When Prime Minister Narendra Modi laid the foundation stone for the Ken-Betwa Link Project (KBLP) in Khajuraho, Madhya Pradesh, on December 25, 2024, it was hailed as a historic step to quench the thirst of the drought-prone Bundelkhand region. The project, the first under India’s National River Linking Project, promises to transfer “surplus” water from the Ken River to the Betwa River, irrigating 10.62 lakh hectares, supplying drinking water to 62 lakh people, and generating 130 MW of renewable energy.
Yet, beneath the fanfare lies a troubling truth: the KBLP is a poorly planned, politically driven endeavor that threatens ecosystems, displaces communities, and lacks transparency. Its flawed decision-making process, exposed in a recent expert discussion, demands that we pause and rethink this megaproject before it sets a dangerous precedent for 29 more river-linking schemes.
The KBLP’s roots trace back to 1919, when Sir Arthur Cotton envisioned interlinking India’s rivers to manage floods and droughts. Revived in the 1980s and pushed forward in 2002 by the Supreme Court, the project gained momentum with a 2021 agreement between Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. The plan involves building the Daudhan Dam on the Ken River within the Panna Tiger Reserve and a 221-km canal to divert water to the Betwa. Proponents claim it will transform Bundelkhand’s arid districts, but a closer look reveals a project built on shaky assumptions and coerced approvals.
A critical examination of the KBLP’s feasibility came during a Wednesdays.for.Water session organized by the WforW Foundation, a think tank dedicated to water conservation dialogues. The session, titled “The Decision-Making Process of the Ken-Betwa Link Project,” featured two experts who laid bare the project’s shortcomings. Himanshu Thakkar, an engineer from IIT Mumbai and coordinator of the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers & People (SANDRP), questioned the core claim that the Ken River has surplus water. He cited a lack of public data and noted that the Panna District Collector warned that diverting water would leave Panna—one of Madhya Pradesh’s least irrigated districts—permanently parched. Thakkar also highlighted an affidavit from Uttar Pradesh’s Principal Secretary, predicting social unrest over water-sharing conflicts, and pointed out that the Forest Advisory Committee’s call for a hydrological review was ignored. His analysis suggests the KBLP could exacerbate water scarcity rather than resolve it.
The environmental toll is staggering. The Daudhan Dam will submerge 9,000 hectares of the Panna Tiger Reserve’s core, disconnecting 10,500 hectares and felling 46 lakh trees. This threatens tigers, vultures, and the downstream Ken Gharial Sanctuary, undoing decades of conservation. Thakkar noted that the original Panna director, who warned of ecological ruin, was replaced to secure approval, and the National Board for Wildlife’s concerns about wildlife impacts were dismissed. A report from IIT Gandhinagar, cited in the session, warns that climate-driven rainfall changes could render the project unviable, with no surplus in the Ken and no deficit in the Betwa, disrupting monsoons and coastal ecosystems.
The human cost is equally dire, as Nikita D’cruz, an activist working with forest tribal villages in the Panna Tiger Reserve’s buffer zone, emphasized in the session. The KBLP will displace 6,600 families across 10 villages, primarily Adivasi communities whose livelihoods depend on forests. D’cruz described a displacement process marred by a lack of informed consent, unclear relocation plans, and inadequate compensation. Promised payments—five lakh rupees per acre and 12.5 lakh per household—are tangled in bureaucracy, with many lacking land documents. She highlighted a gender disparity, noting that compensation often bypasses women, creating inequities. “The voices of the most vulnerable are silenced,” D’cruz said, underscoring the project’s undemocratic approach. With no rehabilitation strategy, displaced families face an uncertain future.
The government claims the KBLP will bring prosperity, but who truly benefits? Past dam projects show water often flows to urban areas or industries, not local farmers. The Betwa’s water deficiency, driven by water-intensive crops, could be addressed through sustainable farming, not a $5 billion dam. Meanwhile, 45 lakh trees and 6,600 families pay the price. As D’cruz poignantly asked, “Who are actually benefiting if not the local people?”
The KBLP is a pilot for India’s plan to interlink 30 rivers, creating a 12,500-km canal network. If this is the model, we’re headed for disaster. Rivers are living systems, not pipelines to be rerouted. The WforW session’s insights echo protests from thousands of villagers, mostly tribals, who fear losing their homes and forests. Environmentalists and experts, including those at the Supreme Court’s Central Empowered Committee, have called the project illegal and ecologically unsound.
India must halt the KBLP’s fast-tracked construction and commission an independent review, grounded in transparent data and community input. Policymakers should explore alternatives that prioritize sustainability over spectacle. The public must hold leaders accountable, ensuring water projects serve people, not politics. If we let the KBLP proceed unchecked, we risk drowning not just Panna’s forests and villages but India’s trust in equitable development.
---
*Archita Varyani is a Junior Research Fellow at WforW Foundation. Dr. Mansee Bal Bhargava is an entrepreneur, researcher, and educator. Learn more at www.wforw.in
Comments