Is it practicable to structure a joint watershed management regime in South Asia? This was the primary thrust of the presentations made at an SDPI seminar in Islamabad on the "Water Conflict in South Asia", the other day. The seminar brought together a diversity of expert opinions on the problem, not only of depleting availability of water but also its equitable sharing by the regional states.
There was a call to mull over the implementation of this concept, and its wider implications for the region, including its long-term impact on the regional environment. The proposal, though rather contentious in the regional context, needs to be viewed against the backdrop of rising Pakistan-India tensions over the sharing of river waters, in the Indus Basin Water Treaty framework.
(Visiting Indian Water Commissioner Auranga Nathan's statement in Lahore that there was no possibility of a war breaking out between India and Pakistan on water issue was implicitly reflective of the turn the issue could take, in case the water-sharing irritants are not resolved expeditiously and strictly in accordance with the spirit of the 1960 Indus Basin Water Treaty).
There have already been attempts by India, particularly in recent years, to short-change Pakistan on its rightful share, through different overt and covert means, including unauthorised diversion of water, as in the case of the Baglihar dam filling.
According to speakers at the seminar, proper watershed management offers a viable way out of the dilemma, not only for Pakistan, but also for other regional states, though how far the idea will be practicable in the India-Pakistan context remains to be seen, given the multiplicity of disputes that have historically dogged Pakistan-India ties.
Secondly, adverse environmental fallout cannot be kept confined within the territorial boundaries of the erring state, as it is bound to be almost equally severe in its cross-border impact in the neighbourhood. Thirdly, the changing rainfall patterns, particularly in the Himalayan region, have generated a new threat:
If surface and groundwater is not managed properly, it will get polluted during scarcity periods and will be equally injurious to health during period of water abundance. Though, thanks to the changing regional and global climate patterns, there is no such possibility. The joint watershed management proposal, if implemented with equal sincerity of purpose by all the regional players, can indeed create a win-win situation for all of them, particularly for Pakistan and India, as it will take care of water outflows from all the rivers into Pakistan from the Indian-controlled areas.
With its rapidly depleting fresh water resources, the subcontinent, as many other parts of the world, are prone to "water wars" breaking out among upper riparian and lower states, such as India and Pakistan despite what Auranga Nathan has reassuringly said, at the conclusion of his five-day Pakistan visit.
(As one analyst has put it, conflict among over 50 countries in five continents could break out if these states do not work out a consensus framework for sharing river waters, acquifers and other sources.) Some sobering facts need to be quoted here. The Indus River Basin, shared as it is by Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and China, is over 30 percent arid, though it remains a source of 80 percent of irrigation water in Pakistan.
Secondly, as much as 80 percent of the Indus water comes from glaciers in the Himalayas, ensuring less variability in the annual water flows. Experts believe that the present position of over-extraction of water has resulted in salt-water intrusion into the Indus Delta, which supports a vast range of mangroves and bio-diversity.
It needs to be pointed out here that irrigation in South Asia constitutes 92 percent of water withdrawals, which is a large enough drain on both surface and groundwater resources. Thirdly, a high rate of sedimentation in Pakistan has seriously affected long-term sustainability of agriculture in the country as a high sedimentation load, both in the reservoir and irrigation system, has acted as a major constraint - a menace that is second only to waterlogging and salinity in harmfulness.
According to one estimate, Pakistan will lose around one Maf of water every four years to salinity alone, which requires pursuit of proper watershed management practices in the catchement areas. Putting together a joint watershed management can indeed yield a very high payoff, in the shape of a significant reduction in sediment flow into the rivers, leading to a higher farm yield, in addition to environmental improvement through the provision of more water for irrigation and improved fishing catches, because a cut in silting improves the quality of water.
Most assessments of global water availability have, meanwhile, focused on understanding human water needs, which can be satisfied by total renewability of water resources in a country or a basin. However, according to experts, a drawback of this approach is the failure to consider freshwater-dependent ecosystems as users of water. Without adequate supply of water to these ecosystems, they will lose their inherent ability to support the populations that depend on them.
Meanwhile, poverty and livelihood have emerged as the fundamental motivating principles in watershed management while previously, hydrology, soil sciences and engineering had held the dominant position.
It needs to be mentioned here that responses to water scarcity at the local and regional levels can be categorised into three types: 1) Supply resources to focus on increasing the amount of controlled water and tapping new water resources through fast-track construction of dams and reservoirs, in which our performance has been pathetic. 2) conservation responses, which can entail increased efficiency in water use, but without increasing the sources of water supply and 3) allocation responses that consist of transferring water from one use to another, within or across sectors.
Interestingly, many analysts view an ecosystem as an "infrastructure," though it does not receive anywhere near the level of investment that physical and other types of infrastructure do. If planners start considering an ecosystem as a part of the infrastructure, it may be possible for them to mobilise the requisite political will and financial resources, the paucity of which has been responsible for restricting the progress and well-being of communities.
Comments
Comments are closed.