Race, Ethnicity, and the Case for - Recherche en IA spécialisée au MIT

Race, Ethnicity, and the Case for
Intersectional Water Security

(cid:129)
Cameron Harrington, Phellecitus Montana,
Jeremy J. Schmidt, and Ashok Swain*

Abstrait

This Forum article reports on a meta-review of more than 19,000 published works on water
security, of which less than 1 percent explicitly focus on race or ethnicity. This is deeply con-
cerning, because it indicates that race and ethnicity—crucial factors that affect the provision
of safe, reliable water—continue to be ignored in academic and policy literatures. Dans
response to this ﬁnding the Forum calls for building intersectional water security frameworks
that recognize how empirical drivers of social and environmental inequality vary both
within and across groups. Intersectional frameworks of water security can retain policy focus
on the key material concerns regarding access, safety, and the distribution of water-related
risks. They can also explicitly incorporate issues of race and ethnicity alongside other vectors
of inequality to address key, overlooked concerns of water security.

Water security scholarship almost uniformly excludes an explicit treatment of race
or ethnicity. This is a critical issue, because without an adequate account of water
security’s relationships to race and ethnicity, crucial factors affecting the provision
of safe, reliable water will continue to go unaddressed. In response to this exclusion,
we call for intersectional analyses of water security as an anti-oppressive approach
that can orient academic and policy analysis to multiple dimensions of inequality
and insecurity, including ones dependent on ethnic and racial discrimination.

This Forum article proceeds in two steps. D'abord, it highlights the limited
attention given to race and ethnicity within water security scholarship. It does
so by reporting and discussing the ﬁndings from a meta-review of water security
scholarship, where less than 1 percent of that scholarship explicitly references

* We acknowledge support from the Durham-Uppsala Seedcorn Fund, which facilitated the orig-
inal academic exchange that led to this article. We also thank Dr. Cat Button and participants of
le 2021 British International Studies Association panel “Water Security across Scales,” the edi-
tors of Global Environmental Politics, and two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments
and suggestions.

Politique environnementale mondiale 23:2, May 2023, https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00702
© 2023 par le Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International (CC PAR 4.0) Licence.

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
g
e
p
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

2
3
2
1
2
0
7
9
5
7
0
g
e
p
_
un
_
0
0
7
0
2
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

2 (cid:129) Race, Ethnicity, and the Case for Intersectional Water Security

factors of race or ethnicity. Deuxième, it makes the case for an intersectional framing of
water security. A core concern of an intersectional approach is an understanding
that differences of race, genre, class, ethnicity, and other aspects of inequality vary
within groups and among them (Crenshaw 1991). To treat categories of race, ethnic-
ville, genre, or class as singular or homogenous is inadequate to the task of empir-
ically specifying water inequalities. We argue for an intersectional framing that
combines the strength of wider studies on race, ethnicity, genre, poverty, and vul-
nerability in ways that enhance accounts of, and policy responses to, water security.
Ce faisant, we follow and support the small number of water scholars calling for
greater attention to the multiple and interacting vulnerabilities that shape experi-
ences of water insecurity (par exemple., Sultana 2020; Gerlak et al. 2022).

A Meta-review of the Water Security Literature

Water security is a contested but dominant concept (Pahl-Wostl et al. 2016). Dans
its initial public-facing use around the 1980s and 1990s, it was closely tied to
the specter of wars over dwindling water resources (Starr 1991; Kaplan 1994).
The concept has since evolved, cutting across different scales, metrics, and dis-
ciplines (Octavianti and Staddon 2021). Par conséquent, there have been several
English language meta-reviews of water security (par exemple., Cook and Bakker 2012;
Garrick and Hall 2014; Lankford et al. 2013; Pahl-Wostl et al. 2016; Zeitoun
et autres. 2016; Gerlak et al. 2018; Hoekstra et al. 2018). These meta-reviews make
reference to the commonly cited deﬁnitions from Grey and Sadoff (2007) et
the Global Water Partnership (2000). Two of the most inﬂuential reviews have
systematically organized the water security literature through binary framings:
narrow and broad or reductive versus integrative (Cook and Bakker 2012;
Zeitoun et al. 2016). What is common among all reviews, cependant, is the liter-
ature’s silence on race and ethnicity. De même, the gray literatures produced in
the water sector—reports, policy assessments, and strategic guidance produced
by international organizations—are noted as key contributors shaping the dis-
course of water governance (Varady et al. 2009). As our results show, ils, aussi,
frame water security largely without reference to race or ethnicity.

Our review employed a comparable method to Cook and Bakker’s (2012)
to ﬁnd relevant water security publications. We ﬁrst undertook a quantitative
review of the Web of Science database, searching for the exact phrase “water
security” for all available years up until February 2022. This yielded 3,001 arti-
clés. We cross-referenced these articles with searches on “race” and cognate
termes (racism, racist, racial, racialization) and “ethnic” and “ethnicity,” elimi-
nating incidental occurrences (par exemple., “the race for water security”). We allowed
publications to count in different categories, Par exemple, if they covered issues
of both race and ethnicity. Using the exact phrase “water security” returned only
fourteen unique results on race and ten on ethnicity. We then relaxed the search
parameters to capture “water AND security” and repeated the exercise. We cross-
referenced results to avoid duplicate counting, and as Table 1 shows, le

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
g
e
p
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

2
3
2
1
2
0
7
9
5
7
0
g
e
p
_
un
_
0
0
7
0
2
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

C. Harrington, P.. Montana, J.. J.. Schmidt, et un. Swain (cid:129) 3

Tableau 1
Results: “Water Security,” Race, and Ethnicity

Key Words (Février 2022)

“Water security”

Water security
“Water security” and race, racial, racism, racialization
“Water security” and ethnic, ethnicity

Water security and race, racial, racism, racialization

Water security and ethnicity, ethnicity

Total articles

Source: Web of Science Database.

Nombre

3,001

19,568

132

expanded pool (n = 19,568) increased the overall number of publications to
132, of which 55 were on race and 77 on ethnicity. In each respective search,
fewer than 1 percent of the articles on water security explicitly address race or
ethnicity. The qualitative review of the resulting articles showed no clear
emergence of race, ethnicity, and water security issues. Sans surprise, le
high-proﬁle case of Flint, Michigan, where systemic environmental racism
factored into water security outcomes, was prominent in the search (Pauli 2019,
2020). Other articles focused on shifting conceptual understandings of water
security to incorporate racial and ethnic concerns. These included articles advo-
cating for understanding water through Indigenous forms of relationality
(Wilson et al. 2019) or “embodied urban political ecology” (Truelove 2019).

We extended our search to examine critical studies of water security that
frame similar material concerns through water insecurity (results shown in Table 2).

Tableau 2
Results: “Water Insecurity,” Race, and Ethnicity

Key Words (Février 2022)

“Water insecurity”

Water insecurity
“Water insecurity” and race, racial, racism, racialization
“Water insecurity” and ethnic, ethnicity

Water insecurity and race, racial, racism, racialization

Water insecurity and ethnic, ethnicity

Total articles

Source: Web of Science Database.

Nombre

425

1,565

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
g
e
p
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

2
3
2
1
2
0
7
9
5
7
0
g
e
p
_
un
_
0
0
7
0
2
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

4 (cid:129) Race, Ethnicity, and the Case for Intersectional Water Security

This was designed to capture two things. The ﬁrst, as Zeitoun et al. (2016) have
argued, is that the proliferation of water security discourse has coincided with the
emergence of competing policy, gouvernance, and disciplinary frames that seek to
accommodate multiple perspectives. These frames may include, exclude, or occlude
different water security concerns, and this raises critical ethical issues for policy and
gouvernance (Schmidt and Peppard 2014). The second is that the limited number of
studies regarding race, ethnicity, and cognate concerns is not evidence that such con-
siderations are not inﬂuencing water security. Plutôt, it is evidence that they are not
explicitly factoring into most studies identiﬁed in the large Web of Science database.
We therefore recognized the adjacent framing of water insecurity in studies critical of
prevailing politics regarding “water security” but concerned with similar material
concerns of water access and risk. The results show that race and ethnicity are sim-
ilarly excluded from water insecurity studies. Many of the same articles appear across
both Tables 1 et 2. One prominent article argued that US household water inse-
curity was highly racialized by examining the geographic inequality of “plumbing
poverty” (Deitz and Meehan 2019).

Enfin, as reported in Table 3, we repeated our earlier search with both
exact (c'est à dire., “water security”) and relaxed terms (c'est à dire., “water AND security”). À
identify other areas of concern regarding inequalities, we also searched place-
holder categories relevant to water security, such as gender and justice. As Table 3
shows, notions of marginalization, poverty, genre, vulnerability, Indigeneity,
and justice are more common categories than race or ethnicity. Although these
still form a small fraction of water security research, they are potential pathways
through which race or ethnicity may be indirectly addressed. Despite this poten-
tial, it is difﬁcult to gauge how issues of racial or ethnic inequality are addressed
through indirect means. The turn to water insecurity, while not a precise contra-
nym to water security, does not alleviate these concerns. Cependant, critical
appraisals of water insecurity have begun to identify intersecting issues of race,

Tableau 3
Results: “Water Security” and Placeholder Categories

Key Words (Février 2022)

“Water security”
“Water security” and marginalized
“Water security” and poor, poverty, impoverished
“Water security” and inequality
“Water security” and justice
“Water security” and gender
“Water security” and Indigenous

Source: Web of Science Database.

Nombre

3,001

266

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
g
e
p
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

2
3
2
1
2
0
7
9
5
7
0
g
e
p
_
un
_
0
0
7
0
2
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

C. Harrington, P.. Montana, J.. J.. Schmidt, et un. Swain (cid:129) 5

class, and gender (par exemple., Jepson et al. 2017un, 2017b; Wutich et al. 2016; Meehan
et autres. 2020) in ways that elude the water security literature. Par exemple, Wutich
et autres. (2016) found race critical to ascertaining whether the human right to water
can be met through informal water networks. De la même manière, adjacent literature on
water and environmental justice contains examples of explicitly intersectional
approaches to inequalities (par exemple., Pulido 2016; Switzer and Teodoro 2018; Sze
2020; Gerlak et al. 2022), though not always with respect to water security spe-
ciﬁcally. Without explicit attention to race and ethnicity in the framing of water
(dans)security itself, the extent to which indirect categories address water security
challenges that are speciﬁc to these issues is indeterminate.

It is important to note that, by design, our method and analysis are not
comprehensive. We cannot offer a deﬁnitive account of, nor fully trace, the var-
ious disciplinary, empirical, and conceptual directions of the literature and how
they could tangentially address themes of race and ethnicity. Par exemple, quelques
of the pioneering work of Wendy Jepson is absent from our review data despite
its ﬁndings—demonstrating how US household water insecurity intersects with
systems of exclusion—resonating with our own analysis (Jepson 2014). Comment-
jamais, closer examination of the work shows that, though it deals with systemic
exclusion, it avoids explicit mention of race and ethnicity. Despite limitations,
we believe that our ﬁndings indicate something clear and compelling: race and
ethnicity do not factor explicitly into the water security literature.

These ﬁndings suggest three main points of discussion. D'abord, bien que
neither race nor ethnicity is explicitly acknowledged in the vast majority of water
security studies, they may be implicitly addressed through other categories, tel
as poverty. Deuxième, the rise of water insecurity literature is important, though it
does not explicitly take up issues of race or ethnicity in a signiﬁcant manner.
Enfin, the proliferation of studies on poverty and water justice demonstrates
concerns that are germane to intersecting issues of class, course, genre, et ainsi de suite;
they therefore provide further warrant to examine the shape that an intersec-
tional approach to water security might take.

Given these results, we call for scholars and practitioners to extend frames
of water (dans)security to develop an explicitly intersectional approach. The ﬁnal
section explains our rationale and details what intersectional water security
might entail.

Intersectional Water Security

We propose an explicitly intersectional framing of water security. In her original
formulation of intersectionality, Crenshaw (1991) details how Black women
experience compounded forms of discrimination by virtue of being both Black
and female. For scholars of intersectionality, concepts like “discrimination” can
be too rigid when they depend on the homogenizing function of a single class
or category (King 1988; Yuval-Davis 2006). Single-axis frameworks overlook
how individuals may be vulnerable to multiple, often compounding forms of

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
g
e
p
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

2
3
2
1
2
0
7
9
5
7
0
g
e
p
_
un
_
0
0
7
0
2
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

6 (cid:129) Race, Ethnicity, and the Case for Intersectional Water Security

oppression, which may work together or apart, depending on the context, mais
nevertheless produce something distinct from any single type of discrimination
(Cho et al. 2013).

An intersectional framing of water security provides two interrelated
strengths. D'abord, it can overcome the tendency to reduce explanations of people
and their environment to singular and/or homogenous categories of analysis.
The corollary is a treatment of social positions as inherently ﬂuid, plural, et
relational that provides points of engagement for water security studies. Deuxième,
an intersectional approach avoids negatively framing water security (c'est à dire., comme
water insecurity) in ways that require “holistic” changes to policy. By positively
reframing water security, intersectionality produces a greater focus on the empir-
ical drivers of inequality. Many of these drivers are already recognized indirectly,
yet intersectionality frames these and other excluded concerns for explicit policy
fiançailles. The aim is not to prioritize any particular aspect of discrimination
but to understand how inequalities operate empirically. Understanding how
inequality operates empirically, intersectionality orients attention to race, class,
genre, ethnicity, nation, ability, colonialism, and so on not as mutually exclu-
sive but as co-constituted phenomena (Collins 2015). En effet, intersectionality
does not simply “add” issues of race or ethnicity to concerns regarding poor,
marginalized, or vulnerable communities. It recognizes that individuals and
groups experience inequality through multiple, asymmetric power relations
and that those inequalities are interpreted through categories that are not a
direct match to existing categories framing water security (Yates et al. 2017).

Intersectional water security counters dominant binary framings of water
security as “reductionist” versus “integrative” or “broad” versus “narrow,” which
fail to explicitly address race and ethnicity. It also acknowledges how the empir-
ical effects of this omission have historically limited and continue to limit how
frames of water security overlook issues of race and ethnicity and misdiagnose
important issues that intersect with them, such as gender, colonialism, class, et
caste. In this context, intersectional water security identiﬁes shortcomings of cur-
rent water security framings and provides a way to address them by reframing
shared material concerns that add necessary context to the empirical drivers of
inequality. Par exemple, an intersectional approach recognizes how social differ-
ences are refracted through conﬂicts affecting water access, utiliser, and the distribu-
tion of risk. Instead of turning to negative framings of water insecurity, cependant,
an intersectional approach retools water security to more accurately reﬂect the
empirical reality of how inequalities manifest differentially owing to factors of
course, ethnicity, genre, class, and colonialism. Enfin, in all cases, intersectional
water security must be an explicitly antioppressive framework.

Conclusions

Water security has come close to achieving conceptual hegemony in water gov-
ernance literature, yet it largely excludes explicit treatment of race and ethnicity.

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
g
e
p
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

2
3
2
1
2
0
7
9
5
7
0
g
e
p
_
un
_
0
0
7
0
2
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

C. Harrington, P.. Montana, J.. J.. Schmidt, et un. Swain (cid:129) 7

Ce, despite numerous scholars cited herein, as well as the consistent ﬁndings
of the inﬂuential World Water Development Reports, which highlight the need
to address intersecting forms of inequality (UN Water 2006, 2020). We delib-
erately avoid the question of why this exclusion exists or whether other para-
digms, such as water justice, are better equipped for questions of race and
ethnicity. Plutôt, nous soutenons que, without speciﬁcally addressing how race and
ethnicity intersect with other dimensions of inequality, using the existing water
security paradigm intrinsically limits policy responses intended to enhance
social well-being. We thus call for a reframing of water security in intersectional
termes. This provides a substantive alternative to the inﬂuential, binary framings
of water security as narrow/reductionist or broad/integrative.

Policy uses of water security that do not address inequality through anti-
oppressive approaches tolerate moral harms against individuals, societies, et
l'environnement. In this context, one can abandon the policy frame or seek a
new one. We have argued for the latter—a reframing of water security that
orients water security toward intersectional justice.

Cameron Harrington is an assistant professor of international relations in the
School of Government and International Affairs at Durham University. He is a
coauthor of Security in the Anthropocene: Reﬂections on Safety and Care (2017) et
coeditor of Climate Security in the Anthropocene: Exploring the Approaches of United
Nations Security Council Member-States (forthcoming).

Phellecitus Thuli Montana is a PhD candidate in the School of Government
and International Affairs at Durham University. Her research project on “The
Politics and Ethics of Water Security in Cape Town, South Africa” is funded
by the Global Challenges Research Fund–Centre for Doctoral Training.

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
g
e
p
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

2
3
2
1
2
0
7
9
5
7
0
g
e
p
_
un
_
0
0
7
0
2
p
d

Jeremy Schmidt is an associate professor of geography at Durham University.
He is the author of Water: Abundance, Scarcity and Security in the Age of Humanity
(2017) and coeditor of Water Ethics: Foundational Readings for Students and
Professionals (2010).

Ashok Swain is a professor and head of the department of peace and conﬂict
recherche, as well as UNESCO chair of International Water Cooperation at
Uppsala University, Sweden. He is also the founding editor-in-chief of the
peer-reviewed journal Environment and Security. He is a coeditor of Handbook
of Security and the Environment (2021).

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

Les références

Cho, S., K. W. Crenshaw, and L. McCall. 2013. Toward a Field of Intersectionality Studies:
Theory, Applications, and Praxis. Signs 38 (4): 785–810. https://doi.org/10.1086
/669608

8 (cid:129) Race, Ethnicity, and the Case for Intersectional Water Security

Collins, P.. 2015. Intersectionality’s Deﬁnitional Dilemmas. Annual Review of Sociology 41:

1–20. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073014-112142

Cook, C., and K. Bakker. 2012. Water Security: Debating an Emerging Paradigm. Global
Changement environnemental 22 (1): 94–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011
.10.011

Crenshaw, K. 1991. Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, et
Violence Against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review 43 (6): 1241–1299.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039

Deitz, S., and K. Meehan. 2019. Plumbing Poverty: Mapping Hot Spots of Racial and
Geographic Inequality in US Household Water Insecurity. Annals of the Association
of American Geographers 109 (4): 1092–1109. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452
.2018.1530587

Garrick, D., and J. Hall. 2014. Water Security and Society: Risks, Metrics, and Pathways.
Annual Review of Environment and Resources 39: 611–639. https://doi.org/10.1146
/annurev-environ-013012-093817

Gerlak, UN. K., L. House-Peters, R.. G. Varady, T. Albrecht, UN. Zúñiga-Terán, R.. Routson de
Grenade, C. Cook, and C. UN. Scott. 2018. Water Security: A Review of Place-Based
Research. Environmental Science and Policy 82: 79–89. https://est ce que je.org/10.1016/j
.envsci.2018.01.009

Gerlak, UN., E. Louder, and H. Ingram. 2022. Viewpoint: An Intersectional Approach to

Water Equity in the US. Water Alternatives 15 (1): 1–12.

Global Water Partnership. 2000. Towards Water Security: A Framework for Action.

Stockholm, Sweden: Global Water Partnership.

Grey, D., and C. W. Sadoff. 2007. Sink or Swim? Water Security for Growth and Devel-

opération. Water Policy 9: 545–571. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2007.021

Hoekstra, UN., J.. Buurman, and K. van Ginkel. 2018. Urban Water Security: A Review.
Environmental Research Letters 13 (5): 053002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748
-9326/aaba52

Jepson, W. 2014. Measuring “No-Win” Waterscapes: Experience-Based Scales and
Classiﬁcation Approaches to Assess Household Water Security in Colonias on the
US–Mexico Border. Geoforum 51: 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum
.2013.10.002

Jepson, W., J.. Budds, L. Eichelberger, L. Harris, E. Norman, K. O'Reilly, UN. Pearson, S.
Shah, J.. Shinn, C. Staddon, J.. Stoler, UN. Wutich, et S. Jeune. 2017un. Advancing
Human Capabilities for Water Security: A Relational Approach. Water Security 1:
146–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasec.2017.07.001

Jepson, W., UN. Wutich, S. M.. Collins, G. Ô. Boateng, et S. L. Jeune. 2017b. Progress in
Household Water Insecurity Metrics: A Cross-Disciplinary Approach. WIREs Water
4 (3): e1214. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1214

Kaplan, R.. 1994. The Coming Anarchy. The Atlantic Monthly 273 (2): 44–76.
King, D. 1988. Multiple Jeopardy, Multiple Consciousness: The Context of a Black

Feminist Ideology. Signs 14 (1): 42–72. https://doi.org/10.1086/494491

Lankford, B., K. Bakker, M.. Zeitoun, and D. Conway, editors. 2013. Water Security:
Principles, Perspectives, Practice. Londres, ROYAUME-UNI: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324
/9780203113202

Meehan, K., W. Jepson, L. M.. Harris, UN. Wutich, M.. Beresford, UN. Fencl, J.. Londres, G.
Pierce, L. Radonic, C. Wells, N. J.. Wilson, E. UN. Adams, R.. Arsenault, UN. Brewis,
V. Harrington, Oui. Lambrinidou, D. McGregor, R.. Patrick, B. Pauli, UN. L. Pearson,

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
g
e
p
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

2
3
2
1
2
0
7
9
5
7
0
g
e
p
_
un
_
0
0
7
0
2
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

C. Harrington, P.. Montana, J.. J.. Schmidt, et un. Swain (cid:129) 9

S. Shah, D. Splichalova, C. Workman, et S. Jeune. 2020. Exposing Myths of
Household Water Insecurity in the Global North: Une revue critique. WIREs Water
7 (6): e1486. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1486

Octavianti, T., and C. Staddon. 2021. A Review of 80 Assessment Tools Measuring Water

Sécurité. WIREs Water 8 (3): e1516. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1516

Pauli, B. J.. 2019. Flint Fights Back: Environmental Justice and Democracy in the Flint Water
Crisis. Cambridge, MA: AVEC Presse. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11363.001
.0001

Pauli, Benjamin J. 2020. The Flint Water Crisis. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water

7 (3): e1420. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1420

Pahl-Wostl, C., UN. Bhaduri, and J. Gupta, editors. 2016. Handbook on Water Security.
Cheltenham, ROYAUME-UNI: Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781782548010
Pulido, L. 2016. Flint, Environmental Racism, and Racial Capitalism. Capitalism, Nature,
Socialism 27 (3): 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10455752.2016.1213013
Schmidt, J., and C. Peppard. 2014. Water Ethics on a Human Dominated Planet:
Rationality, Context and Values in Global Governance. WIREs Water 1 (6):
533–547. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1043

Starr, J.. R.. 1991. Water Wars. Foreign Policy 82 (1): 17–36. https://doi.org/10.2307

/1148639

Sultana, F. 2020. Embodied Intersectionalities of Urban Citizenship: Water, Infra-
structure, and Gender in the Global South. Annals of the American Association of
Geographers 110 (5): 1407–1424. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2020
.1715193

Switzer, D., and M. Teodoro. 2018. Class, Race, Ethnicity and Justice in Safe Drinking
Water Compliance. Social Science Quarterly 99 (2): 524–535. https://est ce que je.org/10
.1111/ssqu.12397

Sze, J.. 2020. Environmental Justice in a Moment of Danger. Oakland: Université de

Presse californienne. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520971981

Truelove, Oui. 2019. Rethinking Water Insecurity, Inequality and Infrastructure Through an
Embodied Urban Political Ecology. WIREs Water 6 (3): e1342. https://est ce que je.org/10
.1002/wat2.1342

UN Water. 2006. Water: A Shared Responsibility—The United Nations World Water Develop-

ment Report 2. Paris, France: UNESCO.

UN Water. 2020. Water and Climate Change: United Nations World Water Development

Report 2020. Paris, France: UNESCO.

Varady, R., K. Meehan, and E. McGovern. 2009. Charting the Emergence of “Global
Water Initiatives” in World Water Governance. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth,
Parts A/B/C 34 (9): 150–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2008.06.004

Wilson, N. J., L. M.. Harris, UN. Joseph-Rear, J.. Beaumont, and T. Satterﬁeld. 2019. Water Is
Medicine: Reimagining Water Security Through Tr’ondëk Hwëch’in Relationships
to Treated and Traditional Water Sources in Yukon, Canada. Water 11 (3): 624.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w11030624

Wutich, UN., M.. Beresford, and C. Carvajal. 2016. Can Informal Water Vendors Deliver on
the Promise of a Human Right to Water? Results from Cochabamba, Bolivia. Monde
Développement 79: 14–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.10.043

Yates, J.. S., L. M.. Harris, and N. J.. Wilson. 2017. Multiple Ontologies of Water: Politique,
Conﬂict and Implications for Governance. Environment and Planning D, Society &
Espace 35 (5): 797–815. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263775817700395

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
g
e
p
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

2
3
2
1
2
0
7
9
5
7
0
g
e
p
_
un
_
0
0
7
0
2
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

10 (cid:129) Race, Ethnicity, and the Case for Intersectional Water Security

Yuval-Davis, N. 2006. Intersectionality and Feminist Politics. European Journal of Women’s

Études 13 (3): 79–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350506806065752

Zeitoun, M., B. Lankford, T. Krueger, T. Forsyth, R.. Carter, UN. Oui. Hoekstra, R.. Taylor, Ô.
Varis, F. Cleaver, R.. Boelens, L. Swatuk, D. Tickner, C. UN. Scott, N. Mirumachi, et
N. Matthieu. 2016. Reductionist and Integrative Research Approaches to Complex
Water Security Policy Challenges. Changement environnemental mondial 39: 143–154.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.04.010

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
g
e
p
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

2
3
2
1
2
0
7
9
5
7
0
g
e
p
_
un
_
0
0
7
0
2
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3
Télécharger le PDF