As I write, it is a typical November day in upstate New York - cold and rainy. The fields where I walked the dogs this morning were sodden, requiring me to wear rubber boots.  It seems impossible that there could ever not be enough water.

However, in Atlanta, people are deciding which is more important: a law protecting an endangered species of mussels, or the five million humans who share their watershed. The mussels are not going to fight back. They will die without a word if leaders in Georgia decide to divert their water, but humans are not so humble. The governor of Florida has objected vociferously, saying the planned diversion of the water could "displace the entire economy in the Florida Panhandle.”

In the past few years the Supreme Court, charged with settling disputes between US states, has heard cases regarding the Colorado River and the rights of Arizona and California; the Potomac River and the rights of Maryland and Virginia; and the Republican River, Kansas and Nebraska. 
Negotiations over sharing water resources become even more complex across national boundaries. A 2005 UN Environmental Programme report, Hydropolitical Vulnerability and Resilience in International River Basins, summarizes: 
”Wherever a major river, lake, or aquifer system is shared by two or more sovereign nations, the shared (international) waters become vulnerable to indiscriminate exploitation and degradation. Urbanization and environmental degradation can cause nations sharing the water resources to be vulnerable to conflict. These vulnerabilities are made more acute by climate variations and variations in precipitation.”
According to the Green Cross, an organization which works to prevent and resolve conflicts arising from environmental degradation, half the world’s population lives in river basins shared by two or more countries, and lack of cooperation between those sharing these precious water resources is causing reduced living standards, devastating environmental problems, and even potential conflicts. As global climate change makes matters worse, how can there not be increased conflict over this very basic need?
In the case of water security, economists have very specific competence to add to the discussion. Water is not a public good according to the classical definition; it is certainly not non-excludable.  However, in 2002, A UN Committee declared access to water a human right, stating that water is a social and cultural good, not merely an economic commodity. The effect of this declaration was to obligate the 145 countries that have ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to ensure access to clean water, "equitably and without discrimination." The social utility of ensuring clean water is so high that the consequences of ignoring this obligation will be dire.

As our authors in this issue note, solutions are needed at both the top and bottom. At the highest levels of international cooperation, treaties and even new regulatory bodies will need to be established. There will need to be an internationalization of water-use thinking.
At the local level, reduction (at least in the industrialized world) and recycling will need to become the norm. I once heard that it takes 100,000 gallons of water to make one car in Detroit.  Many modern manufacturing processes are predicated on the availability of unlimited fresh water.  Notwithstanding all the other reasons to shift our economy to more sustainable practices, the need for protecting our water supplies necessitates a paradigm shift.

With the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, EPS can come out of the closet as an organization concerned with environmental issues; water security is so clearly within our field of expertise. The solutions leading to sustainable access to clean water for all the world’s people will require international cooperation, encompassing economic considerations as well as conflict resolution protocols. I hope you find this issue of the Quarterly inspires you to find out more and get involved, as economists and concerned citizens.