Kura-Araks Basins: Insights from the Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database

From AquaPedia Case Study Database
Jump to: navigation, search

About this Article
Contributed by: Aaron T. Wolf, Joshua T. Newton, Matthew Pritchard
Article Type(s): Analysis
Contributor Perspective(s): Academic
Article last edited 12 Feb 2013 by Amanda
Article originally added by Mpritchard

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 International Management for Water Quality Within The Kura-Araks Basin


The points below are summarized or excerpted from the Oregon State University Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database (TFDD). Matthew Pritchard provided this and other summarized analysis or insights from the TFFD on behalf and with permission of the original authors. Available on-line at: http://www.transboundarywaters.orst.edu/

Outcome

As of yet, there still has been little advancement towards an agreement with regards to the Kura-Araks River. It is thought that as long as there is the issue of the Nagorno-Karabakh region at hand, it will be very difficult for the governments to discuss environmental security when national security is still a major issue. Perhaps through building a more secure environment, with better living conditions and potable water, national security threats might prove to be easier to resolve.

Lessons Learned

Political tensions between countries do not necessarily prevent governments from coming to the table to talk about issues such as management of their transboundary water resources. As a result of the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, the relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan have been cold and neither have been willing to discuss the Kura-Araks problems to a great degree until the land issue has been resolved. With Georgia acting as a mediator between the two nations, this has slowed down the negotiation process to talks concerning the Kura-Araks, but they have moved forward nonetheless.

Creative Outcomes Resulting From Resolution Process

The principle of "parallel unilateralism" was developed here, allowing each collaborating pair of countries to work together, while coordinating the work of the countries which do not. Due to lack of movement from the three primary governments of the Kura-Araks River basin (Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia) towards working together in the management of the river, fifty NGOs came together to form the NGO Coalition of the Kura-Araks in order to start activities between the three countries by cleaning up pollution and educating the public about the current situation.







Facts about "Kura-Araks Basins: Insights from the Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database"RDF feed
ASIASI:Kura-Araks Basins: Insights from the Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database +
ASIContributor Aaron T. Wolf +, Joshua T. Newton + and Matthew Pritchard +
ASI TypeAnalysis +
Article CreatorMpritchard +
Case StudyInternational Management for Water Quality Within The Kura-Araks Basin +
Last Edited12 February 2013 +
Last Edited UserAmanda +
PerspectiveAcademic +