ID: 30821207 Freya Elizabeth Patten
Should Water be a Human Right or a Commodity?
Water plays a central role in everyday life, with symbolism in culture, religion, and history
(USDA, 2008). With population and agricultural demand growing (Sheffield, 2020), the need
for water has never been as critical as now. But who controls water? In July 2010, the United
Nations recognised the human right to water and sanitation, with the acknowledgment that
clean drinking water and sanitation are essential to all human rights (UN, 2010). The motion
of affirming the human right to clean drinking water passed with 122 nations in favour and 44
nations abstaining with the US being one of these. Their reasoning was that the right to water
was unclear and unnecessary. Therefore it has been hard to determine whether water
resources should be privatised or a human right, especially due to the economic disparity
between countries.
Water commodity dilemmas stem from the thought that the water is being controlled by
someone. Water is needed for survival, and the idea that someone else owns this resource can
cause individuals to feel imprisoned. Agriculture and energy production have an important
role in consumption of water resources which is different in every city (UN, 2020). The price
of water as a commodity would fall, and bias authoritative figures in the west may
underestimate the devastating consequences of water and availability, leading them to make
bad choices. Developing countries do not have easy access to clean water, let alone money to
pay for the water. The extraction of water will also cause a depletion in specific areas due to
lack of consumer care and source of profit. You could argue that globally everyone should be
able to use only what they need to survive free of charge, however anything that exceeds this
baseline will have to be paid for.
In the documentary “Thirst”, the issue at hand was discussed in different regions of the
world. In Bolivia, the pressure of water laws produced riots and gunfights, due to Bechtel
raising water rates from 30 to 300% (Thirst, 2004). As said by Oscar Olivera whom is one of
the main protestors against water privatization in Bolivia, ‘The people united will never be
defeated, but the words are carried away. People have lost their fear, and from that moment,
you know you will win”. Water is a necessity to live, it is a right to life, and therefore it
should be classified as a human right. A substantial amount of people in the world cannot pay
for unclean water- let alone sanitised. Allowing privatisation will put yet another stress on the
lives of millions. In Stockton USA, they held a similar opinion that the authorities see the
citizens as customers, and not free individuals. Disallowing the citizens to vote caused uproar
and protests, as water is for people – not for profit. However, Mayor Podesto promised that
170 million dollars will be saved over a 10-year period if the privatisation of water went
through (Private Citizen, 2003), and repairs to water infrastructure will be cheaper- yet how
much of this is true coming from an authoritative political figure?
Governments see water as a political control machine, using it to increase economy. In
western society, the main goals are money and power, and it is very unusual to have an
authoritative figure who focuses on anything else. Water can never be a human right if power
is controlling civilisation. In reality, water as a human right is idealistic and improbable;
where money can be made, it will be exploited, which is comparable to what has happened
with water.
Having said this, the UK is a clear and concise example of how privatisation of water can
work more efficiently and safer than if water was classified as a human right. Water was
privatised in England in 1989 (Roberts, 2020). With years of poor water quality and sewage
