In support of an expansion of the current right to water for domestic uses to also encompass a right to water for food, the five points below trace implications for the state as duty bearer.
1. Statutory water law should respect and protect any water directly used by people to meet their human right to food. Currently, the most widespread statutory law, permit systems, entail the opposite. First, micro-users exempted from the obligation to apply for a permit, are categorically relegated to a status of second-class entitlement. Second, small-scale users, especially women, who are obliged to apply for a permit are discriminated by the administrative structure. The revisions of the permit systems to these ends should be well communicated in local language.
2. The state has the following obligation to fulfil the right to water for domestic uses and food when investing in public infrastructure. The contents of the human right to water should at least be 50 lpcd. This is because a significant proportion of clients of water supplies that were designed for domestic uses only, already use those supplies for productive purposes as well, even at levels that are commonly seen as basic domestic uses (Hall 2013; Van Koppen et al 2009). These productive uses should be respected and protected instead of being declared illegal. Hence, in order to reach the recommendations for absolute minimum for domestic uses of 25 lpcd, higher service levels are needed.
- 3. Irrigation projects should also respect and protect the already existing human right to water for domestic uses, in case such domestic needs are not met as yet otherwise. There is no justification why irrigation professionals can ignore that right. Thus, new irrigation schemes should be designed to also meet the human right to water for domestic uses. In existing schemes, as a minimum, no one should be prohibited to use the scheme for domestic purposes. Instead, such domestic uses should be encouraged and enabled. A minimum volume of 5 lpcd should be safe for drinking and cooking.
4. People’s own investments in infrastructure for water for multiple uses that contribute to meeting the human right to water for domestic uses and for food should be fully respected and protected , also as the starting point of planning any new public water scheme.
5. Future users of a new scheme or a rehabilitation, women and men, should have a strong say in the planning of the scheme that affects their lives, especially in the technology choice.
Barbara Van Koppen