28 July 2014: An article published by the Global Water Forum (GWF) on the 1996 Ganges Treaty between India and Bangladesh discusses problematic aspects of the treaty, including: rules for water allocation; limitations of the allocation approach; and the de facto lack of a conflict resolution mechanism.

The article calls for a basin-wide approach to water management, based on a “genuine community of interest and political will for ‘river sharing’,” which would be more likely to create mutual benefits than the current, water-sharing based approach.

In the article, titled ‘Sharing Waters vs. Sharing Rivers: The 1996 Ganges Treaty,’ Paula Hanasz of the Australian National University characterizes the treaty as a “superficial agreement about dividing waters,” created as “a response to a quirk of history and geography rather than a mutual desire to share the benefits of, and responsibilities for, the river.” Suggesting that the existing forms of “cooperative” arrangements, such as the Ganges Treaty, may sustain conflicts and exacerbate underlying tensions, the author argues that appreciating the river Ganges calls for a multilateral effort.

Describing the treaty, the author notes that it: divides water flow; does not share the value and uses of the river between the two signatories; excludes the uppermost riparian, Nepal; and lacks a whole-of-basin approach to river management. She further explains that the volumetric allocation of river flow during the dry season specified in the treaty is based on averages from flows at the Farakka Barrage in India between 1949-1988, and thus fails to account for changes in water use further upstream and consequences downstream. As a result of declining dry season discharges at the point of measurement, due to increased upstream uses for agriculture and other purposes, the lower riparian Bangladesh has, on several occasions, been left with less than its allocated share.

The author notes that, notwithstanding principles of international law adopted in the treaty, including “do no harm,” “reasonable use,” and a focus on water needs instead of rights, a mere inclusion of clauses on equitable utilization does not equal to equitable sharing.

Criticism is also directed at the Ganges Treaty for lacking a de facto conflict resolution mechanism, with its Joint Committee unable to undertake dispute resolution or recourse to mediation or arbitration, and the treaty’s failure to account for certain crises, such as drought or floods, with negative agro-ecological and economic consequences for Bangladesh.

The Global Water Forum was established in 2010 as an initiative of the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Chair in Water Economics and Transboundary Water Governance in order to make water related knowledge and resources freely available. [Publication: Sharing Waters vs. Sharing Rivers: The 1996 Ganges Treaty] [GWF Website]