A range of players are involved in any issue relating to water resources and their use.
There are supporters and opponents, villains and victims, ‘Davids’ and ‘Goliaths’.
However, for almost all players, the conservation and sustainable
development of water resources is an increasingly important priority.
The process of weighing up the motivations and perceptions of players is called values analysis.
It is an important factor in the evaluation of issues and in decision-making.
Political
International organisations (e.g. UN), government departments (e.g.
DEFRA), regional and local councils, lobbyists and pressure groups
Economic
World Bank, governments, developers, utility companies (e.g. Thames Water), agriculture,
industry (esp. chemicals and food), TNCs and businesses (including energy companies)
Social
Individuals, residents, indigenous
groups, landowners, farmers,
consumers, health officials,
scientists and NGOs (e.g. Water Aid)
Enviornmental
Conservationists, scientists, planners, international organisations (e.g. FAO) and NGOs (e.g. WWF and People & Planet)
Water futures for India and its neighbours
The Indian subcontinent has an insecure water future because:
it has considerable supplies of
water provided by three of the
world’s major rivers, but its
monsoon climate creates extremes
of flooding and drought
rapid population growth and
urbanisation, the existence of a
large rural population and
recent industrialisation are
creating an unsustainable
demand for water
the political division of some of its
major drainage basins does not help
water management, and disputes
with neighbouring countries over
water are ongoing
The Ebro River in Spain
In July 2001 the Spanish government approved a scheme
to divert water from the lower Ebro valley to supply cities,
farmers and tourists in the parched southeast of the country
Three years later, the newly elected government cancelled the
diversion project and replaced it with cheaper, I more localised
schemes, including desalination plants.
This decision was the outcome of a hotly contested debate between
players in favour of and opposed to the diversion project.
The case for
Big international investors were concerned because they had marketed the south-
east of Spain as the ‘new Florida’.
Vast tourist developments between
Alicante and Almeria costing billions of
euros, many based on new golf courses,
were to be sited in areas supplied with
Ebro water.
People in Murcia and Almeria saw the Ebro scheme as the beginning of a new future, allowing the
development of holiday homes, golf resorts and Europe’s biggest tourism complex at Cabo Cope.
The head of the Murcia regional government claimed desalination was unproven and expensive.
EU funding was available, but may not be in the future.
The case against
Environmentalists in the north protested that the diversion scheme was a misuse of a
scarce resource and that it would have a drastic impact on the Ebro and its fragile delta.
The Environment Minister claimed that the desalination plants would provide the same amount of water sooner and more cheaply.
The new national government
also promised to improve water
recycling and make irrigation
systems more efficient.
Environmentalists claimed that the aquifers of the Ebro basin
were already drying out because of over-extraction.
They, and other critics, felt that the subsidies
offered to farmers for irrigation encouraged the
use of unsuitable land.