Water Scarcity: A Threat to Women's Food Work and Livelihood
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Le probleme persistant pour plusieurs Premieres Nations au Canada se traduit par le manque de securite autour de l'eau du a une implication limitee de la gestion de l'eau. Le savoir traditionnel des Anishinaabekwe peut prendre en charge une approche equilibrte et sa protection en suggerant des principes qui reconnaissent, maintiennent et etablissent des relations socio-ecologiques essentielles. ********** Omi l'abuwe, Omi 'l'abumu enikan ki ba omi s'ota. --Yoruba Proverb (Literally translates to: water for bathing, water for drinking, nobody makes enemy with water; water is so invaluable that living organisms cannot do without it.) Water scarcity threatens the well-being of humans. Access to sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible, and affordable water for personal and domestic use is a fundamental human right. These five core attributes of the right to water represent the foundations for water security yet they are widely violated (UNDP). It is estimated that by 2025, 2.7 billion people will experience water scarcity (UN 2003). Presently, 748 million people are water insecure out of which 173 million rely on untreated surface water. If current trends continue, there will still be 547 million people without an improved drinking water supply in 2015 (WHO/UNICEF 2014). The roots of the water crisis can be traced to poverty, inequality and unequal power relationships, uneven distribution, and flawed water management policies that exacerbate scarcity (UNDP). Nigeria is one of the 25 African countries that will experience economic water scarcity by 2025 (UNEP). Presently, about 48 percent of the inhabitants of the urban and semi-urban areas, and 39 percent of rural areas, have access to potable water in Nigeria. Poor planning, inadequate funding, insufficient relevant manpower, haphazard implementation, and lack of a national policy for water supply are all factors contributing to water scarcity in Nigeria (Federal Republic of Nigeria). Ibadan residents experience serious water supply problems such dry taps in virtually every part of the city leading to the prevalence of children and women searching for water elsewhere (Adetunji and Odetokun). About 9.4 percent of the Ibadan city population depends on pipe-borne water, 20.5 percent on boreholes, 41.4 percent on wells, 22.9 percent on streams and 5.8 percent on springs (DMS). This paper contends water scarcity is a threat to women's food work and livelihood in Ibadan, Nigeria. The paper adopts ecofeminism and women's environmental ethic of care a conceptual framework and suggests inclusion of women in water management and decision-making, and the use of low cost water technologies in water scarce communities. Women water users and livelihood managers are disproportionately affected by water depletion and scarcity. Traditional gender roles ascribe the responsibility for household water provision, well agricultural and communal food activities to women in Nigeria. Women live day-to-day with water anxiety and stress of water scarcity. Access to safe and clean water 'Omi' (Yoruba); 'Ruwa' (Hausa) and 'Mmiri (Igbo) in the three prominent languages in Nigeria, remains the Achilles' heel for majority of women in their efforts to be water and food secure. From fetus to birth ... from socio-cultural through corporeal to material domains, women's water security has never been more profound and their water burden continues to impact on their livelihoods. (Olufemi Gender, Environment; Concepts 91) Conceptual Framework Water scarcity is defined as the point at which the aggregate impact of all users impinges on the supply or quality of water under prevailing institutional arrangements to the extent that the demand by all sectors, including the environment, cannot be satisfied fully (UN Water 2006: 2). Water scarcity means lack of access to adequate quantities of water for human and environmental uses (White). …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,009 | 0,008 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».