Whether it is dealing with externality or with the limitations resulting from lack
of information (on the scale of aquifers) or proceeding beyond supply-side management into the domain of demand-side groundwater management, the conceptual
framework of robust institutions, and therefore, the broader reference to groundwater governance become significant. In moving forward, it is important to couple
participatory forms of groundwater management with decentralized groundwater
governance in India. In doing so, it is important to remember that transdisciplinary,
demystified science should become the basis for participatory decision-making
leading to developing an institutional system of groundwater governance based on a
relevant protocol of groundwater management. The process itself could be based on
four basic steps:
1. Mapping of aquifers leading to participatory responses that include direct,
indirect and community instruments of management.
2. Special emphasis on securing rural drinking water supply, in terms of assured
quantity and potable quality of water.
3. Management plan will depend upon the groundwater setting, aquifer geometry,
state of groundwater usage including agriculture/industry/rural–urban interface
and other such factors.
4. A legislative framework that goes beyond a typical command-and-control legislation to a more reformed legislative instrument that compliments and protects
the socially accepted norms of participatory groundwater management.
In a recent attempt to reform India’s water sector, the Mihir Shah Committee
(Shah 2016) has recommended the constitution of the National Water Commission,
which builds enduring partnerships between government, academia and civil
society and functions through a decentralized, transdisciplinary river-basin structure. The main purpose behind the recommendations in the report is to reform
India’s Water Governance. As part of the same report, it becomes relevant to
summarize the reform included specifically for the groundwater sector. The main
suggestions for groundwater governance deal with reforming the topmost
groundwater institution in the country—the Central Ground Water Board (CGWB).
These suggestions are summarized as:
• India must engage with the issues of groundwater depletion and contamination
by looking beyond groundwater assessment and permits. This can be done by
strengthening the institutional architecture on water in general and groundwater
in particular, the latter through a major reform within the CGWB and all the
state groundwater departments/directorates without whom the CGWB simply
cannot function.
• At the topmost echelons in the institutional structure of the country, the reform
must include bringing in an interdisciplinary approach to groundwater institutions through:
– Expansion and enrichment of the human resource profile of the CGWB and
all other such organizations involved in groundwater governance.
16
H. Kulkarni et al.
of information (on the scale of aquifers) or proceeding beyond supply-side management into the domain of demand-side groundwater management, the conceptual
framework of robust institutions, and therefore, the broader reference to groundwater governance become significant. In moving forward, it is important to couple
participatory forms of groundwater management with decentralized groundwater
governance in India. In doing so, it is important to remember that transdisciplinary,
demystified science should become the basis for participatory decision-making
leading to developing an institutional system of groundwater governance based on a
relevant protocol of groundwater management. The process itself could be based on
four basic steps:
1. Mapping of aquifers leading to participatory responses that include direct,
indirect and community instruments of management.
2. Special emphasis on securing rural drinking water supply, in terms of assured
quantity and potable quality of water.
3. Management plan will depend upon the groundwater setting, aquifer geometry,
state of groundwater usage including agriculture/industry/rural–urban interface
and other such factors.
4. A legislative framework that goes beyond a typical command-and-control legislation to a more reformed legislative instrument that compliments and protects
the socially accepted norms of participatory groundwater management.
In a recent attempt to reform India’s water sector, the Mihir Shah Committee
(Shah 2016) has recommended the constitution of the National Water Commission,
which builds enduring partnerships between government, academia and civil
society and functions through a decentralized, transdisciplinary river-basin structure. The main purpose behind the recommendations in the report is to reform
India’s Water Governance. As part of the same report, it becomes relevant to
summarize the reform included specifically for the groundwater sector. The main
suggestions for groundwater governance deal with reforming the topmost
groundwater institution in the country—the Central Ground Water Board (CGWB).
These suggestions are summarized as:
• India must engage with the issues of groundwater depletion and contamination
by looking beyond groundwater assessment and permits. This can be done by
strengthening the institutional architecture on water in general and groundwater
in particular, the latter through a major reform within the CGWB and all the
state groundwater departments/directorates without whom the CGWB simply
cannot function.
• At the topmost echelons in the institutional structure of the country, the reform
must include bringing in an interdisciplinary approach to groundwater institutions through:
– Expansion and enrichment of the human resource profile of the CGWB and
all other such organizations involved in groundwater governance.
16
H. Kulkarni et al.