140
10 The Resilience of Transboundary Water Governance …
at all levels of transboundary water governance within the EU. Indeed, under EU law
practically all other possible water management questions are subordinated to the
protection and improvement of the aquatic environment. Non-ecological uses, such
as navigation, irrigation, industrial consumption or energy production must all be
adjusted to the ecological imperatives of the Water Framework Directive (Art. 4.1.).
Thus, new interventions that impair freshwater quality and jeopardise the achievement of good water status can only be permitted, if they are warranted by “imperative
reasons of overriding public interest”, rather than sheer economic considerations, and
must be limited to the strict necessary minimum (Art. 4.7.).
It remains to be seen whether the rather one-sided ecological focus of EU water
law will withstand the new hydrological pressures of the Anthropocene. In any case,
EU member states are subject to a regulatory framework of such a high political
ambition and policy complexity that renders it very unlikely that issues relating to
water quality will give rise to persistent political tensions within the European Union.
10.3 Cooperation Over Planned Measures
10.3.1 Unilateral Interventions as a Source of Water Conflict
It is a well-documented fact that a high number of interstate water conflicts are linked
to some kind of a deliberate unilateral intervention into the basin implemented by
one (typically upstream) riparian state to the detriment of others. These interventions
(measures) can take several forms, but they mostly relate to flow quantity and timing
or the installation of water infrastructure works. The anatomy of water conflicts
suggests that in the absence of a robust cooperation regime unilateral measures can
quickly turn into a flashpoint triggering conflict among riparian states that often leads
to long term tensions in the basin (Delli Priscoli and Wolf 2009). Indeed, the recent
history of co-riparian relations is replete with examples of serious interstate disputes
that erupted around dams, dykes, diversions, be it the blocking by India of the flow of
the Indus river into Pakistan in 1948, the diversion by Slovakia of the Danube from
the joint Slovak-Hungarian riverbed in 1992 or the highly publicised recent conflict
between Egypt and Ethiopia surrounding the construction of the Great Ethiopian
Renaissance Dam.
36
Not surprisingly, the prevention of disputes arising out of unilateral riparian action
has been a key concern of international water law and policy from the outset. The
Montevideo Declaration on Industrial and Agricultural Use of International Rivers,
adopted as early as in 1933 under the auspices of the Pan American Union (PAU
1933), already called on riparian states intending to implement projects affecting
water use by other basin states to give an advance notice and three months for
evaluation of the information provided (Art. 7.). The 1966 Helsinki Rules (ILA 1966)
36 Ethiopia diverts Blue Nile for controversial dam build, BBC, 28 May 2013, http://www.bbc.com/
news/world-africa-22696623 (accessed 12 February 2019).
10 The Resilience of Transboundary Water Governance …
at all levels of transboundary water governance within the EU. Indeed, under EU law
practically all other possible water management questions are subordinated to the
protection and improvement of the aquatic environment. Non-ecological uses, such
as navigation, irrigation, industrial consumption or energy production must all be
adjusted to the ecological imperatives of the Water Framework Directive (Art. 4.1.).
Thus, new interventions that impair freshwater quality and jeopardise the achievement of good water status can only be permitted, if they are warranted by “imperative
reasons of overriding public interest”, rather than sheer economic considerations, and
must be limited to the strict necessary minimum (Art. 4.7.).
It remains to be seen whether the rather one-sided ecological focus of EU water
law will withstand the new hydrological pressures of the Anthropocene. In any case,
EU member states are subject to a regulatory framework of such a high political
ambition and policy complexity that renders it very unlikely that issues relating to
water quality will give rise to persistent political tensions within the European Union.
10.3 Cooperation Over Planned Measures
10.3.1 Unilateral Interventions as a Source of Water Conflict
It is a well-documented fact that a high number of interstate water conflicts are linked
to some kind of a deliberate unilateral intervention into the basin implemented by
one (typically upstream) riparian state to the detriment of others. These interventions
(measures) can take several forms, but they mostly relate to flow quantity and timing
or the installation of water infrastructure works. The anatomy of water conflicts
suggests that in the absence of a robust cooperation regime unilateral measures can
quickly turn into a flashpoint triggering conflict among riparian states that often leads
to long term tensions in the basin (Delli Priscoli and Wolf 2009). Indeed, the recent
history of co-riparian relations is replete with examples of serious interstate disputes
that erupted around dams, dykes, diversions, be it the blocking by India of the flow of
the Indus river into Pakistan in 1948, the diversion by Slovakia of the Danube from
the joint Slovak-Hungarian riverbed in 1992 or the highly publicised recent conflict
between Egypt and Ethiopia surrounding the construction of the Great Ethiopian
Renaissance Dam.
36
Not surprisingly, the prevention of disputes arising out of unilateral riparian action
has been a key concern of international water law and policy from the outset. The
Montevideo Declaration on Industrial and Agricultural Use of International Rivers,
adopted as early as in 1933 under the auspices of the Pan American Union (PAU
1933), already called on riparian states intending to implement projects affecting
water use by other basin states to give an advance notice and three months for
evaluation of the information provided (Art. 7.). The 1966 Helsinki Rules (ILA 1966)
36 Ethiopia diverts Blue Nile for controversial dam build, BBC, 28 May 2013, http://www.bbc.com/
news/world-africa-22696623 (accessed 12 February 2019).