In a country where nearly 600 million people face high to extreme water stress and where per capita water availability has dropped sharply from 5,177 m³ in 1951 to about 1,400 m³ today, water security has rightly taken centre stage in policy discussions.
The government’s flagship plan, the National River Linking Project (NRLP), proposes nothing short of a hydrological transformation on a grand scale: linking over 60 rivers, building a canal network of 15,000 km, connecting 3,000 reservoirs, and transferring 174 billion m³ of water every year from the so-called surplus basins to deficit regions.
The price tag? A staggering Rs 8.5 lakh crore (around $168 billion), a figure that could rise to Rs 21.9 lakh crore as inflation, execution delays, and project complexities pile up.
At the heart of this ambitious programme is the Ken-Betwa Link Project (KBLP), the first river-linking project to take off on the ground. With an estimated cost of Rs 44,605 crore ($5.06 billion), the KBLP plans to divert water from the Ken River in Madhya Pradesh to the Betwa River in Uttar Pradesh.
The promise is irrigation for 10.6 lakh hectares of farmland, drinking water supply for 62 lakh people, and 130 MW of hydropower generation along with solar energy. The key infrastructure includes a 77-metre-high Daudhan Dam and a 221-km canal cutting across the drought-hit Bundelkhand region.
However, as work begins, serious cracks are emerging in the grand narrative.
The Human Cost: The project is set to displace at least 21 villages, home to over 7,000 families, many of whom belong to the Gond and Kol tribal communities. It is not just about losing farmland—ancestral homes, cultural heritage, and forest-based livelihoods all are at stake. The compensation being offered ranges from a meagre Rs 7.5 lakh to Rs 12.5 lakh per household, barely enough to buy equivalent land elsewhere, let alone rebuild lives from scratch.
Sadly, this is not the first time India has witnessed “development” at the cost of its marginalised communities. For families who have never had electricity in their own homes, losing land to generate power for others feels like the ultimate betrayal.
Ignoring Ecology: One of the biggest ecological casualties of the Ken-Betwa project is the Panna Tiger Reserve—a sanctuary where tigers were carefully reintroduced after local extinction in 2009. The project will submerge nearly 98 sq km of this delicate ecosystem, amounting to 18% of the reserve’s core area—putting at risk not only tigers but also gharials, vultures, and many other species unique to this habitat.
While the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) has cleared the project, the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) has flagged this clearance as a violation of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. The law clearly prohibits such diversion of river flows unless it directly benefits the wildlife—a condition that has not been convincingly demonstrated here. Independent experts, including those appointed by the Supreme Court, have also raised serious doubts about the project’s hydrological assumptions and its ecological justification.
To make matters worse, the project’s assessment of “surplus” water in the Ken basin is based on yield estimates from as far back as 2003, failing to consider updated hydrological data and the increasing uncertainties posed by climate change.
The Climate Challenge: The core idea of moving “surplus” water from one basin to another overlooks the profound changes in rainfall patterns brought about by climate change. India’s monsoon, which provides 80% of its annual rainfall, has become highly erratic. Recent estimates warn that inter-basin water transfers could actually reduce rainfall in dry regions like Rajasthan by up to 12% while increasing rainfall in wetter basins by around 10%—thus worsening both droughts and floods.
Research from IIT Bombay suggests that large-scale irrigation from river-linking could disrupt local land-atmosphere feedback loops, potentially affecting the monsoon cycle across the subcontinent. History offers sobering lessons from the ecological disasters of the Kissimmee River restoration in the US, the shrinking Aral Sea, and other large-scale hydrological interventions.
It is important to recognise that India’s water crisis is not just about scarcity. Mismanagement, pollution, and over-extraction of groundwater—which currently provides 85% of rural and 50% of urban drinking water—are the real culprits.
The Economic Reality Check: With Rs 45,000 crore earmarked for the Ken-Betwa project alone, the economic feasibility of such ventures deserves close examination. Once maintenance, ecological restoration, and rehabilitation costs are included, the expenses could easily double over the project’s lifetime. Moreover, the risk of ongoing legal disputes and social unrest cannot be ignored.
A key question arises: what if these massive investments were directed instead towards micro-irrigation, rainwater harvesting, wastewater recycling, or smart technologies like IoT-based precision agriculture? Studies show that micro-irrigation alone can improve water-use efficiency by 30-70% and increase crop yields by 20-90%—without displacing people or harming wildlife.
Global examples should also serve as cautionary tales. China’s South-North Water Transfer Project displaced over three lakh people and caused widespread ecological damage. Australia’s Snowy River scheme and the diversions of the Colorado River in the US offer similar warnings against interfering with natural water systems.
Yet, India seems determined to follow the same path, positioning river-linking as the ultimate solution for water scarcity.
The Smarter Path Ahead: Rather than relying solely on heavy engineering, India should focus on integrated water resource management at the basin level. This includes improving demand-side efficiency, encouraging water-saving technologies, and promoting decentralised, community-led solutions.
Local innovations like the Mangal Turbine, developed by a farmer in Bundelkhand in 1987 as a low-cost irrigation alternative, are examples of homegrown ideas that deserve more attention and support.
Further, strengthening River Basin Authorities under Article 262 of the Constitution, alongside effective interstate cooperation and transparent public participation, could resolve disputes and lead to more sustainable outcomes.
India’s river-linking projects, portrayed as marvels of modern engineering, risk becoming monuments to ecological neglect and social injustice. If we truly want water security that is resilient to climate change, we must approach nature with humility, not arrogance.
Before the next dam is sanctioned, we must ask the most fundamental question: Whose water is it, and at what price are we choosing to move it?
Mohapatra is with IIT Jodhpur, and Mitra is with NCAER New Delhi. Views are personal.
