In India, access to safe and adequate water is governed more by arbitrary per capita standards than scientific need. These standards drive planning and investment, but often lack empirical justification or equitable delivery mechanisms.

The Concept of Per Capita Water Standard

• Defined in litres per capita per day (lpcd), the per capita water standard determines the estimated daily water requirement of each individual.
• It is used to:
  • Calculate domestic demand in cities
  • Justify infrastructure investments (e.g., dams, water pipelines)
  • Assess shortages or overconsumption
  • Influence rural-to-urban water transfers

Lack of Empirical Basis

• Multiple agencies, including the Central Public Health and Environmental Engineering Organization (CPHEEO) and the Bureau of Indian Standards, prescribe different per capita norms.
• Cities like Mumbai and Delhi often have their own standards.
• These standards are:
  • Not based on large-scale surveys
  • Do not account for climate, geography, socio-economic variations
• Examples:
  • CPHEEO: 135 lpcd (general), 150 lpcd (megacities)
  • Mumbai: Uses 240 lpcd to justify new dam projects
  • Jal Jeevan Mission: Retains 55 lpcd from earlier policies without revising it to reflect increased needs due to toilet construction under Swachh Bharat

Impact on Water Policy and Infrastructure

• Urban water schemes use these standards to secure central funding (e.g., under AMRUT, Smart Cities Mission).
• CPHEEO standards are followed unquestioningly to get technical approvals.
• Engineers and consultants design projects to match standards rather than actual need.
• Cities apply multiple standards inconsistently to suit their funding and design needs.
  • Mumbai used 150 lpcd in the Gargai Dam DPR to align with CPHEEO norms, despite typically using 240 lpcd.

No Monitoring or Accountability

• Per capita standards are rarely verified during actual water delivery.
• Implementation challenges:
• • Lack of metering at household and bulk distribution levels
  • Supply zones are not isolated, making flow measurement difficult
• Service level benchmarks by MoHUA include per capita supply, but they are assessed only at the city level, not at the household level.
• This results in a disconnect between planning assumptions and on-ground delivery.

Consequences of the Arbitrary Standard

• Citizens are often deprived of their rightful share despite ambitious infrastructure.
• Rural areas may suffer due to diversion of water to meet inflated urban needs.
• The lack of data-driven, need-based planning risks inefficiency, wastage, and inequity in service delivery.
• The standards become tools for budget justification rather than instruments of water justice.

Conclusion

India’s water policies rely heavily on arbitrary per capita norms rather than evidence-based standards. A shift towards measured, monitored, and equitable water delivery is essential to ensure real access for all citizens.

DOWNLOAD PDF