Contribution from the International Planning Committee on Food Sovereignty (IPC) working group on Water:
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this initial process for the HLPE report on water and food security.
Governance, while an important concept and focal point for change, has questionable conceptual origins, and often associated with the international policies and programs of the World Bank. Thus is it important that a definition of what is meant by “governance” is given, a political assessment of what it means in different contexts, and how to conceptualize it within the framework of water distribution of water from the government/state. Water systems, like land and other natural resources must also favor community interests fist and foremost.
It is also important that “governance” and water management for that matter not be restricted to a rural scope, but also include urban areas as access to suitable water for consumption and agriculture is an issue faced by many urban communities and producers. In this light it would also be important to explore best practices/alternative methods for water use and governance in urban areas (as well as rural).
The document outlines that there are clear roles and responsibilities for different actors who participate in the governance and management of water, and the report intends to outline these utilizing a “clear criteria”. However, what will the framework or criteria for “rights and responsibilities” be based on? It is important that these rights and responsibilities are linked to international human rights norms, and civil society supported documents, which discuss the management of resources such as the VGGT, which provide guidance on how these roles should look and how rights of civil society should correspond with state obligations (including local authorities). This analysis should look at the relationship of different actors/forms of management to and component of food sovereignty.
This scoping document touches on many important issues, but privatization seems to be missing as a core issue despite the role that the private sector has played in organizing international water forums and expos, and the increasing rate at which international and national partners in many regions have explored water-related projects. Local administrations and central governments in many areas have failed to manage natural resources efficiently or sustainably, especially water, and many have turned away from traditional support and regulation of service delivery as they turn management over to private interests. This results in a lack of community control over resources, raised user fees and restricted access. It is important that this study critically examines the effects that privatization of water resources has had on a community’s food and nutrition security in both rural and urban areas. This affects not only access to water for agriculture (urban/peri-urban included), but also water for consumption and other components to the food system, such as food handling/sanitation, which are important factors to food and nutrition security.
The document also states that “available evidence and knowledge will be used to critically analyze the impacts of different governance regimes for water management”. However, for some regions/communities with problematic water policies/issues of access, the data and information available is very limited, unreliable or outdated. In these cases, what alternative means of data/information collection will be used?
Another important component to examine is the role of water in situations of occupation and conflict. Guidance on some of these issues can be found in previous CFS/CSM work on protracted crisis, however there are instances of water policy discrimination in some areas that could be explored. An obvious example here is the role that water has played in the Israeli occupation of Palestine and discriminatory policies that govern unequal water allocation in the occupied territories and Gaza.
In addition to what is stated in the document, the vision of building international and public policy around water and food sovereignty should also address the policies and processes around land policy, rural systems and their relationship with the urban context (and vice versa) and the direct impacts that pollution, privatization and appropriation have on the realization of the right to water (and food) within the context of food sovereignty. Spaces such as the World Water Forum, mentioned in the introduction to this paper should also be examined as to whether or not they are real spaces for civil society participation to discuss issues of concern such as relationships of water and food sovereignty, water and rural-urban relations, water and land tenure etc., rather than spaces that serve private interests.
International Planning Committee on Food Sovereignty (IPC) working group on WaterEmily Mattheisen