पूर्णतः एक अराजनैतिक व्यक्तित्व यस पंक्तिकारलाई राष्ट्रिय जनमोर्चाको तर्फबाट शान्तीवाटिकामा जलश्रोत र संघियता सम्बन्धमा गत बैशाख ९ गते प्रवचन दिन निम्ता आउंदा दुई विषयमा घोत्लिन बाध्य पार्यो । कुनै पनि प्रकारको साम्यबादमा विश्वास नगर्ने भएकोले उक्त राजनैतिक दलको निम्ता नैं स्वीकृत गर्ने सम्बन्धमा अन्तरद्वन्द्व भयो । तर लोकतन्त्र, मौलिक हक, कानूनी राज, राजनैतिक नियन्त्रण र सन्तुलन जस्ता मूलभूत सिद्धान्तहरुमा अधिकांश दलहरुमा फरक देखिन्न भने आर्थिक/वित्तिय हिसाबले सबै दलहरु एकै किसिमका देखिन थालेकाछन् । तर देशभक्ती देशप्रेमको हिसाबले भने टड्कारो रुपमा दुई प्रकारका दलहरु देखिएकाछन्; देशभक्ती देशप्रेम भएका दल र राष्ट्रिय स्वार्थसंग सम्झौता गर्ने दल । तसर्थ राष्ट्रिय स्वार्थको सम्बर्धनको मुद्दा उठाएको दलले गरेको आग्रहलाई अस्वीकार गर्ने इच्छा भएन । त्यस पछि विषयवस्तु बारेमा चिन्तन गर्दा उब्जेको निम्न बिचारलाई यहां लिपिबद्ध गरिएकोछ ।
अन्तरिम संबिधानमा संघियता
२०५८ सालको दरबार हत्या काण्डमा तत्कालिन युवराजले आत्महत्या गर्नु अगाडी राजा, रानी (आफ्नै माता, पिता) लगायत सम्पूर्ण राजपरिवारको हत्या गरे पछि - जुन अपराध तिनले नैं गरेको हो भन्ने मान्न धेरै नेपाली अझ पनि तयार छैनन् - नेपालमा चलेको जनआन्दोलन ६२/६३ मा चरमोत्कर्षमा पुग्दा नेपालमा लोकतन्त्र मात्र स्थापना नभएर राजतन्त्रको पनि अन्त्य भयो । जनता आफैले चुनेकॊ संबिधान सभाद्वारा नेपालको संबिधान बनाउने नेपाली जनताको २००७ साल देखि अपूर्ण आकांक्षा परिपूर्ति हुने अवस्था पनि श्रृजना भयो । संबिधानको ढांचा कस्तो हुने, यसमा के कस्ता कुरा लेख्ने लगायत मुलुक एकात्मक नैं रहने कि संघियतामा जाने आदि विषयमा यो सभाले छलफल गरेर निक्र्योल गरी संविधानमा समावेश गर्नुपर्ने हो, तर अन्तरिम संबिधान लेख्ने जिम्मा पाएका बिज्ञहरुले बढी जान्ने भएर संघियता के कस्तो हो, यसले मुलुकमा के कसरी अनुकूल प्रतिकूल प्रभाव पर्छ भन्ने बारे नबुझेरै अन्तरिम संबिधानमा नैं नेपाललाई संघिय राज्य घोषणा गरिदिए । यसले गर्दा एकात्मक राज्य संरचनाले नेपालमा निरन्तरता पाउने कि संघिय संरचनामा जांदा देश र जनता लाभान्वित हुन्छ भन्ने विषयमा छलफल र सहमति गर्ने अवसरबाट संबिधान सभालाई बंचित पारिने अवस्था भएकोछ । तर यसो भन्दैमा अन्तरिम संविधान लेख्नेहरुलाई संविधान सभाकै जस्तो अधिकार सम्पन्न मान्न सकिन्न र यस सम्बन्धमा छलफल, मन्थन, बहस जरुरी छ र यस पछि मात्र निर्णयमा पुगिनुपर्छ नेपाल जस्तो सानो मुलुकलाई बिभिन्न प्रान्तहरुमा बिखण्डित गर्नु लाभदायक हुन्छ कि हुन्न भनेर ।
प्राकृतिक श्रोत
जलश्रोत पनि प्राकृतिक श्रोतहरु मध्ये एक भएतापनि अन्य प्राकृतिक श्रोत भन्दा फरक छ । संघियताको सन्दर्भमा जलश्रोत बारे बिबेचना गर्नु अगाडी जलश्रोत र अन्य प्राकृतिक श्रोतको बीचमा बिद्यमान बिभेद पहिचान गर्न आवश्यक हुन्छ । जमिन, जंगल, जडीबुटी, खनिज पदार्थ जस्ता श्रोत स्थानिय बासिन्दा आफै संलग्न भएर, उद्यम गरेर र उपयोग गरेर लाभान्वित हुनसक्छन्, प्रत्यक्ष लाभ लिन सक्छन्, रुखबाट टिपेर, जमिनबाट उखेलेर, जग्गा उत्खनन् गरेर, खेती गरेर इत्यादि । तर जलश्रोतको प्रकृति फरक छ । स्थानिय बासिन्दाले िसंचाई, लघु जलबिद्युत, जल पर्यटन आदिबाट लाभान्वित हुन सक्छन् तर ठूला जलबिद्युत आयोजना निर्माण भएमा स्थानिय बासिन्दा प्रतिकूल प्रभावमा पर्छन् भने लाभान्वित हुन्छन् अन्यत्र बत्ति बाल्ने जनता ।
नदीको प्रवाहमा आधारित जलबिद्युत आयोजना निर्माण हुंदा आयोजनाको अनुमतिपत्र (लाईसेन्स)ले प्रदान गर्ने जलाधिकारको कारण माथिल्लो तटीय क्षेत्रमा नयां जमिनमा िसंचाई गर्नबाट बंचित हुन्छन्, किनभने आयोजनालाई उपलब्ध हुने पानीको परिमाण घटेमा बिद्युत उत्पादन घट्नाले आयोजानाको राजश्व घटेर लगानिकर्तालाई घाटा हुनेहुन्छ । दृष्टान्ततः कर्णाली आयोजना निमार्ण भएमा जुम्लाका जनताले तीला नदीबाट समेत नयां िसंचाई आयोजना निर्माण गर्नबाट बंचित हुन्छन् । यस अतिरिक्त नदी छेकेर नहर/सुरुङबाट आयोजनामा पानी लैजानाले नदीको एउटा भेग नैं पानी रहित हुनपुग्छ (सडक मार्गबाट पोखरा जांदा मस्यांङदी नदीको यस्तो बेहाल टडकारो रुपमा देखापर्छ) र नदीको यस भेगमा निर्भर स्थानिय बासिन्दा परापूर्व देखि आफूले प्रयोग गर्दै आएको पानीबाट बंचित हुन्छन् । यस्तोमा उत्पादित बिजुली अन्य प्रान्तमा उपयोग हुने भएमा आयोजना निर्माणको लागि स्थानिय जनता राजीहुने सम्भावना अत्यन्त न्यून हुन्छ र सम्भाव्यता अनुरुप जलबिद्युत उत्पादन गर्ने सम्भावना क्षीण हुन्छ ।
जलाशययुक्त आयोजना
नदीको प्रवाहमा आधारित आयोजना भन्दा जलाशययुक्त आयोजनाले स्थानिय जनतालाई अझ बढी प्रतिकूल प्रभाव पार्छ - काली गण्डकी ए आयोजनाले जस्तै नदीमा दिनभरी बगेको पानी संचय गरेर आवश्यक समयमा बिद्युत उत्पादन गर्नेले सापेक्ष रुपमा कम प्रतिकूल प्रभाव पार्दछ भने कुलेखानी जस्तो वर्षभरी परेको पानी संचय गर्ने आयोजनाले अत्यधिक प्रतिकूल प्रभाव पार्दछ । जलाशय निर्माण गिरंदा जग्गा जमिन, वन जंगल, वन्यजन्तु, पर्यटकीय स्थल, मन्दिर देवालय, स्थानिय पूर्वाधार समेत डुबानमा पर्नुको अतिरिक्त स्थानिय बासिन्दा बिस्थापित समेत हुन्छन् । यसरी ठूला जलाशाययुक्त आयोजना निर्माण गरेर जलश्रोतको उपयोग गरेको अवस्थामा स्थानिय बासिन्दा लाभान्वित हुनुको सट्टा धेरै कुराबाट बंचित हुन्छन् ।
अर्कोतिर जलाशययुक्त आयोजनाको निर्माणबाट तल्लो तटीय क्षेत्रमा सुख्खायाममा समेत थप पानी उपलब्ध हुन्छ, जुन खानेपानी, सिचाई, औद्योगिक प्रयोग, जलाधारको सुधार आदिमा मात्र उपयोग नभई सुख्खायाममा निश्चित परिमाणमा पानी बग्नाले जलपरिवहन र जलक्रीडामा आधारित पर्यटकिय प्रयोग समेत भएर तल्लो तटीय क्षेत्र लाभान्वित हुन्छ । यस्तोमा माथिल्लो तटीय प्रान्तले जलाशययुक्त बहुउद्देश्यीय आयोजना निर्माणमा सहमत हुने सम्भावना एकदम न्यून हुन्छ । उदाहरणको लागि धेरै टाढा जानु पर्दैन भारत पाकिस्तानमा बिद्यमान यस सम्बन्धी प्रान्तियद्वन्द्व मात्र अवलोकन गरे पनि पुग्छ ।
पुनर्वास
अझ बढी मनमुटाव बढाउंछ बहुउद्देश्यीय आयोजनाबाट विस्थापित स्थानिय जनताको पुनर्वासको मुद्दाले । जलाशय निर्माण गरिने पहाडी क्षेत्रमा पुनर्वासको लागि आवश्यक जग्गा जमिनको अभाव हुन्छ भने आवश्यक जग्गा उपलब्ध हुने ठाउंमा जातिय सन्तुलन बिग्रने कारण दर्शाएर पुनर्वासको लागि सहमत हुन्नन् । पश्चिम तराईका थारुहरुले पश्चिम सेती आयोजनाबाट विस्थापितलाई आफ्नो भूभागमा पुनर्वास गराउन असहमति नैं जनाईसकेकाछन् । यस्तोमा छुट्टाछुट्टै प्रान्त गठन भईसके पछि अन्यत्र कतैका शहर बजारहरुमा उज्यालो छर्नको लागि माथिल्लो तटीय प्रान्तले आफ्नो भूभाग डुबाएर जनता विस्थापित गरेर जलाशययुक्त आयोजना निर्माण गर्न सहमत हुने सम्भावना हुन्न ।
िसंचाई तथा बाढी नियन्त्रण
नेपालमा झण्डै ४० लाख हेक्टर खेतीयोग्य जमिन छ भन्ने तथ्यांक छ (धेरै जसो तराईमा) भने ५ लाख हेक्टर (१३ प्रतिशत भन्दा कम) मात्र िसंचित छ त्यो पनि अधिकांश वर्षायाममा मात्र जसले गर्दा धेरै जसो जमिनमा एक वाली मात्र राम्ररी खेती गरिन्छ । देशमा खाद्य सुरक्षा बहाल गर्न र नगदे वाली लगायत प्रबद्धन गरेर किसानलाई समृद्ध पार्न सुख्खायाममा समेत िसंचाई गरेर खेती गरिनु - कम्तीमा तीन बाली लगाइनु - पर्दछ । यसको लागि जलाशय बनाएर वर्षायाम, ४ महिनामा परेको पानी संचित गरेर बांकी ८ महिना पनि िसंचाई गर्नुपर्दछ । जलाशय निर्माण गर्दा तल्लो तटीय क्षेत्रमा वर्षायाममा आउने बाढी पनि नियन्त्रण हुन्छ । यस्तोमा तराई छुट्टै प्रान्त बनेमा जलाशययुक्त आयोजना निर्माणको सम्भावना कमै हुन्छ ।
जलबिद्युत
अहिले पश्चिमााचल विकास क्षेत्रले सबभन्दा बढी, झण्डै ३ सय ३० मेगावाट जलबिद्युत उत्पादन गरेर आधा मात्र खपत गर्दछ भने पूर्वााचल विकास क्षेत्रले १४ मेगावाट उत्पादन गरेर त्यसको बीसौं गुणा बढी उपयोग गर्छ । मध्यमााचल विकास क्षेत्रले आफ्नो उत्पादन २ सय ७५ मेगावाट भन्दा केहि बढी खपत गर्छ । बिद्यमान ५ विकास क्षेत्रहरुलाई नैं प्रान्त घोषित गरिएमा यस किसिमको मिलिजुली उत्पादन एवम् उपयोगको सम्भावना कम हुन्छ । एक प्रान्तबाट अर्को प्रान्तमा कति मूल्यमा बिजुली उपलब्ध गराउने भन्ने सामान्य विषय पनि बिबादमुक्त हुन नसकेर एक प्रान्तले अर्को प्रान्तमा बिद्युत आपूर्ति नैं बन्द गर्ने सम्मको अवस्था आउन सक्छ ।
जलश्रोत सम्बन्धमा बिबाद
संघियताको संघारमा पुग्न लागेका नेपालीको आंखा छिमेकी भारतमा बिद्यमान यस सम्बन्धी बिबादले मात्रै पनि खुल्नु पर्ने हो । पानीको बांडफांट सम्बन्धमा पंजाब र हरियाणा बीच बिबाद छ भने नर्मदा बिबादमा मध्य प्रदेश महाराष्ट्र गुजरात र राजस्थान संलग्न छन् । त्यस्तै तमिल नाडु र कर्णाटकता बीच काबेरी बिबादले उग्ररुप िलंदा अपेक्षातितरुपमा काम भएकोछैन । तथापि भारतको भूभाग ठूलो हुनाले संघियतामा जानु जायजै मान्न सकिएला तर भारतको एक प्रान्त भन्दा पनि सानो वा प्रान्त जत्रो नेपाललाई अझ ससाना प्रान्तमा बिभाजन गर्दा जलश्रोतका समुचित दोहनमा बिभिन्न प्रान्त बीचको बिबादले धेरै नैं अवरोध पुर्याउने देखिन्छ ।
मित्र राष्ट्रसंग सन्धी गर्ने क्षमता
कोशी देखि गण्डकी टनकपुर हुंदै महाकाली सन्धी सम्मको यात्रामा नेपालले धेरै गुमाईसकेकोछ । यो कृयाकलाप नेपालमा संघियता लागू हुनुभन्दा अगाडी भएकोहो । तर एक पटक नेपाल विभिन्न प्रान्तहरुमा विभाजित भएपछि यी प्रान्तहरु नैं आपसमा द्वन्द्वरत रहने भएकोले मित्र राष्ट्रसंग सन्धी सम्झौता गर्दा अझ बढी गुमाउने अवस्था आउनेछ । नेपाल भित्रका बिभिन्न प्रान्तलाई जुधाएर, लडाएर कोशी, गण्डकी, महाकाली पुनराबृत्ति गर्ने अभिष्ट पनि पूरा हुने अवस्था बन्न सक्छ । सम्झन के जरुरी छ भने एउटा पाउरोटी कसरी बांड्ने भन्ने बारे दुई बिरालो बीच बिबाद उठ्दा तराजुमा जोखेर बांडफांट गर्ने अग्रसरता देखाउने बांदरले अलिअलि गरेर पूरै पाउरोटी खाईसकाएको कथा चरितार्थ हुने ठूलो जोखिम संघियतामा गएपछि खडा हुनेछ ।
अन्तमा
बिभिन्न प्रान्तहरुका फरक आकांक्षा आवश्यकताले गर्दा जलश्रोतको अधिकतम उपयोगमा अवरोध आउने सम्भावना धेरै छ । अझ प्रान्तहरुको सीमांकन नदीमा आधारित गर्ने परिपाटी हुनाले दुई किनाराका प्रान्तहरुको दुई किसिमका आकांक्षा हुनेहुनाले बिबाद अझ घनिभूतरुपमा खडा हुन्छ जसले गर्दा समेत जलश्रोतको समुचित दोहन कष्टसाध्य हुनजान्छ । तसर्थ अहिले हतारमा देशलाई विभिन्न प्रान्तमा खण्डित पारेमा पछि फुस्रदमा धेरै पछुताउन पर्ने हुन्छ । समय छंदै यस सम्बन्धमा चेत्न जरुरी छ ।
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Monday, May 4, 2009
Re: Federalism and Water Resource
Resolving these issues in the interest of people, I admit, is possible as has been pointed out, in an ideal society. But that too would be over simplification as, unfortunately, utopia is rather rare. Had it been that simple, a number of provinces in India wouldn’t have been fighting with each other (it is same in Pakistan, too). Suppose I were to agree that these issues could be resolved in the interest of people in an ideal situation, then one will have to further agree that even it would not have been necessary to raise the demand for federal structure in such a situation as nobody would have been excluded (or felt excluded) from the mainstream of the society and governance. But that is the not the case. Therefore, in my article I have simply pointed out the possibilities of hindrances in the optimal exploitation of water resources under federal structure.
I have perused the chapter on natural resources of NACSS memo and it has recommended apportionment of the right to natural resources between and center and states at various rates. The question that will arise is what is the basis of these percentages and may be deemed arbitrary. Reaching an agreement on these percentages will amount to opening a Pandora’s Box. After arriving at a consensus on these ratios then there will be second generation problems of quantification and monetization of the benefits to share the benefits amongst various provinces (yes, more than one province may be involved in one project) and the center . Moreover, the costs in terms of adverse impacts on the local populace also will have to be quantified which will also result in a lot of arguments. Hence, under a federal structure optimal exploitation water resource will be possible with great difficulty.
I have perused the chapter on natural resources of NACSS memo and it has recommended apportionment of the right to natural resources between and center and states at various rates. The question that will arise is what is the basis of these percentages and may be deemed arbitrary. Reaching an agreement on these percentages will amount to opening a Pandora’s Box. After arriving at a consensus on these ratios then there will be second generation problems of quantification and monetization of the benefits to share the benefits amongst various provinces (yes, more than one province may be involved in one project) and the center . Moreover, the costs in terms of adverse impacts on the local populace also will have to be quantified which will also result in a lot of arguments. Hence, under a federal structure optimal exploitation water resource will be possible with great difficulty.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Federalism will hinder optimal exploitation of water resources
For this scribe “People’s Movement II” is “Rhododendron Revolution” of 2006 which not only paved path for the abolition of much maligned monarchy, subsequent to Royal Palace massacre – reportedly committed by the then Crown Prince who is alleged to have committed suicide after committing heinous crime of regicide (also patricide), matricide, fratricide (both bother and sister) and also killing off an uncle and couple of aunts (however, most of the people still do not believe this “yarn” – which denigrated royalties (mainly the last “monarch” of Nepal and his son) in the eyes of the “loyal subjects” of Nepal, in 2001 June, but also afforded an opportunity for the people of Nepal to write a constitution of their own – through the elected Constituent Assembly. The assembly is supposed to decide the form and content of the constitution and also the structure of the state as to whether federal or unitary. However, the overzealous people in the commission writing Interim Constitution went out of way to declare that Nepal will be a federal state; preempting the people’s representatives in the assembly from deliberating about it and arriving at a well thought through decision. Now it has become a contentious issue as to whether spinning off of Nepal into an indeterminate number of provinces under federal structure is really a good idea. Here an attempt is being made to analyze how will federalism affect optimal exploitation of water resources.
Water Resource – Unique Natural Resource
Optimal exploitation of most of the natural resources can be done locally. They can benefit by cultivating land, harvesting it, collecting herbs, living off forest or extracting minerals. But water resource is a different kind of natural resource and things are not that simple with its exploitation. Local inhabitants can benefit, for example, by building micro hydropower project (less than 100 kW) or from water based tourism like rafting. But exploitation at a larger scale to benefit from scale economy results in different set of additionalities and externalities.
Construction of a run-of-the-river (RoR) hydropower at a specific site deprives upper riparian populace from using the river water for consumptive uses (i.e. irrigation) as any reduction in the quantum of water will result in decrease in electricity generation and in turn downsizing the revenue stream. Similarly, a patch of the river will become dewatered as water will be diverted from the river into powerhouse through a network of canal/tunnel and eventually penstock pipe by building intake. The people dependent on this patch of river will face severe water scarcity – amply demonstrated by the dewatered area in Marshyangdi River by the highway to Pokahra. If the users of electricity come from a different province, the people adversely impacted as such will never agree to construction of implementation of hydropower plant in their province resulting in failure to generate electricity at optimum level.
Reservoir Project
Contrasted with RoR project, a storage project will entail building a reservoir resulting in inundation/submergence of large tracts of fertile agricultural land, forest and even extant infrastructure and will also displace the inhabitants. Daily pondage project also causes similar adverse impact, by a lesser magnitude, though. In this scenario, people of the province set to lose their land and to get displaced will not be too eager to build a project if the electricity is to be used in another province. Moreover, storage project also generates downstream benefit in terms of augmented flow which benefits the lower riparian people by making water available for water supply, irrigation, industrial use, improvement of watershed and they can also use the same for water sports based tourism and navigation. In this backdrop people in upper riparian province will have no reason to agree to build such a project, thus scuttling the prospect of implementation of a multipurpose project, but for federal structure.
Resettlement of people displaced by a multipurpose project will also become problematic as there is scarcity of good land in the hills where such projects could be sited while the resettlement in the area where necessary land is available will not be allowed for reasons of disturbing ethnic balance. Tharus in western Terai are already objecting to the resettlement plan for people to be displaced by West Seti project. After formation of separate provinces, the ensuing tussle will take the form of agitation as to why should upper riparian province lose land and its people to electricity for some far off city.
Irrigation and Flood Control
Nepal has 3.97 million hectares of cultivated land (mostly in Terai) and only 0.5 million hectares (only 12.6%) has some irrigation (mostly during rainy season). Cultivation of multiple crops in a year – imperative to ensure food security in the country (including high value cash crop that will make the farmers there prosperous) – requires massive irrigation during dry season which is possible only by building a reservoir in the hills that will store water during the rainy season (about 4 months in year) for irrigation during other 8 months. Building reservoirs as such will also control flood in the river’s flood plain in the Terai. But such a scheme will be precluded after splitting the country into federal structure for reasons explained above, especially if Terai is to become a separate province.
Electricity
Suppose it is decided to have 5 provinces in the lines of current development regions, then western development region will be generating most of hydropower (over 329 MW), using only about half of its generation capacity, while eastern region will be consuming a lot more than what it generates (under 14 MW). Central development region will consume a little more than it generates (275 MW). Under federal structure this type of happy sharing will not be possible. Simple issue like pricing can spin out of control and provinces with more generation capacity can shut off power if the price is not right.
Dispute over water resource
What is happening in India should be an eye opener for us in Nepal about to cross the threshold into federalism. There is dispute between Punjab and Haryana over Yamuna Sutlej Link canal. A clutch of states are fighting over Narmada and Tamil Nadu and Karnataka do not see eye to eye on Cauvery. All this is impeding optimal exploitation of water resource in India, although she has adopted federal structure due to her huge land mass.
Negotiating power
From Koshi through Gandaki, Tanakpur and Mahakali treaties Nepal has ended up getting raw deals. These things took place before Nepal went federal. After implementing federalism, each province will be squabbling with other province/s and Nepal’s negotiation capacity will be further weakened vis-à-vis India and the nightmare of a “monkey” from abroad settling dispute between two “cats” - siblings - over sharing of a bread of loaf (water resource) and monkey ending up eating the bread bite by bite will become a reality. Merely this should disssuade patriotic Nepali people from breaking up Nepal into several provinces.
Conclusion
Implementing water resource projects in a federal structure will become difficult/daunting task due to competing demands over water and clashing aspirations of each province and several provinces. The complications will get compounded due to the convention of demarcating provinces by using rivers as the boundary. This will result in diametrically opposite aspiration of one province with that of the province on the other side of the river.
In view of this, and also due to the fact that Nepal is as small or smaller than a reasonable sized province of India and most federal nations, we need to tread cautiously before going for federal structure. As far as water resource is concerned, splitting the country in haste will provide us ample opportunity to repent at leisure.
(A shorter version of it was published in Nepali Times # 449 (1-7 May 2009.)
Water Resource – Unique Natural Resource
Optimal exploitation of most of the natural resources can be done locally. They can benefit by cultivating land, harvesting it, collecting herbs, living off forest or extracting minerals. But water resource is a different kind of natural resource and things are not that simple with its exploitation. Local inhabitants can benefit, for example, by building micro hydropower project (less than 100 kW) or from water based tourism like rafting. But exploitation at a larger scale to benefit from scale economy results in different set of additionalities and externalities.
Construction of a run-of-the-river (RoR) hydropower at a specific site deprives upper riparian populace from using the river water for consumptive uses (i.e. irrigation) as any reduction in the quantum of water will result in decrease in electricity generation and in turn downsizing the revenue stream. Similarly, a patch of the river will become dewatered as water will be diverted from the river into powerhouse through a network of canal/tunnel and eventually penstock pipe by building intake. The people dependent on this patch of river will face severe water scarcity – amply demonstrated by the dewatered area in Marshyangdi River by the highway to Pokahra. If the users of electricity come from a different province, the people adversely impacted as such will never agree to construction of implementation of hydropower plant in their province resulting in failure to generate electricity at optimum level.
Reservoir Project
Contrasted with RoR project, a storage project will entail building a reservoir resulting in inundation/submergence of large tracts of fertile agricultural land, forest and even extant infrastructure and will also displace the inhabitants. Daily pondage project also causes similar adverse impact, by a lesser magnitude, though. In this scenario, people of the province set to lose their land and to get displaced will not be too eager to build a project if the electricity is to be used in another province. Moreover, storage project also generates downstream benefit in terms of augmented flow which benefits the lower riparian people by making water available for water supply, irrigation, industrial use, improvement of watershed and they can also use the same for water sports based tourism and navigation. In this backdrop people in upper riparian province will have no reason to agree to build such a project, thus scuttling the prospect of implementation of a multipurpose project, but for federal structure.
Resettlement of people displaced by a multipurpose project will also become problematic as there is scarcity of good land in the hills where such projects could be sited while the resettlement in the area where necessary land is available will not be allowed for reasons of disturbing ethnic balance. Tharus in western Terai are already objecting to the resettlement plan for people to be displaced by West Seti project. After formation of separate provinces, the ensuing tussle will take the form of agitation as to why should upper riparian province lose land and its people to electricity for some far off city.
Irrigation and Flood Control
Nepal has 3.97 million hectares of cultivated land (mostly in Terai) and only 0.5 million hectares (only 12.6%) has some irrigation (mostly during rainy season). Cultivation of multiple crops in a year – imperative to ensure food security in the country (including high value cash crop that will make the farmers there prosperous) – requires massive irrigation during dry season which is possible only by building a reservoir in the hills that will store water during the rainy season (about 4 months in year) for irrigation during other 8 months. Building reservoirs as such will also control flood in the river’s flood plain in the Terai. But such a scheme will be precluded after splitting the country into federal structure for reasons explained above, especially if Terai is to become a separate province.
Electricity
Suppose it is decided to have 5 provinces in the lines of current development regions, then western development region will be generating most of hydropower (over 329 MW), using only about half of its generation capacity, while eastern region will be consuming a lot more than what it generates (under 14 MW). Central development region will consume a little more than it generates (275 MW). Under federal structure this type of happy sharing will not be possible. Simple issue like pricing can spin out of control and provinces with more generation capacity can shut off power if the price is not right.
Dispute over water resource
What is happening in India should be an eye opener for us in Nepal about to cross the threshold into federalism. There is dispute between Punjab and Haryana over Yamuna Sutlej Link canal. A clutch of states are fighting over Narmada and Tamil Nadu and Karnataka do not see eye to eye on Cauvery. All this is impeding optimal exploitation of water resource in India, although she has adopted federal structure due to her huge land mass.
Negotiating power
From Koshi through Gandaki, Tanakpur and Mahakali treaties Nepal has ended up getting raw deals. These things took place before Nepal went federal. After implementing federalism, each province will be squabbling with other province/s and Nepal’s negotiation capacity will be further weakened vis-à-vis India and the nightmare of a “monkey” from abroad settling dispute between two “cats” - siblings - over sharing of a bread of loaf (water resource) and monkey ending up eating the bread bite by bite will become a reality. Merely this should disssuade patriotic Nepali people from breaking up Nepal into several provinces.
Conclusion
Implementing water resource projects in a federal structure will become difficult/daunting task due to competing demands over water and clashing aspirations of each province and several provinces. The complications will get compounded due to the convention of demarcating provinces by using rivers as the boundary. This will result in diametrically opposite aspiration of one province with that of the province on the other side of the river.
In view of this, and also due to the fact that Nepal is as small or smaller than a reasonable sized province of India and most federal nations, we need to tread cautiously before going for federal structure. As far as water resource is concerned, splitting the country in haste will provide us ample opportunity to repent at leisure.
(A shorter version of it was published in Nepali Times # 449 (1-7 May 2009.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)