The Ken-Betwa Project: Huge outlay, questionable benefits, and high social and environmental costs.

On March 22, 2021, PM Narendra Modi presided over the signing of a memorandum of agreement between the Chief Ministers of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh that will launch the Ken-Betwa River-Linking Project. This project is part of the years-old national river linking scheme, which proposes to connect 14 Himalayan and 16 peninsular rivers with 30 canals and 3000 reservoirs in order to irrigate 87 million ha of land.

Under the Ken-Betwa Project, water from the Ken river will be transferred to the Betwa river. Both the rivers are tributaries of river Yamuna, but Ken is supposed to have excess water, which would be fed to Betwa through dams, tunnels, canals, and barrages. 

The project is located in Bundelkhand, a drought-prone region, which spreads across 13 districts of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. The Union Jal Shakti Ministry claims that the project would provide annual irrigation of 10.62 lakh ha, supply drinking water to about 62 lakh people, generate 103 MW of hydropower, facilitate groundwater recharge, and reduce the occurrence of floods.

The project cost estimate is Rs.35,000 crore at 2017-18 prices, with the Centre contributing 90% of it. It will take eight years for completion.

The Ken-Betwa Project was first proposed in the 1980s, later the Vajpayee government took it up seriously, and more recently, the former Union Water Resources Minister Uma Bharti has been a great supporter. 

The environmental and social costs of the project will be huge:

• 12,500 ha of land will be submerged by the project, of which more than 9000 ha are categorised as forest land. 
• The submergence area will include an important section of the Panna Tiger Reserve. (This Reserve has been commended for the successful improvement of tiger and vulture populations.)
• 23 lakh trees with a girth of 20 cm or more will be cut down.. 
• Many wildlife species will be affected including tigers, endangered vultures, mahseer fish, and gharials in the Ken Gharial Sanctuary.
• Ten villages, including Daudhan, are expected to be submerged, displacing over 10,000 people.

The project has been pending for many years since it could not get all the required environmental clearances:

• It must get clearance from the Central Empowered Committee of the Supreme Court, which had raised concerns about the project. 
• The National Water Development Agency (NWDA) applied for forest clearance in 2015, but the Stage I forest clearance accorded in May 2017 stipulates several conditions that would imply a fundamental restructuring of the project. The conditions include that the proposed 78 MW power house shall not be constructed in the forest area and that no building material is to be taken from the forest, among others.

Environmentalists and local groups also question the supposed benefits of the project:

• The claims of Ken having surplus water may be unrealistic as the river is not perennial. Sometimes it slows to a trickle. 
• The Ken River flows 60-70 feet lower than the Betwa and at least 30% of the 103 MW power generated will be used for pumping the water up. 

In spite of these issues, the governments concerned seem to be going ahead with the project.

(This post is based on several news reports, including those by Himanshu Thakkar and Sunny Sebastian in 'The Hindu')

Global Hunger Index 2020 released: India ranks 94 out of 107 countries

The Global Hunger Index 2020 (GHI) was released in October 2020. GHI is a peer-reviewed annual report, jointly published by two international NGOs - Concern Worldwide and Welthungerhilfe. GHI is a tool designed to comprehensively measure and track hunger at global, regional, and national levels. GHI scores are calculated each year to assess progress and setbacks in combating hunger. 

GHI is designed to raise awareness and understanding of the struggle against hunger, provide a way to compare levels of hunger between countries and regions, and call attention to those areas of the world where hunger levels are highest and where the need for additional efforts to eliminate hunger is greatest.

GHI is calculated based on four indicators:

1. Undernourishment: Share of the population that is undernourished 
2. Child wasting: Share of children under the age of five who are wasted
3. Child stunting: Share of children under the age of five who are stunted
4. Child mortality: Mortality rate of children under the age of five. 

GHI ranks countries on a 100-point scale, with 0 being the best score (no hunger) and 100 being the worst. Values less than 10 reflect low hunger, values from 20 to 34.9 indicate serious hunger; values from 35 to 49.9 are alarming; and values of 50 or more are extremely alarming.

Progress and Setbacks

The 2020 GHI shows that while the world has made gradual progress in reducing hunger on a global scale since 2000, this progress has been too slow. The global level of hunger has fallen from a GHI score of 29.0 points in 2000 to 18.2 points in 2020. While this is encouraging, hunger persists in many countries, and in some instances, progress is even being reversed.

Where are Hunger Levels the Worst? 

Alarming levels of hunger exist in eleven countries: Chad, Timor-Leste, Madagascar, Central African Republic, Yemen, Comoros, Burundi, Somalia, South Sudan, Syria, and DR Congo. Several of these countries are experiencing unrest or violent conflict, which affects the availability of data as well as the food and nutrition situation in the country. 

Serious levels of hunger exists in 40 countries including India, Botswana, Kenya, Lesotho, and Mauritania. For 14 countries in the moderate, serious or alarming categories, hunger and malnutrition has worsened since 2012 – driven by conflict, poverty, inequality, poor health, and climate change. While the 2020 GHI does not yet reflect the impacts of COVID-19, it shows that the situation is already worrying in many contexts and is likely to worsen in the years to come.

Policy Recommendations

To ensure the right to adequate and nutritious food for all and to end hunger by 2030, we must not only reshape our food systems to become fair, healthy, resilient, and environmentally friendly but also integrate them into a broader political effort to maximize the health of humans, animals, and our planet.

• Make food systems work better for people and the planet   
• Improve how food systems are governed   
• Expand social investments for resilience   
• Make emergency and long-term development interventions more equitable and sustainable   
• Strengthen international cooperation and regulations

Key findings with regard to India:

• India has the highest prevalence of wasted children under five years in the world, which reflects acute undernutrition.
• India ranks 94 out of 107 countries in the Index, lower than her neighbours such as Bangladesh (75) and Pakistan (88).
• The report put India under serious category with the score of 27.2.
• The child stunting rate in India was 37.4 %.
• The child wasting was at 17.3 %.
• The undernourishment rate of India was at 14% and child mortality at 3.7%.

As expected, the Government of India objected to the ranking. Truth hurts!