159
distribution and monitor water allocations, generating new levels of transparency to
irrigation services (Abdullaev et al. 2010 ). They have no legal status but are proving
increasingly infl uential as a voice for water users rights, drawing on the authority of
informal institutions, social norms and local leaders (on informal institutions of irrigation in post-Soviet Central Asia, see Sehring 2009 ). The inclusion of WUG leaders in
WUA councils is regarded by some commentators as a major step towards transforming WUAs into more participative, responsive organisations acting in water user interests (Abdullaev et al. 2010 ). These WUG leaders are raising the concerns of local
farmers in the WUAs, demanding action and offering options for cooperative ventures. Their degree of infl uence depends heavily, however, on the willingness of the
WUA chairman to share power.
A second attempt to improve representation in the South Fergana Canal area is
the emergence of a Canal Water Users Union of South Fergana Canal in 2005, representing the fi rst and only umbrella organisation for WUAs in any region in
Uzbekistan. It was created with funding from the IWRM Fergana Valley project
with the task of advising new WUAs and resolving confl icts within and between
them over water allocation (Abdullaev et al. 2009 ). All 43 WUAs in the top two
reaches of the South Fergana Canal are members of the union. It works primarily by
inviting WUA representatives to its central offi ce to discuss differences and is
unusual in that its activities focus not on technical issues but on people and their
interaction. Even though the project – together with its funding – has been terminated, the federation continues to operate, paying its seven staff members with fees
collected from its member organisations. This, in itself, is an indication that the
federation is regarded as providing a service of value to water users.
Issues of representation are by no means restricted to structures and procedures
within and between WUAs but relate to higher levels of decision-making, where
WUA interests need articulating. Referring to the representation of WUA leaders in
councils and committees at subbasin and basin levels, Dukhovny et al. refl ect:
Our experience shows that the management of WUAs and Canal Water User Committees
do not participate enough in the processes of water resources planning, allocation, and
management, as well as in decision making relating to maintaining and rehabilitating of
water infrastructure and seeking funding sources. (Dukhovny et al. 2008 , p. 28)
Within the IWRM pilot areas, there are positive signs that WUAs are being given
a voice in the water councils of basins and subbasins and in the water committees of
irrigations systems, but few water offi cials are prepared to view such forms of representation as benefi cial to their own position (Dukhovny et al. 2008 , p. 29).
11.3.2 Practices of Leadership
How WUAs are run is, in practice, highly dependent on the people in charge and
their modes of leadership. The allocation of water via irrigation systems is traditionally the responsibility of the mirab or “water master”. This practice has not changed
11 Where Water Meets Agriculture: The Ambivalent Role of Water Users Associations
distribution and monitor water allocations, generating new levels of transparency to
irrigation services (Abdullaev et al. 2010 ). They have no legal status but are proving
increasingly infl uential as a voice for water users rights, drawing on the authority of
informal institutions, social norms and local leaders (on informal institutions of irrigation in post-Soviet Central Asia, see Sehring 2009 ). The inclusion of WUG leaders in
WUA councils is regarded by some commentators as a major step towards transforming WUAs into more participative, responsive organisations acting in water user interests (Abdullaev et al. 2010 ). These WUG leaders are raising the concerns of local
farmers in the WUAs, demanding action and offering options for cooperative ventures. Their degree of infl uence depends heavily, however, on the willingness of the
WUA chairman to share power.
A second attempt to improve representation in the South Fergana Canal area is
the emergence of a Canal Water Users Union of South Fergana Canal in 2005, representing the fi rst and only umbrella organisation for WUAs in any region in
Uzbekistan. It was created with funding from the IWRM Fergana Valley project
with the task of advising new WUAs and resolving confl icts within and between
them over water allocation (Abdullaev et al. 2009 ). All 43 WUAs in the top two
reaches of the South Fergana Canal are members of the union. It works primarily by
inviting WUA representatives to its central offi ce to discuss differences and is
unusual in that its activities focus not on technical issues but on people and their
interaction. Even though the project – together with its funding – has been terminated, the federation continues to operate, paying its seven staff members with fees
collected from its member organisations. This, in itself, is an indication that the
federation is regarded as providing a service of value to water users.
Issues of representation are by no means restricted to structures and procedures
within and between WUAs but relate to higher levels of decision-making, where
WUA interests need articulating. Referring to the representation of WUA leaders in
councils and committees at subbasin and basin levels, Dukhovny et al. refl ect:
Our experience shows that the management of WUAs and Canal Water User Committees
do not participate enough in the processes of water resources planning, allocation, and
management, as well as in decision making relating to maintaining and rehabilitating of
water infrastructure and seeking funding sources. (Dukhovny et al. 2008 , p. 28)
Within the IWRM pilot areas, there are positive signs that WUAs are being given
a voice in the water councils of basins and subbasins and in the water committees of
irrigations systems, but few water offi cials are prepared to view such forms of representation as benefi cial to their own position (Dukhovny et al. 2008 , p. 29).
11.3.2 Practices of Leadership
How WUAs are run is, in practice, highly dependent on the people in charge and
their modes of leadership. The allocation of water via irrigation systems is traditionally the responsibility of the mirab or “water master”. This practice has not changed
11 Where Water Meets Agriculture: The Ambivalent Role of Water Users Associations