Of the world’s total population, nearly forty percent lives within a transboundary water basin, and over ninety percent lives within the nations that share these basins (Sadoff 2005). The world contains 214 major transboundary freshwater resources, several of which include the Nile, Tigris, Jordan, Ganges, Brahmaputra, Colorado, Rhine, and Scheldt rivers (Toset 2000). These basins have been targeted and exploited. In order to study such complex and dynamic resources, “evaluations of the environmental impacts of human activities as well as strategies for river conservation should use the whole river basin as the basic functional unit of river landscapes” (Nilsson 2005). To create such a comprehensive study, the interests of all major actors must be considered, unfortunately these interests often collide in a water stressed world.
As water scarcity becomes an increasingly significant concern for many nations, greater potential for international tensions are created through various exploitations of transboundary water basins. These exploitations and impacts include: pollution, boundary disputes, navigation restrictions, damming projects, agricultural irrigation, urbanization demands, and various impacts of climate change (Grafton 2014). Such factors have been identified as likely to produce “intense political pressures” and ultimately international political instability (Wolf 2001). Generally, when water is limited, nations identify obtaining continued access to the resource as a matter of national security (Toset 2000). Basins that are most likely to experience political unrest due to conflicting exploitations and exponentially increasing scarcity, include the Brahmaputra, Han, Mekong, Salween, Senegal, Zambezi, Nile, Jordan, and Tigris (Wolf 2001).
Freshwater governance has taken an increasingly prominent role in global policy agendas. Such policies however span many disciplines, and therefore developing effective policies is a major challenge. Furthermore, policy decisions must take both short and long-term repercussions into consideration. These considerations are especially important when ecological health is concerned. “Environmental systems are frequently subject to thresholds and cumulative impacts that result in significant loss when they occur, but which are hard to predict and difficult to reverse” (Grafton 2014). This particular issue of an ecological tipping point becomes more prominent as climate variability increases.
Transboundary water governance theoretically necessitates the same level of coercive power that national governments require to apply more local water policies, however, no such executive power exists. Negotiations and resolutions are therefore more difficult to produce (Grafton 2014). Although the United Nations could potentially serve as such a power, “[t]he sovereignty of nation states is a key principle of the UN…[and] the General Assembly and other UN bodies are not vested with the power to make or enforce decisions on how particular countries use transboundary waters” (Grafton 2014).
River basin organizations and joint river administrations have become more common as transboundary water issues unfold. For example, in 1995, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam created the Mekong River Commission, which attempts to assure responsible management in regards to irrigation, hydropower, navigation, flood control, fisheries, timber transportation and tourism of the Mekong (Toset 2000). Additionally, the United States and Mexico created a Border Environmental Cooperation Commission which partially handles issues regarding transboundary river conflicts. However, it is agued that in general cooperation is more easily reached when water quality is the concern, rather than quantity issues, which have spurred more complex disputes.
The Middle East proves an historical example of this. Israel inflicted physical military attacks upon Syria, Jordan, and Lebanon in 1965 due to the latter’s major water diversion project, The Headwater Diversion Plan. Nevertheless, from 1814 to 2000, 300 separate water treaties have been developed relating to transboundary water resources concerns (Toset 2000). Although nations which control the headwaters of such major basins are fully aware that they hold the advantage, which potentially encourages their own water security interests to take precedence above allocation compromises, bilateral and multinational cooperation is seen as a growing necessity.
The Colorado and Brahmaputra River watersheds are two major basins which have faced transboundary tensions. These issues have largely been spurred by domestic over-allocation of water, and the potential for increased ecological dilemmas, which could impact longterm flow rates. This actor map displays these general relationships, as well as the main exploiters and international results. The histories, current dilemmas, and triumphs of both of these watersheds will be discussed in great detail, and ultimately compared to gain greater insight into major transboundary basin management.
W O R K S C I T E D