Urban water contamination is a systemic governance failure driven by fragmented institutions, technocratic fixes, and neglected water quality and public health
Image Source: Getty Images
Urban water crises can manifest through scarcity, inequity, and contamination. Of these, contamination remains chronically under-addressed. Public surveys indicate that water pollution is the top environmental issue worldwide. A recent incident in Indore, otherwise celebrated as the cleanest city in the country, has once again put the spotlight on water pollution. Municipal water supply contamination led to a microbial outbreak, resulting in the deaths of at least 15 people. But this is not an isolated case. From Flint, Michigan’s water crisis to Shimla’s 2016 Hepatitis outbreak, these incidents reveal the disconnects between surface-level metrics like tap connection coverage and the realities underneath.
Globally, the World Health Organization estimates 1.7 billion people consume water from sources contaminated with faeces, causing approximately 505,000 diarrhoeal deaths each year.
Globally, the World Health Organization estimates 1.7 billion people consume water from sources contaminated with faeces, causing approximately 505,000 diarrhoeal deaths each year. According to the National Family Health Survey, 96 percent of households in India have access to an improved drinking water source. However, incidents like the one in Indore are a stark reminder that mere access to water without ensuring quality is not enough. Seen this way, urban water contamination is not an episodic failure but a systemic outcome of governance that overlooks ecological integrity and public health.
Indore was hit with a severe water contamination crisis, triggering a diarrhoea and vomiting outbreak, which claimed at least 15 lives and affected many in Bhagirathpura. Following the tragedy, the municipal corporation has repaired several leaks in Narmada water pipelines, which are believed to be carrying contaminated water due to seepage from the nearby sewage network. An investigation found a public toilet block right above a leaking main water supply pipeline. While regular water samples are being collected and tested as part of ongoing monitoring, people have also been told to keep their home taps closed and not to use the water. Meanwhile, tankers are supplying water, which is to be boiled and filtered before drinking. Just a few months ago, students of Vellore Institute of Technology (VIT) University near Bhopal protested the poor quality of water and the rising jaundice cases on campus.
Following the Indore incident, there was a continued uproar over typhoid outbreaks in Gandhinagar, Greater Noida, and Hyderabad caused by the contamination of drinking water with sewage and other pathogens. Fecal coliforms were also found in tap water in Kerala. Contrary to the belief that water contamination occurs primarily due to ageing infrastructure and poor maintenance, leaks were found in newly laid water pipelines in Gandhinagar, resulting in the mixing of sewage with the city’s drinking supply.
In 2016, Shimla witnessed a jaundice outbreak due to contamination of the Ashwani Khad, a major source of drinking water that provides 10.8 MLD of water, accounting for 20 percent of the city’s total water requirement. The contamination occurred due to sludge discharge from the malfunctioning Malaya sewage treatment plant, 4 kilometres upstream. The incident reflected a standard design and planning failure, with a sewage treatment plant in such proximity upstream of a water source. The resulting water supply cut led to severe water shortages for months.
These cases show that urban water contamination is not sporadic or geographically exclusive. The issue is embedded in how cities plan, build, and govern their water and sewage infrastructures: poorly designed networks, inadequate separation of sewage and drinking water systems, and weak oversight.
Similar cases of contamination have occurred repeatedly in cities across the world. The 2014 Flint water crisis in Michigan, United States, was a watershed environmental contamination event in contemporary American history. Flint switched its water source from Lake Huron to the Flint River while awaiting a new pipeline connection to Lake Huron that would link the city to the Karegnondi Water Authority (KWA). This decision was made based on cost considerations, after recognising that the Flint River was contaminated by industrial effluents. Eventually, complaints about dark, bad-tasting water led to itchiness, rashes, and hair loss. Lack of chlorine in the water resulted in bacterial growth, causing an outbreak of Legionnaires’ disease in 2014-2015, killing over 80 residents and infecting hundreds more. Finally, the supply of polluted water through the city’s ageing pipes caused leaching, leading to systemic lead contamination in the city’s drinking water. In an earlier case, an outbreak of Cryptosporidium and Giardia was found in Sydney’s water supply in 1998, and health warnings were issued, including comprehensive boil water alerts. In 2025, trifluoroacetic acid and polyfluoroalkyl substances, which can affect fertility and cause certain cancers, were found in the tap water of some cities in France, including Paris.
These cases show that urban water contamination is not sporadic or geographically exclusive. The issue is embedded in how cities plan, build, and govern their water and sewage infrastructures: poorly designed networks, inadequate separation of sewage and drinking water systems, and weak oversight.
Authorities generally blame the intermittent water supply model for possible back siphonage of sewage when the pipes are empty or under low pressure between supply cycles. To address this issue, several cities have adopted ‘transformative’ technocratic interventions, such as the 24×7 water supply model, which ensures full water pressure in the network at all times to prevent sewage seepage. However, such models, besides being capital-intensive, also divert attention from the much more complex and core issues of institutional gaps, pipe leakages, and inequities. For example, the Nagpur 24×7 water supply pilot project continues to record non-revenue water at 27 percent of total supply, against the target of 15 percent. On the other hand, the Shimla 24×7 project was mired in a non-transparent bidding process and unexplained cost escalation. Similarly, in Chandigarh, the 24×7 pilot project in Manimajra drew flak over the tripling of costs, reduced water pressures, and the non-replacement of old pipelines and existing house service connections. Beyond cost recovery and source sustainability challenges, such technocratic propositions include longer sewerage pipelines and pumping activities, which inevitably increase system operation and water production costs and increase the risk of leakages.
The longer the pipeline, the higher the cost of building it, and the higher the risk of leaks. This increases water cost, making it inaccessible to low-income groups.
The growing urban water demand has also made cities explore distant water sources. For example, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation’s Gargai project, approved last year, seeks to supply an additional 440 MLD of water from the Palghar district, over 200 km away. The longer the pipeline, the higher the cost of building it, and the higher the risk of leaks. This increases water cost, making it inaccessible to low-income groups. Water projects must therefore be connected to local sources, with a sewage-first approach, including the rejuvenation of waterbodies.
These examples indicate that technocracy perpetuates growth biases, masking needs for unified governance and equity. Rather than reducing risk, such approaches may reproduce new vulnerabilities through expanded network lengths, higher leakage probabilities, escalating costs, and exclusionary tariff regimes.
Urban water contamination cannot be framed as an episodic malfunction that is addressed through emergency responses or pilot-driven technological fixes. Since it is deeply intertwined with fragmented institutional arrangements, ageing infrastructure, poor maintenance, weak monitoring processes, and a persistent neglect of ecological and equity considerations, this crisis requires pragmatic, evidence-based interventions.
Institutional convergence on water supply, quality, and sewage management would reduce regulatory blind spots and improve accountability across the water cycle. States must undertake systematic audits of water supply sources and distribution networks for chemical and sewage contamination, and regularly identify, repair, or replace pipelines at risk. Water quality monitoring must extend beyond treatment plants to delivery points at the neighbourhood level to ensure that the water supplied meets quality benchmarks.
Urban local bodies (ULBs) and parastatal water authorities in cities such as Delhi, Bengaluru, and Chennai must ensure coordinated urban planning to synchronise activities and prevent inadvertent damage to water and sewerage networks during road excavation, pipeline installation, and infrastructure expansion.
While pressure testing, acoustic leak detection, ground-penetrating radars, real-time leak detection systems, and the use of artificial intelligence have made leak detection more accurate and easier, interventions must move beyond mere leak repairs and prevention to establishing a comprehensive water quality governance framework. Urban local bodies (ULBs) and parastatal water authorities in cities such as Delhi, Bengaluru, and Chennai must ensure coordinated urban planning to synchronise activities and prevent inadvertent damage to water and sewerage networks during road excavation, pipeline installation, and infrastructure expansion. Further, all cities must have contingency plans in place to ensure that overall water supply is not compromised if the main supply line or source becomes contaminated.
Ultimately, a paradigm shift is required: from growth-centric, technocratic urban water management to an ecologically integrated and equity-first governance framework. This transition is essential not only to safeguard public health but also to uphold the Sustainable Development Goals and build cities that are resilient and adaptive to climate stress.
Soma Sarkar is an Associate Fellow with the Urban Studies Programme at the Observer Research Foundation.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Soma Sarkar is an Associate Fellow with ORF’s Urban Studies Programme. Her research interests span the intersections of environment and development, urban studies, water governance, Water, ...
Read More +
PREV
