Abundance | Basic Needs

People need three basic things: water, food, and safety. Without these essentials, we cannot survive, much less thrive. 

When we have them, it can be easy to take these essentials for granted. For many of us, we turn on the tap, and clean water fills our cup. Go to the grocery store, and food options abound. Walk around the block, and it’s safe enough to let our guard down. 

But while standard expectations to some, these everyday moments of well-being and security are far from guaranteed for millions of California residents. In a state of plenty, why do some people still struggle to meet their most basic needs? And what can we do to fix that? 

In the summer of 2024, the Possibility Lab invited public policy researchers from across California to share their ideas on addressing these questions. Here, we present reports from three policy experts: Nicola Ulibarri (water), Anastasia Telesetsky (food), and Mikaela Rabinowitz (public safety). According to these researchers, abundance is not only about the numeric supply of essential goods; it is also about the distribution of these resources. 

Water is relatively unique among essential goods in that it is exceptionally difficult to create more of it. The amount of water on Earth today is essentially the same as billions of years ago. What does abundance mean in the context of a fixed resource?

According to Ulibarri, it means recognizing that our existing water supply is not actually scarce. In fact, water is already abundant for most California residents, whose homes are serviced by the large-scale infrastructure system that moves water from wet to dry parts of the state. However, there’s variation in terms of who can access it. 

While clean water is readily available to most people, many residents slip through the cracks. Thousands of households, especially in rural areas, are not connected to the water system, leaving them dependent on groundwater wells that can run dry during droughts or due to local over-pumping. And among those who are connected to the system, almost a million California residents receive water that doesn’t meet standards set by the Safe Drinking Water Act. Meanwhile, a growing number of California residents face new or worsening affordability challenges as water prices rise faster than inflation.     

Sustainable water abundance requires regenerating and preserving our natural ecosystems. In terms of sheer supply, California’s infrastructure already collects enough water to sustain all California residents, according to Ulibarri, so closing the equity gap does not require extracting more water from the environment. Instead, the report suggests expanding our use of water recycling technologies and distributing the existing water supply to a wider circle of residents. By investing in the infrastructure and workforce of the water system, and by changing the design of utility rates to make them more affordable, Ulibarri suggests that California can sustain water abundance for generations to come. 

Water is elemental, but food is not far behind in its essentiality. By many accounts, California already produces plentiful food. The state’s agricultural industry is a major exporter to consumers across the country and around the world. And yet, Telesetsky points out that 11.4% of California households are food insecure, meaning that millions of state residents experience limited or uncertain access to adequate food. Moreover, conventional industrial agriculture is water-intensive and soil-depleting. How can California ensure all residents have access to a nutritious diet, given these conditions?

For Telesetsky, the answer is multifaceted. Telesetsky describes a range of policy interventions that might improve access in food deserts, such as investing locally in cold food storage and subsidizing grocery delivery in underserved areas. In addition, Telesetsky suggests wider use of agricultural innovations, including seawater greenhouses and regenerative farming techniques.  

Over and above these interventions and innovations, however, Telesetsky envisions food abundance in terms of strengthening local farmers and communities. To this end, Telesetsky encourages California to pilot new models of growing and sharing food, including locally-sourced community kitchens that provide free or at-cost nutritious meals, with government funding to cover the kitchens’ overhead costs and provide basic income programs to participating local farmers. Telesetsky describes the potential of these community kitchens as not only addressing food insecurity but also cultivating connections between people and strengthening their relationships to the land. 

Community-level investments are likewise a centerpiece of Rabinowitz’s vision for abundance in public safety. Many state and local budgets allocate significant resources to the criminal justice system, but at the same time are often perceived as producing unsatisfactory results in terms of solving violent crime and improving safety outcomes. According to Rabinowitz, police officers are often expected to provide public services that are better taken on by social workers and community organizations. In particular, there is a lack of reliable funding for many community-based organizations that facilitate evidence-based programs aimed at community violence intervention through peer-to-peer mentorship. 

To support police departments in delivering on their direct law enforcement functions, and to ensure resources flow to interventions that de-escalate violence, Rabinowitz says California can do three things: Reduce, Improve, and Reinvest. By reducing the scope of non-criminal 911 calls assigned to police officers, by improving the ability of law enforcement to solve violent crime, and by reinvesting resources into community-based interventions that work, Rabinowitz argues that California can create the conditions for abundant public safety, enjoyed by all. 

For all their differences, these three experts on California’s water, food, and safety suggest one thing in common: they argue for stronger, more effective leadership from state government. Rabinowitz suggests creating a single Office of Violence Prevention within the California Department of Justice to consolidate and build upon existing efforts throughout the state. Meanwhile, Ulibarri and Telesetsky emphasize the need for the state to put more teeth behind existing legislation that classifies water and food as human rights.

From the floor of the state legislature to community-led initiatives across California, there are numerous opportunities to improve the supply, distribution, and allocation of resources so that all people can have their basic needs met.