Skip to main content

India behind Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka in access to clean water: WaterAid

Data released by the London-based WaterAid, a high-profile international non-profit organization, which "supports" the Narendra Modi government's programmes like Swachh Bharat Mission and National Rural Drinking Water Programme, show that India is behind all its neighbours, including Pakistan and Bangladesh, in providing “basic access” to clean water.
Its new report, released on the occasion of World Water Day, which falls on Thursday, the report says that, as against India’s 87.5%, who have the basic access to water, Pakistan’s 88.5%, Nepal’s 87.7%, Sri Lanka’s 92.3%, China’s 95.8%, Bangladesh’s 97.3 and Bhutan’s 97.5% have such an access.
The top 10 countries with lowest access to
clean water close to home – by population
Ironically, despite such poor showing, the WaterAid report, titled “The water gap – The State of the World’s Water 2018”, seeks to present a rosy picture of India’s water situation, saying, “India in particular has made water access a major focus”. It adds, India (along with China) has shown “most striking results”, by reaching out to “the greatest number of people with water since 2000.”
In its support, the report provides the instance of one Hrudamajhi, 45, who lives in Kirejholla village in western Odisha, pointing out how the village’s previous open, dug wells were “contaminated with bacteria and had high levels of naturally-occurring fluoride, which at high concentrations causes skeletal damage.”
It adds, “WaterAid and local partners installed a small piped-water system from an improved well”, the report says, adding, as a result Hrudamajhi is happy that “swelling of feet and elbows has decreased.” Earlier, she “would not be able to sit on the ground or do household work for long hours, but now the situation has improved.”
Hrudamajhi
At the same time, the report provides the instance of one Kashi Ram, 50, who is shown carrying water from a nearby well to his house in Sheetal Pani village, Baiga Chak, Dindori, Madhya Pradesh.
The report provides what it calls “new data” for several countries that “links water access to household wealth” in order to show that, even in countries making progress, “there are still vast discrepancies between richest and poorest”, However, it avoids providing any such data for India.
Among other countries, the “new data” show that in Bangladesh 93.2% of the poorest people have clean water as against 98.9% of the richest people, and in Pakistan, “79.2% of the poorest people have clean water 98% of the richest people have clean water”.
Calling India “one of the world’s most-improved nations for reaching the most people with clean water”, the report, however, regrets, the country “faces challenges with falling groundwater levels, drought, demand from agriculture and industry, pollution and poor water resource management.”
Kashi Ram
Even as seeking to suggest that these challenges would “intensify as climate change contributes to more extreme weather shocks”, the report nevertheless says, in November last year, India “restructured its rural water programme with a goal to reach 90% of rural households with piped water by 2022.”
The report shows that, population-wise, India still has the largest population in the world with “no access” to clean water, 163 million, followed by Ethiopia’s 60.5 million, Nigeria’s 59.5 million, China’s 57.5 million, Democratic Republic of Congo 46.87 million, Indonesia’s 26.9 million, Tanzania’s 26.65 million, Uganda’s 23.84 million, Pakistan’s 21.64 million, and so on.
Pointing out that “more than 60% of humanity lives in areas of water stress, where the supply of water cannot or will not continue to meet demand”, the report says, “Some 844 million people are now struggling to access life’s most essential requirement – almost 200 million more than previously counted.”

Comments

TRENDING

A Hindu alternative to Valentine's Day? 'Shiv-Parvati was first love marriage in Universe'

The other day, I was searching on Google a quote on Maha Shivratri which I wanted to send to someone, a confirmed Shiv Bhakt, quite close to me -- with an underlying message to act positively instead of being negative. On top of the search, I chanced upon an article in, imagine!, a Nashik Corporation site which offered me something very unusual.  I don't know who owns this site, for there is nothing on it in the About Us link. It merely says, the Nashik Corporation  site   "is an educational and news website of the municipal corporation. Today, education and payment of tax are completely online." It goes on to add, "So we provide some of the latest information about Property Tax, Water Tax, Marriage Certificate, Caste Certificate, etc. So all taxpayer can get all information of their municipal in a single place.some facts about legal and financial issues that different city corporations face, but I was least interested in them."  Surely, this didn't interest...

Beyond the 'plum' posting: Why the caste lens still defines bureaucratic success

Following my recent blog on former IAS bureaucrat Atanu Chakraborty’s sudden exit as non-executive chairman of HDFC Bank, a few colleagues from the Gujarat cadre — mostly those I interacted with during my Gandhinagar stint (1997–2012) as the Times of India representative — reacted rather sharply. Most of them sent their responses directly on WhatsApp, touching upon on the merits and demerits of Chakraborty’s controversial move. One former IAS officer, a Dalit, however, went further, raising a broader question: why do some officials like Chakraborty secure plum post-retirement assignments, while others are overlooked?

Blaming RTE, not underfunding: Education groups hit back at NITI Aayog working paper

A preliminary working paper by Arvind Virmani, economist and member of the Government of India think tank NITI Aayog, has concluded that the Right to Education (RTE) Act — enacted to guarantee free and compulsory schooling for children between six and fourteen — has actually worsened learning outcomes rather than improved them. The paper, published in March 2026 and reported by The Print on 16 April, has drawn sharp pushback from education rights advocates, who argue it builds a politically motivated narrative against constitutionally guaranteed entitlements.