From the Editor

From the Editor...

This, our fifth issue of the Newsletter, offers several viewpoints which may stimulate some challenges from our readership. Please feel free to debate; remember, anything you write makes my job that much easier! What's so controversial about this issue? Gender for one. Ashok Dalwai suggests that women are sometimes more responsive than men to suggestions of self-management. Should we go one step further, as Barbaravan Koppen suggests, and make a special effort to bring women into thepicture? Should PIM become a vehicle for empowering women? Would thiscomplicate an already difficult process? Are we neglecting an importantsocial opportunity if we do not utilize the new organizations of PIM topromote gender equity? There are more controversies. PIM, according to the EDI-IIMI workshop in Colombia, does not result in larger irrigated areas. At least there doesn't seem to be any evidence that it does. This was the surprising conclusion by 32 experts in the field. Yet water conservation is one ofthe major justifications for promoting PIM reforms in many countries. Is PIM really ineffective as a water conservation measure? Or are we measuring the effects badly? Are there any other controversies lurking in this newsletter? Please look for some, and let us know!