Conservation Is Not Enough: Rethinking Relationships with Water in the Arid Southwest

The title is the argument: “I'm not sure that modifying laws, negotiating better ways to share the little water available, raising water prices, and launching conservation campaigns are going to be enough to solve the problems we face” (10–11). In order to make this argument Janine Schipper employs three analytical lenses: (1) a socially constructed “Conservation Ethos”; (2) Deep Ecology, which deploys an ecocentric framing and “a shift from a utilitarian view of water as a resource to be exploited to a perspective that recognizes the intrinsic value of water and all living beings” (17); and (3) Environmental Justice. Schipper's background as a sociologist comes through with her exploratory and qualitative approach, which draws on ninety-five interviews with water users, activists, and neighbors conducted over three years. This allows for chapter-opening sections of “Voices,” where people share stories, experiences, and relationships with water, and a grounded, contemporary snapshot for perspectives on water conservation.Those familiar with historical accounts may find the order of Schipper's chapters puzzling; the first three move from her contemporary qualitative results about perspectives on water conservation, to the limitations of the conservation ethos, to its historical roots. Most writers would've gone through the history, then the limitations, then how those origins and contradictions are playing out in contemporary society. The central archive of interviews means that this is a decidedly present-day perspective, even the chapter that aims to explore the historical roots of the conservation ethos.Having partially developed the historical roots, limitations, and contemporary manifestations of the conservation ethos, Schipper dives into alternatives, including Indigenous perspectives and a Deep Ecology focus. At times, discussions of an “indigenous water ethos” could be interpreted as veering a bit essentialist, with a global, singular Indigenous perspective that can flatten tribal, regional, and historical nuance; she is on firmer ground when discussing contemporary, pantribal activism, such as the Water Protectors movement.Halfway through the book, Schipper confesses to earlier drafts of the book containing writing that embodies parts of the colonial mentality she is indicting. This is an important admission, as non-Native scholars of Indigenous history need to be braver in their self-criticism. But there are other sections that stand to benefit from this examination of assumptions, such as when she explains “water is dammed and siphoned away to be redirected where needed: Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Tucson. Approximately 40 million people depend on water from the Colorado River. Nowhere else on the planet do so many people depend on a river so small” (5). Perhaps “demanded” rather than “needed” and “exploit” rather than “depend” would have made a moral inflection more in line with the mission of the book, without unduly validating the actions and assumptions of engineers and those they serve.The most laudatory, and the harshest, thing that can be said about this book is that it is indeed, as the author notes, preliminary. “Exploratory research is a preliminary investigation that seeks to generate insights, raise questions, and gain a broad understanding of a complex phenomenon,” she explains (12). This is a noble goal, but at times it feels like a kaleidoscope of ideas that are introduced but not developed to their fullest potential. For example, the idea of personhood-style rights for water or other natural features is a very complicated topic, with roots in legal theory, social criticism, and ecofeminist approaches; a scholar could fill a bookcase on just this one idea. But in this book, it gets three pages, mostly drawn from the work of one person; it is thrown into the mix and swirled around, and then we move on. Chapter 2 aims to examine the limitations of the conservation approach, but the only aspect she effectively criticizes is a mindset of rugged individualism. Yet, also like a kaleidoscope, interesting images, connections, and juxtapositions emerge. Text boxes isolate and extrapolate key topics, and the writing that connects them offers a blueprint for new connections.Hopefully the exploratory approach that Schipper employs inspires more work in this direction. Taking a hard look at contemporary paradigms and shared assumptions like water conservation is badly needed and a worthy pursuit. Perhaps most importantly, more work is needed to develop a “water ethic” that can address the challenges and opportunities of the twenty-first-century Southwest. Conservation may not be enough, but until contrasting approaches are developed with theoretical and practical rigor, it's the best we've got.