|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
161121
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
It is imperative to analyse the Chinese hydro-political behaviour in a manner that can clearly reflect the downstream concerns, so that the riparian nations manage and prevent the adverse impacts of development occurringin the upstream. The political, economic and human security concerns are to be included in the existing hydro-political framework by adopting wider diplomatic solutions. a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
180681
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper enquires into how effectively “regional transboundary water governance” functions in resolving ecological problems associated with shared water resources. It compares three cases in Asia—the Irtysh River, Aral Sea, and Mekong River basin. Previous scholarly work on the hydro-politics of these three cases within social science disciplines, especially political science and international relations, focuses heavily on the dimension of “hegemonic power disparity between state actors” (from the weaker parties’ points of view) and/or the “economic or strategic benefits of development either defending or criticizing” (from the more powerful—often the polluters’—point of view). To contribute to existing research, this paper intends to enlarge the analytical scope and use the formation of regional environmental governance to grasp a broader picture of the complexity and interconnectivity of ecological issues, regional history, and politics. For analysis, we investigated the multilevel gaps in environmental communication at three different levels, exploring both the conflictual and cooperative relationships amongst all actors involved, namely (a) state-to-state relations: hydro-hegemonism due to the power disparity in historical and political contexts; (b) society level: authoritarian environmentalism between politics and citizens; and (c) global inter-connectivity or distance from (or the absence of) the application of international norms. We argue that all three cases, albeit at various degrees, equally exhibit the potential to fill the multidimensional gaps to ensure more functional, effective, and equitable regional hydro-governance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
191878
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
China has made Yunnan Province its ‘Southern Gateway’ and the hub of its transportation corridors and energy-water nexus in Southeast Asia by incorporating the Greater Mekong Subregion into its ‘Belt and Road Initiative.’ China’s Lancang River (Upper Mekong) hydropower development generates costs and benefits for downstream countries. China dominates the Greater Mekong Subregion through institutional development, technological expertise, and financial investment; yet, despite asymmetrical power relationships, China’s Mekong neighbors guard their sovereignty and maintain substantial bargaining power. China is most successful when it embraces the ‘preferences’ it shares with them. An ongoing debate likewise undermines Beijing’s dominance among China’s stakeholders, who contest the developmental model versus the environmental sustainability model, as well as the meaning of ‘environmental protection.’
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|