Introduction : Equity and Justice in the context of water access and governance

‘The availability of water is a concern for some countries. But the scarcity at the heart of the global water crisis is rooted in power, poverty and inequality, not in physical availability’
(UNDP 2006, 2)

1Theories of environmental justice often highlight several inter-linked elements — distributive justice, procedural justice, and compensatory justice. Increasingly, there is also focus on recognition as a key, yet often undertheorized dimension. As defined by Schlosberg (2007), this element highlights the politics of demanding recognition of communities’ distinct histories, knowledges, use of resources, or claims to resources/territory. Community sovereignty and rights to self-governance may also be key concerns for the politics of recognition (von der Porten, 2012).

2In parallel, scholars have pushed for a more expansive theorization of what might be included in the idea of the ‘human right to water, ’ moving beyond notions of basic access to water, to include involvement in decision making over water-related concerns that affect communities (Linton, 2012), or broader recognition of the cultural, spiritual, and historical roles water might play for different communities (i.e., particularly for Indigenous communities, Singh, 2006, Wilson, 2014). As well, recent work on water security has similarly highlighted the importance of relational conceptualization, moving beyond access and the physical resource, to include broadened relational understandings of the capabilities and hydro-social relations that give rise to water-related well-being, development and justice (Jepson et al., 2017). With such reconceptualization, water access is not necessarily the focus in an of itself, but rather, attention should be given to broader and sustained hydro-social processes that are able to enable water flows, quality, uses, and distribution in order to support human capability, development, and flourishing (see also Boelens et al., 2017). Added to this, we might also seek to focus not on well-being in terms of averages, or to consider broad aggregate statistics such as those often used for achievement of the MDGs, SDGs, and similar goals, but rather but might also work to highlight that situation of the most impoverished, or most vulnerable, in our assessments of water security (cf. Kabeer, 1994 ; Sen, 1991). Increasingly, these sorts of engagements have emerged as central to definitions of water security, water justice, or the human right to water, with attention to relational and context specific understandings of what might constitute justice, or to consider the ways that justice is important for human flourishing in line with the capabilities approach (Perreault, 2014 ; Harris et al., 2018, Boelens et al., 2017).

3This paper focuses on the intersection of environmental justice and human right to water debates, with the aim of applying an extended and multi-valent engagement with both concepts, highlighting their intersection. Through discussion water access and governance in underserved areas of Accra, Ghana, a focus on equity serves to highlight salient features and points of overlap between HRW and water/ environmental justice debates. While equity is often implied and it in many ways central to both concepts, analysis of equity considerations is not always explicit nor directly explored as central to the framing and implementation of the HRW. As such, the paper adds weight to the claim made by Lu et al. (2014) that “Despite the gravity of the water crisis, our theoretical and analytical models do not adequately explain inequitable water access and distribution, nor how equity might be achieved (129).” A key conclusion is that ongoing progress to more clearly draw out the equity considerations important both for HRW and EJ remains a key concern.

4The paper first provides a very brief literature review of HRW, EJ, and water justice. This section also defines key elements concerning ‘equity’, drawing from the broader literature. Following this, the paper moves to characterize the situation of water access and governance in Accra, Ghana at present, with focus on underserved sites and key equity challenges. Finally, the third and final section of the paper connects these domains through a discussion of ways that equity and justice serve as key lenses through which to understand, and respond to, ongoing water access and governance challenges in this context, and elsewhere.

The Human Right to Water, Theories of Justice

5The last decade witnessed several key milestones regarding basic water access. In 2010, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution recognizing the human right to water and sanitation. Shortly thereafter, in 2012 the international community declared success with respect to the water related Millennium Development goal, declaring that the number of people without access to water had been halved in advance of the 2015 deadline. In 2016, the Sustainable Development Goals came into effect, with Goal #6 setting the new target of universal access to safe and affordable drinking water by 2030.

6Even as the global community celebrated ‘success’ with respect to the water-related MDG, it was recognized that the linked sanitation goal had not been achieved. Perhaps more important for our purposes, it was also acknowledged that progress had been uneven across different regions (i.e., failing to achieve the goal in parts of Africa and Asia), between urban and rural areas, and between rich and poor. This uneven progress has been highlighted as a key cause for concern, stressing the need for an equity focus in any efforts to promote water and sanitation access. Indeed, there have even been suggestions that quantitative indicator focused efforts such as those offered by the Joint Monitoring Program (JMP) provide incentives to extend access in middle and upper income areas, or to those communities most likely to be able to pay for services, as ‘low hanging fruit’ that can readily suggest ‘progress’ in meeting targets while potentially exacerbating equity concerns. As well, others have suggested these sorts of efforts (as well as the HRW in general) have contributed to an over-focus on domestic drinking water in ways that direct water away from agriculture or other important water uses (Hall et al., 2013 ; Goff and Crow, 2014 ; Birkenholtz, 2016). Added to this, others have questioned the degree to which discourses and practices such as those associated with the human right to water or SDGs effectively evacuate the political context and content of water (in) access and related injustices (Loftus, 2014), and perhaps even impede needed transformative changes in politics or practices of water governance (and water justice movements, cf. Bakker, 2010).

7Interrogating the value of the HRW and other rights based frameworks for the world’s poor, in particular, Mehta (2006) argues that to the degree that rights based frameworks assume accountability and state respect for rights, there are significant obstacles to extending the benefits of these rights to those who are most marginalized, particularly given that poorer states may lack capacity to implement rights. It is also critical to consider other historical and contextual challenges that might make achievement of these rights particularly difficult in the global South (not least among them might include colonialism, corruption, or control and influence of the International Financial Institutions, including the World Bank or International Monetary Fund, cf. Harris and Roa, 2013, Goldman, 2007). As such, there have been calls to push forward on theorizations of equity and water justice (Lu et al., 2014, Boelens et al., 2017), or to repoliticize debates about water (in) security (Loftus, 2014), and the context specific implementation of the HRW (Sultana and Loftus, 2012). In this vein, several authors have suggested the value of adopting a capabilities approach as one way to move beyond a narrow focus on drinking water, and to understand water more holistically through a focus on freedoms and capabilities to more fully connect to broader goals of development and well-being, or people’s multiple needs and uses of water (per work by Sen, in Lu et al., 2014, Goldin, 2013, Jepson et al., 2017).

8As noted, environmental justice frequently focuses on several inter-linked dimensions : distributive, procedural, and compensatory notions of justice, and increasingly, the politics and practices of recognition (Schlosberg, 2007). Combining these debates with ideas related to the human right to water and its implementation, we can focus attention on the distribution and access to safe and affordable freshwater [or on the flip side, the distribution of pollution or other ills associated with (in) access or (in) security]. Here key considerations would be to map, understand, and critically analyze which communities are able to access safe and affordable water, and where the burden of inaccess or unsafe water is particularly acute. Procedural justice would signal key debates related to participation, and how to meaningfully engage communities in decisions that affect them (a key stated goal of water governance of the past several decades, Dublin, 1992, Harris et al., 2013, although not always easy to achieve in practice). Compensatory justice might involve payments or reconciliation related to past injustices, pollution events, or ‘takings’ of water, such as the frequently contested privatization of community water sources as occurred in the context of Cochabamba, Bolivia, or as has occurred in several examples with transnational corporations such as Coca Cola or Nestlé (Parmar, 2008). Of course, we must also acknowledge that certain losses cannot and perhaps should not be merely ‘compensated for’, particularly to the degree that this implies monetary compensation, or endorses the notions of substitutability of particular waterways or uses for others (in ways that might endorse marketization, cost-benefit analyses, or similar frameworks, e.g. Harris, 2013).

9Recognition is complex, difficult to assess, and often overlooked relative to the other dimensions of justice. As described by Perreault (2014), this notion can refer to the ‘right to have rights’ in ways that “take into account the need for socially excluded groups to be acknowledged as legitimate claimants, to be recognized for having valid political, social and cultural standing, particularly as a precondition for other forms of justice (p. 239).” To the degree that recognition also acknowledges the broader terrain of past injustices that condition current patterns of uneven water access, or poor water conditions (e.g. colonialism, apartheid), this can be particularly salient for Indigenous and other historically marginalized groups (Murdocca, 2010). Ongoing work with first nations on water access and governance challenges in the context of British Columbia, and Canada more generally, suggests that recognition is among the most central concerns of many equity seeking Indigenous groups (Bakker et al., 2017, Simms et al., 2016). In this context, Indigenous communities might not only expect and make claims to safe and affordable drinking water, but also may seek recognition of culturally specific relationships and uses of water, with implications beyond basic access to include the right to maintain healthy source water for ecosystems and other living beings (Wilson, 2014).

10Although implicit, and indeed central to, discussions of HRW and EJ, surprisingly few contributions highlight equity as an explicit discussion related to these concepts, nor as related to their implementation in the water realm. Among recent exceptions, Perreault offers definitions of equity for consideration in water governance, highlighting : “the state, quality, or ideal of being just, impartial, and fair ; Justice applied in circumstances covered by law yet influenced by principles of ethics and fairness” (p. 238, citing the American Heritage Dictionary, 1992). Similarly, he cites an earlier discussion by Boelens (Boelens and Davila, 1998, p. 16) “Equity is about fairness, about ‘social justice’, about the ‘acceptability’ of something… Equity is fairness. Equity is impartiality. Equity is something defined in law, and yet informed by deeper ethical principles.” With these contributions, we see that to bring equity more fully into conceptualizations of HRW and EJ, and their realization/ implementation, would require careful and sustained engagement with debates of justice, fairness, and ethics — concepts and debates have recently emerged in writings on water access and governance (Rodina, 2017, Groenfeld and Schmidt, 2013). All of these elements intertwine to provide a sense of the multi-valent and contextual factors that are critical for an equity and justice oriented understanding of water access and conditions. Given the types of concerns already noted regarding the HRW, and particular efforts to extend water access globally (as with the MDGs and SDGs), the core argument and focus here is to better understand, and theorize what an explicit focus on equity brings to these debates. The remainder of this paper elaborates this terrain, both in general, and through specific reference to the situation of underserved areas in Accra, Ghana.

Water Access and Governance in Accra, Ghana : focus on underserved areas

11Even as the Millennium Development Goal number 7 related to water was achieved globally, Sub Saharan Africa, in general, fell far short of these targets. Ghana however, was one of the countries that plainly declared success in meeting the goal (country-wide, notably with progress in urban areas more so than in rural regions). As explored below, however, delving into equity dimensions of this achievement in line with a broadened notion of the HRW that is also conceptualized in relation to EJ concepts (distributional, procedural, compensatory justice, as well as recognition), brings other considerations to the fore. Establishing this understanding is crucial as Ghana continues with aims to achieve its stated country-wide goal of achieving “sustainable water and basic sanitation for all by 2025” (5 years in advance of the SDG target). For all practical purposes, this would mean that “all people living in Ghana have adequate, safe, affordable and reliable access to a basic level of water service, practice safe sanitation and hygiene and that water resources are sustainably managed” (MWRWH, 2014). The analysis here proceeds according to each of the core EJ concepts, as detailed above. While it is possible that there are salient issues regarding compensatory justice that could be noted, our ongoing work on water access and governance in Accra has not foregrounded considerations of note here — as such I leave this dimension out of the discussion, with the suggestion that this might be an interesting focus for follow up work.

Distributional justice

12As noted above, while the situation in urban Ghana has improved considerably, there are many in rural areas of the country that remain without basic access to water (let alone sanitation). As well, within regions and urban locales, there are significant disparities between different parts of the city with respect to safe and affordable water access and sanitation services, tracking against income, location, and other core axes of difference. Based on our survey conducted in 2012 in Teshie and Ashaiman (urban and peri-urban areas near the capital city of Accra), affordability, access, and quality remain key concerns (Harris et al., 2016). In particular, our survey (focused on underserved areas) suggested that nearly half of respondents relied on water vendors, while other qualitative research revealed the extent to which access to piped water networks does not guarantee regular supply of water, whether due to irregular service (i.e., linked to a rationing schedule that was long used to coordinate water delivery to varied parts of the city), lack of access to storage facilities, or in relation to affordability challenges (particularly given reliance on vendors and other intermediaries, or associated with the rapidly growing sachet water industry, Morinville, 2012, Dapaah, 2014, Stoler, 2017).

13Access access to safe and affordable water, and improved sanitation is a highly differentiated patchwork, with much of the unevenness related to geographic distribution across the city, with some intersection according to Indigenous communities, income, religion and new migrant status to the city (as well as informal settlement growth). In peri-urban areas of Ashaiman and Madina, for instance, the absence of any piped supply from the central service means that residents paying for water to be trucked in by tanker, and purchase sachet water for drinking, paying much more on a per unit basis as compared with other parts of the city with more regular piped access (Peloso and Morinville, 2014, Dapaah and Harris, 2017).

14From a distributive justice perspective, there are clear concerns related to who has water, how frequently, of what quality, and at what price. These injustices extend beyond who in the city has access to piped services, or not, given that residents of Accra rely heavily on storage infrastructure to access water on a daily basis, particularly in view of rationing and other scarcity concerns (Dapaah and Harris, 2017). Also linked to distributional concerns, it is clear that some residents face considerable vulnerabilities when access to water in the metro area is less available, for instance, with some areas queuing for water for up to 8 hours or more a day, and with some areas reporting considerable hostility and conflict associated with inadequate water access [for instance, 68 % of respondents in a follow-up survey we undertook in 2014 in two other sites of Accra (Ga Mashie and Madina) reported conflict and fighting associated with water access, Dapaah and Harris, 2017]. Just to provide another perspective on the effects of such distributional concerns, 79 % of our (2012) survey respondents said that they worry about water sometimes or often — highlighting a range of social and affective considerations related to inequities in water access and distribution (cf. Wutich and Ragsdale, 2008 highlight stress and other emotional-affective aspects of the lived experiences of uneven access to water).

15In terms of progress related to these distributional concerns, it is note-worthy that Teshie (one of our study sites and well known as one of the most underserved locales in Accra) is now the beneficiary of a new desalinization plant, adding considerably to the overall supply of water for the metropolitan area (though residents note taste and hardness concerns, as well as inadequate infrastructure to deal with the enhanced supply, Tremblay, ISODEC & Harris, 2016). With this new technology, and augmented supply, the GWCL (the entity responsible for water delivery to urban areas throughout the country) now suggests that demand for water in the metropolitan area no longer outstrips supply (Author Interviews, 2015). As of January, 2018, however, the new desalinization plant was taken offline due to disputes over the contract with the private companies managing the facility (Gadugah, 2018).

16All in all, it is clear that even with some progress related to bulk water supply, or extending access to some impoverished neighborhoods, there are profound and lasting distributional concerns related to who experiences water (in) access, who is particularly vulnerable in times of water shortage, or variable quality, storage capacity, or affordability concerns. While statistics from the Joint Monitoring Program or the GWCL will often highlight aggregate statistics to signal progress on ‘water access’ in a broad sense, an equity and justice lens foregrounds these distributional issues and concerns as paramount, bringing attention to the considerable variability in terms of how these issues play out and are experienced, particularly in residents’ daily lives (cf. Peloso and Morinville, 2014). These distributional concerns link directly to notions of equity and justice in that it is clear that the rates that residents’ must pay for water, or the quality of that water, is a function of their location, as well as migrant status, ethnicity, and other considerations — meaning that all residents do not equally benefit form public services, and that considerable inequities remain regarding implementation of the human right to water.

Procedural Justice

17From a procedural justice perspective, we could also consider the widespread failures to include NGOs and marginalized populations in water related decision making, a situation that some claim was further undermined by the five year contract granted to Aqua Vitens Rand Limited (AVRL) for the operation and management of Accra’s water system from 2006-2011 (as a requirement of World Bank conditionalities, Yeboah, 2006, see also Amego-Etego and Grusky, 2005 for discussion of resistance movements that opposed the initial privatization). Among the reasons cited for the non-renewal of the contract after the initial five-year term were criticisms related to failure to involve stakeholders in decision-making, particularly local NGOs (Adank et al., 2011). Work on the Local Water Boards in Accra has also revealed that while these entities do enable some community participation in water governance, there are also significant limitations, including the fact that all such boards have been almost exclusively established by external actors (Morinville & Harris, 2014). Our survey in Ashaiman and Teshie revealed very low participation in water governance, and no local governance institutions in Ashaiman that dealt with water (although further research also revealed that perhaps water-focused institutions may not be the most suitable for this context, despite international pressure to have sectorally specific water governance institutions, Peloso and Harris, 2017).

Recognition

18In this context, there may be particular concerns related to equity and justice issues that rely on recognition of the particular needs and situation of certain populations, such as the Ga Indigenous communities that populate underserved settlements in the city (Dapaah, 2014). Such recognition would be consistent with other UN guidance, such as those associated with the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP, UN 2018). As well, there might be specific justice and equity concerns related to recognition of specific cultural or spiritual dimensions of uneven water access, for instance, for Muslim communities living in underserved settlements who have particular needs or requirements for water.

19A broader issue of interest might also be the need for more formal recognition of key concepts and goals, such as those associated with the HRW. This is a key political focus of groups such as ISODEC, working actively to promote water justice in Ghana, in part by focusing on the formal adoption of the HRW as a key policy goal in this context. A 2012 statement of citizen demands includes universal access to water and other basic needs, but also focuses on key roles for the state to ensure equity and protect marginalized populations, as well as to regulate and provide oversight to the private sector (ISODEC, 2012). As such, we see that equity is a core component of current calls and campaigns for water justice, even as it has not always been explicitly highlighted in policy efforts to achieve the HRW.

Discussion and Conclusion

20This discussion highlights the need to make explicit the equity and justice dimensions of the human right to water, and related efforts to extend water access to the world’s poor. Highlighting elements of the situation Accra, Ghana, the essay explores empirical and conceptual issues of importance for achieving the human right to water. In particular, tracing key concerns in relation to environmental justice notions of distributional and procedural justice, as well as linked politics of recognition, we see that these considerations add important dimensions to the discussion of what it would mean to achieve the human right to water and sanitation in this context. Even as there is progress in aggregate or average senses (as highlighted in relation to the JMP, or MDGs, for instance), it is clear that access to water and sanitation remains importantly marked by equity and justice concerns. In turn, addressing these justice considerations would be a central feature of any effort to implement and address the ‘human right to water’ in this context.

21Among other insights, the analysis suggests that progress towards implementation of the HRW is reliant on progress in the most underserved and vulnerable communities and segments of society, not only in aggregate senses. As such, equity concerns are foundational to the concept and practice of achieving the HRW. As well, if we are interested in a broadened notion of HRW and water security, linking to well-being and flourishing (per Jepson et al., 2017), we would need to give careful consideration to the uneven distributional justice, procedural justice, and recognition issues that are at stake. While the implementation and politics of the HRW necessarily unfolds differently in different sites and contexts (Sultana and Loftus, 2012), the situational and site specificity offered by a justice oriented evaluation of the HRW is insightful to highlight where and why water access, security, quality or affordability remain key challenges.

22Highlighting some key features of water access and politics in underserved communities of Accra, Ghana provides a foundation from which to re-imagine and chart alternative paths forward in terms of understanding, and imagining, what might be required, or what is at stake, in highlighting (and politicizing) water insecurity and (in) access (cf. Loftus, 2014). While equity is often implied in HRW debates, it is important work towards more sustained and nuanced engagement with ideas of fairness and justice to reimagine, and eventually reconfigure, water access and politics.