We have read and discussed this week to considerable lengths on the problem of arsenic poising in Bangladesh and Western Bengal. Arsenic originates naturally from the composition of the earth's crust in the Himalayan region, and is dissolved into freshwater aquifers by the hydrological cycle. The element tends to remain at depths of at least forty feet, thereby not affecting surface water, the standard water resource for human society1.
Recently, however, water-intensive farming practices have depleted much of the region's surface water resources. The temporal variability of rainfall, linked to the South Asian monsoon, has also decreased the reliability of surface water for agricultural and domestic use. This fact, paired with the relatively low prices of fuel and electricity in the early 1970's, encouraged the drilling of many new wells for access to underground water reserves. Over a twenty year period, groundwater extraction in West Bengal and Bangladesh increased sixfold and fourteenfold, respectively1. This has caused relatively isolated arsenic contamination to spread throughout underground water sources.
Poorer social classes, especially manual laborers, are disproportionally affected by arsenic exposure. They are less likely to maintain a properly balanced diet, and more likely to drink directly from contaminated irrigation wells while working in the fields. The symptoms then affect their ability to perform physicals tasks, so they quickly become ineffective employees. Arsenic contamination spreads quickly through the food chain, occurring at significant levels in milk and grains produced in affected regions.
Treating the arsenic problem raises a plethora of difficult issues. Filtering water to remove arsenic is a feasible option, but that requires advanced technology that many rural households and government agencies do not understand how to implement properly. Sarkar reports a survey of large-scale arsenic treatment facilities, which found the majority of them to not function properly after two years of operation. This is basically an issue of untrained, unregulated employees. The same hold true of home-sized filtration systems, which require periodic basic maintenance. Families attempting to use the filtration systems rarely have the requisite education to do so correctly.
Instead of fixing the groundwater, some advocate a switch back to surface water, through preserving and replenishing those natural reserves. They suggest a system of small dams on rivers and streams to hold fresh water a little longer after the monsoon rains disappear, which would simultaneously replenish shallower, uncontaminated aquifers. The collection of roof runoff is another potential clean water source, but the grass thatching material typical of the region is incompatible with this technique. The implementation of less water-intensive crops provides a good way to reduce water demands, as does drip irrigation technology1.
Sarkar suggests that the arsenic problem is surmountable through a concerted effort employing all of the aforementioned approaches, and laments the disjointed, uncooperative action currently occurring. In the end, he places primary responsibility on the Indian government, though emphasizing the need for the general population to become concerned about the issue. He thinks a successful effort will require that everyone become informed and work cooperatively at the particular solution most relevant to their skillset. The government is the party most capable of enabling this scenario.
I completely agree with his suggested collaborative approach. I think it speaks to a much larger theme faced by any society trying to bring about a change. I recently spoke about improving public health issues to a friend in a global health program in her first year of medical school. She mentioned that a large number of her classmates are very invested in public health issues, but the more I consider these types of problems, the less important doctors seem to be in their prevention. Instead of treatment, the real issue in the arsenic problem, and many others like it, is the home lifestyle, which consists of an incredibly complex web of social, technological environmental, educational, and economic factors.
When professionals rigidly aligned with any of these fields attack the problem, they can only advance a limited distance before stalling, because the other interdependent factors have not advanced sufficiently to support their progress. I have only recently realized the extent to which this holds true, and I think it speaks to the difficulty I have experienced while choosing a major at Furman, and the value I find in a liberal arts education. As cliché as it sounds, one of my major career goals is to understand and contribute to some process that appreciably changes the world for the better.
I have struggled to find any academic field capable of such an achievement singlehandedly. Ideally, I should become an expert in most fields, and combine them to fix the planet. But humans don’t have that capacity. We must specialize to reach cutting-edge expertise in any realm, which returns us to the problem of collaboration. This why I think Princeton University is on to something with its statement that “The University requirements for graduation transcend the boundaries of specialization and provide all students with a common language and common skills2.” Though I found several statements about well-rounded people in the Furman course catalog, it never quite addressed such a collaborative capacity for its graduates. I think we do a fine job of practicing this, but we would do well to acknowledge its significance.
I suppose the conclusion of this post is an encouragement of collaboration, but with a special warning against overspecialization. Effective collaborations will come from actors with specific, limited skillsets, but who understand the other relevant fields well enough to accommodate and complement those primary concerns when solving a problem. Maybe a Furman system can produce a few of those actors. I’m betting about 200 grand on it.
[1] Sarkar, A. (2009). Sustainable Solutions to Arsenic Contamination of Groundwater . In U. Pascual, A. Shah, & J. Bandyopadhyay (Eds.), Water, Agriculture, and Sustainable Well-Being (pp. 73-92). Oxford University Press
[2] Mathews, J. (2004, May 18). Learning the Value of Liberal Arts. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35939-2004May18.html
No comments:
Post a Comment