Rationing Water or Rationing Human Right
By S. Mohammed Irshad
23 April, 2011
Countercurrents.org
The Planning Commission of India, vice chair man Montek Singh Ahulwalia declare the one of the future policy initiatives of Government of India i.e rationing of water, according to him "by water rationing I don't mean that less water should be supplied, but that we can price water so that people use water as per requirement. In India, we have to pay for using energy but not water. A fee should be charged for using water too. However, different slabs of this fee can be formed,". He made this comments while referring the water problems of Rajasthan state. There is absolutely no point of difference with those who refer the water crisis of Rajasthan. Yet, the planning commission vice chair men’s policy support seldom refer the importance of public funded water governance projects. The whole debate is hovering around rationing water accesses rather than any effective policy implementation to ensure proper access to water. In India people have been told by the government that universal rationing will not go due to financial crisis. Universal rationing has been dropped and the entire public distribution system in India is subjected to target rationing. However, for rationing water is no way fit in to neither targeted nor universal rationing system. The new concept of water rationing even if at limited level would have far reaching impacts.
While government trying to implement rationing of water the UN declares water as human rights; hence, any attempt on rationing or denying access over water is the violation of human right. The declaration said “today more than a billion people lack safe drinking water and almost two and a half billion live without access to sanitation systems. An estimated 14 to 39 thousand people mostly young and elderly die every day from avoidable water-related diseases. If current trends persist, by 2025 two-third of the world’s population will be living with serious water shortage or almost not water at all ”(1). The report went on to say that “water is essentially to ensure the continuance of life, and is intrinsically linked to other fundamental human rights: water is necessary to produce food (rights to adequate food), to ensure environmental hygiene (right to health), for securing livelihood (rights to gain a living by work), to enjoy certain cultural practices (rights to take in cultural life) etc. The following demonstrates that numerous fundamental human rights can not be fully realized without water.” a) Right to life, b) right to food, c) right to self determination, d) right to adequate standard of living, e) right to housing, f) right to education, g) right to health, h) right to take part in cultural life, i) right to sustainable working conditions”. “Human right to water is remain imperfectly defined” (2)
There are three issues pertain to water rationing, first is legitimization of the idea of water as an economic good to the poorest of the poor, and second) defaming the struggle for water, and three) privatization/controlling of water bodies. UN declares water is a human right, however, international lending agencies considering water as an economic good. The Doublin principle of 1992 endorses political commitments regarding the involvement of government and community towards institutional changes, the use of market economy, capacity building etc. The principle declares;
• Fresh water is a finite and vulnerable resource, essential to sustain life, development and the environment
• Water development and management should be based on a participatory approach, involving users, planners and policy-makers at all levels
• Women play a central part in the provision, management and safeguarding of water
• Water has an economic value in all its competing uses and should be recognized as an economic good
However, in 1993, World Bank initiated drastic changes in water sector lending . It advocates a comprehensive approach to water resources and incentives for good management.
a) Maximize the contribution of water to countries’ economic, social, and environmental development while ensuring that resource and water services are managed sustainably.
b) Encourage and help countries to establish comprehensive analytical frameworks to foster informed and transparent decision making with an emphasis on demand management; and
c) Promote decentralized implementation process and market forces to guide the appropriate mix of public and private sector provision of water services.
The question of water rights has been critically challenged by these international agencies and government. Infact, we generally assume that every nation state has to accept the universal declaration of UN agencies, however, the contemporary political economy persuade many countries to override UN agencies declaration. Mr Aluwalia’s comment is infact is an indication Indian government’s political will to implement a market driven water policy. As said before, struggle for water is increasingly becoming a crucial public policy crisis across the world. In India rural water supply has been a problem owing to the lack of public support to increase the connectivity. However, community water supply schemes in rural areas initially give a hope to the people who had been denied water by public water supply system, later financial crisis pulled many community organsations pull back from enjoying proper access to water . (3)
The present water supply system is having two mode of operation i.e. public water supply with subsidy, community water supply with full cost pricing and private sources. Governing water in tandem with neo-liberalism is one of the unfinished tasks of government. Major policy shift taking place in water sector is public private partnership and price regulation, of which price regulation has not been effectively implemented. Water tariffs have been increased in many state water supply agencies, yet, it would not alone meet the cost of water supply. Hence, government financing is an inseparable component of water supply. The current policy of rationing water is infact not for putting limitation on access to water; yet, it would drastically redefine the concept of public ownership on basic sources. Basic water sources like rivers and ponds are being targeted by global water companies. No government across the world is able to assess the raw material price of these resources; instead all these deals are being protected by the managerial idea of fixing either royalty or lease agreement. Technically no water companies are able to ensure the sustainability of such sources. Infact the statement of Mr Aluwalia’s has to be taken into account in this context. If we put the existing rationing mechanism in water, there would be three markets would arrive, a) Below Poverty Line, b) Above Poverty line and c) Private market. First two components are come under public distribution system and third would be a fully privatized water market. The privatization of water is unfinished process unlike any other public utilities, however the idea of rationing of water would gradually leads to accessibility rationing. This is infact the major impediment on larger water privatization.
The proposal of rationing needs to be discussed in this perspective. The liberal strings of governance pull the government to implement price mechanism to avoid huge public funding. Rationing of water is the most effective administrative tool to reduce the public funding. Reduction of quantity also increases the marketability of water. Government imposed rationing necessitate control over public or subsidized water supply system. Rationing or full cost price of water leads to the legitamisaiotn of water privatization. UN declaration on water was expected to influence the water governance on humanitarian grounds; however, the UN declaration remains as an abstract idea. The rationing of water infact rations the human right.
Notes:
1. IUCN Environmental Policy and Law Paper No 51
2. ibid
3.This argument is based on my PhD thesis. My study found that many beneficiary committees had dropped their schemes owing to the lack of financial capacity.
S. Mohammed Irshad PhD
Assistant Professor
Jamsetji Tata Centre for Disaster Management
Tata Institute of Social Science
Malatil and Jal A.D. Naoroji (New) Campus
Sion-Trombay Road, P.O.Box 8313
Deonar, Mumbai-400 088
E-Mail: [email protected]
[email protected]
Comments are not moderated. Please be responsible and civil in your postings and stay within the topic discussed in the article too. If you find inappropriate comments, just Flag (Report) them and they will move into moderation que.
