Duong Hoang Le ENGL 101X
Position Paper
5-16-2019
The Value of Dams in Mekong River Basin and How To Make Them Sustainable
Like many other Sunday mornings in the middle of autumn season in Vung Tau City, Vietnam, I stayed behind the back seat of the motorbike when my mom took me to an outdoor market. Passing by the line of people pouring in to purchase rice from the food service, I wondered why these families could not choose anywhere else to acquire the rice packages. It turned out that, from the words that my mom told me, these rice packages were delivered directly from the farmland in the Mekong Delta.
In recent months, the price had gone up high that some families had to share among each other. The answer for the causes of this inflation, perhaps, come from the events happening on the river. According to the research conducted by the CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystem (MLE), the Mekong is considered “the world’s 12th longest river at 4,350 km.”
Excerpting from the exact scientific source, “the Mekong Basin contains the world’s largest inland fishery” for more than “40 million rural people.” However, this biodiversity system is intercepted by major human activities. Hydropower dams cause “hydrological alterations on both the Mekong mainstream and tributaries” with 9 operating ones, “11 projects under construction,” and 21 others “at various levels of planning stages” (Hecht et al., Piman et al. 724).
By identifying different elements contributing to the process of building dams, this essay seeks to explore the potential of restructuring the future dams with socio-economic and environmental benefits. To provide clarification for my central argument, I will first explain the
exigence of the dam problems relating to the current crises. I will then investigate the circumstances in which dams convey both positive and negative meanings to the ecosystem and human communities. I will conclude with the proposal solutions of remodeling dams and alternative approaches, thus link directly to the national and international contributors. Throughout the course of the essay, examples varying from daily reports to academic research will be presented to highlight the cause and actions in building sustainable dams. From the perspectives of recent incidents of breaking dams to the urgent warning messages from environmental experts, it is imperative to raise awareness about dam problems in order to make positive progress. The central concern in this first step to change is whether or not dams do harm to the natural conditions and livelihoods of local residents. According to the National Geographic News contributor Stefan Lovgren in the column “Southeast Asia May Be Building Too Many Dams Too Fast,” the construction of dams yields serious consequences to the daily basis of many residents and natural habitat. To provide an overview of the recurring threat, Stefan voices the fear of villagers in Sdao on the Sekong River in northern Cambodia.
Engulfed in fear and anxiety, Ey Bun Thea, who is a young fisherman and farmer, maintained that a dam was being built without the announcement from the local governance. In addition, Stefan highlights the destruction of “hydropower project on the Xepian River” with the statistical fact that “at least 39 people dead and up to 100 went missing, as well as thousands of people homeless.” Drawing from these factual statistics, it is unequivocal that the construction of dams in the Mekong River Basin exacerbates the daily routine of million dependent people. More importantly, this scenario increasingly reflects on data excerpting from environmental research.
Jon M. Polimeni who is an expert in studying the economic development and the environment at Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences partners with two other authors critically
explore the reliance of Cambodian villagers on the natural support from the river. For instance, the authors emphasize that particular diseases such as “anemia, cholera, diarrhea, encephalitis, malaria” become epidemic due to the “unsanitary conditions and contaminated water.”
Particularly, Jon M. Polimeni et al. identify that “household cases of anemia did not increase as dramatically, although they did nearly double since the dam was built.” What both Stefan Lovgren and Jon M. Polimeni et al. prove is that the severe damage resulting from dam projects needs to be addressed responsibly in order to rescue the community and the natural habitats.
One of the two primary actors who suffer these negative impacts of dams is the environment. According to Yuichi Kano in the Institute of Decision Science for a Sustainable Society at the Kyushu University along with other experts, both hydropower dams and global warming jeopardize the “freshwater biodiversity” (2). In the case study of the Indo-Burma region where population density is rising, the consideration of putting more dams or not hugely determine the regional biodiversity. While hydropower dams, as Yuichi et al evaluate, “offer an alternative to burning fossil fuels for energy generation” and ultimately shrink down CO2 emissions, dams obstruct “downstream flood cycles, floodplain inundation and fish production” (2). Among the total of 363 riverine species, 5% of them “were categorized as threatened” (9). In other words, if there is a hypothetical situation that dams are deemed to be all removed, the increase in the fish population means no surprise at all. At the heart of the question about how impactful dam problems can be to the natural world, Jory S. Hecht, PhD at the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Tufts University, accompanying with four other experts in the environmental field examine the extend of “hydrological alteration” to the ecosystem. Hecht et al. argue that multifaceted factors comprising “hydraulics (depth, velocity), temperature, along with nutrient and sediment transport” are fundamental to the foundation of
the riverine ecosystems which can be at stake with “dam-induced changes.” Additionally, Hech et al. assert that “flood magnitude, duration, timing, and variability” correlate with the “floodplain hydrology” which is directly manipulated by hydropower dams in the Lower Mekong Basin (LBM) fisheries. This information highlights the fact that hydropower projects explicitly alternates the behaviors of the ecosystem in various ways.
In addition to the environmental degradation, dam projects are impactful to human civilization as well. To put into the context, since the Mekong River Basin travels through the landscape of six Southeast Asian countries, it is inherently true that everything that surrogates the characteristics of the river will cause a huge influence. Electricity, of course, is familiar to the majority of public when thinking about the benefits of hydropower dams to the society. According the news cover in CNBC published by Nyshka Chandran whose specialization is Asia-Pacific politics, because of the electricity shortage Southeast Asia, hydropower becomes “an attractive, clean energy source and a valuable source of revenue.” Adding on that claim, Nyshka Chandran affirms that “hydropower also provides water for consumption, storage, irrigation and flood control.” Although providing the claim that well-planned hydropower projects on any scale can potentially boost the economy of the region, Nyshka explains that “higher poverty levels” will not be far from the reality if “food security and agricultural productivity from decreased sediment flows. This implies that without proper strategies to develop dams, the external effects can go further beyond economic measurements. In terms of social dynamics of rural areas, Bryan Tilt, PhD at the Department of Anthropology at Oregon State University joining with two other scholars assess the social impacts of large dams, specifically in the upper Mekong River Basin. In the research, Bryan Tilt et al. distinctively support the claim that hydropower projects dismay rural activities. In the Manwan Dam project
in 1991, the researchers noticed that “the ratio of paddy fields to non-irrigated fields in the reservoir area” dropped from 6:4 to 4:6 after the inundation of the valley. Moreover, villagers are left with no choice but to substitute the primary agricultural products, rice, with maize to “meet household consumption needs.” Another discomfort that villagers experience is the relocation out of the area due to sterile lands after flooding. In an article published in 2017 with the provocative title “Water and power: Mega-dams, mega-damage?”, Emanuele Bompan with 3 other Sci Dev Net editors examine the general impacts of dams around the world. With regard to the social function after dam constructions are finished, Emanuele Bompan et al. recognize that thousands of people “are often relocated, without adequate compensation, to poorly built areas including shantytowns.” These instances well represent the pros and cons of hydropower dams to the living conditions of every citizen in the area.
To remedy the consequences of improper hydropower planning, some observers focus on remodeling dams so that the central purpose is for both sustainability and productivity. One of the bright ideas is the distribution of dams in the river while minimizing the size. According Thomas B. Wild, professor in Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center, with five other experts in the environmental field, the “sediment-management techniques” can bring light into the hope of reviving future hydropower projects. In the instance of the planned Lower Sesan 2 (LSS2) Dam in Cambodia, Thomas B. Wild et al. specify that “the opportunities to modify dam sitting, design, and operating (SDO) policy decision” will help increasing “sediment passage at dams in the MLB” and “energy production” (2). The concept for this proposal is to replace the LSS2 Dam with three smaller dams that “benefit downstream ecosystems and preserve long-term reservoir storage capacity” (3). This method demonstrates the availability of reducing harms to the environment by scattering dams in the tributaries. Another suggestion to remodel
hydropower projects ties with the consideration of typology and location. Looking at the solution from the preservation standpoint, Stuart Chapman, who is a “naturalist” working as a Conservation Director for WWF’s Greater Mekong Programme in 2008, states that such sustainable strategies can renovate conventional dams in 2012 TEDxWWF. Before introducing the alternative approach, Stuart admits that the invention of “fish ladder” in Mun River Dam in Thailand and “high wall dams” cause more disadvantage for indigenous fish to migrate back to their breeding upland. To resolve this issue, the environmentalist comes up with the two design criteria to revolutionize dams including having dams in “high upstream mountain” and the type of dams which profit both human and nature. As the result of this adaptation, the living qualities of villagers will develop along with the natural system of the river.
While remodeling dams with the adjustment in construction process alleviate the intense ramification to the natural world, it is better to adopt alternative approaches based on social situations to limit the impacts of dams. The first concept shifts toward the necessity of having multiple technologies to cultivate renewable energy for the area. A New York Times editor, David Robert, published a perspective article “No More Dams on the Mekong” on Sep 3rd, 2014 to assess the possibility for Southeastern Asian countries to procure clean energy without building huge dams. For example, David argues that minimizing the scope of building hydropower plants will relieve the ecological tension, as well as improving energy production. Furthermore, he ensures that the synergistic energy supply from the development of “small-scale hydropower in Vietnam and solar power in Vietnam and Thailand” will be better off than the current proposed plan. According to the International Center for Environmental Management, “a thoughtful combination of renewables” could generate a greater amount of energy by 2025. This prediction means the energy efficiency will even rise higher when fusing renewable energy.
While transitioning to other renewable methods will have to take a long way before putting into practice, adaptive design using a “pico-hydropower system” offers a promising future to the Laos communities. Silvia Vincente from Lao Institute for Renewable Energy and Hans Bludszuweit from Research Centre for Energy Resources and Consumption bring to the discussion of hydropower a new implementation called pico-hydro technology. The merit of the project is the inclusion of villagers in the infrastructural process. In particular, Silvia Vincente and Hans Bludszuweit affirms that “implementation, training follow-up and evaluation phases” accommodate the involvements of “the entire village,” specially “women, indigenous and even illiterate people.” Because of the funding restriction, the parameter of the hydropower design entails “a decentralized manner” and “village institutions.” The final result of having “shared pico-hydropower systems” captures the initial objective with “the reduction of emissions (CO2 and other) and deforestation.” In other words, if the project becomes a holistic approach for every dam in the Mekong River, the social lives of million people will improve.
These listed strategies are effective only if there are mutual agreements among state government, private sectors, and most importantly, citizens. The key concern in solving hydroelectric problems does not lie solely on any responsible individual, but rather spreads across the board and involves a network of countries and communities. Take a cover story “Mekong River nations face the hidden costs of China’s dams” written by the Nikkei staff writer Yukako Ono for example. By both accounting the anxiety of indigenous inhabitants and ongoing political conflicts, Ono amplifies the ultimate advantage of building up trust among Southeast Asian nations. On the national level, Ono believes that Cambodians can be more transparent in the decision-making process in order to gain support from the community. For instance, she claims that the government decided to relocate the entire village with the assistance
of 2 hectares of farming land. Nonetheless, she reckons that the farmers could not recover the agricultural productivity unless there were special aids for farming equipment. Multiple cases of improper hydropower project management raise the need of streamlining the environmental assessment. From one instance happens in Thailand’s Supreme Administrative Court on June 24th, Michelle Nijhuis, a national award-winning environmental and science journalist in the National Geographic, recognizes that the Xayaburi project (a hydro project in the river south of the Chinese border) is conducted without the overall approval from the public with the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT). Convincingly, these circumstantial problems will unlikely repeat if there were an appropriate legal framework. Jane Singer studying at Kyoto Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies along with two other colleagues suggest that the decision to “resettle villages” from the Dong district government needs to align with the culture of Co-tu villages (218). In particular, Jane Singer et al. mention that enhancing qualities of “food security,” “agricultural land,” and “national poverty alleviation programmes” can be right solutions that the government is capable of promoting (219). What is behind these precautions is the need of having direct negotiations between the government and the representative of the local council.
In addition to the national tactics, international relationships are equally crucial to the legal process of building dams. The core of this concept is the urgency of having trans-boundary collaboration, so that every country in Northeast Asia is held accountable for every infrastructural project in the river. Marko Keskinen who is a senior university lecturer at the Department of Built Environment at Aalto University along with other three scholars address the possibility of bringing China “on board to the basin-wide planning process” and ensuring the transparency of the environmental assessment. Reinforcing the coalition within the region, such
as the Mekong River Commission (MCR), will surely put forward the “shared responsibility of all riparian countries.” This research exemplifies the opportunities that countries can integrate in their foreign policies to ensure the validity of hydropower projects. At the place where the political environment heightens, the MCR, as briefly mentioned, plays a pivotal role in regional water management. In this sense, Diana Suhardiman at the International Water Management Institute partnering with two other experts categorize the organizational effect of the MRC correlates with “the strategic environmental assessments” (SEAs) (201). For example, Diana Suhardiman et al. emphasize that “the SEA created a political space for several actors … and helped open up alternative decision-making pathways with regard to transboundary hydropower development” (210). This indicates that in spite of focusing on the intense political climate, Southeast Asian countries should come together to resolve the ecological crises of dams.
In conclusion, although hydropower dams present huge economic opportunities for Southeast Asian countries, the external impacts that it yields reach far beyond the livelihood of millions of people and the ecosystem. Therefore, we can prevent the negative impacts from happening by remodeling dams and seeking alternative solutions. The process of making changes to the current dam system has to be taken seriously on both national and international scale. While the state governments, private sectors and especially, countrywide citizens need to streamline the communication about the topic, international relationships can potentially be pivotal factors to idealize future dams. If these positive actions start taking place, we are gracious enough to have enough food resources in our daily meals. From then on, never will we have to be anxious or remorseful when hearing about dam constructions.
Works Cited
Bompan, Emanuele, et al. “Water and Power: Mega-Dams, Mega-Damage?” SciDev.Net, SciDev.Net, 22 Mar. 2017.
Chapman, Stuart. “Dam Right!” TED. 27 June 2012. Lecture.
Chandran, Nyshka. “Southeast Asia Is Betting on Hydropower, but There Are Risks of Economic Damage.” CNBC, CNBC, 10 Aug. 2018.
Kano, Yuichi, et al. “Impacts of Dams and Global Warming on Fish Biodiversity in the IndoBurma Hotspot.” PLoS ONE, vol. 11, no. 8, Aug. 2016, pp. 1–21.
Keskinen, Marko, et al. “Mekong at the Crossroads: Next Steps for Impact Assessment of Large Dams.” AMBIO - A Journal of the Human Environment, vol. 41, no. 3, May 2012, pp. 319–324.
Lovgren, Stefan “Southeast Asia May Be Building Too Many Dams Too Fast.” Mekong River Dams Threaten Southeast Asia's Fish, Soil, and People, 23 Aug. 2018.
“Mekong River Basin.” WLE Mekong, wle-mekong.cgiar.org/changes/where-we-work/mekongriver-basin/.
Ono, Yukako. “Mekong River Nations Face the Hidden Costs of China's Dams.” Nikkei Asian Review, Nikkei Asian Review, 9 May 2018.
Piman, T., et al. “Assessment of Flow Changes from Hydropower Development and Operations in Sekong, Sesan, and Srepok Rivers of the Mekong Basin.” Journal of Water Resources Planning & Management, vol. 139, no. 5, Nov. 2013, pp. 723–732.
Polimeni, John M., et al. “Trans-Border Public Health Vulnerability and Hydroelectric Projects: The Case of Yali Falls Dam.” Ecological Economics, vol. 98, Feb. 2014, pp. 81–89.
Roberts, David. “No More Dams on the Mekong.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 3 Sept. 2014.
Singer, Jane, et al. “Post-Displacement Community Resilience: Considering the Contribution of Indigenous Skills and Cultural Capital among Ethnic Minority Vietnamese.” Asia Pacific Viewpoint, vol. 56, no. 2, Aug. 2015, pp. 208–222.
Suhardiman, Diana, et al. “Between Interests and Worldviews: The Narrow Path of the Mekong River Commission.” Environment & Planning C: Government & Policy, vol. 33, no. 1, Feb. 2015, pp. 199–217.
Tilt, Bryan, et al. “Social Impacts of Large Dam Projects: A Comparison of International Case Studies and Implications for Best Practice.” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 90, July 2009, pp. S249–S257.
Vicente, Silvia, and Hans Bludszuweit. “Flexible Design of a Pico-Hydropower System for Laos Communities.” Renewable Energy: An International Journal, vol. 44, Aug. 2012, pp. 406–413.
Wild, Thomas B., et al. “Maintaining Sediment Flows through Hydropower Dams in the Mekong River Basin.” Journal of Water Resources Planning & Management, vol. 142, no. 1, Jan. 2016, pp. 1–14.