We could fight Water Crises by allowing Communities to trade and sell Water

Dan Corder
Jul 28, 2017 · 5 min read

Q Division is based in Cape Town, so we have been thinking a lot about water security lately. We are looking at creative solutions to the crisis, and found one interesting idea, which could combat the age-old problem that exacerbates water shortages.

Even during crises, it is hard to incentivise citizens to save water. Humans are selfish and water seems like such a common resource that people struggle to imagine the negative effect that an extra two minutes in the shower has on a whole city’s attempt to save water. But when the water runs out, it is because of the millions of moments when people don’t see their seemingly tiny, inconsequential actions as contributions to a disaster. The harsh reality is that our natural inability to reform our lifestyles forces governments to shut off the water, to avert disaster for a little longer. At least with water, officials have that option.

Environmental activists can’t just shut off the pollution if things get dire. Carbon dioxide emissions created by all kinds of human activities like farming, manufacturing and everyday living cause destruction of natural systems that we need to keep to preserve our world. Attempts to curb emissions through political pressure and taxes haven’t worked well, because carbon dioxide producers can’t see the effect that their particular emissions have on the worldwide problem, and because carbon dioxide pollution is often an unavoidable consequence of the work they do. They can’t cut down without affecting the profitability of their business, so they don’t comply with environmental protection initiatives. Countries needed a way to barter rights to emit carbon dioxide that kept worldwide emissions in check but also secured big pollutants’ compliance by allowing them to pollute more if they wanted.

Under the Kyoto Protocol, each nation is allotted a quantity of carbon dioxide that they have the right to emit. Carbon emission trading allows nations to buy and sell credits that represent the right to release units of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. They can sell the right to emit carbon dioxide they do not produce to countries which want that right to produce extra CO2. The less you produce, the more you are rewarded through sales. And if you really need to produce more than you are allowed, you can buy the right to do so. Ideally, this system of redistribution keeps global emissions in check because all of the countries’ allocated CO2 emissions combined release a sustainable quantity of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. This model would be even more effective at combating water shortages.

Cities can be split into zones and allotted an amount of water per month to match the reasonable needs of each zone, whether it be residential, small-business, industrial or the like. The combined water allocations for all of the zones constitute sustainable water consumption for the city. If the zone’s assigned water is used up before month’s end, the city will allocate a new amount of water for the zone that provides enough for dignified living until the end of the month. If the zones are an appropriate size, social pressure should cause more responsible water usage, for two reasons. Firstly, people will exert social pressure on neighbours to save water so that the collective does not suffer water cuts. Secondly, people will see the real cost of water waste in their daily lives if the community uses too much water. They will lose water for periods. Their neighbours will too. This makes the cost of water waste real.

Allotted amounts of water represented as credits can be traded on a government-regulated market. Each zone creates a committee that represents it on the market. All those who occupy property in a zone, as dwellers or workers, get to vote on how their committee acts on the market. The key question is whether the city-allotted water credit given to the zone is enough, too little or too much. If everyone is happy with the water allocation, and everyone complies comfortably, the zone won’t be active on the market. The water credit allocation could be more than the zone feels it needs, or the zone could actively cut down on its usage to create a surplus of water. In these cases, the committee takes its surplus water credits to the market and tries to sell it to another zone. And if a zone feels it needs more water, it sends its committee to market to buy more water credits. Once a transaction between zones is complete, the trade is registered with the city, which then redistributes water to the buyer zone and facilitates payment to the seller zone. Committees can sell their credits for any length of time and receive monthly payments for the credits they sell.

Ultimately, this system creates a cap on water usage and water is allocated to ensure equitable distribution. It creates meaningful accountability because the consequences of water waste are seen and felt by wasters. It still provides enough water for dignified living when zones transgress. Critically, it gives zones the ability to buy more water if they decide they need it, and incentivises people to use less water so they can sell it.

  1. Does a regulator gauge supply and demand at all times and control a standard market price per water credit that all zones must trade at or can zones negotiate prices freely?
  2. If a zone uses up its monthly credit, and then uses up its ‘dignified living minimum’ allocation, what next? People have a universal right to water, so total shut off is unacceptable. Yet this model requires some tactic that dissuades people from abusing the city’s water beyond their allotments.
  3. Similarly, what if members of a zone disregard their neighbours and use enormous amounts of water? How can these people be regulated when community pressure fails?
  4. Are water credits bought for money? Are there better possible alternatives that can be used to trade for credits?

We will be investigating answers to these questions. Stay tuned.

Like our ideas? Get the best fresh to your inbox and keep up them on Twitter and LinkedIn.


Originally published at medium.com on July 28, 2017.

QDivision

Inspiration to consider, from Q Division. We find game-changing insights and transform ambitious concepts into innovative digital products and ventures.

Dan Corder

Written by

Inspiration to Consider | Digital Content for Q Division | Digital Product and Service Design | Tw/IG:@DanCorderOnAir

QDivision

QDivision

Inspiration to consider, from Q Division. We find game-changing insights and transform ambitious concepts into innovative digital products and ventures.

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade