基于平等协商的跨境水资源初始分配研究

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-9479.2024.06.20222244

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

跨境水资源分配是缓解水资源冲突、实现水资源有效治理和利用的核心问题。基于平等协商视角，利用协商谈判博弈模型刻画流域国间的合作路径。首先引入柔性权重思想，利用多准则决策模型建立跨境水资源公平合理分配模式。然后在此基础上，运用协商谈判博弈模型，近似模拟各流域国协商谈判过程，探寻公平合理、能被各流域国普遍认可的跨境水资源初始分配方案。并以澜沧江-湄公河流域为例进行实证分析，结果表明：①各流域国基于公平合理分配模式约束提出的谈判方案，体现了各流域国的利益诉求，但是各流域国理想水权分配比例之和不满足等于100%的约束条件，需要进行协商谈判，各自承担一定的水权损失，且各流域国承担的水权变化幅度在0~5.02%之间；②不同偏好情景下的谈判优化后跨境水权分配方案，平均满意度均在90%以上，相比各流域国提出的谈判方案，具有更高的满意度和稳定性，说明基于主体满意度函数来寻找水资源分配的最优解，兼顾了各流域国的利益诉求，可以提高跨境水权分配方案的可接受性；③不同分配情景下，均是中国和泰国得到的跨境水权分配比例较高，而缅甸得到的分配比例较低，从谈判前后各流域国分配比例变化率和流域国平均满意度来看，偏好公平情景和偏好效率情景下的跨境水权分配方案是各流域国争议较小的方案。通过该研究，以期提高跨境水资源分配的合理性与可行性，为减少跨境水资源冲突提供技术支撑。

关键词: 平等协商, 跨境水资源, 初始分配, 协商谈判博弈模型, 澜湄流域

Abstract:

Transboundary water resource allocation is the core issue to alleviate water resources conflicts and realize effective management and utilization of water resources. Based on the perspective of equal negotiation, we used the Negotiation Game Model to describe the cooperation path among basin countries. Firstly, we introduced the idea of flexible weight to establish a fair and reasonable allocation mode by using a Multi-criteria Decision Model. Then, we used the negotiation game model to approximate the negotiation process of each basin country, to explore a fair and reasonable initial allocation scheme of transboundary water resources that can be generally recognized by each basin country. Taking the Lancang-Mekong River Basin (LMRB) as an example for empirical analysis, the results show that: ① The negotiation scheme proposed by each basin country based on the constraint of fair and reasonable allocation mode reflects the interest demands of each basin country, but the sum of the ideal water rights allocation ratio of each basin country does not meet the constraint condition equal to 100%, so negotiation is required. Each country bears a certain loss of water rights, and the reduction of water rights borne by each basin country ranges from zero to 5.02%; ② The average satisfaction of the optimized allocation scheme under different preference scenarios is above 90%, which has higher satisfaction and stability compared with the negotiation scheme proposed by each basin country. It indicates that finding the optimal solution of water resource allocation based on the subject satisfaction function considers the interest demands of each basin country, which can improve the acceptability of the transboundary water rights allocation scheme; ③ Under different allocation scenarios, the proportion of transboundary water rights allocated to China and Thailand is higher, while the proportion allocated to Myanmar is lower. From the perspective of the change rate and the average satisfaction of each basin country before and after the negotiation, the transboundary water rights allocation scheme under the preference equity scenario and preference efficiency scenario is the less controversial scheme for each basin country. This study aims to improve the rationality and feasibility of transboundary water resource allocation and provide support for reducing water resource conflicts.

Key words: equal consultation, transboundary water resources, initial allocation, Negotiation Game Model, LMRB

李芳, 吴凤平, 赵越, 陈向南. 基于平等协商的跨境水资源初始分配研究[J]. 世界地理研究, 2024, 33(6): 27-38.

Fang LI, Fengping WU, Yue ZHAO, Xiangnan CHEN. Research on initial allocation of transboundary water resources by the vision of equal consultation: Take the Lancang-Mekong River Basin as an example[J]. World Regional Studies, 2024, 33(6): 27-38.

图/表 7

图1 跨境水资源初始分配的基本思路

Fig. 1 Basic idea of transboundary water resources initial allocation

表1 各流域国的理想水权分配比例和谈判破碎点（%）

Tab.1 Ideal allocation ratio and breaking point of each basin country

流域国	理想水权分配比例 $p i +$				谈判破碎点 $p i -$
流域国	情景1	情景2	情景3	情景4	情景1	情景2	情景3	情景4
中国	31.29	29.49	30.29	31.29	23.47	22.12	22.72	23.47
缅甸	3.28	2.55	3.17	3.28	2.46	1.91	2.38	2.46
老挝	15.27	14.56	15.27	14.55	11.45	10.92	11.45	10.91
泰国	25.86	25.86	24.16	25.40	19.40	19.40	18.12	19.05
柬埔寨	15.30	15.24	14.94	15.30	11.48	11.43	11.21	11.48
越南	22.69	22.69	22.26	18.81	17.02	17.02	16.69	14.11

表1 各流域国的理想水权分配比例和谈判破碎点（%）

Tab.1 Ideal allocation ratio and breaking point of each basin country

流域国	理想水权分配比例 $p i +$				谈判破碎点 $p i -$
流域国	情景1	情景2	情景3	情景4	情景1	情景2	情景3	情景4
中国	31.29	29.49	30.29	31.29	23.47	22.12	22.72	23.47
缅甸	3.28	2.55	3.17	3.28	2.46	1.91	2.38	2.46
老挝	15.27	14.56	15.27	14.55	11.45	10.92	11.45	10.91
泰国	25.86	25.86	24.16	25.40	19.40	19.40	18.12	19.05
柬埔寨	15.30	15.24	14.94	15.30	11.48	11.43	11.21	11.48
越南	22.69	22.69	22.26	18.81	17.02	17.02	16.69	14.11

表2 不同情景下澜湄流域水权分配方案（%）

Tab.2 Water rights allocation scheme and evaluation in Lancang Mekong River Basin under different scenarios

情景	中国	缅甸	老挝	泰国	柬埔寨	越南
情景1	26.27	3.28	14.25	22.14	14.22	19.84
情景2	25.50	2.55	14.26	22.81	14.63	20.25
情景3	26.08	3.17	14.71	21.52	14.48	20.04
情景4	27.06	3.28	14.41	22.61	14.87	17.77

表3 不同分配标准下澜湄流域水权分配结果对比分析

Tab.3 Comparative analysis of water rights allocation in Lancang Mekong River Basin under different allocation standards

分配方法	流域国
分配方法	中国	缅甸	老挝	泰国	柬埔寨	越南
按国家数量平均分配（M1）	1/6	1/6	1/6	1/6	1/6	1/6
按流域面积比例分配（M2）/%	20.75	3.02	25.41	23.14	19.50	8.18
按实际产水量分配（M3）/%	16	2	35	17	19	11
按流域人口比例分配（M4）/%	13.93	0.70	6.82	34.26	15.04	29.25
按现状用水分配（M5）/%	5.10	0.27	7.75	20.40	17.49	48.98
多主体协商谈判分配（M6）/%	26.08	3.17	14.71	21.52	14.48	20.04

表4 ε不同取值下各流域国理想水权分配比例的确定（%）

Tab.4 Determination of ideal water right allocation proportion of each basin country under different ε values

$ε$ 的取值	中国	缅甸	老挝	泰国	柬埔寨	越南	总和
0	31.46	3.47	15.27	24.41	14.96	23.66	113.23
5	30.88	3.33	15.27	24.28	14.95	22.96	111.67
10	30.29	3.20	15.26	24.26	14.94	22.25	110.20
15	29.69	3.06	15.26	24.03	14.93	21.53	108.50
20	29.08	2.92	15.26	23.90	14.91	20.81	106.88
25	28.46	2.78	15.26	23.77	14.90	20.06	105.23
30	27.83	2.64	13.82	23.63	14.89	19.31	102.12

表4 ε不同取值下各流域国理想水权分配比例的确定（%）

Tab.4 Determination of ideal water right allocation proportion of each basin country under different ε values

$ε$ 的取值	中国	缅甸	老挝	泰国	柬埔寨	越南	总和
0	31.46	3.47	15.27	24.41	14.96	23.66	113.23
5	30.88	3.33	15.27	24.28	14.95	22.96	111.67
10	30.29	3.20	15.26	24.26	14.94	22.25	110.20
15	29.69	3.06	15.26	24.03	14.93	21.53	108.50
20	29.08	2.92	15.26	23.90	14.91	20.81	106.88
25	28.46	2.78	15.26	23.77	14.90	20.06	105.23
30	27.83	2.64	13.82	23.63	14.89	19.31	102.12

表5 不同最低满意度取值下澜湄流域水权初始分配比例与满意度（%）

Tab.5 Initial allocation proportion and satisfaction degree of each basin country in Lancang Mekong River Basin under different values

最低满意度 $u i 0 p i -$	分配结果	中国	缅甸	老挝	泰国	柬埔寨	越南
20	分配比例	22.62	3.17	15.27	23.01	14.94	20.99
20	满意度	74.67	100	100	95.23	100	94.30
40	分配比例	24.13	3.17	15.27	21.70	14.93	20.79
40	满意度	79.65	100	100	89.80	100	93.40
60	分配比例	25.06	3.17	15.27	21.34	14.94	20.22
60	满意度	82.72	100	100	88.31	100	90.84
80	分配比例	26.50	3.17	14.47	21.62	14.15	20.10
80	满意度	87.48	100	94.77	89.47	94.70	90.30

表5 不同最低满意度取值下澜湄流域水权初始分配比例与满意度（%）

Tab.5 Initial allocation proportion and satisfaction degree of each basin country in Lancang Mekong River Basin under different values

最低满意度 $u i 0 p i -$	分配结果	中国	缅甸	老挝	泰国	柬埔寨	越南
20	分配比例	22.62	3.17	15.27	23.01	14.94	20.99
20	满意度	74.67	100	100	95.23	100	94.30
40	分配比例	24.13	3.17	15.27	21.70	14.93	20.79
40	满意度	79.65	100	100	89.80	100	93.40
60	分配比例	25.06	3.17	15.27	21.34	14.94	20.22
60	满意度	82.72	100	100	88.31	100	90.84
80	分配比例	26.50	3.17	14.47	21.62	14.15	20.10
80	满意度	87.48	100	94.77	89.47	94.70	90.30

图2 中国的非对称性权力对各流域国水权分配的影响

Fig. 2 The impact of China's asymmetric power on the water rights allocation of each basin country

参考文献 28

1	刘艳丽, 赵志轩, 孙周亮, 等. 基于水利益共享的跨境流域水资源多目标分配研究——以澜沧江湄公河为例.地理科学, 2019, 39(3):387-393.
	LIU Y, ZHAO Z, SUN Z, et al. Multi-objective water resources allocation in transboundary rivers based on the concept of water benefitsharing: A case in the Lancang-Mekong river. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2019, 39(3):387-393.
2	钟苏娟,毛熙彦,黄贤金.地缘安全视角下的中国国际河流水资源开发利用.世界地理研究,2022, 31(3):466-477.
	ZHONG S, MAO X, HUANG X. Water resources exploitation and utilization of international rivers in China from the perspective of geo-security. World Regional Studies,2022,31(3):466-477.
3	王涛, 刘承良, 杜德斌.1948—2018年国际河流跨境水冲突的时空演化规律.地理学报, 2021,76(7):1792-1809.
	WANG T, LIU C, DU D. Spatio-temporal dynamics of international freshwater conflict events and relations from 1948 to 2018. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2021,76(7):1792-1809.
4	邢伟.水资源治理与澜湄命运共同体建设.太平洋学报, 2016,24(6):43-53.
	XIN W. Water resources governance and building the Lancang-Mekong community of common destiny. Pacific Journal, 2016, 24(6): 43-53.
5	王志坚.权利义务对等原则在国际河流水体利用中的适用——兼及国际河流水权制度的构建.南京:河海大学出版社,2017.
	WANG Z. Applicability of the Principle of Reciprocity of Rights and Obligations in International River Water Utilization-And Construction of International River Water Rights System. Nanjing: Hohai University Press, 2017.
6	郭思哲. 国际河流水权制度构建与实证研究.昆明:昆明理工大学, 2014.
	GUO S. Theoretical and empirical research on the construction of the system of international river water rights. Kunming: Kunming University of Science and Technology, 2014.
7	何大明,冯彦.国际河流跨境水资源合理利用与协调管理.北京:科学出版社,2006.
	HE D, FEN Y. Rational Utilization and Coordinated Management of Cross-border Water Resources of International Rivers.Beijing:Science Press, 2006.
8	FU Y, ZHANG J, ZHANG C, et al. Payments for ecosystem services for watershed water resource allocations. Journal of Hydrology, 2018,556: 689-700.
9	GONG X, ZHANG H, REN C, et al. Optimization allocation of irrigation water resources based on crop water requirement under considering effective precipitation and uncertainty. Agricultural Water Management, 2020,239: 1-10.
10	KAMPRAGOU E, ELEFTHERIADOU E, MYLOPOULOS Y. Implementing equitable water allocation in transboundary catchments: The case of river Nestos/Mesta. Water Resources Management, 2007, 21(5): 909-918.
11	ZENG Y, LI J, CAI Y, et al. Equitable and reasonable freshwater allocation based on a multi-criteria decision-making approach with hydro-logically constrained bankruptcy rules. Ecological Indicators, 2017,73: 203-213.
12	冯彦, 何大明, 王文玲. 基于河流健康及国际法的跨境水分配关键指标及阈值.地理学报, 2015, 70(1):121-130.
	FEN Y, HE D, WANG W. Key indicators and the thresholds of trans-boundary water allocation based on river health and international treaties. Acta Geographica Sinica 2015, 70(1):121-130.
13	王先甲, 刘佳. 基于合作博弈模型的公共河流水资源分配方案研究.中国管理科学, 2020, 28(1): 1-9.
	WANG X, LIU J. Research on water resources allocation scheme of public rivers based on cooperative game model. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2020, 28(1): 1-9.
14	谭佳音, 蒋大奎. 基于水资源合作的水资源短缺区域水资源优化配置.系统管理学报, 2020, 29(2): 180-191.
	TAN J, JIANG D. Optimal allocation of water resources in water-stressed regions based on water resources cooperation among water using sectors. Journal of Systems & Management, 2020, 29(2): 180-191.
15	葛勇平, 苏铭煜. 公平合理利用原则在国际水法中的适用局限及其反思.河海大学学报:哲学社会科学版, 2020, 22(1):91-98.
	GE Y, SU M. The application limitation of the principle of equitable and reasonable utilization in international water law and its reflection. Journal of Hohai University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), 2020, 22(1):91-98.
16	何大明, 冯彦, 陈丽晖,等. 跨境水资源的分配模式,原则和指标体系研究.水科学进展, 2005, 16(2):255-262.
	HE D, FEN Y, CHEN L, et al. Study on models, principles and index system on trans-boundary water resources allocation. Advances in Water Science, 2005, 16(2):255-262.
17	段海燕, 王培博, 蔡飞飞,等. 省域污染物总量控制指标差异性公平分配与优化算法研究——基于不对称Nash谈判模型.中国人口·资源与环境, 2018, 28(8):56-67.
	DUAN H, WANG P, CAI F, et al. Difference fairness allocation and the optimization algorithm of the provincial total amount control index of pollutant emissions: Based on asymmetric Nash Negotiation Model. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2018, 28(8):56-67.
18	SHEIKHMOHAMMADY M, HIPEL K, KILGOUR D. Formal analysis of multilateral negotiations over the legal status of the Caspian Sea. Group Decision and Negotiation, 2012, 19(3): 305-329.
19	陈刚, 顾世祥, 杨霄,等. 集中分配模式下跨界河流水量分配协商模型研究.中国农村水利水电, 2013(10):37-41.
	CHEN G, GU S, YANG X, et al. A negotiation model for centralized water quantity allocation in a trans-boundary river. China Rural Water and Hydropower, 2013(10):37-41.
20	褚钰.考虑用水主体满意度的流域水资源优化配置研究.资源科学,2018,40(1):117-124.
	CHU Y.Optimal water resource allocation of the river basin considering the water body satisfaction degree.Resources Science,2018,40(1):117-124.
21	王慧敏, 唐润. 基于综合集成研讨厅的流域初始水权分配群决策研究.中国人口·资源与环境, 2009, 19(4): 46-49.
	WANG H, TANG R. Group decision of initial water rights allocation in water basin based on HWMSE. China Population Resources and Environment, 2009, 19(4): 46-49.
22	吴凤平, 白雨卉. "一带一路"跨境水资源合作——以中哈为例.经济与管理评论, 2020, 36(5): 127-135.
	WU F, BAI Y. Cross border water resources cooperation along the Belt and Road Initiatives--Take China and Kazakhstan as examples. Review of Economy and Management, 2020, 36(5): 127-135.
23	YU Y, TANG P, ZHAO J, et al. Evolutionary cooperation in transboundary river basins. Water Resources Research, 2019, 55(11): 9977-9994.
24	AVARIDEH F, ATTARI J, MORIDI A. Modelling equitable and reasonable water sharing in transboundary rivers: The case of Sirwan-Diyala River. Water Resources Management, 2017, 31(4): 1-17.
25	QIN J, FU X, PENG S, et al. Asymmetric bargaining model for water resource allocation over transboundary rivers. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2019, 16(10): 1-23.
26	Transboundary freshwater dispute database (TFDD). (2022-04-15)[2022-07-22]. .
27	Transboundary waters assessment programme (TWAP). (2022-03-21)[2022-07-22]. .
28	孙冬营,王慧敏,王圣.社会选择理论在流域跨界水资源配置冲突决策问题中的应用.中国人口•资源与环境, 2017, 27(5):37-44.
	SUN D, WANG H, WANG S.Application of social choice theory in decision-making issues on transboundary water resource allocation conflict in river basin. China Population Resources and Environment,2017,27(5): 37-44.