New Zealand 's Water Quality

On July 28th 2010, through Resolution 64/292, the United Nations General Assembly explicitly recognized the human right to water and sanitation. They acknowledged that clean drinking water and sanitation are essential to the realization of all human rights. The UN stated that water should be, “safe, sufficient, acceptable [taste, colour, odor], physically accessible, and affordable” (Knight and Hartl, 2003). Water is one of the most important elements to human life. In Canada we are host to about twenty percent of the world’s fresh water (Boyd, 2003). It has a square kilometer measurement large enough to cover both California and Nevada (Matsui, 2012, p. 1). While most Canadians who live in urban areas are free to enjoy safe drinking water, some First Nations communities living on reserves do not (White, Murphy, Spence, 2012). For instance, as of July 2010, 116 First Nation communities in Canada were under a drinking water advisory (Health Canada, 2010), with many of these communities living under advisories for prolonged periods of time. This issue is of vital importance to discuss and evaluate because clean, safe drinking water is a mandated human right. In Canada we have failed to ensure that water on reserves meets that standards set out by the UN.

What we gained from this research was not a thorough understanding of the legislative measures that governments are taking to provide water to the citizens within their borders. Rather, we learned the general lesson that governments, regardless of their resources or political structure, are not the most reliable or capable entities to provide for human beings

Water is one of life’s most precious resources. Without it, life as we know it would cease to exist. Almost all life is dependent on water for survival. Humanity uses water in almost everything they do in their daily lives, whether that be for consumption or production. However water itself is not enough to sufice, clean water is required for life to thrive. Dirty untreated water can be the cause for death as well, so it is integral that water be kept clean. The government has enacted laws to ensure that our water is maintained and kept clean. These laws cover industries, plumbing, and sanitation among other things. Unfortunately, the city government in Flint Michigan willfully failed to provide safe water for its citizens.

The article “Water Works”, published by Orion Magazine and written by environmental specialist Cynthia Barnett intends to inform the reader anyone can make water an important factor. Overlooking it has become common many people in the United States have adapted to through the changes that have occurred in society over time. At the beginning of her article, she describes an area that does not make water care a priority, whereas in another location they make it very evident water is important. The location she describes is gloomy, grey, and is a populated area that has old water systems that are damaging environmental factors. Barnett continuously emphasizes that people are the ones who can help restore nature. This is at a less cost than

The goal of this paper is intended to provide the legal, political, social, economic, ecological dimensions of water resource policy

In the fourth chapter, “Fouling Our Own Nests,” of Unquenchable: America’s Water Crisis and What to do About It, Robert Glennon discusses the dangers of water contamination that plague many parts of the United States. His main claim that water pollution requires the help of the entire population stems from an unmentioned warrant: contaminating the national water supply with chemicals from individual communities and industries is detrimental to American society. In order to strengthen his argument, Glennon showcases the impacts of local contamination issues on larger populations and utilizes quantitatively intimidating statistics to solidify his position and inspire his readers to fight for better water regulation.

When reading about safe drinking water, likenesses and differences in both authors’ points of view have been noted. In the pieces, After Pollution in Flint, Some Find Tap Water’s Benefits Hard to Swallow, and For the World’s Poor, Drinking Water Can Kill, there are many facts presented about how tap water causes issues. When comparing the texts, similarities and differences are noted.

The story Thirst reflects on how global corporations like Nestle, Suez, and Veolia are rapidly purchasing local water sources such as lakes, streams, and springs. Those companies are also taking control of public water services. While trying to privatize and turn a larger profit off of water, they have manipulated and bought politicians, have gone “under the table” to make deals and undermined the democratic process by trying to deny citizens a voice in fundamental decisions about their most essential public resource. The authors ' Thirst explain the emergence of a controversial new water wars in the United States and showing how communities here are fighting this battle, often against companies headquartered overseas. The three followed water privatization battles across the United States from California to Massachusetts and from Georgia to Wisconsin, documenting the rise of public opposition to corporate control of water resources. These towns find it hard to balance a budget, so when large companies come in and offer to control the water the town looks at it as a major way to cut costs, but what it ends up costing is much more.

Lack of water and conflict with water rights have instigated wars and political tension especially in the Middle East and Africa, as well as promoting unlikely cooperation to ensure its availability. Also, natural water bodies like lakes mark international

Central idea: Access and availability to fresh water are essential to the survival of the human race. Fresh

As supported by Christopher D. Stone, it is evident that rivers need special attention from the public(302). The main reason behind this is that, water inhabits many creatures that cannot survive without it. Even human beings rely on rivers for refreshment purpose especially for swimming. The American conservationist supports the water ethics issue in that they view it as an evolutional event meant to change the utilitarian approaches towards water(304). The best thing that the article is focusing is how to satisfy the need of the people rather than concentrate on natural resources with the purpose of maintaining them. Under his claim, measures need to be set up to ensure that clean water is protected from unauthorized access in order to reduce the problem of shortages. Postel advocates for introduction of ethics in use and supply of water. The ethics aims at safeguarding the clean water especially the natural one to ensure that people use it in a positive way. Since water is the stepping stone for each and every activity in any nation, once it becomes insecure, then the other activities are interfered with. (303).Postel tries to convince people to not waste water by saying that water not does just belong to the human. It can help the global markets to change from the utilitarian form of water management to a better holistic approach that will ensure that the relationship that exists between people and

The 2008 documentary “Blue Gold: World Water Wars” introduced the world to one of the most significant environmental concerns of the modern era. Directed by Sam Bozzo, this film brings to life the compelling story told by Maude Barlow and Tony Clarke in their 2002 international bestseller Blue Gold: The Battle against Corporate Theft of the World’s Water. It was first screened at the 2008 Vancouver International Film Festival where it won the audience award for Best Environmental Film. This film’s main message is that water is no longer a fundamental human right, but a privilege awarded only to those with the means to access it. Through its cinematic elements, “Blue Gold: World Water Wars” succeeds in conveying its main argument, which is that if nothing is done about water scarcity now, the wars of the future will be fought not over oil, but water.

Economic relations and resource management, 2. Ideology and culture including the way people think about the environment and water rights, 3.political agents like the state, transnational actors and organizations involved in water disputes and trade 4.the transnational social movements which endorse and resist water privatization, and 5.the power relations which engender unequal access to safe water (Bywater, 2008).

Life springs up around water sources. It is no coincidence that some of the greatest civilizations have been build need fertile bodies of water. Known life relies on water to sustain that life. So it is no surprise when a debate arose in 2013 around comments made by Nestlé Chairman Peter Brabeck regarding privatization of water and the fundamental human right to survive from dehydration and illness from non-portal water consumption. Although the context of Brabeck’s comment was taken out of context, issues surrounding the access companies like Nestlé have been given to bottle their water when people do not have access to clean water and droughts are threatening crop production. Adding a price tag is not the answer. The market, both these companies and their consumers have a major role to play in the management of water; a role that requires a change in mindset of privilege many citizen of the United States, and other countries that do not see the direct effects that serious clean water issue have on people that do not have it.

Few decades ago, clean water was “commons” (Hardin, 1968) to us. It was a natural resource shared by everyone and not owned by anyone. This “commons” was taken for granted to the extent that people exploit clean water without considering its finiteness. Resorts and factories dumped wastewater and ruined nearby rivers and oceans. People carelessly littered garbage and substituted the dirty water with diminishing clean water. They definitely benefited in terms of financial cost and comfort from their negligence. However, those individual interests ended up bringing severe water pollution, attacking our collective interest of public health and well-being. In this vein, water pollution is undeniably the “Tragedy of the Commons” (Hardin, 1968). Following these dire circumstances, water purification techniques and systems have been further developed and become widespread. Yet, the technical measurements have not quite fundamentally solved the problem. What is needed at this point is people’s will and practical action to improve the environment. However, merely hoping and encouraging people to do so are not enough. In order to have a steady support from people, we need a practical device for a “mutual coercion” (Hardin, 1968) to earn consent to coercion necessary to amend the situation. In this paper, I am going to address the technical and individual effort for water pollution and its limitation, and suggest a way to complement this limitation through a device on an institutional