Blocking the pathof a free-flowing river was once concidered a good thing to do. But now, a century later, we are paying the price of standing in nature’s way
DAMS are built to control floods, to store water for hydropower, supply for agriculture, industry and drinking purposes. However, they are not all that good. Many questions have come to the surface regarding the seemingly good image of dams. They have had an adverse social and environmental impact on their surroundings. For example, dams are credited with displacing anywhere between 40 to 80 million people in different parts of the world.
People worldwide are committed to caring for their rivers; water-bodies that know the best ways to producing electricity. and people understand that access to water is a basic human right and know that respect for human rights must be the core principle.
The World Commission on Dams (WCD) has studied these divergent views and perspectives and based on that, recommended a comprehensive option that requires that a transparent and a democratic decision be taken about such projects. The WCD also asserts that alternatives to dams often exist and there is a need to define the objective clearly and explore these alternatives.
According to the WCD, five values govern the entire process and are based on the concerns raised.
• Equity
• Efficiency
• Participatory decision making
• Sustainability
• Accountability
The report boils down to this: Worldwide, large dams have not provided benefits, which were promoted and were predicted by the proponents of large dams. At the same time, negative impacts of large dams have been far greater than imagined. The outstanding social and environmental problems associated with existing dams need to be addressed and that the rights of all people especially indigenous people, must be respected and risk must be fairly analyzed and publicly discussed for the thousands of people who are expected to lose their fisheries and other livelihoods and especially because they have never been consulted to assess potential risks they would be subjected to in short and long-term.
PEOPLES’ LIVES AND RIGHTS AT RISK (PAKISTAN CONTEXT): In the context of Pakistan it is a fact that the affected people are involuntary risk takers, who have been provided no opportunity to participate in decisions affecting their lives. As examples, case studies of the Indus Delta and Chashma Right Bank Canal may be referred.
INDUS DELTA: Indus Delta is home to centuries old indigenous communities. These people have globally recognized rights on the Indus River. According to the law of the land, they also posses constitutional right to be consulted before starting any water project on the Indus.
Fisher folk of the Indus Delta have historical and traditional rights on Indus, but they are not even recognized as affectees of large dams. Indigenous communities are totally ignored in the entire consultations and decision-making process regarding dam development. People have suffered due to big dam constructions as they are paying the huge cost of ecological disaster. And the situation will become more alarming following the construction of more dams. Communities will be exposed to further risks due to such projects. Further decrease in the water flow to the Indus Delta and increased displacement of communities from it will aggravate the already existing precarious situation.
CHASHMA RIGHT BANK CANAL: In the specific case of Chashma Right Bank Canal, project proponents have completely ignored the communities. Communities’ traditional rights were trespassed and no compensation was paid to them.
There are a range of communities’ rights that come under the risk due to indifferent attitude of project proponents. Rights of, not only the present generation, but also of the future generations such as land, water flow and fisheries are at risk due to the poorly designed and inefficiently executed water projects. Further to that the compensation process has been in total violation of national laws. In case of Chashma Right Bank Canal, while land acquisition for construction of the project began in 1995, the formal process of notification was initiated in December 2001. Construction of the project resulted in various forms of disruptions in the lives of the local communities, including disintegration of existing community support networks, disabling of Rowed-kohi (the traditional irrigation) system.
Hence in Pakistani context, experience of large reservoirs and dams has been largely against the guidelines and proposed values by WCD. Public sector projects in the water sector have been designed and executed in complete isolation even without ceremonial participation of stakeholders. Empty of consultation with potential affectees, these projects have benefited the privileged corridors at the cost of marginalized and voiceless communities by putting their historical and constitutional rights at risk.
WOMEN — THE WORST HIT AFFECTEES: Though imprudent development has resulted in affecting almost all segments of all communities, yet the worst hit are women.
Women, as the world’s most important food producers are directly dependent on a healthy environment, which is often lost in the non-consultative development projects.
Women play a very significant role in managing natural resources. Being food providers, they daily interact with the natural resources, therefore any negative impact on the environment directly affects women. In the Pakistani context, women are actively involved in water sector related activities such as agriculture, fishing and livestock that includes, agriculture harvesting, net making, shrimps peeling, nets cleaning, cattle grazing etc. which was the major contribution towards their house incomes.
However, women have never been part of any pre-project consultation and decision making in this regard. Although women are paying the equal cost economically, socially and environmentally due to large reservoirs and dams, they are the least heard segment among affectees. Women have the right to fully participate in the entire process as defined in policies and laws (according to National Resettlement Policy, affected women should be ensured equal access to all income restoration programmes by maximum involvement of women). In the typical Pakistani society, where women are often socially secluded, social assets and relations take decades to frame. With displacement, women lose their social relations and cannot regain them in their lifetime.
Though the list of rights of communities’ at risk could be unending; yet the most important of them are given below, considering the Pakistani experience.
RIGHTS:
• Downstream people have historically recognized rights on natural flows such as the Indus and Roewd-kohi, which become increasingly at risk with every new reservoir constructed at upstream.
• People have constitutional right of consultation with them before starting any water project on Indus River. This has also been recognized in National Resettlement Policy.
• Fisher-folk have historical fishing rights which is directly dependent on the flow of the Indus.
• People possess property rights such as no one can forcibly deprive them from their land against their will. However, in large reservoir projects this right is often risked and violated.
• People have historical rights on natural endowment in their areas such as lakes, ponds and pastures. These natural resources are often inundated or left dry due to new reservoirs. Resettlement and money cannot compensate this loss.
• People have legislative right to participate in decision-making. But there is no provision to include potential affectees in decision-making process.
• Women have the right to fully participant in the entire process. For example, according to the National Resettlement Policy, affected women should be ensured equal access to all income restoration programmes by maximum involvement of women.
RISK:
The following risks are most frequently observed in large reservoir projects:
• Water projects are designed and executed without proper consultation and thus become nonparticipatory. * New reservoirs further decrease fresh water flow to downstream areas such as the delta.
• More increased displacement from project sites and downstream areas.
• Additional communities lose their natural means of livelihood.
• New developments unfold new conflicts among communities due to dwindling resources.
• Indigenous communities face specific cultural and social risk (inflow of new cultural groups from affectees or beneficiaries) due to large sale development projects.
• Fragile eco-systems are exposed to a variety of risks such as inundation and desertification.
• Beneficiaries’ lobbies tamper laws and rules in their favour to execute large projects, thus leaving communities politically deprived from the right of participation in decision making. In broader context it pushes society to political chaos and creates long-term risks for sociopolitical integrity of the society.
WHAT TO DO?
• All viable options should be properly explored before opting for large reservoirs and dams. Energy and irrigation development should not be carried out at the cost of livelihood and natural endowment of communities.
• Lower riparian, particularly women should be considered as major affectees of the large reservoirs and dams.
• WCD guidelines should be adopted as a framework for working out feasibility of any water sector development project, particularly large reservoirs and dams.
• A comprehensive study should be initiated to assess socio-economic and environmental impacts of large reservoirs and dams already implemented in the country.
• A comprehensive baseline of natural resources should be conducted in downstream areas (eg. Indus Delta) before initiating any new water development project.
Blocking the pathof a free-flowing river was once concidered a good thing to do. But now, a century later, we are paying the price of standing in nature’s way 
