5 August 1999
Closing the circle: the WCD canvasses opinions of minorities affected by dams

One of the most contentious issues in the dams debate is the impact of dams on indigenous and tribal peoples and ethnic minorities. Dams often are built in remote rural areas which, in many cases, are populated by minority groups, with reservoirs created by submerging land owned or customarily used by such groups. The social, economic, and political status of minorities frequently restricts their capacity to assert their interests and rights in land and natural resources, and restricts their role in decision-making that affects them. Such groups may be harmed inadvertently by development unless their specific circumstances are addressed in advance.

Because lack of consultation has been at the heart of such disputes over dams, the writers of WCD's 'thematic review' on Dams, Indigenous Peoples and Ethnic Minorities have canvassed a broad range of minority groups affected by dams in the past. The draft paper was written by Dr. Marcus Colchester from the UK-based Forest Peoples Programme. To document experiences of minorities in relation to dams, Dr. Colchester and the WCD commissioned seven case studies, in Chile, Guatemala, Namibia, Norway, Canada, The Philippines and Malaysia. The resulting draft paper included input from multilateral development institutions (eg World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank), dam developers, and utilities. Further information was gleaned via a literature review, an e-mail questionnaire, and telephone interviews.

To ensure comprehensive review, the draft paper was put on the table for discussion at a workshop 31 July - 1 August in Geneva, taking advantage of the presence in that city of numerous delegates to a meeting of the UN Working Group on Indigenous Populations. The dams workshop was organised by the World Commission on Dams, Forest Peoples Programme, the World Council of Churches, the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs, the United Nations Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights, the TebTebba Foundation, and Novib (the Dutch acronym for Oxfam). Fifty participants attended, including representatives of indigenous peoples and ethnic minorities from Peru, Brazil, South Africa, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Thailand, India, Taiwan, Russia, Guatemala, Chile, Namibia, Norway, Canada and the Philippines. The meeting included representatives from Hydro-Québec (a major North American utility), the international engineering firm ABB-Asea Brown Boveri, the UN International Labour Organisation, the World Wildlife Fund, as well as the organisers.

The case studies and submissions from interested parties were presented on the first day of the Geneva dams workshop. The draft review paper was presented on the second morning, followed by discussion of the salient findings, conclusions and recommendations. In particular, Hydro-Québec's experience offered an interesting framework for analysis of how to integrate indigenous peoples in decision-making processes affecting their territories and livelihood.

Many speakers stressed the fundamental significance to indigenous peoples and ethnic minorities of their territories. As a spokesperson for the Saami people of Norway put it: "Indigenous peoples have a right to a past, a right to a present and a right to a future." Their right to the past is bound up with their attachment to their territories. "The land, forests and rivers are our mothers," as another speaker noted. Their right to a present implies a right to a voice in decision-making and to have a secure place on the earth. Moreover, in looking to the future, "as members of indigenous peoples we don't have the right to sell out our cultural existence because (of our obligation to) the coming generations."

Some of the major inputs from the indigenous peoples included:

Future decisions related to water resources and energy development should be based on free, prior, and informed consent of the indigenous peoples and ethnic minorities. This would include complete and free access to information, participation in assessments of the environmental and social impacts of large dams, and full assessment and selection of alternatives to dams, including the 'no project' option. The suggested process is one of negotiated agreement involving indigenous peoples, government, and/or the dam developer, with full recourse to legal redress. One of the provisions to enable the affected people to recover lost livelihoods is the principle of an exchange of land for land lost. The indigenous people also suggested establishment of a mechanism to deal with the demand for restitution for past losses.

The revised review paper, which takes note of the comments made in the Geneva workshop, will be discussed by the WCD Commissioners in their meeting in Sao Paulo, Brazil 14-15 August, 1999, and they may suggest further steps to organise debate and to otherwise assist them as they consider their conclusions on these key issues related to dams.