The Pros And Cons Of Water Privatization
As earth’s most valued resource moves further into scarcity, water privatization has become a fear for those who cannot afford its high prices, turning water into a privilege rather than a right. People all over the world have witnessed a shift in water accessibility as droughts continue to occur, and access to a reliable source of water is not as common as it once was. As water consumption is set to exceed supply by over 30% around 2040 (Interlandi, 68), multinational companies have taken it upon themselves to help curb the consumption of water by setting high costs that are often pricing people out around the globe. For instance, As the Jeneen Interlandi stated, “As the crisis worsens, companies like True Alaska that own the rights to vast
…show more content…
For example, Fijian locals have been impacted by scarce supplies of clean water to nourish many of their rural communities. In Rakiraki, Fiji “The water has been deemed unfit for human consumption, and grocery stores were stocked with Fiji Water going for 90 cents a pint - almost as much as it costs in the US” (Lenzer, 116). Companies like Fiji who have access to large bodies of water have not taken it upon themselves to help crackdown on local water scarcity by instead making the local Fijians pay for water that is often out of their price range. While Fiji Water may be responsible for the country’s 3 percent GDP growth over the last few years (Lenzer, 116), the company has failed to address the water crises occurring in local communities around their plant. A similar instance to Fiji has also occurred in Cochabamba, “where in they year 2000, Bolivian citizens had taken to the street due to Bechtel - the multinational corporation that had more than doubled their rates, leaving tens of thousands of Bolivians who couldn’t pay which left them without any water” (Interlandi, 69). Pricing water may drive down water consumption for many people living in areas of poverty, but wealthy citizens are not as affected, creating large inequities in the system. This
For example, Fijian locals have been impacted by scarce supplies of clean water to nourish many of their rural communities. In Rakiraki, Fiji “The water has been deemed unfit for human consumption, and grocery stores were stocked with Fiji Water going for 90 cents a pint - almost as much as it costs in the US” (Lenzer, 116). Companies like Fiji who have access to large bodies of water have not taken it upon themselves to help crackdown on local water scarcity by instead making the local Fijians pay for water that is often out of their price range. While Fiji Water may be responsible for the country’s 3 percent GDP growth over the last few years (Lenzer, 116), the company has failed to address the water crises occurring in local communities around their plant. A similar instance to Fiji has also occurred in Cochabamba, “where in they year 2000, Bolivian citizens had taken to the street due to Bechtel - the multinational corporation that had more than doubled their rates, leaving tens of thousands of Bolivians who couldn’t pay which left them without any water” (Interlandi, 69). Pricing water may drive down water consumption for many people living in areas of poverty, but wealthy citizens are not as affected, creating large inequities in the system. This