5.3 Beyond the River Basin: Institutions of Transboundary Water …
49
5.3 Beyond the River Basin: Institutions of Transboundary
Water Governance at Global and Regional Level
5.3.1 Global Institutions
Water—unlike similarly important policy areas—does not have a dedicated specialised agency, fund or programme within the United Nations system. Nor is it supported by a robust comprehensive treaty and a well-resourced convention secretariat
(as is the case of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) that
could steer decision-making, institution building and mobilise resources at a global
scale. Paradoxically, however, this does not imply that water is not looked after within
the UN. To the contrary, there are 31(!) various UN bodies that are officially engaged
in water policy issues in a significant way. This institutional cacophony results in
considerable overlaps and rivalry among the various actors, despite the existence
of an internal coordination platform called UN-Water. Given, however, UN-Water’s
weak mandate and the lack of political leadership its influence is limited and is
unlikely to evolve into a global water governance platform (Baumgartner and PahlWostl 2013). This institutional gap has, to some extent, been filled in the past two
decades by the establishment of other international organisations dedicated to water
issues as the Global Water Partnership (GWP), the significant engagement in water
issues by the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) or
the activities of the World Water Council (WWC), an international umbrella organisation of governments, international organisations, companies, universities and other
non-governmental bodies (Newton 2014). Yet, notwithstanding some successful initiatives in and outside the UN system, the global framework of water governance can
be best described as a “fragmented, Mobius-web arrangement” (Pahl-Wostl 2015).
It follows from the foregoing that transboundary water governance—a sublet of
global water governance—has no dedicated institutional structure within the UN
system either. Nor have the major UN environmental/sustainable development conferences addressed the institutional aspects of transboundary water governance to
any significant extent since the UN’s only global conference dedicated to water that
was held in Mar del Plata in 1977. Indeed, anecdotal evidence suggests that the
inflammatory potential of the issue is such that any substantial mention of the matter
in multilateral political forums can impede the discussion of all other (water-related)
subjects (Newton 2014). Against this backdrop the fact that Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) No. 6 on water, adopted by the 2015 UN Sustainable Development
Summit, makes a specific reference to the transboundary cooperation constitutes a
welcome, but a rather limited development (UN 2015).
Yet, some organisations scattered within broader UN framework do address the
legal, institutional and political aspects of transboundary water cooperation in a
significant way. E.g. the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) commissioned, in the early 2000s, a seminal in-depth analysis of the risks of transboundary
water cooperation, entitled Hydro-political vulnerability and resilience in international river basins for Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America and North America
49
5.3 Beyond the River Basin: Institutions of Transboundary
Water Governance at Global and Regional Level
5.3.1 Global Institutions
Water—unlike similarly important policy areas—does not have a dedicated specialised agency, fund or programme within the United Nations system. Nor is it supported by a robust comprehensive treaty and a well-resourced convention secretariat
(as is the case of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) that
could steer decision-making, institution building and mobilise resources at a global
scale. Paradoxically, however, this does not imply that water is not looked after within
the UN. To the contrary, there are 31(!) various UN bodies that are officially engaged
in water policy issues in a significant way. This institutional cacophony results in
considerable overlaps and rivalry among the various actors, despite the existence
of an internal coordination platform called UN-Water. Given, however, UN-Water’s
weak mandate and the lack of political leadership its influence is limited and is
unlikely to evolve into a global water governance platform (Baumgartner and PahlWostl 2013). This institutional gap has, to some extent, been filled in the past two
decades by the establishment of other international organisations dedicated to water
issues as the Global Water Partnership (GWP), the significant engagement in water
issues by the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) or
the activities of the World Water Council (WWC), an international umbrella organisation of governments, international organisations, companies, universities and other
non-governmental bodies (Newton 2014). Yet, notwithstanding some successful initiatives in and outside the UN system, the global framework of water governance can
be best described as a “fragmented, Mobius-web arrangement” (Pahl-Wostl 2015).
It follows from the foregoing that transboundary water governance—a sublet of
global water governance—has no dedicated institutional structure within the UN
system either. Nor have the major UN environmental/sustainable development conferences addressed the institutional aspects of transboundary water governance to
any significant extent since the UN’s only global conference dedicated to water that
was held in Mar del Plata in 1977. Indeed, anecdotal evidence suggests that the
inflammatory potential of the issue is such that any substantial mention of the matter
in multilateral political forums can impede the discussion of all other (water-related)
subjects (Newton 2014). Against this backdrop the fact that Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) No. 6 on water, adopted by the 2015 UN Sustainable Development
Summit, makes a specific reference to the transboundary cooperation constitutes a
welcome, but a rather limited development (UN 2015).
Yet, some organisations scattered within broader UN framework do address the
legal, institutional and political aspects of transboundary water cooperation in a
significant way. E.g. the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) commissioned, in the early 2000s, a seminal in-depth analysis of the risks of transboundary
water cooperation, entitled Hydro-political vulnerability and resilience in international river basins for Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America and North America