The role of communities in conserving water

An oran in Rajasthan’s Jaisalmer district. Orans are sacred forests which hold deep religious and cultural significance to local communities. Some communities have been establishing orans to serve an additional purpose — water conservation. Photo: Special Arrangement

On March 22, World Water Day, Prime Minister Narendra Modi highlighted the need to conserve water for present and future generations through collective action. On the same day, the Ministry of Jal Shakti launched the Jal Shakti Abhiyan: Catch the Rain 2025, emphasising the importance of community participation in water conservation.

Issues for consideration

In the context of this occasion, it is important to take a panoramic view of India’s water policies, with a focus on rural areas. New environmental challenges and renewed understandings of ecosystems underscore the need to recalibrate rural water policies. The following issues must be considered by policymakers.

First, policies should ensure effective participation from communities and mainstream their ecological practices. Indigenous and local communities carry rich knowledge of their immediate ecosystems. Existing policies provide for their participation, but it is limited to the management of water sources; decision-making powers remain with state authorities. Further, policies have overlooked the need to identify and empower communities’ own ecological practices on water management. Rather, they have formalised water governance by introducing uniform practices. This is counter-intuitive to the objective of encouraging effective participation from communities.

Take, for example, Water User Associations (WUAs), which are statutory bodies set up in different States since the 1990s to further participatory irrigation management. Water users (or farmers) are members of these bodies. While the responsibility to manage irrigation sources has been transferred to them, they have little say in decision-making.

Second, water policies should consider the disproportionate vulnerability of certain groups to environmental crises. Subaltern social groups and economically marginalised individuals are more vulnerable to such crises than others. Within these groups, those located at the intersection of social and economic marginalisation are the most vulnerable. Therefore, it is crucial for policies to consider the interests of vulnerable groups. Concomitantly, policies must recognise their agency in managing water and ensure their participation in decision-making.

Third, policies must address the issue of fragmentation of water management. Here, fragmented management means that different parts of the ecosystem, such as forests, water, land, and biodiversity, are regulated by different policies and authorities. Such an approach fails to consider the interdependence of these constituents. While there have been some efforts towards taking an integrated approach, they are limited and ineffective. Since policies adopt a fragmented approach, they do not always achieve the desired goals, and in fact, adversely affect each other’s potential to do so.

A good example of an integrated approach comes from the ecological practices of rural communities in western India. For example, the practice of establishing orans. Orans are sacred forests which hold deep religious and cultural significance to local communities. Some communities have been establishing orans to serve an additional purpose — water conservation. By augmenting tree and grass cover, orans trap surface runoff and support in-situ rainwater harvesting. Such an appreciation about the interdependence of water with other constituents of the ecosystem is key to effective water management and conservation.

Fourth, globally, there has been a thrust on adopting a more-than-human perspective in environmental governance. This means considering the interests of the non-human environment in laws and policies that regulate the environment. This approach is based on the idea that the non-human environment has an intrinsic value, and so its interests must be considered in environmental policies. The judiciary has often subscribed to this approach and developed compelling jurisprudence recognising the rights of nature. However, water policies have overlooked this aspect. Their sole focus has been on human needs for water. Contrastingly, water management practices of some of the local communities in western India take a more holistic perspective to water governance. For example, the amount of water available for irrigation is partly dependent on its sufficient availability for animals.

A final issue is the impact of climate change on water. A recent report published in the journal Nature concluded that as global temperatures rise, the water gap in India will widen. Both climate and water policies must address the impact of climate change on water. Water policies must focus on creating climate-resilient water systems and increasing the climate resilience of existing systems; climate policies, particularly adaptation policies, should focus on building the resilience of ecosystems to water gaps.

Beyond the rhetoric

A common theme across these suggestions is that local and indigenous communities and their practices can support effective water management. Therefore, rural water policies should facilitate active engagement with communities. This means moving beyond the existing rhetoric of engagement, and centering communities’ voices in the decision-making process. While doing so, we must be mindful that communities’ practices may come with their own limitations which should be addressed through sensitisation and capacity building where required.

Kanika Jamwal, doctoral candidate, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore