ICOLD members - Zimbabwe

Zimbabwe National Committee On Large Dams (ZIMCOLD): national conclusions and comments report on the report of the World Commission On Dams

1. General

The WCD must be applauded for conducting “the first comprehensive and global review of the performance of dams and their construction to development”. In the short period of nearly two years, a vast amount of data was gathered and consultants were conducted around the world. The result is an impressive document, though it must be observed that out of a total number of 45 000 dams” around 1 000 dams” were studied “with varying degrees of intensity”. Nevertheless, a great amount of data has been collected and stored in the WCD Knowledge Base.

The main concern, must be whether the work of the WCD, and the guidelines given in the Report, will lead to more effective and efficient development of dams in the future, with social and environmental concerns fairly addressed, or whether it may merely serve to delay and frustrate essential and viable projects, with consequential increases in costs and loss of benefits to the populace at large. As acknowledged by the commission, this is of particular concern to emerging economies, which may see the developed countries applying restrictions, and conditions that they did not themselves follow in the past.

2. Global Review

Part 1 of the Report, WCD Global Review of Large Dams, gives a good summary of the current status of large dams, their purposes and benefits and the contentious issues over which debate has arisen. It cannot be accused of intentional bias, as the essential nature of dams and their recorded benefits receive full mention. Nevertheless, a reading of the Part seems to give more emphasis on the negative aspects and failures of dams to meet expected targets. This is perhaps inevitable in a report of the nature. In seeking improvements in the development process, it is necessary to draw attention to those areas that require intervention, rather than elaborate on the successful aspects.

It is an obvious truth, freely admitted by dam proponents and highlighted in the WCD Report, that there have been and still are many shortcomings in the development process associated with the construction of large dams. Efforts are continually made to improve in areas of weakness, and the WCD Report should assist in identification of these. It is not true, however, to refer to present approaches as “business-as-usual” that require a radical re-structuring to achieve acceptable results. Methodically and techniques are continually evolving and charging, not only in technology and financing arrangements, but also in respect of social issues and preservation of the environment.

The Report makes special mention of cost overruns and delays in completion of large dams’ projects. This is certainly an important area where improvement must be sought, but it should be mentioned that these problems are not unique to water development prospects. Difficulties in producing realistic cost estimates are more pronounced on big projects, particularly when geology and ground conditions are a significant component.

Care has to be taken when assessing the economic benefits of water development projects. The current trend to treat as an ‘economic good’ and to compare the project cost of a dam with the ‘opportunity cost’ of development in other spheres ignores its role as vital life support. Water projects often fail to meet certain economic rates of return due to deliberate policies to subsidise the cost to disadvantaged sectors of the population. In this regard, there are contradictions between some sections of the WCD Report. In chapter 4, Social Performance (page 128) it is Stated “Almost 40 years after commissioning the Kariba Dam, only about one-fifth of Zimbabwean households have access to electricity. Prohibitive power pricing policies adopted by the government continue to exclude poor people from this service.” This is in contrast to Chapter 2, Technical, Financial and profitable and it is recorded, moreover, that the actual EIRR for Kariba is “a respectable one of the lowest cost producers of electricity in the world, and that the present cost of electricity in Zimbabwe is dominated by the cost of thermal generation at Hwange and the price of imported power which accounts for 40% of demand).

3. Social Issues

The crux of the controversies surrounding the construction of the large dams is the matter of social equity, the question of resettlement of affected populations and the issue of fair compensation. Once again, it is evident that there have been severe injustices in the past and initiatives are already being taken to prevent similar instances in the future.

However, there is a perceived danger that the pendulum may swing too far the other way; that groups whose interest were not adequately catered for previously may now be given too strong a position in which they are able to dictate a direction in development which is not optimum for the project or for the bulk of the beneficiaries.

There can be no argument against the requirement that affected populations should be relocated and compensated such that they are no worse off, and preferably better off, than their previous state. But no strong case can be made for grass over compensation. This would not only increase total project costs and thus affect financial viability, but in effect would reduce the funds available to benefit other disadvantaged sections of the community.

There is a real danger that too much power in the decision-making process is given to people who may wish to gain unwarranted benefits from the compensation exercise, perhaps supported by various external pressure groups.

4. The Guidelines

The WCD Report concludes with guidelines to direct decision-making and development planning in the future. A large part of the recommendations are a normal part of the process of implementation of a dam project, and are not controversial. These include the assessment of demand and predictions of future growth, the comparison of alternative options to meet the anticipated demand, with due attention paid to social costs and mitigation of adverse environmental effects, and selection of optimum technology to meet the desired objective. These principles are widely accepted, though there is clearly a need for improvement in implementation.

The Guidelines that address the questions of project definition and acceptance, including issues of consultations, involuntary risk and negotiations to achieve wholly acceptance solutions, are less easily assimilated for universal application. They tend to grant delaying or blocking powers to groups that while clearly affected by the proposed development may have concerns of self-interest at heart. This can impact adversely on national economic progress on the WCD Report is it made plain on several occasions that the recommendations given are guidelines, not hard and fast rules. “Nobody can, of course, simply pick up the report and implement it in full. It is not a blueprint” (page 311). There is a danger, however, that many agencies and development banks in particular, will accept and rigidly apply the findings of the Report and Guidelines without regard to individual project circumstances. The effect will be to delay implementation and increase project costs, to the detriment of economic progress and the goal of poverty alleviation.

T. C. KABELL

CHAIRMAN – ZIMCOLD

February 13, 2001