Summary of Event's Presentations

23-24 November 2015

Venue: Shangri La Hotel 19 Ashoka Road, New Delhi

Table of Contents

Technical Session .................................................................................................................. 1

Review of the Draft Indian Framework Legislation and Comparison with the European Water Framework Directive – Ms. Flore Lafaye de Micheaux, EU Water Expert ..................... 1

Tools for continued Cooperation: The Environmental Technical Assistance and Information Exchange Facility (TAIEF) of the European Union – Mr. Luca Marmo, Policy Officer, Environment Directorate-General, European Commission, Brussels ........................................ 2

Session I – The River Basin Management Approach ............................................................... 3

An Example of a River Basin Management Approach in the EU: The Rhine – Mr. Ben van de Wetering, Executive Secretary (Emeritus) ................................................................................. 3

The Challenges of overcoming Boundaries: The Experience of the Danube River Basin Commission – Mr. Raimund Mair, Technical Expert, River Basin Management International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR) .................................................... 3

The Challenges and Opportunities facing the Ganga River Basin and India's River Basins – Mr. Puskal Upadhyay, Director (MoWR, RDt & GR) & Additional Mission Director (NMCG) .... 5

Session II – Water Policy in India and the European Union: Using the EU Experience to Drive India's Water Policy Development ........................................................................................ 6

Water Management Policy in India: Setting the Scene – Shri A. B. Pandya, Chairman, Central Water Commission (CWC) .......................................................................................................... 6

The Evolution of Water Management Policy in the EU – Mr. Luca Marmo, Policy Officer, Environment Directorate-General, European Commission, Brussels ........................................ 7

Shared Responsibility for Implementation: The EU's Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive – Ms. Henriette Faergemann, First Counsellor - Environment, Energy, Climate Change of the EUD .................................................................... 8

India's Water Framework Law – Dr. B. Rajender, IAS Joint Secretary (Policy & Planning), MoWR, RD & GR ....................................................................................................................... 10

Lessons from Danube Basin for Integrated Water Resource Development in West Bengal – Mr. Naveen Prakash, Principal Secretary, Irrigation and Water Resource, West Bengal Government .............................................................................................................................. 11

Session III – How to cope with Water Scarcity and the ecological Aspects of Water Management ...................................................................................................................... 12

Implementing EU Legislation in a Context of Water Scarcity: The Water Accounting Approach in the Arno River Basin in Italy – Mr. Bernardo Mazzanti, Arno River Basin Authority ................................................................................................................................... 12

The Case of the Guadalquivir River Basin in Spain – Mr. Victor Cifuentes, Guadalquivir River Basin Authority, Seville, Spain .................................................................................................. 13

Minimum Requirements of ecological Flows of Rivers – Shri Suresh Babu, WWF-India ....... 13

How to minimise the morphological Impacts due to Water Management? The European Perspective – Ms. Helena Muehlmann, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management, Austria .................................................................................................... 14

EU Supported State Partnership Programme in Rajasthan - EU SPP- IWRM: An Overview – Shri Azitabh Sharma, Secretary, Water Resources, Rajasthan and Shouvik Datta, EUD to India .................................................................................................................................................. 15

Water Recycling: The EU Case – Mr. Neil Dhot, Secretary General, EurEau, Brussels, Belgium .................................................................................................................................................. 16

Session IV – Research, Innovation and Business Solutions for Water Challenges .................. 17

Opportunities offered by the EU's Research Programme 'Horizon 2020' for Research and Innovation on Water – Mr. Florent Bernard, Research and Innovation Directorate-General, European Commission .............................................................................................................. 17

Challenges in Ground Water Sector in Context of Integrated Water Resources Development and Management - Shri K. B. Biswas, Chairman, Central Ground Water Board (CGWB) ..................................................................................................................................... 18

The Role of the Business Sector – Mr. Poul Jensen, Director, European Business and Technology Centre (EBTC), New Delhi ..................................................................................... 18

Pilot Project on Non-Revenue Water (NRW) in Sheetal Park Area of Rajkot City in Gujarat – Mr. Anshul Jain, Deputy Head of Trade, Danish Embassy to India .......................................... 19

Regulation of Public and Private Water Entities in Europe – Mr. Neil Dhot, Secretary General, EurEau, Brussels, Belgium .......................................................................................... 20

Deploying Best Available Techniques (BATs) in Water Management in India – Mr. Jan Klasinski, Managing Director, Industrial Services, Veolia India ................................................ 20

1 | P a g e

Technical Session

Review of the Draft Indian Framework Legislation and Comparison with the European Water Framework Directive – Ms.FloreLafaye de Micheaux, EU Water Expert

1. Although both texts aim at protecting water resources, the underlying political approaches

are different, due to much different contexts of emergence. The questioned legitimacy of a

water framework legislation drafted by the Central level in the Indian context versus the

clear mandate of the European Union in the environmental domain have notably

influenced the directions taken by both texts.

2. The European Water Framework Directive is technical and science-oriented, with a great

concern for achieving results (results-oriented provisions). The draft Indian Water

Framework Law is much more policy and social matters-oriented, with the principal

objective of establishing common governing principles for all States and especially a Right

to Water throughout the country.

3. The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) is a strong legally binding instrument,

with firm deadlines and penalties in the case of non-compliance, which are not present in

the Indian text.

4. Some further governing principles do not exactly converge. Concerning for example water

pricing, on which both text converge, the Indian text requires differential pricing for

drinking and sanitation in the name of social justice while the European text insists rather

on the adequate contribution of the different water uses to the recovery of costs of water

services.

5. Integrated river basin approaches are named differently. The Indian draft WFL requires

River Basin Master Plans in order to achieve Integrated River Basin Development and

Management while the European WFD requires River Basin Management Plans with a clear

emphasis on water quality aspects (chemical and ecological status of water bodies).

6. The implementation strategies diverge too: the WFD requires an exhaustive coverage of

the European Union territory with such River Basin Management Plans, with whatever

authorities to take care of the plans drafting (to be designated by the member states,

among existing institutions or not). In contrast, the draft Indian WFL requires first the

creation of a river basin organization, which will then get the responsibility of producing

the River Basin Master plan. In this approach, the governance aspects are given precedence

over the technical planning process. As a potential consequence, only ”governance-

mature” river basins in India might be covered by River Basin Master Plan in short or

medium terms.

Some recommendations stemming from the comparison:

Further clarity could be brought to the respective position, legal status and administrative

responsibilities of the institutions or organizations set up or mentioned by the text, as well as

2 | P a g e

to respective interactions and coordination required in preparation of “River Basin Master

Plans” and of “Perspective Plans for sustainable development of water resources”.

In some areas where India and Europe face similar challenges, further collaboration

could take place. The proposed issues are water scarcity reduction (water efficiency

technologies, natural water retention measures, green infrastructure), urban water

management (drinking water supply, sanitation, soil sealing mitigation), flood management

and integration of water and biodiversity measures.

Tools for continued Cooperation: The Environmental Technical Assistance and Information Exchange Facility (TAIEF) of the European Union – Mr. Luca Marmo, Policy Officer, Environment Directorate-General, European Commission, Brussels

The Environmental Technical Assistance and Information Exchange Facility (TAIEF) of the

European Union offers short-term peer-to-peer assistance to support environmental policy

development and implementation in a number of third countries, including India.

TAIEF provides rapid mobilisation of experts from EU Member State administrations to

contribute to workshops or seminars, or to provide short-term targeted assistance on

environmental challenges. Study visits to an EU country can also be applied for. TAIEF target

groups are public authorities at national and sub-national level, judiciary and law enforcement

authorities and non-governmental and private organisations such as professional associations

concerned with environmental policy and instruments, and their implementation. Individual

persons or enterprises are not eligible.

TAIEF support must be demand-driven. A partner country focal point must ensure

ownership of the activity, secure participants and oversee implementation of the TAIEF event.

Close liaison with TAIEF staff is essential. More information, including examples of recently

completed TAIEF missions, can be found under:

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/international_issues/taief/index_en.htm.

3 | P a g e

Session I – The River Basin Management Approach

An Example of a River Basin Management Approach in the EU: The Rhine – Mr. Ben van de Wetering, Executive Secretary (Emeritus)

Although water quality problems in the Rhine were already recognised in the 15th century, a

deteriorating quality was not really apparent before the end of the 1960s. By that time, the

pollution of the Rhine with organic substances had led to acute oxygen problems and a

disappearance of almost all aquatic life. Discharges of heavy metals, pesticides, hydrocarbons

and organic chlorine compounds caused further ecological problems. More and more efforts

were needed to produce good quality drinking water, and the Rhine had the distressing

reputation of being the sewer of Europe.

The International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine (ICPR) was established in

1950 as the first intergovernmental body for the management of transboundary waters.

For the benefit of the Rhine and of all waters running into the Rhine, the members of the ICPR

– Switzerland, France, Germany, Luxemburg, the Netherlands and the European Commission

successfully cooperate with Austria, Liechtenstein and the Belgian region of Wallonia as well as

Italy.

What started with the development of a joint monitoring strategy in the 50s and 60s of

the last century has become today a comprehensive integrated management strategy of the

Rhine, comprising aspects of water quality, emission reduction, ecological restoration and

flood prevention.

This development was guided by a process of “learning by doing” and was influenced

considerably by some major disasters.

The presentation illustrates how management approaches of the Rhine Commission

have developed to date, what lessons were learned and what challenges the Rhine

Commission will have to cope with. Special attention is being paid to the prerequisites

necessary for a successful water management strategy and to those factors that might be

considered to be the success factors in the work of the Rhine Commission.

The Challenges of overcoming Boundaries:The Experience of the Danube River Basin Commission – Mr. RaimundMair, Technical Expert, River Basin Management International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR)

The Danube has a catchment area of 800,000 km2 and is the second largest river basin in

Europe. With 19 countries sharing the basin this makes the Danube the most international

river basin the world. Water cooperation on the basin-wide scale faces specific challenges –

most notably the heterogeneity with EU and non EU Member States, different socio-economic

circumstances with a GDP range of approx. 1:9 between countries, armed conflicts in recent

history, different native languages as well as different water management traditions.

4 | P a g e

The fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989 opened a window of opportunity for basin-wide

cooperation. In 1994 the “Danube River Protection Convention” (DRPC) was signed. It commits

the contracting parties (14 Danube countries with a major share of the basin and the European

Union) to join their efforts in sustainable water management, including the conservation of

surface and groundwater, pollution reduction, as well as the prevention and control of floods,

accidents and ice hazards.

The International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR) was

created to implement the DRPC. It is both a forum to allow its contracting parties to coordinate

the implementation of the DRPC and to review the progress they make. Contracting parties

also decided to make the ICPDR the coordination platform for the implementation of the EU

Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the EU Floods Directive (FD) on the basin-wide scale.

The ICPDR is an international organisation. The Heads of Delegations, representing the

contracting parties, meet twice a year, chaired by the ICPDR President. Presidency is passed on

from one contracting party to another in an alphabetical order every year. The meetings

comprise of delegations of contracting parties and observer organisations.

The gross of the work of the ICPDR is done by a range of Expert Groups and Task

Groups on different water-related topics (currently 12), which are panels of specialists from

the ICPDR contracting parties and observers – usually civil servants of the relevant ministries,

employees of stakeholder organisations and NGOs. The ICPDR has a Permanent Secretariat in

Vienna from where it administers, manages and supports the work of the ICPDR.

If all national experts, delegates from observers and consultants are considered, there

are more than 300 people working on basin-wide water management issues within the

framework of the ICPDR. The Expert Groups discuss water-related issues and prepare reports

and recommendations for coordinated action. Key milestones include the adoption of the

Danube River Basin Management Plan (2009 and update 2015) according to the WFD and

including a “Joint Programme of Measures”, and the Danube Flood Risk Management Plan

(2015) according to the FD.

Key factors for progress and success in the Danube basin include inter alia the following:

• Recognition that local, national & basin-wide levels are inter-related & interdependent

• Clear and shared legal framework for cooperation (DRPC, EU WFD, FD) as pre-requisite

for practical work

• Involvement of key actors at political, administrative and technical level

• Efficient structures: Secretariat and Working Groups with experts from national level

• Strong Civil Society engagement via direct involvement of observers & public

participation

• Policy coherence - major efforts towards integration with other sector policies (water –

floods – energy – navigation - agriculture - climate change adaptation)

• At basin-wide level: Focus on key issues! For not getting lost in details. Joint selection of

strategic level measures

5 | P a g e

• Evidence-based decision making, requiring assessments and sharing of data e.g. on

pressures, impacts, monitoring results, planned projects and measures

• And finally, mutual understanding, shared efforts and step-wise building of trust.

The Challenges and Opportunities facing the Ganga River Basin and India's River Basins– Mr. PuskalUpadhyay, Director (MoWR, RDt& GR) & Additional Mission Director (NMCG)

The Ganga basin is particularly important in India as it is the largest covering 26% of India's

land mass, the most populated with 43% of India's population and the river provides 38% of

India's total estimated utilisable water. One of the main challenges faced by India's river basins

include growing population and increasing water demand, with projections for the demand

from the domestic sector to increase 2.6 times, the energy sector to increase 3.7 times and the

industry sector to increase 2.2 times in the next 40 years. The second main challenge to India's

rivers is increasing water pollution, partially or untreated municipal sewage makes up for 75%

of the pollution load to streams and water bodies. Moreover there are issues with highly toxic

pollution from industries and contamination of groundwater with heavy metals. The third main

challenge is that India faces increasingly high seasonal variations and extreme weather events

such as droughts and floods due to climate change. These variations must therefore be taken

into account when planning water management for the future. Another main challenge India's

water basins face is transboundary water issues, for example the Ganga-Brahmaputra-Barak

basins are international and therefore require management driven by agreements or treaties

between many riparian countries. Moreover, inter-state rivers and basins also pose problems

as there are often multiple entities with rights and making claims to the water in the river such

as states, sectors, individuals and communities. One of the largest issues acting as a barrier to

management of these basins is the fact that in India water is a state subjects and therefore the

management of water is dictated by each state and is often implemented by many different

institutions. However, effective management requires coordination between all

stakeholders/departments/institutions. Moreover, so far, most management initiatives by the

government have been town-centric and implemented by individual states. A holistic basin

management approach must be adopted in order to implement effective water management.

The Namami Gange project represents this holistic management approach and includes

improved inter-ministerial and Centre-State co-ordination. The main thrust areas of this

project are pollution abatement, wholesome river, river front development, flood-plain

protection, biodiversity conservation, capacity building and state participation, increasing

awareness and research and modelling. The project will last five years from 2015-16 to 2019-

20 and will cost INR 20,000 crores, this is a fourfold increase in expenditure compared to the

last 30 years.

6 | P a g e

Session II – Water Policy in India and the European Union: Using the EU Experience to Drive India's Water Policy Development

Water Management Policy in India: Setting the Scene–Shri A. B. Pandya, Chairman, Central Water Commission (CWC)

Mr. A. B. Pandya, Chairman of the Central Water Commission (CWC), gave a presentation

focused on the Policy, Legal and Institutional Framework in Water Sector in India. In order to

provide a holistic perspective on topic, the discourse has been subdivided into three

categories, namely the Legal Setup, the Institutional Setup and the Policy Setup of the Indian

water sector.

Legal Setup: Most relevant provisions and acts framing the water sector's legal setup

are Constitutional Provisions (Art. 246; Art. 262; Entry 56 of List I (Union List); Entry 17 of List II

(State List)), Central Acts (The Inter-State Water Dispute Act, 1956; The River Board Acts, 1956;

The Betwa River Board Act, 1976, The Brahmaputra Act, 1980) and State Acts (Entry 17 of List II

(State List) and various different state acts in place). Taken together, the planning of particular

water resource projects, their investigation, implemention and management fall within the

purview of State Governments.

Institutional Setup: Having the overall planning competence over the water sector,

Central Government authorities, in particular the MoWR, RD & GR (and its subsidiaries), the

Ministry of Rural/Urban Development and the MoEF&CC, render assistance to States which is

technical, advisory, catalytic and promotional in nature. The Union Government can also act as

a facilitator of co-ordination efforts among co-basin states as well as a provider of financial

resources. However, it is at State Government level where the concrete planning and

implementation of projects takes place. Furthermore, other stakeholders can be involved in

the maintenance and operation, such as Water User Associations, Panchayati Raj Institutions

(local government) or NGOs.

Policy Setup: The National Water Policy (NWP) has been mentioned as the major policy

adopted. It prevails on states to adopt State Water Policies in accordance with a national

policy. Being the latest adaptation, the NWP 2012 follows the objective to take cognizance of

the existing situation, to propose a framework for creation of a system of laws and institutions

and for a plan of action with a unified national perspective. Water needs to be managed as a

community resource held, by the state, under public trust doctrine to achieve food security,

livelihood, and equitable and sustainable development for all. Furthermore, the NWP 2012 is

based on the idea that policy on water resources needs to be governed by certain basic

principles safeguarding some commonality in approaches in dealing with planning,

development and management of water resources on Union, State and Local level. In

consequence, the policy defines a need to evolve a National Framework Law as an umbrella

statement of general principles on water policies.

7 | P a g e

The Evolution of Water Management Policy in the EU – Mr. Luca Marmo, Policy Officer, Environment Directorate-General, European Commission, Brussels

Water is essential for citizens, nature and economic development. EU water policies aim at

ensuring enough quantities of clean water for all legitimate purposes.

Water is at the core of natural ecosystems, and climate regulation. Water pollution and

scarcity pose threats to human health and quality of life. But there are also wider ecological

considerations. The free flow of water, unaffected by pollution, is important to sustaining

water-dependent ecosystems. A shortage of good-quality water damages aquatic, wetland and

terrestrial environments, putting further pressure on flora and fauna that are already suffering

the impact of urbanisation and climate change.

European water legislation dates back to the latter half of the 1970s, when the first

‘wave’ of laws set standards and targets for discharges of dangerous substances, drinking

water, fishing waters, shellfish waters, bathing waters and groundwater, designed to protect

human health and the environment. A 1988 review identified gaps to be filled, leading to

further measures obliging Member States to control sewage from urban areas, nitrogen

fertilisers from farmland, and pollution from factories and industrial plants. Nonetheless, it was

becoming clear that the EU needed a more coherent approach to water policy.

In 2000, the EU took a ground-breaking step when it adopted the Water Framework

Directive1, establishing a legal obligation to protect and restore the quality of waters across

Europe. It is one of the most ambitious and comprehensive pieces of EU legislation ever. The

Directive introduced an innovative approach to water management, based not on national

administrative or political boundaries, but on natural geographical and hydrological

formations: the river basins. In fact, there are 110 river basin districts in the EU, 40 of which

are international and cross borders, covering about 60% of EU territory.2All EU Member States

apart from islands like Cyprus and Malta share waters with neighbouring countries.

The Directive is built on four main pillars: 1) Coordinated action to achieve ‘good status’

for all EU waters, including surface and groundwater, by 2015; 2) Setting up a water-

management system based on natural river basin districts, crossing regional and national

boundaries; 3) Integrated water management, bringing different water management issues

into one framework; and 4) Active involvement of interested parties and consultation of the

public.

The Directive covers groundwater and all surface waters including rivers, lakes, coastal

waters and ‘transitional waters’, such as estuaries that connect fresh and saltwater. It sets a

less ambitious objective – ‘good potential’ – for artificial and ‘heavily modified’ bodies of water

such as canals and reservoirs, or industrial ports. It requires EU Member States to set up or

1Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a

framework for Community action in the field of water policy (OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1–73), available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32000L0060. 2 Catchment areas can be very large, or quite small. The Danube’s international river basin district (IRBD), for

example, is the largest in the EU, spanning 801 463 km² and touching ten Member States and nine neighbouring countries. By contrast, the Hérault in the south of France covers 2 900 km².

8 | P a g e

adapt monitoring procedures – there are more than 82 000 surface-water monitoring stations

and over 60 000 for groundwater across the EU (even if the density varies considerably

between Member States).

Fifteen years after the adoption of the Water Framework Directive, we can say that –

while there is still a long way to go to achieve good quality status across all European waters –

the river basin approach is the best and most cost-effective way to manage water.

Longstanding international cooperation Elbe, Danube and Rhine basins – where countries

worked together to meet joint objectives – has demonstrated its potential. Public participation

is a cornerstone of the EU's approach to water management, so European citizens are playing a

crucial role in planning and implementing measures. The Directive also links other important

water-relevant policies into one integrated framework, covering issues such as industrial

pollution, major accidents, and impact assessments.

Shared Responsibility for Implementation: The EU's Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive–Ms. Henriette Faergemann, First Counsellor - Environment, Energy, Climate Change of the EUD

Ms. Henriette Faergemann gave a presentation that was addressing the informal organisation

of the EU's Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (WFD)

adopted in 2000, shared by all 28 Member States (MS) to ensure a coherent approach to and

knowledge-sharing of EU water policy implementation.

The WFD covers all inland water categories (surface (rivers/lakes) and groundwater,

coastal and transitional waters), it sets broad principles eventually aiming to achieve good

qualitative and quantitative status of all water bodies across Europe before a certain deadline.

However, it remains crucial that a common and well-coordinated approach needs to be the

basis of such ambitious enterprise. This precondition was already recognised among MS shortly

after the adoption of the Directive and finally resulted in the establishment of the EU Common

Implementation Strategy for the WFD. Several arguments can be put forth in favour of such

common approach, for instance, that challenges are widely shared by MS, the complexity of

the tasks inhere a need for extensive cooperation and that it inevitably fosters efficiency and

transparency. However, not only MS are part of the strategy, but also the European

Commission, various stakeholders and NGOs.

Its main objectives can be summarized as follows:

Coherence and comparability

Common understanding and approach

Joint efforts and activities

Limit risks of bad application

Share experience and information

Develop guidance

Improve the information management.

Following organizational chart displays the basic setup of the strategy:

9 | P a g e

Essential information and guidance notes are being shared among partners via a collaborative

platform (CIRCABC), which offers an easy distribution and management of documents and

thereby facilitates the accessibility for all stakeholders. In addition, several documents are

publicly available.

Up to now, several lessons learnt can be derived from the successful co-operative

approach. Among others the following features shine out in a positive manner:

The informal process steered at political level but with a strong technical development

behind it to achieve common understanding

Working groups to develop the established work programme with clear deliverables

and timetable

Ownership: it is a joint process between the Commission and MS

Presidency rotation helps sharing the steering of the process among partners; decision

making by consensus

Broad participation of stakeholders, through an agreed set of criteria, essential for

successful water policy

A platform to develop guidance and exchange of information/experiences – as a side

effect, but very important, building of networks among experts across the EU,

stimulating exchange of experiences also in bilateral/multilateral on issues of common

interest.

Finally, by illustrating essential features of the EU's Common Implementation Strategy, Ms

Faergemann was building a bridge to India highlighting the relevance of this mechanism for the

country's own context. She concludes her presentation by referring to many potential

possibilities for replicating the EU's joint approach in the Indian set-up in order to tackle

present challenges in the nation's water sector on Union and State level.

10 | P a g e

India's Water Framework Law – Dr. B. Rajender, IAS Joint Secretary (Policy & Planning), MoWR, RD & GR

Dr. B. Rajender addressed the idea of a National Water Framework Law in his presentation.

Elaborating on the usefulness and necessity of such law. Mr. Rajender provided several

arguments in favour of this endeavour. Water – a sustainer of life and ecology – is more than

just a scarce resource threatened by population increase, pollution and climate change.

Currently, it is the States having the competence to make laws, formulate and implement plans

and schemes for development of water resources, which eventually has resulted in the

creation of a large number of laws relating to water sector. However, considering the critical

importance of accurate water management for the national development, water needs to be

administered with a more holistic and national perspective. One option to achieve a higher

degree of coherence within the country could be based on shifting water-related legislative

power from State List to Concurrent List. Having said this, such proposal has been opposed by

most of the States and two Commissions on Centre State Relations, which led to the failure of

the idea so far. Nevertheless, a National Water Resources Council (NWRC) had been

established in 1983 that adopted the first National Water Policy (NWP) in 1987. Ever since the

NWP has been revised constantly, which finally resulted in the latest adaptation, the NWP

2012.The document is stressing the need to evolve a National Framework Law as an umbrella

statement of general principles governing the exercise of legislative and/or executive powers

by the Centre, the States and the local governing bodies. This claim got backed by the Eighth

Report on Water Pollution in India (2014), which concludes that an over-arching national legal

framework is required in order to guarantee effective water management, conservation,

development and equitable distribution. In view of the above, the Ministry of Water Resources

initiated action for the preparation of a Water Framework Act in 2012. Meanwhile a draft has

been written containing, among others, following salient claims and features:

Proposal of eighteen principles for Water Management to bring different state legal

interventions within one framework of governing principles.

Proposal to establish an independent statutory Water Regulatory Authority by every

state, ensuring access for all and fair pricing (drinking, industrial, agricultural) on

volumetric basis.

Using precautionary approach when drafting laws in order to protect, conserve and

regulate groundwater.

All water resources water projects shall conform to the River Basin Master Plan.

Making industry discharge their duties by defining standards on effluents/water

returns.

Proposal to set up of a High Powered Committee at the Centre and in each State for

coordination and policy support mechanism.

The draft has been circulated amongst all Union/State territories and related Central

Ministries. In future, further regional consultation meetings are planned for wide spread

consultation with the State Governments, NGOs, Academia/Professionals and Panchayati Raj

Institutions. In addition, a Committee is proposed to be constituted under the chairmanship of

11 | P a g e

Dr.Mihir Shah, former Member Planning commission to examine the provision of the Draft

National Water Framework Law and Draft River Basin Management Bill.

Lessons from Danube Basin for Integrated Water Resource Development in West Bengal – Mr. Naveen Prakash, Principal Secretary, Irrigation and Water Resource, West Bengal Government

Mr. Naveen Prakash was portraying the experiences made by an Indian Delegation, led by

Mission Director, National Water Mission, during their visit to the Danube river basin in

Austria. In addition, he has built a bridge to the Indian context, i.e. the Damodar River Basin.

He listed several lessons learnt during this trip related to the sustainable and equitable

use of water and fresh water resources. The Delegation was able to gain a profound

impression of the advantages and challenges of river basin cooperation among 10 different

countries under the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR)

and the European Water Framework Directive. These are ranging from effective waste water

management to different schemes of (cross-border) water quality monitoring.

Thereafter, the case of the Damodar River Basin has been introduced as one example

from West Bengal. Mr. Prakash illustrated various issues that need to be addressed in future,

such as challenges of coordination between the Government of India and two States (West

Bengal/Jharkhand) with reference to the Damodar Valley Coporation (DVC). The public

company is in charge of major dams and is presently moving towards hydro-electric power

generation. Furthermore, the downstream areas of the basin (West Bengal) are prone for

floods and dry periods, while being exposed to erratic climatic changes. These issues encounter

a present infrastructure characterized by a lack of modernisation and up-gradation of

hydraulic/canal systems, no integrated flood (early warning) and irrigation management

system as well as problems in the Command Area Development (CAD). However, in order to

tackle shortcomings major renovation/up-graduation projects and modernization projects are

in the offing. In addition, future focus will be put on the World Bank National Hydrology Project

for Integrated Flood and Irrigation Management as well as on the claim for an integrated basin

development in place of the 'River Authority' approach.

12 | P a g e

Session III – How to cope with Water Scarcity and the ecological Aspects of Water Management

Implementing EU Legislation in a Context of Water Scarcity: The Water Accounting Approach in the Arno River Basin in Italy– Mr. Bernardo Mazzanti, Arno River Basin Authority

The Arno River Basin Authority is one of the six Basin Authorities of national relevance and is

responsible for reviewing, updating and coordinating the Northern Apennines River Basin

District Management Plan, according to Water Framework Directive (Dir. 2000/60/CE). As in

many Mediterranean areas, water scarcity and flash flood events are increasing both in

frequency and intensity in the last decade.

As stated in the bilateral meeting with the DG Environment in September 2013, the

second cycle’s River Basin Management Plan (2016-2021) has to tackle three main issues: a

better link between pressures and measures should be for all sectors, a justified choice of

exemption to general goal “good status in 2015”, the inclusion of economic analysis elements

in the Programme of Measure’s definition.

With the aim to answer to those issues, the Arno River Basin Authority developed an

Executive Information System, based on shared data at European level (e.g. WISE, Water

information System in Europe), able to support the following steps:

Assessment of the Drivers, pressures, impacts and their influence on the environmental

status on the basis of the monitoring cycle 2010-2015, on the basis of the DPSIR

methodology.

Evaluation of the environmental status taking quantitative hydrologic data into

consideration properly linked to the detection of diffused pollutants and hazardous

substances

Assessment of the actions currently planned in the Programme of Measure

Evaluation of possible measures to counteract the impact of drivers

Appraisal of the gap between planned and implemented measures necessary to achieve

the environmental objective, taking into consideration pollution load, water

consumption, morphological alterations;

Assessment of the technical economic sustainability of the measures necessary to

achieve the objective

Setting of alternative objectives to “good status in 2015”.

The use of water balance data is a key point in the gap appraisal, in order to compare the

impact of water uses and the pollution load’s contribution of different drivers, and to evaluate

the measure’s effectiveness. The implementation of the EU founded PAWA (Pilot Arno Water

Accounts) project, testing the application of UN System Environmental-Economic Accounts –

Water (SEEA-W) in the Arno Basin, provided a solid experience to fulfill this task.

13 | P a g e

The Case of the Guadalquivir River Basin in Spain– Mr. Victor Cifuentes, Guadalquivir River Basin Authority, Seville, Spain

Mr. Victor Cifuentes'presentation about the Guadalquivir Basin had the aim to introducea

perspective onone river basin authority thatneeds to deal with EU Water Framework Directive

"standard" duties plus some otherderiving from a given situation of chronical water scarcity.

In the first part of the presentation, the basin is presented as amorphological and

hydrological unit in its geographical and climatically context: a medium/big size basin in

south Europe open to Atlantic influence with a Mediterranean hydrology.

The second part shows some of the main issues of the basin management, mostly those

concerning water scarcity. Some concepts as regulated and non-regulated water and

guarantee are presented, and also its consequences in terms of operational planning

and management.

The third part introduce some of the strategies used by the river basin agency in order

to cope with water scarcity and also accomplish the WFD mandate: control (on the

ground & remote sensing), modernization and agrarian policies, the role of a basin

control centre in decision making, drought plans as tools to prevent and minimize the

effects of droughts and environmental flows.

The fourth and last part explains the legal and institutional spanishwaterframe, focused

in river basin management agencies ("ConfederacionesHidrográficas"). The history,

legal status and structure of those agencies are presented with some detail, stressing

the President's role as ultimate water authority in the basin and the role of users and

stakeholders in the decision making process.

Minimum Requirements of ecological Flows of Rivers – Shri Suresh Babu, WWF-India

WWF are working with many different Indian and international partners such as UNESCO-IHE

and IIT Kanpur to conduct environmental flow assessments on the Ganga. The objectives were

to promote sustainable use of the water resources in the Ganga in order to ensure ecological

integrity, provide livelihoods and maintain sacred values. Some of the indicators the project

has focused on for the assessment include fish, dolphins, invertebrates, algae, religious rights,

livelihoods and channel processes. The project began with a scoping exercise followed by

preparation for the assessment, carrying out of the assessment which includes determining a

number or parameters such as habitat integrity, present ecological status, reference

conditions, ecological and social importance and sensitivity and finally defining environmental

objectives. The next phase included an Environmental flow assessment workshop followed by

an exercise to balance the trade-offs through hydrological yield analysis and scenario analysis.

The final stages are mainly decision making and implementation followed by compliance

monitoring. So far the lessons learned from the project have been that a multidisciplinary,

coordinated approach increases the reliability and credibility of the EFA process. Moreover,

data and knowledge sharing coupled with capacity building on E-Flows must be facilitated as

14 | P a g e

good data and informed personnel is the key to successful assessments. Finally there is much

need for the integration of E-Flows analysis into trade-off management in basin management

plans.

How to minimise the morphological Impacts due to Water Management? The European Perspective – Ms. Helena Muehlmann, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management, Austria

River hydromorphology is defined by the hydrological and geo-morphological characteristics of

a water body and also includes the type-specific dynamic processes of a river. These physical

characteristics provide the natural habitat of the aquatic flora and fauna and are the basis for

the river’s ecosystem functionality. Water uses such as hydropower, flood protection,

navigation, water supply or urbanization cause alterations to the natural hydromorphological

characteristics. Impacts like the disruption of continuity for biota and sediment, physical

alterations to the river bed and banks, the disconnection of floodplains or the alteration of

flow quantity or flow velocity induce often massive environmental degradation which leads to

the decrease of biodiversity and to loss of ecosystem functionality. The EU Water Framework

Directive puts a strong focus on ecosystem functionality and demands the achievement of the

good ecological status in all European water bodies within a stringent timeframe. EU member

states have to develop detailed programmes of measures in order to achieve these goals. To

ensure a European-wide common understanding on hydromorphological issues several policy

and guidance papers were published and also many workshops were held in the frame of the

EU-Common Implementation Strategy.

In Europe hydromorphological alterations are a very prevalent. For example 63 % of

Austria’s rivers fail the ecological objectives of the water framework directive due to

hydromorphological alterations. The main drivers for hydromorphological alterations in Austria

are flood defence and hydropower. Due to the very large number of hydromorphological

impacts, Austria decided on a stepwise restoration approach by setting priorities on well-

established and well-researched measures and by defining priority rivers for restoration. In the

first planning cycle of the water framework directive in Austria river continuity was restored

for about 1000 migration barriers, ecological flow was re-established in 200 impacted river

stretches and 250 measures for increasing habitat diversity in regulated rivers were conducted.

Since the restoration of existing hydromorphological pressures is cost-intensive and

often very difficult to implement the current focus in water management is also on the

prevention of new alterations. Especially in the field of flood protection focus should be given

on natural water retention measures instead of hard river regulation. Further development of

hydropower should consider ecological requirements (ensure fish migration and ecological

flow) and optimal choice of location (maximum energy output and minimum ecological impact)

already in the planning phase of new projects.

15 | P a g e

EU Supported State Partnership Programme in Rajasthan-EU SPP- IWRM:An Overview– Shri Azitabh Sharma, Secretary, Water Resources, Rajasthan and Shouvik Datta, EUD to India

Mr. Sharma started his exposition by introducing the current status quo of water resources in

Rajasthan. While the utilisation of surface water does not exceed available resources, he

stressed the overuse of groundwater in the state. The extraction of groundwater is exceeding

essentially what is considered to be a sustainable use of the resource (2008: available: 11.15

bn. cubic meter; used 15.39 bn. cubic meter (138%)). In consequence, water levels fall at

alarming rate in most of the state, while water quality problems occur due to geological

reasons, municipal and industrial pollution.

In order to address these problems the European Union and the Government of

Rajasthan were launching a state wide water sector reform leading to sustainable and

integrated water resources management spread over 60% of the state's area (11 districts, 82

blocks, 3182 GPs covering 11249 villages), i.e. the EU Supported State Partnership Programme

(EU SPP). Having six broad components, (1) support to SWRPD; (2) Sustainable Water

Campaign; (3) Institutional Development of Water Related Departments; (4) Institutional

Development of PRI's/User groups; (5) Capacity Building of PRI's/User groups; and (6) an

Investment Component, the EU SPP was able to improve equitable access to safe, adequate,

affordable, and sustainable water supply in selected areas within Rajasthan. Furthermore, an

enhanced conservation, stabilization and replenishment of surface and groundwater have

been achieved. Another aspect of the partnership has been the promotion of Integrated Water

Resource Management (IWRM) within the State Water Policy (SWP). Rajasthan is the first State

to adapt this inclusive and participatory concept which promotes a co-ordinated development

and management process of water, land and related resources, in order to maximize the

resultant economic and social welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the

sustainability of vital ecosystems.

Among others, the following key achievements can be stressed:

State Water Policy-2010 enacted in the Rajasthan,

Learning lessons from Rajasthan, Govt. Of India also included IWRM and the village wise

aquifer mapping as core activity in National Water Policy 2012,

Constitution of Rajasthan River Basin and Water Resources Planning Authority in the

State,

To ensure water security through local level water management mechanism in 3182

GPs, IWRM plans prepared & implemented,

Water Auditing and Benchmarking of 57 irrigation schemes has been done and planned

to do for 70 more schemes in this financial year,

Aquifer Mapping Studies was recognised at national level and selected under the

category of best initiatives taken in Water Management sector for “India Geospatial

Excellence Award” by Geospatial Media and Communications Pvt Ltd Hyderabad,

16 | P a g e

Model District Irrigation Plan for Sikar District prepared as a showcase study. Rajasthan

is the first State in country which has initiated preparation of such plans and this has

been acclaimed by MOWR,

Rajasthan Water Conservation Mission, 2015 and now “Mukhya Mantri Jal Swalamban

Yojana” have been started in the State. It will encompass all the water management &

capacity building activities related to water sector reform including preparation of

IWRM plans in all gram panchayats of the State.

Water Recycling: The EU Case– Mr. Neil Dhot, Secretary General, EurEau, Brussels, Belgium

Across Europe there are facilities in place to recover wastewater and treat it to

standards that allow safe use.

The EU has recognised the economic and environmental benefits of wastewater reuse

and is working on legislation that will provide minimum standards of quality and safety

of the treated water across the EU.

At this stage wastewater reuse is not common across Europe but is emerging and being

encouraged by the EU. It is mostly used in the most water scarce areas of Europe where

there are already huge pressures on water resources.

The agriculture and industry sectors potentially could gain the most from water reuse

schemes, in terms of availability of water and reduced costs.

However, there are some major challenges in making reuse schemes viable -mainly

costs - and reuse will not be appropriate in all cases.

17 | P a g e

Session IV – Research, Innovation and Business Solutions for Water Challenges

Opportunities offered by the EU's Research Programme 'Horizon 2020' for Research and Innovation on Water – Mr. Florent Bernard, Research and Innovation Directorate-General, European Commission

Horizon 2020 is the biggest EU Research and Innovation programme ever with nearly €80

billion of funding available over 7 years (2014 to 2020). It promises more breakthroughs,

discoveries and world-firsts by taking great ideas from the lab to the market.

Horizon 2020 is Open to the World. This means that participants from all over the

world, regardless of their place of establishment or residence, can participate in most of the

calls of Horizon 2020.

Indian researchers, enterprises and institutions are able to team up with their European

partners to participate in projects under Horizon 2020 and make best use of Europe’s excellent

opportunities in research and innovation. Through participation in Horizon 2020 beneficiaries

can gain great benefits from access to excellent knowledge, access to research data and access

and connection to world-leading scientific networks and research teams.

There are many opportunities for India-EU collaboration in the field of Water, such as

‘Water in the context of the circular economy’, ‘Demonstrating innovative nature-based

solutions in cities’, ‘Large-scale demonstrators on nature-based solutions for hydro-

meteorological risk reduction’ or ‘Exploiting the added value of climate services’, and many

more.

The Participant Portal3 can be consulted for particular topics open for the submission of

proposals.

Indian participants are no longer automatically funded through Horizon 2020. Indian

participants themselves determine the sources of funding for their Indian part of the project:

these may be own funds of the participating institutions, as well as funds received from Indian

ministries, departments, foundations and other organisations that fund research and

development activities in India. Potential Indian participants are therefore encouraged to

contact relevant research and innovation funding bodies and organisations (e.g. DST, DBT,

ICMR, etc.) to seek support for their participation in Horizon 2020, as a co-funding mechanism

has been agreed in principle with DBT and DST.

3https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/home.html

18 | P a g e

Challenges in Ground Water Sector in Context of Integrated Water Resources Development and Management - Shri K. B. Biswas, Chairman, Central Ground Water Board (CGWB)

India has 2.45% of the world's surface area, 17% of the world's population and only 4% of the

world's water resources. Groundwater supplied 80% of drinking water in rural areas, 50%

drinking water in urban areas and 70% irrigation support in agriculture. However, Groundwater

development is highly skewed in India as the North western, Western & Southern areas have

high groundwater development leading to over-exploitation whereas Northeastern, Eastern

and parts of central India experience low development of groundwater resources.

Indiscriminate Groundwater withdrawal is leading to deterioration in GW quality, sea water

ingress in coastal areas, decrease in base flow in small rivers and increased energy and

therefore emissions required to withdraw GW due to lowering of water tables. As well as

indiscriminate GW withdrawl, private ownership, inadequate regulatory measures and a

decrease in community participation in GW management are among the main challenges to

effective GW management in India. There have been a number of management initiatives

including the development of a master plan of artificial recharge to ground water in 2013.

However here is still much to be done to rectify the abuse of our GW resources in India.

There is a need for information generation through scientific techniques on aquifer

disposition and vulnerability to generate models for aquifer-based development of

groundwater. A participatory groundwater management approach and increased public sector

investment are required as well as area-specific implementation of regulation by standardizing

depth of tube wells for various user sectors and discontinuing free energy for irrigation.

The Role of the Business Sector – Mr. Poul Jensen, Director, European Business and Technology Centre (EBTC), New Delhi

Mr. Poul Jensen was presenting a perspective based on the role of potential added value by

the businesses' contributions. He introduced the five step process of creating the Full Circle of

a successful project. During this procedure different roles are attributed to the Government

and the Business side.

The Full Circle – The Government Role:

1. Develop a Master Blue Print of the Project

Absorption and integration of all local studies

Inspired by EU water legislation & policy

Inspired by existing European Ganga reports

Inspired by industry inputs

2. Capitalising the Plan

Identify financing options

Project(s) to be appraised by WB, IMF, IFC, ADB, other financial institutions – multilateral + EU MS

Raise long term, low cost financing; 20-30yrs

19 | P a g e

3. Project Construction

Open source design specifications drawn up

Global tenders, TORs – full value chain

Public Private Partnership model explored

Consortia building

Here the role of Business is to provide essential inputs to develop holistic, actionable projects.

The Full Circle – The Business Role

4. Full scale Construction by India Incorporation

Collaboration/ tie-ups between European andIndian industries, experts and stakeholders

Company to company technology sharing, -transfer

Skill building, skill enhancement

Training on O&M, sustainable practises

5. Milestonebased Setup - Revenue Generating assets

Areas for revenue generating projects: o Energy ; Water highways; River front development; Tourism; Irrigation systems;

Agriculture sector industries; Food processing parks… o Projects pay back, financially self-sustainable o Tax revenue income to States

Here the role of Business is to provide essential inputs for ensuring long term, sustainable

projects.

In addition, the option for Quick Wins occurs during the circular process. These can be of

different nature, such as action on ground, generation of revenue at designed timelines and

the creation of visibility and monitizable assets. Finally, the major value proposition of

cooperation between India, the EU and its Businesses is the access for India to best practices,

technology, skills and capabilities.

Pilot Project on Non-Revenue Water (NRW) in Sheetal Park Area of Rajkot City in Gujarat– Mr. Anshul Jain, Deputy Head of Trade, Danish Embassy to India

This project on Non-revenue water (NRW) in Gujarat is managed by the Danish Water Forum

(DWF) in cooperation with the Raijkot Municipal Corporation (RMC). The objective of this

project is to facilitate RMC staff to demonstrate the need to reduce the NRW in the pilot area.

We achieved this through installation of meters, quantification of leakage, leakage detection

surveys, training in the use of detection instruments, develop an appropriate methodology and

to propose water loss management tools. Non-revenue water includes water loss through

leakage or the loss of revenue through unbilled consumption and metering inaccuracies.

Therefore the means of understanding NRW include understanding the continuous process of

the water supply. This requires understanding where the losses are made, developing a

strategy to reduce loss and improve performance and then maintain the strategy and sustain

the achievements gained. A water audit found that in this area, there was no asset

management system causing difficulties for operation and maintenance and there were no

20 | P a g e

taps or ball valves at the consumer end resulting in excess use/misuse of water by consumers

who also had little awareness of water conservation habits. The audit also found that the NRW

resulting in a loss of around INR 60.95 Lakhs per day. The recommendations for further

management include a comprehensive study of the entire network in Rajkot, meter

installation, a campaign to register all consumers and billing by metering, pressure

management by hydraulic modelling and a phased replacement of AC pipes by HPPE pipes.

Regulation of Public and Private Water Entities in Europe – Mr. Neil Dhot, Secretary General, EurEau, Brussels, Belgium

There is a mixture of regulatory models in the EU. Some countries have economic

regulators which control the price, and investment levels. Other countries have

regulators to monitor environmental/water quality.

In some European countries, the regulators are completely independent, but have their

objectives and sometimes also their leadership set by politically-elected representatives

or by Government.

In Europe, the regulators aim to ensure compliance with their own rules and laws set

down by national and EU Government/

A partnership between regulators and regulated is essential.

Investors, whether private or Central banks, want stable and predictable regulation.

Deploying Best Available Techniques (BATs) in Water Management in India – Mr. Jan Klasinski, Managing Director, Industrial Services, Veolia India

Through its 160 years of industrial history, Veolia has become the world leader of

environmental services: Veolia designs and deploys circular economy solutions for water,

waste and energy management to improve efficiencies for cities, industries and citizens.

In India, Veolia is the water market leader with the most innovative schemes from the

first desalination plant built in India (Andaman Islands) in 1946 to the first water PPP with the

city of Nagpur. Veolia India serves 4.5 million inhabitants in India while managing water and

wastewater services for public authorities and industries.

The development of BATs in India requires multiples adjustments:

1. The pricing of water must be revised while water pollution standards have to be

updated and enforced.

2. Authorities must focus where it matters like for the Ganga cleaning whereby instead of

aiming for the full 2525Km a state-by-State approach with a zoom on the key polluting

basins (6-7) and online monitoring accessible to all via internet, real time could have a

higher impact.

3. Acknowledging that investment without proper Operations and Maintenance lead to

sub-optimal output particularly at a time when the 8 core Indian industrials sectors face

the double need to deleverage and expand.

21 | P a g e

4. Action and Speed must underpin project award process so to de-bottleneck the

deployment of BATs:

I. For instance regarding Ganga cleaning, nor more studies are required

II. “Most economically advantageous” Vs lowest-cost

III. Limit drastically the option(s) to re-tender

IV. Set deadlines and stick to them for awarding projects.

5. Increase the value created by smarter water management

I. To solve complex environmental issues, facilitate the match between local

needs and Global experienced companies by lifting local entry barriers

II. Systematic current tendering process does not maximize output

III. Right metrics and contract duration drive economic value i.e. think beyond

current fiscal year/’Cost+’’

IV. Continuous dialogue between client and pre-qualified operators to ensure

contract is and remains achievable in its objectives, terms and conditions: think

win-win

V. Factor-in all benefits generated including Social Return on Investment which

help to keep one’s Social License to Operate.

6. ‘‘Think circular‘‘ by turning waste water treatment plants into power stations with the

example of the Design-Build and Operate of Nilothi Waste Water Treatment Plant

where the digestion of the sludge created by the treatment process creates biogas used

within the station.

22 | P a g e

Contact at the Delegation of the EU to India

Henriette Faergemann First Counsellor - Environment, Energy, Climate Change Delegation of the European Union to India 5/5 Shanti Niketan, New Delhi 110 021, INDIA Tel. +91 11 6678 1919 ext. 940 / Fax +91 11 6678 1955 Mobile +919818711494 Email: Henriette.Faergemann@eeas.europa.eu Website: http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/india Skype: henriette.faergemann Twitter: @henriettebxl Like us on: www.Facebook.com/EUinIndia