Chapter
2:
Concept
note
Stage
3:
Political
and
institutional
feasibility
Potential
fit
and
misfit
of
solutions
with
existing
institutional
arrangements
– In
terms
of
Moss’
components,
how
is
the
management
of
water
resources
institutionally
configured?
– Which
political
and
institutional
arrangements
and
processes
are
most
relevant
to
implementing
solutions?
– What
kind
of
institutional
configuration
might
the
proposed
solutions
require?
– How
compatible
are
the
requirements
of
the
proposed
solution
with
the
existing
arrangements
and
processes?
What
level
of
fit/misfit
exists
between
the
proposed
solutions
and
existing
institutional
arrangements?
– Overall,
how
feasible
do
solutions
appear
to
be?
Stage
4:
Ways
forward
Most
appropriate
means
of
implementing
solutions
and
promoting
more
favorable
institutional
and
policy
contexts
In
terms
of
solutions
with
a
high
degree
of
fit:
– What
specific
measures
and
resources
are
required
to
implement
solutions?
– Who
should
be
included/consulted
in
implementation?
– How
long
would
it
take?
And
how
should
costs
and
benefits
be
equitably
distributed?
In
terms
of
solutions
with
a
low
degree
of
fit:
– What
will
be
the
benefits
of
institutional
and
policy
reform
and
how
will
these
benefits
be
distributed?
– What
will
be
the
costs
and
who
will
bear
them?
– Who
will
be
the
bearers
of
institutional
transformation?
Who
will
constitute
the
coalition
of
interest
groups
to
push
forward
and
implement
the
change?
– Around
which
storylines/issues
can
such
efforts
be
organized
most
productively?
– How
can
these
coalitions
be
supported?
– What
can
realistically
be
done
to
adapt
the
enabling
and
– Constraining
conditions
for
this
institutional
transformation?
– How
can
knowledge
producers
and
processors
such
as
project
researchers
and
managers,
consultants
and
reflective
practitioners
play
a
more
active
role
in
this
process?
The Political Economy in Yemen of Water Management: Conflict Analysis and Recommendations
40
of
241