Demand, supply, and restraint: Determinants of domestic water conflict and cooperation
By Tobias Böhmelt, T. Bernauer, Halvard Buhaug, Nils Petter Gleditsch, T. Tribaldos, Gerdis Wischnath. 2014
116 citations recorded by the source corpus.
This article focuses on one of the most likely empirical manifestations of the “environment-conflict” claim by examining how demand for and supply of water may lead to domestic water conflict. It also studies what factors may reduce the risk of conflict and, hence, induce cooperation. To this end, the article advances several theory-based arguments about the determinants of water conflict and cooperation, and then analyzes time-series cross-section data for 35 Mediterranean, Middle Eastern, and Sahel countries between 1997 and 2009. The empirical results show that demand-side drivers, such as population pressure, agricultural productivity, and economic development are likely to have a stronger impact on water conflict risk than supply-side factors, represented by climate variability. The analysis also reveals that violent water conflicts are extremely rare, and that factors conducive to restraint, such as stable political conditions, may stimulate cooperation. Overall, these results suggest that the joint analysis of demand, supply, and restraint improves our ability to account for domestic water-related conflict and cooperation.
Subfields: Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law, Sociology and Political Science
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0a2394be11c6dfec42909ecc962c5c512807eba3
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
In Sociology and Political Science
Citations in the corpus
- Climate variability, food production shocks, and violent conflict in Sub-Saharan Africa (2015, background): “…changing ecological conditions, scarcity, and the tensions these may engender (Salehyan 2008); crises may promote cooperation rather than conflict (Böhmelt et al 2014); hunger and deprivation may produce ineffective fighters (Adano et al 2012); or the adversely affected population may lack the…”