Water Institutional Reforms in Tajikistan - The Politics of Water Institutional Reform in Neopatrimonial States - page 139

addition to the Water Code of 2000 (see ch. 7.3.2), it is the fundamental document on water
policy. In it several institutional objectives for water reform are highlighted, such as:
Introduction of an Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM);
Transition to basin management;
Establishment of Water User Associations (WUAs);
Differentiation of the Irrigation Service Fee (ISF);
Introduction of market mechanisms for water use;
Decrease in organizational hierarchy;
Better coordination between states, regions, districts, and sectors;
Stakeholder participation (Pulatov 2004: 85f).
These issues reflect the general definition of good water governance. Similar subjects are also
raised in the PRSP of 2002 as well as in the governmental plan for achieving the UN Millen
nium Development Goals (MDG) of 2003 (GoT 2002: 41f; Pulatov 2004: 85).
In 2005, the 2001 Concept was updated and a new Water Sector Development Strategy
was formulated. It reflects a growing commitment to IWRM in the international debate, a
change in the national situation with a turn from locally and short term oriented humanitarian
assistance to long term development, and the quest for the MDGs. In June 2006, this new
Water Sector Development Strategy (WSDS) came into force. The WSDS mentions full cost
recovery, the establishment of WUAs, and the transfer of irrigation management as main ob
jectives in the institutional realm (MIWM, UNDP, EC IFAS 2006: 9). The 2005 draft lists the
following problems: the mismanagement of water, land, and environment, the poor mainten
ance and state of the existing infrastructure, lack of funds, poor strategic planning, a weak
institutional framework, an inadequate pricing system, a lack of regional cooperation, and poor
management of the infrastructure. It also recognizes the need for better coordination among
state bodies as well as donors, NGOs, and civil society (UNDP, UNECE, National Working
Group 2005:2).
No information was available on the development of the 2001 concept. The development
of the 2005 Water Sector Development Strategy proceeded rather quickly. Reportedly, the
initiative resulted from the preparation of the PRSP. Since 2003, a working group had been
assigned to develop a reform program. The working group consisted of 15 representatives
from the MinVodKhoz , the Agricultural Ministry, the CFPS, the Parliament, as well as scientists
and other specialists such as economists and lawyers. It was headed by the Minister of the
MinVodKhoz . Its tasks were defined according to four areas: (1) development of a recommen
dation for the reform of the water administration in general; (2) development of a legal founda
tion for WUAs; (3) identification of priorities in rehabilitating irrigation systems; and (4) analy
sis and assessments of the costs of water. 216 In August and September 2005, the UNDP orga
nized discussions on strategies and priorities. In October, the national working group was
consigned to develop the strategy together with the UNDP until December 27, 2005. In addi
tion, three three month consultancies were tendered. This may also have been related to the
commitment of the Tajik government at the 2003 Johannesburg WSSD to establish a national
IWRM and water efficiency plan by the end of 2005. On June 26, 2006, the final version of the
strategy was approved by decree No. 121 of the MinVodKhoz (MIWM, UNDP, EC IFAS 2006:
3 4; UNDP, UNECE, National Working Group 2005: 4, 6).
Do these activities and policy papers give evidence of a strong political will to pursue
good water governance? It is difficult to assess whether the documents alone suffice to reflect
216 Author's interview with a former senior official at the MinVodKhoz , Dushanbe, 08/23/2004; with a senior official at
the CFPS, Dushanbe, 10/13/2003.