Resolving water conflicts: A comparative analysis of interstate river compacts

Edella Schlager, Tanya Heikkila

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

37 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper examines compacts used by U.S. western states to engage in shared governance of interstate rivers. Compacts are viewed as inflexible, rigid governance structures incapable of responding to changing environmental and institutional settings because of the use of unanimity rules and the inability to directly regulate water users. Using data from a study of 14 western interstate river compacts we examine this claim. In particular, we explore the response of compacts to water conflicts. We find that members of compacts, closely related water agencies, and compact governments are capable of responding to conflicts. To better understand this finding, we identify the conditions under which compacts are likely to address conflicts, as well as the types of conflict solutions compact governments adopted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)367-392
Number of pages26
JournalPolicy Studies Journal
Volume37
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2009

Fingerprint

river
water
governance
conflict
analysis

Keywords

  • Conflict resolution
  • Institutional analysis and development framework
  • Interstate compacts
  • Qualitative comparative analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Public Administration
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

Resolving water conflicts : A comparative analysis of interstate river compacts. / Schlager, Edella; Heikkila, Tanya.

In: Policy Studies Journal, Vol. 37, No. 3, 2009, p. 367-392.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{76584f661cac4f42b736804f50f52fa1,
title = "Resolving water conflicts: A comparative analysis of interstate river compacts",
abstract = "This paper examines compacts used by U.S. western states to engage in shared governance of interstate rivers. Compacts are viewed as inflexible, rigid governance structures incapable of responding to changing environmental and institutional settings because of the use of unanimity rules and the inability to directly regulate water users. Using data from a study of 14 western interstate river compacts we examine this claim. In particular, we explore the response of compacts to water conflicts. We find that members of compacts, closely related water agencies, and compact governments are capable of responding to conflicts. To better understand this finding, we identify the conditions under which compacts are likely to address conflicts, as well as the types of conflict solutions compact governments adopted.",
keywords = "Conflict resolution, Institutional analysis and development framework, Interstate compacts, Qualitative comparative analysis",
author = "Edella Schlager and Tanya Heikkila",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.1111/j.1541-0072.2009.00319.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "37",
pages = "367--392",
journal = "Policy Studies Journal",
issn = "0190-292X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Resolving water conflicts

T2 - A comparative analysis of interstate river compacts

AU - Schlager, Edella

AU - Heikkila, Tanya

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - This paper examines compacts used by U.S. western states to engage in shared governance of interstate rivers. Compacts are viewed as inflexible, rigid governance structures incapable of responding to changing environmental and institutional settings because of the use of unanimity rules and the inability to directly regulate water users. Using data from a study of 14 western interstate river compacts we examine this claim. In particular, we explore the response of compacts to water conflicts. We find that members of compacts, closely related water agencies, and compact governments are capable of responding to conflicts. To better understand this finding, we identify the conditions under which compacts are likely to address conflicts, as well as the types of conflict solutions compact governments adopted.

AB - This paper examines compacts used by U.S. western states to engage in shared governance of interstate rivers. Compacts are viewed as inflexible, rigid governance structures incapable of responding to changing environmental and institutional settings because of the use of unanimity rules and the inability to directly regulate water users. Using data from a study of 14 western interstate river compacts we examine this claim. In particular, we explore the response of compacts to water conflicts. We find that members of compacts, closely related water agencies, and compact governments are capable of responding to conflicts. To better understand this finding, we identify the conditions under which compacts are likely to address conflicts, as well as the types of conflict solutions compact governments adopted.

KW - Conflict resolution

KW - Institutional analysis and development framework

KW - Interstate compacts

KW - Qualitative comparative analysis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=68349127127&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=68349127127&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2009.00319.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2009.00319.x

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:68349127127

VL - 37

SP - 367

EP - 392

JO - Policy Studies Journal

JF - Policy Studies Journal

SN - 0190-292X

IS - 3

ER -