4. Geography
Spaces are gendered and public spaces have been historically construed as masculine spaces whereas private/domestic spaces as feminine. While public–private boundaries may be blurred and often are for various reasons, they can also be maintained through cultural and material practices with regard to water (e.g. men irrigate farm land; women manage domestic water needs).
4.1. Fluid lives: subjectivities, gender and water
Gender relations are linked to 1) gender division of labor, 2) norms and rights as well the 3) spatiality and materiality of different kinds of waters. Gender identities and subjectivities both produce and challenge gender relations in water but in uneven ways. Sultana says that gender relations are influenced …show more content…
Material inequalities influence water security and deprivation through a range of processes operating at different social levels. These processes include property relations, inequalities of income, state provision, rules of access to common social property, and social status.
5. Conclusion
The current policy consensus is predominance of an approach based on economics where water is defined as an economic and social good. Efficiency argument perceives users of water as economic agents, taking decisions about water use and management based primarily on their expectation of quantifiable economic benefits (Najlis and Edwards, 1991; Wade, 1988 as quoted in Zwarteveen, 2013). There is a danger that the focus on water as an economic good leads to an underestimation of the importance of domestic uses. It also fails to quantify the social and health implications of water. Women do not have access to resources (or decision making powers pertaining to it) so even when they are willing to pay for it they may not be able to do so owing to male control. There is need to shift the focus from water as economic good towards promoting it as a public good owned and managed by community with a definite focus on gender
Spaces are gendered and public spaces have been historically construed as masculine spaces whereas private/domestic spaces as feminine. While public–private boundaries may be blurred and often are for various reasons, they can also be maintained through cultural and material practices with regard to water (e.g. men irrigate farm land; women manage domestic water needs).
4.1. Fluid lives: subjectivities, gender and water
Gender relations are linked to 1) gender division of labor, 2) norms and rights as well the 3) spatiality and materiality of different kinds of waters. Gender identities and subjectivities both produce and challenge gender relations in water but in uneven ways. Sultana says that gender relations are influenced …show more content…
Material inequalities influence water security and deprivation through a range of processes operating at different social levels. These processes include property relations, inequalities of income, state provision, rules of access to common social property, and social status.
5. Conclusion
The current policy consensus is predominance of an approach based on economics where water is defined as an economic and social good. Efficiency argument perceives users of water as economic agents, taking decisions about water use and management based primarily on their expectation of quantifiable economic benefits (Najlis and Edwards, 1991; Wade, 1988 as quoted in Zwarteveen, 2013). There is a danger that the focus on water as an economic good leads to an underestimation of the importance of domestic uses. It also fails to quantify the social and health implications of water. Women do not have access to resources (or decision making powers pertaining to it) so even when they are willing to pay for it they may not be able to do so owing to male control. There is need to shift the focus from water as economic good towards promoting it as a public good owned and managed by community with a definite focus on gender