It's that time of the week again where I'm sharing my values, visions, and possible interventions for this week's ENVR 430 topic: Water - in collaboration with the @CoSphere initiative.
I don't even think I realize how much I value water. Whether I'm using water as a physical resources, marveling at the life it hosts, or simply reveling in it's beauty - I don't think I can quite quantify what it means to me.
This makes for quite a challenge in conservation, how do we assign value to infinity? In thinking that water benefits everyone and everything, but not everyone or everything can contribute equally to its conservation, I present two possible solutions: Philanthropic Leadership and Required Relative Contributions. The first being a voluntary solution (less controversial, but perhaps less effective) and the second a government requirement (perhaps controversial, but more guaranteed.
💧Philanthropic Leadership could be from individuals, corporations, or governments with the managerial or economic means to implement and maintain water infrastructure. This answer not only benefits the contributor, but also fulfills the Leader in knowing that their efforts will greatly benefit countless externalities.
💧Relative Economic Contributions, on the other hand, could exist similarly to tax brackets, in that individuals who make more money contribute more to the economic means required to implement and maintain water infrastructures. However, this answer would require government oversight to manage said funds, as well as to implement a water tax-type policy.
My personal vision for water is that we as a species and a planet can without hesitation, continue to receive all the magnificent benefits that water currently provides, and hopefully the ideas presented provide some food for thought for others to #UnLeashValues related to the wonderful substance of water.
Awesome post Megan! I really like what you said about relative economic contributions and philanthropic leadership to achieve water conservation.
Great post Megan! Your comparison between philanthropy and government projects is interesting, and I agree that the latter seems more effective. After all, water seems like a public service that should be guaranteed by our public representatives. Relative Economic Contributions essentially sounds like how we gain access to water now, in that property and income tax is bracketed by income, and our tax dollars are what currently fund our water infrastructure. So perhaps (in wealthy states, i.e. the global North) our existing taxes just need to be higher and funding priorities more centred on access to drinking water?
I really like what you said about how individuals who make more money could contribute more financially and that you identified the government management aspect to management and implementation. This is a very real constraint that can often make useful policies not work the way they were intended to, especially when you also start factoring in things like corruption. Definitely agree that it's a great strategy to try!
Megan, I agree that this is a really challenging topic since water holds so much value, but we do not always appreciate it. I think the plans you present in your post would be effective!