Drinking water security: the neglected dimension of Australian water reform

Howey, Kirsty; Grealy, Liam

doi:10.1080/13241583.2021.1917098

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This paper has identified three key arguments for addressing aqua nullius: (a) to achieve water justice [27], (b) to recognise human rights [18,107], and (c) to address the fundamental problems of legitimacy and sustainability within settler state water law [63]. This review has focused on the third argument.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Water sovereignty for Indigenous Peoples: Pathways to pluralist, legitimate and sustainable water laws in settler colonial states

O’Donnell

2023

PLOS Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In settler colonial states, the doctrine of discovery that dispossessed Indigenous Peoples of their lands also took their waters. The original water theft of colonization was underpinned by the erroneous assumption of ‘aqua nullius’ and remains almost entirely unacknowledged and largely unaddressed. Scholarly literature has focused on the injustice of this water theft and the human rights of Indigenous Peoples (under UNDRIP as well as their human right to water). This review shows that aqua nullius also renders settler state water law not fit for purpose in two important ways. Firstly, the legitimacy of settler state water laws is contested, presenting a foundational challenge to water governance, and failing to acknowledge the plurality of water laws in settler colonial states. Secondly, settler water law is experiencing a more widespread failure to deliver ecologically sustainable water management. In responding to the injustice of aqua nullius, foundational reform of settler state water laws can enable the settler state to learn from Indigenous laws that have supported thriving communities and genuinely sustainable water management for millennia. Drawing on examples from Aotearoa New Zealand, the USA, Canada, and Australia, this review shows how acknowledging, and challenging, the false assumption of aqua nullius creates novel pathways for reform, enabling pluralist water laws and water governance models that improve both legitimacy and sustainability of settler state water governance.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Water sovereignty for Indigenous Peoples: Pathways to pluralist, legitimate and sustainable water laws in settler colonial states

O’Donnell

2023

PLOS Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this paper, we argue that as interest in water development in the NT grows, it must be coupled with an equivalent commitment to recognise Indigenous rights and interests, act on Indigenous people's culturally specific development aspirations and develop models of water governance that can accommodate customary law and management institutions (Jackson andAltman, 2009, O'Neill et al, 2016). Building on Howey and Grealy (2021), we bring together the law and policies applying to water for economic development as well as those designed to regulate domestic water supply to present a more comprehensive picture of water insecurity for Indigenous peoples across the NT. We place the Aboriginal Water Reserve (AWR) into its historical, settler colonial context, and show how despite this crucial step towards water justice, the NT is plagued by serious weaknesses in water law.…”

Section: The Hydrological Frontiermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Poor quality water data affects both commercial water users, the environment and those who rely upon its health. Lack of transparency in reporting costs and investment in water management also undermines water services in remote communities (Howey and Grealy, 2021). Applying a blanket policy of cost recovery would seriously impact access to water services in remote communities, but in these cases, it would increase transparency for the NTG to report on the costs of water services and how they are being met, as well as the standard of service provision.…”

Section: Benchmarking Water Law and Policy In The Ntmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The NT's statutory water management systems privilege 'mainstream' management approaches, normative frameworks, and values over those of Indigenous peoples (O'Donnell, 2013, Jackson and Altman, 2009, Jackson, 2006, Howey and Grealy, 2021. Further, the ability of Traditional Owners to exercise their cultural rights and responsibilities, and to access cultural water sites for customary purposes, has been impaired as a result of the history of non-Indigenous alienation and exclusive use of land (O'Donnell, 2002).…”

Section: Indigenous Rights Economic Development and Watermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Racialized water governance: the ‘hydrological frontier’ in the Northern Territory, Australia

O’Donnell

Jackson

Langton

et al. 2022

Australasian Journal of Water Resources

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increased scrutiny and contestation over recent water allocation practices and licencing decisions in the Northern Territory (NT) have exposed numerous inadequacies in its regulatory framework. Benchmarking against the National Water Initiative shows that NT lags behind national standards for water management. We describe key weaknesses in NT's water law and policy, particularly for Indigenous rights and interests. NT is experiencing an acceleration of development, and is conceptualised as a 'hydrological frontier', where water governance has institutionalised regulatory spaces of inclusion and exclusion that entrench and (re)produce inequities and insecurities in water access. Regulations demarcate spaces in which laws and licencing practices provide certainty and security of rights for some water users, with opportunities to benefit from water development and services, while leaving much of NT (areas predominantly owned and occupied by Indigenous peoples) outside these legal protections. Water allocation and planning, as well as water service provision, continue to reinforce and reproduce racialised access to (and denial of) water rights. Combining an analysis of the law and policies that apply to water for economic development with those designed to regulate domestic water supply, we present a comprehensive and current picture of water insecurity for Indigenous peoples across the NT.

show abstract

“…Notwithstanding high service standards in large cities and the resolution of several recurring boil water alerts in recent years (e.g. 2,3 ), 'universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all ' does not yet exist across Australia [4][5][6] . Poor drinking water quality and access remain barriers to improved health and economic outcomes in many Australian regional and remote communities [7][8][9] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring the gaps in drinking water quality and policy across regional and remote Australia

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drinking water quality remains a persistent challenge across regional and remote Australia. We reviewed public reporting by 177 utilities and conducted a national assessment of reported exceedances against the health-based and aesthetic guideline values of the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (ADWG). Four definitions of a basic level of drinking water quality were tested to quantify service gaps across regional and remote areas of each subnational jurisdiction in 2018–2019. At least 25,245 people across 99 locations with populations <1000 reportedly accessed water services that did not comply with health-based guideline values. Including larger towns and water systems, the estimated service gap rises to at least 194,572 people across more than 115 locations. Considering health parameters and the ADWG definition of ‘good’ aesthetic characteristics, the reported service gap rises further to at least 627,736 people across 408 locations. Forty percent of all locations with recorded health exceedances were remote Indigenous communities. Monitoring and reporting gaps indicate that the actual incidence of non-compliance with the guideline values of the ADWG could be much higher than our estimates. Our results quantified the divergence in the assessment of water quality outcomes between Sustainable Development Goal Target 6.1 and the ADWG, demonstrated disparities between service levels in capital cities and the rest of Australia, and highlighted the need for place-based solutions. The methods and dataset provide a ‘proof-of-concept’ for an Australian national drinking water quality database to guide government investments in water services.

show abstract

Drinking water security: the neglected dimension of Australian water reform

Cited by 8 publications

References 11 publications

Water sovereignty for Indigenous Peoples: Pathways to pluralist, legitimate and sustainable water laws in settler colonial states

Water sovereignty for Indigenous Peoples: Pathways to pluralist, legitimate and sustainable water laws in settler colonial states

Racialized water governance: the ‘hydrological frontier’ in the Northern Territory, Australia

Measuring the gaps in drinking water quality and policy across regional and remote Australia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About