Edit ASI: ASI:Seperating foriegn interests from the main dispute

You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:

You are not allowed to execute the action you have requested.

You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:

You are not allowed to execute the action you have requested.

While the historical, geographical and scientific facts involved in a water management problem or water conflict can often be attributed to well-respected sources and agreed upon by multiple parties, each problem can also have multiple facets and not all issues may be considered equally important by all parties. Certain perspectives may interpret the implications of neutral facts in a different way from others.

Because of this, each case study can be linked to multiple articles in which contributors can provide analysis or insights and synthesis different viewpoints or lines of evidence. Professionals, academics, and community-members who have some involvement with the case first hand might have different experiences or interpretations to share. The goal is to collect a wide range of knowledge on these cases, which requires incorporating multiple (and sometimes conflicting) viewpoints into each case.

Each of these Analysis, Synthesis, & Insights (ASI) sections is protected -- only the user who created the section, official editors, and administrators have the ability to change the content in an individual ASI. Editors who take on the task of editing a user-contributed ASI section are committed to only adjust grammar and stylistic issues, and will avoid any changes that could lead to a different meaning or adjust content.

We suggest that anyone who would like to help improve an ASI section leave comments for the author and community on the discussion page for the specific ASI section. If you have questions about how this works, please refer to the help section or contact a site administrator.

[edit]

AEZ
Enter the contributor's name and (optional) link to a descriptive website, such as a professional bio or AquaPedia user page.

Enter the contributor's name and (optional) link to a descriptive website, such as a professional bio or AquaPedia user page.

Link to Case Study :

The Caspian- a Sea or a Lake?

ASI articles need to be linked to a specific case study. If the case title above is not correct, you can select a different case.

Summary - Displayed only in Case Study:

Image Upload - open the image upload page in a new tab:
Upload a File View all Files
You can find or upload a file and then return here.

To insert an image in your text, type: [[File:filename.jpg]]

ASI - Extended Article Content

1. Is it possible to use mutual studies and research to conduct an energy exploration survey, which can create a clearer picture of the energy reserves?
The dispute between the littoral states on their share of the Caspian is not allowing for data collection regarding its energy reserves. In fact, it seems that one of the main reasons the littoral states are finding it so hard to compromise is the lack of certainty as to what it is exactly that they are giving up on. Since energy has a highly precious value in terms of both profits and political power this is not likely to change unless there is more certainty in the estimation of the reserves. Gathering more data, can bring the parties to have a more specific discussion on their demands, and leave more room for a creative package creates more value.

2. If large external parties with foriegn interests are invited to join negotiations as observers, can that create more responsiblity on their behalf to motivate the parties to reach an agreement rather than push their own  foriegn interests?
Behind the scenes, large global actors such as the US are pulling strings in order to advance their interest of exploring the region’s energy resources further. Indirectly, these actors are affecting the interests of the littoral states.

3.Are the littoral states sincere about their commitment to preserve the environment?
It seems like the countries are officially positive about using the conventions to reach a broad agreement that includes all issues, and certainly to advance environmental issues, however in essence it is not clear how sincere they are about acting upon their proposed intents. Their agreement on a plan regarding the environmental issues does not seem to have much impact as each party is expected to follow a national plan, but cooperation between them according to the plan is minimal, meetings are rare, there is no mechnism of enforcement or dispute resolution and in general the language of the agreement is very vague.

Perspective(s)
Selecting any of these choices expresses to to the reader what perspective you feel that you are taking by adding your analysis, synthesis, or insight. If you want to share more on your specific expertise, consider updating your user page with additional details about your professional and academic background. Practitioner Academic Participant Observer
Contribution Type(s):
Selecting any of these choices expresses to to the reader whether you consider your contribution to be primarily academic, professional, or personal in nature, or a combination of these types. Analysis Synthesis Personal Insights Professional Insights

Keywords

Help others find your ASI by providing keywords or short phrases. Selecting the arrow or entering a few letters will show you keywords others have used to describe their contributions

Add Keywords or phrases (no special characters or punctuation)

Provide a summary of the type/purpose of updates you have made. This summary is displayed on the "History" tab for the page and is not part of the page as it is viewed:

This is a minor edit Watch this page

Cancel

Edit ASI: ASI:Seperating foriegn interests from the main dispute

Navigation menu

Personal tools

Namespaces

Variants

Views

Actions

Search

Explore

Learn More

Advanced