Got Water?

Ethics Issues and the Privatization of Water PYTs

Lack of access to clean drinking water is a huge problem in global health that is the reason for many preventable health issues. The privatization of water is one of the main issues keeping residents of poor, underdeveloped countries from getting clean water. The privatizations of water drastically grew in the late 20th century when the World Bank and International Monetary Fund required countries that were pursuing aid to deregulate, abolish subsidies, and in some cases sell their infrastructure and water systems to private investors (worldsavvy.org). In the beginning, the idea of privatizing water was to make it more efficient and less corrupt. The private investors would have an incentive to build, upkeep, and upgrade these water facilities to make a profit (worldsavvy.org).  The governments that previously maintained the water supply had been doing a poor job in many countries. “Nowadays, politicians in Africa are generally more concerned with market efficiency, economic growth rates, productivity of financial capital and the security of the rich than they are about human rights and the security of the people.” Privatization programs are present today in many underdeveloped poor countries that seek aid and money from international institutions. Due to this, members within the communities that were refused a source of water were forced to turn on each other in order to try and gather water to survive.

http://worldsavvy.org/monitor/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=695&Itemid=1151

http://www.cartoonmovement.com/cartoon/2094

Water is getting out of the public's hands and into the hands of private companies that stand to gain a fortune from bottling local water resources and selling them for a profit to people who barely can support their families.  The World Bank and other big corporations are going into countries with high poverty and privatizing water to help bring investors and skilled workers to the countries’ rescue. It seems like a good idea, but it actuality it is harming the people more. People in Bolivia went to the streets creating riots after water was privatized. 

They were angry for several reasons. First, they were not asked if they wanted the water to become privately owned, and second, they were not ready for the increased rates which they were now required to pay in order for these new companies to make money (worldsavvy.org). The people of Bolivia didn’t understand why prices increased and they were no longer able to use local wells or even catch their own rainwater as they had traditionally done. To avoid the “consumer rebellion” big investor companies should come up with a subsidized rate for water distribution in poorer populations (worldsavvy.org). Having a subsidized rate for water distribution would help ease the financial cost to those who cannot afford it and keep them be more accepting of the changes that water privatization brings.

https://sou-media.s3.amazonaws.com/a/img/pakistan_water06.jpg

Recently, a corporate giant has tapped into a new source for profit. Typically, this company is known for its candy, Tollhouse products and coffee creamer, but water was a bit surprising.  The Chairman of Nestlé defended the interests of his company when he announced that he thinks the answer to global water issues is privatization and has denied that water is a fundamental human right. Although a tiny detail was overlooked, Nestlé has a “track record of creating shortages.” Over time, Nestlé has made its way into a small community in Pakistan called Bhati Dilwan. In this small community, they are already seeing the consequences of Nestlé’s damage. Children are becoming sick because of the lack of potable water. ‘Potable water’ meaning the water that can be ingested by humans, water that is clean and safe for humans to access.

What caused this outcome? A more upstream look tells us that the vulnerability of such a community without legal protections against this company allowed vital water resources to be tampered with. More specifically,  it was caused by Nestlé digging a deep well. This resulted in making the water dirty and reducing the water levels by 400 feet. Why would such a company be able to access a foreign country’s natural resources? Definitely, there are socioeconomic factors at play like the social status of this community, the economic status, the political status which includes how much influence they have over what goes on in their community. Does their government have a binding contract with Nestlé? Are the community members able to effectively change the upstream policies which have resulted in inequity and consequently the poor health outcomes of their children? More importantly, how can such a community defend themselves against voracious monopoly giants whose interest lay in the bounty they can extract from the earth unethically? When we approach this problem, it’s important to keep a ‘grassroots approach’ by working with the community from a humble, cooperative standpoint ensuring the locals have a say in how the problem is solved.

http://www.thehindubusinessline.in/2003/03/25/stories/2003032500030800.htm

To start with, such a community needs tools. They need to raise their economic status and pursue higher levels of education. By doing so, they can increase their socioeconomic status, which can enable a community to become a stronger advocate in policies and infrastructural determinants. Communities must do their best with the collective help of others to make themselves untouchable to unethical companies and outside influences that don’t have that community’s health interests in mind. The same can be said for companies like Walmart and industries for oil, chemicals, and various other giants. Onlookers from other communities, and even overseas, also have the responsibility to prevent such monopolies from developing in the first place and helping each other out. The issue is definitely infrastructural, social, economic, political, and global.

http://www.herinst.org/BusinessManagedDemocracy/government/privatisation/business2.html

This negative attitude toward the privatization of water isn't the end all be all, though. There are some instances where private companies have actually succeeded in making the water situation better for people.Take Qatar for example, a country where they have basically no water for tons of people. A private company is responsible for providing the people of Qatar with fresh water for not only consumption, but bathing as well. They have developed a system that harnesses the positive qualities of private water, greater knowledge of the best freshwater techniques for example, but protects the people by still maintaining some government oversight.

https://wiki.geneseo.edu/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=67115353

At the end of the day, we are seeing a shortage of clean, drinkable, water across the world. Clearly the answer isn't total privatization, but in many cases, government isn’t the answer either. If something isn't done to quell the rising tide of people that don’t have drinkable water, we will have the next global crisis on our hands, and possibly the next world war. We need to put our biases aside and take a look at developing effective freshwater strategies that take the best of both the public and private sectors and provide clean, drinkable water to everyone.

http://youtu.be/gO2IZwtR56g (General Water privatization video)

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-privatisation-of-water-nestle-denies-that-water-is-a-fundamental-human-right/5332238 (Sick children in Pakistan as a result of privatized water-Nestle)

http://aattp.org/colbert-exposes-nestles-disturbing-desire-to-privatize-water/ (Colbert Report Clip via YouTube)