The economic and population growth of the last two centuries presents a clear challenge to the management of water resources, easily explained by the relationship between supply and demand as well. Going beyond the usual categorization on the availability of fresh and salt water in the world, as important it is to mention the total amount of water on Earth. The water supply remains stable in absolute amounts on the planet, ranging just from where it can be captured and subsequent used, as well as its quality. Natural to say that water security is closely connected to food, energy, climate and, ultimately, to the classic sense of security of countries. It should be considered the tenuous balance between water availability and its multiple uses; agricultural production and the supply needs; generation by hydropower and growing energy demand; and changes of the hydrological cycle and changes in rainfall and flow. Globally, it is projected a growth of over 60 percent on water demand, driven mainly by rising industrial demand and power generation. (OECD, 2012) In Brazil, water management is largely decentralized since 1997 s Water Law. This means that the discussions, definitions, policies and actions with respect to water resources management in Brazil is made largely by local actors that are more affected. Institutionally, the Watershed Committees are the formal space for this dialogue. In this dynamic of Watershed Committees, given that participation is precisely from those who have the most interest in better use by availability and quality of water of the watershed, there is a great possibility that those users make choices that optimize the potential for multiple uses water, maximizing the possibility of continuity of their activities. This work analyzes the duality between conflict and cooperation in these scenarios, especially at the logic of the water-energy-food nexus. To this end, it uses concepts of Games Theory to demonstrate how rational actors tend to take collective decisions potentially bad for everyone precisely due their visions of maximization of their own gains. Finally, in the other hand, it presents the overcoming of these joint performance gaps in favor of the collective good from the institutionalization of a better-concerted action by the leadership of the business sector.