Water as a negative right: A philosophical argument against water as a commodity

This presentation will make a philosophical argument that access to clean water is a negative right (a liberty interest that must be protected) and that any interference with such access is unjust and morally indefensible. Access to water cannot be a positive right, or entitlement, to be granted by governmental or corporate agencies as neither has a legitimate claim on water and can therefore not be in a position to provide what already is shared property of the world's community. Rather, the only legitimate role of authority is to protect water and ensure that cooperative activities to distribute, use, or redirect water are done only as a means of securing this negative right. Water is not a commodity, and no industry can claim a right to it. This does not prevent businesses and other cooperative enterprises from providing services to maintain, collect, or distribute water for profit, but individuals and groups would always have a right to pursue other means of securing, cleaning, and distributing water. When conflicts arise and in the case of water shortages, the proper role of governing bodies is to ensure that the greatest number of individuals possible receives adequate access to water. In extreme cases of drought, every individual has an obligation to ensure that the right to water is protected as broadly as possible. The presentation will include case studies of unjust practices and instances where the right to access was protected, including the current redistribution of water to drought-plagued areas in China.