62) decentralised governance of irrigation water in cambodia - CDRI

In DAP, where the irrigation system runs through several villages, water allocation
conflicts had arisen annually as villagers from Kandeung Meas village, located near the lower
part of the secondary canal, would close the canal that takes water to the upper villages of
Khma and Thnous Tachap to use the water for their own purposes. Farmers from Kna and
Thnous Tachap reported their anger at this annual conflict over water supply.
5.4.2 Regional Coordination
Theoretically, communication mechanisms between PDOWRAM and FWUC committees
seemed to be well established in each of the case-study schemes, but not in practice. Coordination
at this level had some failings, primarily with regard to ineffective training and
lack of financial resources. Other important relationships at a larger than local scale include
that between local government bodies and private companies, donor agencies, other provincial
government departments (e.g. PDAFF) and the relationship between neighbouring FWUCs
that rely on i.e. share the same body of water (e.g. in the case of DAP).
The PDOWRAM and FWUC committees of all three case-study schemes communicate
on a regular basis, which is partly because all of the schemes are not far from PDOWRAM
offices. A PDOWRAM officer would often come to the scheme and meet with one or some
of the FWUC members to assess the water levels in the fields and advise on the opening and
closing of the head-structures. In this fashion, the PDOWRAM provided technical assistance
to the irrigation schemes.
PDOWRAM has maintained close support for the DAP FWUC over the past two to
three years. After the irrigation system was built, PDOWRAM continued to be very closely
involved with management decisions within the scheme so as to build the FWUC’s technical
knowledge and independence. At the time of study it was reported that all water allocation
decisions had been made through consultation and consensus between the FWUC committee
and PDOWRAM. For example, whenever the FWUC wanted to open a head-structure to allow
water into a particular rice field, they would wait for approval from PDOWRAM so as to
avoid any unforeseen negative consequences. While this cooperation and consultation was
commendable, the Pursat PDOWRAM believed that they should ultimately be trying to help the
FWUCs to become more independent and self-reliant in managing their scheme. Stung Chinit
and Rolous received less detailed support from PDOWRAM; for example, in Rolous (before
the new private company investment) PDOWRAM donated a big water pump to the north-west
part of the scheme but failed to follow up with on-the-ground technical advice. Farmer reports
from Stung Chinit and Rolous suggest that the PDOWRAM should give technical assistance
when the FWUC and the farmers cannot resolve issues themselves.
Water conflict issues in DAP happen on a wider geographic scale than in the other two
case study schemes as the DAP scheme (located in Bakan district, Pursat province) is within
the same catchment as Mong Russei district in Battambang province and shares the same
main river source as a number of other irrigation schemes, both upstream and downstream.
The farmers in the DAP scheme had recently increased their production of dry season rice
despite being warned of physical water shortages by PDOWRAM and the FWUC committee.
PDOWRAM and the FWUC were unable to effectively prevent these farmers from trying to
grow dry season rice as their livelihoods depend on the extra resources. PDOWRAM had often
been asked to assess the hydrological situation and decide whether it would be beneficial to
release water from upstream schemes as neither the FWUCs nor the district authorities had
the capacity or authority to make this decision and negotiate water allocation agreements at
28 Decentralised Governance of Irrigation Water in Cambodia: Matching Principles to Local Realities