International Transboundary Water Research Articles

Intergovernmental River Basin Management: The Role of the International Joint Commission in the Great Lakes Basin between the United States and Canada

The International Joint Commission (IJC) is an independent agency that guides Canada and the United States on how to settle disputes involving their 13 transboundary river basins. The IJC’s river basin management methods can be evaluated by using 10 principles, and its techniques can be modelled by other international transboundary water organisations. The 2012 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement serves as a case study that demonstrates how the IJC responds to situations in an immense and historically disputed basin.

Quantitative evaluation of ‘No-harm’ rule in international transboundary water law in the Helmand River basin

The international legal principle of ‘no-harm’, as a customary international law, lies at the heart of numerous international transboundary water conventions, rules, and agreements. The current study identifies and examines the three most common categories of harm, namely health, environmental, and economic, in an integrated framework. Exploitation of the Kamal Khan dam over the Hirmand/Helmand Transboundary River internationally shared between Iran and Afghanistan has been selected as a case study. For this aim, an integrated modeling approach that links Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT), Indicators of Hydrologic Alteration (IHA), dust storm events (DST) and crop production is developed to simulate the indicators and their parameters under historical conditions and future exploitation of the dam. Effects on the three types of harm are classified as being low, moderate or high. The results showed that the effects of the dam diversion for economic harm would be high. For instance, it could reduce the wheat production of the Iranian side of Sistan plain up to 70%. The hydrological alteration of the river is also significant, up to 80% during the winter and spring months. This can result in health and environmental harms. The region’s health and environment are already in a critical situation mainly due to the drying of Hamoun wetlands, which rely on the inflows of the Helmand River and are the major sources of dust storms. Notably, these issues would affect the entire plain in both Iran and Afghanistan. The scope of this study was the principle of ‘no-harm’ but the methodology with some additional modifications could be considered for other principles like “equitable and reasonable utilization” in transboundary river basins.

The spatio-temporal structure of international transboundary water cooperation: Based on the changes of issue area and scale differentiation

The spatio-temporal structure of international transboundary water cooperation: Based on the changes of issue area and scale differentiation

Justicia del agua transfronteriza: una lectura combinada de la literatura crítica sobre la interacción del agua transfronteriza y la ‘justicia’, para el análisis y la diplomacia

Mediante la revisión y combinación de dos grandes cuerpos de investigación —el trabajo crítico sobre la interacción del agua transfronteriza y siglos de pensamiento sobre justicia social— este artículo busca contribuir a la diplomacia y al análisis internacional sobre la interacción del agua transfronteriza. Varias implicaciones para el análisis y la diplomacia transfronteriza suelen relacionarse con cuestiones de equidad, preocupaciones estructurales, y procesos y resultados. Esto incluye deficiencias en los análisis y las políticas basadas en presunciones infundadas de igualdad, así como en opciones que no son consideradas debido a la legitimación de unos conceptos particulares de justicia sobre otros. Debido a que se considera que la asimetría de poder permite o impide esfuerzos relacionados con la resolución de conflictos y la demanda de justicia, se defiende la importancia de garantizar resultados equitativos como prerrequisito para la cooperación. De manera similar, al menos procesualmente, la resolución de conflictos hídricos suele ser vista como más justa que la gestión del conflicto, por lo que, hasta cierto punto, puede estar respaldada por la legislación internacional del agua. Se sugieren una serie de objetivos analíticos para futuras investigaciones y políticas, entre las cuales se incluye un llamado a examinar la fuente de legitimidad de las vertientes de justicia invocadas. Dadas las múltiples perspectivas de justicia que existen en la red de actores relevantes, el potencial sesgo en la investigación y la diplomacia podría reducirse si todos los involucrados reconocieran públicamente los valores morales que sustentan su comprensión de “justicia”.

State Succession in International Transboundary Water Obligations: South Sudan and the Nile Water Agreements

South Sudan’s independence has raised the number of Nile riparian states to eleven, and the questions of state succession and international law discourse on the issue are expected to arise in relation to South Sudan. Some of the international legal issues that may be raised in relation to Nile agreements are: whether the new state of South Sudan (in its utilization of the Nile waters) is under an international legal obligation to respect and honor the 1929 and 1959 Nile agreements made by Sudan with Egypt. The article addresses this issue in light of the law of state succession to treaties. Based on several theories of international law relating to state succession with respect to treaties, I argue that South Sudan is not bound by the 1929 and 1959 Nile waters agreements. More specifically, it is argued that the 1929 and 1959 agreements between Egypt and Sudan governing trans-boundary water resources do not fall within the boundary exceptional clause, and South Sudan can nullify the agreements at any time. Key terms South Sudan; State Succession; 1929 and 1959 Nile Water Agreements; International Water Transboundary Obligations; International Water Law

Identifying China’s transboundary water risks and vulnerabilities – a multidisciplinary analysis using hydrological data and legal/institutional settings

This paper identifies the vulnerabilities and risks linked with China’s transboundary waters through an analysis of hydrological data and the legal and institutional settings. The risks and vulnerabilities arise in three areas: (1) serious issues of water security arise, both internally and externally, relating to water quantity and water quality; (2) transboundary waters management is hampered by weak capacity across the region; and (3) underdeveloped legal regimes, including procedural requirements for the exchange of information, prior notification and early warning mechanisms, make it difficult to realize effective international transboundary water cooperation.

Transboundary water justice: a combined reading of literature on critical transboundary water interaction and ‘justice’, for analysis and diplomacy

By reviewing and blending two main bodies of research (critical transboundary water interaction analysis and centuries of thought on social justice) this paper seeks to improve international transboundary water interaction analysis and diplomacy. Various implications for transboundary analysis and diplomacy are grouped under themes of equitability, process/outcomes, and structural concerns. These include shortcomings of analysis and policy based on unfounded assumptions of equality, and options excluded from consideration by the legitimisation of particular concepts of justice over others. As power asymmetry is seen to enable or disable justice claims and conflict resolution efforts, the importance of ensuring equitable outcomes as a pre-condition for cooperation is asserted. Similarly, water conflict resolution is found to be more fair – procedurally – than is conflict management, and may be supported to a limited extent by international water law. A number of analytical tasks are suggested for future research and policy, including a call to scrutinise the source of legitimacy of strands of justice invoked. Given the very many perspectives on justice that exist in the network of relevant actors, potential bias in research and diplomacy could be reduced if all involved openly stated the morals underpinning their understanding of ‘justice’.

Anthropocentric Hydro Politics? Key Developments in the Analysis of International Transboundary Water Politics and Some Suggestions for Moving Forward

The purpose of this paper is to review the key analytical developments in international trans-boundary water politics and to shed light on the important, but overlooked, issue of ecosystems. The scholarship has gained greater breadth than the narrowly focused ‘water war’ discussion of two decades ago. The understanding of power and power relations has given greater nuance to why and how conflict and cooperation occur in international trans-boundary river basins. A new conceptual approach, the Transboundary Waters Interaction Nexus (TWINS), is discussed briefly to show how the analysis of coexisting conflict and cooperation provides an insight into the cross-sector linkages of water and the resulting interests and motives governing water use and allocation. However, it is argued that much of the literature is anthropocentric and frames the natural environment through a human lens. This paper calls for more attention to the ways in which the analytical framework on trans-boundary water interaction can include ecosystems as legitimate users. The paper concludes with some suggestions for future research and policy discussions.

A Gendered Critique of Transboundary Water Management

The starting point of this paper is that most of the international transboundary water management (TWM) processes taking place globally are driven by ‘the hydraulic mission’ —primarily the construction of mega-infrastructure such as dams and water transfer schemes. The paper argues that such heroic engineering approaches are essentially a masculinised discourse, with its emphasis being on construction, command and control. As a result of this masculinised discourse, the primary actors in TWM processes have been states—represented by technical, economic and political elites operating in what generally gets termed ‘the national interest’. Left out are the local communities relying on the resource directly: the water users; the poor; women; and other important groups. Instruments such as the UN Watercourses Convention of 1997 make an effort to present an attempt at a gender-balanced approach—through asserting the importance of the ‘no-harm rule’ and the ‘equitable share approach’. However, they end up supporting the status quo through the omission of any reference to gender issues. The paper provides an overview of the masculinised discourse on TWM institutions, proposing that this is the case because of the intersection of two masculinised fields—water resource management and the disciplines engaged in the research of transboundary water management, namely, political science and international relations. The paper investigates two southern African examples that illustrate the potential for including a gendered perspective and pro-poor policies that take into account the needs of the water users or ‘stakeholders’. The analysis includes the international and regional legal agreements on transboundary water issues, searching for evidence of a gendered approach. It is concluded that the laws and organisations responsible for transboundary water management currently do not reflect a gendered approach, despite the international recognition given to the necessity of including women in water management structures at all levels.

Applying hegemony and power theory to transboundary water analysis

This paper introduces the basic concepts of hydro-hegemony which are employed in the analysis of the contributors of this special issue. It emphasises the roles of hegemony, power and political–economy processes in shaping international transboundary water relations. Central to the analysis is Lukes’ concept of the three dimensions of power and Gramscian notions of hegemony (see S. Lukes, Power: A Radical View, 2005). Hegemony depends on the skilful use of hard and soft forms of power, between formally equal parties such as nation states. Hydro-hegemony is hegemony active in international transboundary water settings, the analytical framework for which is laid out in detail by Zeitoun and Warner in Water Policy vol 8 (2006, 435–460). The challenges of conceptualising the complex nexus of international water relations are also addressed. A recurring theme is that both power and political economy processes are especially effective when they operate invisibly. The approach furthermore sets the frame for exploration of improvement of the options of hegemon riparians and non-hegemon riparians alike for more principled transboundary water governance.

Ethiopia–Challenges to Egyptian hegemony in the Nile Basin

The Framework of Hydro-Hegemony (described by Zeitoun & Warner, in Water Policy8, pp 435–460, 2006) challenges mainstream analyses of hydro-political relations in transboundary river basins and highlights the role of power. The approach asserts that asymmetric power relations represent the cornerstone of the analysis of hydro-political relations. Varying hegemonic configurations and the unequal control of water resources among riparian states are characteristic of these relations. The hegemonic riparian in a given international transboundary water setting deploys several strategies to attain and maintain control, sometimes unilaterally, over the shared water resources. But is the control always as deep and entrenched as it sometimes seems to be? The starting point of this paper is that hydro-hegemony is not incontestable. An established hegemonic order may often be challenged and resisted through a variety of counter-hegemonic strategies. Through examination of Ethiopian contest and consent of Egyptian hydro-hegemony, this study attempts to provide insights into the condition of counter hydro-hegemony and to provide a framework for further analysis in the field of transboundary water relations. The approach explores the options available for non-hegemonic riparians to challenge a particular hydro-hegemony and finds that these come from unexpected or unacknowledged sources. An assessment of these strategies shows how non-hegemonic riparians might challenge unequal hydro-political configurations and eventually contribute towards a more sustainable and equitable water and benefit-sharing regime.