Dams! Always ammunition for debate
The Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) call it a ‘gamble with people’s lives.’ The World Bank says the fears are exaggerated.
Dams fanned debates, as usual.
On the sidelines of the Annual Conferences of the world Bank and International Monetary Fund in Dubai, a group of CSOs condemned the World Bank’s new ‘high-risk/high-reward’ strategy in water, forestry and extractive industries sectors.
At the end of the one-hour discussion, largely taken up by the NGO representatives presenting their case against ‘huge’ projects, the World Bank officials, who attended the meeting, took much of the steam away thanks in no mean measure to a time handicap.
With time constraints preventing further explanation, they virtually closed the meeting pointing out that less than 3 per cent of all water projects of the World Bank belong to the high-risk/high-reward category, and hardly 0.6 per cent of the Bank’s funding goes for large infrastructure.
International Rivers Network Policy Director Peter Bosshard and Environmental Defense Policy Analyst Shannon Lawrence stood their ground.
“The number of projects might not be big but every one of them affects hundreds of thousands of people,” said Bosshard, later. Not pitting themselves entirely against major projects, he said development projects must be executed in a rational way.
Environmental Defense, International Rivers Network and Friends of the Earth had together formulated a report titled, ‘Gambling with People’s Lives,’ which ‘analyses the World Bank’s ability to manage social and environmental risks in high-risk projects and to learn from its past mistakes.’
The CSOs said the World Bank ‘plays a reckless, high-stakes game of roulette, where the poor stand to lose big.’
“While the Bank and private investors are shielded from project risk, the communities affected by its projects have no such guarantees,” observed Lawrence.
On their part, World Bank officials — Sustainable Development Communications Advisor Sergio A Jellinek; and Richard Uku, adviser, Office of the Vice President for Infrastructure — said the Bank’s water strategy is based on a ‘balanced approach to better management of the water infrastructure. Dams are pretty insignificant compared to the whole water infrastructure.”
They also called upon NGOs from developed countries to take into account the growth their countries had made based on the presence of big projects. “You must consider the role of that infrastructure in providing economic growth and social justice,” they said.
The CSOs hit back saying, the World Bank’s new strategy that endorses high-risk projects will only increase conflict, prolong deadlock in important sectors and prevent sustainable alternatives from being developed.
They cited the examples of the Bujagali dam in Uganda, initiated through World Bank support, which was investigated for corruption and suspended by the Bank. “Uganda has served as guinea pig of the Bank’s high-risk approach for many years but has not seen any rewards.”
However, the CSOs said they do not have an alternative masterplan. “What we have is a set of principles on how projects should be assessed and projects developed. All options must be evaluated; unfortunately, the World Bank is not insisting on that.”
