It is challenging to quantify and manage non-point sources of water pollution – pollution that does not come from industrial and sewage treatment plants – due to their fuzzy flow, uncertain distribution area and variable pollution load. In rural India, livestock waste, on-site sanitation systems, and agricultural runoff are major contributors. The dry and wet weather flows carry and infiltrate contaminants from these sources and contaminate groundwater and surface water resources.
Numerous studies have reported nitrate and faecal contamination above WHO drinking water standards in groundwater and surface water sources in rural and peri-urban India. In the absence of regular water quality testing, this leads to water-borne and water-washed diseases. Water-borne diseases are much more prevalent in rural areas (64%) when compared with urban areas (36 %) due to a lack of water treatment and sanitation techniques.
Despite these findings, non-point sources of pollution did not gain enough attention in India until recently. Regulatory frameworks and policies in India lack clear mandates and strategies addressing the issue.
Sewage diversion and other unattended goals
The Ganga Action Plan (GAP), with the objective of improving water quality in the Gangetic basin, took an explicit initiative in incorporating the management of some non-point sources like open defecation, agricultural runoff, and livestock wastes into policy objectives through its non-core schemes. It was successful in diverting nalas (open drains) carrying dry and wet weather flows into sewage treatment plants (STPs) and reducing open defecation through low-cost community toilets. This reduced the organic load in the middle stretch of the river by 50% as a result of diverting 65% of untreated sewage from Ganga towns into STPs.
However, the plan had major lacunas in the design aspects, coverage of objectives, and policy implementation. GAP completely failed to address pollution from agricultural runoff and livestock wastes since it was deemed unimportant during the implementation phase and hence attracted meagre funding.
Roughly 20% of STPs constructed under GAP were overloaded, discharging untreated sewage to the river and about 80% were under-loaded, leading to dead investments in STPs. The water quality discharge standards for the river set by the GAP committee and the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) did not corroborate with each other, with the former deemed arbitrary and unscientific. Gaps in existing pollution abatement laws and ambiguities regarding discharge standards have led to bottlenecks in the plan.
Representative image. Ganga ghats in Varanasi, May 6, 2021. Photo: PTI
Judicious fertiliser use
The last decade has seen some policy interventions to address pollution from agriculture and livestock waste. The National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture, operational since 2015, advocates for the conservation and sustainable use of natural resources. The policy promotes judicious chemical use and enhanced water use efficiency to reduce the consequences of agricultural run-off.
The Soil Health Management component under the mission has successfully conducted activities to train and demonstrate the balanced use of fertilisers. It has also issued Soil Health Cards to the farmers to incorporate and update the details of the nutritional status of their soil and the required dosage of fertilisers. The scheme has achieved above 90% implementation target in 20 states and UTs so far. The awareness of the scheme among the farmers was high which led to its success. It has been reported to achieve an 8-10% reduction in fertiliser application in the country and subsequently a 5-6% improvement in the crop yield.
The shift from conventional agriculture to sustainable agriculture is time-consuming and needs financial and institutional support. The success of such initiatives is conducive to the confidence of farmers, locally adaptable designs (for example, availability of micronutrients) well-established institutional mechanisms for awareness and support, soil testing facilities, agricultural financing, and risk incentives.
Waste to energy
Biogas is an age-old practice for agricultural and livestock waste management in India. The biogas sector has evolved to use new feedstock materials such as kitchen waste, agricultural waste and market waste (organic). The National Biogas and Manure Management Programme was established to promote the switch to renewable energy and farm waste management, it provides provision for the deployment of simple-to-construct and easy-to-operate family-type biogas plants. About 49.5 lakhs of household biogas plants have been deployed under the scheme till 2018. Gujarat, Kerala, Maharashtra, Mizoram, and Sikkim have displayed a good percentage (>65%) of biogas plant installation achievement over the potential.
The Ministry of New and Renewable Energy provides financial incentives, such as interest and capital subsidies for investing in renewable energy technologies. These policies provide incentives for sustainable waste management, thereby preventing the open dumping of livestock wastes.
Community awareness of non-point sources and their involvement is key in non-point source pollution management. It ensures the successful implementation and sustainability of interventions. The Galvanizing Organic Bio-Agro Resources (GOBARdhan) scheme under the Swachh Bharat Mission Gramin successfully deployed 561 biogas plants providing community-level decentralised solutions for livestock and agricultural waste management in 149 districts of India. The successful implementation and 100% coverage of this scheme can prevent pollution from livestock waste to a great extent.
Some gram panchayats have displayed good progress in the management of livestock wastes. In Rajpur village of Uttar Pradesh, the sarpanch Priyanka Tiwari was successful in collecting and diverting wastewater from the village through silt chambers into collection pits. To reduce the contaminant infiltration, runoff, and clogging of drains by cow dung and animal litter, villagers were asked to relocate and store the pile away from drains, roads, and wet areas.
These interventions successfully reduced the pollution load, removed the pollution sources from the vicinity of water resources and also promoted community accountability.
Vague policies, loose legal frameworks, lack of clear financial models, and overlapping responsibilities were some of the weaknesses of many action plans for water pollution control in India. Learning from these lacunae, recent schemes addressing livestock and agricultural waste management in rural areas like Swachh Bharat Mission, Jal Jeevan Mission etc. highlight the importance of convergence of schemes for better coordination, clarity of responsibilities and fund transfer. Subsequently, national agendas and policies that resonate with community aspirations have been implemented successfully. Structural interventions co-designed and co-managed with local stakeholders have proven to be effective in curbing non-point source pollution in India. Therefore, reducing and managing non-point sources of pollution in the country will require rigid policy framework, practical financial models and community involvement and commitment.
The author thanks Muhil Nesi and Gauravjeet Singh for their suggestions for improving the article.
Anjali V. Raj is a natural science researcher working in Bangalore.
