Managing international river basins: reviewing India–Bangladesh transboundary water issues

Abstract

As the demand for fresh water has increased over the years, the conflicts between water-sharing countries have also been on the rise. Many countries, such as Bangladesh in Asia, depend upon water originating from outside their national borders and hence do not have any control in the headwaters and large part of the watershed management of their rivers. Being militarily and economically weaker than its neighbours, it cannot influence their watershed management policies. Consequently, it suffers from both floods and water scarcity. This paper looks at the long-standing conflict between Bangladesh and India with regard to the sharing of water of the River Ganges. It discusses the water quantity and quality problems faced by Bangladesh and its inability to negotiate an equitable deal with India. In order to reduce the water-sharing conflict between Bangladesh and India, a multi-national watershed management approach is required.

Keywords:

• India
• Bangladesh
• Ganges
• water sharing
• conflict
• watershed management

Notes

Mesopotamian civilization in Middle East Asia existed from 3600 to 2004 BC between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. In fact, Mesopotamia means ‘between two rivers’. Similarly, the Nile river was the lifeline for the Egyptian dynasty in Africa. Mohenjodaro and Harappa in Indus Valley Civilization in South Asia were built on the banks of Indus river and the Ghaggar–Hakra rivers between 2600 BC and 1800 BC.

Alam (2002) questions the logic of water wars and suggests that it is in the interest of riparian nations to avoid water wars and instead reach some sort of agreement. Using the example of the Indus Water Treaty between India and Pakistan over sharing of waters of Indus river, the author suggests that ‘water rationality’ precedes water wars.

The latest effort has been the adoption of the ‘The Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses’ by the United Nations General Assembly on 21 May 1997. Although adopted by 103 nations in 1997 and requiring only 35 rectifications to bring it into force, even after 10 years of adoption, only 15 countries have ratified it (Salman 2007).

According to this agreement, during the leanest period from 21 April to 30 April, India would withdraw 20,500 cubic feet per second out of the expected 55,000 cubic feet per second (India: 37.5%/Bangladesh: 62.5%). After that India's share will increase to get as close as it can to 40,000 cubic feet per second (rate of increase to be between 2% and 2.5%). According to the agreement, India could withdraw less than 200 cubic feet per second for local use below Farakka Barrage.

Paul and Harun (1993) have shown that there is about 4% annual loss to the rice plantation (which accounts for three-quarters of the total annual loss of the agricultural output) but it is not uniform in the region. Some districts have disproportionally higher loss than others. They suggest that embankment planning should be at district level rather than the whole river section.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Aditya Sood

Currently working at International Water Management Institute, IWMI, Colombo, Sri Lanka