Vupenyu Dzingirai and Rumbidzai Mashava CASS, UZ.

Introduction For some time CASS has been conducting prolonged and extensive studies in search of a model for water resources management. In this presentation concern is on Women and Water Resources Management, This is area that is frequently overlooked.

Why institutions? Institutions are important because they do two things. They are (i) A representation mechanism on water issues. (ii) a platform for users to air views to those critical in resource management. ◦ All these are necessary ingredients for empowerment and enhanced water resource delivery. ◦ This is the rationale for CASS engagement with the topic in multi resource, in wildlife, forestry and even water. ◦ This is the reason why CASS engaged the issue of women and institutions.

Study objectives 1. To investigate how women prefer the form of want representation 2. To document the operational character of the preferred institution. 3. To investigate how women ‘s preferred institution link up with others outside. 4. To investigate the focus and essence of the preferred institution.

Methodology Methods used were: Case study- Informant interviews, eg with irrigatiors Participant observation involving visits to water resources such as dams irrigations and boreholes Focused group eg with women at schemes Methods were ethically sound and efficient but there is a possibility of data slippage. Planned workshops as contexts for input and verification.

Findings 1- Representation women were found to prefer personal representation rather than that which is mediated Within the IWRM framework women meant being afforded the right to decision making visa vis water issues.

Finding 2: operational character of preferred institution women preferred what can be termed ‘gender-based institutional sensitivity’ They preferred an institution operating with women’s situated lives in mind. – As busy class women preferred a labour-saving institution. – As a socially conscious group women wanted an institution respecting their integrity.

Findings 3: Focus and essence of preferred institution it appeared that women preferred an institution that privileged delivery of water resources. Thus they preferred an institution that Provided improved water access - Makwe Assisted in the repair of water infrastructure e.g Guyu. Provided affordable water- Makwe and Guyu.

Finding 4: Connectivity and linkages For some scholars institutions that work are often simple as opposed to institutional plurality Against this view women were interested in an institution that networked users in 2 ways:- (i) bringing water resource users together (ii) Linking local users to outside levels

A gender-based institutional model Local users women Other user associations State Institutions, sub catchment council

Conclusion What is clear from the study is that women have a distinct preference regarding appropriate institutions. What men and other social groupings want in relationship to institutional issues is not necessarily what women prefer. They prefer institutions that deliver water in ways that reflect their situated lives. This is the view that emerged and one that provided the researchers with a perspective in the final Workshop.

Challenges The more serious challenge is defending the model from threats and risks. The task therefore is to make the preferred institution more robust and resilient to outlive these threats

Last word: Institutions are not occasions for eating. THANK YOU!