More Mexicans Have a Smartphone Than Reliable Running Water.
And nobody calls it what it actually is: a political decision about which infrastructure we chose to build — and which ones we didn't.
Two infrastructure systems. Two investment decisions. Two different political priorities. One country living with the consequences of both.
In 2024, only 52.3% of urban Mexicans had a constant, reliable water supply.
Read that again.
These are not estimates. They are the official numbers — published by INEGI and CONAGUA, the same government institutions responsible for measuring exactly this kind of gap. They are not disputed. They are simply not talked about in the same sentence.
We celebrate the smartphone number as progress. We lament the water number as a persistent challenge. What we almost never do is place the two figures side by side and ask the obvious question: how does a country build the infrastructure to connect 99 million people to mobile networks — and simultaneously fail to provide half its urban population with water they can count on turning the tap and finding?
The answer is not complicated. It is uncomfortable. It is a political decision. And understanding it is essential for anyone who cares about what digital progress actually means — and who it actually serves.
The Numbers Side by Side
Let that sit for a moment. Mexico has built a digital connectivity infrastructure that reaches more than four out of five people. It has not built a water infrastructure that guarantees reliable, constant supply to even half of those living in its cities. And in rural areas — where water scarcity is most acute — the infrastructure gap for both is larger, even if mobile connectivity has grown faster there than anywhere.
The smartphone reached communities where the water pipe never did. That is not a technology success story. It is an infrastructure priority story.
Why the Comparison Is Not Unfair
Some will argue that telecommunications and water infrastructure are different problems — different technical complexity, different funding mechanisms, different timelines. That is true, and it is also the argument that has been used for decades to avoid the comparison. The technical differences are real. The political convenience of treating them as entirely separate is also real.
The facts make the comparison unavoidable. Mexico's telecommunications sector attracted massive private investment — primarily from a single dominant operator, but investment at scale nonetheless — under a regulatory framework that made connectivity a commercial opportunity. The IFT was created specifically to govern that investment and promote competition. When the commercial incentive was clear, the infrastructure followed. Not perfectly, not equitably, but it moved.
Water infrastructure in Mexico is constitutionally the responsibility of municipalities — many of which lack the technical capacity and the budget to maintain existing systems, let alone build new ones. CONAGUA estimates that approximately 30% of potable water in Mexico is lost to infrastructure leaks before it reaches anyone's tap. The national water balance shows 9,500 million cubic meters of groundwater being extracted annually in excess of natural recharge — the country is mining water it will not replace. Nine states including major industrial and population centers saw their reliable water supply decrease between 2021 and 2023. Chihuahua, Nuevo León, Puebla, Veracruz.
Meanwhile, the country built mobile coverage for 99 million people.
The comparison is not unfair because the two things are technically equivalent. The comparison is fair because they reflect the same political economy: when there is a clear private return on investment, infrastructure gets built. When the beneficiaries are primarily poor, rural, or politically marginalized communities — and the return on investment is long-term, diffuse, and public — the investment does not follow at the same pace.
The Narrative of Digital Progress and What It Hides
The ENDUTIH 2024 results were celebrated across Mexico as evidence of transformative progress. And in one sense they deserve to be. Going from 39% of households with internet access in 2015 to 73.6% in 2024 is a real change that has real consequences for people's lives. Access to information, government services, economic opportunity, telemedicine, education — these are not trivial benefits.
But the narrative of digital progress becomes distorted when it is used to substitute for the harder conversation about basic services. When a government announces that 83% of the population uses internet as evidence of development — without noting that the same population is drinking water stored in household tanks because the municipal supply is unreliable — it is using one number to obscure another.
This is not unique to Mexico. It is a pattern visible across emerging economies where digital infrastructure has outpaced physical infrastructure. The smartphone becomes a substitute for the services the state did not deliver: telemedicine instead of clinics, digital banking instead of bank branches, online government services instead of functional local offices. The device is real. The access is real. The substitution for missing infrastructure is also real.
The Investment Gap Is a Decision, Not a Destiny
Here is the number that puts everything in context: the UN estimates that every dollar invested in safe water and sanitation infrastructure returns between three and twelve dollars in economic benefits — through reduced healthcare costs, increased productivity, and decreased time spent obtaining and treating water. It is one of the highest-return infrastructure investments a government can make.
And yet the investment does not follow at the scale the need demands. Why?
Because water infrastructure does not have a private investor with the same motivation that built the cellular towers. Because the communities with the least reliable water access are also the communities with the least political weight. Because fixing a leak in a rural water system in Guerrero or Oaxaca does not generate the same headline as announcing 100 million mobile subscribers. Because the incentive structures in Mexican public spending — across administrations and parties — have consistently underweighted physical infrastructure for basic services relative to the visibility of digital announcements.
In communities where water arrives twice a week by truck, internet arrived first. That sequence is a policy choice, not a technical inevitability.
This is not a left or right argument. The underinvestment in water infrastructure has been consistent across six-year terms, multiple parties, and different economic philosophies. It is a structural feature of how Mexico allocates public resources — and of how private capital flows in the absence of the regulatory frameworks that made telecommunications investment commercially viable.
The question is whether the same political will that built the IFT, structured the telecommunications concessions, and drove mobile penetration to 81.7% can be applied to water — with different ownership models, different regulatory incentives, and a genuine accounting of what the deficit is costing the country in healthcare, productivity, and human dignity.
What This Means for Digital Transformation — Really
For those working in technology, digital transformation, or public policy, this comparison matters in a very practical way. Every conversation about AI, IoT, smart cities, digital health, or connected government takes place in a context where the infrastructure underneath those promises is uneven — often radically so.
Building a telemedicine platform for rural communities that lack reliable water is not the same problem as building one for an urban hospital. Building a smart water meter network for a system that loses 30% of its water to leaks before those meters is not a technology problem — it is a political priority problem that technology can help solve, but cannot solve alone. Designing digital government services for populations that alternate between internet access and water rationing requires understanding both deficits, not just the one with the better press release.
The honest version of digital transformation in Mexico — in any emerging market — starts with the acknowledgment that connectivity is necessary and insufficient. That reaching 83% internet penetration while 47.7% of urban residents cannot count on water is not a paradox to be explained away. It is a mandate to ask different questions about which infrastructure problems deserve the same urgency, the same investment frameworks, and the same political will that built the mobile network.
It is an infrastructure priority story with some chapters missing.
The Conversation Worth Having
None of this is a reason to stop celebrating digital connectivity. Smartphones and internet access have genuinely transformed what is possible for millions of Mexicans — in health information, economic opportunity, civic participation, and daily life. The ENDUTIH numbers represent real change for real people.
But progress should be measured against the full list of what people need — not just the things that attracted private capital. The right benchmark for a country's development is not how many people have smartphones. It is how many people have smartphones and reliable water and functional health infrastructure and educational access and physical safety.
When we measure progress with only the metrics that look good, we end up making policy that optimizes for the measurement — not for the people. Mexico is not unique in this. But Mexico's specific combination of world-class digital penetration and deeply inadequate water infrastructure makes the gap unusually visible — and unusually instructive.
The next time someone celebrates Mexico's digital progress with an INEGI chart, ask them to put the water access chart next to it. The conversation that follows is the one worth having.
Sources · INEGI · Encuesta Nacional sobre Disponibilidad y Uso de Tecnologías de la Información en los Hogares (ENDUTIH) 2024 — May 2025 (81.7% mobile users; 83.1% internet users; 73.6% households with internet; 161.8 MXN average prepaid spend) · INEGI / IFT · ENDUTIH 2024 Press Release — 98.6 million mobile users · INEGI · Encuesta Nacional de Calidad e Impacto Gubernamental (ENCIG) 2023 — only 52.3% of urban Mexicans report constant reliable water supply, down from 62.4% in 2019; 9 states reduced reliable supply 2021–2023 · CONAGUA · Estadísticas del Agua en México 2023 — 30% of piped water lost to leaks; 9,500 million m³ groundwater overextraction annually · WHO / OPS 2022 — 92% of Mexicans have access to potable water source; only 14% have access to treated water at home · DAPA Mexico — data compilation from CONAGUA, INEGI, OMS · UN Water — estimated $3–$12 economic return per $1 invested in safe water and sanitation infrastructure · El Financiero — "Crisis de agua crece en México: Casi la mitad de la población no tiene acceso a suministro constante" — March 2024.
If your organization works in digital transformation, public policy, smart infrastructure, or regulated sectors — and you want to think more clearly about which problems technology actually solves and which ones require different conversations — let's talk.
The How Maker · #JMCoach
Digital Transformation · Public Sector Technology · Smart Infrastructure · AI & Data Platforms · Regulated Industries · Executive & Board Advisory
No hay comentarios.:
Publicar un comentario
Nota: sólo los miembros de este blog pueden publicar comentarios.