Suchergebnisse

Paper presented at the International Conference on Spatial Justice, University of Paris, X-Nanterre, France, 12-14 March 2008

Since 2011 and the transition to civilian government, Myanmar and the Ayeyarwady Delta in particular are witnessing swift and dramatic changes in the modalities of access and use of natural resources. Drawing from political ecology, and on the basis of ethnographic work conducted in Yeinek village tract in the Nyaungdone Township of the Ayeyarwady Delta, this article places recent resources dynamics in a historical perspective. Rather than seeing natural resources as a 'given', we see them as resulting from socially embedded strategies of resource-making. These strategies contribute to a constant redefinition of the "resource-frontier" the delta has historically been for multiple actors. Notably, we show how land for rice cultivation, and water for capture fisheries and aquaculture, have been made into key resources over time, often in an exclusionary way. Post-2011 land and fishery reforms are the most recent examples of resource-making dynamics; they have certainly triggered significant resource re-allocation, but existing cross-scale patronage networks still largely shape how this takes place in practice. Finally, in this deltaic environment where resources are part water, part land, part rice, part fish, and the legitimacy of one's claims often hinges on proving prior use of a specific resource, it is the nature of the resource to be reallocated that is contested. In the newly politicized context of Myanmar, resources and institutional fluidity is in itself a frontier to navigate.Keywords: Ayeyarwady Delta; Myanmar; fisheries; land; resource making; frontier; exclusion

Since 2011 and the transition to civilian government, Myanmar and the Ayeyarwady Delta in particular are witnessing swift and dramatic changes in the modalities of access and use of natural resources. Drawing from political ecology, and on the basis of ethnographic work conducted in Yeinek village tract in the Nyaungdone Township of the Ayeyarwady Delta, this article places recent resources dynamics in a historical perspective. Rather than seeing natural resources as a 'given', we see them as resulting from socially embedded strategies of resource-making. These strategies contribute to a constant redefinition of the "resource-frontier" the delta has historically been for multiple actors. Notably, we show how land for rice cultivation, and water for capture fisheries and aquaculture, have been made into key resources over time, often in an exclusionary way. Post-2011 land and fishery reforms are the most recent examples of resource-making dynamics; they have certainly triggered significant resource re-allocation, but existing cross-scale patronage networks still largely shape how this takes place in practice. Finally, in this deltaic environment where resources are part water, part land, part rice, part fish, and the legitimacy of one's claims often hinges on proving prior use of a specific resource, it is the nature of the resource to be reallocated that is contested. In the newly politicized context of Myanmar, resources and institutional fluidity is in itself a frontier to navigate.Keywords: Ayeyarwady Delta; Myanmar; fisheries; land; resource making; frontier; exclusion

Seen as hotspots of vulnerability in the face of external pressures such as sea level rise, upstream water development, and extreme weather events but also of in situ dynamics such as increasing water use by local residents and demographic growth, deltas are high on the international science and development agenda. What emerges in the literature is the image of a 'global delta' that lends itself to global research and policy initiatives and their critique. We use the concept of 'boundary object' to critically reflect on the emergence of this global delta. We analyse the global delta in terms of its underpinning discourses, narratives, and knowledge generation dynamics, and through examining the politics of delta-oriented development and aid interventions. We elaborate this analytical argument on the basis of a 150-year historical analysis of water infrastructure development and policymaking in the Ayeyarwady Delta, paying specific attention to recent attempts at developing an Integrated Ayeyarwady Delta Strategy (IADS) and the role that the development of this strategy has played in the 'making' of the Ayeyarwady Delta as a global delta. This lays the groundwork for a broader critique of recent efforts to promote a 'Dutch Delta Approach' internationally, which we contend not only contributes to, but also aims at, making this global delta a boundary object. Such efforts play a key role in structuring an ever-expanding actor network supporting delta research and (sustainable/integrated) development. However, the making of a boundary object such as the global delta also hinges on depoliticising (delta) development. This, we consider to be problematic notably in the context of Myanmar where land and water politics have strongly shaped the changes the Ayeyarwady Delta has and will continue to witness.

Jordan is one of the countries with the scarcest water resources in the world. The aquifers of the Lower Jordan River Basin, a region of prime importance for the country, are exploited well beyond their sustainable rate. In 1997, Jordan's officials designed a new water strategy, with emphasis on demand-management instruments. Water pricing policies, and notably the bylaw no. 85 of 2002, were deemed to assist in controlling agricultural groundwater abstraction with the ambitious task of taking the abstraction rate close to the annual recharge. While much hope has been placed in such strategies, this paper argues that substantial increases in volumetric charges would not result in major water savings but would further decrease the income from low-value or extensive crops. A shift towards highvalue crops would raise water productivity but would also entail a transfer of wealth to the government and to wealthier entrepreneurs. It is therefore essential that negative incentives be accompanied by positive measures offering attractive alternatives (market opportunities, subsidies for modernization, technical advice, etc.) and exit options with compensation. Prices are unlikely to enable regulation of groundwater abstraction and significant reduction will only be achieved through policies that reduce the number of wells in use, such as buying out of wells.

Paper presented at the Workshop on Global Environmental Justice: Towards a New Agenda?, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK, 2-3 July 2010 ; Water development projects punctuate the landscapes of the rural South where water sector reforms are endlessly pursued. On the one hand, these new projects and reforms emerge on the ground that they enhance rural livelihoods and are central for food production and sound use of natural resources. On the other hand, the social and environmental inequalities they can induce are often not properly anticipated or recognized. When acknowledged, these effects are attributed to shortcomings in implementation; the remedy is said to be further reforms and projects. In this way, water projects have locked themselves into a 'business as usual' approach, which we argue is unlikely to succeed in delivering equitable water access and control. We do so by investigating the links between procedural (which say do water users have in water development projects?) and distributive justice (how are the benefits distributed?), based on case studies of large irrigation infrastructures in Western India and small reservoirs in West Africa and Eastern India. We draw from the fields of political ecology, development and governance studies and combine institutional and discourse analysis to understand the realities of water projects and their environmental justice dimension. We defend that water projects are grounded in environmental and development narratives that are co-produced by science and policy. Those narratives wield notions of sustainability and justice as universal, hence 'black-boxing' the realities of water resources management. Crucially, and in contrast with the new vocabulary of development, they continue to regard intended beneficiaries as 'recipients' rather than actors with agency. Water projects induce new and multiple claims over resources thus influencing the distribution of goods and bads and related perceptions of justice. Global environmental justice discourses need to recognize that the fairness of any intervention is shaped by, and depends on, the vantage point considered to effectively address current issues of inequality.

This paper explores a fruitful convergence between the distributive and procedural dimensions of environmental justice theory and current debates in the field of development studies over capitals and capabilities, institutions, and discourse formation to shed new light on natural resource management projects in the developing world. Specifically, we document the planning and implementation of two types of water interventions in two contrasting regions: watershed development programmes in northeast India and small reservoirs in sub-Saharan West Africa.We find that there is a contradiction between the inherently political nature of water interventions and the fact that such projects remain grounded in apolitical, technical and managerial narratives. In contrast to the new semantic of development, this depoliticization results in the near absence of attention paid to procedural (participation and empowerment) and distributive (equity) justice concerns and in local actors having to revert to covert ways to achieve their ends. A constructive dialogue between development studies and environmental justice scholars can offer a fresh look on the society-environment nexus in the developing world.

In densely populated coastal wetlands with rich biodiversity, multiple, but generally competing, economic activities are common. This paper adopts a polycentric perspective to the study of wetlands management in India to assess the scope for sustainable and equitable use of these remarkable and threatened ecosystems. The analytical framework proves to be useful and highlights that the intertwined processes of environmental and social changes result from, and shape, governance patterns. The three wetlands studied share commonalities in their trajectories: high population pressure, the enclosure of the commons and subsequent capitalization of resources and social marginalization, conflicting interests and intense local politics, a disconnect between global conservation discourses and local concerns, weak institutional arrangements, and global economic forces. The intense politics of access, control and use of natural resources challenge the implementation of a true polycentric regime in the Indian context due to a tendency to bureaucratization and a lack of participation, and existing limits to democratic citizenship. Creating a democratic space where multiple voices can be considered in the decision-making process remains a challenge. The paper concludes that inclusion of power and politics in the study of governance of natural resources should be of prime concern for researchers and decision makers.

International audience ; This paper explores a fruitful convergence between the distributive and procedural dimensions of environmental justice theory and current debates in the field of development studies over capitals and capabilities, institutions, and discourse formation to shed new light on natural resource management projects in the developing world. Specifically, we document the planning and implementation of two types of water interventions in two contrasting regions: watershed development programmes in northeast India and small reservoirs in sub-Saharan West Africa.We find that there is a contradiction between the inherently political nature of water interventions and the fact that such projects remain grounded in apolitical, technical and managerial narratives. In contrast to the new semantic of development, this depoliticization results in the near absence of attention paid to procedural (participation and empowerment) and distributive (equity) justice concerns and in local actors having to revert to covert ways to achieve their ends. A constructive dialogue between development studies and environmental justice scholars can offer a fresh look on the society-environment nexus in the developing world.

Ownership of development processes has been high on the international agenda since the Paris Declaration of 2005. There is, however, much discussion about whether highly aid-dependent governments can really 'own' policy reforms in their countries. In this paper, we argue that the ownership of policy reforms is the outcome of an interaction between individual agency and structural conditions. Taking the implementation of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) in Burkina Faso (since 1996) and Mali (since 2004) as an entry point, the paper describes the interplay between national policy makers, international organizations and dominant development discourses in the shaping of water policy reforms in both countries over the past 15 years. Despite the apparent uniformity of the global IWRM paradigm, a qualitative comparison of water policy changes in the two countries shows that policy reforms, as well as the extent to which they are 'owned' by national policy makers, are significantly distinct. This can be explained by different forms of individual agency and diverse structural conditions at a national level.

This paper explores a fruitful convergence between the distributive and procedural dimensions of environmental justice theory and current debates in the field of development studies over capitals and capabilities, institutions, and discourse formation to shed new light on natural resource management projects in the developing world. Specifically, we document the planning and implementation of two types of water interventions in two contrasting regions: watershed development programmes in northeast India and small reservoirs in sub-Saharan West Africa.We find that there is a contradiction between the inherently political nature of water interventions and the fact that such projects remain grounded in apolitical, technical and managerial narratives. In contrast to the new semantic of development, this depoliticization results in the near absence of attention paid to procedural (participation and empowerment) and distributive (equity) justice concerns and in local actors having to revert to covert ways to achieve their ends. A constructive dialogue between development studies and environmental justice scholars can offer a fresh look on the society-environment nexus in the developing world.

The 2015 Paris declaration obligated international development organizations to assess the climate compatibility of their projects. For irrigation projects, like those negotiated between the Agence Française de Développement, and the Cambodian government in the early 2020s, calculations of estimated greenhouse gas emissions have become important requirements. But how to estimate emissions from future rice fields and the effects of irrigation infrastructures that do not exist? To address this issue, emissions calculators have been developed as a means to bridge climate science and development knowledge infrastructures, so that data and forms of calculation from climate science can easily enter the world of development. However, by engaging in an infrastructural inversion, we argue that this understanding is flawed. Drawing on a case study of an irrigation project in Cambodia, we show that heterogeneous data concatenations are continuously transformed in the movement across infrastructures until referentiality breaks down. Emission calculators operate as a data wormhole, emitting extremely uncertain numbers that contribute to a problematic and speculative politics of anticipation. In contrast with the dominant politics of anticipation, which depends on futile efforts to neutralize uncertainty, infrastructural inversion makes it possible to envision a decentered politics attentive to distributed agency.

Paper presented at the ACP-EU Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) Annual Seminar, Closing the Knowledge Gap: Integrated Water Management for Sustainable Agriculture, Johannesburg, South Africa, 22?26 November 2010 ; Small reservoirs development in Ghana dates back to the post-independence era. Small reservoirs were meant at providing water for livestock, mitigating the impacts of recurrent drought, increasing food security, and reducing poverty. These small reservoirs are mostly located in Northern Ghana and have become an integral component of the communities they serve by supporting multiple livelihood strategies (livestock, fishing, irrigation and domestic use). In the mid-1990s and early 2000s, several donor-led development projects invested in rehabilitating and upgrading these small reservoirs through the inclusion of canal irrigation infrastructures. Most projects established water users associations (WUAs) that were aimed at ensuring sustainable management of the upgraded schemes. The underlying hypothesis was that local communities tend to have greater incentives than external actors to maintain their natural resources base. Organizing local farmers in a WUA would then increase their sense of ownership, leading to better performance of the system. Evidence from northern Ghana showed that WUAs have had mixed results. There is evidence of some WUAs having positive impacts. However, it is also clear that most WUAs fail to live up to expectation. This paper argues that the relative failure of WUAs is mostly due to the implementation approach that was adopted for their establishment during past development projects, specifically, the lack of attention given to the complex social fabric and the multiple actors and livelihood strategies that organized around small reservoirs. Past development projects re-iterated the model of ?technology transfer? but, this time, by promoting an ?institutional fix?. Government and donors should not only invest in infrastructure rehabilitation but also in soft components (organization, capacity, extension) that need to be embedded in the local social fabric.