Water, White Gold - What Steps Has Our Government Taken to Ensure Its Survival - Assignment Example

Water, White Gold, What Steps Has Our Government Taken to Ensure Its Survival and Accessibility? INTRODUCTION All living creatures require water for their living. Daily they need it for their survival on our planet, Earth. We, the human beings, require it in the purest form with an ease access. It is known that only less than 1% of the total water available is usable as drinking water. (http://www.lenntech.com/Water-Quantity-FAQ.htm, viewed on 117th August 2007). The world population is increasing at tremendous speed every moment and the water resources have to be well maintained throughout to meet the increasing demand. But it is a fact that 20% of the world population is still has no access to pure, safe and affordable drinking water. Just think of the state of affairs when the global population reaches the predicted eight billion by the year 2025. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_resources, viewed on 17th August 2007). It’s quite alarming. The necessity of water management to cope with the above population level is very important in this context. DISCUSSION Water is liquid white gold. It means the value of water, the life giver, is beyond all monetary terms. If this is true then what steps has our Government taken to ensure its survival and accessibility? Let’s think about it a little while. Consider the quantum of water resources available on our planet. Almost all of us know that most of the water available is salt water and unfit for our use. Therefore, we have to conceive a practical and feasible way to harness the available water resources to meet our increasing demand. For this we have to evaluate the steps the governmental institutions have taken in order to manage the water resources for the benefit of mankind and its co-inhabitants. It is universally accepted that only policymakers could achieve effective water use and resource protection with access to all relevant information. The government's role in water management is expressed indisputably in the constitutions of all countries. For instance, take the case of USA. The Federal Commerce has got the authority on navigation of the waters of United States and the jurisdiction over the same is vested with the Congress. Several legislations were passed in the course of time insisting that the Federal Government should have the key role in the development of water resources in the country. The US Army Corps of Engineers, the primary federal agency with water resources responsibility, started functioning in 1824 http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ agency/army/usace.htm, viewed on 117th August, 2007) for the management of rivers and harbors for navigation. Since then, the Congress extended their role to environmental infrastructure, groundwater protection and waste-water management. In order to use the available water to its fullest extent it went for the construction of dams so that they could control the flood, and store the water for drinking and irrigation purposes. (http://drought.unl.edu/plan/managewater.htm, viewed on 117th August 2007). The government in 1950, in order to analyze the water resources and its planning & management made a review of it. This, known as Green Book, (http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/Oc-Po/Planning-and-Management-History-of-Water-Resources.html, viewed on 117th August, 2007) was revised in 1958 with the title, Proposed Practices for Economic Analysis of River Basin Projects. It covered benefit-cost analysis, principles and procedures for program formulation, analysis of various projects along with cost allocation ways. The findings were incorporated which is known as Circular A-47. This document went into effect in 1953. These documents contained the federal government's role in water resources planning and management etc. Moreover, it was opined that federal projects should not be implemented unless the profit exceeded the costs. Additionally, it stated that national economic development was the prime goal of federal project planning. Due to these legislations, water planning and management became successful in USA. But society values were changed in the last decades starting from 1960 which reflected in the policy of water resources management and as such all institutions working with the aim of betterment of water resources joined hands together and moved forward to formulate a new design for the optimal exploitation of hydro systems to meet the challenges of increasing demand of freshwater and the decreasing water resources. However, several problematic issues face the common people while the policy makers formulate plans and designs for the betterment of water management. Some of the problems are given hereunder: Who has the responsibility for managing water resources during droughts? What did they do so far? The responsibility for managing water resources during droughts is with the State. While managing this care was taken by the Government to get itself free from the so- called non-favorable attitude of some sect of people seeking legal assistance for thwarting the governmental action. The attitude of the States is based on group management activities with the help of government, which responded to disasters instantly. For example: Colorado, Delaware, New Jersey, and North Carolina. “The government has applied its executive power to develop statutory guidelines that defined droughts and delineate interaction among State agencies responsible for water resources.” (Hrezo and others, 1986a, p. 162-163). Can the community preserve future water supply, which was once freely available? What is the role of private companies dealing with water? We know the world paces at an alarming speed destroying the environmental equilibrium. If it is so who has the control over water? Who will provide it and how could we maintain the quality? This has become a much-debated issue in the United States and around the world for quite some time. Berkeley filmmakers Alan Snitow and Deborah Kaufman in their documentary titled Thirst (http://www.science-spirit.org/article_detail.php?article_id=448 viewed on 117th August 2007) explored this issue from a critical point. They reveal three cities that have faced the loss of control over water resources to multinational corporations. It elaborated that when energy was deregulated in California, billions of dollars leaked from American citizens and went into the pockets of energy companies like Enron, who were trying to take over water resources in California and other parts of the world. The multi-national water corporations were buying out the smaller companies who were delivering drinking water to the public on monetary basis. Even now these corporate bodies having money power, political influence and strength are waiting for their chance to subdue the local communities/institutions whether it is small or large and if it happen, then, the control over water resources by the communities will be lost for ever and beyond doubt. (http://www.science-pirit.org/article_detail.php?article_id=448&page=1) How could we get rid of the negative aspects of privatization in the case of water resources and its supply? At present, the public water systems in the U.S. are easily accessible, low cost and have quality. Thanks to the federal government’s regulations on the waster systems. Private companies in the course of time have proved they could not meet the needs of the people. So the government intervened and set water standards. The private companies were forced to meet higher water standards set by the federal government.  This achievement came when there were unprecedented ideological attacks on government and the public sector that they were totally inefficient, inflexible, costly, etc. International institutions like World Bank are coercing the developing countries and the under developed countries as well, to catch hold of the water resources in their countries, when they need a loan. People in these countries will only suffer due to this on the long run. Nevertheless, the international financial institutions demand privatization as a condition for the loan. Why can’t they suggest innovations in the public sector performance instead of advocating privatization? It seems a puzzle to common people. Prior to this, the multinational companies were acquiring each and every public enterprise on water management and its supply including buying out the work force, which later on affected the human resources behind the system. As such privatization not only affect the aspirations of the entire society but also affects the core of the community and brings in communal disharmony and class struggle as Karl Marx wrote in his unfinished section on "Alienated Labor" from the Ökonomisch-philosophische Manuskripte aus dem Jahre 1844 (Economic and Political Manuscripts of 1844) (1844). Marx tried to express the consequences of the analysis of the creation of value through investment of human labor. The process is effective, he argued, as it has a devastating effect on the lives of human beings. “Workers create products by mixing their own labor in with natural resources to make new, composite things that have greater economic value. Thus, the labor itself is objectified, its worth turned into an ordinary thing that can be bought and sold on the open market, a mere commodity. The labor now exists in a form entirely external to the worker, separated forever from the human being whose very life it once was. This is the root of what Marx called alienation, a destructive feature of industrial life.” (http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/5o.htm, viewed on 117th August, 2007). Supporters of privatization argue that it offers low prices. It is not true. Let’s not forget what we heard from Enron regarding competition, “a good thing!” Privatization in the case of water supply at least, will bring only higher price. The government must have the monopoly of water resources and its supply and its preservation. After all, water is our life giving matter. The government, the citizens and the multi national companies should mind that. Considering the above arguments it is evident that demand for pure drinking water is a concern for all. If the government loses the monopoly of water then the whole resources will fail to meet the demand of the people. Privatization is not at all advisable in the case of water management. Government must give the public quality centered service both in terms of monetary and as a vision to the future. CONCLUSION Privatization of water management is a global issue at this time of industrialization and high-tech environment. (http://www.wwd.watsan.info/wwday/2001/thematic/pollution.html, viewed on 117th August 2007). This issue has crossed all boundaries including class, race and politics. But the concept, ‘life giving matters such as air, water and light are everybody’s right’, will never change as long as the world of ours exist. Therefore, privatization in these must be curtailed at any cost. ‘Birth is not our right, but once we are born we have got the right to live-to live as a human being- when we got not right to die’. That means our birth right to live with the help of the life supporting elements like water shall never be allowed to pass on to individuals or multinational companies. It shall vest with the governmental institutions. Only then the members of the community will get access to it and could allow the same to be passed on for the good of the common people and the nature itself, which in turn will enable us to offer at least a beam of gratitude to the creator who made this nature of ours including us. The right to live is reciprocal and relates to every form of living creature in this world. METHODOLOGY In order to prepare this thesis information on water resources, technologies for the water management and supplies, and the human resources for its execution were collected from various sources. The main source sought was the web. Several web sites were visited in this regard. After collecting the required data from them, the same was placed for discussion and what arrived after it is converged to frame this thesis. REFERENCE 1. Managing Water: Policies and Problems, http://drought.unl.edu/plan/managewater.htm, retrieved on 17th August 2007). 2. Military, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ agency/army/usace.htm, retrieved on 17th August, 2007 3. How much water is there on earth? , http://www.lenntech.com/Water-Quantity-FAQ.htm, retrieved on 17th August 2007 4. Marx and Engels: Communism, http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/5o.htm, retrieved on 17th August, 2007). 5. The Future of Water, http://www.science-spirit.org/article_detail.php?article_id=448, retrieved on 17th August 2007 6. The Future of Water, http://www.science-pirit.org/article_detail.php?article_id=448&page=1, retrieved on 17th August, 2007 7. World Water Day 2001: Pollution from Industry, Mining and Agriculture, http://www.wwd.watsan.info/wwday/2001/thematic/pollution.html, retrieved on 17th August 2007). 8. http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/Oc-Po/Planning-and-Management-History-of- Water-Resources.html, retrieved on 17th August, 2007 9. Water resources, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_resources, retrieved on 17th August 2007 10. Book: Hrezo and others, 1986a, p. 162-163 11. Ökonomisch-philosophische Manuskripte aus dem Jahre 1844 (Economic and Political Manuscripts of 1844). Read More