Author Archives: jessebaltutis

Berardo, R., & Gerlak, A. K. (2012). Conflict and Cooperation along International Rivers: Crafting a Model of Institutional Effectiveness. Global Environmental Politics, 12(1), 101–120.

The effectiveness of institutions tasked with the management of international water resources is discussed by Berardo and Gerlak. They provide a framework through which effectiveness can be assessed and “conditions under which institutions are most like to foster meaningful cooperation … Continue reading

Posted in Reading Reflections, Theme 2: Transboundary Water Governance | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Dore, J., Lebel, L., & Molle, F. (2012). A framework for analysing transboundary water governance complexes, illustrated in the Mekong Region. Journal of Hydrology, 466-467, 23–36

Most useful from this article are the definitions provided for a number of important concepts found throughout the water discourse literature. For instance: Water governance: understood as a social process of dialogue, negotiation and decision-making; or, instrumentally, as a means … Continue reading

Posted in Reading Reflections, Theme 2: Transboundary Water Governance | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Furlong, K. (2006). Hidden theories, troubled waters: International relations, the “territorial trap”, and the Southern African Development Community’s transboundary waters. Political Geography, 25(4), 438–458.

Furlong’s (2006) article critiquing the IR/IO theorizing in the international watercourses literature addresses important limitations found throughout the literature. Her main critique is on the regime approach to water discourse and the territorial trap, which obscure water realities within states … Continue reading

Posted in Reading Reflections, Theme 2: Transboundary Water Governance | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The territorial trap, triadic critique of state as actor in IR/IO theorization

Considering the most recent framing of my research question, the two cases will help to illustrate how domestic policies have shaped transboundary water governance processes. Both of these examples come from Furlong (2006), and challenge the triad of the regime … Continue reading

Posted in Research Question, Theme 2: Transboundary Water Governance | Leave a comment

Research question – take 3!

Recognizing that my research focus and question was getting a little 1) convoluted, and 2) difficult to find empirical evidence for, M-L suggested a way to simplify. This is in line with what ST suggested as well last we spoke. … Continue reading

Posted in Research Question | Leave a comment

Reed, M. G., & Bruyneel, S. (2010). Rescaling environmental governance, rethinking the state: A three-dimensional review. Progress in Human Geography, 34(5), 646–653

This article provides a critical perspective on the notion of multi-level governance and the perceived ‘hollowing-out’ of the state. Though multi-level governance implies inclusion of a variety of actors at different scales, all engaged in management over a resources, or … Continue reading

Posted in Reading Reflections, Theme 1: Multilevel governance and resilience theory, Theme 2: Transboundary Water Governance | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Toly, Noah. (2011). “Cities, the environment, and global governance: A political ecological perspective” in Amen, M., Toly, N., McCarney, P., & Segbers, K. (2011). Cities and global governance: new sites for international relations. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

In this chapter, Toly makes an interesting point, similar to what Conca (2006) refers to in his critique of a regime approach to global environmental degradation. Toly states “patterns of global production, distribution, and consumption shape local distributions of environmental … Continue reading

Posted in Reading Reflections, Theme 3: Global cities and transnational networks | Leave a comment

Suhardiman, D., & Giordano, M. (2012). Process-focused analysis in transboundary water governance research. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 12(3), 299–308.

A good review paper of a series of articles from a special section in the journal. Current research directions on transboundary water governance processes are noting the role played by actors at scales above and below the formal state level; … Continue reading

Posted in Reading Reflections, Theme 2: Transboundary Water Governance | Leave a comment

Molle, F. (2008). Nirvana concepts, narratives and policy models: Insight from the water sector. Water Alternatives, 1(1), 131–156.

Nirvana concepts, narratives and models have all been used to propagate certain policies and decision-making in the water sector. Each of these ‘discursive objects’ are used to design policies and support particular agendas, for better or worse. In a nutshell, … Continue reading

Posted in Reading Reflections, Theme 2: Transboundary Water Governance | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Cohen, A., & Davidson, S. (2011). The watershed approach: challenges, antecedents, and the transition from technical tool to governance unit. Water Alternatives, 4(1), 1–14.

This article provides a very unique and interesting critique of the watershed governance approach. The authors argue that watersheds, as a governance tool, are often conflated with other governance tools, such as IWRM or ‘integration’. A number of challenges associated … Continue reading

Posted in Reading Reflections, Theme 2: Transboundary Water Governance | Leave a comment