Quenching Fire with Water? Power Structures, Practice Paradigms, and Decision-Making Models of Water Diplomacy in the Jordan River Basin

Water diplomacy is gaining increasing attention among both researchers and policy-makers. The interest is understandable, given that the concept brings together themes such as shifting geopolitics, new types of diplomacy and increasing water scarcity. Yet, there is no common definition for water diplomacy and actual water diplomacy actions typically vary across multiple tracks and scales.In this article, we seek to contribute to the practice of water diplomacy by introducing a step-wise Water Diplomacy Paths approach for analysing different water diplomacy contexts and related water diplomacy actions. To facilitate this, we recognise five key aspects for water diplomacy (Political; Preventive; Integrative; Cooperative; Technical) and propose a general definition for water diplomacy. We also discuss the possible distinctions between the related concepts of water diplomacy and transboundary water cooperation. The use of the Water Diplomacy Paths approach is demonstrated with brief case studies focusing on Central Asia, the Mekong Region, and the Finnish-Russian water cooperation. The work builds on an extensive literature review and comparative analysis of water diplomacy approaches as well as on a series of workshops and interviews among selected water diplomacy actors, including career diplomats.The suggested Water Diplomacy Paths approach envisions possible ways forward through four main steps: 1) identification of key themes and related actors; 2) analysis of the current state, 3) recognition of (undesired) drivers and related scenarios; and 4) identification of possible water diplomacy actions. We see that the approach has potential to support water diplomacy processes with the help of the distinction it makes between water- and diplomacy-focused activities as well as its consideration of tensions and related actions. Such characteristics also emphasise the complementarity that water diplomacy actions have with more traditional transboundary water cooperation arrangements. We argue that water diplomacy as a concept and as a practical approach provides an example of the future of foreign policy and diplomacy, where the use of shared waters is likely to be of increasing importance.

Summary In 2013, the European Union (EU) formulated its ambition to develop a ‘water diplomacy’. Subsequently, it attempted to put this aspiration into practice, notably through various Council Conclusions. Despite this activity, the EU’s evolution as a ‘water diplomat’ remains underexplored. To address this gap, this article examines the EU’s understanding of ‘water diplomacy’ by conducting a comprehensive discourse analysis of its framing of water as an object of diplomacy and the resulting diplomatic approaches. The analysis of key EU documents, triangulated through interviews with policy-makers, reveals that several water frames currently intersect, resulting in a multifaceted EU external water action comprising both a narrow and a broad understanding of water diplomacy. Following an explanation of this finding focusing on the policy entrepreneurship of intra-EU water diplomacy stakeholders, the article concludes by discussing its implications for the academic study and political practice of water diplomacy within and beyond the EU.

A key instrument for combating climate change, preserving the environment and promoting sustainable development is water diplomacy. For this reason, in this article, the authors look at the various aspects of water diplomacy, including international collaboration, cross-border water protection, data exchange, ecological protection, flood management and global food security. Given that water transcends borders, the authors address various agreements concluded between countries to manage rivers, lakes and basins of groundwater common to several nations, requiring international cooperation and diplomacy that are of particular value to this study. Water diplomacy promotes comprehensive conversations and solutions. Diplomacy is used to bring together stakeholders to create comprehensive water resource management plans. This article employs a descriptive, interpretative, qualitative-quantitative methodology based on the use of primary sources, international and national instruments, as well as the conduct of documentary and bibliographic research. The results obtained allow the authors to conclude that it is impossible to underestimate the importance of water diplomacy for international relations and society. Water diplomacy promotes social justice by putting the needs of all parties first, including historically marginalized groups. Water diplomacy can prevent social inequality in water management and allocation by using inclusive decision-making procedures increasing social equity.

Growing evidence within nexus research has highlighted the importance for sustainable governance of considering the interdependencies between water, energy, food and the environment, whereas water diplomacy has provided the necessary tools to address water conflicts of a transboundary nature. This paper therefore identifies and evaluates unrealised complementarities between nexus governance and water diplomacy, and discusses the benefits of integrating both for improved transboundary basin management. Two case studies - a wastewater treatment plant within the Jordan's nexus vision and a research project into management of the transboundary Zambezi River Basin - illustrate the identified complementarities and their contribution towards collaborative transboundary natural resources management. On one hand, the consideration of synergies and trade-offs between water, energy and food systems and beyond the river basin scale within nexus governance engages a larger diversity of stakeholders and can help realise more balanced agreements between sectors and hence complement water diplomacy goals. The enriched negotiations arising from a nexus approach can facilitate benefits-sharing in water diplomacy due to the broader exchange of experiences across several natural resources systems. Likewise, international nexus development projects involving a diverse range of sectors and stakeholders can ultimately facilitate peace building through inter-state cooperation and reduce the focus on disputed natural resources. On the other hand, water diplomacy provides tools to address complexity and capture political contexts that overcome the traditional technical and ‘most-rational-solution’ methods. With the application of joint fact finding, value creation and collaborative adaptive management, the added value includes the generation of a shared understanding that embeds politics in decision-making and promotes mutual gains. Further collaboration and on-the-ground experiences between researchers, policy makers and the private sector are needed, to acknowledge and act upon the complementarities of nexus governance and water diplomacy, with the final outcome of promoting cooperation in the management of transboundary resources.

El objetivo del presente artículo es analizar las cuencas transfronterizas entre la República del Líbano y los países ribereños, considerando aspectos de cooperación y conflicto, geopolíticos de la región árabe, así como gobernanza. Esto se complementa con la propuesta del paradigma de la Gestión Integrada de Recursos Hídricos (GIRH). Tradicionalmente, la cuestión de recursos hídricos compartidos en la región árabe ha estado altamente politizada, así como las negociaciones de alto nivel entre gobiernos han sido críticas. Al mismo tiempo, esto genera preocupación sobre la justicia y la seguridad hídrica. La atención ha estado centrada en disputas de largo recorrido surgidas de la dependencia árabe en recursos hídricos superficiales originados (o controlados por) países no árabes. El agua es uno de los recursos más preciados en Líbano, como en todo el mundo, en especial si se consideran los actuales y futuros escenarios de cambio climático. La crisis humanitaria de 1,5 millones de refugiados sirios en territorio libanés presiona en mayor medidasobre los servicios de agua y sobre los recursos; si bien dicha crisis hídrica antecede a la llegada de dichos refugiados y está marcada por la propia situación geopolítica. El agua disponible discurre por ríos, lagos, embalses y aguas subterráneas. Los recursos hídricos de este país se encuentran bajo estrés debido a distintos factores: prácticas de manejo no sostenibles, aumento de la demanda desde todos los sectores, contaminación y gobernanza inefectiva (casi ausente) del agua. El Líbano comparte las siguientes cuencas con países ribereños: el río Jordán, el río Orontes y el río Nahr Al Kabir. En lo que respecta a agua subterránea, la cadena montañosa de Anti-Líbano está ubicada en la frontera con Siria. La promoción de la cooperación es crucial para el manejo de los recursos hídricos compartidos en esta región. En este sentido, una acción más cooperativa y un diálogo constructivo son necesarios para gestionar estos recursos compartidos, considerando la gobernanza del agua, los principios de la hidrodiplomacia y la GIRH. Las preguntas que guían este estudio son conocer qué cuencas hídricas comparte el Líbano, cuáles son las características de las mismas, y si existen acuerdos internacionales que regulen su uso y aprovechamiento conjunto. En cuanto a la metodología utilizada, la siguiente investigación se basa en información de fuentes primarias y secundarias (investigaciones académicas, prensa especializada, estadísticas, entre otras). El análisis de datos es cualitativo y documental. Este artículo comienza con una introducción a la administración del agua en los países árabes. A continuación, se proponen bases teóricas para el estudio de cuencas transfronterizas. Como aporte al marco teórico, se desarrollan los principios sobre cursos de agua compartidos en el Derecho Internacional. A continuación, se presentan las cuencas transfronterizas del país de origen fenicio. Finalmente, se proponen las conclusiones del estudio.

Summary This article explores how EU water diplomacy can enrich the current debate on science diplomacy, primarily in the science in diplomacy category. It aims to contribute to the debate on diplomatic instruments and their innovative elements. It focuses on new practices in the field of water diplomacy, including (1) the involvement of a wide range of stakeholders in the diplomatic process from an early stage, (2) a multi-dimensional approach, and (3) multidisciplinary science-based diplomacy. More generally, the article identifies and conceptualises particular diplomatic methods, (1) the internalisation of scientific expertise, (2) cross-cutting lexical understanding across diplomatic agendas, and (3) pluri-disciplinarity, which facilitates the interconnection of science and diplomacy within a diplomatic framework. It thus addresses the commonly acknowledged challenge of interaction between scientists and diplomats and shows that analysis of diplomatic methods may bring more clarity to the peripheral or often neglected science in diplomacy category of science diplomacy.

Better Assessment Science Integrating point & Non-point Sources (BASINS) is a popular tool for Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) modeling and management. The Hydrological Simulation Program - Fortran (HSPF) model, as a key component of BASINS, is widely used in hydrological and water quality modeling. This study explores the sensitivity of HSPF model to the watershed topographic characteristics used in hydrological and water quality modeling. The Wolf River Basin and Jordan River Basin in the Mississippi Coastal Watershed were divided into multiple sub-catchments using the BASINS watershed delineation tool. The ground elevation dataset was from National Elevation Data (NED). The land use / land cover dataset, Geographic Information Retrieval and Analysis System (GIRAS) was used as input data in HSPF to perform hydrograph calculation. Amongst these two basins, the Jordan River Basin has smaller average elevation, smaller elevation difference, and a larger coastal area (in this study defined where elevations are from 0 to 4 m); the Wolf River Basin has larger average elevation, larger elevation difference, and a less coastal area. The hydrological and water quality parameters including streamflow, water temperature, and dissolved oxygen were simulated for these two basins to see the sensitivity of HSPF to the watersheds’ topographic characteristics. The simulation relative errors for streamflow (daily), water temperature, and dissolved oxygen were 11.23%, 0.46%, and 7.86% respectively for the Wolf River Basin and 18.60%, 4.46%, and 21.81% respectively for the Jordan River Basin. Rugged topographic characteristics enabled Wolf River Basin simulation to have better results.

The water relations in the Jordan River Basin are an often-analysed case of decision-making under terms of water scarcity. However, most of these studies fail to address the underlying structures, which are the focal point in the formation of each of the basin parties' water policy. This paper argues that it is necessary to analyse the domestic structures of the parties since the policies pursued in the international arena are likely to be a reflection of the domestic discourse. Particular emphasis is put on how domestic structures affect and create sanctioned discourses and how these in turn affect foreign policy decision-making with regards to water. The various dominant discourses in three of the parties in the Jordan River Basin--Jordan, Israel and the Palestine Authority--are analysed. Failing to acknowledge the explanatory power of this line of thinking runs the risk of reaching simplified conclusions, such as--"the policy-makers do not understand water issues"--instead of acknowledging that the power of the discourse perhaps gave them little choice. The paper draws on a variety of disciplines such as international relations theory, sociology and science studies.

Journal Article Water and power: the politics of a scarce resource in the Jordan River basin Get access Water and power: the politics of a scarce resource in the Jordan River basin. By Miriam Lowi. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1993. 291pp. Index. £35.00. ISBN 0 521 43164 6. Caroline Thomas Caroline Thomas 1University of Southampton Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar International Affairs, Volume 70, Issue 2, April 1994, Page 339, https://doi.org/10.2307/2625287 Published: 01 April 1994

International water law (IWL) principles are often called upon to address disagreements and conflict between riparian states to a shared watercourse, with various parties invoking them to guide states’ behavior towards cooperative solutions that benefit the water resources as well as broader regional cooperation and peace. This essay argues that it is particularly important to acknowledge the role IWL principles play in negotiation processes, that is, in an ex ante and non-judicial function, providing a framework for cooperation and contributing to lawmaking, which makes them important tools of international relations and water diplomacy. First, IWL principles are particularly relevant in negotiation processes. IWL principles are thus not only relevant to legal adjudication or enforcement, but are also tools of international relations and diplomacy. Additionally, in their ex ante role, in the context of negotiations or other non-judicial interactions between riparian states, IWL principles can pose an inherent dilemma, as they can both provide a framework for negotiations and be the focus of negotiations, each dimension having implications for the effectiveness of negotiations and the likelihood of negotiated compromise outcomes. Third, in spite of this inherent dilemma and its possible negative repercussions on negotiation outcomes, the use of IWL principles in negotiations has a lawmaking function, contributing to the further development and strengthening of the overall legal regime for governing shared watercourses.

Closing the (widening) gap between natural water resources and water needs in the Jordan River Basin: a long-term perspective

While the water crisis is an expanding world-wide problem (see Chapter 3), many studies and reports tend to highlight the prominence of the issue in the Middle East (see in Chapter 1, notes 3–7). And among all the water basins of the Middle East, the Jordan River basin has been the focus of the most intensive attention. Despite its historical prominence, the Jordan River is the smallest watershed in the Middle East that is shared by more than two countries. From a hydrological point of view, the physical dimension of this river in no way matches its biblical fame. As its name in Arabic, Nahr al-Urdunn, indicates, the Jordan is rather a rivulet than a river in the proper sense of the word. From its furthest headwaters in Lebanon to the Dead Sea, with all the meanderings it makes in its course, the river measures about 320 kilometres. All tributaries considered, the basin drains an area of about 18 000 km2. Total average intact flow of the Jordan River is between 1200 and 1850 million m3 per year. This is less than 2 per cent of the Nile, 5 per cent of the Euphrates, and slightly more than 3 per cent of the Tigris river flow (see Table 4.1). Furthermore, this already limited amount of water is subject to extreme seasonal and annual fluctuation.

: Many regional experts regard the Jordan River basin as the most likely flashpoint for conflict in the Middle East. Water is entangled in basin tensions because it has become the most precious resource. The 360-kilometer transnational Jordan River, its tributaries, and a handful of aquifers are the only sources of fresh water to sustain life, agriculture, and industry. Today, politicians and water experts alike recognize the strategic importance of water as a limited resource. Israel, the Occupied Territories, and Jordan tally use or exceed their renewable annual water supplies. The water problem will grow even more severe over the next decade as governments deal with Palestinian autonomy, Jewish immigration, and refugee resettlement issues. This paper examines how water impacts security in the Jordan River basin and the extent technology can help solve the problem.

: Clean fresh water is the lifeblood of human existence. In some parts of the world, this essential resource is undeniably quite scarce - a scarcity which contributes to the belief that violence or armed conflict over water will eventually occur. This perception is no more strongly held than in one of the planet's most severely waterstressed regions - the Jordan River basin in the Middle East. This essay strives to address the fundamental issue of how fresh water could be the cause of violence or armed conflict in the western Middle East. It examines a number of the more significant areas where water is a recognized challenge between the populations and governments of that part of the world and suggests the relative significance that water plays as a determinant of conflict in each of those areas. In the end, it affirms the widely held belief that water has an important role in conflict generation, while at the same time, it suggests that in some areas where water-related issues exist, other determinants are present that relegate water to a secondary factor of potential conflict.

Climate-driven changes in precipitation distribution have implications for the long-term sustainability of international water-sharing and hydropower agreements. This research analyses water allocation methods, estimates the resilience of existing water supply arrangements, and examines the role of modified institutional arrangements in addressing possible vulnerabilities in transboundary basins. Specifically, we analyse the resilience of the 1994 Israel–Jordan Treaty of Peace during climate extremes. While the absence of a drought provision in the Treaty left Jordan and Israel vulnerable to drought-induced conflict, the Treaty did establish a Joint Water Committee (JWC) to resolve conflicts without making permanent amendments to the original agreement. During the drought of 1998/99, Israeli and Jordanian members of the JWC brokered a temporary arrangement to modify allocations in order to reflect water availability. Even though water availability restricted the parties from fulfilling Treaty obligations, the institutional arrangement created by the Treaty enabled the parties to peacefully cooperate in time of severe drought. Citation Odom, O. & Wolf, A. T. (2011) Institutional resilience and climate variability in international water treaties: the Jordan River Basin as “proof-of-concept”. Hydrol. Sci. J. 56(4), 703–710.