"It started with a fence. Not around a palace, but a
river."
Once a lifeline for farmers, children, and wildlife, the
riverbanks are now lined with surveillance cameras, barbed wire, and armed
patrols. Water, the element that once united communities, is being guarded like
a state secret. Behind the razor wire, corporations broker billion-dollar
deals. Outside it, locals wait for tankers or walk miles to fill a plastic jug.
This is not a scene from a dystopian novel—it is happening
from Jakarta to Johannesburg, from California to Cairo. As climate pressures
rise, governments promise security. However, what they are really securing is Profit.
In a world where Water is traded like oil, thirst is not just for
hydration—it is for control.
1 Introduction
In
the narrow alleys of Jakarta's northern slums, Nuraini wakes before sunrise to
wait by a rusty tap. Some days, it drips; some days, it does not. When it runs
dry, she pays a private vendor triple the city rate for a few jugs of murky Water.
Nearby, a corporate pipeline hums beneath her feet—delivering clean,
pressurized Water to a luxury complex across the city.
It
is not just a local injustice—it is a global pattern. Across Jakarta, Dhaka,
the West Bank, and the Nile Delta, access to Water is no longer defined by
geography or rainfall but by ownership, contracts, and control. Water, once
shared and safeguarded as a public right, is increasingly being fenced off,
priced up, and militarized. From corporate boardrooms to armed security patrols
at dams and reservoirs, Profit and power now govern the flow of Water.
What
was once a communal resource is now a traded asset. Global finance institutions
are investing in water futures. Governments are partnering with private
companies under the guise of efficiency. Moreover, in vulnerable regions,
private security forces are being deployed to guard water infrastructure, not
from natural disasters but from the public itself.
This
article explores the transformation of Water into a financialized,
securitized, and militarized commodity. It examines how corporations
exploit institutional weaknesses, how governments enable resource
capture, and how powerful actors use technological systems to control
access and forecast scarcity for market gain. However, it also traces the
rise of resistance: the Indigenous communities, urban collectives, and civil
society movements fighting to restore Water as a common good.
Midway
through this shift lies a dangerous intersection, where corporate power aligns
with state security and militarization becomes a method of governance.
Across regions like Egypt's New Delta or the Bangladesh Delta basin,
militarized public-private partnerships have reshaped landscapes and dislocated
communities under the rhetoric of modernization and resilience.
As
corporate entities expand their hold, they deploy predictive technologies,
opaque contracts, and lobbying influence to entrench their position in
water markets. These mechanisms not only reshape physical infrastructure
but also erode democratic control. Governments, often motivated by
fiscal incentives or geopolitical strategy, enable this process, turning what
should be a public right into an engineered privilege.
However,
amidst the encroachment, new forms of resistance are emerging. In Palestine,
grassroots water networks monitor Israeli-controlled aquifers. In Latin
America, Indigenous women lead legal battles against extractive mega-projects.
In Jakarta and Dhaka, slum communities use mobile apps to document corporate
mismanagement and build pressure for policy reform.
Scholars
have increasingly analyzed the convergence of corporate governance, water
scarcity, and environmental injustice (Choi et al., 2016; Hikmawan et al.,
2021; Evers, 2022). Research highlights how shareholder obligations often
override environmental safeguards (Rodin, 2005) and how legal loopholes
and policy influence tilt governance in favour of private actors (Mora et
al., 2014). These frameworks often fail to account for the lived realities
of communities that face the brunt of these decisions.
The
logic of commodification extends beyond pricing models. It redefines Water's
very meaning—from a life source to a ledger entry. Moreover, doing so deepens
inequality, displaces people with low incomes, and corrodes ecological systems
already strained by climate change.
There
is a growing moral imperative to resist this trajectory. That means redefining
water governance to centre transparency, equity, and environmental
sustainability. It requires legal reform, participatory policy-making, and
community-led monitoring of water access and corporate accountability.
Corporate
social responsibility frameworks and international campaigns for water justice
are gaining momentum (Ali et al., 2023; Bashir, 2019). Some companies have
begun integrating sustainable practices, but without enforceable standards and
citizen oversight, many remain performative.
Ultimately,
reclaiming Water as a public good requires more than technical fixes—it
demands a shift in power. From Dhaka to Detroit, from Jakarta to Johannesburg,
water justice must flow from the grassroots upward. This article aims to
illuminate how we got here and how a more just, inclusive, and
sustainable path can be carved, drop by drop, story by story, and voice by voice.
2
Hydropower Hegemony – Privatization Meets
Militarization Main Focus: Corporate-military partnerships in water governance
2.1 From Commons to
Corporations
Once, a farmer could walk to the Nile, dip his
hands into the river, and draw Water as his ancestors had for generations.
Today, he signs a lease from a holding company he has never met—to irrigate his
fields. Behind a veil of contracts and acronyms, what was once a birthright has
become a business model.
In Egypt's Delta, as in countless regions
across the globe, access to clean Water has become a battleground—no
longer dictated by the rhythms of nature but by the tides of investment. Water
is no longer a shared commons; it is guarded, priced, and parcelled out under
security watch. From Jakarta's polluted rivers to military-escorted pipelines
in the Sahel, the liquid that sustains life now flows where capital allows it,
not necessarily where communities need it.
Engineers (or powerful actors) intentionally
designed this transformation. Through the machinery of public-private
partnerships (PPPs), Powerful economic actors increasingly govern water
systems, pushing aside communal needs. Corporations and governments promote
these partnerships as solutions to ageing infrastructure and climate
unpredictability, but they often conceal a more sobering reality: they
systematically transfer ownership and control from local communities to
corporate portfolios(Cousins, 2019)
Water, once managed by elders and public
trusts, is now filtered through algorithms, hedge funds, and militarized
oversight. In this new paradigm, People must negotiate access; it is no longer
guaranteed. The entanglement between corporations, government agencies, and
military actors has created a governance model that prioritizes return on
investment over public interest. This convergence does not merely privatize—it weaponizes
inequality(Gama, 2023; Gleick, 2019).
Corporations are rapidly investing in water infrastructure
under the banner of progress, armed with surveillance systems and backed by security forces. However, what they often build are not bridges of
inclusion but walls of exclusion. Communities are being distanced—physically
and politically—from the very resources that define their survival.
This article investigates this shifting
landscape of control and resistance. It delves into the operational strategies
behind these corporate-military partnerships, their socio-political and
environmental consequences, and the grassroots movements rising in defiance. In
tracing this global story, we uncover a fundamental question: Who really
holds the valve—and who gets left behind in the thirst for capital?
2.2 The
Framework of Corporate-Military Partnerships in Water Governance
The
intersection of corporate interests and military involvement in water
governance is not merely a theoretical construct; it manifests in various ways
across the globe. Corporations are increasingly leveraging their financial
prowess to impose control over water resources; scholars (or critics, analysts)
characterize it as a new form of imperialism. Armed guards now stand at the
gates of Ethiopia's mega-dams, scanning the horizon not for floods, but for
protesters. In California, drones buzz above fenced-off reservoirs while
motion-activated cameras track every ripple. In the West Bank, water tankers
move under military escort, serving settlements first while Palestinian
villages ration from rooftop barrels. In this model, corporations (or market
actors) commodify access to clean Water. In this model, they treat Water not as
a right but as a product to be bought and sold; access to clean Water is
commodified, resulting in severe implications for community rights and
environmental sustainability (Plisson et al., 2025). The privatization of water
risks turning clean Water into a luxury, available only to those who can afford
it, thus stripping it of its status as a universal human right.
The
military's function in bolstering these industrial initiatives is significant.
Military-grade surveillance technology and security systems are increasingly
deployed to protect corporate water interests, often at the expense of local
populations. This arrangement creates a fortified environment where the opposition
encounters brutal repression, thus perpetuating a cycle of oppression and
inequality (Xie & Warner, 202) (Gleick, 2019). As demonstrated in the
Syrian conflict, water resources have been utilized as a strategic instrument.
This evolution reflects a troubling example of how disputes over Water can be
manipulated for tactical advantages, further entrenching corporate hegemony
(Gama, 2023; Daoudy, 2020).
Governments,
in their eagerness to attract foreign investments and maximize revenues, often
cooperate with corporations, facilitating the latter's control over critical
resources. This collaboration raises alarms about accountability and ethical
governance as elected officials increasingly prioritize corporate welfare over
community needs. The lack of regulation and oversight in these partnerships
leads to unsustainable practices that threaten water quality and endanger local
ecosystems (Cousins, 2019; Gleick & Shimabuku, 2023). The militarization of
water governance must be understood as a pivotal issue that transcends
environmental concerns, striking at the core of social justice and human
rights.
2.3 The
Consequences of Water Militarization and Corporatization
The
consequences of allowing water governance to fall into the hands of
corporations and their military allies are both profound and far-reaching. One
of the most immediate outcomes is the deepening of social inequalities.
Marginalized communities often bear the brunt, as corporations extract local
water supplies for Profit while neglecting their responsibility to ensure
equitable distribution. In regions facing chronic drought and resource
scarcity, this imbalance can become explosive.
Take
the Lake Chad Basin, for example. Once a thriving water source for over 30
million people, the lake has shrunk by 90% in recent decades. As multinational agribusinesses secured control over surrounding water systems, local communities, already displaced by climate impacts, were pushed further to the margins. Armed groups exploited the desperation, recruiting among youth whose
villages could no longer sustain farming or fishing. What began as an
environmental crisis soon escalated into a humanitarian and security
catastrophe.
This
case illustrates how the commodification and militarization of Water can
transform ecological stress into violent conflict, driven not only by climate
variability but also by systems of exclusion that prioritize financial gain
over human rights (Griffin, 2020; Nkiaka et al., 2024).
2.4 Case
Studies: Weaponization of Water and Corporate Interests
The case studies examining the weaponization
of Water in conflict zones emphasize, in a striking manner, vividly the
critical consequences of corporate-military entanglements in water governance.
In Syria, a well dries not by drought, but by
design. Authorities have strategically manipulated the water supply to
destabilize opposition-controlled areas, cutting off communities from one of
their most basic survival needs (Gama, 2023). This tactic transforms Water from
a source of sustenance into a weapon of war. The deliberate targeting of water
infrastructure marks a stark departure from the norms of humanitarian
protection. Analysts highlight how states and powerful actors militarize Water
to exert control, inflict punishment, and fracture resistance.
Around Lake Chad, survival means navigating
both bullets and boardrooms. Once a crucial lifeline for fishing and
farming communities, the lake has dramatically shrunk due to climate change and
overuse. Into this ecological crisis stepped corporate actors eager to extract
and commodify dwindling water reserves. Their operations, often conducted with
little regard for local livelihoods, intersect with armed insurgencies like
Boko Haram, which exploit community grievances to gain influence. Security forces
sent to restore order frequently intensify the violence, protecting corporate assets
while displacing vulnerable populations (Griffin, 2020; Meihami et al., 2025).
What emerges is a humanitarian crisis where Armed groups and
powerful actors capture Water as a resource and turn it into a flashpoint for
conflict.
In the West Bank, water trickles behind
military checkpoints. Israeli control over transboundary aquifers
has allowed settlers nearly full access to piped, pressurized water. At the same time, many
Palestinian communities receive an intermittent supply or rely on trucked-in water
at inflated prices. Corporate entities involved in the extraction and
distribution of Water have profited from this imbalance, while military
enforcement ensures that the infrastructure remains tightly secured. Families
in villages like Masafer Yatta store rainwater in rooftop tanks, knowing it may
be their only source for days. Here, authorities (or powerful actors) do not
just allow Water to remain scarce—they actively segregate it(Amnesty
International, 2022; Weinthal & Sowers, 2019).
These cases reflect a broader pattern: When
Water is militarized and monetized, it becomes a battleground for power rather
than a shared source of life. The implications stretch beyond environmental
degradation—they reveal the extent to which the control of vital resources
shapes modern conflict. In Syria, Lake Chad, and the West Bank, the fusion of
military force and corporate interest exacerbates inequality, undermines human
rights, and reshapes Water not as a right, but as leverage.
2.5 The
Path Forward in Water Governance
The central challenge presented by the corporate-military partnership in water governance is the urgent need for reform. As communities across the globe confront the consequences of water militarization and corporate interests, the importance of advocating for decentralized governance models becomes clear. Such models emphasize community involvement and participation, recognizing Water as a common good fundamental to human dignity and life (Humphreys, 2013). Fostering collaborative governance frameworks that prioritize sustainability and equity is essential. These frameworks must include comprehensive legislation aimed at regulating the water market and ensuring public accountability in decision-making processes (Plisson et al., 2025; Griffin, 2020). Nations must engage in international cooperation and establish agreements to protect shared water resources, resolve disputes, and ensure equitable access (Zawahri, 2008).
Activism
and grassroots movements play a pivotal role in challenging the prevailing
norms surrounding water governance. By mobilizing stakeholders and leveraging
digital tools for oversight and advocacy, communities can resist trends of
commodification and militarization. The rise of local initiatives focusing on
water conservation, environmental protection, and community rights must be
supported to counter the hegemony of corporations and military interests (Gama,
2023; Metaxas et al., 2023).
The
potential for transformative change lies in recognizing Water as a fundamental
human right and public good, one that requires vigilant protection against
monetization and militarization. By prioritizing corporate accountability,
fostering community engagement, and upholding environmental integrity, society
can strive toward a more just and sustainable future where Water serves as a
source of life rather than division and conflict.
3
The Public-Private Pressure Valve: When
Partnerships Turn Into Power Plays
Public-private
partnerships (PPPs) have gained prominence as a mechanism to enhance efficiency
and address pressing infrastructure challenges across the globe. However,
policymakers and stakeholders often herald such collaborations for their
potential to optimize resources, and the reality frequently paints a different
picture. In many cases, these partnerships inadvertently undermine equity,
reinforcing existing socioeconomic divides rather than bridging them. Specific
instances, such as Egypt's New Delta Project, vividly illustrate this dynamic and
the operations of the US Army Corps of Engineers, which demonstrate how the
promise of efficiency can morph into a power play that privileges corporate
interests over community needs (Cepiku & Mastrodascio, 2021); (Kulkarni,
2018)(Forrer et al., 2010).
3.1 Egypt's
New Delta Project: Militarization and Corporate Interests
In Egypt's western desert, tractors rumble
across freshly claimed soil as drones hover overhead. Behind a chain-link
fence, farmers who once tilled this land by hand now stand idle, watching
corporate machines plough fields they can no longer access.
Framed as a solution to Egypt's agricultural
challenges and chronic water scarcity, the government (or officials, leaders, and
media—depending on context) heralded the New Delta Project as a national triumph.
It aims to expand cultivable land and modernize irrigation systems in a country
heavily reliant on the Nile. However, beneath the promises of progress lies a
troubling reality: the project is managed by military-affiliated entities in
collaboration with private investors, creating a governance model that
privileges control over the community (Kulkarni, 2018).
As the sun rises over the New Delta,
silhouettes of armed personnel patrol irrigation canals lined with barbed wire.
Water flows abundantly through concrete channels, but not a drop reaches the
village just beyond the fence. In the distance, satellite-guided sprinklers
sweep across corporate fields—precision-controlled yet socially disconnected.
"They say this land is for feeding the
nation," says Ahmed, a displaced farmer in the Beheira Governorate. "But
we are the ones who used to feed it—and now we cannot even grow enough for our
own families."
While the state has significantly expanded its
capacity to secure vast tracts of land, this development has sidelined local
farmers, many of whom have relied on these areas for generations. Land once
stewarded by communities has been privatized through lease agreements granted
to corporate agribusinesses, often under military oversight. This process
reflects a broader pattern of modifying public resources for private gain.
Displaced from their livelihoods, local
farmers now face intensified competition and diminishing influence as
agriculture shifts toward large-scale, profit-driven models that prioritize
export and efficiency over tradition and equity. The result is rising
inequality, eroded community agency, and growing resentment among those
excluded from decision-making. This entanglement of military power and
corporate interest illustrates how the governance of essential resources
can become a political battleground, where the rhetoric of development masks the
reality of dispossession (Sarvari et al., 2020).
3.2 Indonesia's
River Cleanups: Tokenism and Exclusion
Similar
patterns of inequity emerge from Indonesia's river cleanup initiatives,
particularly in urban hubs like Jakarta and Bandung. Foreign-funded sanitation
projects, which ostensibly aim to address rampant pollution and public health
issues, involve private logistics firms operating under the watchful eye of
security forces. While these projects promise an improved urban environment, Decision-makers
often relegate community involvement to a token status, where decisions impact
slums. There is a significant distance between the realities of the areas. (Hu
et al., 2020).
In
these contexts, the failure to incorporate local knowledge and engage
communities in decision-making processes exacerbates the inequalities faced by
marginalized groups. The local populations, whose health and livelihoods are
directly affected by river conditions, remain detached from the very initiatives
that claim to benefit them. As a result, the operational success of these
projects often comes at the cost of community welfare, reinforcing a model
where the public treatment of services as commodities rather than fundamental
rights to which all individuals are entitled (Frone & Frone, 2018).
3.3 US Army Corps of
Engineers: A Potential Conflict of Interest
In
a similar vein, the US Army Corps of Engineers, while technically a public
agency, frequently partners with private contractors to manage crucial infrastructure like dams and flood control. Critics
argue that this practice fosters a revolving door between public spending and
corporate water interests, which prioritizes the fiscal incentives of private
partners at the expense of effectively serving the public interest (Forrer et
al., 2010).
This
model illustrates a broader trend whereby accountability becomes diluted as
public resources are channelled towards lucrative contracts that may favour one
entity over another. Consequently, essential services are often handed over to
private actors, accompanied by state-sanctioned protection from public scrutiny
(Islam & Akroyd, 2024). This results in a governance structure that is not
only inefficient but also characterized by potential conflicts of interest
between the roles of public entities and private corporations.
3.4 Global
Patterns of Public-Private Partnerships and Local Impacts
The
patterns observed in Egypt and the United States reflect a global phenomenon
whereby public-private
partnerships are becoming increasingly beneficial in addressing serious societal concerns. However, the trend often
reveals that the anticipated efficiencies frequently come at the expense of
equity. Research highlights a negative relationship between the establishment
of PPPs and equity, indicating an upward trajectory of privatization that
systematically diminishes community control over essential services and
environmental resources (Cepiku & Mastrodascio, 2021; Forrer et al.,
2010; Morea & Balzarini, 2018).
Globalization
has, in many instances, facilitated the rise of corporate power to the
detriment of local interests. As a result of the widespread exploitation of
vital resources for Profit, marginalized communities often bear the brunt of
environmental degradation and systemic inequalities that arise from such
partnerships. As infrastructure needs grow, the risk remains that PPPs will
perpetuate a cycle of dispossession and disenfranchisement without meaningful
accountability (Febiola & Basar, 2024).
3.5 Conclusion:
Reenvisioning Public-Private Partnerships for Equitable Outcomes
The
growing body of literature detailing the repercussions of public-private
partnerships emphasizes an urgent need for reevaluation. For PPPs to fulfil
their intended purpose of enhancing efficiency and equity, equitable frameworks
must be instituted that prioritize community involvement and protect local
interests over corporate profits. This includes establishing safeguards against
the marginalization of vulnerable populations and integrating community voices
into all stages of development projects (Forrer et al., 2010).
Addressing
the complexities inherent in these partnerships requires a commitment to
transparency, accountability, and robust regulatory frameworks that govern
public resource management. As evidenced by the discussed case studies, the
path forward demands a shift from viewing Water and public services merely as
commodities to understanding them as essential human rights that require
diligent stewardship from both public and private spheres (Acharya et al.,
2019; Rashed et al., 2019). Without such a shift, the lessons from Egypt and
the US Army Corps of Engineers forewarn an increasingly stratified society in
which Corporations' interests, rather than egalitarian government, are the ones
that decide who has access to crucial resources.
4
Commodifying the Flow: Water as a Product, Not
a Right
The contemporary landscape of water governance
reveals a troubling shift: Water, an essential element of life, is increasingly
commodified and treated as a marketable asset rather than an inherent human
right. Across global cities and rural peripheries alike, public-private
partnerships (PPPs) have introduced pricing mechanisms and service frameworks
that disproportionately affect people with low incomes. This commodification is
most visible in rising tariffs, opaque contractual arrangements, and the
treatment of ecosystems as extractive zones. These practices collectively
transform water access into a transactional privilege, leaving the most
vulnerable behind (Zhang et al., 2021; Baisa et al., 2010).
4.1
Ariff Hikes: The Economic Burden on Poor
Communities
For many, a clean glass of Water now costs as
much as a complete meal. In urban peripheries, from Lima to Lagos, the
privatization of water services has led to steep hikes in tariffs. Upon the
transfer of water systems to private operators, the priority often
shifts from universal service provision to return on investment (ROI).
Low-income households, already burdened by inflation and precarious employment,
must stretch limited income to cover basic needs—Water included (Zhang et al.,
2021; Baisa et al., 2010).
Ana, a mother of three in a low-income neighbourhood
of Lima, received a water disconnection notice despite never missing a payment.
The new provider had introduced a surcharge without warning. Similar
stories echo globally, where families are forced to ration water consumption or
rely on expensive informal vendors. The rise in water tariffs can lead to
deteriorating health outcomes, especially when households reduce hygiene or
water intake to cope with mounting bills (Zhou et al., 2016). Disconnections due
to unpaid fees further entrench cycles of poverty, limited educational and
employment opportunities, and heightened vulnerability (Villar & Melgarejo,
2020).
4.2
Opaque Contracts: Shielding Corporations from Scrutiny
The commodification of Water often thrives in
the shadows of legal opacity. Many PPP contracts are protected by
non-disclosure agreements, enabling corporations to operate without meaningful
transparency or public oversight (Purvis & Dinar, 2020; Gupta et al.,
2020). Community members are rarely aware of the terms dictating water quality
standards, pricing formulas, or infrastructure commitments.
In Accra, a civil society group filed a
freedom of information request to review a significant water PPP. The response?
"Contractual confidentiality." This concealment fosters
public distrust and leaves room for exploitative practices. Without precise
accountability mechanisms, private operators may cut corners on infrastructure
investment, delay service expansions, or impose hidden fees—practices that
disproportionately harm the poorest residents (Momeni et al., 2023; Jalón et
al., 2017).
4.3
Ecosystem Exploitation: Treated as Extractive Zones
Commodification does not stop at pricing; it
extends to the landscapes where Water lives. Wetlands, riverbanks, and aquifers
are increasingly leased or sold to private actors who treat them as economic
units rather than ecological commons (Lowe et al., 2014; Tang,
2010). These arrangements prioritize immediate economic return over long-term
environmental stewardship.
In the Heihe River Basin in China,
over-extraction by industrial water users has degraded surrounding wetlands and
reduced biodiversity critical to local livelihoods.
Corporations driven by growth metrics often extract without replenishment,
disrupting delicate ecological balances and diminishing resilience against
climate extremes (D'Mello & Kumar, 2015; Wang et al., 2023; Qu et al.,
2022). This environmental degradation compounds social marginalization, as
communities that rely on natural water sources lose both environmental
stability and cultural identity.
4.4
Access as a Transactional Privilege: Implications for the
Marginalized
In this commodified reality, access to Water
becomes a matter of affordability, not entitlement. Urban areas experiencing water scarcity are increasingly reliant on privatized models that prioritize payment over need. Clean Water is distributed not by
fairness or urgency but by market logic (Vítková et al., 2022; Tang et al.,
2013).
In Bangalore's informal settlements, residents
watch tankers fill private corporate cisterns before delivering low-quality,
overpriced Water to slum neighbourhoods. This dynamic not only
widens the gap between rich and poor but also undermines the fundamental
premise of Water as a human right. The transactional nature of access
reinforces existing social hierarchies, making Water another barrier to
mobility and equality (Shen & Reddy, 2016). These injustices spark protest,
resistance, and—in some cases—violent unrest as communities push back against
the enclosure of their most vital resource (Jaffee & Newman, 2012).
4.5 Conclusion:
Reaffirming Water as a Common Good
The
commodification of Water reflects broader socioeconomic trends that underscore
profound inequalities within society. Privatization and public-private
partnerships, water shortages, and the issues that there is a consistent
suggestion of management positions. As potential answers to these problems,
their implementation frequently perpetuates inequities through tariff hikes,
opaque contracts, and systemic exploitation of ecosystems. As communities
grapple with rising costs and declining access to essential resources, it
becomes clear that Water needs to be reaffirmed as a common good.
Addressing
these disparities necessitates concerted efforts to establish transparent
governance frameworks alongside equitable pricing mechanisms that prioritize
community access and environmental justice (Hu et al., 2024). Policymakers and
stakeholders must reevaluate existing water governance models, ensuring that Water
remains a fundamental right that is accessible and affordable to all,
especially the most vulnerable populations. Only by collectively challenging
the commodification narrative can society initiate a transition toward a more
just and equitable future for water access and management.
5
Risks of Corporate-Military Fusion: Where Efficiency
Becomes Exploitation
"We
are not criminals. We just want Water for our children," says María, a
Guatemalan activist now under house arrest for protesting a foreign-owned hydro
project. Her plea
echoes across continents where communities defending their right to water face
militarized repression. Before the first drop flows, corporations secure
protection from floods, but only from the very people whose rivers they have
claimed.
The
increasing fusion of corporate interests and military involvement in water
governance poses profound risks, particularly for public voices and community
advocacy. This relationship often manifests in ways that suppress dissent,
evade regulatory oversight, and intensify state repression against those who
stand up for water rights. The implications of this corporate-military
collaboration extend beyond mere economic exploitation—they craft a strategic
environment that makes resistance to the corporation's objectives substantially more challenging to overcome. At the same time, extraction processes proceed
with minimal opposition.
5.1 Public Voices
Silenced: National Security Justifications
The
language of national security is frequently employed to justify the suppression
of dissent in the context of water privatization. State actors often invoke
security rhetoric to delegitimize grassroots movements advocating for equitable
water access, framing them as threats to societal stability. This transition
facilitates a concerning pattern where individuals or groups protesting against
privatization efforts face criminalization fueled by the perceived necessity of
maintaining "public order "Treacy, 2019)(Bytyqi & Morina, 2023;
By
framing dissent in the context of national security, states can easily sideline
the voices of marginalized communities. In numerous instances, activists
advocating for water rights in Latin America, Africa, and Southeast Asia
encounter aggressive tactics meant to intimidate or deter their efforts. The
militarization of response to dissent further exacerbates the challenges faced
by these advocates who, in a climate of escalating repressive measures, must
navigate increased risks of arrest, surveillance, and violence (Franz, 2011; Tiede, 2012)
5.2 Oversight
Avoided: Regulatory Evasion through Military Partnerships
The
involvement of military partners in corporate water projects often allows
corporations to sidestep regulatory hurdles under the guise of "vital
infrastructure" projects. For instance, military frameworks that protect
corporate interests can obscure the processes that govern environmental
assessments, procurement, and compliance with local laws (Bytyqi & Morina,
2023; Madondo & Putten, 2022). This strategic evasion can lead to approval
for projects that may be detrimental to local communities and ecosystems under
the pretext of economic development and national security.
In
this context, transparency generally occurs when public
governance mechanisms are undermined. Military troops employed to protect corporate venture assessments intended to
uphold public safety and environmental integrity may be either bypassed or
significantly downplayed. The resulting lack of oversight jeopardizes the
communities directly affected by these water governance decisions, leading to
outcomes that favour corporate Profit over public welfare (Tiede, 2012;
Mahardhika et al., 2022).
5.3 Repression
Intensified: The Militarization of Water Defense
The
increasing militarization of water governance has resulted in the intensified
repression of water defenders worldwide. Areas in Latin America, Africa, and
Southeast Asia that are rich in water resources have often become sites of
conflict between corporate interests and local populations (Bytyqi &
Morina, 2023; Santos et al., 2021). Activists in these regions face threats
that escalate to criminal charges, surveillance, and even violence as states
reinforce corporate investments through militarized law enforcement (Dollinger,
2017).
The
violence targeted at water defenders reflects a broader pattern of
state-sanctioned repression, where legal instruments are used as weapons
against individuals or organizations advocating for environmental justice and
human rights. As these defenders confront heightened risks, the social fabric
of communities advocating for water rights becomes increasingly strained. The
narratives of protection employed by the state frequently fail to incorporate
the perspectives of those negatively impacted by water privatization (Sabyr et
al., 2024; Zębek, 2021).
5.4 Strategic Fusion of
Profit and Force
The
fusion of profit motives and military force is not merely an incidental
development; it is a strategic collaboration cultivated through specific
objectives. This unity enhances extraction operations, streamlines
corporate access to water resources, and renders public opposition less viable.
As profit-driven motives shape governance frameworks, militarized forces' engagements in this sector reinforce the overarching theme that it is
common practice to regard water resources as commodities for extraction rather
than vital assets for communities.
In
practice, the synergy between corporate entities and military forces transforms
resistance into a formidable challenge for local populations, complicating
efforts to advocate for rights that should be universally safeguarded (Castro,
2020; Zębek, 2021). The consequences of this strategic fusion are seen not only
in the immediate suppression of dissent but also as part of a broader systemic
framework where essential resources are managed in ways that favour elite
interests over community empowerment (Backman, 2012; Zhilina et al., 2021).
5.5 Challenging
Corporate-Military Collaborations
To handle the myriad problems that have arisen as a result of the
merger between industries and the military in water governance, there is an
urgent need for advocacy that prioritizes transparency, accountability, and
community agency. Strategies that strengthen the voices of local communities
are paramount to countering the silencing effects of national security
justifications employed against dissent. Engaging in legislative reform and
public dialogue can ensure that regulatory frameworks safeguard Water as a
human right rather than a lucrative commodity under corporate control.
Additionally, significant attention must be given to demilitarizing water governance
and disbanding abusive practices targeting activists. The reinforcement of
human rights protections and environmental justice principles stands as a
necessary counterbalance to the trends described in this analysis. By actively
challenging the dynamics of corporate-military partnerships, communities can
reclaim control over their water resources and work towards systems of
governance that prioritize environmental sustainability and social equality.
The integration of local advocacy into decision-making processes will serve to
disrupt the patterns of exploitation and repression, fostering resilience
against corporate power and military strength (Kupryashina et al., 2021;
Garriga & Phillips, 2022; Doeffinger & Hall, 2020).
6
Pathways to Water Justice: People Before Profit
Deep and systemic reforms in water governance are imperative to counter the prevailing hegemony that prioritizes Profit over communal needs. The
discourse surrounding public-private partnerships (PPPs) and corporate control
over water resources necessitates a complete reimagining of how these systems
operate, emphasizing accountability, transparency, and ecological health. The
following pathways advocate for the critical reforms required to ensure that Water
remains accessible as a fundamental human right rather than a commodified
product.
6.1 Rewriting PPPs:
Ensuring Public-benefit Clauses
Future
contracts under public-private partnerships should incorporate enforceable
public-benefit clauses that prioritize not only access and affordability but
also environmental integrity. The traditional approach to PPPs has often
sidelined critical considerations of community welfare, leading to scenarios
where corporations operate primarily on a profit-centric model. Incorporating
clauses that mandate community engagement in the decision-making processes
regarding water management will help ensure that local communities retain a
voice in determining how their water resources are utilized McCluskey et al., 2019; Nakbum & Jang, 2024).
Enforceability
is key; it is not sufficient to have beneficial clauses merely included in
contracts if there are no mechanisms to hold corporations accountable for their
adherence to these stipulations. Regulatory frameworks must be strengthened to
monitor compliance systematically, ensuring that violations can result in
appropriate penalties aimed at safeguarding public interests (Sun et al., 2018;
Bos et al., 2014). This reform is essential to combat the harm posed by
existing models that facilitate unchecked extraction and commodification of
water resources, as witnessed in numerous global contexts.
6.2 Citizen Governance:
Elevating Local Participation
To
counterbalance the influence of corporate interests in water governance,
establishing Water planning councils that include local voices is critical. It
is essential to ensure representation from marginalized groups, such as women,
indigenous communities, and informal workers, whose perspectives are often
overlooked in traditional governance frameworks (Dai, 2020; Cohen &
Headley, 2023). By engaging these stakeholders in water management decisions,
the governance structure can shift from a top-down approach, where decisions are
imposed, to a more inclusive model that recognizes and validates local wisdom
and needs.
Empowerment
through local governance can foster a sense of ownership and responsibility
among communities, creating more resilient water management strategies. This
participatory approach not only enhances equity but also boosts the ecological
sustainability of water resources, as communities are better positioned to
advocate for practices that honour their ecological contexts (Maltby, 2017;
Fisk & Cherney, 2016). Thus, community voices serve not only to challenge
corporate narratives but also to foster practices that prioritize ecological
sustainability and livelihood security.
6.3 Independent
Regulation: Establishing Accountability Mechanisms
One
fundamental pathway toward water justice is the establishment of robust, independent regulatory bodies, both at the national and international levels. These
watchdog organizations should be tasked with monitoring compliance,
investigating abuses, and enforcing penalties against corporations that exploit
water resources without regard for community rights or environmental health
(Neufeld, 2016; Sargeant et al., 2018). Strengthening independent oversight
mechanisms is vital to ensuring that corporate and governmental
partnerships do not compromise ethical governance.
Regulatory
bodies should employ diverse surveillance methods and hold transparent
inquiries into corporate practices that impact water management. By effectively
enforcing accountability, these regulators can dismantle the culture of
impunity that often surrounds corporate exploitation and foster deeper trust
among affected communities. Promoting a culture of accountability is
essential for ensuring that all stakeholders, including corporations, adhere to
ethical practices in their water management operations (Levin, 2022; Ji et al.,
2019).
6.4 Restoring
Accountability, Transparency, and Ecological Health
For
genuine reforms to take root, pathways to water justice must address not only
access to Water but also broader issues of accountability, transparency, and
ecological health. Establishing frameworks for independent scrutiny of water
policies allows communities to hold governments and corporations accountable
for their actions and decisions regarding water resources. This transparency is
vital to ensure that the management of water does not exacerbate
environmental degradation or social inequities.
Moreover,
achieving ecological health requires integrating holistic and sustainable
practices within water resource management. Policies should incentivize
practices that maintain and restore ecosystems, such as wetlands and
watersheds, which are essential for ensuring the long-term viability of water supplies
(Ting & Jeng, 2023; Kozjek & Brezovar, 2022). Encouraging restorative
practices not only enhances ecological integrity but also reinforces community
ties to local natural resources, turning water governance into a collaborative
effort that respects both human and ecological needs.
6.5 Conclusion:
A Reimagined Future for Water Governance
The
pathways outlined towards water justice emphasize a fundamental shift from
profit-oriented water governance to one that prioritizes people and ecological
health. To accomplish this, deep and systemic reforms are crucial, encompassing
the rewriting of PPP contracts, elevating local governance participation,
establishing independent regulatory frameworks, and restoring integrity across
water management systems. The reimagining of governance structures in favour of
inclusivity and sustainability can reshape the narrative surrounding Water from
one of commodification to one of collective stewardship.
As
these reforms are implemented, it becomes essential to foster a culture of
accountability and transparency that empowers communities to reclaim their
rights to Water and ensures that resources are managed holistically. This
commitment to justice can serve as a powerful catalyst for meaningful change,
addressing both historical and contemporary injustices while moving toward a
more equitable and sustainable future.
The pathways outlined towards water justice
emphasize a fundamental shift from profit-oriented water governance to prioritising people and ecological health. To accomplish this, deep and systemic
reforms are crucial, encompassing the rewriting of PPP contracts, elevating
local governance participation, establishing independent regulatory frameworks,
and restoring integrity across water management systems. The reimagining of
governance structures in favour of inclusivity and sustainability can reshape
the narrative surrounding Water from one of commodification to one of
collective stewardship.
As these reforms are implemented, it becomes
essential to foster a culture of accountability and transparency that empowers
communities to reclaim their rights to Water and ensures that resources are
managed holistically. This commitment to justice can serve as a powerful
catalyst for meaningful change, addressing both historical and contemporary
injustices while moving toward a more equitable and sustainable future.
In Cochabamba, citizens once took back their Water.
Now, they teach others how to do the same. From Peru to Palestine, community
victories—though hard-won—prove that resistance works and change is possible.
Water justice is not just an idea; it is a movement. Moreover, it is growing.
7
Conclusion : Democracy at the Tap
The
ongoing struggle for water justice is a poignant testament to the impact of
privatization on fundamental human rights. The actual cost of privatized water
services extends beyond mere rising bills; it encapsulates the erosion of
rights, the silencing of voices, and the deepening of inequality within
communities. As militarized governance cloaks the commodification of Water in
the guise of progress, it inevitably paves over the essential principles of
democracy, leaving vulnerable populations disenfranchised Lee et al., 2016).
Reclaiming
Water as a public good necessitates a robust commitment to restoring collective
ownership, respecting indigenous rights, and embedding transparency at every
level of decision-making. This shift is critical to ensure that water
governance is aligned with principles of equity and justice, allowing
communities to not only access water but also participate meaningfully in the
governance of this vital resource. Moreover, when Water flows freely, not solely
as a commodity exchanged for Profit, but with dignity and equity, the potential
to foster a sustainable and just future becomes increasingly attainable (Nguyen
et al., 2021).
The
path to water justice begins where policy and public engagement intersect.
Future reforms must prioritize enforceable public-benefit clauses in
public-private partnerships that govern water supply; these principles should
ensure affordability and accessibility for all, environmental integrity, and
the participation of local communities in governance structures (Felgendreher
& Lehmann, 2015). Policymakers will need to dismantle entrenched power
dynamics that favour corporate profits over public welfare and empower
citizens, especially marginalized groups, so they have a substantial say in how
water resources are managed.
As
communities demand accountability and transparency, independent regulatory
bodies must be established to protect against the abuses often cloaked under
the pretext of economic development (Henn & Gnutzmann‐Mkrtchyan, 2015). By holding
corporations accountable to the communities they serve, it is possible to
dismantle the militarized structures that have increasingly governed the
politics of water distribution and access. Such changes are crucial for creating
resilient systems that honour both people and ecosystems, positioning
communities as the rightful custodians of their water resources.
In
essence, the fight for water justice is inextricably linked to the broader
struggle for democratic governance and social equity. As we advocate for
reforms, it is imperative to recognize that not only must the taps remain open,
but it is equally essential that the public retains the agency to control the
valve. Through collective actions that affirm the right to Water and uphold the
principles of justice, it is possible to pave a way forward for future
generations, where access to clean, affordable Water is not a privilege but a
right guaranteed for all (Li et al., 2022).
In
essence, the fight for water justice is inextricably linked to the broader
struggle for democratic governance and social equity. As we advocate for
reforms, it is imperative to recognize that not only must the taps remain open,
but the public must reclaim the right to hold the valve. Water governance
must no longer serve corporate margins but must instead uphold the dignity of
those it was meant to serve.
It
is time we broke the fences, unlocked the valves, and reclaimed the flow for
all. Water was never meant to be a commodity—it was meant to be a covenant—a covenant of life, equity, and shared stewardship for generations to come.
Reference
Acharya, B., Lee, J., & Entele, B. (2019).
Diversification of private participation in public infrastructure in developing
countries. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 8(4),
12060-12071. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijrte.c6057.118419
Ali, I., Husin, N., Alrazi, B., & Ali, N. (2023).
Stand your ground: theories applied and their influence on corporate water
performance. https://doi.org/10.15405/epfe.23081.45
Backman, C. (2012). Mandatory criminal record checks
in Sweden: a scandal and function creep. Surveillance & Society, 10(3/4),
276-291. https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v10i3/4.4206
Baisa, B., Davis, L., Salant, S., & Wilcox, W.
(2010). The welfare costs of unreliable water service. Journal of Development
Economics, 92(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2008.09.010
D'Mello, J. and Kumar, S. (2015). Why is the Bay of Bengal experiencing a
reduced rate of sea surface warming?. International Journal of Climatology,
36(3), 1539-1548. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4414
Bashir, A. (2019). The role of private security
companies in the provision of security to corporate organizations in Sabon Gari Local Government, Kaduna State, Nigeria. International Journal of Recent
Technology and Engineering, 8(2S3), 264-266. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijrte.b1045.0782s319
Boatemaa, M., Asante, K., & Agyemang, C. (2019).
The moderating role of psychological flexibility in the relationship between
organizational commitment, workaholism, job security, and corporate
entrepreneurship among information technology workers in Accra, Ghana. Sage
Open, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019871063
Bos, K., Velden, L., & Lind, E. (2014). On the
role of perceived procedural justice in citizens' reactions to government
decisions and the handling of conflicts. Utrecht Law Review, 10(4), 1.
https://doi.org/10.18352/ulr.287
Bytyqi, V. and Morina, F. (2023). The international
standards on the protection
of the environment through criminal law
- Special focus on the EU directive
on environmental crime. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 32(2),
1545-1554. https://doi.org/10.15244/pjoes/152146
Castro, P. (2020). National interests and coalition
positions on climate change: a text-based analysis. International Political
Science Review, 42(1), 95-113. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512120953530
Cepiku, D. and Mastrodascio, M. (2021). Equity in
public services: a systematic literature review. Public Administration Review,
81(6), 1019-1032. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13402
Choi, G., Chong, K., Kim, S., & Ryu, T. (2016).
Swmi: New paradigm of water resources management for SDGs. Smart Water, 1(1).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40713-016-0002-6
Cohen, G. and Headley, A. (2023). Training and 'doing'
procedural justice in the frontline of public service: evidence from police.
Review of Public Personnel Administration, 44(2), 215-239.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371x221149137
Cousins, J. (2019). Malleable infrastructures: crisis
and the engineering of political ecologies in southern California. Environment
and Planning E Nature and Space, 3(3), 927-949.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2514848619893208
Dai, M. (2020). Training police for procedural
justice: an evaluation of officer attitudes, citizen attitudes, and
police-citizen interactions. The Police Journal Theory Practice and Principles,
94(4), 481-495. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032258x20960791
Daoudy, M. (2020). Water weaponization in the syrian
conflict: strategies of domination and cooperation. International Affairs,
96(5), 1347-1366. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiaa131
Doeffinger, T. and Hall, J. (2020). Water stress and
productivity: an empirical analysis of trends and drivers. Water Resources
Research, 56(3). https://doi.org/10.1029/2019wr025925
Dollinger, B. (2017). Subjects in criminality
discourse: on the narrative positioning of young defendants. Punishment &
Society, 20(4), 477-497. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474517712977
Ekwall, D. and Rolandsson, B. (2012). Security aspects
on corporate culture in a logistics terminal setting. Journal of Transportation
Security, 6(1), 13-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12198-012-0100-0
Evers, M. (2022). Discovering the prize: information,
lobbying, and the origins of US–Saudi security relations. European Journal of
International Relations, 29(1), 104-128.
https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221115961
Fayez, S., Nazeri, H., & BagherKiaroodi, M.
(2013). Risk assessment of information security management systems in government organizations in Iran. https://doi.org/10.2991/iccnce.2013.19
Febiola, M. and Basar, B. (2024). Local private sector
involvement in public–private partnerships for sustainable Water and sanitation
in Asia. https://doi.org/10.56506/oowf2834
Felgendreher, S. and Lehmann, P. (2015). Public choice
and urban water tariffs—analytical framework and evidence from Peru. The
Journal of Environment & Development, 25(1), 73-99.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1070496515619651
Feuer, A. (2022). Environmental warfare tactics in
irregular conflicts. Perspectives on Politics, 21(2), 533-549.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s153759272200189x
Fisk, K. and Cherney, A. (2016). Pathways to
institutional legitimacy in post-conflict societies: perceptions of process and
performance in Nepal. Governance, 30(2), 263-281.
https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12208
Forrer, J., Kee, J., Newcomer, K., & Boyer, E.
(2010). Public–private partnerships and the public accountability question.
Public Administration Review, 70(3), 475-484.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02161.x
Franz, A. (2011). Crimes against Water:
non-enforcement of state water pollution laws. Crime Law and Social Change,
56(1), 27-51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-011-9308-3
Frone, S. and Frone, D. (2018). Issues of efficiency
for public-private partnerships in the water sector. Studies and Scientific Research Economics Edition, (27). https://doi.org/10.29358/sceco.v0i27.413
Gama, M. (2023). Water weaponization: the Syrian case.
E-Cadernos Ces, 40. https://doi.org/10.4000/120rj
Garriga, A. and Phillips, B. (2022). Organized crime
and foreign direct investment: evidence from criminal groups in Mexico. Journal
of Conflict Resolution, 67(9), 1675-1703.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027221145870
Gleick, P. (2019). Water as a weapon and casualty of
armed conflict: a review of recent water‐related violence in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. Wiley
Interdisciplinary Reviews Water, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1351
Gleick, P. and Shimabuku, M. (2023). Water-related
conflicts: definitions, data, and trends from the water conflict chronology.
Environmental Research Letters, 18(3), 034022.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/acbb8f
Griffin, T. (2020). Lake Chad changing hydrography,
violent extremism, and climate-conflict intersection. Expeditions With McUp.
https://doi.org/10.36304/expwmcup.2020.05
Gupta, R., Yan, K., Singh, T., & Mo, D. (2020).
Domestic and international drivers of the demand for water resources in the
context of water scarcity: a cross-country study. Journal of Risk and Financial
Management, 13(11), 255. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm13110255
Henn, C. and Gnutzmann‐Mkrtchyan, A. (2015). The layers of the it agreement's
trade impact. https://doi.org/10.30875/92cd71f9-en
Hesarzadeh, R. and Bazrafshan, A. (2019). Ceo ability
and regulatory review risk. Managerial Auditing Journal, 34(5), 575-605.
https://doi.org/10.1108/maj-08-2018-1958
Hikmawan, M., Indriyany, I., & Hamid, A. (2021).
Resistance against corporations by the religion-based environmental movement in
water resources conflict in Pandeglang, Indonesia. Otoritas Jurnal Ilmu
Pemerintahan, 11(1), 19-32. https://doi.org/10.26618/ojip.v11i1.3305
Hu, R., Wang, Y., Xiao, W., Wang, Y., & Qiu, X.
(2024). Study on water-saving potential and incentive systems in southern
water-lifting irrigation districts. E3s Web of Conferences, 490, 03009.
https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202449003009
Hu, Z., Li, Q., Liu, T., Wang, L., & Cheng, Z.
(2020). Government equity investment, effective communication, public-private partnership PPP) performance: evidence from China. Engineering
Construction & Architectural Management, 28(9), 2811-2827.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ecam-02-2020-0138
Humphreys, S. (2013). Predicting, securing and shaping
the future: mechanisms of governance in online social environments.
International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics, 9(3), 247-258.
https://doi.org/10.1386/macp.9.3.247_1
Islam, S. and Akroyd, C. (2024). Control strategies
for impactful exits in impact private equity firms. Accounting and Finance,
64(4), 3419-3442. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.13258
Jackson, S. (2017). 'selling' national security: saab,
youtube, and the militarized neutrality of swedish citizen identity. Critical
Military Studies, 5(3), 257-275. https://doi.org/10.1080/23337486.2017.1395675
Jaffee, D. and Newman, S. (2012). A more perfect
commodity: Bottled water, global accumulation, and local contestation. Rural
Sociology, 78(1), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831.2012.00095.x
Jalón, S., Tánago, M., Alonso, C., & Jalón, D. (2017). The environmental
costs of water flow regulation: an innovative approach based on the 'polluter
pays' principle. Water Resources Management, 31(9), 2809-2822.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-017-1663-0
Ji, S., Yoon, K., Park, J., An, S., & Oh, H.
(2019). The relationship between ceo governance and social responsibility of
service firms. Sustainability, 11(18), 4942. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11184942
Junianto, O., Arafah, W., & Kusnadi, K. (2024).
The influence of strategic competence, transformational leadership, and good
corporate governance on the organizational performance of the presidential
security forces is mediated by organizational citizenship behavior. IJSMR, 07(02),
96-107. https://doi.org/10.37502/ijsmr.2024.7209
Kozjek, T. and Brezovar, N. (2022).Citizens'
mistreatment by public servants in social public services. Danube, 13(2),
82-106. https://doi.org/10.2478/danb-2022-0006
Kulkarni, S. (2018). Canal commands and rising
inequity. Sociological Bulletin, 67(3), 348-360.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0038022918796958
Kupryashina, E., Boev, D., Gileva, A., Lyakhova, A.,
& Shumilin, S. (2021). Right to receive legal assistance in criminal
proceedings in Russia and in foreign countries. Linguistics and Culture Review,
5(S3), 992-1000. https://doi.org/10.21744/lingcure.v5ns3.1689
Lambooy, T. (2011). Corporate social responsibility:
sustainable water use. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(8), 852-866.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.09.009
Lee, F., Aggarwal, V., & Nickum, J. (2016). Urban
domestic water pricing in India and China. Water Policy, 18(S1), 68-82.
https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2016.205
Levin, L. (2022). Contracting out public participation
to external consultants: observations on epistemic justice. Public
Administration Review, 83(1), 92-102. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13517
Li, W., Guo, J., Yuan, J., Liu, J., & Edwards, D.
(2022). Exploring the key indicators of social impact assessment for sponge
city ppps: a sustainable development perspective. Buildings, 12(9), 1329.
https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12091329
Lowe, B., Lynch, D., & Lowe, J. (2014). Reducing
household water consumption: a social marketing approach. Journal of Marketing
Management, 31(3-4), 378-408. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257x.2014.971044
Madondo, C. and Putten, M. (2022). Mental health and
criminal justice: bridging two worlds. Journal of Forensic Practice, 24(4),
390-403. https://doi.org/10.1108/jfp-05-2022-0020
Mahardhika, V., Astuti, P., Rusdiana, E., Hikmah, N.,
& Ahmad, G. (2022). Challenges in the implementation of the "jalur
khusus" concept in the draft indonesian criminal procedure code. SHS Web
of Conferences, 149, 02006. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202214902006
Maltby, E. (2017). The political origins of racial
inequality. Political Research Quarterly, 70(3), 535-548.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912917704518
McCluskey, J., Uchida, C., Solomon, S., Wooditch, A., Connor, C., & Revier,
L. (2019). Assessing the effects of body‐worn cameras on procedural justice in the los angeles
police department*. Criminology, 57(2), 208-236.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12201
Meihami, R., Andik, B., Jafari, M., Mianabadi, H.,
Houshmand, E., & Talebi, M. (2025). Autonomy within sovereignty: the
multiscalar hydropolitics of the Kurdistan Regional Government. World Water
Policy, 11(1), 61-81. https://doi.org/10.1002/wwp2.12256
Metaxas, T., Gallego, J., & Juárez, L. (2023).
Sustainable urban development and the role of mega-projects: experts' view
about the Madrid Nuevo Norte project. Journal of Infrastructure Policy and
Development, 7(2), 2161. https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v7i2.2161
Momeni, M., Razavi, V., Zahedi, S., Momeni, F., Behzadian,
K., & Dolatabadi, N. (2023). A study of the required sustainability-driven
institutional and behavioural mechanisms to tackle the anticipated implications
of agricultural water price shocks: a system dynamics approach.
https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2933795/v1
Mora, A., Cuevas, P., Merelo, J., Zamarripa, S., &
Esparcia-Alcázar, A. (2014). Enforcing corporate security policies via
computational intelligence techniques. 1245-1252.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2598394.2605438
Morea, D. and Balzarini, M. (2018). Financial
sustainability of a public-private partnership for an agricultural development
project in Sub-Saharan Africa. Agricultural Economics (Zemědělská Ekonomika),
64(9), 389-398. https://doi.org/10.17221/161/2017-agricecon
Nakbum, C. and Jang, J. (2024). The effect of
organizational justice on police officers' perception of procedural justice in South Korea: the mediating roles of perceived discretion and
responsiveness. Policing an International Journal, 47(2), 321-336.
https://doi.org/10.1108/pijpsm-11-2023-0143
Neufeld, B. (2016). Freedom, money and justice as
fairness. Politics Philosophy & Economics, 16(1), 70-92.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594x16651058
Nguyen, P., Trieu, H., Anh, M., & Nguyen, T.
(2021). Evaluating critical success factors in public–private partnership
water supply infrastructure projects. SHS Web of Conferences, 129, 09012.
https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202112909012
Nkiaka, E., Bryant, R., & Kom, Z. (2024).
Understanding links between water scarcity and violent conflicts in the Sahel
and Lake Chad basin using the water footprint concept. Earth's Future, 12(2).
https://doi.org/10.1029/2023ef004013
Paudyal, H., Pangeni, B., Basnet, P., & Inoue, K.
(2021). Studies on removing Sr (II) ions from Water using carbonized
orange juice residue. International Journal of Environment, 10(2), 83-98.
https://doi.org/10.3126/ije.v10i2.42823
Plisson, H., Kharevich, A., Харевич, В., Chistyakov,
P., Зоткина, Л., Baumann, M., … & Krivoshapkin, A. (2025).Arrowheads at
obi-rakhmat (Uzbekistan) 80 ka ago.. https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.01.14.632810
Purvis, L. and Dinar, A. (2020). Are intra- and
inter-basin Water transfers a sustainable policy intervention for addressing
water scarcity?. Water Security, 9, 100058.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasec.2019.100058
Qu, Y., Kang, J., Lin, X., Ni, H., Jiang, Y., &
Chen, G. (2022). Analysis of agriculture water pricing reform in a
water-deficient area of northwest China. Water Policy, 24(10), 1570-1589.
https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2022.288
Rashed, A., Alam, M., & Toriman, M. (2019).
Considerable issues for a sustainable public-private partnership (PPP) project.
https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/h9gw4
Rodin, D. (2005). What's wrong with business ethics? International Social Science Journal, 57(185), 561-571.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2451.2005.00571.x
Sabyr, A., Ramazanova, A., Koishybaiuly, K.,
Zhanibekov, A., & Apakhayev, N. (2024). Problems of the prevention of criminal
offenses related to the use of water resources in Kazakhstan. World Water
Policy, 10(1), 22-36. https://doi.org/10.1002/wwp2.12166
Santos, M., Testa, A., & Weiss, D. (2021).
Inflation and cross-national homicide: assessing nonlinear and moderation
effects across 65 countries, 1965–2015. International Criminal Justice Review,
31(2), 122-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057567720981624
Sargeant, E., Murphy, K., & Madon, N. (2018). Is
dissatisfaction with police inevitable? Testing an integrated model of
motivational postures and procedural justice in police-citizen contacts. Police
Practice and Research, 19(2), 125-137. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2018.1418156
Sarvari, H., Cristofaro, M., Chan, D., Noor, N., &
Amini, M. (2020). Completing abandoned public facility projects by the private
sector: results of a Delphi survey in the Iranian Water and Wastewater Company.
Journal of Facilities Management, 18(5), 547-566.
https://doi.org/10.1108/jfm-07-2020-0046
Schillinger, J., Özerol, G., Güven‐Griemert, Ş., & Heldeweg, M. (2020). Water in war:
understanding the impacts of armed conflict on water resources and their
management. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Water, 7(6).
https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1480
Shen, D. and Reddy, V. (2016). Water pricing in china
and india: a comparative analysis. Water Policy, 18(S1), 103-121.
https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2016.107
Sun, I., Wu, Y., Liu, J., & Craen, M. (2018).
Institutional procedural justice and street procedural justice in Chinese
policing: the mediating role of moral alignment. Australian & New Zealand
Journal of Criminology, 52(2), 272-290. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004865818782572
Tang, Z. (2010). Value the irrigation water: a case
study in northwest China. Advanced Materials Research, 113-116, 2385-2388.
https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/amr.113-116.2385
Tang, Z., Nan, Z., & Liu, J. (2013). The
willingness to pay for irrigation water: a case study in northwest China.
Global Nest Journal, 15(1), 76-84. https://doi.org/10.30955/gnj.000903
Tiede, L. (2012). Legal reform and good governance:
assessing rights and economic development in Chile. Law & Policy, 34(3),
237-262. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9930.2012.00363.x
Ting, Y. and Jeng, W. (2023). Exploring data justice
in citizen humanities: case studies from memory institutions. Proceedings of
the Association for Information Science and Technology, 60(1), 1149-1151.
Treacy, J. (2019). Drinking water treatment and
challenges in developing countries.. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80780
Tulchynska, S., Popelo, O., Tulchinskiy, R., Popelo,
O., & Tkachenko, T. (2022). Innovative development as a determinant of
corporate economic security. Opportunities and Challenges in Sustainability,
1(1), 52-60. https://doi.org/10.56578/ocs010106
Valentinov, V. and Pies, I. (2017). From complexity
reduction to moral character: A Deweyian reading of Luhmann's social systems
theory. Behavioral Science, 35(6), 632-644.
Villar, A. and Melgarejo, J. (2020). Prospective
models for water service demand and price analyses. Water, 12(6), 1613.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w12061613
Vítková, E., Vaňková, L., & Oblouková, A. (2022). Comparison of the price
level of the water and sewerage charge rates and macroeconomic indicators in
the Czech Republic. Przegląd Naukowy Inżynieria I Kształtowanie Środowiska,
31(2), 113-123. https://doi.org/10.22630/srees.2958
Wang, S., Fu, L., Peng, H., Wang, J., Hua, Y., &
Gui, Z. (2023). Study on an equilibrium water price system based on cooperative
game technology. Water, 15(13), 2354. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15132354
Xie, L. and Warner, J. (2021). The politics of securitization:
China's competing security agendas and their impacts on securitizing shared
rivers. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 63(3), 332-361.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15387216.2020.1870516
Zawahri, N. (2008). International rivers and national
security: the Euphrates, Ganges–Brahmaputra, Indus, Tigris, and Yarmouk
rivers1. Natural Resources Forum, 32(4), 280-289.
Zhang, X., Rivas, M., Grant, M., & Warner, M.
(2021). Water pricing and affordability in the us: public vs private
ownership. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/7mc4r
Zhilina, N., Lukyanchikova, E., Kovalenko, D.,
Mironuk, I., & Prokhorova, M. (2021). Terminological description of
extremism in international acts and national criminal laws. Linguistics and
Culture Review, 5(S3), 942-949. https://doi.org/10.21744/lingcure.v5ns3.1670
Zębek, E. (2021). Essential issues in select European Union countries' criminal
environmental law in compliance with Directive 2008/99/EC. Vestnik of Saint
Petersburg University Law, 12(2), 356-373.
Zhou, D., Wang, X., & Shi, M. (2016). Human
driving forces of oasis expansion in northwestern China during the last
decade—a case study of the Heihe River basin. Land Degradation and Development,
28(2), 412-420.
No comments:
Post a Comment