Karnataka water governance model faces criticism over large dam-centric climate strategy

 

A joint submission by environmental research platform Mapping Malnad and climate coalition SAPACC has raised serious objections to the Karnataka government’s draft climate adaptation and mitigation strategy for the water sector, alleging that several major water infrastructure projects are being “mislabelled” as climate adaptation measures despite worsening ecological and hydrological stress across the state. 

The 17-page response, submitted on May 11 to the Government of Karnataka, critiques the State Specific Action Plan on Climate Change (SSAPCC) prepared under the National Water Mission framework and calls for a complete overhaul of the state’s water governance approach.

The document argues that the consultation process conducted by the Advanced Centre for Integrated Water Resources Management (ACIWRM) on March 24 involved only a “limited set of selected individuals and institutions,” making it inadequate for a policy that would shape Karnataka’s long-term water governance. 

The submission says climate adaptation planning “cannot be designed solely through top-down technical consultations” and instead demands district-wise and taluk-wise consultations involving citizens, farmers, gram panchayats, pollution control authorities, researchers, environmental groups, MLAs and MPs.

A major concern raised in the report relates to projections regarding the Cauvery basin. The submission notes that the SSAPCC workshop projected streamflow increases of 12% between 2021 and 2040 and 18% between 2041 and 2060, based on earlier climate modelling exercises. 

However, the authors cite a recent IIT Gandhinagar study dated March 21, 2026, which estimates a near-term decline of around 3.5% in mean annual flows in the Cauvery at Kollegal between 2026 and 2050, while also noting that annual flows have already declined by 28% since the 1950s. The submission warns that treating the Cauvery as a basin with increasing streamflow could lead to flawed planning in an already water-stressed region.

The report also criticises the emphasis placed on the proposed Mekedatu balancing reservoir project in the draft climate strategy. It argues that reducing non-revenue water (NRW) losses in Bengaluru and other cities would be a more effective climate adaptation strategy than building new large dams. 

According to the submission, Bengaluru’s NRW losses declined from 48% in 2017 to 30% in 2024, but still remain significantly above the Government of India benchmark of 20% and global best practice levels of around 10% in Israel and 7.5% in Denmark. The report recommends time-bound NRW reduction targets across all city corporations in Karnataka.

The submission describes several existing projects, including tank-filling schemes, the KC Valley and HN Valley wastewater reuse projects, Yettinahole and Mekedatu, as examples of “hydrological maladaptation.” It alleges that large-scale tank-filling projects implemented in drought-prone regions have enabled expansion of water-intensive sugarcane cultivation rather than improving drinking water security. 

Citing Belagavi district as an example, the report states that sugarcane cultivation expanded from 221,086 hectares in 2017-18 to 513,499 hectares in 2022-23, a rise of 132.3% within five years. It adds that Belagavi alone accounted for nearly 44% of Karnataka’s total sugarcane cultivation area by 2022-23 and hosts 28 sugar factories, at least 20 of which are integrated with ethanol distilleries.

The report links this expansion to worsening groundwater depletion and argues that ethanol-linked sugarcane cultivation is being ignored in Karnataka’s climate planning. It states that statewide sugarcane cultivation more than doubled from 533,084 hectares in 2017-18 to 1,167,916 hectares in 2022-23, driven largely by ethanol feedstock demand. According to the submission, unless these “structural drivers” of groundwater depletion are addressed, “climate resilience in the water sector will remain largely an illusion.”

On wastewater reuse projects such as KC Valley and HN Valley, the report says treated wastewater reuse is necessary but argues that the current design poses risks to drinking water, groundwater and public health because of inadequate treatment and monitoring. 

It warns of emerging contaminants, antimicrobial-resistant bacteria and possible groundwater contamination due to flaws in the application of Soil Aquifer Treatment systems. The document calls for tertiary treatment, strict regulation of industrial discharges, long-term health studies and restrictions on cultivation of food crops in reuse zones.

The submission devotes substantial attention to the Mekedatu project, arguing that portraying it as climate adaptation contradicts both the Karnataka State Water Policy 2019 and the Draft National Water Policy 2020, which advocate demand-side management rather than endless supply-side expansion. 

The report further claims that the proposed 67.16 TMC dam and 400 MW powerhouse would submerge more than 12,000 acres of the Cauvery Wildlife Sanctuary and nearly 486 acres of its eco-sensitive zone, threatening one of southern India’s most significant forest-river ecosystems.

The authors also criticise what they describe as the near-total absence of pollution prevention in Karnataka’s climate planning. They argue that pollution directly undermines climate resilience, drinking water security, ecosystem health and public health, while climate change itself worsens pollution impacts. 

The submission points to weakening ecological safeguards such as reduced lake and stormwater drain buffer zones in Bengaluru and warns that weakening both environmental regulations and ecological buffers is “fundamentally incompatible” with serious climate adaptation.

The report similarly attacks the Yettinahole project, describing it as a “textbook case of hydrological maladaptation.” It alleges that the project ignored basin-scale hydrological assessments, downstream ecological needs and environmental flow requirements while causing forest destruction and increasing landslide risks in Hassan district. The document also claims that projected water benefits from the scheme were overstated.

Another issue flagged in the submission is the allocation of public water resources to commercial packaged drinking water industries. 

The report cites PepsiCo’s Dharwad bottling plant as receiving more than two lakh litres of Malaprabha water per day even during periods of drought, while a Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages facility in Bidadi allegedly receives around 9.36 lakh litres of Cauvery water daily from the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board. According to the submission, this quantity could meet the basic daily water needs of around 18,720 people at 50 litres per capita per day.

In its concluding remarks, the submission says Karnataka’s current draft climate strategy “falls short on nearly every count,” arguing that genuine climate resilience requires basin-scale planning, pollution prevention, groundwater governance, reduction of non-revenue water, restoration of wetlands and ecological buffers, and transitions towards drought-resilient agriculture. 

The authors urge the state government to undertake a broader institutionalised consultation process and revise the draft plan based on “science, data, and the people of Karnataka.”