Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This journal paper evaluates the extent that different stakeholders are represented in water resource management (WRM) in Tanzania. The idea of the paper is sound, as it empirically evaluates the level that different stakeholders are represented in WRM. The findings of there being fewer women involved than is policy is important, but I think that the article would benefit from a stronger discussion around the implications of the results. This would be supported by a stronger discussion of existing literature on the implications of the imbalance (although I am not certain whether more specific literature exists). The article would benefit from a thorough review for grammar and punctuation. I have made suggestions for the first 2 pages but then stopped. Specific comments are attached.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This manuscript tackles an important topic. It offers an study into the dynamics of MSP in the water sector. Overall i am supportive of the paper but would like see a more critical examination of the nature of the power relationships that are impeding the success of the MSP. This analysis should be both theoretically informed and draw on the data generated by the study. The study raises many questions about why the gender targets are not met and what needs to occur. I would like to see more critical examination of the issues identified in the discussion and conclusions. Other questions are: What are the key lessons for people in similar situations in other countries.  how can globally developed norms be adapted to East Africa. It would be good if some theories of power and governance informed the analysis. These platforms don't just exist they are created and they reproduce power inequities and shore up the status quo.

Author Response

Please see the attachment 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

the paper is suitable for publication and much strengthened  by the revisions

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx