4.0 Article

Domestic water supply in rural Greenland - sufficiency, affordability and accessibility

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/22423982.2022.2138095

关键词

Arctic; water access; drinking water; water consumption; remote communities

资金

  1. Nunatsinni Ilisimatusarnermik Siunnersuisoqatigiit (NIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examined the water supply situation in rural Greenland and found that while the supply of drinking water is sufficient and affordable, access is severely restricted due to lack of piping. Residents of un-piped households have insufficient water consumption to sustain public health and this could lead to water quality degradation.
Global efforts are still under way to ensure sustainable development goal 6 of providing enough clean water to sustain public health in many regions, and especially in the Arctic where the remoteness of communities and the harsh climate make water provision especially challenging. This study aimed to examine the sufficiency, accessibility, and affordability of water supplies in rural Greenland. The state of the water supply was investigated using quantitative data on infrastructure and demographics. Qualitative data on water-related practices and perceptions were collected through fieldwork and interviews in a selection of settlements. Generally, the supply of drinking water was found to be sufficient and affordable for most. However, access was severely constrained by the lack of piping to rural homes (20% were piped). The daily water consumption of residents from un-piped households was between 13 and 23 L/d/cap, i.e. within the basic access level according to WHO, which is in theory not sufficient to sustain public health. Several health risks could be caused by the low daily consumption in un-piped homes, and water saving practices induced by it - i.e. the use of shared handwashing basins, and household water storage, which could lead to degradation of water quality at the point-of-use.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据