21st Oct 2025 5pm
- 6:30pm
Greenwich Campus
QA120
Presenter: Co-authors: Location: Teams (Online) details: Meeting ID: 319 421 430 872 5
GENERAL PUBLIC
From taster days to subject open evenings, find out more about what you'll study, where you'll study it and perhaps even meet who'll you'll be studying with. If you'd like to see what your child's experience at Greenwich will be like, join them at one of our Open Days. Visitors can talk to staff and students and attend talks on student finance and how to apply. Learn something new or join the discussion at one of our many public lectures, seminars and events, covering everything from education to foreign policy and current affairs.
Emanuele Lobina
Conor Gray
University of Greenwich, QA120
Passcode: N9eW6W66More Greenwich events
Events for prospective students
Open Days
Public events and lectures
This talk aims to identify an important knowledge gap in the scholarly debate on international development. It does so by drawing on over 25 years of empirical research on water service reform in the Global North and South. We suggest that we are bereft of a comprehensive history of global water development, intended as an account of the institutional trajectories (including changes in ownership and organisational modes, pricing and regulatory regimes, and reliance on public or private sources of investment finance) that have accompanied the process of water universalisation in the Global North (whereas in the Global South the observer’s attention should go to the relative progress towards universalisation).
We argue that this knowledge gap has implications for policy, most notably the lingering expectation in neoliberal and mainstream circles that privatisation and financialisation can lead to sustainable water development, despite growing empirical evidence on the limitations of both. Otherwise put, the absence of this historical account facilitates the convergence of Cosean blackboard economics (e.g. ungrounded theoretical expectations on the benefits of water privatisation and financialisation) and the reproduction of water as “zombie policies” (i.e. failed approaches that nevertheless persist). The upshot is that filling this knowledge gap will lead to more informed (and less cognitively dissonant) scholarly and policy debates on an urgent topic.