







































Ecology, Economy, and Society–the INSEE Journal 7(1): 29-46, January 2024 

THEMATIC ESSAY 
 

Inclusive Management of  Our Water Commons 

Rashmi R. Mahajan* and Manish Rajankar  

Abstract: In the past 75 years, since Independence, the central and state 
governments in India have implemented various measures for water management, 
which include initiatives to construct and revive small water bodies and wetlands. 
Schemes such as Amrit Sarovar, Amrit Dharohar, Jalyukta Shivar, and Galmukta 
Dharan-Galyukt Shivar are being implemented to revive small water bodies. 
However, these schemes have been criticised for their unsystematic planning and 
implementation and for benefiting an elite section of society while excluding people 
experiencing poverty. India is known for its traditional water harvesting systems and 
community-based management of water commons. Through a case study of 
grassroots-level management of small-scale waterbodies in eastern Maharashtra, this 
paper demonstrates the need to understand local dynamics and ground realities for 
inclusive and efficient water management.  

Keywords: Water management; Commons; Tanks; Irrigation; Fisheries; Conflict 

 

1. INTRODUCTION  

As we cross the 75th anniversary of India’s Independence, the central 
government has launched various events and schemes to celebrate Azadi ka 
Amrit Mahotsav (75th Independence Day celebration). The schemes focusing 
on waterbodies and wetlands in India include Mission Amrit Sarovar and 
Mission Amrit Dharohar. Mission Amrit Sarovar aims to construct or 
develop at least 75 ponds in every Indian district and help fight the acute 
water crisis in India (Mission Amrit Sarovar 2023). Mission Amrit Dharohar 
is part of the “Green Growth” priority, one of the seven priorities of the 
Indian Budget 2023–24. The scheme promotes the optimal use of wetlands 

 
* PhD student at the Academy for Conservation Science and Sustainability Studies, ATREE, 
Bengaluru, and the Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Manipal. 
rashmi.mahajan@atree.org  

 Director of the Foundation for Economic and Ecological Development, Nagpur. 
manishrajankar@gmail.com  

Copyright © Mahajan and Rajankar 2024. Released under Creative Commons Attribution © 

NonCommercial 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC 4.0) by the author.  

Published by Indian Society for Ecological Economics (INSEE), c/o Institute of Economic 
Growth, University Enclave, North Campus, Delhi 110007.  

ISSN: 2581–6152 (print); 2581–6101 (web).  

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37773/ees.v7i1.1161  

mailto:rashmi.mahajan@atree.org
mailto:manishrajankar@gmail.com
https://doi.org/10.37773/ees.v7i1.1161


 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [30] 

to enhance biodiversity, carbon stocks, eco-tourism opportunities, and 
income generation for local communities (Jha 2023). 

As India is rich in wetland ecosystems, the Indian government’s focus on and 
investment in reviving waterbodies and wetlands is a step in the right 
direction. According to the Ramsar Convention, most natural and artificial 
waterbodies and wetlands in India form wetland ecosystems, but only 75 
wetlands are listed as Ramsar sites (Banerjee et al. 2023; Ramsar 2023). For 
centuries, small waterbodies have formed the centre of the country’s 
traditional water-harvesting systems (Agarwal and Narain 1997; Mishra 1993; 
Reddy 1990). Traditional water-harvesting systems have provided numerous 
services, including meeting the domestic and livelihood needs of the rural 
population. But their importance has declined following Independence and 
they have fallen into disrepair (Reddy et al. 2018). Consequently, considering 
their importance and status, government schemes focusing on waterbodies 
and wetlands must draw learnings from current grassroots and community-
led initiatives targeting small waterbodies. They must focus not only on the 
success of community initiatives but also on the challenges communities face 
in the implementation process. 

In the last 75 years, various government initiatives and strategies for water 
management have been introduced. After Independence, the Indian 
government applied a top–down approach and built dams and canals to 
increase agricultural productivity in the developing nation (Iyer 2003; 
Palanisami and Meinzen-Dick 2001; Pradhan and Srinivasan 2022). 
Interlinking rivers in India to transfer water from surplus to deficit river 
basins is one of the proposed ideas under the top–down approach. However, 
researchers have criticized this approach because of its potential 
environmental and social impacts. Interlinking of rivers would not only 
disrupt river ecosystems but also displace people from their land and homes 
(Iyer 2014; Bandyopadhyay and Perveen 2004). 

The 1980s–90s saw the beginning of considerable opposition from civil 
society to the top–down, supply-oriented approach because of the social and 
environmental impacts of dams as well as the resistance from movements 
opposing corporate exploitation of water resources (Shah 2003; Raman 2005; 
Mehta 2010). Thus, the World Commission on Dams (WCD)—established 
in 1998—reviewed the effectiveness of dams. The main findings of the WCD 
assert that dams have failed in achieving their targets in terms of electricity 
production, ensuring water availability, and flood control. The report also 
highlights the social and environmental impacts of dams and recommends 
maximizing the efficiency of existing water systems (WCD 2000). The same 
period saw increasing demands for the devolution of water management to 
communities and the revival of small-scale, sustainable water management 



[31] Mahajan and Rajankar 

 
 

systems (Iyer 2008). The Indian government also adopted bottom-up 
initiatives, such as participatory watershed management, irrigation 
management transfer (IMT), and participatory irrigation management (PIM) 
(Menon et al. 2007).  

However, despite all these water management efforts in India, we are still 
learning to deal with challenges such as droughts, floods, and disputes over 
the sharing of water for drinking, irrigation, and other purposes. These 
challenges have persisted with time, indicating the need for a change in our 
approach to water management. Addressing water management challenges 
requires macro- and micro-level reforms (Thakkar and Harsha 2019).  

In this essay, we focus on one of the micro-scale water management systems, 
i.e., maji-malguzari (MM) tanks, which are a form of water commons in the 
eastern Vidarbha region of Maharashtra. Using the example of MM tanks, we 
highlight various issues in current management approaches and argue that 
water management approaches must be more inclusive in addressing water 
management challenges. To make this argument, we draw insights from two 
separate field studies conducted by the authors in the Bhandara and Gondia 
districts between 2014 and 2021. The field studies include the first author’s 
PhD research on community-based water management of MM tanks and the 
second author’s research on freshwater biodiversity conservation with fishing 
communities. The case study presented in Section 2.6 is derived from the 
second author’s research as a part of the Maharashtra Genebank Programme 
(MGP) (ISSER 2020). 

2. WATER MANAGEMENT IN MAHARASHTRA 

The Indian state of Maharashtra is renowned for its various water 
management initiatives. It is well known for its traditional community-
managed systems such as the phad system in north-western Maharashtra and 
the MM tank system in the eastern Vidarbha region (Agarwal and Narain 
1997; Menon et al. 2007). The phad system is a 300-400-year-old community-
managed irrigation system in which a series of bandharas (diversion weirs) 
were built on rivers in the Tapi river basin to divert water for irrigation 
(Agarwal and Narain 1997). The MM tank system derives its name from the 
land tenure system prevalent during British rule in the central provinces. This 
community-based irrigation system was developed in central India during the 
pre-colonial period and continued during the colonial period (Mahajan et al. 
2021). Maharashtra has the highest number of large dams in India (2,354), 
constituting 41.29% of the large dams in the country (GoI 2018). It is a 
pioneering Indian state, having initiated the water-sector reform process 
through the Maharashtra State Water Policy, 2003; Maharashtra Management 



 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [32] 

of Irrigation Systems by Farmers (MMISF) Act, 2005; and the Maharashtra 
Water Resources Regulatory Authority Act (MWRRA), 2005 (SOPPECOM 
2012). These reforms highlight the need for water users to participate in water 
management and the need to ensure legislative support for participants. The 
state boasts success stories such as the initiatives implemented in Hivre-Bazar 
and Ralegan-Siddhi villages, renowned for their participatory watershed 
management and the Ozar water user associations (WUAs) movement 
(Paranjape et al. 2003). Though studies have highlighted equity- and 
participation-related issues, these ventures have improved water availability 
in a conventional sense by improving the overall efficiency of irrigation 
management of water structures and maintenance of WUA records 
(Sangameswaran 2008; Paranjape et al. 2003). 

Figure 1: State-wise Distribution of Large Dams (Completed and Under 
Construction) in India 

 

Source: National Register of Large Dams, Government of India (2018) 

Similarly, in its commitment to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 
2015, the Maharashtra State Water Policy, 2019, acknowledges the need to 
manage water resources sustainably and equitably. The policy dictates that 
the state is responsible for the effective development and management of 
water resources to achieve SDG-6 (ensuring clean water and sanitation for 
all), SDG-12 (ensuring sustainable consumption and production patterns), 
and SDG-15 (protecting, restoring, and promoting sustainable use of 
terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably managing forests, combating 
desertification, and halting degradation and biodiversity loss) (GoM 2019). 



[33] Mahajan and Rajankar 

 
 

However, the following example demonstrates that this acknowledgment of 
SDG goals does not translate to the implementation of legislations and 
schemes. In 2015 and 2017, the Maharashtra government promoted the 
flagship schemes, Jalyukta Shivar Abhiyan (JSA) (water-rich farmland 
scheme) and Galmukta Dharan-Galyukt Shivar (GDGS) (silt-free dam and 
silt-rich farms) for drought mitigation (Zade et al. 2020; Bhadbhade et al. 
2019), respectively. The JSA, launched in 2015, aimed to make 25,000 villages 
in Maharashtra drought-free between 2015 and 2019. According to a 
Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) report, the Maharashtra 

government spent ₹9,633.75 crore under the JSA on 6.41 lakh works during 
2015–19 (CAG 2020). In 2019, there was a claim that the JSA1 projects had 
helped improve the crop yield in villages where works had been completed 
by bringing more area under irrigation (Jitendra 2019). However, the CAG 
report implies faults in project planning, implementation, and evaluation, and 
several researchers have criticized the scheme (Tiwale 2020). The main failing 
is that despite the JSA being a programme for de-siltation, state agencies 
carried out de-silting activities in rivers and nalas (streams) solely to 
demonstrate water storage during the rainy season. This was, however, done 
without conducting an environmental assessment of river flows or a scientific 
assessment of the levels of silt in the riverbed. Bhadbhade et al. (2019) also 
highlight the poor participation of people due to a lack of awareness of the 
scheme and the construction of poor-quality physical structures under the 
JSA. 

Thus, the state’s focus appears to be limited to immediate outcomes and 
benefits instead of sustainable water management that considers ground 
realities. Especially in the case of small-scale water commons, which are also 
multiple-use commons, consumptive uses such as irrigation and revenue 
generation through fisheries are given priority over the role of the commons 
in supporting rural domestic activities, local biodiversity, and groundwater 
recharge needs (Meinzen-Dick and Bakker 1999). Moreover, different 
governing bodies focus on functions such as irrigation and fisheries, ignoring 
the interactions and conflicts between various uses (Rajankar 2011b). In such 
cases, legislations such as the MMISF and schemes such as JSA—which 
focus primarily on irrigation and increasing water storage—fall short. These 
legislations and schemes do not engage with the many functions associated 

 
1 The Maharashtra Remote Sensing Application Centre (MRSAC) has developed an 

application for the Water Conservation Department, Government of Maharashtra, where 
village-wise information can be gathered about the work completed as part of JSA by various 
government departments such as agriculture, irrigation, revenue, and forest. 



 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [34] 

with multiple-use commons and often focus on economic gain or short-term 
solutions to water-related issues (Bhadbhade et al. 2019). 

2.1 Maji-Malguzari Tanks 

The MM tanks in the eastern Vidarbha region of Maharashtra are artificial 
water reservoirs whose construction began during the pre-colonial period, 
dating back to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries when the Gonds ruled 
in central India (Russell 1908). To increase revenue from agriculture, Gond 
kings invited communities to clear forests, built irrigation tanks, and 
promoted the cultivation of cash crops—such as paddy and sugarcane—in 
high-rainfall areas (Pallavi 2014). The story of the settlement of the Kohli 
community on a Gond king’s invitation is well known in local areas; the 
Kohlis were known for their tank-building skills (Paranjpye 2004; Rajankar 
2011a; Majmudar 2020). The Marathas, who ruled in central India after the 
Gonds, further encouraged tank building by renewing the leases of patels, who 
made improvements to their villages by investing in tank construction and 
agriculture (Russell 1908). During the Gond and Maratha periods, the king 
appointed the patel, who bore the responsibility for revenue collection and 
administration in the designated area (Rajankar and Dolke 2001). 

The spread of tanks in eastern Vidarbha districts is such that every village has 
one or more tanks of varying sizes. According to a 2012 report, there are 
6,828 MM tanks in the eastern Vidarbha region, and their irrigation potential 
is 147,903 ha (Kimmatkar 2012). Residents of some villages have even built 
an irrigation system with a network of interconnected tanks to collect as 
much rainfall as possible (Paranjpye 2004). At present, MM tanks are an 
essential part of paddy irrigation, the staple crop in this region. Initially, tanks 
were mainly constructed for irrigation, but they gradually became an essential 
part of other livelihood-supporting activities such as fishing and the 
extraction and sale of vetiver grass, lotus flowers and stems, and water 
chestnuts (Trapa natans; variety: Bispinosa). In addition, tanks are habitats for 
various aquatic flora and fauna, serve as sources for groundwater recharge, 
and support several domestic and cultural activities (Rajankar 2011a; IISER 
2020). 

Under British rule, in the 1860s, the alternative term, malguzar, was coined for 
patel, when the malguzari class was established as part of a land-settlement 
strategy. The malguzar was in charge of revenue collection and 
administration (Velankar 2011; Harnetty 1987). Malguzars benefited from the 
surplus revenue generation and invested their efforts in tank-building and 
maintenance activities (Rajankar and Dolke 2001).  

The management and use of MM tanks evolved slowly. During the pre-
colonial and colonial periods, the responsibility for MM tank management, 



[35] Mahajan and Rajankar 

 
 

repair, and water distribution rested with the villagers and was overseen by 
the patel/malguzar. A committee of farmers was established to address water 
distribution and conflict resolution. The committee appointed a pankar (water 
distributor) to release water according to the decided distribution schedule 
and ensure no farmer broke the committee rules. Farmers paid the pankar in 
cash or kind. When farmers broke irrigation canals adjoining their farms to 
take irrigation water out of turn, consequently affecting water distribution 
and committee regulations, the committee suspended access to water for the 
farmers until the following year or till the dues were paid (Paranjpye 2004). 

After Independence, the Indian government abolished the malguzari system 
in 1950 by enacting the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights 
(Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands) Act, 1950. After this abolition and 
following the formation of Maharashtra state in 1960, tank management 
became the state’s responsibility. The government renamed tanks “maji-
malguzari” (ex-malguzari) (Mahajan et al. 2021). Tank-management duties 
were divided among various state-governed irrigation bodies based on the 
irrigation capabilities of the tanks. Smaller tanks with an irrigation potential 
<100 ha were transferred to the zilla parishad’s (district council) minor 
irrigation department, and larger tanks with an irrigation potential >100 ha 
were transferred to the Maharashtra State Irrigation Department (Kimmatkar 
2012). These governing bodies became responsible for developing the tanks’ 
irrigation potential and overseeing the water distribution process.  

The irrigation department took over tank-management responsibilities and 
implemented changes in tank structures—including modifying old tank 
structures such as tank irrigation gates, embankments, overflow structures, 
and irrigation canals—to improve the water storage and command area. 
While these changes helped make tank structures more enduring, they 
increased villagers’ dependence on the irrigation department. Moreover, the 
irrigation department applied modern engineering techniques without 
consulting tank users. The villagers thus slowly became dependent on the 
irrigation department if tank structures needed significant repair. 

In addition to irrigation-related changes, the Maharashtra government 
promoted the formation of fishery cooperative societies in the 1970s to 
increase the economic benefits from fishing. The Maharashtra Fisheries 
Department and panchayat samiti2 leased tanks to fishing communities in the 
region. The fisheries department introduced Indian major carps (IMCs) such 
as Catla (Catla catla), Rohu (Labeo rohita), and Mrigal (Cirrhinus mrigala). 

 
2 A taluka or a subdivision of a district-level governing body in a three-tier Panchayati Raj 

system. 



 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [36] 

Production and profits for fishers were large in the beginning. However, IMC 
species slowly replaced indigenous fish species because of compatibility 
issues (Rajankar 2011b). Introducing IMCs and fishing techniques involving 
drag nets negatively affected the aquatic biodiversity and habitat, 
consequently negatively impacting IMC yields (Khandekar 2020). Thus, such 
interventions without a proper understanding of local management practices, 
ecology, and livelihoods gave rise to various management challenges and 
conflicts. 

2.2 Management Challenges 

Considering the expanse of tanks, routine tank management became a 
considerable challenge for the government. The first irrigation commission 
recommended collecting fees for using irrigation water from MM tanks. 
However, descendants of malguzars filed and won a Supreme Court case 
against this decision (Majmudar 2020). Farmers with free irrigation rights 
called nistar rights—documented in the Nistar-Patrak—get free water for 
Kharif crop irrigation (Velankar 2011). Most farmers with nistar rights belong 
to the dominant castes3 in the region and have strong political networks. 
Fishers4 belonging to the Nomadic Tribes (NT) category and small farmers 
belonging to the Scheduled Caste (SC) or Scheduled Tribe (ST) categories 
with nistar rights are rare and have received those rights through land 
purchase. Enforcement of free irrigation rights for the primary crop 
cultivation season has led to less revenue generation from the tanks and, 
subsequently, loss of interest on the irrigation department’s part in their 
management (Majmudar 2020). 

The state irrigation department also formed WUAs to manage MM tanks, 
but several remain only on paper. Moreover, there is reluctance on the part 
of farmers and the government to maintain formally registered WUAs. 
Farmers believe that formalization is a burden, as it demands extensive 
record-keeping and legal obligations to follow complicated rules. In the 
government’s case, this entails a monetary and resource burden to monitor 
something that offers little revenue. In turn, villagers needing water for their 
crops have formed informal water management committees (WMC) in their 
villages. They took over the water distribution and basic maintenance of 
tanks and canals when they realized that depending on the government would 
not ensure water for irrigation. Thus, villagers adopted the same water 
distribution and management techniques followed during the malguzari 

 
3 Dominant castes in this area include Kohli, Kunbi, and Teli, which belong to the Other 

Backward Castes (OBC) category. 
4 Fishers belong to the Dhiwar/Dhinwar Caste, which is categorized as a Nomadic Tribe 

(B). 



[37] Mahajan and Rajankar 

 
 

period. With no support, recognition, or formal mechanisms to induce 
equitable participation, informal systems work with varying levels of 
efficiency in each village. For example, in Bolde village, where the WMC head 
is actively encouraging tank water management, irrigation, and water 
distribution, WMC record-keeping is up to date. In contrast, in Bampewada 
village, there are multiple conflicts over water distribution and tank 
encroachment. In villages where WMCs are actively managing tank water, 
large farmers’ interests take precedence over the concerns of farmers without 
nistar rights and fishers. As a result, poor farmers and fishers are at the mercy 
of large farmers for water access. 

2.3 Conflicts over Multiple Water Uses 

Dropping tank water levels in summers lead to conflicts among farmers, 
fishers, and livestock owners. Considering this, a Maharashtra government 
resolution (GR)5 from 1990 directed the halting of irrigation using tank water 
once the water levels reached dead storage levels. This directive intended to 
maintain water levels for fisheries and livestock. However, farmers do not 
follow these provisions in practice. The low-water-level period coincides with 
summer paddy crop cultivation. When farmers’ private irrigation sources are 
inadequate, they use diesel pumps to access tank water. The use of these 
pumps becomes a source of conflict, causing tensions between farmers and 
fishers. Simultaneously, fishers are held responsible for unsettling water 
through fishing activities, thus rendering it undrinkable for livestock. 

There are conflicts not only between farmers and fishers but also among 
farmers themselves. Farmers who do not have nistar rights constantly 
struggle and negotiate with other farmers to get tank water, even if they have 
a permit from the irrigation department to access tank water for irrigation. 
Large farmers from dominant castes possess land in areas that are reachable 
by irrigation; they have also dug borewells on their farms. The increasing 
construction of borewells within the catchment and command areas of tanks 
has begun to affect the water storage in MM tanks. Moreover, large farmers 
are utilizing the communal water source for personal benefit. Thus, there is 
a strong need for an effective mechanism to address these issues. 

2.4 Budgetary Allocations 

Though the Dandekar Committee Report (1984) on the regional imbalance 
in Maharashtra highlights Vidarbha as a mainly underdeveloped region in 
Maharashtra, it notes that irrigation development in Bhandara, Chandrapur, 

 
5 Government resolution on maintaining water levels in a tank: GR No.PTN1089/14376/35 

(dated July 9, 1990). 



 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [38] 

and Nagpur districts was good.6 While malguzari tanks were deteriorating, 
funds were not allocated for their development. However, later reports on 
MM tanks (Kimmatkar 2008, 2012) and the Kelkar Committee Report (2013) 
highlight the importance of MM tanks for irrigation and fisheries. The Kelkar 

Committee recommended a ₹2,520 crore budget for MM tanks, which was 
38.2% of the water-sector allocation. Based on this recommendation, the 
Government of Maharashtra allocated revenue for MM tanks under the JSA, 
GDGS, Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act 
(MGNREGA), and MM tank restoration schemes. Works undertaken 
through these schemes mainly involved the de-siltation of MM tanks and the 
repair of canal structures. In the case of fisheries, the state fisheries 
department only allocates 3% of its overall budget to freshwater fisheries, but 
the allocated budget is focused on the aquaculture of commercial fish species 
and not indigenous fish species. 

2.5 The Negative Impact of Government Interventions  

During our field interactions, farmers contended that paddy irrigation should 
take precedence over fishing as the main use for tank water. Simultaneously, 
aquatic biodiversity receives no consideration from the government. In the 
case of MM tanks, we also observed this attitude during JSA and GDGS 
implementation. Tank de-siltation is essential as it increases the tank’s 
capacity to store water and provides nutrient-rich silt to farms. However, in 
many waterbodies where tank de-siltation works were conducted, favoured 
machinery included mechanical excavators, which unevenly dug tank beds 
and affected the aquatic flora and fauna. Destruction of aquatic flora and 
fauna negatively impacts native and introduced fish species as it alters the 
habitat of the native species and the food sources of the introduced species 
(Majmudar 2020). Additionally, fishers complained of uneven tank beds 
affecting their fishing activity. According to them, the best way to de-silt 
tanks is manual excavation, wherein silt can be removed without damaging 
the plants and soil underneath.7 

In the following section, we present a case study from the eastern Vidarbha 
region to showcase how an inclusive approach can be used to efficiently 
manage MM tanks and dependent livelihoods.  

 

 

 
6 In 1984, the Gondia district was part of the Bhandara district, and the Gadchiroli district 

was part of the Chandrapur district. 
7 This has been successfully implemented in some tanks by an NGO in the region with the 

help of local fishers, and positive results achieved (Rajankar 2023). 



[39] Mahajan and Rajankar 

 
 

Figure 2: Indigenous Fish Production Before and After Habitat Restoration 

 

Source: BNVSAM and MGP Database (IISER 2020) 

2.6 Inclusive Approach 

A non-profit organization (NGO) called Bhandara Nisarga Va Sanskruti 
Abhyas Mandal (BNVSAM) started working with fisherfolk in 2009, with the 
aim of reviving freshwater biodiversity in the MM tanks of Bhandara and 
Gondia districts. Between 2014 and 2021, they worked with 11 fishery 
cooperative societies to revive freshwater diversity in the tanks leased by 
fishery cooperatives. As part of the initiative, they made a wetland 
management plan with the fishers and conducted various works such as 
aquatic habitat development and the removal of the invasive species, Ipomoea 
fistulosa. For aquatic habitat development, they planted local aquatic plant 
species—submerged plants such as Hydrilla (Hydrilla verticilata), Coontail 
(Ceratophyllum demersum), and Tape Grass (Vallisneria spiralis); floating plants 
such as Water Snowflake (Nymphoides indicum) and Crested Floatingheart 
(Nymphoides hydrophylla); and partly submerged plants like Water Chestnut 
(Eleocharis dulcis) (Rajankar 2019). Following habitat restoration, the NGO 

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

632.31

1267.4

254.55
109.9

162.48

81…
3…

328.18 385

0

125.2

Result of Habitat Restoration on 
Indigenous Fish Production

Fish production in kg before restoration

Fish production in kg after restoration

% of rise in production



 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [40] 

workers and fisherfolk observed positive results in eight tanks as the yield of 
indigenous fish species increased, ranging from 125% and 1,200% (IISER 
2020). 

During their work with the fishers, primarily women and elderly fishers from 
fishing households, the NGO staff also discovered another overlooked issue, 
i.e., the role of fisheries in local food security. Indigenous fish species are 
known for their nutritional and medicinal value. Some indigenous fish 
species, such as Dadak (Channa striatus), Maral (Channa marulius), and Wagur 
(Clarius magur), are in high demand in local markets as they are known for 
their rich taste and nutritional value. These fish species also fetch more 
money compared to IMCs. The BNVSAM members took several steps to 
increase awareness of the importance of indigenous fish species and their 
availability. They encouraged fishery societies to ban the fishing of native 
species during their breeding period8 (IISER 2020; Majmudar 2020). Fishers 
also understood the importance of indigenous fish species during the 
COVID-19 pandemic. When commercial fisheries were affected by the 
lockdowns, local fish species came to the rescue of many rural households, 
fulfilling their monetary and nutritional requirements. No government 
policies currently promote the production of indigenous fish species. 
However, if fishery cooperative societies are given the resources to support 
indigenous fish species, they can help improve food and economic security. 

Before habitat development, many fishers complained about the reduced 
numbers and species of birds, which negatively affected the aquatic fauna. 
Habitat development of tanks also appears to increase the number and 
species of birds (see Figures 3 and 4). 

In addition to their work on freshwater biodiversity, the NGO staff 
encouraged women from fishing households to form self-help groups 
(SHGs). These women SHGs are now participating in their villages’ mahila 
gram sabha (women assembly) and raising questions about the poor water 
governance of MM tanks. During the gram sabha, women demanded the 
inclusion of works such as Ipomoea extraction and tank de-siltation under the 
MGNREGA. Approval of tank de-siltation work through the MGNREGA 
has benefited tank biodiversity and provided employment opportunities to 
around 5,000 families (IISER 2020). A total of 15,967 people worked on 37 
jobs under the MGNREGA between 2019 and 2021 in 11 villages. Work 
under the MGNREGA included tank de-siltation and provided work for an 
average of 56 days to villagers. 

 
8 Fish travel upstream during the monsoons in search of suitable breeding habitats. This 

process is called reverse migration. 



[41] Mahajan and Rajankar 

 
 

Figure 3: Number of Bird Species Before and After Habitat Development Activity 

 

Source: BNVSAM and MGP Database (IISER 2020) 

Figure 4: Number of Birds Before and After Habitat Development Activity 

 

Source: BNVSAM and MGP Database (IISER 2020) 

This case study illustrates how an inclusive approach at the grassroots level 
can lead to benefits at various levels. 

0

5

10

15

20

25

13
11 12 12 13 13

7

11 10
12

17

9

22

14 13
1…

18 19
16

12 11
14

25

12

2016 no. of species 2019 no. of species

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

404

159
60 133 103 83 37 76 127 59

182
63

1641

199 102
280

137
297 252 228 163 72

221

8…

2016 no. of birds 2019 no. of birds



 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [42] 

3. CONCLUSION 

In this article, we highlight that water is not just a commodity to support 
occupations such as farming and fishing but also a system supporting 
biodiversity, groundwater, local livestock, and other domestic needs. 
However, this complexity does not manifest in the government’s current 
management approach. The state-governed bodies concerned with MM 
tanks operate individually, and interventions are often fragmented. Similarly, 
there are separate committees at the village level to manage irrigation and 
fisheries connected to MM tanks. This is necessary as these aspects require 
various kinds of expertise. However, there is also a need for a body that 
channels government support but provides autonomy and space to tank 
dependents to discuss their concerns on a single platform. It is essential to 
consider the maintenance of the tank catchment, water-spread area, and 
various structures, including canals. All tank-dependent farmers and fishers 
need to discuss how different activities are helping or hindering their 
livelihoods and their source of livelihoods, the MM tanks. Finding a balance 
between the needs of farmers, fishers, and other villagers is essential for 
sustainable long-term solutions. 

The intentions of schemes such as Amrit Sarovar, JSA, and GDGS are 
appreciated. However, such schemes are often forgotten after their initial 
success, until the next water issue or conflict occurs, and they are often 
criticized for not being grounded in the local context. We need long-term and 
sustainable solutions that involve community participation in finding, 
planning, and implementing these solutions (Bhadbhade et al. 2019). It has 
been proven time and time again that water management and governance 
issues cannot be solved by engineering solutions alone (Thakkar and Harsha 
2019). There is a need to approach water issues using a transdisciplinary lens 
where, in addition to economy and ecology, we focus on social and 
institutional factors influencing water management and governance to make 
it more inclusive (Ghosh 2018; Shah 2018). There is currently a gap between 
research and policy. Research highlights the multiple uses of commons and 
the complexities of managing conflicting interests, taking ground realities 
into consideration. However, this is not reflected in the policies or 
implemented schemes. Future research on water commons needs to focus 
on how the gap between research and policy can be minimized to make water 
management more effective. 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

This paper partially fulfills the publication requirements of Rashmi Mahajan’s 
PhD thesis at the Manipal Academy of Higher Education. The authors thank 



[43] Mahajan and Rajankar 

 
 

Dr. Jagdish Krishnaswamy, Pradeep Purandare, and Anuja Date for their 
comments and suggestions on a previous version of this article 

Ethics Statement: I hereby confirm that this study complies with requirements of 
ethical approvals from the institutional ethics committee for the conduct of this 
research.  

Data Availability statement: The data used to support this research cannot be 
shared openly to protect the privacy of study participants and is stated in the paper. 

Conflict of Interest Statement: No potential conflict of interest was reported by 
the author. 

REFERENCES 

Agarwal, Anil, and Sunita Narain. 1997. Dying Wisdom: Rise, Fall, and Potential of India’s 
Traditional Water-harvesting Systems. New Delhi: Centre for Science and Environment. 

Bandyopadhyay, Jayanta, and Shama Perveen. 2004. “Interlinking of Rivers in India: 
Assessing the Justifications.” Economic & Political Weekly 39 (50): 5307–16. 

Banerjee, Dhriti, Daizy Bharti, Santosh Kumar, Ankush Mitra, Rahul Joshi, and 
Devanshu Gupta. 2023. “Faunal Composition of Ramsar Wetlands from India: An 
Analysis.” Records of the Zoological Survey of India 123 (1S): 1–15. 
https://doi.org/10.26515/rzsi/v123/i1S/2023/172458. 

Bhadbhade, Neha, Sarita Bhagat, KJ Joy, Abraham Samuel, Kiran Lohakare, and 
Raju Adagale. 2019. “Can Jalyukt Shivar Abhiyan Prevent Drought in Maharashtra?” 
Economic & Political Weekly 54 (25): 12–14. 

CAG. 2020. Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on General & Social Sector 
and Public Sector Undertakings for the Year Ended 31 March 2019. New Delhi: Comptroller 
and Auditor General of India.  

Dandekar, VM. 1984. Report of the Fact-finding Committee on Regional Imbalance in 
Maharashtra. Mumbai: Planning Department, Government of Maharashtra. 

Ghosh, Nilanjan. 2018. “On Water Governance: From a Reductionist Paradigm to a 
Holistic One. Combining Ecology, Economics, Engineering, and Social Sciences in 
a Transdisciplinary Framework for Water Governance.” Ecology, Economy and Society 1 
(2): 69–72. https://doi.org/10.37773/ees.v1i2.36.   

GoI. 2018. National Register of Large Dams. New Delhi: Government of India, Central 
Water Commission. https://cwc.gov.in/sites/default/files/NRLD_06042018.pdf 

GoM. 2019. Maharashtra State Water Policy 2019. New Delhi: Government of 
Maharashtra, Water Resources Department. 
https://mwrra.maharashtra.gov.in/en/wpcontent/uploads/sites/2/2022/09/State
-Water-Policy-2019.pdf.     

Harnetty, Peter. 1987. “The Landlords and the Raj: The Malguzars of the Central 
Provinces, 1861–1921.” Studies in History 3 (2): 187–209. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/025764308700300203.  

https://doi.org/10.26515/rzsi/v123/i1S/2023/172458
https://doi.org/10.37773/ees.v1i2.36
https://mwrra.maharashtra.gov.in/en/wpcontent/uploads/sites/2/2022/09/State-Water-Policy-2019.pdf
https://mwrra.maharashtra.gov.in/en/wpcontent/uploads/sites/2/2022/09/State-Water-Policy-2019.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1177/025764308700300203


 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [44] 

IISER. 2020. Maharashtra Genebank Programme (MGP): A Multi-institutional Project 
Funded by Rajiv Gandhi Science & Technology Commission, Govt. of Maharashtra, Progress 
Report 2014–2020, Volume I. Pune: Government of Maharashtra. 

Iyer, Ramaswamy R. 2003. Water: Perspectives, Issues, Concerns. New Delhi: Sage 
Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9788132103813  

———. 2008. “National and Regional Water Concerns: Setting the Scene.” In Water 
First: Issues and Challenges for Nations and Communities in South Asia, edited by Kuntala 
Lahiri-Dutt and Robert J Wasson. 3–30. New Delhi: Sage Publications. 

———. 2014. “Interlinking of Rivers: A Plea to the Government.” Economic & 
Political Weekly 49 (50): 16–8. 

Jha, Shuchita. 2023. “Budget 2023–24: ‘Amrit Dharohar’ to Encourage Conservation 
of Vital Wetlands in India.” Down To Earth, February 1. 
https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/wildlife-biodiversity/budget-2023-24-
amrit-dharohar-to-encourage-conservation-of-vital-wetlands-in-india-87429.  

Jitendra. 2019. “Drought but Why: What Happened to the Promise of a Drought-
free Maharashtra?” Down To Earth, March 9. 
https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/agriculture/drought-but-why-what-
happened-to-the-promise-of-a-drought-free-maharashtra--63417.  

Kelkar, Vijay. 2013. Report of the High-level Committee on Balanced Regional Development of 
Maharashtra. Mumbai: Planning Department, Government of Maharashtra.  

Khandekar, Nivedita. 2020. “Returning to Traditional Practices to Save Vidarbha’s 
‘Lake District.’” Mongabay Series: Eco Hope, Wetland Champions, December 16. 
https://india.mongabay.com/2020/12/returning-to-traditional-practices-to-save-
vidarbhas-lake-district/.  

Kimmatkar, Madhukar. 2008. Maji-malguzari Talavababat Ahwal (Report on Maji-
Malguzari Tanks). Mumbai: Government of Maharashtra. 

Kimmatkar, Madhukar. 2012. Purv-vidarbhatil Maji-Malguzari Talavacha Abhyas (Study of 
Maji-Malguzari Tanks of Eastern Vidarbha), Maharashtra. Mumbai: Government of 
Maharashtra. 

Mahajan, Rashmi, Anuja Date, and Manish Rajankar. 2021. “Wainganga: A Lifeline 
of Central India.” Veditum India Foundation, April 23. 
https://veditum.org/2021/04/23/wainganga-a-lifeline-of-central-india/.  

Majmudar, Tanya. 2020. “Fishing for a Difference.” Vikalp Sangam, February 18. 
https://vikalpsangam.org/article/fishing-for-a-difference/.  

Mehta, Lyla. 2010. “The Social Construction of Scarcity: The Case of Water in 
Western India.” In Global Political Ecology, edited by Richard Peet, Paul Robbins, and 
Michael Watts, 371–86. London and New York: Routledge. 
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203842249.  

Meinzen-Dick, Ruth, and Margaretha Bakker. 1999. “Irrigation Systems as Multiple-
use Commons: Water Use in Kirindi Oya, Sri Lanka.” Agriculture and Human Values 
16 (3): 281–93. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007507918459  

https://doi.org/10.4135/9788132103813
https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/wildlife-biodiversity/budget-2023-24-amrit-dharohar-to-encourage-conservation-of-vital-wetlands-in-india-87429
https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/wildlife-biodiversity/budget-2023-24-amrit-dharohar-to-encourage-conservation-of-vital-wetlands-in-india-87429
https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/agriculture/drought-but-why-what-happened-to-the-promise-of-a-drought-free-maharashtra--63417
https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/agriculture/drought-but-why-what-happened-to-the-promise-of-a-drought-free-maharashtra--63417
https://india.mongabay.com/2020/12/returning-to-traditional-practices-to-save-vidarbhas-lake-district/
https://india.mongabay.com/2020/12/returning-to-traditional-practices-to-save-vidarbhas-lake-district/
https://veditum.org/2021/04/23/wainganga-a-lifeline-of-central-india/
https://vikalpsangam.org/article/fishing-for-a-difference/
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203842249
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007507918459


[45] Mahajan and Rajankar 

 
 

Menon, Ajit, Praveen Singh, Esha Shah, Sharachchandra Lélé, Suhas Paranjape, and 
KJ Joy. 2007. “Introduction.” In Community-Based Natural Resource Management: Issues 
and Cases from South Asia, edited by Ajit Menon, Praveen Singh, Esha Shah, 
Sharachchandra Lélé, Suhas Paranjape, and KJ Joy, 1–27. New Delhi: Sage 
Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9788132101550    

Mishra, Anupam. 1993. Aaj Bhi Khare Hain Talaab. New Delhi: Gandhi Peace 
Foundation. 

Mission Amrit Sarovar. 2023. “Home.” Accessed September 1, 2023. 
https://amritsarovar.gov.in.   

Palanisami, K, and Ruth Meinzen-Dick. 2001. “Tank Performance and Multiple Uses 
in Tamil Nadu, South India.” Irrigation and Drainage Systems 15 (2): 173–95. 
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012927722965.  

Pallavi, Aparna. 2014. “The Gond Kingdoms.” Down To Earth, October 1. 
https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/the-gond-kingdoms-46701.  

Paranjape, Suhas, KJ Joy, and Chris Scott. 2003. The Ozar Water User Societies: Impact 
of Society Formation and Co-management of Surface Water and Groundwater. Pune: Society 
for Promoting Participative Ecosystem Management. 
https://www.soppecom.org/pdf/Ozar%20WUA%20study%20report.pdf.   

Paranjpye, Vijay. 2004. “Water – Bhandara, the Lake District, Maharashtra.” In Seeds 
of Hope: Case Studies from the Planning Commission and Lokayan. India Water Portal. 
https://www.indiawaterportal.org/articles/seeds-hope-case-studies-planning-
commission-and-lokayan.  

Pradhan, Amruta, and Veena Srinivasan. 2022. “Do Dams Improve Water Security 
in India? A Review of Post Facto Assessments.” Water Security 15 (2): 100112. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasec.2022.100112.  

Rajankar, Manish, and Yogini Dolke. 2001. “Decline of a Grand Tradition.” In 
Making Water Everybody’s Business: Practice and Policy of Water Harvesting, edited by Anil 
Agarwal, Sunita Narain, and Indira Khurana, 30–32. New Delhi: Centre for Science 
and Environment. 

Rajankar, Manish. 2011a. “Traditional Water Management Systems of Eastern 
Vidarbha: Community Conservation 1.” Dams, Rivers and People 9 (8–9): 5–8. 

Rajankar, Manish. 2011b. “Traditional Water Systems of Eastern Vidarbha II: 
Current Status.” Dams, Rivers and People 9 (10–11): 14–7. 

Rajankar, Manish. 2019. “Aquatic Habitat Development – A Community 
Approach.” Leisa India. https://leisaindia.org/aquatic-habitat-development-a-
community-approach/  

Raman, K Ravi. 2005. “Corporate Violence, Legal Nuances and Political Ecology 
Cola War in Plachimada.” Economic & Political Weekly 40 (25): 2481–86. 

Ramsar. 2023. “Home.” Accessed September 1, 2023. 
https://ramsar.org/wetland/india.    

https://doi.org/10.4135/9788132101550
https://amritsarovar.gov.in/
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012927722965
https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/the-gond-kingdoms-46701
https://www.soppecom.org/pdf/Ozar%20WUA%20study%20report.pdf
https://www.indiawaterportal.org/articles/seeds-hope-case-studies-planning-commission-and-lokayan
https://www.indiawaterportal.org/articles/seeds-hope-case-studies-planning-commission-and-lokayan
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasec.2022.100112
https://leisaindia.org/aquatic-habitat-development-a-community-approach/
https://leisaindia.org/aquatic-habitat-development-a-community-approach/
https://ramsar.org/wetland/india


 Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [46] 

Reddy, ST Somashekhar. 1990. Forfeited Treasure Status of Irrigation Tanks in Karnataka. 
Bangalore: Bangalore Prarambha. 

Reddy, V Ratna, M Srinivasa Reddy, and K Palanisami. 2018. “Tank Rehabilitation 
in India: Review of Experiences and Strategies.” Agricultural Water Management 209: 
32–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2018.07.013.  

Russell, RV. 1908. “Central Provinces: District Gazetteers (Facsimile Reproduction), 
Volume A.” Mumbai: Gazetteers Department, Government of Maharashtra. 

Sangameswaran, Priya. 2008. “Community Formation, ‘Ideal’ Villages and Watershed 
Development in Western India.” Journal of Development Studies 44 (3): 384–408. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220380701848426.   

Shah, Esha. 2003. “Social Designs: Tank Irrigation Technology and Agrarian 
Transformation in Karnataka, South India.” PhD diss., Wageningen University. 

Shah, Mihir. 2018. “Reforming Governance to Solve India’s Water Crisis” Ecology, 
Economy and Society 1 (2): 77–80. https://doi.org/10.37773/ees.v1i2.38  

SOPPECOM. 2012. “Maharashtra Water Resources Regulatory Authority: An 
Assessment.” Society for Promoting Participative Ecosystem Management. 
https://hdl.handle.net/10568/38991.    

Thakkar, Himanshu, and J Harsha. 2019. “Can Outdated Water Institutes Steer India 
Out of Water Crisis? Poor Functioning of Water Organisations CWC: An Advisory 
Body for States?” Economic & Political Weekly 54 (9). 
https://www.epw.in/engage/article/can-outdated-water-institutes-steer-india-
water-crisis.   

Tiwale, Sachin. 2020. “Jalyukt Shivar La Apyash Ka Ale? (Why Did Jalyukt Shivar 
Fail?)” Loksatta, September 20. https://www.loksatta.com/vishesh/reason-behind-
jalyukt-shivar-yojana-fail-zws-70-2279973/  

Velankar, Raghunandan A. 2011. “Village Tanks and Community-based 
Management in Gondia District, Maharashtra State, India.” MA thesis, Institute of 
Social Studies, The Hague, The Netherlands. 

WCD. 2000. “Dams and Development: A New Framework for Decision-making.” 
London: Earthscan. 

Zade, Dipak, Eshwer Kale, Aditya Sood, Sandeep Jadhav, and Aditya Shinde. 2020. 
“Gaalmukt Dharan, Gaalyukt Shivar (Tank Desiltation) Scheme in Maharashtra, 
India: Policy Concerns and the Way Forward.” Law, Environment and Development 
Journal 16 (2): 134. https://doi.org/10.25501/SOAS.00033482.  

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2018.07.013
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220380701848426
https://doi.org/10.37773/ees.v1i2.38
https://hdl.handle.net/10568/38991
https://www.epw.in/engage/article/can-outdated-water-institutes-steer-india-water-crisis
https://www.epw.in/engage/article/can-outdated-water-institutes-steer-india-water-crisis
https://www.loksatta.com/vishesh/reason-behind-jalyukt-shivar-yojana-fail-zws-70-2279973/
https://www.loksatta.com/vishesh/reason-behind-jalyukt-shivar-yojana-fail-zws-70-2279973/
https://doi.org/10.25501/SOAS.00033482

