A RECENT survey we conducted across low-, middle- and
high-income households of an urban population in Rawalpindi Pakistan to look at
the level of exit from services that we usually think the state provides
showed some surprising results.
Across all income groups quite a high percentage of people now
supplement their water supply from private sources and the proportion
who supplement public supply, as expected, goes up with income levels.
For the rich, the private source is usually private-company-provided
bottled water, for the middle- and lower-income households, the source
might be a tanker.
But for all of them, across income levels, especially in the middle-
and higher-income households, a popular source of supplement is private
boring into the ground for direct access to groundwater. Although few
people get water tested, most felt that if you dig deep enough,
groundwater is better than the public supply of water. Private boring,
though there are requirements for getting permission from the local
government, is usually done without permission. And even if permission
is secured, the amount of water that is mined post boring is not
monitored/regulated.
This raises the question: who owns groundwater? It is important to
answer this as we know what happens to resources over which rights are
not clearly and unambiguously assigned: the tragedy of the commons.
It is also wasteful and inefficient for a large number of households
to each have a hole drilled and a motor installed for pulling water up.
The efficient solution is for the public supply to be good enough to
cater to all.
There are agreements on how river waters are to be shared among the
provinces and on who gets canal water when and at what cost. But
groundwater, even though it supplements canal water for
irrigation/agricultural purposes, has few regulations. For urban areas,
groundwater is the main source of water for drinking and other household
purposes. But, again, the regulations are missing.
As water scarcity increases, the gravity of the situation will be
realised even more. But even now, when water mining is uncontrolled, we
know groundwater levels can fall drastically over a matter of
months/years; the fall can have damaging effects on the aquifers, and
water quality can be permanently affected. We need to be more aware and
cognisant of possibilities here.
The key issue is: who does the groundwater belong to? It is not clear
from our jurisprudence/law. Can anyone bore a hole in the ground and
mine as much water as they want? Do owners of a piece of land own the
water under it? But aquifers are not divided the way we parcel land so
when I mine water it will impact, possibly, the entire town/city. Should
ownership belong to the local government? If nobody owns water, or no
one knows who owns water, clearly people will do as they please.
Companies selling bottled water mine water from one area and sell it
all over the country. The people of one area lose the water but do they
get anything in return for it? Do they have any way of controlling how
much water is mined from their area? What happens if the water table
falls or if the aquifer is damaged? The company will, most likely, pack
up and move on and the people of the area will suffer the consequences.
Should the people not have any control over what happens to the
groundwater in their area? Should they not benefit from the resource
even if they allow a company to mine the water?
It is common for water from one jurisdiction (across tehsil/district
boundaries) to be piped to another. Haripur supplies water to Islamabad
and there are many such examples across Pakistan. What do the Haripur
people get in return? Should they have a say in how the water in their
area is being utilised? Should they be able to sell water to Islamabad?
For those who know economics this will immediately strike them as an
example of what Ronald Coase was talking about: if a right is not
clearly assigned over a resource, we cannot develop even the basics of
pricing, markets and trading for the resource.
The consequences, in terms of the inability to manage the good/service
and its usage, issues of conservation, preservation and trade, can be
wastage, inefficiency, even irreparable damage.
The first step is the development of jurisprudence around
groundwater. Who owns water, who has the power to manage it and how,
what is the role of the local government/provincial government? What is
the role of citizens?Once we have clarity on these issues we could move
to designing institutions, organisations and operating procedures for
managing groundwater. But without the first step, of recognising the
issue and getting the legislatures to make the appropriate laws, it is
hard to go further.
A priori, one can argue that the best place to rest groundwater
rights should be with local communities and the local government should
be empowered to manage the resource on behalf of the local communities.
Provincial governments should come in on cross-boundary issues only.
Local governments, on behalf of communities, should be negotiating on
the issue of their water with companies and other local governments,
and they should be developing ways of managing the resource in a
sustainable manner and to the best advantage of the community. This will
involve managing access of individuals to that water. But if the right
is with the community, individuals will have to negotiate for the right
of usage with the community. We do this with a lot of other
products/services already.
Groundwater is a precious resource. By not having the proper laws and
operating procedures for managing it, we are wasting the resource and
using it unsustainably. This needs to change. We need to develop
relevant water rights/jurisprudence and create institutional structures
to manage these rights. The issue is not even on the public policy radar
right now. Is there a local government/community that can take the
lead? Or is there someone who can file a public-interest case?
No comments:
Post a Comment