Conclusions – integrated water management and the future

1. Conclusions – integrated water management and the future • Water policies must be comprehensive to be effective – embrace many objectives (economics, cultural needs, ecological needs, ethical concerns). • They must acknowledge watersheds and aquifers in mind– these don’t always conform to political jurisdictions. • They must recognize that – like other natural resources – (e.g., energy, timber, fisheries) – freshwater can be depleted, and bad management can lead to degrading of environmental quality. • They must seek to be sustainable – sound management balances supply and demand for the benefit of future generations.

2. Reforming decision-making important to the future of water resource policy • Bad decisions generally ignore alternatives to providing additional freshwater. • Bad decisions ignore costs, adverse environmental impacts. • Bad decisions ignore socially damaging consequences – e.g., need to relocate people. ------------------------------------------- • Good decisions consider all viable options to supplying clean water– they try to evaluate and embrace emerging social and natural trends. • Good decisions rely on good science that is not beholden to special interests. • Good decisions embrace public concerns and public demands through allowing participation.

3. Adaptive Management – making better decisions • Goal – make and modify decisions in light of what we have learned about the impacts of previous decisions on natural & social systems. • We should seek to learn from mistakes, make corrections. • Challenge – no one is in a position to “preach” to others: all have made their share of bad decisions. • Decisions should be: • Modest in scope and impact. • Scientifically sound, based on real-time monitoring. • Reversible if failure evident – avoid structural measures if possible. • Negotiate boundaries among science, policy, ethics – by planning ahead.

4. Developing nation efforts to develop water resources – lessons for adaptive management • Brazil – Itaipu Dam (1971-1984) • China – Three Gorges Dam (1994-2005)

5. Itaipu Dam as case study

6. Itaipu Dam – under construction

7. Itaipu Dam – Parana River Border of Brazil and Paraguay

8. Major dam benefits • World’s 2nd largest hydroelectric facility – 14,000 MW (as much as 9 nuclear plants). • Provides 20% of Brazil’s and 94% of Paraguay’s power. • Fostered strong political and economic cooperation between Brazil and Paraguay – agreed to joint construction, management, and operation – a bi-national commission manages the project and sells power. • In recent years – some political friction over power sales: Paraguay wants to be able to re-sell surplus power anywhere it chooses; Brazil says no. • Has encouraged foreign investment in and around the project – from Argentina, Italy, U.S.

9. Major dam impacts • Over 700 square km of old growth forests were destroyed – mostly on Paraguayan side of reservoir; over 4 million people relocated. • Some plant species became extinct during construction (including a rare orchid). • Adaptive measures? • Through bi-national efforts, many endangered plant species and forests were salvaged - today, over 50 percent of what could have been lost in the region remains. • Both governments undertook environmental planning to monitor and prevent further damage to flora and fauna. • To minimize effects of reservoir flooding on the fauna of the region by catching animals and releasing them in biological reserves. • A forest buffer/protective zone was established around the reservoir on the Brazilian side to avert further damage after project completed. • Verdict? Uncertain – much damage was averted after the project was completed; but initial impacts may be irreversible.

10. Three Gorges Dam as case study

11. Three Gorges Dam – under construction

12. Three Gorges Dam – 2008

13. Major dam benefits • Goal: “Build up a power project to promote economic development, improve the local eco-environment, and benefit reservoir migrants.” • By 2011 will be able to generate 22,500 MW of electricity (equivalent to 10-15 fossil or nuclear power plants). • Flood control of Yangtze River virtually ensured – 1.5 million hectares of land, 15 million people protected from 100 year floods. • Year-round navigation channel to Shanghai and East China Sea: growth from 9.5 – 60 million tons/cargo per year between 2003-08. • Gaining experience to be used in other projects on Jinsha River, elsewhere in China.

14. Major dam impacts • 1.3 – 2 million people displaced; 13 cities, 140 towns, 1,350 villages inundated; 600 kilometers of river valley flooded, many archeological sites lost. • Submergence of hundreds of factories, mines, waste dumps creating effluent, silt, industrial pollutants and rubbish in reservoir. • Erosion of reservoir and downstream riverbanks causing landslides, threatening one of the world’s biggest fisheries in the East China Sea. • Scientists estimate annual catches may be reduced by one million tons due to decline in fresh water and sediment reaching the sea. • Project plagued by corruption, spiraling costs, technological problems, resettlement difficulties.

15. Achieving Adaptive Management • Manage by learning/modify through experience: • Determine what impacts affect basin and surrounding region. • Give stakeholders opportunity to envision different scenarios. • Former was done at Itaipu, not Three Gorges – latter was not done in either case: decisions were centralized, non-participatory from outset. • Make errors reversible: • Emphasize non-structural solutions where applicable. • Employ multi-purpose planning from outset (e.g., in-stream flow, allocation, water quality). • In both cases, governments set out to dam a river for power, flood control – non-structural measures, smaller dams not considered. • Mid-course corrections: • Some correction at Itaipu; remains to be seen if damage at TG can be reversed. • Public involvement – limited at both; public was not encouraged to identify concerns/acceptable solutions. There were protests/public dissent at TG.

16. Conclusions & lessons • Debate is continuing – particularly as new dams come “on-line” (e.g., Ethiopia, China, India). • Dams create adverse environmental and social impacts that cannot be entirely mitigated! • Are adverse impacts worth the benefits? • Does flooding an “upstream” region generate benefits for people “downstream?” – is it worth it? • This is a debate in Ethiopia today, for example, over Gilgel Gibe project. • How else can the world get its water supply, electricity, and development needs met?