THE COMMODIFICATION OF WATER

Water supply remains a pressing issue in Africa, with millions lacking access and many forced to travel long distances for this essential resource. The recent approval by members of Parliament for a 12 per cent water tariff hike by the Eswatini Water Services Corporation (EWSC) not only burdens cash-strapped consumers but also highlights the ongoing commodification of water. The corporation has cited various reasons for the hike, including plans to extend supply to rural areas.

However, this raises critical questions about how water should be valued and treated. Differing perspectives on water as an environmental resource, a basic need, or a human right challenge commodification schemes and pricing models. How should water be priced? What criteria should govern its cost?

Water: An economic good?
 To meet water demands and improve service delivery, various initiatives across Africa, such as the construction of dams and boreholes, are underway. For instance, the National Disaster Management Agency in Eswatini constructed solar-powered systems for 174 households in 2023, aimed at alleviating water scarcity. The introduction or increase of water tariffs has given water an economic value. However, not everyone may agree on its worth, nor be willing to pay for it.

Erik Swyngedouw argues that water commodification is integral to modern development and urbanisation. He contends that consumers should shoulder the costs of the necessary infrastructure for water delivery. Yet, this economic view must be weighed against the notion of water as a human right.

Water: A human right?
 There is a growing global movement advocating for the recognition of water as a human right, essential for life. This principle asserts that all individuals, regardless of geography, race, gender, or class, should have access to water. In 2010, the United Nations recognised the right to water and sanitation as a human right. This perspective conflicts with the neo-liberal view that water should only be accessible to those who can afford it. In many cases, even minimal water service costs can be prohibitively high for the poor, potentially preventing them from accessing safe and adequate water.

Advocates argue that constitutions should enshrine the right to water, making it available freely or at minimal cost. Such constitutional inclusion is seen as pivotal for developing nations like Eswatini, enabling faster social and economic development. The commodification of water can undermine poverty reduction efforts by increasing scarcity for those who are already vulnerable, particularly as providers focus on delivery costs, such as with EWSC’s rural supply expansion plans.

Water delivery costs
Traditionally, water delivery has been a state responsibility, regarded as a public good or managed through public-private partnerships (PPPs). However, the shift towards privatising state-owned enterprises has altered water’s treatment. Governments may provide substantial subsidies to protect users from the actual costs of water provision, often for political or social reasons. At the same time, there has been a push for private sector involvement in water management to enhance efficiency and service quality, particularly in under-served areas.

To ensure supply and sustainability, traditional financing sources, like loans, grants and NGO funding, are increasingly scrutinised, as they often entangle countries in debt.
The suggested solution is full-cost recovery, meaning tariffs must cover all costs associated with water delivery without relying on external loans, aligning with EWSC’s objectives. The contemporary debate surrounding water management is not whether market principles will be applied, but how and to what extent, particularly in ways that do not negatively impact the poor.

Water: An environmental good?
Historically, water discussions have centred on socio-economic issues. Today, with a focus on sustainable resource management, the environmental dimension is gaining prominence. Water plays a critical role in maintaining healthy ecosystems and promoting environmentally-friendly consumption practices. The 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro underscored the need to protect global water resources for sustainable development, advocating for their treatment as environmental resources rather than mere commodities.

Clearly, there are diverse perspectives on how water should be valued, as an economic good, an environmental asset, or a human right. These differing views reflect the complexities surrounding delivery costs and water scarcity. As the newly-approved tariff unfolds, it will be crucial to observe its impact on consumers and their perceptions of water management in Eswatini.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: