Dear Kai, thank you for your response. I wholeheartedly agree with the point you raise about the need for greater examination of the social and political contexts surrounding canal operations and modernization. The primary focus of last month's London event was on the technical aspects of deteriorating surface irrigation systems. Speakers placed far less emphasis on how social, political, and agricultural systems have changed since the introduction of canal infrastructure in many of the case study countries. They did wrestle with this topic a bit, but there was a general sense of pessimism in the room about whether entrenched political and bureaucratic systems could be meaningfully reformed to induce more efficient water usage in surface irrigation.
That said, there were a few comments made in passing suggesting that institutional modernization needs to happen in concert with technical upgrades and enhanced managerial training in order for surface irrigation systems to become truly sustainable from a water-use efficiency standpoint. Realities on the ground concerning political power structures, irrigation bureaucracies, and long-standing land-ownership arrangements certainly complicate the process of surface irrigation modernization, but these realities --- and gradual shifts in these realities that have taken place over the decades --- must be taken into account, as you say. Training and physical rehabilitation are important tools for more efficient water use, but there is no one-size-fits-all approach to modernization. Another interesting facet of canal modernization that needs to evaluated on a case-by-case basis concerns the role of water-user associations (WUAs). Out of curiosity, in your experience in the field, how effective have WUAs been in challenging the traditional power hierarchies that govern agricultural water use?
Dear Kai, thank you for your response. I wholeheartedly agree with the point you raise about the need for greater examination of the social and political contexts surrounding canal operations and modernization. The primary focus of last month's London event was on the technical aspects of deteriorating surface irrigation systems. Speakers placed far less emphasis on how social, political, and agricultural systems have changed since the introduction of canal infrastructure in many of the case study countries. They did wrestle with this topic a bit, but there was a general sense of pessimism in the room about whether entrenched political and bureaucratic systems could be meaningfully reformed to induce more efficient water usage in surface irrigation.
That said, there were a few comments made in passing suggesting that institutional modernization needs to happen in concert with technical upgrades and enhanced managerial training in order for surface irrigation systems to become truly sustainable from a water-use efficiency standpoint. Realities on the ground concerning political power structures, irrigation bureaucracies, and long-standing land-ownership arrangements certainly complicate the process of surface irrigation modernization, but these realities --- and gradual shifts in these realities that have taken place over the decades --- must be taken into account, as you say. Training and physical rehabilitation are important tools for more efficient water use, but there is no one-size-fits-all approach to modernization. Another interesting facet of canal modernization that needs to evaluated on a case-by-case basis concerns the role of water-user associations (WUAs). Out of curiosity, in your experience in the field, how effective have WUAs been in challenging the traditional power hierarchies that govern agricultural water use?