Norway Case Study - Executive Summary

This study is one of a series of case studies undertaken worldwide for the WCD process. Where a common approach and methodology was used to assess the development effectiveness of large dams. The Norwegian case study considers the development experience with an integrated system of 40 dams and reservoirs, watercourse diversions and 51 hydropower stations (total installed capacity of 2,165 MW) in the Glomma and Lågen river basin (G&L basin) in Southeast Norway. It considers the development of the basin over one hundred years and illustrates how decision-making and operation have evolved over time, shaped by both national and local interests.

The study is organised around a number of common questions established by the WCD. The selected issues are assessed at the basin level supported with more detailed analysis of four non-focal dams in the basin, rather than a single focal dam. The questions include:

The G&L basin was selected to illustrate the Norwegian hydropower development history and experience in the context of a run-of-river basin system with upstream reservoirs. The G&L development history is only partly representative of Norwegian experiences because most of the hydropower dams in the G&L basin were built prior to hydropower dams in other parts of Norway. The following sections summarise the National and basin context, after which responses to the six questions are provided.

The National Context

Hydropower as a key driver in the development of modern Norway

In the 20^th century the economic development of Norway has depended considerably on the exploitation of the country's rich energy resources. Throughout this time hydropower and dam development have provided a basis for industrialisation, particularly for the expansion of energy intensive industry such as the electro-metallurgical industry of the World War II. Norway is presently the 6^th largest hydropower producer globally and has the highest use of electricity per capita in the world (25 882 kWh in 1996) about 10 times the world average of 2 300 kWh per capita. Hydropower was 99% of electricity generated with a market value of 19, 43 billion NOK (approximately 3 billion US$).

From the early 1970s large reserves of oil and gas were discovered on the continental shelf in the North Sea, which provides the basis for a large oil and gas industry sector. Norway ranks as the 2nd largest exporter of oil in the world. The technology expertise from hydropower development has also been crucial in the development of deep-sea oil extraction.

The political debate over the economic, social, technical, and environmental merits of technology options for the power sector has been high on the public agenda in Norway during the last 15 years, particularly as the population become more concerned with environmental issues. Until recently, hydropower has been viewed as the only acceptable source of energy. The idea of nuclear power was dispensed with in the 1970's. Natural gas is presently being considered, but is still highly controversial due to pollution effects and international conventions on the reduction of emissions (eg the Kyoto protocol). This has contributed to the slowing down of further expansion of power generation to the extent that Norway, during the last 5 years, has been the net importer of power from Sweden and Denmark. In neighbouring Scandinavian countries, electricity is, in part, generated by nuclear and coal-based technologies, and consequently imports to Norway are conceived by many as negatively branded on environmental grounds.

Hydropower provides almost 100% of electricity in Norway, and has relied on development of the country's water resources by technical interventions in more than 1/3 of the nations main river landscapes. Investments in the hydropower sector equals that of industry in total, discounted at about 200 billion NOK (approx. US$ 25 billion) for each sector. Based on the hydropower system, Norwegian utilities on average hold some of the lowest prices for power supply globally at 0,162 NOK per kWh, ie 0,02c/kWh (1997). Cost recovery has been attained in the system, however with some cross subsidisation within individual government owned companies. Undeniably, hydropower development has had a role in contributing to development effectiveness in Norway as a nation. However, it is debatable whether Norwegian dam and hydropower development and management has been environmentally sustainable.

During the 20^th Century, river regulation and the expansion of the Norwegian power system had firm parliamentary support. Until the 1980s electricity supply was broadly regarded as a public good and seen as boosting economic development with considerable multiplier effects. Publicly, this was given as justification for the high investments needed in dams and hydropower. Providing adequate power was seen as a basic welfare issue, as was the attitude of fair distribution of wealth within the nation.

However, paramount changes came in 1991, when Parliament decided to deregulate and unbundle the power sector. Competition and profit motivation were introduced to provide incentives for maintaining low prices and making utilities more efficient. Hydropower suddenly became a market commodity, causing the ownership structures to change. Deregulation came as a result. Economists had, for a long time, pointed to the high investment, low returns and cross-subsidisation in the power supply industry. In order to increase efficiency, hydro-expansion was no longer to be based on centrally planned demand forecasts, but on the market forces of supply and demand. With deregulation in process, industry is still willing to continue investing in hydropower, largely because it is still seen as "clean-energy" in environmental terms. The Norwegian WCD case demonstrates some of the dilemmas decision-makers are faced with in dealing with options assessment, and how solutions have been sought in practice.

Presently Norway has a total installed capacity of 27 359 MW which, in 1996, provided a hydropower production of 103,9 TWh. Norway currently has 350 registered large dams. In contrast to the G&L case, much of recent hydro-expansion has relied on high-head development along the mountainous west coast (up to >1000 m). Such developments have taken place in smaller, even- glaciated, high precipitation river basins, in some cases including inter-basin transfers. Rock tunnelling, high pressure turbine technology, underground powerhouses, and frequently discharged underwater from the turbines near or at sea-level have been applied. Hydropower production may vary by as much as 10% on the national level annually due to hydrological variability.

Of Norway's 179,7 TWh economic hydro-potential, 113 TWh is developed, and new generation licenses have been granted for an additional 1,9 TWh. Environmentally important rivers with a hydropower production potential equalling 35,3 TWh have been protected against hydropower development by means of four Protection Plans for Watercourses (The Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE) 1999). Power generation is well distributed and today fully grid-interconnected, including the neighbouring Nordic countries. As per 31 December 1998 the ownership of the hydropower generating capacity was 86,8% public (the state-owned Norwegian Energy Co-operation - Statkraft 30,3%, county and municipal power companies 56,5%) and 13,2% private, mainly industrial enterprises (NVE 1999).Electricity consumption is shared equally between heavy industry, services, and households, Domestically, electric space heating during wintertime takes a considerable share of the supply. Due to the public desire for electric power, electricity costs compete with those of petroleum based products and wood which have been the traditional fuel in Norway.

Compared to inland fisheries, estimated earnings from water-based tourism, irrigation, and water and sanitation fees, hydropower holds the dominant position accounting for 85-90% of direct earnings from freshwater uses in Norway. Allowing room for stakeholder interests is common in the Norwegian institutional practice. Presently the main other stakeholder interests relate to flood protection, inland fisheries and angling, tourism/water sports, environmental conservation, water supply and sanitation, and irrigation. Previously log driving, inland navigation and milling also counted as significant stakeholder interests in Norwegian rivers.

Historically, development of hydropower electrification has been driven and influenced by two, later three, basic interest groups. International and national industrialists began in the early part of the 20^th century to realise the potential for developing cheap hydropower in Norway. Simultaneously, municipal governments and counties were motivated to develop local hydro-resources to create new employment opportunities and welfare for local inhabitants. The two groups have been termed as urban centralists and district regionalists respectively.

In the process of developing a national system of hydropower utilisation, a third powerful interest group emerged as concerns mounted over the environmental impacts of hydropower. A conservation movement arose as river landscapes were increasingly encroached upon. One result of this is that rivers representing the equivalent of 35,3 TWh are now protected against hydropower development by means of the parliamentary approved Protection Plans for Watercourses. This may be seen as an indication of public willingness to pay for river protection. Similarly, hydro-projects constituting the remaining undeveloped potential were subjected to a comprehensive, national, hydropower Master Plan exercise in the 1980s. Stakeholders were widely involved in this exercise, and projects were categorised according to their economic and technical, as well as environmental-social merits. The objective was to achieve a more publicly acceptable sequencing of future projects to come on line. The Master Plan has since served as a regulatory tool for national authorities, and has been revised twice. Currently a third revision is underway. The elaborate licensing process for water resources development has become a corner stone in the decision making process. A salient prerequisite in this process is stakeholder involvement. Consequently, considerable emphasis has been laid on institutional capacity building, knowledge development, public awareness and participation, and efforts to streamline the hydropower licensing process.

Currently Norway is experiencing a heated debate on the future of electricity supply. Issues that are considered are imports, the building of gas power stations in Norway, more hydropower development, and more efficient use of energy. In spite of Norway's extremely abundant resources of gas and oil in the North Sea, as well as the potential for wind-power, it is only during the past 15 years such options have been considered as substitutes for further hydropower development. While there is a growing need for more power, this is being widely contested, and very little new generation capacity has come on line in this period. In the mean time, the power utilities and industry itself have sought opportunities for gaining more power from the existing system through upgrading, refurbishment and associated research and development to make upgrading more profitable and the total power-supply system more efficient. Bringing down the costs of upgrading and taking advantage of a high degree of national and international co-ordination of supply in the system is the most cost effective option in a country the size of Norway. The opportunity for attaining greater efficiency and output from the system is well documented. Substantial upgrading and system improvement is taking place, ie inter-linking more strongly with the Northern European power market.

The mainly thermal power based European power market is deregulating, and sub-sea cable interconnections have expanded from Norway to Denmark, Holland and Germany. Many Norwegian power companies are looking to these markets to take advantage of high prices for exports of daytime peaking power, while cheaper thermal generated base-load can be imported for night-time supply, and to replace the emerging national deficit in Norwegian power generation for self-sufficiency. The gas power debate has divided the Norwegian Parliament causing the current minority Governments to resign in March 2000.

The G&L Basin Context

The G&L basin is the most populated river basin in Norway and, in addition to the hydropower development, has clearly been influenced by the human impact, especially during the last century. The influence is typical for industrialised countries, and includes land use changes (new farmland, deforestation, flood embankments, housing, industrial development, infrastructure, etc) and pollution.

The basin comprises of 42 000km² , approximately 1% of which is in Sweden. The western and northern headwaters of G&L are mountainous with high precipitation, partly glaciated, and with the highest peak reaching 2 469 m.a.s.l. These vast highland areas are snow-covered for half the year, causing a formidable reservoir of water to be released as spring floods continuing through summer.

A typical feature of reservoirs in G&L and most of Norway is that they were originally natural lakes where storage capacity has been increased by dams, often located in remote highland areas, and not involving resettlement of people. The rivers Glomma in Østerdalen valley and Lågen in Gudbrandsdalen both run about 250 km south and southeastwards through these glacially sculptured rural valleys, forming the upper parts of the G&L basin. The confluence of the two rivers is downstream of Lake Mjøsa, the largest lake in Norway, some 150 km from the sea. Downstream of Mjøsa the river system crosses lowland agricultural and urban areas, reaching the sea in the urbanised south between Norway's capital Oslo and the Swedish border.

The basin has two main rivers, Glomma in Østerdalen valley and Lågen in Gudbrandsdalen valley (Figure 1).

Hydropower operation and history

The hydropower development in the G&L basin reflects a history of more than 100 years. The main construction period in the basin was from 1945 to 1970. Most regulation dams and power stations in the G&L basin were built more than 30 years ago in a context quite different from the present situation in the G&L basin. The first regulation reservoirs were developed in the large lowland lakes (Lake Mjøsa and Lake Øyeren) in the middle of the 19^th century for the combined purpose of flood protection and transportation. Later most reservoir capacity was developed primarily for hydropower production purposes, but also with flood mitigation in mind.

During the early development phase run-of-the-river power plants, feeding the established industries, were built in the lower parts of the river basin and in tributary rivers close to the industries. Later, reservoirs were built in the mountain areas far upstream of the power plants. The development took place when each power company supplied electricity for a specific region, and several of them were built before the distribution grid was fully unified. In the period after World War II the Norwegian State was active in developing hydropower projects to feed the power-based melting industry as well as other heavy industry projects with power for substantially lower prices than the other markets, eg the household market. Hydropower development projects were also initiated to support specific districts in periods of depression and high unemployment.

Today the G&L basin encompasses 40 regulation reservoirs with a total capacity of approximately 3 500 million m³ of storage, equivalent to 16% of the basin runoff. Generally the hydropower reservoirs are natural lakes with water level fluctuation of 2-12 meters after regulation. Lake regulation capacities result from a combination of heightening and lowering natural water levels. The increase in total basin lake area is approximately 46.6 km². The highest dam in the basin (Raudalsvatn) is 40.8 meters and many of the lower dams qualify for the ICOLD definition of large dams due to the size of the reservoir they regulate. The largest power station in the basin has an installed capacity of 300 MW. The total installed capacity in the basin is 2 165 MW, with an average capacity of 42 MW for the 51 power stations.

Today the operation and management of the basin involves several governmental institutions (5 counties, 5 county governors and 60 municipalities in addition to the national ministries and directorates) with jurisdiction of different acts, different types of planning processes and monitoring, forecasting, and research activities. Operation and management also include the participation of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and management of the different water user interests by professional associations. The NGOs have a similar 3 level organisational structure; national, regional and local, while the only NGO organised on basin level is the Water Management Association - GLB. Monitoring activities include measurement stations for precipitation and temperature, hydrology, water quality, air quality and flora and fish. Specific activities are hydrological and meteorological monitoring for reservoir and flow forecasting and for short and long term hydropower production planning. Basin modelling activities include river system simulations and flood zone mapping.

The Norwegian hydropower history is well reflected in this basin. The integrated G&L basin operation is the most comprehensive in Norway. The last hydropower license process handled by Parliament was a project involving further development of the Øvre Otta River in the western part of the G&L basin. The project was a symbol for hydropower proponents and opponents and included conflicts nationally and locally. In September 1999, Parliament refused to grant the applicants licence for the applied hydropower scheme of approximately 1 TWh, but opened up for a reduced scheme of approximately540 GWh. The premises given by Parliament on the refusal in September 1999 can be interpreted as an instruction to the government to grant a license for a reduced project if the applicants chose to reapply. An application for a reduced project in accordance with the premises given by Parliament was filed with NVE in February 2000.

Historically, milling and log driving were important user interests in the G&L basin. Hydropower development has been a dominant interest throughout the 20^th century, while environmental protection has become a major interest only during the last 30 years. Water quality, flood protection and fishing, on the other hand, have been important issues throughout the whole period of hydropower development. Other important user interests in the G&L basin include tourism, recreation, water sports etc. Although important in terms of public services, water supply for urban areas, industries and for irrigation has so far been regarded as subsidiary interests.

Projected and actual impacts of the G&L basin hydropower development

Hydropower: Predicted vs Actual Generation: The study assessed the predicted versus the actual power generation by comparing the generation and capacity at the time of the permit application for the hydropower facility with the actual generation from the basin. It is important to note that regulation dams that have been build to regulate river flows and lake levels may have more that one power station associated with the reservoir.

The results presented in Section 3 of the report show that with technology development and change over time, including upgrading of equipment, unplanned expansion of generation facilities, and optimisation of the operations in an integrated manner, the generation from the basin today is greater that the original estimates provided by the individual permit applications. This is illustrated in the following table.

Table ES.1: Power Stations upgraded during the last 20 years.

Power Station

Year	Increase in installed capacity (MW)	Increase in production (GWh/y)	Planned New production (GWh/y)
Røstefossen ¹⁾	1987	1,9®3,1	10,3®16,5	20
Kongsvinger ²⁾	1988	20,9®20,9	106®129	120
Eidefoss ³⁾	1983	1,5®12,0	9,7®71,4	75
Nedre Vinstra ⁴⁾	1990	200®300	1073®1097
Rånåsfoss ⁵⁾	1983	61,8®99,0	356®486
Solbergfoss ⁶⁾	1985	118®215	687®878	890
FKF ⁷⁾	1985	22,0®212	800®1087
SUM	-	426,1®862	3042®3764,9

The building of new power stations and the upgrading of old ones has thus been a continuous process during the last 100 years. Most of the power plants in the G&L basin have increased production during their period of operation. Increased capacity is gained by the installation of new units, by the renewal of power stations or by the building of new power stations. Seven power stations, renewed within the last 20 years, have increased the installed capacity from 426,1 to 862 MW (102%) and the production from 3042 to 3764,9 GWh (24%) during their time of operation, exceeding the production estimates put out at the time of the original permit and approval.

Predicted vs Actual Costs: The assessment of predicted versus actual costs of dams for reservoir development is affected by the following conditions:

Cost estimates from the time of license approval and actual costs of the projects have been available from the 4 non-focal dams in the G&L basin (Olstappen, Rauddalsvatn, Fundin and Mjøsa III). A common feature of all of the projects analyzed is that the actual costs of the projects have been higher than the estimated cost at the time of license approval (Table 2). The main reasons for the deviation was the delay of 3-5 years till the start of construction for each of the projects and that the compensation part of the total costs (mainly for land acquisition) were higher than originally estimated.

Table ES.2: Planned and actual costs of non-focal dams (Source: GLB)

Reservoir

Fundin	Raudalsvatn	Olstappen	Mjøsa (III)
Permission	1966	1948	1950	1961
Construction start	1966	1949	1953	1958
In operation	1970	1952	1955	1963
Period of cost calculation	1962-74	1946-55	1948-60	1952-90
Estimated cost (Million NOK)	6	3	2	10,7
Actual cost (Million NOK)	9,6	5,1	5,7	18,5
Est. Cost (Million NOK1999)	41,9	43,4	21,3	97
Act. Cost (Million NOK1999)	59,8	63,5	60	103,5
Deviation (Million NOK1999)	+17,9	+20, 1	+38,8	+6,5
Deviation (%)	+43 %	+ 46 %	+182 % (+126 %) ¹⁾	+7 %
Construction part of total cost (%)	76%	66%	79%	37%
Compensation part of total cost (%)	24%	34%	21%	63%

Predicted vs Actual Schedules: Generally there has been a considerable time span (5-23 years) from when an application for a license was forwarded, to when the permission was given and the power stations/reservoirs commissioned. The reasons why several development plans have been delayed may be due to legal or environmental disputes resulting in changes/reduction of plans during the licensing process, controversies on ownership, shortage of funding, World War II or combinations of one or more factors.

Other Unexpected Impacts: Among other factors the study indicates that there were no predictions of sedimentation of reservoirs and this in fact did not occur in the lower reaches of the basin. The sedimentation load in G&L basin rivers is relatively low and not an issue in terms of their operation for power generation. This is because the regulated segment of the reservoirs encompass only the reservoir top layer. Some of the glacier feed rivers as well as other unregulated rivers in the higher mountains in the north-western part of the basin have a higher sediment load. The presence of regulation dams in these locations has reduced sediment transport downstream. One exception is the reservoir of Lake Øyeren where the effective regulated volume has decreased to some extent from expansion of the inlet delta in the last century, this, however is caused from erosion of nearby cultivated areas.

Some of the regulated reservoirs in the G&L basin have their low supply level some meters below the natural level for the actual lake and have experienced some erosion in the zone between full supply level and low supply level in a Norwegian context.

Although flood mitigation was cited as a major reason for constructing the regulation dams, there were no specific targets set for flood control in terms of predictions to reduce flood levels, flooded area or damage. There has been a general trend towards reduced flood levels in the G&L basin during the last 150 years concurrently due to the establishment of reservoirs that permit co-ordinated flood management decisions. The basin's degree of regulation increased from 4% to 16% during the 20^th century. In addition to the use of the reservoirs during major flood events other protective measures in the low areas of the basin include flood banks, and since 1995 flood hazard mapping, zoning and public information during flood periods.

The G&L basin has experienced several large floods during the last century, with the 1995 flood as the most severe. In the central part of River Glomma the return period of the 1995-flood has been estimated to 200 years. As a consequence of the G&L 1995 flood a governmental commission on flood protection measures was established, and the G&L basin was used as the focal area for a research program on floods (The HYDRA-programme) headed by The Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE) during 1996-1999.

Calculations of flood peak attenuation of the major floods in the main rivers from 1900 to 1999 show that today's reservoir capacity yields considerable extra flood attenuation, eg of flood attenuation by reservoir storage at the 1995 flood in Glomma at Elverum is shown in Figure ES.2.

The 1995 flood was a near optimal flood protection scenario of the existing dams in the G&L basin. The large effect of the reservoirs was possible due to the fact that this was a spring flood. The effect was especially important for Lake Øyeren where the calculated water level at flood peak was reduced by 1,9m by utilising the upstream reservoirs. Also in River Glomma the storage in reservoirs reduced the water level at flood peak.

The additional flood reduction potential by increasing reservoir capacity is still significant in the G&L basin. The 10 regulation projects proposed by the Commission on Flood Protection Measures would increase the degree of river regulation from 16 % to 23 %. So far none of these projects have planned for a license application and will probably not do so in the foreseeable future due to the current opposition against further dams, even if flood protection is the main purpose.

Available quantitative economic data on flood damages prior to 1980 are limited. During the last 20 years only the floods in 1987 and in 1995 have resulted in damages of substantial economic value. In spite of the significant flood reduction the total estimated flood damages of the 1995 flood was $280 million. It was estimated the damage would have been in the order of $326.67 without the regulation by dams, and subsequent damages avoided were in the order of 0.36 billion NOK.

The G&L basin contains some of Norway's main agricultural areas, which comprise 2 400 km² or 5,8% of the total basin area. The climate and the distribution of rainfall in Norway do not call for a high interest in dam building in relation to irrigation. The agricultural land is widely distributed and there is a high variability of production. Most irrigation plants depend on existing lakes and rivers and to a small extent to smaller irrigation ponds, which supply water for a short period.

None of the reservoirs in the basin are built for irrigation purposes and there was no expected water withdrawal for irrigation from the reservoirs when they were licensed. In total, 3 265 properties in the basin had installations for irrigation in 1989 and the irrigated area was 385 km² or 16% of the agricultural area. Few of the irrigation installations withdraw water from the hydropower reservoirs, and water withdrawal for irrigation is negligible compared to the discharge of the main rivers of the basin. The lack of conflicts between irrigation and hydropower production interests is also due to the fact that most irrigation installations are established after the hydropower reservoirs. However, in some smaller tributary the potential for future irrigation may have been reduced due to upstream hydropower regulation.

Both the flood attenuation from reservoirs and the flood protection measures, like flood banks and erosion control measures as a result of hydropower development, have been favourable for the agricultural interests and have contributed to a more effective utilisation of floodplains for agricultural purposes. Conflicts between the agricultural and hydropower development interests seem to be occasional changes in ground water level in some areas, loss of land from reservoir inundation and loss of fence-effect in rivers with reduced flow during summer. All these conflicts are minor in the G&L basin perspective, although they can be important for a few local farmers. According to the Norwegian legislation, the affected land owners/farmers will be compensated either by mitigation measures or by money.

The municipalities in the basin have 227 water supply plants serving 682 000 inhabitants with water from main rivers, tributary rivers, lakes, and ground water resources within the basin. Lake Mjøsa is the only reservoir in the G&L basin with considerable municipal water supply interests. Of the approximately 150 000 people living in the immediate surrounding of the lake, about 35 000 persons use Lake Mjøsa as their source of drinking water. According to records from the Directorate for Public Health the annual water abstraction from Lake Mjøsa is 4,75 million m³. Most of the water returns to the lake as runoff from sewage treatment plants and has minor effect on hydropower production.

Industrial Water Supply in the basin is mainly for cooling purposes and has minor impact on river discharge, and thus for hydropower production.

There are no examples of distinct recreational opportunities or activities that have been completely eliminated by the establishment of reservoirs and power plants or by changes in river flow rates from hydropower developments. However there are examples of hydropower development projects that have been stopped due to the recreational interests, eg the early development plans for Jotunheimen. Locally, the quality of recreational activities have been reduced due to the aesthetic properties of rivers and valleys, which have been negatively affected by dams, landfills, roads and transmission lines. Conversely, access opportunities have been provided through new roads related to construction activities. It is difficult to assess whether hydropower development has affected tourism.

Sport fishing and subsistence fishing with more catch efficient methods such as gill nets, are major user interests in the G&L basin. The participation rates are quite high in Norway. Locally more than half the population participates in fishing once or more annually. Historically commercial fishing in the lower part of Lågen and in Lake Mjøsa was the most important inland fishing activity in southern Norway. Brown trout, Cisco and Whitefish as well as other species were caught with a wide range of locally adapted catch methods. Today, recreational fishing is among the most popular outdoor recreation activities in the G&L basin as well as in the rest of Norway. The middle section of the G&L river system above the cities of Lillehammer and Elverum constitutes a very important recreational area. Rod and line fishing for brown trout and grayling and, to some extent also whitefish, is the main attraction in these rivers. Also the fishery of large-grown brown trout in the reservoir of Lake Mjøsa is a fishery of special interest. Of the annual catch of 10-15 metric tonnes, one half is caught by netsmen and the other half by trolling anglers.

Undoubtedly, hydropower development has played a significant role in developing settlements, economics, infrastructure, and public services in the G&L basin. However, hydropower development has not provided the G&L region with any noteworthy economic and population developments that differ significantly from similar regions without hydropower development. Power development has provided some municipalities with increased income resulting in improved general welfare and public services compared to other municipalities without income from hydropower developments. The direct economic effects are primarily derived from revenues to the municipalities and to a certain extent to the counties. The revenues to the private sector are small. The revenues for municipalities are taxes (profits taxes, nature resource taxes, basic interest taxes and property taxes), license fees, sale of compulsory energy, owner incomes (dividends), and municipal compensation funds. The State subsidies for municipalities receiving large energy revenues are reduced. Accordingly the municipalities' net effect of energy revenues are reduced.

The Norwegian energy sector has been highly regulated and dominated by public management for 90 years. During the period of hydropower development in the G&L, all of Norway was being electrified. Electric power was made available in all parts of the country, independent of the regions' own production of hydropower. In 1991 an Energy Act was introduced which turned the production and sale of electricity into a market-based activity. The transmission of electricity, which has a natural monopoly character, was still to be organised as a regulated monopoly.

There has been no resettlement in the G&L basin due to the building of the reservoirs or hydropower development. This is attributed to the scale of the development (run-of-the-river basin) and the features of the topography and population distribution in Norway. Generally in the lowland areas, which were relatively densely populated, run-of-river power plants were developed with existing upstream lakes as reservoirs. The remaining reservoirs were developed in the mountain areas with little or no population at the time. This is typical for most Norwegian hydropower projects and the resettlement is generally very low.

The most significant social effects of the hydropower development in G&L basin are connected to changes in local and regional economies. The effects include providing jobs, both permanent and temporary during the construction period, involving the operation of power plants and reservoirs, as well as the distributional effects of taxes, licenses fees, owner incomes and different kinds of compensations to inhabitants and interest groups in the development areas. All the distributional economical effects are covered in more detail in the paragraphs on regional and national effects and on distribution of cost and benefits.

Dam safety is also an issue in the G&L basin, and in 1977 there was a small dam failure in one of the tributaries to Lågen, which caused considerable damage to technical installations and infrastructure, as well as the landscape, but fortunately not harm was done to people..

Environmental effects of hydropower in the basin account for both the construction and operation phase and can be related to the reservoir itself and regulation of water level and water-flow. Effects also arise from the combination of impacts of hydropower developments with impacts from agriculture, flood protection, use of riparian areas and infrastructure developments.

Effects of the reservoirs have involved loss of habitat due to flooding, erosion and sedimentation, and raised water levels in the bordering terrestrial habitat. Physical gradients and processes governing plant successions have been permanently disrupted, leading to loss of specific vegetation types over time. The land areas lost can be vital,eg winter survival or nesting places for birds. The creation of a large water body probably also has positive effects on some water birds, notably ducks, in the basin. The fluctuations in water level may have increased sedimentation and particle content in the water especially in the first year after impoundment, and this has affected biota in various degrees in the reservoir as well as further downstream. Productive, shallow areas have become unstable and "washed out". However the regulated zone is not always barren. This depends on substrate, climate, depth gradient, and the amplitude and speed of water fluctuations. In some reservoirs this zone can have a significant production of semi-aquatic species and be important areas for bird and fish species.

Below the dams and diversion/inlet tunnels the natural river water flow is changed. These changes vary from minor reductions to a complete absence of water. In general, the effects of such a reduction in water flow on the natural biota are negative. Especially vulnerable to regulation are, for instance, some bryophytes and the specific waterfall vegetation that totally depends on constant wet or very humid conditions.

The access roads to reservoirs and hydropower stations represent a loss of terrestrial habitat and act as migration barriers. Roads also open up areas and increase recreational as well as commercial use. In the G&L basin, few new roads were actually built in connection with hydropower projects, especially when considered relatively to roads built by other interests such as forestry, tourism, communication etc. The transmission lines impact on the habitat in the clear-cut areas below the power lines in forested areas, and through reduced use of the area connected to the power line corridor due to avoidance behaviour. The latter effect has been noted for reindeer. Although habitat changes in the corridor area are beneficial to some species, the transmission line is a threat to bird life. Collisions with and electrocution by the power lines affect a number of bird species, particularly forest species and birds of prey, and is a significant mortality factor. No data is available on transmission lines as a mortality factor from the G&L basin.

Traditionally, watercourse regulations were thought to have strong negative impacts on salient fish species like brown trout, char and whitefish, and on spawning and hatchery areas and hence recruitment. Potential effects on productivity were also considered to be minimal. Thus, it was believed for a long time that that the waters could still support the same biomass of fish and the same fishing potential, provided there was stocking of hatchery-reared fish to compensate for loss of natural recruitment. This was a far too optimistic view. The littoral fauna, which is the main food resource of brown trout, is greatly reduced by fluctuations in water level. Planktonic fauna is less, or even positively affected by regulation, and can to some extent replace the littoral fauna as brown trout food. However, if whitefish and/or char are present, brown trout will not compete with these more specialised plankton feeders. Brown trout production and yield has in general decreased, in spite of stockings. There are a few mountain lakes and large lakes where the food base is unaffected because several of the planctonic species tolerate water level fluctuations. The recruitment of char and whitefish are often negatively affected by the regulation. However, if the pre-regulation populations were dense and slow growing, reduced recruitment has in some cases been positive for individual fish growth and fishing potential. In nutrient-rich, lowland lakes like Lake Øyeren, it seems that the dominance of cyprinids have further increased after regulation. It is not known that fish production by area has increased in any reservoir as a result of the regulation (where fish production has increased this is related to increased nutrient supply). Small lakes dammed up to large reservoirs can, however, hold more fish after regulation.

Changed water flow below dams and diversion tunnels and slow-flowing conditions above dams, have to a large extent affected fish populations in the G&L rivers. Important spawning and nursery areas are often totally or partly destroyed by the reduction in water flow. Slow-flowing conditions above dams have been detrimental, especially to Brown Trout and in River Glomma downstream Elverum where few rapids and riffles as spawning and nursery habitats are left. The slow-flowing conditions have favoured other species like cyprinids, pike, perch and turbot.

The dams also act as migration barriers. Before the regulation dams were constructed, it was possible for brown trout and grayling in River Glomma to migrate several hundred kilometres, and from Lake Øyeren in the south to the uppermost reaches. After the regulation dams were constructed, the migration patterns were probably broken down to a large extent, in spite of the construction of fish ladders. This is especially true for grayling; there are still examples of marked brown trout migrating more than 100 kilometres. Although few in number, the long-migrating individuals may have an important role in terms of exchanging and maintaining genetic diversity.

In River Lågen, the fish migrations are minimally affected by the dams. Only one dam, Hunderfossen, interferes with the natural migrations of large-sized brown trout, but the efficiency of the fish ladder is reasonably good. However, a minimum discharge in the important spawning and nursery area below the dam is the bottleneck for natural fish production.

Stocking of fish (brown trout) is the traditional mitigation measure, which shall compensate for loss in recruitment. A prerequisite for stocking is the existence of a necessary food supply, and in many of the dams this is not the case. Another issue emerging in the past 15-20 years due to new knowledge is the significance of the nativeness. Supplementary stockings of brown trout have usually involved non-native, hatchery-reared individuals. In recent years, the stocking policy is directed more to using native fish, and the nativeness aspect is now considered in all new license terms. The success of stocking programs has been assessed by several marking experiments to distinguish the naturally produced fish from the hatchery-reared fish. As a result, stocking has been terminated or reduced in some reservoirs. In other localities, natural recruitment is very limited and fish production almost completely depends on stocking. The so-called Hunder-trout, a famous, large-sized strain of brown trout, which can attain weights up to 20kg, was initially threatened by the hydropower project at Hunderfossen, but a successful stocking program has secured the viability of this fish population.

Habitat improvement efforts have comprised of the construction of weirs, pools and stream deflectors and creation of a more diverse habitat for aquatic or semi-aquatic biota. Many licenses, for instance in River Glomma, authorise the establishment of habitat improvements. In river stretches with a minimum water flow, weirs are important in order to maintain the water level in definite pool areas. Improvement efforts in large rivers as well as smaller rivers much affected by flood, are often very expensive, because the efforts have to be robust and well founded in order to withstand large fluctuations in flow rates. Spawning and nursery habitats are to a large extent lost in connection with river dams in the main rivers, and tributaries have become more important for the recruitment of fish. Often, tributaries are also affected by hydropower regulations and/or have been modified (cleared, channelised) due to log driving activities, and thus might also have needs for habitat improvement efforts. When considering cost-benefit, habitat improvements clearly have the greatest potential in the smaller tributaries. The efforts are more simple and easy to accomplish in such localities, and the effect on fish populations can be substantial.

In total, there are 34 fish ladders in the G&L watercourse. Only 26% of the ladders are considered to have a good efficiency, 41% are mediocre and as much as 32 % are not working at all. Twelve of the ladders are located in dams in the main rivers, Glomma and Lågen. In general the efficiency is considered low, and thus fish migrations are severely affected. There is a considerable variation in efficiency. The most important factors determining fish ladder efficiency are: i) entrance of the fish ladder in relation to the main water-flow; and ii) water-flow in the ladder compared to dam overflow. These factors vary between different ladders and with different water-flows, and results in large annual variations in the number of migrating fish.

Categories of cultural properties found along the G&L rivers include log-driving constructions, sawmills and grain mills, mining facilities, power stations, industrial constructions linked to the river, settlement constructions, hunting, fishing, and harvesting remnants, bridges and roads, defence constructions, and prehistoric foundations and sites. Studies of any extent on effects of the implementation of hydropower projects on cultural heritage issues were not carried out until the 1970s. During the past 15-20 years cultural heritage has become a salient topic of investigation in cases where water is seen to be exploited. Data from the G&L basin are largely missing. It is probable that in a number of early hydropower developments in the basin prehistoric cultural relicts and monuments were lost or partly destroyed.

Distribution of costs and benefits

The hydropower development in the G&L basin did not result in resettlement of households and only a small fraction of the area that was submerged comprised of agricultural land. The flood reducing effects are considerable, which benefits all activities in the flood zone (i.e. infrastructure, settlements, industry and agriculture). However, negative effects occur on the flood vegetation. The predicted effects on fisheries were considerable and the quality of the catch was reduced in the affected areas. The most severely affected areas are some of the mountain reservoirs and the migrating fish species in the Glomma River and in the lower reaches of Lågen.

For many local communities, the long construction period represented growth in employment, increased tax revenues and increased demand for goods and services. Only a few of the municipalities have higher incomes than they otherwise would have had. Approximately 250 people are employed in the production part of the hydropower sector, that is, excluding transmission, marketing and sales, which provide most of the employment. Within the G&L basin, approximately 2 100 persons are employed by the entire power sector. The direct economic effects in the GL region today stem from revenues to the municipalities in the form of taxes, license fees, sale of licensed energy and owner incomes (dividends). Of the accumulated public income of $71 million from the energy sector in G&L, $55 million or almost 80% went to the G&L region. The large revenue entries are owner incomes and taxes. The energy revenues for the municipal sector (municipal and counties) in the G&L region constitute approximately 1.9% of the total incomes to the municipal sector. A few municipalities in Norway do however receive a substantial income from the hydropower sector.

Annual state subsidies make up a large portion of the municipality's income. The subsidies partly compensate for standardised fees and partly for low earnings). Municipalities with large energy incomes receive lower subsidies than municipalities without energy incomes. When considering that the State subsidies are reduced for municipalities with large energy incomes, the net effect of the energy revenues probably lie around 1.5% of the municipal sectors' aggregate annual incomes in the GL region. In a few municipalities, the revenues of the power installations make up more than 5% of the incomes.

Planning and decision making system

The power sector in Norway is virtually 100% reliant on hydropower dams has generally been managed in a planned-economy approach, with dominant monopolistic structures in production, transfer and consumption. A Norwegian market reform was introduced in 1991 (The New Energy Act 1991) so that the various functions in the electricity system were separated. Functions like transport, transmission, and distribution have been organised as regulated monopolies. Others like production and trading have been exposed to competition. The current situation is the result of a long political and industrial history. Today, the relevant legislation for river basin management involves multiple sector acts administered mainly by the Ministries of Petroleum and Energy, Environment, and Agriculture. Administrative tasks are further delegated to their respective directorates, as well as institutions on the county and municipal levels. Key elements of this history are briefly outlined below.

From the late 19^th century to 1906 there was a period of intense activity by private financial actors (domestic and foreign) buying and selling rights to utilise waterfalls by foreign and Norwegian companies, which resulted in Parliamentary action in 1906. In 1907 the state established a substantial "buy-back-the-rights-to-waterfalls"-policy lasting until 1917. The first watercourse state authority, The Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (Vassdragsvesenet), was established in 1907. Ownership of waterfalls became based on a licensing system with licenses granted for a limited period (normally 60-80 years), whereupon the ownership is transferred to the state without financial compensation.

The period from 1920 to the end of World War II was rather inactive. The period from 1945 to the end of the 1960s was the era of physical development in Norwegian power policy. The state took on an active financing, development and operative function. The political goal was the re-construction of society after World War II, and one of the means was to feed the power-based melting industry and other heavy-industry projects with sufficient cheap power. In pre-war Norway industry and the municipalities were mainly producing their own power, the state played a more withdrawn role. Power for household consumption was given second priority. The state increased its ownership in the hydropower industry from around 10% in 1940, to about 30% in 1995. In the same period the part of the industry owned by the local and county authorities increased from 36% to 55%, while the private owners have decreased their share from 42% to 15%.

At the end of the 1960s criticism from environmentally concerned parties grew. Criticism focused on: (i) the decentralised and thematically fragmented system of water management politics; (ii) the centralised and "technocratic" nature of the hydropower production apparatus; and (iii) the ideological critique of a society allegedly obsessed with economic growth depleting natural resources. During the 1970s and 1980s substantial reforms took place in the policy-making and in the political and administrative tools operative in this (policy) field. The establishment of the Ministry of Environment in 1972 was a particularly important institutional action. A planning system was introduced as an instrument to create a comprehensive hydropower policy. It included one set of plans for protection, and one set of plans for utilisation.

The first Protection Plan was passed the in Parliament in 1973, giving permanent protection to 95 "items" (6,9 TWh), and protection for the next 10 years (temporary protection) of a further 8,1 TWh. A revised plan, the so-called Protection Plan II, passed through Parliament in 1980, adding 51 items (potential production capacity: 2,6 TWh) to the list of permanent protection. The last revision of the protection passed through Parliament in 1993. 341 river systems are presently protected under this planning system against further hydropower development, with a potential production capacity of 35 TWh. The objective of the protection plans is to shield especially valuable watercourses from hydropower development projects. The protected rivers, lakes and waterfalls are to be utilised for outdoor recreation, for research and education, and are intended to act as a reference for the long-term natural development of more pristine watercourses. The protection is political and not legal and is an instruction to the Government as to how a possible hydropower license application should be concluded. Several of the protected watercourses have experienced pollution, road building, flood protection and other impacts from different activities damaging the values protected from hydropower development.

Conservation plans were spurred on by means of a Master Plan for the remaining river systems which provided an instrument to assess and utilise the resources in a holistic manner, balancing multiple interests and giving it a more transparent decision making process. This involved the organising and construction of a priority list of all the remaining hydro power projects, referring them to one of two categories: (i) those already approved for the applying of a license (MP-Category 1); and (ii) those who the authorities are, in principle, prepared to deal with at a later date (MP-Category 2). The Master Plan also initially included a third Category. The rivers classified to MP-category 3 were transferred to Protection Plan IV. Thus only two categories remain. All applications for hydropower development, including those in MP category 1, have to run formally through the licensing process and Parliament has the final decision. The Master Plan was, from the outset, a contested tool in hydropower policy, especially in the hydropower industry. Salient modifications in the development of Master Plan procedures since its inception include: (i) the improvement of the transparency of the process through the introduction of a public notification of the intention to apply for a license; (ii) through the introduction of more comprehensive and publicly accessible impact assessments of both nature and society to be carried out as part of the application process; and (iii) the obligation to propose measures and/or alternatives to avert negative consequences on nature and society during or by a development project.

Basin Operation

" The Glommen Water Management Association (GB)" founded in 1903 and The Glommen's and Lågen's Water Management Association (GLB)" in 1918. Together they operate the reservoirs as a sector organisation for the hydropower producers in the G&L basin. GLB members include 21 hydropower and industry companies. GB and GLB hold licenses for a complex of 26 regulated reservoirs of small and medium size, which together provide some 3 500 million m³ of storage, equivalent to 16% of the runoff in the G&L basin.

Optimising the water resources for hydropower production is the main objective of GLB. However as a consequence of the increasing number of issues within water resource development the association also does other types of management work in the joint reservoir system, for example in relation to environmental issues. According to legislation (licence conditions), there is a complex system of water sharing rules between the members of GLB and agreements between environment interests, municipal and county authorities, private power and industry water users, as well as various associations representing farmers, land owners and civil society groups. This is seen as a next to impossible "tight-rope" activity being performed.

The GLB have an important role in co-ordinating the operation of the complex system of reservoirs on behalf of their members. It is also involved in communications with interested parties about co-operation on ecological issues and mitigation improvements so as to reduce conflict levels. The operations of the reservoirs are supposed to adapt step-by-step to the new Energy Act and the system of market liberalisation. Yet, the degrees of freedom are limited due to physical and legal constraints. GLB has an important role in reducing flood damage as there is a considerable flood abatement effect in optimal basin operation. However, the basin operation is not yet optimal from an economic point of view. An additional income potential of $3,8 million was estimated in 1995.

During the last 10-15 years, the GLB, the individual power companies, and the environmental authorities as well as landowner representatives have co-operated on fish issues related to the hydropower sector. The aim of this work has been to identify the optimal use of resources to improve the conditions for fish production and angling. The work includes test fishing, registration of fish migrations in fish ladders, catch statistics and data to evaluate mitigation measures, as well as implementation of various mitigation measures such as fish stocking, habitat improvement, fish ladders and minimum water flow. The experience from these projects is very positive and shows some of the benefits from an open dialogue as well as co-operation between the stakeholders. In this way cost-effective measures can be developed to substitute those implemented in the licensing process.

Summary of findings on key WCD questions

Hydropower development has played a significant role in developing settlements, economics, infrastructure and public services in the G&L basin. For many local communities the long construction period represented growth in employment, increased tax revenues and increased demand for goods and services. The hydropower development represents an annual hydropower production of 9-11 TWh (annual value $159-253 million). The production has exceeded the projected production at the time of license approval due to expansions, rebuilding or building of new reservoirs resulting in increased winter production. The constructions and operations have created important employment opportunities. Today the hydropower sector alone employs 250 people. When including the system and utilities producing power services, employment is 2100 people. The total income in 1998 encompassed $71 million. The larger revenue entries were taxes ($44 million) and public owner incomes ($20 million). The reservoirs have a capacity of 16% of the annual runoff. During the catastrophic spring flood of 1995, peak flood levels on stretches with dense population were reduced by 1.0 - 1.9m. Although flood protection has been a subsidiary interest, and flood damages on floodplain agricultural areas, settlements and infrastructure have been considerably reduced. Negative effects of hydropower development are primarily related to environmental conditions and to some extent to agricultural activities. Few environmental effects were predicted in pre-regulation studies with the exception of the effects on harvested fish populations. Fish production has been reduced in impounded lakes and regulated rivers. Negative effect on fish recruitment has been partly mitigated through stocking of hatchery reared fish as well as habitat improvement, release of minimum water flow and the construction of fish ladders. The negative effects for agriculture include loss of land from reservoir inundation, loss of fence effect in rivers with reduced flow during summer and periodically dry wells in some areas due to reduced river flow rate. The effects for the agricultural sector have been predicted and generally been compensated for.

Many old hydro-facilities are running well beyond their projected life-times and/or have been upgraded, making considerable earnings and providing profits and incomes for concession and fiscal taxes. The deregulation of the energy market with the new Energy Act in 1991 represents a significant change of context for production and sale. Traditionally, the energy sector has been regulated and dominated by public management. Price competition and third-party access to transmission lines increase the market-consciousness in the power companies. Management is now directed towards competition and profitability. Actual cost of the projects analysed exceeds the estimated cost at the time of license approval. The deviation is due to the delay in the construction of the projects, and cost for compensation of land acquisition as well as third party ecological interests. Recent knowledge on the differences in adaptability and behaviour of the different strains has changed stocking policy with a substantial increase in production costs for compensation stocking material. Log-driving, an important interest in the first half of the last century, decreased gradually until the end in the 1980s. This was not foreseen in the licensing process and the log-driving paragraph still exists in G&L reservoir operation rules.

Annual fees and compulsory delivery of electricity to the local municipalities to secure local benefits was included in Norwegian legislation in 1917. Land acquisition has been taken care of through comprehensive compensation. Similarly, third party interests, mainly environmental and social safeguards, are protected through law, license covenants and the rules of operation for dams. Compulsory maintenance flow releases are a common feature in most rules of operation as are fish stocking and other mitigation measures. Almost 80% of the $71 million income goes to the G&L region. The total annual incomes of the municipalities in the region are approximately $1.6 billion. Energy revenues comprise $53 million or 3% of the total municipal income. The municipal income from energy revenues is unevenly distributed. In a few municipalities the revenue is more than 5%, however the variation is partly compensated by reduced subsidies from the State. The regional distributions also include a lump sum of resources for development of local industry, as well as employment and secondary income from the increased activity during and after the construction period. Infrastructure elements include communications (roads and telecommunications), quays, public halls, utilisation of surplus rock from excavations and underground works for roads and other construction purposes etc.

GLB and the power companies have a good record of compliance with guidelines for construction, safety, compensation, mitigation and operation from the time the licences were granted. Conditions implemented in the hydropower licenses cannot be substituted without a formal process, eg revision of the conditions according to the legal mechanism. The opportunity to re-evaluate old licences was changed in 1959 when an option to revise after 50 years was included in the legislation. In 1992, this was reduced to 30 years and all licenses older than 50 years were to be re-evaluated and the conditions revised. Old licenses can thus be re-evaluated and conditions set according to present knowledge and attitude regarding environmental issues, including minimum flow and other mitigation measures.

The decision-making process for water resource development has undergone considerable evolution over time. Since early in the 20^th century the requirement for licensing has influenced the procedures that have constituted the backbone of the decision making process. From 1921 the government granted licences based on applications. The applicant was confronted with detailed instructions on the technical content of the application, and there were demands to analyse benefits and disadvantages following the project. Changes in licensing procedures in 1969 included public notification of the intention to apply for a licence, demands for more comprehensive impact assessments and an obligation to propose measures and/or alternatives to avert or mitigate negative impacts on nature and society. In the 1970s and the 1980s substantial reforms in policy making procedures and in the administrative tools operative in the hydropower policy field took place. In 1972 the Ministry of Environment was established. In 1960 Parliament took the initiative to establish regional plans for the protection of rivers and waterfalls, and around 1980 a Master Plan for all the remaining hydropower development projects was devised. The aim was to get a more unified approach to decision making in particular projects. These plans led to avoidance of (further) hydro-impacts in the river selected for protection, thereby reducing conflict levels.

After the deregulation in 1991 and the resulting shift in framework conditions for the production and sale of electricity as well as the focus on cost recovery and rate of return, the proponents are observing the risks of investments much more closely than before. The dilemma for hydropower developers is the conception of how market prices will develop. The market price of electricity today is too low to make most of the new potential hydropower development plans profitable, and the possible gas power developments further complicate the estimation on future market prices. In today's context environmental impacts of further hydropower developments as well as that of gas power development are considered as serious, and the choice of strategy will be a question for Parliament. Currently there are plans to upgrade and refurbish power plants and dams, for new company structures and also for one new project (The Øvre Otta project). The municipalities were in favour of the hydropower projects because of the local economic benefits, however, during the last decade the municipalities have become more negative to hydropower development. The Master Plan has handled 65 different alternatives for further hydropower development, and 31 tributaries are included in The Protection Plans for Watercourses and National Parks. Public support for new reservoirs, even in the context of flood protection after the 1995 flood, is low in the basin. It is thus very likely that, viewed in today's context, strong resistance from various stakeholder groups would have influenced the construction of many of the present G&L reservoirs.

Table.ES.3: Predicted, Actual, and Unexpected Outcomes of the G&L hydropower developments.

	Predicted	Actual	Unexpected
Schedule	Determined by license applications	Variable	Delays in older dams affected by World War II
Design	Provided in license applications	Almost all dams change from initial planning, through licensing to final approved project. Projects generally were reduced through the licensing processes
Sedimentation	Not significant factor	Not significant factor
Project costs	203.6 Million NOK in 1999 currency for 4 non-focal dams	286.8 Million NOK in 1999 currency for 4 non-focal dams 140% increase on average	Deviation in project costs due to delays in construction and higher payment of compensations than predicted
Irrigation and irrigated agriculture	No impact on irrigation withdrawals from lakes and rivers	No impact on irrigation withdrawals from lakes and rivers	No significant unexpected effects
Municipal water supply	No impact on municipal withdrawals from lakes and rivers	No impact on municipal withdrawals from lakes and rivers	No significant unexpected effects
Agriculture	Loss of land from inundation of reservoirs. Local loss of fence-effect from reduced river flow-rates during summer and dry well from changed ground water level	Effects as predicted. Effects generally are compensated and mitigated.	No significant unexpected effects
Hydropower generation	Several G&L hydropower plants were initially established prior to the licensing system, have been rebuilt and upgraded step by step, and are influenced by new reservior developments. The question of predicted production is therefore very complex and is answered by analyses of selected power plants, not on basin level	Mean annual G&L production of 10 145 GWh from an innstalled effect of 2 165 MW. Production has far exceeded the prediction for the analysedpower plants	The increase in generation from technical changes, expansion of facilities and optimisation of flows at basin level for power were not expected at the time of development of several of the power plants
Flood control	Dams will reduce the incidence of damaging floods in lower parts of the G&L system	Flood peaks have been reduced by about 20%. The 1995-flood culmination level in Lake Øyeren was redused by 1,9 m by reservoir storage.	Flood reduction is a subsidary not predicted positive effect of most reservoirs
Tourism and recreation	Unquantified	Unquantified	Impacts on attractiveness of rivers landscapes and for recrational fishing
Social impacts	No resettlement for construction of facilities and inundation No impact on socio-economic activities upstream and downstream apart from downstream flood protection.	No resettlement for construction of facilities and from inundation.	No significant unexpected social impacts
National development	Stimulation of national economy	Taxes paid by publicly owned power companies were 2 190 million NOK nationally in 1996. Various views on the degree of stimulation of national economy
Environmental impacts	Negative effect on fish harvesting was the only predicted at the time of constructions (before EIAs were required). Effects have been compensated and mitigated	Negative impacts on fish, fisheries and aquatic biology	Predictions of mitigation measures effectiveness for maintaining fish stocks were too optimistic The significans of nativeness and differences in adaptability and behavior of the different fish strains
Distribution of Cost/Benefits and Impacts	Positive effect for employment and local economy of the development municipalities.	Public revenues from power installations in G&L area of 534 million NOK in 1998, of which almost 80 % went to the G&L region. 2350 persons are permanently employed in the G&L area power sector.	Revenues from hydropower developments are unevenly distributed and the population and economic development of the total G&L region is not different from regions without hydropower development

Summary of Lessons learned

One main objective of the WCD process is to identify new knowledge from past experience with regards to large dams. The basin focus for lessons learned in the Glomma-Lågen context seeks to demonstrate accumulated experience representing the long time period of the development and the multitude of stakeholders in the basin. Some of the lessons are generated specifically from the G&L Case Study, whereas some are more general for the Norwegian hydropower development context. The summary of the some of the main lessons generated by the study team is provided below. These are elaborated upon in the main report.

A large number of hydropower projects were forwarded for licensing to the Parliament in post-war Norway, resulting in a growing frustration amongst the politicians having to deal with these applications one by one. A binary planning system was thus developed, with one set of plans for protection (The Protection Plans for Watercourses), and one set of plans for development (The Master Plan for Hydropower Development Projects). The Master Plan defines an order of priority for the consideration of individual hydropower projects on the basis of economic considerations, and the degree of conflict with environmental and other user interests. The Master Plan was, from the outset, a contested tool in hydropower policy, and it remains an uncertain question weather or not the plan has had a conflict reducing function in the public debate on power policy. The various stakeholders have divergent views on the planning system and this is particularly related to the Master Plan.

Regional distribution is an important issue in Norwegian hydropower development and is recognised in the legislation. There is general agreement among the stakeholders that the regional economic impact was substantial.

The G&L basin has experienced reduced flood levels during the last 150 years due to the use of the reservoirs during major flood events, as well as other protective measures in the low areas of the basin such as flood banks. The 1995 flood was a near optimal flood protection scenario by the existing dams in the G&L basin and flood levels were reduced by 1-1.9 meters. Since 1995 flood hazard mapping, zoning and public information during flood periods have also been utilised.. There is a wide spread agreement among stakeholders on the flood abating effects of the regulation.

During the last 10-15 years, the GLB, the individual power companies, and the environmental authorities, as well as landowner representatives have co-operated on fish issues related to the hydropower sector. The experience from these projects is very positive and demonstrates some of the benefits from an open dialogue and co-operation between the stakeholders. In this way cost-effective measures can be developed to substitute those implemented in the license process. There is a general consensus among stakeholders on the need to develop more effective and ecological sound mitigation measures. Some stakeholders feel however that that the measures in operation are not sufficiently comprehensive and that more efforts should focus on changing the physical characteristics of the actual regulation.

Data series and subsequent modelling of the water course is a salient management tool used to meet the various and often conflicting demands in the short and long term operation of the basin, including flood issues, impact assessments, economic simulations, operational planning, and development planning. Additionally, detailed descriptions of reservoirs, basin, power stations and other technical facilities, in addition to reliable market forecasts, are required to produce good modelling, analysis and management strategies. There are no divergent views among stakeholders on this issue.



	Regional Consultations / Case Studies / Cross-Check Survey / Thematic Reviews / Submissions



Home