Ethics and ambiguity in wastewater development on the Placencia Peninsula, Belize

IF 0.7 Q3 ANTHROPOLOGY
W. Alex Webb, E. Christian Wells, Christine Prouty, Rebecca Zarger, Maya Trotz
{"title":"Ethics and ambiguity in wastewater development on the Placencia Peninsula, Belize","authors":"W. Alex Webb,&nbsp;E. Christian Wells,&nbsp;Christine Prouty,&nbsp;Rebecca Zarger,&nbsp;Maya Trotz","doi":"10.1111/napa.12215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Development projects present ambiguous ethical terrain for anthropologists to navigate. Particularly in relation to WaSH (Water, Sanitation, Hygiene) infrastructures which mediate human and environmental health. Our interdisciplinary team of anthropologists and engineers initially set out to design context-sensitive on-site wastewater treatment infrastructures for homes along Belize's Placencia Peninsula. The project's beginning coincided with the announcements of a government sponsored centralized wastewater infrastructure project and the construction of a cruise ship port on a nearby island, however. Soon the wastewater project's promises—economic opportunity, improved human and environmental health, modernization - came crashing into its pratfalls—exacerbating existing inequalities, loss of livelihoods, and diminished local governance. Our team was left with uncertain decisions about how to engage with improving infrastructure, given the emerging community dynamics. By detailing the imperfect trade-offs at play, we highlight ethical complexities inherent when communities’ development futures are at stake. Anthropology's fraught history includes legacies of unintended harms from entanglement in others’ inequities. However, avoiding involvement out of excessive caution risks leaving marginalized voices unheard and extant problems unresolved. This case immersed our team in the inherent optimism and ethical experimentation which underlie development contexts. Our analysis adopts the structure from Whiteford and Trotters’ (2008) “Ethical-Problem Solving Guide” to reveal the layered tensions that underly critical WaSH infrastructures.</p>","PeriodicalId":45176,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Anthropological Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Anthropological Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/napa.12215","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Development projects present ambiguous ethical terrain for anthropologists to navigate. Particularly in relation to WaSH (Water, Sanitation, Hygiene) infrastructures which mediate human and environmental health. Our interdisciplinary team of anthropologists and engineers initially set out to design context-sensitive on-site wastewater treatment infrastructures for homes along Belize's Placencia Peninsula. The project's beginning coincided with the announcements of a government sponsored centralized wastewater infrastructure project and the construction of a cruise ship port on a nearby island, however. Soon the wastewater project's promises—economic opportunity, improved human and environmental health, modernization - came crashing into its pratfalls—exacerbating existing inequalities, loss of livelihoods, and diminished local governance. Our team was left with uncertain decisions about how to engage with improving infrastructure, given the emerging community dynamics. By detailing the imperfect trade-offs at play, we highlight ethical complexities inherent when communities’ development futures are at stake. Anthropology's fraught history includes legacies of unintended harms from entanglement in others’ inequities. However, avoiding involvement out of excessive caution risks leaving marginalized voices unheard and extant problems unresolved. This case immersed our team in the inherent optimism and ethical experimentation which underlie development contexts. Our analysis adopts the structure from Whiteford and Trotters’ (2008) “Ethical-Problem Solving Guide” to reveal the layered tensions that underly critical WaSH infrastructures.

伯利兹普拉森西亚半岛废水开发的伦理与模糊性
发展项目给人类学家带来了模棱两可的伦理问题。特别是在涉及 WaSH(水、环境卫生和个人卫生)基础设施时,这些基础设施对人类和环境的健康起着中介作用。我们这个由人类学家和工程师组成的跨学科团队最初的目标是为伯利兹普拉森西亚半岛沿岸的住宅设计与当地环境相适应的现场废水处理基础设施。然而,项目开始时恰逢政府宣布启动集中式废水处理基础设施项目,并在附近岛屿上建设游轮港口。很快,废水处理项目的承诺--经济机遇、改善人类和环境健康、现代化--就陷入了困境--加剧了现有的不平等、生计的丧失和地方治理的削弱。考虑到新出现的社区动态,我们的团队在决定如何参与改善基础设施时遇到了不确定性。通过详述不完美的权衡,我们强调了当社区的发展前景受到威胁时所固有的伦理复杂性。人类学充满争议的历史包括因卷入他人的不平等而造成意外伤害的遗留问题。然而,出于过度谨慎而避免参与,有可能会使边缘化的声音无人倾听,现存的问题得不到解决。这个案例让我们的团队沉浸在固有的乐观主义和道德实验中,而这正是发展环境的基础。我们的分析采用了怀特福德和特罗特斯(2008 年)的 "伦理问题解决指南 "的结构,以揭示关键的瓦希德社区卫生基础设施背后的层层紧张关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
21
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信