International Water Law and the Quest for Common Security

Magsig, Bjørn‐Oliver

doi:10.4324/9781315745923

Cited by 38 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Delli-Priscoli & Wolf, 2008;Trondalen, 2008;Cronin & Hamlin, 2010;Stimson, 2010;DNI, 2012; and see discussion in Magsig, 2015).…”

Section: Law: Subject Of Politics or Norm Building?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The relevance of international water law to later-developing upstream states

Zeitoun

2015

Water International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relevance of the main instruments of international water law to the hydraulic development projects of later-developing upstream states is explored, for a non-legal audience. Relevance is gauged by querying common misperceptions, checking the compatibility of the instruments, and considering their effect along the Nile, Jordan and Tigris Rivers and associated aquifers. Specific principles of international water law are found to support upstream development in theory, though its relevance is threatened by incompatibility of clauses between the instruments, the erosion of normbuilding processes, and a shift away from the idea that territorial sovereignty over a fluid resource should be limited. 2 The question arises in the non-legal water community: Should we care enough about this progress to learn the language and issues, and engage in the debates?Certainly water resource managers, diplomats and researchers should, for tensions between upstream and downstream states are increasing, and a compelling case has been made that IWL favours those downstream nations that have already developed the transboundary resource (Wegerich & Olsson, 2010). This article queries that argument by investigating the extent to which IWL is relevant to the later-developing, upstream states. It follows a tradition of articles on water law in Water International (e.g. Leb, 2015;Vink, 2014;Wouters & Chen, 2015), though in considering also the politics of water interaction between states, it is written for a non-legal water audience. The relevance is gauged by reviewing common misperceptions about law and lesser-known clauses, then by cross-checking the mutual compatibility of the many legal instruments that make up the body of IWL, and finally by querying the effect of IWL on the behaviour *Email: m.zeitoun@uea.ac.uk 2 of riparian states along the Jordan, Nile, and Tigris Rivers and associated aquifers. This is preceded by a critical review of the relevant legal principles and debates, and followed by discussion of the implications of the findings.The analysis finds that on the whole, IWL is entirely relevant to all late-developing upstream states. Taken (momentarily) out of the political context, the chief legal instruments are found to contain no provisions which compromise upstream development or privilege downstream development. This theoretical relevance of IWL is found to be threatened, however, through a perceptible shift away from coordinated to unilateral transboundary activity, through erosion of the norm-building feature of international law (as when IWL is ignored or discredited by those seeking to maintain the status quo) and through incompatible clauses (in particular the sovereignty clause in the Draft Aquifer Articles). IWL's actual influence over the transboundary water arrangements in the cases considered is found to be qualified, revealing how the threats may and do play out in practice. The article argues that the advances IWL has made in tackling the collective challenge of governing a fluid transboundary resource a...

show abstract

“…Delli-Priscoli & Wolf, 2008;Trondalen, 2008;Cronin & Hamlin, 2010;Stimson, 2010;DNI, 2012; and see discussion in Magsig, 2015).…”

Section: Law: Subject Of Politics or Norm Building?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The relevance of international water law to later-developing upstream states

Zeitoun

2015

Water International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to the traditional (hydrological and geographical) meaning of scope, the approach here is to better reflect watercourses, for the benefit of the whole basin, can only be achieved through a truly joint strategy involving all sectors and disciplines across borders and levels. 86 In addition to the predominant perception of scope, 87 and to better echo the common character of the global water crisis, the element of ambit also does justice to the fact that water security has to be seen as a common security issue. 88 Owing to the interconnectedness of the global- The role of international law in the management of transboundary freshwater resources has long been regarded as merely focusing on the (re)allocation of water -which strengthened the argument that riparian disputes should be perceived as zero-sum games.…”

Section: Magsigmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…90 International environmental governance in general, and transboundary water management in particular, have long been dominated by the either/or debate on sovereignty versus the joint management of natural resources. 91 93…”

Section: Cooperative Sovereigntymentioning

confidence: 99%

Water security: A litmus test for international law

Magsig¹

2020

Rev Euro Comp Intl Enviro

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While water security is now being discussed at the highest political level, the debate on how the concept should actually be implemented to improve the management of our transboundary freshwater resources is still in its infancy. Further, the absence of law in much of this debate impedes efforts to utilize water security as a change agent for international water law and diplomacy – an unsatisfactory situation threatening global stability and international security. This article demonstrates that a fresh conceptualization of water security is not only required to bring about the desperately needed change in the underlying perceptions of sovereignty, but that it is also possible. However, this will only work if international law plays its part in turning the buzzword into a meaningful concept. By supporting the contemporary understanding of water security through strengthening normative developments regarding the concepts of common concern and cooperative sovereignty, these concepts of international law could simultaneously be better employed to tackle other increasingly complex global challenges.

show abstract

“…Treaty practice does not allow for excessive optimism either, as most of the water-sharing agreements in the region struggle with issues of noninclusiveness, inflexibility, false predictions about the future hydrology and socio-economic realities, lack of joint vision and poor implementation at the national level. 89 Indications of the shortcomings of treaty law in the region are the current and smouldering disputes surrounding the development of the Mekong and Indus rivers -both equipped with water-sharing agreements which are often being praised as success stories. 90 While most water-sharing agreements (not only in Himalayan Asia) have their weaknesses, one should not underestimate the impact these legal frameworks have on the transboundary water interaction in the region.…”

Section: The Potential For a Regional Approach To Water In Himalayan mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Moynihan¹,

Magsig²

2014

Rev Euro Comp Intl Enviro

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The contribution of regional approaches to the international law of transboundary watercourses is currently being investigated with elevated interest. The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) area and Himalayan Asia are two key focus regions for testing new legal approaches and enhancing understanding of how existing regional regimes function and contribute to the development of international water law. The UNECE Water Convention, together with an entourage of hard and soft water instruments, appears to be the most sophisticated legal regime addressing freshwater cooperation. Within Himalayan Asia, where the water crisis is augmenting the already tense political situation, the current state of affairs for implementing a more progressive regional approach is examined. Studying the structurally different and challenging Himalayan context furthers our understanding of hurdles regarding the transferability of regional concepts. This article identifies gaps in our current perception of the role for regional approaches in international water law and outlines pathways for addressing them.

show abstract

International Water Law and the Quest for Common Security

Cited by 38 publications

References 29 publications

The relevance of international water law to later-developing upstream states

The relevance of international water law to later-developing upstream states

Water security: A litmus test for international law

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About