Contested Waters: Rituals of Resistance and Water Activism

Abstract

The discussion in the previous chapters has shown how water is deeply embedded in the practice of everyday urban life, and how the uneven power over its control and the oppression caused by its absence result in it being highly contested terrain. A wide spectrum of social conflicts and struggles consequently unfold over the appropriation of and access to ‘metabolized’ urban water; struggles that are embedded in and embody social, political, and economic power relations. Put simply, the transformation of nature and the urbanization of nature’s water express the political economic and socio-ecological power relations that shape the urbanization process itself. The urban hydrosocial cycle is indeed infused with a myriad of social tensions and is contested terrain at each moment of its flow. We shall consider not only the strategies of the weak and the weapons they deploy, but also the tactics of the water vendors. Their control over water enables them to mobilize a range of tactics to maintain if not expand their hold over water and the appropriation of water rents. This chapter will explore these multifaceted dimensions of the social struggles around water and their political, economic and social significance. The most striking, if least powerful, actions are those waged by urban communities to gain or improve access to water. From the position of those facing oppressive mechanisms of water supply, four strategies have been identified (see, among others, Espinoza and Oliden 1988): passive acceptance, individual resistance, self-help, and social protest/mobilization. Notwithstanding the immense problems associated with problematic access to water, acceptance of the exclusive and/or exploitative status quo is very often the most common behaviour, resulting in the absence of collective action. Cotic and Dascal (1987) suggest that the nature of an eventual possible, but essentially private solution (i.e. domestic connection to a comprehensive networked system), results in passive acceptance as a particular form of response. While the demand for the provision of roads, schools, health services, or public transport is often subject to collective action and struggle,water (and waste disposal (Olaya 1991) ) has rarely resulted in popular and collective revolts.