Manifestations of Development: a Political Ecological Perspective on Development in Azraq

Manifestations of Development: A Political Ecological Perspective on Development in Azraq, Jordan.

Degree of Master of Science (Two Years) in Human Ecology: Culture, Power and Sustainability 30 ECTS

CPS: International Master’s Programme in Human Ecology Human Ecology Division

Department of Human Geography Faculty of Social Sciences

Lund University

Author: Zackery Ryan Thill

Supervisor: Richard Langlais

Term: Spring Term 2012

Department: / Human Geography, Human Ecology Division
Address: / Geocentrum 1Sölvegatan 12 223 62 Lund
Phone: / +46-46-2228417
Supervisor: / Richard Langlais
Title and Subtitle: / Manifestations of Development: A Political Ecological Perspective on Development in Azraq, Jordan.
Author: / Zackery Ryan Thill
Examination: / Master’s thesis (two year)
Term of defense: / Spring Term 2012

Abstract :

Azraq, meaning blue in Arabic, is the name of an oasis that once existed in the Eastern Desert of Jordan. Prior to the drying of the oasis in the early 1990s, the oasis was home to endemic species, millions of migrating birds from Eurasia to North Africa, as well as the Gazelle, Oryx, and Onager. The only fresh standing body of water in Jordan, The Azraq oasis was a unique habitat for a region that receives less the 100mm of precipitation annually. Some of the newest inhabitants to Azraq are Homo sapiens; today Bedouin, Druze, and Chechens call Azraq home, and stories of their migration to the oasis and the innovative methods these three communities interacted with the wetland are testaments to the human condition. This thesis explores the transformations brought by development specifically focusing on pipes, pumps, roads and capital. Using a political ecological framework this thesis examines how development has reshaped residents daily habits and lives, and the recursive affects the phenomenon of development has had on the ecosystem of Azraq.

Acknowledgments:

First I would like to thank my siblings and patents for their support in my Swedish universityendeavors. Without them, I would be adrift. I also thank the Azraq residents who welcomed me into their homes and for their generosity and warm hospitality.

I need to give a special thanks to JuliaOlszewska for her words of encouragement and critical feedback on my thesis. I also thank Jens Hansson for welcoming me into his home and giving me a warm and cheerful place to stay my final semester in Lund, but also for the helpful feedback on my thesis, and the chance to play with Joni Katt.

And, of course, I’d like to thank my supervisor Richard Langlais, for his support in the writing process.

I give a special super tack to all my CPS colleagues who contributed to making the weekends unforgettable and the weekdays enjoyable, I hope to carry you all in my memories.

I also would like to thank the RSCN for providing me the opportunity to engage with citizens of Azraq, especially Hussein, Hazem, Amer, Nouris, and otherswho helped me along the way in Azraq. Especially Sylvie Janssens who was of great help by introducing me to key informants, as well as making my time in Azraq more enjoyable.

Finally, I would like to thank Astrid Ellefsen, Hana Kolic, and Alessandro Barni for telling me about the wonderful programs offered at Lund University. I would not be in Lund today had it not been for them.

Table of contents

Chapter 1:Introduction...... 4-5

1. Topic...... 4

1.1 Research Question...... 5

Chapter 2: Methodology ...... 6-9

2. Theoretical Considerations: Phenomenology...... 6-7

2.1 Analytical Tools Used...... 8-9

Chapter 3:Framework of Study...... 10-17

3.1Political Ecology...... 10-11

3.1.1 Institutions and Power...... 12-13

3.1.2 Global and Local Knowledge...... 14-16

3.1.3 Scale...... 16-17

Chapter 4: Background...... 18-26

4.Development...... 18-21

4.1 Jordan ...... 22

4.1.1 Azraq Basin...... 22-23

4.1.2 Azraq Oasis...... 24

4.1.3 Bedouin...... 24-25

4.1.4 Chechens...... 25-26

4.1.5 Druze...... 26

Chapter 5:Presentation of Findings...... 27-42

5.1 Pipes and Pumps...... 27-29

5.2 From Oasis to Wetland Reserve...... 29-31

5.3 The Changing Life of the Bedouin ...... 31-36

5.4Borders ...... 31-34

5.5 Capital ...... 34-36

5.6 The Changing life of Druze and Chechens...... 36-42

5.7 Agriculture of Not ...... 38-39

5.8The caravan and salt trade ...... 39-42

Chapter 6: Discussion of Findings ...... 42-47

Chapter 7: Conclusions ...... 47-48

Bibliography...... 49-52

Chapter 1:INTRODUCTION

1. Topic

Azraq, meaning blue in Arabic, is the name of an oasis that once existed in the Eastern Desert of Jordan. The 27 sq km oasis has been the home to endemic species, millions of migrating birds from Eurasia to North Africa, as well as the Gazelle, Oryx, and Onager (RSCN Site 2012). The only standing body of fresh water in Jordan, Azraq oasis was a unique habitat for a region that receives less the 100mm of precipitation annually. For nearly 250,000 years the Azraq oasis has existed in various forms and conditions (RSCN Site 2012). Some of the newest inhabitants to Azraq are Homo sapiens; today Bedouin, Druze, and Chechens call Azraq home, and stories of their migration to the oasis and the innovative methods these three communities interacted with the wetland are testaments to the human condition. The Bedouin being the oldest continual inhabitants were semi nomadic in nature, whereas the Chechens and Druze communities fled to the shores of Azraq in the beginning of the 20th century and made it their permanent homes.

As the global forces of development gradually began to incorporate more rural areas around the globe, Azraq too was part of this process. The region once known as Arabia gradually became fragmented, one of those parts would be called Transjordan, and by 1946, Transjordan was transformed into the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Furthermore, as Azraq became more integrated into modernity through development projects: roads, pipes, pumps, and capital all began to transform the ecosystem of Azraq, leading to the disappearance of oasis in 1993. For the inhabitants of Azraq development has meant a switch in daily routines and habits –the Bedouin have transitioned from semi-nomadism to a more sedentary lifestyle. The Chechens and Druze once depended directly on flora and fauna of the oasis. Today wage labor and government assistance are their primary sources for livelihood. While Azraq has slowly integrated into a more global market in which access to modern conveniences are evermore apparent, inequalities in standards of living, unequal access to resources, and degradation of biodiversity have also accompanied a more modern Azraq.

This thesis explores the phenomenon of development in the case of Azraq both the physical i.e. pipes, pumps, capital, and the social aspects of development. I aim to study how development has altered resource use and distribution and what this has meant for the ecosystem. By implementing a political ecological framework, I aim to explore changing relationships between man and environment, and the institutions that have conducted these changes.

Azraq is labeled a poverty pocket by the government of Jordan, and thus the target of many development projects to revitalize its economy (IUCN2009, 2010). I see environmental degradation such as the drying of the wetland, and social issues such as unemployment interconnected in that development and modernity have reconstructed reality for Azraq. Understanding poverty as an outcome of development begs us to take a more critical analysis of what development means both in its physical and its socio-economic state(Mosse 2010). By striving for a more historical, phenomenological, exploration of development I aim to contribute a more holistic understanding of reality and the power relations involved in constructing it.

Thus in my thesis, a goal for me has been to understand the whole while keeping in mind the particular. Likewise, I see this as a goal for human ecology; to make sense of totality. It is this whole or totality that we are a part of, we can call it an ecosystem, a region, or planet Earth, and one of human ecology’s endeavors is to understand what role humans have in this totality –what it means to be human in various environments and conditions.

Albeit, I argue like many authors that the legacy of anthropocentrism has gotten us where we are today. Which is a world of extreme inequalities, and bioregions in crisis(Keil et al 1998). In the case of Azraq, I began to realize the simple truth that these people were not always in a “poverty pocket”–what happened to the oasis and the people then? Before the processes of modernization, capitalism, or development (what ever one wishes to call global forces of change) how did the communities of Azraq survive? What were their daily habits by which they sustained themselves? And how has development augmented these quotidian habits to create a new reality for the people of Azraq? I take development as the nexus in which reality has been created therefore, I ask the following:

1.1 Research Question

How has development manifested in Azraq, Jordan?

Chapter 2 Methodology

2. Theoretical Considerations: Phenomenology

Phenomenology is an endeavor to understand peoples learned experiences that construct their realities, but it is also an epistemological perspective that puts those experiences in the center searching for meaning of phenomena (Flood 2010, Wilson 2007). Thus for this thesis, because I examine how development has manifested in Azraq, Jordan, I see phenomenology as a method that can provide alternative perspectives to traditional development thought, which emphasizes economic growth by means of industrialization and western institutions. I put development as the phenomenon of inquiry and my participants as the individuals who have experienced the phenomenon.

While there is criticism of phenomenology because of its relativist perspective and the difficulties in choosing appropriate individuals for inquiry, (Creswell 2007; Bryman 2008) I argue that using phenomenology as a theoretical perspective to investigate groups of individuals’ experiences in regard to a particular phenomenon gives a presence or voice to individuals experiences. Another critique to phenomenology is that it doesn’t seek to necessarily give quantitative factual descriptions to experiences. Rather the emphasis is on the lived experience, what it means to have experienced a given phenomenon (Wilson 2007).

Additionally, I use phenomenology because it attempts to emphasize the relationships amongst humans and their physical environments, which is the central endeavor of this thesis(Creswell 57, 2007; Merleau-Ponty 1958, Wilson 2007), to explore how the phenomenon of development has reshaped reality for residents of Azraq. As Flood states:

“Meanings are constructed by people as they engage with the world they are interpreting. The researcher’s task is to analyse the intentional experiences of consciousness to perceive how a phenomenon is given meaning and to arrive at its essence” (Flood 8, 2010).

Phenomenology also lends it self well to political ecology in that it can help to understand alternative ontologies in given ecosystems and the power relations involved. Bryan Bannon explains this using Merleau-Ponty’s past work by pointing out that a phenomenological perspective can be useful to gain further insight into how individuals perceive themselves in their environment (Bannon 2011).

The inquiry into perceptions of reality becomes key in that although development often manifests itself in terms of physical objects, these objects have recursive relationships with the surrounding environment (Bennett 2010).

With this spirit I aim to build on knowledge that looks at totality, rather than merely the human. I also aim to build on the author, Jane Bennett; her emphasis on objects problematicizes the nature/human dichotomy so prevalent in Western thought. I use Bennett’s concept thing-power, because it draws attention to the importance of recognizing that things (i.e. roads pipes, pumps, capital etc.) have the ability to co-shape human life. This is a dramatic turn from the anthropocentric views most ontologies portray. But accommodating a perspective on things may be a more holistic way for situating humans into their environments. Here also I believe it is necessary to let the reader know that while I aim to show the inter-relationships of people to their ecosystem and the meanings that come from that, I do not aim to de-emphasize power relations between people. Rather, the interplay between people and things can be understood as an inquiry to power, culture, and sustainability.

2.1 Analytical Tools Used

In this thesis I take a holistic approach by using a mixture qualitative research tools. To elaborate then on what I mean by qualitative tools, I point out what is most often considered qualitative data: text, interviews, observations, etc., and explain my reasoning for utilizing them (Bryman 21-22, 2008).

Qualitative research for Bernard (2006) and Bryman (2008) puts significance on words and statements, often leading to interpretivist and constructionist ontologies. For my research, because I examine how development has manifested in Azraq, I contend that an ontology of constructionism suits my theoretical considerations best. This is because constructionism lends itself to the notion that reality is a social construction, and that it can lead to a multitude of interpretations(Wilson 2007).

Additionally, for my research, I used a variety of tools including semi-structured interviews, text analysis, and participant observation. Creswell states that using tools such as interviews and participant observation supplies me, the researcher, with data that can be analyzed and interpreted in various ways, and that phenomenological inquiries are built upon these methodological tools (Creswell 46-65, 2007).

I spent four months in Jordan and a total of two months in Azraq, Jordan. While in Azraq, I held an internship position at the Royal Society for the Conservation of Nature (RSCN),located next to the wetland in Azraq. My internship provided me with a backdrop for participant observation within the RSCN organization in which I worked alongside RSCN managers, tour-guides, guards, and other staff; this allowed me to conduct semi-structured interviews with the staff members as well. Nouris, a maintenance man at the wetland reserve introduced me to relatives who were informants that provided me with historical information regarding the Druze settling in Azraq.

My accommodation while in Azraq was at the RSCN lodge; my experience there provided me further contact with locals for interviews and participant observation. Also, through my time at the organization I was welcomed into many homes by community members from the three main ethnic segments of the community, Druze, Chechens, and Bedouin. Through my stay at the RSCN lodge, I came to know Shakker, a local from the Bedouin community, and a major informant who provided me with several interviews. Hazim, the site manager for the RSCN wetland reserve also provided valuable insight into Azraq life. Likewise, Hamouda and Ziad, guards for the wetland reserve, introduced me to local Bedouin with whom I interviewed.

Through my time interning at RSCN I was able to access historical, and organization documents. Additionally, I utilized documents and reports from international development organizations such as the United States Agency for Development (USAID), which has had a presence in Jordan since the 1950’s. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), also conducted two development projects in 2009 and 2010, as well as the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), which has extensive connections with Jordan; these sources contributed to my text analysis.

Sylvie Janssens, a fellow researcher in Azraq, also assisted me greatly in finding potential interviewees and introducing me to Um Jadooh and her family. Additionally, Sylvie assisted me to meet with Mohammad Al-Hawi, the manager of the Water Authority of Jordan (WAJ), as well as Othman a key informant from the Chechen community, and Sallah from the Druze community. With these contacts I conducted semi-structured interviews with Chechen and Druze elders, which heavily contributed to building my historical analysis of development in Azraq.

Chapter 3 Framework of Study

In this section I provide an overview of authors and theoretical concepts that have guided my method of analysis and have shaped the way I view and analyze particular phenomena in regard to development and Azraq. I begin by discussing the theoretical significance of political ecology and then I add Jane Bennett’s concept of thing-power to show how emphasizing things is complementary to political ecology thus leading to a stronger understanding.

In the spirit of human ecology a multi-lens approach can add needed perspectives to lingering issues of unequal resource use, and degradation of biodiversity. With this in mind I continue on to discuss local and global knowledge and the power dynamics involved when the two meet. Finally I conclude the framework section with a discussion of scale, and the pros and cons of examining phenomena in the particular while keeping in mind the global.

3.Political Ecology

David Harvey:

It is fundamentally mistaken... to speak of the impact of society on the ecosystem as if these are two separate systems in interaction with each other. The typical manner of depicting the world in terms of a box called ‘society’ in interaction with a box ‘labelled’ environment not only makes little intuitive sense.... but it also has just as little fundamental theoretical and historical justification.Harvey 23, 1993

Harvey’s quote above, introduces a starting point for myframework of understanding social and ecological relations, and I take his quote to mean that while I writesocial and environmental as separate concepts, I keep in mind that these two are intimately intertwined into the ecosystem, and the relationship they have is one of the fundamental phenomena political ecology endeavors to explore.

What’s more, a fundamental component of human ecology is the understanding that resources are disbursed according to social-cultural relations and norms (Paulson and Gezon 2005). I also argue that it is important to explore what methods of resource use are favored over others and who has the power in deciding these answers. Indeed, political ecology is more than merely adding the environment to society, it is as much about understanding access to knowledge, and whose knowledge is considered important (Escobar 2008). But I contend that it is more than knowledge, it is as much about institutions of knowledge –and, embedded within institutions of knowledge is the ontology of life –the how, and why of our daily activities.

Additionally, Jane Bennett argues for an ecological understanding that alters the Western dichotomy of nature and human, toward one which also gives presents to things. Thing-power as Bennett calls it, is an acknowledgment that humans are not at the apex of their own agency; rather, things get in the way (Bennett 2010). For Bennett things are physical material, they are the substances that humans often attempt to control, sometimes create, and sometimes ignore. An important point to underscore is that political ecology strives to point out that humans often create and alter those things that inhibit some and enable others. Interestingly, I see that contemporary political ecology and Bennett’s thing-power are quite complementary. As political ecology strives to understand power, decision making capability, and the recursive affects those decisions have on humans, these recursive affects are often manifested through things, thus also being a part of the ecosystem and playing a role in human activities.