well motor as a matter of priority. The condition available for this priority is that the farmer would have to bring a minimum 2.5 acres of his land under the micro-irrigation system (drip or sprinkler irrigation). 13 The installation cost of the drip or sprinkler irrigation system is subsidised by the government to the extent of 50 percent to the beneficiary farmer. The central government’s share is 80 percent and that of the state government is 20 percent.

234

Chapter Nine

Despite the provision of priority in electric connection and subsidy, the situation regarding area under micro-irrigation is not very encouraging. Out of the total land of 75 acres of 9 respondents from district Hoshiarpur only 23 acres (30.67%) are under drip irrigation whereas 52 acres (69.33%) are still under the flooding method of irrigation. In Fatehgarh Sahib district, out of the total 26.8 acres owned by all the three respondents only 7.5 (28.04%) are under drip irrigation while 19.3 acres (71.96%) are under the flooding method of irrigation. It is clear from this discussion that the respondents, on average, spared 2 acres for drip irrigation so as to fulfil the minimum requirement of land area. An almost similar scenario prevails in the case of sprinkler irrigation, as is clear in table A9.6. In Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib, the respondents have earmarked 32.28 percent and 25.50 percent of their land area for sprinkler irrigation, respectively. The remaining 67.72 percent and 74.50 percent of area in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib, respectively, is under the flooding system of irrigation. Interestingly, all 22 respondents in both districts owned tube-wells. Tables A9.7 and A9.8 present a very interesting picture about the continuation of drip and sprinkler irrigation systems. There are selfcontradictory responses by the respondents. All the respondents have said that they are satisfied and are continuing with drip as well as sprinkler irrigation. They also said that they would recommend them to others also. However, all the respondents also said that their micro-irrigation systems, drip as well as sprinkler, are not in use at present (at the time of our survey, April–June 2015). This, along with the subsidy and the provision of priority electric connection reveals the real face of the “successes” of micro-irrigation. Interestingly, all the responses regarding benefits of the micro-irrigation system are almost in synergy with the benefits “claimed”/ “projected” by the government agency. It seems as if the respondents were tutored by the concerned officials to respond in a similar fashion. More recently revival of ponds and water bodies has also been initiated by the Government of Punjab (table A9.9) to arrest the decline in water table and augment ground water recharge. However, the area under ponds is less than 0.5 percent of the total geographical area of Punjab. Roof top rain water harvesting, another measure to enhance water supply, has been made mandatory in all buildings above 200 square yards by amending the building by-laws (GoP, 2005). Outside the municipal limits, Punjab Urban Development Authority (PUDA) shall address the issue of roof top water

Water Governance and Policy Response

235

harvesting. Furthermore, the Government of Punjab has built 12 low level dams to provide irrigation facilities to about 13,000 hectares of land and 9 more low level dams are in the pipeline, under the Bharat Nirman Programme.

9.5 Diversification and Free Electricity to Farm Sector: An Antithesis to Judicious Use of Water Though crop diversification has been the subject of debate at various levels, the government still seems to be half-concerned and has not made any significant efforts towards it. A couple of committees (GoP, 1986 and 2002), Punjab Agricultural University and Farmers Commission, including many individual research studies, have emphasised crop diversification that is mainly focused on alternative to paddy crop so as to arrest the declining water table in Punjab. It has been estimated that if Punjab reduces the area under paddy from about 2.8 million hectares (at present) to 1.6 million hectares (i.e. a reduction of 1.2 million hectares) then the water table would not be adversely affected (GoP, 2013). The proposed alternative crop choices are given in table A9.10 (appendix). For over a decade, the Union Government has also been advising Punjab to reduce area under paddy. Recently, the Government of India initiated a crop diversification programme (CDP) in Haryana, Punjab and Western Uttar Pradesh (representing success stories of the green revolution and states surpluses in food grains, especially wheat and rice) which are contributing grains to the central pool in a big way (GoI, 2013c). Under the CDP a target was set for diverting 280,000 hectares from paddy to other crops (GoI, 2014). A provision of Rs. 5000 million was made in the Union Budget of 2013–2014 for crop diversification in the original green revolution states. The aim was to divert a significant area from being under a water-guzzling crop (i.e. paddy) to alternative crops, starting from 2013–2014 kharif season. It is being argued that the continuous cultivation of paddy (with flood irrigation method) has resulted in depletion of the ground water table in Punjab, Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh. It is therefore, essential to diversify area from paddy to alternative crops not only to improve soil fertility and arrest depletion of ground water but also to enhance farm incomes (GoI, 2014). In 2014 and 2015, the Government of India again wrote to the above-mentioned states about accelerating the diversification process by giving them specific targets (GoI, 2014 and 2015).

236

Chapter Nine

In response to the Union Government’s advice, the Government of Punjab has prepared an action plan for diversification in the state. It has been resolved that the present wheat-paddy dominant cropping pattern needs to be diversified for the following reasons: (i) to conserve depleting ground water; (ii) to check deterioration of soil quality; (iii) to improve farmers productivity and real income; and (iv) to encourage value addition through agro-processing, agri-business, etc. Maize, cotton, Basmati rice have been identified as the potential alternative crops. The Punjab State Farmers Commission is also advising farmers to choose maize in a big way. Agroforestry is another option and has the potential to yield economic returns higher than wheat-paddy rotation. The area under alternative crops can be increased in their traditional belts if prices become remunerative, the market is assured, yield variability is reduced and value addition is taken up. The likely potential of expansion in area under various crops is given in table A9.10 (GoP, 2014). Given all the concerns and efforts on the part of the central and state governments apart, the farmers of Punjab are not only a confused lot but also beleaguered in the wheat-paddy cropping pattern with nearly a stagnated yield, shrinking per hectare net return, ever-increasing production cost, depleting water table and mounting indebtedness. Suicides by farmers and farm labourers are some of its serious manifestations. Significantly, all the alternative crops, being recommended by the experts, Punjab Agricultural University, Farmers Commission (draft the agricultural policy, 2013) and the government, have a very limited scope and potential to replace the vast area under paddy for various reasons. The farmers are not averse to crop diversification provided they get an alternative crop combination which could ensure them a minimum return equivalent to what they are getting from the wheat and paddy. The government and experts in Punjab could not find any alternative crop combination to the existing wheat-paddy and wheat-cotton crop combination (Romana, 2006; Ghuman and Romana, 2008). This would also require processing of produce of alternative crops and marketing of the processed items. The government policies, too, are supporting the wheat-paddy crop rotation. One such example is the provision of free and assured (for eight hours during kharif season) power supply to the agricultural sector to cultivate the paddy crop. It seems quite paradoxical as on the one hand the government is advising crop diversification but acting against it. What a predicament! It is tantamount to: “Running with the hare and hunting with the hound.”

Water Governance and Policy Response

237

In fact, without a compatible policy regime, crop diversification would never take place to the desired level. Along with crop diversification, there is an urgent need to focus on the diversification of the entire agriculture sector and the entire rural economy (Ghuman, 2005; Ghuman, et al., 2010). The recently released socio-economic and caste survey (2015) by the Union Government, too, pleads to diversify the entire rural economy, as two-third of the rural households are landless and the majority of them are having an income of less than Rs. 5000 per month. Thus, there must be a comprehensive, composite and integrated policy to rejuvenate the rural economy as every segment of it has an organic relationship with the others. The deteriorating water table has far reaching socio-economic implications for the agricultural sector in particular and for the entire Punjab economy and society in general (Sarkar, 2011). The issues of depleting water table and socio-economic distress would have to be addressed at that level. The competitive political populism in Punjab (and also in many other states of India) has resulted in the perpetuation of free power to the farm sector as farmers constitute a sizeable vote bank. In the process farmers are happy to enjoy free power and the political parties are happy to consolidate their vote bank. But the water table has become the victim. It is a myopic view of the emerging water scarcity and insecurity. The political leadership and the farmers are in denial which would have serious repercussions not only for the water table and agriculture but also for the entire economy of Punjab. Furthermore, rural education and rural health have also become victims, especially in the government schools which are mainly meant for scheduled castes (SCs), backward classes (BCs) and other weaker sections (the residue) and those who can afford (or even cannot afford) are willingly or unwillingly bearing the high cost of private schools to “buy quality” education for their wards. The situation is almost the same in the health delivery system in the rural area. Interestingly, the free power is being enjoyed by the farmers and the absentee landlords (who are otherwise well-off); while the landless population is suffering from the high costs of education and health services. Even for the farmers the tradeoff is not in their favour as the amount of the power bill is much lower than the cost of private education and health. It is, thus, bad economics and perhaps bad politics. There are a good number of studies which argue for full or partial recovery of cost of power being given to tube-wells (Jon Strand, 2010; Singh

238

Chapter Nine

Karam, 2007; Draft Agriculture Policy of Punjab, 2013; Sidhu et al., 2011; Ghuman et al., 2009). The single most important argument against free electricity to the farm sector is that it leads to unmindful, unnecessary and excess extraction of ground water. The ground water basin (which is a common pool) is exploited by a large number of farmers; each farmer has a little incentive to conserve the ground water stock. Our study argues and the existing literature (Briscoe and Malik, 2006; Dubash, 2005; Ray, 2008; Reddy, 2005; Shah et al., 2000; Shah, 2009; World Bank 2005 & 2010; and Srivastava, et al., 2015) supports a general consensus that the current situation is unsustainable in many countries and regions, in the sense that the amount of extracted ground water is greater than the water replacement, resulting in a falling water table (Jon Strand, 2010). Some studies however, argue that the increasing demand for water from agriculture is the main culprit and not low electricity prices. It is significant to note that even such studies do not favour free electricity to the agriculture sector; they are in favour of charging some part of the cost, maybe a small proportion of the cost. The single most effective solution to get rid of the problem and consequences of free power has been the physical segregation of rural inhabitations and non-farm consumers of electricity and separate feeders to give 3-phase predicable supply to agriculture, which is rationed in terms of total time, at a flat tariff. The government of Gujarat, for example, separated 800,000 tube-wells during 2003–2006 from other rural connections and imposed an 8-hour/day power ration of high quality and full voltage. This was combined with a massive watershed development programme for ground water recharge. This has led to halving the power subsidy; stabilisation of groundwater draft and improved power supply in the rural areas of Gujarat (GoI, Planning Commission, 2013b:157). It is evident from this chapter that the state is aware of the deteriorating water situation and has been actively engaged in discussing the issue for a long time. However, from the implementation point of view, the policy response is very weak in the state. Continuous increase in demand for water from all sectors along with changing climatic conditions is predicted to make these problems worse in many regions of the state. Thus, it is important for state government and other stakeholders to formulate comprehensive policies and take timely action to address the emerging water crisis in Punjab.

CHAPTER TEN SUMMARY AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

10.1 Summary In view of an ever-increasing demand for water arising from competing and alternative uses, the world community is likely to face serious water scarcity and insecurity. Many countries and regions are already facing water insecurity emerging out of scarcity. Global warming and melting of glaciers would further aggravate the water scarcity. By 2050, the global demand for water is projected to increase by 55 percent, mainly due to growing demand from manufacturing, thermal electricity and domestic use. The world population is projected to pass 9 billion by 2050. The increasing population will step up the pressure on water to meet their demand generating from agricultural, industrial, energy and domestic sectors. Thus, in addition to enhanced demand for water from nonagricultural usage, the demand from the agriculture sector will also increase. Already in the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) agriculture accounts for 74 percent of water withdrawals. In India it is 87 percent and in less developed countries agriculture accounts for 90 percent of water consumption. The non-renewability of fresh water is going to augment the demand side pressure and supply side scarcity. Since water is no more a free gift of nature, it is being priced and, with an ever-increasing imbalance between demand and supply, the price of water is bound to increase even if we go by the simple law of demand. In such a scenario, the poor and poorest of the poor peoples’ access to water will be adversely impacted because of their non-affordability. The ever-increasing inequality and concentration of purchasing power in a few hands would make the situation even worse for these sections of the population. The inadequate availability of water, especially for irrigation, would further have a serious adverse effect on food security and the livelihood of billions of poor people across the world. That may erupt into socio-political instability which is already reflected, though in rudimentary form, by forced internal and international

240

Chapter Ten

migration. Almost every region and country is facing the problem of refugees and spends a lot of resources to manage it (UN, 2009). Already the global community is facing a large number of inter and intracountry water disputes and even water riots. The transnational companies are also looking at water resources in a big way. The deteriorating quality of water has created a huge space for the supply of bottled water. This is paradoxical in a view of the fact that water is one of the most essential elements for sustaining life. It is predicted that the third world war will be fought over water. Let us pray that such a prediction does not come true. In view of such a scenario and prophecies, the global community, through international bodies, such as the UN and the World Bank, has already started responding to the situation. However, the world community’s response is mainly focused on raising the awareness and sensitivity levels of people with regard to water use. The observation of World Water Day (on 22nd March every year) since 1992 is one such effort. The annual feature of bringing out the World Water Development Report is also an effort towards focusing the issues pertaining to water scarcity, management and governance. All these efforts are aimed at judicious, efficient and optimum use of water and thence minimising wastage. This, in turn, would result in a virtual increase of water supply by way of reducing water consumption. The propagation of three R’s (Reduce, Recycle and Reuse) is aimed at reducing water consumption, recycling and reusing water. This needs to be implemented across all sectors, namely, agriculture (irrigation), industry, energy and municipal (domestic) water use. In this book an effort has been made to focus on the global water scenario and water resource development and usage in India. In addition, a large part of the book has been devoted to discussing the water use pattern in Indian Punjab, an agriculturally advanced state and a success story of the green revolution. India and many other countries and regions, who are now venturing into the green revolution have many lessons to learn from Punjab’s experience in the field of water usage. The state is highly dependent on ground water resources to meet its water requirements across all the sectors, viz, agriculture, industry and domestic sectors. A sizable part of this book dwells on primary data pertaining to water use patterns in agriculture, industry and domestic sectors in Punjab.

Summary and Policy Recommendations

241

10.1.1 Indian Water Scenario Various estimates of water resources in India, starting from the beginning of the twentieth century, have agreed that India’s water resources are around 1,869 billion cubic metres (BCMs). As regards water requirement of various sectors, we have two official estimates. According to the standing sub-committee of the Ministry of Water Resources (MoWR), agriculture accounted for 84.62 percent of water in 2010. However, by 2050, its water requirement is projected to decline to 74 percent. According to the National Commission on Integrated Water Resources Development (NCIWRD), the water requirement of agriculture in the corresponding years would be 68 percent. The requirement for drinking water in 2050 would be between 7 percent (MoWR) and 9.4 percent (NCIWRD). The corresponding figures for industry would be 4.35 percent and 6.86 percent. The energy sector’s requirement by 2050 would be between 9 percent (MoWR) and 6 percent (NCIWRD). At the aggregate level, the water requirement in India would increase from 813 BCMs in 2010 to 1447 BCMs in 2050 (MoWR). According to NCIWRD estimates the corresponding figures would be 710 BCMs and 1180 BCMs. Though there are wide differences between both the estimates, both have projected a much higher demand in 2050 as compared to 2010. From the available water resources and future estimates of aggregate demand for water it seems that India is in a comfortable position as the stock of available water is higher than the requirement. However, this may not be the real picture as there are widespread regional and spatial variations in the availability and demand for water. The inter-state water disputes testify that some of the regions /states are facing acute water scarcity. In view of the increasing requirement for water, India started the development of major and medium irrigation projects, right from the beginning of the first Five-Year Plan in 1951. In all, 305 major and 1023 minor projects were completed during 1951–2012. During the period of first eleven five-year plans, India spent Rs.4819 billion on the development of irrigation, which was 6.67 percent of the total plan outlay. The share of irrigation in total plan outlay during the first Five-Year Plan was 22.55 percent. During the second and sixth plans, it varied between 11 percent and 15 percent. During the subsequent plans, the share of irrigation in total plan outlay varied between 6 percent and 8.5 percent. All this helped to enhance the irrigation capacity; yet nearly 66 percent of the arable land does not have assured irrigation and is largely rain fed.

242

Chapter Ten

As regards ground water resources in India, the net availability of water (410.65 BCMs) is much higher than the net draft (252.87 BCMs) but the ground water development is only 62 percent. Clearly, this is an indication that there is ample scope for additional ground water development. Across the states, the ground water development varies from 16 percent in Assam to 149 percent in Punjab. Even in rainfall, there is widespread intra-period variation and decline in the mean rainfall during the first decade of the twenty-first century. However, at the aggregate level, India did not experience any significant shortfall in rainfall for about the last 25 years. But the averages and aggregates often do not give the true picture of the regional variations. Almost every year, many states face mild to severe droughts while there are severe floods in some other states. This is quite a regular feature and many of the states often suffer from a widespread loss from droughts and floods.

10.1.2 Water Availability and Usage in Punjab Historically, Punjab has never been a water deficit state. It had five perennial rivers (Ravi, Chenab, Jhelum, Beas and Sutlej) prior to India’s partition and independence in August 1947. After its division, the Indian Punjab was left with three perennial rivers. According to the Indus Water Treaty of 1960, India has the exclusive right to use the water of the Ravi, Beas and Sutlej rivers. The vast networks of canals were also divided between the Indian and Pakistan Punjab. Out of the total irrigated area of 6,300,187 hectares in undivided Punjab on the eve of independence, the Indian Punjab was left with 1,773,242 hectares (28.15%). The remaining 71.85 percent (4,526,945 hectares) went to Pakistan Punjab. With only 1.53 percent of India’s geographical area, the state of Punjab has been contributing on average 60 percent of rice and 45 percent of wheat annually to the central pool of the country during 1975–2007. Thereafter, this share has been between 22 to 27 percent in rice and between 40 to 45 percent in wheat. The country obtained much-needed food self-sufficiency at the cost of Punjab’s subsoil water. The skilled and hardworking farmers, availability of assured irrigation, high-yielding variety of seeds and fertilisers and highly mechanised agriculture, made Punjab a success story of the green revolution. It should be noted that 83 percent of Punjab’s geographical area is under cultivation as compared to 43 percent in India. The state’s irrigation and cropping intensity is 99.9 percent and 190 percent, respectively. The corresponding figures for India are 45 percent and 141 percent, respectively.

Summary and Policy Recommendations

243

It is significant that the state of Punjab (pre-independence, undivided Punjab), even after the development of canal irrigation by the British Empire (since the 1880s), has never been a paddy growing area. In the 1939–40 rabi season nearly 55 percent irrigated area was under wheat. In the kharif season, the area under paddy was 9 percent in 1939–1940. However, the cropping pattern in Punjab has undergone a sea change since the advent of the green revolution in the mid-1960s. Wheat, cotton, pulses and maize were the principal crops in 1960–1961. Paddy accounted for just 6.04 percent of the net sown area (NSA) in 1960–1961. It started picking up from 1970–1971. Astonishingly, the area under paddy increased from 227,000 hectares in 1961 to 2970,000 hectares in 2015– 2016. Its share in area under kharif cereals increased from 33 percent to 96 percent during this period. Similarly, wheat accounted for 99 percent of the area under rabi cereals. The green revolution and the consequent cropping pattern put enormous pressure on underground water as canal water was grossly inadequate to meet the rising demand for water for irrigation. In 1960–1961, out of the total irrigated area of 2,020,000 hectares, 1,173,000 hectares (58.07%) was under canal water and 829,000 hectares (41.04%) was under tube-wells and wells. In 2000–2001 the share of tube-well irrigated area increased to 76.45 percent (3,074,000 hectares) and thereafter its share remained around 72 percent. The area under canal irrigation in Punjab decreased from 43 percent in 1981 to 27 percent in 2011. The ever-increasing dependence on ground water led to an exponential increase in the number of tube-wells. The number of tube-wells increased from 192,000 in 1971 to 1,400,000 in 2015. The provision of free electricity to the agricultural sector has been equally responsible for the rising number of tube-wells and increasing area under tube-well irrigation. The close relationship between the number of tubewells and the area under paddy, and between the number of tube-wells and the total production of rice during 1970–1971 to 2014–2015 upholds the hypothesis that paddy is the major contributory factor for the exponential increase in the number of tube-wells and the consequent depletion of the water table. The country’s increasing demand for food grains (especially cereals) and the Union Government’s push to ‘grow more food’ also led to substantial increase of area under paddy in Punjab. However, the excessive use of water has not led to the corresponding increase in yield. This is classic case of the application of the law of

244

Chapter Ten

diminishing returns. Even the correlation coefficient between yield of rice and free electricity to farmers is not significant and during 2008–2009 and 2014–2015, the correlation coefficient between yield and free electricity came out to be minus 0.10. Thus, free electricity did not have any significant impact on the yield of rice but it has certainly resulted in an injudicious use of water. The annual trend growth rate of the number of tube-wells during 1970– 1971 and 2014–2015 is 4.0 percent while it is 4.1 percent in the case of area under paddy. The higher trend growth rate in the area under paddy is a clear response to the provision of reliable irrigation which was made possible by the tube-well irrigation. The consumption of water in Punjab to produce one kilogram (kg) of rice is the highest among all the major rice-producing states of India. The allIndia average consumption of water per one kg of rice is 3,875 litres, while it is 5337 litres in Punjab. The consumption of water to produce one kg of rice is the lowest (2,605 litres) in West Bengal. The water use efficiency gap in Punjab is the largest (51.2%) among all the riceproducing states of India. All this has led to very high consumption of water for producing rice in Punjab. During the triennium ending (TE) 1980–81, the rice production in Punjab consumed 16,643 billion litres of water, out of which the component of rice contribution to the central pool accounted for 13,449 billion litres of water, which comes out to be nearly 81 percent of the total water consumption on rice production in Punjab. During the TE 2013–14, the water consumption on rice production in Punjab was 59,047 billion litres, out of which 43,262 billion (73.3%) went to the central pool. The consumption of water in rice production increased 3.55 times between the TE 1980–81 and the TE 2013–14. Consequently, between 73 and 81 percent of water consumption in rice production in Punjab was virtually meant for the central pool of rice in the country. This is the classic case of virtual water export from Punjab to the rest of India. The fast-depleting water table led to an increased number of submersible motors (tube-wells) in place of centrifugal (mono-block) motors. The falling water table also necessitates the installation of motors with higher and higher horse power, thus leading to increased energy consumption and an additional cost to the farmers. The compound annual growth rate (CAGR) reveals that the consumption of electricity in agriculture registered an extraordinary high growth rate during 1974–1975 and 1984–

Summary and Policy Recommendations

245

1985. Incidentally this was the period during which both the area under paddy and number of tube-wells registered manifold increase. Significantly, the consumption of electricity was very high in those districts (central plan zone) where paddy was the major crop. The number of tube-wells in the central plain zone (CPZ), increased from 962,000 in 1976 to 64,400,00 (a 6.7-fold increase) in 2015. The number of submersible motors in Punjab increased from 619,000 in 2009 to 844,000 in 2014 (an increase of 225,000; 36.34 percent). With the increasing number of submersible motors, the number of high horsepower (BHP) motors also increased, With the increasing depth of the water table, the cost of extracting subsoil water, both installation and energy, also increased. This has put a lot of pressure on the farmers’ budget and state exchequer. All this led to an ever-increasing gap between demand and supply of water. As compared to 1984, the demand supply gap increased by 1,163,000 hectare metres (hams) in 2013. In percentage terms, it increased by 285 percent in 2013 over 1984. The extent of ground water exploitation in Punjab presents a very grim picture. The number of over-exploited blocks increased from 53 (44.92 percent) in 1984 to 105 (76.09 percent) in 2013, an increase of nearly 31 percentage points. The district-wise distribution of over-exploited blocks reveals that the situation has gone from bad to worse in most of the districts, especially in the central zone (paddy zone) during 1984–2011. Such a scenario must be a cause of concern for the government, policy makers and farmers as the very sustainability of agriculture and Punjab’s water balance is under great stress. At the aggregate level, Punjab is drafting water to the tune of 149 percent of the net ground water available. Across the districts, it ranges from 160 percent to 211 percent in many of the districts. This is a clear indication that Punjab has moved to a stage where the draft of ground water is precariously higher than that of recharge. There were four main reasons for such a scenario. First, the country needed food grains and the governments (Central as well as State) were extending their implicit and explicit support to wheat-paddy cropping system in Punjab. This is amply reflected by the policy mix. Second, there was no breakthrough in the R & D of alternative crops and the farmers are also happy with the wheat-paddy rotation as this gives them assured

246

Chapter Ten

market clearance and income. Third, there did not come any alternative cropping system which could give at least the same amount of per hectare net return with an assured market. The physical infrastructure and machinery and the skill to husband the wheat-paddy crop further acted against the much-needed diversification. Fourth, the MSP regime was either not in place for alternative crops or it was not being implemented properly. Fifth the policy of free power to the farm sector in Punjab also encouraged cultivation of paddy. The government and policy makers often advise the farmers, without any policy or road map, to consider alternative crops. Clearly, the objective conditions were not created to change the ground realities in favour of alternative crops. It is significant to note that the so-called green revolution (mainly wheat-paddy revolution) became a success story because of the multi-dimensional public policy intervention (public investment in agriculture and irrigation, MSP regime, high-yielding variety seeds and assured supply of water and chemical fertilisers) during the 1960s and 1970s. The foregoing discussion has amply established that the state of Punjab is in for grave water shortage and water insecurity. The over-exploitation of groundwater and the consequent wheat-paddy cropping pattern and downward trend of rainfall over the long period have led to a continuous depletion of the water table. This is largely because of over-drafting of water ever since the 1970s when paddy started emerging as the main crop in Punjab. Not taking serious note of this situation would certainly push the state into a multi-pronged crisis; not just a water crisis. The very sustainability of agriculture and the livelihoods of farmers (especially small farmers) and agricultural labourers is at stake in Punjab.

10.1.3 Validation by Primary Data In order to validate the secondary data, primary data were also collected from 30 villages located in 10 districts of Punjab. These districts were from all three agro-climatic zones, viz; central plain zone, south-west zone and sub-mountain (Kandi area) zone. These districts also represent all three cultural regions viz; Majaha, Malwa and Doaba. The central plain zone (CPZ) is wholly a wheat-paddy region. The south-west zone (SWZ) is a wheat-cotton and wheat-paddy region. The sub-mountain zone (SMZ) is predominantly wheat-paddy region. Thus, empirical analysis based on primary data is a representative one.

Summary and Policy Recommendations

247

The study pertains to 300 cultivating households. The share of central, south-west and sub-mountain zones is 210, 60 and 30 households, respectively. As regards the domestic water consumption in rural households, the data and information from the above-mentioned thirty villages were collected through the specially designed pre-tested questionnaires. For the purpose of studying the domestic water consumption of the urban households, we selected two cities of Punjab, namely, Amritsar and Sangrur. Amritsar is the second largest city of Punjab while Sangrur is a small city. Amritsar has a municipal corporation and Sangrur has a municipal committee. Relatively speaking Amritsar is a developed city whereas Sangrur is less developed. Culturally, Amritsar is located in Majaha region and Sangrur is in Malwa region. The primary data pertain to 200 urban households—100 from each city. In the case of the industrial sector, we selected fifty small-scale industrial units from ten industries. They are located in six districts. In the case of medium and large-scale industries, we selected 100 industrial units, representing ten industries; located in eight districts. The primary data collected from 300 farmer households also support the findings based on the secondary data. In the thirty sampled villages, the paddy is being cultivated in nearly 69 percent of their total area in the kharif season. The share of paddy in the central plain zone is little more than 90 percent, followed by 85 percent of area under paddy in the submountain zone. The share of paddy in the area in the south-west zone (traditionally known as the cotton belt) is, however, 20 percent, while under cotton it is 39 percent. The main source of irrigation is ground water which is being extracted by tube-wells, mainly electricity operated. On average, a tube-well runs for about 188 to 256 hours in a year; 188 days during kharif season and 69 days during rabi season. The duration is very high in the central zone and sub-mountain zone. Significantly, 41 percent of farmers at the aggregate level do not want to continue with paddy cultivation. This proportion is 80 percent in the south-west zone, 47 percent in the sub-mountain zone and 30 percent in the central zone. Clearly, farmers are not emotionally attached to paddy cultivation and would be willing to grow alternative crops, given their economic viability. It is important to note that this response was to the situation of withdrawal of the facility of free electricity. Thus, free electricity is an important incentive to continue with paddy cultivation.

248

Chapter Ten

Contrary to popular belief, farmers are aware of the declining water table, as 79 percent of farmers revealed that they are aware of the depletion due to over-exploitation of ground water. Interestingly, the level of awareness is 90 percent in the central zone which is a paddy region. Notwithstanding the high level of awareness, 93 percent of farmers transplant paddy with the puddling method and use the flooding method of irrigation. As regards rain water harvesting, only 11 percent of respondents are resorting to it. This means 89 percent do not harvest rain water at all. About 78 percent of respondents do not apply any water saving techniques. As regards the small-scale industrial sector, it is mainly dependent on ground water, with all the sampled small-scale units having their own tube-wells. The average depth of the tube-wells is 230 feet. However, across the units and districts this figure ranges from 150 feet to 350 feet. Textiles, food & beverages products, basic metal, paper and paper product, leather & leather products are the highest water-consuming industries. As regards water harvesting and conservation, 96 percent of small-scale units do not do any water harvesting or conservation. For the purpose of water saving, only 24 percent of units have installed one or the other device. Even the Effluent Treatment Plants (ETPs) have not been installed by 54 percent of units. A total of 46 percent of units do not have any certification from the Punjab Pollution Control Board (PPCB). About 70 percent of units are, however, aware that water is a scarce resource and hence needs to be used in a judicious manner. Nonetheless, 76 percent did not install any water saving device (s) and water harvesting and conservation are almost negligible. The situation regarding conservation and harvesting of water is almost similar in the medium and large-scale industries. They, too, depend on ground water being extracted by their own tube-wells. The average depth of tube-wells is 350 feet, higher than that in the small-scale units. The BHP of tube-well motors is also very high as water has to be extracted from a depth of 350 feet and more. The tube-well runs for 25 to 28 days in a month. The paper industry consumes the highest amount of water (111 million litres of water in a month), followed by the textiles industry (23 million litres), metal product (14 million litres) and leather and leather industries (2.4 million litres). As regards water harvesting, 95 percent of respondents do not do any water harvesting. Altogether 61 percent of units have ETPs and they have obtained certification from the PPCB. However, 39 percent have yet to install ETPs and obtain certification from the PPCB. Against this information, almost all the units do recognise that

Summary and Policy Recommendations

249

water should be saved but the ground reality does not match this, as 55 percent have yet to install any water saving technique. It is clear from the foregoing discussion that among the industrial units the level of awareness about the scarcity of water is there, but the sensitivity is missing. In the case of water use in the domestic sector, the secondary data show that out of nearly 2,263,000 rural households in Punjab, only 33 percent use tap water. About 36 percent use hand pumps to meet their water demand and 27 percent use tube-well water. Thus, almost all the rural households use ground water. The primary data pertaining to 300 rural households, however, show 55 percent of households use tap water and 23 percent use tube-well water. Awareness regarding the judicious and efficient use of water among the rural households is extremely low, as only 10 percent of respondents said that they are aware of water conservation and 91 percent of households do not use any water saving techniques. As regards rain water harvesting, 92 percent are not even aware of it. Nonetheless, 66 percent of households expressed awareness about the scarcity of water but only 52 percent are in favour of judicious use of water. About 23 percent of households are not satisfied with the quality of water and 95 percent are not making use of waste water. Thus, it is clear that the level of awareness about water scarcity, conservation and harvesting is quite low and hardly any efforts are being made in this direction. In view of the ever-increasing share of the urban population an effort has also been made to study the water use pattern in urban households. As per the census 2011, the share of urban population in Punjab has crossed 37 percent. There are 1,637,000 urban households in Punjab. Out of them about 77 percent use tap water—much higher than that in the rural area. Interestingly people want to have a quality service and good quality of water but do not want to pay even the minimum user costs. Our study has found that nearly 78 percent of households are not willing to pay for this utility. A recent study of Ludhiana city (Bedi, 2013) also had similar findings. Unmetered water supply is also a serious constraint on the recovery of user charges. A recent report (Khanna, 2015) has revealed that a little less than 50 percent of the urban households are not paying their water and sewerage bills, though they are supposed to pay. A very high amount (Rs. 15000 million) is owed by urban households and that too at a time when the state government is facing a serious financial crunch. Such a situation is bound

250

Chapter Ten

to hit the quality of the service and the very health of the utility. It is an open secret that due to political populism by all the political parties the people of Punjab have become addicted to freebies and subsidies. Unfortunately, the Punjab government has been subsidising the rich in the name of the poor across all sectors. Such a policy response and governance deficit has resulted in a serious deterioration in the quality of services and health of the service providing utilities.

10.1.4 Policy Response by the Punjab Government The irony on the policy front is that the state of Punjab does not have any agricultural or irrigation policy. There is no water policy either. The state is also found to have a deficit in industrial policy. In fact, the state has been suffering from a policy paralysis for well over four decades. Ever since the advent of militancy in the decade of the 1980s, the state’s orientation has changed from development to law and order. The deceleration in GDP growth rate since the early 1990s is the direct outcome of such a situation. As such the water sector is also a victim of such a scenario in the state. There was hardly any policy response to the declining water table and polluting subsoil water till the early 1980s. The first policy response came in 1986, when a government-appointed committee cautioned the government about the continuous depletion of the water table. Thereafter, again in 2002, another government-appointed committee pointed out that the situation is going from bad to worse as far as the water table is concerned and paddy crop is mainly responsible for it. As such the committee recommended a substantial shift of area from under paddy to other crops. Nothing has happened so far. Paradoxically, the state and central governments are advising the farmers to sow alternative crops without providing any road map. Since 2002–03, the state government has been giving free power to the farm sector. The area under paddy is increasing rather than decreasing. The provision of free electricity to the farm sector is in fact pro-paddy and hence anti-diversification. Another policy response came in 2008 (by way of an ordinance) when the state government prohibited the farmers from sowing nursery of paddy before 10th May and transplanting the nursery before 10th June. In 2009, the ordinance was replaced by the Act. In the Act the date of transplantation has been shifted to 15th June. In between, the state government appointed a state-level committee to estimate the ground water resources in 2004 under the chairmanship of the then Secretary of

Summary and Policy Recommendations

251

Irrigation and Power. Unfortunately, the committee took 8 long years to submit the report and that, too, without any recommendations, worth the name. The government and Punjab Agricultural University have also tried to use certain resource conservative techniques (RCTs) to reduce water consumption in agriculture. These are: micro-irrigation, laser levelling, planting paddy and wheat on raised beds; zero tillage; use of tensio-metres and direct seeding of paddy. The micro-irrigation (drip and sprinkler) was initiated in 2007–08. So far about 15,000 hectares have been brought under micro-irrigation, as per the government claim. Accepting that it is correct, the area under microirrigation is just a fraction (0.36 percent) of the total sown area in Punjab. As per our field study in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib Districts, most of the farmers have installed drip and sprinkler irrigation just to get priority electric connection and to avail of the subsidy. Even after installing the micro-irrigation system a very high proportion of the area with such farmers is under the flood irrigation method. Most of the farmers have stopped using the micro-irrigation system giving one or the other excuse and the government has not taken any serious notice of this. As regards diversification, it did not even start in spite of the fact that several expert committees and Punjab State Farmers Commission have strongly recommended diversification by effecting a substantial shifting of area from under paddy. Significantly, the state agricultural policy, though finalised and submitted to government in 2013, is still at the draft stage and is waiting the government stamp. The organic farming is yet to recognise its existence. Incidentally, the state does not have any water policy either. As for industry and domestic water consumption, the situation is even more disappointing. Whatever policies, technical and legal measures, are there they are largely on paper. The implementation, regulation and monitoring are almost conspicuous by absence. The evaluation is also not being done, neither in-house or by independent agencies. It is clear from the foregoing discussion that consumption of water, especially ground water, is not being done in a judicious manner, more so in agriculture but it is almost the same case in the industry and domestic sectors. The water table has gone down alarmingly, and subsoil water is

252

Chapter Ten

becoming unfit for human and animal consumption and in certain areas even for irrigation. Such a scenario is unsustainable. If this issue is not addressed in a comprehensive and time bound manner, Punjab may have to pump out water from deeper and deeper aquifers. This would result in higher cost of tube-well installation and energy, higher subsidy bill, food insecurity, water deficiency and augmentation of the agrarian crisis. Eventually, it may turn the food bowl of India into a barren land and put the very sustainability of agriculture in danger. It is in this context that all the stakeholders, the state, farmers, domestic water users and industry, must recognise the emerging water scarcity and insecurity; the sooner the better. The attitude of being in denial mode will not avert the crisis because that would mean living in an illusion, exactly like the pigeon that thinks that by shutting its eyes the cat will not be able to see it, but unmindful of the fact that cat has not shut its own eyes. Unfortunately, all the stakeholders are keeping their eyes shut even after unambiguous warnings by experts. Such an attitude will not solve the emerging crisis; rather the crisis is deepening day by day. In view of this, there is an urgent need to wake up and accept the gravity of the crisis so as to take appropriate policy measures. For a long period, Punjabis have been very happy with the greenery of the green revolution but it is now time to accept that the green colour is fading. The ongoing agrarian crisis and suicides by farmers and the labourers are manifestations of such a denial mode. It is good to have a positive attitude and live in a jovial mode while seeing the glass half full but if we do not see glass half empty we shall never take any measures to fill-in that empty part of the glass. Something similar is going on in Punjab as far as water table is concerned. The governments—both the Union and Punjab—need to see the empty part of the glass and must understand that Punjab’s subsoil water is not a flow but is a finite stock. Mere sermons for diversifying the crop sector will not serve the purpose. The Union Government, too, must not run away from its responsibility. Now when Punjab’s agriculture and farmers are in crisis, the Union Government is simply advising to go in for diversification by shifting a substantial area from under paddy. This is not a good practice as it tantamount to use, abuse and abandon. But more than that, the moot question is why the Punjab government is running away from its own responsibility. Simply by passing the buck to the Union Government and expecting everything to be done by the Union Government is not a good

Summary and Policy Recommendations

253

policy. The Punjab government and its policy makers must rise to the occasion and come up with viable policy measures. The sooner the better, otherwise it may be too late and, in that case,, we will have nothing but repentance. Let us do something so that our future generations do not curse us. The emerging water crisis in Punjab throws up many lessons for the world in general and India in particular. In view of the growing need of water for food security, industry, energy and household usage, India must learn from Punjab’s good or bad experience of using and abusing the subsoil water. All those regions in the world and all those Indian states who are on the threshold of the green revolution must learn that they should go in for a sustainable use of water especially subsoil water so that they will not face the Punjab-like water crisis. There is a need to develop less waterconsuming varieties of cereals so that precious underground water could be used in an efficient and optimum manner. Punjab must also learn from its own experiences. Punjab’s experience also provides a lesson that irrational and unmindful use of subsoil water across all sectors will worsen the situation. Instead, efficient and optimum use of water is the best policy. The various provincial governments and their political leadership must also learn that unlike Punjab they must take policy measures which are in their purview and which are supposed to be done by them. Merely accusing the Union Government and not doing what can be done by them, is not a good policy. The state government and the state political leadership have the primary responsibility towards the people, economy, society and policy of the state. That would require diagnosing, recognising and finding viable solutions. It is in this context that a comprehensive water policy encompassing all the sectors of the economy should be in place.

10.2 Recommendations In view of the above, the following can be offered as the main recommendations: 1. Keeping in view the declining water table, there is an urgent need to enact a comprehensive water policy with a long-term road map for water management and governance pertaining to all sectors of the economy. 2. In view of the fact that the water users across all sectors are not resorting to the policy of reducing (consumption), recycling and

254

Chapter Ten

reusing the water, there is an urgent need to promote and strengthen this policy. The appropriate incentives and disincentives also need to be introduced in order to promote the judicious use of water across all sectors. 3. As the state has a negligible presence of water users associations (WUAs), there is a need to promote WUAs across all the sectors, including all the stakeholders. Water management and governance needs to be in place and effectively implemented. 4. The impact assessment analysis of every unit of water consumed across all sectors would also encourage efficient and optimum use of water. 5. The social and public audit of water consumption must be made a mandatory feature across all the sectors. 6. There is a need to have a state independent Water Expert Authority in order to take techno-economic decisions. For the review of these decisions, the state must have a Water Regulatory and Development Council to ensure accountability. This has also been proposed by the model bill for state regulatory system. 7. The Government of Punjab must formulate a comprehensive agricultural policy with special focus on crop diversification, rural economy, and water consumption. 8. As paddy is a major water-guzzling crop and responsible for depleting the water table, the shifting of a substantial area from under paddy is a must. This would only happen when the farmers are provided with alternative crops which could give at least the same level of income which they are getting from the wheat-paddy crop combination. 9. Micro-irrigation practices should be promoted with a missionary zeal as this would not only save water but could also encourage crop diversification as well as improve the environment. 10. The water conservation technologies (RCTs) in irrigation should be made popular, affordable and effective as at present their adoption is negligible. This is because of three main reasons: high cost of these technologies; lack of awareness and non-suitability for most of the prevalent crops. 11. In view of the declining area (absolute and share) under canal irrigation, the canals must be renovated and rejuvenated so that the area under canal irrigation is increased. 12. In view of the fact that the consumption of water to produce a unit of rice is the highest in Punjab, there is a need to find ways and means to narrow down the water use efficiency gap. This, inter alia,

Summary and Policy Recommendations

255

would require switching over from the flooding method of irrigation as most of the crops need only a particular level of moisture. There is also a need to promote a variety of less waterconsuming crops, including paddy. 13. The provision of free electricity for the agricultural sector should be stopped forthwith as it is anti-diversification. If it has to be given at all it should be restricted to small farmers. That would encourage the rational and optimum use of water besides saving a substantial amount of financial resources which may then be used on agricultural R&D; and on rural health, education and infrastructure. 14. In future, tube-well connections should be given only in the mostdeserving cases and the existing connections must be reviewed and rationalised. In fact, the entire water market needs a comprehensive review so as to rationalise demand for and supply of water. 15. A comprehensive industrial policy, including the water use pattern in the industrial sector also needs to be in place. The over dependence on subsoil water also needs a serious review so that it might be rationalised. The possibility of supply of river/canal water for industrial use could also be explored. 16. Water and air polluting industries should be dealt with strictly and legal provisions should be implemented effectively. The ‘polluter must pay’ policy should be in place and implemented. This is important to check the practice of pouring waste water in the subsoil water. Effluent treatment plants must also be in place in the industrial sector. 17. In the domestic sector, there must be a separate and comprehensive water policy for both urban and rural areas. The user charges must be recovered and the same need to be progressive. 18. In order to raise the awareness and sensitivity levels of the stakeholders, there is a need to organise water workshops on a regular basis across all sectors of the economy. This would also require widespread and sustained campain for spreading water literacy. 19. The competitive political populism across all walks of life needs to be stopped as it promotes irrational and injudicious use of a state’s financial, physical and natural, resources, particularly subsoil water. This is sine qua non for curing the addiction to freebies, both of people and political parties. 20. The policy of subsidising the rich (in the name of the poor) must be stopped across all sectors of the economy so as to encourage

256

Chapter Ten

judicious use of water and saving the state exchequer from additional financial burden. 21. Organic farming needs to be patronised and promoted both by the public and private sectors so that it could become a viable alternative to the prevailing chemical farming that would bring multiple benefits to the state including judicious use of water. 22. In view of the dismally low level of forest cover in Punjab, there is a need to bring more area under forest cover. 23. The adverse impact of the excessive over-drafting of groundwater on agriculture, health and the environment needs to be studied and quantified empirically in order to formulate suitable policies. 24. Political will and credibility of the government and institutions is a prerequisite to address the water crisis in particular and other issues in general. That would also require good governance. 25. The entire water sector in Punjab needs intensive and extensive research so as to save Punjab from the emerging water crisis and insecurity. 26. Last, but not the least, the other states of India need to learn from Punjab’s experience so that they may save themselwes from the emerging water scarcity and water insecurity.

APPENDICES

Appendixes to Preface A.P.1: Level of development and distance from the nearby town/city of the sampled villages across the selected districts District/Block Gurdaspur/

Amritsar

Ferozepur

Jalandhar

Ludhiana

Patiala

Sangrur

Muktsar

Village Massania Bahadurpur Kala Nagal Taprian Kotla Saida Navan Nag Mian Singhwala Rotal Rohi Pandori Khatrian Muzaffarpur Sharkpur Sianiwal Bassowala Mirpur Hans Aliwal Marauri Dodra Mial Khurd Burj Gorha Issi Mimsa Roranwali Sangu Dhaun Chak Duhewala

Level of Development Low Medium High Low Medium High Low

Distance from Nearby Town/City (Kms.) 6 kms. from Batala 2 kms. from Batala 3 kms. from Batala 6 kms. from Majitha 2 kms. from Kathu Nangal 5 kms. from Majitha 6 kms. from Zira

Medium High

5 kms. from Zira 7 kms. from Zira

Low Medium High Low Medium

4 kms. from Nakodar 2 kms. from Nakodar 4 kms. from Nakodar 10 kms. from Jagraon 4 kms. from Jagraon

High Low Medium High Low Medium High Low Medium

2 kms. from Jagraon 6 kms. from Samana 5 kms. from Samana 4 kms. from Samana 6 kms. from Bagrian 8 kms. from Dhuri 10 kms. from Dhuri 7 kms. from Muktsar 3 kms. from Muktsar

High

8 kms. from Muktsar

Appendices

258

Bathinda

Hoshiarpur

Fatta Balu Fatehgarh Naubad Teona Pujarian Sherpur Sahib Ka Pind Pandori

Low Medium

12 kms. from Talwandi Saboo 4 kms. from Talwandi Saboo

High

4 kms. from Talwandi Saboo

Low Medium

6 kms. from Mukerian 5 kms. from Mukerian

High

8 kms. from Mukerian

A. P.2: Village-level data of the sampled villages of Punjab in 2001 Total Total SC District Villages Population Population Bahadurpur 898 52 (0.6) Gurdaspur Massanian 2786 379 (13.6) Kala Nangal 1558 557 (35.8) Taprian 148 0 (0.0) Amritsar Navan Nag 8369 4020 (48.0) Kotla Saida 1390 872 (62.7) Singhwala 1095 459 (41.9) Pandori Ferozepur Khatrian 1491 636 (42.7) Rotal Rohi 1257 519 (41.3) Sharkpur 1450 1000 (69.0) Jalandhar Muzaffarpur 315 224 (71.1) Sianiwal 837 672 (80.3) Bassowala 527 98 (18.6) Ludhiana Mirpur Hans 811 296 (36.5) Aliwal 974 718 (73.7) Mial Kurd 1644 320 (19.5) Patiala Dodra 878 203 (23.1) Marauri 2793 398 (14.3) Mimsa 3643 971 (26.7) Sangrur Issi 1556 579 (37.2) Burj Gorha 341 60 (17.6)

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

Househol d Size 5.79 5.94 5.39 4.48 5.62 5.6 5.56 6.37 5.35 6.25 5.63 5.94 5.67 5.48 6.2 5.57 6.06 7.02 5.57 5.98 6.2

No. of Households 155 469 289 33 1488 248 197 234 235 232 56 141 93 148 157 295 145 506 654 260 55

58.8 53.4 66.3 62.4 66.3 80.1 73.9 61.2 65.1 48.1 31.4 54.6 64.0 68.0

Literac y Rate 69.0 64.8 71.1 68.8 63.0 59.8 55.6

259

Fatta Balu Teona Pujarian Pandori Sahib ka Pind Sherpur

Sangu Dhaun Chak Duhewala Roranwali Fategarh Naubad 656 (39.35) 1 97 (29.8) 606 (26.8) 197 (44.6) 24 (4.5) 190 (31.4)

1667

2262 442 536 605

661

456 (30.8) 350 (25.6)

1185 (49.1)

1479 1366

2414

Appendices

Source: Govt. of India (2001), Population Census, 2001. Note: Figures in brackets indicate percentage to total population.

Hoshiarpur

Bathinda

Muktsar

260

390 88 96 112

109

298

255 247

411

5.8 5.02 5.58 5.4

6.06

5.59

5.8 5.53

5.87

60.8 73.4 78.9 82.8

48.2

52.3

52.0 56.9

60.3

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

261

Appendixes to Chapter 3 Table A3.1: Criterion for the classification of the development blocks in Punjab Stage of Ground Water Development < or = 90% > 70% and < or = 100% > 70% and < or = 100% > 90% and < or = 100% > 100% > 100% > 100%

Significant Long-term Water Table Decline Trend Pre-monsoon Post-monsoon No No No Yes

Category Safe Semi-critical

Yes

No

Semi-critical

Yes

Yes

Critical

No Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes

Over-exploited Over-exploited Over-exploited

Source: Central Ground Water Board North-Western Region and Water Resources & Environment Director, Punjab, Chandigarh (2013), Dynamic Ground Water Resources of Punjab.

Table A3.2: Decline of water table in central Punjab Year 1973 1980 1990 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Percent area with depth to water table more than 10 metres 15 metres 20 metres 3.7 0.6 0.4 5.7 0.6 0.4 26.7 2.9 0.4 53.2 14.1 0.1 65.7 21.7 1.2 72.7 26.1 4.3 79.9 32.7 5.7 84.6 36.6 12.5 85.4 42.1 14.5 85.5 52.0 19.2 80.4 46.4 26.3 86.5 60.5 32.1 81.9 62.9 34.5 91.6 75.1 50.5

Source: Department of Agriculture, Govt. of Punjab, Chandigarh.

Appendices

262

Appendixes to Chapter 4 Table A4.1: Water requirement of various crops Sl.

Crop

Water Requirement (mm) (1) Cereals

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Rice Wheat Sorghum Maize Ragi

1.

Pulses

900–2500 450–650 450–600 500–800 400–850 (2) Pulses* 250–300 (3) Oilseeds

6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Groundnut Soybean Sunflower Sesame Castor

11. 12. 13.

Sugarcane Cotton Tobacco

14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.

Tomato Potato Onion Chillies Bean Cabbage Pea

21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26.

Banana Citrus Pineapple Grape Guava Mango

500–700 450–700 350–500 350–400 500 (4) Commercial crops 1500–2500 700–1300 400–600 (5) Vegetable crops 600–800 500–700 3505–50 500 3005–00 380–500 350–500 (6) Fruit crops 1200–2200 900–1200 700–1000 500–1200 625 625

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

27. 28. 29. 30.

Peach Plum Pears Pomegranate

263

450 450 400 300

Source: (1) http:// www.aboutcivil.org/water-requirements-of-crops.html (2) *Kerala Agricultural University NB: Shaded crops are water-guzzling crops.

Table A4.2: Crop wise water saving and resultant yield increase with the adoption of sprinkler and drip irrigation Sl. Crop

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 1. 2. 1. 1. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Sprinkler Water Yield saving increase (%) (%) (A) Cereals Bajra 56 19 Jowar 55 34 Maize 41 36 Barley 56 16 Wheat 35 24 (B) Pulses Bengal 69 57 gram Cow pea 19 3 (C) Oilseeds Groundnut 20 40 Sunflower 33 20 Cotton 36 (E) Fodder crops Lucerne 16 Bhindi (Okra) Cabbage Cauliflower Chillies Fenugreek Garlic Onion

50

Drip Irrigation Location Water Yield saving increase (%) (%) (A) Fruit Crops Banana Navsari 30–40 9–60 Pomegranate Hyderabad 21 51 Sapota Navsari 20–40 17 (B) Commercials crops Sugarcane Delhi 50 35 (C) Flowers Rose Navsari 20 40 Crop

(D) Fibres Cotton

Navsari

28

27 (F) Vegetables crops 23 Bhindi Pantnagar

40 35 33 29 28 33

3 12 24 35 6 23

5–33

40–47

27

15

Cabbage Navsari 34 46 Cauliflower Navsari 44 20 Chillies Pantnagar 10 68 Brinjal Pantnagar 18 44 Bottlegourd Pantnagar 20 45 Potato Pantnagar 20 49 Tomato Delhi 25 40 Source: Report of Task Force on Irrigation-May 2009; pp. 36–37; Planning Commission, Government of India.

Appendices

264

Appendixes to Chapter 6 Table A6.1: Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: textile and dyeing Name of Industry

the

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Economic Activity Dyeing & finishing unit Dyeing of Yarn Dyeing of Acrylic Yarn Dyeing of Yarn Dyeing of Acrylic Yarn Dyeing of Acrylic Yarn Dyeing of Acrylic Yarn Dyeing of Knitted Fabric Dyeing of Yarn Blanket Printing Unit Dyeing Unit Dyeing Unit

Type of Raw Material Used

Nature of Processing

Chemical dye

Washing-DyeingDrying-Finishing

Basic Dyes

Washing-DyeingWashing-Drying

Reactive Dyes

Washing-DyeingWashing-Drying

Chemical dye

Washing-DyeingDrying-Finishing

Modified Colour

Washing-DyeingDrying-Finishing

Basic Dyes

Washing-DyeingDrying-Finishing

Azofree Colour

Washing-DyeingDrying-Finishing

Chemical dye

Washing-DyeingDrying-Finishing

Chemical dye Chemical dye, Petcock (fuel) Chemical dye, Husk Chemical dye

Washing-DyeingDrying-Finishing WashingPrintingWashing-Drying Washing-DyeingDrying-Finishing Washing-DyeingDrying-Finishing

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Dyeing of Cotton Yarn Manufactu ring of Shirts Manufactu ring

265

Chemical dye

Washing-DyeingDrying-Finishing

Fabric

Stitching of shirts

Acrylic fibre & Towel

Not available

Source: Field survey, 2013–2014 (As per the information given by the industrial units).

266

Appendices

Table A6.2: Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: food product and beverages Name of the Industry Food Product & Beverages Food Product & Beverages

Economic Activity Manufacturing milk product Manufacturing of Tomato Ketch Up

Food Product & Beverages

Manufacturing of Biscuits

Type of Raw Material Used

Nature of Processing

Milk

Ghee making

Tomato Paste

Not available

Wheat, Sugar, Refined Vanaspati Oil

Mixing-ShapingHeating-Packing

Food Product & Beverages

Manufacturing of Packaged Drinking water

Raw water

Food Product & Beverages

Manufacturing & Processing of IceCream

Milk, Sugar, Fruit, Dry Fruit

Food Product & Beverages Food Product & Beverages

Manufacturing of Mineral Drinking Water Manufacturing of Packaged Drinking water club soda

Raw water-Sand filter-Carbon filter-Micron filter-Ultraviolet treatment-RO treatmentOzonationPacking MixingProcessingFinishingCooling-Packing

Raw water

Filtration with RO System

Raw water

Filtration with RO System

Feed through graining, Oil Food Product & Agri products, through Beverages Vegetables oil bleaching, dregriming Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (As per the information given by the industrial units). Manufacturing of Cattle Feed, Refined Vegetable Oil

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

267

Table A6.3: Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: manufacturing of basic metal Name of the Industry

Economic Activity

Type of Raw Material Used

Nature of Processing

MFG of Basic Metal

Manufacturing of Wire Drawing

Wire Rod

Wire Drawing

MFG of Basic Metal

Manufacturing of Bicycle Rims

CR Strip

Cutting-RollingMachiningPaintingFinishing

MFG of Basic Metal

Manufacturing of Bicycles & Parts

Unfinished Frame, Fork, Mudgaurd, Chain Covers, Paint, Chemical

Not available

MFG of Basic Metal

Manufacturing of Strips

Ingot, Billet, Slap

MFG of Basic Metal

Manufacturing

Iron Scrap, Sponge Iron

MFG of Basic Metal

Fabrication of Reactor & Tanks

Stainless Steel

Heating-CuttingMachiningFinishing Melting-CuttingMachiningFinishing MouldingGrindingWeldingFinishing

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (As per the information given by the industrial units).

268

Appendices

Table A6.4: Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: chemical industry Name of the Industry MFG of Chemical & Chemical Product MFG of Chemical & Chemical Product MFG of Chemical & Chemical Product MFG of Chemical & Chemical Product

Economic Activity

Type of Raw Material Used

Nature of Processing

Manufacturing of Capsules & Tablet

Dry Raw Material

Not available

Manufacturing of Laundry Soap

Rice Oil & Palm Oil

MixingHeatingShapingCuttingFinishingPacking

Manufacturing of Fertilisers

Zinc Ash

GrindingSievingMelting-Final

Manufacturing of Ayurvedic Medicines

Herbs Plant

BoilingSyrupFiltration

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (As per the information given by the industrial units).

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

269

Table A6.5: Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: paper and paper products Name of Industry

the

Economic Activity

Type of Raw Material Used

MFG Paper & Paper Product

Manufacturing of Craft Paper

Waste Paper

MFG Paper & Paper Product

Manufacturing of Craft Paper

Waste Paper

MFG Paper & Paper Product

Manufacturing of Craft Paper

Waste Paper

Nature of Processing Beating-PulpingPaper MakingDrying-Packing Beating-PulpingPaper MakingDrying-Packing Beating-PulpingPaper MakingDrying-Packing

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (As per the information given by the industrial units).

Appendices

270

Table A6.6: Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: rubber & plastic products Name of the Industry

Economic Activity

Type of Raw Material Used

Rubber & Plastic Product

Manufacturing of Rubber Sports Goods

Rubber, Rubber Chemical, Fabric

Rubber & Plastic Product

Manufacturing of Conveyor Belt

Rubber, Rubber Chemical

Rubber & Plastic Product

Manufacturing of Rubber Compound

Rubber, Rubber Chemical

Rubber & Plastic Product

Manufacturing of Plastic Products

High Density & Low-Density Granule

Nature of Processing MixingHeatingShapingCuttingFinishingPacking MixingHeatingShapingCuttingFinishingPacking MixingHeatingShapingCuttingFinishingPacking Plastic products

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (As per the information given by the industrial units).

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

271

Table A6.7: Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: hosiery and garments Name of the Industry Hosiery & Garment Hosiery & Garment Hosiery & Garment

Economic Activity Manufacturing of Embroidery of Fabrics Manufacturing of Knitted Garments Job Work of Fabrication of Cloths

Type of Raw Material Used Fabric Cloth

Nature of Processing Embroidered cloth

Dyed Acrylic Yarn Yarn

EmbroideryStitching Job Work

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (As per the information given by the industrial units).

Table A6.8: Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: leather and leather product Name of the Industry Leather & Leather Product Leather & Leather Product

Economic Activity

Type of Raw Material Used

Manufacturing of Upper Leather

Wet Blue Leather

Manufacturing Wet Blue Leather

Raw Hides

Nature of Processing WettingNeutralisationDyeing SoakingLimingFleshingPicklingTanning

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (As per the information given by the industrial units).

272

Appendices

Table A6.9: Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: hotel & restaurants Name of the Industry

Economic Activity

Type of Raw Material Used

Hotel & Restaurant

Processing of Food Products

Food Items

Hotel & Restaurant

Processing of Food Products

Vegetables & Food Items

Nature of Processing WashingCleaningCookingPacking WashingCleaningCookingPacking

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (As per the information given by the industrial units).

Table A6.10: Classification of sampled small-scale units according to economic activity and nature of processing: cold storage Name of the Industry Cold Storage Cold Storage

Economic Activity Cold Storage of Vegetable & Fruits Processing of Vegetables & Eggs

Type of Raw Material Used

Nature of Processing

Water & Ammonia Gas

Colling

Vegetables, Eggs & Other Material

Vegetables and eggs

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (As per the information given by the industrial units).

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

273

Table A6.11: Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled medium and large-scale textile units Industrial Category

Economic Activity

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Yarn, Textile Processing

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Manufacturing of blankets Manufacturing of Polyester, Cotton Cloth Manufacturing of woollen & woollen blended fabrics Manufacturing of shoddy yarn

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Type of Raw Material Used Grey Yarn, Dye & Chemical Shoddy Rags Wool

Washing-DyeingPrinting-Finishing

Woollen’s synthetic fabrics

Dyeing-SpinningWeaving-FinishingWarehouse

Wool waste

Dyeing & Printing of polyester cotton cloth

Chemical dye

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Manufacturing of cotton yarn & polyester yarn

Cotton

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Processing of cloths

Dyes & chemical

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Dyeing & Finishing

Dyes & chemical

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Manufacturing of woven labels Manufacturing of cotton yarn Manufacturing of woollen & woollen blended yarn Manufacturing of cotton yarn

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Washing-DyeingDrying-FinishingDyeing Milling-WashingDyeing-Rinsing

Grey Fabric

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Nature of Processing

Carding-GinningSpinning-Packing Washing-Heat Setting-PrintingWashing-FinishingPacking Not available Grey Fabrics-Making Lots-WashingDyeing-FinishingPacking Yarn-WindingDyeing-WashingDrying-RewindingPacking

Polyester yarn

Making of labels

Cotton

Carding-GinningSpinning-Packing

Wool & Acrylic waste

Batching-MixingCarding-SpinningWinding-Packing

Cotton

Carding-CombingSpinning-Packing

Appendices

274 Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Manufacturing of grey cotton yarn

Raw cotton

Carding-SpinningInspection-Packing

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Spinning of yarn

Acrylic, Synthetic, Wool, Nylon, Polyester

Carding-GinningSpinning-DyeingPacking

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Manufacturing of fabric garments & dyeing units

Yarn

Not available

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Manufacturing of yarn

Cotton, Cotton Fibre, Acrylic Fibre

Carding-GinningSpinning-Packing

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Manufacturing of yarn

Polyester

Carding-GinningSpinning-Spinning of Polyester Yarn

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Manufacturing of yarn

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Manufacturing of cotton/ acrylic

Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills Textile, Dyeing & Spinning Mills

Processing Manufacturing of yarn Manufacturing of yarn Manufacturing of cotton yarn Manufacturing of cotton yarn Manufacturing of cotton & polyester yarn Processing Manufacturing of sewing threads

Cotton, Acrylic, Polyester Cotton, acrylic ACN, DMF, VA Cotton Cotton & Narma Cotton Cotton

Spinning-Dyeing Not available Dry-Spun-AcrylicFibre Carding-GinningSpinning-Packing Carding-GinningSpinning-Packing Carding-GinningSpinning-Packing Blow Room-CardingSpinning-Packing

Cotton

Blow Room-CardingSpinning-Packing

Yarn

Dyeing & Bleaching

Cotton & Spinning-TwistingPolyester Dyeing-Finishing Purified Terepthalic Manufacturing of Textile, Dyeing Acid, Mono polyester staple Not available & Spinning Mills Ethylene fibre Glycol, PET Flans Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (as per the information provided by the industrial units).

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

275

Table A6.12: Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled food product and beverage units (medium and large units) Industrial Category Food Product & Beverages

Economic Activity Manufacturing of Milk & Milk products

Type of Raw Material Used Milk

Nature of Processing Testing-BoilingCondensation-Making Products-Packing CrushingClarificationEvaporation-BoilingGrainingCentrifuzing-DryingPacking ENA-DM water-Malt Spirit-CoremalMixing-BlendBottling

Food Product & Beverages

Manufacturing of sugar

Sugarcane

Food Product & Beverages

Manufacturing of PML & IMFL

Extra Neutral Alcohol (ENA)

Food Product & Beverages

Manufacturing of Carbonated Soft drinks & NonCarbonated

Food Product & Beverages

Processing

Sugar, Condensated, CO2, Package material Granulated sugar, CO2, Concentrated Pepsi flavour

Food Product & Beverages

Manufacturing of cane food (Palak paneer, Matar paneer)

Leaf vegetables

Washing-CuttingWashing-CookingPreparation-TillingExhausting-SeamingProtating-Couling

Food Product & Beverages

Processing of milk, milk product

Milk

Boiling-ChillingMaking Products

Food Product & Beverages

Processing

Milk

Boiling-ChillingMaking Products

Milk

Not available

Milk

Pasteuriser & Packing

Food Product & Beverages Food Product & Beverages

Manufacturing of milk, milk product Processing & Dairy Farm, Milk & Milk Products

Not available

Heat treatment & carbonation

Appendices

276

Manufacturing of Package water

Water

Bottle Making-Water Filling-CappingLabelling-InspectionPacking

Food Product & Beverages

Bottling plant of coca cola

Water, Lime, Calcium Chloride, Calcium Hypo chloride, Ferrous Sulphate

Not available

Food Product & Beverages

Extraction & Refining of vegetables oil

Rice bran

Not available

Food Product & Beverages

Refining of vegetables oil

Raw rice bran oil & raw washed cotton seed oil

Refining

Milk

Heating-CoolingCondensing-Drying

Milk

Skimming-CreamButter-Ghee-Packing, Skimmed Milk-SMP Powder-Packing

Paddy

Not available

Milk

Not available

Food Product & Beverages

Food Product & Beverages Food Product & Beverages Food Product & Beverages Food Product & Beverages

Manufacturing of Milk & Milk products Manufacturing of desi ghee & skimmed milk powder Manufacturing of rice Manufacturing of Milk & Milk products Manufacturing of Milk & Milk products

Testing-BoilingDrying-ChillingPacking Testing-BoilingFood Product Milk Processing Milk Drying-Chilling& Beverages Packing Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (as per the information provided by the industrial units). Food Product & Beverages

Milk

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

277

Table A6.13: Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled basic metal units (medium and large units) Industrial Category

Economic Activity

Type of Raw Material Used

MFG of Basic Metal

Manufacturing of Auto Parts

Cast Iron

MFG of Basic Metal

Manufacturing of Valves

Non-Ferrous scrap used in foundry

MFG of Basic Metal

Manufacturing of Tools

Steel

MFG of Basic Metal MFG of Basic Metal

Manufacturing of Steel Billets Manufacturing of Auto Parts

MFG of Basic Metal MFG of Basic Metal MFG of Basic Metal MFG of Basic Metal

Nature of Processing CastingMachineryPacking Machining of castings produced by US ForgingGrindingPolishingPlatingPacking

Scrap Material

Not available

Steel rod

Not available

Manufacturing of Fasteners

Iron, Coil, Low carbon steel

MeltingShapingCoolingFinishing

Manufacturing of Auto Parts

Alloy steels

Not available

Manufacturing

Iron Scrap

Not available

Manufacturing

MFG of Basic Metal

Manufacturing

MFG of Basic Metal

Manufacturing

Iron Scrap, Sponge Iron Steel Ingots, Comcast Billets Steel Ingots, Comcast Billets

Not available Not available Not available

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (as per the information provided by the industrial units).

Appendices

278

Table A6.14: Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled motor vehicle manufacturing units (medium and large units) Industrial Category

Economic Activity

Type of Raw Material Used

Nature of Processing

MFG of Motor Vehicle

Manufacturing of hydraulic press, breaks & sharing machine

Mild steel sheet

Not available

MFG of Motor Vehicle

Manufacturing of bus bodies

Readymade motor parts, sheet metal

Not available

MFG of Motor Vehicle

Manufacturing tractors, engines & DG sets

Non-Ferrous scrap used in foundry

MFG of Motor Vehicle

Manufacturing of engines

Spare parts of engines

MachiningCleaningConditioningFabricationPressing MachiningWashingAssemblingTesting-Inspection

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (as per the information provided by the industrial units).

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

279

Table A6.15: Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled chemical units Industrial Category MFG of Chemical & Chemical Product MFG of Chemical & Chemical Product

Economic Activity

Nature of Processing

Formulation of pesticide

Pesticides & solvent

Grinding & Mixing

Manufacturing of Agriculture Pesticides

Sand type Grunion & Solvent, Chemicals

Crushing-Spray of LiquidMixing-Packing

Chemical & Solvent

Raw MaterialReactorAdditionReactor-Final Stage

MFG of Chemical & Chemical Product

Manufacturing of Active Pharmaceutical s Ingredients

MFG of Chemical & Chemical Product

Manufacturing of Active Pharmaceutical s Ingredients

MFG of Chemical & Chemical Product

Manufacturing of synthetic caffeine

MFG of Chemical & Chemical Product MFG of Chemical & Chemical Product MFG of Chemical & Chemical Product

Type of Raw Material Used

Manufacturing

Chemicals (erythromycin, methylene, chloride, palladium charcoal) Dimethyl urea, mono methyl, amine gas, acetic acid, ammonia gas Chemicals in the form of solid, liquid & gas

Raw MaterialReactorAdditionReactor-Final Stage

Not available

Not available

Formulation of pesticide

Pesticides Chemicals

Not available

Manufacturing of Active Pharmaceutical s Ingredients

Chemical & Solvent

Not available

Appendices

280

MFG of Chemical & Chemical Product

Processing

Caustic Soda Flack, Lye chlorine gas

Not available

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (as per the information provided by the industrial units).

Table A6.16: Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled manufacturing paper units (medium and large units) Industrial Category MFG Paper & Paper Product MFG Paper & Paper Product MFG Paper & Paper Product MFG Paper & Paper Product

MFG Paper & Paper Product MFG Paper & Paper Product MFG Paper & Paper Product

Economic Activity Manufacturing of paper & paper board Manufacturing of craft paper Manufacturing of paper Manufacturing of paper and board Manufacturing of craft board, duplex board Manufacturing of paper & paper board Manufacturing of writing printing paper

Type of Raw Material Used

Nature of Processing

Waste paper

Not available

Waste paper

Not available

Waste paper

Not available

Agriculture residue (wheat straw for paper manufacturing & rice husk as fuel)

Not available

Waste paper

Not available

Waste paper

Not available

Agro waste, wood waste & bamboo

Pulp paper

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (as per the information provided by the industrial units).

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

281

Table A6.17: Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled rubber and rubber product units (medium and large units) Type of Raw Material Used Rubber & Chemical

Industrial Category

Economic Activity

Rubber & Plastic Product

Manufacturing of Rubber Sole

Rubber & Plastic Product

Manufacturing of cycle & rickshaw tyre & tubes

Rubber & Chemical

Rubber & Plastic Product

Manufacturing of cycle & rickshaw tyre & tubes

Rubber & Chemical

Rubber & Plastic Product

Manufacturing of cycle & rickshaw tyre & tubes Manufacturing of cycle & rickshaw tyre & tubes

Rubber & Chemical

Rubber & Plastic Product

Manufacturing of cycle & rickshaw tyre & tubes

Rubber & Chemical

Rubber & Plastic Product

Manufacturing of carbon (Black)

Carbon black feed stock (Hydro Carbon Oil)

Rubber & Plastic Product

Rubber & Chemical

Nature of Processing Compound MixingChemical MixingCutting-Die MouldingFinishing-Packing Compound MixingChemical MixingCutting-Die MouldingFinishing-Packing Compound MixingChemical MixingCutting-Die MouldingFinishing-Packing Not available

Batch Mixing-Final Mixing-Ply-TradeGreen Tyre Building-Bias Cutting-InspectionPacking-Dispatch Batch Mixing-Final Mixing-Ply-TradeGreen Tyre Building-Bias Cutting-InspectionPacking-Dispatch High Temp. Enclosed burning

282

Rubber & Plastic Product

Appendices

Manufacturing of Auto Parts

Metal parts, Rubber Compound

Metal treatment, injection, moulding

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (as per the information provided by the industrial units).

Table A6.18: Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled metal product units (medium and large units) Industrial Category Fabricated Metal Products Except Machinery & Equipment Fabricated Metal Products Except Machinery & Equipment Fabricated Metal Products Except Machinery & Equipment Fabricated Metal Products Except Machinery & Equipment

Economic Activity Manufacturing of Auto Parts

Type of Raw Material Used

Nature of Processing

Steel rod

Machining

Manufacturing of Bicycle

MS Steel, Chemical, Paint

CuttingMachiningFinishingPaintingAssemblingInspection

Manufacturing of Auto Parts

Steel rod

Not available

Manufacturing of Auto Parts

Steel rod

Not available

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (as per the information provided by the industrial units).

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

283

Table A6.19: Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled hosiery units (medium and large units) Industrial Category Hosiery & Garment Hosiery & Garment Hosiery & Garment Hosiery & Garment

Economic Activity Manufacturing of Embroidery Cloth Manufacturing of Readymade Garments Manufacturing of Readymade Garments Manufacturing of Readymade Garments

Type of Raw Material Used Fabric & Yarn Cotton Fabric Cotton Fabric Cotton Fabric

Nature of Processing Fixing-Embroidery Work-Finishing Cutting, stitching, finishing and packing Cutting, stitching, finishing and packing Cutting, stitching, finishing and packing

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (as per the information provided by the industrial units).

Table A6.20: Economic activity and nature of processing in sampled leather product units Industrial Category Leather & Leather Product Leather & Leather Product Leather & Leather Product

Economic Activity Manufacturing of Finish Leather Manufacturing of Finish Leather Manufacturing of Finish Leather

Type of Raw Material Used Raw Hides Wet Blue Leather Raw Hides

Nature of Processing Washing-Dyeing-Fat liquoring-DryingFinishing Washing-RetainingFat liquoringDyeing-Finishing Washing-Dyeing-Fat liquoring-DryingFinishing

Source: Field survey, 2013–14 (as per the information provided by the industrial units).

Appendixes to Chapter 9

Appendices

Extent of water saving (cm/ha) 36.19 8

Extent of power saving (kwh/ha)

Reduction in power subsidy (Rs.ha) 610 135

Improvement/ reduction in crop yield (t/ha) 0.78 -

Increase in returns (Rs /ha) 7597 2419

Total benefit (Power subsidy reduction + increase in returns) (Rs.ha) 8207 2554

Laser levelling in ricea 213.35 Permanent raised bed in 47.16 wheatb Permanent raised bed in 60 353.72 1012 -0.85 -5727 -4715 riceb Happy seeder in wheatc 8.5 50.11 143 2020 2163 Tensiometerd 37 218.13 624 336 960 Delayed Transplanting of rice (15 June)c With respect of 42 247.60 709 709 May 16 With respect to 23 135.59 388 388 May 31 Source: Sidhu, et al., 2010, p.419.c Note: The estimates of only the water savings and improvement in the crop yield have been obtained from the above sources at the farm level. The respective power savings have been estimated by converting water savings into time equivalents of a standard 7.5 HP motor and then converting these hours of use into power units. The cost savings have been calculated at Rs. 2.86 price per unit of power. The increase in returns has been calculated by multiplying the MSP with yield improvements. The state-level figures have been estimated by multiplying the area under a particular crop with the per hectare benefits. However, all the benefits are not cumulative in nature.

Conservation Technology

Table A9.1: Potential of water conservation technologies for water saving and cost reduction in Punjab agriculture (farm level estimates)

284

285

Extent of water saving (cm/ha) 0.99 0.28

Extent of power saving (kwh/ha) 583.51 166.29

Laser levelling in rice Permanent raised bed in wheat Permanent raised bed in 1.64 967.42 rice Happy seeder in wheat 0.30 176.69 Tensiometer 1.01 596.59 Delayed Transplanting of rice (15 June) With respect of 0.63 370.84 May 16 With respect to 1.15 677.19 May 31 Source: Reproduced from Sidhu, et al., 2010, p. 419.

Conservation Technology

2.13 -2.32 -

276.68 50.53 170.62 106.06 193.68

Improvement/ reduction in crop yield (t/ha)

Reduction in power subsidy (Rs/ha) 167 47.56

-

-

712.25 91.90

-1566.33

2078 852.94

Increase in returns (Rs/ha)

193.68

106.06

762.78 262.52

-1289.65

Total benefit (Power subsidy reduction + increase in returns) (Rsha) 2245 900.50

Table A9.2: Potential of water conservation technologies for water saving and cost reduction in Punjab agriculture (State-level estimates)

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

Appendices

286

Table A9.3: Reasons for drip irrigation in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib Districts (as reported by respondents) Districts Reasons Priority in electric connection Reduction in labour cost Saving of water Saving of electricity Subsidy Saving on diesel cost after electric connection Increase in yield

Hoshiarpur Yes 9 9 9 9 9 9

No Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

1

8

Fatehgarh Sahib Yes No 3 Nil 3 Nil 3 Nil 3 Nil 3 Nil 3 Nil Nil

3

Source: Field survey, 2013–14.

Table A9.4: Reasons for sprinkler irrigation in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib Districts (As reported by respondents) District

Hoshiarpur

Reasons Priority in electric connection Reduction in labour cost Saving of water Saving of electricity Subsidy Saving on diesel cost after electric connection Increase in yield Source: Field survey, 2013–14.

Yes 11 11 11 11 11 11

No Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

9

2

Fatehgarh Sahib Yes No 11 Nil 11 Nil 11 Nil 11 Nil 11 Nil 11 Nil 11

0

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

287

Table A9.5: Area under drip irrigation in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib Districts (sampled farmers) District

Hoshiar pur Fatehga rh Sahib Total

No. of farmers 9

Total land (acres) 75.0 (100.00) 26.8 (100.00) 101.8 (100.00)

3 12

Area under (acres) Drip Irrigation 23.0 (30.67) 7.5 (28.04) 30.5 (29.98)

Irrigation by flooding 52.0 (69.33) 19.3 (71.96) 71.3 (70.02)

Source of Irrigation (No. of respondents) TubeCanal well 9 Nil 3

Nil

12

Nil

Source: Field survey, 2013–14.

Table A9.6: Area under sprinkler irrigation in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib Districts (sampled farmers) District

No. of farmers

Hoshiarpur

9

Fatehgarh Sahib Total

3 12

Total land

79.0 (100.00) 101.0 (100.00) 180.0 (100.00)

Area under (acres) Sprinkler Irrigation 25.5 (32.28) 25.8 (25.50) 51.3 (28.47)

Flood Irrigation 53.5 (67.72) 75.3 (74.50) 128.8 (71.53)

Source of Irrigation (No. of respondents) TubeCana well l 9 Nil 3

Nil

12

Nil

Source: Field survey, 2013–14.

Table A9.7: Respondents responses with respect to drip irrigation system in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib Districts District Continuing with drip irrigation Satisfied with drip irrigation system Recommend drip irrigation to others Presently drip irrigation system is in use Source: Field survey, 2013–14.

Hoshiarpur Yes 9 9 9 0

No Nil Nil Nil 9

Fatehgarh Sahib Yes No 3 Nil 3 Nil 3 Nil 0 3

Appendices

288

Table A9.8: Respondents responses with respect to sprinkler irrigation system in Hoshiarpur and Fatehgarh Sahib Districts District

Hoshiarpur

Continuing with sprinkler irrigation Satisfied with sprinkler irrigation system Recommend sprinkler irrigation to others Presently sprinkler irrigation system is in use

Yes 11

No Nil

Fatehgarh Sahib Yes No 11 Nil

11

Nil

11

Nil

11

Nil

11

Nil

0

11

0

11

Source: Field survey, 2013–14.

Table A9.9: District-wise number of ponds in Punjab Name of District

Amritsar Barnala Bathinda Faridkot Fatehgarh Sahib Fazilka Ferozepur Gurdaspur Hoshiarpur Jalandhar Ludhiana Kapurthala Mansa Moga Muktsar Pathankot Patiala

No. of Gram Panchayats

No. of Ponds

Ponds Area (in sqm)

Pond Area (in acre)

803 154 313 189 405

1168 346 796 257 559

6538120.70 2432898.00 6311479.00 1907530.00 2815696.00

1615.60 601.18 1559.60 471.36 695.77

Share in District Area (%) 0.61 0.43 0.47 0.33 0.59

353 752 1168 1332 901 900 533 244 153 258 398 977

402 753 1594 1178 1245 1520 610 520 318 491 338 1359

2896952.00 2789083.00 7545095.97 3927953.00 4268140.61 9757143.73 2002343.00 6441874.00 3440262.00 4888839.00 629149.00 7447558.00

715.85 689.20 1864.43 970.62 1054.68 2411.04 494.79 1591.82 850.11 1208.06 155.47 1840.33

0.25 0.29 0.73 0.29 0.40 0.66 0.30 0.73 0.51 0.46 0.17 0.56

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

Roop Nagar Sangrur S.A.S Nagar S.B.S Nagar Tarn Taran Total

289

533

599

2584697.22

638.69

0.44

574 377

1137 646

8924219.00 2383841.21

2205.22 589.06

0.61 0.53

455

685

2746082.00

678.57

0.57

510 12282

916 17255

6088060.62 98767017.06

1504.39 24405.84

0.62 0.48

Source: Govt. of Punjab, Director of Rural Development and Panchayats and Statistical Abstract of Punjab, 2014

Table A9.10: Proposed alternative crop choices for diversification in Punjab Crop

Potential

Rice

Current area (lakh ha) 28.0

Maize Cotton Sugarcane Guar Kharif Fodder Arhar Mungbean Kinnow Guava Agroforestry

1.3 4.8 0.7 4.0 Negligible 0.2 0.4 0.1 1.3

5.5 7.0 2.6 0.3 5.5 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.2 3.0

0.2

0.2 0.5

Groundnut Turmeric, chilli, tomato, garlic, capsicum, onion

16.0

Districts Amritsar, Gurdaspur, Tarntarn, Ferozepur, Kapurthala Traditional areas South-western districts Majha and Doaba regions South-western districts Throughout the state Central districts Central districts Traditional areas Hoshiarpur, Ferozepur Kandi belt and Central districts (Poplar); Southwestern districts (Eucalyptus) Hoshiarpur, Nawanshahar Hoshiarpur, Kapurthala, Jalandhar, Amritsar

Source: Based on historical data of area under crops, Department of Agriculture, Govt. of Punjab, Chandigarh.

REFERENCES

x Alcamo, Joseph, Jose M. Moreno and Bela Novaky. “Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability”, in Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, eds. M.L. Parry, et al. (Cambridge University Press, UK: 2007), pp. 541–580. x Alcamo, Joseph, Thomas Henrich and Thomas Rosch. “World Water in 2025: Global modelling and scenario analysis for the World Commission on Water for the 21st Century”. Centre for Environmental System Research (University of Kassel, Germany), 2000. x Anonymous. “High Fluoride, Arsenic Content in Water: State”. The Tribune, November 8, 2017, p. 2. x Arora, V. K., S. K. Jalota and K. B. Singh. “Managing Water Crisis for Sustainable Crop Productivity in Punjab”. Journal of Research PAU 45, nos. 1 & 2 (2008): 17–21. x Bain, Robert, Ryan Cronk, Rifat Hossain, Sophie Bonjour, Kyle Onda, Jim Wright, Hong Yang, Tom Slaymaker, Paul Hunter, Annette PrussUstun and Jamie Bartram. “Global Assessment of Exposure to Faecal Contamination through Drinking Water Based on a Systematic Review”. Tropical Medicine and International Health 19, no. 8 (2014), pp. 917–927. x Ballabh, Vishwa, ed. Governance of Water: Institutional Alternatives and Political Economy. Sage: New Delhi, 2008. x Bathla, Seema. “Ground Water Sustainability: A Case Study of Ludhiana District”. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics. 52, no. 3 (1997), pp. 546–554. x Bedi, Jasdeep Kaur and Ranjit Singh Ghuman. “Water Supply and Sewerage Services in Ludhiana City: A study of Financial Constraints”. Man and Development 35, no. 4 (2013b), pp. 23–32. x Bedi, Jasdeep Kaur, R. S. Ghuman and A.S. Bhullar. “Health and Economic Impacts of Unsafe Drinking Water: A Study of Ludhiana”. Economic and Political Weekly 50, no. 2 (2015), pp. 23–26 x Bedi, Jasdeep Kaur. “Domestic Water Consumption Pattern in Urban Punjab: A case study of Ludhiana City”. PhD Thesis (unpublished), Department of Economics, Punjabi University, Patiala, India, 2013a.

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

291

x Benbi, D.K and J.S. Brar. “A 25 Years Record of Carbon Sequestration and Soil Properties in Intensive Agriculture”. Agronomy and Sustainable Development 29 (2009), pp. 257–265. x Briscoe, John and R.P.S. Malik. India's Water Economy, Bracing for a Turbulent Future. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2006. x Chand, Ramesh. “Emerging Crisis in Punjab Agriculture: Severity and Options for Future”. Economic and Political Weekly 34, no. 13 (1999): A-2-A-10. x Chopra, R P S and Krishna G. “Assessment of Ground Water Quality in Punjab, India”. Journal of Earth Sciences and Climatic Change 5, no.10 (2014):1–3. x Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture. “Water for Food, Water for Life: A Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture”. Earthscan/International Water Management Institute, London/Colombo, 2007. x Dhaliwal, Sarbjit. “Set Up Water Regulatory Body, State Told”. The Tribune, Chandigarh, January 12, 2014. x Dhawan, B.D. “Externalities of New Ground Water Technology on Small Farmers”. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics 30, no. 3 (1975): 191–96. x Dhawan, B.D. Development of Tube-well Irrigation in India. New Delhi: Agriculture Publishing Academy, 1982. x Dhawan, B.D. Irrigation in India’s Agricultural Development: Productivity Stability and Equity. New Delhi: Sage Publication, 1988. x Dhillon, Paul Singh. Water Resources Development and Management in North-West Indian. Chandigarh: Centre for Research in Rural and Industrial Development (CRRID), 1988. x Dubash, Navroz K. The Electricity-Groundwater Conundrum: The case for a Political Solution to a Political Problem (Unpublished). New Delhi: National Institute of Public Finance and Policy, 2005. x FAO. “How to feed the world in 2050”. 2009. Accessed October 7, 2017. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/wsfs/docs/expert_paper/How_t o_Feed_the_World_in_2050.pdf. x FICCI. “Water Use in Indian Industries Survey”. New Delhi, 2011. Accessed October 5, 2017. Accessed October 7, 2017. http://ficci.in/Sedocument/20188/WaterUse-Indian-Industry Survey_results.pdf. x Foster, S. and Daniel, P. Loucks. Non-Renewable Groundwater Resources. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2006.

292

References

x Ghuman, R.S, S. Singh and J.S. Brar. Professional Education in Punjab – Exclusion of Rural Students. Patiala: Punjabi University, 2009. x Ghuman, R.S. “Green Revolution and Socio-economic changes”, in Punjab Economy, ed. Azad, Nirmal Singh (Publication Bureau, Punjabi University, Patiala: 1993). x Ghuman, R.S. “Punjab Economy Depends on Water: State Resources Lost in Food Security”. The Tribune, August 24, 2004. x Ghuman, R.S. “Rural Non-Farm Employment Scenario: Reflections from Recent Data in Punjab”. Economic and Political Weekly 40, no. 41(2005): 4473–4480. x Ghuman, R.S. “Socio-Economic Crisis in Rural Punjab”. Economic and Political Weekly 43, no.7 (2008), pp. 12–15. x Ghuman, R.S. “Water Use Scenario in Punjab: Beyond the SutlejYamuna Link Canal”. Economic and Political Weekly 52, no. 3 (2017):343–37. x Ghuman, R.S. “WTO and Indian Agriculture: Crisis and Challenges”. Man and Development 23, no.2 (2001), pp. 67–98. x Ghuman, R.S. and G.S. Romana. “Sustainability of the Existing and Alternative Cropping Systems in the South-West Punjab”, in Economic and Environmental Sustainability of the Asian Region, eds. Sucha Singh Gill, Lakhwinder Singh and Reena Marwah (Routledge, New Delhi, India: 2008), pp. 317–336 x Ghuman, R.S., Inderjeet Singh and Lakhwinder Singh. Status of Local Agricultural Labour in Punjab. Mohali: Punjab State Farmers Commission, Government of Punjab, 2007. x Ghuman, R.S., P.S. Rangi and M.S. Sidhu. “'National Food Security: The Strategic Role of Punjab”. Journal of Agricultural Development and Policy 20, no.2 (2010), pp. 1–16. x Ghuman, R.S., Sukhwinder Singh and J.S. Brar. Rural Students in Universities of Punjab. Patiala: Punjabi University, 2006. x Gill, S.S “Agricultural Crop Technology and Employment Generation in Punjab”, in Future of Agriculture in Punjab, eds. S.S. Johl and S.K. Ray (Chandigarh CRRID: 2002). x Giordano, M. and Vilholth, K. eds. The Agricultural Groundwater Revolution. Wallingford, UK: Centre for Agricultural Bioscience International (CABI), 2007. x Government of India. Census of India-Provisional Population Totals. Registrar General & Census Commissioner, 2011.

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

293

x Government of India. Planning Commission: Draft Five-Year Plan, 1953. x Government of India. Planning Commission: Eleventh Five-Year Plan Vol. III, 2008, p. 9, p. 25, p. 454. x Government of India. Planning Commission: Twelfth Five-Year Plan: 2012–2017, 2013 b, p. 144, p. 163, pp. 172–173. x Government of Punjab, Public Works Department, Irrigation Branch (1964), Administrative Reports for 1940–41. x Govt. of India. Crop Diversification Programme in Haryana, Punjab & Western Uttar Pradesh. Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi, (2013c). x Govt. of India. Draft National Water Policy. Ministry of Water Resources, 2012 x Govt. of India. Planning Commission: Report of the High-Level Expert Group on Water Logging in Punjab, 2013a. x Govt. of India. Revised Action Plan for crop Diversification Programme for the year 2013–14; F. No. 1–3/2013- C4–11. Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi, 2014. x Govt. of India. Revised Plan under crop Diversification Programme (CDP) for the year 2014–15. Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi, 2015. x Govt. of India. Socio-Economic and Caste Census 2011, 2015. x Govt. of India. Water Resources Development Plan of India: Policy and Issues. Ministry of Water Resources, 1999. x Govt. of Punjab. District-wise and crop-wise targets of microirrigation under project for promotion of micro-irrigation in Punjab (2010–11 to 2012–13) water NABARD- RLDF – 16. Chief Conservator of Soils, 2014). x Govt. of Punjab. Draft Agricultural Policy. Punjab State Farmers Commission, 2013. x Govt. of Punjab. Free Electricity to Agricultural Tubewell Consumers. Punjab State Electricity Board, 2005. x Govt. of Punjab. Free Electricity to Agricultural Tubewell Consumers. Punjab State Electricity Board, 1997. x Govt. of Punjab. Free Electricity to Agricultural Tubewell Owners. Punjab State Electricity Board, 1996. x Govt. of Punjab. Local Government Department. Notification no. 10/19/05–2LG/803-III, dated 28 December 2005. x Govt. of Punjab. Office order by the Chief Engineer/Commercial. Punjab State Electricity Board, Fax no. 558/62, 2002.

294

References

x Govt. of Punjab. Report of the Expert Committee on Agriculture Production Pattern Programme in Punjab for productivity and growth, 2002. x Govt. of Punjab. Report of the expert Committee on Diversification of Agriculture in Punjab, 1986. x Govt. of Punjab. Report of the State-Level Committee on Ground Water Resource Estimation, 2012. x Govt. of Punjab. State-level Committee on Ground water resource Estimation, vide notification no 1/5/2003/IPJ (3) 24, pp. 378–89, 2004. x Govt. of Punjab. Statistical Abstract of Punjab 2016, 2017. x Govt. of Punjab. Sub-committee for Ground Water Balance of the State Resource Estimation, vide notification no. 1/5/2003/IPJ (3) 3419, October 9, 2009. x Ground Water Resource Estimation Committee. “Ground Water Resource Estimation Methodology”. Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India, 1997. Accessed October 7, 2017. http://cgwb.gov.in/documents/gec97.pdf. x Gujja, B. and Hajara Shaik. “Linking of Rivers: Learning From Others’ Mistakes to Avoid Damage to People and Ecosystem”, in Interlinking of Rivers in India: Overview and Ken-Betwa Link, eds. Y.K. Alagh, G. Pangare and B. Gujja (Academic Foundation, New Delhi: 2006). x Gujja, Bisham, K.J. Joy, Shruti Vispute, Suhas Paranjape and Vinod Goud. “Million Revolts in the Making”. Economic and Political Weekly 41, no.7 (2006), pp. 570–74. x HLPE. Water for Food Security and Nutrition – A Report by the HighLevel Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security. Rome, 2015. x Jain, A.K. and Raj Kumar. Water Management Issues- Punjab, NorthWest India, 2007.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281208643. x Jeroen, Vos and Rutgerd Boelens. “Sustainability Standards and the Water Question”. Development and Change 45, no.2 (2014), pp. 1–26. x Johl, S.S. and S.K. Ray. Future of Agriculture in Punjab. Chandigarh: Centre for Research in Rural and Industrial Development (2002), pp. 249–255. x Jon Strand. “The Full Economic Cost of Ground Water Extraction”. Policy Research Working Paper 5494, World Bank, 2010. x Kaul, J.L and S. Sakhon. “Flexibility and Reliability of Irrigation Systems and their Effect on Farming: A Case Study of Punjab”. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics 46, no. 4 (1991), pp. 587–92.

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

295

x Kaur, Baljinder, Kamal Vatta and R.S. Sidhu. “Optimising Irrigation Water Use in Punjab Agriculture: Role of Crop Diversification and Technology”. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics 70, no. 3 (2015), pp. 307–316. x Khanna, Ruchika M. “Unpaid Bills Hit Urban Renewal Plan”. The Tribune, July 21, 2015. x Konikow, L.F. and E. Kendy. “Groundwater Depletion: A Global Problem”. Hydrogeology Journal, 13 (2005), pp. 317–320. x Kulkarni, Himanshu and Mihir Shah. “Punjab Water Syndrome: Diagnostics and Prescriptions”. Economic and Political Weekly 48, no. 52(2013), pp. 64–73. x Llamas, M. R. and A. Garrido. “Lessons from Intensive Ground Water Use in Spain: Economic and Social Benefits and Conflicts”, in the Agricultural Groundwater Revolution, eds. M. Gordano and K. G. Vilholth (Wallingford, Centre for Agricultural Bioscience International: 2007), 266–95. x Llamas, M. R. and Martínez-Santos, P. “Intensive Groundwater Use: A Silent Revolution that cannot be ignored”. Water Science and Technology Series, 51, no. 8 (2005), pp. 167–74. x Mann, V.J. Troubled Waters of Punjab. New Delhi: Allied Publishers, 2003. x Martinez-Paz, J.M. and Perni, A. “Environment Cost of Ground Water: A Contingent Valuation Approach”. International Journal of Environment Res. 5, no. 3 (2011), pp. 603–612. x Nehra, Kulwant. Evaluation Study on Optimisation of Agriculture Power Subsidy and Irrigation Water Intensity in Haryana. Chandigarh: Centre for Research in Rural and Industrial Development (CRRID), 2016. x Pandey, Rita. “Ground water irrigation in Punjab: Some Issues and way Forward”. National Institute of Public Finance and Policy, New Delhi, Working paper no. 2014–140, 2014. Accessed on August 15, 2017. http:www.nipbp.org.in. x Prasad, K. Water in the Coming Decades: Policy and Governance Issues in India. New Delhi: Cambridge University Press, 2015. x Raphael, Jos. C. “Ground Water Governance in Kerala”. KILA Journal of Local Governance 2, no.1 (2015), pp. 41–50. x Ray, Binayak. Water: The Looming Crisis in India. UK: Plymouth, Lexington Books, 2008. x Reddy, V. Ratna. “Costs of Resource Depletion Externalities: A study of Groundwater Over-exploitation in Andhra Pradesh, India”. Environment and Development Economics 10 (2005), pp. 533–556.

296

References

x Romana, G.S. “Sustainability of Alternative Cropping System in the Cotton Belt of Punjab”. PhD Thesis (Unpublished), Department of Economics, Punjabi University, Patiala, 2006. x Sarkar, Anindita. “Socio-Economic Implications of Depleting Ground Water Resources in Punjab: A Comparative Analysis of Different Irrigation Systems”. Economic and Political Weekly 46, no.7 (2011), pp. 59–66. x Sekhri, S. Missing Water: Agricultural Stress and Adaptation Strategies. University of Virginia, USA (Mimeo), 2011. x Sekhri, S. Wells, Water and Welfare: Impact of Access to Ground Water on Rural Poverty. University of Virginia, USA (Mimeo), 2012. x Sen, Amartya. The Idea of Justice. UK: Penguin Books, 2009. x Shah, T.D., Molden, R. Sakthivadivel and D. Seckler. The Global Groundwater Situation: Overview of Opportunities and Challenges. Colombo: International Water Management Institute, 2000. x Shah, Tushaar. “The Groundwater Economy of South Asia: An Assessment of Size, Significance and Socio-Ecological Impacts” in the Agricultural Groundwater Revolution: Opportunities and Threats to Development, eds M. Giordano and K. G. Villholth (Wallingford, UK: International Water Management Institute (IWMI)/Centre for Agricultural Bioscience International, 2007), pp. 7–36. x Shah, Tushaar. Taming the Anarchy, Groundwater Governance in South Asia. Washington DC: Resources for the Future Press, 2009. x Shergill, H.S. Strategy for Sustainable Expansion of Food grains production in Punjab. Chandigarh: Institute for Development and Communication, 2012. x Sidhu, H.S. “Crisis in Agrarian Economics of Punjab: Some Urgent Steps”. Economic and Political Weekly 37, no. 18 (2002), pp. 3132– 3138. x Sidhu, R.S., Kamal Vatta and U. Lall. “Climate Change Impact and Management Strategies for Sustainable Water Energy-Agriculture Outcomes in Punjab”. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics 66, no. 3(2011), pp. 328–337. x Sidhu, R.S., Kamal, Vatta and H.S. Dhaliwal. “Conservation of Agriculture in Punjab- Economic Implications of Technologies and Practices”. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics 65, no. 3 (2010), pp.1–15. x Singh, A.J, and A.S. Joshi. “Economics of Irrigation India with Special Reference to Punjab”. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics 44, no. 3 (1989), pp. 264–65.

Emerging Water Insecurity in India

297

x Singh, Gurpreet and Ranjit Singh Ghuman. “Peasant Suicides in Punjab and Indebtedness among Victim Households”, in Rural Indebtedness in Punjab and Other States: Problems and the Ways-Out, ed. Verma Satish (Chandigarh CRRID: 2016). x Singh, J. and M. Hossain. “Total Factor Productivity Analysis and Components in a High Potential Rice-Wheat System: A Case Study of Indian Punjab”, in Development in the Asian Rice Economy, eds. M. Sombilla, M. Hossain and B. Hardy (The Philippines: International Rice Research Institute, 2002). x Singh, Karam. The Dance of Water Table. Mohali: The Punjab State Farmers Commission, 2007. x Singh, Lakhwinder, Kesar Bhangoo and Rakesh Sharma. Agrarian Distress and Farmer Suicides in North India. New York: Routledge, 2016. x Singh, Sukhpal. “Crisis in Punjab Agriculture”. Economic and Political Weekly, 35, no. 23(2000), pp. 1889–1992. x Singh, Surender. “Some Aspects of Ground Water Balance in Punjab”. Economic and Political Weekly 26, no. 52 (1991): A-146-A-155. x Srinivasan, Veena and Sharachchandra. Lele. “From Ground Water Regulation to Integrated Water Management: The Biophysical Case”. Economic and Political Weekly 52, no. 31 (2017), pp. 107–114. x Srivastava, S.K, Chand Ramesh, Raju, S.S, Jain, Rajni, Kingsly. I, Sachdeva, Jatinder, Singh, Jaspal and Kaur, Aprit Pal. “Unsustainable Groundwater Use in Punjab Agriculture: Insights from Cost of Cultivation Survey”. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 70, no. 3 (2015):, pp. 365–381. x UN Human Settlements Programme. Water and Sanitation in the World’s Cities: Local Action for Global Goals. London: Earth scan Publications, 2003. x UNDESA. Population Division. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2011. x UNDP. Human Development Report, 2016. x UNEP. Climate Change 2001: Working Group II: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, 2001. x United Nations. International Migration Report 2009: A Global Assessment (ST/ESA/SER.A/316),2009.http://www.un.org/esa/population/publicati ons/migration/WorldMigrationReport2009.pdf x United Nations. Wastewater: The Untapped Resource. World Water Development Report, 2017.

298

References

x United Nations. World Water Development Report, 2015. x United Nations. World Water Development Report: Managing Water under Uncertainly and Risk, Report 4, Volume 1, 2012. x Vaidyanathan, A. Water Resources in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2013. x Vidyanathan, A. and Sivasubramanian. “Efficiency of Water Use in Agriculture”, Economic and Political Weekly 39, no.29 (2004), pp. 2989–2996. x Wagle, Subodh and Sachin Warghade. “New Laws Establishing Independent Regulatory Agencies in the Indian Water Sector: LongTerm Implications for Governance”, 2010, pp. 49–77. Accessed August 10, 2017, www.sawasjournal.org. x WATECO. Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), 2003 as quoted by Martinez and Perni, 2011. x Water Resources Information System, WRIS. India’s Water Health. Ministry of Water Resources, River Development and Ganga Rejuvenation, Government of India, 2015. x WHO. World Health Organisation, 2017. Accessed on September 25, 2017. www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs39/en. x World Bank. World Development Indicators. Washington D C: The World Bank, 2017. x Work Bank. Risk and Opportunity: Managing Risk for Development. World Development Report, 2014a. x World Bank. World Development Indicators. Washington D C: The World Bank, 2014a. x World Bank. Review of World Bank Support to the Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Sector in India (1991–2011), 2012. x World Bank. Deep Wells and Prudence: Towards Pragmatic Action for Addressing Groundwater Over-exploitation in India. Washington DC: The World Bank, 2010. x World Bank. India’s Water Economy: Bracing for a Turbulent Future. Washington DC: The World Bank, 2005 x Zhu, Tingju, Claudia Ringler and Ximing Cai. “Energy Price and Ground Water extraction for Agriculture: Exploring the EnergyWater-Food Nexus at the Global and Basin Levels”, 2007. Accessed on September 10, 2017. http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/EWMA/files/papers/Energyprice_GW.pdf.