A prescription that suits the doctor! 
  Does the World Bank advocate development, or is it simply a money-
lender pushing its loan packages? For too long, the distinction has 
been blurred, allowing the Bank to make self-serving 
recommendations. This writer notes the latest instance of this as 
the Bank pushes into water sector reforms in India. 

  By Sudhirendar Sharma  
  India Together | 11 November 2005 
  http://www.indiatogether.org/cgi-bin/tools/pfriend.cgi 

The World Bank reiterates what has been glaringly evident: India 
will have neither the cash to maintain and build new infrastructure, 
nor the water required for the economy and its people; and unless 
current water development and management system goes through 
dramatic changes, the country's water future will remain turbulent. 
Making the most out of this prophecy, however, the World Bank has 
carved out a renewed but controversial niche for itself in reshaping 
the country's sustainable water future. The Bank's recent report 
India's Water Economy: Bracing for a Turbulent Future (see link) has 
caused quite a stir; the craftily packaged assessments and insights 
only help the legitimise a lending portfolio commensurate with a 
reform process that favours privatisation. With $3.2 billion in 
loans for 2005-08 as against $700 million for the previous five 
years, the Bank has clearly launched itself to drive significant 
changes in water governance. 

Based on a set of commissioned studies by Indian experts, the study 
has meandered through the muddled waters of the sub-continent to 
conclude that the country needs the World Bank's money as much as 
its knowledge to affect a paradigm shift in water management. 
Through a comprehensive analysis of the country's water economy the 
report builds a case for increased investment in water 
infrastructure. The trouble is, the Bank's advocacy for such 
investment includes a prominent place for its own lending - a clear 
conflict of interest. 

It is true that the gap between tariffs and value of water supply 
services has fuelled endemic corruption in the water sector. As 
demand outpaces supply, the deficit of funds needed to sustain under-
priced delivery has grown. This does not mean, however, that the 
World Bank's recipes offer a good solution; the lender's track 
record in affecting reforms in the water sector across different 
countries is highly questionable, so even if it has correctly 
identified the problem India should be wary of its proposed 
solutions. Unfortunately, given the current emphasis on 
infrastructure development, the Bank's report finds favour with 
politicians and planners of every hue as it advocates building dams 
and irrigation networks - the sort of investment from which 
corruption has poured over the years. Consultations with several 
ministries including Water Resources and Finance have yielded strong 
endorsement of re-engagement with the apex bank in the full-range of 
water-related issues, including the big and the complex. 

Interestingly, the report interprets available information to suit 
its prescription. It quotes a study by the International Food Policy 
Research Institute to argue that the poor and the landless have 
gained as much as 125% from the massive Nagarjunasagar project on 
the Krishna River by way of wage employment. Further, the report 
highlights the World Bank's own assessment of the Bhakra dam that 
adds to its overwhelming 'pro-poor' thesis of large dams. These, the 
report argues, are reason enough for India to increase its stock of 
water infrastructure, even if it were to be at the cost of massive 
displacements! 

Such an assessment could at best be seen as motivated, as it ignores 
reams of literature that presents counter-position on dams. 
Moreover, reading the report one senses that the Bank recognises 
problems with past policies and implementation, only to thereafter 
urge more of the same, completely ignoring the evidence of past 
failures. Thus, though the report is critical of an enormous backlog 
of deferred maintenance of existing infrastructure that reflects 
water machinery's gross inefficiency and lack of accountability, its 
prescription - increased lending to better infrastructure - could 
end up repeating the same mistakes, and leave India footing an even 
larger bill. 

India must store as much water as possible to fight poverty, the 
report notes. Storage structures alone can plug the leak as 50 per 
cent of precipitation falls in just 15 days and over 90 per cent of 
river flows occurs in just four months in the country. Currently, 
India stores only about 30 days of its rainfall, compared to 900 
days in major river basins in arid areas of developed countries. 
Citing rapid glacial melting and increased variability of rainfall, 
the report argues that the need for storage will grow as India 
braces up to confront global climate change. However, it fails to 
present any credible evidence that establishes a correlation between 
large water bodies and climatic change! 

Nor is there any explanation as to why this storage needs to happen 
in mega-projects. The report underlines the fact that 'all water is 
local and each place is different' and hence 'one size will not fit 
all', yet it advocates creating a monoculture of engineering 
infrastructure (dams and irrigation network) that are rarely site-
specific. How should the storage capacity be increased? Should it be 
at the cost of displacing millions of poor through submergence of 
fertile lands or should it be through engagement of the communities 
in reviving water bodies across the country? Ironically, if the 
current rate of siltation of country's reservoirs is any indication, 
65 billion cubic metres - 38% of the capacity for storage - will get 
filled by silt in the next 40 years. Should such structures be 
promoted nonetheless? 

There is no doubt that to meet rising demand for potable water and 
food the country would need to bring its per capita water storage 
(200 cubic metres) at par with that of say, China (1000 cubic 
metres). But increased storage need not result from large 
infrastructure projects only, especially if those projects are all 
silting up! Numerous much smaller efforts by local communities could 
produce the same result. Oddly enough, while the report itself 
acknowledges that the 'era of the individual coping strategies' has 
been remarkably successful and that communities are the country's 
greatest 'assets', its prescription continues to ignore both. The 
report argues in favour of reforming the water sector but fails to 
acknowledge the need for institution building at the local level to 
bring about paradigm shift in water governance. The report paints a 
gloomy picture apparently only to justify increasing the Bank's 
lending stakes. 

India needs to be able to separate the World Bank's advocacy of 
particular reforms from its interest as a lending institution. For 
too long the institution has worn its 'development' hat while making 
solemn pronouncements of problems, and quickly switched to 
its 'moneylender' hat as soon as it is time for solutions. ¨' 

o o o o o o
Sudhirendar Sharma 
11 Nov 2005 

Sudhirendar Sharma, formerly with the World Bank, is a water expert 
and Director of the Delhi-based Ecological Foundation. 

URL for this article:
http://www.indiatogether.org/2005/nov/eco-waterbank.htm







------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/NJYolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥««¤»¥«¤»§«¤»
This is ZESTEconomics. Post economics-related articles and event info to 
[email protected]

If you got this mail as a forward, subscribe to ZESTEconomics by sending a 
blank mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR, if you have a Yahoo! ID, visit 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTEconomics/join

==theZESTcommunity======================================

[1] ZESTCurrent: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCurrent/
[2] ZESTEconomics: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTEconomics/
[3] ZESTGlobal: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTGlobal/
[4] ZESTMedia: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTMedia/
[5] ZESTPoets: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTPoets/
[6] ZESTCaste: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCaste/
[7] ZESTAlternative: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTAlternative/
[8] TalkZEST: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkZEST/ 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTEconomics/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to