Rainwater harvesting : in Mexico City’s conservation area : implications for domestic water supply and ecological conservation in the context of Peri-Urban informality

(1)

Rainwater Harvesting

in Mexico City’s Conservation Area

Implications for Domestic Water Supply and Ecological Conservation in

the Context of Peri-Urban Informality

Master Thesis in International Development Studies

September 2016

Graduate School of Social Sciences

Supervisor: Francine van den Brandeler Luisa Hlawatsch (5995078) Second Reader: Dr. M. A. Hordijk luisa.hlawatsch@gmail.com

(2)

(3)

These flows of water that are simultaneously

physical and social, carry in their currents the

embodiment of myriad social struggles and

conflicts but also the potential for an improved,

more just and more equitable right to the city

and its water.

Erik Swyngedouw, 2004

Cover image: Mural and entrance sign informal neighbourhood Jardines de Huacahuasco. Painted by residents in collaboration with Artolution and Isla Urbana. Source: Isla Urbana.

(4)

(5)

Abstract

The governance of domestic water supply implies complex decision-making processes and political negotiations on multiple levels. It represents social power relations between different actors who are involved in the process of shaping socio-environmental conditions, which favour some and exclude others. Increasing (informal) urbanization in ecologically valuable peri-urban areas may generate a conflict between the Human Right to Water and ecological conservation. Thus far, this trade-off in the governance of domestic water supply in the specific context of peri-urban areas has been underresearched. This research aims to contribute to this knowledge gap by addressing the implications of rainwater harvesting for the aim to ensure both the Human Right to Water and ecological conservation in peri-urban neighbourhoods in the south of Mexico City, where informal urbanization in the Conservation Area (Suelo de Conservación) is increasing.

Rainwater harvesting is addressed from a socio-political viewpoint. Employing a qualitative research design, fieldwork has been conducted in a formal and an informal neighbourhood in Mexico City’s Conservation Area. Key stakeholders’ positions towards rainwater harvesting and domestic water supply in the Conservation Area have been investigated by means of in-depth interviews and a content analysis of policy documents. The study concludes that rainwater harvesting can be a sustainable support in the Conservation Area, where informality is a crucial determinant for domestic water access. The implementation of rainwater harvesting requires its integration into public policy and the provision of sufficient information for potential users. Furthermore, this research offers theoretical insights into how the Human Right to Water and ecological conservation can be reconciled by means of sustainable alternatives that are designed for a specific local context.

(8)

Acknowledgements

I wish to express my gratitude towards all the people who have made the completion of this thesis possible by supporting me in numerous ways.

First of all, I would like to thank my supervisor Francine van den Brandeler who guided me throughout my research with great inspiration and knowledge. I am not only grateful for her support in the field, her insights and encouragement, but also for her comprehensive feedback and suggestions.

I would also like to thank Dr. Michaela Hordijk for her valuable comments during the writing process.

Maribel Pacheco Cauich supported my research not only as a research assistant but also as a friend. Without her empathy, patience and immense support during our fieldtrips this thesis would not have been possible.

Special thanks go to the members of the organization Isla Urbana, whose dedication to the construction of an inclusive and sustainable water management in Mexico City was a great inspiration throughout my research. I would like to thank them for assisting me during my field research by sharing their knowledge and experience with me.

Many thanks also go to the public officials, experts, academics and activists who were willing to share their time and knowledge with me. They helped me gain insights into Mexico City’s water governance and into the complexity of water supply in the Conservation Area.

Finally, I wish to express my gratitude to the residents of San Mateo Xalpa and Jardines de Huacahuasco who generously shared their time, thoughts, and experiences with me. Their kindness and strength have left a deep impression on me and made my field research a truly rewarding experience.

(9)

Abbreviations and Acronyms

CA Conservation Area (Suelo de Conservación del Distrito Federal) CDMX Ciudad de México (Mexico City)

CONAGUA Comisión Nacional del Agua (National Water Commission) GDF Gobierno del Distrito Federal (Government of the Federal District) INEGI Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía

(National Institute of Statistics and Geography) ZMCM Zona Metropolitana de la Ciudad de México

(Mexico City Metropolitan Area) MDGs Millennium Development Goals

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

PAOT Procuraduría Ambiental y del Ordenamiento Territorial de la CDMX (Attorney General’s Office for the Environment and Land-Use Management in the Federal District)

PE Political Ecology

SACMEX Sistema de Aguas de la Ciudad de México (Water System of Mexico City) SDGs Sustainable Development Goals

SEDEMA Secretaría de Medio Ambiente (Secretariat of the Environment) SEDESOL Secretaría de Desarrollo Social (Secretariat of Social Development) SEDUVI Secretaría de Desarrollo Urbano y Vivienda

(Secretariat of Urban Development and Housing)

SECITI Secretaría de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (Secretariat of Science, Technology and Innovation)

SEMARNAT Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources) UN United Nations

UNAM Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (National Autonomous University of Mexico) UPE Urban Political Ecology

(10)

List of Tables and Illustrations

Figures Page

Figure 1: Policy-driven and needs-driven practices in the water supply wheel 8 Figure 2: Mexico and the borough of Xochimilco in Mexico City 21 Figure 3: Key actors in Mexico City's governance of domestic water supply 25 Figure 4: Water resources in the Mexico City Metropolitan Area 26 Figure 5: Mexico City's Conservation Area and its distribution across boroughs 28

Figure 6: Informal settlements in the Conservation Area 29

Figure 7: Rainwater-harvesting system and its components designed by Isla Urbana 50

Pictures Page

Picture 1: Common advertisement for water delivery by private water trucks 31 in the streets of Xochimilco

Picture 2: Installation and explanation of a rainwater-harvesting system 58 in San Mateo Xalpa

Picture 3: Mural in Jardines de Huacahuasco painted in collaboration with 60 Isla Urbana and Artolution during environmental education programme

Picture 4: A resident and owner of a self-installed rainwater-harvesting system 62 that was improved with a 'Tlaloque' by Isla Urbana in 2014

Picture 5: Marking sign of the Conservation Area and informal constructions 63 in San Mateo Xalpa

Tables Page

Table 1: Overview of relevant policy documents 33

and approaches to rainwater harvesting

(11)

1

Introduction

The general comment (No. 15) on the Right to Water states that “the Human Right to Water entitles everyone to sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible and affordable water for personal and domestic uses” (Singh et al., 2009: 600) It was adopted by the United Nations (UN) Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in November 2002. Eight years later, the General Assembly of the UN declared access to water and sanitation a human right, introducing a legal framework that emphasizes the responsibilities of states to guarantee universal access to safe water for all (United Nations General Assembly, 2010).1_{In 2015, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)}

have been adopted by the UN, building on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). One of the SDGs aims to ensure the availability and the sustainable management of water and sanitation for all by 2030 (United Nations Development Programme, 2015). Despite the increasing international attention to global water issues during the past two decades, 663 million people still live without sufficient access to safe water (World Health Organization [WHO] & United Nations Children's Fund, 2015).

The water crisis is often approached as a crisis of governance (Gupta & Pahl-Wostl, 2013; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2011). Until today, academics and policymakers debate on different strategies to ensure the Human Right to Water without compromising the sustainability of water-related ecosystems. This is a challenging task, as water governance involves complex processes of decision-making and a variety of actors with different interests and power relations who are involved at several levels (Baud, de Castro & Hogenboom, 2011; Gupta & Pahl-Wostl, 2013; Weiss & Wilkinson, 2014). The discipline of Urban Political Ecology (UPE) has made important theoretical contributions to the identification of barriers regarding the compliance of the Human Right to Water and its reconciliation with the conservation of ecosystems in the urban context. UPE emphasizes the inseparableness of society and nature and focuses on the political processes through which socio-environmental conditions are produced. It demonstrated that unequal social power relations can result in the construction of urban environments that privilege some and exclude others (Grimm et al. 2008; Swyngedouw, 2004).

1_{For the purpose of this study, which focuses on access to water for domestic use, the Human Right to Water and}

Sanitation will be referred to as the Human Right to Water.

(12)

Literature on peri-urban areas highlights that these areas are not only physically, but also politically marginal to urban environments. Moreover, they are characterized by informal urbanization, environmental degradation and a lack of access to water infrastructure. Paradoxically, at the same time peri-urban areas are often rich in water resources and of major ecological importance to the urban centres that they surround (Mehta et al., 2014; Ranganathan & Balazs, 2015; Roy, 2005). These specific characteristics require an approach to water that ensures both universal access for peri-urban residents and the conservation of the ecosystems they live in. Yet the peri-urban dimension has remained largely unexplored within UPE.

Mexico City, the research location of this study, displays the urgent need of inclusive ways to address the issue of water governance and ecological conservation in general, and specifically in the peri-urban area. It is facing increasingly water-related problems: Water access in sufficient quantity and quality is lacking, while the city is affected by frequent flooding during the rainy season. There is a high level of inequality regarding access to water services and mainly the marginalized peri-urban neighbourhoods are affected by a lack of access to (sufficient) water for domestic use. Many of these neighbourhoods are located within the city’s Conservation Area (Suelo de Conservación,

CA). The ecologically valuable area comprises 59% of Mexico City’s territory and is vital for the sustainability of the city in terms of aquifer recharge and other environmental services. Uncontrolled urbanization in the CA had its highest rate during the last two decades of the 20th_{century and caused environmental degradation and a loss of}

conservation land (Gobierno del Distrito Federal [Government of the Federal District], GDF, 2005). The lack of access to water in neighbourhoods that have been created in the CA – in some cases more than 30 years ago - poses a dilemma between the ecological conservation of the area and the compliance with the Human Right to Water.

Among many reports, articles and documentaries that address the water crisis in Mexico City, a local initiative of rainwater harvesting is frequently mentioned. In 2009, the hybrid social enterprise and non-profit organization Isla Urbana started its project of installing rainwater-harvesting systems, mostly in Mexico City’s peri-urban neighbourhoods. Besides providing water to people that do not have (sufficient) access, the organization’s self-proclaimed objective is to prove to policy makers that rainwater harvesting is a viable and sustainable alternative that lessens the demand from other sources, such as the overexploited aquifer and the big-scale projects that transport water over large distances to the city (Isla Urbana, n.d.a).

Most academic debates on rainwater harvesting address technological and ecological implications (Abdulla & Al-Shareef, 2009; Aladenola & Adeboye, 2010). The social implications of domestic rainwater harvesting are only addressed by a few studies with a

(13)

regional focus on African and Asian countries. Several of these case studies reveal that despite challenges such as installation costs and a lack of trust in the water quality, domestic rainwater harvesting has the potential to supplement water resources, provided that there is enough rainfall (Handia, Tembo & Mwiindwa, 2003; Owusu & Teye, 2015). A study on the implementation of sustainable technologies by Nanninga et al. (2012) is a noticeable exception to the research gap in the peri-urban context. Among other technologies, domestic rainwater harvesting is analysed in the context of Mexico City’s peri-urban areas. However, the study does not focus on the aspect of informality and the implied issues of governance and power inequalities, which play an essential role in Mexico City’s governance of domestic water supply.

This study contributes to the debate on domestic rainwater harvesting by researching its social implications in the peri-urban context of Mexico City. Focussing on the socio-environmental conditions of the CA, the aim of this thesis is to make a decentralized needs-driven practice visible and analyse its implications for policy-driven strategies to both improve domestic water access and ensure ecological conservation in the peri-urban area in the south of Mexico City.

In the next two chapters, the theoretical and methodological frameworks will be presented respectively, including the research question and sub-questions. The fourth chapter sets the stage for the empirical chapters and introduces the context of the research location. The fifth chapter discusses the role of rainwater harvesting within Mexico City’s water governance and the sixth chapter analyses land use policy and its implications for domestic water supply within the CA. Chapter Seven illustrates domestic water supply and rainwater harvesting at the neighbourhood level, presenting perceptions of residents in a formal neighbourhood and an informal settlement. Finally, the sub-questions and the main research question will be answered in the concluding chapter of the thesis.

(14)

2

Theoretical Framework

This research focuses on the implications of rainwater harvesting for domestic water governance and ecological conservation in a peri-urban context. The theoretical framework is embedded in critical urban theory. After an introduction to the theoretical foundations of this research, the concept of informality will be analysed in relation to water access in peri-urban areas. Rainwater harvesting will be addressed within the framework of needs-driven and policy-driven practices to access water for domestic use. While the ecological implications are given consideration, the emphasis lies on the social implications of rainwater harvesting. The section ends with a discussion of the tension between the Human Right to Water and ecological conservation within water governance, followed by a conclusion of the main theoretical findings and the resulting research question.

2.1 A Shift from Government to Governance and Urban Political Ecology

This research is embedded in the context of a shift from government to governance. The latter gained popularity as a concept in the 1990’s. David Levi-Faur (2012) conceptualizes three directions in which this shift is taking place: upward (to the regional, transnational, intergovernmental and global), downward (to the local, regional, and the metropolitan) and horizontally (to private and civil spheres of authority). In its broadest sense, the concept of governance is a way to describe the complexity of authority and power relations across different levels (Weiss & Wilkinson, 2014). It further refers to the question of how resources are used and allocated when various interests are at play (Beall, Fox & Goodfellow, 2009). This implies a complex decision-making process in which different actors are involved at different levels (Gupta & Pahl-Wostl, 2013). Furthermore, governance implies the involvement of state actors as well as non-state actors. It is important to note that instead of a plenary retreat of the state as central actor and provider, governments are rather moving towards market-oriented policies, striving to create new forms of capital accumulation and leading to increased concentration of power within the global economy. This affects the process of decision-making on multiple levels (Eriksen, 2007). However, government outcomes vary to a great extent, as they are context-dependent (Beall et al., 2009).

(15)

The shift from government to governance has seen both positive and negative changes. New ways of making politics, a different understanding of the state and the involvement of new actors have been part of attempts to deepen democratic decision-making. Decentralization, a main feature of governance, has been applied to increase public participation and to enhance the local government’s response to citizen demands (Levi-Faur, 2012). However, when capital accumulation is overemphasized and power relations between key actors are unequal, decentralization may increase regional inequalities as interests of local elites and powerful actors might be prioritized. Within the capitalist system, inequalities are not only expressed socially but also through the polarization among different territories, regions, places and scales (Brenner, 2014). This aspect will be illustrated by the example of peri-urban areas in section 2.2.

Despite its origin in a different historical context, critical urban theory responded to issues in urban development that are embedded in the present-day context of the shift from government to governance (Brenner, Marcuse & Mayer 2009; Marcuse, 2009; Purcell, 2002). Departing from the Frankfurt school of critical theory and Marxist theory, critical urban theory emerged in the 1970’s. It relates the urban space to social power relations with the aim to consider a more democratic, socially just and sustainable form of urbanization (Brenner et al., 2009). Building on the work of critical urban theorists Henri Lefebvre and David Harvey, the field of Political Ecology (PE) has a similar, yet more political agenda, with the aim: “[…] to enhance the democratic content of socio-environmental construction by means of identifying the strategies through which a more equitable distribution of social power and a more inclusive mode of environmental production can be achieved”(Swyngedouw, Kaika & Castro, 2002: 3). PE emerged in response to the prevalent scientific distinction between society and nature. In the history of (western) science, this separation underpinned the idea that humankind controls the external world. Capitalism is one of the most exemplifying developments following this belief, as it is based on the dependence on and control of nature (Swyngedouw & Heynen, 2003; Walker, 2005). The fundamental idea of PE is that nature is constructed rather than pre-given (Lefebvre, 1976 in Heynen, Kaika & Swyngedouw, 2006). Nature and society cannot be separated. Consequently, the concept of ‘the environment’ entails both physical and social qualities (Heynen et al., 2006; Keil, 2003; Swyngedouw et al., 2002). The sub-field of UPE builds on this assumption. The notion of metabolism illustrates the fusion of the social and the physical in the production and transformation of urban environments (Heynen, et al., 2006). UPE emphasizes political processes through which particular socio-environmental conditions are produced and reproduced.

Water is a central element of the Political Ecology of urban spaces and it has a political meaning as it is modified by humans to meet their demands (Swyngedouw, 2004).

(16)

Conflicting interests regarding these demands and unequal social power relations result in the construction of environments that are characterized by inequality (Grimm et al., 2008; Swyngedouw, 2004). The urban transformation of water can be seen as a representation of wider social-spatial power relations.

Before moving to the next section, which addresses informality as another expression of socio-spatial power struggles, it is important to point out that UPE has been criticized for “methodological cityism” and for dichotomizing urban and rural spaces (Angelo & Wachsmuth, 2015; Purcell, 2002). Urban theory suggested that urban issues needed to be tackled by concentrating on the city (Brenner et al., 2009). This research builds on central ideas of UPE with a focus on its principle of socio-environmental justice. However, it is assumed that in order to address urban questions, multi-spatial linkages need to be taken into account. Urban spaces are increasingly interconnected and the distinction between urban and rural becomes more diffuse (Aguilar, 2008; Brenner et al., 2009; Hofmann, 2011; Marcuse, 2009). Therefore, the following section addresses informality and domestic water access in relation to another dimension of present-day urbanization processes, which is the notion of the peri-urban area.

2.2 The Practice of Informality, Peri-Urban Water Access

and Rainwater Harvesting

Not exclusively, but especially in the Global South, informal settlements are part of the realities that urban planners must integrate into their work, as they play an important role

regarding the demand and provision of services (Tortajada, 2008). The theoretical debate

on informality is divided into two streams of literature. A traditional stream, in which informality and formality are opposed to one another (Davis, 2006; Simone, 2006) and another stream that emphasizes the diffuse boundaries between the two concepts (Ahlers et al., 2014; McFarlane, 2012; Roy, 2012). Here, the latter will be further addressed as the empirical data of this research correspond with the theoretical understanding of informality as a dynamic practice. In opposition to the idea that formality and informality are pre-existing and fixed categories, it is assumed that both concepts are flexible and legitimized by the institutions that hold the power to determine what is formal and what is not.2 From this viewpoint, informality cannot be measured as quantity, but rather needs to be understood as something that is practiced (McFarlane, 2012).

The practice of informality has social and political implications (Ahlers et al., 2014). It

2_{In this research the distinction between informal and formal neighborhoods in the Conservation Area refers to the}

distinction as determined by the authorities.

(17)

can be actively used as a strategic instrument, a state of exception that can serve to alter

urban land use and to gain access to resources and infrastructure (McFarlane, 2012; Roy,

2005). Roy (2012) argues that the logic of urban informality is “the making and unmaking of spatial value” (p.14). A tool for the production of spatial value is the provision of infrastructure. Hence, the practice of informality influences the access to water supply. Here, it is important to note that formality does not necessarily guarantee access to infrastructure and service provision. Instead, it depends on political negotiations, mainly but not exclusively practiced by governmental authorities (Roy, 2005). Ahlers et al. (2014) acknowledge the governments’ role in such negotiations but criticize Roy’s approach for overemphasizing the authorities dominance in determining informality. They relate the discussion on informality to urban water provision and argue that not only the governmental authorities but also other actors on multiple levels are involved in the process. The conceptualization of the disaggregation and co-production of water services emphasizes the interactions between actors who are “[…] moving in and out of formality” (Ahlers et al., 2014: 6). The concept of co-production describes the interaction between socio-political, economic, biophysical and infrastructural drivers, which results in hybrid service provision. Power relations and different interests of key actors influence this process, which often results in uneven water service provision, expressed socially but also through inequality between different territories, as explained in section 2.1.

This research is concerned with the governance of domestic water supply in the context of an ecologically protected area, located in the peri-urban interface. Following the definition of the World Health Organization (Howard & Bartram, 2003) domestic water is “[…] used for all usual domestic purposes, including consumption, bathing and food preparation” (p. 2). In most urban areas, infrastructure covers parts of the city and often leaves out marginalized peri-urban neighbourhoods. Ranganathan and Balazs (2015) define these areas as urban fringe, which comprises “hybrid, transitional areas on the outskirts of cities” (p. 404). The concept of the urban fringe emphasizes the unequal power relationship between peri-urban areas and the city core.3 The former are not only physically but also politically marginal to the latter. The “thickness” of the regulatory structure within decision-making systems that was brought about by the above-mentioned shift from government to governance, requires that responsibilities and accountabilities are clearly defined and that all relevant social actors are incorporated. However, in the urban context, water governance is more often characterized by fragmentation than by inclusiveness (Swyngedouw et al., 2002). The urban fringe illustrates this problem as it is often characterized by the practice of informality, administrative und jurisdictional ambiguities, environmental degradation and a lack of access to water in sufficient quantity and quality (Allen, Dávila & Hofmann 2006; Mehta et al., 2014; Ranganathan &

(18)

Balazs, 2015; Roy, 2005).

Hofmann (2011) points out that, ironically, these areas are often rich in water resources. As urban growth influences the extent to which cities need to rely on additional water resources, competition over these resources increases and water is being distributed from

the peri-urban areas to supply the urban centre. Hence, the lack of water access in

peri-urban areas is partly the result of political negotiations and unequal power relationships. Particularly people who are living in peri-urban areas that are deemed to be informal are often left with nothing as they “[…] not only lack access to services but, more importantly, are politically marginalized” (Hofmann, 2011: 51).

In their struggle for basic rights and resources, communities in the urban peripheries rely

on alternative water supply systems (Bakker, 2003). They have developed largely needs-

driven and flexible practices to cope with the lack of (sufficient) access to water. Academic literature on peri-urban water access states that in order to address water challenges and make the peri-urban water poor visible, these needs-driven practices need to be recognized and integrated into the policy-driven system of water supply (Allen et al., 2006; Hofmann, 2011). Figure 1 illustrates the different forms of needs-driven and policy-driven practices. Their definition implies a distinction between the formal (policy-driven) system and the alternative or informal (needs-(policy-driven) system of water supply. Despite this distinction, the argument’s aim to incorporate needs-driven practices (such as rainwater harvesting) into the policy-driven formal system eventually requires a more flexible and less normative understanding of informality.

Figure 1: Policy-driven and needs-driven practices in the water supply wheel

(19)

Hofmann (2011) introduces five parameters that need to be considered in attempts to improve water access: regularity, sufficiency, affordability, quality and contextualized needs (p.42). He argues that in most policy-driven efforts not all of these parameters are taken into account, which is especially critical in peri-urban areas. The integration of needs-driven practices ultimately aims at the inclusion of the marginalized peri-urban areas into the governance of domestic water supply. Since policy makers often view peri-urban areas as temporary, the hybrid water provision in these areas generally does not fall under legal regulations and environmental standards (Mehta et al., 2014). At the same time many needs-driven practices remain unrecognized, while they provide an alternative form of access to water that respond to the needs of the peri-urban residents (Hofmann, 2011).

The focus of this study is domestic rainwater harvesting, which is defined as the small-scale collection and storage of rainwater at the household level for the purpose of its domestic use (Owusu & Teye, 2015; Kahinda, Taigbenu & Boroto, 2007). In the conceptualization of the water supply wheel (Figure 1), rainwater harvesting is defined as a needs-driven practice. However, it depends on the specific context whether it is considered to be a needs-driven or a policy-driven practice. In the introduction, it has been mentioned that the few case studies on the social implications of rainwater harvesting reveal that it has the potential to supplement water resources, provided that there is enough rainfall (Handia, Tembo & Mwiindwa, 2003; Owusu & Teye, 2015). Similar to the argument that needs-driven practices need to be integrated into the policy-driven system, Owusu & Teye (2015) emphasize the importance of governmental support for rainwater harvesting in order to be a viable alternative in water-poor areas.

2.3 Governing Water: Ecological Conservation

and the Human Right to Water

The previous section explained that the water needs of people living in peri-urban areas in the Global South are rarely met (Allen et al., 2006). Peri-urbanization processes are often accompanied by the practice of informality and occur without the provision of proper access to water for domestic use. Particularly in these areas the integration of a human right to water into the governance of domestic water supply seems to be a fundamental necessity. However, the same areas are often characterized by a high ecological value including recharge areas for aquifers, which makes them vulnerable to possible consequences of increasing urbanization such as contamination and environmental degradation (Aguilar, 2008; Jacobi, Empinotti, Schmidt, 2016; Villar,

(20)

2016). Accordingly, urbanization in peri-urban areas can imply a tension between ecological conservation and the Human Right to Water.

Different discourses on water emphasize different aspects. Water can be approached for example as an economic good, as a source of ecosystem services, as a political good or as a heritage of humankind (Obani & Gupta, 2014). In response to another discourse, which addresses water as a natural resource in crisis, national and international actors have mobilized to recognize the Human Right to Water (Villar, 2016). In the human rights based approach, water is regarded a public good and basic human right rather than a commodity. As such it should be administered by the public sector in cooperation with civil society (Allen et al., 2006; Villar, 2016).

To ensure access to water, “the human right to water should address the availability, quality, accessibility (including affordability and non-discrimination) of water and the provision of information regarding water.” (Gupta, Ahlers & Ahmed 2010: 300). The argument by Gupta et al. (2010) is largely conform with Hofmann’s (2011) parameters for improving water access that have been presented above, including the parameter of the contextualized needs by stating that locational aspects can challenge the compliance of the Human Right to Water (Gupta et al., 2010). An example of such locational aspects, or contextualized needs is the increasing urbanization in ecologically valuable areas. A human rights approach to water access not only converts intentions into enforceable rights and obligations but also implies the empowerment of vulnerable groups in terms of their demands for access to water. By prioritizing human consumption over economic uses, the issues of water access are moved into the discourse of social justice, which makes it possible to address inequalities on a global scale (Gupta, Ahlers & Ahmed, 2010; Villar, 2016). However, it has been argued that the Human Right to Water should go beyond ensuring people with sufficient water. The role of water as an environmental resource in ecosystems is equally important and therefore, needs to be protected (Mehta et al., 2014). Trigueros (2012) points out that:

“The right to water is one of the most, if not the most, environmentally consequential human rights in international law because it involves human access to a resource that is vital not only to humans but to all living things in the global ecosystem” (p. 600).

McIntyre (2012) makes a distinction between anthropocentric environmental protection and ecocentric ecological conservation. The former aims at protecting the environment to ensure the fulfilment of human needs and the latter emphasises the need to protect water resources for their ecological significance. Despite its recognition of the need to discuss water in terms of human rights, the ecocentric approach does conflict with the human rights approach in several aspects. There are environmental costs implicit in the human

(21)

consumption of water, which ought to be taken into account according to the ecocentric approach (Allen et al., 2006). This idea conflicts with the human rights approach’s requirement that the price for water must be affordable for everyone (Obani & Gupta, 2014). Aside from its recognition that the Right to Water must also be sustainable, a human rights approach prioritizes human needs, health and an adequate standard of living above ecological concerns.

The issue of how to govern water in an inclusive manner that is sensitive to the local context and to equitable access, without compromising its sustainability, is a challenging task (Singh et al., 2009). David Groenfeldt (2013) promotes the integration of ethics into the development of policies for water management. He introduces Merchant’s categories of ethical intention as a measure for questioning underlying motivations behind policies: egocentric (self-interest), homocentric (utilitarian social interests) and ecocentric (pure environmentalism) (Merchant 2010, original 1997 in Groenfeldt, 2013). According to Merchant’s argumentation a hybrid of homocentric and ecocentric ethics is needed, which she refers to as partnership ethics. It is argued that ethical analyses of policies can help to guide the process of decision-making, for example by exposing ethical inconsistencies such as the tension between the Human Right to Water (homocentric ethical intention) and ecological conservation (ecocentric ethical intention). From an ethics perspective, the Human right to Water emphasizes the relation between access to safe water and human well-being and can be considered a social ethic. However, the compliance of the Human Right to Water implies not only the social ethical dimension but also environmental and economic ethical dimensions. Groenfeldt illustrates this by pointing out that “the picture of a city depleting not only its local aquifers, but also the aquifers and rivers of neighbouring regions, raises questions about the full spectrum of water ethics, from economic to environmental, social and cultural” (2013: 80).

Different discourses on water can lead to tensions within policies regarding domestic water supply. Especially in peri-urban areas of the Global South this tension is present. Both environmental degradation and a lack of access to water are common characteristics of these areas (Mehta et al., 2014). Ideally, policies regarding these issues should be synergetic, incorporating the above mentioned partnership ethics. Ultimately, the compliance of the Human Right to Water depends on the protection of aquatic ecosystems (Trigueros, 2012). As emphasized in UPE, nature and society cannot be separated. Consequently, a link between the human need and the sustainability of water resources should be established in the discourse on water governance (Mehta et al., 2014; Obani & Gupta, 2014). However, Mehta et al. (2014) point out that the implementation of global legal frameworks that are based on a global discourse may be limited in a local context that is characterized by inequality and local power struggles.

(22)

2.4 Conclusion and Research Question

In the first section of this chapter the Urban Political Ecology approach has been presented. With its basic assumption that nature and society cannot be separated and its emphasis on political processes that shape socio-environmental conditions, UPE addresses human needs as much as the sustainability of water resources and takes into account local contexts and power struggles. For these reasons it is a useful theoretical approach to the question of how to govern water in the specific context of a peri-urbanized ecological conservation zone. Peri-urban areas in the Global South are often characterized by the practice of informality and a tension between ecological conservation and the Human Right to Water. Needs-driven and policy-driven practices are applied to access water for domestic use in socio-environmental conditions that privilege some and exclude others.

Based on the theoretical discussion, identified gaps in the literature and the specific context of the research location (which will be presented in Chapter Four) the main research question is as follows:

(23)

How is rainwater harvesting integrated into the governance of

domestic water supply and what are its implications for the

aim to ensure both the Human Right to Water and ecological

conservation in Mexico City’s Conservation Area?

The sub questions that were used to answer the main question are:

1. Who are the key actors involved in Mexico City’s water governance and how is rainwater harvesting integrated into current policies regarding domestic water supply? 2. What are the implications of land use policy in the Conservation Area for domestic water supply in formal and informal neighbourhoods?

3. How do residents in a formal and an informal neighbourhood in Mexico City’s Conservation Area perceive the governance of domestic water supply and how is rainwater harvesting practiced and experienced at the neighbourhood level?

(24)

3

Methodological Framework

3.1 Ontological and Epistemological Foundations

This research departs from an interpretive perspective. It is believed that individuals have an active role in the construction of social realities (Boeije, 2010). Understanding the participants’ reality in their own context and from their perspective is a central goal of this research. This implies that the findings are not generalizable for other research locations but that the value of the research is rather to be found in the qualitative insights, gained from an emic perspective (Boeije, t’ Hart & Hox, 2009).

It is important to highlight that my epistemological orientation is shaped by the theoretical influence of Urban Political Ecology. Following Walker’s (2006) definition of the common denominator within the subfield, the focus lies on “social relations of production and power as they shape human relations with nature” (p. 388). In order to answer the research question it is important to uncover these relations and to relate them to the governance of domestic water supply in the CA. Understanding the local socio-physical realities is believed not only to contribute to a better insight into the broader dynamics within urban water governance, but it also plays a crucial role in the creation of a sustainable and equitable system of domestic water supply in the context of informal urbanization and environmental conservation.

3.2 Methodology

This study draws on three months of fieldwork, conducted in Mexico City from January until April 2016. The process of conducting fieldwork was characterized by a need for flexibility. Data gathering was alternated with data analysis and reflections on findings and research methods. Methods have been redefined during the research process in relation to themes and issues that emerged in the field (Boeije et al. 2009; Boeije, 2010). In line with the epistemological foundations, mainly qualitative research methods were used in order to answer the research question. Qualitative methods enable the researcher to learn about the meaning people ascribe to social phenomena (Boeije, 2010). In this research, rainwater harvesting is addressed as a social phenomenon rather than as a

(25)

technical one. The aim is to understand its social implications and the meaning people ascribe to it in the specific context of the CA in Mexico City.

For the purpose of triangulation, different methods have been integrated where applicable in order to gain insights into the research topic from different angles and to test for consistency among different data sources (Boeije, 2010). The integration of quantitative methods has been limited to a supplementary survey, due to reasons that will be explained in the following section, in which the sampling procedure, the unit of analysis and each of the applied methods will be presented.

3.3 Research Methods

3.3.1 Sampling and Unit of Analysis

The unit of analysis of this research is the governance of domestic water supply in Mexico City’s CA. The focus on governance implies the incorporation of various levels. Following the conceptualization of the shift from government to governance by Levi-Faur (2012), this research mainly incorporates the downward (local, regional and metropolitan) and horizontal (private and civil) dimensions of governance, involving state actors as well as non-state actors.

The units of observation are two selected neighbourhoods and the key actors in the governance of domestic water supply in the CA. As the status of (in)formality is a crucial factor regarding domestic water supply in the CA, the first unit of observation is the formal neighbourhood San Mateo Xalpa, and the second unit is the informal settlement Jardines de Huacahuasco.4 In both neighbourhoods the organization Isla Urbana has installed rainwater-harvesting systems in recent years. Furthermore, both neighbourhoods are situated in the borough of Xochimilco. The specific characteristics of the research location will be further explained in the fourth chapter. Here, it is important to note that I decided to focus on these two neighbourhoods within the same administrative division not only for accessibility reasons, but also because of Xochimilco’s relevance with respect to its groundwater resources and the large proportion of its territory that is located in the CA (Aguilar & López, 2009).

In the informal neighbourhood, ten participants were included into the sample for qualitative interviews. In addition to the sample of six participants for qualitative interviews in the formal neighbourhood, a supplementary survey with a sample of 30 respondents is integrated into the analysis. Households with rainwater harvesting systems

(26)

represent a small minority, particularly in the formal neighbourhood. The sample size is relatively small and was therefore supplemented with survey data and field notes taken after conducting the survey.

In both neighbourhoods purposive sampling was applied. I selected participants who harvest rainwater with a system that has been installed by the organization Isla Urbana, participants who harvest rainwater with basic devices such as buckets and tubs and participants who do not harvest rainwater at all. Initially, the selection of participants was based on the ownership of a rainwater-harvesting system. Residents were approached with Isla Urbana’s assistance as a gatekeeper. Subsequently, the snowball method was applied to approach other residents. The aim was to select participants based on a balanced gender division and based on a minimum of three years of residence in the neighbourhood. I will further elaborate on the methodological limitations of the sampling process in the final section of this chapter.

For the third unit of observation, the key actors in the governance of domestic water supply, purposive sampling was applied as well. Important actors with respect to the research question have been identified and approached prior to and during fieldwork. However, accessibility was limited, since the unit of observation is composed of a narrowly defined and difficult-to reach group of key actors. Fourteen stakeholder interviews have been conducted with nineteen actors from the local government division of Xochimilco (departments that are responsible for water provision and land use policy), NGOs, social and political movements and academia. The interviews are complemented with a content analysis of policy documents. The content analysis will be further explained in the following section, which addresses each of the applied research methods.

3.3.2 Research Methods

• Qualitative interviews

Semi-structured and in-depth interviews were conducted with participants on both the neighbourhood level and the level of the key actors. Semi-structured interviews are partially dependent on the course and situation of each individual interview (Boeije, 2010). In depth-interviews are also characterized by flexibility, with an emphasis on depth, nuance and the interviewee’s own language (Legard, Keegan & Ward, 2003). A combination of both interview types served well, not only to learn about the participants’ perception of rainwater harvesting, (in)formality and domestic water supply in the CA, but also to give the participants room to talk about related issues that may not seem important for answering the research questions at first sight, but often resulted to be relevant for the research. Furthermore, semi-structured expert interviews were conducted with

(27)

academics and participants with specific knowledge on the research topic (Boeije et al., 2009). Two general interview guides have been prepared: one for the neighbourhood level and one for the stakeholder level (Appendices B & C). Prior to each interview, the interview guides were adjusted and complemented with questions and topics according to the type of actor that was going to be interviewed.

• Supplementary survey

In the first stage of the fieldwork period a face-to-face survey was conducted with a total of 30 respondents in the formal neighbourhood San Mateo Xalpa. Residents were asked to participate in a short survey, answering a set of 21 questions on socio-economic conditions, issues related to domestic water supply and personal perceptions of these issues (Appendix C). The aim of conducting a survey was to contextualize the water-related problems in the neighbourhood and to gain an acquaintance with residents. The data provided by the survey and the field notes that were taken afterwards revealed that the issue of informality was a highly relevant topic in the area. Accordingly, the research question was adjusted and an informal neighbourhood was selected as another research location. It became clear that here it would not be possible to conduct a survey. In the informal neighbourhood contact with gatekeepers, such as local leaders and well-respected residents of the neighbourhood was crucial in order to get in contact with other participants. Walking around in the neighbourhood and randomly talking to people was not possible, firstly due to safety issues and secondly because residents would not trust two strangers (me and my research assistant), asking them questions about issues related to water access in the neighbourhood. Therefore, and because the sample size is relatively small for a statistical analysis, the survey is treated as qualitative data and combined with the field notes that have been taken after conducting the survey. This also allows for triangulation of the data that was gathered in a relatively small amount of interviews in San Mateo Xalpa.

• Content analysis of policy documents

In addition to stakeholder interviews, a qualitative content analysis of public policy documents was conducted, focussing on policies that are related to the domestic water governance in the CA. Hsieh and Shannon (2005) define qualitative content analysis as “a research method for the subjective interpretation of the content of text data through the systematic classification process of coding and identifying themes and patterns” (p. 1278). The summative approach to content analysis implies not only identifying the presence of specific words but also the interpretation of the content in order to discover underlying meanings

(28)

(Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). The method was applied in order to provide knowledge on the stakeholders’ official position regarding rainwater harvesting and the meaning they ascribe to it in policy documents.

• Participant observation

Participant observation implies observing and taking part in the daily lives of the participants. In doing so, contacts in the field are established and intensified (Boeije et al., 2009). Engaging in informal conversations with residents and making observations were essential in order to understand the social realities of participants at the neighbourhood level. Without understanding the context of their everyday lives, the research question could not have been answered, as it requires placing the socio-environmental implications of rainwater harvesting in the local context. Additionally, the method provided support for the information obtained through qualitative interviews.

• Secondary sources

Secondary sources, including online sources, newspaper articles and reports published on websites of non-governmental and governmental organizations and institutions were consulted to gain knowledge on the context and background of the research topic.

3.4 Data Analysis

As already mentioned, the data from the household survey was not converted to a statistical data set, due to the small sample size. Instead, it was treated as qualitative data and analysed together with the data that has been gathered by means of qualitative methods. The qualitative data analysis software NVivo (QSR International Pty LTd. Version 10, 2014) was used. Initially, open coding was applied to get an overview of the topics, or codes, that came forward. Then, axial coding was initiated and codes were categorized and rearranged according to the findings (Boeije, 2010). This process ultimately brought about a code tree that was analysed and combined with the findings of the policy document analysis.

3.5 Ethical Considerations

In qualitative research, the primary research instruments are the researchers themselves. Considering the qualitative nature of this study, this aspect heightens the responsibility of

(29)

the researcher to carefully take into account ethical considerations before and during fieldwork (DeWalt & DeWalt, 2011).

First of all, informed consent of the participants has to be warranted. People can only choose freely whether they want to participate or not if they are informed sufficiently. Therefore, all participants were informed about the research topic and aim prior to the conduction of interviews and surveys.

The focus on the socio-political issue of domestic water supply in formal and informal neighbourhoods in Mexico City’s CA requires the protection of all participants. In the course of the fieldwork I engaged with different stakeholder groups, which implied that tensions between these groups became apparent during informal conversations and interviews. To ensure the anonymity of participants no names are included in this research and data will not be shared with others without the consent of the participants.

Finally, it is important to acknowledge that my personal identity and role as a researcher in the field most likely influenced the research. As a field researcher, I sought to leave my personal context behind me as far as possible in order to understand the local social realities. Ultimately, I was an outsider who came from a different social context, which is characterized by different power relations. This influenced not only the way people interacted with me but also my own interpretation of their words and actions. Reflections, written down in a field journal, helped me to detect and address problematic issues regarding my role in the field. Several of these issues will be addressed in the following methodological reflection.

3.6 Methodological Reflection

Reflections on the research methods have been a constant part of the fieldwork. Not only by keeping a fieldwork journal, but also by discussing the findings and methods with my supervisor and with my research assistant. Furthermore, the alternation between interviews at the neighbourhood level and interviews with officials encouraged me to reflect on the research topic from different points of view, which in turn was a good way to detect possible subjectivities that otherwise might have remained unnoticed.

In the neighbourhoods, a relationship of trust was already established to a certain extent as the organization Isla Urbana assisted me in contacting residents who own a rainwater-harvesting system. Furthermore, I was working with a research assistant who contacted participants and assisted me during interviews. My research assistant is from Mexico, hence a native speaker of Spanish, which both helped in creating a relationship of trust.

(30)

The fact that it was mentioned that Isla Urbana was helping me during my fieldwork and also my interest in rainwater harvesting made residents feel confident about my good intentions as their experience in working with Isla Urbana has generally been very positive. Though Isla Urbana’ support was helping me to get in contact with participants, it certainly influenced the purposive and snowball sampling procedure. Residents who applied rainwater harvesting by other means than a system that has been installed by the organization, or residents who did not apply rainwater harvesting and had not heard of Isla Urbana were difficult to reach (especially in the informal neighbourhood). Consequently, the number of participants in both neighbourhoods was lower than originally expected.

I also discovered at an early stage that my affiliation with Isla Urbana would influence the data gathered in interviews, as residents who did not own a rainwater harvesting system seemed to assume that I could arrange an installation of a rainwater harvesting system for them. As soon as this misunderstanding was discovered, I started each interview by explaining my relationship with Isla Urbana, emphasizing that I was working independently and for academic purposes. Nevertheless, I tried to assist participants who were interested in rainwater harvesting by passing on information and contact data (after consulting Isla Urbana).

At the governance level, key actors were difficult to reach as most of them occupy high-level positions within governmental institutions. During the interviews with government officials and other institutional key actors, trust did not seem to be an issue. This is most likely related to my role as a researcher in the field. Nevertheless, in some cases participants may have portrayed their opinion in a biased manner in relation to my research topic.

Finally, I conducted fieldwork for three months, from January until April, prior to the beginning of the rainy season in Mexico, which usually starts in May. In order to fully understand the implications of rainwater harvesting, participant observation during this season would have been a very useful addition to the research.

(31)

4

Research Location and Context

To set the stage for the empirical analysis, this chapter introduces the research location and its context. First, relevant facts about Mexico will be discussed. Then, the focus is set on Mexico City and its water-related problems, including an overview of the key actors in the city’s governance of domestic water supply. The section ends with a description of the borough of Xochimilco, in which a significant part of the CA is situated. Finally, the two peri-urban neighbourhoods, in which empirical research has been carried out, will be presented, highlighting their particular characteristics and relation towards each other.

Figure 2: Mexico ad the borough of Xochimilco in Mexico City

Source: Adapted from Merlín-Uribe et al. (2013, p. 404)

4.1 Mexico

The United Mexican States are a federal republic comprising 31 states and its capital Mexico City, which is a separate federative entity. In 2015 Mexico had an estimated population of 119,530,753 people with an urban percentage of 79% (Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía [National Institute of Statistics and Geography], INEGI, 2015; World Bank, 2016). The country has a variety of climates, ranging from arid areas in the north to humid areas in the southeast (Comisión Nacional del Agua [National Water Commission], CONAGUA, 2010). Mexico is facing increasing water related problems such as the overexploitation of renewable groundwater resources, water quality decline and intensifying water scarcity, reaching critical levels in some regions (UN, 2013). Mexico City and the surrounding Metropolitan Zone of the Valley of Mexico is one of the most vulnerable areas of the country in terms of water.

(32)

In relation to the national approach to water related problems in Mexico, it is important to note that at the time of the research a national debate was taking place regarding the mandated formulation of a new national water law. After the recognition of the Human Right to Water in 2012 particularly two bills have been discussed in the chamber of deputies (Coordinación Nacional Agua Para Tod@s, 2016). One was formulated by the authorities (CONAGUA) and the other one by a citizen’s initiative. The latter was presented in 2015 in response to attempts by the federal government to impose the General Water Act as formulated by the CONAGUA, which was criticized for approaching water merely as an economic resource and transferring water control to the private sector. The citizens’ initiative, founded by NGOs, academics, experts and grassroots organizations mobilized a public outcry that delayed the passage of the bill as proposed by the authorities (Adler, 2015). The citizen’s initiative proposed a bill that approaches water as a human right and emphasizes the aspects of sustainability and public participation in Mexico’s water governance.5 Hitherto both bills are under consideration.

4.2 Mexico City

4.2.1 Mexico City and the Mexico City Metropolitan Area

Mexico City, formerly known as the Federal District and as of January 2016 officially renamed Mexico City (Ciudad de México)6, is part of the rapidly growing Mexico City Metropolitan Area (Zona Metropolitana de la Ciudad de México, ZMCM), which comprises the capital city, 59 municipalities in the state of Mexico and one municipality in the State of Hidalgo. With a population of more than 20 million people, the ZMCM is the economic, financial, political and cultural centre of Mexico (INEGI, 2010; Wigle, 2013).

Mexico City, the centre of the metropolitan area, has a total population of 8,918,653 people and is divided into sixteen territorial and political administrative divisions (INEGI, 2015). Each of these boroughs (delegaciones) is led by publicly elected authorities, which will be referred to hereafter as municipal governments. Every borough

5_{From field notes February 24, 2016; Forum “Analysis of the Initiatives of the National Water Law” at the}

Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM).

6_{In January 2016, the former Federal District officially changed its name to Mexico City (Ciudad de Mexico, CDMX).}

Thereby, it gained more autonomy, tuning the sixteen boroughs into similar entities like the municipalities of the federal states. However, Mexico City did not become a federal state itself and the ultimate implications of the changes depend on the formulation of a new constitution of the capital (Agren, 2016). At the time of the research there was a lot of discussion about the topic, as the formulation of the constitution, was closely observed by different groups and actors in society who wanted to ensure the representation of their interests in the constitution.

(33)

is subdivided into neighbourhoods (colonias) and, in some cases, traditional communities (pueblos originarios).

4.2.2 Key Actors in Mexico City’s Domestic Water Governance

Mexico City’s water governance is multi-layered and comprises a variety of institutions, agencies and other administrative bodies that operate at different levels. Nevertheless, during expert-interviews with public officials, academics and activists, statements regarding the key actors in Mexico City’s water sector generally reflected the relatively centralized structure of the management of the city’s water supply. Most of the participants appointed the National Water Commission of Mexico (Comisión Nacional del Agua, CONAGUA) and the city’s water operator SACMEX (Sistema de Aguas de la Ciudad de México [Water System of Mexico City]) as the most dominant actors regarding decision-making in Mexico City’s water governance.

The CONAGUA, one of the central actors, operates at the federal level and through the regional administrations of hydrological-administrative regions. One of these administrative regions is the Valley of Mexico Hydrological Region, which comprises the ZMCM (CONAGUA, 2011). The commission administers and manages water in all of Mexico. It belongs to the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, SEMARNAT), which is responsible for Mexico’s policy regarding natural resources and the conservation of ecosystems. SEMARNAT is also in charge of authorizing land-use changes and ecological land planning (CONAGUA, 2011; OECD, 2015).

As stated above, next to the CONAGUA, another dominant key actor is SACMEX. The government of Mexico City is responsible for the city’s water supply and appoints the director of SACMEX. The Water System of Mexico City was set up in 2003 and is in charge of the water distribution across the city, service delivery of domestic water supply, drainage, wastewater treatment and reuse (GDF, 2013; OECD, 2013). While SACMEX is a public entity, service contracts were signed with four private sector concessionaries that operate accordingly in four different zones of the city (SACMEX, n.d.).

Seventeen secretariats fall under the government of Mexico City. Each of them plays a role in the water governance of Mexico City according to its area of responsibility. The most important secretariats for this study on rainwater harvesting and domestic water supply in the CA are the Secretariat of the Environment (Secretaría de Medio Ambiente, SEDEMA), the Secretariat of Social Development (SEDESO) the Secretariat of Science, Technology and Innovation (Secretaría de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación, SECITI) and the Secretariat of Urban Development and Housing (Secretaría de Desarrollo

Rainwater harvesting : in Mexico City’s conservation area : implications for domestic water supply and ecological conservation in the context of Peri-Urban informality