The water security concept has been widened and deepened in scholarly and policy discourses in the last two decades. Even though it is challenging to identify the origin of this concept, scholars link it with the water disputes in the Middle East in the 1990s (Cook & Bakker, 2012; Grey & Sadoff, 2007; Thapliyal, 2011). At the beginning of the 1990s, water security was associated with threats to food security, energy security, environmental security. For example, studies in the 1990s linked water security to geopolitical security in the Middle East and North Afrika because of water scarcity issues (Gerlak et al., 2018). Moreover, worldwide environmental degradation has raised attention towards water security and ecological security.
The water security concept has roots in the securitization theory, which studies the perceptions of threats (Octavianti, 2020; Thapliyal, 2011; Zeitoun et al., 2016). The securitization concept was first met in international relations and was developed during the Cold War, maintaining an inherent military focus (Charrett, 2009; Stritzel, 2014). The securitization theory states that national security policy does not appear independently; instead, it is carefully designed by policymaking dynamics. Security policies are formulated around ‘dangerous,’ ‘threatening,’
‘hazardous’ issues (Stritzel, 2014; Zeitoun, 2011). In other words, external security threats negatively affect national security solved by the state-centric approach, where the state is the referent of security (Thapliyal, 2011). However, not all threats become securitization problems.
According to the Multiple Streams Framework, social/economic/environmental issues getting the attention of policymakers become policy problems. Often, problems reach the attention of decision-makers due to crises or dramatic events, or negative feedback, which requires concentration and urgent action from the policymakers (Kingdon, 2001). The traditional approach of dealing with the securitization issue is built around military capabilities, power distribution, and
resources. According to the securitization approach, safeguarding resources, including water resources, can be achieved using military measures.
The securitization concept has maintained an inherent military focus before the Copenhagen School, where scholars presented alternative interpretations of the security concept and emphasized the constructive nature of the security concept (Charrett, 2009; Leb & Wouters, 2013; Stritzel, 2014). The Copenhagen School discussed why some security issues receive more attention and relevant policy measures while others are overlooked. Securitization was defined by the Copenhagen School as “the intersubjective and socially constructed process by which a threat to a particular referent object is acknowledged and deemed worth protecting” (Charrett, 2009, p.
13). Hence, when a security issue is declared with the proper context and audience, it will get attention and mobilization of resources to handle it (Octavianti, 2020; Stritzel, 2014; Zeitoun, 2011). Understanding the nature of security issues and perceptions about security issues attempt to identify societal discourses. The Copenhagen School conceptualized security with economic, societal, environmental, and political sectors and highlighted that the role of security analyzers is to understand and interpret security issues.
The securitization theory attempts to address the questions such as “what compromises the security, security for whom, and for what” (Octavianti, 2020, p. 147). The securitization of water is linked with national security threats such as access to water, water availability, and human security against any bioterrorism, considered a geopolitical issue, and requires military measures (Cook & Bakker, 2012; Leb & Wouters, 2013; Mirumachi, 2013). For example, reducing the transboundary river flow or stopping it from upstream to downstream countries might provoke conflict, regional instability, and water insecurity. However, the idea for 'securitization' of water by national military-political institutes has not been developed (Leb & Wouters, 2013; Zeitoun, 2011). Octavianti (2020) proposed the framework of ‘determinants of securitization’ (Figure 2.1) consisting of the capacity of state (political context, expertise, experience) and characteristics of
threat (impacts, types, and uncertainties). Different water-related dangers receive various policy measures. This framework might help understand why some water-related threats are securitized while others are not. According to Octavianti (2020), water-related treats with visible effects and higher uncertainties have high probability to be securitized than water-related treats with invisible effects and low delays. Indicatively, the threats excess of water (floods) is more likely to be securitized to protect society and economy from water than threats of shortage of water (droughts) because of invisible and delayed impacts.
Figure 2.1 The framework of 'determinants of securitization'
Source: Octavianti (2020)
The Ministerial Declaration on water security in XXI century was adopted at the World Water Forum in 2000, where water security was framed as meeting human needs in access and availability to water, sustaining environmental health, mitigating risks, and promoting good water governance and cooperation (Cook & Bakker, 2012; Gerlak et al., 2018; Zeitoun et al., 2016).
Since then, water security has been extensively discussed by academic and policy communities and international organizations. Even a special journal of Water Security was initiated in 2017 by Elsevier’s publisher. Water security is one of the future potential security risks linked with
socioeconomic, environmental, and political areas. Moreover, international events highlighted the
importance of water security, such as the Asia-Pacific Water Forum on Water Security: Leadership and Commitment in 2007, World Economic Forum of Global Agenda in 2008 and other.
International organizations attempt to conceptualize and promote water security concepts internationally, such as the Global Water Partnership, UNESCO Institute for Water Education, ADB, etc. Scholars and development organizations have primarily started creating and elaborating on the water security concept.