Environmental Cooperation in Conflict Zones: Riparian Infrastructure at the Armenian–Turkish Border

• Author: Saleem H. Ali,Mehmet Altingoz
• Published date: 01 September 2019
• Date: 01 September 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/1070496519859680
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article

Environmental

Cooperation in Conflict

Zones: Riparian

Infrastructure at the

Armenian–Turkish Border

Mehmet Altingoz

1

and Saleem H. Ali

1

Abstract

Due to historical grievances, Armenia and Turkey experience severe international

conflicts and do not maintain diplomatic ties. Yet, as a vestige of the Soviet period,

when Armenia was not an independent country, both nations share the Arpacay/

Akhuryan Dam, and riparian cooperation exists at the local level. We observed that

local cross-border water institutions are authorized to manage the dam and do so

via polycentric management principles. We suggest that such a devolved model

of governance facilitates this unique cooperation. Furthermore, there is a positive

relationship between private management of water resources in such areas and

the ability to sustain cooperation. However, so far, the positive impacts of this

cooperation on improving international relations have been little, if any. We suggest

that what makes cooperation possible in this context also inhibits its expansion to

broader peacebuilding. We also suggest that increased localization of management,

coincident with improved relations, maximizes cooperation potential.

Keywords

Kura–Araks, Arpacay/Akhuryan Dam, transboundary water management, Armenia,

Turkey, USSR, severe international conflicts, water cooperation, polycentric

management, devolution

Journal of Environment &

Development

2019, Vol. 28(3) 309–335

!The Author(s) 2019

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/1070496519859680

journals.sagepub.com/home/jed

1

Department of Geography, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA

Corresponding Author:

Mehmet Altingoz, Water Science and Policy Program, Department of Geography, University of

Delaware, 125 Academy Street, 216 Pearson Hall, Newark, DE 19716, USA.

Email: altingoz@udel.edu

Introduction

Primarily due to human-induced factors, stress on water resources is globally increas-

ing at an alarming rate. In addition, the majority of surface and groundwater

resources traverse national boundaries during their hydrologic cycle (Wolf, 2007).

Transboundary freshwater systems thus establish hydrological interdependencies

between countries. The use of the shared waters in one country may af‌fect water

availability for use in another country: seasonally (e.g., in case of f‌low changes

through storage or other f‌low management infrastructure), quantitatively (e.g., in

case of consumptive use), qualitatively, and over time (downstream development or

water resources may foreclose future use upstream). These cross-border impacts

invariably af‌fect relations among the countries sharing and depending on the

same water resources. They may catalyze cooperation, which Wolf, Yof‌fe, and

Giordano (2003) categorize as verbal, political, and military support, where it is

perceived as mutually benef‌icial. Navigation for river transport and trade is one

of the oldest and most established forms of cooperation along transboundary

rivers. Other issues of country cooperation include information exchange for f‌lood

forecasting and early warning systems to prevent damage, and coordination on

upstream storage and f‌low releases to smoothen seasonal hydrologic extremes and

ensure water availability in dry seasons. Furthermore, preventing collective f‌lood risk

and water quality management, through wetland restoration and green infrastruc-

ture, are important vehicles of cooperative conservation (Conca & Weinthal, 2018).

Enabling Conditions for Cooperation

A simple hydropolitics approach would indicate that countries cooperate when

the net benef‌its of cooperation are perceived to be greater than the net benef‌its

of noncooperation and when the distribution of these net benef‌its is perceived

to be fair.

The benef‌its and costs considered in this calculation are not only of a f‌inancial

or economic nature; they may also involve considerations such as national

security, stability of a government, and social and environmental well-being.

For in-country water-related activities with transboundary impact, such as the

construction of a hydropower dam plus reservoir, which can provide f‌low con-

trol, cooperation may happen when mutual benef‌its outweigh the costs of

cooperation. Furthermore, cooperation may be galvanized when the benef‌its

that can be achieved for the country in whose territory the operation is located

are greater than when acting unilaterally. This may be possible if the down-

stream country of‌fers payment, for example, for f‌lood prevention or other bene-

f‌its received through upstream f‌low management. Cross-country projects

involving the territory of two or more countries generally take place only in

the presence of a joint understanding between those who agree to it that the

benef‌its outweigh the costs (Subramanian & Brown, 2012).

310 Journal of Environment & Development 28(3)