Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorDenby, Kristi
dc.contributor.authorMovik, Synne
dc.contributor.authorMehta, Lyla
dc.contributor.authorvan Koppen, Barbara
dc.date.accessioned2018-08-02T13:54:57Z
dc.date.available2018-08-02T13:54:57Z
dc.date.created2016-12-08T13:37:57Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.citationWater Alternatives - An interdisciplinary journal on water, politics and development. 2016, 9 (3), 473-492. http://www.water-alternatives.org/nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn1965-0175
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2507338
dc.description.abstractThe historical legacy in South Africa of apartheid and the resulting discriminatory policies and power imbalances are critical to understanding how water is managed and allocated, and how people participate in designated water governance structures. The progressive post-apartheid National Water Act (NWA) is the principal legal instrument related to water governance which has broadly embraced the principles of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM). This translation of IWRM into the South African context and, in particular, the integration of institutions related to land and water have faced many challenges due to the political nature of water and land reforms, and the tendency of governmental departments to work in silos. The paper explores the dynamics surrounding the implementation of IWRM in the Inkomati Water Management Area, and the degree of integration between the parallel land and water reform processes. It also looks at what these reforms mean to black farmers’ access to water for their sugar cane crops at the regional (basin) and local levels. The empirical material highlights the discrepancies between a progressive IWRM-influenced policy on paper and the actual realities on the ground. The paper argues that the decentralisation and integration aspects of IWRM in South Africa have somewhat failed to take off in the country and what 'integrated' actually entails is unclear. Furthermore, efforts to implement the NWA and IWRM i n South Africa have been fraught with challenges in practice, because the progressive policy did not fully recognise the complex historical context, and the underlying inequalities in knowledge, power and resource access.nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.publisherWater Alternatives Associationnb_NO
dc.relation.urihttp://www.water-alternatives.org/index.php/alldoc/articles/vol9/v9issue3/333-a9-3-6/file
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)*
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/*
dc.titleThe 'trickle down' of IWRM: A case study of local-level realities in the Inkomati Water Management Area, South Africanb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.typePeer reviewednb_NO
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionnb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber473-492nb_NO
dc.source.volume9nb_NO
dc.source.journalWater Alternatives - An interdisciplinary journal on water, politics and developmentnb_NO
dc.source.issue3nb_NO
dc.identifier.cristin1410197
dc.relation.projectNorges forskningsråd: 213624nb_NO
cristin.unitcode7464,30,22,0
cristin.unitnameVann og samfunn
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)