Back

SPOTLIGHT                         ON REGIONAL AFFAIRS

Introduction

This paper attempts to look into the achievements and failures of India and Pakistan in utilising their respective share of water from the Indus Basin. Studies show that India and Pakistan share lot of similarities and fewer differences in the management of the Indus Basin waters. Comparing notes identifies the need for Pakistan to learn from India in increasing water productivity and developing hydroprojects’ potential on the one hand; while on the other, it points to the need for Pakistan to take serious policy steps against India’s drive to build numerous hydropower projects on its eastern tributaries of the Indus Basin, which can cumulatively increase flood level in wet seasons and decrease water volume in dry seasons downstream Pakistan. The present and future challenge for both the countries is efficient utilisation of existing water resources. While India needs to focus on the maintenance of existing water-infrastructure and follow water-efficient practices, Pakistan must embark on major investments in building water infrastructure besides maintaining the existing one and adopting sustainable practices for water conservation.

A profile of the Indus Basin

Arising from the Tibetan Plateau in western China, the Indus River travels northwest through the Himalayan valleys and after crossing into the Kashmir region and traversing Pakistan, flows out into the Arabian Sea. The principal rivers of the Indus system are snow-fed and their flow varies seasonally and spatially.(1) Most of the Indus Basin lies in India and Pakistan, and only about 13 per cent of its total catchment in Afghanistan and in China’s autonomous region of Tibet.(2)

The Indus Waters Treaty, brokered by the World Bank in 1960, divides the Indus Basin system between India and Pakistan by allocating three eastern rivers of the basin, namely the Ravi, Beas and Sutlej to India and the three western rivers — the Indus, Chenab and Jhelum — to Pakistan. The Treaty obliges both India and Pakistan to not interfere in the waters of the rivers allocated to the other side except for the limit specified(3) for Agricultural Use, Domestic Use and Non-Consumptive Use. India was also given the right to generate hydroelectricity on waters of the western rivers through run-of-the river projects, i.e. without altering the flow of water. The same right has, however, not been given to Pakistan on the eastern rivers.(4)

 

 Table 1.1

Statistics for the Indus Basin

Sources (India): Central Water Commission, 2010(5)

Sources (Pakistan): WAPDA 2011,(6) Pakistan Economic Survey 2010-2011,(7) Planning Commission.(8)

Note: BCM = Billion Cubic Meters, CM = Cubic Meters, MAF=Million Acres Feet

Eastern rivers of Indus Basin and India

Having a catchment area of 321289 sq km up to border, the Indus Basin is one of the six major river basins of India.(9) It lies in the states of Himachal Pradesh, Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan and the disputed area of Jammu & Kashmir.

Although water is a state subject in India and states have the exclusive power to regulate their water supplies, irrigation and hydropower infrastructure, the central government under the provision of “economic and social planning” of the concurrent list has been proposing various reforms such as the introduction of participatory management in irrigation and sponsoring projects to utilize surface and groundwater more efficiently. A Model Bill to regulate and control the development and management of ground water was formulated in 2005, which led to the establishment of a groundwater authority under the direct control of the government. In the recent past, the Indian Government embarked upon major reforms in the water sector,(10) which are largely focused on improving water efficiency in agriculture and building new power projects. These reforms however lack aspects on maintenance of old and existing infrastructure.

The present section deals with past achievements and failures of India in managing its share of waters in the Indus Basin within two selected study areas: irrigation and hydropower.

Achievements and failures

Irrigation

Immediately after independence from colonial rule and in the pre-Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) period, India embarked upon various schemes to provide irrigation to those areas previously uncovered by the British. This included enlarging the capacity of the Sirhind Canal, and Upper Bari Doab Canal System as well as construction of the Bist Doab Canal System on the Sutlej.(11) The Ferozepur Feeder and head regulator of Rajasthan Feeder was completed during 1947-1960 along with the remodelling of the pre-1947 barrages of Ropar and Madhopur. The Bhakra-Beas system was conceived as early as the late 1950s. It consists of the Bhakra Dam constructed on the Sutlej River in the state of Himachel Pradesh, Nangal Barrage constructed on the same river downstream of Bhakra Dam in the state of Punjab and its canal system. Major part of the canal system was operational before 1960 with the Bhakra Dam being completed in 1963. This new system of Indus canals led to the growth of irrigated area in the Indian part of the Indus Basin from 22.0 million hectares (ha) in 1947 to 55.0 million ha in 2000.(12) The Bhakra Dam alone added an irrigated area of 6.8 million hectares over 35 years. The production of rice and wheat in the Bhakra command area in 1996-97 was eight times the 1960-61 figure.(13)

One of the biggest landmarks in Indus Basin irrigation achievements is the Indira Gandhi Canal Project. Conceived as early as 1940 and previously known as the Rajasthan Canal Project, it was reviewed in the post-IWT years. The main objective of the project was to convert arid and semi-arid lands of Rajasthan into cultivable area and to provide water for drinking and industrial uses to the local people. Construction began in 1958 to provide 9.36 BCM of water per year to the Indira Gandhi Canal (IGC) by building links between the main canal starting from the Sutlej River in Punjab and a feeder canal on Harike Barrage constructed at a point downstream the confluence of the Beas and Sutlej rivers. The IGC project with a cultivable command area of 1.55m ha is India’s largest irrigation and drinking water project to cater for the needs of five districts in north-western Rajasthan.(14) The project is still under construction creating further irrigation potential in the command areas.

In the immediate post-IWT period, the Indian government embarked upon interlinking the eastern rivers — the Ravi, Beas and Sutlej, through canal networking and diversion projects. The idea to transfer surplus water of the Beas into the Sutlej led to the conception of Beas-Sutlej Link Project, the largest tunnelling project in the country.(15)

Since 1960, three important storage dams have been built on the eastern rivers of the Indus basin, namely the Bhakra dam on the Sutlej, the Beas (Pong) dam on the Beas and the Thein (Ranjit Sagar) dam on the Ravi, with respective gross storage capacities of 9340 million cum, 8570 million cum. and 3280 million cum.(16) Besides building these massive reservoirs, the Indian government embarked upon modernization of canal systems and command area development programme to enhance agriculture production in areas fed by the Indus waters.

Irrigation water management in
Indus Basin: Achievements and failures

Some of the prominent achievements of India in the irrigation sector of the Indus-fed areas are:

·                    In the past decades, India has achieved a steady increase in irrigation development through various major, medium and small irrigation projects. Over the years, states in the Indus region became the food baskets for other areas in India. Major area under food grain in Haryana and Punjab is irrigated and these are the highest water productivity states in India contributing to 72 per cent and 75 per cent of consumptive water use, respectively.(17)

·                    Huge investments in canal networking and inter-basin transfer projects resulted in the popular green revolution which transformed India from a nation facing frequent famines in the 1950s and 60s to a self-sufficient and food exporting country.

·                    Irrigation development in poor rainfall areas especially in Punjab and Haryana is supported by the vast network of power supply and distribution networks. This allows farmers to use groundwater in addition to canal water to grow crops throughout the year.(18) Installation of diesel pumpsets and energised tubewells remained the largest for these two states in the Indus Basin. Moreover, Indian Punjab received 100 per cent rural electrification which gave farmers reliable and fast access to groundwater resources.(19)

·                    Indian experiences with Water User Associations (WUAs) are a good example in participatory watershed management. Within Rajasthan alone, there are 800 WUAs. Although these WUAs are less effective in influencing equitable water distribution and demand management, their positive role in cost recovery, system maintenance and service quality cannot be denied.(20

However, India today has achieved the limits of developing its water resources for irrigation purposes. Reliability on surface water in the Indus region is difficult due to its dependency on seasonal rainfall and snowmelt. With regard to groundwater resources, the scenario is bleak in the face of reports of overexploitation by the agriculture sector of the region states. India is the world’s largest user of groundwater in agriculture.(21) Haryana and Punjab have exploited about 94 per cent of their ground water resources. This water stress situation combined with low rainfall in the Indus basin region of India ranging from 300 mm in Rajasthan to 800 mm in Haryana and falling water tables by less than one metre to several metres/per year,(22) pose alarming threats to future irrigation in the region. With reduced rainfall levels in the past years, there has been a sharp rise in tubewell uses for irrigation across the Indus region, exhausting the groundwater resources and putting the high-cost incurred canal system in jeopardy.

Some of the major failures of the Indian government in irrigation water management in the Indus Basin are listed below:

·                    As the country witnessed a swift increase in irrigation potential across the years, a gap can be identified between the potential created and utilised (Table 1.2) in the Basin states. Moreover, wide discrepancies exist between huge water withdrawals (96%) and actual water used for crop production (37%) in the region (Table 1.3). The table shows that the irrigation sector accounts for 96% of total water withdrawal and the actual consumptive use for the crops is only 37%. This leaves a balance of 59%, which could otherwise be saved by adopting water-efficient practices at farm level. Unconcerned about this variance, the Indian government plans to create additional irrigation potential in the Eleventh Plan through major and medium irrigation projects(23) rather than focusing on increasing the efficient utilisation of existing water supply and irrigation potential created under the previous five-year plans.

·                    Waterlogging and salinity issues have also been arising out of mismanagement of water resources. For example, the command areas irrigated under the famously thriving Indira Gandhi Canal Project have witnessed an average rise of groundwater of 0.42 m/annum during the two-decade period observed from 1952 to 1972. Cultivation in about 4.4% of the area has been abandoned due to waterlogging and salinity. One of the major reasons for high rise in soil salinity and waterlogging is the absence of drainage system in the IGCP region. Moreover, inconsistency between large water releases and low irrigation usage is also leading to water seepages and subsequent waterlogging.(24)

·                    Lack of enforcement of energy regulations is one of the leading causes of the inconsistency pattern in water supply and demand resulting in subsequent inefficient use of water. The Indian government has failed to restrain farmers from digging more bore-wells in spite of the existing laws.(25) Almost 75% of all irrigated areas in Indian Punjab depend upon well and tubewell irrigation.(26) According to V.R. Reddy, “since water rates are charged in terms of area, crop and season (or combinations thereof), they fail to create enough incentive for water use efficiency. While water rates in groundwater areas are relatively higher, they are also related to average pump costs rather than to water productivity or economic value.”(27)

·                    The cropping pattern in the Basin states is largely responsible for the current water depletion scenario. Over the past decades, the pre-dominance of rice-wheat production in the Indus basin of India, Punjab and Haryana in particular, has led to a reduction in area under low-water requiring crops, resulting in high demand for groundwater resources.(28) The overdrawal of water beyond the recharge capacity of the aquifers is resulting in rapid fall of subsoil water to dangerous levels.

 

Table 1.2

Achievements of Total Irrigation Potential Created and Utilised (Cumulative) by State [Taking Major, Medium and Minor Irrigation Schemes into consideration]

(Unit: '000 Hectare)

Source: Central Water Commission, India, 2010.(29)

Table 1.3

Water withdrawal and Usage Discrepancies
for irrigation in Indus Basin (India)

 

Source: R. M. Saleth, 2009.(30)

Notes:

 ¹Total includes withdrawals for irrigation, domestic and industrial sectors

²This also includes recycling

³NET is the net evapotranspiration of all irrigated crops

⁴It relates total groundwater withdrawals to the total groundwater availability through natural recharge and return flows

Hydropower

The hydroelectric potential of the Indus Basin in the country as assessed by the Central Electricity Authority of India is 19988.00 Megawatt (MW) with a probable installed capacity of 33382.00 MW. The total number of identified schemes in the Basin is 190, out of which 79 (see Annex 1) have been graded under categories A, B, and C for priority purposes.(31)

Achievements and failures

India has achieved phenomenal progress in developing its hydropower resources although huge gaps exist between demand and supply of power across the country. The five rivers of the Indus Basin — the Ravi, Beas, Sutlej, Chenab and Jhelum — provide large hydropower resources to India while for the latter two rivers, limits and conditions have been specified in the IWT. The Sutlej River with an identified hydropower potential of 9443.75 MW is the largest hydropower resource in the Indian part of Indus Basin. Five schemes on the Sutlej are already in operation with a total installed capacity of 3150.25 MW. Projects under execution or likely to be commissioned in the near future will add another 1880.50 MW to the installed capacity. The remaining 4296 MW potential is yet to be developed.(32) Similar is the case with other rivers in the basin where a large number of major and medium hydropower schemes are already in operation, some are under study and others awaiting approval for execution (Table 1.4).

Table 1.4

Existing Hydropower projects in the Indus Basin (India)

Source: Adapted from South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People.(33)

The development of hydropower potential in the Indus Basin has become a priority for the Indian government over the past few decades as seen from reports of large number of proposed schemes. In fact, the valleys of Ravi, Beas and Sutlej have been saturated with hydel projects.(34) The large number of proposed and installed hydropower stations in the Basin are, however, generating below the installed capacities. According to South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People “a downward trend (Figure 1.1) can be witnessed in hydropower generation across the Basin tributaries including Sutlej, Beas, Ravi, Chenab and Jhelum.”(35)

Figure 1.1 Hydro Power Performance in Sutluj, Bias, Ravi, Chenab and Jhelum Basin

 

Source: South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People, 2010.(36)

The viability of under-construction and proposed hydropower projects is, therefore, a big question mark in view of the diminishing performance of existing hydropower projects in the Basin. This also nullifies Indian arguments for the need to explore the untapped hydropower potential in the occupied Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) region. The Indian government has long been arguing that due to the limitations of the IWT regarding the Indian use of waters of the Jhelum and Chenab, the occupied state of J&K has to suffer energy shortages. Whereas the reality is that the performance of big hydropower projects in India does not match with the energy demands. For example, the two big hydropower projects in J&K – Salal 690 MW on the Chenab and Uri 480 MW on the Jhelum — have been generating much less power than existing demand.(37) According to Central Electricity Regulatory Commission, the Naptha Jhakri project (1500 MW) on the Sutlej River was not generating peaking power while it could.(38)

Like irrigation, the hydropower projects of India in the Indus Basin suffer from lack of maintenance. New developments in the hydropower sector can only lead to success with an integrated policy formulation. At present, the pace to build new hydropower projects in the Indus Basin seems to be driven by environmental changes and altered river flows in the region. The feasibility of these projects is, however, questionable in the long run, particularly for the large ones. Furthermore, downstream environmental aspects of these projects will only add to riparian tensions in South Asia. Pakistan has been raising serious objections to India’s massive designs of control infrastructures on the Jhelum and Chenab which may reduce the level of water for Pakistan’s own hydropower projects and irrigation schemes.

According to a US Senate report, “India has 33 projects at various stages of completion on the Indus River tributaries. While studies show that no single dam can affect Pakistan’s waters but cumulative effects of these projects could give India the ability to store enough water to limit the supply to Pakistan at crucial moments in the growing season.”(39)

Western rivers of Indus Basin and Pakistan

The Indus River system is the single major water resource for Pakistan. Depending heavily on seasonal rainfall and glacial melt for its average flow, the Indus Basin system is the backbone of agrarian economy of Pakistan.

With 56% drainage area(40) of the Indus Basin within its boundaries, Pakistan has been facing the challenge of water management with the hydrological changes induced by infrastructure investments and climate variations in the basin. Pakistan’s water resources are under serious stress from population pressure, lack of storage capacities and inefficient water management practices at the public level. The government of Pakistan has increasingly been paying attention to various problems in the water sector over the recent years. For example, increases in electricity tariffs and diesel prices during recent years have discouraged farmers from high groundwater mining through electric and diesel tubewells. However, there is a greater need to improve and modernise the existing canal infrastructure in order to encourage conjunctive use of surface and groundwater for agriculture.

Existing water resources can generate more than the required energy but this requires infrastructure investment and technological applications. The present challenge for Pakistan is to increase water sector efficiency at the public level besides developing new projects.

The following section deals with the achievements and failures of Pakistan in managing its share of waters in the Indus Basin within two selected study areas: irrigation and hydropower.

Achievements and Failures

Irrigation

The process of water development for irrigation was given great attention in the post-independence period. Besides other large-scale schemes to interlink canal irrigation in the country, three major storage reservoirs, namely Tarbela on the Indus, Mangla on the Jhelum and Chashma on the Indus, were built (Table 1.5) to meet the requirements for those areas earlier irrigated from supplies of the rivers that went to India under the Indus Waters Treaty (1960). This vast irrigation system feeds more than 40 million acres of irrigated land in Pakistan, a country with the highest irrigated and rain-fed land ratio in the world.(41) The same system provides fresh water supply to a population of 172 million besides sharing aggregate energy at 33.07 per cent.(42)

 

Table 1.5

Salient Features of Irrigation Network on the Indus Basin (Pakistan)

Source: Shams ul Mulk, 2009.(43)

Irrigation water management in
Indus Basin: Achievements and Failures

Some of the major achievements of Pakistan in the Indus Basin irrigation system are reviewed:

·                    The Indus Basin infrastructure created in the latter half of the past century is a valuable asset for Pakistan as it generates production that accounts for 25 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP), 47 per cent of total employment, and more than 60 per cent of annual national foreign exchange earnings.(44) The most vibrant and result-producing era of agriculture was the introduction and widespread adoption of green revolution technologies with increased canal supplies after completion of the Mangla Dam and IBP works, giving an average growth rate of 6.3% during 1965-70.(45)

·                    Massive investment in surface water infrastructure during the post-independence period has resulted in positive economic growth commonly known as green revolution of the 1960s. The actual power and irrigation benefits from Tarbela only (1975-1998) were 25 per cent higher than the appraisal estimates.(46)

·                    Agriculture is the largest user of water (97%) in Pakistan. In order to achieve high production targets, the water sector has increasingly been gaining government attention during the past decades. A number of new projects financed by the government are in the process of completion (Table 1.6), which will add to government’s control over surface water supply to the command areas.

·                    In order to control land salinisation, the government introduced groundwater pumps in the 1960s installing 16,700 tubewells to supply water to an area of 2.6 million ha under the Salinity Control and Reclamation Projects (SCARPs). Besides reducing the risk of soil salinity, the SCARP programme increased irrigation supplies to the existing public canal system through groundwater discharge.(47)

·                    Other water management efforts include massive projects of National Drainage Programme (NDP), left- and right-bank outfall drains (LBOD and RBOD), National Watercourse Improvement Programme, On-farm Water Management (OFWM) programme for controlling seepage and improving water delivery to the lower reaches, rehabilitation and modernization programme of barrages and irrigation systems by the provinces, creation of provincial irrigation and drainage authorities, water-user associations (WUAs), farmer organizations (FOs) and area water boards (AWBs). Water conservation technologies like bed-furrow, raised beds, zero-tillage, laser land levelling and dry-seeding of rice have been introduced but are going at a very limited scale.(48)

 

Table 1.6

Major Water Sector Projects under Completion

 

* Date of completion for all three canals is for phase-I, whereas cost is reflected for total project.

Source: Pakistan Economic Survey 2010-2011.(49)

 

Some of the major failures of the Pakistan government in irrigation water management in the Indus Basin are listed below:

·                    Throughout the post-independence period, massive attention has been given to the engineering aspects of the irrigation system in Pakistan with no concern for management and conservation of water resources. Receiving only 250 millimetres (mm) of rainfall per year—far less than the world average,(50) Pakistan is totally dependent on the Indus Basin waters for irrigation and other requirements. Lack of adaptation to seasonal variations in basin flows is the major reason for the present water crisis in the country. The problem gets further exacerbated with irregular Indian withdrawal and release of water in the shared river bodies. This happened in August-September 2008 when India withdrew water from the Chenab to fill its Baglihar hydroelectric dam reducing the river flows to as low as 25,000 cusecs on 4 September 2008.(51) This also happened recently when Indian releases of excess Sutlej water during the monsoon rains have inundated a large number of Pakistani villages and destroyed hundreds of hectares of ready cropped area.

·                    The present irrigation system supplies about 11% less water than actual crop requirements.(52) At the time of independence, Pakistan had about 67 million acre feet (MAF) water available for diversion, this figure increased to about 85 MAF by 1960. The recent statistical data shows that the Indus and its tributaries provide about 147 MAF during flood season, out of which nearly 106 MAF is diverted into canals and is available for irrigating 14.6 million hectares of land, while about 39 MAF of water outflows into sea annually, whereas over 8.6 MAF is considered evaporation and seepage losses in the river system. The storage capacity of Pakistan’s major reservoirs — Tarbela, Mangla and Chashma — has already declined to 12.6 MAF.(53)

·                    Official estimates for present irrigation efficiency range from 40 to 45 per cent only About 11 million hectares of arable land in Pakistan is affected by waterlogging while over 3 million hectares are affected by salinity.(54)

·                    In spite of the fact that total water availability has increased within the Indus Basin Irrigation System (IBIS) over the past 15 years, the average water availability is continuously falling in Pakistan due to limited storage capacity and water leakages from canals. During the monsoon season of July-September 2010, Pakistan received an increase of 81.6 per cent in actual rainfall but the canal head withdrawals in Kharif (April-September 2010) decreased by 21 per cent.(55)

·                    The government is all in favour of increasing the cultivated area by building more storage reservoirs. The target set for 2025 is to increase the cropped area to 31.83 million hectares.(56) Although the focus should be on increasing water productivity per irrigated unit.

·                    Pakistan’s irrigation system is suffering from major water losses (Table 1.7) owing to lack of canal system maintenance, siltation in the reservoirs, saline water areas and traditional cropping patterns. Water seepages are one of the major reasons for low crop yields against per unit of water withdrawal.

·                    Lack of demand management has led to the overexploitation of water resources resulting in falling water tables, degraded groundwater quality and poor yields. The area irrigated by groundwater alone has increased from 2.7 million to 3.4 million ha whereas the area irrigated by canal water alone has decreased from 7.9 million to 6.9 million ha.(57) The declining use of surface water across the country is challenging the efficacy of world’s largest contiguous irrigated network.

 

Table 1.7

Seepage losses in Indus Basin Irrigation System

Source: Medium Term Development Framework 2005-2010.(58)

Hydropower

Hydropower (11 %) after gas (50%) and oil (30%) is the third largest source of energy supply in the country.(59) Pakistan is endowed with hydropower resources of about 60000 MW, almost all of which lie in the provinces of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, Gilgit-Baltistan, Punjab, besides Azad Jammu & Kashmir (AJ&K). The total installed capacity of hydropower projects in the country up till 2010 is 6720 MW, out of which 3849 MW is in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, 1699 MW in Punjab, and 133 MW in the Gilgit-Baltistan, besides 1039 MW in AJ&K. (Table 1.8).(60)

 

Table 1.8

Hydropower Resources of Pakistan

Source: Annual Report of Private Power and Infrastructure Board, 2011, Government of Pakistan.

Achievements and failures

At the time of partition in 1947, Pakistan inherited only 60 MWs hydropower capacity for its 31.5 million people. By 1958, this capacity was increased to 119 MW. During the post-Indus Waters Treaty period, the 1000-MW Mangla and 3478-MW Tarbela Hydropower Projects were completed to meet the rising demand of the growing population.(61) At present, 35 major and medium hydropower stations are operating in Punjab, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, Gilgit-Baltistan and AJ&K. Within Gilgit-Baltistan alone, there are 84 small hydel projects with less than 2 MW capacity (see, Annex II).

The development of hydropower in the country has really helped in increasing the rural electrification network in the country. Pakistan has installed 538 micro hydelpower plants (5-50 KW capacity) with a total capacity of 7.8 MWs resulting in electrification of 700,000 houses.(62) The Tarbela and Mangla dams are a big success story in hydropower development of the country. These dams are paying back three times their original cost by generating hydroelectricity at less than Re1 per unit.(63) The Tarbela Dam has in fact exceeded the predicted levels of power generation than the actual installed capacity.(64)

A number of new hydropower projects have been under investigation while others are in the process of construction. According to WAPDA reports, there are more than 150 projects of 30039 MWs which are in the process of implementation in the provinces of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, Punjab, Gilgit-Baltistan, and AJ&K by public and private entities.(65)

Nearly all the operational projects in Pakistan are generating 2-30 MWs hydropower except for three large (Mangla, Tarbela and Ghazi Barotha) and three medium hydel stations (Warsak, Chashma and Malakand). These projects are only providing 35% of current power generation.(66) It is in this scenario that the country has not only been facing severe power shortages but the power rates are getting higher day by day. The full development of country’s hydropower potential requires huge infrastructure investment which depends upon effective planning as well as external help.

Many of the existing hydropower projects are generating below their installed capacity either owing to siltation problem in the reservoirs or due to old canal infrastructure. The two operating hydropower stations – Nandipur and Chichoki located at Upper Chenab Canal system — are reportedly generating power less than their installed capacity.(67) Learning from these experiences, the government is now building run-of-the-river projects to generate electricity without any fear of sedimentation. The Chashma Hydelpower Station on the Indus has already set the precedent for such projects in Pakistan.

Lots of problems regarding low level of hydropower generation than the actual potential of the country can be identified at the top of which are the financial constraints and administrative delays in commissioning the projects. Most under-construction projects are reportedly behind their scheduled time of completion. The feasibility studies and engineering design of the Neelum-Jhelum Hydroelectric Project (NJHP) were completed in 1997 for a 969-MW project by a Norwegian company.(68) Approved in 2002, the project was supposed to be completed in eight years time but the unnecessary delays in commissioning the project have not only increased the project cost but also provided India good enough time to start the construction of its Kishanganga Hydropower Project on the same river tributary. The NJHP has achieved only 13 per cent physical progress,(69) whereas the Indian project is in its advanced stages.

Many other projects are also facing similar delays including the Khan Khwar and the Duber Khwar in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province and Chakothi-Hattian and Kohala power projects in AJ&K.(70)

Notes for comparison

In the post-IWT period, both India and Pakistan embarked upon projects for interlinking rivers in their respective water bodies. They share lot of similarities and fewer differences in the management of the Indus Basin waters (Table 1.9). India built the gigantic Indira Gandhi Canal Project besides many other reservoirs and Pakistan built numerous canals and barrages to interlink its three western rivers. Massive investments in building water infrastructure led to the growth of irrigated areas in the Indus Basin (Table 1.10) which subsequently provided a boost to the agricultural economies of the two countries. Introduction of tubewells and rural electrification encouraged the development of groundwater resources in both the countries. This has accelerated crop outputs in both India and Pakistan, the latter achieving high growth in terms of agricultural produce but low water productivity as compared to India. The overall water productivity was reported to be 0.5 kg/m³ for Pakistani Punjab and 1.0 kg/m³ for the Bhakra system of the Indian Punjab.(71)

 

Table 1.9

Comparison of irrigation and hydropower development in the Indus Basin

Randomly selected areas	Pakistan	India
Agriculture growth rates 1947-2002	3.58 % per year	2.8 % per year
Maintenance of water distribution network	Low	Low
Water productivity*	Low	High
Exploitation of groundwater resources	High	High
Nutrient-exhaustive cropping pattern	High	High
Environmental degradation in canal command areas	High	High
Pricing of groundwater(72) (diesel pumps, electric tube-wells)	High	High
Private-public participation in energy development projects	Low	High
Inequity in water distribution	High	High
Seepage losses	High	Low

*crop yields per cubic meter of water

Sources: World Bank,(73) V.R. Reddy,(74) Tushaar, et al,(75) R.S. Sidhu, and A.S. Bhullar(76)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 1.10

Growth of irrigated area in the Indus Basin in million ha

Source: H. Fahlbusch et al.(77)

 

There has been a shift in both India and Pakistan from surface water uses to groundwater uses during the recent decades. In spite of massive investments by India and Pakistan in canal networking, irrigation at present in both the countries relies heavily on tubewell and other water supply sources. Pure canal irrigation is on decline whereas groundwater irrigation is increasing in both. During the seven-year period between 1994 and 2001, India and Pakistan together lost over 5.5 million ha of canal irrigated areas despite massive investments in rehabilitation and new projects.(78) Reports show an overexploitation of groundwater resources not only for irrigation but also for domestic and industrial uses. Huge estimates exist for underground drilling and tubewells by the population living in the Indus Basin. According to a study by the University of Colorado, “the most intensively irrigated areas in northern India, eastern Pakistan and parts of Bangladesh are losing groundwater at an overall rate of 54 cubic kilometres per year.”(79) In future, therefore, water could be a major limiting factor in sustaining agriculture production in India and Pakistan.

Water productivity of the Indus region varies geographically and seasonally. Past massive investments in infrastructure development by India is one of the major reasons for comparatively better water productivity of irrigated crops. The existing live storage capacity of Pakistan is only 9 per cent of its average annual flow as compare to India which has 35 per cent (Table 1.11). Similar is the case for the development of hydropower resources in India and Pakistan as the former is performing better with regard to the existing power generation capacity (Table 1.12). In recent decades, Pakistan has embarked upon huge investments in water infrastructure development which will increase water storage capacity besides generating cheap hydelpower. Sustained institutional support is required in the hydropower sector of Pakistan to encourage rapid development of hydelpower resources besides taking serious policy steps against India’s drive to build numerous hydropower projects on the eastern tributaries of Indus Basin, which can cumulatively increase flood level in wet seasons and decrease water volume in dry seasons downstream Pakistan. The present day challenge for both India and Pakistan is the proper utilisation of existing water resources by adopting water conservation practices and efficient irrigation methods.

 

Table 1.11

Average annual flow and storage
capacity of Indus Basin rivers in India and Pakistan

Sources: *Central Electricity Authority, India 2011.(80)

**Medium-Term Development Framework 2005-2010.(81)

 

Table 1.12

Status of hydroelectric potential development in Indus Basin

Identified capacity as per assessment		Capacity developed		Capacity under construction		Capacity developed + under construction		Balance potential
	MW	MW	%	MW	%	MW	%	MW	%
Indus* (India)	33832	9929.3	29.34	5431.0	16.5	15360.3	46.51	18471.7	54.60
Indus** (Pakistan)	59796	6720	11.23	30039	50.23	36759	61.47	23037	38.53

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sources: *Central Electricity Authority, Government of India.(82)

** Private Power and Infrastructure Board, Government of Pakistan.(83)

Conclusion

This research study shows that during the past 50 years, Indus Basin development has achieved substantial progress in both India and Pakistan within the sectors of irrigation and hydropower generation. The two countries share few differences and more similarities in the management of their respective share of Indus Basin waters. Massive investments in building surface water infrastructure and exploring groundwater development have resulted in high production rates in India and Pakistan. However, the management of Basin waters at present is posing a number of challenges including population pressures, climate-induced changes in water flows, groundwater depletion and old inefficient infrastructure for surface water supply. In the background of growing water insecurity in the region, past achievements in water management in the Basin cannot be called sustainable. Both countries need to adopt water-efficient practices at the public level besides maintaining existing water infrastructure.

 

Notes and References

 

1.                  “Indus River,” Encyclopedia Britannica Online, 2011. <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/286872/Indus-River>, (accessed 29 June 2011).

2.                  “History of Multipurpose River Valley Project Development in Indus Basin”, Bhakra Beas Management Board, Government of India. <http://bbmb.gov.in/english/menu2.asp>, (accessed 30 June 2011).

3.                  “Annexure B and Annexure C”, Indus Waters Treaty, World Bank. <http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTSOUTHASIA/Resources/223497-105737253588/IndusWatersTreaty1960.pdf>, (accessed 7 July 2011).

4.                  See Articles II, III and IV, Text of Indus Waters Treaty, World Bank, Ibid.

5.                  “Water and Related Statistics”, Water Planning and Project Wing, Central Water Commission, Government of India, December 2010. <http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/water%20and%20related%20statistics.pdf>, (accessed 8 July 2011).

6.                  “Projects for Friends of Democratic Pakistan”, Water and Power Development Authority, Government of Pakistan, March 2011, p.2. <http://www.wapda.gov.pk/pdf/BrochureFODPMarch2011.pdf>, (accessed 11 August 2011).

7.                  Pakistan Economic Survey 2010-2011, Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan. <http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey_1011.html>, (accessed 10 August 2011).

8.                  “Medium-Term Development Framework, 2005-2010,” Planning Commission, Government of Pakistan, 2005. <http://www.planningcommission.gov.pk/mtdf/27-Water%20Sector/27-Water%20Sector.pdf>, (accessed 10 August 2011).

9.                  “Water and Related Statistics”, op.cit., (ref.5).

10.              Philippe Cullet and Joyeeta Gupta, “India: Evolution of Water Law and Policy”, in Joseph W. Dellapenna and Joyeeta Gupta (eds.), The Evolution of the Law and Politics of Water, (USA: Springer Academic Publishers, 2009), pp.166, 169-171.

11.              H. Fahlbusch, Bart Schultz, and C.D. Thatte, (eds) The Indus Basin: History of Irrigation, Drainage and Flood Management, (New Delhi: International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage; New Delhi, 2004), p.25.

12.              Ibid., pp.25-27, 132.

13.              “Report on Economic Impact of Interlinking of Rivers Programme,” National Council of Applied Economic Research, India, April 2008, p. xiii. <http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/99.pdf>, (accessed 11 July 2011).

14.              “Water Resources Development Projects in Indus Basin,” Hydrology and Water Resources Information System for India, National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee, India. <http://www.nih.ernet.in/rbis/india_ information/iNDUS_PROJECTS.htm>, (accessed 12 July 2011).

15.              Water Resources Department, Government of Rajasthan, India. <http://waterresources.rajasthan.gov.in/4bhakhra.htm#link>, (accessed 12 July 2011).

16.              Ibid.

17.              Bharat R. Sharma, Upali Amarasinghe and Cai Xueliang, “Assessing and Improving Water Productivity in Conservation Agriculture Systems in the Indus-Gangetic Basin,” paper presented at the 4th World Congress on Conservation Agriculture-Innovations for Improving efficiency, Equity and Environment, New Delhi, India, 4-7 February 2009. <http://cpwfbfp.pbworks.com/f/WCCA-Paper_BRS_.pdf>, (accessed 20 July 2011).

18.              G. Narendranath, Uma Shankari and Rajendra K. Reddy, “To Free or Not to Free Power: Understanding the Context of Free Power to Agriculture”, Economic and Political Weekly, Mumbai, 31 December 2005, p.5561.

19.               Nirvikar Singh and Deepali S. Kohli, “The Green Revolution in Punjab, India: The Economics of Technological Change”, Journal of Punjab Studies, Special Number on Agriculture and Rural Economy of Indian Punjab, Volume 12, Number 2, Fall 2005, pp.285-302.

20.              R. M. Saleth and U.A. Amarasinghe, “Promoting Irrigation Demand Management in India: Policy Options and Institutional Requirements”, in R.M. Saleth, (ed.), Strategic Analyses of the National River Linking Project (NRLP) of India, Series 3. Promoting Irrigation Demand Management in India: Potentials, Problems and Prospects, (Colombo: International Water Management Institute, 2009), pp. 14-15. <http://nrlp.iwmi.org/PDocs/workshops/IWMI%20NRLP-Series%203-Latest-final%20(27-03-2009).pdf>, (accessed 20 July 2011).

21.              Tushaar Shah, “Indian Irrigation in transition”, paper presented at a Workshop on Water Resources Management – Economic Instruments, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, 23-24 January 2009. <http://www.igidr.ac.in/conf/water/Indian% 20Irrigation%20in%20Transition-Tushaar%20Shah.pdf>, (accessed 20 July 2011).

22.              World Bank and the Government of India, Initiating and Sustaining Water Sector Reforms: A Synthesis, (Washington and New Delhi: World Bank publications and Allied Publishers, 1999), p.95.

23.              “Annual Report 2009-2010”, Central Water Commission, Government of India, p.11. <http://www.cwc.gov.in/main/downloads/Final% 20Annual%20Report%202009_10.pdf>, (accessed 20 July 2011).

24.              Bharat R. Sharma, K.V.G.K. Rao and Govind Sharma, “Groundwater Externalities of Large Surface Irrigation Transfers: Lessons from Indira Gandhi Nahar Pariyojana, Rajasthan, India”, in R.M. Saleth, (ed.), Strategic Analyses of the National River Linking Project (NRLP) of India Series 5, op.cit., pp.107-122, (ref.20).

25.              Narendranath et al., op.cit., (ref. 18), pp.5565-5566.

26.              Tushaar Shah et al., “Is Irrigation water free: A Reality Check in the Indo-Gangetic Basin,” World Development, Vol.37, Issue 2, February 2009, p.4.

27.              V.R. Reddy, “Water pricing as a demand management option”, in Saleth, (ed.), op.cit., (ref.20), p.146.

28.              A. K. Jain, and Raj Kumar, “Water Management Issues – Punjab, North-West India”, presented at Indo-US Workshop on Innovative E-technologies for Distance Education and Extension/Outreach for Efficient Water Management, 5-9 March 2007, ICRISAT, Patancheru/Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India, p.1. <http://akicb.ifas.ufl.edu/upload/proceedings/jainak_water_management.pdf>, (accessed 20 July 2011).

29.              “Water and Related Statistics”, op.cit., (ref.9), p.134.

30.              Saleth, op.cit., (ref.20).

31.              “Hydro development Plan for 12^th Five-Year Plan (2012-2017)”, Central Electricity Authority- Hydro Planning and Investigation Division, Government of India, September 2008, New Delhi. <http://www.cea.nic.in/reports/hydro/hydro_develop_12th_plan.pdf>, (accessed 2 July 2011).

32.              “Tidong-II Hydroelectric Project (70 MW) Himachal Pradesh, Preliminary Feasibility Report”, Ministry of Power, Government of India. <www.powermin.nic.in/whats_new/PFR/HP/Tidong-II.pdf>, (accessed 3 July 2011).

33.              “Declining Generation of Big Hydropower Projects”, Dams, Rivers and People, April-May 2010, Vol. 8, Issue 3-4, p. 7, South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP), New Delhi. <http://www.sandrp.in/drp/DRP_Apr_May-2010.pdf>, (accessed 2 August 2011).

34.              “In the Name of Clean Energy – A report on Asian Development Bank Financed Hydropower Projects in Himachal Pradesh”, May 2011, South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP), Delhi, p.21. <http://www.sandrp.in/hydropower>, (accessed 2 August 2011).

35.              “Declining Generation of Big Hydropower Projects”, op.cit., (ref.33).

36.              Ibid.

37.              “Baglihar HEP: Some Crucial Facts”, South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP), Delhi, May-June 2005, p. 2. <www.sandrp.in/hydropower>, (accessed 3 July 2011).

38.              Quoted in “Diminishing Performance of Big Hydro Projects in India”, South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP), Delhi, 1 May, 2010. <www.sandrp.in/hydropower>, (accessed 3 July 2011).

39.              “Avoiding Water Wars: Water Scarcity and Central Asia’s Growing Importance for Stability in Afghanistan and Pakistan”, A Majority Staff Report, Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, Washington, 112^th Congress, First Session, 22 February  2011.

40.              “Report of National Seminar on Public Private Partnership (PPP) Mode of Financing & Implementation of Water Sector & Hydro Power Sector Projects,” Project Management and Policy Implementation Unit (PMPIU), Ministry of Water & Power, Islamabad, 5 January 2009.

41.              Aijaz Nizamani, Fauzia Rauf and Abdul Hakeem Khoso, “Case Study: Pakistan - Population and Water Resources”, in Alex de Sherbinin and Victoria Dompka (eds.), Water and Population Dynamics: Case Studies and Policy Implications, (Washington DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1998).

42.              “Power Generation”, Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA), Government of Pakistan. <http://www.wapda.gov.pk/ htmls/pgeneration-hydelpower.asp>, (accessed 15 June 2011).

43.              Shams ul Mulk, “Pakistan’s Water Economy, the Indus River System and its Development Infrastructure, and the Relentless Struggle for Sustainability”, in Michael Kugelman and Robert M. Hathaway (eds.), Running on Empty: Pakistan’s Water Crisis, (Washington, D.C: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 2009), p. 64.

44.              Ibid.

45.              Dr. Shahid Ahmed, National Seminar on “Water Conservation, Present Situation and Future Strategy”, organized by Project Management & Policy Implementation Unit (PMPIU) of the Ministry of Water & Power, Government of Pakistan, p.50.

46.              “Pakistan Country Water Resources Assistance Strategy Water Economy: Running Dry”, 14 November 2005, World Bank Report. <http://siteresources.worldbank.org/PAKISTANEXTN/Resources/PWCAS-Full.pdf>, (accessed 10 August 2011).

47.              Asad Sarwar Qureshi, Peter G. McCornick, A. Sarwar, Bharat R. Sharma, “Challenges and Prospects of Sustainable Groundwater Management in the Indus Basin, Pakistan”, Water Resource Management online, Spring, 2009. <http://cpwfbfp.pbworks.com/f/Sutainable+ GW+Mgt_Indus_Pak.pdf>, (accessed 11 August 2011).

48.              The Punjab province of Pakistan has introduced a crash programme of providing 2500 laser land levellers at 50 per cent subsidy to farmers in order to have at least one unit in each union council of the province. Abdul Hakeem Khan, Peter McCornick and Asim Rauf Khan, “Evolution of Managing Water for Agriculture in the Indus River Basin”, Proceedings of the second International Forum on Water and Food, (Volume 3), Addis Ababa, 10-14 November 2008, CPWF, Colombo, p.3. <http://cpwfbfp.pbworks.com/f/Evolution+of+ agrl+water+mgt+in+IB.pdf>, (accessed 11 August 2011).

49.              “Agriculture,” Pakistan Economic Survey, 2010-2011, Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan, p.25.

50.              Kaiser Bengali, “Water Management under Constraints: The Need for a Paradigm Shift”, in Michael Kugelman and Robert M. Hathaway (ed.), op.cit., (ref.43), p.45.

51.              Under the Indus Waters Treaty 1960, the minimum flow of the Chenab River has to be 55,000 cubic feet per second. Kaiser Bengali, ibid., pp.48-49.

52.              “Pakistan Water Sector Strategy”, National Water Sector Profile, Volume 5, October 2002, Ministry of Water and Power Office of the Chief Engineering Advisor/Chairman Federal Flood Commission, Islamabad. <http://cms.waterinfo.net.pk/pdf/vol5.pdf>, (accessed 15 June 2011).

53.              Dr. S.M. Alam and Dr. M H. Naqvi, “Water scenario and Pakistan”, Pakistan Economist, 19-25 May 2003. <http://www.pakistaneconomist.com/pagesearch/Search-Engine2003/ S.E180.asp>, (accessed 15 June 2011).

54.              Pakistan Economic Survey, 2010-2011, Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan, pp.23, 213.

55.              Ibid., p. 24.

56.              “Pakistan Water Sector Strategy”, op.cit., (ref.52), p.71.

57.              Qureshi et al., op.cit., (ref.47).

58.              “Upgrading Physical Infrastructure,” Medium-Term Development Framework 2005-2010, Planning Commission, Government of Pakistan. <http://www.pc.gov.pk/mtdf.html>, (accessed 16 June 2011).

59.              Hassan Abbas, “Pakistan 2020: A Vision for Building a Better Future,” May 2011, Asia Society, Pakistan 2020 Study Group Report. <http://asiasociety.org/Pakistan2020>, (accessed 4 July 2011).

60.              “Hydropower Resources of Pakistan”, Annual Report of Private Power and Infrastructure Board, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad, February 2011, pp.1-2.

61.              Ibid., p. 1.

62.              “Success Story”, Pakistan Council for Renewable Energy Technologies, Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of Pakistan. <http://www.pcret.gov.pk/>, (accessed 12 August 2011).

63.              Arshad H. Abbasi, “Hydropower — clean energy”, Dawn, Islamabad, 4 March 2010.

64.              “Dams and Development: A New Framework for Decision Making,” Report of the World Commission on Dams, (United Kingdom: World Commission on Dams, 2000), p.52. <http://www.unep.org/dams/ WCD/report/WCD_DAMS%20report.pdf>, (accessed 12 August 2011).

65.              “Hydropower Resources of Pakistan,” op.cit., (ref.60).

66.              Rest of the 65% power generation is from thermal, nuclear and rental power sources, –“Projects for Friends of Democratic Pakistan,” Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA), Government of Pakistan, March 2011. <http://www.wapda.gov.pk/pdf/ BrochureFODPMarch2011.pdf>, (accessed 11 August 2011).

67.              Z. Majeed, Z. U. Hasan and A. Piracha, “Developing Hydropower Schemes on Existing Irrigation Network: A Case Study of Upper Chenab Canal System,” International River Basin Management Congress Book, Chapter 2, No. 70, (Turkey: International Congress on River Basin Management, 22-24 March 2007), p.884. <http://www.dsi.gov.tr/ check English version>, (accessed 11 August 2011).

68.              WAPDA Annual Report 2009-2010, Water and Power Development Authority, Government of Pakistan, p.74.

69.              Ibid.

70.              Arshad H. Abbasi, op cit., (ref.63).

71.              Bharat R. Sharma, Upali A. Amarasinghe and Alok Sikka, “Indo-Gangetic River Basins: Summary Situation Analysis”, International Water Management Institute (IWMI), New Delhi Office, New Delhi, India, 25 July 2008, p.4. <http://cpwfbfp.pbworks.com/f/ IGB_situation_analysis.PDF>, (accessed 15 July 2011).

72.              While both countries have increased the power tariffs as an approach to groundwater management, diesel pumps in operation in the Indus region outstrip the electric ones.

73.              “Better Management of Indus Basin Waters Strategic Issues and Challenges”, The World Bank: Pakistan, 2006. <http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPAKISTAN/Data%20and%20Reference/20805819/Brief-Indus-Basin-Water.pdf>.

74.              V.R. Reddy, “Water pricing as a demand management option,” in Strategic Analyses of the National River Linking Project (NRLP) of India, Series 3. Promoting irrigation demand management in India: Potentials, problems and prospects (Colombo: International Water Management Institute, 2009). <http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/Publications/Other/PDF/ NRLP%20Proceeding-3.pdf>, (accessed 14 July 2011).

75.              Tushaar Shah, Intizar Hussain, and Saeed ur Rehman, “Irrigation Management in Pakistan and India: Comparing Notes on Institutions and Policies”, Working Paper 4, Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI), 2000. <http://ideas.repec.org/p/iwt/ worppr/h027088.html>, (accessed 12 July 2011).

76.              R.S. Sidhu and A. Bhullar, “Patterns and Determinants of Agricultural Growth in the Two Punjabs”, Economic and Political Weekly, Mumbai, 31 December 2005, Vol. XL No 53, pp.5620-5627.

77.              H. Fahlbusch et al., op.cit, p.27, (ref.11).

78.              Tushaar Shah, Taming the Anarchy: Groundwater Governance in South Asia, (Washington D.C: The RFF Press, 2008). <http://waterknowledgehub.iwmi.org/PDF/REFORM_OR_MORPH.pdf>, (accessed 16 August 2011).

79.              Quoted in M Rodell, I. Velicogna and J.S. Famiglietti, “Satellite-based estimates of groundwater depletion in India”, Nature, Volume 460, Issue 7257, 13 August 2009. <http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090812/ pdf/460789a.pdf>, (accessed 16 August 2011).

80.              “Status of hydroelectric potential development — Basin wise,” Central Electricity Authority, Ministry of Power, Government of India. <http://www.cea.nic.in/reports/hydro/he_potentialstatus_basin.pdf>, (accessed 30 June 2011).

81.              “Upgrading Physical Infrastructure,” Medium Term Development Framework, op.cit., (ref.58).

82.              “Status of hydroelectric potential development — Basin wise”, op.cit., (ref.80).

83.              “Hydropower Resources of Pakistan”, op.cit., (ref.60).

 

 

 

Annex I

Proposed Hydropower Projects of India on Indus Basin

Source: Central Electricity Authority, Government of India

 

Annex II

Existing Hydropower Projects in Pakistan

Source: Annual Report – Private Power and Infrastructure Board, Government of Pakistan, February 2011.

 

 

---

Accountable	Consensus Oriented	Participatory
Responsive	GOOD GOVERNANCE	Transparent
Follows the Rule of Law	Effective and Efficient	Equitable and Inclusive

Ranking in terms of Civil Liberties and Political Rights in South Asia, 1999-2007
1999				2007
Country	Political rights rank	Civil liberties rank	Freedom	Political rights rank	Civil liberties rank	Freedom
Pakistan India Bangladesh Sri Lanka Nepal Maldives Bhutan	5 4 4 4 4 6 7	4 2 2 3 3 6 7	Partly free Partly free Partly free Partly free Partly free Not free Not free	5 3 4 4 4 5 5	6 2 4 4 5 6 6	Not free Free Partly free Partly free Partly free Not free Not free

Country Ranking	Country	Score
36	Bhutan	5.7
87	India	3.3
91	Sri Lanka	3.2
134	Bangladesh	2.4
143	Maldives	2.3
143	Pakistan	2.3
146	Nepal	2.2

Country	Ranking
	Voice and Accountability	Political Stability & Absence of Violence	Government Effectiveness	Regulatory Quality	Rule of law	Control of Corruption	Average
Bangladesh	35.1	7.5	16.7	23.3	27.8	16.7	21.1
Bhutan	29.4	71.2	64.8	13.8	59.4	75.2	52.3
India	60.2	13.2	54.3	44.3	55.7	46.7	45.7
Maldives	44.1	39.2	42.4	37.1	52.8	29.5	40.8
Nepal	30.8	5.2	18.1	23.8	17.9	25.2	20.1
Pakistan	20.9	0.5	19	33.3	19.3	13.3	17.7
Sri Lanka	32.2	11.8	49	43.3	53.3	44.8	39

	1990/91	1997/99	2015	2030	1990/92	1997/99	2015	2030
	Percentage of population				Million persons
Developing countries	20	17	11	6	815	776	610	443
Sub-Saharan Africa	35	34	23	15	168	194	205	183
excl. Nigeria	40	40	28	18	156	186	197	178
Near East/North Africa	8	9	7	5	25	32	37	34
Latin America and Caribbean	13	11	6	4	59	54	40	25
South Asia	26	24	12	6	289	303	195	119
East Asia	16	11	6	4	275	193	135	82

Area	Targets	Strategies
Delivery of public goods and services	Efficient system for delivery of public goods and services	Through computerization and establishing performance-based criteria for delivery of basic public goods and services
Parliaments	Openness   Transparency     Participatory	Through increasing media coverage;   Proceedings must be made public and easily accessible to all;   People must be allowed to attend except in extraordinary circumstances
Judiciary	Mitigating corruption within courts   Educating people about laws Improving competence of judges	Through enforcing higher penalties   Through the media Through regular training
Police	Improving professional competence   Bringing accountability in the system and minimise external influence   Bringing change in traditional policing system	Through modern training to counter present-day challenges   An independent commission should be established to oversee police functioning   Strengthen community policing system
Local Government	Improvement in functioning	Through maximising people’s participation Laws must be made to minimise  administrative control of the state.   Through increasing budgetary allocation Search for the multiple sources of income instead of relying exclusively on the state Accountability over funds and annual auditing through independent auditors
Participation	Maximising people participation at all levels both for men and for women	Through public awareness about the system and their role and importance in it. The task can be done well by the media.
Continuity