SavedAdd your journal

Journals / International Journal of Water Management and Diplomacy / 2026 / Volume: 1 Issue: 9

Deconstructing the Anatomy of Water Conflict: A Six-Layer Framework for Transboundary Water Issues

Syed Mohsin(North South University)
Sk. Tawfique M. Haque(North South University)
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-01-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

This power-sensitive architecture offers a comprehensive tool for scholars, policymakers, and diplomats to foster resilient and cooperative transboundary water governance.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In an era of intensifying water scarcity and geopolitical tensions, transboundary water disputes present complex challenges to international peace and security.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Developed through a mixed-methods approach—including comparative case studies of eight major international basins, qualitative content analysis, and expert workshops—the framework integrates and extends beyond existing models by explicitly addressing power asymmetries, socio-cultural identities, and the role of external actors.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This power-sensitive architecture offers a comprehensive tool for scholars, policymakers, and diplomats to foster resilient and cooperative transboundary water governance.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Transboundary Water Disputes · Analytical Framework · Hydro-Politics

Abstract

In an era of intensifying water scarcity and geopolitical tensions, transboundary water disputes present complex challenges to international peace and security. This paper proposes a novel, multidimensional analytical framework to dissect these disputes across six interdependent layers: hydrological, institutional, socio-cultural, geoeconomic, geopolitical, and global engagement. Developed through a mixed-methods approach—including comparative case studies of eight major international basins, qualitative content analysis, and expert workshops—the framework integrates and extends beyond existing models by explicitly addressing power asymmetries, socio-cultural identities, and the role of external actors. It moves beyond the conflict-cooperation dichotomy to reveal how these factors co-evolve and interact across scales. The framework's application to hotspots like the Nile and Mekong basins demonstrates its utility in diagnosing leverage points and prescribing tailored interventions, such as adaptive trigger mechanisms and binding dispute-settlement institutions. This power-sensitive architecture offers a comprehensive tool for scholars, policymakers, and diplomats to foster resilient and cooperative transboundary water governance.

🔖

Cite This Article

Mohsin, S., Haque, S. T. M. (2026). Deconstructing the Anatomy of Water Conflict: A Six-Layer Framework for Transboundary Water Issues. International Journal of Water Management and Diplomacy, Volume: 1 Issue: 9. https://ajindex.com/articles/1499174

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (57)

  1. Acharya, A. (2014). Global International Relations (IR) and Regional Worlds: A New Agenda for International Studies. International Studies Quarterly, 58. https://doi.org/10.1111/isqu.12171
  2. Ahuja, K. (2025). Transboundary water disputes and international legal mechanisms. Bhatt & Joshi Associates. Retrieved from https://bhattandjoshiassociates.com/transboundary-water-disputes-and-international-legal-mechanisms/
  3. Akhter S. (2019). Water Sharing Conflicts and Management in the Indus River Basin. https://www.scholarena.com/article/Water-Sharing-Conflicts-and-Management-in-the-Indus-River-Basin.pdf
  4. Ali, S., & Khuhro, A. A. (2021). Indus Water Treaty: Challenges and Prospects. PERENNIAL JOURNAL of HISTORY, 2(2), 131–148. https://doi.org/10.52700/pjh.v2i2.67
  5. Aljuaidi, A. E. (2018). Conflict resolution for the Jordan River Basin dispute considering coalitions among riparian states. East African Journal of Water and Environment, 4(2), 101–115. https://eajournals.org/wp-content/uploads/Conflict-Resolution-for-Jordan-River-Basin-Dispute-Considering-Coalitions-among-Riparian-States.pdf
  6. Azizi, M. A., & Leandro, J. (2025). Factors Affecting Transboundary Water Disputes: Nile, Indus, and Euphrates–Tigris River Basins. Water, 17(4), 525. https://doi.org/10.3390/w17040525
  7. Biersteker, T. J., & Weber, C. (1996). State sovereignty as a social construct. Cambridge University Press. https://books.google.com.bd/books?id=qy97O2Eon0gC
  8. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  9. Canavesi, A., & Minelli, E. (2021). Servant leadership: A systematic literature review and network analysis. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 34(3), 267–289. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8476984/
  10. Climate Diplomacy. (2017). Dam projects and disputes in the Mekong River Basin. https://climate-diplomacy.org/case-studies/dam-projects-and-disputes-mekong-river-basin
  11. Daza-Clark, A. M. (2022). Resolving water conflicts: Dispute settlement mechanisms applicable to international water resources. PeaceRep Report: Climate & Natural Resources. University of Edinburgh. http://dx.doi.org/10.7488/era/5146
  12. European Parliament. (2018). Water disputes in the Mekong basin. Policy Department for External Relations. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2018/620223/EPRS_ATA(2018)620223_EN.pdf
  13. FAO. (2019). AQUASTAT - FAO's Global Information System on Water and Agriculture. Fao.org. http://www.fao.org/aquastat/en/
  14. Fernandes, S., Fernandes, G. W., Pereira, C. C., Raty, J., & Wheeler, K. (2025). Reimagining river governance: Insights from the Colorado River crisis. BioScience. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biaf037
  15. Ghosh, J. (2023). Conflict Over Water Will Become More Common Without Action From International Community, Opinion Piece Says | KFF. KFF. https://www.kff.org/news-summary/conflict-over-water-will-become-more-common-without-action-from-international-community-opinion-piece-says/
  16. Hassan, Q. M., Salar, S. G., Raman, D., Campbell, S., & Palani, I. Q. (2023). When the law is unclear: challenges and opportunities for data and information exchange in the Tigris-Euphrates and Indus river basins. Water Policy, 25(8), 780–796. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2023.261
  17. Hossen, M. A., Connor, J., & Ahammed, F. (2021). Review of hydro-economic models (HEMs) focused on transboundary river water-sharing disputes. Water Policy. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2021.114
  18. International Crisis Group. (2024, October 7). Dammed in the Mekong: Averting an Environmental Catastrophe | Crisis Group. Crisisgroup.org. https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-east-asia/cambodia-thailand-china/343-dammed-mekong-averting-environmental-catastrophe
  19. Islam, S., & Susskind, L.E. (2012). Water Diplomacy: A Negotiated Approach to Managing Complex Water Networks (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203083659
  20. Kåresdotter, E., Destouni, G., Lammers, R. B., Keskinen, M., Pan, H., & Kalantari, Z. (2025). Water conflicts under climate change: Research gaps and priorities. AMBIO. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-024-02111-7
  21. Loures, F. R., & Rieu-Clarke, A. (2013). The UN Watercourses Convention in force: Strengthening international law for transboundary water management. Taylor & Francis. https://books.google.com.bd/books?id=UXy_AAAAQBAJ
  22. Mianabadi, H., Farzaneh, F., Andik, B., & Ghadimi, S. (2025). The role of media in shaping the hydropolitical interactions in the transboundary basins. EGU General Assembly 2025. https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-20601
  23. Mirumachi, N. (2015). Transboundary Water Politics in the Developing World. Routledge. Mirumachi, N., & Allan, J. (2008). Revisiting transboundary water governance: power, conflict, cooperation, and the political economy.
  24. Mndzebele, D. (2025). Transboundary water rights and conflicts in sub-Saharan Africa: Conflict prevention through functional transboundary river basin institution-building in the Southern African Development Community region. Frontiers in Water, 7, 1537509. https://doi.org/10.3389/frwa.2025.1537509
  25. Nagheeby, M. (2022). Challenges for international water law: The hidden and untapped magic of 'equity'. Global Water Forum. Retrieved from https://www.globalwaterforum.org/2022/08/22/challenges-for-international-water-law-voices-from-emerging-scholars/
  26. Nahar, A. (2025). WATERS OF RECONCILIATION: MODERNIZING THE INDUS WATERS TREATY FOR CLIMATE RESILIENCE AND COOPERATION. https://nyujilp.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Nahar_571-253-267.pdf
  27. NASA JPL. (2023). Global Terrestrial Water Storage Anomaly. GRACE-FO. https://gracefo.jpl.nasa.gov/resources/18/global-terrestrial-water-storage-anomaly/
  28. News18. (2025, August 12). After aggressive war rhetoric, Pakistan urges India to resume the Indus Waters Treaty. News18. https://www.news18.com/india/after-aggressive-war-rhetoric-pakistan-urges-india-to-resume-indus-waters-treaty-9500471.html
  29. Offutt, A. (2022). Mixing waters: stakeholder influence in transboundary water conflict and cooperation. Water International, 47(4), 583–609. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2022.2059322 Pacific Institute. (n.d.). Water Conflict Chronology. Retrieved August 18, 2025, from https://pacinst.org/water-conflict-chronology/
  30. Pandey, A., Prakash, A., Barua, A., Abu Syed, Md., & Nepal, S. (2020). Upstream-downstream linkages in Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna basin: the hydro-social imperatives. Water Policy, 22(6), 1082–1097. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2020.231
  31. Qader, M. (2002). Global warming and changes in the probability of flooding in Bangladesh: implications. Global Environmental Change, 12(2), 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/S09593780(02)00002X
  32. Rahman, K. S., Islam, Z., Navera, U. K., & Ludwig, F. (2019). A critical review of the Ganges Water Sharing arrangement. Water Policy, 21(2), 259–276. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2019.164
  33. Rai, S., Wolf, A., Sharma, N., & Tiwari, H. (2017). Hydropolitics in Transboundary Water Conflict and Cooperation. In River System Analysis and Management. https://doi.org/10.1007/9789811014727_19
  34. Rakhmatullaev, S., Abdullaev, I., & Kazbekov, J. (2017). WaterEnergyFoodEnvironmental Nexus in Central Asia: From Transition to Transformation. In Handbook of Environmental Chemistry (pp. 1–18). https://doi.org/10.1007/698_2017_180
  35. Rieu-Clarke, A., Moynihan, R., & Magsig, B.-O. (2015). Transboundary water governance and climate change adaptation: International law, policy guidelines and best practice application. UNESCO World Water Assessment Programme. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000235678
  36. Sadoff, C., & Grey, D. (2005). Cooperation on International Rivers. Water InternationalWATER INT, 30, 420–427. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060508691886
  37. Schmeier, S. (2022). Transboundary conflict and cooperation: Legal and institutional mechanisms [White paper]. Water, Peace & Security Project. https://waterpeacesecurity.org/files/555
  38. Silvis, L. (2025). Water conflict: Water diplomacy has never been more critical. Haskoning.com. https://www.haskoning.com/en/newsroom/blogs/2024/water-conflict-water-diplomacy-has-never-been-more-critical
  39. Sithirith, M. (2021). Transboundary river basin governance: A case study of the Mekong River Basin. In J. S. A. Do Carmo (Ed.), River Basin Management: Sustainability Issues and Planning Strategies (pp. 153–176). IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95377
  40. Tanaka, Y., & Nakayama, M. (2010). Transboundary Water Dispute over the Euphrates and Tigris River Basin. Journal of Japan Society of Hydrology & Water Resources, 23, 144–156. https://doi.org/10.3178/jjshwr.23.144
  41. Tayia. (2019). Transboundary Water Conflict Resolution Mechanisms: Substitutes or Complements. Water, 11(7), 1337. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11071337
  42. Tayie, M.S. (2016). The Hydropolitics of the Nile River Basin. In: Negm, A. (eds) The Nile River. The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, vol 56. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/698_2016_106
  43. TFDD (Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database). (n.d.). About the TFDD. Oregon State University. https://tfddmgmt.github.io/tfdd/index.html
  44. UN. (2021). HANDBOOK ON WATER ALLOCATION IN A TRANSBOUNDARY CONTEXT. In unece.org. https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2021- 12/ECE_MP.WAT_64_Handbook%20on%20water%20allocation%20in%20a%20the%20transboundary%20context.pdf
  45. UNEP, OSU et al. (2005). Hydropolitical vulnerability and resilience along international waters in Africa. United Nations Environment Programme. https://transboundarywaters.ceoas.oregonstate.edu/sites/transboundarywaters.ceoas.oregonstate.edu/files/Publications/Hydropolitical_Vulnerability_%20Resilience_Africa.pdf
  46. UNESCO. (2022). Transboundary water governance and climate change adaptation: international law, policy guidelines and best practice application. Unesco.org. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000235678
  47. UN-Water. (2020). Policy brief: Strengthening transboundary water cooperation through the UN water conventions. United Nations. Retrieved from https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2021-02/UN-Water_Policy_Brief_United_Nations_Global_Water_Conventions.pdf
  48. Wei, Y., Wei, J., Li, G., Wu, S., Yu, D., Ghoreishi, M., Lu, Y., Souza, F. A. A., Sivapalan, M., & Tian, F. (2022). A socio-hydrological framework for understanding conflict and cooperation with respect to transboundary rivers. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 26, 2131–2146. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2131-2022
  49. Wolf, A. T., & Hamner, J. (2000). Trends in Transboundary Water Disputes and Dispute Resolution. Palgrave Macmillan UK EBooks, 123–148. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230596634_8
  50. Wolf, A. T., & Newton, J. T. (2007). Case study of transboundary dispute resolution: Aral Sea. Oregon State University, Program in Water Conflict Management and Transformation. https://transboundarywaters.ceoas.oregonstate.edu/sites/transboundarywaters.ceoas.oregonstate.edu/files/Database/ResearchProjects/casestudies/aral_sea.pdf
  51. Wolf, A. T., Yoffe, S. B., & Giordano, M. (2003). International waters: identifying basins at risk. Water Policy, 5(1), 29–60. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2003.0002
  52. Yin, R. (2014). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Yoffe, S., Fiske, G., Giordano, M., Giordano, M., Larson, K., Stahl, K., & Wolf, A. T. (2004). Geography of international water conflict and cooperation: Data sets and applications. Water Resources Research, 40(5).
  53. Yuan, L., Liu, C., Wu, X., He, W., Kong, Y., Dagmawi Mulugeta Degefu, & Ramsey, T. S. (2023). A Set Pair Analysis Method for Assessing and Forecasting Water Conflict Risk in Transboundary River Basins. Water Resources Management, 38(2), 775–791. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-023-03698-4
  54. Zawahri, N. (2008). International rivers and national security: The Euphrates, GangesBrahmaputra, Indus, Tigris, and Yarmouk rivers 1. Natural Resources Forum, 32, 280–289. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14778947.2008.00204.x
  55. Zeitoun, M., & Mirumachi, N. (2008). Transboundary water interaction I: reconsidering conflict and cooperation. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 8(4), 297–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-008-9083-5
  56. Zeitoun, M., Mirumachi, N., Warner, J., Kirkegaard, M., & Cascão, A. (2019). Analysis for water conflict transformation. Water International, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2019.1607479
  57. Zeitoun, M., & Warner, J. (2006). Hydro-hegemony – a framework for analysis of trans-boundary water conflicts. Water Policy, 8(5), 435–460. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2006.054