Cultivating "success" and "failure" in policy: Participatory irrigation management in Nepal

M. Singh, J. Liebrand, D. Joshi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduced over a decade ago and considered largely successful by irrigation professionals, Irrigation Management Transfer and Participatory Irrigation Management (IMT/PIM) policies were recently reviewed and seen to have resulted in more cases of “failure” than “success”. Primary research on two IMT/PIM projects in Nepal, which were among the few “successes” in the assessment supporting a “failed” PIM, shows how such policy-driven evaluations, when defining success, overlook incongruities between policies, institutions, and the evolving dynamics around class, caste, ethnicity, and gender. Without exploring the dynamics of practice, the process of “cultivating” success and/or failure in evaluations provides little insight on how irrigation management works on the ground.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)155-173
Number of pages19
JournalDevelopment in Practice
Volume24
Issue number2
Early online date30 May 2014
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Nepal
irrigation
management
caste
project management
ethnicity
evaluation
policy
gender

Keywords

  • Irrigation
  • Participation
  • Aid
  • Development policies
  • South Asia

Cite this

Cultivating "success" and "failure" in policy : Participatory irrigation management in Nepal. / Singh, M.; Liebrand, J.; Joshi, D.

In: Development in Practice, Vol. 24, No. 2, 2014, p. 155-173.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{84bd2f1cec8f4c229acf27f8180d182d,
title = "Cultivating {"}success{"} and {"}failure{"} in policy: Participatory irrigation management in Nepal",
abstract = "Introduced over a decade ago and considered largely successful by irrigation professionals, Irrigation Management Transfer and Participatory Irrigation Management (IMT/PIM) policies were recently reviewed and seen to have resulted in more cases of “failure” than “success”. Primary research on two IMT/PIM projects in Nepal, which were among the few “successes” in the assessment supporting a “failed” PIM, shows how such policy-driven evaluations, when defining success, overlook incongruities between policies, institutions, and the evolving dynamics around class, caste, ethnicity, and gender. Without exploring the dynamics of practice, the process of “cultivating” success and/or failure in evaluations provides little insight on how irrigation management works on the ground.",
keywords = "Irrigation, Participation, Aid, Development policies, South Asia",
author = "M. Singh and J. Liebrand and D. Joshi",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1080/09614524.2014.885494",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "155--173",
journal = "Development in Practice",
issn = "0961-4524",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cultivating "success" and "failure" in policy

T2 - Participatory irrigation management in Nepal

AU - Singh, M.

AU - Liebrand, J.

AU - Joshi, D.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Introduced over a decade ago and considered largely successful by irrigation professionals, Irrigation Management Transfer and Participatory Irrigation Management (IMT/PIM) policies were recently reviewed and seen to have resulted in more cases of “failure” than “success”. Primary research on two IMT/PIM projects in Nepal, which were among the few “successes” in the assessment supporting a “failed” PIM, shows how such policy-driven evaluations, when defining success, overlook incongruities between policies, institutions, and the evolving dynamics around class, caste, ethnicity, and gender. Without exploring the dynamics of practice, the process of “cultivating” success and/or failure in evaluations provides little insight on how irrigation management works on the ground.

AB - Introduced over a decade ago and considered largely successful by irrigation professionals, Irrigation Management Transfer and Participatory Irrigation Management (IMT/PIM) policies were recently reviewed and seen to have resulted in more cases of “failure” than “success”. Primary research on two IMT/PIM projects in Nepal, which were among the few “successes” in the assessment supporting a “failed” PIM, shows how such policy-driven evaluations, when defining success, overlook incongruities between policies, institutions, and the evolving dynamics around class, caste, ethnicity, and gender. Without exploring the dynamics of practice, the process of “cultivating” success and/or failure in evaluations provides little insight on how irrigation management works on the ground.

KW - Irrigation

KW - Participation

KW - Aid

KW - Development policies

KW - South Asia

U2 - 10.1080/09614524.2014.885494

DO - 10.1080/09614524.2014.885494

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 155

EP - 173

JO - Development in Practice

JF - Development in Practice

SN - 0961-4524

IS - 2

ER -