Une action collective analysée par ses acteurs : une association d’irrigants en Tunisie

Mustapha, Azza Ben; Faysse, Nicolas; Marlet, Serge; Jamin, Jean-Yves

doi:10.1051/nss/2015055

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, these problems are concealed within the conflictual relation at the interface between farmers/WUAs/state. WUAs have often diagnosed mediocre performance (Ben Mustapha et al, ). Obsolescence and lack of maintenance of the system cause frequent incidents at all levels, while the shared responsibility is the source of frequent misunderstandings, or even conflicts, between individual farmers, WUAs and the state.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Participation in a Complex and Conflicting Context: Implementing a Shared Diagnosis in a Northern Tunisia Irrigation Scheme

Hanafi

Marlet

Jamin

et al. 2018

Irrigation and Drainage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Promoting innovation to improve both productivity and sustainability of irrigated farming systems is crucial for the first question addressed within the Sustainable Development Goals process led by the United Nations. This is a complex task that requires methods and processes which include a diversity of knowledge. For this reason, participatory approaches have been increasingly encouraged. A broad range of methods have been developed in the literature. However, debates on the effectiveness of the results, including questions on how different stakeholders influence results and how the context influences platform processes, remain theoretical. In this article, the authors evaluate the results of a participatory diagnosis aiming to identify the constraints and possible innovations to improve agricultural production in the Brahmi irrigation scheme in Tunisia. The process was implemented with individual interviews and focus groups operationalized through two types of platforms, 'Community of Practice (CoP)' and 'Learning and Practice Alliance (LPA)'. We highlighted that both CoP and LPA offer fruitful platforms for the interaction of all stakeholders. However, the results could be biased by the context and the expectations and strategies of powerful participants. RÉSUMÉPromouvoir l'innovation pour améliorer la productivité et la durabilité des systèmes agricoles irrigués est crucial pour répondre aux premiers objectifs du développement durable promu par les Nations Unies. Cette tâche exige l'effort de diverses disciplines. Les approches participatives ont donc été de plus en plus encouragées et développées dans la littérature. Cependant, les débats sur la qualité des résultats, y compris des questions sur les biais relatifs au type des parties prenantes et au contexte, restent théoriques. Dans cet article, les auteurs évaluent un diagnostic participatif visant à identifier les contraintes et les innovations possibles pour améliorer la production agricole dans un périmètre irrigué en Tunisie. Le processus a été mis en oeuvre d'une part avec des entretiens individuels et d'autre part avec des ateliers collectifs à travers deux types de plates-formes, Communauté de pratique (CoP) et Forum d'échange d'expérience (LPA). CoP et LPA offrent tous deux une plate-forme fructueuse pour l'interaction de toutes les parties prenantes. Cependant, les résultats peuvent être biaisés par le contexte, les attentes et les stratégies des participants puissants. Les entretiens individuels sont complémentaires des ateliers collectifs, en particulier dans les situations où des conflits ouverts ou latents existent.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Participation in a Complex and Conflicting Context: Implementing a Shared Diagnosis in a Northern Tunisia Irrigation Scheme

Hanafi

Marlet

Jamin

et al. 2018

Irrigation and Drainage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Tunisia, only 25% of WUAs succeeded in covering their entire operation and maintenance costs, while 25% of them covered even less than 50% and were still subsidized by the government (Al Atiri, 2007;Marlet and Mnajja, 2017). However, problems differ from one WUA to another, with only some associations eligible to be considered efficient (Al Atiri, 2007;Ben Mustapha et al, 2015;Marlet and Mnajja, 2017;Ben Mustapha and Fyasse, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Water users associations and irrigation water use efficiency in costal oases areas of Gabes, South-eastern Tunisia

Mahdhi¹

2021

New Medit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to measure the efficiency level of Water Users Associations (WUAs) in the coastal oases of Gabès (South-Est of Tunisia) and assessing its main determinants. First, an input-oriented data envelopment analysis (DEA) was used to measure the relative efficiency scores of WUAs and to evaluate the management and maintenance costs sub-vectors efficiencies separately through a mathematical modification in the initial DEA specification. In a second stage, critical determinants of sub-vector efficiency are determined by applying a Tobit model. A key finding of the study is that WUAs are clearly inefficient. Results show that on average, 38% of the used inputs could be saved if the WUAs operated on the frontier. The inefficiency found can be mainly attributed to the number of water pumping stations managed, the ratio of water losses and WUAs' age. The results also show a discrepancy between the technical efficiency values calculated under the CRS and VRS assumptions, resulting in a 20% scale inefficiency. The study also revealed that the sub-vector inefficiency of WUAs is more linked with engineering inefficiencies than to their management inefficiencies.

show abstract

“…Ben Mustapha (2016) showed that, within the same water user association, the types of coalitions between actors differed significantly from one issue to another. This applies both to the actors involved and to their position on the gradient.…”

Section: Two Examples Of Analyses Using a Meso-validity Scalementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, Shah's assessment of 100 cooperatives across India is situated at a higher level than Ben Mustapha's study (2016) of three irrigation schemes in northern and central Tunisia. Concomitantly, Shah (1995) and Ben Mustapha (2016 Shah's assessment of cases of collective action was much less detailed than that undertaken by Ben Mustapha.…”

Section: Finding Common Ground Between Theories Of Collective Actionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, in one case, farmers considered that the association's main goal was to meet the members' needs. However, the civil servants in the administration in charge of monitoring water user associations considered that the association's main goal was to ensure that the irrigation infrastructure was used sustainably (see also Ben Mustapha et al 2015).…”

Section: Two Examples Of Analyses Using a Meso-validity Scalementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Finding common ground between theories of collective action: the potential of analyses at a meso-scale

Faysse¹,

Mustapha²

2017

International Journal of the Commons

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The theories of collective action relating to natural resource management and agricultural development are often considered to be polarized. The theories are divided into institutional economics with a focus on social dilemmas and sociology/anthropology. This article reviews the attempts to find common ground between the two groups. Several studies in sociology and anthropology have pointed out weaknesses in the approaches based on institutional economics. However, the criticisms have failed to trigger serious debate. Studies in each group have taken the initiative to "reach out" to the other, but so far the results have been limited. This article proposes an alternative approach to finding common ground between both groups. This involves focusing on the scales of validity of the research, i.e. the scale at which research results are considered valid. Many studies use or develop theoretical bases and build methodologies in order to obtain results that are deemed to be valid at a local or global scale. Other approaches use a meso-validity scale, e.g. one economic sector or one type of natural resource in a specific region. Some of these approaches organize a structured comparison between different cases of collective action and, at the same time, address the criticisms made by sociologists and anthropologists with regard to the approaches used in institutional economics. Research at a meso-validity scale can help establish common ground between the two main groups of theories concerned by collective action.

show abstract

Une action collective analysée par ses acteurs : une association d’irrigants en Tunisie

Cited by 10 publications

References 11 publications

Participation in a Complex and Conflicting Context: Implementing a Shared Diagnosis in a Northern Tunisia Irrigation Scheme

Participation in a Complex and Conflicting Context: Implementing a Shared Diagnosis in a Northern Tunisia Irrigation Scheme

Water users associations and irrigation water use efficiency in costal oases areas of Gabes, South-eastern Tunisia

Finding common ground between theories of collective action: the potential of analyses at a meso-scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About