20 years ago, the World Commission of Dams published its relatively critical report to improve the planning construction and operation of dams. What has changed? This panel convenes cross disciplinary researchers to analyse the evolution in decision-making around dams and their impacts.
Long Abstract:
In November 2000, Nelson Mandela launched the Report of the World Commission on Dams (WCD). The commission sought to assemble evidence on why, where and how to (not) build dams to establish a scientific and political consensus around how future dams should be envisaged, designed and operated to achieve social and economic goals whilst minimising impacts on host communities and the environment. While there was a slowdown in dam construction in the immediate aftermath of the WCD report, large-scale water infrastructure projects are back on the development agenda; with over 3,700 large dams under construction or planned in the developing world.
Twenty years since the WCD report, this panel offers a forum to bring together learning from the social, natural and engineering fields about the evolution in decision-making around dams, particularly in the context of the WCD report and the following global dam-building ’renaissance’ of 2005-2020. In particular, we welcome contributions that explore the evolution in decision-making around: water management interventions (political economy of large infrastructure projects, political actions and counter movements), integrated water-food-energy-environment nexus and resource management decisions (decision-making frameworks and integrated assessment toolsets), and socio-environmental ex-ante and ex-post impacts (ecology, hydrological and climate science, resettlement, benefit sharing). Moreover, we also invite abstracts that explore the overarching question “what has changed in the dams and development arena in the last two decades?”
Ecuador avowedly upholds the Rights of Nature in its constitution, yet has continued to pursue environmentally damaging construction projects. An analysis of the decision to build the Coca Codo Sinclair dam illustrates the tension between environment and development.
Paper long abstract:
Two-thirds of the world's longest rivers are no longer free-flowing thanks to tens of thousands of dams. Industrialised and developing countries alike have dedicated vast resources to the construction of dams which have brought benefits in the form of energy, yet have caused widespread and lasting environmental damage to communities and to ecosystems, contributing to climate change.
While dams are being dismantled in North America, construction of dams in Latin America has continued, despite rivers having been granted personhood under Rights of Nature legislation, such as in Ecuador. Economic and political pressures have resulted in Environmental Impact Assessments having been ignored. Pressures on central governments to embark upon so-called "clean" energy production have been intensified by personal and political party interests, leading to decision-making having been swayed by opportunities to receive corrupt payments and to reinforce political power. Insufficient monitoring and control of dam projects has led in some cases to faulty construction, accidents and performance failure. Using case studies of the role of political influence in the construction of dams in Latin America, with particular reference to the Coca Coda Sinclair dam in Ecuador, this presentation examines the source and the role of corruption as a driver of crimes against the Rights of Nature in dam construction and operation.
In this study, we find that irrigation schemes underperform in terms of achieved benefits and maintenance over time. We argue that the observed problems are rooted in unclear project objectives and a lack of accountability due to an absence of systematic assessments and monitoring approaches.
Paper long abstract:
Anecdotal evidence and detailed site-specific assessments suggest that irrigation infrastructure projects and reforms in West Africa (WA) have failed to achieve proposed targets on a large scale. We evaluate this proposition by conducting a meta-analysis, based on 46 irrigation scheme assessments evaluating performances of 124 irrigation schemes across ten countries in WA. After accounting for differences in methodological approaches, performance indicators and cited reasons for underperformance, we address the question of what we know about irrigation scheme performance and how this knowledge is transferred into scheme design and management of new projects. We find that irrigation schemes underperform in terms of both achieved benefits and maintenance over time. We argue that many of the observed problems are rooted in unclear project objectives and a lack of accountability due to an absence of systematic assessments and monitoring approaches. As irrigation scheme development will continue to be an important part of development agendas in WA and around the world, it is pertinent that we embed lessons from the past to avoid unsuccessful investments in the future.
In this position paper we take issue with the new wave of hydropower dam construction in the Global South since the publication of the World Commission on Dams report and propose a new assessment framework that builds on the governance capacity of local communities among other aspects.
Paper long abstract:
The World Commission on Dams (WCD) established the most comprehensive guidelines for dam building in 2000. The resulting report described a then innovative framework for planning water projects that was intended to protect dam-affected people and the environment, and ensure that the benefits from dams are more equitably distributed; however, many countries including Brazil and China did not adopt the recommendations of the WCD. Thus, twenty years after, the sustainability of large dams is still in question.
More importantly, the report did not consider the agency of local communities in finding alternatives. There is now growing evidence that communities are not just victims, but many take positive actions to change their situation. In this position paper we frame dam building policy within a broader water and energy governance framework that puts said agency and local community projects at the center of assessments. We build the framework based on a series of empirical and conceptual accounts including a preliminary assessment of the few countries that have followed or adapted the WCD´s recommendations and/or successfully applied participatory processes; an overview of environmental justice conflicts and community alternatives associated to hydropower dam building; an ad hoc revision of challenges and opportunities of small hydropower dam projects; an overview of new trends in hydropower funding; and recent conceptual contributions in the study of water-food-energy governance.
Resettlement policies of hydroelectric dams have deficits in citizen participation in the Global South. We use fsQCA to explain participation deficits in dam projects. Dams under autocracies before the WCD and largest dams with high political interest under democracies have deficits in participation
Paper long abstract:
Construction of large-scale hydroelectric dams has increased in recent decades in the Global South. One of the most severe socioeconomic impacts caused by dam construction is population resettlement, and policies aiming to mitigate and restore livelihoods are often described as inadequate. The resettlement policies' ineffectiveness could be explained by persistent citizen participation deficiency. We conducted a medium-N comparative study showing sufficient pathways to explain the deficiency of participation across 23 large-scale hydroelectric dams in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. We focus on one project characteristic and four political conditions including: national political regime, World Commission on Dams (WCD) report, and forms of public opposition. We conducted a fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) based on information from a qualitative meta-analysis and secondary sources. Our results suggest that there are at least three pathways to explain deficiency in participation. The first two pathways include dams constructed under autocracies. Most of these dams were built before the publication of the WCD report. Thus, an autocratic national regime combined with a historical moment before the WCD, is sufficient for resettlement policies having a deficiency in participation. The third pathway involves the largest dams, with high economic and political interests at stake built under autocratic and democratic regimes, disregardless of the WCD report. In this article, we discuss features that make large hydroelectric dams inherently undemocratic.
has 1 download
1