Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T11:00:42.696Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Softness in the Law of International Watercourses: The (E)merging Normativities of China's Lancang-Mekong Cooperation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 March 2022

David J. Devlaeminck Open the ORCID record for David J. Devlaeminck [Opens in a new window]
David J. Devlaeminck*
Affiliation:
Chongqing University, School of Law, Chongqing (China). Email: djdevlaeminck@cqu.edu.cn.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The law of international watercourses consists mainly of a series of bilateral, multilateral, regional, and global agreements that establish binding rules through which state parties jointly manage transboundary water resources. China similarly manages its shared freshwaters through a series of bilateral agreements. Increasingly, however, it relies on non-binding soft law instruments to manage these resources with its riparian neighbours. An important example of this is the Lancang-Mekong Cooperation, a branch of the Belt and Road Initiative. Its use of soft instruments, which recognize international law and promote projects, displays evidence of merging and emerging normativities, ensuring that it is capable of playing both a supporting and a developmental role in the law of international watercourses.

Keywords

ChinaInternational water lawLancang-Mekong CooperationMekong RiverSoft lawTransboundary water
Type
Article
Information
Transnational Environmental Law , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , July 2022 , pp. 357 - 380
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The author would like to thank Patricia Wouters and Yang Liu for their comments on an earlier draft of this article and the TEL reviewers for their insightful comments.

References

1 Wolf, M. McCracken & A.T., ‘Updating the Register of International River Basins of the World’ (2019) 35(5) International Journal of Water Resources Development, pp. 732–82Google Scholar, at 733.

2 Art. 38, Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), San Francisco, CA (United States (US)), 26 June 1945, in force 24 Oct. 1945, available at: https://www.icj-cij.org/en/statute.

3 Z. Adeel et al., Water Cooperation: Views on Progress and the Way Forward (United Nations University, 2015).

4 New York, NY (US), 18 Mar. 1997, in force 17 Aug. 2014, available at: https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/1998/09/19980925%2006-30%20PM/Ch_XXVII_12p.pdf.

5 Helsinki (Finland), 17 May 1992, in force 6 Oct. 1996, available at: https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/1992/03/19920317 05-46 AM/Ch_XXVII_05p.pdf.

6 Rieu-Clarke, A., ‘Can Reporting Enhance Transboundary Water Cooperation? Early Insights from the Water Convention and the Sustainable Development Goals Reporting Exercise’ (2020) 29(3) Review of European, Comparative and International Enviromental Law, pp. 361–71Google Scholar, at 365.

7 At the time of writing, the Water Convention has 46 parties, while the Watercourses Convention has 37 parties.

8 Eckstein, G., ‘The Status of the UN Watercourses Convention: Does It Still Hold Water?’ (2020) 36(2–3) International Journal of Water Resources Development, pp. 429–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 P. Wouters & S. Vinogradov, ‘Reframing the Transboundary Water Discourse: Contextualized International Law in Practice’ (2020) 29(3) Review of European, Comparative and International Environmental Law, pp. 385–94.

10 C. Leb, Cooperation in the Law of Transboundary Water Resources (Cambridge University Press, 2013), p. 30.

11 Weil warned that this ‘blurring of the normativity threshold’ would undermine the legal certainty of international law: Weil, P., ‘Towards Relative Normativity in International Law?’ (1983) 77(3) American Journal of International Law, pp. 413–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 415. Alvarez revisits this topic in a recent AJIL symposium: Alvarez, J.E., ‘The Relativity Apocalypse is Nigh’ (2020) 114 American Journal of International Law Unbound, pp. 77–81Google Scholar.

12 In order to explain instruments beyond the sources of international law in Art. 38 of the Statute of the ICJ (n. 2 above,) Thirlway uses the term ‘quasi-legislative activity’: H. Thirlway, The Sources of International Law (Oxford University Press, 2019), p. 34. Goldman, in exploring the debate concerning ‘alternative instruments’, describes this spectrum as ‘different grades of legal normativity’: M. Goldman, ‘Inside Relative Normativity: From Sources to Standard Instruments for the Exercise of International Public Authority’ (2008) 9 German Law Journal, pp. 1865–908, at 1872. Fastenrath describes the ‘gradation in the normativity of the law’ as unavoidable, a fact of our pluralistic world: Fastenrath, U., ‘Relative Normativity in International Law’ (1993) 4(3) European Journal of International Law, pp. 305–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 338–9.

13 J. d'Aspremont, ‘Softness in International Law: A Self-Serving Quest for New Legal Materials’ (2008) 19(5) European Journal of International Law, pp. 1075–93.

14 Chinkin, C.M., ‘The Challenge of Soft Law: Development and Change in International Law’ (1989) 38(4) International and Comparative Law Quarterly, pp. 850–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 851; Dupuy, P., ‘Soft Law and the International Law of the Environment’ (1990) 12(2) Michigan Journal of International Law, pp. 420–35Google Scholar; A.E. Boyle, ‘Some Reflections on the Relationship of Treaties and Soft Law’ (1999) 48(4) International and Comparative Law Quarterly, pp. 901–13, at 901; D. Shelton, ‘Soft Law’, in D. Armstrong (ed.), Routledge Handbook of International Law (Routledge, 2009), pp. 68–80, at 72; A.T. Guzman & T.L. Meyer, ‘International Soft Law’ (2010) 2(1) Journal of Legal Analysis, pp. 171–225, at 174; D. Thürer, ‘Soft Law’, in R. Wolfrum (ed.), Max Planck Encyclopedia of International Law (Oxford University Press, 2009) pp. 269–78, at 269.

15 d'Aspremont, n. 13 above, p. 1083.

16 This includes Afghanistan, Bhutan, India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Tajikistan, and Vietnam. These shared rivers flow into three states further downstream, including Bangladesh, Cambodia, and Thailand.

17 P. Wouters & H. Chen, ‘China's “Soft-Path” to Transboundary Water Cooperation Examined in the Light of Two UN Global Water Conventions: Exploring the “Chinese Way”’ (2013) 22(6) Journal of Water Law, pp. 229–47.

18 Ibid. See also, e.g., Y. Su, ‘China's International Water Relations’, in S. McCaffrey, C. Leb & R.T. Denoon (eds), Research Handbook on International Water Law (Edward Elgar, 2019), pp. 447–62.

19 Wang, H., ‘China's Approach to the Belt and Road Initiative: Scope, Character and Sustainability’ (2019) 22(1) Journal of International Economic Law, pp. 29–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 30.

20 Ibid., p. 40.

21 A recent book collects chapters on the BRI from a variety of legal areas: G. Martinico & X. Wu, A Legal Analysis of the Belt and Road Initiative: Towards a New Silk Road? (Palgrave MacMillan, 2020).

22 M.F. McPherson, ‘China's Role in Promoting Transboundary Resources Management in the Greater Mekong Basin (GMB)’, Harvard Kennedy School, Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation, Mar. 2020, available at: https://ash.harvard.edu/files/ash/files/300675_hvd_ash_chinas_role.pdf; S. Wu, ‘The Trouble with the Lancang-Mekong Cooperation Forum’, The Diplomat, 9 Dec. 2018, available at: https://thediplomat.com/2018/12/the-trouble-with-the-lancang-mekong-cooperation-forum.

23 The pillars include political and security issues; social, cultural and people-to-people exchange; and economic and social development. The five cooperative areas include agriculture and poverty reduction, water resources, production capacity, cross-border economic cooperation, and connectivity: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the PRC, ‘Five Features of Lancang-Mekong River Cooperation’, 17 Mar. 2016, available at: https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjb_663304/zzjg_663340/yzs_663350/gjlb_663354/2787_663568/2789_663572/201603/t20160321_524720.html.

24 I.A. Ibrahim, ‘The Importance of International Water Law to the Successful Implementation of the Belt and Road Initiative: Evidence from Central Asia’, in Martinico & Wu, n. 21 above, pp. 145–70.

25 Art. 26, Vienna (Austria), 23 May 1969, in force 27 Jan. 1980, available at: https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/1_1_1969.pdf.

26 E.g., the ICJ applied the Watercourse Convention and the principle of equitable and reasonable use in its judgment in the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros case even though neither Hungary nor Slovakia were parties at the time. The Court also clearly stated in the San Juan case that Nicaragua violated its customary obligation not to cause significant harm. See Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia), Judgment, 25 Sept. 1997, ICJ Reports (1997), paras 78, 85; Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua) / Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica), Judgment, 15 Dec. 2015, ICJ Reports (2015), para. 75.

27 O. McIntyre, ‘Substantive Rules of International Water Law’, in A. Rieu-Clarke, A. Allan & S. Hendry (eds), Routledge Handbook of Water Law and Policy (Routledge, 2017), pp. 234–46, at 238.

28 Shelton, n. 14 above, p. 70.

29 ICJ Statute, n. 2 above, Art. 38(d); J.W. Dellapenna, ‘The Work of International Legal Expert Bodies’, in McCaffrey, Leb & Denoon n. 18 above, pp. 26–43, at 27. The ILC, e.g., consists of a body of international legal experts who are nominated by states. Much of its work and the soft instrumentum that it produces are on topics studied at the request of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA); see Baylis, E., ‘The International Law Commission's Soft Law Influence’ (2019) 13(6) FIU Law Review, pp. 1007–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 Baylis, n. 29 above.

31 Shelton, n. 14 above, p. 69; Thürer, n. 14 above, para. 2.

32 Boyle, n. 14 above, p. 904; Chinkin, n. 14 above, p. 858; Dupuy, n. 14 above, p. 432; Shelton, n. 14 above, p. 72.

33 Madrid (Spain), 20 Apr. 1911, available at: http://www.hlrn.org/img/documents/Declaration%20Madrid%201911.pdf.

34 Ibid., Statement of Reasons.

35 Ibid., Statement of Reasons and Art. I.

36 Ibid., Art. II(3).

37 Adopted by the Seventh International Conference of American States, Montevideo (Uruguay), 24 Dec. 1933, Art. 2, available at: http://www.fao.org/3/W9549E/w9549e06.htm#bm06.2.1 (Montivideo Declaration).

38 ILA, Statement of Principles, Resolution of Dubrovnik, Dubrovnik (Croatia), 1956, Arts III and V, available at: https://hlrn.org/img/documents/Resolution_Dubrovnik1956.pdf.

39 New York, NY (US), 7 Sept. 1958, Arts 2–4, 8 and 9, available at: https://www.internationalwaterlaw.org/documents/intldocs/ILA/ILA-Resolution_or_New_York1958.pdf.

40 Salzburg (Austria), 11 Sept. 1961, available at: https://www.internationalwaterlaw.org/documents/intldocs/IIL/IIL-Resolution_of_Salzburg.pdf (Salzburg Rules).

41 The ILA report from the 1966 meeting adopting the Helsinki Rules refers to earlier instruments, including the 1933 Montevideo Declaration (n. 37 above), the 1956 Resolution of Dubrovnik (n. 38 above), and the 1961 Salzburg Rules n. 40 above; however, they do not adopt the exact wording of those earlier instruments; see ILA, Helsinki Rules on the Uses of the Waters of International Rivers, Helsinki (Finland), 20 Aug. 1966, available at: http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/water/meetings/legal_board/2010/annexes_groundwater_paper/Annex_II_Helsinki_Rules_ILA.pdf.

42 Salman, S., ‘The Helsinki Rules, the UN Watercourses Convention and the Berlin Rules: Perspectives on International Water Law’ (2007) 34(4) Water Resources Development, pp. 625–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 630.

43 UNGA Res. 2669, ‘Progressive Development and Codification of the Rules of International Law relating to International Watercourses’, 8 Dec. 1970, UN Doc. A/CN.4/244/Rev.1, available at: http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/Res/2669(XXV).

44 Boyle, n. 14 above, p. 905; Guzman & Meyer, n. 14 above, pp. 174–5; Shelton, n. 14 above, p. 74.

45 Seoul (South Korea), 30 Aug. 1986, available at: https://www.internationalwaterlaw.org/documents/intldocs/ILA/ILA-Complementary_Rules_Applicable_to_International_Water_Resources-Seoul1986.pdf.

46 Seoul (South Korea), 30 Aug. 1986, available at: https://www.internationalwaterlaw.org/documents/intldocs/ILA/ILA-Seoul_Rules_on_International_Groundwaters-1986.pdf.

47 UN Doc. GC.6/CRP.2, 19 May 1978, available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20691944?seq=1.

48 Shelton, n. 14 above, p. 72.

49 Adopted by the UN Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janerio (Brazil), 3–14 June 1992, available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf.

50 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, adopted by the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro (Brazil), 3–14 June 1992, available at: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_CONF.151_26_Vol.I_Declaration.pdf.

51 O. McIntyre, Environmental Protection of International Watercourses under International Law (Ashgate, 2007), pp. 239–43.

52 Boyle, n. 14 above, p. 903; Shelton, n. 14 above, p. 72.

53 S. Biba, ‘China's “Old” and “New” Mekong River Politics: The Lancang-Mekong Cooperation from a Comparative Benefit Sharing Perspective’ (2018) 43(5) Water International, pp. 622–41.

54 Wang, n. 19 above, p. 35.

55 Boyle, n. 14 above, p. 903; Guzman & Meyer, n. 14 above, p. 198; Shelton, n. 14 above, p. 77.

56 Wang, n. 19 above, p. 43.

57 For an occasionally updated account of the LMC and its various water-related activities, see D.J. Devlaeminck, ‘Timeline of the Lancang-Mekong Cooperation (LMC) Mechanism’, Academia.edu, Feb. 2021, available at: https://chongqing.academia.edu/DavidDevlaeminck.

58 This MoU states that it ‘does not create any rights or legally binding obligations upon both Parties and does not constitute a treaty under international law’: Memorandum of Understanding between the Mekong River Commission (MRC) Secretariat and the Lancang-Mekong Water Resources Cooperation Center (LMC-MRC MoU), Beijing (China), 19 Dec. 2019, available at: http://www.lmcwater.org.cn/cooperative_achievements/important_documents/files/202008/t20200825_162724.html.

59 X. Jinping, ‘Carry Forward the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence To Build a Better World through Win-Win Cooperation’, People's Daily, 28 June 2014, available at: http://en.people.cn/n/2014/0710/c90883-8753393.html.

60 Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, Agreement (with exchange of notes) on Trade and Intercourse between Tibet Region of China and India, Beijing (China), 29 Apr. 1954, available at: https://www.mea.gov.in/bilateral-documents.htm?dtl/7807/Agreement+on+Trade+and+Intercourse+with+Tibet+Region.

61 Vientiane Declaration of the Third Mekong-Lancang Cooperation (MLC) Leaders’ Meeting, Vientiane (Laos), 24 Aug. 2020, para. 1.2, available at: http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-08/24/c_139314536.htm.

62 H. Xue, ‘Chinese Contemporary Perspectives on International Law: History, Culture and International Law’ (2011) 355(41) Recueil des Cours, pp. 51–233, at 106.

63 T. Ginsburg, ‘Eastphalia as the Perfection of Westphalia’ (2010) 17(1) Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, pp. 27–45, at 28.

64 Joint Press Communiqué of the First Lancang-Mekong Cooperation Foreign Minister's Meeting (1st Foreign Ministers’ Meeting), Jinghong (China), 12 Nov. 2015, para. 4, available at: http://www.lmcwater.org.cn/cooperative_achievements/important_documents/files/202008/t20200825_162710.html; Sanya Declaration of the First Lancang-Mekong Cooperation (LMC) Leaders’ Meeting, Sanya (China), 23 Mar. 2016, para. 10, available at: http://www.lmcwater.org.cn/cooperative_achievements/important_documents/files/202009/t20200908_163007.html; Joint Press Communiqué of the Second Lancang-Mekong Cooperation Foreign Minister's Meeting (2nd Foreign Ministers’ Meeting), Siem Reap (Cambodia), 23 Dec. 2016, para. 13, available at: http://www.lmcwater.org.cn/cooperative_achievements/important_documents/files/202008/t20200825_162711.html; Phnom Penh Declaration of the Second Lancang-Mekong Cooperation (LMC) Leaders’ Meeting, Phnom Penh (Cambodia), 10 Jan. 2018, para. 11, available at: http://www.lmcwater.org.cn/cooperative_achievements/important_documents/files/202009/t20200908_163047.html; Five-Year Plan of Action on Lancang-Mekong Cooperation (2018–2022), 11 Jan. 2018, para. II(2), available at: http://www.lmcwater.org.cn/cooperative_achievements/important_documents/files/202008/t20200825_162709.html; Five-Year Action Plan on Lancang-Mekong Water Resources Cooperation (2018–2022), 3 May 2018, available at: http://www.lmcwater.org.cn/cooperative_achievements/important_documents/files/202008/t20200825_162726.html; Joint Press Communiqué of the Fourth Mekong-Lancang Cooperation (MLC) Foreign Ministers’ Meeting (4th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting), Luang Prabang (Laos), 17 Dec. 2018, para. 17, available at: http://www.lmcwater.org.cn/cooperative_achievements/important_documents/files/202008/t20200825_162713.html; Joint Press Communiqué of the Fifth Mekong-Lancang Cooperation Foreign Ministers’ Meeting (5th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting), Vientiane (Laos), 20 Feb. 2020, para. 17, available at: http://www.lmcwater.org.cn/cooperative_achievements/important_documents/files/202008/t20200825_162714.html; Joint Statement on Enhancing Sustainable Development Coopertion of the Lancang-Mekong Countries (6th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting), Chongqing (China), 9 June 2021, para. 1, available at: http://english.www.gov.cn/archive/ministrydocument/202106/09/content_WS60c029edc6d0df57f98daf78.html.

65 H. Wang, ‘The Belt and Road Initiative Agreements: Characteristics, Rationale, and Challenges’ (2020) 20(3) World Trade Review, pp. 1–24, at 15.

66 Joint Press Communiqué of the Third Lancang-Mekong Cooperation Foreign Minister's Meeting, Dali (China), 15 Dec. 2017, available at: http://www.lmcwater.org.cn/cooperative_achievements/important_documents/files/202008/t20200825_162712.html; Joint Statement of the Ministerial Meeting of Lancang-Mekong Water Resources Cooperation (Water Ministers’ Meeting), Beijing (China), 17 Dec. 2019, available at: http://www.lmcwater.org.cn/cooperative_achievements/important_documents/files/202008/t20200825_162723.html; 1st Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above;

67 Sanya Declaration, n. 64 above, para. 10; 2nd Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above, para. 13; Phnom Penh Declaration, n. 64 above, para. 11; 4th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above, para. 17; 5th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above, para. 17; 6th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above, para. 1.

68 T. Wang, ‘International Law in China: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives’ (1990) 221(195) Recueil des Cours, pp. 195–369, at 265.

69 Vientiane Declaration, n. 61 above, para. 4.

70 Given the timing of this meeting, this is likely to have been in response to ongoing trade frictions between China and the US; see 5th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above, para. 17.

71 Sanya Declaration, n. 64 above, Preamble and para. 11.

72 ‘Early harvest’ projects were first mentioned in the Sanya Declaration (n. 64 above, para. 24). At the 2019 Ministerial Meeting, LMC states established a list of projects proposed by various states; see ‘List of Proposed Projects on Lancang-Mekong Water Resources Cooperation’, Lancang-Mekong Water Resources Cooperation Information Sharing Platform, 17 Dec. 2019, available at: http://www.lmcwater.org.cn/cooperative_achievements/major_events/events_a/news_c/202008/t20200831_162823.html. The 6th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting (n. 64 above, para. 9) also mentions the ‘List of the Projects Supported by LMC Special Fund of 2021’.

73 These include the Joint Communiqués of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Foreign Ministers’ Meetings. They may mention the word ‘water’ or the ‘river’, but this is in passing or related to, e.g., the work of a joint working group or as a priority area of the LMC.

74 The 6 instruments that refer to water in the context of projects include the Vientiane Declaration, n. 61 above, para. 7; 1st Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above, para. 8; 5th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above, para. 10; Five-Year Action Plan on Water Resources, n. 64 above; Five-Year Plan of Action, n. 64 above; Water Ministers’ Meeting, n. 66 above. Those that do not mention water resources in relation to projects include the Sanya Declaration, n. 64 above; the Phnom Penh Declaration, n. 64 above; 6th Foreign Ministers' Meeting, n. 64 above; LMC-MRC MoU, n. 58 above.

75 N. 77 below.

76 There is also a series of river-related agreements, which includes the 2000 Agreement on Commercial Navigation along the Lancang-Mekong River (China, Laos, Myanmar, and Thailand). While these agreements are relevant to the river, they do not seek to govern the shared water resource.

77 Chiang Rai (Thailand), 4 Apr. 1995 (Mekong Agreement), available at: https://www.mrcmekong.org/assets/Publications/MRC-1995-Agreement-n-procedures.pdf.

78 VCLT, n. 25 above, Art. 36.

79 See n. 26 above.

80 J.W. Dellapenna, ‘The Customary International Law of Transboundary Waters’ (2001) 1(3/4) International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, pp. 264–305, at 265.

81 Mekong Agreement, n. 77 above.

82 R. Kinna & A. Rieu-Clarke, The Governance Regime of the Mekong River Basin: Can the Global Water Conventions Strengthen the 1995 Mekong Agreement? (Brill, 2017), p. 20; International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), ‘A Window of Opportunity for the Mekong Basin: The UN Watercourses Convention as a Basis for Cooperation (A Legal Anaylsis of How the UN Watercourses Convention Complements the Mekong Agreement’ (2016), p. 20, available at: https://www.iucn.org/sites/dev/files/mekong.pdf.

83 Watercourses Convention, n. 4 above.

84 O. McIntyre, ‘The World Court's Ongoing Contribution to International Water Law: The Pulp Mills Case between Argentina and Uruguay’ (2011) 3(2) Water Alternatives, pp. 123–44, at 123.

85 These procedures can be found attached to the Mekong Agreement, n. 77 above.

86 Kinna & Rieu-Clarke, n. 82 above, p. 61.

87 MRC, ‘China Signs Data-Sharing Agreement’, Mekong News, Apr.–June 2002, available at: http://www.mrcmekong.org/assets/Publications/Mekong-News/issue20022AprJun.pdf.

88 MRC, ‘China to Provide the Mekong River Commission with Year-round Water Data’, 22 Oct. 2020, available at: https://www.mrcmekong.org/news-and-events/news/china-to-provide-the-mekong-river-commission-with-year-round-water-data.

89 Sanya Declaration, n. 64 above, para. 10; Phnom Penh Declaration, n. 64 above, para. 2.5; Vientiane Declaration, n. 61 above, para. 7; 5th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above, para. 10; 6th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above, para. 2; Five-Year Plan of Action, n. 64 above, para. 42; Five-Year Action Plan on Water Resources, n. 64 above, paras 3.1, 3.2 and 5.3; Water Ministers’ Meeting, n. 66 above, paras 2–4; LMC-MRC MoU, n. 58 above, paras 4 and 5.

90 Watercourses Convention, n. 4 above (emphasis added).

91 5th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above, para. 10 (emphasis added).

92 This report was released by the Lower Mekong Initiative, funded by the US Government; see A. Basist & C. Williams, Monitoring the Quantity of Water Flowing through the Upper Mekong Basin under Natural (Unimpeded) Conditions (Sustainable Infrastructure Partnership & Lower Mekong Initiative, 2020), available at: https://data.opendevelopmentmekong.net/library_record/monitoring-the-quantity-of-water-flowing-through-the-upper-mekong-basin-under-natural-unimpeded-con. This report created significant debate in the region, with multiple regional responses, including MRC, Understanding the Mekong River's Hydrological Conditions: A Brief Commentary Note on the ‘Monitoring the Quantity of Water Flowing through the Upper Mekong Basin under Natural (Unimpeded) Conditions’ Study by Alan Basist and Claude Williams (Mekong River Commission, 2020), available at: https://www.mrcmekong.org/assets/Publications/Understanding-Mekong-River-hydrological-conditions_2020.pdf; M. Kallio & A. Fallon, ‘Are China's Dams on the Mekong Causing Downstream Drought? The Importance of Scientific Debate’, Center for Social Development Studies, 28 Apr. 2020, available at: https://www.csds-chula.org/publications/2020/4/28/critical-nature-are-chinas-dams-on-the-mekong-causing-downstream-drought-the-importance-of-scientific-debate; T. Ketelsen, T.A. Räsänen & J. Sawdon, ‘Did China Turn Off the Lower Mekong? Why Data Matters for Cooperation’, Southeast Asia Globe, 13 May 2020, available at: https://southeastasiaglobe.com/china-mekong-river-flow.

93 6th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above.

94 5th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above, para. 10; 6th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above, para. 2.

95 Sanya Declaration, n. 64 above, para. 10.

96 It should be noted that mention of the mechanism at this stage was in relation only to flood, drought, and emergency situations: Five-Year Action Plan, n. 64 above, para. 1d.

97 MRC, n. 88 above; Vientiane Declaration, n. 61 above, para. 7.

98 Lancang-Mekong Water Resources Cooperation Information Sharing Platform, ‘Hydrological Data’, 2020, available at: http://www.lmcwater.org.cn/water_information/hydrological_data.

99 Wouters & Chen, n. 17 above, p. 237.

100 Five-Year Action Plan on Water Resources, n. 64 above, para. 5.6.

101 Ibid., para. 5.3.

102 O. Spijkers, X. Li & L. Dai, ‘Sustainable Development in China's International and Domestic Water Law’ (2016) 24(5–6) Journal of Water Law, pp. 207–19, at 208.

103 1st Foreign Ministers' Meeting, n. 64 above, paras 2, 4; 2nd Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above, paras 4 and 9; 5th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above, para. 10; 6th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, n. 64 above, para. 2; Sanya Declaration, n. 64 above; Phnom Penh Declaration, n. 64 above; Vientiane Declaration, n. 61 above, para. 10; Five-Year Plan of Action, n. 64 above, para. 42; Five-Year Action Plan on Water Resources, n. 64 above, para. 3.2; LMC-MRC MoU, n. 58 above, para. 2; Water Ministers’ Declaration, n. 66 above.

104 Morgera analyzes the concept of benefit sharing via international environmental law, human rights law, and the law of the sea. Her analysis, however, includes limited discussion of the law of international watercourses: E. Morgera, ‘The Need for an International Legal Concept of Fair and Equitable Benefit Sharing’ (2016) 27(2) European Journal of International Law, pp. 353–83, at 373–4.

105 Paisley, R., ‘Adversaries into Partners: International Water Law and the Equitable Sharing of Downstream Benefits’ (2002) 3(2) Melbourne Journal of International Law, pp. 280–300Google Scholar, at 288.

106 D.T. Tarlock & P. Wouters, ‘Are Shared Benefits of International Waters an Equitable Apportionment?’ (2007) 18(3) Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy, pp. 523–36, at 527.

107 Ibid., p. 523.

108 Morgera, n. 104 above, p. 356.

109 Washington DC (US), 17 Jan. 1961, available at: http://gis.nacse.org/tfdd/tfdddocs/246ENG.pdf.

110 Paisley, n. 105 above, pp. 287–8.

111 C.W. Sadoff & D. Grey, ‘Cooperation on International Rivers’ (2005) 30(4) Water International, pp. 420–7, at 422.

112 Paisley, n. 105 above, p. 287.

113 McIntyre, O., ‘Benefit-Sharing and Upstream/Downstream Cooperation for Ecological Protection of Transboundary Waters: Opportunities for China as an Upstream State’ (2015) 40(1) Water International, pp. 48–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 52.

114 C. Middleton & D.J. Devlaeminck, ‘Reciprocity in Practice: The Hydropolitics of Equitable and Reasonable Utilization in the Lancang-Mekong Basin’ (2020) 21(2) International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, pp. 235–53, at 247.

115 Morgera (n. 104 above, p. 383) identifies that benefit sharing is emerging as a customary rule in some areas of international law, such as deep-sea mining and bioprospecting.

116 Sanya Declaration, n. 64 above, Preamble para. 2; Phnom Penh Declaration, n. 64 above, para. 1.

117 Water Ministers’ Meeting, n. 66 above, para. 2.

118 Five-Year Action Plan on Water Resources, n. 64 above, para. 5.7.

119 Ibid., paras 6.1–6.3.

120 Ibid., para. 6.4.

121 Lancang-Mekong Water Resources Cooperation Information Sharing Platform, ‘Projects’, 2021, available at: http://www.lmcwater.org.cn/cooperative_achievements/collaborative_projects.

122 List of Proposed Projects, n. 72 above.

123 Sanya Declaration, n. 64 above, para. 23; Embassy of the People's Republic of China in the Kingdom of Thailand, ‘China and Thailand Sign the MoU on Lancang-Mekong Cooperation Special Fund Projects’, 15 Oct. 2018, available at: http://www.chinaembassy.or.th/eng/ztgx/t1604490.htm.

124 A. Westerman, ‘In Laos, a Chinese-Funded Railway Sparks Hope for Growth – and Fears of Debt’, NPR, 26 Apr. 2019, available at: https://www.npr.org/2019/04/26/707091267/in-laos-a-chinese-funded-railway-sparks-hope-for-growth-and-fears-of-debt.

125 Guzman & Meyer, n. 14 above, p. 174.

126 Ibid., p. 193.

127 MRC, n. 87 above.

128 See n. 91 above.

129 MRC, n. 87 above.

130 Vientiane Declaration, n. 61 above, para. 7.

131 MRC, n. 88 above.

132 Ho, S., ‘China's Transboundary River Policies towards Kazakhstan: Issue-Linkages and Incentives for Cooperation Water International’ (2017) 42(2) Water International, pp. 142–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Devlaeminck, D.J., ‘The Legal Principle of Reciprocity and China's Transboundary Water Treaty Practice’ (2018) 2(2) Chinese Journal of Environmental Law, pp. 195–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 211.

133 Shelton, n. 14 above, p. 69.

134 Boyle, n. 14 above, p. 903; Shelton, n. 14 above, p. 72.

135 See, e.g., Phnom Penh Declaration, n. 64 above, para. 8; Vientiane Declaration, n. 61 above, para. 7; Five-Year Action Plan, n. 64 above, para. 8.

136 LMC-MRC MoU, n. 58 above.

137 Biba, n. 53 above, p. 638; S. Po & C.B. Primiano, ‘Explaining China's Lancang-Mekong Cooperation as an Institutional Balancing Strategy: Dragon Guarding the Water’ (2021) 75(3) Australian Journal of International Affairs, pp. 323–40.

138 Mekong Agreement, n. 77 above.

139 Water Ministers’ Meeting, n. 66 above, para. 12 (emphasis added).

140 At the time of writing, the data is not shared in real time, with a slight delay in posting information; see Hydrological Data n. 98 above.

141 MRC, ‘MRC Data Portal’, available at: https://portal.mrcmekong.org/monitoring/river-monitoring-telemetry.

142 E.g., Mekong Agreement, n. 77 above, Art. 4.

143 Biba, n. 53 above, p. 638; Middleton & Devlaeminck, n. 114 above, p. 248.

144 See, e.g., Water Convention, n. 4 above, Art. 5c.

145 C. Nedopil, ‘Countries of the Belt and Road Initiative’, Green Belt and Road Initiative Center, 2021, available at: https://green-bri.org/countries-of-the-belt-and-road-initiative-bri.

146 ‘China's Plans for Gigantic Brahmaputra Dam Strains Relations with India Further’, The Third Pole, 4 Dec. 2020, available at: https://www.thethirdpole.net/en/regional-cooperation/chinas-plans-for-gigantic-brahmaputra-dam-strains-relations-with-india-further.

147 S. Jie & S. Cao, ‘Yarlung Zangbo River Hydropower Project Nailed with the Passing of 14th Five-Year Plan, but Won't Be Completed Soon’, Global Times, 13 Mar. 2021, available at: https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202103/1218241.shtml.

148 Memorandum of Understanding between the Ministry of Water Resources of the Republic of India and Ministry of Water Resources of the People's Republic of China upon Provision of Hydrological Information of the Yaluzangbu/Brahmaputra River in Flood Season by China to India, New Delhi (India), 20 May 2013, available at: http://mea.gov.in/Portal/LegalTreatiesDoc/CH13B0811.pdf.

149 Memorandum of Understanding between the Ministry of Water Resources of the People's Republic of Bangladesh and the Ministry of Water Resources of the People's Republic of China upon Provision of Hydrological Information of the Yaluzangbu/Brahmaputra River in Flood Season by China to Bangladesh, 16 Sept. 2008 (on file with the author).

150 UNGA Res. 70/1, ‘Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’, 25 Sept. 2015, UN Doc. A/RES/70/1, available at: https://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E.

151 Guide to Reporting under the Water Convention as a Contribution to SDG Indicatory 6.5.2 (UN Economic Commission for Europe, 2020), p. 14, available at: https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2021-02/ece_mp.wat_60_eng_web.pdf.

152 See, e.g., Reflections on Building More Inclusive Global Governance: Ten Insights into Emerging Practice (Chatham House, 2021), available at: https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/2021-04/2021-04-15-reflections-building-inclusive-global-governance.pdf; ILA, ‘The Role of International Law in Sustainable Natural Resources Management for Development’, 79th Conference of the ILA, Kyoto (Japan), 29 Nov.–13 Dec. 2020, available at: https://ila.vettoreweb.com/Storage/Download.aspx?DbStorageId=25359&StorageFileGuid=63fc224f-0c60-4125-8411-3c76f5abfd6a.

153 Weil, n. 11 above, p. 415.