The dominant definition of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict concerning water has been produced by hydrologists and water engineers. This article explores the power-knowledge nexus within which this scientific discourse emerged, portraying the conflict as one over determining quantitative allocations between two parties, assuming that each party manages water in a very centralised fashion. The paper questions the institutional construction that has been put forward in previous proposals to settle the conflict. It explores the opportunities that emerge if we recognise and harness Palestinian legal pluralism in order to achieve joint management on the basis of continuous monitoring of the aquifers. Presently, the dominant scientific narrative has imposed a paradigmatic transformation of a problem of joint management of natural resources into one of supply management and international aid. Considering the possibility of constructing institutions that recognise the Israeli state centralised water management in Israel and Palestinian legal pluralism allows to avoid such paradigmatic transformations. It leads us to reflect more generally on the construction of proposals to solve transboundary water conflicts in situations where legal pluralism prevails concerning water management.
