World Water Forum declaration falls short on human rights, claim experts

Ministerial declaration on water policy condemned for alleged failure to define water and sanitation as human rights

Cross-Posted from The Guardian, Wednesday 14 March 2012

MDG : 6th World Water Forum in Marseille

Willem Alexander, chair of the UN secretary-general’s advisory board on water and sanitation, at the World Water Forum. Photograph: Gerard Julien/AFP/Getty Images
Governments have been accused of backtracking on their commitments after ministers at the World Water Forum were charged with failing to define water and sanitation as human rights.

In a ministerial declaration, 84 government ministers and dozens of other national representatives endorsed the five-page statement calling for a “new approach” to water policy ahead of the Rio+20 conference on sustainable development in June.

Tuesday’s declaration said: “We commit to accelerate the full implementation of the human rights obligations relating to access to safe and clean drinking water and sanitation by all appropriate means as part of our efforts to overcome the water crisis at all levels.”

Campaigners say this is not the same thing as formally defining water and sanitation as human rights. The declaration’s language, they argue, leaves potential loopholes for countries to dodge their legal and financial obligations to uphold these rights.

Felipe Quispe Quenta, Bolivia’s minister for water and the environment, denounced the declaration for failing to address the “social dimensions” of water policies and reaffirm the human rights to water and sanitation as recognised by the UN general assembly in 2010.

Meera Karunananthan, national water co-ordinator for the Council of Canadians, a civil society organisation, said that while the declaration is not politically binding, it risks sending mixed signals. “The fear is that countries can now say this is the latest international language,” she said.

Meanwhile, Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch, said the declaration was “a step backwards for water justice and the UN process that has begun to enforce the human right to water”.

Held every three years, the forum is the largest global gathering of policymakers, business and water experts. Held in Marseille, France, this week, the forum is officially billed as a “platform for solutions” to the global water crisis. Some 783 million people still do not have access to drinking water.

The declaration called on countries to increase their investments in water and sanitation as a strategy to reduce poverty, accelerate growth and create new jobs. It urged policymakers to pay special attention to the “inter-linkages” between the water, food and energy sectors.

It called for a “strategic and sustainable” approach to financing water and sanitation through an “appropriate mix” of contributions from governments, aid donors, the private sector and water users themselves. It proposed a “helpdesk mechanism” whereby public authorities, NGOs, companies and communities can exchange best practices on water laws, regulations, standards and budgets.

It also urged intensified efforts to prevent and reduce water pollution and develop “non-conventional” water sources. Desalination projects, and the safe reuse of waste water, it said, could also help stimulate local economies, prevent waterborne diseases, and halt the degradation of ecosystems.

However, Quenta said the declaration’s focus on technology and investment could be seen as promoting privatisation policies.

Quenta said while investment was important, it must be guided by concerns for equity, justice and the exercise of rights.

“It is certainly important to strengthen and support local actions to protect and preserve water for the benefit of all those who will enjoy it in different uses, but a payment is not the way to do it,” he said. “Water cannot be turned into a business.”

Karunananthan denounced the forum for its lack of transparency. She noted there are no signatures on the ministerial declaration, making it difficult to understand who endorsed it. Bolivia’s objections signalled that no consensus was reached, she said.

Hauter agreed, adding that the declaration, “like the forum itself, is illegitimate because it presupposes that corporations have a role in democratic water governance, when nothing could be further from the truth”.

She said: “The forum didn’t even collect signatures from nations who supposedly endorsed it. This document should not be mistaken for a serious multilateral statement on water policy.”

Chief executive of WaterAid Barbara Frost said: “Warm words in the World Water Forum declaration will not solve the crisis of unsafe drinking water and inadequate sanitation that is the biggest killer of children in sub-Saharan Africa. What is needed is urgent investment in these essential services combined with political leadership that delivers improved access to the world’s poorest people.”

Frost urged governments to make and honour pledges at the next high-level meeting of the sanitation and water for all (SWA) partnership, in Washington next month. Every two years, finance ministers from developing countries and aid officials from donor countries gather under the SWA framework to discuss planning and funding for programmes related to water and sanitation.

According to EurActiv, donors provided more than $8bn in aid for water and sanitation programmes in 2010 – just over 5% of total development assistance. Nearly a third of this came from the EU, with sub-Saharan Africa receiving 28% of funds provided, followed by South Asia with 19%.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Climate Change, Corporate Globalization, Rio+20, Water

0 Responses to World Water Forum declaration falls short on human rights, claim experts

  1. Here in Australia we have gone down the “title” route. Unless you own land outright, you will have to pay a mortgage to a bank for 20 years or pay rent to a landlord for life. The effect is that you are bonded labour for a boss for a good part of your working life. If you have any ethical objections to the way the boss operates you can’t exercise freedom of speech because you might lose your job (and so your house). We have the dole, but very heavy stigmatisation is designed to get you back into line in any role available, even if that role doesn’t fit you at all.

    With the globalisation of UNemployment looming and the high specialisation of the workforce, the demands on the welfare system is threatening our competitiveness.

    Nevertheless most people are still happy enough with the way things are here for now because, thanks to our exploitation of other nations and the environment, life is still pretty easy – but there are dark clouds gathering.

    The value of land increases as a result of development by the community, but the capital gain on land goes to the owners only – the rest of the community have to pay increasing rents for the value the community at large has added.

    The upcoming generations are now finding that land values have increased to the point where housing is a real worry and there is little prospect of buying in to the scam which is real estate. Landowners are getting richer, the poor are comng under increasing threat of unemloyment, specialisation, globalisation and the pressures and uncertainty of the welfare system, and the environment is demanding that we end our cheap and nasty exploitation.

    I believe that when we are born we each have the right to sustain our life with the free gifts of nature, and that we have a responsibility to live sustainably. The total commodification or the land has enslaved us to this exploitative system and that the theft of our birthright is totally unsustainable.

    Please don’t follow the path we have used – we are in deep trouble, even if we don’t see it yet. “South Africa needs better tenure solutions. But the property models that work in wealthy suburbs can’t be enshrined as the only valid approach.”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>