Applying the Water Diplomacy Framework to the Rhine River Basin on Water Pollution Control

About this Article

Article last edited 20 May 2014 by Jcheung6
Article originally added The date "<strong class="error">Error: Invalid time.</strong>" was not understood.The date "<strong class="error">Error: Invalid time.</strong>" was not understood. by Jcheung6

What is an ASI Article? Individuals may add their own Analysis, Synthesis, and Insight (ASI) to a case by linking a case to an ASI article. These ASI articles are protected, so that each person who creates a section retains control of their own content. Please use the discussion page for commenting on this article. Learn More

This article is linked to Water Quality and Pollution Control in the Rhine River Basin

This case study on the water quality and pollution control in the Rhine River Basin demonstrates that although water diplomacy and international cooperation is a long process, it is attainable given that the principles of the Water Diplomacy Framework are implemented; however, I would also attribute the success of this trans-boundary collaboration in-part to the facilitation of the negotiations by a well-established organization (the Navigation Commission) in the first place. Because shipping was such an important economic activity for the Rhine countries, the multilateral agreements pertaining to shipping and trading gave the Navigation Commission an authority to preside over issues in the Rhine River; thus when the Navigation Commission facilitated the formation of the International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine, there was already a precedence that the countries in the Rhine River Basin can also collaborate on other issues, this time on water quality and pollution control.

In terms of applying the WDF, after the ICPR members convened to discuss the Sandoz Accident, the Dutch hired an independent party, McKinsey & Company, to conduct a stakeholder assessment and develop an action plan that eventually became the basis for the Rhine Action Program of 1987. Having a third party investigate and provide alternatives definitely helped facilitate a plan that was unbiased and receptive to the other members of the ICPR. Furthermore, the members of the Rhine River Basin acknowledged that the water network is continuously changing and collaborative adaptive management is necessary. This is seen when Rhine 2020 was developed to be the successor of the Rhine Action Program, in which the goals were refined to reflect changing conditions (i.e. more emphasis on floodplain management). Setting a timeline and target goals and then reviewing the goals on a regular basis ensure that the plan is ongoing, flexible, and sustainable. In essence, the water quality program for the Rhine River Basin has been successful because the stakeholders promote information exchange, cooperation and consensus, there is trust, and there is a stable budget/ funding to implement the goals. Applying the Water Diplomacy Framework to this case, we can see why the Rhine Action Program was successful:

1. Were all the relevant stakeholders represented in the water policymaking? Yes and no. While only representatives of the ICPR were involved with the policymaking of the Rhine Action Program, the development of Rhine 2020 and the EU Water Framework Directive included all relevant stakeholders as “observers” and the conventions welcomed input from the stakeholders.

2. Did the parties engage in joint fact-finding? Yes. The ICPR conducts research, and one of the goals of the CHR is to ensure joint fact-finding, especially on hydrological issues. Because a representative from the ICPR is typically present at the CHR meetings, and vice versa, the participants from these organizations were informed about the scientific and technical information.

3. Was value-creation involved in this case? Limited information was found on value-creation, but because all relevant stakeholders were involved, discussion on the priorities and value-creation may have been generated through negotiations that led to the final goals of the Rhine 2020 and EU WFD.

4. Did the parties convene to discuss strategies? Yes. Even though convening with the member states were not successful until after WWII and after the Sandoz Accident in 1986, negotiations and meetings did take place to discuss strategies to minimize pollution to the Rhine.

5. Was there collaborative adaptive management? Yes. Once the Rhine Action Program ended, the Rhine 2020 and EU Water Framework Directive were adopted. The goals of these programs were formed through evaluating the (then) current state of the ecosystem and water quality, and adjusting the management plans as necessary to reflect the changing conditions.

6. How does this example illustrate societal learning? Because of the CHR, a database on the hydrology in the Rhine basin exists, which can be used to educate others on the various water management decisions.