One of the most controversial
inter-state disputes over shared resources between two states is one of the
Cauvery water dispute tribunal. The source of this conflict was mainly due to
the agreement on the water sharing treaties conceded by the states of Karnataka
and Tamil Nadu during 1892 and 1924 between the Madras presidency (Tamil Nadu)
and the princely state of Mysore (Karnataka) which was more in favour of Tamil
Nadu. Now, Karnataka demands equitable sharing of the Cauvery waters and Tamil
Nadu had already set up a livelihood which depends solely on the existent water
partition between the two states. If Karnataka got their way, then a massive
population in Tamil Nadu would get severely affected as a consequence of it.
Most of the initiatives taken by the local communities had proved unsuccessful
because of a difference of opinion. Earlier futile protests were because the 50
year old agreement signed in 1924 was never carried out till 1974. And in the
later years, around 1990’s, the issues ballooned up creating unrest within the
communities involved. This is when the judicial and bodies stepped in in an
attempt to remedy the issue. Thus formed the Cauvery River Authority and its
monitoring committee headed by the Prime Minister and Chief Ministers of the
riparian states. Since this committee didn’t act effectively as planned, a
Cauvery Water Tribunal was formed in 1990 under the act of 1956 Inter State
Water Disputes. After proposing an interim order in 1991, the final award was
delivered in 2007 according to which the water partitioning for each of the
four states would be as follows:
Tamil Nadu, 419 TMC
Karnataka, 270 TMC
Kerala, 30 TMC
Pondicherry, 7 TMC
*TMC – thousand million cubed
After the final award was
proposed, initially there were no major grievances. But eventually, all states
approached the Supreme Court with Special Leave Petitions. Availing no other
option, the Supreme Court acknowledges the petition and left the situation back
at ground zero.
During this entire process, the farmers and the stakeholders never came into
the picture. This is one conflict that has been going on for quite some decades
now and we need a fresh new perspective into the problem. Multi-Stakeholder’
Dialogue (MSD) is one such possibility. Also, the farmers involved in this have
never actually had a say in any of this. This has been initiated by the Madras
Institute of Development Studies in 2003. As a consequence of this, the
Committee of the Cauvery Family held several meetings and made significant
improvement in the remediation. Using relevant facts and research, the total
water quantity was summed unto 670 TCM (approx.). Of which, Kerala and
Pondicherry shares 50 TCM, and the rest is to be respectively shared between
Tamil Nadu and Karnataka depending on the agricultural and agronomical scene in
both these states.
LONG TERM Solution:
When considering issues over natural resources, we must always seek remedies
that are long term. Temporal treatment to such disputes would spur even bigger
problems in the future. Due to the early efforts of the Tamil Nadu government,
Tambrapani watershed (The entire geographical area drained by
a river and its tributaries; an area characterized by all runoff being conveyed
to the same outlet), a tributary through Tirunelveli, is being well protected
and preserved. This tributary is the very reason why Tirunelveli is one of the
highest agricultural crop yielding districts of the state. Since most of the
agricultural land usage depends purely on this tributary, these districts are
very well content with the way things are. Hence, watershed management proves
very beneficial and is also a sustainable method of water resource
usage.
Although, Tamil Nadu has rights
over the tributaries Bhavana and Moyar, its legislature prevents rights over
the main headwaters of Cauvery. The government also has full control of the
watersheds like, Ponnayar, Palar etc. Reports suggest Tamil Nadu to receive 13
less rain days annually, but the amount hasn’t decreased. This says that there
would be harder rains but lesser number of times. This further propels the
necessity of healthy and efficient watersheds.
Following are the advantages of
proper utilization of watersheds:
- Help slow down the process of surface
water run-off,
- Improve percolation of water to
recharge underground aquifers,
- Decrease the siltation of
waterway
- Help lengthen the flow
period of rivers.
Watersheds have proved useful for over a century in Tirunelveli alone, and it
has also proven its worth many other districts within India. In Madura district
and in less than five years, the watershed had recovered causing a improved
stream flow as and when the cattle grazing and fuel wood harvesters were
removed. Similarly in the reserve forests of Karavakurichi, these watersheds
have improved the forest growth within two years of their implementation.
Though
everything seems well and good, the problem arises while setting up a watershed
management. Seeking foundation through politically motivated social forestry
and village forest schemes will fail as this involves usage of large areas of
land. The setup of such an establishment requires the full consented
cooperation of the government, political parties, NGO’s, the forest department
and most essentially the local people. Money required reaches over 20 crores
rupees and about 500,000 hectares of
land (which should be regenerated).
The Ambedkar Way:
While addressing to such issues where
the livelihoods of people is at stake, the remedies should be such that the verdict equally
suffices all parties involved. Though this method has been quite frowned upon
in the past, could possibly work in the issue at hand. It seems to add much
more sense in the entire process of fostering solutions not just momentarily
but for future days to come.
Ambedkar believed in a path of
“equity”, wherein equal sharing of resources and opportunities seeds
understanding and peaceful mutual existence between societies. There are
situations where local and regional bodies get involved and because of the
absence of a properly functional legal system there seems to be no solution at
hand. He had come up with an idea of implementing independent authorities of
these water resources controlled by the Central. This gives autonomous
governance rights to the Central which would ensure equal water sharing in
times of desperate needs largely based on a constitutional framework. Since,
the system is centralised it reduces the chances of conflicts over the outcome.
REFERENCES:
From Publications:
- Transforming Potential Conflict into
Cooperation Potential: Role of International Water Law
By: Sergei Vinogradov, Patricia
Wouters, Patricia Jones
- The Cauvery Water War
By: Neil Pelkey
- Water And Conflict
By: Jason Gehrig with Mark M. Rogers
- Article reviewed - Inter State Water Disputes in India:
Institutions and Policies
By:
Alan Richards & Nirvikar Singh
From Sites:
- Wikipedia: www.wikipedia.org
KARTHIK CHANDRASEKAR
AE11B015
No comments:
Post a Comment