Abstract
Government expenditure on water supply and sanitation (WSS) aims to improve both the quality of life and health conditions. Using budget analyses, this article highlights the trend and composition of WSS expenditure in Uttar Pradesh covering the period 1990–1991 to 2018–2019. The article also presents political regime wise trend of WSS expenditure and finds that political regime affects WSS expenditure. Regression analysis reveals that net state domestic product is negatively related to WSS expenditure. This is not a good sign for the state where unsafe drinking water, sanitation and hygienic condition is the fourth leading risk responsible for disease burden, and the current status of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) condition is quite low. The overall budget for WSS in Uttar Pradesh is grossly inadequate, irresponsive and out of sync with the development reality. There is an acute need of government intervention with higher budgetary allocations for the overall development of water and sanitation facilities in Uttar Pradesh.
Introduction
Drinking water and sanitation are one of the most important determinants of human development. They extend opportunity, enhance dignity and help to create a virtuous cycle of improving health and rising wealth (United Nations Development Program, 2006). The health of the people is directly related to the availability of safe drinking water, sanitation and hygienic conditions (World Water Assessment Program, 2012). These health benefits also include an increased economic well-being of the household through saving large amounts of people’s time and energy which can be used in economically productive or educational activities (Mavalankar & Shankar, 2004; Rao, 2009). It is also proved by various studies that an improved facility of drinking water and sanitation can reduce health cost of a state significantly (Ghosh, 2017; Satapathy, 2014; Water and Sanitation Program, 2011) and a main determinant of nutrition (Dev, 2019; Jose & Navaneetham, 2010). Historically well-maintained public health facilities such as modern drainage and sewerage sys-tems, drinking water systems have reduced mortality and health cost (George, 2011). Therefore, the government has to play a significant role in water supply and sanitation (WSS) provision due to high degree of externality. The supply of water is mainly characterised by the production, transportation and distribution process of water through the network of pipelines. So, there is need for a network and the huge sunk cost is involved in establishing the network. Water supply and sewerage systems require large capital investments. The greater the spread of water and sanitation, the greater are its benefits. Expenditure on WSS aims not only to increase the quality of life but also to improve health conditions.
Background and Importance of Public Expenditure
Classical economists believed in laissez faire policy and recommended no government intervention in an economy. But after the great recession of 1930s and advent of Keynesian theory, the need of active role of government in the economy is understood. The relation between public expenditure 1 and economic growth is a well-known fact. Wagner considered public expenditure as an endogenous variable in the process of economic growth in his famous Wagner’s law (1883) while according to Keynesian framework (1936), it is an exogenous factor of economic growth (Ray et al., 2019). Since 1980 the growth of public expenditure is very slow all over the world and it is less than 10% of GDP among European countries while in the twenty-first century, this figure exceeds 50% in many European countries which was largely driven by social spending. However, persistently large differences can be seen across countries. In India, the government spends about 1,800 US$ per head (PPP) in one year; while in countries such as Norway, the corresponding figure is over 30,000 US$ (Ortiz-Ospina & Roser, 2019).
Public expenditure on social sector 2 is very important as it enhances the human capital of the economy that can produce direct growth. It is more important especially for a developing country like India as there is a large magnitude of deprivation and it cannot be left to the market forces alone to tackle. Because poor households utilise more government services as compared to richer households. Many studies also find that the poor households of India have relatively little access to water supply and sanitary toilets (Agarwal, 2011; Tiwari, 2017; Water and Sanitation Program, 2011). Development of social sector depends on expenditures and effective implementation. It is well known that progress of social sector in India has been much slower compared to its GDP growth. In terms of GDP, social sector expenditure (SSE) of India is lower than other G20 countries. It is about 8% in contrast to about 20% in developed economies (Mate et al., 2018). The expenditures are inadequate in comparison to the problems in the sector, such as significant regional, social, gender disparities and poor quality of delivery systems (Dev, 2019). In the last few years, SSE as a percentage of the GDP remained a little above 6.6% during the period 2011–2012 to 2017–2018, which increased to 7.7% in 2019–2020 (Table 1). On the other hand, the share of SSE out of total expenditure (TE) has registered an increase of 2 percentage points during the period 2011–2012 to 2019–2020. It shows the expenditure priorities of government for boosting social infrastructure. However, figures of 2018–2019 and 2019–2020 are allocation figures. Expenditure figures are more important than allocation figures as they give a better impression of the priorities (Mooij & Dev, 2004).
Trend in Public Expenditure on Social Sector (Combined Centre and State Governments)
On the basis of above, the article deals with expenditure patterns in the water supply and sanitation sector. It falls under broad category of SSE. The article is aimed at a focused analysis of the expenditure of government covering the period 1990–1991 to 2018–2019 in Uttar Pradesh. The present study is entirely based on secondary source of data which is mainly derived from National Family and Health Survey (NFHS 3 & 4), Handbook of Statistics on State Government Finances and RBI database. The analysis is structured into the following sections. The first section deals with the introduction and overall trend in combined government expenditure on WSS and aggregate WSS expenditure of all state governments followed by the second and third sections which discuss the trend and composition of WSS revenue expenditure and capital expenditure of Uttar Pradesh. The fourth section deals with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and current status of drinking water and sanitation facility in Uttar Pradesh. The determinants of government expenditure have been presented in the fifth section. Finally, the last section provides a summary of the present study and its main conclusions.
Since Independence, public expenditure of India is increasing continuously and India’s social policies have focused on the welfare of the people and also human development. Over the last few years in India there has been a tremendous change in the national government’s approach to the drinking water and sanitation sector. In this regard, the government has launched Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM) on 2 October 2014 to achieve universal sanitation coverage, improve cleanliness and eliminate open defecation in India by 2019. Jal Shakti Abhiyan was launched to accelerate progress on water conservation activities in the most water stressed blocks and districts of India (GOI, 2020). Further, the government has introduced new Ministry of Jal Shakti and it has launched the 10-year Rural Sanitation Strategy (2019–2029) along with the Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation to sustain the sanitation behavior change that has been achieved under the SBM Gramin and increasing access to solid and liquid waste management (GOI, 2020).
Under the federal system in India, centre and state both spend on WSS. Due to data limitation, to see the trend of combined expenditure of centre and states on WSS, we have to look at the trend of health expenditure as Expenditure on health includes expenditure on ‘Medical & Public Health’, Family Welfare’ and ‘Water Supply & Sanitation’. A positive trend of government expenditure can be seen as the share of health expenditure out of GDP, TE and SSE has registered a slightly increase during the period 2011–2012 to 2019–2020 (Table 2). However, water is a state subject and the state governments have a major responsibility under the federal system in India with regard to the provision of social and economic infrastructure. To analyse actual trend of government expenditure on WSS, we will study only state level data.
Trend in Public Expenditure on Health (Combined Centre and State Governments)
Expenditure Pattern on Water Supply and Sanitation (WSS) Across States
The demand for WSS services is growing fast due to demographic growth, economic development and improvements in living standards. It is well known that the provision of safe drinking water, adequate sanitation and personal hygiene is necessary for the sustainable environmental conditions and reducing the incidence of diarrhoea, malaria, trachoma, hepatitis A and B and morbidity levels. There is always a constant budgetary pressure for additional resource allocation to meet the increasing demand for these services in view of their economic and welfare contributions as well as their political implications. According to the Constitution of India, water supply is a state subject (Shreyaskar, 2016). The Union Government is only responsible for setting water quality standards. States account for a large part of the total government expenditures in India. At present, states generally plan, design and execute water supply schemes through their Water Boards (GOI, 2009). Government expenditure comprises both the revenue and capital components 3 . Broadly, all expenditure of the government, which does not result in the creation of physical or financial assets, is treated as revenue expenditure (RBI, 2010). The WSS expenditure of all states has continuously increased in the period 1990 to 2017. Growth rate is highest for the period of 2010–2017 due to government plans. However, there has been declining trend in percentage of revenue expenditure of WSS till 2010 (Table 3).
Trend of Growth in Government Expenditure on WSS Sector Across States
The composition of aggregate expenditure on WSS shows that the share of capital expenditure increased steadily during the 1990s and 2000s. Revenue expenditure showed a steady increase till 1997–1998. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, there has been a significant decline in the share of revenue expenditure to PE. The declining trend of revenue expenditure and increasing trend of capital expenditure are clearly evident (Figure 1). It is an important indication for WSS sector as it has a long-term impact on growth than revenue expenditure. If spent efficiently, it also ensures an improved WSS facility to people due to better WSS infrastructure. However, the share of capital expenditure in TE of states exhibited a marginal increase during 1990s. It has increased from around 17% in 1990–1991 to around 45% in 2018–2019, whereas revenue expenditure has substantially declined from 82% to 55% in the corresponding period. In 2008–2009, capital expenditure exceeds revenue expenditure. However, this is the only year when capital expenditure is higher than revenue expenditure.
Government Expenditure on WSS in Uttar Pradesh
Drinking water and sanitation being a state subject, the achievements in this sector depends mainly on the initiative taken by the state governments. State government’s efforts are often measured through their expenditures over time. There is a considerable difference between nominal expenditure and real expenditure as real expenditure has been corrected for inflation. Nominal expenditure has been converted into real terms using a net state domestic product (NSDP) deflator. Five series of NSDP are available for the state, that is, the first based on 1980–1981 prices, the second based on 1993–1994 prices, the third based on 1999–2000 prices, the fourth based on 2004–2005 and the fifth based on 2011–2012. The 2011–2012 series has been extended backwards in order to estimate the ratio of NSDP for 2011–2012 according to the two series (both at current and constant prices). The adjusted series of NSDP at 2011–2012 prices has been used to estimate expenditure in real terms. The total WSS expenditure has shown increase in both nominal and real terms (Figure 2). In nominal terms, WSS expenditure has increased from ₹205.51 crore in 1990–1991 to ₹3,590 crore in 2016–2017 or by 17.5 times. However, when these figures are converted in real terms, WSS expenditure has increased by 2.5 times only during this period. Thus, a continuous upward trend has been observed in WSS expenditure of the Uttar Pradesh government.
Trend of WSS Expenditure in Uttar Pradesh
There are three ways of examining trend of WSS expenditure. The first is to look at WSS expenditure as a proportion of NSDP, the second is to calculate it as a percentage of SSE, and the third is to look it as a percentage of overall government expenditure. Table 4 gives an overview of WSS expenditure of Uttar Pradesh for the period of 1990–1991 to 2016–2017. The picture that emerges from these three ways of looking at trends in WSS expenditure is slightly different. As a percentage of NSDP, Uttar Pradesh spends around 0.25 to 0.3% on the WSS sector. In 1990s, the share of NSDP was stagnant and highest. But throughout the 2000s and 2010s, WSS expenditure, in terms of a percentage of NSDP, is lower than that in the 1990s. However, it is slightly increasing, that is, 0.01% after 2005s but it cannot reach the level of 1990s. WSS expenditure as percentage of SSE accelerated during the 1990s and decelerated during the 2000s and 2010s while WSS expenditure as percentage of TE accelerated during the 1990s and decelerated during the beginning of 2000s. However, the percentage increased in 2010s (Table 4).
Trend in WSS Expenditure of Uttar Pradesh Government
The percentages of NSDP, social services and aggregate expenditure of WSS expenditure have gone down during the period. It shows that the WSS expenditure of Uttar Pradesh government as percentage of NSDP, SSE and TE decelerated after the 2000s (Figure 3). All trend lines show negative growth rate. In 1990–1991, the share in NSDP was 0.42% and increased to 0.44% in 1997–1998 and reached to 0.33% in 2016–2017. The share of WSS in SSE which was 4.36% in 1990–1991 has reduced down to 2.47% in 2018–2019 with the exception in 1997–1998. As a percentage of aggregate expenditure, Uttar Pradesh spends between 0.67 to 1.68% on WSS. In terms of percentage of aggregate expenditure, it was 1.68% in 1990–1991 and reached a higher level of 2% in 1997–1998, then came down to 1.11% in 2016–2017.
The picture that emerges from above analysis shows that both real and nominal WSS expenditure has been increased, but some fluctuations can be seen in both real and nominal WSS expenditure during the period (Figure 2). There can be many reasons behind these fluctuations. Centre and state level WSS programs affect WSS expenditure as we can see significant increase in it after 2013–2014 which was due to the introduction of SBM launched on 2 October 2014. SBM is the latest sanitation programme by Government of India to accelerate efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage, improve cleanliness and eliminate open defecation in India by 2019 (Shukla, 2018).
WSS expenditure also depends on priorities of the state government. There are number of parties who govern Uttar Pradesh during the period 1991 to 2017 such as Samajwadi Party (SP), Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) and Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP). Each political party has own priorities. To see the effect of political willingness on WSS sector, we have to see the political regime wise trend of WSS expenditure. Political instability marked the period between 1991 and 2003 in Uttar Pradesh, with ten chief ministers and president’s rule being imposed three times. The period between 1990 and 1992 was especially tumultuous. However, I have used data of WSS expenditure since 1990, but the period of 1990–1993 has been a rather special period, in social as well as political terms. The political situation was very uncertain during the period 1990–1992. So, political regime-wise trend since 1993 is analysed. The figure shows wide variations in WSS expenditure according to governing political party. BSP govt. spends least on WSS sector, that is, 0.16% to 0.18% of NSDP (Figure 4). Furthermore, as a percentage of SSE and TE, the trend shows same picture. It can be said that WSS sector is not the priority of BSP govt. The share of WSS expenditure as percentage of NSDP, SSE and TE decelerated during BSP governance and accelerated during SP governance (Figure 5). However, BJP government has given highest priority to WSS sector as per share of all these. BJP government is elected again for next five years, that is, 2017 to 2022, but the analysis is only for the period of 1991 to 2017, as it is analysed only actual expenditure. 2018 and 2019 data are revised and budget estimates and they do not provide real picture.
However, time series analysis of real expenditure is an important tool to measure the government’s effort. To see the real picture of WSS expenditure, per capita WSS expenditure is also computed. In terms of per capita real expenditure, WSS expenditure has risen from ₹81 in 1990–1991 to ₹127 in 2016–2017, an increase of 54% in 27 years. To see the effect of political regime, a Poreto chart is used which plots the distribution of data in descending order of frequency, with a cumulative line on a secondary axis as a percentage of the total. It shows the least per capita expenditure for the period of 2002–2003 and 2007–2012 which was the period of BSP governance. The highest per capita expenditure is ₹98.95 for the period of 2007–2012 (Figure 6). There may be two reasons; first, we find that SP government gives priority to WSS sector and second, Swacchch Bharat Mission has launched in this period. Thus, the analysis brings out surprising results and proves our hypothesis that political regime also affects WSS expenditure.
Composition of WSS Expenditure in Uttar Pradesh
The level and composition of public expenditure is also very important as it can have macro level as well as social implications. Since the distinction between the revenue expenditures and capital expenditures is more in terms of administrative powers and controls rather than in terms of the nature of expenditures, consumption or investment, it is important to consider both these categories of expenditures for such social sectors to measure the efforts of the government (Dholakia, 2005). The structure of WSS expenditure has undergone a significant change during this period. So far as composition of the TE of Uttar Pradesh government is concerned, revenue spending accelerated during the 1990s and decelerated during the 2000s. A sharp decline can be seen in 2010s. Since the beginning of the 2010s, the share of revenue expenditure to total WSS expenditure has declined from around 85% during 2005–2010 to 32% during 2010–2017 (Table 5). The share of capital component is continued to be low during 1990–2010. There has been tremendous increase in capital expenditure since the period of 2010–2011 due to huge increase in plan expenditure.
Composition of WSS Expenditure in Uttar Pradesh (in %)
There is inconsistency in WSS expenditure of Uttar Pradesh. In nominal terms, WSS revenue expenditure has increased rapidly during 1991 to 2017–2018. However, when these figures are converted into real terms, that is, corrected for inflation, there is modest decline. The real revenue expenditure shows a slightly negative trend over the period with some fluctuations (Figure 7).
The current and real capital expenditure show a positive trend over the period. In nominal terms, WSS capital expenditure has increased from ₹2 crore in 1990–1991 to ₹ 4,391 crore in 2017–2018 with some fluctuations. When these figures are converted in real terms, real capital expenditure rose sharply from ₹12.23 crore to ₹3337.63 crore during this period by about 273 times. Both the capital expenditure in current price and real capital expenditure showed the steady increase during the 1990s, 2000s and 2010s (Figure 8).
Sustainable Development Goals and Uttar Pradesh
On 25 September 2015, Member States of the United Nations adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development which comprises 17 Sustainable Development Goals and 169 targets addressing social, economic and environmental aspects of development. Goal 6 is related to drinking water, sanitation and hygiene. It ‘ensures availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all’ and includes targets addressing all aspects of the freshwater cycle. It has included the elimination of open defecation by 2030 (United Nations Children’s Fund, & World Health Organization, 2017). The JMP has divided improved drinking water sources 4 into three categories: safely managed services, basic and limited. Safely managed drinking water is defined as drinking water from an improved source that is located on premises, available when needed and free from contamination. If water collection from improved source takes 30 minutes or less and more than 30 minutes, it will be categorised as basic and limited services respectively. But the water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) condition of Uttar Pradesh is not quite good. It is well below the all-India average. About 73% households of Uttar Pradesh have drinking water facilities within premises in 2015–2016. However, if we talk about access to piped water within premises, it is merely 10%. Another 81% households depend on hand pump/tube well for drinking water. Therefore, tubewell or handpump is the main source of drinking water in Uttar Pradesh (Table 6). But it is not satisfied the criteria of the new SDG indicator of the ‘safely managed’ drinking water facility. It may be noted that the percentage of households having piped water in all over India has increased from 24.5% in 2005–2006 to 30.1% in 2015–2016, that is, 5.6% while the percentage of households having access to piped water has increased only 1.8% in Uttar Pradesh during this period. The reason may be intermittent water supply coupled with low levels of urbanisation has led to better availability and reliability of other water sources in Uttar Pradesh (Shukla, 2019; Tiwari & Nayak, 2017).
Percent Distribution of (Urban + Rural) Households by Source of Drinking Water in Uttar Pradesh and India
There is considerable variation in access to toilet facility across India and Uttar Pradesh. However, sanitation facility is not satisfactory in India, as about 39% households have no access to any type of sanitation facility, but it is better than Uttar Pradesh (Table 7). Open defecation declined from 66.7% in 2005–2006 to 54.2% in 2015–2016, at an average rate of 1% a year. It is a shame that more than half of Uttar Pradesh households have no access to any type of sanitation facility. Another important aspect of the sanitation facility is whether the households have access to improved source of latrine 5 . About 48% households at all India level have improved sanitation facility while only 35% households of Uttar Pradesh have this kind of facility.
Percent Distribution of Households by Types of Sanitation Facility Uttar Pradesh and India
It is clearly revealed that the WASH conditions are poorer in Uttar Pradesh. Potential risk to diseases such as diarrhoea, cholera, typhoid is linked to unsafe drinking water, sanitation and hygienic condition (Haq et al., 2007; Hussain et al., 2003). As per Indian Council of Medical Research’s (ICMR) report, it is the fourth leading risk responsible for disease burden in Uttar Pradesh, contributing 6% of the total disease burden, mainly through diarrhoeal diseases in 2016 (Indian Council of Medical Research, Public Health Foundation of India, & The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, 2017). As per NFHS-4, infant mortality rate (64 deaths per 1,000 live births) and child mortality rate (16 deaths per 1,000 live births) are also highest in Uttar Pradesh across states (IIPS, 2017). IMR and CMR are also linked with WASH conditions.
Uttar Pradesh is the most populous state in India with almost 200 million people living here, which is more than the population of Brazil, the fifth most populous country in the world (GOI, 2013). But WSS expenditure of government is not sufficient to fulfil the demand of safe drinking water and sanitation to such a huge population. If we consider the period (1991–2011), population of Uttar Pradesh has increased 13,20,62,000 to 19,98,12,341, that is 51.3% while the real WSS expenditure has decreased 1122.1 crore to 1120.2 crore, that is, –0.16%. So how can we expect the improvement in WSS sector when government expenditure has negative growth rate. To analyse the real picture of WSS expenditure towards population pressure, per capita real WSS expenditure is also computed. Except in the year 1997–1998 when per capita WSS expenditure was ₹96.97, it never increase during the period (1990–1991 to 2013–2014) above 1990–1991 level, that is, ₹81.37 (Appendix 1). However, after launching SBM per capita WSS expenditure has continued to increase since 2014–2015. It has risen from ₹109 in 2014–2015 to ₹127 in 2016–2017, which is very low. It can be said that one of the main reasons for poor condition of WSS sector of Uttar Pradesh is low per capita government expenditure. Uttar Pradesh is a low-income state and it is found that the states with low revenue capacity have been constrained to incur significantly lower per capita expenditures on developmental heads (Panagariya et al., 2014). It is interesting to see that there is about 57% increase in expenditure in a year 2017–2018, that is, ₹127 in 2016–2017 to ₹199. It may be noted that the figure of 2017–2018 is a revised estimate of allocation figure, not an expenditure figure. Expenditure figures differ from allocation figures in most of the cases and they are not so much based on good intentions but are the concrete result of decisions and other social processes and compulsions (Mooij & Dev, 2004). Population pressure, lack of infrastructure, poor planning and implementation and low expenditure of Uttar Pradesh government on WSS sector are the main reasons for poor sanitation facility in the state (Tiwari & Nayak, 2013). However, government allocation has risen in this sector since 2014, but these funds may not be enough to achieve SDG goal.
Empirical Analysis
There are various determinants of access to WSS in a state, government expenditure is one of the important determinants among them. In this section, the determinants of Uttar Pradesh government expenditure on WSS are analysed through Multiple Regression Analysis by using Ordinary Least Square method. The analysis attempts an explanation of why there is wide variation in WSS expenditure. The dependent variable in the study is WSS expenditure while the independent variables used are SSE, TE and NSDP of Uttar Pradesh.
The functional form of Regression model is as follows.
Where WSSE is WSS sector expenditure, b0 is the intercept; b1 b2 and b3 are the coefficients associated with SSE, TE and NSDP respectively and UI is the error term. SSE is social sector expenditure, TE is total expenditure and NSDP is net state domestic product of Uttar Pradesh. The regression result as shown in Table 8 indicates that SSE is an important determinant and it is positively and significantly related to WSS expenditure. 1% gain in SSE would increase WSS expenditure by .038%.
Estimated Regression Equation for Determinants of WSS Expenditure
NSDP of a state affects government expenditure. It is surprising to note that it is negatively and significantly related to WSS expenditure in this model. That means if net state domestic product increases, the WSS expenditure decreases. It is not a good sign for a state like Uttar Pradesh where current status of drinking water and sanitation is worst. Every 1% rise in NSDP would reduce the WSS expenditure by 0.0045%. Total expenditure is positively related with WSS expenditure, but it is not significant in the model. Adjusted R 2 value is estimated 0.7038 for the model. It reveals that about 70% of the variation in WSS expenditure is explained by SSE, TE and NSDP. F statistics is significant for the model at 1% level.
Summary and Conclusion
Access to safe drinking water and sanitation is a condition for a healthy society and a prerequisite for human development. Uttar Pradesh is the most populous state in India and the demand for WSS services is growing fast owing to the interactive effect of demographic growth. The government has to play a significant role in WSS provision due to high degree of externality. The article has made an attempt to study the WSS expenditure of Uttar Pradesh government covering the period 1990–1991 to 2018–2019 and found that WSS expenditure has increased in both nominal and real terms. Trend analysis shows as a percentage of SSE and as a percentage of overall government expenditure, WSS expenditure has gone down in 2000s and beginning of 2010s, but it is quite inconsistent as a percentage share to NSDP. An analysis of composition of WSS expenditure shows positive trend for capital expenditure and negative trend for revenue expenditure during the period. Regression analysis reveals that SSE is positively and significantly related to WSS expenditure. Net state domestic product is negatively related to WSS expenditure which is not a good sign for a state like Uttar Pradesh where current status of WASH condition is well below the all-India average. It is also found that WSS expenditure is also dependent on priorities of the state government.
From the above analysis it can be argued that the overall budget for WSS in Uttar Pradesh is grossly inadequate, irresponsive and out of sync with the development reality. State government is not playing significant role to improve the WASH conditions as it remains fourth leading risk responsible for disease burden in Uttar Pradesh. It can be said that one of the main reasons for poor condition of WSS sector of Uttar Pradesh is low per capita government expenditure. However, government allocation has risen in this sector since 2014 due to the introduction of SBM, but these funds may not be enough to achieve desirable goals. There is an acute need of government intervention with higher budgetary allocations for the overall development of water and sanitation facilities in Uttar Pradesh.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Professor Sanatan Nayak for his valuable comments on an earlier draft of this paper.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.