Wednesday, July 13, 2005
Conclusions
Claudia Campero Arena
As a result of the analysis presented in this work the questions set in the introduction can now be addressed: How far is the water governance system in Mexico City responsible for a socially unjust distribution and management of the resource? How can civil struggle or conflict help to change governance systems to achieve more socially just results?
In relation to the first question, the argument set in this work is that the water governance system in Mexico City is definitely one of the causes for the prevailing socially unjust distribution and management of water. The current water governance system in the city is still dominated by the decisions of local government officials and to some extent of the private sector. The institutional channels for citizens to participate are far from being structured in a way that could guarantee meaningful participation. This is the first way the system becomes socially unjust in that it does not allow people to take part in the decision-making process that affects a central part of their lives. In practice, as it has been clear in the development of this work, the inhabitants of some of the areas that suffer water scarcity are highly involved and participate, not through institutional channels, but through different protest strategies.
The second way the governance system becomes responsible for a socially unjust distribution of water services is manifested in the fact that the decisions of where and how water is distributed is normally to the disadvantage of the most vulnerable, generally using the explanation of financial and technical limitations. The same neighbourhoods simultaneously suffer the worst service regarding availability, reliability and quality and are the ones that end up turning to water vendors paying much higher prices for their water. This has not only a technical or financial explanation, it is a expression of the power relations prevalent in the city, where people of these neighbourhood, particularly their women, find themselves powerless in front of the other actors defining how water services are managed and distributed.
Water scarcity is a constant theme when discussing the sustainability of Mexico City. Yet as discussed in this work, scarcity is suffered unequally. While citizens in Iztapalapa and other delegaciones suffer water unavailability for months, inhabitants of more affluent neighbourhoods have water uninterruptedly year-round. What is more the scarcity is not suffered equally within households, where normally women are responsible for overcoming the lack of water having to invest hours in fetching it.
The second question where the evidence is much less clear can now be addressed. Although it is appreciable that conflict over water, particularly when it brings together considerable number of citizens to contest the authority, can motivate responses in them to somehow resolve the claims, the solutions are commonly ephemeral. Yet this continuous battle with the authorities has, not only in Mexico but in other Latin-American countries, brought significantly improved water services (Bennett, 1995). Now, the question of whether these conflicts have actually changed the governance system to achieve more socially just results is one step further. The fact that the Legislative Assembly of the Federal District (ALDF) has created a Special Commission for the Integral Management of Water shows to some extent recognition of the present deficiencies in the governance system. The uncertainty is whether the resulting law modifications will help to improve social justice in water services. Moreover, the question of whether the law will be put in practice is pertinent because there are plenty examples in the country where laws are not practiced.
The need to improve regulation in the water sector of the city is nonetheless evident. The SACM needs to have greater supervision on the private companies work to improve the water service particularly for those who suffer most the scarcity of the resource. Furthermore the role of the delegaciones has to be restudied to be more effective in addressing citizens’ needs and improving efficiency. Moreover the participation channels for citizens involvement in water distribution and management is central for social justice.
According to Martha Delgado, the water sector in Mexico City is crumbling. She admits there are people working to improve the situation; but will it be enough to revert the tendency? We need urgent investment, she emphasises (interview with the author, 3/08/04). Yes, investment is needed, but the way this investment is used will be defined by the power struggles within the governance system. Those who suffer the worst service might fight for an improvement, but how well organised they are – and the honesty of their leaders to avoid co-option – will be crucial to success. Indeed, there are other areas that like Iztapalapa suffer water scarcity, but the combativeness and organisation of this delegación has helped it to be at the centre of attention.
The fact that governance systems do change in time is somewhat encouraging, but how the power relations will evolve is difficult to tell. Will the result of the local water law amendments improve the conditions of some of the poorest in the city? If it is the result of an exercise of wide participation of the different actors, including the most vulnerable, it might to certain extent be a more socially just result. But given the present situation this will most probably be a long process of struggle. Some hard decisions – regarding participation, distribution and management – would be necessary to arrive at a more socially just result. This involves changing power balances which is not something that normally happens as the result of good will but of struggle. Hopefully this struggle can be resolved in negotiation and dialog spaces.
As a result of the analysis presented in this work the questions set in the introduction can now be addressed: How far is the water governance system in Mexico City responsible for a socially unjust distribution and management of the resource? How can civil struggle or conflict help to change governance systems to achieve more socially just results?
In relation to the first question, the argument set in this work is that the water governance system in Mexico City is definitely one of the causes for the prevailing socially unjust distribution and management of water. The current water governance system in the city is still dominated by the decisions of local government officials and to some extent of the private sector. The institutional channels for citizens to participate are far from being structured in a way that could guarantee meaningful participation. This is the first way the system becomes socially unjust in that it does not allow people to take part in the decision-making process that affects a central part of their lives. In practice, as it has been clear in the development of this work, the inhabitants of some of the areas that suffer water scarcity are highly involved and participate, not through institutional channels, but through different protest strategies.
The second way the governance system becomes responsible for a socially unjust distribution of water services is manifested in the fact that the decisions of where and how water is distributed is normally to the disadvantage of the most vulnerable, generally using the explanation of financial and technical limitations. The same neighbourhoods simultaneously suffer the worst service regarding availability, reliability and quality and are the ones that end up turning to water vendors paying much higher prices for their water. This has not only a technical or financial explanation, it is a expression of the power relations prevalent in the city, where people of these neighbourhood, particularly their women, find themselves powerless in front of the other actors defining how water services are managed and distributed.
Water scarcity is a constant theme when discussing the sustainability of Mexico City. Yet as discussed in this work, scarcity is suffered unequally. While citizens in Iztapalapa and other delegaciones suffer water unavailability for months, inhabitants of more affluent neighbourhoods have water uninterruptedly year-round. What is more the scarcity is not suffered equally within households, where normally women are responsible for overcoming the lack of water having to invest hours in fetching it.
The second question where the evidence is much less clear can now be addressed. Although it is appreciable that conflict over water, particularly when it brings together considerable number of citizens to contest the authority, can motivate responses in them to somehow resolve the claims, the solutions are commonly ephemeral. Yet this continuous battle with the authorities has, not only in Mexico but in other Latin-American countries, brought significantly improved water services (Bennett, 1995). Now, the question of whether these conflicts have actually changed the governance system to achieve more socially just results is one step further. The fact that the Legislative Assembly of the Federal District (ALDF) has created a Special Commission for the Integral Management of Water shows to some extent recognition of the present deficiencies in the governance system. The uncertainty is whether the resulting law modifications will help to improve social justice in water services. Moreover, the question of whether the law will be put in practice is pertinent because there are plenty examples in the country where laws are not practiced.
The need to improve regulation in the water sector of the city is nonetheless evident. The SACM needs to have greater supervision on the private companies work to improve the water service particularly for those who suffer most the scarcity of the resource. Furthermore the role of the delegaciones has to be restudied to be more effective in addressing citizens’ needs and improving efficiency. Moreover the participation channels for citizens involvement in water distribution and management is central for social justice.
According to Martha Delgado, the water sector in Mexico City is crumbling. She admits there are people working to improve the situation; but will it be enough to revert the tendency? We need urgent investment, she emphasises (interview with the author, 3/08/04). Yes, investment is needed, but the way this investment is used will be defined by the power struggles within the governance system. Those who suffer the worst service might fight for an improvement, but how well organised they are – and the honesty of their leaders to avoid co-option – will be crucial to success. Indeed, there are other areas that like Iztapalapa suffer water scarcity, but the combativeness and organisation of this delegación has helped it to be at the centre of attention.
The fact that governance systems do change in time is somewhat encouraging, but how the power relations will evolve is difficult to tell. Will the result of the local water law amendments improve the conditions of some of the poorest in the city? If it is the result of an exercise of wide participation of the different actors, including the most vulnerable, it might to certain extent be a more socially just result. But given the present situation this will most probably be a long process of struggle. Some hard decisions – regarding participation, distribution and management – would be necessary to arrive at a more socially just result. This involves changing power balances which is not something that normally happens as the result of good will but of struggle. Hopefully this struggle can be resolved in negotiation and dialog spaces.
# posted by Claudia Campero Arena @ 8:49 PM 
Post a Comment