Is water a 'commodity' or a 'human right'?
Have a look at this interesting clip:
Same old question.
Let me put it another way.
1. Is education a commodity? You'd probably say no. But hey, why do we need to pay for piano and language courses? They should be freely provided by the state, no?
2. Is health service a commodity? If no, then why do you have to pay your health insurance?
3. Is water a commodity? If no, then why do we need to pay for coca cola, starbucks and all those beverages in Tesco's shelves?
If no water can be commodified, every bartender in this earth will lose their jobs. No one can open a Cafe' because all the drinks should be for free.
Now you probably said: no, because they are "processed". Those who process them added the value of water, and is entitled for their labor. But drinking water should be free.
Now wait a minute here. Aren't drinking water "processed" too? If you ask me to get you a bucket of water from uphill, aren't you supposed to pay me for my work? Those plumbing and water treatment plants need funds too, no? The tap's going have to come from somewhere.
But I agree that in some instances water should be provided for free by the state. In times of emergencies, natural disaster or for people in prison, the state should provide them with adequate and safe water. Also for those who can't afford to pay it. Subsidy measures should be available, or payment in arrears facility, or solidarity tariffs.
But we cannot say that water entirely cannot be commodified. Humans are not commodities, that I fully agree, both morally and legally. Sex should not be a commodity too, at least, morally. But some people think it differently. As such there are differences of opinion on whether the commodification of sex should be prohibited by the state.
That human is not a commodity is universal. But whether water is a commodity or not is highly contextual. It depends on what sort of water and in which situation.
Hi Mova,
Interesting question.
As any other things provided by nature, like forest, soil etc. water should be preserved and consumed properly. We must stop taking it for granted. Especially in Indonesia whereby underground water is consumed almost without limits. Although there are regulations for industries but still it might cause environmental instability.
Further, water processed, into any kinds of drinkable water thus has added value, would obviously be a community.
Nice post Mova. I agree that drinking water now has a cost and that it must be paid for. I wonder by who, though.
Is it possible to consider what you have to pay for purifying drinking water as an externality cost transfered from polluters to water consummers?
For example, industries discharge toxic gases in the atmosphere and contaminate clouds. Resulting acid rain kills boreal lakes. Surface water that was potable in the natural environment in the past is not fit for drinking anymore and has to be processed.
The ecosystem used to produce a service for free - freely available drinking water. This service has been destroyed by the pollution created by cost externalisation processes in companies that generate private profits.
My question is this: why should I pay for something that I used to get for free but that was destroyed by others?
This "pristine-state" approach is interesting. Then there is two kinds of costs: (i) the cost of returning the quality of water as it were before industrialization -- this is like paying for our grandfather's expenses, call it 'rectification cost' and (ii) the cost that we borne for ourselves for emitting pollutants.
The second cost is doable to be paid. The first cost may not be, and is likely to be impossible as paying the cost would make us destroy some livelihood.
What do you say?
I agree Nizam. It is an environmental service. One must be charged both by the cost of processing it and by the cost of its subsequent release to the environment.
I think you are right. First, apply the polluter pays principle and then, there is only so far you can go in rectification before the whole thing stops making sense. The big question on a going forward basis is who gets to bear the brunt of the cost. The end user of drinking water? Or the consumer of manufactured goods produced by the polluters of drinking water sources? Should there be a drinking water tax when one buys a car produced in a factory that degraded a drinking water source?