SSRR33 Cover
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ISSN 1608-6287 Social Science Research Report Series No. 33 Organisation for Social Science Research in Eastern and Southern Africa © 2006 Organisation for Social Science Research in Eastern and Southern Africa (OSSREA) OSSREA acknowledges the support of the Ford Foundation, Swedish International Development Co-operation Agency (Sida/SAREC), Norwegian Agency for Development Co-operation (NORAD), The Netherlands' Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and International Development Research Centre (IDRC). Published 2006 Printed in Ethiopia All rights reserved. Copy editors: Mesfin Adinew Abiye Daniel Text layout: Etalem Engeda Organisation for Social Science Research in Eastern and Southern Africa P. O. Box 31971, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Tel: 251-11-1239484 Fax: 251-11-1223921 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.ossrea.net OSSREA’s Research Report Series The Organisation for Social Science Research in Eastern and Southern Africa (OSSREA) has been running two research competitions – the Social Science Research Grant Competition, since 1988, and the Gender Issues Research Grant Competition, since 1989. Winners of these competitions are required to submit their findings in the form of research reports. The Research Report Series presents papers selected from these reports and is intended to disseminate the results to a wider audience. The views expressed in the papers are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the organisation. Contents 1. The Image of Women in African Oral Literature: A Case Study of Gikuyu Oral Literature Catherine M. Ndungo 1 2. Oral Narratives as an Ideological Weapon for Subordinating Women: The Case of Jimma Oromo Abraham Alemu 81 3. Gender-Friendly Human Resource Management and Organizational Commitment: A Study of Organizations in Uganda Matagi Leon 123 INSTITUTIONAL EVOLUTION UNDER WATER SECTOR REFORMS: LESSONS FROM THE MAZOWE CATCHMENT, ZIMBABWE Claudious Chikozho* Abstract: The effectiveness of institutions that have emerged from the Zimbabwean water reform process needs to be assessed from a socio-political standpoint. Global shifts in water management thinking emphasizing participatory development seem to have played a significant role in precipitating the reform. Theoretically, the new institutions are appropriate but rhetoric has overtaken reality. Without sufficient capacity building, the institutions cannot tackle the multiple complexities facing the sector. Government has not demonstrated commitment to transfer power to these institutions. Lack of support to water user boards has alienated local communities from the reform process. The land reform programme has also disrupted water reform activities in a very fundamental way. The paper argues that future research must ascertain the suitability of the water management model adopted to circumstances prevailing in Zimbabwe. Key Words: Decentralization, institution, integration, community, globalisation 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 About the Paper Since 1995, Zimbabwe has been involved in concerted efforts to revamp the institutions governing the water sector. Subsequently, new institutions of governance have emerged in the sector with the hope that they will ensure the equitable and effective management and control of water resources through devolution of management responsibilities from central government to the local community levels. This paper seeks to assess the effectiveness of these new institutions as units of natural resource governance. So far, there is no indication or guarantee that the new institutions are better than the old ones. An analysis of these new structures and the policy and legislative framework that they operate under could help to demonstrate their potential effectiveness particularly in comparison to the old institutions. The extent to which power is being devolved in reality has also not yet been assessed. It is therefore necessary to analyse the water management decentralization process and find out whether or not some significant management authority has been shifted from central government to the community levels. * Centre for Applied Social Sciences, University of Zimbabwe, Box MP 167, Mt- Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe 2 Social Science Research Report Series, no. 33 1.2 Why the Water Sector Reforms? Before the Water Act of 1998, water resources in Zimbabwe were mainly developed, managed, and governed through a number of institutions. The Ministry responsible for water resources was at the top of the hierarchy. It generally set out policy guidelines for water development and resource allocation in the sector. The Department of Water Development (DWD) attended to the day-to-day running of the water sector nationally. It also designed and constructed government dams. Rural District Councils, through the District Development Fund, provided funding and technical assistance for borehole and dam construction and maintenance at the district level. The Water Court was responsible for issuing water rights to users. It also resolved conflicts over water between and among water users. At the local level, river boards managed rivers and water point committees managed water for primary purposes. Department of Agriculture and Extension Services (Agritex) officers provided technical assistance to prospective water users in applying for water. The Hydrological Department provided the requisite hydrological reports on behalf of the prospective users. Some Non-Governmental Organizations funded water development projects of various types. The set-up explained above was riddled with a number of shortcomings. There was no systematic coordination of the institutions involved in water resources at the local level. Overlaps, duplication of effort and unsatisfied water needs were difficult to identify. In addition, the legislation governing the water sector was, in several respects, fundamentally biased in favour of large-scale commercial farmers. Conflicts over water rapidly increased. Major problems were encountered at the administrative court and river- board levels. The administrative court was often considered inefficient and slow in processing water rights such that it could take years for one to be granted a water right after applying. Membership of river boards was exclusive to water right holders (mainly large-scale commercial farmers). This systematically excluded other people from participating in the management of water resources at that level. In rural areas, Rural District Councils (RDCs) failed to cope with the need to develop and maintain water structures in their areas of jurisdiction due to inadequate resources. The more or less open access water regime in the rural areas also rendered water resources conservation efforts useless as people had little incentive to manage the rivers and dams in a sustainable manner. Effective management of water resources was, therefore, only possible in the commercial farming areas where the farmers were well organized into river boards. The scenario presented above resulted in the rise of a powerful and perennially productive commercial farming sector while the communal areas remained stagnant or degenerated as their natural resource base was exploited to unsustainable levels. The institutional and legal framework for water resources development and management was not fully supportive to Claudious Chikozho. Institutional Evolution Under Water Sector Reforms 3 new entrants in the irrigation sector. It heavily relied on the priority date system, which stipulated that the water needs of new entrants would only be satisfied after those of earlier water right holders had been satisfied. This ensured that the allocation of water remained skewed in favour of the large- scale commercial farmers because most of them inherited, from their parents and grandparents, very old water rights attached to commercial farming land. Some of the water rights they inherited dated as far back as the 1920s. Dismantling that monopoly could not be done without the establishment of new water management institutional structures that accommodate all stakeholders. 1.3 General Objective of the Study The principal aim of the Zimbabwean water reform is to advance poverty alleviation and social equity by broadening access to water resources and to achieve more integrated water development planning across economic sectors. This study seeks to further these goals by assessing the suitability of the institutions that have emerged in the water sector and how effective they are in contributing to the achievement of the reform's major goals. 1.3.1 Specific Objectives of the Study The specific objectives of this study are: • To examine how different stakeholder groups are represented on the new water management institutions and how this representation impacts on the effectiveness of those institutions; • To assess the extent to which integrated planning is occurring in the new institutions and more broadly in the water sector; • To assess the extent to which authority and decision-making powers have been devolved to the lowest water management institutions, and the power dynamics involved as power determines the patterns of resource allocation that eventually emerge; and • To generate viable policy recommendations for the advancement of the reforms. 1.4 Assumptions • Large-scale commercial water users will dominate the reform and water management processes because they already have an unfair historical advantage over other groups. In other words, the larger the amount of water used, the better the interests will be represented