Suchergebnisse

Changes in the ecological system, such as climate change, and changes in the social system, such as political and economic transformation processes, put water governance regimes under pressure. These regimes must either have at their disposal the needed resilience to cope with these changes and adapt or face the need to transform into another regime configuration which is better suited to cope with these changes. These options entail different levels of institutional continuity and change. Three types of balances between institutional continuity and change in social-ecological systems are elaborated: persistence, adaptive change and transformative change. This paper addresses the challenge of water sector institutions to provide for continuity on the one hand while meeting the need to change and adapt to new circumstances (such as climate change or political and economic transformation) on the other hand. Uzbekistan, which has accumulated intense pressure for change both in the social and the ecological system, serves as a case study. Highly unsustainable use of water resources and cotton monoculture put high pressure on the ecological system. One of the consequences, the desiccation of the Aral Sea, has major negative repercussions in the social system (increasing unemployment and decreasing health status of the population). Since the breakdown of the Soviet Union political and economic reforms have taken place rather reluctantly and have not triggered comprehensive changes in the water governance regime. Minor changes have been introduced at the local level, but the system has not yet departed from its unsustainable path of development. The paper concludes that the Uzbek water sector is rather resistant to change and comprises only a low level of institutional resilience. By applying the concepts of adaptive cycles and panarchy to institutions and water governance reform processes in Uzbekistan some drivers of these processes are identified.

Mit dem Weltentwicklungsbericht 2012 widmet die Weltbank erstmals eine ihrer konzeptionell einflussreichsten Publikationen dem Thema Geschlechtergerechtigkeit. Auf profunden qualitativen Studien beruhend, dokumentiert der World Development Report (WDR) 2012 zunächst Fortschritte – wie den verbesserten Zugang von Mädchen und Frauen zu Bildung – und Hindernisse – wie die massive Ungleichheit im Bereich politisch-sozialer Partizipation – auf dem Weg zu einer größeren Geschlechtergerechtigkeit. Gleichzeitig wird erstmalig die Gleichberechtigung der Geschlechter als ein eigenständiges Entwicklungsziel anerkannt. Durch Bezugnahme auf die normativen bzw. rechtsverbindlichen Referenzrahmen der Vereinten Nationen – die Millenniumsentwicklungsziele (MDGs) und die Anti- Diskriminierungskonvention (CEDAW) – erfolgt zudem eine deutliche Politisierung des Gender-Ansatzes. Bemerkenswert sind dabei nicht so sehr die Ergebnisse des Berichts; denn die Trends dieser heterogenen Entwicklung der globalen Geschlechterverhältnisse sind seit der Überprüfung der MDGs bekannt. Markant ist vielmehr die Tatsache, dass die Weltbank mit dem Weltentwicklungsbericht an zentrale Erkenntnisse aus der internationalen Frauenbewegung anknüpft – ganz entgegen ihres über viele Jahrzehnte vertretenen instrumentalisierenden Credos, dass "Wirtschaftswachstum gut für die Chancengleichheit" und die Gleichberechtigung von Frauen zugleich eine wichtige Voraussetzung für eine erhöhte Produktivität und Marktentwicklung seien. So erkennt sie erstmals die Bedeutung kollektiver Aushandlungsprozesse und kollektiver Handlungsmacht ( agency ) für Empowerment -Prozesse zur Veränderung bestehender Gesellschaftshierarchien und Diskriminierungsmuster an. Aber auch die hohe Bindekraft von informellen Institutionen, wie kulturelle Normen und Traditionen, für geschlechtsspezifische Rollenzuschreibungen werden analysiert. Diese konzeptionelle Neuerung steht jedoch im Gegensatz zum operationalen Geschäft, dessen Programme trotz einiger Bemühungen weiterhin nur ungenügend gendersensibel ausgerichtet sind. Somit ist der Weltentwicklungsbericht ein konzeptioneller Schritt in die richtige Richtung, dessen Handlungsempfehlungen jedoch unzureichend und seine Auswirkungen auf die praktische Arbeit der Bank noch offen sind. Um die mit dem Weltentwicklungsbericht eingeschlagene Richtung weiter zu verfolgen, sollte die Weltbank zunächst verstärkt zur Finanzierung des MDG 3 beitragen, wieder länderspezifische Genderanalysen ( Country Gender Assessments) einführen sowie den aktuellen Gender Transition Plan zur Umsetzung der Weltbank- Genderpolitik an den im WDR vertretenen Genderansatz anpassen.

For the first time, the World Bank devotes one of its most influential publications in the world of opinion, the World Development Report for 2012, to the issue of Gender Equality. Based on studies of profound quality, the World Development Report (WDR) 2012 begins by documenting progress – e.g. the improved access of girls and women to education – and obstacles – like massive inequality in the areas of socio-political participation - on the road to increased gender equality. In addition, and for the first time, gender equality is recognized as a development goal in its own right. In the form of references to the normative and legal reference framework of the United Nations – i.e. the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) – there is also a clear-cut politicization of the gender issue. Noteworthy in this regard are not so much the results of the report, since the trends of this heterogeneous development of global gender relations have been known since the review of the MDGs. Rather, it is striking that the World Bank is calling attention in its World Development Report to central insights gained by the international women's movement – quite contrary to the instrumentalising credo which it has stood behind for many decades, namely that economic growth is good for equal opportunities and that equal rights for women are simultaneously an important precondition for increased productivity and market growth. Thus the Bank is recognizing for the first time the importance of agency and collective negotiating processes for empowerment processes in bringing about change in existing societal hierarchies and patterns of discrimination. But it also analyses the strong binding forces of informal institutions, such as cultural norms and traditions, in the assignment of gender-specific roles. On the other hand, this conceptual innovation goes contrary to business operations whose programs continue to have only an inadequate gender-sensitive orientation in spite of the efforts of some sectors. Thus, although its recommendations remain inadequate and its impact on the practical work of the Bank remains to be seen, the World Development Report is a conceptual step in the right direction. In order to further pursue the path laid out by this World Development Report, the World Bank should begin by contributing even more funding to the MDG 3; it should again introduce country-specific Gender Assessments and should adapt the current Gender Transition Plan for implementation of the World Bank's gender policies to the gender approach propounded in the WDR.