Search

An essay is presented on the international law regarding international rivers and seas in Europe. It notes on the multi-dimensional public governance arrangement of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) and Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MFD) to protect the European Union's transboundary aquatic environment. It explores the dimensions of the arrangement for international rivers and regional seas. The shift in the arrangement which may affect international river commissions is also noted.

The La Plata River Basin in South America, whose waters are shared by Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay, provides important lessons from the long history of negotiations over its shared water and other natural resources. In particular, innovative resource management practices developed over time have led to the relative harmony in which the riparian countries coexist. In this article, we analyze negotiation techniques within the La Plata River Basin by examining in detail the processes leading to the two seminal agreements – the 1969 Treaty of La Plata Basin and the 1979 Itaipú-Corpus Agreement. Based upon our analysis of the complex and often contradictory relationships between the riparian states, we evaluate the outcomes of both treaties from the standpoint of cooperation in the region and sustainable development. In doing so, we extend the relevance of the analysis to other basins with similar issues of regional management. The article extends the basin cooperation, through negotiation, to include trade agreements and development via project partnerships that draw in regional and global actors, including non-governmental organizations, environmental lobbies in foreign countries, and multinational development banks. The above actors are relevant for many parts of the world in today's era of globalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Building on the findings from the International Negotiation's 2000 issue on negotiations in international watercourses and the major advances in the field during the past nine years, this issue seeks to advance our knowledge about the management of international river disputes. Collectively, the articles in this issue move beyond the simple dichotomy of conflict and cooperation to suggest the possibility that both are often simultaneously present within a basin and should be studied as such. Using a diversity of methodological approaches from comparative case studies to single case studies to quantitative analysis, the articles also illustrate the growth of institutionalization within river basins and their contribution to conflict management. Moreover, the articles advance our knowledge of the role of the relative distribution of power within the basin on the resolution of water disputes and management of resources. Some scholars find power asymmetry important for treaty formation, while others suggest that issue linkages and side payments can provide weaker riparians with the means to gain from cooperation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article seeks to expand our understanding of why states use international institutions to manage transboundary rivers. Agreements governing the use and management of international rivers can contain a variety of different institutional features. We address the question of why riparian states choose to include or exclude these features from river treaties. Our explanation focuses on the problem of securing post-agreement compliance. Institutions perform a variety of functions that help states maintain cooperation over time. We analyze this explanation using a data set of river treaties formed between 1950 and 2002. We find that the institutionalization of river treaties is associated with water scarcity, the flow pattern of shared rivers, trade interdependence, and the level of economic development. These findings have important implications for the possibility that rivers will be a source of future conflicts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many case studies and some large-N research have shown that upstream-downstream cooperation in international river basins occurs quite frequently. The same holds for global water governance efforts more generally. Yet such findings are blind in one eye because they focus primarily on political commitments or compliance with international agreements. A policy performance metric (PER) allows for a more substantive assessment of success or failure in international water governance. To test its usefulness, this article applies this metric to the Naryn/Syr Darya basin, a major international river system in Central Asia. Management of the Toktogul reservoir, the main reservoir in the Naryn/Syr Darya basin, was internationalized in 1991 when the Soviet Union collapsed. Compliance with an international agreement, concluded in 1998, has been quite high. This agreement establishes an international trade-off between water releases for upstream hydropower production in winter and water releases for downstream irrigation in summer. However, performance of this agreement over time has been very low and highly variable. The management system in place is therefore in urgent need of reform. Studies of international and global water governance should pay more attention to the degree to which political commitments actually further de facto problem solving. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines negotiations for the 1995 Mekong Agreement, signed by Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam. A ``negotiation analysis'' approach is used, which is based on understanding interests and ``no agreement'' alternatives. The article draws upon interviews by the author with approximately 25 principals in the negotiations. Thailand and Vietnam, the regional powers, wanted to build cordial relations in the aftermath of the Cold War, and needed the Agreement to help contain conflict and promote cooperation on water resources. Laos and Cambodia were motivated to reach an accord to help procure aid. Planned Chinese hydropower reservoirs may increase the dry season flow – allowing the lower Mekong countries to share future increments of dry season flow. Negotiation assistance by UNDP was necessary to overcome a legacy of mistrust. Key articles of the Agreement deal with maintaining dry season flows, notification procedures, and a Basin Development Plan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]