Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorLawrence Susskind.en_US
dc.contributor.authorZaerpoor, Yasmin(Bijani Zaerpoor)en_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Urban Studies and Planning.en_US
dc.coverage.spatialfl-----en_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-02-28T20:50:48Z
dc.date.available2020-02-28T20:50:48Z
dc.date.copyright2019en_US
dc.date.issued2019en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/123913
dc.descriptionThis electronic version was submitted by the student author. The certified thesis is available in the Institute Archives and Special Collections.en_US
dc.descriptionThesis: Ph. D., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Urban Studies and Planning, 2019en_US
dc.descriptionCataloged from student-submitted PDF version of thesis.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (pages 179-186).en_US
dc.description.abstractWe are headed towards a global water crisis. While technological advancements may help reduce this gap, achieving global water security will also require establishing self-enforcing agreements negotiated among countries that share transboundary rivers. At its core, transboundary water governance is a type of collective action problem (Olson 1965), in which sovereign actors must cooperate to achieve a collective interest. In this research, I attempt to delineate common procedural and context-specific barriers to collective action within transboundary water negotiations in the Nile River Basin. I compare efforts by three countries -- Egypt, Ethiopia, and Sudan --en_US
dc.description.abstractto pursue collective action in two separate, but related, face-to-face negotiations related to water use: the basin-wide negotiations on the Nile Basin Cooperative Framework Agreement (1997 - 2010) and the ongoing project-specific negotiations on the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam which started in 2011. Between 2015 and 2018, I interviewed over 50 Egyptian, Ethiopian, and Sudanese negotiators; transboundary water scholars and academics; and journalists and reviewed primary and secondary documents to identify the perceived barriers within these negotiation processes. The conventional approach to treaty-making is through negotiations among state actors.en_US
dc.description.abstractI argue that while many barriers related to the number of actors and degree of heterogeneity among them (as defined by differences in their capacity, access to information, preferences, beliefs, and identities) can be addressed through procedural interventions, non-procedural interventions by both state- and non-state actors are necessary to reduce these barriers at different scales (e.g., between negotiators or between negotiators and the public) in the short-, medium-, and long-term. Furthermore, I argue that multi-track water diplomacy is increasingly necessary in the Nile Basin due to several context-specific factors: the 'securitization' of water, frequent political transitions, and lack of public trust. Based on this research, I offer a list of procedural- and non-procedural interventions that can be employed by state- and non-state actors to reduce different types of barriers.en_US
dc.description.abstractAlthough reducing these barriers will not guarantee collective action, I argue that these interventions can create a more enabling environment in which collective action can occur.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Yasmin Zaerpoor.en_US
dc.format.extent186 pagesen_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsMIT theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed, downloaded, or printed from this source but further reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582en_US
dc.subjectUrban Studies and Planning.en_US
dc.titlePursuing the common good : overcoming barriers to collective action through transboundary water negotiation along the Blue Nile Riveren_US
dc.title.alternativeOvercoming barriers to collective action through transboundary water negotiation along the Blue Nile Riveren_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreePh. D.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Urban Studies and Planningen_US
dc.identifier.oclc1139711453en_US
dc.description.collectionPh.D. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Urban Studies and Planningen_US
dspace.imported2020-02-28T20:50:47Zen_US
mit.thesis.degreeDoctoralen_US
mit.thesis.departmentUrbStuden_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record