Institutions For Integrated Water Resources Management In Upland Watersheds Of Southeast Asia A Comparative Analysis Of Thailand And Lao Pdr

Income / Environmental degradation / Domestic water / Food security / Watersheds / Decentralization / Institutions

This challenging but accessible book critically examines the dominant food regime on its own terms, by seriously asking whether we can afford cheap food and exploring what exactly cheap food affords us. Detailing the numerous ways that food has become reduced to a state, such as a price per ounce, combination of nutrients, yield per acre, or calories, the book argues for a more contextual understanding of food when debating its affordability. The author makes a compelling case for why today's global food system produces just the opposite of what it promises. The food produced under this regime is in fact exceedingly expensive. Thus meat production and consumption are inefficient uses of resources and contribute to climate change; the use of pesticides in industrial-scale agriculture may produce cheap food, but there are hidden costs to environmental protection, human health and biodiversity conservation. Many of these costs will be paid for by future generations – cheap food today may mean expensive food tomorrow. By systematically assessing these costs the book delves into issues related, but not limited, to international development, national security, health care, industrial meat production, organic farming, corporate responsibility, government subsidies, food aid and global commodity markets. The book concludes by suggesting ways forward, going beyond the usual solutions such as farmers markets, community supported agriculture, and community gardens. Exploding the myth of cheap food requires we have at our disposal a host of practices and policies. Some of those proposed and explored include microloans, subsidies for consumers, vertical agriculture, and the democratization of subsidies for producers.

Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) has in recent years captured the attention of policy makers and policy analysts. A lot has been written on this topic, most often disparately, about institutions for IWRM. However, there has been limited success in bridging disciplinaryboundaries (social versus physical sciences) with the result that conceptual inconsistencies persist with regard to our understanding of institutions for IWRM. This paper outlines key features of an analytical framework for the institutional analysis of IWRM in river basins. Thenovelties of the analytical approach include emphasis on transparent policy processes of state parastatals, modes of water-service provisioning and conditions for collective action in the management of common pool resources in river basins and its implications for sustainable rurallivelihoods. The paper then discusses certain methodological concerns with regard to the operationalizing of various elements of the analytical framework. In particular, the paper discusses issues related to defining the scope of analysis, scale of water use and management and collective action for the management of common pool resources in a river basin. The paper also discusses the process by which the comparative analysis of IWRM may be undertaken by highlighting the importance of problem specification, hypothesis generation and methods of data collection.

In recent years Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) has gained widespread support in policy circles. Integrated management poses the challenges of coordinating the use of both natural systems (characterized by multiple land uses) and social systems (characterized by competing end uses of natural resources). Viewed in the context of geohydrological boundaries shaped by river basins, IWRM can place enormous demands on institutions to synchronize the use of natural and social systems to produce optimum results in the form of lower levels of resource conflicts, reduced deforestation and soil erosion in catchment areas and improved livelihoods of the rural populations. Research by the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) on IWRM institutions carried out in a diversity of biophysical and socioeconomic settings around the world contributes towards understanding the complexities of naturalresource use in river basins. Water-accounting indicators allow us to visualize seasonal water balance in a river basin while appreciating the historical process of economic development that allows for a particular trajectory of institutional evolution. More recently, IWMI research has highlighted some equity concerns inherent in discussions surrounding Participatory Irrigation Management (PIM). In this context studies have highlighted the influence of poverty, market development and community organizations for enhanced provision of irrigation services.

Today, a systemwide approach to watershed resource management is essential. As recent history has shown, the usual mixture of biophysical management measures are often constrained by institutional factors, frequently producing limited results. This book offers important management alternatives, examining this resource problem within an economic framework, using an interdisciplinary approach. Part I introduces the basic economic, biophysical, social, institutional, and policy aspects of watershed management. Part II illustrates specific watershed approaches through selected case studies from Asia and the Pacific.

institutions / legal aspects / decentralization / Thailand / Lao PDR

In recent years, Integrated Water-Resources Management (IWRM) has captured the attention of policymakers and policy analysts. A lot has been written, most often in a disparate way about institutions for IWRM. However, there has been limited success in bridging disciplinary boundaries (social versus physical sciences) with the result that conceptual inconsistencies persist with regard to our understanding of institutions for IWRM. This paper reviews IWMI research on IWRM in Asia and highlights drawbacks in contemporary approaches to the study of institutions for IWRM in river basins. The paper then outlines key features of an alternative analytical framework. In doing so, it discusses certain novel features of the alternative approach: emphasis on transparent policy processes of State parastatals, modes of water-service provisioning and conditions for collective action in the management of common-pool resources in river basins and its implications for sustainable rural livelihoods.

In many developing countries, their governments dominate the field of water resources management. Even in “participatory irrigation management” efforts, the governments play a dominant role. As these efforts are rarely based on any internally generated demand from the water users, they usually fail to create viable organizations at the local level. A similar setback can be seen in the more recent institutional reforms in Asia’s water sector, which are promoted by the donor agencies and, national and international development professionals. A survey of experiences in Asian countries shows that no country has successfully completed establishing new water sector policies and laws and river basin organizations, as prescribed. The need to improve current performance of water resources management is widely appreciated.In managing the scarce water resources, a change in attitude and approach is seen to be essential. Participatory learning and action methods conducted in a study of selected river basins in five Asian countries surfaced a distinct need for coordination at the river basin level. They also indicated a clear stakeholder preference for establishing coordinating mechanisms, by way of adapting the existing institutions, as an initial step towards greater stakeholder control of river basin management. Essentially, cost-effective and contextually appropriate institutional arrangements were preferred over the prescribed standard models, in order to meet the varying needs related to integrated water resources management.