Is adjudication a pre-cursor to neoliberal water policies?

So below I've listed these side by side, with a check if the substitution works, a check - if it is awkward or too soon to tell, and a check+ if the parallel is downright creepy. The list, please remember, is generated as a way of summarizing what social scientists, especially geographers, have said about neoliberalism.
1. Neoliberalism (adjudication) is a process. CHECK2. Neoliberalism (adjudication) is articulated through contextually specific strategies. - In other words, neither neoliberalism nor adjudication exsist in a single, "pure" form. CHECK.
3. Neoliberalism (adjudication) hinges upon the active mobilization of state power. CHECK+
4. Neoliberalization (adjudication) generates path-dependent outcomes. Check - (remains to be seen in NM)
5. Neoliberalization (adjudication) is intensely contested. CHECK+
6. Neoliberalization (adjudication) exacerbates regulatory failure. Check - (remains to be seen, though there are signs that this will surely happen when agencies butt heads)
7. The project of neoliberalism (adjudication) continues to evolve. CHECK+ Adjudication has taken different flavors depending on the time period, the basin involved, the number of acequias per basin, and the development projects tied to the adjudication process (dams, canals).
* doesn't mean I like it!
Disclaimer: Please note that I am not calling adjudication a form of neoliberalism, just a necessary first step BEFORE neoliberal processes are carried out on water in New Mexico. Water, in other words, cannot be severed from the land over which it flows if owners/maps/tax records are not distinguishable to the requisite authority. It's that simple, or that complicated, depending on how you read this template of ideas. I'll surely get some feedback after I submit the larger article to the journal Geoforum. Pax.
Comments