Inclusive governance of hydropower on shared rivers? Toward an international legal geography of the Lower Mekong basin

IF 3.3 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Oliver Hensengerth
{"title":"Inclusive governance of hydropower on shared rivers? Toward an international legal geography of the Lower Mekong basin","authors":"Oliver Hensengerth","doi":"10.3389/fclim.2024.1275049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hydropower is now the largest source of renewable energy worldwide. The International Renewable Energy Agency estimates that current hydropower capacity will need to double by 2050 in order to transition to net zero and to arrest the rise of global temperatures at 1.5 degrees Celsius. Much of the currently built and planned dams are on rivers shared between two or more countries. This raises the risk of increased inter-state conflicts. However, to exploit hydropower peacefully, the impact on local communities must also be considered. This foregrounds the need to build inclusive institutions that can mediate the different interests, norms, and values held by communities located across different scales. The article examines the role of international river basin organizations to manage this legal pluralism in shared river basins. In many basins globally, such as the Lower Mekong, the Columbia, the Zambezi, or the Senegal, international river basin organizations are tasked with the development of shared water resources. To understand to what extent river basin organizations can mediate the legal pluralism in a shared basin, the article develops an international legal geography approach to the governance of transboundary waters in an attempt to uncover marginalization and disempowerment in the process of law-making. It therefore expands the analytical scope of legal geography to the study of transnational spaces, in this case complex ecosystems for which there are no fixed jurisdictional boundaries. It then applies this approach to the case study of the Lower Mekong basin. Findings indicate that the Mekong River Commission, despite attempts to include project-affected people in decision-making, largely operates within a Westphalian framework of sovereignty to the detriment of more inclusive forms of governance. Project affected communities are largely unable to exert influence and are relegated to participation in alternative forums. These forums, or counter publics as Yong called them, are disconnected from official processes. While they give rise to marginalized voices and enable the creation of inclusive and participatory spaces, the exclusionary official decision-making processes continue to produce significant tension and conflict potential as hydropower is championed globally as a clean, climate friendly form of energy. As hydropower is set to double by 2050, inclusive participatory institutions in basins worldwide must be built to navigate complex stakeholder interests and to benefit those who are otherwise likely to lose out in net zero transitions. These findings are relevant for other shared basins, particularly across Southeast Asia, Africa and Latin America where hydropower is booming. An international approach to legal geography can foreground these hidden and marginalized voices and help identify ways to build inclusive institutions for the governance of shared resources.","PeriodicalId":33632,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Climate","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Climate","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2024.1275049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Hydropower is now the largest source of renewable energy worldwide. The International Renewable Energy Agency estimates that current hydropower capacity will need to double by 2050 in order to transition to net zero and to arrest the rise of global temperatures at 1.5 degrees Celsius. Much of the currently built and planned dams are on rivers shared between two or more countries. This raises the risk of increased inter-state conflicts. However, to exploit hydropower peacefully, the impact on local communities must also be considered. This foregrounds the need to build inclusive institutions that can mediate the different interests, norms, and values held by communities located across different scales. The article examines the role of international river basin organizations to manage this legal pluralism in shared river basins. In many basins globally, such as the Lower Mekong, the Columbia, the Zambezi, or the Senegal, international river basin organizations are tasked with the development of shared water resources. To understand to what extent river basin organizations can mediate the legal pluralism in a shared basin, the article develops an international legal geography approach to the governance of transboundary waters in an attempt to uncover marginalization and disempowerment in the process of law-making. It therefore expands the analytical scope of legal geography to the study of transnational spaces, in this case complex ecosystems for which there are no fixed jurisdictional boundaries. It then applies this approach to the case study of the Lower Mekong basin. Findings indicate that the Mekong River Commission, despite attempts to include project-affected people in decision-making, largely operates within a Westphalian framework of sovereignty to the detriment of more inclusive forms of governance. Project affected communities are largely unable to exert influence and are relegated to participation in alternative forums. These forums, or counter publics as Yong called them, are disconnected from official processes. While they give rise to marginalized voices and enable the creation of inclusive and participatory spaces, the exclusionary official decision-making processes continue to produce significant tension and conflict potential as hydropower is championed globally as a clean, climate friendly form of energy. As hydropower is set to double by 2050, inclusive participatory institutions in basins worldwide must be built to navigate complex stakeholder interests and to benefit those who are otherwise likely to lose out in net zero transitions. These findings are relevant for other shared basins, particularly across Southeast Asia, Africa and Latin America where hydropower is booming. An international approach to legal geography can foreground these hidden and marginalized voices and help identify ways to build inclusive institutions for the governance of shared resources.
共有河流水电的包容性治理?构建湄公河下游流域的国际法律地理学
水电是目前全球最大的可再生能源。据国际可再生能源机构估计,为了过渡到净零排放,并阻止全球气温上升 1.5 摄氏度,目前的水力发电能力到 2050 年需要翻一番。目前已建和计划修建的大坝大多位于两个或两个以上国家共有的河流上。这就增加了国家间冲突的风险。然而,要和平开发水电,还必须考虑对当地社区的影响。这就凸显了建立包容性机构的必要性,这些机构可以调解不同规模的社区所持有的不同利益、规范和价值观。本文探讨了国际流域组织在管理共有流域法律多元化方面的作用。在全球许多流域,如湄公河下游、哥伦比亚河、赞比西河或塞内加尔河,国际流域组织承担着开发共有水资源的任务。为了了解流域组织能在多大程度上调解共有流域的法律多元化,文章对跨界水域的治理采用了国际法律地理学的方法,试图揭示法律制定过程中的边缘化和失权现象。因此,文章将法律地理学的分析范围扩展到了跨国空间的研究,在这里指的是没有固定管辖边界的复杂生态系统。然后将这种方法应用于湄公河下游流域的案例研究。研究结果表明,尽管湄公河委员会试图让受项目影响的人们参与决策,但它在很大程度上是在威斯特伐利亚主权框架内运作的,不利于更具包容性的治理形式。受项目影响的社区在很大程度上无法施加影响,只能参与其他论坛。这些论坛,或勇所说的 "反公众",与官方程序脱节。虽然这些论坛能发出边缘化的声音,并能创造出具有包容性和参与性的空间,但由于水电在全球范围内被倡导为一种清洁、气候友好型的能源形式,因此排斥性的官方决策过程仍然会产生巨大的紧张和冲突隐患。到 2050 年,水力发电量将翻一番,因此必须在全球流域建立包容性参与机构,以引导复杂的利益相关者的利益,并使那些在净零过渡中可能遭受损失的人受益。这些发现对其他共享流域也有借鉴意义,尤其是水电正在蓬勃发展的东南亚、非洲和拉丁美洲。法律地理学的国际方法可以凸显这些被隐藏和边缘化的声音,并有助于确定如何建立包容性机构来治理共有资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Frontiers in Climate
Frontiers in Climate Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
233
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信