Bangalore Water Index - Project Proposal to the BWSSB

up
181 users have liked, including you.
Water

Folks,

Attached here is the project proposal we plan to go to the BWSSB with. Most of it is similar to Pranav's ppt, with a couple of edits - thanks for taking the lead on this, Pranav!

Have a look, and let us know what you think. Also - the parameters are not part of the presentation. That list will be enclosed separately.

Cheers,

Neha

AttachmentSize
BangaloreWaterIndexProposal.pdf332.29 KB

Comments

water index proposal - some comments

up
67 users have liked.

The proposal itself looks nice.  Since BWSSB has been somewhat of a closed organization (or does not open up easily) in the past, it is rather difficult to figure out what will motivate them  to collaborate / open up.  To that extent, the presentation is fairly generic. Just go and make a pitch I think.

There is  a good possibility of failure to open up the first time around (I mean to be pragmatic, not trying to be negative).  Whoever goes for the meeting, strongly suggest that you try to get an idea of what will motivate the board to engage.

comment - about "smallest unit"

up
73 users have liked.

Neha - hmm, cool. So you have a proposal ready for BWSSB. Nice to have left place for a sponsor, I think we should be able to find one once we produce first set of numbers to establish serious intent.

Some comments

- I put in a "three component" index by thinking of water as a resource in similar way as the other popular utility - power (produce, transmit, distribute to consumer). I am not confident if experts also look as water the same way. How many high level components do the experts see here? We need to think of expert-certified good, but 3-5 only not more high level components.

- I notice that you have mentioned focus area as "smallest unit of measurement bwssb has", which may be wards. I would focus on city level aggregated data right noe. Getting into ward level detail is good, but un-necessarily complicates things because 1) ward etc s to technical a thing for most people (ask 10 random people in your office what ward they live in) 2) most data may be available easily at city level rather than ward level. However, one complication I can think of in collecting city level data is - how do you define the city - Bangalore Metro region ideally, but does BWSSB cover the whole BMR?

Look forward to the meeting with BWSSB. When away from Bangalore, I so look forward to comments and posts about every little thing you guys do. Can imagine how other remote but active guys (like Syed) would feel when there are little reports on project or general praja meetings !!

Revised comments

up
106 users have liked.

 I went through the proposal once again during waking hours.  Here are some more specific comments

The Slide: BWSSB and consumers - Information Issues could be interpreted by a sensitive ear as a critique of BWSSB.  My suggestion would be to change it to one looking at the grim water scenario in Bangalore absed on future projections and a need to inform and educate citizens.  Suggest that the water index can come as a way to educate the public about the work of the BWSSB and help drive more informed consumption practices.  Just my opinion.

One concern that people always have is on the quality of the data used.  It would be nice to reinforce that data will be thoroughly vetted by experts and that BWSSB's help will allow us to have vital, good quality data in the index.

The summary / key message on on slide 5 has a typo

Slide 6 - you say that new research is not involved.  Then two lines later, it says that if critical data is missing, we may find a sponsor to collect data.  Kind of contradictory?  Again, emphasize that data will be vetted and validated.  Also, one line says "demand data from city government".  (1) City government has almost nothing to do with water supply!  (2) Maybe change demand to source from or request, just to keep the language.  It is a small change, but maintains the desired tone I think. 

 

@Sanjay/ SB

up
74 users have liked.

@Sanjay

Thanks for pointing out all the errors/contradiction.

Slide 6 - you say that new research is not involved.  Then two lines later, it says that if critical data is missing, we may find a sponsor to collect data.  Kind of contradictory?

Actually it is not contradictory. What we are trying to say is that whatever data we already have, we will use that. The data that we don't have but need, we will get sponsors. But yeah it is not coming out clearly.

@ SB

- I notice that you have mentioned focus area as "smallest unit of measurement bwssb has", which may be wards. I would focus on city level aggregated data right noe. Getting into ward level detail is good, but un-necessarily complicates things because 1) ward etc s to technical a thing for most people (ask 10 random people in your office what ward they live in) 2) most data may be available easily at city level rather than ward level. However, one complication I can think of in collecting city level data is - how do you define the city - Bangalore Metro region ideally, but does BWSSB cover the whole BMR?

Agree and disagree. I think when we are creating an index we should focus on City level data. But while we are at it we might as well get the zone level data. Think of it in open data terms. It is us who should be aggregating all the data, not BWSSB.


Shekhar - Start small

up
72 users have liked.

Shekhar - trust BWSSB aggregation on technical data for now, as in, start small. Data for all wards means 100+ data points. Chances of succes of this project depends on starting with not more than 30-40 data points.

Any updates on this

up
99 users have liked.

Apologies in advance for posting this "I am busy, but what are you guys upto" query.  But curious - what is happening with the water index project?