Is there too much theorizing about water? Does regarding water as an economic good obscure its cultural, social and symbolic dimensions? Can market forces protect the right of the poor to water?

A report from the Institute of Development Studies casts a critical eye over current research and debate, emphasising the need to address neglected questions of equity and justice. What is the role of water in the everyday lives of real people? Are we really on the verge of a global water ‘crisis’? The report argues against seeing water scarcity in absolute terms. We need to look instead at how local social, institutional and hydrological factors manufacture scarcity.

Are we entitled to water as a human right? The 1986 Convention on the Rights of the Child explicitly says so and activist coalitions want to cement this right in international law. Advocates pressing for water to be declared a human right argue for a minimum daily entitlement of 25 litres - in comparison, per capita daily usage in the USA is 700 litres. The report looks at the feasibility of creating a system of national and international obligations and responsibilities. It argues that rights-based discourses in water are still rather abstract and practicalities still need to be worked out.

More influential is the coalition of water utilities, donors, the World Bank and NGOs who argue that water is an economic good, that it must be paid for and that water and sanitation infrastructure is most efficiently built and managed by public/private partnerships or by market forces. The report cites countervailing evidence that privatisation of water may not necessarily be pro-poor and the track record of state provision not totally negative. Firms focus on rich urban customers and cut off the poor. In a free market there is a risk that pricing mechanisms will tax the poor instead of the rich.

Further findings include:

• The number of silted up dams, broken hand-pumps and defunct water pipelines indicates bad management and failure to build supportive institutional arrangements to govern water supplies.
• Studies on household willingness to pay for water do not look at ability to pay and ignore power and gender dynamics within households.
• Poor households pay disproportionately more for water. In some parts of the world it is as much as 25 percent of household income.
• Despite persistent global discourses concerning demand management, in most developing countries water resource management is still supply driven.
• Donors have underestimated the time and difficulty of putting into place more rational management of water.

Among the recommendations are the need to:

• identify the assumption and actors driving forward the ideology of privatization
• better understand how local water users understand water scarcity and how water is government and managed
• put in place demand-based approaches which do not unduly tax the poor and prevent the rich from using disproportional amounts of water.

Source(s):
‘Water for the twenty-first century: challenges and misconceptions’ by Lyla Mehta, Institute of Development Studies, Working Paper #111 (2000)

Funded by: Rockefeller Foundation

id21 Research Highlight: 2 May 2001

Further Information:
Lyla Mehta
Institute of Development Studies
University of Sussex
Falmer
Brighton BN1 9RE
UK

Tel: +44 (0) 1273 67 8736
Contact the contributor: lylam@ids.ac.uk

Institute of Development Studies (IDS), UK

Other related links:
'Competing for water: is integrated management an elusive goal?'

WaterAid helps the poorest communities provide themselves with a safe water supply and adequate sanitation

World Water Day addresses the increasing need for adequate and safe water

WELL promotes environmental health and well-being through clean water supplies

WEDC is concerned with the planning, provision and management of physical infrastructure of water and engineering

IRC focuses on low-cost water supply and sanitation in developing countries

World Water Council promotes effective use of water in all its dimensions