FACTS againest MYTHS V0L-VII-2-2002.pdf
Media
- extracted text
-
5
w(
«o *
VIKAS ADHYAYAN KENDRA
Vol VII # 2/2002
INFORMATION BULLETIN
Endangering Peoples’ Right to a Natural Resource:
The Myths behind Water and “Water Scarcity” -1
“And at what cost do we flush? Water
companies spend millions on purifying
water for us to use and much of that
beautifully clean water goes into flushing
the indoor toilet. If that is not a criminal
waste, then lam indeed more ignorant
than I thought I was.”
- Jean Turner,
“East Anglian Privies” (1995)
COMMENT
conomic globalisation has transformed the
contemporary world beyond imagination
with market freedom - not democracy or
ecological stewardship - as the defining
discourse of this era. At the centre of this
transformation is an all-out assault on
virtually all aspects of life. Everything is
commodified and up for sale, even those
areas of life once considered sacred, such
as genetic codes and seeds, and natural
resources like water and air. Privatisation
has become the new development mantra.
Till recently water was one of the last goods
and services unaffected by the wave of
privatisations that has swept away nearly
every public sector undertaking over the
past two decades: from banks and
insurance agencies, through gas,
electricity and railways, to postal services,
telecommunications and hospitals. The
proponents of water privatisation would
have us believe that the global water crisis
the inefficiency and corruption of public
sector undertakings has made it imperative
to privatise and price water.
E
The Long Trek For Water!
Q FACTS against MYTHS- Vol VO# 2/2002
Q FOR PRIVATE
CIRCULATION ONLY "J
Accordingly massive public resources have been
transferred to private hands with services and
resources controlled by just a few corporate monopolies
e.g. the mega-TNC Monsanto, which is attempting to
exploit the crisis and monopolise and control India’s
water resources. It estimates that the Indian water
market has risen to over $300 m and hopes to earn a
net income of $63 m. by 2008 not only from the Indian
but also from the Mexican market. Brisk trade in water
has already been transacted by a few countries. Largescale water exports from the South to the North have
been undertaken. In such a situation the ability of
governments in the South to safeguard public interest
has considerably weakened. A new global royalty today
centrally plans the market, destroying lives and nature
in its wake and bringing about inequalities of all kinds
that ultimately affects the poor’s access to water.
According to the UN Economic and Social Commission
on Sustainable Development, 26 percent of the global
population are in the South experience severe water
stress which by 2025 will rise to 47 per cent. Over 70
per cent of the world’s population is without clean
drinking water, an estimated 30,000 people die each
day and over 5 m. people, mostly children, die each
year from illnesses caused by contaminated water. In
addition, there is enormous amount of wastage of water.
A news report in the Free Press Journal (3/2/03)
quoted the Planning Commission’s “Vision 2020” that
there is huge wastage from evapotranspiration,
distribution losses and seepage. Moreover, agriculture
accounts for 89% of the total water consumption with
domestic consumption at 4.8 per cent but the
subsidised supply of power and water has led to overexploitation and inefficient use of water in agriculture,
leading to problems like water logging and salinity on
5.76 m. hectares.
In India the water situation is also worsening. The
average annual per capita fresh water availability has
come down to 1869 cubic meters in the year 2000,
from 5000 c metres in 19501 Overall, though India will
not fall under the “water scarcity” category, it would
definitely be water stressed by 2025 and though its
availability looks confortabble till then, the water
scarcity condition (availability less than 1000 cu
meters per annum) already exists in 8 of the 20 major
river basins in the country: Pennar, East flowing rivers
between Pennar and Kanyakumari, Kaveri, West
flowing rivers of Kutch and Saurasthatra including Luni,
Sabarmati, Tapi, Mahi and East flowing rivers between
Mahanadi and Godavari. Some of these regions suffer
absolute water scarcity, with availability below 500 cu
meter.
A major ground water crisis is also unfolding. In around
15 States, underground water levels have been falling
at the rate of about 5 per cent per year. According to
the above study1 it would take just 2,600 additional
tube wells, running at an average of 10 hours per day,
to exhaust the entire reserve of underground water in
C FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VII # 2/2002
Delhi. According to the TATA Energy Research Institute,
about 91 per cent of the available freshwater is
consumed by the agriculture sector, while the share of
industry and domestic sectors is a small 4 per cent
and5percentrespt.
Moreover, the imposition in the 70s of the Green
Revolution model of agricultural development with its
water-intensive system has also exacerbated the
critical state of the country’s water resources.The
expansion of areas under cultivation has also led to
the digging of more and more private wells for
groundwater. At the national level, only 8 per cent of
the groundwater sources have been utilised out of 85
per cent of their potential. However, this does not reflect
the disparities that exist between regions. Punjab,
Haryana, Tamil Nadu and Gujarat are the states where
water tables have declined steeply. The percentage
of area where groundwater sources have been exploited
by over 85 per cent has increased 3-fold in a span of
10 years. Additionally, groundwater has been exploited
to the extent of 98 percent in Punjab, 80 percent in
Haryana, 62 per cent in Rajasthan and 54 percent in
Tamil Nadu.The area irrigated by groundwater in Punjab,
UP and Haryana is over 61,57, and 48 percent res pt .w
Interestingly, it is the agriculturally important states
that are witnessing the falling of water tables due to
their heavy dependence on irrigation.
At the same time, the UN observes that the North
spends $11 b. a year on ice cream alone, $ 2 b. more
than the estimated total money needed to provide clean
water and safe sanitation for the world’s population!
While billions go without fresh water, the North
consumes 1,300 gallons of water per person. But water
inequality exists not only within societies in the North
but in the South as well. For instance, .
X
In cities like Mumbai water-sport amusement
parks e.g. Essel World, Water Kingdom, plus
5-Star Tourist Hotels and golf courses are
consuming prodigious amounts of water. The
municipality also supplies 2,540 m. litres each
day — un-equally — between the elite and£
the poor. In case of shortage, tanker water
supplies 25 m. litres every day to the urban
elite. Tankers come from place like Nala
Sopara, resulting in local residents having to
bear the brunt of acute scarcity. The elite also
have access to bottled water with privateers
like Kinley (owned by Coca Cola) using up
fresh water from Vaitarna Lake equivalent to
the daily requirement of 75,000 villagers.2
Bottled water has become big business as
corporates have capitalised on water scarcity,
providing bottled water to the urban elite. The
All-lndia market is Rs.8 b. and 10 b. and
growing at the rate of nearly 40 per cent per
annum. The Indian corporate, Parle, has the
largest share (Rs.2.5 b) of the market led by
Bisleri.
Whilst the elite can afford bottled water, for millions of
families in the South water has become an extremely
precious and scarce need. Little wonder, then, long
distance treks to search for water is very common.
Most affected are women who are the major water
carriers with even young girls as young as 10 forced
to provide the family with water, walking 4 to 5 km to
collect it. There are cases where these girls have
experienced damage of the neck and spine. Many stay
out of school to carry out this and other household
chores.
X
’
X
In Mumbai, according to the above survey2
the average distance to a tap in an average
slum settlement is about 70 metres and 1.5
hours on an average were spent on queuing
at the tap. Consequently, 82% of the
respondents reported getting an insufficient
amount of water and 65% reported frequent
failure of even this amount. This tenuous and
unreliable public tap is however, the main
source of drinking water for 77% of the
population.
In 1998 the Cypress government cut water
supply to farmers by 50 per cent while
guaranteeing the country’s 2 m. tourists a year
all the water they needed.
Indeed, the elite in the South get 10 times more water
than slumdwellers. Because the poor lack access to
publicly subsidised utilities, they often end up paying
more for their water than to the elite because they
must get it from private vendors or even illegally;
X
Finally, in 1999 under World Bank and IMF
pressure Bolivia (South America) privatised
water services to a major MNC Aguas who
raised water tariffs by 30 to 300 percent.
Immediately, this led to mass protests lasting
months and also accompanied by immense
police brutality. The government however had
to eventually give in, in the face of mass public
protest including global protests. It was forced
to cancel its contract with the MNC who filed
a compensation claim in response. In October
2000, it demanded $ 25 m. as compensation
from the Bolivian government. But as of today
the MNC is in search for a negotiated
settlement realising that it is also involved in
a $1.5 b. gas project in the country.
X
in Dhaka (Bangladesh) slumdwellers pay water
rates that are 12 times higher than what the
local utility charges.
)
The distribution of water is also very unequal, both
within countries and among different states. Around
40 per cent of the world’s population depend on water
that flows from a neighboring country. There are 214
transboundary river systems where two or more states
FACTS against MYTHS - Vol vn # 2/2002
share their water. This is a potential source of conflict.
Already in several parts of the world conflicts have
arisen as between Palestinians and Zionist Israelis,
between India and Bangladesh. However, even within
national boundaries, the sharing of water resources
has led to disputes - between states, agriculturists of
different regions, between agriculture and industry, and
between rural and urban areas.
For instance, sharing of the water of the River Kaveri
between Karnatka andTamilnadu has flared up into a
major political issue disrupting social and community
life. At another level, deforestation upstream may also
cause floods or water shortage downstream, while a
country’s hydroelectric, irrigation and public water
projects may cut off its neighbor’s supply.
Apart from this, freshwater resources are overstrained.
Industrial wastes, sewage and agricultural runoff
overload these water bodies with chemicals, wastes
and nutrients, consequently poisoning water supplies.
Sediments from eroded land silt up dams, rivers and
hydroelectric projects. From the US to India, illconceived irrigation schemes are over-exploiting
irreplaceable groundwater reserves dry. In the South
there are also difficulty in coping with fecal
contamination of drinking water. Many cities seem
unable to control and reduce the dumping of raw
sewage and garbage into rivers and drainage canals,
or stop the growth of synthetic wastes from households
and industries.
Side-by-side there is increasing demand for monopoly
control of the natural resources like water as in the
case of Monsanto with the demand to declare these
as commodities and not as social assets. Global trade
agreements are means by which environmental
resources are valued and disputes settled. At same
time the IMF has since prescribed water privatisation
as one of the conditionalities for its loans especially
at a time when the South has already been forced to
restructure their economies to pay their debts and
export their way to so-called prosperity. Plans have
been launched for large-scale exports of water from
the South to the North so that the North does not face
a water crisis. In Canada a Canadian company, Global
Water Corporation, has signed an agreement with
SITLA-Alaska to export 18 m.gallons per year of
glacier water to China where it will be bottled and re
exported to the US to save on labour costs. At the
other extreme is the case of an Indian corporate, Radius
Water Ltd., in an agreement with the Chattisgarh
government purchased 23.6 km of River Sheonath for
a 22-year renewal lease, covering 400 acres of land.
Similarly, a number of water-intensive industries like
LNG Bhilwara, Khoday Distilleries and Food Park have
established privatised water units in the State.
Evidently, globalisation's unlimited growth has made
it impossible for participating countries to pursue
development goals and making preservation and water
3
consveration an urgent priority. It has in the process
led to the destruction of both natural eco-systems and
environmental regulations. The massive abuse and
pollution of the internal water bodies and waterways of
the South has been the price of belonging to the global
economy. Intrusive technologies, including the massive
transportation systems needed to carry out global trade
have been planned, threatening to impact water
systems everywhere. There is thus the urgent task to
not only struggle and campaign against such predatory
maneuvers of global financial and corporate institutions
but to also expose their false claims on natural
resources like water.
MYTH: The earth is a boundless and an
inexhaustible body of water and as a renewal
resource is not constrained by human activities.
FACT: This quantity of water is highly misleading and
refers to the planet’s greatest reservoir - the World
Ocean. Part of this mis-impression emanates from
pictures by photographers of our planet taken by earth
satellites and cosmonauts. These images demonstrate
a highly startling blue planet, seemingly a water-world
spinning in space! In reality, this impression of water
wealth is as deceptive as a desert mirage. For all the
apparent abundance, the supply of freshwater is limited.
About 99 per cent of earth’s water is either saline or
frozen. Of the remaining 1 per cent, most is
groundwater and soil moisture.Thus, the net availability
of freshwater for all human uses is 100th of that 1 per
cent. And not even all of that can actually be used.
For example, two thirds of the annual rainfall
evaporates into the atmosphere. Over half of the rest
of the water flows back into seas without being used.
The annual renewal freshwater supply on land - that
made available year after year by the solar-powered
hydrologic cycle in the form of precipitation - totals
some 110,000 cubic kilometers, a mere 0.000008 of
all the water on earth. (A cubic kilometer equals a billion
cubic meters).
Each year, nearly 2/3rds of this renewable supply
returns to the atmosphere through evaporation or
transpiration, the uptake and release of moisture by
plants. This evapotranspiration (it is difficult to
distinguish the 2 processes over large areas; hence,
the joint term) represents the water supply for forests,
grasslands, rain-fed croplands, and all other non
irrigated vegetation. Just over 1/3"* of the renewable
supply - about 40,000 cubic kilometers per years - is
runoff, the flow of fresh water from land to sea through
rivers, streams, and underground aquifers. Runoff is
the source for all human diversions or withdrawals of
water - what is typically called water “demand" or
water “use”.
In the past the World Ocean was considered
boundless, inexhaustible. Today, however, it is
powerless vis-a-vis human activities. It is powerless
not only against the exhaustion of food resources of
FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VH # 2/2002
this eternal storehouse, which the ocean seemed to
be, not only against the disappearance of valuable
specifies of fish and animal, but also against the
ocean’s loss of its usual role in the regulation of natural
processes. Oil tankers transporting oil are a major
danger to the ocean. The “normal” annual loss of oil
during transportation is above 2 m.tons.This quantity
of oil can cover a huge area of 50 m. square kilometers
with an iridescent film. Add to this unforeseen leakage
- shipping accidents (like the oil still spilling from the
recent accident of the oil tanker, the Prestige, off the
coast of Spain).
Oil in the ocean seems harmless in comparison with
pesticides, mercury, etc., but this “harmlessness” is
completely relative. The iridescent film on top of the
water conceals a whole spectrum of dangers. This
mono-molecular cover becomes an impenetrable barrier
between the atmosphere and the hydrosphere. As a
result, one of the main “purifiers” of the atmosphere
ceases to operate and this results in noticeable
changes in the atmosphere. About 15,000 tons of
carbon dioxide are produced on the earth each year.
The spectre of the green-house effect is the result of
an increase in the amount of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere. The main devourers of this gas at are the
greenery covering the earth and the World Ocean carbon dioxide dissolves easily in water. Oil spreading
over enormous expanses of water cuts them off from
the oecan-atmoshpere system. But this is not the
only reason that clean air is becoming a rare resource.
The green cover and the expanses of water are no
longer able to restore the atmosphere as efficiently as
they once did.
Thus, although fresh water is renewable it is also finite:
the land receives roughly same amount of water today
as when the first civilization emerged ages ago.
MYTH: The alarming fall in the amount of water
worldwide is one of the reasons for the water
shortage.
FACT: First and foremost, the notion of “water shortage!
is a contradiction. It is contradicted by elementary facts
of nature. Among water’s amiable natural
characteristics is its extraordinary chemical stability.
It differs from minerals like coal or vegetables or other
commodities in that the use of it does not consume or
destroy it. When water is used domestically in an
industry or agriculture it evaporates and is therefore
not available for reuse. Most of the “used" water,
however, returns in some way to supply and is available
for re-use. Even the dirtiest water can be made clean
albeit at a cost.
What lies ahead, then, is not a water shortage but a
rising curve of water-treatment costs. As an expanding
population uses a non-expanding water supply, more
and more wastes and contaminates will have to be
removed from water either before discharge into
streams or afterward. Whether the de-pollution is done
4
Water & Forests
Another very important factor affecting clean
drinking water are forests, one of the main
means of purifying water and the atmosphere
and restoring the soil. Living wood has
amazing qualities. For instance, one hectare
of birch forest exhales 47,000 litres of water
a day. This is water purification, and moisture
for the air and future saving rain - a type of
water distillation. To transpire such a volume
of moisture, the forests must possess the
ability to retain it for a long time. The forest
is a truly unique reservoir. One kilogram of
ordinary moss covering tree roots, takes in 4
litres of water after rain and, when needed,
sends it into the atmosphere through the
foliage. If there is no forest, this water flows
immediately into streams and rivers, causing
floods. If there is no forests, the fast flow of
this water tears up the soil, carries off humus
into rivers and blocks the river-beds. This
problem is particularly serious because, in
the last 100 years, man has managed to
“harness” many rivers with hydro-electric
plants and the greater part of the soil which
is carried away ends up in reservoirs. If the
upper reaches of the river are deforested, then
the days of hydro-electric stations are
numbered. In the USA, for example, the
silting up of reservoirs has become so rapid
that some have lost 80 per cent of their
volume in 30 years; 39 per cent of them
apparently will go out of use in less the 50
years, and 25 per cent in less than a 100 years.
There have been cases when the dam has
only been able to operate for 10 to 15 years,
after which it ceased to exist.
•at outfalls or at intakes, the total public and privates
cost, will be extremely expensive. This prospect might
be called a fresh-water shortage but it cannot in any
objective sense be called simply a water shortage
which is nothing but a frame of mind.
Finally, the worldwide shortage of water is not because
the amount has fallen. What has fallen, drastically, is
the amount of clean, fresh water. The “turnover” of water
resources has speeded up and increased to such an
extent that nature does not have time to cleanse rivers,
lakes, etc., from problems like pollution, etc. As a
result, many rivers flowing through the most populated
areas have become open cess pools e.g. the Mahim
Lake in Mumbai.The author, Laptev,5 notes that at the
beginning of the 20* c. Britishers used to fish in the
River Thames with British MPs even fishing outside
Westminster Palace. Until the end 18th century,
(2
FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VII # 2/2002
Parisians got their drinking water direct from the River
Seine without any processing. Today, there is no fish
either in the Thames or the Seine; their waters no longer
fit for human consumption.The growth of industry, the
development of the production of synthetic material,
requiring prodigious amount of water (the production
of 1 ton of cotton cloth requires 6 to 30 cu.metres of
water, while 1 ton of viscose requires 800 cu.meters
and 1 ton of capron - 5,000 cu. metres far outstrip the
construction of purification installations like de
salination plants and further research into water
purification)
MYTH: The global water crisis is also due to
population explosion.
FACT: The spectre of population growth is (again) being
resurrected to explain the “new” global crisis!
To reiterate, however, this false claim largely overlooks
the huge inequality of consumption between people in
the North and also those in the South.For, as the UNDP
Human Development Report (1998) showed, the richest
5th of the world’s population (slightly less than a billion
people) account for 86 per cent of the world’s
consumption. A new born child in the West (or a rich
one in the South) consumes a voracious average
between 40 and 70 times more water than one in the
South who has no access to water. Lest we forget: it
takes 400,000 liters of water to make one car, and
that most of the 50 m. cars produced each year are
bought and used by people in the North (and
increasingly today by the rich in the South).
In recent years, however, other relevant factors have
precipitated the “crisis” viz., economic interests and
power politics that manifest nationalist geo-political and
geo-economic designs with a view to gaining regional
or global hegemony. In general, however, it is still
considered—albeit erroneously—that such strategies
and conflicts stem from water scarcity rather than being
one of its causes. Consider the dispute over the waters
of the Kaveri between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. For
almost two centuries these states have been in dispute
over the sharing of the river sometimes resulting in
riots and violence. In many ways the dispute is really
quite simple. Karnataka wants to use the water in the
river to irrigate its water-starved areas. Dams have
been built on the river for this purpose. This diversion
of water affects Tamil Nadu, downstream from
Karnakata on the river. Today, Karnataka effectively
controls the flow of water in the river, particularly as it
winds through Tamil Nadu. Thus, while one state wishes
to find an escape from drought, the other is fearful
that drought will descend on it as a result.
What exacerbates this conflict is that water for irrigation
from dams is traditionally used in a profligate, wasteful
manner.As water wields enormous political clout and
building dams is such a goldmine for so many of all
those involved in the dam business (!) that water from
dams is supplied to farmers virtually free of cost. As a
5
result, the farmers pour it into their fields extravagantly,
even growing water-intensive crops like sugarcane, etc.
This is why dams invariably encourage the waste of
water. On the other hand, used prudently, wisely, etc.,
there is enough water in the Kaveri to supply the needs
of both these States. Unfortunately, thousands of
farmers use water thoughtlessly, thanks also to dams
on the river like those at Mettur and Kabine. So, when
water is released to Tamil Nadu, farmers in Karnataka
feel threatened. When Karnataka holds on to that water,
farmers in Tamil Nadu are deprived. Evidently, the real
impediment to a solution is, ironically, the very
existence of the dams on the Kaveri and the profligacy
they foster.
MYTH: Because of rapid population growth India
does not have enough water to meet the needs of
its people.
FACT: India’s water resources are capable of supporting
the maximum number of people at which its population
will stabilize.
According to an FAO study, India will be able to support
1038 m. people against a projected population of 1036
m. provided low-levels of inputs - low-yielding
varieties, no chemical fertilisers, long fallow-periods,
high labour and low -energy intensity, subsistence
production, etc., are adopted. The study highlights
the fact that India’s population problem, in terms of
food needs, is not an insurmountable one. The real
problem lies in the government and people’s ability to
manage two basic productive resources, viz., soil and
water. In other words, India’s water resources are
capable of supporting the maximum number of people
provided (again) these resources are used in a prudent
and in a sustainable manner.
MYTH: Water privatisation is the solution to water
access in that i) it is more efficient in terms of cost
ii) it will overcome bureaucratic mis-management,
inefficiency and corruption and iii) significantly
improve public utility services as for instance in
Manila in the Philippines.
FACT: Experiences in a number of countries, however,
disprove this claim, in terms of direct cost comparisons
between public and private water companies. The
Swedish municipality, for instance, which delivers
water at around a third of the cost, had operating costs
of about half, and delivered nearly three times higher
return on capital than British private companies. In
Puerto Rico, Trinidad (Jamaica) and Budapest
(Hungary), government authorities found serious
deficiencies in maintenance, repairs, administration,
operation and finance, plus significant increases in
deficit, and unworkable business plans on the part of
the private sector and MNCs.
On the supposed benefits of competition this is also
non-existent! In the UK, a tough and resourceful
Administrator tried to simulate competition since
r FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VII # 2/2002
privatization in 1989 by trying to outguess the
companies’ costs, and set price limits that would reward
efficiency gains. Worldwide, however, there is at least
as much evidence of collusion with just a few powerful
TNCs dominating the global water market, often
operating jointly and restricting works contracts to their
own subsidiaries. In practice, privatisation and
corruption have been interlinked. Some of the world’s
largest MNCs along with several of their subsidiaries
have also been convicted in France of paying bribes
to obtain water contracts to obtain contracts in the
huge Lesotho High Lands Project in Africa.
In 1998, the MNCsTHAMES WATER and LYONNAISE
DES EAUX confessed that the concessions they had
negotiated for Jakarta’s water supply with the consortia
involving friends of President Suharto were no longer
defensible. But the revised contacts have also been
bitterly criticised on grounds of that they were never
properly advertised, prices to consumers were
excessive and Suharto’s son continued to hold a large
equity stake.
Water privatisation has also adversely impacted
environmental protection. In 1998, a major disaster^
occurred in Puerto Rico where the water system
managed by VIVENDI burst during a hurricane. Its sister
concern, GENERALE DES EAUX had been convicted
in 1994 for supplying spurious water for over a year
and a half, as it had excessive nitrates and pesticides.
In England and ‘Wales there were over 250 convictions
between 1989 and 1997 for pollution related incidents.
Additionally, private operators indulging in bulk water
supply schemes with ‘take or pay’ contracts,
guaranteeing profits by requiring consumption of water
regardless of need.
MYTH: Pricing water is another effective solution
that help will help in a big way in curbing wastage
and over-consumption and this will in turn
encourage conservation.
FACT: The heavy price of dealing with the decay
through privatisation rather than through increased^
public investment has been a huge gap in who has
access to water. In most parts of the South, water
now costs 50 times more for the poor than for the elite
sections of society, often because subsidies to the
former have been withdrawn. Even in a country like
Britain8the Office of Water Supplies (the public sector
body set upon privatisation to regulate prices) tariffs
will double in real terms by 2005 to make up for years
of underinvestment and to meet higher environmental
standards. Yet pipes continue to leak while the burden
of water users increases to pay shareholders dividends
and large pay rises for CEOs. The average salary and
perks per year of British water company executives
was - £ 432,821, at least 5 times their level before
privatisation. Still further, the number of British citizens
disconnected from the water supply because they
6
were unable to pay the hike in water charges trebled
between 1991 and 1992. The effects included serious
health hazards: ‘The phrase used by a caretaker at a
Birmingham tower block to describe conditions after
1 in 7 of its tenants had been disconnected was 'quite
a stink’. Unable to flush the toilet, tenants were shiting
in the stairwells and flung the shit out of the window."
The culprit for the water hike was South Staffordshire
Water company. It had disconnected 20 times more
homes in 1992 than it did during the previous year.
Since then, the increasing use of pre-payment meters
has led to such a rise in disconnection that the British
Medical Association has warned of health risks and
called for a ban on disconnection.
In Ghana in West Africa the dismantling of the water
sector has led to a situation where people have to
pay high tariffs. Market rates after privatisation have
risen tremendously. Little wonder then the government
of Ghana is under pressure from the people to give
up privatization of their water resources.In Britain too
citizens - as the above illustrations show — have
complained that privatisation has had a negative
impact on their water supply. Prices have risen,
Wupplies to poor users have been cut while local
streams have dried up as a result of careless
exploitation. Users who paid $150 year for water
supplies in 1989 had to pay $250 and $800 a year in
1990 for the same services. When two millions users
were late in paying their bills 1,000 users are cut off
every month. 20 rivers dried up after privatisations
because “companies have no incentive to discourage
waste and every incentive to extract water as cheaply
as possible”. Half of the new companies are owned
by French TNCs while others are owned by new British
companies.
In Argentina residents also have the same complaint.
Their water bills add up to 24 pesos ($24) a month,
more than when the water supply was government
managed.
Finally, the example of Manila, IMF’s privatisation’s
Ibigship. A report in the Times of India (27/11/02)
showed how the privatisation of water of City’s 119year-old Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage
System — the world’s first and largest - has since
collapsed! The scheme benefited primarily the Filipino
elite while the majority, the poor, have been bearing
the brunt of the price- hike in water and water-related
schemes. Prior to privatisation, the water rate in 1997
was 8.78 Filipino peso per cubic meter. Two leading
Filipino industrial families, Ayla of Manila Water Co
and Lopez of Maynilad Water Services in collaboration
with MNCs had subsequently raised the tariffs on water.
The latter’s rate, for instance, rose from 5 pesos in
1997 to the current of 15.46 pesos - a 150 per cent
rise over the price in its bid. If current negotiations
succeed, there could be a further rise to 30 pesos per
cubic metre, a 300 per cent rise over the promised
price!!
FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VII # 2/2002
MYTH: As it contributes to curbing wastage and
profligate water-use pricing water does not adversely
affect the environment.
FACT: On the contrary! Profit being the main driving
force of water companies and corporations their main
preoccupation is to abstract and consume water to the
maximum. This eventually results in major major
environmental diasters: For instance,
•X In 1989 following water privatisation, in England
and Wales, 20 water bodies dried up within a
few years. (See also page 6)
MYTH: Fostering a partnership between public and
private institutions is an effective strategy to tackle
the water crisis.
FACT: On the contrary! But, first, the state and the
market should serve society rather than society being
the slave of either in resolving this crisis.
At any rate, such partnership between the public and
private institutions expresses an unequal relationship
whereby the role of the public is devalued (strategically,
financially and operationally) and that of the private
glorified. Analysis and proposals referring to the public
domain all focus on its limitation and on the urgent need
for deep reforms so that it can become an effective
and credible partner. But when it comes to the private
sector, the talk is mainly of the benefits to be gained
from its involvement in hither to public areas, and of
the most effective ways of encouraging and facilitating
its partnership with the public sector. Private is taken
to be synonymous with efficient, profitable, transparent,
flexible, adaptable and innovative.However, public/
private partnership in relation to water tends to cultivate
and implement the visions and approaches of the private
sector, so that water becomes one of the main sources
of profit.
Further, this claim is nothing but an attempt - through
a mix of state, the market and civil society — to return
power and resources from the privileged few to the under
privileged majority. It also means the rejection of both
statism and neo-liberalism so as to find an optimum
balance of public and private. However, it is not just
the extreme expressions of that dichotomy which is
false! It is the dichotomy itself, not least in its neglect
of society. It is characteristic of both outlooks that
they either deny (as the former British Prime Minister,
Margaret Thatcher did) the very existence of society or
else subsume it into one or other of the categories they
do recognise. For the neo-liberal, individuals make
rational economic and social choices only through the
market. For the statist, the state is the sole custodian
of society’s interests and its decisions their only reliable
expression, with or without free elections. While the
one ideology seeks to subordinate state to market, and
the other the makert to the state, both subordinate
society’s will and the means of its expression.
7
Instead, both state and market should be the servants
of society rather than society being the slave of either.
MYTH: Water is an economic asset, not a social
asset.
FACT: This is a highly simplistic formulation stemming
from a purely ideological choice that highlights only
one of the various dimensions intrinsic to water,
emphasising economic value to the detriment of all
other values. This ideological choice is in turn based
upon an assertion that the market is the hairspring in
the distribution of wealth. However, there are other
vital sources of life (except air) comparable to water
within the ecosystem Earth to which humans must
have recourse so as to satisfy their basic individual
and collective needs. Its unique nature depends,
among other things, on the fact that nothing can replace
it. Oil can substitute for coal, and nuclear energy for
oil; one can substitute rice for wheat or take a local
train to a car. One can practice a money economy as
well as a non-cash or non-price economy (where things
are free). But it is not possible to replace water and go
on living. Yet, one of the distinctive principles for
efficiently funcinging market mechanisms is that it
should be possible to replace certain goods (factors
of production or products/services) with other goods hence the function of relative prices in reflecting the
comparative use value of such interchangeable goods
and services.
It is thus an essential feature of the market that one
should be able to choose among several goods of the
same or a different nature using for the choice such
certeria as price and quality. This is what constitutes
consumer or producer freedom. To have access to
water, however, is not a matter of choice. Everyone
needs it. Hence, it is also a right! (See also box on
page 8 of Part II)
The fact that it cannot be replaced with anything else
makes water a basic asset that cannot be subordinated
to a single sectoral principle of regulation, legitimation
and valorisation; it comes under the principles of the
functioning of society as a whole. This is precisely
what is called a social asset, a common good basic to
any human community. Further, the fact that a social
asset is limited in quantity does not mean that its
integrated management by society as a whole should
consider nothing other than the value parameters of
the globalised market economy, which imply the private
appropriation, ownership or management of this nonsubstitutable common social asset. The transformation
of water in line with oil is an aberration bound with the
economism currently dominant among the global and
national power elite - a way of thinking which reduces
everything to a commercial good, to be bought and
sold in the market — for profit.
It is one of the beliefs firmly held among business and
corporate groups that money is everything. But no lesM
important, in the same order of ideas, are the fantasie?
that economists entertain about the ‘law of supply and
demand’, and their conviction that water does not
escape the ‘natural law’ of optimisation represented
and measured by the point at which two intersect. In
the end, this conception rests upon vague and
ambiguous inferences from the shortage and growing
scarcity of water. It views, erroneously, that this
shortage and growitngf scarcity as an irreversible fact
that can, at the most, be managed or moderated but
no way be fundamentally altered.
G3JB0
Our website is launched and operation. Kindly visit it at http://www.vakindia.org
We shall be grateful for your comments and suggestions.
Please feel free to reproduce material from this publication but with due credit.
I
|
■
t
■
n
|
Facts Against Myths is a monthly bulletin offactual
information on a number ofdevelopment myths and
fallacies, etc, including information against alien
development models, paradigms and false concepts
on caste, creed and gender.
\
•-
Produced and Published by:
Vikas Adhyayan Kendra
D-l Shivdham, 62 Link Road,
Malad West, Mumbai 400 064, INDIA
I
f
S : 882 2850 & 889 8662
Fax: 8898941
Email: vak@bom3.vsnl.net.in
Design & Layout: Kartiki Desai
I
I
|
Printed by : Omega Offset, 4574, Shetty Gaily
Belgaum 590 002. ® 0831—424124/433429
i
|
pPlNTED MATi^
j
.
BOOK-POST
p
I
I
p
,
L!
I
|i
p
■I
Position: 3777 (2 views)