Conclusion: Globalization, multi-governance, and transboundary river basin management

The main object of this conclusion is to discuss and develop the concept of multi-level governance with regards to transboundary river basin management. As shown in the introduction, the nation-state is no longer the most appropriate unit for managing unilaterally transboundary river basins. Indeed, in all of the different case studies, one can already observe a multitude of actors involved in river basin management (e.g., nongovernmental actors). These new actors bring with them new perspectives and interests. Besides, one can also witness dynamics at different levels, from the global to the local. More precisely, it appears that the economic, political, or ecological issues linked to water resources management cannot be analyzed and solved without taking into account the current dynamics at the four major levels, i.e., the global, the regional, the national, and the local levels. In this regard, the four case studies have clearly shown the necessity for a multi-level approach to governance, be it in water or elsewhere. We consider governance to be a function for collectively solving problems. As stressed in the introduction, water problems in particular, cannot be adequately understood simply by looking at one level (e.g., the national level). Therefore, the management and solution of any given problem (e.g., water) cannot be limited to just one level, and a multi-level approach is required. Moreover, the originality of our approach lies in the fact that governance is seen as a dynamic process by which the different levels (from local to global) continuously interact along the policy circle, i.e., from problem definition to evaluation. Applied to transboundary river basin management, our approach aims at understanding the different ways in which water resources are currently being managed. In doing so, one needs to look at the various actors' interests and the different perspectives of how the river should be managed at each level. Furthermore, all river basins are characterized by a number of issues ranging from political, via economic to ecological ones. Our approach identifies the different actors and their perspectives at each level and then ties them to the various functions necessary for managing water resources. This conclusion will be divided into two parts. First, each case study will be summarized and analyzed in order to outline the different problems encountered, namely in terms of actors' interest, conflicting issues, and contradicting dynamics between the various levels. Second, we will link the four case studies to our concept of multi-governance as developed in the introduction and by doing so will provide a conceptualization of water multi-governance. This conceptualization will be done by identifying and applying the different functions and phases of the policy circle to transboundary rivers. In this respect, our approach to governance is quite different from the current theories of governance, introducing an additional dynamic view.