Water Geopolitics

As countries compete for water resources international agreements and treaties have to be drawn up on how best to manage shared water supplies.
Pacts about water supply, distribution and use are in place along many major rivers.
However, as the political situation changes, these can flare up into disputes (hydropolitics).
As water resources take on a greater significance, new treaties may need to be negotiated using what might be called water diplomacy.
Unfortunately, inter- national law does not provide a clear solution to transboundary river disputes, except where navigable waterways are involved.
In fact, present international law tends to make matters worse.
Upstream countries usually assert their right of territorial sovereignty (it is our water, so it is our decision how it is used).
Downstream countries claim territorial integrity (it is our right to receive the same amount and quality of water as we have in the past)
Sharing Water
1. Under the Helsinki Rules there is general agreement that international treaties must include concepts such as ‘equitable use’ or ‘equitable share’ and be applied to whole drainage basins, not single countries.
2. Ideally, the criteria for water sharing should be based upon the following:
  1. natural factors – rainfall amounts, water sources, share of drainage basin
  2. social and economic needs – population size, development and welfare
  3. downstream impacts – restricting flow, lowering water tables, pollution
  4. dependency – are alternative water sources (other rivers or aquifers) available to the country?
  5. prior use – the tricky question of existing (past) or potential (future) use
  6. efficiency – avoiding waste and mismanagement of water
3. In reality, of course, agreements are rarely equitable because the country with the greatest political, economic and even military power gets the better deal.
4. This is true in the middle east, in many parts of southeast Asia, and arguably even between states in the USA
The Colorado River
1. The basin of the Colorado River is the most heavily used source of irrigation water in the USA.
2. Water rights between states were allocated by the Colorado Compact in 1922
3. Over the next 60 years a series of treaties were agreed between the seven US states with a direct interest in the river, and between the USA and Mexico.
4. A ‘giant plumbing system’ has come into being, involving more than ten major dams to serve the water needs of 30 million people
5. The 1920s ‘Law of the River’, based on the Colorado Compact, established the division of water between the upper basin states of Colorado, Wyoming, Utah and New Mexico and their responsi- bility to supply the lower basin states of Arizona, Nevada and California, together with Mexico, where the river meets the sea.
6. Initial agreements allocated California the largest proportion of water because of its large population and considerable political power.
  1. This has since been reduced by new developments and legal challenges.
7. The 1920s, when these agreements were drawn up, was a period of higher rainfall and water surpluses.
8. As demand and populations increase and less water is available they are a growing challenge for the states and players involved.
9. The stakeholders include the following:
  1. Farmers
    1. Agriculture has always done well out of the Colorado River, receiving some 80% of the water allocation.
    2. This is because the farmers and ranchers got there first.
    3. In addition, to encourage agricultural development, the federal government supplied the water to farmers at low cost – as low as one-twentieth of the price in nearby cities.
    4. Much of this water is wasted in flood irrigation and inappropriate choices of crop (cotton and rice which need a lot of water).
    5. The sale of water rights by farmers to others is controversial.
  2. City Dwellers
    1. The southwest states have become increasingly urbanised.
    2. California is accused of using water that other states may need in the future.
    3. In recent years, against the background of a 5-year drought and continuing population growth, the conflict has become even angrier.
    4. . In 2007, for the first time, Arizona began to take its full share of water for the cities of Phoenix and Tucson.
    5. To make up for this, California is squeezing farmers in the Imperial Valley to supply Los Angeles and San Diego.
  3. Environmentalists and recreationalists
    1. The recre- ational development of lakes is of increasing concern to environmental groups which would prefer to see lower levels of recreational activity in wilderness and wetland areas.
    2. The heavy use of Lake Powell by tourists, for example, is threat- ening the lakeshore areas.
  4. Indigenous groups
    1. Native Americans along the Colorado River have claims to water rights based on treaties and agreements made between their tribes and the federal government in the 1880s.
    2. They are engaged in prolonged legal battles over these claims.
  5. Mexican People
    1. The Colorado River is used so heavily that it no longer reaches the sea – 90% of its water is extracted before it reaches Mexico.
    2. The wetlands that once existed in the river’s delta are now a vast expanse of barren mudflats.
    3. Most of the local Cucupa fishermen have been forced to move elsewhere.
    4. The delta has reduced in size as water and sediment have been retained by the huge dams on the Colorado.
  6. US federal government
    1. This is under pressure from its own politicians not to change water alloca- tions.
    2. Plans to line the canal which carries water to California’s Imperial Valley with concrete seem a sensible water conservation project.
    3. However, seepage from the canal tops up groundwater along the border, so any change would reduce supplies in Mexico.
    4. On the other hand, it seems that Mexico is taking more than its allotted share from the Rio Grande.
    5. These water issues could affect US–Mexican relations on other matters, such as curbing cross-border drug smuggling and controlling illegal immigration from Mexico into the USA.
10. The measures taken to control the River Colorado in order to prevent floods, generate electricity and provide water for homes and agriculture were an engineering marvel at the time of their construction. There is a view now, however, that it has been a costly, inefficient, divisive and environmentally damaging operation

Next up

Water Geopolitics

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by Jodie Goodacre over 10 years ago