The Watering Hole: LAST DAYS of THE WORLD WATER FORUM

« Article on the action in Mexico City posted on Upside Down World | Main | In advance of Blue October »

March 24, 2006

LAST DAYS of THE WORLD WATER FORUM

The last days of the official forum were a whirlwind, and I’ve been unable to post. I’ll try to give a brief summary – admittedly incomplete – of my experience of the forum’s conclusion….In trying to sum up, it will be difficult not to go on at length...so I beg forgiveness in advance for stuffing your mailboxes with, as they say in Mexico, "mucho bla bla bla."

By the end of the World Water Forum – World Water Day, March 22 -- many of the Mexican newspapers had published articles recognizing that it was, overall, a top-heavy event where a lot of money was spent and little was achieved. And many participants seemed to agree. Meanwhile, behind closed doors, Ministers of Water, Energy and Environment from 78 countries, and 68 other Ministerial delegations, negotiated the final Ministerial Declaration of the Forum. Rather than achieving “consensus” on the declaration, however, several Ministers -- most notably Abel Mamani, Water Minister of Bolivia – demanded changes or additions to the document. By the closing ceremony of the WWF no agreement had been reached, though a bland and noncommittal document was agreed upon soon after.

The final declaration commits governments to prioritize water and sanitation as aspects of sustainable development; to continue efforts to reach the millennium development goals of cutting in half the number of people without water and sanitation services by 2015; and to commit funds to reducing risks from water-related natural disasters, among other commitments that do little, if anything, to recognize a need for a different approach to the water issue. Recognizing the bland nature of the document, the Ministries of Bolivia and Venezuela lobbied hard to add an addendum – in the Venezuelan Minister’s words, “to add a little salt to a tasteless soup.” Several other governments – Cuba, Uruguay, Brazil, Angola and Argentina have agreed, or nearly agreed, with the contents of the addendum – and at the end of the forum, the sense behind the scenes was that the discussion was more open than closed.

THE BOLIVIAN ADDENDUM, and some thoughts on the alternative forum....

Below is the content of the addendum promoted by Bolivia and Venezuela. When asked why they saw a need to draft this addendum, Ernesto Paeva, the head of the Venezuelan delegation, said “It was not possible to have an open discussion about the issues that we see as important, and for this reason we have drafted a complementary document that we believe reflects the true interests of the people of the world.”

Asked if many governments disagreed with the addendum, and if their intervention had caused a severe disruption of the declaration process, Abel Mamani said: “Unfortunately in these processes, protocol often comes before real discussion of the issues. It is not that other governments do not agree with our point of view – it is that they believ in the importance of protocol. As you know, I do not come from the political class, but from the social movements – therefore I have little regard for protocol.”

He continued, “Our intention has not been to sabotage consensus. But consensus in our understanding is the complete agreement between 140 countries involved in the process – and we are not in complete agreement.”

So, without further ado, here is the addendum to the Declaration of the 4th World Water Forum:

COMPLEMENTARY DECLARATION OF THE FOURTH WORLD WATER FORUM

The Ministers or their representatives herein signing at the Fourth World Water Forum, declare before the participants of this Forum, the international community and the people of the world, the following:

Access to water with quality, quantity and equity, constitutes a fundamental human right. The States, with the participation of the communities, shall make efforts at all levels to guarantee this right to their citizens, within their respective countries. Thus, we agree to continue making all efforts within the Commission on Sustainable Development of the United Nations and other international fora according to their mandates, to recognize and make this right effective.

We declare our profound concern regarding the possible negative impacts that international instruments -- such as the free trade and investment agreements -- can have on water resources, and reaffirm the sovereign right of every country to regulate water and all its uses and services.

We exhort the international community and multilateral entities to comply with the commitments repeatedly made to support efforts of countries guarantee access to water and sewage treatment.

We call on all States to develop the World Water Forum in the framework of the international multilateral system, based on the principles of full participation and inclusion.

Mexico City, March 22, 2006

Signed at the meeting by Bolivia, Venezuela, Cuba and Uruguay. (Other States might sign later)

Abel Mamani, Water Minsiter of Bolivia, with Ernesto Paeva, Vice-Minister of Environment of Venezuela

THE INTERNATIONAL DAYS IN DEFENSE OF WATER

In contrast to the official forum, the alternative forum concluded with a great deal of agreement among the participants. The central points that will lead to continued action in the water movement are:
-- Water is a fundamental human right, and not a commercial good.
-- Water out of the WTO and WTO out of water.
-- Rejection of the authority of the World Water Council and World Water Forum.

In addition to the basics, many subtle points were brought up in public meetings that, many feel, have helped to sharpen the analysis of the water movement. For example, in the last few years the alternative to water privatization has been made out to be “public management of water services.” But several participants, most notably the Uruguayan delegation who were, in their own words “the spinal column of Uruguay’s movement to build a constitutional approach to water as a human right” insisted that the term “public control” leaves too much up to states that may be corporate, corrupt, and anti-democratic. The emphasis, agreed on the final declaration, is now on water management that is “public, social, community controlled and participatory.”

The overall experience of the alternative forum was empowering and forward looking, especially in the fact that the forum was very much led by social movements and the ngo’s that work with them. (In my personal experience, it felt very much like a People’s Health Movement event, where activists from all levels of civil society manage to participate equally). If I have one criticism of the alternative events, it would be the lack of practical, hands-on skills-building. There was much radical talk of participatory management, clear analysis of the problems and sharing of information between movements in many countries. But insisting on community controlled water management means building both technical and social skills, and I would hope that future for a would make room for workshops on home water treatment, ecological sanitation, graywater management, water conserving agriculture and other small-scale community-controlled methods….

In the official forum, to my knowledge, there were exactly two (amongst 2000) stands promoting these kinds of technologies. One was an ecological sanitation stand, supported by the Swedish government and Mexican ngo’s, and the other was a display sponsored by the Dutch government of simple ceramic water filters, low-tech rope pumps, hand-operated well-drilling equipment, and that sort of thing. (All of these technologies are described in the Hesperian Foundation publications Water for Life and Sanitation and Cleanliness for a Health Environment.) At the Dutch Pavilion, accompanied by the Dutch appropriate technology promoter Practica Foundation, I met and spoke at length with Allen Fajardo, one of the leading promoters of appropriate technology (AT) in rural Nicaragua.

Here are some of his commentaries about the World Water Forum and the role of AT in water development:

“One of the great debates in the forum is that some think the millennium development goals (MDG’s) are very ambitious, while others say they are insufficient. To those pessimists who say that the goals are too ambitious, those of us working in AT say that it is not that the MDG’s are too ambitious but that there is a lack of political will. If there were political will of all governments to improve health and services, it could be done. And if we were to be less ambitious, and choose simply one of the MDG’s – the one for water – this would help us to achieve all the others.

“Another problem is that of administration. If we had good administration, we would give more emphasis to appropriate, small-scale solutions promoted by communities, and this would in turn create more democracy.”

“This is to say that, yes, the problem is political, because it has to do with power. Because people have no power, they have no water.”

“Appropriate technology has a democratic affect, because it empowers people, and when the people are empowered, they resolve their own problems. Take for example, rainwater harvesting – rainwater cannot be collected in one central place and then distributed to people. It is decentralized by its nature. Also the Nicaraguan rope pump [a simple pump made of rope, rubber gaskets, and pvc pipe that can be used to raise water in nearly any setting, and which is in wide use in Central America]. If we have millions of people using rope pumps, we have millions of people protecting the aquifers – which means reforesting, which means protecting water catchments, which means ensuring that water goes back into the ground. In taking water, by hand, from the insides of the earth, the people are personally taking something from the earth, and this gives them the consciousness to also give back to the earth. In contrast to large systems of pipes and water storage, this gives people a direct relation with the water and with the earth. This doesn’t mean we are against large systems in cities and elsewhere where they are necessary, just to say they should be augmented by small scale systems that work towards developing democracy and ecological consciousness….”

“We want potable water for everyone. But we have to be careful that our politics do not become potable, if you know what I mean. Potable water is colorless, odorless, and tasteless. But we need to recognize that the problem of water has color – the color of politics. It has flavor – the flavor of our cultures. And too often it has a smell – the smell of corruption.”

With that, Allan, a hefty man with many years working with social movements and NGO’s in revolutionary Nicaragua and after -- erupted into a fit of laughter. I said that he was confirming for me what they say – that all Nicaraguans are poets. He answered, “In Nicaragua we have a saying: el que no es poeta as hijo de poeta.” ("He who is not a poet is a son of a poet," but it takes on a different meaning in the Spanish, ha ha ha...)

Henk Holtslag of Practica Foundation, Netherlands, Arno Rosemarin of Stockholm Environment Institute, Sweden, and Allan Fajardo, promoter of appropriate technologies in Nicaragua, discussing the fine points of the Nicaraguan rope pump.

Okay, I’ve gone on way too long. In closing, an interview with Patrick Apoya, who participated in both the official forum and the alternative forum. Patrick, who I know through work at Hesperian, is a leader of Ghana’s Anti-Privatization Forum and head of the Ghanain NGO Community Partnership for Health and Development:

“There has been a vast difference between the two forums. The official forum is supposed to be a place where stakeholders, technocrats, and policy makers address different problems together. But I think this objective has been defeated. I would like to see a platform where community people are brought together with academics and governments. I don’t see that platform. The academics are locked in their rooms, the governments are locked in their rooms, and the community people are not invited.

“Most of the World Water Forum has been about things – what we have invented, what we can sell – rather than about actions – what we can do together. This is not right. It is a marketplace not for ideas, but for products. Everything I see is just like a trade fair.

Patrick Apoya of Ghana in the clean, well-lighted press center of the World Water Forum

“If you compare this to the alternative forum, you see every single continent, every single sub-region, and everybody talking together. It is not three people talking here and five people talking there, but everybody talking together. And they are talking about substantive issues – very big issues. This is how the official forum should be, but it is not. I will not be surprised if, in some years, the official forum becomes obsolete and everyone is coming to the alternative forum…”

I may be able to post some links to important issues that came out of the alternative forum in the week to come, as well as an English translation of the people's Declaration when it's done. But for now, no more dispatches.... In closing, a series of photos of people and scenes from these ten days in Mexico:

A view of the tired crowd, last day of the alternative forum