What is the Benefit of Privatizing Water?

by |September 2, 2010

A recent Wall Street Journal article reports on what seems to be an accelerating trend: cities privatizing their water supplies. According to the article, the Indianapolis city-county council voted last month to sell its water and sewer utilities to a charitable trust; San Jose and Pittsburgh are considering selling their water systems as well, while Sacramento is now allowing Nestle, SA to bottle and sell “excess” tap water.

private water companies worldwide grew from 51 million in 1990 to nearly 300 million in 2002

Privatization: Half-full or half-empty?

Worldwide, private ownership of water utilities has been growing for a number of years. According to a 2004 editorial by Gary H. Wolff in the Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management the number of people served by private water companies worldwide grew from 51 million in 1990 to nearly 300 million in 2002.

The reason for the most recent uptick is trend financial: in the current economic climate, municipalities across the country are strapped for cash and will, it seems, take any measure to shore up finances.

But is privatizing water good for the public?

Wolff takes a balanced view of what he calls the “Gordian Knot” of the public/private water debate, suggesting, “we do not need to decide if private or public ‘players’ are superior, in the abstract. We need to implement and enforce the ‘rules of the game’ under which private or public utilities or operators are efficient and responsive to social needs and desires.”

Wolff further points out that worldwide, the greatest water problems occur in places where the government is too weak to either provide adequate services or to regulate private companies—no doubt true.

But leaving aside the very real problems of water access, quality and accessibility that must be addressed in the developing world, what is the case for private water ownership in a place like the United States?

Chicago Water Tower. Source: Melissa Gasser on Wikimedia

Privatization advocates point out that private water companies must still comply with local and federal regulations on water safety, and argue that privatizing water saves the consumer money.

However, when the non-profit water advocacy group Food and Water Watch looked at average water rates charged by utilities in California, Illinois, Wisconsin, and New York, it found that private utilities charged consumers “significantly higher water rates” than public ones did—as much as 50 percent more.

The group listed several reasons that private companies charge more for water. First, corporate utilities are required to provide returns to shareholders, not the community. While regulations in theory limit profit margins to approximately 10 percent, companies can get around this requirement by leveraging their assets. “In other words, instead of using money they had borrowed for needed improvements to water operations and infrastructure, the companies invest in side businesses or other activities that diversify their operations to increase profits.”

In addition, Food and Water Watch says, financing is also more expensive for private companies, which are not eligible for tax-free bonds, and private water companies are usually less efficient at water delivery. And because there is no effective competition to provide water in a given area (private water utilities are essentially local monopolies) there is no market incentive to cut costs.

According to the Wall Street Journal article, Atlanta privatized its water service in the late 1990s, but had to retake control four years later because of poor water quality and cost overruns. And there was a public uproar in Illinois last year when the largest private water company, Illinois American Water Co., requested a 30 percent rate increase, which it said was needed for infrastructure improvements.

Given that access to clean water is among the most basic human needs, shouldn’t we think twice before selling it off for a short-term financial fix?

Get our newsletter

I'd like to get more stories like this.
Email address
Secure and Spam free...

12
Leave a Reply

avatar
12 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
12 Comment authors
harga sepatu rodaBertrand LacrabatteCynthia BushnellChristophe CarlierLaura Debt Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Consumer Reviews
Guest

I agree. I think selling off water could get out of hand and ugly. We all need clean water to survive, and should work to keep our water clean. However, I don’t think we need to allow ‘money hungry greed mongers’ control it.
Kind regards.

Clarice Jacobson
Guest
Clarice Jacobson

Privatized water service is unwise. Do not approve of privatized water service. Thank you for this information.

Bob B
Guest
Bob B

I’ve been in the water business for years, as a consumer advocate and a private utility advocate. The bottom line is government-supplied water service is held to lower standards than private water service. Municipal water utilities are, literally, slush funds for local politicians. Private ownership drives waste out and forces accountability in- accountability to customers, regulators, shareholders and employees. Municipal ownership does none of this. Nor does government accounting make the movement of money transparent. Our children and grandchildren are already paying for our roads and other infrastructure- shouldn’t we be in a “user pays” system for water and wastewater,… Read more »

PS
Guest
PS

In response to Bob B’s comments: “The bottom line is government-supplied water service is held to lower standards than private water service.” If that is the case, than the solution is to raise government standards. “Private ownership drives waste out and forces accountability in- accountability to customers, regulators, shareholders and employees.” Private sector employees are only accountable to their company and the companies are accountable to their shareholders. Where do the consumers (the community) come in? Not to mention that all companies and their shareholders don’t have 200-year contracts. Thus, they are after short-term profit maximization, not the long-term well-being… Read more »

daroo
Guest
daroo

Privatization of water is among the worst ideas of modern human happenings. The American-Capitalist system is, without doubt, the most ecologically destructive human apparatus this planet has ever seen. When profit motive (by route of privatization) dominate philosophy, approach, and decision making – we commodify living creatures, human labor, and vital (priceless) resources and ecosystem services. Such mis-use of renewable resources (water, topsoil, forests, etc …) by humans turns them quickly into non-renewable resources. Can privatization help to conserve fresh water resources? Historical example tells us very plainly that the answer is no – at least, not without strong government… Read more »

Wes Strickland
Guest
Wes Strickland

In response to PS’s comment, yes, perhaps there would be some value in raising standards for government-owned utilities. In addition, there are many well-run government-owned utilities, so the problem is not universal. But neither of those points gets away from the reality that government regulators and government-owned utilities are on the same side of the fence, and there will always be political pressures within the government not to enforce certain standards against itself. For the privately-owned utilities, in the US they are comprehensively regulated by the state public utility commissions. Thus, their monopoly status does not allow them to hold… Read more »

Andy Pritchard
Guest
Andy Pritchard

What seems most concerning is the Nestle-style “bottling excess tap water.” It’s one thing if a private corp. holds the deed to a water treatment plant. It does seem a little sketchy, but regulations and enforcement can ensure fair pricing, etc. But it’s another if a private company leverages that ownership to start bottling/shipping millions of gallons of water to who-knows-where. That kind of behavior has the potential to do real damage to water systems. When municipalities are negotiating these arrangements, they’d be wise to make sure they aren’t giving away more than they bargained for. daroo, to your point,… Read more »

Laura Debt
Guest

Giving the option to privatize water would be a huge mistake. Another way to drive people below poverty even further into poverty. Also another way to make the rich, richer. I have no problem with people gaining money, especially at increased rates but when it is at the expense of others I have a problem with it.

Christophe Carlier
Guest

Thank you for sharing this information on the benefits of privatizing water. I never knew that certain cities were privatizing their water supplies. There are also potable water services that deliver water to certain places that request this. This can either be for swimming pools, permit potable water, or even emergency water supplies. Thank you again for sharing this article, it has been very informative.

Cynthia Bushnell
Guest
Cynthia Bushnell

From the CDC: “Private water companies, in contrast, have no responsibility to promote public health and wellbeing. They are accountable first and foremost to their owners and make their investment decisions based on profitability.27 Because water service is a natural and often legal monopoly,28 if a private water company charges high rates or provides bad service, customers cannot simply switch to another provider. Rather, they are stuck with the company unless they are able to move to another community, which is neither realistic nor desirable for most people.” “Private Ground Water Wells.” Cdc.gov. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Drinking… Read more »

Bertrand Lacrabatte
Guest

I would like to play the devil’s avocate, not because it is my position, but because there is some advantages with water supply privatisation. Indeed, due to the competition and importance of the market, companies will have to improve their service (technologies used, hiring high skilled designers and operators, reactivity in case of problem etc.) and still ask for a reasonable price to the municipality if they want to keep the opportunity, this is a good thing for customers. Most of the time the companies does not own the water supply network which is a state property, but just operate… Read more »

harga sepatu roda
Guest

“Nor does government accounting make the movement of money transparent.” Do private companies make their financial resources fully transparent? They BID on contracts. I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t want my right to water to be on put on auction. Once the company acquires the 30- to 50-yr contract, it effectively creates a monopoly and can raise prices as much as it wants since water isn’t a luxury, but a necessity.
Perhaps the solution lies in a decentralized tripartite approach, involving the community, the private sector and the government.