on their health and productivity. The Central Ground Water Board’s (CGWB)
monitoring of groundwater quality shows 17% of the blocks, out of 6881 monitored
across the country, are ‘overexploited’ (CGWB 2019). In some states like Punjab,
these overexploited blocks exceed safe limits by 149%.
The National Water Quality Monitoring Programme of the Central Pollution
Control Board (CPCB 2018) reports reduction of biological oxygen demand
(BOD) levels in about 29% of the river stretches monitored (351 in number). These
levels exceed the discharge standards for treated sewage into freshwater sources
(30 mg/l of BOD). The extensive dependency on groundwater for drinking water
and also the growing pollution loads in water and river bodies expose large proportion of India’s populations to contaminants like fluoride, arsenic and heavy
metals (Ayoob and Gupta 2006; Chakraborti et al. 2003). There is an emerging
evidence of more perilous challenges. The history of long and extensive use of
synthetic fertilizers by the Green Revolution apparently has led to widespread
nitrate contamination of groundwater as well as surface waters.
Besides the issues with water quality, the states are engaged in a race for augmenting water resources—evident from the frequently emerging and recurring
interstate river water disputes. These are on the rise, and the nature is shifting to
water quality issues.
2.2 Failed Federal Governance?
The above outcomes at the national level do not inspire confidence about India’s
national water security in the long term. The situation poses several questions. One
is do the sum of parts (states’ contributions) make the whole (national water
security)? Or is it different? Is there a greater whole?
Two is the federal government (Centre) in a position to steer the federal constituents (states) towards the whole? If the above-described indicators do not assure
that the Centre can steer the states, does it indicate a failed federal governance?
Federal governance arrangements under the Indian Constitution put the primary
onus for water governance on the states. Water is a state subject by virtue of Entry
17 of the State List, under the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution: ‘Water, that is
to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, drainage and embankments, water
storage and water power subject to the provisions of entry 56 of List I’. These
powers of the states are subject to the powers of the Centre under the Entry 56 of
the Union List: ‘Regulation and development of inter-State rivers and river valleys
to the extent to which such regulation and development under the control of
the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be expedient in the public
interest’. These are the often-cited provisions to describe the contours of water
governance in India.
Whither India’s Federal Governance for Long-Term Water Security?
169
monitoring of groundwater quality shows 17% of the blocks, out of 6881 monitored
across the country, are ‘overexploited’ (CGWB 2019). In some states like Punjab,
these overexploited blocks exceed safe limits by 149%.
The National Water Quality Monitoring Programme of the Central Pollution
Control Board (CPCB 2018) reports reduction of biological oxygen demand
(BOD) levels in about 29% of the river stretches monitored (351 in number). These
levels exceed the discharge standards for treated sewage into freshwater sources
(30 mg/l of BOD). The extensive dependency on groundwater for drinking water
and also the growing pollution loads in water and river bodies expose large proportion of India’s populations to contaminants like fluoride, arsenic and heavy
metals (Ayoob and Gupta 2006; Chakraborti et al. 2003). There is an emerging
evidence of more perilous challenges. The history of long and extensive use of
synthetic fertilizers by the Green Revolution apparently has led to widespread
nitrate contamination of groundwater as well as surface waters.
Besides the issues with water quality, the states are engaged in a race for augmenting water resources—evident from the frequently emerging and recurring
interstate river water disputes. These are on the rise, and the nature is shifting to
water quality issues.
2.2 Failed Federal Governance?
The above outcomes at the national level do not inspire confidence about India’s
national water security in the long term. The situation poses several questions. One
is do the sum of parts (states’ contributions) make the whole (national water
security)? Or is it different? Is there a greater whole?
Two is the federal government (Centre) in a position to steer the federal constituents (states) towards the whole? If the above-described indicators do not assure
that the Centre can steer the states, does it indicate a failed federal governance?
Federal governance arrangements under the Indian Constitution put the primary
onus for water governance on the states. Water is a state subject by virtue of Entry
17 of the State List, under the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution: ‘Water, that is
to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, drainage and embankments, water
storage and water power subject to the provisions of entry 56 of List I’. These
powers of the states are subject to the powers of the Centre under the Entry 56 of
the Union List: ‘Regulation and development of inter-State rivers and river valleys
to the extent to which such regulation and development under the control of
the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be expedient in the public
interest’. These are the often-cited provisions to describe the contours of water
governance in India.
Whither India’s Federal Governance for Long-Term Water Security?
169