60x36 Poster Template

1
Water Reform as a Vehicle for Social
Transformation A Comparative Multidisciplinary
Analysis1 LaDawn Haglund School of Justice and
Social Inquiry
Expected Contributions
Competing ideological frameworks influencing
water reform
Though The Dublin Principles might be viewed as
part of an integrated water policy, they reflect
at least 3 divergent ideological perspectives
This study examines the construction of
institutional and human capacities, public
accountability, and sustainability accompanying
water sector reform, as well as the justice
implications of such transformations. Given the
contentiousness of debates regarding conceptions
of water (as an ecological resources, a human
right, or an economic good), the lack of clarity
regarding the desirability or efficacy of
different reform types, and the urgency of better
managing this precious resource, this study is
especially timely. It will expand the literature
on social and economic rights in the public
sector, test propositions regarding mechanisms
and processes through with social transformations
occur, and offer practicable, democratic, and
sustainable alternatives for policy.

• water as an endangered resource (reflected in
  Dublin Principle 1)
• water as a social or public good, or more
  recently a human right (reflected in Principles 2
  and 3),
• water as an economic good (reflected in
  Principle 4)

Policies resulting from these perspectives are at
times controversial or even contradictory, and
they lead to distinct social transformations.
Brazil
Despite having 14 of the worlds freshwater,
close to nine million families in Brazil lack
drinkable water, and nearly 70 of hospital
visits are related to water-borne diseases. The
divide between rich and poor is stark. Wealthy
Previous work
My empirical research is fundamentally concerned
with understanding global poverty and inequality,
resource distribution, structural power, and
justice. It shows that 25 years of market-led
development not only failed significantly to
improve public services in developing countries,
but also undermined democratic institutions and
processes, undercut inclusive social policy,
reproduced authoritarian power relations, and
suppressed alternatives made possible by a
multilateral focus on economic and social rights.
Project Goals
Hypotheses regarding social transformation1
This project examines processes and consequences
of water reforms in developing countries, i.e.,
their impact on public institutions, social
relations, and political inclusion. The objective
is to explore the dynamic
Though water policy objectives may be similar
among countries, other requirements such as
state capacity, autonomy, and accountability to
the population are indispensable to their
realization.
residents with pools and jacuzzis exist
side-by-side with slum-dwellers, who lack running
water or sanitation. Reform efforts have been
geared to alleviating these conditions for social
conflict.

• relationships among
• three general types of water reforms state-led,
  centralized approaches private sector-led
  reforms and decentralization
• changes in the human, institutional, and
  financial capacity of state and sectoral
  institutions and
• broader transformations of political and social
  relations, with a focus on democratization and
  inclusion of marginalized populations.

• Water reform outcomes depend on these preexisting
  contexts. But we hypothesize that reforms have
  varied transformative possibilities.
• Centralized state reform can improve management
  and coordination coherence, but will have
  difficulties if institutional deficits and power
  structures are not addressed, and may face
  challenges from local groups unless communities
  are included in reform processes.
• Private sector reform can promote financial or
  technical capacity, and may weaken elite control.
  But use of government funds for private projects
  undermines the financial contribution, state
  firms may also be quite competent, and ruling
  elites that are also economic elites may use
  privatization to legitimize their monopoly over
  public resources. Privatization may also
  undermine functioning state structures, erode
  accountability, or transfer profits from social
  to private ends.
• Community-led decentralization can draw on
  contextual knowledge to respond to local
  realities and promote citizens rights to decide
  how resources are allocated/managed. It may
  impede conservation and planning, regulatory
  coherence, and user coordination.
  Decentralization will have difficulty where
  states lacks capacity and accountability.

All of this has increased political
disenchantment and conflict. The theoretical
argument is unique in incorporating
sustainability, human rights, and social justice
in an interdisciplinary public goods framework.