Water Conflicts in a Warming World: Where Research Is Still Missing

Redacción HC
16/07/2025

Climate change doesn't start wars over water—but it often makes them worse. According to a recent systematic review published in Ambio, climate change acts as a "threat multiplier" in regions where water is already scarce, poorly managed, or deeply politicized. Yet, the global scientific community has significant blind spots in understanding how climate, governance, inequality, and livelihoods interact to create or resolve water-related tensions.

This post explores the key findings of the article "Water conflicts under climate change: Research gaps and priorities", highlighting the regions and topics still underexplored, and why better, broader research is critical for both policy and peacebuilding.

Where the Research Is—and Isn’t

Most academic studies on climate and water conflict are concentrated in Asia and Africa. These regions dominate the literature for good reason: they are both densely populated and deeply vulnerable to hydrological stress. However, other regions with rising water insecurity—such as Latin America and North America—are significantly underrepresented.

In Africa, conflicts between pastoralists and farmers over water access are a recurring theme. In Asia, studies focus largely on agricultural water management, reflecting the sector’s sensitivity to shifting rainfall patterns. However, very few studies tackle transboundary conflicts—those involving rivers and aquifers shared across countries.

Even more glaring is the lack of attention to non-violent conflicts and cooperative governance models. Instead of asking how water can be a vector for peace, much of the existing literature zooms in only after tensions have already escalated.

Unpacking the “Scoping Review” Methodology

The study’s approach was both rigorous and innovative. By using semi-automated text mining, the authors reviewed thousands of academic articles published before 2023 that explicitly link climate change, water resources, and conflict.

They analyzed key variables such as:

• Scale of conflict (local vs. international)
• Sectoral focus (agriculture, urban use, energy)
• Institutional and social factors (e.g., governance models, inequality)
• Regional distribution (continents and countries)

But the methodology also had inherent limitations:

• Heavy language bias toward English publications
• Overrepresentation of certain geographies (Asia, Africa)
• Lack of standardized metrics, which complicates cross-study comparison
• Absence of traditional meta-analytical techniques that synthesize statistical results

Key Knowledge Gaps in Global Water Conflict Research

The authors outline several critical blind spots in the global water-conflict-climate nexus:

1. Latin America is almost absent from the literature, despite being home to vulnerable basins like the Amazon and highland watersheds in the Andes.
2. Transboundary water disputes are under-researched—despite their geopolitical relevance.
3. Topics such as cooperation, gender, indigenous rights, and community-based water governance are rarely addressed.
4. Many studies fail to integrate mixed methods—the ideal combination of qualitative insights and quantitative robustness.

This gap isn't just academic: overlooking these dimensions hampers the ability of policymakers and communities to preempt or resolve water disputes.

Reframing the Narrative: From “Water Wars” to Water Systems

One of the study’s most important contributions is its departure from the simplistic “water wars” narrative. Traditional conflict literature often focuses narrowly on interstate tensions—two countries disputing over a shared river, for example.

Instead, this review emphasizes a systems-based understanding, where conflicts are shaped by the interplay of climate, politics, culture, and local economies. This broader lens is essential for designing more effective responses and fostering resilience.

Implications for Policy and Practice

For Policymakers:

• Invest in research that targets underrepresented regions, especially Latin America and North America.
• Strengthen transboundary governance frameworks, emphasizing climate adaptation and inclusive participation.
• Integrate local stakeholders (e.g., indigenous communities, women, rural workers) in decision-making processes.

For Researchers:

• Adopt interdisciplinary methods that blend computational tools with ethnographic and institutional analysis.
• Explore non-violent forms of conflict, such as protests, negotiation deadlocks, and water rationing debates.
• Rebalance the narrative: less about “who fights over water,” more about how cooperation can work.

For Civil Society and NGOs:

• Use findings to advocate for water justice, especially in regions historically excluded from research and policy.
• Promote knowledge-sharing platforms that connect communities, researchers, and institutions.

Final Thoughts: A Call to Research Where It Hurts

Water stress will define much of the 21st century’s environmental and political agenda. But to manage it well, the scientific community must look beyond the usual suspects and begin investigating neglected regions, underexplored conflict types, and overlooked social groups.

Only then can water serve not just as a source of risk, but as a foundation for cooperation and peace.

Topics of interest

Climate Biodiversity