Toxic Water

The issue of water quality is very important because of its strong links to health and livelihoods of water users. The NY Times has been writing a series on water called Toxic Waters, which talks about some ways water can become contaminated and its impacts on lives of people in the US. This series examines the links between different types of pollution and water quality, and also shows that for some Americans this is a hindrance on their day-to-day-life. I particularly liked Duhigg's entry on the neglect of water laws because it displays the role of politics in dictating water policy, the detrimental effects of poor water quality on people, and highlights the flaws in current systems of regulation. Also Duhigg's focus on the EPA throughout the series provides readers with a well-needed critique of current environmental policy.

One interesting thing that has been gaining attention recently is the link between water quality and gender "bending". While there seems to be a growing body of work focused on water quality and gender bending in fish and other animals, there have been growing concerns about how this effects men. One Canadian study shows that tiny traces of birth control hormones dumped into a lake (I do not know how environmentally friendly that was) caused a crash in the fish population due to its effects on male fish. Scientists are worried about the implications for human populations since the traces of hormones peed out by women on birth control end up in our drinking water and are so small that they cannot be filtered out.

Toxic Waters and the issue of gender bending leaves us with questions about water quality that are applicable to developed and developing countries. What can we as individuals and communities do to keep our waters clean for our usage? How can we improve regulation and technology? How can we ensure that water provision improves economic, health, and livelihoods aspects of people's lives?

Squatter Water

One large problem in trying to provide water and sanitation in cities is trying to reach communities in peri-urban areas and slums. People who live in these parts of cities often reside there informally, albeit rather permanently. The blog squattercity does a good job of highlighting many of the problems slum dwellers face and exposes how governments can make problems worse by trying to either ignore the existence of these communities or by neglecting the range of urban and rural problems that peri-urban communities have to deal with.

Recently squattercity has been commenting about Sodom and Gomorrah communities in Accra, which have been receiving a lot of attention from the Ghanaian government, but not in a positive way. Accra Metropolitan Assembly is currently in talks with local utilities to cut off water and electricity to these communities, beginning the process of demolition of these communities, The Daily Graphic states. In addition the government is trying to force people out of these communities, without providing adequate housing elsewhere. Here a Ghanaian academic voices frustration with the government's way of dealing with the problems in these communities.

This case brings up some interesting issues in how to deal with development in peri-urban and slum areas. Although it is relatively common for governments to tear down areas deemed to be 'slums', this causes massive problems for water and sanitation in the areas where these people move and usually ends up transferring other problems as well. Inevitably people from Sodom and Gomorrah will move to another community, or create a space to live, and these people will suffer from the same problems that used to plague them in their old communities. Failure to provide proper water and sanitation infrastructure will perpetuate the same sorts of livelihood, health, food, sewerage problems that previously existed.

Squattercity also has some interesting commentary on how the people of these communities have been labelled as "dirty" and have also been called a threat to national security. These posts highlight how squatter or informal communities suffer from social exclusion and are further marginalised because they reside in these poor areas, with no infrastructure, and very few public resources.

Governments need to find a way to deal with informal communities in a better way. Destroying homes and cutting off basic services (like water, sanitation, electricity) does not help to improve the lives of people in these communities and only creates more problems for governments to deal with in the future. This is not to target the Ghanaian government, similar situations have occurred in Brazil, Cambodia, Liberia, and elsewhere. It is more to raise the question of what are the aims of the governments in these situations? How do people get access to water in the interim period between eviction and settling, and how much do they pay? How does this affect water and sanitation in areas where people settle? And on informal settlements and water in general, can you justify charging people for water and water systems when they do not have a claim to the land they live on?

Hi! We are the Water for Africa Research Project.

This is the Water for Africa Research Project blogging on 'Working for Water'. The Water for Africa Research Project (WFA) is a project based at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), Development Studies Department. This project is primarily concerned with issues linking water governance, equity, and poverty in Africa and other developing regions. For more information about our project also check out our website.

'Working for Water' will not necessarily be about the WFA project per se, but it will encompass many of the issues that we find important and issues that we have particular knowledge in. This is a place to openly discuss water issues and broader problems in development. We look forward to engaging with our readers and fostering a better understanding of water-related issues.