See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/365415675

Assessment of future water demand and supply using WEAP model in Dhasan
River Basin, Madhya Pradesh, India

Article  in  Environmental Science and Pollution Research · November 2022

DOI: 10.1007/s11356-022-24050-0

CITATIONS READS

7 538

8 authors, including:

Shreya Nivesh Jyoti P Patil

National Academy of Agricultural Research Management National Institute of Hydrology
14 PUBLICATIONS   42 CITATIONS    23 PUBLICATIONS   228 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Bhagwat Saran A. Raizada

G. B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar Central Coastal Agricultural Research institute
11 PUBLICATIONS   37 CITATIONS    88 PUBLICATIONS   625 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Prioritization of watershed based on remote sensing and GIS in Uttarakhand State, India View project

PhD Fellow, FLUVIO - River Restoration and Management View project

All content following this page was uploaded by A. Raizada on 13 December 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Environmental Science and Pollution Research
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-24050-0

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Assessment of future water demand and supply using WEAP model

in Dhasan River Basin, Madhya Pradesh, India
Shreya Nivesh1 · Jyoti Parasharam Patil2 · Vikas Chandra Goyal2 · Bhagwat Saran3 · Ajay Kumar Singh1 ·
Anurag Raizada1,4 · Anurag Malik5   · Alban Kuriqi6,7

Received: 25 July 2022 / Accepted: 2 November 2022

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2022

Abstract
Understanding the available resources and the needs of those who use them is necessary for the evaluation and allocation
of water resources. The main sectors utilizing the basin water resources are agriculture, drinking water, animal husbandry,
and industries, and the efficient and rational management of water resources to be distributed among those different sectors
of activity is vital. This study attempts to develop an integrated water resource management system for the Dhasan River
Basin (DRB) by employing a scenario analysis approach in conjunction with Water Evaluation and Planning Model (WEAP)
to analyze trends in water use and anticipated demand between 2015 and 2050, simulating five possible scenarios (I, II, III,
IV, and V) as for external driving factors. For the WEAP modeling framework, 2015 was chosen as a current (base) year for
which all available information and input data were given to the model and the future demand situation was analyzed for
the period 2016–2050 (forecasting period). From the findings, it was observed that for the forecasting period, total water
demand, unmet demand, and streamflow were 185.29 B ­ m3, 117.35 B­ m3, and 58.26 B
­ m3, respectively, in the case of scenario
I; 232.34 ­Bm3, 162.17 B ­ m3, and 59.87 B­ m3 in case of scenario II; 139.40 ­Bm3, 84.37 B
­ m3, and 58.15 B ­ m3 in case of sce-
3 3 3 3 3
nario III; 186.15 B­ m , 118.76 B­ m , and 56.98 B­ m in case of scenario IV; and 181.89 ­Bm , 96.87 B ­ m , and 53.11 B ­ m3 in
case of scenario V. Results of the study indicated that by 2050, increasing population growth, industrial development, and
an increase in the agricultural area will rise the water demand dramatically, posing threats to the environment and humans.
Therefore, implementing improved irrigation technologies, advancing agricultural practices on farms, and constructing water
conservation and retaining structures could significantly reduce the unmet demands and shortfalls in DRB. Overall findings
reveal that the pressure on the Dhasan water resources would increase in the future, and thus several suggestions have been
provided to assist decision-makers in sustainable planning and management of water resources to meet future demands.

Keywords  Water demand · Supply delivered · Unmet demand · Streamflow · Simplified coefficient method · Bundelkhand

Introduction

Water is the foundation of life and essential to all. It is the

most abundant resource, covering about 71% of the earth’s
surface, but despite being abundantly available, it is a scarce
Responsible Editor: Marcus Schulz resource. According to the existing consumption rates,
* Anurag Malik
amalik19@pau.edu 4
ICAR-Central Coastal Agricultural Research Institute,
1 Old Goa 403402, Goa, India
ICAR-Mahatma Gandhi Integrated Farming Research
5
Institute, East Champaran 845429, Bihar, India Punjab Agricultural University, Regional Research Station,
2 Bathinda 151001, Punjab, India
National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee 247667,
6
Uttarakhand, India CERIS, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa,
3 Lisbon, 1049‑001, Portugal
Department of Soil & Water Conservation Engineering,
7
College of Technology, G. B. Pant University of Agriculture Civil Engineering Department, University for Business
and Technology, Pantnagar 263145, Uttarakhand, India and Technology, Pristina 38220, Kosovo

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

nearly 1/3rd of the world population will face water scar-
city by 2025 as studied by United Nations (Awotwi et al.
2019). During the last decade, climatic change has been
recognized as one of the major problems in rural develop-
ment on a local, regional, and international scale. In arid/
semi-arid areas, water resource scarcity has become one of
the determinants which restrict social and economic sus-
tainable development, especially in agrarian-based devel-
oping countries like India. Water constitutes a permanent
challenge for India in the general and semi-arid regions of
Bundelkhand in particular (Chand et al. 2020; Vishwakarma
et al. 2020). Bundelkhand was earlier known as Jejabhukti
or Jejakabhukti in ancient days due to the ten principal riv-
ers flowing in the region and was also known as Dhasarna
Pradesh. Possibly the centrally located river Dhasan got its
name from Dasharna. Bundelkhand is a hard rock region
with limited and inadequate groundwater resources divided
between Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh (Pandey et al.
2021). This part of India is considered one of the most vul-
nerable regions due to erratic climate and acute water crises
in terms of availability, storage, and utilization because of
its unique topography and underlying granitic layers, which
does not allow rainwater to seep in and recharge the ground-
water table. Bundelkhand lies between the Indo-Gangetic
Plain to the North and the Vindhya Range to the South.
Principal rivers are Sindh, Betwa, Shahzad, Ken, Bagahin,
Tons, Pahuj, Dhasan, and Chambal. The area suffers from
low crop productivity (1–1.5 t/ha), low rainwater use effi-
ciency (35–45%), high erosion, poor soil fertility, frequent
droughts, poor irrigation facilities, heavy biotic pressure on
forests, inadequate vegetation cover, and frequent crop fail-
ure resulting in scarcity of food, fodder, and fuel. The region
has serious limitations of ground and surface-water avail-
ability and heavily depends upon perched water for drinking
as well as irrigation (Palsaniya et al. 2011). The region is
also classified as “backward” based on the human develop-
ment index, infrastructure, and agriculture-related social and
economic indicators. Improving water use efficiency through
optimizing water resource allocation currently has been con-
sidered the essential method for solving water scarcity in
a river basin. Meanwhile, the main aim of water resource
allocation is to find a balance for allocation methods among
different water use sectors, such as domestic, agricultural,
and industrial uses to ensure the sustainable development
of society and the economy. However, the problem of insuf-
ficient or excessive water allocation within each sector may
occur in the traditional water allocation pattern, which
distributes water resources based on the current situation
and trend of water use (Wang et al. 2015; Hanifehlou et al.
2022). Therefore, there is an urgent need to quantify the
possible demographic changes, future policies of the govern-
ment, and climate change impacts on water resources in this
region. Thus, water allocation measures in the Bundelkhand
13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
that consider equity, efficiency, and sustainability in every
water sector should be treated as the main goal for the stock-
holders and decision-makers (Al-Mukhtar and Mutar 2021).
In this context, the study area selected for planning water
resources allocation in the present study is Dhasan River
Basin (DRB) of the Bundelkhand region, Madhya Pradesh.
The basin is divided into five sub-watersheds, viz., Rohni,
Bila, Sukhnai, Lakheri, and Ur (Pareta and Pareta 2011;
Prakash et al. 2016). Dhasan forms a part of the Yamuna
sub-basin; since the annual water deficit is much more than
the annual water surplus, the basin may be considered to be
drought-prone (Thakural et al. 2009; Kar et al. 2016).
Hydrological models allow one to study the relationship
between climate and water resources. Many scholars around
the world have used various hydrological models for water
resource assessments by integrating them with socio-economic
factors (Nivesh and Kumar 2018; Skoulikaris and Zafirakou
2019; Salman et al. 2021), for example, the soil and water
assessment tool (SWAT) watershed model (Goyal et al. 2018;
Sharafati et al. 2020; Boufala et al. 2022), the spatial agro
hydro salinity model (SAHYSMOD) (Peng et al. 2020), the
modular simulator (ModSim) (Fanta et al. 2022), the agro-
hydrological land surface process model (PROMET) (Hank
et al. 2015; Degife et al. 2021), artificial intelligence-based
models (Malik et al. 2020; Xiang et al. 2021; Nivesh et al.
2022), and the water assessment and planning tool (WEAP),
which has been widely used in different basins of the world
in recent decades (Ayt Ougougdal et al. 2020). Among all
the water resource allocation models, Water Evaluation and
Planning (WEAP) (Yao et al. 2021) has been the most widely
used model in different basins around the world in the last
decades (Yates et al. 2005; Moncada et al. 2021). WEAP has
proven to be a useful tool for water resource allocation under
different socio-economic and climate change scenarios (Hum
and Talib 2016). Thus, with a view to achieving a management
plan for water resources under climatic and anthropic
constraints and to improving decision-making capacities in
water resource management, we proposed to test the WEAP
(Water Evaluation and Planning System) hydrological
model in the Dhasan River Basin. Some recent studies have
reported effective applications of the WEAP model in arid
and mountainous regions of India for managing water supply
and demand (Bhave et  al. 2018). The WEAP model has
also been applied in the Ur watershed of the Bundelkhand
region (Agarwal et al. 2018, 2019). However, these studies
were based on a micro-watershed (< 500 ha) scale, while this
study was conducted at the basin level assessment covering
five districts (Tikamgarh, Chhatarpur, Raisen, Sagar, and
Lalitpur) and sharing interstate boundaries. The adopted
methodology is based on hydro-climatic and physical datasets,
taking into account a prospective vision of water availability.
This approach extends the current trends (2015) by 2050,
incorporating alternative scenarios for changing water demand.
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
Material and methods
Study area
The DRB (Dhasan River Basin) which is a right-bank trib-
utary of the Betwa River lies between 23°45′ and 24°00′ N
latitudes and 78°30′ and 78°45′ E longitudes and comprises a
total drainage area of 3565 ­km2 (Fig. 1). The river originates
in Raisen district of Madhya Pradesh (MP) in central India
and forms the south-eastern boundary of the Lalitpur district
of Uttar Pradesh (UP). The total length of the river is 365 km,
out of which 240 km lies in MP, 54 km is a common boundary
between MP and UP, and 71 km in UP. Dhasan is primarily a
rainfed river whose water level varies with the amount of rain-
fall and flows only for about 4–5 months, mostly during mon-
soon (July to November/December months). Hence, a storage
reservoir is required to meet the water demand for the no-flow
period of 7–8 months of the year since sometimes the arrival of
the monsoon gets delayed until the end of July. Flow is consid-
erable from July to August and reduces significantly in Novem-
ber, gets completely dried up by December, and remains dry
until the onset of the next monsoon season. The DRB lies at
the southern-eastern edge of the great Malwa plateau and
slopes from south to north, and hence the flow of the river is in
this direction. Most of the area has undulating topography with
hills extending from the southwest to the northeast direction.
The basin comprises five districts—Tikamgarh, Chhatarpur,
Raisen, Sagar, and Lalitpur—covering 717 villages and having
an average annual rainfall of 1223.5 mm. The average elevation
Fig. 1  Location map of Dhasan
River Basin (DRB), India INDIA
Tikamgarh
Lalitpur
Sagar
Raisen
0 35 70 140
of the basin is 466 m, with a minimum of 260 m and a maxi-
mum of 715 m. Various geological formations are exposed
from east to west, the soil being predominantly clay and clayey
loam type. The area lies over the Deccan trap, which is basaltic
lava flow and is made up of horizontal basalt. Sandstones are
spread in the northern part of the basin. Land use in the DRB
follows the trend of agriculture > grassland > forests.
Data collection
This study analyzes trends (present and future) in water use
and demand between 2015 and 2050 under different scenar-
ios. Since model results are as good as the input variables,
careful attention has been paid to choosing and processing
data for the current year representing the system as it cur-
rently exists (2015) and the scenario analysis (2016–2050).
In this study, different types of data were collected for the
water balance analysis using the WEAP model. The dataset
involves hydro-meteorological data (evaporation, tempera-
ture, rainfall, and streamflow), water demand, land cover,
soil type, groundwater and reservoir data, and climate sce-
narios (Mounir et al. 2011; Amin et al. 2018). The meteoro-
logical data were acquired from IMD (Indian Meteorological
Department), Pune; water demand data was obtained from
the state agricultural department and Madhya Pradesh water
portal; land use data were collected from Madhya Pradesh
Council of Science and Technology; climate scenario data
was taken from spatial climate scenario generator program
Cligen; groundwater and reservoir data were collected from
79°0'0"E
± ±
DHASAN BASIN
±
24°0'0"N
24°0'0"N
Chhatarpur
Legend
Elevation
High : 715
Low : 260
Legend
Dhasan Basin
District
Kilometers
0 5 10 20 30 40
Kilometers
210 280 79°0'0"E
13

central groundwater board, water resource department, and
state irrigation department; and hydrological data for the
Garauli site was collected from the Central Water Com-
mission, MP.
Methodology
WEAP model
The concept of the WEAP model was initially designed
by SEI (Stockholm Environment Institute) in 1988 for
integrated planning and management of water resources.
It is based on water balance and requires many inputs like
the land cover, soil types, supply sources (i.e., groundwa-
ter, streams, rivers, and reservoirs), water quality, water
demands (agricultural, domestic, livestock, and industrial),
withdrawals, economic assessment, and requirement. In
the WEAP model, the representative modeling scenario
comprises three stages: (i) base year (or current year), (ii)
reference scenario created from current accounts to project
the possible development in the system with intrusion, and
(iii) “what-if” scenarios formed to adjust the “reference sce-
nario” and measure the deviations in technologies and rules.
The WEAP model is designed as a set of five different views
of the study area (1) schematic, (2) data, (3) results, (4) sce-
nario explorer, and (5) notes. The schematic view is used to
set the area boundaries and change various nodes and labels
in the water supply and demand system. The data view is an
ordered tree used to generate and establish data structures
under six categories: (i) key assumptions, (ii) demand sites,
(iii) hydrology, (iv) supply and resources, (v) environment,
and (vi) other assumptions. The result view represents maps,
charts, and tables as model output. Scenario explorer allows
forming overviews by grouping favorite charts. Notes are
views where data and assumptions are recorded. The model
uses five methods to simulate catchment processes on a daily
or monthly basis. The rainfall-runoff method (simplified
coefficient method) was selected for this study because it
determines evapotranspiration for irrigated and rainfed crops
using crop coefficients; the remainder of rainfall not con-
sumed by evapotranspiration is simulated as runoff to a river
or can be proportioned among runoff to a river and flow to
groundwater via runoff/infiltration links. WEAP model has a
linkage to a parameter estimation tool (PEST) that allows the
user to automate the process of comparing WEAP outputs
to historical observations and modifying model parameters
to improve its accuracy. PEST is computer software, for
model-independent parameter estimation and uncertainty
analysis. PEST is able to “take control” of a model, running
it as many times as it needs to while adjusting its parameters
until the discrepancies between selected model outputs and a
complementary set of field or laboratory measurements are
reduced to a minimum in the weighted least squares sense.
13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
WEAP model setup
All the components of the water resource system of this study
and the analysis parameters to be undertaken are defined in the
SETUP portion of the WEAP model. There are four primary
types of system components in WEAP: (1) demand sites, (2)
local supplies, (3) wastewater treatment facilities, and (4)
rivers and their nodes, representing the water resources and
other river-based water use that form a single river network
managed together through a river simulation network. The
WEAP model was run for the DRB, which includes the Dhasan
river, one catchment node, one groundwater node, one demand
node (agricultural demand, livestock demand, and industrial
demand), seven reservoir nodes (4 water harvesting structures,
2 lakes, and 1 reservoir), one return flow link, two runoff/
infiltration links, and fourteen transmission links (Fig. 2). After
defining the components, the water system was configured
by linking demand sites with local supplies, catchment,
groundwater, river, or river nodes. In water balance accounting,
water is transmitted over the system links on a monthly basis
to the appropriate demand sites to satisfy water demands
(Dimova et al. 2014; Negasa Jaleta et al. 2019). Water that is
not consumed at a demand site was directed to groundwater
nodes, rivers, and other local supplies through return flow and
runoff/infiltration links. The year 2015 was selected as the base
year or current account year, and the study estimates for future
projections are based on external driving factors covering the
period 2016–2050 (approximately 35 years) (Sharafati et al.
2022). To allocate available resources, many options were
verified by constructing numerous scenarios, and demands
of future water were projected. The model was applied using
different scenarios that concern the river basin’s response to
demographic changes, various plans or future policies of the
government, and climate and management scenarios (Demertzi
et al. 2014). These scenarios were constructed according to
the WEAP’s varied demand method. This method allows us
to easily use historical data and simulate future changes in
hydrological patterns, and the method is based on varying water
demand or supply requirements only, not supply. In this method,
natural discrepancies in hydro-climatic data, for example,
rainfall and streamflow, are not considered for the scenario
analysis in the WEAP model. The hydrological conditions
were characterized as usual throughout the year, relative to
account the amount of surface water inflows. The scenarios
used in the WEAP model include a reference scenario, which
represents a base scenario with future climate projections
and a population growth rate continuing at 5.5%. Scenario I
looks at the impact of increasing the population growth rate
from 5.5 to 8%. Scenario II is defined as a base scenario with
an increase in industrial area as a result of a 50% decrease in
the forest area. Scenario III looks at the impact of increasing
irrigation efficiency by 20%. Scenario IV estimates the impact
of conversion of 50% barren land and 50% fallow land into
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
Fig. 2  The schematic diagram of the WEAP model for DRB
agricultural use, while scenario V computes the impact of
incorporating four water harvesting structures (WHS1, WHS2,
WHS3, and WHS4), viz., weir (with storage capacity = 0.06%
of annual water availability), percolation tank (with storage
capacity < 50% of annual utilizable runoff), pond (with storage
capacity = 5% of annual water requirement), and reservoir (with
storage capacity = mean annual rainfall*area of roof*runoff
factor). First, the schematic map of the area was prepared, and
then data was provided as input into different branches of the
model, after which results were obtained in the form of different
charts and tables. Then the favorite charts were grouped using
the scenario explorer view wherever necessary data and
assumptions were documented (Ayele 2016).
Results and discussion
Over the past decade, the Bundelkhand region has become
synonymous with drought, rapid population growth, unem-
ployment, illiteracy, poverty, soil erosion, untimely agricultural
practices, poor industrialization, deforestation, and perennial
water stress. Facing these challenges, an integrated modeling
framework has been introduced as a key tool to understand
hydrology processes for present and future predictions.
Water balance at the basin scale
The simulation results of the WEAP model in DRB during
2015 estimate a total water demand of 4846 million cubic
meters ­(Mm3), while only 313 M ­ m3 of supply was delivered,
leaving a total unmet demand of 976 M ­ m3. The highest unmet
demand was observed for the catchment site with 552 ­Mm3,
accounting for 57% of the total other unmet demands, includ-
ing domestic, livestock, and industrial demands. There are vari-
ations between months in water demand sectors (Fig. 3a), with
the unmet demands being higher during those months with
lower supply delivered (Höllermann et al. 2010; Mehrparvar
et al. 2020). Furthermore, the results revealed no significant
change in water demand on the demand side for the base year.
In contrast, water demand varies significantly at the catch-
ment site with a nil value in January, July, and August, and
a maximum value in May (1368.0 M ­ m3). However, monthly
precipitation and conveyance losses vary each month, illus-
trating an apparent variability within the Dhasan basin for
unmet demand. In this study, river basin supply delivered was
observed to be maximum in September and nil in June, July,
August, October, November, and January months. Results
showed that in DRB, there are 9 months characterized by water
shortage, which is most severe in May (Fig. 3b). Unmet water
demands are extreme in May for both sites. Unfortunately,
water inadequacy is visible in almost all the months, with a
primary water deficit for the agricultural sector.
The demand site coverage report provides a quick estima-
tion of how well water demands are being met and is defined
as the percent of each water demand site’s requirement met
considering demand site losses, reuse, and demand-side
management savings from 0 (no water conveyed) to 100%
(conveyance of complete water demand). Results demonstrate
that the demand site has the highest water scarcity and lowest
13
 Environmental Science and Pollution Research

coverage. The demand in the catchment site is met to an extent (a)

1600
of about 82% in 8 months in the basin. It is observed that 1400
Catchment Site Demand Site

Water Demand (Mm3)

Dhasan especially May, November, and December months 1200
at the demand site have the lowest water demand coverage 1000

period (coverage as low as 43% appearing in this period). 800

600
However, results also illustrate that for the two sites, July, 400
August, and January months have the highest coverage (100%) 200

due to maximum precipitation and quantity of water delivered; 0

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
therefore, demand is best met in these months (Fig. 3c). Month
Inflows to the area are defined as the water entering the (b)
350
system or basin through different sources: river, groundwater, 300
Catchment Site Demand Site

catchment precipitation, local reservoir, and other local

Unmet Demand (Mm3)

250
supply sources such as nalla, pond, and lake. Different 200
sources of water input into the Dhasan area are Rohini 150

Reservoir, Dhauri Sagar Lake, and Lakha Banjara Lake. It 100

was observed that average monthly inflows to Dhasan range 50

from 4.58 to 910.81 M ­ m3 (Fig. 3d). The lowest value was 0

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
registered in May and the highest in August when higher Month

inflows were observed during the monsoon season due to (c) 120
high rainfall in the area. Five scenarios and one reference Catchment Site Demand Site

Demand Site Coverage (%)

100
scenario were estimated based on current water demands, and
80
scenario analysis was defined from 2016 to 2050.
60

40

20
Reference scenario
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
This scenario foresees the effect of climate change and (d)
Month

population increase at a growth rate of 5.5%. The scenario 1200

was projected according to climate data, especially rainfall and 1000

Inflows to Area (Mm3)

temperature, projected by the spatial climate scenario generator 800

program. It was observed that the projected total water demand 600
decreased from 4845.81 in 2015 to 4520.69 M ­ m3 at the end 400
of the scenario (Fig. 4a) since it is expected that the Dhasan 200
population growth rate is expected to decline by the end of 2050 0
due to persistently low birth rates, high mortality rates, and Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

continued migration. Figure 4b shows the supply delivered to Month

the area up to 2050. It was estimated that the total water supply
would vary between 313.08 in 2015 to 14.68 ­Mm3 in the year
2050, with maximum supply during 2036 and minimum in 2044
due to anticipated variations in rainfall. This scenario projected
higher unmet demands in most years, showing maximum
water shortage in 2018 and minimum in 2015 (Fig. 4c). The
results revealed that the future unmet water demand is likely
to reach 2864.97 M­ m3 by 2050 from 976.06 M ­ m3 in the base
year. The catchment monitoring station at the Garrauli site
(MP) was used for streamflow analysis and model testing. In
the future, streamflow in the basin is likely to reach 1735.46
­Mm3 in 2050 from 1126.83 M ­ m3 in the base period, depicting
maximum value in the year 2016 and minimum in the year 2030
(Fig. 4d). The variation in the streamflow is perceived because
streamflow is highly dependent on precipitation (Nordström
2019). Correlating water supply requirements in 2050 with
streamflow rate, it is estimated that water released from different
Fig. 3  Calculated water supply and demands by WEAP model dur-
ing different months for the base period. a Water demand; b unmet
demand; c demand site coverage; d inflows to the area
sources will not be sufficient to fulfill the requirements of the
area (Johannsen et al. 2016) and sustainable water management
policies are urgently needed for the river basin.
Scenario I
This scenario, known as the population growth scenario,
looks at an increasing population growth rate of 2.5%.
Estimates indicate that water demand will increase from
4845.81 ­Mm3 in the base period to 4870.12 ­Mm3 by the
end of 2050 (Fig. 5a). It was also observed that the total

13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research

water supply is expected to increase from 313.08 in the (a)

7000
base period to 457.85 M ­ m3 in 2050 for the DRB (Fig. 5b).
6000
Unmet demand was estimated to be 976.06 ­Mm3 in 2015

Water Demand (Mm3)

5000
and which increased to 3133.25 M ­ m3 in 2050 (Fig. 5c). 4000
This increase in unmet demand is due to constant water 3000
supply, improved living standards, and population growth 2000

in the coming years (Hadded et al. 2013). Streamflow in the 1000

basin is likely to increase from 1126.83 in the base year to 0

2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
1948.11 ­Mm3 in the last year of the scenario (Fig. 5d). The Year
amount of precipitation received in 2015 is an average, and (b)
600
by 2050, the projected precipitation will be more than the 500

Supply Delivered (Mm3)

average rainfall resulting in more streamflow during 2050. 400

300
Scenario II 200

100
This scenario forecasts an increase in industrial area as a
0
result of a 50% decrease in forest area and is known as the

2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
industrial development scenario. Results revealed that this (c) Year
6000
could cause a significant increase in water demand, which
would increase from 4845.81 in 2015 to 11,862.87 ­Mm3 at 5000

the end of the scenario (Fig. 6a). The quantities delivered to Unmet Demand (Mm3)
4000

the basin by the end of the scenario expected a null value (0 3000

­Mm3) in the year 2050 compared to 571.06 ­Mm3 in the base 2000

year (Fig. 6b). The estimated unmet demand was 976.06 1000

­Mm3 in 2015 and is expected to increase up to 9501.38 0

201520172019202120232025202720292031203320352037203920412043204520472049
­Mm3 by the end of the scenario (Fig. 6c). Streamflow in the (d) Year

basin is likely to reach 1889.15 ­Mm3 by 2050 from 1126.83 3500

­Mm3 with maximum flow in 2016 (Fig. 6d). The results 3000

illustrated that the future unmet demand would grow dra- 2500
Streamflow (Mm3)

2000
matically because of the limited water supply and increased
1500
population and industries, due to which the amount of water 1000
would not be sufficient (Sanjaq 2009). Therefore, increasing 500
water demand must be managed and met by judicious use 0
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
of available resources, investments in rooftop harvesting,
recharge of groundwater resources, and promotion of low Year

water-consuming industries.
Fig. 4  Calculated water supply and demands by WEAP model for
reference scenario. a Water demand; b supply delivered; c unmet
Scenario III demand; d streamflow

This scenario determines the impact of increasing irrigation

efficiency by 20% along with expected population growth
and climate change and is known as the increased irriga-
tion efficiency scenario. As per the findings, water demand
would decline by 35% from 4845.81 in 2015 to 3581.07
­Mm3 in 2050 (Fig. 7a). Quantities delivered to the basin are
projected to decrease from 313.08 in 2015 to 88.35 M ­ m3
by 2050 (Fig. 7b), while unmet demand would increase
from 976.06 in the base period to 2160.24 M ­ m3 by 2050
(Fig. 7c). Streamflow projected to increase from 1126.83 in
the base period to 1735.46 ­Mm3 by the end of the scenario
(Fig. 7d). Consequently, increase in supply and streamflow
is the adoption of more efficient irrigation practices resulting
in a reduction of water stress induced by irrigation demands.
Scenario IV
This scenario known as the increased agricultural area sce-
nario looks at the impact of the conversion of 50% barren
land and 50% fallow land into agricultural use. Under this
scenario, water demand is projected to decrease from 4845.81
­ m3 by 2050 (Fig. 8a). It was
in the base period to 4614.70 M
also observed that quantities delivered to the basin in the
future would decrease from 313.08 in 2015 to 139.67 ­Mm3
in 2050 (Fig. 8b). Unmet demand estimated at 976.06 ­Mm3 in
2015 would increase to 2977.11 ­Mm3 in 2050 (Fig. 8c). This
increase in unmet demand is due to constant water supply and

13
 Environmental Science and Pollution Research

(a) (a)
7000 14000

6000 12000

Water Demand (Mm3)

Water Demand (Mm3)

5000 10000

4000 8000

3000 6000

2000 4000

1000 2000

0 0

2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
Year (b) Year
(b) 600 900
800
500

Supply Delivered (Mm3)

Supply Delivered (Mm3)

700
400 600
500
300
400
200 300
200
100
100
0 0
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050

2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
Year
(c)12000 Year
(c)6000
10000

Unmet Demand (Mm3)

5000
Unmet Demand (Mm3)

8000
4000
6000
3000
4000
2000
2000
1000
0
0
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050

Year (d) 3500 Year

(d)3500 3000
2500
Streamflow (Mm3)

3000
2500 2000
Streamflow (Mm3)

2000 1500

1500 1000

1000 500

500 0
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
0
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050

Year

Year

Fig. 6  Calculated water supply and demands by WEAP model for

Fig. 5  Calculated water supply and demands by WEAP model for scenario II. a Water demand; b supply delivered; c unmet demand; d
scenario I. a Water demand; b supply delivered; c unmet demand; d streamflow
streamflow

increased agricultural water demand compared to livestock,
domestic, and industrial demand in the future. Streamflow in
the basin is likely to increase from 1126.83 in the base year
to 1713.66 ­Mm3 in the last year of the scenario (Fig. 8d).
Variation in the amount of precipitation in the future leads
to an increase in streamflow in the basin.
Scenario V
This scenario foresees the impact of four water harvesting
structures in the basin, known as the incorporation of water
harvesting structure scenario. Results reveal that construct-
ing water harvesting structures in the basin could cause a
significant decrease in the water demand from 4845.81 in
2015 to 4520.69 M ­ m3 at the end of the scenario (Fig. 9a)
due to the recharging of local aquifers and assured water
availability in the water-scarce zones. The quantities deliv-
ered to the basin by the end of the scenario are expected to
be 304.96 ­Mm3 in 2050 compared to 313.08 ­Mm3 in the
base year (Fig. 9b). The estimated unmet demand of 976.06
­Mm3 in 2015 is expected to increase up to 2408.40 M ­ m3 by
2050 (Fig. 9c) due to increase in population in the future
(Johannsen et al. 2016). Streamflow in the basin is likely to
reach 1657.10 ­Mm3 by the year 2050 from 1126.83 ­Mm3
with maximum flow in 2016 (Fig. 9d). Results indicate that

13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research

(a) 6000 (a)

7000
5000 6000
Water Demand (Mm3)

Water demand (Mm3)

4000 5000

3000 4000
3000
2000
2000
1000
1000
0
0
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050

2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
Year
(b) 450 (b) 450 Year
400 400
Supply Delivered (Mm3)

350 350

Supply delivered (Mm3)

300 300
250 250
200 200
150 150
100 100
50 50
0 0
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050

2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
(c) Year
(c)
Year
4000
6000
3500
Unmet Demand (Mm3)

3000 5000

Unmet demand (Mm3)

2500 4000
2000
3000
1500
1000 2000
500 1000
0
0
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050

2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
(d) Year
3500 (d) Year
3500
3000
3000
2500
Streamflow (Mm3)

Streamflow (Mm3)

2500
2000
2000
1500
1500
1000
1000
500
500
0
0
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050

2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
Year
Year

Fig. 7  Calculated water supply and demands by WEAP model for

Fig. 8  Calculated water supply and demands by WEAP model for
scenario III. a Water demand; b supply delivered; c unmet demand;
scenario IV. a Water demand; b supply delivered; c unmet demand;
d streamflow
d streamflow

there would be a reduction in unmet demand in most of the

years compared to other future scenarios.
Water demand under different scenarios for the forecasting
period (2016 to 2050) is presented in Fig. 10. Annual water
demand is projected to rise from 5785.31 to 11,862.87 ­Mm3
by end of the scenario II, and for other scenarios in 2050,
requirement has decreased to 4520.69 M ­ m3 from 5780.88
3
­Mm in the reference scenario, to 4870.12 M­ m3 from 5781.93
­Mm3 in the scenario I, to 3581.07 ­Mm3 from 4344.33 ­Mm3
in the scenario III, to 4614.70 ­Mm3 from 5924.62 ­Mm3 in
the scenario IV, and to 4520.69 ­Mm3 from 5780.88 ­Mm3 in
the scenario V. The DRB is poised to experience a gradual
increase in demand for a population growth scenario. Water
demand projections at all the nodes show a remarkable
increase in the abstraction levels for all the abstraction points
in scenario II compared to others (Metobwa et al. 2018). The
results reveal that problems of water availability will increase
in the future in the Dhasan river until strong mechanisms of
water resources supervision are not in place to keep the phe-
nomena of rapid inhabitants increase plus industrial growth
with the climate change aberrations. Scenario III exempli-
fies the favorable scenario with a reduction in total annual
demand by 2050 using new irrigation and water conservation
technologies, which will have the most significant impact on
water supply management in the future (Hamlat et al. 2013).

13
 Environmental Science and Pollution Research

(a) A comparison of annual unmet demands for the DRB in

7000 different scenarios is presented in Fig. 11. Estimates revealed
6000 that by the end of the scenario (2050), the annual unmet
Water demand (Mm3)

5000
demand during the reference scenario is 2860.97 M ­ m3. The
4000 3
total supply delivered is 14.68 ­Mm which is about 0.84%
3000
2000
of the annual streamflow (1735.46 M ­ m3). For scenario I in
1000 2050, the annual unmet demand is 3133.25 ­Mm3. The total
0 supply delivered is 457.85 M ­ m3 (about 9% of the annual sup-
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
ply requirement), against the streamflow of 1948.11 M ­ m 3.
(b)
900 Year
The quantity of water supply delivered to the basin in 2050
800
700 is expected a nil value (0 M ­ m3) by the end of scenario II.
Supply delivered (Mm3)

600 Annual unmet demand is observed to be 9501.38 M ­ m 3,

500 3
400
against 1889.15 M ­ m annual streamflow. It is observed that
300 there is a sudden increase in unmet demand from 2045 and
200
100
onwards, showing some dips in the years 2047 and 2048 in
0 the case of scenario II. In the last year of the scenario, the
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
annual unmet demand during scenario III is 2160.24 ­Mm3.
(c) 5000 Year
The total supply delivered is 88.35 M ­ m3 about 5.1% of the
4500 annual streamflow during this year. For scenario IV, in 2050
4000
annual unmet demand is 2977.11 M ­ m3. The total supply deliv-
Unmet demand (Mm3)

3500
3
3000
2500
ered is 139.67 M ­ m (about 3% of the annual supply require-
2000 ment), against the streamflow of 1713.66 ­Mm3. In the case of
1500
1000 scenario V, the quantity of water supplied to the basin in 2050
500 is 304.96 ­Mm3, and the annual unmet demand is observed to
0
be 2408.40 M ­ m3, against 1657.10 M ­ m3 annual streamflow.
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050

The reason for the significantly less quantity of water sup-

(d)3500 Year
plied in different scenarios compared to supply requirements
3000 in the basin can be attributed to the geology of the area with
2500
limited and inadequate groundwater resources, abstraction
Steamflow (Mm3)

2000
losses, evaporation from the soil surface, and losses caused
1500
1000
by the conveyance system. It can be seen that the trends in
500 unmet demands in most scenarios are similar to yearly dips
0 in coverage except for some years. Water demand is best met
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050

in scenario III (irrigation efficiency scenario, while the worst

Year
situation is in scenario II (industrial development scenario).
Future projections of streamflow in the DRB during differ-
Fig. 9  Calculated water supply and demands by WEAP model for ent scenarios are depicted in Fig. 12. To calculate the over-
scenario V. a Water demand; b supply delivered; c unmet demand; d
streamflow
all impact of upstream water withdrawals on instream and

Fig. 10  Future projections of Reference Scenario Scenario-I Scenario-II

water demand in the DRB under Scenario-III Scenario-IV Scenario-V
14000
the reference scenario, scenario
I, scenario II, scenario III, sce- 12000
Water Demand (Mm3)

nario IV, and scenario V

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000

0
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Year

13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
downstream water availability in the DRB, streamflow at the
basin outlet was estimated (Adgolign et al. 2016). The results
revealed that the trends of streamflow in different scenarios
are almost similar, except for a few a year. It was observed
that in the last year of the scenario, there would be a reduc-
tion in the streamflow compared to 2016. At the end of the
scenario, annual streamflow is expected to reduce by 42.2% in
the reference scenario, 35.1% in scenario I, 37.1% in scenario
II, 42.2% in scenario III, 42.6% in scenario IV, and 39.7% in
scenario V. The reason for the reduction in streamflow in the
future is its dependency on precipitation in the basin.
Water demand, unmet demand, and streamflow for the
forecasting period (2016–2050) under different scenarios are
shown in Fig. 13. From the figure, it is found that there is sig-
nificant water demand in five scenarios as follows: 185,287
­Mm3 (scenario I), 232,344 ­Mm3 (scenario II), 139,396 ­Mm3
(scenario III), 186,145 M ­ m3 (scenario IV), and 181,893
3
­Mm (scenario V). According to the results, unmet demand
was 117,351 ­Mm3 in scenario I, 162,171 ­Mm3 in scenario II,
84,368 ­Mm3 in scenario III, 118,757 ­Mm3 in scenario IV, and
96,867 ­Mm3 in scenario V, while the streamflow for scenario
I was 58,259 M ­ m3, for scenario II was 59,873 M ­ m3, for sce-
nario III was 58,154 M ­ m , for scenario IV was 56,983 ­Mm3,
3
and for scenario V was 53,111 ­Mm3. As per the results of
the study, scenarios III and V with lower unmet demand and
higher streamflow suggested that the implementation of water
conservation structures and management strategies and the use
of advanced irrigation techniques (which minimize water trans-
mission losses) could significantly reduce the supply require-
ment and water deficit in the future (Li et al. 2015). Increasing
irrigation efficiency using enhanced techniques such as drip
irrigation, sprinkler irrigation, and sub-surface drip irrigation
and construction of water harvesting structures like ponds,
weirs, and percolation tanks were found to have important
effects on water demand coverage in the Dhasan River Basin.
Hence, to solve the problem of water shortage in a semi-arid
region like Bundelkhand, the implementation of these sce-
narios needs the special attention of relevant organizations.
Fig. 11  Future projections of
unmet demand in the DRB 14000
under the reference scenario,
Unmet Demand (Mm3)
scenario I, scenario II, scenario 12000
III, scenario IV, and scenario V 10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
2015
Conclusions
This study represents a first attempt at applying and testing
the WEAP model as a means of addressing water allo-
cation problems in a water-stressed Dhasan River Basin
in the Bundelkhand region, Madhya Pradesh. The Water
Evaluation and Planning System has been developed for
simulating current water balances and evaluating water
management strategies in the DRB under different sce-
narios and climate change until 2050. The five scenarios
constructed in this approach reflect the effect of future
trends in water demands by taking into account demo-
graphic changes, different operating policies of the gov-
ernment, and factors that may affect demand and evaluat-
ing the impact of resource availability through probable
climate change in the region.
The results showed that in the first scenario, population
growth was the most important factor influencing domestic
water demand in the DRB. It is also the most difficult to
predict and control. This implies that sufficient flexibility
must be built into the water management system in order to
accommodate unexpected changes in service populations.
Faced with the scarcity of freshwater supply in the Bun-
delkhand region, the second scenario analyzed the develop-
ment of industrial structure impact on water demand. The
amount of required water should be maintained by reus-
ing and improving the quality of water through wastewa-
ter technology for sewage treatment and eco-hydrological
methods. Third, the irrigation efficiency scenario examined
the impact of better or improved irrigation techniques on
water demand. Enhanced irrigation methods lead to less
water infiltration to the aquifers but lessen the overall water
demand of surface water. Revival of traditional land use
practices could show the way to rejuvenate the wasted land
of Bundelkhand which has been battling drought for years.
The fourth scenario looked over the effect of the conver-
sion of waste and barren lands into agricultural use. The
Reference Scenario Scenario-I Scenario-II
Scenario-III Scenario-IV Scenario-V
2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Year
13
 Environmental Science and Pollution Research

Fig. 12  Future projections of Reference Scenario Scenario-I Scenario-II

streamflow in the DRB under Scenario-III Scenario-IV Scenario-V
the reference scenario, scenario 3500
I, scenario II, scenario III, sce- 3000

Streamflow (Mm3)
nario IV, and scenario V
2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Year

Fig. 13  Comparison of future Water Demand Unmet Demand Streamflow

250000
water demand, unmet demand,
Volume of Water (Mm3)

and streamflow projections in

the DRB during different sce- 200000
narios in forecasting period
150000

100000

50000

0
Reference Scenario-I Scenario-II Scenario-III Scenario-IV Scenario-V
Scenario
Scenario

management solutions looked at the adaptation of field
size, use of drought-resistant crop varieties, crop diver-
sification, and changes in cropping patterns. Additional
water needs in such a basin can be met through wiser water
retention strategies. Scenario V analyzed the impact of the
construction of water harvesting structures or the creation
of storage facilities in the basin. This technique leads to
reducing the loss of water by runoff, makes rainwater per-
colate under the ground so as to recharge groundwater, pro-
motes both water and energy conservation, and improves
the quality and quantity of groundwater. Increasing irriga-
tion efficiency by utilizing advanced techniques of irriga-
tion such as micro-irrigation on the farm is a great idea
that causes effective utilization of the water resources with
maximum efficiency and saving in irrigation water up to
50–70%. Also, the implementation of rainwater harvesting
structures, like weirs, percolation tanks, and ponds, help
in meeting the future demand by redistributing the sup-
ply sources. Once the harvesting structures are built, more
recharge of groundwater takes place, and thus supply load
on rivers decreases and gets transferred to the groundwater
bodies. Thus, investing in four structures for the Dhasan
River basin is an effective step. Therefore, a combination
of increasing irrigation efficiency and incorporating water
harvesting structures is recommended.
Summarizing, the limitations mainly result from the
absence of quantitative data which made the present study
slightly difficult to find broader results. Discharge data was
one such type in this study. The second limitation of the study
is only varied demand not supply, i.e., the water year method
was not used. Another limitation of the study that prevented
us from carrying out an effective study is the unavailability
of climate models (coupled model intercomparison project-
CMIP6) data. Scenario III presents an effective and reliable
strategy for coping with climatic variability and changes and
growing water scarcity. The moment has come by effective
management of the demand, it is technically possible to con-
serve a large part of the water lost, and it should cost less
than the cost of providing new supplies to cover future addi-
tional demands. The results confirmed that the WEAP model
offers a solid basis to assist planners in developing recom-
mendations for future water resource management by reveal-
ing hot spots of action. As shown in this study, WEAP is a
user-friendly, scalable, and cost-efficient tool and would be

13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
a suitable application to support Dhasan local authorities in
integrated water resource management. It can be coupled with
the models of water quality, groundwater, energy, and climate
to help policymakers to understand the water availability and
their allocation for current and future periods, which are an
important basis for any rational water policy initiatives.
Acknowledgements  The authors would like to thank the India Mete-
orological Department (IMD), Pune and Central Water Commission,
Yamuna Basin Organization, Lower Yamuna Division, Agra, Madhya
Pradesh Council of Science and Technology, and the State Irrigation
and Agriculture Department for providing the datasets used in the
study. Many thanks to the scientists of the Research Management and
Outreach Division, National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee, for con-
sistent help to carry out the research. The authors thank the editor and
the anonymous referees for their helpful comments.
Author contribution  Shreya Nivesh, Jyoti P. Patil, V. C. Goyal—con-
ceptualization, methodology, data curation, formal analysis, software,
validation, writing—review and editing. Bhagwat Saran—investiga-
tion, writing—review and editing. Shreya Nivesh, Anurag Raizada,
Anurag Malik—investigation, visualization, supervision, writing—
review and editing. Ajay Kumar Singh—investigation, writing—review
and editing. Alban Kuriqi—investigation, writing—review and editing.
Data availability  All the data and materials related to this paper will
be available on request by the corresponding author.
Declarations  Demertzi KA, Papamichail DM, Georgiou PE et al (2014) Assessment
Ethical approval  It is an original work, not yet published/submitted/
under review anywhere.
Consent to participate  All the authors review the manuscript and are
permitted to submission.
Consent to publish  Not applicable.
Competing interests  The authors declare no competing interests.
References
Adgolign TB, Rao GVRS, Abbulu Y (2016) WEAP modeling of
surface water resources allocation in Didessa Sub-Basin, West
Ethiopia. Sustain Water Resour Manag 2:55–70. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1007/​s40899-​015-​0041-4
Agarwal A, Patil JP, Goyal VC, Jayakumar KV (2018) A review on
WEAP21 model for managing water resources. J Indian Water
Resour Soc 38:38–44
Agarwal S, Patil JP, Goyal VC, Singh A (2019) Assessment of
Water Supply-Demand Using Water Evaluation and Planning
(WEAP) model for Ur River Watershed, Madhya Pradesh,
India. J Inst Eng Ser A 100:21–32. https://​d oi.​o rg/​1 0.​1 007/​
s40030-​018-​0329-0
Al-Mukhtar MM, Mutar GS (2021) Modelling of future water use sce-
narios using WEAP model: a case study in Baghdad City, Iraq. Eng
Technol J 39:488–503. https://​doi.​org/​10.​30684/​etj.​v39i3A.​1890
Amin A, Iqbal J, Asghar A, Ribbe L (2018) Analysis of current and
future water demands in the Upper Indus Basin under IPCC
climate and socio-economic scenarios using a hydro-economic
WEAP model. Water 10:537. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​w1005​0537
Awotwi A, Anornu GK, Quaye-Ballard JA et al (2019) Water balance
responses to land-use/land-cover changes in the Pra River Basin
of Ghana, 1986–2025. CATENA 182:104129. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1016/j.​catena.​2019.​104129
Ayele AS (2016) Application of water evaluation and allocation plan-
ning (WEAP) model to assess future water demands and water
balance of the Caledon River Basin. Bloemfontein Cent Univ
Technol Free State
Ayt Ougougdal H, Yacoubi Khebiza M, Messouli M, Lachir A (2020)
Assessment of future water demand and supply under IPCC cli-
mate change and socio-economic scenarios, using a combination
of models in Ourika Watershed, High Atlas, Morocco. Water
12:1751. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​w1206​1751
Bhave AG, Conway D, Dessai S, Stainforth DA (2018) Water resource
planning under future climate and socioeconomic uncertainty in
the Cauvery River Basin in Karnataka, India. Water Resour Res
54:708–728. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​2017W​R0209​70
Boufala M, El Hmaidi A, Essahlaoui A et al (2022) Assessment of the
best management practices under a semi-arid basin using SWAT
model (case of M’dez watershed, Morocco). Model Earth Syst
Environ 8:713–731. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s40808-​021-​01123-6
Chand P, Jain R, Chand S et al (2020) Estimating water balance and
identifying crops for sustainable use of water resources in the
Bundelkhand region of India. Trans ASABE 63:117–124. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​13031/​trans.​13429
Degife AW, Zabel F, Mauser W (2021) Climate change impacts on
potential maize yields in Gambella Region, Ethiopia. Reg Environ
Chang 21:60. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10113-​021-​01773-3
of rural and highly seasonal tourist activity plus drought effects
on reservoir operation in a semi-arid region of Greece using the
WEAP model. Water Int 39:23–34. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 080/0​ 2508​
060.​2013.​848315
Dimova G, Tzanov E, Ninov P et al (2014) Complementary use of the
WEAP model to underpin the development of SEEAW physical
water use and supply tables. Procedia Eng 70:563–572. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​proeng.​2014.​02.​062
Fanta SS, Namara WG, Yesuf MB (2022) Assessment of water sup-
ply and demand in Gilgel Gibe watershed, southwest Ethiopia.
Sustain Water Resour Manag 8:104. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s40899-​022-​00684-3
Goyal MK, Panchariya VK, Sharma A, Singh V (2018) Compara-
tive assessment of SWAT model performance in two distinct
catchments under various DEM scenarios of varying resolution,
sources and resampling methods. Water Resour Manag 32:805–
825. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11269-​017-​1840-1
Hadded R, Nouiri I, Alshihabi O et al (2013) A decision support system
to manage the groundwater of the Zeuss Koutine aquifer using the
WEAP-MODFLOW framework. Water Resour Manag 27:1981–
2000. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11269-​013-​0266-7
Hamlat A, Errih M, Guidoum A (2013) Simulation of water resources
management scenarios in western Algeria watersheds using
WEAP model. Arab J Geosci 6:2225–2236. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1007/​s12517-​012-​0539-0
Hanifehlou A, Hosseini SA, Javadi S, Sharafati A (2022) Sustainable
exploitation of groundwater resources considering the effects
of climate change and land use to provide adaptation solutions
(case study of the Hashtgerd plain). Acta Geophys 70:1829–
1846. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11600-​022-​00843-2
Hank T, Bach H, Mauser W (2015) Using a remote sensing-sup-
ported hydro-agroecological model for field-scale simulation
of heterogeneous crop growth and yield: application for wheat
13

in Central Europe. Remote Sens 7:3934–3965. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​3390/​rs704​03934
Höllermann B, Giertz S, Diekkrüger B (2010) Benin 2025—bal-
ancing future water availability and demand using the WEAP
‘Water Evaluation and Planning’ System. Water Resour Manag
24:3591–3613. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11269-​010-​9622-z
Hum NNMF, Talib SA (2016) Modeling water supply and demand
for effective water management allocation in Selango. J Teknol
78(5–5):15–20. https://​doi.​org/​10.​11113/​jt.​v78.​8569
Johannsen I, Hengst J, Goll A et al (2016) Future of water sup-
ply and demand in the Middle Drâa Valley, Morocco, under
climate and land use change. Water 8:313. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
3390/​w8080​313
Kar SK, Thomas T, Singh RM (2016) Assessment of drought char-
acteristics for Dhasan basin in Bundelkhand region. Int J Agric
Environ Biotechnol 9:897. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5958/​2230-​732X.​
2016.​00115.7
Li X, Zhao Y, Shi C et al (2015) Application of Water Evaluation
and Planning (WEAP) model for water resources management
strategy estimation in coastal Binhai New Area, China. Ocean
Coast Manag 106:97–109. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​oceco​aman.​
2015.​01.​016
Malik A, Tikhamarine Y, Souag-Gamane D et al (2020) Support
vector regression optimized by meta-heuristic algorithms for
daily streamflow prediction. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess
34:1755–1773. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00477-​020-​01874-1
Mehrparvar M, Ahmadi A, Safavi HR (2020) Resolving water allo-
cation conflicts using WEAP simulation model and non-coop-
erative game theory. Simulation 96:17–30. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1177/​00375​49719​844827
Metobwa OGM, Mourad KA, Ribbe L (2018) Water demand simu-
lation using WEAP 21: a case study of the Mara River Basin,
Kenya. Int J Nat Resour Ecol Manag 3:9–18. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
11648/j.​ijnrem.​20180​301.​12
Moncada AM, Escobar M, Betancourth A et al (2021) Modelling
water stress vulnerability in small Andean basins: case study of
Campoalegre River basin, Colombia. Int J Water Resour Dev
37:640–657. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​07900​627.​2019.​16997​80
Mounir ZM, Ma CM, Amadou I (2011) Application of Water Evalu-
ation and Planning (WEAP): a model to assess future water
demands in the Niger River (In Niger Republic). Mod Appl Sci
5(1):38–49. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5539/​mas.​v5n1p​38
Negasa Jaleta T, Yesuf MB, Hirko DB (2019) Modeling surface
water resources for effective Water Allocation Using Water
Evaluation and Planning (WEAP) model, A Case Study on
Finchaa Sub basin, Ethiopia
Nivesh S, Kumar P (2018) River suspended sediment load predic-
tion using neuro-fuzzy and statistical models: Vamsadhara river
basin, India. Indian J Soil Conserv 46:68–76
Nivesh S, Negi D, Kashyap PS et al (2022) Prediction of river dis-
charge of Kesinga sub-catchment of Mahanadi basin using
machine learning approaches. Arab J Geosci 15:1369. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s12517-​022-​10555-y
Nordström Y (2019) Water availability challenges in Mozambique–
implications to the Nexus. Master Sci Thesis, KTH Sch Ind Eng
Manag Div Energy Syst Anal Stock
Palsaniya DR, Singh R, Yadav RS et al (2011) Now it is water all the
way in Garhkundar-Dabar watershed of drought-prone semi-arid
Bundelkhand, India. Curr Sci 100:1287–1288
Pandey V, Srivastava PK, Singh SK et al (2021) Drought identification
and trend analysis using long-term CHIRPS satellite precipitation
product in Bundelkhand, India. Sustainability 13:1042. https://d​ oi.​
org/​10.​3390/​su130​31042
13
View publication stats
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
Pareta K, Pareta U (2011) Quantitative morphometric analysis of a
watershed of Yamuna basin, India using ASTER (DEM) data. Int
J Geomatics Geosci 2:248–269
Peng X, Adamowski J, Inam A et al (2020) Development of a behav-
iour-pattern based global sensitivity analysis procedure for
coupled socioeconomic and environmental models. J Hydrol
585:124745. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jhydr​ol.​2020.​124745
Prakash K, Mohanty T, Singh S et al (2016) Drainage morphometry of
the Dhasan river basin, Bundelkhand craton, central India using
remote sensing and GIS techniques. J Geomatics 10:122–132
Salman SA, Shahid S, Sharafati A et al (2021) Projection of agricul-
tural water stress for climate change scenarios: a regional case
study of Iraq. Agriculture 11:1288. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​agric​
ultur​e1112​1288
Sanjaq LM (2009) The use of Water Evaluation and Planning “WEAP”
program as a planning tool for Jerusalem water undertaking
“JWU” service area. Dr Diss An-Najah Natl Univ Nablus, Palest
Sharafati A, Pezeshki E, Shahid S, Motta D (2020) Quantification
and uncertainty of the impact of climate change on river dis-
charge and sediment yield in the Dehbar RIVER BASIN in
Iran. J Soils Sediments 20:2977–2996. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s11368-​020-​02632-0
Sharafati A, Moradi Tayyebi M, Pezeshki E, Shahid S (2022) Uncer-
tainty of climate change impact on crop characteristics: a case
study of Moghan plain in Iran. Theor Appl Climatol 149:603–620.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00704-​022-​04074-9
Skoulikaris C, Zafirakou A (2019) River basin management plans as
a tool for sustainable transboundary river basins’ management.
Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:14835–14848. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s11356-​019-​04122-4
Thakural LN, Kumar S, Singh S et al (2009) Estimation of water bal-
ance components in the Dhasan River Basin. Water Energy Res
Dig 19:1–8
Vishwakarma A, Choudhary MK, Chauhan MS (2020) Assessment of
the performance of CMIP5 and CORDEX-SA models over the
drought-prone Bundelkhand region, India. J Water Clim Chang
11:133–144. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2166/​wcc.​2020.​177
Wang Z, Yang J, Deng X, Lan X (2015) Optimal water resources allo-
cation under the constraint of land use in the Heihe River Basin
of China. Sustainability 7:1558–1575. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​
su702​1558
Xiang X, Li Q, Khan S, Khalaf OI (2021) Urban water resource man-
agement for sustainable environment planning using artificial
intelligence techniques. Environ Impact Assess Rev 86:106515.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​eiar.​2020.​106515
Yao AB, Mangoua OMJ, Georges ES et al (2021) Using “Water Evalu-
ation and Planning” (WEAP) model to simulate water demand in
Lobo Watershed (Central-Western Cote d’Ivoire). J Water Resour
Prot 13:216–235. https://​doi.​org/​10.​4236/​jwarp.​2021.​133013
Yates D, Sieber J, Purkey D, Huber-Lee A (2005) WEAP21—a demand-,
priority-, and preference-driven water planning model. Water Int
30:487–500. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​02508​06050​86918​93
Publisher's note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds
exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the
author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of
such publishing agreement and applicable law.