Human Rights Council resolution 7/22 expresses deep concern “that over one billion people lack access to safe drinking water and that 2.6 billion lack access to safe sanitation.” Having access to safe drinking and sanitation is central to living a life in dignity and upholding human rights. The mandate of the Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation was established to examine these crucial issues from a human rights perspective and provide recommendations to the Human Rights Council, and other actors. 

Ms. Catarina de Albuquerque was appointed as Independent Expert in September 2008, and began her work on the mandate in November 2008. As Independent Expert, she is called upon to undertake specific tasks: 

• Firstly, on developing a dialogue with Governments, the relevant United Nations bodies, the private sector, local authorities, national human rights institutions, civil society organizations and academic institutions, to identify, promote and exchange views on best practices related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation, and, in that regard, to prepare a compendium of best practices;
•  Secondly, on advancing the work by undertaking a study, in cooperation with and reflecting the views of all the stakeholders, on the further clarification of the content of human rights obligations, including non-discrimination obligations, in relation to access to safe drinking water and sanitation;
• Thirdly, on making recommendations that could help the realization of the Millennium Development Goals, in particular of Goal 7.

In 2010, the Independent Expert is preparing a report on the  compatibility  between the human right to water and the involvement of private sector in water and sanitation services.

As a major actor, SUEZ ENVIRONNEMENT takes part in this debate. Its submission to Ms. Catarina de Albuquerque has been posted on the UN website. In accordance with Aquafed, SUEZ ENVIRONNEMENT reaffirms that private operators contribute to make the right to water and sanitation effective :

• Letter of Bernard Guirkinger, Senior Executive Vice President, in charge of water business
• Contribution to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) submitted in April 2007
• Contribution of United Water
• Contributions of Aquafed

For more information

Visit the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)  website

Evaluating the Forum just a few days after its close is no easy feat, given the over 100 sessions and as many side events held… Before the members of the delegation each begin to focus on their respective field and concrete cases, and use information and exchanges from the Forum to enhance the analysis and approach of their teams, we have asked each of them to indicate the highlights of the Forum.

We have selected six:

1.    Participants spoke much more about resources than services: A sign of the times and of the greater awareness about the impact of global warming on water and the water stress already affecting certain regions of the world. For the first time, the issues at stake for water were approached in the same manner as those of climate and energy, with a particular emphasis put on our "water footprint" – a concept to use with caution. At times, there was a tendency to take an overly "macro" approach to the quantitative issues, and the degree to which the protection of resource quality is analysed remains insufficient, despite the fact that quality is equally important.

• For information on the state of the resource, see the 3rd report of World Water Assessment Programme: www.unesco.org/water/wwap.
• An indicator proposed by Plan Bleu (PNUE): "If a country consumes more than 75% of its renewable water resources, it is in difficulty. Certain countries are already above 75% and the proportion will increase between now and 2025 ".

2.    The need to better link issues in Water and Energy. In a "water for energy" approach, discussions on energy choices should include factors such as the volumes of water required for withdrawal, refining, setting-up infrastructures and operating them on a daily basis. The water lost in industrial processes and the water required for the use of each energy must be quantified – first-generation biofuels are again on the hot seat. However, we also require "energy for water" – the need to rethink infrastructures and services in order to reduce their energy consumption and emissions.
Biofuels and hydropower form the crucial links in this interdependence, and the debate on the subject remains intense but it is no longer purely ideological.

• The WWF has taken the following position on hydropower:  "We are committed to sustainable development of hydropower”
• A quote from Henrik Larsen of the Danish Hydraulic Institute concerns us directly: "The water sector should think more about its energy consumption"
• A figure quoted by Koichiro Matsuura, UNESCO Director-General: "The cost of adapting water infrastructures to climate change is estimated at $11 billion, 85% of which is in cities in developing countries."

3.    Wastewater finally front and centre: The taboos have been broken and participants spoke freely about the "hidden side of water", in particular by tying the issue of toilets to that of human dignity. For the first time, meaningful discussions were held about wastewater collection and treatment infrastructures, crucial to the protection of health and the environment in urban areas, and about the recovery of the organic matter (particularly as green energy). We also noted a strong presence of issue of gender in the discussions on wastewater and the need to better adapt solutions to local geographical and cultural conditions. Lastly, the re-use of treated wastewater still appears to be one of the sustainable solutions (part of the solution) to water stress and usage conflicts.  

4.    The concept of participation-consensus is no longer "Nice to have", but is now a "must-have" for the sustainable management of water resources and services:  When confronting issues related to development and the environment, a precise understanding of local needs and the ability to provide services tailored to these needs are two key factors for success. This involves professionalisation, development of information, participation and consensus methods, as well as better coordination of all the stakeholders in the region (in order to coordinate the sustainable development strategies of organisations, for example)

• One phrase from the 3rd WWAP report: "Think outside the water box!"

5.    A more closely shared vision of the economic issues involved in water:
The consensus on sustainable cost recovery continues to grow. First set forth in Kyoto, this principle is now better understood. It is based on the observation that in emerging countries, the user alone cannot support both the costs of investments and services; local subsidies and international aid are required to finance the investments.

• A new expression: "the 3 Ts: Tariff, Taxes and Transfers" introduced in the OECD report "Managing Water for All: an OECD Perspective and Pricing and Financing" has improved understanding of "sustainable cost recovery".

The claim to free drinking water as a consequence of the right to water has disappeared – this argument is no longer supported by anyone.

6.    and lastly… The financial crisis: risk and/or opportunity for water and wastewater networks?
We must pass on the concerns of the stakeholders in development, who fear a reduction in government aid for development in the months and years to come. It is interesting to note on this topic that "sustainable cost recovery" as described in the OECD report puts forward the "foreseeability of the transfer of aid" as a condition of success. Speakers also emphasised the fact that the crisis has already had an impact on services: improvement works have been pushed back and self-financing ability has decreased, in particular. At the same time, the water community is pinning its hopes on a greater place for water and wastewater infrastructure projects in economic stimulus plans. The goal is to seize this opportunity to reform the water sector and set up a sustainable solution combining better governance procedures, management, operation and environmental protection.

• A quote from Angel Gurria, Secretary-General of the OECD: "Important investments (in infrastructure) must be made during normal times. Today, during an extremely difficult period, yes, there is a risk, but our hopes rest on these extraordinary plans (…) Look at the contents of the Obama plan, look at the contents of the Chinese plan."

Attendance was massive and international at the session for local representatives on Wednesday, March 18th in the evening and Thursday, March 19th, and that is one of the best news items from this Forum. Among participants, a large proportion of mayors but also elected officials of other levels, governors of provinces, regional elected officials from Ecuador, Korea, the United States… and deeply committed French local councillors, with particular regard to the issue of decentralised co-operation, made a tangible contribution to help raise the level of policy discussions on the issue of water at the local political level.

 At the session, SUEZ ENVIRONNEMENT introduced a tool designed to present a panorama of the methods of water governance around the world (produced in partnership with UCLG (United Cities and Local Governments), the largest global association of local councillors chaired by Bertrand Delanoë, one of whose co-chairs is Kadir Topbas, the mayor of Istanbul.

Governance is the critical factor of success, even more so than the question of resources, and we hope that research will be expanded to further study and compare the various existing methods of regulation and participation.

The publication is also designed to provide factual information on the terminology as well as the distribution of the various functions and responsibilities between the players involved in the field. It also provides a panorama on management methods around the world and insight about the various solutions for covering costs.

Session of March 18th, together with the local branches of the UCLG, allowed us to identify the local events to come during which this tool could be presented and discussed, such as the General Assembly of the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR) in Malmö next month.

For more information:

• Read the article on the "Role of Local Governments in water supply and sanitation" brochure
• Visit the UCLG website
• View the interactive version of the "Role of Local Governments in water supply and sanitation" brochure

As in every World Forum, the question of the price of water is on the agenda of the Forum in Istanbul.

It has been repeated that water in its natural state is priceless, but that access to drinking water has a cost, corresponding to its treatment and its distribution. The stages involved in pumping, treating, transporting, collecting, and purifying water require investments to build and renew facilities (supply networks, production plants etc.) and also generate operating costs (maintenance, personnel, power to run the equipment, water analyses and so on) no matter who operates the service.

The operator can make suggestions on the various rate options, but the price of water is always defined by the local authorities, according to their social and/or environmental objectives. 

Pricing is decisive in order to:

• Guarantee effective implementation of the right to water

Recognising the right to drinking water does not mean that it must be free. Treating and distributing water has a cost which, if it is not covered by the rates paid by users or public subsidies, results in the degradation of the infrastructures and water resources. Implementing the right to water may require a social pricing system, which limits the costs related to water in the expenses of more modest households. 

Many countries have adopted a graded pricing policy based on consumption brackets, by setting a price lower than the real cost for the first cubic meters of water consumed per month (in general from 6 to 10 m3) and by increasing the rate for higher consumption brackets. Certain studies have pointed out the limits of this system, in particular because small consumers are not necessarily the most modest and large-scale consumers sometimes tend to seek alternative solutions (such as drilling boreholes to withdraw subsoil water) in the event of a surcharge they find too expensive. 

Instead of using pricing, certain countries have set up grants to help the poorer households pay their rates, based on in-depth socio-economic studies used to define objective and appropriate eligibility criteria. These mechanisms prove to be socially more effective because they are better targeted.

The cost of connection to the network for the user is often forgotten in pricing discussions. It can, however, represent a significant cost for the poorer households: subsidising connections has more impact on the access to services than graded pricing policy based on increasing consumption brackets. It is one of the key principles of the new model of intervention on which SUEZ ENVIRONMENT works with its stakeholders.

• Preserve water resources

The price of water can be set in order to encourage the sustainable management of water and to avoid wastage, by penalising large-scale consumers or by rewarding those who use it moderately. To do so, thought must be given to the scale of the catchment area and all users must be taken into account. Priority must be given to seeking measures to rationalise the use of water in agriculture, which is generally the leading sector in terms of water consumption. 
While the operator can provide advice on the various pricing options, the price of water is always defined by the local authorities, who may or may not choose to include various taxes and duties in the cost, according to their social or environmental objectives. 

Fore more information:  

• Water, Electricity and the Poor – Who benefits from Utility Subsidies? (Komives, Foster, Halpern and Wodon – The World Bank, 2005)
• Economic issues in the provisioning of Water and Environmental Services: Guiding Principles of Pricing Policy (Ramesh Bhatia, 2005)
• The Political Economy of Water Pricing Reforms. (Ed. Ariel Dinar, the World Bank)
• Water Prices in CEE and CIS Countries: A Toolkit for Assessing Willingness to Pay, Affordability and Political Acceptability. Danish Cooperation for the Environment in Eastern Europe

Jacques Labre is Vice President for Relations with Institutions of SUEZ ENVIRONNEMENT.

In this interview, he speaks about the "water footprint", an indicator which seeks to measure the total impact of an activity on water resources. He also mentions the interest of a variant of the water footprint, designed to measure the environmental impact of local services.

For more information:

Water footprint: a tool to protect water resources?

More information about Jacques Labre

In a fast-changing world, whether in ecological, economic or social terms, we come to the 5th World Water Forum with the firm intention to help define new growth models that need to be invented collectively. With this aim in mind, we are taking part in the Istanbul Forum in order to discuss 3 issues which we consider to be priority:

1/ Changing our business lines in order to adapt them to global changes and local needs.

Empathy, dialogue and consensus have enabled us to learn from our past experiences, to isolate the key ideas, and propose new models of intervention, based on a more open vision of water governance. In particular at the Forum we shall be presenting the new forms of intervention we have developed as part our contracts or our patronage policy, as well as the principles of social engineering used to govern those interventions. In Istanbul, we should like to begin the debate with the conditions, in particular legal and financial, for scaling up certain pilot experiments we have initiated since the 4th World Water Forum in Mexico City, in conjunction with our stakeholders.

2/ Research and innovation to serve new sustainable models

Gradually, we must integrate new requirements for sustainable development into our business lines, from controlling emissions to safeguarding natural resources, biodiversity and landscapes. This requires, for example, reconsidering of the economic models developed during a period when increasing drinking water consumption was thought to be in our collective interest. In concrete terms, this has resulted in the reorientation of our research and innovation network, and in new business offers such as Edelway. It has also resulted in an on-going analysis of the eco-environmental performance of the technologies we propose to our customers, depending on the local context. During the Istanbul Forum, in particular we wish to draw the attention of the international water community to the need for making carbon footprint a relevant criterion for selecting technical and managerial options in the services available.

3/ The place of wastewater treatment

Against a background of increasing urban development, we wish to resituate wastewater treatment as a central priority among the health and environmental issues for cities.
Based on our experience of cities such as Amman, Milan, Indianapolis or San Luis Potosi in Mexico, we want to show that over and above health and environmental requirements, investing in wastewater services is also a vector for economic and human development. We hope that the Forum will help promote the idea that wastewater is valuable. Reprocessing is an absolute necessity in order to guarantee sustainable access to drinking water for all, and means of recycling must be sought wherever water stress occurs.
 

For further information, please visit:

• Redefining our business lines in order to adapt to local needs and global changes
• Research and innovation to serve new sustainable models
• Faced with the challenge of urban development, making wastewater treatment a crucial health and environment issue in cities