Free Flow

[

] 44

ransboundary

ater

anagement

were highly contextual and other critical dynamics

were at play. Unfortunately these dynamics could

not be adequately captured within the constraints of

this study. Therefore, it is recommended that future

research should further develop and refine the enabling

factors; more closely examine the circumstances under

which high levels of cooperation are born; and move

towards generating actionable recommendations for

parties seeking to intensify cooperation on trans-

boundary aquifers.

As such, we recommend that the following actions

are considered for enhancing transboundary aquifer

cooperation. Aquifer states should enhance and

strengthen existing legal mechanisms, prior to or at

the same time as creating new mechanisms for trans-

boundary aquifer management. Existing regional

institutions, in which a high level of cooperation

already exists, should be leveraged and motivated

to address issues of groundwater management.

Financing mechanisms should be integrated into

cooperative efforts in order to fund activities in

large-scale transboundary aquifers. Organizations

should strengthen their institutional capacity for

groundwater management through education and

partnerships. Recognizing and capitalizing on

previous water cooperation in organizations such

as existing river basin organizations and interna-

tional task forces for groundwater management can

also catalyse transboundary aquifer cooperation.

Additionally, extending scientific and technical

efforts to groundwater resources research will serve

as a basis for transboundary dialogue and manage-

ment. Those seeking to elevate cooperation to a high

level should foster strong political will by enhanc-

ing education and communication mechanisms

for politicians and government officials regarding

groundwater resources. Finally, third-party organiza-

tions that have the appropriate mandate, capacity and

financing to facilitate cooperation over transbound-

ary resource management should dedicate some of

their efforts towards taking action for transboundary

aquifer management.

This research was hopefully the beginning of greater

research efforts on transboundary aquifer cooperation.

The primary purpose of this research was explora-

tory. As a result, the outcomes are mainly descriptive.

Hypotheses about causal links between any of the

enabling factors and cooperation were avoided.

Nevertheless, IGRAC’s mission and projects will

contribute directly to enhanced transboundary aquifer

cooperation through offering tools which strengthen

institutional capacity for groundwater. Further, our

online data portal, the Global Groundwater Monitoring

Network and Global Groundwater Information System

aim to increase knowledge of transboundary aquifers

through the dissemination of scientific and techni-

cal information. We also look forward to continuing

cooperation with international partners dedicated to

the management of the world’s groundwater.

tion; while in others, cooperation occurred prior to any negative

transboundary conditions manifesting. Cooperation occurred

among some of the world’s least developed countries and some

of the world’s most developed countries. Further, the instances

of cooperation occurred under various political conditions, from

times of peace to times of violence.

In reviewing available literature regarding transboundary water

cooperation and conflict, it became clear that characterizing a

particular transboundary aquifer in a binary way – as being in a

state of cooperation or conflict – would be overly simplistic. The

reality for transboundary aquifers is that governing them often

incites both cooperation and conflict between the relevant stake-

holders. Therefore, IGRAC combined several existing conceptual

models for identifying and assessing transboundary water conflict

and cooperation. In combining these models, we were able to

integrate information about specific cooperative events relevant

to transboundary aquifers; a range of interactions (both coopera-

tive and conflictive) which occurred before and/or after these

events; and the broader relationship dynamics among each of

the actors in the aquifer. Using this analytical approach, each

transboundary aquifer was then classified as being in a state of

low, moderate or high cooperation. Analysis of the cases showed

that there were eight enabling factors for transboundary aquifer

cooperation: existing legal mechanisms, existing regional institu-

tions, funding mechanisms, high institutional capacity, previous

water cooperation, scientific research, strong political will and

third-party involvement.

Once these eight enabling factors were identified, we described

in more detail the interplay between the enabling factors, specific

cooperative events related to groundwater, analysis of interactions

between aquifer states, and the overall nature of transboundary

relations. Conclusions about these interplays were discussed with

respect to low, moderate and high levels of cooperation. This

comparison showed that in the five cases classified as low coopera-

tion, existing regional institutions and previous water cooperation

are the enabling factors with the greatest influence. Seven cases

were identified as moderate cooperation cases. Analysis showed

that moderate cooperation required at least four enabling factors to

be present and was highly influenced by existing legal mechanisms,

existing regional institutions and previous water cooperation.

There were seven high cooperation cases in which there was no

observed correlation between the number of enabling factors and

a high level of cooperation. However, high cooperation cases were

primarily enabled by existing regional institutions, funding mecha-

nisms and strong political will. We also observed the critical role

of existing regional institutions in all three types of cases.

Based on this analysis there are several noteworthy conclusions.

Overall, the research indicated that the enabling factors present

in cooperative cases do have some relationship with the level of

cooperation. Low cooperation is often motivated by scientific

research, especially when a (potential) problem with the aquifer

is identified and the states decide to begin interacting about it.

Moderate cooperation is mainly birthed and/or supported by exist-

ing regional institutions. This implies that having a functional

forum for cooperation in conjunction with the desire to cooper-

ate can result in concrete cooperative actions for transboundary

aquifer governance. However, it seems that achieving high coop-

eration is relatively complex. There did not appear to be any one

influence that was critical. Rather, scenarios of high cooperation