Institutional Frameworks for Development and Management of the Mekong River’s Water Resources

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The Mekong River which is shared commonly by six countries: China, Myanmar, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam, is one of the world’s great river systems. The source of the river’s great productivity is its seasonal variation in water level and the range of wetland habitats. Its biodiversity is fundamental to the viability of natural resource-based rural livelihoods of a current population of more 80 million people living in the total basin. The River is used for many purposes and belongs to each of the six basin countries and provides rich potential in hydropower, agriculture, and aquaculture...This also leads to some challenges and controversies faced by all countries in the basin relating to utilising, developing and managing the River’s water resources in a sustainable and effective way. Although the four lower downstream basin has their own cooperation frameworks including the “historic” 1995 Agreement and the Mekong River Commission (the MRC) with a series of Procedures and Processes of water utilisation and diversion in theory, some large dams and water utilisation projects are being conducted and have plan to use unilaterally on the River and its tributaries in practice. As a result, after 23 years establishment of the MRC, this regional institution of the four lower downstream countries has not achieved completely its functions and missions given by the 1995 Agreement. The MRC is not an “antidote” to deal with conflicts and issues on utilisation and management of water resources. The paper will analyse institutional legal and framework of the 1995 Agreement and finally give suggestions about sustainable development and management of Mekong River’s water resources in the time to come.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Southeast Asian Research Association of Vietnam, "Vietnam and Mekong Sub-Region Development Cooperation" THẾ GIỚI PUBLISHERS 2000

2 Ezra Ho, "Unsustainable Development in the Mekong: The Price of Hydropower" 12 (12): 63-76, 2014

3 Mai-Lan Ha, "The Role of Regional Institutions in Sustainable Development: A Review of the Mekong River Commission’s First 15 years" 1 : 2011

4 Mekong River Commission, "The 1995 Agreement"

5 Mekong River Commission, "Thai Reply to prior Consultation of the Xayaburi project"

6 Le Thanh Long, "Sustainable Development of the Mekong: A Reality or Just Another Hortatory Cliché?" Nagoya University Graduate School of Law 2002

7 Mekong River Commission, "Statement of Save The Mekong Coalition"

8 Mekong River Commission, "NMC of Vietnam’s Reply to prior Consultation of the Xayaburi project"

9 Mekong River Commission, "NMC of Cambodia’s Reply to prior Consultation of the Xayaburi project"

10 Mekong River Commission, "Mekong Basin"

11 Tran Diep Thanh, "Institutional Frameworks for Equitable Utilisation and Protection of the Mekong River’s Water and Related Resources" 206-212, 2016

12 Sergio Villamayor-Tomas, "Hydropower vs. fisheries conservation: A test of institutional design principles for common-pool resource management in the lower Mekong basin social-eclogical system" 21 (21): 2016

13 Mekong River Commission, "Governance and Organisational Structure"

14 Tran Diep Thanh, "Globalization and its impact on the Vietnamese Integration" World Publishing House 439-448, 2003

15 Mekong River Commission, "Fisheries"

16 George E. Radosevich, "Existing and Emerging Basin Arrangements in Asia: Mekong River Commission Case Study" World Bank 1999

17 Apisom Intralawan, "Economic Evaluation of Hydropower Projects in the Lower Mekong Basin" Mae Fah Luang University 2017

18 Lu Guangsheng, "China seeks to improve Mekong Sub-regional cooperation: Causes and Policies" Nanyang Technological University 2016

19 Yang Yi, "China on the Lancang/Mekong: “We Share the Water, We Share the River”"

20 Mekong River Commission, "Basin Development Plan Programme, Phase 2: Assessment of Basin-wide Development Scenarios"

21 Tran Diep Thanh, "An overview of the Mekong River Commission" 2 : 63-72, 2005