|Title||Climate Change Negotiation Role-Play: Finn River Basin Negotiating Boundary-Crossing Water-Management Agreements|
|Year of Publication||2012|
|Authors||Rumore, D, Lohani, A, Imam, M, Susskind, L|
|Keywords||agency, agreement, collaborative, dispute, finn river, Finn River Basin, negotiation, negotiation game|
Seven-party, seven-person, multi-issue negotiation game involving a dispute over inter-provincial water allocations. It explores issues of prediction and monitoring, water sharing, and the environmental adequacy of water flows.
|Full Text|| |
Concerned about continued drought and the mismanagement of water resources in the Finn River Basin, the Ministerial Council of the Alba national government has convened a meeting of key stakeholders to advise on improved water-management strategies for the Basin. A representative from the Ministerial Council, who has received specific instructions from the national government, will facilitate the meeting. The other stakeholder participants include representatives from each of the four Alban states that share the Finn River Basin—Northland, Eastland, Southland, and Darbin—along with representative from the Ministry of the Environment (a national government agency), and a representative from the Basin Authority (an independent body consisting of politically appointed leaders from each of the four states). If the Ministerial Council representative and at least five of the other stakeholders can reach agreement on a proposed package of actions, the Ministerial Council has agreed to cover the cost of implementation. If at least six of the seven participants cannot reach agreement, it is likely that the Ministerial Council will impose its own Basin-management plan and force the states to pay some or all of the cost of implementation.
The seven parties have been asked to addresses three key issues:
(1) Water prediction and water-use monitoring: who will develop water-availability predictions and who will monitor water withdrawals?
(2) Unused water allocations: what should be done with water allocations that are not used by any given state in any given year?
(3) Environmental flows: should certain amounts of water be allocated to ensure minimum flows during times of drought to protect the environment, and, if so, who should decide what these flows should be and whose shares should be reduced to ensure them?
Climate Change Negotiation Role-Play: Finn River Basin Negotiating Boundary-Crossing Water-Management Agreements
Submitted by firstname.lastname@example.org on