Reviving rivers is economic sense

INDIA’S rivers are usually framed as environmental casualties. We speak of pollution, encroachment, shrinking flows and disappearing wetlands. Restoration is therefore treated as a clean-up exercise rather than a development strategy. This framing confines ambition and prevents policymakers from recognising that a healthy river system is a growth asset. River rejuvenation should be understood not as an act of environmental goodwill but as a strategic investment in agriculture, fisheries and urban resilience.

Agriculture is the clearest example. River basins support some of the country’s most productive farmlands, yet policy continues to treat farms and rivers as separate domains. Soil moisture, groundwater levels, crop yields and river health form a single hydrological system. When catchments degrade and natural storage declines, farmers depend on deeper borewells, which push up energy costs and accelerate aquifer depletion. Restoration provides a direct corrective. Recharged floodplains, revived feeder channels and protected riparian zones increase surface water availability and reduce reliance on groundwater. This stabilises irrigation, lowers input costs and makes the wider food economy less vulnerable to climatic swings.

Recent experience in Tamil Nadu illustrates this potential. The Naganadhi, once dry for nearly two decades, saw flows return after communities and volunteers constructed contour trenches, check dams and recharge structures across its catchment. The economic impact was immediate. Groundwater levels rose, abandoned irrigation wells began functioning again and households reduced expenditure on tanker water. Farmers reported timely sowing, expansion of rabi crops and a shift towards higher value cultivation because water security improved. This was achieved without large capital outlays, demonstrating that hydrological restoration is a low cost and high return form of rural risk management.

River health is equally central to inland fisheries. India is one of the world’s largest fish producing nations, ranked third globally in total production. Yet inland fisheries operate below potential because degraded rivers reduce breeding grounds and alter water chemistry. Cleaner water, restored wetlands and more natural flow regimes can reverse these ecological constraints and strengthen local nutrition and livelihoods.

Uttar Pradesh provides a useful example of how this can work in practice. The Bhaisahi River in Mau district was revived along more than forty kilometres through labour intensive works undertaken largely under the national rural employment guarantee. The project generated significant employment during implementation and improved soil moisture locally. As flow returned, farmers expanded rabi cultivation and small inland fisheries re-emerged in stretches that had been dry. The gains were therefore economic as well as ecological and were achieved by aligning restoration with existing employment and rural development instruments.

Urban India faces a different set of pressures but rivers remain central to resilience. Cities struggle with flooding, water scarcity and extreme heat. Restored rivers, tanks and wetlands act as natural infrastructure that moderates these risks. When riverbanks and associated water- bodies are restored with permeable surfaces and vegetation, cities gain buffers that store rainfall and reduce the burden on storm-water drains. This directly cuts the economic losses that routinely accompany intense monsoon events.

Chennai offers a compelling case. The city has restored and desilted hundreds of ponds, tanks and wetlands connected to its river system. Recent monsoon cycles have shown that these restored water-bodies can store more than one trillion cubic feet of water, significantly reducing the intensity and duration of flooding in several neighbourhoods. The benefits are measurable: lower damage to homes and businesses, reduced disruption to transport and better groundwater recharge during dry months. Wetland restoration has also improved biodiversity and enhanced land values in adjoining areas. These are not incidental gains but the result of treating water-bodies as assets rather than liabilities.

These examples reflect a broader truth. India has already invested heavily in river systems, most notably through the Namami Gange programme which has had more than twenty thousand crore rupees allocated over a ten year period and has disbursed more than eighty per cent of those funds. Yet national outcomes remain uneven. The number of polluted river stretches has declined only marginally in recent assessments and sewage treatment capacity still lags far behind wastewater generation in many urban centres. Wetland protection also remains limited, with only a very small proportion of the country’s identified wetlands formally notified under existing rules. These structural weaknesses prevent restoration from achieving its full economic potential.

To reposition river restoration as a growth policy, three reforms are essential. The first is institutional integration. Responsibility for rivers is currently split across departments for water resources, agriculture, fisheries, urban development and environment. This results in fragmented planning. States would benefit from basin level authorities with mandates that cut across sectors and with budgets that link ecological outcomes to economic returns. Such authorities should manage restoration as a portfolio of growth enhancing assets.

The second is financing. Current funding remains dominated by central schemes and state budgets, which constrains scale. Blended finance models that combine public funds with development finance and impact investment can support larger, longer term restoration efforts, provided states quantify the economic value of outcomes such as reduced flood damage, improved groundwater recharge and enhanced agricultural productivity.

The third is community engagement. The most successful restoration efforts, including the Naganadhi and Bhaisahi cases, embedded local communities in design and execution. This reduced conflict, ensured local relevance and translated ecological gains into livelihood gains. Formal mechanisms for community consultation should therefore be central to any restoration programme.

Above all, India needs a conceptual shift. Rivers must be recognised not as drains requiring occasional clean up but as living systems that underpin agriculture, fisheries, urban safety and water security. The case studies from Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and Chennai show that restoration can yield clear economic dividends. The task now is to scale these successes and integrate them into wider development planning.

If India places rivers at the centre of its growth strategy, it will not only revive ecological health but also build a more resilient and productive economy. The country’s rivers have sustained civilisation for millennia. With the right policies, they can sustain its next phase of development too.

The writer is an independent commentator on environment and development issues, with a particular interest in water, agriculture and sustainability challenges facing India