3.2 Theories of Conflict and Cooperation Over Transboundary Watercourses
19
“[o]f the elements that make for political controversy in human affairs, the control of water
is one of the most persistent… The last community to get the water is always suspicious of
the intentions of those upstream” (quoted by Dinar 2008).
3.2.2.2 Liberalism, Institutionalism: Cooperation as a Rational Choice
The liberal school of international relations views interaction among states through
the lens of positive mutual interdependencies. Thus, states cooperate not because
of coercion or a sense of vulnerability, rather, out of mutual interest. As such, unilateralism and sheer power politics, projected by the realist theory, may turn counterproductive as in reality no state may act completely freely without some kind of
cooperation with others (Dinar 2008). It follows that in international river basins the
various water-related and non-hydrological interdependencies among upstream and
downstream countries create powerful incentives to cooperate so as to collectively
exploit water in the entire basin. In other words, states seek to maximise their absolute benefits through cooperation and are less concerned with the relative gains of
other countries (Dombrowsky 2009).
Within the liberal school the so-called institutionalism is one of the most relevant
theories. In the institutionalists’ view the creation of formal institutional arrangements greatly enhances the success of cooperation as these institutions provide states
with a platform for discussion, decision-making, information gathering, technical
assistance, etc. They also contribute to confidence building and a culture of compliance thereby creating an atmosphere conducive to collaboration (Rees 2010).
3.2.3 Modern Hydropolitics: Schools of Water Wars
and Water Cooperation
3.2.3.1 The Water Wars Thesis
The water wars literature flourished in the 1980s and 1990s during and after the
demise of the bi-polar global political system that gave rise to new global security
challenges (Turton 2008). However, the water war prognostics gained fresh currency
in more recent times in the light of the intensification of climate change whose
impacts are mainly manifested through changes in hydrology (Dinar et al. 2014).
The starting point of the water wars theory is that water is such a fundamental
natural asset that growing human, economic, social and ecological needs inevitably
lead to competition for the same resource. Consequently, when water becomes scarce
states may choose to respond to this pressure by seeking a solution outside their
boundaries. Water scarcity and poor distribution therefore magnify the potential for
conflict in transboundary basins (Dinar 2008). This potential grows significantly
when the availability of water drops below a critical level (i.e. the downward supply
curve crosses the demand curve). In addition to scarcity, a number of other factors
19
“[o]f the elements that make for political controversy in human affairs, the control of water
is one of the most persistent… The last community to get the water is always suspicious of
the intentions of those upstream” (quoted by Dinar 2008).
3.2.2.2 Liberalism, Institutionalism: Cooperation as a Rational Choice
The liberal school of international relations views interaction among states through
the lens of positive mutual interdependencies. Thus, states cooperate not because
of coercion or a sense of vulnerability, rather, out of mutual interest. As such, unilateralism and sheer power politics, projected by the realist theory, may turn counterproductive as in reality no state may act completely freely without some kind of
cooperation with others (Dinar 2008). It follows that in international river basins the
various water-related and non-hydrological interdependencies among upstream and
downstream countries create powerful incentives to cooperate so as to collectively
exploit water in the entire basin. In other words, states seek to maximise their absolute benefits through cooperation and are less concerned with the relative gains of
other countries (Dombrowsky 2009).
Within the liberal school the so-called institutionalism is one of the most relevant
theories. In the institutionalists’ view the creation of formal institutional arrangements greatly enhances the success of cooperation as these institutions provide states
with a platform for discussion, decision-making, information gathering, technical
assistance, etc. They also contribute to confidence building and a culture of compliance thereby creating an atmosphere conducive to collaboration (Rees 2010).
3.2.3 Modern Hydropolitics: Schools of Water Wars
and Water Cooperation
3.2.3.1 The Water Wars Thesis
The water wars literature flourished in the 1980s and 1990s during and after the
demise of the bi-polar global political system that gave rise to new global security
challenges (Turton 2008). However, the water war prognostics gained fresh currency
in more recent times in the light of the intensification of climate change whose
impacts are mainly manifested through changes in hydrology (Dinar et al. 2014).
The starting point of the water wars theory is that water is such a fundamental
natural asset that growing human, economic, social and ecological needs inevitably
lead to competition for the same resource. Consequently, when water becomes scarce
states may choose to respond to this pressure by seeking a solution outside their
boundaries. Water scarcity and poor distribution therefore magnify the potential for
conflict in transboundary basins (Dinar 2008). This potential grows significantly
when the availability of water drops below a critical level (i.e. the downward supply
curve crosses the demand curve). In addition to scarcity, a number of other factors