No modern states have ever declared war over water. In fact, nations dependent on shared water sources have collaborated far more frequently than they have clashed. Nevertheless, global surveys have counted over forty hostile, militarized international actions over water—from riots to border skirmishes to larger battles—in the first six decades after World War II. This report reviews the pathways that link water resource pressures to conflict risks and describes how peacebuilding strategies such as water diplomacy can help mitigate these risks.

woman walks along a dry lake bed near the Rawal Dam in Pakistan on June 22, 2018. (B. K. Bangash/AP)
A woman walks along a dry lake bed near the Rawal Dam in Pakistan on June 22, 2018. (B. K. Bangash/AP)

Summary

Growing populations and economies, unsustainable management practices, and mounting environmental pressures are exerting increasing strains on the world’s vital freshwater resources. Resulting shortfalls between rising demands and shifting supplies could engender or exacerbate water conflicts among countries or communities attempting to ensure their share.

History furnishes little evidence of outright water wars, but violent international water-related confrontations do occur and frictions over water can contribute to fueling civil conflicts within states. A range of indirect factors including political institutions, economic conditions, and societal values and perceptions affect the relationship between water insecurity and conflict risks. Inequitable allocation of the costs and benefits of water development and inadequate access to decision-making procedures around shared waters can loom larger in generating conflict than the unequal allocation of or inadequate access to the physical resource itself.

Studies examining the actors, drivers, and contexts engaged in different types of water conflicts may help to develop early warning indicators for emerging risks and contribute to crafting tailored conflict reduction approaches and targeted peacebuilding strategies. Many of the world’s shared waters most vulnerable to potential water conflicts are marred by a dearth of effective governance mechanisms and distrust and dissension among water users that frustrate sustainable cooperation.

Water diplomacy, formal and informal engagements undertaken by state and nonstate actors not party to the water conflict, can constructively shape the context and collective decision-making frameworks for collaborative water resources management. By working to enhance the conflict parties’ water governance resources and capacities, promote cooperative decision-making processes and inclusive policy institutions, and facilitate peaceful dispute resolution, water diplomacy can contribute to building the environmental and societal resilience to sustainably manage future water resource challenges.

About the Report

This report explores water-related conflict pathways and articulates potential peacebuilding strategies to mitigate conflict risks. The report is grounded in a survey of the academic literature on natural resources conflict, case studies of three major basins, and participant interviews and documentary analyses of water diplomacy processes.

About the Author

David Michel is a senior researcher with the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. He previously served as a senior manager at the Stockholm International Water Institute. He has over twenty years of experience working with governments, civil society, and the private sector to build cooperative solutions to policy challenges posed by global environmental change.


Related Publications

A Delicate Balance: Promoting Nuclear Energy While Preventing Proliferation

A Delicate Balance: Promoting Nuclear Energy While Preventing Proliferation

Thursday, November 21, 2024

As global energy demands intensify and the urgency of addressing climate shocks mounts, the role of nuclear energy has come to the forefront of discussions for governments, businesses and those concerned about sustainable development. Just last week, the Biden administration released a plan to triple U.S. nuclear capacity by 2050. While nuclear energy promises efficiency gains and significant emissions reductions, public opinion remains divided about the tradeoffs of increased investment, the safety risks and the implications for international security. This puts the U.S. at a crossroads as it tries to navigate its role in a world with new demands for nuclear energy and heightened risks of conflict between nuclear-armed states. Such risks were highlighted this week when Russia lowered its nuclear threshold in response to new U.S. authorizations for Ukraine to use long-range weapons.

Type: Analysis

EnvironmentGlobal Policy

Why Early Warnings Are Critical for Climate Action and Conflict Prevention

Why Early Warnings Are Critical for Climate Action and Conflict Prevention

Tuesday, November 19, 2024

Amid a changing climate, understanding the interplay between extreme environmental events and conflict is only growing more important. Droughts, floods and other natural disasters can exacerbate socioeconomic vulnerabilities, highlight weaknesses in governance, disrupt livelihoods and increase perceptions of marginalization.

Type: Analysis

EnvironmentViolent Extremism

Back to the Future? Kazakhstan’s Nuclear Choice

Back to the Future? Kazakhstan’s Nuclear Choice

Thursday, October 17, 2024

Although Kazakhstan denuclearized over three decades ago when it split from the Soviet Union, the Central Asian nation held a referendum on October 6 over whether it should build a nuclear power plant. With 73% voting yes, the referendum could reverberate beyond Kazakhstan and the Central Asia region. Safe nuclear power would be a boon for Kazakhstan, decreasing its reliance on fossil fuels while increasing economic resilience and helping it to address its immense climate change challenges. There are also important U.S. interests at stake here. The U.S. and Western allies should constructively engage with Kazakhstan, including helping to build a new reactor, to avoid Russian or Chinese control of Kazakhstan’s new nuclear energy sector and its valuable uranium resources.

Type: Analysis

EnvironmentGlobal Policy

How U.S. Leadership Can Elevate the Food-Climate-Security Nexus

How U.S. Leadership Can Elevate the Food-Climate-Security Nexus

Wednesday, October 16, 2024

Today, environmental, economic and political shocks have pushed more than 250 million people into food insecurity. Climate change, extreme weather events, conflict, and supply and distribution issues are impacting what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) considers the four pillars of food security: availability, access, utilization and stability. Food insecurity can lead to social unrest, economic instability and political challenges — impacting individual countries and broader regions. Unpredictability and disruptions in food systems can open the door for food to be wielded as a weapon or source of influence by state and non-state actors. Along with the worrying human toll, these dynamics have important implications for U.S. and global security, which means that increasing the ability of global food systems to withstand these acute and slow-onset shocks is a U.S. security imperative.

Type: Analysis

Environment

View All Publications