A/HRC/15/31 II. Background on provision by non-State actors 4. It is possible to identify three different forms of service provision: (a) Direct management. The State can provide services itself, often through its municipalities. In that case, no actor other than the State is involved and the State is directly responsible and accountable for the provision of services; (b) Delegated service provision. Instead of providing services itself, the State may choose to formally delegate service provision to non-State actors. While more attention is often paid to the involvement of large, transnational companies, service provision may also be delegated to smaller companies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) or community-based organizations. Services are also often operated through Stateowned companies, that is, companies that are totally or in the majority owned by the State, but that are legally distinct entities from the State itself. From the perspective of human rights, the crucial aspect is that the State has delegated the task of providing water and sanitation services to a third actor; (c) Informal provision. Finally, in many cases, the State neither provides services itself, nor does it formally delegate service provision. Under these circumstances, informal provision often takes place, involving a variety of actors and structures that have evolved over time, responding to a need in areas not covered by formal provision, ranging from small-scale entrepreneurs to NGOs and community-based organizations. In this case, the State has not made an intentional decision to involve third actors. Rather, informal provision is de facto participation of non-State actors. 5. While the independent expert is aware of the significant differences in size, capacity and structure of these actors, she considers it necessary to cover the entire spectrum of nonState service providers. In the present report, she will not address direct State provision, because the legal analysis is different when non-State actors are involved, as will be explained below. Hence, the present report addresses both formal and informal service provision and covers private companies and entrepreneurs, NGOs and community-based organizations involved in service provision, as well as State-owned companies. She will use the terms “non-State service providers” or “actors” to refer to these. Where her considerations are limited to the private sector or parts of it, she will use the terms “(formal/ informal) private sector”, “private sector participation” or “private actors”, while avoiding the term privatization for the reasons outlined below. A. Delegated service provision 6. While the private sector has a long history of involvement in water and sanitation service provision, the starting point for the most recent wave of private sector participation can be situated in the 1980s in several developed countries, followed by many developing and transition countries during the 1990s.1 Private sector participation in developing countries should be understood in the context of donor approaches and international policies.2 International financial institutions, in particular, have promoted neo-liberal 1 2 4 Naren Prasad, “Overview: social policies and private sector participation in water supply”, in Social Policies and Private Sector Participation in Water Supply, Naren Prasad, ed. (Houndsmill, Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), pp. 3 and 12. Private sector participation also has to be seen in the context of international trade and investment law that may potentially conflict with human rights law by limiting the regulatory space of a State. It would, however, be beyond the scope of the present report to address these complex issues. See generally the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on human rights, trade and