Water Integrity Network - Revision history

David: /* Multi-stakeholder initiative? */

2009-06-21T08:07:33Z

Multi-stakeholder initiative?

David: /* People */

2009-06-21T08:05:13Z

People

David: /* Focus ion the Public Sector */

2009-06-21T08:03:45Z

Focus ion the Public Sector

David: /* Introduction and Background */

2009-06-21T07:56:47Z

Introduction and Background

David: /* People */

2009-06-21T07:45:52Z

People

David: /* WIN Steering Committee */

2009-06-21T07:43:38Z

WIN Steering Committee

David: /* Founding Members */

2009-06-21T07:29:22Z

Founding Members

David at 07:20, 21 June 2009

2009-06-21T07:20:20Z

Claire Robinson: /* Introduction and Background */

2009-06-20T21:56:54Z

Introduction and Background

Claire Robinson at 21:55, 20 June 2009

2009-06-20T21:55:49Z

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 WIN notes on its website, “If corruption in water worldwide is to be successfully contained, it requires the establishment and sustained functioning of  local, national and international cross-sector coalitions made up of all stakeholders.”<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/page/458 What is WIN?], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref> WIN uses itself as a “primary example” of one of these coalitions.
-However, WIN is an initiative involveing all stakeholders.  Its main stakeholders are involved in lobbying for mareket friendly policies. These include:
+However, WIN is not an initiative involving all stakeholders.  Its main stakeholders are involved in lobbying for market friendly policies. These include:
 *[[World Bank Water and Sanitation Programme]] (WSP),
 *[[Aquafed]] – an international water industry lobby group described by the now Senior Water Advisor to the President of the UN General Assembly and National Chairperson of the Council of Canadians,  Maude Barlow, as a “player in the elite transnational water policy network.”<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/page/458 What is WIN?], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref><ref>Maude Barlow, (2007) ‘Blue Covenant: The Global Water Crisis and the Coming Battle For the Right to Water’, Toronto: McClelland & Stewart Ltd., p.51.</ref>
 Additional high-profile pro-privatisation organisations that WIN claims make “good partners” include: [[Global Water Partnership]] (GWP), [[World Water Council]], and [[Cap-Net]].<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/content/download/3521/64614/file/Forming%20coalitions%20for%20advocacy.pdf Forming Coalitions for Advocacy], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref>
 ==Focus on the Public Sector==
 Corruption takes many forms and occurs in both the public and private sector, as WIN suggests. However, WIN’s emphasis and focus concerning corruption is on isolated misdemeanours and the public sector. WIN implies that corruption is somehow indicative of the public sector in general. What is missing from WIN’s analysis of corruption, and this is evident from a survey of their ‘Glossary and Acronyms’ index, which serves to define the parameters and nature of corruption as understood by WIN – and they do this by defining frequently used concepts in the water governance community - is a systematic analysis of the reasons for and nature of corruption.

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:05, 21 June 2009
Line 67:		Line 67:

	==People==		==People==
−
−	The steering committee of the Water Integrity network appears to compose multi-stakeholder representation. There is a UN representative, institute members, government related members, research centre members, community and national representatives, a [[World Bank]] official, a private sector lobbyist and a [[Transparency International]] representative. But not all major stakeholders in the industry are represented. For instance, there is no Trade Union nor public utility representation. Moreover, the steering committee membership is disprortionately made up of people linked to organisations with a record of favouring increased private sector participation in the water and wastewater sector. Notably, the [[World Bank]].
−
−	Donal O'Leary was a World Bank official, prior to his appointment as Senior Water Adviser to [[Transparency International]] <ref> Donal O’ Leary Transparency International [http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTDECABCTOK2006/Resources/OLeary.pdf The Role of Transparency International in Fighting Corruption in Infrastructure] Accessed 19th June 2009 </ref>. [[Jack Moss]] represents the private lobbyist [[Aquafed]]. [[Janelle Plummer]] is an adviser to the [[World Bank]], she has written extensively on corruption. [[John Butterworth]] represents the [[International Water and Sanitation Centre]], amongst others they enjoy partnerships with the [[Global Water Partnership]] and the World Bank sponsored [[Water and Sanitation Programme]] (WSP). The [[Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Fund Development Board]], (Nepal), is funded by the World Bank <ref> [http://www.oieau.fr/ciedd/contributions/at2/resume/r2nepal.htm Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Development Board], Accessed 19th June 2009 </ref>. Moreover, the [[Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Fund Development Board]] are undoubtedly in favour of private sector solutions in the provision of water and wastewater services' Stating, "The main objective of the Government to establish and operationalize the Board is to gradually transfer the water supply and sanitation service delivery responsibility to the private sector. With this objective, the Board is designed to operate in partnership with SOs and communities, and obtain the services of national SAs to provide it technical, institutional, and operational assistances in various stages of scheme implementation" <ref> [[Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Fund Development Board]] [http://www.rwss.org/contents.php?mainid=13#Promotion Program Concept] Accessed 19th June 2009 </ref>.
−

	===WIN Steering Committee===		===WIN Steering Committee===

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 Additional high-profile pro-privatisation organisations that WIN claims make “good partners” include: [[Global Water Partnership]] (GWP), [[World Water Council]], and [[Cap-Net]].<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/content/download/3521/64614/file/Forming%20coalitions%20for%20advocacy.pdf Forming Coalitions for Advocacy], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref>
-==Focus ion the Public Sector==
+==Focus on the Public Sector==
 Corruption takes many forms and occurs in both the public and private sector, as WIN suggests. However, WIN’s emphasis and focus concerning corruption is on isolated misdemeanours and the public sector. WIN implies that corruption is somehow indicative of the public sector in general. What is missing from WIN’s analysis of corruption, and this is evident from a survey of their ‘Glossary and Acronyms’ index, which serves to define the parameters and nature of corruption as understood by WIN – and they do this by defining frequently used concepts in the water governance community - is a systematic analysis of the reasons for and nature of corruption.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 According to its website, [[Water Integrity Network]] (WIN) is a coalition  of individuals and organisations “support(ing) anti-corruption activities in the water sector worldwide...” and promoting “solutions-oriented action and coalition-building between civil society, the private and public sectors, media and governments.”<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/page/121 About Us], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref><ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/page/458 What is WIN?], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref> In practice WIN focuses mainly on corruption in the public sector and counts corporate lobbyists for the private water industry among its members.  The secretariat of the group is hosted by [[Transparency International]].
-==Introduction and Background==
+==Multi-stakeholder initiative?==
 WIN notes on its website, “If corruption in water worldwide is to be successfully contained, it requires the establishment and sustained functioning of  local, national and international cross-sector coalitions made up of all stakeholders.”<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/page/458 What is WIN?], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref> WIN uses itself as a “primary example” of one of these coalitions.
-Indeed WIN does link itself with various stakeholders, notably however, with many pro-privatisation agencies such as the [[World Bank Water and Sanitation Programme]] (WSP), [[Aquafed]] – an international water industry lobby group described by the now Senior Water Advisor to the President of the UN General Assembly and National Chairperson of the Council of Canadians,  Maude Barlow, as a “player in the elite transnational water policy network.”<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/page/458 What is WIN?], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref><ref>Maude Barlow, (2007) ‘Blue Covenant: The Global Water Crisis and the Coming Battle For the Right to Water’, Toronto: McClelland & Stewart Ltd., p.51.</ref> Additional high-profile partners and organisations with a pro-privatisation persuasion, which WIN claims make “good partners” include: [[Global Water Partnership]] (GWP), [[World Water Council]], and [[Cap-Net]].<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/content/download/3521/64614/file/Forming%20coalitions%20for%20advocacy.pdf Forming Coalitions for Advocacy], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref>
+However, WIN is an initiative involveing all stakeholders.  Its main stakeholders are involved in lobbying for mareket friendly policies. These include:
 Corruption takes many forms and occurs in both the public and private sector, as WIN suggests. However, WIN’s emphasis and focus concerning corruption is on isolated misdemeanours and the public sector. WIN implies that corruption is somehow indicative of the public sector in general. What is missing from WIN’s analysis of corruption, and this is evident from a survey of their ‘Glossary and Acronyms’ index, which serves to define the parameters and nature of corruption as understood by WIN – and they do this by defining frequently used concepts in the water governance community - is a systematic analysis of the reasons for and nature of corruption.

@@ Line 64: / Line 64: @@
 ==People==
-The steering committee of the Water Integrity network appears to compose multi-stakeholder representation.  There is a UN representative, institute members, government related members, research centre members, community and national representatives, a [[World Bank]] official, a private sector lobbyist and a [[Transparency International]] representative.    Some could argue that the stakeholders represented on the steering committee are not as multi-faceted as could be.  For instance, there is no Trade Union nor public utility representation. Moreover, the steering committee membership is disprortionately made up of people linked to organisations with a record of desiring an increase in private sector participation in the water and wastewater sector. Notably, the [[World Bank]] who have links to several of the members in shape or form.
+The steering committee of the Water Integrity network appears to compose multi-stakeholder representation.  There is a UN representative, institute members, government related members, research centre members, community and national representatives, a [[World Bank]] official, a private sector lobbyist and a [[Transparency International]] representative.    But not all major stakeholders in the industry are represented.  For instance, there is no Trade Union nor public utility representation. Moreover, the steering committee membership is disprortionately made up of people linked to organisations with a record of favouring increased private sector participation in the water and wastewater sector. Notably, the [[World Bank]].
 Donal O'Leary was a World Bank official, prior to his appointment as Senior Water Adviser to [[Transparency International]] <ref> Donal O’ Leary Transparency International [http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTDECABCTOK2006/Resources/OLeary.pdf The Role of Transparency International in Fighting Corruption in Infrastructure] Accessed 19th June 2009 </ref>.  [[Jack Moss]] represents the private lobbyist [[Aquafed]]. [[Janelle Plummer]] is an adviser to the [[World Bank]], she has written extensively on corruption.  [[John Butterworth]] represents the [[International Water and Sanitation Centre]], amongst others they enjoy partnerships with the [[Global Water Partnership]] and the World Bank sponsored [[Water and Sanitation Programme]] (WSP). The [[Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Fund Development Board]], (Nepal), is funded by the World Bank <ref> [http://www.oieau.fr/ciedd/contributions/at2/resume/r2nepal.htm Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Development Board], Accessed 19th June 2009 </ref>.  Moreover, the [[Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Fund Development Board]] are undoubtedly in favour of private sector solutions in the provision of water and wastewater services' Stating, "The main objective of the Government to establish and operationalize the Board is to gradually transfer the water supply and sanitation service delivery responsibility to the private sector. With this objective, the Board is designed to operate in partnership with SOs and communities, and obtain the services of national SAs to provide it technical, institutional, and operational assistances in various stages of scheme implementation" <ref> [[Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Fund Development Board]] [http://www.rwss.org/contents.php?mainid=13#Promotion Program Concept] Accessed 19th June 2009 </ref>.

@@ Line 81: / Line 81: @@
 *[[Henk Van Norden]] Senior Adviser [[Water, Environment and Sanitation]] (WES) section - [[UNICEF]] (United States)
 *[[Franz-Josef Batz]] Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), Water Politics Department (Germany) <ref> Water Integrity Network [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/page/451 International Steering Committee] Accessed 27th May 2009 </ref>.
 ==Website==

@@ Line 56: / Line 56: @@
 *[[Transparency International]] (TI) Transparency International, the global civil society organisation leading the fight against corruption, brings people together in a powerful worldwide coalition to end the devastating impact of corruption on men, women and children around the world. The TI secretariat is based in Berlin and is host to the WIN secretariat.
 *[[Water and Sanitation Program-Africa]] (WSP-AF) The Water and Sanitation Program (WSP) is a multi-donor partnership of the [[World Bank]] with the goal of helping the poor gain sustained access to improved water supply and sanitation services. The program disseminates best practices across regions and places a strong focus on capacity building by forming partnerships with non-governmental organisations, governments at all levels, community organisations, private industry, and donors.
+==Funding and Secretariat==
 *The WIN is currently funded by the [[Stockholm International Water Institute]] (SIWI) | [[German Federal Ministry of Economic Development and Development]] (BMZ)
-*The WIN secretariat is hosted by: [[Transparency International]]-Secretariat (TI-S)
+*The WIN secretariat is hosted by: [[Transparency International]]-Secretariat (TI-S) <ref>WIN [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/page/446 Home / About WIN / Founding Members], accessed 21 June 2009</ref>

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:20, 21 June 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	According to its website, [[Water Integrity Network]] (WIN) is a coalition of individuals and organisations “support(ing) anti-corruption activities in the water sector worldwide...” and promoting “solutions-oriented action and coalition-building between civil society, the private and public sectors, media and governments.”<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/page/121 About Us], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref><ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/page/458 What is WIN?], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref> In practice WIN focuses mainly on corruption in the public sector and counts corporate lobbyists for the private water industry among its members. The secretariat of the group is hosted by [[Transparency International]].
		+
	==Introduction and Background==		==Introduction and Background==
−
−	According to its website, [[Water Integrity Network]] (WIN) is a coalition of individuals and organisations “support(ing) anti-corruption activities in the water sector worldwide...” and promoting “solutions-oriented action and coalition-building between civil society, the private and public sectors, media and governments.”<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/page/121 About Us], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref><ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/page/458 What is WIN?], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref>

	WIN notes on its website, “If corruption in water worldwide is to be successfully contained, it requires the establishment and sustained functioning of local, national and international cross-sector coalitions made up of all stakeholders.”<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/page/458 What is WIN?], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref> WIN uses itself as a “primary example” of one of these coalitions.		WIN notes on its website, “If corruption in water worldwide is to be successfully contained, it requires the establishment and sustained functioning of local, national and international cross-sector coalitions made up of all stakeholders.”<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/page/458 What is WIN?], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref> WIN uses itself as a “primary example” of one of these coalitions.

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 Conversely, however, one could argue that corruption is, in the first instance, predicated on the existence of a private sector. The Public Services International Research Unit (PSIRU), based at the University of Greenwich, argues, “corruption is a systemic feature of privatisation processes.” They continue, “corruption happens because bribery is a method by which companies can gain higher returns: either by winning contracts or concessions which they would not otherwise have won, or by gaining contracts or concession on more favourable, and so more profitable, terms.”<ref>Public Services International Research Unit (PSIRU), [http://www.psiru.org/reports/9909-U-U-Corrup.doc Privatisation, Multinationals, and Corruption], accessed 18 June 2009, p.4.</ref> The World Bank itself, in an article entitled, “The Political Economy of Corruption: Causes and Consequences”, suggests, “... the privatisation process itself can create corrupt incentives.”<ref>World Bank, [http://rru.worldbank.org/Documents/PublicPolicyJournal/074ackerm.pdf The Political Economy of Corruption: Causes and Consequences] access 18 June 2009, p.</ref>  In other words, corruption has come to play an integral part of the privatisation process where private firms compete for billions of dollars worth of procurement contracts. Indeed, as WIN notes, public officials are often complicit in corruption schemes. However, and as the World Bank confirms, “corruption thrives in an environment where the power of individual members of society is measured in terms of access to people in power… ”<ref> World Bank, [http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPUBLICSECTORANDGOVERNANCE/EXTANTICORRUPTION/0,,contentMDK:20222075~menuPK:1165474~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:384455,00.html, Corruption, Poverty and Inequality], accessed 18 June 2009.</ref> In other words, wealth and power in the private sector is often defined by access to public figures in power; but again, this is symptomatic of the need for the private sector to continuously seek out higher returns. The World Bank points out, “bribes are paid for two reasons: to obtain government benefits and to avoid costs.”<ref>World Bank, [http://rru.worldbank.org/Documents/PublicPolicyJournal/074ackerm.pdf The Political Economy of Corruption: Causes and Consequences] accessed 18 June 2009, </ref>
-In terms of WIN's analyses of corruption, there is a disproportionate amount focusing on ‘governance’ rather than within the bidding, acquisition, leasing or concession processes - in other words, the processes of commercialisation. And though WIN notes that governance and corruption are both public and private sector problems, it would seem that WIN overwhelmingly employs these terms (corruption and governance) in reference to public sector management and Third World countries. For example, in the “Advocating for Integrity in the Water Sector” policy paper, WIN suggests, “The water sector, especially in the developing world, has certain fundamental characteristics, some shared by public service generally, which make it prone to corruption...”<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/content/download/3754/69654/file/Advocating%20for%20integrity%20in%20the%20water%20sector.pdf Advocating for Integrity in the Water Sector], accessed 19 June 2009.p.4.</ref> Such a statement, clearly, paints the public sector with a broad brush and, moreover, is constructed in such a way that readers may come away perceiving the public sector, and in particular the public water sector, especially within Third World countries, as unfavourable and/or undesirable. Similarly, WIN suggests that “a large flow of public money” is an additional dimension which makes the water sector “particularly susceptible to corruption.”<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/content/download/3754/69654/file/Advocating%20for%20integrity%20in%20the%20water%20sector.pdf Advocating for Integrity in the Water Sector], accessed 19 June 2009.p.4.</ref> One may draw the conclusion, then, that this is the rationale, support or justification for increased privatisation; for what are the other options other than to keep water, and indeed large amounts of public funds that are much needed for construction and improvement projects in the water sector, in public hands? Surely the answer is increased commericalisation of public institutions or full-scale privatisation. Furthermore, readers may come away with a sense that corruption is an issue that can indeed be addressed by the private sector. In the same document WIN suggests, “Private investment in water is growing in countries already known to have high risks of corruption, posing particular challenges for international investors...” <ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/content/download/3754/69654/file/Advocating%20for%20integrity%20in%20the%20water%20sector.pdf Advocating for Integrity in the Water Sector], accessed 19 June 2009.p.4.</ref> There perception is that there is more concern here about the needs of private investors than the need for water and its provision to stay in public hands. This analysis, it should be said, is carried out at the expense of a more holistic view of corruption that would explore corruption as a systemic problem. Indeed, it is important to note, as WIN does, that corruption is a problem that affects both the private and public sector; however, a holistic view would explore the systemic nature of the problem of corruption and view corruption as symptomatic of the nature of the privatisation process.
+In WIN's analyses of corruption, there is a disproportionate amount of focus on ‘governance’ rather than within the bidding, acquisition, leasing or concession processes - in other words, the processes of commercialisation. And though WIN notes that governance and corruption are both public and private sector problems, it would seem that WIN overwhelmingly employs these terms (corruption and governance) in reference to public sector management and Third World countries. For example, in the “Advocating for Integrity in the Water Sector” policy paper, WIN suggests, “The water sector, especially in the developing world, has certain fundamental characteristics, some shared by public service generally, which make it prone to corruption...”<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/content/download/3754/69654/file/Advocating%20for%20integrity%20in%20the%20water%20sector.pdf Advocating for Integrity in the Water Sector], accessed 19 June 2009.p.4.</ref> Such a statement, clearly, paints the public sector with a broad brush and, moreover, is constructed in such a way that readers may come away perceiving the public sector, and in particular the public water sector, especially within Third World countries, as unfavourable and/or undesirable. Similarly, WIN suggests that “a large flow of public money” is an additional dimension which makes the water sector “particularly susceptible to corruption.”<ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/content/download/3754/69654/file/Advocating%20for%20integrity%20in%20the%20water%20sector.pdf Advocating for Integrity in the Water Sector], accessed 19 June 2009.p.4.</ref> One may draw the conclusion, then, that this is the rationale, support or justification for increased privatisation; for what are the other options other than to keep water, and indeed large amounts of public funds that are much needed for construction and improvement projects in the water sector, in public hands? Surely the answer is increased commericalisation of public institutions or full-scale privatisation. Furthermore, readers may come away with a sense that corruption is an issue that can indeed be addressed by the private sector. In the same document WIN suggests, “Private investment in water is growing in countries already known to have high risks of corruption, posing particular challenges for international investors...” <ref>Water Integrity Network (WIN), [http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/content/download/3754/69654/file/Advocating%20for%20integrity%20in%20the%20water%20sector.pdf Advocating for Integrity in the Water Sector], accessed 19 June 2009.p.4.</ref> There perception is that there is more concern here about the needs of private investors than the need for water and its provision to stay in public hands. This analysis, it should be said, is carried out at the expense of a more holistic view of corruption that would explore corruption as a systemic problem. Indeed, it is important to note, as WIN does, that corruption is a problem that affects both the private and public sector; however, a holistic view would explore the systemic nature of the problem of corruption and view corruption as symptomatic of the nature of the privatisation process.
 ==Defining Corruption==