All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
UPSC Exam  >  UPSC Questions  >  How to resolve the tamilnadu karnataka cauver... Start Learning for Free
How to resolve the tamilnadu karnataka cauvery water dispute?
Clear all your UPSC doubts with EduRev
Most Upvoted Answer
How to resolve the tamilnadu karnataka cauvery water dispute?
Tamil Nadu-Karnataka Cauvery Water Dispute: Resolving the Conflict

The Tamil Nadu-Karnataka Cauvery water dispute has been a longstanding issue, causing tension between the two states for several decades. The dispute revolves around the sharing of the Cauvery river water, which is vital for irrigation, drinking water, and power generation in both states. Resolving this dispute requires a comprehensive and balanced approach that takes into account the interests and concerns of both Tamil Nadu and Karnataka.

1. Establish a Cauvery Management Board:
- The formation of a Cauvery Management Board (CMB) can be a crucial step in resolving the dispute. The CMB should comprise of experts, representatives from both states, and central government officials.
- The CMB should be given the authority to monitor and regulate the water sharing between Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. It should ensure the fair allocation of water based on scientific data and the needs of both states.

2. Data Collection and Sharing:
- Collecting accurate and reliable data on rainfall, river flow, and water demand is essential for a fair water-sharing agreement. Both states should collaborate to establish a robust data collection mechanism.
- The collected data should be shared transparently with all stakeholders, including the CMB, to ensure that the water-sharing decisions are based on scientific evidence and not influenced by political considerations.

3. Water Conservation and Management:
- Both Tamil Nadu and Karnataka need to focus on water conservation and management practices. Implementing measures like rainwater harvesting, watershed management, and efficient irrigation techniques can help reduce water wastage and ensure optimal utilization of available resources.
- The CMB should encourage and support initiatives aimed at water conservation and management, providing financial assistance and technical expertise to farmers and local communities.

4. Mediation and Dialogue:
- Mediation and dialogue between the governments of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka can play a crucial role in resolving the dispute. Both sides should engage in constructive negotiations, facilitated by neutral mediators, to find a mutually acceptable solution.
- The central government can play an active role in facilitating the dialogue process and ensuring that both parties are committed to finding a resolution.

5. Public Awareness and Participation:
- Public awareness and participation are vital in resolving the dispute. Both states should engage with the public through awareness campaigns, public consultations, and involvement of civil society organizations.
- The CMB should also conduct regular public hearings to ensure that the concerns and suggestions of the affected communities are taken into account while making water-sharing decisions.

Conclusion:
Resolving the Tamil Nadu-Karnataka Cauvery water dispute requires a multi-faceted approach that encompasses the establishment of a Cauvery Management Board, data collection and sharing, water conservation and management, mediation and dialogue, and public awareness and participation. By addressing the concerns of both states and ensuring a fair and sustainable water-sharing agreement, a lasting solution to the dispute can be achieved. It is essential for all stakeholders to work together collaboratively and in good faith to find a resolution that benefits both Tamil Nadu and Karnataka.
Explore Courses for UPSC exam

Similar UPSC Doubts

The biggest gain from the Union Governments welcome decision to notify the final award of the Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal is that it may be the first and most significant step towards a permanent solution to the persistent conflict over sharing the inter-State rivers waters. A positive feature is that implementation ofthe final award will involve the formation of a Cauvery Management Board to regulate the supply of water and a Water Regulation Committee, which will post representatives in each of the eight reservoirs in the basin states, to ensure that the decisions are carried out. Giving finality to the award through the notification may help take the issue away from politics and place it in the hands of a technical, expert body. The February 2007 award has been questioned by way of clarification petitions before the Tribunal itself as well as suits in the Supreme Court by both parties and sceptics may wonder how useful the gazette notification may be now. The parties are still free to pursue their clarification petitions and appeals, but in the larger interest of a long term solution and to end seasonal acrimony, they would do well to give the award a chance.The fact that notifying the award has been a long pending demand ofTamil Nadu should not make one believe that the action redounds to one partys benefit to the detriment of the other. It was the Supreme Court that made the suggestion that thefinal decision be notified and counsel for all the basin states have agreed that it should be done. It may be argued that gazetting the award will not resolve the present standoff over judicial and administrative directives to Karnataka to release water to save standing crops in Tamil Nadu. The Cauvery Monitoring Committee, while asking Karnataka to ensure 12 thousand million cubic feet of water to Tamil Nadu in December, has itself admitted that its decision is unlikely to satisfy either party, given that both states have less water in their reservoirs than in previous years. Yet, is has opted for a pragmatic solution under which both states will be in deficit of approximately 47 tmcft. It is the same spirit of pragmatism that both states must now approach the larger problem of sharing water as per a judicially determined solution in both normal and distress years. The two should not let posterity say of them that long after equitable distribution has entrenched itself as the most acceptable doctrine in riverine jurisprudence, they did not allow a judicially determines system for sharing to work.Q.It can be inferred that notifying the final award of the Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal could lead to

The biggest gain from the Union Governments welcome decision to notify the final award of the Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal is that it may be the first and most significant step towards a permanent solution to the persistent conflict over sharing the inter-State rivers waters. A positive feature is that implementation ofthe final award will involve the formation of a Cauvery Management Board to regulate the supply of water and a Water Regulation Committee, which will post representatives in each of the eight reservoirs in the basin states, to ensure that the decisions are carried out. Giving finality to the award through the notification may help take the issue away from politics and place it in the hands of a technical, expert body. The February 2007 award has been questioned by way of clarification petitions before the Tribunal itself as well as suits in the Supreme Court by both parties and sceptics may wonder how useful the gazette notification may be now. The parties are still free to pursue their clarification petitions and appeals, but in the larger interest of a long term solution and to end seasonal acrimony, they would do well to give the award a chance.The fact that notifying the award has been a long pending demand ofTamil Nadu should not make one believe that the action redounds to one partys benefit to the detriment of the other. It was the Supreme Court that made the suggestion that thefinal decision be notified and counsel for all the basin states have agreed that it should be done. It may be argued that gazetting the award will not resolve the present standoff over judicial and administrative directives to Karnataka to release water to save standing crops in Tamil Nadu. The Cauvery Monitoring Committee, while asking Karnataka to ensure 12 thousand million cubic feet of water to Tamil Nadu in December, has itself admitted that its decision is unlikely to satisfy either party, given that both states have less water in their reservoirs than in previous years. Yet, is has opted for a pragmatic solution under which both states will be in deficit of approximately 47 tmcft. It is the same spirit of pragmatism that both states must now approach the larger problem of sharing water as per a judicially determined solution in both normal and distress years. The two should not let posterity say of them that long after equitable distribution has entrenched itself as the most acceptable doctrine in riverine jurisprudence, they did not allow a judicially determines system for sharing to work.Q.Which of the following options cannot be inferred as a negation with respect to the award of the tribunal?

The biggest gain from the Union Governments welcome decision to notify the final award of the Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal is that it may be the first and most significant step towards a permanent solution to the persistent conflict over sharing the inter-State rivers waters. A positive feature is that implementation ofthe final award will involve the formation of a Cauvery Management Board to regulate the supply of water and a Water Regulation Committee, which will post representatives in each of the eight reservoirs in the basin states, to ensure that the decisions are carried out. Giving finality to the award through the notification may help take the issue away from politics and place it in the hands of a technical, expert body. The February 2007 award has been questioned by way of clarification petitions before the Tribunal itself as well as suits in the Supreme Court by both parties and sceptics may wonder how useful the gazette notification may be now. The parties are still free to pursue their clarification petitions and appeals, but in the larger interest of a long term solution and to end seasonal acrimony, they would do well to give the award a chance.The fact that notifying the award has been a long pending demand ofTamil Nadu should not make one believe that the action redounds to one partys benefit to the detriment of the other. It was the Supreme Court that made the suggestion that thefinal decision be notified and counsel for all the basin states have agreed that it should be done. It may be argued that gazetting the award will not resolve the present standoff over judicial and administrative directives to Karnataka to release water to save standing crops in Tamil Nadu. The Cauvery Monitoring Committee, while asking Karnataka to ensure 12 thousand million cubic feet of water to Tamil Nadu in December, has itself admitted that its decision is unlikely to satisfy either party, given that both states have less water in their reservoirs than in previous years. Yet, is has opted for a pragmatic solution under which both states will be in deficit of approximately 47 tmcft. It is the same spirit of pragmatism that both states must now approach the larger problem of sharing water as per a judicially determined solution in both normal and distress years. The two should not let posterity say of them that long after equitable distribution has entrenched itself as the most acceptable doctrine in riverine jurisprudence, they did not allow a judicially determines system for sharing to work.Q.Consider the following assumptions:1. The 2 parties in the dispute should favour the setting up of the tribunal as it will bring some resolution to the issue2. The dispute between the 2 parties is best solved through the judicial route.Which of the following assumptions are valid?

Top Courses for UPSCView all

Top Courses for UPSC

How to resolve the tamilnadu karnataka cauvery water dispute?
Question Description
How to resolve the tamilnadu karnataka cauvery water dispute? for UPSC 2025 is part of UPSC preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the UPSC exam syllabus. Information about How to resolve the tamilnadu karnataka cauvery water dispute? covers all topics & solutions for UPSC 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for How to resolve the tamilnadu karnataka cauvery water dispute?.
Solutions for How to resolve the tamilnadu karnataka cauvery water dispute? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for UPSC. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for UPSC Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of How to resolve the tamilnadu karnataka cauvery water dispute? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of How to resolve the tamilnadu karnataka cauvery water dispute?, a detailed solution for How to resolve the tamilnadu karnataka cauvery water dispute? has been provided alongside types of How to resolve the tamilnadu karnataka cauvery water dispute? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice How to resolve the tamilnadu karnataka cauvery water dispute? tests, examples and also practice UPSC tests.
Explore Courses for UPSC exam

Top Courses for UPSC

Explore Courses
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App for FREE
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup