The Zambezi Society "strongly supports" the conclusions of the World Commission on Dams, according to Dick Pitman, Director of the Harare-based regional conservation NGO.

The Commission, which recently concluded its work, set out to make an objective evaluation of the benefits and disadvantages associated with the construction of large dams - a subject that has aroused strong feelings among both biological and social experts throughout the world.

The Commission examined the impacts of 125 dams throughout the world, including the Kariba dam on the Zambezi, which supplies Zambia and Zimbabwe with hydroelectric power. Among its conclusions, the Commission's report says that "dams have made an important and significant contribution to human development, and the benefits derived from them have been significant"

But, it goes on to say, "in too many cases an unacceptable and often unnecessary price has been paid to secure those benefits, especially in social and environmental terms, by people displaced, by communities downstream, by taxpayers and by the natural environment." And the people most affected by dams - usually rural communities who lose their lands or suffer other impacts - are not consulted, and do not share in the benefits.

Among the Commission's conclusions: opportunities for mitigating the impacts of existing dams should be thoroughly explored. Meanwhile, plans for future large dams should be subjected to a rigorous process of stakeholder consultation and the examination of alternatives before final and far-reaching decisions are made.

"The Kariba and Cabora Bassa dams exemplify the Commission's conclusions" said Mr Pitman. "Both have brought immense benefits in the form of cheap power. But the social impacts of Kariba on the people it displaced are still being felt. The recent deaths caused by floods downstream of Cabora Bassa illustrate the dangers that can arise when people become accustomed to changed river flows. And neither Kariba nor Cabora Bassa incorporate biological issues, such as wetland and floodplain ecology either around their reservoirs or downstream, into their management." The biological results include dramatic impacts on the ecologies of areas such as the Matusadona National Park due to erratic lake levels, the choking of river-channels in the Mana Pools and Sapi areas by invasive exotics such as water hyacinth, and the possible drying out of the Zambezi Delta."

The Commission's findings have met a mixed reception, both locally and globally, with proponents of large dams arguing that the report is "anti-development". This was exemplified when the findings were presented in Harare recently, to an audience consisting of key stakeholders including civil engineers and environmentalists. A common ignorance of the potentially massive ecological impacts of large dams, and of the importance of biological diversity to human wellbeing, was illustrated by the comment that "dam building shouldn't be held up because of a few frogs".

Another delegate argued, quite rightly, that "everyone needs water", but failed to point out that all present and planned Zambezi dams are designed solely for hydroelectric power production, not for irrigation or drinking water supplies.

Worldwide, many environmental groups have argued that, far from being anti-developmental, the recommendations of the World Commission on Dams are not strong enough to mitigate the worst social and biological effects of large dam construction. "However" said the Zambezi Society Director, "many of these comments are made from a developed-world perspective. The Society's position is that, as they stand, the conclusions of the World Commission on Dams present a firm basis for future dam planning. They have sought - and achieved - an excellent balance between the demands of development, and those of social and biological responsibility."

Please visit our website at www.zamsoc.org