Search

Since the recognition of the Human Right to Water and Sanitation by the United Nations in 2010, processes and debates have emerged regarding its effective implementation on an international, European and Spanish scale. Without doubt, the expression Human Right to Water is a key point of reference in debates about the management of urban water supply and sanitation services. However, the interpretations about the meaning of this Right are often excessively simplistic. On the contrary, the initiative promoted in Spain by various social groups and the Association of Public Operators of Water Supply and Sanitation Services (AEOPAS), called the Social Pact for Public Water, has moved in a different and enriching direction. This article presents a comparative analysis of the main aspects and implications of the notion of Human Right to Water approved by the United Nations and the Social Pact for Public Water developed in Spain. This issue has been published as Volume 5, Number 1 of the WATERLAT-GOBACIT Working Papers (http://waterlat.org/publications/working-papers-series/). This is a special series of the Working Papers, titled “The struggle for democracy in Spain: grassroots initiatives to defend essential water services as a common good”, José Esteban Castro (Ed.), Edurne Bagué (Org.).

This issue is part of the activities of the WATERLAT-GOBACIT Network’s Thematic Area 3 (TA3), the Urban Water Cycle and Essential Public Services (http://waterlat.org/ thematic-areas/ta3/). TA3 brings together academics, students, professionals working in the public sector, practitioners from Non-Governmental Organizations, activists and members of civil society groups, and representatives of communities and users of public services, among others. The remit of this TA is broad, as the name suggests, but it has a strong focus on the political ecology of urban water, with emphasis on the politics of essential water services. Key issues addressed within this framework have been the neoliberalization of water services, social struggles against privatization and mercantilization of these services, the politics of public policy and management in the sector, water inequality and injustice in urban areas, and the contradictions and conflicts surrounding the status of water and water services as a public good, as a common good, as a commodity, as a citizenship right, and more recently, as a human right. The publication is a contribution of the Network within the framework of the Cooperation Agreement with the Public Services International (PSI) on issues of common interest (http://waterlat.org/projects/cooperation-agreement-with-the-psi/). In this case, the special issue is the outcome of the work of a member of our team of postgraduate students, Edurne Bagué, who is a native from Catalonia and is currently completing a PhD at the Centre for Higher Research and Studies on Social Anthropology (CIESAS) in Mexico City. Her research focuses on the grassroots mobilization that has been taking place in the city of Terrasa, Catalonia, seeking to end a 75-year history of privatized water supply and “remunicipalize” the service. As discussed below in relation to Article 6, Terrasa Municipality finally decided to take back the water services into public hands on 22 March 2018, as we were finishing the publication of this issue. The case of Terrasa is part of anationwide processin Spain, whereby widespread mobilizations to oppose further privatizations of water services and to bring back under public control those systems that had been privatized have been taking place over the last decade. In TA3 we thought that producing a special issue of the Working Papers dedicated to this process could be an important contribution to the international debate, fostering further exchange of knowledge and experience on this urgent matter. I dared to propose Edurne Bagué to take responsibility for the organization of this issue, and I am glad that she accepted the challenge and brought it to fruition. I am sure that it will be received as a welcome contribution to the ongoing debates. The issue has 6 articles, authored by academics, postgraduate students, practitioners, municipal officers, among other, all of them involved in diverse ways with the social organizations participating in the campaigns.

El presente trabajo contiene un análisis histórico de las reglas de explotación del trasvase Tajo-Segura. Se estudia el contexto en el que surgen, las modificaciones introducidas, así como el resultado técnico y social de su aplicación. Con detalle, se evalúa el diseño de la regla de explotación actualmente vigente, especificada en el Real Decreto 773/2014. Tras su evaluación, en esta regla de explotación se detectan una serie de errores técnicos, pero también legales, que desaconsejan su continuidad, especialmente el incumplimiento de la Directiva Marco del Agua. Por ello, se concluye con una propuesta de regla de explotación radicalmente diferente, empleando el carácter hiperanual de los embalses de cabecera del Tajo. El objetivo de esta nueva regla es estabilizar los recursos superficiales totales (propios más externos) de la cabecera del Segura respetando a su vez los condicionantes de la cuenca cedente, la del Tajo, cuyas garantías deben estar plenamente garantizadas.

ATERLAT-GOBACIT Working Papers (ISSN 2056-4864 - online) Vol. 4 No 3. (www.waterlat.org). This issue of the Working Papers was developed by members of the WATERLAT-GOBACIT Network’s Thematic Area 6, Hydrosocial Basins, Territories, and Spaces (http://waterlat.org/thematic-areas/ta6/). Itfocuses on one of the main topics addressed by TA6, which is the ongoing academic and political debate about the concept of “basin”, which has become the object of severe criticism in several areas of public policy related to water management. From different standpoints, the papers discuss the commonalities and differences between the concepts of “hidrosocial” basins, territories, spaces, and landscapes, a topic particularly debated in human and political geography but also in the broader interdisciplinary field of political ecology. The last two papers also offer an empirical discussion about the continued relevance of the concept of “river basin” in the Iberian and French traditions of water management, and explore some of the associated policy implications, contradictions, and conceptual cleavages.

he article starts by summarizing the state of the art of the current debate on scalar politics in the management of natural resources, in particular water. Against this background, we review the territorial, juridical and political evolution of basin organizations in the Iberian Peninsula, since their creation in 1926 to the situation in 2015, in the light of current critical approaches to the river basin as the unquestionable unit for water management. It is argued that when discussing ‘spatial fit’ issues in relation to the management of natural resources, special attention should be given to the changes in social relationships and power structures implied by different options, within their specific historical and geographical contexts. Key questions to be addressed include: when is the river basin an appropriate alternative for management decisions; what type of decisions are to be taken at the basin scale; and what sustainable practices and legitimate rights can be endangered.

The European Union (EU) Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires EU member states to produce and implement river basin management plans, which are to be designed and updated via participatory processes that inform, consult with, and actively involve all interested stakeholders. The assumption of the European Commission is that stakeholder participation, and institutional adaptation and procedural innovation to facilitate it, are essential to the effectiveness of river basin planning and, ultimately, the environmental impact of the Directive. We analyzed official documents and the WFD literature to compare implementation of the Directive in EU member states in the initial WFD planning phase (2000–2009). Examining the development of participatory approaches to river basin management planning, we consider the extent of transformation in EU water governance over the period. Employing a mixed quantitative and qualitative approach, we map the implementation “trajectories” of 13 member states, and then provide a detailed examination of shifts in river basin planning and participation in four member states (Germany, Sweden, Poland and France) to illustrate the diversity of institutional approaches observed. We identify a general tendency towards increased, yet circumscribed, stakeholder participation in river basin management in the member states examined, alongside clear continuities in terms of their respective pre-WFD institutional and procedural arrangements. Overall, the WFD has driven a highly uneven shift to river basin-level planning among the member states, and instigated a range of efforts to institutionalize stakeholder involvement—often through the establishment of advisory groups to bring organized stakeholders into the planning process.

En España la sostenibilidad no es uno de los principios rectores de la política económica general, pero sí que lo es (o debería) de la política del agua dado el obligado cumplimiento de la Directiva Marco de Agua. En el presente artículo se evalúa la sostenibilidad de la política del agua aplicada en la demarcación hidrográfica del Tajo, analizando todas las dimensiones del desarrollo sostenible. El resultado es que la planificación y gestión del agua en dicha demarcación no es sostenible en ninguna de las tres principales dimensiones del desarrollo sostenible (económica, social y ambiental) y, lo que es más grave, las instituciones que la gestionan (dimensión política-institucional o de gobernanza) no han asumido en sus políticas que la sostenibilidad es un objetivo obligatorio de primera magnitud. La clara consecuencia de este hecho es el incumplimiento sistemático de la Directiva Marco de Agua europea en la cuenca del Tajo., Sustainability is not one of the guidelines or objectives of economic policy in Spain, but it should be in water policy as Water Framework Directive goals, which include sustainability, are mandatory. This article assesses water policy sustainability in the Tagus river basin from the point of view of the three main dimensions of sustainable development: economic, social and environmental. In addition, the institutions responsible for designing water policy (governance dimension) in the Tagus river basin have not come to terms with the sustainability objective. The main result is a systematic and recurrent failure to comply with the Water Framework Directive in the Tagus river basin.

International audience

El presente estudio continúa con la línea de investigaciones que se han producido sobre la gestión del agua subterránea en el Alto Guadiana en las últimas décadas, pero centrándose en un tema poco analizado en detalle: el funcionamiento de las Comunidades de Regantes (CCRR). Así, El objetivo general de este estudio es realizar un análisis actualizado y exhaustivo de la gestión de las aguas subterráneas en el acuífero de la Mancha Occidental a través de una investigación sobre el funcionamiento de las CCRR. Trataremos con ello de poner de relieve las debilidades y carencias que tienen actualmente, así como las oportunidades y fortalezas, para subsanar las primeras y potenciar las segundas en una propuesta de reforma para mejorar la gestión de las aguas subterráneas. Para ello, la metodología utilizada ha sido la siguiente: en un primer momento se realiza una revisión bibliográfica para encontrar un punto de partida. Seguidamente se mantienen entrevistas personales con nueve expertos en la materia analizada y posteriormente, se recoge toda la información posible de las propias CCRR a través de un breve cuestionario que se realizó a todas ellas (20 en total) y de entrevistas personales con los Presidentes de diez Comunidades estratégicamente elegidas. Con toda esta información, ha sido posible realizar una caracterización de las CCRR y un análisis de la situación en las que se encuentran actualmente (análisis D.A.F.O.), como paso previo a la propuesta de reforma que planteamos. Actualmente existen 20 Comunidades de Regantes en el acuífero de la Mancha Occidental organizadas por términos municipales y una Comunidad General de Usuarios del Acuífero 23 que agrupa a las 20 Comunidades de base, pero que en la actualidad ha dejado de ejercer sus funciones por falta de medios económicos. Están constituidas por todos los usuarios de aprovechamientos legalmente inscritos en el Organismo de Cuenca, principalmente regantes, que suman 16.561 comuneros, 26.234 captaciones y 204.665 hectáreas de regadío, (datos aportados por las propias CCRR) lo que da idea de la dificultad de gestión de este acuífero. Este fue uno de los principales motivos por los que se decidió organizar las CCRR por términos municipales, para facilitar la gestión. No obstante existen grandes diferencias entre ellas, debido sobre todo a su tamaño, ya que las Comunidades más grandes cuentan con más recursos económicos y más personal que las pequeñas. Sin embargo todas ellas funcionan de una manera parecida, asemejándose en muchos casos a simples gestorías ya que sus funciones se centran en los expedientes administrativos de los pozos, dejando de lado las funciones de guardería, policía etc. En cuanto a su financiación depende de las cuotas que cobran a los comuneros, que consideran insuficientes por lo que reclaman mayor apoyo económico de la administración. El análisis de la situación actual de las Comunidades de Regantes en la Mancha Occidental nos ha permitido obtener un conocimiento contrastado y válido de la realidad. Son muchas las Debilidades de las CCRR; excesivo número y pequeño tamaño de las mismas que favorece la atomización de los recursos económicos, el sesgo en las funciones orientadas hacia la defensa de los intereses de los regantes sobre el interés general del acuífero, la escasa participación de los usuarios, la falta de transparencia informativa o la deficiente regulación normativa. Las amenazas son el propio carácter de los agricultores, la falta de información y conocimiento por parte de los usuarios y las implicaciones políticas e influencias sindicales sobre las CCRR. En el lado opuesto de la balanza cabe destacar las fortalezas y oportunidades. Las fortalezas las constituyen un uso racional del recurso, el carisma del presidente de la Comunidad, el gran potencial que tienen las CCRR y el acercamiento que se ha producido en los últimos años entre éstas y el Organismo de Cuenca. Por último las oportunidades de futuro las constituyen el apoyo del organismo Consorcio Alto Guadiana, el giro hacia una agricultura más tradicional de secano, la posibilidad de celebrar contratos de cesión de derechos de uso de agua y convenios con la administración y la evolución de los usuarios a favor de una adecuada gestión del acuífero. Nuestra propuesta de Reforma, tomando como base la información anterior, consiste en reorganizar la estructura actual de veinte CCRR en tres Comunidades de Usuarios por Masa de Agua Subterránea (CUMAS). Propuesta que justificamos a través de la implantación de una serie de programas de actuaciones: programa económico (independencia económica a través de cuotas satisfechas por los usuarios por hectárea y m3) inventario de regadíos mediante SIG, programa de formación, sensibilización y participación, medidas de comunicación, planes de cultivo y programa de control y seguimiento de las extracciones (instalación de contadores), todas ellas desarrolladas por personal técnico cualificado. Consideramos que nuestra propuesta puede contribuir a mejorar la gestión del acuífero estudiado y al mismo tiempo, adaptar la gestión de las aguas subterráneas a la Directiva Marco del Agua.

The Water Framework Directive establishes a common framework for EU water policy. One of its guiding principles is the promotion of public participation in water planning and management. In response to this requirement, River Basin Authorities are undertaking public participation and consultation processes as part of the elaboration of the Draft Basin Management Plans. This article describes and analyzes these processes, placing them in the context of wider public discussions and debates over water policy that have taken place in Spain over the past two decades. The paper argues that some of the strengths of Spanish WFD-related public participation processes derive from the significant improvement in the amount of information made available to the public, and from the relationships that are established between different stakeholder groups and between these and the water administration. On the other hand, the lack of credibility and legitimacy of some processes is related to the lack of political leadership and commitment to public participation, to insufficient inter-administrative cooperation, and to the persistence of parallel channels of communication between traditional water users and water managers. The paper also points to some potential areas of improvement such as the methodological design of public participation processes, a clarification of their impact on specific plans and proposals, and a search for tools to adequately inform and incorporate the wider public in water policy debates. Finally, the paper discusses the role that social networks, built around the ideas and goals of the New Water Culture, are playing in water policy debates by demanding more transparent and sustainable water policy decision making., Fundación Nueva Cultura del Agua. Universidad de Zaragoza.