by Gert Jan Veldwisch
Chin-A-Fo, H., G.J.A.Veldwisch and P. Waalewijn (2003). Critical Path for Participatory Irrigation Development. Positioning paper produced as part of an MSc thesis. Wageningen University.
The issues described in the positioning paper call for a practical crystallisation. We used a model of an irrigation... more
The issues described in the positioning paper call for a practical crystallisation. We used a model of an irrigation intervention designed by Boelens (unpublished). It sketches an ideal intervention that, in our opinion, leaves ample room for the issues we describe in our positioning paper. The core is an iterative and integrated development of the infrastructural, organisational and normative aspects of an irrigation system in full co-operation with future users and relevant institutions. It is not a design manual, it does not give a stepwise intervention program or checklist. We do acknowledge the value of such bodies of literature, but found that the way such manuals are used is equally important. This critical path tries to give a more holistic overview of interactive development in which design practices should be embedded. Before explaining the how and what, we would like to make two remarks to the reader:
1) The critical path is to a large extent addressed to an imaginary intervener. During our research we focussed largely on the role of the intervener (a/o irrigation specialist) within an intervention process. We realise that there is a wide array of possible working environments in which you as the reader (and we as writers) might come into contact with irrigation reform interventions. A more generalised account or further elaboration of all possible positions would be needed to make the path more comprehensive. The first would in our view loose its practicality and the second would require too much tailor-making. So we chose to delimit ourselves to the position of the intervener. This means that if you have another background or position you will have to translate the issues and strategies to your specific situation. There are ample opportunities for that, since the intervener is only one of the nodes in the web of the intervention.
2) The intervener is addressed in singular. Interveners come in the plural however. The intervener can very well be a team of professionals. There is an internal dynamic within this group that plays a decisive role on the outcome of the intervention. Neglecting the need for good cooperation, communication, mutual guiding, fine-tuning, delegation, etc etc within the intervening team would invariably cause major problems in the different phases of the execution. It has not been a specific topic of our research, however, and therefore we will to some extent leave aside these questions. For professionals within an intervention team, the same counts as for those addressed under the first remark: try to translate the issues to your own situation, with your specific working environment. A little more is added in the pre-preparation phase. The path consists of 5 different phases:
pre-preparation This phase precedes the inception of any intervention. In this phase the conditions under which the intervener intervenes are shaped.
preparation This is the start of the actual intervention. It deals with gathering information, organising stakeholder and negotiating the intervention.
intermediate In this phase negotiations and activities of the preparation phase boil down to a plan of action and an agreement between intervener and the stakeholders.
execution On basis of prior negotiations and arrangements the infrastructure is built, the organisation is further shaped, rules are fine-tuned and legal and institutional setting are solidified.
post-execution Evaluation and follow up are ensured, and ongoing partnership with the stakeholders is sought.
Each phase gives the main activities that will normally be undertaken. The list cannot possibly and should therefore not be seen as exhaustive, nor as as applicable in every intervention. That would lead us back to a blue-print approach. Not all phases might be applicable, nor does it have to be a linear process. The path serves as a mind-catcher, not as checklist. We think it could be a creative source of inspiration at specific points in time. We provided a forum on which you can address these issues and exchange thoughts on it with other practitioners and researchers.
The critical path we present here consists for each activity of five headings:
Description shortly describes the activity within the larger framework
Strategy gives a basic strategy for applying the concepts of the positioning paper in the practice of the intervention.
Issues and questions for reflection based on the strategy, several issues can be distinguished with questions that can be used to reflect on the activities in this phase.
Suggestions are of a very practical level concerning the specific activity and are mostly based directly on answers of participants in the Delphi Process or of the interviews.
Examples are taken from the same sources and used as illustrations for what is said above, as well as to give insight in alternative possibilities.
Several of the Delphi respondents had reacted that taking part in our research process was an opportunity for reflection. We hope that this critical path will continue to provide this opportunity.
Download (.pdf) 
