[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
DAM-L LS: Hindu, Christian Science Monitor, FT, Guardian on WCD (fwd)
----- Forwarded message from owner-irn-narmada@netvista.net -----
From owner-irn-narmada@netvista.net Fri Nov 17 21:34:31 2000
X-UIDL: 61e52d22f09a6bee58e06cf0a096ce0e
Return-Path: <owner-irn-narmada@netvista.net>
Received: from DaVinci.NetVista.net (mjdomo@mail.netvista.net [206.170.46.10])
by lox.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca (8.8.7/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA02398
for <dianne@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 21:34:29 -0500 (EST)
From: owner-irn-narmada@netvista.net
Received: [(from mjdomo@localhost)
by DaVinci.NetVista.net (8.10.0/8.8.8) id eAI1Zbh08548
for irn-narmada-list; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 17:35:37 -0800 (PST)
(envelope-from owner-irn-narmada@netvista.net)]
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 17:35:37 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <200011180135.eAI1Zbh08548@DaVinci.NetVista.net>
subject: LS: Hindu, Christian Science Monitor, FT, Guardian on WCD
Sender: owner-irn-narmada@netvista.net
Precedence: bulk
More WCD Clippings
1) Guidelines for future dams, The Hindu, 11/17/00
2) Dams generate a reservoir of controversy, Christian Science Monitor,
11/17/00
3) The unacceptable cost of big dams, Guardian, 11/17/00
4) Dams and damnation, Financial Times, 11/16/00
--------------------------
Guidelines for future dams
Kalpana Sharma, Mumbai
The Hindu
November 17, 2000
--------------------------
http://www.the-hindu.com/2000/11/17/stories/0217000i.htm
MUMBAI, NOV. 16. A ``rights-and-risks approach'' should determine whether
large dams are built rather than the usual cost-benefit calculations. This
is the central suggestion of the World Commission on Dams (WCD), which
released its report in London today. In its 398-page report titled ``Dams
and Development - A new Framework for Decision-making'', the WCD sets out
values, criteria and guidelines that could govern future decisions on dam
building. The report was released by the former South African President,
Mr. Nelson Mandela.
The WCD was born in May 1998 against the background of the increasing
controversy surrounding big dams worldwide. It was conceptualised at a
meeting in April 1977 initiated jointly by the World Bank, one of the
principal funders of large dams in developing countries, and the World
Conservation Union (IUCN) to which the opposing sides of the dams debate
were invited. All agreed that an independent review of large dams was
needed so that a set of guidelines could be formulated for future big dams.
Since then, the 12-member WCD, which is headed by South African Education
Minister, Prof. Kader Asmal, with India's Mr. Lakshmi Chand Jain as the
vice-chair, has conducted wide- ranging consultations with all the
stake-holders in this issue. It has held four regional consultations in
which 1,400 individuals from 59 countries made representations, took part
in two hearings on large dams organised by NGOs in Southern Africa and
Europe and received 947 submissions from over 80 countries.
Apart from this, the WCD commissioned eight independent case studies on
large dams and two country studies (India and China). It also sought 17
thematic reviews under the following categories: social, environmental,
economic and financial, options assessment and institutional. And finally,
it conducted a comprehensive global survey of 125 dams for a ``Cross- Check
Survey''. Altogether, 1,000 of the 45,000 large dams in the world have been
examined in some detail. All this data is now part of the WCD Knowledge
Base which will be freely available.
It is the consequence of this detailed and consultative process that has
led to the final report. Despite the diversity of views represented by the
commissioners, who include dam builders and those who oppose them, members
of government and NGOs, academics and economists, the main conclusions of
the report are consensual. The only commissioner to have made a separate
representation is Ms. Medha Patkar of the Narmada Bachao Andolan who has
felt that some fundamental issues are missing or have not been given the
central place they deserve. These include the fact, as she sees it, that
``dams are a symptom of the larger failure of the unjust and destructive
dominant development model''. But Ms. Patkar has signed the report and
suggested that the missing elements form an agenda for future dialogue and
research.
Anti-dam NGOs hail report
Other anti-dam NGOs, who also took part in the WCD consultations, have
generally welcomed the report. ``The WCD report vindicates much of what dam
critics have long argued. If the builders and funders of dams follow the
recommendations of the WCD, the era of destructive dams should come to an
end,'' says Mr. Patrick McCully of the International Rivers Network.
The WCD report, however, is not narrowly critical of large dams. It
assesses the positive and negative points of large dams and then sets out
criteria and guidelines for the future. It has used three important
internationally-endorsed conventions to arrive at five core values. These
are the little- known UN Declaration of the Right to Development (1986),
the UN Human Rights Charter (1948) and the Rio Declaration on Environment
and Development (1992). The framework of sustainable development provided
by these three documents informs the five core values that the WCD suggests
should govern decision-making: equity, efficiency, participatory
decision-making, sustainability and accountability.
Seven strategic priorities are spelled out in the report which would form
the basis of a new policy framework. These are: gaining public acceptance
through an open and transparent decision-making process; a comprehensive
options assessment which looks at alternatives to dams; addressing existing
dams by optimising the benefits; sustaining rivers and livelihoods by
looking at basin-wide ecosystems; recognising entitlements and sharing
benefits by holding joint negotiations with adversely affected people;
ensuring compliance through a Compliance Plan for each project and sharing
rivers for peace, development and security.
Documenting some of the negative aspects of large dams, the WCD report
acknowledges the fact that 40 to 80 million people have been displaced by
large dams. And although large dams have contributed to 12-16 per cent of
world food production, 60 per cent of food production is still through
rain-fed agriculture. The studies conducted for the WCD also record the
under- performance of large dams in providing irrigation facilities and
generating hydro power . It also notes the adverse environmental impacts of
large dams including on river ecosystems, and the negative impact on people
dependent on these ecosystems, specially tribals and indigenous
communities. The studies also reveal that the mitigation steps taken to
offset the negative impacts have rarely been enough.
----------------------------
Dams generate a reservoir of controversy
Peter Ford
Christian Science Monitor
November 17, 2000
----------------------------
http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/2000/11/17/fp7s1-csm.shtml
A report launched by Nelson Mandela yesterday calls for radical rethink on
how to build a better dam.
Of all mankind's efforts to harness nature for the greater good, none -
from the Lower Snake River in the Pacific Northwest to the ponderous
Narmada running through central India - have proved so dangerously mixed a
blessing as large dams.
The mighty symbols of modernity for some, harbingers of catastrophe for
others, the huge dams that now block or divert more than half the world's
rivers have brought with them far more than just the water and electricity
they promised.
Often flooding poor peasants out of their homes so that wealthier town
dwellers can have light and water, dams raise "issues of equity,
governance, justice and power - issues that underlie the many intractable
problems faced by humanity" in the words of a report issued Thursday.
The report, launched in London by former South African President Nelson
Mandela, is the work of an international group of independent experts who
have written a stinging indictment of the way large dams have been built
over the past half century. But they also propose fairer and less
disruptive ways of managing the planet's key resource - water - in the next
century.
Mr. Mandela praised the World Commission on Dams report Thursday. "It is
one thing to find fault with an existing system," he said. "It is another
thing altogether, a more difficult task, to replace it with an approach
that is better."
The report finds that although dams "have made an important and significant
contribution to human development ... in too many cases an unacceptable and
often unnecessary price has been paid to secure those benefits."
After two years of work around the world, the 12-member commission reached
its conclusions unanimously - remarkable for a group that ranged from Göran
Lindahl, head of the engineering giant ABB that has built many dams, to
Mehda Patkar, a leading antidam activist.
Dam critics generally welcomed the report. "It vindicates a lot of the
things we have been saying" says Patrick McCully, Campaigns Director for
the International Rivers Network, who is part of the global movement that
urged the commission's creation. "We are very pleased with the report, and
we want its recommendations to be implemented."
Future dam projects, the report argues, must be governed by five core
values: equity, efficiency, participatory decisionmaking, sustainability,
and accountability. And better management of demand for water and
electricity could reduce the need for new dams.
Suggestions include erecting more small-scale (micro-hydro) dams,
bolstering conservation efforts, and expanding wind-and solar-power projects.
The reservoirs behind the 45,000 large dams built around the world so far
have forced as many as 80 million people out of their homes, the commission
estimates, more than half of them in India and China where titanic dams are
still being built on the Narmada and Yangtze Rivers. Case studies showed
that "the direct adverse impact of dams have fallen disproportionately on
rural dwellers, subsistence farmers, indigenous peoples, ethnic minorities,
and women."
Large dams also "have many, mostly negative impacts on ecosystems," the
report finds. They have wiped out species and worsened global warming as
rotting vegetation creates greenhouse gases.
At the same time, the $2 trillion invested worldwide in large dams over the
past 50 years have not always proved even economically worthwhile. The
report found that "a considerable portion [fell] short of physical and
economic targets." Overall, dams contribute to 19 percent of the world's
electricity and 16 percent of food production.
In the future, the commission urged, everybody who might be affected by a
dam - from government officials and peasant farmers to funding agencies,
fishermen, and engineers - must be part of the decisionmaking process.
That has been the commission's own experience in what its chairman, South
African Education Minister Kader Asmal called "an extraordinary journey of
learning and reflection" by people from a wide range of backgrounds and
opinions.
"This impressive report shows that there is common ground that can be found
among people of good faith coming from very diverse starting points" says
James Wolfensohn, president of the World Bank, which was once a major
funder of big dams, and which sponsored the commission along with the World
Conservation Union (IUCN).
"It means nothing to build billion-dollar dams if your monuments alienate
the weak," says Mr. Asmal. "It means nothing to stop all dams if your
protests only entrench poverty. But show me a clear and sustainable way to
provide food, energy, stability, and running water for those who need it
most - that means something."
Some antidam activists are cautious. "All the agencies involved in funding
dams have become masters at writing noble-sounding policies and
humane-sounding declarations that have nothing to do with the situation on
the ground," says Arundhati Roy, a popular Indian novelist who has been
prominent in the campaign against dams on the Narmada.
"Whether the World Commission on Dams report remains on paper or if any
part of it is implemented remains to be seen. I just hope it isn't just
another document," she adds.
But, the commission has already had an effect, says Mr. McCully. The US
Export-Import Bank, which has funded many large dams built by American
firms in developing countries, and the African Development Bank have both
said they will respect the commission's guidelines and not fund dams that
do not follow them.
"With public pressure," McCully predicted, "things can happen."
--------------------------
The unacceptable cost of big dams
Paul Brown
Guardian
November 17, 2000
--------------------------
http://www.guardianunlimited.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4092323,00.html
The unacceptable cost of big dams: Commission condemns ill-thought-out
projects bulldozed through without consulting those whose homes and jobs
they destroyed
Many of the 45,000 big dams built across the world cost too much, were
late, damaged the poor, and have failed to provide all the electricity and
water for irrigation that their planners claimed they would, the world
commission on dams reported yesterday.
The main beneficiaries were often western construction companies which
gained billions of pounds worth of business paid for by aid agencies such
as the World Bank, and consequently added to the debt of some of the
poorest countries.
But despite condemning ill-thought-out immense projects that were bulldozed
through without consulting those whose homes and jobs they destroyed, the
commission said dams are not all bad.
Properly planned, with the consent of those most affected, and provided
that alternatives are investigated and found unacceptable, dams still have
a place in providing development for poorer countries.
The report, launched by Nelson Mandela in London yesterday, is the first
definitive assessment of big dam projects and is expected to act as a
blueprint for further developments. It recommends that export credit
guarantee departments do not support projects unless a number of conditions
are met, including prior consent of those affected, proper compensation
schemes and environmental safeguards. The commission is also concerned
about conflicts arising from states building dams on shared rivers without
consulting downstream neighbours.
Greenhouse gases
One surprise is that the report says claims that dams provide "clean"
electricity and do not add to global warming are not always true. Some dams
that drown forests and create large quantities of gas because of decaying
vegetation may produce as much greenhouse gases as generating electricity
with fossil fuels.
The number of people displaced by dams is estimated at between 40m and 80m,
most of them in China and India. The costs of dams were on average 50%
above their original estimate. Some designed to reduce flooding made it
worse, and there were many unexpected environmental disadvantages,
including the extinction of fish and bird species. Half the world's
wetlands had been lost because of dams.
Kader Asmal, the commission chairman, said: "In general countries that have
built big dams have paid a high cost to secure benefits while the people
affected have paid an unacceptable and often unnecessary price. It has not
been equitable or efficient. We are not in the business of moral or
religious condemnation, we are trying to point out that shortcomings are
not automatic and can be avoided."
Mr Mandela said the picture was not all bleak and dams had brought great
benefits too. Although millions had suffered, millions more had made great
gains in terms of water and electricity not available before.
"The problem is not the dams," he said. "It is the hunger. It is the
thirst. It is the darkness of a township. It is the townships and rural
huts without running water, lights or sanitation that we must cure."
Critics of dams immediately urged the World Bank and export credit agencies
to halt all support for dams until the commission's recommendations were
implemented.
"The report vindicates much of what dam critics have long argued. If the
builders and funders of dams follow the recommendations of the commission
the era of destructive dams could come to an end," said Patrick McCully,
campaigns director of the US-based International Rivers Network.
Steve Fisher, from the dams commission, said the report showed that dams
should be approved only if they demonstrably met the goal of human
development. Small scale energy schemes, manufactured and constructed
locally, created employment and reduced dependence on foreign capital,
technology and expertise.
Kariba Dam, Zambezi river, Zambia/Zimbabwe
Built 1960, cost £1bn. Height of 128 metres and flooded 5,477sq km, making
it the largest man-made lake in the world. Led to resettlement of 57,000
people who lost homes and livelihoods and suffered increased disease. Main
beneficiaries were multinational corporations which needed power and water
for copper mines. Also serves urban areas, farmers and 20 hotels on dam
shores. Created commercial fisheries on the lake and 450 full-time jobs.
Produces 1,266 megawatts of power.
The good, the bad and the dammed
Tarbela Dam, Indus river, Pakistan
1976, cost £6bn. Height of 148 metres, flooded 240sq km. Resettled 96,000
people. Loss of migratory fish species. Created largest irrigation scheme
in the world: waters 18m acres, about 60% of cultivable land, providing
jobs for millions of small farmers. Poor irrigation practices causing large
scale salination of soil and loss of croplands. Produces 3,478 megawatts of
power, 28% of the country's need.
Grand Coulee, Columbia river, USA/Canada
1941, cost £6.5bn. Height of 170 metres, with 260 sq km reservoir.
Resettled 6,000 people mostly Indians not compensated for 45 years. Loss of
fish species. Irrigates 1,400 farms, supplies water to industry and urban
areas. Capacity of 6,809 megawatts of power and has made huge profits.
Tucurui Dam, Toccantis river, Brazil
1986, cost £4bn, £2bn over budget. Height of 78 metres, 2,430 sq km
reservoir. 4,000 megawatts of power. Resettled 25,000-35,000. Some fish
species lost. Aluminium industry consumes more than half the power.
Useful links:
www.damsreport.org The report in full
www.dams.org World commission on dams
www.irn.org International Rivers Network
------------------------
Dams and damnation
Financial Times
Nov 16, 2000
------------------------
http://globalarchive.ft.com/globalarchive/articles.html?id=001116001680&query=dam
COMMENT & ANALYSIS: Dams and damnation: Controversy over large dam projects
in developing countries is starting to dissuade European governments from
getting involved. But protests are falling on deaf ears in India and China,
write Alan Beattie and Kevin Brown:
Jawaharlal Nehru, India's first prime minister, once declared that dams
were "the temples of modern India". Thousands of activists, fighting
against the building of the controversial Narmada dam in western India,
this week filled the streets of New Delhi to disagree.
They may gain comfort from the concluding report issued today by a
gathering of experts under the title of the World Commission on Dams (WCD),
set up two years ago by the World Bank. The report expresses strong
reservations about large dam projects, which, it says, frequently fail to
deliver promised benefits and greatly underestimate their cost to humans
and the environment.
Neither the protests nor the report spells the end for big dams. Among
governments of developing countries there is a growing backlash against
interference from environmental activists and international agencies. In
addition, the report goes on to set out principles for the future
development of dams that could help governments to justify their projects
in the face of fierce environmental protests.
As if to prove the point, the concrete mixers once again started up on the
Narmada dam this month after a six-year hiatus caused by legal disputes.
For the Indian national and local state governments, which strongly support
the dam, the resumption of construction was a triumph.
"The people of Gujarat have been waiting for this day for 40 years. Now, no
power in the world will be able to stop us from forging ahead with the
project," says Keshubhai Patel, chief minister of Gujurat. The state
declared a half-day holiday for offices and schools to celebrate the event.
Meanwhile leading activists from the main protest organisation, the Narmada
Bachao Andolan (NBA) - "Save the Narmada" - which has been active in the
Narmada valley for more than a decade, expressed fury and went on hunger
strike. "We are not defeated. It's a long road. There are dead ends but we
have to find a new path," says Medha Patkar, a leading activist.
The fall from grace of large dam projects has been dramatic. For most of
the 20th century they were a potent global symbol of economic development,
a physical manifestation of human mastery over nature. The Hoover Dam and
the Tennessee Valley Authority were the showpieces of Franklin D.
Roosevelt's New Deal, bringing hydroelectric power and employment to
Depression-hit America; the Aswan dam was the pride of Egyptian nationalism
under Colonel Nasser. Dams tamed floods, powered cities and made deserts
bloom.
It was the Narmada dam, more accurately known as the Sardar Sarovar project
after Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel, Nehru's political adviser, that helped
turn world opinion against big dams. The multi-billion- dollar dam on the
Narmada river - conceived in 1946, approved in 1979 and begun in the late
1980s - was intended to bring irrigation to more than 1.8m drought-affected
hectares of the western states of Gujurat, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh.
So far, 88 metres of the planned height of 134 metres have been built.
But opponents say it has ended up as a symbol of oppression for the
estimated 320,000 local people, mainly from lower-caste and "tribal"
backgrounds, who will be displaced when the waters rise in the Narmada
valley. The best-known recent pro tester has been Arundhati Roy, the Indian
novelist, who declared in a polemic called The Greater Common Good that
"Big Dams started well but have ended badly. There was a time when Big Dams
moved men to poetry. Not any longer."
The World Bank has been circumspect about dams since 1993, when it withdrew
from the Narmada project after commissioning an independent report that
criticised the project. Some bank officials say privately that it decided
then not to defy the growing weight of public opposition.
The bank, whose president James Wolfensohn visited New Delhi this week,
today says that it funds less than 1 per cent of the large dam projects
that are under way around the world.
The publication of the WCD report may encourage similar doubts among
industrialised countries' governments, some of which help domestic
companies to build dams abroad with trade credit guarantees. Siemens, the
German construction company, received a setback in its bid to build the
Maheshwar dam - part of the Sardar Sarovar complex - when environmental
activists' pressure on the German government prevented the company from
gaining an export guarantee credit. Such groups are also putting direct
pressure on the companies involved. Ogden Corporation, the US contractor,
has become a target of protests in New York.
European governments and export credit agencies are coming under ferocious
pressure to withdraw support for Turkey's proposed hydroelectric dam at
Ilisu, on the Tigris river.
Officially, the Swiss, Italian and British governments are still
considering applications from the construction and engineering companies
Sulzer Hydro, ABB, Impregilo and Balfour Beatty for more than Dollars 700m
in guarantees. But ministers have been shaken by criticism from a
Europe-wide coalition of human rights and environmental groups predicting
mass deportations, environmental degradation and even a regional war over
water supplies involving Iraq if the project goes ahead.
But governments of developing countries may be less impressed. Those of
China - which is building the Three Gorges Project on the Yangtze river -
and India show little sign of being influenced by environmental pressure
groups. Indian ministers have accused the NBA of acting on behalf of
unspecified "foreign interests" and have talked of investigating the
finances of Indian campaign groups.
Nor is there much prospect of campaigners' being able to rely on local
courts to block projects. The Indian Supreme Court last month lifted an
injunction on Sardar Sarovar construction, saying it was a matter for
national and state governments to decide.
"This is a signal to foreign investors that projects will not be impeded by
local protest," says Chittaroopa Palit, an NBA activist. "On a global
level, there is progress. Locally, the situation is regressing."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to majordomo@netvista.net
with no subject and the following text in the body of the message
"unsubscribe irn-narmada".
----- End of forwarded message from owner-irn-narmada@netvista.net -----