128
10 The Resilience of Transboundary Water Governance …
natural water household of an entire river basin as to its components (precipitation,
evaporation, surface and underground runoff)”, including “man-made effects originating from water use and influencing water quantity” (Art. 1.g)). Moreover, the
Convention requires riparian states to cooperate with regards to existing and planned
river flow control measures (“water construction works, in particular regulation as
well as runoff and storage level control of watercourses, flood control and ice-hazard
abatement”) and other water uses (such as water power utilisation, water transfer and
withdrawal, etc.) so long as these measures/uses are likely to give rise to transboundary impacts (Art. 3.2.). While water quantity management is expressly covered by
the Convention, water allocation is not mentioned in the text even indirectly. Water
balances are prepared for monitoring purposes only, rather than to establish water
sharing principles, let alone quotas. All that the Convention provides for in this context is the observance of general principles of international water law—sustainable
and equitable utilisation of water resources and the prevention of transboundary
harm—and a set of notification and consultation procedures (Art 6., 10., 11., 12.).
Against this limited consideration of water quantity management by the Convention,
it is not surprising that the work programme of the International Commission for the
Protection of the River Danube reflects very limited political will to address potential
water sharing questions in a substantial manner, even though the impacts of climate
change and variability is now perceived as one of the top collective action problems
in the basin (Schmeier 2013).
The Rhine Convention
19 focuses almost exclusively on water quantity measures,
save a meagre reference to cooperation on flood protection (Art. 2.e)). Thus, the
quantitative dimensions of transboundary water management come under the scope
of the Convention only indirectly through the broad objectives of “environmentally
sound and rational management of water resources” and the “principle of sustainable
development” (Art. 3.1.e), 4.g)). Despite this relatively narrow focus commentators
underline that the Rhine governance regime is indeed based on the broad concept of
integrated water resources management. Consequently, in line with this integrated
approach the implementing body of the Convention, the International Commission
for the Protection of the Rhine (ICPR) embraces a range of issues that are not of
predominantly ecological character (Jekel 2015). For example a special expert group
has been established to address low water flow, a recent but recurring phenomenon in
the Rhine basin (Expert Groups “Niedrigwasser”).
20 Also, a specific technical report
was recently commissioned by the ICPR on discharge regime variation on the Rhine
that identifies decreases in summer flow volumes and potentially significant increases
in winter flows in the remote future (ICPR 2011). In summary, the activities of the
ICPR confirm the recognition of the growing importance of quantity management, yet
there appear to be no immediate plans to systematically address allocation questions,
let alone revise the Convention to that effect.
19 Convention on the Protection of the Rhine, Bern, 12 April 1999.
20 https://www.iksr.org/en/international-cooperation/about-us/organisation/working-group-floodsand-low-water-wg-h/ (accessed 12 February 2019).
10 The Resilience of Transboundary Water Governance …
natural water household of an entire river basin as to its components (precipitation,
evaporation, surface and underground runoff)”, including “man-made effects originating from water use and influencing water quantity” (Art. 1.g)). Moreover, the
Convention requires riparian states to cooperate with regards to existing and planned
river flow control measures (“water construction works, in particular regulation as
well as runoff and storage level control of watercourses, flood control and ice-hazard
abatement”) and other water uses (such as water power utilisation, water transfer and
withdrawal, etc.) so long as these measures/uses are likely to give rise to transboundary impacts (Art. 3.2.). While water quantity management is expressly covered by
the Convention, water allocation is not mentioned in the text even indirectly. Water
balances are prepared for monitoring purposes only, rather than to establish water
sharing principles, let alone quotas. All that the Convention provides for in this context is the observance of general principles of international water law—sustainable
and equitable utilisation of water resources and the prevention of transboundary
harm—and a set of notification and consultation procedures (Art 6., 10., 11., 12.).
Against this limited consideration of water quantity management by the Convention,
it is not surprising that the work programme of the International Commission for the
Protection of the River Danube reflects very limited political will to address potential
water sharing questions in a substantial manner, even though the impacts of climate
change and variability is now perceived as one of the top collective action problems
in the basin (Schmeier 2013).
The Rhine Convention
19 focuses almost exclusively on water quantity measures,
save a meagre reference to cooperation on flood protection (Art. 2.e)). Thus, the
quantitative dimensions of transboundary water management come under the scope
of the Convention only indirectly through the broad objectives of “environmentally
sound and rational management of water resources” and the “principle of sustainable
development” (Art. 3.1.e), 4.g)). Despite this relatively narrow focus commentators
underline that the Rhine governance regime is indeed based on the broad concept of
integrated water resources management. Consequently, in line with this integrated
approach the implementing body of the Convention, the International Commission
for the Protection of the Rhine (ICPR) embraces a range of issues that are not of
predominantly ecological character (Jekel 2015). For example a special expert group
has been established to address low water flow, a recent but recurring phenomenon in
the Rhine basin (Expert Groups “Niedrigwasser”).
20 Also, a specific technical report
was recently commissioned by the ICPR on discharge regime variation on the Rhine
that identifies decreases in summer flow volumes and potentially significant increases
in winter flows in the remote future (ICPR 2011). In summary, the activities of the
ICPR confirm the recognition of the growing importance of quantity management, yet
there appear to be no immediate plans to systematically address allocation questions,
let alone revise the Convention to that effect.
19 Convention on the Protection of the Rhine, Bern, 12 April 1999.
20 https://www.iksr.org/en/international-cooperation/about-us/organisation/working-group-floodsand-low-water-wg-h/ (accessed 12 February 2019).