Joakim Öjendal

Politics and Development in a Transboundary Watershed - The Case of the Lower Mekong Basin

This introductory chapter presents the main theme of the volume: the perceived dilemmas in pursuing IWRM in a transboundary context. The chapter discusses the IWRM approach and its package of progressive values and practices that focus on integration and participation and contrast it to transboundary politics and its tendency to remain within a state logic that emphasises sovereignty and national interests. In order to realise sustainable, efficient and inclusive water management, the chapter argues that it is essential to recognise and visualise power asymmetries and politics in regional water politics. Based on this assumption – that politics matter – the chapter contends that there is a need to explore how the perceived dichotomy between the interests of state sovereignty and (progressive) transboundary water management is played out in the Mekong River Basin. Together with its 50-year history of institutionalised cooperation and the river basin’s significance in terms of supporting local livelihoods and its contribution to the region’s national economies, the case is of paramount importance and interest. The disputed results and uncertain future in the region illustrate the complexity of achieving efficient, equitable and ecologically sustainable water management in a competitive international system. It thus makes up an excellent case study to illuminate the politics of IWRM in a transboundary setting. The different chapters of the volume, which are set to unpack, scrutinise, and illuminate the politics of the Lancang-Mekong Basin, are introduced at the end of the chapter. This section thus indicates some of the possible ways forward, challenges, dilemmas and incompatibilities in sustainable water management in the region which will be dealt with in more depth throughout the book.

From friction to hybridity in Cambodia: 20 years of unfinished peacebuilding

Peacebuilding is rarely delivering to expectations. Instead, high-strung ambitions tend to mix with local dynamics triggering complex processes. In particular, the liberal peace approach has been criticised for operating with simplified world-views, mismatching with realities. In this article, we take a long-term perspective and assess the outcome of peacebuilding efforts in Cambodia two decades after the massive UN-operation was concluded. We apply the notion of ‘friction’ between interveners and intervened in order to illuminate the ‘hybridity’ that has, we claim, been the key outcome of both peace and democratisation attempts. We trace several key development processes in some detail in order to illuminate how the particular kind of ‘friction’ that came with this particular kind of peacebuilding. We conclude that although progressive development and deepened peace have emerged, inevitably a hybrid society has been created with remaining deep-seated tensions and severe questions on progressive long-term development.

The Security-Development Nexus : Peace, Conflict and Development

Attention to the ‘security-development nexus’ has become commonplace in national and global policy-making, and yet the exact nature of the term remains undefined. This study approaches the subjects ...

Politics and Development of the Mekong River Basin: Transboundary Dilemmas and Participatory Ambitions

The chapter takes a two-pronged approach. Firstly it reviews the fundamentals of the Mekong Basin system, providing a broad overview of the natural system and its basic water regime and from there defines the key developmental and governance challenges. Secondly, it performs a historical odyssey in order to assess which previous attempts have been made to regulate the system, and what we have learnt from them. At its core we find three contemporary tools developed to accommodate a sharpening regional politics with urgent development imperatives, all emanating from the MRC. These are the Water Utilization Project (WUP), the IWRM Strategic Framework, and the Basin Development Plan (BDP). They are scrutinized before we conclude that the MRC-agreement, as well as these three tools, have delivered valuable input to basin governance. Simultaneously we are pointing out that they have not provided the final solution for how to deal with the accelerating urge for exploitation of the system’s natural resources.

Atomised and Subordinated? Unpacking the Role of International Involvement in ‘the Local Turn’ of Peacebuilding in Nepal and Cambodia

Abstract The local turn debate sometimes falls into the trap of romanticising the local, while vilifying international involvement in peacebuilding. Although this post-colonially informed argument makes immediate theoretical sense, there is a dearth of empirically driven comparative research which explores whether, and if so how, an international presence actually influences local peacebuilding efforts. In order to address this research gap, the present article sets out to study the execution of local peacebuilding programmes in two relatively similar cases where one (Nepal) has enjoyed little international peacebuilding presence, while the other (Cambodia) has seen a massive influx of international actors and funding in its peacebuilding endeavour. Our empirical material indicates that international support for the local peacebuilding process in Cambodia has bolstered it, while the locally owned process in Nepal has been far from successful in forging the conditions for sustainable peace. To fathom why these particular outcomes have occurred, however, the full answers are unlikely to be found by merely scrutinising whether the peacebuilding processes have been primarily internationally or locally driven. Instead, we suggest that peacebuilding outcomes are better understood by studying situated practices.

Politics vs Development in a Transboundary River Basin – The Case of the Mekong Basin

This concluding chapter looks at the nexus of development and politics in a transboundary basin by bringing together the different contributions to the volume and their different approaches to this problematique. Together they help us unpack the perceived incompatibility between an integrative participatory approach and international dynamics relying on a sovereignty logic in a contested space. Four central themes are discussed, namely the limitation of institutions and agreements; the securitization and national prerogative in water management; the tendency of IWRM approaches to hide politics and allow business as usual; the politics of participation and the challenges to its implementation; and finally knowledge management as a key to make a difference – given that its inevitable politicization is taken into account. Taking a critical stand the chapter still emphasizes the possibility to alter politics, on condition of its recognition. The challenges and dilemmas should not be used as an argument for not continuing to work with the politics of water management.

Building Peace in the Era of Three Waves

Introduction During the last few decades, the nature of peace and development in the international system has shifted considerably so has the measures applied in support of those values. Whereas ‘war’ has structurally shifted from being interstate concern to becoming intrastate in nature, ‘development’ has moved from one of typically defining national development strategies to one of tapping into a neo-liberal global order in the most efficient way possible. As such, the values and processes of, and measures to support, peace and development have, to a large extent, conflated. Moreover, internal war is typically founded in a particular political economy further feeding – or even being the origin of – conflicts; adaptation to the neo-liberal globalization has, on the other hand, turned ‘development’ into a conflict prone process, marginalizing large number of people. Globalization which – for good and bad – is driving the processes described above will not fade within the foreseeable future, but rather it is likely that the trend will increase in the decades to come. While undeniably, this shift in ‘order’ has brought some positive values, globally the problems may be even more severe, including the creation of social and internal conflicts, ethnic strife, political instability (often related to democratization), pauperization, forced migration and rampant natural resource extraction with severe livelihood losses for millions, just to mention a few of the far too prevalent problems.