A Gendered Critique of Transboundary Water Management

Abstract

The starting point of this paper is that most of the international transboundary water -primarily the construction of mega-infrastructure such as dams and water transfer schemes. The paper argues that such heroic engineering approaches are essentially a masculinised discourse, with its emphasis being on construction, command and control. As a result of this masculinised discourse, the primary actors in TWM processes have been states-represented by technical, economic and political elites operating in what generally gets termed 'the national interest' . Left out are the local communities relying on the resource directly: the water users; the poor; women; and other important groups. Instruments such as the UN Watercourses Convention of 1997 make an effort to present an attempt at a gender-balanced approach-through asserting the importance of the 'no-harm rule' and the 'equitable share approach' . However, they end up supporting the status quo through the omission of any reference to gender issues. The paper provides an overview of the masculinised discourse on TWM institutions, proposing that this is the case because of the intersection of two masculinised fields-water resource management and the disciplines engaged in the research of transboundary water management, namely, political science and international relations. The paper investigates two southern African examples that illustrate the potential for including a gendered perspective and pro-poor policies that take into account the needs of the water users or 'stakeholders'. The analysis includes the international and regional legal agreements on transboundary water issues, searching for evidence of a gendered approach. It is concluded that the laws and organisations responsible for transboundary water management currently do not reflect a gendered approach, despite the international recognition given to the necessity of including women in water management structures at all levels.transboundary water management; international water law; human rights; gender; masculinised discourse; international relations management (TWM) processes taking place globally are driven by 'the hydraulic mission' fe m in ist review 103 2013

Women as change-makers in the governance of shared waters

“…Another reason for the lack of recognition of women's roles relates to the way in which transboundary water governance is traditionally framed and negotiated as a state-to-state matter to be addressed among high-level representatives from ministries of water, public works, river basin authorities and foreign affairs. In these positions women are structurally under Framing transboundary governance as a state-to state matter also misses the range of scales and nature of the challenges faced: discussions often centre around large infrastructure projects relating to national and strategic interests around energy, irrigation, or navigation, and may overlook the issues encountered by water users at basin level (Earle & Bazilli, 2013;von Lossow, 2015). Where gender considerations in a transboundary context have been identified, measures can be lacking impact due to insufficient budget, political support, or means of implementation, as in the case of the Nile River Basin Initiative (von Lossow, 2015; Nile Basin Discourse, 2015).…”

Afghanistan electrical energy and trans-boundary water systems analyses : challenges and opportunities / Saadatullah Ahmadzai, Alastair McKinna.

“…Most of the trans-boundary water management practices are driven by the construction of mega hydro infrastructures such as hydropower dams and water reservoirs. Earle and Bazilli (2013) mentioned that such approaches have shaped discourses with the emphasis on national interest. This might has the negative effect on local communities who rely directly on these resources and might be forced to relocate, and lose the access to traditionally belong agricultural land (Kistin, 2007).…”

“…Hence, regional and national food and water security are not only closely related to the shared water but are also related to a higher portion with global food trade (Appelgren and Klohn, 1997). Allan and Allan (2002) and Earle and Bazilli (2013) have linked the trans-boundary water management to the politician willingness toward resolution. The commitment to defend sovereignty and country rights influence the speed, direction and quality of water management deals and water laws influences from political stance.…”

Inclusive Transboundary Water Governance

“…Acute, persistent or seemingly intractable problems persist, with ecosystem degradation continuing unabated, joint investments in water infrastructure not materialising and joint management organisations failing to attract signifi cant long-term support from their respective basin states. Despite at least two decades of concerted support by the international development community, the impacts of enhanced interstate cooperation are noticeable through their absence (Earle and Bazilli 2013 ). These challenges pose a risk to other interventions seeking to promote development, peace, regional integration, ecosystem protection and poverty eradication in a transboundary context.…”

“…Thus states, as represented by politicians, are not the only actors possessing agency; they are but part of a range of actors that play a role in water governance frameworks (Earle et al 2010 ). By better understanding the interests of these non-state actors, it may be possible to better understand some of the choices articulated by states at the international level (Earle and Bazilli 2013 ;Earle et al 2015 ).…”