[Commons-Law] an article from FE (25/10/2005)

[solomon benjamin]

Hi
Some very quick and intial questions to think about:

a) Who are the 'citizens'?

b) Who 'acts' on 'whos' behalf and who pays the cost?

c) Who can 'participates' and who cannot?

d) Translated from an old French conjugation -- if you
remember some its gets the flavor: "I participate --
you participate -- he participates -- she participates
-- THEY DECIDE.."

e) Does politics have to be 'explict engagement' or
are there other forms?

f) Finally, as a swiss friend told me some time ago,
they are so caught up in the series of elections and
discussions as 'citizens' that the really really big
issues of how their private banks and FIs fit into
grey areas of Int. Finance, their role with Nazi
Germany and other more contemporary issies soon get
forgotten. Also, in commenting to our local elected
representatives who: "..juggle competing claims in
whatever manner they do.." the interesting point was
that somehow, migrants from different states or quite
often across borders did seem to find political and
economic spaces in our messy cities more easily than
what migrants do in the Swiss case. If so, there
really was a question of "whose democracy" 
Cheers
Solly



--- Aditi thorat <aditi.thorat at gmail.com> wrote:

>   CITIZEN
> 
> *'Water gatekeeping': seeds of change germinate in
> the seams of conflict*
> 
> Recent instances of water-related social unrest can
> be used to find larger
> solutions
> 
> Ramesh Ramanathan
> 
> * * The simmering rifts between rural and urban
> demands are exploding with
> increasing frequency. The latest incident: a riot in
> Tonk on the outskirts
> of Jaipur. Thousands of farmers blocked the highway,
> the situation got
> violent, and five farmers were shot dead. The issue:
> water. The problem: a
> project bringing water from Bilaspur dam to meet
> Jaipur's growing demands.
> The incident in Tonk is being repeated across the
> country: the Uttar Pradesh
> government recently shut off Yamuna's taps to South
> Delhi; Bangalore has
> seen protests about Cauvery water being carted
> hundreds of miles, depriving
> rural folk of their natural rights.
> 
> There are no simple answers, no cute quick-fixes
> that can resolve the
> situation. These situations demonstrate the need for
> the robust practice of
> democracy, in arriving at imperfect answers in
> near-impossible situations.
> The riots in Tonk may disperse, the families could
> get compensation, but the
> central issue remains: creating equitable outcomes
> for such intractable
> situations. The instinct to essay a knee-jerk
> solution needs to be curbed:
> every option has trade-offs. Two examples illustrate
> the point:
> 
> One solution is to retain the status quo: leave the
> dam water to the
> farmers, and tell the city dwellers that poor
> planning has caused the city
> to grow beyond its means. While this seems
> reasonable, it comes with
> collateral damage: Jaipur and cities like it,
> generate most of the
> Rajasthan's revenues of Rs 8,000 crore, coming from
> excise duties,
> commercial taxes etc. If these cities are not
> supported, they will collapse.
> Industry will leave, economic activity will migrate
> away from Rajasthan, and
> the state will have no funds to undertake critical
> rural development work:
> in healthcare, education, infrastructure.
> 
> The other extreme choice suggests that urban
> economics should be the driving
> consideration. This also seems skewed: for one, it
> seems blatantly unfair
> and inequitable. Secondly, it does not distribute
> growth in a manner that is
> sustainable, spreading wealth-creation out of the
> city.
> 
> Of critical importance are two questions: one, what
> is the right policy
> framework for complex public good issues like water;
> and two, even if such a
> policy framework did exist, how should decisions be
> made for issues that
> have conflicting interests—in this situation, rural
> and urban.
> 
> As the layers of complexity are peeled back, they
> unleash a deep pessimism,
> and a defeating belief that these are best left
> alone, to the democratic
> process that we currently have: elected
> representatives, who juggle
> competing claims in whatever manner they do. This
> throw-up-the-hands
> reaction is not surprising. But maybe, there is
> cause to pause, maybe there
> are better answers, lessons that can be taken from
> elsewhere.
> 
> Switzerland offers one case study in dealing with
> water. The Swiss practice
> direct democracy, where citizens engage in most
> issues by voting in
> referendums. Most decisions are in the domain of the
> regional governments
> called Cantons; the Confederation or central
> government plays more of a
> coordinating role. Despite this fragmented
> governance structure, complex
> issues like water have found resolution through
> democratic processes. Water
> policies give a significant regulatory role to the
> confederation, but retain
> large operational responsibility to local
> governments through what can be
> called 'implementational federalism'.
> 
> Swiss water policy has evolved over several decades,
> and covers ten uses of
> water, including drinking water, energy, waste
> waters, economic production (
> e.g. fishing), recreation and strategic reserve. The
> instruments used were a
> mixture of property rights (defining who owned water
> sources; for example,
> does a property owner also own the right to
> groundwater beneath her land),
> and public policies (defining how water could be
> used, irrespective of
> ownership; for example, despite ownership of the
> land, public policy
> restricts anyone from using the groundwater, so
> borewell digging could be
> illegal).
> 
> While regulations came from the central government,
> it was up to the Cantons
> to implement these policies, and arrive at the
> necessary negotiated
> settlements, especially where complex jurisdictional
> issues saw one water
> body being owned by multiple regional governments.
> 
> In keeping with Swiss political processes, citizens
> played a large role in
> crafting these policies. Economic interests also
> played a big role, with
> hydro-electric companies needing a conducive
> regulatory climate. Almost all
> significant changes in Swiss water policy emerged
> out of specific pressures
> and crisis situations: either water-based natural
> catastrophes, or
> environmental degradation, or rival use-interests
> like farmers versus
> hydroelectric producers.
> 
> The Swiss record is enviable: over the past four
> decades, there has been
> substantial improvement in all categories of water
> bodies in the country:
> surface water, groundwater, springs and wetlands.
> 
> A classic Indian response to this example is, "Our
> conditions are different.
> We are a country of a billion people, with a feudal
> past and massive poverty
> problems." While there is truth in these arguments,
> they are wearing thin.
> In the absence of an energetic, positive
> alternative, such casual remarks
> are just tired excuses of a jaded government and a
> disengaged citizenry.
> 
> This leaves the second issue: even if we did have a
> good water policy, how
> will competing rural-urban interests debate these in
> hundreds of local
> situations across the country. It is time we did
> away with the increasingly
> artificial distinction between rural and urban. We
> are at the inflexion
> point for local government in our country, as also
> of urbanisation. If we
> are to truly meet the livelihood test for millions
> of Indians, urban centres
> will have to co-exist with rural hinterlands; the
> efficiencies of the urban
> area in terms of markets, access to credit etc. will
> have to be leveraged to
> improve rural livelihoods.
> 
> We already have regional planning structures like
> the District Planning
> Committees(DPC) and Metropolitan Planning Committees
> (MPC) that are
> constitutionally mandated. These can be immediately
> operationalised, and act
> as bridging mechanisms across rural and urban India,
> unleash joint
> rural-urban growth and address complex negotiations
> on issues like water.
> Gandhi said after Independence, "The hardest is yet
> to come. (The country)
> has won political freedom, but it has yet to win
> economic freedom, social
> and moral freedom. These freedoms are harder than
> the 
=== message truncated ===>
_______________________________________________
> Urbanstudygroup mailing list
> Urban Study Group: Reading the South Asian City
> 
> To subscribe or browse the Urban Study Group
> archives, please visit
>
https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/urbanstudygroup
> 



		
__________________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your partner now. Go to http://yahoo.shaadi.com