case study on narmada project

The Narmada Issue: An Overview

The Narmada Valley Project (NVP) is made up of plans for 30 major, 136 medium and 3,000 minor dams in India. In Sardar Sarovar Project (SSP) in the state of Gujarat and the Narmada Sagar Project (NSP) in the state of Madhya Pradesh are, at present, the NVP's major constituents. Estimates show that the cost of the whole project would be around US $19 billion over the next 25 years. The present estimate for the NSP and the SSP is US $3 billion and $9 billion, respectively.

The state governments of Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh claim that the SSP and the NSP would irrigate 1.9 million ha and 0.14 million ha of land and generate 1,450 megawatts (mw) and 1,000 mw of power, respectively. The hydroelectric power of the SSP would be shared by the states of Gujarat, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh; the irrigation benefits would accrue to the states of Gujarat and Rajasthan. All irrigation and power benefits of the NSP would go only to Madhya Pradesh. Without the NSP, the SSP would not be able to achieve its full irrigation and power potential - it needs regulated water supply from upstream.

These projects had been treading water for many years for want of environmental clearance from the Ministry of Environment and Forests. Recently, the Indian government gave clearance for the construction of the SSP in Gujarat and the NSP in Madhya Pradesh. But very few dispute the fact that the ecological impacts of these projects have not been properly studied.

Both environmentalists and social activists have raised serious questions about the projects. The studies done thus far have been found to be inadequate, or the follow-up actions to rectify the damages not up to the mark. The government of Gujarat commissioned a study of the projects carried out by the department of botany, M.S. University, Baroda, in just six months. The study did not take into consideration the seasonal temporal variations in the climate and many other important parameters. This study was commissioned only after the work on the project had begun. Moreover, much of the information in this study derives from government data, rather than from recent, independent, empirical data.

Similarly, the Environment Planning and Coordination Organization (EPCO), in Bhopal, carried out a study to assess the environmental impact of the NSP. This study is an almost worthless exercise; it is based on secondary data, which were at times found to be contradictory. Such a report can hardly be passed off as legitimate environmental research.

Other studies, conducted by Consulting Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd., in New Delhi, and the Indian Institute of Sciences, in Bangalore, can only be considered a piecemeal approach to the whole project, because they only examine one or two dams.

Submerging Forests and Agricultural Land

The Sardar Sarovar Project will submerge about 10,000 ha of forest land. The case of the Narmada Sagar Project is even worse: it will submerge 40,332 ha of forest land.

The forests to be submerged are basically teak, with excellent strands of bamboo and other woods. The only pure stand of anjun left in India is located in the Dewas district of Madhya Pradesh. Many of these species no longer naturally regenerate.

Although the Madhya Pradesh state policy guarantees that "for all forest areas submerged in the project, an equal area will be taken up under compensatory forestry," the same document also states that big chunks of land are not available in the districts close to the submergence area. The question then is: Where is all the land for afforestation going to come from?

An amount of US $238,000 has been allocated for the afforestation in Madhya Pradesh. A conservative estimate would allocate US $1,150 for replanting trees on one hectare of land, meaning that US $238,000 can be used to replant a mere 206 ha.

These projects will also flood a large amount of agricultural and grazing land. Most of the agricultural land, situated close to the river Narmada, is highly fertile and produces fine yields of wheat, jowar (barley) and cotton. The official document for the NSP says, "big chunks of cultivable land are not available in Khandwa, Khargone, Dhar, Jhabua, Dewas Hoshangabad and other districts...In these circumstances the only course left is to allot the affected families small bits of government land available in the nearby districts of the submergence area." This policy would lead to serious sociocultural disruption in the life of the area's residents. A report carried out by National Institute of Urban Affairs (NIUA), in New Delhi, mentions that adequate areas in every district would be available for the residents. However, the project authorities have made no serious attempt to find cultivable land for the residents.

Loss of Wildlife

The project report of the NSP states, "the impact of the project on the wildlife shall be nil. Since wildlife has got natural characteristics of shifting to nearby jungles wherever it is felt unsuitable to them." In other words, the wildlife will relocate itself. Similarly, the policy document prepared by the government of Madhya Pradesh says, "wildlife in submerged forests will be guided to adjacent localities. Protection of the wildlife will be the responsibility of the forest authorities." These statements not only contradict each other but also reflect the irresponsible attitude of the project authorities toward the fate of the area's wildlife, which consists of several rare and endangered species. To date, no one has taken an inventory of the species of plants and animals found in the forests; these studies have only just been commissioned.

Displacement and Rehabilitation

Both these projects will displace nearly 200,000 people from their homes. Officials sources state that, in the case of the SSP, 182 villages in Madhya Pradesh, 36 in Maharashtra and 19 in Gujarat will be under water, and the NSP will submerge an additional 254 villages in Madhya Pradesh. These figures, however, are incorrect, because they only include revenue villages, with no mention of forest villages. A recent field report by Multiple Action Research Group (MARG), a nongovernmental organization in New Delhi, mentions six forest villages of Tehsil Barwani (Dhar district, Madhya Pradesh) that will go under Sardar Sarovar's waters. Similarly, no attempt has been made to list those villages that will fall victim to the backwater effect.

Out of the more than 25,000 people affected by the SSP in Gujarat and Maharashtra, more than 90 percent of them are members of the Bhil and Tadavi tribes. Most of them are landless, and fall into two categories: traditional tribal cultivators with no land titles, and the real landless agricultural laborers found in many villages of Madhya Pradesh. For the forest-dwelling tribals, the most serious impact of displacement will be the separation from their natural surroundings. The forest and the river play central roles in their cultural and economic life; neither will be present at resettlement sites.

The families to be displaced by the SSP are to be rehabilitated through the directives of the Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal. Although these directives are a marked improvement on past rehabilitation polices, they contain serious loopholes and omissions. First, the policy applies only to those resettled from Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra. Second, only those families from whom more than 25 percent of their land holdings are acquired will be entitled to irrigable land, with a minimum of two hectares. The directives contain no mention of any resettlement and rehabilitation of forest dwellers, who eke out a living on common property resources. Most of the potential oustees of Madhya Pradesh are not aware of any of these directives, and, according to MARG's report, the directives have been misquoted by project officials.

In the case of Maharashtra Gujarat, the initial phase of resettlement and rehabilitation has been far from satisfactory. According to activist Medha Patkar, the land-for-land policy has largely failed in the state of Maharashtra, and in Gujarat, the state government has not bothered to find adequate land for the residents. Many people in Gujarat have complained that the lands sold to them came with heavy debts. Many others received lands which the same SSP was about to acquire for the construction of canals. In many cases, the cash compensation has been inadequate. According to a news report, the lands acquired in the village of Panchmuli, in Gujarat, were to be compensated at the rate of US $438 per acre; the villagers received only US $354 per acre. The resettlement sites do not have adequate drinking water supplies. To date, civic amenities like electricity, schools and panachayat ghar (town halls) have not been provided in one resettlement village, Suka.

Waterlogging

Every year, a large portion of good, fertile land is rendered unproductive and barren by almost all the irrigation projects. The annual increase in soil salinity and waterlogging was as high as 50,999 ha and 27,000 in Ramganga project area in Uttar Pradesh. About 25 percent of the arable lands of Punjab and Haryana have been affected by waterlogging and soil salinity, too. The problem of waterlogging and soil salinity in the Narmada projects is expected to be serious because the command areas of the projects have largely black soils, which have very good water retention capacity. A study by Indian Institute of Science, in Bangalore, found that about 40 percent of the NSP's command area will become waterlogged unless stringent preventive measures are taken. Significantly, the cost of these measures does not figure in the original cost-benefit analysis for NSP-the analysis submitted for funding approval.

Catchment Area Treatment

There is no denying the fact that the catchment areas of the river Narmada are subject to heavy ecological degradation. If this is not properly checked, the increasing soil erosion will lead to salutation and sedimentation, thereby reducing the life span of the reservoirs. No comprehensive study has been commissioned on the existing state and future demands on the catchment forests in the Narmada Valley. However, an expert committee has looked into the matter for part of the area, and has suggested a US $38 million scheme to treat the catchment. As the Department of Environment report points out, however, this study was commissioned several years before the projects were sanctioned.

Cost-Benefit Analysis

A project is sanctioned by the planning commission only when the cost-benefit ratio is 1 to 1.5 - that is, for every rupee spent, there must be a return of at least Rs. 1.50. It has been found that this ratio is often distorted by exaggerating the benefits and underplaying the costs. Environmentalists have made the following points, among others, on the NSP and the SSP:

1. The costs of land acquisition have been underplayed.

2. The allocation of money for compensatory afforestation is inadequate and distorted. For the NSP, it is US $238,000 for afforestation of 40,332 ha. It is US $4 million for afforestation of 10,000 ha in the case of the SSP.

3. The value of the forest land has been calculated only in terms of commercial products. The analysis does not consider the loss of ecological benefits of forests.

4. The loss of wildlife is omitted from the cost-benefit analysis.

5. The cost of preventive measures for waterlogging is also omitted from the cost-benefit analysis.

6. Due to delays in the clearance of these projects, present costs of construction run much higher than anticipated.

Other Impacts

Environmentalists and social activists have anticipated many other negative impacts of these projects. Some of them are:

1. Seismicity - a hotly debated issue that seems to produce more confusion than clarity.

2. Contamination by pollution, pesticides and minerals.

3. Saltwater ingress at mouth of river due to reduced water flow.

4. Spread of waterborne diseases in the command area.

5. Impact on aquatic ecology.

On the basis of these serious inadequacies and distortions, we strongly demand that all the initial assumptions and ideas be reevaluated before pushing ahead with these projects.

The following steps should be taken to prove inadequacies and distortions in the existing assessments:

Independent Assessments:

Detailed sociological and anthropological studies on the existing sociocultural lifestyle of those to be relocated are desperately needed in order to assess the likely impact of the changes. Equally vital are studies on the environmental impacts of the projects. Independent cost-benefit analyses must be carried out to judge the feasibility and viability of these projects.

Public Awareness and Mass Media

The full utilization of communication techniques, including mass media, would help create widespread awareness and understanding of these issues. Exhibitions plays, film shows and publication of articles and books can bring awareness at many different levels.

Local People's Action

The people Maharashtra and Gujarat have been able to organized themselves to demand better rehabilitation with the help of Narmada Dharangrasht Samiti/SETU and Chattra Yuva Sangharsh Vahini. Little sign of this mobilization is evident among the people of Madhya Pradesh, however; out of the total 491 villages to be submerged (from the NSP and the SSP), 436 (more than 90 percent) are situated in Madhya Pradesh alone. Two local organizations in the state - Narmada Ghati Sangharsh Samiti, Harsude and Narmada Ghati Nav Nirman Samiti, Tavlai - are working in these areas, but the existing sociopolitical situation has not allowed these samitis (organizations) to organize the potential oustees.

Legislative Measures

Both the projects involve displacing nearly 200,000 people, many of whom make their livings from common property resources. There is no comprehensive resettlement and rehabilitation scheme for them in the directives and rules laid down thus far. A petition on behalf of these people can be filed under Article 21 of India's Constitution, which says, "no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law." A position proving the inadequacies and distortions in the existing assessments can also be filed in the court.

Article copyright Cultural Survival, Inc.

Youth Fellow Spotlight: Ishey Angmo from Ladakh, India

May 18, 2022

UN Member States Review India’s Record on the Protection of Indigenous Peoples’ Rights

Jan 04, 2023

Irula-led Community Radio Station in Nilgiris, India Uplifts Indigenous Voices

Feb 07, 2024

Our website houses close to five decades of content and publishing. Any content older than 10 years is archival and Cultural Survival does not necessarily agree with the content and word choice today.

Land Acknowledgement We acknowledge that we are headquartered on Massachusett land , in Cambridge, MA, and we thank the past, current, and future Indigenous stewards of this territory.

Our Mission

Cultural Survival advocates for Indigenous Peoples' rights and supports Indigenous communities’ self-determination, cultures and political resilience, since 1972.

Cultural Survival envisions a future that respects and honors Indigenous Peoples' inherent rights and dynamic cultures, deeply and richly interwoven in lands, languages, spiritual traditions, and artistic expression, rooted in self-determination and self-governance.

Stay Informed

Cultural Survival E-Newsletter - News and Updates
Bazaars and Events
Information on conferences, meetings and global events pertaining to Indigenous Peoples
Free digital CSQ Magazine

Main page content

Sardar sarovar dam conflict in india.

The Sardar Sarovar Dam, constructed on the sacred Narmada River, aims to secure power, as well as irrigation and drinking water, for the drought-prone region. However, the project has also had significant environmental impacts and has displaced large proportions of the population, especially poor farmers and ethnic and Adivasis, the aboriginal population of India. Indeed, this situation catalysed one of the major environmental protest movements in India.

Agricultural/Pastoral land

Conceptual Model

Conflict history.

The Sardar Sarovar Dam is one of the biggest dams built within the framework of the Narmada River Development project which started in 1979 thanks to the award of the Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal (NWDT – see Narmada Dam Water Dispute between Indian States ). However, from 1985 onward, civil discontent began to rise, coming from citizens, academics, international and national NGOs and medias who denounced several infringements of environmental and human rights standards ( Narula, 2008 ). Different groups of non-violent activists merged in 1989, giving birth to the Narmada Bachao Andolan, which has been leading the protest since then and opposing the governments of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat, as well as the government of India, which were all supporters of the project.

A development project causes public outcry

From the outset, governments and dam builders advocated the development aspect of the project which aimed at providing power as well as irrigation and drinking water in a drought prone region ( Ellison, 2005 ). Whilst the World Bank had agreed to support the project in 1985, political protest mainly voiced by the Narmada Bachao Andolan grew by peaceful means. This non-violent protest was inspired, among other, by the Gandhian ideology ( Vinay Lal, 2000 ; Kalland & Persoon, 1998 ).

The World Bank's withdrawal

This led the President of the Bank to form an independent commission in 1991, in order to reassess its position. The Independent Review, also called Morse Report, which followed firmly condemned the lack of a proper resettlement and rehabilitation plan (R&R) as well as the inadequate evaluation of the environmental damages involved ( Morse Report 1992 ), while highlighting the lack of data and consultation with the people concerned. The World Bank consequently withdrew its support for the project.

Environmental impact

The building of the dam has entailed massive flooding of villages and productive land. This has brought about extensive environmental consequences, such as a negative effect on downstream fishing, threat on wildlife natural habitat, waterlogging and salinization of water, silting of the river bed, deforestation ( Morse Report 1992 ; Kothari & Ram, 1994 ). For populations whose livelihood entirely relies on agriculture, an ecological disaster, such as this, also has economic impacts by damaging their mean of subsistence. The net benefits of the dam itself are thus questioned. Further it has been argued that climate change could worsen the situation.

Social repercussions

The displacement of small farmers and tribal groups without a proper financial compensation, if any, has been at the heart of the conflict. The governments of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat are still responsible for massive violation of the right to life, livelihood and rehabilitation of thousands of families ( Indian Independent People’s Tribunal, 2010 ). Although the public protest managed to publicize the conflict at an international stage in the 1990s, the Sardar Sarovar Dam has been built and several raises in its final height have been agreed to, expanding the scope of the submerged zone and thus worsening the environmental and social impact of the project.

Conflict resolution

Although the nonviolent protest of the Narmada Bachao Andolan led to the withdrawal of the World Bank in 1993, neither the government of India nor the state governments stopped the project. The Narmada Bachao Andolan thus brought the case to the Supreme Court of India in 1995. The latter decided to suspend the construction of the dam because of the lack of prior assessment of the project’s environmental and social impacts.

Unaddressed grievances

The government of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat consequently established a Grievance Redressal Authority which aimed at dealing with the resettlement and rehabilitation complaints of those displaced. The Supreme Court’s next rulings (1999, 2000) permitted the construction of the Sardar Sarovar Dam, thus leaving the grievances unaddressed. The lack of involvement of civil society and especially of those displaced in the decision-making process has been much criticized and may be responsible for the failure of the conflict resolution efforts. As the decision-making process still excludes the different social movements and citizens, the dam’s construction has not been held and thousands of families remain left without any compensation.

Governments disregard their obligations

There is yet rehabilitation and resettlement requirement laid down in the award given by the NWDT in 1979 as well as in the Supreme Court rulings. Those requirements foresaw that the states of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat would have to compensate those displaced, but the concerned government still do not comply with their obligations towards the displaced populations ( Indian Independent People’s Tribunal, 2010 ).

No accountability to the international community

Besides, the World Bank’s withdrawal from the project somehow removed the international attention from the conflict, and certainly released India from its accountability duties towards the international community ( Narula, 2008 ). Indeed, after the scandal following the Morse Report which constituted a “historical watershed for the World Bank" and an important landmark in the struggle for accountability ( Sureda, 2003 ), the World Bank did not leave the project but set up conditions to its participation ( Kirk, 2011 ). It withdrew at the request of the Government of India, which allowed the latter to avoid increasing its social and environmental standards.

Prestige dimension

An important factor of the conflict resolution’s failure is the political context in which the project was drafted and decided. Its rhetoric and legal framework date back to the direct aftermath of India’s independence, when an ambitious modernization agenda was established ( Aquapedia, 2015 ). The Sardar Sarovar Dam is thus also about prestige and development, a theme explored in more detail in the Narmada Dam Water Dispute between Indian States .

Resilience and Peace Building

Mediation & arbitration.

The Supreme Court of India decided to suspend the construction of the dam in 1995 because of the lack of a prior assessment of the project’s environmental and social impacts. After the involved regional governments established a Grievances Redressal Authority to deal with the resettlement and rehabilitation of those displaced, the Supreme Court permitted the construction of the dam. However, the grievances of the displaced population were ultimately left unaddressed.

Social inclusion & empowerment

The involvement of different social movements and citizens in the decision making process of the project is key for a satisfactory resolution of the conflict.

Resources and Materials

Kothari, A., Ram, R.N. (1994). Environmental Impacts of the Sardar Sarovar Project
Sardar Sarovar: The Report of the Independent Review, 1992
Jason A. Kirk, J.A. (2011). India and the World Bank, the Politics of Aid and Influence. Anthem Press
Narula, S. (2008). The Story of Narmada Bachao Andolan: Human Rights in the Global Economy and the struggle against the World Bank. New York University Public Law and Legal Theory Working Papers. Paper 106
Kalland, A., Persoon, G. (1998) Environmental Movements in Asia. Nordic Institute of Asian Studies, Man and Nature in Asia Series, No.4
Lal, V. (2000). Gandhi and the Ecological Vision of Life: Thinking beyond Deep Ecology
Sureda, A.R. (2003) Informality and Effectiveness in the Operation of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press
Conflicts over development in India's Narmada River Basin, 2015
Talib N. Ellison, The Sardar Sarovar Dam and Ethnic Conflict in India, 2005
Indian Independant People's Tribunal, Report on Sardar Sarovar Project, Canals of Indira Sagar & Omkareshwar and Jobat Dam Project, 2010

20.500.12592/844kvm

Narmada dams controversy -- case summary

Peterson, M.J. , Kiratli, Osman , Ercan, Ilke

Add to list

You have no lists yet

Create your first list:

1 ? 's' : ''}`" >

Full-page Screenshot

ग्राउंड रिपोर्ट हिंदी

ग्रामीण भारत
Madhya Pradesh
Climate Change
Extreme Weather
Sustainability
Climate Warriors
Biodiversity
Agriculture
Video Reports
Climate Glossary
Data Reports
Web Stories

The Narmada Valley Development Project: A Never-Ending Controversy

The Narmada Valley Development Project is a multi-purpose river valley development project in India

The Narmada Valley Development Project is a multi-purpose river valley development project in India, aimed at creating a network of dams, canals, and reservoirs in the Narmada River basin. However, the project has been the subject of controversy for decades due to its potential social and environmental impacts.

Plan of Water Resources schemes in the narmada Basin

Background and History of the Project

The Narmada Valley Development Project was first proposed in the 1940s to harness the hydroelectric potential of the Narmada River. In 1961, the Central Water Commission prepared a plan for the project. In 1971, the project was revised. The project aims to generate electricity, provide irrigation, and supply water for domestic and industrial purposes for the state of Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Rajasthan and Maharashtra.

Controversies and Concerns

The project has been the subject of controversy for decades due to its potential social and environmental impacts. The following are the major controversies and concerns associated with the Narmada Valley Development Project:

Displacement of People: The project involves the construction of large dams and reservoirs, which will lead to the displacement of thousands of people from their homes and land. Many of these people belong to indigenous communities and have lived in the area for generations.
Environmental Impacts: The project will have significant environmental impacts, including the loss of forests and wildlife habitats. The construction of dams and reservoirs will also disrupt the natural flow of the river and affect fish populations.
Cultural Heritage: The project will also affect the cultural heritage of the people living in the area, including the destruction of historical and archaeological sites.
Human Rights Violations: The displacement of people from their homes and land without adequate compensation or resettlement violates their human rights.
Economic Viability: The project has also been criticized for its economic viability, with some experts arguing that the costs of the project outweigh its benefits.

Protests and Opposition to the Project

The Narmada Valley Development Project has faced significant opposition from environmentalists, human rights activists, and local communities. The following are some of the major protests and opposition to the project:

Narmada Bachao Andolan: The Narmada Bachao Andolan (Save Narmada Movement) is a social movement led by environmentalist Medha Patkar to protest the construction of large dams on the Narmada River. The movement has gained international attention and has been supported by many prominent activists, including Arundhati Roy.
Court Cases: The project has also been the subject of several court cases, with many legal challenges raised against it. In 2000, the Supreme Court of India ruled that construction on the dam could proceed but with certain conditions.
International Opposition: The project has also faced international opposition, with many international organizations and activists criticizing its social and environmental impacts.

The Narmada Valley Development Project has been a never-ending controversy for decades, with concerns over its social and environmental impacts. While the project aims to provide economic development and infrastructure, its potential negative impacts on indigenous communities, the environment, and cultural heritage cannot be ignored. Hence, the government must address these concerns. Furthermore, ensure that the project is implemented in a sustainable and socially responsible manner.

Keep reading

150 homes to submerge: Bothi village opposes the Morand-Ganjal dam project
Why are tribals against Basania Dam on Narmada in MP?
#Explained: Pancheshwar Multipurpose Project
Kishau Dam will displace people from Uttarakhand and Himachal
How dam water mis-management causes floods in riverside areas?
Revival of Bodhghat hydropower irritation project, and its subsequent problems

Follow Ground Report for Climate Change and Under-Reported issues in India. Connect with us on Facebook , Twitter , Koo App , Instagram , Whatsapp and YouTube . Write us on [email protected]

Ground Report English

India’s Greatest Planned Environmental Disaster:

The Narmada Valley Dam Projects

www.sierraclub.org/human%2Drights/india/index.asp

“For over a century we’ve believed that Big Dams would deliver the people of India from hunger and poverty.

The opposite has happened.” - Arundhati Roy

The Narmada Valley Development Project is the single largest river development scheme in India. It is one of the largest hydroelectric projects in the world and will displace approximately 1.5 million people from their land in three states (Gujarat, Maharashtra, and Madhya Pradesh). The environmental costs of such a project, which involves the construction of more than 3,000 large and small dams, are immense. The project will devastate human lives and biodiversity by inundating thousands of acres of forests and agricultural land. “The State” (India) wants to build these dams on the Narmada River in the name of National Development. But “How can you measure progress if you don’t know what it costs and who has paid for it?” (Roy 16).

Each monsoon season thousands of people are told by the Indian government that they will have to be relocated as their ancestral lands are flooded out. “The people whose lives were going to be devastated were neither informed nor consulted nor heard” (Roy 26). A disproportionate number of those being displaced are tribal people: Adivasis and Dalits.

Damming the Narmada River will degrade the fertile agricultural soils due to continuous irrigation (rather the seasonal irrigation which is dependent on the monsoon), and salinization, making the soil toxic to many plant species. The largest of the dams under construction is the Sardar Sarovar, which, if completed, will flood more than 37,000 hectares of forest and agricultural land, displacing more than half a million people and destroying some of India’s most fertile land.

The thing about multipurpose dams like the Sardar Sarovar is that their “purposes” (irrigation, power production, and flood control) conflict with one another. Irrigation uses up the water you need to produce power. Flood control requires you to keep the reservoir empty during the monsoon months to deal with an anticipated surfeit of water. And if there’s no surfeit, you’re left with an empty dam. And this defeats the purpose of irrigation, which is to store the monsoon water (Roy 34).

In the end, the Big Dam will produce only 3% of the power planners say it will – that’s only 50 megawatts! Additionally, when you take into account the power needed to pump water through the network of canals inevitably attached to the dam, the Sardar Sarovar Project (SSP) will consume more electricity than it produces! Another problem with the SSP is that its reservoir displaces people in Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, but its benefits go to Gujarat (Roy 34-35). Even though the arid regions of that state, Kutch and Saurashtra, are not mentioned in the water-sharing award as recipients of drinking water.

The proposed dams will affect millions of people but only a certain percentage of them will be privy to the government’s resettlement and rehabilitation (R & R) programs. The problem here arises in defining who are Project-Affected Persons (PAPs). The World Commission on Dams urges that the “impact assessment includes all people in the reservoir, upstream, downstream and in catchment areas whose properties, livelihoods and nonmaterial resources are affected. It also includes those affected by dam-related infrastructure such as canals, transmission lines and resettlement developments” ( www.irn.org/wcd/narmada.shtml ). In reality, however, people affected by the extensive canal system are not considered as PAPs. These people are subject to R & R packages, but not the same ones as those living in the reservoir area. Unbelievably, those not entitled to any compensation at all are the hundreds of thousands whose lands or livelihoods are affected by either project-related developments or downstream impacts.

Back to Table of Contents

“Big Dams are to a nation’s ‘development’ what nuclear bombs are to its military arsenal. They’re both weapons of mass destruction.”

- Arundhati Roy

The Narmada River, on which the Indian government plans to build some 3,200 dams, flows through three states: Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Gujarat. Ninety percent of the river flows through Madhya Pradesh; it skirts the northern border of Maharashtra, then flows through Gujarat for about 180 kilometers before emptying into the Arabian Sea at Bharuch.

Plans for damming the river at Gora in Gujarat surfaced as early as 1946. In fact, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru laid the foundation for a 49.8-meter-high dam in 1961. After studying the new maps the dam planners decided that a much larger dam would be more profitable. The only problem was hammering out an agreement with neighboring states (Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra). In 1969, after years of negotiations attempting to agree on a feasible water-sharing formula, the Indian government established the Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal. Ten years later, it announced its award. “The Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal Award states that land should be made available to the oustees at least one year in advance before submergence” ( www.narmada.org/sardarsarovar.html ).

Before the Ministry of the Environment even cleared the Narmada Valley Development Projects in 1987, the World Bank sanctioned a loan for $450 million for the largest dam, the Sardar Sarovar, in 1985. In actuality, construction on the Sardar Sarovar dam site had continued sporadically since 1961, but began in earnest in 1988. Questions arose concerning the promises about resettlement and rehabilitation programs set up by the government, so by 1986 each state had a people’s organization that addressed these concerns. Soon, these groups came together to form the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA), or, the Save the Narmada Movement.

In 1988, the NBA formally called for all work on the Narmada Valley Development Projects to be stopped. In September 1989, more than 50,000 people gathered in the valley from all over India to pledge to fight “destructive development.” A year later thousands of villagers walked and boated to a small town in Madhya Pradesh to reiterate their pledge to drown rather than agree to move from their homes. Under intense pressure, the World Bank was forced to create an independent review committee, the Morse Commission, which published the Morse Report (a.k.a. Independent Review) in 1992. The report “endorsed all the main concerns raised by the Andolan [NBA]” ( www.narmada.org/sardarsarovar.html ). In author Arundhati Roy’s opinion “It is the most balanced, unbiased, yet damning indictment of the relationship between the Indian State and the World Bank.” Two months later, the Bank sent out the Pamela Cox Committee. It suggested exactly what the Morse Report advised against: “a sort of patchwork remedy to try and salvage the operation” (Roy 45-46). Eventually, due to the international uproar created by the Report, the Bank withdrew from the Sardar Sarovar Project. In response, the Gujarati government decided to raise $200 million and push ahead with the project.

While the Independent Review was being written and also after it was published confrontations between villagers and authorities continued in the valley. After continued protests by the NBA the government charged yet another committee, the Five Member Group (FMG), to review the SSP. The FMG’s report endorsed the Morse Report’s concerns but it made no difference. Following a writ petition by the NBA in 1994 calling for a comprehensive review of the project, the Supreme Court of India stopped construction of the Sardar Sarovar dam in 1995. Tension in the area dissipated but soon the NBA’s attention shifted to two other Big Dams in Madhya Pradesh – the Narmada Sagar and the Maheshwar. Though these dams were nowhere near their projected heights their impacts on the environment and the people of the valley were already apparent. The government’s resettlement program for the displaced natives “continues to be one of callousness and broken promises” (Roy 51). In 1999, however, the Supreme Court allowed for the dam’s height to be raised to 88 meters (from 80 meters when building was halted in 1995). In October 2000, the Supreme Court issued a judgement to allow immediate construction of the Sardar Sarovar Dam to 90 meters. In addition, it allowed for the dam to be built up to its originally planned height of 138 meters. These decrees have “come from the Court despite major unresolved issues on resettlement, the environment, and the project’s costs and benefits” ( www.narmada.org/sardarsarovar.html ).

“Nobody builds Big Dams to provide drinking water to rural people.

Nobody can afford to.”

Native people

Dalits are the “Untouchables” of the caste system. Translated literally the Dalits are the “oppressed” or “ground-down.”

Adivasi is the term used to designate the original inhabitants (indigenous people) of a region.

The government of India supports the building of over 3,000 dams on the Narmada River. What the State fails to take into account are the infinite costs of what it terms National Development; the millions of lives affected by the devastating environmental impacts of building dams.

Narmada Bachao Andolan, The Save the Narmada Movement

The NBA is a people’s movement formed from local people’s movements in Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Gujarat. Through peaceful means, the NBA has brought much media attention to the plight of the native people along the river. Medha Patkar is a prominent leader of the group.

The World Bank had originally supported the Sardar Sarovar with a $450 million loan. However, after appointing an independent panel to review the impacts of the project the Bank withdrew support. The panel expressed much concern that the environmental and social impacts of the project had not been properly considered.

The Supreme Court

The Court is one of the most formidable opponents of the NBA. It has exercised its power over the people through judgements to continue with building of dams along the river, disregarding concerns about the dams’ environmental and social impacts.

Demographics

“Every aspect of the project is approached in this almost playful manner, as if it’s a family board game.

Even when it concerns the lives and futures of vast numbers of people.” - Arundhati Roy

In a country where 200 million people (one-fifth of the population) do not have safe drinking water, 600 million (two-thirds of the population) lack basic sanitation, and 350 million (two-fifths of the population) live below the poverty line, it is no wonder that the government of India wants to implement projects that could potentially improve the lives of the people. Unfortunately, the State chose a method that has and will likely cause more harm than good. According to the government, the Narmada Valley Dam Projects will provide water to 20 to 40 million people, irrigate 1.8 to 1.9 million hectares of land, and produce 1450 megawatts of power. The Narmada Bachao Andolan and other organizations believe otherwise. They believe these claims are greatly exaggerated. These groups estimate 1.5 million people (about 10,000 families) will be displaced in the three states of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Gujarat.

A disproportionate number of oustees are indigenous people. Eight percent of India’s population are Adivasis and fifteen percent are Dalits but an incredible sixty percent of those displaced by the dam projects are Adivasis and Dalits (Roy 18).

“This July will bring the last monsoon of the twentieth century. The ragged army in the Narmada valley has declared that it will not move when the waters of the Sardar Sarovar reservoir rise to claim its lands and homes.” - Arundhati Roy

http://www.goldmanprize.org/search/search.html

With activist Medha Patkar to lead them, the Narmada Bachao Andolan began mobilizing massive marches and rallies against the Narmada Valley Development Project, and especially the largest, the Sardar Sarovar, in 1985. Although the protests were peaceful, Patkar and others were often beaten and arrested by police. Following the formation of the NBA in 1986, fifty thousand people gathered in the valley from all over India to pledge to fight “destructive development” in 1989. In 1990, thousands of villagers made their way by boat and foot to a small town in Madhya Pradesh in defense of their pledge to drown in the reservoir waters rather than move from their homes. Later that year on Christmas day an army of six thousand men and women accompanied a seven-member sacrificial squad in walking more than a hundred kilometers. The sacrificial squad had resolved to lay down its lives for the river. A little over a week later the squad announced an indefinite hunger strike. This was the first of three fasts and lasted twenty-two days. It almost killed Ms. Patkar, along with many others.

The NBA has also taken a more diplomatic approach to getting through to the government. They have submitted written representations (complaints) to government officials such as the Grievance Redressal Committee, the Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam, the President, and the Minister of Social Justice and Environment Maneka Gandhi. More often than not, their voice goes unheard and unacknowledged.

http://www.irn.org/

“No one has ever managed to make the World Bank step back from a project before. Least of all a ragtag army of the

poorest people in one of the world’s poorest countries.” - Arundhati Roy

The demonstrations, protests, rallies, hunger strikes, blockades, and written representations by Narmada Bachao Andolan have all made an impact on the direction of the movement to stop the building of large and small dams along the Narmada. Media attention from these events has taken the issues from a local level to a more national scale. The NBA was an integral force in forcing the World Bank to withdraw its loan from the projects by pressuring the Bank with negative media attention.

Recommendations

“Big Dams are obsolete…They lay the earth to waste. They cause floods, waterlogging, salinity; they spread disease.

There is mounting evidence that links Big Dams to earthquakes.” - Arundhati Roy

Reassessing the environmental and social impacts of the more than 3,000 dams slated for construction should be the first step the Indian government takes in solving the country’s water management problems. It should then observe the recommendations proposed by those assessments, rather than ignoring them.

The country and the individual states could also consider cheaper and more effective energy options that do in fact already exist. In fact, “A task force set up by the Madhya Pradesh state government suggested alternatives such as demand management measures, biomass generation, optimum use of oil-based plants and existing dams, and micro-hydro plants” ( www.irn.org/wcd/narmada.shtml ).

According to renowned irrigation expert K. R. Datye, a comprehensive review of the yield of the land, taking into account the water, energy, and biomass availability is required. Datye highlights the need for regenerative water use for agriculture, using local water resources. Water from outside (i.e. dams) is used to restore vegetative cover to degraded land and to recharge ground water aquifers that are badly depleted, to a point where water and energy balance can be maintained ( www.narmada.org/sardar-sarovar/ecotimes.alternatives.html ).

The following watershed management strategies are traditional practices that have been revived by local communities in the states of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Gujarat with the help of Non-Governmental Organizations and state government programs.

Alwar District, Rajasthan
BanniGrasslands Kutch Dist., Gujarat
Jhabua District, Madhya Pradesh
Thunthi Kankasiya & Mahudi, Dahod Dist. Surendranagar District Devgadh, Junagadh District

http://www.narmada.org/ALTERNATIVES/index.html

Alternatives to dams do exist and should be considered seriously.

“India: Peaceful Demonstrators Against the Narmada Dam Project Arrested, Beaten, and Intimidated by Police.” The Sierra Club: Human Rights Campaigns. 1999.

< http://www.sierraclub.org/human%2Drights/india/index.asp >

“Medha Patkar.” The Goldman Environmental Prize. 1992.

< http://www.goldmanprize.org/search/search.html >

Narmada River page. International Rivers Network. 1996-2000.

< http://irn.org/programs/narmada/map.html >

Roy, Arundhati. The Cost of Living . New York: Random House, Inc. 1999.

“The Sardar Sarovar: A Brief Introduction.” Friends of the River Narmada. 2000.

< http://narmada.org/sardarsarovar.html >

Shruti Mukthyar . “ Alternatives.” Friends of the River Narmada. U of Wisconsin-Madison: Institute for Environmental Studies. 2000.

< http://narmada.org/ALTERNATIVES/index.html >

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

Implementing the report of the World Commission on Dams: A case study of the Narmada Valley in India

2000, Am. U. Int'l L. Rev.

Related Papers

Osman Sabri Kiratli

daniel bradlow

Mushtaq Gaadi

The paper is written in the backdrop of World Bank's Pakistan Water Strategy entitled "Pakistan's Water Economy: Running Dry (2005)". It presents the critique of the World Bank's advocacy for the construction of Kalabagh Dam and it is related with its lending economy..

International Journal of Regulation and Governance

Navroz Dubash

Jayanta Bandyopadhyay

International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding IJMMU

Balgovind Baboo

Water Alternatives

Dipak Gyawali

Although three quarters of the globe is covered with water, there is a crisis for fresh water. In the next two decades many countries might fail to provide safe drinking water to their citizens if there is no cooperative and systematic effort. The best way out would be to store and utilize the runoff in the rainy season. Large dams have been found to be popular for this purpose. While these are useful for flood control, irrigation, navigation, power generation followed by ancillary secondary and tertiary benefits, these also cause untold human miseries. However, large dam construction would be an ongoing phenomenon across the world and more so in the era of globalization as many professionals and politicians tend to believe in mega projects supported by a powerful lobby. In this paper we examine the case of the Hirakud dam, the longest earthen dam in the world, built in Sambalpur district, Orissa, India in the light of a duality in human geography-determinism vs. possibilism-and a neo-Marxist stand point of centre-periphery approach. We find that river Mahanadi has been tamed temporarily in the name of developmental initiative in western Orissa but the political agenda was to save the eastern coastal plain and especially Cuttack city from the ravage of flood. The construction of the dam; the subsequent human sufferings, of the dam oustees and the affected population of about 22,000 households; and the recent concentration of important mile posts of Orissa in the coastal plains have accentuated the long standing cultural differences between the periphery and the centre, the hills and the plains, the silent and the vocal, the simple and the clever. Mindless mining and installation of so many extracting polluting industries and power plants in the districts of Sambalpur, Kalahandi and Sundergarh and the subsequent demand on the Hirakud reservoir and pollution of river Mahanadi led to simmering discontent in western Orissa. Resistance movement before the construction of the Hirakud dam was crushed by the political strategy of divide and rule and the overarching image of the Congress in the early years of Independence. Recent outcry in the form of Western Orissa Liberation Front and Kosala Rajya has resulted in Western Orissa Development Council to take up the problems of western Orissa. While some people in the command area have prospered, the oustees and the affected persons of the Hirakud dam still live under the stigma of reservoir oustees (budi anchalar loka); feel that the coastal people have been the cause of their sufferings and cherish the desire of going back to their homeland in the event of breach of the dam. Let us be careful of the sound of the distant drum!

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Giyasuddin Siddique

Water Politics and Development Cooperation

Waltina Scheumann

Jhimli Bhattacharjee

Global Environmental Politics

Richard A. Matthew

IJSRP Journal

Basil Al-Hilal

Rights and Development Bulletin

Philip VARGHESE

Politics and the life sciences : the journal of the Association for Politics and the Life Sciences

Monthly Review

Rohan D'Souza

Onhring Langhu

American University International Law Review

Upendra Baxi

Economic and Political Weekly

Arun K Nayak

Surya Prakash Mantha

CBU International Conference Proceedings

Ciprian Benea

Pouya Joudi

Bart Schultz

Water Resources Development

Prof. Asit K . Biswas

Harry Verhoeven

IUCN eBooks

Tony Dorcey

Soegeng A. Hardiyanto

SSRN Electronic Journal

Melanie Murcott , Malak Poppovic , Daniel Augenstein , Flavia Scabin

Hydrological Processes

M. Nakayama

Edmund Kyei Akoto-Danso

Success of Narmada landscape restoration needs payment for ecosystem services; will users pay?

All along the 60-km drive from Maheshwar town on the banks of the Narmada river in Madhya Pradesh to Lachora village in Khargone district, the weather is quite hot, with the temperatures hovering around 40˚C and the landscape brown and dry. Nearly all the fields along the highway bear a deserted look.

The scene changes dramatically as one approaches the Pandukhal Faliya hamlet in Lachora village. In this hamlet of about 15 families that belong to the Bhilala tribe, residents can be seen tilling their farms, which are surprisingly green and have moist soil. “Our dam has water that we use for growing vegetables,” says Champa bai, her pallu pulled over her head, as she tends to her crop of bhindi (okra). The cement check dam was built across a stream a few metres away, she says.

Another farmer, Jeldha bai, says her dugwell now has about 15 m of water. “The check dam has raised the groundwater level, increasing the water in the well,” she says. “Earlier, we could not cultivate rabi [winter] crops because there was no water for irrigation. But now we also grow wheat,” she adds.

Pandukhal Faliya is about 65 km south of Indore. Water harvesting and landscape resto-ration works being carried out here, and in other villages on the north and south banks of the Narmada river basin in Khargone, are also expected to benefit people of Indore. According to Indore Municipal Corporation, the installed capacity of surface water sources for the city is 594 million litres daily (MLD), of which Narmada meets 360 MLD.

These projects are part of the Narmada Landscape Restoration Project (NLRP), a one-of-a-kind-project in the country launched in 2020, says Nitesh Kumar, project manager and India program lead at Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI), a Seoul-based inter-govern-mental and international organisation.

Funded by the US Agency For International Development and the National Thermal Power Corporation, the five-year project, which will end in June 2025, is being implemented by GGGI in partnership with the Indian Institute of Forest Management, Bhopal.

“We are developing a series of community initiatives to increase water availability and quality in the Narmada. Once achieved, this model will provide evidence to push for payment for ecosystem services (PES) under which cities will pay the people undertaking the conservation projects,” he says.

PES is a market-based initiative to finance nature conservation, in which the beneficiaries or users of ecosystem services pay for them.

These ecosystem services may include the supply of food, water and timber (provisioning services); the regulation of air quality, climate and flood risk (regulating services); opportunities for tourism and education (cultural services); and essential underlying functions such as soil formation and nutrient cycling (supporting services).

A number of countries, such as Germany, China and the UK, use the PES model for watershed protection and climate change mitigation. But in India, PES is an evolving concept. In the case of NLRP, it is proposed that the village residents undertaking landscape restoration works to improve the quantity and quality of water in the two tributaries of Narmada will eventually receive financial benefits from Indore city dwellers and agencies or industries that use this water.

Signs of revival

According to Lakhan Patidar, project associate agriculture with GGGI, a range of sustainable landscape practices are being implemented under NLRP in an area of 12,825.53 hectares (ha) on north and south banks of Narmada’s catchment. Of this, 6,217.81 ha are under for-ests and 6,607.54 ha under agriculture.

The project is currently focusing on Nani and Vansavali, two tributaries of the Narmada in Khargone district, from where water for Indore city is lifted. A total of 16 micro watersheds have been selected for intervention, of which eight are in the catchment of Nani and six are in that of Vansavali.

“Through the project, we aim for a 20 per cent increase in the quantity of water and a 25 per cent reduction in runoff pollution in both Nani and Vansavali,” says Patidar. “We have a detailed monitoring strategy and plan for measuring the change in water quality and quantity, which includes sampling from different locations, both surface water and groundwater,” he adds.

GGGI has conducted aquifer mapping to identify optimal sites for water harvesting structures and watershed works at different locations in the project area. Various structures including cement stop dams, loose boulder structures, gabion structures and farm ponds were constructed to harvest rainwater based on the topography.

This has helped re-store several local streams and rivulets feeding into the Nani and Vansavali tributaries. With community involvement, plantations have been developed along these rivulets, and villagers are growing fodder grass in some areas.

In Bagdara village on the north bank of the Narmada river, a stop dam was built on a rivulet at a cost of Rs 14 lakh. This rivulet, which typically ran dry by January-February, now provides sufficient water for irrigation even in the summer, thanks to the stop dam constructed two years ago.

“Earlier, I had to wait until July for the monsoon to sow cotton. But now, I can sow it in May and plant wheat in the rabi season,” says Harna Singh, who owns 0.5 ha of land near the stop dam.

A similar transformation has occurred in Gulavad village, where four check dams were built over a 2-km stretch of another rivulet. “Our dug well used to go dry by February, but since the check dams were constructed, it has water even in April-May. Now, we can cultivate both cotton and wheat, and our cattle have water too,” says Kailash Yadav, a farmer in his 60s.

The village residents are responsible for the maintenance of the water harvesting structures. “Opening and closing the gate of the stop dam is our responsibility. We keep it clean and safe,” says Champa bai, one of the seven members of the water user group in Pandukhal Faliya. Trained to operate the gates, local farmer Bhagwan bhai ensures the gate is opened in June and closed after Diwali to store the harvested rainwater.

Restoring the Narmada’s landscape requires active participation of local forest-dwelling communities and tribal groups. According to Neeraj Gautam, senior project assistant with GGGI, forest-fire fighting groups with 10 members each have been trained in three forest villages (Beklya, Navrangpura, and Sirsiya) on the north bank of the Narmada.

The project provides financial incentives to these groups if they successfully prevent forest fires. Ashok Bhavre, a Bhil tribal member and president of Beklya village’s joint forest management committee, says, “Village residents have identified the 10 people who have been trained to become forest-fire fighters. Last year, we had three forest fires in our area. This year, we want to ensure there are none.”

“We have also created a short film, Jadui Jungle, that we screen in villages near the forests. Many residents get very emotional watching the film as their lives depend on the forests,” says Jitendra Thakur, program coordinator with Samaj Pragati Sahayog, a local non-profit implementing the project with GGGI.

The project is providing liveli-hood to communities. In Beklya village, Bhil adivasi women have formed a self-help group (SHG) to collect leaves of the palash trees, also known as the flame of the forest to make plates and bowls (dona- pattals).

“We collect the leaves between May and January,” says Shivkanya, president of the SHG that was set up two years ago. Shaitan bai, the oldest member of the six-member SHG, says, “Two women go to the forest to fetch palash leaves. The leaves are dried for two days but some moisture should still be in them. We then stitch the leaves to make dona and pattal.”

According to her, one palash leaf makes one dona, but a pattal takes five to six leaves. These are then pressed using a machine provided to the group. “We sell a dona for Rs 2 and a pattal for Rs 4 each. So far, we have sold 1,750 pieces and earned Rs 3,500. We have another 2,000 pieces in stock,” says Shivkanya.

Meanwhile, in Lal Talai Faliya of Nalwat village on the south bank of Narmada, six Barela tribe farmers have been given lac seed for lac cultivation on palash trees for an extra income. “Last December, residents were taken to Seoni to show them how bangles and varnish are made out of lac. A kg of lac sells for anything up to Rs 400 and farmers can earn from it,” says Umrai Singh, president of the village JFMC.

Litmus test

In the first four years of the project, apart from restoring waterbodies and providing livelihood opport-unities, NLRP has helped increase the groundwater table by 17 per cent, says Kumar.

But, if the project is to made sustainable, the PES component will have to come into play. This means that the municipal corporation or the people of Indore will have to agree to pay for the ecosystem services on Narmada. But increasing the water bills of urban consumers is a political issue and often meets with stiff resistance.

So far, the Indore Municipal Corporation has extended its support to the project. In a letter on January 30, 2023, Divyank Singh, chief executive officer, Indore Smart City Development, wrote that the project “is developing a proof of concept for impact of sustainable landscape measures of water quality and quantity, which then will help it develop ‘Payment for Ecosystem model’”. Whether this translates into actual money transfer remains to be seen.

“In times of increasing water stress, PES model being piloted in the Narmada river basin offers a sustainable solution for water security. It ensures that cities and other water users financially support water conservation, recognise the river’s essential services, and compensate the communities protecting its health and vitality,” says Kumar.