Water Wars: Obscuring Opportunities

Abstract

Speaking at the 2008 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon weighed in on water conflict: The challenge of securing safe and plentiful water for all is one of the most daunting challenges faced by the world today ... Too often, where we need water, we find guns instead. Population growth will make the problem worse. So will climate change. As the global economy grows, so will its thirst. Many more conflicts lie just over the horizon. (1) Ban's water wars warning served to bring water to the attention of a diverse and powerful audience. Yet there is a real danger that by imprecisely stating--or overstating--the likelihood of water conflict, this argument could undercut opportunities that water offers for cooperation. His prediction is not unique. We are constantly bombarded with heated predictions of coming water wars: newspaper headlines trumpet the possibility, advocates warn against it, and politicians confidently predict the next war will be over water, not oil. (2) Truly dire statistics on declining amounts of water available for human consumption reinforce a deep pessimism over the future of water. Yet if we move beyond surface-level arguments, we find a decidedly more mixed story. There is considerable conflict over water, but it is not necessarily where politicians, journalists or advocates suggest we should expect it. Countries have historically been quick to rattle their sabers over water, but they have nevertheless been content to keep them sheathed. One hears of few--if any--actual cases of wars being fought over water. (3) Instead, evidence from systematic assessments of bilateral and multilateral interactions over water suggests a cooperative narrative is more accurate than a violent one. (4) Successful cooperation within many transboundary river basins has become a powerful counter-story to the ubiquitous water wars prediction. At the same time, it would be wrong to conclude that water does not precipitate conflict simply because states have not fought full-fledged wars over it in the past. If we move beyond the classic realist focus on states to analyze conflict at the subnational level, we find extensive violence surrounding water. While it does not involve armies on the move, these conflicts carry high stakes--and life and death consequences-for those involved. Conflicts over the pricing of water, large mega-projects such as dams, competing sectoral water uses and limited supplies within sectors have engendered a long record of violent, if not always large-scale or deadly, conflict. As Ban highlighted, in the coming years, population growth, expanding agricultural production, increased consumption levels and climate change will give rise to an unprecedented scarcity of safe water. At the same time, as nations become increasingly dependent on each other for food and other goods and services, the need to cooperate will become even more imperative. Hence, the challenge for scholars and practitioners alike is to differentiate between the various dynamics that can lead to conflict over water and find ways to capitalize on the range of opportunities for cooperation. Addressing the history of water conflict and expanding opportunities for cooperation requires that we unpack the distinctions among different levels of analysis and accompanying evidence. To do so, we delve into the historical evidence for water wars and find it absent. (5) To the contrary, we find the case for cooperation around water to be compelling at the transboundary level. Yet within states there is considerable conflict over water. These conflicts are diverse in nature and manifestation but present a more accurate picture of water conflict. The future of transboundary water conflict may not look like the past, given the severe and deteriorating conditions for water quality and quantity, which are pushing states and peoples into unprecedented territory Therefore, we leave open the possibility for future conflict. …