Water wealth: On groundwater exploitation in Punjab
Groundwater exploitation in Punjab disincentivises small farmers
360° Perspective Analysis
Deep-dive into Geography, Polity, Economy, History, Environment & Social dimensions — AI-powered, on-demand
Context
According to the latest Dynamic Groundwater Assessment, Punjab continues to face severe groundwater depletion, with an extraction rate of 152% and 72% of its blocks in the 'red zone'. This crisis, driven by the intensive rice-wheat cropping system established during the , is now exacerbating wealth inequalities among farmers, as marginal farmers struggle to access deeper aquifers while larger landowners dominate groundwater extraction.
UPSC Perspectives
Environmental
The groundwater depletion in Punjab highlights a critical failure in sustainable water management. The state's agriculture relies heavily on groundwater extraction, primarily for water-intensive crops like paddy and wheat. According to the Dynamic Groundwater Assessment, Punjab's extraction rate is 152%, meaning it is drawing more water than is being recharged. This has led to a significant drop in the water table, with a growing number of observation wells reporting water levels below 40 meters. This scenario is a classic example of the 'tragedy of the commons', where individual farmers, incentivized by free electricity, over-exploit a shared resource, leading to its eventual depletion. Addressing this requires a shift towards demand-side management, such as crop diversification away from water-intensive crops, promoting micro-irrigation techniques, and pricing water to reflect its scarcity.
Economic
The economic implications of this crisis are profound and touch upon agricultural policies and rural inequality. The current Minimum Support Price (MSP) regime, coupled with assured procurement and subsidized electricity, creates perverse incentives for farmers to stick to the rice-wheat cycle, despite its ecological unsustainability. The article points out that the reluctance to diversify stems from 'uncertainties in storage options, prices, processing infrastructure, and supply chains' for alternative crops. Furthermore, the dropping water table increases the capital required for irrigation. Wealthier farmers can afford deeper tube wells and more powerful pumps, while marginal farmers cannot. This forces smaller farmers to buy water from larger ones, creating 'unregulated dependencies' and transferring wealth upwards, thereby widening rural inequality. The scheme , which offers cash incentives for saving electricity, is a step towards aligning economic incentives with conservation, though its low enrollment suggests structural challenges remain.
Governance
From a governance perspective, the state must balance its mandate to ensure food security and farmer welfare with environmental sustainability. The article suggests that state interventions should aim to 'protect farmers' incomes and access to irrigation while rendering the cost of additional extraction prohibitive.' A key governance reform could involve redesigning the electricity subsidy. Instead of providing free power, the state could use part of the subsidy bill to 'directly support smallholder farmers, help collectivise irrigation infrastructure, and/or support farmers’ transition to other crops.' Crucially, welfare policies should target the 'cultivator, including tenants,' rather than just the landowners, to ensure equitable access to resources. This requires robust institutional mechanisms to identify beneficiaries, monitor groundwater usage, and enforce regulations on extraction, moving away from a purely populist approach to a more sustainable and equitable governance model for water resources.