Water resource

management is the activity of

planning, developing,
distributing and managing the
optimum use of water
resources. It is a sub-set
of water cycle management.
The field of water resources
management will have to
continue to adapt to the
current and future issues
facing the allocation of water.
With the growing uncertainties
of global climate change and
the long term impacts of
management actions,the
decision-making will be even
more difficult. It is likely that
ongoing climate change will
lead to situations that have not been encountered. As a result, alternative management strategies are sought
for in order to avoid setbacks in the allocation of water resources.
Ideally, water resource management planning has regard to all the competing demands for water and seeks to
allocate water on an equitable basis to satisfy all uses and demands. As with other resource management, this
is rarely possible in practice.
One of the biggest concerns for our water-based resources in the future is the sustainability of the current and
even future water resource allocation.[1] As water becomes more scarce, the importance of how it is managed
grows vastly. Finding a balance between what is needed by humans and what is needed in the environment is
an important step in the sustainability of water resources. Attempts to create sustainable freshwater systems
have been seen on a national level in countries such as Australia, and such commitment to the environment
could set a model for the rest of the world.
Water is an essential resource for all life on the planet. Of the water resources on Earth only three percent of it
is fresh and two-thirds of the freshwater is locked up in ice caps and glaciers. Of the remaining one percent, a
fifth is in remote, inaccessible areas and much seasonal rainfall in monsoonal deluges and floods cannot easily
be used. As time advances, water is becoming scarcer and having access to clean, safe, drinking water is
limited among countries. At present only about 0.08 percent of all the world’s fresh water[3] is exploited by
mankind in ever increasing demand for sanitation, drinking, manufacturing, leisure and agriculture. Due to the
small percentage of water remaining, optimizing the fresh water we have left from natural resources has been
a continuous difficulty in several locations worldwide.
Much effort in water resource management is directed at optimizing the use of water and in minimizing
the environmental impact of water use on the natural environment. The observation of water as an integral part
of the ecosystem is based on integrated water resource management, where the quantity and quality of the
ecosystem help to determine the nature of the natural resources.
As a limited resource, water supply sometimes supposes a challenge. This fact is assumed by the
project DESAFIO (the acronym for Democratisation of Water and Sanitation Governance by Means of Socio-
Technical Innovations), which has been developed along 30 months and funded by the European Union’s
Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration. This project
faced a difficult task for developing areas: eliminating structural social inequity in the access to indispensable
water and public health services. The DESAFIO engineers worked on a water treatment system run with solar
power and filters which provides safe water to a very poor community in the state of Minas Gerais. [4]
Successful management of any resources requires accurate knowledge of the resource available, the uses to
which it may be put, the competing demands for the resource, measures to and processes to evaluate the
significance and worth of competing demands and mechanisms to translate policy decisions into actions on the
ground.For water as a resource, this is particularly difficult since sources of water can cross many national
boundaries and the uses of water include many that are difficult to assign financial value to and may also be
difficult to manage in conventional terms. Examples include rare species or ecosystems or the very long term
value of ancient groundwater reserves.
 Food security is a measure of the
availability of food and individuals'
accessibility to it, where accessibility
includes affordability. There is
evidence of food security being a
concern over 10,000 years ago, with
central authorities in ancient
China and ancient Egypt being known
to release food from storage in times of
famine. At the 1974 World Food
Conference the term "food security"
was defined with an emphasis on
supply. Food security, they said, is the
"availability at all times of adequate,
nourishing, diverse, balanced and
moderate world food supplies of basic
foodstuffs to sustain a steady
expansion of food consumption and to
offset fluctuations in production and
prices".[1] Later definitions added
demand and access issues to the
definition. The final report of the 1996
World Food Summit states that food
security "exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and
nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life". [2][3]
Household food security exists when all members, at all times, have access to enough food for an active,
healthy life.[4] Individuals who are food secure do not live in hunger or fear of starvation.[5]Food insecurity, on
the other hand, is a situation of "limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods or
limited or uncertain ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable ways", according to the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA).[6] Food security incorporates a measure of resilience to future
disruption or unavailability of critical food supply due to various risk factors including droughts, shipping
disruptions, fuel shortages, economic instability, and wars.[7] In the years 2011–2013, an estimated 842 million
people were suffering from chronic hunger.[8] The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, or
FAO, identified the four pillars of food security as availability, access, utilization, and stability. [9] The United
Nations (UN) recognized the Right to Food in the Declaration of Human Rights in 1948,[5] and has since noted
that it is vital for the enjoyment of all other rights.[10]
The 1996 World Summit on Food Security declared that "food should not be used as an instrument for political
and economic pressure".[3]
Food security can be measured by calorie intake per person per day, available on a household budget.[11][12] In
general the objective of food security indicators and measures is to capture some or all of the main
components of food security in terms of food availability, access and utilization or adequacy. While availability
(production and supply) and utilization/adequacy (nutritional status/anthropometric measures) seemed much
easier to estimate, thus more popular, access (ability to acquire sufficient quantity and quality) remain largely
elusive.[13] The factors influencing household food access are often context specific.[14]
Several measures have been developed that aim to capture the access component of food security, with some
notable examples developed by the USAID-funded Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance (FANTA) project,
collaborating with Cornell and Tufts University and Africare and World Vision.[14][15][16][17] These include:
 Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) – continuous measure of the degree of food insecurity
(access) in the household in the previous month
 Household Dietary Diversity Scale (HDDS) – measures the number of different food groups consumed
over a specific reference period (24hrs/48hrs/7days).
 Household Hunger Scale (HHS)- measures the experience of household food deprivation based on a set
of predictable reactions, captured through a survey and summarized in a scale.
 Coping Strategies Index (CSI) – assesses household behaviours and rates them based on a set of varied
established behaviours on how households cope with food shortages. The methodology for this research is
 Urgent actions are required to help
reduce air pollution in Delhi, one of
the most polluted cities in the world,
and restore various air parameters to
levels safe for the health of its citizens
and visitors. Here are few steps that
can play an instrumental role in
reducing air pollution in Delhi, which
reached alarming levels of 485 AQI
(air quality index), when the safe limit
for humans is less than 100 AQI.
1. Car pooling: Reduce traffic-based
air pollution and congestion by starting car pool lanes for those cars and four wheelers that have
three or more passengers to encourage people to go for car pooling. Meanwhile, citizens too
should take initiative and car pool with friends, colleagues, family wherever possible.
2. Use bicycles: Mark out bicycle lanes in residential colonies as well as on all roads in Delhi to
encourage safe travel by bicycles. Meanwhile, citizens should also be encouraged to use
bicycles.
3. Public transport: Encourage greater use of public transport by supporting the Metro,
overhead rail and bus services to make it convenient for people to travel by public transport
affordably and safely instead of using their own vehicles. Citizens too must shed hang-ups over
social status and try to travel by public transport proactively.
4. More CNG vehicles: Encourage use of CNG in motor vehicles as it is a much cleaner fuel
than petrol or diesel by considerably reducing the road tax and sales tax on CNG filled cars as
compared to petrol and diesel four wheelers. Since there are at least 1,400 cars added to Delhi
roads every day, all the cars should be restricted to using CNG only as all new petrol cars can
be converted to CNG. Also, new registrations should be discouraged by enhancing registration
charges.
5. Fuel-efficient cars: Encourage more fuel efficient four wheelers with better mileage per litre
through road tax and sales tax incentives in addition to CNG requirement. Citizens should opt
for more efficient and smaller cars that can run on CNG as alternate fuel.
6. Bigger trucks: Encourage six-axle trucks rather than the typical four-axle ones to increase
the pay load per truck to reduce the number of trucks on roads. Trucks going to other
destinations must not be allowed to pass through Delhi and only use the bypass.
7. Road signs: Improve the poor road signs so that people do not travel extra to locate their
destinations. All the signs must be signposted at two or three places well before the turning
rather than at the last minute.
8. Maintenance of roads: Better maintain roads to complexes such as Nehru Place to reduce
the time a four wheeler spends on plying on such poor roads.
9. Shared taxis: The transport department should encourage shared taxi services by developing
a taxi sharing website and set up taxi stands and cabs to offer reduced fares for shared service.
This is other than the facilities Ola and Uber provide.
10. Burning waste: Burning of leaves, old tyres or any items in the open should be made a
punishable offence in NCR with a fine of Rs 10,000 per incident as this is a major cause of air
pollution. Citizens should be asked to report such incidents to helpline numbers and emails.
Various Waste Disposal Problems

1. Production of too much

waste
One of the major waste disposal
problems is attributed to the generation of
too much waste. America alone is
responsible for the producing of about
220 million tons of waste annually. In
2007 for instance, it’s recorded that
Americans generated nearly 260 million
tons of municipal solid waste. This is
about 2.1 kg per person each day. The
point is; if these are only figures in
America, let’s try to imagine the amount
of waste produced by the rest of the
population across the globe.
According to the World Bank report, the
average global municipal solid waste (MSW) generation per person on daily basis is about 1.2 kg and the figure
is expected to rise up to 1.5 kg by 2025. It therefore means that every state and local authority suffer the
problem of effective waste disposal due to the generation of too much waste. The problem is that the present era
is driven by a throw-away consumerism with companies and producers striving to maximize profits by
producing one-time use products without prioritizing on reuse, recycling or the use of environmentally
friendly materials.
2. Most of the waste is toxic
The majority of the state and local authority legislations are generally lax on regulating the ever-expanding
manufacturing industries. On a daily basis, these industries produce toxic products that end up getting thrown
away after use. Most of the products contain hazardous and health-threatening chemicals.
A report by the U.S. EPA indicates that more than 60,000 untested chemicals are present in the consumer
products in our homes. There are even products known to contain toxic chemicals, such as Biphenyl-A (BPA) –
often present in plastic toys, but they are still poorly regulated. Packaging is also one of the biggest and rapidly
enlarging categories of solid waste which accounts for 30% of MSW and approximately 40% of the waste is
plastic which is never biodegradable. It’s this level of toxicity together with the lax regulatory laws that
exacerbates the problem of dealing with waste disposal.
3. Landfills are a problem as well
Most landfills lack proper on-site waste management thereby contributing to additional threats to the
environment. In the long-term, landfills leak and pollute ground water and other neighboring environmental
habitats making waste management very difficult. They also give off potentially unsafe gases.
Also, the laws and regulation guiding the operations of landfills are often lax at monitoring and regulating the
different types of wastes namely medical waste, municipal waste, special waste or hazardous waste. With this
kind of laxity of the laws in landfill waste management, the landfills toxicity and hazardous nature significantly
increases to a point where the landfill waste problems often lasts for up to 30 years.
4. Regulations are based on vested interests
Since waste disposal and management has become a profit making venture, those who advocate for safe, quality
and proper management of waste disposal are outmatched by industries in the business. Large enterprises in the
waste disposal business dictate all aspects of the market from operating landfills, sewer systems and incinerators
to recycling facilities. The corporations simply aim at making profits regardless of the waste reduction
requirements or the resultant destructive environment impacts.
As such, they collaborate with vested interest regulators thereby creating a big problem in the effective
regulation of waste disposal, which has worsened the devotions to waste reduction and recycling programs. To
make matters worse, even some state officials work together with such industry officials to expand landfills,
increase waste tonnage, and develop new waste disposal or recycling or treatment facilities to augment profits.
5. Reliance of dying technologies to reduce and recycle waste
Waste disposal and management facilities as well as state resources have continued to rely on myopic and
quickie solutions instead of developing effective recycling and waste reduction programs. Consequently, it has
created continued reliance on the use of outdated technologies to deal with waste disposal. The problem is that
most states are reluctant and less creative towards advancing novel technologies for reducing the toxicity and
volume of waste or enhancing recycling, especially solid waste.
Waste Disposal Solutions
Eco-responsibility – “Reduce, Re-use, Recycle”
Eco-responsibility pertains to the three Rs mantra of Re-use, Reduce, and Recycle. Local communities,
authorities and states need to put more efforts towards the education of waste management. Essentially, the
slogan can help reduce the levels of unsustainable waste that prove problematic in various environments across
the globe. With the implementation and consistent practice of the three Rs, communities and local authorities as
well as states will not only be able to manage waste but also move in the direction of achieving zero waste.
More emphasis should be placed on responsible resource use with an objective of avoidance, maximizing
recycling and waste reduction methods. Avoidance and waste reduction involves techniques such as repair of
broken things instead of buying new, purchasing and re-using second-hand items, and designing reusable and
recyclable products.
Effective waste disposal and management
An effective strategy for municipal waste disposal and management can offer improved solutions for the
various problems associated with waste materials. It ensures there is gradual improvement of new and cost-
effective facilities which aim to encourage higher environmental protection standards. An effective
management strategy will also see to it that landfills are purposefully located to ease waste collection, transfer,
and monitoring or recycling. This can be achieved through the implementation of waste disposal plan which
must include proper monitoring and regulation of municipal solid and food waste, livestock waste, sewage
sludge, clinical waste, and construction waste.
Control and monitoring of land filling and fly-tipping activities
Thousands of tones of construction and demolition materials are generated by various local construction
industries. In most cases, a large portion of these waste materials can be re-used, reclaimed or recycled. With
the control and monitoring of land filling and fly-tipping activities in the area of public works, construction and
demolition materials can be resourcefully reclaimed, reused or recycled in other projects such as landscaping,
village houses, recreation facilities or car parks, or roads. By applying these techniques and monitoring fly-
tipping activities, the construction and demolition materials that sometime go into landfills which further
worsen the management of solid waste can easily be managed.
Waste Diversion Plans
A multifaceted approach on waste transfer and diversion in terms of more hygienic and efficient waste disposal
management can offer tremendous solution to waste problems. To address most of the waste problems,
especially landfills and sewer material, the local authorities and state waste management facilities need to
formulate waste diversion plans, with an objective of making certain that there is convenient and proper waste
disposal at landfills and waste transfer facilities. Measures such as mandating equipment standards and
rerouting of refuse collection/transfer can enhance the environmental performance of waste disposal operations.
Improvements of thermal waste treatment
Thermal waste treatments have been proved not to be 100% green as they are normally pronounced. Therefore,
to mitigate the problems that come with thermal waste treatments – (issues such as emission of toxic gases with
organic compounds such as furans, PAHs, and dioxins); states and researchers as well as green groups and
academicians can explore the possible developments with regards to advanced thermal waste treatment
techniques. Appropriate and improved thermal waste treatment technology is important as a strategy for
tackling the environmental concerns.
Polluter pays principle and eco-product responsibility
Polluter pay principle is where the law requires the polluter to pay for the impact caused to the environment.
When it comes to waste management, the principle will require those who generate waste to pay for the suitable
disposal of non-reclaimable materials. For the effectiveness of the pay principle, it should incorporate charging
schemes on all waste disposal aspects including construction waste and domestic waste through public fill
reception facilities.
 the recent financial crisis has expanded the
power of government. Tea parties have revealed
the disillusion of millions of Americans with the
rise of government and the decline of morality.
The crisis has damaged, unfairly, the vision of
market liberalism. It is essential, therefore, to
reexamine and articulate the principles of a free
society and to understand the danger to liberty
that the new progressivism poses.
Since this essay was first presented at the historic
Chautauqua Institution in 1995, the federal
government has grown in size and scope. Today
Congress spends nearly $4 trillion, the federal share of GDP has risen to 25 percent, and the U.S. debt exceeds
$12 trillion. Washington has bailed out financial, insurance, and automobile firms while also taking control of
the mortgage market. We are now more dependent on government for our health care, pensions, and future than
ever before.
Politicians thrive on using other people’s money and promising free lunches. The growth of government has
politicized life and weakened the nation’s moral fabric. Government intervention—in the economy, the
community, and society—has increased the payoff from political action and reduced the scope of private action.
People have become more dependent on the State and have sacrificed freedom for a false sense of security.
One cannot blame government for all of society’s ills, but there is no doubt that economic and social legislation,
especially since the mid-1960s, has had a negative impact on individual responsibility. Individuals lose their
moral bearing when they become dependent on government. Subsidies, bailouts, and other aspects of the
“nanny state” socialize risk and reduce individual accountability. The internal moral compass that normally
guides individual behavior will no longer function when the State undermines incentives for moral conduct and
blurs the distinction between right and wrong.
More government spending is not the answer to our social, economic, or cultural problems. The task is not to
reinvent government or to give politics meaning; the task is to limit government and revitalize civil society.
Government meddling will only make matters worse.
If we want to help the disadvantaged, we do not do so by making poverty pay, restricting markets, prohibiting
educational freedom, discouraging thrift, and sending the message that the principal function of government is
to take care of us. We do so by eliminating social engineering and all kinds of welfare, cultivating free markets,
and returning to our moral heritage.
At the beginning of the twentieth century there was no welfare state as we know it. Fraternal and religious
organizations flourished. Total government spending was less than 10 percent of GDP, and the federal
government’s powers were limited.
Immigrants were faced with material poverty, true, but they were not wretched. There was a certain moral order
in everyday life, which began in the home and spread to the outside community. Baltimore’s Polish immigrants
provide a good example. Like other immigrants, they arrived with virtually nothing except the desire to work
hard and to live in a free country. Their ethos of liberty and responsibility is evident in a 1907 housing report
describing the Polish community in Fells Point:
A remembered Saturday evening inspection of five apartments in a house [on] Thames Street, with their
whitened floors and shining cook stoves, with the dishes gleaming on the neatly ordered shelves, the piles of
clean clothing laid out for Sunday, and the general atmosphere of preparation for the Sabbath, suggested
standards that would not have disgraced a Puritan housekeeper.
Yet, according to the report, a typical Polish home consisted “of a crowded one- or two-room apartment,
occupied by six or eight people, and located two floors above the common water supply.”
Even though wages were low, Polish Americans sacrificed to save and pooled their resources to help each other
by founding building and loan associations, as Linda Shopes noted in The Baltimore Book. By 1929, 60 percent
of Polish families were homeowners—without any government assistance.
Dependent Not Self-Reliant