Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database Research Articles

Building a methodological framework and toolkit for news media dataset tracking of conflict and cooperation dynamics on transboundary rivers

Abstract. The management of transboundary rivers will be one of the great political and environmental challenges of the 21st century if knowledge of conflict and cooperation is not fully developed. Transboundary river conflict and cooperation are critical for the sustainable development of river basins, regional security, and stability and have significant scientific and practical implications. The construction of a dataset of transboundary water events – individual conflictive or cooperative interaction between riparian regions – provides an important data support and a factual basis for the study of transboundary rivers. However, the most representative research, the Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database, is built by means of manual reading for information extraction, is, thus, difficult for fast updating, and also does not cover the global changes in the past decade. This research aims to build a methodological framework for news media datasets to track conflict and cooperation dynamics on transboundary rivers, provide a mass of relevant data for the research of transboundary rivers on the globe, prepare a potent research toolkit, lay a solid foundation for further data mining research, and better suit the big data age. In order to test the effectiveness of the methodological framework and toolkit for dataset construction, this research analyses the spatial coverage, both in terms of continental and national, temporal coverage from 1953 to 2019, and content coverage and conducts relevance screening of the articles in the four representative river basins in the datasets. The results show that the datasets built by this framework can capture comprehensive content of transboundary water conflict and cooperation in both spatial and temporal coverage with acceptable data quality.

A geospatial analysis of water-related risk to international security: an assessment of five countries

This paper assesses countries with transboundary water resources that are at risk for instability. Water security, a term we use in our work to refer to an individual’s, community’s or state’s access to freshwater resources at the right time, quality, and quantity, is becoming of increasing concern due to rising populations, development, and climate change. Building upon the Basins at Risk project at Oregon State University, we used updated Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database geospatial physical, social, and hydrological data to assess the water-related stability of countries in transboundary freshwater basins. We selected five countries to conduct case studies by assessing three parameters: percentage of territory within a shared basin, number of shared basins, and/or dependency ratio of a country on water resources originating from outside its borders. Given the availability of data and to cover a wider geographic distribution, we selected Afghanistan, China, Iraq, Moldova, and Sudan as our case studies. We created a series of 30 maps at 2 scales to spatially analyze the population density, institutional capacity, and water withdrawals, in addition to assessing each country’s water profile. We developed a resiliency tool to analyze these parameters and scored each country to determine whether a country is at risk for water-related instability. We found that while China has a high water-related resilience, Iraq has a low water-related resilience and Afghanistan, Moldova, and Sudan fall within a low to mid-low resilience range.

On quasi-constitutional treaties

Through analysis of North American water treaties, this article specifies criteria for determining the quasi-constitutionality of freshwater treaties in order to determine if some of them have quasi-constitutional standing. These criteria, temporal, substantive, and contextual, are applied to treaties found in the Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database at Oregon State University (TFDD). Of 74 agreements (with 50 years standard duration), only six agreements meet or come close to meeting the quasi-constitutional standard, not counting the North American treaties. We conclude that while quasi-constitutional treaties are rare among the more than 600 in the TFDD, they reinforce international water law and strengthen social cohesion among the contracting states. They also highlight the importance of both substantive and contextual conditions in consolidating support for such treaties.

Updating the Register of International River Basins of the world

ABSTRACTThe delineation of the world’s international river basins has not been undertaken by any formal body since 1978. Researchers with the Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database have attempted to fill this void through the 1999 Register, with online updates and currently with the present study. This current register delineates 310 international river basins, reflecting changes in political boundaries and increased data quality. These basins are shared by 150 countries and disputed areas, cover 47.1% of the Earth’s land surface and include 52% of the world’s population. This paper lists all international river systems, their basin areas, their riparian states and their respective territorial percentages.

Hydropolitics and hydropolitical dynamics between India and Nepal: an event-based study

India and Nepal not only share common borders and cultures, but also share precious freshwater sources, i.e., rivers. Rivers have been discussed often in the political corridors because they cross international borders, which transform water reserves into a competitive resource and lead to hydropolitical dynamics between riparian countries. Nepal and India are two of the major riparian nations that share the mighty and complex Ganges Basin. The objective here was to study the more-than-a-century-old hydro-diplomacy between India and Nepal, passing through tumultuous political scenarios to understand how water relations have been shaped and reshaped with time. For this, a database of historical individual events/actions of water cooperation and conflict from 1874 to 2014 was compiled. These events/actions were ranked by intensity, using precise definitions of conflict and cooperation as suggested by the Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database under the Basins at Risk project formulated at Oregon State University. Statistical analyses indicated cooperative events greatly outnumbered conflictive events. Out of 351 events, only 4% were conflictive, 92% were cooperative, and the remaining 4% were neutral. The study revealed an abundance of cooperative events; however, when seen through the lens of conflict-cooperation levels, the findings indicated a moderately positive cooperation, without much concrete action.

Getting to the First Handshake: Enhancing Security by Initiating Cooperation in Transboundary River Basins

AbstractHow does transboundary water cooperation begin at the initial stages, and how can third parties help to foster said cooperation? Many nations with transboundary waters do not cooperate or have ceased cooperation. Yet cooperation often prevails, resulting in 688 water‐related treaties signed from 1820 to 2007. We address the following: by which practices can development partners best design and implement cooperative projects at the state level to enhance basin water security in the earliest stages? This article identifies strategies for initiating cooperation and lessons drawn from reviewing select cases. We compiled from the Oregon State University Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database all transboundary water resources projects over the last decade with multinational participation. We selected 10 case studies that enhance water security that fit the following filtering criteria: (1) Funding exclusively/primarily from outside sources, (2) Including nonofficial stakeholders in project design/implementation, (3) Absence of formal relations around water resources between or among the riparian nations before the project was discussed, (4) Project design possibly enhancing hydropolitical relations. Findings suggest that to enhance water security, project designs should respect participating riparians' autonomies, create basin‐wide networks of scientists, allow for each partner to garner responsibility for project activities, and consult a diverse group of stakeholders.

The effectiveness of treaty design in addressing water disputes

We examine the design features of treaties governing international rivers and empirically test their effectiveness in managing water disputes. We expect peaceful conflict management to be more successful and militarized conflict to be less likely in dyadic river claims when riparians share membership in treaties with mechanisms for river basin organizations, information exchange, monitoring, enforcement, and conflict resolution. To test our expectation we analyze a set of diplomatic disagreements over cross-border rivers coded by the Issue Correlates of War project. We combine this database with treaty content data from the Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database. Empirical analyses suggest that information exchange and enforcement provisions in river treaties are most effective for preventing militarization of river claims and increase the chances that negotiations over river claims successfully resolve the issues at stake. Enforcement provisions also promote third-party dispute settlement attempts and increase the likelihood of compliance with agreements reached. States that share membership in river basin organizations are more likely to experience militarized disputes and less likely to be amenable to third-party dispute settlement. However, the latter states are more likely to reach agreements in peaceful negotiations over their river claims. These findings demonstrate that institutional design influences riparian states’ ability to address water disputes.

Basins at Risk: Predicting International River Basin Conflict and Cooperation

Growing demands for water combined with supply constraints may lead to an increased potential for international water conflicts, because many of the world’s freshwater systems cut across national boundaries. Which international river basins are likely to experience greater conflict risks or more cooperation? What factors increase or decrease conflict risk (cooperation)? We use prediction and forecasting approaches to address these questions and compare the results with findings of an earlier “basins at risk” study. Whereas the earlier study identified twenty-nine basins at risk, our study identifies forty-four such river basins. We also arrive at different findings with respect to key determinants of river basin conflict and cooperation. Our analytical approach also can help to increase the robustness of explanatory models in other areas of environmental politics, and could make research findings more policy-relevant by moving from ex-post analysis to in-sample prediction and out-of-sample forecasting.

The institutional design of river basin organizations – empirical findings from around the world

ABSTRACTRiver basin organizations (RBOs) have become a key feature of international water resources governance, providing riparian states with multiple means for overcoming collective action problems that emerge due to the transboundary nature of resources. However, little is known about the RBOs themselves, especially with regard to their organizational structure as well as the mechanisms they actually employ for governing water resources. This paper presents a comprehensive overview of the institutional design of all international RBOs by summarizing the empirical data available through the RBO Institutional Design Database in the context of the Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database. It contributes to both water resources governance research, requiring institutional design data in order compare different RBOs or to comprehensively assess the contributions RBOs can make to better governing shared watercourses, as well as policy, facing the challenge of establishing new or reforming existing RBOs for more sustainable water resources governance in shared basins.

Negotiating conflict resolution mechanisms for transboundary water treaties: A transaction cost approach

Conflict resolution mechanisms are recognised as indispensable constituting elements of transboundary water agreements. Earlier studies confirm, however, that such mechanisms are either incomplete, unsophisticated or absent from treaties. We argue that transaction costs, which occur during treaty negotiation, may constitute a barrier to the adoption of conflict resolution mechanisms in water treaties. Transaction costs are never equal and depend largely on the context in which negotiations take place. A content analysis of the treaties in the Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database demonstrates that the adoption of conflict resolution mechanisms to transboundary water treaties is not random, but may be affected by external factors that influence the transaction cost of negotiating such mechanisms. Water scarcity and a history of cooperative hydro-relations are factors that coincide with the presence of conflict resolution mechanisms in treaties and are therefore considered to lower transaction costs. External resource dependency is believed to stir transaction costs to such an extent that it prevents the adoption of mature mechanisms. The same goes for political freedom, political heterogeneity and the presence of colonial signatories as these factors correlate with mechanism absence and the adoption of a low number of conflict resolution mechanisms per treaty. The effect of hydrological variability resulted insignificant, indicating that variability remains largely ignored by negotiators of transboundary water treaties. Our research further shows that if a mechanism for conflict resolution contains one element of maturity (e.g. institutionalisation or an activation procedure based on a unilateral rule) other elements of maturity are also likely to be present, providing negotiators with an incentive to negotiate conflict resolution mechanisms with at least one mature characteristic. Finally, the adoption of a high number of mechanisms coincides with the presence of institutionalised forms for conflict resolution, supporting the incentive of negotiating more than two mechanisms per treaty.

Geography of international water conflict and cooperation: Data sets and applications

The Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database provides a framework for quantitative, global‐scale explorations of the relationship between freshwater resources and international cooperation and conflict. Projects were designed to test common theories linking freshwater resources to cooperation and conflict, in particular within the context of geography and environmental security. The projects, which follow in sequence, consider three main hypotheses on the likelihood and intensity of water resource disputes. To test these hypotheses, a unique set of tools was created that links water‐specific event data with a geographic information system (GIS) that meshes biophysical, political, and socioeconomic data sets at the river basin and other scales. There are three linked data sets: (1) an event data set documenting historical water relations, including a methodology for identifying and classifying events by their intensity of cooperation/conflict; (2) a GIS data set of countries and international basins, both current and historical; and (3) a spatial data set of biophysical, socioeconomic, and political variables, linked to the GIS. This paper describes the hypotheses, the above tools created to test them, and a methodological framework for utilizing the linked event and GIS data sets, providing three projects as examples: (1) indicators of international basins at risk of political tensions, (2) relationships between internal and international hydropolitics in three geographic regions, and (3) hydroclimatological variables and international water relations.

Jerusalem and the riparian simile

Abstract Many see the city of Jerusalem as an intractable religious political issue, beyond the pale of negotiation and problem solving. This view reflects a set of problematic assumptions, including beliefs that Jerusalem produces a contest between maximalist claims that only power can resolve. In this article, we conduct a conceptual exercise designed to rethink Jerusalem as an issue of political geography open to needs-based bargaining. Drawing from evidence in the Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database, we suggest that riparian negotiations offer an analogue that might be used to restructure the discourse used in the negotiations about Jerusalem. We propose the use of a riparian simile in which negotiators begin with the assumption that “the conflict over Jerusalem is like international water disputes.” Riparian negotiations encourage movement from sovereign rights to functional needs, the use of time as a flexible variable, a focus on beneficial uses, and the creation of language recognizing local contingencies.

Water Resources and Indicators of Conflict

Analysis of current economic and environmental trends reveals increasing competition over access to and use of freshwater resources at the same time that population growth, economic development, and potential climate change are adding stress to those resources. Given these trends, it is hardly surprising that in the policy literature and the popular press the issues of water and conflict are being raised together with increasing frequency. The Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database (TFDD) project at Oregon State University delineates 261 international river basins. Professionals concerned with security-related issues have an interest in being able to identify which of those basins may be prone to conflict over water resources, from both a perspective of intra-state and inter-state instability and conflict. Having such knowledge allows for the possibility of “preventive diplomacy,” whereby diplomatic intervention prevents the escalation of disputes over shared water resources into violent conflict. Identification of basins prone to water conflict requires a framework that incorporates a wide array of physical, social, economic, and political variables, the implications of these variables at different spatial and temporal scales, and the linkages across scales. This paper proposes a methodology for defining potential indicators of international water conflict and portraying these indicators spatially within a Geographic Information System. Indicators will be defined across multiple scales in a parallel analysis of global and basin attributes. While indicators should be viewed with a healthy skepticism, they still provide value when defined through an effective analytical framework that takes into account the availability and appropriateness of relevant data and information sources.

Criteria for equitable allocations: the heart of international water conflict

AbstractAt the heart of most international water conflicts is the question of ‘equitable’ allocations, criteria for which are vague and often contradictory. However, application of an equitable water‐sharing agreement along the volatile waterways of the globe is a prerequisite to hydropolitical stability. This article explores the question of equity measures for water‐sharing agreements in the context of global hydropolitics and is divided into three parts. The Introduction provides a brief summary of the general principles of equitable allocations. The second part of the paper describes the practice of water resources allocations as exemplified in the Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database ‐ a computerized database of 149 treaties relating to international water resources compiled at Oregon State University; 49 of these treaties delineate specific water allocations. The third and fourth parts of the article contrast the principles and practice of water equity. It is noticeable how rarely the general principles are explicitly invoked, particularly the extreme principles of absolute sovereignty or absolute riverain integrity. Most treaties favor existing uses, and/or guarantees to downstream riparians. It is interesting that, while many international water negotiations begin with differing legal interpretations of rights, they often shift to a needs‐based criteria for water allocations. Mostly, one is struck by the creativity of the negotiators in addressing specific language to each very specific local setting and concerns.

International Water Conflict Resolution: Lessons from Comparative Analysis

This paper offers lessons learned for the process of resolving international freshwater conflicts from the combined experience of treaty negotiations, process case studies, and a series of forums on international waters. The first section describes the current state of international water institutions and law, and discusses weaknesses in each structure. The second section describes recent attempts at the resolution of international water disputes as exemplified in 140 transboundary water treaties and 14 process case studies collected on the University of Alabama Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database, and at the three Forums of the International Water Resources Association (IWRA) Committee on International Waters. Lessons learned are then described in the third section for the three stages of negotiation. During the prenegotiation stage, lessons are to be found for involvement in advance of conflict, and indicators suggested both for possible water conflict and for the type and intensity of a pending dispute. During the negotiation stage, common obstacles to successful negotiations are suggested and the lessons of introducing multi-resource linkages to encourage positive sum solutions are offered. For the implementation stage, often ignored parameters are described-physical, economic and political-as are aspects unique to water resources that can encourage cooperation.