Subscriber access provided by UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE LIBRARIES
Policy Analysis
Transitioning from a Human Right to an Infrastructure Service: Water, Wastewater & Displaced Persons in Germany Jessica A. Kaminsky, and Kasey M. Faust Environ. Sci. Technol., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.7b03594 • Publication Date (Web): 02 Oct 2017 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on October 3, 2017
Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.
Environmental Science & Technology is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.
Page 1 of 22
Environmental Science & Technology
1 2
Transitioning from a Human Right to an Infrastructure Service: Water, Wastewater & Displaced Persons in Germany
3
Jessica A. Kaminsky1* and Kasey M. Faust2
4
1
5
Washington, Seattle, Washington. 201 More Hall, Seattle, Washington 98195, United States
6
Telephone +1.206.543.1543. Fax +1.206.221.3058. E-mail
[email protected] 7
2
8
University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas
*
[email protected], Assistant Professor, Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of
[email protected], Assistant Professor, Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, The
9 10 11
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
12
ABSTRACT
13
Water and sanitation utilities across Europe have recently been challenged to provide services to asylum
14
seekers and refugees fleeing complex humanitarian disasters. We explore public perceptions regarding
15
how secondary disaster impacts – or, mass migration into an undamaged area – has impacted the utilities.
16
We show that the hosting population is typically willing to provide water and sanitation services to
17
displaced persons for a set period of time, even if the displaced persons are unable to pay (water and
18
sanitation as human rights). However, as time passes, displaced persons are eventually expected to pay
19
for access (water and sanitation as infrastructure services). Drawing from statistical modeling of survey
20
data from German residents, we find the average length of time for this transition in 2016 Germany was
21
2.9 years. The data also show statistically significant demographic and locational attributes that influence
22
this timeframe, indicating the normative length of the transition from a right to a service is contextually
23
dependent. Regardless, this is a significant period of time that the public expects utilities to provide
24
services to unexpected displaced persons. To be able to meet this kind of demand, utilities, engineers,
25
and policy makers must consider the potential for displaced populations in their regular, long-range utility
26
planning.
27 28
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank the many individuals who took the time to answer our questions and share their perceptions and
29
knowledge with us. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation
30
under Grant No. 1624417 and 1624409.
31 32
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 2 of 22
Page 3 of 22
Environmental Science & Technology
33
INTRODUCTION
34
Due to instability in the Middle East, European nations have recently and suddenly received large
35
numbers of refugees and asylum seekers1. As these displaced persons stream into Europe, the engineering
36
community has become increasingly aware of the impacts this suddenly increased population has on
37
critical infrastructure systems. In terms of system performance, these infrastructure impacts have the
38
potential to be either positive or negative depending on a number of contextual factors2. For example, for
39
the water and wastewater infrastructure systems of primary interest to this paper, unexpectedly increased
40
population may require new construction to meet the demand for services, or to prevent reduced level of
41
services for the hosting community. In contrast, the new populations may instead improve the technical
42
performance of otherwise oversized infrastructure systems in previously shrinking cities3. In a parallel
43
dichotomy of impacts, assuming the availability of raw water an increased population has the potential to
44
lead to increased utility revenues. However, providing this increased supply of water and wastewater
45
requires upfront financial resources for construction, management, or treatment process requirements
46
such as chemicals and energy2. In the current European situation, meeting these upfront costs is difficult
47
as displaced persons are frequently not able to pay for access to water or wastewater services as they first
48
arrive. Regardless of their previous circumstances and future potential, they have fled a complex
49
humanitarian disaster and temporarily depend on aid from others to meet essential needs.
50
For infrastructure in humanitarian response, one international definition of what counts as essential is
51
encapsulated in the SPHERE Handbook4. This handbook has been developed from a long collaboration
52
of international organizations, such as the International Red Cross, that provide humanitarian aid after
53
disasters5. It establishes a set of minimum standards for the provision of select infrastructure services
54
such as shelter or water and sanitation4. However, these minimum standards for water and wastewater do
55
not meet the technical engineering codes required by most highly developed utilities. For example,
56
Water Supply Standard 2 deals with water quality, and specifies a chlorine residual as a proxy for
57
microbiological quality, but does not (for example) require log reduction in coliforms. Still, the SPHERE
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
58
Handbook standards clearly establish standards for water access, quantity, quality, and the provision of
59
facilities for storing water, doing laundry, etc. as an essential part of humanitarian response. Indeed, and
60
as detailed in the literature review, the international community broadly agrees that access to water and
61
sanitation are fundamental human needs in both day-to-day and disaster response contexts. This framing
62
establishes access to clean water and adequate sanitation as universal human rights6.
63
Functionally, however, the engineering and policy communities more often think of water and wastewater
64
as a service, or as the provision of a commodity. For example, this might be volumes of drinking water
65
provided, or volumes of wastewater removed. There is a market price for treatment and transport, and
66
these costs must be met in order for the utility to be able to continue providing services. While
67
governments often subsidize this cost through taxpayer or donor funds, it is increasingly common around
68
the world for households and businesses to directly pay water and wastewater tariffs that are tied to the
69
volume of water they use or wastewater they produce, and for services to be cut off if payments are not
70
made7.
71
Given these contrasting but fundamentally linked epistemologies of water and sanitation, we seek to
72
understand how the German public—who have received the largest number of refugees and asylum
73
seekers in the ongoing crisis1,8 - reconciles and rationalizes these two normative perspectives. We
74
hypothesize that populations hosting asylum seekers perceive a temporal transition between water and
75
wastewater as a right to water and wastewater as a service, and seek to understand demographic and
76
locational factors that shape public perceptions of this transition. For engineers, policy makers, and water
77
utility staff, this knowledge suggests that there is a potential resilience gap during this transition time
78
(Figure 1) when utilities are widely expected to provide water and sanitation services to the displaced
79
population as their right, irrespective of their ability to pay. In other words, to maintain status quo
80
performance (shown by the dashed line in Figure 1), the hosting population and utility must provide water
81
and wastewater services to the displaced population. Otherwise, we would expect the system
82
performance to drop (shown by the solid line in Figure 1) until the displaced population became able to
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 4 of 22
Page 5 of 22
Environmental Science & Technology
83
pay for infrastructure services. While this provision of services to the displaced population is a normative
84
expectation, the measures needed to meet it are technical and economic. As such, while the hosting
85
public’s perception of this potential resilience gap is certainly not the only factor required in policy,
86
planning, design, or construction that can anticipate challenges, understanding that perception is a step
87
towards enhanced utility resilience due to the intrinsic relationship between public perceptions and policy. Influx of displaced persons
Higher Performance
potential resiliency gap
Water and Wastewater System Performance
Status quo performance Post-event performance, without human rights response
Access to water and wastewater is perceived to be a Service
Right
Service
Lower Performance Shorter
88 89
Time
Longer
Figure 1. System resiliency & the transition from a right to a service
90
LITERATURE REVIEW
91
In this literature review, we frame large disaster migrations as a type of extreme event in terms of its
92
potential impacts to the recipient built environment. From this theoretical perspective, we link issues of
93
utility resilience to providing access to water and sanitation to displaced persons. Given the high
94
likelihood of vulnerability among the displaced populations, utilities experiencing disaster migration must
95
engage with the international conversation on water as a human right. Specifically, the utilities and
96
funding host communities must determine how long to provide water and sanitation infrastructure
97
services to a new and vulnerable population that is at least temporarily unable to pay. In this paper, we
98
understand this timeframe as a transition between understanding access to water and sanitation as a right
99
to understanding it as a service that households must pay for or do without.
100
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
101
Utility Resilience
102
For the built environment, such as water and sanitation utilities, resilience means the ability to respond or
103
adapt to extreme events9–13. For example, this includes the need to identify the critical services provided
104
by the infrastructure system, the thresholds beyond which it may fail, how long the system may take to
105
recover from an extreme event, and if the system can adapt in response to that extreme event14. Most
106
typically, the extreme events that impact infrastructure physically destroy built assets. For example, the
107
average annual normalized economic damage from hurricanes in the US Gulf and Atlantic coasts from
108
1900 to 2005 was $10 billion USD15. These impacts are known to fall most heavily on vulnerable
109
members of society who are more likely to be impacted by disasters due to a constellation of political,
110
social, and economic factors16. For example, homes located in a flood zone are more likely to be
111
impacted by flood damage; these properties are accordingly less expensive and therefore tend to be
112
inhabited by people with fewer economic resources. Regardless of who is impacted, however, post-
113
disaster it is of vital importance that critical infrastructure services are restored as quickly as possible; this
114
leads to considerable challenges for utilities, the construction industry, and regulating governments17–20.
115
In this paper, we consider a different kind of extreme event that impacts infrastructure systems – that is,
116
extreme population movement into a region where the built environment has not otherwise been
117
physically impacted by a disaster. The particular population dynamics that we consider here – movement
118
from the Middle East to Europe, peaking around 2015 – were triggered by complex humanitarian
119
disasters of violence and poverty21. These various events did not damage the European infrastructure.
120
However, the infrastructure has certainly been impacted by the sudden population influx, in a secondary
121
but no less real impact of the triggering disaster events.
122
In Germany, one of the most visible examples of the impacts of extreme migration has been the sudden
123
need for housing for displaced persons. For example, the Brookings Institution reports that German
124
federal government expects to reimburse the German federal states 500 million euros in both of 2017 and
125
2018 for the development of new housing facilities for refugees22. Accordingly, post-disaster housing
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 6 of 22
Page 7 of 22
Environmental Science & Technology
126
efforts have been the focus of increasing research attention23. Underground, the water and sanitation
127
systems that serve the displaced population have also, if less visibly, been impacted. In the German
128
context of interest to this study, part of the reason the impacts to water and sanitation infrastructure have
129
been less visible than the housing impacts is that previously shrinking demand and excess infrastructure
130
system capacities24 have enabled utilities to stretch to meet the need. In other words, the happenstance
131
patterns of recent demand and infrastructure policy, combined with the German utilities’ proactive
132
response to the disaster migration, have enabled German cities to provide displaced persons with access to
133
water and wastewater. This in turn has enabled the hosting cities to avoid the waterborne disease
134
epidemics that are the unavoidable consequence of any dense population living without access to clean
135
water25,26.
136
To avoid leaving the scope of such consequences to chance, in this paper we argue that utilities should
137
consider possible disaster migration in routine planning and construction efforts, much as they currently
138
consider more typical population growth or shrinkage27. This may include elements such as disaster risk
139
reduction efforts28, creating or identifying new interconnections between systems to increase operational
140
flexibility, or even the construction of what would otherwise seem to be excess capacity11. Another
141
element of this planning is understanding how such efforts would be paid for, given that displaced
142
persons may never materialize or may be utterly without resources if they do arrive. This latter point
143
links our discussion of utility resilience to global conversations on the human right to water and
144
sanitation.
145
From A Right to a Service
146
After the Second World War, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly adopted the Universal
147
Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)29. This declaration is linked to centuries old political thought
148
stemming from the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the American Declaration of
149
Independence30. Still, the document established that the ways nations treat their nationals was a matter
150
for international concern, and thereby enabled international enforcement mechanisms such as the
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
151
European Court of Human Rights. Broadly, the UDHR has been understood as asserting the rights of the
152
individual over those of the state.
153
Infrastructure services are, perhaps unsurprisingly, not explicitly mentioned in the UDHR. However, that
154
document itemizes rights such as Article 25 (“the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and
155
well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary
156
social services”29) that would seem impossible to meet without either a pristine environment or the water
157
and wastewater infrastructure services of interest to this analysis. Still, it was not until the 1972
158
Stockholm Declaration31,32 that issues of water appeared in the global rights discourse. Subsequently, the
159
Vancouver Conference on Human Settlements and the Mar del Plata Conference on Water Resources
160
advanced the conversation to specifying the goal of the provision of clean and adequate water to all33;
161
these conferences clearly blended water and sanitation services with ideas of justice. Since this time a
162
series of global, quantitative goals for the provision of water and sanitation to all people have been set
163
(and, to date, missed). The most recent version of these global goals is outlined in the Sustainable
164
Development Goals and target “universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for
165
all” and “access to adequate and equitable sanitation and hygiene for all” by 203034. The emphasis in
166
these definitions on water quality, affordability, and equitable access can be read as consciously linking
167
these engineering goals to the human rights discourse35. In sum, while issues of water and sanitation are
168
not explicitly listed in the original declarations of human rights, the international community has since
169
recognized that those human rights cannot be achieved while neglecting issues of water and sanitation,
170
and has committed itself to the goal of ensuring water and sanitation for all. This position is canonized in
171
the UN Resolution on The Human Right to Water and Sanitation6.
172
It is in this context that we place our study of vulnerable, displaced persons moving to cities with highly
173
developed infrastructure systems. While these cities certainly contain long-standing homeless
174
populations that do not have adequate access to water and sanitation services, the legal framework in the
175
German cities this work is situated in requires the German state to provide decent housing, including
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 8 of 22
Page 9 of 22
Environmental Science & Technology
176
access to water and sanitation facilities, to asylum seekers while asylum applications are processed and
177
per German social benefits once applications are approved22,36. Beyond the German context, we would
178
argue that regardless of legal requirement any highly developed city hosting asylum seekers or any
179
category of displaced persons would strive to ensure water and sanitation services, with motivations likely
180
ranging from felt moral imperatives to the more pragmatic avoidance of waterborne disease epidemics.
181
However, water and sanitation services are not free, and are typically paid for through a combination of
182
government funding and volumetric user fees7. As such we would expect that at some point, displaced
183
persons would be integrated into the infrastructure as service epistemology, and to begin paying for water
184
and sanitation services as do other members of the hosting population. In the German policy context,
185
displaced persons who are legally recognized as refugees may be granted both the right to work and the
186
right to the standard German social benefits, which include a housing stipend for apartment rental and
187
utility costs36 regardless of whether or not the displaced persons have yet found work. In other words, the
188
conception of water and sanitation access in emergency response and recovery necessarily shifts over
189
time from a right to service. In remote refugee camps, the timeframe of this shift demonstrably stretches
190
over the decades refugees have been in residence with water and sanitation services supported by
191
humanitarian organizations37,38. In less remote contexts with at least perceived opportunities for social
192
and economic integration of the displaced populations, this timeframe may be significantly shorter.
193
As such, in this paper we seek to understand what that timeframe is, and if host community demographics
194
and locational factors shape public perceptions of the transition from a right to a service, specific to the
195
2016 German context we collected data in. As described previously, this knowledge is practically
196
important for the resilience of the utilities that physically provide water and sanitation, and to the policy
197
makers who regulate those utilities
198
towards the quantification of resilience.
39,40
. In addition, it contributes to the limited41,42 literature working
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
199
MATERIALS AND METHODS
200
Survey analyses and statistical modeling methods enable this study. To operationalize the exploration of
201
transitioning from right to service, we asked a representative sample of the German public to answer
202
questions regarding the provision of access to water and wastewater to displaced persons who are unable
203
to pay. For example, we asked the German public if water and wastewater services should be provided to
204
the displaced population, and if so how long services should be provided. The responses to these
205
questions were modeled statistically along with a variety of demographic and locational factors to capture
206
heterogeneity across the respondents; this research method is described in detail below. If our hypothesis
207
of a transition from a right to a service is supported, we would expect to see that respondents are willing
208
to provide these services to displaced persons for a set period of time, but not indefinitely.
209
Survey Development and Deployment
210
A survey was deployed in August 2016 to the general public in Germany after the peak of the influx of
211
displaced persons, which occurred at the end of 2015 and continues in 2017. This survey sought to assess
212
the perceptions, awareness, knowledge and attitudes toward the provision of infrastructure services for
213
incoming displaced persons in hosting communities. The survey was conducted in German, deployed as
214
an online survey via Qualtrics, LLC43, a web-based survey software. Prior to deployment, the survey
215
underwent content review by eight subject matter experts with expertise spanning survey analyses, civil
216
infrastructure, human-infrastructure interaction, public perception modeling, and German language and
217
culture. Additionally, a pilot survey was deployed to 15 individuals who were not included in the final
218
sample pool to assess the correctness of data collected, German word choice, and accessibility of
219
questions regarding whether individuals with limited knowledge of the water and wastewater systems
220
could easily answer posed questions. The survey underwent Institutional Review Board review at the
221
University of Texas at Austin and the University of Washington in July 2016. Participation was
222
voluntary, with all respondents over the age of 18. The final sample consisted of 416 valid responses
223
spanning 16 states in Germany, providing a 95% confidence with a +/- 5% margin of error.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 10 of 22
Page 11 of 22
Environmental Science & Technology
224
Specifically of interest was the attitude of the general public towards the provision of water and wastwater
225
service to displaced persons with the inability to personally pay for the service due to varying
226
cisumstances arising from displacement (e.g., assets unavailable, lack of financial means, etc.). Survey
227
respondents were asked, “We should provide water (wastewater) service to incoming displaced persons
228
who are unable to pay for water (wastewater) service for a specified amount of time: (1) Yes, we should
229
provide water (wastewater) service to incoming refugees for a defined amount of time, not indefinitely;
230
(2) No, we should not provide water (wastewater) service to incoming displaced persons who are unable
231
to pay for the service for a specified amount of time, service should be provided indefinitely; (3) No, we
232
should not provide service to incoming displaced persons who are unable to pay for water (wastewater)
233
service for any amount of time.”
234
Following this question, respondents were asked to provide the length of time in years, via a slider or text
235
entry, that they believed water and wastewater services should be provided to displaced persons who are
236
unable to pay for such services. Respondents were asked to select/enter “0” if they did not believe
237
water/wastewater service should be provided at all, and to max out the slider bar at 20 years if the
238
respondent believed water or wastewater services should be provided indefinitely. It should be noted that
239
all respondents who answered “(1) Yes, we should provide water (wastewater) service to incoming
240
displaced persons for a defined amount of time, not indefinitely” provided answers greater than 0 and less
241
than or equal to 12 years, removing the possible error of an individual believing that the provision of
242
service for a defined amount of time should be more than 20 years. A neutral or “I do not know” option
243
was not provided for the questions of interest to force a stance, avoiding decision paralysis bias 44.
244
Random Parameters Tobit Model
245
Supporting our research approach, in aggregate the majority of respondents believe the provision of water
246
and wastewater service for displaced persons is a right for a limited amount of time (see Discussion
247
section below, and Tables 1 and 2). In addition, we seek to understand the contributing demographic and
248
location parameters associated with the length of time to provide such services. As such, a statistical
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
Page 12 of 22
249
model is used to determine those influential factors that affect the length of time water or wastewater
250
service should be provided in the instance a displaced person is not able to pay using a tobit modeling
251
framework first introduced by Tobin45. In order to account for the unobserved heterogeneity (i.e., those
252
unobserved factors that may vary across observations) associated with influential parameters, the random
253
parameter tobit model is used. It should be noted that respondents who stated that the water or
254
wastewater should be provided “indefinitely” were removed from the statistical model as outliers.
255
To formulate the random parameter tobit regression model, the standard tobit regression model is used to
256
left-censor the data at zero (i.e., those who do not believe water or wastewater should be provided free of
257
charge to displaced person for any period of time) as follows45,46:
258
∗ = + ℎ ~0, = 1, 2, … = ∗ ∗ > 0 = 0 ∗ ≤ 0
1
259 260
where is the number of observations, is the number of years water/wastewater service should be
261
provided to displaced persons unable to pay (the response variable), is the vector of explanatory
262
variables (socioeconomic and locational characteristics), is the vector of estimated parameters and is
263
the normally and independently distributed error term with a mean of zero and a constant variance, σ .
264
To account for heterogeneity, Greene47 developed estimation procedures (simulation based maximum
265
likelihood estimation) for incorporating random parameters in tobit (censored regression) models. To
266
incorporate random parameters into the tobit models, estimable parameters can be written as: = + "
267 268 269
where, " is randomly distributed term (all random parameters are normally distributed). The tobit model
270
then becomes:
271 272 273 274 275
(2)
∗ | " = +
(3)
$$ = ∑∀ & '* (" ) ∗ | " "
(4)
With the corresponding log-likelihood: +
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 13 of 22
Environmental Science & Technology
276
where g(.) is the probability density function of the " , and P(.) is the probability for the tobit model.
277
Maximum likelihood estimation of the tobit model (Eqn. 1) is undertaken with simulation approaches
278
using Halton draws, a technique developed by Halton48 to generate a systematic non-random sequence of
279
numbers. Bhat49 demonstrates that Halton draws provide a more efficient distribution of the draws for
280
numerical integration than random draws.
281
Marginal effects are presented, quantifying the impact of each parameter on the dependent variable (i.e.,
282
length of time water or wastewater service should be provided to displaced persons in the instance of the
283
inability to pay). The reported values are the average marginal effect of each parameter due to a unit
284
change in the independent parameter46, with a positive value indicating an increase in the length of time a
285
respondent believe water/wastewater services should be provided to displaced persons, and a negative
286
value decreasing the time period.
287
Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research
288
Future research should expand this work to consider contexts other than Germany. In support of this, we
289
note that both demographic and locational factors are statistically significant in our results. In addition,
290
qualitative research is needed to explore and problematize the statistical relationships observed in the
291
survey data. In a related limitation, the research design presented here does not explore the scale or scope
292
of services that host populations perceive as appropriate to provide to displaced populations. This
293
combined future work would enable the engineering community to understand the shape14 of the
294
resilience curve sketched in Figure 1, and thereby be better equipped to build resilient utility systems.
295
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
296
Survey Results
297
Aggregated from the survey responses, Table 1 summarizes the aggregate respondent perceptions
298
regarding the provision of water and wastewater service for displaced person who are unable to pay.
299
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
300 301 302
Page 14 of 22
Table 1. Respondent attitudes towards providing water and wastewater service for displaced persons who are unable to pay
Provide water service for a prespecified amount of time Provide water service indefinitely, for as long as need No, do not provide water service
Provide wastewater service for a prespecified amount of time
Provide wastewater service indefinitely, for as long as need
No, do not provide wastewater service
65.2%
0.0%
0.6%
0.0%
12.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
21.3%
303 304
Table 2 summarizes the further exploration of those respondents who believe that water or wastewater
305
service should be provided for a pre-specified period of time.
306
Table 2. Respondent stated length of time to provide services to displaced persons who are unable to pay
Percentage of Respondents
Water: Years of provision of service (St. Dev)
Wastewater : Years of provision of service (St. Dev)
307
Provide for water and wastewater services 88.0% 2.92 (2.16) 2.92 (2.16) for the same amount of time Provide water service for a longer period 5.8% 4.92 (3.90) 3.38 (3.40) of time Provide wastewater service for a longer 6.2% 3.57 (3.05) 5.14 (3.42) period of time Figure 2 shows the distribution of responses for perceptions regarding the provision of water and
308
wastewater service to displaced persons unable to pay for the service.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 15 of 22
Environmental Science & Technology
309 310 311
Figure 2. Respondent distribution for length of time to provide water and wastewater service to displaced persons who are unable to pay
312 313
The results of the random parameter tobit models seeking to better understand the influential parameters
314
impacting the length of time respondents believe water (Table 3) and wastewater (Table 4) services
315
should be provided are shown below. Table 5 summarizes the parameters influencing each service, with a
316
“+” indicating that the parameter has a positive impact on the length of time the service is provided and a
317
“-“ indicating that the parameter has a negative impact on the length of time the service is provided.
318
Interestingly, both locational and sociodemographic parameters were revealed as influential in impacting
319
the perceived amount of time water (wastewater) services should be provided to displaced persons. The
320
locational parameters may be capturing local culture or perceived system capabilities, as well as may aid
321
utilities in understanding the local expectations of the communities to provide services to displaced
322
persons. Select sociodemographic parameters (education, household size, marital status often capturing
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
Page 16 of 22
323
dual incomes, and household income) often are indicative of wealth and the perceived capabilities to
324
provide such services or not.
325 326
Table 3. Random parameter tobit model for length of time water service should be provided to displaced persons who are unable to pay
Independent Variable Constant Highest level of education is school diploma or less (1 if true, otherwise 0) Gender (1 if male, otherwise 0) Marital status (1 if married, otherwise 0) Household size (1 if two or fewer people reside in household, otherwise 0) Length of time living in city (years) Geographic parameters Residing in Hesse (1 if true, otherwise 0) Residing in North Rhine-Westphalia (1 if true, otherwise 0) Log likelihood at convergence AIC Number of observations
Parameter (t-statistic) 2.75 (13.47)
St. Dev. (t-statistic)
Marginal Effects
-0.97 (-6.95)
fixed
-0.937
-0.28 (-1.98) 0.58 (4.18)
2.10 (20.10) 1.97 (20.05)
-0.266 0.561
-0.55 (-3.67)
1.12 (13.31)
-0.524
0.01 (0.38)
0.04 (19.53)
0.001
-0.38 (-1.65)
2.02 (8.87)
-0.369
-0.15 (-0.88)
1.26 (8.29)
-0.144
-611.21 1256.4 298
327 328 329
Table 4. Random parameter tobit model for length of time wastewater service should be provided to displaced persons who are unable to pay
Independent Variable Constant Highest level of education is school diploma or less (1 if true, otherwise 0) Gender (1 if male, otherwise 0) Marital status (1 if married, otherwise 0) Household income (1 if greater than €50,000, otherwise 0) Household size (if two or fewer people reside in household, otherwise 0) Geographic parameters Residing in Baden-Württemberg (1 if true, otherwise 0) Residing in Hesse (1 if true, otherwise 0) Residing in Lower Saxony (1 if true, otherwise 0) Residing in North Rhine-Westphalia (1 if true, otherwise 0) Log likelihood at convergence AIC Number of observations
Parameter (t-statistic) 2.75 (12.75)
St. Dev. (t-statistic)
Marginal Effects
-0.93 (-5.94)
fixed
-0.876
-0.26 (-1.72) 0.36 (2.28)
1.57 (14.13) 2.26 (19.94)
-0.243 0.338
0.21 (1.19)
0.583 (4.26)
0.197
-0.66 (-4.08)
1.90 (20.94)
-0.628
0.10 (0.39)
1.16 (4.86)
0.095
-0.42 (-1.63) 0.36 (1.29)
1.90 (7.46) 0.18 (2.72)
-0.400 0.337
0.22 (1.11)
2.23 (12.45)
0.206
330
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
-616.57 1271.1 298
Page 17 of 22
331 332 333
Environmental Science & Technology
Table 5. Summary of parameters influencing the perceived length of time water and wastewater service should be provided to displaced persons who are unable to pay
Independent Variable
334
Provision of water service
Highest level of education is school diploma or less (1 if true, otherwise 0) Gender (1 if male, otherwise 0) Marital status (1 if married, otherwise 0) + Household size (1 if two or fewer people reside in household, otherwise 0) Length of time living in city (years) + Household income (1 if greater than €50,000, otherwise 0) NS Residing in Hesse (1 if true, otherwise 0) Residing in North Rhine-Westphalia (1 if true, otherwise 0) Residing in Baden-Württemberg (1 if true, otherwise 0) NS Residing in Lower Saxony (1 if true, otherwise 0) NS *NS indicates the parameter was not statistically significant in the respective model
Provision of wastewater service + NS + + + +
335 336
The results support the premise of our analysis. Most respondents identified a temporal transition point
337
when water and sanitation transitions from a right to a service that must be paid for. Table 1 breaks down
338
responses regarding if and how long respondents perceive it is appropriate to provide services for
339
displaced persons who are not able to pay for water and sanitation services. As shown in that Table,
340
21.3% of respondents are willing to provide those services to the displaced persons indefinitely (or,
341
understand water and sanitation only as a human right), 12.9% of respondents are not willing to provide
342
these services to the displaced persons at all (or, understand water and sanitation only as an infrastructure
343
service to be paid for), and 65.2% of respondents are willing to provide services to the displaced persons
344
for a limited period of time (or, believe access to water and sanitation transitions from a right to a
345
service).
346
Table 2 explores the length of the temporal transition described by respondents. Of those respondents
347
who indicated they would be willing to provide water and sanitation for a limited period of time, 88% felt
348
water and sanitation should be provided for the same amount of time. In this sample, the mean of this
349
length of time was 2.9 years. The remaining 12% were roughly evenly split between preferring to
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
350
provide water or sanitation for a slightly longer period. The demographic factors (Tables 3-5) also tend to
351
treat water and sanitation similarly. For example, respondents who hold more than a high school
352
education, are female, married, and live with no more than one other person are more likely to support
353
providing water and sanitation services for a longer period of time. In contrast, the locational factors in
354
the model are less consistent across water and sanitation infrastructure. It is possible this is due to local
355
infrastructure system capacities, history, or messaging from the utilities; future research should explore
356
the reasons behind the differing significance and directionality of the locational factors.
357
It is also worth considering what our results mean for populations other than displaced persons, and how
358
results fit with the literature on human rights. It seems reasonable that most people would be unwilling to
359
provide water and sanitation services for a very wealthy person who simply preferred not to pay, despite
360
the public health benefits of doing so. In contrast, the same wealthy person who was displaced by a
361
disaster and temporarily unable to access her wealth seems a more likely candidate for humanitarian aid,
362
though possibly not for the multiple years allocated to the more typical asylum seekers in Germany by our
363
survey respondents. Generalizing these hypotheticals with the empirical survey data, we refer to the
364
philosophically important distinction between the capabilities and the functionings of individuals50. This
365
longstanding distinction is embedded in the Human Development Approach51 that has shaped much of
366
modern development theory and practice. Here, the philosophers tell us that there is a difference between
367
being able to choose (capabilities) and choosing (functioning). For example, a famine victim who is
368
starving to death is importantly different than an activist who chooses to be on a hunger strike. Neither of
369
these individuals is eating, but one of them is choosing the condition. Similarly (though likely less
370
idealistically than our hypothetical activist!), our hypothetical wealthy person chooses not to have water
371
and sanitation services; a displaced person who is unable to make that choice is thereby entitled to public
372
assistance to ensure her human rights are met. This also seems to explain why our survey respondents
373
feel the right to such assistance for access to water and sanitation is temporally limited. Over time we
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 18 of 22
Page 19 of 22
Environmental Science & Technology
374
would expect the typical displaced person to gain the functionings (or, the ability to choose) related to
375
water and sanitation; at that point, they are expected to choose to pay their own way.
376
We would expect that other factors such as institutional structure52, socioeconomic demographics and
377
scale of the displaced populations, host nation history, the nature of events driving the mass migration,
378
and local pre-migration water and sanitation coverage rates might also influence this timeframe; future
379
research should explore these and other factors across a variety of contexts. Additionally, future,
380
qualitative research should explore and problematize this proposed explanation of the statistically
381
described trends. Regardless, the 2.9 years of service described by survey respondents is a substantial
382
length of time that the German utilities are expected to provide services to a significantly sized and
383
unexpected population.
384
Utilities cannot instantly plan and construct new infrastructure in response to emergency events. As
385
such, the ability to handle this kind of extreme event is a challenge to utility resilience that must be
386
prepared for through regular utility planning efforts. Given anticipated trends in urbanization and climate
387
change, planning infrastructure to handle this type of extreme event may ultimately become the norm53–55.
388
This suggests that utilities need to have a reserve of physical, economic, and organizational capacity
389
available in case they experience this kind of mass migration. German policy already provides for
390
permanent housing structures in case of asylum applications; the recommendation here is to extend these
391
permanent provisions to extra capacity in water and sanitation infrastructure. Contexts without a history
392
of maintaining permanent infrastructure for displaced populations may find this to be politically
393
challenging. In addition, while this paper has provided engineers and policy makers a first data point on
394
the length of time this reserve capacity should serve, recommendations for the type and scale of the
395
reserve capacity (e.g., number of people, percentage capacity, etc.) cannot be developed from this study’s
396
methodology and must be left for future work. In the meantime, we suggest historic data as one way to
397
determine likely scales of impact, and anticipate that locally acceptable scales and metrics will be deeply
398
contextual.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448
REFERENCES (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
(8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13)
(14) (15) (16) (17) (18)
(19)
(20) (21) (22)
Eurostat. Asylum in EU Member States: 1.2 million first time asylum seekers registered in 2016; News Release 46/2017; Eurostat, 2017. Faust, K. M.; Kaminsky, J. Building Water and Wastewater System Resilience to Disaster Migration: Utility Perspectives. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2017, 143 (8). Faust, K. M.; Abraham, D. M.; McElmurry, S. P. Sustainability of Water and Wastewater Infrastructure in Shrinking Cities. J. Public Works Manag. Policy 2016, 21, 128–156. SPHERE. The Sphere Handbook: Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response; Sphere Association: Geneva, 2011. SPHERE. The Sphere Handbook | What is Sphere? http://www.spherehandbook.org/en/what-issphere/ (accessed Jul 11, 2017). UN. The Human Right to Water and Sanitation; Resolution adopted by the General Assembly 64/292; United Nations General Assembly: Geneva, 2010; p 3. Danilenko, A.; van den Berg, C.; Macheve, B.; Moffitt, L. J. The IBNET Water Supply and Sanitation Blue Book 2014: The International Benchmarking Network for Water and Sanitation Utilities Databook; The World Bank, 2014. Eurostat. Aslyum in the EU Member States: Record number of over 1.2 million first time aslyum seekers registered in 2015; News Release 44/2016; Eurostat, 2016. Fiksel, J. Designing Resilient, Sustainable Systems. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37 (23), 5330– 5339. Marchese, D.; Linkov, I. Can You Be Smart and Resilient at the Same Time? Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51 (11), 5867–5868. Matthews, J. C. Disaster Resilience of Critical Water Infrastructure Systems. J. Struct. Eng. 2016, 142 (8). Opdyke, A.; Javernick-Will, A.; Koschmann, M. Infrastructure hazard resilience trends: an analysis of 25 years of research. Nat. Hazards 2017, 87 (2), 773–789. IRGC. IRGC Resource Guide on Resilience; Linkov, I., Florin, M.-V., Series Eds.; doi:10.5075/epfl-irgc-228206; EPFL International Risk Governance Council (IRGC): Laussane, Switzerland, 2016. Connelly, E. B.; Allen, C. R.; Hatfield, K.; Palma-Oliveira, J. M.; Woods, D. D.; Linkov, I. Features of resilience. Environ. Syst. Decis. 2017, 37 (1), 46–50. Pielke, R.; Gratz, J.; Landsea, C. W.; Collins, D.; Saunders, M. A.; Musulin, R. Normalized Hurricane Damage in the United States: 1900–2005. Nat. Hazards Rev. 2008, 9 (1), 29–42. Wisner, B.; Blaikie, P.; Cannon, T.; Davis, I. At risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability, and disasters, 2nd ed.; Routledge: London ; New York, 2003. El-Anwar, O.; Chen, L. Computing a Displacement Distance Equivalent to Optimize Plans for Postdisaster Temporary Housing Projects. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2013, 139 (2), 174–184. Hwang, S.; Park, M.; Lee, H.-S.; Lee, S.; Kim, H. Postdisaster Interdependent Built Environment Recovery Efforts and the Effects of Governmental Plans: Case Analysis Using System Dynamics. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2015, 141 (3). Linkov, I.; Eisenberg, D. A.; Bates, M. E.; Chang, D.; Convertino, M.; Allen, J. H.; Flynn, S. E.; Seager, T. P. Measurable Resilience for Actionable Policy. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 47 (18), 10108–10110. Sun, C.; Xu, J. Estimation of time for Wenchuan Earthquake reconstruction in China. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2010, 137 (3), 179–187. Eurostat. Asylum quarterly report - Statistics Explained http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statisticsexplained/index.php/Asylum_quarterly_report (accessed Sep 26, 2016). Garrelts, B.; Noring, L.; Garrelts, N. Cities and refugees: The German experience; Brookings Institution: Washington, D.C., 2016.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 20 of 22
Page 21 of 22
449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499
Environmental Science & Technology
(23)
(24) (25) (26) (27) (28) (29) (30) (31)
(32) (33)
(34) (35) (36)
(37) (38)
(39) (40) (41) (42) (43) (44)
(45)
Hosseini, S. M. A.; Fuente, A. de la; Pons, O. Multicriteria Decision-Making Method for Sustainable Site Location of Post-Disaster Temporary Housing in Urban Areas. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2016, 142 (9). Moss, T. ‘Cold spots’ of Urban Infrastructure: ‘Shrinking’ Processes in Eastern Germany and the Modern Infrastructural Ideal. Int. J. Urban Reg. Res. 2008, 32 (2), 436–451. BMJ. Medical Milestones. Br. Med. J. 2007, 334, s1–s20. Edwards, M. A.; Pruden, A. The Flint Water Crisis: Overturning the Research Paradigm to Advance Science and Defend Public Welfare. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50 (17), 8935–8936. Faust, K. M.; Mannering, F. L.; Abraham, D. M. Statistical analysis of public perceptions of water infrastructure sustainability in shrinking cities. Urban Water J. 2015, 13 (6), 618–628. Bosher, L.; Dainty, A. Disaster risk reduction and ‘built-in’ resilience: towards overarching principles for construction practice. Disasters 2011, 35 (1), 1–18. UN. Universal Declaration of Human Rights; General Assembly resolution 217 A; United Nations General Assembly: Paris, France, 1948. Rainey, B.; Wicks, E.; Ovey, C. Jacobs, White & Ovey: The European Convention on Human Rights, 6th edition.; Oxford University Press: Oxford ; New York, 2014. Klaphake, A.; Scheumann, W.; Schleip, R. Biodiversity and International Water Policy: International Agreements and Experiences Related to the Protection of Freshwater Ecosystems; Technical University of Berlin: Berlin, 2001; p 44. UN. Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment; United Nations: Stockholm, 1972. Scheumann, W.; Klaphake, A. Freshwater resources and transboundary rivers on the international agenda: From UNCED to RIO+ 10; German Development Bank: Bonn, Germany, 2001. UN. Sustainable Development Goals: Water and Sanitation http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/water-and-sanitation/ (accessed Jun 29, 2017). Fukuda-Parr, S.; Yamin, A. E. The Power of Numbers: A critical review of MDG targets for human development and human rights. Development 2013, 56 (1), 58–65. Hacker, M.; Kaminsky, J.; Faust, K. Constructing Emergency Accommodation for Displaced Persons in Urban Contexts: A Government Perspective. In Leadership in Sustainable Infrastructure; ASCE: Vancouver, BC Canada, 2017. Agier, M. Between War and City: Towards an Urban Anthropology of Refugee Camps. Ethnography 2002, 3 (3), 317–341. Montclos, M.-A. P. D.; Kagwanja, P. M. Refugee Camps or Cities? The Socio-economic Dynamics of the Dadaab and Kakuma Camps in Northern Kenya. J. Refug. Stud. 2000, 13 (2), 205–222. Rotimi, J. O.; Wilkinson, S.; Zuo, K.; Myburgh, D. Legislation for effective post‐disaster reconstruction. Int. J. Strateg. Prop. Manag. 2009, 13 (2), 143–152. Wilkinson, S.; Chang-Richards, A. Y.; Sapeciay, Z.; Costello, S. B. Improving construction sector resilience. Int. J. Disaster Resil. Built Environ. 2016, 7 (2), 173–185. Ganin, A. A.; Massaro, E.; Gutfraind, A.; Steen, N.; Keisler, J. M.; Kott, A.; Mangoubi, R.; Linkov, I. Operational resilience: concepts, design and analysis. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, srep19540. Fox-Lent, C.; Bates, M. E.; Linkov, I. A matrix approach to community resilience assessment: an illustrative case at Rockaway Peninsula. Environ. Syst. Decis. 2015, 35 (2), 209–218. Qualtrics. Qualtrics; Qualtrics, LLC: Utah, Washington, 2016. Krosnick, J. A.; Holbrook, A. L.; Berent, M. K.; Carson, R. T.; Michael Hanemann, W.; Kopp, R. J.; Cameron Mitchell, R.; Presser, S.; Ruud, P. A.; Kerry Smith, V.; et al. The impact of" no opinion" response options on data quality: Non-attitude reduction or an invitation to satisfice? Public Opin. Q. 2002, 66 (3), 371–403. Tobin, J. Estimation of Relationships for Limited Dependent Variables. Econometrica 1958, 26 (1), 24–36.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521
(46) (47) (48) (49) (50) (51) (52) (53) (54)
(55)
Washington, S. P.; Karlaftis, M. G.; Mannering, F. Statistical and econometric methods for transportation data analysis, 2nd ed.; Chapman & Hall/CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 2010. Greene, W. Limdep; Econometric Software, Inc.: Plainview, NY, 2007. Halton, J. H. On the efficiency of certain quasi-random sequences of points in evaluating multidimensional integrals. Numer. Math. 1960, 2 (1), 84–90. Bhat, C. R. Simulation estimation of mixed discrete choice models using randomized and scrambled Halton sequences. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2003, 37 (9), 837–855. Nussbaum, M. C. Creating capabilities the human development approach; Belknap Press of Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Mass., 2011. Sen, A. K. Development as Freedom, 1st ed.; Anchor Books: New York, 1999. Scott, W. R. Institutions and Organizations: Ideas, Interests, and Identities, Fourth Edition edition.; SAGE Publications, Inc: Los Angeles, 2013. Alhanaee, G.; Sanders, K.; Meshkati, N. Rising Temperatures, Rising Risks: The Food-EnergyWater Nexus in the Persian Gulf. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51 (8), 4117–4118. Boyle, C.; Mudd, G.; Mihelcic, J. R.; Anastas, P.; Collins, T.; Culligan, P.; Edwards, M.; Gabe, J.; Gallagher, P.; Handy, S.; et al. Delivering Sustainable Infrastructure that Supports the Urban Built Environment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44 (13), 4836–4840. Xu, M.; Weissburg, M.; Newell, J. P.; Crittenden, J. C. Developing a Science of Infrastructure Ecology for Sustainable Urban Systems. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46 (15), 7928–7929.
For Table of Contents Only
522
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 22 of 22