Water Conservation

Water Conflicts in the USA - Part 2

Water Conflicts in the USA - Part 1

This is to remind ourselves that water is not only scarce in developing countries. For example, there are also parts in the United States where water can become the source for conflicts. This video is about the Rio Grande and how Texas and New Mexico are both dependent on the river.

Treating Water as Common Good

“No to water privatization – Yes to water as a human right.” (Bakker 2010:2)

In March 2000, these words were written down on bodies of protestors to the World Water Forum in The Hague. One of the main arguments of opponents of privatization is that it is unethical to profit from water, because it is the essential substance for life. This is why David Harvey calls water privatization “accumulation of dispossession” (Bakker 2010:2), which leads to social and environmentally inequities. Perreault points out the dualistic nature of water. It is both a natural physical entity that becomes a resource through human labor and the most basic precondition to life: Water is “as dependent on social institutions and labors as it is on climate and geology” (2004:269).

The opponents also criticize the power private investors gain through controlling such a basic, vital good (Chong 2007:2). One of the main opponents of the privatization of water is Shiva Vandana. She sees water as a sacred that cannot be owned as a private property or sold. Water is no human invention, it cannot be bound. She has a clear opinion toward the IMF and the World Bank: “Denying poor people access to water by privatizing water distribution or polluting wells and rivers is also terrorism... [terrorists] are hiding behind the privatization conditionality’s of the IMF and World Bank” (Shiva 2002: xiv; 37). Water needs to be a collective right and a collective management like it is treated by indigenous communities, for example in India (Shiva 2002:12). Moreover, Shiva defines water crisis as an ecological crisis that cannot be solved through market mechanism, because higher prices won't lead to conversation (2002:15ff). The representatives of the 'water as common good' approach also argue that government-run water supply systems work as effective as private ones and can offer lower tariffs on top because they have access to cheaper forms of finance (Bakker 2010:2).

Alberto, Chong. Privatization for the public good?: Welfare Effects of Private Intervention in Latin America. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA. 2008. Print

Bakker, Karen. Privatizing Water. Governance Failure and the World's Urban Water Crisis. Cornell University Press: Ithaca and London. 2010. Print.

Swyngedouw, Erik. Dispossessing H²O: the contested terrain of water privatization. In: Heynen, Nik (ed.). Neoliberal Environments. False promises and unnatural consequences. Routledge: New York. 2007. Print. pp. 51-62.

Treating Water as Commodity

 From my least entry we know that water conflicts mostly arise between adherents of two opponent ideologies of how to treat water. Today I am going to talk about the "water as commodity" approach and my next entry will be about the "water as common good" approach.


At the end of the last century, international companies like Bechtel or Vivendi expanded their ownerships of water supply systems. The private sector started taking over more and more government owned systems. The nations considered market-based water sectors as the best possibility to face the world's increasing water crisis (Bakker 2010:2). With this idea, they followed the so-called 'market paradigm' that explains water crisis as the result from the absence of water trade: “If water could be moved and distributed freely through free markets, this paradigm holds, it would be transferred to regions of scarcity, and higher prices would lead to conversation” (Shiva 2002: 14). In other words, treating water as commodity leads to an adjustment of water demand and supply. The force of the free market can solve the problem of the water crisis.

Representatives of the ‘water as commodity’ approach are certain that private companies perform better than public services in terms of efficiency, finance and expertise. They argue that water should be treated as an economic good to guarantee water conservation or reduction of pollution. The problems of government management of urban water supplies are “low coverage rates, low rates of cost recovery, low tariffs, underinvestment, deteriorating infrastructure, overstaffing, inefficient management, and unresponsiveness to the needs of the poor” (Bakker 2010:2). In short: according to the 'water as commodity' view, the government has failed and it is irresponsible to not let private companies take over (Bakker 2010:2).

The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund regard privatization of government services as one way to reduce poverty. To achieve the MDG, they strongly support privatization of water. Private sector investors underline the under performance of the public sector in many developing countries to legitimize the commodification of water (Morvaridi 2008:70). Behind this course of action stands the neo-liberal assumption development can be initiated by market-led measures such as free trade, privatization and minimal state intervention (Moravidi 2008:67). Neo-liberals see individuals as “rational economic actors, who operate in the market for utility maximization and are motivated by self-interest” (Moravidi 2008:69). This assumption leads them to the conclusion that public goods and community are not necessary because every individual is responsible for his/her own poverty (Moravidi 2008:69).

Morvaridi argues that it is problematic to give water an economic value, because at the end the poor have to pay charges they cannot afford. In addition, it is the duty of the state to guarantee its citizen access to human rights and basic standards of living, as they are put down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Moravidi 2008:70).

Bakker, Karen. Privatizing Water. Governance Failure and the World's Urban Water Crisis. Cornell University Press: Ithaca and London. 2010. Print.

Morvaridi, Behrooz. Social Justice and Development. Ch.3: Neoliberalism and Social Justice. Palgrave MacMillian: New York. 2008. Print. pp. 67-106.

Shiva, Vandana. Water Wars. Privatization, Pollution, and Profit. South End Press: Cambridge, MA. 2002. Print.

Water Privatization

 Since Vandana Shiva is such a big opponent to the privatization of water, I did a little background research on the subject. Because so far, my impression is that water wars do not take place between countries, but between private coporations and local citizen.


In recent years, neo-liberal policies focused on the privatization of water. Capitalist companies have begun to use especially urban water supply systems as a source for economic growth and profit (Swyngedouw 2007:53). In the countries of the global South, the reforms have reworked the government's provision of public services. At the same time, water privatization has become a controversial discussed issue because it leads to civil protests all over the world (Bakker 2010:3).

Privatization is a transfer of entitlements that can be defined as a “process through which activities, resources, and the like, which had not been formally privately owned, managed or organized, are taken away from whoever or whatever owned them before to a new property configuration that is based on some form of 'private' ownership or control” (Swyngedouw 2007:52). The part of this definitions that is most likely to be a source for discussion is “...are taken away”. Behind this stands the assumption that resources already belong to someone before they get privatized.

Since the inception of urban water systems, there have always been changes in the public-private partnership. Until the mid of the nineteenth century, the system was characterized by a range of small private companies within a city that provided water of varying quality. After that followed a period of municipalization in which providing essential public goods was more important than making profit. After the end of the Second World War and the rising of the nation state, the water industry became a growing national concern. The governments invested big in water infrastructure that went along with new jobs, generation of demand from the private sector and the providing of basic collective production and consumption goods (Swyngedouw 2007:53f).

Since then, a major shift in the public/private relationship in the water sector took place, initiated through the demise of state-led economic growth. The nations suffered from payment difficulties. The call for greater competitiveness within the water supply system was accompanied by privatization tendencies. Investors searched for new investment possibilities. One possibility was to turn water into capital and profit (Swyngedouw 2007:53f).

Behind privatization strategies often stands the wish of the public sector to strengthen its financial position and to improve competitiveness of the economy. In terms of developing nations, the idea of privatization includes structural adjustments and an economic push to stabilize these nations within the world economy (Glade 1991:2). But at the same time, a country’s society is more concerned about direct welfare effects of private over public management than about the economic growth that comes along with privatization. These welfare effects could be related to the access to public services and their prices, job losses or corruption (Chong 2007:3).

In Latin America, privatization found its way into the relationship between a state and its citizens after the economic crisis in the 1980s, with the goal to reduce fiscal deficits and inflation and to liberalize the economy. Nevertheless, the inhabitants of Latin American countries take a critical stance towards privatization. According to the Latinobarometer 2006, only 30 percent of Latin Americans are “satisfied or very satisfied” with the results of privatization of public services, “considering price and quality”. Reasons therefore are among others the fear of social exclusion and the distrust in economic elites (Chong 2007:1f).

Despite to the negative view in the population, according to Chong, water privatization decreases poverty and inequality in most cases, since it leads to a reduction in common diseases through the improvement of water quality by privatized companies. However, the nation's governments need to have strong economic and political capabilities to regulate the companies and make the lower social class benefit as well (2007:4).

Alberto, Chong. Privatization for the public good?: Welfare Effects of Private Intervention in Latin America. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA. 2008. Print

Bakker, Karen. Privatizing Water. Governance Failure and the World's Urban Water Crisis. Cornell University Press: Ithaca and London. 2010. Print.

Swyngedouw, Erik. Dispossessing H²O: the contested terrain of water privatization. In: Heynen, Nik (ed.). Neoliberal Environments. False promises and unnatural consequences. Routledge: New York. 2007. Print. pp. 51-62.

India Water Crisis - Part 2

In this video, Vandana Shiva talks about the roots of the water crisis in India. She is a well-known environmental activist and anti-globalization author and wrote the book "Water Wars. Privatization, Pollution and Profit" that criticizes harshly the privatization of water.

According to her, the roots of the water crisis in India lie with the introduction of non-sustainable technology and the mining of groundwater.

India Water Crisis - Part 1

India might have enough rainfall for its whole population, but the counrty is facing a water crisi nevertheless. One of the problem is that water is taken away from poor areas to fill water tanks and swimming pools in richter cities like Delhi.

Bolivia 'Water War' - Part 4

The events of the water war in Cochabamba are well know worldwide – what happened afterward not so much. As an outside observer, it is easy to approve of the social movement in Cochabamba and how the people managed to resist the private companies. But by looking closer in what happened after the water war, it turns out that things are not simply black and white in regards to water privatization. In fact, in comparison to the Bolivian cities La Paz and El Alto, where water supply is privatized, Cochabamba is doing worse.

Even though the water prices decreased after Bechtel left the city, they are still above average. The change of the total water coverage rate is very distinct, particularly for the poorest people. The decrease for the lowest quintile from 63.3% in 1996 to 25.9% in 2005 is dramatic. In addition, from 2001 to 2005, the average water capita expenditure increased for the poor and decreased for the upper class. These numbers clearly indicate that there has been no positive development or reduction in poverty in the city after the anti-privatization of the water supply in 2000 (Hailu 2012).

It is expected that private water supply is set up faster than a community-owned water governance. It is the proficiency of private companies to provide access to water - they have money and know-how to do so. Whereas on the other side, a water governance based on social justice still needs to be framed. This is the problem in Cochabamba since the end of the 'water war'. The leaders of the social movement have the 'water as common good' approach in mind, but the external circumstances make it difficult to act upon the approach. As mentioned above, the Cochabamba elite would not cooperate, and corruption even within the SEMAPA would garner little support from the local population. That, in turn, makes the Andean communities go back to their tradition of self-help (Bakker 2010:169).

Fabricant comes to the conclusion that international human rights laws have to be adapted; otherwise, state regulation and service delivery will always determine water justice. In addition, one has to wait if the organizations will be able to “build a water management system that is truly based upon the principles of social justice and equality” (2013:138; 143).

Bakker, Karen. Privatizing Water. Governance Failure and the World's Urban Water Crisis. Cornell University Press: Ithaca and London. 2010. Print.

Fabricant, Nicole; Hicks, Kathryn. Bolivia's Next Water War. Historicizing the Struggles over Access to Water Resources in the Twenty-First Century. In: Radical History Review. Issue 116. Spring 2013. MARHO:The Radical Historians' Organization. PDF.

Hailu, Degol; Guerreiro Osorio, Rafael; Tsukada, Raquel. Privatization and Renationaliztion: What Went Wrong in Bolivia's Water Sector? In: World Development. Vol. 40, No. 12. Elsevier: Amsterdam. 2012. PDF. pp. 2564-2577.

Bolivia 'Water War' - Part 3

 

Even though there were various actors involved in the conflict, it all came down to two contradictory fronts: the ones that wanted to treat water as an economic good and the others that emphasized the sacred value of water and regarded access to it as a human right without monetary cost.

The Bolivian government and the private corporations Bechtel and Aguas del Tunari acted under the assumption that water is a commodity. They saw a market-based water sector reform as the only way to face the water crisis (Bakker 2010:2). Following the framework of 'green neoliberalism', they adopted the idea that “corporate management can improve service and enhance conservation of scarce resources, while bringing in healthy profits” (Fabricant 2013:132). The idea behind their action was not necessarily to take care of the lower class citizen, but to push the Bolivian economy. They wanted to ensure more market competition and, therefore, increase wealth in the country and solve environmental problems. They believed market power would balance the demand and supply of water on its own – something that the government had 'failed' to achieve.

On the other side, the Bolivian citizen and their various protest groups were committed to the 'water as common good' approach that emphasized its environmental and social value. Especially, the indigenous population of the Andean highlands was certain that water is sacred (Bakker 2010:167). In their eyes, the privatization process gave economic elites illegitimate control over water, which is such an essential part of human life. According to the Bolivian citizen, privatization went against water equity (fairness in pricing and access to services) (Bakker 2010:140). They accused Bechtel and Aguas del Tunari of not acting in favor of the citizen but for the company's stockholders. Behind the specific protests against the water privatization in Cochabamba stood also a general distrust of the 'neo-liberal turn' in the country and its assumed economic oppression. Oscar Olivera, one of the spokespersons for the Coordinator for the Defense of Water and Life, said in an interview: “We want democracy. We want a government that takes our opinion seriously. We want a government that doesn't just take into account the interests of international financiers and their neoliberal agenda” (Multinational Monitor 2000:19).

 

Bakker, Karen. Privatizing Water. Governance Failure and the World's Urban Water Crisis. Cornell University Press: Ithaca and London. 2010. Print.

Fabricant, Nicole; Hicks, Kathryn. Bolivia's Next Water War. Historicizing the Struggles over Access to Water Resources in the Twenty-First Century. In: Radical History Review. Issue 116. Spring 2013. MARHO:The Radical Historians' Organization. PDF.

Multinational Monitor. The Fight for Water and Democracy. An Interview with Oscar Olivera. Essential Information: Washington, DC. June 2000. PDF. pp. 15-19.

Bolivia 'Water War' - Part 2

The conflict over water in Bolivia is a conflict in which corporations fight against citizen:

“Cochabama is a semidesert region, water is scarce and precious. The World Bank recommended privatization of Cochabamba's municipal water supply company through a concession to International Water, a subsidiary of Bechtel. On October 1999, the Drinking Water and Sanitation Law was passed, ending government subsidies and allowing privatization.”

“In a city where the minimum wage is less than $100 a month, water bills reached $20 a month.”

“In January 2000, a citizen's alliance called The Coalition in Defense of Water and Life was formed. The alliance shut down the city for four days through mass mobilization.”

“The protesters issued the Cochabamba Declaration, calling for the protection of universal water rights.”

“In April 2000, the government tried to silence the water protests through martial law. Activists were arrested, protesters killed, and the media censored. Finally on April 10, 2000, the people won. Aguas del Tunari and Bechtel left Bolivia and the government was forced to revoke its hated water privatization legislation.”

Shiva, Vandana. Water Wars. Privatization, Pollution, and Profit. Cambrigde: South End Press. 2002. Print.

Bolivia 'Water War' - Part 1

In 2000, a private company took over the water system of Cochabamba, Bolivia. The price for water increased dramatically – thousands of families had to spend up to half of their monthly income to pay for the water. The people went on the street, demanding the termination of the water contract. In the end, the protesters won and their water rights were restored. (Source)

I will refer to the conflict in Bolivia as a 'water war', because this expression is mostly used in this context. But I don't think it was a real war, it was 'only' a conflict in my eyes. I recently wrote a research paper about the failed water privatization in Cochabamba. I have decided to publish part of my results in future blog entries.

Movie: Blue Gold

The movie 'Blue Gold' came out in 2008 and is based on the book Blue Gold: The Right to Stop the Corporate Theft of the World’s Water by Maude Barlow and Tony Clarke.It won many awards.

On the official homepage of 'Blue Gold' you can find a YouTube link to watch the full movie online. 

On the homepage, the film makers introduce into the topic with this statement:

"In every corner of the globe, we are polluting, diverting, pumping, and wasting our limited supply of fresh water at an expediential level as population and technology grows. The rampant overdevelopment of agriculture, housing and industry increase the demands for fresh water well beyond the finite supply, resulting in the desertification of the earth.

Corporate giants force developing countries to privatize their water supply for profit. Wall Street investors target desalination and mass bulk water export schemes. Corrupt governments use water for economic and political gain. Military control of water emerges and a new geo-political map and power structure forms, setting the stage for world water wars.

We follow numerous worldwide examples of people fighting for their basic right to water, from court cases to violent revolutions to U.N. conventions to revised constitutions to local protests at grade schools. As Maude Barlow proclaims, “This is our revolution, this is our war”. A line is crossed as water becomes a commodity. Will we survive?"

Israel Water Crisis - Part 3

This UNICEF video and the following, gives insight in the water situation in the Gaza stripe.

Source

Israel Water Crisis - Part 2

Water Conflict between Israel, Jordan and Palestina:

There is a lack of fresh water in all three countries. The sea of Galilee is the primary source of surface water in the region. 

Israel pumps water out of the lake to supply the dry south of the country with fresh water. 

Palestina is cut from the sea of Galilee and the Jordan river. The people have to rely on ground water and on additional water supply, which is provided by Israel. This gives Israel direct control over how much water Palestina gets.

In Jordan people have access to water only once a week.

West Bank Water Conflict:

Even though there should be enough aquifer in the region to supply water, Palestinien missmanagement led to water shortage. This is why Palestina is dependend on Israel in terms of water. 10% of the population have to buy water from water trucks, which are run by Israeli water companies.

Israel Water Crisis – Part 1

This video has a very dramatic undertone, but it gives a first insight in what is happening in Israel.

• The sea of Galilee is drying up
• Jordan River is drying up
• sea water is poisoning underground aquifers 
  
  
  This has consequences for farmers as well as citizens in bigger cities.

Source

As the following video indicates, on top of the above mentioned problems, the nation has been suffering from drought for the last couple of years, so there is even less water available. The Israli population has to lower its water consumption.

Maude Barlow: Do You Foresee Wars Over Water?

In this video Maude Barlow answers the question if she foresees war over water. She is the National Chairperson of the Council of Canadians and Senior Advisor on Water to the President of  the United Nations General Assembly. 

She says that struggles over water are already happening on different scales: between people, between states, between nations. Moreover, big cooperation seem to play a key role in the disputes. For example, she names Bechtel in Bolivia and Nestle in The Philippines.

I find her observation that the struggles will be between those of us who believe in water as a public service, who see it as a human right, and those who treat it is a commodity interesting.

Disputes over water are also likely to happen within the United States, as she talks about several states that already argue over water.

The Difference Between War and Conflict 2.0

I found an other differentiation between war and conflict on the website differencebetween.com.

In brief:

Difference Between War and Conflict

• War is intentional, disclosed, wide spread and long duration armed conflict between countries.

• War requires mobilization of troops and use of arms and ammunition to destroy enemy targets.

• Conflict is disagreement between parties where parties perceive threat to their interests and needs

• Conflict can be between individuals, communities, or even countries

• There are mechanisms to resolve conflicts but when they fail, conflicts can give rise to full scal wars (when involving countries)

Read more: http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-war-and-vs-conflict/#ixzz2kwJgl39r

The Difference Between War and Conflict

At the beginning of this blog I raised the question if there will be war over water one day. This question implies that up to now there haven't been any wars over water. Nevertheless water war is a common term. I think it is important in this context to distinguish between the terms. When can one talk about war? What is the difference between a war and an (armed) conflict? It is important to know this to rate disputes about water.

The free dictionary defines “war” as:

a. A state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nations, states, or parties.

b. The period of such conflict. 
c. The techniques and procedures of war; military science.

When I type in “armed conflict” the dictionary redirects me to “war”.

The site also defines “conflict” as:

1. A state of open, often prolonged fighting; a battle or war.
2. A state of disharmony between incompatible or antithetical persons, ideas, or interests; a clash

It is difficult to see the differences between war and conflict within these definitions. A war is armed. A conflict maybe not? But a conflict can be war.

I am wondering what are right evidences to measure war. The number of people killed? The weapon used? The period of time?

Water Wars 1: Scarcity - Stuff They Don't Want You To Know

Quotes from the video:

“What if the next war is not fought over geopolitical dominance or ideology? What if the next war is a desperate struggle over water?”

→ In this context I am wondering what exactly is the difference between war and conflict. Has there been real wars over water or “only” conflicts? Where is the boundary?

“Today, water scarcity is common in some of the political most unstable regions. Water crisis are ongoing in the Middle Eastern, North African and South Asian countries, such as Israel, Egypt, Pakistan.”

→ I will do some research on the conflicts in Israel, Egypt or Pakistan.

“Some institutions argue that privatization may be the best way for developing countries to require the infrastructure necessary to supply clean water. This approach has mixed results, leading to social unrest in the local because the population can not afford the prices set by private utility companies.”

→ Why are there local oppositions against water privatization? What is the story behind this?

In the next day I will try to find some answers to the questions the YouTube video raises.

Water becomes a more Costly and Regionally more Scarce Resource

What we know about water so far:

• Only 2.5% of the world's water is freshwater
• Every form of water (solid, liquid, gas) (fresh- or salt water) is connected over the world's water cycle
• 11% of the global population is still without access to water
• When it comes to safe water, even less people have access: only one in six.
• By the year 2015 the water availability in Africa and South-East-Asia will be catastrophically low for nations like Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Saudi-Arabia or India
• The access to safe water is unequally distributed in the world
• Whereas Americans use 100 gallons of water a day, people living in Sub-Sahara-Africa use only 2-5 gallons of water a day
• 70% of the water is used for irrigation
• Most of the countries in North and Sub-Sahara Africa, as well as countries in South-East-Asia use more than 75% of their withdrawn water for agricultural
• Water scarcity can be physical or economic
  
  
  
  
   Why is it important to know about these facts? 
  
  
  This You Tube video gives a first hint: The World's Water - Fidelity Investment 
  
  
  In the video it says: “This water stress could further accelerate regional water issues and border disputes. This is already happening in the Middle East....Water, becoming a more costly and regionally more scarce resource, will have massive economic, ecological and geopolitical implications.”
  
  
  I will think about it.

The Global Water Footprint

Agricultural water use per nation

Domestic water use per nation

 

Industrial water use per nation

 

"So the concept of water footprint is essential to help societies understand their global impact on this resource and the need for conservation and management. And in this domain, the main culprit is agriculture, as the Worldwatch Institute article states:  

'Agriculture has the greatest impact on a water footprint. Global crop production requires more than 6 trillion cubic meters of water each year, with nearly a quarter of supplies flowing to rice paddies. Livestock production requires the most water resources in the food chain. One hamburger, for instance, needs 2,400 liters of water on average.'"

Source

Even though I posted some days ago a world map that indicates the nations in Africa and South-East Asia as the ones with the highest proportion of total water withdrawal that is withdrawn for agriculture, we have to keep in mind that their withdrawal is nothing compared to what the industrialized countries consume.

Access to Water and Sanitation

Source

The Forecast Dry in Asia and Africa from 1950 to 2025

The difference between physical and economic water scarcity

Source

What is interesting about this map, is that it divides water scarcity in physical and economic scarcity. In areas of physical water scarcity there really is just not enough water available. 

But with economic water scarcity the situation is different: "Economic scarcity is where there is enough in-country water, but heavy investment needs to be made to ensure there will be no eventual physical water scarcity" (WWF Global), This applies for most countries in Central Africa.

Agricultural Water Withdrawal per Country

Source

This is a map of the world illustrates the proportion of total water withdrawal that is withdrawn for agriculture. Only a few industrialized countries in central Europe (for example France and Germany), Russia, and Canada use less than 25% of the total water they withdraw for agricultural purposes. These nation have two things in common: a boreal geographical location and a very small primary sector.

The opposite occurs for countries in Sub-Sahara, the Arabian Peninsula and South East Asia. The economy in most of these countries is less developed, what means that a huge part of the population works within the primary sector (the agricultural sector). Also, due to their location between the equator and the tropic of Cancer these regions suffer aridity for most months.

Most of the Freshwater is used for Irrigation.

Source

As it was already mentioned in some of the videos I posted so far, most of the freshwater worldwide is used aggricultural: 70% of the water is used for irrigation. That is why milk is so expensive in terms of water. 22% is used industrial (the jeans, you remember). The water we use at home only makes 8% of the overall freshwater consumption.

Source

Humans use blue water agricultural, industrial and municipal. The global water withdrawal in total has increased clearly since the 1950. Whereas from 1900 to 1950 the amount of withdrawal has roughly doubled, from 1950 to 2000 the amount has nearly quadrupled. And the graph shows no sign of stagnation whatsoever.

Suddently I feel bad about drinking milk. And bad about eating burgers (old feeling, but new reason).

In a day, 

Europeans use about 50 gallons of water. 

Americans use 100 gallons of water. 

The people living in Sub-Sahara-Africa use 2-5 gallons of water.

It takes

10 gallons to make a single slice of bread.

713 gallons to produce a cotton T-shirt.

1000 gallons for just one gallon of milk.

and 634 gallons to produce one burger.

Where Water is hidden. It ins in your Jeans. And the Plastic you use. And in other places you would not expect.

In average, 99% of the population of Developed Countries have Access to Safe Drinking Water. In Sub-Saharan Africa this applies only for 61%.

Source

As we can see above, the access to safe water is unequal distributed in the world. In Sub-Saharan Africa fewest people have access to safe drinking water. But also in South Asia and Latin America & Caribbean a bigger part of the human population is suffering from water scarcities.

The biggest difference between the regional average and the lowest is within the Developed Countries. Whereas the group average is that 99% of the population have access to safe drinking water, in Romania it applies only for 57%.

In 2015, more Countries will be effected by Low Water Availability than back in 1980

Source

This map illustrates the development of the world water availability per country from 1980 to 2000 to the 2015 estimate. The red colored countries are the ones, where the water availability is catastrophically low. 

The overall tendency of the picture is clear: Within 35 years, the number of countries that have to suffer from below average water availability has increased. Even for the United States the estimated water availability in 2015 is low. However, the most affected are nations in Africa and South-East-Asia.

1 in 6 People in the World have no Access to Safe Water

Source

 Did you know this? That 11% of us live without access to water? I did not.

Source

When it comes to safe water, even less people have access: only one in six.

Especially in Africa the access to safe water is limited. As you can see in the picture, there are a lot of nations in which more than every second person has no access to safe water. In Ethiopia it is only 22% of the population.

But also tropical regions like Cambodia or Papua Newguinea are affected. Whereas in Africa in most cases safe water is limited, because water in general is scarce, I could imagine that in South-East-Asia the lack of safe water may be caused by limited technology to clean the water.

For Everybody who is interested in the World Water Cylce

Only 2.5% of the World's Water is actually Freshwater

We all know that there is A LOT of water on our planet. But the problem is: most of this water is saltwater, which means that we can not drink it. Only 2.5% of the overall water is freshwater. Most of this water is stored in glaciers and permanent snow cover, the rest is stored in groundwater. Only 0.3% of the Freshwater comes from lakes and rivers.

Source: United NationsEnvironment Programme (UNEP) (2008): A world of salt. 

But the saltwater plays a big role in the world water cycle. When the water in the oceans and seas evaporates, saltwater is becoming freshwater. Vaporized into clouds, the water gets transported all over the world. Precipitation brings the freshwater down to the earth's surface again, where it infiltrates into the ground or the lakes and rivers – with the exception of glacial regions. In this areas, that are either in great heights or close to the north or south pol, the water changes its aggregate state to solid. It is not infiltrating into the ground anymore. As the fist image shows, glaciers are the biggest freshwater accumulators. 

Source: United NationsEnvironment Programme (UNEP) (2008): The water cylce.

Can Water be the Cause of States going to War?

The aim of this blog is to inform about the relationship between access to water and conflicts. Is there a chance, that we will one day have wars over water? Climate change increases the world's temperature. Human population is expanding. The access to water in arid regions of the world is already limited. Taking this general knowledge as a starting point, the blog claims to go deeper into this field, considering political, geographical, social and scientific discussions about water conflicts.

One year ago a group of former world leaders was calling on the UN to make water a topsecurity concern. They argued that water crisis threatens political stability and economic development in a number of developing and emerging markets and therefore has an implication for global peace.

Fabrice Renaund from the Institute for Environment and Human Security at the United Nations University in Bonn said: “Water resources worldwide are under increasing pressure through a combination of factors that include population growth, pollution and the consequences of climate change. In some regions of the world, acute stresses could be magnified or become the norm, and many academic, political and media circles predict that this will inevitably lead to violent conflicts.”

To find my answer to the big question of this blog “Can water be the cause of states going to war?”, I have to start with finding answers to basic questions.

The first question, that I am asking myself is: How much drinkable water is there in the world? How big are our water resources?

Source:

John Blau.Water could spark future conflicts, leaders warn. 18.09.2012. www.dw.de