In the last week of September, Nepal’s upper Koshi catchment area received the heaviest rainfall ever recorded in the region’s history. The unprecedented rainfall triggered landslides and flooding, resulting in 246 fatalities, over 16,000 families being affected and extensive damages to physical infrastructures, including roads, electricity and water supply systems. While over 50 districts were afflicted, Kavrepalanchowk was hit the hardest.

Despite the immediate response from different directions, a detailed factual analysis has not emerged yet. However, previous studies have highlighted the region's increasing environmental challenges and potential for disaster. These underline the significant loss of water sources and rapid land use changes in the Roshi catchment area, where agriculture and pastoral lands have been increasingly converted for stone mining. The debris accumulation from the mining activities along the Roshi River banks posed a serious risk. Eventually, such continuous environmental exploitation resulted in heavy rains that caused severe flooding in the river.

Impact on water supply

The flooding of the Roshi has impacted two big water supply systems supplying water to Dhulikhel, Panauti and Banepa. These projects, which draw water from the upstream tributaries of the Roshi to supply the cities downstream, were completely disrupted after the flood washed away the main pipelines and other physical infrastructures. Although floodwaters have receded and the downstream users in Dhulikhel are attempting to restore the water supply system, they face resistance from upstream communities. The people living upstream, whose water supply system was severely damaged, demand that their local supply system be rebuilt before restoring the downstream supply. This has led to a confrontation between upstream and downstream users over their continuous water sharing.

This is not the only example of a disaster which has exposed the vulnerability of Nepal’s water infrastructure. A destructive flood in Melamchi in June 2021 was caused by the sudden landslides that blocked the river after incessant rainfall damaged the Melamchi Water Supply Project. The project supplies water to Kathmandu Valley. It took over a year to restore water from this project, which is closed during the monsoon season. Similarly, the landslide from the 2015 Gorkha earthquake swept away pipelines of the Bidur Water Supply Project, causing the people to rely on a hodgepodge of alternatives until the renovation of the system.

Nepal's bigger water supply systems that transport water from distant sources in the mid-hills are highly vulnerable to disaster events. The recurring damage and destruction to the bigger water supply systems from the disasters in the mid-hills of Nepal have raised some critical issues. The region’s hydrological regime has been disrupted repeatedly due to the changing climate, destructive development practices and rapid land use changes. Consequently, several springs that could serve as alternatives to bigger water supply systems are gradually drying up. When an important water supply system is damaged, a considerable investment is wasted, and substantial time and resources are required for reconstruction. Moreover, consumers face higher costs during slow rebuilding, as in our case.

In most cities, once the water supply is distributed through a large-scale project, there is a tendency to neglect previously relied upon smaller water sources, such as small springs, traditional wells and stone spouts. Without proper conservation, these local sources dry up over time, further disrupting the hydrological system. These sources could become important alternatives when the bigger water supply systems are disrupted. This is prevalent in the cases from Kathmandu, Bidur and Dhulikhel, as when the major systems in the regions failed, people were forced to travel long distances to fetch water, pay higher costs to tankers and bottling companies and compromise on the basic household needs in the absence of local alternatives.

As the cities in the mid-hill region source water from upstream villages, they must continually negotiate with upstream users to secure access to water. The bigger water supply projects can only be built after this contentious issue is settled through negotiations and agreements for cooperation. However, Dhulikhel’s case has shown that when the water supply system is damaged, either by disaster or other causes, these carefully negotiated agreements can be disrupted, reigniting old tensions.

Bigger water supply systems offer new potentials but also disrupt old relations and customs around water. These often lead to conflicts and disparities in water access within and beyond the towns. Most emerging Nepali towns invest in bigger water supply projects with loans from international donor organisations. Users are charged higher installation costs and water tariffs to repay the loans. Once regarded as a communal service and human right, it has become a commodity traded on the market. This shift has become detrimental to the urban poor and communal tap users, raising significant concerns about people’s fundamental right to access basic water services. These sort of emerging challenges related to large-scale water supply systems in growing cities have prompted the need to reconsider approaches and explore alternative solutions for making cities more water-resilient.

Diversification of water sources is a crucial strategy for cities to achieve water resilience. Several studies have highlighted the importance of small-scale and locally managed schemes. We should not underestimate these initiatives, as they can serve as lifelines during crises, ensuring water access for individuals with limited financial resources.

Water management

Regarding water management, cities must prioritise self-organised community-based schemes, often more sustainable than market-oriented bigger water supply systems. The notion of community and mutual sharing in smaller schemes is more effective during the construction of new projects and in rebuilding post-disaster. Hence, different from market-based ‘payment for ecosystem services’ schemes, organically maintained upstream-downstream cooperation for water sharing, often called the reciprocal water shared agreement, could facilitate hydrosolidarity between the users.

There is a pressing need for strong regulations to conserve water sources and ensure the sustainability of water infrastructures. Current practices, such as stone mining, road construction and other infrastructure building near water sources and along the pipelines, require serious reassessment. Local governments and community-based water user committees must become vigilant of these issues to promote better practices.

The water supply system is a fundamental aspect of urban planning. Sustainable water management should be central to the agenda of upcoming city planning and urban development initiatives. A city-specific collaborative platform with a regular dialogue among experts, municipal leaders, and upstream and downstream water users could aid in exploring solutions for making cities water resilient.