In recent months, GoI’s flagship programme, Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM), has come under scrutiny. In mid-August, a parliamentary panel headed by BJP Lok Sabha MP Rajiv Pratap Rudy raised concerns over the authenticity of data uploaded on JJM’s Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) and noted the absence of any annual assessment of tap water functionality in 2023.
In May, GoI sent teams to states for ground inspections of JJM implementation. This move followed the Expenditure Finance Committee’s (EFC) recommendation of a 46% reduction in additional funding sought for the mission. Jal Shakti ministry had requested Rs 2.79 trillion in central funding to complete JJM by December 2028, but EFC approved Rs 1.51 trillion, citing escalating costs and suspicions of inflated contracts in some states. The scheme was extended to 2028 in this year’s budget.
Water experts and non-profits that have worked on JJM, the world’s largest publicly funded water supply programme, point to several shortcomings for the current crisis.
Infra heavy: The programme has largely prioritised physical infrastructure—ensuring a tap in every household. This has led to extensive tendering, contracting, and large capital inflows. But infrastructure alone doesn’t guarantee water delivery. Installing a tap is easy; ensuring a reliable water supply through it is far more complex.
Speed kills: In India, groundwater is decentralised and highly variable, influenced by rainfall, geology, and aquifer characteristics. Sustainable water governance must be hyper-local, and building community ownership takes time. Rushed timelines have compromised these foundations. Behaviour change and capacity-building are harder to measure, so they’re often deprioritised. In reality, capacity building should precede infrastructure. Without it, ownership and accountability are unlikely to follow.
Fund absorption: The funding surge—from Rs 10,000 crore to several multiples of that—outpaced the system’s ability to absorb and use it efficiently. Planning and execution capacities weren’t strengthened beforehand, creating pressure to spend quickly and sometimes leading to misuse or inefficiencies.
Cost escalations: Costs vary significantly between regions like the Himalayas, Sundarbans, and the plains. Rising costs, already flagged by the finance ministry, may partly stem from the failure to account for these variations.
Misaligned KPIs: Heavy emphasis on metrics such as coverage and number of taps has encouraged competitive spending across states, but the system’s ability to deliver on this demand remains unclear. Until 2024, the mission’s focus was primarily on coverage—the hardware. The ‘software’—community training, behaviour change, and governance processes—was secondary. In many places, taps have been counted even if they’re not connected to functioning water sources.
State-specific: variability In most states, JJM is implemented through public health engineering departments (PHED) and not all states have performed well. There have been bright spots: in Bihar, for instance, there has been openness at the highest levels and even community contributions, signalling trust in the system and demand for assured services.
Speaking to ET, Bishwadeep Ghosh, country director, Water for People India—which has partnered with the government on JJM—outlined the way forward for the mission, or similar ground-level projects:
Continuity of services: A viable service delivery model is essential. Community members or institutions like SHGs or ASHA workers could be trained and paid as service providers. Most states currently lack financial mechanisms to support such models, but this must be addressed for long-term continuity.
Source sustainability: Over 90% of rural drinking water depends on groundwater, often of poor quality and at risk of depletion. Planning must prioritise source protection and recharge.
Wastewater management: Significant volumes of water generate greywater, which is still a resource. Strategies are needed to treat and reuse wastewater locally—closing the loop.
Behavioural change: People must value water, and that requires sustained engagement and trust-building.
Strengthening Panchayati Raj: Institutions (PRIs) PRIs are the constitutional fulcrum for decentralised governance. They must be empowered to oversee such large programmes. JJM needs a strong local cadre working with and through PRIs. Cross-departmental silos must be broken down to enable integrated water management.
The true test of such a public infrastructure project isn’t how many taps were installed—but whether water flows, communities take ownership, and systems sustain themselves long after the project’s official end.
In May, GoI sent teams to states for ground inspections of JJM implementation. This move followed the Expenditure Finance Committee’s (EFC) recommendation of a 46% reduction in additional funding sought for the mission. Jal Shakti ministry had requested Rs 2.79 trillion in central funding to complete JJM by December 2028, but EFC approved Rs 1.51 trillion, citing escalating costs and suspicions of inflated contracts in some states. The scheme was extended to 2028 in this year’s budget.
Water experts and non-profits that have worked on JJM, the world’s largest publicly funded water supply programme, point to several shortcomings for the current crisis.
Infra heavy: The programme has largely prioritised physical infrastructure—ensuring a tap in every household. This has led to extensive tendering, contracting, and large capital inflows. But infrastructure alone doesn’t guarantee water delivery. Installing a tap is easy; ensuring a reliable water supply through it is far more complex.
Speed kills: In India, groundwater is decentralised and highly variable, influenced by rainfall, geology, and aquifer characteristics. Sustainable water governance must be hyper-local, and building community ownership takes time. Rushed timelines have compromised these foundations. Behaviour change and capacity-building are harder to measure, so they’re often deprioritised. In reality, capacity building should precede infrastructure. Without it, ownership and accountability are unlikely to follow.
Fund absorption: The funding surge—from Rs 10,000 crore to several multiples of that—outpaced the system’s ability to absorb and use it efficiently. Planning and execution capacities weren’t strengthened beforehand, creating pressure to spend quickly and sometimes leading to misuse or inefficiencies.
Cost escalations: Costs vary significantly between regions like the Himalayas, Sundarbans, and the plains. Rising costs, already flagged by the finance ministry, may partly stem from the failure to account for these variations.
Misaligned KPIs: Heavy emphasis on metrics such as coverage and number of taps has encouraged competitive spending across states, but the system’s ability to deliver on this demand remains unclear. Until 2024, the mission’s focus was primarily on coverage—the hardware. The ‘software’—community training, behaviour change, and governance processes—was secondary. In many places, taps have been counted even if they’re not connected to functioning water sources.
State-specific: variability In most states, JJM is implemented through public health engineering departments (PHED) and not all states have performed well. There have been bright spots: in Bihar, for instance, there has been openness at the highest levels and even community contributions, signalling trust in the system and demand for assured services.
Speaking to ET, Bishwadeep Ghosh, country director, Water for People India—which has partnered with the government on JJM—outlined the way forward for the mission, or similar ground-level projects:
Continuity of services: A viable service delivery model is essential. Community members or institutions like SHGs or ASHA workers could be trained and paid as service providers. Most states currently lack financial mechanisms to support such models, but this must be addressed for long-term continuity.
Source sustainability: Over 90% of rural drinking water depends on groundwater, often of poor quality and at risk of depletion. Planning must prioritise source protection and recharge.
Wastewater management: Significant volumes of water generate greywater, which is still a resource. Strategies are needed to treat and reuse wastewater locally—closing the loop.
Behavioural change: People must value water, and that requires sustained engagement and trust-building.
Strengthening Panchayati Raj: Institutions (PRIs) PRIs are the constitutional fulcrum for decentralised governance. They must be empowered to oversee such large programmes. JJM needs a strong local cadre working with and through PRIs. Cross-departmental silos must be broken down to enable integrated water management.
The true test of such a public infrastructure project isn’t how many taps were installed—but whether water flows, communities take ownership, and systems sustain themselves long after the project’s official end.
KumKum Dasgupta