scholarly journals Implementing an evolving human right through water and sanitation policy

Water Policy ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Mason Meier ◽  
Georgia Lyn Kayser ◽  
Urooj Quezon Amjad ◽  
Jamie Bartram
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Political Development ◽  
Water Policy ◽  
Water Governance ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Water And Sanitation ◽  
National Governments ◽  
Global Water ◽  
National Water

With water and sanitation vital to the public's health, there have been growing calls to accept water and sanitation as a human right and establish a rights-based framework for water policy. Through the development of international law, policymakers have increasingly specified water and sanitation as independent human rights. In this political development of human rights for water and sanitation, the authors find that the evolution of rights-based water and sanitation policy reached a milestone in the United Nations (UN) General Assembly's 2010 Resolution on the Human Right to Water and Sanitation. By memorializing international political recognition of these interconnected rights and the corresponding obligations of national governments, states provided a normative framework for expanded efforts to realize human rights through water and sanitation policy. Examining the opportunities created by this UN Resolution, this article analyzes the implementation of the human right to water and sanitation through global water governance, national water policy and water and sanitation outcomes. While obstacles remain in the implementation of this right, the authors conclude that the UN Resolution could have lasting benefits for public health.

Water for Life

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madeline Baer
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Citizen Participation ◽  
Urban Areas ◽  
Water Policy ◽  
State Capacity ◽  
National Level ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Political Will ◽  
Water And Sanitation ◽  
The Right

Chapter 5 provides a case study of the human rights-based approach to water policy through an analysis of the Bolivian government’s attempts to implement the human right to water and sanitation. It explores these efforts at the local and national level, through changes to investments, institutions, and policies. The analysis reveals that while Bolivia meets the minimum standard for the human right to water and sanitation in some urban areas, access to quality water is low in poor and marginalized communities. While the Bolivian government expresses a strong political will for a human rights approach and is increasing state capacity to fulfill rights, the broader criteria for the right to water and sanitation, including citizen participation and democratic decision-making, remain largely unfulfilled. This case suggests political will and state capacity might be necessary but are not sufficient to fulfill the human right to water and sanitation broadly defined.

The impact of cost recovery and sharing system on water policy implementation and human right to water: a case of Ileje, Tanzania

2011 ◽  
Vol 63 (11) ◽  
pp. 2520-2526
Author(s):  
Deusdedit Kibassa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Water Supply ◽  
Policy Implementation ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Water Policy ◽  
Cost Recovery ◽  
Human Right ◽  
The Impact ◽  
National Water

In Tanzania, the National Water Policy (NAWAPO) of 2002 clearly stipulates that access to water supply and sanitation is a right for every Tanzanian and that cost recovery is the foundation of sustainable service delivery. To meet these demands, water authorities have introduced cost recovery and a water sharing system. The overall objective of this study was to assess the impact of cost recovery and the sharing system on water policy implementation and human rights to water in four villages in the Ileje district. The specific objectives were: (1) to assess the impact of cost recovery and the sharing system on the availability of water to the poor, (2) to assess user willingness to pay for the services provided, (3) to assess community understanding on the issue of water as a human right, (4) to analyse the implications of the results in relation to policies on human rights to water and the effectiveness of the implementation of the national water policy at the grassroots, and (5) to establish the guidelines for water pricing in rural areas. Questionnaires at water demand, water supply, ability and willingness to pay and revenue collection were the basis for data collection. While 36.7% of the population in the district had water supply coverage, more than 73,077 people of the total population of 115,996 still lacked access to clean and safe water and sanitation services in the Ileje district. The country's rural water supply coverage is 49%. Seventy-nine percent of the interviewees in all four villages said that water availability in litres per household per day had decreased mainly due to high water pricing which did not consider the income of villagers. On the other hand, more than 85% of the villagers were not satisfied with the amount they were paying because the services were still poor. On the issue of human rights to water, more than 92% of the villagers know about their right to water and want it exercised by the government. In all four villages, more than 78% of the interviewees are willing to pay for water provided that the tariffs are affordable. Water policy implementation continues slowly: regardless of the fact that more than five years have passed since policy inception, 60% of the villagers in Itumba still have no water services at all. The study shows that government fulfilment of human rights to water has a long way to go, especially in rural areas where people cannot afford to pay for water and some of the villages still depend on water from wells and seasonal rivers.

Private Water, Public Good

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madeline Baer
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Citizen Participation ◽  
Water Policy ◽  
Human Right ◽  
The Public ◽  
Strong State ◽  
Neoliberal Reforms ◽  
Narrow Definition ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
State Interventions

Chapter 4 provides an in-depth case study of water policy in Chile from the 1970s to present, including an evaluation of the outcomes of water policy under the privatized system from a human rights perspective. The chapter interrogates Chile’s reputation as a privatization success story, finding that although Chile meets the narrow definition of the human right to water and sanitation in terms of access, quality, and price, it fails to meet the broader definition that includes citizen participation in water management and policy decisions. The chapter argues that Chile’s relative success in delivering water services is attributable to strong state capacity to govern the water sector in the public interest by embedding neoliberal reforms in state interventions. The Chile case shows that privatization is not necessarily antithetical to human rights-consistent outcomes if there is a strong state role in the private sector.

Human Rights in a Neoliberal World

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madeline Baer
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Transformation ◽  
Water Policy ◽  
Empirical Work ◽  
Transformation Model ◽  
Central Research ◽  
Transformative Change ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Regulatory Frameworks ◽  
Negative Effect

Chapter 2 presents the central research questions that drive the theoretical and empirical work of the book, outlines the “moments of social transformation” model used for analyzing human rights realization, and positions the book in relation to theoretical and contemporary policy debates. The chapter synthesizes the literatures on socioeconomic human rights fulfillment and the human right to water and sanitation. It introduces two key elements for implementing human rights: political will and state capacity, as well as some obstacles to rights realization, including lack of strong regulatory frameworks and accountability mechanisms. The chapter explores the tensions between markets and rights, finding that neoliberal approaches to water policy have a negative effect on rights fulfillment by weakening the state’s role, and it engages with critiques that the human rights frame is too narrow and vague to facilitate transformative change in the water sector.

Remarks by Sean D. Murphy

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 ◽  
pp. 193-199
Author(s):  
Sean D. Murphy ◽  
Claudio Grossman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Human Rights Movement ◽  
Interstate System ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Individual

Our conversation might begin by looking backward a bit. The human rights movement from 1945 onward has been one of the signature accomplishments of the field of international law, one that refocused our attention from a largely interstate system to a system where the individual moved in from the periphery to the center. Human rights champions point to numerous landmark treaties, numerous institutions, and the rise of NGOs as a critical vehicle for developing and monitoring human rights rules. Yet others look at the international human right system and still see the state as overly central, tolerating and paying lip service to human rights, but too easily discarding them when they prove to be inconvenient. The persistence of racism comes to mind. As a general matter, how would you assess the strengths and weaknesses of the system that was built essentially during your lifetime?

Part III The Current International Law of State Immunity, 15 Immunity from Adjudication: The Territorial Tort Exception

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fox Hazel ◽  
Webb Philippa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Human Right ◽  
State Immunity ◽  
The Icj ◽  
Environmental Loss

This chapter critically examines the territorial tort exception in UNCSI, Article 12. With some understanding of its reach and any areas of inconsistency, it next evaluates the effect of the Jurisdictional Immunities judgment on this tort exception to State immunity. This evaluation of the ICJ judgment refers to the aspects mentioned above as they apply to a tort exception and apply it briefly to three well-known controversial areas of non-contractual delictual loss — loss arising from armed conflict, environmental loss, and loss resulting from violation of a procedural fundamental human right (violation of substantive human rights being barred by the ICJ ruling). The chapter then states whether the territorial tort exception continues today to represent a restriction on the bar of State immunity.

Legal Tests for Applying the European Convention On Human Rights and Freedoms in Adjudicating On Alleged Discrimination

1980 ◽  
Vol 49 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 31-58
Author(s):  
Brita Sundberg-Weitman
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effect ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
State Policy ◽  
Differential Treatment ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Minimum Standard ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Escape Clause ◽  
State Measure

AbstractIn this paper I have proposed some criteria for solving the "justification" problem inherent in Article 14 of the Convention on Human Rights and Freedoms. My conclusions are the following. Obviously a State measure does not need any justification under the Convention, if it does not lie within its scope. In my view, the measures in dispute in the Linguistic case and in the three cases against a State-Employer did not fall within the scope of the Convention and, therefore, did not need any justification. Justification presupposes a legitimate aim and a non-arbitrary manner of obtaining that aim. The basis for the "aim test" is the bona f ide principle in general international law. A State measure taken in order to pursue a policy that runs counter to the order sought to be realised by the Convention is not justified. In a situation where there are "aims within aims" both the superior aim and the subordinate aim(s) should be scrutinized under the aim test, and all must be justified. A State policy intended to prevent or discourage people from enjoying a right or freedom falling within the scope of the minimum standard granted by the Convention is not justified, unless it is covered by an expressly stated escape clause. In contrast, where there are lateral aims in the sense of "killing two birds with one stone", it is enough for the aim test that any one of these aims is legitimate; the presence of a concurrent illicit aim does not permit the conclusion that the measure under examination is illegitimate, but its presence may, of course, show the invoked aim to be only a pretext. The "arbitrariness test" invokes the principle that it is not justifiable to frustrate a human right or freedom in order to pursue a policy that could as effectively, or more effectively, be realised with less or no adverse effect on human rights and freedoms. The fact that a State policy is not consistently pursued is not in itself a proof of non-justification. The most fruitful way of dealing with such situations would be to examine separately the differential treatment of the subcategories, according to the tests mentioned.

Restricting Discretion: Judicial Review of Diplomatic Protection

2006 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 279-307 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annemarieke Vermeer-Künzli
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Diplomatic Protection ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
National Governments

AbstractIn the last 30 years, individuals have increasingly filed complaints against their national governments for failure to exercise diplomatic protection on their behalf, in particular in cases of serious violations of international human rights law. Despite the fact that diplomatic protection has traditionally been regarded as a discretionary right of states, the national courts have invariably decided to enter into the merits of the case and to review the exercise of diplomatic protection by the executive. Initially, a draft article on this subject was not accepted by the International Law Commission in the Draft Articles on first reading, but an encouraging provision was included in the Draft Articles adopted on second reading. The development discussed in this article shows support for an obligation to exercise diplomatic protection in case of serious violations of human rights law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document