179
Overall, the above-mentioned linkages between food law and the clauses on
human health and environmental protection in the trade agreements enable interpretations that support the food–energy–water nexus. Furthermore, references to sustainable development in the preambles of these treaties allow their interpretations to
evolve as required by growing societal needs, offering further opportunity to take
the nexus approach into account.
6.6 Integrating Food, Energy, and Water Law
When comparing international food, energy, and water law, water law provides the
most practical point of entry for the nexus approach. There are two reasons for this.
First, it is in the essence of international water law to allocate international water
resources between different interests such as energy production, agriculture, and
vital human needs, whereas international energy and food law are much more fragmented areas of law in which balancing international trade against national protectionism plays a key role.
Second, international water law requires transboundary cooperation between
States sharing international water resources, while international energy and food
law do not have a similar emphasis on transboundary cooperation from the point of
view of the sustainable management of resources.
In terms of the nexus, one interesting way to find common legal ground would be
to look at nexus integration in a clearly defined geographical area such as a region
including countries sharing the same transboundary river basin. While the discussion about transboundary cooperation in such contexts often focuses on water flows,
the countries involved are also very commonly linked by transboundary flows of
energy and food (e.g., Keskinen et al. 2016), and related international and regional
laws and regulations. This also means that while international water cooperation
may provide a starting-point for the food–energy–water nexus, watercourse States
should understand the community of their interests within and beyond international
water law. This would provide an opportunity for cross-sectoral bilateral and multilateral agreements to enhance regional water, energy, and food security and
sustainable development in the long term (see Sadoff and Grey 2002; Grzybowski
et al. 2010; Belinskij 2015).
Finally, human rights law seems to provide a point of connection between all
three sectors. While this chapter does not analyze the human rights system in detail,
it can be concluded that human rights law supports the conclusion that water, energy,
and food should be first allocated to meet vital human needs. Both the nexus
approach and human rights law can, therefore, be seen to share common ground:
both aim to address fundamental aspects of human life on this planet: sustainability
and equity. It can even be argued that one cannot exist without the other: human
rights law helps to address the politics inherent to management of the nexus, while
the nexus brings important aspects of sustainability and resource scarcity to the
discussion of human rights.
6 International Governance
Overall, the above-mentioned linkages between food law and the clauses on
human health and environmental protection in the trade agreements enable interpretations that support the food–energy–water nexus. Furthermore, references to sustainable development in the preambles of these treaties allow their interpretations to
evolve as required by growing societal needs, offering further opportunity to take
the nexus approach into account.
6.6 Integrating Food, Energy, and Water Law
When comparing international food, energy, and water law, water law provides the
most practical point of entry for the nexus approach. There are two reasons for this.
First, it is in the essence of international water law to allocate international water
resources between different interests such as energy production, agriculture, and
vital human needs, whereas international energy and food law are much more fragmented areas of law in which balancing international trade against national protectionism plays a key role.
Second, international water law requires transboundary cooperation between
States sharing international water resources, while international energy and food
law do not have a similar emphasis on transboundary cooperation from the point of
view of the sustainable management of resources.
In terms of the nexus, one interesting way to find common legal ground would be
to look at nexus integration in a clearly defined geographical area such as a region
including countries sharing the same transboundary river basin. While the discussion about transboundary cooperation in such contexts often focuses on water flows,
the countries involved are also very commonly linked by transboundary flows of
energy and food (e.g., Keskinen et al. 2016), and related international and regional
laws and regulations. This also means that while international water cooperation
may provide a starting-point for the food–energy–water nexus, watercourse States
should understand the community of their interests within and beyond international
water law. This would provide an opportunity for cross-sectoral bilateral and multilateral agreements to enhance regional water, energy, and food security and
sustainable development in the long term (see Sadoff and Grey 2002; Grzybowski
et al. 2010; Belinskij 2015).
Finally, human rights law seems to provide a point of connection between all
three sectors. While this chapter does not analyze the human rights system in detail,
it can be concluded that human rights law supports the conclusion that water, energy,
and food should be first allocated to meet vital human needs. Both the nexus
approach and human rights law can, therefore, be seen to share common ground:
both aim to address fundamental aspects of human life on this planet: sustainability
and equity. It can even be argued that one cannot exist without the other: human
rights law helps to address the politics inherent to management of the nexus, while
the nexus brings important aspects of sustainability and resource scarcity to the
discussion of human rights.
6 International Governance