Criteria for equitable allocations: the heart of international water conflict

Abstract At the heart of most international water conflicts is the question of ‘equitable’ allocations, criteria for which are vague and often contradictory. However, application of an equitable water‐sharing agreement along the volatile waterways of the globe is a prerequisite to hydropolitical stability. This article explores the question of equity measures for water‐sharing agreements in the context of global hydropolitics and is divided into three parts. The Introduction provides a brief summary of the general principles of equitable allocations. The second part of the paper describes the practice of water resources allocations as exemplified in the Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database ‐ a computerized database of 149 treaties relating to international water resources compiled at Oregon State University; 49 of these treaties delineate specific water allocations. The third and fourth parts of the article contrast the principles and practice of water equity. It is noticeable how rarely the general principles are explicitly invoked, particularly the extreme principles of absolute sovereignty or absolute riverain integrity. Most treaties favor existing uses, and/or guarantees to downstream riparians. It is interesting that, while many international water negotiations begin with differing legal interpretations of rights, they often shift to a needs‐based criteria for water allocations. Mostly, one is struck by the creativity of the negotiators in addressing specific language to each very specific local setting and concerns.