64
6 Emerging Challenges to Transboundary Water Governance
does not even arise). In contrast, allocation mechanisms that are either too rigid or
too vague may actually increase vulnerability as they fail to adequately respond to
the very challenge they were designed to solve (Dinar et al. 2014). Consequently,
in order to draw robust conclusions on hydropolitical resilience and vulnerability
based on treaty design the initial findings must always be embedded in the concrete
hydrological and geo-political context of the international river basin at issue.
Yet, the high degree of convergence among the findings of the various hydropolitical assessments summarised below suggests that irrespective of these limitations
the use of formal indicators is a suitable instrument to map out fundamental vulnerabilities in co-riparian relations.
6.4.2.1 Mapping Hydropolitical Resilience and Vulnerability
The most comprehensive and detailed global mapping of hydropolitical vulnerability
thus far has been carried out by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
that, together with the Oregon State University and the University of Dundee, undertook, between 2005 and 2009, an extensive analysis of hydropolitical risks in Africa,
Latin America, North America, the Caribbean, Asia and Europe (see Sect. 5.3.1).
Similarly, a comprehensive analysis of the risks of transboundary water governance
has also been commissioned by the World Bank that aimed at drawing a global picture
of hydropolitical risks (De Stefano et al. 2010). In the years to follow the findings of
these studies have been further refined by a series of publications on various aspects
of hydropolitical resilience (De Stefano et al. 2012; Dinar et al. 2014).
A thorough multiannual assessment of global hydropolitical stability has also been
carried out by the Mumbai-based Strategic Foresight Group using a slightly different
methodology. Their results are broken down to individual river basins and countries
and can be easily accessed through an interactive global water cooperation map
(Strategic Foresight Group 2015).
2 In addition, numerous assessments have been
made with regard to specific regions and individual basins that already are or may
turn into political hotspots, e.g. the European Union (WRc plc 2012), Middle East,
Sahel (Milman et al. 2012), the Himalayas (Strategic Foresight Group 2011), etc.
The main findings of the above hydropolitical surveys can be summarised through
two fundamental conclusions:
– cooperation, rather than conflict, is the dominant feature of co-riparian relations,
– risks to transboundary water cooperation are growing in most parts of the world.
First, statistical evidence confirms that differences over transboundary waters are
more likely to result in cooperation than conflict. On record, the number of acute
conflicts over water has been significantly lower than instances of cooperation. The
extensive qualitative research by Aaron Wolf and colleagues reveals that the period
between 1960 and 2010 saw only 37 acute disputes (involving violence); of those 30
were between Israel and one or another of its neighbours and the violence ended in
2 http://strategicforesight.com/water-cooperation-map/ (accessed 12 February 2019).
6 Emerging Challenges to Transboundary Water Governance
does not even arise). In contrast, allocation mechanisms that are either too rigid or
too vague may actually increase vulnerability as they fail to adequately respond to
the very challenge they were designed to solve (Dinar et al. 2014). Consequently,
in order to draw robust conclusions on hydropolitical resilience and vulnerability
based on treaty design the initial findings must always be embedded in the concrete
hydrological and geo-political context of the international river basin at issue.
Yet, the high degree of convergence among the findings of the various hydropolitical assessments summarised below suggests that irrespective of these limitations
the use of formal indicators is a suitable instrument to map out fundamental vulnerabilities in co-riparian relations.
6.4.2.1 Mapping Hydropolitical Resilience and Vulnerability
The most comprehensive and detailed global mapping of hydropolitical vulnerability
thus far has been carried out by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
that, together with the Oregon State University and the University of Dundee, undertook, between 2005 and 2009, an extensive analysis of hydropolitical risks in Africa,
Latin America, North America, the Caribbean, Asia and Europe (see Sect. 5.3.1).
Similarly, a comprehensive analysis of the risks of transboundary water governance
has also been commissioned by the World Bank that aimed at drawing a global picture
of hydropolitical risks (De Stefano et al. 2010). In the years to follow the findings of
these studies have been further refined by a series of publications on various aspects
of hydropolitical resilience (De Stefano et al. 2012; Dinar et al. 2014).
A thorough multiannual assessment of global hydropolitical stability has also been
carried out by the Mumbai-based Strategic Foresight Group using a slightly different
methodology. Their results are broken down to individual river basins and countries
and can be easily accessed through an interactive global water cooperation map
(Strategic Foresight Group 2015).
2 In addition, numerous assessments have been
made with regard to specific regions and individual basins that already are or may
turn into political hotspots, e.g. the European Union (WRc plc 2012), Middle East,
Sahel (Milman et al. 2012), the Himalayas (Strategic Foresight Group 2011), etc.
The main findings of the above hydropolitical surveys can be summarised through
two fundamental conclusions:
– cooperation, rather than conflict, is the dominant feature of co-riparian relations,
– risks to transboundary water cooperation are growing in most parts of the world.
First, statistical evidence confirms that differences over transboundary waters are
more likely to result in cooperation than conflict. On record, the number of acute
conflicts over water has been significantly lower than instances of cooperation. The
extensive qualitative research by Aaron Wolf and colleagues reveals that the period
between 1960 and 2010 saw only 37 acute disputes (involving violence); of those 30
were between Israel and one or another of its neighbours and the violence ended in
2 http://strategicforesight.com/water-cooperation-map/ (accessed 12 February 2019).