Photo: Reuters

Like every other years, the 22 March of 2013 is being observed as the World Water Day, focusing on the importance of freshwater and advocating for the sustainable management of freshwater resources. Following a recommendation from the United Nations (UN) Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in 1992, the UN General Assembly designated 22 March 1993 as the first World Water Day. Since then, each year World Water Day is observed, highlighting a specific aspect of freshwater. So far different aspects like Caring for Our Water Resources, Women and Water, Water for Thirsty Cities, Groundwater, Everyone lives Downstream, Water for the 21st Century, Water for Health, Water for Development, Water for the Future, Water and Disaster, Water and Culture, Water Scarcity, Sanitation, Transboundary Waters, Water Quality, Water for Cities, Water and Food Security have been highlighted.

This year, the focus is even broader, as the year 2013 has been declared as the International Year of Water Cooperation by the UN. It is evident that the growing population and rapid urbanization is putting pressure on the freshwater resources of the world. In order to manage this precious resource, cooperation is essential between different users for the betterment of the environment and ecosystem. Hence, the slogan for the year 2013 World Water Day, “Water, Water Everywhere, Only If We Share” draws attention to the need for cooperation in water resources management. In this article we focus on the importance of cooperation in water management in the context of Bangladesh.

Let’s explore the meaning of cooperation in water management in different context. In a local scale, cooperation in water management reflects integrated management of water among various stakeholders like municipal, irrigation, industrial, recreational, and instream or ecological needs. But, do we always consider the need of the ecosystem?

Let’s see a typical example. Consider an area in Bangladesh where supplementary irrigation is required for better crop production, and as a management strategy the government builds a barrage on a river passing over the area to supply sufficient amount of freshwater to irrigated land. As a result, the food production of that area increases and solves the food scarcity. However, because of the barrage, the natural riverine ecosystem will be negatively impacted unless provisions for ecological flow are maintained or proper fish pass is included in the design. In most cases, the proper measures to protect the riverine ecosystem are ignored in these development projects, which directly impact the downstream users who live their lives on fisheries. So, we can see, without integrated management of water resources, even though we can solve problem in one particular area, it can create problems in other area. As a result, the overall socio-economic equilibrium of the country or region will be impacted. In a nutshell, we need to manage our water resources in an integrated manner considering the interest of all stakeholders in a watershed or basin.

Now, let’s bring our focus on sharing of water resources among various stakeholders living in a basin area of a transboundary river. River basin is not confined by political boundaries, and multiple nations can share a common river basin and its water resources. About 86% of the countries in the world have international river basin. To ensure equitable and reasonable sharing of water resources of these international basins cooperation among all stakeholders, including the policymakers, hydrologists, and water resources engineers is essential. But, in reality, how much cooperation is being practiced? For example, the India-Bangladesh Joint River Commission is a bilateral body that exists for decades to resolve the water conflicts between these two countries; however, it took about 20 years to sign the Gages Water-sharing Treaty. The Teesta conflict is yet to be resolved even after two decades of discussion; and the Indian plan for building the multipurpose Tipaimukh Dam project is still proceeding without any consideration for environmental impacts on downstream region in Bangladesh. Even if we look at in global scale, the 1997 UN Convention on the Laws of Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses is not yet in force because of insufficient ratification or acceptance of the convention by many countries in the world, including India and Bangladesh.

The UN declaration to celebrate the year 2013 as the International Year for Water Cooperation is very fitting. Bangladesh being at the receiving end of the flow in the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna (GBM) basins is completely dependent on upper riparian countries for a guaranteed natural flow in these rivers and their tributaries. Only 8% of basin areas of the GBM basins belong to the territory of Bangladesh. Therefore, Bangladesh should wholeheartedly welcome the UN declaration and work hand in hand with the UN and upper riparian nations. Although the UN declaration is very fitting, by itself this declaration will not do any good for Bangladesh. Bangladesh needs to be more work towards implementation of the UN declaration. The UN have undertaken various programmes to commemorate the World Water Day to be held on March 22 that includes a high-level interactive dialogue among various countries and several panel discussions to identify challenges and solutions related to transboundary water resources sharing. If planned ahead of time then Bangladesh probably could partake in these forums or panel discussions. The UN is open to various ideas about finding potential projects to highlight the importance of cooperation among co-riparian countries because this is their own motto for this year.

Bangladesh could be proactive and could jump on all these activities.  Bangladesh can be diplomatic in getting the UN’s attention to the problems in our region and can seek for ways to extend international research and collaboration to resolve water-related conflicts and lack of collaboration among the co-riparian countries in the GBM basins.

There are several UN-sponsored programmes, such as the UN-Water Programme, International Hydrologic Programme (IHP), and PC-CP (potential conflicts to cooperation potential). They are involved in carrying our research under UN funding and in resolving water-related problems. Bangladesh and Bangladeshi scientists and policymakers could be involved in these programmes to the extent possible. The PC-CP programme under the IHP is another venue where Bangladesh can raise water-related environmental issues that all countries in the GBM basins are facing and seek for involvement, suggestions, and resolution. Although the final outcome from such involvement is somewhat uncertain, by participating in these programmes, Bangladesh can be on the radar screen among the international community with regard to water and climate change issues.  The world is aware of the potential consequences that Bangladesh faces as an impact of climate change, but most of the people cannot make the connection between water-scarcity from upper riparian region to the impact of climate change in Bangladesh.  Less water we have during summer months, more salinity encroachment will occur in coastal region, which will devastate the agriculture, navigation, irrigation, and ecosystems in the Sundarbans – the World Heritage site. Bangladesh needs to highlight the impact of low flow on her economy and environment in the face of climate change to the rest of the world.

The World Water Day provides the right platform to do just that.

———————–
Zahidul Islam is a Hydrologist at Government of Alberta, Canada; and Md. Khalequzzaman is a Professor of Geology at Lock Haven University, USA.

II

The Joint River Commission (JRC) is charged with implementation of the treaty and evaluation of the success and failure of the treaty every five years. As per the initial agreement, the treaty is subject to critical review every five years by the JRC based on field observations. It has been 15 years since two countries signed the treaty, but no review of the success and failure has been carried out by the JRC. If no further review is made then the agreement should remain unchanged until 2026. After the expiration of the treaty, its renewal will depend on mutual agreement between the two countries.

Since its inception during the lean season in 1996-97, the news media in Bangladesh has been reporting on the success and failure of the treaty as it pertains to the interest of Bangladesh. As per the print and electronic news media, Bangladesh did not receive its fair share of water during 12 of the last 15 years. However, in most cases, the media reports are not based on the actual data and critical analysis of the existing condition of the treaty. The proper implementation of the treaty has a bearing on Bangladesh-India bilateral relationship. Therefore, it is important that the success and failure of the treaty is evaluated based on field data.

III)

Before going into the main discussion, let’s have a look at the existing water-sharing equation of the Ganges Treaty. The agreement remains active from January 1 to May 31 each year, and water sharing calculations are based on 10-day average flow. As per the treaty:

• If the flow is greater than 75,000 cusec (cubic feet per second) at Farakka Barrage, then India will receive 40,000 cusec, and the remaining will be allocated for Bangladesh.
• If the flow ranges between 70,000 and 75,000 cusec, the Bangladesh will receive 35,000 cusec and the remaining will be allocated for India
• If the flow is less than 70,000 cusec, the share between Bangladesh and India will be at the rate of 50:50. However, India and Bangladesh each shall receive a guaranteed 35,000 cusecs of water in alternative three 10-day periods during the period March 1 to May 10.

It should be noted that, the water-sharing equation has been formulated based on the availability of the historic average flow of 10-day period during the past 40 years, spanning from 1949 to 1988 at Farakka Barrage (Annexure II of the Ganges Treaty).

IV)

We have used the last four years of flow data (2008-11) of Ganges both at Farakka Barrage in West Bengal and at Hardinge Bridge in Bangladesh that are available on the official website of JRC (http://www.jrcb.gov.bd/press_release.html). The Ganges Treaty is operational between January 1 and May 31 each year, and each lean season is divided into 15 time-intervals with 10-day in each interval.  In analyzing the flow data, we paid particular attention to the following two points:

a)     During how many of the 15 intervals Bangladesh received her fair share of the Ganges water as per the treaty.

b)    During how many of the 15 intervals Bangladesh received the right share of water as per the historical average flow as included in the treaty.

Bangladesh’s share of the Ganges has been verified at Hardinge Bridge. Hardinge Bridge  is located downstream of the Farakka Barrage, and there is no distributary channel between Farakka Barrage and Hardinge Bridge that diverts water from the main stem of the Ganges River.  A tributary named Mahanada channel is located between Farakka Barrage and Hardinge Bridge that augments the flow of Ganges River, which means that the amount of water measured at Hardinge Bridge should be more than the amount released at Farakka Barrage.  Also, the amount of water that India is allowed to withdraw between Farakka Barrage and India-Bangladesh Border is limited to 200 cusec (Article 3). Consequently, we assumed that the flow of the Ganges River must be greater at Hardinge Bridge as compared to the amount released at Farakka Barrage. The historical average flow recoded at Hardinge Bridge also supports this assumption.

V)

The analysis of flow-data revealed that, in 2008, 2009 and 2011 Bangladesh received the right share of the Ganges water during 12 out of 15 intervals. In other words, during those three years, 20% of the times Bangladesh received less water at Hardinge Bridge than is prescribed in the treaty.  In 2010, the situation was worse, as Bangladesh received the fair share during 9 out of 15 intervals, indicating a clear violation of the treaty for 40% of the time.  Based on the analysis of the flow-data, we concluded that, on average, 25% of the time during the last 4 years, Bangladesh received less water at Hardinge Bridge than was presumably released at Farakka Barrage to enter Bangladesh.

While considering the data for historical average flow for the years 2008 and 2009, only during 2 out of 15 intervals the flow at Hardinge Bridge reached the historical average flow as recorded in the Annexure II of the treaty. In 2010, during none of the 15 intervals the measured flow reached the amount that was equal or exceeded the historical average flow for the respective time intervals; and in 2011, during 5 out of 15 intervals Bangladesh received the right share of water that was comparable to the historical average flow.  The analysis of flow data revealed that during the years 2008-11, 85% of the times, the flow at Farakka Barrage was below the respective historic average flow that was recoded for the period of 1948-88. The analysis of flow-data indicates that the lean season’s flow during the last four years (2008-11) has declined substantially declined when compared to the respective historic average flow at Farakka Barrage, which can be considered to be a violation of the treaty on the part of India, as the amount of water allocated in the treaty was based on the historic average flow during lean seasons.

VI)

The Ganges Treaty can serve as harbinger of water sharing among all co-riparian countries within the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna basin.  Proper implementation of the Ganges Treaty is important for bilateral relationship between India and Bangladesh.  The economic wellbeing and environmental functioning of riverine ecosystems both in Bangladesh and India depend on proper implementation of the treaty.   Currently, the treaty is not being implemented fully as was originally intended.  Despite of the treaty in action, 25% of the time during the last 4 years Bangladesh received less water at Hardinge Bridge than was presumably released at Farakka Barrage to enter Bangladesh.

The basis of the Ganges treaty is the historic average-flow in the Ganges River at Farakka Barrage.  However, since the implementation of the Ganges Treaty in 1996, the amount of water-flow at Farakka Barrage hardy ever reached the historic average flow.  Part of the reason can be attributed to upstream diversion of water from various tributaries of the Ganges River before they reach at Farakka Barrage.  It is expected that India will identify the factors that act as hindrance to proper implementation of the Ganges Treaty, and will take initiatives to formulate an integrated water resources management plan that protects the interests of all stakeholders and the ecosystems that are supported by all shared rivers in the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna basin.

—————–
Zahidul Islam is a PhD Candidate at Water Resources Engineering, University of Alberta, Canada and Md. Khalequzzaman is a Professor of Geology at Lock Haven University, USA.