Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
The case for water privatization
The case for water privatization
Feb 14, 2026 9:20 AM

To provide water for munities have usually turned to two different options: public or private utilities. However, if Bolivian President Evo Morales, leader of the Movement Towards Socialism Party, gets his way, the United Nations will pass a resolution blocking the sale of public water utilities to panies. If adopted, this resolution will cause problems for many nations, especially the undeveloped countries receiving support from the U.N. that will be forced to abide by one option—public supply of water—instead of being permitted to consider privatization which may be more efficient and cost effective. The makes the global water crisis much worse.

It will not help any country to limit its options when searching for the most efficient and cost effective solutions for providing a clean, sanitary, and abundant source of water.

Theories and examples in support and against both private and public water utility systems are numerous. A study conducted by the University of Michigan showed that water prices, in general, are too low. The study explains that direct and indirect subsidies, in both developed and undeveloped countries, have caused low prices, resulting in water waste. Furthermore, the study argues that if the subsidies are removed, the price of water will increase and provide an incentive for those utilizing water to not waste it. This, in turn, will result in the investments that are needed to develop more efficient technologies. If subsidies are removed, then a lighter burden is placed on public funds.

Lending support to the findings of the University of Michigan study, a survey conducted in 2004 by Global Water Intelligence found that the under-pricing of water is widespread. The study analyzed the prices charged by water utilities in 132 major cities worldwide and found that 39 percent of water utilities had average tariffs that are set too low to cover basic operation and maintenance costs. Some 30 percent had tariffs that are set below the level required to make any contribution toward the recovery of capital costs.

Changing the price system may be a solution. Some argue for a metering that charges water users based on consumption. However, while subsidies are proving to be largely inefficient the question must be asked: Can those in undeveloped countries, who are already living in a state of grave poverty, afford increased prices on water?

The International Development Association and the World Bank are quick to point out the success of private water utilities. Examples can be found in Rwanda and Mozambique where the private sector helped provide, improve, and/or expand the water supply. The U.N. has acknowledged five reasons to pursue private sector partnerships.

A private sector supply of water can be more efficient and cost effective. According to the World Bank, it is estimated that in the United States each dollar of public funds raised for utilities has an opportunity cost of $1.30 of private consumption, and the average opportunity cost for each dollar of tax revenue raised is $1.17 for 38 African countries.

Critics of the privatization of water argue that while it is more efficient and cheaper, the private systems fall short of social equity in supplying water and charge higher prices. While there have been unsuccessful stories of privatization, the aforementioned examples in Rwanda and Mozambique are a just a few of the many success stories, and, as The Economist notes, when private utilities charge higher prices, that often corresponds to higher rehabilitation investments, better water quality, and better service.

Privatization will also promote the decentralization of government, and in the case of many developing nations, remove the control of water out of the hands of corrupt bureaucrats. A large overarching centralized government is not needed. Instead, the principle of subsidiarity should be applied.

Private entities are able to supply an efficient and cost effective supply of water. Privatization is an effective solution, and its ability to meet the needs of consumers has improved. As a result, water supply can follow the principle of subsidiarity by utilizing other alternatives to supply water instead of through a system brought forth by a centralized government.

It is important to note that just as public utilities are open to corruption, inefficiencies, and poor management, so is privatization. Privatization can fall subject to a corrupt government. The example of Detroit is instructive here. For example, when a government decides to contract a private utility to supply water, instead of having an open bidding process, the government accepts no outside bids and picks pany that is owed a political favor. If privatization is to succeed government must take the appropriate actions to allow it to succeed and also nurture an environment that is open to decentralization, promoting business without unnecessary government interference.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Rev. Sirico to speak at Freedom of Religion Rally in Grand Rapids, Mich.
A ‘Stand Up For Religious Freedom’ Rally, organized by a coalition of religious, non-profit, pro-life and pro-family organizations and individuals is scheduled for Friday, June 8, at Rosa Parks Circle in Grand Rapids, Mich. The Rev. Robert Sirico is a featured speaker. This public event, scheduled for 10:30 a.m. – 2:30 p.m. EST, is described as “…a peaceful protest to stand up for our religious beliefs and our 1st Amendment Freedoms guaranteed by the US Constitution.” Other speakers include former...
Only a Sunday Believer?
“I do my religion on Sundays.” That was House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s answer to a press conference question on the Catholic Church’s stance on contraception, according to The Washington Examiner. Pelosi has consistently backed the Obama administration’s call to force employers to offer abortion, sterilization and birth control as part of employee health care, despite many organizations’ ethical, moral and religious objections (Acton’s PowerBlog offers more here on this topic.) Pelosi’s answer is telling: Her faith should not affect...
Sirico: The Great Lie of Socialism
Socialism, despite its deficiencies, still has its fans. “Visit the philosophy and English departments on most college campuses, and you will still find intellectuals waxing eloquent on the glories of socialist theory. Students are still encouraged to imagine that it could work,” says Fr. Robert Sirico, in Crisis Magazine. However, Pope Benedict XVI is not one taken in by the great lie of socialism: History is strewn with intellectuals who imagined that they could save the world–and created hell on...
Buying a House Makes People Less Entrepreneurial
Suzy Khimm points out an interesting study from the UK’s Spatial Economics Research Centre: Our fixed-effects estimates show that purchasing a house reduces the likelihood of starting a business by 20-25%. … This result is driven by homeowners with mortgages and persists for several years after entering homeownership. … We argue that this finding can be rationalized by the fact that homeowners typically have to overinvest in housing (Brueckner, 1997; Flavin and Yamashita, 2002) and therefore cannot adequately diversify their...
The Dangers of Democratic Tyranny
In the context mentary on protests like those in Quebec and the Occupy movement more broadly, it’s worth reflecting on the dangers of democratic tyranny. The “people” can be tyrannical just as an individual sovereign or an oligarchy might. That’s why Aristotle considered democracy a defective form of government, because it too easily enshrines the will of the majority into an insuperable law. As Lord Acton put it, “It is bad to be oppressed by a minority, but it is...
Politics and Pulpits Don’t Mix
Over at Commentary Magazine, Jonathan S. Tobin remarks on the double standards liberals have about allowing politicians to promote political positions from the pulpits of churches and synagogues: [A]llowing a religious event to e the venue for partisan politics is always asking for trouble. No one is saying, or ought to say, that synagogue buildings can’t be used for debates or forums in which politics is discussed. But there is a big difference between a Sunday morning bagel breakfast to...
Crony Capitalism and Congressional Connections
“It’s helpful to look at the track record of this bipartisan idea that government is smarter and better at picking winners and losers in the marketplace,” said House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan at a recent hearing on efforts bat cronyism and promote upward mobility. “What we have learned from this bipartisan approach is that corruption does occur, cronyism does occur, and what ends up happening is those who are connected, those who have established connections, those who know the...
Being a Christian CEO Means Never Having to Fire Someone
Does being a Christian in business mean you’ll never have to fire someone? Of course not. But that’s one of the many subtexts that is detectable in the recent attention being given to this story: “CEO of Christian Publishing Firm Fires 25 Employees after Anonymous Email.” Now I don’t know any more details than what is contained in the Romenesko report, and it may well be that CEO Ryan Tate acted in an imprudent and incorrect fashion following his receipt...
On Call Check In Team
The team is growing as I write this. People from the On Call in Culture Community have taken the challenge to begin checking in with how they are being On Call in Culture on an everyday basis. You too can be a part of the encouraging and motivating exercise of checking in. By letting others know what God is doing through you and your work, you can encourage others, stay focused and be more aware of how God is working...
Acton Commentary: Calvin Coolidge and the foundational truths of government
In this mentary, I take a look at Calvin Coolidge and his views on government. Coolidge is important today for many reasons. Chiefly, he’s a striking contrast to our current culture of government and the bloated state. Coolidge was sandwiched in between the progressive era and the rise of the New Dealers. And in his era of leadership, tyrannical leaders who preached the supremacy of the state rose to power abroad. Joseph Stalin and Benito Mussolini in Italy are two...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved