Just how important is water to India Inc became apparent recently when India's top industrial lobby group Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) recommended a 10-point agenda for inclusion in the national Water Policy being prepared by the Central government.
Trade lobbies like CII regularly make presentations to the Government, asking for a tweaking of tax rates here, or an anomaly in policy to be removed there. But, this is, perhaps, the first time that an agenda has been charted by the industry on the issue of water.
CII has asked for incentivising state governments to migrate water utilities towards greater financial sustainability and encouraging & implementing public private partnerships in urban water supply systems.
The recommendations assume importance not only as they come from a body that represents some of India's largest business houses as its members, but also for the issue itself.
Water is turning out to be what carbon was during the 1990s and thereafter. Indian industry has become efficient in handling carbon emissions, so much so that several Indian companies are actively trading in carbon credit trading.
However, it is going to take more efforts and a few years to become water-efficient.
CII has called for enacting an over-arching Water Act to signal water sector as an important policy priority, which will enable greater clarity on water rights and bring better participation of users and effective dispute resolution.
This will also encourage water efficiency and create an environment for regulating and conserving water resources – both groundwater and surface.
The recommendations by CII's National Committee on Water list down the recommendations under three broad heads -- policy clarifications, institutional framework and enhancing accountability.
The way ahead should be for the Indian government to unveil a Water Policy that encompasses these three heads, and some more, while Indian industry steps up efforts to reduce its water footprint.
Showing posts with label water policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label water policy. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Monday, March 15, 2010
World's leading companies not forthcoming on water-related risk disclosures: Report
Most companies operating in water-intensive sectors including utilities and computer-chip makers are failing to provide investors with enough information on water-related risks, a report has warned.
Also, investors have almost no idea how their supply chains could be hit by water shortages in the future in several cases, the report -- 'Murky Waters: Corporate Reporting on Water Risk' -- prepared by sustainable investor group CERES and financial services firm UBS, states.
Even though most of these publicly-traded companies depend on water, they do not adequately disclose their financial risks to droughts and future regulations, even as water scarcity problems mount across the world.
The report, released last month, assessed the water-related disclosures of 100 of the world's largest publicly traded companies operating in the food, drink, electricity, mining, oil and gas, semiconductor, chemicals and construction industries.
It scored the companies based on five key categories of disclosure: water accounting, risk assessment, direct operations, supply chain and stakeholder engagement.
Puting the companies' water policies on a scale of up to 100, the report found that even the best-performing firms like beverage giant Diageo, Swiss mining company Xstrata and US electricity provider Pinnacle West, scored not more than 43 points. Eighty of the 100 companies scored fewer than 30 points.
Overall, several companies did not include any information on water risks and performance in their financial filings and provided no data on how water shortages could affect facilities operating in water-stressed regions.
Non-availability of water has emerged as a formidable business risk across the world. Poor water availability as well as an increase in its procurement cost are predicted with increasing frequency and climate change and poor management of water resources are expected to exacerbate the problem of scarcity.
CERES, which is a Boston-based coalition of investors with $8 trillion USD under management, used information collected by Bloomberg LP from corporate reports and financial filings of beverage, chemicals, electric power, food, homebuilding, mining, oil and gas and semiconductor companies. UBS analyzed the data for CERES. Regulatory, reputational and litigation risks related to water supply were also looked into.
The report states that not even one company from the 100 selected had provided detailed water data on its supply chains, despite the fact that many of them operate global supply chains with sizeable water footprints across several areas of the world that are at high risk from the increased incidence of droughts.
It cites some recent incidents where businesses have been affected by regional water shortages. For instance, the drought in California last year reportedly cost the state's agricultural industry $1 billion USD (£640 million) and led to the loss of an estimated 21,000 jobs. Similarly, the 2007-08 drought in Georgia increased costs for energy firm Southern Co by $33 million as it was forced to replace falling hydroelectric power output with more costly fossil fuel-based power.
Also, investors have almost no idea how their supply chains could be hit by water shortages in the future in several cases, the report -- 'Murky Waters: Corporate Reporting on Water Risk' -- prepared by sustainable investor group CERES and financial services firm UBS, states.
Even though most of these publicly-traded companies depend on water, they do not adequately disclose their financial risks to droughts and future regulations, even as water scarcity problems mount across the world.
The report, released last month, assessed the water-related disclosures of 100 of the world's largest publicly traded companies operating in the food, drink, electricity, mining, oil and gas, semiconductor, chemicals and construction industries.
It scored the companies based on five key categories of disclosure: water accounting, risk assessment, direct operations, supply chain and stakeholder engagement.
Puting the companies' water policies on a scale of up to 100, the report found that even the best-performing firms like beverage giant Diageo, Swiss mining company Xstrata and US electricity provider Pinnacle West, scored not more than 43 points. Eighty of the 100 companies scored fewer than 30 points.
Overall, several companies did not include any information on water risks and performance in their financial filings and provided no data on how water shortages could affect facilities operating in water-stressed regions.
Non-availability of water has emerged as a formidable business risk across the world. Poor water availability as well as an increase in its procurement cost are predicted with increasing frequency and climate change and poor management of water resources are expected to exacerbate the problem of scarcity.
CERES, which is a Boston-based coalition of investors with $8 trillion USD under management, used information collected by Bloomberg LP from corporate reports and financial filings of beverage, chemicals, electric power, food, homebuilding, mining, oil and gas and semiconductor companies. UBS analyzed the data for CERES. Regulatory, reputational and litigation risks related to water supply were also looked into.
The report states that not even one company from the 100 selected had provided detailed water data on its supply chains, despite the fact that many of them operate global supply chains with sizeable water footprints across several areas of the world that are at high risk from the increased incidence of droughts.
It cites some recent incidents where businesses have been affected by regional water shortages. For instance, the drought in California last year reportedly cost the state's agricultural industry $1 billion USD (£640 million) and led to the loss of an estimated 21,000 jobs. Similarly, the 2007-08 drought in Georgia increased costs for energy firm Southern Co by $33 million as it was forced to replace falling hydroelectric power output with more costly fossil fuel-based power.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
