Why is bottled water a controversial commodity?

The Change Lab x Paths Academics

Water, the fundamental prerequisite for life, health, and dignity. Without access to sufficient, safe water, the enjoyment of other fundamental rights-such as the right to life, freedom from cruel or degrading treatment, an adequate standard of living-is impossible. Bottled water, on the other hand, is drinking water packaged in bottles and sold for human consumption. It is water that has been extracted, processed, packaged, branded and sold for profit, rather than being delivered as a public service. Thus, it becomes a controversial commodity because, although it can provide short term access and convenience, it undermines public water systems, worsens global inequalities, and creates serious environmental costs when humanity is already confronted with a considerable amount of environmental challenges. 

To understand why bottled water is controversial, it helps to start with the idea that access to water is a fundamental human right. Safe drinking water is fundamental to life, and in many countries it is provided as a public service through municipal systems, funded by taxes or low user fees. However, the same resource that flows almost free from the tap can be sold in a bottle at hundreds of times the price per litre. Many critics argue that treating water primarily as a commodity directly undermines the principle that everyone, regardless of income or status, should enjoy reliable access to safe, clean water. Bottled water effectively places a price tag on water that inevitably prevents universal access, when water should be free and accessible to all. Marketing intensifies this problem: companies often advertise bottled water to be ‘pure’, ‘natural’ or even ‘safer’ than tap water. In doing so, they normalise the idea that those with the ability to pay deserve a higher-quality version of something essential and effectively transform water from an essential ‘need’ to a status-laden  symbol of  ‘quality’ living. 

This controversy is perhaps exacerbated when looking at inequality between and within countries. In much of the Global North, bottled water is largely a product of personal preference i.e. people buy it for convenience, taste, or brand image and not necessarily because tap water is unsafe. Meanwhile, in the Global South, it is the lack or absence of reliable public water supply and water management infrastructure that drives bottled water markets. Therefore, in many low and middle income countries, rising consumption of bottled water can be seen as a sign of decades of governments’ failure to deliver safe drinking water to their citizens. According to research, half of what the world pays for bottled water annually at present would pay to provide clean and long-term public water supply for hundreds of millions of people currently without it. Yet, studies of sachet water in West African cities show that low-income households often rely heavily on packaged water due to unreliable and unsafe piped supply; and thus ‘the burden of sachet water dependency falls on the poorest of the poor in Accra’s slums’ when these people need help the most. By encouraging the growth of the bottled water market, we are encouraging the widening of the global disparity between the many people who lack adequate access to reliable water services and the others that enjoy water as a luxury.

Bottled water also raises the question of negative environmental impacts. According to the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority, single-use bottled water systems consume between 11 and 90 times more energy than tap water systems. Energy generation and consumption is a driver of climate change and bottled water’s overall carbon footprint is 300 to 1000 times higher than that of local tap water. Purchasing and consuming bottled water therefore accelerates climate change and puts increasing pressure on mitigation and adaptation strategies trying to reverse or reduce climate damage. Recent studies have also shown that bottled water contains 10 to 100 times more microplastics than previously estimated, with 90% of these. Being nanoplastics. These substances damage cells directly, and are harmful due to a plethora of toxic chemicals that are embedded in the plastic itself, eventually leaking into cells. Thus, drinking bottled water is not only worsening global inequalities, but it also harms human health and aquatic biodiversity. 

Nonetheless, despite all this, bottled water acts as a critical lifeline during emergencies and natural disasters when established water systems and infrastructures are destroyed or disrupted. Organisations like the Red Cross rely heavily on pre-packaged water to provide immediate, safe hydration and prevent waterborne diseases in crisis zones. The bottled water industry has always been at the forefront of relief efforts, either during emergencies or natural disasters. In 2014, IBWA members stepped forward to provide citizens of Toledo, Ohio, with safe, clean, bottled water when the public water system was disrupted and contaminated by a toxin from an algae bloom. This effectively saved lives and prevented the spread of waterborne diseases. Some companies have also tried to improve their environmental performance, for example by using recycled plastics, lightweight bottles, or funding conservation projects. This suggests that the controversy is not about banning bottled water altogether but questioning when and where it is appropriate, and whether its presence is undermining more equitable and sustainable alternatives. 

In conclusion, bottled water is a controversial commodity because it sits at the intersection of providing for the public needs whilst undermining equitable outcomes. Water in a bottle does indeed offer more convenience and act as important relief during emergencies where public systems fail to cope. However, at the same time, it risks entrenching a two-tier system of access, worsening plastic pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, and mask the inadequacy of public water systems in poor countries. Thus, before we can decide on whether essential resources should be branded products for sale or shared public goods as a matter of justice, bottled water will forever be a controversial commodity seen as both a life and a leash.