Fish out of water
Not so participatory development
From 1990s, there has been a rising trend in participatory development. Participatory approaches aim to be inclusive of local communities, including women, in the decision making process. Increasingly, we see many policy documents stating the need to include women, most famously - the Dublin principles. The third principle states that ‘women play a central part in the provision, management and safeguarding of water’. Other organisations such as the UN make bold claims that adopting this approach will make significant positive impact on poverty reduction and gender equality in Africa, however, the reality is quite different. This blog post will highlight that while woman are participants in the management of water resources, they are not influencers (Cornwall, 2003). It will do so by giving a particular focus to the case study of water user association (WUA) of a catchment area in the Thukela river basin in South Africa, by Kemerink et al (2013).
 |
| Image Credit: Instagram, @dailydoodlegram |
One of the biggest problems with these approaches is that while they are “gender aware”, they are far from “participatory” (Cornwall, 2003). Kemerink et al (2013) study of the water user association in the Thukela River Basin highlights this very well. The WUA were set by the post-apartheid South African government to transfer the water management controls back to those who had been historically disadvantaged - blacks and women. However, out of the 10 committee members, 5 are white and 5 black, despite the community being made of 85% Blacks and 5% Whites. And, out of the 5 black members, only one of them were female. Not INCLUSIVE or REPRESENTATIVE. The woman was given the role of gender representative however her role wasn’t clearly defined. It was clear to the researchers that she had been elected purely for the purpose of ticking boxes (Kemerink et al 2013). She is able to have little impact or influence when committee and herself are unaware of who she represents and what she is advocating. So while the need for women to be involved in water management is recognised implicitly, the exact role women of women is not explicit.
Another reason for the lack of participation is the perception of what a woman’s role and capabilities are. As mentioned in the first post, in many communities and households in Africa, women are considered subordinate to men. So while men go out to work in public sphere, women are often restricted to the domestic sphere. They are often just seen as users of domestic water and lacking in knowledge of water management. So when involved in the decision making process, their expertise and authority is often undermined (Mohanty, 2002). One particular thing that stuck with me from the Kemerink et al paper was a quote from a white male committee member - ‘the black woman from the township who sits in the management committee is growing some tomatoes in a little garden or so. I don’t know what she will use more water for, she does not need it'. Firstly, he assumes her role is one of a home-keeper - quickly placing her within the home space and away from public space. Secondly, he claims that she doesn’t 'need' any more water, which suggests that he cannot see beyond his own needs and interests and is clearly unaware how other actors may use and need water for very different reasons. Without a change in attitudes and perceptions about women's role with water, it is highly unlikely that participatory water management approaches will be successful.
 |
| Image Credit: Instagram, @dailydoodlegram |
So while women are included in water management schemes, it is obvious that their participation is at the lowest end of the scale. Yes they do attend interviews and are informed about the decisions and plans, however they are hardly active participants. The case of the South African WUA shows how the governing body needs to make a better effort at defining the role of female representatives to ensure the work is focused and effective. Secondly, the committee needs to be truly representative of the local population. Finally, it is important to acknowledge that while change in perception of women's position in society is possible through their active participation as water managers, these changes are not likely to be as bold and drastic as some organisations suggest.
List of references
Cornwall, A., 2003. Whose voices? Whose choices? Reflections on gender and participatory development. World development, 31(8), pp.1325-1342.
Kemerink, J.S., Mendez, L.E., Ahlers, R., Wester, P. and Van der Zaag, P., 2013. The question of inclusion and representation in rural South Africa: challenging the concept of water user associations as a vehicle for transformation. Water Policy, 15(2), pp.243-257.
Mohanty, R., 2002. WomenÕs participation in JFM in uttaranchal villages. Mimeo.
