26
This “moral constellation” strongly depends on the range of the confl ict under
consideration and its possible implications in space and time. Extension in space
and time infl uences heavily the range of moral positions and of actors to be involved.
A fi rst and rough differentiation could be:
• Confl icts on the use of water in a strongly limited region without impacts beyond
the borders of the region and beyond present time as well. In this case the actors
from the corresponding region directly affected are entitled to solve the confl ict
according to ethical rules.
• Confl icts in a strongly limited area between the economic use of water and longterm ecological requests of sustaining ecosystems and biodiversity – in this case
advocates of those desires must be included.
• Confl icts on the use of water today with assumed interests of future generations,
e.g. in case of degrading water resources by usage or of degrading landscapes. In
this case advocates of future generations must be included in the ethical
discourse.
• Confl icts on large-scale interventions into water systems (geo-engineering
Potthast 2013 ), which per se will have a global, an inter-cultural and an intertemporal dimension.
This approach can only demarcate the task in front of water ethics. In the literature available (see above), the task of classifying water confl icts in ethical respect
has not even been touched. However, it is necessary to do so because it is exactly this
type of differentiation that allows water ethics to become specifi c and to genuinely
contribute to dealing rationally and responsibly with confl icts. In particular, this type
of differentiation allows establishing relations between refl ective ethics and the governance in the respective fi eld. The ethical discourse as a “real deliberation” (see
above) forms the link between theoretical ethical analysis and refl ection on the one
side, and empirical deliberation and decision-making on the other. This is also the
place to locate debates on the assignment and distribution of responsibilities.
Classifying water confl icts is, in this sense, necessary to enable actors to determine adequate strategies in responding to challenges and involving stakeholders.
However, the classifi cation and subsequent assignments of an individual confl ict to
a classifi cation scheme will be an act in itself, which is not value-neutral and might
itself be an issue of controversy. Thus those determinations are part of the ethical
discourse. This also might include reaching a consensus that the assignment usually
will not fully meet all of the situational aspects but rather some of them, which have
been identifi ed crucial for problem-solving.
2.6 Water Ethics and Specifi c Water Confl icts
Water ethics is an emerging fi eld of ethical reasoning. Its motivation is fuelled by
high concerns about the stability of water cycles, about quality issues of water, about
increasing water scarcity in many world regions, about an increasing pressure on
A. Grunwald
This “moral constellation” strongly depends on the range of the confl ict under
consideration and its possible implications in space and time. Extension in space
and time infl uences heavily the range of moral positions and of actors to be involved.
A fi rst and rough differentiation could be:
• Confl icts on the use of water in a strongly limited region without impacts beyond
the borders of the region and beyond present time as well. In this case the actors
from the corresponding region directly affected are entitled to solve the confl ict
according to ethical rules.
• Confl icts in a strongly limited area between the economic use of water and longterm ecological requests of sustaining ecosystems and biodiversity – in this case
advocates of those desires must be included.
• Confl icts on the use of water today with assumed interests of future generations,
e.g. in case of degrading water resources by usage or of degrading landscapes. In
this case advocates of future generations must be included in the ethical
discourse.
• Confl icts on large-scale interventions into water systems (geo-engineering
Potthast 2013 ), which per se will have a global, an inter-cultural and an intertemporal dimension.
This approach can only demarcate the task in front of water ethics. In the literature available (see above), the task of classifying water confl icts in ethical respect
has not even been touched. However, it is necessary to do so because it is exactly this
type of differentiation that allows water ethics to become specifi c and to genuinely
contribute to dealing rationally and responsibly with confl icts. In particular, this type
of differentiation allows establishing relations between refl ective ethics and the governance in the respective fi eld. The ethical discourse as a “real deliberation” (see
above) forms the link between theoretical ethical analysis and refl ection on the one
side, and empirical deliberation and decision-making on the other. This is also the
place to locate debates on the assignment and distribution of responsibilities.
Classifying water confl icts is, in this sense, necessary to enable actors to determine adequate strategies in responding to challenges and involving stakeholders.
However, the classifi cation and subsequent assignments of an individual confl ict to
a classifi cation scheme will be an act in itself, which is not value-neutral and might
itself be an issue of controversy. Thus those determinations are part of the ethical
discourse. This also might include reaching a consensus that the assignment usually
will not fully meet all of the situational aspects but rather some of them, which have
been identifi ed crucial for problem-solving.
2.6 Water Ethics and Specifi c Water Confl icts
Water ethics is an emerging fi eld of ethical reasoning. Its motivation is fuelled by
high concerns about the stability of water cycles, about quality issues of water, about
increasing water scarcity in many world regions, about an increasing pressure on
A. Grunwald