By Harry Mok

California's increasing demand for water will exacerbate environmental inequities and place undue burdens on poor and minority communities unless policies are reformed, according to UC Irvine Social Ecology Professor David L. Feldman.

"I think it's about time that we consider environmental justice when we decide how we provision our water resources," Feldman said in a forum, "California Water Policy and Environmental Justice," held June 26 at the UC Sacramento Center.

At the same time that climate change is decreasing precipitation and California's water supply, the state's population may grow to 14 million by 2030. Half of those new residents are likely to live in hotter inland areas, which will increase demand for urban water, Feldman said, and "50 to 60 percent of that water is used for outdoor landscaping."

That seemingly wanton use is part of the social inequity of the way water is used today.

Feldman pointed out that residential lot sizes grow with income, which in turn leads to more landscaping and more water consumption to keep yards green. With rising income also comes increased use of water-guzzling appliances.

Metering is one way to slow the taps; and studies have shown it can cut per capita water use by 40 percent. Since 1991, new homes in the state must have water meters installed, but "utilities don't have to read them," Feldman said, referring to water districts that charge a flat fee for unlimited use. In many areas that do meter water, Feldman said the rates are too low to encourage conservation, and low-income residents end up paying more even though they generally are not using water excessively.

"It's a myth that population and economic growth drive water demand," said Feldman, chairman of the Department of Planning, Policy and Design in UC Irvine's School of Social Ecology. "The reality is inexpensive and subsidized water induces growth in the wrong places."

Rather than uniform price metering, a system called increasing block rate pricing -- in which higher charges are incurred for higher use -- is generally more fair because the greater a household's income, the greater the water use, Feldman said.

On the supply side, climate change is decreasing supply, so water recycling would seem to be an ideal solution, but even it has issues. Purified drinking water is stigmatized as "toilet to tap" and faces public opposition, particularly in low-income or minority communities where there is mistrust due to a legacy of environmental problems, such as abandoned hazardous waste sites or contaminated aquifers. Relying on recycled water also can subsidize and encourage unwanted urban growth, Feldman said.

Reforming water decision-making must be fair and policies on the demand and supply sides must be integrated to ensure water for all. Some of Feldman's suggestions are:

• Stabilize and reverse the gratuitous demand for water.

• Discourage wasteful water use in urban areas.

• Encourage conservation efforts (tiered pricing, water-saving appliances), but be sensitive to the inequities associated with them.

• Consider and alleviate health and equity concerns (mistrust, growth issues) associated with recycled water through public outreach.

• Strengthen laws to ensure that new urban developments have a reliable water supply before they are built.

Before any new laws or policies are enacted, Feldman said the real change begins on an individual level.

"You have to start with fundamental education and personalize the water problem," he said after his presentation. "There's too much of the mentality that what I do doesn't affect the problem; that it's the farmers, or it's the developers ... There has to be recognition that accumulated demand is a major part of this."

Harry Mok is principal editor with the UC Office of the President.