NEW AWAKENINGS: THE RIGHT TO WATER
4.1 Water in Global Perspectives
4.1.1 Growing Interest in Water
Currently, water seems to be attracting immense political as well as economic attention globally . This upsurge of interest in water may have many explanations, but the emerging awareness of the 'looming' water crisis is one of the many reasons (World Water Development Report, 2006; Mollinga, Meinzen- Dick & Merry, 2007). While the magnitude of the crisis is only dimly understood, there seems to be an insuppressible awareness that the current rate of water resources consumption at the global level is clearly unsustainable. Although much of the water crisis campaign literature has focused on issues of sustainable use of the resources, in this chapter it is noted that much of the crisis, especially with domestic water supply, is related to management and allocation of water rather than a scarcity problem.
In reality, as Global Water Partnership notes "the water crisis is mainly a crisis of governance"(in Mollinga, Meinzen-Dick & Merry, 2007: 700). The world has enough water resources, just like many other resources. The Second United Nation World Water Development Report also confirms this when it states that, "[tjhere is enough water for everyone. The problem we face today is largely one of governance: equitably sharing this water while ensuring the sustainability of natural ecosystems. At this point in time, we have not yet achieved this balance" (2006:3). The apparent water crisis arise from the way water resources are shared (HDR, 2007). The Zambian situation is a case in point.
On another level, interest in water from the corporate sector began to grow during the 1990s especially after the Dublin Statement and the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. Now, the growth of interest in water post Rio Summit is not a mere coincidence. One of the key statements in both the Dublin and Rio summits is the prominent recognition of water as an economic as well as a public good. In a sense, the recognition of economic value in water opened up the possibility of trading water just like any other commodity. There are two sides to the apparently growing interest in water that directly arise from the Rio Summit in particular. On one side is the interest of those who seek to make economic profit from the 'water business.' Prospects for profits from the water business have been high for large multinational water corporations such as Suez and Vivendi, Thames Water, given that water has low elasticity, and also because the supply of water services is often a a natural monopoly with the potential of creating monopoly profits. Furthermore water guarantees returns to investments since water is without a perfect substitute (McDonald & Ruiter, 2005:31, Bakker, 2007). Private investments in water service provision in particular have offered new breathers for over-accumulated capital that
This is clearly evident from the number of international conferences on water in the last decade and half, but also the deepening controversy over how water management, delivery, pricing and conservation.
has been seeking profitable investment ventures (Swyngedouw, 2005; ibid). From this arises the growth of interest in water as an investment avenue globally.
It should be noted that private sector involvement in water did not start during the 1990s. Involvement of private sector in water supply has been part of the water delivery arrangement for a long time, especially in Europe and America. Swyngedouw(2005) identifies four major phases in the configuration of water service delivery system. Evident from these phases is that private sector has been part of the water services provision from the inception of reticulated water systems. Over the years, there have been some partnerships between the public and private service providers of one kind or another86. However, it was during the vigorous privatisation policy adopted by the Thatcher era that the notion that the private sector will address the growing problems of water service delivery emerged (Prasad, 2006). This notion became widespread during the 1990s, strengthened by the declaration that water is an economic good.
On the other side, the possible dangers arising from the commodification of water triggered a counter- force that sought to block the expansion of the market into water (Bond, 2005; Hall, Lobina & de la Motte, 2005). On this side, apart from raising the negative implications of treating water as a commodity, the risks of exploiting and depleting water resources have been ably voiced. The anti- privatisation movements all over the world, in a bid to protect society from the negative impact of commodification, have mobilised against the move to treat water just like any other commodity (Hall &
Lobina, 2006; Bond, 2004b). A 2005 publication by the Transnational Institute and Corporate Europe Observatory entitled "Reclaiming Public Water" documents the anti-water privatisation struggles from all over the world (Balaya, et al, 2005)87. Through these struggles we witness what Polanyi calls a
"double movement": the expansion of the market evokes a counter force that opposes its further expansion (1944:130).
The four phases identified by Swyngedouw are the period from the first inception of piped water up to the second half of 19' Century when water was provided by small private companies which supplied only parts of the city. The second phase was the municipalisation of the water services which occurred between the second half of the 19th Century and the First World War prompted by sanitary and environmental concerns in the cities. The third phase was the management of water services by national bodies or public utilities which occurred after the First World War. The Fourth phase started during the 1980s when the third wave of privatization initiated by the Thatcher government took central stage (see Swyngedouw 2005: 83-84).
The Cochabamba "Water Wars" in Bolivia since 2001 is an excellent example of strong resistance to privatization of water services.
As the struggles over water from these two fronts ensues, interest in water becomes phenomenal. At the global level, there are fears that commodification of water may trigger unscrupulous exploitation of water resources with obvious environmental consequences. The basic argument on this side is that water is one of the commons and therefore it is not right to embark on "enclosing the commons"(see Section 5.2.3). It is on the basis of this that privatisation and commercialisation have been seriously challenged. But on the other side, it is argued that putting an economic value on water results in efficient use of water resources, which in turn promotes conservation and sustainability as it avoids waste via the economic cost imposed. These issues are addressed in detail in sections below (see Sections 4.2.9 and 4.2.10).
4.1.2 Global Water Resources
Arguably, at the international level, attention to issues of fresh water resource management and development only began to feature prominently during the last two decades. In a sense, the concern to address issues of water resources has only surfaced in the midst of the imminent water crisis (Rogers, 1997). Essentially, the looming water crisis can be seen as an outcome of the growing world population together with the expanding global industrial activities in the post World War II period (Webb &
Iskandarani, 1998).
In terms of demographic pressure, global population has more than doubled between 1950 and 1990. A United Nations Population Division Report reveals that the population increased from 2.52 billion in 1950 to 5.27 billion in 1990, representing more than a 100% increase within 40 years. This increase in population, as it would be expected, implies increased demand for fresh water—a situation that has led to what is now being referred to as 'water crisis' (Saleth, 2002). The impact of this rapid increase in world population on water resources is reflected by the change in the availability of water per capita over the 50 year period (1950-2000). In most cases, water availability per capita has dropped with the highest drop recorded in Europe, Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America where the availability of water per capita in 2000 is less than 25% of its 1950 levels as shown in Figure 4.1 below.
Figure 4. lGlobal Per Capita Water Availability (1950,1980, 2000)
( a . ^ — i
i
o 100 -
§ 80 "
P 60 - 40 ' 20 -
0
• 1950
• 1980
• 2000
•EM—, w Africa
20.6 9.4 5.1
Asia 9.6 5.1 3.3
Latin America
105.6 48.8 28.3
rl i m n a North
E u r o p e America
59 4.4 4.1
37.2 21.3 17.5
S o u r c e : B a s e on Data from Ayibotele (in Webb & Iskandarani, 1998:16)
Strangely enough, though there is a significant drop in the water availability per capita, withdraw of water for domestic purposes per capita has dramatically increased in all the regions of the world as indicated in Figure 4.2 below, and this trend is likely to continue. Sharp increases in water withdraw are expected in India and China. Evident in Figure 4.2 is the fact that the way water resources are shared is scandalously uneven when different regions are compared. While on average a person in Africa was withdrawing only 11M3 per year in 1995, an average American was consuming 240M3 per year, 21 times more water. Differences of this magnitude in the use of resources highlight the point that the nature of the water crisis is not so much that of absolute scarcity but that of uneven geographical distribution and consumption, a matter that relates to governance rather than availability.
Figure 4. 2 Global Per Capita Water Withdraw (Domestic 1995/2020)
M3 240 200 160 120 80 40 0
I 1995
• 2020 15
China
25 71
India Latin America
20 65
54 82
Western Europe
Eastern Europe 94 98 94 103
USA 240 240
Worid 56 75
• 1995
• 2020
Regoins
S o u r c e : B a s e on Data from Rosegrant (in Webb & Iskandarani, 1998:17)
Citing (Rosegrant, 1997), Webb & Iskandarani observes that,
As with food, the world still has sufficient water at an aggregate level to meet everyone's minimum needs. Against estimated annual renewable freshwater supplies of between 9 and 14 trillion cubic meters, current global usage stands at less than 4 trillion cubic meters. As is the case with food, however, the global availability of water is not matched by adequate local access. Freshwater is unevenly distributed geographically and temporally, resulting in surpluses for some people and a threat of severe water insecurity for others (1998: 16).
Unevenness in the distribution and share of water is not only limited to the regional level, but huge disparities exit within countries and cities such that people in the same city can have very different levels of access to water, as the Zambian case in Chapters Five and Six below illustrates.
In terms of expanded industrial activities, the growth in global GDP can be used as a proxy indicator of the growing pressure on natural resources including water. In this regard, while the 'global' economy in 1950 was producing goods and services worth slightly above US$17 billion a day, in 2000, this figure rose to US$107.5 billion per day (Institute for International Economics, 2004: 5) . Thus, the crisis that is increasingly receiving attention pertains to the mismatch between demand for and the supply of water (Saleth, 2002), with the later remaining constant (almost) while the former growing exponentially. Paradoxically, it is this seeming imbalance between demand for water and its supply that has helped to draw attention to issues of water including access to water (Webb & Iskandarani, 1998)
Figure 4. 3 below also gives a rough idea of how water consumption is shared by the major water consuming sectors. At the global level, agriculture in all its different forms (irrigation, fish farming, animal watering, etc) uses more that two-thirds of the world's fresh water. Agriculture is often cited as the most inefficient user of the water at the global level (Mollinga, Meinzen-Dick & Merrey, 2007).
The figures are converted to the 1993 dollar Purchasing Power Parity price.
Although it has been argued that increases in technology has meant that resources are now used more efficiently than before (see Saleth, 2002; Roger, 1997), the efficiency resulting from technological advances would not deflect the huge net growth in demand for water resources by a very big margin especially in industries such as agriculture and mining where water is consumed in bulk.
Figure 4. 3 Water Use by Sector
Industrial 23%
Agriculture 69
Domestic 8%
S o u r c e . ' Based on Data from the Centre for Economic and Social Rights (2004:2).
4.1. 3 Wealth of Conferences, Poverty of Programmes and Political Will
At the international level, the increasing attention directed towards issues of water can be inferred from the number of international water conferences that have been dedicated to water, especially during the 1990s. Beginning from the Mar del Plate Conference in 1977, which was the first international conference dedicated to water, there has been an increasing focus on water issues, as indicated in the Table 4.1 below. However, while many of these conferences have focused on water and have made several solemn declarations, since the early 1970s, progress in realizing a world where everyone has access to at least basic clean water has been limited (Biswas, 1997; Falkenmark, 1997). Assessing the impact of Mar del Plata, Biswas makes the observation that,
[w]hile the Mar del Plata Action Plan provided an excellent road map, it would be true to say that we have not succeeded to follow this map to any significant extent. There have been many global meetings and discussions on water issues, ranging from Dublin and Rio in 1992, to New York in 1997. All of these have contributed marginally so far in terms of:
• putting water firmly in the international political agenda
• making governments aware of the real urgency of the water crisis facing mankind, so that they are forced to take immediate and concrete actions; and
• where do we now want to go, and how do we get there (1997: 114).
Evidence of the failure to follow up on the principles of Mar del Plata Conference include the fact that 30 years after the 1977 conference, there are still more than 1 billion people living without clean water, and more than 2.6 billion people living without adequate sanitation (HDR, 2007. 5). Despite most governments having committed themselves to the responsibility to ensure that "all people" have access to basic clean water, this commitment has meant little for many people world over.
Table 4. 01 International Water Conferences 1972-2003
Conference Year Statement
UN Conference on the Human Environment, Stockholm
UN Conference on Water, Mar del Plata
I n t e r n a t i o n a l Drinking W a t e r and Sanitation Decade
International Conference on Water and the Environment, Dublin
UN Conference on environment and Development (UNCED Earth S u m m i t ) , Rio de Janeiro
Ministerial Conference on Drinking Water Supply and Environmental Sanitation, Noordwijk
World Summit for Social Development, Copenhagen
UN Fourth World Conference on W o m e n , Beijing
World Food Summit, Rome
1st World Water Forum, Marrakech 2nd World Water Forum, the Hague M i l l e n n i u m Declaration
International Conference on Freshwater, Bonn
World Summit on Sustainable Development, R i o + 1 0 , Johannesburg 3rd World Water Forum, Japan
1972 1977
1981- 1990 1992 1992
1994
1995 1995
1996 1997 1997 2000 2001 2002 2003
\..we must shape our actions throughout the world with a more prudent care for their environmental consequences.'
'...all peoples, whatever their stage of development and their social and economic conditions, have the right to have access to drinking water in quantities and of a quality equal to their basic needs.'
'Fresh water is a finite and vulnerable resource, essential to sustain life, development and the environment'
'The holistic management of freshwater ... and the integration of sectoral water plans and programmes within the framework of national economic and social policy, are of paramount importance for action in the 1990s and beyond 'To assign high priority to programmes designed to provide basic sanitation and excreta disposal systems to urban and rural areas.
These efforts should include the provision of ... safe drinking water and sanitation
'Ensure the availability of and universal access to safe drinking water and sanitation and put in place effective public distribution systems as soon as possible.'
'To combat environmental threats to food security
to recognize the basic human needs to have access to clean water and sanitation
Massively increase investments in water' 'We resolve ... to halve, by the year 2015 ... the proportion of people who are unable to reach or to afford safe drinking water.'
...water plays a vital role in relation to human health, livelihood, economic growth as well as sustaining ecosystems.'
Integrate sanitation into water resources management strategies.'
S o u r c e : Adapted from UNESCO 's World Water Assessment Programme: "From Stockholm to Kyoto" ^available at www. unesco .ore/water)
The situation where more than 1 billion people lack access to adequate clean water leads to the question of whether international declarations are taken seriously by those who commit themselves to these agreements. Insignificant levels of commitment to issues of access to water bring out the water paradox, particularly that although water is universally recognized to be very vital to human life, it receives less attention than it deserves.
119
4. 2 The Right to Water
90in International Human Rights Law
Although water is recognized to be very central to the existence and sustenance of the life on the biosphere, including human life, its only recently that it has began to receive sizable attention both at the national and international levels, especially in terms of explicitly recognising water as a human right. Below are various instruments in public international law that have implicitly or explicitly proclaimed access to water as a human right are discussed.
4..2.1 Implicit Provision
4. 2.1.1 UN Charter Article 55
Article 55 of the United Nations Charter which provides for "a higher standards of living, full employment, and conditions of economic and social progress and development" as a necessary conditions for global peace and security, is often cited to be the foundation for most social economic rights including the right to development (Bedjaou, 1994b). Although water is not explicitly mentioned here, the argument has been that a purposive interpretation of the phrases, "higher standards of living"
and "social progressive" is likely to include water as an essential constituent. Similarly, it has been observed that respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms would be impossible to contemplate without access to adequate clean water.
4.2.1.2 Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)
Like the UN Charter, Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) also provides for everyone to have the,
right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control (#1).
The argument here, again, is that a standard of living adequate for one's health and well-being cannot be realized in circumstances where people have no access to basic clean water. Gleick for instance argues that,
As elaborated in footnote two, there is a significant difference between the "right to water" and "water rights." The right to water is often used to signify the entitlement to access and the use of water for domestic purposes, while water rights encompasse a wider range of entitlements which include the right to divert a natural water course and the use of water for industrial, agriculture and other commercial purposes. Water rights are often linked to the removal of water and its subsequent use out of its natural environment. For an elaboration on the distinction between the right to water and water right, see Hodgson (2004:10) "Land and Water—The Rights Interface".
Satisfying the standards of Article 25 cannot be done without water of a sufficient quantity and quality to maintain human health and well-being. Meeting a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of individuals requires the availability of a minimum amount of clean water(1998: 5).
4.2.1.3 Articles 11 and 12 of International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Article 11 of ICESCR has the same wording as Article 25 ofUDHR except the addition of the phrase
"and to the continuous improvement of living conditions" (1). Like Article 25 ofUDHR, Article 11 of ICESCR does explicitly mention food, housing and clothing without candidly mentioning water. Health is provided for separately in Article 12, which stipulates that the "States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health" (1).
Here again, though water is not explicitly mentioned, it is assumed that realizing the highest standard of physical and mental health is both conceptually and practically unachievable without access to basic clean water. A reasonable interpretation of this provision is one that creates a duty to ensure that people, especially those who can not provide for themselves, have access to facilities and other elements such as clean water and sanitation and medical care which make the attainment of physical and mental health possible. The OHCHR Guidelines on Human Rights and Poverty Reduction Strategies (2002) adopts a similar interpretation arguing that,
The right to health is not to be understood as the right to be healthy: the state cannot provide protection against every possible cause of ill health. It is the right to the enjoyment of a variety of facilities, goods, services and conditions necessary for the realisation of the highest attainable standard of health. The right includes both health care and the underlying determinants of health, including access to potable water, adequate and safe food, adequate sanitation and housing, healthy occupational and environmental conditions, and access to health-related information and education (#116).
General Comment 14, offers a similar interpretation arguing that the right to health is not to be interpreted as the right to be health, but rather as a right to a "system of protection and opportunities that enable people to enjoy the highest attainable level of health" (# 14). Interestingly, this interpretation, which seems to be a comment on Article 12 of ICESCR, does explicitly extend the right to health to include access to water. General Comment 14 which elaborates on the scope of the rights provided for in this article, states that the right to health should be understood not in a narrow sense, but in a wider and comprehensive sense. The Committee defines the right to health "as an inclusive right extending not only to timely and appropriate health care but also to the underlying determinants of