150
11.1 WUAs in the Global Discourse on Integrated Water
Resources Management
Over the past century, the world has witnessed an almost threefold increase in the
total area of irrigated agriculture (Ostrom 1992 ). Representing 20 % of total cropland, irrigated agriculture produces more than 40 % of the world’s total agricultural
output (Perry 2007 , p. 369). Expansion of irrigated agricultural areas has been a key
component of nation-building processes (Kreutzmann 2015 , in this volume) and, in
recent decades, the construction and modernisation of large-scale irrigation facilities has become the target of massive investment programmes of international donor
agencies in developing and transition countries. However, towards the late twentieth
century, the management and operation of irrigation systems, particularly at the
community level, proved an increasing fi scal burden for many governments. As
central government funds in many countries were reduced, maintenance standards
declined and irrigation infrastructure began to deteriorate at a serious rate (World
Bank 2007 ). One of the main solutions widely voiced from the early 1990s onwards
has been the creation of so-called water users associations (WUAs), in which farmers are given more responsibility to manage and maintain local irrigation systems
themselves.
WUAs have been defi ned as “a voluntary, nongovernmental, non-profi t entity
established and managed by groups of farmers located along one or several watercourse canals” (Winrock International 2007 , cited in Gunchinmaa and Yakubov
2010 , p. 166). Ideally, WUAs are set up by a group of farmers and other water users
along one or more hydrological subsystems or watercourses to collectively manage,
operate, maintain and develop a local irrigation and drainage system. Membership
is based on contracts and/or agreements between the members and the WUA. In
accordance with WUA by-laws, their main responsibilities generally include:
• Ensuring reliable distribution of water amongst water users
• Determining and collecting irrigation service fees
• Resolving disputes on water use and management of the irrigation system in an
appropriate, transparent and democratic manner
• Maintaining, refurbishing and improving the irrigation system in the WUA operational area
Within the global debate on water resources management, the wide appeal of
WUAs can be attributed not merely to the inherent advantages emanating from the
self-organisation of local irrigation infrastructures by the farmers that use them but
also to the various ways in which WUAs – on paper at least – play to the dominant
discursive paradigm of integrated water resources management (IWRM) (for a defi -
nition of IWRM, see GWP 2000 , p. 22). Within the global discourse on IWRM,
increasing the involvement and responsibility of water users in water management
issues has become a central tenet for successful implementation. Decentralising
decision-making powers and strengthening the role of local water users is also
acknowledged as a core element of IWRM in Central Asia and post-socialist
T. Moss and A. Hamidov
11.1 WUAs in the Global Discourse on Integrated Water
Resources Management
Over the past century, the world has witnessed an almost threefold increase in the
total area of irrigated agriculture (Ostrom 1992 ). Representing 20 % of total cropland, irrigated agriculture produces more than 40 % of the world’s total agricultural
output (Perry 2007 , p. 369). Expansion of irrigated agricultural areas has been a key
component of nation-building processes (Kreutzmann 2015 , in this volume) and, in
recent decades, the construction and modernisation of large-scale irrigation facilities has become the target of massive investment programmes of international donor
agencies in developing and transition countries. However, towards the late twentieth
century, the management and operation of irrigation systems, particularly at the
community level, proved an increasing fi scal burden for many governments. As
central government funds in many countries were reduced, maintenance standards
declined and irrigation infrastructure began to deteriorate at a serious rate (World
Bank 2007 ). One of the main solutions widely voiced from the early 1990s onwards
has been the creation of so-called water users associations (WUAs), in which farmers are given more responsibility to manage and maintain local irrigation systems
themselves.
WUAs have been defi ned as “a voluntary, nongovernmental, non-profi t entity
established and managed by groups of farmers located along one or several watercourse canals” (Winrock International 2007 , cited in Gunchinmaa and Yakubov
2010 , p. 166). Ideally, WUAs are set up by a group of farmers and other water users
along one or more hydrological subsystems or watercourses to collectively manage,
operate, maintain and develop a local irrigation and drainage system. Membership
is based on contracts and/or agreements between the members and the WUA. In
accordance with WUA by-laws, their main responsibilities generally include:
• Ensuring reliable distribution of water amongst water users
• Determining and collecting irrigation service fees
• Resolving disputes on water use and management of the irrigation system in an
appropriate, transparent and democratic manner
• Maintaining, refurbishing and improving the irrigation system in the WUA operational area
Within the global debate on water resources management, the wide appeal of
WUAs can be attributed not merely to the inherent advantages emanating from the
self-organisation of local irrigation infrastructures by the farmers that use them but
also to the various ways in which WUAs – on paper at least – play to the dominant
discursive paradigm of integrated water resources management (IWRM) (for a defi -
nition of IWRM, see GWP 2000 , p. 22). Within the global discourse on IWRM,
increasing the involvement and responsibility of water users in water management
issues has become a central tenet for successful implementation. Decentralising
decision-making powers and strengthening the role of local water users is also
acknowledged as a core element of IWRM in Central Asia and post-socialist
T. Moss and A. Hamidov