NAVIGATING TRANSBOUNDARY WATER LAWS: LEGAL STRATEGIES FOR INTERNATIONAL HYDRO PROJECTS

Introduction

Transboundary water resources, including rivers, lakes, and aquifers that cross or are shared by multiple countries, are essential for international hydro projects, supporting agriculture, energy generation, and domestic water supplies. Managing these shared resources effectively requires robust legal frameworks to prevent conflicts, promote cooperation, and ensure sustainability. International water law, through treaties, agreements, and customary practices, plays a vital role in fostering collaboration among nations, protecting ecosystems, and maximizing shared benefits, all of which are crucial for the success of international hydro projects.

At the heart of international cooperation is the principle embedded in the UN Charter, which has shaped various global frameworks for managing transboundary waters. Key among these is the 1997 UN International Watercourses Convention (UNWC), alongside recent UN resolutions on the Right to Water and Sanitation and transboundary aquifers. Despite these advancements, challenges persist, with unclear water rights and resource allocation leading to conflicts. This article explores legal strategies to navigate transboundary water laws, balancing the economic, social, and environmental impacts of international hydro projects while promoting peaceful cooperation.

Overview of Transboundary Water Resources

Transboundary water resources, including aquifers, lakes, and river basins shared by two or more countries, are pivotal in addressing global water challenges. With growing water scarcity and increasing demand driven by climate change and population growth, poor management of these shared waters can lead to heightened tensions, social instability, and even conflict. Effective cooperation is crucial to ensuring sustainable management, as these resources are essential for agricultural irrigation, energy generation, and domestic water supply. Major transboundary water bodies, such as the Nile, Mekong, Danube, Indus, and Zambezi rivers, exemplify the need for international collaboration in managing water resources. Hydroelectric projects within these basins can significantly contribute to energy security, economic development, and environmental sustainability.

However, the success of such projects hinges on strong legal frameworks and cooperative agreements that facilitate resource sharing while balancing the diverse needs of the nations involved. Agreements like the Danube River Protection Convention and the Zambezi Watercourse Commission (ZAMCOM) illustrate the potential for transboundary cooperation, yet challenges persist. For instance, Zambia's reluctance to ratify the ZAMCOM Agreement has limited the full potential of regional collaboration in the Zambezi basin, underscoring the complexities of achieving consensus on shared water management. Despite these hurdles, effective legal frameworks remain key to unlocking the economic and environmental benefits of transboundary hydroelectric projects while promoting peace and cooperation.

Legal Framework Governing Transboundary Waters

In the realm of transboundary water management, each state is entitled to an equitable and reasonable share of shared water resources. The principle of "equitable and reasonable use" is fundamental in guiding the development and allocation of water within transboundary river basins. However, striking a balance between the needs of riparian countries can be a complex and challenging task. To assist in this process, several rules and principles have been established. Notably, the 1997 United Nations Watercourses Convention sets binding rules for the sustainable and equitable use of transboundary watercourses, promoting cooperation, consultation, and conflict resolution. Earlier, the non-binding Helsinki Rules (1966) were the first to codify key principles such as equitable and reasonable utilization of shared waters, influencing subsequent international water laws. The Berlin Rules (2004) further refined these principles by emphasizing integrated management, environmental protection, and the recognition of human rights in transboundary water use.

In addition to global frameworks, regional agreements play a crucial role in managing transboundary waters by addressing region-specific challenges and fostering cooperation among neighboring countries. The EU Water Framework Directive, for example, governs shared basins across Europe, while the SADC Revised Protocol promotes equitable water use in Southern Africa. Similarly, the Niger Basin Commission facilitates cooperation on water and land management in West Africa. These regional frameworks complement global agreements by tailoring solutions to local contexts, ensuring sustainable resource management, and fostering peace and cooperation among states sharing vital water resources. Customary international law also contributes by shaping unwritten norms that influence treaty-making and guide state practices in the governance of transboundary waters.

Case Study

The Indus Waters Treaty (1960), signed between India and Pakistan with the World Bank as a signatory, is a landmark agreement that took nine years of negotiation to finalize. The treaty allocates the waters of the Indus River system, with Pakistan receiving control over the Western Rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) and India over the Eastern Rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej), while also allowing each country limited use of the other's rivers for certain purposes. The Permanent Indus Commission, established under the treaty, facilitates ongoing cooperation and dialogue between the two nations. When disputes arise, they can be resolved through a Neutral Expert or an ad hoc Court of Arbitration, depending on the nature of the disagreement.

Despite its resilience in the face of political tensions, the treaty has recently faced challenges, particularly over India's Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects, which Pakistan argues violate the treaty's provisions. The two countries have diverged on the preferred method of dispute resolution, with India advocating for a Neutral Expert and Pakistan calling for a Court of Arbitration. In 2016, the World Bank, acting as a procedural facilitator, paused the resolution process to encourage a mutually acceptable solution. However, in 2022, it resumed the process, appointing both a Neutral Expert and members of the Court of Arbitration. The Neutral Expert renders binding decisions on procedural matters, while the Court of Arbitration makes rulings by majority vote, with its Chairman casting the deciding vote in case of a tie. The duration of these processes varies, with past cases taking between one to three years for resolution.

Key Legal Challenges for International Hydro Projects

  1. Sovereignty and Water Rights: In international hydro projects, sovereignty and water rights present complex legal challenges. In maritime law, sovereignty refers to full authority over a territory, while sovereign rights are more limited functional rights over resources in areas such as Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) and continental shelves. Sovereign rights do not equate to full sovereignty, which often leads to disputes over shared territories. For example, in the South China Sea (SCS), China's refusal to differentiate between sovereignty and sovereign rights has escalated tensions with neighboring countries. China views these nations’ claims as threats to its sovereignty and justifies its actions, such as building artificial islands, from its perspective. However, these actions violate international law, specifically the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which governs maritime resources globally. In hydro projects, the challenge of overlapping claims to shared water resources often mirrors this scenario, requiring compromises and legal negotiations to resolve water rights and boundaries.

 

  1. Equitable and Reasonable Utilization: The principles of equitable and reasonable utilization and the obligation not to cause significant harm underpin international water law and guide water allocation between riparian countries. However, there are no universal criteria for these principles, as every transboundary river basin has unique circumstances. For example, differences in seasonal water discharge patterns and primary water needs—such as agriculture or hydropower—make allocation especially complex. A broader approach to understanding the benefits of water use is often necessary for crafting creative solutions. Some agreements, such as the 1995 accord between Russia and Mongolia, mandate minimum environmental flows to protect ecosystems, while others focus on maintaining a fair share of water resources for downstream countries through minimum cross-border flows. The need for flexible and tailored agreements highlights the challenges in applying equitable water management in diverse river basins.

 

  1. No Significant Harm Rule: The "no significant harm" principle, as established in the Watercourses Convention (WCC), is a cornerstone of international water law, ensuring that no state has automatic priority over shared water resources. Article 5 of the WCC, considered customary international law, emphasizes that water use must be equitable and reasonable, except for vital human needs like drinking water and food production, which hold inherent priority. Article 6 further elaborates on the factors determining equitable water use, including the needs of riparian states and populations dependent on the watercourse. The principle of "no significant harm" aligns with the right to water and focuses on preventing harm through mechanisms such as consultations and Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA), ensuring that international hydro projects consider the needs of all stakeholders and ecosystems.

 

  1. Environmental Considerations: Environmental impacts are a significant concern for international hydro projects, particularly when multiple projects exist within the same river basin. While traditional Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) evaluate individual projects, a broader approach is required for transboundary projects. Cumulative Environmental Impact Assessments (CEIA) examine the combined effects of existing and planned projects at a regional river basin level, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of their collective environmental impact. Currently, CEIA is primarily applied to large-scale hydro projects, while smaller projects, such as run-of-the-river facilities, are generally excluded. These smaller projects tend to have fewer environmental impacts, as they use the river’s natural flow without large dams, minimizing changes to the ecosystem, such as oxygen depletion, increased temperatures, or disruption to fish migration. This approach highlights the need to differentiate between project scales when addressing environmental regulations in transboundary hydro developments.

 

Emerging Legal Trends in Transboundary Water Governance

  1. Climate Change and Water Scarcity: Climate change poses significant challenges to transboundary water governance, as it alters the availability and quality of shared water resources. Rising temperatures, shifting precipitation patterns, and accelerated glacial melting are affecting water volumes in transboundary basins, which heightens tensions between riparian states. These changes require enhanced cooperation and the strengthening of governance frameworks to ensure sustainable and equitable water use. Countries sharing rivers, lakes, and aquifers must adapt through agreements that promote data-sharing, joint management, and mutual benefits. Without collective action, conflicts may arise, as water scarcity intensifies. Robust transboundary agreements, however, can help mitigate climate change’s impacts, reducing the risk of conflict while ensuring sustainable cross-border water management.

 

  1. Private Sector Involvement: International legal frameworks increasingly integrate the private sector into public water management through models like public-private partnerships (PPPs). These partnerships balance public oversight with private sector investment and efficiency, which is crucial for sustainable development in water infrastructure and management. Legal approaches differ across jurisdictions but generally follow two trends: recognizing water as both an economic good and a human right and establishing regulatory systems to ensure equitable, sustainable water use. For example, many countries, including EU members, adopt integrated water management principles, requiring both public and private sectors to collaborate within regulatory frameworks that prioritize human and environmental rights. Moreover, international investment law has begun addressing the responsibility of private actors in ensuring access to water, particularly when it comes to human rights obligations in privatized water services. Cases like Urbaser v. Argentina reflect the ongoing debate about whether private companies should be held directly accountable for human rights violations related to essential services like water. These developments highlight the need for regulatory frameworks that enforce human rights while facilitating private sector participation in water governance.

 

  1. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Transboundary water governance plays a vital role in achieving Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), particularly through fostering cooperation among countries that share water resources. International legal frameworks governing these shared resources, such as rivers and aquifers, are essential to promoting sustainable management, equitable use, and preventing conflicts. However, challenges like political tensions, climate change, and limited institutional capacity slow progress, with only 59% of transboundary basins currently covered by operational cooperation frameworks. Strengthening these legal frameworks is critical to ensuring global water sustainability and achieving SDG 6.

Progress on Transboundary Water Cooperation – 2024 Update

 Target 6.5 of the UN SDGs focuses on the implementation of integrated water resources management (IWRM), including transboundary cooperation, by 2030. This goal is crucial, as many of the world’s water resources are shared by multiple countries, requiring coordinated management to address common challenges such as pollution, climate change, and water scarcity. Indicator 6.5.2 measures the extent of operational cooperation within transboundary basins by tracking formalized agreements, information-sharing, and joint management plans among riparian countries.

Despite the importance of transboundary water cooperation, progress has been slow. Globally, around 313 rivers, 468 aquifers, and numerous lakes are transboundary, affecting over three billion people. However, only 59% of these areas are covered by operational cooperation arrangements, a figure that has seen little improvement since 2017. This gap presents a significant challenge to achieving equitable and sustainable water management across borders, making it imperative to strengthen international legal frameworks and increase cooperation to meet the 2030 SDG target.

Conclusion

The management of transboundary hydro projects poses complex legal challenges, deeply intertwined with issues of sovereignty, equitable water allocation, and environmental sustainability. While international treaties such as the UN Watercourses Convention and the Helsinki Rules offer essential frameworks for cooperation, they often fall short in addressing the increasingly urgent needs of riparian states. As climate change, population growth, and water mismanagement continue to intensify these pressures, the principle of “equitable and reasonable” use of transboundary waters becomes not just a legal standard but a crucial strategy for ensuring the survival of nations that depend on these shared resources. Effective legal frameworks must go beyond promoting cooperation—they must empower states to navigate disputes, mitigate environmental risks, and uphold the human right to water.

As climate impacts worsen, legal approaches to transboundary water governance will need to become more adaptive and forward-thinking. Incorporating climate risk assessments and embracing advanced methodologies such as cumulative environmental impact assessments (CEIA) will be essential for future agreements. In parallel, the role of the private sector, particularly through public-private partnerships (PPPs), is likely to expand in the realm of water governance. While private sector involvement may help improve infrastructure and resource management, it also raises important legal questions regarding the balance between private investment rights and the state’s duty to ensure access to water as a fundamental human right. Global legal cases like Urbaser v. Argentina highlight the complexities of integrating private actors into water governance while maintaining human rights standards.

Looking ahead, the need for stronger international cooperation and innovative legal frameworks is more pressing than ever. Strengthening existing treaties, fostering new regional agreements, and promoting inclusive, multi-stakeholder dialogues will be vital steps toward addressing the challenges of water scarcity, climate change, and global inequalities. Legal innovation, coupled with collaborative governance, will ensure that transboundary water resources are managed in a way that is sustainable and equitable for future generations. Only through such efforts can we hope to achieve a balance between the growing demands on water resources and the need to protect this essential lifeline for both people and the environment.

References

·         https://iwrmactionhub.org/learn/iwrm-tools/international-water-law

·         Attached PDF “International Law – Facilitating Transboundary Water Cooperation” by Patricia Wouters. Page No. 14 and 15

·         OECD Studies on water, Water Resources and Allocation, sharing risks and opportunities

·         https://www.worldbank.org/en/region/sar/brief/fact-sheet-the-indus-waters-treaty-1960-and-the-world-bank

·         https://www.orfonline.org/research/sovereignty-vs-sovereign-rights-de-escalating-tensions-in-the-south-china sea#:~:text=Maritime%20boundaries%20only%20separate%20sovereign,sovereignty%20over%20the%20'baseline'.

·         The no signifcant harm principle and the human right to water by Otto Spijkers

·         https://energypedia.info/wiki/Hydro_-_Environmental_Impact_Assessment_(EIA)

·         https://brill.com/view/journals/bol/1/1/article-p37_37.xml

·         https://press.un.org/en/2023/envdev2056.doc.htm

·         https://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/transboundary.shtml