Water User Associations and the Politics of Water in Jordan

Abstract

If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination, volume/issue, and date of publication details. And where the final published version is provided on the Research Portal, if citing you are again advised to check the publisher's website for any subsequent corrections.

Who counts, what counts: representation and accountability in water governance in the Upper Comoé sub‐basin, Burkina Faso

“…However, this strength also translates into a tendency to reduce complexity, thereby ignoring history and context and favouring Global North ideals of robust institutions, sound processes, and desirable outcomes (Hall et al ., ). This bias leads to a predisposition to emphasize the materiality over the meaning of resources, and economic gains over social goals of equity and empowerment (Mustapha et al ., ). Critical institutionalism questions the drive to improve institutional arrangements without considering the root causes of their dysfunction.…”

“…Evidence from comparative analyses of community‐based natural resource management (Shackleton et al ., ; Dyer et al ., ), decentralized service provision (Mody, ), river basin management (Lebel et al ., ; UNEP, ), and water user associations (Mustapha et al ., ; Ricks, ) show that sustainable development goals do not easily translate into feasible, sustainable, and effective practices at the local level. Identified operational constraints relative to IWRM include limited financial and human resources, poor data quality and availability, weak technical and managerial capacity, unclear mandates and defective organizational design, and limited project timeframes that do not foster institutional memory and learning (Mody, ; Lebel et al ., ; UNEP, ).…”

“…This justifies the preponderance of technocrats on resource management committees, particularly in IWRM, given its emphasis on scientific data and expertise for rational planning (Lemos et al ., ; Orlove and Caton, ; Taddei, ). Though community members may be formally included, their arguments are often dismissed as ungrounded or unscientific (Li, ; Ojha, ; Rutt et al ., ; Mustapha et al ., ) and their ability to engage in debates and influence decisions is limited by knowledge disparities (Adams and Zulu, ; Faye, ) and hegemonic styles of public discourse (Cleaver and Toner, ; Mehta and Movik, ). A critical role in these processes is played by ‘conveners’ – institutions or individuals who are tasked with group formation or facilitation and are able to choose meeting venues, formats, and agendas, thereby granting recognition to certain stakeholders and disempowering others (Dore and Lebel, ).…”

Impacts Assessments without True Baselines: Assessing the Relative Effects of Training on the Performance of Water User Associations in Southern Tajikistan

“…For example, collection of irrigation and/or membership fees and dispute arbitration functions of WUAs have been examined in Jordan, China, and Turkey (Çakmak et al 2004;Huang et al 2010;Mustafa et al 2016). Nagrah et al (2016) consider performance indicators such as maintenance of irrigation watercourses, dispute resolution, collection of water charges, and success of monthly meetings when explaining functioning of water user groups in Pakistan.…”

“…Such cases are often not considered as plausible candidates for quantitative assessments due to difficulty in controlling for selection effects and constructing a baseline. Consequently, many assessments of institutional transformations are qualitative (Theesfeld 2004;Zhou 2013;Mustafa et al 2016). Quantitatively assessing performance of new institutions in their early years can yield important evidence that contributes to adaptive management, but also supports construction and testing of theories of change for the future.…”