Trans-Boundary Freshwater: A Global Environmental Problem

         Similar to the climate change, whaling, and deforestation environmental regimes, attempts to combat the global environmental problem of freshwater availability and distribution has seen little success.  Transboundary freshwater resources, in particular, create various conflicts that need to be dealt with on an international level.  Protocols, like the 1997 UN Convention on the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses, can be used to create rules and institutions that eliminate conflict and preserve important freshwater resources.  Like the unsuccessful protocols designed to deal with the aforementioned issues (Kyoto, the IWC, and UN-REDD), this convention could easily become ineffective.  The success of the freshwater regime and UN Convention can be determined by deciding how the problem is classified, what role certain countries play, and which powerful actors and economic motivations are involved.

Over 1 billion people lack access to safe drinking water worldwide.  Increased demand from population growth and unequal distribution of freshwater, exacerbated by climate change, create numerous conflicts over the rights and responsibilities to utilize and protect a shared watercourse. Globally, 145 nations contain the 263 trans-boundary lakes and river basins—of these, 19 are shared between more than five nations.  Despite the many trans-boundary freshwater flows, cooperative frameworks exist for only about 60% of them, and of these 80% are between only two countries (known as “partial” agreements).  

         The UN Convention on the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses is the only universal treaty governing shared freshwater resources.  The key principles expressed in the treaty include: equitable and reasonable utilization of water resources, application of appropriate measures to prevent harm to other users, and prior notification of planned measures involving the shared water source.  Though these principles seem positive and fair to all parties, the treaty has yet to be ratified or see much success for a variety of reasons.

Depending on how it is framed, the overall environmental problem of freshwater resources could fall under any of the four classifications: a trans-boundary externality when one state pollutes into water that flows into another state; a linked issue when the quality of water is negatively affected by development or when water is redistributed through globalization and trade; or a global commons problem when regarding the overall water cycle as a common heritage of mankind, under no one jurisdiction.  In this particular example, trans-boundary water resources best embody a shared natural resource problem—including a freshwater resource that stretches across two or more state borders. The UN Convention seeks to create institutions and rules for creating joint management regimes and agreements between states, which is often the most effective way to combat shared natural resource problems.

In order for the convention to be put into force it needs to be ratified by 35 states.  As of now, 33 states have ratified, with several others signing on and awaiting ratification.  The main pusher states include countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, a region facing some of the most dire and complicated water scarcity and distribution issues.  Certain EU countries—such as Germany—that tend to favor international environmental reform, have also ratified the treaty.  The biggest dragger states, which voted against the treaty from the beginning, are Burundi, China, and Turkey—all upper-riparian states reluctant to give up rights to their water resources.  

The UN Convention has positive goals and is close to meeting its 35 necessary ratifications to be entered into force—but it cannot be considered a success by any description of the word.  Using the legal approach, it was unsuccessful because—although all but three UN members voted for it—only 33 actually ratified it and compliance is low.  Because freshwater problems have grown since the formation of the treaty, it can also be seen as unsuccessful under the problem-solving approach.  The words in the treaty demonstrate a desire to solve water problems justly and economically efficiently, but until it is entered into force there is no telling whether or not the problems are actually solved in this manner.

In order to avoid the failures of past regimes, the UN Conventional on International Watercourses needs to have power and economic drivers at its aid.  Powerful countries (like the US, who has yet to ratify the treaty) are often predictors of the success of a convention, agreement, or proposed solution.  Another predicting factor are the economic drivers—if a state finds it economically advantageous to comply with a treaty (like the Montreal Protocol) it often will.   

I believe that freshwater is such an important resource that, as questions of trans-boundary water conflicts arise, states will be more and more motivated to form agreements and comply with treaties to distribute and protect the shared resource.  The UN Convention on the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses could, if put into force and implemented correctly, become an effective tool for creating fair and effective institutions and rules for dealing with shared freshwater resources.