International conflict and cooperation over freshwater resources

Abstract

Unsustainable use of freshwater resources worldwide creates enormous challenges for human societies populating these natural systems, and these challenges are likely to grow with climate change. Will societies respond with increased cooperation to manage freshwater resources more sustainably or will there be more conflict over this scarce but vital resource? This review of research on conflict and cooperation over transboundary freshwater resources shows that, thus far, the prevailing response is cooperation, albeit non-violent conflict is quite frequent, too. It also documents substantial progress in understanding the drivers of water-related cooperation and conflict. Key knowledge gaps remain, particularly with respect to transboundary water conflict and cooperation in the past 10 to 15 years and in terms of local water-related events. The key prerequisite for filling these gaps is that the research community engages in a joint effort to address persistent shortcomings in existing event datasets on water cooperation and conflict.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: BAR scale, 1948–2008.

References

  1. 1.

    IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C (eds Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) (WMO, 2018).

  2. 2.

    Grill, G. et al. Mapping the world’s free-flowing rivers. Nature 569, 215–221 (2019).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    UNESCO World Water Assessment Programme The United Nations World Water Development Report 2019: Leaving No One Behind (UNESCO, 2019).

  4. 4.

    Weinzettel, J. & Pfister, S. International trade of global scarce water use in agriculture: Modeling on watershed level with monthly resolution. Ecol. Econ. 159, 301–311 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    IPCC Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report (eds Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R. K. & Meyer, L. A.) (IPCC, 2014).

  6. 6.

    Maavara, T. et al. Global phosphorus retention by river damming. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 15603–15608 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Vörösmarty, C. J., Green, P., Salisbury, J. & Lammers, R. B. Global water resources: vulnerability from climate change and population growth. Science 289, 284–288 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Schewe, J. et al. Multimodel assessment of water scarcity under climate change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 3245–3250 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Arnell, N. W. & Gosling, S. N. The impacts of climate change on river flow regimes at the global scale. J. Hydrol. 486, 351–364 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Padowski, J. C., Gorelick, S. M., Thompson, B. H., Rozelle, S. & Fendorf, S. Assessment of human–natural system characteristics influencing global freshwater supply vulnerability. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 104014 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Koubi, V. Climate change and conflict. Annu. Rev. Political Sci. 22, 343–360 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Koubi, V., Bernauer, T., Kalbhenn, A. & Spilker, G. Climate variability, economic growth, and civil conflict. J. Peace Res. 49, 113–127 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Wrathall, D. J., Van Den Hoek, J., Walters, A. & Devenish, A. Water Stress and Human Migration: A Global, Georeferenced Review of Empirical Research (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2018).

  14. 14.

    Mach, K. J. et al. Climate as a risk factor for armed conflict. Nature 571, 193–197 (2019).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    De Stefano, L., Petersen-Perlman, J. D., Sproles, E. A., Eynard, J. & Wolf, A. T. Assessment of transboundary river basins for potential hydro-political tensions. Glob. Environ. Change 45, 35–46 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Beck, L., Bernauer, T., Siegfried, T. & Böhmelt, T. Implications of hydro-political dependency for international water cooperation and conflict: insights from new data. Political Geogr. 42, 23–33 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Bernauer, T. & Böhmelt, T. Basins at risk: predicting international river basin conflict and cooperation. Glob. Environ. Politics 14, 116–138 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    De Stefano, L. et al. Mapping the Resilience of International River Basins to Future Climate Change-Induced Water Variability, Volume 2: Appendices (World Bank, 2010).

  19. 19.

    Milman, A., Bunclark, L., Conway, D. & Adger, W. N. Assessment of institutional capacity to adapt to climate change in transboundary river basins. Clim. Change 121, 755–770 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Dinar, A. & Tsur, Y. Management of Transboundary Water Resources Under Scarcity: A Multidisciplinary Approach (World Scientific, 2017).

  21. 21.

    McCracken, M. & Wolf, A. T. Updating the Register of International River Basins of the world. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 35, 732–782 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Weinzettel, J. & Pfister, S. International trade of global scarce water use in agriculture: modeling on watershed level with monthly resolution. Ecol. Econ. 159, 301–311 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Xie, L., Zhang, Y. & Panda, J. P. Mismatched diplomacy: China–India water relations over the Ganges–Brahmaputra–Meghna River Basin. J. Contemp. China 27, 32–46 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Zawahri, N. A. & Mitchell, S. M. Fragmented governance of international rivers: negotiating bilateral versus multilateral treaties. Int. Stud. Q. 55, 835–858 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Villar, P. C., Ribeiro, W. C. & Sant’Anna, F. M. Transboundary governance in the La Plata River basin: status and prospects. Water Int. 43, 978–995 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Böhmelt, T. et al. Demand, supply, and restraint: determinants of domestic water conflict and cooperation. Glob. Environ. Change 29, 337–348 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    De Stefano, L., Edwards, P., De Silva, L. & Wolf, A. T. Tracking cooperation and conflict in international basins: historic and recent trends. Water Policy 12, 871–884 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Bernauer, T. & Kalbhenn, A. The Politics of International Freshwater Resource (Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies, Oxford Univ. Press, 2010).

  29. 29.

    Hand, B. K. et al. A social–ecological perspective for riverscape management in the Columbia River Basin. Front. Ecol. Environ. 16, S23–S33 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Zhupankhan, A., Tussupova, K. & Berndtsson, R. Water in Kazakhstan, a key in Central Asian water management. Hydrolog. Sci. J. 63, 752–762 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Barua, A., Vij, S. & Zulfiqur Rahman, M. Powering or sharing water in the Brahmaputra River basin. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 34, 829–843 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Al-Saidi, M. Insights from negotiations models on water sharing conflicts in the development of water basin plans. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 191, 012004 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Barnes, J. The future of the Nile: climate change, land use, infrastructure management, and treaty negotiations in a transboundary river basin. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 8, e449 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Calhman, O. K. B. & da Hora, M. D. A. The Amazon Basin in the context of shared management of transboundary water resources. J. Water Resour. Prot. 9, 629–636 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Thomas, V. & Warner, J. Hydropolitics in the Harirud/Tejen river basin: Afghanistan as hydro-hegemon? Water Int. 40, 593–613 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Suhardiman, D., Giordano, M. & Molle, F. Scalar disconnect: the logic of transboundary water governance in the Mekong. Soc. Nat. Resour. 25, 572–586 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Siegfried, T. & Bernauer, T. Estimating the performance of international regulatory regimes: methodology and empirical application to international water management in the Naryn/Syr Darya basin. Water Resour. Res. 43, W11406 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Register of International River Basins (Oregon State University, 2018); https://go.nature.com/2tKI9WX

  39. 39.

    Kalbhenn, A. & Bernauer, T. International Water cooperation and conflict: A New Event Dataset (SSRN, 2012); https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2176609

  40. 40.

    Gleditsch, N. P., Wallensteen, P., Eriksson, M., Sollenberg, M. & Strand, H. Armed conflict 1946–2001: a new dataset. J. Peace Res. 39, 615–637 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Palmer, G., D’Orazio, V., Kenwick, M. R. & McManus, R. W. Updating the militarized interstate dispute data: a response to Gibler, Miller, and Little. Int. Stud. Q. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqz045 (2019).

  42. 42.

    Brochmann, M. & Gleditsch, N. P. Shared rivers and conflict–a reconsideration. Political Geogr. 31, 519–527 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Tir, J. & Stinnett, D. M. Weathering climate change: can institutions mitigate international water conflict? J. Peace Res. 49, 211–225 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Zawahri, N. & Michel, D. Assessing the Indus Waters Treaty from a comparative perspective. Water Int. 43, 696–712 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Brochmann, M. Signing river treaties—does it improve river cooperation? Int. Interact. 38, 141–163 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Schmeier, S. & Vogel, B. in Riverine Ecosystem Management (eds Schmutz, S. & Sendzimir, J.) 347–370 (Springer, 2018).

  47. 47.

    Giordano, M. et al. A review of the evolution and state of transboundary freshwater treaties. Int. Environ. Agreem.: Politics Law Econ. 14, 245–264 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Karreth, J. & Tir, J. International agreement design and the moderating role of domestic bureaucratic quality: the case of freshwater cooperation. J. Peace Res. 55, 460–475 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    McClelland, C. World Event/Interaction Survey, 1966–1978. WEIS Codebook ICPSR, 5211 (ICPSR, 1978).

  50. 50.

    CAMEO Event Data Codebook (CAMEO, 2013); https://go.nature.com/37w3eCN

  51. 51.

    Open Event Data Alliance Software (OEDA, 2014); https://openeventdata.github.io/

  52. 52.

    BBC Monitoring (BBC, 2019); https://monitoring.bbc.co.uk/

  53. 53.

    Factiva (Dow Jones, 2019); https://professional.dowjones.com/factiva/

  54. 54.

    Ward, M. D., Greenhill, B. D. & Bakke, K. M. The perils of policy by p-value: predicting civil conflicts. J. Peace Res. 47, 363–375 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Yoffe, S. & Larson, K. Basins at Risk: Water Event Database Methodology. In Basins At Risk: Conflict and Cooperation Over International Freshwater Resources 6–41 PhD thesis, Oregon State Univ. (2002).

  56. 56.

    Yoffe, S., Wolf, A. T. & Giordano, M. Conflict and cooperation over international freshwater resources: indicators of basins at risk. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 39, 1109–1126 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Hensel, P. R., McLaughlin Mitchell, S., Sowers, T. E. & Thyne, C. L. Bones of contention: comparing territorial, maritime, and river issues. J. Confl. Resolut. 52, 117–143 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. 58.

    Mitchell, S. M. & Zawahri, N. A. The effectiveness of treaty design in addressing water disputes. J. Peace Res. 52, 187–200 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    Munia, H. et al. Water stress in global transboundary river basins: significance of upstream water use on downstream stress. Environ. Res. Lett. 11, 014002 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. 60.

    Wolf, A. T., Yoffe, S. B. & Giordano, M. International waters: identifying basins at risk. Water Policy 5, 29–60 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. 61.

    Yoffe, S. et al. Geography of international water conflict and cooperation: data sets and applications. Water Resour. Res. 40, W05S04 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. 62.

    Giordano, M. A. International River Basin Management: Global Principles and Basin Practice. PhD thesis, Oregon State Univ. (2002).

  63. 63.

    Kehl, J. R. Hydropolitical complexes and asymmetrical power: conflict, cooperation, and governance of international river systems. J. World-Syst. Res. 17, 218–235 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    Rai, S. P., Sharma, N. & Lohani, A. K. Risk assessment for transboundary rivers using fuzzy synthetic evaluation technique. J. Hydrol. 519, 1551–1559 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. 65.

    Rai, S. P., Wolf, A. T., Sharma, N. & Tiwari, H. in River System Analysis and Management (ed. Sharma, N.) 353–368 (Springer, 2017).

  66. 66.

    Petersen-Perlman, J. D., Veilleux, J. C. & Wolf, A. T. International water conflict and cooperation: challenges and opportunities. Water Int. 42, 105–120 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. 67.

    Blankespoor, B., Dinar, S., Dinar, A. & Kulukurasuriya, P. The Impact of Water Supply Variability on Treaty Cooperation Between International Bilateral River Basin Riparian States (The World Bank, 2010).

  68. 68.

    Zeitoun, M., Mirumachi, N. & Warner, J. Transboundary water interaction II: soft power underlying conflict and cooperation. Int. Environ. Agreem. 11, 159–178 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. 69.

    Tir, J. & Stinnett, D. M. The institutional design of riparian treaties: the role of river issues. J. Confl. Resolut. 55, 606–631 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. 70.

    Dinar, S., Katz, D., De Stefano, L. & Blankespoor, B. Do treaties matter? Climate change, water variability, and cooperation along transboundary river basins. Political Geogr. 69, 162–172 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. 71.

    Dinar, A., De Stefano, L., Nigatu, G. & Zawahri, N. Why are there so few basin-wide treaties? Economics and politics of coalition formation in multilateral international river basins. Water Int. 44, 463–485 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. 72.

    Kalbhenn, A. Liberal peace and shared resources–a fair-weather phenomenon? J. Peace Res. 48, 715–735 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. 73.

    Wolf, A. T., Natharius, J. A., Danielson, J. J., Ward, B. S. & Pender, J. K. International river basins of the world. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 15, 387–427 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. 74.

    Wolf, A. T., Stahl, K. & Macomber, M. F. Conflict and cooperation within international river basins: the importance of institutional capacity. Water Resour. Upd. 125, 31–40 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  75. 75.

    Farinosi, F. et al. An innovative approach to the assessment of hydro-political risk: a spatially explicit, data driven indicator of hydro-political issues. Glob. Environ. Change 52, 286–313 (2018).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  76. 76.

    De Stefano, L. et al. Climate change and the institutional resilience of international river basins. J. Peace Res. 49, 193–209 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. 77.

    Petersen‐Perlman, J. D. & Wolf, A. T. Getting to the first handshake: enhancing security by initiating cooperation in transboundary river basins. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 51, 1688–1707 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. 78.

    Subramanian, A., Brown, B. & Wolf, A. Reaching Across the Waters: Facing the Risks of Cooperation in International Waters (The World Bank, 2012).

  79. 79.

    Moran, E. F., Lopez, M. C., Moore, N., Müller, N. & Hyndman, D. W. Sustainable hydropower in the 21st century. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 11891–11898 (2018).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  80. 80.

    Methodology (Water Peace and Security Partnership, 2020); https://waterpeacesecurity.org/info/methodology

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Thomas Bernauer or Tobias Böhmelt.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bernauer, T., Böhmelt, T. International conflict and cooperation over freshwater resources. Nat Sustain 3, 350–356 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0479-8

Download citation