Indian society is one of division. From caste to religion, some residents of India are seen as ‘belonging’ to the country and others are not. Critically, this division also extends to the provision of clean water, a fundamental human right. Major swaths of Mumbai’s population have shaky access to water at best, and what is available is often unsuitable for consumption. Those in positions of power continuously enforce views on which peoples hold legitimate versus illegitimate rights to water. It will be argued that these longstanding views on the legitimacy of water access, combined with the economic liberalization of Mumbai that has seen the middle class attempt to ‘reclaim’ slums from the poor, serve to perpetuate inequality and reinforce
…show more content…
Unchangeable social characteristics, mainly religion and caste, serve to undermine equitable water provision. “In many apartment blocks taps are separated by caste or religion, and in times of shortage lower castes are routinely ‘shooed away from their taps.’” (Gandy 2014: 114) Even within a single residential complex, a social hierarchy exists that gives certain individuals preferential access to fresh water and makes others second-class citizens. Such differences in caste and religion are historic and difficult to change. “Water,” explains Gandy (2014), “is a dominant symbol in Hindu mythology,” with implications in “purification and social differentiation.” (114) While traditional Hindu residents feel a strong traditional sense of “regional belonging,” Muslim populations are often seen as outsiders and are drawn into violent altercations with Hindu populations as a result. (Anand 2011: 553) Gandy (2014) paints a picture of how the exclusionary rhetoric is manifest in public places: in the past fifteen years, Mumbai has seen billboards spring up advertising pale urbanites delighting in vast water parks. (130) In these advertisements, “luxury access to water is being used to reinforce existing caste-based social distinctions.” (Gandy 2014: 130) From billboards to humble community water taps, social differences translate directly into water …show more content…
As is consistently the case, private developers and wealthy property renters hold this power. Many of the problematic realities that now define water provision are rooted in what Banerjee-Guha (2010) calls the “wave of liberalization” that “swept the country in [the] early 1990s.” (209) As the private business interests of the middle- and upper-classes became increasingly dominant, elected officials began to be “overpowered by powerful corporate consultant groups in terms of shaping the future course of urban development.” (Banerjee-Guha 2010: 209) This led to privatization that extended to many sectors, including Mumbai’s water. Under a privatized model, the provision of water, like any municipal service, becomes dependent on one’s capacity to pay. The sixty percent of Mumbai that lives in slums is therefore left largely to fend for itself, with the task of negotiating water hookups with corrupt city councillors and officials. The neoliberal withdrawal of the state from its responsibilities to provide clean drinking water to its citizens regardless of class means that water in Mumbai is increasingly classified by the inequalities of its
Unchangeable social characteristics, mainly religion and caste, serve to undermine equitable water provision. “In many apartment blocks taps are separated by caste or religion, and in times of shortage lower castes are routinely ‘shooed away from their taps.’” (Gandy 2014: 114) Even within a single residential complex, a social hierarchy exists that gives certain individuals preferential access to fresh water and makes others second-class citizens. Such differences in caste and religion are historic and difficult to change. “Water,” explains Gandy (2014), “is a dominant symbol in Hindu mythology,” with implications in “purification and social differentiation.” (114) While traditional Hindu residents feel a strong traditional sense of “regional belonging,” Muslim populations are often seen as outsiders and are drawn into violent altercations with Hindu populations as a result. (Anand 2011: 553) Gandy (2014) paints a picture of how the exclusionary rhetoric is manifest in public places: in the past fifteen years, Mumbai has seen billboards spring up advertising pale urbanites delighting in vast water parks. (130) In these advertisements, “luxury access to water is being used to reinforce existing caste-based social distinctions.” (Gandy 2014: 130) From billboards to humble community water taps, social differences translate directly into water …show more content…
As is consistently the case, private developers and wealthy property renters hold this power. Many of the problematic realities that now define water provision are rooted in what Banerjee-Guha (2010) calls the “wave of liberalization” that “swept the country in [the] early 1990s.” (209) As the private business interests of the middle- and upper-classes became increasingly dominant, elected officials began to be “overpowered by powerful corporate consultant groups in terms of shaping the future course of urban development.” (Banerjee-Guha 2010: 209) This led to privatization that extended to many sectors, including Mumbai’s water. Under a privatized model, the provision of water, like any municipal service, becomes dependent on one’s capacity to pay. The sixty percent of Mumbai that lives in slums is therefore left largely to fend for itself, with the task of negotiating water hookups with corrupt city councillors and officials. The neoliberal withdrawal of the state from its responsibilities to provide clean drinking water to its citizens regardless of class means that water in Mumbai is increasingly classified by the inequalities of its