Conflict and cooperation of water users in Nduruma sub-catchment: the role of commercial estates in...

H. Komakech;

Co- authors: M. Condon and P. van der Zaag

The role of commercial estates in local water sharing agreements in the Nduruma sub-catchment

Water Policy (2002) / Act (2009) - formalization:

• Basin board to issue water access right/permit

• Right is volumetric - based on mean values

• No other permit issued under any other law may apply

• Customary rights recognised and must apply for use permit

Water right and access in Tanzania

Implementation: intake gates?

• Invested and maintain hydraulic infrastructures (irrigation canals or furrows)

• Developed elaborate proportional and time based allocation systems

• River committees manages allocation at river level• Water guards monitor compliance• Canal committees oversee allocation within canals

Water users approaches (local)

Water users approaches (local)

• Whose views or right system is legitimate?

Important question

Actor-network approach

• Field observation and spatial mapping• Discussions with the actors• Review of secondary material e.g. minutes of meetings,

letters, reports• Research conducted in the Pangani river basin,

Tanzania

Methodology/Methods

Nduruma sub-catchment

Spatial geography

“the iron ring of land alienation” colonial time

now “ the plastic valley”

Gomba estate: Official right?

• Estate has legal right allocated by basin board• Does not recognise local river committee• Not comfortable with ‘unofficial agreements’

Struggle over water

Gomba “…you end up with guards wielding machetes watching your water intake to make sure you don’t open early, no one knows what is official or not….”

Farmers reaction: intake vandalized and estate’s workers harassed

Stopped operation in 2007, water shortage a factor

• Invested in strong relationship with river committee

• Willing to reduce abstraction: dry season 9-10 hrs/day.

“.. there is not enough water, you can’t blame anybody, .. .. you also need to respect that downstream villages need some water for food production”

• International outlook: “seen working with the locals, good neighbour”

Mediators: Enza Zaden

• Produces vegetable seeds (18.2ha)• View “..there just isn’t enough water.. ”• Use groundwater during dry seasons – drilled boreholes• Employees 140 permanent and 40 temporary. All locals• Estate’s ad hoc mediation - water conflict Nambala and

Manyire village

Use own resource to construct local irrigation intakes

Results: “Enza ..like our relative…..solves problems beyond our control …..most youths here works for Enza”

• Estates and villagers momentarily on the same side• Year 2003, even Gomba estate joined fighting Arusha

city’s new allocation

Gomba estate hired lorries and transported angry villagers upstream to disrupt Arusha’s water works.

• Collaboration with river committees

“better to have venue for people to discuss and complain than resort to violence”

Upstream-downstream crisis

Estates adopt varied strategies

• Claim access by sticking to state’s water law

“the official right”• Engage and negotiate rotational allocation• Band together to secure more water

Discussions: struggles over access

• Line of division between user groups• Customary right and access• State-issued rights and access permit

• Process of exclusion (access and decisions)• Water users associations,• “official” permits

• Structures leading to unequal access• Property relations (right systems)• Capacity (knowledge, technology etc)• Location

Conclusions

• Successful estates negotiate local agreements

• Working with downstream village estates:• avoid conflict • gain social reputation, • labour ;and • security on hydraulic infrastructure investment

• Local government keen to ‘keeping peace’ than enforcing water law

• Variable allocation – could sustain equity during scarcity

Smallholder System Innovations in Integrated Watershed ManagementSmallholder System Innovations in Integrated Watershed Management

Thank you all…