When did it all begin?
The foundation for the Sardar Sarovar project (SSP) was laid in 1961; the state government obtained clearances by flaunting a massive 1450 MW power capacity, irrigation to 3393 villages in Gujarat and by estimating that only 6000 families would face displacement. However, once canal networks of Narmada are fully developed, factoring in water for irrigation, the average power generated falls down to a mere 145 MW, and the government itself revised its estimate to 52,000 displaced families

What is the history of the campaign?
In 1980s tribal and peasant groups, demanding information about dam costs, benefits, displacement and rehabilitation, merged under the banner of “Narmada Bachao Andolan”.  

Why does NBA criticize big dams?
First, large dams cause enormous displacement and poverty. Second, the benefits are highly exaggerated compared to the costs. For instance, SSP uses 80% of Gujarat’s irrigation budget but serves less than 10% of its drought-prone regions. Above all, such large projects concentrate power into the hands of a few. NBA’s stand is that large dams should not be constructed in the absence of (a) fair rehabilitation leading to higher living standards, (b) proper cost-benefit analysis and (c) people’s participation.

Are there any alternatives for water and power needs?
More than 60% of India’s irrigation comes from wells, tanks and traditional methods. These can be further strengthened instead of spending 85% of budget on dams and canals. In water-scarce regions such as Rajasthan, rain-harvesting and revival of tanks have proved effective. Note that only 1/5 of India’s energy comes from hydro-power. Reducing transmission/ distribution losses from the current 40% to global standards of 10%, and promoting energy-efficient devices can double India’s available energy. Wind, solar, biomass and small hydel projects can provide much renewable energy. In Bilgaon, a 15 kW micro-hydel plant has lit up 12 Narmada hamlets.