Victoria A. BenavidezANT 6973.001

Spring 2016Tapped Out and Bottled Up:

0

Tapped Out and Bottled Up: Perceptions of Risk in Local Drinking Water Supply

“Majority of people under the poverty line are minorities and people under the poverty line don't generate much tax revenue nor do they have the disposable income to redo their pipes. So it in fact has nothing to do with race and everything to do with poverty”1

- Facebook Post January 29, 2016

INTRODUCTION

Urban and rural communities in the United States face persistent and emerging water

challenges related to the quality and quantity of potable drinking water. Low income

communities of color often carry the burden of health and environmental risks related to water

(mis)management in the globally, as well as locally (VanDerslice 2011, Ramos da Silva et al

2010, Donahue and Johnston 1998, Jepson 2014, Jespon and Brown 2014, Eichelberger 2012).

1 https://www.facebook.com/NowThisNews/videos/1127665920576907/

1

Key Words:

Water quality, contamination, environmental justice, infrastructure, health, San Antonio

Abstract:

This research paper contributes to the urban political ecology of water through applied anthropological research methods and theoretical foundation drawing from both political ecology and medical anthropology. Water quality and quantity are emergent themes in anthropology as the ability to meet the global demand for clean and adequate supplies has become more challenging. Pollution, failing infrastructure, governmental practices, and population growth have contributed to actual and perceived risk in drinking water quality in urban centers in the United States. Water mismanagement in American cities has increased the risk of contaminated drinking water supplies, primarily in lower socioeconomic communities. Anthropologists contribute by framing water not only as a valued resource but as a health resource. They can the differing ways of contextualizing government and structural practices related to water management, examine the unequal distribution of water, and study the differing knowledge systems in which agents understand water, risk, and contamination. Anthropologists can also analyze how actors respond and behave to perceived and actualized risks of contaminated drinking water.

Crumbling infrastructure, out of date water policies, and the threat of pollution has increased the

pressure on national and local drinking water sources (Butts and Gasteyer 2011, VanDerslice

2011). The inequalities in water management - as evidenced in recent cases in Michigan, Texas,

and Louisiana, Colorado – have increased both the actual and perceived risk of contamination

and illness in low-income and minority communities (Sanburn 2016, Hanna-Attisha, et al. 2016,

Whiteford and Whiteford 2005). Few studies have documented how the public has responded to

either perceived or actual risks of contaminated drinking water (Caimcross 2010, Bartram and

Caimcross 2010).

In the last year, there has been an increased reporting of drinking water disasters in cities

across the Rust Belt and American Southwest. Media images of unclean water are often

accompanied by images of pallets of bottled water. Most of these crises have occurred in

communities of low-socioeconomic status, where the high cost of bottled water maybe out of

reach for residents. Limited resource populations that need to use bottled water are often less

able to afford bottled water. However, a review of the literature indicates more economically

secure populations are turning to bottled water as a preventive health measure. Bottled water is

used in place of tap water for its better taste, convenience, and perceived health benefits. Risk

perception and preventive behaviors are the result of social and cultural factors as well as

objective information. This research project will serve as an exploratory case study that focuses

on local water knowledges, infrastructural systems, and alternatives and attitudes to centralized

water distribution systems and alternative water sources.

Hypotheses regarding the use of bottled water are as follows:

H1: Perceptions of poor water quality represent a higher risk in drinking water and

therefore more likely to be associated with the purchase of bottled water.

2

H2: Public perceptions if drinking water quality have changed since the publicized

incidents in low-income communities. Residents in other communities are more aware of failing

infrastructure and the risk of contamination

H3: The consumption of bottled water suggests that perception of risk underscores social,

cultural, and economic contexts of water consumption.

THE VIOLENCE OF DRINKING WATER

“Older infrastructure, government budget cuts, prone to natural disasters that

interfere with water supply or purification processes, proximity to resource

extraction or industrial sites, good old fashion racism”

Political ecology is defined as the intellectual tradition that seeks to dismantle

dominant accounts of environmental issues and nurtures alternative ways of thinking (Radonic

and Kelly-Richards 2015, 390). This perspective is premised on the understanding that resource

access and management have affected some groups disproportionately. As this positionality of

this research endeavor is closely related to health disparities, it is also guided by a framework in

medical anthropology focusing on the violence of inequitable access. Grounded in environmental

justice and medical anthropology, this research paper focuses on concepts in structural and

infrastructural violence, with a particular emphasis how drinking water “remains invisible until

breakdown” (Jackson 2015). An environmental justice foundation will allow for an analysis of

how drinking water is reproduced by culture, politics, and history in predominately low-income

areas and communities of color (Sze 2007). This paper further examines how the perception of

risk informs the reliance on alternative water supplies. The data collected for this project will

consist of ransom sample surveys (n=50) on water quality and consumption. Informants will be

asked, “Where do they primarily get drinking water” and other questions related to water quality

3

and contamination, as well as knowledge of water contamination in Flint and other areas. The

significance of this project is the analysis of the structural inequalities embedded in public water

systems and how the public responds to those inequalities. The applied value of this project will

acknowledges the roles the media, whether social or mainstream, uses to inform the public

perceptions of contamination and water. This project will also follow Strang’s ethnography by

examining how “physical, sensory, and cognitive experiences articulate with cultural meanings

and value” (Strang 2004).

San Antonio’s river and bodies of water function as a watershed, water regime, and a

waterscape. Watersheds are the areas of land through which water drains downhill, a water

regime is the rules and practices for managing water resources in a specific setting, and a

waterscape is the culturally meaningful place in which humans and water interact (Orlove and

Caton 2010). For the intent of this paper, I will not be discussing water regimes, however it

should be noted that the waters that supply San Antonio

residents with water are heavily regulated at the local,

regional, and state level. Watersheds are also defined as a

basin of water that can be managed, but in some instances

these areas are managed and maintained to promote

environmental quality. Watersheds can be indicative of the

quality of drinking water and these perceptions help guide drinking water preferences. San

Antonio has several watersheds that the public can use a recreational spaces but also act as areas

to promote environmental awareness and sustainability of a body of water. These areas can be

anthropologically situated as waterscapes. Waterscapes are a way of showing the overlapping

social, physical, and economic boundaries of basins. Less than half of the respondents reported

4

they did actively use San Antonio’s area watersheds but highlighted those areas was not entirely

sustainable. Most reported that the water in the watershed was stagnant, when water was even

present. As I will explain later, many of the respondents had trouble identifying where the city’s

drinking water came from – was it ground or surface water. This disconnect is also evident when

discussing watersheds as several of the respondents did not see the link between creek water and

Edwards Aquifer. These misconceptions in water value are one area in which applied

anthropology can show how watersheds, water regimes, and waterscapes are interconnected and

their sustainability and management impacts drinking water quality and quantity in urban areas.

LOCAL WATER HISTORY

5

San Antonio’s climate is best described as semi-arid to drought conditions, broken up

periodically by heavy downpours. Average annual rainfall is 30 inches, however the region is

known for deadly and unpredictable flash-flooding with storms dumping over 10 inches of rain

in 24 hours. 2 Topographically, San Antonio is located between the Edwards Plateau and the Gulf

Coast Plains. The city’s location and climate are instrumental in how the water system was

developed and how it still continues to operate. Residents of the city, from the early barrio days

through contemporary configurations as an urban metropolis have often struggled with questions

of water quality and water quantity. To better understand how the contemporary population of

San Antonio perceives and defines conceptions of water quality and contamination, an

understanding of the historical

development of the city is necessary.

Two major springs, San Pedro

Springs and the Blue Hole, are

considered the cultural hearth of the

city’s watershed and waterscape. Both

of these springs are currently dry, but

they formed the foundation for the

acequia system. San Antonio has a

complex relationship with water that can be traced to its colonial beginnings. The mission

acequias were an early form of water management that led to the development of agriculture but

also influenced racial neighborhood development (Rivera 2003, Marquez, Mendoza and

Blanchard 2007). Archival evidence documents how the management of San Antonio’s

2 http://safloodsafe.com/FloodFacts/HistoricalOccurrences.aspx#5971-may-25-2013

6

waterscapes created spatial boundaries between Anglos and Mexican Americans (Porter 2009).

Inadequate running water and lack of access to clean drinking water in pre-World War II west

side neighborhoods led to a disproportionate amount of fatalities in tuberculosis and infant

intestinal diseases (Zelman 1983, Porter 2009). Many neighborhoods did not receive drinking

water through the city’s water system, it was brought to the homes by horse and cart.

Photographs document how the Mexican American population living in the west side and near

downtown neighborhoods still had outdoor communal drinking water faucets and bathrooms as

late as the 1960s.

Mexican American neighborhoods in San Antonio are still at risk for polluted

groundwater as many are “fence-line” communities that sit adjacent to military bases and

refineries (Brown 2007, Lerner 2010). However, a recent study on perceptions of water quality

on the Salado and Leon Creek watersheds indicates middle-class residents who live near

watersheds and identify as environmentally conscious tend to perceive their water as “highly

polluted” (Brody, Highfield and Peck 2005). Hence, public perceptions of drinking water offer a

relevant route to examine how spatial, health, and economic inequalities are manifested in the

infrastructure and neoliberal water development and access policies.

Water, already commodified through privatization and bureaucratic policies, is

entrenched in structural and everyday violence or urban environments. The built environments

of American cities are challenging the perceptions of the public water supply as people are not

only cognizant of where their water comes from, but also what the water has been exposed to

before it reaches their homes. The perception of risk has reshaped drinking habits in the United

States as the consumption of bottled water has increased across socioeconomic levels. (Saylor,

Stalker Prokopy and Amberg 2011, Massoud, et al. 2012, van Erp, et al. 2014). The consumption

7

of bottled water suggests the perception of risk of contamination underscores the social, cultural,

and economic contexts. This ethnographic case study focuses on how actors recognize informal

water infrastructure as a site of social inequality and disrepair. Uneven urbanization and the

perceived risk of contamination has been linked to increased bottled water consumption, and this

research project is designed to explore the demographic and social factors associated with

drinking water consumption and perceptions of risk in San Antonio.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The demographic distribution of the survey respondents (n=40) was limited to the greater

San Antonio area with four outliers (Washington DC, Boulder, Tucson, and Midland).

Demographic factors compared similarly to census data in gender and age. However, ethnic

groups did not represent San Antonio demographics, as no African-Americans participated in the

survey. Formal education levels were not comparative to San Antonio, as over half the

respondents had completed a four year degree. The summary of the sample statistics is shown

below.

Variable Name Description Responses

Age Age of Respondents Range from 18 to 64

Ethnicity What is your ethnicity? 0% Black

2.5% Asian or Pacific Islander

33% Hispanic

69% White

Gender What is your gender 84% Female

15% Male

Public Water Supply Where does your water come

from?

8% Surface Water

5% Ground Water

61% Aquifer

5% Well Water

19% Unsure

8

Tap Water Quality How would you rate the quality if

your tap water?

5% Very High Quality

34% High Quality

37% Neither High or Low

22% Low Quality

0% Very Low Quality

Tap Water Quality Has your tap water ever been

discolored or smelly?

16% smelly

16% discolored

75% neither

San Antonio’s water is provided by a

groundwater aquifer system, the Edwards Aquifer.

This artesian aquifer has been the sole source for the

region’s water needs for over 200 years. However,

some of the informants were unsure of where their

water comes from. Over 55% of all respondents

reported that they use tap water as their primary source for drinking water, while 41% of the

respondents said they rely on bottled water for drinking. Most of the respondents who drank

bottled water, did so because they preferred the taste. Very few of the informants cited health

reasons as why they drank bottled water, however one resident reported she drank bottled water

because her doctor said the minerals in tap water are harmful for arthritis. Some of the

informants did not drink bottled water as they considered tap water the more eco-friendly choice.

One informant reported she did not drink bottled water because the “privatization of water is

disturbing and criminal.” Most informants preferred tap water as their primary source because it

was free. Convenience and taste were the primary reasons respondents choose bottled water over

tap water. Despite academic literature demonstrating a causal relationship between

contamination related health risk and the consumption of bottled water, none of the informants in

9

this case study reported contamination fears as a reason they choose to drink bottled water. When

asked if the recent reports on drinking water contamination had affected their drinking habits,

66% reported they had not made changes. However, 12% (n=4) had been concerned enough to

change their drinking habits.

Most of the respondents did express concern about the present and future quality and

quantity of the region’s drinking water. Respondents were asked to identify what problems will

be a problem for drinking water in San Antonio within the next decade. Pollution (70%) and

population growth (73%) were the top ranking concerns. Water quality in the various local

watersheds was a concern for 55% of the

informants. Other responses included flooding

(44%), water scarcity (58%), and climate change

(47%). Respondents were also aware of current

threats such as the presence of oil refineries along

portions of the San Antonio River. An

overwhelming majority (88%) said the city

planners need to develop alternative water

sources.

Respondents were also asked a series of questions related to current water management

disasters many American cities are facing. They were first asked their familiarity on which

disasters they recognized. Next, they were shown two images from those areas and asked (1)

how it makes them feel about who is responsible for water and (2) how does the image make

them feel about water quality. Finally, they were asked why some areas are more prone to

10

drinking water pollution than other areas. Respondents frequently reported racism and

infrastructure as the primary factors in drinking water pollution.

These findings show that while there is not a negative association between tap water and

drinking water quality, it does indicate the public is aware of how infrastructure and

environmental racism are determinants in water quality. The respondents also recognize the

precariousness of the Edwards Aquifer watershed and the need to develop alternative water

systems to minimize present and future risk to water availability. Other informants mentioned the

monopoly on water management should be broken up into smaller groups. However, others said

there should be more of a regional control to allow for better management practices across the

area. Currently, San Antonio’s water system is managed by the San Antonio Water System, the

Edwards Aquifer Authority, the San Antonio River Authority, and several of the small

municipalities in and around San Antonio have their own water system.

CONCLUSION

Safe water is essential for human health and life. Access to clean drinking water is one

the central concerns of consumers. This study indicates individuals are aware of perceived and

actual threats to their water supply and are aware bottled water is an alternative to public water

systems. Individuals are also aware of the threats posed to the public water system by toxic

exposure and crumbling infrastructure. All of the individuals surveyed were able to identify at

least two examples of drinking water pollution and draw parallels between those sites and

structural causes. However, this study did not identify a relationship between the likelihood of

increased bottled water consumption and the threat of risk. Most informants believed their water

source was a quality water source, but were concerned about the aquifer’s long term

sustainability.

11

This exploratory research project contributes to the role of applied anthropology can

serve in how the public is engaged in understanding the relationship of water quality and the

capacity of the local water system to maintain safe and sustainable standards. Consumer distrust

of ground and surface water quality should be a concern of public health officials and

government leaders. This project reflects and advances current thoughts on the role of

environmental justice and infrastructural violence as a both a theoretical method and guide for

informing change in disproportionate water access. Recognizing structural inequalities as part of

the positionality and place of subjects in relation to their environment further supports the

applied anthropology tradition of investigating human-infrastructure relationships. The data

collected in this survey would serve anthropologists working with NGOs and governmental

organizations on water quality and local pollution sources. It would also inform anthropologists

who work with public policy and planning on how to correct infrastructural problems as well to

create environmentally friendly waterscapes.

Works CitedBrody, Samuel D, Wes Highfield, and B. Mitchell Peck. 2005. "Exploring the mosaic of

perceptions for water quality across watersheds in San Antonio, Texas." Landscape and Urban Planning 73: 200-214.

Brown, Phil. 2007. Toxic Exposures: Contested Illness and the Environmental Health Movement. New York: Columbia University Press.

Butts, Rachel, and Stephen Gasteyer. 2011. "More Cost per Drop: Water Rates, Structural Inequality, and Race in the United States—The Case of Michigan." Environmental Practice 13 (4): 386-395.

Hanna-Attisha, Mona, Jenny LaChance, Richard Casey Sadler, and Allison Champney-Schnepp. 2016. "Elevated Blood Lead Levels in Children Associated with the Flint Drinking Water Crisis: A Spatial Analyis of Risk and Public Health Response." AJPH Research 106 (2): 283-290.

Jackson, Steven. 2015. Repair. September 24. Accessed March 25, 2016. http://www.culanth.org/fieldsights/720-repair.

12

Lerner, Steve. 2010. Sacrifice Zones: The Front Lines of Toxic Chemical Exposure in the United States. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Marquez, Raquel, Louis Mendoza, and Steve Blanchard. 2007. "Main content area Neighborhood Formation on The West Side of San Antonio, Texas." Latino Studies 5: 288-316.

Massoud, M.A., R. Maroun, H. Abdelnabi, I.I. Jamali, and M. El-Fadel. 2012. "Public Perception and Economic Implications of Bottled Water Consumption in Underprivleged Urban Areas." Environ Monit Assess 185: 3093-3102.

Orlove, Ben, and Steven C Caton. 2010. "Water Sustainability: Anthropological Approaches and Prospects." Annual Review of Anthropology 401-415.

Porter, Jr, Charles R. 2009. Spanish Water, Anglo Water: Early Development in San Antonio. College Station: Texas A&M University Press.

Radonic, Lucero, and Sarah Kelly-Richards. 2015. "Pipes and Praxis: A Methodological Contribitution to the Urban Political Ecology of Water." Journal of Politcal Ecology 389-409.

Rivera, Jose A. 2003. "Restoring the Oldest Water Right in Texas: The Mission San Juan Acequia of San Antonio." The Southwestern Historical Quartlerly 106 (3): 366-395.

Sanburn, Josh. 2016. "The Toxic Trap." Time Magazine, February 1: 32-39.

Saylor, Amber, Linda Stalker Prokopy, and Shannon Amberg. 2011. "What's Wrong with the Tap? Examining Perceptions of Tap and Bottled Water at Purdue University." Enviornmental Management 48: 588-601.

Strang, Veronica. 2004. The Meaning of Water. Oxford: Berg Publishers.

van Erp, Brianna, Whitney L. Webber, Pamela Stoddard, Roshni Shah, Lori Martin, Bonnie Broderick, and Marta Induni. 2014. "Demographic Factors Associated with Perceptions About Water Safety and Tap Water Consumption Among Adults in Santa Clara County, California, 2011n Santa Clara ." Preventing Chronic Disease (Centers fo Disease Control and Prevention) 11.

VanDerslice, James. 2011. "Drinking Warer Infrastructure and Environmental Disparities: Evidence and Methodological Considerations." American Journal of Public Health, Supplement 1 101 (S1): S109-S114.

Whiteford, Linda, and Scott Whiteford. 2005. Globalization, Water, and Health: Resource Management in Times of Scarcity. Santa Fe: School for Advanced Research.

Zelman, Donald L. 1983. "Alazan-Apache Courts: A New Deal Response to Mexican American Housing Cinditions in San Antonio." The Southwestern Historical Quarterly 87 (2): 123-150.

13

14