Dams OR Development?

Large dams have been controversial as "development" projects not only in India but almost everywhere in the world. The formation of the World Commission on Dams (WCD) was a result of such a controversy and it was hoped that the commission would be able to bring together the various perspectives of the debate to decide if the dams have been really effective as development instrument. The report of the unprecedented commission, released in London in November last by Nelson Mandela, was expected to be controversial, as it sought to judge something on which over USD 2 trillion has been invested over the last century. And yet. barring some exceptions, the responses have been mostly positive.

A consensus report from the 12-member commission that had such diverse people  on it was the first surprise of the report. People like Jan Vltrop, former President of International Committee on Large Dams. Goran Lindahl, the then CEO of ABB, one of world's largest large dams related equipment suppliers and Donald Blackmore, Chief Executive of the Murray-Darling Basin Commission, were members of the commission that was chaired by Prof Kader Asmal, who had sanctioned one of the largest dams in South Africa under his tenure as water resources minister in South Africa. These people were known supporters of large dams."0n"the other hand, the commission also had among its members Medha Patkar, leader of Narmada Bachao Andolan, well known for fighting against large dams in the Narmada Valley.

World level bodies like the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the African Development Bank, the World Health Organisation, the World Water Council (which includes among its members bodies like the International Commission on Large Dams, the International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage, the International Hydropower Association, the International Water Resources Association), the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Environment Programme, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, have all welcomed the report. The United States Export-Import Bank has said, "Exim Bank strongly encourages participants of hydroelectric and water resource projects to follow to the extent possible, the principles and guidelines set forth in the Final Report of the World Commission on Dams". UNEP has not only welcomed the report, but has described the report as "major contribution to future energy and water resource policy-making"

From among the dam industry, the response of Skanska AB, one of the world's leading dam building company was most prompt and positive. In its message of November 2000, it said: "We find the Commission's work to be extremely valuable. Skanska intends to apply the guidelines for major hydropower projects recommended by the World Commission on Dams in their final report".

The World Bank, who has been single most influential institution that has been responsible for pushing large dams across the worid over the last five decades, was almost forced to set up the Commission. Its president James Wolfensohn has said about the WCD report, "It is a milestone, not just for dams but a reassertion of the way you should go about development generally". He has said that the report is of fundamental importance and has implications for operations by the Bank's commercial wing, as well as Bank's core soft loan operations.

Chris Mullin, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for International Development, Govt. of UK, said at a function in London earlier this month, "The., report is an impressive achievement.... the report puts people at the centre. This is a consistent theme and it is the report's greatest strength”. Perhaps of greatest significance was his pledge that, “DFID will offer support to governments in developing countries wanting to implement the Dams Commission report”. More surprising were the words of Geoff Sims, member of the British Dams Society and Vice President of ICOLD: “ as engineers we have a duty to use this document and the guidance it contains for the betterment of mankind". Netherlands Committee on Large Dams said in its response in December 2000, "Never before we have seen a better analysis of the process of gaining public acceptance...The WCD has done an extremely energetic and well balanced effort to bring the debate on the pros and cons of dams on a higher level".

International Committee on Dams, Rivers and People, a coalition of non governmental organisations and people's movements from across the world has also welcomed the report and said that now that a consensus has been arrived at, it would be expected that all involved would follow the recommendations and not build any more dams till the recommendations are implemented in letter and inspirit.

But there have been exceptions too to such positive responses. ICOLD, a known pro-dam lobby, has expressed fears that the report may be seen as anti development. But that was expected. Its present president. CVJ Verma has been known supporter of large dams. Indian Government, member of the WCD forum is also expected to tow similar line, but that would be typical of its knee jerk reactions.

What are the main findings of the report that could draw such enthusiastic response from across the world? The WCD report has said that while dams have contributed to development, "In too many cases an unacceptable and often unnecessary price has been paid to secure those benefits, especially in social and environmental terms, by people displaced, by communities downstream, by taxpayers and by the natural environment.” The next finding is even more revealing” “Lack of equity in the distribution of benefits has called into question the value of many dams in meeting water and energy development needs when compared with the alternatives. “ The WCD report notes that dams typically have cost overruns, time overruns, under performance in terms of benefits, seen limited success in efforts to counter ecosystem impacts. The  failure to assess and mitigate potential negative impacts has been “pervasive and systematic” and

true profitability of these schemes remains elusive, the report concludes. The report notes that the social groups who bear the costs and the ones who receive the benefits are often not the same. The report notes that the options to large dams exist, but are rarely explored. Thus, the findings of the report more or less vindicates the criticisms that large dams have been facing across the world.

In terms of recommendations, the most significant one is that before-a-project is taken up, the decision making process must show that there is  “demonstrable acceptance of the key decisions. The projects must be guided by free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous and tribal people when they are among the affected people. Decisions must start with needs assessment, prioritization of needs and comprehensive Options assessment process in a participatory, transparent way. Before taking up any new project, options of optimisation of benefits from existing infrastructure must be exhausted and outstanding social and environmental issues must be settled. The WCD has accepted equity, efficiency, participatory decision making, sustainability and accountability as core values that should inform the understanding of relevant issues.

Few governments, international financial institutions or other developers can really find fault with such a report. The report more or less echoes what India's declared policies and principles are. The question is of course of implementation. And that question only the future can answer.

How difficult the commission must have found to arrive at a consensus report is reflected at a number of places in the report, but comes out most significantly from the comment that Medha Patkar had to add to the report. In this brief note, she says, " While signing the Report because of its many positive aspects. I still feel I must put forth this opinion on some fundamental issues that are missing or not given the central place they deserve... Even with rights recognised, risks assessed and stakeholders identified, existing iniquitous power relations would too easily allow developers to dominate and distort such processes".

This note by Medha Patkar only shows the difficulties that critics of large dams would have faced in accepting a report that can at best be called a compromise. And yet if the critics have welcomed the report and demanded that its recommendations be followed, than at the bare minimum, one would expect that the dam supporters from across the world, including governments, UN bodies, multi lateral banks, bilateral institutions, dam building companies, equipment suppliers, export credit agencies, international bodies like the ICOLD, ICID & IHA and investors would honestly try to implement this consensus report. Only time will till if this really happens.

Himanshu Thakkar                                                               March 6, 2001
South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People                        1400 words
53B, AD block, Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi, cwaterp@vsnl.com