Recognising water as a central relational location of the asymmetric Israel- Palestinian conflict, this study critically analyses the peacebuilding significance of Israeli, transboundary water and peace practitioner discourses. Anchored in a theoretically-constructed framework of hydropolitical peacebuilding, it discursively analyses the historical, officially-sanctioned, as well as academic and civil society water and peace relations of Israelis and Palestinians. It responds to the question: How are Israeli water and peace practitioners discursively practicing hydropolitical peacebuilding in the Middle East? In doing so, this study has drawn upon a methodology of interpretive practice, combining ethnography, foucauldian discourse analysis and narrative inquiry. This study discursively traces Israel's development into a hydrohegemonic state in the Jordan River Basin, from the late-19th century to 2011. Recognising conflict as a power-laden social system, it makes visible the construction, production and circulation of Israel's power in the basin. It examines key narrative elements invoked by Israel to justify its evolving asymmetric, hydrohegemonic relations. Leveraging the hydropolitical peacebuilding framework, itself constituted of equality, partnership, equity and shared ii sustainability, this study also examines the discursive practices of Israeli transboundary water and peace practitioners in relationship with Palestinians. In so doing, it makes visible their hydrohegemony, hydropolitical peacebuilding, and hydrohegemonic residues. This study's conclusions re-affirm earlier findings, notably that environmental and hydropolitical cooperation neither inherently nor necessarily constitute peacebuilding practice. This work also suggests that hydropolitical peacebuilding may discursively be recognised in water and peace practices that engage, critique, resist, desist from, and practice alternative relational formations to hydrohegemony in asymmetric conflicts.

京都大学 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(地球環境学) / 甲第23591号 / 地環博第218号 / 新制||地環||42(附属図書館) / 京都大学大学院地球環境学舎地球環境学専攻 / (主査)教授 宇佐美 誠, 教授 諸富 徹, 准教授 吉野 章 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Global Environmental Studies / Kyoto University / DGAM

Recognising water as a central relational location of the asymmetric Israel- Palestinian conflict, this study critically analyses the peacebuilding significance of Israeli, transboundary water and peace practitioner discourses. Anchored in a theoretically-constructed framework of hydropolitical peacebuilding, it discursively analyses the historical, officially-sanctioned, as well as academic and civil society water and peace relations of Israelis and Palestinians. It responds to the question: How are Israeli water and peace practitioners discursively practicing hydropolitical peacebuilding in the Middle East? In doing so, this study has drawn upon a methodology of interpretive practice, combining ethnography, foucauldian discourse analysis and narrative inquiry. This study discursively traces Israel¿s development into a hydrohegemonic state in the Jordan River Basin, from the late-19th century to 2011. Recognising conflict as a power-laden social system, it makes visible the construction, production and circulation of Israel¿s power in the basin. It examines key narrative elements invoked by Israel to justify its evolving asymmetric, hydrohegemonic relations. Leveraging the hydropolitical peacebuilding framework, itself constituted of equality, partnership, equity and shared ii sustainability, this study also examines the discursive practices of Israeli transboundary water and peace practitioners in relationship with Palestinians. In so doing, it makes visible their hydrohegemony, hydropolitical peacebuilding, and hydrohegemonic residues. This study¿s conclusions re-affirm earlier findings, notably that environmental and hydropolitical cooperation neither inherently nor necessarily constitute peacebuilding practice. This work also suggests that hydropolitical peacebuilding may discursively be recognised in water and peace practices that engage, critique, resist, desist from, and practice alternative relational formations to hydrohegemony in asymmetric conflicts. / British Council/Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Fonds québecois de recherche sur la société et la culture (FQRSC).

The Jordan Valley is a region where water resources are both scarce and disputed. Over a long period of time, the shared water resources in the region have constituted a source of conflict. Meanwhile, these shared resources and the challenges connected to them can also function as a basis for mutual understanding and trust-building, potentially fostering cooperation and sustainable peacebuilding. This thesis explores the potential of different kinds of cooperation efforts on shared water resources promoting such a development, by investigating the relationship between bottom-up local transboundary water cooperation efforts and top-down transboundary cooperation on a national level. The research question, “What direct and likely indirect impacts has the Good Water Neighbours programme had on the adherence to the Article 6 of the Israel-Jordan peace treaty from 1994?”, is examined through a single case study, in which a Multi-Track Water Diplomacy Framework (MTWD) analysis is conducted in order to map and understand key factors affecting water cooperation in the specific transboundary water context in which the Good Water Neighbours programme operates. The indirect impacts are examined through adding an intermediate variable, namely national transboundary water cooperation efforts between Israel and Jordan, operationalised through the regional NGO master plan for sustainable development in the Jordan Valley (released in 2015).  The study finds support for the hypothesis that cooperation on the local-international level will lead to trust-building and increased public pressure, creating incentives for national-international cooperation, and thereby increased adherence to the peace treaty. It can however neither reject nor confirm the hypothesis that local-international cooperation will lead to better designed projects, increased acceptance and accountability, in turn increasing the adherence to the peace treaty. The study further concludes that national-international cooperation depends on a sensitive interplay between economy and politics, and that successful transboundary water cooperation requires both bottom-up and top-down engagement.

<p>Management of water bodies according to their river basinsis becoming increasingly common, as the concept of IntegratedWater Resources Management (IWRM) is getting more and moreacknowl-edged. In Europe, a large portion of these“new”management units will probably be internationalor transboundary. Decisions and policies consideringtransboundary water issues need to be based on reliable andcomprehendible information. In this thesis, a review of variousexisting models that may be used for understanding the role anduse of information in (transboundary) water management ispresented. Further, the thesis reports on an assessment of theinformation management of three transboundary water regimes inEurope, namely the international water commissions for LakeNeusiedl, Lake Constance and Elbe River. Besides examining theinformation management of the regimes as such, the managementwas also related to information needs implied by the IWRMcon-cept and by the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD). Thereviewed models and approaches were grouped into threecategories: information management models, information cyclemodels and communication between actors. The first categorycomprised models that may be used for managing and assessingdifferent types of information. The second group dealt withmodels explaining the production and communication ofinformation predominately from an information producer/senderperspective. The third group focused on ideas concerninginteractions and communication of information between differentkinds of actors. The studies on information management intransboundary water regimes showed that the information needsand strategies often were defined primarily with watercommissions’own needs in mind. The data collected by thecommissions were predominated by monitoring data, describingthe status of the environment and the impact caused by humanactivities. Furthermore, any communication of information toother groups of actors was mainly done through passivechannels. The information management in these transboundarywater regimes was not fully in accordance with informationneeds implied by the IWRM concept and the EU WFD.</p><p><b>Keywords:</b>Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM);transboundary water management; information; EU Water FrameworkDirective (WFD); regimes; policy and decision making; LakeNeusiedl; Lake Constance; Elbe River.</p>

Em 2010, Argentina, Brasil Paraguai e Uruguai assinaram o Acordo sobre o Aquífero Guarani. O documento foi elaborado depois da realização de um estudo internacional sobre o SAG, o chamado Projeto de Proteção Ambiental e Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Sistema Aquífero Guarani (PSAG, 2009). A ação foi financiada pelo Banco Mundial, durou de 2002 a 2009 e reuniu pesquisadores de Argentina, Brasil, Paraguai e Uruguai, além de equipe técnica e representantes de governo dos quatro países. Essa iniciativa científica manteve um diálogo aberto com os diplomatas das quatro nacionalidades que negociavam o Acordo, e isso deu subsídios à tomada de decisão dos negociadores. Este estudo tem como foco analisar a atuação do Brasil para a celebração do acordo. Após análise de correspondências diplomáticas, versões preliminares do tratado e da realização de entrevistas, e com base também no conhecimento acumulado sobre o Aquífero Guarani, esta dissertação indica que o Brasil teve uma postura soberanista no tocante às negociações do Acordo. Essa postura adiou a assinatura do documento por seis anos e gerou um precedente negativo no Itamaraty em matéria de cooperação sobre águas transfronteiriças e cooperação em meio ambiente no Cone Sul. Constatou-se que a liderança de todo o processo foi do Uruguai, enquanto o Brasil foi membro mais reticente quanto à criação do tratado. A análise dos documentos deixa claro ainda que o tema é visto pelas Relações Exteriores do Brasil como um precedente negativo no que diz respeitos às relações com os quatro países e também no que se refere à águas transfronteiriças na região. Fica claro ainda que a delegação brasileira obteve sucesso em sua estratégia de adiar a criação do documento porque, em sua forma final, o acordo contempla todas as exigências iniciais do país. A presente análise deve auxiliar no entendimento de como se dá a liderança brasileira na região e as consequências dessa liderança sobre a diplomacia para temas ambientais, especificamente para o uso dos recursos hídricos transfronteiriços. / In 2010 Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay signed the Agreement on the Guarani Aquifer. The document was prepared after conducting an international study on SAG, called Project Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development of the Guarani Aquifer System (PSAG, 2009). The action was financed by the World Bank, lasted from 2002 to 2009 and brought together reserchers from Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay, as well as technical staff and government representatives from the four countries. This scientific initiative maintained an open dialogue with the diplomats of the nationalities who negotiated the agreement, and this has given subsidies to the decision makers during the negotiation. This study focuses on analyzing the performance of Brazil for the conclusion of the agreement. After analysis of diplomatic correspondence, drafts of the treaty and conducting interviews and based also on the accumulated knowledge of the Guarani Aquifer, this dissertation indicates that Brazil had a sovereigntist stance concerning the negotiations of the Agreement. This attitude postponed the signing of the document for six years and has generated a negative precedent in the Foreign Ministry on cooperation on transboundary waters and cooperation in environmental matters in the Southern Cone. It was found that the Uruguay had the leadership of the whole process, while Brazil was the most fearful limb during the creation of the treated. The document analysis makes also clear that the subject is seen by the International Affairs of Brazil as a negative precedent toward the four countries and also regards to transboundary waters in the region. It is clear also that the Brazilian delegation was successful in its strategy to delay the creation of the document because the agreement includes all the countrys initial requirements. This analysis should assist in understanding how the Brazilian leadership works in the region and the consequences of that leadership on diplomacy to environmental issues, specifically for the use of transboundary water resources.

Transboundary water management (TWM) regards how internationally shared waters are managed. Recently, TWM processes have been researched from the perspective of gender inclusivity. In line with this trend, this thesis is investigating to what extent the Transboundary Policy Dialogue for Improved Water Governance in Brahmaputra River (the Brahmaputra Dialogue) about the Brahmaputra River is gender sensitive. The Brahmaputra River is shared by China, India, Bhutan and Bangladesh. The management of the river is severely conflicted both intra- and interstate wise. Therefore, the Brahmaputra Dialogue, facilitated by the South Asia Consortium for Interdisciplinary Water Resources Study (SaciWATERs), aims at creating understanding between the different stakeholders. To measure the gender sensitivity, the Gender Sensitivity Framework is created. The framework is a toolkit that, through a set of indicators, measure gender inclusivity from both a structural and a substantive perspective. Using a descriptive text analysis method of the reports from the third and current phase of the Brahmaputra Dialogue, the investigation reveals that the Brahmaputra Dialogue is only 45% gender sensitive. While the work ways of the Brahmaputra Dialogue generally are gender inclusive, the Brahmaputra Dialogue content wise lacks some key aspects of gender awareness. One such aspect is that the concept of “gender” is broader than women’s vulnerabilities to masculine decision-making.

The aim of this study was to develop a framework that makes explicit some of the core norms and indicators of hydrosolidarity and to assess whether regional and basin-level multilateral water regimes in SADC are able to promote and apply the identified norms and indicators. This is a relevant aim given that water availability and provision is a challenge in this water scarce region. This is further complicated by the reality that transboundary water contains 68 percent of the area of the SADC region; it provides for 74 percent of the region’s people and constitutes 91 percent of the available surface water resources in the region. In a region where fresh water is both fundamentally scarce and shared, it becomes critical to best govern water so as to respond to the needs of water-related ecosystems which transcend political boundaries as well as the complex spectrum of social actors and forces that place demands on the resource. Hydrosolidarity is a concept that aims to respond to this challenge. The concept has not, however, been distilled into a framework for analysing the effectiveness of transboundary water governance. Also, International Relations (IR) has extensive scholarship on the closely related ideas of cooperation, regimes and international organisations. This literature has not, however, been systematically linked to a framework for analysing whether water regimes can deliver on the indicators of hydrosolidarity. This context gives rise to a core research question which focused on the extent to which SADC Water Sector (WS) (a regional water regime) and the Orange-Senqu River Basin 214 Commission (ORASECOM) (a basin level water regime) can foster hydrosolidarity in Southern Africa. The assumption and thesis statement is that water regimes in SADC offer a partial promotion of hydrosolidarity by developing cooperative institutional structures that allow for the development of norms and standards of behaviour, but are not able to create enhanced integration and linkages beyond the water sector or to deal with issues relating to holistic stakeholder participation. This research question is unpacked through four subquestions. The first question considers the extent to which hydrosolidarity contributes to an understanding of an ideal for transboundary water governance. The second analyses whether water regimes can foster hydrosolidarity. The third considers if regional and basinlevel water regimes exist in SADC, and if so, how they manifest. The last considers whether SADC WS and ORASECOM do actually foster hydrosolidarity in practise. The task of developing a theoretical framework for analysing hydrosolidarity in a transboundary context results in a set of norms and indicators being clarified. The norms of hydrosolidarity include cooperation and solidarity, equity, inclusivity, promotion of human well-being and environmental sustainability around transboundary waters. Linked to these norms are a set of indicators that can be used to identify and work towards hydrosolidarity. These include striving for shared knowledge about transboundary rivers, enhanced integration and linkages between relevant actors, issue areas and governance structures, organisational structures for fostering transboundary water governance, stakeholder involvement in transboundary water governance processes, and development of a normative framework for transboundary water governance. These norms and indicators are also systematically linked to the characteristics and functions of multilateral water regimes. When applying this framework to the two case study areas, it emerges that SADC WS and ORASECOM can only partially foster and promote the norms and indicators of hydrosolidarity in SADC. Whilst all the norms and indicators are present in the agreements and practices of the regimes, there are certain limitations to the extent to which the norms and indicators can be entrenched. There are three main reasons for this. Firstly, the regimes are confronted with various capacity constraints. Secondly, the regimes have a limited advisory and technical mandate, meaning that they cannot enforce their recommendations or actually implement anything in the domestic jurisdiction of member states without express permission. Thirdly, the regime structure itself is limited by its theoretical assumptions which emphasise the authority of states, the importance of state sovereignty and the importance of a Western-centric, positivist type of scientific knowledge as being the most authoritative statements of truth with which to guide policy. In order to fully achieve hydrosolidarity, a more complex set of actors needs to work in collaboration with these water regimes. These other actors include national governments, pre-existing bilateral arrangements in the basin, non-state actors and civil society. The theoretical contribution of this dissertation from a water perspective is a clarification of the norms and indicators of hydrosolidarity. From an IR perspective, it illustrates how important a multi-theoretical lens is when analysing complex problems, as it helps to elucidate the strengths and weaknesses of a variety of individual theoretical stances. The practical contribution of this dissertation is to provide a clearer understanding of the capacity of water regimes to deliver on the outlined norms and indicators of hydrosolidarity. / Dissertation (MA)--University of Pretoria, 2014. / gm2014 / Political Sciences / unrestricted

Em 2010, Argentina, Brasil Paraguai e Uruguai assinaram o Acordo sobre o Aquífero Guarani. O documento foi elaborado depois da realização de um estudo internacional sobre o SAG, o chamado Projeto de Proteção Ambiental e Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Sistema Aquífero Guarani (PSAG, 2009). A ação foi financiada pelo Banco Mundial, durou de 2002 a 2009 e reuniu pesquisadores de Argentina, Brasil, Paraguai e Uruguai, além de equipe técnica e representantes de governo dos quatro países. Essa iniciativa científica manteve um diálogo aberto com os diplomatas das quatro nacionalidades que negociavam o Acordo, e isso deu subsídios à tomada de decisão dos negociadores. Este estudo tem como foco analisar a atuação do Brasil para a celebração do acordo. Após análise de correspondências diplomáticas, versões preliminares do tratado e da realização de entrevistas, e com base também no conhecimento acumulado sobre o Aquífero Guarani, esta dissertação indica que o Brasil teve uma postura soberanista no tocante às negociações do Acordo. Essa postura adiou a assinatura do documento por seis anos e gerou um precedente negativo no Itamaraty em matéria de cooperação sobre águas transfronteiriças e cooperação em meio ambiente no Cone Sul. Constatou-se que a liderança de todo o processo foi do Uruguai, enquanto o Brasil foi membro mais reticente quanto à criação do tratado. A análise dos documentos deixa claro ainda que o tema é visto pelas Relações Exteriores do Brasil como um precedente negativo no que diz respeitos às relações com os quatro países e também no que se refere à águas transfronteiriças na região. Fica claro ainda que a delegação brasileira obteve sucesso em sua estratégia de adiar a criação do documento porque, em sua forma final, o acordo contempla todas as exigências iniciais do país. A presente análise deve auxiliar no entendimento de como se dá a liderança brasileira na região e as consequências dessa liderança sobre a diplomacia para temas ambientais, especificamente para o uso dos recursos hídricos transfronteiriços. / In 2010 Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay signed the Agreement on the Guarani Aquifer. The document was prepared after conducting an international study on SAG, called Project Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development of the Guarani Aquifer System (PSAG, 2009). The action was financed by the World Bank, lasted from 2002 to 2009 and brought together reserchers from Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay, as well as technical staff and government representatives from the four countries. This scientific initiative maintained an open dialogue with the diplomats of the nationalities who negotiated the agreement, and this has given subsidies to the decision makers during the negotiation. This study focuses on analyzing the performance of Brazil for the conclusion of the agreement. After analysis of diplomatic correspondence, drafts of the treaty and conducting interviews and based also on the accumulated knowledge of the Guarani Aquifer, this dissertation indicates that Brazil had a sovereigntist stance concerning the negotiations of the Agreement. This attitude postponed the signing of the document for six years and has generated a negative precedent in the Foreign Ministry on cooperation on transboundary waters and cooperation in environmental matters in the Southern Cone. It was found that the Uruguay had the leadership of the whole process, while Brazil was the most fearful limb during the creation of the treated. The document analysis makes also clear that the subject is seen by the International Affairs of Brazil as a negative precedent toward the four countries and also regards to transboundary waters in the region. It is clear also that the Brazilian delegation was successful in its strategy to delay the creation of the document because the agreement includes all the countrys initial requirements. This analysis should assist in understanding how the Brazilian leadership works in the region and the consequences of that leadership on diplomacy to environmental issues, specifically for the use of transboundary water resources.

Management of water bodies according to their river basinsis becoming increasingly common, as the concept of IntegratedWater Resources Management (IWRM) is getting more and moreacknowl-edged. In Europe, a large portion of these“new”management units will probably be internationalor transboundary. Decisions and policies consideringtransboundary water issues need to be based on reliable andcomprehendible information. In this thesis, a review of variousexisting models that may be used for understanding the role anduse of information in (transboundary) water management ispresented. Further, the thesis reports on an assessment of theinformation management of three transboundary water regimes inEurope, namely the international water commissions for LakeNeusiedl, Lake Constance and Elbe River. Besides examining theinformation management of the regimes as such, the managementwas also related to information needs implied by the IWRMcon-cept and by the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD). Thereviewed models and approaches were grouped into threecategories: information management models, information cyclemodels and communication between actors. The first categorycomprised models that may be used for managing and assessingdifferent types of information. The second group dealt withmodels explaining the production and communication ofinformation predominately from an information producer/senderperspective. The third group focused on ideas concerninginteractions and communication of information between differentkinds of actors. The studies on information management intransboundary water regimes showed that the information needsand strategies often were defined primarily with watercommissions’own needs in mind. The data collected by thecommissions were predominated by monitoring data, describingthe status of the environment and the impact caused by humanactivities. Furthermore, any communication of information toother groups of actors was mainly done through passivechannels. The information management in these transboundarywater regimes was not fully in accordance with informationneeds implied by the IWRM concept and the EU WFD. <b>Keywords:</b>Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM);transboundary water management; information; EU Water FrameworkDirective (WFD); regimes; policy and decision making; LakeNeusiedl; Lake Constance; Elbe River. / NR 20140805