Search

Severe water pollution is among the top policy priorities in both China and India. This paper undertakes a comparative case analysis to examine efforts in combating river pollution in two major rivers - the Yangtze in China and the Ganga in India. Our analysis suggests that efforts in combating river pollution in the two Asian giants have encountered substantial challenges, such as the lack of comprehensive legal mechanisms to control pollution at the basin level, the lack of coordination among multiple government agencies, and significant gaps in policy implementation. Our analysis also points out considerable differences between China and India in institutional structure, regulatory approaches and policy instruments in dealing with river pollution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the intricate issues that prompt water pricing reform in China and India. China adopts a comprehensive pricing framework of cost of resources, treatment and distribution, and environmental requirements, which has been gradually developed part by part since 1980 based on the perception and change of water issues in the country. India follows a simple approach of cost recovery, though its recent policy guidelines talk about more systematic pricing. The results present that both countries fail to realize water pricing policy targets regardless of different pricing structures. But China and India are on the same road and direction of water pricing and China goes a little farther. The treatment of water resources and its services, and property rights have a significant impact on pricing, and costs, including service, resources and environment, are difficult to recover. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the dynamic interface of state-water users' relationships in large-scale surface irrigation in India and China, to inquire to what extent the issues encountered in large-scale irrigation management and governance are independent of regime characteristics. Though operating in very different overall political regimes, China and India exhibit strong similarities in the way a central state has attempted to relate with local water users, in the types of policy instruments deployed to shape that relationship, and in the problems encountered. Both China and India have a long history of state involvement in irrigation management. Both saw massive expansion after the late 1940s. The state then tried to extend its control in response to 'underutilisation' of the created infrastructure, revenue shortfalls and perceived inefficiencies and yield gaps. In recent decades the policy approaches have, at least rhetorically, emphasised water users' self-management and governance, including financial self-management/cost recovery. In both countries the instrument for this has been Water User Associations. Results have been mixed, to say the least, on all counts. Larger institutional and policy characteristics adhering to the problematic of the state-user interface subvert stated reform objectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rising energy prices, geopolitics and concerns over the impact of greenhouse gas emissions on climate change are increasing the demand for biofuel production. At present biofuel production is estimated at 35 billion liters, accounting only for a small part (~2%) of the 1200 billion liters of annual gasoline consumption worldwide. But the contribution of biofuels to energy supply is expected to grow fast with beneficial impacts including reductions in greenhouse gasses, improved energy security and new income sources for farmers. However, biomass production for energy will also compete with food crops for scarce land and water resources, already a major constraint on agricultural production in many parts of the world. China and India, the world's two largest producers and consumers of many agricultural commodities, already face severe water limitations in agricultural production, yet both have initiated programs to boost biofuel production. This paper explores the land and water implications of increased biofuel production globally and with special focus on these two important countries, using the WATERSIM model. It concludes that, although of lesser concern at the global level, local and regional impact could be substantial. In fact, the strain on water resources would be such in China and India that it is unlikely that policy makers will pursue biofuel options, at least those based on traditional field crops. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]