2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2006.04.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Livelihood rights perspective on water reform: Reflections on rural Zimbabwe

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…But in the worst case, this top-down policy change might even have destabilised past community initiatives due to the creation of unclear roles and rules. Water reforms in Zambia also posed multiple challenges to current local management norms and practices (Derman and Hellum 2007). Whereas it seems that strong policy backup has strengthened local water institutions in Zambia (Chitonge 2011), or deliberate technical assistance supported local communities in Ghana (World Bank 2005), the Ugandan implementation process might have been too fast and without enough support.…”
Section: Discussion Of Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…But in the worst case, this top-down policy change might even have destabilised past community initiatives due to the creation of unclear roles and rules. Water reforms in Zambia also posed multiple challenges to current local management norms and practices (Derman and Hellum 2007). Whereas it seems that strong policy backup has strengthened local water institutions in Zambia (Chitonge 2011), or deliberate technical assistance supported local communities in Ghana (World Bank 2005), the Ugandan implementation process might have been too fast and without enough support.…”
Section: Discussion Of Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As devolution trends are spreading internationally, reforms in the water sector have taken place in various developing countries such as Ghana (Imoro and Fielmua 2011), India (Gopakumar 2010), Zambia (Chitonge 2011), Malawi and Tanzania (Mathew 2004), Zimbabwe (Kujinga and Jonker 2006;Derman and Hellum 2007), Ethiopia (Lenaerts et al 2013), Burkina Faso and Mali (Cherlet and Venot 2013) or South Africa (Goldin 2010). The results of water policy reforms in Sub-Saharan Africa are a mixture of success and failures as indicated by evidence from Uganda (Asingwire 2008;Nkonya et al 2008;Nakano and Otsuka 2011;Mugumya 2013), Ghana (Fielmua 2011), Zambia (Chitonge 2011) or Ethiopia (Lenaerts et al 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Here, we conclude by suggesting that (a) managers of community water supplies schemes together with their development partners should continue to encourage CP as a policy most suitable for improving water service delivery in both the developing and developed world during this period of unprecedented climate change and rapid SN Soc Sci (2021) 1: 37Page 17 of 20 37 population increase, and (b) we note that while no doubt remain on the prowess of CP theory as a tool for success in the water service sector, more specific case studies based on comparative evaluations are still needed. This is particularly important due to the policy reforms taking place in the water sector in most developing countries such as Zambia (Chitonge 2011), Malawi andTanzania (Mathew 2004), Zimbabwe (Derman and Hellum 2007), Ethiopia (Lenaerts et al 2013), Ghana (Imoro andFielmua 2011), India (Gopakumar 2010), Burkina Faso and Mali (Cherlet and Venot 2013), and even South Africa (Goldin 2010). The results of water policy reforms in most Sub-Saharan Africa are a mixture of success and failures.…”
Section: Discussion Of Findings and Gaps In Knowledge/suggestions For Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A central feature of successful water reform within developed and developing countries is community involvement, ‘implying that planning and managing with and for people is the core business of water managers’ (Syme and Hatfield‐Dodds 2007). Devolved water management has become a facet of the wider process of decentralisation of resource governance; based on the premise that local‐level management is assumed to result in improved opportunities for sustainable livelihoods (Derman and Hellum 2007). The same forces that are compelling water managers to engage with communities are contributing to the emergence of what Poff et al.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%