Priority of Uses in International Water Law

The <i>raison d’être</i> of international water law is that it provides States with a toolkit to equip them to deal with complex problems relating to the joint use and sustainable management of transboundary freshwater resources. The principle of equitable and reasonable utilization is o...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Chenjun Zheng, Otto Spijkers
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2021-02-01
Series:Sustainability
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1567
id doaj-989caabf90bd41c6bf930927e0e4bbcd
record_format Article
spelling doaj-989caabf90bd41c6bf930927e0e4bbcd2021-02-03T00:05:36ZengMDPI AGSustainability2071-10502021-02-01131567156710.3390/su13031567Priority of Uses in International Water LawChenjun Zheng0Otto Spijkers1China Institute of Boundary and Ocean Studies (CIBOS), Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, ChinaChina Institute of Boundary and Ocean Studies (CIBOS), Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, ChinaThe <i>raison d’être</i> of international water law is that it provides States with a toolkit to equip them to deal with complex problems relating to the joint use and sustainable management of transboundary freshwater resources. The principle of equitable and reasonable utilization is one such tool in this toolkit. When applying the equitable and reasonable utilization principle to a specific transboundary watercourse, States sharing that watercourse must decide which water uses are more important than others. But the general rule is that no water use takes <i>a priori</i> priority over others (this is the so-called no-inherent-priority rule). This paper examines three ways in which this no-inherent-priority rule can be relativized, by recognizing a certain degree of priority to certain categories of water uses. Based on an assessment of previous State practice, it is suggested that (1) existing uses enjoy a certain degree of priority over new uses; that water uses that are (2) more beneficial to a greater number of people and are less damaging to other uses and the freshwater ecosystems, enjoy priority; and that water uses that (3) immediately satisfy vital human water needs enjoy priority. States need some general guidance in identifying which water uses normally take priority in defined circumstances, and this paper provides such guidance, thereby making the tool more effective. States can decide to derogate from these general rules if the circumstances so require; they are, of course, not legally binding on them.https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1567international water lawpriority of usesequitable and reasonable utilization
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Chenjun Zheng
Otto Spijkers
spellingShingle Chenjun Zheng
Otto Spijkers
Priority of Uses in International Water Law
Sustainability
international water law
priority of uses
equitable and reasonable utilization
author_facet Chenjun Zheng
Otto Spijkers
author_sort Chenjun Zheng
title Priority of Uses in International Water Law
title_short Priority of Uses in International Water Law
title_full Priority of Uses in International Water Law
title_fullStr Priority of Uses in International Water Law
title_full_unstemmed Priority of Uses in International Water Law
title_sort priority of uses in international water law
publisher MDPI AG
series Sustainability
issn 2071-1050
publishDate 2021-02-01
description The <i>raison d’être</i> of international water law is that it provides States with a toolkit to equip them to deal with complex problems relating to the joint use and sustainable management of transboundary freshwater resources. The principle of equitable and reasonable utilization is one such tool in this toolkit. When applying the equitable and reasonable utilization principle to a specific transboundary watercourse, States sharing that watercourse must decide which water uses are more important than others. But the general rule is that no water use takes <i>a priori</i> priority over others (this is the so-called no-inherent-priority rule). This paper examines three ways in which this no-inherent-priority rule can be relativized, by recognizing a certain degree of priority to certain categories of water uses. Based on an assessment of previous State practice, it is suggested that (1) existing uses enjoy a certain degree of priority over new uses; that water uses that are (2) more beneficial to a greater number of people and are less damaging to other uses and the freshwater ecosystems, enjoy priority; and that water uses that (3) immediately satisfy vital human water needs enjoy priority. States need some general guidance in identifying which water uses normally take priority in defined circumstances, and this paper provides such guidance, thereby making the tool more effective. States can decide to derogate from these general rules if the circumstances so require; they are, of course, not legally binding on them.
topic international water law
priority of uses
equitable and reasonable utilization
url https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1567
work_keys_str_mv AT chenjunzheng priorityofusesininternationalwaterlaw
AT ottospijkers priorityofusesininternationalwaterlaw
_version_ 1724290306647523328