Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
G3-Water Governance and Community Based Management
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

G3-Water Governance and Community Based Management

158
views

Published on

by Marie-Charlotte Buisson. At Ganges Regional Research Workshop of the Challenge Program on Water and Food/Water Land and Ecosystems (CPWF/WLE),May 2014

by Marie-Charlotte Buisson. At Ganges Regional Research Workshop of the Challenge Program on Water and Food/Water Land and Ecosystems (CPWF/WLE),May 2014

Published in: Environment, Technology, Business

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
158
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Polder
    Subprojects
    Location (Upazila)
    Agency
    Level of Salinity
    WMOs (Yes/No) and project
    Management challenges
    Polder 3
    Debhata & Kaliganj
    BWDB
    High
    No – informal management
    Shrimp- paddy conflict
    Polder 24G
    Keshobpur
    BWDB
    Increasing
    Yes –KJDRP
    Water logging and salinity
    Polder 31
    Daacope
    BWDB
    Average to High
    Yes – 4th Fisheries
    Salinity and river erosion
    Polder 30
     
    Batiaghata
    BWDB
    Low to Average
    Yes –IPSWAM
    Water logging
    Polder 43-2F
     
    Amtoli
    BWDB
    Low
    Yes –IPSWAM
    Water scarcity
    Latabunia
    Dumuria
    LGED
    High
    Yes- SSWRDP
    Disaster vulnerability
    Jabusha
     
    Rupsha
    LGED
    Average to High
    Yes –SSWRDP
    Salinity
    Jainkathi
     
    Sadar
    LGED
    Low
    Yes –SSWRDP
    Water scarcity
    Bagarchra-Badurgacha
    Dumuria
    LGED
    High
    Yes –SSWRDP
    Declining shrimp productivity
  • Myth of apolical community based water management organization
    Myth of unified and idealized community without internal tension
  • Myth of apolical community based water management organization
    Myth of unified and idealized community without internal tension
  • Myth of apolical community based water management organization
    Myth of unified and idealized community without internal tension
  • Myth of apolical community based water management organization
    Myth of unified and idealized community without internal tension
  • Myth of apolical community based water management organization
    Myth of unified and idealized community without internal tension
  • System Rehabilitation Project (92-97)
    Participation limited to farmers, exclusion of landless and non-gariculural households

    Khulna-Jessore Rehabilitation Project (94-2002)
    Mobilization of 42,000 person in WMO but unsustaibability and criticized for ignoring local communities and indigenous solutions
  • Replication of institutions
    Unclear demarcation of responsibility (‘advisers’)
    Lack of resources
    National Water Management Plan (2001)

  • CCCl – Even if the stated intention of the policies is to empower local people, neglect of the role of LGI in water management undermine local empowerment.

  • Actors are defined as individuals and group actively involved in water management.
  • Actors are defined as individuals and group actively involved in water management.
  • 250m for women vs 930 for men
  • 250m for women vs 930 for men
  • 250m for women vs 930 for men
  • 250m for women vs 930 for men
  • 250m for women vs 930 for men
  • 250m for women vs 930 for men
  • 250m for women vs 930 for men
  • 250m for women vs 930 for men
  • Transcript

    • 1. G3-WATER GOVERNANCE AND COMMUNITY BASED MANAGEMENT Ganges Regional Research Workshop 5 May 2014- Dhaka
    • 2. PRESENTATION 1.What G3 is about? What has been done? 2.Highlights from ‘A Review of Water Management Policies from the 60s to 2000s’ 3.Highlights from ‘The Gender Gap between Management and Water Users’ 4.G3 findings, messages and recommendations 5.Uptake of the messages and recommendations
    • 3. RESEARCH QUESTIONS • Is community management the best way of managing coastal polders? If so, under what circumstances does it work? • If community management is indeed the way forward, what are the constraints that communities face in polder management? • What kind of policies and institution are needed so that communities can participate in management of polders?
    • 4. OBJECTIVES Understanding the actors, communities and institutions
    • 5. STUDY AREA
    • 6. RESEARCH QUESTIONS ACTIVITIES AND OUTPUTS
    • 7. PARTNERSHIPS BANGLADESH AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY BANGLADESH WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT INDIVIDUAL CONSULTANTS FROM BANGLADESH & WEST BENGAL +
    • 8. Highlights from… A REVIEW OF WATER MANAGEMENT POLICIES FROM 1960S TO 2000S Camelia Dewan Aditi Mukherji Marie-Charlotte Buisson
    • 9. • Current ecology of coastal Bangladesh: result of long term evolution of human and natural processes • Ecology and history / society and environment are interlinked (Mosse, 2003) Research objectives: How changing water ecology of the coastal zone is tied to institutional changes reflected in the water policy? How the institutional changes in water policy have been affected by the global discourses? INTRODUCTION
    • 10. Zamindars • Right of revenue collection on the coastal land • Responsible for construction of temporary earthen embankment, 8 months systems Community • Involved in the construction of the embankment through labor Zamindari system abolished in 1950 Disastrous floods in 1954, 1955, 1956 Krug Mission Report (UN, 1957) WAPDA/BWDB BEFORE THE 1960s Water management in the colonial period
    • 11. Coastal Embankment Project (1961) • 136 polders • Southwest region: 1566 km of embankment, 282 sluice gates Flood protection + food security purposes 1960s Mega-infrastructure projects and top- down engineering Positive impacts: • Change in cropping patterns to 1 to 2/3 crops • Increased productivity • More security and population increased But: • Tides surged farther inland • Siltation / drainage congestion / water logging • Reduction in water flow Shift from traditional system of flood management to construction of large scale polders. Community management or involvement of stakeholders, not mentioned in the 1960s (WAPDA Master Plan, 1964)
    • 12. • Some criticism of top-down engineering • IBRD reviewed the Mater Plan (1964), recommended a shift toward small scale projects in flood control, drainage and irrigation. • From donor side, oil and financial crisis, reduced motivation for long terms repayment periods and mega infrastructure projects 1970s Shift to small scale projects and people’s participation Early Implementation Project (EIP) • Small scale flood control • Drainage improvement • Irrigation schemes Evaluation of phase 1 emphasized the need to more social equity  Focus of phase II, III Comilla cooperative model • Mobilization of social credit, cooperative • Access to subsidized fertilizers and pesticides • Management committees, membership contributions
    • 13. Landless Cooperative Societies and Target Groups • Inclusion of landless and marginalized groups • Focus on social issues and poverty • Creation of employment opportunities • Use of NGOs as social mobilizers, empowerment agenda  1st attempt to include people participation in designing infrastructure projects  Awareness raising, giving voice to the poor  Acknowledgement of the power inequalities 1980s Demand driven participation with empowerment objectives Early Implementation Project III Delta Development Project Participation as an ‘end in itself’
    • 14. • Maintenance issues  Introduction of the need for participation • Evolution in the donor community from social mobilization to service delivery • Decentralization and privatization trends Shift from politicized empowerment of communities to depoliticized participation of communities with Water Management Organization (WMOs). Participation as a ‘mean to an end’ 1990s-PRESENT Decentralization and depoliticized participation System Rehabilitation Project Khulna-Jessore Rehabilitation Project Small Scale Water Resources Development Project Integrated Planning for Sustainable Water Management
    • 15. National Water Policy (MoWR, 1999) Guidelines for Participatory Water Management (MoWR, 2001) • All stakeholders ‘actively and fruitfully participate in water management decision-making at all stages’. • Stakeholders: ‘inhabitants of an area who are directly or indirectly affected by water management’.  All the segments of the society clubbed together to form Water Management Organizations. • Apolitical water management • Myth of homogenous community • Quasi-ignorance of Local Government Institutions (LGIs), apolitical vs democratic decentralization 1990s-PRESENT Decentralization and depoliticized participation
    • 16. CONCLUSION - SYNTHESIS
    • 17. Highlights from… THE GENDER GAP BETWEEN MANAGEMENT AND WATER USERS Marie-Charlotte Buisson Jayne Curnow Farhat Naz
    • 18. Research objectives: • To which extend the inclusive policy help to increase the representation of women in water management issues or increase their influence in decision making? INTRODUCTION Guidelines for Participatory Water Management • WMO membership is open to ‘women and men belonging to the households of farmers, fishermen, small traders, craftsmen, boatmen, aqua-culturist, landless people, destitute women, project affected person, ect’. • Executive Committee elected for a 2 years term • 3 over the 12 seats reserved for landless, fishers and destitute women • At least 30% of women representation
    • 19. Frameworks: • Moser framework (Moser, 2003)- Triple role of women: reproductive, productive and community management. • Kabeer framework (Kabeer, 1994) – Social relation approach: rules, resources, people, activities and power. METHODOLOGY Qualitative data • 57 FGDs, 8 with women only groups • 92 KIIs, 16 with women Quantitative data • 1000 households from 44 villages • 30% of women respondents • 3% of female headed households Gender case study
    • 20. WATER AND REPRODUCTIVE ROLES ‘Supplying drinking water is the role of women.’  Blanket assumption, static perception But: In 10.6% of the cases men are responsible for fetching water. • Distance is the main reason for men to be involved • Degradation of the environment, salinity • Positive or not? Seclusion of women? Debunking the myth of static gender roles.
    • 21. WATER AND PRODUCTIVE ROLES Productive roles: activities generating cash or kind. Water fundamental for all the activities conducted by men and women. Women have multiple productive use of water, especially for small- scale productive activities. Agriculture and Aquaculture • Male decision-making, land ownership • Women well aware of agricultural decisions • Women family labour • Women daily labour Homestead aquaculture • 31% of the households own a pond • Around 40% of the women are involved in homestead aquaculturePoultry and livestock • Cattle (60%), goat (26%), poultry (80%), women responsibility - Eggs and milk • Safety net • Degradation of the environment Homestead vegetables • Production within the bari, self-consumption • 54% of the homestead plots managed by women • Gender differences in the source of irrigation
    • 22. WATER AND COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ROLES RULES – How things have to be done? All community members able to become members of the WMO • 17% of the members are women • Lack of awareness 30% of women members in the EC • 80% of the WMOs have less than 3 women in the EC • No women holds president or treasurer position, only one is secretary. WMOs don’t fill full the rules and the quotas established by the policy.
    • 23. WATER AND COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ROLES PEOPLE – Who is out? Who does what? • Female WMOs members are from households with a higher socio- economic status. • Relatives from political elites without water management concerns. WMOs are not representative or responsive to female water users. Self-exclusion of women • Illiterate, poor and women • Waste of time • Inappropriate feminine behaviour 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Households with a women member of a WMOs Female headed households Entire sample Large farmer (more than 2.5 acres) Medium farmer (1.5 - 2.49 acres) Small farmer (0.5 - 1.49 acres) Marginal farmer (less than 0.5 acres)
    • 24. WATER AND COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ROLES ACTIVITIES – What is done? Maintenance • Labour Contracting Societies involve women for maintenance work • 25% of the work has to be done by LCS groups • 30% of LCS members have to be women • Employment opportunity but no decision making on water management Operation • Very few women involved • No decision making
    • 25. WATER AND COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ROLES RESSOURCES – What are used? 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Number of voluntary working days for gate maintenance Number of voluntary working days for canal maintenance Number of voluntary working days for embankment maintenance Non WMO members Men WMO members Women WMO members 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 Financial contribution Non WMO members Men WMO members Women WMO members Voluntary labour contribution Financial contribution
    • 26. WATER AND COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ROLES POWER – Who decide, whose interests? • Decision largely determined by power relations among social groups • Women participation within the WMOs is low and passive • Token participation • Representative of their male relative not of women Reproduction of the religious, political and economic distribution of power. Women members don’t question the power relations in place. Women non members are excluded or self- excluded from decision making.
    • 27. CONCLUSION WMOs • focus on large-scale productive use of water. • don’t address the small scale productive uses of water and reproductive use of water Disjuncture between • Policy and WMOs rules required to be inclusive, • Women who consider that WMOs do not address their needs Policy has not been able to increase the representatively of women needs on terms of water management not to increase their decision making power. Recommendations • Acknowledgement of the status of women in Bangladesh, of their particular needs for water management. • Targeted approach, focus on empowerment • WMOs with shared interests
    • 28. G3 FINDINGS, MESSAGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
    • 29. 1st Finding Poor quality of maintenance induces vulnerability… …but poor quality of maintenance can be solved through a three tier strategy.
    • 30. Poor quality of maintenance induces vulnerability… • Poor quality of the infrastructures is a commonality across the polders and subprojects. • Gates • Canals • Embankments Reasons • Deferred maintenance • Conflicts • Design of the infrastructures or of the projects • Weak institutions Consequences • Communities are at at risk in case of natural calamity • Infrastructures don’t play their roles • Costly alternatives for the farmers (use of groundwater) 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 Bad or very bad condition of the embankment Bad or very bad condition of the gates Bad or very bad condition of the canals
    • 31. …but poor quality of maintenance can be solved through a three tier strategy. Community level Improving the contributions of the community members • Homogeneous WMOs with shared interests in water management (conditions for membership) • Relating contributions to benefits (microcredit, fishing rights…) • Income generating activities for the WMOs • Creating strong institutions with ownership of the infrastructures UP level Involving the local representative, Union Parishad Using social safety nets for water infrastructure maintenance GoB and donors level Donor-Government Trust Fund for Maintenance of Water related infrastructure in Bangladesh • Allocation per polder and per year of maintenance funds
    • 32. Poor quality of maintenance induces vulnerability… …but poor quality of maintenance can be solved through a three tier strategy. SUPPORTING EVIDENCE • 9 Situation Analysis Reports + Maps • Technical Report from Quantitative Survey • What determines contribution to a common fund for upkeep of water infrastructures? Evidence from experimental game in coastal Bangladesh • The Imposition of Participation? The Case of Participatory Water Management in Bangladesh +
    • 33. 2nd Finding Institutional coordination needs to improve through a clear water governance framework.
    • 34. Institutional coordination has to be improved through a clear water governance framework • Myriad of actors in the sector of water management in the Coastal Zone of Bangladesh Formal – Informal scale Top–DownscaleDownTop Formal Informal Actors involved in water management in polders (more than 1000 ha), BWDB Actors involved in water management in sub- projects (less than 1000 ha), LGED Other actors BWDB LGED WMA WMG WMCA Gate committees Gher/beel committees Union Parishad
    • 35. Institutional coordination has to be improved through a clear water governance framework • Recommendations • Revising the water policy to bring more clarity on the institutional governance framework. • Clear role and responsibility of each actor • Integrated water management • Institutional Coordination have to happen between the actors • Consequences Fragmentations of the roles and responsibilities - Overlaps Conflicts, power dynamics, some stakeholders not taken into consideration - Gaps  Defaulting behaviours and responsibilities, disrepair of the infrastructures Fragmentation of the different scales • From gate committee (few hectares) to Water Management Association (thousand of hectares). • Where is the institutional coordination, the integration of each level?
    • 36. SUPPORTING EVIDENCE • 9 Situation Analysis Reports • Multiple actors, conflicting roles and perverse incentives. The case of poor operation and maintenance of Coastal polders in Bangladesh Institutional coordination needs to improve through a clear water governance framework.
    • 37. 3rd Finding The role of local government institutions (Union Parishad) in water governance needs to be formally recognized.
    • 38. The role of local government institutions in water governance needs to be formally recognized. • Currently, no formal role but: • Implication in gate operation, • Implication in conflicts resolution, • Role in case of urgency, natural calamity. Trust in elected representatives. Community people 24% WMO 2% UP 35% BWDB 28% LGED 9% Other 2% Who should act to solve the water related problems? • Advantages • Conflict resolution • Coordination of all the stakeholders • Social safety nets for maintenance of water infrastructures (gate, canal re-excavation, embankments). • Not a new institutional layer added • Strengthen capacities of local governments • Example Union Parishad Coordination Committee
    • 39. SUPPORTING EVIDENCE • 9 Situation Analysis Reports • How did global discourses on participation influence Bangladesh’s water policies? A review of water management policies from 1960s to 2000s The role of LGIs (Union Parishad) in water governance needs to be formally recognized. +
    • 40. 4th Finding Creating Smaller Hydrologic Units can improve the water governance.
    • 41. Creating Smaller Hydrologic Units can improve the water governance. • What are SMU? • Dykes, sub division in the polders • Based on coherent hydro ecological sub-basins • Why is it useful? • Because scale matters, experience from LGED sub-projects • Many conflicts are in fact high/low land conflicts: shrimp/paddy, water logging, opening/closing the gates, crop calendars… • Challenge • Rethinking the polders and their infrastructures • Advantages • Creating units with commonality of interest • Reducing conflicts • Drainage, irrigation for introducing more intensive cropping patterns(G2)
    • 42. 5th Finding …policy for community involvement has to be revised. Community management does not bring efficient, equitable nor sustainable water management…
    • 43. Community management does not bring efficient, equitable nor sustainable water management… Lack of equity • Elite capture • Exclusion and self-exclusion of some segments of the community who however have water uses • Conflicts and competing water uses Lack of sustainability • Poor quality of the infrastructures • Lack of financial sustainability • Lack of institutional sustainability Lack of efficiency • Final decision-making power over physical infrastructures remains largely in the hands of the implementing agency. • Most if the WMOs are dysfunctional.
    • 44. Challenges • Rethinking the ‘participatory water policy’. …policy for community involvement has to be revised. From inclusiveness to targeted groups policy • Homogeneous groups with shared interest • Sectorial groups • Institutional coordination INTEGRATIONEXCLUSIONINCLUSION
    • 45. SUPPORTING EVIDENCE • 9 Situation Analysis Reports • The Imposition of Participation? The Case of Participatory Water Management in Bangladesh • The Gender Gap between Management and Water Users. Evidence from Southwest Bangladesh Community management does not bring efficient, equitable nor sustainable water management… …policy for community involvement has to be revised.
    • 46. GBDC MESSAGES Message 3: To unlock the potential productivity improvement, it is of utmost importance to invest in water management infrastructure – but with a new paradigm with fundamental changes in thinking about the polders and their roles, and special emphasis on drainage. Message 4: Maintenance of infrastructure is the Achilles heel of water management in the polders of the coastal zone. Deferred maintenance can be solved through a three-tier strategy. Message 5: A transparent and accountable water governance framework is needed for the polders, that formalizes and enhances the role of local government institution representatives and follows the IWRM river- basin governance principles.
    • 47. WAYS TOWARD UPTAKE You can make it REAL
    • 48. Mustafa Bakuluzzaman, Shushilan Uptake from… COMMUNITIES Validation and consultation workshops
    • 49. Workshop objectives The main aim of these two workshops was to validate the research findings among the people who lived in these 3 polders of BWDB and 3 sub project area of LGED. The overall objectives were to know about what they can perceive about community based water management within polder? And also know what can future direction of community based water management within the polder and how?
    • 50. Details of Validation Workshop Sl. Workshop Presented polder Constructed by Date of workshop Participants Number 1 Patuakhali Workshop Jainkathi sub- project LGED (2001- 2002) 9th November, 2013 59 43/2F BWDB (IPSWAM project 2005- 2008) 2 Khulna Workshop Latabunia sub- project LGED 10th November, 2013 43 Polder3 LGED Jabusa sub-porject LGED 30 (IPSWAM 2004-11) BWDB
    • 51. Workshop Participants • Union Parishad’s chairmen/members, • BWDB, LGED, • Upazila officials (i.e. UNO, UAO, UFO, ULO, UE), • District Commissioners, • WMA’s members, • Farmers, • Shrimp gher owners, • Teachers, and • NGOs officials
    • 52. Four Emerging Messages 1. Lack of maintenance induces vulnerability… but deferred maintenance can be solved through a three tier strategy. 2. The role of local representatives (Union Parishad) in water governance needs to be formally recognized. 3. Coordination has to be improved through a clear water governance framework. 4. Creating Smaller Hydrologic Units can improve the water governance
    • 53. Validation Workshop Findings of First Message Community Level UP Level GoB and donors level Lack of maintenance induces vulnerability… but deferred maintenance can be solved through a three tier strategy. • Ensure participation of all levels of people in water management committee •Increase contribution of local community by cash or kind • Empower Local Government (Union Parishad) and WMO • Increase involvement of Union Parishad (UP) for water infrastructure by Social safety net working program • Form a Trust Fund for water infrastructure maintenance where donated by Government, Donor Agency, NGOs and beneficiaries • Audited of the Fund in coordination with govt representative and Union Parishad (UP) representative
    • 54. Validation Workshop Findings of Second Message • Coordinate with different stakeholders (Fisherman, Agriculture, Livestock etc.) by discussion in assisting Union Parishad (UP), WMA and Local Administration. • Conflict regulation by discussion of different stakeholders(Fisherman, Agriculture, livestock etc.) • Endowed decision with integrated committee Union Parishad (UP) would be the integrator or coordinator of different department in water management perspective •There has to organize a monthly meeting in Union Parishad about Water Policy •Union Parishad could play the main role in water management perspective The role of local representatives (Union Parishad) in water governance needs to be formally recognized.
    • 55. Validation Workshop Findings of Third Message • Utilize Water Policy at field level • Give emphasize on local govt, different department of local govt, water management committee to make and update water management policy • Adapt water policy to the changing situation Proposed Activities Role Coordination has to be improved through a clear water governance framework. • By stakeholder consultation according to place, time and situation • Coordination and Integration with different department of local govt, water management committee
    • 56. Validation Workshop Findings of Fourth Message • Make small hydrological unit/sub polder -to use existing road, canal and embankment in coordination with LGED and BWDB -to use land elevation and land use -to use homogenous water use -Common interest among the beneficiaries • Organize regular discussion and meeting • Strengthening WMO to minimize the conflict Creating Smaller Hydrologic Units can improve the water governance
    • 57. Maniruzzaman Md Masud Ahmed A.H.M. Kausher / Nandish Kenia Uptake from… G3 PARTNERS

    ×