Resolving the Ganges pollution paradox: A policy‐centric systematic review

Abstract

Despite the fact that it is one of the most sacred and holy rivers in the world, the Ganges River is paradoxically among the most polluted. Over the past decade, researchers have described various mechanisms and actions for improving the pollution problem within the Ganges watershed. The aim of this policy-centric systematic review is to summarize these recommendations to make them more accessible for concerned citizen groups and planners while also critically appraising their findings. Using the Reporting standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses (ROSES) framework, our findings indicate that there are a wide range of potential solutions for mitigating pollution in the river system that originate from 37 peer-reviewed sources that encompass field studies, modeling analyses, and review articles. While we find that there are many actionable and thoughtprovoking recommendations for improving water quality and pollution mitigation given by authors studying the Ganges, there are also areas for improvement. Notably, there is a heavy focus on state-centric planning in the basin with only a few examples of policies that have been tailored toward encouraging communitybased solutions. This lack of community-based planning may relate to the fact that there is also a missing social dimension to policy recommendations in the Ganges watershed, where most of the articles that we reviewed were published in natural science journals and were not interdisciplinary in nature. Better reporting standards for recommendations arising from reviews and a greater focus on the interrelations between different components of the Ganges system may also yield novel and more trustworthy policy findings for practitioners.

Centralized versus Decentralized Cleanup of River Water Pollution: An Application to the Ganges

“…The result in (15) contains an interesting but negative finding about the centralized provision of pollution cleanup in the two cities under study. Specifically, we see that in the centralized regime, pollution cleanup will be underprovided in the city (Kanpur) that has a stronger mean preference for pollution cleanup w E K ≥ w C and overprovided in the city (Varanasi) that has a weaker mean preference for pollution cleanup w C ≥ w E V .…”

“…Very recently, in their review of alternate approaches to the cleanup of water pollution in the Ganges, Sigdel et al (2023) [15] have also criticized excessively centralized approaches. Specifically, these researchers contend that "[a]lternative frameworks need to be considered that work from a bottom-up approach rather than a top-down polity" (p. 138).…”

Tackling Heavy Metal Pollution: Evaluating Governance Models and Frameworks

“…Table 2, a fundamental cornerstone of this study, stands as an invaluable resource, meticulously crafted to provide readers with an extensive and intricately detailed overview of the most recent developments within the multifaceted realm of pollution control governance modes. Within the vast and ever-expanding landscape of scholarly investigations that characterizes the field of environmental governance, a notable and substantial portion of research endeavors has been diligently focused on the exploration and analysis of the static-centric governance approach [24][25][26]. This persistent and recurring emphasis on the static-centric model not only underscores its historical significance but also highlights the pivotal and central role it plays in shaping and influencing the discourse surrounding pollution control governance.…”