ebbflow_mar06-f0770a36271565e9.pdf

The document analyzes the global debate over water privatization, contrasting the view of water as an economic good promoted by international financial institutions with the view of water as a human right. It details the role of the World Bank and IMF in pushing privatization through loan conditionalities and provides case studies of both failed privatization (Cochabamba, Bolivia) and successful participatory public management (Porto Alegre, Brazil).

• There is a fundamental tension in water policy between treating water as a social good and a human right versus treating it as an economic good subject to market forces. Proponents of the economic view, including the World Bank and the 1992 Dublin Conference, argue that treating water as an economic good prevents waste and ensures efficient management.
• International Financial Institutions (IFIs), specifically the World Bank and the IMF, use 'conditionalities' to pressure developing nations into privatizing water services in exchange for loans and debt relief. Examples include Mozambique in 1999 and Uruguay in 2002.
• Critics of privatization argue that the profit motive undermines equity and access, leading to 'water apartheid' where the poor are excluded. This is often manifested through 'full cost recovery' strategies, tariff hikes, and the use of prepaid cards that can lead to disease outbreaks when the poor are forced to use contaminated sources.
• Privatization is argued to threaten environmental sustainability because private corporations may ignore the long-term ecological impacts of water extraction or resist expensive pollutant monitoring to maximize profits.
• The case of Cochabamba, Bolivia, illustrates the failure of privatization; after Bechtel raised prices by over 50%, massive protests led to the contract's rescission. Subsequently, a participatory model involving the 'Coordinadora' and the municipality was established, keeping capital within the city.
• Porto Alegre, Brazil, provides a successful example of a publicly owned, non-profit water company (DMAE) that uses a Participatory Budget process to prioritize the needs of poor communities, resulting in 99.5% of citizens having access to clean water.

APA

Center for International Environmental Law (n.d.). ebbflow_mar06-f0770a36271565e9.pdf. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/EbbFlow_Mar06.pdf

Chicago

Center for International Environmental Law. ebbflow_mar06-f0770a36271565e9.pdf. n.d. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/EbbFlow_Mar06.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Center for International Environmental Law |title=ebbflow_mar06-f0770a36271565e9.pdf |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/EbbFlow_Mar06.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centerforinternationalenvironmentallawndebbflowmar06f0770a36271565e9pdf, author = {{Center for International Environmental Law}}, title = {{ebbflow\_mar06-f0770a36271565e9.pdf}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/EbbFlow_Mar06.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }