More‐Than‐Water More‐Than‐Human

ore

A TRANSDISCIPLINARY SOCIOLOGY OF W ATER CONFLICT IN CENTRAL IRAN

A THESIS BY SEYED EHSAN TAVAKOLI-NABAVI

Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the Australian National University

December 2017

Candidate's Declaration

This thesis is presented as a “Thesis by compilation” following guidelines of the Australian National University. This thesis is structured as a series of nine connected papers, each forming one Chapter. These papers have been published, accepted or submitted for publication at the time of thesis submission. For further information regarding the authorship, status, journal and extent of the candidate’s contribution in each paper, see the “paper specification” section. This thesis comprises 95,987 words (excluding footnotes, appendices, references, tables and boxes). The thesis was evaluated and approved by the Australian National University Human Research Ethics Committee, protocol number 2014/030.

This thesis contains no material accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university. The thesis is wholly my own work except where otherwise acknowledged.

Ehsan Nabavi Date: BEng. (Civil), MEng. (Civil) 5/12/2017

iii

Acknowledgments

Undertaking this PhD has been a truly life-changing experience for me and it would not have been possible without the support and guidance that I received from many people.

During my time at Australian National University (ANU), I have been lucky enough to study something that I am fascinated with and I am very grateful to Dr. Katherine Daniell whose support provided me with this opportunity to do something that I dreamed of when I finished my Masters. I have been very privileged in having Katherine as my supervisor during these past five years, and I wish to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation for her unwavering patience and support. Thanks also to Professor Ian White, Professor Mark Evans, and Dr. Sarah Milne for supporting me through the research. And special thanks to Professor Jacqueline Lo and Dr Annmarie Elijah and other colleagues at ANU Centre for European Studies for hosting and supporting me with all their means during most part of my PhD career.

This thesis would not have been possible without the support of a scholarship award from the Research School of Social Sciences (RSSS). I also gratefully acknowledge the funding received as travel grants and visit scholarships from the Institute of Development Studies (IDS), Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research Fellowship to take part in some great training programs which became an invaluable part of my PhD experience and has shaped my approach to research. I benefitted greatly from working as a visiting scholar in the Department of Political and Cultural Change, Center for Development Research (ZEF) University of Bonn, Centre for Water and Development, School of African and Oriental Studies (SOAS), University of London. In this period, I had chance to share my thoughts and works and receive guidance from Professor Peter Mollinga, Professor Larry Swatuk and Dr. Saravanan Subramanian.

To Professor Sheila Jasanoff and STS research fellow team at Program on Science, Technology and Society Harvard Kennedy School of Government, where I was a Research Fellow in 2016-2017, for seeing the potential of this research and for your wonderful hospitality and support during my time in the US.

I acknowledge the help of Dr. Ahmad Khatoon-Abadi, Dr. HamidReza Safavi, Isfahan Chamber of Commerce, and Charmahal-Bakhtiari local government hosting me and helping me for conducting the research during the fieldwork.

Special mention to Seyed Ahmad for inspiring love of research, as well as Mohammad at the Iranian Water Policy Research Institute who were so helpful in numerous ways. I would also like to acknowledge Katherine Daniell, Maryanne McKay, Merran Laver for proofreading the papers and their helpful comments.

A very special thank you to Hessam and Ali for hosting me and supporting me during my fieldwork. To my friends and family throughout Australia, Iran, US and who have supported me in so many different ways throughout the long process of research, writing, and my travels. In particular, to Salim, MohamadReza, Fatemeh, Anna, Hossein, Pooya, Anja, Ehsan, Alireza, and Suzy for helping in whatever way they could during this challenging period.

And I would also like to say a heartfelt thank you to my Mum and Dad, my sisters Maryam and Mitra, and my very old friend Mohammad for always believing in me and encouraging me to follow my dreams, and for being on my side when it feels like no one else is.

gÉ Åç ÑtÜxÇàá Mahboub and Mohammad

vii

Abstract

Water conflict situations represent an intense meeting point of society and nature, particularly in terms of increasing water demand and diminishing resources. However, less tangible interactions also occur in these situations: between hydraulic infrastructure, governments, science and communities. Such connections are often left unidentified because of the assumption of the division between culture and nature and between the human and the nonhuman as separate categories.

This thesis argues the water conflicts that our current world seeks to govern—often through technical, apolitical, acultural approaches—are ‘hybridized’ in nature. They are immersed in myriad of nested networks of heterogeneous elements (e.g. humans, technologies, scientific evidence, laws, ideas, and biophysical processes), interacting together and connecting the past, present, and future. Specifically, what is understood in societies as ‘water conflict’ is the outcome of dynamic interactions that continuously form and reform the conflict situation, and determine the social and political orders surrounding it.

The thesis argues that we can and should go beyond singular disciplinary viewpoints to unpack this ‘water conflict assemblage’. To this end, it proposes a transdisciplinary frame of analysis, called Actor-Network-Systems (ANSs). The thesis offers a new way to reconceptualise water conflict, including the well-established notion of ‘hydrohegemony’, and ‘hydropolitics’ more generally.

The theoretical shift is brought about in two ways: first, by revisiting the meaning and implication of the ‘political’, and the ‘social’ in water research through considering the role of nonhumans; second, by establishing the connection between ‘conflict’ and ‘the future’ and the ways in which it affects the ‘sustainability’ discourse circulated in society.

Using the example of the Zayandeh-Rood water conflict in Iran, the study illustrates how different concepts developed in this thesis encourage a higher level of understanding, deeper reflection, and renewed purpose to the study of water conflict. To put the provided insights into practice, the thesis also developed and trialled a form of participatory drama, called Pathways Theatre, as an innovative initiative to influence a conflict situation, so as to transform it into a more sustainable configuration. The Zayandeh-Rood case demonstrates the value and policy-relevance of the approach to real-world conflict transformation. viii

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION Paper specification ...... xv Thesis rationale: why am I writing this thesis? ...... 2 Intoduction……...... 3 Summary of literature review and research gaps ...... 7 Research questions and approach ...... 14 Thesis structure and content ...... 18

PART 1 DIAGNOSING THE PROBLEM

Chapter 1 Boundary Matters: The Potential of System Dynamics to Support Sustainability? 1. 1. Introduction ...... 28 1.2. Sustainability and System Dynamics ...... 30 1.2.1. Sustainability and sustainable development ...... 30 1.2.2. Systems theory and System Dynamics ...... 33 1.3. The challenge of boundary setting in System Dynamics for sustainability ...... 37 1.3.1. Judgements on sustainability principles as system boundaries ...... 40 1.3.2. Judgements on problem extent for system boundaries ...... 41 1.3.3. Judgements on methodologies for developing models ...... 43 1.4. The politics of System Dynamics modelling: why boundaries matter ...... 44 1.4.1. Dynamic Integrated Climate-Economy Model: preliminary problem scope challenges ...... 45 1.4.2. Lake Urmia basin: complex modelling politics around multiple boundary judgements ...... 46 1.4.3. Zayandeh-Rood Basin: beyond the limits of System Dynamics modelling and bringing water management politics into the open ...... 50 1.5. The future of System Dynamics modelling for sustainability ...... 51

Chapter 2 Who Speaks for Water in A Time of Crisis? An Iranian Perspective 2.1. Introduction ...... 58 2.2. Democracy in a time of crisis ...... 58 2.3. Water hegemony and black-boxing ...... 60 2.4. Water spokespeople in the Iranian context ...... 62 2.5. Conclusion ...... 68

Chapter 3 (Ground)Water Governance and Legal Development in Iran, 1906–2016 3.1. Introduction ...... 72 3.2. One century of water legislation in five snapshots ...... 73 3.2.1. Codification (1906-1959) ...... 73 3.2.2. Fast-paced development and legislation (1959-1966) ...... 77 3.2.3. Development and conservation (1966-1979) ...... 78 3.2.4. Development and justice (1979-1989) ...... 81 3.2.5. Back-to-development (1989-2016) ...... 86 3.3. A short reflection on water legislation and development policies ...... 89 3.4. A way forward in legislation: ‘development and participation’? ...... 94 3.5. Concluding remarks ...... 95

PART 2 DEVELOPING A TRANSDISCIPLINARY FRAME OF ANALYSIS

Chapter 4 (Un)Sustainability Imaginaries: River Basin Politics over Water Resources and Sustainability 4.1. Introduction ...... 101 4.2. The ‘politics’? ...... 105 4.2.1. (Un)sustainability imaginaries ...... 87 4.2.2. Contextualising the politics of water and sustainability ...... 112 4.2.3. Imaginaries emancipation ...... 115 4.3. Case Study: Zayandeh-Rood River Basin ...... 119 4.3.1. Imaginary future of the past ...... 124 4.3.2. (Un)sustainability imaginaries and social order ...... 131 4.4. Conclusion ...... 137

Chapter 5 Rediscovering Social–Ecological Systems: Taking Inspiration from Actor-Networks 5.1. Introduction ...... 145 5.2. Towards a more transdisciplinary frame ...... 150 5.3. Using simplicial complexes to decipher SESs ...... 150 5.4. Moving forward ...... 157

Chapter 6 Blending Description and Explanation: A Political Sociology of Water Conflict 6.1. Introduction ...... 163 6.1.1.What is ‘social’ in the social study of water? ...... 164 6.1.2. Social structures and mechanisms ...... 165 x

6.1.3. Incorporating the sociology of ‘things’ into the field ...... 166 6.2. Theoretical background ...... 171 6.2.1. Critical realism and systems thinking ...... 171 6.2.2. Actor-Network Theory and assemblage thinking ...... 174 6.2.3. Sociological pluralism and multi-paradigms ...... 180 6.3. Theoretical development: Actor-Network-Systems ...... 181 6.3.1. ‘How’ and ‘why’ questions (description and explanation) ...... 181 6.3.2. Another oxymoron? ...... 159 6.3.3. How does the concept work? ...... 183 6.4. Rethinking water conflict through ANS ...... 191 6.4.1. Water conflict and hegemony ...... 191 6.4.2. Reconceptualising hegemony through ANS ...... 195 6.4.3. Water conflict assemblage ...... 197 6.5. Concluding remarks: ‘ANS’ and ‘sustainability imaginaries’ ...... 200

PART 3 APPLICATION OF THEORY & DEVELOPING A STRATEGY OF ACTION

Chapter 7 Understanding the Zayandeh-Rood River Conflict Using the Idea of Actor-Network-Systems 7.1. An overview of the problem ...... 207 7.2. Unpacking two episodes ...... 213 7.2.1. A piece of law ...... 213 7.2.2. A pipeline ...... 223 7.3. Conclusion ...... 237

Chapter 8 Water Conflict