Lecture 1: Introduction to global water challenges. Zafar Adeel, UNU-INWEH

To say the least, I felt incredibly satisfied with the introductory lecture on the current challenges to water in terms of their social impact and their more ecological aspects. It was established that the area this topic filters into does not simply involve water, but extends its tentacles to sanitation and health, climate change, the economy, politics, human rights, international organizations, private vs. public debates etc. The provided figures were astounding.

The gravity of these statistical figures is no longer understood or interpreted correctly by individuals and as a group we sought to identify ways to challenge and change that.  Nowadays, people seem to interpret '3.5 million people dying every year from lack of water and sanitation’ as too large a number to empathize with. Perhaps they may even rationalize that 'people are dying everyday- from wars and diseases; water diseases are just another cause’. This lack of empathy is very problematic. It seems people’s interest is gradually decreasing, as they are not in direct contact with the “suffering". Individuals living comfortable lifestyles in a developed country that either has enough water resources or has enough finances to resolve the problem- i.e Canada, cannot immediately comprehend the extent to which others are suffering. 

My response to HOW we can change people’s reactions was through suggesting an emphasis on the relativity of these figures. One example could be stating: '3.5 million die every year from lack of water and sanitation’ OUT OF the 7 billion people living on earth. Other responses suggested breaking down the numbers to per second, or per local regional figures, so they are more tangible. 

Further, we discussed how to foster awareness among decision-makers, comprising mostly of policy-makers and economists. It was brought up that an effective way has been translating human figures into monetary figures. An attempt at trying to tie the link between the impact of the lack of access to water and human suffering on economic growth. Therefore, it entails pointing out how a country could be losing human capital, and consequently hampering economic growth, if water and health issues are not prioritized.  

This particular argument is very controversial. I personally have reservation with converting human life that was already turned into statistical numbers, further into monetary figures (a loss or a gain).  It seems as though to solve the problem facing those who are left without access to water, one can only further rid them of their dignity as individuals and, perhaps unintentionally, collaborate in a process of dehumanize them, by correlating their stats into monetary figures. This is clear indication of where our head is at in our current system. Are we using a wrong to correct a wrong?  This greater interest in profit than in human life only reminds me of why we are in the crisis of having to resolve water, food, health, security and environmental issues in the first place.