Moral economies for water: A framework for analyzing norms of justice, economic behavior, and social enforcement in the contexts of water inequality

Abstract

Over the past two decades, scholars have invoked E. P. Thompson's and James Scott's concept of a "moral economy" to explain how people mobilize notions of justice to make claims to water. We draw together 20 years of literature to assess the state-of-the-art present in research on moral economies for water. We trace the historical foundations of the moral economies concept and its relevance to water; define the three basic components of a moral economy for water-(1) shared understandings of justice, (2) normative economic practices, (3) social pressure mechanisms-and provide examples of how they manifest globally. We then discuss how moral economies for water can cycle through four basic statesbalanced struggle, intensified reaction, mass revolt, and collapse and dissolution-at different scales. We also explore the implications of the moral economies framework for key areas of current research on water: water sharing, water commons, water markets, and biocultural outcomes, and discuss the ways in which the moral economies framework dovetails with recent advances in water research, especially the economics of water and development. We argue that the moral economies framework is a powerful explanatory tool for understanding the relationships between ideas of water justice, economic behaviors, and mechanisms of social enforcement that complements other methodological approaches and theoretical perspectives. We envision moral economies for water as a field that can facilitate a range of norm-based analyses of economic behavior and water justice, including across scales-from local to global-and in broad, integrative, multiscalar, and cross-disciplinary ways.

Sticking around or fading away: water patronage and value in Chad

“…As noted above, the moral economy framework has been widely used to define norm-based arrangements for water supply and access. By looking at water-sharing practices, this framework has analysed 'norms of reciprocity, an aversion to inequality, and a commitment to justice' (Beresford et al 2022). This article offers an alternative interpretation: it explores the physical and symbolic relational distance between patrons and constituents.…”

Toward a middle‐range theory of environmental morality

“…Thompson (and the uplands of Vietnam by James C. Scott), the theory has been updated to accommodate contemporary scholarship). Beresford et al (2023) observe "A moral economy is not defined by any legal certification, rather, it is normative and consistently evolving. A moral economy is a site of ongoing struggle and social conflict."…”

“…Beresford et al. (2023) observe “A moral economy is not defined by any legal certification, rather, it is normative and consistently evolving. A moral economy is a site of ongoing struggle and social conflict.” I apply the theory of moral economies to the empirical cases of lithium mining in the highlands of the Andes and to the production and mining of palm oil in South Asia and Africa.…”

Beyond engagement: Enhancing equity in collaborative water governance

“…Scholars across disciplines have increasingly highlighted concerns around equity and justice in water governance (e.g., Beresford et al, 2023; Ingram, 1990; Perreault, 2014; Sultana, 2018; Sultana & Loftus, 2019; Swyngedouw, 2004; Zwarteveen et al, 2017; Zwarteveen & Boelens, 2014), and around power and politics in collaborative governance broadly (Klijn & Skelcher, 2007; May, 2016; Purdy, 2012; Ran & Qi, 2016). Harrington (2017) summarizes the core of many of these concerns when he argues that collaborative water governance processes often ignore the political nature of water, meaning they overlook the social processes “that determine what water is, and what specifically needs protection in the quest for water security” (p. 255).…”