More than one billion people worldwide receive intermittent water supply (IWS), in which water is delivered through a pipe network for fewer than 24 h/day, limiting the quantity and accessibility of water. During the COVID-19 pandemic, stay-at-home orders and efforts to limit contact with others can affect water access for those with unreliable home water supplies. We explored whether water service delivery and household water-use behaviors changed during the COVID-19 pandemic in Hubballi–Dharwad, India, and whether they differed if households had IWS or continuous (24×7) water supply through a longitudinal household survey in 2020–2021. We found few perceived differences in water service delivery or water access, although one-quarter of all households reported insufficient water for handwashing, suggesting an increased demand for water that was not satisfied. Many households with 24×7 supply reported water outages, necessitating the use of alternative water sources. These findings suggest that water demand at home increased and households with IWS and 24×7 both lacked access to sufficient water. Our findings indicate that water insecurity negatively affected households’ ability to adhere to protective public health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight the importance of access to uninterrupted, on-premise water during public health emergencies.

The patrons and the workers in the hospitality sector continue to be exposed to secondhand smoke despite the enactment of COTPA, which bans smoking in public places. This situation demands stringent measures for effective implementation of the Smoke Free Act and negative response to smoking among civil society.

This discussion paper is a qualitative analysis built on opinions. Though there is no one-to-one link between performance and service delivery of grama panchayats (GPs) and method of election to GP president, the paper talks about opinions, which support direct election. There is a discussion going on at the policy level in States like Karnataka whether to go in for direct election of the president of the gram panchayat or not. Although the overall preference of stakeholders and people is for direct election, the empirical data and the opinions of those with whom we interacted fail to clearly bring out the justification for direct or indirect election of GP president. The reasons are many: the differences in structure and size of the panchayats across selected States, linkages with higher level of PRIs, their financing mechanism and devolution of powers. In the absence of counterfactuals with similar panchayati raj system in States with direct election it is difficult to say which system is better than the other. Though the differences are not very significant, resource mobilisation, efficiency in delivery of services and utilisation of funds appear to be better in States with direct election. And, quick decisions, higher social auditing, higher social equity, satisfaction with election system and low incidence of no-confidence motion, dominance of caste are also the features noted in States with direct election. On the other hand, cooperation and collective decision, weightage to the institution rather than the individual, competition among members for getting benefits to their wards are some of the merits of indirect election. After weighing the merits of both the systems, direct election clearly stands out as a preferred system.

No abstract

No abstract