The process of hydropower projects

The consulting companies have standards to follow when conducting a feasibility study or an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). However, these standards are not universal; both the World Bank and the World Commission of Dams have their own guidelines. These guidelines are meant to make sure that the social and environmental impact is minimized and that the corruption in the dam industry is limited. On the other hand these standards are often not followed. More common is that they are referred to in a hazy way, making it difficult to know what guidelines the companies are trying to follow, thus making it difficult to keep the government and companies accountable. Often the companies refer to ‘generally accepted international engineering standards’, but fail to define what these standards are, and who sets them and enforces them (ibid:2007).

The feasibility study is supposed to be done by an independent party, and not be related to the commercial benefits of the project. The purpose is to get an understanding of the implication of the suggested the project, and what kind of reimbursement for the local community might be necessary. It is independent and should give an objective view of the socio-economic and environmental costs and benefits of the hydropower project. As Usher (1997) has shown, these consultants of the feasibility studies operate in a grey zone. In the case of the Norwegian project, Fula Rapids, Norplan is responsible for the feasibility report and Norfund is the contractor. However, since there is little information about the methodological choices of Norplan, it is difficult to analyze the information gathering process. In such a study it is important to interview the local community, unbiased and without an agenda. The purpose is to get the local community’s view, not to state the purpose of the hydropower project and how it might benefit the project.

These feasibility studies lay the ground work for the EIA, which also must be carried out before the construction phase begins. In the evaluation of the feasibility study and the EIA, it

85

is vital to look into how the state and consultants approach the community. This approach will affect how the community responds to the studies.

When treating a natural resource as a commodity, the holistic ecological picture needs to be accounted for. This is the point of feasibility studies and the EIA. These are supposed to give the picture of the possible consequences of the hydropower projects. However, these studies are influenced by the same high modernism ideology, and this may affect the studies. The questions asked in the preliminary studies will affect the answers and outcome of the study.

The focus is often of the prospected benefits of the project, and not on the possible negative consequences. It is also driven by the need for mapping the local area for possible

implications, and this need is often economic. This mapping is done by independent, foreign consultants. Their local knowledge is often limited, and the way they access the community will impact the result (Hirsch:2010, McCully:2007, Usher:1997).

One example of the challenges with local knowledge is local measurements. Local

measurements are often different from place to place, and international measurement may not catch these differences. The difference in measurements may affect how land is divided, and can thus create conflict if there is a diversion in the foreign versus the local measurements (Scott:1998). Another challenge is the nomadic lifestyle many people have. It can be difficult to measure how many will be affected by a project, because the population in an area may vary. This is particularly a challenge in South Sudan. Statistics of where people live and how many live where are difficult to get, due to the post-war situation. In addition, many people are returning from Sudan. These people have lived most of their lives in Khartoum, and finding a place to stay might not be easy. The issue of how many live in an area needs to be clearer when conducting a feasibility study, because the actual feasibility depends on these numbers.

As I showed in the methodological chapter; I had difficulties in getting in touch with representatives from the civil society. This weakness of representations is a challenge for conducting social representative feasibility studies, and getting the view of the local community. Who the consulting companies talk to when doing the feasibility study, will

86

affect the outcome of the study, and also the project in itself. I met with one representative from the South Sudan National Environmental Association, who confirmed these views.

‘Community should be part of the system; it is currently not the situation.’ – Samuel Justin, South Sudan National Environmental Association.

‘The gap [between civil society and government] is an issue, because the civil society is not aware of their role.’ – Samuel Justin, South Sudan National Environmental Association.

Samuel Justin requests a stronger civil society that can hold the government accountable. He also argues that the lack of information is a weakness for the democracy, because there is little transparency in the government’s actions.

‘No information, it is hard to get’ – Samuel Justin, South Sudan National Environmental Association.

I received various arguments for why the voice of the civil society was not stronger. One of the reasons mentioned was that South Sudan is a newly independent state, and therefore do not have all the elements of a well-functioning democratic state in place. Though this is a relevant argument, it is still one of the main challenges of South Sudan, and thus also the development of the hydropower plans.

[South Sudan] ‘is only 4 months old, crawl first, then walk.’ – Honorable Henry Omai Akolawin

Civil society just emerged, do not have power. Need to be guided, told how to organize ideas and plans, address issues.’ – Victor Wurda Lo Tombe, Ministry of Environment.

87

Since the local community is often the people who will live with the consequences from the hydropower projects, they are a vital group to include in the plans. When conducting the feasibility studies and the EIA, it is important to look at the questions that are asked, and how the local community is viewed. Language has power, and in this case, the local community’s needs are often downplayed in favor of the state’s plans. The view is that local the community does not need much power, and also that the government is represented by the people, and therefore can make plans for the state.

‘Pastoralists and nomads really do not need much power [energy].’ – Anthony Badha, Joint Donor Team.⁴

‘Do not think they [local population] will be involved, would not be affected, they want electricity will boost development in the area’ – General Joseph Lagu

This last quote shows an attitude of development as ultimately good, and hydropower as an element in this. Since the hydropower project will provide electricity, the possible negative consequences are not thought of. It is also a picture of how the ‘needs’, in this case electricity, are seen as universal, or national. Then need of the state is then the need for the local

population, and thus the electricity will benefit the whole country (Benjaminsen and Svarstad:2010).