Table of ContentsIntroductionWater PrivatizationDisadvantagesBolivia's EconomyWater Problems in BoliviaBolivia's Water WarSuez in South AfricaPossible ConsequencesIs Water Free for the PublicThe Is water privatization ethicalWhat happens if the public takes initiatives in water resources and benefits of water in the public sectorConclusionIntroductionWater privatization is defined as private companies purchasing or operator of public water services. In the environmental field, whether companies are considered private entities or individuals with a responsibility to care for the environment, privatization plays a key role in a company's profit process. The decision to behave ethically towards the public and provide social benefits to the public remains a key issue for the company. This is why leaders must have a good understanding with the public of the framework and value of environmental ethics. But in the public sector, maintaining good relationships and behaving ethically in the eyes of public governance can positively influence factors such as customer satisfaction by providing clean and cheaper water to their citizens. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”? Get the original essay This article aims to teach leaders about the issues of water privatization, with reference to the water privatization scandal water in Bolivia which led to a water war in December 1999. Our group believes that this issue constitutes a striking example of how the privatization of water is at the heart of environmental issues. To strengthen and simplify our theories and concepts, our team designed three questions to answer the water privatization dilemma. The questions are: Is the water free for the public? Is water privatization ethical? What happens if the public takes initiatives on water resources and the benefits of water in the public sector? Water Privatization Before discussing the key issues, we must first look at the basic details. of the case. This section includes the definition and concepts of water privatization. And discusses the water war in Bolivia. Water privatization is the participation of private sector companies in the provision of water and sanitation services. Water privatization in developing countries was initiated primarily to solve the municipal budgetary problems of a country's government. Although water privatization promises clean water and public jobs at a company, it mainly backfires through high water rates, poorer service, and lower water losses. jobs. Initially, the United States and European countries attempted to privatize their water during their development period. But later when scientists discovered that industrial chemicals and toxicants present in water and sewage systems after water privatization affected the immune systems of animals and humans. Research by the organization BlueVoice has found that industrial toxins travel through water and reveal that most animals in the Arctic, such as seals, whales, polar bears and even our mothers' breast milk mothers all contain industrial toxins. Another key toxin found in our waters is atrazine, it is used as a pesticide and a Swiss company, Syngenta was the largest producer of atrazine. in the United States. THEScientists have discovered that the chemical travels 600 miles through rain and causes a reduction in sperm count. (Salina, 2008) Moreover, what we use in our daily lives, such as cosmetics, bathing liquids and even cigarettes that are thrown away. the sewer system returns to drinking water. Thus, the United States and European countries have decided to ban water privatization. Thus, water privatization has become widespread in many developing countries where there is less clean water and employee salaries are low. Disadvantages There are several disadvantages to privatizing water; rising interest rates, environmental pollution and job losses. Allowing companies to take over the water system means the price of water would increase because they are doing it more for their bottom line than what the people need. Water is a basic human need and natural resource. However, water privatization would create a society in which only those who can afford it would get it and those who cannot pay for water would go without. Water privatization would put their lives in danger. Water privatization also has an environmental downside. As I mentioned, since corporations prioritize profits, privatization generally harms water quality because they care no less about polluting natural resources than the government or NGOs. Additionally, they tend to use too much water at once, so the water table would quickly deplete if companies continued to use water for their operations. Finally, due to privatization, mass layoffs easily occurred. As companies try to minimize all kinds of costs and increase profits, they try to hire as little staff as possible. Unemployment not only hurts the workers but also their families and ultimately makes the nation unhappy. When discontent builds up, riots may break out to change the situation. Additionally, mass layoffs lead to staff shortages and ultimately endanger water quality. Bolivian Economy In 1982, Bolivia ended its military dictatorship, but the country did not bring economic stability. So the Bolivian government asked the World Bank and a few foreign investors for help when the country was suffering from hyperinflation at an annual rate of 25,000 percent. Water problems in BoliviaBolivia also faced a massive shortage of water for its agricultural use. Cochabamba, Bolivia's third largest city, primarily produces most of the country's grains, poultry, fruits and vegetables. But due to the increase in population and drier climate, the city's water supply system has been reduced. Some areas of the city only received water for a few hours every other day. And farmers have to move their crops that require less irrigation. San Francisco-based Bechtel was the largest shareholder in Municipal Water and Sewer Services (SEMAPA). By signing this contract, the government gave in to pressure from the World Bank and the IMF in favor of privatization. This is a $450 million project to bring water from a group of rivers. The project requires digging a 19 km tunnel through the mountains. It promised to expand access to water to many previously unserved communities. But when the company took over local wells and informal pumps as well as public system infrastructure, the public had to pay high water bills. The water bill hasincreased by more than 35% on average and in some localities by twice as much. “They want us to pay now for improved water supply and services that won't even start for two years,” said one resident. In January 2000, demonstrators blocked roads in Cochabamba for several days. More than 100 protesters and 30 police officers required medical treatment due to the intense riot. The city was darkened by tear gas and smoke from demonstrators' fires. In 2005, the giant Suez obtained a lucrative concession to supply water to the El Alto district of the Bolivian capital La Paz. In 2005, however, El Alto residents also took to the streets to protest high water rates, forcing the government to cancel the Suez contract. Suez in South AfricaAnother example related to water privatization occurred in South Africa. The Suez company, of French origin, has been involved in numerous water privatization cases. In South Africa, Suez has introduced a prepaid water supply system in many towns across the country. The prepaid water system requires a person to pay monthly and receive a key to use the water system line. The average price for using the water system is around $1. But most citizens, who are poor, cannot afford to pay due to high prices and high inflation in the country. And this system has not affected wealthy households. The Suez company raised an issue by stating that it was trying to promote "paid behavior" in the country so that it can get used to this behavior for future aspects. Possible consequences In most parts of the world, people pay for water that comes from the government pipeline, but they do not notice the increase in water rates. In Singapore, a citizen would have to pay between 200 and 300 USD per month. Citizens do not realize the high amount of payments because they have become accustomed to paying. This behavior is common in middle- and upper-class families, but it is not affordable for poor communities. The price of gasoline in Japan is 160 yen and the price of a liter of water is 140 yen. The ratio of these prices is close to each other. This is an alarming question for both the population and the government. The possible consequence of water privatization is high water contamination. Since private companies have the right to use public water, they could also discharge chemicals. In Bolivia, after the privatization of water, the death rate increased. One in five children die before the age of five. People are worried about drinking water from rivers in Bolivia. Another possible consequence would be a demonstration and riot in the streets where people might be tired of the high water levels. As this example from Bolivia shows people wanted to change their way of life and started to protest. Is water free for the public? Water can be considered essential in our lives. Looking at different aspects of our lives, this is obvious. All the vegetables, meats, and other foods we eat daily have been grown using water, and the transportation of supplies needed to form society by water has not changed from the past. In the past, great rivers flowed around the lands where huge civilizations such as the Indus Civilization and the Yellow River Civilization flourished, and people used their great advantage to live their lives. Even looking at these things, it turns out that the fact that water has a great influence on our lives is undeniable. Water problem in BoliviaLet's consider the water problem in Bolivia based on the above content. Bolivia is undoubtedly a society supported by water, just like other societies. Bolivia is a developing country with a population of 10 million, and its national strength can be said to be not as huge as other super nations. In such circumstances, it is only right for the government to seek financial assistance from the IMF, World Bank, etc. What the IMF and World Bank have demanded from Bolivia in return for its aid is the privatization of water projects. As we can understand from the case of Japanese society, it is not really wrong to prioritize government affairs over the public sector under these conditions. SuggestionsHowever, in the case of Bolivia there were few points different compared to other societies. The first is that the purpose of privatization was water supply, not like the postal service, and that it was actually an American water company that took over the municipal water supplier. If the American water company provides water at a reasonable price to Bolivian citizens, there is no problem. But in the case of Bolivia's water problems, the exceptional water fee set by this company was ultimately the trigger for a subsequent tragedy. Considering the series of water wars that have occurred in Bolivia, water is considered free due to its social nature. As mentioned above, water is the source of human life and should be essential for the prosperity of society. If you market water as a commercial resource, even worse cases may occur. Dependency Theory In the field of international relations and economics, there is a term “dependent theory”. “Dependency theory contains certain features of the relationships between dominant states or global corporations and dependent nations. One of the features of this theory explains that external factors such as corporations or the international commodity market can be assumed to play an important economic role in a dependent country (Vincent, 1996, p. 2). This relationship between a country and a company could be worse than expected. If this system is unwittingly installed between the US water supplier and the Bolivian government and company, the US water supplier can manipulate the Bolivian government at will by cutting off the Bolivian company's water supply. What is even worse than this case is that the American water suppliers are once again cooperating with the IMF or the World Bank and reorganizing the Bolivian government system as they wish. Under such circumstances, adjusting the balance of power within the international community will not work, so such things should be avoided at all costs. So, water in Bolivia should be free, and this water should generally not be controlled by anyone or any specific factor. Is the opinion on water privatization ethical So far we have looked at the dangers of water privatization from the perspective of international relations, but let us here question the ethics of privatization of water supply projects. In response to this question, from a personal point of view, privatization of water projects is unethical. This is because water is a central being in the source of human activity, as mentioned in the first question. Maslow's theory of self-actualization expresses the fact that water is the necessary element of humanity. The figure.