Western Values Challenged Part 4 - What defines equity?

In the last post, I addressed one of the three questions I have raised in the last two post - 'how do you define who should be involved?', highlighting the fact that migratory tribes and environmental migrants are often disadvantaged. The discussion ends with the conclusion that the minority groups should also be eligible to participate in the water resources management, yet, there are a number of difficulties associated with it. If you are interested in reading further, here is a link to my previous blog post. In this post, I would like to discuss the second question:

2) How can we quantify the degree of equity among different individuals/stakeholders?

Photo.1. Agriculture in Africa (Reference: the World Bank, 2015)

The question above fundamentally deals with the fact that the values of water resources go beyond simply water for drinking, cooking and treatment, which we all consume in every day manner. It changes the form into agricultural crops, fishes, and sometimes non-monetary goods such as ecosystems (Zagg, 2005). The latter case is often dismissed due to the difficulty to assess the economic values of, ecosystems, for example. Therefore, sharing the same amount of water directly withdrawn from the basin does not mean that the resources are equitably distributed among individuals.

In order to draw a full picture of water resources, the concept of IWRM can be useful since it assesses the values of water from a number of different perspectives (Savenjie and Zaag, 2008). There are mainly four dimensions; natural dimension; human dimension; spatial scale; and temporal scale. Natural dimension takes the entire hydrological cycle including stock and flows. It classifies fresh water resources into blue, green and fossil water (Haileslassie et al, 2014). The first is the water that flows and is stored such as in rivers, lakes, active shallow aquifers, and wetlands. These are often managed by water resources planners (Molden, 2007). By contrast, green water is the one stored in the unsaturated zone and is responsible for the production of biomass (Molden, 2007). This type of water is often neglected in managing resources because it cannot be directly used for human's consumption. However, 60% of the world's agricultural crops and forest's materials are produced using green water. Fossil water is in deep aquifers, which are essentially non-replenishable because the flows are either not active or not fast enough to keep up with human's withdrawal (Molden, 2007).

Human dimension evaluates the economic interests of water resources (Savenjie and Zaag, 2008). It is more demand side perspectives because water resources are understood in monetary terms. The concept of 'virtual water'  is born out of this perspective (Gupta, 2010). It is where products are expressed in the amount of water used in its production. Spatial dimension deals with the fact that the scale of water resources stored in the basin significantly influences the availability of water, for instance, individual users, village, watershed, catchment and basin (Savenjie and Zaag, 2008). Basins are generally considered the most appropriate units for operating management, however, there is a barrier to the institutional arrangements because the basin often extends beyond one single political boundary (Thompson, 2000). Note that the geopolitical concerns shall be discussed in the next post when I address the third question relevant to the point. Temporal dimension, lastly, highlights the significance of temporal fluctuation of the availability and demand of water, due to seasonality of crop production and the local climate (Savenjie and Zaag, 2008).

Photo. 2 Water dam at the Blyde River Canyon, Mpumalanga, South Africa (Reference: Nkem et al, 2011)

These four dimensions are critical to understand the full values of water resources. Natural dimension, in particular, is the most significant of all because it takes into account the indirect values of water as I mentioned earlier. In the case of Hadejia-Nguru Wetlands, wetland communities are heavily reliant upon blue water in floods season and upon green water after floods so that crops can be produced using the residual water (Thompson, 2000). On the other hand, upstream populations who constantly practice irrigation depends solely upon blue water, and that is the reason why they would prefer to damming the rivers to keep resources when dry season comes. Similarly, fishes are an indirect outcome of the wetlands' water resources, and its monetary values are enormous especially in downstream communities (Thompson, 2000).

Obviously, fulfilling the potential of these production, both of the quantity and quality of water needs to be sustained at appropriate level. The implication is that whether different individuals and stakeholders residing across the basin receives an equitable amount of benefits from water resources is not to do with the average required amount of water for human life. Instead, I guess the following key question will help address the question raised at the beginning of this post:

- How much water is required to sustain 'a good quality of the environment' in which they depend upon for production of food and economic goods that can support their life either directly or indirectly?

The above question places a focus upon the land rather than water itself. I think considering the wellbeing of land, such as through assessing the healthiness of ecosystems is more appropriate because it reflects the feasibility of food production as well as direct water withdrawal. Although the quantification of water in this way can be complicated by the introduction of virtual water, I believe it helps draw a true picture of how much water is required to sustain individual's life. This land-based / ecosystems-centred perspective then leads to equitable sharing of water resources. In the next post, I will try to answer the third question and complete this series of blog posts on Africa's wetlands management.