2/17/2016
p.1
Draft Pre-proposal/prospectus for discussion and action.
A Collaborative and Comparative study of ecological status and risks for river
resources in the Upper Gangan (India) and Upper Laurentian (North America)
basins.
An international study targeted for NSF-USA and DST-India
Period for which funding is being sought: 3-4 years beginning in 2004.
Cost: ?? 1-4 million?
Background and Overall Objective:
The claim that future wars are most likely to be fought over water resource issues
is becoming distressingly common in both public and private discourse related to natural
resource conservation and management. As with most natural resources, Nature has
distributed the world’s hydrologic resources unevenly; and in a way that seems unfair to
many who inhabit areas where water scarcity (for whatever reason) has become routine.
Global warming and related climate change threaten to further exacerbate existing water
shortages in many regions. Growing political sensitivity to natural inequities of water
supply raises both, hopes for and fears of, remedial engineering of regional water
distribution and supply systems.
For the past several years governments of the Great lakes States, regional resource
agencies (e.g. The Great Lakes Basin Commission, Great Lakes Protection Fund), and
NGO’s across the St. Lawrence basin have been carefully screening legal options,
regulatory strategies, and decision-making tools in a growing atmosphere of concern over
the potential for inter-state water transfers to drier regions to the South and West. In
November 2002, and literally on the other side of the planet, the Indian Supreme Court
ordered the Central Government of India
to proceed on a decades old plan to link
all of the major rivers of India with the
goal of distributing excess flood waters
from the water-rich Ganga-Barmaputra
system to water-hungry basins in the
south. Already individual Indian states
are raising alarms over water transfers
across their borders, and many
environmentalists worry that the already
stressed Ganga River ecosystem may be
threatened by the continents’ thirst. A
contentious age of water shortage in the
face of growing demand now seems
clearly perched on everyone’s horizon.
2/17/2016
p.2
These two major river systems, the Ganga River basin in India, and the St.
Lawrence (Great Lakes) basin in North America share more than just the distinction of
being water-rich rivers on a generally drier continental landscape. They are similar in size
(~1,000,000 km2; Table 1, figure below); and despite dramatically different climates have
surprisingly similar annual discharge, water yield, and fluvial hydrology (average annual
discharge is 450 and 447 km3 yr-1, for the Ganga and St. Lawrence respectively, Table
1),. Both have much of their river channel system developed on extensive alluvial
deposits and geomorphic histories strongly tied to glacial activity. Both basins are
experiencing rapid urbanization, and large areas of their watersheds have been
extensively developed for agricultural production (see Table 1). Finally, both basins have
developed a distinctive cultural affinity for plentiful water that goes much deeper than
mere economics. Albeit that one culture is perhaps the most ancient water-centric culture
on the planet, and the other is perhaps the most recent.
The people in both river basins see their rivers and associated ecosytems (lakes and
wetlands), indeed their own access to plentiful water, as an integral part of their cultural
heritage, and as central to the identity and economic well-being of their regions.
We are proposing a collaborative, comparative study of these two major river
ecosystems, focusing on their interaction with growing human populations and regional
demands for water access. Our long-term scientific goals are:
(1) to develop a culturally and physiographically broad model of the ways in which
human societies impact the ecological character of fluvial ecosystems; including an
explicit analysis of the ways in which ecological and physiographic context
influence cultural values and the politics of water resource use.
And,
2/17/2016
p.3
(2) to develop technical tools (data and models) which can be used in an integrated
(wholistic: ecological-political-social) risk assessments of proposed water resource
management strategies in the Ganga and Laurentian basins. In particular we are
interested in evaluating the ecological implications of population growth, landscape
alteration, and out-of-basin transfers in a technically responsible manner.
Approach:
Our approach will be to use comparative studies of Indian (Ganga Basin) and North American
(Laurentian Basin) rivers to help us examine and model basic issues in river ecology and
conservation, and related social attitudes and approaches to resource policy. Using teams of
researchers in both India and the U.S. we will build the analysis on a framework of state-of-theart river classification and assessment approaches, currently being developed and deployed in the
Great Lakes States by a suite of regional, federal, and multi-university projects (Table 2). River
segment classification and mapping in a GIS environment will provide a common database and
modeling structure for both intra and inter basin analyses.
To achieve our study goals we have identified a series of specific research objectives and
supporting studies. Each research objective involves analysis across both the Gangan and
Laurentian basins and will require collaborative data assembly, refinement of study hypotheses
to be tested, and interpretation of results.
Specific Research Objectives:
[listed studies are just suggestions, teams need to work these out]
1. To test the utility and transferability for the Ganga of classification-based river
modeling and assessment techniques being developed in the Laurentian Great
Lakes Basin.
Study 1a. Valley segment-scale macrohabitat classification for the Ganga
Study 1b. Preliminary Ecological Inventory and Assessment (based on
existing data) for the Gangan Basin by Valley segment, followed
by a formal GAP analysis.
Study 1c. Targeted field assessment surveys and integration with
landscape change and river ecosystem modeling for the Ganga Basin.
2. To develop a general model for both the Gangan and Laurentian river basins
relating ecological patterns in structure and productivity to patterns in land
cover/use and human development.
Study 2a. Comparative study of longitudinal organization and patterns of
biological diversity
2/17/2016
p.4
Study 2b. Comparison of land-use (urban and agricultural) stressorresponse relationships and a test of their contingency on ecohydrologic, climatic, and cultural contexts.
Study 2c. Development of empirically parameterized linear system
models (e.g. SEM) of biological, chemical, and hydrological
responses to watershed landscapes and development-related
stressors.
3. To begin to analyze the roles of environmental education and social value systems with
regard to the efficacy of river conservation and management activity, and political
feasibility of out-of-basin transfers.
Study 3a. Preliminary Integrated Assessment of rivers in the Gangan and
Great Lakes [Michigan-Huron] basins.
Study 3b. Integrated causal modeling of attitudes and politics regarding
water conservation and sharing.
Expected Results:
The work proposed would have both important regional impacts and more general
scientific utility. This program would begin to organize and integrate existing (and some
new) knowledge of the Ganga system at a time when the need for deep insight into the
ecological structure and function of Indian river systems is critical. Plans to link major
rivers over the next several decades to make inter-basin water transfer possible
presupposes a clear understanding of the ecology of the rivers involved that does not at
present exist. From the perspective of biodiversity and river ecosystem conservation, the
work proposed here is critical to informing the water resource planning which is now a
national priority in India. And, while many of the approaches being proposed here have
been or are currently being piloted in the Great Lakes Basin, comparative study across
these two world-class river systems will greatly enhance our understanding and
confidence in the results of studies now underway in the U.S. A broader analysis brings
water resource planning and conservation efforts in both countries a much richer and
more accurate scientific basis for future policy decisions.
As an exercise in science, the proposed studies provide a truly unique opportunity to
increase the scale of our analysis and modeling to a level which is technically appropriate
when we are discussing societal interactions a with international-scale ecosystems of of
millions of square kilometers. Whether we are focusing on ecological, hydrological, or
social subsystems, the limited variation inherent in a single system limits both our ability
to observe and test causal mechanisms. In this sense comparative studies of the scale we
are proposing here are likely a necessary prerequisite for accurate (and therefore useful)
2/17/2016
p.5
modeling of globally significant natural resource issues. We believe that water resource
management, like climate modification, presents both regional and global challenges
which require a scaling up of what has been for aquatic resource sciences, traditionally a
technically sophisticated but locally focused set of analytical tools and principals.
Finally, because of the nature of the problem being addressed (coupled dynamics of
aquatic ecosystems and human societies) we are proposing comparative integrated
assessments in both India and the US (Integrated Ecological Assessment; sensu Toth
2001 [EEA]). The concept and practice of integrated assessment is relatively new and the
global scientific community has limited experience in designing and executing such
studies. We believe that coupling both natural and social sciences in a common analysis
of the interactions of societies with major river systems can provide a useful but
relatively discrete test-bed for refining approaches to integrated ecological assessment.
Our results and experiences will contribute to a growing body of scientific literature
focused on the integrated application of science to understanding the relationships
between human societies and the world we inhabit.
Status
This research proposal is in the beginning stages of development. With generous support
provided by the University of Michigan Rackham Graduate School’s International
Partnership Program, we held a series of preliminary meetings/discussions in India during
Dec 2002, at a series of host institutions across the Ganga Basin (see Table 3). Principal
Collaborators have been identified in both countries, and a longer list of investigators
expressing interest has also been compiled (Table 4). This document will be circulated
among all potential collaborators as a basis for wowrk towards a formal proposal which
we plan to develop during 2003, and submit for funding review early in 2004. Our initial
target for potential funding is a joint US-INDIA collaborative science program
administered by NSF and the Indian Department of Science and Technology. Other
possible funding sources we have not explored may include the Ford Foundation, the
World Bank, FAO.
Our plan now is to circulate this document (or a revision of it) among potential
collaborators in both countries seeking input, advice, and a preliminary commitment to
participation. We will then try to organize two additional planning meetings (one in
Michigan, one in India) during the next year to develop the basis for a detailed proposal.
2/17/2016
p.6
Table 1. An overall comparison of basin attributes in the Ganga and St.Lawrence
Watersheds.
Parameter
Ganga Basin
St. Lawrence Basin
Basin area
1,016,104 km²
1,049,621 km²
Population density
Urban growth rate
Large cities
Urban landscape
Protected areas
Wetlands
Foresedt landscape
Cropland
375 people per km²
3.2%
82
8%
6%
18%
4%
71%
54 people per km²
0.8%
60
22%
10%
10%
55%
20%
Large dams
Total fish species
6
141
11
120+
Annual Q
Dissolved Load
450 km3/yr
75 Tg/yr
447 km3/yr
45 Tg/yr
Table 2. Examples of currently active, collaborative research programs in the St.
Lawrence (upper Great Lakes) basin focused on developing tools for river resource
management.
Study
Institutions involved
Program funding
Muskegon Watershed
Risk Assessment
UM, MSU, MDNR
GVSU, NOAA, WSU
GLFT, $5 million
3-state (MI,Il,Wn) Regional
River Risk Assessment
UM,MSU,MDNR.WDNR,.
IDOC
USEPA-ORD, $850,000
Mult-istressor modeling
MSU,UM
USEPA-ORD, $850,000
Great Lakes riverine GAP
Analysis
USGS, MDNR,ODOC,
WDNR,IDOC, UM
USGS&States
$1-2Million?get
Michigan Rivers Inventory
UM,MDNR
MDNR, others $1 million
2/17/2016
p.7
Table 3. Preliminary meetings with interested scientists and engineers in India to discuss
collaborative river studies.
Date (2002) [facilitator]
Host Organization
Other organizations represented
Dec 2 Dr. Ram Boojh
Center for Environmental
Education (CEE) Delhi Office,
Ministry of Forestery and
Environment-
CEE-South region, Jawaharlal Nehru
University, Jamia Milia Islamia University
Dec 4
Dr. Ram Boojh
CEE-North Office, Lucknow
Lucknow University; National
Environmental Engineering Res. Institute;
T.D. Girls Inter College; Industrial
Toxicology Research Institute (ITRC);
BALA Foundation, JAGRITI, TALEEM,
Dec 6
Dr. V K Dubey
Ganga River Laboratory,
Banares Hundu University,
Varanasi
Depart of Environmental Sciences, Dept of
Geology, Inst of Technology, BHU;
National Council of Development
Communication
Dec 10 M. Ehtesham & M. Omair
Chief Minister of the State of
Bihar, Patna
Dec 13 Dr. R.K. Sinha
Patna Science College,
Department of Zoology, Patna
Patrna University: Dept. of Geology; Bihar
Scampi Farmers’ Associations, Institute for
Remote Sensing.
2/17/2016
p.8
Table 4. Potential collaborators who have indicated an initial interest in participating. Names in
bold have already played a significant role in organizing preliminary discussions. No particular
ordering. {{needs updating and additions}}
Basin
Host Organization
St Lawrence Basin
Dr. Mike Wiley SNRE, University of Michigan
Mohammed Omair (Res. Assoc), SNRE, University of Michigan
Dr. Bernard Naylor, Medical School, University of Michigan
Dr. Sudhakar Reddy, Director, Univ.of Michigan OSEH Environmental Lab
Dr. Paul Seelbach, Director of Research, Fisheries Division, Michigan DNR
Dr. Jim Diana, SNRE, University of Michigan
Dr. David Jude, SNRE, University of Michigan
Dr. Jan Stevenson, Dept. of Zoology, Michigan State University
Dr. Bryan Pijanowski, Dept. of Zoology, Michigan State University
Ganga Basin
Dr. Ram Boojh, CEE Ministry of Forestery and Env., Lucknow
Dr. R.K. Sinha, Patna Science College, Patna
Prof. Tasneem, Dept of Bio Sciences Jamia Milia Islamia University, New Delhi
Dr. K G Saxena, School of Environmental Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru Univ.,New Delhi
Dr. Brij Gopal, School of Environmental Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru Univ., NewDelhi
Prof. P.K. Mathur, Department of Chemistry, Lucknow University, Lucknow
Prof. P.K. Tandon, Department of Botany, Lucknow University
Dr. M.J. Hassan, National Environmental Engineering Res. Institute, Nagpur
Dr. S.M. Akhtar, Integral Inst. of Technology,Lucknow
Dr. Sanjeev Singh, Integral Inst. of Technology,Lucknow
M.P. Yadav, Principal, T.D. Girls Inter College, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow
Dr. V.P. Sharma, Industrial Toxicology Research Institute (ITRC), Lucknow
Dr. Abdhesh Gangwar, Himalaya Iniative,CEE-North, Lucknow
Preeti. M Shah, BALA Foundation, Lucknow
Dr. Jalal Rizvi, JAGRITI, Lucknow
Sheeba Basheer, TALEEM, c/o CEE, Lucknow
G C Chaudhary, Dept of Geology, Benaras Hindu University, Varanasi
U K Chaudhary, Ganga Res Lab, Inst of Technology, BHU, Varanasi
Dr. B D Tripathi, Coordinator Environ. Science, BHU, Varanasi
Dr. V K Dubey, National Council of Development Communication, Varanasi
Dr. Kriteshwar Prasad, Dept. of Geology, Patna University, Patna
Dr. Akhileshwari Nath, Dept. of Zoology, Patna University, Patna
Dr. M.P. Shrivatava, Bihar Scampi Farmers’ Associations; Vikas Foundation, Patna