Debate on dams

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS: Kamta Prasad, R. S. Goel; Concept Publishing Company, A/15-16, Commercial Block, Mohan Garden, New Delhi-110059. Rs. 750.

DAMS BY themselves are not debatable, but the promises made by their executors and their fulfilment are certainly debatable. The total involvement and co-operation of a project-affected people (PAPs) are indispensable keys for the success of a dam or any other development project. Dams that ignore the agonies of its displaced peasants are bound to be damned or even doomed.

This book containing the proceedings of a national seminar, held in November 1999, at New Delhi, and organised by the Institute for Resource Management and Economic Development, is on one of the most controversial topics in development through large dams vs destruction of local environment and peasants. Out of a total of about 91,000 MW of power generation capacity in India, about 22,000 MW only are from the hydel sector, although its total potential is about 84,000 MW. Hydel power, though cheap and clean, yet because of the extensive environmental and human tragedies that dams result in, has created perennial and severe battles between the project proponents and project opponents, thus delaying the completion of hydel projects in India. In fact, dams are the best means of harvesting rain water, for a water- starved country like India.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is said to be the singular key in decision-making for any development project, provided it is done far in advance of the project initiation and by competent inter-disciplinary and honest experts. Hydel projects based on river-basin or sub-basin concepts are said to be both ecologically as well as economically viable. Monitoring and evaluation of hydel projects, through remote sensing and geographic information system (GIS) are said to be more realistic. Independent review of projects in operation, as the Morse Report on the Narmada dam, is advisable. Some success stories from the existing hydel projects are narrated.

Decision-making on major or minor dams, although is location- specific, dependent on topographical and technical feasibilities, yet the past track-record of almost all our major dams in India has been so disillusioning, particularly with regard to the resettlement and rehabilitation (R&R) of the project-affected people (PAPs) that the public in India today, backed up by emotional environmentalists, are unfortunately opposing all hydel projects, indiscriminately. Out of a total of about 21.3 million development-displaced people (PAPs) in India by the year 1997, 16.4 million are due to hydel projects alone,, and as one author herein says, ``It is the voice of the public that should determine the weights of the qualitative and subjective elements, forming a part of the environmental evaluation system (EES) or the benefit-cost analysis (BCA),'' for a project.

There should be an equity in sharing benefits between the project-affected people and the project benefited people, following the Gandhian principle of Sarvodaya.

Whereas most of the papers presented at this seminar are in favour of larger dams, and hence all the recommendations at the end also are pro-dam, yet the papers published in section VI, under the title ``Post-conference papers'' have some powerful arguments by international experts and justifications against the disappointing performance of our current large dams in India, so that they even recommended that there should be no more new dams, until the faults in the existing dams are rectified, for restoring the confidence of the public. Thus the whole debate on major dams, boils down to a debate on changing human values, attitudes and accountabilities, concerning dam-displaced peasants.

P. J. SANJEEVA RAJ

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Features
Previous : Poised for turnaround?
Next     : Principles of Vaastu