Our Work:

Transboundary Lakes and Crisis Prevention

Introduction

The EU Water Framework Directive defines a lake as a "body of standing inland surface water". The fact that lake water is "standing" makes for specific characteristics of the ecosystem that differ from those of running water. The management of transboundary lakes therefore partly encounters other issues and problems than the management of transboundary rivers.

Lake water has what science calls a residence time: it stays in the lake for a certain period of time. The residence time implies that the resource water is much less renewable in lakes than it is in rivers. Another physical characteristic is the thermal stratification which occurs in all deeper lakes during the summer period. Stratification inhibits the mixing of the lake's water, and oxygen deficiency can develop if micro-organisms grow at unusually high rates. This happens when high nutrient loads in waste water are discharged to the lake, and it is called eutrification.

Moreover, lakes are inhabited by different kinds of organisms that depend heavily on one another: those that live close to the surface and experience sunlight influence produce nutrients while those living close to the bottom feed on them. If one of these parts is disturbed by any kind of negative external influence, both will suffer from the consequences as the successful recycling of nutrients is disrupted.

Together all these characteristics make for an almost closed, yet inextricably interlinked ecosystem. Lakes therefore tend to be even more sensitive to pollution and imbalanced nutrient cycles than rivers.

Like any other water resource, lakes may suffer from excessive use for human activities. Competing water uses, subsequent pollution and the introduction of alien species pose growing strains on the water bodies. As explained above, lake water is a less renewable resource than river water. Consequences of this fact include a higher vulnerability to quality as well as quantity problems. Lakes need longer to recover from pollution, and they can experience important drops of water levels, which in turn may lead to salinization.

Transboundary Lakes: Incentives for Conflict or Cooperation?

What is it that makes lakes such an interesting object of transboundary management studies? Lakes, unlike rivers, are usually shared as a whole by two or more riparian countries. Countries cannot be divided into upstream and downstream riparians as they all have access to the same water body, that is, the lake itself. Quality and quantity issues therefore affect all riparians in a similar, if not in the same way. This is why these issues are a common problem for all riparians, and its solution out to be a common goal for all. Nevertheless, conflicts can arise between riparian countries because of competing plans on resource use. Especially water extraction for irrigation and shared fishing grounds can lead to severe disputes.

Furthermore, in cases where one party is in control of a river that represents a major influx to the lake, a kind of upstream-downstream relation can develop. In this case, a national water body (the river) has such an impact on an international one (the lake), that a classical situation of dependency might evolve. Unlike in the case of transboundary rivers, though, the concerned state will at some point also feel the impact of negative effects of its own water use.

Apart from water quantity and quality, another important challenge of transboundary lakes consists in the actual boundaries of its riparian countries. As it is extremely difficult to mark a boundary on water, (voluntary or involuntary) illegal crossing, for example of fishermen, occurs. If the lake is sufficiently big, these problems can develop into serious security threats, as it is exploited by organized, criminal groups of smugglers, pirates or even rebels. Another reason for regular border disputes is the fact of withdrawing waters with shrinking lakes where countries fear to loose access to the lake.

The above-mentioned facts show quite clearly that a joint management of transboundary lakes is a difficult and complex process that on the other hand can offer benefits for all riparian states. Incentives for cooperation on shared lakes are even greater than for transboundary rivers. As all countries suffer the direct and indirect implications of declining water quality and quantity, their desire to develop joint visions and tools for implementation ought to be equally strong.

The Legal Framework:

In the 1990s, an in-depth legal framework for transboundary watercourses was developed. The Helsinki Agreement (Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes) of 1992 was the first legal text to reformulate the 1966 Helsinki Rules on the Use of Waters of International Rivers, and the first that explicitly mentioned shared lakes. It urges to use transboundary waters in an ecologically sound and rational manner and asks to respect the aims of resource conservation and environmental protection. (Art. 2, 2.b). Both the precautionary and the polluter-pays-principle are adopted (Art. 2, 5.a & b), and sustainability is declared as a goal (Art. 2, 5.c). The Helsinki Agreement dedicates a full article to the issue of dispute settlement (Art. 22). The Convention was adopted by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) and signed by its members as well as States having consultative status with this institution. Most Central Asian countries have thus accepted the rules formulated in this document, however, it does not apply to African countries.

In 1997, the UN General Assembly adopted the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses. Again, an equitable and reasonable utilization of the resource and participation of the concerned states in its management are stated. The Convention even speaks of a "duty [of the states] to co-operate in the protection and development" of the states. (Art. 5) What is new is the obligation not to cause significant harm (Art. 7), and the stipulation that in a situation of competing water uses, the UN give highest priority to the requirements of vital human needs. (Art. 10.2). The protection of the ecosystem is treated in Articles 20-23, and mechanisms of dispute settlement are described in detail in Article 33. Apart from Tanzania that abstained, and Swaziland and Zimbabwe that were absent, all member countries of the SADC voted in favor of the Convention. The only country of Sub-Saharan Africa to have voted against the Convention is Burundi. The Convention thus represents today�s basic framework for any international agreement between states that share any kind of water bodies.

The latest text are the Berlin Rules On Water Resources that were articulated in 2004 by the International Law Association which, however, do not yet possess the status of an internationally binding convention. These Rules revise former legal agreements and do not only treat international water courses but water resources in general. Their scope of application is thus broader than the one of the texts mentioned above. Yet Chapter 3 of the Rules does apply to internationally shared waters only. After an introduction to the general principles in the management of all waters (like integrated management, sustainability and minimization of ecological harm), this part of the Rules states that: "Basin States shall in their respective territories manage the waters of an international drainage basin in an equitable and reasonable manner having due regard for the obligation not to cause significant harm to other basin States." In the Rules, the protection of all aquatic environments is treated in Chapter V, specifying earlier statements. Chapter XIV deals with the settlement of international water disputes, drawing on the previous UN Convention without going into too much detail.

Examples of Conflict and Cooperation at Transboundary Lakes:

Lake Chad

In the Lake Chad region, cooperation has a longstanding history. The riparian countries of Nigeria, Niger, Chad and Cameroon founded the Lake Chad Basin Commission (LCBC) as early as in 1967, being the first Lake Basin Organization on the continent. Meanwhile, the Central African Republic and Sudan, who have a share in the lake's basin, joined the organization.

As Lake Chad faces heavy degradation and has shrunk to about one-tenth of its size within 30 years, problems concerning the water use and the borders arise regularly. All countries wish to expand irrigation to achieve independence in the food sector and augment cotton export. Border disputes, on the other hand, have manifested themselves between Nigeria and Chad as well as between Nigeria and Cameroon.

Recent plans of the LCBC consist in an Inter Basin Transfer from the Congo Basin which they hope can prevent the lake from drying up completely. Due to the ecological costs and the unsustainablility of such a project, donor countries have been reserved on the subject so far.

Lake Victoria

Lake Victoria gained sad fame through problems caused by invasive species: The water hyacinth as well as the Nile perch and the Nile Tilapia have heavily disturbed its ecosystem and, above that, overfishing has recently become a serious problem. This is particularly dangerous, as the fishing industry is an important sector in all riparian countries. Situated in a most densely populated area, the lake also suffers from waste water discharge and wetland destruction.

Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania founded the Lake Victoria Fisheries Organisation (LVFO) in 1994 in the context of the Lake Victoria Environmental Management Plan. As its name indicates, cooperation efforts first focussed on the fish resources. Currently, the LVFO forms part of the East African Community (EAC) that has extensive plans about regional integration. In 2003, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda signed the Protocol for Sustainable Development of Lake Victoria Basin on the basis of which a Lake Victoria Commission will be established.

Since the lake is also the source of the White Nile it is an important asset for all countries within the Nile Basin. In spite of these recent, positive developments, there remains tension between the management of the lake to benefit the riparian communities and managing the lake to benefit the downstream countries of the Nile. This issue is currently being addressed by the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI), a forum that brings together all ten countries in the Nile Basin.

Caspian Sea

Cooperation is not exactly prevalent in the Caspian Sea region. Formerly an almost exclusive Soviet water body - with nominal Iranian sovereignty over the southern coastal waters - collaboration only became essential with the breakup of the USSR and the emergence of three new riparians - Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan - besides Iran and Russia.

The main object of contention revolves around the definition of the Caspian Sea as either an enclosed sea or an international lake. As an enclosed Sea it would fall under the jurisdiction of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS,) entitling the riparians to an equidistant division of the Sea's surface and bottom. This is the de facto situation today, supported more or less by four states and opposed by Iran. If defined as a lake, a condominium - a shared use of the sea and its resources by all riparians - would be the solution, although there is no reference in international law to such a maritime legal regime. Russia and Iran favored this definition.

The urgency to resolve the legal dispute on the Sea becomes apparent in the light of the dire environmental hazards faced by the region. The transboundary consequences of the alternating sea level (approx. 3 meters), the decline in fishing stock (including the sturgeon), the pollution inflow (mainly from the Volga), and the environmental threats posed by the hydrocarbon industry can only be improved or reversed through a cooperative effort by all five states. The existing Caspian Environment Programme (CEP), launched in 1995, is far from achieving the desired results. A genuine international environmental regime is thus necessary.

Research focus

We at BICC center our research on transboundary lakes on institutional arrangements and mechanisms for conflict prevention, conflict management and resolution. The functioning of institutions depends largely on the trust they can generate among the population of the territorial entity they represent. Therefore, the participation of all relevant actors including civil society and local communities in the process of water management and the sense of ownership are decisive factors for crisis prevention at transboundary lakes.

Thereby, our interest at BICC mainly lies on possibilities to integrate customary law and local mechanisms of dispute settlement in modern approaches to water management. The development of international agreements will need new and creative approaches to local custom, if they are to avoid implementation failure at different stakeholder levels.

Please check our selected bibliography for further information on the subject and references for this brief paper.

---