184
property rights in the agricultural and the water sector, effective governance structures and a clear division of responsibilities are not resolved.
12.4 Concluding Remarks
Water pricing is considered by many economists and water experts to be a key
element in water management. It is seen as a crucial step towards coping with the
adverse effects of increasing water scarcity. This paper has contrasted the theoretical idea of water pricing with the practical obstacles evident in Uzbekistan.
Uzbekistan is a post-Soviet era country where the process of transformation into a
market economy with decentralised decision-making has been rather slow.
Although the water-related irrigation system in the area is among the oldest and
most extensive in the world, there is almost no integrative management of water
resources that incorporates the possibility of incentivising water users.
It has become clear that water-related technologies are closely connected with
socio-economic developments. Using water for agricultural purposes is a practice
deeply rooted in Uzbek society so that irrigation is given high priority over other
water uses. These institutional (cultural, legal and economic) roots constitute a powerful obstacle to introducing water prices in the area. Path and context dependencies
that have emerged over decades cannot be overcome in a short period of time.
It can thus be concluded that in this geographical area, the challenge of increasing water scarcity cannot (yet) be met by introducing water prices. Without a comprehensive reform of property rights (including land and water-related property
rights), water prices will not work properly. These fi ndings contradict not only
economists’ recommendations that are based on a theoretical “nirvana approach”
but also the opinion of water experts and practitioners in Central Asia that focus
exclusively on fi nancial factors when calling for water prices as a key element in
solving the water scarcity problems in the area.
What, then, are the alternatives? Indeed, are there any? The answer to these questions would go beyond the scope of this paper and so cannot be given here. But there
are certain steps that could be taken which potentially point in the right direction.
One could be to reduce the amount of cash crops to be grown, thus giving farmers
more freedom to plant crops in accordance with their own interests. Another step
would be to strengthen the role of the WUA in the sense that they might actually
become the kind of organisations they already are on paper, namely, ones that represent farmers’ interests. It remains an open question whether Uzbekistan will go in
such a direction.
Open Access This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
Noncommercial License, which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction
in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
B. Hansjürgens
property rights in the agricultural and the water sector, effective governance structures and a clear division of responsibilities are not resolved.
12.4 Concluding Remarks
Water pricing is considered by many economists and water experts to be a key
element in water management. It is seen as a crucial step towards coping with the
adverse effects of increasing water scarcity. This paper has contrasted the theoretical idea of water pricing with the practical obstacles evident in Uzbekistan.
Uzbekistan is a post-Soviet era country where the process of transformation into a
market economy with decentralised decision-making has been rather slow.
Although the water-related irrigation system in the area is among the oldest and
most extensive in the world, there is almost no integrative management of water
resources that incorporates the possibility of incentivising water users.
It has become clear that water-related technologies are closely connected with
socio-economic developments. Using water for agricultural purposes is a practice
deeply rooted in Uzbek society so that irrigation is given high priority over other
water uses. These institutional (cultural, legal and economic) roots constitute a powerful obstacle to introducing water prices in the area. Path and context dependencies
that have emerged over decades cannot be overcome in a short period of time.
It can thus be concluded that in this geographical area, the challenge of increasing water scarcity cannot (yet) be met by introducing water prices. Without a comprehensive reform of property rights (including land and water-related property
rights), water prices will not work properly. These fi ndings contradict not only
economists’ recommendations that are based on a theoretical “nirvana approach”
but also the opinion of water experts and practitioners in Central Asia that focus
exclusively on fi nancial factors when calling for water prices as a key element in
solving the water scarcity problems in the area.
What, then, are the alternatives? Indeed, are there any? The answer to these questions would go beyond the scope of this paper and so cannot be given here. But there
are certain steps that could be taken which potentially point in the right direction.
One could be to reduce the amount of cash crops to be grown, thus giving farmers
more freedom to plant crops in accordance with their own interests. Another step
would be to strengthen the role of the WUA in the sense that they might actually
become the kind of organisations they already are on paper, namely, ones that represent farmers’ interests. It remains an open question whether Uzbekistan will go in
such a direction.
Open Access This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
Noncommercial License, which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction
in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
B. Hansjürgens