ethnographies 

Section 1: Introduction 

Identifying The Problem 

In the United States, nearly one in two adults and one in four children do not drink tap water on a given day; with children from minority and low-income families less likely to drink tap water, opting for bottled beverages instead (Patel et al.).This has several implications; a decrease in hydration availability, the added cost of buying bottled water, a worsening of dental health from the lack of fluoride in bottled water, and the exorbitant environmental impact of bottled water waste are just a few considerations that negitivley impact the health and well–being of people. Research analyzing water-quality has found evidence of less safe drinking water quality in communities of color and low income (Balazas et al.).What this data reveals, is something far more sinister: a mistrust of tap water and a larger picture of water-inequality in the United States.This ethnography will analyze how the dominant water structures disproportionally affect communities of color by dissecting discourse of inequality enacted on the body perpetuated by systemic and structural inequalities. I seek to understand how systems and structures as well as created dilemmas like conflicts of interest in private water utility operations and social preconceptions, for a holistic approach to our current conception of the intrinsic right to safe water and water equality. The driving question I chose for this ethnography is, why in a developed nation such as the United States, is clean and safe water not accessible to all in? Being born and raised in California, in addition to our agricultural prominence, I will orient my question around the state of California. Being a student at UC Berkeley, I will utilize Berkeley's local water distribution system, East Bay Municipal Utility District, to understand this issue. 

Section 2: Theoretical Framework

A theoretical framework beginning my ethnography will help enumerate the themes I discovered during my fieldwork, interviews, research and used to synthesize my final reflections. Analyses on the intersections of power, race, economic status, education level, health, and language barriers are numerous. Critical Race Theory,  Social Determinants of Health Theory, Environmental Justice, Environmental Racism, Racism, Socioeconomic Inequality and so forth are all attempts at understanding this multivariable relationship. I believe a more insightful approach is not a commitment to a single one of these fields or theories, but rather an investigative approach. Investigation means to me playing Sherlock Holmes, combining theories, being ideologically flexible,  and never ceasing to understand and note my presence in the investigation. 

The Investigative Framework

What does it mean to be a person of color in a hegemonically white system? How is navigating American structures, such as healthcare or education, different for a Hispanic person in comparison Black person, in comparison to a White person? Does American structuralism, place people of color in compromised health situations? Further, does the drinking water system of a state such as California place people of color at greater risk of health adversities?

Postulating a claim such this, the drinking water system of a state, such as California, places people of color at greater risk of health adversities, requires evidence and demonstration. To demonstrate this claim I will firstly use research from the peer-reviewed journal Water Alternatives. This research examines the unlawful behavior of private water utility companies in two small towns, Maywood and Cudahy,  outside of Los Angeles. Both towns are highly populated with minorities. In his research for Water Alternative, JustinMcBride collected data on the 5-main mutual water companies running Maywood and Cudahy. In 2008, residents of these towns began to notice a fowl smell emanating from their tap water. Rallied together to fight for their right to clean drinking water, residents of these towns repeatedly went to courts to challenge the privately owned mutual water companies, yet they were defeated by the privately owned mutual water companies who were backed at city and state level rulings (McBride). 

The apparent qualms with these private mutual water companies could be denoted as follows; the lack of ownership of houses in the cities which in turn leads to an inability to decide where their water comes from (as well as the financial limitations renters often have), and the inability for the presently operating mutual water companies to meet standards of clean water quality.

Yet thats only scratching the surface of the issues at play here. McBride pointed out that these private mutual water companies had day-to-day staff serving on their board of directors. Why is that an issue? When staff members serve on a firm's board of directors, in this case in the drinking water sector, it becomes especially dangerous for several reasons; 

1. The Lack of Oversight in Safety & Quality– The board of a drinking water utility is supposed to independently oversee operations, ensuring water quality and compliance with health regulations. When staff members also sit on the board, they are essentially regulating themselves, increasing the risk of cut corners, neglected maintenance, or falsified reports on drinking water safety.  

2. Self-Dealing Can Prioritize Profits Over Public Health– If board members grant themselves jobs or higher salaries instead of investing in infrastructure and drinking water quality improvements, critical repairs and testing may be underfunded, leading to contamination risks.  

3. Regulatory Avoidance– Independent boards help hold staff accountable for following state and federal drinking water safety laws. When the lines are blurred, firms may ignore regulations, leading to dangerous conditions like lead contamination, bacterial outbreaks, or chemical pollution. This was all to evident in a case like Flint, Michigan. 

4. Misallocation of Public Funds– Many drinking water systems receive government funding for improvements. If board members use these funds for personal gain (such as hiring themselves), necessary upgrades to filtration systems, pipe replacements, or emergency response measures, it may never happen, endangering entire communities.  

5. Erosion of Public Trust– Access to clean water is a basic human need, and when corruption exists within the organizations managing drinking water systems, communities lose trust. This can delay action on water crises, as seen in Flint, Michigan, where officials downplayed contamination concerns for years.  

In short, corruption and conflicts of interest in drinking water governance can directly endanger public health, leading to toxic water, disease outbreaks, and long-term environmental harm.

This is one anecdote in an anthology of research papers and only one negeltected necessity and one apparent consequence- stinky drinking water. Yet the consequences of even the slightest contamination of drinking water by a multitude of pollutants like lead, nitrates, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, E.Coli, giardia, over a prolonged period is extreme. Cardiovascular health, reproductive health, birth weight, higher education attainment, future projected income,  are all negatively affected as observed across a multitude of studies. And thats only drinking water- there's air pollution and lung health, processed food and obesity, housing and lead or mold exposure, and the list goes on. 

I'd be remiss if I did not briefly enunciate the agriculture industry's part in drinking water contamination.  In the Public Health Nursing journal, research conducted by Sarah Brown Blake looked at the impact dairy farms in the San Joaquin Valley have on local water quality. Nitrate is a common byproduct of cow manure and fertilizers used in agriculture (Blake). The toxin nitrate is again looked at in relation to peoples’ health as well as birth rates.The study concludes that while low birth weights and water quality aren’t spatially correlated, high levels of nitrate are correlated with high density cow populations. Focusing primarily on vulnerable groups, Blake’s research notes that pregnant women and children are particularly susceptible to nitrate contamination and are adversely affected. Are institutions such as agricultural water management, delibertaly maiming this population of vulnerable people? That would be an act of structural violence. This research clearly provokes the question; is the ubiquity of nitrate a byproduct of accepted systemic racial inequality within San Joaquin Valley? Do the agricultural institutions operating really not know the by-products of their industries are hurting people? Do they exploit language barriers, gaps in education, income constraints such as the inability to take time off of work to conduct research as I have, ability to compile a lawsuit, or immigration legality status? Seeing as I quickly discovered these facts, and to operate as an agricultural business you must know the region, the product and your labor source, "comply" to various EPA regulations, the answer seems like an incontestable yes.

Can it be suggested then, by this research and others that American Institutionalism has embedded structures of inequality into local city and state governance. Is it because of institutional violence? The idea that structural hierarchies embed into society and a public belief prevails that people of certain perceived races are more deserving of quality services or resources than others (Holmes)? Or is it a case of malpractice? A misfortunate instance of bad actors? It's difficult not to assume in this case of drinking water regulation, that there is a predation, whether implicit or explicit, on the lack of knowledge in communities of immigrants- a cutting of corners until noticed and change is demanded. That is a devastating way to run a system, especially for something as critical and prevalent as drinking water.   

Section 3: Methodology 

Fieldwork

For my ethnographic fieldwork I collaborated with East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). In the Fall semester of 2022 at UC Berkeley, I was enrolled in a water and wastewater systems class designed for civil engineers. I am not a civil engineer. Therefore my understanding of some of the concepts being taught were obscured if not outright misunderstood by my lack of knowledge. I asked for clarifications when I could. The course was also in its trial phase and our class was the first to have taken it. As my main strategies, I conducted observations via note taking on field trips to various water treatment plants, as well as observations via note taking in class and during labs. Taking this course rerouted the way I had previously thought about water; it wasn’t untamable waves of the ocean, but a meticulously managed system of pipes interwoven all throughout the East Bay. Tap water became more than a faucet maneuver, it became regulations, treatment-process, a question of public health and safety.

Section 4: Field Notes and Interviews

Unleash The Waterworks

Context: For my field research I went on a class field trip to the East Bay Municipal Utility District water treatment plant in El Sobrante. The date was 09-23-2022.

I start out the morning in a rush from my apartment to Hearst Mining Circle. It’s no easy feat, I live on the exact opposite corner of Berkeley’s campus, tucked away on a Shattuck and Haste. Not to mention the incline. Not to mention my backpack loaded with books. Not to mention what feels like a ten ton laptop and endless campus hills. But I’m no quitter and at 11 am sharp, the white bus pulls into the bend and we file in, printouts in hand. An injury waiver (mildly alarming), a covid-symptom check, and a EBMUD sponsored informational pamphlet detailing the water-treatment process we’d soon behold are passed out. Exciting. I take a spot in the very far back. The campus rolls by and I lose track of time listening to music, peering into car windows from my steel and rubber high horse, and suddenly we’re in the town of El Sobrante. 

 El Sobrante is a small city tucked into some hills in the northeast. Trees and little convenience shops litter the main avenue we’re driving on. Old and quaint. We take a turn into a residential area. The bus barely fits. Then, like a big and noisy neighbor, the El Sobrante plant is nestled in with the surrounding homes. I’m gathering my things; pens, notebook, headphones, as the security guard smiles kindly at us and throws up a peace sign and the gate. We file out of the bus and walk from the dirt and gravel parking lot up to the main building. Chatter among my classmates and instructors. We are met by the staff, two men in sunglasses who I miss the names of, and a lady also donning shades. It is bright outside. So I squint. I realize the need for shades. It is not an intimidation technique. I recognize the first man, A, from a previous guest lecture he gave a week or two ago in my class. The other man, B, is new to me but is an established figure at the company he says. The lady, C, utters a brief hello and by a mysterious force, or a perhaps an unheard walkie talkie, takes off to tend to something urgent. Like Batwoman.

We begin the tour in a room segregated by glass walls. This is the ozone generator. Noisy and very metal. We move behind the glass into the room and the humming grows louder, yet no trace of water is evident. Instead, there’s the inorganic juxtaposition of the metallic ozone cylinders and rigid metal pipes lining the ceiling. We look into the cylinders through a porthole and I see tiny blue mechanical eyes peering back at me. A function of the machine. The ozone generator continues to hum as A tells us its importance within the water purification system EBMUD facilitates. Most of the chemistry talk doesn't make sense to me. I look around and see a mix of puzzled faces like mine as well as the civil engineer students grinning and scribbling as fast as they can. I do understand the reverence for the ozone machine though. It has revolutionized the water sanitation game; ozone is interspersed into water and oxidizes it which in turn negates bacteria and certain metal contaminants. 

The tour continues, still no sight of water. We enter a room significantly quieter. A relief. This is a graveyard of sorts; old machinery (replaced by the shiny new expensive ozone generator), blueprints the length of a toddler, and various unlabeled boxes lay around. A takes any questions we have, I don’t ask anything embarrassed about my lack of chemistry and engineering  knowledge, and with that we’re off again.

We move outside and the sun thaws me out; it was unreasonably cold in there I realize. I look around and there in the distance, Water! Water is shooting out of several man-made geysers at least 4 feet high. I’m ecstatic. As we walk I ask C, who has returned to us unheard, if that's the aeration process which she confirms. Aeration is crucial when treating water from the San Pablo reservoir. Because the reservoir is so deep, water beyond a few feet from the surface becomes anoxic, starved of oxygen which in turn invites all kinds of nasty and hazardous byproducts. Anoxic water is responsible for blue and green algae blooms which have proved fatal for unsuspecting hikers and dogs alike. The process of aeration is by far my favorite, not only aesthetically pleasing, it also mimics the ocean smell. It’s the hydrogen sulfide B explains. Again the chemistry surpasses me but I inhale and savor the smell. 

We keep moving and come up to a metal walkway where we find the second step of the purification process characterized by two large parallel pools. Flocculation. The paddle is elusive, explains B, but a few of my classmates and I peer eagerly over the edge to try and catch a glimpse. There! A classmate shouts and sure enough a large metal bar passes by. Like a dolphin or a whale sighting, I think. It recedes, dipping below where I can see it and I realize the group is gone. Catching up with the rest of the group who are now looking at a pool of settled water. This water is awaiting further chemical treatment. It's a swimming pool size with shower-looking faucets spewing out water. The sound is soothing and relaxes me. It’s almost like being by a creek. I grew up spending weeknights trekking down to our local creek and playing in the mud. Here A and B explain the importance of chemically treating water. Some of the chemicals mentioned shock me; ammonia, hydrogen peroxide, chlorine… They sound like the last thing you want in water you drink. But as I think to raise my hand to complain, B assures that the chemicals are added in such moderation it scarcely harms you. In fact, a lack of chlorination would result in something far worse, like cholera. Here the ozone also enters the water. Apparently it flows in through a pipe at the bottom of the pool but I don’t see it. I take their word for it. We all do right? 

The tour ends and we walk to a large cement platform engraved into the surrounding dirt. Apparently this is the top of a chamber in which water flows through and is further chemically treated before splitting like veins into the cities. We can't see the process because the chamber has to be pressurized correctly or a big boom will happen, explains A. Layman's terms…finally! I crouch down in an effort to hear anything but considering its a couple feet of concrete thick, it's a futile effort. We stand around, exhausted and sun-stroked and a few concluding questions and remarks are exchanged. I ask where the water from San Pablo, a large reservoir in the area, is coming from, an aqueduct? C answers that question; a tunnel several hundred feet long and thick enough to drive a truck in, nestled under San Pablo Dam road and coming down and under a hill in the east part of the facility. That amazes me. All underground and all efficient. And with that, we make our way back to the bus and head back to Berkeley. I imagine we’re driving over the massive tunnel as we pass San Pablo Dam road on the freeway. 

Perhaps the most striking aspect of this field trip was witnessing  the control of water—the machinery, engineering, and infrastructure that govern its flow and distribution. In particular, smelling the “ocean” from the geysers reminded me of water’s greatest form; unbridled and mildly terrifying. Uncontrollable. The anthropogenic control of water is a sign of human ingenuity and resourcefulness. I love mankind.

What also resonates with me is the extensive and expensive feat of water management. The systems we build to control and manage water made me realize the real-world limitations of dealing with water crises. It's a process which can’t be easily changed. It’s easy to critique water utility companies when incidents like Flint happen but running a water filtration site is no easy job either.

Interviews

Conversations With The Experts

Another strategy I used was personal interviews. I was able to have two interviews to enrich my ethnography.  The first was with EBMUD staff member Michael Ambrose. When I interviewed Mike, I began with basic questions about his position; what was his role at EBMUD and what he did on a daily basis. I then moved onto more open ended questions such as; what are the most important aspects of EBMUD and what worried him most about California’s current dire water situation. Interviewing him I found out Mike has a department of about 600 people and they do all of the maintenance and construction for the water distribution system. All the pipes that are in the streets, the services that go to each customer, the meters that go to each customer that measure how much water each person uses, his team maintains that. He also has a group of people that maintain EBMUD’s work fleet of about 1300 vehicles. A busy man. What I found most enriching about interviewing was the open ended questions. Mike's response to what he was most concerned about regarding Californian water. He responded “what worries me most is definitely the variability of climate change from a supply and quality standpoint”. He offered up information about less frequent supply of rain, snow,and huge atmospheric rivers. Less safe supply is obviously an issue for public health. The same goes for atmospheric rivers and wildfires which stir up a lot of dirt and turbidity that many existing water treatment plants aren’t capable of treating.

The second interview I had with Scott Hill. Scott Hill is an East Bay watershed specialist. This interview trailed off a little too far into carbon neutrality and Scotts enuanced enthusiasm regarding it's feasibility, but was still equally enlightening. We discussed how water availability is being impacted by climate change, which in turn can cause social disparity. Advancing water treatment plants costs money, money ratepayers are expected to provide, yet what happens if they cannot? Dirty water or worse no water at all if the bill can’t be paid. Its evident water quality becomes a structural problem. I found both interviews rewarding; they put a face on water system management that was sympathetic and understanding. 

Section 5: Reflection

Concluding Thoughts

Cumulatively, by looking at water inequality from a systemic perspective, I became aware of a deeper understanding of water management as a complex process that can perpetuate inequality from so many external factors. One of my most significant field-experiences that demonstrated this was a field trip our civil engineering class took to a sort of invention lab.  Specifically, it's a lab funded by UC Berkeley and EBMUD in the middle of nowhere. In an aircraft hanger. The bus-driver-got-lost-twice kind of middle of nowhere. The lab was cutting edge, decked out with million dollar equipment such as an earthquake simulator machine shipped all the way from Cornell. Meticulously taken apart, it was shipped across the country and was being put back together to much clamor and excitement. But what stuck out to me the most was the 20 feet of bright blue IPVC pipe we stood watching as it slowly, slowly bent. IPVC is a cutting-edge version of PVC from South Korea which is set to revolutionize water infrastructure. It’s chemically more safe than lead pipes and cheaper than cast-iron pipes. 

There's a little factoid I remember from lectures, during World War II, metal was rationed for war efforts, and the structural integrity, durability, protection from leeching,  and general safety of pipes all around suffered. Engineers were pressured to make pipes as thin as possible. We haven't replaced all of those thin pipes. This shiny blue pipe could change that. The blue pipe of the future was being simulated with normal water flow, I stood, notebook in hand, ready to see some insane action; the IPVC was going to burst! Water everywhere! I waited. And waited. Nothing. After about 30 minutes of small increments of pressure being added, a small stream of water peeked out at the gasket. Exhilarating. That small stream concluded the trial. Quite frankly, we were all a little disappointed. No big boom. 

Yet on the bus ride I came to realize that what was significant was the little leak. Tests like these are what is revolutionizing the water infrastructure game. Infrastructure development is a pressing factor that is and will continue to perpetuate inequality in water systems and public health. It made me think, will everywhere have access to implement this technology? Who is this technology benefiting? My professor was only able to cite academic studies. No mention of prioritizing vulnerable communities. Pipe replacement was done by a cost-benefit analysis, not on the basis of race or income. What I was seeing afterall was a byproduct of UC money and funding. This ties to my theoretical framework, access to clean water is barricaded by technology development and the way institutions operate. It's likely communities of color won’t see IPVC in their neighborhoods before affluent neighborhoods do. It’s likely lack of higher education will affect the ability of communities to advocate for technology like IPVC. It’s a byproduct of American institutional water management. It’s devastating. 

From my fieldwork and interviews alike, the issue of climate change always came up. It’s the big bad monster hiding in the closet waiting to strike. A wildfire. A flood. An earthquake. Climate change seemed to me as a pressing factor that is and will continue to perpetuate inequality in water systems and public health. The severity of climate change is debatable, a lot remains unknown. I do not know a whole lot on climate change, yet I feel confident in believing it will impact people and places differently. Water scarcity and wildfires in Southern California, atmospheric rivers and flooding in Northern California- both equally bad things.  Following en suite, people’s health will be impacted differently. More vulnerable groups such as rural migrant workers in San Joaquin are at higher risk of water inequality from drought. Old and underfunded water treatment sites ill-equipped to deal with increased turbidity from wildfires, will put more groups at risk than others. 

Learning about water inequality through ethnography provided an understanding of water management as an intricate affair that perpetuates health inequalities from many external factors, some within our control, some entirely out of our control, some we can mitigate, some we have to adapt to. Hopefully a declaration and critique such as this one initiates change. 

Works Cited

Balazas, Carolina et al. “Social Disparities in Nitrate-Contaminated Drinking Water in California’s San Joaquin Valley.” Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol.119, No.9, September 2011, pp. 1272-1278.

 Blake, Sarah Brown. “Spatial Relationships among Dairy Farms, Drinking Water Quality, and Maternal-Child Health Outcomes in the San Joaquin Valley”. Public Health Nursing, Vol. 31, No.6, pp. 429-499. 

Delgado, Richard, and Jean Stefancic. Critical Race Theory (Third Edition): An Introduction. NYU Press, 2017. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1ggjjn3. 

Holmes, Seth. “ESPM 162A Health Medicine, Society and the Environment.” University of California Berkeley, 08 November 2022. Lecture.  

McBride, Justin. “ Mutual Water Systems and the Formation of Racial Inequality in Los Angeles County.” Water Alternatives, Vol.15, Issue 1, 2022.  

Patel, Anisha I et al. “Sociodemographic characteristics and beverage intake of children who drink tap water.” American journal of preventive medicine vol. 45,1 (2013): 75-82. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2013.04.001

Raphael D, Bryant T. Emerging Themes in Social Determinants of Health Theory and Research. International Journal of Health Services. 2022, doi:10.1177/00207314221109515.

Schell, Christopher J. et al. “The Ecological and Evolutionary Consequences of Systemic Racism in Urban Environments.” Science, Vol.369, No. 6510, 18 September 2020. 

Wallis, Michael J., Michael R. Ambrose, and Clifford C. Chan. "Climate Change: Charting a Water Course in an Uncertain Future." American Water Works Association.Journal, vol. 100, no. 6, 2008, pp. 70-79. ProQuest,