Case Study ReportDownstream affect of the Pak Mun Dam in

Ban Keng Ta na , Khong Chiam district, Ubon Ratchathani Province-Thailand

Group Research: Mr. Aekkapol Aekakararungroj Ms. Soytavanh Mienmany Mr. Vu Manh Hai

Mr. Lum Sereykut

Outline

• Introduction• Methodology • Finding from field trip – Stakeholder analysis – Downstream Impact from Pak Mun dam – Lesson learn – Recommendations

Introduction • Background

- Mekong river start flow from upstream in 6 countries (Length 4500 km)- Pak Mun Dam concrete with a maximum height of 17 m and total length of 300 m- The reservoir has a surface area of 60 square km- Normal high water level 108 m mean sea level and during dry season 106 m MSL- EGAT build Pak Mun dam completed since 1994

Objective

• To describe and understand the Pak Mun Dam project

• To identify the stakeholders and their respective interests and influence

• To Determine the impacts of Pak Mun Dam in both the downstream community

• To compare situation before and after the project• To provide recommendations in improving the

water resource management in the communities.

Methodology

Finding from Field TripDescription of study area

Stakeholder AnalysisStakeholders Interest in project

(positive/negative)Influence on the project

1. Farmers (fish, rice, vegetable)(known as the assembly of the poor)

+ An increase in availability of Mekong fish in their fishing areas during the sluice closure- The fluctuation of water level affects to the vegetable farming on the bank- The bank protection makes their lives difficult to go fishing

+ The vote of community+ Request for the compensation-Less voice

2. Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand: EGAT

+ Electricity generation to meet the peak of power demand+ Changing the livelihood standard of the effected villagers

+ Implement the project

Stakeholder AnalysisStakeholders Interest in project

(positive/negative)Influence on the project

3. Local government officers (Governor, Head of the villagers)

+ The improvement of infrastructure and people’s lives in their area

+ Support & coordinate with EGAT and villagers

4. Building contractor and merchants

+ Business+ Reputation for the new project

+ Implement the construction phase

5. NGOs (Government side) e.g. Academic

+ Supporting money from the government to do the research

+ Partial cooperation+ Convince the villagers on the benefits of the dam

Stakeholder AnalysisStakeholders Interest in project

(positive/negative)Influence on the project

6. Academic + NGOs (Villagers side), Consultant,

+ Give knowledge to villagers on the effect of the dam+ Reputation

+ Make a public hearing+ Give a consultation to villagers+ Policies recommendation

7. Freelance demonstrators

+ Money from EGAT + Not their roles

Stakeholder Map high

Low high

influence/ power

inte

rest

1. Farmers2. EGAT3. Gov’t officers

7. FreelanceDemonstrators

7

6. Academic + NGOs (Farmer side)

21

3 5. NGOs (Gov’t side)

5

6 4. Contractor4

The problems of people in downstream are:

• Fisheries: can’t catch more fish because they close the gate so fish can’t migration.

• Agriculture: - people don’t have enough food and income for their life. - they decide to work in the town.- people can’t plant vegetable along the Mun River because bank

protection method from EGAT

• water quality (the first 3 years)

• Social live: decrease of social unity (some of people in village went to controversial with GOV, the other didn’t go the complain people who went to controversial so people not unite like in the past)

Downstream Impact from Pak Mun Dam Before After

Water availability-water level-water quality - Fish 20 box/day

Ex: Pa e tou (fish’s name) there are a lot in the Mun river

0.5 box/dayDon’t have Pa e tou

- Production -Rice- cassava-

Sifting cultivation or rice field

Can’t do because no labor (their son/daughters go to work in the town)

- Source of fish and period of time to catch fish

Can go any time and got many fish

When the gate opened they will go for catch fish

Downstream Impact from Pak Mun Dam Before After

- Income- fish- Rice - Cassava

Max 100,000 bath/yearMin 30,000-40,000bath/yEnough for eating in the household3,000-4,000 bath/y

Max 10,000 bath/yearMin 2000-3000 bath/yThey can catch a lot of fish that from Mekong river but just short time not enough.Just buy

- Households(HHs) 12 HHs 12+10= 22 HHMove from other villages:34 HHsTotal: 56 HHs

- Infrastructures- road- temple- public media

Road1 templeDon’t have

Road develop by Tourism Authority not develop by dam.Improved but have only 2 monks -Increase number of restaurants and shop. -increase TV, mobile-Change culture

Lesson Learn • People in that area experience on building dam. There

are a lot affects on their life. They don’t want dam at all.

• A lot of negative effect has been found e.g. fisheries

• Unbalance between cost and benefit (cost high but benefit low)

• stakeholder related resources must be concerns while

planning.

Recommendations

• Dam must be open at least 6 months• Find new method for protect river bank• An anonymous source suggested that the dam

should be named according to the name of Royal Family, e.g. Sirindhorn Dam