Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Legal challenges to the management of transboundary watercourses in Central Asia under the conditions of Eurasian Economic Integration

  • Thematic Issue
  • Published:
Environmental Earth Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Worldwide experience has shown that interstate economic integration can help states in strengthening of management of transboundary waters and international water law serves as a reference for developing of relevant interstate cooperation. Transboundary waters in Central Asia play important role in the economic cooperation among riparian states, including those who are members of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). At the current stage of transboundary waters management in Central Asia, the obsolete legal status is evident. The international water law sources developed under the United Nations’ auspices have no binding application due to luck of formal membership of the EAEU states in these treaties. Also the regional set of regulations, especially for the Aral Sea Basin, needs further enhancement and more efficient implementation. The bilateral interstate regulatory framework of the managemennt of waters shared by EAEU states in Central Asia requires development of additional rules to enable better accommodation of challenges existing in terms of the current interstate cooperation. Having said that can one further assume that EAEU could serve as a new legal framework for more effective cooperation on transboundary watercourses in Central Asia? The answer might be yes, but… the current stage of the legal framework for cooperation on transboundary waters within the EAEU requires sufficient enhancements in terms of developing its legal and institutional framework. The first condition for EAEU to serve as framework for cooperation on transboundary waters of Central Asia is to strengthen the regulatory framework for the cooperation of EAEU member states regarding environmental issues in general and transboundary water relations in particular, able to accommodate two main goals: environmental protection on the one hand and economic development on the other hand. The EAEU legal framework shall also lead to improvement of existing institutional cooperation and a dispute settlement mechanism on transboundary waters shared by the member states of the EAEU.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See: The Helsinki Rules 1966 (art. III); UNECE Water Convention 1992 (Art. 1); UN Water Convention 1997. Art. 2 (b).

  2. Concerning their legal force we may admit that some authors consider provisions of the Helsinki Rules of 1966 as a reflection of the international customary law (Valeev 2012: 378), but some others consider them merely as unbinding recommendations (Vinogradov 2000).

  3. The Law of Transboundary Aquifers’ of December 11, 2008, UN Doc A/RES/63/124.

  4. ‘Agenda 21’ of the UN Conference on Environment and Development of June 14, 1992, UN Doc A/CONF.151/26/Rev 1 vol I, 9.

  5. UN Water Convention 1997 Art. 6.

  6. See: Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States of 1974, Art. 1. A/RES/29/3281; Rio Declaration on Environment and Development of 1992 in Principle 2. A/CONF.151/26 (Vol. I).

  7. Helsinki Rules 1966, Art. 4; UNECE Water Convention 1992, Art. 2, par. (c), UN Water Convention 1997 Art. 5, par. 1.

  8. Helsinki Rules 1966, Art. 10; UNECE Water Convention 1992, Art 2 par. 1, UN Water Convention 1997. Art 7.

  9. Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina vs. Uruguay), para 205 (Judgment of International Court of Justice from April 20, 2010). Available at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=3&k=88&case=135&code=au&p3=4. Last visited 20.03.2016.

  10. According to Article 2 (para 2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966 “All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law”.

  11. ILA Berlin Rules, Art. 64.

  12. Art. 64 of Berlin Rules on Water Resources, International Law Association ‘Resolution No 2/2004: Water Resources’ in International Law Association (ed) Report of the Seventy-First Conference: Berlin: 16–21 August 2004 (ILA London 2004) 15. https://www.google.pl/#q=ilahq+Berlin+Rules+on+Water+Resources%2C+International+Law+Association+%282004%29+.

  13. UN Water Convention 1997, Art. 8, and 24; UNECE Water Convention 1992, Art. 9.

  14. CIS Agreement on basic principles of interaction in the sphere of sustainable use and protection of transboundary waters of 1998.

  15. See Ref. EU-UNDP Project (2008–2012), p. 10.

  16. Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Joint Utilisation and Protection of Transboundary Water Bodies from 2010 (further referred to as 2010 Water Agreement).

  17. Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Joint Utilisation and Protection of Transboundary Water Bodies from 1992. It created a Kazakhstan–Russia committee meeting twice a year to approve the work schedule for reservoirs designated for joint use, set limits for water extraction and develop measures for the repair and operation of water facilities designated for joint use.

  18. https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/water/Chu-Talas/ChuTalas_II_Project_Report_Short_ENG.pdf. Last visited 20.03.2016.

  19. The global opening of the 1992 Water Convention, P. 2, see: http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/water/publications/brochure/Opening_brochure.pdf. Last visited 20.03.2016.

  20. See: www.chutalas-commission.org. Last visited 20.03.2016.

  21. EAEU Treaty 2014, Art. 29.1.

  22. EAEU Treaty 2014, Art. 65.7.

  23. The Declaration of the high-level meeting of the General Assembly on the rule of law at the national and international levels A/RES/67/1, para 7 (2012).

References

  • Amanzholov ZhM (2007) Multilateral treaties Ensuring Water Security in Central Asia. Mosc J Int Law 4:226–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Blagov S (2016) Kyrgyz hydro projects hit rocks as Russia rethinks economic plans for Central Asia. Asia times news and features. http://atimes.com/2016/01/kyrgyz-hydro-projects-hit-the-rocks-as-russia-rethinks-economic-plans-for-central-asia/. Last visit 20.03.2016

  • Caponera DA (1985) Patterns of cooperation in international water law: principles and institutions. Nat Resour J 25(3):565–587

    Google Scholar 

  • Conca K, Wu F, Mei C (2006) Global regime formation or complex institution building? The principled content of international river agreements. Int Stud Q 50(2006):263–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crabb P (2003) Straddling boundaries: inter-governmental arrangements for managing natural resources. In: Dovers S, River SW (eds) Managing Australia’s environment. The Federation Press, Annandale, pp 229–254

  • Danilov-Danilian VI (2014) Global problem of fresh water deficit. In: Chumakova AN, Grinina LE (eds) Where does epoch of globalization move? Uchitel, Volgograd, pp 161–174

  • Dellapenna J, Gupta J (2008) Toward global law on water. Glob Governance 14(4):437–453

  • DeStefano L, Edwards P, DeSilva L, Wolf A (2010) Tracking cooperation and conflict in international river basins: historic and recent trends. Water Policy 2010:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Durth R (1996) Grenzüberschreitende Umweltprobleme und regionale Integration: Zur politischen Ökonomie von Oberlauf-Unterlauf-Problemen an internationalen Flüssen [Transboundary environmental problems and regional integration: on the political economy of upstream-downstream problems on international rivers], Baden–Baden

  • EU-UNDP Project (2008–2012) Overview of regional transboundary water agreements. Institutions and Relevant Legal/Policy Activities in Central Asia, p 24. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230854803_Principles_of_Transboundary_Water_Resources_Management_and_Water-related_Agreements_in_Central_Asia_An_Analysis. Last visited 20.03.2016

  • Gleick P (1998) The world’s water: the biennial report on freshwater resources 1998–1999. Island Press, Washington, DC

  • Hedemann-Robinson M (2015) Enforcement of European Union environmental law: legal issues and challenges, 2nd edn. London, Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  • Iskandarhonova BA (2007) Legal governance of transboundary rivers in Central Asia. Mosc J Int Law 3:140–153

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaiharn N, Popattanachai N (2013) Analysis of Thai water managment legislation from an international law perspective. Yonsei Law J 4(2):352–359

    Google Scholar 

  • Janusz-Pawletta B (2015) Current legal challenges to institutional governance of transboundary water resources in Central Asia and joint management arrangements. Environ Earth Sci 73(2):887

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janusz-Pawletta B, Gubaidullina M (2015) Transboundary water management in Central Asia. Cahiers d’Asie Centrale 25:195–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Jovanovic MN (2011) International handbook on the economics of integration: general issues and regional groups, vol I. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham

    Google Scholar 

  • Karkkainen BC (2006) Managing transboundary aquatic ecosystems: lessons from the great lakes. Pac McGeorge Glob Bus Dev Law J 19(1):209–240

    Google Scholar 

  • Keessen AM, Kempen J, Rijswick H (2008) Transboundary river Basin management in Europe legal instruments to comply with European water management obligations in case of transboundary water pollution and floods. Utrecht Law Rev 4(3):35–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemerova D, Zhalkubaev G (2003) Water, conflict and regional security in Central Asia revisited. NY Univ Environ Law J 11(2):479–502

    Google Scholar 

  • Kliot N (1994) Water resources and conflict in the Middle East. Routledge, London

  • Lautze J, Giordano M, Borghese M (2005) Driving forces behind African transboundary water law, internal. External, and implication. In: Paper presented at the international workshop on “African Water Laws: plural legislative frameworks for rural water management in Africa”, 26–28 January 2005, Johannesburg, South Africa

  • Law of Transboundary Aquifers (2008) As annex to the resolution A/RES/63/124, adopted by UN general assembly at the 63rd session, on December 11, 2008. http://www.internationalwaterlaw.org/documents/intldocs/UNGA_Resolution_on_Law_of_Transboundary_Aquifers.pdf. Accessed 20 June 2017

  • LeMarquand D (1977) International rivers: the politics of cooperation. Westwater Research Center, Vancouver

  • Libert B (2008) Water management in Central Asia and the activities of UNECE. In: Rahaman MM, Varis O (eds) Central Asian waters: social, economic, environmental and governance puzzle. Water and Development Publications, Helsinki University of Technology, Espoo, p 37

    Google Scholar 

  • Mechlem K (2009) Moving ahead in protecting freshwater resources: the international law commission’s draft articles on transboundary aquifers. Leiden J Int Law 22(4):801–821. doi:10.1017/S0922156509990239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neumayer E (2002) Does trade openness promote multilateral environment cooperation? World Econ 25:815–832

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paisley R (2002) Adversaries into partners: international water law and the equitable sharing of downstream benefits. Melb J Int Law 3(2):280

    Google Scholar 

  • Pittock J, Finlayson M, Gardner A, McKay C (2010) Changing character: the Ramsar convention on wetlands and climate change in the Murray Darling Basin, Australia. Environ Plan Law J 27:401–425

    Google Scholar 

  • Qaddumi H (2008) Practical approaches to transboundary water benefit sharing. Overseas development institute, London

  • Soffer A (1999) Rivers of fire: the conflict over water in the Middle East. Lanham

  • Starr J (1991) Water wars. Foreign Policy 82:17–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tir J, Ackermann J (2009) Politics of formalized river cooperation. J Peace Res 46(5):623–640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) (2015) Reconciling resource uses in transboundary basins: assessment of the water-food-energy-ecosystems nexus, Geneva, pp 81–97

  • Valeev RM (ed) (2012) The handbook of international environmental law, vol 639. Statut, Moscow

  • Vinogradov SV (2000) International law of water resources. http://www.cawater-info.net/bk/1-7-3.htm. Last visited 21.03.2016

  • Vinogradov S, Wouters P (2013) Sino-Russian transboundary waters: a legal perspective on cooperation. In: Stockholm paper, December 2013, p 54

  • Wegerich KH (2008) Passing over the conflict. The Chu Talas Basin agreement as a model for Central Asia? Central Asian Waters. In: Rahaman MM, Varis O (eds) Social, economic, environmental and governance puzzle, pp 117–132, Water and Development Publications—Helsinki University of Technology TKK-WD-03, 2008. http://water.tkk.fi/English/wr/research/global/material/Central_Asian_Waters-book.pdf. Last visited 20.03.2016

  • Wolf A, Hamner J (2000) Trends in transboundary water disputes and dispute resolution. In: Water for Peace in the Middle East and Southern Africa. Green Cross International, pp 55–67

  • Wolf A, Yoffe S, Giordano M (2003) International waters: identifying basins at risk. Water Policy 5:29–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Wouters P (2013) International law—facilitating transboundary. Water cooperation, global water partnership. http://www.gwp.org/Global/ToolBox/Publications/Background%20papers/17%20International%20Law%20-%20Facilitating%20Transboundary%20Water%20Cooperation%20(2013)%20English.pdf. Last visited 10.10.2016

  • Wouters P, Vinogradov S (2003) Analysing the ECE water convention: what lessons for the regional management of transboundary water resources? In: Stokke OS, Thommessen B (eds) Yearbook of international co-operation on environment and development. Earthscan, London, pp 55–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu X (2011) Transboundary water pollution management: lessons learned from river basin management in China, Europe and the Netherlands. Utrecht Law Rev 7(1):188–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ziganshina D (2015) Promoting transboundary water security in the Aral Sea Basin though international law. Int Water Ser 3:152–167

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of International Public and Private Law, Faculty of Law, National Research University Higher School of Economics, 20 Myasnitskaya Str., Moscow, Russia, 101000

    Daria S. Boklan

  2. German - Kazakh University Almaty, Almaty, Kazakhstan

    Barbara Janusz-Pawletta

Authors
  1. Daria S. Boklan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barbara Janusz-Pawletta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daria S. Boklan.

Additional information

This article is part of a Topical Collection in Environmental Earth Sciences on “Water in Central Asia”, guest edited by Daniel Karthe, Iskandar Abdullaev, Bazartseren Boldgiv, Dietrich Borchardt, Sergey Chalov, Jerker Jarsjö, Lanhai Li and Jeff Nittrouer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Boklan, D.S., Janusz-Pawletta, B. Legal challenges to the management of transboundary watercourses in Central Asia under the conditions of Eurasian Economic Integration. Environ Earth Sci 76, 437 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-017-6741-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-017-6741-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation