Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.

Accepted Paper:

Wittfogel and beyond: water, infrastructure and political rule on the Hungry Steppe (1950-1980)  
Christine Bichsel (University of Fribourg)

Paper short abstract:

This paper takes stock of recent conceptual engagement in water studies with Wittfogel’s link between irrigation systems and forms of rule. Drawing on these re-conceptualizations, the paper explores the case study of irrigation development on the Hungry Steppe in Soviet Central Asia.

Paper long abstract:

The relationship between modes of water governance and forms of rule is a long-standing debate. Karl Wittfogel's (1957) postulated relationship between large-scale irrigation systems and the emergence of centralized bureaucracies, and possibly authoritarian rule, provided a critical impetus. While Wittfogel's work was met with considerable critique, it has also informed much research in water studies. The aim of this paper is twofold. Firstly, it takes stock of recent conceptual approaches in the social sciences to engage and take further Wittfogel's statements. Secondly, it explores the link between irrigation systems and forms of rule in Soviet Central Asia. Empirically, the paper centers on the case study of the Hungry Steppe, a large plain subject to large-scale land reclamation and irrigation development during the 19th and 20th century. Several of Wittfogel's criteria are applicable to the case study: the prevailing arid and semi-arid climate which requires irrigation for intensive agriculture, the authoritarian form of Soviet rule in Central Asia and mass mobilization of labor for irrigation construction and agricultural production. The paper focuses on the historical period of 1950-1980 during which irrigation systems in Central Asia received considerable financial and technical input. Data stem from archival research in Dushanbe and Moscow during 6 months in 2011 and 2012. This paper argues that, while Wittfogel's statement is problematic for its concepts and causalities, he nevertheless correctly identified an interrelationship between water, infrastructure and political rule. This interrelationship must be further explored to better understand the social and political relations with/over water.

Panel P047
Water and social relations: Wittfogel's legacy and hydrosocial futures
  Session 1