Mr. R. Mochebelele
Joint Permanent Technical Commission Lesotho Highlands Development Project, Lesotho LHWP:
Concerns and Benefits of Dams including the Environmental and Social Impacts and the Associated Mitigation Measures for Sustainability

Mr. Mochebelele explained to the meeting that Lesotho was landlocked within South Africa (SA). More than 50% of the water resources in the region come from the mountainous area of Lesotho. All water flows to the south-east part of South Africa, while the Lesotho Highlands Water Project (LHWP) supplies water to the northern part of SA. It is considered cheaper doing this in Lesotho than making such transfers later within SA.

The growing water demands in the industrial heart-land of Gauteng province in South Africa was instru-mental in promoting inter-governmental discussions on the possibility of a water transfer from Senqu-Orange river in Lesotho to augment the Vaal river system, as early as the 1950s. The LHWP treaty was signed October 24, 1986. According to the treaty Water transfer costs were to be borne by South Africa, while Lesotho paid for the development of hydropower and other ancillaries.

Phase 1A development commenced in the late 1980s and Phase 1B started in early 1995. For the phase 1A "Environmental Action Plan" (EAP) prior and full consultations were undertaken with the Lesotho government and affected communities through public meetings, the "pitsos". The Compensation for the loss of arable land started in 1989 and consisted of distribution of grains to affected households for a period of 15 years. The loss of grazing land was compensated through the distribution of fodder to the affected households for a period of 5 years. Community owned Wood lots were compensated by a once-off payment. NGOs and affected communities participated in the baseline environmental assessment in Phase 1B.

Lesotho will earn US $20 million annually in the form of royalties, in addition to the revenue earned from the sale of water to South Africa. Out of the US $68 million received till date, US $23 million have been used for various public works program generating short-term employment for urban and rural poor. The other benefits include, power gener-ation, improved access to a mountain hinterland, creation of tourism opportunities, wildlife & cultural reserves.

There have been recent changes in policy with regard to rural development and resettlement asso-ciated with the project because at the time of original Phase I development, SA was an apartheid government and there was a military government in Lesotho. Lessons from Phase 1A was that the project had to include not only the dams but the costs of the resettlement and environment action programme. In Phase 1A , the environment costs were 11% of the project. In the current context of Phase 1B, the cost is 25% of total project costs. More emphasis is now placed on better housing, schools, local roads and establishment of grazing associations and livestock improvement programs. One lesson is it is essential to involve the NGOs in the design, implementation and monitoring of the resettlement and social improvement programs. Other issues more difficult to address included fisher-ies impacts and viable alternatives for fish restocking and enhancement as there will be species change.

Ms. Anna Moepi
On behalf of the Matala Community, Lesotho
The impact of the LHWP on the community resettled from Molikaliko

(Presented by Ms. Motseao Senyane)
Motseao Senyane delivered the testimony of Anna Moepi, who was the author of this presentation and a representative of the resettled community of Matala, who came originally from Molikaliko.
Ms. Senyane works for the Transformation Resource Centre in Lesotho.

Ms. Moepi's community was displaced and relocated because of the LHWP. People were not satisfied with the compensation they were getting because it was below what was initially promised. The com-pensation package was too low to sustain their lives, and was disbursed only once a year. In addition, not all the people from the displaced community have received compensation.

The personal story of a community resettled was recounted. Life before the project was simple and undisturbed. It was an agricultural lifestyle planting maize, wheat and other cash crops and raising livestock. When the project arose, they were told resettlement was compulsory and the lives would be improved for the resettlees. They were promised full compensation for loss of land and better social services. The compensation package was perceived to be limited and came too late. It did not compre-hensively address all the losses and promises such as water and stoves were not kept. The relationship of the resettlees and the host communities was a major concern and most do not feel their life was better off. They felt their future was uncertain as there was no training on self reliance and income generation activities. There was great worry about what they would do after the annual compensation payments ended.

Ms. Senyane concluded that the future of the resettlees was uncertain because they had no means to sustain their lives, once compensation came to an end. In addition, they had not been accepted by the host community at Matala. The Molikaliko com-munity was asking to be resettled again.

Ms. Claire Limbwambwa
Zambian Electricity Supply Corporation, Zambia
Mitigating Impacts of Large Dam Construction
ex-post: the Case of the Gwembe-Tonga Development Project

The construction of the Kariba Dam in the late 1950s led to the flooding of an area measuring close to 4,000 square kilometres. This resulted in the need to relocate approximately 50,000 people in the 1950's people and disrupt their cultural systems and traditions. Some initiatives were undertaken using the resettlement fund created by the Federal Government to try and reduce the disruptions. However, it became evident that the relocated people of Gwembe-Tonga and other affected people were not part of the planning and management of those initiatives and the people felt that the money was limited, late in coming and that there was no community input.

Based on that experience, there is an overwhelming sense that for new interventions people need to be involved in the design and planning. In 1994,
the new Government of the Republic of Zambia (GRZ) promulgated the Energy Sector Reform Programme which among other issues set the policy framework for dealing with environmental and social issues arising out of any energy sector project.
This included unresolved issues from projects undertaken before the promulgation of this Act. One such issue was that relating to the resettlement of the Gwembe-Tonga people.
Based on that, a study was commissioned entitled "The Development Strategies and Rehabilitation Programmes for the Peoples Affected by the Construction of the Kariba Dam" in 1996. The result of the study led to the conceptualisation of the current Gwembe-Tonga Rehabilitation and Develop-ment Project. The aim of this project is two-fold: first, to mitigate some of the negative impacts on the resettled people, their hosts and the physical environment, and secondly to encourage the on-going voluntary migration out of the original resettlement areas in order to normalise population densities.

Among the priorities today are road rehabilitation, upgrading of health facilities, construction of earth dams for livestock water supply for people away from the lake, provision of 30 bore holes for drinking water; and land conservation and reclamation in instances where resettlees were sent to barren land. Also, only 2% of the people in the area had electrification so rural electrification was a priority. Linking the agriculture, fisheries, power and roads activities was considered essential.

The selected strategy is to provide physical, social and economic infrastructure and assist with capacity building of the affected people. It is hoped that such a strategy would enable the affected people to pursue their economic activities with a little bit more hope than is currently the case. Although the project has encountered problems such as the existence of landmines, budgetary constraints, con-tinued distribution of food aid by some agencies and high expectations raised in the beneficiary communities, it is hoped that the project will be implemented successfully despite of these problems.

Ms. Limbwambwa concluded that the final lesson was the need for capacity building, awareness and liaison. The cost of the new programs is estimated to be US $ 26 million and $12 million has been raised to date. Many communities have very high expectations of the program.

Mr. David Syantami Syankusule
Kaluli Development Foundation, Zambia
Impacts of the Construction of Lake Kariba on the Gwembe Tonga People

The construction of the Kariba dam (1954-1959) by the Federal Government of Rhodesia and Nyasaland both negatively and positively affected the community in the Zambezi Valley. This submission discusses the effects of the dam on the community and offers recommendations for future dam projects. The community was not consulted, but merely informed of compensation and other facilities and infrastructure. Many of the promises were not kept and people are waiting still.

The negative impacts of the dam revolved around three main issues: resettlement, human and environ-mental health, and land use. The resettlement process was especially problematic for the comm-unity. First of all, the communities thought that the resettlement period was too short to properly and respectfully transfer their goods and cultural tradi-tions to their new homes. Secondly, violence was used by territorial authorities to force co-operation. Thirdly, compensation for resettling was insufficient. Regarding issues of human and environ-mental health, the proliferation of water borne/ related diseases such as malaria worried the communities. Also, the loss of diversity of food base was another concern. The loss of fertile and manageable soil for farming due to the resettlement rounded off the list of neg-ative impacts. Forty years later many communities are still awaiting the delivery of the promises made at the time and are still very concerned over the very limited scope of compen-sation.

The dam also had positive impacts on the communities. They were: increased employment opportunities, improved standards of living, and the creation of more schools. The resultant fishing industry has provided meaningful employment for most, and encouraged others to pursue other economic development opportunities such as opening shops. The standard of living has also improved in terms of levels of sanitation and communication systems with the outside world. Lastly, the increased number of schools has allowed more children to be educated than before the dam was built. The recommendations for future dam projects included: fair compensation based on prevailing economic prices, monitoring systems before and after the dam is built, and the fulfilment of promises made.

Mr. Syankusule concluded that a major concern is the lack of negotiation on local sharing of revenues from power generation. Mr. Syankusule called for EIA to be carried out with people's participation. Affected people should be involved and gain access to project benefits. Where dams are developed, dams must be seen as a means of local development rather than an end in itself. A Commission on Dams in each country may be one method of ensuring this process.

Ms. Cansen Akkaya, and Dr. Levin Ozgen
Directorate of State Hydraulic Works and Cukorova University/Advisor to South Eastern Anatolia Project, Turkey
New Criteria for Resettlements in Regional Development: Turkey's Water and Land-based Development Experience in the South Eastern Anatolia Region and Project

Ms. Akkaya briefly introduced the importance of dams for economic and social development in Turkey, which has developed vast experience with dams for irrigation, power and water supply purposes. Government overcomes resettlement problems through a policy on appropriation and compensation policies with proper studies, clear establishment of procedure and careful monitoring of impacts. In the past, powerful central authorities facilitated construction and management of water resources. Turkey has developed 600 large dams for irrigation and 500 hydropower dams. Large dams have contributed to the overall development of Turkey and to meeting the needs of a rapidly increasing population.

Dr. Ozgen stressed that human civilisation has almost always been established near water. The control, development, and usage of water for economic activities, power production, and the improvement of human welfare have validated the importance of water in any human settlement. Regional development planning has to focus on the development of people within the region. Today human development stands in the focus of the regional development planning. Sustainability in the regional development and planning may only be provided by the voluntary participation of the people.

The South-Eastern Anatolia Project Regional Development Administration accepts these approaches. It puts them into the systemic-integrated spatial practices by means of various resettlement projects at different scales. These projects cover also architectural and restoration/rehabilitation levels with emphasis on human, socio-economic life and cultural components in the South-eastern Anatolian Region of Turkey. In this context, regional development planning has to consider the rights of the people or in other words, "if you can't resettle - as viable, equal and fair, and sustainable -- you have no right to displace." (Dharmadhikary: 1998)

Regional development is an important consideration in planning and transformations of human and social systems need to be considered in relation to each project. Turkey's experiences provide advice to other countries.

Mr. Bhekani Maphalala
Community representative from Woodstock Dam, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
Recommendations to the WCD from Dams Affected People in Southern Africa

Mr. Maphalala said that large dams represent a field of broken promises for many communities and people directly affected by dams projects in Africa. In the past they have been built without local input and involvement.

Mr. Maphalala said that an independent commission should be established in countries to establish the compensation needed. To ensure people are treated in a fair and equitable manner in future many steps are required. Among these: dams should be viewed as a means to development and not an end; communities should be shareholders in dams and mechanisms such as Trust funds should be established; communities should be involved in negotiating all key aspects of a project such as resettlement, compensation and benefits sharing. Communities should be informed of their rights and capacity building and training should be provided. All project documents must be public. Binding and enforceable contracts should be entered into between the authorities and communities and individuals for compensation and resettlement to ensure the agreements are followed and done before construction begins. The impact of dams on community safety and sanity must be part of monitoring. Communities involved with dams must be treated with dignity and be provided with legal protection and access to legal recourse.

Mr. Maphalala was one of the participants of the Southern African Hearings for Communities Affected by Large Dams, in Cape Town, South Africa, who had jointly submitted a statement. To ensure that in the future, communities are treated in a just and equitable manner, they made the following requests:

• Communities need to be involved in the decision-making process before the decision to build has been made.
• Affected communities must be allowed to participate as equal partners in the process. It means they are becoming "shareholders" of dam projects, resulting in benefits accruing directly to communities.
• To facilitate effective participation of communities, they need to be informed of their rights, and all project documents have to be available to the public.
• To ensure that projects are implemented properly, government and project developers must take responsibility and enter into binding contracts for compensation and resettlement programmes. These contracts must be properly negotiated and agreed upon with affected communities.
• As long as they continue to stand, dams must be monitored, including dam safety and impacts on community health and sanitation.

On the broader level, communities request the following:

• - International law must be created to just compensation, resettlement and benefit-sharing.
• A moratorium on new dams should be instituted until the results of the World Commission on Dams have published its finding and criteria and standards.

The presenter concluded that Governments should compensate project affected communities for outstanding losses and damages. International law should also be created to address these issues and a moratorium on new dams should be instituted until the WCD report is completed.

Commissioners' question time

Commissioner Patkar appreciated the clear and forthright presentation from the governments on displacement, resettlement and reparation issues. She posed three related questions:

1. Do the affected people and the government concerned agree on the principle of seeking consent of the community? Can consent of the community become a precondition for planning and decision-making for new projects?
2. Who should be responsible for reparation in projects implemented by colonial administrations - the British monarchy, Commonwealth, present government, lending organisations, etc.?
3. What would be the mechanism(s) to identify whether a case is eligible for reparation, and what would be the mechanism(s) for administering reparation?

The response to the first question was that consent of the community could be the guiding principle in selection of projects and mitigation measures. On responsibility and mechanism for reparation no clear answer came forth.

Mr. Mochebelele:
NGOs have helped in shaping the resettlement policy and been involved in capacity building of the affected people. I think that lenders and donors should also agree to the process.

Commissioner Patkar:
(posed to the LHWP presenter) Can some form of sustainable livelihood measures could be put in place instead of cash compensation and dependency perpetuating measures such as provision of grain?

Mr. Mochebelele acknowledged the point.

Chair:
Did the Kariba project cost include the cost of resettlement when the dam was made in the 1950s?

Ms. Claire Limbwambwa:
12 million pounds was set aside for compensation in the 1950s. This was general compensation (given to local authority to develop / improve the area where people were resettled), and another portion of the money was used for payment of compensation for private property acquired. The reparation measures planned now will be mobilised by the government.

Chair:
(posed to Dr. Ozgen) Can you please elaborate how resettlement action plans were developed with people's participation?

No clear answer was given.

Summary of panel 2

Discussions focussed on :

• the changing nature of community participation in the decision making process around dams as countries move to more democratic systems of governance. It was noted there was commonality seen in the presentations by Government and NGO representatives on impacts and experience with large dams.
• the responsibilities for rehabilitation and the fact that experience is still very limited in implementing open and full consultative processes.
• the responsibility for compensation for past concerns of inadequate compensation or promises made but not kept. Alternative source of livelihood such as "land for land" is not always possible.
• The inclusion of resettlement costs in the total project costs. The difficulties of today's project entity versus the past institutions.