INDUS WATERS ACROSS 50 YEARS:
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE
MANAGEMENT METHODOLOGIES
OF INDIA AND PAKISTAN
ASMA YAQOOB
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
Asma Yaqoob is Research Analyst at the Institute of Regional Studies.
2
resources. While India needs to focus on the maintenance of existing waterinfrastructure 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)
3
Table 1.1
Statistics for the Indus Basin
India
Pakistan
Length
1,114 km
1, 708 miles
Basin area
321289 sq. km
252,638 miles2
Average annual flow
73.31 BCM
173.63 BCM
Live storage capacity
6.57 BCM
15 MAF
Utilizable surface water
46.0 BCM
—
Basin Population in 2010
58.42 million
172 million
Per capita availability of water
1255 CM
1038 CM
2010
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
4
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
5
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
6
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
7
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
8
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
9
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.
10
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)
Sr.
No.
1.
2.
State
Ultimate
Potential
At the
end of
Sixth
Plan
1980 85
At the
end of
Seventh
Plan
1985-90
Haryana
4512
Himachal
Pradesh
353
Irrigation
3310.0
123.0
Potential
created
Irrigation
3106.0
110.0
Potential
Utilised
3.
Irrigation
3509.0
134.6
Potential
created
Irrigation
3245.9
118.7
Potential
Utilised
4.
At the
Irrigation
3559.5
149.6
end of
Potential
Annual
created
Plan
Irrigation
3274.7
126.5
1990-92
Potential
Utilised
5.
At the
Irrigation
4392.2
209.1
end of
Potential
VIII Plan created
1992-97
Irrigation
4023.4
178.2
Potential
Utilised
6.
At the
Irrigation
4539.1
230.1
end of IX Potential
Plan
created
1997Irrigation
4130.3
190.8
2002
Potential
Utilised
7.
At the
Irrigation
4669.2
263.1
end of
Potential
2002-07
created
Irrigation
4220.5
214.7
Potential
Utilised
Source: Central Water Commission, India, 2010.(29)
J&K
Punjab
Rajasthan
1358
5967
5128
490.0
5426.0
3699.0
439.0
5373.0
3488.0
514.3
5596.7
4176.1
463.2
5505.4
3943.3
521.6
5657.5
4387.7
488.3
5547.2
4203.6
539.3
9390.4
6545.5
490.5
8700.1
5832.8
620.1
8885.6
8678.1
533.1
8286.8
6372.7
770.0
9130.4
9235.6
616.8
8505.3
6817.6
11
Table 1.3
Water withdrawal and Usage Discrepancies
for irrigation in Indus Basin (India)
Water withdrawal
Total¹ (BCM)
As % of potentially utilizable resources²
135 %
Share of irrigation
96 %
NET³ as % of irrigation withdrawal
37 %
Total (Mha)
Gross irrigated area
98 BCM
11.6 Mha
Ground water share
58 %
Ground water abstraction ratio4
67 %
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
4
It 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
12
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)
Total Installed
Capacity (MW)
Name of
Sub-Basin
Existing Hydropower Stations
Sutlej River
Bhakra, Ganguwal, Kotla, AP Sahib,
Sanjay Bhaba, Baspa, Naptha Jhakri
and Ghanvi
3556.8
Beas River
Pong, Dehar, Shannan, Mukerian,
Malana, Gaj, Bassi, Larji, Baner, Binwa
and Kahuli
2015.5
Ravi River
Chamera I, Chamera II, Baira Siul, Sewa
I, Ranjit Sagar and Upper Bari Doab
Canal hydropower project
1738.35
Chenab River
Baglihar, Salal, Dul Hasti, Chenani and
Thirot
1565.14
Mohara, Gandharbal, Uri, Lower Jhelum
736.6
and Upper Sindh Hydropower Projects
Source: Adapted from South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People.(33)
Jhelum River
13
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
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
14
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
15
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.
16
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)
17
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 (19751998) 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
18
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)
19
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.
20
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
21
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.
22
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)
23
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 1000MW 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).
24
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, GilgitBaltistan, 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
25
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 ChakothiHattian 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
26
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
3.58 % per
2.8 % per
year
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
High
High
Low
High
Inequity in water distribution
High
High
Seepage losses
High
Low
Agriculture growth rates 1947-2002
tube-wells)
Private-public participation in energy development
projects
*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)
27
Table 1.10
Growth of irrigated area in the Indus Basin in million ha
Year
India
Pakistan
1947
22.0 (70)*
10.75 (68)
1950
22.0 (70)
9.45 (68)
1955
23.45 (70)
10.60 (68)
1960
26. 52 (70)
12.04(67)
1965
31.25 (70)
12.95 (56)
1970
32.30 (70)
14.30 (56)
1975
39.35 (69.7)
13.83 (54)
1985
41.77 (68.1)
15.76 (52)
1990
43.05 (65)
16.30 (69.7)
1995
53.0 (61.9)
17.20 (49.4)
2000
55.0 (60)
18.00 (47)
* Figures in parenthesis show the percentage of population engaged in agriculture.
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
28
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.
29
Table 1.11
Average annual flow and storage
capacity of Indus Basin rivers in India and Pakistan
River
Catchment
Length
Average
No. of
Storage
% age
Basin
Area (1000
(km)
Annual
Dams
Capacity
Storage
sq. km)
Flow
(MAF)
(MAF)
India*
Sutlej-
-
1,440
32
5
11.32
35
1,166
2,880
145
3
13.64
9
Beas
Pakistan**
Indus and
tributaries
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
Capacity
Capacity
Balance
capacity as per
developed
under
developed +
potential
construction
under
assessment
construction
MW
MW
%
MW
%
MW
%
MW
%
Indus*
3383
9929.
29.3
5431.
16.5
15360.
46.51
18471.
54.60
(India)
2
3
4
0
Indus**
5979
6720
11.2
3003
(Pakista
6
3
9
3
50.23
36759
7
61.47
23037
n)
Sources: *Central Electricity Authority, Government of India.(82)
** Private Power and Infrastructure Board, Government of Pakistan.(83)
38.53
30
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 waterefficient practices at the public level besides maintaining existing water
infrastructure.
31
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/2234
97-105737253588/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%20relat
ed%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
Commission,
Development
Government
Framework,
of
2005-2010,”
Pakistan,
Planning
2005.
32
<http://www.planningcommission.gov.pk/mtdf/27-Water%20Sector/27Water%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
33
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%203Latest-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%
34
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 Etechnologies for Distance Education and Extension/Outreach for
Efficient
Water
Management,
Patancheru/Hyderabad,
Andhra
5-9
March
Pradesh,
2007,
ICRISAT,
India,
p.1.
<http://akicb.ifas.ufl.edu/upload/proceedings/jainak_water_managemen
t.pdf>, (accessed 20 July 2011).
35
29.
“Water and Related Statistics”, op.cit., (ref.9), p.134.
30.
Saleth, op.cit., (ref.20).
31.
“Hydro development Plan for 12th 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),
<http://www.sandrp.in/drp/DRP_Apr_May-2010.pdf>,
New
Delhi.
(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).
36
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, 112th 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.
37
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/PW
CAS-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.
38
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).
39
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).
40
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, “IndoGangetic 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%20
Reference/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
41
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.pd
f>, (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).
42
Annex I
Proposed Hydropower Projects of India on Indus Basin
43
44
Source: Central Electricity Authority, Government of India
45
Annex II
Existing Hydropower Projects in Pakistan
46
Source: Annual Report – Private Power and Infrastructure Board, Government of
Pakistan, February 2011.
CONTENTS
Introduction
1
A profile of the Indus Basin
2
Eastern rivers of Indus Basin and India
3
Achievements and failures
4
Western rivers of Indus Basin and Pakistan
Achievements and Failures
15
16
Notes for comparison
25
Conclusion
30
Notes and references
31
Appendix
42