UR BA N ST R EAM S

BRI DGES*

Poverty, urbanization, and environmental degradation:

urban streams in the developing world
Krista A. Capps1,2,5, Catherine N. Bentsen3,6, and Alonso Ramírez4,7
1
Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 USA
2
Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, Aiken, South Carolina 29802 USA
3
Masssachusetts Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Environmental Conservation, University of
Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts 01003 USA
4
Department of Environmental Science, University of Puerto Rico, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00936 USA

Abstract: Urbanization is occurring at a rapid pace in developing countries. The urban stream syndrome has been well doc-
umented in higher-income countries, but in lower-income, developing countries, resources often are unavailable for quantifying
how urbanization affects streams. Basic infrastructure to support water supply and wastewater treatment frequently is lacking in
lower-income countries, and this situation has repercussions for human health and for ecosystem structure and function. The
interaction of environmental, social, and economic factors may produce differences in the expression of the urban stream syn-
drome in lower-income countries relative to in high-income countries. We address how patterns of economic development and
urbanization can influence the quality of freshwater resources, and we discuss some of the relationships between urban water-
sheds and marginalized human populations in lower-income countries. We argue that sustainable management of urban water-
sheds and the provisioning of drinking water and sanitation services require integration of innovative technology and financing
schemes into ecosystem-based management. We must develop new and enhance existing uses for sewage and other wastewater to
support ecologically functional urban watersheds. Furthermore, managers of freshwater resources in lower-income countries
require more data on which to base decisions. Acquisition of these data will necessitate the creation of interdisciplinary research
teams with representatives from national and international development organizations to address stakeholder-driven research
questions.
Key words: low-income economies, urban, freshwater, environmental Kuznets curves, water security, ecosystem
services, wastewater, infrastructure

Research on urban stream ecology has been limited largely
to urban areas in temperate climate zones in relatively
wealthy countries ( Walsh et al. 2005, Gao et al. 2013,
Ramírez et al. 2014). This body of work has identified
many common effects of urbanization on lotic ecosystems,
collectively termed the urban stream syndrome (Meyer
et al. 2005). However, we remain relatively ignorant of the
effects of urbanization on the structure and function of and
the ecosystem services provided by streams in impoverished
urban regions of the globe. Many characteristics of the ur-
ban stream syndrome—flashier hydrographs, higher con-
centrations of nutrients and toxicants, altered channel
morphology and stability, reduced species richness, and
dominant tolerant species (Walsh et al. 2005)—also are
predicted to occur in urban streams in lower-income
countries (Ramírez et al. 2014). However, differences in
patterns and histories of economic development and ur-
banization may produce important contrasts in the expres-
sion of urban stream syndrome between higher- and lower-
income countries (Booth et. al 2016, Hale et al. 2016, Parr
et al. 2016).
Urban streams provide valuable ecosystem services in-
cluding heat reduction, flood control, and recreational areas
(Meyer et al. 2005). In lower-income countries, urban
streams also are used for small-scale or recreational fish-
ing, sources of building materials (e.g., sand, gravel), and

E-mail addresses: 5kcapps@uga.edu; 6katebentsen@gmail.com; 7aramirez@ramirezlab.net

*BRIDGES is a recurring feature of FWS intended to provide a forum for the interchange of ideas and information relevant to FWS readers, but beyond the
usual scope of a scientific paper. Articles in this series will bridge from aquatic ecology to other disciplines, e.g., political science, economics, education,
chemistry, or other biological sciences. Papers may be complementary or take alternative viewpoints. Authors with ideas for topics should contact BRIDGES
Co-Editors, Allison Roy (aroy@eco.umass.edu) and Sally Entrekin (sentrekin@uca.edu).

DOI: 10.1086/684945. Received 1 March 2015; Accepted 9 November 2015; Published online 29 December 2015.
Freshwater Science. 2016. 35(1):429–435. © 2016 by The Society for Freshwater Science. 429

This content downloaded from 187.171.135.014 on August 17, 2019 10:19:30 AM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
430 | Poverty, urbanization, and environmental degradation K. A. Capps et al.

water for irrigation and household uses (Corcoran et al.

2010). Unplanned settlements characterized by substan-
dard living conditions (hereafter called slums) are common
in all cities. However, slums are of special concern in cities
undergoing rapid urbanization in lower-income econo-
mies, where they often are characterized by limited access
to drinking water and sewerage because rates of infrastruc-
ture development typically lag behind rates of urban expan-
sion (Moe and Rheingans 2006, Corcoran et al. 2010). There-
fore, upstream reaches of urban watersheds may function
as sources of water for household use (Fewtrell et al. 2005,
Ali 2010), while downstream reaches collect and move re-
sidual wastewater (Parkinson and Mark 2005). In regions
where drinking-water shortages are common, urban streams
have the potential to provide an important alternative source
of water (Niemczynowicz 1999). Yet, projections for many
watersheds indicate that major increases in industrial and
sewage pollution will occur in the next few decades (Cor-
coran et al. 2010), and these increases will threaten the long-
term sustainability of services provided by urban streams Figure 1. Predicted relationships between environmental
in lower-income countries. degradation and economic growth.
The purpose of this BRIDGES article is to discuss pat-
terns of urbanization and their effects on freshwater re- the EKC are based upon 3 primary assumptions that may
sources of lower-income countries (Table 1; World Bank not apply to environmental conditions in urban watersheds.
2015). In particular, we will: 1) describe patterns in eco- The 1st assumption is that all pollutants will respond
nomic development and environmental degradation and similarly to economic development. Much of the original
pollution, 2) highlight particularities of urbanization and research on the EKC was based on air pollutants (e.g.,
water resources, 3) discuss some of the human-health risks Ederington 2007, Stern 2007, Levinson 2009), but pollut-
associated with urban watersheds in lower-income coun- ants in aquatic systems may not behave like air pollutants
tries, and 4) identify some challenges and opportunities work- (Hettige et al. 1998, 2000, Dodds et al. 2013; Fig. 1). This
ing in urban streams in lower-income economies presents difference might be partially attributable to environmen-
for freshwater scientists. tal externalities—consequences of commercial activities that
affect other parties and the environment, but are not re-
flected in the cost of production. Levinson (2008) found
E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T, E N V I R O N M E N TA L that pollutants with local effects (e.g., fecal coliform, indoor
D E G R A DAT I O N , A N D PO L L U TA N T S air quality) began improving at lower incomes, whereas
IN FRESH WATERS pollutants with widely dispersed effects (e.g., C emissions)
Many investigators have postulated that as an economy tended to begin improving at higher incomes or did not
develops, environmental degradation initially increases and decline with increasing economic development (e.g., Hettige
then decreases, such that the shape of the relationship be- et al. 1998; Fig. 1).
tween economic development and environmental degra- A 2nd assumption is that once improvement begins,
dation takes the form of an inverted U-shaped curve (i.e., the trajectory is reliable and improvement will continue.
the environmental Kuznets curve [EKC]; Grossman and However, high gross national income may lead to increases
Krueger 1991, 1995, Munasinghe 1999, Dinda 2004; Fig. 1). in pollution associated with higher rates of resource con-
Proponents maintain that the EKC trajectory is inevitable sumption and subsequent waste generation, thereby con-
with increasing economic development, but expectations of verting the U-shaped EKC to an N-shaped curve (Arrow

Table 1. Income categories classified by the World Bank. Monetary units are in US$ (World Bank 2015).
Classification Examples Per capita gross national income

Low-income economies Bangladesh, Haiti, Tanzania ≤$1045

Lower-middle-income economies Indonesia, Nicaragua, India $1046–4125
Upper-middle-income economies Brazil, China, Mexico $4126–12,745

This content downloaded from 187.171.135.014 on August 17, 2019 10:19:30 AM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

et al. 1995, Dinda 2004; Fig. 1). Simultaneously, trade liber-
alization policies, characteristics of freshwater pollutants,
and the higher consumption rates in wealthier countries
may produce novel development and environmental deg-
radation pathways in watersheds of lower-income coun-
tries (Vörösmarty et al. 2010, Dodds et al. 2013).
The EKC also is based on the assumption that increas-
ing development and establishment of trade relationships
will alleviate poverty for increasing proportions of the
population. However, in practice, development strategies
and trade relationships in developing countries may exac-
erbate poverty-related pollution because they frequently
are designed to increase the capital of the wealthy in a
given economy and lead to increased economic disparity
and larger percentages of people living in poverty (Tobey
1989, Beckerman 1992). In addition, the EKC does not
account for adoption of less stringent environmental stan-
dards to gain or preserve competitiveness for international
business after the liberalization of trade. This practice may
exacerbate environmental degradation (Daly 1993, Asici
2013).
A primary method used in higher-income countries to
reduce costs associated with development-related pollution
and threats to water security has been to move certain
industries (e.g., types of manufacturing) to lower-income
countries that lack the environmental policies, political
will, or infrastructure to regulate pollution (Stern et al.
1996, Ederington 2007). For example, China has absorbed
many industrial activities that threatened the quality of USA
domestic freshwater resources (Liu and Diamond 2005).
Similarly, researchers have questioned whether the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) transferred some
of the USA’s pollution burden to Mexico (Grossman and
Krueger 1991, Ederington 2007). After NAFTA, lower en-
vironmental standards did result in increased concentra-
tions of factories along the USA–Mexico border that have
been linked to increased environmental damage and health
problems in Mexico (Asici 2013), but the net effects on pol-
lution are in question (Domínguez-Villalobos and Brown-
Grossman 2007). Exporting pollution outside national bor-
ders has been commonplace, but such opportunities are
becoming more limited. Few countries are willing to accept
new, pollution-intensive industries. Therefore, many lower-
income countries supporting pollution-intensive industries
are now forced to address environmental problems or live
with the negative consequences of environmental degrada-
tion (Stern et al. 1996, Stern 2007).
U R BAN I Z AT I O N A N D WAT E R I NF R A S T R U C T U R E
I N LOW E R -I N C O M E E CO N O M I E S
Urbanization is occurring at much faster rates in lower-
income than in higher-income countries (McMichael 2000).
Grimm et al. (2008) argued that >95% of the net increase
in global population will be in cities in the developing world.
This content downloaded from 187.171.135.014 on August 17, 2019 10:19:30 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
Volume 35 March 2016 | 431
By 2030, ∼60% of the population of lower-income econo-
mies will live in urban areas (Cohen 2006). Human migra-
tion to urban centers in lower-income economies is driven
by industrialization, food insecurity in rural areas, refuge
from political conflict or environmental damage, and oppor-
tunities for employment (McMichael 2000).
The resulting increased population densities may have
large negative consequences for urban watersheds because
cities in lower-income countries frequently lack appropri-
ate infrastructure to convey sewage or drinking water
(McMichael 2000). Though progress has been made to-
ward the United Nations (UN) Millennium Development
Goals, 900 million people still live without access to safe
drinking water and 2.6 billion do not have access to basic
sanitation (WHO/UNICEF 2010). The problem is partic-
ularly acute in the poorest neighborhoods in urban cen-
ters in lower-income countries where people tend to have
much less access to basic services than in higher-income
countries (Cohen 2006). Existing water infrastructure in
developing regions may be aging, outdated, or inadequate,
and challenged by insufficient funding, technology, and
trained personnel to manage water and sewerage systems
(Corcoran et al. 2010). In many slums, the lack of water
and user-pay systems for communal toilets has driven peo-
ple to extreme measures. For example, the term “flying
toilet” was coined in the Kibera slums of Nairobi, Kenya,
to describe the plastic bags used to dispose of human
feces. The flying toilets are thrown onto roofs for disposal
and pose serious risks to human health, especially during
the wet season when rainfall converts the waste into con-
taminated runoff (Corcoran et al. 2010).
In the absence of adequate waste-management policies/
infrastructure, people frequently come into contact with a
wide variety of pollutants, including sewage, vectors of dis-
ease, and organic chemicals (Cohen 2006, Isunju et al. 2011),
and ultimately, pollution loads from slums impair the struc-
ture and function of urban streams in the developing world
(Kulabako et al. 2007, Nyenje et al. 2010, 2014, Isunju et al.
2011). Moreover, the rate at which households are con-
nected to sewerage systems typically exceeds the rate of con-
struction of wastewater treatment facilities in the develop-
ing world (i.e., sewerage systems are not always connected
to wastewater treatment facilities; McMichael 2000, Bouw-
man et al. 2005, Corcoran et al. 2010). Therefore, increased
water infrastructure (i.e., sewerage) does not directly trans-
late into reductions of untreated sewage effluent flowing
into urban watersheds.
H U M A N H E A LT H R I S K S A S S O CI ATE D W I T H U R BAN
WAT E R S H E D S I N L OW E R - I NC O M E E C O N O M I E S
Urban streams receive large quantities of wastewater
delivered intentionally or inadvertently; the UN estimated
that ∼90% of wastewater in developing countries is dis-
charged directly into rivers without treatment (UN-Water
432 | Poverty, urbanization, and environmental degradation
2008). For example, the fecal coliform count in the Ya-
muna River in New Delhi, India, was 3000× times higher
downstream than upstream of the city (Chaplin 1999, Mc-
Michael 2000). The pollution burden in the Yamuna also
includes 20 million liters of industrial effluent discharged
in the same stream reach (McMichael 2000). Nevertheless,
New Delhi regularly faces water shortages, and untreated
water from the Yamuna is used as a source of water for
urban residents (McMichael 2000).
The practice of reuse of water exported from urban
areas is a global phenomenon, especially in arid and water-
stressed regions where the entire flow during the dry sea-
son might be composed of wastewater returns (Raschid-
Sally and Jayakody 2008). Reuse of untreated wastewater
for irrigated agriculture creates another pathway by which
humans can be exposed to heavy metals, pesticides, and
microbial contaminants through consumption of tainted
vegetables and food products (Raschid-Sally and Jayakody
2008, Corcoran et al. 2010).
Inadequate drinking water and sanitation infrastruc-
ture exacerbate health risks in urban centers. Urban res-
idents tend to have better access to water-related services
than their rural counterparts, but much of the population
growth is in slums, where inhabitants are confronted with
limited local water availability and high costs of water rel-
ative to income (Dill and Crow 2014). Collectively, water-,
sanitation-, and hygiene-related diseases, including diar-
rhea, caused 2 million deaths and 4 billion incidents of
illness worldwide in 2012 (UNICEF/WHO 2012). Contam-
inated urban water is a major source of disease from bac-
terial and viral pathogens and mosquito-borne illnesses
(Monath 1994, Crump et al. 2004, Achee et al. 2015). For
example, retention of water on the landscape to mitigate
flashy flows or to maintain flows during dry periods in
more arid environments can have the unintended conse-
quence of creating habitat for disease-transmitting mos-
quito populations (Angel and Joshi 2008, Irwin et al. 2008).
Managers attempting to mitigate negative effects of the ur-
ban stream syndrome on ecosystem structure and func-
tion in lower-income countries also must consider the po-
tential consequences of human exposure to pollutants and
pathogens.
C H A L L E N G E S TO A P P LY I N G T H E U R BA N
S T R E A M SY N D R O M E TO S T R E A M S
I N LOW E R -I N C O M E C O U N T R I E S
Climate is an important driver of stream responses to
urbanization because it regulates the hydrological regime,
the volume of runoff, and the movement of contaminants
into streams (Hale et al. 2016). Climates of lower-income
countries span a wide range of conditions, thereby creating
a broad range of scenarios as to how climate may influence
stream responses to urbanization in the developing world.
This content downloaded from 187.171.135.014 on August 17, 2019 10:19:30 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
K. A. Capps et al.
In arid environments (e.g., The Arab Republic of Egypt,
Mongolia), urban streams receive relatively little runoff.
Thus, urban pollutants may have longer residence times,
subjecting human populations to greater exposure to dan-
gerous chemicals (Corcoran et al. 2010, Silva et al. 2011,
Bayram et al. 2013). In contrast, wetter tropical and sub-
tropical environments (e.g., Honduras, Thailand) might
provide sufficient runoff to export pollutants downstream
and away from resident human populations continuously.
Given overall climate-change predictions of increased vari-
ability in rainfall for many tropical areas (Neelin et al.
2006), pollutant loads might vary greatly over a year for any
particular urban stream (e.g., Bayram et al. 2013). Scientists
conducting research in urban systems across climate gra-
dients in higher-income countries should apply their work
to systems in lower-income countries. Partnerships be-
tween research institutions actively engaged in urban ecol-
ogy research and international-aid groups, such as UN-
Water, may prove to be an effective way to gain a better
understanding of the threats to urban watersheds and to
quantify the critical services they provide to marginalized
human populations.
The metrics currently used to quantify urbanization
and the subsequent changes in ecosystem services pro-
vided by urban watersheds generate additional complica-
tion in applying the urban stream syndrome globally. In
the developing world, particular challenges include: 1) ap-
propriately defining urban areas, 2) accurately predicting
urban population growth, and 3) defining globally appli-
cable metrics to measure the effects of urbanization on
watersheds. Accurate population estimates can be excep-
tionally difficult to obtain for many urban centers in lower-
income economies. Despite global increases in urbanization
rates, the definition of what constitutes an urban area is
highly mutable (Frey and Zimmer 2001). Depending on the
metric used—such as population size, population density,
or administrative criteria (e.g., nonagricultural employment;
Biswas 2006)—the size of an urban center can vary widely
from country to country. For example, in Ethiopia an urban
center contains >2000 people, whereas areas in Benin must
have >10,000 occupants to be classified as urban (Cohen
2006). Country-specific definitions for urban areas also in-
fluence the ability to predict growth in urban centers. Coun-
try size, level of economic development, and geographic
region all influence the accuracy of UN urban-growth
projections in a given country (Cohen 2006). Creating ap-
propriate metrics to measure the environmental effects of
urbanization can be challenging. For example, total imper-
vious surface coverage (ISC; e.g., roads, rooftops, parking
lots) is often used as a metric that relates the effects of
urbanization with the structure and function of lotic
ecosystems (e.g., Wenger et al. 2008). However, ISC strongly
depends on development status and total area in a given
country. Countries with high ISC typically are higher in-

come and larger in area or total population than countries
with lower ISC (Elvidge et al. 2007). In developing coun-
tries, total imperviousness might not be as high relative
to urban population growth in developed countries, espe-
cially in unplanned settlements where water infrastruc-
ture and paved roads are limited and where the need to
grow food may enhance vegetative and soil cover relative
to in higher-income areas (Biggs et al. 2010). Therefore, to
measure the effects of urbanization on the structure and
function of stream ecosystems in lower-income economies
effectively, scientists, resource managers, and policy-makers
must standardize the classification of urbanization, obtain
the information needed to make consistent projections of
urban growth throughout the globe, and define metrics that
can be used to estimate development and environmental ef-
fects in lower-income urban centers.
TOWAR D B E T T E R M A N AG E M E N T O F U R BA N
STREAMS IN DEVELOPING REGIONS
More than 3.4 billion people worldwide are living with
intense threats to water security, including many residents
of China, India, and Mexico and large regions of Africa,
Asia, and South America (Vörösmarty et al. 2010). Invest-
ments in technology or infrastructure can mitigate water-
security issues (Vörösmarty et al. 2010). Higher-income
countries may be able to avoid the loss of some ecosystem
services provided by urban watersheds through increased
financial investments (e.g., for water filtration). In con-
trast, lower-income economies may not be buffered against
major threats to water security because they cannot use
expensive infrastructure and technology to alleviate envi-
ronmental problems (Vörösmarty et al. 2010).
Insufficient water infrastructure has direct, negative
economic effects (Vörösmarty et al. 2010). Lack of access
to safe drinking water and sanitation can cost a country
between 1 and 7% of their gross domestic product (UN-
Water 2012). In most developing countries, drinking water
and sanitation are managed in a decentralized manner at
the local level (UN-Water 2012). When implemented ef-
fectively, decentralized systems might be the most practi-
cal and affordable option for many lower-income economies
(WHO 2005) because they offer increased capacity to adapt
to current demand when compared to end-of-pipe central-
ized treatment facilities requiring large upfront investments
of capital (Ashley and Cashman 2006).
Funding infrastructure initiatives must take into ac-
count local environmental and social conditions to pro-
mote sustainable urban development and to limit negative
effects on urban streams. In many developing countries,
most of the funding (in some cases, up to 90%) used to
support increased sanitation comes from governments of
higher-income countries or international organizations,
such as the World Bank (UN-Water 2012). Approximately
This content downloaded from 187.171.135.014 on August 17, 2019 10:19:30 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
Volume 35 March 2016 | 433
70% of the total funds allocated are directed to ad-
dressing sanitation challenges in urban areas (UN-Water
2012). By working together, international funding agen-
cies and the governments of lower-income economies
may be able to use existing data and financial resources
to develop strong policy guidelines. Research programs
in which freshwater scientists, political scientists, urban
planners, engineers, and development agencies work to-
gether to examine the influence of governance on the
quality of services provided by urban watersheds may
prove especially fruitful.
The need is great to build local, human resources by
increasing opportunities for training and formal education
in aquatic ecology, hydrology, and engineering in the de-
veloping world. In many, if not most, low-income countries,
high-level research questions that have been identified by
leading experts in urban stream ecology would be excep-
tionally challenging to answer (e.g., Wenger et al. 2009).
The dearth of available data and, in many cases, a lack of
the physical or human resources needed to conduct the
research render many fields of research untenable. More-
over, we argue that freshwater ecologists need to examine
interactions among economic development, urbanization,
and pollution of freshwater resources to inform manage-
ment strategies at local, regional, and national scales in
the developing world.
Successful management of urban watersheds requires
integration of innovative technological approaches and
ecosystem-based management into development and main-
tenance of wastewater and drinking-water infrastructure.
This ubiquitous environmental problem challenges us to
develop new and to enhance existing uses for sewage and
other wastewater. We echo the sentiments of Vörösmarty
et al. (2010) and Dodds et al. (2013) and assert that if we
are going to protect global freshwater resources and en-
sure the provisioning of freshwater ecosystem services,
more research is needed to understand the effects of an-
thropogenic stressors on fresh waters in lower-income
countries. Sustainable management of urban watersheds
necessitates the creation of innovative financing schemes
that support economic development through job training,
development of new industries, and creation of interdisci-
plinary research teams addressing stakeholder-driven re-
search questions.
AC KNOW LE DGEMENTS
We thank the other organizers of and participants in the
3rd Symposium on Urbanization and Stream Ecology (SUSE3)
who inspired this work. SUSE3 was funded, in part, by the Na-
tional Science Foundation (DEB 1427007). Our paper was en-
hanced by comments from Associate Editor Ashley Moerke, Seth
Wenger, Editor Pamela Silver, and 2 anonymous referees. Any use
of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only
and does not imply endorsement by the US Government.
434 | Poverty, urbanization, and environmental degradation
L I T E R AT U R E CI T E D
Achee, N. L., F. Gould, T. A. Perkins, R. C. Reiner, A. C.
Morrison, S. A. Ritchie, D. J. Gubler, R. Teyssou, and T. W.
Scott. 2015. A critical assessment of vector control for dengue
prevention. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases 9:e0003655.
Ali, S. I. 2010. Alternatives for safe water provision in urban and
peri-urban slums. Journal of Water and Health 8:720–734.
Angel, B., and V. Joshi. 2008. Distribution and seasonality of
vertically transmitted dengue viruses in Aedes mosquitoes in
arid and semi-arid areas of Rajasthan, India. Journal of Vec-
tor Borne Diseases 45:56–59.
Arrow, K., B. Bolin, R. Costanza, P. Dasgupta, C. Folke, C. S.
Holling, B. O. Jansson, S. Levin, K. G. Maler, C. Perrings,
and D. Pimentel. 1995. Economic growth, carrying capacity,
and the environment. Science 268:520–521.
Ashley, R., and A. Cashman. 2006. The impacts of change on the
long-term future demand for water sector infrastructure. Pages
241–349 in Infrastructure to 2030: telecom, land transport,
water and electricity. OECD Publishing, Paris, France.
Asici, A. A. 2013. Economic growth and its impact on environ-
ment: a panel data analysis. Ecological Indicators 24:324–333.
Bayram, A., H. Önsoy, V. N. Bulut, and G. Akinci. 2013. Influ-
ences of urban wastewaters on the stream water quality: a
case study from Gumushane Province, Turkey. Environmen-
tal Monitoring and Assessment 185:1285–1303.
Beckerman, W. 1992. Economic growth and the environment:
whose growth? whose environment? World Development
20:481–496.
Biggs, T. W., E. Atkinson, R. Powell, and L. Ojeda-Revah. 2010.
Land cover following rapid urbanization on the US–Mexico
border: Implications for conceptual models of urban water-
shed processes. Landscape and Urban Planning 96:78–87.
Biswas, A. K. 2006. Water management for major urban centres.
Water Resources Development 22:183–197.
Booth, D. B., A. H. Roy, B. Smith, and K. A. Capps. 2016. Global
perspectives on the urban stream syndrome. Freshwater Sci-
ence 35:412–420.
Bouwman, A. F., G. van Drecht, J. M. Knoop, A. H. W. Beusen,
and C. R. Meinardi. 2005. Exploring changes in river nitrogen
export to the world’s oceans. Global Biogeochemical Cycles
19:17.
Chaplin, S. E. 1999. Cities, sewers and poverty: India’s politics
of sanitation. Environment and Urbanization 11:145–158.
Cohen, B. 2006. Urbanization in developing countries: current
trends, future projections, and key challenges for sustain-
ability. Technology in Society 28:63–80.
Corcoran, E., C. Nellemann, E. Baker, R. Bos, D. Osborn, and H.
Savelli. 2010. Sick water? The central role of wastewater man-
agement in sustainable development. A rapid response assess-
ment. UN-HABITAT, GRID-Arendal, New York. (Available
from: http://www.unep.org/pdf/SickWater_screen.pdf )
Crump, J. A., S. P. Luby, and E. D. Mintz. 2004. The global
burden of typhoid fever. Bulletin of the World Health Organi-
zation 82:346–353.
Daly, H. E. 1993. The perils of free trade. Scientific American
269:50–57.
Dill, B., and B. Crow. 2014. The colonial roots of inequality:
access to water in urban East Africa. Water International
39:187–200.
This content downloaded from 187.171.135.014 on August 17, 2019 10:19:30 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
K. A. Capps et al.
Dinda, S. 2004. Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis: a
survey. Ecological Economics 49:431–455.
Dodds, W. K., J. S. Perkin, and J. E. Gerken. 2013. Human im-
pact on freshwater ecosystem services: a global perspective.
Environmental Science and Technology 47:9061–9068.
Domínguez-Villalobos, L., and F. Brown-Grossman. 2007. NAFTA’s
impact on business environmental decision making. Policy
Studies Journal 35:245–263.
Ederington, J. 2007. NAFTA and the pollution haven hypothe-
sis. Policy Studies Journal 35:239–244.
Elvidge, C. D., B. T. Tuttle, P. C. Sutton, K. E. Baugh, A. T.
Howard, C. Milesi, B. Bhaduri, and R. Nemani. 2007. Global
distribution and density of constructed impervious surfaces.
Sensors 7:1962–1979.
Fewtrell, L., R. B. Kaufmann, D. Kay, W. Enanoria, L. Haller, and
J. M. Colford. 2005. Water, sanitation, and hygiene inter-
ventions to reduce diarrhoea in less developed countries: a
systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infectious Dis-
eases 5:42–52.
Frey, W. H., and Z. Zimmer. 2001. Defining the city. Handbook
of Urban Studies 1:14–35.
Gao, J. B., Q. Wu, Q. L. Li, J. Ma, Q. F. Xu, P. M. Groffman, and S.
Yu. 2013. Preliminary results from monitoring of stream nitro-
gen concentrations, denitrification, and nitrification potentials
in an urbanizing watershed in Xiamen, southeast China. Inter-
national Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecol-
ogy 20:223–230.
Grimm, N. B., S. H. Faeth, N. E. Golubiewski, C. L. Redman,
J. G. Wu, X. M. Bai, and J. M. Briggs. 2008. Global change
and the ecology of cities. Science 319:756–760.
Grossman, G. M., and A. B. Krueger. 1991. Environmental impacts
of a North American Free Trade Agreement. NBER Working
Paper National Bureau of Economic Research, Washington,
DC. (Available from: http://www.nber.org/papers/w3914)
Grossman, G. M., and A. B. Krueger. 1995. Economic growth and
the environment. Quarterly Journal of Economics 110:353–
377.
Hale, R. L., M. Scoggins, N. J. Smucker, and A. Suchy. 2016.
Effects of climate on the expression of the urban stream syn-
drome. Freshwater Science 35:421–428.
Hettige, H., M. Mani, and D. Wheeler. 1998. Industrial pollu-
tion in economic development: Kuznets revisited. Policy Re-
search Working Paper 1876. Development Research Group,
World Bank, Washington, DC.
Hettige, H., M. Mani, and D. Wheeler. 2000. Industrial pollution
in economic development: the environmental Kuznets curve
revisited. Journal of Development Economics 62:445–476.
Irwin, P., C. Arcari, J. Hausbeck, and S. Paskewitz. 2008. Urban
wet environment as mosquito habitat in the upper midwest.
Ecohealth 5:49–57.
Isunju, J. B., K. Schwartz, M. A. Schouten, W. P. Johnson, and
M. P. van Dijk. 2011. Socio-economic aspects of improved
sanitation in slums: a review. Public Health 125:368–376.
Kulabako, N. R., M. Nalubega, and R. Thunvik. 2007. Study of
the impact of land use and hydrogeological settings on the
shallow groundwater quality in a peri-urban area of Kampala,
Uganda. Science of the Total Environment 381:180–199.
Levinson, A. 2008. Environmental Kuznets curve. In S. Durlauf
and L. E. Blume (editors). The new Palgrave dictionary of

economics online. 2nd edition. Palgrave–MacMillan, London,
UK. (Available from: http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com
/article?id=pde2008_E000211)
Levinson, A. 2009. Offshoring pollution: is the United States
increasingly importing polluting goods? Review of Environ-
mental Economics and Policy 4:63–83.
Liu, J., and J. Diamond. 2005. China’s environment in a global-
izing world. Nature 435:1179–1186.
McMichael, A. J. 2000. The urban environment and health in a
world of increasing globalization: issues for developing countries.
Bulletin of the World Health Organization 78:1117–1126.
Meyer, J. L., M. J. Paul, and W. K. Taulbee. 2005. Stream eco-
system function in urbanizing landscapes. Journal of the
North American Benthological Society 24:602–612.
Moe, C. L., and R. D. Rheingans. 2006. Global challenges in wa-
ter, sanitation and health. Journal of Water and Health 4:41.
Monath, T. P. 1994. Dengue: the risk to developed and develop-
ing countries. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci-
ences of the United States of America 91:2395–2400.
Munasinghe, M. 1999. Is environmental degradation an inevitable
consequence of economic growth: tunneling through the envi-
ronmental Kuznets curve. Ecological Economics 29:89–109.
Neelin, J. D., M. Münnich, H. Su, J. E. Meyerson, and C. E.
Holloway. 2006. Tropical drying trends in global warming
models and observations. Proceedings of the National Acad-
emy of Sciences of the United States of America 103:6110–
6115.
Niemczynowicz, J. 1999. Urban hydrology and water manage-
ment – present and future challenges. Urban Water 1:1–14.
Nyenje, P. M., J. W. Foppen, S. Uhlenbrook, R. Kulabako, and
A. Muwanga. 2010. Eutrophication and nutrient release in
urban areas of sub-Saharan Africa: a review. Science of the
Total Environment 408:447–455.
Nyenje, P. M., J. C. N. Havik, J. W. Foppen, A. Muwanga, and R.
Kulabako. 2014. Understanding the fate of sanitation-related
nutrients in a shallow sandy aquifer below an urban slum area.
Journal of Contaminant Hydrology 164:259–274.
Parkinson, J., and O. Mark 2005. Urban stormwater management
in developing countries. IWA Publishing, London, England.
Parr, T. B., N. J. Smucker, C. N. Bentsen, and M. W. Neale. 2016.
Potential roles of past, present, and future urbanization char-
acteristics in producing varied stream responses. Freshwater
Science 35:436–443.
Ramírez, A., K. G. Rosas, A. E. Lugo, and O. M. Ramos-González.
2014. Spatio-temporal variation in stream water chemistry in a
tropical urban watershed. Ecology and Society 19:11.
Raschid-Sally, L., and P. Jayakody. 2008. Drivers and charac-
teristics of wastewater agriculture in developing countries:
results from a global assessment. International Water Man-
agement Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka. (Available from: http://
www.unwater.org/downloads/RR127.pdf )
Silva, J. S. O., M. M. D. Bustamante, D. Markewitz, A. V.
Krusche, and L. G. Ferreira. 2011. Effects of land cover on
chemical characteristics of streams in the Cerrado region of
Brazil. Biogeochemistry 105:75–88.
Stern, D. I. 2007. The effect of NAFTA on energy and environmen-
tal efficiency in Mexico. Policy Studies Journal 35:291–322.
This content downloaded from 187.171.135.014 on August 17, 2019 10:19:30 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
Volume 35 March 2016 | 435
Stern, D. I., M. S. Common, and E. B. Barbier. 1996. Economic
growth and environmental degradation: the environmental
Kuznets curve and sustainable development. World Devel-
opment 24:1151–1160.
Tobey, J. A. 1989. Economic development and environmental
management in the third world. Habitat International 13:125–
135.
UNICEF/WHO (United Nations Children’s Fund/World Health
Organization). 2012. Progress on drinking water and sanita-
tion: 2012 update. United Nations Children’s Fund, New York.
(Available from: http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMPreport
2012.pdf )
UN-Water. 2008. Tackling a global crisis: international year of
sanitation 2008. United Nations, New York. (Available from:
http://esa.un.org/iys/docs/IYS_flagship_web_small.pdf )
UN-Water. 2012. UN-Water global analysis and assessment of
sanitation and drinking-water: the challenge of extending and
sustaining services. United Nations, Geneva, Switzerland. (Avail-
able from: http://www.unwater.org/downloads/UN-Water_GLAAS
_2012_Report.pdf )
Vörösmarty, C. J., P. B. McIntyre, M. O. Gessner, D. Dudgeon, A.
Prusevich, P. Green, S. Glidden, S. E. Bunn, C. A. Sullivan, C.
Reidy Liermann, and P. M. Davies. 2010. Global threats to
human water security and river biodiversity. Nature 467:555–
561.
Walsh, C. J., A. H. Roy, J. W. Feminella, P. D. Cottingham, P. M.
Groffman, and R. P. Morgan. 2005. The urban stream syn-
drome: current knowledge and the search for a cure. Journal
of the North American Benthological Society 24:706–723.
Wenger, S. J., J. T. Peterson, M. C. Freeman, B. J. Freeman, and
D. D. Homans. 2008. Stream fish occurrence in response to
impervious cover, historic land use, and hydrogeomorphic
factors. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
65:1250–1264.
Wenger, S. J., A. H. Roy, C. R. Jackson, E. S. Bernhardt, T. L.
Carter, S. Filoso, C. A. Gibson, W. C. Hession, S. S. Kaushal,
E. Martí, J. L. Meyer, M. A. Palmer, M. J. Paul, A. H. Purcell,
A. Ramírez, A. D. Rosemond, K. A. Schofield, E. B. Sudduth,
and C. J. Walsh. 2009. Twenty-six key research questions in
urban stream ecology: an assessment of the state of the sci-
ence. Journal of the North American Benthological Society
28:1080–1098.
WHO (World Health Organization). 2005. Sanitation and hy-
giene promotion. Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative
Council and World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzer-
land. (Available from: http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health
/hygiene/sanhygpromo.pdf )
WHO/UNICEF (World Health Organization/United Nations
Children’s Fund). 2010. Progress on sanitation and drinking-
water, 2010 update. WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Prog-
ramme (JMP) for Water Supply and Sanitation. United Na-
tions, New York. (Available from: http://www.wssinfo.org/file
admin/user_upload/resources/1278061137-JMP_report_2010_en
.pdf )
World Bank. 2015. Country and lending groups. The World
Bank Group, Washington, DC. (Available from: http://data
.worldbank.org/about/country-and-lending-groups)