ESR Framework

Pune produces an Environmental Status Report (ESR) every year, and it has done so since 1997. This is mandated in the state-level legislation (the BPMC Act) following the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act and the Twelfth Schedule.

The development, writing and production of the ESR is usually tendered out. The Pune ESR has been prepared over various years by Mashal, Change Re-engineering, PATPL, and in recent years by the PMC Air Quality Cell. Since the approach and detail in the different chapters is quite varied, it appears that there is no continuing information framework for the ESR as a whole or for the individual sections.

In order to make the ESR a more useful / usable document, some reorganization of the ESR has been suggested by the Pune Citizens Environment Forum (various meetings):

1. The purpose of the ESR has to be clear
1. It should reveal the health status of the population linked to the state
   of services and the environment
2. It should provide information support for investment and management
   decisions for the PMC
3. It should serve as an important input into the annual budgeting and
   planning exercises of the PMC
4. It should be a tool for citizens' use as well, serving both as an
   information/ education resources, as well as a way for tracking improvements
2. It should have some overview chapters for a comprehensive picture of the city, including key sectors
3. Certain data sets have to be presented disaggregated at ward-level so that actions needed to be taken by corporators are clear, and these can in turn be linked to ward level municipal budgets and plans
4. It is important to create the framework, even if data is not there. The purpose of this is to identify data gaps and put in place appropriate data collection systems
5. Descriptive material, detailed data tables, references etc are valuable information and the ESR is a good way of making such information publicly available and these may be included. However, the key actionable aspects may be presented as a separate section for facilitating monitoring and follow-up
6. Information, such as flights operating out of Pune and list of Malls, which has appeared in the ESR of some years may be removed from the report as it is not directly relevant. However, a lot of the development-related data could still be included, albeit in the form of appendices.
7. The ESR will need to draw upon data apart from the official data gathered and provided by PMC departments on municipal services and functions
8. Which data is gathered and reported by the PMC depts. needs to be looked into, as they may not necessarily be collecting some critical information – this depends on what goals (short and long term) are being set for improvements – for instance if reducing energy use is a goal, then data related to energy use in specific service provision will have to be tracked
9. In any case the Key Performance Indicators for PMC depts exercise initiated by Janwani should link with the ESR preparation work; the KPI work in Pune is also linked to the Benchmarking of Municipal Services initiated by JNNURM
10. This means that citizens, academic institutions, independent organizations, NGOs etc can also and should contribute information
11. A system to receive and categorize information needs to be created for this
12. Information collection/ compilation/ review etc can happen year round
13. The ESR should be available on the internet – creating wikis may be a useful way to do this

'''Which indicators?'''
Draft frameworks have been developed for biodiversity and water. These are available under the respective Work Themes in this blog

The CEROI set prepared by UNEP GRID Arendal may also give useful insights [http://www.ceroi.net/ City Environment Reports on the Internet]

DC Rules Meeting 12 July 2008

MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE D.C.RULES STUDY GROUP MEETING
HELD IN THE OFFICE OF AR. RAJIV RAJE ON SATURDAY 12TH JULY, 2008.

A] The following were present :
Mr. Dinesh Girolla – Representative of the PMC DC Rules Committee
Ar. Vikas Bhandari – Member of the PMC DC Rules Steering Committee
Ar. Pushkar Kanvinde – Director, NIASA, and PCEF Member
Ar. Rajiv Raje – IIA Pune Representative and PCEF Member
Ar. Shirish Kembhavi – AESA Pune Representative
Ar. Anagha Paranjpe – PCEF Co-ordinator for DC Rules Committee.
Mr. Ranjit Gadgil – Director, Janawani, and Member PCEF & PTTF

B] The following points were discussed in the meeting:

1. The general structure of DC Rules in Pune City and the constraints in application were discussed in general. It was pointed out by Ar.Vikas Bhandari, that there was a need to remove the “extra flab” in the DC rule book – to remove the unnecessary, irrelevant and inoperable regulations. He highlighted several such Rules in the current Rule book which were redundant and required to be deleted.

2. Ar. Vikas Bhandari also emphasised on the need to make the TONE of the rules
“ POSITIVE ”. For instance, instead of a rule saying “ aaa should not be LESS than bbb…”, the phrasing should always be that “ aaa should be MORE than bbb …” .This will induce a
more POSITIVE response in the adoption and application of Rules.

3. Shri.Dinesh Girolla suggested making a comparison of key development rules as are prevalent in major indian cities along with a few overseas examples of model cities, only to get an overview of the way in which issues have been handled elsewhere. Rules of Delhi Municipal Corporation were already circulated for this purpose and the Rules of Bhopal City were handed over to Shri.Girolla for study. It was suggested by Mr. Girolla that comparison of Development Control rules and its impact on the development of those cities for various cities such as Delhi, Bangalore, Hyderabad, Singapore and Tokyo to be done. Also, the similarities and future trend of growth between Pune and these cities to be studied.

4. Ar.Vikas Bhandari presented a workable scheme for revitalisation of the Core City by providing an incentive based system which encourages land pooling. It was agreed that this would help in a much better urban fabric in the core city, with more civic amenities, and create Open Spaces in areas which needed them most. A tabular format of the consolidated rules suggested by Ar. Vikas Bhandari in this unique scheme is enclosed herewith in attachment.

5. Shri.Dinesh Girolla suggested that a threshold of ONE ACRE ( approx 4000 Sq.M ) be set in the core city for application of this concept, and rules of non congested area be applied
for such plot with increased FSI being the incentive. There was a counter-suggestion, however, that if an upward sliding scale be adopted as suggested by Ar. Vikas Bhandari, more properties would opt for amalgamation to avail of the incentives – which would be beneficial for the city.

6. Ar. Kembhavi has undertaken the task of splitting the current DC rule book into THREE segments viz. Administrative Rules, Layout & Building Rules and Rules for Services – as a primary exercise for the new structure.

7. There was a discussion on merging all premium paid built-up areas into the basic permissible FSI - as has been done at Bangalore - in order to simplify the process. The pros and cons of the system were discussed and generally found to be promising. This concept would be explored further in detail. It was also pointed out that this idea should not again bring restriction on the open areas within a building.

8. Ar.Rajiv Raje suggested that the new rules should also be categorized into THREE categories or Classes viz. A, B, and C, wherein, Category-A rules would be mandatory to all and sacrosanct - not to be touched or modified, except with a statutory Sect.37 Modification by
the Government. Category-B Rules would be flexible within a RANGE – with options available against payment of premiums to PMC. Such premiums would be treated as payment of compensation paid to the city for availing of some flexible non-detrimental relaxations in rules. Category-C category rules would be completely optional, but highly incentive based. These would allow further non-detrimental concessions in construction, in lieu of proportionate benefits offered for the city without any price tags. This concept would be examined in more detail later.

9. There was an overall concern expressed by all on the issue of parking and various ways to mitigate the problem. Ranjit Gadgil highlighted the issues involved and several options were discussed without any conclusive course of action. The issue is flagged for more discussions.

10. Ar.Bhandari discussed the mobilisation plan for the city and his views on the same. Shri. Girolla was requested to provide an integrated map of old PMC limits and the extended areas to facilitate a more detailed explanation of the concepts and subsequent further discussion.

11. It was agreed unanimously that the DC rules are not an exercise in isolation, but needs to be closely integrated with the physical planning exercise The framework of Rules should be directed to achieve the VISION of the development plan. Ar. Raje cited the lesson given by City Planner Shirish Patel of Ahmedabad where a concept of Density Zoning and its control through DC Rules is in practice. Similar use of DC Rules could be made in Pune to provide a suitable DIRECTION to the inevitable growth in the next 20 years, instead of being just a regulatory tool.

12. It was felt that while the exercise of the ELU is on, an exercise of assessing and recording the infrastructure available in all areas, and future plans if any for the same, also be recorded to facilitate future planning.

The meeting concluded with a decision to meet every week for further discussions. The date, time and venue of weekly meetings will be co-ordinated and communicated by Anagha.

Mobility in the City

Do you have an idea or experience to share on how your work place or neighbourhood has addressed or could contribute to improving mobility in Pune? Do write in ...

Here is an article from the July 26 08 issue of Outlook Business on mobility in our cities
http://www.outlookbusiness.com/outlook/26072008/home.aspx (see page 51)

with a special mention of the Pune Traffic and Transportation Forum at

http://www.outlookbusiness.com/inner.aspx?editionid=49&articleid=1874&catgid=3&subcatgid=894

Meeting Notes 13 June 2008 at Air Quality Cell

Environment Status Report

Ajay presented the work done thus far for the ESR 2008. The discussions at the Jan 10 meeting were revisited, where it had been stated that the ESR framework would be reorganized. The main points of reorganization are:

1. The purpose of the ESR has to be clear – it should reveal the health status of the population linked to the state of services and the environment
2. Overview chapters for a comprehensive picture of the city, including key sectors
3. Certain data sets have to be presented disaggregated at ward-level so that actions needed to be taken by corporators are clear, and these can in turn be linked to ward level municipal budgets and plans
4. It is important to create the framework in the next few weeks, even if data is not there. The purpose of this is to identify data gaps and put in place appropriate data collection systems
5. Descriptive material, detailed data tables, references etc are valuable information and the ESR is a good way of making such information publicly available and these may be included. However, the key actionable aspects may be presented as a separate section for facilitating monitoring and follow-up
6. A point was raised about lot of the information in the ESR being irrelevant, such as tourist sites, flights operating out of Pune and list of Malls - Commissioner agreed that all such material can be removed from the report. However, a lot of the development related data could still be included, albeit in the form of appendices.

Sharad Mahajan raised issue of printing the ESR on recycled paper and this was accepted

Aneeta, Ranjit and Himanshu would help Ajay evolve the ESR framework.

Update: This group has met and a new framework is to be made available by Ajay shortly.

Biodiversity
The following aspects were suggested for inclusion in the ESR:
1. Aggregate and per capita green zones and reservations
2. Status of aquatic ecosystems
3. Number of municipal gardens and per capita garden area, and change over the last few decades
4. Naturalness of municipal gardens
5. Tree plantation and tree cutting
6. Status of selected rare species
7. Status (incl mapping) of biodiversity hot specks

Anchal and Sanskriti are to help develop a section on Biodiversity

Update: The above have been incorporated in the Biodiversity framework draft, which is posted on http://pcef.blogspot.com

Non-motorized Transport
Dinesh reported that an NMT cell has been created at PMC. This group has been meeting regularly. Several implementation tasks have been identified which PMC is to take up.

Schools
Ranjit reported that three areas have been identified by the School Group for focusing effort:

1. Testing of learning attainment – a set of tests is being developed to be discussed with the school dept and administered in July; while testing is done by PMC, the effort from the School Group would be to improve testing systems and to monitor efforts to improve quality
2. Infrastructure status – the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and PMC have been gathering this information, and the School Group would like to monitor whether improvements are being made based on this data – are schools moving up from being ‘C’ to ‘B’ and ‘A’, as well as by examining and improving the level of data gathered
3. Out of school children – again, this data is gathered by SSA and PMC, but there may be constraints in the data gathering methods as certain sections of the children population may not be getting counted (such as children of construction labour families, children employed as resident domestic help). The School Group would like to help improve systems reaching out of school children including the alternative education schemes, funding, the capacities of NGOs providing non-formal education etc

The School Group has had a number of meetings to clarify its role. It has revamped the format of the Annual Report of the School Board, so that it now focuses more on outcomes and not just on activities, as it did before. Besides the new format seeks to emphasize the important aspects & indicators wrt Schools, and to drop or dilute the less important ones. The School Group will now encourage the School Board to adopt this format to prepare its next Annual Report.

MC suggested that Schools be taken out of the purview of the PCEF and the individuals/ organizations interested in contributing to school improvement should join the monthly meeting forum already initiated by PMC.

Update: The School Group is requesting an appointment for next week with the Education Officer, Chair of School Board and MC to discuss the above and to request inclusion in the monthly meetings

DC Rules
MC suggested that the DC Rules group work in coordination with the Planning Cell and especially Mr Gohad and Mr Vikas Bhandari.

Update: The DC Rules group is discussing whether the earlier task they had taken up – of simplifying existing DC Rules – should be done or not, as in any case, the new DP will have a new set of rules. It may be better to focus the discussion on what the new DC Rules should be. A meeting is being arranged by Anagha for end of June/ early July

PCEF Work Scope
The PCEF will now focus on ESR, Biodiversity and Water. Groups and individuals interested in Schools and DC Rules should work with the other forums as suggested above.

Draft Framework for ESR Status of Biodiversity

I. Introduction and Scope
Biogeographic zone in which Pune is located

Why is BD important to assess - impacts on human health and environment locally, regionally and globally (as appropriate)

The ESR reports on

• status of ecosystems, hot specks and selected groups of plants/animals, and selected species in the city
• institutional aspects of BD conservation/ management: specialized govt/scientific agencies to deal with bd, civil society engagement, forums of complaint/redressal, conflict resolution

Definition / ownership related issues

• while some major ecosystems (river, forest) are not technically under PMC limits and are governed by other government depts, they are enclosed by PMC lands and they are heavily impacted by the city and contribute in a major way to the citizens’ health and city aesthetics
• several hotspecks are within private / institutional lands

II. Values
What values does the city current place on bd?
What values could/should it place?
Differential values between rich and poor? How to put these values into the city’s planning?

III. Policy and legislative framework

• Land records (for river ecosystem integrity) administered by District Collector
• Water Act (for surface water quality) regulated by MPCB
• Irrigation agreement (for water returned to regime and net consumption) by Irrigation dept
• Forest Act for reserved forests
• MRTP Act for urban environment and planning (Development Plan and DC Rules) for BD reservation, green zones, open spaces, setbacks, parks and gardens in municipal lands
• Tree Act for tree felling permissions
• BD Act for management aspects and setting up of Biodiversity Management Committee

IV. Key drivers or factors influencing Biodiversity

• Population growth and pattern of settlement (?) affecting land conversion and usage of BD rich areas
• Amount of untreated or uncollected sewage and garbage (for river / water body quality)
• Road widening/ construction
• Any others? Biomass collection?

V. Status and Change in Key Indicators

1. Aggregate green cover extent: total area and per capita green cover (from Sharad/ DP Cell), disaggregated between forest/wild/semi-wild and lawns/parks
2. Tree cutting and transplantation/survival, plantation and survival rates, exotic/indigenous ratio in plantations (from Tree Authority records and Garden Dept)
3. Select rare species status (TBD – Dr Sane, Dr Ankur Patwardhan, Ranwa)
4. Ecosystems/ hotspecks (including small wetlands) status report in table below (needs a quick outreach to various research and study groups, colleges for data on different parts of the city)

5. Ecosystem type (forest, grassland, river, reservoir, garden, hotspeck)

   Name (for e.g. Vetal Hill, Baner Hill, Mula R, Mutha R, Ramnadi R, Katraj Lake, Pashan Lake, Turtle Pond, Bat roost site .....)

   Location (with a map key)

   Ownership/ regulatory authority (for e.g. PMC, private ...)

   Legal status (Reservation, green zone, private/ institutional)

   Area (ha)

   Status of major indicators of health of ecosystem (state methods and reliability elsewhere)

   For e.g. for Lakes: Hyacinth cover increased; Fish species decreased by x; Black winged stilts increased; Migratory species number decreased

   For Rivers: Physical-chemical characteristics at various points; indicator species of fish, birds, plants + Ecosystem physical integrity by measuring naturalness of banks in terms of area of encroachments in the form of lawns, roads, tenements etc

   For Gardens: Number of indigenous vs exotic trees and %

   For Hotspecks: Flapshell turtles number same, Bats number same etc....

   Based on above, state Change in Ecological Status (improved, degraded, no change from previous year – TBD over time)

6. Status of Institutional aspects of BD Management in City
   Current institutional methods of BD Mgt: Garden Dept, Pune Tree Authority, Encroachments Dept, Water and Sewage Dept
   Existence of BD Management Committee: No
   Steps taken to set up one: None
   Mapping of BD: Not done
   BD Info system: Not done

(add civil society institutional aspects and actions…PTW, Lakaki lake committee, Green Earth, etc.)

VI. Analysis and Key Issues and Concerns

Status of BD

• Forest status improved through soil and water conservation works carried out over … acres
• River status degraded over previous years, as measured through instances of pollution/ extent of pollution and decrease in number of freshwater fish species etc
• Lake status degraded over previous years, as measured through decrease in numbers of birds, and diversity/composition of migratory bird species
• Grassland status degraded as area of grassland decreased as it has been planted over by trees, or fire instances
• Gardens total area increased though number of exotic tree species planted increased
• Tree numbers went up or down as measured through tree-felling permissions granted less plantation (and survival) number
• Hot specks – 30 (or whatever) in number; x number were extinguished; y number were preserved and granted ‘PMC Hotspeck’ status (perhaps in the future)
• Rare species numbers/distribution – enhanced / went up or down

Comment on overall status of BD

Status of Institutional Aspects

• Policy and legislation gaps and issues of coordination between multiple authorities
• Data and information gaps
• Financial gaps

VII PMC Response planned
VIII Recommendations

Appendices

• Methodological and reliability aspects
• Where to report data year round

School Group - Minutes of 23 May 2008

23rd May 2008, University Canteen

Attendees: Mini Srinivasan, Lalita Agashe, Asim (Sakal Times), Sanskriti Menon, Avinash Madhale, Ranjit Gadgil, Mrs Waley, Anjali Bapat, Maitreyi Shankar (KKPKP)

1. Pilot infrastructure survey has been done in 12 schools (Doorstep School 3; CEE 3; Swadhar 3; Asha Kiran 2, ISC has not returned survey forms). Mini will get feedback from surveyors about changes to be made to forms. Janwani to computerize the data. Overall infrastructure seems ok. Schools reporting that maintenance requests seem to be getting better response. We still plan to conduct a more comprehensive survey when new school year begins. We may ask schools to do the survey, with our formats. Need to grade schools as A, B or C and ensure that 6 months later schools are improving.

2. Possibility of PMC setting up an Education Helpline discussed. This will allow parents/others to call a centralized helpdesk to register complaints/issues. Meher has already suggested the setting up of a website for schools. Ranjit will take this up with the PMC CIO, Anupam Saraph.

3. Learning Level Tests – these were the issues raised
a. Why have our own tests when schools are already testing?
b. What is the motivation for this? Do we not already know, as reported even by SSA, that children are not doing well in schools?
c. If we are saying that their testing is not good, on what basis are we saying that? If so, should we try and improve their testing rather than devise our own tests?
d. If children are already overtested and if we do not trust the teachers to conduct the tests fairly in the schools then how to administer the tests?
e. If we administer the tests externally how can we make the test results “official”?
f. How do we get children externally? If we use the NGOs that run study classes for our sample, will this not be biased?
g. Which standards and how many students will need to be tested? How long to administer the tests? What resources will be required?
We will meet with John Kurrien to discuss these issues.

4. There was discussion once more on the role of the school group. The name “Municipal School Watch” was thought to be appropriate. It emphasises the monitoring nature of the group. It was decided that we should, as far as possible, not get involved in the “reasons for the failure of the Municipal School system” and focus on demanding better education in the schools and improvement in the school environment. We will focus on creating more awareness in the public, creating pressure groups (like parents of children attending Municipal Schools through organizations like KKPKP), media attentions and lobbying with State and Central Govt. authorities. The thrust will be to demand that Municipal Schools, given the ample resources that are available, should be as good as and even better than private schools. How to achieve this, how to fix the million internal problems should be left to the administration. IF the school system requests help in certain matters or areas, then the MSW could provide assistance.

5. Some specific issues like issuing of books and uniforms and no. of teachers in schools and absentism should be looked at. Issue of corporal punishment in schools, cited as the no. 1 reason for dropout should also be highlighted by collaborating with organizations like Abhay (Bina Joshi).

6. PMC has already done a gradation of the schools and assigned grades to them. This data and the methodology and data used to assign grades to be obtained from PMC.

7. We should meet Commissioner, EO and Chairman of SB in a joint meeting to discuss the following issues
a. Emphasise that Municipal Schools should be excellent – School Dept. should possibly adopt an appropriate Mission, Vision and define Objectives.
b. Ask for results of the MLL tests
c. Infrastructure survey done and request new survey using our format for the new year
d. Raise issue of out-of-school children

Comments from Meher Gadekar
Thanks Ranjit for the minutes. You seem to have had a good meeting. A few remarks/observations: If we need support for lobbying/advocacy we may like to involve NCAS – National Centre for Advocacy Studies, who are specialists at lobbying and advocacy. I can put the School Group/MSW in touch with Amitabh Behar, who heads NCAS.

There is no need to lobby at the National level to improve education in PMC schools. We need to concentrate at the city level for this.

It might be a good idea to bring out, as a result of our work, a Citizen’s Report on the State of Edn in PMC schools. We can use the occasion to publish or broadcast the report, to create a noise about this issue, raise awareness and seek involvement of more citizens.

Certain things like contacting Bina Joshi and School Board of PCMC have been on our pending list for quite a long time now.

Look forward to attend the next meeting Cheers Meher

Draft ESR framework - Water

Pune and the Status of Water

Scope

River basin and water regime in which Pune is located
- Rivers and streams flowing through Pune and reservoirs on these
- Groundwater

Pune city uses surface and ground water, and in the process impacts the physical integrity of the resource, consumes energy and returns water of a certain quality and quantity back to the water regime. The ESR attempts to assess the impact of the city on three aspects related to water:

• Physical integrity of the water regimes (surface and ground) (local and regional impact)
• Physical and chemical quality of the water resource (local and regional impact)
• CO2 released to the atmosphere (global impact)

Why this is important to assess - Impacts on human health locally, regionally and globally

Policy and legislative framework

• Land records (for ecosystem integrity) administered by District Collector
• Water Act (for surface water quality) implemented by MPCB
• Ground water Act (for ground water quantity and quality) administered by GSDA
• BPMC Act (for municipal obligation to supply – linked to net consumption) by PMC
• Irrigation agreement (for water returned to regime and net consumption) by Irrigation dept

Key drivers or factors influencing Water

1. Population growth (for quantity abstracted)
2. Tapping of groundwater for home and commercial uses (for quantity abstracted)
3. Economic growth and pattern of economic activity (for quantity abstracted)
4. Pattern of settlement (for physical integrity of both surface and ground water regimes)
5. Amount of untreated or uncollected sewage and garbage (for quality)
6. Industrial effluents (for quality)
7. Technology used by PMC and private entities (for quality, quantity and energy efficiency)
8. Fiscal instruments (their role as regulatory instruments)
9. Extent of rain water harvesting (for quantity)
   

Status, Trends and Projections of Key Indicators

Primary indicators

1. Physical status of rivers, streams, reservoirs and aquifers (including channel integrity and ecosystem base flows)
2. Water quality in rivers, streams, reservoirs and aquifers
3. Net consumption and where released (supposed to be in Mutha right bank canal as per Irrigation Dept and PMC agreement)
4. Energy used for net consumption (municipal water supply, estimated spend in sump to overhead tank, bore well pumps) (yields global impact of CO2 related to water supply)

Secondary indicators (relate to social and economic aspects)

1. Coverage of households - municipal supply, private (tankers, bore wells – nothing wrong with private supply except bore well difficult to regulate)
2. Municipal spending
3. Technology used

Key Issues and Concerns

Against above selected indicators

1. Physical status of rivers, streams, reservoirs and aquifers channel integrity not maintained; no concept of ecosystem base flows; natural aquifer systems being dismantled and degraded due to construction, etc
2. Water quality in rivers, streams, reservoirs and aquifers is being degraded; toxicity in rivers and reservoirs reaching levels that will affect animal and human health;
3. Net consumption rising and where released (supposed to be in Mutha right bank canal as per agreement)
4. Energy used for net consumption (municipal water supply, estimated spend in sump to overhead tank, bore well pumps) (yields global impact of CO2 related to water supply) - CO2 footprint rising (energy used by water sector)

Secondary indicators (relate to social and economic aspects)

1. Coverage of households - municipal supply, private (tankers, bore wells – nothing wrong with private supply except bore well difficult to regulate)
2. Municipal spending

Concerns related to information, regulatory authority, technology etc

• Policy and legislation gaps and issues of coordination between multiple authorities
• Data and information gaps
• Financial gaps

Response

TBD

Recommendations

Primary

• Physical integrity related
• Quality related
• Consumption related
• CO2 / energy efficiency related

Secondary

• Data collection systems related
• Local policy related

Appendix: Data Sets Contributing to Water Indicators

Primary indicators

Physical status of rivers, streams, reservoirs and aquifers (including channel integrity and ecosystem base flows) and MPCB classification of River I, II, III, IV and A, B, C zones

Data needed
· Channel information
· Aquifer information
· Encroachment
· Base flows

Water quality in rivers, streams, reservoirs and aquifers
Data needed
BOD, COD, pH, turbidity measurements at appropriate locations and times
Proximate measures
- Waste water treatment
- Sewage not captured (informal settlement data)

Net consumption and where released (supposed to be in Mutha right bank canal as per Irrigation Dept and PMC agreement)
Data needed: Quantity measurements before and after (or use proximate measures – which ones?)

Energy used for net consumption (municipal water supply, estimated spend in sump to overhead tank, bore well pumps) (yields global impact of CO2 related to water supply)

Data needed
Municipal supply electricity units used and converted to CO2 equivalent
Number, type of sump and bore well and how long they run (alternatively MSEDCL records on domestic pumpsets – total units used and converted to CO2 equivalent)

Secondary indicators (relate to social and economic aspects)
Coverage of households - municipal supply, private (tankers, bore wells – nothing wrong with private supply except bore well difficult to regulate)