Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
graphic boundaries) are based solely on presidential decrees, while those issues in which more
actors were involved (Water Code, National Water Strategy) got stuck already in the decision
making process. The economic and organizational reforms were most contested, as they
threatened the self interest of those involved in decision making. This is also connected to
administrative fragmentation, which is perceived as one of the most serious water governance
problems in Kyrgyzstan. In Tajikistan, policy fragmentation was not as much considered a
problem by the interviewed experts as in Kyrgyzstan. This may on the one hand point to less
fragmentation, but on the other hand to less open articulated conflicts and less participation of
the higher levels of administration in decision making so that it cannot amount to policy frag
mentation. However, coordination problems clearly exist beyond the surface.
It became obvious that in both countries the Parliament is not a major actor in water pol
icy. This reflects the general marginal role of Parliaments in Central Asia. The authoritarian
tendencies in both countries are reflected in both new Water Codes where the competencies of
the Parliament were further reduced (Kyrgyzstan) or completely expelled (Tajikistan). In Kyr
gyzstan, however, Parliament hindered the implementation of water fees, and with the law on
transboundary waters it once became proactive in decision making. However, this law is not
applied and can be considered to be merely symbolic. For Kyrgyz politicians, it is more attrac
tive to focus on economic mechanisms at the international level, where actual difficulties with,
as well as resentments against, Uzbekistan can be utilized, than to discuss economic mechan
isms domestically that threaten to displease the voters and therefore are opposed. Also in Taji
kistan, this symbolic level of water policy can be observed, namely in the campaigns of the UN
Year of Freshwater and the subsequent decade. These activities also served the international
audience more than the domestic needs.
293
Concerning problem perception in water policy in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, we can find
similarities and differences. Due to similar conditions, many topics are the same: deteriorated
infrastructure in agriculture; regional water distribution; and the need to reform administration,
to introduce economic mechanisms and rational usage. Neverthesess, the way they are per
ceived and the priority attached to them differs: In Kyrgyzstan, international water relations
and the legal status of water obtain the first places on the agenda, while in Tajikistan a concen
tration on technical problems (such as infrastructure and financing) prevails.
Despite differences in problem perception patterns, the same rules are established in both
countries. This can be explained by the influence of donors and international discourses, which
stress the same norms. Donors in both countries are influential actors in decision making.
They actively participated in the drafting of the Laws on WUAs, the Kyrgyz Water Code, and
the Tajik Water Sector Development Strategy. Many basic ideas of water institutional reforms
have not originated from the countries but have been 'imported' by international organizations,
consultants, and NGOs. Therefore, the policy reform process may be read not only as the
implementation of a government reform, but also as response (adoption, co optation, or resis
tance) to the global norms how water should be governed.
293
Concerning the regional dimension of transboundary water management, which receives so much attention in
Kyrgyzstan, this point is not such a prominent and especially not such an ideologized issue in political debate. Despite
the perception of a certain unfairness as Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan do not provide cost recovery mechanisms for
O&M of the Kairakum reservoir, Tajikistan still regulates it according to the irrigation modus out of 'tradition' and to
show good will (Petrov 2003, author's interview with a representative of the EC-IFAS, Dushanbe, 10/21/2003).
Although in Tajikistan as well certain actors perceive that the country is in an unjust position and should try to get a
bigger water quota or treat water as an economic good, this point of view didn't gain access to the political discourse,
as it does not promise to be politically lucrative in the momentous situation of Tajikistan.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search