ThePoliticalEconomyofWaterSecurity,EcosystemServicesandLivelihoodsintheWesternHimalaya

• TheimportanceofCriticalWaterZones:Maintenance andgrowthofurbansettlements arecontingent onthelong-termsustainability oftheirwatersource.Theactive identification,management andprotectionoftheCriticalWaterZoneswhichsupportthese sourcesarepressingandcrucial.

• Inequalityandthepolitics ofwaterdistribution:Withinurbansettlements,waterishighlyunequallydistributedandaccess isdetermined byarangeofsocio-economic factors.Agencies andinstitutions responsibleforsupplyneedtobesensitive tothese issues.

Overthepastthreeyears,thisprojecthasinvestigatedthewaysinwhichpeople livinginandaround sixsmalltowns intheWesternHimalayaaccesswaterthrough adiversity ofsources, fromsprings topiped supply, andthesustainability challengesfacedbythesesources.Through thesemultiple andfar-rangingcasestudies inHimachalPradesh,Uttarakhand andNepal,theteamhasdrawnoutimportantlessonsrelevanttounderstanding watersupply anddemandusedynamics inthehills, aswellasthepolicy options forsecuringwatersupplies fortheneeds ofthese hillresidents.

• The'political economy'journeyofwaterfromsourcetotap:Watertravelsthroughavariedsocio-ecologicallandscape that influences andis inturnimpacted byurbanwaterdemand. Betterunderstandingofthese competingdemands isrequiredwhenplanninginfrastructuredevelopment forwater.

• Diversification ofwaterstrategiesanddrinkingwaterpreferences:Householdsinthehillscontinue todependonmultiple watersources,evenwhentheyhavepipedwaterconnections, asariskminimisation strategy. Thereremainstrongculturalpreferencesforspringwaterthatpipedconnections havenotdisplaced.

• Up- anddown- streamrelationshipsandnegotiations(informalandformal):Arangeofnegotiations andconflictsaroundwateraccess, distributionandqualitybetween up- anddown- streamsettlements characterise life inthehills.Thediversionandappropriationofwatercancreate newconflicts intheseinterdependent landscapes.

• Dataandknowledgeaboutbiophysicalandsocio-economic processes:TheHimalayas lacklongtermbiophysicalandsocio-economic data.Decisions aroundlanduse,urbanplanninganddevelopment continue tobemadeinthese data-poorenvironments. Intheabsence ofscientific data, itisparticularlyimportanttobeawarethattherearemultiple waysinwhichknowledge ismadeandreproduced,aswellasdiverseactorstobeincludedinunderstandingthisdynamiclandscape.

ProjectteamCentre forEcology,DevelopmentandResearch(CEDAR),India: Chetan Agarwal,DevendraChauhan,VijayGuleria,Anvita Pandey,Nuvodita Singh,VishalSingh,RajeshThadani.Southasia InstituteofAdvanced Studies,Nepal: Ngamindra Dahal,KamalDevkota, TikeshwariJoshi,Kaustuv Neupane,Hemant Ojha.UniversityofCambridge, UK:EszterKovacs,BhaskarVira

• Largeinfrastructuredecisions andmanagementchoices: States anddonorsaredevelopinglarge-investmentandinfrastructureprojectstosupplywaterinmountainareas,butthese“solutions” donotalwaysconsiderthefullrangeofpossibleoptions,especiallythosethataremorelocalandsmall-scale. Theprocessofprojectidentification andselection inresponsetoperceivedwaterchallenges needs tobemoretransparentandinclusive.

• Multipleoverlappinginstitutionsforwatersupply:Watersupplysystems toaddresstheneedsofsmalltownsareadoptingnewandvariedgovernancestructures. Donorandstate-led systemsengagewithanumberof localactorsandinstitutions intheup- anddown-stream, influencingdevelopmentpathwaysandlandusechoices, whichimpact wateravailability.