View previous stories
	Corruption in water sector increases hunger risk by Julie Mollins TrustLaw Sweden   Aug 2012   Stamping out corruption in the water sector is crucial to boosting global food production as world population growth increases pressure on water supplies, according to experts meeting at World Water Week in Stockholm.   Corruption in the water sector is already a major problem for farmers and it’s likely to get worse as competition for water increases, a joint statement released by the Water Integrity Network (WIN), Transparency International and the U.N. Development Programme (UNDP) Water Governance Facility at the Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI) said.   Governments, businesses and civil society must work together to improve transparency in the water sector, and introduce better checks and balances to counter corruption and nepotism, the statement said.   “It''s about raising awareness, pushing and talking about it - that makes a difference” WIN research coordinator Binayak Das told TrustLaw.   “This creates a sense of accountability – if the information is out there it''s difficult to be more corrupt.”   Decisions about projects affecting water supplies should be made open to the public, and government agencies and private entities should not abuse their power, the statement said.   Already, more than two-thirds of freshwater is used for agriculture and biofuels - and food demand is predicted to double by 2030 as the global population grows and diets change, the joint statement said, citing U.N. data.   Corruption occurs throughout the food production process, Hakan Tropp, director of UNDP’s Water Governance Facility, said.   Defeating corruption in the water sector is critical in helping reduce hunger, Tropp told TrustLaw.   “It''s not a silver bullet, but if we can resolve these water integrity issues it can go a long way to increasing food security,” he said.   Corruption is one factor driving small-scale farmers to leave their land and move to the cities, Tropp said.   Bribery is often used to get permits for water and land title deeds in what is often a complicated and lengthy process. "These are things that are being exploited by certain groups leading to land evictions. If you don''t have access to land you don''t have access to water. If you have unstable access to land and water it is very difficult to be a farmer,” he said.   Although he has seen some improvements in the way authorities regulate water systems, “it''s more difficult to say exactly how this will impact on corrupt practises itself”, Tropp said.   “When it comes to the water and food challenge it''s critical to look at the actual availability of water and how water is being managed,” he added. Visit the related web page
	Privatization has been a public policy failure in Sub-Saharan Africa by United Nations Development Programme   This policy research brief draws on the findings of a UNDP-supported book, Privatization and Alternative Public Sector Reform in Sub-Saharan Africa, to analyse the effects of privatisation on the delivery of water and electricity. Its chief conclusion. Privatisation has been a widespread failure.   This has hampered progress on the MDGs for both water and sanitation, and on many other MDGs dependent on energy.   Privatisation has failed on several counts. Contrary to expectations, private investors have shied away from investing in such utilities in the region. So it has been costly for governments to motivate them to invest. Moreover, the focus of investors on cost recovery has not promoted social objectives, such as reducing poverty and promoting equity.   Thus, current realities dictate refocusing on building up the capacity of the public sector. It continues to dominate the provision of water and electricity, and will do so for the foreseeable future. But a dramatic scaling up of both external and domestic resources will be needed to finance more extensive public investment in these sectors.   This approach is consistent with the current priority of adopting more ambitious MDG-based development strategies in the region.   The Push for Privatisation   When countries in sub-Saharan Africa became independent, the state dominated the provision of utilities. However, in the 1980s the debt crisis and the ensuing contraction of budgets prompted a re-appraisal of public sector provision. Donors began lobbying for the restructuring of public services; by the 1990s, they were demanding full-scale privatisation. However, implementation of such reforms has been slow. One of the chief reasons: lack of interest from private investors. After an initial surge, the pace of privatisation slowed markedly.   Between 1990 and 2003, less than four per cent of global private investment in infrastructure went to sub-Saharan Africa. Thus, many governments have had to re-align their expectations. They now focus on creating the right conditions for private investors, having put full-scale privatisation on the back-burner.   This approach also involves resorting to short-term management contracts with private firms as an interim measure.   The initial hopes for privatisation were so high that donor spending on infrastructure fell in the expectation that the private sector would take up the slack.   For example, World Bank lending for infrastructure investment declined by 50 per cent during 1993-2002— with much of this directed towards preparing firms for privatisation. In 2002, Bank lending for water and sanitation projects, in particular, was only 25 per cent of its annual average during 1993-97.   At the same time, the World Bank increased its support for private investment in utilities through its International Finance Corporation and its Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency. While Bank lending to public electricity utilities dropped from about US$ 2.9 billion in 1990 to only US$ 824 million in 2001, its sector lending to private investors rose from US$ 45 million to US$ 687 million.   Hence, African countries have been caught in a terrible bind. Not only has donor financing of public investment declined but also private investment has followed suit. Moreover, many governments have had to adopt fiscal austerity programmes, which have led to further declines in domestic public investment in utilities. Visit the related web page
	View more stories