The High Stakes Behind Water Acquisitions
Water is no longer just a utility—it’s a contested power. Around the world, the quiet wave of water acquisitions is reshaping not only who manages supply, but who holds control over the future. From corporate takeovers to community resistance, these deals often prioritize profit over people, embedding financial risks, hidden contracts, and legal shields that sideline public interest. Yet, amid backlash in cities like Cochabamba, Buenos Aires, and Jakarta, a new movement is emerging—one that reclaims water as a public good, governed by accountability, rights, and equity. This is not just a fight over pipes; it’s a fight for sovereignty, justice, and the right to live with dignity.
1
Introduction
1.1 Overview
of Water Sector Acquisitions
Water, as an essential public good and a fundamental human right, plays
a critical role in sustaining life and supporting societal functions. The
recognition of Water as a vital resource underscores the necessity for it to be
managed effectively to ensure equitable access for all. Across the globe, water
privatisation and acquisitions have emerged as notable trends in the water
sector, driven by factors including urbanisation, population growth, and
climate change challenges. Increasingly, private corporations have sought to
acquire water utilities and services, framing these initiatives as pathways
towards efficiency and innovation in water management (Correa et al., 2020).
However, this commodification raises significant concerns about the
implications for public welfare, as private interests may often clash with the
overarching need for access to safe, clean Water for all individuals (Rajala et
al., 2019; Dugard, 2010).
The advent of water acquisitions has been marked by a divergence in
outcomes, with some regions experiencing significant improvements in water
service delivery while others have faced inequities and limited access for
vulnerable populations. The consequences of such acquisitions highlight the
urgent need for critical evaluation of water governance models, particularly in
the face of a global water crisis that exacerbates issues of sustainability and
social justice (Li et al., 2024; Lobina, 2016). The core challenge lies in
identifying a balance between the financial interests of shareholders and the
public's right to access safe and sufficient water supplies. In this sense, it
is imperative to scrutinise ongoing trends and assess their impact on community
welfare and ecological sustainability, thereby shedding light on the shifting
paradigms in global water management (Henkel, 2016; Kvartiuk, 2016).
The necessity for comprehensive assessments of these acquisitions
extends beyond mere economic analyses; they must also incorporate frameworks
for public accountability and environmental stewardship. The assessment of
stakeholder interests, including those of marginalised communities
disproportionately affected by water governance decisions, remains crucial in
achieving better outcomes. In this context, restructuring and re-evaluating
previously privatised water assets must be approached not solely as a technical
exercise but as a socio-political endeavour that prioritises human rights and
community needs (Jordà-Capdevila & Casals, 2019; Lobina, 2016).
1.2 Purpose
of the Article
This article aims to uncover the hidden questions and risks associated
with water acquisitions—a landscape replete with complexities that extend
beyond the immediate financial gains often cited by proponents of privatisation.
Environmental implications and social equity serve as key undercurrents of this
inquiry, as stakeholders seek to comprehend the actual costs and benefits of
privatising water resources. Lessons drawn from a diverse array of global case
studies will inform this analysis, providing insights into the varied outcomes
of water acquisition initiatives and their reversals (Kvartiuk, 2016; Rasul et
al., 2019).
We will explore how different contexts—ranging from successful public
re-municipalisation efforts in places like Paris and Buenos Aires to persistent
struggles in South Africa and Flint, Michigan—serve as critical learning
opportunities for stakeholders navigating the turbulent waters of water
governance (Lobina, 2016; Dugard, 2010). By dissecting these case studies, we
aim to delineate best practices, recognise the signs of failure, and advocate
for models of governance that honour Water as an essential public good,
reinforcing the legitimacy of public intervention in water management
practices. Ultimately, the objective is to foster a better understanding of the
interplay between governance structures and community outcomes, advocating for
a more just and equitable approach to water management that aligns with global
human rights standards (Gambino et al., 2020); Ukpai, 2022).
1.3 Detailed
Case Studies and Analysis
1.3.1
Public vs.
Private Water Provision
The case of water privatisation in Cochabamba, Bolivia, serves as an
emblematic example of the repercussions that arise when Water is treated as a
commodity. Following the privatisation of the local water supply, the city
experienced an acute price increase, which ignited widespread protests and led
to the eventual ousting of the private firm in charge. The episode highlighted
the fundamental misalignment between profit motives and the ethical obligation
to provide Water as a public commodity (Lobina, 2016; Dugard, 2010). Similar
patterns can be observed in other regions where privatisation has resulted in
access disparities, thereby questioning the viability of market mechanisms in
managing essential resources.
In contrast, the example of re-municipalisation in Melbourne, Australia,
demonstrates a successful shift back to public control of water services,
following challenges faced under privatisation. The city reported improvements
in service delivery and community engagement when governance was re-centred
around public accountability and local needs (Gambino et al., 2020; Rajala et
al., 2019; Lobina, 2016). This transition indicated that public ownership could
lead to enhanced investments in infrastructure without compromising
accessibility.
1.3.2
Evaluating Stakeholder Perspectives
A critical dimension of understanding water acquisitions pertains to the
varied perspectives of distinct stakeholder groups. Policymakers and investor
stakeholders often prioritise profitability and efficiency metrics, shaping
narratives that promote privatisation as a solution for water management
challenges (Otaki et al., 2022; Rasul et al., 2019). However, consumers,
notably those from marginalised communities, perceive their needs through a
different lens, often emphasising the importance of access, affordability, and
transparency in governance processes.
Moreover, public perception studies reveal alarming discrepancies in
community understanding and satisfaction regarding drinking water quality, illustrated
starkly in the findings from Bekasi, Indonesia, where considerable portions of
the population lacked confidence in the safety of municipal drinking water
(Dianty et al., 2022; Rajala et al., 2019). This divergence in stakeholder
attitudes illustrates the complexity of achieving a unified vision for water
governance amidst competing interests.
1.3.3
The Global
South: Renewed Scrutiny of Privatisation Policies
Countries in the Global South have faced unique challenges in managing
their water resources, often shaped by historical injustices and a legacy of
colonial exploitation (Correa et al., 2020). The recent trend of
remunicipalization in various locales—from France to South Africa—has sparked
renewed interest in reinvigorating public governance models, positing both
regulatory accountability and community-centric decision-making as pathways to
sustainable water governance. For example, cities like Cape Town have witnessed
increasing public pushback against water privatisation initiatives in favour of
more equitable and fair water policies that prioritise citizen needs over
profit (Zhang et al., 2023; Lobina, 2016).
This growing scepticism of privatisation policies converges with global
movements advocating for Water as a human right, thereby reshaping the
discourse around public goods (Ukpai, 2022). Innovations such as community-led
infrastructure projects underscore the potential of localised governance
approaches that elevate public interest over corporate profit motives
(Kvartiuk, 2016; Correa et al., 2020).
2
Section 1: Key Questions to Ask Before Water
Acquisitions
2.1 Who Truly Benefits—Public Interest or
Shareholder Returns?
The question of who benefits from water acquisitions is crucial in the
discourse surrounding public versus private interests. Water, regarded as a
public good and human right, often comes under threat when financial motives
overshadow community welfare. This tension materialises particularly starkly in
case studies of privatisation, such as that of Thames Water in the UK. Upon its
privatisation in 1989, Thames Water was expected to improve service efficiency
through private sector management (Correa et al., 2020). However, substantial
increases in customer bills and concerns regarding service quality soon
followed, raising critical questions about the actual beneficiaries of such
arrangements. Research indicates that while operational efficiencies may be
realised, they often come at the cost of public welfare, demonstrating an
evident prioritisation of shareholder returns over community access to
essential services (Rajala et al., 2019; Dugard, 2010).
The aftermath of Thames Water's privatisation ultimately serves as a
cautionary tale, revealing that profit-seeking behaviours compromised the
initial promises of enhanced service quality. Activists and policymakers alike
have called for a reassessment of such models, advocating instead for
governance structures that align water management with the interests of public
health and equity rather than short-term financial gains (Li et al., 2024).
This case clearly illustrates the need for a balanced approach that prioritises
community welfare as much as profitability.
2.2 Are
There Confidentiality Clauses Limiting Public Scrutiny or Policy Reforms?
Confidentiality clauses in the context of water acquisitions pose
significant risks to transparency and public engagement. Non-Disclosure
Agreements (NDAS) and long-term locking clauses can prevent scrutiny and impede
necessary policy reforms that protect public interests (Lobina, 2016). Such
contractual mechanisms can shield decision-making processes from public
oversight, effectively removing accountability from water service providers.
For instance, the use of stabilisation clauses allows companies to guarantee
against adverse regulatory changes, which can prevent necessary policy
adjustments for improving water quality or service delivery (Henkel, 2016).
One prominent example is found in the contracts that governed previous
water acquisitions by multinational corporations in various global contexts.
These often included clauses that inhibited the ability of governments to adapt
regulations in response to changing public needs (Kvartiuk, 2016).
Consequently, this situation underscores the importance of ensuring that future
acquisitions are accompanied by frameworks that promote transparency, allowing
for meaningful public discourse and potential policy adjustments that are in
the collective interest (Jordà-Capdevila & Casals, 2019).
2.3 What
Protections Exist Against Financial Engineering and Asset Stripping?
The risks associated with leveraged buyouts (LBOS) and other financial
engineering strategies in water acquisitions require careful consideration.
Such financial manoeuvres can lead to asset stripping, ultimately jeopardising
the long-term viability of water utilities and the services they provide to
communities (Rasul et al., 2019). Case studies, including that of Thames Water
following its privatisation, illustrate these risks vividly; the company faced
increasing debt levels as private owners extracted substantial dividends while
investing minimally in infrastructure improvement (Gambino et al., 2020; Ukpai,
2022).
Regulatory frameworks designed to counteract such practices must be
robust and enforceable; they could include measures to cap dividend payouts,
mandate reinvestment in infrastructure, and establish rigorous oversight
mechanisms to ensure that financial practices align with the expected standards
of public service (Otaki et al., 2022). Evidence suggests that safeguarding
against excessive financial engineering not only protects community access to
water resources but also enhances the overall sustainability of water service
provisioning (Dianty et al., 2022).
2.4 Are
Water Rights or Natural Resources Being Permanently Transferred or Collateralised?
The implications of transferring control over water rights or natural
resources through acquisitions can have profound and often dire consequences
for local communities. Permanent transfers of water rights—primarily when
undertaken by multinational entities—risk severing local populations from
access to their natural resources (Zhang et al., 2023; Tiwale, 2025). A
poignant example is the controversy surrounding water extraction initiatives by
major beverage corporations, where residents have raised alarms over their
diminishing access to water resources redirected for profit (Blazy et al.,
2021; Kastner, 2014).
The accompanying loss of local control over essential resources
reiterates the need for stringent regulations to ensure that any acquisition
agreements respect existing water rights and prioritise the welfare of local
populations (Mitsi et al., 2017). Consequently, frameworks that facilitate
community engagement and provide legal pathways for residents to contest
detrimental water rights transfers are critical in maintaining equitable access
to water resources (Barouch et al., 2012).
2.5 Is the Acquisition Designed to Bypass
Democratic Oversight?
The risks of investment treaties, particularly those including
Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) clauses, can significantly affect the
ability of governments to regulate water services effectively. Such mechanisms
often empower corporations to legally challenge governmental regulations that
they view as detrimental to their interests, thereby undermining democratic
oversight intended to protect public welfare (Kwatra et al., 2015).
High-profile legal disputes reflect the contentious nature of this
dynamic, as exemplified by the case of Suez versus Argentina, where Suez
challenged the Argentine government's regulatory decisions amidst economic
turmoil (Tuleneva, 2018). This instance highlights gaps in legal frameworks
that can undermine national sovereignty and prioritisation of public interest
in the management of essential services such as water delivery. Comprehensive
reforms are needed to establish clear limits on ISDS applications while
simultaneously reinforcing local governance mechanisms that prioritise
community well-being in decision-making processes related to water management
(Barouch et al., 2013).
3
Types of
Water Sector Acquisitions
3.1
Public-to-Private Acquisitions (Privatisation)
Public-to-private
acquisitions, commonly referred to as privatisation, involve transferring the
ownership and management of water utilities from public entities to private
corporations. One of the landmark cases is the privatisation of Thames Water in
the UK in 1989. Originally public, Thames Water was expected to function more
efficiently under private management, which proponents argued would generate
substantial benefits for consumers (Correa et al., 2020). However, the outcomes
post-privatisation were mixed, revealing a trend where profit motives often
took precedence over public welfare. Despite an initial surge in capital
investment, service quality declined in several significant areas, resulting in
increased water bills and concerns about supply interruptions (Rajala et al.,
2019; Dugard, 2010).
Globally,
the mixed outcomes of privatisation efforts permeate the discourse surrounding
water management. For instance, the privatisation effects observed in South
America, such as in the case of Bolivian water systems, highlighted significant
public backlash against rate hikes and decreased service reliability (Li et
al., 2024). These experiences align with criticisms asserting that privatised
water management frequently fails to uphold the standards expected of public
service provision. As evidenced, while market-driven approaches have indeed led
to operational efficiencies in select instances, they also raise fundamental
questions about the accessibility and affordability of Water as a basic human
right (Lobina, 2016).
3.2
Private-to-Private Acquisitions
In
the realm of private-to-private acquisitions, one noteworthy example is YTL
Power's acquisition of Ranhill SAJ, a water utility company in Malaysia.
Following the acquisition, YTL Power strategically positioned itself to expand
its portfolio and harness operational synergies (Henkel, 2016). This
acquisition demonstrated how private firms often pursue mergers not only to
consolidate resources but also to enhance operational efficiencies through
shared technologies and management systems.
Strategic
motivations for private acquisitions typically encompass market expansion and
the pursuit of economies of scale, as illustrated in this example. Companies
often aim to capitalise on existing customer bases for improved revenues while
streamlining operations under a singular corporate framework (Kvartiuk, 2016).
Nonetheless, the transition from one private entity to another can yield risks
associated with service delivery quality. Stakeholders may worry that the
competitive pressures of private ownership could result in service cutbacks or
prioritise operational profit over community service standards (Jordà-Capdevila
& Casals, 2019). Hence, even within the private sector, vigilance and
regulatory frameworks are essential to ensure that public interests are not
compromised during such shifts.
3.3
Private-to-Public Acquisitions
(Remunicipalization)
Private-to-public
acquisitions, characterised as remunicipalization, reflect a growing global
trend where municipalities reclaim management of essential services,
particularly Water. An exemplary case is Eau de Paris, which returned the
management of the city's water supply to public hands in 2010 after nearly two
decades of privatisation (Rasul et al., 2019). This shift was driven by public
dissatisfaction with service quality and a desire for greater transparency and
accountability. Following remunicipalization, Eau de Paris committed to
reinvesting in infrastructure and improving community engagement, resulting in
not only enhanced service delivery but also reduced costs for consumers
(Gambino et al., 2020).
The
trend towards remunicipalization demonstrates a broader movement to re-align
water governance structures with public values that prioritise social equity
and public welfare over shareholder returns. A growing body of literature
highlights that such transitions are often motivated by the failures of privatisation
and the need for enhanced accountability in water management (Ukpai, 2022).
Statistical analyses indicate that remunicipalized services frequently witness
increased investment in infrastructure and community-oriented policies,
fostering trust among residents (Otaki et al., 2022).
3.4
Public-to-Public Acquisitions
Public-to-public
acquisitions involve the consolidation of water services within the public
sector itself, often aiming to improve governance and reduce operational
inefficiencies. A notable case is Halifax Water in Canada, where water systems
underwent consolidation to enhance efficiency and service delivery (Dianty et
al., 2022). The consolidation aimed to unify various public drinking water
systems under a single administrative body, allowing for better resource
allocation, decision-making, and operational transparency.
The
collaborative approach in public-to-public acquisitions not only maximises
resource efficiency but also reinforces the legitimacy of Water as a communal
shared resource. Evidence suggests that such configurations can lead to
improved outcomes concerning regulatory compliance and service reliability,
thereby addressing the systemic issues prevalent in fragmented service
provision (Zhang et al., 2023). Moreover, an increasing body of research
advocates for the benefits of inter-municipal cooperatives in pooling resources
and expertise, which ultimately benefits consumers while maintaining public
oversight (Tiwale, 2025).
4
Strategic
Motivations Behind Acquisitions
4.1 Utility
Portfolio Expansion
Utility portfolio expansion is a fundamental objective when companies
engage in acquisition activities, enabling them to enhance their service
offerings and market presence. A notable example of this is Suez's acquisition
of GE Water, a strategic move that significantly broadened Suez's capabilities
in water treatment and management technologies (Correa et al., 2020). By
integrating the advanced technologies and innovations of GE Water, Suez aimed
to achieve economies of scale, reduce operational costs, and diversify its
service portfolio (Rajala et al., 2019). This acquisition not only represented
a tactical expansion but also fostered diversification, allowing Suez to
address a broader range of client needs and respond effectively to the evolving
water landscape.
The benefits associated with portfolio expansion through acquisitions
include improved market competitiveness, the opportunity to leverage synergies,
and the enhancement of service quality. Furthermore, such strategic
acquisitions can contribute to increased customer loyalty as firms are better
positioned to meet diverse customer demands (Dugard, 2010). However, it is
critical to recognise that these endeavours are not without risks. Acquirers
must effectively manage the integration of new assets and cultures to realise
the anticipated benefits, as failure to do so can lead to operational
disruptions and hinder the expected gains from the acquisition (Li et al.,
2024).
4.2 Securing
Industrial Water Supply
Another strategic motivation behind acquisitions in the water sector
involves securing industrial water supply, particularly for corporations in
resource-intensive industries. A controversial example is Nestlé's acquisition
of groundwater rights in various locations, such as Michigan. This acquisition
garnered significant public scrutiny as the company's activities raised
questions about the balance between commercial interests and community needs
(Lobina, 2016). As Nestlé extracted large quantities of groundwater for its
bottled water brands, local communities expressed concerns about diminishing
water reserves and the potential threat to their access to safe drinking water.
The tensions that arose from these actions highlighted broader issues
related to corporate ownership of water resources, suggesting that such
acquisitions can lead to conflicts between profit-oriented strategies and the
long-term sustainability of local water supplies (Henkel, 2016; Kvartiuk,
2016). The implications of such acquisitions reveal the necessity for robust
regulatory frameworks that prioritise community welfare, safeguard ecosystems,
and prevent the over-extraction of scarce water resources (Jordà-Capdevila
& Casals, 2019). In this context, it is essential for acquiring entities to
engage transparently with local stakeholders to mitigate backlash and better
align their operations with sustainable practices that respect public interest.
4.3 Asset
Diversification
Asset diversification represents a critical strategic motivation for
firms seeking to enhance resilience by spreading risk across different
operational areas. Ranhill Holdings, for example, pursued a diversification
strategy by expanding its footprint not only in water services but also in the
power generation and wastewater management segments (Rasul et al., 2019). This
multifaceted approach was designed to stabilise revenues and mitigate risks
associated with the cyclical nature of water supply services, which can vary
significantly due to climate conditions and regulatory changes.
The importance of risk mitigation through diversification cannot be
overstated; by operating across varied sectors, companies like Ranhill can
capitalise on economies of scope, where the costs saved in one area enhance
profitability in another (Gambino et al., 2020). Additionally, this strategic
orientation allows firms to safeguard themselves against market volatility; for
instance, downturns in one operational segment may be offset by stability or
growth in another (Ukpai, 2022). Firms that successfully implement diversified
strategies are often better equipped to weather economic fluctuations, thus
solidifying their market positions as comprehensive service providers in the Water
and utility sector.
4.4 Operational
Synergies
Operational synergies are a prominent motivator for mergers and
acquisitions, embodying the desire to enhance efficiency and drive long-term
profitability and sustainability. A key example is the merger between Veolia
and Suez, two giants in the water and waste management industries. The merger
aimed to consolidate assets, eliminate duplication of efforts, and improve
service delivery by merging the strengths of both companies (Otaki et al.,
2022).
This strategic consolidation allowed for a comprehensive pooling of
resources, knowledge, and capabilities that can lead to enhanced efficiencies
and cost savings. Operational synergies from such mergers can yield benefits
such as reduced operational redundancies, streamlined supply chains, and shared
best practices across the integrated entity (Dianty et al., 2022). Moreover,
they can position the new entity to leverage economies of scale, enhancing
competitive advantages and improving service offerings across the board (Zhang
et al., 2023). However, the successful realisation of these synergies depends
heavily on effective integration strategies and meticulous change management
processes to align the differing cultures and structures of the merging organisations
(Tiwale, 2025).
5
Financial
Considerations in Acquisitions
5.1 Valuation and Discount Pricing
Valuation and pricing strategies are pivotal aspects when considering
acquisitions in the water sector. A noteworthy case is YTL Power's acquisition
of Ranhill SAJ, where the transaction was executed at a discounted price that
reflected the perceived risks and potential synergies (Correa et al., 2020).
The strategic fit of this acquisition not only enabled YTL Power to broaden its
operational footprint in Malaysia but also allowed for long-term financial
gains by capitalising on economies of scale and operational efficiencies
inherent in water management (Rajala et al., 2019).
In transactions like this, it is essential to assess the long-term
financial outlook alongside current market conditions. A discounted acquisition
approach can serve as a mechanism to mitigate risks, allowing companies to
enter promising markets without overextending their financial commitments at
the onset of the relationship (Dugard, 2010). Thus, forward-looking analyses
that focus on integration, operational scalability, and potential growth
trajectories play crucial roles in appraising acquisition opportunities.
Ultimately, the success hinges on thorough due diligence to ensure that the
future earnings potential justifies the initial discounted price and supports
sustainable operational results (Li et al., 2024; Lobina, 2016).
5.2 Debt Loading Risks
Debt loading presents a significant risk during and after acquisitions,
particularly within utility sectors where capital requirements can be
substantial. A vivid example is Thames Water, which experienced severe
financial struggles post-privatisation, primarily attributed to excessive debt
levels imposed by the private equity owners (Henkel, 2016; Kvartiuk, 2016). The
financial burden from debt loading diverted essential capital away from
operational improvements, ultimately impacting service delivery and corporate
sustainability (Jordà-Capdevila & Casals, 2019).
The importance of assessing post-acquisition financial health cannot be
overstated. The consequences of high leverage can not only hinder investment in
infrastructure but may also lead to operational inefficiencies and reduced
service quality, as seen in the Thames Water case (Rasul et al., 2019). Such
financial distress further illustrates the necessity of proactive financial
management strategies that balance acquisition financing through debt with
robust risk assessment frameworks to monitor and mitigate long-term financial
health post-acquisition (Gambino et al., 2020). Regulators and stakeholders
must remain vigilant to ensure that service providers maintain acceptable
financial ratios that prioritise operational viability while also safeguarding
public interests (Ukpai, 2022).
6
Broader Implications of Water Sector Acquisitions
6.1 Economic
Development Enablement
Water infrastructure plays a crucial role in enabling economic
development, as evidenced by partnerships such as those between Manila Water
and the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA). This collaboration
exemplifies how reliable water services can create an attractive environment
for foreign investment, effectively stimulating local and national economic
growth (Correa et al., 2020). By providing a consistent water supply and
improved sanitation services, water utilities make economic zones more viable,
fostering regional development and attracting businesses that prioritise
operational efficiency and resource availability. As a result, strong water
management frameworks not only meet the immediate needs of local communities
but also catalyse larger-scale economic opportunities (Rajala et al., 2019;
Dugard, 2010).
Additionally, successful water investments can yield positive
externalities, such as job creation and improved health outcomes, which further
augment economic resilience. Infrastructure investment in the water sector can
spur downstream industries and enhance productivity across various economic
sectors, demonstrating the interconnected nature of Water and economic
prosperity (Li et al., 2024). Therefore, it becomes imperative for stakeholders
to recognise the strategic importance of water management in fostering broader
economic development frameworks, particularly within emerging markets.
6.2 Public
Accountability and Resistance
The implications of water sector acquisitions extend to public
accountability, often manifesting as community resistance against privatisation
attempts. A significant historical case is the Cochabamba Water War in Bolivia,
where the privatisation of the municipal water supply led to widespread
protests and civil unrest (Lobina, 2016). The local population reacted against
escalating water tariffs, perceived loss of access to a vital resource, and the
prioritisation of profit over the public good. This episode highlighted the
critical lessons regarding equity and human rights in water provision, emphasising
that Water should be treated as a universal right rather than a commodity
(Henkel, 2016).
The Cochabamba Water War encapsulates the potential for large-scale
public resistance against neoliberal water governance models. It underscores
the urgent need for frameworks that emphasise transparency, community
involvement, and accountability within water contracts. Such participatory
governance models can act as safeguards against potential rights violations
while ensuring that Water remains accessible to all, particularly marginalised
communities that are often the hardest hit by privatisation efforts (Kvartiuk,
2016).
6.3 Hidden
Risks and Systemic Issues
Water sector acquisitions can also unveil hidden risks and systemic
issues, as demonstrated by the privatisation of water services in Accra, Ghana,
and the engagement with Aqua Vitens Rand Ltd. The contract intended to improve
service delivery was marred by operational challenges, resource misallocation,
and public discontent over inadequate water quality and service interruptions
(Jordà-Capdevila & Casals, 2019). These risks underscore the importance of
transparent contracting processes and consumer protection measures to safeguard
against the ramifications of profit-driven management approaches.
The operational failures in Accra illustrate that without upfront
transparency in contracting and robust accountability measures, the outcomes of
privatisation can lead to worsening service conditions, further marginalising
underserved populations (Rasul et al., 2019). Moreover, contracts that lack
clarity may fail to establish adequate performance metrics, ultimately
compounding the systemic issues faced by water service providers and the
communities they serve. Thus, emphasising consumer protection in such
arrangements becomes crucial to ensure that public interests are prioritised
over private financial ones (Gambino et al., 2020).
6.4 Environmental
Risks
The environmental risks associated with water sector acquisitions are
particularly pronounced in contexts where natural resources are exploited
without adequate assessments, as exemplified by Nestlé's groundwater extraction
activities in drought-prone regions. The withdrawal of significant groundwater
for bottling has raised alarms about the sustainability of local water
resources and the ecological health of the surrounding areas (Ukpai, 2022).
This case reinforces the necessity for thorough environmental assessments as
critical components of water rights management to avert potential detrimental
impacts on ecosystems and long-term water sustainability.
Environmental evaluations must strive to understand both the direct and
indirect consequences of water extraction practices, particularly in vulnerable
regions facing climate-induced water scarcity. Assessing the ecological
footprint of water use not only supports regulatory compliance but also
enhances corporate social responsibility initiatives that prioritise
sustainable water management practices (Otaki et al., 2022). Stakeholders in
water acquisitions must recognise the imperative of integrating environmental
stewardship into their operational frameworks to mitigate risks associated with
resource depletion and ecological degradation (Dianty et al., 2022).
6.5 Sovereignty
and ISDS Clauses
The interplay between acquisitions and state sovereignty is exemplified
in international legal disputes such as Suez v. Argentina, which centres on the
contentious nature of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) clauses. These
provisions enable corporations to challenge government policies that they
perceive as detrimental to their investments, raising concerns about the
balance of private interests with sovereign policy autonomy (Zhang et al.,
2023). In this case, Argentina's regulatory changes in response to economic
crises were contested, threatening the country's ability to govern its water
resources effectively.
The Suez case illustrates the broader implications of ISDS mechanisms,
which can potentially undermine national sovereignty and dilute the rights of
states to implement policies that serve public interests (Tiwale, 2025). As
such, it is critical to consider how these legal frameworks can create barriers
to effective public governance, particularly in essential sectors like water
management. Balancing the rights of private investors with the sovereign
authority of states necessitates a nuanced approach that safeguards public
interest while encouraging responsible foreign investment (Blazy et al., 2021).
7
Conclusion
In summary, the broader implications of water sector acquisitions
encompass economic development enablement, public accountability, hidden risks,
environmental concerns, and the tension between sovereignty and ISDS
provisions. The diverse case studies discussed illustrate the complexity and
interconnectedness of these issues in shaping outcomes within the water sector.
Stakeholders must approach water acquisitions with an emphasis on
sustainability, public welfare, and transparent governance to cultivate a future
where water management serves the needs of both communities and the
environment.
In summary, the
broader implications of water sector acquisitions encompass economic
development enablement, public accountability, hidden risks, environmental
concerns, and the tension between sovereignty and ISDS provisions. The diverse
case studies discussed illustrate the complexity and interconnectedness of
these issues in shaping outcomes within the water sector. Stakeholders must
approach water acquisitions with an emphasis on sustainability, public welfare,
and transparent governance to cultivate a future where water management serves
the needs of both communities and the environment.
7.1
Beyond the Balance Sheet: Reclaiming Water as a
Public Good
A call for
integrating human rights, equity, and environmental stewardship into water
governance, moving past privatisation's financial lens. The terrain of global
water acquisitions necessitates a multifaceted discussion that addresses not
merely the financial implications of privatised water services but their
broader impacts on public health, equity, and trust in governance structures.
The shift towards emphasising Water as a public good must incorporate the
voices of affected communities and align with human rights discourses to ensure
sustainable outcomes. By extracting lessons from varied case studies and
recognising the centrality of stakeholder engagement, we can work towards
fostering more resilient water management systems that prioritise accessibility
and environmental stewardship. Ultimately, it is crucial to recognise that
effective water governance hinges upon the integration of public accountability
and community stewardship, creating pathways toward sustainable and equitable
management of this vital resource.
7.2
Mapping the Terrain: Understanding the Types and
Stakes of Water Acquisitions
A deep dive
into privatisation, remunicipalization, and inter-public transfers—and what
each means for equity and access. The examination of various types of water
sector acquisitions reveals a complex interplay between profit motives and
public welfare. Whether through privatisation, private-to-private transitions,
remunicipalization, or public-to-public consolidations, each scenario possesses
unique implications for service delivery, community access, and equity in water
governance. As evidence suggests, the merits and challenges of these approaches
call for vigilant oversight and robust regulatory frameworks to ensure that
community needs remain at the forefront of Beneath the Strategy: The Business
Logic Behind Water Takeovers.
7.3
Exploring motivations like utility
consolidation, industrial supply security, and asset synergy, and their
implications for communities.
Water
management decisions.
The strategic
motivations behind water sector acquisitions encompass a wide array of
considerations, including utility portfolio expansion, securing industrial
water supplies, asset diversification, and the pursuit of operational
synergies. Each case, from Suez's acquisition of GE Water to Nestlé's
controversial groundwater acquisitions, underscores the complex interplay
between profit motives and community responsibilities. While firms can realise
significant benefits by strategically navigating these acquisitions, they must
also prioritise sustainable practices and community engagement to ensure their
operations align with broader societal needs.
7.4
Debt, Discounts, and Dividends: The Financial
Mechanics of Water Deals
Lessons from
valuation tactics, debt-loading risks, and financial engineering that shape
long-term service quality. In summary, financial considerations in water sector
acquisitions underline critical aspects such as valuation and debt management
strategies. Case studies, including YTL Power's strategic approach to
discounted pricing and the financial struggles of Thames Water due to debt
loading, illuminate the intricacies of navigating acquisitions effectively.
Thorough evaluations that factor in long-term implications for financial health
and strategic fit are vital for successful integration, operational resilience,
and the ultimate sustainability of water service provision.
7.5
When the Pipeline Breaks: Hidden Risks and
Global Lessons from Water Takeovers
From
Cochabamba to Argentina, these cases show how misaligned interests can lead to
public backlash and legal battles. As this exploration into water sector
acquisitions reveals, several vital takeaways emphasise the necessity for a
meticulous approach in managing such complex transactions. First and foremost,
water acquisitions must prioritise public welfare, transparency, and
sustainability, ensuring that the fundamental human right to Water is
maintained. Evidence from various global case studies highlights the inherent
risks and opportunities associated with different acquisition models, including
public-to-private, private-to-private, and remunicipalization efforts. These
case studies—spanning the privatisation of Thames Water and the Cochabamba
Water War to Suez's contestation in Argentina—demonstrate that misalignment of
corporate interests with community needs can result in enduring social and
environmental consequences (Correa et al., 2020; Rajala et al., 2019; Dugard,
2010; Li et al., 2024).
7.6
Law, Leverage, and the Limits of Accountability
Why
strong legal frameworks and community voice are essential to preventing
exploitation and ensuring sustainable access.
Furthermore,
the overarching need for robust legal frameworks and regulatory oversight
cannot be overstated. Transparent processes that incorporate the voice of local
communities are essential to mitigate against potential exploitative practices,
ensuring that Water remains accessible, equitable, and sustainable for future
generations (Lobina, 2016; Henkel, 2016). The lessons derived from these
scenarios indicate a shift towards embracing models of governance that bolster
public accountability and prioritise environmental stewardship alongside
profitability.
7.7
Turning the Tide: A New Governance Model for
Water Equity
Advocating for
co-governance models that unite public institutions, regulators, and
communities to reclaim water justice. Call to Action. In light of these
critical insights, governments, policymakers, and citizens must engage in
rigorous evaluations of water acquisitions. Stakeholders must remain vigilant,
advocating for frameworks that preserve Water as a public good rather than a
commercial commodity. A collaborative approach, where local communities,
regulatory bodies, and private entities function together, is vital in
safeguarding water resources while contributing to sustainable economic development
(Kvartiuk, 2016; Jordà-Capdevila & Casals, 2019).
7.8
Water is Political: Empowering Citizens to
Defend the Commons
Mobilising
civic engagement and rights-based advocacy to protect Water as a non-negotiable
public resource.
Citizens have
a crucial role in holding authorities accountable, ensuring that water
governance aligns with public interests and broader sustainability goals. By
fostering an informed and engaged citizenry, the conversation around water
management can evolve into one that emphasises rights, equity, and protection
of natural resources. Ultimately, collective Action and commitment are
essential to ensure that Water remains a public good that is accessible to all.
References
Akinyi, Agwa Maryline, Odundo, Paul A. (2018). Revenue
Generation Aspects That Influence Financial Sustainability of Public Water
Utilities in Kenya: The Case of Homa Bay Water and Sewerage Company Limited. Asian
Business Research, 3(2), 1. https://doi.org/10.20849/abr.v3i2.370
Boulos, Paul F., Jacobsen, Laura B., Heath, J. Erick,
Kamojjala, Sri (2014). Realâ€time modelling
of water distribution systems: A case study. Opflow, 106(9), .
https://doi.org/10.5942/jawwa.2014.106.0076
Rudebeck, Thérèse (2022). Framing water as a financial
risk: Reviewing the processes shaping a narrative. Wiley Interdisciplinary
Reviews Water, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1596
Tebbutt, R. J., Guy, John Adam, Cochin, R. J., Lester, J.N.
(2002). Investment Appraisal in the Water Industry of England and Wales. Water
and Environment Journal, 16(2), 100-104.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-6593.2002.tb00378.x
Zeff, Harrison B., Characklis, Gregory W. (2013). Managing Water
utility financial risks through thirdâ€party index
insurance contracts. Water Resources Research, 49(8), 4939-4951.
https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20364
Mugabi, Josses, Njiru, Cyrus (2006). Marketing urban water
services: information needs for water utility managers in developing countries.
Water Science & Technology Water Supply, 6(5), 17-25.
https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2006.715
Ganjidoost, Amin, Haas, Carl T., Knight, Mark A., Unger,
Andrè (2022). Integrated asset management of urban Water and wastewater
systems. Awwa Water Science, 4(5). https://doi.org/10.1002/aws2.1309
Telfah, Dua’a B., HALASHEH, MAHA, Ribbe, Lars, Roth,
Giorgio (2017). PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF COMMERCIAL PRINCIPLES IN WATER
SERVICES PROVISION. Nan. https://doi.org/10.2495/wrm170031
Njiru, Cyrus, Sansom, Kevin (2003). Strategic marketing of
water services in developing countries. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil
Engineers - Municipal Engineer, 156(2), 143-148.
https://doi.org/10.1680/muen.2003.156.2.143
Kayaga, Sam (2013). Effective water safety management of
piped water networks in low-income urban settlements. Journal of Water
Sanitation and Hygiene for Development, 3(3), 402-410.
https://doi.org/10.2166/washdev.2013.105
Karamage, Fidele, Zhang, Chi, Ndayisaba, Felix, Nahayo,
Lamek, Kayiranga, Alphonse, Omifolaji, James Kehinde, Shao, Hua, Umuhoza,
Alice, Nsengiyumva, Jean Baptiste, Liu, Tong (2016). The Need for Awareness of
Drinking Water Loss Reduction for Sustainable Water Resource Management in
Rwanda. Journal of Geoscience and Environment Protection, 4(10), 74-87.
https://doi.org/10.4236/gep.2016.410005
Yakymova, Larysa, Kuz, Vasyl (2019). The use of discriminant
analysis in the assessment of a municipal company's financial health. Economics
& Sociology, 12(2), 64-78. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789x.2019/12-2/4
Hassanein, Amr A.G., Khalifa, Reham (2007). Financial and
operational performance indicators applied to public and private water and
wastewater utilities. Engineering Construction & Architectural Management,
14(5), 479-492. https://doi.org/10.1108/09699980710780773
Gorelick, David, Gold, David, Reed, Patrick M., Characklis,
Gregory W. (2022). Impact of Interâ€Utility
Agreements on Cooperative Regional Water Infrastructure Investment and
Management Pathways. Water Resources Research, 58(3).
https://doi.org/10.1029/2021wr030700
Zeff, Harrison B., Kasprzyk, Joseph, Herman, Jonathan D.,
Reed, Patrick M., Characklis, Gregory W. (2014). Navigating financial and
supply reliability tradeoffs in regional drought management portfolios. Water
Resources Research, 50(6), 4906-4923. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013wr015126
Murrar, Abdullah, Batra, Madan M., Rodger, James A. (2021).
Service quality and customer satisfaction are antecedents of the financial
sustainability of water service providers. The TQM Journal, 33(8), 1867-1885.
https://doi.org/10.1108/tqm-05-2020-0104
Tyszer, Magdalena, Chmielowska, Anna, Tomaszewska, Barbara
(2020). Initial recognition of the possibilities of using abandoned oil and gas
wells to desalinate produced Water. E3S Web of Conferences, 154, 5002.
https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202015405002
Bartholomew, Timothy, Mauter, Meagan S. (2016). Multi-Objective
Optimisation Model for Minimising Cost and Environmental Impact in Shale Gas
Water and Wastewater Management. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering,
4(7), 3728-3735. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b00372
Julius, Christine Mawia, Kalunda, Elizabeth (2021). The
Influence of Utility Efficiency on Financial Sustainability of Water Service
Providers in Kenya. nan, 11(1), 103-113. https://doi.org/10.58216/kjri.v11i1.98
Baum, Rachel, Characklis, Gregory W., Serre, Marc L. (2018).
Effects of Geographic Diversification on Risk Pooling to Mitigate Droughtâ€Related Financial Losses for Water Utilities. Water Resources
Research, 54(4), 2561-2579. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017wr021468
Geremew, Abraham, Nijhawan, Anisha, Mengistie, Bezatu,
Mekbib, Dinku, Flint, Adrian, Howard, Guy (2024). Climate resilience of
small-town water utilities in Eastern Ethiopia. Plos Water, 3(5), e0000158.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pwat.0000158
Rogers, Jeffrey W., Louis, Garrick (2006). A financial
resource allocation model for regional water systems. International
Transactions in Operational Research, 14(1), 25-37.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-3995.2006.00573.x
Grant, Stanley B., Duong, Kimberly, Rippy, Megan A., Pierce,
Gregory, Feldman, David L., Zanetti, Enrique, McNulty, Amy L. (2020). From
yards to cities: a simple and generalisable probabilistic framework for
upscaling outdoor water conservation behaviour. Environmental Research Letters,
15(5), 54010. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab7c1e
Ji, Yuguang, Ji, Maoli, Yang, Gang, Dong, Shulan (2023).
Water resource management and financial performance in high waterâ€sensitive corporations. Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management, 30(5), 2419-2434. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2493
Gorelick, David, Gold, David, Reed, Patrick M., Characklis,
Gregory W. (2021). Impact of inter-utility agreements on cooperative regional
water infrastructure investment and management pathways. Nan.
https://doi.org/10.1002/essoar.10507429.1
Ganjidoost, Amin, Knight, Mark A., Unger, Andrè, Haas, Carl
T. (2021). Performance Modelling and Simulation for Water Distribution
Networks. Frontiers in Water, 3, https://doi.org/10.3389/frwa.2021.718215
Fülöp, Kinga-Erzsébet, Fülöp, Ãrpád-Zoltán (2023). THE PERFORMANCE
MEASUREMENT OF WATER AND SEWERAGE OPERATORS IN ROMANIA THROUGH THE KEY
PERFORMANCE INDEX. Journal of Financial Studies, 8(15), 106-118.
https://doi.org/10.55654/jfs.2023.8.15.06
Haider, Husnain, Sadiq, Rehan, Tesfamariam, Solomon (2014).
Selecting performance indicators for small and medium-sized water utilities:
Multi-criteria analysis using<i>ELECTRE</i>method. Urban Water
Journal, 12(4), 305-327. https://doi.org/10.1080/1573062x.2014.900089
Gardner, J, Kohls, Elisabeth, Gingerich, Daniel B. (2024).
Assessing the Impact of the PFAS Rule on Water Affordability: Evidence from
Ohio. Acs Es&t Water, 5(1), 188-196.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acsestwater.4c00787
Daigger, Glen T. (2009). Evolving Urban Water and Residuals
Management Paradigms: Water Reclamation and Reuse, Decentralisation, and
Resource Recovery. Water Environment Research, 81(8), 809-823.
https://doi.org/10.2175/106143009x425898
Hidayat, Hidayat, Zakri, Azriyenni Azhari, Satria, Iman
(2021). Feasibility Study of Hydro Power Plant (HPP) Lubuak Gadang Sangir South
Solok. International Journal of Electrical Energy and Power System Engineering,
4(1), 121-126. https://doi.org/10.31258/ijeepse.4.1.121-126
Treuer, Galen, Koebele, Elizabeth A., Deslatte, Aaron,
Ernst, Kathleen, Garcia, Margaret, Manago, Kim (2017). A narrative method for
analysing transitions in urban water management: The case of the
<scp>M</scp>iamiâ€<scp>D</scp>ade
<scp>W</scp>ater and <scp>S</scp>ewer
<scp>D</scp>epartment. Water Resources Research, 53(1), 891-908.
https://doi.org/10.1002/2016wr019658
Crapeau, Mark (2000). Changing the Face of the Water
Industry. Opflow, 92(11), 60-66.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1551-8833.2000.tb09048.x
No comments:
Post a Comment