Transboundary water justice: a combined reading of literature on critical transboundary water interaction and "justice", for analysis and diplomacy
Zeitoun, M. ; Warner, J.F. ; Mirumachi, N. ; Matthews, N. ; McLaughlin, K. - \ 2014
Water Policy 16 (2014)S2. - ISSN 1366-7017 - p. 174 - 193.
global environmental justice - hydro-hegemony - south-africa - nile basin - power - management - allocation - equity - law - hydrosolidarity
By reviewing and blending two main bodies of research (critical transboundary water interaction analysis and centuries of thought on social justice) this paper seeks to improve international transboundary water interaction analysis and diplomacy. Various implications for transboundary analysis and diplomacy are grouped under themes of equitability, process/outcomes, and structural concerns. These include shortcomings of analysis and policy based on unfounded assumptions of equality, and options excluded from consideration by the legitimisation of particular concepts of justice over others. As power asymmetry is seen to enable or disable justice claims and conflict resolution efforts, the importance of ensuring equitable outcomes as a pre-condition for cooperation is asserted. Similarly, water conflict resolution is found to be more fair – procedurally – than is conflict management, and may be supported to a limited extent by international water law. A number of analytical tasks are suggested for future research and policy, including a call to scrutinise the source of legitimacy of strands of justice invoked. Given the very many perspectives on justice that exist in the network of relevant actors, potential bias in research and diplomacy could be reduced if all involved openly stated the morals underpinning their understanding of ‘justice’.
Transboundary water interaction II: the influence of 'soft' power
Zeitoun, M. ; Mirumachi, N. ; Warner, J.F. - \ 2011
International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 11 (2011)2. - ISSN 1567-9764 - p. 159 - 178.
hydro-hegemony - river-basin - cooperation - management - conflict - project - regime - peace
This paper seeks to broaden the analysis of transboundary water interaction, by examining and interpreting the influence of ‘soft’ power therein. The ‘soft’ power of persuasion is understood to be exercised through discursive and to a lesser extent ideational means, and is interpreted in terms of compliance related to distributive (conflictual) or integrative (consensual) ends (after Scott (1994)). The focus is on inter-state water conflicts in hegemonic political contexts, where, it is found, the ‘first among equals’ has a greater ability to exploit ‘soft’ power and to determine the outcome. ‘Soft’ power is also seen to influence the choices states make or avoid in their transboundary water interaction, which explains in part how treaties intending to manage conflict may in fact delay or perpetuate it. For example, ‘soft’ power can be used by the basin hegemon to frame inequitable forms of cooperation in a cooperative light, such that unfair and ultimately unsustainable transboundary arrangements are replicated by the international donor community. Non-hegemonic riparian states also employ their capacity of ‘soft’ power, though may find themselves with little choice other than to comply with the arrangement established by the basin hegemon. The findings stress the importance of analysts questioning claims of interaction promoted as ‘cooperative’, and of examining the ‘soft’ power plays that underlie all transboundary water arrangements. Exemplification is provided through transboundary river basins and aquifers around the globe