Water, energy and food nexus of Indus Water Treaty (IWT) is presented in the light of water governance. The water governance doctrine refers to social, economic, administrative and political systems influencing the transboundary water use and management. Water governance means who gets what water, when and how much, and who has the right to water related benefits. Indus Water Treaty is cited to be one of the few successful settlements of boundary water basin conflicts that has stood the test of times since last six decades. Riparian states have opportunities of harvesting water, power and agriculture by compliance to accords in letter and spirit. IWT restrains both (India) and lower (Pakistan) riparian from pulling out of accord from fear of deadly consequences. IWT is founded on World Bank’s professionally prepared comprehensive terms and conditions keeping in mind future regional developments. This treaty has given control of three eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas and Sutlej) to India and three western rivers (Indus, Jhelum and Chenab) to Pakistan. IWT gives both countries genuine share of eastern/western waters for domestic use, agriculture and electricity generation using Run-of-River Plants, subject to observing minimum level of water flow into lower riparian at Head Marala Barrage. Water, energy and food nexus of this treaty bonds upper and lower riparian to comply with water governance principles. Upper riparian diverted 34 million acre feet (MAF) water out of eastern rivers before entering into Pakistan and launched run-of-river power plants spree on western rivers in last two decades. Restricting water flow to lower riparian in the name of pond filling needs attention. Unrestricted use of water in run-of-river power plants is pointed out to be a limiting factor in Indus Water Treaty. Continuum of cooperation has room for collaboration under Indus Water Treaty. India and Pakistan can sort out disputes by dialogue, in light of rights and needs, rather Harmon Doctrine.

A major water governance concern is how to coordinate the complex relationships of the water, food, and energy sectors and the resulting economic, social, and environmental consequences. Focusing on the challenges in one sector (e.g. water shortage in the water sector) and making decisions without considering other sectors will not solve these problems; rather, it will create a new problem (the decline of food production) in the food sectors. The nexus approach is a novel method to represent the interrelated challenges of the water, food, and energy sectors by considering the sectors’ policies to achieve sustainable development. The present study analyzes the social network of nexus actors in the Yazd-Ardakan aquifer, Yazd province, Iran. For this purpose, 54 partners in the nexus network were first identified in various public, private, semi-private and non-governmental organizations. Three types of interactions (knowledge and information exchange, budget transfer, and collaboration) were analyzed among the actors. The actor-network was, then, assessed at the levels of the entire network and individual actors. Then, a coherence analysis was performed by the density index at the entire network level, and the power analysis was carried out using in-degree, out-degree, betweenness, closeness, and eigenvector centrality indices at the individual actor level. Social network analysis criteria were, then, incorporated with the multi-criteria decision-making model ELECTRE I to select the key and powerful actors in the nexus network. Next, the powerful actors were identified and introduced with respect to 15 criteria employed in the social network analysis. According to the results, the power structure in the nexus network of the research area is not at equilibrium. Most of the power lies with the public sector. The water, food, and energy sectors act alone and they do not exploit their maximum organizational capacities to establish relationships with one another.

Peter G. McCornick, Seleshi B. Awulachew, Michael Abebe, 'Water?food?energy?environment synergies and tradeoffs: major issues and case studies', Water Policy, vol. 10(S1), pp.23-36, IWA Publishing, 2008

The article takes hydro-development schemes in the Upper Blue Nile Basin of Ethiopia as an example to discuss the suitability and shortcomings of nexus approaches for the analysis of complex socio-ecological transformations. Based on critical theoretical debates and extensive field research in Ethiopia, the paper broadens the nexus perspective by integrating the three analytical dimensions of time, space, and power. The empirical material comes from a case study of the Fincha-Amerti-Neshe scheme that was implemented in three consecutive stages over almost half a century, combining dams, hydro-power plants, large-scale sugar cane plantations, and a factory for sugar production. The empirical findings follow the historical stages of the scheme and their physical outcomes, which affected much more than just water, energy, and food. The paper explores socio-ecological transformations along the analytical dimensions of time, scale, and power. First, it views time and temporality as essential aspects of change and calls for a more systematic recognition of the historical context out of which development trajectories and current nexus situations have emerged. Second, it takes a cross-scalar perspective to explain how local land use is influenced by regional and global drivers. And third, it emphasizes the importance of asymmetric power structures to explain the dynamics of hydro-developments and their social consequences. In conclusion, the paper calls for a “nexus-plus” perspective that is more sensitive to the historical and cross-scalar embeddedness of hydro-development, and which enables more inclusive and fair governance of scarce resources.

Despite evidence of women’s roles and expertise in the management of water, energy, food, and the environment (WEFE), the WEFE literature is almost silent on gender issues. In the context of climate change, achieving more inclusive management of natural resources is vital; yet women continue to be underrepresented as professionals in WEFE sectors, and largely absent in leadership positions. Using Nepal as a case study, this paper explores the enduring barriers to their exclusion, and entry points for greater equity among professionals in these sectors. To do so, we draw on key informant interviews with 34 male and 31 women professionals from government, civil society, non-governmental organizations and consultants, as well as a roundtable discussion with 20 women professionals specifically focused on gender barriers in these sectors in Nepal. Drawing on Gaventa (2006)’s power cube, this paper examines how power dynamics within and between the public and the private spheres create a web of barriers that conflate to sideline women professionals. While women have reached the “closed space” as defined by Gaventa (i.e., are recruited to professional positions in WEFE sectors), different sources of “hidden” and “invisible” power at play in the public and private spheres continue to limit their participation, influence and decision-making. We argue that the continued marginalization of women professionals calls for a focus on understanding the power and intersectionality dynamics that sustain exclusion. This focus is critical for the development of strategies to increase the voice and leadership of women professionals in WEFE decision-making.