| Summary: | : In the academic literature, the assessment of water diplomacy processes has generally focused on
rational factors; some studies, however, have shown that these are not the only driving force in transboundary
water negotiations. The role of the affective aspects of transboundary water negotiations is often undervalued and
overlooked. Such aspects include emotions, trust, religion, the relationship between body and mind, and the
connection with nature. The research presented here explores if and how the spiritual beliefs and practices of
individuals engaged in water diplomacy play a role. It builds on a review of the literature on spirituality and engages
in qualitative interviews with water diplomats. The conceptualisation of spirituality and water diplomacy is applied
to the lived experiences of water diplomacy practitioners in order to assess the role of spiritual beliefs and practices
in transboundary negotiations. Fifteen professionals were interviewed about their personal, self-defined spiritual
beliefs and practices and the role they perceived them to play in water diplomacy processes. The spiritual practices
they identified included meditation, prayers, reading sacred texts, and emotional intelligence practices such as
managing emotions (self-management), active listening, effective communication, and self-awareness. The
research mainly found that spiritual beliefs and practices can play a role in the preparation of meetings on a personal
level, for example through prayers, meditation, and self-centring. During the negotiation process itself, spiritual
practices are more implicit and internal. Spiritual practices can provide an alternative to, or can complement,
classical approaches to water negotiations. Negotiators’ internal spiritual practice may manifest itself in more
positive and/or less reactive negotiation processes. Creating more room for spirituality in the negotiation setting
gives negotiators with a spiritual background more opportunity to bring in their spiritual beliefs and practices. This
can unlock new ways of negotiating, which can potentially lead to more equity in the allocation of water resources.
|
|---|