Tag Archives: injustice

2013 – 2018 EVT – Learning from Water Privatization? (Panglossy)

Posted on by
Reply

This post, as many others in the Chronicles of Everstate, can be read both as part of the scenarios on the future of the nation-state, as explained below, or as part of the section on Global Water Security. This shows how all issues are intertwined, and that the multiple existing feedbacks should not be ignored.

Previously: In 2012 EVT, Everstate (the ideal-type corresponding to our very real countries created to foresee the future of governance and of the modern nation-state) knows a rising dissatisfaction of its population. Alarmed by the rising difficulties and widespread discontent, the governing authorities decide to do something when new elections start, which begins the second scenario, Panglossy. The new Everstatan government, dependent upon past thinking, decides that a return to economic efficiency through growth is the key to the crisis. The first years fail to bring back growth; the power of the lenders’ nexus and induced appropriation of public power continue unabated as the regulation of the international financial system does not progress. The initial efforts to fund  Green Growth through infrastructure investments show minimal and disappointing impacts. Worse still, the initial implementation of air commodification under the ISSIGE flagship project by the consortium Novair triggers a nationwide wave of outrage because the beliefs of Everstatans are denied at all levels, while the elite is surprised.   

(The reader can click on each picture to see a larger version in a new tab – a navigating map of posts is available to ease reading)

The Everstatan elite, surprised by the new Air Revolt, continues applying to the situation a superficial analogy with water to estimate the severity of the outrage in the country and its potential evolution. Yet, analogy is not comparison and is often insufficient to inform proper understanding and thus decisions.

Margaret Thatcher with Ronald Reagan at Camp David

Margaret Thatcher with Ronald Reagan at Camp David (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

First, the commodification of water, in its second wave, is still a very recent phenomenon. It started at the end of the 20th century with the privatization of water utilities in the United Kingdom of Margaret Thatcher, and is far from being completed, assuming it is meant to follow an ineluctable path towards completion, which has still to be proven. Everstatan elite cannot thus easily draw any clear conclusion.

Second, some voices exist, even if they are not so numerous and have so far not mobilised masses, that underline the ethical problems linked to the privatization of water (e.g. 2008 Symposium) or criticise the whole commodification endeavour.

Third, the current and future various issues and problems surrounding global water security will most probably keep the matter of water services privatization and water commodification on the agenda, seen in an even larger perspective, where security questions and geopolitics will be underlined.* This is likely to lead to stronger stance taken by all actors, and open the door to any strategy including manipulation and irredentism. As a result, a complete and smooth commodification of water that would not generate rebellions cannot be taken for granted.

Sbocco della Cloaca Massima in Rome, sewer system started in 735 B.C by Ettore Roesler Franz, 1880 via Wikimedia Commons

Fourth, in countries such as Everstate, when water was privatized at the end of the twentieth century, it was done in a way that is very different from the way Novstate-Air intends to monetize air. Then, a public service dealing with water-related issues was handed over or sold from the state to private companies. This was only one episode in the millennia-long struggle of human societies to manage wastewater, sewage and obtain clean water (Jungclaus, 1998). Everstatans never went from free clean water, or free apparently clean water, free sewage, etc. to becoming suddenly aware of the extent and danger of polluted water and having to pay for being able to drink and eat safely.

1865 – New York City Sanitary Commission, via Wikimedia Commons

Furthermore, throughout the millennia old struggle for safe water, they have, at least dimly, become conscious of direct links between living beings concentrations and water pollution, thus of their own responsibility. This long process and history does not exist in the case of air. With water, there was thus no effect of shock, no sudden awareness triggering a feeling of injustice and moral outrage, when there is with air. This implies that the absence of initial reaction in the case of water cannot be used to deduce that Everstate’s air revolt is unimportant and will be short-lived.

Finally, timing matters, twice. The privatisation of water utilities itself is not always done nationally but according to the administrative organisation underlying the public service, most of the time municipalities. This implies that changes happen according to the timing of each town. This stops the creation of any nationwide reaction. The impossibility of such large reaction is strengthened by the diverse situations existing for each administrative division. However, here, had separatists feelings and right conditions existed, water privatization in Everstate would then have strengthened those sentiments (see the last posts of the Mamominarch scenario for an example of such dynamics). Those underlying processes could and should have been considered by Novstate-Air and the Everstatan government, as those lessons were applicable to air. Considering the current conditions in Everstate, Novstate-Air had thus the “choice” between triggering a nationwide protest and sowing the seeds for separatism.

Then, water privatisation has mainly been done before the crisis, before the rise of inequalities and decline of purchasing power became obvious, before the rise of tension, before the legitimacy of governments and actors and of the whole socio-political model started being questioned.

Walker, DEFRA, 2009

In the past, if water prices increased with privatization (Barlow, 2001), the share of the water bill in a household expenses (e.g. averaged to 335$ a year in the U.S. in 2012 by the American Water Works Association, CNN February 28, 2012, 339£ a year in England and Wales in 2009 according to DEFRA, with many local and individual variations) and the added cost were not such that a collective feeling of relative deprivation could be born. The unequal weight of water bills according to household income inequalities must however be noted (Smets, 2002). Then, water privatization has been done while respecting, to a point, and with (large) variations according to countries and actors, the human right not to die of thirst or because of polluted water. For example, the existence of public fountains, access to clean public utilities, etc. has been maintained, while in many OECD countries one scheme or another used to exist or was created to help the poorest face their water bills. There was thus little that could have triggered a nationwide outrage and related escalation.

The commodification of air is happening in completely different circumstances and with no such safeguards as those that were implemented for water. Actually, Everstate’s Air revolt should suggest to the government and concerned actors that they should actively revisit water related policies, be they public, private, or mixed, as circumstances have changed. True enough, the privatization of water has been done and thus it cannot be a trigger for a new rebellion. If matters continue to be handled carefully by all actors involved, if the impacts of the various global and local evolutions are properly foreseen, while adapted and timely preventive measures are implemented, then the risk to see water riots added to the air revolt will be minimized. On the contrary, lack of foresight and of caution, which, considering the overall level of tension and ideological polarization becomes everyday more plausible in Everstate, will most probably mean that water issues will soon be added to the escalating number of grievances.

Alas, neither Novstate-Air nor the Everstatan governing bodies even attempt to move beyond the analogy with a water privatization of the past. They thus decide that the air revolt is nothing more than the passing fit of a population that does not truly understand problems, and that an emphasis on communication and advertisement while local meetings with the population are organised by Novstate-Air and the local authorities will be enough to defuse the anger. Meanwhile Novstate-Air does not change the schedule according to which Air contributions will be collected.

To be continued…. after the Summer.

——-

References

* For more references, see, notably U.S. Intelligence Community Assessment, Global Water Security, 2 February 2012, and two previous posts as well as their bibliography: Water security: a strategic foresight and warning issue for national security? (1 February 2012) and Building upon the 2012 “Global Water Security” IC Assessment (27 March 2012).

American Water Works Association

Barlow, Maude, “The Water Privateers,” Blue Gold: The global water crisis and the commodification of the world’s water supply (International Forum on Globalization (IFG), 2001).

Ellis, Blake, “Water bills expected to triple in some parts of U.S.,” CNNMoney, February 28, 2012.

Jungclaus, Joyce Everhart, “1998 Congress Recap” published in the APWA Reporter, excerpt republished as “History of sewage management” on Bloomington Minnesota Cityweb.

Smets, Henri, Le Droit à l’Eau, Conseil européen du droit de l’environnement., 2002.

Symposium Proceedings: Common Grounds, Common Waters: Toward a Water Ethic, Panel I: Water Ethics and Commodification of Freshwater Resources, Diamond, Stephen (Moderator), 6 Santa Clara J. Int’l Law 15 (2008).

U.S. Intelligence Community Assessment, Global Water Security, 2 February 2012.

Walker, Anna, CB, Independent Review of Charging for Household Water and Sewerage Services, DEFRA, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (UK), December 2009.

Wikipedia, Criticisms of the commodification of water.

Wikipedia, History of Water Privatization.

Enhanced by Zemanta

2013 – 2018 EVT – Unforeseen Outrage: Privatising the Commons (Panglossy)

Posted on by
1

Last weeks’ summary: In 2012 EVT, Everstate (the ideal-type corresponding to our very real countries created to foresee the future of governance and of the modern nation-state) knows a rising dissatisfaction of its population. Alarmed by the rising difficulties and widespread discontent, the governing authorities decide to do something when new elections start, which begins the second scenario, Panglossy. The new Everstatan government, dependent upon past thinking, decides that a return to economic efficiency through growth is the key to the crisis. The first years, however, fail to bring back growth; the power of the lenders’ nexus and induced appropriation of public power continue unabated as the regulation of the international financial system does not progress. The initial efforts to fund growth through infrastructure investments show minimal and disappointing impacts. Worse still, the implementation of the ISSIGE flagship project on air quality by the consortium Novair triggers a nationwide wave of outrage as the struggle against air pollution is monetized.

(The reader can click on each picture to see a larger version in a new tab – a navigating map of posts is available to ease reading – Research/methodological note at the bottom of the post – see credits for the images in the references)

The monetization of the struggle against air pollution is perceived by Everstatans as nothing else than the privatization of air.  It generates such a strong reaction and mobilization because it creates a feeling of injustice, actually moral outrage, as it impacts and upsets all layers of beliefs of Everstate’s population (see Ideological Stakes in an Outdated Worldview).

by Tim Evanson

Most fundamentally, monetizing air is at once an appropriation of an essential element that has so far belonged by right to each living being by the simple fact of it being alive, and a desecration, both going against the deepest human beliefs as shown by symbolism, as air is an image often found in many cosmological, religious and philosophical myths, books and systems. Air is one of the four (or five if we include aether) elements of classical thought. It can be found in Hinduism, Buddhism, Bon (Tibetan philosophy), in the Japanese traditions, and more recently in medieval Western alchemy. If it is not present per se in the Chinese elements, breathing, notably in Qi Gong, is seen as fundamental. In the Bible, the “breath of life” is God’s power to create and give life to man (Genesis 2:7). Air and breath go thus beyond one religion to reach something that can be seen as archetypal, following Jung. It is the very relation to the Mystery of life (Mystery meaning “a religious truth that one can know only by revelation and cannot fully understand”), life’s origin, beauty, and continuation or termination, that is being upset by Novstate-Air.

At the normative level, more superficial although also crucial, the monetization of air is one more attempt at privatizing the commons, at transforming the public good into public goods that can then be transferred to the private, sold and bought in the name of any ideology, as recently denounced again, among others by Reich. This process is also known as commodification, for example the commodification of water or the commodification of nature. Indeed, in the real world, the latest failure of the 2012 Rio+20 summit (Montbiot, June 2012) is not lost on the private sector and, among other impacts, open the door even more widely to an all-out commodification, as underlined by a recent article in MarketWatch:

“So while it is a sad time for the planet from a policy perspective, the private sector has just been handed a golden opportunity.” Kostigen, 29 June 2012

The privatisation of the commons started in England, as early as the 12th and 13th century, then accelerated with the rise of capitalism – and modernization – through the centuries-long struggle over the right to use common land to graze livestock, which ended up with generalised enclosure and the disappearance of the commons. History shows that privatization leads to protests and revolts (e.g. Hardin 1968, Moore, 1966).

“In the case of the enclosure of the common lands, which was going on from about 1600 to 1850, the land-grabbers did not even have the excuse of being foreign conquerors; they were quite frankly taking the heritage of their own countrymen, upon no sort of pretext except that they had the power to do so.” Orwell, 1944

If, as underlined by Hardin, we must also be conscious of “The Tragedy of the Commons,” with air pollution as a perfect example, and one that he singles out, commodification and monetization of the air, paid only by consumers, may not be the best solution, even if this solution has worked beforehand for other commons. Indeed, the ideological battle that is actually taking place questions now this approach, and could very well emphasize that as, modernity, it is part of an outdated order.

One could also argue that Everstatans felt directly threatened too, as air, actually oxygen, is one of the most basic, fundamental elements for living beings on earth since the Great Oxidation Event, because cellular respiration depends on it. Being deprived of air means death within a few minutes for the strongest. However, historical facts and research, including the direst political phenomenon that is genocide, have shown that direct threat to life alone does not lead to rebellion or even to escalation, whilst feeling of injustice and moral outrage, in specific conditions, do.*

The Everstatan government and elite are surprised by the moral outrage that spreads because of their position within the ideological battle that is taking place. Moreover, during the last decades of economic, materialistic, technocratic, politician supremacy, they have forgotten the most fundamental political dynamics, or, if they know and understand, they do not care because they believe that those who will have to deal with the most violent side of political processes are not them but future generations. The analogy they used to create Novstate-Air and the monetization of air, the commodification of water, also plays into their inability to foresee Everstatans’ reaction. Privatizing water has so far not created such a moral outrage. Thus why should air be any different? Does the acquiescence to water’s monetization show that the air revolt will be short-lived and soon forgotten if Novstate-Air, backed up by the government, remains firm?

To be continued…

Research and methodological note

This post (and the next one) and the way the scenario narrative unfolds suggest that what the elite does, more precisely the way public power is appropriated matters. Here, however detailed our model (see Creating the model part 1 & 2) may appear, especially when it is described in number of variables used (compare with the 2 to 8/10 variables that are most often suggested as ideal for foresight), the means and processes of appropriation are not detailed.

The question is: should we translate those processes in terms of our model and add them to it, to the price of complicating the model even further, or should we, as I have done here, add further understanding only through the narrative, keeping the model as guidance?

The answer depends upon the degree of automation of the system and of the composition of the foresight team. The more automated the foresight system (let’s imagine it is computer run and can generate automated foresight scenarios through text-generation) , the more important to continuously expand the model, when some processes appear to have been underdeveloped as here. This begs the question of detecting such underdevelopments. The more diverse, knowledgeable and well-educated the team of foresight analysts, the more the model can be kept as such, being used as guidance.

————

References

* Among others, Sambanis, Nicholas, “Using Case Studies to Expand the Theory of Civil War,” (World Bank, CPR Working Papers, Social Development Department Environmentally and Socially Sustainable Development Network, Paper No. 5, May 2003); James C. Scott and Benedict J. Tria Kerkviliet, Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance in South-East Asia, ed.  (London: Frank Cass & Co.; 1986); Scott, James C., Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts, (New haven: Yale University Press, 1990) and Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985); Moore, Barrington, Injustice: Social bases of Obedience and Revolt, (London: Macmillan, 1978); Jeff Goodwin, James M. Jasper, Francesca Polletta, Passionate Politics: Emotions and Social Movements, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001).

Hardin, Garrett, “The Tragedy of the Commons,” Science 13 December 1968: Vol. 162 no. 3859 pp. 1243-1248 DOI: 10.1126/science.162.3859.124.

Kostigen, Thomas, “Rio+20 was a win for social investors,” MarketWatch, June 29, 2012.

Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Mystery.

Monbiot, George, “After Rio, we know. Governments have given up on the planet: The post-summit pledge was an admission of defeat against consumer capitalism. But we can still salvage the natural world,” Guardian.co.uk, Monday 25 June 2012.

Moore, Barrington, Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World, (Beacon Press, 1993, 1966).

Orwell, George, “As I Please” column, Tribune, 18 August 1944. in Alex Peak blog.

Reich, Robert, “The Decline of Public Good,” 4, January 2012.

Images

Clerestory window – North Nave – National Cathedral – DC by Tim Evanson [CC-BY-SA-2.0 via Wikimedia Commons: The center pane depicts God (upper portion) breathing the breath of life into man (bottom portion). It is the breath of God which leads to creative inspiration (center portion).
A group of dissenters in Norfolk during Robert Kett’s rebellion of 1549 in Samuel Wale engraving of Robert Kett beneath the oak of reformation – 1785, via Wikimedia Commons.

The Red (team) Analysis Weekly No45, 26 April 2012

Link

Reply

No45 – 26 April 2012 - Click on the image below to read on Paper.Li (best with mobiles & tablets)

Rising prospects of global unrest: Knowing that feelings of injustice thus of unfairness are a major incentive for unrest, the BBC poll’s results are a crucial signal for the evolution of political dynamics in the coming years. Meanwhile, in a related way and unsurprisingly, in Europe a polarisation regarding best ways  - and for whom – to address the economic, financial, budgetary and fiscal situation is taking place. The tension with Iran does not improve. The only positive sign is space exploration that could be the real way forward to solve the energy crisis, but on the long term.