Monitoring Transboundary Water Cooperation in SDG 6.5.2: How a Critical Hydropolitics Approach Can Spot Inequitable Outcomes
2. Critical Hydropolitics: A Brief Overview
3. Results: Analysis and Critique of SDG Target 6.5 and Indicator 6.5.2
A bilateral or multilateral treaty, convention, agreement, or other formal arrangement, such as memorandum of understanding, between riparian countries that provides a framework for cooperation on transboundary water management. Agreements or other kind of formal arrangements may be interstate, intergovernmental, interministerial, interagency, or between regional authorities.
- there is a joint body, joint mechanism, or commission (e.g., a river organization) for transboundary cooperation;
- there are regular (at least once per year) formal communications between riparian countries in the form of meetings (either at the political or technical level);
- there is a joint or coordinated water-management plan(s), or joint objectives have been set;
- there is a regular exchange (at least once per year) of data and information.
3.1. Are Operational Arrangements Always ‘Good’?
3.2. Either Operational Arrangement or Nothing?
4. Discussion: Two Proposals for Improving Indicator 6.5.2
4.1. Making Informal, Formal and Technical Talks Count by Adding a Preoperational Arrangement Phase
4.2. Uncovering Bad Cooperation
Conflicts of Interest
- UN. United Nations Millennium Declaration. 2000. Available online: http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/ares552e.htm (accessed on 23 August 2018).
- UNDP. MDGs Produced Most Successful Anti-Poverty Movement in History: UN Report. 2015. Available online: http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/presscenter/pressreleases/2015/07/06/mdg-s-produced-most-successful-anti-poverty-movement-in-history-un-report.html (accessed on 15 August 2018).
- Hulme, D. The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs): A Short History of the World’s Biggest Promise. 2009. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1544271 (accessed on 16 August 2018).
- Attaran, A. An immeasurable crisis? A criticism of the Millennium Development Goals and why they cannot be measured. PLoS Med. 2005, 2, e318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
- Amin, S. The Millennium Development Goals: A Critique from the Shouth. Mon. Rev. 2006, 57, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vandemoortele, J. If not the Millennium Development Goals, then what? Third World Q. 2011, 32, 9–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fehling, M.; Nelson, B.D.; Venkatapuram, S. Limitations of the Millennium Development Goals: A literature review. Glob. Public Health 2013, 8, 1109–1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
- Clegg, L. Benchmarking and blame games: Exploring the contestation of the Millennium Development Goals. Rev. Int. Stud. 2015, 41, 947–967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Swyngedouw, E. Impossible “sustainability” and the postpolitical condition. In The Sustainable Development Paradox: Urban Political Economic in the United States and Europe; Krueger, R., Gibbs, D., Eds.; Guilford Press: London, UK, 2007; pp. 13–40. [Google Scholar]
- Davidson, M. Sustainability as ideological praxis: The acting out of planning’s master-signifier. City 2010, 14, 390–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gunder, M.; Hillier, J. Planning in Ten Words or Less: A Lacanian Entanglement with Spatial Planning; Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.: Farnham, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Temenos, C.; McCann, E. The local politics of policy mobility: Learning, persuasion, and the production of a municipal sustainability fix. Environ. Plan. A 2012, 44, 1389–1406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hartwick, E.; Peet, R. Neoliberalism and nature: The case of the WTO. Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 2003, 590, 188–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bakker, K. The limits of ‘neoliberal natures’: Debating green neoliberalism. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2010, 34, 715–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sultana, F. An (Other) geographical critique of development and SDGs. Dialogues Hum. Geogr. 2018, 8, 186–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davidson, M. Hacking away at sustainability. Hum. Geogr. 2010, 3, 83–90. [Google Scholar]
- Methmann, C.P. Climate protection as empty signifier: A discourse theoretical perspective on climate mainstreaming in world politics. Millennium 2010, 39, 345–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greenberg, M. What on Earth Is Sustainable? Toward Critical Sustainability Studies. Boom J. Calif. 2013, 3, 54–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saarinen, J. Critical sustainability: Setting the limits to growth and responsibility in tourism. Sustainability 2013, 6, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brown, T. Sustainability as empty signifier: Its rise, fall, and radical potential. Antipode 2016, 48, 115–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCracken, M.; Meyer, C. Monitoring of transboundary water cooperation: Review of Sustainable Development Goal Indicator 6.5. 2 methodology. J. Hydrol. 2018, 563, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeitoun, M.; Mirumachi, N. Transboundary water interaction I: Reconsidering conflict and cooperation. Int. Environ. Agreem. Polit. Law Econ. 2008, 8, 297–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Zeitoun, M.; Warner, J. Hydro-hegemony: A framework for analysis of trans-boundary water conflicts. Water Policy 2006, 8, 435–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cascão, A.E. Changing power relations in the Nile river basin: Unilateralism vs. cooperation? Water Altern. 2009, 2, 245–268. [Google Scholar]
- Hussein, H.; Grandi, M. Dynamic political contexts and power asymmetries: The cases of the Blue Nile and the Yarmouk Rivers. Int. Environ. Agreem. Polit. Law Econ. 2017, 17, 795–814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Warner, J.; Mirumachi, N.; Farnum, R.L.; Grandi, M.; Menga, F.; Zeitoun, M. Transboundary ‘hydro-hegemony’: 10 years later. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Water 2017, 4, e1242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cox, R.W. Gramsci, hegemony and international relations: An essay in method. Millennium 1983, 12, 162–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daoudy, M.; Elizabeth, K. Beyond water conflict: Evaluating the effects of international water cooperation. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Conference of the International Studies Association, San Francisco, CA, USA, 26–29 March 2008; International Studies Association: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Selby, J. Cooperation, domination and colonisation: The Israeli-Palestinian joint water committee. Water Altern. 2013, 6, 1. [Google Scholar]
- Selby, J. Dressing up domination as ‘cooperation’: The case of Israeli-Palestinian water relations. Rev. Int. Stud. 2003, 29, 121–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Julien, F. Hydropolitics is what societies make of it (or why we need a constructivist approach to the geopolitics of water). Int. J. Sustain. Soc. 2012, 4, 45–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Çonker, A. An Enhanced Notion of Power for Inter-State and Transnational Hydropolitics: An Analysis of Turkish-Syrian Water Relations and the Ilisu Dam. Ph.D. Thesis, School of International Development, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- UN-Water. Step-by-Step Monitoring Methodology for Indicator 6.5.2. 2016. Available online: http://www.unwater.org/publications/step-step-methodology-monitoring-transboundary-cooperation-6-5-2/ (accessed on 17 August 2018).
- World Bank. West Bank and Gaza: Assessement of Restrictions on Palestinian Water Sector Development; World Bank Group: Washington DC, USA, 2009; Available online: https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/9a798adbf322aff38525617b006d88d7/ddcb9fc89a11d8108525759e005b8c93?OpenDocument (accessed on 12 August 2018).
- Zeitoun, M. Power and Water in the Middle East: The Hidden Politics of the Palestinian-Israeli Water Conflict; IB Tauris: New York, NY, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Menga, F. Hydropolis: Reinterpreting the polis in water politics. Polit. Geogr. 2017, 60, 100–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nijsten, G.J.; Christelis, G.; Villholth, K.G.; Braune, E.; Gaye, C.B. Transboundary aquifers of Africa: Review of the current state of knowledge and progress towards sustainable development and management. J. Hydrol. Reg. Stud. 2018, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hussein, H. The Guarani Aquifer System, highly present but not high profile: A hydropolitical analysis of transboundary groundwater governance. Environ. Sci. Policy 2018, 83, 54–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hussein, H. ‘Whose ‘reality’? Discourses and hydropolitics along the Yarmouk River. Contemp. Levant 2017, 2, 103–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hussein, H. An Analysis of the Discourse of Water Scarcity and Hydropolitical Dynamics in the Case of Jordan. Ph.D. Thesis, School of International Development, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Hussein, H. Yarmouk, Jordan, and Disi basins: Examining the impact of the discourse of water scarcity in Jordan on transboundary water governance. Mediterr. Polit. 2018, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hussein, H. Lifting the veil: Unpacking the discourse of water scarcity in Jordan. Environ. Sci. Policy 2018, 89, 385–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jägerskog, A. Why States Cooperate over Shared Water: The Water Negotiations in the Jordan River Basin. Ph.D. Thesis, Linköping University Electronic Press, Department of Water and Environmental Studies Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden, September 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Haddadin, M.J. Diplomacy on the Jordan: International Conflict and Negotiated Resolution; Springer Science & Business Media: New York, NY, USA, 2012; Volume 21. [Google Scholar]
- Villar, P.C. International cooperation on transboundary aquifers in South America and the Guarani Aquifer case. Rev. Bras. Polít. Int. 2016, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferragina, E.; Greco, F. The Disi project: An internal/external analysis. Water Int. 2008, 33, 451–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eckstein, G. The Newest Transboundary Aquifer Agreement: Jordan and Saudi Arabia Cooperate over the Al-Sag/Al-Disi Aquifer. 2015. Available online: https://www.internationalwaterlaw.org/blog/2015/08/31/the-newest-transboundary-aquifer-agreement-jordan-and-saudi-arabia-cooperate-over-the-al-sag-al-disi-aquifer/ (accessed on 1 October 2018).
- Neal, M.J.; Greco, F.; Connell, D.; Conrad, J. The Social-Environmental Justice of Groundwater Governance. In Integrated Groundwataer Management: Concepts, Approaches and Challenges; Jakeman, A.J., Barreteauo, O., Hunt, R.J., Rinaudo, J.D., Ross, A., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Loures, F.; Rieu-Clarke, A.; Vercambre, M.L.; Witmer, L.; WWF International. All You Need to Know about the United Nations Water Courses Convention. 2015. Available online: https://www.gcint.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/UNWC.pdf (accessed on 1 October 2018).
- UNWC Official Website. Available online: http://www.unwatercoursesconvention.org/importance/the-unwc-global-initiative/ (accessed on 1 October 2018).
- Menga, F. Reconceptualizing hegemony: The circle of hydro-hegemony. Water Policy 2016, 18, 401–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Hussein, H.; Menga, F.; Greco, F. Monitoring Transboundary Water Cooperation in SDG 6.5.2: How a Critical Hydropolitics Approach Can Spot Inequitable Outcomes. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3640. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103640
Hussein H, Menga F, Greco F. Monitoring Transboundary Water Cooperation in SDG 6.5.2: How a Critical Hydropolitics Approach Can Spot Inequitable Outcomes. Sustainability. 2018; 10(10):3640. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103640Chicago/Turabian Style
Hussein, Hussam, Filippo Menga, and Francesca Greco. 2018. "Monitoring Transboundary Water Cooperation in SDG 6.5.2: How a Critical Hydropolitics Approach Can Spot Inequitable Outcomes" Sustainability 10, no. 10: 3640. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103640