Analysis of Cauvery water-sharing award using an analytical framework model

• Published in: Journal of hydrology (Amsterdam) 2019-12, Vol.579, p.124214, Article 124214
• Main Authors: Garg, N.K., Azad, Shambhu
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Cauvery conflict; Cauvery river dispute; System dynamics; Water allocation; Water conflicts; Water-sharing model
• ISSN: 0022-1694; 1879-2707
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.124214

•Cauvery water disputes tribunal award was analysed and compared with authors model.•Tribunal award plagued with subjectivity resulted in inequitable water allocations.•Tribunal award found to be inequitable and unreasonable even for normal basin yield.•More objectivity can be brought out in equitable water sharing using authors model.•Distress year proportional water sharing formula of Tribunal found to be irrational. The award finalized by the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal CWDT (2007a,b) [Final order of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal. Ministry of Water Resources, Govt. of India, New Delhi] for water sharing among the co-basin states of the Cauvery river basin in India was analyzed and compared with the results obtained by using a model proposed by Garg and Azad (2018) [J. Hydrol., 560, pp. 289–300] by analyzing the same data that was used by the Tribunal. The comparison of the model results for a real basin, with the results of the altogether different approach like the tribunal award, was made to serve two purposes (i) establishing confidence in the applicability of the model, which otherwise might be considered as some mathematical jargons by the authors without having adequate connect with the realities (ii) analyse the Tribunal award for its rationality and to draw general inferences. The analysis of the Tribunal award led to some new insights on the water sharing among co-basin states, namely (i) it is demonstrated that it would not be proper to reduce the allocation of water to a co-basin states for distress year in proportion to its’ allocation for the normal year to ensure an equitable distribution among co–basin states (ii) it is also revealed that the static allocation even for normal yield of the basin as a whole, should not be made among co-basin states, because it is possible that the normal yield of the basin as a whole may not synchronize with the normal yield of co–basin states (iii) the study defied the general perception that the inclusion of groundwater in overall water availability of the basin will lead to reduction in share of the surface water for co–basin states having relatively more groundwater potential as compared to other co-basin states. The study indicated that the CWDT (2007a,b) award failed to ensure an equitable water-sharing among co-basin states even for a year with normal yield in the Cauvery basin as a whole. The results of the model demonstrated different allocations to different co-basin states depending upo