Chinese Geographical Science

, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 58–69 | Cite as

Water Cooperation Priorities in the Lancang-Mekong River Basin Based on Cooperative Events Since the Mekong River Commission Establishment

  • Yan Feng
  • Wenling Wang
  • Daniel Suman
  • Shiwei Yu
  • Daming HeEmail author


The Lancang-Mekong River has attracted much attention from researchers, but the cooperation on water issues in this river basin has been limited, even after the establishment of the Mekong River Commission (MRC). Cooperation on water resources has been determined as one of the key priority areas in the Lancang-Mekong Cooperation Mechanism, but there are no details of targets. In order to establish the priorities of water cooperation under the mechanism, we adopted nine categories to classify the objectives of 87 water cooperation events based on the ‘Lancang-Mekong Water Cooperative Events Database’ from 1995 to 2015. Based on the occurrence of cooperative events, cooperative objectives, cooperative scales, and approaches to cooperation, we conducted statistical, correlation, and text analyses. Our analyses indicated the following results: under the impact of economic conditions inside and outside the river basin, full cooperation appeared more difficult than bilateral and multilateral cooperation. Each of the partners adopted different preferences for cooperation targets. Cooperation with more definite objectives was easier to establish than cooperation with broader and more complex objectives. The potential objectives for water cooperation were navigation, hydropower, joint management, data sharing, flood control and water use. Because hydropower development is controversial, and because water cooperation is avoided by most existing regional cooperation mechanisms due to its complexity, we suggest the following priority areas for water cooperation in the Lancang- Mekong River Basin. 1) Navigation and flood control/drought relief are attractive objectives for all the riparian countries across the whole watershed. 2) Data sharing should be a priority for cooperation in the watershed due to its laying the foundation for the equitable and reasonable utilization of transboundary waters. 3) Hydropower is an objective best implemented mainly through bilateral cooperation, and on tributaries.


water cooperation objective cooperative scale the Lancang-Mekong River riparian country Mekong River Commission 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. ASEAN Economic Community, 1996. Basic framework of Asean- Mekong basin development cooperation. Available at 2018-03-27.
  2. ASEAN Secretariat, 2002. ASEAN-China free trade area. Available at 2018-04-25.
  3. ASEAN Secretariat, 2017. Overview of ASEAN plus three cooperation. Available at 2018-03-27.
  4. Baird I G, 2011. The don Sahong dam: potential impacts on regional fish migrations, livelihoods, and human health. Critical Asian Studies, 43(2): 211–235. doi: 10.1080/14672715.2011.570567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baran E, Ratner B, 2007. The don Sahong dam and Mekong fisheries. World Fish Center. Available at 2017-06-20.Google Scholar
  6. Baran E, Myschowoda C, 2009. Dams and fisheries in the Mekong Basin. Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management, 12(3): 227–234. doi: 10.1080/14634980903149902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Biba S, 2016. China drives water cooperation with Mekong countries. Eco-Business. Available at Scholar
  8. Bruce G, 2013. Hydropower development in the Mekong basin: perspective of a Canadian private environmental consulting company. Available at 2017-08-30Google Scholar
  9. Cambodia-Laos-Vietnam Development Triangle Portal, 2016. Introduction of the Cambodia-Laos-Vietnam development triangle area. Available at 2018-03-27.
  10. Campbell I C, 2007. Perceptions, data, and river management: lessons from the Mekong River. Water Resources Research, 43(2): W02407. doi: 10.1029/2006WR005130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. de Stefano L, Duncan J, Dinar S et al., 2012. Climate change and the institutional resilience of international river basins. Journal of Peace Research, 49(1): 193–209. doi: 10.1177/0022343311427416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dugan P J, Barlow C, Agostinho A A et al., 2010. Fish migration, dams, and loss of ecosystem services in the Mekong Basin. Ambio, 39(4): 344–348. doi: 10.1007/s13280-010-0036-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eidem N T, Fesler K J, Wolf A T, 2012. Intranational cooperation and conflict over freshwater: examples from the western United States. Journal of Contemporary Water Research & Education, 147(1): 63–71. doi: 10.1111/j.1936-704X.2012.03103.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Feng Yan, He Daming, Bao Haosheng, 2000. Study on the equitable and suitable allocation model of water resources in the Lancang-Mekong River Basin. Journal of Natural Resources, 15(3): 241–245. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  15. Ferguson J W, Healey M, Dugan P et al., 2011. Potential effects of dams on migratory fish in the Mekong river: lessons from salmon in the Fraser and Columbia rivers. Environmental Management, 47(1): 141–159. doi: 10.1007/s00267-010-9563-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Friend R M, Blake D J H, 2009. Negotiating trade-offs in water resources development in the Mekong Basin: implications for fisheries and fishery-based livelihoods. Water Policy, 11(S1): 13–30. doi: 10.2166/wp.2009.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fu K D, He D M, Lu X X, 2008. Sedimentation in the Manwan reservoir in the Upper Mekong and its downstream impacts. Quaternary International, 186(1): 91–99. doi: 10.1016/j.quaint.2007.09.041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Global Water Partnership, 2012. The Handbook for Integrated Water Resources Management in Transboundary Basins of Rivers, Lakes and Aquifers. Elanders: GWP, INBO.Google Scholar
  19. Government of India, 2017. About Mekong-ganga cooperation (MGC). Available at
  20. Greater Mekong Subregion Secretariat, 2018. About the greater Mekong Subregion: overview. greater Mekong Subregion. Available at 2018-04-24
  21. Guen-Murray J, Haque M, Lichtefeld J, 2017. The future shape of Mekong cooperation: a closer look at the paths ahead for the Mekong river commission. Available at 2018-03-28.Google Scholar
  22. Halls A S, Kshatriya M, 2009. Modelling the Cumulative Barrier and Passage Effects of Mainstream Hydropower Dams on Migratory Fish Populations in the Lower Mekong Basin. MRC Technical Paper No. 25, Vientiane: Mekong River Commission.Google Scholar
  23. Ho S, 2014. River politics: China’s policies in the Mekong and the Brahmaputra in comparative perspective. Journal of Contemporary China, 23(85): 1–20. doi: 10.1080/10670564.2013.809974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hoanh C T, Jirayoot K, Lacombe G et al., 2010. Impacts of climate change and development on Mekong flow regimes: first assessment-2009. Mekong River Commission. Available at 2017-07-25.Google Scholar
  25. ICEM, 2010. MRC Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of Hydropower on the Mekong Mainstream. Hanoi: Mekong River Commission.Google Scholar
  26. Ioannides M J, Tilt B, 2017. China: lessons learned from the Manwan dam. Case study series on dam displacement. Geneva, Switzerland: Internal Displacement Monitoring Center. Available at 2018-03-27.Google Scholar
  27. Kang B, He D M, Perrett L et al., 2009. Fish and fisheries in the Upper Mekong: current assessment of the fish community, threats and conservation. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries, 19(4): 465–480. doi: 10.1007/s11160-009-9114-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kingston D G, Thompson J R, Kite G, 2011. Uncertainty in climate change projections of discharge for the Mekong River Basin. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 15(5): 1459–1471. doi: 10.5194/hess-15-1459-2011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kummu M, Varis O, 2007. Sediment-related impacts due to upstream reservoir trapping, the Lower Mekong River. Geomorphology, 85(3–4): 275–293. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.03.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lauri H, de Moel H, Ward P J et al., 2012. Future changes in Mekong River hydrology: impact of climate change and reservoir operation on discharge. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 16(12): 4603–4619. doi: 10.5194/hess-16-4603-2012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lower Mekong Initiative, 2017. The Lower Mekong Initiative (LMI). Available at 2018-04-25.
  32. Lu X X, Siew R Y, 2006. Water discharge and sediment flux changes over the past decades in the Lower Mekong River: possible impacts of the Chinese dams. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 10(2): 181–195. doi: 10.5194/hessd-2-2287-2005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lu X X, Li S Y, Kummu M et al., 2014. Observed changes in the water flow at Chiang Saen in the lower Mekong: impacts of Chinese dams? Quaternary International, 336: 145–157. doi: 10.1016/j.quaint.2014.02.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lü Yusheng, Shen Dehai, 2014–2015. China-ASEAN Yearbook 2014–2015. Beijing: Thread-Binding Books Publishing House. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  35. Mekong River Commission (MRC), 2017. About MRC.
  36. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, 2009. Tokyo declaration of the first meeting between the heads of the governments of Japan and the Mekong region countries. Available at 2018-04-25.Google Scholar
  37. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the People’s Republic of China, 2016. The 2nd Lancang-Mekong Cooperation Foreign Ministers’ Meeting Convenes. Available at 2018-04-25.
  38. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the People’s Republic of China, 2018. Li Keqiang Attends the 2nd LMC Leaders’ Meeting. Available at 2018-01-15.
  39. MRC, 2008. Flood Situation Report. MRC Technical Paper No. 21, Vientiane: Mekong River Commission. MRC, 2010.Google Scholar
  40. State of the Basin Report 2010. Vientiane: Mekong River Commission.Google Scholar
  41. Räsänen T A, Koponen J, Lauri H et al., 2012. Downstream hydrological impacts of hydropower development in the upper Mekong basin. Water Resources Management, 26(12): 3495–3513. doi: 10.1007/s11269-012-0087-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ratner B D, 2003. The politics of regional governance in the Mekong river basin. Global Change, Peace & Security, 15(1): 59–76. doi: 10.1080/0951274032000044522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Roberts T R, 2004. Fluvicide: an independent environmental assessment of Nam Theun 2 hydropower project in Laos, with particular reference to aquatic biology and fishes. Available at 2017-06-30.Google Scholar
  44. Roset N, Grenouillet G, Goffaux D et al., 2007. A review of existing fish assemblage indicators and methodologies. Fisheries Management and Ecology, 14(6): 393–405. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2400.2007.00589.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Son J, 2017. Mekong cooperation, China-style. Reporting ASEAN. Available at 2017-10-02.Google Scholar
  46. Stone R, 2011. Mayhem on the Mekong. Science, 333(6044): 814–818. doi: 10.1126/science.333.6044.814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Thailand International Cooperation Agency, 2013. Ayeyawady- Chao Phraya-Mekong economic cooperation strategy (ACMECS). Available at Chao-Phraya-Mekong-Economic-Cooperation.html. 2018-04-25Google Scholar
  48. The Hague Institute for Global Justice, 2016. The Multi-Track Water Diplomacy Framework. Hague: The Hague Institute for Global Justice.Google Scholar
  49. Thorne C, Annandale G, Jensen J et al., 2011. Review of Sediment Transport, Morphology, and Nutrient Balance. Report to the Mekong River Commission Secretariat Prepared as Part of the Xayaburi Mrcs Prior Consultation Project Review Report. Nottingham, UK: Nottingham University.Google Scholar
  50. UNEP, 2016. Transboundary River Basins: Status and Trends. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).Google Scholar
  51. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 2014. Integrated Water Resources Management in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia. New York and Geneva: United Nations.Google Scholar
  52. UN-Water, 2015. Good practices in transboundary water cooperation. Available at 2018-03-26.Google Scholar
  53. Wang J J, Lu X X, Kummu M, 2011. Sediment load estimates and variations in the Lower Mekong River. River Research and Applications, 27(1): 33–46. doi: 10.1002/rra.1337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wang Q Y, 2015. Six countries agree on Mekong cooperation system. China Daily. Available at cn/. 2017-07-30.Google Scholar
  55. Wolf A T, Yoffe S B, Giordano M, 2003. International waters: identifying basins at risk. Water Policy, 5(1): 29–60. doi: 10.2166/wp.2003.0002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Xinhua, 2015. Joint declaration issued to enhance Mekong river security. Available at 25/content_36884092.htm. 2017-07-30.Google Scholar
  57. Xu Honggang, Bao Jigang, Zhou Changchun, 2006. Effectiveness of regional tourism integration: case of quadrangle economic cooperation zone in great Mekong region. Chinese Geographical Science, 16(2): 141–147. doi: 10.1007/s11769-006-0008-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Yorth B, 2014. International Mekong River Basin: Events, Conflicts or Cooperation, and Policy Implications. Oregon: Oregon State University.Google Scholar
  59. Yu X Z, 2015. Water resources collaboration: potential flagship in Lancang-Mekong cooperation mechanism. Available at 2017-07- 30.Google Scholar
  60. Zhang Yong, He Daming, Lu Ying et al., 2013. The influence of large dams building on resettlement in the Upper Mekong River. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 23(5): 947–957. doi: 10.1007/s11442-013-1054-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Ziv G, Baran E, Nam S et al., 2012. Trading-off fish biodiversity, food security, and hydropower in the Mekong River Basin. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(15): 5609–5614. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1201423109CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science Press and Northeast Institute of Geography and Agricultural Ecology, CAS and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yan Feng
    • 1
    • 2
  • Wenling Wang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Daniel Suman
    • 3
  • Shiwei Yu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Daming He
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Asian International Rivers CenterYunnan UniversityKunmingChina
  2. 2.Yunnan Key Laboratory of International Rivers and Transboundary Eco-securityYunnan UniversityKunmingChina
  3. 3.Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric ScienceUniversity of MiamiMiamiUSA

Personalised recommendations