Sahjeevan
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy
STUDY TEAM Kavita Mehta, Krupa Dholakia, Bharati Nanjar and Pravin Muchhadiya
Publication Year 2012
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 1
Sahjeevan
Acknowledgements
Though Sahjeevan has worked in water sector since long, we are no experts in the economics aspects of the subject. Understanding economics of delivery of water were absolutely new subject for us and that’s why study took long time to get accomplish. While working on strengthening village panchayats for their drinking water security, we learnt that even though village panchayats are having their own drinking water scheme, they were tempted to continue to be connected with Regional water supply scheme of Gujarat Water and Sewage Supply Board (GWSSB). Why Village Panchayats are not ready to become independent and to own their drinking water scheme was the question in our mind. Largely, there were two major concerns from village panchayat, one,” if we say no to GWSSB that we do not need water from regional scheme, we will be in bad situation in case of shortfall or poor quality of water from source in future and another reason was why should we bear higher cost to manage our own scheme where, government is providing water on highly subsidized rate”. This has pushed us to understand the issues in detail and we took up the study. Hope we have been able to do some justice to the subject.
During the course of this study, several people have contributed to our understanding the subject, many have helped to gather data and many have helped with ideas to explore further. However this study was possible due to constant support and guidance from Sri S.V. Ahuja Sir, Technical Advisor of GWSSB and WASMO - Water and Sanitation Management Organisation, Sri Yugandhar Mandavkar, Vice President of Sahjeevan and Sri Sandeep Virmani, Governing Board member of Sahjeevan. Their support and guidance has given direction to the study.
We, sincerely thanks Mr. M.S. Singh, Member Secretary GWSSB, Gandhinagar, for his positive insights on the policy matters; his support and willingness to conduct sharing workshop jointly by GWSSB and WASMO to share the findings of this study at state level. Our sincere thanks to Mr. U.R. Pandya, CEO WASMO, Gandhinagar to provide inputs and help design sharing workshop at District as well State level.
We specially thank all the officials of GWSSB, WASMO, and GWIL to provide all kind of data, required for the study. We would like to thanks Mr. N.M. Patel and later on Mr. R. L. Patel, Chief Executive Engineer, GWSSB Bhuj, Mr. D.G. Chaudhary, Chief General Manager, GWIL, Gandhinagar, Mr. S. H. Kanani and later on Mr. A.G. Maru, Unit Manager, WASMO, CMSU Bhuj, Mr. Fafal, Executive Engineer, GWSSB Bhuj division for their constant support. We would also like to thanks Mr. Parmar, Mr. Maheshwari, Mr. Solanki, Mr. Ramanuj, Mr. Dhokia, of GWSSB, Mr. Mitesh Vakhariya of GWIL, Anjar for providing all kinds of data at any given time. Without their support the study could not have been completed.
Our sincere thanks to all members of Vllage Panchayat and Pani Samitis from study villages for fruitful interactions and further to provide ground level data on O & M aspects of their village schemes. Their cooperation and readiness to provide data at any time has helped us to provide ground level scenario.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 2
Sahjeevan
Several experts on the subject have helped us understand subject. We would like to especially thanks to Mr. S. Vishwanathan, Advisor, Arghyam, Banglore for providing critical inputs. We would also like to thanks programme team of Arghyam, Mr. Rahul Bokare, Programme Director and Mr. Nelson Royal, Programme Officer, Arghyam, Banglore to back our idea and to provide financial support for this study.
We would also like to thanks Mr. Yogendrsinh Jadeja, Director and Mr. Jayantilal Gorasiya, Programme Coordinator of Arid Communities and Technologies (ACT), Bhuj for helping us to present different kinds of data on maps.
Several other people have helped in many ways whose names might have not mentioned here, we would like to thank all of them for their inputs and sharing.
Last but not least, we would also like to thank entire water team of Sahjeevan whose dedication and timeless efforts have given end result to the study. Without their efforts this study could not have been completed.
May 31, 2012 Krupa Dholakia Bhuj Bharati Nanjar Pravin Muchhadiya Kavita Mehta
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 3
Sahjeevan
Preface
Drinking water security assumes great importance in arid and drought-prone areas like Kutch, where water is a scarce and thus a precious resource. After independence, India adopted a democratic governance system and responsibility of a Welfare State, whereby undertaking a role of providing basic services and facilities to her citizens. Over the last thirty years, the government endeavoured to supply drinking water to all villages of Kutch, with financial assistance from several sources, including Rs 30 crore provided by the World Bank. Such centralised approach did not succeed in addressing the drinking water security of the people of Kutch due to a variety of factors.
Sahjeevan and other VOs have been working towards water security in times of stress - cases of two consecutive years of droughts was common in Kutch and water security in such years was a challenge successfully met by over a hundred village communities at present. This was possible because of decentralised and community managed schemes were promoted and implemented by Sahjeevan and other VOs since 1990’s, and more prominently, under WASMO project in recent years.
For more than a decade, Narmada water was a promise by the government as a reliable alternative to perpetual scarcity problem - people from Kutch and Saurashtra looked at it with great expectation. Now that the water supply from Narmada canal has started, it was considered useful to study its reliability and financial aspects.
On this backdrop, Sahjeevan undertook a study during 2009-10 to understand the operational aspects of locally managed water supply systems and the cost and price- related implications of centralised versus decentralised systems. This study report is an attempt to familiarise the reader with ground reality about drinking water pricing in an objective manner.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 4
Sahjeevan
Index
Chapter 1: Background of the study/ History 6
Chapter 2: Study Design 9
Chapter 3: Water Supply Scenario in Kutch 1. Historical Perspective 13 2. Policy Framework of Water Pricing in Gujarat 13 3. Present Status of Water Supply 15 4. Narmada water in Kutch 17 5. Cost for delivery of water 20 6. Recovery for Centralised Scheme 22
Chapter 4: Water Distribution and its Economics – Village Level Scenario 23 1. Narmada / RWSS based Drinking Water Scheme 24 2. Tube-well based Individual Drinking Water Scheme 27 3. Open-well based Individual Drinking Water Scheme 32 4. Summary Village Level Scenario 37
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations 39
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 5
Sahjeevan
Chapter 1 Background of the study/ History
About Kutch
Kutch district is located in a crescent-shaped peninsula in the Gujarat state of Western India on the western border with Pakistan and the Arabian Sea; it is the largest district in Gujarat and has an area of 45,612 sq km constituting 23 per cent of the state, with the lowest population density of 66 persons per sq.km. Kutch is like an island as it is bound by the sea in the South and West and by the Ranns (salt marshlands) in the East and North.
Kutch has 886 inhabited villages with a population of 2.1 million. It has ten talukas or Administrative sub-districts: Bhuj and Nakhatrana in the North; Lakhpat and Abdasa in the West; Mandvi, Mundra, Anjar and Gandhidham in the South and Bachau and Rapar in the East
Water situation: Kutch has a semi-arid type of climate and accounts for 60 per cent of the semi-arid tract in Gujarat. Kutch is known for its scanty and erratic rainfall with average annual rainfall is 388 mm ranging from 338 mm in Lakhpat to 440 mm in Mundra. With 2-3 droughts every five years, water availability remains the central issue for any development. The rainfall conditions and topography limits the scope for sites for large dams -there are 16 medium-sized and 160 minor-sized water schemes in Kutch (Raju: 1985). Kutch has 97 rivers that flow seasonally with a high run-off rate.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 6
Sahjeevan
Kutch has barely 15 per cent of its geographic area as cultivable land, which supports animal husbandry and rainfed agriculture, the mainstay of rural economy. While settled agriculture is practised as an important occupation today, traditionally, most Kutchis, in spite of very heterogeneous social and ethnic composition, were pastoralist. Even today the cattle population exceeds that of the human population and dairy products form a crucial part of the daily diet. However, the planners have rarely taken into account the cattle population and its water requirement in development planning of Kutch.
Water scarcity in Kutch is a commonly known curse, especially since 1812 when an earthquake changed the course of River Sindhu erstwhile flowing into Kutch. The government response to address this problem ranged from temporary measures like supplying water by tanker to medium-scale multi-village schemes based on a “reliable” source.
Genesis: Over the last thirty years, the government endeavoured to supply drinking water to all villages of Kutch, with financial assistance from several sources, including Rs 30 crore provided by the World Bank. Such centralised approach did not succeed in addressing the drinking water security of the people of Kutch due to a variety of factors. Realising the limitations of such top-down approach, the State has been promoting people’s involvement in various development programmes including rural water supply, especially since the last decade. Formation of Water and Sanitation Management Organisation (WASMO) - a State managed society - with the assistance of the Netherlands government, was one such endeavour to establish ownership of panchayats in water supply schemes and their sustained management marking a shift towards a participatory approach in development planning.
This new approach also came with the concept of cost recovery, and thus, the need to bring in economic sense about cost of water among the people. As Government of Gujarat is promoting centrally planned or top down drinking water supply schemes, often based on exogenous water such as from Narmada project, the communities have not developed ownership of the scheme, which in turn, has led to low recovery of water charges. On the other hand, communities undertaking and managing their decentralised water supply schemes have been paying almost entire cost of water supply, thereby reducing the burden of the government on long-term management and sustainability.
Simultaneously, Civil Society Organisations like Sahjeevan and Kutch Mahila Vikas Sangathan (KMVS) worked on the challenge of reviving traditional systems and working on local source solutions, and by mid-nineties, demonstrated that the most remote and arid villages could develop their solutions in their villages that will provide sufficient and good quality water even in droughts.
Such successes led to influencing the approach of developmental organisations, but to a limited scale - first through Drought Proofing Programme and then through WASMO. The VOs and community organisations demonstrated a process of establishing control of the local women or community on the technology and management of water supply in their villages. Drawing lessons from these initiatives, WASMO accepted it as a policy and promoted such institutional arrangements.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 7
Sahjeevan
Experience of WASMO in promoting community or PRI managed water supply schemes in the last five to six years indicated that the communities developed the capacity to plan, implement and operate schemes to supply water right up to the habitation level. Under this programme, communities from nearly 400 villages also demonstrated that when communities take up responsibilities, they can easily and effectively manage their water supply schemes at lower costs.
On this background, Sahjeevan undertook a study during 2009-10 to understand the water security status of locally managed water supply systems and the financial and economic implications of centralised versus decentralised systems. The details of this study and its findings are presented in the following chapters.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 8
Sahjeevan
Chapter 2 Study Design
1. Description, goal and purpose
Experience of decentralised water supply schemes and the recent developments in terms of increasing dependence on exogenous source bring to light the policy issue as to whether the communities managing their own water supply schemes should pay higher price than those dependent on the State or whether they should be given incentive for their local initiative. To understand the economic reality of the phenomenon for any macro level advocacy, Sahjeevan undertook a study of water supply schemes in Kutch. It was also expected that the findings would also be useful for the communities operating their decentralised schemes to develop rational water pricing policy at the micro level. This document presents the details of the study and its findings, along with the implications for participatory democracy.
Goal: Goal is to study costs of delivery of water to recommend a pricing policy that incentivises the development and use of local water; that ensures cross subsides and ensure financial viability for the department; strengthens participatory democracy.
Objectives: The objectives of the study were- • Understand the policy of Govt of Gujarat on water supply and its mechanism of costing and pricing • Understand the actual cost incurred by communities in operating their own decentralised water supply systems in different ecological and physiographic settings of Kutch • Provide the principles for developing a pricing policy • Provide recommendations to the state and other development agencies on pricing or investment policies based on the evidence gathered
2. Methodology
The methodology was determined based on the consultations with the experts in the sector. A part of the methodological inputs were prompted by the experience of an earlier study in Abdasa carried out 2005-06 as a part of planning process of Pani Thiye Panjo programme. Looking at the vast scope of examples to chose from, it was decided to study a limited number of community driven initiatives across different physiographic and hydrogeological regions of Kutch. Case study method was used to generate information on these experiments and draw inferences. Similarly, technological options chosen and management structure adopted by the community institutions were taken into account to build the typologies based on energy source for pumping, recharging and distribution system. The methodology comprised of the following elements.
2.1 Secondary data collection: As a first step in the research, it was considered important to study the existing policies, guidelines, decisions, plans, programmes, tariff
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 9
Sahjeevan
proposals, and economic data related to rural water supply of the State Government. For example, data related to water supply schemes, distribution system, costs for delivery of water, recovery ratio, source and it’s dependency, quality of water, etc were collected from GWSSB, GWIL and WASMO. Towards this, the following documents were also studied.
List of Documents studied Sr. Documents Studied Source No. 1. GWIL Water Tariff Proposal (based on Financial Year 2007-08) GWIL
Government Resolutions regarding Village Water Committee, 2. GWSSB Management of Water Schemes, and Tariff, etc.)
3. Policy and Tariff on Electricity bill for Water Works PGVCL 4. Status of Kutch District from State-wide Water Supply Grid GWSSB List of Villages who have Established O & M Systems in their 5. villages, and list of villages having quality of water unfit for WASMO drinking purpose 6. Format to derive O & M Cost for Village WASMO & GWSSB 7. Network Map of Narmada Piped Water Supply Scheme GWIL / GWSSB
2.2 Consultation with experts: During the course of the study we engaged with officials from various Government departments dealing with water supply and electricity supply. Besides Officials from Government departments, we also have series of consultations with experts in the sector.
Sr. Experts / Officials
1. Sr. V. S. Gadhvi, Secretary, Water Supply Department, Government of Gujarat
2. Sr. M.S. Singh, Member Secretary GWSSB, Gandhinagar
3. Sr. S.V. Ahuja, Technical Advisor, WASMO & GWSSB, Gandhinagar
4. Sr. U.R. Pandya, CEO, WASMO, Gandhinagar
5. Sr. D.G. Chaudhary, Chief General Manager, GWIL, Gandhinagar
6. Sr. N.M. Patel/ Sr. R.L. Patel, Chief Executive Engineer, GWSSB, Bhuj-Kutch
7. Sr. S.H. Kanani/ Sr. A.G. Maru, Unit Manager, WASMO, Bhuj – Kutch
8. Prof. K.C. Malhotra, Former faculty, Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata
9. Sr. S. Vishwanath, Advisor, Araghyam, Bangalore
10. Sr. Yugandhar Mandavkar, Governing Board Member, Sahjeevan, Bhuj – Kutch
11. Sr. Sandeep Virmani, Executive Secretary, Sahjeevan, Bhuj - Kutch
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 10
Sahjeevan
These consultations helped us in understanding state policies and overall scenario of water supply in Kutch; determining the case study as the main method; to gather source relevant literature; determine framework of analysis; share and reflect on the preliminary inferences.
2.3 Sample selection: besides understanding macro level scenario at district level through secondary data, it was designed to identify villages based on their drinking water scheme to understand their water consumption pattern, Management systems they have adopted, tariff structure, O & M Costs incurred per Household as well as per kilo litre. Total 19 villages were studied and mainly they were categorised in three sets of villages as per following Map.
Category 1 Narmada/RWSS based Drinking Water Scheme 6 Villages Category 2 Tube-well based Individual Drinking Water Scheme 5 Villages Category 3 Open-well based Individual Drinking Water Scheme 8 Villages
2.4 Field Data Collection Methods and Tools: Based on the discussions with the key experts, it was decided to collect primary data from the Pani Samiti (along with the village key informants) and through direct observation. Experienced staff of Sahjeevan carried out the primary data collection mainly to understand their management systems, tariff structure, O & M Costs incurred at household level and per kilo litre.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 11
Sahjeevan
Three main data collection tools were used, namely, 1) checklist for structured interview with the Pani Samiti 2) points to be observed through village transect and 3) Framework developed by WASMO to derive O & M Costs to be incurred at village level was used to collect data on water resource Infrastructure, lifting device and operation staff.
2.5 Sharing of initial findings
Initial findings of this study were presented at the Workshop Perspective on Water Governance held at Bhuj on 23rd March 2010. The participants, comprising of practitioners and researchers from different parts of India, provided feedback on the findings, based on which additional data was collected from the field. The findings of the study are presented in the following chapters.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 12
Sahjeevan
Chapter 3 Water Supply Scenario in Kutch
This chapter presents the findings of the study at broader level of state policies and priorities related to drinking water supply. It also presents the situation in district Kutch.
1. Historical Perspective
Droughts and water scarcity were commonplace phenomena in history of Kutch and communities have been traditionally devising appropriate solutions to suit the needs of local conditions - ranging from virdas to ponds to shallow wells to river bank filtration. After 1979, the government focussed on rural water supply and promoted regional water supply schemes based on groundwater tapped mainly from Bhuj ridge area. This work was carried out by GWSSB, the main agency responsible for water supply in the state. Earlier in the last decade, in line with trend in the country and elsewhere in the developing world, there had been a shift towards involving community in operations and maintenance of water supply schemes at village or GP level. WASMO was a state agency created to promote community management of drinking water supply in rural areas.
Post Earthquake Scenario: After the 2002 earthquake, drinking water was one of the main rehabilitation agenda of the government. This phase saw focus on decentralised management and distribution of drinking water through community organisations (Pani Samiti). This was promoted through a project with aid from The Netherlands government. Similarly, several Voluntary Organisations during the mid-nineties and during the post- earthquake rehabilitation phase, demonstrated that the most remote and arid villages could develop their solutions in their villages that will provide sufficient and good quality water even in droughts. Several organisations demonstrated the process of establishing control of the local women or community on the technology and management of water supply in their villages. Drawing lessons from these initiatives, WASMO accepted it as a policy and promoted such institutional arrangements.
2. Policy Framework of Water Pricing in Gujarat
Structure: GoG promoted a three-tier structure for rural water supply in the entire state. According to which, GWIL was established to supply water from large reservoirs (SSP, in this case) to regional sumps by gravity through canals. GWSSB was entrusted with the responsibility to supply water from these sumps, either by gravity or by pumping, to the GP level sumps or tanks constructed as ESR/ GSR/ HGLR. Gram Panchayats, through their water samiti, was made responsible for internal distribution of this water to the villagers (Source: Gujarat Government Resolution – Formation of Gram Panchayat Pani Samiti – prc/2002/1082/c ).
Operation and Management: of water supply at Gram Panchayat level was the responsibility of Pani Samiti, a sub-committee of Gram Panchayat. (Source: Gujarat Government Resolution – Formation of Gram Panchayat Pani Samiti – prc/2002/1082/c ) Pani Samiti was also made responsible to plan and implement the village based water supply
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 13
Sahjeevan
schemes under WASMO programme. Total 885 village Pani Samities are functioning in the District. (Source: WASMO)
In case of Regional Water Supply Schemes being operated by GWSSB, people were encouraged to take over management either through a Group Gram Panchayat a federation of GPs or Pani Samitis (p(rp#i k\mi>k: T[ks[l/p(rp#i/piN) s(mt)/ 2158/07.07.2006 ). However, so far there was no report of implementation of this provision in Kutch.
Capital Investment: State has separate allocations for laid down infrastructure to provide narmada water in different parts of state. In Kutch, there is planning to connect all 886 villages to get narmada water. In 2011, 853 villages were connected with narmada pipeline and remaining are under progress. Besides, Naramda water supply, In Kutch there are 54 regional schemes, covering 730 villages, being managed by GWSSB. GWSSB has separate allocations from state budget in each financial year to meet capital cost (that includes source development, source strengthening, laid down pipeline network, storage structures, machinery, etc) for these 54 regional schemes. In case of Individual water supply scheme, state provides 90% cost where 10% should be contributed by village panchayats.
Tariff: In the past, GWSSB had Category Tariff/ Kl determined a tariff of Rs 14 per person per year and it was Rural Area 2.00 collected from GP supplied with Nagar Palika 4.00 water supply. But, according to Maha Nagar Palika 6.00 the 2007 decision of GoG (k\mi>k: Education, Social, Health, Religious Inst. 12.00 m&.E.a.s./ piN)ni dri[/2007/p).a[. Industries 15.00 /4/ K-4 ti. 08/02/2007 ), which applies uniformly to entire state of Gujarat, the GP has to pay Rs 2 per kilolitre of water supplied and GWSSB was made responsible to collect the amount from Gram Panchayat. Out of this, GWSSB will transfer Re 1 per kl to GWIL and retain Re 1 for itself - irrespective of whether the water is supplied from SSP or tapped by GWSSB locally, whereas for Industrial use, Raw water charges to be paid by GWSSB to GWIL is Rs. 10/- per kl. There shall be 10% increase every year in water charges to be paid to GWIL. During 2009, government mooted a proposal that GWIL will charge Rs. 4 per kl to GWSSB (Source: GWIL 2007-08).
Power for water supply: Since 1996, GoG has decided to waive the entire cost of electricity for pumping water in case of Individual Schemes where Gram Panchayat is lifting drawing water from a local source (open well or bore well). However, this waiver is not available to GP dependent on water supplied by GWSSB from a remote source (Source: Government of Gujarat Resolution No: J.e.b). /1095/2188/k )
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 14
3. Present Status of Water Supply
Water Supply Schemes: After 1979, the government focussed on rural water supply and promoted regional water supply schemes based on groundwater tapped mainly from Bhuj ridge area. This work was carried out by GWSSB, the main agency responsible for water supply in the state. Out of total villages of 886, 6 are uninhabited ; 73 with 54 regional w ater supply schemes of GWSSB and 150 village having individual water supply Schemes.
State has planning to c over all 886 villages under Nar mada based state grid supply network so that in case of short fall or poor quality of water from local source Narmada water. As on date 28.02.2012 total 853 villages of RWSS and Individual Scheme connected to Naramda network.
However, In year 2011, as per data received from regional offices of GWSSB, only 99 villages primarily dependent on Narmada water and 218 villages relied on dual source, where Narmada water being mixed in existing local storage facility and mixed water supplied short fall /poor quality, where as 558 villages are still getting water from local source. Taluka wise scenario can be seen from following
and table.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy
Sahjeevan
Table showing source wise water distribution in each Taluka.
Taluka No. of Villages having water supply from inhabitat Total Villages Local Local Only Narmada Tanker Source Source Narmada + RWSS - IWSS –RWSS Water Rapar - 26 60 11 - - 97 Bhachau - 30 39 - - - 69 Anjar 5 48 - 8 - 3 64 Gandhidham - 8 - - - - 8 Mundra - 42 - 17 - - 59 Mandvi 24 37 - 28 - 1 90 Bhuj 31 67 - 44 - 2 144 Nakhtrana 60 46 - 13 - - 119 Abadasa 24 63 - 62 1 - 150 Lakhapat 6 41 - 35 4 - 86
Total 150 408 99 218 5 6 886
(Source: GWSSB, 2011)
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 16
Sahjeevan
As per primary data collected by Arid Communities & Technologies Bhuj, The towns and villages of Kutch use a combination of at least 2-3 sources to meet their domestic water needs including shallow wells, tanks, deep bore wells, and Narmada waters. Today 90% continue to be dependent on the local waters while 10% are using Narmada waters as a priority. If shallow wells and tanks are categorized as sustainable sources about 20% villages are primarily using these as their main source. If decentralization with Panchayats managing their own sources is considered, a large 44% villages/towns use local sources while 56% use Narmada and regional water supply schemes (deep borewells) as primary sources.
Kutch is one of the few districts of the country with a higher population of domestic animals than human population contributing significantly to its economy. Tanks continue to be used as the primary source of water for domestic animals. Of the 827 tanks surveyed covering 78% of the towns/villages of Kutch, 577 are used by domestic animals. A small but significant number (52 tanks) are using tanks for drinking water too with a significant quantity coming for domestic water use from tanks. The district is significantly dependant on borewells for its drinking and domestic water supply with 236 bores supplying water to villages under this survey. However, shallow wells too play a significant role with 290 wells used for drinking and domestic water.
Water Demand Vs. Supply: The water requirement of Kutch is estimated to be 268 MLD, out of which Narmada water supply through GWIL is on and average approximately 90-100 MLD, whereas about 150 MLD is used from local source including RWSS and Individual schemes of GWSSB, still 12 MLD is in short.
Water Demand per day Water Supply Scenario Cen sus Popul Water 10% Total Shortfall 12 MLD 2011 ation requir loss water 5% in ement (MLD) requir Narmada lakh /day ement 100 MLD (MLD) /day 38% Local Source 150 MLD (MLD) 57% Rural 13.35 136 14 150 Urban 7.65 102 10 112 Source: GWSSB & GWIL, 2011 Total 21.00 238 24 262 (Source: GWSSB 2011)
4. Narmada water in Kutch
GoG has been working on bringing Narmada to Kutch and Saurashtra for nearly a decade. Three years ago, the construction work of regional sump was completed and water was supplied as the construction of distributory network progressed. Water from SSP has been brought to a regional sump at village Madiya, in District Rajkot but on border of Kutch. It is supplied by five distributaries, labelled as NC-9, NC-10, NC-11, NC-13. The salient features of these are as per the follows.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 17
Sahjeevan
Length Cost Executing O & M Scheme Network Area Transmission in km in Crore Agency Agency
NC – 9 Bhachau, Varsamedi Pumping 63 155.65 GWSSB GWIL
NC – 10 Anjar Gravity 34.66/11.30 77.05 GWIL GWIL
Kukma, Bhuj, NC – 11 Pumping 125 75.42 GWIL GWIL Mundra, Mandvi Pumping/ NC – 13 Samakhyali to Rapar 30.91/12.64 19.96 GWSSB GWSSB Gravity
NC – 22 Nakhtrana, Netra Pumping 142.70 GWIL
(Source: GWIL, 2007-08)
Please note that the cost stated in the table below refers to the investment in distributory network, and does not include the cost of infrastructure creation for the regional sump and the investment done to bring water up to Madiya.
Narmada Water Distribution System: There are major 5 distributaries to supply narmada water to Kutch through Maliya Sump. Each distributory has major head works at main location and around 3-5 off take points. GWIL has given direct connections for different use of water to different institutions. For domestic use in rural areas, connections given to GWSSB, for urban areas, direct connections given to Municipalities, and for industrial use, connections given to Industries. However, in case of Anjar division – 2 (Gandhidham, Adipur and Mundra) for urban areas and for industries too, GWSSB has been the main recipient of narmada water and then they supply water to municipalities (Adipur and Gandhidham), Kandla Port and some of the Industries. As far as Rural water supply is concerned, from major head works of Narmada, GWSSB lifts water and supply to existing nearby storage facility of regional Scheme and from there water is being delivered to village fall point through existing network of regional scheme. Separate connections to villages having Individual Schemes were also been given and different pipeline network for connecting those villages were laid down.
The first three distributaries have been constructed and are in operations for last two years, whereas the last two: 1) NC – 13 going to Adesar (Rapar) has become functional recently and 2) NC – 22 going to Nakhtrana-Netra was under plan. (hence, data is not A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 18
Sahjeevan
available on its operational aspects). These three distributaries are supplying 13 0 MLD to Kutch, out of which 102.21 MLD (or 102,210 kl per year or 7 8%) is going for drinking water supply in rural and urban areas and 28.63 MLD (or 28,630 kl per year or 22%) to industries.
Network Water Supply in KL Scheme Industri Area Domestic Industry es Bhachau, NC – 9 52,730 3,000 Varsamedi 28,630K Domest L… ic NC – 10 Anjar 20,830 17,280 Kukma, 102,210 NC – 11 Mundra, 28,650 8,350 KL… Mandvi, Bhuj Water Supply through Narmada Total 102,210 28,630 Network NC - 9, 10, 11 Source: GWIL 2007-08
(Source : GWIL, 2007-08)
Further, data available from GWIL for year 2011, during the year, average 135 -136 MLD supplied to Kutch out of which 90 -100 MLD was supplied for Domestic use and 35 -36 MLD was supplied to Industries. While discussing with Mr. R.L. Patel, Executive Engineer , GWSSB Bhuj, It was found that during 2011, GWIL supplied average 80 MLD for Domestic purpose and approximately 60 MLD supplied to Industries.
Narmada water not a main source: During the study it was found that water from Narmada is used as supplementary source, to tide over the deficit when the local or regional water supply schemes (based on local or regional sources) fails (dry up) and or where the quality of water from the local source is poor or non -potable . Based on pre- monsoon 2010 dat a from WASMO , there are 122 villages having poor quality of water as shown in Map.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 19
Sahjeevan
5. Cost for delivery of water:
Narmada canal based scheme: The Gujarat Water Infrastructure Limited is incurring Rs 15.19 (weighted average) per kilolitre of water supplied to domestic consumers (as from 2008 data). The major component is provision for Interest Cost (46%), followed by Operating costs (ETP) (28%) and depreciation (26%), as shown in the following table.
Table: Cost of Domestic Water Supply
Water Cost (ETP+Interest) / Cost (ETP + Interest + Scheme Network Area Supplied Cost per KL (ETP) KL Depreciation) / KL in KL 5= (3 x 1 2 3 4 6 7= (3 x6) 8 9= (3 x 8) 4) Bhachau, NC – 9 52,730 3.25 171,373 6.59 347,491 8.72 459,806 Varsamedi NC – 10 Anjar 20,830 4.35 90,611 11.93 248,502 15.95 332,239 Kukma, Mundra, NC – 11 28,650 5.97 171,041 19.28 552,372 26.56 760,944 Mandvi, Bhuj Total 102,210 433,024 1,148,365 1,552,988
Weighted Average Cost per KL 4.24 11.24 15.19 (Source: GWIL 2007-08)
The data (GWIL, 2008) indicates that the cost of industrial water supply is far higher compared to this. The major component is operating costs (55%), followed by provision for interest cost (29%) and depreciation (16%), as shown in the following table.
Table : Cost of Industrial Water Supply
Water Cost (ETP+Interest) / Cost (ETP + Interest Scheme Network Area Supplied Cost per KL (ETP) KL + Depreciation) / KL in KL 9= (3 x 1 2 3 4 5 = (3 x4) 6 7= (3 x 6) 8 8) Bhachau, NC – 9 3,000 15.23 45,690 18.57 55,710 20.70 62,100 Varsamedi
NC – 10 Anjar 17,280 16.33 282,182 23.91 413,165 27.93 482,630 Kukma, Mundra, NC – 11 8,350 17.96 149,966 31.26 261,021 38.54 321,809 Mandvi, Bhuj
Total 28,630 477,838 729,896 866,539
Weighted Average Cost per KL 16.69 25.49 30.27
(Source: GWIL 2007-08)
Regional Water Supply Scheme of GWSSB: Based on data received from Gujarat Water Supply & Sewerage Board (GWSSB) for the Financial Year 2010-11, the average cost for Regional Water Supply Scheme per kilo litre is Rs 13.10 for water supplied to village Panchayats at their fall point. Total cost per kilo litre to GWSSB for 54 Regional Water Supply Scheme has shown in following table.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 20
Sahjeevan
Annual O & M cost for 54 RWSS (Rs.) 37.08 C rore The major compone nt is wages (46%), followed by electricity (21%), Population covered under 54 RWSS 11,08,257 payment to GWIL (12%), other costs Water requirement per day 77.58 MLD (12%), outsourcing (6%), hiring & fuel for DG set (3%) and chemical & Cost per kilo litre per Annum Rs.13.10 treatment (1%).
(Source: GWSSB 2010-11)
It is also noticed that GWSSB do not have provision for depreciation. However, separate budget for capital cost for replacement is being made and approved from different scheme of State Budget. The cost per kilo litre for each regional supply scheme was assessed based on data given by GWSSB for Financial Year 2010-11 which is presented in table below:
Category Cost/Kl No. of No. of Out of 54, only 20 regional schemes Scheme villages/ incurring cost between Rs.1/-to 7/- per Kl, Hamlets 14 Schemes incurring cost between Rs.8/-to Rs.1/ - to Rs.7/ - 20 200/31 Rs.12/- per Kl, whereas 20 regional schemes incurring heavy O& M costs to Rs.8/ - to Rs.12/ - 14 233/37 GWSSB. Against these, GWSSB only charges Rs.13/ - to Rs.20/ - 12 231/216 Rs. 2/- per Kl to villages and that too Rs.20/ - to Rs.30/ - 6 62/79 village panchayats are not paying which in turn results into major loss for GWSSB. The Above Rs.30/ - 2 4/7 following map depicts the cost wise pockets
(Source: GWSSB 2010-11) for regional schemes of GWSSB.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 21
Sahjeevan
The reasons for having wide range of costs for different schemes, were discussed with GWSSB Officials which revealed many factors affecting O & M costs for any network. However, two basic scenario can be seen, 1) in case where network is too large covering many villages or population density is too low can be major factors to incur high cost per kilo litre. 2) where, network is short covering less number of villages or population density is high can reduce the cost per kilo litre.
6. Recovery for Centralised Scheme:
Though tariff structure is highly subsidized cost for delivery of water, recovery ratio for GWSSB is very negligible. Total receivables as on 31 st March 2011 were Rs. 89 crores, against which only Rs.8.23 crores were received last year which is 9.24% of total receivables. Out of Rs.89 crores, Rs.23.28 crores (26%) were due from village panchayts, Rs.57.11crores (64%) from Municipalities and Institutions, and Rs. 8.67 crores (10%) were due from Industries. Against these, GWSSB has received Rs.0.13 crores (0.58%) from Village panchayats, Rs.2.58 crores (4.51%), and Rs.5.52 crores (64%) from Industries. This can be seen from following table.
Table showing Recovery Ratio for GWSSB
Figures are in Crore Rs.
Details Rural Urban Industries Total Receivables as on 01.04.2010 19.79 52.08 3.13 75.01 Receivable during the year 2010-11 3.48 5.03 5.54 14.05 Total Receivable as on 31.03.2011 23.28 57.11 8.67 89.06 Total Receipt during the year 2010-11 0.13 2.58 5.52 8.23 Net Receivable as on 31.03.2011 23.14 54.53 3.15 80.83 Recovery Ratio as on 31.03.2011 0.58% 4.51% 63.67% 9.24%
(Source: GWSSB, 2010-11)
Reasons for low recovery were discussed with GWSSB Officials, according to them, water being a socio-political agenda and prime necessity, GWSSB cannot take punitive actions. For example, they cannot disconnect water supply in case village panchayats are not paying regularly. Whereas, they have full power in case of industries not paying bills, GWSSB can cut-off their connection within a month of the account being overdue.
The next chapter presents the findings of the field study in terms of situation of water supply and use in the study villages. It also includes detailed analysis of economic aspects of water supply and its implications.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 22
Sahjeevan
Chapter 4
Water Distribution and its Economics – Village Level Scenario
This chapter presents the findings of the field study in terms of situation of water supply, consumption pattern, and its financial aspects in the study villages. It includes detailed analysis of financial and economic aspects of water supply and its implications for participatory democracy.
The study covered nineteen villages selected on the basis of its main source of water. As said earlier objective of filed study to understand its management system, tariff structure, available water resource Infrastructures, operation staff, based on which to calculate O & M cost per household and per kilo litre. Villages were categorised in three sets as below:
Category 1 Narmada/RWSS based Drinking Water Scheme 6 Villages Category 2 Tube-well based Individual Drinking Water Scheme 5 Villages Category 3 Open-well based Individual Drinking Water Scheme 8 Villages
Field study mainly focused on following points:
Water Consumption Pattern: In order to calculate water consumption at village level, storage capacity and frequency for filling up storage structure was considered. However, other than storage structures, most villages were having alternate sources (like talavs) for their domestic use and for animal drinking water. Cost of Water: In order to derive cost of water at village level, framework designed by WASMO to calculate O & M cost at village level, was used which comprise mainly five components. 1. Maintenance & Repair Cost 2. Establishment Cost (Operator’s Salary) 3. Energy Cost 4. Tariff to GWSSB 5. Depreciation Cost of water resource infrastructures However, study findings indicate that there is no uniform method for considering M & R Cost at village level. As far as depreciation is concerned, since capital cost for infrastructure is being borne by the government, no villages are considering depreciation cost for their water resource infrastructures. Tariff Structure: Each village has its own tariff structures ranges from monthly basis to annual basis and per head basis to per household basis. Amount also varies from village to village Rs. 10/- per month to Rs. 60/- per month. Subsidy Component: As per the recent decision of Government of Gujarat, drinking water is supplied to the Gram Panchayats or Pani Samitis at Rs 2.00 per kilolitre through Regional Water Supply Scheme. However, for villages having Individual Water Supply through tube well or open well were given energy subsidy to lift water from source.
Following paragraphs will explain above parameters in detail for each category:
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 23
Sahjeevan
1. Narmada / RWSS based Drinking Water Scheme
1.1 Key Characteristics of villages: Sr.No. Village Taluka Scheme 1 Chhogelvandh Lakhpat Regional Schmes , Talav and cattle trough for animal, Storage Tanks, household connection 2 Bhanada Abdasa 3 Badalpar Rapar Narmada Supply, Talav and cattle trough for animal, Storage Tanks, household connection 4 Chitrod Rapar 5 Adesar Rapar 6 Gagodar Rapar
1.2 Village size: The study selected villages to cover the wide range of sizes to understand its implication for operations and management of water supply schemes. The study villages ranged from small village like Chogelvandh (23 households) to Gagodar (1200 households).
Size of Village (No. of Households) 1,400 1,200 1,200 1,157
1,000
800
600 500
400 350
200 70 23 - Chhogelvandh Bhanada Badalpar Chitrod Adesar Gagodar
1.3 Water consumption: Though it shows many of villages having water consumption below 70 litres per person per day, which is a State Government norm. It was found during interaction with pani samitis, that due erratic supply of Regional water scheme, normally at the time of water supply, they open their valves to supply at household level so that, storage can be used for subsequent day. And village like Adesar managing shortfall through hiring water cart and tankers.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 24
Sahjeevan
Water Consumption per day per head (in litre) 140 116 120
100 86 80 72 70LPCD 60 53 50
40 25 20
0 Chitrod Gagodar Chhogelvandh Badalpar Bhanada Adesar
1.4 Cost of Water: O & M Cost varies from Rs. 1.80 per kl in case of Chitrod to Rs.11.29 per kl in case of Adesar. Reason for higher cost for Adesar is due to its lower consumption vis a versa lower in case of Chitrod for higher consumption. 35% to 51% of total cost accounts for water tariff to GWSSB that too, only few villages are paying on regular basis . Villages having gravity flow for internal distribution, doesn’t requires energy charges for pumping. In study villages only 2 villages requires pumping machinery for internal distribution.
12.00 11.29 Total Energy Charges Establishment Cost 10.00 Water Tarrif to GWSSB M & R Cost 8.00 Depreciation Charges
6.12 5.77 6.00 5.52
4.00 3.17
1.80 2.00
0.00 1,157 70 23 350 1,200 500 Adesar Bhanada Chhogelvandh Badalpar Gagodar Chitrod
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 25
Sahjeevan
1.5 Tariff Structure: The Water Committee or Gram Panchayat is collecting tariff from the villagers on periodic (monthly, bi-monthly, quarterly, half-yearly, or annual basis, except in Chhogelvandh where tariff is not collected. All villages have a per-household pricing norm. These norms were evolved by each committee or GP based on their experience and assessment of anticipated costs.
Annual Cost per Kl Vs. Annual Tarrif per Kl 14.00 12.68 12.68
12.00 11.29
10.00
8.00 6.12 5.61 5.61 5.77 6.00 5.52 4.79 4.79 3.45 3.45
4.00 3.17
2.00 1.80 0.82 0.82 - 0.00 Gagodar Adesar Bhanada Badalpar Chitrod Chhogelvandh Annual Cost per Kl (Rs.) Annual Tariff per Kl (Rs.)
Gagodar 177%, Adesar 112%, Bhanada 78%, Badalpar 62%, Chitrod 46%, Chhogelvandh 0% of their costs recovers from tariff.
Tariff per Household: Tariff structure varies from Rs.240/- (chitrod) per household per annum to Rs. 640/- (Gagodar) per household per annum. Following chart will depict the cost vs. tariff at household level.
900 Annual Cost per HH Vs. Annual Tarrif per HH 824 800
700 640 638 600 600 576 534 525 500 500 362 400 360
300 240 200
100 0 0 Gagodar Adesar Bhanada Badalpar Chitrod Chhogelvandh
Annual Cost per HH (Rs.) Annual Tariff per HH (Rs.)
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 26
Sahjeevan
1.6 Cost of water excluding depreciation Cost: Depreciation costs accounts 5% to 9% of total cost except Bhanada and Chhogelvandh accounts 19% and 23% respectively. Since capital cost for infrastructure being borne by the government cost of water for each village calculated excluding depreciation cost so as to relate their tariff structure with excluded cost.
12.00 Water Tarrif to GWSSB 10.32 Establishment Cost 10.00 Total Energy Charges M & R Cost 8.00 Depreciation Charges
6.00 5.09 4.97 4.43 4.00 2.98
2.00 1.68
0.00 1,157 350 70 23 1,200 500 Adesar Badalpar Bhanada Chhogelvandh Gagodar Chitrod
1.7 Cost excluding Depreciation Vs. Tariff: In case we exclude depreciation from overall cost, existing tariff recovers 188% for Gagodar, 123% for Adesar, 97% for Bhanada, 68% for Badalpar, 49% for Chitrod, and 0% for Chhogelvand of their Costs.
Annual Cost per Kl Vs. Annual Tarrif per Kl 14.00 12.68 12.68
12.00 10.32 10.00
8.00
6.00 5.61 5.09 4.79 4.79 4.97 4.43
4.00 3.45 2.98
2.00 1.68 0.82 0.82 - 0.00 Gagodar Adesar Bhanada Badalpar Chitrod Chhogelvandh Annual Cost per Kl (Rs.) not factoring Depreciation
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 27
Sahjeevan
2. Tube-well based Individual Drinking Water Scheme
2.1 Key Characteristics of villages: Sr.No. Village Taluka Scheme 1 Pantiya Anjar Tube -well, electric motor, household connection 2 Tunda Mundra Tube -well, cattle trough, electric motor, household connection 3 Shirva Mandvi Tube -well, filter plant, sump, electric motor, household connection 4 Suvai Rapar Tube -well, sump, cattle trough, electric motor, house connection 5 Naliya Abdasa Tube -wells, manual fetching from well (drinking), sumps, motors, house connections
2.2 Village size: The study selected villages to cover the wide range of sizes to understand its implication for operations and management of water supply schemes. The study villages ranged from small village like Pantiya (115 household) to Naliya (1781 households).
Size of Village (No. of Households) 2,000 1,781 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000
800 660 600 381 400 241 200 115 - Pantiya Tunda Shirva Suvai Naliya
2.3 Water consumption: Field Study indicates that water consumption is higher in case of individual water supply based on deep tube-well. It ranges from 87 lpcd to 134 lpcd, higher than 70 litres per person per day, which is a State Government norm. The same can be seen from following chart.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 28
Sahjeevan
Water Consumption per day per head (in litre) 160
140 134 116 115 120 93 100 87 80 70 LPCD 60
40
20
0 Naliya Tunda Shirva Suvai Pantiya
2.4 Cost of Water: O & M Cost varies from Rs. 5.04 per kl in case of Suvai to Rs.12.08 per kl in case of Pantiya. Reason for higher cost for Pantiya, Shirva, Tunda and Naliya is due to its higher Energy Cost. Energy Costs accounts 55% to 83% of total cost. However, Energy cost for pumping water from source is being paid by GWSSB, actual cost reduced drastically. Even though, getting energy subsidy for pumping from source, villages like Naliya has comparatively higher energy cost because they requires pumping for internal distribution. 14.00 12.08 Water Tariff to GWSSB 12.00 Establishment Cost Total Energy Charges 10.00 M & R Cost 7.88 Depreciation Charges 8.00 6.08 5.99 6.00 5.04
4.00
2.00
0.00 115 241 381 1,781 660 Pantiya Tunda Shirva Naliya Suvai
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 29
Sahjeevan
2.5 Subsidized Cost of Water (Energy Subsidy): In case of Individual water supply scheme, energy cost for pumping water from source is being paid by GWSSB, Pantiya, Shirva and Suvai’s energy cost reduced by 22% to 69%. However, in case of Naliya, even though, getting energy subsidy for pumping from source, it is still comparatively higher because it requires pumping for internal distribution. 5.00 4.65 Depreciation Charge 4.50 M & R Cost 4.00 3.70 3.60 Energy Cost 3.50 Establishment Cost 3.00 Tariff to GWSSB 2.60 2.50 1.88 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 1,781 115 660 241 381 Naliya Pantiya Suvai Tunda Shirva
2.6 Tariff Structure: The Water Committee or Gram Panchayat is collecting tariff from the villagers on periodic (monthly, bi-monthly, quarterly, half-yearly, or annual basis. All villages have a per-household pricing norm. These norms were evolved by each committee or GP based on their experience and assessment of anticipated costs.
Annual Cost per Kl Vs. Annual Tarrif per Kl
5.00 4.65 4.50
4.00 3.70 3.60 3.50
3.00 2.63 2.60 2.50 2.03 2.03 2.00 1.88 1.45 1.45 1.50 0.85 0.85
1.00 0.63 0.50 0.00 Pantiya Naliya Suvai Shirva Tunda Annual Cost per Kl (Rs.) after Energy Subsidy Annual Tariff per Kl (Rs.)
Pantiya 71%, Naliya 44%, Suvai 40%, Shirva 34%, Tunda 33% of their costs recovers from their existing tariff structure.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 30
Sahjeevan
Tariff per Household: Tariff structure varies from Rs.120/- (Shirva) per household per annum to Rs. 418/- (Pantiya) per household per annum. Following chart will depict the cost vs. tariff at household level. 1400 Annual Cost per HH Vs. Annual Tarrif per HH
1200 1144
1000
800 587
600 551 500 498 418
400 360 200 180
200 120
0 Pantiya Naliya Suvai Shirva Tunda
Annual Subsidized Cost per HH (Rs.) Annual Tariff per HH (Rs.)
2.7 Cost of water excluding depreciation Cost: Depreciation costs accounts 5% to 12% of total cost. In case of Individual Water Supply Scheme, 90% of capital cost for infrastructure being borne by the government, while 10% needs to be contributed by Village Panchayat. In this context, since most villages are not considering depreciation, cost of water for each village excluding depreciation cost was also assessed so as to relate their tariff structure with excluded cost. 4.50 4.18 Establishment Cost 4.00 Subsidised Energy Charges 3.50 M & R Cost 3.02 3.01 Water Tarrif to GWSSB 3.00 Depreciation Charges 2.50 2.03 2.00 1.57 1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00 1,781 660 115 241 381 Naliya Suvai Pantiya Tunda Shirva
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 31
Sahjeevan
2.8 Cost excluding Depreciation Vs. Tariff: In case we exclude depreciation from overall cost, existing tariff recovers 88% for Pantiya, 49% for Naliya, 48% for Suvai, 42% for Tunda,and 40% for Shirva of their costs recovers from tariff.
1200 Annual Cost per HH Vs. Annual Tarrif per HH 1028 1000 Annual Subsidized Cost per HH (Rs.) excludes Depreciation Annual Tariff per HH (Rs.) 800
600 500 477 431 418 417 400 301 200 200 180 120
0 Pantiya Naliya Suvai Tunda Shirva
3. Open-well based Individual Drinking Water Scheme
3.1 Key Characteristics of villages: Sr.No. Village Taluka Scheme 1 Vanki Mundra Well, Storage tank/sump, elec tric motor 2 Godhara Mandvi Filter well, Recharging structure, Storage tank , electric Motor 3 Karmata Abdasa Well, Talav, check dam, Storage tank, solar pump 4 Khirai Rapar Well, Talav, Storage tank, e lec tric m otor 5 Dadamapar Abdasa Well, Recharging structure, Storage Tank, solar pump 6 Bhavanipar Abdasa Well in d/s of Irrigation dam, Storage Tank, electric motor 7 Bara Abdasa Well, Talav, check dam, Storage tank, solar pump 8 Bitta Abdasa Well in d/s of Irrigation dam & ESR (GWSSB), electric motor
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 32
Sahjeevan
3.2 Village size: The study selected villages to cover the wide range of sizes to understand its implication for operations and management of water supply schemes. The study villages ranged from small village like Dadamapar (35 household) to Godhara (658 households). Size of Village (No. of Households) 700 658
600
500
400 325 300 300 225 200 160
100 70 35 40 - Dadamapar Karmata Bara Bhavanipar Khirai Vanki Bitta Godhara
3.3 Water consumption: Field Study indicates that water consumption is ranging from 68 lpcd to 118 lpcd in case of individual water supply based on open-well, slightly higher than 70 litres per person per day, which is a State Government norm. The same can be seen from following chart. Water Consumption per day per head (in litre) 140 118 120 114 105 100 87
80 75 72 69 68 70 LPCD 60
40
20
0 Karmata Dadamapar Bara Bitta Khirai Vanki Godhara Bhavanipar
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 33
Sahjeevan
3.4 Cost of Water: O & M Cost varies from Rs.3.58 per kl in case of Bara to Rs.10.07 per kl in case of Godhara. Reason for higher cost for Shirva, Tunda and Bitta is due to it’s higher energy cost. In their case, energy costs accounts 57% to 79% of total cost. Villages like Karamata, Damapar, and Bara have higher M & R cost (33% to 50%) and depreciation cost (30% to 32%) due to higher capital cost of solar pumps set and lower population density. Khirai has employed three operation staff which results in higher establishment cost (54%). 12.00 Water Tarrif to GWSSB 10..07 10.00 Establishment Cost 08.63 Total Energy Charges M & R Cost 8.00 7.13 6.79 Depreciation Charges 6.40 6.08 6.00 5.50
4.00 3.58
2.00
0.00 658 40 225 160 300 35 325 70 Godhara Karmata Khirai Bhavanipar Vanki Dadamapar Bitta Bara
3.5 Subsidized Cost of Water (Energy Subsidy): In case of IWSS, energy cost for pumping water from source is being paid by GWSSB, energy cost for Godhara, Khirai, Vanki, Bhavanipar & Bitta reduced by 21% to 57%, however, in case of Godhara and Vanki, it is still comparatively higher because it requires pumping for internal distribution. In case of Karamata, Bara & Dadamapar there is no change since they are using solar pump.
10.00 Water Tarrif to GWSSB 9.00 8.64 Establishment Cost
8.00 Subsidised Energy Charges 6.71 M & R Cost 7.00 6.08 Depreciation Charges 6.00 5.19 5.05 5.00 4.69
4.00 3.58
3.00 2.35
2.00
1.00
0.00 40 658 35 225 300 160 70 325
Karmata Godhara Dadamapar Khirai Vanki Bhavanipar Bara Bitta
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 34
Sahjeevan
3.6 Tariff Structure: The Water Committee or Gram Panchayat is collecting tariff from the villagers on periodic (monthly, bi-monthly, quarterly, half-yearly, or annual basis except in Bara where tariff is not collected. All villages have a per-household pricing norm. These norms were evolved by each committee or GP based on their experience and assessment of anticipated costs.
Annual Cost per Kl Vs. Annual Tarrif per Kl 10.00
9.00 8.64 8.00
7.00 6.71 6.08 6.00 5.19 5.04 5.00 4.69 3.45 3.45 3.58
4.00 3.21 2.60 2.60 2.30 2.30
3.00 2.35 1.75 1.75 1.71 1.71 2.00 1.48 1.00 - 0.00 Bitta Dadamapar Godhara Bhavanipar Khirai Vanki Karmata Bara Annual Cost per Kl (Rs.) after Energy Subsidy Annual Tariff per Kl (Rs.)
Bitta 137%, Dadamapar 57%, Godhara 39%, Bhavanipar 37%, Khirai 33%, Vanki 29%, Karmata 27% and Bara 0% of their costs recovers from tariff. In village Bara they have corpus fund donated by mahajan families from which drinking water scheme is being managed.
Tariff per Household: Tariff structure varies from Rs.180/- (Vanki) per household per annum to Rs.720/- (Dadampar) per household per annum. Following chart will depict the cost vs. tariff at household level. 1800
Annual Cost per HH Vs. Annual Tarrif per HH 1577 1600
1400 1269 1200 933 1000 930 757
800 720 614
600 535 420
400 360 360 264 250 200 200 180 0 0 Bitta Dadamapar Godhara Bhavanipar Khirai Vanki Karmata Bara
Annual Subsidized Cost per HH (Rs.) Annual Tariff per HH (Rs.)
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 35
Sahjeevan
3.7 Cost of water excluding depreciation Cost: Depreciation costs accounts 5% to 9% except in case of Bhavanipar (14%), Dadamapar, Bara & karmata (30 to 32%) of total cost. In case of Individual Water Supply Scheme, 90% of capital cost for infrastructure being borne by the government, while 10% needs to be contributed by Village Panchayat. In this context, since most villages are not considering depreciation, cost of water for each village excluding depreciation cost was also assessed so as to relate their tariff structure with excluded cost.
7.00 Establishment Cost 6.23 5.97 6.00 Subsidised Energy Charges 4.77 M & R Cost 5.00 4.47 4.15 4.00 3.77
3.00 2.51 1.88 2.00
1.00
0.00 658 40 225 300 35 160 70 325 Godhara Karmata Khirai Vanki DadamaparBhavanipar Bara Bitta
3.8 Cost excluding Depreciation Vs. Tariff : In case we exclude depreciation from overall cost, existing tariff recovers 171% for Bitta, 83% for Dadamapar, 47% for Bhavanipar, 42% for Godhara, 38% for Karmata,36% for Khirai, 33% for Vanki, and 0% for Bara of their costs. 1200 1091
1000 866 864 800 720 696 654
600 544 429 420
400 360 360 250 210 200 200 180 0 0 Bitta Dadamapar Bhavanipar Godhara Karmata Khirai Vanki Bara
Annual Subsidized Cost per HH (Rs.) excludes depreciation Annual Tariff per HH (Rs.)
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 36
Sahjeevan
3.9 Capital Investment for Open-well based Scheme: Though it was not the scope of study to examine capital investment required for different kind of Water supply scheme, field study reveals interesting data or open well based scheme. Except in case of Godhara, capital investment requires at village level for open-well based scheme ranging from Rs.10-15 laks only. Since open well based schemes draw water from Shallow aquifer, ecologically and economically too open-well based schemes are more viable. Capital Investment (Rs. in Lakhs) 45.00 40.46 40.00
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00 14.90 13.46 13.50 15.00 11.70 12.17 12.30 9.64 10.00
5.00
0.00 35 300 160 225 40 325 70 658 Dadamapar Vanki Bhavanipar Khirai Karmata Bitta Bara Godhara
4. Summary Village level Scenario
Village level scenario can be summarised in major four parts - 1) Consumption Pattern, 2) Cost Structure, 3) Tariff Structure and 4) Overall Management System
4.1 Water Consumption Pattern: • Most of villages having alternate source like pond/talav for animal and/or domestic use • per capita consumption is high in most villages, though data shows few villages having low consumption due to various reasons • Instances were found where supply of Narmada water / regional scheme was erratic and short in demand.
4.2 Cost Structure: • Overall O & M Costs are higher in villages having Individual scheme compare to regional /Narmada water supply • Villages having regional or Narmada water supply were having major component of water charges to GWSSB. • Villages having tube well based scheme were having major component of energy charges
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 37
Sahjeevan
• O & M Costs are high in case of low density villages vis-a-viv low in case of higher consumptions • Energy cost is zero where solar pumps were installed in case of open well based scheme • Capital Cost in tune of Rs. 10-15 lakhs required for open well based scheme
4.3 Tariff Structure: • Existing tariff recovers major O & M costs in villages having Regional scheme /Narmada water supply (due to low O & M Cost) • Existing tariff recovers half the cost in most villages having Individual Schemes • Since capital investment for source in case of IWSS, being borne by Govt., villages do not consider depreciation cost on their water assets. • While deciding tariff, villages do not consider scientific method of calculating M & R Cost
4.4 Overall Management System: Community has crucial role to play in governance of its drinking water scheme at village level. Government of Gujarat also identified the role of Village Panchayat and further to its Pani Samitis for the internal distribution system and to oversee Operation & Maintenance of the scheme . Most villages are having Pani Samitis to oversee management of their water scheme; to frame rules and regulations, to levy and collect tariff on regular basis. However, relationship between village panchayat and Panisamiti needs to be formalised. So that panchayat can have control over their assets and management system. Capacity of pani samiti and panchayat be built to standardise method of calculating O & M Cost; allocating appropriate provisions for O & M Cost in village panchayat’s budget for each financial year; though most villages have tariff system, it needs to be restructured considering O & M cost and to introduce volumetric tariff system at household level.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 38
Sahjeevan
Chapter 5 Conclusions and Recommendations
1. Conclusions: Based on the previous chapters and findings of the study, following can concluded:
1. 558 villages (63%) are still getting water from local source, 218 villages(25%) relied on dual source, where Narmada water being mixed in existing local storage facility and mixed water supplied in case of short fall /poor quality, where as only 99 (11%) villages primarily dependent on Narmada water.
2. Government provides 100% capital investment for infrastructure including source development, piped network, storage structures, pumping machinery etc. for narmada water and regional schemes to supply water at village fall point where as 90% provides to village panchayats for developing infrastructure in case of individual scheme.
3. The cost of supply of narmada water (Rs.28.39/kl) and regional scheme (Rs.13.10/kl) are higher than that of individual scheme using local source (Rs.3/- to Rs.12/- per kl) Scheme Cost to Cost to Cost to Total Cost GWIL /Kl GWSSB /Kl Village/Kl /Kl (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) Narmada 15.29 13.10 2 to 11 30 to 39 RWSS - 13.10 2 to 11 15 to 24 Tube -well based IWSS - 1 to 8 2 to 5 5 to 12 Open -well based IWSS - 1 to 3 2 to 9 3 to 10
4. Shallow aquifer based individual water supply schemes are ecologically and economically too far more feasible since it (Open well with recharging structure) draws water from shallow layer, consumes lower energy compare to deep ground water (tube-well) based scheme, requires lower capital investment (Rs.10-15 lakhs per village).
5. While charging Rs.2/- per kl, Government provides higher subsidy to villages in case of narmada water (93%) and regional water supply (85%). Whereas, energy subsidy ranges from 21% to 69% in case of individual water supply scheme using local source.
6. The state policy provides higher subsidy (Rs 15.27) to industrial consumer as against the urban domestic consumer (Rs 9.19 per kl) and other religious and education institutions (Rs.3.19 per kl).
7. Although management systems in each study villages were in place, there are few areas where capacity building of Gram Panchayats and Panisamitis needs to be A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 39
Sahjeevan
strengthened, like, formalise relationship between pani samiti and village panchayats; regularise water agenda in Panchayat body meeting and Gramsabhas; help standardise calculating O & M Costs and tariff structure; introducing volumetric tariff system to promote water conservation and judicious use of water, etc.
2. Recommendations: Based on findings of the study, following recommendations can be given for principles to be followed for policy framework.
1. Policy should incentivise capital investment for shallow aquifer based water resource schemes rather than deep ground water based schemes. That can be supported through surface water based schemes in scarce resource or poor quality of local source.
2. Policy should prioritise use of local source first and distance water should be brought-in for short fall / poor quality.
3. Price of water supplied from distance source should be comparatively higher so that village panchayats get promoted to set up their own local sources.
4. Individual schemes based on shallow aquifer should incentivize such a way that panchayats take initiatives to own their water scheme.
5. Incentives for energy subsidy to be linked with depth and consumption of water to protect deep ground water and energy resources.
6. Policy should promote adoption of renewable energy based pumping systems (solar pumps) to draw water from source.
7. Tariff for water should be on volumetric basis. Further village Panchayat be promoted to develop tariff at household level on volumetric basis.
8. Industries should be charged on a profitable basis so that cross subsidy can balance the cost for rural and other users.
9. Pricing policy for industries should be designed such a way that Industries get promoted to set up their own desalination plant
10. Pricing for social sector, education and health institutions should be subsidized.
11. GWSSB which is a primary agency for water supply should run on a financially viable model.
12. Method for calculating cost of water should be standardised at all level.
13. Policy should have provisions for strengthening of Village/Taluka Panchayats for Water Governance aspects.
A Study to understand economics, pricing of Drinking Water and it's implication for Participatory Democracy 40