A host oj socio-economic, institutional, environmental and cultural Jactors arernresponsible Jor either the success or Jailure oj a particular watershed managementrnprogram, In spite oj the growing interest in the literature on watershed management,rnthere is limited affention given to the socio-economic and institutional dynamics behindrnthe success or Jailure oj watershed management interventions, The aim oj this study is,rnthereJore to explore this new fi'ontier oj research in watershed management by taking tworncontrasting micro-watersheds, Kanat and Magera, in the Blue Nile Basin To this end,rnsuch issues as the major stakeholders involved in the watershed intervention and theirrnrespective roles; the differences in ' institutional arrangements and stakeholders'rnparticipation; and the root causes oj success and Jailure oj the watershed intervention inrnthe study sites were scrutinized The study involved both quantitative and qualitative datarncollection methods including, household survey, Jocus group discussions, key inJormantrninterviews, personal observation, and review oj some secondary data, A mix oj Agrawal 's synthesis oj 'Facililating conditions' Jor eJfective governance ojrnCommon Pool Resources (CP Rs) and determinants oj 1I successJul watershedrnmanagement identified by different scholars are used as all analyticalfi'ameworkJor thisrnstudy,rnThe results oj the study have shown that there are clear differences between the twornintegrated watershed interventions in: level of participation oJ the beneficiaries in thernprogram; evolution and strength oJloati institutions to manage the resource and thernappropriation oj benefits; and the level oj commitment oj the donor and governmentrnbodies, Accordingly, a synergy oj aClive roles oj the Kebele administration, highrncommitment and participation oJ the beneficiaries, strong commitment oj a donor agencyrnLe, GTZ, good leadership and coordinating skill oj the watershed managementrncommittee, and the active role oj government bodies in creating enabling environmentrnwere the most important Jactors that contributed to the success oJ the watershedrnintervention in Kana!' On the other hand, weakness oj Kebele Administration, lack ojrnJollow-up by the concerned government bodies, lack oj strong local institutions includingrnby-laws, and GTZ's Jailure to consul! the cornmunity beJore the intervention were thernmost important reasons behind the Jailure a/the watershed intervention in MagerarnwatershedrnThese results have important implications Jar the design oj successJul integratedrnwatershed management programs, Es{(rblishment oj appropriate managementrnarrangement should be given equal emphasis to that oj implementation oj the program.rnAll important actors and their reopective role should be clearly identified prior to anyrnintegrated watershed intervention. Clear chain oj linkage/co-operation should bernestablished among and within the upper level institutions and the local level actors. Sincerncommunity's particrjJCrtion highly depends on the level of awareness, awareness raisingrnshould be in the center 0/ any integrated watershed management program.Â· Presence ojrnclearly defined boundaries of the resource oncl the resource users per se based on the