This month, water once again takes center stage at the 4th World Water Forum in Mexico City. It is an opportune moment: While much of the world's attention has been fixed on issues of energy supply and security, hundreds of millions of people in the developing world continue to see the supply and security of fresh water as equally, if not more, important.
Surveys undertaken by the World Bank in developing countries show that when poor people are asked to name the three most important concerns they face, "good health" is always mentioned. And a key determinant of whether they will have good health or not is access to clean water.
More than a billion people around the world today do not. As a result, they are increasingly vulnerable to poor health. The World Bank estimates that by 2035, as many as 3 billion people, almost all of them in developing countries, could live under conditions of severe water stress, especially if they happen to live in Africa, the Middle East or South Asia. This will cause obvious hardship, but it will also hold back the economic growth needed for millions of people to escape poverty.
In Latin America, about 15 percent of the population -- roughly 76 million people -- do not have access to safe water, and 116 million people do not have access to sanitation services. The figures are worse in Africa and parts of Asia.
This is a situation that few people in rich countries face. Generally, these countries' citizens enjoy services that provide for all water needs, from drinking to irrigation to sanitation. In addition, other water-related issues, such as the risks posed by flooding, have been reduced to manageable levels.
Rich nations have invested early and heavily in water infrastructure, institutions and management capacities. The result, beyond the health benefits for all, has been a proven record of economic growth; one only has to look at investment in hydropower to see the positive impact of water management projects on many economies.
Granted, rich countries have a certain advantage: They benefit from generally moderate climates, with regular rainfall and relatively low risks of drought and flooding. Even so, they are not immune to water-related disasters, as Hurricane Katrina's destruction of New Orleans taught us.
But the impact of such events on poor countries is much greater. Extreme rainfall variations, floods and droughts can have huge social and economic effects and result in the large-scale loss of life. The Gulf coast of Mexico and Central American countries have repeatedly experienced such tragedies, with poor communities the most vulnerable and the least able to cope.
Ethiopia and Yemen are equally stark examples. Ethiopia's development potential is closely tied to seasonal rains, so high rainfall variation, together with a lack of infrastructure, has undermined growth and perpetuated poverty. A single drought can cut growth potential by 10 percent over an extended period. Yemen, for its part, has no perennial surface water; its citizens depend entirely on rainfall, groundwater, and flash flooding.
To move forward, developing countries need new water infrastructure and better management. Any approach must be tailored to the circumstances of each country and the needs of its people, but there is no fundamental constraint to designing water development investments that ensure that local communities and the environment gain tangible and early benefits.
In some countries, new water infrastructure may mean canals, pumping stations and levees. Other nations might need deeper reservoirs, more modern filtration plants or improved water transport schemes. These can all potentially be designed to improve and expand water supplies for power generation, irrigation, and household and industrial use, while providing security against droughts and protection from floods.
The key to successfully increasing investment in water infrastructure is an equal increase of investment in water institutions. Badly managed infrastructure will do little to improve peoples' health or support economic growth, so water development and water management must go hand in hand. Water infrastructure can and must be developed in parallel with sound institutions, good governance, attention to the environment and an equitable sharing of costs and benefits.
A water investment policy that reduces the vulnerability of the poor and offers basic water security for all will require customized planning and an effective partnership of donor countries, developing country governments, the private sector and local communities.
Delegates to the World Water Forum will have ample opportunity to forge and/or strengthen these partnerships. If they succeed, the rewards for the world's poor will be immense.
Katherine Sierra is vice president for infrastructure at the World Bank.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS