STANDARDS AND CONSUMERS- A CASE STUDY OF

PACKAGED DRINKING WATER

ABSTRACT: Consumer bodies across the world, especially amongst developed

countries have been performing prominent role in the process of standardization of
products of mass consumption. Food sector, is an important area within which, packaged
drinking water has emerged as a great market potential in recent times. Late 1990s saw a
revolution of sorts when a handful of consumer organizations in India took it upon
themselves to highlight the deficiencies in the system that led to interest of the consumer
being sidelined as the regulations for bottled water were not as stringent as needed.
Through effective use of science & technology in terms of conducting comparative
product testing of various brands of packaged drinking water available in the market in
independent laboratories and also comparing the Indian standards vis-à-vis the
international ones, these organizations tried to open the eyes of public at large and
Government bodies in particular. How this movement, a continuous one, has played a
significant part in development and up gradation of standards for packaged drinking
water is one of most important findings of the study. The study also tries to explore
various facets of standardization— its definition, the process of standardization, major
categories and its benefits. The study attempts to capture the involvement of different
interest groups, especially, the consumer organizations and how it helps in shaping the
standards. It is pertinent to mention here that the standards need not become the tools of
power for the government or prerogative of big business houses; rather they should
empower the people in asserting their rights as a consumer. Therefore the role of
consumer organizations in standardization process not only needs to be recognized but
also enhanced in terms of support from Government bodies. The commercial
establishments or manufacturers on the other hand need to be sensitized to the issue of
need for standards for food products. Strengthening the consumer movement by capacity
building would encourage more and more people coming together for effective and
greater contribution in the field of standardization and beneficial to the society on the
whole. Standards have accordingly been a site of struggle between citizens and experts—
or, more precisely, among social movement groups, academic scientists, regulators, and
industries. The activism of health-based social movement organizations, for example, has
often involved challenges to standardized procedures; the environmental justice
movement in particular contests standards for statistical significance in epidemiological
studies that systematically thwart fence line communities’ efforts to prove that disease
rates are elevated in residential areas near hazardous facilities. Finally, the findings of
this study throw light upon the potential benefits of associations likely to take place
between Governmental organizations and consumer bodies involved in standard setting
process in terms of collaborative studies or any other research efforts that are required
and that must be inclusive of the end users.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2637309

INTRODUCTION:
Consumer and user contributions to the standards development process add a balanced,
impartial view and help to produce voluntary standards which reflect more accurately the
needs and desires of the entire marketplace. User influence in standardization benefits
both industry and society. Not only is the consumer perspective integrated into the
standardization process, but also participation in the process results in a more informed
consumer. These people are more likely to assist in the use and implementation of
standards in whose preparation they have been involved. The role of the informed
consumer should extend to making the general public aware of the existence of standards
and to encouraging the demand for products and services conforming to these standards.
India has a fast growing consumer movement. The enactment of the Consumer
Protection Act in 1986 and the Indian Government's policy to liberalize the economy
have accelerated progress in this area also. An effective tool in advocacy -- Comparative
testing is at the heart of the consumer movement globally. A major objective of
comparative testing is to serve as a basis for campaigns to persuade the government to
introduce policies which protect consumer rights and interests. As the subsequent
chapters depict the market scenario for packaged drinking water in India and abroad, it
automatically garners dire need for stringent measures for regulating a booming packaged
drinking water industry.
The central thesis for this paper is that there must be greater participation by public and
consumer interest groups in the regulatory process. In order to fully appreciate the
rationale for such a thesis, it will be helpful to examine the issues from a theoretical
perspective which in turn will provide a foundation for a more specific discussion of
remedies to the problems which currently beset the regulatory process and also prove
beneficial to all with regards to our day to day dealings with consumable products.

This research undertakes the case study of packaged drinking water that started being
marketed in 1990s when regulations for packaged drinking water were practically non-
existent or rudimentary. A number of multinational players were bombarding the market
with new brands on one hand and Indian consumers were just warming up to the idea of
packaged drinking water on the other. Soon it was noticed that there were people who
were just packaging the tap water or unprotected water and selling them. The packaged
water available in the market was not of good quality. Failure of this product to comply
with existing standard had been widely reported on the basis of surveys conducted by
various eminent institutions and consumer organizations.

The issue of unsafe water being marketed to the consumer who were paying premium
price for the packaged variety caught the media and hence peoples attention. It ultimately
reached the quarters of parliament where after a number of deliberations and rounds of
heated arguments and discussions, certification of packaged drinking water was made
mandatory.

In the short history of consumer group activity relative to regulation, the emphasis has
been placed on public utility regulation since the products or services provided are,
mostly without exception essential and are deserving of priority given to them by
consumer groups.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2637309

Thus, before a regulatory agency can engage in a process of balancing the variety of
interests that relate to a particular issue, those interests must be articulated before the
agency. The agency then needs to facilitate the process by making its proceedings as
accessible as possible to the largest number of interests so that the ultimate decision may
be based upon a variety of relevant inputs. The appearance of consumer groups after,
after more than a half century of regulation in India, has upset the regulatory process and
the regulators in particular. Mechanisms are required so that consumers themselves have
a feeling that they can participate through their own groups and say what they want to say
in the manner they want to say it.

It is a collaboration of activists, scientists, technicians, legal experts, advocates and

specific subject experts that brings about the desired outcomes for the consumer from the
regulatory process. Hence there is a very clear obligation on consumer organizations to
ensure that their position is articulated in a public forum in a way that reflects the views
of its membership and that their submissions have sufficient weightage/ support in terms
of in-house research and/ or background information on the issue being dealt with.

STS perspectives on Standardization

Scholars from the field of science, technology and society (STS) studies have on various
occasions stressed how technological artifacts and systems influence human behavior and
how human behavior reciprocally affects these artifacts and systems.

Both consumption history and user-oriented STS-literature have demonstrated that the
influence of users on the development of technology clearly goes beyond a mere passive
role as consumers. In the course of the last decade or so, research coined the expressions
mutual shaping of technology and society or co-construction of users and technology in
order to emphasize that users always take part in the shaping of technology – if only
through their creative and often unforeseen consumption habits. Marketing literature also
regularly praises co-production by users, and many offers of the last decades even rely on
users’ investing their time, work and expertise. Furthermore, no standardization happens
without users adopting the technology, and users often provide feedback to the producers.
Concepts of the “co-construction” of users and technology call for a closer look on the
role of users in the shaping of large technological systems. Users are innovative actors
due to their creative and unforeseeable practices and meanings that they develop along
product offers. Thus, standardization theory should definitely have an interest in the
micro politics of everyday life and consider the many socio-cultural aspects of users’
everyday routines. (Oudshoorn, Nelly; Pinch Trevor, 2004)

In the Social Construction of Technology approach (SCOT) ‘relevant social groups’ are
the starting point. Technical artifacts are described through the eyes of the members of
relevant social groups (including users/consumers). The interactions within and among
relevant social groups can give different meanings to the same. As a result of the
involvement of different groups, problems are defined differently and so are possible

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2637309

solutions, giving rise to different interpretations as to whether a problem has been solved
or to the proper working of a technology. This interpretative flexibility demonstrates the
necessity of a sociology of technology—it shows that neither an artifact’s ‘success’ or
‘failure’, nor its technical ‘working’ or non-working,’ are intrinsic properties of the
artifact but subject to social variables. Here, the lesson could be that technology is not
merely constructed by engineers, but also by marketing departments, managers, anti-
technology action groups, and consumers. (Bijker et al, 2001)

Social shaping of technology (SST) has gained increasing recognition in recent years,
particularly in the UK and Europe, as a valuable research focus, for its broader import for
the scientific and policy claims of social sciences. SST is seen as playing a positive role
in integrating natural and social science concerns; in offering a greater understanding of
the relationship between scientific excellence, technological innovation and economic
and social well-being; and in broadening the policy agenda, for example in the promotion
and management of technological change1
Thus `SST' is often taken to be synonymous with one particular approach - for example,
the social construction of technology - or more generally with the sociological study of
technology. A variety of scholars, with differing concerns and intellectual traditions, find
a meeting point in the SST project. They are united by an insistence that the `black-box'
of technology must be opened, to allow the socio-economic patterns embedded in both
the content of technologies and the processes of innovation to be exposed and analysed
(MacKenzie and Wajcman 1985, Bijker and Law 1992).

SST has been strongly influenced by a concern with technology policy. By rendering the
social processes of innovation problematic, SST has opened up policy issues that had
been obscured by technological determinism, and by related simplistic models. For
example SST criticised established `linear models', which conceived of innovation as
involving a one-way flow of information, ideas and solutions from basic science, through
Research and Development (R&D), to production and the diffusion of stable artefacts
through the market to consumers.

Standardization studies have many muses: inspiring standards practitioners as well as

theoretical muses from various disciplines. Within the given limits, the previous research
autobiography could only highlight a few of them. Given the importance of standards and
the way they pass on social, cultural, and economic values, a good understanding of
negotiation processes is of paramount importance. The implication for government policy
makers is, firstly, to keep a close watch on standards, the values they embed and their
(negative) consequences. Secondly, to advance the regulatory standard set-ting as an area
which needs political legitimacy (i.e. give a voice to public values which have little
chance of being heard). Finally, to exploit standards, as a means for technical and societal
change. (Schuller et al, 2008).

1
European Science Foundation/Economic and Social Research Council 1991, Newby 1992.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2637309

ROLE OF CONSUMER ORGANISATIONS IN STANDARD-
SETTING PROCESS

International standards were originally created as voluntary guidelines for promoting the
compatibility of manufactured parts. In the last decade they have begun to shape
consumer products and services. Standards now are used to implement public policy and
legislation.

As standards impact the public interest, civil society organizations have taken a greater
interest in participating in their making. Civil society organizations’ involvement in the
standards world now varies from marginal to full involvement. However, the nature of
this involvement is ad hoc and the rules of engagement ambiguous. To some degree this
ambiguity reflects the status of other stakeholders in standards making, including
business and government. As their policy impact increases, the quality and credibility of
standards will depend more and more on the endorsement and participation of all sectors
of society. Civil society organizations have a unique contribution to make in developing
working models of balanced representation and constructive participation in standards
making.

Civil society organizations engaging standards are as diverse as the standards. Civil
society organizations engage international standards directly at the international level,
and indirectly at national levels.

Emerging civil society organizations in transition and developing countries often have
their roots in the academic community, among students and professors. This population
stratum has the up-to-date technical expertise, language training, and global civil society
comfort level needed to participate effectively in the international standards arena.
Because of their access to global civil society organizations, developing country
representatives can tap into the breadth of global governance expertise emerging from
this sector.

The composition of standard committees is an essential element of standardization

processes. A committee made up of many different stakeholders justifies the principle of
openness for representation of all interested parties, which is a fundamental characteristic
of formal standardization. Some types of stakeholders have representative organizations
that are dedicated to serve the interests of their members. Examples are labor unions,
consumer organizations, professional organizations and branch of business organizations.
These representative organizations are usually involved in standardization processes
rather than their individual members.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2637309

The first reason for this is that the needs and objectives of the representative organization
are not necessarily similar to those of their individual members. This holds especially for
organizations that represent a heterogeneous stakeholder group, such as consumer
organizations. Secondly, representative organizations are usually relatively independent
in choosing their strategic position in standardization processes.

In a large developing country like India, there are numerous gaps left by the government
in the development process - sometimes by intention, sometimes due to lack of funds,
sometimes due to lack of awareness. These are the gaps that many NGOs try to fill in
modern India. Arguably then, one of the most crucial roles played by civil society in
contemporary India has been to act as a watch dog to the state; and in doing so push the
state in directions that are accountable and responsive to citizens thereby protecting and
deepening their democratic rights. The movement for social transformation initiated by
civil society has largely been conducted within a framework of ‘participative and
mobilization politics’ In recent years, the civil society space has witnessed the growth of
organizations that have attempted to devise innovative strategies that straddle the practice
of mass mobilization with effective engagement with the state. These include efforts that
emphasize research; participatory planning and public interest litigation amongst others.
Consumer and user contributions to the standards development process add a balanced,
impartial view and help to produce voluntary standards which reflect more accurately the
needs and desires of the entire marketplace. This is true at all levels of standards.

User influence in standardization benefits both industry and society. Not only is the
consumer perspective integrated into the standardization process, but also participation in
the process results in a more informed consumer. These people are more likely to assist in
the use and implementation of standards in whose preparation they have been involved.
The role of the informed consumer should extend to making the general public aware of
the existence of standards and to encouraging the demand for products and services
conforming to these standards.

Consumers in every country have their own unique problems and an exchange and
sharing of information between the countries about the ways and means of tackling such
problems would benefit the consumers of the world as a whole. Also, multi-national
companies from developed countries try to enter the markets of other countries by
forming joint ventures, collaborations and also by direct marketing of their products and
services. It has, therefore, become necessary for consumer groups and organizations of
the world to come together to defend and protect their own interests.
An International Consumer Organization- Consumers’ International, contributes not only
to coordinate the efforts and activities of the various consumer organizations of the
world, but also helps them in tackling their problems by sharing their experiences and
information.

India has a fast growing consumer movement. The enactment of the Consumer Protection
Act in 1986 and the Indian Government's policy to liberalize the economy have
accelerated progress in this area also. The arrival of multi-national corporations has
created a change in the market scenario which is now more challenging than ever before.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2637309

In this situation, developed countries have ample scope for dumping banned goods
produced in their own countries into the developing countries. In the face of this
challenge, the Indian consumer organizations have felt the need to expand their activities
and to improve their international network.

Consumers International provides a clean platform where the Indian organizations can
get the right guideline. It is, therefore, not surprising that the Indian representation in CI
has grown from a mere three in the eighties to as many as 17 by the middle of the 90s.
Some of the members are full members while other are Affiliates.

A significant achievement of the consumer in India has been the representation given to
consumer organizations on the policy making bodies (regulator machinery) of
governments and Advisory Welfare Committees of big business organizations and the
service sector. Central and State (Government) Consumer Protection Councils, regulatory
departments of Preventions of Food Adulteration, Supplies of Food and Drugs, Weights
and Measures Department, Quality Control Institutions like Bureau of Indian Standards
(BIS) and AGMARK, Petroleum Product Department, Railway Commuters Welfare
Committees, Regional Advisory Committees for Indian Airlines Services all have
representatives of the various consumer organizations. Thus, consumers get opportunity
to participate in policy making aspects.

Role of Consumer organizations in standardization of packaged drinking water

India is a vast country with varying quality of water resources. The situation has give
rise to development of industry, which supply packaged drinking water in pouches /
bottles for bulk quantities in 12-litre, 20-litre, 25-litre (reusable cans). As per information
available this industry has grown from scratch to approximately Rs.1500 crore in the last
few years.

There were reports that due to mushrooming growth in this industry, the interest of
consumer was being sidelined. It was noticed that there were people who were just
packaging the tap water or unprotected water and selling them. The packaged water
available in the market was not of good quality. Failure of this product to comply with
existing standard had been widely reported on the basis of surveys conducted by various
eminent institutions and consumer organizations.

Comparative testing is at the heart of the consumer movement globally. A major

objective of comparative testing is to serve as a basis for campaigns to persuade the
government to introduce policies which protect consumer rights and interests. Unbiased
information dissemination empowers the common consumer and facilitates nurturing a
matured marketplace.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2637309

 Prominent consumer organizations such as-- Consumer Guidance Society of India
(Mumbai) in the year 1994, Consumer Education and Research Centre, (Ahmedabad) in
the year 1998 and Consumer Voice (New Delhi) in the year 1999 conducted Comparative
product testing of packaged drinking water available in the Indian market and found
many branded samples not fulfilling the requirements. The test results of these surveys/
studies were publicized through various means of print and electronic media.

Lok Sabha members raised the issue in Parliament and desired regulatory measures
following which Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, the regulatory authority, had
issued the notification, namely, GSR No. 759 (E) and GSR 760 (E) under PFA Act in
September 2000. This notification made it mandatory that packaged drinking water and
packaged natural mineral water manufactured and sold after 29 March 2001 shall be with
BIS Certification Mark. (Rangasamy, 2005).

Aviram Sharma (2010) explores the regulatory decision making process for setting
quality standards of bottled water in India. The paper also attempts to explore the public
understanding of regulatory decision making and their opinion over expert’s committee
composition. Through primary survey, the study explores three basic premises: the
awareness of people towards regulatory bodies and its implications over their decision
making, their willingness to participate in decision-making process and their perception
of the composition of the expert committee.

In the study referred above, it was found, that majority of the respondents were aware
about the regulatory body. Apparently, the scientific and technical parameters used by
BIS for setting quality standards do not connotes much meaning to them, and perhaps,
they trust other parameters to judge drinking water quality. Here, it was also found that
people were highly willing to participate in the decision making process of standards
setting. The individuals in the least educated category were more willing to participate in
the standard setting exercise. Where as, people belonging to the highest category of
education want to leave it to the ‘experts’. This suggests that people perception over
scientific authority and validity varies across different sections of society. Over the issue
of composition of expert committee for setting standards for bottled water, it was found
that people posed more faith in government and consumer organizations. Only thirteen
per cent of the respondents felt that there is a need to have representatives of industry
groups in the expert committee. This is in sharp contrast with the present composition of
these regulatory bodies where around forty percent experts are industry representatives.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2637309

CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION

In this paper we have tried to understand the concept and process of standardization from
the perspective of regulatory bodies, commercial establishments and the end users or
consumers. The participation of consumers in the process has been reviewed through
their involvement in various consumer organizations. The case study of standardization
packaged drinking water in India is shown as a classic model for shaping of standards
through society’s intervention. It goes on to disprove the false notion that the modern
consumer movement is just an elitist movement meant for the select few in large cities
indifferent to the cause of common consumers. The various activities taken up by
consumer organizations in the area of standardization across the country, include—
conducting market surveys, laboratory testing, desk research, representation in technical/
other committees, lobbying, advocacy, participation in workshops/seminars/training for
generating interest and awareness on related issues etc.- depict the rigorous efforts in the
interest of consumers. It only adds to the challenges faced by them that most of these
organizations are Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and not-for-profit ones.
They are often dependent on grants and donations received from various sources-private
or Governmental etc.

The fact that consumer products such as packaged drinking water have penetrated to
even remote and rural areas, their safety and quality needs to be ascertained and ensured
through effective implementation of standards. Thus the work does not stop with the
formulation of regulations and/or guidelines for product/s, it’s more important that the
authorities follow it up with enforcement of the same. The consumer organizations with
the necessary expertise and experience in the area may also be entrusted with monitoring
or other such activities as imparting training and education to the interested parties.

One of the important conclusions that may be drawn here is that the standardization
practices can benefit the most from an interdisciplinary perspective. Future research on
standardization might therefore have transdisciplinary collaboration with standardization
practitioners. In addition, the participation of consumers/ consumer organizations is
necessary in view of new technologies being introduced in food sector and hence new
products entering in the Indian market such as nanotechnology in food processing,
genetically modified (GM) foods, organic foods, and irradiated foods, functional foods &
nutraceuticals and so on. Since these issues are highly debatable and regulatory policy is
still somewhat unclear on many of them, a word of caution is required. The recent
controversy surrounding introduction of Bt brinjal in Indian market is just an example.
Thus when standards & requirements pertaining to such products are being discussed or
formulated, concerns regarding their safety and their regulatory status in other parts of the
world need to be considered which is generally assumed to be the job of activists only.
Such situation needs to be transformed, in the sense that a more professional approach is
required when dealing with powerful interest groups – the firms and more importantly
with matters concerning health. This can be achieved by getting organized and by
employing methodologies that are guided by science and then it would also become
possible to make significant impact on future policy matters.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2637309

REFERENCES

1)Radomir Lasztity, Matra Petro-Turza, Tamas Foldesi, (2004), HISTORY OF FOOD

QUALITY STANDARDS, in Food Quality and Standards, [Ed. Radomir Lasztity], in
Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS), UNESCO [www.eoloss.net].

2)Kirti Joshi, (2006) MECHANISM OF DEVELOPING AND FIXING FOOD

STANDARDS IN INDIA, NISTADS, CSIR, NEW DELHI.
SOURCE: www.nistads.res.in

3)Kirti Joshi, (2010) MECHANISMS OF DEVELOPING AND FIXING FOOD

STANDARDS IN INDIA; PROCESSED FISH, CRUSTACEANS AND MOLLUSKS
IN INDIA
SOURCE: www.globaltrade.net

4)Bejon Misra, (2005) INDIA: BOTTLED WATER TESTING SHOWS

CHALLENGES OF KEEPING STANDARDS UP-TO-DATE AND ENFORCED;
STANDARDS SETTING FOR BOTTLED WATER IN INDIA, CONSUMERS
INTERNATIONAL, SEPTEMBER 2005.

5) KC Chaudhary, (2010) COMPARATIVE PRODUCT TESTING & BENEFITS TO

CONSUMERS, VOICE, STANDARDS INDIA – VOL. 24, NO.2, MAY 2010.

6) ISO and the Consumer, (2010) pp.2-3, Standards India – Vol. 24, No.2, May 2010.

7)Robert Madelin, (2004) THE IMPORTANCE OF CONSUMER PARTICIPATION IN

STANDARDIZATION, PP. 1-6, EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 15TH ANEC
GENERAL ASSEMBLY, BRUSSELS, 3 JUNE 2004.

8) Charlotte Williamson, (2000), CONSUMER AND PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS;

WORKING TOWARDS CONSENSUS, CONSUMERS’ VIEWS,
SOURCE: www.qualityhealthcare.com

9)T. Rangasamy, (2005) AN OVERVIEW OF INDIAN STANDARDS ON

PACKAGED DRINKING WATER, PP.11-15, STANDARDS INDIA, VOL.18, NO.10,
JANUARY 2005.

10) Jagdish Kumar and R.K. Banerji, (1996), BOTTLED MINERAL WATER –
CONCEPTS AND MISCONCEPTS, PP-181-183, CHEMICAL WEEKLY, JUNE 18,
1996.

10

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2637309

11) Marine Moguen-Toursel (2007) THE ROLE OF USERS IN THE SHAPING OF
GERMAN TELEPHONY , The Co-production of economic actors on innovative
products and Standardization, organized by,EBHA conference, Geneva, 11-13
September 2007 Heike Weber, TU Darmstadt, weber@ifs.tu-darmstadt.de

12) Sander van den Burg1 (draft version), CONSUMPTION DOMAINS IN

TRANSITION; Consumers (real, projected, represented or imagined) and socio-technical
systems of provision. Environmental Policy Group, Wageningen University.
Accessed:11/08/2011 03:27pm.

13) Wiebe E. Bijker, Chris Leonards, Ger Wackers (2001), RESEARCH AND
TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT (RTD) THROUGH A EU-ACP POLICY
DIALOGUE. For DGIS, Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, DG Development,
European Commission, and European Centre for Development Policy Management,
Maastricht, 14 August 2001.

14) Judith Schueller, Andreas Fickers, Anique Hommels(2008),BARGAINING NORMS,

ARGUING STANDARDS : NEGOTIATING TECHNICAL STANDARDS ; STT74,
The Hague, the Netherlands.

15) Hastak, Michael B. Mazis, Louis A. Morris (2001) THE ROLE OF CONSUMER
SURVEYS IN PUBLIC POLICY DECISION MAKING ; Journal of Public Policy &
Marketing, Vol. 20, No. 2 (Fall, 2001), pp. 170-185 Published by: American Marketing
Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30000586 .Accessed: 05/04/2011 03:57.

16) Consumer Movement in India: features, issues and trends

Source: www.egyankosh.ac.in

17) Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, Government of India.
Source: Press Information Bureau

18) Consumers and standards: partnership for a better world -

Source: ISO – www.iso.org

19) First steps in Standards representation: a guide for consumer organizations

Source: CI – www.consumersinternational.org.

20) Your voice matters – Why consumers need to participate in standards making
Source: ISO – www.iso.org

11

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2637309

21) Verman, L. C. Standardization, a new discipline. New Delhi, Affiliated East-West
Press, Nizamudin, 1973.

22) Sanders, T. The aims and principles of standardization. Geneva, ISO, 1972.

24) International Organization for Standardization. Development manual No. 6:

application of standards. Geneva, ISO, 1991.

25) International Trade Centre, UNCTAD/WTO (ITC). Export quality management: an

answer book for small and medium-sized exporters. Geneva, ITC, 2001. Website at:
http://www.intracen.org/.
26) Institute of Standards Engineers. Guide on company standardization. New Delhi.

27) Institute of Standards Engineers. Monograph on standardization. Mumbai, 1998.

28) Website of the International Organization for Standardization at http://www.iso.org.

29) Website of the World Standards Services Network at http://www.wssn.net.

30) Website of the World Trade Organization at http://www.wto.org.

31) Dr. Aisha Ghaus-Pasha, ROLE OF CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS IN

PARTICIPATORY AND ACCOUNTABLE GOVERNANCE, December 2004, 6th
Global Forum on Reinventing Government Towards Participatory and Transparent
Governance, 24 – 27 May 2005, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

32) Andrew Puddephatt, Exploring the Role of Civil Society in the Formulation and
Adoption of Access to Information Laws: The Cases of Bulgaria, India, Mexico, South
Africa, and the United Kingdom, Working Paper Series, 2009 The International Bank
for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank1818 H Street, Washington, DC
20433.

33) Bureau of Indian Standards, IS 14543:2004, Specifications for Packaged Drinking

Water, website www.bis.org.in.

34) Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, website www.fssai.org.in.

35) Aviram Sharma(2010) , People’s Perception of Public Participation in Regulatory

Decision Making: The Case of Bottled Water Quality Standards in India, Centre for
Studies in Science Policy, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi 110 067, India.

12

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2637309

36) T.Gregory Kane (1980), Consumers and the Regulators – Intervention in the Federal
Regulatory Process. The Institute for Research on Public Policy, Montreal, Canada.

37) Nelly Oudshoorn and Trevor Pinch, (eds.) 2003, How Users Matter: The Co-
construction of Users and Technology, MIT Press, Cambridge, ISBN 0-262-15107-3

38) Frickel, S., & Moore, K. (Eds.) (2006). The New Political Sociology of Science:
Institutions, Networks, and Power.Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

39) Bijker,W.E., J.Law(eds.) 1992. Shaping Technology/ Building Society. Studies in

Sociotechnical Change, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

40) MacKenzie, Donald & Wajcman, Judy (eds.) (1985) The Social Shaping of
Technology, Open University Press: Buckingham, 1998.

41) Gwen Ottinger, June 12, 2009, Buckets of Resistance: Standards and the
Effectiveness of Citizen Science, Chemical Heritage Foundation, Philadelphia, PA, USA,
Journal of Science Technology Human Values, Sage Publications.

42) Levidow L, Carr S, von Schomberg R, Wield D (1997) European biotechnology

regulation: framing the risk assessment of a herbicide-tolerant crop. Science,
Technology and Human Values 22: 472–505.

43) Levidow L, Carr S, (1997),'How biotechnology regulation sets a risk/ethics

boundary', Agriculture and Human Values, 14(1): 29-43.

44) Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (1999). Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its
Consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

45) Priyanka Jayashankar and Swetha Kannan, ‘Slaking a City’s Thirst’, , Hindu
Businessline, July 14, 2005

46) Ratna Bhushan, ‘Bold and Bisleri’, Hindu Businessline, April 25, 2002.

47) Nityanand Jayaraman, ‘Water Woes and Bottle Battles’, www.indiaresource.org

InfoChange News & Features, October 2005.

48) Laxmi Murthy, ‘Boond-boond mein paisa: Bottled water is big business’, India
Resource Center.

13

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2637309

49) Robin Williams and David Edge, THE SOCIAL SHAPING OF TECHNOLOGY,
Research Policy Vol. 25, (1996) pp. 856-899.

50) Peter H.Gleick, TheMyth andReality of BottledWater. The World’s Water, The
Biennial Report on Freshwater Resources: 2004-2005, Island Press 2004, Pacific Institute

51) Tushaar Shah, The New Institutional Economics of India’s Water Policy
International workshop on ‘African Water Laws: Plural Legislative Frameworks for
Rural Water Management in Africa’, 26-28 January 2005, Johannesburg, South Africa

52) Catherine Ferrier, April 2001. BOTTLED WATER: UNDERSTANDING A

SOCIAL PHENOMENON (DISCUSSION PAPER) – Report commissioned by WWF.

14

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2637309