Cochabamba, Bolivia, became more than just a mark on the world map when by its citizens protested the skyrocketing price of water in early 2000. After a Bechtel Corporation subsidiary took over the city’s water system, thousands of families of Bolivia’s third largest city found the resulting rate hike meant as much as half their monthly income went to paying for water. Acts of civil disobedience and thousands of peaceful protestors prompted Bolivia’s president to dispatch police with tear gas in a government effort to protect the contract. A teenager was shot and killed by police, hundreds were wounded, and the country was placed under martial law. Within days, the president terminated the water contract and returned the control of the city’s water system to the people.

Five years later, a similar revolt took place again in Bolivia, and South America’s poorest country once again shooed away a multinational corporation and took back their water system.

The World Bank backed the privatization of Bolivia’s water as a part of its commitment to resolve the world water crisis. “The challenge we face is finding the resources needed to provide clean water and sanitation for everyone,” noted an officer of the World Bank. “Many countries' public sectors do not have the money or the expertise needed to deliver safe water to all their citizens. Consequently, they look to the private sector to build, maintain, and manage water systems.”

However, $600 million in international debt relief was dependent on the privatization scheme for Cochabamba. The demonstrations in Bolivia have turned the world’s eyes to the issue of water management and sanitation. Must water resources be placed in private hands, turning water into a commodity that is owned and managed by private corporations? Should the poor pay the full cost of receiving safe water? If not, who should? What does it cost to provide adequate water management services? Is privatization an issue for developed countries like the United States? And perhaps most important: who owns the water?

Human right vs. human need
As much as 40 percent of the world population will suffer water shortages by 2050, according to the United Nations. Global warming is expected to intensify the scarcity. The issue of finding enough water to quench the thirst of six billion-plus people while satisfying agriculture and industry demands is compounded by the ability to deliver clean water to the tap. Two questions arise: Who owns the water and is water a human right or a human need?

According to the World Trade Organization, “human needs can be supplied by private entrepreneurs for a profit, unlike a human right, which accrues equally to everyone.” In other words, water is a commodity and may be sold to anyone who can afford to pay for it.

Maude Barlow, author of Blue Gold, which explores the world’s growing water crisis, says the conditioning for private ownership of water started when water was included as a good and later as an investment in the free-trade agreement between Canada and the U.S. that later became NAFTA. She claims the commercialization of water is now driven by corporate interests and supported by water companies, the World Water Council, the World Bank, the WTO, and the International Monetary Fund. Now, she says, governments of developing countries that owe a debt to the developing world are forced by the IMF and the World Bank to abandon programs that provide water to their people and allow multinational corporations to deliver water – at a price many of them simply cannot afford to pay.

Barlow suggests that if the World Bank can pay water companies to deliver water service to developing countries, it could afford to train public-sector workers to deliver water on a not-for-profit basis – for less money. She cites as a model Japan’s highly skilled public workforce that successfully delivers clean water to millions living on an island.

What’s on tap?
The cost of delivering clean drinking water is increasing throughout the world. The price is determined by the cost of transport from the source to the user, the total demand, treatment to remove contaminants, and price subsidies. According to Edwin H. Clark of the Earth Policy Institute, consumers rarely pay the actual cost of water. Rational water management, he says, would place a price on water that reflects its value and its scarcity. He suggests a block rate pricing system where a low level of consumption that can satisfy basic needs makes water affordable for low-income families. Prices would then increase at higher levels of consumption, encouraging efficient use.

Water management in the U.S., where municipalities generally own water services, is becoming a concern. Aging pipes and antiquated public water plants point to impending problems in water delivery over the next decade. In some of our largest cities, systems date back to the 1860s. Costs are increasing dramatically as cities see the need to replace aging infrastructure and to comply with security and environmental regulations. With decreasing federal funding, municipalities must bear the increased cost, which taxpayers are reluctant to fund.

Many cities are signing contracts with private corporations to provide water services. But relinquishing public control can cost communities too much. Local governments are becoming fiercely protective of their water services after experiencing problems with multinational water companies who bear little allegiance to the communities. Atlanta residents were confronted with the issue when a public-private partnership with a subsidiary of Suez Lyonnaise led to slow service delivery times, malfunctioning fire hydrants, and brown water flowing from faucets. The city canceled the $428 million contract.

In July, the city of Stockton, California, reversed a $600 million, 20-year water privatization agreement giving a multinational consortium full control over the city’s water, sewage, and stormwater systems because of sewage spills and other problems.

Citizens in Lexington, Kentucky, recently lost a vote to regain public control of the local water system from a German utility conglomerate. Elected officials and citizens launched a public campaign for municipalization, but the utility outspent reformers by at least a 10-to-one margin in the referendum and retained the contract.

Pooling Efforts
Choosing between government and business to develop new infrastructure may not be the right question. Some suggest that the problem must be addressed cooperatively between governments representing the people and private industry with the money to invest in needed infrastructure. Local government would oversee decision-making forums involving the public and the private sector. The project would offer appropriate input and adequate incentives for the private company. Once the infrastructure is built and the company has recouped its investment along with a reasonable profit, the system could be turned back over to the people.

Some municipalities are joining forces to update infrastructure. Several suburbs in Virginia created a new public authority to build and operate a new wastewater treatment plant rather than privatizing. They defrayed costs and benefited from economies of scale.

Some cities elect a board of directors that governs a utility district, permitting citizen input into the governance of the utility. Others create co-operatives, in which consumers have the sole right to elect the governance of the utility.

Taking ownership
Who owns the water? Those who turn the on tap to get a drink have rarely considered the question. In fact, water generally is managed as if it were worthless instead of the life-sustaining, valuable, and increasingly scarce resource that it is. Citizen involvement is vital in the control and management of water.

In Texas, where the law says groundwater belongs to the landowner, Mesa Water has bought the rights to Ogallala Aquifer groundwater in the panhandle. The company anticipates selling the water to municipalities facing water shortages, including Dallas, Ft. Worth, and San Antonio. The aquifer, which supplies water to Texas farmers, is already severely depleted. Its minimal recharge rate means the water will not be replenished.

In India, Rajendra Singh left a comfortable government job to raise citizen awareness of the importance of water conservation and to help them take charge of water management. He travels in India and abroad urging support for rainwater harvesting, water conservation, and water as a human right.

“In a democracy, it is the duty of the government to make sure every person has drinking water,” Singh says. “The government should declare water is a common natural resource. Only when a community realizes that it owns water will it treat it with care and stop misusing it.”