Chapter
2:
Concept
note
sufficient
and
clean
(drinking)
water,
an
equitable,
sustainable
and
fair
use
of
resources
or
the
value
that
no
significant
harm
should
be
done
to
others.
Values
are
often
-‐
but
not
always
-‐
further
elaborated
in
principles.
Principles
differ
from
rules
and
regulations
because
of
their
more
general
character.
The
assessment
method
used
distinguishes
several
groups
of
principles,
namely
(1)
institutional
principles,
inter
alia
decentralisation,
subsidiarity,
river
basin
management,
or
integration;
(2)
principles
of
good
governance,
proportionality
and
public
participation;
(3)
specific
environmental
principles,
e.g.,
the
precautionary
principle,
the
polluter
pays
principle,
the
prevention
principle,
the
principle
that
pollution
should
preferably
be
tackled
at
the
source,
and
(4)
technical
principles,
e.g.,
from
global
design
to
detailed
design.
Conflicts
may
enlarge
or
decrease
depending
on
the
policy
discourses
in
which
they
are
framed.
Framing
is
a
three-‐fold
process
of
selection,
focusing
and
embedding
(Dewulf
et
al.,
2011).
People
frame
issues
by
identifying
certain
aspects
of
a
complex
problem
domain
(a
process
of
selection),
by
placing
certain
aspects
in
the
foreground
and
others
in
the
background
(a
process
of
focusing)
and
by
using
certain
aspects
as
the
overarching
elements
within
which
the
rest
fit
(a
process
of
embedding).
For
the
purposes
of
the
Yemen
study,
values,
principles
and
policy
discourses
are
extremely
relevant.
Important
here
are
traditional,
religious
and
universal
values
as
the
concept
of
water
as
a
public
or
common
good,
priority
for
basic
needs,
equality,
sustainability
and
so
on
based
on
human
rights,
Shari’ah,
customary
law,
the
constitution,
the
Civil
Code
and
the
Water
Law,
but
we
see
also
principles
as
‘first
come,
first
serve’.
Religious
and
other
power
generating
institutions
seem
to
be
of
great
importance,
neglecting
other
values
and
principles
and
thus
leading
to
conflicts.
This
can
be
derived
from
the
legal
analysis
and
the
interviews
and
literature.
2.6.3
C:
Dispute
regulation
mechanisms
Which
solutions
have
been
tried
and
why?
What
are
the
arrangements
and
practices
used
and
newly
established?
Preventing
conflicts
by
sound
mechanisms
to
create
service
level
agreements
with
attention
for
trade-‐offs
In
the
Yemen
context,
the
economics
of
water
management
is
about
the
allocation
of
scarce
resources,
mainly
focussing
on
water
quantity,
but
also
on
water
quality.
Allocation
is
not
only
a
legal
or
economic
instrument
but
also
a
political
bargaining
process.
The
objectives
that
should
guide
allocation
decisions
should
be
clear
just
as
the
principles
of
equitable
access,
economic
efficiency,
sustainability
and
customary
norms
and
values.
Yemen,
in
a
similar
vein
as
many
other
countries,
recognizes
the
need
for
reforming
their
water
allocation.
The
implementation
of
new
water
allocation
mechanisms
will
have
various
implications,
which
make
the
political
economy
of
the
reform
of
water
policies
complex
and
very
vulnerable
for
conflicts.
Service
level
agreements
have
to
be
translated
into
rules,
regulations
and
procedures
and
will
often
use
explicit
or
even
implicit
water
allocation
mechanisms
(e.g.,
rationing,
pricing,
or
markets
or
based
on
tradition
ways
of
allocation
like
Dyala,
Former
of
the
First
&
Supreme
to
High,
as
we
have
seen
in
the
Yemen
study).
The
suitability
of
rules
and
allocation
mechanisms
to
prevent
or
solve
conflicts
depend
on
the
time
and
the
geographical
scales,
but
also
on
the
values
they
are
based
upon.
Property
rights
The
identification
of
responsibilities
and
authorities
with
respect
to
water
starts
with
the
determination
of
property
rights.
Four
traditional
types
of
ownership
are
identified
in
literature:
(1)
private
property,
(2)
The Political Economy in Yemen of Water Management: Conflict Analysis and Recommendations
47
of
241