The debate over privatizing and water markets has moved back and forth for decades between the “I” and the “We” perspectives. Rather than either/or, a balanced “I&We” view of water institutions is needed. West is meeting east in water law. Public interest needs must be satisfied in appropriate decision forums, but marketing may prove a social improvement when used as a supplement. Balancing an “I&We” institution involves establishing an acceptable or tolerable level of interference through judicious mixing of state, common and private property regimes. Third-party effects are eliminated as mutual gain arises in a variety of decision forums.
