The limits of cooperation : Water as a profit

 In this post, I would like to analyze and question the relevance of aid and  cooperation and their effectiveness. Cause if several organizations exist (UNWC, IWRM, Water Act), we still have to question their effectiveness and relevance at the scale of the African continent and the world.

I would also like to address the problem of an European and international vision and presence in the management of conflicts around water in Africa. Indeed, since the majority of African countries are former colonies, it is interesting to wonder what role the old metropolises still play and what hypocrisy lies behind a desire to develop Africa.

• What success for the IWRM ? 

IWRM is the dominant organisation in water resource management in the world. It was promoted by multilateral and regional development banks and donor agencies and knew a rapid spread in southern Africa over the past two decades. 

IRWM is known for having contributed to decentralisation which has led to experimentation with new institutions and new planning processes. But above all, it can be said that IWRM has mainly used Africa as a laboratory and many poor women and men did not really benefit from this program. According to the article, this is because IWRM has focused on water management and ‘software’ outputs rather than expanding access to resources and their development.  (Mehta, et al, 2016). 

Here, water has become for World Bank an ‘economic good’. Cause even if these intentions are honorable, in reality, they are often unusable, internally inconsistent and unimplementable in operational terms. This project remains idealistic and is riddled with contradictions.

Maybe it is better to think about a more diversified approach more focuses on the available capacity and resources of each country and region, by developing strategies that highlight the political character of water and by linking water policies to antipoverty strategies and countering the dangers of capture on the part of powerful players. (Mehta, et al, 2016)

• Is water a colonial capture ? 

“There’s Money in Thirst,” a 2006 New York Times headline read. 

Ancient metropolises have not completely disappeared from water management in Africa. Indeed, with the help of national governments and institutions ( Word Bank, IMF) they mining water and gain control over the world’s water supplies. ( Piper, 2014). 

The article ‘The Colonial Origins of Global Water Inequality’ shows a conflict between World Water Forum and the Forum Alternatif Mondial de l’Eau (Alternative  World Water Forum), or FAME with “Water for life, not for profit.” as their slogan. It’s a conflict over two ways of seeing water. One considers it as an ‘economic good’ while the other as a ‘human right’ ( Piper, 2014). 

One of the reasons the World Bank neglected urban water was that the Bank was unable to see any economic benefits from an investment in healthier individuals. 

China Daily recently ran a front-page story on the water crisis with a positive spin: “Water will emerge as the ‘new gold’ and an integral part of future global security, considering there is tremendous pressure on water resources from climate change, urbanization, and economic growth. . . . ». 

 • Water as a profit  =  

Africa is a source of great international lust. I refer first of all to the land-grabbing process which is developing considerably in Africa and which consists in transnational land acquisition. It involves the purchase or lease of large tracts of land by foreign nations, companies or individuals for agricultural production (Braun et. al, 2009). 

It generates insecurity and poverty in the host countries, which are often marred by political conflict, war and food and water shortages. ( Piper, 2014)

It is also often mentioned as ‘new colonialism’. This process is interesting because it raises the question of water use in countries (Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Sudan, Tanzania and Zambia) where many are experiencing water supply difficulties cause water is used for land that is not even for their benefit (Cotula et al, 2009).  

• Zimbabwe and Lesotho cases =   

These two cases illustrate the capture of land and water resources by international bodies, which questions the real issues of water in Africa.

Indeed, in Zimbabwe thousands of white farmers were forced from their land, often violently, between 2000 and 2001 because of the land reform programme launched by former President Robert Mugabe. The seizures were meant to redress colonial-era land grabs but contributed to the country's economic decline and ruined relations with the West. This case illustrates the challenges of water redistribution cause land and water rights were overwhelmingly in white hands (Mehta, et al, 2016).   

KATSE DAM OVERSPILLING LHDA

Similarly for Lesotho with the LHWP which is a canal project to divert water from the Orange River to South Africa financed by foreign investments and which also benefits the foreign diamond mines located in the country. 

• The case of wast management = 

The proliferation of toxic waste in Africa is a major political concern. It is of several kinds (chemical, nuclear, electronic, household, etc.) and of various origins (endogenous or exogenous). Gerd Leipold, then Executive Director of Greenpeace International, spoke about« toxic waste colonialism ». 

In addition to chemical and nuclear waste, special attention should be given to “end-of-life electronic devices” that are thrown into nature or piled up in wild landfills in Africa.

All this shows that under international meetings, conferences and treaties there is also a strong profit stakes around water, which is concentrated around and at the expense of Africa. There is therefore a need for African countries to mobilize to establish real alliances to fight against a certain form of ‘neo-colonialism’. 

A young boy standing in front of a pile of waste