Explore the vast range of titles available.

Warnings about climate change invariably stress water-related effects. Such effects are typically framed as both unpredictable and disruptive, and are thus said to create large new risks to the water sector demanding adaptive responses. This article examines how such responses are mediated by, and also compromised by, two dominant trends in the evolution of water governance institutions: (1) the rise of an \"integrated\" paradigm of water resources management, which has encouraged the development of more complex and interconnected water institutions, and (2) the rapidly changing political economy of water financing and investment. Each of these trends carries its own strong presumptions about what constitutes water-related risk and how such risk is properly managed. The article uses the specific example of large dam projects to illustrate how these ongoing trends in water governance shape and complicate the prospect of managing climate-water risks.

Over the past decade, the policy and scholarly communities have increasingly recognized the need for governance of water-related issues at the global level. There has been major progress in the achievement of international goals related to the provision of basic water and some progress on sanitation services. However, the water challenge is much broader than securing supply. Doubts have been raised about the effectiveness of some of the existing governance processes, in the face of trends such as the unsustainable use of water resources, the increasing pressure imposed by climate change, or the implications of population growth for water use in food and energy production. Conflicts between different water uses and users are increasing, and the state of the aquatic environment is further declining. Inequity in access to basic water and sanitation services is still an issue. We argue that missing links in the trajectories of policy development are one major reason for the relative ineffectiveness of global water governance. To identify these critical links, a framework is used to examine how core governance processes are performed and linked. Special attention is given to the role of leadership, representativeness, legitimacy, and comprehensiveness, which we take to be critical characteristics of the processes that underpin effective trajectories of policy development and implementation. The relevance of the identified categories is illustrated with examples from three important policy arenas in global water governance: the effort to address access to water and sanitation, currently through the Millennium Development Goals; the controversy over large dams; and the links between climate change and water resources management. Exploratory analyses of successes and failures in each domain are used to identify implications and propose improvements for more effective and legitimate action.

Environmental challenges create high-stakes choices in war-torn societies. Handled well, they may create a solid foundation for peace and sustainable development; handled poorly, they risk undercutting an already tenuous peace. In this article, we identify patterns and lessons from the work of the UN Environment Programme's Post-Conflict and Disaster Management Branch, which has conducted postconflict assessments in several war-torn societies over the past decade. PCDMB's experience sheds considerable light on the nature of conflict-related environmental challenges, identifies possible entry points for environmental initiatives in peacebuilding, and suggests cautions about the requirements for environmental initiatives to be peacebuilding tools. We identify four themes emerging from their work: the multiple and often indirect links between violent conflict and environmental degradation; the political dimensions of environmental assessment as a confidence-building tool; resource and environmental linkages among the different segments of war-torn economies; and the environmental dimensions of reconstituting the state, regulation, and the rule of law.

A recent study found that up to one-third of California's urban water use could be saved with current technologies, and 85% of those savings are available at lower cost than that of securing new supplies.\\n In terms of overall aid flows, water has been a second-tier priority as compared with other sectors, garnering only about 5% of total aid flows. [...]water aid tends to privilege drinking water over sanitation, new sources over existing systems, supply over demand, and resource development over ecosystem services and water quality. [...]it is critically important to tap water s cooperative, peace-building potential, on scales ranging from local communities to international rivers.

Donors have converged upon an increasingly institutionalised process of promoting post-conflict recovery. The hallmarks of this process are a Post-Conflict Needs Assessment (PCNA), a Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP), and a UN Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF). This paper examines the ability of this multi-stage process to address environmental issues. While research demonstrates that environmental governance and natural resource management are key challenges facing war-torn societies, they are often subordinated to other agendas or disappear from consideration entirely. We analyse PCNAs, PRSPs, and UNDAFs for seven cases (Afghanistan, Georgia, Haiti, Iraq, Liberia, Somalia, and Sudan) and compare them to baseline environmental assessments. We ask which types of environmental and natural resource issues garner the most attention and test whether the PCNA–PRSP–UNDAF chain sustains a consistent focus. We find that topics related to infrastructure and environmental governance are most likely to be flagged in PCNAs. In contrast, ‘environmental services’ and mining-related issues are far less likely to be identified. These oversights are problematic given the importance of good natural resource management for reconciliation and recovery, the centrality of environmental services to the livelihoods of poor people, and the role of the mining sector in fostering conflict.

This article examines the role of the United States in international institutions and practices for governing water. Water is a critical global challenge of environmental protection and human security. Water is also characteristic of a set of \"translocal\" environmental issues for which international institution building has emerged along several different fronts: development assistance initiatives, efforts to manage ongoing controversies over water privatization and large dams, the campaign to recognize water as a human right, and a framework convention on cooperation in internationally shared river basins. U.S. engagement across these initiatives reveals several patterns: the fragmented nature of U.S. policies on water, a systematic tilt toward framing water as a market commodity rather than as a human right, the late arrival of U.S. nongovernmental organizations to several important domains of global water politics, and some notable gaps between U.S. policies, at home and abroad, and evolving international concepts of best practice.

Solar radiation management (SRM) technologies would reflect a small amount of incoming solar radiation back into space before the radiation can warm the planet. Although SRM may emerge as a useful component of a global response to climate change, there is also good reason for caution. In June 2017, the Academic Working Group on Climate Engineering Governance released a policy report, “Governing Solar Radiation Management”, which developed a set of objectives to govern SRM in the near-term future: (1) keep mitigation and adaptation first; (2) thoroughly and transparently evaluate risks, burdens, and benefits; (3) enable responsible knowledge creation; and (4) ensure robust governance before any consideration of deployment. To advance the governance objectives identified above, the working group developed twelve recommendations, grouped into three clusters: (1) create politically legitimate deliberative bodies; (2) leverage existing institutions; and (3) make research transparent and accountable. This communication discusses the rationale behind each cluster and elaborates on a subset of the recommendations from each cluster.

A simple way of characterizing the world’s current environmental condition is to start with the explosive growth trends—in population, consumption, and environmentally harmful technologies—of the post–World War II era. In this view, there are simply too many people, chasing too many things, and using too many technologies that are inefficient, or toxic, or both. These trends are seen to strain against the carrying capacity of individual nations, entire regions, and, at least in the long run, the planet as a whole. The challenge implicit in this perspective follows directly. We must find a way to accommodate the needs

A simple way of characterizing the world’s current environmental condition is to start with the explosive growth trends—in population, consumption, and environmentally harmful technologies—of the post–World War II era. In this view, there are simply too many people, chasing too many things, and using too many technologies that are inefficient, or toxic, or both. These trends are seen to strain against the carrying capacity of individual nations, entire regions, and, at least in the long run, the planet as a whole. The challenge implicit in this perspective follows directly. We must find a way to accommodate the needs