WaterBytes: Book Recommendation - Water: The Epic Struggle for Wealth, Power, and Civilization
Steven Solomon (2010), Water: The Epic Struggle for Wealth, Power, and Civilization
Far more than oil, the control of water wealth throughout history has been pivotal to the rise and fall of great powers, the achievements of civilization, the transformations of society’s vital habitats, and the quality of ordinary daily lives. In Water, Steven Solomon offers the first-ever narrative portrait of the power struggles, personalities, and breakthroughs that have shaped humanity from antiquity’s earliest civilizations, the Roman Empire, medieval China, and Islam’s golden age to Europe’s rise, the steam-powered Industrial Revolution, and America’s century. Today, freshwater scarcity is one of the twenty-first century’s decisive, looming challenges and is driving the new political, economic, and environmental realities across the globe.
As modern society runs short of its most indispensable resource and the planet’s renewable water ecosystems grow depleted, an explosive new fault line is dividing humanity into water Haves and Have-nots. Genocides, epidemic diseases, failed states, and civil warfare increasingly emanate from water-starved, overpopulated parts of Africa and Asia. Water famines threaten to ignite new wars in the bone-dry Middle East. Faltering clean water supplies menace the sustainable growth and ability of China and India to feed themselves. Water scarcity is inseparably interrelated to the global crises of energy, food, and climate change. For Western democracies, water represents no less than the new oil—demanding a major rethink of basic domestic and foreign policies—but also offering a momentous opportunity to relaunch wealth and global leadership through exploiting a comparative advantage in freshwater reserves. Meticulously researched and masterfully written, Steven Solomon’s Water is a groundbreaking account of man’s most critical resource in shaping human destinies, from ancient times to our dawning age of water scarcity.
View more on the HarperCoillins website.
Walk for Water
Pictured above, my friend Shana and I organized a “Walk for Water” event last month in order to demonstrate and empathize for the women and children who have to do this daily—the daily task of having to walk, on average, 3.5 miles in search of water.
Joining us on the walk were nine 10th graders from Northside Charter in Brooklyn, and a few New School students, all simulating the daily chore of the thousands of women and children in developing countries. We were quite the sight to see in lower Manhattan.
Providing water and sanitation are vital first steps out of poverty. More than one in six people worldwide - 894 million - don’t have access to adequate safe freshwater.
Photo credit: Justin Silles
Jimmy Murphy of Sprigg, W.Va. , holds a jar filled with well water from his home he says was contaminated with coal slurry by Massey Energy and subsidiary Rawl Sales & Processing, prior to court hearing Monday, Nov. 15, 2010, in Charleston, W.Va. Hundreds of plaintiffs are gathering in Charleston to see if they can resolve a water pollution lawsuit against Virginia-based Massey Energy. The plaintiffs claim that Massey and subsidiary Rawl Sales & Processing have poisoned their water wells in Mingo County with 1.4 billion gallons of toxic coal slurry.
(via apsies)
More than 1 million people in California live in places where tap water isn’t reliably safe to drink, and about a third of them are in small, mostly Latino towns such as Seville in the San Joaquin Valley.
(Source: Los Angeles Times)
Why The United States Did Not Support “Water as a Human Right” Resolution
Mark Leon Goldberg - July 28, 2010 The General Assembly today voted for a resolution that declares that access to water and clean sanitation to be a human right. From the UN News Center: Safe and clean drinking water and sanitation is a human right essential to the full enjoyment of life and all other human rights, the General Assembly declared today, voicing deep concern that almost 900 million people worldwide do not have access to clean water. The 192-member Assembly also called on United Nations Member States and international organizations to offer funding, technology and other resources to help poorer countries scale up their efforts to provide clean, accessible and affordable drinking water and sanitation for everyone. The Assembly resolution received 122 votes in favour and zero votes against, while 41 countries abstained from voting. That does not sound all that controversial. But apparently, it is. One of those 41 abstentions was the United States, which said it could not support the resolution because, in fact, access to water is not an internationally recognized human right. (At least not yet.) In an explanation of the United States vote, John F. Sammis, U.S. Minister Counselor to the Economic and Social Council, argued that “This resolution describes a right to water and sanitation in a way that is not reflective of existing international law; as there is no “right to water and sanitation” in an international legal sense as described by this resolution.” Notwithstanding the merits of this particular resolution, this kind of back and forth is reflects a very natural tension between the General Assembly and the United States. The General Assembly is not a legislative body—the only part of the UN system that can “make law” is the Security Council. But sometimes, the General Assembly pushes the boundaries, and this causes a reflexive retrenchment by big powers like the United States. Here is the full explanation of vote by Sammis. As you can see, the USA’s big objection here is over process, not necessarily substance of the resolution. Explanation of Vote by John F. Sammis, U.S. Minister Counselor to the Economic and Social Council, on Resolution A/64/L.63/Rev.1, the Human Right to Water, July 28, 2010 Mr. President, The United States is deeply committed to finding solutions to our world’s water challenges. We support the goal of universal access to safe drinking water. Water and sanitation issues will be an important focus at this September’s Millennium Development Goal Summit. The United States is committed to working with our development partners to build on the progress they have already made in these areas as part of their national development strategies. Water is essential for all life on earth. Accordingly, safe and accessible water supplies further the realization of certain human rights, and there are human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation. The United States supports the work of the UN Human Rights Council’s Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation. In fact, we co-sponsored the resolution on Human Rights and Access to Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation last September at the Human Rights Council in Geneva. We look forward to receiving the next report of the Independent Expert. We also look forward to a more inclusive, considered, and deliberative approach to these vital issues in Geneva than we have unfortunately experienced on this resolution in New York. And I would just add to my prepared remarks that these concerns are not alleviated by the fact that just this morning, we have seen an amendment made to what the lead sponsor viewed as the core operative paragraph of the resolution from the floor. This again is an imposition on all of us. We haven’t had sufficient time to really consider the implications of this, and I think that it would have been far better, under the circumstances, not to bring this resolution forward for action today. The United States had hoped to negotiate and ultimately join consensus on this text, on a text, that would uphold and support the international process underway at the Human Rights Council. Instead, we have here a resolution that falls far short of enjoying the unanimous support of member States and may even undermine the work underway in Geneva. This resolution describes a right to water and sanitation in a way that is not reflective of existing international law; as there is no “right to water and sanitation” in an international legal sense as described by this resolution. The United States regrets that this resolution diverts us from the serious international efforts underway to promote greater coordination and cooperation on water and sanitation issues. This resolution attempts to take a short-cut around the serious work of formulating, articulating and upholding universal rights. It was not drafted in a transparent, inclusive manner, and the legal implications of a declared right to water have not yet been carefully and fully considered in this body or in Geneva. For these reasons, the United States has called for a vote and will abstain on this resolution.
Visit to Gundu Village
A couple weeks ago I visited the Village Development Committee (VDC) of Gundu which is in Bhaktapur district. (See map below)
The organization that I am based out of just completed a two-year long water and sanitation improvement plan for Wards no. 6 and 7 within Gundu village. Although Gundu VDC is in close proximity to Bhaktapur city, safe water and sanitation there was in very poor condition so ENPHO, with support from WaterAid Nepal, took immediate action in devising an improvement program. And in order to ensure that the water and sanitation issues (which were relevant to the community) were to be addressed in a comprehensive manner, ENPHO conducted a study with extensive participation from local communities. Therefore, the “Gundu Environmental Sanitation Improvement Programme” became a community-based initiative that utilized the households and centered on a community approach to improve sanitation and public health.
Before the implementation of ENPHO’s improvement plan, a survey that was conducted in the village showed that 24% of households were completely deprived of toilet facilities. But among those with toilets, most of them (79%) did not practice safe and hygienic sanitation. Furthermore, the quality of water in Gundu is very poor since there is lack of a proper treatment system and some households (38%) did not practice any type of filtration before consuming. Other households (35%) only used cloth filtration. This led to some diarrhea and fever problems (but fortunately no deaths!)
Since the improvement plan was only a two-year long project, the “Gundu Environmental Sanitation Improvement Programme” has come to an end but I wanted to see for myself how the community has carried on with what ENPHO started. So after lots of driving and asking for directions through unpaved roads uphill, we finally found Ward no. 6 and 7 of Gundu. While there I met with a water user committee member of Ward no. 7 who has been on the committee for awhile. First I asked him about the make-up of the water committee in Ward 7. He stated that there are 11 members on the committee but only 3 are women. The ages of the committee members range from 35 years old to 67, with him being one of the oldest. When I asked him how the community has been carrying on from where ENPHO left off, he said the biggest problem is that there still needs to be more awareness on why not to defecate in some areas. He went on to say that particularly during the monsoon season, when farmers are out in the field and far away from toilets, open defecation is quite common. However, the water user committee is struggling with ideas on how to enforce these new sanitation practices. He stated that the community members can be fined as a penalty but he doesn’t believe that this enforcement is strong enough to change people’s habits without some type of awareness campaign. Only when the water user committee members come walking around do households practice safe and hygenic practices, he added. However, “ENPHO did a good job of going door-to-door to educate the community members, which is unlike the other [NGO] groups who have come to implement projects in the past.”
Below are some pictures of ENPHO’s work that were taken during my site visit.
EcoSan toilet. It consists of two chambers which are used for defecation and an outlet for urine. This way urine and feces will be separated. When the first chamber is filled up with feces, it is closed for 6 months. In the meantime the second chamber is filled up. This converts feces into manure which can then be used as fertilizer.
Toilet with solar compost to be used as fertilizer.
ENPHO logo on ECOSan toilet.
Rainwater harvesting to increase water supply.
In sum, ENPHO’s “Gundu Environmental Sanitation Improvement Programme” has led to better water quality, improved water pressure at tap stands, construction of toilets for every household, promotion of EcoSan toilets, a health and hygiene training program at school, storm water management and drainage system, solid waste management, and general awareness to the inhabitants on water and sanitation related issues so that the local government can take over once ENPHO has completed the project.
Before leaving, I asked our water user committee friend what’s the next big challenge for Gundu. He stated that since drinking water supply is not a problem anymore, the next big issue is securing enough water for irrigating the fields. Currently the community relies solely on the monsoon rains although they are waiting to hear back on a project proposal which would help them build a canal so that water is better collected at their source point.
Signage for “Gundu Environmental Sanitation Improvement Programme.”
❧
Grad student in New York City. Blogging about: traveling, international affairs, Nepal, recipes, water & sanitation, India, travel photos, economic development.
"Cento" Copyright © Andrew Brinker 2011.
