Right to water in the context of "Hydraulic empire"

Play Trivia Questions online!

or

Skip to study material about Right to water in the context of "Hydraulic empire"





👉 Right to water in the context of Hydraulic empire

A hydraulic empire, also known as a hydraulic despotism, hydraulic society, hydraulic civilization, or water monopoly empire, is a social or government structure which maintains power through control over water. It arises through an ecological need for flood control and irrigation, which requires central coordination and a specialized bureaucracy. The term was promoted by Karl August Wittfogel's book Oriental Despotism: A Comparative Study of Total Power (1957).

Often associated with these terms and concepts is the notion of a water dynasty. This body is a political structure which is commonly characterized by a system of hierarchy and control often based on class or caste. Power, both over resources (food, water, energy) and a means of enforcement such as the military, is vital for the maintenance of control.

↓ Explore More Topics
In this Dossier

Right to water in the context of Water privatization

Water privatization is short for private sector participations in the provision of water services and sanitation. Water privatization has a variable history in which its popularity and favorability has fluctuated in the market and politics. One of the common forms of privatization is public–private partnerships (PPPs). PPPs allow for a mix between public and private ownership and/or management of water and sanitation sources and infrastructure. Privatization, as proponents argue, may not only increase efficiency and service quality but also increase fiscal benefits. There are different forms of regulation in place for current privatization systems.

Private sector participation in water supply and sanitation is controversial. Proponents of private sector participation argue that it has led to improvements in the efficiency and service quality of utilities. It is argued that it has increased investment and has contributed to expanded access. They cite Manila, Guayaquil in Ecuador, Bucharest, several cities in Colombia and Morocco, as well as CĂ´te d'Ivoire and Senegal as success stories. Critics, however, contend that private sector participation led to tariff increases, and privatized water systems are incompatible with ensuring the international human right to water, with the belief that public water will no longer be public. Aborted privatizations in Cochabamba, Bolivia, and Dar es-Salaam, Tanzania, as well as privately managed water systems in Jakarta and Berlin, are highlighted as failures. In 2019, Austria forbade the privatization of water provision via its constitution. Water privatization in Buenos Aires, Argentina and in England are cited by both supporters and opponents, each emphasizing different aspects of these cases.

↑ Return to Menu