Sixteenth International Conference on Environmental, Cultural, Economic & Social Sustainability

Abstract

Access to good quality water is agreed upon across the globe as a basic human right. Water is managed along the U.S.-Mexican border, a natural desert region, by a couple of large national institutions, respective states, and local water districts, with strong self-interests. This limits who has access and how allocations are made. In many cases, it can be seen that individuals and the environment suffer as they take a back seat to larger, organized interests. This is due in part to the conflicting goals of national, state, and local institutions, and political/economic actors that function in their own self-interest based in the fundamental principles of sovereignty held by their respective nation-states. Therefore, it can be argued that real equity does not exist for the people living in the region as there is not a governing institution that represents the interests of all of the people. Without equity, it is difficult to obtain sustainability as actors compete for a limited resource. The hypothesis of this study is that sovereignty and self-interest governance models in Mexico and the United States have limited social equity in the management of water. This hypothesis is tested through a model analyzing the main federal, state, and local water governance institutions in the California-Baja California border region, based on the following factors: agency descriptions; institutional visions and mission statements; grant process/funding; government programs and services; cross border work/projects; local networks with private, public, and community members’ access; and laws, rules, regulations, and governance.