Graduate school approval record northeastern university
Download 0.56 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Social Good vs. Economic Good
- Value vs. Price
The Water CouncilThe Water Council became the most prestigious and respected political institution in the oasis of Figuig. It maintained its prominence as a fair and impartial arbiter of water issues and consequently social and political disputes. A transparent and respected governance structure complimented and upheld the law that emerged relative to the value of water and the values of the community in keeping with religious law and cultural norms that placed the survival of the oasis at the forefront of its value system. With each of the Ksar’s appointing a representative with established credentials as a knowledgeable and esteemed member of society, the legitimacy and well-defined authority of the Water Council brought about continuity of purpose and asserted the importance of water in the community through its actions over time.(Figuig Interviews, 2005) Given that the Oasis has little written history and its legal records had traditionally not been preserved in a written documents, there is no actual measure of the length of existence of the Water Council. According to elders in the community, the Water Council has existed for generations.(Figuig Interviews, 2005) Its existence was animated in the town square (Figure 20), Jmaâ, where its proceedings were public and actively attended. The Council met every day to discuss issues relative to water, disputes, and, increasingly, over time, often called upon to intervene in social affairs respective of what was considered balanced and respected judgment.  
Figure 20: Jmaâ The continuity of the Water Council and a clear body of law, supported by the community and the national government allowed for flexible approaches to water governance. Examples of modern effective systems are often cited for their flexibility. Rogers and Hall cite, examples of flexible approaches to water problems in the US that “have allowed for adjustments to be made over time when economic and social conditions change because it does not aspire to build institutions that cover all possible eventualities.”(Rogers and Hall, 2003, 17) In the case of Figuig, the foundations of a well established legal system that supported important rights and obligations had provided a pillar for the community to support its goal of sustainability.
As in Figuig, when private property rights play a vital role in public life, market forces are typically enhanced by government regulation and other institutional controls to ensure that the good of the entire community is served. Both developed and underdeveloped countries continue to alter market forces by regulating monopolies and lowering the cost of vital resources such as grains, gasoline, and electricity. through subsidies. For a society like Figuig, with such a volatile environment, survival was only possible by creating a system of effective demand controls. While the price of water in Figuig fluctuates relative to supply levels of pricing has traditionally been maintained at a level below the price a modern free market would assign, hovering around 25 Dirhams/kharouba ($.07 per cubic meter). There are two main reasons for keeping prices at a very low level. First, it is contrary to social dogma to charge exploitative prices. Figuig’s social system was heavily influenced by sophist philosophy (not to be confused with the Greek sophists) where it was believed that the wealthy should remain humble and refrain from flaunting their richness while those less financially solvent, including the very poor are entitled to enjoy a dignified status in the community.(Figuig Interviews, 2005) Second, while denying water to the poor in Figuig because of one’s inability to pay was contrary to sophist and Islamic tradition, it further undermined the value of community in supporting sustainability.(Figuig Interviews, 2005, Koran) Individuals and families at all economic levels of society worked together to maintain an effective water infrastructure and institutional system to support the community and the Oasis as a whole. Additionally, the poor also worked and gave their lives fighting for water or building access points to the Springs. When Tzadert was under attack from other Ksars, for instance, all able men went to battle regardless of whether they owned water shares or not. Ksar solidarity has resulted, for example, in every person from Zenaga believing that Tzadert is theirs to maintain and defend. Value vs. PriceIn keeping with the principles of the important proclamation of the Dublin Conference water is considered an “economic good”.(ICWE, 1992) It is difficult to argue against the assertion “that water is an economic good” as this follows directly from the definition of economics as they present as “the science which studies human behavior as a relationship between ends and scarce means which have alternative uses.”(Robbins, 1935) Water meets these requirements, first as a scarce resource. Further, it serves a multiplicity of ends (ranging from drinking and bathing, through irrigation, recreations, and environmental use, to waste disposal), and thus satisfies the condition of “alternative uses.”(Perry et al., 1997) Water is generally considered a common property resource, limited only by private property of the land that consumes, or is contained by it. As a result, these are often assumed to be over utilized, as in the case of water. Accordingly, economists generally assume that society will not effectively manage its resources without market forces, which in turn requires private property ownership. The examples of Valencia, Spain suggests that this is not always true. Economists believe economic efficiency can be achieved without government control if property rights are well specified.”(Pindyck, Rubinfield, 2004:661) Public goods, on the other hand, are assumed, to create market inefficiencies that often warrant government oversight. Single ownership is not always practical, as most common property resources are vast, as in the case of water in lakes, rivers, and oceans. “In such cases government ownership or direct government regulation may be needed.”(Pindyck, Rubinfield, 2004:661) Morocco maintains ownership of all water resources, hence they are considered common property. Water rights, however, are assigned to property owners with water resources contained within well-defined limits. Islamic law, which is reflected in much of Moroccan law emphasizes the community aspect of private property ownership of water, known as Harim. Many adepts believe that water should be subject to market pricing to ensure efficient allocation.(ICWE 1992) While there is wide scale approval of treating water as an economic good, “the role of water as a basic need, a merit good, and a social, economic, financial, and environmental resource makes the selection of an appropriate set of prices exceptionally difficult as the flow of water through a basin is complex, and provides a wide scope for externalities, market failure, and high transaction costs.”(Perry, et al, 1997) Proponents of water as a public good, on the other hand, “contend that safe water is a basic need that should be available at reasonable levels to everyone. They also argue that water used for irrigation can be a powerful means of reducing food costs to poor people and, under the proper conditions, should be subsidized.(Chambers, 1988) Others believe that water serves important ecological, environmental, and aesthetic benefits in many cases, and should not be allocated to other uses simply on the basis of an individual or community’s ability or willingness to pay. In the terminology of economics, “this school believes that, at least up to some minimal level of availability, water is a social good whose availability to certain groups and for certain purposes at well below market prices will serve the greater benefit of society as a whole.”(Perry, et al, 1997) Much of the time, however, we find that water tends to lend itself, both to the properties of a common good and a social good while demanding the controls of the market that impose economic value and the efficiency of the market to check demand. “Even in cases of conflicts over values, rational people can reach agreement in terms of relative quantities.” Advocates of water as a public good would most likely agree that once individuals or families have obtained an adequate amount of necessary resources (food, water) additional water and food should be allocated by market forces. Accordingly, they argue that programs directed toward poverty alleviation should be complimented by market forces that can allocate goods more efficiently”(Perry, et al., 1997) Free market pricing of water without effective controls and value consideration, undermines the basic tenets of a supply and demand management system. The free market quantifies the value of water in monetary terms, but it diminishes the non-monetary value to the consumer by taking away value controls. Economic models do not necessarily represent the realities of pricing. They often fail to incorporate the notion that to maintain a level of control and cost recovery, demand management must reflect fundamental values of proximally situated water users that are not easily assigned monetary value. Findings from my research indicate that price, in the past, had little influence on demand in Figuig. Water usage remained relatively consistent for generations as farms were passed from one generation to the other for subsistence farming and date export. As water remained limited to irrigation for local use, price fluctuations were minimal. Price must be assigned carefully so as not to overshadow the important controls established by social and cultural values that check consumption and encourage conservation. In Short, while water is assigned an economic value in Figuig, as it is consumed and traded in the market, its value is not easily discernible in economic terms.(Bencharifa et al., 1992) The value of water in Figuig is so great that the market alone would have to assign an unrealistic price to accommodate the supremacy of the value of equity and fairness along with other social needs. Sustainability could be considered to be one of the most important value components.(Figuig Interviews, 2005)
Download 0.56 Mb. Share with your friends:
|