Comparative International Water Research

Abstract

The early decades of the 21st century will witness increased efforts to learn from water experiences and experiments in distant places and times. Water problems in different regions are increasingly linked through processes of globalization that drive the international diffusion of water technologies, policies, and water use patterns, as well as global climate change that has regional manifestations and teleconnections that cascade through regional hydrologic systems. Information technologies and international organizations will also facilitate comparative international water inquiry. But many areas, including wealthy countries such as the U.S., have been slow to draw upon international experience (Wescoat, Theobald, and Headington 2008). The U.S. National Research Council’s (2004) report on Confronting the Nation’s Water Problems: The Role of Research did not document significant federal support of international water research over the past 25 years, although there have been a variety of U.S. Aid for International Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers international research programs. A century earlier, U.S. water scientists traveled around the world searching for ways to address issues such as development of the Central Valley of California (Wescoat 2000). The problem is extensive – there are few comparisons of major flood hazards problems and programs underway on mainland rivers such as the Ganges-Brahmaputra, Indus, Mekong, Huang Ho, and Yangtze, not to mention the unprecedented Bangladesh Flood Action Plan. Yet there is growing evidence of informal, non-governmental, and historical lines of comparative research that offer promising directions (e.g., Duryog Nivaram on hazards, the Centre for Science and Environment on rainwater harvesting; and the International Rivers Network on basin development). Other sections of this journal issue include many examples of international research, so this section focuses on theoretical, methodological, and organizational trends – and vibrant research opportunities – for comparative research. The first section documents the implicit use of comparison in contemporary water research. The second section argues for a shift to explicit comparative research on critical water problems. The third and fourth sections show how longterm historical research and analogical methods contribute to that goal. The final section outlines how future research along these lines can inform water resource management adjustment, planning, and design.