SPO_Baseline-Context_Analysis_Final_Report_19-april

1

Table of ContentsList of Figures............................................................................................................................... 3List of Tables................................................................................................................................ 4Acronyms .................................................................................................................................... 5Executive Summary...................................................................................................................... 61. Background and Introduction.............................................................................................. 102. Review of Literature ........................................................................................................... 193. Findings of the Study .......................................................................................................... 324. Conclusions & Recommendations ....................................................................................... 59References................................................................................................................................. 63Annexures ................................................................................................................................. 65 Annexure: I – Field Data Collection Tool – Individual Interview (Quantitative Questionnaire) ...65 Annexure: II – Field Data Collection Tool – Focus Group Discussion Checklist..............................70 Annexure: III – Field Data Collection Tool – Key Informant Interview (KII) Checklist....................72 Annexure: IV – Field Data Collection Villages .................................................................................74 Annexure: VI – Photo Gallery...........................................................................................................78 2

List of FiguresFigure 1 FO Formation in AWBs............................................................................................................13Figure 2 Management Transfer to FOs in AWBs...................................................................................13Figure 3 Command Plan – Left Bank Canal Area Water Board .............................................................14Figure 4 Possible New Roles for Irrigation Agencies...........................................................................20Figure 5 Land Tenure Status .................................................................................................................33Figure 6 Average Land Holding of Different Categories of Growers (Acres) ........................................34Figure 7 Marital Status of Respondents................................................................................................35Figure 8 Status of Education of Respondents .......................................................................................35Figure 9 Distribution of Respondents by their Religion........................................................................36Figure 10 Respondents House Structure ..............................................................................................37Figure 11 Position of Land along Distributary.......................................................................................38Figure 12 Status on Existence of Water Course Association ................................................................38Figure 13 Membership in WCA .............................................................................................................39Figure 14 WCA Formation.....................................................................................................................40Figure 15 Willingness to Have WCA in your Command Area................................................................41Figure 16 Role of Women .....................................................................................................................55Figure 17 Role of Marginalized Community .........................................................................................55Figure 18 Role of WCA ..........................................................................................................................56Figure 19 Role of Farmer Organization.................................................................................................56Figure 20 Role of SIDA...........................................................................................................................56Figure 21 Role of Area Water Board .....................................................................................................56Figure 22 Role of Landlord ....................................................................................................................57Figure 23 Role of Village Elder ..............................................................................................................57Figure 24 Role of Agriculture Extension Department...........................................................................57Figure 25 Role of Irrigation Department...............................................................................................57Figure 26 Role of Civil Society ...............................................................................................................58Figure 27 Role of Media........................................................................................................................58Figure 28 Role of Politician ...................................................................................................................58Figure 29 Role of On-Farm Water Management Dept. ........................................................................58Figure 30 Role of Police Department....................................................................................................58Figure 31 Role of Law Department .......................................................................................................58 3

List of TablesTable 1: Assessment of Irrigation & Drainage System.......................................................................................... 12Table 2: Sample for Command Area ..................................................................................................................... 17Table 3: Adjacent Area (Non-Project Water Course)............................................................................................ 17Table 4: Break-up of Key Informant Interviews .................................................................................................... 17Table 5: Field Plan................................................................................................................................................. 18Table 6: Water management transfer impacts..................................................................................................... 24Table 7: Distribution of Respondents by their Gender ......................................................................................... 32Table 8: Distribution of Respondents by their Farming Category ........................................................................ 32Table 9: Average Land holding of different Categories of growers (Acres) .......................................................... 33Table 10: Marital Status of Respondents.............................................................................................................. 34Table 11: Status of Education of Respondents ..................................................................................................... 35Table 12: Distribution of Respondents by their Religion ...................................................................................... 36Table 13: Type of House ....................................................................................................................................... 36Table 14: Main Sources of Livelihood ................................................................................................................... 37Table 15: Position of land along Distributary ....................................................................................................... 37Table 16: Status on Existence of Water Course Association................................................................................. 38Table 17: Membership in WCA ............................................................................................................................. 39Table 18: WCA Formation..................................................................................................................................... 40Table 19: Willingness to have WCA in your Command Area ................................................................................ 40Table 20: Involvement of women in coordination with WCA .............................................................................. 41Table 21: Involvement of women in coordination with Farmer Organization ..................................................... 42Table 22: Involvement of women in coordination with SIDA & AWB .................................................................. 42Table 23: Involvement of women in water management with WCA ................................................................... 42Table 24: Involvement of women in water management with FO, SIDA & AWB ................................................. 43Table 25: Presence of Political Activist ................................................................................................................. 43Table 26: Role Played by Political Activist ............................................................................................................ 44Table 27: Status on CBO/NGO working in the Area.............................................................................................. 44Table 28: CBO/NGO worked in the Past ............................................................................................................... 44Table 29: Advocacy Campaign by any CBO/NGO in the past................................................................................ 45Table 30: Types of Local Disagreements on Water .............................................................................................. 45Table 31: Local Dispute Resolution Mechanism ................................................................................................... 46Table 32: Respondent Household's Water Dis-agreement in the past................................................................. 46Table 33: Who Resolved Your Household's Water dis-agreement issues? .......................................................... 47Table 34: Natural Disaster .................................................................................................................................... 47Table 35: Effect of Disaster................................................................................................................................... 47Table 36: Effect of Disaster on women life........................................................................................................... 48Table 37: Types of Effect on women life .............................................................................................................. 48Table 38: Effect of disaster on life of marginalized community ........................................................................... 48Table 39: Types of Effect on marginalized community......................................................................................... 49Table 40: Role of women in water management ................................................................................................. 49Table 41: Role of Women in Disagreement Resolution........................................................................................ 50Table 42: Role of women in Crop Selection.......................................................................................................... 50Table 43: Role of women in crop management.................................................................................................... 50Table 44: Role of women in decision related to crop harvesting ......................................................................... 51Table 45: Role of women in crop marketing......................................................................................................... 51Table 46: Role of men in water management ...................................................................................................... 51Table 47: Role of men in disagreement resolution............................................................................................... 52Table 48: Role of men in crop selection ............................................................................................................... 52Table 49: Role of men in crop management ........................................................................................................ 52Table 50: Role of men in decision related to crop harvesting decisions .............................................................. 53Table 51: Role of men in crop marketing ............................................................................................................. 53Table 52: Stakeholder mapping with their Roles.................................................................................................. 54 4

Acronyms - Asian Development Bank - Association for Water, Applied Education & Renewable EnergyADB - Area Water BoardAWARE - Board of ManagementAWB - Badin Rural Development SocietyBoM - Community Based OrganizationBRDS - Centro Internacional de Agricultura TropicalCBO - Civil Society OrganizationCIAT - Drainage Beneficiary GroupCSO - ElectrodeionizationDBG - Food & Agriculture OrganizationEDI - Focus Group DiscussionFAO - Farmers OrganizationFGD - Gross Domestic ProductFO - Global Environmental SolutionsGDP - Ghotki Feeder Canal Area Water BoardGES - Government of SindhGFCAWB - Housing Development AgencyGoS - Human Development FoundationHDA - Irrigation and DrainageHDF - Indus Basin Irrigation SystemI&D - Irrigation and Drainage Management TransferIBIS - Irrigation and Drainage Management Transfer AgreementsIDMT - International Irrigation Management InstituteIDMTA - Irrigation Management TransferIIMI - International Network on Participatory Irrigation ManagementIMT - Integrated Processing Development SchemeINPIM - Irrigation system of PakistanIPDS - Integrated Water Resources ManagementISP - Key Informant InterviewIWRM - Laar Humanitarian and Development ProgrammeKII - Management and Development FoundationLHDP - Member of National AssemblyMDF - Ministry of Women’s DevelopmentMNA - Member of ParliamentMOWD - Member of Provincial AssemblyMP - Non-Governmental OrganizationMPA - National Irrigation AdministrationNGO - National Plan of ActionNIA - Operation and MaintenanceNPA - Participatory Irrigation ManagementO&M - Sindh Irrigation and Drainage AuthorityPIM - Strengthening Participatory OrganizationSIDA - Sindh Water Management OrdinanceSPO - Water Allocation CommitteesSWMO - Water Resources Adjustment Loan ProjectWAC - Water Course AssociationWATSAL - Water Management TransferWCA - Water User AssociationWMTWUA 5

Executive SummaryThe Strategic Partnership project is a set of outcomes and interventions ranging fromcommunity mobilizations to policy level improvement to contribute the women’s andmarginalized group’s participation in formal water governance and related social cohesionand policy processes. The project will provide an opportunity to Women and marginalizedgroups have a meaningful say in water-related peace-building processes and policies and theirinvolvement contributes to a decrease in water-related disputes in the target areas, AkramWah (Channel) Division, including the District Hyderabad, Badin and Tando Muhammad Khanof Sindh province.The project is entitled as “Strategic Partnership- Women and Marginalized Groups, NaturalResource Management and social cohesion Peace-building: Unlocking the Potential”. Theproject is expected to generate a set of outcomes and interventions ranging from communitymobilizations to policy level improvement to contribute the women’s and marginalizedgroup’s participation in formal water governance and related peace-building; as well as thepolicy change processes in Sindh province to increased and has led to the inclusion ofwomen’s and marginalized group needs, interests and priorities in water governance policiesand water peace-building processes. The project will provide an opportunity to Women andmarginalized groups have a meaningful say in water-related peace-building processes andpolicies and their involvement contributes to a decrease in water-related disagreements inthe target areas, Akram Wah Division, including the District Hyderabad, Badin and TandoMuhammad Khan of Sindh province.The project is being implemented at field level by Strengthening Participatory Organization(SPO) in district Hyderabad and Association for Water, Applied Education & Renewable Energy(AWARE) in district Tando Muhammed Khan and Badin in a partnership with Oxfam.With the poor water governance system, the Govt. of Sindh formally decided to introduceirrigation reforms through an Act of parliament known as SIDA Act in 1997 and gave space tostakeholders and farmers in the affairs of water management. The reform process in Sindhwas formally initiated in 1998. Unlike earlier attempts in irrigation system performanceimprovement in Pakistan, its core strategy has been management transfer. As such thereforms have two dimensions. The first dimension was the transition of the IrrigationDepartment into an autonomous Sindh Irrigation and Drainage Authority and Area WaterBoards that respectively will manage the barrages and the canals. The second change is thetransfer of responsibilities in water management and cost collection at distributary and minorlevel to Farmer Organizations.The overall reform has so far been top-down with the SIDA being the primary agent of change.As a change agent, SIDA has stimulated the notification of new Area Water Boards and hasinitiated social mobilization programs under which FOs were established. Since 1999, 5 AreaWater Board have been notified of which 3 are operational. Transfer of staff from theIrrigation Department to the AWBs is not effective yet and in all of the AWBs approval ofadditional staff is pending. 6

The system of Participatory irrigation management was introduced where inclusion andparticipation were kept key points of change where participation was considered a processthrough which stakeholders influence and share control over development initiatives and thedecisions and resources which affect them. Participatory Irrigation Management refers to theinvolvement of farmers/irrigation users in all aspects of irrigation management.Accordingly, the change program was given legal backing and the legal and institutionalframework of water management in Sindh was established through the Sindh WaterManagement Ordinance No. XL 2002 (SWMO), which stipulates tasks, powers andorganizational structures, including principles of participation and membership. Aftercritically examination of law, it has been found that the SWMO does not specify genderspecific actions by any agency or organization concerning water management transfer. Whilethere remains an implicit assumption by implementers of the SWMO that all tasks,responsibilities and decisions will be made by men, the Ordinance itself maintains gender-neutral language. From a legal standpoint and by not specifically excluding women, theSWMO applies equally to male and female landowners and leaseholders (tenants with formal,documented rights and obligations). The SWMO does not cover, however, other forms oftenancy, namely of haris (sharecroppers).Moreover, with regard to social cohesion process, it has been found that, the water, with itsessential, practical, local and cooperative characteristics could be an important factor to takeinto consideration in peacebuilding contexts. As research on this subject has been scarce, thisstudy would contribute how water could interact as a tool for peacebuilding with inclusiveapproach by giving space to women and marginalized farmers and stakeholders of watergovernance in Akram wah (Channel) area.The study has been carried out through to assess the whole process with respect to womenand marginalized groups’ participation and role. The study followed participatory researchtechniques including desk review of project documents, individual interviews with projectbeneficiaries, focus group discussions with community members, and key informantinterviews with key stake holders. Desk review was conducted with important projectdocuments including project proposal, periodical reports, progress reports, work plans, andmonitoring reports etc. and a sample of 60 individual farmers falling into different categorieswas selected from different villages following random sample selection technique. Thefarmers were selected equally both from project as well as non-project areas.The team consisted of one Team Leader assisted by one Field Coordinator and one QualityAssurance Supervisor with rich working experience in data collection and management. FiveField Enumerators were hired to conduct individual beneficiary interviews from the villages.The team was given enough orientation about project background and detailed training onfield tools and data collection methods. The main focus of this study was based ontriangulation of qualitative and quantitative data collected through this study. The data wasentered into a predesigned data templates. The data so collected has been analyzed andpresented in this report for the purpose of consideration in any future project in this or anyother area. The results of the study were reviewed, analyzed against the required objectivesof project and results are presented in this report. Based on results derived from the analysisof the data, several recommendations have been made. 7

Main findings and ConclusionsWater Governance Women and marginalized groups are direct stakeholders in the affairs of water governance and as per survey results 95% of the respondents reported that they are not involved in water management and coordination. More than 70% people in the project area are directly linked with farming and their livelihood depends on water, while 20% people reported daily wages as their source of income as indirect link with water management. The survey findings reveal that 95% of the respondents reported the farming community including women and marginalized groups are neither aware of role of WCAs and FOs nor have the opportunity to become members of these water management institutions at local level. The social mobilization and awareness programs do not reach such vulnerable groups including women and marginalised communities. At community level, the local customs and traditions are seen as practical hindrance towards involvement of women in water management issues. Out of those respondents who reported that there is no WCA in their village, highest majority of 88% respondents from three project district villages and 96% of respondents from control area villages from three districts shown their keen interest to form community groups like WCA and take part in the water management affairs. This gives an open area for working at gross root level with community. However, political activists exist in the area but they don’t take interest in the affairs of the community. Representative from SIDA while KII informed that from Akram Wah (Channel) in the administrative jurisdiction of the Hyderabad as such there is no distributary or minor where FOs to be formed, however, there are number of outlets/water courses which off takes from main canal and on many water course associations are being formed by Agriculture department to support their recently launched Sindh Irrigated Agriculture Productivity Enhancement Project (SIAPEP) project interventions.Social cohesion Water “Timing” (wara) and shortage of water were the most important issues of local disagreement on water. The village elders/landlord are seen as important persons to resolve the water informally. Whereas, the formal institutions do not play any remarkable role to resolve gender based issues.Gender Based Roles The natural disaster occurred in the area during last 8-10 years in all project districts and had worst effect on the livelihood of vulnerable groups including women marginalized people. Around 89% respondents from project and control area villages confirmed that due to these disasters, women and marginalized communities became poorer and homeless. However, women are involved in farming activities such as sowing, weeding, harvesting of crops etc. but unfortunately they are not involved in decision making related to crop selection, sharing of benefits, and social cohesion. 8

 The findings of consultation with key stakeholders reveals that there is need of revision of SWMO 2002 in order to ensure inclusion of women and marginalized groups in the WCA, FO and other key water institutions. The stakeholder mapping suggest that currently women and marginalized community groups have limited role in water governance and the people want such role of women and marginalized groups to be enhanced at high degree level. Therefore, it creates need to the role of politicians to minimum in water governance which is currently rated at high.Recommendations Based on findings of quantitative and qualitative data it is recommended that irrigation reforms should be inclusive and based on justice and equity by providing space to women and marginalized groups. The community mobilization and awareness program should focus women and marginalized groups which have been seen as most disadvantaged community in terms of getting benefits of water reforms including water allocation, representation in decision making bodies, etc. The role of community especially of women and marginalized groups in social cohesion process is very important and effective and must be promoted at all levels including involvement in resolution of water related disagreements and social cohesion process. Proposed irrigation reforms and strategy development in water governance is highly important especially for inclusion of women and marginalizing community at mainstream level. The focus of such reforms should be at grass root level in order to create space and empowerment for vulnerable groups and ensure equity in water allocation. The government should consider it as key component of better governance and develop it in consultation with stakeholders including women and marginalized groups. The government should initiate community based programs to ensure inclusion of women and marginalized groups. Ensure education (i.e. technical and vocational training in water sector, training to involve women in project’s scheme and activities, and environmental awareness) especially for women, girls and most marginalized rural socio-economic groups. Create economic opportunities for women and most marginalized groups. Promote irrigation and agricultural reforms that ensure participation of women’s and marginalized groups in water governance. Parliamentarian be sensitized and made aware of propoed reforms to seek their political commitment and will for inclusive approach of reform. Create awareness among male and female members of the community to involve women in project’s activities, through membership in FOs. Ensure adequate participation of women marginalized community in water bodies like WCAs and FOs etc. and legal amendments may be made accordingly.. Organize strong mobilization and awareness campaign to assist women farmers and sensitize male members of their families to let them participate in FOs. Given the challenges of incorporating women and marginalized groups into the official community structures such as WCA, FO, SIDA Board and AWB, several amendments have been recommended in in Sindh water management Ordinance 2002 with rationale for each amendment. 9

1. Background and IntroductionThe Indus Basin Irrigation System (IBIS) is the backbone of Pakistan agriculture, converting animmense desert into a productive agricultural land and creating the largest contiguousirrigation system of the world. Sindh is one of the primary beneficiaries of the IBIS with threemajor barrages (Sukkur, Guddu and Kotri) which provide irrigation water for approximately5.8 million hectares of land. However, the irrigation system has been facing seriousInfrastructural deteriorations.Pakistan’s water crisis has been exacerbated by climate change, the prioritization ofagriculture, under-priced water, poor management, and a lack of political will to change thestatus quo. According to the Asian Development Bank (ADB), Pakistan is already one of themost water-stressed countries. By 2020, water availability will further reduce to less than fivehundred cubic meters per capita per year, making Pakistan water-scarce.Agricultural sector is of vital importance in Pakistan due to its substantial contribution to GDP,employment, and export earnings. About 62% of Pakistani population lives in rural areas ofwhich about 60 % pick up their livelihood from agriculture directly or indirectly. Furthermore,the number of people living under the poverty line is relatively higher in rural areas makingagriculture the only hope, for the poor and the policy instrument for the government toalleviate the poverty.Agricultural production in Pakistan is heavily dependent on irrigation system since 90 % ofagricultural production comes from irrigated land. With 3 barrages, 14 main canals and about42000 watercourses, the irrigation system of Sindh is also the backbone of the agriculturalsector of Sindh supplying irrigation water to around 5.8 million ha of land which mostly wouldbe a desert otherwise.Keeping these things in mind, one can say that management of the Irrigation and Drainage(I&D) system is one of the most important issues both in Pakistan and Sindh. However, dueto snags in the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) of the I&D system, the Government ofSindh (GoS) has been facing some serious problems such as inefficiencies in water delivery,inequities in water distribution, wastage of irrigation water and water logging & salinity inirrigated areas. As a matter of fact, O&M budget has been about 30 % less than therequirement in recent years, and cost recovery rates are very low with about 50 % at maincanal level. Low budget, coupled with inefficiencies of centralized bureaucracy, lack ofmanagerial skills and poor client orientation has deepened the problem further.Even though, some steps have been taken to stop the deterioration of I&D system, none ofthem have borne fruit and the quality of service delivery continues to be poor, systemefficiency low and inequities in the distribution of water persist. In turn, cropping intensityhas gone down and the size of water logged and saline areas has increased gradually.For addressing these problems in I&D systems management, the Provincial Government ofSindh has initiated an institutional reform process to transform the irrigation managementsystem towards a participatory and decentralized system under an innovative SIDA Act 1997.The Sındh Irrigation and Drainage Authority (SIDA) was set up at provincial level with 10

representation of farmers and the government representatives. The Act provides for settingup of Area Water Boards (AWBs)at main canals command levels, with farmers andGovernment Representatives as members of the Board and establishment of FarmersOrganizations(FOs) at distributary/minor levels, an entirely farmer based entity. The reformfocused on the decentralization of the irrigation system management, through public andprivate partnership with participation of farmers and resource governance. Hence, the Actfocuses on decentralization of a centrally controlled irrigation system (Provincial IrrigationDepartment-PID) into a three tier public private partnership based management system.The reform process in Sindh was formally initiated in 1998. The new system has been furtherdefined in the Sindh Water Management Ordinance, 2002. According to the Ordinance 2002,the water management system rests on three pillars.: Sindh Irrigation and Drainage Authority(SIDA) has been established and given the responsibility to manage and operate the mainstructures such as barrages and overall monitoring and supporting the reform process; AreaWater Boards (AWBs) are responsible for the operation and maintenance of main canals, andsupporting and coordinating the FOs established or to be established under their canalcommand areas; and, Farmer Organizations (FOs) are water users organizations that areformed by farmers at the bottom, and they are responsible for management, operation andmaintenance of distributaries/minors. 360 FOs have been established, of which 326 haveproceeded to sign an Irrigation and Drainage Management Transfer (IDMT) contract. Theperformance of the FOs varies and a need for continued support and capacity building hasbeen identified to ensure they can live up to the content and spirit of the IDMTs. In spite ofthe role of women in agriculture they are not represented as a group in the FOs.There is a need to ensure that the FOs are jointly represented and able to form the pressuregroup that demands the reforms to proceed and deliver. The FOs also have several practicalcommon interests - for instance in financial management, equipment rental, credit. Both theadvocacy and the service mediation can be done through the services of Farmers OrganizationCouncils. Farmer Organization Councils need to come in force in each AWB that is notified.Further Water Allocation Committees (WACs) can bundle FOs interests in water managementin partnership with the engineering staff of the AWBs.One important threat to the reform process is that FOs will not function well and that asubstantial proportion of them fails. There is a risk of this happening with the current modusof social mobilization where after care and capacity buildings are underprovided. Training andsupport facilities for FOs need to be developed1.At the same time FO formation and FO development should not only be dependent on top-down social mobilization efforts. There should be room for local initiatives – of farmers takingthe lead in forming an FO, possibly with support of civil society organizations, but also at theirown initiative. A situation should be created in which the initiative for the establishment ofthe new organizations comes from farmer leaders themselves. In the capacity buildingprograms that follow later well running FOs can also become resource centers for newlyestablished FOs1.1 Transition Strategy, SIDA 11

PIM in Sindh- Realignment of the Institutions Created2Sindh Irrigation and Drainage Authority (SIDA): SIDA is the first tier in the new system oforganizations running the irrigation system. SIDA will be responsible for operation andmaintenance of the three Indus barrages in the Province of Sindh: the Guddu, Sukhur andKotri Barrages. It will therefore be responsible for the distribution of the Indus waters overthe fourteen main canals. It will be responsible for the construction and thereafter theoperation and maintenance of the major drains. It will be responsible for the flood protectioninfrastructure along the river Indus. It will contribute in setting up the envisaged institutionalsystem for the irrigation and drainage system. Finally, it has tasks in the fields of environment,research and development and an advisory task to the government. SIDA will be supervisedby a Board in which farmers play an important role. Besides farmers there will be independentmembers at the board: high repute specialists in widely diverging fields such as agriculture,social development, finance, rural sociology, irrigation and drainage etc. The ManagingDirector will report to the Board. Area Water Boards (AWBs): The second tier of the water management system consists of Area Water Boards (AWBs). On all fourteen main canals in Sindh, Area Water Boards (AWBs) will be formed. The Area Water Boards will be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the main and branch canals. They will therefore be responsible for the distribution of water to the Farmers Organisations in their command area. Where no Farmers’ Organisations exist, they will be responsible for the collection of the required revenue. The Area Water Board will have to pay to SIDA for the water received. They will charge Farmers’ Organisations for the water they distribute to them. Apart from water charges to Farmers’ Organisations, AWB can also develop other sources of income. A board in which farmers are represented will manage the AWBs. The director will report to the Board. Farmers’ Organizations (FOs): The third tier of the system consists of Farmers’ Organizations (FOs). FOs will be established on the distributaries and minors. The FOs will take care of the water distribution in the distributaries to the farmers. They will maintain the distributaries, minors and watercourses. FOs will collect water charges (abiana) from the farmers. The same way as AWBs, they can develop other sources of income. They will have to pay for their own expenditures and for the water supplied by the Area Water Board. A contract will be made to regulate the water services between AWB and FO. Ultimately there will be close to 1400 FOs in Sindh. The FOs would also undertake and implement investment and modernization schemes of their channels. Transition Program: The Area Water Boards are formed on the basis of Canal Commands. Farmer Organizations are formed on the basis of Distributary or Minor Commands. The current assessment is that 12 AWBs and 1434 FOs will take over the management of the irrigation and drainage system in Sindh3. Table 1 gives the most recent assessment, which may change over time. Table 1: Assessment of Irrigation & Drainage System2 Participatory Irrigation Management and Institutionalizing Irrigation Service in Sindh, Nazeer Ahmed Memon,Proceedings of the INPIM’s Ninth International Seminar on Participatory Irrigation Management, 4-8 December2006’ “Institutional and Technological Interventions for Better Irrigation Management in the New Millennium”3 Reforms & Organizations 12

S# AWB (Canal Command) FOs to be formed1 Nara Canal 1662 Left Bank canals (Akram and Phuleli canal) 1053 Ghotki 944 Beghari Sindh 855 Dadu/Rice Canal 1836 Desert Pat Feeder 457 North West 1278 Rohri 2839 Kalri Baghar 11010 Pinyari 11311 Khairpur Feeder West 6812 Khairpur Feeder East 55 Total 1434But as of 2017, only 3 AWBs have been formed i.e. Nara, Left Bank and Ghotki Feeder Canalwhere FOs have established and about 327 FOs are being managing the channels. Details aregiven in below graphs. 400 400 350 350 300 300 250 250 200 200 150 150 100 100 50 50 0 NCAWB LBCAWB GFCAWB TOTAL 0 NCAWB LBCAWB GFCAWB TOTAL 368 162 94 89 345FO FORMATION Target 172 105 91 345 IDMTA TargetFO FORMATION Achievement 162 94 89 IDMTA Achievement 159 94 74 327Figure 1 FO Formation in AWBs Figure 2 Management Transfer to FOs in AWBsThe data in above figure reveals that on an overall basis 94% target has been achieved withhighest achievement of 98% in Ghotki Feeder Canal Area Water Board (GFCAWB) followed by94% achievement in Nara Canal Area Board. Achievement of Left Bank AWB has also been onhigh side of 90%. On the other hand, the IDMTA target was achieved 100% in Left Bank AWB,followed by 98% in Nara Canal AWB. The performance of Ghotki Feeder Canal AWB was alsogood with achievement of 83% of targeted IDMTA. 13

Keeping in view water governance andmanagement issues, Oxfam is funding a3 years’ project to be implemented inthree districts i.e. Hyderabad, TandoMuhammed Khan and Badin. Theproject is entitled as “StrategicPartnership- Women and MarginalizedGroups, Natural ResourceManagement and social cohesion:Unlocking the Potential”. The project isexpected to generate a set of outcomesand interventions ranging fromcommunity mobilizations to policy levelimprovement to contribute thewomen’s and marginalized group’sparticipation in formal watergovernance and related peace-buildingand policy processes in Sindh provincehas increased and has led to theinclusion of women’s and marginalizedgroup needs, interests and priorities inwater governance policies and social Figure 3 Command Plan – Left Bank Canal Area Water Boardcohesion processes. Social cohesion is acomprehensive concept that includes,generates and sustains the many processes, approaches and stages needed to transform destructiveconflict towards more sustainable, peaceful relationships. Social cohesion is a process to engage in,not a goal to arrive at. Peace has always been among humanity's highest values--for some, supreme.Consider: “Peace at any price.” “The most disadvantageous peace is better than the most just war.\"Peace is more important than all justice. There never was a good war or a bad peace. Peace, however,especially among pacifists, is also opposed to violence. This includes confrontation, of course, butadditionally covers violent acts not ordinarily thought of or legally defined as disagreement.Disagreements are generally considered to be disagreements that involve negotiable interests. Suchissues can be settled through negotiation, mediation, or adjudication. They are generally short-termand, given the right process, lend themselves to the development of mutually satisfactorysolutions. Social cohesion and disagreement has a close relationship. Prolong disagreements, directlypose threat to peace. Therefore, social cohesion process is actually resolution of disagreements andconflicts on sustainable basis.The peace building process at local level is undertaken on various issues including water shortage androtation/warabandi (timing of water) where any disagreement may trigger a situation where the mostaffectee is women and marginalized group member (hari, sharecropper, peasant/worker). Thedisagreement is also witnessed during floods disaster time when surplus or storm water is diverted tothe villagers of poor community which affects badly to women, children and landless people as wellas tail end farmers whose land come under water. In this whole process the role of women andmarginalized is very important for social cohesion and peace building on sustainable basis. 14

Akram Wah (canal) was established in 1962 and is a perennial canal and its first half is linedwith cement concrete and bricks while other half is unlined. To prevent sedimentation thefirst quarter of the canal was provided with the “humps” at every 1.5 km.The Akram Wah was initially designed on 4200 cusecs but at the time of commissioning it didnot carry the designed discharge. However, its designed was fixed at 3714 cusecs. Waterdelivery system of Akram Wah is comprised of different channels including the 01 main canal,05 branch canals, 06 distributaries, 34 minors, 1,483 watercourses, 196 Pumping Machinesand 66 Pipes Outlets. The canal has full supply depth of 15 feet and width of 50 feet. Thecanal irrigates Hyderabad, Tando Muhammed Khan and Badin districts. The name of Akrambelongs to the name of Engr. Akram Shaikh in recognition of his services for construction ofGhulam Muhammad Barrage - Hyderabad).There is a shortage of about 2,000 cusecs in Akram Wah. This shortfall is presently met bysupplementing from Fulleli Canal through siphons/sluices constructed at 43rd mile Alipur X-Regulator. There is an Escape at the tail of Akram Wah, which links the escape to Dhoro PuranOutfall drain. Main crops of Akram Wah are Sugarcane, Rice, Cotton & Wheat. The total designintensity of the Akram Wah is 78 % as in Kharif is 33.5 % and Rabi 44.5 %. Since thecommissioning of Akram Wah, more than one hundred thousand acres of Rohri Canalcommand were transferred to Akram Wah command area. About 110 cusecs are beingutilized for non-irrigation purpose by H.D.A, S.I.T.E and other agencies.Project Outcomes O u t c o me 1 : Women and marginalized groups have the capacity to understand and claim their role in local water governance and related peace-building processes. O u t c o me 2 : Civil society is empowered to analyse the links between water governance, dispute transformation and gender; and propose and advocate for evidence-based and feasible policy solution vis-a-vis the government and private sector. O u t c o me 3: Policies of provincial government in Sindh and water governance bodies in the Akram Wah division are adapted to include women and marginalized groups and their needs and priorities in water governance, including the resolution of disputes. O u t c o me 4 : Civil Society engagement with the international community has contributed towards the knowledge base on supporting women’s’ and marginalized groups roles in peace-building processes through the entry point of water disputes.Objective of the StudyThe overall objective of this study was to conduct a baseline (Context analyses) survey toanalyze women's and marginalized group's participation in formal water governance andrelated social cohesion and policy processes at Akram Wah Division, Sindh Province.Purpose of Consultancy To find out the existing challenges, their root causes and effects on water management and governance of Akram Wah in district Badin, Tando Muhammad Khan and Hyderabad 15

 To identify role of women and marginalized groups in decision making process of water governance issues at distributaries and water courses levels for solution of issues and challenges to peace related in project target area. The mapping of water related local disputes and analysis of key drives in the area Stakeholder mapping (including identification of potential allies) To analyze role of women and marginalized groups in different processes of water management such as process of coordination and communication with water distribution controlling authorities like SIDA, Irrigation department, FO, water user association in project target areas. To know the livelihood sources of target area people and assess women engagement in decision making of crop selection, cultivating, harvesting, marketing and selling phases. To know the effects of natural disasters and calamities on life of women and marginalized communities in previous 8-10 years focusing on socio-economic conditions. To know the existence of social organizations, political activists and their influence in water governance at Akram Wah. Gender analysis of roles played by men & women in water use, management and sharing of benefits as well as their roles in dispute resolution and general decision- making at different levels. Impacts of gender roles and their relationship on women and marginalized groups. Analysis of local dispute resolution mechanism and practices, the roles and responsibilities of both formal and informal bodies and the outcomes of their work, particularly related to gender-justice. Analysis of water policy gaps related to women’s and marginalized group’s inclusion, participation in decision making process, roles in water management and dispute resolution mechanismMethodologyThe study followed participatory research techniques including desk review of projectdocuments, individual interviews with project beneficiaries, focus group discussions withcommunity members, and key informant interviews with key stake holders. A brief detail ofeach activity is given below:Desk ReviewDesk review was conducted with important project documents including project proposal,periodical reports, progress reports, work plans, and monitoring reports etc.Field Tool DevelopmentHaving detailed desk review, review of secondary data and meetings with project staffdifferent field data collection tools were developed to collect relevant data from the field.Both quantitative and qualitative data collection tools were made including: Individual Interview (Quantitative) Focus Group Discussion (Qualitative) Key Informant Interview Tool (Qualitative)Sampling for the Study 16

Quantitative data Sample:A sample of 60 individual farmers falling into different categories was selected from differentvillages following random sample selection technique. The farmers were selected equallyboth from project as well as non-project areas. The detailed breakup of the sample is givenbelow in the tables. Table 2: Sample for Command Area Water Large Land Owner Small Large Lease Owner Small Sharecropper Total Course (50+ (1-12.5 (50+ (1-12.5 / TenantLocation Acres) Medium Acres) Acres) Medium Acres) (12.5 to 50 (12.5 to 50 Acres) Acres)Head 1 1 11 1 1 4 10Middle 1 1 11 1 1 4 10Tail 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 10 Grand Total 30Table 3: Adjacent Area (Non-Project Water Course) Water Large Land Owner Small Large Lease Owner Small Sharecropper Total Course (50+ (1-12.5 (50+ Medium (1-12.5 / TenantLocation Acres) Medium Acres) Acres) (12.5 to 50 Acres) (12.5 to 50 Acres) 1 Acres) 1 1Head 1 1 11 1 4 10 1 4 10Middle 1 1 11 1 4 10 Grand Total 30Tail 1 1 1 1Qualitative data Sample:Focus Group Discussions (FGDs): In total 6 FGDs were conducted in 3 districts. This included2 FGDs in each district with one FGD with male and other FGD with female communitymembers from the project area villages in each district.Key Informant Interviews (KIIs): In total 15 KIIs were conducted in 3 districts as per detailgiven in the table below.Table 4: Break-up of Key Informant InterviewsDistrict # of Interviews Proposed Respondents Irrigation Department Sindh Irrigation Drainage Authority (SIDA)Hyderabad 9 SPO & AWARE Project Staffs Local NGOs/CSOs working in the areas on same Issues FO Chairman WCAs Chairman / PresidentTando FO ChairmanMuhammad 3 WCAs Chairman / PresidentKhan Local NGOs/CSOs working in the areas on same IssuesBadin 3 FO Chairman 17

WCAs Chairman / President Local NGOs/CSOs working in the areas on same IssuesField Data Collection / PlanThe field data collection plan was finalized in consultation with BhS project staff as per detailgiven below:Table 5: Field PlanNo. Date Detail LocationQuantitative Data Collection Individual beneficiary survey Project & non project villages 1 12 Mar to 17 Marc 17 2 in each district FGD with male & femaleQualitative Data Collection community membersFocus Group Discussions 15 KIIs in 3 districts 1 12 Mar to 17 Marc 17Key Informant Interview 1 12 Mar to 17 Marc 17Study TeamThe team consisted of one Team Leader assisted by one Field Coordinator and one QualityAssurance Supervisor with rich working experience in data collection and management. FiveField Enumerators were hired to conduct individual beneficiary interviews from the villages.The team was given enough orientation about project background and detailed training onfield tools and data collection methods.Data AnalysisThe main focus of evaluation was based on triangulation of qualitative and quantitative datacollected through this evaluation study. The data was entered into a predesigned datatemplates. The data so collected has been analyzed and presented in this report for thepurpose of consideration in any future project in this or any other area.Lessons Learnt and RecommendationsBased on results derived from the analysis of the data, several recommendations have beengiven in this report.LimitationsThe study team did not face any problem in conducting this study. The community waswelcoming in all villages due to the reason that they believed that the project has broughtpositive impact on their living.ReportThe results of the study were reviewed, analyzed against the required objectives of projectand results are presented in this report. 18

2. Review of LiteratureIrrigation system of Pakistan is the largest integrated irrigation network in the world. Thesystem is fed by the waters of Indus River and its tributaries. Pakistan has three main riverbasins: Indus, Kharan and Makran. The Indus basin forms the largest river basin with thefertile plain lands in Punjab and Sindh provinces. The Sindh province has almost 13 millionacres of irrigated lands in its three barrage command areas, built between 1932 and 1962.Sukkur barrage (which includes Nara Canal) was the major irrigation achievement with acommand area of 8.5 million acres. The irrigation system is core infrastructure of Sindh with14 feeders and main canals below the barrages, and nearly 1500 branch canal, distributariesand minors. More than 95% of the irrigation depends on canal water. This infrastructureaffects any social, economic and ecological development of the region.Participation is a process through which stakeholders influence and share control overdevelopment initiatives and the decisions and resources which affect them. ParticipatoryIrrigation Management (PIM) refers to the involvement of farmers/irrigation users in allaspects of irrigation management (INPIM Handbook on PIM). PIM has evolved and becomegenerally accepted as a necessary aspect of productive and sustainable irrigation. It isincreasingly understood as a broader kind of reform, to include empowerment of WUAs;transfer of authority to WUAs; reform of irrigation agencies; shared investment inrehabilitation, modernization and construction; and modernization of agricultural extension,agri-business development and marketing. The reason for this broader view is, in part,because of the recognition that this broader degree of reform is needed in order to createthe necessary incentives and accountability arrangements for stakeholders to support a moreproductive and sustainable irrigation and irrigated agriculture. However, the obstacles tobasic, comprehensive reform in the irrigation and agriculture sectors of developing countriesare daunting. They include resistant bureaucracies, conflicts between agencies, lack ofsupport in parliament, lack of a farmer “lobby,” too much focus on rehabilitation, etc.Sometimes “reform” only happens in pilot projects or at the level of legal changes or is onlypartially designed and implemented, after which parliaments or resistant bureaucracies failto bring it to fruition.Literature on the evaluation of impacts of on-going participatory irrigation management andirrigation management transfer programs in terms of water service delivery, agriculturalproductivity and agricultural performance indicates that improved service is a problem area(Facon, 2000). The sustainability of the water users associations is however now seen todepend on their capacity to provide an adequate water delivery service and control and toallocate water and to provide an improved service to enable gains in agricultural productivity(Svendsen, 1997). This is essential for the capacity of farmers to pay water and for the waterusers associations to be financially viable. As a result, it is now recommended that strategiesof gradual improvement of irrigation systems be adopted to support the transfer of watermanagement responsibilities and associated rights (Vermillion, 2000). The research road inPakistan in above context is still less traveled. The implementation of PIM programme in Sindhhas widely been acclaimed and many reports of World Bank and other agencies do supportthe initiative, but results and achievements are yet to get recognition, which could be 19

cultivated by analyzing the overall contribution in releasing the economic distress ofvulnerable and marginalized group of farmers.The introduction of reforms in irrigation sector would only be viable if the move fullysupported in letter and spirit and result is assessed  River basin planningin terms of reducing rural poverty. Therefore, a  Water resources allocation & monitoringpre-requisite multi-sufficient leverage in both  Development of new policies and regulationsstrategy and operations be identified, therefore,  Environmental monitoring and enforcementresearch needs to produce and identify factors to  Groundwater monitoring and controlfoster the overall success rate, effectiveness and  Project planning, design and constructionefficiency of change and competence transfer. In  Technology transfer to IAareas of poverty and low agricultural prices and  Advisory services to associationsyields, it will be even more important to establish  Monitoring of association performance Arbitrating disputes (from Svendsen et al.,responsive support services, even in advance of 1997)reforms. Introducing reform in the irrigation Figure 4 Possible New Roles for Irrigation Agenciessector only does not allow for a re-definition of themissions of the irrigation agency within a re-organization of the whole sector. This may induceblockages and resistance to reform in the sector if the only future offered to agency staff isseen to be redundancy or early retirement, as shown in Andhra Pradesh (Vermillion, 2000).Impacts of Participatory Irrigation ManagementAfter management transfer is implemented, what are the likely results? The impacts may beviewed from three perspectives: Farmers, The government (and more generally, society as a whole), and The irrigation agency which formerly controlled system management. These impacts are summarized below:From the farmers’ perspective, the major positive impacts are often intangible, butnonetheless real: a sense of ownership, increased transparency of processes, improvedirrigation service and reduced conflicts among users. The main negative impact would beincreased water fees.From the national government perspective, the key positive impact would be the reductionof subsidies to irrigation, particularly with regard to O&M costs. This impact is often theprimary incentive for a government to initiate PIM policies. Another potential benefit to thegovernment, but one which is not clearly documented, is increased irrigated area and/orreductions in overall water use.From the Irrigation agency perspective, a significant negative impact is often a sharpreduction in regard to field personnel and O&M staff. In Mexico, 5,000 out of 7,000government personnel were released from the irrigation department, while the Philippineshas reduced NIA staff from 19,353 to 10,368 because of the turnover program. This might bea painful process. But once the turnover thoroughly takes place in the system, it is importantfor the agency to shift its role from direct irrigation management towards guidance,monitoring and technical support to WUAs. This new role of the government agency is exactlyin line with the demand management approach. 20

There are some benefits that apply to all three interest groups. Reduced conflicts amongwater users, for example, is appreciated by farmers, as well as by the irrigation agency and bythe larger government. But clearly the three parties do not have an equal interest in PIM. Theclear winners appear to be the national governments, or society as a whole, who benefit fromreduced subsidies to the irrigation sector. Farmers also have much to gain in terms oftransparency, more reliable information about future irrigation timing, better service, etc. Butwhat about the irrigation agencies? They appear to be the losers, since the successfulintroduction of PIM transfers authority from the agency to the farmers.Moreover, the agency becomes accountable to the farmers for delivering water on schedule,making repairs to the main system, etc. While there are also some benefits that agencies canderive from PIM – such as less political interference – some of those benefits – such asreduced opportunities for rent seeking – are actually costs to those officials who hadpreviously benefited from those reduced practices.Given these varying, and in some cases conflicting, sets of interests, where is the stimulus forPIM most likely to be initiated? Based on five case studies, commissioned by EDI and theInternational Irrigation Management Institute (IIMI), on Mexico, Argentina, Colombia, Turkey,Philippines, the following conditions were identified as important in stimulating PIM policies4: National budgetary crisis. Without a crisis, there is no urgency to initiate changes: This was applicable to the cases in Mexico, Turkey, Colombia, and Philippines. In Argentina, however, the PIM process was part of a privatization of the economy as a whole in early 1990s. Top level political will and commitment. Without strong political commitment at the highest levels, the initiative to transfer management from the public sector agency will not go far. This condition was applicable in four of the five case study countries. The exception was the Philippines, where a bottom-up approach was adopted. The Government and the National Irrigation Administration (NIA), collaborating with NGOs have promoted farmers participation in irrigation management in a gradual manner since the mid-1970s. It is good physical condition of irrigation infrastructure. Unless the system works, farmers will not be willing to take over management. This was generally applicable in all five cases. However, there is considerable room for negotiation in the kinds of repairs that are required prior to transfer, and even on the timing of the repairs. In Mexico, the government promised farmers to rehabilitate certain portions of their systems after management turnover. In some systems in Colombia, the government transferred poor infrastructure to WUAs. As a result, it made those WUAs financially unmanageable, and created serious second generation problems. A workable legal framework. The legal framework needs to be “workable” though not necessarily enacted specifically for supporting the transfer program. The legal aspects should include establishment of WUAs, water rights, the new role of irrigation4 The five case studies formed the basis of an international workshop on \"Participatory Irrigation Management: Benefits andSecond Generation Problems,\" held at the Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT) in Cali, Colombia, fromFebruary 9-15, 1997. The workshop was jointly organized by EDI and IIMI and is reported in Svendsen, Trava, and Johnson(forthcoming). 21

department, and supportive measures to WUAs. In Turkey, existing laws were adequate, although not ideal, to support the transfer of irrigation management to various entities such as WUAs, Cooperatives, and community enterprises. In most cases, a new set of laws will be required, although the transfer process might begin while the new law is taking final form. In Mexico, the first systems were transferred in 1990, although the new water law did not take effect until 1992.Mode of Implementation: Implementation modes range from the very bottom-up orgradualism approach that has been used in the Philippines to the highly top-down or big-bangapproach used in Colombia and Mexico. In terms of promotion of PIM, Colombia has investedmuch less time and effort than the other countries. As a result the process of transfer wasvery quick but the degree of farmers’ participation was very limited. At the other extreme,the Philippines has spent more than 15 years to promote PIM with intensive use ofinstitutional development officers and farmer organizers to serve as catalysts.In practice, both top-down and bottom-up approaches are needed in the process of adoptingPIM. Top-down is particularly needed in the beginning stage including awareness campaigns,formulating a legal framework, reforming irrigation agency structure, and rehabilitatinginfrastructure. However, a bottom-up approach is essential when WUAs are to be organized,during which time thorough understanding and participation of farmers are required.Gender mainstreaming, Women and marginalized groups in water governanceGender refers to the roles and responsibilities of men and women and the relationshipbetween them. Gender roles are not the same as sex-defined roles, which are biologicallydetermined. Gender does not simply refer to women or men, but to the way their qualities,behaviours and identities are determined through the process of socialization. These rolesand responsibilities are culturally specific and can change over time. The different roles andresponsibilities are influenced by historical, religious, economic, cultural and ethnic factorsGender Equity is concerned with promoting personal, social, cultural, political and economicequality for all. Traditions and discriminatory practices have resulted in the systematicdevaluation of attitudes, opinions, activities and abilities attributed to, and associated with,girls and women. The negative consequences of these practices negatively affect men as wellas women. Improving the situation of girls and women in the long-term also improves thesituation for boys and men. Gender equity is particularly concerned with fairness inwomen’s and men’s access to resources.A further objective of irrigation water management transfer is to redress previous inequitiesin the distribution system. It is recognized by SIDA that a major inequity is felt by at least halfthe population, namely women. Despite women's involvement in agriculture and in irrigatedand domestic water use, they fail to participate in any membership of Farmer's Organizations(FO's), are not included in decision making, and gain no direct advantage from benefitsgenerated via FO's. The current FO structure, as legislated by the Sindh Water ManagementOrdinance XL, 2002 (SWMO), reinforces the rights of landowners, both male and female. Alegal structure has been created to protect these rights. 22

However, inequity not only has a gender face in Sindh, but a social and economic one. This isnot just a gender issue for SIDA, but a strategic issue. Water management transfer takes placein an existing power structure where women's concerns do not even feature. Efforts tocontrol water distribution has created confrontation between:• Big landowners versus small landowners• Landowners versus tenants (sharecroppers)• Land users at the head versus the tail ends of the water distribution systemGender disparities are additional factors which cross-cut all the above, making it sometimesdifficult to distinguish between equity issues related to gender and those related to largerpower structures. Furthermore, change for women, the marginalized, and the poor, does nothappen because it is legislated; change is a slow process brought about through the efforts ofmany different people and agencies. It is particularly slow when it concerns the situation ofwomen in Sindh, whose current status is guarded by centuries of custom, culture and history,among other factors.The SIDA Gender Equity Strategy proposes ways whereby the concerns and interests ofwomen in particular, and of male and female agriculturally-dependent land users in general,may be legitimated and formally integrated into a more equitable system. The Strategyrecognizes that there are different starting points whereby this could be done, and takes intoaccount constraints at both institutional and field levels which influence the type of startingpoints appropriate for SIDA at present. The legal and institutional framework of watermanagement in Sindh is established in the Sindh Water Management Ordinance No. XL 2002(SWMO), which stipulates tasks, powers and organizational structures, including principles ofparticipation and membership.The SWMO does not specify gender specific actions by any agency or organization concerningwater management transfer. While there remains an implicit assumption by implementersof the SWMO that all tasks, responsibilities and decisions will be made by men, the Ordinanceitself maintains gender-neutral language. From a legal standpoint and by not specificallyexcluding women, the SWMO applies equally to male and female landowners andleaseholders (tenants with formal, documented rights and obligations). The SWMO does notcover, however, other forms of tenancy, namely of haris (sharecroppers).Rural Sindh remains a conservative place, relying more on traditional practices concerningproperty and women's status than on national or provincial legislation. It is recommendedthat any gendered actions are relevant and acceptable to men and women stakeholders andprogramme staff, taking into account that SIDA accepts a programme principle of gendersensitivity and equity for all stakeholders.Policy decisions require support through a legislative framework, and gender equity requireslegal recognition and status. The key instrument is the Sindh Water Management OrdinanceXL 2002, which will require amendments as the transfer process takes place. An importantfeature is the inclusion of tenant rights in the Ordinance. At present, the Ordinancerecognizes the rights of one set of tenants, i.e. leaseholders, but not of another set of tenants,i.e. sharecroppers. Arguments against this include the points that haris are itinerant labourersand have no long term interest in the land. While there are haris who choose, or are obliged 23

through lack of water, to be mobile in search of a livelihood, there is a large number who havefarmed the same land for years, if not generations, particularly on larger landholdings. Thewater user rights of such tenants require formal recognition and legal protection asleaseholder tenants now have. While women landowners are entitled to become FOmembers, very few are so in reality. With the exception of some with large land holdings,women landowners are rarely included in decision-making about, or have access to resourcesgenerated by, their land.Nonetheless, it would be a step to specify in the Ordinance that women landowners areentitled to become FO members and to participate in decision making. A balance ofstakeholder representation would be better reflected by ensuring that the number of FOmembers is in proportion to the number of male and female landowners and tenants in theFO command area, rather than in proportion to the size of landholding. Preliminary genderanalysis undertaken in the GES workshop identified some already visible impacts of WMT onmen and women, and between different socio-economic classes. These impacts, both positiveand negative, are outlined as underTable 6: Water management transfer impacts Negative WMT impactsPositive WMT impacts 1. No abiana share for non-landowners1. Greater access to 40% abiana (water 2. No direct benefits for women charges) for landowners2. Assets in the area (e.g. Govt. land) can be 3. Some women landowners included in FO's, but not in proportion to actual land leased by an FO ownership as female landowners3. Ability of FO to generate non abiana normally not making decisions re. land use, nor having access to any revenue income (e.g. from industrial water use) from their land use4. Equity gap between big and small 4. Existing and potential women FO landowners reducing; small landowners members cannot attend meetings with more confident men, therefore are not participating5. Option open for FO sub-committees for 5. Inequity gap between landowners and any relevant function with membership non-landowning land users (particularly open to non-land owners (e.g. CAC) well-established sharecropping tenants) is increasing6. FO now seen as possible mobiliser of vote banks and given importance by 6. Big landowners still have the force of all MNA's and MPs institutions behind them (e.g. government officials, police), and small landowners still remaining deferential to this power structureKey gender points from this preliminary analysis and from focus group discussions in villageswith men and women include: No direct benefits for women currently seen in water management transfer. 24

 Women's awareness of the role and function of the FO is very limited, and generally women do not see themselves as playing a part in water management transfer decision making Male stakeholders have limited, or no, perception of the relevance of women's involvement in FO's. This is an important limiting factor to women's participation. Women landowners are not normally involved in making decisions concerning use of their land, nor in accessing revenues resulting from use of that land Women landowners are not normally included in FO's. Where women do belong to FO's, they do not participate as social restrictions often prevent them from sitting and discussing matters with men Women landowners may have different agricultural priorities from other women land users – women cannot be grouped as a single element of water management transfer, but will have different stakeholder perspectives as much as men Female respondents from villages noted that Government policies and practices do not allow for women's participation in water management transfer and are not supportive of their role in the agricultural sector Women experience multiple time constraints due to multiple task responsibilities in different ways than men. This has implications for their ability to participate in different activities, e.g. water release timing may create problems for women farmers; lack of involvement in FO's and WCA's does not give them opportunity to negotiation rotation schedules Existing structures of authority, both formal and informal, reinforce the power of large landowners Both men and women feel they need much more support than they are currently receiving in order to successfully participate in water management transferAn important impact that can be anticipated if SIDA is successful in its objectives of achievingmore equitable water distribution resulting in higher productivity, will be an increased burdenof agricultural work for men and women. Increased productivity means more weeding, moreharvesting, more maintenance of watercourses, etc.Men and women have differential incentives for investing time, labour and capital in watermanagement activities, reflecting gender differences in responsibilities, their access to andcontrol over productive resources, including water and the benefits from irrigated agriculture.Women and men are generally responsible for different water-related tasks at the householdlevel; and generally women have unequal access to water-related resources and decisionmaking bodies at all levels. Research and practical experience demonstrate that effective,efficient and equitable management of water resources in only achieved when men andwomen are equally involved in consultation processes and in the management andimplementation of water-related services. A gender balance ensures that the roles andresponsibilities of women and men are mobilized to best effect; the creativity, energy andknowledge of both sexes contribute to making water schemes and eco-systems moresustainable; and the benefits and costs of water use accrue equitably to all groups.Experience has shown that gender analysis can help irrigation planners and policy makersimprove the performance of the irrigation schemes. There are three broad areas in irrigated 25

agricultural production systems were gender analysis can help create more effective,equitable and sustainable irrigation policies and programmes:a) Irrigation design: where it is necessary to identify who will be using the water, the amounts needed, at what times and for what purpose;b) Legal, administrative and organizational arrangements: ensure women’s use and control of land and irrigation water is fundamental. Land and water allocations should be to the individual farmers rather than to the households. All farmers who own, rent or work on irrigated plots should be members of Water users’ associations, and women also be guaranteed leadership positions;c) Implementation: devise the water delivery schedules in order to accommodate both men and women’s needs with respect to quantity and quality of water, and timing. Access to training, credit and technology (i.e. introduce gender-friendly technologies so that women may not be marginalized as they are not technology specialists) should be ensured to both men and women.Analysis of the Socio-economic Factors of the Sindh Water Sector with a Gender PerspectiveThe Government of Pakistan has made a commitment to empowering women and hasestablished the Ministry of Women’s Development (MOWD) as the implementing agency toachieve this. As follow-up to the Beijing Platform for Action, adopted by the Government ofPakistan at the Fourth World Conference on Women (1995), MOWD has prepared in 1998 aNational Plan of Action (NPA) and in 2002 a National Policy for Development andEmpowerment of Women. The National Policy is guided by guarantees in the Constitution ofPakistan “to international instruments on human rights, as the reiteration of the Islamicprinciples of justice and equality” and by “non-discrimination and gender equity at all levels”.Some efforts were also undertaken to integrate gender analysis in some recent policy-relateddocuments (i.e. draft Water Policy and National Environment Policy).The Legal and Institutional Framework of Water Management in the Province of Sindh isestablished in the Sindh Water Management Ordinance No. XL of 2002 (SWMO) whichstipulates tasks, powers and organizational structures, including the principles of participationand membership. SWMO applies equally to male and female landowners and leaseholders(tenants with formal, documented rights and obligations, without covering other forms oftenancy, namely of haris -sharecroppers), and does not provide gender specific actionsconcerning water management transfer. SIDA accepts a programme principle of gendersensitivity and equity for all stakeholders.Rural areas in Sindh Province reply more on traditional practices concerning property andwomen’s status than on national or provincial legislation. Existing social and cultural biases,inequitable inheritance laws and the inadequacies of legal structures further limit ownershipand control by women. Although some attempts at addressing women’s needs in domesticwater management and water projects have been made, their specific needs remain largelyinvisible in the agenda of water institutions and are inadequately considered in terms of waterpolicies, strategies, programmes and conservation initiatives. Women are often notrecognized as vulnerable group in terms of impact nor as a legitimate group to engage within the effort to ward off the impending water-related difficulties. They are still not adequatelyrecognized as a party in the current national debate on dams, water distribution and 26

competing demands. The delineation of water and land regimes could assist securing thelivelihoods of not only women landowners but also the landless men and women.As the Water sector is still often considered outside the purview of women as such, there areonly a few women who have become prominent in this area as planners, managers,technicians, researchers, professionals and members of decision-making bodies. Human andsocial indicators in Pakistan show that, in spite of improvements in some indicators, incomparison to men, women are still lagging behind especially in the Education sector (i.e.Literacy Rate, Gross primary enrolment and Labour force participation). Women also earnlower wages than men in the agricultural labour.Few women own agricultural lands (or control their lands, even if owned) or manage theselands and therefore their rights to water are ill-defined. Land ownership by women hasincreased due to the Land reforms undertaken by various Governments which fixed ceilingson personal holdings of land. Women often see themselves in ways that are directed by maledominant viewpoints, and hence think that domestic water supply is their only responsibility.Major concerns were reported by women in the rural communities on hygiene and water-borne diseases related to the poor water quality available in the villages. Given the interplayof formal and customary laws in inheritance to the disadvantages of women, they haveperfunctory ownership in a majority of cases with little control to buy or sell. Women managethe household economy and the rising prices of water which results in cuts elsewhere. So farlittle policy or programmatic action has been taken to lessen the burden of women carryingwater for domestic use. Irrigation and agriculture use up to 97 percent of Pakistan’sfreshwater resources, and the rest is left for all other uses, including drinking water, suppliesfor municipal and industrial uses and for maintaining the river courses, and the crucialfreshwater interface in coastal areas.Seventy-three percent of women in rural areas are economically active, and in agriculturalhouseholds 25 percent of fulltime workers (defined as one who does only agricultural work)and 75 percent of part-time workers are women 5. The major agricultural activities performedby women farmers are related to crop and livestock production, post-harvest management,marketing and other activities like threshing, winnowing, cleaning, drying, making bins andstoring. Nevertheless, the global commitments covering water do not specifically address theissues of equitable division of power, work, access to or ownership of environmentalentitlements (including water and land) between men and women.Regarding the political participation, some institutional reforms were attempted to movetowards farmer management of the irrigation and drainage systems. Nevertheless, there arestill no women in the SIDA Board and the Area Water Boards, with some attempts under wayto introduce gender focal points; and the membership of women in the Farmer Organizationsand the Water Course Associations is still limited. This is mainly related to the fact that womenwith land rights are still often not in control of their property and therefore do not participatein Farmer Organizations and decision-making bodies. Women landholders, by being moreactively involved in agriculture, are more motivated to get organized and could play a major5 Simi Kamal 2005, women & Water Issue of Entitlements, Access and Equity 27

role in Farmer Organizations, if special amendments can be made at legal level to let thembecame members or at least invite them to attend the information and training activities.There are an increasing number of Women’s groups among community-based associations ofwater users, and a rise in women membership in Community groups focusing on drinkingwater and sanitation issues. A recent study has shown that women represent 33 percent ofthe local elected bodies.Below is reported a list of Key points from the Analysis on the Impacts of Water ManagementTransfer on Men and Women, carried out during the formulation of the SIDA Gender EquityStrategy, which still reflect in many cases the current situation: No direct or limited benefits for women were seen in Water Management Transfer WMT; Women have limited awareness of the role and function of the FO, and do not see themselves playing a part in the decision-making of WMT; Male stakeholders have limited perception of the relevance of women’s involvement in the FOs, which represents a limiting factor to women’s participation; Women landowners are not normally involved in making decision on land use nor in accessing revenues resulting from use of that land; Women landowners are not normally included in FOs; Where women belong to FOs, they do not actively participate as social restrictions often prevent them from sitting and discussing matters with men; Women landowners may have different agricultural priorities from other women landusers – women cannot be grouped as a single element of WMT, but still have different stakeholder perspectives as much as men; Female respondents from villages noted that Government policies and practices often still do not allow for women’s participation in WMT and are not very supportive of their role in the agricultural sector; Women experience serious time constraints due to their multiple task responsibilities, compared to men. This has implications on their ability to participate in different activities (i.e. water release timing may create problems for women farmers; the lack of involvement in FOs and WCSs does not give them the opportunity to participate in the negotiation of the rotation schedules); Existing structures of authority, both formal and informal, reinforce the power of large landowners; Both men and women feel they need much more support in order to successfully participate in WMT; Increasing inequity gap between landowners and non-landowning land users, particularly well-established sharecropping tenants; Big landowners still receive more support from Government institutions while small landowners remain deferential to this power structure.Representation of Vulnerable Groups in Irrigation Water Management (in FOs)Female Participation in Water Management at the Level of FOs: 28

Involvement of women in irrigation water management at watercourse and distry/minor levelis very limited due to exclusion of women from the land property and traditional social andcultural barriers. Because only landowners are allowed to have membership to WCAs thatform FOs in accordance with the Ordinance, women are automatically excluded from themembership to WCAs that is a medium to involve in management of irrigation water atdistry/minor level through FOs. The number of women having membership to WCAs is verylimited; the number was 921 in 2010, and during the last five years there is no change in thisnumber as seen from the record.Very minor improvement is observed in the female membership in General Body and Boardof Managements of FOs. While number of female member in General Bodies of FOs was 7,and in Board of Management was 5 in 2010, these numbers increased to 8 and 6 respectivelyafter 5 years, in 2014; and as of 2014, 1 FO (Bhan Minor) has a female chairperson, and 2FOs (Duthro II Minor and RD-205 R/S) have female vice chairpersons. But lately thechairperson also resigned. These are enthusiastic and motivating improvements for thefemale participation in water management in a traditional and conservative society like Sindhrural society.Representation of Landless Farmers:The landless farmers, i.e. tenants and harries, are not represented in WCAs and FOs due tothat membership to these organizations are allowed to those having land property inaccordance with the SWMO 2002. Great majority of rural people working in the agriculturalland are Harries, and their exclusion from the decision making processes in watermanagement may prevent bringing real issues to the discussion and decision making in therelevant platform of water management organizations.Participation and Representation of Small Farmers and Tail End Users in the BoM ofFOs:According to Ordinance 2002, the FO membership is open only to Water Course Associations(WCAs) and Drainage Beneficiary Groups (DBGs) and FOs act through their General Bodiescomprising representatives of the WCAs and DBGs. Daily management of the FO affairs iscarried out by the Board of Management consisting of elected members (chairman, vice-chairman, secretary, treasurer and two additional members), ex-officio member, advisorymember and co-opted advisory member.The Ordinance 2002 intends to representation of tail end users in the management of FOsthrough ordering that 3 members of BoM of FO should have to come from tail end of thechannels in order to ensure equal distribution of water. This mandatory rule is generallyfollowed by the FOs in re-election process under the supervision of social mobilization teamsof AWBs. Because of the rule of the Ordinance 2002 and efforts of social mobilization teams,representation of tail end users in the BoM of FOs are at acceptable or more than acceptablelevel. In FOs in which re-election have been conducted, the percentage of members comingfrom tail end in the BoM increased from 43 % to 51 % after re-election process. The higherrepresentation of tail end users in the FOs would ensure the equitable distribution ofirrigation water. 29

Small landowners constitute the majority of farmers in rural Sindh, and their representationin the decision making and management of bodies of water management organizations is verycrucial to cut the domination of landlord and to use irrigation water in an equitable andefficient way for a sustainable rural and agricultural development. It is observed thatrepresentation of small farmers in the Board of Management of FOs is getting increasedthrough the efforts of social mobilization teams of SIDA and AWBs; in FOs in which re-electionwere conducted, percentage of small farmer members in the BoMs was increased from 40 %to 47 % in comparison to pre-re-election It can be told that almost 50 % of BoM members ofFOs is consisted of small farmers.But majority of the chairpersons of the BoM of FOs comes from the big landholder groups;during 2010 to 2014 showing that 58 % of chairpersons of the BoM of FOs are big landholderhaving more than which 50 acres of agricultural land.Representation of Farmers at upper tier of System in SIDA & AWBs:In accordance with the Ordinance 2002, the SIDA would be established as an autonomousauthority in which farmers (water users) would also be represented through their electedrepresentatives. SIDA is composed of mainly two bodies; the SIDA Board, the highest decisionmaking body, and the Board of Management, the secretariat and managing body of the SIDA.Members of the SIDA Board would come from the three groups: (1) the members nominatedby the Government, (2) elected members, and (3) ex-officio members. Chairperson of SIDA isappointed by GoS and the Chairperson is the Chief Minister, presently.The Ordinance dictates the representation of 5 farmers (water users-FOs) in SIDA Boardthrough their elected members. On the paper 5 farmers (FOs) are present in the Board, butthey did not come through an election process, but they are selected members through theirpolitical affiliations. So it cannot be mentioned about a real representation of water users inthe SIDA Board. According to the Ordinance 2002, AWBs shall be established as autonomousentities at the level of main canals. In parallel to SIDA, AWBs also have mainly two bodies; 1)AWB Board, the highest decision making body of the AWB, and 2) Board of Management,secretariat and managing body of the AWB.AWB Board has to be composed of four main groups; (1) nominated members, (2) electedmembers, (3) members co-opted by the elected and nominated members, and (4) ex-officiomembers. There should be two nominated members; one representative from SIDA, and oneagriculturalist nominated by a local Chamber of Agriculture. There should be 4 electedmembers; one small farmer, one tail end user, two representatives of FOs. As the case in theSIDA Board, so-called elected members (representative of farmers and FOs) exist in the AWBsBoards, but they were not elected, but selected members.Community participation, water governance and social cohesion processCommunity participation in all stages of planning, decision-making and project/policyimplementation for local water resource management” in the developing world have beenrecognized as key guiding principles of sustainable water management since the beginning ofthe 1980s. The proponents for local community based water management rely on threearguments. First, the central state-based water supply and management programs were notreaching the people who needed them the most, rather such groups were excluded and 30

marginalized from the decision- making and implementation processes. Secondly, theInternational Monetary Fund’s structural adjustment programs launched in many developingcountries advocated a smaller state apparatus, and therefore left gaps in important areas ofgovernance, with water management being one of them. Community participation andmanagement could effectively fill those voids. Thirdly that an increasing faith in thecommunities and their individual capacity would lead to an empowerment for the localcommunity who had taken ownership, control and responsibility for the project and the localenvironment. Equitable and sustainable management of water resources can contributetowards peacebuilding in local areas where distribution and allocation of water is notjudicious and women and marginalized groups are kept away from decision makinginstitutions at local level.The experiences from the world show that effective water management has contributed toimprovements within in a number of different areas. They include public-health, economicrevitalization as well as the restoration of a lasting peace. Their examples show howparticipation of local communities in the planning as well as implementation of water projectscontributed to peacebuilding at the local level but was also conducive to the larger statebuilding and development processThe water, with its essential, practical, local and cooperative characteristics could be animportant factor to take into consideration in peacebuilding contexts. As research on thissubject has been scarce, this study would contribute how water could interact as a tool forpeacebuilding with inclusive approach by giving space to women and marginalized farmersand stakeholders of water governance in Akram wah area. 31

3. Findings of the StudyThe field team has visited randomly selected sample villages both from Project area as wellas Control areas from three districts i.e. Hyderabad, Tando Muhammed Khan for datacollection. The data collection was done through quantitative as well as qualitative tools(FGDs & KIIs). The data collected was analyzed and findings are presented in this section ofthe report.Section – I: Demographic InformationThis section includes findings on demographic detail of respondents by their gender, landownership, marital status, type of house, education, religion etc. Table 7: Distribution of Respondents by their Gender District Project Area Control Area Male Female Total Male Female TotalBadin 37 0 37 30 5 35Hyderabad 28 7 35 23 9 32Tando Muhammed Khan 29 6 35 24 9 33 Total 94 13 107 77 23 100 % 88% 12% 100% 77% 23% 100%The data reveals that on an overall basis 88% respondents were male and 12% respondents werefemales from project areas, whereas, 77% respondents were male and 23% were females from controlarea villages. The number of women respondents was lower mainly due the reason that there wereno women under the farming category of land owner or lease owner.Table 8: Distribution of Respondents by their Farming Category Detail Control Villages Project Villages Grand Total Male Female Total Male Female TotalBadin 49Land Owner 22 0 22 27 0 27 2Lease Owner 202 00 21Share Cropper 6 5 11 10 0 10 Total 30 5 35 37 0 37 72 % 42% 7% 49% 51% 0% 51% 100%HyderabadLand Owner 12 0 12 23 0 23 35 1Lease Owner 1 0 1 0 0 31Share Cropper 10 9 19 5 7 12 Total 23 9 32 28 7 35 67 % 34% 13% 48% 42% 10% 52% 100%Tando Muhammed KhanLand Owner 13 0 13 24 0 24 37Lease Owner 0 0 0 1 0 1 1Share Cropper 11 9 20 4 6 10 30 68 Total 24 9 33 29 6 35 100% % 35% 13% 49% 43% 9% 51%Grand Total 77 23 100 94 13 107 207 % 37% 11% 48% 45% 6% 52% 100% 32

80% 69%70%60%50% 47%40%30% 27% 23%20% 18% 12%10% 1% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% Female Male Male Female Project Area Control Area Land Owner Lease Owner Share Cropper Figure 5 Land Tenure StatusThe data related to farmer land tenure status reveals that out of three categories, the land ownerswere on higher side in project (69%) and control area (47%) villages and they were all male. Thequantitative data collection team informed that they tried their best to find and interview female landowner but they could not find any land owner in the surveyed villages. However, there were 12%female in project area and 23% female in control area villages who were working with their husbandas share cropper. The findings of qualitative data reveals that the land ownership rights are not givento women in rural area. The project staff during KII, informed that even if the land is in the name ofwomen, but these women are not aware of this. The project staff further informed that they haveidentified some land owner women in project villages and now working to involve them in WCA andFO in their respective command areas.Table 9: Average Land holding of different Categories of growers (Acres)District Area Land Owner Lease Share Owner Cropper Project 8.0 0.0 4.2Badin Control 5.0 3.0 3.9 Total 6.7 3.0 4.0 Project 9.0 0.0 4.0Hyderabad Control 13.0 18.5 3.7 Total 10.3 18.5 3.8 Project 7.6 17.0 7.0Tando Muhammad Khan Control 9.5 0.0 6.3 Total 8.2 17.0 6.5 Project 8.2 17.0 4.9Total Control 8.3 10.8 4.7 Total 8.2 12.8 4.8 33

18.0 17.016.014.0 10.812.010.0 8.2 8.3 8.06.0 4.9 4.74.02.0 Lease Owner Share Cropper0.0 Land Owner Project(n=107) Control(n=100) Figure 6 Average Land Holding of Different Categories of Growers (Acres)The data on land holding of respondents reveals that on an overall basis, average land of 6.7 acreswere reported from district Badin followed by 10.3 acres in district Hyderabad and 8.2 acres in districtTando Muhammad Khan. The Land Holding on lease owners was comparatively higher in districtHyderabad i.e. 18.5 acres. The share croppers reported almost same land i.e. in between 4 to 4.8acres. The comparative analysis of land ownership in project and control area villages reveals that landceiling of ownership and share cropping was almost same in both areas i.e. 8.2 acres and 4.7 acresrespectively with a slight different. However, the average land of lease owner was comparativelyhigher in project areas i.e. 17 acres as compared to 10.8 acres in control areas. The findings of thequalitative data reveals that the local community during FGDs informed that the majority of the localcommunity has small land holding and mostly the land owner family cultivate their land themselves. Table 10: Marital Status of RespondentsDistrict Married Unmarried Widow / Total 32 4 Widower 37 Badin 1 Hyderabad 35 0 0 35 Project TMK 31 3 1 35 Total 98 7 2 107 % 92% 6% 2% 100% Badin 32 3 0 35 Hyderabad 31 1 0 32 Control TMK 31 2 0 33 Total 94 6 0 100 % 94% 6% 0% 100% 34

100% 92% 94% 90% 80% 6% 6% 2% 0% 70% Widow/Widower 60% Unmarried 50% Project(n=107) Control(n=100) 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Married Figure 7 Marital Status of RespondentsThe data related to marital status of the respondents reveals that 92% were married followed by 6%un-married and 2% widow/widowers in project village. Whereas, 94% respondents were married and6% un-married in control area villages. Table 11: Status of Education of RespondentsDistrict Under Primary Primary Middle Matric Intermediate Graduate Illiterate TotalProject Badin 13 4 17 1 0 11 37Control Hyderabad 10 6 01 2 3 13 35 TMK 8 7 24 0 0 14 35 31 17 3 12 3 3 38 107 Total 29% 16% 3% 11% 3% 3% 36% 100% % 6 4 15 1 10 5 01 3 18 35 Badin 13 5 11 2 13 32 Hyderabad 29 14 2 7 6 11 33 TMK 29% 14% 2% 7% 6% 42 100 0% 42% 100% Total % Status of Education of Respondents 45% 42% 36% 40% 35% 29%29% 30% 25% 20% 16%14% 11% 15% 7% 10% 6% 3% 5% 3% 2% 3% Middle 0% 0% Primary Matric Intermediate Graduate Illiterate Under Primary Project(n=107) Control(n=100) Figure 8 Status of Education of Respondents 35

The data on education reveals 36% respondents reported being literate for project villages ascompared 29% from control village. The highest ratio of literate people were primary i.e. 16% fromproject villages and 14% form control villages. Table 12: Distribution of Respondents by their ReligionDistrict Badin Muslim Hindu TotalProject Hyderabad 37 0 37 TMK 35 0 35Control 35 0 35 Total 107 0 107 % 0% 100% 0 100% Badin 35 10 35 Hyderabad 22 1 32 TMK 32 11 33 89 100 Total 89% 11% % 100% 100% 100% 89% 90% 80% 11% 70% 0% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Muslim Hindu Project(n=107) Control(n=100) Figure 9 Distribution of Respondents by their ReligionThe data on religion shows that 100% respondents form district Hyderabad were Muslims. Whereas,89% respondent from control area villages were Muslims and 11% Hindus. Moreover, the majority ofHindu community belonged to control area villages from district Hyderabad. Table 13: Type of House District Katcha Pakka Katcha/Pakka Thatched Hut Total Project Badin 36 0 1 0 37 Control Hyderabad 5 12 16 2 35 TMK 30 1 3 1 35 Total 71 13 20 3 107 66% 12% 19% 3% 100% % 33 1 1 0 35 Badin 19 7 4 2 32 Hyderabad 12 10 10 1 33 TMK 64 18 15 3 100 Total 64% 18% 15% 3% 100% % 36

70% 66% 64% 60% 50% 40% 30% 18% 19% 12% 15% 20% Pakka 3% 3% 10% Katcha/Pakka Thatched Hut 0% Katcha Project(n=107) Control(n=100) Figure 10 Respondents House StructureThe data of types of House reveals that 66% houses were Katcha followed by 19% Katcha/PakkaHouses and 12% Pakka Houses form project villages. Whereas, 64% Houses were Katcha and 18%Pakka from control area villages. Table 14: Main Sources of LivelihoodDistrict Agriculture Daily Wage Govt. Job Livestock Private Total Farming Work Rearing Job Badin 25 10 2 37 Hyderabad 29 2 1 2 1 35Project TMK 20 9 3 3 35 Total 74 21 1 7 4 107 % 69% 20% 1% 7% 4% 100% Badin 26 Hyderabad 23 62 1 35 TMK 24 7 1 1 32 TotalControl 73 7 11 33 20 3 2 2 100 % 73% 20% 3% 2% 2% 100%The data on different sources of Livelihood reveals that Agriculture farming was on the highest side asa source of income as reported by 69% respondents in project villages and 73% respondents fromcontrol area village, followed by 20% respondents from both areas who reported daily wages as theirsource of income. The findings of the qualitative data reveals that the community shared during theFGDs that the rural areas have no more options of livelihood therefore, they are mostly involved inagriculture farming, livestock rearing and daily wage work either in the land or nearby town etc. Table 15: Position of land along DistributaryDistrict Badin Head Middle Tail TotalProject Hyderabad 12 14 11 37 TMK 13 13 9 35Control 14 10 11 35 Total 39 37 31 107 % 36% 35% 29% 11 13 11 100% Badin 11 10 11 35 Hyderabad 10 13 10 32 TMK 32 36 32 33 32% 36% 32% 100 Total % 100% 37

100% 36% 32% 35% 36% 29% 32% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Head Middle Tail Project(n=107) Control(n=100) Figure 11 Position of Land along DistributaryThe data with regard to position of land along distributary reveals that 36%, 35%, and 29%respondents belonged to head, middle and tail areas from project villages as compared to 32% 36%and 32% from head, middle and tail areas from control area villages.Section II – Water GovernanceThe findings of the questions related to involvement of women and marginalized community inissues related water governance are presented in the table below.District Table 16: Status on Existence of Water Course Association Total Yes No Don’t KnowProject Badin 11 14 12 37 TMK 22 13 0 35 Total 33 27 12 72 % 46% 38% 17% 100%Control Badin 0 32 3 35 TMK 2 30 1 33 Total 2 62 4 68 % 3% 91% 6% 100% 100% 91% 90% 80% 46% 70% 38% 60% 50% 3% 17% 40% Yes No 6% 30% 20% Project(n=72) Control(n=68) Dont Know 10% 0% Figure 12 Status on Existence of Water Course Association 38

The data reveals that Water Course Association (WCA) was not reported from district Hyderabadmainly due to the reason that SIDA does not work in district Hyderabad. Representative from SIDAwhile KII informed that from Akram Wah (Channel) in the administrative jurisdiction of theHyderabad as such there is no distributary or minor where FOs to be formed, however, thereare number of outlets/water courses which off takes from main canal and on many watercourse associations are being formed by Agriculture department to support their recentlylaunched Sindh Irrigated Agriculture Productivity Enhancement Project (SIAPEP) projectinterventions. The data results from two districts i.e. Badin & Tando Muhammed Khan reveal that46% respondents from Project Area villages reported that WCA exist in their command area ascompared to only 3% respondents from control area villages. Moreover, 38% respondents fromproject areas and 91% respondents from control area villages informed that WCA does not exist intheir command area followed by 17% and 6% respondents from project and control area villagesrespectively informed that they don’t know about existence of any WCA in their water coursecommand area. The findings of KIIs with FO Chairmen reveals that the election process of WCA andFO body is democratic but generally people tend to elect those people who have influence and canresolve their water related issues among local community and irrigation department. Table 17: Membership in WCADistrict Yes No TotalProject 5 11 Badin 6 6 22Control 11 33 TMK 16 33% 2 100% Total 22 2 2 100% 2 % 67% 100% TMK 0 Total 0 % 0%100% 100% 90% 67% 80% 70% 33% 60% 50% 0% 40% Yes 30% 20% Project(n=33) 10% 0% No Control(n=2) Figure 13 Membership in WCAThe data reveals that those members who confirmed having WCA in their village, 67% respondentsfrom project village confirmed that they are members of WCA. On the other hand only 2 respondentsform Tando Muhammad Khan confirmed having WCA in their village informed that they are memberof WCA. 39

Table 18: WCA FormationDistrict SIDA NGO Don't Know TotalProject 11 Badin 07 4 22Control 33 TMK 6 15 1 100% Total 6 22 5 2 2 % 18% 67% 15% 100% TMK 20 0 Total 20 0 % 100% 0% 0%120% WCA Formation100% 100% 80% 60% 67% 40% 20% 18% 15% 0% 0% 0% SIDA NGO Don't Know Project(n=33) Control(n=2) Figure 14 WCA FormationWhile replying question about who formed WCA 67% respondents form project village informed thatWCA has been made by NGO followed by18% respondents reported that SIDA made this. The findingof Focus group discussion with community reveals that local community perceive local CBO which hasbeen made by AWARE in this district as Water Course Association.Table 19: Willingness to have WCA in your Command AreaDistrict Badin Yes No No Idea TotalProject Hyderabad 13 10 14 TMK 26 51 32Control Total 13 00 13 52 61 59 % 88% 10% 2% Badin 30 20 100% Hyderabad 26 20 32 TMK 30 00 28 Total 86 40 30 96% 4% 0% 90 % 100% 40

120% 96% 2% 0% 100% 88% No Idea 80% 10% 60% 4% 40% 20% Yes No Project(n=59) Control(n=90) 0% Figure 15 Willingness to Have WCA in your Command AreaThe data shows that those respondents who reported that there is no WCA in their villages, were alsoin favor of creation of WCA in their villages. The findings reveal that 88% respondents from projectarea villages and 96% respondents from control area villages informed that they want creation of WCAin their villages. The findings of the qualitative data reveals that however, majority of the communitymembers were in favor of creating WCAs in their village, but some of the FGD participants also shownless interest in WCA as they perceive that it may work on for big landlords or those who have onlyland in their name. Table 20: Involvement of women in coordination with WCADistrict Yes No Don't Know TotalProject 37 Badin 5 28 4 35Control 35 Hyderabad 0 34 1 107 TMK 14 21 0 100% 35 Total 19 83 5 32 33 % 18% 78% 5% 100 Badin 0 35 0 100% Hyderabad 0 31 1 TMK 0 31 2 Total 0 97 3 % 0% 97% 3%The data reveals that only 18% respondents from project area villages reported that women areinvolved in coordination with Water Course Association. These respondents were from district Badinand Tando Muhammad Khan. On the other hand, 97% respondents from control area villagesinformed that women are not involved in coordination with WCA followed by 3% respondents whowere not aware of such coordination. 41

Table 21: Involvement of women in coordination with Farmer OrganizationDistrict No Don't Know TotalProject Badin 33 4 37 Hyderabad 34 1 35 TMK 35 0 35 Total 102 5 107 % 95% 5% 100%Control Badin 35 0 35 Hyderabad 31 1 32 TMK 31 2 33 Total 97 3 100 % 97% 3% 100%The majority of over 95% respondents from both project and control area village informed thatwomen are not involved in coordination with farmer organization followed by only 5% from projectarea and 3% from control area villages, that they don’t know either women involved in coordinationwith farmer organization or not. The findings of qualitative data also reveals that women are notinvolved in any coordination on water related issues mainly due to the reason that women are givenland rights and according to Law, only land owner can become member of WCA and FO. The projectstaff informed that they have identified some women with land in their names in 3 districts and willnow make efforts for their inclusion in WCA/FO. One of the female local community activist duringkey informant interview informed that women are not allowed to consult directly with FarmerOrganization or other offices. Table 22: Involvement of women in coordination with SIDA & AWB District No Don't Know Total Project Badin 33 4 37 Hyderabad 34 1 35 TMK 35 0 35 Total 102 5 107 % 95% 5% 100% Control Badin 35 0 35 Hyderabad 31 1 32 TMK 30 3 33 Total 96 4 100 % 96% 4% 100%The absolute majority of 95% respondents informed that women are not involved in coordination withSIDA and AWB followed by 5% respondents who were not aware about such coordination from projectand control area villages. The findings of the qualitative data also support the findings of quantitativedata that women are not involved in any coordination with SIDA and AWB with regard to water relatedproblems. Table 23: Involvement of women in water management with WCADistrict Yes No Don't Know TotalProject Badin 5 28 4 37 Hyderabad 0 34 1 35 TMK 14 21 0 35 Total 19 83 5 107 42

Control % 18% 78% 5% 100% Badin 0 35 0 35 Hyderabad 0 31 1 32 TMK 0 31 2 33 0 97 3 100 Total 0% 97% 3% 100% %The data reveals that 78% respondents reported that they are not involved in water managementissues followed by 5% respondents who were not aware about such involvement. Only 18%respondents informed that women are involved in water management issues. The findings ofqualitative data reveals that women work with their Husbands in land and also manage water duringirrigation application. Table 24: Involvement of women in water management with FO, SIDA & AWBDistrict No Don't Know TotalProject Badin 33 4 37 Hyderabad 34 1 35 TMK 35 0 35 Total 102 5 107 % 95% 5% 100%Control Badin 35 0 35 Hyderabad 31 1 32 TMK 31 2 33 Total 97 3 100 % 97% 3% 100%The absolute majority of 100% from project and control area villages reported that women are notinvolved in water management issues with Farmer Organization, SIDA. The findings of qualitativesuggest that inclusion of women and marginalized community will be ensured in FO, SIDA and AWBby assigning a quota seat for marginalized community in FO, SIDA and AWB so that rights of this strataof the community is secured by themselves. Table 25: Presence of Political ActivistDistrict Yes No Don't Know TotalProject 37 Badin 24 12 1 35Control 35 Hyderabad 27 4 4 107 TMK 23 11 1 100% 35 Total 74 27 6 32 33 % 69% 25% 6% 100 Badin 30 3 2 100% Hyderabad 21 9 2 TMK 23 8 2 Total 74 20 6 % 74% 20% 6%The data reveals that 69% respondents from project area and 74% from control area village informedthat political Activist exist in their villages followed by 20% respondents from project areas and 25% 43

from control areas who reported non-existence of political activist in their village. The findings ofqualitative data reveals that community consulted through FGDs and key stakeholders through KIIsinformed that mostly the political activist focus on working for their own interests or in some casesthey support in resolving the issues of their voters. Table 26: Role Played by Political Activist District Resolve local Consult Consult Consult with No Total disagreements with FO with SIDA Government RoleProject Badin 2 10 2 21 26Control Hyderabad TMK 1 01 11 17 30 Total 0 00 0 23 23 % 3 11 13 61 79 Badin Hyderabad 4% 1% 1% 16% 76% 100% TMK 0 00 3 30 33 Total % 0 00 0 21 21 3 23 6 13 27 3 23 9 64 81 4% 2% 4% 11% 79% 100%While replying to role played by political activists, the majority of 76% from project areas and 79%from control areas villages reported that political activist don’t play any role in resolving water relatedissues. Moreover, 16% and 11% from project and control areas respectively informed that PoliticalActivist consult with relevant government department to resolve water related problems. A smallquantity of 4% respondents also reported active role played by political activists to resolve waterrelated dis-agreements. Table 27: Status on CBO/NGO working in the Area Yes No Don't Know TotalProject Badin 33 3 1 37 Hyderabad 17 18 0 35 TMK 34 1 0 35 Total 84 22 1 107 % 79% 21% 1% 100%Control Badin 0 33 2 35 Hyderabad 0 31 1 32 TMK 0 32 1 33 Total 0 96 4 100 % 0% 96% 4% 100%The data reveals that 79% respondents from project area villages reported existence of CBO/NGO intheir village as against 100% non-existence of CBO/NGO in the control area villages. While replying tothe question about the name of CBO/NGO, the respondents reported that SPO, AWARE, HDF, MDF,LRDP and BRDS are working in the area on water related issues. Table 28: CBO/NGO worked in the Past Yes No Don't Know Total 33Project Badin 28 5 0 17 34 Hyderabad 9 7 1 84 TMK 34 0 0 Total 71 12 1 44

% 85% 14% 1% 100%Control Badin 00 0 3 Hyderabad 0 0 0 4 TMK 0 0 0 3 Total 00 0 10 % 0% 0% 0% 0%While replying to the question “did the CBO/NGO worked in the past on water related issues, 85%respondents from project area villages confirmed that they worked in the past followed by 14% whoinformed that they did not work and 1% respondents were not aware about such work. Table 29: Advocacy Campaign by any CBO/NGO in the pastDistrict Yes No Don't Know TotalProject 37 Badin 5 30 2 35Control 35 Hyderabad 0 32 3 107 TMK 17 18 0 100% 35 Total 22 80 5 32 33 % 21% 75% 5% 100 Badin 4 31 0 100% Hyderabad 0 32 0 TMK 0 32 1 Total 4 95 1 % 4% 95% 1%The data regarding advocacy campaign by any CBO/NGO in the past reveals that 21% respondentsfrom project area villages and 4% respondents from control area village confirmed that there has beenadvocacy campaign in their village by CBO/NGO in the past. The findings of qualitative data revealsthat different NGOs worked during floods of 2011 and also ran advocacy campaigns on the rights ofpoor community with regard to agricultural farming and shortage of irrigation water.Section II – Social CohesionThe findings on social cohesion issues are given below: Table 30: Types of Local Disagreements on WaterDistrict Allocation Timing Land Tribal Cultural Linguistic Wages Other None Don’t Know TotalProject Badin 15 18 1 0 0 0 2 04 0 40 Hyderabad 4 7 11 0 1 1 2 21 1 39 TMK 1 27 6 1 1 0 7 34 0 50 Total 20 52 8 2 1 1 10 5 29 1 129 % 16% 40% 6% 2% 1% 1% 8% 4% 22% 1% 100%Control Badin 7 27 1 0 0 7 11 0 44 Hyderabad 0 4 22 1 0 7 23 0 39 TMK 8 11 0 0 0 3 0 13 2 37 Total 15 42 3 2 1 10 8 37 2 120 % 13% 35% 3% 2% 1% 0% 8% 7% 31% 2% 100%The data reveals that majority of 40% respondents from project areas and 35% from control areasreported that “Timing” of water the main point of dis-agreement among local community followed by 45

16% respondents in project areas and 13% from control area villages who reported that “allocation ofwater” had been the main point of local dis-agreement among local community. A small quantity of4% and 7% respondents from project and control area villages also reported other reasons of local dis-agreements i.e. shortage of water due to their land in tail area of the water course. The findings ofqualitative reveals that mostly water related dis-agreements occur mainly due to shortage, timing andtheft of water by influential landlords. The stakeholders also informed that in district Hyderabad andTando Muhammed project area villages the land area covered under Sukkur Barrage is now irrigatedthrough Akram Wah which is otherwise illegal as it has created more pressure of water demand onAkram Wah. Table 31: Local Dispute Resolution MechanismDistrict Village Clan Elders Village Politician Farmer Court / None of Total Community Landlord (MPA/MNA) Organization judiciary AboveProject Badin 11 8 1 0 0 0 17 37 Hyderabad 6 06 3 0 0 1 16 TMK 22 13 1 0 1 0 4 41 Total 39 21 8 3 1 0 22 98 % 41% 22% 9% 3% 1% 0% 23% 100%Control Badin 19 12 6 0 0 0 6 43 Hyderabad 4 02 0 0 2 5 13 TMK 12 3 3 2 0 0 2 22 Total 35 15 11 2 0 2 13 78 % 45% 19% 14% 3% 0% 3% 17% 100%The data reveals that village community is most important institution to resolve local dis-agreementson water as reported by 41% respondents from project area and 45% from control area villages. Clanelders and village landlord are important persons to resolve these issues as reported by 22% and 9%respondents from project area. The community during FGDs informed that the level of local dis-agreements on water related issues is not so serious in the project area villages and these are easilyresolved through local village community dispute resolution system, tribal elders or village landlordetc. Table 32: Respondent Household's Water Dis-agreement in the past District Badin Yes No Total Project 17 20 37 Hyderabad 7 28 35 TMK 19 16 35 Total 43 64 107 % 40% 60% 100% Control Badin 14 21 35 Hyderabad 5 27 32 TMK 7 26 33 Total 26 74 100 % 26% 74% 100%While replying the question either the Household has any water dis-agreement, 60% and 74%respondents from project and control areas respectively reported that they don’t have any dis-agreement on water related issues. 46

Table 33: Who Resolved Your Household's Water dis-agreement issues?District Village Clan Village Politician Court / Other None of Total Community Elders landlord (MPA/MNA) judiciary AboveProject Badin 6 81 0 0 1 4 20 Hyderabad 3 23 1 1 0 0 10 TMK 7 10 0 1 1 0 2 21 Total 16 20 4 2 2 1 6 51 % 31% 39% 8% 4% 4% 2% 12% 100%Control Badin 2 12 0 0 0 0 0 14 Hyderabad 2 21 0 0 0 05 TMK 3 3 1 1 0 0 0 8 Total 7 17 2 1 0 0 0 27 % 26% 63% 7% 4% 0% 0% 0% 100%The date reveals that village community and Clan elders were most important institutions whoresolved the water dis-agreements as reported by 31% and 39% respondents respectively followed by8% respondents who reported resolution of their problems through village land lord and 4%respondents informed that their water disagreement issues were resolved by local MPA/MNA.Section III - GenderThis section includes findings of issues related to questions with regard to Gender based involvementin natural disasters, water management and coordination etc. Table 34: Natural Disaster District Badin Yes No Total Project 37 0 37 Hyderabad 35 0 35 TMK 35 0 35 Total 107 0 107 % 100% 100% 0% Control Badin 35 0 35 Hyderabad 32 0 32 TMK 33 0 33 Total 100 0 100 % 100% 100% 0%The absolute majority of 100% respondents informed that there was natural disaster in their villageboth from project as well as control area villages. Table 35: Effect of Disaster District Badin Worst Moderate Normal Total Project Hyderabad 37 0 0 37 TMK 32 1 2 35 Control Total 35 0 0 35 104 1 2 107 % 97% 1% 2% Badin 34 0 1 100% Hyderabad 30 2 0 35 TMK 28 4 1 32 33 47

Total 92 6 2 100 % 92% 6% 2% 100%The data related to effects of disaster reveals that majority of more than 90% reported that there hadbeen worst effect of disasters on their livelihood form both project and non-project villages. Table 36: Effect of Disaster on women life District Badin Yes No Total Project 35 2 37 Hyderabad 25 10 35 TMK 35 0 35 Total 95 12 107 % 89% 11% 100% Control Badin 34 1 35 Hyderabad 26 6 32 TMK 29 4 33 Total 89 11 100 % 89% 11% 100%The data related to effect of natural disasters on life of women reveals that 89% respondents fromproject and control area villages confirmed that there had been direct effect of disasters on the life ofwomen. Table 37: Types of Effect on women life District Became Became Became poorer Total unemployed homeless Project Badin 16 35 35 89 Hyderabad 10 21 25 56 TMK 7 35 39 81 Total 33 91 88 226 % 15% 40% 44% 100% Control Badin 11 34 34 79 Hyderabad 12 25 30 67 TMK 1 28 35 64 Total 24 87 87 210 % 11% 41% 47% 100%While reporting the types of effects 44% respondents informed that women become poorer, followedby 40% respondents who were of the opinion that women became homeless due to natural disasterin project area villages. Whereas, the majority of 475 respondents from control area villages informedthat women became poorer due to natural disasters followed by 41% respondents who reported thatwomen became homeless due to natural disaster. Table 38: Effect of disaster on life of marginalized community District Badin Yes No Total Project Hyderabad 37 0 37 TMK 33 2 35 34 1 35 Total 104 3 107 % 97% 3% 100% 48

Control Badin 35 0 35 Hyderabad 31 1 32 TMK 33 0 33 Total 99 1 100 % 99% 1% 100%The data related to effect of natural disasters on the life of marginalized community reveals thataround 97% respondents form project and control area villages reported that marginalizedcommunities were affected by natural disasters. Table 39: Types of Effect on marginalized communityDistrict Became Became Became TotalProject unemployed Homeless Poorer 95Control Badin 16 37 42 70 85 Hyderabad 14 24 32 250 100% TMK 14 32 39 87 74 Total 44 93 113 83 244 % 18% 37% 45% 100% Badin 18 34 35 Hyderabad 12 25 37 TMK 12 32 39 Total 42 91 111 % 17% 37% 45%The data reveals that becoming homeless and more poor were among highest as reported by 37%and 45% respondents from both project and control area villages. Table 40: Role of women in water managementDistrict Badin Reduced Role No Role TotalProject 7 30 37 Hyderabad 3 32 35 TMK 12 23 35 Total 22 85 107 % 21% 79% 100%Control Badin 8 27 35 Hyderabad 2 30 32 TMK 5 28 33 Total 15 85 100 % 15% 85% 100%The data reveals that 79% respondents form project area and 85% respondents form control areavillages informed that women have no any role in water management. The findings of qualitative datareveals that, generally women are not involved in water management and such other issues. But insome cases, women also play role with their husbands, as informed by the female community activistfrom Tando Muhammed Khan that she works on the land and sometime manage water in absence ofher husband. 49

Table 41: Role of Women in Disagreement ResolutionDistrict Badin Reduced Role No Role TotalProject 7 30 37 Hyderabad 3 32 35 TMK 8 27 35 Total 18 89 107 % 17% 83% 100%Control Badin 8 27 35 Hyderabad 2 30 32 TMK 5 28 33 Total 15 85 100 % 15% 85% 100%The data reveals that 83% respondents form project area and 85% respondents form control areavillages informed that women have no any role in social cohesion. The findings of qualitative datasuggests that involvement of women in local dispute resolution will help reducing the number of dis-agreements as culturally women are given more respect in rural community. Table 42: Role of women in Crop SelectionDistrict Enhanced Reduced No Role TotalProject Role Role 37 35Control Badin 0 12 25 35 107 Hyderabad 1 4 30 100% TMK 0 17 18 35 32 Total 1 33 73 33 100 % 1% 31% 68% 100% Badin 0 10 25 Hyderabad 0 2 30 TMK 05 28 Total 0 17 83 % 0% 17% 83%The data reveals that 68% respondents form project area and 83% respondents form control areavillages informed that women have no any role in crop selection. The findings of qualitative data alsoreveals that women are not involved in decision making related to selection of crop for cultivation etc. Table 43: Role of women in crop managementDistrict Badin Enhanced Reduced No Role TotalProject Role Role 24 37 0 13 Hyderabad 2 3 30 35 TMK 0 18 17 35 Total 2 34 71 107 % 2% 32% 66% 100%Control Badin 0 12 23 35 Hyderabad 0 2 30 32 TMK 0 5 28 33 Total 0 19 81 100 % 0% 19% 81% 100% 50