Download Water Supply and Sanitation in Rural Areas PDF

TitleWater Supply and Sanitation in Rural Areas
TagsWater Supply Water Resources Sanitation Water Management
File Size382.2 KB
Total Pages29
Document Text Contents
Page 1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanitation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improved_sanitation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community-led_total_sanitation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delhi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improved_water_source
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improved_sanitation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanitation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jairam_Ramesh

Page 2

Page | 2


According to Indian norms, access to improved water supply exists if at least

40 liters/capita/day of safe drinking water are provided within a distance of 1.6 km or

100 meter of elevation difference, to be relaxed as per field conditions. There should be at

least one pump per 250 persons.

Water supply continuity

Challenges. As of 2010, only two cities in India — Thiruvananthapuram and Kota — get

continuous water supply.In 2005 none of the 35 Indian cities with a population of more than

one million distributed water for more than a few hours per day, despite generally sufficient

infrastructure. Owing to inadequate pressure people struggle to collect water even when it is

available. According to the World Bank, none have performance indicators that compare with

average international standards. A 2007 study by the Asian Development Bank showed that

in 20 cities the average duration of supply was only 4.3 hours per day. None of the 20 cities

had continuous supply. The longest duration of supply was 12 hours per day in Chandigarh,

and the lowest was 0.3 hours per day in Rajkot. According to the results of a Service Level

Benchmarking (SLB) Program carried out by the Ministry of Urban Development (MoUD) in

2006 in 28 cities, the average duration of supply was 3.3 hours per day, with a range from

one hour every three days to 18 hours per day. In Delhi residents receive water only a few

hours per day because of inadequate management of the distribution system. This results in

contaminated water and forces households to complement a deficient public water service at

prohibitive 'coping' costs; the poor suffer most from this situation. For example, according to

a 1996 survey households in Delhi spent an average of 2,182 (US$35.60) per year in time

and money to cope with poor service levels. This is more than three times as much as the

2001 water bill of about US$18 per year of a Delhi household that uses 20 cubic meters per

month.

Achievements. Jamshedpur, a city in Jharkhand with 573,000 inhabitants, provided 25% of

its residents with continuous water supply in 2009. Navi Mumbai, a planned city with more

than 1m inhabitants, has achieved continuous supply for about half its population as of

January 2009. Badlapur, another city in the Mumbai Conurbation with a population of

140,000, has achieved continuous supply in 3 out of 10 operating zones, covering 30% of its

population. Thiruvananthapuram, the capital of Kerala state with a population of 745,000 in

2001, is probably the largest Indian city that enjoys continuous water supply.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiruvananthapuram
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kota,_Rajasthan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Bank
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandigarh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajkot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delhi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamshedpur
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jharkhand
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navi_Mumbai
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badlapur
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mumbai_Conurbation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiruvananthapuram
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_rupee

Page 14

Page | 14


Germany

Germany supports access to water and sanitation in India through financial cooperation by

KfW development bank and technical cooperation by GTZ. Since the early 1990s both

institutions have supported watershed management in rural Maharashtra, using a participatory

approach first piloted by the Social Center in Ahmednagar and that constituted a fundamental

break with the previous top-down, technical approach to watershed management that had

yielded little results. The involvement of women in decision-making is an essential part of the

project. While the benefits are mostly in terms of increased agricultural production, the

project also increases availability of water resources for rural water supply. In addition, GTZ

actively supports the introduction of ecological sanitation concepts in India, including

community toilets and decentralised wastewater systems for schools as well as small and

medium enterprises. Many of these systems produce biogas from wastewater, provide

fertiliser and irrigation water.

Japan

As India's largest donor in the sector the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)

finances a multitude of projects with a focus on capital-intensive urban water supply and

sanitation projects, often involving follow-up projects in the same locations.

Current projects. Projects approved between 2006 and 2009 include the Guwahati Water

Supply Project (Phases I and II) in Assam, the Kerala Water Supply Project (Phased II and

III), the Hogenakkal Water Supply and Fluorosis Mitigation Project (Phases I and II) in

Tamil Nadu, the Goa Water Supply and Sewerage Project, the Agra Water Supply Project,

the Amritsar Sewerage Project in Punjab, the Orissa Integrated Sanitation Improvement

Project, and the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Project (Phase II).

Evaluation of past projects. An ex-post evaluation of one large program, the Urban Water

Supply and Sanitation Improvement Program, showed that "some 60%–70% of the goals

were achieved" and that "results were moderate". The program was implemented by the

Housing and Urban Development Corporation, Ltd. (HUDCO) from 1996 to 2003 in 26

cities. The evaluation says that "state government plans were not based on sufficient demand

research, including the research for residents' willingness to pay for services", so that demand

for connections was overestimated. Also fees (water tariffs) were rarely increased despite

recommendations to increase them. The evaluation concludes that "HUDCO was not able to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KfW
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GTZ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watershed_management
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maharashtra
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_sanitation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_International_Cooperation_Agency
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guwahati
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assam
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hogenakkal_Integrated_Drinking_Water_Project
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Nadu
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goa
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agra
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amritsar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punjab,_India
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orissa
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangalore

Page 15

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andhra_Pradesh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karnataka
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Nadu
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uttarakhand
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punjab,_India
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mumbai

Page 28

Page | 28


Concluding Remarks

Effectiveness of PRIs depends on the proficiency levels of elected representatives at the

village, block and district levels in discharging their responsibilities. Whereas training is to be

need based only but in broad terms PRIs personnel need to be trained in state laws

particularly labour laws, administrative procedures, financial rules and regulations, and

cultivation of right attitudes. Education level of PRIs personnel is a major hinderance, which

can be corrected by training at village, block and district levels

Government efforts on training have generally been more directed at DRDO, Zilla Parishad

and Panchayat Samiti levels but not with the same vigour at panchayat levels. State agencies

like Administrative Training Institutes (ATI), State Institute of Rural Development (SIRD),

Extension Training Centres (ETCs), etc by themselves are too inadequate to meet the training

needs of PRI personnel.

Training of PRI personnel is important considering that a large number of them are illiterate

or semi-illeterate without any administrative or managerial experience. It is in this context

that corporates, NGOs and other social groups have a major role to fulfil. Corporates should

consider prescribing a per cent of their budget for developing rural entrepreneurs and PRI

personnel by imparting training in administration, management and IT areas.

Panchayats can be effective if they enjoy necessary autonomy and flexibility to function

without bureaucratic interference. A panchayat should be free to decide its own development

priorities and outlays. A panchayat has responsibility to implement its own programmes and

mandate to monitor the state and GOI schemes such as Bharat Nirman and eight flagship

programmes for which it should be provided support from all quarters, be it, block

development office, district authorities, or state governments.

No system of governance can effectively work without accountability and scrutiny.

Panchayat should be accountable and transparent in programme implementation and funds

management towards gram sabhas of village representatives. A gram sabha should play

major role in ensuring transparency and accountability of panchayats towards programme

implementation (Iyer, 2006). Apart from overseeing panchayat activities, gram sabhas

should undertake regular social audit of a panchayat‘s contribution to rural society.

Similer Documents