Between the market and the commons: ensuring the right to water in rural communities.

• Author: Astle, Jason
• Position: Africa

1. INTRODUCTION

   More than one billion people in the developing world lack safe drinking water. (1) The U.S. government estimates that by the year 2015 it is possible that up to forty percent of the world's population will live in countries where water is in short supply. (2) An estimated fourteen to thirty thousand people die each day from water-related diseases. (3) Of those who die everyday from water infected with disease, between 9,500 and 20,000 are children. (4)

   While access to fresh water is not the only problem, limited supply is the primary dilemma. The total fresh water supply on Earth is being diminished through pollution, diversion, and depletion. (5) Only 0.77 percent of the total water on Earth circulates as part of the water cycle, and even less circulates as rain water--the only source of renewable fresh water. (6) Less than one half of one percent of the world's water is available for human consumption. (7) Thus, the total amount of water available for human consumption and use is extremely limited. Population explosions, urbanization, industrialization, and agriculture have increased demand for water while pollution has decreased the already limited supply. (8) Increased demand for a limited water supply exacerbates the human crisis worldwide.

   The human right to water entitles everyone to an adequate amount of safe water and is necessary to prevent death from dehydration, to reduce the risk of water-related disease and to provide for consumption, cooking, personal, and domestic hygienic requirements. (9) Many of the efforts to meet this challenge by governments and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have failed on many levels. (10) This article advocates for the privatization of wells in rural areas as an incentive to maintain both the quantity and the quality of local water while improving access and availability. Rather than putting the wells into the hands of large corporations, this article suggests a middle path wherein the owner of the well would be a non-profit, non-governmental organization that leases the operation to a local business person, who is accountable to both the organization and the village. The large scale provision of water is a serious and growing problem everywhere, especially for urban areas, but is beyond the scope of the discussion here. (11)

   In the face of these alarming trends, governments are faced with the problem of ensuring that every one of their citizens has access to safe, fresh water. Part II asks the question what is water: a human need or a human right? Part III addresses whose water is it, by examining three typical models: (1) private control; (2) government ownership; and (3) the "development" model. Part IV narrows the focus to the more limited problem of access to water in rural areas of Africa, and concentrates on methods of delivery. The conclusion addresses the concerns of anti-privatization advocates and many of the problems the current system faces in ensuring that rural communities have access to enough safe water to meet their basic needs. Moreover, the conclusion will evaluate how privatized wells protect the right to water in a human rights framework.

2. WHAT IS WATER?

   There are two basic ways of conceptualizing water: (1) as a need (commodity); or (2) as a right (entitlement). It is important to distinguish water as a right versus a need. A right is something that creates obligations; whereas a need carries with it no assurance of its provision. (12) Because water is essential to all aspects of life from the basic need for drinking water, to growing food, to industrial uses such as coolant in power plants, there is no consensus on the question of whether water is a need or a right.

   Businesses and pro-market institutions such as the World Bank insist that water is a need or commodity better managed in free markets. (13) They argue that markets are efficient and reduce waste, ensuring that limited resources will be fully utilized. On the other side, environmentalists and local populations insist they have a right to water--that it cannot be denied to them. (14) Kofi Annan, U.N. Secretary General, blended the logic of both arguments by stating that "[a]ccess to safe water is a fundamental human need and, therefore, a basic human right." (15) The right to water as a human right, though controversial, is well established in international legal theory as well as in traditional practice. (16) This section addresses both arguments in turn.

   1. Water as a Human Need

      Water is clearly a need in the broad sense as a fundamental necessity of life, regardless of the label of need or right. Water as a commodity, a good that can be sold in the market, is the more narrow meaning of need. It is important to acknowledge from the start that water is in fact bought and sold, given a value, and paid for everyday, in all contexts. Water, like lunch, is never free. Even where no money is paid, opportunity costs are incurred when fetching and using water for whatever purpose. For example, water taken from a river has to be carried, that energy could be spent on other activities. Water could also be contaminated, which would involve additional costs in terms of time and money for medical care. Thus, even in circumstances where no money goes into developing the source, there is a cost for using that water. Those costs can be translated into value. (17)

      Value as an economic term means the amount an individual is willing to pay for the good or service. (18) This means that value is inherently subjective, not intrinsically connected to the water itself; it is a function of the buyer. Cost as an economic term is more complicated, but essentially it is the amount the seller has spent to make the water available. This can be broken down into two types of costs: (1) opportunity costs (described above, they can also include environmental damage and other intangible costs); and (2) use costs. (19) Use costs are the traditional costs associated with developing, transporting, and managing water. (20)

      Making water sellable requires calculating its costs to sellers and its value to buyers, and where those two numbers meet is the price of water. (21) In a simple supply and demand curve, water is not sold below its cost, and not paid for above its value. When traded at this point, water is used in the most efficient manner, not wasted or lost, and thus conserved. (22) Markets also solve the problem of allocation by determining how water is used and who gets to use it.

      Because there are many competing demands for water--consumption, agriculture, and industry, a finite resource like water has to be divided up. Markets do precisely that--divide and allocate the limited supply of water. Water is allocated to those who are willing to pay a price that allows the supplier to recover costs. This excludes those who charge too much or who pay too little. However, individuals act differently than corporations--value is also a function of the resources available to the buyer. In the Sahara, the opportunity cost to other users and the use costs to get the water will both be higher. Scarcity of water is also highly variable. For example, countries along the Nile should pay less than Saharan countries for the same amount of water. The problem is that life cannot be sustained long without water, so its value (in terms of what a person is willing to give up to have it) cannot be measured in any accurate manner. (23)

      The difficulties encountered in determining the price of water were summarized by John Briscoe in a World Bank paper entitled, Water as an Economic Good: What it Means in Practice, which was presented in 1996. (24) Briscoe outlined various methodologies and then concluded that "most certainly these 'ballpark estimates' can never, and should never, be used to make technocratic decisions on allocations and prices." (25) That did not prevent him from declaring that "the hegemony of the market model of development, and the corresponding move to using market-like and market-friendly instruments for managing all elements of the economy (including water)" is part of a group of ideas that will shape society in the future. (26)

      Building on this work, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and multi-national corporations have pushed (some would say forced) privatization of water on developing countries as a loan condition. (27) Any meaningful acknowledgement of the world's water crisis (i.e. recognizing the fourteen to thirty thousand deaths every day from water-related disease) requires a simultaneous recognition that water cannot be wasted. Waste is also an economic term describing a condition that occurs when the price is set below or above the optimal point where supply and demand meet. (28) In practical terms, this means that when water is treated as free, or is priced well below its cost and subsidized, water is wasted. (29) Additionally, corrupt governmental practices or use of water for political patronage also create waste by diverting water to users or uses that are inefficient. (30) Private corporations, on the other hand, bring market efficiencies, management experience, and most importantly--private investment capital. (31)

      Not surprisingly, many corporations have taken advantage of this situation and have gone into the business of providing water. The annual revenue of the three biggest multinational water corporations in 2001 was almost 160 billion dollars. (32) The most obvious example is the bottled water industry. Many countries, such as Cameroon, are also privatizing their municipal water supplies. (33) The Bolivian example described below is dramatic in terms of both the application of market theory and the reaction by the population to such a scheme.

      In 1999, the city officials of Cochabamba, Bolivia put water services under the control of a for-profit corporation. (34) The corporation, Aguas del Tunmari (a subsidiary of Bechtel), seemed a...