عنوان مقاله [English]
Exploring and explaining hydro-political interactions requires an in-depth understanding of the nature of water issues. Water issues are in complex interactions with the values, norms, and ideas of the stakeholders, as well as nonlinear and dynamic interactions and feedbacks with social, political, and security dimensions, so they named a complex coupled human-natural ecosystem. Water systems, as common resources among two or more stakeholders (at local, national, international scales), not only ignore political boundaries, also cross multiple natural, societal, and cultural boundaries.
Analyzing hydro-political relations, also requires understanding the theories, values, and assumptions that interpret them. The Neo-Malthusians argue that population growth increases resource consumption, which causes resource depletion, exacerbates resource scarcity, increases resource competition and ultimately results in armed conflict. In contrast, the Cornucopians argue that there is enough energy and food to provide for the rising population of the world. They point out that technological innovation and cooperation can overcome resource scarcity. They believe that resource scarcity stimulates innovation and the development of technology and resource competition motivates cooperation between states and nations, rather than violent conflict. Hence, avoiding confining researchers' insights into a particular paradigm and developing a comprehensive understanding of different issues requires to learn for thinking across paradigms, or perhaps beyond paradigms.
Reflecting each paradigm of international relations in hydro-political relations offers a specific view of conflictive and or cooperative relations on shared water resources in transboundary basins. The purpose of this study is to investigate and address these key questions: according to different theories and paradigms of international relations, what kind of tools are fruitful for transboundary water resources in hydro-political interactions? In addition, what are the philosophy and roots of each attitude and deficiencies of each strategy in hydro-political interactions?
This paper has a theoretical-fundamental methodology. In terms of data collection, data of this paper are qualitatively collected through the library methods. The theoretical framework of this research is formed by dominant paradigms in international relations. Therefore, at first, we will introduce the Realism paradigm and the reflections of these theories in hydro-politics interactions in form of three theories of Water War, Neomalthusians, and The Tragedy of the Commons, and also criticisms on these theories are presented. Second, the Liberalism paradigm and the reflections of these theories in hydro-political interactions in form of three theories of Cornucopians, the Economic Value of Water, and Water Institutions as well as criticism of these theories are presented. Finally, the nature of hydro-political interactions is explained.
Results and discussion
Exploring the paradigms of international relations, their theories on hydro-political interactions, and analysis of water conflicts and cooperation among countries, are so significant. Because it shows what are the deficiencies of policies and strategies and how can they improve. Therefore, a comprehensive understanding from the reflection of international relations paradigms in the field of international water and environmental issues is essential to gain more comprehensive understanding of hydro-political interactions and, accordingly, outlined appropriate strategies to sustain countries' water interactions. There have been different paradigms throughout the history of hydro-political interactions. It is important to understand the various paradigms throughout history. Because understanding history helps understand and analyze the current situation. Historical lessons can also help provide more comprehensive strategies and more sustainable policies for the future. Analysis the history of hydro-political interactions shows that:
1- The relation between conflict and cooperation in hydro-political interactions is complex. Some scholars use an either/or approach to examine this issue. Other scholars disagree with separating conflict and cooperation and contend that conflict and cooperation can co-exist.
2- Transboundary water interaction is an inherently political process and the outcomes are determined by the broader political context.
3- Conflict is not always undesirable. Like a virus in our body, we cannot remove conflict from our life but we should manage it. Conflict can be constructive and may lead to increase cooperation.
4- It is a misconception that conflict and cooperation are set against each other so that increasing conflict means decreasing cooperation.
Zeitoun, M; Mirumachi, N; Warner, J. F. (2011). Transboundary Water Interaction II: The Influence of ‘Soft’ Power. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 11(2), 159–178. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s10784-010-9134-6.