Available via license: CC BY-NC 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Making water flow in Bengaluru: planning for the resilience of water supply in a semi-arid city © 2016 Hita Unnikrishnan, et al. This is an Open
Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.
org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly
cited. 1
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Making water flow in Bengaluru: planning for the
resilience of water supply in a semi-arid city
Hita Unnikrishnan1,2*, Seema Mundoli1 and Harini Nagendra1
1 Azim Premji University, PES Institute of Technology Campus, Pixel Park, B Block, Electronics City, Hosur Road,
Bengaluru – 560100, Karnataka, India
2 Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), Royal Enclave, Sriramapura, Jakkur PO, Ben-
galuru – 560064, Karnataka, India
Abstract: The south Indian city of Bengaluru (formerly Bangalore) has a long history of human occupation. Today as
one of the fastest growing cities in the world, Bengaluru is unusual in the fact that it is an old city, located at a distance
from perennial sources of fresh water. While in the precolonial past, it depended upon an interconnected system of
rainwater harvesting via lakes and wells, today it relies on water that is pumped from a river at a distance of over a hun-
dred kilometres.
This paper traces the evolution of Bengaluru’s water supply infrastructure from the precolonial past into the present
day. We posit that the shift of the city’s dependence on water from local to distant sources, with the advent of technol-
ogy and the introduction of centralized piped water, has weakened local residents’ and policy makers’ awareness of the
importance of conservation of local ecosystems. The resulting degradation and conversion of the city’s water bodies has
reduced the resilience of Bengaluru to flooding and drought, especially affecting the poorest and most vulnerable of its
residents. The disruption of the links between water and other forms of commons, including grazing lands, fishing areas
and wooded groves, has further fragmented the once-organic connection between the city and its ecosystems, with
widespread construction on wetlands leading to flooding and water scarcity in different seasons. In an era of increas-
ing climate change, cities in semi-arid environments such as Bengaluru will be hit by problems of water scarcity. We
stress the need to develop an integrated perspective that considers the importance of local ecosystems as commons for
increased urban resilience.
Keywords: Lakes, wells, resilience, urban infrastructure
*Correspondence to: Hita Unnikrishnan, Azim Premji University, PES Institute of Technology Campus, Pixel Park, B Block, Electronics
City, Hosur Road, Bengaluru – 560100, Karnataka, India; Email: hita.unnikrishnan@apu.edu.in
Received: September 17, 2016; Accepted: November 20, 2016; Published Online: February 10, 2017
Citation: Unnikrishnan H, Mundoli S and Nagendra H, 2017, Making water flow in Bengaluru: planning for the resilience of water
supply in a semi-arid city. Journal of Sustainable Urbanization, Planning and Progress, vol.2(1): 1–11. http://doi.org/
10.18063/JSUPP.2017.01.002.
1. Introduction
rbanization is taking place at increasingly
rapid rates of progression, leading to large-
scale transformations in land use and land
cover across the world[1]. The rapid growth of cities
has led to a host of environmental challenges, of whi-
ch water scarcity is one of the most apparent and wid-
espread[2].
Challenges of water availability and access are es-
pecially pronounced in the context of developing
countries such as India, given the high population
U
Making water flow in Bengaluru: planning for the resilience of water supply in a semi-arid city
2 Journal of Sustainable Urbanization, Planning and Progress (2017)–Volume 2, Issue 1
density and inequity in access to resources[3]. Cities in
India today face frequent challenges of droughts lead-
ing to frequent conditions of water scarcity[4]. Water
therefore becomes a highly contested resource, creat-
ing massive conflicts and disputes both locally as well
as regionally over its management and appropriation[5].
An example of one such conflict is the ongoing Cau-
very Water Dispute between the south Indian states of
Karnataka and Tamil Nadu over the waters of the river
Cauvery[5]. In such cases, while states and bureaucra-
cies are engaged in legal battles over water, the most
affected are marginalized communities for whom wa-
ter represents lives and livelihoods[6]. At the same time,
with increased focus on meeting the demands of their
rapidly increasing demographics, cities have over time
forgotten traditional methods of water storage, har-
vesting, and recharge[7]. Many traditional water stor-
age and harvesting structures across the country thus
have been dismantled, built over, or degraded. Exam-
ples include the massive, ornate stepwells (baolis)
scattered throughout north and central India, the tanks
dotting the south, and open wells across the country[7].
They are unable to perform their role in enhancing the
water security of the landscape of which they were
once an integral part[7]. Furthermore, the social capital
of communities once centred on water harvesting sys-
tems and other forms of associated commons such as
grazing lands and wooded groves has been disrupted,
affecting the lifestyles of communities dependent up-
on them[8].
This paper is focused on the city of Bengaluru (for-
merly Bangalore), in the south Indian state of Karna-
taka. Known famously as the Garden City of India,
and internationally known for its Information Tech-
nology industry, Bengaluru is located in a semi- arid
region, distant from large rivers, and faces frequent
challenges of acute water shortage[9]. Yet, it has also
been a city with a long history of settlement[10, 11]. How
did the city survive and grow in a water-scarce land-
scape, and what lessons can we learn from its past that
may be relevant for its resilience today? Through a
narrative of changes in the history of water supply in
Bengaluru from its precolonial past to the present day,
we examine these questions.
2. Methods
We conducted detailed analysis of archival records
and historical maps from the Karnataka State Archives
in Bengaluru, the Divisional Archives in Mysuru, the
Mythic Society of India in Bengaluru, and the British
Library in London. We also conducted field research
on the current uses of commons, with semi-structured
interviews of commons users to understand recent
changes in access and usage.
Drawing on old maps, we examined changes in
lakes in the older parts of Bengaluru from the late 19th
century to current times. The “Map of Bangalore Can-
tonment and its Environs for the Year 1884–1885”
was referenced from the Mythic Society of India, Beng-
aluru. The “Bangalore Guide Map for the year 1935–36,”
published by the Survey of India in 1935, was ob-
tained from the Indian Institute of World Culture,
Bengaluru. 1:25,000 scale topographic maps dating to
the 1970s were obtained from the Survey of India’s
Bengaluru Office. All maps were scanned, georefere-
nced to Google Earth images, and then digitised to
look at changes in the number and extent of lakes.
Field research was conducted around 21 lakes aro-
und the city, some of which are no longer extant over
three years, i.e., from 2012 to 2015. The lakes were
chosen using a process of stratified sampling across
gradients of size. They were distributed across the city
and ranged from those located within its core to those
situated in its peripheral peri-urban zones. Figure 1
shows the location of each of these study sites as loc-
ated within the current administrative boundaries of
Figure 1. Map showing the study sites within administrative
boundary of Bengaluru.
Hita Unnikrishnan, Seema Mundoli and Harini Nagendra
Journal of Sustainable Urbanization, Planning and Progress (2017)–Volume 2, Issue 1 3
the city. At each lake, we recorded the social and eco-
logical uses through a combination of field observa-
tions, archival literature, and interviews with resource
users. The archival material we used for the study was
obtained from the holdings of the Karnataka State
Archives in Bengaluru, the Divisional Archives in
Mysuru, and the British Library in London. The mate-
rial analysed covered the period between the late 18th
century (about 1799 CE onwards) and the year 1935.
These files consisted of government records of use,
regulation, and conflicts surrounding water bodies with-
in the city.
They also detailed various schemes — proposed
and implemented — to provide water for Bengaluru.
Additional historical information was obtained by
consulting secondary sources of information in the
form of old school magazines and records of speeches
made by former ministers of the colonial city.
The former were obtained through internet-based
searches, while the latter from the collections of the
Mythic Society, Bengaluru. We also conducted oral
history interviews with communities living around ea-
ch lake to understand changes they perceived in
their relations with the water bodies over time. A desc-
ription of each of these 21 lakes is provided in Table 1.
A total of 129 such interviews were conducted
around the study sites to arrive at the results we pre-
sent here. As the focus of our study was the history of
use and change around water bodies, we conducted
interviews with elderly members of communities liv-
ing around the lake selected through a process of
snowball sampling where one interviewee would di-
rect us to the next. During these interviews, we asked
the interviewees what they remembered of the incep-
tion and use of the lakes, changes perceived in the
quality and utility of the resource as well as perceived
causes for these changes. We also examined how
communities perceived themselves as having been
Table 1. Characteristics of study area
Name of lake Area (Acres) Size* Degree of urbanity Level of pollution Governance of lake Managing Authority**
Pillappanakatte 3.48 S Low High Public Unknown
Thubarahalli lake 8.46 S Medium Medium Public BDA
Bhattarahalli lake 8.91 S Medium Medium Public BDA
Kelaginakere lake 10.01 S Low Medium Leased BBMP
Doddakallasandra lake 13.30 S Low Medium Public BDA
Nyaayanayakanahalli 18.82 S Low High Public BDA
Rampura lake 42.24 S Medium High Public BDA
Sawl kere 50.35 M High Low Public BBMP
Sarakki lake 52.84 M High High Public BDA
Kogilu lake 60.05 M Low Low Public BBMP
Jakkur lake 61.87 M Medium Low Public BDA
Mallathalli lake 67.56 M Low Medium Public BDA
Rachenahalli lake 76.43 M Medium Medium Public BDA
Hebbal lake 89.09 M High Medium Private LDA
Madivala lake 99.40 L High Medium Public FD
Kalkere lake 117.22 L Medium High Public BBMP
Agara lake 193.70 L High Medium Private LDA
Yelahanka lake 196.66 L High Medium Public BBMP
Varthur lake 376.57 L High High Public BDA
Bellandur lake 829.02 L High High Public BDA
Sampangi lake NA*** NA High NA Converted into
built space
Department of
Youth Services and
Sports, Karnataka
*S = Small sized lakes; M = Medium sized lakes; and L = Large sized lakes
**LDA = Lake Development Authority; BDA = Bangalore Development Authority; BBMP = Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike; and FD =
Forest Department
*** NA = Not applicable as lake has been converted into a built space.
Making water flow in Bengaluru: planning for the resilience of water supply in a semi-arid city
4 Journal of Sustainable Urbanization, Planning and Progress (2017)–Volume 2, Issue 1
affected by landscape transformations around each
lake. At each study site, our interviews were supple-
mented with field observations made through field vi-
sits conducted over two seasons (pre-monsoon and post-
monsoon). Adopting this mixed-methods approach,
we were able to trace out the various provisioning and
cultural dependencies communities have formed aro-
und lakes in the city of Bengaluru.
3. Results
Figure 2 shows the changes in the distribution of tra-
ditional water bodies (lakes) within the area covered
by the older parts of Bengaluru city (colonial Benga-
luru) between the years 1885 and 2014. It shows that
the number of lakes has drastically reduced in the in-
tervening years.
Figure 2. Changes in the distribution of lakes within the colo-
nial boundaries of Bengaluru between the years 1885 and 2014.
Epigraphic inscriptions discovered around the city
reveal that the landscape surrounding present day
Bengaluru was ruled from about the 6th Century AD
by a succession of dynasties including the Gangas, Ch-
olas, Pallavas, Hoysalas and the Vijayanagaras[11]. Th-
ese dynasties placed great economic, spiritual, and
cultural importance on exploiting the undulating terra-
in to harvest rainwater from seasonal rivulets and stre-
ams in the form of networked cascading reservoirs —
tanks or lakes — to capture and provide rainwater to
local communities[12].
Great importance was attached to their management
and upkeep, with inscriptions listing a number of cur-
ses aimed at discouraging potential violators[10]. Lakes
were connected in networks along topographic gradi-
ents, with water flowing from upstream lakes to those
located downstream at lower elevations, via storm
water channels (locally known as kaluves)[12]. A semi-
arid landscape covered by thorny scrub was thus trans-
formed into a fertile irrigated landscape with paddy
fields, fruit, and flowering orchards, large herds of
cattle, and thriving village settlements, by the design
of interconnected rainwater harvesting systems.
The market town of Bengaluru was founded in 1536
AD by a local chieftain Kempe Gowda[10]. Kempe Go-
wda and his successors are credited with the construc-
tion of a number of new lakes across the city, some of
which still survive to the present day. To supplement
the water in lakes, a number of smaller tanks — kaly-
anis — and massive open wells were constructed,
which connected to the shallow ground water table
recharged by the lakes on the surface[10]. These water
bodies were managed as commons and community
life revolved around them[8].
Each lake was connected to one or more local areas
that jointly undertook the responsibility of its mainte-
nance and upkeep. Rules governed the access, appro-
priation, and management of these resources bearing
in mind the various dependencies associated with the
water body as well as the number of dependents[12].
Both archival as well as oral histories have shown that
water from the lake was used for various purposes —
irrigation, brick making, laundering, fishing, domestic
needs, and drinking. Grass and green leafy vegetables
growing on the banks of the lake were harvested for
use as fodder and food respectively[8]. Our interview-
ees recall that certain plants, chief among which was
called the Onagane soppu (Alternanthera sessilis) we-
re particularly harvested as a nutritional supplement in
times of drought. They also recalled that the banks of
the lake provided a space for livestock grazing and the
dung so left behind was collected both for fuel and
manure. In the case of the Hebbal lake particularly, in-
terviewees remembered the intense competition with
which local women would reach the lake in order to
collect cow dung. Some of the collected resource was
used to meet subsistence needs, while the rest contrib-
uted to increasing the income generated by the family.
Irrigation too was regulated around the lake by means
of manual sluice gates operated by specific members of
the community (the neerganti or the village waterman)
Hita Unnikrishnan, Seema Mundoli and Harini Nagendra
Journal of Sustainable Urbanization, Planning and Progress (2017)–Volume 2, Issue 1 5
who also monitored levels of water in the lake[12, 13].
Lakes were further associated with a number of
other commons integral to the lifestyles of village
communities. Wooded groves or gundathopes planted
with fruit trees were situated in close proximity to
lakes and they provided shade and shelter both to no-
madic tribes as well as the livestock herders of the
village associated with the water body[3, 8, 14]. Water is
held sacred in many communities and therefore ceme-
teries or burial grounds for both humans and livestock
were situated close to lakes. Our field studies have
documented the continued presence of some or all of
these structures in the immediate vicinity of the extant
lakes we have studied. Gomalas or grazing commons
were also part of the commons associated with water
bodies[13]. The strong ties communities built around
their water resources were further reflected in the cul-
tural traditions that revolved around water bodies,
many of which continue into the present day[3, 15].
These traditions included various forms of worship of
female deities associated with water bodies[3], rituals
related to flooding and overflow cycles of the water
body such as the Gange Pooje (a tradition where nu-
merous oil lamps were lit and set afloat on the lake
during its first overflow of the year)[16], and festivals
such as the Karaga[15].
In 1799 AD, after the defeat of the ruler Tipu Sultan,
the city of Bengaluru passed into the hands of the
British[10, 17]. At this point in time, lakes and wells still
formed the primary source of water for the population,
and agriculture was one of the primary occupations[18].
Thus, narratives of the time describe how advancing
armies were deterred or slowed down by the presence
of vast flooded marshlands and paddy fields in their
path[15]. The British regiments established the Can-
tonment in 1807 AD, to the east of the then existing
city limits. From 1831, the British established direct
rule over Bengaluru until 1881, when they signed an
agreement of Rendition with the Wodeyar rulers of the
Mysore State[16]. The city was then divided into two
zones — the British governed Cantonment and the
native city or the Pete, managed under the jurisdiction
of the Mysore state.
Lakes and open wells continued to meet the water
needs of this increased population, with the Canton-
ment and Pete sharing resources from certain lakes
dotting the cityscape[18]. Yet, it was also around this
time that sewerage systems of the city directed their
contents into some of the city lakes (which were not
used for the supply of water), heralding an era where
lakes began to be contaminated in different forms[19].
In 1830 AD, with a view to improving the water sup-
ply of the city, various lakes began to see restoration
attempts to rectify damages caused due to prolonged
conditions of war[20]. Between 1873 and 1882, new
tanks such as the Millers tanks and the Sankey tank
were constructed to augment existing water supply
following conditions of drought and famine in the
preceding years[21]. The Mysore Gazetteer of 1897
records an impressive number of 2388 government
tanks, 16725 wells, and 254 canals present within the
District of Bangalore[18]. Yet, this supply of water was
insufficient for the city, which experienced a number
of successive years of drought towards the late 1880s.
The city started looking beyond its local boundaries to
meet its water needs. The year 1895 AD saw the in-
troduction of piped water from the Hesarghatta reser-
voir (artificially created by damming the river Arkav-
athi), about 13 miles to the northwest of the city[18, 20].
Three additional lakes — the Kakol, Byate, and the
Yellemallappachetty — were further created in the
outskirts of the city[3].
The introduction of piped water to the city from a
distant reservoir heralded a new era in how lakes
within the city began to be perceived and used. Lakes
now (keeping with the dominant colonial ethic of rec-
reation and aesthetics) began to be seen as picturesque
spaces for recreation, exercise, and nature apprecia-
tion[16]. Uses of the water body that were perceived to
spoil the beauty of the landscape were prohibited.
Examples include the extraction of mud from the lake
for purposes of brick making and the excavation of
wells around the water body[22]. In the case of Sam-
pangi lake, for instance, our interviewees remembered
that uses such as grazing cattle on the banks of the
lake, washing clothes and collecting fodder grass be-
gan to be regulated by uniformed guards stationed
around the water body[16].
Our research into the social ecological history of
the Sampangi lake has revealed that the deepening of
the lake to provide additional water to agriculturists
began to be seen as a potential threat to the low-lying
bungalows and establishments that had sprung up
around it by the year 1904 AD[16]. While such activi-
ties sparked protests among the farmers and horticul-
turists[16], they also saw people gradually distancing
themselves from both the maintenance of the water
body as well as their dependencies on it. Interviewees
recalled that migration of resource-dependent com-
munities became widespread, and such areas began to
Making water flow in Bengaluru: planning for the resilience of water supply in a semi-arid city
6 Journal of Sustainable Urbanization, Planning and Progress (2017)–Volume 2, Issue 1
be repurposed in creating newer settlements either to
house the landless poor or the urban middle classes[16].
The lake began to become more polluted with the
constant inflow of sewage. Its seasonality was lost and
it became a perennial pool of sewage, whose only
value now lay in fishing and extraction of fodder.
Consequently, cultural traditions associated with the
water body too began to dwindle, with many wa-
ter-based traditions becoming mere memories. Signif-
icant portions of the lake were drained and used in
many ways such as for compensatory efforts, or for
use as polo grounds[16]. Lakes, in general, also began
to be perceived as breeding spaces for mosquitoes[23].
While these changes were occurring, the most affected
individuals included those whose livelihoods depend-
ed upon the water body such as the farmer, the fish-
erman, and the pastoralist[16]. These people were de-
prived of a formerly important resource, further en-
hancing their ongoing disconnect from lakes. Inter-
viewees around the Sampangi lake recalled that many
horticulturists migrated away from the resource, leav-
ing behind space for newer settlers to occupy. These
new settlements however did not share the same utili-
tarian or cultural connect with the water body as their
predecessors, further influencing the decline of the
social-ecological system.
The years 1925 and 1926 saw the failure of two
consecutive monsoons, plunging the city into condi-
tions of severe drought[22]. This necessitated aug-
menting the existing water infrastructure, resulting in
the construction of the Thippegondanahalli reservoir
in the outskirts of the city[17]. Lakes and wells within
the city fell into further disuse with many water bodies
drying and in some cases (such as the Sampangi) be-
ing used as playgrounds or as spaces to conduct cattle
fairs, and carnivals[16, 24]. In other parts of the state,
lakes began to be seen as spaces within which to de-
velop public amenities such as stadiums and bus ter-
minals — a trend which began to be repeated within
Bengaluru as well[22]. Existing lakes were either con-
verted into residential and resettlement sites, or public
amenities such as sports stadiums, forever destroying
the deeply ecological character of these resources.
This trend of converting water bodies into built
spaces continued well after India gained independence
in 1947. Lakes were either seen as aesthetic adorn-
ments to the landscapes or as barren spaces suited to
meeting the housing needs of a growing city[25]. Water
supply continued to be sourced from the Thippegond-
anahalli and Hesarghatta reservoirs until about the year
1969[26]. With the formation of the Bangalore Water
Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB) in 1964 and
the inception of the Cauvery Water Supply Scheme in
the year 1969 (currently ongoing in several stages),
Bengaluru shifted its entire water dependency upon
the river Cauvery, located at a distance of over a hun-
dred kilometres from the city, at a lower elevation[26].
A number of lakes were further drained as part of ef-
forts aimed at malaria eradication, and converted into
malls, bus stands, and stadiums[27–29]. In some of these
places today, there exists a collective memory of the
lake having been part of the landscape (examples in-
clude the Sampangi lake, and the Koramangala lake).
However, in others, we found it immensely challeng-
ing to find interviewees who recalled the presence of
the water body, or remember its name (examples in-
clude field interviews conducted around Neelasandra
and Byappanahalli regions of Bengaluru).
By about 1985, local residents, particularly in and
around the heart of the city (Bellandur, Varthur and
Agara lakes, to name a few) recall that their lakes had
become nothing more than sewerage collection units.
They had become extremely polluted not just with the
entry of sewage into their depths but also industrial
and chemically laden agricultural runoff (such as
around the Yelahanka lake). Lakes no longer met the
drinking water needs of communities dependent upon
them, except in some cases (such as Kalkere lake)
where wandering pastoralists consume the heavily
polluted water even today. Domestic uses such as
bathing and washing vessels also ceased around most
of these lakes[30]. Pastoralism, brick making, and com-
mercial laundering of clothes are examples of tradi-
tional livelihoods that have persisted into the present
day, albeit in small pockets of the urban landscape.
Connectivity between lakes was lost due to encroa-
chments and building over of the channels that con-
nected various lakes. In addition, the seasonality of
lakes was lost because of the perennial inflow of sew-
age into the lakes. Both these activities led to the
stagnation and further pollution of the once flowing
water in these lakes. In such places, older residents are
able to point out specific locations where former
channels leading into and out of the lakes used to flow,
as well as those of the village groves and grazing com-
mons. In the case of the Bhattarahalli lake, residents
have even resorted to using legal instruments to recla-
im some of their urban commons, though with little
success.
Uses of lakes that were dependent upon the season-
Hita Unnikrishnan, Seema Mundoli and Harini Nagendra
Journal of Sustainable Urbanization, Planning and Progress (2017)–Volume 2, Issue 1 7
ality of lakes too halted. Rapid urbanization that took
place around most lakes within the urban and peri-
urban landscapes of the city further reduced agricul-
tural dependency upon lakes[30]. The polluted status of
lakes, especially from about 2000 to mid-2014 has
discouraged fishing around some of these lakes. Inter-
views we conducted around some of these lakes
(Rampura lake, Bellandur lake, and Pillappanakatte)
reveal a sense of loss within former fishing communi-
ties when they spot fishes (some of them weighing
over 7 kilograms) swimming within the murky depths,
but are unable to harvest them to supplement their
regular incomes.
Around this point in time, responsibility for the
maintenance and upkeep of lakes rested entirely upon
the state. Furthermore, around the early 2000s, certain
lakes within the study area underwent differing proc-
esses of enclosure such as leasing out for maintenance
(Kelaginakere), creation of public parks with paid en-
try (Madivala lake) and Public Private Partnerships
(PPPs) (Hebbal and Agara lakes). Such undertakings
have reduced the more utilitarian and spiritual de-
pendencies built around the water bodies. At the same
time, they actively encourage middle-class and bour-
geois notions of aesthetics and recreation, unwittingly
excluding a significant population of ecosystem users
from the resource. Another way in which resource
dependents have been alienated are the restrictions on
timing, patrolling by home guards and active discour-
agement of traditional activities introduced after state
led or community led rejuvenation in many lakes. In-
terviewees recall that these changes imposed restric-
tions upon traditional users in the form of gated entry,
fences, and levy of entry charges and the boom of
middle to upper middle class real estate around them.
Along with these restrictions, development of the en-
closed lakes has proceeded with strong emphasis on
building the aesthetic and recreational value of the
water body.
These dominant perceptions favouring aesthetics
and recreational value for water bodies have inher-
ently distanced traditional livelihoods such as brick
making and pastoralism, which were seen to be
against that ethic. Villagers around each of these lakes
reported a strong disconnect from the water body, so
much so that formerly integral cultural practices
around the water body were also discontinued. In ad-
dition, people hesitate to go near the lake or its pe-
rimeter, while expressing a feeling of being powerless
to effect any change. Also, in the case of certain lakes,
informal, unmanned entry points are used by some
traditional users to derive certain provisioning eco-
system services (such as fodder grass), though with a
high risk of eviction from the premises.
This trend of distancing long-term village residents
from their lakes has continued into the present day.
While leasing out of lakes and PPPs has been discon-
tinued mostly due to citizen led protests against these
practices[31], newer forms of enclosure continue to
omit traditional users from accessing benefits from
these water bodies. Due to the high levels of pollution,
many lakes in the study area (examples include Ram-
pura, Bellandur, and Varthur lakes) were covered by
froth from detergents used by city residents. In these
lakes, pastoralism and the collection of fodder grass
from lakes has been adversely impacted.
In the last decade, great attention has been paid to
the condition of lakes within the city, especially with
focus on their aesthetic potential. Further, at the level
of legislations too action has been taken to clear lakes
of encroachments and unauthorized construction
around water bodies. Keeping with this larger climate
of attention to water bodies, the city has seen the rise
of many localized lake protection groups comprising
of middle to upper middle class urban residents living
around lakes. At the other end of the spectrum are
state led rejuvenation efforts which seek to divert
sewage away from lakes, and develop them into aes-
thetically appealing lung spaces for the city. Through
interactions between these two groups, certain lakes
(such as Kogilu, Sawlkere, and Rachenahalli lakes)
have been earmarked for rejuvenation and subsequent
maintenance. Building upon the ethic of enclosure,
these lakes too have had treatments ranging from
draining polluted water, dredging, and diversion of
sewage. They have also been landscaped to include
parks and jogging tracks, while being fenced and pa-
trolled by home guards. Restrictions are strictly im-
posed with respect to access into the water body ex-
cept in the case of tender based fishing activities. Tra-
ditional occupations such as commercial laundering
and grazing cattle are prohibited especially within the
fenced perimeter of the lake. However, in some lakes,
respondents are permitted to enter the lake (within the
restrictions imposed on timing) and harvest fodder
grass.
Our studies indicate that lakes closer to the urban
centres have already distanced their traditional com-
munities for the most part, while those in peri-urban
regions are progressing steadily towards doing so.
Making water flow in Bengaluru: planning for the resilience of water supply in a semi-arid city
8 Journal of Sustainable Urbanization, Planning and Progress (2017)–Volume 2, Issue 1
Increasing real estate around lakes, coupled with fur-
ther losses in connectivity, and the gating of lakes has
further widened the gap between communities and the
formerly important resource.
4. Discussion
This paper demonstrates changes in the waterscape of
the city of Bengaluru, both at the level of providing
water to a city as well as the strong interpersonal rela-
tionships that people build with a source of water. It
shows how as the city grew and expanded, it looked to
ever-distant sources of water. In doing so, the connec-
tion to local sources of water was disrupted. Conse-
quently, the perception and use of water bodies as lo-
cal commons, on which people depended for subsist-
ence, livelihoods, worship and recreation was altered.
Lakes became considered as areas to be preserved for
biodiversity, aesthetics, and recreation[3]. They have
consequently evolved and transformed into their con-
temporary identities concomitant with changes in how
they became used and imagined. Through the intro-
duction and establishment of centralized piped water
supply systems and the rapid pace of urbanization and
migrations both into and out of the city, these spaces
have come to be perceived through different lenses
than what they were originally meant to be.
While lakes then began to be seen in these terms,
benefiting only certain sections of the society (for
whom aesthetics and recreation assumed great signif-
icance), it also affected the lives of the urban margin-
alized whose livelihoods depended upon the water
body. This created a distancing of such communities
from the resource, leading to neglect in its use and
subsequent maintenance. Their vulnerability to de-
velopment and urbanization increased, while at the
same time reducing the city’s capacity to deal with
potential conditions of drought and flooding during
extreme weather events.
5. Conclusion
While this study focuses on lakes in the city of Ben-
galuru, insights provided by this study are relevant to
other urban ecosystem resources in cities across the
globe, when the local link between maintenance and
use is disrupted. In documenting the complexity of
this change and its implications for the present day,
this study also underscores the importance of under-
standing the historical changes in the use of and gov-
ernance of urban commons. It is clear that there is
continued prioritization of certain forms of ecosystems
uses from historical times into present day planning
and policy mechanisms. Therefore, it becomes im-
perative that present day mechanisms of ecosystem
governance should necessarily be guided by knowl-
edge of how exclusionary regimes have operated in
the past and how events of long ago have shaped and
moulded the landscape of the present[16].
The appropriation of and exclusion from urban
commons highlighted in this study is supported by
examples from other cities of India as well[32–35]. We
argue that, given the diverse threats to continued and
equitable distribution benefits from the urban com-
mons, there needs to be increased policy attention to
dealing with contemporary management regimes that
exacerbate exclusion. Democratic governance of ur-
ban commons has to be socially just, inclusive, and
must take close cognizance of the diverse uses and
values among all residents of the city.
On a broader level, lakes and associated water bod-
ies (wells, stepwells and smaller kalyanis or tanks)
have been integral to maintaining the water security of
the city for centuries. Today, the city relies upon water
sourced from distant rivers and reservoirs to meet its
needs, while a potential local source of water has be-
come polluted, dried up or been removed due to the
pressures of urbanization[3]. At the same time, some
studies have forecasted that the city is likely to run out
of water in the coming decades[36]. Given these grim
prospects, we need to better understand the processes
of change and the factors we need to consider in order
to reverse the process[3]. A city’s innate resilience lies
in its ability to absorb changes without losing its in-
tegrity in form or function[37]. It depends upon the ca-
pacity of the system to retain, adapt, and strengthen its
inherent strengths, while at the same time providing
an opportunity for reorganization and memory[38, 39].
The availability of water is an important element inte-
gral to enhancing the resilience of any cityscape. Ben-
galuru, with its extreme dependence on water from the
distant Cauvery, is ill prepared to deal with adverse
changes in water availability because of excessive use,
and depletion in availability. Yet, as our research has
shown, traditional water bodies such as lakes continue
to remain dynamic spaces that are integral to support-
ing a wide variety of lives and livelihoods. Making
Bengaluru resilient to water risks will require pre-
serving both the ecological and social importance of
the resource. Encouraging the diverse and inclusive
utilitarian uses of such resources (thereby creating
Hita Unnikrishnan, Seema Mundoli and Harini Nagendra
Journal of Sustainable Urbanization, Planning and Progress (2017)–Volume 2, Issue 1 9
value for the resource), will help encourage the reten-
tion of value associated with the remainder of the
city’s lakes, wells, and wetland systems along with
other distant sources of water. The current trend of
unintentionally alienating communities from formerly
integral resources places into question the feasibility
of community led stewardship of these resources —
an important step towards enhancing ecosystem resil-
ience. In other words, fostering local collective par-
ticipation towards sustaining and protecting both eco-
logical and social values of a resource can go a long
way in enhancing the resilience of the system[38].
While the city has witnessed numerous movements
towards collective management of its water bodies
(particularly its lakes)[40], these efforts have mostly
been spearheaded by the middle and upper classes of
the society, for whom the lake ecosystem represents
mostly an aesthetic and recreational resource. Includ-
ing marginalized communities for whom water bodies
represent more utilitarian benefits thus poses a poten-
tial challenge and has received limited success (bar-
ring a few examples such as Kaikondrahalli and Jak-
kur lakes)[41, 42]. In this context, adaptive management[43]
of urban commons that involves incorporating local
knowledge into policy and planning, and fostering
collaborations between citizens and administrators has
contributed to resilience building in other cities of the
global South[44, 45]. The decentralised governance stru-
cture for Indian cities has the potential to foster adap-
tive management, but this is not happening at present
to the extent required.
On one hand, restoring the former waterscape of the
city of Bengaluru to provide a means to supplement its
water resources remains unlikely owing to challenges
in the form or rising populations, geographical spread,
and massive changes in land use. On the other hand, it
is imperative that surviving water bodies be focused
upon in terms of ecosystem rejuvenation and promot-
ing inclusivity in its access and appropriation. Such
measures can only be feasible if the physical and cul-
tural dependencies formed around the resource are
thoroughly researched and understood. To do so wo-
uld require historically and contextually sound under-
standing of the landscape coupled with massive effort
in reconceptualising the space as being more inclusive
and equitable. This requires long-term engagement
with local residents around lakes, working with a di-
verse array of stakeholders from different sections of
society with differing conceptions of, and dependen-
cies on lakes, to understand how they envision the
future development and restoration of these lakes, and
towards what goals. Such a collective envisioning wo-
uld be the first step in a process of reclaiming collec-
tive rights to the city[46], and redefining lakes as urban
commons thus enabling stewarding efforts to sustain
these lake landscapes over the long term. This in par-
allel can support ecosystem functions such as grou-
ndwater recharge thereby enhancing water security
and eventual resilience of the cityscape.
Author Contributions
HU, SM and HN conceived and designed the research,
analysed the archival datasets and wrote the paper;
HU conducted the field work and prepared the maps.
Conflict of Interest and Funding
Funding was provided for this research through a re-
search grant from Azim Premji University, and a
USAID PEER Grant to HN at the Ashoka Trust for
Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE),
Bengaluru. The authors report no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support pro-
vided by the Mythic Society, Indian Institute of World
Culture, and the Karnataka State Archives situated in
Bengaluru, the Divisional Archives, Mysuru and the
British Library, London in providing material used in
this research. We acknowledge the invaluable assis-
tance of B. Manjunatha with the field research and
oral history interviews and of Sreerupa Sen in spatial
analysis.
References
1. United Nations Department of Social and Economic Af-
fairs, 2014, World Urbanization Prospects, the 2014 re-
vision, viewed September 15, 2016,
www.esa.un.org/unpd/wup.
2. McDonald R I, Green P, Balk D, et al. 2011, Urban
growth, climate change, and freshwater availability,
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
vol.108(15): 6312–6317.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1011615108
3. Nagendra H, 2016, Nature in the city: Bengaluru in the
past, present, and future, Oxford University Press, New
Delhi.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199465927.001.
0001
4. Parikh J, Sandal G and Jindal P, 2016, Climate resilient
Making water flow in Bengaluru: planning for the resilience of water supply in a semi-arid city
10 Journal of Sustainable Urbanization, Planning and Progress (2017)–Volume 2, Issue 1
cities: Vulnerability profiling of twenty Indian cities, In
Development in India, pp. 351–365. Springer India.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2541-6_16
5. Saleth RM, 2016, Water rights and entitlements in India,
In Indian water policy at the crossroads: Resources,
technology and reforms, Springer International Publish-
ing, 179–207.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25184-4_10
6. Wolf TA, Kramer A, Carius A, et al. 2005, Managing
water conflict and cooperation, In State of the world
2005: Redefining global security, The Worldwatch In-
stitute, 80–95.
7. Agarwal A and Narain S, 1997, Dying wisdom: Rise fall
and potential of India’s traditional water harvesting
systems, Center for Science and Environment, New
Delhi.
8. Unnikrishnan H, Mundoli S, Manjunatha B, et al. 2016,
Down the drain: The tragedy of the disappearing urban
commons of Bengaluru, South Asian Water Studies
(SAWAS), vol.5(3): 7–11.
9. Sudhira HS, Ramachandra TV and Subrahmanya MHB,
2007, Bangalore, Cities, vol.24(5): 379–390.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2007.04.003
10. Rice BL, 1905, Epigraphia Carnatica volume IX: In-
scriptions in the Bangalore district, Mysore Govern-
ment Central Press, Bangalore.
11. Annaswamy TV, 2003, Bengaluru to Bangalore: Urban
history of Bangalore from the pre-historic period to the
end of the 18th Century, Vengadam Press, Bangalore.
12. Dikshit GS, Kuppuswamy GR and Mohan SK, 1993,
Tank irrigation in Karnataka. Gandhi Sahitya Sangha,
Bangalore.
13. Hegde R, 2002, Kere neeravari nirvaahane charitrika
adhyayana (in Kannada), Publication Division,
Prasaranga, Hampi.
14. Ramesh SC (ed), 2005, Alemaarigala sthithigathi (in
Kannada), Prasaranga Kannada University, Hampi.
15. Srinivas S, 2004, Landscapes of urban memory: The
sacred and the civic in India’s high tech city, Orient
Longman, Hyderabad.
16. Unnikrishnan H, Manjunatha B and Nagendra H, 2016,
Contested urban commons: Mapping the transition of a
lake to a sports stadium in Bangalore, International
Journal of the Commons, vol.10(1): 265–293.
https://doi.org/10.18352/ijc.616
17. Hasan MF, 1970, Bangalore through the centuries: A
historical narrative of Bangalore, 1st ed, Historical Pub-
lications, Bangalore.
18. Rice BL, 1897, Mysore: A gazetteer compiled for gov-
ernment, revised edition, volume II—Mysore by districts,
Archibald Constable and Company, Westminster.
19. Ellis CH, 1865, Report on the station, barracks, and
hospitals of Bangalore, Adelphi Press, Madras.
20. Singh RL, 1964, Bangalore: An urban survey (first edi-
tion), Tara Publications, Varanashi.
21. File Number 354 of 1909, Municipal, Important papers
connected with draining a portion of the Sampige Tank,
Karnataka State Archives, Bengaluru.
22. Government Press 1949, Speeches by Amin-ul-Mulk Sir
Mirza. M. Ismail, K.C.I.E., O.B.E., Dewan of Mysore,
volume III (February 1936–December 1938), Karnataka
State Archives, Bengaluru.
23. Ross R, 1896, Report on cholera, general sanitation,
and the sanitary department and regulations in the
C&M Station of Bangalore, Residency Press, Bangalore.
24. The Cottonian, 1946, Annual magazine of Bishop Cot-
ton Boys High School, Vol XXXVI (nos. 1 and 2), C.L.S.
Press, Bangalore.
25. Government Press, 1954, Report of the Bangalore De-
velopment Committee.
26. Subramanian DK, 1985, Bangalore city’s water supply:
A study and analysis. In Essays on Bangalore volumes
1–4, Karnataka State Council for Science and Technol-
ogy, Bangalore.
27. BBMP (Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike), 2010,
Namma Bengaluru Nisarga: An action plan for devel-
opment of lakes in BBMP’s jurisdiction, BBMP, Banga-
lore.
28. Thippaiah P, 2009, Vanishing lakes: A study of Banga-
lore city, Social and Economic Change monographs, no.
17, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Banga-
lore.
29. Rao TR, 1985, Mosquito control in Bangalore city:
Some observations, Council for Science and Technology,
Bangalore.
30. D’Souza R and Nagendra H, 2011, Changes in public
commons as a consequence of urbanization: The Agara
lake in Bangalore, India, Journal of Environmental
Management, vol.47(5): 840–850.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-011-9658-8
31. Public Interest Litigation (WP No. 817/2008), 2008,
filed by Environment Support group and Leo Saldanha
against privatization of lakes in Bangalore, viewed
September 17, 2016,
http://www.esgindia.org/projects/events/campaign-again
st-lake-privatisation-bang.html.
32. Baviskar A, 2011, What the eye does not see: The Ya-
muna in the imagination of Delhi, Economic and Polit-
ical Weekly, vol.46(50): 45–53.
33. Sundaresan J, 2011, Planning as commoning: Transfor-
mation of a Bangalore lake, Economic and Political
Weekly, vol.46(50): 71–79.
Hita Unnikrishnan, Seema Mundoli and Harini Nagendra
Journal of Sustainable Urbanization, Planning and Progress (2017)–Volume 2, Issue 1 11
34. Parthasarathy D, 2011, Hunters, gatherers and foragers
in a metropolis: Commonising the private and public in
Mumbai, Economic and Political Weekly, vol.46(50):
54–63.
35. Vij S and Narain V 2016, Land, water & power: The
demise of common property resources in periurban
Gurgaon, India, Land Use Policy, vol.50: 59–66.
36. Sudhir, 2013, Will Bangalore have to be evacuated by
2023? In Firstpost, 13 April, viewed September 17,
2016,
http://www.firstpost.com/india/will-bangalore-have-to-b
e-evacuated-by-2023-697649.html.
37. Liechenko MR, 2011, Climate change and urban resil-
ience, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability,
vol.3: 164–168.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2010.12.014
38. Folke C, Carpenter S, Elmqvist T et al. 2002, Resilience
and sustainable development: Building adaptive capac-
ity in a world of transformations, Ambio, vol. 31(5):
437–440.
39. Ernstson H, van der Leeuw ES, Redman LC, et al.2010,
Urban transitions: On urban resilience and human
dominated ecosystems, Ambio, vol.39(8): 531–545.
40. Enqvist J, Tengo M, and Boonstra WJ, 2016, Against the
current: Rewiring rigidity trap dynamics in urban water
governance through civic engagement, Sustainability
Science, vol.11(6): 919–933.
41. Nagendra H and Ostrom E, 2014, Applying the so-
cial-ecological system framework to the diagnosis of
urban lake commons in Bangalore, India, Ecology and
Society, vol. 19(2): 67.
42. Nagendra H, 2016, Restoration of the Kaikondrahalli
lake in Bangalore: Forging a new urban commons, Kal-
pavriksh, Pune, India.
43. Folke C, Carpenter S, Elmqvist T, et al. 2002, Resili-
ence and sustainable development: Building adaptive
capacity in a world of transformations. Ambio, 31(5):
437–440.
44. Berney R, 2010, Learning from Bogota: How municipal
experts transformed public space, Journal of Urban De-
sign, 15(4): 539–558.
45. Colding J, Barthel S, Bendt P, et al. 2013, Urban green
commons: Insights on urban common property systems.
Global Environmental Change, vol.23(5): 1039–1051.
46. Lefebvre H, 1991, The Production of Space (Translated
by Nicholson Smith D), Blackwell Publishing.
