Center for Federalism Studies

Permanent URI for this collection

http://etd.aau.edu.et/handle/123456789/100

Browse

Browsing Center for Federalism Studies by Subject "Afforestation"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Ethiopia’s Right to Environmental Compensation from Nile Lower Riparian States
    (Addis Ababa University, 2024-06-01) Mesay Amado; Yenehun Birlie
    Transboundary rivers naturally flow from upper riparian to lower riparian. Regarding this, the upper riparian countries have opportunity costs in afforestation and soil conservation to the ecosystem of the source of the river. But the lower riparian countries lack this opportunity cost in conservation of the source of the river. Regarding this, the water source of the ecosystem was not conserved and properly managed; the ecosystem degraded, and sources of water would be reduced and lost. In the Blue Nile River basins, Ethiopia is found in the upper riparian area and the main source of the river; the other two, Sudan and Egypt, are located in the lower basin. As far as these, these two countries effectively used the water for irrigation, hydropower, and home consumption more than Ethiopia. In contrast, the government of Ethiopia incurred costs for afforestation and soil conservation in the source of the ecosystem. For instance, soil conservation measures in the upper Blue Nile River basins (in Ethiopia), which are approximately equal to 5.43 million hectares, have a total cost of US$2.9 billion per year.All this action benefits Egypt and Sudan through balancing the regular flow of the Blue Nile River. Yet, this nation neither cooperates nor contributes to financing the conservation of the source of the Blue Nile River ecosystem. In this regard, the main issue to be addressed in this paper is whether Ethiopians have a legal right to claim eco-compensation from lower riparian countries (Egypt and Sudan) for eco service and cost incurred for afforestation and soil conservation of the water source of ecosystems from the perspective of international environmental law. To investigate this issue, the researcher used qualitative doctrinal research methods using primary and secondary sources of data. Furthermore, they tried to clarify concepts and information collected via data, qualitatively. Regarding this issue of eco-compensation, there is no binding international law and procedural enforcement mechanism in international environmental law and water law for Ethiopia to claim compensation from LNRSs for the opportunity cost of conservation of the source of the BNR basin. However, there is different state practice in different regions (Elbe River basin, Lancang-Mekong River, and Xin'an River Basin), and there is a general principle of international environmental law, like the sustainable development principle, related to environmental protection and opportunity cost by upper riparian states for protection of the source of the transboundary rivers. From this nation's practice and international environmental law principles, Ethiopia has legal ground to claim eco-compensation from lower riparian states (Egypt and Sudan). Based on this nation practice and international environmental law xii principles, the Ethiopian government and local concerned bodies try to legally claim and diplomatically influence and initiate the lower Nile River basin state to compensate Ethiopia. Key words:-Eco-compensation, Eco service payment, sustainable development, intergenerational equity, Transboundary River, Ecosystem, Degradation, Soil erosion, Afforestation