You are on page 1of 19

1

THE LOCALIZATION OF GLOBALIZED PARADIGMS: Local and Transnational Processes in Boli ian Reso!rce Mana"e#ent
Cristina Cielo Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales Quito, Ecuador

The city of Cochabamba exploded onto the international media scene in the year 2000 with the heady days of protest that came to be nown as the !ater !ar" #ewspaper headlines reported that $%iolence Erupts in &oli'ia( )&&C 2000*, then $+ultinational Company Thwarted by Local &oli'ian Community( ),eynolds 2000*" Leftist websites finally proclaimed the !ater !ar a $-round.brea in- 'ictory a-ainst the life.sappin- effect of -lobali/ation in Latin 0merica( )1oseph 2002*" 3n contrast to this opposition of transnational and local processes, this paper examines the way that institutionali/ed relations of power are more complex and entrenched than such a transnational corporation.'s.local communities narrati'e su--ests" 3t examines these relations throu-h an ethno-raphy of local water mana-ement in Cochabamba, &oli'ia, as these dynamics shape and are shaped by -lobal de'elopment paradi-ms" 4urin- Cochabamba5s !ater !ar, two sides of the -rowin- international debate on water mana-ement defined themsel'es in opposition to one another, the former side represented by the state5s -rantin- of the Cochabamba water administration concession to the transnational con-lomeration 0-uas del Tunari" This side emphasi/ed the need to administer this finite -ood effecti'ely, posin- corporate mana-ement as a 'iable answer to the municipal water company6s lac of capital and efficiency" 0-ainst this position, a coalition of social or-ani/ations, unions and other ci'il society -roups emer-ed, claimin- water as a public -ood

that could not be pri'ati/ed" The social mo'ement coalesced around the or-ani/ational body of the $Coordinadora( )or Coalition* in 4efense of !ater and of Life and ar-ued that water should be administered locally throu-h collecti'ely a-reed upon $customs and usa-es"( 7 Throu-h international networ s and media, Cochabamba5s stru--le a-ainst pri'ati/ation 8uic ly became an iconic 'ictory for the anti.-lobali/ation mo'ement" The 4a'id.beats.9oliath2 elements of Cochabamba5s !ater !ar has, for many, fit perfectly into $the story of water :that; is all too often a story of conflict and stru--le between the forces of self.interest and opportunities associated with <pro-ress6, and the community.based 'alues and the needs of traditional ways of life( )1ohnston and 4onahue 7==>?@*" 3n contrast to these 'iews, my research see s to explore the ways that $community.based 'alues and the needs of traditional ways of life( are neither separate from, nor opposed to, the -lobali/ed $forces of self.interest and opportunities associated with <pro-ress5"( Thus, in this paper, 3 examine how communities5 widely lauded $self.mana-ement( of water access and distribution is distinctly shaped not only by endo-enous or-ani/ational forms, but also by municipal and state institutions, as well as by -lobal conceptions of pro-ress and de'elopment" The paper describe the de'elopment of collecti'e lo-ics in a neoliberal nei-hborhood, throu-h the nei-hborhood5s strate-ic relationships with external actors, its consumer models of water management and its prospects for productive development" This is contrasted with what 3 will describe as a nei-hborhood that is shaped by its collecti'e, counter.he-emonic collecti'e lo-ic" 0s part of this counter.he-emonic lo-ic, the +ineros collecti'e maintains a wary relationship with external actors" 3nstead, nei-hbors in +ineros
1 Black's Law Dictionary defines customs and usages as the general rules and practices that have become generally adopted through unvarying habit and common use 2 !rom media articles to "#$ reports to academic analyses% the &ater &ar has continued to be described using the very phrase David versus #oliath 'Langman 2((2% )ssies 2((*% #oodman 2(1(+

emphasi/e internal and participatory unity, as e'idenced in its collaborative organization of water and its incorporative approach to development" Finally, 3 ma e reference to a final nei-hborhood5s more e8ui'ocal relationship with external actors as part of its di'er-ent collecti'e or-ani/ational forms" ,ather than bein- dri'en by dominant models of resource mana-ement and de'elopment, or by a reaction a-ainst such externally imposed framewor s, the di'er-ent lo-ic in Lomas enables shared water access in the context of pluriactive development" 4espite the fact that the Cochabamba !ater !ar has also become a si-nificant international symbol in the mo'ement to stem the tide of neoliberal pri'ati/ation of public utilities and natural resources, this paper be-ins with the premise that the opposition that the !ater !ar rested on A between neoliberal, transnational pri'ati/ation, on the one hand, and locally, self.mana-ed systems, on the other A has made it more difficult to critically analy/e the ways that different local collecti'e lo-ics transform or reinforce social and economic ine8ualities" The clarity of that opposition may play an important mobili/in- role, to be sure, yet it also pre'ents a clear understandin- of the interactions between dominant institutions and local practices that constitute political orders, while concealin- the more ambi'alent social relations of power that these interactions produce" This paper will loo at how a different lo-ic rei-ns in the collecti'e water or-ani/ation in each nei-hborhood of study, as well as the ways that each lo-ic is shaped by the particular relationships that the collecti'e has for-ed with municipal and external actors, resultin- in water mana-ement practices in each site that constitute a shared understandin- of water as a type of pri'ate, public or communal -ood" 0s such, the paper will identify the ways that different conceptions of water are part of distinct transnationally.influenced 'isions of de'elopment that inscribe particular forms of community and social relations"

,esearchin- the relationships between local practices, state institutions and -lobal de'elopment lo-ics re8uires a methodolo-y that reco-ni/es -lobal lo-ics as an ensemble of processes.in.construction rather than determinant structures )what 1ames Fer-uson calls the $'ertical topo-raphy of power(*" 3 use the comparison of confi-urations in order to in'esti-ate the local and contin-ent nature of socially constructed structures, to identify systemic and structural patterns in the sites where these materiali/e, in local, collecti'ely.defined practices and subBects" #orbert Elias notes that what is needed in order to understand social transformations is to $in'esti-ate the nature of this ran-e of possible transformations and the confi-uration of factors responsible for the fact that, of all of the possibilities, only this one is materiali/ed"( Csin- this comparati'e framewor , in what follows 3 loo at how residents in three nei-hborhoods in the peripheral nei-hborhoods of Cochabamba access water" !hile the water systems in all of these nei-hborhood5s water systems are nominally $informal( and locally mana-ed, we will see that formal state and de'elopment institutions play an important role in the way the lo-ics of each nei-hborhood5s administration of water and the social relations that are thus encoura-ed" The comparisons are framed as ideal.types, which 3 call by the most distincti'e socio. political characteristic of each nei-hborhood" They are? a neoliberal nei-hborhood, a counter. he-emonic territory and a nei-hborhood characteri/ed by di'er-ent associations" The terms neoliberal, counter.he-emonic and di'er-ent are used to describe pre'ailin- practices and subBecti'ities that are collecti'ely constructed in order to more clearly examine shared results of, and responses to, dominant institutional mechanisms" 0s ideal types, neoliberal, counter. he-emonic and mar-inal lo-ics, subBecti'ities and practices do not exist in any pure form, but

are ways of heuristically examinin- three distinct confi-urations between institutions, people and their social and political relations" 3n this tal , 3 will only describe the administration of water in the neoliberal and in the counter.he-emonic nei-hborhood" E'en with Bust these two cases, we will see that it is precisely the interactions between formal state and de'elopment institutions and informal practices of water mana-ement that defines the possibilities for particular lo-ics and social relations" The table below -i'es a sense of the ar-ument that will follow"
Collecti e lo"ics and $olitical s!%&ects Constr!ction o* co##!nit+ NEOLIBERAL NEIGHBORHOOD CO'NTER(HEGEMONIC NEIGHBORHOOD DI)ERGENT NEIGHBORHOOD

Urbanized neighborhood The search to be a le-itimate part of the city pre'ails Consumer management !ater as pri'ate -ood, administered throu-h supplier.consumer model reproducinune8ual access Productive development Entrepreneurship represents the main possibilities for de'elopment Reproduces &ut best positions indi'iduals in capitalist society and economy

Unified territory !ith stron- leadership that defines the unity of the collecti'e in contrast to dominant urban ideolo-ies Collaborative organization !ater understood as a public -ood, administered collaborati'ely and e8uitably but subBect to he-emonic exclusions

Intimate associations The nexus of participation is not the nei-hborhood as a whole, but rather smaller -roups and other networ s Shared access !ater as a communal -ood, accessed throu-h reciprocal or-ani/ational forms but unable to ma e broader impacts

For#s o* ad#inisterin " ,ater

Collecti e ision o* de elo$#en t

Incorporative development 3nclusi'e of the maBority of nei-hbors, demands their constant acti'e presence

Pluriactive development %arious familial socioeconomic strate-ies as well as personal and labor lin s are combined Peripheral to them +ost e8uitable forms within collecti'e but mar-inali/es within dominant hierarchies

I#$lication *or do#inant -ierarc-ies . ine/!alities

Challenges &ut also discoura-es di'ersity, producin- its own exclusions

3 include the last ideal.type a-ain only to -i'e a sense of the 'ariety of collecti'e lo-ics that are produced as a result and in response to institutional, state and de'elopment

framewor s" The point in describin- the two collecti'e lo-ics and practices of water administration that we will loo at is not that these are most representati'e of local responses to dominant structures, but more simply that identifyin- and explorin- these can help identify elements of the interaction between -lobal, state, institutional and local forms" !e will see that the neoliberal nei-hborhood of study has a strate-ic relationship with external institutions, as it reco-ni/es its peripheral status and its see s inclusion in the city throu-h its relationships with the municipality and de'elopment or-ani/ations" !e will see the ways that this shapes a consumer model of water mana-ement, which reproduces dominant hierarchies but best positions indi'iduals within capitalist society and economy" The counter.he-emonic nei-hborhood also reco-ni/es its peripheral status, but see s to 'alidate its alternati'e normati'e order" 0s such, residents of this nei-hborhood are both territorial defensi'e before state and de'elopment institutions, wary of their influence" !e will see how the dynamics of a counter.he-emonic territory play out in a collaborati'e or-ani/ation of water that is administered collaborati'ely and e8uitably but subBect to he-emonic exclusions" The nei-hborhood typified by di'er-ent associations is neither defined in terms of the dominant lo-ics of state and de'elopment institutions, nor in opposition to them" The particular study site whose collecti'e lo-ics are identified as mar-inal, for example, has particular communal, associational and networ ed or-ani/ational characteristics" 3ts description as $di'er-ent( see s to stress the point that the pre'ailin- characteristics of nei-hborhoods such as this one are peripheral to dominant urban and state institutional lo-ics A that is, they are both an alternati'e to them and mar-inali/ed by them" #eoliberal subBecti'ities are produced throu-h institutional practices and techni8ues" Counter.

he-emonic subBecti'ities are framed by their discursi'e opposition to these" 4i'er-ent subBecti'ities, in contrast, are predominantly defined by practices and techni8ues that are tan-ential rather than anta-onistic to dominant lo-ics" 0ll the nei-hborhoods of study are located in the area of Cochabamba nown as the Dona Sur, the Southern Done" Ef the study sites, the neoliberal nei-hborhood has been established for the lon-est period of time, since the 7=>0s" 3t is the most di'erse of the three nei-hborhoods? of e'ery fi'e residents, two are from rural areas, one is from the minin- sector and two named their place of ori-in as cities" 3n comparison, less than one fifth of residents in the other two nei-hborhoods are from other urban areas" #e'ertheless, residents of this neoliberal nei-hborhood still identify themsel'es as peripheral to the city, as one community leader noted? $3nstead of sayin-, 36m from here, nei-hbors ha'e said, 36m from %alle Fermoso :a nearby nei-hborhood;, because %alle Fermoso is more de'eloped"( Get out of the three nei-hborhoods of study, residents of this neoliberal nei-hborhood are relati'ely well.positioned to access the city5s resources, by 'irtue of their relati'ely hi-her formali/ation in many spheres" For example, in terms of education, almost half of the neoliberal nei-hborhoods5 residents had some formal middle or hi-h school education, while in the other two nei-hborhoods, less than a third of the residents had reached this le'el of formal education" Education and professionali/ation in community leaders is hi-hly 'alued, as one nei-hbor said, $There should be someone :in the leadership; who nows about proBects, that has the capacity to de'elop proBects, constructions""" who can propose de'elopment proBects"( 3n fact, this nei-hborhood is the only one of the three nei-hborhoods of study where a hi-her education was correlated with hi-her le'els of participation in the or-ani/ation" !ith such professional leadership, external actors are encoura-ed to wor with this

neoliberal nei-hborhood because of the dependability of its nei-hborhood association" The school in this nei-hborhood was built from financin- from an international foundation, this picture shows computers donated by a local #9E, and their first nei-hborhood water system was established in collaboration with a borderin- nei-hborhood" The water committee that was thus formed du- a well to access water" 3t funded the well and under-round pipe system by char-in- residents a fee of H7@0 to become members of the water committee" The price, howe'er, was out of reach for many, and a Spanish priest wor in- in the area found donations to co'er part of the fees" Later, residents applied to another #9E for micro.credits for the fees to Boin the water committee" E'en then, less than a 8uarter of the nei-hborhood5s residents were part of the networ , exacerbated by the dryin- up of the well" 3n 200I, followin- the political mobili/ation of the !ater !ar, leaders of this nei-hborhood6s water committee Boined other water committees throu-hout the Dona Sur to form the 0ssociation of !ater Committees of the Dona Sur )0S3C0.SC,*" Leaders of this neoliberal nei-hborhood culti'ated a collaborati'e relationship with prota-onists from the 0ssociation of !ater Committees? $!e ha'e more confidence in them than in the municipal water companybecause we5'e been been wor in- with them since the !ater !ar, when we expelled 0-uas del Tunari"( !hen the 0ssociation of !ater Committees recei'ed international fundin- for a water proBect in the Dona Sur it chose the neoliberal nei-hborhood of study as one of the sites to de'elop the proBect" The decision was a testament to the reputation of inte-rity and efficacy of the neoliberal nei-hborhood or-ani/ation" For the proBect, a nei-hborhood water tan was built and it was connected to the pipe system used earlier with the wells" !ater committee members would ha'e now ha'e access to a more reliable water supply" The only thin- missin- before the water system could be used,

howe'er, was the water pump that municipal offices had a-reed to contribute" The system had to be ready for the inau-uration of the 0ssociation of !ater Committee5s proBect" 3n an emer-ency nei-hborhood assembly, residents clamored that the municipality had to be held to its promise" There was a 'ote and -eneral a-reement that nei-hbors should mobili/e and protest before the city offices to exert pressure on the municipality" The community leaders held a meetin- the followin- e'enin-" Ene of the community leaders worried that, $!e5ll ma e a bad impression on the municipal offices if we -o out and protest"( Fe reminded the others that they would ha'e to coordinate with the municipality in the future" Finally, after much deliberation, and despite the a-reement reached in the nei-hborhood assembly, leaders decided that a'oidin- conflict with the municipality was preferable to mobili/in-" Csin- a community loudspea er, the leaders one of the diri-entes announced that the protest was called off" #ei-hbors had little room for discussion of the decision to ne-otiate with the municipalityJ the decision was ne'er brou-ht up in an assembly, only announced on the loudspea er" Cnsurprisin-ly, a number of nei-hbors went to the city center to protest as had been a-reed" Ene of them later said an-rily, $!e6re not -oin- next time they call us, let them protest"( Thus, the nei-hborhood5s relationships with municipal and external institutions tends to be one of adBustments, collaborations and mutual benefit" These characteristics of concurrence and accommodation to urban and de'elopment lo-ics is also apparent in its approach to community de'elopment" Community leaders, for example, sou-ht to establish a +icro.Enterprises 3ncubator KroBect" They were also amon- the founders of the SteerinCommittee for the 4e'elopment of the Dona Sur" 3n this context, the form of self mana-ement of the neoliberal nei-hborhood is aimed at effecti'ely meetin- members5 indi'idual needs,

1(

throu-h ma in- the most producti'e use of the a'ailable resources" Critical resources in this sense include, as shown abo'e, relationships with external actors and institutions" 3t is with this bac -round that the model of water mana-ement that has emer-ed in the neoliberal nei-hborhood can be better understood" !hile there is clearly no attempt to ma e a profit from nei-hbors5 access to water, the nei-hborhood5s water committee has chosen operati'e functionality o'er -uaranteed e8uality in water access" Thus the application of a culture and of the 'ery institutions of capitalism A such as mar ets, measures of efficiency and free competition A is part of how water is mana-ed in this study site" The re-istration fee to enter into the water committee and system was determined by the need to recuperate costs, pre'entin- most residents from Boinin- the committee" The newest members of the water committee paid o'er CSH@20 to enter into the committee" 3n a nei-hborhood where most household incomes are under CSH720 per month , the re-istration fee has made it impossible for many to Boin the committee" 4espite the new water tan and system, only about a 8uarter of the residents were still of the water committee5s catchment area were members of the water committee" The lac of a wholly collecti'e approach to water mana-ement exacerbated ine8ualities between nei-hbors" Li e their nei-hbors who Boined the water committee, those residents who continued to obtain their water from water truc s depended on pri'ate resources to secure their water access" This underscored economic differences between nei-hbors" Those who could afford to, for example, built tan s to store water, in order to lessen their dependence on the unreliable water 'endors" 0ccordin- to the sur'ey conducted in 200L, those #ue'a %era Cru/ nei-hbors who relied on water 'endors, the maBority A >2M A used barrels to hold their water and dipped into the barrels for daily water usa-e" The 7>M who

11

were able to build household cisterns often had more newly built houses with interior plumbin- )C%C*" 0 nei-hbor whose husband had mi-rated to Spain used the remittances sent by her husband to both be a part of the nei-hborhood system and build a household water tan " She said? NSometimes we buy from the water truc , and they fill up our whole tan " Ether times we -et it from up there :from the nei-hborhood tan , throu-h the pipes;, but that5s not really 'ery reliable, seeO &ut when you ha'e your own cistern, then you ha'e water e'ery day"N Thus, the wealthier nei-hbors of the neoliberal nei-hborhood are more li ely to ha'e the most reliable access to water" This is precisely the ind of social dynamics that a supplier.consumer model of water mana-ement promotes" Thus, despite bein- a locally.created system of water mana-ement, the #ue'a %era Cru/ model of water access is fundamentally shaped by its strate-ic relationships with external institutions" Cnder the lo-ic of a supplier.consumer model of water mana-ement, the principle obBecti'e of water mana-ement passes from bein- social e8uality and the -uarantee of its pro'ision, to bein- efficiency in the use of the resource, that is already percei'ed, mediated and mana-ed as a scarce -ood" 0 form of administerin- water, thus, does more than distribute water" 3t also shapes a particular understandin- of what water is, and our conse8uent administration of it, in turn, shapes our relationships to each other" The counter.he-emonic nei-hborhood, li e the neoliberal nei-hborhood, also reco-ni/es its peripheral status and defines its collecti'e by those terms" 3n contrast to the neoliberal nei-hborhood, howe'er, it does so in opposition to, rather than in line with, dominant 'alues of le-ality and formality" Supported by a stron- and dominant unity, for example, these nei-hbors claim le-itimacy for their informal and untitled possession of their

12

land" 0t one of their well.attended nei-hborhood assemblies, the charismatic president of the nei-hborhood, explicitly proclaimed this lo-ic of collecti'ely 'indicated possession of the land? $The ri-ht of ownership has been declared" #o one can remo'e us from here, no matter what they do" This :land; will ha'e to be titled"( Formal titlin-, accordin- to this 'iew, should follow upon collecti'ely le-itimated possession, not the other way around" From their conflicti'e settlement of the nei-hborhood, residents ha'e been united by their collecti'e ad'ersities and ad'ersaries" The leaders5 unifyin- discourse reinforces the sense of belon-in- to this mar-inali/ed yet powerful -roup" 0s the representati'e of nei-hbors5 shared mar-inality, the maximum leader literally embodies the counter.he-emonic collecti'e" !ith their unity defined in opposition to dominant hierarchies, the nei-hborhood is wary of state and de'elopment institutions" Li e the neoliberal nei-hborhood, the counter. he-emonic territory also benefited from a forei-n foundation" Get the nei-hborhood5s relationship to this 4utch Foundation was 8uite different" :SL34E; Two tan s were built by the nei-hbors themsel'es which would be filled by water truc s re-ularly, and an under-round water pipe networ would carry water from the tan s to all nei-hborhood residents re-ularly" 3n eepin- with the contentious conditions in the counter.he-emonic territory, howe'er, there were threats to this nei-hborhood public wor from -roups with whom the nei-hborhood had fou-ht to settle the land" !hile the tan s were bein- built in the first months of 200L, $enemies( tried to dynamite the tan s" The 4utch foundation threatened to cut off fundin- of their in'estment if such threats continued, so nei-hbors or-ani/ed themsel'es in -roups to protect the tan s, ta in- shifts to -uard them twenty.four hours a day" 0s much as nei-hborhood leaders were also ea-er to protect the tan s they had contributed in buildin-, they spo e warily of the representati'e of

1*

the 4utch foundation who placed conditions on the nei-hborhood" Ene -roup dele-ate explained, $The gringa :forei-ner; obli-ated us to -uard the tan s" 3f we didn5t do it, we5d lose the water""" That gringa is so difficult"( Such an apprehensi'e perception of actors external to the nei-hborhood, despite their financial or technical support, was widespread in this counter. he-emonic nei-hborhood" This wariness is not surprisin- in this nei-hborhood unified by its discursi'e identification of its enemies and proud of its a--ressi'e independence" Li ewise, more than in the other study sites, residents of this counter.he-emonic territory emphasi/ed that only by inte-ratin- all nei-hbors in the community5s wor would they obtain what they needed" Ene resident of the nei-hborhood, for example, said that, $3f all of us are united, we can do anythin-"""" if e'eryone5s wor in-, we5ll -et water and we5ll ma e a sewer system, then we5ll -o to the prefecture :state -o'ernment; so that they cement our streets"( Cnli e the water committee in the neoliberal nei-hborhood, the water committee in the counter.he-emonic territory was considered an inte-ral part of the nei-hborhood association" Thus, all residents were automatically members of the water committee" 0ll the maBor decisions concernin- the water networ proBect too place A as did decisions for most community issues A in lar-e nei-hborhood assemblies on Sundays" 3n this way, the administration of water in the nei-hborhood incorporated the acti'e participation of most nei-hbors in the construction of the local water system" :SL34E; 3n order to be included in the water system, each household paid H20 for their indi'idual meters and wor ed to di- the trenches on their street and to their house for the water pipe installation" This sort of face.to.face community wor not only made the installation of the water system a collecti'e effort, but also created a particular type of

1,

collecti'e that depended on the maBority of its members5 participation" !hether or not particular nei-hbors decided to di- to-ether and at the same time, the collecti'e nature of the wor re8uired coordination and increased dependence between nei-hbors" For the pipes to be laid down each street, the trench needed to be du- up the entire street" Ene nei-hbor explained? $So if the owner isn5t there and hasn5t du-, or hasn5t paid the amount he owes, then that area is left out" The :main; tube passes it by, and this is terrible for the rest of the people who ha'e du-" So that5s why there needs to be a-reements between owners re-ardindi--in-"( ,esidents were e'en dependent on whether their nei-hbors complete the wor correctly" The en-ineer who supported the technical aspects of the water system installation, warned nei-hbors at a meetin- that some sectors needed to fix their trenches" 3f a nei-hbor5s faulty di--in- was not corrected, pipes on that street would not be able to be laid down" Eut of 70PL lots in the nei-hborhood, =I0 households initially paid their re-istration fee and be-an to contribute in the community wor of -uardin- the tan s and di--in- the trenches" Compared with less than a 8uarter of the neoliberal nei-hborhood5s residents who were part of the nei-hborhood water system, almost =0M of residents of the counter. he-emonic territory were included in the water system" 9i'en the extent of the inclusion in this water system, as well as the wor re8uired to be part of it, it is not surprisin- that there was a -reater sense of ownership of the water system by residents in the counter.he-emonic nei-hborhood" This was apparent in the way that residents spo e of the water proBect, despite its external fundin-" Ene nei-hbor said, $3t5s ours, e'en thou-h it was -i'en to us :by the 4utch foundation;" They are helpin- us with the water that5s for us, and it5s our twenty dollars and our labor" !e our sacrificin- oursel'es,

1-

that5s why they5re -i'in- us the money"( 0s a proBect that is considered theirs, leaders of the nei-hborhood also made decisions re-ardin- inclusion in the water system" The +ineros treasurer explained that $!e ha'e an inter.institutional a-reement, between the foundation, the :nei-hborhood or-ani/ation;, the water committee and SE+0K0" 3n one of its clauses it says that we ha'e to endorse each nei-hbor who is to ha'e their meter" &ecause we5re wor in- with an internal statute that we ha'e :by which; all of us ha'e to comply with our duties as settlers""" 3f we don5t endorse :a household;, they won5t ha'e water" 3f they5'e complied with P0, L0M :of the community wor andQor fees;, we5ll endorse them" !e5ll certify who will ha'e and who won5t ha'e water"( This reinforced residents5 participation in the nei-hborhood collecti'e, and also buttressed the importance and authority of the nei-hborhood and its leaders" :SL34E: 3n this scheme, leaders of this nei-hborhood could decide who could be part of the water networ " 3n contrast, residents of the neoliberal nei-hborhood residents applied indi'idually to a local #9E for micro.credits to borrow money to pay the water committee re-istration fee" The decisions re-ardin- these applications were made by the #9E5s technicians based on the li elihood that the loan would be repaid" +ost of the residents who applied in 200L for micro.credits of around CSH@00 to Boin the neoliberal nei-hborhood5s water committee were turned down" 3n the counter.he-emonic nei-hborhood, in contrast, decisions re-ardin- who could Boin the water networ was based on other factors" The treasurer said that $There are people who don5t ha'e :money;, but ha'e wor ed" Some ha'en5t been able to ma e the deposit, but they5'e wor ed"( This approach does indeed wor towards the ind of re.inte-ration of the

1.

social and economic spheres" 3n doin- so, it creates a different order of priority for access to natural resources than is found in the consumer model of water mana-ement" 3n the counter. he-emonic territory, residents who contribute to the constitution of the collecti'e are incorporated into the water system" 0s a result, water is distributed more inclusi'ely, with the process of establishin- the water supply networ manifestin- the collaboration of the maBority of nei-hbors" 0t the same time, howe'er, it also ma es admission into the water system less re-ulated and more dependent on particular leaders ability to distin-uish between $deser'in-( and $undeser'in-( nei-hbors" This ta es on particularly important in a nie-hborhood in which a sense of the forei-n as an in'asi'e threat to nei-hborhood unity is so mar ed" The rhetoric used by the nei-hborhood5s leaders and particularly the nei-hborhood5s president was a contentious anti. imperialist discourse influenced by the 0ndean discourse that E'o +orales and his +o'ement Towards Socialism )+o'imiento al Socialismo, +0S* party has ad'anced" 3n his inter'iews and speeches, he often contrasted what he called the $occidental""" neoliberal, pri'ati/in- 'ision( with indi-enous 0ndean perspecti'es" 3mplicit in this perspecti'e is the idea that !estern models of society, economy and de'elopment are in'asi'e forces to the &oli'ian and 0ndean ways of life" 0n extreme conse8uence of this $you5re.one.of.us.or.a-ainst.us( tendency was the attitude that nei-hbors too towards -roups of the nei-hborhood5s own residents, blaminthem for the hei-htened insecurity" 0s bur-laries increased, security became a theme of discussion in more nei-hborhood assemblies" 0t a -eneral assembly, the +ineros president the topic was brou-ht up, and nei-bors concurred that the thie'es were youn- men from the nei-hborhood" The self.defensi'e and combati'e disposition that helped to conform the

1/

collecti'e identity of the counter.he-emonic nei-hborhood found its scape-oat in the youth who residents feared were behind the robberies" :SL34E; 0 nei-hbor responded? $!e can ma e dummies and han- them on posts,( referrin- to the practice of usin- these dummies as warnin- si-ns of the fate that would befall criminals in the area" $0nd if it5s possible,( continued the nei-hbor, $put their names on there too" That way we now who it is amon- us who5s doin- thisR( 3t would not be difficult to ima-ine such collecti'e actions intensifyin- and becomin- unruly enou-h to see release in the inds of lynchin-s that ha'e been reported in other periurban areas of Cochabamba" The counter.he-emonic collecti'e identity was thus affirmed throu-h the exclusion A e'en a 'iolent exclusion A of a feared Ether" 4oes a more inclusi'ely.constructed collecti'e than that of #ue'a %era Cru/ necessarily imply the sort of combati'e attitude towards -roups considered different that is apparent in +ineros San 1uanO 3n the communal or-ani/ation 'ersus transnational pri'ati/ation opposition, nei-hborhoods li e +ineros San 1uan explicitly place themsel'es on the side of the local and indi-enous confrontin- imperialist, international forces" The case of the #ue'a %era Cru/ water mana-ement model, which was locally constructed yet exacerbated existin- socio.economic ine8ualities, shows us that this opposition is not an entirely useful analytic lens" Get +ineros San 1uan5s collecti'e or-ani/ation of water, which ensures most residents will ha'e access to water, problematically relies on the discursi'e and unifyin- force of that opposition" 3 ar-ued at the be-innin- of this tal that this opposition between pri'ate -lobal capital and public local self.mana-ement does little to help identify the ways that une8ual access to water has continued to persist in the peripheries" The contemporary context of &oli'ia

10

re8uires analytic approaches that, instead, identify ways that the public, the local, or the community interact with external relationships, dynamics and lo-ics" The challen-e is to specify the ways that resultin- or-ani/ational forms contribute to, or wor counter to, more e8uitable social relations" 0s shown in the cases abo'e, or-ani/ation for access to water is part of how a collecti'e constructs itself and the social relations between its members" The $self.mana-ed( systems for collecti'e access to water were, thus, shaped by the different nei-hborhoods5 residents interacted with municipal and de'elopment framewor s and the hierarchies of social relations that these establish" That is, #ue'a %era Cru/ is clearly the nei-hborhood that is best inte-rated and coordinates most effecti'ely with external institutions, despite its limitations" 3ts water system was efficiently built based on these relationships and a consumer model of water mana-ement that emphasi/es economic utility" Get this 'ery inte-ration into urban institutional contexts also reproduces those contexts5 socio.economic differences, with une8ual access to water in the nei-hborhood reinforcin- those differences" The collaborati'e or-ani/ation of water in +ineros San 1uan, on the other hand, is an important part of the nei-hborhood5s participatory approach to de'elopment" The characteristic unity of +ineros, that incorporates residents into its collecti'e is also, howe'er, dependent on the potentially dan-erous identification of that which is external to itself" !hile this allows for a s eptical attitude towards dominant de'elopment framewor s, it also hinders dialo-ue and exchan-e between di'erse perspecti'es and has the potential of creatin- di'isi'e social relations" 4ominant municipal institutions and framewor s thus encoura-e particular collecti'e lo-ics and practices o'er others" These or-ani/ational forms and collecti'e practices, in turn,

11

produce certain inds of social relationships" The ways that each of the nei-hborhoods or-ani/ed to access water are shaped by the collecti'es5 insertion into these urban framewor s, and in turn, shapes social relations within their nei-hborhoods"

You might also like