Decentralization, community participation, and improvement of water access in Mexico

References

• Bardham, P. (2002). Decentralization of governance and development. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16, 185–205.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bardham, P., & Mookherjee, D. (2006). The rise of local governments: An overview. In P. Bardham, & D. Mookherjee (Eds.), Decentralization and local governance in developing countries (pp. 1–52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beard, V. A., & Dasgupta, A. (2006). Collective action and community-driven development in rural and urban Indonesia. Urban Studies, 43, 1451–1468.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beltrán Morales, F. (1982). Medicina tradicional en la comunidad zapoteca de Zoogocho [Traditional medicine in the Zoogocho zapotec community]. Oaxaca: INI/SEP.
   Google Scholar
• Chambers, R. (1997). Whose reality counts? Putting the last first. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Cleaver, F. (1999). Paradoxes of participation: Questioning participatory approaches to development. Journal of International Development, 11, 597–612.
   Google Scholar
• Collado, J. (2008). Entorno de la Provisión de los servicios públicos de agua potable en México [The context of water public service provision in Mexico]. In R. Olivares & R. Sandoval, Coord (Eds.), El Agua Potable en México. México: ANEAS.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, J., & Iyer, P. (2002). Taking sustainable rural water supply services to scale. A discussion paper. Bank Netherlands Water Partnership Energy and Water Department. Washington, DC: World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Diario Oficial [Federal official gazette]. (1999, Lunes 2 de Agosto de). Reglas de operación para los programas de infraestructura hidroagrícola y de agua potable, alcantarillado y saneamiento a cargo de la Comisión Nacional del Agua [Rules of operation of the hydro-agricultural, water, sewer and treatment programs of the National Water Commission]. México: Secretaría de Gobernación.
   Google Scholar
• Diario Oficial [Federal official gazette]. (2003, Lunes 7 de Abril de). Reglas de Operación para los Programas de Infraestructura Hidroagrícola y de Agua Potable, Alcantarillado y Saneamiento a cargo de la Comisión Nacional del Agua y sus modificaciones oficiales a partir del 2003 [Rules of operation of the hydro-agricultural, water, sewer and treatment programs of the National Water Commission and their official modification since 2003]. México: Secretaría de Gobernación.
   Google Scholar
• Eisenstadt, T. A. (2007). Usos y costumbres and post electoral conflicts in Oaxaca, México, 1995–2004. An empirical and normative assessment. Latin American Research Review, 42, 52–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emery, M., & Flora, C. (2006). Spiraling-up: Mapping community transformation with community capitals framework. Community Development, 37, 19–35.
   Google Scholar
• Ezcurra, R., & Rodriguez-Posé, R. (2013). Political decentralization, economic growth and regional disparities in the OECD. Regional Studies, 47, 388–401.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, J. (2007). Rural democratization and decentralization at the state/society interface: What counts as “local” government in the Mexican countryside? The Journal of Peasant Studies, 43, 527–559.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• González Rivas, M. (2012). Why do indigenous municpalities in Mexico have worse piped water coverage? Development in Practice, 22, 31?43.
   Google Scholar
• González Rivas, M. (2014). Ethnolinguistic divisions and access to clean water in mexico. Latin American Research Review, 49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hickey, S., & Mohan, G. (2005). Relocating participation within a radical politics of development. Development and Change, 36, 237–262.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Instituto Nacional de Estadísticay Geografía [National institute of statistics and geography]. (2004). Panorama censal sobre los organismos operadores de agua en México. Mexico: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Instituto Nacional de Estadísticay Geografía [National institute of statistics and geography]. (various years). Censo de Población y Vivienda. Mexico: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Inman, R. P., & Rubinfeld, D. L. (1997). Rethinking federalism. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11, 43–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lago Peñas, I., Lago Peñas, S., & Martinez-Vazquez, J. (2011). The political and economic consequences of decentralization. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 29, 197–203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lessman, C. (2009). Regional inequality and decentralization, an empirical analysis. Environment and Planning A, 44, 1363–1388.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, R., Jr. (1974). El impacto de la economía moderna sobre la economía tradicional de Zoogocho, Oaxaca y su área circundante [The impact of the modern economy on the traditional economy in Zoogocho Oaxaca and its surrounding region]. México: INI.
   Google Scholar
• Manikutty, S. (1997). Community participation: So what? Evidence from a comparative study of two rural water supply and sanitation projects in India. Development Policy Review, 15, 115–140.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mansuri, G., & Rao, V. (2004). Community-based and driven development: A critical review. World Bank Research Observer, 19(1), 1–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansuri, G., & Rao, V. (2011). Localizing development: Does participation work? (World Bank Policy Research Report). Washington, DC: World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Mason, D. R., & Beard, V. A. (2008). Community-based planning and poverty alleviation in Oaxaca, Mexico. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 27, 245–260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Narayan, D., Patel, R., Schafft, K., Rademacher, A., & Koch-Schulte, S. (2000). Voices of the Poor. Can anyone hear us? Voices from 46 countries. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Oates, W. E. (1972). Fiscal federalism. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
   Google Scholar
• Prud’homme, R. (1995). The dangers of decentralization. The World Bank Research Observer, 10, 201–220.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam, R., Leonardi, R., & Nannetti, R. (1993). Making democracy work. Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ramos Pioquinto, D. (1991). Migración y cambios socioeconómicos en la comunidad de Zoogocho, Oaxaca [Migration and socioeconomic changes in the community of Zoogocho, Oaxaca]. Estudios Demográficos y Urbanos, 6, 313–346.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ramos Pioquinto, D. (2008). Migración rural-urbana y redes sociales. El caso de la Sierra Norte de Oaxaca [Rural-urban migration and social networks. The case of Oaxaca’s northern mountain range]. El Cotidiano, 23, 95–104.
   Google Scholar
• Rodríguez Briseño, E. (2008). Agua y saneamiento en México: Avances, errores y alternativas[Water and sewer in Mexico: Advances, mistakes and alternatives]. In R. Olivares & R. Sandoval, Coord (Eds.), El Agua Potable en México (pp. 29–47). México: ANEAS.
   Google Scholar
• Rodríguez-Pose, A., & Bwire, A. (2004). The (in)efficiency of devolution. Environment and Planning A, 36, 1907–1928.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodríguez-Pose, A., & Ezcurra, R. (2010). Does decentralization matter for regional disparities? A cross-country analysis. Journal of Economic Geography, 10, 619–644.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodríguez-Pose, A., & Gill, N. (2005). On the “economic dividend” of devolution. Regional Studies, 39, 405–420.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sirianni, C., & Girourd, J. (2012). The civics of urban planning. In R. Weber & R. Crane (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of urban planning (pp. 669–690). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tiebout, C.M. (1956). A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 64, 416–424.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trans, L. O. (2009). Mexican hometown associations in the US: Motives for transnational engagement. Diálogos Latinoamericanos, 16, 70–89.
   Google Scholar
• Treisman, D. (2007). The architecture of government. Rethinking political decentralization. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wampler, B. (2004). Expanding accountability through participatory institutions: Mayors, citizens and budgeting in three Brazilian municipalities. Latin American Politics and Society, 46, 73–99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong, S. (2012). What have been the impacts of World Bank community-driven development programs. Washington, DC: The World Bank, Social Development.
   Google Scholar