ABSTRACT
Understanding of transboundary waters and their unique management characteristics, including the nested institutional set-up across scales as an entry point for collective action, is crucial for inclusive water governance at the basin scale. Transboundary water governance is often perceived as a set of institutions, which will be axis upon which the riparian countries are supposed to rotate. In transboundary water governance, this highlights the need to position riparian states as players in international theories, and thus moves beyond viewing member states as united actors. The collective action approach is supposed to transform transboundary water governance from a zero-sum scenario (ZSS) to positive-sum outcomes (PSOs), where all stakeholders benefit from cooperation, cascading from the local to the transboundary levels. Furthering the analysis of the Nile, the case of Mekong River Commission's Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) shows how the notion of representativeness in transboundary water governance can be partially addressed through the shaping of informal networks and the formation of strategic alliances.
