This Article Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (30) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Budds, J. Articles by McGranahan, G. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Are the debates on water privatization missing the point? Experiences from Africa, Asia and Latin America

School of Geography and the Environment, Mansfield Road, Oxford, OX1 3TB, United Kingdom; jessica.budds{at}geog.ox.ac uk

Gordon McGranahan

Human Settlements Programme at IIED.

This paper has two principal aims: first, to unravel some of the arguments mobilized in the controversial privatization debate, and second, to review the scale and nature of private sector provision of water and sanitation in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Despite being vigorously promoted in the policy arena and having been implemented in several countries in the South in the 1990s, privatization has achieved neither the scale nor benefits anticipated. In particular, the paper is pessimistic about the role that privatization can play in achieving the Millennium Development Goals of halving the number of people without access to water and sanitation by 2015. This is not because of some inherent contradiction between private profits and the public good, but because neither publicly nor privately operated utilities are well suited to serving the majority of low-income households with inadequate water and sanitation, and because many of the barriers to service provision in poor settlements can persist whether water and sanitation utilities are publicly or privately operated. This is not to say that well-governed localities should not choose to involve private companies in water and sanitation provision, but it does imply that there is no justification for international agencies and agreements to actively promote greater private sector participation on the grounds that it can significantly reduce deficiencies in water and sanitation services in the South.

Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 15, No. 2, 87-114 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/095624780301500222


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. H. Spencer Household Strategies for Securing Clean Water: The Demand for Piped Water in Vietnam's Peri-Urban Settlements Journal of Planning Education and Research, December 1, 2008; 28(2): 213 - 224. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. E. Castro Neoliberal water and sanitation policies as a failed development strategy: lessons from developing countries Progress in Development Studies, January 1, 2008; 8(1): 63 - 83. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Gilbert Water for All: How To Combine Public Management with Commercial Practice for the Benefit of the Poor? Urban Stud, July 1, 2007; 44(8): 1559 - 1579. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Spronk and J. R. Webber Struggles against Accumulation by Dispossession in Bolivia: The Political Economy of Natural Resource Contention Latin American Perspectives, March 1, 2007; 34(2): 31 - 47. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Gandy Planning, Anti-planning and the Infrastructure Crisis Facing Metropolitan Lagos Urban Stud, February 1, 2006; 43(2): 371 - 396. [Abstract] [PDF]