The case that opened the debate
The investigation begins with a bill that sparked debate in Colombia: in 2016 Coca-Cola paid 607,501 Colombian pesos to withdraw 56 million litres of water in La Calera. The amount complied with the regulation, but national and local authorities considered it negligible and the case placed the Water Use Fee under scrutiny.
Twenty years of incomplete information
When reviewing reports from 2004 to 2023, the Ministry concluded that it was impossible to reconstruct how much each company or water utility paid year by year. Of 41 regional environmental authorities, only about half had submitted information in recent years; the analysis ultimately used approximately 41% of the data it should have received.
Measurements and calculations that cannot be compared
The review found calculation problems in between 69% and 99% of reports, depending on the year. For 2023, 24% of the concessions analysed lacked measuring systems and 53% did not report the volume withdrawn. Without reliable readings, billing relies on estimates rather than actual use.
What this means for Water Security
The case does not by itself determine the correct tariff, but it does show that information is part of the infrastructure. A verifiable VTV approach records source, volume, quality, continuity, treatment, energy and related costs so alternatives can be compared and each project can be assessed transparently.
- Measure withdrawn and produced volumes instead of relying on estimates.
- Maintain comparable quality, operating and maintenance records.
- Relate visible cost to availability, continuity and operational risk.
This content summarises and contextualises information from the linked source. It is educational and does not replace laboratory analysis, medical assessment or recommendations from the competent authority.
Read the original investigation in EL PAÍS →