Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
physical reasons for problems of water distribution and usage and highlight the role of institu
tions. It might be argued that this constrains the explanatory power of the results as the prob
lems might be simply not pressing enough and reforms would be better carried out if they were
of greater necessity. In this respect is has to be said that, first, it was shown that water prob
lems are perceived as serious and as a political priority issue in both countries. Second, one can
take a comparative look at an area affected by scarcity of water in the same region. This study
showed that even under rather favorable water conditions, reforms face resistance. The studies
of Wegerich (2005, 2006, 2006a, 2008) and Veldwisch (2007) on local and meso level water
institutional reform in Khorezm, Uzbekistan (a water scarce region at downstream Amu
Darya) show that many similar problems occur: the constraining impact of a state dominated
agricultural economy, patronage, the resistance to hydrographic boundaries, and undermining
informal arrangements. Their results indicate that patrimonial influences are even stronger in
subverting formal rules when water is scarcer. Also for other neopatrimonial states, it can be
concluded that the independent variables as well as the dependent one will be characterized by
a similar balancing act between formal and informal institutions, and by patrimonial elements
that are in conflict with formal good water governance mechanisms. The impact of the inter
fering variable donor policies affects all countries dependent on foreign aid.
The validity of the four variables in shaping the politics of water institutional reform can
be also assumed for water institutional reforms in general. The stringent comparative design
was chosen in order to allow for bounded generalizations. This is not to say that the impact of
the variables is the same, but that these are the factors that have to be studied and that ac
cording to their content can exert a supportive or obstructive effect. They present the set of
institutions from which actors choose elements and which constrain actors in their behavior as
they are beyond water institutions as such part oft the institutional environment and hence
the wider water governance structure. While the objective of this study was as a first step
to identify the variables of water institutional reform, systematic comparative research on these
factors would allow differentiating distinct parameter values and weighting the variables ac
cording to their respective significance for reform success or failure.
How should reforms be designed and implemented in order to avoid obstacles? It should
be clear that there cannot be a one size fits all recommendation or blueprint on how to bring
WIR to success. When the concrete institutional arrangements are of utmost importance, as
was shown for the two case studies, in any other case the setting might be dissimilar and may
require a different approach. Nevertheless, we would like to point to five aspects, which as
results of the analysis are considered important for WIR.
Sound Sequencing of Reforms
The first point is the question of sequencing of reforms. The analysis of both states showed
how reforms already conducted or not yet conducted in related sectors can have positive or
negative impacts on water institutional reform. This affects especially reforms in the agricultur
al sector, but also reforms addressing decentralization and local government structures. As we
have seen, the land reforms conducted were a major incentive for reform of local irrigation
management in Kyrgyzstan. However, establishment of new cooperatives not based on hydro
graphic principles proved to be an obstacle for hydrographic water management afterwards. In
Tajikistan, the de facto non realization of land reform hindered the introduction of new water
governance approaches. The lack of a real market economy in both countries' agricultural
sectors prevented the conditions necessary to successfully introduce market mechanisms.
The need for an integration of land and water governance is obvious and was acknowledged by
experts in both countries, but is not followed in practice. This is not specific for the two coun
Search WWH ::




Custom Search