25
justifi cation, arise and are subject to ethical analysis and discourse. In making the
ethical water discourse operable, a lot of concretisations and contextualisation must
be applied, according to scales in space and time, but also with respect to different
types of normative uncertainties to be tackled. A typology of water confl icts, of
argumentation patterns used in specifi c constellations and of typical normative
uncertainties involved would be desired. In this section, I would like to discuss
briefl y some typical confl icts arising in water systems interventions and ask for the
possible contribution of ethics to deal constructively with them. Before doing this,
the scope of possible confl ict types shall be sketched.
Discourses around water have some specifi c properties related to the medium
under consideration. Water and water systems are different from soils and other
compartments of the environment. Water is almost always fl owing: it passes landscapes and private property, soils and regions (e.g. see above for the Islamic view on
this). It cannot be consumed chemically – in using water it remains the same compound of hydrogen and oxygen. However, human use of water adds other materials
and chemicals and so usually leads to degradation of its quality, or it changes landscapes and impacts human settlements, ecosystems and the biodiversity.
Water confl icts have different origins and can be characterised by different
parameters. An ethical characterisation would consider possible or intended interventions into water systems with a focus on questions such as:
• What is at stake? Are the aims of the intervention justifi ed? Which non-intended
effects could arise?
• Who or what would be the winners and losers (not only with respect to humans
but also regarding elements of the biosphere and the natural environment in
general)?
• Could rights (e.g. the Human Right on Water but also cultural or religious rights)
be violated as unintentional side effects?
• What can be said about the distribution of gains and losses, of costs and benefi ts,
of chances and risks among people alive today or between contemporary and
future generations?
• Which uncertainties are involved, which characteristics do they show, and should
the precautionary principle (Harremoës et al. 2002 ) or another type of precautious approach be applied?
• Which timescales are involved? There are huge differences in the timescales of
the impact of human interventions in water systems and the recovery of the water
systems. This is important in particular in taking over long-term responsibility
• Are there alternatives available to the intervention proposed meeting the same
targets at lower “moral costs”?
Basically, the “moral constellation” of the water confl ict under consideration
must be clarifi ed and then can be used for categorising different types of confl ict.
This constellation in particular will determine who and which positions should be
represented in the ethical discourse. It also must be clarifi ed whether advocates of
non-human interests or of future generations should be present.
2 Water Ethics – Orientation for Water Confl icts as Part of Inter-…
justifi cation, arise and are subject to ethical analysis and discourse. In making the
ethical water discourse operable, a lot of concretisations and contextualisation must
be applied, according to scales in space and time, but also with respect to different
types of normative uncertainties to be tackled. A typology of water confl icts, of
argumentation patterns used in specifi c constellations and of typical normative
uncertainties involved would be desired. In this section, I would like to discuss
briefl y some typical confl icts arising in water systems interventions and ask for the
possible contribution of ethics to deal constructively with them. Before doing this,
the scope of possible confl ict types shall be sketched.
Discourses around water have some specifi c properties related to the medium
under consideration. Water and water systems are different from soils and other
compartments of the environment. Water is almost always fl owing: it passes landscapes and private property, soils and regions (e.g. see above for the Islamic view on
this). It cannot be consumed chemically – in using water it remains the same compound of hydrogen and oxygen. However, human use of water adds other materials
and chemicals and so usually leads to degradation of its quality, or it changes landscapes and impacts human settlements, ecosystems and the biodiversity.
Water confl icts have different origins and can be characterised by different
parameters. An ethical characterisation would consider possible or intended interventions into water systems with a focus on questions such as:
• What is at stake? Are the aims of the intervention justifi ed? Which non-intended
effects could arise?
• Who or what would be the winners and losers (not only with respect to humans
but also regarding elements of the biosphere and the natural environment in
general)?
• Could rights (e.g. the Human Right on Water but also cultural or religious rights)
be violated as unintentional side effects?
• What can be said about the distribution of gains and losses, of costs and benefi ts,
of chances and risks among people alive today or between contemporary and
future generations?
• Which uncertainties are involved, which characteristics do they show, and should
the precautionary principle (Harremoës et al. 2002 ) or another type of precautious approach be applied?
• Which timescales are involved? There are huge differences in the timescales of
the impact of human interventions in water systems and the recovery of the water
systems. This is important in particular in taking over long-term responsibility
• Are there alternatives available to the intervention proposed meeting the same
targets at lower “moral costs”?
Basically, the “moral constellation” of the water confl ict under consideration
must be clarifi ed and then can be used for categorising different types of confl ict.
This constellation in particular will determine who and which positions should be
represented in the ethical discourse. It also must be clarifi ed whether advocates of
non-human interests or of future generations should be present.
2 Water Ethics – Orientation for Water Confl icts as Part of Inter-…