{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020168067226890758, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004481792717086834, 'mean_word_length': 5.244755244755245, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Water Pollution Control in Africa: A Comparative Legal Survey

A country's water resources are important not only for the continued well-being of its population but also because water is a critical element in its economic development. Water is vital for human, animal and plant life. Life cannot exist without it. Most domestic needs in developing countries are satisfied through direct access to natural sources. The World Health Organisation in 1976 estimated that only 38 per cent of the total population in developing countries had access to safe water supplies. This means that 62 per cent of the population resorted to lakes, rivers, streams and wells for domestic requirements. Many industries abstract water from rivers and lakes for their industrial processes and often return it to those sources as trade effluents. Water is a critical factor in agricultural production. In turn agricultural activities create by-products such as sediment loads and chemical residues with adverse impact on water quality. It is obvious therefore that a country must ensure that its water resources are rationally utilised and managed. Such utilisation and management entails the creation of normative and institutional structures, first, to regulate the allocation of an often scarce resource to competing legitimate demands and, secondly, to anticipate, prevent and control the adverse consequences of resources utilisation. This article examines the nature of the legal mechanisms instituted by selected African countries, viz. Zambia, Ethiopia, Ghana, Sudan and Kenya, for the control and prevention of water pollution. The objective is two-fold: first, to determine the adequacy of existing legal regimes and, secondly, to suggest how deficiencies in existing frameworks may be rectified.