Advertisement

Water resources data and information exchange in transboundary water treaties

  • Andrea K. Gerlak
  • Jonathan Lautze
  • Mark Giordano
Original Paper

Abstract

Despite international calls for data and information sharing in transboundary waters and basin-specific evidence of its importance to cooperative management, no systematic research has been undertaken to answer questions of where, how frequently, and which water resources data and information are exchanged. This paper examines all available transboundary water agreements signed between 1900 and 2007 to determine the degree to which water resources data and information is exchanged in the world’s regions, how the level of exchange has developed over time, and the different ways in which data and information sharing has been codified in practice. In doing so, we reveal important trends regarding the mechanisms, types, and frequencies of water resources data and information sharing—as well as differences across temporal and spatial scales, by treaty type and function, and regime type. The results indicate that data and information exchange as already practiced is more nuanced and, in some senses, widespread than may commonly be recognized. Further, the results reveal key linkages between democracy and data and information exchange and provide a basis to test analogous linkages related to data sharing and other variables in transboundary water settings.

Keywords

Data Agreement Exchange Information International Law Sharing Transboundary Water 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Basman Towfique for preliminary work in the conceptualization of this document and Nishath Yapa for the management of the Treaty Database. We are also grateful to Keith Grant for his work on the statistical analyses.

References

  1. Abbott, K., & Snidal, D. (1998). Why states act through formal international organizations. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 52, 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agrawal, A. (2002). Common resources and institutional sustainability. In E. Ostrom, T. Dietz, N. Dolsak, P. C. Stern, S. Stonich, & E. U. Weber (Eds.), The drama of the commons (pp. 41–85). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  3. Baldwin, D. A. (1993). Neorealism and neoliberalism: The contemporary debate. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Barraqué, B., & Mostert, E. (2006). Transboundary river basin management in Europe. Thematic paper for human development report 2006. New York: UNDP.Google Scholar
  5. Berland, A. (2000). The water component of the peace process between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Master of arts in law and diplomacy thesis. Boston, MA: Fletcher School, Tufts University.Google Scholar
  6. Bernauer, T. (2002). Explaining success and failure in international river management. Aquatic Sciences, 64, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernauer, T., & Kalbhenn, A. (2010). The politics of freshwater resources. In R. A. Denemark (Ed.), The international studies encyclopedia (pp. 5800–5821). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. Boockmann, B., & Thurner, P. (2006). Flexibility provisions in multilateral environmental treaties. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 6(2), 113–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brunner, R. D., & Steelman, T. A. (2005). Beyond adaptive governance. In R. D. Brunner, T. A. Steelman, L. Coe-Juell, C. M. Crommley, C. M. Edwards, & D. W. Tucker (Eds.), Adaptive governance: Integrating science, policy, and decision making (pp. 1–47). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Burton, M., & Molden, D. (2005). Making sound decisions: Information needs for basin water management. In M. Svendsen (Ed.), Irrigation and river basin management: Options for governance and institutions (pp. 51–74). Massachusetts: CABI Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chenoweth, J. L., & Feitelson, E. (2001). Analysis of factors influencing data and information exchange in international river basins: Can such exchange be used to build confidence in cooperative management? Water International, 26, 499–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Conca, K., Wu, F., & Mei, C. (2006). Global regime formation or complex institution building? The principled content of international river agreements. International Studies Quarterly, 50, 263–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Congleton, R. D. (1992). Political regimes and pollution control. Review of Economics and Statistics, 74, 412-421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Lange, M., Merrey, D. J., Levite, H., & Svendsen, M. (2005). Water resources planning and management in the Olifants basin of South Africa: Past, present and future. In M. Svendsen (Ed.), Irrigation and river basin management: Options for governance and institutions (pp. 145–168). Massachusetts: CABI Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dietz, T., Ostrom, E., & Stern, P. C. (2003). The struggle to govern the commons. Science, 302, 1907–1910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dimitrov, R. (2006). Science and international environmental policy. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  17. Dombrowsky, I. (2008). Integration in the management of international waters: Economic perspectives on a global policy discourse. Global Governance, 14, 455–477.Google Scholar
  18. Draper, S. E. (2007). Introduction to transboundary water sharing. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 133(5), 377–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Drieschova, A., Giordano, M., & Fischhendler, I. (2009). Climate change, international cooperation, and adaptation: Lessons from transboundary water law. In W. N. Adger, K. O’Brien, & I. Lorenzoni (Eds.), Adapting to climate change (pp. 384–398). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Duda, A. M., & LaRoche, D. (1997). Sustainable development of international waters and their basins: Implementing the GEF operational strategy. International Journal Water Resources Development, 13(3), 383–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Elhance, A. (2000). Hydropolitics: Grounds for despair, reasons for hope. International Negotiation, 5(2), 201–222.Google Scholar
  22. Feitelson, E., & Haddad, M. (1998). Identification of joint management structures for shared aquifers: A cooperative Palestinian-Israeli effort. Washington, DC: World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fischhendler, I. (2008). Ambiguity in transboundary environmental dispute resolution: The Israeli-Jordanian water agreement. Journal of Peace Research, 45(1), 91–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fischhendler, I., & Feitelson, E. (2003). Spatial adjustment as a mechanism for resolving river basin conflicts: The US-Mexico case. Political Geography, 22, 557–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Furlong, K., Gleditsch, N. P., & Hegre, H. (2006). Geographic opportunity and neomalthusian willingness: Boundaries, shared rivers, and conflict. International Interactions, 32(1), 79–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gates, S., Gleditsch, N.P., & Neumayer, E. (2003). Environmental Commitment, Democracy, and Inequality. Background paper for World Development Report 2003 Washington, DC: World BankGoogle Scholar
  27. Gerlak, A. K. (2004). One basin at a time: The global environment facility and governance of transboundary waters. Global Environmental Politics, 4(4), 108–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gerlak, A. K., & Grant, K. A. (2009). The correlates of cooperative institutions for international rivers. In T. J. Volgy, Z. Šabič, P. Roter, & A. K. Gerlak (Eds.), Mapping the new world order (pp. 114–147). New York: Wiley-Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  29. Gilpin, R. (1981). War and change in world politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Giordano, M. A., Giordano, M. F., & Wolf, A. T. (2005). International resource conflict and mitigation. Journal of Peace Research, 42(1), 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gleditsch, N. P., Furlong, K., Hegre, H., Lacina, B., & Owen, T. (2006). Conflicts over shared rivers: Resource scarcity or fuzzy boundaries? Political Geography, 25(4), 361–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gleick, P. H. (1993). Water and conflict: Fresh water resources and international security. International Security, 18(1), 79–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Grieco, J. M. (1988). Anarchy and the limits if cooperation: A realist critique of the newest liberal institutionalism. International Organization, 42(3), 485–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Grossman, M. (2006). Cooperation on Africa’s international waterbodies: Information needs and the role of information-sharing. In W. Scheumann & S. Neubert (Eds.), Transboundary water management in Africa: Challenges for development cooperation (pp. 173–236). Bonn, Germany: German Development Institute.Google Scholar
  35. Haas, P. M. (2000). International institutions and social learning in the management of global environmental risks. Policy Studies Journal, 28(3), 558–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hamner, J. H., & Wolf, A. T. (1997). Water: I. Patterns in international water resource treaties: The transboundary freshwater dispute database. Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law, 9, 157–177.Google Scholar
  37. Hamner, J., & Wolf, A. T. (1998). Patterns in international water resources treaties: The transboundary freshwater dispute database. Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy, 9, 157–177Google Scholar
  38. Hansen, H. E., McLaughlin Mitchell, S., & Nemeth, S. C. (2008). IO mediation of interstate conflicts: Moving beyond the global versus regional dichotomy. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 52, 295–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hensel, P. R., McLaughlin Mitchell, S., & Sowers, T. E. (2006). Conflict management of riparian disputes. Political Geography, 25, 383–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jacobson, H. K., Reisinger, W. R., & Mathers, T. (1986). National entanglements in international governmental organizations. American Political Science Review, 80, 141–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jasanoff, S. (2004). Heaven and earth: The politics of environmental images. In S. Jasanoff & M. L. Martello (Eds.), Earthly politics: Local and global in environmental governance (pp. 31–52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  42. Karkkainen, B. C. (2006). Managing transboundary aquatic ecosystems: Lessons from the Great Lakes. In 19 Pacific McGeorge Global Business & Development Law Journal, pp. 209–240.Google Scholar
  43. Keohane, R. O. (1986). Reciprocity in international relations. International Organization, 40, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kibaroglu, A., Klaphake, A., Kramer, A., Scheumann, W., & Carius, A. (2005). Cooperation on Turkey’s transboundary waters. Status report commissioned by the German federal ministry for environment, nature conservation and nuclear safety. Adelphi Research and the German Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety.Google Scholar
  45. Kibaroglu, A., & Ünver, O. (2000). An institutional framework for facilitating cooperation in the Euphrates-Tigris river basin. International Negotiation, 5(2), 311–330.Google Scholar
  46. Kistin, E. J., Ashton, P. J., Earle, A., Malzbender, D., Patrick, M. J., & Turton, A. R. (2009). An overview of the content and historical context of the international freshwater agreements that South Africa has entered into with neighbouring countries. International Environmental Agreements, 9, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kliot, N., & Shmueli, D. (1997). Building institutional frameworks for the common water resources: Israel, Jordan, and the Palestinian authority. Haifa, Israel: Technion Israel Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  48. Koremenos, B., Lipson, C., & Snidal, D. (2001). The rational design of international institutions. International Organization, 55(4), 761–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lee, K. (1993). Compass and gyroscope: Integrating science and politics for the environment. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  50. Libecap, G. D. (1995). The conditions for successful collective action. In R. O. Keohane & E. Ostrom (Eds.), Local commons and global interdependence; heterogeneity and cooperation in two domains (pp. 161–190). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  51. Marcoux, C. (2009). Institutional flexibility in the design of multilateral environmental agreements. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 26, 209–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Marshall, M., & Jaggers, K. (2002). Polity IV project: Political regime characteristics and transitions, 1800–1999: Dataset and user’s manual. Manuscript: University of Maryland.Google Scholar
  53. Marty, F. (2001). Managing international rivers: Problems, politics, and institutions. Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  54. Mearsheimer, J. H. (1995). The false promise of international institutions. International Security, 19(Winter), 5–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Meinzen-Dick, R. (2007). Beyond panaceas in water institutions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 104(39), 15200–15205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Miles, E. L., Underdal, A., Andresen, S., Wettestad, J., Skodvin, T., & Carlin, E. M. (Eds.). (2002). Environmental regime effectiveness: Confronting theory with evidence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  57. Miller, C. A., & Edwards, P. N. (2001). Changing the atmosphere: Expert knowledge and environmental governance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  58. Mitchell, S. M., & Hensel, P. R. (2007). International institutions and compliance with agreements. American Journal of Political Science, 51(4), 721–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Mitchell, R. B., & Keilbach, P. M. (2001). Situation structure and institutional design: Reciprocity, coercion, and exchange. International Organization, 55, 891–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Myint, T. (2007). Dynamics of issues, interests, and actors in multilayer governance of the Rhine River basin. Prepared for presentation at the international studies association 48th annual convention: Politics, policy and responsible scholarship, Chicago, February 28–March 3, 2007.Google Scholar
  61. Neumayer, E. (2002). Do democracies exhibit stronger international environmental commitment? A cross-country analysis. Journal of Peace Research, 39(2), 139–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Nishat, A., & Faisal, I. (2000). An assessment of the institutional mechanisms for water negotiations in the Ganges–Brahmaputra–Megna system. International Negotiation, 5(2), 289–310.Google Scholar
  63. Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Powell, R. (1991). Absolute and relative gains in international relations theory. American Political Science Review, 85(4), 1303–1320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Raadgever, G. T., Mostert, E., Kranz, N., Interwies, E., & Timmerman, J. G. (2008). Assessing management regimes in transboundary river basins: Do they support adaptive management? Ecology and Society, 13(1), 14 [online]. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss1/art14/.
  67. Rogers, P., & Hall, A. W. (2003). Effective water governance. Stockholm: Global Water Partnership.Google Scholar
  68. Rosendorff, P. B., & Milner, H. (2001). The optimal design of international trade institutions: Uncertainty and escape. International Organization, 55(4), 829–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sadoff, C. W., & Grey, D. (2005). Cooperation on international rivers: A continuum for securing and sharing benefits. Water International, 30(4), 420–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Scholz, J. T., & Stiftel, B. (Eds.). (2005). Adaptive governance and water conflict: New institutions for collaborative planning. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
  71. Shanks, C., Jacobson, H. K., & Kaplan, J. F. (1996). Inertia and change in the constellation of international governmental organizations, 1981–1992. International Organization, 50(4), 593–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Sneddon, C., & Fox, C. (2006). Rethinking transboundary waters: A critical hydropolitics of the mekong basin. Political Geography, 25, 181–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Stinnett, D., & Tir, J. (2009). The institutionalization of river treaties. International Negotiation, 14(2), 229–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Taylor, M., & Singleton, S. (1993). The communal resource: Transaction costs and solution of collective action problems. Politics & Society, 21, 195–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Timmerman, J. G. (2004). Incorporating user needs into environmental information systems. In J. G. Timmerman & S. Langaas (Eds.), Environmental information in European transboundary water management (pp. 108–124). London: IWA Publishing.Google Scholar
  76. Timmerman, J. G., & Langaas, S. (2004). Environmental information in European transboundary water management. London: IWA Publishing.Google Scholar
  77. Timmerman, J. G., & Langaas, S. (2005). Water information—What is it good for? On the use of information in transboundary water management. Regional Environmental Change, 5(4), 177–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Tir, J., & Ackermann, J. T. (2009). Politics of formalized river cooperation. Journal of Peace Research, 46(5), 623–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Toset, H. P. W., Gleditsch, N. P., & Hegre, H. (2000). Shared rivers and interstate conflict. Political Geography, 19, 971–996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Tropp, H. (2007). Water governance: Trends and needs for new capacity development. Water Policy, 9(2), 19–30.Google Scholar
  81. Turton, A., Ashton, P., & Cloete, E. (2003). An introduction to the hydropolitical drivers in the Okavango River basin. In A. Turton, et al. (Eds.), Transboundary rivers, sovereignty and development: Hydropolitical drivers in the Okavango river basin (pp. 7–30). Pretoria: African Water Issue Research Unit, Green Cross.Google Scholar
  82. Uitto, J. I., & Duda, A. M. (2002). Management of transboundary water resources: Lessons from international cooperation for conflict prevention. Geographical Journal, 168(3), 365–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. United Nations (UN). (1969). Vienna convention of the law of treaties. Treaty Series, Vol. 1155, p. 331.Google Scholar
  84. United Nations Educational, Scientific Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2009). United nations world water development report 3: Water in a changing world. Paris, France: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  85. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). (2002). Atlas of international freshwater agreements. Nairobi, Kenya: UNEP.Google Scholar
  86. van der Gun, J. (2001). From monitoring and modeling to decision support frameworks for the joint management of shared aquifers. In E. Feitelson & M. Haddad (Eds.), Management of shared groundwater resources: The Israeli-Palestinian case with an international perspective (pp. 303–321). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  87. van der Zaag, P., & Savenije, H. G. (2000). Towards improved management of shared river basins: Lessons from the Maseru conference. Water Policy, 2, 47–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Volgy, T. J., Fausett, E., Grant, K., & Rodgers, S. (2008). A new database for identifying formal intergovernmental organizations: Conceptual and empirical considerations. Journal of Peace Research, 45(6), 837–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. von Stein, J. (2008). The international law and politics of climate change: Ratification of the united nations framework convention and the kyoto protocol. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 52, 243–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of international politics. Reading, PA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  91. Wolf, A. T. (1997). International water conflict resolution: Lessons from comparative analysis. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 13(3), 333–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Wolf, A. T. (2007). Shared waters: Conflict and cooperation. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 32, 241–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Wolf, A. T., Yoffe, S. B., & Giordano, M. (2003). International waters: Identifying basins at risk. Water Policy, 5, 29–60.Google Scholar
  94. Wouters, P. (1997). Procedures in the development of international drainage basins: Notice and exchange of information. In International water law: Selected writings of Professor Charles B. Bourne (pp. 143–176). Dordrecht: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  95. Young, O. R. (1994). International governance: Protecting the environment in a stateless society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  96. Young, O. R. (1999). The effectiveness of international environmental regimes: Causal connections and behavioral mechanisms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  97. Zawahri, N. A. (2008). Designing river commissions to implement treaties and manage water disputes: The story of the joint water committee and permanent indus commission. Water International, 33(4), 464–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Zeitoun, M., & Mirumachi, N. (2009). Transboundary water interaction I: Reconsidering conflict and cooperation. International Environmental Agreements, 8, 297–316.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea K. Gerlak
    • 1
  • Jonathan Lautze
    • 2
  • Mark Giordano
    • 2
  1. 1.University of ArizonaTucsonUSA
  2. 2.International Water Management InstituteColomboSri Lanka

Personalised recommendations