New Water Policy and Practice Volume 1, Number 1 - Fall 2014 | Page 17

New Water Policy and Practice

were forced to unite by the biased report which otherwise may not have
happened. With a combined voice,
they could tell developed countries
who had already constructed most of
their large dams, that infrastructure
construction is important for their socio-economic development and that
they need such structures to produce
food, generate energy employment
and income, provide basic services
and improve the overall quality of life
of their citizens.” (Biswas 2012)

Such approaches will require some
introspection on the part of the research
community, in particular, the extent to
which it provides what could (dangerously in the context of modern social science)
be called useful and objective analysis.
It might help if there was more interplay
between researchers and practitioners.
Briscoe laments the disconnect between
them:-

“…. ended up as an audacious attempt
by NGOs to impose policies on governments and inter-governmental
institutions. The overreach was so
great that even normally placid governments reacted and the core, the
WCD guidelines, were rejected by all
governments building dams and by all
IFIs. (A few rich country governments
where green parties are strong, notably Germany, remain doggedly committed to the WCD.).”

“I see this disconnect between those
who opine and advise (frequently with
no practical knowledge, and usually
for others to live with the consequences) and those who do and know to be
a dangerous gap in this water-aware
world. The truth is that informing an
ever-more-interested public is a vital
task. And the sad truth is that those
who opine are much more effective at
dealing with the media (and frequently
those who define the agenda for international financing institutions) than
those who do. Therein lies, I suppose,
the germ of a discussion for another
day, perhaps one that can help bring
together a ‘coalition of those who do’!”
(Briscoe 2010a).

A useful response would see the
emergence of a different focus for research.
Mollinga and Gondhalekar recently noted
the continued impact of the long-standing separation of natural and engineering sciences from social sciences and the
humanities. They highlight the impact of
the now-growing interaction through its
association with the modernization of international development efforts, which has
indeed provided the paradigm and set the
tone for much research on aspects of water. They suggest a new and more rigorous
comparative approach to water research.
(Mollinga and Gondhalekar 2014)

That sentiment is increasingly often
expressed. Even some of the authors of the
more ideological and polemical literature
cited here have recognized the need for
an approach that is perhaps more empirically focused. In support of the arguments
raised against commoditization some of
these writers have suggested that forms of
management, under “community” control,
would offer better alternatives. In this context, the work of Elinor Ostrom is often cited as evidence that the “tragedy of the commons” is not an inevitable outcome. But a
researcher like Bakker, who has generated a
substantial literature on the subject has also

In the same context, Briscoe referred to the WCD process which

15