Since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations in 1948, the world has made a substantial progress in recognising and improving human rights. Despite huge efforts, access to water is yet to be recognised as a basic human right, which is often denied and neglected in many parts of the world. International communities and financial institutions are not very keen to declare access to water as a basic human right as demonstrated in the recently concluded World Water Forum in The Hague. On the other hand, water re-• sources development processes are not fully democratic and transparent. The concerns of the grassroots stakeholders are seldom taken into account. Donors and investors are not currently accountable which underscores their overall institutional and policy reforms. In the wake of fast economic liberalisation, the future of water resources planning and access of the poor to water need special attention, writes Dr M. Monirul Q. Mirza

DESPITE repeated demands by the nongovernment institutions, the World Water Forum in The Hague has avoided to declare ■water' as a basic human right. The South Asia Water Vision has also fell short of to include water as a basic human right for survival.

In 1948. the United Nations General Assembly approved the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The Article 25 11) of the Declaration states:

Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care... (UN General Assembly. 1948)

It is evident that the UDHR neither explicitly mentions the term ’water' nor declares it as a 'human right'. For individuals, a minimum amount of clean water is required hi order to ensure a standard of Using. Some basic amount of clean water is required to avert dehydration related death, to reduce' the risk of water related diseases, and to Krovide for basic cooking and ygienic requirements. The Universal Declaration unphc itly Includes water as a need lu grow suiticieni loud lor an adequate standard ol living, in div wake of growing water demands due to population growth and other driving forces, it is necessary to include water as a basic human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations. Non-ac-knowledgement of water as a human right was one of the most fundamental failures of the world community in the 20th century. Unfortunately, failing to declare access to water as a basic human right' in The Hague Forum, the world has stepped into the new millennium with past legacy.

Preparation process of the j Vision Document lacks democracy for the stakeholders. The document was prepared based on a top-down approach I through organising few consultation meetings in South Asian countries (except Bhutan). Seventy-five per cent of the meetings were held in the capital cities. Although the Vision Document mentions about representations of wide-variety of stakeholders in the first consultation meeting, the composition of the stakeholders is not known. In the subsequent consultations. the stakeholders , were not invited to participate 1 and only the water planners I took part.

In South Asia, water resources planning and implementation have oeen broadly following a top-down approach. Ideas, concerns and suggestions of the grass-root level stakeholders are seldom taken into account. In Bangladesh, some ; NGOs were allowed periphery

level participation during the study of the 'Flood Action Plan' in the early nineties. Note that the decision of conducting such a huge study was taken without having any consultation with the actual stakeholders. Despite echoing of necessity of bottom-up planning approaches, the National Thermal Power Corporation of India has recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the government of Himachal Pradesh to develop 800 MW Koi Dam project on the SulteJ River without any consultation with the stakeholders especially the potential affected communities.

The current project planning. financing and implementation processes are highly donors/investors driven. From the very outset, they are very keen to have their policies listened. incorporated and implemented in terms of project concept, selection of consultants. design, fund release and commissioning. Responsibility of donors/lnvestors ends as soon as a project is handed over to the concerned authority. Should this be an ideal case?

A pio|eci should be considered like a commodity with a certain warranty period tagged to it If any thing goes wrong, responsibility goes to the seller. Many Irrigation and other water development projects in South Asia have failed to deliver stipulated benefits to the stakeholders due to ill conceived project concepts. There is no single instance that donors/investors acknowledged their responsibility and helped to repair the damages. Even in such cases, governments had to approach the donors for more money to rectify the damages, results increased credits for the project.

This culture of non-account-abiUty has to be changed for efficient. democratic and transparent project planning, financing, implementation and monitoring processes. The concept of 'financier' to be changed to partners’. Some donor agencies now use the word ’partner’ but the basic definition has remained the same, which means a development partner without any responsibility. The Vision Document has ignored this vital issue. If donors/investors will remain unaccountable, the past legacy will be carried over to the future.

In the 1990s. in terms of market economy. South Asia became a hotspot to the foreign investors because of its large potential consumer classes and untapped market. About onefifth of the world population lives in South Asia and therefore. has tremendous scope of expansion of commodity based economy. Structural changes have been prescribed and pushed forward for more and more economic and financial

reforms. Since early nineties, the debate started in South Asia whether 'water' should be treated as a 'commodity' or not. Note that water received formal recognition as a 'commodity' after Its endorsement in the Dublin Declaration In 1992.

Pressures are now being mounted on the governments to introduce drastic structural changes in the water sector to accept water as a commodity.

The South Asia Water Vision Document acknowledged 'water' as a 'commodity' beyond

basic needs. However, an explicit definition of basic needs Is required, because that will draw the bottom line for 'water a commodity'. If basic needs include water only for domestic uses, then we have a problem.

As stated earlier that the

Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the UN acknowledges every ones right to a standard living including food, clothing, etc. Therefore, food also falls under the basic needs', which Indirectly Includes water. If water for food production is excluded from the basic needs, then right of living of an individual is taken away.

'Commodity' means a 'merchandise item' and a profit margin is tagged with it. Water is already sold to the urban population in South Asia that Is highly subsidised, ff subsidy is withdrawn, then per unit selling price will Increase that might go beyond capacity of many limited Income people in the urban areas. On the other hand, if subsidy is withdrawn from the agriculture water supplies. marginal farmers will be more marginalised. If water is on the shelf as profit making commodity in South Asia, it will be difficult for the urban limited Income groups and the poor to buy water at nigh prices.

It will be unrealistic to apply same pricing policies for all income groups in urban and rural areas (for agriculture uses). Water can still be sold at cheaper rates if system loss is reduced to a tolerable limit. For example. Dhaka WASA's 41 per cent water is unaccounted for. If this loss is taken into account during 'rate fixation', per unit price of water simply doubles. Instead of a common pricing policy. a “rational pricing policy-can be introduced based on income levels. That would provide a safety net for urban limited income groups and the poor and rural marginal farmers.

South Asia is a region where about half of the population is currently below the poverty level. In the urban and rural areas. disparity with regard to rights of access to resources and distribution of socio-economic benefits are growing. Water has never been a problem even in the crisis time of summer months in the wealthy urban areas of South Asia. However, less wealthy or poor areas of the cities receive less or no attention. The situation is more critical in the urban slums where drinking and cooking water is a very precious item. There is no government financed water supply system for the slum people in Dhaka City. By and large, a similar situation prevails in other countries of South Asia. When the Const!-’ tutions of the South Asian countries guarantee all basic needs for every citizen, in reality that remains absent.

The author is currently with the Adaptation and Impacts Re-searctr Group (AIRG). The Institute for Environmental Studies (IES). University of Toronto. Canada.