Intergovernmental disputes involving water allocation
and the environment are widespread and impose costs
and uncertainties on water users, communities, and
governments. This article presents criteria for evaluating
different types of efforts to resolve disputes. The criteria
were developed after extensive analysis of several dozen
interjurisdictional disputes involving water allocation and
environmental quality. These criteria are used to examine
the strengths and weaknesses of litigation, negotiated
agreements, and market transactions as tools for effecting
changes in water allocation and management needed to
resolve transboundary disputes.