Author Jeanne Perrier Coordination Research Stéphanie Leyronas papers and rivalries decentralization, centralization, Between water laws: Palestinian No. 151 No. NOVEMBER 2020 NOVEMBER Agence française de développement Papiers de recherche AFD Research Papers Les Papiers de Recherche de l’AFD ont pour but AFD Research Papers are intended to rapidly de diffuser rapidement les résultats de travaux disseminate findings of ongoing work and mainly en cours. Ils s’adressent principalement aux target researchers, students and the wider chercheurs, aux étudiants et au monde academic community. They cover the full range académique. Ils couvrent l’ensemble des sujets of AFD work, including: economic analysis, economic de travail de l’AFD : analyse économique, théorie theory, policy analysis, engineering sciences, économique, analyse des politiques publiques, sociology, geography and anthropology. AFD sciences de l’ingénieur, sociologie, géographie Research Papers and other publications are not et anthropologie. Une publication dans les Papiers mutually exclusive. de Recherche de l’AFD n’en exclut aucune autre. The opinions expressed in this paper are those Les opinions exprimées dans ce papier sont of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect celles de son (ses) auteur(s) et ne reflètent pas the position of AFD. It is therefore published under nécessairement celles de l’AFD. Ce document est the sole responsibility of its author(s). publié sous l’entière responsabilité de son (ses) auteur(s). 1 Palestinian water laws: exacerbates these challenges. associations d’usagers de l’eau. Between centralization, However, legislative tools such as Cependant sa mise en œuvre decentralization, and rivalries the 2014 water law and recent s’avère un échec. Cet article regulations are paving the way montre comment elle a ignoré Jeanne Perrier for the gradual advancement of les constellations UMR Art-Dev, Université Paul- the pawns involved in the hydropolitiques locales et les Valéry (Montpellier, France) centralization of water resource enjeux de pouvoir entre les management. The analysis of différents acteurs de cette legislative documents, coupled gestion de l’eau. with Palestinian strategies and Abstract internal dynamics, reveals these Le pouvoir de l’Autorité This article explores the process dynamics of centralization that palestinienne de l’eau reste of reforming Palestinian water threaten local water limité. Il se heurte à la réalité du laws, in particular the last water management practices. pluralisme juridique, en pratique law enacted in 2014. These dans la gestion de l’eau legislative reforms are part of an Keywords palestinienne. L’occupation international context of water law, irrigation, Israeli- israélienne accentue ces modernization of water laws, as Palestinian conflict, water difficultés. Cependant, les outils well as a national Palestinian governance, legal pluralism législatifs, tels que la loi de l’eau context of water management de 2014 et les récentes reform, which began in 2008. réglementations, permettent They reflect the key ideas d’avancer petit à petit les pions Résumé formulated in the Dublin d’une centralisation de la gestion Cet article explore les processus Statement of 1992. des ressources en eau. L’analyse de réformes des lois des documents législatifs palestiniennes de l’eau, en The purpose of this article is to couplés aux stratégies particulier la dernière loi de l’eau deconstruct the process of palestiniennes et aux promulguée en 2014. Ces Palestinian water management dynamiques internes nous réformes législatives s’inscrivent reforms to understand the real permet de révéler ces dans un contexte international power struggles at play. To dynamiques de centralisation de modernisation des lois de achieve this, we will analyze the qui menacent les pratiques l’eau, et dans un contexte political and discursive context locales de la gestion de l’eau. national palestinien d’une of the production of the réforme de la gestion de l’eau Palestinian water law of 2014, Mots-clés entamée en 2008. Celles-ci which aims to establish a more loi de l’eau, irrigation, conflit reprennent les idées clés democratic management of israélo-palestinien, gouvernance formulées dans les Principes de water resources, notably de l’eau, pluralisme juridique Dublin en 1992. through a process of Acknowledgments decentralizing the Palestinian L’objectif de cet article est de The author would like to thank Water Authority in favor of new déconstruire le processus de AFD for its financial support in the actors, such as regional réformes de la gestion de l’eau framework of the “Governing the suppliers or even water user palestinienne pour comprendre Paracommuns of Palestinian associations. However, this has les véritables enjeux de pouvoir. Water” project, under which this failed, and this article shows how Pour y parvenir, nous work takes place, and Julie it ignored local hydropolitical analyserons le contexte politique Trottier, who supervised this work. constellations and power et discursif de production de la struggles between the different loi de l’eau palestinienne de 2014. JEL classification actors implicated in this water Celle-ci a pour objectif de mettre D71, H82, O12, O13, O17, O19, O35, management. en place une gestion plus Q15, Q24, Q25, Q28 démocratique des ressources en The power that the Palestinian eau, notamment à travers un Original version Water Authority has remains processus de décentralisation French limited. It faces the challenges of de l’Autorité palestinienne de the reality of legal pluralism, Accepted l’eau vers de nouveaux acteurs, which in practice translates to August 2020 tels que les fournisseurs the management of Palestinian régionaux ou encore les water. The Israeli occupation 2 Introduction On the occasion of World Water Week in these discourses and new modalities of Stockholm in 2017, the Stockholm International governance. This article deconstructs the Water Institute (SIWI) affirmed the importance process of reforming Palestinian water of governance issues in the water sector management to understand the real power through the following slogan: “the water crisis is struggles. a crisis of governance”, picking up the injunction that had already been formulated First, we will analyze the attempts to (re)build back in 2000 by the Global Water Partnership at state control over water resources in the the World Water Forum. The issue of water Palestinian territories. To do this, we will explore governance1 is at the heart of the concerns of the context of water governance discourse States, international institutions, and donors, as production, the basis of Palestinian water law they attempt to cope with a context of water reforms. We will analyze how the 2014 water law resource scarcity. In the 1990’s, there was was constructed from international discourse already talk of rethinking water governance at that was rejected at the local level and how, the international level through the despite its national scale, it differs little from the implementation of neoliberal policies. These previous law of 2002. policies were intended to disengage States from some of their prerogatives by We will then study the reasons for the failure of strengthening the participation of local private the 2014 water law. Just like that of 2002, its actors. Legislation has been an excellent implementation faces a set of challenges. The means of reforming practices and forcing first has to do with local, complex, and socially actors to respect this new normative and politically anchored hydropolitical governance framework. The Palestinian constellations. The second has to do with the territories experienced a first cycle of water Israeli occupation. Finally, any internal governance reforms in the late 1990’s, which organizational change in the Palestinian led to the first water law of 2002, then a second Authority (PA) comes up against internal cycle of reforms as of 2008, which led to the rivalries. In that sense, the 2014 water law, second water law of 20142. These laws have similarly to that of 2002, ignores the powerful changed the institutional landscape of the dynamics at work and is valid only on paper. water sector, as well as the power relations These legislative tools nevertheless make it between the different actors in this sector. They possible, little by little, to advance the pawns are also part of a sociopolitical context that involved in the centralization of water resource influences the reception and application of management. 1 The concept of “governance” is of a polysemous nature. The World Bank and the Global Water Partnership have adopted a managerial definition of governance that is depoliticized and focused on strengthening institutional capacities as well as the participation of private actors. This article breaks away from these normative definitions and instead uses this concept as an analytical tool. We mobilize the FAO’s definition of governance as the sets of rules, organizations, and processes, formal or informal, through which different actors express their interests, prioritize issues, make decisions, and implement these decisions that tackle water resources (Hodgson, 2016, 50). 2 We adopt the term “law”, used by the PA and donors, to define the 2014 text. However, the Palestinian water “law” of 2014 is in fact a presidential decree which has the power of law, according to Article 43 of the Palestinian Basic Law of 2003. There has never been a vote in the Palestinian Legislative Council to approve and enact this text. The latter, dominated by Hamas, has not met since July 5, 2007, allowing the PA President to issue decrees having the power of law so as not to constrain Palestinian legislative development. 3 I – An attempt to build state control over water resources The Palestinian water law of 2002 constitutes a first attempt to build state control over water resources. After the failure of the first, the 2014 water law constitutes an attempt to rebuild PA control over resources, but largely repeats the content of the 2002 law, contrary to the reform rhetoric promoted by the Palestinian Water Authority (PWA) starting 2008-2009.