Boundaries, Territorial Disputes, and Water Insecurity: Evidence from the Lower Mekong Basin

  • Rongxing Guo
  • Gongzheng Zhao


On the basis of cross-section and time-series data, we find that water resources within the Lower Mekong Basin (LMB)—an area including large sections of Cambodia and Lao PDR, and the north and northeast regions of Thailand, and the Mekong delta of Vietnam—tend to be more seriously polluted in the transnational areas than in the other areas. Specifically, the estimated coefficients show that political influence on transnational water pollution is more significant in areas near “the international border along which a river runs” (denoted by BORDER2) than in places near “the international border across which a river runs” (denoted by BORDER1). In addition, transboundary water pollution is found to be very sensitive to the dummy of “territorial dispute”. The estimated result also shows that the chance of territorial disputes is higher in BORDER1 than in BORDER2 areas. Finally, ASEAN membership is found to reduce some water pollutants (such as total phosphate) though its effect on the reduction of chemical oxygen demand (COD) is not significant.


Chemical Oxygen Demand Environmental Kuznets Curve Water Quality Station Mekong Delta International Border 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This chapter is part of research supported by the Global Development Award to the first author in 2008. The Mekong River Commission (MRC) provided the primary data on the water quality of the Lower Mekong Basin (LMB). In particular, thanks are due to Mr. Dirk Vanderstighelen (DB/GIS-Team Leader of the Technical Support Division, MRC) and Dr. Rajendra P. Shrestha (UNEP) for their help. Our research has also benefited from suggestions from Dr. Ian Campbell (Senior Environmental Specialist, Environment Division at the MRC), Dr. Lyn Squire (Senor Fellow, The Brookings Institution) and other participants at the Eighth Annual Conference of the Global Development Network (Brisbane, Australia, 27–31 January 2008).


  1. Barrett S (1992) International environmental agreement as games, 11–36. in: Pethig R (ed.) Conflicts and cooperation in managing environmental resources.Verlag, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carraro C, and Siniscalco D (1993) Strategies for the international protection of the environment. Journal of Public Economics 52: 309–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Critchley WH, and Terriff T (1993) Environment and security, 312–348. in: Shultz R, Godson R, and Greenwood T (eds., 1993) Security studies for the 1990’s. Brassey’s, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  4. Ekins P (1997) The Kuznets curve for the environment and economic growth: examining the evidence. Environmental Planning 29: 805–830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Frey F (1993) The political context of conflicts and cooperation over international river basins. Water International 18: 544–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Furlong K, Gleditsch NP, and Hegre H (2006) Geographic opportunity and neomalthusian willingness: boundaries, shared rivers, and conflict. International Interactions 32(1): 79–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gleditsch NP, Furlong K, Hegre H, Lacina B, and Owen T (2006) Conflicts over shared rivers: resource scarcity or fuzzy boundaries? Political Geography 25(4): 361–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Greene WH (2002) Econometric analysis, 5th ed. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.Google Scholar
  9. Grossman GM, and Krueger AB (1991) Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement. NBER Working Paper No. 3914. NBER, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  10. Grossman GM, and Krueger AB (1995) Economic growth and the environment. Quarterly Journal of Economics 110: 353–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Guo R (2005) Cross-border resource management—theory and practice. Elsevier, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  12. Guo R (2007) Territorial disputes and resource management—a global handbook. Nova Science Publishers, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  13. Guo R (2009) The land and maritime boundary disputes of Asia. Nova Science Publishers, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  14. Hensel PR, Mitchell SM, Sowers II TE, and Thyne CL (2008) Bones of contention: comparing territorial, maritime, and river issues. Journal of Conflict Resolution 52(1): 117–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Holtz-Eakin D, and Selden TM (1995) Stoking the fires? CO2 emissions and economic growth. Journal of Public Economics 57: 85–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Homer-Dixon TF (1999) Environment, scarcity, and violence. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  17. Hunter J (1998) Tumen river area development program and transboundary water pollution. Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainable Development, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  18. Israngkura A (2003) Income inequality and university financing in Thailand, 273–305. in: Krongaew M (ed.) Income distribution and sustainable economic development in East Asia: A comparative analysis. National Institute of Development Administration (NIDA), Bangkok.Google Scholar
  19. Jackson AR, Julie W, and Jackson M (2000) Environmental science: the natural environment and human impact, 2nd ed. Pearson Education, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  20. Kirmani S (1990) Water, peace and conflict management: The experience of the Indus and the Mekong river basins. Water International 15(1): 200–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kliot N, Shmueli D, and Shamir U (2001) Institutions for management of transboundary water resources: their nature, characteristics and shortcoming. Water Policy 3: 229–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kristensen J (2001) The Mekong can become many rivers in one. International Herald Tribune, July 31.Google Scholar
  23. Kuznets S (1955) Economic growth and income inequality. American Economic Review 45: 1–28.Google Scholar
  24. Lucas REB, Wheeler D, and Hettige H (1992) Economic development, environmental regulation and international migration of toxic industrial pollution: 1960–1988, 67–86. in: Low P (ed.) International trade and the environment. The World Bank, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  25. Panayton T (1993) Empirical tests and policy analysis of environmental degradation at different stages of economic development. Technology and Environment Program Working Paper. International Labor Office, Geneva.Google Scholar
  26. Roca J, Padilla E, Farre M, and Galletto V (2001) Economic growth and atmospheric pollution in Spain: discussing the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis. Ecological Economics 39: 85–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rock MT (1996) Pollution intensity of GDP and trade policy: can the World Bank be wrong? World Development 24: 471–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rogers P (1992) International river basins: pervasive unidirectional externalities, paper presented at Conference on the Economics of Transnational Commons, University of Siena, Italy, April 25–27Google Scholar
  29. Savenije HHG, and van der Zaag P (2000) Conceptual framework for the management of shared river basins with special reference to the SADC and EU. Water Policy 2: 9–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Selden T and Song D (1994) Environmental quality and development: is there a Kuznets curve for air pollution emissions? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 27: 147–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shafik N (1994) Economic development and environmental quality: an economic analysis. Oxford Economic Papers 46: 757–773.Google Scholar
  32. Shafik N, and Bandyopadhyay S (1992) Economic growth and environmental quality: time-series and cross-section evidence. Discussion Paper No. 158. Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University.Google Scholar
  33. Stern DI, and Common MS (2001) Is there an environmental Kuznets curve? Environmental and Development Economics 3: 173–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Toset H, Wollebek P, Gleditsch NP, and Hegre H (2000) Shared rivers and interstate conflict. Political Geography 19(6): 971–996. Available from Accessed on 9 March 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Unruh GC, and Moomaw WR (1998) An alternative analysis of apparent EKC-type transitions. Ecological Economics 2: 417–433.Google Scholar
  36. Wendt A (1999) Social theory of international politics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wolf AT (1998) Conflicts and cooperation along international waterways. Water Policy 1: 251–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wolf AT (1999) The transboundary fresh water dispute database. Water International 24: 160–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. World Bank (1992) World bank development report 1992. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  40. World Bank (1995) Monitoring environmental progress: A report on work in progress. Environmentally sustainable development series. The World Bank, Washington, DC.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Brookings InstitutionWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.Regional Science Association of China at Peking UniversityBeijingChina
  3. 3.National Development and Reform CommissionBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations