Karnataka: At least 32 water supply schemes worth over 200 crore dysfunctional

Bengaluru: At least 32 water supply schemes meant to service over five lakh citizens, on which Rs 214 crore of taxpayer money was spent, are dysfunctional due to poor planning, no upkeep and open defecation along river banks dissuading people from making use of these projects.

This is according to a government study on why the 32 water supply schemes, spread across 13 districts, failed.

Karnataka has 437 multi-village water supply schemes costing Rs 8,456 cr. Of these, 45 schemes (including 32 that were studied) are defunct.

Reasons for the failure of these schemes, some of which were supposed to work as they depended on a “perennial” water source, could hold a mirror up to the government, which is spending another Rs 18,897 crore on 89 multi-village water supply schemes.

The 32 defunct schemes studied by NABARD Consultancy Services (NABCONS) were implemented between 2000 and 2016.

They were estimated to cover a population of 5.25 lakh in 1.03 lakh households in Bagalkot, Ballari, Belagavi, Bidar, Davangere, Dharwad, Gadag, Kalaburagi, Mysuru, Raichur, Tumakuru, Vijayanagar and Yadgir.

According to the study, the water source for 14 of the 32 schemes were rivers -- Ghataprabha, Malaprabha, Bhima, Krishna, Manjira (a tributary of Godavari), Tungabhadra and Kabini (a tributary of Cauvery). For the rest, the water source was a barrage or impounding reservoir.

“Damage to infrastructure during road works, mechanical tilling of farmlands, flood and, in certain cases theft of assets” were among key reasons for the failure of schemes that had a perennial water source, the study found. Reasons for the failure of other schemes whose water sources were non-perennial are largely similar.

Also, gram panchayats were “taken by surprise” as the schemes were handed over to them without funds for operation and maintenance (O&M). Plus, there was technical design failure, financial constraints and lack of social involvement. “These reasons bring home the message that it is not sufficient to have a perennial source but a host of other measures are required for the successful operation and maintenance of rural water supply schemes,” the study said, adding that the Rural Drinking Water and Sanitation Department (RDWSD) focussed on infrastructure while “neglecting institutional, social, financial and governance aspects”.

“In the case of river-based water supply schemes, there is competition between farmer groups irrigating their crops and RDWSD struggling to take their share of domestic water supply,” the study found. Also, open defecation on riverbanks “has resulted in negative perceptions about water quality”. “Besides these reasons, the larger enabling support environment at the state-level suffers from a political deficit in implementing policies and government orders,” the study said.