Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Conflict and cooperation in Aras International Rivers Basin: status, trend, and future

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Sustainable Water Resources Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 24 January 2023

This article has been updated

Abstract

The transboundary Aras River basin is shared by Turkey, Armenia, Iran, and Azerbaijan. The water resources of the basin have been the basis for major economic activity that has been associated with different hydropolitical interactions of the riparian states. This study investigated the status and trends of these interactions from the perspectives of cooperation and conflict as well as their possible future. The records of the water events of the Aras basin from the IWED (International Water Event Database) database and other creditable sources for four periods from 1926 to 2021 were assessed. The interactions were temporally evaluated with respect to type and dynamics using the TWINS (Transboundary Waters Interaction Nexus) framework. The results showed that basin gains from numerous agreements, joint water projects, and joint technical commissions initially were the grounds for cooperation. However, the Nagorno–Karabakh terrestrial conflict and its anticipated consequences on the geopolitics of the basin as well as water quality and upstream water projects could produce additional conflict. The TWINS analysis revealed that 70% of the water interactions were at the non-politicization or politicization levels, indicating the basin experienced a relatively positive cooperative status (mainly subperiods 1 and 3). However, the remaining 30% of events fell into the securitization or violation levels in recent years (subperiod 4). This indicates that the basin is susceptible to moving towards more conflict.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and materials

Available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Change history

Notes

  1. Yu et al. (2015).

  2. Altingoz et al. (2018).

References

  • Aazami J, Taban P (2018) Monitoring of heavy metals in water, sediment and Phragmites australis of Aras River along the Iranian-Armenian border. Iran J Toxicol 12(2):1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adelphi (2017) Turkey-Armenia: water-quality challenges. Environment, conflict, and cooperation

  • Altingoz M et al (2018) Promoting development in shared river basins: case studies from international experience. World Bank, Washington, DC

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Anadolu Agency (2020) https://www.aa.com.tr/en/turkey/turkey-completes-81-km-wall-along-iranian-border/2065713

  • Aviram R, Katz D, Shmueli D (2014) Desalination as a game-changer in transboundary hydro-politics. Water Policy 16(4):609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod RM, Keohane RO (1985) Achieving cooperation under anarchy: strategies and institutions. World Polit 38(1):226–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Stefano L, Duncan J, Dinar S, Stahl K, Strzepek K, Wolf A (2012) Climate change and the institutional resilience of international river basins. J Peace Res 49:193–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Stefano L, Petersen-Perlman, Sproles A, Eynard J, Wolf A (2017) Assessment of transboundary river basins for potential hydro-political Tensions. Glob Environ Change 45:35–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grunwald R, Wang W, Feng Y (2020a) Modified Transboundary Water Interaction Nexus (TWINS): Xayaburi dam case study. J Water 12:710

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grunwald R, Feng Y, Wang W (2020b) Reconceptualization of the Transboundary Water Interaction Nexus (TWINS): approaches, opportunities and challenges. Water 12:710

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannan T, Leummens HJL, Matthews MM (2013) Desk study: hydrology. UNDP/GEF reducing transboundary degradation in the Kura Araks river basin project. Tbilisi-Baku-Yerevan, 29 p

  • International Crisis Group (2021) The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict: a visual explainer. https://www.crisisgroup.org/content/nagorno-karabakh-conflict-visualexplainer

  • http://gis.nacse.org/tfdd/internationalEvents.php

  • https://www.crisisgroup.org/content/nagorno-karabakh-conflict-visual-explainer

  • https://www.renewableenergyworld.com

  • Kuyumjian N (2021) Dam building on the Kura-Aras and water tensions in the Caucasus. https://www.eurasianet.org/perspectives-dam-building-on-the-kura-aras-and-watertensions-in-the-caucasus

  • Kramer A, Kibaroglu A, Scheumann W (2011) Kura-Aras river basin: burgeoning transboundary water issues. In: Turkey’s Water Policy. pp 263–275

  • Matthews M (2013) Reducing transboundary degradation in the Kura-Aras River basin. Desk study (a), Hydrology (b), Climate change (c), Water quality (d) UNDP/ GEF projects

  • McMillan SM (1997) Interdependence and conflict. Mershon Int Stud Rev 41(1):33–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mirumachi N (2015) transboundary water politics in the developing world. Routledge, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mirumachi N, Allan JA (2007) Revisiting transboundary water governance: power, conflict, cooperation and the political economy. In: Proceedings of the paper presented at the international conference on adaptive and IWM, Switzerland

  • Mutahara M, Warner J, Shah Alam Khan S (2019) Analyzing the coexistence of conflict and cooperation in a regional delta management system: TRM in the Bangladesh delta. J Environ Policy Govern 29:5

    Google Scholar 

  • Porkka M, Gerten D, Schaphoff S, Siebert S, Kummu M (2016) Causes and trends of water scarcity in food production. Environ Res Lett 11:015001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravenborg HM, Bustamante R, Cissé A et al (2012) The challenges of local water governance: the extent, nature and intensity of water-related conflict and cooperation. Water Policy 14(2):336–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNECE (2003) National report on the state of the environment in Armenia

  • UNECE (2009) River basin commissions and other institutions for transboundary water cooperation. Capacity for Water Cooperation in Eastern Europe, Caucasus, and Central Asia, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO (2009) Updating the international water events database

  • Vasquez JA (1995) ‘Why global conflict resolution is possible: Meeting the challenges of the new world order’. In: Beyond confrontation: learning conflict resolution in the post-cold war. pp 131–153

  • Williams L, Zazanashvili N, Sanadiradze G, Kandaurov A (2006) An eco-regional conversation plan for the caucasus, 2nd edn. WWF Caucasus Program Office, p 225

  • Wolf AT, Yoffe SB, Giordano M (2003a) International waters: identifying basins at risk. Water Policy 5(1):29–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf AT, Stahl K, Macomber M (2003b) Conflict and cooperation within international river basins: the importance of institutional capacity. Water Resour Update 125(1):1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoffe S, Larson K (2002) Basins at risk: water event database methodology. In: Conflict and cooperation over international freshwater resources, Chapter 2

  • Yu W, Cestti RE, Lee JY (2015) Toward integrated water resources management in Armenia. World bank group

  • Zeitoun M, Mirumachi N (2008) Transboundary water interaction I: reconsidering conflict and cooperation. Int Environ Agreem 2008(8):297–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-008-9083-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeitoun M, Mirumachi N, Warner J (2011) Transboundary water interaction II: the influence of ‘soft’ power. Int Environ Agreem Polit Law Econ 11(2):159–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-010-9134-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received for conducting this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

MH and SM: conceptualization, methodology, data collection and analysis, writing—original draft, review and editing, SE, BA, EM, and HG: methodology, writing—original draft, review and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saeid Morid.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest associated with this research or manuscript.

Ethics approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hajihoseini, M., Morid, S., Emamgholizadeh, S. et al. Conflict and cooperation in Aras International Rivers Basin: status, trend, and future. Sustain. Water Resour. Manag. 9, 28 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-022-00799-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-022-00799-7

Keywords

Navigation