Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
P
redicting the future is a hazardous business but one thing level of awareness in households about rainwater harvesting.
is certain, that the world in the future, at least in some The last section presents the summary and conclusions of
respects, is going to be different from that of today the study.
[Figueres et al 2005]. It is certain that societies are going to
have to confront, among other things, demographic transitions, I
geographical shift of population, technological advancement, Data and Methodology
growing globalisation, degradation of the environment and
emergence of water scarcities. Water, the need of life, is likely The household survey reveals the consumption, availability,
to pose the greatest challenge on account of an increased demand access and methods adopted for conservation of water in domestic
with population rise and economic development, and shrinking households in seven major Indian cities, Delhi, greater Mumbai,
supplies due to over-exploitation and pollution. Although water Kolkata, Hyderabad, Kanpur, Ahmedabad and Madurai, and was
is an abundant and renewable natural resource covering two- conducted in March 2005. As per the Census of India 2001, these
thirds of the planet, a very small proportion of this is effectively cities, except Madurai (Municipal Corporation) are among 27
available for human use. In India, as a result of development, municipal corporations with a million plus population, and their
the demand for water is increasing both in urban and rural areas. populations are 9.8, 11.9, 4.6, 3.5, 2.5, 3.5 and 0.92 million
This may increase tensions and disputes over sharing and com- respectively. The number of sample households selected from
mand of water resources. The emerging scarcity of water has also each of these cities was 507 in Delhi, 500 in Mumbai, 400 in
raised a host of issues related to sustainability of the present Kolkata, 398 in Hyderabad, 303 in Kanpur, 361 in Ahmedabad,
form of economic development, sustained water supply, equity and 265 in Madurai totalling 2,734 households. The cities were
and social justice, water financing, pricing, governance and categorised according to five different areas, (i) high income
management. group (HIG) areas with well planned buildings, (ii) middle
This study mainly focuses on domestic use of water in seven income group (MIG) areas with well planned buildings, (iii) low
major Indian cities; Delhi, Kanpur, Kolkata, Ahmedabad, Mumbai, income group (LIG) areas with well planned buildings, (iv) slum
Hyderabad and Madurai. Besides analysing activity-wise and areas, and (v) mixed areas. Within these identified clusters, a
socio-economic group-wise consumption of water, the paper random sampling of households from electoral rolls was under-
examines the sources of water supply, perception of households taken. In each of these cities, several clusters of the same kinds
about quality of municipal water, duration of municipal water of areas can be found, hence from each cluster at least eight
supply, and awareness about water conservation. Section I deals interviews were conducted. The data was collected through a
with methods used for data collection and analysis, while Section structured schedule and the target respondents were housewives.
II discusses the recommendations of various agencies about the The volume of vessels in which households stored water was
per capita need of water in urban areas. Analysis of socio- measured and the number of vessels of water used in different
economic group, area and city-wise domestic consumption of activities was ascertained. Where running tap or piped water
water is presented in Section III. Section IV extends the analysis was used in some activities, the duration for which the tap
presented in Section III by analysing activity-wise consumption was used was arrived at and the quantity of water per minute
of water. Sources of water and perception of households about coming out from the tap was measured. By multiplying the time
the safety of water are analysed in Section V, while Section VI with the quantity of water per minute, the volume of water used
deals with the duration and frequency of supply of municipal through running taps was estimated. The quantity of water used
tap water and distance of sources of water. Rainwater harvesting in a toilet was assessed by volume of bucket used, and flush
can play an important role in meeting the water supply challenge tank capacity.
in urban India. This necessitates spreading awareness about Households were classified in various economic classes, such as
rainwater harvesting. In this context, Section VII examines the the “very poor”, “poor”, “lower”, “middle” and “upper” classes.
systems are classified into two groups based on population, i e, Source: Calculated using data from field survey.
per cent lossess), but the consumption in Mumbai, as mentioned Source: As for Table 1.
above, is only about 92 lpcd. Compared internationally, Indian
cities consume for less water. For example, domestic water Table 3: Socio-economic Class-wise Consumption of
consumption in Munich is 130 lpcd, in Amsterdam it is 156 lpcd Water Per Household and Per Capita Per Day
(in litres)
and in Singapore it is 162 lpcd [Down to Earth 2005].
Overall, in terms of per capita consumption of water, the Socio-economic Per Household Per Capita N
Class Mean Std Deviation Mean Std Deviation
condition in the two north Indian cities of Delhi and Kanpur seems
the worst. The dispersion statistics (standard deviation) also show SEC- A 407.1 233.3 102.1 62.8 639
SEC- B 399.2 239.0 95.2 56.7 684
that wide variations in per capita consumption of water exist in
SEC- C 399.9 213.9 88.4 42.0 619
these cities. Further, despite the highest level of water consump- SEC- D 390.0 198.7 84.9 41.1 461
tion, Kolkata also has wide variation in consumption of water SEC- E 387.9 192.5 78.9 39.3 331
per capita. In terms of the variation, Kanpur, Ahmedabad and Total 398.3 220.2 91.6 51.5 2734
90
80 various SECs.
70
60
50
V
Percentage of
40
Percentage
30
20
Sources and Perception about
10
0
Safety of Water
Total
50001 &
3001 to
5001 to
10001 to
20001 to
3000
Upto
10000
above
20000
50000
5000
Kanpur (75.2 per cent), followed by Delhi (72.6 per cent). In Table 6: Socio-economic and Consumption Category-wise
fact except Kolkata, in all the other cities, over 60 per cent Distribution of Households
households are water deficient. Analysis shows that households (Per cent)
with monthly income up to Rs 3,000 suffer the most as about Litres/Capita/ Socio-economic Category
72 per cent of such households are found to be water deficient Day SEC-A SEC-B SEC-C SEC-D SEC-E
(Figure 1). Area-wise classification of water deficient households Below 50 18.0 17.7 14.1 15.2 25.7
(Table 8) shows, as expected, that these are slum areas which 50 to 75 17.7 19.3 25.5 27.5 26.6
75 to 100 22.2 24.9 27.8 29.1 22.7
have the largest percentage of water deficient households in all 100 to 135 18.8 21.9 21.6 20.0 16.9
the cities. In Ahmedabad and Kanpur, the percentages of water 135 to 175 13.1 9.6 7.6 5.4 5.1
deficient slum households are as high as 86.1 per cent and 82.1 175 to 200 2.8 3.4 1.1 1.1 2.1
per cent respectively, while it ranges between 70 per cent to 75 Above 200 7.4 3.2 2.3 1.7 .9
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
per cent in the case of Delhi, Mumbai, and Hyderabad. Among
the cities, the least percentage of water deficient households are Source: As for Table 1.
found in Kolkata (47.3 per cent). Per capita water consumption Table 7: Asset and Consumption Category-wise
in different areas, asset-classes and SECs of households are Distribution of Households
highly correlated with each other, as they have very similar (Per cent)
percentages of water deficient/sufficient households (see Litres/Capita/ Asset Class
Tables 5, 6, and 7). Day Very Poor Poor Lower Middle Upper
cent of the households respectively, view municipal water supply Source: As for Table 1.
Table 11: Dependence of Household (Per Cent) on Various Sources of Water (Multi-Source Possible)
Source All 7 Cities Delhi Mumbai Kolkata Hyderabad Kanpur Ahmedabad Madurai
1 Municipal tap water 92.0 91.9 98.6 98.8 99.7 54.1 94.2 98.5
– of which community tap 9.5 8.1 1.5 1.9 0.3 45.9 20.0 1.5
Depend only on Municipal Tap water 57.6 71.4 94.4 68.5 39.7 15.5 59.6 17.7
2 Groundwater
a Tube well/hand-pumps 38.1 24.5 3.6 27.8 48.5 79.2 38.5 81.1
– of which private tube-well/hand-pumps 24.0 6.3 3.6 1.0 41.8 36.4 37.2 76.7
b Well/open well 1.0 0.2 0.6 2.8 3.3
Depend only on groundwater 6.9 7.5 1.3 0.3 40.6 5.0 1.5
3 Tanker 2.1 2.0 0.5 10.6 1.1
– of which municipal tankers 59.3 60.0 100.0 54.5 100.0
4 River/canal /tank 0.4 2.8
5 Packaged/mineral water 0.8 2.2 1.0 0.5 0.3 0.2 1.5
6 Others (railways supply, broken pipes,
mill compounds, etc) 1.1 0.2 0.6 5.3 2.5
The key observations of the study are summarised here: Source: As for Table 1.
It is observed that water consumption in Indian cities (more
so in large cities) is far lower than the norms laid down by the Table 16: Awareness of Households (Per Cent) about Rain
Water Harvesting in Different SEC
Bureau of Indian Standards. The lower consumption is mainly
because the water supply is not keeping pace with population SEC All 7 Delhi Mumbai Kol- Hydera- Kanpur Ahmeda- Madu-
Cities kata bad bad rai
growth and increasing needs of users.
It is interesting to observe that though a majority of households SEC-A 63.8 58.1 59.1 77.0 71.6 55.8 32.3 98.0
SEC-B 45.6 24.3 49.5 70.0 51.0 47.0 12.4 98.0
consume water below the specified norms, by and large, they SEC-C 40.7 10.0 49.3 48.1 48.3 35.6 5.7 70.1
show satisfaction with available supply. This is mainly because SEC-D 41.2 8.7 50.9 49.2 36.2 18.2 73.3
they have limited their aspirations and requirements of water in SEC-E 28.7 5.3 54.9 43.6 21.3 7.8 76.4
Total 46.0 24.5 51.8 62.0 53.0 35.0 12.7 83.2
relation to available supply from the municipalities or water
authorities. Source: As for Table 1.
Table 13: Availability of Tap Water to Households (Per Cent) in Indian Cities
Supply All 7 Cities Delhi Mumbai Kolkata Hyderabad Kanpur Ahmedabad Madurai
24 hours/round the clock 17.9 13.6 5.0 47.3 0.3 5.6 50.1 2.6
For a few hours once in a day 27.0 15.4 84.4 2.8 7.0 7.3 38.5 14.7
For a few hours twice a day 24.9 64.3 7.4 39.3 44.2 6.4 1.5
Once in two days 20.7 0.2 88.9 2.2 77.0
Once in four days 0.0 0.4
Once in a week 0.2 3.4
Not predictable 1.8 3.7 2.8 0.5 2.0 1.7
Cannot say 7.3 3.0 0.2 10.3 1.8 41.3 2.8 0.4
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0