The New Economic Market: Water: Difference between revisions

The fourth point made it possible to treat water as an economical good. Until then, it was possible for companies to make money with water. One reason for this decision was the thought that through the treatment of water under economical aspects and under the free market economy conditions, it will rise in quality. If water will be seen as a good, it will follow the rules of supply and demand, and it was hoped, that water would be dispensed equal and more efficient. Since then water was not treated as a common property-resource, or common-pool resource  anymore. As water was treated as a common property-resource, water was characterised as a good “whose size or characteristics makes it costly, but not impossible, to exclude potential beneficiaries from obtaining benefits from its use”(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-pool_resource). This conference made it possible to treat water as an economic good. That means that the water-market changed. From now on it follows the rules of an economic market, characterised by the rules of supply and demand.The idea was that this could solve the water supply problem. For the first time water lost its status as common property and became marketable. The World Bank as one big supporter of water privatisation:

 

The idea is, that if companies as Nestlé, Pepsi, Danone and the Coca Cola do not have the exclusive right as an monopoly to sell water in a bottle in certain regions and communities as Mexico or Guatemala, the pressure on the government would rise to provide tap water of good quality. The problem that shall be pointed out is, that through the supply of water in bottles the basic service of water is secure, even if the price is variable and made by companies as Danone and Coca Cola, or others. That makes it possible that the governments of these countries do not have to improve the quality of the tap water, they do not have to improve the water-pipes and the water quality and the water supply. The pressure of the population is not strong enough and the rich people do not have to help changing something, because companies as Coca Cola for example take over the water supply.

 

To calculate the amount of water that a county utilizes, it is necessary to consider the amount of virtual water too, that is used to produce the products that the country imports. There are some possibilities to reduce the amount of virtual water and to dispense water more equally:

*One possibility is to transport unused water from a region with an abundance of water to a region with low water abundance. This concept is used sparely. For example in Colorado in North America , a region with a high water abundance, the unused water is transported through pumps over the Rocky Mountains to a region with a low water abundance, California.

*Another possibility to reduce the amount of virtual water is to use the water surplus in regions with a high water amount to produce goods that need a lot of water to be produced and to export them after they were produced. Then the water does not need to be exported.

*The next thing to think about is, how much water can be saved, if the product would be sold in the same regions where they were produced? The problem is that a lot of products can’t be produced just in some specific regions. For example rice can’t be produced in Germany, because there are not the right climate conditions.

 

The consumption of food out of the region is never the less important aspect, even if it is not possible with every kind of goods.

All the aspects that were mentioned are thoughts and developments concerning water supply and the possibilities of its sustainable handling. The fact that water is indispensable to life makes it necessary to find solutions to offer every one a secure water supply. The meetings and conferences that were held pointed the importance of water and its treatment out and made some important reforms possible. The fight for equal sustainable water supply is not won jet, and it will take a lot of time and energy. Water is a problem of equal utilisation and its importance for living is more and more in the mind of people.

 

This article is focused on the importance of water and the different developments of the water sector. Globalisation is discussed in different aspects and influences the treatment of the water supply sector too. Since the inter-linking of world wide water markets, water as an unlasting good is a problem to be solved. It is mentioned that the economy competition is not secure. In a lot of countries the public water supply turns into a monopoly and competition is more or less impossible.  

 

 

It is not easy to find solutions for this problems, it is clear that the ways of solving the problem as in the moment are no satisfaction. One opportunity would be to keep up the way of privatising the water sector but with a bigger focus on the postulate of a fixed price that secures a good quality and the possibility for every one to effort water.

Further the importance of the large amount of water wastage that is caused by the production of food as described in the part of the virtual water is important to keep in mind. It was pointed out that water is an unlasting good. The world has an amount of water that can’t be changed. The handling of water in the moment does not consider this fact enough. If there won’t be any changes, the amount of usable water won’t be enough for everyone in a few years. Some possible solutions were mentioned in the text as the transportation of water from a region with an abundance of water to a region with low water abundance. Or another possibility is to use the water surplus in regions with a high water amount to produce goods that require a large amount of water in the production.

In general it is important to have the scarcity of water and other goods in mind and in politic discussions the environment with its resources has to achieve an extra importance all over the world. And not only for some years, rather until expedient solutions are found. Since the last 15 years the political movement towards environment protection has a positive effect but it has to be followed more intensively.