Neutral ideas and apolitical policies are (examples of) oxymora. Reform, in irrigation water management as in many other sectors, is likewise a please-all word. The malleability and ductility of its interpretations have allowed different actors to employ it in a variety of ways. The interests and agendas of influential international bodies or governments provide the initial push to ideas which later gain currency globally. Multiplicity of agents holding varied interests in different arenas complicate the picture. Even when coming to the adoption of a global “reform”, the transfer to, translation of, and transformation by local actors can vastly alter the net result achieved. Lofty goals of rationality alone have not been the primary driving force for policy making regarding PIM in Andhra Pradesh. Political rhetoric, image building exercises and strengthening of party base have been but some of the inducements. The gap between policy formulation and implementation itself is considerable, with the process being far from a simple linear model. Evidence from literature and the field show considerable dynamism and negotiations in changes in irrigation water management on the ground in Andhra Pradesh.
|Keywords:||Policy, Politics, Integrated Water Resources Management, Participatory Irrigation Management, Andhra Pradesh|
PhD Student, Department of Political and Cultural Change, ZEF - Centre for Development Research, University of Bonn, Bonn, Nordrhein Westfalia, Germany