Social group Essay Example for Free

Social group Essay This book, Ain’t No Makin’ It, shows the lives of the youth who are living in a neighborhood of low income earners. It shows that people are not poor because they are not ready to work, but it is because of various societal structural barriers that get them entrapped in poverty. The book is about the lives of two distinct units of teenagers who live in the inner- city with one unit believing in the ideology of achievement while the other unit rejects it. It further shows how the society can play a destructive part in the lives of the marginalized in the society thus giving the well to do a chance to blame the less fortunate yet they are the victims with the excuse of achievement ideology. The working class kids are the blacks who call themselves the brothers and believe in achievement ideology. They have realized that racial discriminations which have already ceased to exist made the past generations not to excel in their endeavors. Now they view the society as one that has given them a level playing ground and they decide to achieve what they want by excelling in school and not engaging in bad habits. The second social group, which is made up of the whites who call themselves hallway hangers, on the contrary, reject the ideology of the achievement and believe that their aspirations are low in the labor market (MacLeod, 2008, p283). The hallway hangers have realized from friends and family that they can’t make it out of the poverty and due to this, they engage themselves in bad habits like smoking dope and dropping out of school among other unlawful deeds (ibid p29). Despite the fact that both groups have different aspiration levels, no single group prospers in its endeavors. The hallway hangers do not get any degree of upward-ness but the brothers, although they fail to get what they exactly aimed for, they do make to achieve a fraction of it. Thus the poor blacks turn out to be better of than their parents but the poor whites turn out poorer than their parents. Macleod has the belief that the working class kids have a tendency of ending up in working class professions; with this he also points out that the family’s class structures are passed to the coming generations through the school system. The working class kids are also seen using limited linguistic codes which form a disadvantage at school while the other group uses elaborated codes which have an advantage for they are the codes used in the school’s academic setting (ibid, p226). As it is evidenced, no single group prospers with the reason for this failure being that the whites believe that everything is on their way but the blacks believe that they have to struggle to make it in life. They both end up as losers due to the fact that they are disintegrated with different ideologies. Although the blacks excelled in school, what they achieved from the school were theories which could not help them excel in life. The fact that the blacks gained some upward mobility but not all they expected shows that one can not jump from the bottom to the top of the society in one lifetime for it has to take time; it also shows that at that rate, in three generations time the blacks will be at the middle class if at all they teach their children to follow in their footsteps. Despite the efforts the blacks made in school, they view themselves as losers and tend to view the America as a society which does not keep its promises thus ending up in hurting themselves more. The working class families should mentally change their fashion through being honest to themselves and thus be able to improve the education in their children; this can be through working very hard to show their children the importance of commitment and working hard in school for even if they do not excel, they will be able to overcome some barriers. Macleod’s work is seen to have played a very important role in both the Brother’s lives as well as that of the Hallway Hangers since it made it possible for them to see beyond their immediate despairs and conditions. Both groups experienced a persistent cycle of poverty with negative role models such that they could not help themselves; for those who had no fathers, they suffered great grief and anger. Although the brothers believed in achievement ideology while their counterparts did not, the outcome is that the dominant culture guarantees a better result for the hallway hangers as compared to the outcome of the brothers (ibid p66). Education cannot be treated as a part of luxury, but as a necessity in the country. There is a major advantage for the outcome of attending school. Nevertheless, it is until the United States comes to recognize the reality that America as a country symbolizes several ways of interpreting data on the basis of various linguistic codes in comparison with various cultural and social classes; through this they will know that the way education is arranged in the public schools is an enormous disadvantage to the groups in consideration, that is the brothers and the hallway hangers. There is no theory being constructed up to this moment to bring about societal equality in the manner education is arranged. For instance, in Haiti, the colonizers do not allow for educational equality but the parents have struggled to make their children be able to recognize some linguistic codes used in Parisian French so that they can fit in the professional market. For people to grow individually there is need of self- actualization; this is to mean that with the brothers getting positive role models who will give them just a bit of basic motivation, their lives will change a great deal (ibid, p283). The whites should stop their negativity in life and understand that hard work is the key to success; it is through this that they will not depend on the fact that they are white for their survival. The brothers should realize that patience pays and it is through patience that they will get to the top since they can not go to the top at once but has to go through steps which take time (ibid p 226). If the teenagers tried hard enough in their every day lives then they could have made it in life. There is one boy who almost made it but he fails because he can’t drop the behaviors of the poor such as having kids at a tender age. There are some behaviors which cannot be changed by education as is shown by the boy who makes it to a community college and has a chance of going further but has to drop out after he impregnates a girl in the neighborhood. The youngsters just lacked the drive to forget about their beginnings and thus work hard to better their lives so their failure to achieve their set targets had nothing to do with capitalism. The theoretical framework used by the author is that of the two major races in the United States which can never be at par in their achievements in the society. The blacks are expected to be below the whites and seen working very hard and achieving very little while the whites should just have achievements come their way with no struggling. The main topic of discussion is that of whether hard work pays as it is shown in the lives of the brothers who although achieve little, it is due to the efforts they put; the whites end up gaining nothing since they do not work hard at all and in deed leave school and engage in illegal activities. It is at this point that the country should change the academic curriculum to fit the groups in discussion. The topic of discussion is very important to the author for he wants to show that even the blacks can make it to the top of the society if at all they work towards it. It also shows that the blacks should not loose hope because they are not gaining to their expectations since they can not do it in a day. One only needs to set a target and work towards it and be satisfied even if he makes a single step towards it and believe that it is only a matter of time before he achieves the whole of it (ibid, p 204). Macleod hangs out with both groups to get the first hand data rather than relying on statistical data. He follows them and even after realizing their beliefs, that is achievement ideology, he later goes back to them to collect data on how far they have gone in realizing their dreams. He goes directly to his interest group which is the teenagers (the blacks and whites) and in fact he shows no interest in their background families but is only interested in their aspirations and beliefs. The author used the best method in his collection of data since he got the first hand information which is never distorted and biased; this is shown by the fact that he interviewed those people he was interested in and also use the method of data collection of observation. He also asked the questions for the information that he saw necessary such as their aspirations and the intended ways of achieving those aspirations. The results he yielded are valid because as he collects the data by asking questions, he can as well see for himself the realities for he is collecting the data by himself. He further goes back to them to see what they have achieved and finds that it is as he had expected. His going back shows that the results are true for it is at this point that he sees for himself the outcome of their beliefs without interviewing. Since his research is based on many people of two different races and ideologies, it is okay to apply it as if it is for the general population as long as the circumstances he based his research on are the same. The researcher has taken a good sample which is a good representation of the whole population since he has included in his research two races and two ideologies. There are no other better methods which could have been used to conduct this research since the most applicable are observation and interviewing and they are the ones used. The research yielded valid results since it gives a reality in America which nobody can deny; this shows that he had the best methods applicable in use to get valid results. The interpretation of the data by the author is the best he could have given since it is the reality that you have work hard to achieve your expectations and also the fact that it took time for him to make the conclusions. After he interviewed the teenagers, he had to come back to them years later to see how the youths were doing. He found out that the blacks had achieved something which is because they were optimistic but the whites had made zero progress because of their pessimism in life which led to most of them dropping out of school and start taking drugs. The book is a good read because it shows that the less fortunate in the society can change their status by working hard and stop blaming the society for their failure. The book clearly shows that one becomes what he aspires to be if he is focused and optimistic thus anybody’s son can be the president. Work cited MacLeod Jay, Aint No Makin it: Leveled Aspirations in a Low-income Neighborhood, NY, Perseus Books Group Publishers, 2008

Animal Testing and Researching Essay -- Biology Medical Biomedical Ani

Animal Testing and Researching Animal testing is supported by some, but opposed to others. The growing number of animals used in research differs among the different countries. The fruit fly and nematode are the most used animal in testing. However, the most common mammals used in animal research are mice and rats. Shaved albino rabbits and guinea pigs suffer severe testing for skin irritancy and eye irritancy. Though the usage of non-human primates are outlawed in some countries, the U.S. still finds the need to use them. The U.S. government uses tax dollars for testing pesticides and flourine products on animals. Animal testing has been a subject of controversy throughout the years. Though it may seem like a ?cruel and unusual punishment? to some, others see it as an opportunity to expand the knowledge of our constantly changing society. These experiments are the beginning of a new perspective in scientific evolution, but an end for others. Some examples of animal researching and testing would be mutagenesis, evolution, genetics, product safety, and so forth. According to the Laboratory Primate Advocacy Group, it is estimated that one hundred million animals are experimented on around the world and twenty-three to twenty-five million belong to the United States. The Department of Agriculture (USDA) states that in 2004, 26,573 rabbits, 105,678 farm animals, 64,932 dogs, 23,640 cats, 54,998 non-human primates, 244,104 guinea pigs, 175,721 hamsters and 171,321 other mammals--excluding mice and rats which make up over 80% of the number of animals tested on. The number of mice and rats are not recorded, but it is estimated that a plethora of these animals are utilized, ranging from fifteen million to twenty million. (Wikipedia... ...wn life. People?s beliefs differ with their background, whether animal testing is a pro or con. Nowadays, animals are tested a lot more humanely than the past. Fortunately, researchers are finding more alternatives to testing animals and the numbers of unnecessary deaths are decreasing. Bibliography Bennie I. Osburn, DVM, PhD, Dean. "The Mouse in Science: Why Mice? ." . 1996. UC Davis. 22 July 2006 . Best, Steven; Bentham, Jeremy; Francione, Gary; Langley, Gill . "Wikipedia." . 23 July 2006. . 23 July 2006 . "U.S. Government Testing Programs." . . . 23 July 2006 . "World Animal Net: Cosmetics Testing - Background." . . British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection. .

Globalisation ; Video games

I am sitting in a small coffee shop on Nanjing Road in the heart of Shanghai's central business district as I write this post. As I look around me the energy of this metropolis is palpable. There is a sense of optimism and a can-do attitude that is remarkably similar to what I experience in every vibrant economy worldwide. There is another common thread. Gaming is pervasive. Wherever I look, whether in the coffee shop or in the subway or bus station, people are enjoying video games and immersed in their phone, tablet, or laptop.Last week, I expounded on the first of three secular orces that I believe are changing the videogame industry and today seems more relevant than ever to discuss the second one: globalization. The global software market for video games was approximately $52 billion in 2012. In Just the last 8 years, the emerging markets have gone from 12% to 47% of the market size and are growing at a compounded annual rate of nearly 30%. While the growth is broad based, countr ies like China, Brazil and Russia are on a tear, growing upwards of 100% in categories like Android and iOS.In most of these markets, consoles are a very small art of gaming today, though that is also starting to change as even countries like China are re-evaluating long held policies on allowing consoles. As I look at technological and game play trends, it is my strong belief that the market for gaming is going to sustain this growth for many years to come and in most cases even accelerate. However, with globalization comes a very different set of technical challenges. Companies can't simply replicate their success in western markets with a â€Å"rinse and repeat† of existing strategies for new geographies.Companies that simply ranslate their products verbatim and release it into new markets will fail. To succeed, you have to think global but act local. What does this mean in the context of videogames? Each country is different in its gaming patterns, consumer behavior, infr astructure, commercial norms and local regulations. Different aspects of the game have to be tailored for local playing conditions as though the game was built from the ground up for that market.A few examples: New game content that has local relevance and appeal Architectural changes that cater to local infrastructure, such as accounting for expected network latencies and packet losses. Introduction of different business models such as free-to-play Respect for local commercial norms, such as Konbini in Japan or Boleto Bancario in Brazil Expansion of the backend platform to support local offers, promotions and pricing changes Even though videogames are prevalent around the world today, there are cultural nuances that are extremely important to react to when it comes to delivering digital entertainment and services.It's not Just about marketing products differently (which is also very important) but the technology backbone that goes into supporting these titles also needs to adjust f or he country or region you're in. Everything from payment systems, gameplay mechanics and monetization strategies could be different. One such example is Plants vs. Zombies, a spectacular tower defense game from PopCap that has a massive consumer base in North America.It has had remarkable success in China with its Great Wall edition which was released on mobile in China with local content, consumer data plans (26 and 36) and local network topology. Another example is FIFA Online 3 which was recently released in Korea and is based on the game mechanics of the popular FIFA 13 console game but tailored for the local market. It has already broken records with 2. 4 million players in Just the first four weeks since launch.It's a format that works better for that market and gives us the opportunity to deliver one of our core franchises to a new audience. Global connectivity has expanded the opportunities for our industry while also completely changing the demands on our technology infra structure. I have to be thinking global with every decision I make. My next post I'll address what I see as the final secular force – social connectivity. In the meantime, I'd love to hear how going global in business impacts your day-to-day.

Water Conflicts and Dispute Resolution - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 30 Words: 8972 Downloads: 4 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Environment Essay Type Essay any type Did you like this example? THE LARSON . KING SYMPOSIUM: WATER, CATALYST OF LIFE AND STRIFE: A THREAT TO SECURITY OR A VITAL OPPORTUNITY TO FOSTER COOPERATION?: ARTICLE: INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION: WATER CONFLICTS AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION SUMMARY: The process was created in 1909 and although it uses a bottom up approach to reach consensus, the real decision making is done by the two governments; the recommendations are made by nationally appointed commissioners, and the study groups are made up of technical experts from government and elected or appointed officials who make decisions in the traditional way, where public comment and citizen engagement is at best advisory in nature and not necessarily meaningful. Most recently, Lake Mead and Lake Lanier are two examples of the many pending conflicts that focus on competing water demands. Often these problems cause real conflicts because unanticipated changes in needs, disagreements regarding the costs and values inherent in the policy priorities, and dissatisfaction with the benefits received by some participants compared to the benefits obtained by other competitive interests. In most cases, the dispute resolution mechanisms are rather basic and include some form of consu ltation, facilitation, mediation and, in some limited cases, adjudication or arbitration. Waterways and Boundary Disputes Water and boundary disputes and international treaties are not new to the United States. He understood the importance of good relations between the United States and Canada, and he believed that one important aspect of that relationship was the eventual resolution of disputes arising under the Boundary Waters Treaty. Grey pressed Canadas leadership to appoint Commissioners to the newly established International Waterways Commissions; he encouraged Secretary of State Elihu Root to participate in discussions and negotiations with Canada, and to establish a formal ongoing mechanism for Canada and the U.S. to utilize for resolving boundary disputes. The participation process used by the IJC encourages participants to better understand boundary water disputes and issues. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Water Conflicts and Dispute Resolution" essay for you Create order I. BACKGROUND Water is very special. It is needed for survival. The nature of water and its general availability is often taken for granted and only recently have industrialized nations of the world taken note of the potential problems water shortages might create for communities, businesses and governments. A supply of fresh water is not enough. There is a need for accessible, inexpensive, safe, and usable water. Emerging nations generally have a better understanding of the importance water plays in health, hygiene, education, agriculture, economic development, and peace. The United Nations estimates that by 2025 nearly 2.7 billion people will experience severe water scarcity, and contaminated water supplies will contribute to millions of deaths annually. n2 Approximately 1.1 billion people in the world lack adequate water and about 2.6 billion are without adequate sanitation. n3 In addition, only 1% of the worlds fresh water is usable. n4 The most apparent needs for water can be seen in Ind ia, China and Africa, but these examples are not isolated. India and Chinas skyrocketing economic growth have diverted old priorities and added new demands for significant amounts of additional water. n5 Other countries in South America, parts of Asia, Europe, and North America also reflect increasing demands for water. Population growth contributes to the rising demand for water, and the impact of world wide droughts caused by the changing environment has made parts of China and areas of Africa, Australia and the United States extremely vulnerable. Examples of dependence on dwindling water supplies are easily found. Declining levels of water in reservoirs, fresh water lakes and rivers are compounded by declining rainfall. n6 Similar situations can also be found in the western and southeast areas of the United States. Changing population trends, such as movements from the Northeast and Midwest United States to Atlanta, Phoenix, Las Vegas and parts of California and Texas, contrib ute to the water shortage problem. Rising energy demands because of urban/suburban growth, legal decisions and [*595] continually increasing agricultural demands have also raised awareness and understanding of the importance of maintaining adequate water supplies, preserving high quality water reserves and managing the limited water supply as effectively as possible. n7 In addition, there has been an increased awareness of the interdependence communities and countries have toward one another regarding the preservation and use of fresh water; the development and protection of existing water basins and groundwater supplies; and the conservation practices and best practices relating to water management. Conflicts over water supplies are not new. In the United States, early conflicts arose over competing agricultural and mining uses; later, residents in the Southwest fought in state and federal courts as well as at the administrative agency level over the distribution of water from t he Colorado River. Currently, Las Vegas is in several disputes regarding its need for water. The situation in Las Vegas invokes the problem demonstrated during the early 1900s, when Los Angeles acquired the water rights in the Owens Valley which left a wasteland of a former agricultural region. n8 Most recently, Lake Mead and Lake Lanier are two examples of the many pending conflicts that focus on competing water demands. n9 Current international examples of disputes over water usage and supplies can be found in conflicts arising in and around the Jordan, Saskatchewan and Rhone Rivers. n10 Other areas where concerns have arisen regarding the preservation of significant water supplies include the area surrounding the Guarani Aquifer, which covers an area greater than Great Britain, France and Spain, and provides a water source for more than twenty million people. n11 Another example is the general recognition of the ongoing problem of the Rio Grande or Rio Bravo that is a lifeline for millions of people in the southwestern United States and northern Mexico. The regions aquifers are being depleted from overuse, the new demands created by [*596] changes in the demographics, the rapid expansion of Maquiladoras and the increased demands for greater agricultural production. n12 Disputes over water among competing interests can be explained by its unique ability to provide a foundation for life and society. The finite nature of water can also explain water disputes at both the local and international level. Additional conflicts may, however, arise and become even more problematic as water becomes a commodity that is controlled by international corporations that can buy, sell and trade this product for their own advantage. Currently, about ten corporations control a large portion of the worlds water supply. They represent a $ 400 billion business and will eventually contribute significant national wealth for some countries and cause other water scarce countries to be dependent on, and even debtor nations to, those companies controlling the worlds fresh water. n13 Some experts have suggested that water and the demand for fresh water will be what oil was during the last century and the lack of fresh water may generate such an intense concern and political discontent that future wars might be fought over trans-border disputes involving water. n14 Many governments and companies have begun seeking ownership or control of existing and potential sources of fresh water. Some governments are planning and building dams and reservoirs to store needed water supplies even if such action might be detrimental to those down river from the projects, and other efforts have been undertaken to control ground water within a countrys boundaries. Recently, the Governor of New Mexico, a presidential candidate, suggested there was a need for a national water policy that would divert fresh water from existing sources to those states that had an inadequate water sup ply. The proposal was not well received by the leaders and people from states having adequate water reserves, and it died a quick and quiet demise. Several other overtures have occurred from both government and business interests seeking water resources from the upper Midwest and Canada; one proposal even suggested taking water from the Great Lakes by the tankful. n15 A. Water Policy Programs, Problems and Reports Recognition of the potential problems resulting from competing demands has created several responses. One response has been the Darwinian approach of self- survival or survival of the fittest (those who have the water control those who dont have water). A second approach attempts [*597] to create and manage water policies that coordinate competing demands such as residential, agricultural and commercial needs. Attempts are also made to balance rural, urban environmental and political demands. This second approach requires the use of various experts, community representation, research and a high degree of transparency regarding public decision making. The development of public policy requires the involvement of those with competing interests and values regarding water usage, accurate and dependable data from which options can be evaluated and decisions made, and finally community support based on increased awareness and individual buy-in of the policy choices or recommendations. The likelihood of policy failure or noncompliance with policy directives usually results from lack of accountability or involvement of the appropriate government agency or body, too little funding, failure to balance all interests, unclear rules or guidelines and inappropriate or ineffective dispute resolution mechanisms. n16 Specific problems that arise concerning development of water policy are data gaps, or incomplete information; the difficulty of reflecting real direct and indirect costs in pricing; improper management of water resources caused by failing to include all jurisdictions affected by the appropriate watershed; failure to enforce existing regulations or lack of enforceable rules; incomplete intergovernmental oversight of associated issues; and shortsightedness in policy related decision-making which fails to balance competing interests. n17 Often these problems cause real conflicts because unanticipated changes in needs, disagreements regarding the costs and value s inherent in the policy priorities, and dissatisfaction with the benefits received by some participants compared to the benefits obtained by other competitive interests. Problems may also arise because political influence and pressures that alter the political landscape make compromise difficult or impossible. In some cases water policy problems may be alleviated by new funding sources, different rule interpretations, or recent judicial decisions. Other influences that remove or reduce related conflicts might be the introduction of new technology, changing market conditions, improved conservation practices or improved collaboration among the competing interest groups. n18 In order to respond to the real or potential problem, a well thought-out water policy should be followed. Successful implementation of water policy programs require, according to the International Joint Commission: 1) accountability based on predetermined obligations, 2) meeting performance standards, 3) accomp lishing results based on the means and the agreed upon expectation. n19 The end result of increased accountability should be greater [*598] compliance with policy guidelines, greater collaboration, and cooperation between governmental bodies, NGOs and private interests. In order to insure successful compliance with water policy programs it is also essential that a monitoring system be established to investigate and evaluate the activities of the program and its ultimate success or value. A program of evaluation would include a system of measurements or indicators that establish conditions and goals to be accomplished. n20 In addition, a reporting process should be created that would address economic, political, social and technical issues in a credible timely and transparent manner. n21 A comprehensive monitoring system is not in itself sufficient, therefore it is necessary to develop an assessment process that periodically examines the submitted reports and seriously evaluates the policy plan and implementation and makes recommendations to modify, correct or amend the current program to satisfy needs, such as economic, social and political changes. A report should then be made available to the public and those impacted by the water policy. n22 The report should set out the policy objectives, goals and resources available in the implementation of the policy. It should also consider options and alternatives to the existing policy and an explanation as to why recommended actions were taken. This report should also consider the financial and environmental impact of the various actions. There might also be a report as to the number and types of conflict that have arisen in regard to the policy. Finally, the report and related documentation should be made available to the public. B. Policy Conflicts The issue of who will control the water supply raises a variety of questions that often create conflicts. Who can use the water supply, to whom does the water supply belong to and what rights attach to a particular body of water or the owner of that water? Other questions that arise regarding control of water may include: can water be a commodity and therefore be sold to the highest bidder without concern for personal needs; what is the impact on future generations, or what is the value of water to the general public? Can water be protected under the Public Trust Doctrine because it is, or can be argued that it is like air, a basic necessity of life? n23 If one uses the Commons argument, then almost any water supply that is managed by a governmental body for the benefit of the public could be included in the doctrine; however, if water is not treated as part of the [*599] Commons the survival of individuals in society may be threatened. The Commons argument relies on past judici al decisions interpreting property rights and property law. n24 Other conflicts may also arise in regard to the water supply. Environmental concerns, economic benefits, the equitable distribution of resources, public participation and partisan decision-making are only a few examples. As we examine the existing water policy dispute mechanisms, it will be important to remember that, because of the wide variety of problems, there may not be a single approach or method capable of resolving all water-related conflicts. Since water supplies have a regional or even greater impact, we should look to dispute mechanisms that encourage wide public participation, allow for public consensus among participants and which serve to educate and inform the public about water demand, water conservation techniques and current alternatives to water policy. Special attention should be given the dispute techniques used in international water conflicts between the United States and Canada, and the United States and Mexico. C. Water Policy Dispute Mechanisms Disputes over water have been reported since the beginning of recorded history. A war over a water-related issue occurred over 4,500 years ago, and during the last 1,200 years there have been about 3,600 water related international treaties. n25 Since 1870 there have been 145 treaties to manage water, of which 124 are bilateral and twenty-one are multilateral. n26 The principal focus of these agreements has been related to hydropower, but there are other agreements that concern themselves with water distribution for consumption, industrial usage, navigation, pollution and flood control. n27 Many of the treaties provide for exchange of data between the signatories of the treaty. This effort provides an opportunity for program administrators and technical experts to build relationships and interdependence within their working group. Some conditions of these water resource treaties include a formula or methodology for allocating water within the agreement or by the use of a board o r governing body; the use of economic benefits for one or more of the treaty participants; recognition that the water resource is unique and must be given special consideration in determining the use and distribution of the water in question; and usually downstream participants are given clearer and more specific protection. n28 Treaty participants often negotiate a variety of non-water linkages in their [*600] agreements relating to political concessions, exchange of high quality useable water and access to capital and pollution control mechanisms. n29 Many of the international agreements, about 55%, provide for some form of monitoring process, and approximately 50% of the treaties provide for some form of dispute resolution process which could include an advisory council, a third neutral party or a designated organization such as the United Nations. n30 In most cases, the dispute resolution mechanisms are rather basic and include some form of consultation, facilitation, mediation and, in some limited cases, adjudication or arbitration. Historically, most water treaties established a hierarchy of uses when negotiating water agreements. Generally, navigation is given priority over other preferences, but today most agreements do not list the order of preferences. Instead, they indicate the options or alternative uses for the water. Usually the preference list would include: domestic and municipal uses, industrial uses, navigation, recreational uses, agricultural uses, and energy uses. n31 II. INTERNATIONAL APPROACHES TO ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTES A. Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) When disputes arise over issues addressed in water-related treaties, the mechanism used in resolving the conflict is often an advisory board, an ad hoc or permanent commission, or a governmental body. These bodies have various levels of authority and frequently must have approval from a national or regional government before a decision can be implemented. Until recently there had been no unified forum to which states, NGOs, individual citizens and corporate or international groups could turn for resolution of their disputes. n32 The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) may now, however, be used to resolve water disputes. When taken together, the PCA and the Optional Rules for Environmental Conflicts provide interested parties the opportunity to reach an agreement that is acceptable and capable of harmonizing the needs of diverse interests, cultures and values. n33 In addition, the PCA approach provides decision makers who are experienced in environmental matters, who understand the impact of these decisions on the environment and who need to maintain a high degree of confidentiality regarding national security [*601] issues and proprietary data with a process to produce decisions in a timely manner. n34 The PCA Options are tailored especially for environmental disputes and provide some useful features such as detailed rules for arbitration and conciliation, the use of environmental experts as witnesses, and a process that aids in the facilitation of disputes and the monitoring of any settlement agreement. n35 Currently, over ninety countries have adopted the PCA Environmental Arbitration and Conciliation Rules and have contributed to improving the possibility of environmental disputes being settled more quickly and with greater participant satisfaction. n36 The PCA Environmental Rules fill a gap in the decision-making process for environmental disputes that had not been previously filled. The Rules reflect a broad international acceptance of at least tw o alternatives with defined rules which parties can use and be confident that they will be heard and given a fair hearing regarding their concerns. The Rules do not solve all the problems regarding environmental conflicts but they are a vast improvement over prior dispute mechanisms. The Rules now bring environmental dispute procedures more closely in line with dispute mechanisms found in, for example, investment treaties or the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). n37 Conflicts regarding the distribution of existing water supplies between treaty participants and/or regarding the order of allocation of water among competing users eventually become a public dispute. Governmental bodies are part of every public dispute and because of their involvement, these disputes take on different characteristics than private conflicts. Generally speaking, the public nature of a dispute means public participation, greater transparency, and possible political pressure . Public disputes are, however, similar to private disputes in that the dispute resolution mechanisms available to parties in conflict are the basic alternative dispute resolution options or derivatives of these options. B. Dispute Mechanism Techniques The two most common dispute resolution techniques are arbitration and mediation. Arbitration or non-binding arbitration occurs when two disputants refer their conflict to a third party decision-maker known as the arbitrator, who will render a decision which will generally be final, or only advisory in [*602] non-binding arbitration. Usually arbitrations are the result of a prior contractual agreement, but arbitrations can also begin when the disputants agree to use the arbitration process to resolve a pending dispute. In arbitration or non-binding arbitration the parties select one or more arbitrators, who hear the case as presented by the representatives of the parties and then issue an award or advisory opinion. Most arbitration decisions cannot be appealed. Parties to an arbitration usually need to agree in advance to the arbitration format and the form of the arbitrators report. Arbitration provides parties with an opportunity to select an excellent ethical fact-finder, who will generate an impartial opinion. It avoids problems associated with litigation and creates a binding decision to be followed by the parties. Non-binding arbitration may be valuable because it could provide a speedy decision based on the recommendation of an expert. Parties may not want to use this type of arbitration if cost or timing is a problem. The arbitration process can often reduce conflicts between the parties and reduce the amount of discovery needed. Mediation is a facilitative process. Mediation is a rapidly growing technique that involves a neutral third party trained to assist the parties negotiating an agreement. The mediator has no independent authority and does not render a decision; any decision must be reached by the parties themselves. Another definition of mediation refers to mediation being an art and not a science, therefore, the process reflects many different and rich options for dispute settlement. n38 One set of authors say mediation is a process in w hich an impartial third party acts as a catalyst to help others constructively address and perhaps resolve, plan a transaction or define the contours of a relationship. n39 Finally, Kimberlee Kovach says mediation is the intervention into a dispute or negotiation by an acceptable, impartial and neutral third party who has no authoritative decision- making power to assist disputing parties in voluntarily reaching their own mutually acceptable settlement of issues in dispute. n40 The mediation process is simple. The initial stage begins with a preliminary review of the facts by the mediator. Mediation begins with an opening statement that describes the process and sets mutually agreeable ground rules. The second stage begins the fact-finding and is the time for the parties to present their case and to confront the issues. This is also the time when venting may occur between the parties. During this stage positions are presented, the interests of the parties are discovered and basic agreement on possible solutions might be aired. The next stage includes a discussion of proposed settlement options, and the mediator must generate movement toward settlement if the parties are at an impasse. The final stage is [*603] agreement between the parties and negotiating the terms of the settlement agreement. Mediation can be described as facilitative, evaluative or transformative. The facilitative method encourages a problem solving approach to dispute resolution. This method requires the mediator to encourage mutual discussion, exchange of information and creative ideas as to how the dispute might be solved. The facilitative method is designed to build consensus. It is quite flexible in the implementation of the process, and it is the least adversarial between the parties. The evaluative method is focused on the resolution of the dispute. The mediator hears the arguments and then attempts to encourage a particular solution between the parties by using his or her skill s, knowledge and expertise. This form of mediation may develop into a shuttle diplomacy approach where the mediator moves back and forth between two rooms and the parties and their lawyers consider various proposals and counter proposals. The third method is a newer mediation approach known as transformative mediation. This method attempts to create a setting that will give the parties the opportunity to exercise their choice and to leave the final decision and responsibility of resolving their conflict to themselves. Healing, reconciliation and the making of a lasting agreement are left to the parties and their individual abilities. The mediator in this approach performs the function of a guide or advisor during the process. Mediation is useful and likely to be successful if the parties have had an ongoing relationship. If cost is an issue, then mediation is the least costly alternative. If one of the parties finds it necessary to express their emotions or if they get out of con trol during formal proceedings, then mediation is a workable solution. Mediation, because it is private and flexible, allows for the use of creative solutions and it may allow the parties to communicate more effectively with each other. Mediation can also be referred to as non-directive and directive mediation. Non- directive mediation describes how the mediators operate in regard to their attempts to influence the parties. In this model the mediator avoids making judgments, recommending options and questioning statements and arguments. A directive mediation oriented mediator would express opinions, make proposals, challenge values, question positions and attempt to steer the parties to his or her solution. Prior to most arbitration or mediation efforts there is a period of discussion, consultation or negotiation that frequently results in a dispute being resolved, troubling actions modified or sticking points settled. Often these methods are ad hoc, informal and unstructured. The process that precedes formal or structured procedures is known as negotiation. Negotiation, unlike arbitration or mediation, does not require the services of a third party neutral. Usually, the interested parties begin a conversation with one another when they believe there is a misunderstanding. Here they are seeking a benefit or improved situation [*604] when compared to their current position or where they try to avoid further escalation of the initial conflict. Negotiation is a conflict resolution technique that settles disagreement and seeks to avoid or prevent future disputes. Consultation may precede a structured negotiation and is frequently used in major contract disputes. Because of the dramatic growth of international trade and the development of the World Trade Organizations (WTO) four-part Dispute Settlement System, its use has increased greatly. Usually consultation is entered into voluntarily and is used to help the parties understand their dispute, how the parties see the issues, and to clarify the legal rights and claims of all parties. WTO records indicate that more than half of their cases are settled or abandoned during the consultation phase. n41 Consultation allows parties to modify their positions, change their understanding or to acquire new information that may influence their action or thinking. n42 Consultation is often voluntary but it may become obligatory if included as a contact clause or treaty requirement. Both negotiation and consultation are devices to encourage cooperation and their use, when mandated, functions as an anticipatory action to avoid or prevent the use of formal or structured dispute settlement mechanisms that are more costly and time consuming. Another possibility when international treaties or conventions are involved and parties to a dispute are not able to reconcile their differences though negotiations is the use of the Good Offices of the governing body of the agreement. Generally, Good Offic es means the office of the secretariat of the organization or body responsible for the implementation of the agreement. The use of Good Offices may be as simple as facilitating a conversation between the disputing parties or providing facilities for such a meeting. It may also include the provision of mediation or conciliation services or it may require the actual intervention by an international body. n43 The use of Good Offices has been a frequently used tool in international diplomacy and was integrated in the Hague Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes in 1907. More recently, similar language has been included in agreements creating the World Trade Organization and the Law of the Sea Convention. Disagreements at the international level often address issues and facts that the parties do not agree to or that they find nearly irreconcilable. When such an impasse occurs it is possible to seek the help of a board of inquiry or a fact-finding body commissi on to investigate and report findings [*605] related to the disagreement. The commission option was initially an ad hoc undertaking that was formalized in the 1899 Hague Convention for the Pacific Settlement of Disputes. n44 The early commissions were established to examine issues in dispute such as when the U.S. battleship Maine was sunk, when the Russian Fleet fired on British fishing vessels in 1904, and when an American woman was killed in a Chilean sponsored car bombing in the United States. n45 These commissions and board inquiries are less frequently used now because other ADR techniques are available and parties are comfortable using them. Conciliation is another ADR method used to resolve international disputes. This method is similar to both mediation and arbitration. Conciliation as a process has been used for about eighty-five years, and over 200 bilateral treaties and many multilateral agreements have language enabling disputants to use this alternative. n46 The idea of conciliation commissions, a combination of inquiry commissions and conciliation, were actually used as early as 1914 but the concept has not become a routine procedure in dispute resolution practice. n47 Conciliation requires a third party neutral to encourage the disputing parties to begin a dialogue with one another and to arrive at a mutually agreeable resolution process. It also requires the neutral to examine the circumstances surrounding the conflict and, after an independent inquiry, make a recommendation based upon the evidence and information that has been discovered during the process of fact finding. n48 The parties are not required to accept the recommendation. Conciliation resembles mediation in its facilitative, non- adversarial and non-binding aspects but it follows formalities more like arbitration, such as investigation, evaluation and decision-making. n49 Conciliation has been successful in the few cases where it has been tried, and it provides benefits to the parties because they can reject any recommendation if they desire. n50 In addition, if the dispute moves forward neither party should be surprised by the arguments of the opposite side or of the factors that support the conciliators solution. Conciliation, like several other ADR mechanisms, allows disputing parties to select the best conflict resolution process for the particular facts and the needs of the parties. Public conflicts such as those addressing water-related matters require a decision making process that encourages public participation and allows interested parties to identify their values, goals, needs and expectations. The opportunity for public participation gives the parties their [*606] voice to engage in making important public choices and the ability to affirm the governing process. Public participation must address individual concerns of the disputing parties; it must allow for debate and argumentation, and it should give interested parties a sense of which fa ctors will be used to make the decision and how that decision will benefit all participants. Decision-makers in water disputes are usually elected or appointed officials who must carry out legislative, administrative or treaty mandates and directives. Public officials are often wary of public conflict and are cautious about placing contentious issues before the public. Todays public officials understand the expectation of accountability and the importance of meeting the demands and preferences of parties to a public conflict. Public decisions require parties to be aware of the interests of opposing parties, the choices that are available, and the need for reasonable compromises among the vested interests. Public decisions require agreement through consensus and consensus building. The process selected to reach agreement in water dispute conflicts is critical, and the long term viability of the water supply may be dependent upon finding workable compromises. III. INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION, DISPUTE RESOLUTION AUTHORITY AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION A. Waterways and Boundary Disputes Water and boundary disputes and international treaties are not new to the United States. For example, boundary disputes can be traced to 1650 between New York, a Dutch colony and the colony of Connecticut that was referred to Massachusetts for a decision. n51 The Articles of Confederation provided for a boundary dispute settlement mechanism in 1777, and a water-related dispute regarding property in the valley of the Susquehanna River was decided in 1782. n52 The Treaty of Paris, in 1783, was an attempt to resolve territorial jurisdiction of boundary waters and navigation rights regarding the Mississippi. n53 This agreement was significant because it related to navigation of boundary waters, the claims of British merchants and the confiscation of property from U.S. vessels. n54 The Jay Treaty combined three different boards of commissions to resolve public disputes, and in 1814 the Treaty of Ghent provided specific standard for boundary settlements along the St. Lawrence River. A va riety of other boundary agreements were entered into from 1817 to 1903 that directly influenced the use or benefits, and limitations on claims relating to boundary matter between the United [*607] States and Great Britain, or more specifically Canada. n55 The 1815 Convention dealt with trade and shipping; the Rush-Bagot Treaty of 1817 was concerned with armed vessels on the Great Lakes; the Webster-Ashburton Treaty of 1842 addressed river and island channels; the Northwest Boundary Treaty of 1846 focused on the Columbia River; and the Washington Treaty of 1871 addressed the navigation rights on several rivers including St. Lawrence, Yukon, Porcupine and Stikine. During the mid-1800s several treaties regarding water rights and boundaries were entered into with Mexico. Prior to the Mexican War, several claims had been made against the United States. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo used a domestic tribunal and was, after many claims, concluded in February of 1848. This agreement was important because it committed the two countries to resolve their problem through the use of specific means. n56 Later in the Convention of 1868, specific language was cited requiring a decision be made according to public law, justice and equity. n57 In 1889, the International Boundary Commission on the Rio Grande was created and by 1895, the parties had established an agreement relating to irrigation and possible construction of dams on the Rio Grande. n58 This model was followed a year later when a similar recommendation was made concerning Canada and the United States. B. Canada and the United States As early as 1888 the United States and Canada were at odds over a variety of water and boundary issues. The Lake of the Woods and the water of the St. Mary and Milk rivers were examples of such issues. n59 In order to address these and related issues, the Canadian government created a Commission known as the International Waterways Commission that was a forerunner to the International Joint Commission created in 1909. n60 Prior to 1909, the Canadian government had very little experience with international relations, especially related to trade and national defense. During the late nineteenth and early twentieth century Canada was not allowed to determine its own external political relations and diplomacy. n61 Many Canadians were very interested in developing a diplomatic working relationship with the United States, especially in regard to fishing rights, boundary rights, water use and seal hunting. n62 In 1903, when Great Britain and the United States began discussions regarding the definitive boundary [*608] between Alaska and Canada, the Canadian government felt strongly that Canadian delegates or representatives should be engaged in the general discussions, evaluation, and decision making regarding its own boundaries. In the Alaskan boundary dispute, Great Britain had more interest in accommodating United States interests than Canadian interests and, therefore, kept the Canadians out of the general discussion and most meetings, and when an agreement was reached ratification was given to the Canadian Prime Minister indirectly. n63 Any claim made by the Canadians or position favorable to Canada had to be proposed and supported by Great Britain. Negotiations were not successful, and eventually the matter was referred to an arbitration panel which was, according to Prime Minister Laurier, unfair and anti- Canadian. n64 C. Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 During the early months of 1905 a new Governor-General of Canada, the Fourth Earl Grey, was appointed and his arrival was an important step in improving Canada- U.S. relations. n65 He understood the importance of good relations between the United States and Canada, and he believed that one important aspect of that relationship was the eventual resolution of disputes arising under the Boundary Waters Treaty. Grey pressed Canadas leadership to appoint Commissioners to the newly established International Waterways Commissions; he encouraged Secretary of State Elihu Root to participate in discussions and negotiations with Canada, and to establish a formal ongoing mechanism for Canada and the U.S. to utilize for resolving boundary disputes. n66 Initially, Canadians were suspicious of the efforts by Great Britain and the United States, but by 1907, a new Boundary Waters Treaty was being negotiated and by the time the agreement was signed in 1909, Canada was part of a bilateral relationsh ip which recognized its sovereignty in North American policy matters. n67 The Boundary Water Treaty of 1909 was ratified by Great Britain in March of 1910, in April by the United States and by Canada in 1911. n68 The Boundary Waters Treaty preamble reflects a brief statement indicating that it is to settle all questions pending before the United States and Canada and to make provisions for the adjustments and settlement of those questions. n69 The mechanism used to resolve these questions or issues [*609] was the International Joint Commission (IJC) found in Article VII of the Treaty. Article VII created a Commission consisting of six members, three Canadians and three Americans which had jurisdiction over all cases involving the use obstruction or diversion of the waters included in the agreement. n70 Article VIII establishes a list of enumerated preferences for decision-making purposes. The preferences are: (1) Uses for Domestic and sanitary purposes; (2) Uses for navigat ion, including the services of canals for the purposes of navigation; (3) I.Uses for power and for irrigation. n71 In general, the Treaty directs the Commission to perform judicial, investigative administrative and arbitral functions. These functions must be carried out in compliance with the conditions of the Treaty and should balance the interests of the parties as much as possible. n72 The Commissions authority allows it to hear and decide questions that have been referred to it by the United States or Canada. When an application or referral is made, the IJC shall examine and make separate reports and conclusions to the governments of the United States and Canada. The report should include appropriate detail, conclusions related to the examination, a decision by the Commission, and if necessary a minority report if there is any disagreement among the Commission members. The report is a recommendation by the Commission and will include any exceptions or limitations on the qu estion referred. n73 If the Commission is divided equally or if the members cannot make a decision, the members must make a report to the two governments and an umpire will be appointed according to the rules established by Article XLV of the Hague Convention, paragraphs four, five and six of the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. n74 This alternative has never been used in IJC recommendations. n75 [*610] D. Referral and Recommendations Since the inception of the IJC there have been over sixty applications and more than fifty-five references. n76 The vast majority of these actions resulted in mutual agreement and nearly all of the recommendations had four or more commissioners supporting the decision. n77 Commission recommendations require action by the two governments before any final decision occurs. The Commission usually tries to avoid split decisions but this means that there may be a protracted discussion of issues before consensus can be reached. Once a referral has been made, the IJC will appoint a board or task force to engage in fact- finding. n78 This body will have equal members from both Canada and the United States, include officials from different levels of government, have experts from appropriate areas, and include some or all commissioners and IJC staff. Once the team has been selected the members of the body will meet and determine what is to be studied, how the issue will be measured, how long the study will take and what review will be necessary. n79 Usually the study group will conclude with science- based answers that are then considered by the Commissioners. n80 Before action can be taken by the Commissioners a public hearing which is open to all interested parties must occur. n81 In addition to hearings being public, governments and interested persons may present oral or documentary evidence and witnesses may be examined or cross-examined by the Commissioners. Most IJC responses take about one year to complete but some have been completed in six months and others will have taken several years. n82 In some circumstances one of the governments also may refer questions to the Commission. When the Commissioners have accepted the report from a study group, and a hearing has been held for interested parties, the Commissioners will consider the matter presented before them and make a decision regarding the proper disposition of the pending question. The decision-making p rocess used by the IJC depends upon the ability to reach consensus among the Commissioners, among the study group members and to some extent among the interested persons who appear at the various hearings. This approach builds from the bottom up and requires technical experts, government officials and Commissioners from both countries to reach agreement or near agreement. Such an approach is time consuming and allows for the possibility of the Commission being immobilized or at least delayed because of resistance from a well-organized opposition. [*611] There is a second method of presentation that can be used to obtain a decision from the IJC. One government on its own behalf or on the part of a person who needs special consideration regarding the use obstruction or diversion of water can submit an application requesting the Commission to take appropriate action. The application by an individual person must be moved by one country and once submitted to the IJC must also be trans mitted to the other country. n83 If the Commission takes action and makes an order approving the request, then the appropriate government authority must authorize action. n84 The basic format for the application presentation begins with the request and statement supporting the request followed by notice in the Canada Gazette and the Federal Register, then statements in reply to the request by supporters or those in opposition to the application. n85 The Commission may, if it chooses, enter into consultation with the applicant and an open hearing may be scheduled if necessary. n86 Interested parties may participate and can either engage personally or through their counsel. n87 A verbatim transcript is prepared after the hearing and the Commissioners may require further evidence, examine and cross-examine witnesses and determine the probative value of any evidence. n88 E. Participation and Consensus The Boundary Waters Treaty gives interested persons an opportunity to be heard on matters before the Commission that were raised either by referral or application. In addition, study groups may have public members as either specialists or non- specialists and notice provisions require publication in national publications to encourage public engagement. The Commission offices assist interested persons by providing materials and reports in hard copy and electronic formats. If questions merit increased public involvement or if the boundary issue is of broad cross-border importance, such as the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, special public information programs may be created. Public participation usually allows proponents and opponents to identify their views and feelings about actions or inactions of the governments; it provides the public with the opportunity to become better informed about the issues and questions being discussed, and it serves as a monitor on the judgment of public officials to be more thoughtful in their responses. n89 The participation process used by the IJC encourages participants to better understand boundary water disputes and [*612] issues. In addition, the ability of interested persons to participate in public hearings may help develop support among many of the participants, especially if interested persons feel they have been given some degree of due process and if the IJC and the governments have been responsive to the citizen engagement process. The IJCs participation process may, however, not be as responsive as many citizens would like. The process was created in 1909 and although it uses a bottom up approach to reach consensus, the real decision making is done by the two governments; the recommendations are made by nationally appointed commissioners, and the study groups are made up of technical experts from government and elected or appointed officials who make decisions in the traditional way, where public comment and ci tizen engagement is at best advisory in nature and not necessarily meaningful. The goal of consensus decision-making is to arrive at a decision that all parties agree to even if that decision is not equally acceptable to all parties. n90 This decision-making approach does not call a vote, and attempts to provide all parties with something of value. One benefit of this approach is that it often creates new solutions to old problems by blending the needs of many participants. Several questions, however, can be raised when measuring the success of consensus decision-making, including: 1) is the eventual agreement acceptable to the parties? 2) is the result fair to the parties? 3) taken together are the gains maximized? 4) is the decision efficient? and 5) is the result an improvement over prior relationships or solutions? If these standards are used, can one find the IJC process successful? The IJC process is time consuming but it does appear to resolve most problems that participan ts raise. The process appears to be fair in regard to due process requirements, but it may lack some of the current expectations for citizen participation. The results appear to improve the circumstances surrounding the referral and applications. This is especially true given the requirements of equal treatment between the parties and the use of the Treatys priorities. IV. CONCLUSION The Commissions decision-making process has worked well since 1909 when the Boundary Waters Treaty was entered into by Canada and the United States. There have been many important boundary and water disputes, and the consensus approach seems to have served both the United States and Canada well. The Treaty established a system of priorities, and in light of the priorities, a basic principle of equal use and equal treatment has recognized the essential value of water to citizens on both sides of the Canada-U.S. boundary. In addition, the Commission has relied on a science- [*613] based foundation for its decision, which has eliminated much of the potential political problems that could have been very detrimental to the international relations between Washington D.C. and Ottawa. The use of balanced study groups has also contributed to the success of the Boundary Waters Treaty. Some problems, however, do exist in the process such as the time it takes to address complicated and pressin g issues, and the issue relating to public participation which reflects a traditional approach of citizen comment and government decision-making. Spreading the power, authority and control among more of the interested persons would build more confidence in the IJC and a greater degree of comfort in decisions when they are made. Additionally, use of the concept of consultation could encourage more public awareness and the possibility of a better exchange of information. The Commission might also consider using some of the tested and acceptable alternative dispute resolution techniques. Mediation might be of help to relieve the tension between opponents before they engaged the hearing phase of the process. Another alternative might be to use conciliators when interested persons submit an application for specific action by the Commission. The use of some form of appeals process or reconsideration option before the Commission forwards its decision to the two governments might also be co nsidered Legal Topics: For related research and practice materials, see the following legal topics: Energy Utilities LawAdministrative ProceedingsGeneral OverviewInternational LawDispute ResolutionGeneral OverviewInternational Trade LawTrade AgreementsIntellectual Property Provisions FOOTNOTES: n1 Professor of Law, Hamline University School of Law. n2 Rick Moore, Its Crystal Clear: Water is Emerging as the Commodity of the Future, UMN News, Summer 2004, https://www1.umn.edu/umnnews/Feature Stories/Crystal clear Water is emerging as the commodity of the future.html. n3 Bret Schulte, A World of Thirst, U.S. News World Rep., June 4, 2007, at 51. n4 Id. at 53. n5 Id. n6 Yuan Yuan, Thirsty China, Beijing Rev., Jan. 10, 2008, at 20-21. n7 See generally Susan S. Hutson et Al., Estimated Use of Water in the United States in 2000 (2004), available at https://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2004/circ1268/pdf/ circular1268.pdf. n8 Alex Markels, Sin Citys Continuous Flow, U.S. News World Rep., June 4, 2007, at 48-49. n9 See generally David Lewis Feldman Ruth Anne Hanahan, Southeast Water Resources: Management and Supply Issues S y m p o s i u m R e p o r t ( 1 9 9 8 ) , https://eerc.ra.utk.edu/divisions/wrrc/sws/REPORT-1998.pdf. n10 See generally Proceedings [of] the [Fifth] Rosenberg International Forum on Water Policy (2006), available at https://rosenberg.ucanr.org/documents/ Volume of Proceedings Rosenberg Forum Banff Canda 2006 web.pdf. n11 International Organisations Urge Group of Eight Leaders to Allocate Funds to Promote Cooperation Over Transboundary Waters, Intl Lakes and Rivers (Dept for Econ. Soc. Affairs, United Nations, N.Y.; The Econ. Commn for Latin Am. the Caribbean, Santiago, Chile), J u n e 2 0 0 3 , a t 5 , a v a i l a b l e a t https://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/sdissues/water/ rivers lakes news39.pdf. n12 See Howard LaFranchi, US, Mexico Hear Drip, Drip, Drip of Water Draining From Border, Christian Sci. Monitor, Mar. 5, 1996, available at 1996 WLNR 1200264; see also Marc N. Scheinman, Report on the Present Status of Maquiladoras, in The Maquiladora Industry 19, 19 (Khosrow Fatemi ed., 1990) (explaining that maquiladoras are U.S. subsidiaries in Mexico and that [s]ince 1982 they have grown very rapidly while the rest o f the Mexican economy has languished in deep recession). n13 Moore, supra note 2. n14 Id. n15 Id. n16 See generally Feldman Hanahan, supra note 9. n17 Id. n18 U.S. Dept of the Interior, Water 2025: Preventing Crises and Conflict in the West 4 (2005), available at https://www.usbr.gov/water2025/images/Water2025-08-05.pdf. n19 Intl Joint Commn, 13th Biennial Report on Great L a k e s W a t e r Q u a l i t y 7 ( 2 0 0 6 ) , https://www.ijc.org/php/publications/pdf/ID1601.pdf. n20 Id. at 10. n21 Id. at 11. n22 Id. at 16-18. n23 See Melissa Kwaterski Scanlan et al., Realizing the Promise of the Great Lakes Compact: A Policy Analysis for State Implementation, 8 Vt. J. Envtl. L. 39, 41 (2006) (suggesting this sort of analysis). n24 Id. at 44-45. n25 See Jesse Hammer Aaron Wolf, Patterns In International Water Resource Treaties: The Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database, 9 Colo. J. Intl Envtl. L. Poly 215, 216 (1998). n26 Id. at 215-224 n2 7 Id. n28 Id. n29 Id. n30 Id. n31 Stephen C. McCaffrey, The Law of International Watercourses 48 (2001). n32 Dane Ratliff, The PCA Environmental Arbitration and Conciliation Rules, 1 Transnatl Disp. Mgmt. 1 (2004), https://www.transnational-dispute-management.com/ samples/freearticles/tv1-1-roundup 12.htm. n33 Id. n34 Id. at 2. n35 Id. at 3. n36 Dane P. Ratliff, The PCA Optional Rules for Arbitration of Disputes Relating to Natural Resources and/or the Environment, 14 Leiden J. Intl L. 887, 887 n.1 (2001). The PCA Rules provide a forum to which states, inter-governmental organizations, non-governmental organizations, corporations, and private parties can have recourse when they agree to use them in seeking resolution of disputes involving environmental protection, and/or conservation of natural resources. Id. at 889 (citation omitted). n37 See id. at 888. n38 James J. Alfini et al., Mediation Theory and Practice 107 (2d ed. 2006). n39 Carrie Menk el-Meadow et al., Dispute Resolution: Beyond the Adversarial Model 266 (2005). n40 Kimberlee K. Kovach, Mediation: Principles and Practice 27 (3d ed. 2004). n41 William J. Davey, The World Trade Organizations Dispute Settlement System, 42 S. Tex. L. Rev. 1199, 1200 (2001). n42 J.G. Merrills, International Dispute Settlement 3 (3d ed. 1998). n43 Jacqueline M. Nolan-Haley et al., International Conflict Resolution 35 (2005) ([U]nder the auspices of good offices, individuals use a variety of means to facilitate the resolution of disputes and conflicts, including informal contracts, friendly suggestions, or mediation. More recently . . . good offices has been expanded to include the intervention of international organizations.). n44 Merrills, supra note 42, at 45. n45 Id. at 45-46, 56. n46 Id. at 84. n47 Id. at 84; see also Nolan-Haley et al., supra note EREF 43, at 36 (discussing the origin of conciliation and the formalities which distinguish it from mediation). n48 Merrills, supra note 42, at 70. n49 Id. at 70, 71; see also Nolan-Haley, supra note 43, at 36. n50 Merrills, supra note 42, at 85-86. n51 Jackson H. Ralston, International Arbitration: From Athens to Locarno 190 (1929). n52 Id. n53 Louis M. Bloomfield Gerald F. Fitzgerald, Boundary Waters Problems of Canada and the United States 2 (1958). n54 Ralston, supra note 51, at 192-93. n55 Bloomfield Fitzgerald, supra note 53, at 4-10. n56 Ralston, supra note 51, at 203-04. n57 See id. at 204. n58 See id. at 8. n59 See id. at 10. n60 See id. n61 Meredith Denning R. Bothwell, Canada, Britain, the United States and the Boundary Water Treaty of 1909, Improving Triangular Relationships, April 2007, at 3. n62 Id. at 7. n63 Id. at 9. n64 Id. n65 Id. at 15. n66 Id. at 15-17. n67 Denning R. Bothwell, supra note 61, at 23. n68 Ralston, supra note 51, at 13-14; see also Boundary Waters Treaty, U.S.-Gr. Brit., Jan. 11, 1909, 36 Sta t. 2448. n69 Ralston, supra note 51, at 15 ([T]o prevent disputes regarding the use of boundary waters and settle all questions which are now pending . . . involving the rights, obligations, or interests of either . . . and to make provision for . . . settlement of all such questions as may hereafter arise.) n70 Id. at 211; see also Boundary Waters Treaty, supra note 68, art. VIII. n71 Ralston, supra note 51, at 211-12. n72 Id. at 15. n73 See id. at 213; see also Boundary Waters Treaty, supra note 68, art. X. n74 See Hague Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, art. 45, Oct. 18, 1907, in Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States of America, 1776-1949 (Charles I. Bevans et al. eds., 1969). n75 Dennis Schornack John Nevin, The International Joint Commission: A Case Study in the Management of International Waters, in Proceedings [of] the [Fifth] Rosenberg International Forum on Water Policy, supra note 10, at 6-7. n76 Id. at 5. n77 Id. n78 Id. at 19. n79 Id. n80 Id. at 20. n81 Schornack Nevin, supra note 75, at 21. n82 Id. at 22. n83 Bloomfield Fitzgerald, supra note 53, at 266. n84 Id. at 227. n85 Id. n86 Id. at 228-29. n87 Id. at 228. n88 Id. at 230-31. n89 See Ronald C. Arnett Pat Arneson, Dialogic Civility in a Cynical Age 52 (1999) (A public narrative is a means to invite common ground between communicators. Narrative serves as a background for communicative action.). n90 Susan L. Carpenter W.J.D. Kennedy, Managing Public Disputes 29 (2d ed. 2001).