Kynan Witters Hicks, Global Perspectives Capstone, April 2014 -- Final Draft

Courtesy of James F. Scott Photography
GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES CAPSTONE
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER SHARING, THE
PRESERVATION OF ECOSYSTEMS, AND HUMAN
WELL-BEING
KYNAN WITTERS HICKS
DR. FAITH PAUL, METHODS ADVISOR
DR. KAREN ECKERT, CONTENT ADVISOR
GLBL 497
APRIL 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Acronyms 1
Acknowledgments 3
Executive Summary 5
Abstract 11
Introduction 13
Background 20
Early Civilizations 20
Industrial Revolution 23
Large-scale Dam Construction 25
21st Century: Era of Scarcity 28
Water and Conflict 29
History of Water Law and Management 32
Integrated Water Resource Management 33
Changing Global Trends 35
Globalization and Regionalization 35
Climate Change 37
Theoretical Elements 38
Model Framework 40
Case Study I - Danube River Basin 46
Geography and Management 47
Context Elements 51
Management Elements 75
Outcome of Sustainability 78
Case Study II - Mekong River Basin 81
Geography and Management 82
Context Elements 87
Management Elements 119
Outcome of Sustainability 121
Danube and Mekong River Basins: A Comparison 124
Analysis 129
State of the River Environment, Ecosystems, and Natural Processes 129
Political and Socio-economic Context Variables and Management Variables 131
Final Remarks 140
Conclusion 141
Bibliography 146

Kynan Witters-Hicks, Global Perspectives Capstone, April 2014 Page 1
LIST OF ACRONYMS
ADB Asian Development Bank
ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations
CEP Core Environment Program
DRB Danube River Basin
EU European Union
GEF World Bank Global Environment Facility
GMS Greater Mekong Subregion
GNP Gross National Product
GWP - CEE Global Water Partnership, Central and Eastern Europe
HBC Coca-Cola Hellenic Bottling Company
HDI Human Development Index
ICDPR International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River
ICJ International Court of Justice
IWRM Integrated Water Resource Management
MRB Mekong River Basin
MRC Mekong River Commission
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization
NGO Non-governmental Organization
UN United Nations
UN ECAFE United Nations Economic Commission for Asia
USSR Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
WFD Water Framework Directive
WWF World Wildlife Fund

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research project could not have been completed if it weren't for a few key people.
These individuals have been instrumental in giving me the inspiration, support and guidance
needed to conduct the research and write this paper. First I would like to thank Dr. Faith Paul for
embarking on this journey with me from the very beginning. From the stages of initial research
to the final writing of the paper, Dr. Paul has met with me regularly to discuss the contents and
methods of my study and paper. Second I would also like to thank Dr. Karen Eckert whose
guidance and direction has also been a significant help in forming my ideas, conducting my
research, and writing my paper. She would always make time for me in her very busy schedule
to discuss ideas and give me helpful feedback. Third I would like to thank my parents who have
instilled in me a love for the environment and for people. The core values of this paper largely
come from my upbringing and my parent's ideals of respect and admiration for spiritual and
practical value that nature brings to our world. Lastly, I would like to thank all of the fellow
members of my capstone class and my friends who have been at my side while I have worked on
this project. This accomplishment is not the result of my efforts alone, but the faith and support
that others provided along the way.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Rivers are the life-blood of almost every freshwater ecosystem on Earth and the keystone
of human existence. They directly and indirectly provide a variety of provisioning, supporting,
regulating and cultural services to humans, who depend on these services to thrive.
Unfortunately, as the world’s freshwater ecosystems and reservoirs are increasingly degraded or
declining, the 21st
century has been characterized as the age of water scarcity. This presents a
number of challenges for people who depend on river ecosystems for their well-being. In order to
tackle these challenges, researchers and water managers must create management frameworks
that adequately safeguard freshwater ecosystems.
Freshwater, largely sourced from rivers and lakes, has shaped the development of human
civilization from the formation of early civilizations (ca.7000 B.C.) through the industrial
revolution (beginning in the late 18th
century) and the construction of large-scale dams
(beginning in the 20th
century). The First World War shifted the water management paradigm
dramatically. Before World War I, waterways were managed for navigation. The war, however,
pushed water managers to think about how the world's water resources would withstand the
intensive use and pollution from heavy industry. After World War II, two international
documents were created to articulate a comprehensive framework for the management of
international waterways. Today the United Nations recognizes an established set of holistic and
cross-disciplinary principles, called Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM), as a best-
practice framework for international water management. The purpose of IWRM is to manage
water with regard to the three principles of sustainability: economic prosperity, social equity, and
environmental sustainability.
Methods of Study: This study looks at the ways in which riparian nation-states sharing an
international watercourse can manage for sustainability across diverse geographical regions and
political and socio-economic contexts in order to effectively provide for the welfare of people
and the protection of ecosystems.
Central Question: How riparian states sharing an international watercourse can
implement IWRM best-practice management principles across diverse geographical regions and
political and socio-economic contexts in order to effectively provide for the welfare of people
and the protection of ecosystems?
Thesis: In order to answer this question, this study theorizes that the extent to which
riparian states sharing an international watercourse are able to effectively provide for the welfare
of people and the protection of ecosystems depends upon both the natural, political, and socio-
economic contexts in which they are placed and the degree to which the three pillars of IWRM
are implemented; namely, participate actively and equitably, protect and preserve ecosystems,
and include stakeholders in decision-making.

Variables: In order to test this thesis, the study analyzes two independent variables to
understand how riparian countries sharing an international watercourse can successfully and
sustainably manage a transboundary watercourse in order to protect river ecosystems and provide
welfare for people (the dependent variable in this study). The independent variables are (1) the
degree to which IWRM best-practice management principles are implemented and (2) the impact
from the political, socio-economic and natural contexts that support and constrain sustainable
management.
Case Studies: This study applies these variables in two distinct geographical regions:
The Danube River Basin and the Mekong River Basin. These river basins were selected because
they offer both positive and negative examples of how contextual circumstances can both
support and inhibit the implementation of best-practice management principles of IWRM and
sustainable management for the protection of ecosystems and provision of human well-being.
Case Study I – Danube River Basin (DRB)
The Danube River is the second largest river in Europe, touching 19 countries in Central
and Eastern Europe. Historically it has been an important passageway for transportation and
trade, and currently it serves as a principle driver of the European economy. Similarly, the DRB
is a central hydrological vein for a variety of riparian ecosystems. Contextual and management
variables are summarized below, with comments on the extent to which sustainability has been
achieved.
Context Variables:
Political
 Strong regional political integration with the formation of the European Union
 Strong legal and policy structures for water management that protects ecosystems
and provide for public well-being at the regional level
o Water Framework Directive (WFD) provides legal structure
o International Commission for the Protection of the Danube (ICDPR)
provides institutional structure
 Water management decision-making is decentralized
 Decisions made at the national level are supportive of the common good and
basin-wide environmental protection
 Country interests are diverse and sometimes conflict
 Water management structure supports and facilitates IWRM including:
o regional (river-basin) thinking
o environmental/ecosystem protection
o decentralization of management
 ICDPR is generally regarded as a good example for coordinating comprehensive
and integrated river-basin management in practice.

 Literature critiques the ICDPR for focusing efforts too much at the state level and
not enough at the regional and local levels.
 Problems with implementation of IWRM exist at local levels because of:
o Rapidly shifting responsibilities
o Lack of funding
o Insufficient cooperation among water management authorities
Socio-economic
 Increase in democratic decision making, government accountability, transparency,
and encouragement of public participation in planning.
 Greater awareness and sensitivity to environmental problems
 Very high - high HDI
 Greater liberalization and internationalization of water markets; the private sector
plays a significant role in water resource management
 The majority of the public feels that environmental problems directly affect them
and that action should be taken to address these problems
 Water pollution is the most important issue to public
 Strong policy and legal structure that puts great importance on including public
and private stakeholders in the water management decision-making
 Strong regional institutions that include stakeholders at the regional level
 ICDPR engages with three different kind of stakeholders at regional level:
o observer organization and scientific experts.
o private sector
o general public stakeholders
 Literature finds that WFD or ICDPR does not guarantee equitable representation
of stakeholder feedback. Roles of different actors are not institutionally defined.
Natural
 Significant pollution in the Danube River from organic, nutrient, and hazardous
substance contamination.
 Significant alterations or obstructions to the natural hydrological flows of the
Danube River.
 Wetlands are in critical decline
 Sturgeon, "a species of basin-wide importance," are severely threatened due to
hydrological alterations, obstructions and pollution.
Management Variables:
Active and equitable participation
 EU countries in the DRB either actively participate or have a desire to actively
participate in IWRM.

 Non-EU countries in the DRB participate to some degree in applying principles of
IWRM.
Stakeholder inclusion
 The WFD and ICDPR provide a framework for public stakeholders provide
feedback to water management decision makers.
 Scholars criticize the WFD and ICDPR for not guaranteeing equitable
representation of different kinds of stakeholders (i.e. private enterprise and public
community members)
Environmental protection and regulation
 There is a legal structure from the European Commission and the WFD for the
protection and regulation of water quality and ecosystems in DRB.
Outcome of Sustainability: Overall the managing institutions of the DRB have made great
strides toward implementing principles of IWRM and sustainable management. The WFD and
ICDPR have outlined several principles that fall in line with the IWRM framework, including the
creation of a platform for which stakeholders can participate in planning and decision making,
encouraging active and equitable participation of all riparian countries within the DRB, taking
steps to confront environmental challenges facing the DRB and seeking to protect both the
quality of water and the integrity of natural ecosystems.
Case Study II – Mekong River Basin (MRB)
The Mekong River plays an important role in both Southeast Asia and in the world
because it is a vital source of water and nutrients for globally transported agricultural products,
cheap energy production, and thriving ecosystems. The yearly floods bring an influx of silts and
nutrients which buoy the Mekong's natural ecosystems, provide food and water for local people,
and sustain agricultural crops. Contextual and management variables are summarized below,
with comments on the extent to which sustainability has been achieved.
Context Variables:
Political
 Strong regional political integration with the formation of the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) and
Mekong River Commission (MRC).
o GMS and MRC provide institutional structure for water management.
 Absence of legal and policy structures for water management that protect
ecosystems and provide for public well-being at the regional level.
 Water management is largely centralized
 GMS promotes trade, investment and economic growth, and primarily excludes
provisions for environmental protection
 MRC attempts IWRM but is hindered by lack of political interest

 MRC and GMS are generally regarded as a bad example for coordinating
comprehensive and integrated river-basin management that considers ecosystem
protection and social well-being in practice.
 Decisions made at the national level are often made in support of national
interests and hinder cooperative basin-wide environmental protection
 Country interests are diverse and sometimes conflict
Socio-economic
 Large portion of population live in rural areas
 Low levels of democracy
 Widespread poverty
 Low - very low HDI
 Regional pressures for development encourages rapid economic growth
 Society primarily supported by agrarian economy
 Majority of Lower Mekong Basin local economy highly dependent on the water
from the Mekong River to make a living.
 Rapidly changing occupational structure.
 Absence of policy and legal structure that includes stakeholders in decision-
making.
 MRC engages with select community stakeholders through the Mekong
Integrated Water Resource Management Project.
 GMS only includes select NGOs and international organizations in decision-
making, and is largely exclusive of other stakeholders.
 Literature generally agrees that centralized management hinders stakeholder
involvement.
 GMS and the MRC do not provide an open forum for public stakeholder
involvement in decision-making at regional level.
Natural
 Different reports on water quality and impacts of pollution.
 MRC reports that even though the Mekong River had been "impacted" or
"severely impacted" by human activities, the quality of the river for agricultural
use and the health of aquatic species is largely not affected.
 Literature reports "high" salinity levels, varying pH levels and sometimes severe
acidification, and "significant" increases in total phosphorus concentrations.
 Significant alterations or obstructions to the natural hydrological flows of the
Mekong River.
 Effects of alterations and obstructions are felt by people in the Lower Mekong
Basin who depend on the natural flow of waters for their livelihood.
 Significant declines in fish populations due to hydrological alterations,
obstructions and overfishing.

Management Variables:
Active and equitable participation
 Countries generally cooperate when they have similar interests.
 Mekong countries generally don't actively participate in IWRM.
Stakeholder inclusion
 Both the MRC and the GMS include selected stakeholders, often international
organizations and NGOs, with less emphasis on public stakeholder feedback.
 Literature states that stakeholder representation in water management decision-
making is largely non-existent.
Environmental protection and regulation
 There is no legal structure for environmental protection and regulation.
 The MRC plays a weak role in conducting environmental assessments and
coordinating environmental protection projects.
Outcome of Sustainability: Even though scholars find that IWRM is incredibly important
to the Mekong Region and its associated ecosystems in order to maintain environmental integrity
(and therefore to support locally dependent economies), sustainable development of the Mekong
River that supports the protection of ecosystems and the provision of social well-being is largely
non-existent. Country interests for economic growth and large-scale infrastructural development
inhibit environmental consideration and protection and limit engagement with most stakeholders.
Conclusions
The findings of this study provide valuable insights related to managing aquatic
ecosystems to safeguard ecological functioning and provide for humankind. The primary
findings are summarized below.
 Pollution, hydromorphological alterations and obstructions, and the destructions of
wetlands are degrading and destroying river ecosystems – and negatively impact
those who directly and indirectly benefit from rivers' ecosystem services.
 Both structure and agency are important and necessary in facilitating effective
sustainable water management and tackle current water challenges.
 Strong legal, policy and institutional structures at the regional level are needed first in
order to support basin-wide implementation of IWRM
 Decentralization of management, facilitated by regional policy and institutions
structures, is critically important to empower national and local water managers to
implement projects of IWRM.
 High levels of individual freedom and democracy encourages public participation in
decision-making and often facilitates more sustainable water management.
 Poverty inhibits the ability of people to take part in decision-making because people
lack adequate resources to engage with decision-makers.

ABSTRACT
The capacity of freshwater rivers to provide a variety of supporting, provisioning,
regulating, and cultural ecosystem services is threatened, leading many researchers to call the
21st century the age of water scarcity because the world's freshwater ecosystems and reservoirs
are rapidly degrading and declining. As a result, water managers need to find ways to manage
rivers that cross political boundaries in order to address a three-part challenge to: conserve
freshwater resources and ecosystems, provide for human well-being, and mitigate jurisdictional
conflicts. Management, however, is constrained by the diverse natural, political, and socio-
economic circumstance in which the rivers are place. Therefore, the central question of this study
is how can riparian states sharing an international watercourse manage for sustainability across
diverse geographical regions and political and socio-economic contexts in order to effectively
provide for the welfare of people and the protection of ecosystems? In an analysis of the diverse
political, socio-economic and natural contexts in two different geographical regions, the Danube
River Basin and the Mekong River Basin, this study finds that the extent to which riparian states
sharing an international watercourse are able to effectively provide for the welfare of people and
the protection of ecosystems depends upon both the natural, political, and socio-economic
contexts in which they are placed and the degree to which they implement three pillars of
Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) for successful transboundary water sharing:
participate actively and equitable, protect and preserve ecosystems, and include stakeholders in
decision-making.

INTRODUCTION
Water must be present for human life to exist on the planet. Since the development of the
first civilization in Mesopotamia, water has played a central role in the history of mankind's
qualitative experience on Earth. Water is a nourishing substance that gives breath to all life, and
access to it is key to human survival and progress. People are often intrigued by water's unique
natural properties in which a strong electromagnetic bond is formed between water molecules.
These unique properties give water distinct characteristics like surface tension and high specific
heat. Just as water molecules form strong bonds with each other, mankind is closely bonded with
this valuable resource and its services. Throughout history, humans have developed tools and
systems for managing their water resources and harnessing the properties of water to their
benefit. However, today freshwater is becoming a scarce resource. With the advent of population
growth, modernization, and now climate change, greater numbers of people and countries
compete for diminishing water resources. Therefore the challenge for mankind's survival in the
21st century will depend on our ability to address a three-part challenge to: conserve freshwater
resources and ecosystems, provide for human well-being, and mitigate jurisdictional conflicts.
The 21st century is being called the age of water scarcity because the world's freshwater
ecosystems and reservoirs are quickly degrading and declining.1
The decline has its origins in
1776 when James Watt created an invention that harnessed the power of water and started a
chain of events that would ultimately pollute and over-use the world's freshwater resources.
Watt's invention of the first modern and efficient steam engine launched the world into an
industrial revolution, and the explosion of innovative ideas and technologies that resulted used
the world's natural resources at an unprecedented rate. As countries modernized with increasing
1
Steven Solomon, Water: The Epic Struggle For Wealth, Power, and Civilization (New York, NY: HarperCollins
Publishers, 2010): 4.

speed and intensity, they expanded their borders and built capital in the form of land, labor and
resources in order to provide resources for the industrial machine and to generate economic
growth and wealth. In 1780, industrial growth in Britain quadrupled form 1 to 4 percent per
year.2
Western European nations were the first colonizers and they exploited both people and
resources within their colonies (Green 1999: 277).3
While this is considered a period of progress
for the developed world, is has come at a great cost for the exploited and the exploiters in the
21st century.
In 2002, the Nobel Prize-winner chemist, Paul Crutzen, commented that mankind had
exited the Holocene, a geological characterization that refers to a period of relative climate
stability over the last 11,700 years, and entered a new Epoch called the Anthropocene. The
Anthropocene is defined by the extensive impact of human activity on the natural environment.4
Crutzen's estimate of the human footprint on Earth's ecosystems agrees with data released by
international research organizations. According to the United Nations Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment (MEA), a global assessment conducted between 2001 and 2005 of the consequences
of ecosystem change for human well-being and the actions needed to promote conservation and
the sustainable use of ecosystems, approximately 60% of ecosystem services examined are
degraded or used unsustainably. The costs of such degradation are both substantial and growing.5
The data suggest that mankind's current path is destroying the immediate environment upon
which we depend for survival.
2
Ibid., 223.
3
A. Green and K. Troup, The Houses of History: A Critical Reader in twentieth-century history and theory (New
York, NY: New York University Press, 1999): 277.
4
Jan Zalasiewicz, "Are we now living in the Anthropocene?" GSA Today 18, no. 2 (2008): 4-8.
5
Walter V Reid et al, "Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis," Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
(Washington, DC: Island Press, 2005): 1.

The resources and services given to us by Earth's ecosystems, and particularly freshwater
ecosystems, are invaluable. They are the cement that holds our communities, countries, and
world together. Rivers, in particular, are the life-blood of almost every natural ecosystem on
Earth and the keystone of human existence. They are the veins that carve through Earth's
landscape housing, regulating and nourishing vast varieties of flora and fauna. Flood seasons in
watersheds sustain vast amounts of forest, providing building materials and food, and in Sub-
Saharan Africa, the MEA identified five direct services that rivers and aquifers provide to the
people: water for domestic consumption, water for industry (primarily used for mining and coal-
fired electricity generation), hydroelectric power generation, irrigated agriculture and
maintenance of aquatic ecosystems.6
Research conducted on freshwater resources in Sub-
Saharan Africa documents that they are declining, and will continue to decline as a result of
population growth, changing consumption standards as living standards rise, and climate
change.7
This trend in Sub-Saharan Africa is not unique. A world with growing demographic
and environmental pressures will face challenges to maintain sufficient reservoirs of usable
freshwater. If the quantity and quality of water continues to decline, then the well-being of
human life will suffer as well.
Water is very often an unevenly distributed resource and declining freshwater ecosystems
disproportionately affect groups of people who rely more directly on a river’s goods and
services. The MEA found that "the harmful effects of the degradation of ecosystem services (the
persistent decrease in the capacity of an ecosystem to deliver services) are being borne
disproportionately by the poor, are contributing to growing inequalities and disparities across
6
The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, Southern African Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, ed. R. Biggs and R.
J. Scholes (Pretoria, South Africa: Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, 2004): 44.
7
Ibid.,

groups of people, and are sometimes the principle factor causing poverty and social conflict."8
Underserved populations are less easily able to adapt if a good or service that they have been
depending on is taken away. Similarly declines in water quantity and quality can have significant
consequences to human health. The MEA found that 1.7 million deaths occur as a result of
disease from inadequate water, sanitation and hygiene. Furthermore, the MEA finds it "highly
certain" that both the continued degradation of wetlands and the continued decline in water
quantity and quality will result in further impoverishment of human health.9
Therefore it is not
only crucially important to understand how to address water issues in order to protect natural
ecosystems, but to improve the well-being of individuals who are directly affected by declines in
water quality and quantity, and related ecosystems.
As sources of water become increasingly scarce, it will become progressively more
difficult for countries to secure adequate freshwater resources to support their people and their
own development requirements. Mankind dealt itself an uneven hand when it created political
borders. International watercourses flow indiscriminately through landscapes without regard for
political boundaries and, as a result, countries are forced to negotiate with each other for control
over freshwater resources. Stress from climate change, pollution, and water scarcity cause an
increase in competition among states for remaining water resources. In some cases negotiations
turn volatile and result in conflict. On March 22, 2012, World Water Day, the U.S. Intelligence
Council released a report on Global Water Security stating that wars over water are unlikely
within the next 10 years, but "water challenges - shortages, poor water quality, floods, - will
8
Reid, 2.
9
Stuart Butchart et al, Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Wetlands and Water (Washington D.C.: World
Resource Institute, 2005): 48.

likely increase the risk of instability and state failure, [and] exacerbate regional tensions...."10
Therefore in order to preserve Earth's natural ecosystems, provide for the well-being of humans,
and mitigate conflict over water resources, water managers need a framework to understand both
the complexity of water issues and the ways in which mankind can manage for the three-part
challenge. Within the last two decades scientists, researchers, and water professionals have
begun to develop ways to manage water in rivers and lakes that flow across boundaries.
The concept of transboundary water management may sound relatively simple, but its
application is placed in a context of complex natural, societal, and political interactions. As Islam
and Susskind explain in their book Water Diplomacy: A Negotiated Approach To Managing
Complex Water Networks, “Complex problems – and that is what most water management
problems are – involve interactions that are both unknowable and unpredictable.”11
The
uncertainty of water issues and contextual circumstances make transboundary water sharing
agreements very challenging. The Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of
International Watercourses (Appendix 1) helps stakeholders to navigate these challenges and to
successfully form agreements and implement policies that help to protect vital ecosystems,
provide for the well-being of humans, and reduce conflict over water.
This paper seeks to contribute to the dialogue of concerned individuals and researchers
who are addressing the issue of the degradation of water ecosystems across the globe as a result
of pollution, over-exhaustion, changes to water flow and land cover, intensification of climate
change and, most importantly, lack of proper management. It finds that, in theory and practice,
the principles of transboundary water management outlined in the Convention on the Law of the
10
David K Kreamer, "The Past, Present, and Future of Water Conflict and International Security," Journal of
Contemporary Water Research and Education 149, no. 1 (December 2012): 88.
11
Shafiqul Islam and Lawrence E. Susskind, Water Diplomacy: A Negotiated Approach to Managing Complex
Water Networks (New York, NY: RFF Press, 2013): xiii.

Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses, or documents like it, are useful in
holistically managing water ways. It is generally agreed upon by researchers and water
practitioners that these principles facilitate peaceful cooperation, protection of ecosystems, and
human well-being. If this is the case, however, why are riparian regions not rushing to adopt
these principles? One possibility is that there are constraining historical, political, and socio-
economic circumstances that prevent certain regions from working to cooperatively manage
water resources. This paper will explore examples of positive and negative transboundary water
management from two case studies, the Danube River Basin (DRB) and the Mekong River Basin
(MRB), to explore the central research question: how can riparian states sharing an international
watercourse manage for sustainability across diverse geographical regions and political and
socio-economic contexts in order to effectively provide for the welfare of people and the
protection of ecosystems?
The DRB and the MRB are both situated in different historical, political, and socio-
economic contexts. These contexts have shaped how each region has managed their water
resources and provided for the well-being of its people. Despite the differences, however,
parallels exist in the types of problems that they face and the ways that integrated management
tools can be used to address challenges. This paper will show that there are key indicators within
the framework of transboundary water management that are consistent between the two case
studies, and that contribute to riparian states' ability to provide for the welfare of people,
protection of ecosystems, and mitigation of conflict. Therefore the thesis of this study explains
that the extent to which riparian states sharing an international watercourse are able to effectively
provide for the welfare of people and the protection of ecosystems depends upon both the
natural, political, and socio-economic contexts in which they are placed and the degree to which

they implement three pillars of Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) for successful
transboundary water sharing: participate actively and equitable, protect and preserve ecosystems,
and include stakeholders in decision-making.
The discussion will include (1) a brief overview of significant historical events during
which water shaped the development of civilizations and mankind shaped the state of freshwater
ecosystems, (2) an analysis of how changing global trends in the 20th and 21st centuries, such as
globalization, regionalization, and climate change, are affecting the way in which water is
managed, (3) major theoretical propositions that inform and shape my content and analysis, (4)
the theory and principles of IWRM and managing for sustainability, (5) a discussion of methods
used in this study, (6) an analysis of transboundary water management in the DRB using a set of
independent and dependent variables, (7) an analysis of transboundary water management in the
MRB using the same set of independent and dependent variables, (8) a comparison and analysis
of transboundary water management in the two case-study regions that pulls out key points of
similarity and difference between the two regions, and (9) a conclusion with a final set of
findings and remarks.
In this study a certain number of ways of knowing shape the way that I observe and
analyze these issues. I will use a braided approach of the interpretivist,12
Annales,13
and critical
inquiry ways of knowing. Looking at issues of transboundary water management through an
interpretivist’s eyes shows me that managing water in the DRB and the MRB is very much
situated within a historical, political, social, and cultural context that makes each case study
12
Interpretivism is a way of knowing that looks for "culturally derived and historically situated interpretations of
the social life-world." The central point of the interpretivist way of knowing is that the way we interpret action,
events and meaning is shaped by our culture. Source: Michael Crotty, The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning
and Perspective in the Research Process (Australia: Sage Publications, 1998): 67.
13
Annales is a school of thought, founded in 1929 in France, which approach historical thinking and research with a
totale lens. This means that Annales historians view all aspects of society as part of historical reality, and they
attempt to draw upon the methods of various disciplines in order to gain a more holistic understanding of history.
Source: Green, A. and K. Troup, 88.

unique. At the same time, using an Annales approach, I recognize that IWRM requires water
managers to use a cross-disciplinary lens in order to make decisions that take into account
changing social, political, and environmental circumstances. Approaching water management
form a totale lens facilitates more effective management. Finally, I employ the critical inquiry
lens because knowledge must be connected to action, and I challenge current models of water
management on the basis of outcomes. I argue that the principles of IWRM provide for more
comprehensive and effective management and help to prevent future conflict. These ways of
knowing guide my point of view and influence the way that I present my arguments.
BACKGROUND
Early Civilizations
Freshwater from rivers and lakes has shaped the development of human civilization from
hunter-gatherer communities to stationary agrarian societies to the industrialized 21st century.
The environmental historian, Peter Coates, describes rivers as a "sinuous blend...not just of
geology, ecology, and climate, but of economics, technology, politics, and human imaginings."14
Coates' observation accurately portrays the important role that rivers have played in shaping
almost every aspect of human society. Humans have harnessed the power of water in order to
perpetuate their own economic development, but the intensive use of water for developmental
reasons has come with a trade-off in ecological destruction. The following section will explore
ways in which many of the major historical turning points of the last 9000 years have been
marked by mankind's ability to control water from large lakes and rivers. The rate at which
mankind uses freshwater resources increases in both geographical scope and intensity over time,
14
Peter Coates, A Story of Six Rivers: History, Culture and Ecology (London, UK: Reaktion Books, 2013): 12.

and eventually the world's economic development will be threatened by Earth's declining ability
to supply freshwater. While the future of the quality and quantity of water resources is uncertain,
mankind's path forward will be influenced by its ability to manage rivers in a way that does not
follow the current model of ecological destruction, and that allows rivers to provide the services
they have given mankind for centuries.
The first major period in human history when water shaped civilization began with the
establishment of irrigated agriculture. The earliest records of irrigated agriculture point to the
Middle East's Fertile Crescent roughly 10,000 years ago.15
Before the establishment of
civilizations, hunter-gatherer societies roamed the land in search of new resources that could
supply their immediate needs. With the invention of agriculture, nomad cultures settled down
and transformed prairies into fields of wild barley and emmer wheat grasses.16
The soil,
however, soon lost its fertility and farmers were forced to slash and burn new plots of land to
grow their crops. By approximately 7000 B.C., farmers had constructed irrigation canals that
delivered streams of water to their crops.17
This was a revolutionary design because it allowed
farmers to stay in one place with all of their food and water requirements met. This forever
changed the way that people survived and organized themselves, and encouraged large numbers
of people to congregate in city centers. In 8000 B.C. about 4 million hunter-gatherers roamed the
Earth. After 5000 B.C., however, the human population doubled every 1000 years and by 1000
B.C., the world population reached approximately 50 million.18
The only condition for these
ancient cities was that there needed to be a source of water close at hand.
15
Steven Solomon, Water: The Epic Struggle For Wealth, Power, and Civilization (New York, NY: HarperCollins
Publishers, 2010): 19.
16
Ibid.
17
Ibid., 20.
18
Ibid., 23.

All of the first major civilizations developed in semiarid environments alongside large,
flooding and fertile rivers.19
The floods seasons were vitally important for agriculture because
they predictably brought fresh soils and nutrients from upstream to nourish planted crops. These
rivers also served as a conduit for trade and transportation. The first civilizations are thought to
have emerged in Mesopotamia along the shores of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, and these
were followed by major civilizations in Egypt along the Nile River, India along the Indus River,
and China along the Yellow River. These were the first societies to harness the great potential of
rivers, and the first to develop large-scale economies, urban politics, and diverse cultures using
engineering knowledge to provide water.
Egypt is an excellent example of a society that truly valued water for its provisioning,
regulating, and spiritual services. The Nile River was the only source of irrigation for agriculture.
Planting was arranged so that the floods arrived at the peak of the agricultural cycle, which
resulted in productive crop yields and layers of fertile black silt. The Greek historian Herodotus,
who visited Egypt in 460 B.C., described the flood season as the "gift of the Nile" due to its life-
giving powers.20
The river also shaped almost all aspects of Egyptian culture and society. The
Pharaoh of Egypt was seen as the absolute sovereign over the river who, in the Old Kingdom,
was believed to be a living god who owned both the land and the river. Furthermore, information
about the cyclic flows of the Nile and the planting season was secretly guarded by Egyptian
priests. It has even been observed that the rise and fall of dynasties in Egypt are correlated with
the variations in the Nile's flood season.21
Years with heavy floods produced a surplus of food,
which would establish political unity between the upper and lower regions of Egypt's Nile
Valley. During these times of harmony and productivity, grand temples and monuments were
19
Ibid., 25.
20
Ibid., 26.
21
Ibid., 27.

erected as cultural centerpieces of prosperity and development. On the other hand, years with
lower flood levels were the dark ages for the Egyptian civilization. These years were
characterized by disunity and dynastic collapse.22
For the Egyptians, the Nile River literally
shaped the civilization's ability to progress and live in peace. Over the next 2000 years, water
would continue to have a significant influence on society.
Industrial Revolution
The second major period of rapid development and innovation occurred in the late 18th
century in Europe. Britain had become the leader in technologies that revolutionized traditional
modes of manufacturing and transformed the global economy.23
Britain's growth began when a
few entrepreneurs who developed ways to efficiently harness the energy of water and other
natural resources and used this energy to more efficiently manufacture goods and services. As a
result Britain grew its economy, developed a strong navy, and expanded their influence and ideas
around the world. Its success can, in part, be attributed to water.
The industrial revolution came about in two phases: the modernization of the cotton
textile industry and the development of iron.24
Geographically, Britain was blessed with
abundant sea and inland water resources. Entrepreneurs in Britain quickly utilized the energy of
fast-flowing rivers by inventing the water wheel. The water wheel provided a constant stream of
energy, which in 1771 could power 1000 spindles at a single time, which produced a superior
quality of cotton thread compared to textiles made by hand.25
It was not until the invention of the
steam engine, however, that Britain became the leader in the production of textile and iron.
22
Ibid.
23
Ibid., 212.
24
Ibid.
25
Ibid., 221.

Thomas Newcome is credited for the invention of the first steam engine, which essentially acted
as a large water pump. The steam engine lifted about 10 gallons of water 153 feet with each
pump stroke.26
The second phase of the industrial revolution, spurred only by the invention of
the steam engine, centered around the production of cast iron. All of the heavy industries in
Britain in the late 18th and early 19th centuries were dependant on the production of iron. With
the combination of the power of steam and the strength of iron, Britain's already well-developed
navy grew to be the dominant military force in the world. Britain's influence quickly spread
across the globe, and it established a global monopoly over the textile market.27
However,
Britain continued to face a serious problem that threatened to jeopardize its growth.
In order to keep up with the incredible energy demand of its expanding industry, Britain
needed a reliable supply of coal. As coal miners dug deeper into the earth, they found it
increasingly challenging to supply the demand. Mining for coal required digging beneath the
water table, which often resulted in flooding. The further that they mined beneath the water table,
the more flooding they experienced. Miners depended upon the steam engine to pump water out
of the mines, but the old steam engine was thermally inefficient and burned large amounts of
coal in order to heat the water into steam. In a short period of time, Britain faced a fuel shortage
that forced them to import half its iron and outsource one-third of its shipbuilding.28
Like the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, technological innovation saved Britain
from its conundrum. James Watt first patented a new 9 horse-power steam engine in 1767 that
was more efficient and could be placed anywhere that coal, wood, or fuel was obtained. This
new design not only made it possible for miners to rapidly and economically pump water from
flooded coal mines, but also significantly increased the rate of manufacturing output. Between
26
Ibid., 225.
27
Ibid., 212.
28
Ibid., 213.

1789 and 1802, raw cotton imports in Britain to be manufactured into cloth multiplied by a factor
of 12, from 5 million pounds to 60 million pounds.29
Watt's invention changed the course of
human activity because it proved that improving technology could make manufacturing more
efficient and more productive. The Industrial Revolution encouraged countries to develop with
greater speed and intensity. At the same time, however, the rapid development encouraged a
cycle of natural resource acquisition and disposal, which over-exploited and polluted Earth's
water resources.
Large-scale Dam Construction
A third major phase in human development and progress began in the 20th century and,
again, came about as a result of man's ability to control water from rivers and lakes. In 1936 the
United States constructed the world's first large-scale dam on the Colorado River. The Hoover
Dam was a scientific, technological, and engineering feat of a scale that had never been
attempted before. It stood at 726 feet high, which was more than twice as high as any other dam
on earth.30
It created the world's largest man-made reservoir, Lake Mead, which could hold up to
two times the annual flow of the Colorado River and, by 2000, it supplied water to some 30
million people in the southwestern cities of Los Angeles, San Diego, Phoenix, and Las Vegas.
Furthermore, the dam was truly a revolutionary design because it improved navigation and
drinking supply, and allowed for the generation of hydroelectric energy through the use of
turbines. Before, dams were designed primarily for irrigation and flood control.31
The
construction of the Hoover Dam marked a moment of pride in U.S. history because it not only
illustrated the United States’ ability to control the water from its largest rivers, but symbolized
29
Ibid., 223.
30
Ibid., 330.
31
Ibid, 331.

the country’s growing influence, wealth, and power even in the midst of a great economic
depression. It served as a message to the rest of the world that the United States was at the
forefront of development and technological ingenuity. The United States’ design spurred foreign
nations to replicate its model, which resulted in boom of dam building on almost every major
river on the planet.
Large-scale dams changed the fabric of human interaction, power, and development
because it allowed developing countries to more quickly climb the economic ladder toward
economic wealth and political influence. Dams provide cheap hydroelectricity and freshwater
that increases capabilities for irrigation and food production, power generation for cities and
industrial factories, and provisions of healthy drinking water. The rise of the Soviet Union was
possible, in part, as a result of the construction of large-scale dams. Joseph Stalin built dams on
the Volga River in 1937 and then on other major rivers such as the Dnieper, Don, and Dniester.
Stalin was quoted to have said that "water which is allowed to enter the sea is wasted."32
The
Soviet Union increased its water use by a factor of eight in the 60 years after the 1917 Bolshevik
Revolution and greatly contributed to the development of their industrial might.33
Similarly,
Chairman Mao Zedong in China whole-heartedly supported the construction of dams as he
worked to restructure Chinese society toward communism.34
By the end of the 20th century
China had constructed approximately 22,000 large dams, which was nearly half of the world's
total.35
In 2006 it constructed the Three Gorges dam on the Yangtze River, which modeled the
Hoover Dam in the sense that it was China's "linchpin in its bid for an accelerated economic
32
Ibid., 258.
33
Ibid.
34
Ibid.
35
Ibid., 359.

transformation."36
At the close of the 20th century approximately 45,000 dams had been erected
world-wide and during the global peak of dam-building in the 1960s, '70s, and '80s an average of
13 dams were being constructed every day. The explosive growth of large-scale infrastructure on
rivers facilitated some of the most encompassing transformation of the natural planet in human
history. These changes had both positive and negative implications for global economies and
natural rivers.
For example, after large-scale infrastructure provided for the expansion of irrigation
systems and increased power generation for urban centers, mankind altered the natural landscape
in order to grow greater amounts of food and enlarge urban centers to accommodate a growing
population. Irrigation almost tripled in half a century after 1950 and covered approximately 17%
of the world's arable land to produce 40% of its food.37
The expansion of irrigation spurred the
Green Revolution near the end of the 20th century when farmers and researchers worked
together to create high-yielding strains of stable crops that were highly responsive to intensive
inputs of water and chemical fertilizer. This method of food production created a variety of
hybrid foods that were engineered and adapted to grow in adverse conditions. This resulted in
crop surpluses across the developing world in the 1960s and '70s. Between 1970 and 1991, the
number of hybrid varietals increased from under 15% to 75% of the developing world's wheat
and rice crop while yields multiplied by three times.38
The intensification of water use has helped
to produce greater amounts of food for a growing population and contribute to economic
development, but it has put incredible strain on the world's water supplies. Entering into the 21st
century, the world began to recognize that healthy and available water supplies were becoming
increasingly scarce.
36
Ibid.
37
Ibid., 360.
38
Ibid., 360.

Today the construction of large-scale dams is a controversial and cross-disciplinary topic
that requires politicians, environmental and social scientists, economists, and engineers to
consider a wide range of trade-offs. It has generally been thought that dams promote economic
development and generate wealth, but the World Bank, which supports the World Dam
Commission and has invested $75 billion for large dam projects in 92 countries, recently
concluded that the majority of large dams "ended up costing far more, profitably irrigated less
cropland, produced less hydroelectric power, and delivered much less water to cities than
originally advertised."39
This statement suggests that the construction of dams has come at a
greater cost to countries than the benefits they provide, and the study does not account for the
displacement of some 80 million people,40
the disproportionate distribution of economic benefits,
the spread of diseases like malaria to the rural poor, and the ecological alterations and destruction
that have resulted from dams.
21st Century: Era of Scarcity
The first United Nations World Water Development Report, published in 2003, declared
that "at the beginning of the twenty-first century, the Earth, with its diverse and abundant life
forms, including over six billion humans, is facing a serious water crisis."41
Researchers report
that water resources are both diminishing and being polluted as a result of the growth of the
agricultural and industrial sectors as well as drivers such as population growth, economic
development, and climate change. The fourth United Nations World Water Development Report,
published in 2012, declared that the global groundwater abstraction rate has at least tripled over
39
Solomon, 240.
40
Ibid.
41
World Water Assessment Program, Water for People, Water for Life: The United Nations World Water
Development Report, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, (Paris, France: United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2003): 4.

the past 50 years, which in some areas is exceeding the rate of recharge.42
Furthermore, it is
predicted that the state of the world's water will get worse if no corrective action is taken.43
As
water resources decline, it becomes increasingly difficult for local, national, and regional
communities to find sufficient amounts of water to supply their political and economic agendas.
In many cases this forces groups of people to compete for remaining resources. While many of
these situations are resolved diplomatically and peacefully, there are many instances around the
world where water disputes result in violence. The goal of current water management
frameworks is to find peaceful solutions to water disputes. In order to understand these
frameworks and how they mitigate conflict, it is useful to understand the sources and nature of
water conflict.
Water and Conflict
Water is a resource that is unevenly distributed in both space and time and conflict results
from what author Steven Solomon describes as the "political fault line [that] is erupting...
between water Haves and water Have-Nots...."44
The "Have-Nots" make up a significant
proportion of the world's population. Approximately one-fifth of the world's population lacks
access to at least one gallon per day of safe water to drink and two-fifths do not have an
additional five gallons needed daily for adequate sanitation and hygiene.45
These people often
depend on their government to supply them with the necessary resources; however, almost every
country struggles to find enough water resources to meet their needs. Solomon describes
42
World Water Assessment Program, Managing Water under Uncertainty and Risk: The United Nations World
Water Development Report 4, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, (Paris, France:
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2012): 5.
43
World Water Assessment Program, Water for People, Water for Life: The United Nations World Water
Development Report, 4.
44
Solomon, 4.
45
Ibid., 370-71.

freshwater to be the "Achilles' heel" of fast-developing countries like China and India, which
both are dangerously close to exhausting water resources necessary to feed their people and
expand their industries.46
The following two examples will demonstrate how water conflict can
take place at the national and international levels and can be detrimental to local populations.
Between 2004 and 2006, East Africa experienced an extended drought that affected 11
million people and killed large numbers of livestock. During this period, tribal groups in Kenya
and Ethiopia began to fight over groundwater wells. In Ethiopia, competing "well warlords" and
"well warriors" bitterly fought for what they saw as their rightful sources of water.47
The fighting
grew so intense that the Ethiopian government intervened and ended the conflict – but not before
250 people were killed and many more injured. In Kenya the fighting occurred between the
Maasai and Kikuyu tribes, and also required government intervention. After the conflict was
resolved, one villager was quoted by the Washington Post saying, "Thirst forces men to this
horror of war."48
These instances in East Africa illustrate that violent conflict over water has real
human consequences and often requires financial and military resources from governments to
resolve. The situation becomes more complicated, however, when disputes are international.
The Chenab River is a major river in India and Pakistan and a source of contention
between the two countries. The river forms in the upper Himalayas and flows through the Jammu
and Kashmir regions of India into the Punjab region of Pakistan. In 1999, India began
constructing a large-scale dam called the Baglihar Dam which generates about 450 Megawatts of
power for the Jammu and Kashmir states. Pakistan, however, claims that the dam violates
the1960 Indus Water Treaty which stipulates that a certain amount of water must flow across the
border from India into Pakistan. The Economist reports that Pakistanis see India's construction of
46
Ibid., 5.
47
Ibid., 80.
48
Ibid.

the Baglihar Dam as an "intensifying Indian threat to their existence, a conspiracy to divert,
withhold or misuse precious water that is rightfully theirs."49
While a large-scale conflict has not
resulted from the dispute, small scale threats of violence do exist. B.G. Verghese, an Indian
writer, claims that "Water is the latest battle cry for jiadis. They shout that water must flow, or
blood must flow."50
A local Pakistani terror group named Lashkar-e-Taiba regularly threatens to
blow up India's dam. This example illustrates that if the governments of India and Pakistan don't
proactively work together to find a diplomatic solution, the Biglihar Dam could be a source of
violent controversy in the future – with the potential to escalate.
While violence is used a source of conflict resolution over water in many places in the
world, international organizations are working with countries and regions to find ways to address
challenges of diminishing water resources peacefully. In fact, the Woodrow Wilson International
Center for Scholars reported that "instances of cooperation between riparian nations
outnumbered conflicts by more than two to one between 1945 and 1999."51
It claims that water is
so important that countries can't afford to fight over it. All around the world regions are proving
their ability to develop management frameworks that will reduce the potential for conflict and
promote cooperation. This paper will illustrate more in-depth how countries can mitigate conflict
over water.
49
"Unquenchable thirst: A growing rivalry between India, Pakistan and China over the region's great rivers may be
threatening South Asia's peace," The Economist, November 19, 2011, accessed December 29, 2013,
http://www.economist.com/node/21538687.
50
Ibid.
51
Aaron Wolf et al, Navigating Peace: Water Can Be A Pathway To Peace, Not War, Environmental Change and
Security Program, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Report no. 1, (2006).

History of Water Law and Management
Around the time period of World War I, the water management paradigm shifted
dramatically. Before World War I, waterways were managed for navigation. The war, however,
pushed water managers to think about how the world's water resources would withstand the
intensive use and pollution from heavy industry. International and private organizations started
to develop general guidelines for the management of the quality and quantity of the world's
waterways. Although these guidelines were never meant to be legally binding, they were to be
used by governing bodies to influence and reinforce law.52
After World War II, two international documents were created, which formed the most
comprehensive framework for the management of international waterways yet. The first was the
Helsinki Rules on the Uses of the Waters of International Rivers formed by the International
Law Association in Helsinki, Finland (Appendix 2). The Helsinki Rules established guidelines
for the "reasonable and equitable" sharing of a common international waterway.53
It laid the
foundation for next international water management framework called the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of the International Watercourses. Very
similar to the Helsinki Rules, the Convention is described as a "flexible and overarching global
legal framework that establishes basic rules and standards of cooperation between riparian states
on use, management, and protection of international watercourses."54
The UN Convention was a
groundbreaking document because it called for the communication and cooperation of
international bodies and its purpose is to address legal weakness, provide policy guidance, foster
political stability, establish a fair playing field for all participation states, and incorporate social
52
Heather L. Beach, J. Joseph Hewitt, and Edy Kaufman, Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Resolution Theory,
Practice, and Annotated References (Tokyo; New York: United Nations University Press, 2000): 9.
53
Ibid.
54
Flavia Loures, Dr. Alistair Rieu-Clarke, and Marie-Laure Vercambre, "Everything you need to know about the
UN Watercourses Convention," (World Wildlife Fund, 2010).

and environmental considerations.55
The Convention cannot be legally enforced because it only
has 19 contracting states, 16 short of the number required to enter into force,56
but it still serves
as a model for holistic management to governments, international organizations, and non-profit
organizations.
Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM)
The UN Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of the International
Watercourses embodies a set of principles established in the 1930s that is holistic and cross-
disciplinary in its approach. Today these set of principles are regarded as IWRM. While there are
a variety of interpretations on the definition of IWRM, its primary purpose is to provide a
management framework to achieve the three principles of sustainability: economic prosperity,
social equity, and environmental sustainability. To this end, Islam and Susskind define IWRM as
"a process which promotes the coordinated development and management of water, land and
related resources in order to maximize economic and social welfare in an equitable manner
without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems and the environment."57
The concept of IWRM is not new, but it is only within the last 30 years that it has been
widely recognized and applied. There are two key elements of IWRM that make it a useful water
management framework for protecting river ecosystems and providing for the well-being of
people. First, IWRM is a dynamic framework that accounts for the changes that are always
occurring in political, socio-economic, and environmental circumstances. Because water
management is tied to these contextual elements, an effective water management framework is
55
Ibid., 10.
56
Dr. Alistair S. Rieu-Clarke, "The Role and Relevance of the UN Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational
Uses of International Watercourses to the EU and Its Member States," (The British Yearbook of International Law,
2008): 389.
57
Islam and Susskind, 6.

dynamic. Figure 1 shows that IWRM provides for ongoing evaluation of management
frameworks and changes to management approaches as political, socio-economic and
environmental circumstances shift.58
Second, IWRM accounts for the benefits and services
provided to humans by natural river ecosystems, and seeks to protect these services for our
continued benefit. Figure 2 shows that highly managed watercourses reduce the benefits
provided by natural systems.59
Furthermore, the total benefit from highly managed systems
declines over time. IWRM seeks to strike a balance between managing a watercourse (i.e.,
constructing hydroelectric dams and diverting water for irrigation) and protecting the natural
integrity of a river ecosystem.
Figure 1: Figure 1 shows the dynamic processes of IWRM that account for on-going evaluation of management
frameworks and changes to management approaches as the political, socio-economic and environmental
circumstances shift. 60
58
UN Water, Introduction to the IWRM Guidelines at River Basin Level, The United Nations World Water
Assessment Programme (2009), 5.
59
Anna Forslund, "Securing Water for Ecosystems and Human Well-being," Global Water Partnership (2009): 23.
60
UN Water, Introduction to the IWRM Guidelines at River Basin Level, 5.

Figure 2: Figure 2 shows the cumulative long-term benefits provided by natural river ecosystems and managed river
systems. The cumulative benefits are measured by adding the total benefits provided by both natural river
ecosystems and managed river systems on a scale of the river being not managed at all to being highly managed.61
CHANGING GLOBAL TRENDS
Globalization and Regionalization
At the beginning of the 21st century, following the break-up of the Soviet Union and the
end of the Cold War, global political and economic relationships began to shift toward greater
regional integration and the intensification of globalization. The bi-lateral relationship between
NATO countries and the former USSR fragmented, and countries began to form new bonds with
nation-states within their regions. At the same time, the effects of intensifying globalization send
people, ideas, commodities, capital, and technology across the globe with greater speed than ever
before. Sebastian Conrad, a professor of history at the Feie Universität in Berlin and an expert on
trans-national and global approaches to history, explains that:
61
Forslund, 23.

Regions, while constituting the strategic frame of reference of historical actors, also
need to be understood as entities that emerged under the pressures of the international
state-system and capitalist integration.... regionalisms are not only based on shared
characteristics, and are not made entirely from within, but are also responses to forces
from without and to larger processes of global integration.62
Conrad emphasizes that the effects of globalization and "the pressures of the international state-
system and capitalist integration" have shaped regions as they are today. These dual trends of
globalization and regionalization have had significant impacts on water management practices
over the past two decades.
As natural resources have become increasingly scarce because of destructive human
activities, regions have come to see that they need to collaborate and create management
frameworks that use these declining resources more responsibly and equitably. Conrad explains,
We believe that physical forms which cross national boundaries -- rivers, forests,
ecologies, ocean currents -- not only remain important, but have become more so as
humans have accelerated their degradation and depletion. The regions that have been
shaped by this geography -- beyond nations -- will have to respond to this threat
collectively or regionally.63
Conrad's statement illustrates that regions are bound together by their geography and,
consequently, they share their environmental challenges. Regions also have to grapple with the
growing presence of transnational and multinational corporations wanting a stake in remaining
resources. In an article that discusses the relationship between capitalism, globalization, and the
environment, James O'Connor explains that "'[C]orporations construct the problem of the
62
Sebastian Conrad and Presenjit Duara, Viewing Regionalisms from East Asia (Washington D.C.: American
Historical Association, 2013): viii.
63
Ibid.

environment... of how to remake nature in ways that are consistent with sustainable profitability
and capital accumulation.'"64
He states that corporations see the degrading global environment as
part of an "ecological revolution" in which corporations must reorganize in order to survive.65
This highlights the fact that corporations have been and are highly active in regions across the
world, seeking to take advantage of local resources – including freshwater – for the purpose of
making profit.
Climate Change
Like regionalization and globalization, climate change is a global trend that influences
water management. CO2 levels in the atmosphere rose dramatically over the course of the 20th
century, causing changes both to local weather patterns and global climate. These changes have a
number of side-effects including extreme oscillations in annual weather patterns resulting in
heavy rain events, draught, and heat waves – all of which negatively impact water reserves by
causing shortages and/or severe flood events. Either way, the effects of climate change are
harmful to human well-being and make water management increasingly unpredictable and
unknowable. Timothy Luke, an expert on environmental and cultural studies, explains that
"...these climate changes are so rapid, profound, and fundamental, that this new unwanted global
environment, which is tied closely to rising levels of industrial by-products and waste, will be
more unpredictable and uncertain for established climatologically science."66
Because climate
change makes water management unpredictable, water managers must factor into policy
64
James O'Connor, Natural Causes: Essays in Ecological Marxism (New York, NY: Guilford Press, 1998): 238.
65
Ibid.
66
Timothy W. Luke, "An Unwanted World: Global Warming as an Alternative Globalization," in Alternative
Globalizations: Conference Documents, ed. Jerry Harris, Global Studies Association: 2006 Annual Conference
(Chicago, IL: ChangeMaker Publications, 2006): 305.

decisions and environmental and economic strategies that account for the potential effects of
climate change on the environment, society, and economy.
THEORETICAL ELEMENTS
In order for water managers to use current models for holistic water management, such as
the UN Watercourse Convention, they must take into account certain theoretical elements that
shape thinking. To understand this, the discussion and analysis in this paper will use a set of
theoretical propositions, which are natural, political, and social in nature, that are critical to
understand and have shaped the design of this study and inform the outcomes.
The first theoretical element that this paper will consider is the proposition that mankind's
current path of capital accumulation and ecological destruction has the potential to have long-
term consequences on both economic growth and the well-being of humans. In Limits to Growth,
a study published by Donella Meadows, Jorgen Randers, and Dennis Meadows, these researchers
used system dynamics theory and computer modeling to analyze the long-term implications of
physical growth in the world's population material economy. They found that humans are
currently engaged in an ecological overshoot in which we are using the Earth's natural resources
at a rate that cannot be sustained indefinitely. Based on these results, they warn that "humanity
might have to divert much capital and manpower to battle these constraints, possibly so much
that the average quality of life would decline sometime during the twenty-first century."67
Mankind's current path is one of destruction and collapse. If humanity wants to continue to
survive and grow its economies, it will have to act in a way that replenishes the Earth's
ecosystems and gives back the resources that it has taken away.
67
Donella Meadows, Jorgen Randers, and Dennis Meadows, Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update, (Vermont:
Chelsea Green Publishing Company, 2004): x.

The second theoretical element that this paper will consider is that mankind's ability to
address the problems of the world's deteriorating environmental state will depend upon political
cooperation. Jeffrey D. Sachs, a world-renowned professor of economics and leader in
sustainable development, conveys this concept in his book Common Wealth: Economics for a
Crowded Planet when he writes "In the twenty-first century our global society will flourish or
perish according to our ability to find common ground across the world on a set of shared
objectives and on the practical means to achieve them."68
Sachs makes this statement with the
knowledge that the environmental problems that the world faces span across political borders. As
it becomes increasingly imperative that countries need to start addressing world-wide ecological
issues, cooperation needs to come to the fore and humanity will need to find ways to negotiate
and make compromises in a way that is best for the global community.
The third theoretical element that this is considered in this paper is that social agency and
the expansion of social freedoms promote sustainable environmental, economic, and social
development. Most countries measure development as how much the Gross Domestic Product
(GDP) grows every year. However Amartya Sen, winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics and
the book Development as Freedom, sees development as overcoming social and environmental
deprivations. He says that "development can be seen, it is argued here, as a process of expanding
the real freedoms that people enjoy."69
As people are given greater freedom to think, act, and
take part in decision-making, they are empowered to control their social, political, and
environmental networks. Sen has found that not only has the expansion of social freedom helped
to address deprivations such as poverty and ecological destruction, but it has also contributed to
68
Jeffry D. Sachs, Common Wealth: Economics for a Crowded Planet, (New York, NY: Penguin Press, 2008): 4.
69
Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom (New York, NY: Alfred A. Knoe, Inc., 1999): 3.

the accumulation of the Gross National Product (GNP).70
It is important to note, however, that
just as society shapes its social, political, and environmental networks, it is also constrained by
the social, political, and economic opportunities available to it.
MODEL FRAMEWORK
As stated in the introduction of this paper, the central question of this study is how can
riparian states sharing an international watercourse manage for sustainability across diverse
geographical regions and political and socio-economic contexts in order to effectively provide
for the welfare of people and the protection of ecosystems? In order answer this question,
researchers need a model that accounts for both the best-practice elements of international water
management, the complexity of water management, and its relationship with political, socio-
economic and natural factors that either support or inhibit sustainable management of
international watercourses. This study has adopted and developed elements for a model (Figure
3) that considers both best-practice management principles of international water management
and supporting and constraining contextual factors in order to answer the central research
question.
70
Ibid., 5.

Figure 3: Figure 3 shows the model that this research paper will use in order to assess how riparian countries can
sustainably manage for the welfare of people and the protection of ecosystems and apply best-management
principles of IWRM.
In order to understand how riparian countries sharing an international watercourse can
successfully and sustainably manage an international watercourse in order to protect river
ecosystems and provide for the welfare of people (the dependent variable in this study), this
study will evaluate two sets of independent variables in two different case-study regions. The
two independent variables in this study are (1) the degree to which the best-practice management
principles of IWRM are implemented and (2) the political, socio-economic and natural context

elements that support and/or constrain sustainable management. The following paragraph will
explain each independent variable in more detail.
The theoretical elements, explained above, form the core principles of IWRM thinking
and the three-best management principles that I have chosen. Even though there are a variety of
IWRM best-management principles recognized by the United Nations in the Convention on the
Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses, I have chosen three of the
more noteworthy principles in the IWRM framework that specifically support the protection of
river ecosystems and human well-being, as follows:
1. Active and equitable participation in transboundary management - Cooperation across
geographical units (countries, regions, etc.) in transboundary management enables better
ecological management, which provides benefits to the river, wetlands, and related
ecosystems. Cooperation can also increase food and energy production, improve
irrigation and contribute to poverty reduction.71
2. Inclusion of public and private stakeholders in decision-making - Participation from
public and private stakeholders (i.e., community members, non-governmental
organizations (NGOs), research institutions, private sector participants and donors) at
regional72
, national, and local levels enhances transparency, decision-making and
enforcement of water laws. The inclusion of a variety of stakeholders allows water
management decisions to be tailored to different values and, as a result, strengthens
integration and reduces the potential for conflict.73
3. Environmental protection and regulation - Measures for environmental protection and
regulation at the regional level are critically important for basin-wide protection of
71
UN Water, Transboundary Waters: Sharing Benefits, Sharing Responsibilities (2008): 3.
72
Unless indicated otherwise, "regional" refers to groups of nation-states sharing a common geographical location.
73
Ibid., 9.

aquatic ecosystems. Environmental protection and regulation at national and local levels
are also important, but they must coordinate with regional-level management.
While these three management principles are crucially important for sustainable management
that protects river ecosystems and provides for human welfare, they cannot be successfully
implemented outside of certain political, socio-economic and natural context elements. These
context elements often differ by region and can be seen to either support or constrain water
managers' abilities to sustainably manage international watercourses. This paper has identified
certain variables under each of the context elements that shape whether managers can
successfully implement these best-practices and, therefore, sustainably manage for the protection
of river ecosystems and the welfare of people. The variables are explained below:
1. Political
i. Political integration and democratic decision-making in regional institutions,
policy and legislation - strong political integration, legal and policy structures
for water management, and decentralizing of management often support
cooperation over water management projects and objectives, and facilitates
basin-wide environmental management. Similarly, democratic decision-
making fosters greater trust across nation-states and enhances transparency
and government accountability in decision-making.
ii. Individualism vs. cooperation among nation-states in decision-making -
Decisions made at the nation-state level that are supportive of the common
good often mitigate conflict over water resources and facilitate cooperation
over basin-wide environmental protection. Decisions made individually by

nation-states, without consulting other nation-state stakeholders, often do not
encourage basin-wide environmental protection, and risk causing harm to
another riparian countries and sparking conflict.
iii. Water management structure - Water management structures (i.e. legislation,
management institutions, governmental frameworks) can either encourage or
inhibit sustainable water management. Strong structures often empower water
management agents (i.e. government officials, water authorities, community
members) to management water sustainably and implement best-practice
principles of IWRM.
iv. Water management in practice - Water management institutions and actors at
regional, national and local levels must reflect legislation, policy and
frameworks for sustainable water management at the structural level.
2. Socio-economic
i. Social and economic trends - Social and economic trends (i.e., levels of individual
freedom, poverty, market liberalization and urbanization) at regional, national and
local levels shape how public stakeholders, private water industries, and policy
makers participate in transboundary water management decision-making.
ii. Public norms and values - Understanding public norms and values can provide
key insights to decision-makers at regional, national and local levels into how
water should be managed in order to support the interests of the general public.
iii. Stakeholder representation in policy - Strong legal and policy structures at
regional, national and local levels that include public and private stakeholders
(i.e., community members, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), research

institutions, private sector participants and donors) in decision-making often
facilitate more sustainable water management.
iv. Stakeholder representation in practice - Water management institutions and actors
at regional, national and local levels must reflect legislation, policy and
frameworks for stakeholder engagement at the structural level in order to facilitate
sustainable water management.
3. Natural
i. Pollution from industrial, agricultural, and urban waste - Pollution in a river basin
is dispersed across political borders, effecting multiple nation-states, and is
destructive to natural river ecosystems and inhibit the river's ability to provide
usable services to humans.
ii. Disruption of rivers' natural hydrological flows - Alterations and obstructions to
rivers' natural hydrological flow , often caused by man-made structures such as
dams and channels, can cause changes to the river's hydrological functions and,
consequently, its ecosystems. These alterations and obstructions in one location
often have basin-wide impacts.
iii. Destruction of wetlands, natural habitats, and/or fish populations - Wetlands,
natural habitats, and fish provide numerous services to humans in an entire river-
basin in the form of food, medicine, flood buffers, etc. Their destruction reduces
the benefits provided to people across the region.
The following sections will apply this model to two case study regions that have diverse
political, socio-economic, and natural environments: DRB and the MRB. These river basins were

selected because they offer both positive and negative examples of how contextual circumstances
can both support and inhibit the implementation of best-practice management principles of
IWRM and sustainable management for the protection of ecosystems and provision of human
well-being. An analysis of these case studies will be used to support or reject my thesis that the
extent to which riparian states sharing an international watercourse are able to effectively
provide for the welfare of people and the protection of ecosystems depends upon both the
natural, political, and socio-economic contexts in which they are placed and the degree to which
they implement the three pillars of IWRM: participate actively and equitable, protect and
preserve ecosystems, and include stakeholders in decision-making.
CASE STUDY I - DANUBE RIVER BASIN (DRB)
The Danube River is the second largest river in Europe after the Volga River and touches
19 countries in Central and Eastern Europe. Historically it has played an important role in
Europe as a passageway for transportation and trade, and currently it continues to serve as a
principle driver of the European economy. Similarly, the DRB is a central hydrological vein for a
variety of riparian ecosystems. It houses a diversity of fish species and feeds into wetlands.
Because of the Danube's critical role in Europe, it is imperative that it continue to sustain
European economies, societal needs, and natural ecosystems. In order to assess the natural,
socio-economic, and political operating elements shaping how the river is managed, and
consequently the river’s ability to effectively provide for the welfare of people and the protection
of ecosystems, this paper will provide (1) a brief description of the Danube's geography and the
ways in which it is has been managed until the present, (2) an analysis of the natural, political
and socio-economic operating elements that either allow for or inhibit the implementation of

IWRM best-practice management principles, and (3) the degree to which IWRM best-
management principles have been implemented for the protection of ecosystems and the welfare
of people.
Geography and Management
The Danube River is a source of water for a significant portion of Europe. It flows
through nine countries in Central and Eastern Europe, including Albania, Austria, Bulgaria,
Croatia, Germany, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, and Ukraine, and touches eight other countries
including Slovenia, Czech Republic, Moldova, Ukraine, and parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Italy, Switzerland, Macedonia, Montenegro and Poland. The river begins in the Black Forest
Mountains in western Germany and runs 1,770 miles to the Black Sea Delta on the coast of
Romania. The Danube's watershed includes approximately 300 tributary rivers. 74
Before World War II the Danube was primarily used for navigation and it was a vital
passageway for countries to be able to efficiently transport goods and people. Management of the
Danube for navigation has its roots with the 1856 Treaty of Paris when The European
Commission of the Danube was established and representatives from each riparian country were
put in charge of managing the river's navigation routes. Their efforts were regarded as a huge
success in providing navigation for all European countries until World War I when international
navigation was interrupted due to war hostilities.75
After World War I, the Versailles Peace
Treaty of June 28, 1919 declared that the European Commission of the Danube, made up of
74
"Danube River," in Encyclopedia Britannica, Encyclopedia Britannica Online Academic Edition (Encyclopedia
Britannica Inc., 2013).
75
Beach et al., 84.

Great Britain, France, Italy and Romania would resume control over water management.76
However, an International Commission of the Danube was also created that included the
countries of Wurtemberg, Bavaria, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and
Romania in decision-making. Leading up to the start of World War II and the rise of the Nazi
German empire, the Danube River became a central vein for German economic transport, and
over 2 million tons of goods passed along the river in the peak economic year of 1936.77
When
war broke out, shared management of the Danube River was suspended.
After World War II, new political alliances were formed that required a new management
approach. In 1948, after a conference held to decide the future of management on the Danube
River, The Belgrade Convention was established and management was split between NATO and
USSR countries. The Convention gave the European Commission of the Danube semi-legislative
powers regarding navigation and inspection. The Eastern Bloc, which contributed the majority of
delegates to the conference, switched navigation over to the "exclusive control of each
riparian."78
Cooperation over the environmental quality of the river was a low priority.
During the Cold War the USSR acted with little regard for the quality of the environment,
which had terrible consequences on the state of natural ecosystems and the health of USSR
citizens. It considered economic development and military power to be a top priority and drew
extensively from the resources of heavy industry. Lignite coal was the main fuel source and
released high levels of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulates and other pollutants into the
air. The toxic pollutants fell from the sky in the form of acid rain and were absorbed into soils
and rivers. In the 1980s, sulfur dioxide levels in Czechoslovakia and Poland were eight times
76
Gordon E. Sherman, "The International Organization of the Danube Under the Peace Treaties," The American
Journal of International Law 17, no. 3 (July 1923): 451.
77
M. B, "The Germans on the Lower Danube," Bulletin of International News17, no. 21 (October 19, 1940): 1343.
78
Ibid., 85.

greater than in Western Europe. 79
At the same time radioactive and chemical pollutants from
manufacturing industries flowed unobstructed into rivers. Not only were these pollutants
destructive to natural ecosystems, but they were also harmful for people who relied upon river
water for drinking purposes. It was recorded that 80% of the children in the town of Espenhain in
East Germany developed bronchitis or heart ailments before turning eight years old. 80
Some
historians believe that one of the factors contributing to the USSR's breakup was popular
discontent with the state of the environment. Politicians in East Bloc countries looking to secede
from the USSR cited "its neglect for the environment" as one reason for becoming independent.
81
The devastating results of the USSR's mistreatment of the environment pushed riparian
countries to call for a different kind of management that would account for, among other things,
the quality of Europe's rivers.
By the late 1980s there were clear problems with water quality in the broad DRB region
that would require a more evaluative and holistic approach to water management. In 1985 the
Bucharest Declaration, signed by eight riparian states, introduced the concept of the integrated
approach to basin management, which viewed rivers as a greater system of related and
interacting parts (Appendix 3). Some of the key points from the Bucharest Declaration include
conserving water resources and their rational use...by incorporating the prevention and control of
Danube River pollution as an integral part of national policy of Danubian countries," and
"establish international long term co-operation based on multilateral and bilateral agreements."82
This was a progressive step in water management frameworks because it reinforced that rivers
79
Mary Ann Cunningham, "Eastern European Pollution," in Environmental Encyclopedia, 4th ed., Gale Virtual
Reference Library (Detroit: Gale, 2011), 1.
80
Chris Niedenthal, "Environmental Damage in Post-Soviet Eastern Europe," in Environmental Issues: Essential
Primary Sources, ed. Brenda Wilmoth Lerner and K. Lee Lerner (n.p.: Gale, Cengage Learning, 2006), 1.
81
Ibid.
82
Varduca, Aurel, Ph.D. "The 1985 Bucharest Declaration: An important step toward danube water quality
protection." NATO ASI Series 24 (1997): 31-41.

had to be managed at the greater basin level and take into account the quality of its ecosystems.
In 1994 riparian countries and the European Union signed the Convention on the Cooperation for
the Protection of Sustainable Use of the Danube River, which called for sustainable and
equitable management of the Danube's surface and groundwater (Appendix 4). Some of the key
objectives for attaining this goal are the conservation, improvement and rational use of surface
waters and groundwater, the implementation of preventative measures to control hazards
originating from accidents involving floods, ice or hazardous substances, and measures to reduce
the pollution entering into the Black Sea.83
In 2000, the European Union established the European Union Water Framework
Directive (WFD) (Appendix 5). This is "a legally binding policy that establishes a common
framework for water management and protection in Europe and that commits to transforming the
European water sector."84
The WFD is a comprehensive management framework that covers all
bodies of water within the European Union including coastal waters. The key points in the WFD
are that it requires riparian states to cooperate on fundamental water management issues,
evaluate the quality of waters and related ecosystems and set objectives to maintain good
ecological status, coordinate large infrastructure projects, streamline legislation over water, and
include the public in decision-making.85
Today it serves as the foundation for all management
initiatives in the DRB.
83
"Danube River Protection Convention," International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River
(ICDPR), last modified 2014, accessed February 17, 2014, http://www.icpdr.org/main/icpdr/danube-river-
protection-convention.
84
Maria Kaika, "The Water Framework Directive: A New Directive for a Changing Social, Political and Economic
European Framework," European Planning Studies 11, no. 3 (2003), 299.
85
"Introduction to the new EU Water Framework Directive," Environment, last modified September 9, 2012,
accessed October 31, 2013, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-framework/info/intro_en.htm.

Context Elements
Political Considerations
After World War II, Europe experienced major changes to its political structure that have
influenced the ways in which European waterways are managed. The creation of the European
Community in 1951 (what is now the European Union) transformed the European landscape
from political and economic disintegration to a cooperative and cohesive group of countries and
economies, which aggregated decision-making at the regional and national levels. After the end
of the Cold War, countries that were once subject to the autocratic rule of the Soviet Union
shifted to democratic governments and began to extend certain freedoms to their people with the
opportunity to positively manage water and other resources, providing more democracy and
disaggregating decision-making at regional and national levels. These changes to the European
political system have had a defining effect on Europe's ability to manage its water. In particular,
the EU acts as a strong co-operational mechanism over water management that considers
environmental protection and the provision of social well-being, while increased democracy in
the former USSR countries not subsequently affiliated with the EU gives greater agency to the
public to partake in decision-making. To capture these developments and their implications for
water management this section will cover (1) the changing political circumstances after World
War II and subsequently the Cold War, (2) the degree of cooperation vs. individualism in
decision-making, (3) water management policy and (4) water management practice.
Changing Political Circumstances: The formation of the EU was a key event that
influenced the evolution of water management in Europe because the political and economic
integration that came about as a result of the formation of the EU allows for water management
legislation and institutions to organize at the regional scale. The concept of the EU was formed

Kynan Witters Hicks, Global Perspectives Capstone, April 2014 -- Final Draft

Kynan Witters Hicks, Global Perspectives Capstone, April 2014 -- Final Draft

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (12)

Similar to Kynan Witters Hicks, Global Perspectives Capstone, April 2014 -- Final Draft

Similar to Kynan Witters Hicks, Global Perspectives Capstone, April 2014 -- Final Draft (20)

Kynan Witters Hicks, Global Perspectives Capstone, April 2014 -- Final Draft