2004
DOI: 10.1002/ird.139
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Participatory management: Would it be a turning point in the history of the Gezira scheme?

Abstract: Since its establishment in 1925 decisions in the Sudan's Gezira irrigated scheme have been top-down from the central headquarters of the Sudan Gezira Board (SGB). The irrigation system is divided into the upper system (US) that includes the dam, main, branch and major canals and the lower system that comprises the minor, tertiary and field channels. The Ministry of Irrigation and Water Resources (MOIWR) is responsible for the O&M of the US in addition to the maintenance of the Minor canals. The operation of th… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the second category, a central agency (private or government) is responsible for main‐system operation and maintenance, whereas WUAs are responsible for water management at subsystems, typiczally at the tertiary level [ Groenfeldt and Svendsen , 2000; Hearne , 2004; Johnson et al , 2004]. WUAs do not arise spontaneously in most cases but are imposed on farmers in a top‐down way by national governments, NGOs, and international donors [ Abdelhadi et al , 2004; N'Khoma and Mulwafu , 2004; Jamin et al , 2005]. In the process, existing forms of organization are frequently neglected despite the fact that the importance of involving local decision makers in setting up WUAs and building upon existing organizational capacity has been repeatedly pointed out [ Meinzen‐Dick and Reidinger , 1995; Vermillion and Sagardoy , 1999; Mosse , 1999; Sokile and van Koppen , 2004; Maganga et al , 2004].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the second category, a central agency (private or government) is responsible for main‐system operation and maintenance, whereas WUAs are responsible for water management at subsystems, typiczally at the tertiary level [ Groenfeldt and Svendsen , 2000; Hearne , 2004; Johnson et al , 2004]. WUAs do not arise spontaneously in most cases but are imposed on farmers in a top‐down way by national governments, NGOs, and international donors [ Abdelhadi et al , 2004; N'Khoma and Mulwafu , 2004; Jamin et al , 2005]. In the process, existing forms of organization are frequently neglected despite the fact that the importance of involving local decision makers in setting up WUAs and building upon existing organizational capacity has been repeatedly pointed out [ Meinzen‐Dick and Reidinger , 1995; Vermillion and Sagardoy , 1999; Mosse , 1999; Sokile and van Koppen , 2004; Maganga et al , 2004].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If some stakeholders do not have the capacity, organization, status, or resources to participate, or to participate on an equal footing with other stakeholders, the collaborative governance process will be prone to manipulation by stronger actors. The problem of power imbalances is particularly problematic where important stakeholders do not have the organizational infrastructure to be represented (Abdelhadi & Hassan, 2016).…”
Section: Collaborative Governance Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The participation of local farmers in the maintenance and operation of the local irrigation system contributes to irrigation sustainability and the higher crop yields [43][44][45][46]. Irrigation management strategies formulated and implemented by the farmers proved more successful and sustainable than the state-initiated irrigation strategies [47].…”
Section: Participation In the Irrigation Operationmentioning
confidence: 99%