IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i3p1503-d737018.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transboundary Water Cooperation in the Post-Cold War Era: Spatial Patterns and the Role of Proximity

Author

Listed:
  • Ziming Yan

    (Institute for Global Innovation and Development, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China
    John. F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA)

  • Xiaojuan Qiu

    (School of Politics and International Relations, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China
    Amsterdam Institute for Social Science Research (AISSR), University of Amsterdam, 1001 NE Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Debin Du

    (Institute for Global Innovation and Development, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China)

  • Seamus Grimes

    (Whitaker Institute for Innovation and Societal Change, National University of Ireland, H91 TK33 Galway, Ireland)

Abstract

Transboundary water cooperation (TWC) is an important theme of international cooperation. We conducted macro-level research on TWC from the perspective of inter-country relations and constructed a theoretical framework in which multidimensional proximity influences the formation of global TWC. We explained how multidimensional proximity and the constituent elements comprehensively influence the cooperative willingness and ability of actors, which directly drive the generation of global TWC. During the empirical research phase, we constructed the TWC frequency and intensity networks based on historical TWC events data from 1992 to 2013. By using social network analysis and QAP regression analysis, the spatial structure and proximity effect of water cooperation linkages are examined. It can be found that: (1) the reconstruction of territorial space on the eve of the end of the Cold War led to the peak of water cooperation events in 1992. The overall scale of events in the Post-Cold War era was relatively high and fluctuated steadily. (2) Water cooperation linkages have distinct spatial heterogeneity and are concentrated in the Eurasian and the African continents. Water cooperation is sensitive to geographical distance, and high-intensity water cooperation linkages exist in only a few areas. (3) China, Egypt, Germany, the United States, and Russia have prominent positions in the network. The United States, Japan, and other extra-regional powers actively participated in TWC in the Eastern Hemisphere. (4) The regression results show that geographical, economic, organizational, and colonial proximity significantly affect the intensity of water cooperation among countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Ziming Yan & Xiaojuan Qiu & Debin Du & Seamus Grimes, 2022. "Transboundary Water Cooperation in the Post-Cold War Era: Spatial Patterns and the Role of Proximity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-19, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:3:p:1503-:d:737018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/3/1503/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/3/1503/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zeyang Bian & Dan Liu, 2021. "A Comprehensive Review on Types, Methods and Different Regions Related to Water–Energy–Food Nexus," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-24, August.
    2. Fang Li & Feng-ping Wu & Liu-xin Chen & Yue Zhao & Xiang-nan Chen & Zhi-ying Shao, 2020. "Fair and Reasonable Allocation of Trans-Boundary Water Resources Based on an Asymmetric Nash Negotiation Model from the Satisfaction Perspective: A Case Study for the Lancang–Mekong River Bain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-20, October.
    3. Melissa McCracken & Aaron T. Wolf, 2019. "Updating the Register of International River Basins of the world," International Journal of Water Resources Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(5), pages 732-782, September.
    4. Pieter W. Heringa & Edwin Horlings & Mariëlle van der Zouwen & Peter van den Besselaar & Wim van Vierssen, 2014. "How do dimensions of proximity relate to the outcomes of collaboration? A survey of knowledge-intensive networks in the Dutch water sector," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(7), pages 689-716, October.
    5. Corinne Autant‐Bernard & Pascal Billand & David Frachisse & Nadine Massard, 2007. "Social distance versus spatial distance in R&D cooperation: Empirical evidence from European collaboration choices in micro and nanotechnologies," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 86(3), pages 495-519, August.
    6. William Simpson, 2001. "The Quadratic Assignment Procedure (QAP)," North American Stata Users' Group Meetings 2001 1.2, Stata Users Group.
    7. Felbermayr, Gabriel J. & Toubal, Farid, 2010. "Cultural proximity and trade," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 279-293, February.
    8. Dagmawi Mulugeta Degefu & Zaiyi Liao & Weijun He & Liang Yuan & Min An & Zhaofang Zhang & Wu Xia, 2019. "The Impact of Upstream Sub-Basins’ Water Use on Middle Stream and Downstream Sub-Basins’ Water Security at Country-Basin Unit Spatial Scale and Monthly Temporal Resolution," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-12, February.
    9. Yaw A. Twumasi & Edmund C. Merem, 2007. "Using Remote Sensing and GIS in the Analysis of Ecosystem Decline along the River Niger Basin: The Case of Mali and Niger," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 4(2), pages 1-12, June.
    10. Jamie Bartram & Clarissa Brocklehurst & Michael B. Fisher & Rolf Luyendijk & Rifat Hossain & Tessa Wardlaw & Bruce Gordon, 2014. "Global Monitoring of Water Supply and Sanitation: History, Methods and Future Challenges," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-29, August.
    11. Ahmet Conker & Hussam Hussein, 2019. "Hydraulic Mission at Home, Hydraulic Mission abroad? Examining Turkey’s Regional ‘Pax-Aquarum’ and Its Limits," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, January.
    12. Tobias Ide & Adrien Detges, 2018. "International Water Cooperation and Environmental Peacemaking," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 18(4), pages 63-84, November.
    13. Peter Maskell & Anders Malmberg, 2007. "Myopia, knowledge development and cluster evolution," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(5), pages 603-618, September.
    14. Shlomi Dinar, 2009. "Scarcity and Cooperation Along International Rivers," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 9(1), pages 109-135, February.
    15. Stephen P. Borgatti & Daniel S. Halgin, 2011. "On Network Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1168-1181, October.
    16. Mark Zeitoun & Naho Mirumachi, 2008. "Transboundary water interaction I: reconsidering conflict and cooperation," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 297-316, December.
    17. Andre Torre, 2008. "On the Role Played by Temporary Geographical Proximity in Knowledge Transmission," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(6), pages 869-889.
    18. Pilar Carolina Villar & Wagner Costa Ribeiro & Fernanda Mello Sant’Anna, 2018. "Transboundary governance in the La Plata River basin: status and prospects," Water International, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(7), pages 978-995, October.
    19. Ana Iglesias & Luis Garrote & Francisco Flores & Marta Moneo, 2007. "Challenges to Manage the Risk of Water Scarcity and Climate Change in the Mediterranean," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 21(5), pages 775-788, May.
    20. Corinne Autant-Bernard, 2001. "The Geography Of Knowledge Spillovers And Technological Proximity," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 237-254.
    21. Xia Wu & Dagmawi Mulugeta Degefu & Liang Yuan & Zaiyi Liao & Weijun He & Min An & Zhaofang Zhang, 2019. "Assessment of Water Footprints of Consumption and Production in Transboundary River Basins at Country-Basin Mesh-Based Spatial Resolution," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-15, February.
    22. Tom Broekel & Ron Boschma, 2012. "Knowledge networks in the Dutch aviation industry: the proximity paradox," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 409-433, March.
    23. O Crevoisier, 1996. "Proximity and Territory versus Space in Regional Science," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 28(9), pages 1683-1697, September.
    24. Subash Prasad Rai & William Young & Nayan Sharma, 2017. "Risk and Opportunity Assessment for Water Cooperation in Transboundary River Basins in South Asia," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(7), pages 2187-2205, May.
    25. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christian Omobhude & Shih-Hsin Chen, 2019. "The Roles and Measurements of Proximity in Sustained Technology Development: A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-30, January.
    2. Villani, Elisa & Rasmussen, Einar & Grimaldi, Rosa, 2017. "How intermediary organizations facilitate university–industry technology transfer: A proximity approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 86-102.
    3. Ron Boschma & Pierre-Alexandre Balland & Mathijs de Vaan, 2014. "The formation of economic networks: a proximity approach," Chapters, in: André Torre & Frédéric Wallet (ed.), Regional Development and Proximity Relations, chapter 7, pages 243-266, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Renato Garcia & Veneziano Araújo & Suelene Mascarini & Emerson Gomes Dos Santos & Ariana Ribeiro Costa, 2018. "An Analysis Of The Relation Between Geographical And Cognitive Proximity In University-Industry Linkages," Anais do XLIV Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 44th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 132, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    5. Marie Ferru & Alain Rallet, 2016. "Proximity dynamics and the geography of innovation: diminishing returns or renewal?," Post-Print hal-02025328, HAL.
    6. Tsouri, Maria & Hansen, Teis & Hanson, Jens & Steen, Markus, 2022. "Knowledge recombination for emerging technological innovations: The case of green shipping," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    7. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & Ron Boschma & Koen Frenken, 2015. "Proximity and Innovation: From Statics to Dynamics," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(6), pages 907-920, June.
    8. Friedrich Dornbusch & Sidonia von Proff & Thomas Brenner, 2013. "The organizational and regional determinants of inter-regional collaborations – Academic inventors as bridging agents," Working Papers on Innovation and Space 2013-11, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.
    9. Xiyao Xiang & Wei-Chiao Huang, 2019. "Does Distance Affect the Role of Nonlocal Subsidiaries on Cluster Firms’ Innovation? An Empirical Investigation on Chinese Biotechnology Cluster Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-18, November.
    10. Kristina Jespersen & Damiana Rigamonti & Morten Berg Jensen & Rune Bysted, 2018. "Analysis of SMEs partner proximity preferences for process innovation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 51(4), pages 879-904, December.
    11. Tatiana Plotnikova & Bastian Rake, 2014. "Collaboration in pharmaceutical research: exploration of country-level determinants," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1173-1202, February.
    12. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & Ron Boschma & Koen Frenken, 2020. "Proximity, Innovation and Networks: A Concise Review and Some Next Steps," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2019, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Mar 2020.
    13. Andrea Caragliu & Peter Nijkamp, 2013. "Space and Knowledge Spillovers in European Regions," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 13-148/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    14. Thomas Brenner, 2014. "The Impact of Foreign Direct Investment on Economic Growth – An Empirical Analysis of Different Effects in Less and More Developed Countries," Working Papers on Innovation and Space 2014-05, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.
    15. Lorenzo Cassi & Anne Plunket, 2014. "Proximity, network formation and inventive performance: in search of the proximity paradox," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 53(2), pages 395-422, September.
    16. Ferretti, Marco & Guerini, Massimiliano & Panetti, Eva & Parmentola, Adele, 2022. "The partner next door? The effect of micro-geographical proximity on intra-cluster inter-organizational relationships," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    17. Stefano Usai & Emanuela Marrocu & Raffaele Paci, 2017. "Networks, Proximities, and Interfirm Knowledge Exchanges," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 40(4), pages 377-404, July.
    18. Davids, Mila & Frenken, Koen, 2015. "Proximity, knowledge base and the innovation process The case of Unilever’s Becel diet margarine," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/7, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    19. Jakob Eder & Michaela Trippl, 2019. "Innovation in the periphery: compensation and exploitation strategies," PEGIS geo-disc-2019_07, Institute for Economic Geography and GIScience, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    20. Rune Dahl Fitjar & Franz Huber & Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 2016. "Not too close, not too far: testing the Goldilocks principle of ‘optimal’ distance in innovation networks," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(6), pages 465-487, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:3:p:1503-:d:737018. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.