Do the benefits of reviving the Himalayan springs exceed the costs? 

In the fragile ecosystems of the Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH), over 100 million people depend on spring water for drinking, agriculture, and livestock. However, nearly 50% of these critical water sources are drying up due to climate change, seismic movement, and unsustainable land use. We find that the benefits of springshed revival in 14 sites across three Indian Himalayan states exceed the costs (with a net economic benefit of USD 10.27 per household per month). This should help with the planning and policies for water and climate adaptation in mountain communities. 

A lifeline under threat 

Natural springs are vital oases to arid and semi-arid ecosystems, acting as hydrologic refuges in mountainous regions like the Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH). Beyond just serving as a source of drinking water, they are lifelines in some communities for human livelihoods and wildlife, and in general buffer against extreme climatic shocks. In the HKH’s fragile ecosystems, over 100 million people depend on these springs for drinking water, agriculture, and livestock rearing. Yet, the stakes are high: nearly 50% of these critical water points have either dried up or become seasonal due to geogenic pressures like shifting geology and anthropogenic risks from land use change and climate change. 

Recognising that, the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) rolled out a comprehensive, science-based springshed management initiative across four states in the Indian Himalayan region (IHR): Himachal Pradesh, Manipur, Sikkim, and Uttarakhand. The initiative marks a shift from traditional watershed conservation to a broader, more sustainable groundwater-focused strategy. To support and improve that initiative, an expert team of economists from the South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics (SANDEE) conducted a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of spring revival and springshed management in the Himalayan states of Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, and Uttarakhand, and published a research report titled ‘Cost-benefit analysis of springs revival in the Indian Himalayan Region’. This blog summarises the key findings from the report. 

Methodology: bridging science and community knowledge 

We used a participatory CBA approach based on a mix of scientific literature review, project-related information, and primary field insights using rapid appraisal by focus group discussions (FGDs) and key informant interviews (KIIs). We began with a broad desk review, scanning global studies on springshed services in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) with parallels to the HKH region in general and the IHR in particular. 

Our data come from three different sources - first, we conducted FGDs and KIIs across the three Indian Himalayan states: Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, and Uttarakhand; second, we gathered cost data from ICIMOD’s project documents, and local stakeholders guided by the six-step protocol for springshed management; and third, we combined these two sets of data sources using a technique called benefits transfer (which adjusts information gathered from a wider literature review to site specific features).

We identified five categories of costs: material, labour, operational, transportation, and miscellaneous. Meanwhile, benefits included tangible gains like improved health, time savings, and increased access to non-timber forest products (e.g. fodder). We recognised harder-to-quantify broader ecosystems as well as cultural services, but did not include these benefits because of time and resource constraints, and because the community respondents did not give prominence to these benefits. We assumed a discount rate of 5% and a 25-year horizon while analysing field data from 14 springs across the three states.

What were the benefits and costs? 

Fetching water is time-consuming. For example, in Thanakasoga Baudi, Himachal Pradesh, households previously spent 60-90 minutes per trip to distant springs. After the intervention, previously dried up or springs with declining water yield started yielding more water. As a result, the travel time came down to 15-30 minutes, saving 45-60 minutes per trip. With 2-3 trips daily and a local wage rate of USD (United States dollar) 4.20 per day, benefits from time savings amount to approximately USD 42 per household per month. Similarly, in Dhokung Dhara, Sikkim, excess water from revived springs has reduced waiting time by half, saving about 30-60 minutes daily across two trips, valued at USD 25 monthly with an average daily wage of USD 4.50 per day. Across all sites, the value of time savings averages USD 9.5 per household per month as a result of a significant gain in water yield, which also reduces drudgery, especially for women.  

As a result of an increased yield of safe drinking water, households experience improved health. For example, in Jori Mata Baudi, waterborne illnesses such as diarrhoea dropped from 8-10 cases to 3-4 cases (a 60% reduction) annually. Across all fourteen sites, health benefits average to about USD 2 per household per month. Although this is not the case for every site, it is a clear indication of health benefits. 

Additional water flow means extra moisture in the soil.  As a result of the springshed revival, households at Upsala Shivani Dhara saved USD 9.10 monthly on fodder for cattle (avoiding fodder purchases at USD 0.12 per bundle). In Bonderi and Jalosa Ram Baudi, Himachal Pradesh, fodder production has doubled, saving about USD 2.50 per household monthly per site. The average across all sites is USD 1.01 per household per month – a small but meaningful saving. 

Next, turning to the upfront and recurring costs of reviving the springs over a 25-year period (amortised using a 5% discount rate), we find that these are as little as USD 0.48 per household per month in Uttarakhand, USD 1.81 in Himachal Pradesh and USD 1.40 in Sikkim. The following table summarises the per household per month net benefits (including costs and benefits). 

Net benefits: a clear case for investment 

These results are promising, underscoring the economic viability of the springs revival project. Our findings estimate the per household, per month net benefits at approximately USD 12 in Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand, and USD 7 in Sikkim. In simple terms, our analysis suggests that the spring revival efforts pass the basic cost-benefit test. Note, our analysis does not consider both the values related to ecosystem services, and cultural and aesthetic values tied to springs. Therefore, these figures represent only the lower bounds of net social benefits, which could only increase if we account for such additional benefits.  

Variation across the sites

We observed variation in the components of both costs and benefits across our study sites. Some of the notable variations include:   

• Himachal Pradesh saw high savings in time (45–60 minutes per day) and health costs (60% drop in waterborne illnesses). 

• Uttarakhand benefited from increased fodder production, reducing household expenses by about USD 9.00 per month. 

• Sikkim’s lower returns stemmed from higher maintenance costs (which have been transferred from the other two states in the absence of such information in Sikkim) and lower quantifiable health/fodder benefits.  

Broader implications: aligning with global goals

Spring revival is not just about water – it is a catalyst for sustainable development: 

1. Climate resilience: Healthy springs buffer against droughts and erratic rainfall. Studies have shown that the HKH is experiencing a warming trend which is faster than the global average, thereby affecting the region’s hydrology. 

2. SDG synergies: Directly advances global Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 (clean water), SDG 13 (climate action), and SDG 1 (poverty reduction via livelihood security). 

3. Gender Equity: Women, often burdened with water collection, reduced time for water collection means more time for education, childcare, income-generating activities, or leisure, which enhances their welfare.   

The path forward: scaling success

1. Tailored strategies: Address site-specific drivers of variability (e.g. Sikkim’s need for cost-sharing models to offset maintenance). 

2. Policy integration: Mainstream Spring revival into national programs and state water security plans. 

3. Community ownership: Strengthen Water User Groups to ensure long-term stewardship and equitable benefit sharing. 

4. Research priorities: Quantify non-market benefits of biodiversity, ecosystem services, cultural value, and climate resilience impacts. 

Conclusion: investing in a spring-led future

The implication is straightforward: reviving Himalayan springs yields positive net benefits per household per month. Beyond the numbers, it safeguards a resource inseparable from cultural identity and ecological balance. As climate threats escalate in the HKH region, scaling these springs revival activities is not just prudent – it’s urgent.

Call to action

• Governments: Allocate dedicated funding for springshed management. 

• Development partners: Prioritise grants for participatory monitoring and capacity building. 

• Researchers: Develop standardised metrics for measuring and valuing ecosystem services, biodiversity, and cultural aspects of the revived springs.