Report on the Water Crisis in Southern West Virginia and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: A Failure to Meet Global Development Standards

In southern West Virginia, a persistent clean water crisis in former coalfield communities highlights significant challenges in achieving key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). For over a year, faith-based organizations like the United Methodist Disaster Response Team have been providing essential clean drinking water, a task necessitated by systemic infrastructure failures and governmental inaction. This report analyzes the situation through the framework of the SDGs, focusing on the interconnected failures related to water, health, inequality, and governance.

SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

The situation in Jackson County and surrounding areas represents a direct contravention of SDG 6, which aims to ensure the availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all. The core of the crisis lies in the lack of access to safe and affordable drinking water.

• Infrastructure Deficit: Former coal towns rely on decaying water systems abandoned by coal companies, which require major upgrades to be functional and safe.
• Community Impact: In small communities like Anawalt, with a population of approximately 130, the water is unusable for consumption and often damages property. Residents report water that is discolored and contaminated.
• Advocacy for Change: The faith-based group “From Below,” led by figures such as Rev. Caitlin Ware, advocates for government transparency and investment in water infrastructure, directly addressing the targets of SDG 6.

SDG 10 and SDG 16: Reduced Inequalities and Institutional Failures

The crisis is exacerbated by institutional decisions that deepen inequalities, undermining SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

• Misallocation of Funds: Of $432 million allocated to West Virginia through the American Rescue Plan Act, only four of 161 funded projects were designated for water or sewer infrastructure in the five most affected coalfield counties.
• Prioritization of Economic Development: State-level grant funds have prioritized tourism and economic development in larger towns over essential infrastructure in smaller, impoverished communities, reflecting a governance model that does not provide an equitable return on investment for all citizens.
• Lack of Accountability: Rev. Ware and other advocates argue that this legislative calculus ignores the hidden costs borne by citizens and demonstrates a lack of empathy and awareness from policymakers, pointing to a failure in creating effective and inclusive institutions. Some communities have been waiting for state intervention for over three decades.

SDG 1 and SDG 3: The Human Cost of Inaction

The failure to provide clean water has severe consequences for residents’ financial stability and health, directly impacting progress on SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being).

Financial Burdens on Impoverished Communities

• Residents are forced to purchase all their water for drinking and cooking, creating a significant financial strain in West Virginia’s poorest counties.
• Additional costs include salt for private well filters, electricity for pumphouses, and the replacement of appliances like washing machines and dishwashers damaged by contaminated water.
• The physical labor of transporting and storing water disproportionately affects elderly residents.

Health and Well-being Impacts

• Contaminated water causes tangible property damage, staining clothes and plumbing fixtures orange.
• Residents report health concerns, including skin rashes after showering and the buildup of gas in the air from heated, contaminated water.
• The ongoing stress and uncertainty of securing a basic necessity like water negatively impacts the overall well-being of the community.

Conclusion: An Urgent Call for Sustainable Investment

The clean water crisis in southern West Virginia is a clear example of how infrastructure neglect and inequitable governance can prevent the realization of fundamental Sustainable Development Goals. While community and faith-based groups provide critical short-term relief, their efforts are not a sustainable solution. The situation demands immediate and substantial government investment in water infrastructure to ensure that all citizens have access to the clean water essential for health, dignity, and economic stability. Without such action, the state will be relegated to providing emergency aid indefinitely while its most vulnerable communities decline.

Analysis of the Article in Relation to Sustainable Development Goals

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

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

  This is the most central SDG in the article. The entire narrative revolves around the lack of access to clean, safe, and affordable drinking water for communities in southern West Virginia. The article details the unusable quality of the local water, the failure of existing infrastructure, and the efforts of residents and volunteers to obtain clean water.

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  The article connects the poor water quality to negative health outcomes. It explicitly mentions that showering in the contaminated water, which turns orange and releases gas, causes “rashes on their skin.” This directly links the environmental problem to the physical well-being of the residents.

• SDG 1: No Poverty

  The issue of water access is shown to have a significant financial impact on residents, particularly in what is described as West Virginia’s poorest county. The article details the multiple costs residents bear: buying salt for filters, purchasing bottled water for drinking and cooking, and paying for electricity to run pumps. These expenses represent a substantial economic burden on households with limited income.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  The article highlights a clear inequality in the distribution of resources and government attention. State funds from the American Rescue Plan Act were disproportionately allocated to tourism and larger towns, while small, former coal communities like Anawalt were overlooked. This suggests that these communities are being left behind, exacerbating social and economic inequalities.

• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

  The core problem is a failure of basic infrastructure in these communities. The article states that since coal companies left, the water systems “need major upgrades.” The lack of access to a fundamental service like clean piped water demonstrates a failure to provide sustainable and resilient infrastructure for all residents.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article questions the effectiveness and transparency of state government institutions. The group “From Below” is working to “make the state government transparent for decisions about where and when to spend money.” The misallocation of $432 million in federal funds, with very little going to critical water projects in the neediest counties, points to a lack of accountable and effective governance.

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

1. Target 6.1: Achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all.

   The article is a case study of the failure to meet this target. The water in Anawalt is described as “unusable” and not safe for drinking. Residents are forced to buy bottled water, making access neither universal nor affordable. The cost of upgrading the system for 130 customers is quoted at $11 million, highlighting the challenge of providing access.

2. Target 3.9: Substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.

   The water is contaminated to the point that it stains clothes and appliances orange and causes skin rashes. This directly relates to illnesses caused by water pollution. The article implies the water flows through “coal seams or abandoned mine works,” suggesting chemical or mineral contamination.

3. Target 11.1: Ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slums.

   Clean piped water is a basic service. The article clearly states that the “public water infrastructure system” in communities like Anawalt is inadequate and needs a complete upgrade, which has been delayed for thirty years. This demonstrates a direct failure to provide this essential service.

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

   The article critiques the state government’s allocation of funds. Out of $432 million in rescue plan money, only four of 161 funded projects were for water or sewer in the five most affected counties. This action, prioritizing tourism over essential infrastructure, demonstrates a lack of accountability and transparency to the citizens of these communities, which groups like “From Below” are trying to address.

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

   The article showcases community involvement through the work of the United Methodist Disaster Response Team, the faith-based group “From Below,” and local volunteers like Diane Farmer and Peggy Bailey. These groups are actively distributing water, advocating for government action, and raising awareness, which aligns with the principle of strengthening local participation.

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

• Proportion of population using safely managed drinking water services (Indicator 6.1.1)

  The article implies this proportion is near zero in Anawalt. The fact that residents rely entirely on bottled water for drinking and cooking, and that their tap water is “unusable,” serves as a qualitative indicator that they lack access to a safely managed water source.

• Financial burden of water access

  The article provides specific financial data that can be used as an indicator of affordability. This includes the cost of salt for filters ($5-6 per bag), gallon jugs for cooking ($1 each), cases of bottled water for drinking ($3.50 per case), and electricity for pumps. Summing these costs provides a concrete measure of the economic strain on households.

• Allocation of public funds for basic services

  The article provides a clear indicator of institutional priorities and accountability. The statistic that “only four were for water or sewer projects in Boone, Logan, McDowell, Mingo, or Wyoming counties” out of 161 projects funded by the $432 million American Rescue Plan Act money is a direct measure of the government’s investment (or lack thereof) in water infrastructure for these regions.

• Prevalence of water-related health issues

  The mention of “rashes on their skin” after showering is a qualitative health indicator. Tracking the incidence of such skin conditions or other water-borne illnesses in the community could serve as a direct measure of the health impacts of contaminated water and progress toward Target 3.9.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: wvpublic.org