The Rising Role of Regional Approaches in International Water Law: Lessons from the UNECE Water Regime and Himalayan Asia for Strengthening Transboundary Water Cooperation

2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruby Moynihan ◽  
Bjørn-Oliver Magsig
Keyword(s):  
Water Regime ◽  
Water Law ◽  
Transboundary Water ◽  
Water Cooperation ◽  
International Water Law ◽  
International Water ◽  
Transboundary Water Cooperation

scholarly journals The Legitimacy of Dam Development in International Watercourses: A Case Study of the Harirud River Basin

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (02) ◽  
pp. 247-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohsen Nagheeby ◽  
Mehdi Piri D. ◽  
Michael Faure
Keyword(s):  
River Basin ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Water Law ◽  
Transboundary Water ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Water Cooperation ◽  
International Water Law ◽  
International Water ◽  
Transboundary Water Cooperation

AbstractThis article examines the international legitimacy of unilateral dam development in an international watercourse from the perspective of international water law. Drawing upon technical analysis over the Harirud River Basin, the article discusses probable negative impacts of unilateral dam development in Afghanistan on downstream Iran and Turkmenistan. Competing claims are analyzed to assess emerging transboundary damage under customary international water law. Applying these insights to the case study, this article explores how legal norms and principles can contribute to transboundary water cooperation. It investigates how equitable and reasonable utilization, as required by the United Nations Watercourse Convention, could be reached and whether current activities are in conformity with international norms. Based on this analysis and in the light of international customary law, the article questions the compatibility of unilateral control and capture of water resources in Afghanistan, particularly through the Salma Dam, with ‘equitable and reasonable utilization’ and ‘no significant harm’ rules. The article also argues that building the Salma Dam results in significant transboundary harm to downstream states. Hence, such harm could be considered as significant transboundary damage. Conclusions point to an understanding of water law as a form of institutional guidance in order to provide a transparent setting for transboundary water cooperation among riparian states.

scholarly journals National Sovereignty Versus Transboundary Water Cooperation: Can You See International Law Reflected in the Water?

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 115 ◽  
pp. 178-182
Author(s):  
Francesco Sindico
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Transboundary Water ◽  
National Sovereignty ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Aquifer System ◽  
Water Cooperation ◽  
Guarani Aquifer ◽  
International Water Law ◽  
Downstream Flow ◽  
Transboundary Water Cooperation

Could Turkey dam the Tigris and Euphrates and deprive its downstream neighbors of vital water resources? Could Brazil over-pump the Guarani Aquifer System to the detriment of the other aquifer states? Could Egypt put pressure on upstream Nile states and prevent them from developing river related infrastructure that might limit downstream flow? International law in the field of transboundary water cooperation has evolved and would appear to condemn unilateral practices such as the ones suggested above. However, hydro politics and the lack of reception of international water law instruments by many countries sometimes make it difficult to see international law properly reflected in the management of major rivers, lakes and aquifers around the world. In this essay, I first highlight what international law dictates when it comes to the tension between national sovereignty and transboundary water cooperation. I then explore how this tension plays out in the three examples noted above. Due to limited acceptance of the existing international, bilateral, or regional legal instruments, the resolution of the tension between national sovereignty and transboundary water cooperation will often be left to customary international law.

Hydro-hegemony and international water law: laying claims to water rights

Water Policy ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (S2) ◽  
pp. 89-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marwa Daoudy
Keyword(s):  
Bargaining Power ◽  
Negotiation Process ◽  
Water Law ◽  
International Rivers ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Bargaining Position ◽  
Prior Notification ◽  
International Water Law ◽  
International Water

This paper addresses hydro-hegemony from the perspective of International Water Law, by examining the role of law in upstream/downstream negotiations. It is built on the understanding that International Water Law constitutes an element of power relations, asserting that it is a source of structural and bargaining power. The first section of the paper discusses main principles that have emerged, and their establishment as terms of reference for water cooperation. In the second part, competing claims are analysed to see how co-riparians in the Euphrates and Tigris basins have provided deliberately conflicting interpretations over “International rivers”, “equitable and reasonable utilization”, “no harm”, “prior notification” and “consultation” to derive negotiating positions and influence from International Water Law. Conclusions point to the understanding of water law as a structural variable, impacting on the actors’ constraints and options and enhancing the structural power of the non-hegemonic riparians. International Water Law appears to operate as well as process-related variable which influences the process and outcome of water negotiations. As a source of bargaining power, legal principles increase the legitimacy of downstream riparians and enhances their bargaining position in the negotiation process.

Inter-State Water Law in the United States of America

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rhett B. Larson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Water Allocation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Water Law ◽  
Transboundary Water ◽  
State Water ◽  
International Water Law ◽  
International Water ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Inter State

AbstractThe rich field of inter-state water law in the United States illustrates both successes and failures in transboundary water management and allocation. This monograph analyzes the three general approaches to water allocation between riparian states to certain shared watercourses in the United States, namely equitable apportionment, congressional apportionment, and inter-state compacts. This analysis is accompanied by a discussion and evaluation of the different cases of shared watercourses that applied these approaches, and a comparison of each of them to similar approaches in international water law. The monograph draws lessons for international water law from inter-state water law—highlighting the successful inter-state approaches that can be adopted by international water law, as well as the approaches that failed, and which should be avoided.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document