Untitled

McCaffrey, James M.; Winders, Richard Bruce

doi:10.2307/30040125

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All these principles form part of the corpus of international law and reflect customary international law, 80 which means that they are binding upon all states. 81 This argument is supported by decisions of the ICJ in the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros (Hungary/Slovakia) case 82 Considering the similarities and differences between the Conventions and the fact that they are currently in operation at the global level, promoting and implementing both Conventions as a 'package' creates more synergistic benefits beyond that of either Convention standing alone. Rieu-Clarke and Kinna suggest a 'package approach' to the implementation of both Conventions in order to strengthen the law of international watercourses: A. on Shared Watercourses, 84 and the Nile Basin Cooperative Framework Agreement.…”

Section: The 1997 Un Watercourses Conventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As McCaffrey correctly asks, 'how can an upstream state know if it is using an international watercourse in an equitable manner?' 95 In the absence of joint management of a shared watercourse, it may be difficult to determine whether a shared watercourse is used equitably and reasonably. Article 6 UNWC lists, in a non-exhaustive manner, a number of factors that should be considered in evaluating equitable and reasonable utilization, such as population dependence, the availability of alternatives, and the effects of the shared water utilization.…”

Section: The Equitable and Reasonable Utilization Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Nagheeby¹,

Piri²,

Faure³

2019

TEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This 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.

show abstract

Section: The 1997 Un Watercourses Conventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Equitable and Reasonable Utilization Principlementioning

confidence: 99%