Naho Mirumachi

Science–policy processes for transboundary water governance

In this policy perspective, we outline several conditions to support effective science–policy interaction, with a particular emphasis on improving water governance in transboundary basins. Key conditions include (1) recognizing that science is a crucial but bounded input into water resource decision-making processes; (2) establishing conditions for collaboration and shared commitment among actors; (3) understanding that social or group-learning processes linked to science–policy interaction are enhanced through greater collaboration; (4) accepting that the collaborative production of knowledge about hydrological issues and associated socioeconomic change and institutional responses is essential to build legitimate decision-making processes; and (5) engaging boundary organizations and informal networks of scientists, policy makers, and civil society. We elaborate on these conditions with a diverse set of international examples drawn from a synthesis of our collective experiences in assessing the opportunities and constraints (including the role of power relations) related to governance for water in transboundary settings.

Water Stress in Global Transboundary River Basins: Significance of Upstream Water Use on Downstream Stress

Growing population and water demand have increased pressure on water resources in various parts of the globe, including many transboundary river basins. While the impacts of upstream water use on downstream water availability have been analysed in many of these international river basins, this has not been systematically done at the global scale using coherent and comparable datasets. In this study, we aim to assess the change in downstream water stress due to upstream water use in the worlds transboundary river basins. Water stress was first calculated considering only local water use of each sub-basin based on country-basin mesh, then compared with the situation when upstream water use was subtracted from downstream water availability. We found that water stress was generally already high when considering only local water use, affecting 0.95–1.44 billion people or 33%–51% of the population in transboundary river basins. After accounting for upstream water use, stress level increased by at least 1 percentage-point for 30–65 sub-basins, affecting 0.29–1.13 billion people. Altogether 288 out of 298 middle-stream and downstream sub-basin areas experienced some change in stress level. Further, we assessed whether there is a link between increased water stress due to upstream water use and the number of conflictive and cooperative events in the transboundary river basins, as captured by two prominent databases. No direct relationship was found. This supports the argument that conflicts and cooperation events originate from a combination of different drivers, among which upstream-induced water stress may play a role. Our findings contribute to better understanding of upstream–downstream dynamics in water stress to help address water allocation problems.

Transboundary water interaction III: contest and compliance

This paper serves international water conflict resolution efforts by examining the ways that states contest hegemonic transboundary water arrangements. The conceptual framework of dynamic transboundary water interaction that it presents integrates theories about change and counter-hegemony to ascertain coercive, leverage, and liberating mechanisms through which contest and transformation of an arrangement occur. While the mechanisms can be active through sociopolitical processes either of compliance or of contest of the arrangement, most transboundary water interaction is found to contain elements of both. The role of power asymmetry is interpreted through classification of intervention strategies that seek to either influence or challenge the arrangements. Coexisting contest and compliance serve to explain in part the stasis on the Jordan and Ganges rivers (where the non-hegemons have in effect consented to the arrangement), as well as the changes on the Tigris and Mekong rivers, and even more rapid changes on the Amu Darya and Nile rivers (where the non-hegemons have confronted power asymmetry through influence and challenge). The framework also stresses how transboundary water events that may appear isolated are more accurately read within the many sociopolitical processes and arrangements they are shaped by. By clarifying the typically murky dynamics of interstate relations over transboundary waters, furthermore, the framework exposes a new suite of entry points for hydro-diplomatic initiatives.

Improving methodologies for transboundary impact assessment in transboundary watercourses: Navigation Channel Improvement project of the Lancang-Mekong River from China-Myanmar Boundary Marker 243 to Ban Houei Sai of Laos

This paper analyzes the factors underpinning transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) methodologies through an examination of the Navigation Channel Improvement Project of the Lancang-Mekong River from China-Myanmar Boundary Marker 243 to Ban Houei Sai of Laos. A comparison of the projects expected and reported transboundary impacts shows that the EIA failed to predict a number of adverse impacts, including social and economic impacts. The restricted scale and scope of the transboundary impact assessment (TIA) is probably due to certain fundamental restrictions on how the EIA was conducted. The case study highlights the importance of public involvement (including advance notification) and adequate regulatory frameworks or guidelines in the EIA and TIA processes.

The Politics of Water Transfer between South Africa and Lesotho: Bilateral Cooperation in the Lesotho Highlands Water Project

Abstract This paper demonstrates that cooperation over international rivers can be achieved through situations where benefits of river development create bilateral dependence between basin states. The case study of the Lesotho Highlands Water Project, a bilateral water transfer in the Orange River basin between South Africa and Lesotho, is examined. Historical analysis of the negotiations leading to the project treaty agreement show that issues of apartheid and the Cold War heavily influenced the riparian relations between the two states. At times, the project faced the threat of abandonment due to deteriorating diplomatic conditions. However, the project was realized because South Africa and Lesotho not only shared the material benefits of the project, but also gained politically from committing to it. These political benefits are influential in creating interdependence between the basin states in order to ensure the reliability of bilateral cooperation.

Domestic Water Policy Implications on International Transboundary Water Development: A Case Study of Thailand

The purpose of this chapter is to understand the impact of domestic water policies on international transboundary water development and management. Transboundary water allocation and river development are part of a political process in which different interests of basin states are reflected. The chapter posits that the national hydrocracy can execute control over the promotion or demotion of water allocation rules and policies, and water development plans in transboundary river basins. The chapter analyzes Thailand’s political economy of water and how the domestic water development progress has manifested in the formation and operation of the regional water management institutions: the Mekong Committee, the Interim Mekong Committee, and the Mekong River Commission. The chapter uses the concepts of hydraulic mission and reflexive modernity to analyze water management paradigms. By showing the progress of water development and the supporting water policies, the chapter examines the concerns of the Thai hydrocracy vis-a-vis regional water management. Specifically, it will be shown how the Thai hydrocracy politicized and securitized issues of water allocation and utilization based on their water development plans and concerns of institutional rules. Some policy implications regarding the way domestic policies can impact transboundary water management, especially transboundary IWRM, are discussed.