State of the Rivers

EGS model refers to outcome as the state of resource. The construction and operation of power plants can significantly cause changes with the status of rivers. As mentioned earlier, the rules and legislations are frequently adopted due to such changes and effects. There has been also influence of civil society actors which argued the outcomes as “not acceptable”.

To better understand, this section will give an overview from official documents and NGO reports, focusing on the findings related to the outcomes. While the reports from non-governmental organizations are problem-oriented, studies from public institutions are prepared as guidelines and solution oriented. This section briefly explains the documents from these institutions and their assessment regarding outcomes. These findings represent the main discussions in the national agenda.

The earliest reports are shared by the Union of Chambers of Turkish Engineers and Architects (TMMOB). The main issues found was EIA reports and discharge water flows (Chamber of Construction Engineers, 2009). The main findings are as follows;

• EIA reports are not prepared adequately. In short periods, reports are prepared without liable data and most of the time without field work.

• Insufficient in determining the discharge water left for the sustainability of ecosystems. The regulated amount is not sufficient especially for key biodiversity areas.

• For future, watershed management should be considered and climate change effect should be considered.

68 WWF Turkey studied similar problems with hydropower plants and guided campaigns.

Water Risks Report, define the hydropower cases in Turkey as an example of “how faulty plans and weakly integration of economic, social and environmental concerns can increase risks over resources” (Öktem, 2014). The sources of these risks were not considerably taking into account of;

i) the current and accurate flow conditions of the river basins ii) the climatic characteristics

iii) the effects of climate change

iv) the possible effects on the river basin ecosystems

Administrative level the discharge flow criteria was not sufficient or effective in practice. Even though the legislative changes were made, the already planned or working power plants faced problems such as decrease in energy production capacity. In some cases, the discharge flow is not enough to sustain ecosystem services and other social needs.

Another critical outcome is the impacts on fish species. Hydropower structures mostly block or considerably change the passage routes for fish. There isn’t any specific requirement or regulation within the previously described rules. However, the law no. 1380 “aquaculture law” was established in 1995. The relevant clause states that “Fish passes, lifts and fish curtains must be built while establishing facilities such as dam lakes, ponds, and embankments. '' The effectiveness of such rule is found to be extremely low.

An assessment from the Ministry of Agriculture stated that none of the publicly invested dams have fish passages, only 35 regulators have included various structures without stating any indication of functionality. One important finding here is that until 2014, they have determined 1034 hydropower plant EIA reports made a commitment for fish passages. This number includes projects that were completed and under construction. However, there is no exact finding for how much of these commitment were complied.

According to the latest activity report of DSI (2020), it appears the planning has been completed with the R & D studies on this subject. The technical guide was prepared in previous years, but it was stated that there is not enough data on the status of local fish species at the basin level and a regulation is needed to improve the ecological status of river ecosystems. The latest plan report emphasize the overlap between authorities and unclear duties regarding the fish passage structure.

69 Moving on to the ministry reports, there are important reports, strategy and development plans that emphasized concerns and challenges of utilizing maximum technical hydraulic potential. The river basin management plans are seen as a prioritized solution. The main approach is taken from EU Water Framework (Ministry of Agriculture and Forest, 2014).

Growth of the hydropower sector is also one of the reasons that support the basin management approach as a new policy to be followed in water management. The requirements within this scope are expressed as follows;

“In some regions, it is important to improve transparency and participation as well as developing standards and institutional capacities for the evaluation of cumulative effects in order to eliminate the problems and disputes experienced due to the negative ecological and social impacts and information deficiencies created by HEPPs.”

In overall, the findings from official reports and NGO studies had pointed out both the issues of input and output legitimacy. Regarding the decision making process in practice it lacks adequate level of participation, transparency. Moreover, the rules have appeared with overlapping authorities, such as in with fish passage regulations. The outcomes discussed with various actors have a common point that conflicts have appeared at the local level. The next chapter therefore will focus on these specific issues with examining cases from Artvin province.

70 CHAPTER 6

6. Objective 2 – Outcome Assessment of Cases in Artvin Region and