Transboundary Water Interaction Research Articles

Power plus: Tony Allan’s contributions to understanding transboundary water arrangements

ABSTRACT We trace the development of a theory and analytical frames within international political economy that originated from Tony Allan’s mainstreaming of power as a determining factor in the control of transboundary flows. These include the Framework of Hydro-Hegemony, coexisting conflict and cooperation and Transboundary Water Interaction Analysis, counter-hegemony and virtual water rivers. These contributions are exemplified briefly through cases from around the globe and in particular the Nile. To ensure that this aspect of Tony’s legacy lives on, we propose a research agenda that includes the analysis of power interactions at substate levels between central governments and non-state actors.

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”.

Modified Transboundary Water Interaction Nexus (TWINS): Xayaburi Dam Case Study

The Mekong River comprises six riparian states and supports the livelihood of more than 65 million people. Although the rapid joint river development enlarges the pie of benefits, it also deepens existing conflict of interests and motivating downstream countries to use more power to get better control over shared waters. The purpose of the article is to operationalize a new Transboundary Water Interaction Nexus (TWINS) and interpret interchange of cooperation and conflict between Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnam about the Xayaburi hydropower dam in the last 19 years (2000–2019). Our results show that (1) there is significant disparity between the official and public attitude towards the Xayaburi dam, (2) since 2013, the debates about the Xayaburi dam issue has been substituted by other mainstream hydropower dams, (3) the Xayaburi dam indicates that hydropower dams are one of the national priorities that will be pursued at all cost, (4) Laos gained confidence and significant political leverage on downstream countries since the groundbreaking ceremony of the Xayaburi dam in November 2012, (5) failure of the Mekong River Commission’s Procedure of Notification and Prior Consultations (PNPCA) with the Xayauri dam motivated downstream countries to redesign the institutional arrangements and stakeholder consultations.

Analyzing the coexistence of conflict and cooperation in a regional delta management system: Tidal River Management (TRM) in the Bangladesh delta

AbstractThis article analyzes the history and dynamics of conflict and cooperation in a local and regional delta management system focusing on tidal river management (TRM). TRM was formally implemented through a participatory approach since early 2000 to address waterlogging problems in the southwest delta of Bangladesh. There have been, and still are, serious difficulties in achieving the full potential of TRM because multistakeholder processes (MSPs) are not effectively sustained. One major cause of ineffective MSPs is incompetent dealing with conflict and cooperation among stakeholders. Our research was a participatory assessment of water management events focusing on the causes, intensity, and trend of conflict and cooperation in TRM practices over the last 30 years. The results show that the history of TRM appeared more conflictive than cooperative, and also the cooperations between major stakeholders were rarely sustained in TRM practices. To that effect, we applied an adapted “Transboundary Water Interaction Nexus (TWINs)” model to this local water management context, which explores the interrelatedness of conflict and cooperation for learning to deal with MSPs in local delta water management. The research findings should be helpful for improving participation policy in water management in Bangladesh and also facilitate MSPs in delta water governance elsewhere.

The weakness of the strong: re-examining power in transboundary water dynamics

This article proposes a re-examination of how power is conceptualized within transboundary hydropolitics by arguing that power has been misrepresented in the water resources literature. Overemphasis on the factors of a country’s relative power, riparian position, and technological potential to exploit the resource has led to assumptions that the non-hegemon(s) is often unable to achieve their own positive outcomes and that the outcomes of interactions between hegemons and non-hegemons are predictable and detrimental. However, it appears that there are many examples that run counter to the power narrative that employs these factors. This study argues that this overemphasis neglects hegemonic vulnerabilities, which, when included with hegemonic capacities, are much more instructive in explaining transboundary water dynamics. The sources of the weakness of the strong of the alleged hegemon originates from several sources, including interlinkages between water and non-water issues, internal and external expectations, and consideration of whether the water-related issue at hand is crucial to each party’s survival or whether the party has the luxury to survive the outcome of the resolution. These factors allow for non-hegemons to achieve more favorable outcomes and, when incorporated in analysis, provide a fuller picture of the true power balance in each transboundary water interaction. We therefore call for a reconceptualization of power dynamics in transboundary waters that accounts for structural weaknesses present within all parties.

Powering or sharing water in the Brahmaputra River basin

This article examines the power interplay that shapes the transboundary water interaction in the Brahmaputra River basin. The article provides two key insights based on data sharing and bilateralism aspects. First, the lack of a standard, hydrological data-sharing mechanism has created a sense of mistrust between riparians. Second, bilateralism and power asymmetry between the riparian countries has created a sense of unilateral control over the Brahmaputra River. This article concludes that due to regional geo-politics, issues of sovereignty, and unequal power, negotiation for a multilateral basin-wide treaty at this moment is a non-starter in the Brahmaputra basin.

Transboundary water interaction III: contest and compliance

This paper serves international water conflict resolution efforts by examining the ways that states contest hegemonic transboundary water arrangements. The conceptual framework of dynamic transboundary water interaction that it presents integrates theories about change and counter-hegemony to ascertain coercive, leverage, and liberating mechanisms through which contest and transformation of an arrangement occur. While the mechanisms can be active through sociopolitical processes either of compliance or of contest of the arrangement, most transboundary water interaction is found to contain elements of both. The role of power asymmetry is interpreted through classification of intervention strategies that seek to either influence or challenge the arrangements. Coexisting contest and compliance serve to explain in part the stasis on the Jordan and Ganges rivers (where the non-hegemons have in effect consented to the arrangement), as well as the changes on the Tigris and Mekong rivers, and even more rapid changes on the Amu Darya and Nile rivers (where the non-hegemons have confronted power asymmetry through influence and challenge). The framework also stresses how transboundary water events that may appear isolated are more accurately read within the many sociopolitical processes and arrangements they are shaped by. By clarifying the typically murky dynamics of interstate relations over transboundary waters, furthermore, the framework exposes a new suite of entry points for hydro-diplomatic initiatives.

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.

Transboundary water interaction II: the influence of ‘soft’ power

This paper seeks to broaden the analysis of transboundary water interaction, by examining and interpreting the influence of ‘soft’ power therein. The ‘soft’ power of persuasion is understood to be exercised through discursive and to a lesser extent ideational means, and is interpreted in terms of compliance related to distributive (conflictual) or integrative (consensual) ends (after Scott (1994)). The focus is on inter-state water conflicts in hegemonic political contexts, where, it is found, the ‘first among equals’ has a greater ability to exploit ‘soft’ power and to determine the outcome. ‘Soft’ power is also seen to influence the choices states make or avoid in their transboundary water interaction, which explains in part how treaties intending to manage conflict may in fact delay or perpetuate it. For example, ‘soft’ power can be used by the basin hegemon to frame inequitable forms of cooperation in a cooperative light, such that unfair and ultimately unsustainable transboundary arrangements are replicated by the international donor community. Non-hegemonic riparian states also employ their capacity of ‘soft’ power, though may find themselves with little choice other than to comply with the arrangement established by the basin hegemon. The findings stress the importance of analysts questioning claims of interaction promoted as ‘cooperative’, and of examining the ‘soft’ power plays that underlie all transboundary water arrangements. Exemplification is provided through transboundary river basins and aquifers around the globe.

Transboundary water interaction I: reconsidering conflict and cooperation

Whether the inter-state and sub-national tensions over transboundary waters will lead to greater conflict or increased cooperation remains a hotly debated issue. Most work on the subject situates transboundary water conflict and transboundary water cooperation at opposing ends of a continuum. The examination of either conflict or cooperation, we argue, refutes the reality of the vast majority of contexts where cooperation and conflict actually co-exist, and perpetuates the paradigm that any conflict is ‘bad’, and that all forms of cooperation are ‘good’. The efforts of the international water academic and practitioner communities may be better served through a combined reading of conflict and cooperation as transboundary water interaction. Mirumachi’s Transboundary Waters Interaction NexuS is offered as a robust method demonstrating that simultaneous consideration of conflict and cooperation is both insightful and possible. Transboundary water interaction is shown to be an inherently political process determined by the broader political context. We examine evidence suggesting that uncritical acceptance of traditional forms of ‘cooperative’ arrangements may in fact sustain the conflict it was intended to transform. Several other less well-known faces of ‘cooperation’ are discussed in detail, with examples of narrow, token and coercive cooperation derived from inter-state relations on the Jordan, Nile and Ganges rivers. With a view to paving the way for improved transboundary water sharing and governance, subjectively negative, neutral and positive forms of interaction are defined, and linked with a first approximation of their potential driving forces.