Joyashree Roy Professor of Economics Global Change Programme Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
description
Transcript of Joyashree Roy Professor of Economics Global Change Programme Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
1
Governing Water Scarcity and Variability
Case Studies from India
presented at Climate Governance and Development
Berlin 28-30 Sept., 2008
Joyashree Roy
Professor of Economics
Global Change Programme
Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
2
Case Studies
climate extremes, impacts, responses
and
development goal oriented water service provision
3
Following Development Goal
can achieve both
adaptation and mitigation
with proactive actionclimate smart actions
4
Sustainability: Issues of ConcernDiarrhoea
DiarrhoeaDengue
Gross Cropped Area
Air Pollution
Crime against Children and Women
PolioAir Pollution
MalariaDengue
Electricity Consumption
Whooping Cough, Asthma and Diarrhoea
Air Pollution
Whooping Cough and Asthma
Diarrhoea
Crime against Women and Children
Whooping Cough, Diarrohea, Malaria, Aasthama
Whooping Cough
MalariaFiscal DeficitMalaria
Malaria
Malaria
Malaria and Diarrhoea
Crime against Children
Consumption of Pesticide Malaria
Whooping Cough, Diarrhoea & Asthama
Dengue and Diarrohea
Crime against Women and Children
Dengue
Air Pollution
Diarrhoea and Malaria
Consumption of Pesticide
Consumption of Pesticide
N
Classification Of PrioritiesEconomicEnvironmentalSocial
An issue of concern is that in which a state has not been performing well and hence is in need of good policies. Source: Roy, Chatterjee, Basak, Nandi (2007), Roy, Chatterjee, Basak (2008)
5
CC over arching challenge
6
Provides opportunity to Rationalise Developmental action
7
Facts: Weather extremes
– Water quantity/volume– More precipitation/water in less number of days– Flood and drought – Source Augmentation, More Water storage and
equitable distribution over longer period in a year– Problem more acute in urban areas with high and
growing density– High temperature days: water quality, arsenic
– BAU : Loss of water bodies, demand
8
Climate Extremes
0
10
20
30
40
50
No.
of
Hou
seho
lds
Sale ofbelongings
Dismantling ofhousingstructure
Borrowing Dissaving
Stategy adopted during last flood
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
% o
f ho
useh
olds
Dis
save
Bor
row
mon
ey
Mor
tgag
epr
oper
ty
Sell
prop
erty
Shif
t liv
esto
ck
Sell
lives
tock
Mig
ratio
n
Wor
k in
Gov
tpr
ojec
t
Save
fodd
er
Buy
fodd
er
Strategies Adopted during Last Drought
9
Climate Extremes
0
20
40
60
80
% o
f h
ou
seh
old
s
Insu
ran
ce
Irri
gati
on
Mo
re r
eli
ef
wo
rk
Hig
her
wag
es
Lo
an
Fo
dd
er/
fert
ilis
er/
foo
d s
ub
sid
y
Catt
le c
am
p
Su
bsi
dy
on
seed
s
Suggested Policies by Households
0
5
10
15
20
25
No.
of
hh
lds
Cro
p C
ompe
nsti
on
Agr
icul
tura
l in
puts
Bet
ter
grai
n pr
eser
vati
on
met
hod
Saf
e dr
inki
ng w
ater
Hea
lth
serv
ices
Tra
nspo
rt &
com
m
Cop
ing
know
ledg
e
Impr
oved
rel
ief
PD
S
Loa
n
Policy Suggestions
10
Likely Impact on Growth Likely Impact on Growth and Development and Development
• Flood and drought increases :Flood and drought increases :
• IndebtednessIndebtedness
• DissavingDissaving
• MigrationMigration
• InflationInflation
• Water borne diseasesWater borne diseases
• Flood is worse than drought Flood is worse than drought Jadavpur University
11
Likely Impact on Growth Likely Impact on Growth and Development and Development
• Incidence of loss are shared by Incidence of loss are shared by
• GovernmentGovernment
• NGOsNGOs
• CommunitiesCommunities
• HouseholdsHouseholds
Jadavpur University
12
Seasonal Variation in Piped Water Quality
0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.0090.00
Months
% o
f con
fluen
t sam
ples
% of Confluent samples KMCoutlet
% of Confluent samples TW
% of Confluent samples IP
13
Water Safe Development
Adaptation and Mitigation
14
Implementation Strategy
• Technical: progressed much but not sustained
• Institutional: urgent need
15
Incentives and Institutions to Ensure Sustainability and
Universal Access
16
Non recovery of Water Production and Distribution Cost
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
KMC's Estimate ofnonrecovery
Research Team's Estimate ofnonrecovery
Total Cost
%
1717
Actual Consumption of water across income groups
0
50
100
150
200
250
BPL MP LIG MIG HIG
income group
litre
per
cap
ita p
er d
ay
Consumption(ltr/cap/day)
1818
% of HHs with In-House KMC Connections
BPL0%
MP14%
LIG28%
MIG29%
HIG29%
BPL
MP
LIG
MIG
HIG
1919
Water use pattern by households
1
2%2
8%
3
90%
1
2
3
Drinking
Cooking
Purpose other than cooking and drinking
Source: Socioeconomic Survey 2003-2008
20
Purification Methods Adopted by Households
0 10 20 30 40 50
BPL
MP
LIG
MIG
HIG
TOTAL
Inco
me
Gro
up
% of Households
Sieve through muslin
Chemicals/Pasteurizer
Boil & Filter
Tap Mouth Filter
Storage Filter
UV Filter
Boiling
21
0 50 100 150 200
% of Affected Households
BPL
MP
LIG
MIG
HIG
Inco
me
Gro
ups
Water-borne Diseases of Different Income Groups
Total
Gastroenteritis
Cholera
Typhoid
Amoebiosis
Jaundice
Dysentery
Diarrhea
22
Society bears the burden
HIG
Averting Expenditure
Adaptive Expenditure
BPL
Averting Expenditure
Adaptive Expenditure
More private benefitMore private cost
2323
WTP as % of avg.income across income groups
0.000.501.001.502.002.503.003.504.004.50
BPL MP LIG MIG HIG
income groups
WTP
as
% o
f ave
rage
in
com
e WTP Min
WTP Max
24
Provides opportunity to Rationalise Developmental action
Integration of water supply service with water recharge, rainwater
harvesting, sewerage, solid waste management
2525
Climate smart building codesUrgent Immediate Action
• To go beyond energy codes only
• Water safe building codes for all new buildings :– Plumbing designs for individual water meters– Meter installation mandatory for all new connections– Rainwater harvesting – Water using appliance standard– Ground water recharge: Large Scale of operation for
scientific, sustainable, quality
26
Governance
• Supply side– Mapping of existing
resource– Source identification and
ownership definition– Source augmentation– Technical efficiency:
• Electricity intensity
• UFW
– Financial efficiency– Sustainability
• Demand side– Behaviourial incentive to
reduce wastage– Incentive design for
economic group wise equity in allocation
– Integrated urban service charge but applicable with decentralised administration
– To induce selection of right kind of technology
27
Beneficiaries do not pay
• Proportion of beneficiaries of the piped water service among total population: 82%
• Proportion of cost un-recovered: 83.7%
• Cost society pays : UFW (30-50%)
28
Mitigation potential
• no accounting for water supply and use
• Per day wastage of treated water: 103.2 MG, cost wise Rs 800 thousand lost /day
• Electricity required to produce 103.2 MG treated piped water: 108,478 units
29
Back of the envelope estimates
• Even if 20% population halves (50% reduction) emission, effect is going to be less but if 80% reduces by little more than 1% same benefit will be generated.
• Mitigation target 50:1?
3030
Multi-criteria based Strategy
• WTP
• ATP criteria for basic amenities
• Access to Basic Minimum need
• Financial Sustainability
• Accountability of Service Provider
31
Value of water quality
• Cost of inaction (4% of HH Income)
• Rs 190 per capita per month on an average.
• In arsenic prone areas Rs 297 per month.
• Cost of action (2% HH income)
• The current cost of supplying filtered piped water to households is Rs. 50-130/- per month per household.
3232
Immediate policy implementation is necessary for initiation of the
Volumetric Water Charge System
Exists:• Meter technology• Installation know-how• Calibration know-how
• Need capacity building
Does not exist:• Policy• Regulation• Incentive• Monitoring
infrastructure
33Thank you
Jadavpur University