Pao-Yu Oei, Markus Siehlow



Modeling Water Management Options for the Tigris–Euphrates Rivershed

pdf PDF


Political instability of several countries in the Middle East is overshadowing one of the biggest challenges of the upcoming century: Water - a natural resource that is easily taken for granted, but whose scarcity might lead to serious conflicts. This paper investigates an optimalWater Allocation of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivershed by introducing the WATER-Model. A series of scenarios are analyzed to examine the effects of different levels of cooperation. Basin-wide coordinated water usage becomes even more important in times of water shortages which can be caused by a drought or by the filling of a dam. Data analysis shows that Turkey is most efficient in its water usage. However, water usage for irrigation purposes in Turkey rather than for the domestic and industrial sectors of Iraq or Syria, decreases the overall welfare. The predicted water demand growth in the region will only increase this effect. Especially the Euphrates basin might thus encounter losses of up to 33% due to such non-cooperation. Minimum flow treaties between riparian countries, however, can help increase the region’s overall welfare and should therefore be implemented.


Integrated Water Resources Management, Euphrates Tigris rivershed, non linear modeling, transboundary water resources allocation, river basins, Turkey, Syria, Iraq


[1] Akanda A, Freeman S, Placht M (2007). The Tigris-Euphrates river basin: mediating a path towards regional water stability. The Fletcher Sch J For Issues Relat To Southwest Asia And Islamic Civiliz:1-12. [1] Akanda A, Freeman S, Placht M (2007). The Tigris-Euphrates river basin: mediating a path towards regional water stability. The Fletcher Sch J For Issues Relat To Southwest Asia And Islamic Civiliz:1-12. 

[2] Akhbari M, Grigg NS (2013). A Framework for an Agent-Based Model to Manage Water Resources Conflicts. Water Resour Manag 27: 4039-4052. 

[3] Allan JA (2002). The Middle East water question: hydropolitics and the global economy. Vol. 2. I.B. Tauris Publishers, London, New York. 

[4] Al-Masri A (2014). Water wars directed against Syria and Iraq: Turkey’s control of the Euphrates river- Turkey’s control of the Euphrates might lead to disaster. http://www.globalresearch.ca /water-wars-directed-against-syria-and-iraqturkeys-control-of-the-euphrates-river/5389357. Accessed 27 February 2015. 

[5] Beaumont P (1998). Restructuring of water usage in the Tigris-Euphrates basin: the impact of modern water management policies. In: Coppock J, Miller JA (1998): Transformation of Middle Eastern natural environments: legacies and lessons, Bulletin Series of Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies 103, pp. 168-186. 

[6] Berkun M (2010). Hydroelectric potential and environmental effects of multidam hydropower projects in turkey. Energ For Sustain Dev 14:320-329. 

[7] Brouwer R, Hofkes M (2008). Integrated hydroeconomic modelling: approaches, key issues and future research directions. Ecol Econ 66:16-22. 

[8] Brown O, Crawford A (2009). Rising temperatures, rising tensions: climate change and the risk of violent conflict in the Middle East. International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD). http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2009/rising_temps_ middle_east.pdf. Accessed 04 October 2013. 

[9] Cai, X., Ringler, C., Rosegrant, M. W. (2006). Modeling water resources management at the basin level: methodology and application to the Maipo River Basin (Vol. 149). Intl Food Policy Res Inst. 

[10] Daoudy M (2009). Asymmetric power: negotiating water in the Euphrates and Tigris. Int Negot 14:361-391. 

[11] Davis DW, Hanbali FU, McPherson MM (2004). Interagency cooperation in an international program: USACE-HEC hydrologic modeling for the Tigris and Euphrates in support of USAIDReconstruction Program in Iraq. US Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center. 

[12] Dinar A, Nigatu GS (2013). Distributional considerations of international water resources under externality: The case of Ethiopia, Sudan and Egypt on the Blue Nile. Wat Res Econ, 2, 1-16. 

[13] Dinar S (2012). The geographical dimension of hydro-politics: international freshwater in the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia. Eurasie Geogr And Econ 53:115-142. 

[14] Dinar A, Dinar S, McCaffrey S (2007). Bridges over water: understanding transboundary water conflict, negotiation and cooperation. World Scientific, New Jersey. 

[15] Elhance A (1999). Hydropolitics in the Third World: conflict and cooperation in international river basins. US Institute of Peace Press, Washington DC. 

[16] Elver H (2002). Peaceful uses of international rivers: the Euphrates and Tigris dispute, Vol. 07. Transnational Pub Inc, New York. 

[17] Evans JP. (2009). 21st century climate change in the Middle East. Clim Chang 92:417-432. 

[18] GAP (2011). GAP action plan. Republic Of Turkey Ministry Of Development Southeastern Anatolia Project Regional Development Administration. http://www.gap.gov.tr/english. Accessed 03 June 2012. 

[19] GAP (2006). Latest situation on Southeastern Anatolian Project- activities of the GAP administration. Republic Of Turkey Ministry Of Development Southeastern Anatolia Project Regional Development Administration. http://includes.gap.gov.tr/files/ekdosyalar_en/about-gap/latest-situation.pdf. Accessed 04 October 2013. 

[20] Gohar AA, Ward FA (2010). Gains from expanded irrigation water trading in Egypt: an integrated basin approach. Ecol Econ 69:2535- 2548. 

[21] Güner SS (1999). Water alliances in the Euphrates-Tigris basin. In: Lonergran SC (ed) Environmental change, adaptation and security. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dordrecht, pp 301- 316. 

[22] Harou JJ, Pulido-Velazques M, Rosenberg DE, MedellÃn-Azuara J, Lund JR, Howitt RE (2009). Hydro-economic models: concepts, design, application, and future prospects. J Of Hydrol 375:627-643. 

[23] Johnston R, Smakhtin V (2014). Hydrological modeling of large river basins: how much is enough? Water Resour Manag 28: 2695-2730. 

[24] Kaya I (1998). The Euphrates-Tigris basin: an overview and opportunities for cooperation under international law. Arid Lands Newsletter, No. 44, Conflict Resolution and Transboundary Water Resources, Fall/Winter 1998. http://ag.arizona.edu/oals/ALN/aln44/kaya.html. Accessed 04 October 2013. 

[25] Kibaroglu A, Scheumann W (2013). Evolution of transboundary politics in the EuphratesTigris river system: new perspectives and political challenges. Glob Gov: A Rev Of Multilater And Int Organ 19:279-305. 

[26] Kibaroglu A, Scheumann W (2011). EuphratesTigris rivers system: political rapprochement and transboundary water cooperation. In: Kramer A, Kibaroglu A, Scheumann W (eds) Turkey’s water policy: national frameworks and international cooperation. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 277-300. 

[27] Kibaroglu A (2008). The role of epistemic communities in offering new cooperation frameworks in the Euphrates-Tigris river system. J Of Int Aff 61:183-198. 

[28] Kibaroglu A (2007). Water for sustainable development in the EuphratesTigris river basin. Middle East Technical University Department, Ankara. http://www.gap.metu.edu.tr/html/yayinlar/ waterforsustainableAKibaroglu.pdf Accessed 04 October 2013. 

[29] Kibaroglu A, Klaphake A, Kramer A, Scheumann W, Carrius A (2005). Cooperation on Turkey’s transboundary waters. Status report commissioned by the German Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety. Project No: 903 19 226. Berlin. 

[30] Kibaroglu A, Ünver IHO (2000). An institutional framework for facilitating cooperation in the Euphrates-Tigris river basin. Int Negot 5:311-330. 

[31] Kucukmehmetoglu M (2012). An integrative case study approach between game theory and pareto frontier concepts for the transboundary water resources allocations. J Of Hydrol 450:308-319. 

[32] Kucukmehmetoglu M, Guldmann JM (2010). Multi-objective programming for the allocation of transboundary water resources: the case of the Euphrates and Tigris. J Of Water Resour Plan And Manag-ASCE 136:95-105. 

[33] Kucukmehmetoglu M, Sen Z, Özger M (2010). Coalition possibility of riparian countries via game theory and fuzzy logic models. Water Resour Res 46:W12528. 

[34] Kucukmehmetoglu M (2009). A game theoretic approach to assess the impacts of major investments on transboundary water resources: the case of the Euphrates and Tigris. Water Resour Manag 23:3069-3099. 

[35] Kucukmehmetoglu M, Guldmann JM (2004). International water resources allocation and conflicts: the case of the Euphrates and the Tigris. Environ And Plan A 36:783-801. 

[36] Leb C (2010). The Tigris-Euphrates joint technical committee - deadlocked. International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/tigris_ euphrates.pdf. Accessed 01 September 2013. 

[37] Liao Z, Hannam PM (2013). The Mekong Game: Achieving an All-win Situation. Water Resour Manag 27: 2611-2622. 

[38] Mutiga JK, Mavengano ST, Zhongbo S, Woldai T, Becht R (2010). Water allocation as a planning tool to minimise water use conflicts in the upper Ewaso Ng’iro North Basin, Kenya. Water Resour Manag 24: 3939-3959. 

[39] Oei P, Siehlow M (2014). Water Model - An Optimal Allocation of Water Resources in Turkey, Syria and Iraq. DIW Discussion Paper 1381. German Economic Research Institute, Berlin. 

[40] Öztan M, Axelrod M (2011). Sustainable transboundary groundwater management under shifting political scenarios: the Ceylanpinar aquifer and Turkey-Syria relations. Water Intern 36:671-685. 

[41] Ozdogan M., Woodcock C.E., Salvucci G.D., Demir H. (2006). Changes in summer irrigated crop area and water use in Southeastern Turkey from 1993 to 2002: implications for current and future water resources. Water Resour Manag 20: 467-488. 

[42] Rahi KA, Halihan T (2010). Changes in the salinity of the Euphrates river system in Iraq. Reg Environ Chang 10:27-35. 

[43] Ruf U (2006). Das Südostanatolienprojekt (GAP). Arbeitskreis Wasser im BBU: Virtuelles Wasser. http://www.akwasser.de/download/file/fid/165. Accessed 01 September 2013. 

[44] Tigrek S, Kibaroglu A (2011). Strategic role of water resources for Turkey. In: Kramer A, Kibaroglu A, Scheumann W (eds) Turkey’s water policy: national frameworks and international cooperation. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 27-42. 

[45] Tilmant A, Pinte D, Goor Q (2008). Assessing marginal water values in multipurpose multireservoir systems via stochastic programming. Water Resour Res 44:W12431 . 

[46] Tilmant A, Kelman R (2007). A stochastic approach to analyze trade-offs and risks associated with large-scale water resources systems. Water Resour Res 43:W06425. 

[47] Tolba MK, Saab NW (2009). Arab environment: climate change- impact of climate change on Arab countries. Arab Forum for Environment and Development 2009. Beirut, Lebanon. http://www.sciencedev.net/Docs/arab_climate_ report.pdf. Accessed 04 September 2013. 

[48] Ward FA, Pulido-Velazquez M (2012). Economic costs of sustaining water supplies: findings from the Rio Grande. Water Resour Manag 26: 2883-2909. 

[49] Warner J (2012). The struggle over Turkey’s Ilisu Dam: domestic and international security linkages. Intern Environ Agreem: Polit, Law And Econ 12:231-250. 

[50] Warner J (2008). Contested hydrohegemony: hydraulic control and security in Turkey. Water Altern 1:271-288. 

[51] World Gazetteer (2010). Population data arranged by country/cities- Turkey, Syria, Iraq. http://www.world-gazetteer.com. Accessed 30 October 2011. 

[52] Wu X, Whittington D (2006). Incentive compatibility and conflict resolution in international river basin: a case study of the Nile basin. Water Resour Res 42:W02417. 

[53] Zawahri NA (2006). Stabilising Iraq’s water supply: what the Euphrates and Tigris rivers can learn from the Indus. Third World Q 27:1041- 1058.

Cite this paper

Pao-Yu Oei, Markus Siehlow. (2016) Modeling Water Management Options for the Tigris–Euphrates Rivershed. International Journal of Environmental Science, 1, 140-150


Copyright © 2016 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article.
This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0