Popular in Social Sciences

Banks and Policy Organisations

Macroeconomic modelling of CBDC: a critical review

European Central Bank Ulrich Bindseil

Social Identities and Divisions

A new explanation of antisemitism: Jew hatred as a civilisational phenomenon

Boston University Liah Greenfeld

Banks and Policy Organisations

Financing Private Credit

Federal Reserve Bank of New York Nina Boyarchenko

Economics

Failing Banks

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Emil Verner

Culture and Society

The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place

New York University Harvey Moltoch

American Politics

Keeping the Republic

Boston College Marc Landy

British Politics

Entrepreneurial thinking: the politics and practice of policy impact

University of Sheffield Matthew Flinders

Substantive democracy in the politics, management, and access to basic sanitation services

View more insights in Social Sciences - Sociology

View more figures from Newcastle University

View the page of Esteban Castro

Read the Study

Next in Social Sciences

Is There Really a Dictator’s Dilemma? Information and Repression in Autocracy

Scott Gehlbach | University of Chicago

The US-China Trade War and Global Reallocations

Penny Goldberg | Yale University

Esteban Castro suggests public sanitation services is an indicator of the democratization process of societies.

Image courtesy of interviewee. March 26, 2024

Log-in or Sign-up to Faculti
Currently viewing this subject insight as a guest. You have insight(s) remaining for this month. Login to view 8000+ figures on the platform.

Generating Workspace...

Export as PDF

This video video discusses the interplay between democracy and access to essential services such as water and sanitation, emphasizing that these issues are not just technical or financial, but fundamentally democratic. The speaker references a paper they wrote upon invitation from a Brazilian journal, aiming to contribute to discussions about these topics, which are prevalent in both Brazil and globally.

The speaker indicates that a significant body of literature exists but often focuses on failures rather than democratic engagement. They note that despite technological advancements, many people, including those in developed countries, still lack access to safe water, highlighting that the problem is not merely one of resources, but one of political will and decision-making.

By tracing historical examples, including the privatization of water services in countries like Chile and the failures of the 1990s, the speaker argues that governments must prioritize public provision of water services over privatization, which has often led to deterioration in quality and access.

They emphasize that water and sanitation should be seen as fundamental rights tied to citizenship, requiring democratic control and accountability. This video video warns against relying on private sector solutions, noting that these have historically failed to address the needs of the poor.

The speaker concludes by urging a recommitment to democratic ideals, stressing that access to water and sanitation is integral to democracy and should be prioritized to ensure equality and justice in society. They advocate for a renewed focus on democratic governance, suggesting that without it, efforts to address these critical issues will likely continue to fail.

Language:

Export as PDF

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP=LOCAL:00:00:00.000,MPEGTS:90000

1
00:00:00.355 --> 00:00:02.485
Well, the context I think is important

2
00:00:02.705 --> 00:00:04.405
to say something about the context.

3
00:00:05.645 --> 00:00:09.645
I have written papers and books before,

4
00:00:10.545 --> 00:00:14.445
but this particular paper was by invitation

5
00:00:15.655 --> 00:00:20.415
from a journal in Brazil asking me to contribute

6
00:00:20.515 --> 00:00:21.575
to a local debate.

7
00:00:22.325 --> 00:00:26.725
Very difficult to illuminate the the debate

8
00:00:26.725 --> 00:00:30.915
because they felt that there was a problem that I know it's,

9
00:00:30.985 --> 00:00:32.355
it's not just in Brazil.

10
00:00:32.925 --> 00:00:37.395
So that's the context. So of course there is a large

11
00:00:37.915 --> 00:00:41.395
literature on the top, a very large literature.

12
00:00:42.575 --> 00:00:45.905
Four or five years ago, I made a search on this,

13
00:00:45.925 --> 00:00:50.875
on this topic and I selected 550

14
00:00:51.145 --> 00:00:54.755
more or less articles out of thousands.

15
00:00:56.535 --> 00:00:57.915
So it is amazing.

16
00:00:59.025 --> 00:01:03.485
So what I have in in that small article is

17
00:01:03.485 --> 00:01:04.725
to highlight some issues

18
00:01:05.785 --> 00:01:08.845
and of course there is a list of references to part

19
00:01:08.845 --> 00:01:11.325
of the literature, which I think is important.

20
00:01:11.795 --> 00:01:16.685
It's nothing new, actually very old and it still persists

21
00:01:16.825 --> 00:01:18.405
and houses problems.

22
00:01:18.915 --> 00:01:22.485
This is why country find difficult to address a topic

23
00:01:22.985 --> 00:01:26.325
and the Brazilian say, well, can you write something for us?

24
00:01:27.665 --> 00:01:31.725
For the current debate, it was in 2022 that I believe.

25
00:01:32.595 --> 00:01:34.575
Anyway, so it is an important topic,

26
00:01:35.715 --> 00:01:39.555
but in a way also march of the literature

27
00:01:40.295 --> 00:01:42.695
is on practical issues.

28
00:01:43.435 --> 00:01:46.295
So there is a lot of evidence about this,

29
00:01:47.195 --> 00:01:49.575
but it focus mainly on failures

30
00:01:50.795 --> 00:01:54.975
and politics in the sense of public policies, not politics

31
00:01:55.525 --> 00:01:59.105
with large capital P as I will say.

32
00:02:00.205 --> 00:02:03.425
So what I wanted to focus in my work

33
00:02:04.245 --> 00:02:08.145
is on the lingual democracy because this is not so frequent.

34
00:02:10.015 --> 00:02:11.475
So there are many articles

35
00:02:11.495 --> 00:02:13.355
and books on struggles over

36
00:02:13.465 --> 00:02:16.675
what the struggles over prioritization issues,

37
00:02:17.655 --> 00:02:20.795
but the linguist democracy is not always present.

38
00:02:21.655 --> 00:02:25.595
And I wanted to put the other center, this is why I say that

39
00:02:26.415 --> 00:02:27.555
the question of water

40
00:02:27.575 --> 00:02:30.115
and sanitation services, essential water

41
00:02:30.135 --> 00:02:32.155
and sanitation services for common people

42
00:02:33.265 --> 00:02:34.685
is a matter of democracy.

43
00:02:35.815 --> 00:02:38.145
This is why I put that in the center.

44
00:02:38.645 --> 00:02:40.545
So we could consider it as a question

45
00:02:40.565 --> 00:02:42.625
of public policy investment

46
00:02:44.185 --> 00:02:47.085
and other things, which is also a matter

47
00:02:47.085 --> 00:02:48.285
of a large literature.

48
00:02:48.895 --> 00:02:51.755
But there is less common, it's less common to say

49
00:02:52.325 --> 00:02:53.875
there is a matter of democracy.

50
00:02:55.295 --> 00:02:57.635
So it's also a question of development.

51
00:02:57.705 --> 00:02:58.875
Some people will say, well,

52
00:02:58.880 --> 00:03:02.565
Well it's a matter of underdeveloped countries

53
00:03:02.565 --> 00:03:06.325
that do not have the population covered with these services

54
00:03:06.945 --> 00:03:09.485
are country with low levels of development,

55
00:03:09.695 --> 00:03:10.805
which is also true.

56
00:03:12.275 --> 00:03:15.815
But I am focusing on another aspect which is heoc.

57
00:03:16.915 --> 00:03:21.135
So a country can be developed like the United States

58
00:03:21.475 --> 00:03:22.735
and still have the problem.

59
00:03:23.405 --> 00:03:24.575
They do have the problem.

60
00:03:26.115 --> 00:03:27.855
So therefore is a problem of democracy.

61
00:03:28.365 --> 00:03:32.635
It's not a question of having the technology of having

62
00:03:34.295 --> 00:03:35.785
development in many other ways.

63
00:03:36.925 --> 00:03:40.065
But still, you may have, we may be a very rich country.

64
00:03:40.875 --> 00:03:42.065
Spain is another case.

65
00:03:42.765 --> 00:03:45.305
You are a rich country, rich European country,

66
00:03:45.365 --> 00:03:48.585
and yet you have problems in certain areas of the country.

67
00:03:49.465 --> 00:03:53.025
So this is the context that I wanted to highlight.

68
00:03:53.765 --> 00:03:55.985
Of course, Brazil is a very different thing

69
00:03:56.955 --> 00:03:58.495
or Latin America in general.

70
00:03:59.595 --> 00:04:00.915
I guess you are from Latin America,

71
00:04:01.055 --> 00:04:02.675
so I can imagine you, you know.

72
00:04:03.495 --> 00:04:08.455
So most developing countries have a more difficult situation

73
00:04:08.455 --> 00:04:10.935
because they have a problem of development

74
00:04:10.955 --> 00:04:13.135
and a problem of DS at the same time.

75
00:04:13.435 --> 00:04:14.575
And they are connected,

76
00:04:15.575 --> 00:04:17.755
but the connection is also in rich gaps.

77
00:04:18.105 --> 00:04:19.995
This is something I wanted to highlight.

78
00:04:20.225 --> 00:04:22.435
This are largely literature on the topic.

79
00:04:23.685 --> 00:04:26.665
One of the myth has been that the state

80
00:04:27.525 --> 00:04:29.505
cannot fund these services.

81
00:04:30.925 --> 00:04:33.055
This a myth that has been construct

82
00:04:34.295 --> 00:04:36.275
and institutions like the Gold Bank

83
00:04:36.865 --> 00:04:38.955
that have been promoting these policies

84
00:04:38.975 --> 00:04:42.625
and this myth have recognized that it's not true

85
00:04:43.535 --> 00:04:45.705
that they made a mistake in saying that.

86
00:04:46.615 --> 00:04:49.315
So in several reports they have recognized that

87
00:04:50.285 --> 00:04:51.665
for a recent moral

88
00:04:51.665 --> 00:04:55.465
or recent report, they say there is not a single country

89
00:04:56.255 --> 00:04:59.325
that have made access to these services.

90
00:05:00.415 --> 00:05:03.865
Also health education without a strong

91
00:05:03.865 --> 00:05:05.385
intervention from the state.

92
00:05:06.615 --> 00:05:08.995
So there is a recognition about this,

93
00:05:09.575 --> 00:05:11.275
but they were saying in the 1990s

94
00:05:11.275 --> 00:05:14.715
and nineties that we have to pass all these services

95
00:05:14.895 --> 00:05:18.355
to the private sector because the state could not invest.

96
00:05:19.645 --> 00:05:24.145
That's a myth. And ally, the bank has recognized that this,

97
00:05:24.575 --> 00:05:27.825
even the IMF has recognized that in some documents

98
00:05:28.565 --> 00:05:30.945
and other institution have also recognized

99
00:05:30.945 --> 00:05:33.135
that this quite it.

100
00:05:33.135 --> 00:05:36.215
Because there was a failure in the 1990s

101
00:05:36.215 --> 00:05:38.815
and nineties, particularly in the 1990s,

102
00:05:39.445 --> 00:05:42.255
that made it impossible not to recognize the failure.

103
00:05:42.315 --> 00:05:43.775
We have to explain why they failed

104
00:05:44.345 --> 00:05:47.035
because there was a myth that the public,

105
00:05:47.175 --> 00:05:48.675
the private sector will invest.

106
00:05:49.055 --> 00:05:52.395
It didn't happen. And then we failed to attend

107
00:05:52.535 --> 00:05:55.675
to meet the millennial development goals in 2015.

108
00:05:57.285 --> 00:06:01.265
Why we didn't meet the goals and we didn't meet the goals

109
00:06:01.265 --> 00:06:03.335
because trusting

110
00:06:03.335 --> 00:06:06.135
that the private sector will invest was a myth.

111
00:06:06.965 --> 00:06:09.655
The private sector always came

112
00:06:09.655 --> 00:06:11.335
and say we, we are not investors,

113
00:06:12.315 --> 00:06:14.175
we are providers of services.

114
00:06:15.555 --> 00:06:17.975
Why we will we invest in poor countries?

115
00:06:18.225 --> 00:06:21.135
Where are the people will not pay the tar

116
00:06:21.165 --> 00:06:23.335
that we need to make a profit?

117
00:06:24.305 --> 00:06:26.035
They have been very clear about this

118
00:06:26.925 --> 00:06:29.345
and you cannot blame the private sector if they say,

119
00:06:29.345 --> 00:06:31.985
well we are, they are to make again a profit.

120
00:06:32.805 --> 00:06:37.515
So we are not an NGO that will provide services for free

121
00:06:38.135 --> 00:06:40.915
and will invest even if we cannot get that return.

122
00:06:42.005 --> 00:06:43.425
So they are clear about that.

123
00:06:44.245 --> 00:06:47.955
But that was one of the myths that was promoted.

124
00:06:49.225 --> 00:06:51.525
The problem is, this is not the question of the past.

125
00:06:52.965 --> 00:06:56.585
It is done right now. Again, despite the failures.

126
00:06:56.695 --> 00:06:58.265
This is why I grow that article

127
00:06:58.845 --> 00:07:01.895
because once we recognize that there was a problem

128
00:07:02.565 --> 00:07:04.775
expecting the private sector to put money

129
00:07:05.345 --> 00:07:07.695
while the the state supposedly will not,

130
00:07:08.825 --> 00:07:10.915
that was a problem to start.

131
00:07:12.055 --> 00:07:15.235
And the other myth was that the state cannot do it well,

132
00:07:16.615 --> 00:07:18.675
cannot invest and cannot do it.

133
00:07:20.065 --> 00:07:23.805
In fact, most people in the planet are served

134
00:07:23.945 --> 00:07:25.085
by public companies.

135
00:07:26.095 --> 00:07:27.705
Sometimes it's not good service.

136
00:07:28.205 --> 00:07:29.705
The quality might not be good.

137
00:07:30.385 --> 00:07:32.095
There are problems, of course there is

138
00:07:32.095 --> 00:07:33.335
corruption, all of that.

139
00:07:33.995 --> 00:07:36.825
We know that that cannot be denied.

140
00:07:37.995 --> 00:07:40.455
But to say that the private sector will intervene

141
00:07:40.515 --> 00:07:42.855
to solve those problems was a mission

142
00:07:43.475 --> 00:07:44.725
because they are not there

143
00:07:44.745 --> 00:07:46.525
to solve the problems of the public sector.

144
00:07:48.035 --> 00:07:50.535
If I have a private company, I want to make money

145
00:07:51.185 --> 00:07:53.565
and I will go to those places where I can make money.

146
00:07:53.975 --> 00:07:55.525
There is nothing wrong with that.

147
00:07:56.545 --> 00:07:58.725
But is this very wrong to tell people

148
00:07:58.985 --> 00:08:01.485
and countries convince people

149
00:08:01.585 --> 00:08:04.325
and countries that the predecessor will come

150
00:08:04.385 --> 00:08:05.525
and solve the situation?

151
00:08:05.985 --> 00:08:09.605
It didn't happen in Europe, it didn't happen in the US

152
00:08:10.515 --> 00:08:12.935
and of course it didn't happen in poor countries.

153
00:08:14.065 --> 00:08:18.205
So this is a question at the center of saying, well,

154
00:08:18.205 --> 00:08:22.645
there are myths and there are lies and fake truth as well.

155
00:08:23.545 --> 00:08:27.245
The history of Europe and the US is so clear on this.

156
00:08:27.945 --> 00:08:31.805
So imagine no, I have in the book, not in this article,

157
00:08:32.665 --> 00:08:36.725
an example of England, for instance, in the 19th century,

158
00:08:37.035 --> 00:08:39.605
England was provided by private companies,

159
00:08:39.965 --> 00:08:44.445
a small private monopolies until a conservative government.

160
00:08:44.825 --> 00:08:46.725
It was not a left wing government

161
00:08:46.905 --> 00:08:51.485
or the workers unions, it was a conservative government

162
00:08:51.485 --> 00:08:54.245
that decided to end the privatization

163
00:08:54.665 --> 00:08:57.245
and to create a public company in London,

164
00:08:57.965 --> 00:08:59.965
a metropolitan public company

165
00:09:01.015 --> 00:09:04.455
that didn't solve the problem immediately, only

166
00:09:04.785 --> 00:09:06.375
after the second World War,

167
00:09:07.645 --> 00:09:10.335
England got full coverage of quarter

168
00:09:10.355 --> 00:09:12.975
and sanitation such in the 1960s models.

169
00:09:13.275 --> 00:09:18.095
It took decades to do it, but it was a state that did it.

170
00:09:18.675 --> 00:09:21.535
The same in the United States, exactly the same.

171
00:09:22.225 --> 00:09:24.685
And this is a history very well documented.

172
00:09:24.905 --> 00:09:29.595
No, my book that is coming soon address is in length

173
00:09:30.535 --> 00:09:31.715
in detail as well.

174
00:09:32.665 --> 00:09:37.375
So, but in Latin America for instance, no one tells people

175
00:09:38.315 --> 00:09:40.175
how it was done in the us.

176
00:09:40.235 --> 00:09:43.415
In the US for instance, people believe in that.

177
00:09:43.555 --> 00:09:46.135
In the US everything is private and works well.

178
00:09:46.765 --> 00:09:50.585
And it's not the case in the US We have today public

179
00:09:51.105 --> 00:09:53.145
companies, not private companies.

180
00:09:54.005 --> 00:09:55.185
For instance, the World Bank

181
00:09:55.645 --> 00:09:58.545
and the IMR receive water from public companies

182
00:09:59.135 --> 00:10:01.985
even when they propose border countries

183
00:10:02.005 --> 00:10:04.625
to privatize their services as the only solution.

184
00:10:05.295 --> 00:10:09.885
But they get water from public companies in the offices.

185
00:10:10.665 --> 00:10:14.665
And just to give an example, this is a very long term

186
00:10:15.415 --> 00:10:19.385
history and in my article I only touched some issues

187
00:10:19.975 --> 00:10:21.345
that are from recent decades.

188
00:10:22.185 --> 00:10:24.125
The failures, for instance, the main,

189
00:10:25.005 --> 00:10:26.885
I don't have here perhaps all the time,

190
00:10:26.985 --> 00:10:30.405
but if you take the case of England for instance,

191
00:10:31.625 --> 00:10:35.635
precisely the 1960s when they got full access

192
00:10:35.635 --> 00:10:38.595
to water sanitation, essential water sanitation,

193
00:10:39.455 --> 00:10:40.795
it was a matter of democracy.

194
00:10:41.535 --> 00:10:45.155
Of course it was in the context of the end of the world.

195
00:10:45.965 --> 00:10:49.025
So it was paying people for the, for the war effort.

196
00:10:50.245 --> 00:10:53.145
So, but it was conceptualize like that.

197
00:10:53.545 --> 00:10:58.425
Sociologists th Marshall for instance, say that

198
00:10:59.125 --> 00:11:03.065
we need to approve social rights of citizenship.

199
00:11:03.515 --> 00:11:05.625
Where were the social rights of citizenship?

200
00:11:06.015 --> 00:11:10.305
This is very different from the US in the uk they say,

201
00:11:10.305 --> 00:11:13.545
well having education, public health

202
00:11:14.245 --> 00:11:18.505
and essential services like water sanitation is a right

203
00:11:18.505 --> 00:11:21.225
of citizenship, social citizenship.

204
00:11:22.065 --> 00:11:24.245
So if part of democracy, precise litigation,

205
00:11:24.485 --> 00:11:27.605
Marshall was one of the theories of democracy

206
00:11:28.785 --> 00:11:32.045
in the uk and these services were part of it.

207
00:11:33.185 --> 00:11:35.565
Our countries in Latin America for instance,

208
00:11:35.985 --> 00:11:40.845
or Europe as well also had some similarities in this sense

209
00:11:40.845 --> 00:11:44.525
conceptualizing the access to what an as sanitation

210
00:11:44.585 --> 00:11:47.285
or public health and of course education,

211
00:11:47.495 --> 00:11:49.925
basic education, rights.

212
00:11:50.555 --> 00:11:52.205
Therefore a question of democracy.

213
00:11:52.985 --> 00:11:56.125
No, of course not all countries have done that in that way.

214
00:11:57.195 --> 00:11:58.755
Dictatorship have also done that.

215
00:11:59.655 --> 00:12:01.225
It's not always a matter of democracy.

216
00:12:01.225 --> 00:12:04.385
There are examples where the dictatorship have done that.

217
00:12:05.005 --> 00:12:07.385
No, you could say, well in the union, the Soviet Union,

218
00:12:08.185 --> 00:12:09.305
everyone has voted as well.

219
00:12:10.445 --> 00:12:12.145
And it was not a matter of democracy,

220
00:12:12.525 --> 00:12:15.025
at least not in the sense of western democracy.

221
00:12:15.765 --> 00:12:18.885
So there is no general law about this.

222
00:12:19.775 --> 00:12:23.955
But what I say is when we are studying today, access

223
00:12:23.955 --> 00:12:26.035
to water and sanitation is an indicator

224
00:12:26.135 --> 00:12:27.715
of the station of democratization.

225
00:12:29.255 --> 00:12:34.035
And of course institutions like the eco un commission

226
00:12:34.035 --> 00:12:38.345
for Latin American and the Caribbean says that openly, no,

227
00:12:39.125 --> 00:12:42.065
who has no water today in Latin America for instance,

228
00:12:42.165 --> 00:12:43.825
but of course is a global issue.

229
00:12:44.735 --> 00:12:47.555
The poor in vision of communities,

230
00:12:48.425 --> 00:12:51.155
Afro descendant communities and the poor.

231
00:12:52.225 --> 00:12:53.685
It is a matter of democracy

232
00:12:54.505 --> 00:12:56.955
because the technology to give water

233
00:12:57.055 --> 00:12:59.355
to everyone exists in the 19th century.

234
00:13:00.015 --> 00:13:03.315
The basic technology. So it's not a matter of technology.

235
00:13:04.035 --> 00:13:05.655
The very basic technology exists.

236
00:13:06.395 --> 00:13:07.855
The funding exists

237
00:13:09.875 --> 00:13:11.255
and some countries have shown

238
00:13:11.255 --> 00:13:13.855
that some poor country have shown that.

239
00:13:15.065 --> 00:13:18.515
And therefore if people do not have, you know, water,

240
00:13:19.165 --> 00:13:22.915
let's say of course we can say extreme examples like it,

241
00:13:23.575 --> 00:13:26.195
but no, we can think about Brazil, A very rich country.

242
00:13:26.855 --> 00:13:30.395
No, in many ways still the poor

243
00:13:31.995 --> 00:13:34.735
in favelas et cetera do not have water

244
00:13:35.155 --> 00:13:36.615
or have poor quality water.

245
00:13:37.615 --> 00:13:41.345
It's a matter of decisions taken by governments.

246
00:13:42.855 --> 00:13:44.835
And the same happens in the rich countries.

247
00:13:45.495 --> 00:13:49.625
Europe has also problems and it is a matter of democracy.

248
00:13:50.245 --> 00:13:52.305
So basically this, this is the point.

249
00:13:52.805 --> 00:13:56.305
Now of course we can say, well the level of a country,

250
00:13:56.445 --> 00:14:00.205
the level of development of countries has an indicator

251
00:14:00.275 --> 00:14:04.775
that includes water and sanitation access as education.

252
00:14:05.155 --> 00:14:09.355
That's true. But more important in my opinion,

253
00:14:09.935 --> 00:14:13.595
and this is my argument, is the stage of democratization

254
00:14:14.465 --> 00:14:17.785
because you have that as an indicator.

255
00:14:18.405 --> 00:14:20.065
No. And this is the point

256
00:14:20.255 --> 00:14:23.025
because the millennial development goals, for instance,

257
00:14:23.875 --> 00:14:26.225
for 2015 came

258
00:14:26.225 --> 00:14:28.665
because the failure in the 1990s,

259
00:14:29.365 --> 00:14:31.305
we have the un water decade.

260
00:14:31.925 --> 00:14:35.145
In the 19 19 81 to 1990,

261
00:14:36.405 --> 00:14:39.465
we wanted to give 40 liters of clean water

262
00:14:40.045 --> 00:14:41.745
to every human being on the planet.

263
00:14:42.485 --> 00:14:45.225
By 1990, we failed.

264
00:14:45.965 --> 00:14:50.105
So the millennial development goal for 2015 set the goal of

265
00:14:51.505 --> 00:14:53.645
having the population, the proportion

266
00:14:53.645 --> 00:14:56.125
of the world population without water and sanitation.

267
00:14:56.185 --> 00:14:59.845
By 2015, we again failed again.

268
00:15:01.345 --> 00:15:05.085
So good efforts were made, progress was achieved,

269
00:15:05.425 --> 00:15:06.885
but we didn't meet the goals.

270
00:15:07.105 --> 00:15:10.245
We didn't particularly, we changed the quality of the water

271
00:15:10.275 --> 00:15:11.285
that people receive.

272
00:15:12.135 --> 00:15:13.955
So we may get the volume of water,

273
00:15:14.495 --> 00:15:17.875
but the quality is people cannot drink it safely.

274
00:15:19.275 --> 00:15:22.405
That's the point. And it's not a problem of technology,

275
00:15:22.955 --> 00:15:24.485
it's not a problem of investment.

276
00:15:25.175 --> 00:15:29.425
It's a problem of decision and democracy in there.

277
00:15:30.875 --> 00:15:33.895
That's the point I partly anticipated the response

278
00:15:34.045 --> 00:15:36.695
with dimension to the 1980s

279
00:15:36.755 --> 00:15:38.855
and the millennial development goals.

280
00:15:39.875 --> 00:15:44.175
So why we failed, of course if you look country by country,

281
00:15:44.235 --> 00:15:47.375
you will find differences for all reasons.

282
00:15:48.365 --> 00:15:53.045
Some countries are really very poor like idea or others.

283
00:15:54.085 --> 00:15:57.065
But essentially we failed because the policies will fail.

284
00:15:58.275 --> 00:16:00.195
Trusting in the 1990s

285
00:16:00.665 --> 00:16:03.515
that private companies will solve the problem of the poor

286
00:16:04.345 --> 00:16:05.795
were really vehicles.

287
00:16:06.935 --> 00:16:08.515
And the whole bank has recognized that.

288
00:16:08.755 --> 00:16:12.875
That director, the gold bank said,

289
00:16:12.905 --> 00:16:15.595
well in the 1990 we, we believed

290
00:16:16.625 --> 00:16:19.355
that the private sector will invest, but it didn't happen.

291
00:16:20.295 --> 00:16:22.155
The state was the one that invested

292
00:16:22.415 --> 00:16:23.875
and yet we didn't meet the goals.

293
00:16:24.845 --> 00:16:29.105
So why we meet the goals, why we fail?

294
00:16:29.495 --> 00:16:31.145
Because the policy failed.

295
00:16:32.145 --> 00:16:34.805
The framework, the political framework fails.

296
00:16:35.485 --> 00:16:36.905
And since the 1990s

297
00:16:36.925 --> 00:16:39.545
and nineties, the political framework has been

298
00:16:40.015 --> 00:16:43.345
that the state should not be doing these things should

299
00:16:43.785 --> 00:16:46.065
transfer this responsibility to the private sector.

300
00:16:47.295 --> 00:16:48.785
This is a failed policy.

301
00:16:49.565 --> 00:16:52.025
But this policy continues to be implemented

302
00:16:52.245 --> 00:16:55.065
and forced on countries right now.

303
00:16:55.685 --> 00:16:59.535
It happening, for instance, in Argentina, the new government

304
00:16:59.535 --> 00:17:02.215
that took over recently is promising

305
00:17:02.215 --> 00:17:03.615
to prioritize everything.

306
00:17:04.615 --> 00:17:07.665
Even if Argentina was precisely one of the countries

307
00:17:07.665 --> 00:17:12.495
where the failure was more evident with a crisis of 2001

308
00:17:13.765 --> 00:17:18.645
that the IMF recognizes was a crisis caused by the policies

309
00:17:19.145 --> 00:17:23.435
of the IMF themselves seem we

310
00:17:23.435 --> 00:17:24.635
don't learn apparently.

311
00:17:25.095 --> 00:17:29.075
So that's one of the points in this second

312
00:17:30.585 --> 00:17:34.415
proposition, the question of Chile comes

313
00:17:34.415 --> 00:17:37.335
because Chile was chosen

314
00:17:38.195 --> 00:17:40.455
in the 1970s as a model

315
00:17:41.965 --> 00:17:44.505
to implement this politics as a model

316
00:17:45.705 --> 00:17:48.045
and then found this politics around the world.

317
00:17:49.585 --> 00:17:52.095
First in Latin America and then in other countries.

318
00:17:53.095 --> 00:17:57.675
When was it done under the dictatorship of general Pinoche?

319
00:17:58.815 --> 00:18:02.035
It seems that we implement these policies cannot be done

320
00:18:02.805 --> 00:18:04.555
under truly democratic

321
00:18:05.965 --> 00:18:08.725
countries or governments.

322
00:18:09.675 --> 00:18:12.775
So the dictatorship was the perfect moment to do it.

323
00:18:13.755 --> 00:18:18.135
So the first thing they did when Pino jet came to power was

324
00:18:18.155 --> 00:18:22.575
to pass a water load that converted water sources,

325
00:18:24.465 --> 00:18:29.265
aquifer, rivers, lakes into private property.

326
00:18:29.885 --> 00:18:33.755
Not directly. What they did is to give private rights

327
00:18:34.585 --> 00:18:38.005
to extract water to individuals and companies.

328
00:18:39.285 --> 00:18:42.625
And it still persists until today

329
00:18:44.195 --> 00:18:46.925
they didn't privatize water and sanitation at the time.

330
00:18:48.145 --> 00:18:51.355
They just created a framework for it.

331
00:18:51.895 --> 00:18:54.195
No, that water should be a private good

332
00:18:55.225 --> 00:18:56.525
to be traded in markets.

333
00:18:58.765 --> 00:19:00.265
It had some level of success.

334
00:19:02.365 --> 00:19:03.465
But then when they tried

335
00:19:03.465 --> 00:19:06.905
to do it in other countries like Mexico, Argentina,

336
00:19:07.485 --> 00:19:09.185
Brazil, it didn't work.

337
00:19:09.925 --> 00:19:13.345
No, it didn't work in relation to water sources.

338
00:19:14.565 --> 00:19:16.585
But water trans sanitation was different.

339
00:19:17.585 --> 00:19:21.595
They did that in the 1990s under democratic governments

340
00:19:22.335 --> 00:19:23.825
when the ship was over.

341
00:19:24.965 --> 00:19:27.545
So the Chilean model is important because of that.

342
00:19:28.635 --> 00:19:31.865
It was the test site for the model

343
00:19:32.445 --> 00:19:34.825
and then was try to be exported everywhere.

344
00:19:35.615 --> 00:19:38.545
They did that in Latin America and the rest of the work.

345
00:19:39.285 --> 00:19:44.145
So in my article I put Biblio showing the failures

346
00:19:44.145 --> 00:19:47.425
around the world, corruption, the former

347
00:19:48.485 --> 00:19:51.745
econom chief economies of the World Bank,

348
00:19:52.835 --> 00:19:56.415
say precisely that corruption was one of the main result

349
00:19:56.435 --> 00:19:58.895
of his policies all over the place.

350
00:19:59.905 --> 00:20:02.005
No. So this is well document.

351
00:20:02.385 --> 00:20:06.245
No, but Chile was a testings place. The first place.

352
00:20:06.865 --> 00:20:10.365
No, it's so powerful for they achieved that.

353
00:20:10.365 --> 00:20:13.765
Even today, Chile, with a new government that tries to

354
00:20:14.905 --> 00:20:19.165
almost delete that history, start the new, they cannot do it

355
00:20:19.635 --> 00:20:22.965
because in Congress when they try to change the law,

356
00:20:22.985 --> 00:20:26.525
the water law, they don't have the majority to do it.

357
00:20:27.195 --> 00:20:31.605
Still the majority defend the pinot jet dimes

358
00:20:32.465 --> 00:20:33.965
and the water low of Pinot.

359
00:20:34.265 --> 00:20:36.725
So they cannot change in Chile yet.

360
00:20:37.355 --> 00:20:40.285
They keep trying, but I think they are giving up

361
00:20:40.715 --> 00:20:43.165
because they couldn't in the last few years.

362
00:20:44.585 --> 00:20:47.325
But in other countries it has been very different.

363
00:20:47.795 --> 00:20:50.965
Argentina for instance, managed to go back to public

364
00:20:52.315 --> 00:20:53.735
in a few years.

365
00:20:54.515 --> 00:20:56.535
But now a new government is trying to go back

366
00:20:56.535 --> 00:20:57.535
to private again.

367
00:20:58.825 --> 00:21:01.325
The reason is pure politics

368
00:21:01.665 --> 00:21:04.445
of the worst kind is myth and lies.

369
00:21:05.295 --> 00:21:07.245
There is no evidence anywhere

370
00:21:07.555 --> 00:21:09.925
that the private sector will solve the problems

371
00:21:09.945 --> 00:21:11.085
of the public sector.

372
00:21:11.705 --> 00:21:15.985
The public sector have many problems, corruption, lack

373
00:21:15.985 --> 00:21:18.865
of quality and many other issues.

374
00:21:19.765 --> 00:21:21.185
The lie is that the private

375
00:21:21.185 --> 00:21:22.505
sector will solve those problems.

376
00:21:23.405 --> 00:21:25.705
It never happened in Europe.

377
00:21:26.645 --> 00:21:29.825
If you want examples of what it is well done, for instance,

378
00:21:30.015 --> 00:21:32.505
well you have many in England.

379
00:21:32.585 --> 00:21:35.265
I can drink water without thinking more or less not

380
00:21:35.265 --> 00:21:36.345
because there are no problems,

381
00:21:36.925 --> 00:21:41.045
but the safe water in general, you have no that in.

382
00:21:42.265 --> 00:21:46.415
So the question is, that the second proposition

383
00:21:47.075 --> 00:21:49.655
is that despite the failures, we seem not

384
00:21:49.655 --> 00:21:52.835
to learn the lessons because we keep insisting

385
00:21:52.835 --> 00:21:53.875
in the same policies.

386
00:21:55.315 --> 00:21:59.045
It's more the millennial development goals

387
00:21:59.785 --> 00:22:03.475
were replaced by the sustainable development goals that have

388
00:22:03.475 --> 00:22:05.115
to be met in 2030.

389
00:22:06.815 --> 00:22:08.355
We are not going to meet the goals.

390
00:22:09.115 --> 00:22:11.835
I am not saying that except for is saying

391
00:22:11.835 --> 00:22:14.995
that already in Latin America, the UN is saying that

392
00:22:14.995 --> 00:22:18.675
for the world, the water goals of the FGS

393
00:22:19.355 --> 00:22:20.575
are not going to be met.

394
00:22:21.975 --> 00:22:24.755
Why? Well, the UN is not saying why.

395
00:22:25.405 --> 00:22:27.735
It's just saying that we are not going

396
00:22:27.735 --> 00:22:29.575
to meet the goals in 2030.

397
00:22:30.725 --> 00:22:33.865
But my argument is that the main reason why we are not going

398
00:22:33.865 --> 00:22:35.505
to meet the goals are

399
00:22:35.505 --> 00:22:37.945
because we are repeating the same failed policies.

400
00:22:39.575 --> 00:22:41.105
This are the main reason.

401
00:22:41.615 --> 00:22:45.645
It's not like the technology is not the lack of funding,

402
00:22:46.835 --> 00:22:50.365
it's mainly the lack of demographic decision making

403
00:22:51.425 --> 00:22:54.605
to achieve the goals of giving water to the poor,

404
00:22:55.025 --> 00:22:56.845
to the unserved population.

405
00:22:57.705 --> 00:23:01.765
You can see that in Asia, in Africa, in Latin America,

406
00:23:02.345 --> 00:23:03.805
and even in parts of Europe.

407
00:23:04.615 --> 00:23:05.745
Even in parts of Europe.

408
00:23:06.975 --> 00:23:10.835
So that was part of the second proposition that I put

409
00:23:11.775 --> 00:23:13.555
Partly I say something about this,

410
00:23:13.695 --> 00:23:17.605
but it's easier to look at an example, for instance,

411
00:23:17.985 --> 00:23:19.045
to say examples.

412
00:23:20.465 --> 00:23:23.925
Eh one example perhaps very well known

413
00:23:23.995 --> 00:23:25.565
worldwide e Bolivia.

414
00:23:26.595 --> 00:23:28.125
Bolivia. In 2000

415
00:23:28.145 --> 00:23:29.365
and 2006,

416
00:23:31.265 --> 00:23:34.885
the well known water wars between double Mars,

417
00:23:35.385 --> 00:23:37.925
the water wars against privatization,

418
00:23:39.405 --> 00:23:40.585
people died there.

419
00:23:42.405 --> 00:23:47.065
Public companies replace the private companies.

420
00:23:48.265 --> 00:23:50.565
And yet Bolivia is more

421
00:23:50.565 --> 00:23:53.385
or less in the same situation today.

422
00:23:54.565 --> 00:23:58.875
We recently have a seminar with them, with people who pa one

423
00:23:58.875 --> 00:24:01.115
of them was a student of mine in the uk.

424
00:24:02.245 --> 00:24:04.025
He did a master on the topic, one

425
00:24:04.025 --> 00:24:05.385
of the leaders of the water war.

426
00:24:06.255 --> 00:24:09.545
And he was not leaving this seminar with people.

427
00:24:09.615 --> 00:24:11.745
Very important people of that moment.

428
00:24:12.775 --> 00:24:15.235
And now they say, well, the public company have failed.

429
00:24:17.005 --> 00:24:18.385
We don't want prioritization.

430
00:24:18.405 --> 00:24:20.185
We know it is not the right decision,

431
00:24:20.845 --> 00:24:24.665
but how we make public companies properly behave

432
00:24:25.655 --> 00:24:28.425
well, it is a matter of democratization.

433
00:24:28.955 --> 00:24:30.105
There is no transparency.

434
00:24:31.005 --> 00:24:33.665
People don't have control over public companies.

435
00:24:34.435 --> 00:24:36.065
There is no democratic control.

436
00:24:37.495 --> 00:24:40.715
And this can be said of many other places even in the US

437
00:24:41.265 --> 00:24:43.195
they were recently in Michigan a problem

438
00:24:43.645 --> 00:24:48.115
where a mayor in the US decided to stop buying water

439
00:24:49.595 --> 00:24:54.245
that was safe water to reduce the, and

440
00:24:54.245 --> 00:24:57.725
therefore he started to tap water again from a lake

441
00:24:57.725 --> 00:25:01.655
that is polluted, that triggered diseases in Michigan,

442
00:25:01.835 --> 00:25:04.335
in Flint, the city of Flint in Michigan.

443
00:25:05.045 --> 00:25:06.985
So it's not the problem of poor countries.

444
00:25:08.215 --> 00:25:10.475
So for this measure, it was more important

445
00:25:10.575 --> 00:25:14.275
to reduce the budget that to give safe water to people.

446
00:25:15.885 --> 00:25:18.735
This is why I insist that the main problem is democracy

447
00:25:19.755 --> 00:25:24.535
is not the, the, the problem of finance or technology

448
00:25:24.755 --> 00:25:27.635
or even the access to water is a problem

449
00:25:27.635 --> 00:25:29.435
of democratic politics.

450
00:25:30.635 --> 00:25:33.495
And if it happens in the us imagine what is happening

451
00:25:34.035 --> 00:25:37.135
in Bolivia or IT or other countries.

452
00:25:37.275 --> 00:25:40.735
No, and of course we are touching just some points here.

453
00:25:41.185 --> 00:25:43.135
There are many, many other problems connected

454
00:25:43.135 --> 00:25:44.215
with the access to water.

455
00:25:44.395 --> 00:25:46.655
No, that I cannot address here.

456
00:25:46.875 --> 00:25:50.015
It was not addressed in the architecture like bottle water

457
00:25:50.195 --> 00:25:54.705
for instance in the Dominican Republic, people in rural

458
00:25:55.005 --> 00:25:58.265
and urban areas mainly take bottled water

459
00:25:58.925 --> 00:26:00.025
at very high prices.

460
00:26:02.235 --> 00:26:03.485
This is one good example

461
00:26:03.585 --> 00:26:06.125
to it was another problem we face in

462
00:26:06.125 --> 00:26:07.325
poorer countries as well.

463
00:26:08.015 --> 00:26:11.575
Again, it's a problem of democracy, of decision making

464
00:26:11.765 --> 00:26:12.855
that is democratic

465
00:26:13.115 --> 00:26:14.695
and that put the right of the people

466
00:26:15.885 --> 00:26:17.425
at the very center of the process.

467
00:26:18.445 --> 00:26:22.585
No, well the same happens in many other places,

468
00:26:23.545 --> 00:26:24.855
quite structural.

469
00:26:25.485 --> 00:26:28.295
Just to explain that point, why it is structural,

470
00:26:28.365 --> 00:26:29.535
what means structural?

471
00:26:30.075 --> 00:26:31.535
It means that it's at the center

472
00:26:31.765 --> 00:26:35.675
because you could say, well a country can be

473
00:26:36.315 --> 00:26:40.275
a dictatorship and yet decide that people must have say

474
00:26:40.305 --> 00:26:41.875
what and sanitation.

475
00:26:42.755 --> 00:26:44.285
We have good examples of that.

476
00:26:46.145 --> 00:26:50.125
But democracy is a normative preference.

477
00:26:50.535 --> 00:26:55.065
Let's say democracy is not perfect, it's not delivering.

478
00:26:55.795 --> 00:26:57.455
So there are many reasons why people

479
00:26:57.555 --> 00:26:59.375
are fed up with democracy.

480
00:27:00.355 --> 00:27:03.175
You see the result of elections in Argentina, America claim

481
00:27:03.335 --> 00:27:06.815
that democracy is not delivered the goods.

482
00:27:07.715 --> 00:27:10.455
So people are unhappy, they are even willing

483
00:27:10.475 --> 00:27:12.255
to buy the the discourse.

484
00:27:12.255 --> 00:27:13.695
Someone say we don't need democracy,

485
00:27:13.955 --> 00:27:15.775
we need someone taking decisions.

486
00:27:16.285 --> 00:27:20.055
Well, if we take a democracy perspective, we say no,

487
00:27:20.055 --> 00:27:22.695
we defend democracy because it's a principle.

488
00:27:23.625 --> 00:27:24.765
It has to be democratic.

489
00:27:26.775 --> 00:27:30.025
Then if you accept that principle, you say yes,

490
00:27:30.045 --> 00:27:33.755
but then what a demo should provide education,

491
00:27:33.925 --> 00:27:37.025
basic education, water is at the center

492
00:27:37.025 --> 00:27:39.705
because without water we can be without food,

493
00:27:40.825 --> 00:27:43.125
but we cannot be without water.

494
00:27:44.375 --> 00:27:46.235
So water is fundamental

495
00:27:46.655 --> 00:27:48.315
and is structural for democracy

496
00:27:50.155 --> 00:27:51.815
for a very basic place.

497
00:27:52.755 --> 00:27:56.655
So we cannot simply live without water

498
00:27:57.595 --> 00:28:00.415
and without essential water and sanitation services.

499
00:28:01.205 --> 00:28:02.775
This is historical as well.

500
00:28:02.955 --> 00:28:05.015
So I don't have much time to to say.

501
00:28:05.395 --> 00:28:09.215
But the first laws of humanity, the very first laws

502
00:28:10.445 --> 00:28:13.935
four, 5,000 years ago were about exactly this.

503
00:28:15.105 --> 00:28:18.445
The provision of water as the most basic right

504
00:28:18.445 --> 00:28:22.085
of human beings and animals, not just human beings.

505
00:28:22.505 --> 00:28:24.125
It went well beyond humans.

506
00:28:25.025 --> 00:28:29.455
So they have for instance, the right of thirst, the right

507
00:28:29.455 --> 00:28:31.575
to have water even if you cannot pay for it.

508
00:28:32.705 --> 00:28:35.195
This is a very old principle in human history.

509
00:28:36.385 --> 00:28:40.525
Since we go, we go back backwards,

510
00:28:40.525 --> 00:28:42.005
we don't learn from our history.

511
00:28:43.165 --> 00:28:44.425
But in the 19th century

512
00:28:44.605 --> 00:28:48.145
and the 20th century, clearly having water at home

513
00:28:48.805 --> 00:28:51.635
became a right, at least in Europe,

514
00:28:52.295 --> 00:28:53.755
in the US became something

515
00:28:53.755 --> 00:28:55.515
of a right is a different culture,

516
00:28:56.575 --> 00:28:57.875
but in principle is the same.

517
00:28:58.865 --> 00:29:01.665
Everyone has to have access if part of the structure

518
00:29:01.885 --> 00:29:05.585
of democracy in the west, no, in other areas.

519
00:29:05.645 --> 00:29:08.625
So the world maybe is a part of another culture.

520
00:29:09.245 --> 00:29:13.435
No democracy probably has less to do in that.

521
00:29:13.815 --> 00:29:14.955
But in the western world,

522
00:29:15.495 --> 00:29:19.435
and I am talking to the western world here, having water,

523
00:29:20.505 --> 00:29:24.235
another essential services is structural to democracy.

524
00:29:25.195 --> 00:29:26.295
You cannot have democracy.

525
00:29:26.595 --> 00:29:30.455
We have having those basic access to services, health,

526
00:29:30.605 --> 00:29:34.935
education, water is one on the one hand is negative.

527
00:29:36.585 --> 00:29:40.685
But I am not negative as I am not, apocalyptic.

528
00:29:41.785 --> 00:29:44.855
To be clear, we have to recognize

529
00:29:44.855 --> 00:29:47.135
that we are in a crisis of democracy.

530
00:29:48.545 --> 00:29:52.245
One of the expressions of that crisis is precisely

531
00:29:52.555 --> 00:29:55.685
that basic services for life like water sanitation

532
00:29:56.455 --> 00:30:00.755
are not available for a majority of people in San countries.

533
00:30:01.145 --> 00:30:05.705
Only elites. The small groups in rich cities have access

534
00:30:05.725 --> 00:30:08.645
to this service that can be said.

535
00:30:08.645 --> 00:30:12.445
It is a crisis of hemo, it's a structural crisis of hemo.

536
00:30:13.465 --> 00:30:15.085
And therefore we have to target that.

537
00:30:15.665 --> 00:30:18.885
Not just to say it is a crisis of finance

538
00:30:19.825 --> 00:30:21.125
or a crisis of technology.

539
00:30:21.305 --> 00:30:22.965
No, it is a crisis of democracy.

540
00:30:23.025 --> 00:30:25.925
We have to recognize the problem to solve. To solve it.

541
00:30:26.375 --> 00:30:29.205
There is no way to solve the problem without recognizing it.

542
00:30:30.065 --> 00:30:32.735
So the problem is in the politics

543
00:30:32.735 --> 00:30:35.015
that we have in implementing and still the defense.

544
00:30:36.605 --> 00:30:39.855
So this is the question, of course, I wrote

545
00:30:39.855 --> 00:30:41.535
that article thinking about RAC Brazil.

546
00:30:42.225 --> 00:30:45.905
Think about this. Rac Brazil now has a, a precedent

547
00:30:46.575 --> 00:30:49.385
that is far more democratic than the previous one.

548
00:30:49.965 --> 00:30:53.905
Far more democratic, far more human than the previous one.

549
00:30:54.755 --> 00:30:59.015
Yet he is also surrendering to the politics.

550
00:30:59.635 --> 00:31:02.615
He will apply or is applying pri

551
00:31:02.755 --> 00:31:05.695
or at least privatization

552
00:31:05.755 --> 00:31:08.295
of water services, which is a failure.

553
00:31:09.695 --> 00:31:11.795
So I know President Lola from

554
00:31:11.795 --> 00:31:13.395
before from his previous government,

555
00:31:14.975 --> 00:31:16.955
and he also had that problem before.

556
00:31:18.295 --> 00:31:21.315
And this is because he's a person that negotiates,

557
00:31:21.315 --> 00:31:23.715
like in democracy you have to negotiate.

558
00:31:24.845 --> 00:31:27.825
But in those negotiations you end up saying, okay,

559
00:31:27.955 --> 00:31:30.065
let's allow the private companies to do it,

560
00:31:31.145 --> 00:31:33.015
which is a failure for democracy.

561
00:31:33.755 --> 00:31:36.935
And then you have to say, well, even if a country goed

562
00:31:36.955 --> 00:31:40.575
by a human being like Lula, he's a nice human being.

563
00:31:42.805 --> 00:31:44.935
This problem, imagine now Argentina

564
00:31:45.855 --> 00:31:48.815
entering a new moment in which even the sea will be

565
00:31:48.815 --> 00:31:50.615
privatized according to the government,

566
00:31:51.075 --> 00:31:53.015
not just water sanitation, even the sea.

567
00:31:54.955 --> 00:31:56.415
And of course other places

568
00:31:57.335 --> 00:32:00.145
that we have in Latin America is another place.

569
00:32:00.525 --> 00:32:02.785
No. So we have this problem.

570
00:32:02.965 --> 00:32:07.785
For me, the main message is we need to focus on private,

571
00:32:07.965 --> 00:32:10.745
on the democratization of politics.

572
00:32:11.365 --> 00:32:13.225
Of course not just water politics.

573
00:32:13.275 --> 00:32:16.065
Water politics as part of the problem,

574
00:32:17.285 --> 00:32:19.625
but we need to insist in the democratization.

575
00:32:19.765 --> 00:32:22.995
So we are in trouble because we are not in a very

576
00:32:22.995 --> 00:32:24.035
good moment for that.

577
00:32:25.135 --> 00:32:27.915
It seems that we are losing democratic principles

578
00:32:29.045 --> 00:32:31.865
and people are not trusting democracy as something

579
00:32:31.865 --> 00:32:33.585
that was preserving.

580
00:32:35.105 --> 00:32:36.285
So we are in a big problem,

581
00:32:37.265 --> 00:32:39.205
but this is the only solution we have

582
00:32:39.205 --> 00:32:42.725
to recover our facing democracy, rebuild democracy

583
00:32:43.545 --> 00:32:48.405
on real principles of democracy like equality, solidarity,

584
00:32:49.965 --> 00:32:52.795
and of course a perspective where

585
00:32:54.655 --> 00:32:57.385
private, private earning is not the

586
00:32:57.385 --> 00:33:00.495
main proposed of democracy.

587
00:33:00.915 --> 00:33:03.615
It has to be justice, it has to be equality.

588
00:33:04.535 --> 00:33:06.475
And we are very far from achieving that.

589
00:33:07.425 --> 00:33:09.245
But I am trying to convey a message

590
00:33:09.245 --> 00:33:11.285
that is positive, not negative.

591
00:33:11.705 --> 00:33:15.405
Saying we are facing big problems is we cannot avoid that.

592
00:33:16.145 --> 00:33:18.835
So we need to work for democracy

593
00:33:19.375 --> 00:33:21.395
and water is precisely in the water.

594
00:33:21.455 --> 00:33:23.555
And sanitation with, with the global water

595
00:33:24.065 --> 00:33:25.795
that we have is very obvious

596
00:33:26.425 --> 00:33:28.835
that we are defending life in the planet,

597
00:33:29.415 --> 00:33:30.995
not just the life of human beings.

598
00:33:31.795 --> 00:33:34.095
And unless we do it through democracy, there is no way

599
00:33:34.325 --> 00:33:38.175
that is no way, it's a battle that we might lose.

600
00:33:39.175 --> 00:33:40.075
We might lose it.

Contextualizing Democracy in Water Services Debate

00:00:00 - Well, the context I think is important to say something about the context. I have written papers and books before, but this particular paper was by invitation from a journal in Brazil asking me to contribute to a local debate. Very difficult to illuminate the the debate because they felt that there was a problem that I know it's,
00:00:32 - So that's the context. So of course there is a large literature on the top, a very large literature. Four or five years ago, I made a search on this, on this topic and I selected 550 more or less articles out of thousands. So it is amazing. So what I have in in that small article is
00:01:05 - and of course there is a list of references to part of the literature, which I think is important. It's nothing new, actually very old and it still persists and houses problems. This is why country find difficult to address a topic and the Brazilian say, well, can you write something for us? For the current debate, it was in 2022 that I believe. Anyway, so it is an important topic,
00:01:40 - is on practical issues. So there is a lot of evidence about this, but it focus mainly on failures and politics in the sense of public policies, not politics with large capital P as I will say. So what I wanted to focus in my work is on the lingual democracy because this is not so frequent.
00:02:11 - and books on struggles over what the struggles over prioritization issues, but the linguist democracy is not always present. And I wanted to put the other center, this is why I say that the question of water and sanitation services, essential water and sanitation services for common people is a matter of democracy. This is why I put that in the center. So we could consider it as a question
00:02:44 - and other things, which is also a matter of a large literature. But there is less common, it's less common to say there is a matter of democracy. So it's also a question of development. Some people will say, well, Well it's a matter of underdeveloped countries that do not have the population covered with these services are country with low levels of development, which is also true.

Democracy's Role in Development Challenges

00:03:16 - So a country can be developed like the United States and still have the problem. They do have the problem. So therefore is a problem of democracy. It's not a question of having the technology of having development in many other ways. But still, you may have, we may be a very rich country. Spain is another case.
00:03:45 - and yet you have problems in certain areas of the country. So this is the context that I wanted to highlight. Of course, Brazil is a very different thing or Latin America in general. I guess you are from Latin America, so I can imagine you, you know. So most developing countries have a more difficult situation because they have a problem of development and a problem of DS at the same time.
00:04:15 - but the connection is also in rich gaps. This is something I wanted to highlight. This are largely literature on the topic. One of the myth has been that the state cannot fund these services. This a myth that has been construct and institutions like the Gold Bank that have been promoting these policies and this myth have recognized that it's not true
00:04:46 - So in several reports they have recognized that for a recent moral or recent report, they say there is not a single country that have made access to these services. Also health education without a strong intervention from the state. So there is a recognition about this, but they were saying in the 1990s and nineties that we have to pass all these services
00:05:19 - That's a myth. And ally, the bank has recognized that this, even the IMF has recognized that in some documents and other institution have also recognized that this quite it. Because there was a failure in the 1990s and nineties, particularly in the 1990s, that made it impossible not to recognize the failure. We have to explain why they failed because there was a myth that the public,
00:05:49 - It didn't happen. And then we failed to attend to meet the millennial development goals in 2015. Why we didn't meet the goals and we didn't meet the goals because trusting that the private sector will invest was a myth. The private sector always came and say we, we are not investors, we are providers of services. Why we will we invest in poor countries?

Myths of Private Sector in Public Services

00:06:21 - that we need to make a profit? They have been very clear about this and you cannot blame the private sector if they say, well we are, they are to make again a profit. So we are not an NGO that will provide services for free and will invest even if we cannot get that return. So they are clear about that. But that was one of the myths that was promoted.
00:06:52 - It is done right now. Again, despite the failures. This is why I grow that article because once we recognize that there was a problem expecting the private sector to put money while the the state supposedly will not, that was a problem to start. And the other myth was that the state cannot do it well, cannot invest and cannot do it.
00:07:23 - by public companies. Sometimes it's not good service. The quality might not be good. There are problems, of course there is corruption, all of that. We know that that cannot be denied. But to say that the private sector will intervene to solve those problems was a mission because they are not there to solve the problems of the public sector. If I have a private company, I want to make money
00:07:53 - There is nothing wrong with that. But is this very wrong to tell people and countries convince people and countries that the predecessor will come and solve the situation? It didn't happen in Europe, it didn't happen in the US and of course it didn't happen in poor countries. So this is a question at the center of saying, well, there are myths and there are lies and fake truth as well.
00:08:27 - So imagine no, I have in the book, not in this article, an example of England, for instance, in the 19th century, England was provided by private companies, a small private monopolies until a conservative government. It was not a left wing government or the workers unions, it was a conservative government that decided to end the privatization
00:08:57 - a metropolitan public company that didn't solve the problem immediately, only after the second World War, England got full coverage of quarter and sanitation such in the 1960s models. It took decades to do it, but it was a state that did it. The same in the United States, exactly the same. And this is a history very well documented.

Water Access as a Democracy Indicator

00:09:30 - in detail as well. So, but in Latin America for instance, no one tells people how it was done in the us. In the US for instance, people believe in that. In the US everything is private and works well. And it's not the case in the US We have today public companies, not private companies. For instance, the World Bank
00:09:59 - even when they propose border countries to privatize their services as the only solution. But they get water from public companies in the offices. And just to give an example, this is a very long term history and in my article I only touched some issues that are from recent decades. The failures, for instance, the main, I don't have here perhaps all the time,
00:10:31 - precisely the 1960s when they got full access to water sanitation, essential water sanitation, it was a matter of democracy. Of course it was in the context of the end of the world. So it was paying people for the, for the war effort. So, but it was conceptualize like that. Sociologists th Marshall for instance, say that
00:11:03 - Where were the social rights of citizenship? This is very different from the US in the uk they say, well having education, public health and essential services like water sanitation is a right of citizenship, social citizenship. So if part of democracy, precise litigation, Marshall was one of the theories of democracy in the uk and these services were part of it.
00:11:35 - or Europe as well also had some similarities in this sense conceptualizing the access to what an as sanitation or public health and of course education, basic education, rights. Therefore a question of democracy. No, of course not all countries have done that in that way. Dictatorship have also done that. It's not always a matter of democracy. There are examples where the dictatorship have done that.
00:12:08 - everyone has voted as well. And it was not a matter of democracy, at least not in the sense of western democracy. So there is no general law about this. But what I say is when we are studying today, access to water and sanitation is an indicator of the station of democratization. And of course institutions like the eco un commission for Latin American and the Caribbean says that openly, no,

Water Access: A Democratic Imperative

00:12:42 - but of course is a global issue. The poor in vision of communities, Afro descendant communities and the poor. It is a matter of democracy because the technology to give water to everyone exists in the 19th century. The basic technology. So it's not a matter of technology. The very basic technology exists. The funding exists
00:13:11 - that some poor country have shown that. And therefore if people do not have, you know, water, let's say of course we can say extreme examples like it, but no, we can think about Brazil, A very rich country. No, in many ways still the poor in favelas et cetera do not have water or have poor quality water. It's a matter of decisions taken by governments.
00:13:45 - Europe has also problems and it is a matter of democracy. So basically this, this is the point. Now of course we can say, well the level of a country, the level of development of countries has an indicator that includes water and sanitation access as education. That's true. But more important in my opinion, and this is my argument, is the stage of democratization
00:14:18 - No. And this is the point because the millennial development goals, for instance, for 2015 came because the failure in the 1990s, we have the un water decade. In the 19 19 81 to 1990, we wanted to give 40 liters of clean water to every human being on the planet. By 1990, we failed.
00:14:51 - having the population, the proportion of the world population without water and sanitation. By 2015, we again failed again. So good efforts were made, progress was achieved, but we didn't meet the goals. We didn't particularly, we changed the quality of the water that people receive. So we may get the volume of water, but the quality is people cannot drink it safely.
00:15:22 - it's not a problem of investment. It's a problem of decision and democracy in there. That's the point I partly anticipated the response with dimension to the 1980s and the millennial development goals. So why we failed, of course if you look country by country, you will find differences for all reasons. Some countries are really very poor like idea or others.

Failures of Privatization in Water Services

00:15:58 - Trusting in the 1990s that private companies will solve the problem of the poor were really vehicles. And the whole bank has recognized that. That director, the gold bank said, well in the 1990 we, we believed that the private sector will invest, but it didn't happen. The state was the one that invested and yet we didn't meet the goals.
00:16:29 - Because the policy failed. The framework, the political framework fails. And since the 1990s and nineties, the political framework has been that the state should not be doing these things should transfer this responsibility to the private sector. This is a failed policy. But this policy continues to be implemented and forced on countries right now.
00:16:59 - that took over recently is promising to prioritize everything. Even if Argentina was precisely one of the countries where the failure was more evident with a crisis of 2001 that the IMF recognizes was a crisis caused by the policies of the IMF themselves seem we don't learn apparently. So that's one of the points in this second
00:17:34 - because Chile was chosen in the 1970s as a model to implement this politics as a model and then found this politics around the world. First in Latin America and then in other countries. When was it done under the dictatorship of general Pinoche? It seems that we implement these policies cannot be done
00:18:05 - countries or governments. So the dictatorship was the perfect moment to do it. So the first thing they did when Pino jet came to power was to pass a water load that converted water sources, aquifer, rivers, lakes into private property. Not directly. What they did is to give private rights
00:18:39 - And it still persists until today they didn't privatize water and sanitation at the time. They just created a framework for it. No, that water should be a private good to be traded in markets. It had some level of success. But then when they tried to do it in other countries like Mexico, Argentina,

Challenges of Water Policy and Governance

00:19:09 - No, it didn't work in relation to water sources. But water trans sanitation was different. They did that in the 1990s under democratic governments when the ship was over. So the Chilean model is important because of that. It was the test site for the model and then was try to be exported everywhere. They did that in Latin America and the rest of the work.
00:19:44 - around the world, corruption, the former econom chief economies of the World Bank, say precisely that corruption was one of the main result of his policies all over the place. No. So this is well document. No, but Chile was a testings place. The first place. No, it's so powerful for they achieved that.
00:20:14 - almost delete that history, start the new, they cannot do it because in Congress when they try to change the law, the water law, they don't have the majority to do it. Still the majority defend the pinot jet dimes and the water low of Pinot. So they cannot change in Chile yet. They keep trying, but I think they are giving up
00:20:44 - But in other countries it has been very different. Argentina for instance, managed to go back to public in a few years. But now a new government is trying to go back to private again. The reason is pure politics of the worst kind is myth and lies. There is no evidence anywhere that the private sector will solve the problems of the public sector.
00:21:15 - of quality and many other issues. The lie is that the private sector will solve those problems. It never happened in Europe. If you want examples of what it is well done, for instance, well you have many in England. I can drink water without thinking more or less not because there are no problems, but the safe water in general, you have no that in.
00:21:47 - is that despite the failures, we seem not to learn the lessons because we keep insisting in the same policies. It's more the millennial development goals were replaced by the sustainable development goals that have to be met in 2030. We are not going to meet the goals. I am not saying that except for is saying that already in Latin America, the UN is saying that

Failed Policies Prevent Water Access Goals

00:22:19 - are not going to be met. Why? Well, the UN is not saying why. It's just saying that we are not going to meet the goals in 2030. But my argument is that the main reason why we are not going to meet the goals are because we are repeating the same failed policies. This are the main reason. It's not like the technology is not the lack of funding,
00:22:51 - to achieve the goals of giving water to the poor, to the unserved population. You can see that in Asia, in Africa, in Latin America, and even in parts of Europe. Even in parts of Europe. So that was part of the second proposition that I put Partly I say something about this, but it's easier to look at an example, for instance,
00:23:20 - Eh one example perhaps very well known worldwide e Bolivia. Bolivia. In 2000 and 2006, the well known water wars between double Mars, the water wars against privatization, people died there. Public companies replace the private companies.
00:23:50 - or less in the same situation today. We recently have a seminar with them, with people who pa one of them was a student of mine in the uk. He did a master on the topic, one of the leaders of the water war. And he was not leaving this seminar with people. Very important people of that moment. And now they say, well, the public company have failed. We don't want prioritization.
00:24:20 - but how we make public companies properly behave well, it is a matter of democratization. There is no transparency. People don't have control over public companies. There is no democratic control. And this can be said of many other places even in the US they were recently in Michigan a problem where a mayor in the US decided to stop buying water
00:24:54 - therefore he started to tap water again from a lake that is polluted, that triggered diseases in Michigan, in Flint, the city of Flint in Michigan. So it's not the problem of poor countries. So for this measure, it was more important to reduce the budget that to give safe water to people. This is why I insist that the main problem is democracy

Water Access: A Democratic Imperative

00:25:24 - or even the access to water is a problem of democratic politics. And if it happens in the us imagine what is happening in Bolivia or IT or other countries. No, and of course we are touching just some points here. There are many, many other problems connected with the access to water. No, that I cannot address here. It was not addressed in the architecture like bottle water
00:25:55 - and urban areas mainly take bottled water at very high prices. This is one good example to it was another problem we face in poorer countries as well. Again, it's a problem of democracy, of decision making that is democratic and that put the right of the people at the very center of the process. No, well the same happens in many other places,
00:26:25 - Just to explain that point, why it is structural, what means structural? It means that it's at the center because you could say, well a country can be a dictatorship and yet decide that people must have say what and sanitation. We have good examples of that. But democracy is a normative preference. Let's say democracy is not perfect, it's not delivering.
00:26:57 - are fed up with democracy. You see the result of elections in Argentina, America claim that democracy is not delivered the goods. So people are unhappy, they are even willing to buy the the discourse. Someone say we don't need democracy, we need someone taking decisions. Well, if we take a democracy perspective, we say no, we defend democracy because it's a principle. It has to be democratic.
00:27:30 - but then what a demo should provide education, basic education, water is at the center because without water we can be without food, but we cannot be without water. So water is fundamental and is structural for democracy for a very basic place. So we cannot simply live without water
00:28:01 - This is historical as well. So I don't have much time to to say. But the first laws of humanity, the very first laws four, 5,000 years ago were about exactly this. The provision of water as the most basic right of human beings and animals, not just human beings. It went well beyond humans. So they have for instance, the right of thirst, the right

Water as a Democratic Right

00:28:32 - This is a very old principle in human history. Since we go, we go back backwards, we don't learn from our history. But in the 19th century and the 20th century, clearly having water at home became a right, at least in Europe, in the US became something of a right is a different culture, but in principle is the same. Everyone has to have access if part of the structure
00:29:05 - So the world maybe is a part of another culture. No democracy probably has less to do in that. But in the western world, and I am talking to the western world here, having water, another essential services is structural to democracy. You cannot have democracy. We have having those basic access to services, health, education, water is one on the one hand is negative.
00:29:41 - To be clear, we have to recognize that we are in a crisis of democracy. One of the expressions of that crisis is precisely that basic services for life like water sanitation are not available for a majority of people in San countries. Only elites. The small groups in rich cities have access to this service that can be said.
00:30:13 - And therefore we have to target that. Not just to say it is a crisis of finance or a crisis of technology. No, it is a crisis of democracy. We have to recognize the problem to solve. To solve it. There is no way to solve the problem without recognizing it. So the problem is in the politics that we have in implementing and still the defense. So this is the question, of course, I wrote
00:30:42 - Think about this. Rac Brazil now has a, a precedent that is far more democratic than the previous one. Far more democratic, far more human than the previous one. Yet he is also surrendering to the politics. He will apply or is applying pri or at least privatization of water services, which is a failure. So I know President Lola from
00:31:14 - and he also had that problem before. And this is because he's a person that negotiates, like in democracy you have to negotiate. But in those negotiations you end up saying, okay, let's allow the private companies to do it, which is a failure for democracy. And then you have to say, well, even if a country goed by a human being like Lula, he's a nice human being.

Democratizing Water: A Call for Justice

00:31:45 - entering a new moment in which even the sea will be privatized according to the government, not just water sanitation, even the sea. And of course other places that we have in Latin America is another place. No. So we have this problem. For me, the main message is we need to focus on private, on the democratization of politics. Of course not just water politics.
00:32:17 - but we need to insist in the democratization. So we are in trouble because we are not in a very good moment for that. It seems that we are losing democratic principles and people are not trusting democracy as something that was preserving. So we are in a big problem, but this is the only solution we have to recover our facing democracy, rebuild democracy
00:32:49 - and of course a perspective where private, private earning is not the main proposed of democracy. It has to be justice, it has to be equality. And we are very far from achieving that. But I am trying to convey a message that is positive, not negative. Saying we are facing big problems is we cannot avoid that.
00:33:39 - and water is precisely in the water. And sanitation with, with the global water that we have is very obvious that we are defending life in the planet, not just the life of human beings. And unless we do it through democracy, there is no way that is no way, it's a battle that we might lose. We might lose it.

Faculti AI can make mistakes

Faculti

Popular in Social Sciences

Macroeconomic modelling of CBDC: a critical review

Financing Private Credit

Failing Banks

The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place

Keeping the Republic

Entrepreneurial thinking: the politics and practice of policy impact

Substantive democracy in the politics, management, and access to basic sanitation services

Next in Social Sciences

Guide

Platform and Category Pages

Contact Us

FAQs

What is Faculti?

How do you select interviews?

Interview Process

Page Structure

Popular in Social Sciences

Guide

Platform and Category Pages

Contact Us

FAQs

What is Faculti?

How do you select interviews?

Interview Process

Accessibility Options

Contrast Adjustment

Text Size Adjustment

Text Spacing Adjustment

Line Height Adjustment

Cursor Size Adjustment

Page Structure Options

Page Structure