From Access to Assurance: Fixing India’s Water Blindspot Through Technology and Data

India’s development journey is closely linked to how effectively it manages its water resources. As cities grow and demand rises, the focus is gradually shifting from building infrastructure to ensuring that essential services are delivered reliably and sustainably. In the water sector, this calls for greater attention to service quality, continuity, and system efficiency.

To explore these issues, TheCSRUniverse spoke with Dr. Sanjay Dahasahasra, a water-sector expert with over three decades of experience in urban water supply and hydraulic engineering. A former member of the National Task Force on 24×7 Water Supply, Government of India, he has worked extensively with utilities and policymakers to improve the performance and sustainability of water systems.

In this interaction, he shares insights on the key gaps that continue to affect service delivery, and highlights the importance of stronger operations, better data systems, and institutional capacity in building reliable water services across India.

Explore the full interview below.

Q&A

Q. India has significantly expanded tap access through national water missions, but why does reliable 'drink-from-tap' water remain a challenge?

A. India has made significant progress in expanding water supply infrastructure through Jal Jeevan Mission and AMRUT 2.0. programmes, yet achieving reliable “drink-from-tap” quality remains a challenge primarily due to gaps in distribution, operations, and water quality assurance. Many cities still depend on intermittent supply, which leads to pressure fluctuations and increases the risk of contamination through ingress at leak points and joints. Ageing pipelines, especially corroded GI and poorly maintained service connections, further deteriorate water quality by introducing rust, sediments, and potential contaminants.

Another key issue is high non-revenue water (NRW), which stems from leaks, illegal connections, and metering inaccuracies—making it difficult to maintain consistent pressure and control water quality. Inadequate treatment monitoring and lack of residual chlorine management across the distribution network also contribute to unsafe water at the consumer end, even if treatment at the plant is adequate.

Operational challenges play a major role. Many utilities lack DMA-based management, real-time monitoring systems such as SCADA, and skilled personnel for proactive maintenance. Water quality testing is often limited and not continuous, and accountability mechanisms are weak.

In summary, while infrastructure development has advanced, achieving “drink-from-tap” requires a shift toward continuous supply, robust asset management, NRW control, end-to-end water-quality monitoring, and stronger operational discipline.

Q. What are the key “water blind-spot” gaps and why do they persist?

A. The key “water blind-spot” gaps are not about lack of infrastructure alone, but about what is not seen, measured, or managed effectively within the system.

One major blind-spot is distribution networks. While significant investments are made in sources and treatment plants, underground pipelines—especially old, leaking, and poorly mapped systems—remain neglected. Because they are not visible, their condition, leakages, and contamination risks are often underestimated

Another critical gap is non-revenue water (NRW). In many utilities, water losses due to leaks, theft, and metering inaccuracies are not accurately measured. Without proper DMA-based monitoring and reliable data, NRW remains a “hidden loss,” making it difficult to take targeted corrective actions.

A third blind spot is water quality at the consumer end. Even if water leaving the treatment plant meets standards, quality can deteriorate in the distribution system due to intermittent supply, low or negative pressure, and inadequate residual chlorine management. Monitoring is often limited to periodic sampling rather than continuous, real-time assurance.

Service connections, particularly ferrules and old GI pipes, form another overlooked area. These small but numerous components contribute disproportionately to leakages and contamination, yet they are rarely prioritised in rehabilitation programs.

Finally, there is a blind spot in data and accountability. Many utilities lack integrated systems such as GIS, SCADA, and digital twins, resulting in fragmented information and reactive decision-making rather than proactive management.

These gaps persist due to a combination of factors: a historical focus on capital works rather than operations, limited technical capacity, insufficient funding for maintenance, weak institutional accountability, and the inherent difficulty of managing buried, complex infrastructure. Addressing these blind spots requires a shift toward data-driven, continuously monitored, and operation-focused water management systems.

Q. Does India need a fundamental shift in water management?

A. Yes—India does not need entirely new policies, but it does require a fundamental shift in how water systems are managed and operated.

Traditionally, the focus has been on creating infrastructure—building sources, treatment plants, and pipelines. The shift now must be toward service delivery, where the goal is reliable, safe, and continuous (24×7) “drink-from-tap” water for every consumer. This means moving from intermittent to continuous supply, ensuring positive pressure, and maintaining water quality across the entire distribution network.

Equally important is a transition from project-based thinking to performance-based management. Utilities must be accountable for outcomes such as NRW reduction, service continuity, and water quality, rather than just completing construction works. This requires adopting DMA-based operations, universal metering, and data-driven decision-making, using tools such as GIS, SCADA, and digital twins.

There is also a need to shift from reactive to proactive operations—detecting leaks early, managing pressure, systematically maintaining assets, and continuously monitoring water quality. Strengthening institutional capacity, building skilled manpower, and ensuring financial sustainability through volumetric tariffs are essential parts of this transformation.

In essence, the required shift is from an engineering-works approach to a utility-management approach—focused on efficiency, accountability, and customer service.

Q. Are we over-investing in infrastructure versus data and governance?

A. There is a clear tendency to over-invest in physical infrastructure relative to data systems and governance, and this imbalance is a key reason why service outcomes often fall short.

Large investments are typically directed toward visible assets—dams, treatment plants, and pipelines—because they are easier to fund, execute, and showcase. However, comparatively less attention is given to data systems (GIS, SCADA, metering), asset management, and institutional governance, which are essential for efficient operations. As a result, many systems are created but not optimally managed, leading to issues like high NRW, intermittent supply, and inconsistent water quality.

Without accurate data, utilities cannot measure flows, detect leaks, manage pressure, or ensure accountability. Similarly, weak governance—such as lack of performance monitoring, unclear responsibilities, and limited financial discipline—prevents sustained improvements even after infrastructure is built.

The need is not to reduce infrastructure investment, but to rebalance it. A greater share must go toward building digital visibility, strengthening utility institutions, training personnel, and enforcing performance-based management. Even a modest increase in investment in data and governance can significantly improve the efficiency and lifespan of existing infrastructure.

In summary, infrastructure creates capacity, but data and governance ensure performance. Without them, investments do not fully translate into reliable service delivery.

Q. What are the most effective practices to achieve a 24×7 water supply?

A. Achieving 24×7 supply requires a structured, phased, and data-driven approach. A key step is the formation of District Metered Areas, which allow utilities to manage the network in smaller, controllable zones. This must be supported by universal metering, GIS-linked and calibrated hydraulic models, and real-time monitoring systems such as Digital Twin which can predict pipe bursts, leakages and help Non Revenue Water (NRW) reduction. Utilities should begin with pilot areas, demonstrate measurable improvements in continuity, pressure, and water quality, and then scale systematically across the network.

Equally important is aligning procurement and contracting with outcomes, where payments are tied to verified performance indicators such as continuity, quality, and reduction in non-revenue water. In this context, Digital Twin platforms, including those enabled through solutions such as Autodesk Digital Twin, can support utilities in scaling operations by providing a data-driven environment to simulate network performance, validate system behaviour, and ensure that service benchmarks are consistently achieved before wider rollout.

Q. How can technologies like SCADA, GIS, and Digital Twins improve systems?

A. These technologies operate as an integrated system to improve visibility, control, and decision-making. GIS provides a comprehensive asset registry, forming the foundation for planning and maintenance. SCADA systems enable real-time monitoring of flows, pressures, reservoir levels, and water quality parameters, allowing utilities to detect and respond to issues quickly.

Digtal Twins build on this by using calibrated hydraulic models linked to GIS and continuously fed by SCADA real-time data to simulate network behaviour, predict/ forecast performance, and test operational strategies before implementation. For example, companies like Autodesk offer Digital Twin solutions as part of the operational stack, enabling predictive modelling (which is particularly helpful in mitigating epidemics like those that recently occurred in Indore) and system optimisation. This allows utilities to anticipate pressure shortfalls, test pump and valve operations before applying them in the field, optimise chlorine dosing, and respond more effectively to incidents such as bursts or contamination risks.

Together, these tools improve water quality management, optimise pressure, reduce losses, and enable more reliable, data-driven operations.

Q. How can utilities reduce non-revenue water (NRW)?

A. Reducing non-revenue water is essential for both water security and financial sustainability. The first step is establishing a reliable baseline through comprehensive water audits supported by accurate metering and data systems. Once a baseline is established, utilities can implement targeted measures such as DMA-based monitoring, minimum night flow analysis, leakage detection, pipe bursts, pressure management, and improvements in billing and collection systems. NRW reduction can be effectively monitored using a Digital Twin. Alerts are triggered when consumption is indicated as high, which helps locate leak spots. 

Utilities should establish a dedicated NRW cell equipped with leak detection and repair instruments, along with mobile vans to enable rapid response. GIS-based hydraulic modelling often reveals that ageing non-metallic pipelines are a significant source of leakages; hence, utilities should implement a systematic program for their replacement.

A major proportion of losses also occurs in consumer house service connections, particularly at the ferrule. These service pipes are often old, and GI pipes tend to corrode rapidly. Therefore, a focused program to replace such connections with MDPE pipes should be undertaken to reduce leakages and improve system reliability.

Sustained reduction requires embedding NRW targets within governance and contracting frameworks, ensuring that performance is continuously measured and linked to accountability mechanisms.

Q. Will technology replace jobs in the water sector?

A. Technology will not replace jobs in the water sector; rather, it will transform the nature of work and create new opportunities. Traditional manual meter reading is increasingly being replaced by AMR/AMI smart metering systems, while trial-and-error based operations are giving way to SCADA-enabled automated controls. Similarly, reactive leak repairs are being substituted with predictive leak detection tools, and paper-based mapping is being replaced by GIS-based digital records. These advancements reduce low-skill, repetitive tasks but do not eliminate the need for human resources.

At the same time, technology is generating new roles and skill requirements within the sector. There is a growing demand for GIS analysts and hydraulic modelers, SCADA and control system operators, and data analysts focused on NRW and system performance. In addition, smart metering and IoT technicians, along with digital twin specialists and system planners, are becoming essential to modern water utilities. Thus, the workforce is not reduced but reshaped toward more skilled, technology-driven roles.

Technology acts as a force multiplier, not a replacement. Utilities that adopt GIS, SCADA, DMA, and smart metering will still need people—but better trained, more specialised, and more empowered.

Thus, in fact, 24×7 water supply systems need more skilled manpower, not less.

Q. How do improved water systems impact public health and the economy?

A. Improved water systems have a significant impact on both public health and the economy, especially when cities move toward safe, reliable, and continuous (24×7) water supply. From a public health perspective, access to clean and treated water reduces the incidence of waterborne diseases such as Cholera, Typhoid, and Diarrhoea. Continuous water supply systems maintain positive pressure in pipelines, which prevents contamination through back-siphonage—a common problem in intermittent supply. This leads to better hygiene, lower child mortality, reduced healthcare burden, and an overall improvement in quality of life.

Economically, improved water systems enhance productivity and efficiency. Households save considerable time otherwise spent collecting water, allowing greater participation in education and income-generating activities. Reliable water supply supports industries and businesses by reducing operational disruptions and ensuring consistent production. Utilities benefit from reduced non-revenue water (NRW), improved billing and revenue collection, and optimized energy use.

Additionally, investments in water infrastructure generate employment opportunities across construction, operations, and technology-enabled services such as GIS, SCADA, and smart metering. In the long term, healthier populations and efficient urban services contribute to sustainable economic growth and stronger urban resilience.

Q. Are current policies sufficient? What changes are needed?

A. Current policies in India, such as CPHEEO guidelines and AMRUT 2.0, are well-framed and clearly promote 24×7 safe water supply, metering, and NRW reduction. However, the main gap lies in implementation rather than policy design. Many utilities still face challenges like intermittent supply, low metering coverage, weak asset management, and limited technical capacity.

To improve outcomes, the focus should shift to performance-based implementation with clear targets for service quality and NRW reduction. Utilities need strengthening through skilled manpower, dedicated NRW cells, and training in GIS, SCADA, and hydraulic modelling. Universal metering and volumetric tariffs must be adopted for financial sustainability, while DMA-based management should be made standard practice. Stronger accountability and greater use of digital technologies are also essential to achieve reliable 24×7 water supply.

In summary, existing policies are directionally correct but require stronger implementation mechanisms, capacity building, financial reforms, and accountability to achieve the goal of sustainable 24×7 water supply across Indian cities.