|
|
|
STRATEGY
FOR WATER PARTNERSHIPS AND WOMEN
AND WATER NETWORKS
A Note - Jasveen Jairath
January 2002 |
|
|
Introduction
Past experience with respect to the formation and governance of water partnerships (WP) in India points to the need for evolving a systematic strategy for formation of these WPs that truly reflect the concerns and voices of stakeholders from below through their direct involvement. A major weakness in connection with the operation and functioning has been the exclusion of the majority and selective inclusion based on subjective and ad hoc criteria. For a country like India with the huge geographical area there arises the need for building up the national WPs from decentralized state/zonal units. Given the state as the administrative unit, it would be practical to use this as a base for organizing country level WPs. The inter and intra regional water specificities can then be adequately captured by further disaggregating at the state level. These state level networks can then be federated at the zonal level-4-5 for India. IWP can then be constituted as a body comprising this balanced representation from zones/states to emerge as a truly broad based forum that constitutes a platform for airing the ‘water voice’ of the country.
The above would create an institutional mechanism for communicating the specific water issues, problems, priorities, policy concerns etc. of an area to the national forum for information, exchange, contributing to the macro water picture. This would comprise a truly bottom up evolution of the national water discourse that would enable situating the local/peripheral water issues within the context of total water scenario. The IWP thus formed could become a more robust institution for lobbying, advocacy and campaign for a more wholesome IWRM approach that reflects not only the narrowly technical but also the social /institutional forces that operate at the grass roots and critically influence the water resource development and access by communities. |
|
|
|
|
|
Plan of Activities
As a plan of action to
operationalise the above we propose the following: |
|
 |
Initiate state level WPs through active campaigning, publicity, discussion, disseminating drives targeted at the public/civil society organizations, government sector, private sector, grass root organizations through seminars, workshops, publication/dissemination of literature in local languages on water policy issues, propagation of IWRM approach to Water Resource Development (WRD) i.e. generating a sensitivity to “integratedness” of water issues. |
|
|
These SWPs may evolve from intra-state regional WPs that compromise a contiguous block of mandals with similar eco- climatic
- hydro characteristics. |
|
|
These
SWPs could have the
following mandate of
activities. |
|
|
| - |
Come
out with state level
water profiles- a
stocktaking
assessment of the
water resources
development in the
state. The typical
situation as of now
is the highly
fragmentary,
isolated and
incomplete nature of
information that is
either not
available/accessible
or is so with
tremendous
difficulty making
its practical
usefulness doubtful. |
|
| - |
Prepare
a draft of state
water policy on IWRM
principles and based
on effective
multi-stakeholder
consultation and
incorporating
interstate water
issues of sharing,
handling floods,
ecological
externalities etc. |
|
| - |
Conduct
in depth studies on
the prominent water
problems of specific
to the regions water
quality problems
such as fluoride
/arsenic, drinking
water scarcity
remote areas,
conservation of
water in drought
prone areas, water
use efficiency |
|
| - |
Conduct
awareness/publicity
campaigns on issues
of water
conservation, water
connectedness,
ecologically
sustainable
exploitation, need
of water regulation
etc. |
|
| - |
Liaise
with government,
private sector,
public sector and
civil society for
practical
implementation of
IWRM pilot projects
and other programs. |
|
| - |
Undertake/play
a role in research,
monitoring,
evaluation,
implementation,
operation and
institutionalization
related to WRD
projects. |
|
|
| Expected Output |
|
Establish a federated institutional structure of WPs that systematically link the grass roots to the country
level |
|
|
Establish and set in motion the two way process of communication between the central/macro level of water discourse and decision making and the widely spread out local water concerns and voices. |
|
|
Enable effective IWRM interventions for the National and State Water policies that provide a space for regional specificities in the macro water policies and are informed by grass root situation – both social and technical |
|
|
Greater public awareness and consciousness regarding environmentally sustainable and equitably regulated
WRD. |
|
|
India Water Partnership – South Zone
Water Partnerships in the Southern Zone comprising the states of AP, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala
In order to operationally the above in the context of the four mentioned states of India the following is proposed in each state: |
|
|
District wise
public meetings – with representatives form rural and urban communities, private sector, NGOs, government sector to raise awareness about water planning as an integrated resource and the need to form water partnerships to voice the regional concerns about WRD collectively and participate in the design and implementation of water related programs in the area. @ Rs. 50,000/- per meeting. |
|
|
Holding state level public meetings, workshops etc again
focused on the above issues for the whole state @ Rs. 75,000/- per meeting that would include the commissioning of regional studies, review papers etc, resource persons from adjoining states. |
|
|
Production of literature – written, audio, and audio visual for awareness raising among the literate and non-literate communities in order to reach out to the far flung and peripheral areas and in local languages @ 5,00,000/- per
state |
|
|
Conduct of studies and review papers on special water related problems, best practices, evaluations, policy reviews, strategy papers, data consolidations on water from scattered sources, etc. that emerge / or are identified by the local water partnerships – 5,00,000/- per state |
|
|
|
For different states the starting point for the activities is different. In A.P. for example, the MSU for the WCM is planning some similar activities for its own program. In other states this may not exist. Therefore drawing up a detailed action plan by a formulation mission of two persons for 4 weeks each (1-week per state) might be considered. SaciWATERs offers itself for the assignment as it is already involved in facilitating water networks in the Southern states. It would also be willing to consider the same for other zones. |
|
|
|
