Water Institutional Reforms in Kyrgyzstan - The Politics of Water Institutional Reform in Neopatrimonial States - page 93

This problem perception shows a rather technocratic view on water management problems
(equivalent to the paradigm of industrial modernity described in chapter 2.1.1).
The second cluster summarizes political institutional factors. The most frequently men
tioned institutional problems were the fragmentation of administrative responsibilities and
competencies, inadequacies in water law, and the general socioeconomic situation that limits
the performance of water reforms like the introduction of water service fees. Under “inadequ
acies in water law” we summarize various aspects mentioned by the interview partners, includ
ing contradictions between laws, ambiguous regulations, the lack of effective sanction mechan
isms, and frequent violations of water laws. Concerning administrative fragmentation, the
dispersion of competencies and responsibilities among various agencies with overlapping and a
lack of coordination were mentioned as a major obstacle in water resource management. It was
assessed as the “most serious misery”. 110 For example, in the 1999 Law on Drinking Water,
seven bodies are named as being responsible for the control of drinking water protection
areas. 111 Other political institutional factors mentioned by the interviewees were the lack of
awareness on part of the water users and the lack of a clear political strategy as a norm to set
rules. The second bloc shows a problem perception more in line with the described political
institutional water paradigm stressing the importance of sound policies and structures.
The final bloc includes all other problems mentioned. Most prominent here was the ques
tion of interstate regulation of the transboundary water resources. The lack of and need for
rational water use in general was also mentioned several times, as well as the issue of water
quality. One other point was the policies of international donors that were considered to be
inadequate in addressing the problems or even harmful (e.g. when international consultants
ignore local expertise).
Comparing the frequency of naming, institutional factors account for 46% of all problems
mentioned. The technocratic problem perception is slightly less with 37%. Other factors ac
count for 17% of the total (see Table 12). It is now interesting to analyze whether the problem
perception is uniform among the political actors or whether the actors' perception vary and
contradictions can be found between them. Therefore, the interviewees have been grouped
according to their organizational affiliation. 112 It can be seen that perceptions differ between
representatives of different organizations involved in water management. A political
institutional problem perception is especially prevalent among representatives working for
international donor agencies and NGOs. Representatives of water user associations (WUAs)
and of lower parts of the state administration tend to stress technocratic factors. They are the
ones most often confronted with practical problems. Academics had the least technocratic
perception.
While these results are not statistically representative, they point to a cleavage in the problem
perceptions of different actors. Farmers and meso level bureaucrats complain about deteri
orated infrastructure and lacking finances; when they mention political institutional factors, it
mainly relates to difficulties with the local water administration not providing the agreed
amount of water, illegal water withdrawal by farmers located upstream, or favored distribution
to relatives and friends of the village elite. These internal disputes on water delivery and water
110 “ a” . University professor, Bishkek, 09/15/2003. Similar statements were made by many
other interviewees.
111 Author's interview with a local consultant of a donor organization, Bishkek, 09/28/2004.
112 This is sometimes problematic as people can be affiliated with several organizations. The interviewed
representatives of the World Bank WUA support program who work directly in the DepVodKhoz -structure and are
meant to be part of it while financed by World Bank have been classified as international as they were selected by the
WB and receive training from it.