Controversial Hydropower: Who
Is Behind the Scene?
Term Paper
EDS 305 Development Theory and Policy
December 5, 2012, UMB
Kateryna Byelova
Controversial Hydropower: Who Is Behind theScene?
Contents:
1. Introduction
2. “Environment-development”
2.1 “Contradiction-interdependence dialectic”
2.2 Ecofeminism: maldevelopment, environment and
social inclusion
3. Global Hydropower Industry
3.1 Main actors: Governments, financiers,
international financial institutions
3.2 “Development-development”: economic growth vs. social costs
3.3 “Environment-environment”: clean energy vs.
environmental costs
4. Case: Tucurui Dam in Brazil
4.1 Environmental impacts
4.2 Social impacts
4.3 “Behind the scene”: benefiting stakeholders
4.3.1 Funding
4.3.2 Legal framework
4.3.3 Construction firms
2
4.3.4 Foreign interests
4.4 Discussion
5. Conclusion
6. Reference list
1. IntroductionHydropower energy has strong positive sides such as
contributing to economic and social development on national and
global level and providing clean energy alternative to fossil
fuels. However, these perceived benefits may be contested by the
social and environmental costs hydropower can involve as well,
such as negative impacts on people`s livelihoods mainly through
involuntary resettlement and displacement, and adverse effects
on local ecosystems and biodiversity. Thus, human well-being and
environmental issues may question the necessity of implementing
certain hydropower projects, particularly large and highly
controversial ones, such as, for example, Tucurui dam in Brazil.
This paper attempts to explore who might “stand behind the
scene” in hydropower on the global, national and local level, as
well as to analyze its main controversies, such as “environment-
development” interconnection, “environment-environment” and
“development-development” conflicts. Particularly, it begins
with the relevant theoretical background such as “contradiction-
interdependence dialectic” of Shanmugaratnam and ecofeministic
ideas of Vandana Shiva about maldevelopment, environment and
social inclusion, which appear through the paper as the main
context. Then, it gives overview on the main actors of the
global hydropower industry, such as governments, financiers and
3
international financial institutions, proceeding with focusing
on major contradictions of hydropower on the global level, such
as economic growth vs. social costs and clean energy vs.
environmental costs. Finally, through the case of Tucurui dam,
it discusses hydropower on the national and local level,
critically assessing main environmental and social costs of the
project and trying to reveal its main benefiting stakeholders.
2.“Environment-Development”
2.1 “Contradiction-Interdependence Dialectic”
One cannot regard separately the fields of environment and
development as they are closely interrelated and influence on
each other. Professor Nadarajah Shanmugaratnam is among those
supporting and promoting this close interconnection and
interdependence. At the same time, there are a lot of
contradictions in the environment-development field.
Shanmugaratnam was among the first scholars who brought it into
the terms of “contradiction-interdenedence dialectic” shifting
from political economy to eco-political economy.
The starting point of this dialectic is that appropriation
of nature through labour processes is vital for human survival.
In its turn it affects ecological systems causing sometimes
environmental crisis. Within capitalist system, which is
dominant in neoliberalism and which is driven by appropriation
of surplus value for further accumulation, there is a
contradiction between the needs of the capital and the needs of
4
daily and intergenerational labour power who depend on the
environment for their subsistence (Kjosavik & Vedeld, 2011).
The main contradictions may be expressed in the four
following forms: (1) between capitalisation and conservation of
nature; (2) between capital accumulation and reproduction of
society and human habitat; (3) barriers to accumulation from
self-expanding logic of the capital itself and emerging of other
barriers through pro-environment protests; (4)
internationalisation of these contradictions through global
environmental pollution and relocation of environment- damaging
production to developing countries (Kjosavik & Vedeld, 2011).
2.2 Ecofeminism: Maldevelopment, Environment and
Social Inclusion
As Vandana Shiva puts it in Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and
Development development is equivalent to maldevelopment or merely
“economic growth” which doesn`t take into consideration the
feminine, the conservation and the ecological principle. To her,
patriarchal way of development regards productivity only from
technological advancements` and gaining highest profits`
perspective which leads to the conflict between long term
survival options for the vast majority of people and short term
over-production and over-consumption for the benefit of minority
(Shiva, 1989).
Also, she regards modern science as a patriarchal project,
based on reductionism. By excluding women` expertise together
with ecological and holistic knowledge which respects nature, it
leads to social exclusion not only of women, but of the other
5
traditionally marginalised groups as well, such as peasants and
indigenous communities. To Shiva, feminine principle is based on
inclusiveness and ignoring it is the root of deprivation and
ecological crisis. Thus, maldevelopment, to her, should be
recovered, first of all, through combined women`s and ecology
movements (Shiva, 1989).
3. Global Hydropower Industry
3.1 Main actors: Governments, Financiers, International
Financial Institutions
After economic downturn in 1990s, global investments into
hydropower infrastructure have boosted. Governments and
financiers have been strongly lobbying hydropower as playing a
key role in “green growth” policies, putting that large dams are
one of the best options to achieve sustainable development in a
triple way: economic growth, environmental protection and social
inclusion. UN Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development and
G-20 Summit which involve multiple stakeholders, called again in
2012 for a transition from a fossil fuel-based economy and thus
bringing large-scale hydropower market back into focus.
However, the roles of hydropower financiers have changed.
Today national governments that have enough capital to construct
their own dams, together with playing a central role in regional
and international markets, finance most new hydropower projects.
Countries of BRICS are particularly visible on this arena. For
example, Chinese state-owned company Sinohydro is the largest
dam builder in the world (International Rivers, 2012). Apart of being
6
responsible for 65% of all hydropower projects within China, it
is also responsible for 132 hydropower projects overseas. India
and Brazil also emerge as leading financiers of dams`
construction and play the strongest role in regional markets (The
Association for International Water Studies, 2012).
Consequently, the roles of traditional lenders in the
hydropower sector i.e. multilateral financial institutions such
as the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the International
Finance Corporation etc., have been increasingly shifting from
direct financial to technical and policy support. Today they
might be regarded as knowledge brokers in this area of
development, more partcipating through technical expertise,
know-how and other forms of knowledge-based assistance (World
Bank, 2011). However, it still happens by means of giving
financial loans. So, though their role as main hydropower
projects financiers might have decreased globally they are still
considerably involved in them but just through another area of
development finance.
3.2 “Development-Development”: Economic Growth vs. Social Costs
One of the main social benefits of hydropower is that it
supplies energy for the people. Partly it is true, but, at the
same time, most of the dams, particularly the large ones, are
built to meet industrial demand in much higher extent than
residential. Consequently, electricity load for industrial users
far outweighs that of residential sector, making it more
secondary goal of dams` construction. These industrial users are
7
usually energy-intensive industries, such as e.g. aluminium
production, ferro-nickel, ferro-silicon smelting, tin, zinc,
steel production, copper extraction. Aluminium is a particularly
energy-intensive product as it has the highest electricity
consumption per ton (14,800 kWh) and requires the highest
percentage of electricity (76%) of the all energy to produce one
ton (World Bank Data, 2012).
As to average residential consumption per year (as of 2011),
such countries as the USA, China, Brazil consume the most
hydropower electricity in general, while Iceland and Norway
have the highest hydropower electricity demands per household,
where most of residential electricity load (around 60%) goes to
heating. In contrast, an Ethiopian household consumes in average
46 kWh electricity per year (Gapminder, 2012).
Nevertheless, the hydropower dams do provide electricity for
the needs of people, despite of its secondary role as to
industry.
Also, the more hydropower dams are constructed, the cheaper
prices for electricity might become for the residents.
Additionaly, hydropower projects might improve situation on the
job market by creating new vacancies. By this financial welfare
of the people on individual level and the employment rates in
general might be improved contributing to the economic growth on
the naional and global level. And it might serve for the better.
At the same time, the social consequences, particularly of
the large dams, can be also devastating. The hydropower industry
has constructed around 50,000 dams across the world by the end
of 20th century (The Association for International Water Studies, 2012). The
world`s largest dams such as the Three Gorges Dam in China and
Tucurui Dam in Brazil might have damaged or completely destroyed8
livelihoods of many people by flooding great amounts of
farmlands, productive wetlands, forests, fisheries. According to
World Comission on Dams, around 40-80 million people were
displaced from their lands in the past 60 years (International Rivers,
2012). Their lives might have worsened in many ways, culturally,
economically and psychologically. Millions, particularly in the
tropics, have suffered from health problems caused by spreading
diseases exacerbated by dams. Apart of direct impact by flooding
reservoirs, millions more might have been impacted by
infrastructure accompanying large dams, such as power lines,
roads, canals, irrigation schemes etc. The communities sometimes
regarded as marginalized and most vulnerable ones, such as
indigenous people and peasants, are considered to be the ones
who particularly feel the impacts (International Comission on Large
Dams, 1999).
Referring to Shanmugaratnam`s dialectic, one may see that by
appropriation of nature, here the rivers, for creating the
surplus value, a contradiction arises between the needs of the
capital, here the industries and the needs of daily labour
power, here local popultation. This contradiction might be
particularly visible in the second form mentioned by
Shanmugaratnam i.e. between capital accumulation and
reproduction of society and human habitat. The people directly
and indirectly affected by hydropower development, are dependent
on the environment for their subsistence and livelihoods and
this might express existing interdependence between environment
and development within the dialectic.
Also, the main rationale for hydropower investors might
derive from economic benefits from electricity and, first of
all, for the industries. Part of the population is also get9
provided with electricity for residential needs and with the
jobs. On the one hand, it might be good for development as it
meets one of its goals – economic growth. On the other hand, it
might sacrifice other development pillars, meaning social costs
often particularly for the marginalised and vulnerable groups in
this context. Industrial development doesn`t always mean that
the whole society benefits from it and develops in a broader
sense, particularly in the long term. Focusing solely on
economic growth may turn to maldevelopment, as put by Vandana
Shiva. Thus, this can serve as one of the evidences of
“development-development” conflict.
3.3 “Environment-Environment”: Clean Energy vs.
Environmental Costs
Another main perceived benefit of the hydropower is that the
energy it provides is clean and green, particularly in contrast
to fossil fuels. At the same time, there exists a practice of
greenwashing i.e. overestimating the positive sides for
environment and underestimating or ignoring negative ones in
order, for example, to push forward a new hydropower project
which might be highly controversial. However, apart of their
potential environmental benefits hydropower dams might cause a
lot of damaging consequences as well.
First, as all of us are connected through watersheds, which
include land, water, all plants, animals and humans in it with
all the infrastructure added. What happens in the one part of
the watershed because of the dam construction, influences
10
ecological processes both upstream and downstream (Ledec &
Quintero, 2003). Such factors as water quantity and quality may
be first of all affected. Consequently it influences the
livelihoods of people.
Second, large dams might cause adverse impacts on biological
diversity by flooding land, species` isolation, habitats`
fragmentation, interruption of nutrients` exchange between
ecosystems and cutting off migration rutes. They reduce flow of
water and sediments to habitats downstream, and change rivers`
estuaries which are home for the world`s fish species. For
example, baiji dolphin completely extincted in the Yangtze River
after the Three Gorges Dam construction (International Comission on
Large Dams, 1999).
Third, the impacts from dams might increase ecosystems`
vulnerability to other threats, such as climate change though
this concept itself is highly disputable. Rivers play central
role in soil deposition that drives carbon sequestration. When
dams significantly change rivers` inundation cycles, they reduce
soils` and biomass ability to capture carbon. Additionaly, dams
can be significant sources of methane, one of the main
greenhouse gases. Particularly in the tropics, water in dam
reservoirs emits more methane gas, mainly because of biological
materials decomposition (Ledec & Quintero, 2003).
Also, in the light of hydropower greenwashing other
renewable energy sources may be disregarded. However, they can
be a better alternative to hydropower projects which are often
higly controversial. Renewable sources, such as wind, solar,
geothermal energy etc., are considered to be more socially and
environmentally friendly. Additionally, they could be more
relevant to contemporary realities working as more efficient and11
innovative substitution to, perhaps, slightly old-fashioned
hydropower. Unfortunately, investments in these markets are
still considered to be more greenfield while the major focus and
broader engagement worldwide is in more traditional hydropower.
Thus, from the above mentioned may derive “environment-
environment” conflict meaning that hydropower can be regarded as
both environmentally friendly and damaging source of energy at
the same time. Referring to Shiva, it might be important not to
reduct the environmental impacts of hydropower only to green and
clean ones i.e. doing greenwashing in order to implement the
project by cost of nature to achieve productivity and high
profits. Also, one might regard potentially valuable ecological
and holistic knowledge about nature which traditionally
marginalised groups, such as peasants and indigenous communities
might held, mentioned by Shiva. However, one might not be too
romantic or simplistic about it, as their voices do not always
offer the best solutions to be adopted.
4. Case: Tucurui Dam in Brazil
The Tucurui Dam is a massive concrete gravity dam on the
Tocantins River in the state of Para in the Eastern Brazil. The
initial aim of constructing the dam was to provide the town of
Belem and the surrounding region with the electricity.
Ultimately, the focus of the project changed in favour of mining
and metallurgical industries which are energy intensive. So,
mainly the industrial interests catalized the construction of
Tucurui Hydropower Complex. In this context, Tucurui is
considered to be a part of the major development projects in the
12
region, such as the Transamazon Highway, Steel Complex, the
Greater Carajas Mining Project, the PA-150 Highway, big ranching
and farming projects run by the private sector etc. (Fearnside,
1999, 2001; La Rovere, 2002)
4.1 Environmental Impacts
Regarding environmental costs, construction of Tucurui dam
resulted in significant forest loss which leaded to damage of
natural ecosystems and contributed into greenhouse gas
emissions. It also heavily affected aquatic ecosystems by
blocking migration of fish and by creating anoxic environments.
Vegetation decay in the flooded reservoir created anoxic water
which corrodes turbines and releases methane providing
conditions for mercury methylation. At the same time, some
mitigation measures were taken such as establishing of 24
archaeological salvages in the submergence area, faunal salvage
(with 284,000 animals from the beginning) and gene bank (with
different tree species collected in the submergence area in 28
2.4-ha parcels on an island in the reservoir near the dam)
(Fearnside, 2001).
However, these mitigation measures did not meet proper
maintenance. For instance, about faunal salvage it was written
the following: “Even those captured and moved were not saved for
long. One problem is the stressed and debilitated state of the
animals when released. Another is that relocated animals enter
into competition with animal populations already present in the
area where they are released. In the case of Tucurui, the
additional lease on life given by being “saved” by the Curupira
13
Project in the 1984 was even more ephemeral: a report of a 1986
field survey by Eletronorte indicates that all of the nature
reserves created for the rescued fauna had been invaded by
loggers and hunters (Monosowski, 1990, p. 33; Fearnside, 2001,
p. 387)”. Supporting of gene bank was not better too: “Only a
small part of one parcel received any maintenance. The
headquarters of the area served mainly as a picnic spot for
high-level employees from the Eletronorte compound at Tucuruı
´and as a stop for reception of visitors being shown
environmental activities in the area” (Fearnside, 2001, p. 388).
As to Environmental Impact Assessment, the environmental
studies of the dam were quiet shallow icluding only its
immediate effects and not taking into account long-run impact on
the environment and local population. Additionaly, no studies
were conducted about accompanying dam`s infrastructure such as
roads and transmission lines (La Rovere, 2002).
4.2 Social ImpactsSocial impacts played played little role in the initial
decision about building the Tucuruı Dam. At the same time social
and economic life of the region was adversely affected in direct
and indirect way.
A total of 33 000 people had to be displaced because of
direct and indirect effects of dam construction. Eletronorte
assisted them with cash payments but in most cases they were
undervalued and delayed. Additionally, a large number of
employment related migrants moved to the area. It resulted in
overpopulation leading to pressure on economic and social
infrastructure, poverty growth, social tensions between re-
14
settled people and migrants. Displaced people also provoked more
deforestation (Fearnside, 1999). The resettlement process itself
underestimated the numbers of people to be relocated and it
didn`t consider livelihood patterns of the families e.g.
riverbank communities were replaced inland and extractive
communities were put in lands which require farming (La Rovere
2002).
The downstream communities also faced adverse impacts on
their livelihoods, though mostly indirect ones. It affected
negatively their trading activities because of shipping
problems, farming activities and fisheries due to water quality
and quantity changes. Before dam construction fishery was
flourishing being a main source of cash income and of animal
protein for the river dwellers. Fish consumption was in average
49 kg per person per year. Dam caused 60% drop in the fishcatch
per unit effort and number of fishermen also fell drastically.
Additionaly, freshwater shrimp harvests decreased by 66%
(Fearnside, 2001). Despite all these negative effects,
downstream residents were excluded from Electronorte`s
evaluations of population being affected as they considered only
people experiencing direct effects.
Impacts on health of local people were also negative. The
population increase in the area boosted vector transmitted
diseases such as malaria, schistosomiasis etc. together with
increased level of alcoholism, sexually transmitted diseases and
AIDS (La Rovere, 2002). Also, high mercury levels in the Tucurui
reservoir put community`s health at risk of neurological damage
(Fearnside, 2001).
Tucurui hydropower complex also had negative effects on
indigenous peoples of the region as it partly flooded Parakana,15
Pucurui and Montanha indigenous reserves and its transmission
lines cut trough others as well (Fearnside, 1999). Although
these indigenous communities were paid small amount of
compensation, for them it can`t really substitute the loss of
their land also because they have special spiritual and cultural
links to it. Additionally, the tribes lack experience of dealing
with money that resulted in spending their funds for purposes
not ensuring their continuous well-being.
4.3 “Behind the scene”: benefiting stakeholders
4.3.1 Funding
The Tucurui project was funded mainly by the Electronorte budget
which is half private half state-owned company.Also it was
supplemented by loans from foreign sources and transfers from
Brazilian governmental institutions. Foreign creditors constituted
around 55% of total project costs and among them were the following:
Bank of America, National Bank of Canada, Banque de L’Union
Europeenne, Crocker National Bank and a consortium of French
banks . As to Brazilian sources, they were: Eletrobrás, Banco do
Brasil, Caixa Econômica Federal, BNH, FINAME resources for
equipment acquisition (Fearnside, 1999).
4.3.2 The legal framework
The legal framework of electricity sector in Brazil included a
state-owned company Eletrobrás ( Centrais Elétricas Brasileiras S/A)
and its four regional utilities. Eletronorte was one of these four and
served as a public power services` subsidiary of Eletrobrás. Being
established in 1973, nowadays it covers about 60% of the
16
Brazil`s land area, including all legal Amazonia and such states
as Acre, Amapá, Amazonas, Maranhão, Mato Grosso, Pará, Rondônia,
Roraima and Tocantins (La Rovere, 2002).
4.3.3 Construction firms
About construction firms, initially four of them competed in
tenders and bidding: Camargo Corrêa, Mendes Júnior, Andrade
Gutierrez and C.R. Almeida. The bidding process included a
technical proposal followed by a commercial proposal together
with corresponding prices for construction. The technical
proposal was based on Eletronorte`s requirements. Camargo Corrêa
construction company became the winner of the bidding process by
having presented the best technical proposal for the lowest
price. The price, however, included only civil works, without
expences for project engineering and electric equipment
(Fearnside, 1999, 2001; La Rovere, 2002).
The principal owner of Camargo Corrêa, Sebastia˜o Camargo,
became one of the Brazilian billionaires in the short run after
Tucurui contract. As was put in ref the increase in number of rich
people in Brazil and Latin America in general may be associated
with an “extraordinary wave of capitalist energy” in the region.
Probably, it was not a coincidence that majority of Brazilian
billionaires in 1992 were the construction firms` owners dealing
with main public works in Amazonia such as Tucuruı´ Dam, Balbina
Dam and North–South Railway (Fearnside, 1999, 2001; La Rovere,
2002).
It may be explained by extremely high profiatability of the
contracts administrating these construction projects. For
example, for Tucurui the profit were estimated as about US$500
million, representing 10% of the total project cost and not17
taking into account the interest. This profit resulted mainly
from the administrative fees accompanying every step of the
project. Additionally, metallic silica plant near the Tucurui
town, being a “preferential client” of the dam and using its
energy at the subsidized rates, became an extra source of
finacial return (Fearnside, 1999, 2001; La Rovere, 2002).
.
4.3.4 Foreign interests
It can be put that the construction of Tucurui was
influenced a lot by foreign intersets. The decision to build the
dam was not even made in Brazil. It happened in Japan after
negotiations between the Brazilian Minister of Mines and
Energy, Shigiaki Ueki, and a group of companies from the
Government of Japan. Japanese interests were specifically to
supply power to the ALBRA´ S and ALUMAR aluminum smelters which
they owned (Fearnside, 1999, 2001; La Rovere, 2002).
France also had interests in the Tucurui project. Most of the
dam turbines were purchased from Neyrpic of Grenoble and
Creusot-Loire of Le Creusot in the form of “supply credits”. It
resulted in US$3 billion debt to France which had been never
paid back. Some of the Brazilian most rich and powerful men were
charged of corruption in relation to this, however, it had been
never properly investigated afterwards. Also, in 1976 and 1977,
French industries and financial institutions gave financial
support to Tucuruí, but with the condition for Brazil to buy a
considerable amount of goods and services from France
(Fearnside, 1999, 2001; La Rovere, 2002).
Iron and manganese smelters in the region are also worth
mentioning, as they are highly dependent on the electricity
from Tucurui. Here a number of US multinational companies, such18
as US Steel through Meridional and Union Carbide through Codim
have become involved (Fearnside, 1999, 2001; La Rovere, 2002).
The Canada`s transnational aluminium producer Alcan also
expressed much interest in the Tucurui, mainly due to the fact
of mining companies` nationalisation in Guyana, where Alcan had
its bauxite mine (Fearnside, 1999, 2001; La Rovere, 2002).
So, apart of supplying energy, Tucuruí Hydropower Complex
played a key role in the metallurgical and mining complex in
Eastern Amazonia.
4.4 Discussion
Among main justifications of Tucurui developers was
economical and social progress of the country in general.
Together with ensuring national energy security, it was supposed
to provide cheaper prices for electricity and create additional
jobs for Brazilian people providing industrial and economic
growth. However, most of the power from Tucurui goes not to the
private consumers but for supplying metallurgic and mining
industries in the region. Thus, in pursuit of national economic
goals, it damaged local ecosystem and by this sacrificed
livelihoods of local poorest, most vulnerable and traditionally
marginalised people. Together with environmetal impacts the
project’s social costs are substantial.
The Tucurui`s high controversy is mainly the result of poor
scientific research on all stages of project implementation,
particularly concerning environmental impacts, and lack of
public consultation together with quiet high level of secrecy
about many aspects of the project, particularly regarding social
impacts, in order to favour interests of particular
19
stakeholders, which due to Tucurui increased their wealth up to
billions in some cases. Decision-making was influenced mainly
by construction firms and foreign financial interests, both on
the construction stage and in the use of electricity afterwards.
Social and environmental costs were not considered in the proper
way. As a result, local ecosystem and population such as mainly
small farmers and indigenous communities became so called
externalities of the project or the victims of development.
Thus “development-development” conflict might be
particularly visible here. On the one hand, there is economic
growth, on the other – sacrificed environment and livelihoods of
many local people. It could be clear that local and regional
development might not be measured only by economic indicators
but rather take into account other significant social variables
such as well-being of communities over time in the areas
directly affected by the project. Also, these communities might
be included and participate in the process of development on the
equal basis.
Most importantly, one might also not forget our
“environment-development” interdependence. It could work for the
better if all developers would have deep understanding of human-
nature or environment-development inseparability. In regard to
Shiva, we might not reduce environment to the economic/dominant
point of view without thinking about reproducing nature. As long
as we`ll be always dependent on nature because we are all part
of it, our capability to achieve greater freedom and well-being
for both current and future generations is in direct dependence
on the well-being of our environment. So, Tucurui Dam might
provide valuable lessons for similar by controversy hydropower
projects e.g. Belo Monte.20
5.ConclusionAs to the main actors “standing behind the scene” in the
global hydropower industry, they are governments, financiers and
international financial institutions. National governments,
particularly of the BRICS countries, tend to play a central role
in regional and international markets and finance most new
hydropower projects. International financial institutions
shifted from direct financing to the knowledge-based area of
development finance.
About main contradictions, in regard to “development-
development” conflict, the main rationale for hydropower
investors might derive from economic benefits from electricity
and, first of all, for the industries. Part of the population is
also get provided with electricity for residential needs and
with the jobs. On the one hand, it might be good for development
as it meets one of its goals – economic growth. On the other
hand, it might sacrifice other development pillars, meaning
social costs often particularly for the marginalised and
vulnerable groups.
In the context of “environment-environment” controversy,
hydropower can be regarded as both environmentally friendly and
damaging source of energy at the same time. It might be
important not to reduct the environmental impacts of hydropower
only to green and clean ones i.e. doing greenwashing in order to
implement the project by cost of nature to achieve productivity
and high profits.
Regarding the case of Tucurui dam, decision-making in the
project was influenced mainly by construction firms and foreign
financial interests, both on the construction stage and in the
21
use of electricity afterwards which was mostly for supplying
metallurgic and mining industries in the region. Social and
environmental costs were not considered in the proper way. As a
result – sacrificed environment and livelihoods of many local
people, mainly small farmers and indigenous communities, which
are interconnected and interdependent through “environment-
development” context.
Reference list:
1. Fearnside, P.M. (2001) Environmental Impacts of Brazil’sTucurui Dam: Unlearned Lessons for Hydroelectric Developmentin Amazonia. \\ Environmental Management Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 377–396. http://libra.msra.cn/Publication/39684502/environmental-impacts-of-brazil-s-tucuru-dam-unlearned-lessons-for-hydroelectric-development-in Access date: 25.11.2012
2. Fearnside, P.M. (1999) Social Impacts of Brazil’s Tucurui Dam \\ Environmental Management 24(4), pp. 219-244. http://www.academia.edu/1188801/Social_impacts_of_Brazils_Tucurui_Dam Access date: 25.11.2012
3. International Comission on Large Dams. (1999) Benefits and concernsabout dams. http://www.swissdams.ch/Committee/Dossiers/BandC/Benefits_of_and_Concerns_about_Dams.pdf Access date: 16.11.2012
4. Gapminder. (2012) http://www.gapminder.org/ Access date: 16.11.2012
5. International Rivers. (2012) “Sinohydro Projects Overseas”. http://www.internationalrivers.org/resources/sinohydro-projects-overseas-3580 Access date: 20.10.2012
6. Kjosavik, D.J. & Vedeld, P. (2011) The Political Economy of Environment and Development in a Globalised World: Exploring the Frontiers –
22
Essays in honour of Nadarajah Shanmugaratnam, Trondheim: TapirAcademic Press.
7. Ledec , G. & Quintero, J. D. (2003) ‘Good Dams and Bad Dams: Environmental Criteria for Site Selection of Hydroelectric Projects‘ Latin America and Caribbean Region Sustainable Development Working Paper 16 http://siteresources.worldbank.org/LACEXT/Resources/258553-1123250606139/Good_and_Bad_Dams_WP16.pdf Access date: 16.11.2012
8. La Rovere, E.L. Mendes, F.E. (2002) WCD Case Study. Tucurui Hydropower Complex Brazil. Prepared for the World Commission on Dams (WCD). Final Report. November. – 196 p. http://www.acendebrasil.com.br/archives/files/csbrmain.pdf Access date: 25.11.2012
9. Shiva, V. (1989) Staying alive: Women, Ecology and Development, London:Zed Books.
10. The Association for International Water Studies http://fivas.org/ENGLISH.aspx Access date: 16.11.2012
11. World Bank. (2011) “Transformation Through Infrastructure: World Bank Group Infrastructure Strategy Update”. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTINFRA/Resources/Transformationthroughinfrastructure.pdf Access date: 20.10.2012
12. World Bank Data. (2012) “Electricity production from hydroelectric sources (% of total)”. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.ELC.HYRO.ZS Access date: 22.10.2012
23
Top Related