With water resources becoming scarcer every year, studying the negotiation processes that leads to the treaties that govern the distribution of water rights across national boundaries is more important than ever. Sub-state units sometimes play an important role in the negotiation of such treaties and thus it is important to better understand how specific types of regional, transborder sub-state units operate both within the context of their respective federal systems and in relation to each other. Exploring the case study of the Columbia River Treaty—governing the area known as the upper Columbia River Basin— and the Water Policy Working Group of the Pacific NorthWest Economic Region (PNWER), this thesis uses documentary sources and original qualitative interviews to examine the roles of sub-state governments and federalism on the original Columbia River Treaty negotiations, as well as the effect the historical legacy of the Treaty negotiations has left on constituent diplomacy today. Examining constituent diplomacy through a micro rather than macro lens, the thesis also explores the role of constituent diplomacy within PNWER with respect to the upcoming Columbia River Treaty negotiations and the impact that PNWER’s governance model has on the effectiveness and functionality of constituent diplomacy. The thesis demonstrates that sub-state governments, specifically the B.C. government, played a vital role in original Treaty negotiations, and suggests that the past Treaty negotiations are relevant to constituent diplomacy today because of modern-day and future Treaty negotiations and ongoing Treaty implementation. Drawing on documentary evidence and original interview data, this thesis details current PNWER governance structures and practices and then moves to argue that the structure, functions and dynamics of the Canadian and American federal systems can impact the effectiveness and functionality of constituent diplomacy.

The challenges facing resource management, including transboundary river basins, have become increasingly complex, requiring more holistic readings of governance processes that encompass a range of formal and informal collaborations between diverse actors. Innovation and transformative governance changes hold potential for addressing the increased complexity and multi-scaled nature of the challenges facing the world’s shared rivers. However, significant research gaps exist around this application in practice. This dissertation asks the following questions: Is governance of transboundary waters changing to integrate a more diverse set of actors beyond centralized governments? If so, what is the role of non-central state actors in contributing to innovations and transformative changes to transboundary water governance processes? In working towards answering these questions, the study explores the case of the Columbia River Treaty (North America) and the Lesotho Highlands Water Project (Southern Africa). This study has the following objectives: first, to determine the type of power, albeit conceived from a Euro-western perspective, that non-central state actors mobilize to engage in transboundary water governance processes, and assess if the power these actors mobilize is contributing to changes in governance. Second, to conceptualize the on-going bordering processes for transboundary water governance, and evaluate whether non-central state actors are shaping these processes. And, third, to identify which non-central state actors are involved in transboundary water governance, and examine whether and how these governance systems are becoming more polycentric. This dissertation is composed of five chapters, three of which have been prepared as standalone articles for submission to academic journals. Broadly, the dissertation findings suggest that changes to governance of transboundary waters, away from state-centric processes, may be emerging in some areas, such as the ability of non-central state actors to exercise and mobilize different forms of power to shape water governance processes. Findings illustrate that a clear distinction between international and national processes is no longer sufficient to address transboundary water governance challenges and issues. Further, findings illustrate that some non-central state actors have power and influence in these transboundary water governance processes. However, these insights also highlight that centralized government authority for transboundary waters remains, and evidence of the emergence of polycentric governance systems at the international scale is limited. / Graduate / 2019-04-30