Uma Perspectiva Histórica Das Primeiras Políticas Públicas De Saneamento E De Recursos Hídricos No Brasil

Abstract

ResumoO artigo objetiva oferecer uma visão histórica de fatores que induziram ou influenciaram as primeiras políticas públicas de saneamento e de recursos hídricos no Brasil. Um dos pressupostos adotados é o de que o desenvolvimento socioeconômico e político do país resultou não apenas de dinâmicas endógenas, mas também de estruturas globais de poder, desde os primórdios da empresa colonial. Para tanto, usa-se a linha teórica de intérpretes clássicos da história brasileira como Celso Furtado e Caio Prado Júnior e suas perspectivas sobre a posição periférica do país no sistema econômico global. O esforço analítico resultou na percepção de que a política de saneamento se desenvolveu em consonância com iniciativas e interesses europeus na área e de que, em diferente sentido, as políticas de recursos hídricos emergiram da necessidade de regular o uso da água, especialmente para privilegiar a geração de energia elétrica em um contexto de crise externa e de centralização administrativa.

Governance and water security: The role of the water institutional framework in the 2013–15 water crisis in São Paulo, Brazil

“…In the 1990s, tensions between state and municipal level water agencies reached a climax due to the implementation of neoliberal reforms. These tensions stemmed from two related factors: the push to privatize water and sanitation services under the discourse of promoting greater efficiency and accountability; and the proposed continued centralization of water supply services at the state level (Aversa and Oliveira, 2017;Heller and Rezende, 2008;Murtha et al, 2015). It was as part of these reforms, which included the 1995 Concession Law (8987), that SABESP was converted from a public company into a publicly traded mixed capital company in 1997 by floating shares on the São Paulo stock market (BM&FBOVESP) (Aversa and Oliveira, 2017;Heller et al, 2014).…”

Public water supply and sanitation policies and inclusive development of the urban poor in Brazil

“…WatSan strategies do not automatically focus on the poor (Guimarães et al, 2014;Murtha et al, 2015;Nyarko et al, 2016). They must contain specific incentives for inclusion of the (urban) poor in WSS (Berg & Mugisha, 2010;Guimarães et al, 2014;Nyarko et al, 2016), while accommodating the different interests of actorsfrom WSS providers to potential users (Bisung et al, 2016).…”

“…Particularly in overcrowded neighbourhoods (e.g., urban poor informal settlements), poor WSS cause unhygienic circumstances and environmental degradation (Obrist et al, 2006). The EI approach in WatSan can be translated into two indicators: (B.1) domestic wastewater collection and treatment to minimise negative anthropogenic impacts on ecosystem services and human health (e.g., waterborne diseases), caused by domestic sewage discharge into the environment (Obrist et al, 2006;Heller, 2009;Oteng-Ababio, 2014;Murtha et al, 2015), and (B.2) water availability which relates to freshwater as the provisioning ecosystem service to be preserved (MEA, 2005;Cutolo et al, 2013;Giatti et al, 2013;UN, 2015), allowing WSS provision. While (B.1) refers to the local ecosystem where the urban poor live and reducing impacts downstream, (B.2) refers to ecosystem services of upstream sites often used as the freshwater source by WSS providers .…”

“…This context was also characterised by WSS delivery moving back and forth between private and public management (see also Murtha et al (2015); Roland et al (2018)). Apart from the WatSan sector's internal dynamics, three 'systemic conditions' have impacted expansion by influencing policies (Castro, 2009;Heller, 2009): (i) the national and international political-economic framework in place (Castro, 2009;Murtha et al, 2015), including the adoption of the MDGs, the SDGs and the Human Right to Water (Heller, 2015;Brown et al, 2016); (ii) the financial support from international organisations (Castro, 2009;Murtha et al, 2015) based often on the need for rationalising the sector and supporting public-private partnerships (Bakker, 2003;Pessoa, 2008); and (iii) the role of the State in WSS management (Roland et al, 2018) (BRASIL, 2010) which sets standards for policy implementation at multiple levels and promotes good governance practices. The BS-Law goes beyond WSS and also embraces: (i) urban sanitation and solid waste management and (ii) drainage and management of urban stormwater services.…”

“…Developing countries struggle to provide WSS for institutional (e.g., private companies profit orientation (Post, 2009)), structural (e.g., tenure legalisation issues (Budds et al, 2005)), technical (e.g., unsuitable conventional technologies (Berg & Mugisha, 2010)) and financial (e.g., unaffordable services cost (Berg & Mugisha, 2010)) reasons (Solo et al, 1993). The urban poor are particularly vulnerable to inadequate water and sanitation (WatSan) but its potential consequences threaten others through 'spillover effects', such as waterborne diseases ( Juuti & Katko, 2005;Obrist et al, 2006;Oteng-Ababio, 2014;Murtha et al, 2015).…”