Hydraulic Despotism: A Literal Interpretation & Analysis

Foz do Iguaçu, Cataratas do Iguaçú, Paraná Brasil.

“Access to safe water is a fundamental human need and, therefore, a basic human right. Contaminated water jeopardizes both the physical and social health of all people.  It is an affront to human dignity.”

(Kofi Annan, United Nations Secretary-General, 2001)

Introduction

In 1957, Karl August Wittfogel wrote about “hydraulic civilizations” – societies that maintained tyranny over their populations by controlling access to water, which is integral to irrigation and sustained agriculture (Wittfogel, 1957).  Such societies were termed hydraulic empires when benign; and hydraulic despots when not.  While the term is used interchangeably today to indicate a system of government control through exclusive access to any one resource, this paper focuses on a very literal interpretation of the term – the accessibility and availability of water to the world’s underprivileged.  The fundamental precept of this paper is that in this post-globalization world, fighting hydraulic despotism is not merely limited to providing access to water, but also the ability to avail and benefit from such access, as well as the ability to adequately preserve it for future generations.

Water as a Right

The right to the highest attainable standard of health is recognized both in the WHO constitution (2006) as well as in the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (1966).  Since access to clean water is an implicit determinant of health, this right should automatically extend to access to safe water (WHO, 2003).  Unfortunately, while the United Nations certainly acknowledges this relationship, it is yet to recognize the right to safe water as a fundamental human right (OHCHR, 2007; UN, 1948).  Furthermore, far from acting as enablers of equity, several international organizations such as the World Bank have actively worked in ways that undermine the right to water of the underprivileged, through development efforts that have resulted in privatization of water (OHCR, 2002).  In many respects, this ingenious tautology of resource privilege versus development is indicative of entitlement failure in the access to a fundamental resource.

Water as an Entitlement

Amartya Sen (1999) highlights the influence of social, economic, and political factors in granting entitlements to populations.  Whilst his focus is primarily on famines, the determinants of entitlements can also be extended to other resources such as water –

1. Ability to utilize endowment of natural resources (e.g. water)
2. Ability to leverage such endowment in production (e.g. water in agriculture or industry)
3. Ability to exchange such production for fundamental necessities (e.g. water and food).

When we look at universal access to safe water in a post-globalization world and evaluate such access as entitlements, we are provided with a framework to understand the causality and impacts of its failure.  For instance, privatization of water hinders the ability of a population to even use a fundamental natural endowment, resulting in an unequal distribution of a public good.  Furthermore, such hindrance also affects the ability to leverage and benefit from this basic necessity.  After all, water is necessary for agriculture; ipso facto, anything that penalizes production of food would also penalize agricultural sustainability, resulting in a reliance on external agents (Diamond, 2005, p. 33).  This loss of sustainability and breakdown of public good apparatuses would result in an effective loss of domestic and international economic (and consequently, political and societal) independence of the affected populations (Landes, 1998, p. 257-275; Lake, 2000, p. 446-460).

Water as an Inheritance

It is not sufficient to merely provide access to a fundamental resource such as water if its renewability cannot be guaranteed (Fuller, 1965, p. 1021–1042).  There is concern that a loss of economic independence can often be accompanied by a “race to the bottom” in an effort by nations to compete internationally for resources and investment (World Bank, 2005).  Such competition, aimed at providing comparative advantages, has the ability to exacerbate existing conditions of vulnerable populations (Lake, 2000, p. 438).  This need not be limited to privatization of public goods and other entitlement failures stemming from the state’s attempt at appeasing investors; it can also happen through pollution and development efforts (e.g. dams) that could adversely affect the renewability and sustainability of the resources for use by future generations.

Conditionality and Other Solutions

Uvin (2004, p. 61) argues that sovereignty in itself is not a guarantee against judgment and interference, and that the benefits that stem from sovereignty would cease to be when nation states fail to protect their citizens.  Sen (1999, p. 143; 1983) also states that the vulnerability of populations can largely be improved through entitlements, and highlights the importance of public policy initiatives in creating social opportunities.  Given these maxims, it is obvious that entitlements that are essential to the survival of a population – such as access to safe water – should become conditionality in development efforts.

Pogge (2000) also states that natural rights are the antecedents of human rights; in this context, it behooves us to question if even mere survival is possible in the absence of water.  Therefore, if access to safe water were to be considered a fundamental right, a rights-based approach to development (Uvin, 2004) would also implicitly factor in the ability to avail, benefit from, and preserve water as part of any developmental effort.

Finally, the ability of communities and populations to participate in governance and decision making processes, particularly with respect to resource cooperation in transboundary contexts (UNESCO, 2009), will also enable them in protecting their entitlements through political incentives that are inherent to democratic processes (Sen, 1999, p. 178).

Post Scriptum

W.H. Auden once said, “Thousands have lived without love; but not one has lived without water”.  However, over a billion humans today live without access to safe, potable water (WHO/UNESO, 2003).  It is our shared responsibility to not just acknowledge this but also help facilitate their access to this very fundamental of human needs.  After all, one wonders if the world would behave thus should a billion people suddenly run out of air to breathe.

References

© 2011, Karthik Narayanaswami. All rights reserved.

Tags: Development, Economic Freedom, Rights, Water

This entry was posted on Tuesday, January 18th, 2011 at 1:12 PM and is filed under Front Page. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.