Trust is frequently invoked to explain cooperation or conflict in interstate relations over shared water resources. Drawing on qualitative research in the Sava River Basin in Southeastern Europe and the Syrdarya River Basin in Central Asia, this article suggests three key dimensions through which trust can be better understood – its sources, levels, and intensities. We combine these three dimensions, or angles, into a Trust Angles Framework that builds on existing conceptualisations and provides an empirically grounded analytical lens for examining trust as a multidimensional and dynamic process. Our findings indicate how different sources of trust (risk-minimising, value-shaping, and psychosocial), governance levels (interpersonal, interorganisational, interstate), and varying intensities (from mistrust to high trust) interact unevenly over time. The Sava case illustrates how cooperation can emerge through strong interorganisational and interpersonal trust despite persistent interstate mistrust, while the Syrdarya case reveals how high-level rapprochement may not translate into stronger interorganisational or interpersonal trust when institutional reliability remains weak. By foregrounding trust as a relational, historically embedded, and spatially differentiated practice, the article contributes to scholarship on transboundary water governance and debates in international relations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sharipova et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: