Comparing the Politics of Water Institutional Reform - The Politics of Water Institutional Reform in Neopatrimonial States - page 172

tions constituting patrimonial dependency relations. The structures and networks of the FSK
still exist in both countries and in many cases they are more reliable than new rules or organi
zations. Wegerich (2005: 178f) made the same observation in Uzbekistan, where land reform
did not really change the structure of the agricultural sector and new farm organizations as well
as WUAs reconfirm old FSK power patterns.
Despite the problems in Kyrgyzstan, it has a better prospect for future reform success
than Tajikistan, where agricultural dependency patterns are much stronger. The empowerment
of water users, which is one objective of WUAs (and to a certain degree also of ISF), cannot be
achieved without the empowerment of the same persons as farmers. Sound agricultural and
land reform therefore turned out to be a necessary precondition for water reform as far as it
addresses agricultural water usage. WUAs only can work effectively when farmers are indepen
dent. ISF can only work in a market economic environment.
Apart from these fundamental constraints, there are several other institutional factors that
have limiting effects on rural well being. For example, farmers cannot use the economic po
tential of their fields due to missing knowledge and experiences in agricultural practices and
management. The current farmers are usually formerly specialized FSK workers or teachers
etc. without training in farming. Often, they simply do not know how much to irrigate and
therefore use as much water as possible leading to wasteful water usage. At the same time, the
experts of the specialized academic institutes lack the means to train people at the local level.
Wasteful water use is therefore at least partly rooted in lacking access to knowledge about
irrigation techniques and results in a 'the more, the better' attitude. 295 The current features of
the agricultural sector in both states limits water institutional reform.
Noticeable, donor interference in this variable could not be observed in either of the case
studies. It should be mentioned that donors' water projects, especially the WUA programs, are
embedded in wider agricultural or rural development programs and the interrelatedness of
water institutions and agricultural performance is reflected in most of the donor projects.
Institutions of Local Governance
The local governance variable only influences the arena of implementation of those reforms
that have to be implemented locally, i.e. the establishment of WUAs and the collection of ISF.
In both countries, official local government structures are accomplished by informal ones that
are characterized by power asymmetries. Patrimonial features such as patronage relations play
an important role. That said, there are differences concerning their strength: In Kyrgyzstan,
decentralization and, thus, the position of formal local government is stronger than in Tajikis
tan, where the FSK structure is more powerful.
As was shown in the analyses of the WUA reforms, WUAs are externally and internally
co opted by local institutions in both countries. 'Externally' means that they are not perceived
as and do not act as independent organizations, but rather as part of the aiyl okmotu (in Kyr
gyzstan) or of the cooperative that replaced the FSK (in both). 'Internally' means that the posi
tions of chairs and in the council are filled with the key actors of the village (in both local case
studies the WUA chairperson was also the head of the agricultural cooperative and had a lead
ing position in the FSK before) and reflect the existing power asymmetries. The WUA heads
generally feel more accountable to the donors that give grants and training than to the mem
bers. The WUA council is rather weak. Water users show little knowledge and awareness of
their membership rights. In Tajikistan, many of the farmers interviewed were not even aware
295 In a study conducted by ASDP „NAU“ in the Zeravshan Valley in Tajikistan, none of the farmers interviewed were
able to identify different species of wheat and potatoes and the amount of water required (ASDP „NAU“ 2003: 18).