Theesfeld, Insa

Climate-change aridification of Colorado River Basin in the U.S., where flows have dropped dramatically, affects the population’s thinking about water distribution and related legal and political arrangements. Century-old agreements encouraged people using the river to imagine it in segments, with little practical connection or communication between “upper” and lower” regions of the basin. Yet the multistate “Colorado River Compact” of 1922, which assumed stable average flows, now appears outdated and even threatening. Major infrastructure built to implement the compact cannot deliver expected water to the lower basin, and sanctions prompted by low flows could force shutdown of industrial and municipal uses in the upper basin. We describe how all involved are coming to see the river as a common resource which they must figure out how to share in the new era of unpredictable water flows – resulting in intense talks involving seven U.S. states and the national governments of both the U.S. and Mexico. We show that those talks echo back into local communities. Our analysis identifies fear of unilateral change as a driver of locally-designed institutional change. Even in the most rural of the basin states, Wyoming, the threat of strict enforcement of the old compact is inviting innovation. Disparate water users have begun to consider water trading and sharing that were anathema only a few years ago. Isolated ranchers, the local mining industry, small cities and conservationists at first gathered loosely to hear about basin challenges from state water managers. In 2024 they created a governance structure which encourages them to learn from each other as well as from hydrologic and economic modelling. These water users are now poised to advise state water managers what legal mechanisms will support more flexible and fluctuating water use locally and respond to the needs of the river as a whole.

Groundwater management in Iran is complex and challenged by increasing water scarcity and groundwater depletion. Despite changes in the country's water policies and laws, groundwater depletion has intensified. This study analyses two key groundwater laws - the Equitable Distribution of Water Resources Law (1983) and the Ta'een Taklif Law (2010) - to systematically identify the challenges embedded in these laws that may contribute to accelerating groundwater depletion. Using Institutional Grammar, the two laws were analyzed according to the ADICO components: Attribute, Deontic, aIm, Condition, and Or else. The paper decomposes the laws to understand their structure and linguistic specificity when expressing the deontic. The analysis shows that the predominant nature of both laws is norm-based, with minimal use of formal sanctions for enforcement. The EDWR law consists mainly of norms, with only a small percentage of statements containing 'Or else' components, which are essential for a statement to be considered a rule. The Ta'een Taklif law further reduces the number of rule-based statements, with the overwhelming majority being norms without concrete punishments or fines (Or else), despite expectations that it would provide a stronger formal tool against illegal wells. This legal feature may reflect that social compliance with norms is sufficient for regulation. However, it could be problematic if the collective understanding in social communities does not function accordingly. It may also indicate a gap in the legal framework where the consequences of non-compliance are not clearly defined. The paper highlights the need to revisit the fundamental IG topic of differentiating between rules and norms. It is crucial to address the gap between prevailing norms and enforceable rules to create a robust and responsive groundwater management system.
Keywords: ADICO Syntax; Groundwater Law; Illegal Wells; Institutional Grammar; Iranian Water Policy