Should Water Supply Privatization Be Allowed - Term Paper Example

The New OIL Introduction Water distribution has remained a challenge for different administrations throughout the world. Although it has posed more problems to the governments in Middle East, which faces constant scarcity of water, the problem is less challenging in states like New York, USA. However, within USA, states like Florida and California do not have enough water reservoirs, resulting in constant drilling for ground water. This leads to depleting water level table in such areas. American economy being market-based, the water rates charged by the authotities in such states is rising every year. Reports of less rainfall during summer this year may lead to these problems, in an alarming manner. The water to Southern California comes from mountains of Sierra Nevada. Public authorities have arranged for supply of water to individual houses, since ages. This is ensured through the piping network and tunnels. For example, New York has almost 125 miles of pipes and tunnels that stretch from Catskill Mountains. However, the supply of clean drinkable water has remained a matter of controversy and debate, as most of the users question the quality of water distributed by the public authorities. This has given rise to evaluating alternate methods of supply and treatment of water, including involving private enterprise for doing so. Nevertheless, water has conventionally remained in the public domain, since thousands of years and passing it to private hands warrants discussions on different forums. Thesis Statement Water supply should not be privatized, as it is the basic human right for all. Following arguments support the thesis statement: Water crisis Before exploring the possibilities for providing clean water for drinking to masses in developing countries, it is better to know the significance of water crisis, around the world. Research studies inform that over 3.4 million people die, in third world countries, due to poor sanitation and supply of unhygienic water. Almost one in nine people lack the luxury of having clean and drinkable water. Such deficiency is also responsible for lack of proper toilets, in most of the developing countries. However, efforts by some multi-nationals, to trade water as a commodity by exporting it from one country to another, are gaining momentum. An example in this direction is the frequent proposals submitted to Canadian municipalities by multinationals for privatizing the water distribution. This has resulted in the formation of a coalition among Canadian Environmental Law Association, Canadian Union of Public Employees and the Council of Canadians to form a front for the purpose of opposing any efforts towards privatization of water.(Catherine) Clean water fit for drinking shall become a rare commodity in the future, as the natural resources are continuously drying up due to the climate change impact. However, water has remained in the public domain, all over the world since ages. According to the President of Waterkeeper Alliance, Robert Kennedy Jr., the ownership of waterways and natural resources always rests with the public. He refers to Magna Carta and other old western laws to support this argument.(Domm) In addition, United Nations has declared many decades ago that access to clean water is a basic human right, applicable to all countries in the universe. Any decision to deny this basic right to the people shall be grave violation of human rights, amounting to crime against humanity. The World Bank also looks after the interests of private companies. This is evident from the fact that the Bank approves loans to governments with exclusive conditions that they should privatize water distribution. There are around three big private water suppliers, which are responsible to deliver this commodity to millions of customers across many countries. Their motive is to maintain the profit margins as they treat water like any other commodity. This can be seen in the case of Argentina, where Suez Company had to terminate its World Bank project for providing water and sewerage services to the consumers of the city of Buenos Aires. The financial crisis in the country forced the company to shut down as they could not maintain their profit margins during such crisis.( Barlow & Clarke) Efforts to monopolize water have resulted in wars As per historical facts, the efforts to divert waters that flow from one country to another have led to wars. For example, the conflicts between Turkey and Syria were the result of efforts to monopolize waters of Euphrates River. Similarly, there have been many conflicts and wars in Middle East over use of water. However, the supporters of water privatization visualize the trading of this commodity in the near future. According to Professor John Reilly, who is the co-director for the joint program on the “Science and Policy of Global Change at MIT Sloan Management School with its ‘Center for Environmental and Policy Research’ division; the process of trading in commodities like water shall increase the economic efficiency. He further informs that water is already privatized in many quarters, as there are many bottled water containers available in the market for supply to consumers. In fact, the consumers may find it more useful to buy such bottles, as it assures the quality of the water, which is fit for drinking purposes. (Domm) However, any commodity comes with a price tag, which can make it non-accessible to the poor. Water being the basic human right for all, any pricing of this natural resource shall mean violation of such right. Governments certainly charge fees for the water supply, but the price of private water can be many times this fees, which will make it a rare commodity for the general masses. Counterarguments Considering the ongoing debate between the options of keeping water distribution with public agencies or privatizing the system, different viewpoints have been put forward that oppose the government control on the water distribution. Their opinion is that this can cause monopolization of water in a different manner, as the distribution remains in the control of certain few groups, mainly to serve their personal interests. This can result in faulty allocation of natural resources of water. Governments are certain to be victim to such individuals and groups, which can jeopardize the fundamental right to clean water for the masses. However, many economists suggest that privatization has an inbuilt mechanism; which alerts the manufacturer in case of any malfunction in the system. This mechanism comes from the market economics and behavior, as private companies may ultimately loose their investments if the water supply is not done in an efficient manner. In addition, the supporters of privatization opine that the governments can interfere at any time, in case such situation arises where masses are deprived of clean water at affordable prices. The supporters give examples of evidence that establishes the superior capability of private organizations in comparison to the government enterprise, like the supply of bottled water. They also suggest that most of governments consider privatization only to pay off the debt, instead of improving the existing system. This cannot be the case for ‘sincere privatization’.(Davidson) Local partners and community ownership The local residents can become partners to initiate a project involving distribution of water to the community. This leads to development of community ownership concept. Since, local residents are fully aware about the problems of their community and financial resources available to tackle this problem; they are at an advantage to forge a solution. Many organizations constantly look for such local partners in water scarce areas. The available local expertise helps in implanting the projects efficiently, as the communities are the project owners and the partners. They give their resources of time and money to solve community problems. The example of various communal projects undertaken in Bolivia signifies the importance of participation by locals in solving their water problems. Bolivians have recognized the fact, since ages, that water is the divine right for every human being. Accordingly, they have formed committees for this purpose. Individuals in each community have a definite responsibility for making water accessible to their communities in an efficient manner. (Olivera) Conclusion Water is a necessity, like air for all human beings. The role of a government is to ensure that basic needs of the people are met with least burden to them, as getting clean, drinkable water is their fundamental right. Privatization will snatch away such facility for most of the poor, who may not afford to pay the hiked water charges. Hence, privatization of water should not be allowed. Works Cited Barlow Maude & Clarke Tony, “Water Privatization”, globalpolicy.org, Jan. 2014, web 30 Nov. 2014 < https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/209/43398.html> Catherine, Louli, “Water at the Risk of Privatization”, Canadian Dimension- Vol 34, June 2000, web 30 Nov. 2014 Davidson, Sinclair, “Why Is Privatization So Controversial”, Policy-vol 30, Autumn 2014, Web 30 Nov. 2014 Domm. P, “Why Trading Water Futures Could be in Our Future”, CNBC.com, 2 July 2014, web 30 Nov. 2014 Olivera. M, “Water Beyond the State”, NACLA Report, Fall 2014, web 30 Nov. 2014 Read More