Your search found 20 records
1 Pihar, R. S.; Singh, N.. 1988. A study into institutional finance for the agriculture sector in Punjab. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 43(3)381-389.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: PER Record No: H05256)
2 Singh, N.. 1988. Bhutan: A kingdom in the Himalayas. 3rd ed. New Delhi, India: S. Chad & Co. xviii, 258p.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: 915.49 G586 SIN Record No: H05322)
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: PER Record No: H01371)
4 Singh, K.; Sandhu, H. S.; Singh, N.; Kumar, B. 1991. Kandi watershed and area development project: Cost benefit analysis of investments in two watersheds. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 46(2):132-141.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: PER Record No: H04363)
5 Singh, N.; Singh, S.; Sharma, K. D. 1992. Identification and mapping saline-alkali wastelands in Jodhpur district Western Rajasthan using remote sensing techniques. Annals of Arid Zone, 31(4):247-254.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: P 2742 Record No: H012563)
6 Singh, K.; Singh, N.; Singh, R. P. 1996. Utilisation and development of common property resources: A field study in Punjab. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 51(1/2):249-259.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: PER Record No: H019170)
7 Moore, M.; Choudhary, M.; Singh, N.. 1998. How can we know what they want?: Understanding local perceptions of poverty and ill-being in Asia. Brighton, UK: IDS. 25p. (IDS working paper 80)
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: 339.46 G570 MOO Record No: H024576)
8 Crow, B.; Singh, N.. 2000. Impediments and innovation in international rivers: The waters of South Asia. World Development, 28(11):1907-1925.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: P 5571 Record No: H027361)
9 Richards, A.; Singh, N.. 2001. No easy exit: Property rights, markets, and negotiations over water. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 17(3):409-425.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: PER Record No: H028657)
10 Richards, A.; Singh, N.. 2002. Inter-state water disputes in India: Institutions and policies. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 18(4):611-625.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: PER Record No: H031243)
(0.19 MB)
11 Singh, N.. 2003. Occult precipitation: That is to say, water from fog. Down To Earth, 11(22):49-51.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: P 6309 Record No: H031768)
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: PER Record No: H033239)
(0.26 MB)
13 Singh, N.; Jain, K. K. 2004. Long-term impact evaluation of watershed development projects in Punjab. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 59(3):321-330.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: PER Record No: H035986)
14 Singh, N.. 2003. Perspectives on emergence and growth of microfinance sector. Asia-Pacific Journal of Rural Development, 13(2):95-108.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: PER Record No: H036110)
15 Singh, N.; Jacks, G.; Bhattacharya, P. 2005. Women and community water supply programmes: An analysis from a socio-cultural perspective. Natural Resources Forum, 29(3):213-223.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: PER Record No: H037812)
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: PER Record No: H038648)
17 Singh, N.. 2006. Indigenous water management systems: interpreting symbolic dimensions in common property resource regimes. Society and Natural Resources, 19:357-366.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: P 7698 Record No: H039581)
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H041375)
Nandita Singh and her colleagues look at children’s right to water in India. They argue for the exercise of the right by children by analyzing the universal normative-legal framework and its difference to the local socio-culturally defined framework. They suggest that defining problems and designing actions only within the normative-legal framework can obscure understanding the critical realities at the right-holders’ end. They suggest that interventions at various levels, such as through policy and targeted programmes, have at best provided an ‘enabling environment’, but the process of implementation of children’s rights at the right-holders’ end is to date an incomplete socio-cultural process.
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H052821)
(0.65 MB) (668 KB)
This article investigates the current institutional arrangement concerning water governance in Nainital, India, located in the Western Himalayas. It assesses the availability of water resources, the functioning of the supply system, and sheds light on the role of institutions in managing water resources, supply, and distribution. Through qualitative methods (such as focus group discussions and key informant interviews with officials from water management institutions, citizens, etc.) supplemented by a literature review, the study reveals a complex network of institutions and stakeholders involved in water management. This complexity results in overlapping jurisdictions, leading to accountability gaps and various issues. The study identifies that in Nainital, existing institutions operate independently, impacting water governance in terms of water supply, resources, and environmental aspects. Considering the fragile biophysical environment of Nainital, the study also recommends integration of nature-centric approaches into institutional frameworks, which can be helpful in improving the resilience of water systems and promoting sustainable water governance.
20 Mdee, A.; Ofori, A. D.; Cohen, J.; Kjellén, M.; Rooney, E.; Singhal, S.; Amezaga, J.; Ankush; Figueroa-Benítez, A.; Gupta, S.; Haile, Alemseged Tamiru; Haileslassie, A.; Kongo, V.; Kumar, A.; Noguera, S. A. M.; Nagheeby, M.; Noor, Z. Z.; Polaine, X.; Singh, N.; Sylvester, R.; Wan Ahmad Tajuddin, W. A. N.; Yusop, Z. B.; Zúñiga-Barragán, J. 2024. Obscuring complexity and performing progress: unpacking SDG indicator 6.5.1 and the implementation of IWRM. Water Alternatives, 17(2):391-414. (Special issue: The Politics of Water Quantification)
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H052998)
(0.53 MB) (544 KB)
At a rhetorical level, the SDGs provide a unified global agenda, and their targets and indicators are believed to drive action for social and environmental transformation. However, what if the SDGs (and their specific goals and indicators) are more of a problem than a solution? What if they create the illusion of action through a depoliticised and technical approach that fails to address fundamental dilemmas of politics and power? What if this illusion continues to reproduce poverty, inequality, and environmental degradation? This paper addresses these questions through a focus on SDG 6.5.1 – the implementation of integrated water resources management (IWRM), measured on a 0-100 scale through a composite indicator. The paper presents an empirical analysis of SDG 6.5.1 reporting in Colombia, Ethiopia, India, Malaysia, and the UK, drawing on research from the Water Security and Sustainable Development Hub.1 An evidence review and series of expert interviews are used to interrogate the local politics of IWRM measurement, specifically three dilemmas of global composite indicator construction: (1) reductive quantification of normative and contested processes; (2) weak analysis of actually existing institutional capability, politics, and power; and (3) distracting performativity dynamics in reporting. The paper concludes that SDG 6.5.1 is an example of a 'fantasy artefact', and that in all countries in this study, IWRM institutions are failing to address fundamental and 'wicked' problems in water resources management. We find little evidence that these numbers, or the survey that gives rise to them, drive meaningful reflection on the aims or outcomes of IWRM. Instead, they tend to hide the actually-existing political and institutional dynamics that sit behind the complexity of the global water crisis.
Powered by DB/Text
WebPublisher, from