Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Mapping Social Networks for Performance Evaluation of Irrigation Water Management in Dry Areas

  • Published:
Environmental Modeling & Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Collaboration between actors is an important determinant of water governance, particularly in developing countries suffering from lack of institutional and organizational performances for water management. The objective of this paper is to use the social network (SN) concept in bringing depth to the understanding of local irrigation governance in three irrigated schemes located in dry regions of southern Tunisia. Local stakeholders in the considered schemes interact around different water-related issues. These include authorizations for access to water, extension services for irrigated crops, training on the use of irrigation technologies, and finance and subsidies of irrigation water saving equipment. We considered each of these types of interactions as different tie and we mapped social networks around each of them. For each network, actors’ densities, frequencies, and weight were reported. The results were revealing that better performances of water management are observed in areas with high SN density and high centrality of water users’ associations. The relative “weights” of actors in the three considered areas were significantly different, indicating that the application of a standard decentralization process of irrigation water may result in different local organizational arrangements, depending on patterns of social interactions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mills, M., Álvarez-Romero, J. G., Vance-Borland, K., Cohen, P., Pressey, R. L., Guerrero, A. M., & Ernstson, H. (2014). Linking regional planning and local action: towards using social network analysis in systematic conservation planning. Biological Conservation, 169, 6–13. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2013.10.015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Lienert, J., Schnetzer, F., & Ingold, K. (2013). Stakeholder analysis combined with social network analysis provides fine-grained insights into water infrastructure planning processes. Journal of Environmental Management, 125, 134–148. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.03.052.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bodin, Ö., & Crona, B. I. (2009). The role of social networks in natural resource governance: what relational patterns make a difference? Global Environmental Change, 19(3), 366–374. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.05.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Carlsson, L. G., & Sandström, A. C. (2007, November 11). Network governance of the commons. International Journal of the Commons. Retrieved from http://www.thecommonsjournal.org/index.php/ijc/article/view/URN:NBN:NL:UI:10-IJC-08003

  5. Bodin, Ö., Crona, B., & Ernstson, H. (2006). Social networks in natural resource management: what is there to learn from a structural perspective. Ecology and Society, 11(2), p2 .http://www.ecologyand society.org/vol11/iss2/resp2/

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dietz, T., Ostrom, E., & Stern, P. C. (2003). The struggle to govern the commons. Science (New York, N.Y.), 302(5652), 1907–1912. doi:10.1126/science.1091015.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: the evolution of institutionsfor collective action. Cambridge University Press.

  8. Pretty, J. (2003). Social capital and the collective management of resources. Science (New York, N.Y.), 302(5652), 1912–1914. doi:10.1126/science.1090847.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Sjah, T., & Baldwin, C. (2014). Options for future effective water management in Lombok: a multi-level nested framework. Journal of Hydrology, 519, 2448–2455. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.07.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Stein, C., Ernstson, H., & Barron, J. (2011). A social network approach to analyzing water governance: the case of the Mkindo catchment, Tanzania. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C, 36(14–15), 1085–1092. doi:10.1016/j.pce.2011.07.083.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Frija, A., Speelman, S., Chebil, A., Buysse, J., & Van Huylenbroeck, G. (2009). Assessing the efficiency of irrigation water users’ associations and its determinants: evidence from Tunisia. Irrigation and Drainage, 58(5), 538–550. doi:10.1002/ird.446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Frija, A., Wossink, A., Buysse, J., Speelman, S., & Van Huylenbroeck, G. (2011). Irrigation pricing policies and its impact on agricultural inputs demand in Tunisia: a DEA-based methodology. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(9), 2109–2118 Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21524839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Faysse, N., Hartani, T., Frija, A., Tazekrit, I., Zairi, C., & Challouf, A. (2011). Agricultural use of groundwater and management initiatives in the Maghreb: challenges and opportunities for sustainable aquifer exploitation.

  14. Frija, A., Chebil, A., Speelman, S., & Faysse, N. (2014). A critical assessment of groundwater governance in Tunisia. Water Policy, 16(2), 358–373. doi:10.2166/wp.2013.038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Frija, A. 2009. Efficiency analysis of irrigation water demand institutions in Tunisia. PhD thesis, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

  16. Frija, A., Chebil, A., Dhehibi, B., Villholth, K. 2016. Performance evaluation of groundwater management instruments: the case of irrigation sector in Tunisia. Groundwater for Sustainable Development, doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2015.12.001

  17. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: methods and applications (1 ed. Retrieved from http://www.amazon.com/Social-Network-Analysis-Applications-Structural/dp/0521387078). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. Prell, C., Hubacek, K., & Reed, M. (2009). Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. Society & Natural Resources, 22(6), 501–518. doi:10.1080/08941920802199202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Grootaert, C., & Van Bastelaer, T. (2001). Understanding and measuring social capital: a synthesis of findings and recommendations from the social capital initiative.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Borgatti, S. (2003). The network paradigm in organizational research: a review and typology. Journal of Management, 29(6), 991–1013. doi:10.1016/S0149-2063(03)00087-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Crona, B., & Bodin, O. (2006). What you know is who you know? Communication patterns among resource users as a prerequisite for co-management. Ecol. Society, 11(2), 7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Scholz, J. T., & Wang, C.-L. (2006). Cooptation or transformation? Local policy networks and federal regulatory enforcement. American Journal of Political Science, 50, 81–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pahl-Wostl, C., Holtz, G., Kastens, B., & Knieper, C. (2010). Analyzing complex water governance regimes: the management and transition framework. Environmental Science & Policy, 13(7), 571–581. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2010.08.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. López-Gunn, E. (2012). Groundwater governance and social capital. Geoforum, 43(6), 1140–1151. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2012.06.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lubell, M., & Fulton, A. (2007). Local policy networks and agricultural watershed management. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 673–696. doi:10.1093/jopart/mum031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ostrom, E., Janssen, M. A., & Anderies, J. M. (2007). Going beyond panaceas. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(39), 15176–15178. doi:10.1073/pnas.0701886104.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Knox, A., and Meinzen-Dick, R. (2001). Workshop on collective action, property rights and devolution of natural resource management: exchange of knowledge and implication for policy. A workshop summary paper. CAPRi Working Paper No. 11, Washington, D.C., IFPRI.

  29. CRDA. (2011, 2013). Annual reports of the agricultural sector in the Governorate of Gabes. Administrative (unpublished reports). Ministry of Agriculture. Tunisia

  30. Ingold, K. (2014). How involved are they really? A comparative network analysis of the institutional drivers of local actor inclusion. Land Use Policy, 39, 376–387. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.01.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Paletto, A., Ferretti, F., & De Meo, I. (2012). The role of social networks in forest landscape planning. Forest Policy and Economics, 15, 132–139. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2011.11.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Brummel, R. F., Nelson, K. C., & Jakes, P. J. (2012). Burning through organizational boundaries? Examining inter-organizational communication networks in policy-mandated collaborative bushfire planning groups. Global Environmental Change, 22(2), 516–528. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.12.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Diani, M. (2003). “Leaders” or brokers? Positions and influence in social movement networks. In M. Diani & D. McAdam (Eds.), Social movements and networks: relational approaches to collective action (pp. 105–122). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Sandström, A., & Carlsson, L. (2008). The performance of policy networks: the relation between network structure and network performance. Policy Studies Journal, 36(4), 497–524. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00281.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Hanneman, R. A., & Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network methods. California: Riverside.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Freeman, L. C. (1978). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215–239. doi:10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). UCINET 6 for Windows Software for Social Network Analysis. Harvard.

  38. Ramirez, A. (2013). The influence of social networks on agricultural technology adoption. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 79, 101–116. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.05.059.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Zhou, Q. (2013). Decentralized irrigation in China: an institutional analysis. Policy and Society, 32(1), 77–88. doi:10.1016/j.polsoc.2013.02.003.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Wilder, M., & Romero Lankao, P. (2006). Paradoxes of decentralization: water reform and social implications in Mexico. World Development, 34(11), 1977–1995. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.11.026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Sarker, A., Itoh, T., Kada, R., Abe, T., Nakashima, M., & Herath, G. (2014). User self-governance in a complex policy design for managing water commons in Japan. Journal of Hydrology, 510, 246–258. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.12.034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Araral, E. (2009). What explains collective action in the commons? Theory and evidence from the Philippines. World Development, 37(3), 687–697. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2008.08.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Srinivasan, V., & Kulkarni, S. (2014). Examining the emerging role of groundwater in water inequity in India. Water International, 39(2), 172–186. doi:10.1080/02508060.2014.890998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry areas (ICARDA), Social, Economics and Policy Research Program (SEPRP), Bldg no. 13, Khalid Abu Dalbouh St. Abdoun, PO Box 950764, Amman, 11195, Jordan

    Aymen Frija

  2. Institut Agronomique Méditerranéen de Montpellier (IAMM), 3191 Route de Mende, 34090, Montpellier, France

    Abderraouf Zaatra

  3. Institut Supérieur Agronomique de Chott-Mariem, BP 47, 4042, Chott-Mariem (Sousse), Tunisia

    Iheb Frija

  4. Ecole Supérieure d’Agriculture de Mograne (ESAM), 1121, Mograne, Zaghouan, Tunisia

    Hassen AbdelHafidh

Authors
  1. Aymen Frija
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Abderraouf Zaatra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Iheb Frija
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hassen AbdelHafidh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aymen Frija.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Frija, A., Zaatra, A., Frija, I. et al. Mapping Social Networks for Performance Evaluation of Irrigation Water Management in Dry Areas. Environ Model Assess 22, 147–158 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-016-9527-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-016-9527-1

Keywords