Anneli Xie
Prof. Susan Ellison
ANTH 231: Anthropology In/Of the City
2020/05/05
Prof. Susan Ellison
ANTH 231: Anthropology In/Of the City
2020/05/05
Water Crisis: Hydraulic Politics and Urban Citizenship in Mumbai
With a population of 1.3 billion, 99
million people in India lack access to safe water. (Water 2020) Discussed in recent years as a “water crisis,” 21 major cities are predicted to
run out of groundwater by this year, 2020. (Yeung 2019) With
more than 50% of the world population seeking to reside within cities to
partake in the gains of urbanization, the right to urban citizenship has become
a highly contested issue; and in the city of Mumbai, it lingers in the
spotlight. Entangled in the midst of it all is water. Fundamental for human
survival and democratic society, access to water is one of the most elemental
pieces of infrastructure in a city. Additionally, in India, the status of water
becomes elevated due to cultural and religious reasons; as explained by
anthropologist Arjun Appadurai in the documentary Liquid City, water is
seen not only as need-filling for the human body, in terms of thirst and
survival, but also as cleansing and purifying for the soul. (Gandy 2007) One could thus imagine access
to clean water as deemed imperative – perhaps especially in India – and that cities
would prioritize their water infrastructure. Yet, for the city of Mumbai, these
utopian longings of well-functioning infrastructure have failed in the context
of the urban poor and the rise of the slum. Defined
by the United Nations as “informal settlements,” slums form where formal
infrastructure fails; and engrained in their definition is that they “lack one
or more of […] access to clean water, access to improved sanitation, sufficient
living area that is not overcrowded, durable housing, and secure tenure.” (UN-Habitat 2006, 1) Contradictory then, the condition for slum classification is lacking many of
the resources a city ought to provide – yet slums are an urban phenomenon that
exist only within a city’s limits. A
closer look at the nature of slums provides a partial answer to this by
revealing a limited access of citizenship to slum dwellers; if these are not
considered part of the city, it makes sense that they would not maintain the
right to access resources. This essay will attempt to
disentangle how urban citizenship is formed and maintained in Mumbai by looking
at Nikhil Anand’s essay “PRESSURE: The PoliTechnics of Water Supply in Mumbai,”
in which Anand explores the water infrastructure of informal settlements in the
city to discuss the emergence of “hydraulic citizenship,” showcasing that
certain marginalized groups become excluded from water services – one of
the key infrastructural elements of a city. I will argue that the water crisis
is not about water, but rather about how water is distributed, directed, and
expected. As Anand puts it, “water has never been in crisis, it is how water
ought to flow that is in crisis.” (Anand 2020)
Every day, the municipal corporation brings in 3 billion liters of water to Mumbai from three rivers in the town of Shahapur. As the water starts moving towards Mumbai, however, Shahapur, a more rural town located 100 km outside of the megacity, is left dry. (Gandy 2007) Already here, at the beginning of water’s journey into Mumbai, it is politicized. By re-directing water from Shahapur itself, the municipal corporation (BMC) is prioritizing some citizens over others; providing water to residents in Mumbai will detract water from residents of Shahapur. Not only is this a huge concern to Shahapur residents, as around 150 areas are left without water each day, (Dutta 2016) but the direction of water will also force people into Mumbai in order to survive, making the city even more crowded than it already is. Comparing the treatment of Shahapur and Mumbai, it is suggested that the BMC prioritizes the urban over the rural, and that this becomes defining in delegating resources to citizens.
Well in Mumbai, too, water takes another politicized turn. As Anand sheds light on in his essay, Premnagar and Meghwadi, two settlements in the city that lie only meters apart, get access to water on a completely different basis. Whereas Meghwadi, populated primarily by Marathi Hindus, gets water with good pressure for a few hours a day, the water in Premnagar, populated primarily by muslims, is highly unreliable, both in terms of duration and water pressure. (Anand 2011, 554) Here, it seems different religions are prioritized, as showcased by access to water. Not only is access to water enough, but for most slum dwellers in Mumbai, water comes only at certain times of the day. In areas in which water supply is unreliable, such as Meghwadi, water can be expected to come only after adults have left the area to go to work. The task of collecting water for the day is then delegated to children, who thus cannot go to school and get an education, (Gandy 2007) raising an array of other issues and showcasing just how much of a difference it would make if a change was made by the authorities, solving a seemingly small issue such as the timing of water. Moreover, as explained by educationist Nirupa Bhangar, the poorer the area, the more likely it is that water is contaminated, as poorer areas are historically underserved and are thus at risk of having overhead tanks or water pipes that haven’t been cleaned for several years. (Gandy 2007)
Instead, to get access to this elemental structure for survival, residents of informal settlements have to navigate a complex political arithmetic through constant negotiation with authorities. Since slum dwellers still maintain the political right to vote, many officials will work to please their large population in order to maximize political support – one of the ways in which slum dwellers can apply political pressure to get access to water. These processes occur not on a basis of shared understanding of legality, but rather as a staged theatrical affair of informal relationships under Partha Chatterjee’s distinction of a political society. In this game-like transaction, documents and paper trails are appropriated to be legalities, and the definitions of legality and illegality are constantly being reproduced.(Anand 2011, 558) An important example of this is the case of water pipe connections in Shivajinagar-Bainganwadi, following the shift in narrative from slum improvement into that of slum rehabilitation. (Björkman 2014, 42) Shivajinagar-Bainganwadi is an interesting case as a connection to municipal water connections was established by local authorities but the neighborhood was later targeted by the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme (SRS) in 1995. The SRS and the liberalization-era policy shifts allowed for redeveloping slum neighborhoods by profiting off their demolition. All slum dwellers that could provide legal documentation of having been on the land prior to January 1, 1995 were eligible for the SRS rehabilitation.In the case of Shivajinagar-Bainganwadi, many residents of the land prior to 1995 did not hold photopasses, “the clearest and most secure form of documentation.” (Björkman 2014, 47) Instead, as the water department engaged in a “ritual cutting” of water pipes following a complaint of the slum, they asked homeowners to assemble documentation of the pipe’s authenticity via water bills and combine them with identity documents of the same name and address in order to claim a legal status. This re-enactment of rights by collecting paper trails of documentation in order to negotiate legal status has thus become another example of the ways in which the BMC appoints urban citizenship as hydraulic citizenships. As Anand argues, hydraulic citizenships can be reverted as soon as the political winds shift, (Anand 2011, 559) Shivajinagar-Bainganwadi being an excellent example of that.
Throughout essays on hydraulic infrastructure in Mumbai, citizenship is read as fundamentally tied to, what Anand calls, politechnical realities that appoint citizenship by providing access to fundamental pieces of infrastructure, such as water. (Anand 2011, 545) By looking at informal settlements such as Premnagar, Meghwadi, and Shivajinagar-Bainganwadi, it can be concluded that the temporality of (hydraulic) citizenship continues to put Mumbai residents in flux. As Arjun Appadurai eloquently puts it,
“it’s quite stunning […] neither are the technologies nor the sciences [to provide water to all residents] very mysterious. The only other missing piece would be the money to make the investment, [… but] we keep being told that we are at a better place now than ever. If so, how can we have so many hundreds and millions of people lacking access to water? It’s not the technology, it’s not the sciences, it’s not the money. Well, that leaves politics and culture, I suppose; and will and habit.” (Gandy 2007)
Anand, Nikhil. “60-Second Lecture: Water Crisis.” Lecture at University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, April 4, 2018. Accessed May 1, 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jduRQiEXYAI.
Anand, Nikhil. “PRESSURE: The PoliTechnics of Water Supply in Mumbai.” Cultural Anthropology26, no. 4 (November 2011): 542-564.
Björkman, Lisa. “Becoming a slum in liberalization-era Mumbai.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 38, no. 1 (January 2014): 36-59.
Dutta, Progyaa. “We cater to Mumbai, where is our share of water: Shahapur residents.” The Hindu, May 18, 2016. https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/mumbai/we-cater-to-mumbai-where-is-our-share-of-water-shahapur-residents/article8613893.ece.
Liquid City. Directed by Matthew Gandy. Mumbai: India, 2007. Streamed on Youtube.
UN-Habitat. State of the World’s Cities 2006/7. London: Earthscan, 2006.
Water. 2020 “India’s water and sanitation crisis.” Accessed May 1, 2020. https://water.org/our-impact/india/
Yeung, Jessie. “India has just five years to solve its water crisis, experts fear. Otherwise hundreds of millions of lives will be in danger.” CNN, July 4, 2019. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/27/india/india-water-crisis-intl-hnk/index.html.
Every day, the municipal corporation brings in 3 billion liters of water to Mumbai from three rivers in the town of Shahapur. As the water starts moving towards Mumbai, however, Shahapur, a more rural town located 100 km outside of the megacity, is left dry. (Gandy 2007) Already here, at the beginning of water’s journey into Mumbai, it is politicized. By re-directing water from Shahapur itself, the municipal corporation (BMC) is prioritizing some citizens over others; providing water to residents in Mumbai will detract water from residents of Shahapur. Not only is this a huge concern to Shahapur residents, as around 150 areas are left without water each day, (Dutta 2016) but the direction of water will also force people into Mumbai in order to survive, making the city even more crowded than it already is. Comparing the treatment of Shahapur and Mumbai, it is suggested that the BMC prioritizes the urban over the rural, and that this becomes defining in delegating resources to citizens.
Well in Mumbai, too, water takes another politicized turn. As Anand sheds light on in his essay, Premnagar and Meghwadi, two settlements in the city that lie only meters apart, get access to water on a completely different basis. Whereas Meghwadi, populated primarily by Marathi Hindus, gets water with good pressure for a few hours a day, the water in Premnagar, populated primarily by muslims, is highly unreliable, both in terms of duration and water pressure. (Anand 2011, 554) Here, it seems different religions are prioritized, as showcased by access to water. Not only is access to water enough, but for most slum dwellers in Mumbai, water comes only at certain times of the day. In areas in which water supply is unreliable, such as Meghwadi, water can be expected to come only after adults have left the area to go to work. The task of collecting water for the day is then delegated to children, who thus cannot go to school and get an education, (Gandy 2007) raising an array of other issues and showcasing just how much of a difference it would make if a change was made by the authorities, solving a seemingly small issue such as the timing of water. Moreover, as explained by educationist Nirupa Bhangar, the poorer the area, the more likely it is that water is contaminated, as poorer areas are historically underserved and are thus at risk of having overhead tanks or water pipes that haven’t been cleaned for several years. (Gandy 2007)
Instead, to get access to this elemental structure for survival, residents of informal settlements have to navigate a complex political arithmetic through constant negotiation with authorities. Since slum dwellers still maintain the political right to vote, many officials will work to please their large population in order to maximize political support – one of the ways in which slum dwellers can apply political pressure to get access to water. These processes occur not on a basis of shared understanding of legality, but rather as a staged theatrical affair of informal relationships under Partha Chatterjee’s distinction of a political society. In this game-like transaction, documents and paper trails are appropriated to be legalities, and the definitions of legality and illegality are constantly being reproduced.(Anand 2011, 558) An important example of this is the case of water pipe connections in Shivajinagar-Bainganwadi, following the shift in narrative from slum improvement into that of slum rehabilitation. (Björkman 2014, 42) Shivajinagar-Bainganwadi is an interesting case as a connection to municipal water connections was established by local authorities but the neighborhood was later targeted by the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme (SRS) in 1995. The SRS and the liberalization-era policy shifts allowed for redeveloping slum neighborhoods by profiting off their demolition. All slum dwellers that could provide legal documentation of having been on the land prior to January 1, 1995 were eligible for the SRS rehabilitation.In the case of Shivajinagar-Bainganwadi, many residents of the land prior to 1995 did not hold photopasses, “the clearest and most secure form of documentation.” (Björkman 2014, 47) Instead, as the water department engaged in a “ritual cutting” of water pipes following a complaint of the slum, they asked homeowners to assemble documentation of the pipe’s authenticity via water bills and combine them with identity documents of the same name and address in order to claim a legal status. This re-enactment of rights by collecting paper trails of documentation in order to negotiate legal status has thus become another example of the ways in which the BMC appoints urban citizenship as hydraulic citizenships. As Anand argues, hydraulic citizenships can be reverted as soon as the political winds shift, (Anand 2011, 559) Shivajinagar-Bainganwadi being an excellent example of that.
Throughout essays on hydraulic infrastructure in Mumbai, citizenship is read as fundamentally tied to, what Anand calls, politechnical realities that appoint citizenship by providing access to fundamental pieces of infrastructure, such as water. (Anand 2011, 545) By looking at informal settlements such as Premnagar, Meghwadi, and Shivajinagar-Bainganwadi, it can be concluded that the temporality of (hydraulic) citizenship continues to put Mumbai residents in flux. As Arjun Appadurai eloquently puts it,
“it’s quite stunning […] neither are the technologies nor the sciences [to provide water to all residents] very mysterious. The only other missing piece would be the money to make the investment, [… but] we keep being told that we are at a better place now than ever. If so, how can we have so many hundreds and millions of people lacking access to water? It’s not the technology, it’s not the sciences, it’s not the money. Well, that leaves politics and culture, I suppose; and will and habit.” (Gandy 2007)
References
Anand, Nikhil. “60-Second Lecture: Water Crisis.” Lecture at University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, April 4, 2018. Accessed May 1, 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jduRQiEXYAI.
Anand, Nikhil. “PRESSURE: The PoliTechnics of Water Supply in Mumbai.” Cultural Anthropology26, no. 4 (November 2011): 542-564.
Björkman, Lisa. “Becoming a slum in liberalization-era Mumbai.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 38, no. 1 (January 2014): 36-59.
Dutta, Progyaa. “We cater to Mumbai, where is our share of water: Shahapur residents.” The Hindu, May 18, 2016. https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/mumbai/we-cater-to-mumbai-where-is-our-share-of-water-shahapur-residents/article8613893.ece.
Liquid City. Directed by Matthew Gandy. Mumbai: India, 2007. Streamed on Youtube.
UN-Habitat. State of the World’s Cities 2006/7. London: Earthscan, 2006.
Water. 2020 “India’s water and sanitation crisis.” Accessed May 1, 2020. https://water.org/our-impact/india/
Yeung, Jessie. “India has just five years to solve its water crisis, experts fear. Otherwise hundreds of millions of lives will be in danger.” CNN, July 4, 2019. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/27/india/india-water-crisis-intl-hnk/index.html.