Water issues are inherently multi-faceted and therefore water policy often involves linkages to other
issues. By providing opportunities for bargaining, use of policy linkages in transboundary water negotiations
can increase the possibilities of reaching agreements; however, they also involve potential
political costs. While there is ample theoretical literature on the potential benefits and risks of linkages in
transboundary water negotiations, there is little empirical work exploring if, how, and why linkages are
implemented in practice, especially in areas of conflict, in which they have perhaps the largest potential
impact. This study evaluates the rationales behind decisions to adopt or refrain from linkage strategies by
examining their actual use in ArabeIsraeli water negotiations. The study finds that the likelihood, scale,
and scope of linkages change over time, and they depend on factors such as the political climate, the level
of trust between the parties, the degree of power asymmetry between parties, and political affiliation.
Other variables such as size of negotiating parties were weakly correlated with likelihood of linkages.
Knowing the opportunities and limits afforded by such linkages is crucial for negotiators and policymakers
who are often drawn to linkage strategies without considering their inherent risks.
