Reforming Water, Adding Women?

Does decentralised water governance further gender justice in India?

Seema Kulkarni, SOPPECOM, India

Sara Ahmed, Utthan, India

Parallel Sessions II - Session B

Agenda

• Context

• Objectives

• Research Methodology

• Key Findings

• Policy Recommendations

• Areas for Future Research and Practice

3

“We do not have money for food –

how are we going to pay for

water?” (women in a village in

Maharashtra which is likely to

have an SEZ)

“By 2010, women should have

access to safe water at their

doorstep,” (project director,

WASMO, Gujarat)

4

5

Context: Water Sector Reforms in India

• 1990s: water scarcity, ‘valuing’ water, right to water

• Changing role of the state: from supply-driven to

demand-responsive, enabling environment

• Decentralised water management – local govt.

• Water users to pay some capital costs (10%)

• Full O&M – water tariffs (willingness/ability to pay)

• Participation of women integral – quotas (30-50%)

• Efficiency, effectiveness, equity and sustainability?

Maharashtra State Context

If you have an image that

enhances your point, add it here

7

Context (1): Maharashtra

• Second most populous state in the country with a high per capita

income

• First state to introduce decentralisation in political governance and

water sector

• Progressive social movements around water and women’s rights

• Drought prone state with 35,000 villages requiring some assistance

to meet domestic water needs

• Irrigation coverage of 16% of the total cropped area largely used for

water intensive crops like sugarcane

• Introduced Jalswarajya, Aple Pani and Jalsudhar programmes in

late 90’s early 2000 with institutional and economic reform

8

Context (2): Gujarat

• Drought prone state, 75% of drinking water needs met from

groundwater – pipelines, leakage, water quality, uncertainty

• Strong state-civil society collaboration: alternatives

• 1997: first sector reform project launched (Ghogha)

• Challenge of re-engineering bureaucracy, participation

• 2002: WASMO formed to facilitate partnerships between

state, water users and NGOs (Implementation Support)

• 2003: Lessons from Ghogha, upscaled in ERR project

Bhavnagar

WASMO/GRWSSP/

Pravah Demo. Pilot/

Utthan

4 villages

Kutch

WASMO/ERR/DPP

KMVS

4 Villages

Dahod

Pravah Demo.

Pilot

1 Village

Surat

Tribal Sub Plan

AKRSP(I)

1 village

Ahmedabad

Pravah Demo.

Pilot

1 Village

Surendranagar

WASMO/ERR

Watershed

AKRSP(I)

2 Villages

10

Objectives

To evolve a more nuanced and critical understanding of formal participation and informal practices of women from diverse social groups.

To look at participation as a process of negotiation, an end in itself (transformative) rather than the means to achieve project efficiency (instrumentalist).

11

Research Questions

• What are the key institutional factors which facilitate /

constrain women’s participation in decentralized water

management?

• What role does civil society (NGOs, CBOs, networks,

academia) play in this process?

• Which women participate, why and how?

• Are women able to articulate priorities which address gender

just, socially inclusive and sustainable water management?

• Has participation led to women’s empowerment?

12

Research Methodology

• Interrogating decentralisation: policy analysis and historical review

of water sector in both states

• Primary data on the performance of water institutions through

discussions with men and women in government water

bureaucracies – challenges in gender mainstreaming

• Selection of villages in consultation with NGO partners (Gujarat,

purposive sampling) and government lists (Maharashtra)

• Criteria for village selection:

– Diversity and size of population

– Stage in project cycle, issues and innovations

– Strong women’s participation (learning from best practice)

13

Research Methodology

In each village:

• Transects to understand poverty, equity, access to water

• In-depth, structured interviews with women on water committees

(diverse socio-economic groups):

•Knowledge, awareness, perceptions of reforms, pricing

•Participation in meetings, articulation of voice, priorities,

understanding change, empowerment

• Focus group discussions with women and men on water committees:

accountability, transparency

• FGDs with non-members on their perceptions of water governance,

role of representatives

Key Findings

Equity, Efficiency and Sustainability

• Access to water improved but inequities across diverse

groups persist (private connections and location of the hamlets)

• Sustainability of the resource compromised due to tight time

frames (not an integrated water resource planning)

• Local groups lack the required technical and managerial

capacities to achieve the mandated efficiency (solar panels,

roof water harvesting)

• Problems in water delivery (timing and quantum) raise issues

of effectiveness

• Dominant discourse of valuing water well internalised- while

large number of poor unable to pay

15

Key findings

Accountability and transparency

• Few mechanisms for downward accountability from the state to

the people or even to NGOs

• Few mechanisms for accountability within the community

representatives and the community

• Transparency at different levels exists (public display of

accounts and work)

• Blunting of collective identities that act as watchdogs- creation

of institutions that can be called as a captive civil society

16

Key findings

Gender and participation

• Participation enhanced when larger framework of

decentralisation is operational and state is strong

• Women’s presence in the public sphere improved but class,

caste, martial status and age biases persist in public

participation

• Women’s presence poor in water for production

• Strong presence of civil society groups improves public

participation of women (NGOs, Self help groups)

17

Key findings

• Women’s responsibilities on water institutions:

– Reinforce gender dichotomies around water/women

– Responsible for ensuring that area around water infrastructure

is kept clean (no waterlogging)

– Resolving conflicts over location of water infrastructure

– Collection of water tariffs – convincing women of need to pay,

ensuring financial sustainability of pani samiti?

• Extending women’s unpaid domestic work to community arena

based on assumptions of women’s honesty, commitment, time and

altruism

• Does not reflect in greater participation in decision-making by

women or articulation of voice, leadership

18

Policy Recommendations

• Decentralisation is largely concerned with the public

arena of water management, but questions of

women’s participation embedded in larger gender

inequalities: private domain, organisational space

• Need for better linkages between water sectors –

moving beyond false dichotomy of water for

domestic purposes (women) and productive (men)

• Planning holistically for villages that fall in the same

watershed or river basin (moving beyond IWRM)

• Emphasis on decentralised planning and

management rather than cost recovery, fund-raising

19

Policy Recommendations

Facilitating participation beyond institutional space

needs:

• Capacity building through different media: awareness

campaigns, folk media, street theatre, engage communities

• Technical training for women, socially excluded groups

(supplementary income) e.g. handpump mechanics, masons.

But also need to look at contracts for women, recognition

• Separate spaces and platforms for women to voice their

priorities – need to be linked to mixed forums too, otherwise

women’s priorities will remain ‘separate’

• Shared learning platforms that can facilitate dialogue between

different stakeholders – critical engagement with water policy

20

Final comments

• Idea of decentralisation needs to be guarded against

‘community failures’ as well as free market advocacy which

goes on to cripple the state - neither is good for its progress

• Decentralisation of planning and management by the diverse

local people can be effective a) in the presence of a strong

state and not its retreat b) strong countervailing forces

that stand like watchdogs c) provision of strong financial

and social support to implement ideas that have

emerged from below d) local combines with the non

local (knowledge, ideas and resources)

21

Final comments

Democratic institutions

can only create space,

but democratic practice

comes with a new politics

emerging both within

the family and outside.

Democracy, like

decentralisation is a

process, not a destination.

22

Areas for Future Research

• Understanding different dimensions of women’s agency and

participation and role of men, others in negotiating participation

• Need for a better understanding of decentralisation investigating

some of the assumptions - fully informed and capable citizens,

mechanisms of accountability, in the Indian context and the role of

the state

• A comparison between centralised and decentralised systems- how

the cross subsidisation worked - do the poor end up subsidising the

local elite

• Research on water rights – minimum livelihood assurance, equity

and equality

Areas for Practice

• Informed advocacy with state and civil society

• Capacity building of different community members,

women and men, in areas of equality, governance

and management of resources and related aspects