The institutional design of river basin organizations – empirical findings from around the world

References

• Abernethy, C., 2005. Financing river basin organizations. In: M. Svendsen, ed. Irrigation and river basin management. Options for governance and institutions. Wallingford, UK: CABI, 75–92.
   Google Scholar
• Agreement between the Federal Republic of Germany, the Republic of France and the Grand Duchess of Luxemburg regarding the Canalization of the Moselle (Moselle Navigation Agreement), signed 27 October 1956 in Luxemburg.
   Google Scholar
• Agreement on the Establishment of the Zambezi Watercourse Commission (ZAMCOM Agreement), signed 13 July 2004 in Kasane, Botswana.
   Google Scholar
• Andresen, S. and Skjaerseth, J., 1999. Can international environmental secretariats promote effective co-operation? Paper presented at the UN University's international conference on synergies and co-ordination between multilateral environmental agreements, 14–16 July 1999, Tokyo.
   Google Scholar
• Backer, E., 2006. Paper tiger meets white elephant. An analysis of the effectiveness of the Mekong River regime. Lysaker: Friedtjof Nansen Institute, FNI Report 15/2006.
   Google Scholar
• Bakker, M., 2007. Transboundary river floods: vulnerability of continents, international river basins and countries. Dissertation (PhD). Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University.
   Google Scholar
• Bauer, S., 2004. Intergovernmental treaty secretariats and policy implementation. What role for bureaucracy. Paper presented at the Uppsala Joint Sessions of the European Consortium for Political Research, 13–18 April 2004, Uppsala, Sweden.
   Google Scholar
• Bauer, S. and Biermann, F., 2007. Aktenzeichen Weltumweltpolitik. Die Rolle internationaler Verwaltungsapparate in der Bearbeitung grenzüberschreitender Umweltprobleme. In: F. Klaus Jacob, P. Busch Biermann, and P. Feindt, eds. Politik und Umwelt. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften (Politische Vierteljahresschrift Sonderhefte), 157–174.
   Google Scholar
• Bernauer, T., 1997. Managing international rivers. In: Oran R. Young, ed. Global governance. Drawing insights from the environmental experience. Cambridge: MIT Press, 155–195.
   Google Scholar
• Bernauer, T., 2002. Explaining success and failure in international river management. Aquatic Science, 64, 1–19. doi: 10.1007/s00027-002-8050-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernauer, T. and Siegfried, T., 2008. Compliance and performance in international water agreements: the case of the Naryn/Syr Dary Basin. Global Governance, 14 (4), 479–501.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biermann, F. and Bauer, S., 2004. Assessing the effectiveness of intergovernmental organizations in international environmental politics, Global Environmental Change, 14 (2), 189–193.
   Google Scholar
• Biermann, F. and Siebenhüner, B., 2009. Managers of global change. The influence of international environmental bureaucracies. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Blake, D. and Payton, A. 2009. Decision making in international organizations: an interest-based approach to voting rule selection. Paper prepared for the Research in International Politics Workshop, 16 January 2008, Columbus, OH.
   Google Scholar
• Breitmeier, H., Young, O., and Zürn, M., 2006. Analyzing international environmental regimes. From case study to database. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burton, M. and Molden, D., 2005. Making sound decisions: information needs for basin water management. In: M. Svendsen, ed. Irrigation and river basin management. Options for governance and institutions. Wallingford, UK: CABI, 51–74.
   Google Scholar
• Chenoweth, J. and Feitelson, E., 2001. Analysis of factors influencing data and information exchange in international river basins: can such exchanges be used to build confidence in cooperative management? Water International, 26 (4), 499–512. doi: 10.1080/02508060108686951
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chenoweth, J., Malano, H., and Bird, J., 2001. Integrated river basin management in the multi-jurisdictional river basins: the case of the Mekong River Basin. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 17 (3), 365–377. doi: 10.1080/07900620120065147
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conca, K., Wu, F., and Mei, C., 2006. Global regime formation or complex institution building? The principled content of international river agreements. International Studies Quarterly, 50 (2), 263–285. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2478.2006.00402.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Convention creating the Niger Basin Authority (Niger Basin Convention), signed 21 November 1980 in Faranah, Guinea.
   Google Scholar
• Convention on Cooperation for the Protection and Sustainable use of the Danube River (Danube River Protection Convention), signed 29 June 1994 in Sofia, Bulgaria.
   Google Scholar
• Convention on the Sustainable Management of Lake Tanganyika (LTA Convention), signed 12 June 2003, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
   Google Scholar
• Convention regarding the Regime of Navigation on the Danube (Danube Navigation Convention), signed 18 August 1948 in Belgrade, Serbia.
   Google Scholar
• Corbetta, R. and Long, A., 2008. Major powers and membership in international environmental agreements. Paper prepared for the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, 3–5 April, Chicago, MI.
   Google Scholar
• Curton, F., 2005. Emerging trends in water resources conflict prevention: public participation and the role of civil society. In: L. Wirkus, ed. Water development and cooperation – comparative perspective: Euphrates-Tigris and Southern Africa. Bonn: Bonn International Center for Conversion, 33–54.
   Google Scholar
• Delli Priscoli, J., 2004. What is public participation in water resources management and why is it important. Water International, 29 (2), 221–227. doi: 10.1080/02508060408691771
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dinar, S., 2004. Treaty principles and patterns: negotiations over international rivers. Thesis (PhD). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Dinar, S., 2009. Scarcity and cooperation along international rivers. Global Environmental Politics, 9 (1), 109–135. doi: 10.1162/glep.2009.9.1.109
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dinar, A. and Dinar, S., 2003. The state of the natural resources literature. Book review. Natural Resources Journal, 43 (4), 1217–1287.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dombrowsky, I., 2006. Institutions for international river management – is integrated water resources management a viable concept? IAHS IWRM 2006 Red Book. Oxfordshire: IAHS.
   Google Scholar
• Dombrowsky, I., 2007. Conflict, cooperation and institutions in international water management: an economic analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Espey, M. and Towfique, B., 2004. International bilateral water treaty formation. Water Resources Research, 40, W05S05.
   Google Scholar
• Gerlak, A.k. and Grant, K.A., 2009. The correlates of cooperative institutions for international rivers. In: T. Volgy et al., eds. Mapping the new world order. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781444306552.ch5
   Google Scholar
• Goh, E., 2007. Developing the Mekong: regionalism and regional security in China-Southeast Asian relations. London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, Adelphi Paper No. 387.
   Google Scholar
• GWP, 2000. Integrated water resources management. Stockholm: GWP TAC Background Paper No. 4.
   Google Scholar
• ICPDR, 2006. Rules of Procedures of the ICPDR, adopted at the 9th Ordinary Meeting of the ICPDR, 11–12 December 2006, Vienna, Austria.
   Google Scholar
• ICPR, 2004. Rhine & Salmon 2020. Koblenz, Germany: ICPR Secretariat.
   Google Scholar
• International Environmental Agreements (IEA) Database Project, Version 2012.1 [online]. Available from: http://iea.uoregon.edu/page.php?file=home.htm&query=static [Accessed 5 June 2013].
   Google Scholar
• International Water Law Project. Transboundary Water Management Organizations [online]. Available from: http://www.internationalwaterlaw.org/institutions/transboundary_wmos.html [Accessed 5 June 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Just, R. and Netanyahu, S., 1998. International water resource conflicts: experience and potential. In: R. Just and S. Netanyahu, eds. Conflict and cooperation on trans-boundary water resources. Boston, MA: Springer, 1–39.
   Google Scholar
• Keohane, R. O., Moravcsik, A., and Slauther, A.-M., 2000. Legalized dispute-resolution: interstate and transnational. International Organization, 54 (3), 457–488. doi: 10.1162/002081800551299
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kibaroglu, A., 2002. Building a regime for the waters of the Euphrates-Tigris river basin. London: Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Kliot, N., Shmueli, D., and Shamir, U., 2001. Institutions for management of transboundary water resources: their nature, characteristics and shortcomings. Water Policy, 3, 229–255. doi: 10.1016/S1366-7017(01)00008-3
   Google Scholar
• Koremenos, B., 2008. When, what and why do states choose to delegate. Law and Contemporary Problems, 71 (151), 151–192.
   Google Scholar
• Koremenos, B., Lipson, C., and Snidal, D., 2001. The rational design of international institutions. International Organization, 55 (4), 761–799. doi: 10.1162/002081801317193592
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kranz, N. and Vorwerk, A., 2007. Public participation in transboundary water management. Paper presented at the 2007 Amsterdam conference on the human dimensions of global environmental change, 30 March 2007, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Lautze, J., et al., 2012. International river basin organizations: variation, options and insights. Water International, 38 (1), 30–42.
   Google Scholar
• LVFO, 2005. The institutional structure and programs of the organization. Jinja, Uganda: LVFO.
   Google Scholar
• Marty, F., 2001. Managing international rivers. Problems, politics and institutions. Bern: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• McIntyre, O., 2007. Environmental protection of international watercourses under international law. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Memorandum of Understanding between the International Commission for the Protection of the Black Sea (ICPBS) and the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR) on common strategic goals, signed 26 November 2001 in Brussels, Belgium.
   Google Scholar
• Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation and Coordination between the International Sava River Basin Commission and the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River, signed 5 June 2008 in Belgrade, Serbia.
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell, R. and Keilbach, P., 2001. Situation structure and institutional design: reciprocity, coercion, and exchange. International Organization, 55 (4), 891–917. doi: 10.1162/002081801317193637
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mostert, E., 2003. Conflict and cooperation in international freshwater management: a global review. Paris: UNESCO, UNESCO IHP Technical Documents in Hydrology No. 19.
   Google Scholar
• OKACOM, 2009. Annual report 2009. Maun, Botswana: OKACOM Secretariat.
   Google Scholar
• Ostrom, E., 2005. Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton, NY: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Peterson, M., 1997. International organizations and the implementation of environmental regimes. In: O. Young, ed. Global governance. Drawing insights from the environmental experience. Cambridge: MIT Press, 115–151.
   Google Scholar
• Protocol for Sustainable Development of the Lake Victoria Basin, signed 29 November 2003 in Arusha, Tanzania.
   Google Scholar
• Raustiala, K., 2005. Form and substance in international agreements. The American Journal of International Law, 99 (3), 581–614. doi: 10.2307/1602292
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadoff, C. and Grey, D., 2002. Beyond the river: the benefits of cooperation on international rivers. Water Policy, 4, 389–403. doi: 10.1016/S1366-7017(02)00035-1
   Google Scholar
• Sadoff, C. and Grey, D., 2005. Cooperation on international rivers. A continuum for securing and sharing benefits. Water International, 30 (4), 420–427. doi: 10.1080/02508060508691886
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadoff, C., et al., 2008. Share. Managing water across boundaries. Gland: International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources.
   Google Scholar
• Schmeier, S., 2010a. Governing international watercourses – perspectives from different disciplines. A comprehensive literature review. Hertie School of Governance Working Paper No. 53, 8/2010.
   Google Scholar
• Schmeier, S., 2010b. The organizational structure of river basin organizations. Lessons learned and recommendations for the Mekong River Commission. Vientiane: MRC Technical Background Paper, April 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Schmeier, S., 2013. Governing international watercourses. River basin organizations and the sustainable governance of internationally shared rivers and lakes. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Schmeier, S., Gerlak, A., and Schulze, S., 2013. Who governs internationally shared watercourses? Clearing the muddy waters of International River Basin Organizations. Earth System Governance Working Paper No. 28, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Snidal, D., 1985. Coordination versus prisoners’ dilemma: implications for international cooperation and regimes. American Political Science Review, 79 (4), 923–942. doi: 10.2307/1956241
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song, J. and Whittington, D., 2004. Why have some countries on international rivers been successful negotiating treaties? A global perspective. Water Resources Research, 40 (5), 1–18. doi: 10.1029/2003WR002536
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tir, J. and Ackermann, J., 2009. Politics of formalized river cooperation. Journal of Peace Research, 46 (5), 623–640. doi: 10.1177/0022343309336800
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database (TFDD), n.d. RBO design database [online]. Available from: http://www.transboundarywaters.orst.edu/research/RBO/index.html [Accessed 5 June 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Underdal, A., 2002. One question, two answers. In: E. Miles et al., eds., Environmental regime effectiveness. Confronting theory with evidence. Cambridge: MIT Press, 433–465.
   Google Scholar
• Underdal, A., 2008. The organizational infrastructure of international environmental regimes. In: U. Sverdrup and J. Trondal, eds. The organizational dimension of politics. Oslo: Fagbokforlaget, 186–205.
   Google Scholar
• Wettestad, J., 1999. Designing effective environmental regimes: the key conditions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Zawahri, N., 2008. International rivers and national security: the Euphrates, Ganges-Brahmaputra, Indus, Tigris and Yarmouk rivers. Natural Resources Forum, 32 (4), 280–289. doi: 10.1111/j.1477-8947.2008.00204.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zawahri, N. and McLaughlin Mitchell, S., 2009. Fragmented governance in international rivers: negotiating bilateral versus multilateral treaties. Paper presented at the ISA annual meeting, 15–18 February 2009, New York.
   Google Scholar