Ana Elisa Cascão Presentation to TWM Lake Victoria Kigali, Rwanda – 26 October 2009 Hydropolitics:  Water, Power and Coope...
Structure of the Presentation <ul><li>13:00 - 14:30 </li></ul><ul><li>What is Hydropolitics </li></ul><ul><li>Water, Polit...
Hydropolitics: is there a definition? What can you see in this picture? Power Water Control Merowe Dam, Sudan
Hydropolitics: POWER ‘ who gets what  water , when, where and how?’ Who? Users: Upstream/downstream/midstream riparians Us...
Water: a multifaceted resource (1) Political resource Natural resource Social resource Economic resource Cultural resource
Water: a multifaceted resource (2)
Water: a transboundary political resource
Water Resources: Transboundary ≠ Shared <ul><li>NILE RIVER BASIN </li></ul><ul><li>Transboundary water resources </li></ul...
Asymmetric Power Relations: explanatory factor Geography Material  power Bargaining  power Ideational power 4 PILLARS OF P...
GEOGRAPHICAL POWER <ul><li>Riparian Position: </li></ul><ul><li>Downstream </li></ul><ul><li>Midstream </li></ul><ul><li>U...
MATERIAL POWER Economic development Military power Political stability and influence
BARGANING POWER: in interstate relations and negotiations WHO CONTROLS THE NEGOTIATIONS? WHO CONTROLS THE AGREEMENTS? WHO ...
IDEATIONAL POWER:  Power to influence perceptions Asymmetric  Knowledge Sanctioned Discourse Incentives Playing with time ...
<ul><li>Select 4 or 5 Nile riparian states and assess the four dimensions of power for each of them </li></ul><ul><li>Powe...
<ul><li>At the end, we must be able to visualise  Power Asymmetries  between different riparians, e.g.: </li></ul><ul><li>...
By the end of the 1st session, participants should be aware:  * What is Hydropolitics * Water is a multifaceted resource *...
Next session: * Hydropolitical Conflict and Cooperation * Case-studies * Financing cooperation * Water-Sharing and Benefit...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Cascao Hydropolitics TWM Lake Victoria 2009 (I)

483

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
1 Comment
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • After I see the 4 pillars of power from ur definition, I understand as you gave more confidence for Egypt and Sudan. How do you think the Material, Baragaining and Ideational power of Sudan is more than EAC (ETh, Keny, Uganda, Tanza, Rawnda, Burundi..), leave Egypt as u suggest they may have such power at a moment, agree. Even for Egypt too, it is time to update your framework and perspective weight. I appreciate your great work for cooperation to be a tool for dev't in regions.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
483
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
19
Comments
1
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Before going to power, let’s look at the water itself
  • Majority of water bodies in the world are transboundary 263 transboundary water resources Africa: 60 (second in terms of total number of basins.... Firt is Europe with 71)
  • The terms are often used interchangeably, but imply quite different reactions. It was suggested that “transboundary water resources” should maintain a strict geography-based definition. Water bodies that cross the administrative borders between two or more countries should be considered transboundary. ”Shared water resources”, on the other hand, should be defined by a political interpretation. Shared water resources would take into account how water is in fact allocated or used between the states (the ‘who/what/when/where/how’ question again).
  • Second dimension of power – Bargaining/negotiational power – GOAL: MAINTAIN STATUS QUO NUMBERS – Israel, Egypt and Turkey have access to all the data at all time (freshwater, groundwater, aquifers), and make use of it.... There is a case of “war on numbers” AGENDA – What can be discussed or not – examples: Israel does not want to talk about the ammount of water taken from the Lake Tiberias, or Egypt dos not want to talk about the surplus of water used for megaloman projects outside their quota NEGOTIATIONS – what can or not be negotiated – Turkey does not want to negotiate with his partners, and uses threats, did not ask any permission for the Anatolia Project; Egypt refuses a new agreement with the 10 Nile Basin countries, and continue to defend a bilateral treaty from 1959 that allocate ALL the water to Egypt and Sudan AGREEMENTS – They are often used to control the other – 1995 Agreement with Jordan; 1959 Agreement with Sudan – the wording of the agreements is favourable to he hydro-hegemons; and refuse to negotiate new agreements when it is not in their favour LEGITIMACY – it is a very important detail: priori use, acquired and historical rrights – the hydro-hegemons assume hegemony over it, and it is out of discussion anything that is considered not leigitimate INTERNATIONAL LAW – Contradictory positions in different law playfiedls – all hydro-hegemons voted against the 1997 Convention on International Watercourses, but thn ask for international princiles of no-harm INVESTMENT – Not all the countries have the same access to international fundins, and any of the three countries have a special position inside thes instiutions, a lot of experts with strong capacity to influence the donors, and the international organisations
  • Ideational Power – thrid dimension of power – influencing and controlling the perceptions, discourses, ideas, and at the end, the negotiations GOAL: MAINTAIN STATUS QUO ASYMMETRIC KNOWLEDGE – countries do not have the same level of expertise, capacity to develop new knowledge, and this influnces the negotiations in all stages SANCTIONED DISCOURSE – what can and cannot be said – they downplay certain realities, and overexpose certain other INCENTIVES – Carrots and sticks strategies toc o-opt certain neighbours – for example economic and political incentives such as support to political regimes, economic integration, trde, etc PALYING WITH TIME – Delay all decision that can affect vested interests SILENCE – Not to talk about what is not wanted – example Wall in Israel prevents Palestinian acess to certain groundtwaer resources CO-OPTION – similar to incentives – Israel did this with Jordan, and Egypt did this with Sudan AMBUIGUITY – sign agreements and treaties that are vague and not precise, to play with time and to avoid commitment – e.g. 1995 Agreement between Israel and Jordan DIPLOMACY – pretending to be diplomatic and cooperative prevents too much pressure from international community, prevents ripairan neighbours to complain too much or even silent them... It is a much sucessful strategy than the conflictive one
  • Cascao Hydropolitics TWM Lake Victoria 2009 (I)

    1. 1. Ana Elisa Cascão Presentation to TWM Lake Victoria Kigali, Rwanda – 26 October 2009 Hydropolitics: Water, Power and Cooperation (I)
    2. 2. Structure of the Presentation <ul><li>13:00 - 14:30 </li></ul><ul><li>What is Hydropolitics </li></ul><ul><li>Water, Politics and Power </li></ul><ul><li>14:15 - 17:00 </li></ul><ul><li>Hydropolitical Conflict and Cooperation </li></ul><ul><li>Financing cooperation </li></ul><ul><li>Water-sharing and and Benefit-sharing paradigms </li></ul>Exercise 1: Assessing power relations in the Nile River Basin Exercise 2: If I was a donor...
    3. 3. Hydropolitics: is there a definition? What can you see in this picture? Power Water Control Merowe Dam, Sudan
    4. 4. Hydropolitics: POWER ‘ who gets what water , when, where and how?’ Who? Users: Upstream/downstream/midstream riparians Uses: Agriculture, Industry and Services sectors What? Blue water, Groundwater, Green water Water quality When? Constant or variable supply and control Where? Tributaries, flows and infrastructures How? Political and economic processes influencing water control, utilisation and allocation of water resources
    5. 5. Water: a multifaceted resource (1) Political resource Natural resource Social resource Economic resource Cultural resource
    6. 6. Water: a multifaceted resource (2)
    7. 7. Water: a transboundary political resource
    8. 8. Water Resources: Transboundary ≠ Shared <ul><li>NILE RIVER BASIN </li></ul><ul><li>Transboundary water resources </li></ul><ul><li>But not (equitably) shared water resources </li></ul><ul><li>Asymmetric Power Relations </li></ul>Why?
    9. 9. Asymmetric Power Relations: explanatory factor Geography Material power Bargaining power Ideational power 4 PILLARS OF POWER Framework of Hydro-Hegemony Zeitoun and Warner 2006
    10. 10. GEOGRAPHICAL POWER <ul><li>Riparian Position: </li></ul><ul><li>Downstream </li></ul><ul><li>Midstream </li></ul><ul><li>Upstream </li></ul><ul><li>Geographical Advantages: </li></ul><ul><li>Contribution to river flow </li></ul><ul><li>Potential for water utilisation </li></ul><ul><li>Suitability for hydraulic infrastructure </li></ul>
    11. 11. MATERIAL POWER Economic development Military power Political stability and influence
    12. 12. BARGANING POWER: in interstate relations and negotiations WHO CONTROLS THE NEGOTIATIONS? WHO CONTROLS THE AGREEMENTS? WHO CONTROLS THE NUMBERS? WHO CONTROLS THE AGENDA? WHO CONTROLS THE LEGITIMACY? WHO PLAYS BETTER WITH INTERNATIONAL LAW? WHO HAS ACCESS TO INVESTMENT?
    13. 13. IDEATIONAL POWER: Power to influence perceptions Asymmetric Knowledge Sanctioned Discourse Incentives Playing with time Silent Diplomacy/ Cooperation
    14. 14. <ul><li>Select 4 or 5 Nile riparian states and assess the four dimensions of power for each of them </li></ul><ul><li>Power dimensions to take into account: </li></ul><ul><li>Classify each dimension as Strong , Middle , or Weak </li></ul>EXERCISE 1: Assessing power relations in the Nile River Basin <ul><li>Geography: </li></ul><ul><li>Riparian position </li></ul><ul><li>Contribution to water </li></ul><ul><li>availability in the Basin </li></ul><ul><li>Suitability for hydraulic </li></ul><ul><li>projects </li></ul><ul><li>Material </li></ul><ul><li>Power: </li></ul><ul><li>Economic development </li></ul><ul><li>Military power </li></ul><ul><li>Political stability </li></ul><ul><li>Political influence </li></ul><ul><li>in the region </li></ul><ul><li>Bargaining </li></ul><ul><li>power: </li></ul><ul><li>Water “numbers” </li></ul><ul><li>and information available </li></ul><ul><li>Power to influence agenda </li></ul><ul><li>Power to set what </li></ul><ul><li>can or cannot be negotiated </li></ul><ul><li>Power to claim legitimacy </li></ul><ul><li>(e.g. prior use) </li></ul><ul><li>Position concerning </li></ul><ul><li>international water law </li></ul><ul><li>Access to international funding </li></ul><ul><li>Ideational </li></ul><ul><li>Power: </li></ul><ul><li>Power to influence knowledge </li></ul><ul><li>production and sharing </li></ul><ul><li>Power to influence discourse </li></ul><ul><li>Available incentives to </li></ul><ul><li>influence neighbouring countries </li></ul><ul><li>Time factors (it can wait) </li></ul><ul><li>Silence factors (it can be hidden) </li></ul><ul><li>Power to play with ambiguity </li></ul><ul><li>Power to influence cooperation </li></ul><ul><li>process and agenda </li></ul>
    15. 15. <ul><li>At the end, we must be able to visualise Power Asymmetries between different riparians, e.g.: </li></ul><ul><li>In the Nile Basin, how asymmetric power relations are? </li></ul><ul><li>How influential is that in the control, utilisation and allocation of the Nile water resources? </li></ul>EXERCISE 1: Assessing power relations in the Nile River Basin
    16. 16. By the end of the 1st session, participants should be aware: * What is Hydropolitics * Water is a multifaceted resource * Water is a political resource * Transboundary ≠ Shared * Power in transboundary basins matters!
    17. 17. Next session: * Hydropolitical Conflict and Cooperation * Case-studies * Financing cooperation * Water-Sharing and Benefit-Sharing Power
    1. A particular slide catching your eye?

      Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

    ×