Criteria for equitable allocations: The heart of international
water conflict
|
BOUNDARY WATERS AGREEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
Main/Sub-Basin(s)
|
Parties/Date of Treaty
|
Title of Treaty
|
Method for Water Allocations1
|
Comments1
|
| Boundary waters between Canada
and USA |
Great Britain (for Canada),
USA 1/11/1910 |
Treaty between Great Britain
and the United States relating to boundary waters and boundary questions
|
Existing uses protected;
equal shares of benefits (not necessarily of water). Order of precedence
for uses: domestic and sanitary; navigation; power and irrigation.
|
Niagara: No diversion above
Falls; 20,000 cfs to USA and 36,000 cfs to Canada for hydropower.
St. Mary and Milk: Both rivers treated as single unit, with overall
equal apportionment to each party; Canada retains prior rights to
minimum 500 cfs on St. Mary during irrigation season, USA does likewise
on Milk. |
| Boundary waters between Mexico
and USA/Colorado, Tijuana, Rio Grande (Rio Bravo) |
Mexico, USA 5/21/1906 2/3/1944
|
Utilization of waters of
Colorado and Tijuana Rivers and of the Rio Grande (Rio Bravo) |
Full rights to some tributaries,
partial rights (by thirds) to others, half rights to main stem of
boundary rivers. Minimum flows guaranteed to cross-boundary streams.
Uses prioritized by: domestic, agriculture, electric power, other
industry, navigation, fishing, other beneficial uses. |
Rio Grande: 1906 treaty assures
Mexico 60,000 acre-feet/yr, mostly in summer, according to set schedule.
1944 treaty allocates full rights to some tributaries, partial rights
(by thirds) to others, half rights to main stem. Any shortages due
to drought can be made up in following cycle. Colorado: Mexico guaranteed
minimum flow of 1,500,000 acre-feet/yr. Tijuana: Commission agrees
to study "equitable distribution." Allocations "are not to be construed
as a recognition of any claims to said waters." |
| Colorado |
Mexico, USA 8/24/1966 |
Exchange of notes constituting
an agreement concerning the loan of waters of the Colorado River for
irrigation of lands in the Mexicali Valley |
USA "loans" water for irrigation
to Mexico during one dry year in exchange for value of lost power
generation. |
USA provides 40,535 acre-feet
above 1944 Treaty allocations during September and December 1966 (after
an especially dry year), but retains an equal amount the following
year (or over three years if low flow). Mexico pays market value for
lost power generation at Hoover and Glen Canyon dams. Treaty explicitly
mentions that no precedent is being set. |
| Colorado |
Mexico, USA 9/30/1973 |
Mexico-US Agreement on the
permanent and definitive solution to the salinity of the Colorado
River (Minute #242) |
Reaffirms 1944 agreement
for 1,500,000 acre-feet/yr to flow to Mexico, but describes salinity
and quality of flow. Also restricts some groundwater pumping of shared
aquifers. |
|
| Boundary waters between Austria
and Bavaria/Blaserbach, Dollmannbach, Durrach, Kesselbach (Danube)
|
Austria, Bavaria 10/16/1950
|
Agreement between the Austrian
Federal Government and the Bavarian State Government concerning the
diversion of water in the Rissbach, Durrach and Walchen Districts
|
Five tributaries to Isar
divided: one allowed to flow freely to Bavaria, two can be freely
developed by Austria, and two can be developed by Austria, provided
minimum flows to Bavaria between August and March. |
Austria is upstream on all
these tributaries to Isar, but becomes a downstream riparian when
Isar flows to Danube and back into Austria. Upstream/ downstream relationships
seem not so valid -- each tributary divided uniquely, but all follow
basin plan. Allocations can be modified if dams are built. "Notwithstanding
this agreement," each maintains its "respective position regarding
the legal principles of international waters." |
| Boundary waters between Austria
and Czechoslovakia/Danube |
Austria, Czechoslovakia 12/7/67
|
Treaty between the Republic
of Austria and the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic concerning the
regulation of water management questions relating to frontier waters
|
"Existing water rights
in respect of frontier waters and the obligations connected therewith
shall remain unaffected;" all others to be worked out within
States or through Commission. |
|
| Boundary waters between Austria
and Hungary |
Austria, Hungary 4/9/1956
|
Treaty between the Hungarian
People's Republic and the Republic of Austria concerning the regulation
of water economy questions in the frontier region |
Rights to use of 1/2 of natural
(not enhanced by artificial means) flow to each party from rivers
which flow along the boundary, "without prejudice to acquired rights;"
upstream state of watercourses which intersect boundary may not decrease
flow by more than 1/3; no development without joint approval. |
|
| Boundary waters between Czechoslovakia
and Hungary/Danube, Tisza |
Czechoslovakia, Hungary 4/16/1954
|
Agreement between the Czechoslovak
Republic and the Hungarian People's Republic concerning the settlement
of technical and economic questions relating to frontier watercourses
|
Each State has rights to
half the natural (excluding artificially increased) discharge, "without
prejudice to acquired rights," of frontier watercourses; no development
which might affect discharge or the bed. |
|
| Boundary waters between Iran
and Iraq/Tigris |
Iran, Iraq 12/26/1975 |
Agreement between Iran and
Iraq concerning the use of frontier watercourses |
Equal parts. |
Flows of the Bnava Suta,
Qurahtu, and Gangir rivers are divided equally. Flows of the Alvend,
Kanjan Cham, Tib, and Duverij are divided based on a 1914 commission
report on the Ottoman/Iranian border "and in accordance with
custom." |
| Euphrates (?) |
Iraq, Kuwait 2/11/1964 |
Agreement between Iraq and
Kuwait concerning the supply of Kuwait with fresh water |
Iraq agrees to supply Kuwait
with 120 million imperial gallons per day without compensation, and
to discuss additional needs if necessary. |
Water source is unspecified
in the agreement. |
| Ganges |
Bangladesh, India 11/5/1977
12/12/1996 |
Treaty between the Government
of the Republic of India and the Government of the People's Republic
of Bangladesh on sharing of the Ganga/Ganges waters at Farakka |
Schedule is established for
dry months -- January 1 - May 31 which allocates the flow at Farakka:
flow of 70,000 cusecs or less - 50% to India, 50% to Bangladesh; 70,000-75,000
cusecs - 35,000 cusecs to Bangladesh, rest to India; 75,000 cusecs
or more - 40,000 cusecs to India, rest to Bangladesh. |
1977 agreement was only to
last for five years. Short-term agreements reached in 1982 and 1985;
the latter lapsed in 1988. A final agreement was reached December
1996. |
| Gash |
Italy (Eritrea) and United
Kingdom (Sudan) 6/12/1925 4/8/1951 |
Notes exchanged between the
United Kingdom and Italy respecting the regulation of the utilisation
of the waters of the River Gash; and 1951 amending letters |
Eritrea can divert all water
from a flow up to 5 m3/sec, about half the flow above 5 m3/sec, and
a maximum of 17 m3/sec, or a total of 65 MCM/yr. The rest flows to
Sudan. |
Sudan paid Eritrea a share
of what was received for cultivation in the Gash Delta -- 20% of any
sales over £50,000 (payments discontinued with British control of
Eritrea). One of few agreements which explicitly favors upstream riparian.
|
| Ili/Horgos |
China, Russia 6/12/1915 |
Protocol between China and
Russia for the delimitation of the frontier along the River Horgos
|
Upper reaches: Prior rights
for Chinese outpost; lower reaches: prior rights for existing canals,
rest to be shared equally. |
China "binds itself" to withdraw
only the water necessary for one outpost in upper reaches (within
Chinese territory), otherwise, water will go to existing canals with
remainder to be shared equally. |
| Pasvik (Patsjoki)/ Pasvik
(Patsjoki), Jakobselv (Vuoremajoki) |
Finland, Norway 2/14/1925
|
Convention between the kingdom
of Norway and the republic of Finland concerning the waters of the
Pasvik (Patsjoki) and the Jakobselv (Vuoremajoki) |
Equal shares of shared boundary
waters, absolute sovereignty over tributaries where both banks are
within single territory. |
Jakobselv (Vuoremajoki) and
parts of Pasvik (Patsjoki) form boundary -- the waters from these
are divided equally. Absolute rights for tributaries of the Pasvik
(Patsjoki) which have both banks in one state are retained by that
state. |
| Rhine/Lake Constance |
Austria, Germany, Switzerland
4/30/1966 |
Agreement regulating the
withdrawal of water from Lake Constance |
Requires notification and
agreement for withdrawals over 750 l/sec within the catchment area,
or 1,500 l/sec outside. |
Must notify of withdrawals
and "afford one another good time to express their views," and to
submit to arbitration if disagreement. "Withdrawals...shall not be
deemed to justify any claim to the provision of water in a specific
volume or of a specific quality." |
| Roya |
Italy, France 10/14/1972
|
Franco-Italian convention
concerning the supply of water to the Commune of Menton |
Italy allows 400 l/sec withdrawal
from alluvial aquifer for French town; Italian town can tap into delivery
pipeline for 100 l/sec. |
Italian government grants
70-year concession to Menton to be governed by Italian law on water-related
issues. Menton deposits 10 million lires for security against concession.
|
| West Bank and Gaza Aquifers
|
Israel, Palestine 9/28/1995
|
Israeli-Palestinian Interim
Agreement |
Population and consumption
patterns -- Israel recognizes Palestinian water rights, and agrees
to provide 28.6 MCM/yr additional water towards future Palestinian
needs of 70-80 MCM/yr. |
Final allocations and rights
to be determined in final status negotiations. Interim accord marks
first time prior rights relinquished in an agreement, first joint
management of aquifer systems, and first treaty which allows for future
market mechanism, provided water is not subsidized. |
| Zarumilla |
Ecuador, Peru 5/22/1944 |
Declaration and exchange
of notes concerning the termination of the process of demarcation
of the Peruvian-Ecuadorian frontier |
Prior rights for Ecuadorian
villages. |
"Peru undertakes...to guarantee
the supply of water necessary for the life of the Ecuadorian villages
on the right bank of the so-called old bed of the river Zarumilla..."
in conjunction with boundary delineation. |
|
RIVER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
Main/Sub-Basin(s)
|
Parties/Date of Treaty
|
Title of Treaty
|
Method for Water Allocations1
|
Comments1
|
| Araks, Atrak |
Iran, USSR 8/11/1957 |
Agreement between Iran and
the Soviet Union for the joint utilisation of the frontier parts of
the rivers Aras and Atrak for irrigation and power ... |
50% of all potential water
and power resources on the shared portions of the two rivers. |
Provides for "separate and
independent division and transmission of water and power in each party's
territory," along with joint data-gathering. Also, each party has
rights to potential even "...if the activities of one of the parties...are
slower than those of the other." |
| Boundary waters between Canada
and USA/Columbia, Kootenai |
Canada, USA 9/16/1964 |
Treaty relating to cooperative
development of the water resources of the Columbia River Basin (with
annexes) |
Equal share of benefits --
cooperative management for flood control and hydropower. Water may
not be diverted out-of-basin (except for some specified in treaty),
but power may (for compensation). |
Equal share of benefits from
power generation. USA pays Canada for benefits of flood control (payment
can be in cash or in electric power) and, in 1964 Exchange of Notes,
agrees to pay US$254,000,000 for entitlement. Canada granted diversions
from Kootenai to Columbia and from Columbia to Kootenai, provided
minimum flows are maintained. |
| Cunene |
Portugal (Angola), South
Africa (Southwest Africa) 7/2/1926 |
Agreement between the Government
of the Union of South Africa and the Government of the Republic of
Portugal regulating the use of the water of the Cunene River |
Up to half of flood water
may be diverted to Southwest Africa from above dam. |
Dam to be constructed in
Portuguese territory with shared cost. No charge for diversion if
for subsistence, but payment would be made to Portuguese government
if water used for "purposes of gain." |
| Cunene |
Portugal (Angola), South
Africa (Southwest Africa) 1/21/1969 |
Agreement between the Government
of South Africa and the Government of Portugal in regard to the first
phase of development of the water resources of the Cunene River Basin
|
Diversion solely for water
for human and animal requirements in South West Africa and initial
irrigation in Ovamboland, limited to 1/2 of flow or 6 m3/s. |
"Humanitarian" part of larger
project for hydropower. South Africa pays for water diversion and
compensation to Portugal for land flooded as a result of dam (also
royalties for hydropower generated). |
| Douro |
Portugal, Spain 8/11/1927
|
Convention between Spain
and Portugal to regulate the hydro-electric development of the international
section of the River Douro |
Roughly equal sections of
the international stretch of the Douro are allocated to each for development.
No diversions permitted, except "for reasons of public health," and
only with joint agreement. |
Separate, but equal and coordinated
development. |
| Ganges/Bagmati, Gandak |
India, Nepal 12/4/1959 |
Agreement between his majesty's
government of Nepal and the government of India on the Gandak irrigation
and power project |
Diversion for project --
irrigation and power generation -- are laid out in a monthly schedule
of water requirements, with about 60% to Nepal (5,760-16,060 cusecs)
and 40% to India (3,690-14,600 cusecs). Nepal retains rights to irrigate
with any water above these project requirements. |
Broad "basket" of benefits
to each side: land acquisition, power generation, capital resources
(primarily from India), irrigation water, and transportation facilities.
|
| Ganges/Kosi |
India, Nepal 12/19/1966 |
Amended agreement between
his Majesty's Government of Nepal and the Government of India concerning
the Kosi project |
Nepal retains right to divert
upstream water, "as may be required from time to time." India has
right to regulate balance. |
Broad "basket" of benefits,
including irrigation/ hydropower project, navigation, fishing, and
aforestation (India plants trees in Nepal to contain sedimentation).
|
| Indus |
India, Pakistan 5/4/1948
|
Inter-dominion agreement
between the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan, on
the canal water dispute between East and West Punjab |
Rights are not determined,
but India agrees, "without prejudice to its legal rights," to reduce
flows of tributaries at a rate which would allow Pakistan to develop
alternative sources. |
India was to reduce flow
from upper Indus basin rivers progressively, to allow Pakistan to
"develop areas where water is scarce and which were under-developed
in relation to Parts of West Punjab." Pakistan agreed to pay
for some water sources. |
| Indus |
India, Pakistan, World Bank
9/19/1960 |
The Indus waters treaty |
River divided geographically:
three eastern tributaries to India, three western tributaries to Pakistan.
|
Considerations were made
for some withdrawals in other state's tributaries, in order of priority:
domestic, non-consumptive, agriculture, hydro-power. Agreement was
phased in and India paid for some Pakistani works deemed "replacement."
|
| Jordan/Yarmuk |
Jordan, Syria 6/4/1953 |
Agreement between the Republic
of Syria and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan concerning the utilization
of the Yarmuk waters |
Dam would be built to guarantee
10 m3/sec. minimum flow to Jordan, about 7/8 of natural flow of river.
Syria relinquishes rights to tributaries between dam and 250m contour,
receives 75% of hydropower. |
Jordan was to cover 95% of
costs, and provide 80% of workforce; Syria the remainder. Dam was
never built, although plans were said to have been revived in August
1996. |
| Jordan |
Israel, Jordan, Lebanon,
Syria Finalized 1/1/1956, never ratified |
Johnston Accord |
Allocations of Jordan based
on survey of irrigable land within basin: Israel -- 31%; Jordan --
56%; Lebanon -- 3%; Syria -- 10%. |
Allocations were based on
irrigable land within basin; then each could do what it wished with
water. Each tributary had one state without designated flow, to accommodate
fluctuating supply. Accord was never ratified for political reasons.
|
| Jordan/Yarmuk, shared aquifers
|
Israel, Jordan 10/26/1994
|
Treaty of peace between the
State of Israel and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan |
Allocations of Yarmuk and
Jordan based on Johnston accord; agreed in conjunction with joint
development projects. Water from shared aquifers allocated on basis
of prior use. |
"Rightful allocations" divide
waters on the basis of historic rights plus future projects. Creative
management: land and water historically used by Israel leased from
Jordan; in absence of storage facility, Yarmuk water "loaned" to Israel
in summer, returned to Jordan from Jordan River during winter. |
| Mekong/Lower Mekong |
Cambodia, Laos, Thailand,
Vietnam 1/31/1975 |
Joint declaration of principles
for utilization of the waters of the lower Mekong basin |
Allocations are based, verbatim,
on eleven parameters of 1966 Helsinki Rules definition of "reasonable
and equitable shares" plus addition of benefit-cost ratio of each
project. |
"Equality of right" does
not mean equal shares of water, but equal right to use water on basis
of economic and social needs. Domestic and urban uses should have
a preference; existing uses are protected. All parties must agree
to any out-of-basin transfers. Groundwater with hydrologic connection
to main stream is covered by agreement. Agreement based on 1957 establishment
of Mekong Committee -- renewed in 1995. |
| Nile/Atbara Nile/Semliki,
Isango |
Great Britain, Italy -- 1891,
1925 Great Britain, Ethiopia -- 1902 Great Britain, Congo -- 1906
|
Series of protocols, agreements,
and exchanges of notes |
"Prior hydraulic rights"
-- Great Britain made agreements with upstream riparians to allow
Nile tributaries to flow uninterrupted to Sudan and Egypt. Water for
"subsistence" of local populations may be used, and existing uses
are protected. |
Agreements required any upstream
development be "in consultation" with Great Britain. 1925 exchange
of notes offers British support for Italian concession for railway
in Eritrea, Ethiopia, and Somaliland, and recognition of "exclusive
character of Italian economic influence" in area to be covered by
railway, in exchange for Great Britain gaining concession to build
barrage at Lake Tana and, recognizing the "prior hydraulic rights
of Egypt and the Sudan," an agreement by Italy not to modify the flow.
|
| Nile |
Egypt, United Kingdom 5/7/1929
|
Exchange of notes between
his majesty's Government in the United Kingdom and the Egyptian Government
in regard to the use of the waters of the River Nile for irrigation
purposes (Nile Waters Agreement) |
Prior rights -- restricts
amount Sudan may use in order to guarantee to Egypt the water needed
for existing agriculture. |
Entirely protects existing,
downstream uses -- no irrigation or power works are to be built on
the river which would reduce the quantity of water arriving in Egypt,
modify the date of its arrival, or lower its level.. If Egypt were
to develop projects in Sudan to enhance flow, agreement would have
to be reached beforehand with local authorities, although Egypt would
retain direct control of such works. |
| Nile |
Egypt, Sudan 11/8/1959 |
Agreement between the Government
of the United Arab Republic and the government of Sudan |
Prior rights ("present acquired
rights") for natural flow, plus benefits of Aswan Dam divided, based
on population, on a ratio of 14.5 to Egypt, 7.5 to Sudan. Water from
future projects, and the costs borne, would be divide equally. |
If benefits of projects are
greater than expected, they are to be divided equally. Egypt paid
15 million Egyptian pounds to Sudan for compensation for flooding
and relocation from Aswan Dam; Sudan was to loan 1.5 BCM/yr to Egypt
until 1977. Both states agreed to develop joint position before negotiating
with any other riparian. |
| Orange/Senqu |
Lesotho, South Africa 11/7/1986
|
Treaty on the Lesotho Highlands
water project between the Government of the kingdom of Lesotho and
the Government of the republic of South Africa |
Lesotho agrees to provide
increasing water delivery to South Africa, from 57 MCM/yr in 1995
until 2,208 MCM/yr after 2020. Lesotho receives hydropower and capital
payment from project. |
A boycott of international
aid for apartheid South Africa required that the project be financed,
and managed, in sections. The water transfer component was entirely
financed by South Africa, which would also make payments for the water
which would be delivered. The hydropower and development components
were undertaken by Lesotho, which received international aid from
a variety of donor agencies, particularly the World Bank. |
|
SINGLE PROJECT AGREEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
Main/Sub-Basin(s)
|
Parties/Date of Treaty
|
Title of Treaty
|
Method for Water Allocations1
|
Comments1
|
| Aden groundwater |
Great Britain, Sultan of
Abdali (Aden) 4/11/1910 |
Terms of a convention regarding
the water supply of Aden between Great Britain and the Sultan of the
Abdali |
Great Britain buys groundwater
from Sultan of the Abdali. |
Sultan gives Great Britain
land in perpetuity and guarantees safety of headworks. Great Britain
agrees to pay 3,000 rupees/month if works unmolested; otherwise 15
rupees/100,000 gallons. Early groundwater agreement. |
| Ebro/Lake Lanoux, Font-Vive,
Carol |
France, Spain 7/12/1958 (revised
1/27/1970) |
Agreement between the Government
of the French Republic and the Spanish Government relating to Lake
Lanoux |
France diverts water out-of-basin,
then tunnels same volume back before Carol reaches boundary; guarantees
minimum 20 MCM flow timed for Spanish irrigation. |
French hydropower project
which moves water out-of-basin, then returns through tunnel before
boundary. Arbitration for this project led to an important international
precedent when a Tribunal ruled in 1957 that "territorial sovereignty...must
bend before all international obligations," effectively negating the
water rights doctrine of "absolute sovereignty," while admonishing
downstream state from the right to veto "reasonable" upstream development,
negating the "natural flow" principle. |
| Indus/Sirhind Canal |
Great Britain, Patiala, Jind,
Nabha 8/12/1903 |
Final working agreement relative
to the Sirhind canal between Great Britain and Patiala, Jind and Nabha
|
Available supply, and development
costs, divided by percentage: Patiala -- 83.6; Nabha -- 8.8; Jind
-- 7.6. British villages receive water sufficient to irrigate the
same proportion of its lands as of other villages nearby. |
If the flow allocations cannot
be met, the engineer may reduce flows proportionally, or may deliver
full proportion to one, then shut off entirely while the others receive
their full allotments. |
| Näätämo/Näätämo,
Gandvik |
Finland, Norway 4/25/1951
|
Agreement between the Governments
of Finland and Norway on the transfer from the course of the Näätämo
(Neiden) River to the course of the Gandvik River ... |
Water diverted between basins
for power generation in Norway, which agrees to compensate Finland
for lost water power. |
Fish habitat and timber transport
are also described. |
| Niagara |
Canada, USA 5/20/1941; 10/27/1941
|
Exchange of notes between
the Government of the United States and the Government of Canada constituting
an arrangement concerning temporary diversion for power purposes of
additional waters of the Niagara river above the Falls |
5,000 cfs additional diversion
to the USA and 3,000 cfs to Canada agreed to for hydropower generation
during war effort; raised an additional 7,500 cfs to USA and 6,000
cfs to Canada in addendum. |
Despite war effort, protecting
the "scenic beauty of this great heritage of the two countries" is
described as the primary obligation of the two countries. |
| Niagara |
Canada, USA 2/27/1950 |
Treaty between the United
States of America and Canada relating to the uses of the waters of
the Niagara River |
Equal amount of water for
power generation, and equal share of cost, to each country. Minimum
flow of river delineated |
Benefits of tourism versus
hydropower: 100,000 cfs minimum during "show times" at Falls -- summer
daylight hours; otherwise 50,000 cfs. "Primary obligation to preserve
and enhance scenic beauty..." |
| 1 All units are reported as in
original documents. One gallon = 3.61 liters; one acre-foot = 1,233
cubic meters; one cfs (cusecs) = 0.0283 cubic meters/second (cumecs).
|
