Abstract/Summary

The study seeks out the factors that enable or constrain the good governance of common pool resources in Cambodia, using irrigation water as the case for analysis. It explores the dynamics of community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) and decentralised natural resource management (DNRM) from a local perspective and how these two approaches interact. The study found that CBNRM, an approach that is being implemented locally to manage irrigation water, is working, although unsatisfactorily due to three main constraints. The first is difficulty maintaining the participation of the community in the form of paying irrigation service fees. CBNRM in the selected area initially generated much enthusiasm but is very fragile due to outside factors, one of which is the uncertainty of the water flow, a technical and natural issue beyond the capacity of the local managing association. The second constraint is that people have no sense of ownership of the managing association. Given their scepticism of higher institutions, the farmer water user association is seen by most as just another level of state authority in which officials put their own interests before those of the community. The non-transparent election of the association leaders, the usual patron personality of the leaders who are autocratic in their thinking, decision-making and implementing of plans and the lack of an independent information system, making the data on revenue collection and expenditure not transparent, are but a few examples that worsen the situation. The third constraint is the limited power of the FWUC due to low management skills, poor networks and very limited revenue. This factor has been exacerbated by the flawed relationship between the association leader and the commune chief, pushing the two “should be cooperating” institutes to avoid each other. DNRM seemed not to be functioning in the selected case. Commune intervention was seen once in a while but also was not effective. The study found disconnections between the FWUC and the commune council, and between the leaders and the led.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.64202/wp.47.201008