Bangalore Water Index - Project Proposal to the BWSSB

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 !!

@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.