Abstract
Abstract
Over the past three decades, much progress has been made in providing water and sewer service to many colonias in the U.S./Mexico border region. However, 134,419 people living in 604 colonias in the border region do not have access to public water systems and/or sewer services. Most of the remaining communities who lack water and sanitation service are relatively small, remote, and isolated, which makes providing services very expensive or perhaps even impossible. We present here two case studies that are representative of these smaller communities, still lacking in water and/or sewer services and are challenged to realize the 2030 Agenda goal of “availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.” The two case studies are water insecure communities that are predominantly Hispanic and impoverished, one that is reliant on hauled water for household use (Las Pampas), and the other that is reliant on old, failing septic tanks for sanitation (Bejar Estates). Our objective in the case studies was to assess the public health and quality-of-life impacts of water insecurity as indicators of environmental injustice. We argue that though water and sanitation infrastructure is a significant contributor to addressing inequities in the border region, much remains to be done to achieve water justice in this challenging region. The “soft path to water” might be the water policy that can address the water injustice remaining in the U.S./Mexico border region.
Introduction
T
Communities/Population Not Served by Public Water Systems and/or Wastewater Treatment Facilities Relative to the Total
There are several reports in the literature that predict impacts of water and sanitation infrastructure with respect to improvements in health outcomes, economic conditions at both the household and community level, and/or quality of life.3,4,5,6,7 There are much fewer published assessments of impacts after actual installation of water and sanitation infrastructure. 8 Results from these studies show that health conditions can improve as a result of water and sanitation infrastructure, especially related to illnesses such as hepatitis A and a variety of gastrointestinal illnesses. In addition, a number of other economic and community development benefits from water and sanitation infrastructure were identified, including increased property values, more businesses, residential development, improved recreation opportunities, and improved fire safety as a result of the installation of fire hydrants.
For communities of a few thousand residents or more, the costs of providing service, often >$20 million for connection to traditional systems of water treatment and distribution or waste collection and treatment, are feasible through a combination of government grants and/or loans. The challenge is that now, most of the remaining communities who lack water and sanitation service are relatively small, remote, and isolated, which makes providing services very expensive on a per capita basis or perhaps even impossible. Goal 6 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is: “Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all,” not just “the majority.” Colonias in Texas and most of the border region are far from meeting this goal (Table 1).
We present here two case studies that are representative of these smaller communities, still lacking in water and/or sewer services, and challenged to realize the 2030 Agenda goal of “availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.” The two case studies are water insecure communities that are predominantly Hispanic and impoverished, one that is reliant on hauled water for household use (Las Pampas), and the other that is reliant on old, failing septic tanks for sanitation (Bejar Estates). Our objective in these case studies was to assess the public health and quality-of-life impacts of water insecurity as indicators of environmental injustice. We used standard health impact assessment methodologies in the case studies, 9 the same as those employed by Hargrove et al. 10 As part of the assessment, we conducted key informant interviews, a household survey, and focus groups, collecting information and perspectives from residents themselves regarding household demographics, health, economic conditions, and quality of life. All protocols were approved by the Institutional Review Board for Human Subjects Research at the University of Texas at El Paso (No. 637598-7). All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before they participated in interviews, focus groups, or surveys.
The contribution of this work is that it adds to the knowledge of water insecurity in small, isolated, remote communities in the U.S./Mexico border region, where donor agencies feel that they have made much progress in providing water and sanitation services for the majority of the population but do not have the resources nor a strategy for addressing the remaining population who are water insecure. Thus, conditions of environmental injustice continue to prevail in spite of much progress over the past 30 years.
Results
Case study descriptions
Las Pampas
Las Pampas is a small community (12 households and 4 businesses) located outside the town of Presidio, Texas, ∼250 miles southeast of El Paso on the U.S./Mexico border. Residents haul water from the city of Presidio in portable hauling tanks. The source water is from the municipal water supply in Presidio. The residents are predominantly Hispanic (67%), a relatively older population who are mostly retired (median age 68 years), living on a low fixed income (89% of households with an annual income of <$15,000/year), and/or suffer from chronic health conditions such as asthma, diabetes, hypertension, and others. We found only one household with children, a family who owned and operated a trucking business. There are three other businesses in the study area including trucking businesses, an automobile body and repair shop, and a small airport, all of which also rely on hauled water with the exception of one business that has its own well. Las Pampas is listed as 1 of 25 colonias in Texas with the greatest need in terms of water and sanitation. 11
We administered a 64-question survey that focused on water use, management, health, economics, and sanitation. We surveyed only adults in each household. We obtained ten household and five business surveys. The ten household surveys included eight residences that were permanently occupied at the time and two that did not reside on the property full time.
Only two residents out of the ten interviewed actually drank the hauled water; all others preferred drinking bottled water. Residents hauled water, on average, two times per week for most of the year, but in the summer, up to three times per week. Several residents had gardens, livestock, trees, and other landscaping that require additional water for outdoor use. The businesses hauled water, on average, one time per month.
The most common health impacts reported by survey respondents were related to stress associated with the fear of running out of water and the risk of accidents associated with hauling water. Several residents reported injuries from accidents such as falling off the hauling tank while filling. One resident had a traffic incident when the tank filled with water that he was hauling fell off the trailer and onto the highway. No illnesses associated with contaminated water were reported by respondents.
The costs of water to residents and businesses who rely on hauled water are significant. Because there is no meter at the Presidio filling point, the city charges $20/month to residents and businesses who obtain water at their filling point, regardless of the volume that they use. Thus, residents spend $20/month on municipal water from the city (hauled) and about the same for bottled water for a total direct cost of about $40/month per household. We estimated the indirect costs of hauling water using the distance hauled and an average cost of $0.51/mile (the state mileage reimbursement rate in Texas). This added, on the average, $30.81/month to the cost of water for residents. Thus, the total average cost per month for residents was $70.47/month and for businesses it was $46.04/month. For households whose total income is <$15,000/year (89% of the households), this is a very significant monthly cost. By comparison, the average water bill for residents of Presidio was $17/month in 2012 (Border Environment Cooperation Commission), and it was estimated to be not >$20/month now. This difference highlights the water justice inequities for rural residents lacking piped potable water. Ninety percent of residents were willing to pay the cost of monthly water bills if connected to the Presidio water supply and even the cost of household connection if the main water line was not too far from their home.
In general, the residents were very disheartened by the lack of piped water. Piped water was promised to the residents within 5 years of the purchase of their property by the sellers. However, 10–15 years have passed and still there are no signs of piped water connections. The quotes given next, gathered during the survey and the focus group, effectively convey the frustration and sense of hopelessness felt by most residents, part of the “water affect” component of water insecurity, 12 and highlight again the water injustice issues associated with colonia residents who are primarily Hispanic and have low incomes.
There is no future. Death is the future. We are going to die waiting for water to come. Water is life. There is sadness, people lose hope, and people get tired…from hauling water.
When I haul water, I come praying to all the saints possible to avoid an accident and that I arrive safely.
…taxes are increasing anyway, at least bring water.
There is too much work involved…most of us are old.
…when we bought property here, we were told water is coming, only 5 years. That was 15 years ago.
Bejar Estates
Bejar Estates is a neighborhood comprising ∼62 occupied households, mostly 20–30 years old, located within the town of Socorro in El Paso County, Texas. About 15 years ago, the neighborhoods surrounding Bejar Estates were connected to water and sewer, and Bejar Estates was connected to water but not sewer (for a reason unknown). The septic tanks in the neighborhood are mostly >20 years old and are beginning to fail. We conducted a door-to-door survey, using a survey instrument focused on sanitation and the impacts related to lack of sanitary sewer service. We obtained a total of 35 completed surveys (34 residences and 1 business), or 54% of the total number possible (62 households in the neighborhood).
The median age of respondents was 57, and the median number of years in the residence was 25 years. This is an indicator that residents are older and have lived in their homes for a significant period. The majority of the residents were in the low-income group (40% with a household income ≤$20,000/year and another 17% in the range of $21,000–$30,000/year).
All survey respondents depended on septic tanks for sanitation. The mean age of septic tanks was 26 years; the median was 27 years. The history of pumping septic tanks varied widely. Nine respondents pumped their septic tanks multiple times per year, from one to four times annually. This would indicate either failing drainfields, or that the tank cannot meet the capacity of the household, or both. Another 10 respondents said that they pumped their septic tanks every 2–5 years. And finally, 11 respondents said that they had never pumped their tanks. Five respondents had no knowledge of whether their tanks had been pumped or not. The life expectancy of a drainfield varies widely by installation type (conventional soil absorption system versus a sand bed filter, e.g.), soil conditions (clay or rock or sand), and, importantly, the frequency of maintenance and cleaning performed on the septic system. Most drainfields if properly installed and if the tanks are properly maintained should have a life of ∼20 years. After that time, they can fail at any point. Certainly the majority of septic tanks in Bejar Estates are older than 20 years and subject to a high rate of failure.
Through our own observations and the survey respondents' comments, we found a number of indications of failing septic tanks. Thirty of the 35 respondents (86%) said that they had observed a wet area or free-standing water near their septic tank or in the drainfield. Several complained of smelling sewage in the area of their drainfield. Several respondents said that they often smelled their septic tank inside the house through their drain lines. Respondents told us that they were worried about drainfield failure and of not being “up to code.” One person said that they were cited by the city of Socorro for having tall weeds growing in their yard in the drainfield. This individual also complained of mosquitoes stemming from free water standing in the drainfield. Several residents water their yards by flood irrigation from the irrigation canal.
This adds to septic tank problems because they pond water on top of the septic tank, which contributes to filling it and making it drain more than normal. This could also account for some of the residents having to pump their tanks multiple times per year.
Self-reported health conditions from survey respondents are presented in Table 2. Forty-five percent of respondents reported frequent gastrointestinal illnesses or bleeding ulcers (which can be caused by Helicobacter pylori). There was one report of hepatitis A and one of West Nile virus. Though causation of these illnesses cannot be certain without more detailed study, certainly they can be associated with poor sanitation. 13 We also compared these results with results from the same survey conducted in Socorro for 100 households where sewer service had been provided for at least 10 years. In that case, only 3.0% of respondents reported frequent stomach-intestinal ailments.
Self-Reported Health Conditions from Bejar Estates Survey Compared with Socorro
Results from a survey of 100 households in Socorro who had sewer service for at least 10 years.
Discussion
Colonias lacking access to potable water and sanitary sewer systems: characterization
There is no general agreement about how to define and measure “water security.” 14 To frame our discussion here, we use the broad definition used by Jepson: “…water security is broadly understood as adequate, reliable, and affordable water for a healthy life.” 15 We expand this definition to link to and include sanitation as well, meaning adequate, reliable, and affordable sanitation as a component of household water security. Further, household water security comprises three dimensions: (1) water access; (2) water quality; and (3) water affect, the emotional, cultural, and subjective experiences of water. 15
Considering this framework and our previous experience in colonias on the border, we apply the term water insecurity to conditions in colonias where there are: (1) inadequate supplies of good quality water to meet the needs of the household, including direct consumption, other indoor household uses, and also the landscaping, gardening, and animal production needs; and/or (2) inadequate sanitation. These conditions are common in households that: (1) do not have piped water and rely on hauled or purchased bottled water; (2) have piped water from domestic wells or other sources of less than adequate quality; and/or (3) have no or non-functioning septic tanks. These conditions are still prevalent in many small colonias in the border region that are also predominantly Hispanic and of low household income. Thus, water insecurity is also a water justice issue. According to Vanderwarker, 16 “water justice demands that all communities be able to access and manage water for beneficial uses, including drinking, waste removal, cultural and spiritual practices, reliance on the wildlife it sustains, and enjoyment for recreational purposes.” The U.S./Mexico border region falls far short of meeting the expectation of access to safe, clean drinking water and wastewater services as a basic human right for all.
Colonias lacking access to potable water and sanitary sewer systems: health impacts
One of the chief indicators of public health impacts from poor sanitation and contaminated water sources is the incidence of water and wastewater-related illnesses, which have been a historical problem in the U.S./Mexico border area. In our sanitation survey, we found several incidences of gastrointestinal illness, stomach bleeding, and one case of hepatitis A. There has been a substantial decrease in the incidence of such illnesses after water and sanitation infrastructure has been installed. In addition, providing piped water will improve health related to stress, risk of accidents, and worker safety at businesses.
Household level economic impacts of water and sanitation infrastructure
The impact of providing piped water to households and businesses could have both positive and negative consequences for disposable income for households or profits/assets for businesses. Positive consequences include the increase of property values resulting from access to piped water. Our experience in other parts of El Paso County show that property values go up by ∼20% within 5 years after a community gets water and sewer service for the first time. 17
Negative consequences of water infrastructure for households include: (1) the upfront cost of a meter; (2) the cost of connecting the house to the mainline at the street/road; (3) the monthly cost of water if the prior source was a domestic well and water was essentially free; and (4) the potential for higher property taxes due to the increased property values. However, most residents that we encountered through our surveys are willing to pay these costs, especially if they depend on hauled water. There are costs also associated with no change. For example, the costs associated with hauling water are higher than the costs of paying for piped water. One of the residents of Bejar Estates provided the following quote that addresses this inequity: “Vivimos pobres, pero pagamos como ricos” (“We live poor, but we pay like the rich”).
Community development impacts of water and sanitation infrastructure
For communities such as Las Pampas, or other colonias that lack access to water and sanitation, water and sanitation infrastructure can play a very significant role in economic development. Las Pampas is located on a major highway and hosts other infrastructure such as an airport that can help spur growth. Water and sanitation infrastructure make an area more desirable for residential development as well, since they improve overall quality of life, highway safety, and fire safety. We also found that complaints of residents regarding odors and other septic drainfield-related nuisances have been reduced where sewer service has been provided; whereas in neighborhoods without sewer service, such as Bejar Estates, these complaints have continued and even grown as the septic tank drainfields age beyond 20 years.
Conclusions
Water justice and continuing needs
The majority of remaining communities in the border region who face water insecurity are predominantly Hispanic (90%–100%), small in population (average population of 222 people per colonia), remote and isolated (far from urban centers), and low income (majority of household incomes <$20,000/year and many <$10,000/year). Although much progress has been made in El Paso County and the U.S./Mexico border region in terms of providing water and sanitation infrastructure to residents, much remains to be done. For example, ∼75% of the population in El Paso County who lacked water and sewer service in 1985 now have water and sewer service, but ∼16,000 people still lack piped water and about twice that many, 32,000, lack sewer service. Across the entire border region, 134,419 people living in 604 colonias still do not have access to a public water system and/or sewer system.
The “soft path to water,” described and discussed by Christian-Smith and Gleick, 18 might be the water policy that can address the water injustice remaining in the U.S./Mexico border region. The soft path to water is an alternative to the traditional “hard” engineered system of centralized treatment and distribution for water and collection and centralized treatment of waste for sanitation. It relies on both alternative supplies such as capturing and use of more rainfall that occurs locally and point-of-use treatment; and altering demand through conservation measures and reduced use technologies. Most donors and lenders do not yet include these approaches in their funding portfolio, resulting in what Jepson calls the “no-win waterscape.” 19 To meet the Sustainability Goals in the twenty-first century, we will have to more fully develop and consider how to support through public funds this soft path to water, which might be the alternative to the no-win waterscape, especially in small, remote, and isolated communities in the U.S./Mexico border region.
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by a grant from the Health Impact Project, a collaboration of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and The Pew Charitable Trusts. Partial funding was provided by BECC through a cooperative agreement with UTEP (BECC funds were from a grant by Border 2012/2020 Binational Environmental Program, USEPA). The authors gratefully acknowledge the advice, support, and constructive criticism of the Health Impact Project Officer, Arielle Simoncelli, and the Technical Consultant, Jonathan Heller, from Human Impact Partners. They also acknowledge the hard work, commitment, and dedication of the UTEP staff and students who worked on the project, including: Mario Chavez, Jesus Placencia, Gustavo Puiatti, Amit Raysoni, Marlene Flores, and Mayra Ruiz.
Disclaimer
The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation or The Pew Charitable Trusts.
Author Disclosure Statement
No competing financial interests exist.