Patterns in transboundary aquifer governance: comparative analysis of eight case studies from the perspective of efficacy

Figures & data

Table 1. Framework for the comparative analysis of institutional design in transboundary aquifer governance based on four dimensions

Dimension	Codes and statements
Normative foundations	Governance reflects principles of International Environment, Water, and Groundwater Law. Codes cover 13 principles recognized in scholarship:
	Exchange of information^a Precautionary principle Environmental conservation No significant harm^b Notification of transboundary impacts^a,b Notification of accidents^b	Social inclusion^a Reasonable and equitable use Polluter pays^b User pays^b Access to water and sanitation Integrated water resource management^a,b Conjunctive use of water resources
Objectives and baselines	Governance objective:^a governance reflects a well-defined objective in terms of the problem that it aims to address (e.g., groundwater depletion, pollution or knowledge gaps)
	Basic geospatial understanding:^a,b governance reflects a mutual understanding of aquifer dimensions and geography. Maps may be indicative of this
	Dynamic understanding of groundwater flow:^a governance reflects groundwater flow dynamics, including natural discharge/recharge and any links to other water bodies
	Pressures on groundwater sustainability: governance reflects a shared understanding of pressures (and socio-economic drivers) such as land-use conversion and technological advancement
Monitoring and adaptive capacity	Platforms and mechanisms for data sharing and integration:^a at the minimum, governance contains provisions to ensure the continuity and consistency of data records
	Governance innovation:^a governance embodies mechanisms for normative refinement and course correction. Pilots and demonstration projects are indicative of such a learning-by-doing approach
	Infrastructure for groundwater monitoring:^a^b governance provides for (or is informed by) resource monitoring infrastructure such as well networks, possibly complemented with remotely sensed data
	Hydrological models:^a governance provides for (or is informed by) a hydrological model. Numerical models facilitate calculations and projections. At least a shared conceptual model is in place
	Flexibility and contingency mechanisms:^a governance entails provisions to account for shifting priorities, emerging (climate) risks or crises, and technological development
Authority and legality	Strong normative provisions:^a governance includes strong normative provisions for prevention (or abatement) of groundwater sustainability issues such as depletion and pollution, as relevant
	Legally binding status:^a governance institution is based on legally binding provisions in an international treaty ratified by all aquifer states
	Enforcement mechanisms:^a^b governance outlines mechanisms for enforcement and/or adjudication and clearly assigns responsibilities to that effect

Notes: ^aCodes that reflect one or more of the OECD Principles. The content of the principles touches upon nearly all of the coding elements presented. Several of the principles cut across two or more dimensions. Marked here are those with the closest overlap.

^bCodes that reflect one or more of Ostrom’s eight design principles for managing the commons. The relevance of these principles may vary based on contextual issues.

Figure 1. Geographical location and key attributes of the case studies based on the Transboundary Aquifers of the World Map (IGRAC, 2021)

Table 2. Indexed scores of case aquifers use of coded institutional design elements (0.0 being no applicability of design elements and 1.0 being applicability of all design elements)

Note: Colours correspond to the values in the boxes (using heatmap functionality in Excel). Readers of the print version can view the table in colour online at https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2022.203892

Figure 2. Distribution of transboundary aquifers by spatial extent, reflecting case study heterogeneity.

Note: The Genevese belongs to the smallest 5% transboundary aquifers in the world; the Nubian Sandstone, Guaraní and the North-Western Sahara aquifer systems are among the largest 1.0%.

Table 3. Efficacy in terms of objectives of transboundary aquifer governance

	Institutional design	Efficacy in terms of (expressly stated) governance objective
		Conservation	Knowledge development	Depletion	Pollution
Abbotsford-Sumas	Multi-stakeholder mechanism	n.a.	High	n.a.	Moderate
Genevese	Permanent (scientific) committee	n.a.	n.a.	High	n.a.
Guaraní	Intergovernmental mechanism – local committees	High	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.
Hueco-Bolsón	Multi-stakeholder mechanism	n.a.	High	Moderate	n.a.
Iullemeden	Intergovernmental mechanism	n.a.	Moderate	Low	n.a.
North-Western Sahara	Intergovernmental mechanism	n.a.	Moderate	Low	n.a.
Nubian Sandstone	Permanent (scientific) committee	Insufficient data	Moderate	Low	Insufficient data
Saq-Ram	Permanent (scientific) committee	n.a.	n.a.	Insufficient data	n.a.

IGRAC (International Groundwater Resources Assessment Centre). (2021). Transboundary aquifers of the world [map. In Scale (Vol. 1, pp. 50 000 000). IGRAC, 2021.

 Google Scholar