We have a tendency to think of ourselves as unique, that our present time is particularly special, and that our challenges are overwhelming and insurmountable and worse than humankind has encountered before. Yes, the climate is changing rapidly now, and CO2 levels are the highest in several million years. Yes, inequality is both obscene and stark. Water consumption is one visible way that manifests—while some frolic in private swimming pools, others rappel down a dried-up well to gather water that oozes out slowly from the earth. One way to work ourselves out of this mess is to adopt a change in perspective. And one way to get a new perspective is to belie the exceptionalism bias, visit our past.
You see, the climate has changed in the past—many times, in fact. And when it has, it has often brought down dynasties—the collapse of the mighty Ming Dynasty of China may have been significantly influenced by the colder climate and poorer harvests in the 16th and 17th centuries. Closer to home, the chaos of 14th century Delhi that saw Sultanates rise and fall like skittles may have a climate footprint to it. Emerging evidence from the study of speleothems (aka stalagmites and stalactites) suggests that the volatility of India’s variable water increased during these episodes of changing climate. Successful leaders understood that the key to withstanding volatility was sound water management. And few gave better water management advice than Chanakya.
Chanakya is popularly considered a minister of Chandragupta Maurya, and the author of the Arthashastra, a manual of statecraft. Pertinently for our story, the Arthashastra provides a fascinating look into the philosophy of water in ancient times. All water belonged to the king, Chanakya decrees, which allowed a single authority to govern water. This is identical to the state of affairs in Singapore or Israel but stands in sharp contrast to that in India today where multiple government departments try to govern India’s water, while the djinni of groundwater makes the notion of governance farcical. Clarity helps management. Anarchy does not.
Chanakya also acknowledged the highly seasonal nature of India’s water as is clear from his water pricing. Chanakya’s water price (in contrast to his water fines) were not payable in cash —they were paid through labour or by share of the crop. The former curbed widespread or accidental profligacy—after all, few would squander water that had been laboriously hauled from a well. In agriculture, making the price payable by a share of crops, synchronised price with availability. During periods of drought, when harvests were poor, paying with a share of crop translated into farmers paying less. Contrast this with a fixed, cash tax that the British imposed. This meant during a drought when his crop had failed, a farmer had to borrow to pay tax, a change that embedded money lenders into Indian agriculture.
Chanakya further addressed the importance of progressive pricing of water. So, while everyone paid a water price, the wealthier farmers, who could transport water through mechanical means or through bullock cart, paid a higher water price than those who lifted water from an irrigation source manually. By getting larger users of water to pay more, Chanakya kept addressing inequality front-and-centre in his water philosophy. Contrast that with today, where wealthier farmers enjoy free water (thanks to free electricity to run their borewells), with some even turning into a source of revenue by selling the water they don’t need to neighbouring farmers who cannot afford a borewell. The situation mirrors the inequality in cities—gated communities enjoy manicured lawns watered by free groundwater while those in slums get by on less than a few bucketful’s of water per person per day procured through jostling by the women of the household. The Jal Jeevan mission is a welcome initiative to redress this imbalance.
Lastly, the primary source of irrigation in Chanakya’s time was the tank (which took the volatility and seasonality of India’s water in its stride) and whose administration was decentralised and the community took care of maintenance—in keeping with the varied nature of India’s water. Chanakya valued this maintenance, he gave tax breaks for it!
Today, thanks to climate inertia, warming and its effects are baked in. A highly vulnerable country like India must ramp up its climate resilience, where resilience begins with water management. From Chanakya’s perspective, that translates to a variable, seasonal, progressive price for India’s water, where communities are involved in its management.
Mridula Ramesh is a writer and Founder, Sundaram Climate Institute. You can find her on twitter: @mimiramesh