Riparianism in Indian Water Jurisprudence

Puthucherril, Tony George

doi:10.4135/9788132104247.n5

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even after the transfer of power to the British imperial administration from the mid-nineteenth century, riparianism (based on European and American laws for private riparian rights or public rights) remained the main guiding legal principle for granting fishing rights (Reeves, 1995;Puthucherril, 2009). As a result, management and access rights to inland capture fisheries were maintained as subservient to land ownership (D'Souza, 2006).…”

Section: Evolution Of Tenure Governance In Indian Inland Fisheriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of governance and tenure in inland capture fisheries and aquaculture systems of India

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) or International Collective in Support of Fishworkers (ICSF) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO or ICSF in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned.The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO or ICSF.

show abstract

Section: Evolution Of Tenure Governance In Indian Inland Fisheriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of governance and tenure in inland capture fisheries and aquaculture systems of India

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The waters were considered common to those who had a right of access to these waters; only riparian landowners were able to withdraw water. The ownership of land included the right to use water from adjacent water bodies (e.g., rivers or streams), which was considered an integral right to the land (Matthews Glenn, 2011; Odgers & Odgers, 1920; Puthucherril, 2014; Radosevich, 1976). This right existed by virtue of law (Barton, 2010; Saxer, 2010), and did not depend upon a specific act of the state, such as the grant of a water use entitlement (Puthucherril, 2014).…”

Section: Water Property Rights In Different Systems Of Lawmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The ownership of land included the right to use water from adjacent water bodies (e.g., rivers or streams), which was considered an integral right to the land (Matthews Glenn, 2011; Odgers & Odgers, 1920; Puthucherril, 2014; Radosevich, 1976). This right existed by virtue of law (Barton, 2010; Saxer, 2010), and did not depend upon a specific act of the state, such as the grant of a water use entitlement (Puthucherril, 2014). While it did not give ownership/property rights in the water (Caponera, 2007; Kwasniak, 2012; Odgers & Odgers, 1920), it allowed riparian landowners to use surface water as long as the water use was reasonable and it did not harm other riparian uses (Caponera, 2007; Odgers & Odgers, 1920).…”

Section: Water Property Rights In Different Systems Of Lawmentioning

confidence: 99%

The tension between state ownership and private quasi‐property rights in water

Bosch

Gupta

2022

WIREs Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A critical legal issue in water governance is who owns and who holds property rights in water. Hence, we address the question: How has the state of legal knowledge on private property rights in water evolved worldwide, and how are these rights embedded in the current existing legal constructions? In answering the question, this article reviews the legal literature to: (i) understand the current state of water ownership and water property rights in the main legal systems, (ii) understand and capture how private water "property" rights are embedded in the existing legal constructions; and(iii) reflect on the application of these rights in practice. We conclude:(a) While most states have placed water in the public domain, past statutory systems of water rights are difficult to abolish, and increasingly Indigenous peoples are successfully demanding recognition of, and reclaiming their water rights. (b) States are (re)allocating water rights through statutory mechanisms, including clearly defined bundle-of-rights. And (c), while the state ostensibly controls the water, the allocation of water through historic and new statutory instruments "encroaches" on state water ownership, and has created confusion affecting the state's power to adaptively govern the water. This confusion reflects the tension between the need of states to own and govern water in the public interest, the rights of Indigenous peoples to their water, with the need of agriculture and industries to have reliable supplies of water, leading to water use rights that imply "quasi-property" rights in water.

show abstract

Right to Water: Some Theoretical Issues

Banerjee

2011

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Riparianism in Indian Water Jurisprudence

Cited by 3 publications

References 6 publications

A review of governance and tenure in inland capture fisheries and aquaculture systems of India

A review of governance and tenure in inland capture fisheries and aquaculture systems of India

The tension between state ownership and private quasi‐property rights in water

Right to Water: Some Theoretical Issues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About