Challenges In Urban Water Governance: Informal Water Tanker Supply in Chennai and Mumbai, India.
A majority of India’s urban population experiences intermittent water supply. The rapidly rising demand for clean water has fostered the rise of various informal water supply modes in many Indian cities. The informal water supply comes with an increased risk of unsustainable and unscrupulous water practises, perpetuating water insecurity and conflict between different water users as well as between users and tanker operators. These modes of supply can also possibly lead to a delegitimisation of local (or even state and national) governments, which appear to be unable to carry out even the most basic public services. In this article, I explore the mode of operations of the Informal Water Tankers (IWTs) in the complex waterscapes of Chennai and Mumbai.
Across the cities, supply gaps exist due to numerous lapses in water governance and management whereas in some cases, these supply gaps are created to facilitate consumption of such informal water supply modes. While these informal water tankers form an important part of the urban water supply chain, they often obtain water of questionable quality by nefarious means and sell them at exorbitant tariffs. Strengthening of regulatory frameworks by acknowledging the role of these informal water supply modes to ensure that safe water is provided reliably to those in need, without compromising people’s health or the legitimacy of public institutions is urgently needed in India
Water resources are tied in with most markers of development like food security, health, and poverty reduction and play a key role in people’s water security. This is especially true for a developing country like India. India is a federal state, but water is a state subject. Water infrastructure is generally managed by the respective state governments (Cullet, 2007). Over time, the governments have accommodated the demands of the elites in the various spheres of the socio-political system, resulting in short-term benefits for the upper-crust whilst the rational technical and development criteria affecting the bulk of the masses have been ignored (Chaplin, 2011). The outlook toward the formulation of public health and environmental policy in urban India has been to mitigate disasters (Prakash, 2014) rather than build sound policies that consider the general well-being of the people (Chaplin, 2011). This implies an increased risk of grievances, social instability, and erosion of good faith in the various rungs of the “government”.
The emergence of IWTs: The exclusion of millions of water users from accessing safe water due to water shortages, supply disparities, ineffective regulatory monitoring, rapid urbanisation, and innovative means of exploitation of groundwater across the country has created more opportunities for numerous non-state actors to enter the water supply domain. Some of these informal water suppliers have established supply strongholds within cities by indulging in illegal and exploitative practices. Their operations are often conducted in secrecy, and it is postulated that these informal water operators have business ties with the politicians, water utility providers, and societal elite in India (Ranganathan, 2014; Viqueira, 2019).
Corruption: The formal water supply and irrigation domain in India is mired in corruption and pilferage (Viqueira, 2019; Wade, 1982). India also ranks high on the list of most corrupt countries in the world i.e., 86th on the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) with a score of 40 out of 100, and 89% of Indians think that corruption within the government is a big problem (Transparency International, 2020). 39% of public utilities and services users admit to having paid a bribe in the twelve months leading up to the 2020 study by Transparency International (Transparency International, 2020). Such inherent corruption, coupled with unscrupulous competition for water, unpredictable climate conditions, failure of the state to provide adequate water infrastructure (Chaplin, 2011), and a rapidly growing population impedes the development of the economy, rendering it nearly impossible to formulate strategies and policies to ensure water security (Aarnoudse, 2011).
Description of the cities
Chennai is a port city located in the south of India, on its eastern coast along the Bay of Bengal. It is the fourth-largest metropolis in India, and the 22nd most populous city in Asia (Imam & Banerjee, 2016). Mumbai, the capital of the state of Maharashtra, is located on the western shores of India. It is a major economic hub and is one of the most densely populated cities in the world (Shafizadeh Moghadam & Helbich, 2013). As of 2011 (last census), about 12.5 million people lived within the 438 km2 of the city in the island peninsula (the city) and its mainland (suburbs) (Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner India, 2011).
The Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (CMWSSB), also called Metro Water, is an autonomous water services entity responsible for water supply in Chennai City. The volume of water provided by Metro Water shows a great variance year-on-year between summer and the other months. About 65% of domestic water demand is met by state-run sources and the rest comes from ‘self-supply’ sources like exploitation of groundwater, official Metro Water tankers, and informal water tankers. It is estimated that there are about 5000 unregulated informal water tanker firms/operators in Chennai with about 6000–10,000 tankers.
In Mumbai, the formal water network, water planning, building, and management are all handled by the Hydraulic Engineers Department of the Municipality (Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM). Mumbai has no accessible official record of the leakages in its piped water supply system, but it is estimated that the leakage/loss is between 20 to 40% across the city.
POLICY AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS — INFORMAL WATER SUPPLY MODES
While India lacks a national-level law to regulate freshwater, several different regulatory principles, rules, and acts have been adopted through the years. These range from the colonial-era irrigation laws to the federal judiciary’s recognition of the human right to water. India does have a non-legally binding National Policy on water which serves as guidance for states to formulate their water policies and laws as well as the Model Groundwater (Sustainable Management) Bill, 2017 which states can use as a template to draft their groundwater laws. While the laws and regulations provide a good foundation and starting point for effective water governance, the propagation of knowledge about these regulatory frameworks is lacking along with its grassroots-level enforcement. The groundwater laws, rules, and associated policies in both cities recognise that the water resources are under threat, yet they falter in the implementation and monitoring of these laws. The lack of overarching national water legislation for freshwater as well as lethargy on part of the federal government has led to disparities in the different state-level and federal-level legal frameworks which impedes effective implementation and monitoring of water resources.
Insights into IWTs’ operations in Chennai and Mumbai
As numerous citizens across the two cities lack access to the state’s piped water supply system, the IWTs and packaged water suppliers have swiftly capitalised on the water demand. The modus operandi of the IWTs in Mumbai is shrouded in utmost secrecy whereas the IWTs in Chennai discuss their activities quite freely. Some IWT operators see themselves as extensions of the formal water supply system and deem their work to be a social service for the “good of the community”, while at the same time undermining local governance mechanisms.
Prevalence of use of IWTs: In Mumbai, 52% of water users surveyed resort to IWT supply and 55% report that they are dissatisfied with the formal piped water supply in the city due to cost, quality, and the erratic nature of supply. 69% of water users believe that the government has failed in providing a clean and secure water supply. In Chennai, 58% of water users surveyed resort to IWT supply and 69% of the respondents report that they are dissatisfied with the formal piped water supply. 61% believe that the government has failed in providing a reliable and safe water supply. It is estimated that in 2019, about INR 20 billion (~EUR 0.24 billion) of water was purchased in Chennai, and the informal water market accounted for about half of that.
Sources of water for IWTs: The IWT operators source their water from improvised siphons/outlets in the main water supply pipelines, peri-urban sites such as farms, and surface water bodies like small lakes and reservoirs, abandoned housing plots with borewells, or even the state utility’s tanker filling points (especially in Mumbai). A more common operational tactic is to maintain a source at a farm by paying the farmer or the “squatters” on the land a monthly fee to extract as much water as the tankers need. In Chennai, the Metro Water tanker operators sometimes also collaborate with the IWT operators and have their own cans/bottled water delivery service, or they drive tankers in their spare time. These Metro Water tanker drivers and their assistants share the location and information about their own (Metro Water) sources with the informal operators for a price, and these sources are “taken over” by the IWT operators by paying more for using the water than what Metro Water can and is willing to pay. The IWT operators in Chennai utilise a scouting technique wherein, a ‘scout’ travels during daylight on a moped or a motorbike in the areas which are thought to have water resources (quality notwithstanding).
Water quality: Certain parameters of water quality in the IWT mode of supply in both cities exceed the norms outlined in the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) standards (2015). In Chennai and Mumbai, 75% of the samples exceed the BIS E. coli standards. Water contaminated with E.coli leads to increased instances of gastro-intestinal diseases. The most alarming observation about the IWT practise is that they ferry untreated water as ‘purified water’ to numerous consumers including hospitals and schools with no legal consequences.
The cost of water: IWT operators in both cities utilise dynamic pricing based on numerous factors such as distance travelled to pick up the water, time of the day for delivery, traffic conditions, advertised quality of water, type of customer (domestic, commercial, hospital, or hotel), weather, and demand. Water users in Chennai spend between INR 2000 to 6500/month (~EUR 25–80) to whereas their counterparts in Mumbai spend between INR 1500 to 8000/month (~EUR 18–98) on IWT supply.
Creating a supply-gap through “real-estate development”: As Mumbai grew in an unplanned manner over the last three decades, the formal piped water network did not extend itself to service all the newly built areas. The formal water infrastructure could not cope with the rapid urbanisation in many parts of the city, and in many others, the water infrastructure was deliberately made to lag by decision-making authorities. Collusive behaviour between construction companies, water managers and/or decision-making authorities, and IWT operators started developing in areas where the land was reclassified and allocated for residential or commercial use, especially in the northern suburbs. While the land was being built upon, the tanker operators supplied water to the construction companies for construction at a concessional rate with the promise that the tanker operator would have exclusive water supply rights for the property once construction was complete (Real Estate Developer and Construction company in Mumbai, 2021). The construction company would market the newly built building that receives an uninterrupted 24/7 water supply. In a few other cases, the relevant authorities struck down requests for extensions of the formal piped network at the request of the IWT operator to create a supply gap . After completion of construction, the occupants struggled to procure water supply since the building had been built without the basic water supply infrastructure. The IWT operators then swoop into these localities to supply water at a premium rate while the local water actors and officials tussled over securing water rights only to delay it until the next election cycle but never fulfil the promise to secure water supply.
The incongruity of Informal Water Tankers’ operations: The paradox presented by IWTs is ripe — they exist because the state has failed to provide adequate water which is indicative of institutional weakness but at the same time, monitoring and regulating the IWTs would need strong institutional capacity. The IWTs operate with tremendous flexibility and adaptability since they need not conform to any operational boundary conditions or rules imposed by the authorities. If these were to be brought under the umbrella of formal supply systems, they would lose this ‘flexibility’ and cease to be informal.
Supply-augmentation biased policy approach: The two cities exhibit a modified integrated water resources management approach heavily skewed towards its belief in the markets and technology but little in the due processes of participation and deliberation with equity in matters of water policy. Even the implementation of its technological tools is biased towards somehow increasing the water availability and there is little inclination towards ascertaining efficient supply and use of the water that is already available. This increased focus and inclination in both cities to explore new sources of water and ‘develop’ more water resources have manifested itself in the setting-up of desalination plants, appropriation of peri-urban surface and groundwater resources, the building of dams or linking rivers, and the proliferation of the bottled and packaged water industry. The cost of developing new water sources is also increasing in both cities as the state authorities extend the search for newer water sources farther from the cities to meet the burgeoning demand.
There is little focus on other policy approaches like demand management through tariff structures, improving the efficiency of the piped network and mapping out the location of the supply mains, and more efficient billing. In this scenario, increasing the number of water sources and quantity of water supply without addressing losses within such an inefficient supply system will not help bridge a supply gap. The MCGM is the richest civic body in India and its spending on water supply and operations between the 2014–15 fiscal year and 2019–20 fiscal year has reduced from INR 37.4 billion or ~EUR 0.45 billion (11% of the total budget) to INR 27.6 or ~EUR 0.33 billion (10% of the total budget), yet the civic body invests heavily in myopic large-scale projects like desalination plants and cites a limited budget when water supply works lag.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Bolster regulatory frameworks and build institutional capacity: In the urban Indian context, the risk of drafting poorly designed regulations is that it can further worsen the problems by perpetuating corruption. Some IWT operators have admitted to pilfering water from the formal supply systems as well as cutting off the formal water supply to certain water users so they can profit by selling more water. A long-term goal of building institutional capacity, legal frameworks, and effective monitoring over time while deploying other solutions as mentioned below would ensure that immediate water supply goals are achieved.
A transparent permit system for the IWTs: Such a system could help in lending some degree of legitimacy to the IWT operations. This could open up avenues for such emerging businesses to avail appropriate opportunities to grow and gradually build credibility in terms of the quality of service rendered at a more affordable tariff. The permit framework should also include appropriate water pricing guidelines which are fair and sustainable.
Improving water infrastructure and services: The emergence of informal water systems came in the vacuum left behind by the formal water infrastructure, thereby fulfilling the needs of the water users who were left out in the formal supply chain previously. There are numerous issues to be addressed while improving the water infrastructure such as improving the reliability and coverage of water supply across the social-economic spectrum, plugging leaks, efficient and fair cost recovery, and better performance of public supply systems.
Demand management: The rapidly declining groundwater levels compounded by climate change-induced extreme weather events call for better groundwater management. A more demand management-centric approach would ensure that water is used judiciously, especially in industrial and commercial settings. Appropriate water reuse protocols for large water users are also in order.
A strong framework of participatory planning: Consumer awareness campaigns that promote information dissemination and transparency regarding modes of water supply and its sources, tariff, and quality will help in promoting better use of water. In situations where corruption and weak institutions disallow such campaigns, the provision of affordable means of water treatment will ensure water users consume safe water. Informational interventions can be leveraged to populate a robust database of informal operators, water quality, tariffs, and zone of operations including water source and supply endpoints. Sufficient political will and thrust can be instigated by citizen groups to ensure that the citizen’s interests are adequately represented in water planning and governance initiatives.
Utilise the knowledge and expertise of NGOs and civil society organisations: Better water governance outcomes can be achieved when states work in collaboration with community systems and NGOs at the grassroots level. NGOs and civil society organisations have a wealth of local knowledge and expertise, and they can strengthen partnerships with the state and facilitate the on-ground implementation of projects. In a large state like India with a deep-rooted mistrust in the state’s ability to deliver on welfare projects, such collaborations will help in inculcating a sense of ownership of water in the community and garner momentum towards the goal of good water governance.
The findings of this study are not intended to be construed as an exposé designed to denigrate the state of water infrastructure in these cities but to understand the weaknesses in the water governance and supply structures which lead to the perpetuation of exploitative modes of water supply.
The data presented in this article was derived from a larger, in-depth study. The exploratory study utilised a mixed methods approach utilising interviews, surveys, water sampling, and observation of water practises to explore the causes of the existence and proliferation of informal tanker water suppliers in Chennai and Mumbai.
The author is an experienced hydrogeochemist & environmental scientist and has worked in academia, industry, and governmental departments across 3 continents.
