Report on the Puerto Rico Water Crisis and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

In late July, a significant water crisis unfolded in Puerto Rico, leaving tens of thousands of residents and businesses without access to potable water. The event, stemming from critical infrastructure failures, highlights profound challenges to the island’s progress on several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), most notably SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation. The crisis exposed weaknesses in infrastructure resilience (SDG 11), institutional accountability (SDG 16), and public communication, while inflicting considerable damage on the local economy (SDG 8) and public well-being (SDG 3). This report details the timeline of the crisis, the institutional response, its socio-economic impacts, and the broader systemic vulnerabilities affecting water security in Puerto Rico.

I. The Water Crisis: A Failure to Uphold SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation)

A. Timeline and Scope of the Service Interruption

The crisis began around July 24, severely compromising the fundamental human right to water as outlined in SDG 6.

1. Initial Outage: Service interruptions started on or around Friday, July 25, initially communicated to residents in some areas as a localized problem.
2. Escalation: The problem was revealed to be widespread, stemming from a major breakdown at the Sergio Cuevas water plant. At its peak, the outage affected over 183,000 customers, a figure that does not account for the total number of individuals in each household or business.
3. Affected Areas: The crisis impacted numerous municipalities, including the capital, San Juan, and key infrastructure like the Isla Verde International Airport, which required up to 30 tanker truck deliveries per day.

B. Identified Causes of Infrastructure Failure

The immediate causes point to a lack of resilient infrastructure, a key target of SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities.

• A breakdown occurred at the Sergio Cuevas water plant, which supplies water from the Carraízo dam.
• The situation was exacerbated by the rupture of a 54-inch diameter pipe, crippling the distribution system.
• These failures underscore the vulnerability of the island’s essential water systems and the urgent need for investment in robust and modern infrastructure.

II. Institutional Response and Governance Challenges (SDG 16)

A. Communication Deficiencies and Lack of Accountability

The initial response was marked by a significant lack of transparency and communication, undermining SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions, which calls for effective and accountable institutions.

• Residents reported receiving little to no information from official news sources for several days, leading to confusion and distress.
• Elected officials, including the Mayors Association and senators from the Popular Democratic Party (PDP), publicly denounced the Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority (PRASA) for its failure to communicate effectively with municipal leaders and the public.
• The uncertainty left residents unable to plan for basic needs, with one resident describing the hardest part as “the not-knowing.”

B. Official Actions and Interventions

As the crisis deepened, government authorities initiated a formal response.

1. State of Emergency: The Governor of Puerto Rico declared a state of emergency and activated the National Guard to assist PRASA in distributing potable water.
2. Water Distribution: The National Guard was deployed with a capacity to distribute approximately 48,000 gallons of water per day to affected municipalities, including Canóvanas, Carolina, San Juan, and others.
3. Special Coordinator Appointed: Carlos Pesquera was appointed as a special coordinator for PRASA to identify the root causes of the system failures, review capital improvement plans, and improve interagency coordination with bodies like FEMA, in line with SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals.

III. Socio-Economic Repercussions and SDG Impacts

A. Impact on Public Health and Well-being (SDG 3)

The lack of access to clean water posed direct risks to public health and well-being, a core tenet of SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being.

• Residents, including vulnerable elderly and infirm populations, were left without water for basic sanitation and hygiene.
• Dependence on municipal water trucks created accessibility challenges for those unable to transport water themselves.

B. Economic Disruption and Setbacks for SDG 8

The crisis dealt a significant blow to the local economy, hindering progress toward SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth.

• Businesses, particularly in the vital tourism sector of Old San Juan, were forced to temporarily close or reduce operations.
• The Old San Juan Merchants Association warned of severe damage to Puerto Rico’s reputation as a tourist destination.
• Merchants reported spending thousands of dollars on private tanker trucks to remain operational, adding financial strain to an already struggling economy.

IV. Systemic Vulnerabilities in Water Access (SDG 6 & SDG 11)

A. The Plight of Communities Outside the Main Grid

The crisis sheds light on a larger, often overlooked issue: the approximately 120,000 people in rural Puerto Rico who are not served by PRASA. Their situation represents a chronic failure to achieve universal water access as mandated by SDG 6.

• These communities rely on smaller, independent aqueduct systems maintained by unpaid community volunteers.
• Many of these systems are located in communities where a majority of residents live below the poverty level, linking water access directly to SDG 1: No Poverty.

B. Financial and Operational Challenges for Non-PRASA Systems

These independent systems face immense challenges that prevent them from providing reliable, safe drinking water.

• According to the Non-PRASA Aqueduct Systems Organization (OSAN), these systems are heavily dependent on federal funds, which are often the first to be cut.
• 68% of these systems rely on groundwater wells, which require significant financial investment.
• Due to under-financing and the high cost of water testing, many of these systems fail to meet official water quality standards, posing a continuous health risk to their users.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

  This is the central theme of the article. The entire text revolves around the lack of access to clean, potable drinking water for a significant portion of Puerto Rico’s population due to infrastructure failure and mismanagement. It discusses the crisis faced by those served by the Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority (PRASA) and the separate, ongoing struggles of rural communities with their own underfunded water systems.

• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

  The article highlights the vulnerability of urban infrastructure. The water crisis, originating from a breakdown at the Sergio Cuevas water plant and a broken pipe, directly impacts cities and communities like San Juan. The failure of basic services disrupts urban life, affects residential areas, and underscores the need for resilient and reliable infrastructure in human settlements.

• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

  The water shortage has a direct negative impact on the local economy. The article states that the crisis is “affecting tourism, but also other types of businesses, many of which have recently decided to temporarily close or reduce their activities, dealing a major blow to an already struggling economy.” This demonstrates the connection between basic services and economic stability.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article points to significant institutional failures. There is widespread criticism of PRASA’s management, a “lack of communication” with mayors and the public, and a general failure to provide essential services effectively. The appointment of a special coordinator to review “system failures” and the calls for accountability from elected officials highlight issues with institutional effectiveness, transparency, and governance.

• SDG 1: No Poverty

  The article links the lack of access to basic services with poverty. It specifically mentions that in rural areas not served by PRASA, “Many of the community aqueducts are located within communities where the largest number of residents live below the poverty level,” showing how the most vulnerable populations are disproportionately affected by underfunded infrastructure.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 6.1: By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all.

   The article directly addresses the failure to meet this target. It details how a pipe break left “more than 183,000 people without water” and notes that even after repairs, thousands of customers remained without service. The governor’s statement that “The steady access to drinking water is not a privilege, it is an essential right of every Puerto Rican” explicitly frames the crisis as a violation of this universal access goal.

2. Target 11.5: By 2030, significantly reduce the number of deaths and the number of people affected and substantially decrease the direct economic losses relative to global gross domestic product caused by disasters, including water-related disasters…

   The water crisis is presented as a disaster affecting a large population (“Nearly 180,000 customers were affected”) and causing direct economic losses. The article notes the crisis dealt “a major blow to an already struggling economy” and damaged “Puerto Rico’s reputation as a tourist destination,” which aligns with the focus of this target on mitigating the impact of disasters on people and economies.

3. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.

   This target is relevant due to the article’s focus on institutional failure. The spokesperson for the Popular Democratic Party denounced the “lack of communication between the Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority (PRASA) and the mayors.” The public’s frustration, summarized by the feeling of “the not-knowing,” and the need for a special coordinator to identify “what caused the recent breakdowns” point to a lack of effectiveness, accountability, and transparency in the institutions responsible for water management.

4. Target 6.b: Support and strengthen the participation of local communities in improving water and sanitation management.

   The article highlights the role of local communities, especially in rural areas. It describes how “Unpaid community members often volunteer to maintain these smaller systems, doing the work out of passion and care for their neighbors.” This directly relates to the importance of local participation in water management, even as it points out the financial and technical challenges these communities face.

5. Target 1.4: By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services…

   The article illustrates the inequality in access to basic services. It highlights that many non-PRASA systems are in “communities where the largest number of residents live below the poverty level,” and these systems struggle because they are “so under-financed.” This shows a direct link between poverty and a lack of access to the basic service of clean water.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Indicator 6.1.1: Proportion of population using safely managed drinking water services.

   The article provides several quantitative data points that serve as direct measures for this indicator. These include: “more than 183,000 people without water,” “Nearly 180,000 customers were affected,” “nearly 3,000 customers were still without water,” and the fact that “120,000 Puerto Ricans are not served by PRASA.” These numbers quantify the population lacking access to reliable drinking water.

2. Indicator 11.5.2: Direct economic loss… including disaster damage to critical infrastructure and disruption of basic services.

   The article implies this indicator through qualitative descriptions of economic damage. It mentions that businesses “decided to temporarily close or reduce their activities,” which constitutes a direct economic loss. Furthermore, the statement that the crisis is “dealing a major blow to an already struggling economy” and that merchants “have had to invest thousands of dollars in hiring tanker trucks” are clear examples of the economic disruption caused by the failure of basic services.

3. Qualitative Indicators for Institutional Accountability (Target 16.6).

   While not a formal UN indicator, the article provides qualitative evidence of institutional performance. The “lack of communication” between PRASA and mayors, the fact that the public learned of the widespread crisis “through the grapevine” and not official channels, and the need to appoint a special coordinator to “identify the root causes” all serve as negative indicators for institutional accountability and transparency.

4. Indicator 6.3.2: Proportion of bodies of water with good ambient water quality.

   The article provides a direct, though non-numeric, assessment related to this indicator for the non-PRASA systems. The statement that “many of these systems do not meet water quality standards” due to being under-financed is a clear indicator of poor water quality in those specific community-run systems.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: dailykos.com