Is water a source a source of conflict or cooperation? The water community will give contextual answers going both ways while journalists find appeal in the water wars theory perhaps because water as a source of peace may not make for interesting reading in newspapers. On the other hand, from the International Water Event Database developed by the Oregon State University, one can conclude that in aggregate, the outcome of interactions by riparian states is tilted more towards co-operative behaviour over international waters.
Within countries, reforms towards an integrated approach to water management have always carried the inherent risk that divergent views can become a destructive force towards non-cooperation by water users. Two capacity building networks have been busy with this issue in recent months- training water managers and basin stakeholders in conflict analysis, negotiation and mediation skills.
In India, SaciWATERs Cap-Net Network working with the Forum for Policy Dialogue on Water Conflicts in India (Forum) and a host of other partners has trained various stakeholders on conflict analysis. Since 2004, the Forum has documented different types of water conflicts in India and have now been moving forward with training. At one of their courses held earlier this year in the state of Orrisa, participants got a first- hand chance to conduct an analysis of conflict between fishermen and the state government over the use and management of Chilika Lake. One of the issues concerned the location of a new lake mouth which was opened to restore salinity regimes. To date, local village fishermen believe that they knew better where to locate this opening and opposed the state lake authority decision which was based on scientific studies. This underscores the importance of the current training work which in part aims at facilitating knowledge based dialogues.
On the other side of the world in Peru, LA-WETnet together with IPROGA (Instituto de Promoción para la Gestión del Agua) and partners have held 3 courses bringing together water resources managers as well as leaders of irrigators associations, administration boards on sanitation services, local authorities and officials from public and private companies. Together these stakeholders were able not only to identify the issues, actors, and processes for their own conflicts and but to go further and develop action plans with strategies and tools for resolving them. One of the courses was held in Apurimac where the region’s authorities are well aware of how water conflicts can escalate into violence. In 2004 they witnessed clashes between the police and residents of the neighbouring region of Ayacucho when a gold mine was planned to expand to include “Cerro Quilish”, a small mountain that has spiritual significance for locals and part of the main watershed that supplies them with water. Following the course, Apurimac’s technical committee on water resources planned to use the knowledge for further development of an Early Warning System for Water Conflict.
From the current global population and economic growth trends and the implied pressures on water resources, the work on conflict management is becoming even more important. For more information about the above conflict courses contact the Forum for Policy Dialogue on Water Conflicts in India waterconflictforum@gmail.com and Jayati Chourey jayati@saciwaters.org; and for Peru Ms Magdalena Guimac, mguimac@iproga.org.pe and Damian Indij damian.indij@gmail.com