A/HRC/57/48 However, substantive differences arise once timber and water are obtained. For timber, it seems reasonable that the company that harvested the timber sell the logs to the sawmill of its choice; the sawmill will sell the timber boards and beams to construction companies, furniture factories or shipyards, and these companies will sell their products to society at the appropriate prices. In other words, once the sustainability of the forest ecosystem is guaranteed, insofar as the values and utilities of wood are substitutable and interchangeable with capital goods, it is reasonable and consistent to manage them according to the market’s logic, with the appropriate regulatory measures. 8. However, in the view of the Special Rapporteur, applying the same approach to water would lead to serious errors because many of the functions and values related to water use cannot be easily converted into monetary terms; they do not fit into the realm of Aristotelian chrematistics. For instance, how could water’s value be determined to safeguard the health of families and communities? How could the value of water needed for maintaining public health be compared with the value of water required for growing avocados for export? Those values belong to different ethical categories making it challenging to equate them solely based on monetary considerations. B. Ethical order of priorities 1. Water for life 9. As the Special Rapporteur noted, promoting a human rights-based approach to water management requires prioritizing life-sustaining uses and functions, particularly people’s lives and dignity. The Special Rapporteur conceptualizes that as water for life.7 10. The concept of water for life should encompass three key elements: 8 ensuring access to water for drinking and sanitation as a basic human right; providing water for rural communities to produce their own food, which is in line with the human right to food; and preserving and maintaining aquatic ecosystems to ensure a healthy and sustainable environment. Those three aspects are interconnected and vital for promoting a dignified life and environmental sustainability.9 2. Water in functions, uses and services of general interest 11. Water intended for general-interest functions, uses and services should be managed as a secondary priority.10 For the Special Rapporteur, a water service, value or function is of general interest or public interest when it is determined in a transparent, participatory and democratic manner that it should be preserved and guaranteed to the community over private interests. For example, this could involve protecting river flows, as in the United States of America through the Wild and Scenic River Act,11 or allocating specific water flows to ensure the survival of family farming if it is deemed to be in the best interests of society. 3. Water for economic development 12. Water is used for economic development in productive activities, such as extractive industries and large-scale agriculture, that generate profits. However, those activities also generate higher demand for water and the risk of water pollution. Therefore, giving specific attention to them is important, albeit assigning them a third priority level. 13. Lastly, productive activities that generate toxic pollution, such as heavy metals, which pose serious risks to public health and ecosystem sustainability, must be outlawed and avoided at all costs, no matter how profitable they are for their promoters. 7 8 9 10 11 GE.24-13383 A/76/159, para. 22. A/HRC/48/50, para. 14 (a). Ibid. In the scope of the present report, general interest refers to the public interest, which is the well-being of society, as considered in economics and social sciences. See https://www.rivers.gov/about. 3