Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
COMMODITY APPROACH
The commodity approach to water is also regarded as the economic approach. This type of approach supports the pricing of water, water privatisation and the private ownership of water resources. Conceivably, this type of approach has been encouraged by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. While it may be presumed that the human right to water is a conception of the United Nations and human rights generally are ‗free‘, the human right to water is not free. The definition of the human right to water states that water for domestic use should be affordable. The Dublin Principles of 1992 also proclaimed water to be an economic good, when it stated in principle four, that ―water has an economic value in all its competing uses and should be recognised as an economic good‖. Water in various parts of the world is considered chiefly as an economic good.
Adopted in France, for example, is the ―water has to pay for water‖ approach, which means that water is priced and the cost of providing for such water must be recovered. This type of approach may not be favourable to the vulnerable in the society, especially the poor, as the number of people living in extreme poverty is high, especially in Africa. Furthermore, privatising water has led to conflicts and protests. As such, treating water purely as an economic good would only lead to crises, especially when the cost is heavy on communities. Adopting a commodity approach to water does some good too, where it reduces wastage. However, if the only good the commodity approach does is to reduce water wastage, then an alternative to that would be water education, sensitising people on the need to conserve water. The commodity approach may not be disputed in areas where the affluent live, as long as it guarantees their constant access to water supply.
However, this approach should not be the only approach to be considered in any given nation, since there are always vulnerable persons in every society. The World Bank has identified over two billion people to be poor, who may not be able to afford their basic needs. A majority of these persons are found in Africa, and applying a commodity approach in its entirety would not guarantee access to water for all.
PUBLIC APPROACH
A public approach is an approach in which the government, through its water board, or state owned companies, provide water services to the people. In contrast to a commodity approach, a public approach argues that water should be firmly under the control of government, and that the public should participate in making decisions over price of water. In other words, the water resources are vested in the government and held in trust for the people, where the people however have a say in the decision over cost, since they are the direct beneficiaries of the water. The public approach is also evident in Nigeria, where the various states have their respective state water corporations. These water corporations are expected to provide water services to the people via reticulations to their homes or to communities through the local government. The problem with this approach is that, where houses are not reticulated, providing water to people in their homes is automatically rendered impossible. In Nigeria, for example, access to water from the government is limited to homes that are reticulated. Homes that are not reticulated find other means of realising their access to water for domestic use. As such, this approach does not take into consideration all people, as it is limited to those who already had access through government pipes. Newly developed areas, for example, would have to source for their water individually, until they became reticulated by the government; and until this happens, access to water is limited.
In contrast to the commodity approach, the public approach places water under the control of government.This approach aims to place all water resources under government ownership, while privatisation of water resources does not occur at all. However, the public approach to water has recorded a wide failure in many jurisdictions all over the world, as governments of developing countries in particular, have found it difficult to maintain the public water sector successfully. This has led to privatisation of the water sector, which has been repackaged under various names such as ―Public Private Partnership‖, ―Private Sector Participation‖, ―Water Operator Partnerships‖ and ―Integrated Water Resources Management.‖ According to Chong et al, water privatisation began in the late 1980s in the UK, and this began the spread of various privatisation initiatives in the public water sector around the world. The Public Private Partnership approach to water (as I would like to term it in this thesis) involves the transfer of part or all the assets and operations of the public water system to private investors to maintain public wateroperations. This type of approach is usually found where the government has failed to provide the much-needed water to the people, as or where the government does not want to spend money in this area of water sector, as found.
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
1.1 RESEARCH PROBLEM
1.2 ASSUMPTION
1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1.4 BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION FOR STUDY
1.5 METHODOLOGY
1.6 LIMITATION AND JUSTIFICATION FOR THE STUDY
1.7 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
1.8 STRUCTURE/CHAPTERISATION
CHAPTER TWO THE EMERGENCE OF THE HUMAN RIGHT TO WATER
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 THE RIGHT TO WATER AS A CONTEMPORARY HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE
2.3 THE MEANING OF THE HUMAN RIGHT TO WATER UNDER INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW
2.4 THE HUMAN RIGHT TO WATER AND OTHER HUMAN RIGHTS
2.5 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE HUMAN RIGHT TO WATER
2.5.1 INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS INSTRUMENTS
2.6 THE AFRICAN REGIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS SYSTEM AND THE RECOGNITION OF THE HUMAN RIGHT TO WATER
2.7 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER THREE A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR A HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED APPROACH TO WATER
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.2 APPROACHES TO ACCESS TO WATER
3.3 RELATIONSHIP OF IDENTIFIED APPROACHES WITH A HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED APPROACH
3.4 A HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED APPROACH TO WATER
3.5 VIABILITY OF A HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED APPROACH TO WATER
3.6 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER FOUR THE LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK OF WATER GOVERNANCE IN NIGERIA: IMPLICATIONS FOR A HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED APPROACH
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 DEFINITION OF TERMS USED IN THIS CHAPTER
4.3 BRIEF HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF ACCESS TO DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY AND PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM IN NIGERIA
4.4 AN EXAMINATION OF THE LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK OF CURRENT WATER GOVERNANCE IN NIGERIA
4.5 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK OF DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY IN NIGERIA
4.6 CHALLENGES OF ACCESS TO WATER IN NIGERIA
4.7 AN ARGUMENT FOR THE RECOGNITION OF THE HUMAN RIGHT TO WATER AND AN APPLICATION OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED APPROACH TO WATER IN NIGERIA
4.8 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER FIVE COMPARATIVE HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED APPROACHES TO WATER FROM SELECTED JURISDICTIONS
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.2 A HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED APPROACH TO ACCESS WATER IN SOUTH AFRICA
5.3 KENYA WATER REFORMS: A HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED APPROACH
5.4 AN ANALYSIS OF COMPARATIVE HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED APPROACHES TO WATER FROM SELECTED JURISDICTIONS
5.5 COMPARATIVE HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED APPROACHES TO WATER IN SOUTH AFRICA, KENYA, COLOMBIA AND INDIA
5.6 CHALLENGES OF INCORPORATING A HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED APPROACH TO WATER
5.7 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 INTRODUCTION
6.2 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS AND FINDINGS
6.3 COMPARATIVE LESSONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED APPROACHES TO WATER AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NIGERIA
6.4 AVENUES FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
6.5 CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
