wcd_dams report annexes

323

Bibliography

The Report of the World Commission on Dams

Annex I

Bibliography

Abdel Megeed A, Aly Makky E, 1993,‘Shore Protection of the Nile DeltaAfter the Construction of HighAswan Dam’, in Egyptian Committeeon Large Dams (ed), High AswanDam Vital Achievement Fully Control-led, Cairo, ENCOLD.

Acreman M, Farquharson F, McCartney M,Sullivan C, Campbell K, Hodgson N,Morton J, Smith D, Birley M, Lazen-by J, Wingfield R, Barbier E, 2000,Managed Flood Releases from Reser-voirs: Issues and Guidance, Report toDFID and the World Commission onDams, Wallingford, UK, Centre forEcology and Hydrology, ContributingPaper to WCD Thematic Review II.1Ecosystems.

Adams WM, 1992, Wasting the Rain: Rivers,People and Planning in Africa, Earthscan,London.

Adams WM, 1985, ‘The Downstream Impactsof Dam Construction: A Case Studyfrom Nigeria,’ in Transactions of theInstitute of British Geographers NS, Vol.10: 292-302.

ADB (Asian Development Bank), 1984,Chashma Command Area Development -Appraisal Report, Manila, Asian Devel-opment Bank.

ADB, 1994, Sector Synthesis of Post-EvaluationFindings in the Water Supply and Sanitation

Sector, Manila, Asian DevelopmentBank.

ADB, 1995, Sector Synthesis of Post EvaluationFindings on the Irrigation and RuralDevelopment Sector, Manila, AsianDevelopment Bank.

ADB, 1997, Guidelines for the EconomicAnalysis of Projects, Manila, AsianDevelopment Bank.

ADB, 1999a, Special Evaluation Study on theSocial and Environmental Impact ofSelected Hydropower Projects, Manila,Asian Development Bank.

ADB, 1999b, China Resettlement Policy andPractice- Review and Recommendations,Draft for Reviewing, Regional Techni-cal Assistance Project, Manila, AsianDevelopment Bank.

ADB, 1999c, Strategic Options in the WaterSector, Peoples Republic of China,Canada, Hydrosult.

ADB, 2000, Study of Large Dams and Recom-mended Practices, RETA 5828, Manila,Asian Development Bank.

Adeler A, Flatby, R, 2000, Chief Engineer,Section Manager, Norwegian WaterResources and Energy Directorate,‘Norwegian Legislation on LocalBenefits,’ personal communication withauthors, 14 June.

AfDB (African Development Bank), 1998,Review of the Bank’s Experience in the

Annex I

Dams and Development: A New Framework for Decision-Making324

Financing of Dam Projects, AfricanDevelopment Bank, OperationsEvaluation Department.

Agarwal B, 1996, A Field of One’s Own:Gender and Land Rights in South Africa,Cambridge, Cambridge UniversityPress.

Agarwal A, Narain S, (eds), 1997, DyingWisdom, New Delhi, Centre for Scienceand the Environment.

Agence France Presse, 21 January 2000, ThreeGorges Dam Hit by 600 Million-DollarGraft Scam, Agence France Presse.

Agence France Presse, 10 March 2000, OfficialSentenced to Death for 3G Corruption,Agence France Presse.

Aleem AA, 1972, ‘Effect of river outflowmanagement on marine life’, in MarineBiology, Vol. 15: 200-208.

Anane M, 1999, Gender and Dams: A CaseStudy of the Akosombo Dam, WCDSubmission soc210.

Anderson RC, 1997, New Independent StatesIssue Paper No. 1: EnvironmentalDamage Assessment of the Aral SeaDisaster, Central Asia Mission, USAgency for International Development.

Annan KA, 2000, We the Peoples: the Role ofthe United Nations in the 21st Century,New York, United Nations.

Arrow KJ, Lind RC, 1970, ‘Uncertainty andthe Evaluation of Public InvestmentDecisions,’ in American EconomicReview, Vol. 60: 364-378.

ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers),1998, “1998 Report Card for America’sInfrastructure”, in Issue Brief - Dams,American Society of Civil Engineers,5 March.

ASDSO (Association of State Dam SafetyOfficials), 2000, Dam Safety Facts,http://www.damsafety.org/facts/html,viewed 28 June 2000.

Atakpu L, 2000, Dams, Food Security andLivelihoods: Understanding the Nigerian

Experience, African Network forEnvironment and Economic Justice,Nigeria, WCD Regional ConsultationPaper.

Bacon RW, Besant-Jones JE, Heirarian J, 1996,Estimating Construction Costs andSchedules: Experience with PowerGeneration Projects in DevelopingCountries, World Bank Technical Paper325, Washington DC, World Bank.

Bacon RW, Besant-Jones JE, 1998, ‘EstimatingConstruction Costs and Schedules:Experience with Power GenerationProjects in Developing Countries’, inEnergy Policy, Vol. 26, No. 4: 317-333.

Balland P, 1991, Le Littoral MéditerranéenFrançais: Evolution Physique. QualitéGénerale, Agence de l’Eau Rhône-Méditerranée-Corse.

Balsam L, 1940a, Telegram to Collier J, 15March, 311.1(a) Acquisition of Lands -USBR Correspondence, Colville RealtyOffice, Nespelem, Washington DC,cited in WCD Case Study GrandCoulee Dam, Annex 9.

Balsam L, 1940b, Letter to Collier J, 14 July,311.1(a) Acquisition of Lands - USBRCorrespondence, Colville RealtyOffice, Nespelem, Washington DC,cited in WCD Case Study GrandCoulee Dam, Annex 9.

Bandaragoda DJ, 1999, Institutional Change andShared Management of Water Resourcesin Large Canal Systems: Results of anAction Research Programme in Paki-stan, Research Report 36, Colombo,International Water ManagementInstitute.

Barbier E, 2000, Professor, EnvironmentDepartment, University of York,personal communication with authors,14 March.

Barker D, Dave D, 2000, The Asian RiceEconomy in Transition, unpublisheddraft, 5 May 2000.

325

Bibliography


Barrow CJ, 1999, Alternative Irrigation: ThePromise of Runoff Agriculture, London,Earthscan.

Bartolome LJ, Danklmaier CM, 1999, TheExperience with Dams and Resettlement inArgentina, Contributing Paper forWCD Thematic Review 1.3 Displace-ment.

Belli P, Anderson J, Barnum H, Dixon J, TanP, 1998, Handbook on Economic Analysisof Investment Operations, OperationalCore Services Network Learning andLeadership Center, Washington DC,World Bank.

Benade B, 1999, Eco-Impact: EnvironmentalConsultants, ‘Fishways’, personalcommunication with authors, 23November.

Benech V, 1992, ‘The Northern CameroonFloodplain: influence of hydrology onfish production,’ in Maltby E, Dugan P,Lefeuve JC, (eds), Conservation andDevelopment: The Sustainable Use ofWetland Resources, Gland, Switzerland,IUCN.

Berga L, (ed), 2000, Dams and Floods, draftpaper, Paris, International CommissionOn Large Dams, Contributing Paper forWCD Thematic Review IV.4 FloodManagement Options.

Berga L, Yague J, Cajete J, Giron F,Mendiluce JM, 2000, Benefits andConcerns about Dams in Spain, papersfor the Beijing 2000 Congress ofICOLD, draft.

Bermann C, 1999, Community ManagedResettlement: The Case of Ita Dam,WCD Regional Consultation Paper.

Bernacsek G, 2000, Capacity and InformationBase Requirements for Effective Manage-ment of Fish Biodiversity, Fish Stocks, andFisheries Threatened or Affected by Damsduring the Project Cycle, ContributingPaper for WCD Thematic Review II.1Ecosystems.

Berz G, 2000 “Flood Disasters: Lessons fromthe Past - Worries for the Future,” inProceedings of the Institute of CivilEngineers, Water and Marine Engineer-ing, London, Vol. 142, March: 3-8.

Bhatia R, Cesti R, and Winpenny J, 1995,Water Conservation and Reallocation:Best Practice Cases in Improving Econom-ic Efficiency and Environmental Quality,A World Bank- Overseas DevelopmentInstitute Joint Study, Washington DC,World Bank.

Bizer JR, 2000, International Mechanisms forAvoiding, Mitigating and Compensatingthe Impacts of Large Dams on Aquaticand Related Ecosystems and Species,prepared for IUCN, Contributing Paperfor WCD Thematic Review II.1Ecosystems.

Blackmore D, 2000, Chief Executive, MurrayDarling Basin Commission, personalcommunication with authors, 28August.

Boa Nova AC, Goldemberg J, 1999, Electrifi-cation of Shanty Towns in Sao Paolo,International Urban DevelopmentAssociation, 23rd Congress.

Bond P, 2000, Paying for Southern AfricanDams: Socio-Environmental FinancingGaps, Cape Town, EMG-GEM-IRN,WCD Submission eco033.

Bosch JM, Hewlett JD, 1982, ‘A Review ofCatchment Experiments to Determinethe Effect of Vegetation Changes onWater Yield and Evapotranspiration,’ inJournal of Hydrology 55:3-23

Bosi M, 2000, An Initial View on Methodologiesfor Emission Baselines: ElectricityGeneration Case Study, IEA InformationPaper, Paris, International EnergyAgency.

Bourke G, 1988, ‘Subduing the Sea’s On-slaught’ in South, July: 117.

Bowman M, Cantrell S, Johnson S, 1999, DamRemoval Success Stories, Report from

Annex I


American Rivers, Friends of the Earth,Trout Unlimited.

Brandt S, Hassan F, 2000, Dams and CulturalHeritage Management, Newcastle uponTyne, World Archaeological Congress,WCD Working Paper.

Brehm MR, Quiroz J, 1995, The Water Marketfor Water Rights in Chile, WashingtonDC, The World Bank.

Bridle R, 2000, British Dam Society, personalcommunication with authors, 10 June.

Bridle RC, Sims GP, 1999, ‘Benefits of Damsto British Society’, in Turfan M, (ed),Benefits of and Concerns about Dams:Case Studies, Ankara, Turkish NationalCommittee on Large Dams.

Brody H, 1999, Assessing the Project: SocialImpacts and Larger Dams, ContributingPaper for WCD Thematic I.1 SocialImpacts.

Brown C, King J, 1999, Information Needs forAppraisal and Monitoring of EcosystemsImpacts, Contributing Paper for WCDThematic Review II.1 Ecosystems.

Brown C, King J, Tharme R, 1999, Definitionand Implementation of Instream Flows,Contributing Paper for WCD ThematicReview II.1 Ecosystems.

Brown LW, Halweil B, 1998, ‘China’s WaterShortage Could Shake World FoodSecurity’, in World Watch, July/August.

Brunold H, Kratochwill, 1999, ‘ConflictManagement as Part of a SuccessfulImplementation Strategy’, ConferenceProceedings, Hydropower into the NextCentury, International Journal onHydropower and Dams, Gmunden,Austria, October 1999.

Bruijnzeel LA, 1990, Hydrology of MoistTropical Forests and Effects of Conver-sion: A State of Knowledge Review, Paris,International Hydrological Programmeof the United Nations Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organisation.

Cernea MM, 2000, ‘Risks, Safeguards, andReconstruction: A Model for Popula-tion Displacement and Resettlement’,in Cernea MM, McDowell C, (eds),Risks and Reconstruction - Experiences ofResettlers and Refugees, Washington DC,The World Bank.

Cernea MM (ed), 1999, The Economics ofInvoluntary Resettlement: Questions andChallenges, Washington DC, TheWorld Bank.

Cernea MM, Guggenheim SE (eds), 1993,Anthropological Approaches to Involun-tary Resettlement: Policy, Practice andTheory, Boulder, Colorado, WestviewPress.

Chan NW, 1995, A Contextual Analysis ofFlood Hazard Management in PeninsulaMalaysia, unpublished PhD, Enfield,Middlesex University.

Chen C, 1999, The Chixoy Dam Case, RioNegro Community Representative,Guatemala, WCD Regional Consulta-tion Paper.

Childs-Johnson E, 2000, ‘The Three GorgesProject: There is No Dragon’, in BrandtS, Hassan F (eds), Dams and CulturalHeritage Management, World Archaeo-logical Congress, WCD Working Paper.

Colajacomo J, 1999, The Chixoy Dam inGuatamala: The Maya Achi Genocide -The Story of Forced Resettlement,Contributing Paper for WCD ThematicReview I.2 Indigenous People.

Colchester M, 1993, Slave and Enclave:Towards a Political Ecology of EquatorialAfrica, Penang, World RainforestMovement.

Colchester M, 1995, Venezuela: Violations ofIndigenous Rights, Chadlington, WorldRainforest Movement.

Collier M, Webb RH, Schmidt JC, 1996,Dams and Rivers: A Primer on theDownstream Effects of Dams, US

327

Bibliography


Geological Survey Circular 1126,Tuscon, US Geological Survey.

Colson, E, 1971, The Social Consequences ofResettlement, Manchester, ManchesterUniversity Press.

Colson E, 1999, ‘Engendering Those Up-rooted by ‘Development’’, in Indra D(ed), Engendering Forced Migration:Theory and Practice, Oxford, OxfordRefuge Studies Program, OxfordUniversity.

Cook CC, (ed) 1994, Involuntary Resettlementin Africa: Selected Papers from a Confer-ence on Environment and SettlementIssues in Africa, World Bank TechnicalPaper Number 227, Washington DC,The World Bank.

Corbett CJ, Kirsch DA, 2000, ‘ISO 14000: AnAgnostic’s Report from the Frontline’in ISO9000 + ISO140000 News, No.2,February: 4-17.

Cornish G, 1998, Modern Irrigation Technolo-gies for Smallholders in DevelopingCountries, SRP Exeter.

Correa I, 1999, Urra Dam Project, Colombia,Association of Producers for Commu-nal Development of La CienagaGrande de Lorica - ASPROCIG, WCDRegional Consultation Paper.

Cosgrove WJ, Rijsberman FR, 1999, WorldWater Vision: Making Water Everybody’sBusiness, World Commission on Waterfor the 21st Century, draft report,November.

Crabb P, 1997, Murray Darling Basin Resources,Canberra, Murray Darling BasinCommission.

CWC (Central Water Commission), 1994,National Register of Large Dams, NewDelhi, Central Water Commission,Government of India.

Davidson N, Delany S, 2000, BiodiversityImpacts of Large Dams: Waterbirds,funded by UNEP, commissioned by

IUCN from Wetlands International,Wageningen, Netherlands, Contribut-ing Paper for WCD Thematic ReviewII.1 Ecosystems.

Daes I, 1996a, Pacific Island Workshop on theUnited Nations Draft Declaration on theRights of Indigenous Peoples, paperpresented at Suva, Fiji, September.

Daes I, 1996b, Supplementary Report of theSpecial Rapporteur on the Protection of theHeritage of Indigenous Peoples, UnitedNations Sub-Commission on Preven-tion of Discrimination and Protectionof Minorities, forty-eighth Session, E/CN.4.Sub.2/1996/22.

Delaney TA, 1995, ‘Benefits to DownstreamFlood Attenuation and Water Qualityas a Result of Constructed Wetlands inAgricultural Landscapes, in AmericanFarmland Trust, Center for Agriculturein the Environment, http://www.farmlandinfo.org/cae/caepubs/delaney.html.

De Wet C, 1999, The Africa Experience,Contributing Paper for WCD ThematicReview 1.3 Displacement.

DFID (Department for International Develop-ment), 2000, Water, Knowledge andResearch Newsletter, Department forInternational Development, Issue 10,May.

Dhawan BD, 1988, Irrigation in India’s Agricul-tural Development: Productivity, Stability,Equity, New Delhi, Sage Publications,second edition, New Delhi, Common-wealth Publishers.

Dickinson MA, 1999, Water Efficiency Casestudies, California Urban Water Conser-vation Council, cited in WCD ThematicReview IV.3 Water Supply Options.

Dietrich W, 1999, Impacts of Dams on RiverGeomorphology, Berkeley, University ofCalifornia at Berkeley, WCD Submis-sion env082.

Annex I


Dixon DA, 2000, “A Growing Problem”, inInternational Water Power and DamConstruction, May: 23-25.

Dos Santos A, 1999, ‘Salto Caxias Hydroelec-tric Power Plant: Meeting Environmen-tal Needs’, in International Journal ofHydropower & Dams: Hydropower intothe Next Century - III ConferenceProceedings, Gmunden, Austria.

Down to Earth, 1998, “The Value of a Rain-drop”, 15 October: 22-33.

Drinkwater KF, Frank KT, 1994, ‘Effects ofriver regulation and diversion onmarine fish and invertebrates’, inAquatic Conservation: Freshwater andMarine Ecosystems, No. 4: 135-151.

Driver P, 2000, Mubuku III Hydropower Projectin Western Uganda, Contribution toWCD Thematic Review 1.3 WebConference, 28 January.

Dynesius M, Nilsson C, 1994, ‘FragmentationAnd Flow Regulation Of River SystemsIn The Northern Third Of The World’,in Science No. 266, 4 November1994:753-762.

EBRD (European Bank for Reconstructionand Development), 1996, LatvianHydropower Plants Receive EBRDFinancing, press release, 29 April,London, European Bank for Recon-struction and Development, http://www.ebrd.com/english/opera/PRESS-REL/PR1996/30APR29.HTM.

EBRD, 1999, EBRD Signed and ApprovedProjects in Slovenia: as at 31 December1999, London, European Bank forReconstruction and Development,http://www.ebrd.com/english/opera/COUNTRY/Slovproj.htm.

EBRD, 2000a, EBRD Activities in Azerbaijan:EBRD Signed Projects in Azerbaijan,London, European Bank for Recon-struction and Development, http://www.ebrd.com/english/opera/COUN-TRY/AZERACHT.HTM.

EBRD, 2000b, EBRD Signed Projects in Geor-gia: as at 30 June 2000, London,European Bank for Reconstruction andDevelopment, http://www.ebrd.com/english/opera/COUNTRY/Georproj.htm.

Eckstein O, 1958, Water Resource Develop-ment: The Economics of Project Evalua-tion, Cambridge, Massachusetts,Harvard University Press.

EEA (European Environment Agency), 1999,Lakes and Reservoirs in the EEA Area,Topic Report 1/1999, Copenhagen.

Eley TJ, Watkins TH, 1991, ‘In a Sea ofTrouble - The Uncertain Fate of thePacific Salmon’, in Wilderness, Fall:20-26.

Emerton L, 2000, Environmental EconomicTools for Project Analysis: Tana Hydro-power Scheme, IUCN working paper.

Epple R, 2000, Dam Decommissioning inEurope, European Rivers Network,WCD Submission opt136.

EWEA (European Wind Energy Association),1999, Submission from the EWEA:Greenpeace and Wind Industry UnveilGlobal Energy Blueprint, ContributingPaper for WCD Thematic Review IV.1ESDM Annex H.

Fact Finding Committee on the Sri SailamProject, 1986, ‘The Srisailam Resettle-ment Experience: The Untold Story’,cited in Mander H et al, 1999, Dams,Displacement, Policy and Law in India,Contributing Paper for WCD ThematicReview 1.3 Displacement.

Fahim HM, 1981, Dams, People and Develop-ment: The Aswan High Dam Case, NewYork, Pergamon Press.

Famolare L, 2000, Director, Guianas RegionalProgram, Conservation International,personal communication with authors,August.

FAO (UN Food and Agriculture Organiza-tion), IPTRID, World Bank, 1995,

329

Bibliography


Modern Water Control and ManagementPractices in Irrigation, Water Reports 19,Rome, UN Food and AgricultureOrganization.

FAO, 1995, Irrigation in Africa in Figures,Water Reports, Rome, UN Food andAgricultural Organization.

FAO, 1997, ‘Irrigation Potential in Africa: ABasin Approach’, in FAO Land andWater Bulletin 4, Rome, UN Food andAgriculture Organization.

FAOSTAT, 1998, FAO Statistical Databases,Rome, UN Food and AgriculturalOrganization, http://apps.fao.org/,viewed 29 September 2000.

Faught M, 2000, ‘National Reservoir Inunda-tion Study 1975-1980’, in Brandt S,Hassan F (eds), Dams and CulturalHeritage Management, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, World Archaeological Congress,WCD Working Paper.

Fearnside P, 1995 ‘Hydroelectric Dams inthe Brazilian Amazon as Sources of‘Greenhouse’ Gases’ in EnvironmentalConservation, Vol. 22, No.1, Spring:7-19.

Fearnside P, 2000, ‘Environmental Impacts ofBrazil’s Tucurui Dam : UnlearnedLessons for Hydroelectric Developmentin Amazonia’, in Environmental Man-agement, Vol. 26.

Fernandes W, Paranjpye V, 1997, RehabilitationPolicy and Law in India: A Right toLivelihood, Pune, New Dehli, ECONET,Indian Social Institute.

Fernea RA, 1998, Including Minorities inDevelopment: the Nubian Case, unpub-lished report for the World Bank,Washington DC, World Bank.

Ferradas CA, 1999, The Latin American Region,Contributing Paper for WCD ThematicReview I.1 Social Impacts.

Fisher RJ, 1993, ‘Creating Space: Develop-ment Agencies and Local Institutionsin Natural Resource Management’, in

Forest Trees and People Newsletter, No.22: 4-11.

Flanders D, 1999, Effectiveness of Fishways andFish Lifts in Queensland: Passage ofNative Fish in a Modified Vertical-slotFishway on the Burnett River Barrage,South-eastern Queensland, by Stuart IG,Berghuis AP, Bundaberg, QueenslandDepartment of Primary Industries,WCD Submission env219.

Flavin C, 1999, Energy in the 21st Century,International Cogeneration Alliance,Contributing Paper to WCD ThematicReview IV.1 ESDM Annex H.

Fox JA, Brown LD, 1998a, ‘Assessing theImpact of NGO Advocacy Campaigns’in Fox JA, Brown LD (eds), TheStruggle for Accountability: The WorldBank, NGOs, and Grassroots Move-ments, Cambridge, Massachusetts, MITPress.

Fox JA, Brown DL, (eds), 1998b, The Strugglefor Accountability: The World Bank,NGOs, and Grassroots Movements,Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press.

Francfort JE, Cada GF, Dauble DD, Hunt RT,Jones DW, Rhinehart RN, SommersGL, Costello RJ, 1994, EnvironmentalMitigation at Hydropower Projects;Volume II Benefits and Costs of FishPassage and Protection, US Departmentof Energy, Idaho Operations Office.

Frausto K, 1999, Irrigation Study: Technological– Potential for Improvement, Contribut-ing Paper for WCD Thematic ReviewIV.2 Irrigation Options.

Frazier S, 1999, Ramsar Sites Overview, Wet-lands International, Wageningen,Netherlands.

Freeman AM, 1993, The Measurement ofEnvironmental and Resource Values,Washington DC, Resources for theFuture.

Friedrich H, 2000, The Biodiversity of theWetlands in the Lower Mekong Basin,

Annex I


IUCN, WCD Regional ConsultationPaper.

Fuji H, Cho MC, 1996, ‘Water Managementunder Direct Seeding,’ in Morooka Y,Jegatheesan S, Yasunobi K, (eds),Recent Advances in Malaysian RiceProduction: Direct Seeding Culture in theMuda Area, MADA and JIRCAS.

Furness HD, 1978, Ecological Studies on thePongola River Floodplain, WorkingDocument IV, Workshop on Man andthe Pongolo Floodplain, No. 14/106/7C, Pietermaritzburg, South AfricaCSIR.

Gammelsrød T, 1996, ‘Effect of ZambeziManagement on the Prawn Fishery ofthe Sofala Bank’, in Acreman MC,Hollis GE, (eds), Water Managementand Wetlands in Sub-Saharan Africa,Gland, Switzerland, IUCN.

Gapuz AT, Shalupirip S, 2000, What MyPeople Stand to Lose with theConstruction of San Roque Dam,Philippines, Indigenous Peoples’Movement, WCD RegionalConsultation Paper.

Gillis M, Perkins DH, Roemer M, SnodgrassDR, 1987, Economics of Development,2nd Edition, W W Norton & Company,Inc, New York

Gleick PH, 1998, The World’s Water: TheBiennial Report on Freshwater Resources,Washington DC, Island Press.

Gleick PH, 2000, The World’s Water: TheBiennial Report on Freshwater Resources,Washington DC, Island Press.

Goldsmith E, Hildyard N, 1984, The Social andEnvironmental Impacts of Large Dams,Cornwall, UK, Wadebridge EcologicalCentre.

Goldzimer AM, 2000, Prior Informed Consent ofProject-affected Indigenous Peoples: AnAnalysis of Case Studies, John F. KennedySchool of Government, Harvard Univer-sity, WCD Submission soc013.

Goodland R, 1997, ‘Environmental Sustaina-bility in the Hydro Industry, Desegre-gating the Debate’, in Dorsey T (ed),Large Dams: Learning from the Past,Looking at the Future, Gland, Switzer-land, IUCN.

Goodland, R, 2000, Social and EnvironmentalAssessment to Promote Sustainability, AnInformal View from the World Bank.Environment Management Series,Paper No. 74, Washington DC, WorldBank.

Gould J, 1999, Rainwater Harvesting, Contrib-uting Paper for WCD ThematicReview IV. 3 Water Supply.

Government of India, 2000, Comments,Ministry of Health and Family Welfare,30th May, in WCD India CountryStudy.

Gray A, 1995, ‘The Indigenous Movement inAsia’, in Barnes RH, Gray A, Kings-bury B (eds), Indigenous Peoples of Asia,Michigan, The Association for AsianStudies Inc.

Gray A, 1998, ‘Development Policy - Devel-opment Protests: The World Bank,Indigenous Peoples, and NGOs’, in FoxJA, Brown LD (eds), The Struggle forAccountability: The World Bank, NGOs,and Grassroots Movements, Cambridge,Massachusetts, MIT Press.

Grunwald M, 2000, ‘Agency says EngineersLikely Broke Rules: Corps Economist’sAllegations of Rigged Lock ExpansionStudy Forwarded to Cohen’, in Wash-ington Post, 29 February.

Guerra LC, Bhuiyan SI, Tuong TP, Barker R,1998, Producing More Rice with LessWater, SWIM Paper 5, Colombo,International Water ManagementInstitute.

Guhan S, 1995, The World Bank’s Lending inSouth Asia, Brookings OccasionalPapers, Washington DC, BrookingsInstitute.

331

Bibliography


Gwala P, 2000, ‘South Africa: Inanda Dam.How the Dam Affected the Mapheph-eteni Tribe’, in Stott N, Sack K, GreeffL, (eds), Once There Was A Community,Southern African Hearings For Com-munities Affected By Large Dams,Environmental Monitoring Group.

Hanusin J, 1999, Water Supply in Slovakia,WCD Submission opt052.

Hart J, 2000, Assistant Crown Solicitor,Native Title Section, Australia,‘Northern Territories Native Title Act1993’, personal communication withauthors, 13 June.

Hassan F, 2000, ‘The Aswan High Dam andthe International Rescue Campaign’, inBrandt S, Hassan F (eds), Dams andCultural Heritage Management,Newcastle-upon-Tyne, WorldArchaeological Congress, WCDWorking Paper.

Hearne R, Easter KW, 1995, Water Allocationand Water Markets: An Analysis ofGains-From-Trade in Chile, World BankTechnical Paper Number 315, Wash-ington DC, World Bank.

Hearne RR, Trava JL, 1997, Water Markets inMexico: Opportunities and Constraints,Discussion Paper 97-01, EnvironmentalEconomics Programme, London,International Institute for Environmentand Development.

Heuperman A, 1999, Potential for Improvement- Some Drainage Options, ContributingPaper for WCD Thematic Review IV.2Irrigation Options.

Hira P, 1969. ‘Transmission of Schistosomiasisin Lake Kariba, Zambia’, in Nature,Vol. 224.

Holden PB, Stalnaker CB, 1975, ‘Distributionand Abundance of Mainstream Fishesof the Middle and Upper ColoradoRiver Basins’, in Transactions of theAmerican Fisheries Society, Vol. 104:217-231.

Hollis GE, Adams WM, Aminu-Kano M,(eds) 1993, The Hadejia-Nguru Wet-lands: Environment, Economy andSustainable Development of a SahelianFloodplain Wetland, Gland, Switzerlandand Cambridge, IUCN.

Horowitz M, Salem-Murdock M, Niasse M,Magistro J, Nuttal C, Kane O, GrimmC, Sella M, 1994, Les Barrages de laControverse. Le Cas de Flueve Senegal,Paris, Harmattan.

Huashan L, Yongtang J, 1995, ‘Canal LiningExperience in China,’ in Proceedings ofthe Workshop on Canal Lining andSeepage, October 1993, Lahore, Paki-stan, H R Wallingford, UK

Hubbs C, Pigg J, 1976, ‘The Effects of Im-poundments on Threatened Fishes ofOklahoma’, in Annals of the OklahomaAcademy of Science, Vol 5:133-77.

Huertas H, Pacheco B, 1999, The BayanoHydroelectric Dam in Panama, WCDRegional Consultation Paper.

Hynes HBN, 1970, ‘The Ecology Of FlowingWaters In Relation To Management’,in Journal of The Water Pollution ControlFederation, Vol. 42, No. 3: 418-424.

ICE (Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad),1994, Electricity and Sustainable Develop-ment in Costa Rica, San Jose, InstitutoCostarricense de Electricidad.

ICE, 1996, Planes de Expansion de la Genera-cion (Escenario Base), San Jose, Institu-to Costarricense de Electricidad.

ICID (International Commission on Irrigationand Drainage), 2000, Role of Dams forIrrigation, Drainage and Flood Control.ICID Position Paper, New Delhi,International Commission on Irrigationand Drainage.

ICOLD (International Commission on LargeDams), 1981, ‘Dam Projects andEnvironmental Success’ in ICOLDBulletin, No. 37, Paris, InternationalCommission on Large Dams.

Annex I


ICOLD, 1988, ‘Dams and Environment. CaseHistories’, in ICOLD Bulletin, No. 65,Paris, International Commission onLarge Dams.

ICOLD, 1995, ‘Dam Failures StatisticalAnalysis’, in ICOLD Bulletin, No. 99,Paris, International Commission LargeDams.

ICOLD, 1997, Position Paper on Dams and theEnvironment, Paris, InternationalCommission on Large Dams.

ICOLD, 1998, ICOLD World Register of Dams,Computer Database, Paris, Internation-al Commission on Large Dams.

ICOLD, 2000, World Register of Dams 1998:Updating 2000 for China, Paris, Interna-tional Commission on Large Dams.

IDB (Inter-American Development Bank),1999, IDB’s Dam-Related Projects(1960-1999), unpublished, Washing-ton DC, Inter-American Develop-ment Bank.

IDS (Institute of Development Studies), 2000,Operationalisation of Prior InformedConsent, Sussex, Contributing Paper forWCD Thematic Review 1.2 IndigenousPeople.

IEA (International Energy Agency) 1998, KeyWorld Energy Statistics, InternationalEnergy Agency, Paris, http://www.iea.org/stats/files/keystats/stats_98.htm.

IEA, 2000, Implementing Agreement for Hydro-power Technologies and Programmes.Annex III Hydropower and the Environ-ment: Present Context and Guidelines forFuture Action, Paris, InternationalEnergy Agency.

IFRCRCS (International Federation of RedCross and Red Crescent Societies)1998, World Disasters Report 1998,Oxford, Oxford University Press.

IJHD (International Journal of Hydropowerand Dams), 1999, World Atlas andIndustry Guide 1999, International

Journal of Hydropower and Dams, UK,Aqua-Media International.

IJHD (International Journal of Hydropowerand Dams), 2000, World Atlas andIndustry Guide 2000, InternationalJournal of Hydropower and Dams, UK,Aqua-Media International.

IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange), 1992, 1992 IPCC Supplement,Geneva, World Meteorological Organi-sation.

IPCC, 1996, Climate Change 1995: The Scienceof Climate Change, (eds) Houghton JT,Meiro Filho LG, Callendar BA, HarrisN, Kattenburg A, Maskell K, Cam-bridge, Cambridge University Press.

IPCC, 1999, Special Report on EmissionScenarios, draft version, Geneva, WorldMeteorological Organization andUnited Nations Environment Program.

IUCN (World Conservation Union), 2000,Vision for Water for Nature - A WorldStrategy for Conservation and SustainableManagement of Water Resources in the21st Century, Gland, Switzerland, andCambridge, IUCN.

Jackson D, Marmulla G, 2000, The Influence ofDams on River Fisheries, ContributingPaper for WCD Thematic Review II.1Ecosystems.

Jing J, 1999, Displacement, Resettlement,Rehabilitation, Repatriation and Develop-ment - The China Report, ContributingPaper for WCD Thematic Review 1.3Displacement.

Jobin, WR, 1999, Dams and Disease, London,Routledge.

Johnson III SH, 1997, Management Transferin Mexico: A Strategy to AchieveIrrigation District Sustainability, Re-search Report No. 16, Colombo,International Irrigation ManagementInstitute.

Johnston, BR, 2000, Reparations and the Rightto Remedy, Center for Political Ecology,

333

Bibliography


University of California, ContributingPaper for WCD Thematic Review I.3Displacement.

Jubb, RA, 1972, ‘The J.G. Strydom Dam,Pongolo River, Northern Zululand: TheImportance of Floodplain Pans BelowIt’, in Piscator, No.86: 104-9.

Kammen DM, 1999, ‘Bringing Power to thePeople: Promoting Appropriate EnergyTechnologies in the DevelopingWorld’, in Environment, Vol. 41, No.5:10-15, 34-41.

Kassas M, 1973, ‘Impact of River ControlSchemes on the Shoreline of the NileDelta’, in Farvar MT, Milton JP, (eds)The Careless Technology: Ecology andInternational Development, London,Stacey.

Keller A, Sakthivadivel R, Seckler D, 2000,Water Scarcity and the Role of Storage inDevelopment. Research Report 39,Colombo, International Water Man-agement Institute

Kijne J, Prathapar SA, Wopereis MCS,Sahrawat KL, 1998, How to ManageSalinity in Irrigated Lands: A SelectiveReview with Particular Reference toIrrigation in Developing Countries,Colombo, Sector-Wide Initiative forWater Management (SWIM).

Kinahan J, 2000, ‘Quaternary Surveys: Lessonsfrom the Joint Angolan-NamibianLower Cunene Hydropower Scheme’,in Brandt S, Hassan F (eds), Dams andCultural Heritage Management, Newcas-tle-upon-Tyne, World ArchaeologicalCongress, WCD Working Paper.

Kingsbury B, 1995, ‘Indigenous Peoples as anInternational Legal Concept’, in BarnesRH, Gray A, Kingsbury B (eds),Indigenous Peoples of Asia, Michigan,The Association for Asian Studies Inc.

Knudson T, Vogel N, 1997, ‘Again Dams areFacing New Pressures’, in The Sacra-mento Bee, 23-27 November.

Kowalski M, Schuster J, 2000, ‘Die Wind-macher’, in Focus, No. 29: 162-166.

Kudlavicz, M, 1999, Reao: Barragen de PortoPrimavera no Rio Paraná, WCD Submis-sion env129.

Kudlavicz, M, 2000, Porto Primavera Dam inRio Paraná, WCD Submission env063.

Kuriki M, 2000, General Manager, ChugokuRegional Construction Bureau, Minis-try of Construction, personal communi-cation with authors, 14 March.

Lagman A, 2000, Database of ADB LargeDams, unpublished, Manila, AsianDevelopment Bank.

Lahmeyer International, 1990, Nam NgumOperations Study, prepared for AsianDevelopment Bank, Vientiane.

Lamb D, Gilmour D, 2000, A Succinct Over-view of the Issues from the ScientificSessions as a Basis for Interfacing withPolicy, paper presented at UNESCOSymposium on Forest-Water-People inthe Humid Tropics, Bangi, Malaysia, 30July-4 August.

Lane J, 1999, Assessment of Water SupplyOptions, Contributing Paper for WCDThematic Review IV.3 Water SupplyOptions.

Lang C, Hildyard N, Geary K, Grainger M,2000, Dams Incorporated: The Record ofTwelve European Dam Building Compa-nies: A Report by Corner House, Stur-minster Newton, UK, Swedish Societyfor Nature Conservation, WCDSubmission eco041.

Larinier M, 2000, Dams and Fish Migration,Contributing Paper for WCD ThematicReview II.1 Ecosystems.

Laxman MK, 1999, ‘Testing the Risks andReconstruction Model on India’sResettlement Experience’, in CerneaMM (ed), The Economics of Involun-tary Resettlement: Questions andChallenges, Washington DC, WorldBank.

Annex I


Lecornu J, 1998, Dams and Water Management,Report of the Secretary General,International Commission on LargeDams to the Conference InternationaleEau et Developpement Durable, 19-21March, Paris, France, at http://genepi.louis-jean.com/cigb/article-barrages-an.html.

Ligon FK, Dietrich WE, Trush WJ, 1995,‘Downstream Ecological Effects ofDams’, in Bioscience, Vol 45: 183-192.

Lovgren L, 1999, Moratorium in Sweden: AnAccount of the Dams Debate, WCDSubmission env136.

Lovei L, McKechnie A, 2000, ‘The Costs ofCorruption for the Poor - the EnergySector’, in Public Policy for the PrivateSector, June, No. 21: 34-42.

Lowe-McConnell RH, 1985, ‘The Biology ofthe River Systems with ParticularReference to the Fish’, in Grove AT(ed), The Niger and its Neighbours:Environment, History and Hydrobiology,Human Use and Health Hazards of theMajor West African Rivers, Rotterdam,Balkema.

Lu Y, 2000, Three Gorges Project: A ProjectImproving Ecological Environment of theYangtze, papers for the Beijing 2000Congress of ICOLD, draft.

MacDonald A, McInally GA, 1998, “Reser-voirs and Flood Control: A NorthernPerspective”, in Tedd P (ed), TheProspect for Reservoirs in the 21st

Century, proceedings of the tenthconference of the British DamsSociety, University of Wales, Bangor,9-12 September, London, ThomasTelford Publishing.

Macoun A, Horta K, Tricario A, 2000, BriefReport from Meeting Between AndrewMacoun, the World Bank Task Manageron Lesotho Highlands Project with KorinaHorta, EDF and Antonio Tricario ofReform the World, June.

Mahmood K, 1987, Reservoir Sedimentation –Impact, Extent, and Mitigation, WorldBank Technical Paper No 71, Washing-ton DC, World Bank.

Maltby E, 1986, Waterlogged Wealth, London,Earthscan.

Mander H, Hemadri R, Nagraj V, 1999, Displace-ment, Policy and Law in India, Contribut-ing Paper for WCD Thematic Review I.3Displacement.

Manibeli Declaration, 1994, Call for a Moratori-um on World Bank Funding of Large Dams,annexed in McCully P, 1996, SilencedRivers: The Ecology and Politics of LargeDams, London, Zed Books.

Maybury-Lewis D, 1997, Indigenous People,Ethnic Groups and the State, Allen andBacon.

Mburugu E, 1994, ‘Dislocation of SettledCommunities in the DevelopmentProcess: The case of Kiambere Hydroe-lectric Project’, in Cook CC (ed),Involuntary Resettlement in Africa, TheWorld Bank Technical Paper Number227, Washington DC, World Bank.

McCully P, 1996, Silenced Rivers: The Ecology andPolitics of Large Dams, London, ZedBooks.

McCully P, 1997a, A Critique of “The WorldBank’s Experience with Large Dams: APreliminary Review of Impacts,” Berkeley,International Rivers Network.

McCully P, 1997b, ‘Taking Down Bad Dams’, inWorld Rivers Review, Vol. 12, No. 4,August.

McCully P, 1999, Cost and Time Overruns forDam Projects, WCD Submission eco061.

McDowell C (ed), undated, Resisting Impoverish-ment, Oxford, Berghahn Books forRefugee Studies Programme, Universityof Oxford.

McIntosh AC, Yñiguez CE, (eds)1997, SecondWater Utilities Data Book: Asia and PacificRegion, Manila, Asian DevelopmentBank.

335

Bibliography


Mehta L, and Srinivasan B, 1999, BalancingPains and Gains. A Perspective Paper onGender and Large Dams, ContributingPaper for WCD Thematic Review I.1Social Impacts.

Meinzen-Dick R, 1997, ‘Valuing theMultiple Uses of Irrigation Water’, inKay M, Franks T, Smith L (eds),Water: Economics, Management andDemand, Proceedings of the 18th

European Regional Conference,Oxford, September, InternationalCommission on Irrigation andDrainage.

Milewski J, Egre D, Roquet V, 1999, Dams andBenefit Sharing, Montreal, Hydro-Quebec, Direction Environment, WCDSubmission soc196.

Ministry of Construction, Japan, 1999, JapanDam Almanac, Tokyo, Ministry ofConstruction.

Ministry of Water Resources and ElectricPower, PRC, 1987, People’s Republic ofChina, Irrigation and Drainage in China,Beijing, China Water Resources andElectric Power Press.

Mitchell TE, 1995, ‘Report on Canal LiningsUsed by the Bureau of Reclamation’, inProceedings of the Workshop on CanalLining and Seepage, October 1993,Lahore, Pakistan, UK, HR Wallingford.

Mncina J, Ginindza N, 1999, ‘Swaziland:Community Participation in theConstruction of the Maguga Dam’,Ekuvinjelweni ResettlementCommittee Maguga Dam, in Stott N,Sack K, Greeff L (eds), 2000, OnceThere Was A Community, SouthernAfrican Hearings For CommunitiesAffected By Large Dams,Environmental Monitoring Group.

Molden D, Sakthivadivel R, Perry CJ, deFrainture C, Kloezen WH, 1998,Indicators for Comparing Performance ofIrrigated Agricultural Systems, Research

Report No. 20, Colombo, InternationalWater Management Institute.

Moore D, Sklar L, 1998, ‘Reforming theWorld Bank’s Lending for Water’,WCD Submission eco048 in Fox JA,Brown LD (eds), The Struggle forAccountability: The World Bank, NGOs,and Grassroots Movements, Cambridge,Massachusetts, MIT Press.

Morse B, Berger T, 1992, Sardar Sarovar: TheReport of the Independent Review,Ottawa, Resource FuturesInternational Inc.

Mungomba L, Chandiwana S, Madsen H,1993, ‘Schistosomiasis AroundSiavonga on the Shores of Lake Kariba,Zambia’, in Annals of Tropical Medicineand Parasitology, Vol. 87, No.4.

Mung’ong’o C, 1997, ‘Pangani Dam Versus thePeople,’ in Usher AD (ed), Dams asAid: A Political Anatomy of NordicDevelopment Thinking, London,Routledge, WCD Submission eco026.

Murray-Rust DH, Vander Velde EJ, 1994,‘Changes in Hydraulic Performanceand Comparative Costs of Lining andDesilting of Secondary Canals in Punjab,Pakistan’, in Irrigation and DrainageSystems, Vol. 8, Issue 3:137-158.

Nachtnebel HP, 2000, ‘From Hainburg toFreudenau: An Austrian ExperienceWith Seeking Solutions With PublicParticipation’, in Gayer J (ed)Participatory Processes in WaterManagement (PPWM), Proceedings ofthe Satellite Conference to the WorldConference on Science (Budapest,Hungary 28-30 June 1999), UNESCO/IHP-V Technical Documents inHydrology No. 30, Paris: 105-117.

Nahmad S, 1999, The Impact of hydro-electricdams on Indigenous People, Chinantecos,Otomies, Huicholes: A Case Study fromMexico, WCD Regional ConsultationPaper.

Annex I


National Research Council, 1996, A New Erafor Irrigation, Washington DC, NationalAcademy Press.

NEA (Nepal Electricity Authority), 1997,Power System Simulation Model, Medi-um Hydropower Study Project, Nepal,Nepal Electricity Authority.

Niasse M, 1991, ‘Les Périmetres IrriguésVillageois Vieillissent Mal: Les paysansse désengagent-ils en même temps quela SAED?’, in Crousse M, Seck SM,Mathieu P (eds), La Vallée du FleuveSénégal, Evaluations et perspectives d’unedécennie d’aménagements (1980-1990),Paris, Karthala.

Niasse M, 1997, Réforme Foncière et Equité. LaLoi sur le Domaine National à l’épreuvedans les périmètres de la vallée du fleuveSénégal, Proceedings of the RegionalConference on Décentralisation etRéformes Foncières au Sahel, Djamena,Chad, CILSS/PADLOS, 28 July-1August.

Norpower, 1993, Nam Theun 1/2 HydropowerProject. Feasibility Study, Vol.3, Environ-mental Impact Assessment Report,May, cited in Usher AD, Ryder G,1997, ‘Vattenfall Abroad: Dammingthe Theun River’, in Usher AD (ed)Dams as Aid: A Political Anatomy ofNordic Development Thinking, London,Routledge, WCD Submission eco026.

Norr L, Fraught M, 2000, ‘Archaeological SiteLocation and Assessment on LakeAlajuela, Panama’, in Brandt S, HassanF (eds) Dams and Cultural HeritageManagement, Newcastle-upon-Tyne,World Archaeological Congress, WCDWorking Paper.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), 2000a,Development Assistance CommitteeInternational Development Statistics: On-line Databases, Paris, DevelopmentAssistance Committee, Organisation

for Economic Co-operation andDevelopment, http://www.oecd.org/dac/htm/online.htm.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), 2000b,Report by the CIME: Implementation ofthe Convention on Bribery in Internation-al Business Transactions and the 1997Revised Recommendations, Council atMinisterial Level, 26-27 June, Paris,Organisation for Economic Co-opera-tion and Development.

OECD, 2000c, OECD Outline: Anti-Corrup-tion Unit, website http://www.oecd.org/daf/nocorruption/index.htm, viewed 4September 2000.

OED (Operations Evaluation Department),1990, Annual Review of EvaluationResults: 1989, Washington DC,World Bank.

OED, 1992, Water Supply and SanitationProjects: The Bank’s Experience: 1967-1989, Washington DC, World Bank.

OED, 1993, Early Experiences with InvoluntaryResettlement, Washington DC, WorldBank.

OED, 1996a, The World Bank’s Experience withLarge Dams: A Preliminary Review ofImpacts, Washington DC, World Bank.

OED, 1996b, The World Bank’s Experience withLarge Dams: A Preliminary Review ofImpacts: Profiles of Large Dams, back-ground document, Washington DC,World Bank.

OED, 1998, Recent Experience With InvoluntaryResettlement. Overview, Report No.17538, Washington DC, World Bank.

Opaso C, GABB - Action Group for Bio Bio,Chile, 1999, The Bio Bio project: ALesson Not Fully Learned, WCDRegional Consultation Paper.

Ota SB, 2000, ‘Cultural Heritage ManagementVis-à-vis Dams: The Narmada Issue’, inBrandt S, Hassan F (eds) Dams andCultural Heritage Management, Newcas-

337

Bibliography


Postel S, 1999, Pillar of Sand: Can the IrrigationMiracle Last?, New York, WW Norton& Co.

Preston G, 1999, Example of Demand Manage-ment from South Africa, ContributingPaper for WCD Thematic Review IV.3Water Supply Options.

Prinz D, et al, 1998, Rainwater Harvesting forDry Land Agriculture - Developing aMethodology Based on Remote Sensingand GIS, Proceedings, XIII Internation-al Congress Agricultural Engineering,Rabat, Morocco, 2-6 February.

Prinz D, Singh AK, 1999, Potential for Im-provements of Water Harvesting, Con-tributing Paper for WCD ThematicReview IV.2 Irrigation Options.

Pritchard S, 1998a, ‘The InternationalCovenant on Civil and Political Rightsand Indigenous Peoples’, in Pritchard S(ed), Indigenous Peoples, the UnitedNations and Human Rights, London, ZedBooks.

Pritchard S, 1998b, Setting InternationalStandards: An Analysis of the UnitedNations Draft Declaration on the Rights ofIndigenous Peoples, 2nd edition, Aborigi-nal and Torres Strait IslanderCommission.

Ramsar Convention Database, 1999, main-tained by Wetlands International,Gland, Switzerland. http://www.wetlands.agro.nl/ramsar_database/ramsar_quick.html

Raskin P, Hansen E, Margolis R, 1995, Waterand Sustainability: A Global Outlook,Stockholm, Stockholm EnvironmentalInstitute.

Raskin P, Gallapin G, Gutman P, HammondA, Swart R, 1998, Bending the Curve:Toward Global Sustainability, GlobalScenario Group, Stockholm, Stock-holm Environment Institute.

Reinicke WF, Deng F, 2000, Critical Choices:The United Nations, Networks and

tle-upon-Tyne, World ArchaeologicalCongress, WCD Working Paper.

Oud B, 2000, Lahmeyer International, ‘Opera-tion of Nam Ngum during 1995 Flood’,personal communication with authors,2 June.

Oud E, Muir TC, 1997, ‘Engineering andEconomic Aspects of Planning, Design,Construction and Operation of LargeDam Projects’, in Dorsey T (ed), LargeDams: Learning from the Past, Looking atthe Future, Gland, Switzerland, IUCN

Panama Canal Office of Public Affairs,(undated), ‘Growing Participation ofPanamanians’, in The Panama CanalCommission, Balboa Heights, Republicof Panama.

Parasuraman S, 1999, The DevelopmentDilemma: Displacement in India, Lon-don, MacMillan.

Pearce D, 2000, Professor, Department ofEconomics, University College Lon-don, personal communication withauthors, 16 March.

Pillay P, 1999, ‘Water Project’s Former CEO inCourt’, Business Day, Johannesburg’ 30November.

Pinstrup-Anderson P, Pandya-Lorch R,Rosegrant MW, 1997, The World FoodSituation – Recent Developments,Emerging Issues, and Long-Term Pros-pects, Food Policy Statement Number26, Washington DC, InternationalFood Policy Research Institute.

Politis G, Endere ML, 2000, ‘ArchaeologicalHeritage Management and Dams inArgentina: A Brief Review of theCurrent Situation,’ in Brandt S, HassanF (eds), Dams and Cultural HeritageManagement, Newcastle-upon-Tyne,World Archaeological Congress, WCDWorking Paper.

Postel, 1998, ‘Water for Food Production: Willthere be enough on 2025?’ in Bio-Science, August.

Annex I


Future of Global Governance, Interna-tional Development Research Centre,Canada.

Revenga C, Murray J, Abramowitz J, Ham-mond A, 1998, Watersheds of the World:Ecological Value and Vulnerability,Washington DC, The World ResourcesInstitute and Worldwatch Institute.

Revenga C, Brunner J, Henninger N, KassemK, Payne R, 2000, Pilot Analysis ofGlobal Ecosystems: Freshwater Systems,Washington DC, World ResourcesInstitute.

Ringler C, Rosegrant MW, Paisner MS, 1999,Irrigation and Water Resources in LatinAmerica and the Caribbean: Challengesand Strategies, Report prepared for theInter-American Development Bank,Washington DC, International FoodPolicy Research Institute.

Robinson B, 2000, Chairman, EnvironmentalProtection Authority, Victoria, Aus-tralia, personal communication withauthors, July.

Robinson S, 1999, Displacement, Resettlement,Rehabilitation, Reparation and Develop-ment, The Mexico Case, Contributingpaper for WCD Thematic Review I.3Displacement.

Roo, H, 2000, Benefits and Concerns AboutDams, General Report on the Papers forQuestion 77, 20th ICOLD Congress,Beijing, September.

Rosa LP, Matvienko B, Santos MA, Sikar E,1999, Relatório Eletrobrás/FundaçãoCoppetec - Inventário das Emissões de Gasesde Efeito Estufa Derivadas de Hidrelétricas,COPPE Report to Eletrobras.

Rosegrant MW, Hazell PBR, 1999, TheTransformation of the Rural Economy.Rural Asia Transformed: The QuietRevolution, Theme Paper No. 1 for theAsian Development Bank, WashingtonDC, International Food Policy Re-search Institute.

Rumsey P, Flanigan T, 1995, Compendium ofAsian Energy Efficiency Success Stories,Washington, DC, InternationalInstitute for Energy Conservation.

SANDRP, 1999, Assessment of Water SupplyOptions for Urban India - Large Damshave No Case, WCD Submissionopt080.

Sant G, Dixit S, Wagle S, 1998, Reassessing theRole of Large Dams in Meeting PowerDemand, Pune, India, PRAYAS EnergyGroup, WCD Submission eco013.

Saxena NC, 2000, ‘Presentation to the PrimeMinister of India from the Secretary,Planning Commission’, personalcommunication to the authors, 18 July.

Schildgen B, 1999, ‘Unnatural Disasters’, inSierra, May/June: 49-57.

Schmid RE, 2000, ‘Americans Urged to BeAware of Dams’, Associated Press, 6June, http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20000606/us/dangerous_dams_1.html.

Schnitter NJ, 1994, A History of Dams: TheUseful Pyramids, Oregon, BooksNews Inc.

Scudder T, 2000, Dialogue Note with WCDCommissioners on the Multiplier Effects ofIrrigation Schemes, August.

Scudder T, 1997a, ‘Social Impacts’, in BiswasAK (ed), Water Resources: Environmen-tal Planning, Management and Develop-ment, New York, McGraw Hill.

Scudder T, 1997b, ‘Resettlement’, in BiswasAK (ed), Water Resources: Environmen-tal Planning, Management and Develop-ment, New York, McGraw Hill.

Scudder T, 1997c, ‘Social Impacts of LargeDams’, in Dorsey T (ed), Large Dams:Learning from the Past, Looking at theFuture, Gland, Switzerland, IUCN.

Seckler D, 1996, The New Era of WaterResources Management: From ‘Dry’ to‘Wet’ Water Savings, Research Report 1,Colombo, International IrrigationManagement Institute.

339

Bibliography


Seckler D, Molden D, Barker R, 1998, WaterScarcity in the Twenty-first Century,IWMI Water Brief 1, Colombo,International Water ManagementInstitute.

Seckler D, Amarasinghe U, Mollen D, deSilva R, Barker R, 1998, World WaterDemand and Supply, 1990 to 2025:Scenarios and Issues, Research Report19, Colombo, International WaterManagement Institute.

Sen A, 1999, Development As Freedom,Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Shalaby A, 1999, Egypt’s Experience in Manag-ing the Nile River System, WCD Region-al Consultation Paper.

Shevah Y, 1999, Irrigation and AgricultureExperience and Options in Israel, Con-tributing Paper for WCD ThematicReview IV.2 Irrigation Options

Shiklomanov IA, 1998, Assessment of WaterResources and Water Availability in theWorld. Report for the ComprehensiveAssessment of the Freshwater Resources ofthe World, Stockholm, StockholmEnvironment Institute.

Silva Orrego JP, 1997, ‘In Defence of theBiobio River’, in Usher DA (ed) Damsas Aid: A Political Anatomy of NordicDevelopment Thinking, Routledge,London, WCD Submission eco026.

Sinha R, 1998, The Bargi Experience: LessonsLearned the Hard Way, WCD Submis-sion soc009

Sklar L, McCully P, 1994, Damming the Rivers:The World Bank’s Lending for LargeDams, Working Paper 5, Berkeley,International Rivers Network, WCDSubmission eco029.

Sluiter L, 1992, Mekong Currency, Bangkok,Project for Ecological Recovery/TERRA.

Smith DA, 1996, Proceedings of the Institutionof Civil Engineers of Ireland, November1996.

Smith L, 2000, Options in Agricultural Policy,Contributing Paper for WCD ThematicReview IV.2 Irrigation Options.

Smith R, 1999, ‘Reduction in Useful Capacityof Maghreb Dams’, in ICID BritishSection - News and Views, No. 29,Winter: 13.

Soong KK, 2000, Empty Promises, DamnedLives, Coalition of concerned NGOs onBakun, Malayasia, WCD RegionalConsultation Paper.

Srettachau C, Nungren K, Olsson A, 2000,Social Impact of Rasi Salai Dam, WCDRegional Consultation Paper.

St Louis V, Kelly CA, Duchemin E, RuddEWM, Rosenberg DM, in press,‘Reservoir Surfaces as Sources ofGreenhouse Gases to the Atmosphere:a Global Estimate’, in BioScience.

Stanley DG, Warne AG, 1993, ‘Nile Delta:Recent Geological Evolution andHuman Impact’, in Science, No. 260:628-634.

Stapleton RM, 1996, ‘Deep Woods and ClearWater: What Price Sterling Forest?’, inLand and People, The Public Trust forPublic Land, Volume 8, Number 2, Fall

Stewart J, O’Connell K, Ciborski M, PacenzaM, 1996, A People Dammed: A Witnessfor Peace Publication, Witness for Peace.

Sunday Independent, 2000, ‘Bigger Fish in theDock in Lesotho Trial’, in SundayIndependent, South Africa, 11 June.

Supreme Court of India, 1999, Affidavit onResettlement and Rehabilitation by theGovernments of Gujarat, Maharashtraand Madhya Pradesh, unpublished,India.

Susskind L, Cruikshank J, 1989, Breaking TheImpasse: Consensual Approaches toResolving Public Disputes, BasicBooks.

Takeuchi K, Harada J, 1999, Operation,Monitoring and Rehabilitation of Dams/Reservoirs in Japan - Institutional Frame-work and Empirical Studies, Department

Annex I


of Civil and Environmental Engineer-ing, Yamanachi University, Japan.

Tamakloe MA, 1994, ‘Long-Term Impacts ofResettlement: The Akosombo DamExperience’, in Cook CC (ed), Involun-tary Resettlement in Africa, AfricaTechnical Department Series, Wash-ington DC, World Bank.

Tedd P (ed), 2000, Dams 2000, proceedings ofthe biennial conference of the BritishDams Society, University of Bath, 14-17 June, London, Thomas TelfordPublishing.

Tenant C, 1994, ‘Indigenous Peoples, Interna-tional Institutions, and the Interna-tional Legal Literature from 1945-1993’, in Human Rights Quarterly Vol.16, No. 1:1-57.

Thakkar H, 1999, Assessment of IrrigationOptions in India, Contributing Paper toWCD Thematic IV.2 IrrigationOptions.

Tharme RE, 2000, International Trends in theDevelopment and Application of Environ-mental Flow Methodologies: A Review,Water Research Commission Technol-ogy Transfer Report, draft paper,Pretoria, Water Research Commission.

The Economist, 2000, ‘The Electric Revolu-tion’, 5 August 2000: 17-18.

Thomas S, 1998, ‘Columbia River and Salm-on: A Brief History’, in Salmon PassageNotes, US Army Corps of Engineers,North Pacific Division, Summer.

Townshend PD, 2000, ‘Towards Total Accept-ance of Fully Automated Gates’, inTedd P (ed), Dams 2000, proceedings ofthe biennial conference of the BritishDams Society, University of Bath, 14-17 June, London, Thomas TelfordPublishing.

Udall L, 1998, ‘The World Bank and PublicAccountability. Has AnythingChanged?’, in Fox JA, Brown LD (eds)The Struggle for Accountability: The

World Bank, NGOs, and GrassrootsMovements, Cambridge, Massachusetts,MIT Press.

Udall L, 2000, Review of EnvironmentalGuidelines of Selected Export CreditAgencies, International Department ofFirst Nations Development Institute,Contributing Paper for WCD ThematicReview V.4 Regulation.

Umaña A, (ed) 1998, The World Bank Inspec-tion Panel: The First Four Years (1994-1998). Washington DC, The WorldBank.

UN (United Nations), 1947, UniversalDeclaration on Human Rights, New York,United Nations.

UN, 1986, Declaration on the Right to Develop-ment, New York, United Nations.

UN, 1998, World Urbanization Prospects, The1996 Revision, Estimates and Projectionsof Urban and Rural Populations and ofUrban Agglomerations, New York,United Nations Population Division.

UN, 1999, World Population Prospects, The1998 Revision, Volume 1, Comprehen-sive Tables, New York, United Nations.

UNCED (United Nations Conference onEnvironment and Development), 1992,Agenda 21, The Rio Declaration onEnvironment and Development, UnitedNations Conference on Environmentand Development, Rio de Janerio,Brazil, 3-14 June.

UNDP (United Nations DevelopmentProgram), 1998, Human DevelopmentReport 1998, New York and Oxford,Oxford University Press.

UNDP, 1999, Human Development Report1999, New York and Oxford, OxfordUniversity Press.

UNDP, 2000, Human Development Report2000, New York and Oxford, OxfordUniversity Press.

UNDP, United Nations Department ofEconomic and Social Affairs, and

341

Bibliography


World Energy Council, 2000, WorldEnergy Assessment Report, New York,United Nations Development Program.

UNEP (United Nations EnvironmentProgram), 1999, Global EnvironmentOutlook 2000, Nairobi, United NationsEnvironment Program.

US Bureau of Reclamation, 2000a, Here’s aWarm Thought: Temperature ControlModifications at Glen Canyon Dam,http://www.usbr.gov/amp/wr/gctc_feature.html, viewed 7 July 2000.

US Bureau of Reclamation, 2000b, DailyVariations in the Water Discharge of theColorado River at Lee’s Ferry-HourlyFluctuations in Streamflow (cubic feet persecond) During September 1982 - dataobtained from US Bureau ofReclamation, Upper Colorado Region,February.

US Geological Survey, 2000, Real Time WaterData, web page, http://water.usgs.gov/realtime.html, viewed March 2000.

USACE (US Army Corps of Engineers),2000, National Inventory of Dams, http://crunch.tec.army.mil/nid/webpages/nid.cfm

Usher AD, 1997a, ‘Pangani Power Struggle:Nordic Dam Builders on a TanzanianRiver,’ in Usher AD (ed), Dams as Aid:A Political Anatomy of NordicDevelopment Thinking, London,Routledge, WCD Submission eco026.

Usher AD, (ed) 1997b, Dams as Aid: APolitical Anatomy of Nordic DevelopmentThinking, London, Routledge, WCDSubmission eco026.

Usher AD, Ryder, G, 1997, ‘VattenfallAbroad: Damming the Theun River’,in Usher AD (ed), Dams as Aid: APolitical Anatomy of Nordic DevelopmentThinking, London, Routledge, WCDSubmission eco026.

Van Hofwegen P and Svendsen M, 2000, AVision of Water for Food and Rural

Development, Delft, Institute forHydraulic Studies (IHE), draft.

Van Koppen B, 1999, More Crops and Jobs perdrop. Managing Water for GenderedPoverty Alleviation and AgriculturalGrowth, Colombo, International WaterManagement Institute.

Van Wicklin III WA, 1999, Sharing Benefits forImproving Resettlers’ Livelihood,Washington DC, World Bank, WCDSubmission soc184.

Vander Velde EJ, Tirmizi J, 1999, IrrigationPolicy Reforms in Pakistan: Who’s Gettingthe Process Right?, InternationalResearchers Conference onParticipatory Irrigation Management,Hyderabad, Administrative StaffCollege of India.

Vermillion DL, 1997, Impacts of IrrigationManagement Transfer: A Review of theEvidence, Research Report No. 11,Colombo, International WaterManagement Institute.

Verocai I, 1999, Environmental and SocialImpact Assessment for Large Dams -Thematic Review from the Viewpoint ofDeveloping Countries, ContributingPaper for WCD Thematic Review V.2Environmental and Social Assessment.

Walker KF, 1979, ‘Regulated Streams inAustralia: the Murray-Darling RiverSystem’, in Ward JV, Stanford JA (eds)The Ecology of Regulated Streams, NewYork, Pelnum Press.

Wang J, (ed) no date, ComprehensiveDictionary of The Yangtze River(Changjiang Dacidian), Wuhan, WuhanPublishing House.

Wapenhans Task Force, 1992, EffectiveImplementation: Key to DevelopmentImpact, Report of the World Bank’sPortfolio Management Task Force,Washington DC, World Bank.

Welcomme RL, 1976, ‘Some General andTheoretical Considerations on the Fish

Annex I


Yield of African Rivers’, in Journal ofFisheries Biology, Vol.8: 351-364.

Wescoat J, Halvorsen S, 2000, Ex PostEvaluations of Dams and Related WaterProjects: Patterns, Problems andPotential, Boulder, Colorado, Universityof Colorado at Boulder, ContributingPaper for WCD Thematic Review IV.5Operations.

White S, Dupont P, Robinson D, 1999,International Report- DemandManagement, Report to the 1999International Water ServicesAssociation Conference, Sydney,Institute for Sustainable Futures, WCDSubmission eco018.

Whittington D, Lauria DT, Mu X, 1991, ‘AStudy of Water Vending andWillingness to Pay for Water inOnitsha, Nigeria’, in WorldDevelopment, Vol. 9, No. 2/3: 179-198.

WHO, 1999, Human Health and Dams,prepared by Birley M, Bos R, Diop M,Jobin W, Unnikrishnan P, Geneva,WCD Working Paper.

Wiehen M, 1999, The Integrity Pact (TI-IP):The Concept, the Model and the PresentApplications: A Status Report As ofNovember 1, 1999, TransparencyInternational, http://www.transparency.de/activities/ip_status-report.html.

Wolf A, 2000, Development of TransboundaryWaters: Obstacles and Opportunities,Department of Geosciences, OregonState University, Contributing Paperfor WCD Thematic Review V.3 RiverBasins.

Wolf A, Natharius J, Danielson J, Ward B,Pender J, 1999, ‘International RiverBasins of the World’, in InternationalJournal of Water Resources Development,Vol. 15, No. 4:387-427.

Wong T, 1994, ‘Determining O&M CostsOver the Life of a Hydro Station’, in

Hydro in the 90’s, Kansas City, HydroReview Worldwide.

World Bank, 1973, Staff Appraisal Report:Ceyhan Aslantas Multipurpose Project,Report No. 16a-TU, Washington DC,World Bank.

World Bank, 1980, Operational ManualStatement: Economic Analysis of Projects,No. 2.21, issued May, Washington DC,World Bank.

World Bank, 1985, Project Completion Report:Ceyhan Aslantas Multipurpose Project,Report No. 6756, Washington DC,World Bank.

World Bank, 1987, Project Performance AuditReport: Ceyhan Aslantas, Report No.6756, Washington DC, World Bank.

World Bank, 1991, Operational Directive 4.20on Indigenous Peoples, Washington DC,World Bank.

World Bank, 1993, Early Experience WithInvoluntary Resettlement: Impact,Evaluation, Change, Washington DC,World Bank.

World Bank, 1994, China: Xiaolangdi Resettle-ment Project, Report No. 12557,Washington D.C, World Bank.

World Bank, 1995, Staff Appraisal Report: GhaziBarotha Hydropower Project, Report No.14587, Washington DC, World Bank.

World Bank, 1996a, Resettlement and Develop-ment. The Bankwide Review of ProjectsInvolving Involuntary Resettlement.1986-1993, Paper No.032, Environ-ment Department Papers, WashingtonDC, The World Bank, EnvironmentDepartment.

World Bank, 1996b, World Bank BackgroundNote, Chixoy Hydroelectric Project,Guatemala, 27 September 1996,Washington DC, World Bank.

World Bank, 1997, Staff Appraisal Report:Pakistan National Drainage Project,Report No. 15310-PAK, WashingtonDC, World Bank.

343

Bibliography


World Bank, 1999a, World DevelopmentReport 1998/99: Knowledge forDevelopment, New York, OxfordUniversity Press.

World Bank, 1999b, Identifying Opportunitiesto Address Malaria ThroughInfrastructure Projects, WorkshopReport, June, Washington DC, WorldBank.

World Bank, 2000, World DevelopmentReport 2000/2001: Attacking Poverty,New York, Oxford University Press.

World Bank, ADB, FAO, UNDP, NGOWater Resources Group, 1996,Vietnam - Water Resources SectorReview, in cooperation with theInstitute of Water ResourcesPlanning, Vietnam, World Bank,Asian Development Bank.

World Bank Water Demand Research Team,1993, ‘The Demand for Water inRural Areas: Determinants and PolicyImplications’, in The World BankObserver, Vol. 8, No.1, January: 47-70.

World Commission on Water in the 21stCentury, 2000, A Water Secure World:Vision for Water, Life, and theEnvironment, Marseilles, World WaterCouncil.

Worrell E, 1999, Sustainable Energy Strate-gies: Materials for Decision Makers,working draft, UNDP.

WRI (World Resources Institute), UNEP,UNDP and World Bank, 1998, WorldResources 1998-99, A Guide to theGlobal Environment, World ResourcesInstitute, New York, Oxford UniversityPress.

WWF (World Wide Fund for Nature), 2000,Dams: Impacts on Life in River Ecosys-tems, prepared by Gujja B, HunzikerDO, Gland, Switzerland, WCD Sub-mission env230.

Yorkshire Water, 1997, Establishing the Eco-nomic Level of Leakage, Bradford, UK,Yorkshire Water Services Ltd, WCDSubmission eco082.

Young R, 2000, On the Limited EconomicBenefits of Dam and Reservoir Projects,Fort Collins, Colorado, Colorado StateUniversity, WCD Submission eco066.

Zhang L, 2000, China Social Impacts of LargeDams, Institute for Agricultural Eco-nomics, China, WCD RegionalConsultation Paper.

Zinke A, 1999, Dams and the Danube: Lessonsfrom Environmental Impacts, presenta-tion to WCD Forum, Prague, 25-26March.

Annex II


Annex II

Glossary

Active (or live) storage. Volume or cubiccapacity of a lake or reservoir between themaximum and minimum operating levels.

Adversely affected people. Populations whosuffer negative effects during water andenergy development interventions. In thecase of dam projects, this includes peoplewhose economic, social and cultural livesare negatively affected by constructionworks, impoundment, alteration of riverflows and any ecological consequences. Theterm includes displaced people, host com-munities, and downstream and upstreampopulations. It may also include groupsaffected by the construction of transmissionlines or the development of irrigationschemes, water transfer canals, sanctuaries,and so on.

Aquifer. An underground water-bearinglayer of permeable rock, sand or gravel thatis capable of yielding exploitable quantitiesof water.

Barrage (gate-structure dam). A structurebuilt across a river consisting of a series ofgates that when fully open allow the floodto pass without appreciably increasing thewater level upstream of the barrage, and thatwhen closed raise water levels upstream tofacilitate diversion of water to a canal forirrigation or to a powerhouse for the genera-tion of electricity.

Baseline assessment. The collection andanalysis of data that describe prevailing socialand environmental conditions and are used inthe design of project activities and as abenchmark for future monitoring studies.

Benefit sharing. Transfer of a share of thebenefits generated by a project, such as adam, to local communities or authorities.Mechanisms for benefit sharing includepreferential rates (for example, of electricitygenerated), revenue sharing or royalties, andequity sharing (through which local popula-tions or authorities own all or part of theproject).

Catchment. The area that drains into ariver system; in relation to a dam, the areaupstream from the dam from which thereservoir receives water. (The term ‘water-shed’ has been used in this document toconvey the same meaning.)

Civil society. Non-governmental organisa-tions, community based organisations,professional associations from all disciplinesand other sectors of society that are neithergovernment bodies nor the private sector.

Compensation measures. Alternativeresources (land, property or money) provid-ed to displaced people or others adverselyaffected by a project as mitigation for lossessuffered.

345

Glossary


Conjunctive water use. The co-ordinateduse of surface water and groundwaterresources.

Cropping intensity. The extent of land usein a year, which reflects the degree ofmultiple cropping. It is the ratio of the totalarea cropped per year to the irrigation com-mand area.

Cultural heritage. The cultural practices andresources of current populations (religions;languages; ideas; social; political and eco-nomic organisations) and their materialexpressions in the forms of sacred elementsof natural sites or artefacts and buildings;landscapes resulting from cultural practicesover historical and prehistoric times; andarchaeological resources; including artefacts,plant and animal remains associated withhuman activities, burial sites and architec-tural elements.

Dead storage. Storage below the lowestoutlet that cannot be released under normalconditions.

Decommissioning. Removing a dam fromservice and, where appropriate, physicallydismantling it.

Demand-side management. Reducing use ofwater or electricity by improving the effi-ciency of use by the transmission system orthe consumer, whether in the residential,industrial, commercial, agricultural orgovernment sector.

Developer. The organisation (private orpublic sector) responsible for promoting andimplementing a project, as distinct from thecontractor who constructs the project.

Discounting. The process of applying a rateof interest to cost and benefit flows that isused to find the equivalent value today ofsums receivable or payable in the future.

Displaced people. Communities required(often involuntarily) to abandon their

settlements (homes, agricultural land,commons, forests and so on) or suffering lossof livelihood due to construction of a dam,submergence of the reservoir area, down-stream impacts, building of dam-relatedinfrastructure such as roads, and so on.

Ecosystem. An interacting system formedby living organisms and their abiotic envi-ronment regulating itself to a certain degreeand explicitly includes the human socialsystem.

Environmental flow. The specific release ofwater from a dam to ensure the mainte-nance of downstream aquatic ecosystemsand key species. The flows may includeseasonal or annual flows and/or regular orirregular pulses to meet ecosystem needs.They may also be linked to livelihood needsof downstream affected people.

Environmental management system. Theprocesses by which an organisation identi-fies and assesses environmental problems,sets goals to address the problems, andmeasures and verifies progress in solving theproblems.

Ethnic minorities. Social groups with asocial and cultural identity distinct from thedominant society. They have been histori-cally disadvantaged; come from non-dominant sectors of society; have low social,economic and political status; and aredetermined to preserve, develop and trans-mit to future generations their ethnicidentity as the basis of their continuedexistence as people.

Export credit agency. A government agencythat helps finance the overseas sales of anation’s goods and services, generally byproviding guarantees of working capitalloans for exporters, guaranteeing the repay-ment of loans, or making loans to foreignpurchasers of the nation’s goods and servic-es. The agency may also provide creditinsurance that protects exporters against therisks of non-payment by foreign buyers forpolitical or commercial reasons.

Annex II


Externalities or External Impacts. Costsand benefits that are external to the finan-cial aspect of decision-making, and thus donot accrue to project developers and opera-tors.

Flood control. In relation to dams, theintention to reduce flood peaks in the riverand to minimise the impact of flood eventson human activities, including loss of life,social disruption, health impacts, andproperty and economic losses.

Flood management. A broad concept thatfocuses on reducing flood hazards through acombination of policy, institutional, regula-tory and project measures (such as replant-ing catchment areas), while recognising thatthey can never be fully controlled. Thistakes into account the beneficial uses ofnatural floods, which are more difficult toquantify in human and economic terms butwhich sustain natural systems that also haveeconomic, social, cultural and ecosystemvalues and functions.

Greenhouse gases. Gases that accumulatein Earth’s atmosphere and trap heat. Someare naturally occurring gases, like carbondioxide and methane; others are made byhumans, such as halocarbons.

Groundwater. Water that flows or seepsdownward and saturates oil or rock, is storedunderground and supplies springs and wells.The upper level of the saturated zone iscalled the water table. Generally, all subsur-face water, as distinct from surface water.

Impoundment. Body of water formed bycollecting water, as by dam.

Indigenous and tribal peoples. At itsbroadest, the adjective ‘indigenous’ isapplied to any person, community or beingthat has inhabited a particular region orplace prior to colonisation. However, theterm ‘indigenous peoples’ has gained curren-cy internationally to refer more specificallyto long-resident peoples, with strong cus-

tomary ties to their lands, who are dominat-ed by other elements of the national society.

Integrity pacts. Voluntary undertakingsrelated to the procurement of goods andservices that are used to reduce corruption,and that are of particular use in situationswhere regulatory systems and institutionalcapacity are weak, although they haveuniversal application. The concept was firstdeveloped by Transparency International.

Large dam. A dam with a height of 15m ormore from the foundation. If dams arebetween 5-15m high and have a reservoirvolume of more than 3 million m3, they arealso classified as large by the InternationalCommission on Large Dams. In this report,everything else is considered a small dam.

Life-cycle assessment. An options assess-ment procedure at the front end of theplanning cycle used in the energy sector tocompare ‘cradle-to-grave’ performance,environmental impacts, and market barriersand incentives for different demand andsupply options.

Main-stem. The main course of a river,characterised by its middle and lowerreaches.

Major dams. The World Atlas & IndustryGuide of the International Journal onHydropower & Dams defines a ‘major dam’as a project meeting one of the followingcriteria: dam height over 150 meters; damvolume over 15 million cubic meters;reservoir volume over 25 billion cubicmeters; installed capacity over 1 000 mega-watts.

Mitigation measures. The reduction ofpotentially significant adverse impacts.

Multi-criteria analysis. An analyticalprocess that uses a mix of qualitative andquantitative criteria to assess and compareoptions, which may be policies, programmesor projects.

347

Glossary


Multipliers. The amount by which equilib-rium output of the economy changes whenaggregate demand - as caused for example bythe expenditure by a development project -increases by one unit. As those receiving theinitial round of income generated are likelyto consume a portion of the additionalincome, this subsequent expenditure willlead to additional ripple effects of rounds ofincome and consumption through theeconomy. The net effect of these increasesin output is the multiplier effect of theinitial expenditure, measured as a propor-tion of the initial expenditure.

Multi-purpose dam. A dam that meets twoor more objectives (such as irrigation, floodcontrol, water supply, power generation,recreation, navigation or fish and wildlifeenhancement).

Performance bonds. Bonds supported byfinancial guarantees to provide a secureway of ensuring compliance with commit-ments and obligations. The bond is calledupon in part, or in full, to meet unfulfilledobligations and commitments or is repaidwhen commitments are met, either inwhole or in part, depending upon thecircumstances.

Precautionary approach. According to theRio Declaration on Environment andDevelopment, signed in 1992, where thereare threats of serious or irreversible damage,lack of full scientific certainty shall not beused as a reason for postponing cost-effec-tive measures to prevent environmentaldegradation.

Political Economy. Political economy is theanalysis and explanation of the ways inwhich governments affect the allocation ofscarce resources in society through theirlaws and policies as well as the ways inwhich the nature of the economic systemand the behaviour of people acting on theireconomic interests affects the form ofgovernment and the kinds of laws andpolicies that get made.

Recession agriculture. A system of agricul-ture that depends on the moisture of the soilas the flood recedes. Recession agriculturetakes place in the floodplain, which is thearea subject to seasonal flooding by theriver.

Rehabilitation. The physical or socialrestoration of an ecosystem or a communityafter a dam construction project has beencompleted, or the process of renovating afacility or system that has deteriorated andwhose performance is failing to meet theoriginal criteria and needs of the project.

Reservoir. Any natural or artificial holdingarea used to store, regulate or control water.

Reservoir drawdown. The extent to whichthe water level in the reservoir changes on adaily or seasonal basis due to release of waterfrom the reservoir for operations (such asirrigation or daily peaking for power genera-tion). Emergency drawdown may be forsafety reasons, or in anticipation of a majorflood event.

Resettlement. Physical relocation of peoplewhose homes, land or common propertyresources are affected by a development,such as dam building.

Retention. Temporary storage provided by adam. Even when a reservoir is full, theoutflow may be smaller than the inflow as aresult of the retention effect.

Riparian. Lying on or adjacent to a river orlake. Used to denote people, plants orwildlife living along the water’s edge.

Riparian State. Any State through which atransboundary river flows or forms part of itsboundary, or that includes part of thecatchment basin of a transboundary river.

River. Large stream that serves as thenatural drainage channel for a drainagebasin. In terms of transboundary rivers, the

Annex II


term relates equally to all types of watersthat are or might be affected by dams.

River basin. The area from which the riversystem under consideration naturallyreceives its drainage water; may encompass aseries of tributary rivers and their sub-basins.

Riverine. Features or habitats relating to,formed by, or lying within a river; livingalong the banks of a river.

Run-of-river dams. Dams that create anhydraulic head in the river to divert someportion of the river flows. They have nostorage reservoir or limited daily pondage. In-cluded in this category are weirs and barrages.

Surface water. Water that flows or lies onthe ground surface.

Tailwater. The water in the natural streamimmediately downstream from a dam.Applied irrigation water that runs off thelower end of a field.

Water table. The level of groundwater; theboundary between ground that is saturatedwith water (the zone of saturation) andground that is unsaturated or filled withwater and air (the zone of aeration).

WCD Forum. A body with some 68members affiliated to the broad range of

stakeholders and interest groups involved inthe dams debate. The Forum is partlycomposed of members of the ReferenceGroup from the 1997 meeting in Gland thatrecommended the establishment of WCD. Italso has new members subsequently invitedto participate by WCD. The Forum is aconsultative body.

WCD Global Review. An assessment of theperformance and impacts of large dams andof alternatives for water resources andenergy development, based on the WCDKnowledge Base.

WCD Knowledge Base. Materialscommissioned, organised or accepted by theWCD to inform its work: in-depth CaseStudies of eight large dams on fourcontinents, together with two countryreview studies; a Cross-Check Survey oflarge dams located in 52 countries across theglobe; 17 Thematic Reviews grouped alongfive dimensions of the debate; four regionalconsultations; and 947 submissions frominterested individuals, groups andinstitutions. These materials are available atwww.dams.org.

Weir. A structure built across an openchannel to raise the upstream water level orto measure the flow of water. Weirs tend tobe smaller than barrages and are notgenerally gated.

349

The WCD Work Programme


This annex provides additional

details on the method used in

the WCD’s four main work pro-

gramme tasks. In response to its

mandate, the Commission began by

assembling a consolidated knowledge

base on the worldwide experience with

large dams. To give its analysis and

conclusions a solid foundation, it

commissioned, organised or accepted:

■ in-depth case studies of large dams in fivecontinents, together with two countrypapers;

■ a Cross-Check Survey targeted at 150 largedams in 56 countries;

■ 17 thematic reviews grouped along fivedimensions of the debate;

■ four regional consultations; and■ inputs submitted by interested individuals,

groups and institutions.

The work programme elements were mutuallyreinforcing. And there were different levels of

Annex III

The WCD Work Programme –Approach and Methodology

Annex III


analysis and review. For example, differenttypes and purposes for dams were assessed(at the basin, country and regional levels);different methods were employed to look atcross-cutting issues; different timeframeswere used to assess issues, including retro-spective and forward-looking perspectives;and, finally, different stakeholder groups andreview processes were involved. In terms ofparticipation, the case studies involvedinterested and affected stakeholder groupslooking at dams as a whole from a historicalperspective and in the context of a specificcountry or basin; the thematic studiesengaged review groups from all disciplines,regions and constituencies to look at past,present and future trends; the regionalconsultations included all constituencies ina debate of cross-cutting issues at a regionallevel. Finally, the WCD Forum provided theCommission with a multi-stakeholder,international-level review of the knowledgebase products as a whole, as they werefinalised. The following sections describethe main work programme elements in moredetail.

Case StudiesThe case studies were used primarily indeveloping the global review presented inPart 1 and addressed the question of devel-opment effectiveness. In all, the WCDproduced 11 sets of reports and papers in thecase study programme:■ seven full case studies of selected large

dams (five in developing countries –Brazil, Thailand, Pakistan, Turkey andZambia-Zimbabwe, and two in industrialones – the United States and Norway);

■ country-level review papers on theexperience with large dams in India andChina;

■ a pilot case study of two dams in SouthAfrica; and

■ a briefing paper on the Russian Federa-tion and the Newly Independent States.

Each case study had its own stakeholderreview process. A common framework wasused to identify the stakeholders to:

■ identify and set priorities for the studyteam’s coverage of the issues;

■ review the information and analysisprovided by the study team on these issues;and

■ consider the findings, conclusions andlessons drawn.

The Commission took a principled decision toemploy national teams of experts rather thanusing international consultants for the casestudies. While creating greater challenges interms of independence and neutrality itprovided the Commission with a deeperinsight into the political, historical andcultural contexts for water and energyresources management.

Purpose and selection of thecase studies

Given that there are nearly 45 000 large damsworldwide, the case studies were not meant tobe statistically representative. Case studies setout to provide an independent and in-depthreview of the performance and developmenteffectiveness of a number of large dams aroundthe world and to draw lessons from this review.For the WCD Case Studies, a focal dam wasstudied intensively in the context of its riverbasin. Other large dams in the basin wereexamined to assess and illustrate the interac-tive and cumulative effects of these dams withthe focal dam in areas such as storage and riverregulation, sediment impacts, fisheries im-pacts, operation practices and cumulativesocial impacts.The WCD took a broadapproach to the concept of ‘developmenteffectiveness’. This included the relevance andappropriateness of the dam as a response to theneeds that motivated its construction (such asirrigation, power, flood control, water supply,navigation or multi-purpose benefits) or othergoals such as using public infrastructure forregional development. The studies also lookedat projected versus actual benefits, at costs andimpacts, at the distribution of gains and lossesamong groups, and at the general conditionsunder which the dam was built and is nowoperated. The latter aspect includes decision-making and consultative processes, and the

351



ex-post validity of the key assumptions uponwhich the project was originally developed.The stakeholder processes formed around thestudy were the basis for considering develop-ment effectiveness from different perspectives,as it is clear there is no one view on this issue.

Selection process and criteria

The selection process started with theSecretariat, under the Commission’s direc-tion, compiling an initial list of possiblecountries, river basins and specific dams.This list was presented and discussed at theSecond Commission Meeting in CapeTown, in September 1998. A number ofcriteria guided the effort to refine the list ofcandidates. For example, because developingcountries have the largest number of exist-ing dams, and are currently most active indam building, the selection of case studies indeveloping countries was emphasised.

The Secretariat contacted a number ofgovernments and dam authorities to assessthe degree of co-operation the WCD couldexpect in implementing the programme.This co-operation was considered essentialto ensure adequate access for travel to thesite, field visits, interviews with project-affected families and data collection fromgovernment authorities and other institu-tions – and more broadly to maximisestakeholder involvement throughout theprocess. In parallel with the identification ofpotential dams and river basins for the workprogramme, the Secretariat initiated a pilotcase study of two dams on the Orange Riverin South Africa. The pilot study was done todevelop, pre-test and obtain wider consensusamong the WCD stakeholders on theapproach and method for the full case studyprogramme. Once the pilot methodologywas agreed on, terms of reference for thecase studies were developed in two stages:the first for the scoping phase, and thesecond for full implementation of thestudies.

In December 1998, at its third meeting, theCommission discussed a further short list ofcandidate dams. The Secretariat then pro-

ceeded to make formal contacts with govern-ments to enter into agreements to undertakethe scoping phase of an initial group of casestudies.

Diversity was the main criteria applied toselect case studies from across the list ofpotential countries, basins and dams. Thesecriteria generally included:■ regional diversity (with the intention of

covering all continents);■ functional diversity (to cover as broadly as

possible hydroelectric, irrigation, flood-control and multi-purpose dams);

■ age diversity (to capture experience fromdifferent decades and long-term impacts);

■ diversity in size and type (to differentiatebetween large and major dams, as well asbetween storage and run-of-river dams);and

■ diversity of the catchment area (tropical,sub-tropical and temperate zones, coveringa range of variables – climate, biodiversity,river morphology, sediment characteristicsand so on).

The start of the case studies was also influ-enced by budget considerations. Because theWCD was continuously fundraising, thebudget and consequently the number of casestudies was not finalised until mid-1999.

After the initial contacts with dam operatorsand governments, there were a number ofdevelopments. The Governments of Brazil,Pakistan, Thailand, Zambia, Zimbabwe,United States and Norway agreed to fullyparticipate in the case studies. In Brazil, theCommission decided to study the Tucuruíproject. The Governments of India and Chinaindicated initially that they were not preparedto participate in full case studies. Based on ameeting in Beijing in June 1999, China agreedto participate in a country-level review. Aftera change of institutional responsibilitieswithin the Ministry of Water Resources inChina, however, the government withdrewthe agreement to participate actively in thecountry review (October 1999). The WCDthen undertook an external review of dams inChina (January 2000). The Government of

Annex III


India, after meetings in New Delhi (June1999), declined full participation; it subse-quently agreed to co-operate fully with acountry review paper on dams in India (Febru-ary 2000).

Table III.1 lists the dams included in the pilotstudy and case studies, along with the year

seidutsesacdnatolipDCWnoatadcisaB1.IIIelbaT

madlacoF nisabreviR yrtnuocnisaB raeYdenoissimmoc

eeluoCdnarGabiraKalebraT

smaDruoF

satnalsAiurucuTnuMkaP

ydutstoliPfoolkrednaV/peiraG

aibmuloCizebmaZ

sudnInegaaL-ammolG

nahyeCsnitnacoT

nuM

reviRegnarO

setatSdetinUewbabmiZ/aibmaZ

natsikaPyawroN

yekruTlizarB

dnaliahT

acirfAhtuoS

149195918691

,5591,07910191dna2591

589168914991

1791

they were commissioned.

Case study method

The WCD established a stakeholder groupand an inter-disciplinary study team for eachcase study and country study. This involvedvarying degrees of negotiation before the studyteams and stakeholder groups were finalised.The selection of the study team and theidentification of the stakeholders was animportant aspect of the study to maximiseparticipation and acceptance of the processand the study results. The standard methodwas then followed for each case study, basedon the model developed by the WCD for theOrange River pilot. The main steps arerepresented in Figure III.1.

A scoping report and consultative meetingwith stakeholders launched each study. Thescoping phase required two to five months,depending on the study. The purpose of thisphase was to identify and set priorities for theissues and to discuss with stakeholders howthese would be covered within the studyframework provided by the WCD. After ascoping phase meeting with the stakeholdergroup, the study team was revised and theterms of reference for the full study werefinalised.

The study team then started parallel steps ofdata collection and verification, structuredinterviews, enquiries and invitation of submis-sions from interested parties.

After the data collection, field programmes,collection of inputs and analysis, the studyteam assembled a draft report. This wascirculated and discussed by the stakeholders ata second meeting. The study team incorporat-ed comments arising from the meeting andsubsequent written follow-up, and thenproduced the final report. This captured theexperience, lessons learned and the conver-gent and divergent views of the stakeholders.At times the process sparked considerablecontroversy and aspects of reports werecontested in some countries.

WCD requestsco-operation ofresponsible Ministry

WCD appoint localor regional consultant

WCD invitesstakeholders to firstconsultative meeting

WCD organises 1ststakeholder meeting

Project approved byWCD Commissioners

WCD supervisesactual Case Study

Draft Final Report

WCD organises 2ndstakeholder meeting

Final Report, andSummary Report forWCD Commissioners

Ministry agrees andnominates contactperson

Consultant preparesScoping Study

1st stakeholder meeting,discussion of procedure &content of Scoping Study

Local/regionalconsultant carries outCase Study

Draft Final Report sentto stakeholders

2nd stakeholder meeting,discussion of dataand conclusions

Procedure for Case Study

Figure III.1 Procedure for the WCD case studies

353



At the core of the case studies were sixquestions:■ What were the projected versus actual

benefits, costs and impacts?■ What were the unexpected benefits, costs

and impacts?■ What was the distribution of costs and

benefits – who gained and who lost?■ How were decisions made?■ Did the project comply with the criteria

and guidelines of the day?■ How would this project be viewed in

today’s context in terms of lessons learned?

The study response to these particular ques-tions, combined with additional views gath-ered through the questionnaires and discus-sions with stakeholders, were used to assessand illustrate the ‘development effectiveness’of the dam, and to draw out and establishpriorities on the lessons learned.

Media releases were provided for the stake-holder meetings, and at each stage the reportsand results circulated to the stakeholder groupwere placed on the WCD website for interna-tional comment.

Each report presents the lessons learned fromthe case study that the stakeholders and studyteams developed. These lessons were devel-oped in one- or two-day meetings withstakeholders, with sometimes 60-70 partici-pants. The Secretariat also undertook to briefstakeholders on the incorporation of theircomments in the final report. Where fullagreement with all stakeholders was notpossible, divergent views were also captured inthe report and written comments in the annexof the case study. The WCD website includesa list of lessons across the case studies alongwith the individual reports. The reader mayalso refer to the pilot study, which illustratesthe procedures for verifying and collectingopinions from stakeholders at the meetings.

Cross-Check SurveyThe WCD Cross-Check Survey provides alink between the topical issues emerging at aglobal and regional level as provided by the

submissions, consultations and thematicreviews and the more in-depth insightsderived from the WCD case studies. Thesurvey does not provide assessments of individ-ual dam projects nor does it aim to be statisti-cally representative of the nearly 45 000 largedams. Rather it was designed to indicatebroader patterns and trends.

A multi-stakeholder approach with inclu-siveness and participation at all levels andwith access to multiple information sourcesremained the key focus for the information-gathering process. As such, the Cross-Checkrepresents an international collaborativesurvey in which legitimacy, transparencyand integrity of data from contributors inmore than 50 countries was the overridingobjective.

Range of dams selected

The dams included in the Cross-Check Surveywere drawn from a number of sources, includ-ing WCD Case Studies, existing databases andadditional dams that contributed to theoverall diversity of the total sample. The mixof large dams that make up the Cross-CheckSurvey sample includes dams:■ from different regional locations;■ of differing ages – dating from the 1930s

through to the1990s;■ with a range of different heights and sizes;

and■ with different purposes such as water

supply, irrigation, flood management,power and recreation.

The survey sampling technique set out toconstruct a Cross-Check sample that wouldinform the dams debate and provide guidancefor similar studies in the future, within thecontext of the WCD Work Programme.Given the emphasis on the Case Studies inthe work programme, and the interest in‘cross-checking’ the result of these in-depthstudies against the wider experience in theselected river basins, the Case Study dams anda selection of other dams from the basinformed the first two strata in the sample.Inevitably, the selection of these two sub-samples involved some bias due to the criteria

Annex III


used in choosing the Case Study dams andfurther sampling from specific basins.

The remainder of the sample aimed toeliminate many aspects of this selection bias– that is, to correct for the over-representa-tion of specific attributes such as size,location, purpose and age. The third sub-sample aimed to build on dams from existingsurveys by selecting a sub-sample of thedams examined in the 1996 World Bankstudy of large dams. Specifically, dams werechosen to represent regions, countries andpurposes not reflected in the first two sub-samples. Representation of dams fromadditional countries was introduced byincorporating dams from WCD countrystudies of India, China and Russia into thefourth sub-sample.

The final step in the sampling process wasan attempt to correct for remaining differ-ences in representation of dams by location,age, size and purpose in the first four sub-samples as compared with the best availableinformation on the global population oflarge dams. To meet this requirement, theWCD used the ICOLD World Register toselect 73 complementary dams (this excludesChinese dams, as noted elsewhere). The fulldetails of the selection methodology andcriteria are found in the Cross-Check Report.

Table III.2 shows the change from theoriginal targeted sample to the final status of

the dams received for each sub-sample inthe Cross-Check Survey. Numerous chal-lenges were faced in applying a global surveyof this nature as part of a time-limitedprocess. Due to many factors (either contro-versy, denial of permission or logisticaldifficulties), information for some largedams was inaccessible. At the end of theprocess, contributions were received for over80% of the original sample. During theprocess, some dams were substituted toensure compliance with the original criteriafor the target sample. A number of addition-al contributions were received for dams notin the original targeted sample.

Of the total questionnaire submissionsreceived (125 selected dams and 9 addition-al dams), only the 125 originally selected aspart of the Cross-Check methodology wereconsidered for final analysis. Two of thesequestionnaires were excluded due to incom-plete information. The final analysis wastherefore performed on 123 questionnairesabout large dams.

Who provided the evidence?

The large dam projects analysed in theCross-Check span 52 countries in six majorregions of the world:■ Over 70 contributors were contracted,

consisting of 40% government depart-ments/utilities, 40% private consultants/companies and 20% NGO/academic/research institutions.

■ An additional 30 contributors werecommissioned to review a select sampleof 17 randomly chosen and 18 controver-sial projects for data verification. Theconstituencies chosen for review werepredominantly local NGOs, who provid-ed a second opinion on the governmentand private contributions.

Safety nets and dataconfidence

To ensure credibility and confidence in theCross-Check Survey, it was necessary toimplement a series of iterative steps and

esabataDyevruSkcehC-ssorC2.IIIelbaT)selpmas-bus(atartS detceleS

smaddetadpU

elpmassnoissimbuS

deviecer

smaDydutSesaC 31 31 31

ydutSesaCnismadlacof-noNsnisab

42 42 22

sesabatadgnitsixemorfsmaD 42 *32 12seidutsyrtnuoC 91 *9 9

smadyratnemelpmoC 37 37 06latotbuS 451 341 521

seriannoitseuqetelpmocnI 2desylanalatotlaniF 321

snoissimbuslanoitiddA – –elpmasehtmorfsmadesenihC11ehtfonoisulcxeoteudsegnahcrebmun*

355



‘safety nets’ to enhance the quality andquantity of submitted data. They consisted of:■ Range of Data Sources used by contribu-

tors, including interviews.■ Internal Review of all questionnaires,

requesting minimum threshold data andclarifications.

■ Review by WCD staff of in-house literatureon dams in the Survey.

■ External review of controversial andrandomly selected dams. Of the 50 target-ed, 31 reviews were received and analysed,with the following insights:■ Reviewers commented on approxi-

mately one third of the original data.■ Most reviews corroborated the original

data, with 20-40% contested figures(minimum 10% discrepancies).

■ Of the figures contested, the predom-inant focus covered discrepancies innumber of actual displaced peopleand, in a few instances, actual capitalcosts.

■ Transparency through sharing ‘raw’ datafrom submitted questionnaires on request.Around 50% of respondents gave permis-sion for independent review of the ques-tionnaires they submitted. A network ofcivil society organisations conducted ageneral review, supplementing and contest-ing information in this sub-sample.

The questionnaires

The main questionnaire for the Cross-CheckSurvey was developed, tested and revised bythe Commission based on its experience withthe Orange River Pilot Study in South Africa.Ten categories of questions covering a widerange of concerns – including questions abouttechnical, economic, social, environmentaland decision-making aspects – form the basisof the survey. It was necessary during theprocess to introduce a short supplementaryquestionnaire for completeness.

Data analysis

Information submitted in the original ques-tionnaires was stored in a relational database.

The WCD derived 32 indicators from theanalysis of the final dam sample to measureprojected versus actual performance parame-ters. The graphs and statistics required toanalyse these 32 indicators in the Cross-Check Survey were produced using theStatistica statistical software package. Formost of the 32 indicators programs werewritten to draw the required graphs andcalculate the appropriate statistics. This wasautomated to facilitate the smooth and fastproduction of the required results and toensure that the analysis could be easilyregenerated in the future.

The Cross-Check dams were classifiedaccording to the following 11 characteris-tics: region, sub-region, height, decadecommissioned, reservoir area, purpose, sub-samples, reach of river, climate, income andsub-income. (See Table III.3.) Each indica-tor was first analysed from a global perspec-tive – ie all valid observations and theoverall trend or pattern were identified.Then the observations were split betweenthe categories of the chosen set of 11specified characteristics, and the emergingtrends or patterns were compared between thevarious categories of the particular characteris-tic (see list of cross-classifications).

The analysis of the survey questionnaireshas been mostly graphical in conjunctionwith some simple statistics, regressionmodelling and clustering techniques used forhydropower energy output. For each of the32 indicators, different types of graphs andcorresponding statistics were prepared. Alldata was represented at the case level toascertain the distribution and variance.Trends and patterns were inferred from theprepared graphs in the Cross-Check Report.Where possible, appropriate scientific orother explanations were given to justifyemergence of particular trends or patterns.Key findings from 24 indicators were inter-preted and integrated into the performance,impacts and decision-making aspects of PartOne of this report.

All observations classified by Statistica asextremes or outliers were investigated. In

Annex III


elpmaskcehC-ssorCnismadfonoitacifissalc-ssorC3.IIIelbaTybnoitacifissalC semanyrogetaC rebmuN

smadfonoigeR adanaCdnasetatSdetinU 01

aciremAnitaL 71tsaEelddiM&acirfA 02

aisAlartneCdnaeporuE 43aisAfotseR 24

noiger-buS adanaC&setatSdetinU(aciremAhtroN)ylno

01

ocixeM&naebbiraC,aciremAlartneC 21aciremAhtuoS 5

acirfAhtroN&tsaEelddiM 5acirfAnarahaS-buS 51

aisAlartneCdnaeporuEnretsaE 9eporuEfotseR 52

cificaP&aisAtsaE 62aisAhtuoS 61

)m(madfothgieH m03–51 13m001–13 36

m101> 92mk(aerariovreseR 2) mkrqs1< 91

mkrqs01–1 52mkrqs001–01 04

mkrqs001> 93denoissimmocedaceD 0591< 3

95–0591 3196–0691 5297–0791 9398–0891 62

0991=> 71esopruP :esopruPelgniS

ylppuSretaWrewopordyH

noitagirrIlortnoCdoolF

rehtO

9533111

esoprupitluM 46selpmas-buS DEO 32

lacofnoN/ydutSnisaB 12

lacoF/ydutSnisaB 21ydutSyrtnuoC

rehtO 85revirfohcaeR reppU 05

elddiM 23rewoL 81

nwonknU 32etamilC etarepmeT 77

laciporT-buS/laciporT 64emocnI emocnIhgiH 64

emocnIelddiM 64

emocnIwoL 13emocni-buS DCEO 64

reppU-elddiM 22rewoL-elddiM 42

woL 13

most circumstances these observationsturned out to be valid in terms of theoriginal questionnaire submissions andhence legitimate extremes. Any spuriousdata points were corrected where possible.Where the validity of the extremes oroutliers was suspect and unsubstantiated, theobservations were removed from the analy-ses. This was only necessary in a few isolatedinstances.

These are not the only analyses that theWCD has done on the fully verified Cross-Check sample, but they illustrate the finalperformance, impact and decision-makingindicators that can be derived from the data.The WCD has also conducted bivariate andmultivariate analyses to highlight trends andpatterns for regional and other cross-classifications. They are reported in theWCD Cross-Check Report.

Thematic ReviewsThe WCD commissioned 17 thematicreviews and some 130 papers addressing fivemajor areas of concern identified in thestrategy and objectives paper:

■ social and distributional issues,■ environmental issues,■ economic and financial issues,■ options assessment and■ governance and institutional processes.

The thematic reviews provided the baselineinformation, analysis and recommendationson issues that cut across the central ele-ments in the large dams debate. The reviewsconsidered past and current experience, aswell as the forward-looking context, bysynthesising the state-of-the-art knowledge,practices and key viewpoints on each topic.Within limits set by available resources andthe Commission’s schedule, the level ofeffort involved in preparing these reviewpapers varied according to the complexity ofthe issue and the level of controversysurrounding it. Preparation of the reviewpapers included setting up panels andprocedures for broader peer review. This

357



helped to bring together a wide spectrum ofperspectives and approaches on the topicand to clarify the areas of potential agree-ment (and persistent disagreement) onhighly controversial issues. The thematicreview process is illustrated in Figure III.2.

Figure III.2: Thematic Review process

Consultations andSubmissionsFor most of its two-year mandate the WCDfollowed the old adage of being ‘quick tolisten, and slow to speak’. Rather than plant-

17 Themes grouped in 5 categories

(3)

Social anddistributional

issues

Environment(2)

Economics andfinancing

(2)

Options(2)

Institutional andgovernance

(5)

Revisions

Scoping papers reviewed by Commissionersdefine the terms of reference for the review

Process

Gathering information and perspectives for the Knowledge Base

Contracted Writers Submissions Papers from partnerorganisations

Workshops

Drafting thematic papers

Comments from:• External Review Panel

• Forum Members• Commissioners

17 final thematic paperswith recommendations to the Commission

Final papers and comments posted on web

Annex III


Economics7.92%

Case Studies3.09%

SocialIssues21.53%

OptionsAssessments17.20%

InstitutionalIssues

22.65%

EnvironmentalIssues

27.59%

Figure III.3 Topics in Submissions

ing its opinions before it had harvested itsresearch, the Commission canvassed viewsand knowledge on the costs and benefits ofdams from a vast array of stakeholders. Inaddition to its work programme studies, theWCD established global listening poststhrough its submissions programme and itsregional consultations. In addition to thesubmissions and the four regional consulta-tions, the Commission consulted withnumerous professional associations andprovided input for many non-WCD stake-holder events.

A full list of submissions and reports on theregional consultations is available atwww.dams.org.

Regional consultations

In total 1 400 individuals from 59 countriesattended the WCD regional consultationsheld for South Asia, East and South-EastAsia, Latin America, and Africa and theMiddle East. The meetings were carefullyorganised to ensure broad-based participa-tion by NGOs, governments, industries andutilities, irrigation interests, academics,financiers, and other interested parties. TheWCD also participated in two hearings

organised for itsbenefit by NGOs inSouthern Africa andEurope.

The consultationprocess began withthe choice of themesfor each meeting.The themes werebased on a broadrange of submissionsrequested through a‘Call’ announcedand mailed out to alarge list of dams’constituents some

months before the regional consultation.After selecting the themes, the Secretariatinvited presenters based on the relevance oftheir contribution to the WCD KnowledgeBase and the effort to achieve balancedregional representation.

The key issues that emerged through theconsultations were:■ participation and transparency in plan-

ning and decision-making on dams;■ displacement, resettlement and repara-

tion for those negatively affected bydams;

■ dams as a means to satisfy demands forfood, energy, drinking water and floodcontrol;

■ assessing the costs and benefits of alter-natives in providing irrigation, floodcontrol, electricity and water supply;

■ the importance of environmental sus-tainability;

■ regional/transboundary approaches tosharing water resources, as well asconflict resolution; and

■ methods of ensuring that those engagedin dam building comply with regulations,laws and policies.

SubmissionsBy September 2000, the WCD had received947 submissions from 79 countries. Of those,400 submissions were related to the regionalconsultations. All submissions were enteredinto a central database. They were cata-logued by subject along the lines of thethematic reviews: social, environmental,economic and institutional issues, andoptions assessment. The cataloguing systemallows sorting by issue, region and country.The submissions were reviewed by theSecretariat and, where relevant, were sharedwith lead writers and external reviewersinvolved in compiling the WCD CaseStudies, Thematic Reviews and the Cross-Check Survey.

359

Reports in the WCD Knowledge Base


Annex IV

Reports in the WCDKnowledge Base

The WCD Knowledge Base

served to inform the Commis-

sion on the main issues surrounding

dams and their alternatives, and com-

plemented the regional consultations,

where Commissioners heard firsthand

about relevant regional experience

from governments, members of civil

society and the private sector.

The reports listed in this Annex are availa-ble on the website at www.dams.org. Theywere used to synthesise and structure thewealth of knowledge that lies within theKnowledge Base, and to distill key issues,lessons learned and proposals for the future.They remain inputs to the Commissionrather than products of its deliberations andthus do not represent expressions of theCommission’s views and conclusions, whichare contained solely in this final report.

The Case Studies and Thematic Reviewswere contracted by WCD to lead authors,who were selected for their ability to respect

Annex IV


the Commission’s guiding principles ofprofessional expertise, independence,transparency and openness in synthesisinginformation and perspectives from thecontributing papers and the submissions. Allterms of reference, and final draft reports, werepeer-reviewed by local stakeholder groups (forthe Case Studies) or by review panels (for theThematic Reviews) composed of 8–10 peoplewith varying backgrounds, regions of originand perspectives. Working Papers weredeveloped with partner organisations toinclude perspectives on particular issues.

In total, 201 people commented on the draftThematic Reviews, and the lead writerswere asked to address their comments,

wherever possible, in the final report.Reviewers’ comments have been included asannexes to enable the reader to bettercomprehend the debate. Draft and finalreports for Case Studies and ThematicReviews were available on the WCDwebsite throughout the review process.

The Contributing Papers are listed for eachThematic Review, and the synthesis writersof the Reviews drew on them as appropriate.Some were solicited by WCD through keyinstitutional partners; others were directlycontracted to WCD terms of reference; andstill others were the result of initiatives bypartner organisations as direct contributions tothe WCD process and knowledge base.

Case Studies

Case Study Team LeadersGrand Coulee Dam, Columbia River Basin, United States Leonard Ortolano, Katherine Kao

CushingTarbela Dam, Indus River Basin, Pakistan Amir MuhammedAslantas Dam, Ceyhan River Basin, Turkey Refik ÇölasanKariba Dam, Zambezi River, Zambia/Zimbabwe Alois HungweTucurui Dam, Tocantins River, Brazil Emilio Lèbre La Rovere, Francisco

Eduardo MendesPak Mun Dam, Mun-Mekong River Basin, Thailand Songkram Grachangnetara et al.Glomma and Laagen Basin, Norway Jostein SkurdalOrange River (Pilot Study), South Africa WCD Secretariat

Country Studies

Country Study Team of WritersIndia R. Rangachari, Nirmal Sengupta,

Ramaswamy R. Iyer, Pranab Banerji,Shekhar Singh

China Ismail Najjar, Bill Smith, RichardFuggle, Habib Khoury, Sam Pillai,John Boyle

Briefing Paper

Briefing Paper Team of WritersRussia and Newly Independent States Lilia K. Malik, Nikolai I.

Koronkevich, Irina S. Zaitseva,Elena A. Barabanova

361



Thematic Reviews and Contributing Papers

I.1. Social impact of large dams: equity and distributional issues

Lead Writer William Adams

Contributing Paper WriterSocial Impacts of an African Dam: Equity andDistributional Issues in the Senegal River Valley. Adrian AdamsDownstream Impact of Dams. William AdamsDams and Benefit Sharing. A Submission fromHydro-Quebec. Dominique Egré, Joseph MilewskiAssessing the Project – Social Impacts and Large Dams. Hugh BrodyReport on the Social Impact of Dams: Distributional andEquity Issues – Latin American Region. Carmen FerradasSome Evidence on Overall Distributional and EquityImpacts. Pablo GutmanBalancing Pain and Gains – A Perspective Paper onGender and Large Dams. Lyla Mehta, Bina SrinivasanSocial Impacts of Large Dams: The China Case. Lubiao Zhang

I.2. Dams, indigenous people and vulnerable ethnic minorities

Lead Writer Marcus Colchester

Contributing Paper WriterDams, Indigenous People and Vulnerable EthnicMinorities: A Case Study on the Ibaloy People and theAgno River Basin, Province of Benguet, Philippines. Jaqueline CarinoThe Chixoy Dam in Guatemala: The Maya AchiGenocide. The Story of Forced Resettlement. Jaroslave ColajacomoA Case Study on the Proposed Epupa Hydro Power Damin Namibia. Andrew CorbettThe Resettlement of Indigenous People Affected by theBakun Hydro-Electric Project, Sarawak, Malaysia. GabunganLake Winnipeg Regulation Churchill-Nelson River DiversionProject and the Crees of Northern Manitoba, Canada. Luke HertleinLand Acquisition Act and Impact on Tribal Developmentin India. Manisha MarwahaOperationalisation of Free Prior Informed Consent. Lyla Mehta, Maria StankovitchDams and Tribal People in India. Amrita PatwardhanThe Alta-Case in Norway. A Story about How AnotherHydroelectric Dam-Project was Forced through in Norway. Ande Somby

Annex IV


I.3. Displacement, resettlement, rehabilitation, reparation anddevelopment

Lead Writers Leopoldo Bartolome, Chris deWet, Harsh Mander, Vijay Nagaraj

Contributing Paper WriterThe Experience with Dams and Resettlement in Leopoldo Bartolome,Argentina. Christine DanklmaierDisplacement, Resettlement, Rehabilitation, Repatriationand Development. African Experience. Chris de WetDisplacement, Resettlement, Rehabilitation, Repatriationand Development – China Report. Jun JingDisplacement, Policy and Law in India. Ravi Hemadre, Harsh Mander,

Vijay NagrajDisplacement, Resettlement, Rehabilitation, Repatriationand Development. The Mexican Case. Scott Robinson

II.1. Dams, ecosystem functions and environmental restoration

Lead Writers Mike Acreman, Ger Bergkamp,Patrick Dugan, Jeff McNeely

Contributing Paper WriterDams and Biological Diversity – Establishing StrategicLinkages under the Conventions. Asheline AppletonEcosystem Impacts of Large Dams. Mike Acreman, Matthew

McCartney, Caroline SullivanManaged Flood Releases from Reservoirs – Issues and Mike Acreman, Edward Barbier,Guidance. Martin Birley, Kenneth Campbell,

Frank Farquharson, NicholasHodgson, Jeremy Lazenby, MatthewMcCartney, John Morton, DavidSmith, Caroline Sullivan

Capacity and Information Base Requirements for EffectiveManagement of Fish Biodiversity, Fish Stocks and FisheriesThreatened or Affected by Dams during the Project Cycle. Garry BernacsekInternational Mechanisms for Avoiding, Mitigating andCompensating the Impacts of Large Dams on Aquatic andRelated Ecosystems and Species. John BizerDefinition and Implementation of Instream Flows. Cate Brown, Jackie King,

Rebecca TharmeInformation Needs for Appraisal and Monitoring ofEcosystem Impacts. Cate Brown, Jackie KingLarge Dams and Freshwater Fish Biodiversity. John CraigBiodiversity Impacts of Large Dams. John Craig, Nick Davidson, Don

McAllister, Dianne Murray, MarySeddon

Biodiversity Impacts of Large Dams: Waterbirds. Nick Davidson, Simon DelanyFundamental Legal and Ethical Principles in Adjudgingthe Merits of Development Projects. Charles DiLevaThe Influence of Dams on River Fisheries. Donald Jackson, Gerd Marmulla

363



Dams and Fish Migration. Michel LarinierA Review of Guidance and Criteria for ManagingReservoirs and Associated Riverine Environments toBenefit Fish and Fisheries. Steve MirandaMolluscan Biodiversity and the Impact on Large Dams. Mary SeddonReport on the Conference on Hydrological andGeochemical Processes in Large Scale River Basins,15–19 November, 1999, Manaus, Brazil. Leonard Sklar

II.2. Dams and global change

Lead Writers Nigel Arnell, Mike Hulme, LuizPinguelli Rosa, Marco Aureliodos Santos

Contributing Paper WriterAn Analysis of the Linkages between the UNFCCCLegal Regime and Dams. Albert Mumma

III.1. Economic, financial and distributional analysis

Lead Writers Alec Penman, Robert Unsworth

Contributing Paper WriterMethods for Valuation of Flood Control Benefits. Colin GreenResettlement Costs. Pablo GutmanDistributional Analysis. Pablo GutmanSurvey of Multilateral Bank Practice on Financial andEconomic Analysis of Large Dams. Anneli LagmanMethods for Valuation of Impact of Hydropower Projects. Anil MarkandyaReview Paper I - Review Paper on Financial, Economic, Michelle Manion, Bruceand Distributional Analysis . McKenney, Robert UnsworthExample of SAM Analysis in the Republic of South Africa. David MullinsMethodological Approach for the DistributionalEffectiveness of Large Dams. Kyra Naudascher-JankowskiReview Paper II - Financial, Economic andDistributional Analysis. Alec PenmanMethods for Valuation of Irrigation Benefits. Douglas Southgate

III.2. International trends in project financing

Lead Writer Per Ljung

Contributing Paper WriterDatabase Support. Lily DongeHydropower Dams. Chris HeadMultipurpose Dams. Chris HeadNote on Financial Instruments and Incentives. Michael KellyFinancing Statistics, Trends and Policies of InternationalFinancial Institutions. Hilary Sunman

Annex IV


IV.1. Electricity supply and demand management options

Lead Writers Maritess Cabrera, AntonEberhard, Michael Lazarus,Thierry Lefevre, Donal O’Leary,Chella Rajan

Contributing Paper WriterRenewable Options. Glynn MorrisMajor Trends in Energy Development. Donal O’LearyDemand Management. Roger PetersLife Cycle Analysis. Bjorn SvensonRural and Appropriate Energy. Rona WilkinsonSubmissions Contributing to the Thematic. International Cogenereration

Alliance, International HydropowerAssociation, International AtomicEnergy Association, American SolarEnergy Society, European WindEnergy Association, NationalHydrogen Association, GasResearch Institute

IV.2. Irrigation options

Lead Writer K. Sanmuganathan

Contributing Paper WriterPrivatisation of Infrastructure Hydraulic Work –Chilean Experience. Pablo Anguita SalasFuture Approaches towards Taking up Dam Projects. S. CharDeveloping Irrigation Options for Small Farmers. Keith FraustoSome Drainage Options. Alfred HeupermanOptions Assessment and the Planning System in theIBIS, Pakistan. Khalid HussainBiotechnology in Semi Arid Tropics. ICRISATContributions from the Latin American Experience. Hector MalettaPotential for Improvements of Water Harvesting. Dieter Prinz, Anupam SinghIrrigation and Agriculture Experience and Options in Israel. Yehuda ShevahOptions in Agricultural Policy. Laurence SmithAssessment of Irrigation Options in India. Himanshu Thakkar

IV.3. Water supply options

Lead Writers Colin Fenn, David Sutherland

Contributing Paper WriterWater Efficiency Case Studies from California. Mary Ann DickinsonContributions Relating to Rainwater Harvesting. John GouldSupporting Note. Allan LambertContributions on Community Based Systems. Jon LaneExample of Demand Management from South Africa. Guy PrestonSupporting Note. Philip Turner

365



IV.4. Flood control and management options

Lead Writer Colin Green

Contributing Paper WriterDraft ICOLD Bulletin on Dams and Floods. Luis BergaA Review of the Role of Dams in Flood Management (draft). Patrick HawkerWhy Multipurpose Dams Function in Japan. Minoru KurikiSupport to Lead Writer. Dennis ParkerSupport to Lead Writer. Sylvia TunstallAssessment of Flood Management Options. Johannes van DuivendijkFlood Action Plan in Bangladesh. Herb Wiebe

IV.5. Operation, monitoring and decommissioning of dams

Lead Writers Peder Hjorth, Charles Howard,Kuniyoshi Takeuchi

Contributing Paper WriterManaging for Unforeseen Consequences of Large K. Betts, Michael Falter, PeterDam Operations. GoodwinDams in Spain. Enrique GarciaHume and Dartmouth Dams, Murray Darling Basin,Australia. Brian HaismanMacquarie Marshes, Murray Darling Basin, Australia. Brian HaismanOperation, Monitoring and Rehabilitation of Dams/Reservoirs in Japan. Joji Harada, Kuniyoshi TakeuchiOperation, Monitoring and Decommissioning of Dams. Peder HjorthA Report on Large Dams in India. V. JauhariUS Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Thomas RussoOperation, Monitoring and Decommissioning of Dams. Geoffrey SimmsEx Post Evaluation of Dams and Related Water Projects. James WescoatFlushing of Sediments from Reservoirs. Rodney White

V.1. Planning approaches

Lead Writers David Nichols, Theo Stewart,David von Hippel

Contributing Paper WriterPlanning Survey. Daud BegRegional Integrated Resource Planning. Catherine FedorskyPlanning Survey. Matthias FingerPlanning Survey. J. KarmacharyaPlanning Survey. Don MooreFirst Draft of Planning Approaches Thematic. David Nichols, Theo Stewart, David

von HippelPlanning Survey. Miguel NucetePlanning Survey. Girish SantMultiple Criteria Decision Analysis. Theo Stewart

Annex IV


V.2. Environmental and social assessment for large dams

Lead Writer Barry Sadler

Contributing Paper WriterSocial Impact Assessment. Frank VanclayEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessment forLarge Dams – Thematic Review from the Point of Viewof Developing Countries. Iara Verocai

V.3. River basins – institutional frameworks and managementoptions

Lead Writer Peter Millington

Contributing Paper WriterDams in the Context of Transboundary/International Waters. Len AbramsLos Consejos de Cuenca en el Desarrollo de las Presas enMéxico. Enrique Castelan CrespoTransboundary Impacts of Dams: Conflict PreventionStrategies. Fiona CurtinReview of the Role of River Basin Organizations in LatinAmerica. Luis GarciaWater Resources National Policy in Brazil. Raymundo GarridoLarge Dams, Transboundary Waters, Conflicts. Ramaswamy IyerDams on Transboundary Rivers. Erik MostertRiver Basins: Institutional Framework and ManagementOptions for Latin America. Cecilia TortajadaPossible Approach to the Management of Dams onInternational and Inter-Provincial Rivers. Anthony TurtonDevelopment and Transboundary Waters: Obstacles andOpportunities. Aaron Wolf

V.4. Regulation, compliance and implementation

Lead Writers Angela Cropper, Mark Halle,Danny Bradlow, John Scanlon

Contributing Paper WriterReport on International and Comparative Water LawApplicable to Large Dam Construction. Daniel Bradlow, Gabriel EcksteinHuman Rights and Development. Balakrishnan RajagopalImplementing World Commission on Dams Guidelineswithin an International Certification System. Tom RotherhamExport Credit Agencies. Lori UdallWorld Bank Inspection Panel. Lori UdallTransparency and Corruption Prevention when BuildingLarge Dams. Michael Wiehen

367



V.5. Participation, negotiation and conflict management

Lead Writer Bruce Stedman

Contributing Paper WriterSupport to Lead Writer. Tisha GreylingSupport to Lead Writer. Anne RandmerSupport to Lead Writer. Vanchai VatanasaptSupport to Lead Writer. Arch Isabel Viana

Working Papers

Dams and human health

Writers Robert Bos, William Jobin,Martin H. Birley, P.V.Unnikrishnan, M’barack Diop

Dams and cultural heritage management

Writers Steven Brandt, Fekri Hassan

Cross-Check SurveyThe Cross-Check Survey – Methodology, Findingsand Lessons Learned. WCD Secretariat

SubmissionsThe WCD received 947 submissions from 79 countries that were reflected in the Case Study,Thematic Reviews and Regional Consultations. The full list of submissions is available on theWCD website at www.dams.org.

Annex V


Annex V

Dams, Water and Energy –A Statistical Profile

This Annex has two main

sections: data on the world

population of dams and regional

profiles of large dams. The regional

profiles present largely the statistical

data that are available; social and

environmental data are limited.

Readers interested in further details on

regional and national trends and on

the issues under debate should refer to

the reports on the WCD Regional

Consultations, which are available at

www.dams.org.

369

Dams, Water and Energy – A Statistical Profile


Figure V.1Regional distri-bution of largedams in 2000

Source: WCD compilation of various sources and ICOLD, 1998.

Number of dams

0 5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 25 000

Austral-Asia

South America

Eastern Europe

Africa

Western Europe

North andCentral America

China

Asia

Figure V.2 Cumulative commissioning of large dams in the 20th century

Source: ICOLD 1998, excluding over 90% of large dams in China.

Num

ber

of d

ams

01 0002 0003 000 4 0005 0006 0007 0008 000

Africa

before

1900

1900

s

1910

s

1920

s

1930

s

1940

s

1950

s

1960

s

1970

s

1980

s

after 1

990

Time

Europe

South America

Austral-Asia

Asia

North America

Source: ICOLD, 1998, excluding over 90% of large dams in China.

before

1900

1900

s

1910

s

1920

s

1930

s

1940

s

1950

s

1960

s

1970

s

1980

s

after 1

990

630

Num

ber

of d

ams

353601

809 964 913

2 735

4 788

5 418

4 431

2 069

0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

Figure V.3Commissioningof large damsglobally, bydecade in the20th century

Annex V


World Population of DamsThis section is based primarily on theICOLD World Register of Dams (ICOLD1998). This voluntary register containsinformation on 25 420 large dams, which isa partial list, since member countries report-ed 41 413 dams in 1996. The register isconstrained by the following: (1) it providesinformation on a limited set of parametersfor each large dam such as location, commis-sioning date, purpose, height, reservoir size,spillway capacity, etc.; (2) it is incomplete

for certain countries, the most significantbeing China with only 1 855 of the estimat-ed 22 000 large dams registered; (3) gaps forother countries such as the Russian Federa-tion are likely to bias the sample in similarways; (4) data for the 1990s are under-reported to an unknown extent and alsocontain dams that have not been complet-ed; and (5) entries are for a dam and not areservoir – therefore, care must be taken infinding average reservoir volume capacitiesand surface areas where more than one damis associated with a particular reservoir.

egralforebmunybseirtnuoc02poT1.VelbaTsmad

yrtnuoC

DLOCIdlroW dlroW dlroW dlroW dlroWretsigeR retsigeR retsigeR retsigeR retsigeRsmaDfo smaDfo smaDfo smaDfo smaDfo

8991 8991 8991 8991 8991

rehtOsecruos secruos secruos secruos secruos

tnecrePlatotfo latotfo latotfo latotfo latotfo

smad smad smad smad smad

evitalumuCtnecrep tnecrep tnecrep tnecrep tnecrep

12

345

anihCdetinU

setatSaidnInapaJniapS

55815736

110477017811

000225756

192457626911

2.648.31

0.96.55.2

2.640.06

0.966.471.77

67

89

01

adanaChtuoSaeroKyekruT

lizarBecnarF

397

567526495965

397

567526495965

7.1

6.13.12.12.1

8.87

4.087.189.281.48

11

213141

51

htuoSacirfAocixeM

ylatIdetinU

modgniKailartsuA

935

735425715

684

935

735425715

684

1.1

1.11.11.1

0.1

2.58

3.684.785.88

5.98

6171819102

yawroNynamreG

ainablAainamoRewbabmiZ

533113603642312

533113603642312

7.07.06.05.04.0

2.099.095.190.294.29

srehtO 8553 8553 0.7 0.001

latoT 32452 55674 0.001

.yrtnuochcaenismadegralforebmunehtrofsetamitsetnereffideraerehT:setoNgnitadpuyB.yratnulovsiDLOCIybdeniatniamsmaDforetsigeRdlroWehTotpuebyamerehtsetamitseDCWeht,seirtnuocevifpotehtnonoitamrofni

eromybdemrifnocebtonnacetamitserehgihehtsA.ediwdlrowsmadegral00084secruosehT.’00054revo‘foerugifehtsesuDCWeht,revewoh,ecruosenonaht

.etamitseehtnirotcafrojamehtsianihC.wolebdetoneradesu:anihC ■ egralforebmunlautcaehtsetontI.smad5581sah)8991(DLOCI

.smad4344sah)0002(DLOCI.00002revoebyamanihCnismad■ -namuh00048revoeraerehtsetacidniydutsyrtnuocanihCDCW

ybsmadegralevah00022detamitsenahcihwfo,sekaledam.weiveRyrtnuoCanihCDCWehtnidetropersa,noitinifeds’DLOCI

,)0002,gnahZ(scimonocElarutlucirgArofetutitsnIehtotgnidroccA,esehtfo;m51nahtrehgihsmad40122erewereht9991fodneehtyb

m03revoerewsmad8754dnahgihm03–51erewsmad62571rednusmad023oslaerewerehT.)m001nahtrehgih23gnidulcni(

yletamixorppA.hgihm001nahteromerewhcihwfo32,noitcurtsnoc.noitagirriroferewsmadllafo%54

■ .49062setacidni)0002(DHJI

detinUsetatS

■ .smad5736sah)8991(DLOCI■ 51evobasmadegral5756forebmundetadpunasetouq)0002(DHJI

.noitareponismad00057dnam■ erewerehtsetacidni)0002,ECASU(smaDfoyrotnevnIlanoitaNehT

.6991nismadegral0936aidnI ■ .smadegral1104sah)8991(DLOCI

■ lanoitaNehtotgnidrocca1924setouqweiveRyrtnuoCaidnIDCW.)4991,CWC(smaDegraLrofretsigeR

napaJ ■ esohtylnotahtgniton,deretsigersmadegral7701sah)8991(DLOCI.detropererewthgiehnim03evoba

■ detadpu,)4991,napaJ,noitcurtsnoCfoyrtsiniM(canamlAmaDnapaJ.smadegral5762setamitse,yllaunna

■ .smad0652setamitse)0002(DHJIniapS ■ detadpusetouq)0002,lateagreB(DLOCI.7811sah)8991(DLOCI

.smad6911forebmun■ .)m03evoba(smadegral609eraerehtsetamitse)0002(DHJI

naissuR-redeF

noita

■

■

.detropererewsmadrewopordyhyltsom;19sah)8991(DLOCImnoillim3nahtregralsriovreseredam-namuh004sahaissuR 3 egrala(

tcejorpordyHehtotgnidrocca,)noitinifeds’DLOCIgnisu,madnoitaredeFnaissuRehtnorepaPgnifeirBDCWehtnidetic,etutitsnI

.SINdna

371



Functions of large dams, by region

Note: Over 90% of dams in China are excluded as time series data arenot available. Categorisation of 140 countries of the six regions as usedin ICOLD (1998) is as follows:Africa: Algeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Cameroon,Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Dem. Rep. of Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gabon,Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar,Malawi, Mali, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria,Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Sudan, Swaziland,Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe;Asia: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Brunei, Cambodia, China, India,Iran, Iraq, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Latvia,Lebanon, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, North Korea, Pakistan,Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Syria,Taiwan/China, Tajikistan, Thailand, Uzbekistan, and Viet Nam;Austral-Asia: Australia, Fiji, Indonesia, New Zealand, and Papua-New Guinea;Europe: Albania, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark,

Figure V.4 Hydropower dams, by region Figure V.5 Irrigation dams, by region

Source: ICOLD, 1998. Source: ICOLD, 1998.

Figure V.6 Water supply dams, by region Figure V.7 Flood control dams, by region


Num

ber

of d

ams

600

500

400

300

200

100

0Europe

AsiaNorth America

South AmericaAfrica

Austral-AsiaRegion

before1900

1910s1930s

1950s1970s

after 1990 Decades

Num

ber

of d

ams

2 0001 8001 6001 4001 2001 000

800600400200

0

EuropeAsia

North America

South AmericaAfrica

Austral-AsiaRegion

before 19001910s

1930s1950s

1970safter 1990 Decades

Num

ber

of d

ams

400350300250200150100

500

EuropeAsia

North America

South AmericaAfrica

Austral-AsiaRegion

before 19001910s

1930s1950s


Num

ber

of d

ams

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

EuropeAsia

North America

South AmericaAfrica

Austral-AsiaRegion

before 19001910s

1930s1950s


Figure V.8 Multipurpose dams, by region

Source: ICOLD, 1998.

Num

ber

of d

ams

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

EuropeAsia

North America

South AmericaAfrica

Austral-AsiaRegion

before 19001910s

1930s1950s


Annex V


0-1

1-10

10-1

00

100-

1 000

>1 000

Reservoir surface area, km2

0

2 000

4 000

6 000

8 000

10 000

12 000

Num

ber

of d

ams

Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary,Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedo-nia, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal,Romania, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain,Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom,and Yugoslavia;North America: Antigua, Canada, Cuba, El Salvador,Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Trinidad& Tobago, and United States; andSouth America: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile,Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador,Guatemala, Guyana, Panama, Paraguay, Peru,Suriname, Uruguay, and Venezuela.

Figure V.9 Global distribution of dam heights (m) Figure V.10 Regional distribution of dam heights (m)



Figure V.11 Global distribution of reservoir surface area (km2)

Figure V.12 Regional distribution of reservoir surface area(km2)

Height, m

12 000

10 000

8 000

6 000

4 000

2 000

0

Num

ber

of d

ams

>150

0–10

10–2

020

–30

30–6

060

–90

90–1

20

120–

150 Africa North

AmericaSouth

AmericaAsia Austral-

AsiaEurope World

0 to 30 m 30 to 60 m 60 to 150 m >150 m

72%

22%

5%

74%

19%

6%

57%

30%

11%

59%

30%

10%

59%

29%

11%

61%

27%

11%

65%

26%

9%100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%Africa North

AmericaSouth

AmericaAsia Austral-

AsiaEurope World

0–1 km2 1–10 km2 10–1 000 km2 >1 000 km2

53%

33%

14%

64%

22%

14%

67%

17%

15%

65%

24%

11%

46%

37%

17%

63%

28%

8%

63%

25%

11%

Physical attributes of largedams

These figures show the distribution of damsby height, reservoir surface area (km2) andreservoir volume (million m3) globally andacross the regions. These parameters havean influence on the use and operation ofdams and on the nature and scope of theimpacts.

373



smadegraltsomehthtiwseirtnuoc01ehT2.VelbaT

forebmunyBsmadegral smadegral smadegral smadegral smadegral

noitcnufyB

noitagirrI ylppusretaW lortnocdoolF rewopordyH

1 anihC anihC setatSdetinU anihC anihC2 setatSdetinU aidnI modgniKdetinU setatSdetinU setatSdetinU3 aidnI setatSdetinU niapS napaJ adanaC4 niapS aeroK napaJ lizarB napaJ

5 napaJ niapS ailartsuA ynamreG niapS

6 adanaC yekruT dnaliahT ainamoR ylatI

7 aeroK napaJ acirfAhtuoS ocixeM ecnarF

8 yekruT ocixeM lizarB aeroK yawroN

9 lizarB acirfAhtuoS ecnarF adanaC lizarB

01 ecnarF ainablA ynamreG yekruT nedewSgnidliubnidlrowehtdecaptuoevahsetatSdetinUehtdnaaidnI,anihCtahtswohselbatsihT:etoN

.anihCrofnoitcerrocDCWdna8991DLOCInodesab,smadegral

Source: See Table V.1.

Figure V.15 Share of world population ofdams, by country


Figure V.13 Global distribution of reservoir volume(million m3)

Figure V.14 Regional distribution of reservoir volume(million m3)

Volume, million m3

0-1

1-10

10-1

00

100-

1 000

>10 00

0

1,00-

10 00

00

2 000

4 000

6 000

8 000

10 000

Num

ber

of d

ams

Africa NorthAmerica

SouthAmerica

Asia Austral-Asia

Europe World

0–1 Mm3 1–100 Mm3 100–1 000 Mm3 >1 000 Mm3

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

29%37%

19% 21% 21% 28% 28%

58% 47%

52%

69%60%

61% 59%

9% 10%

19%

8%

13%

9% 9%

4% 5% 10%2% 6% 2% 3%

Others16%

Canada2%

France1%Brazil

1%Turkey

1%

South Korea2%

Other

23%

China45%

United States14%

India9%

Japan6%

Spain3%

Annex V


AfricaSouth Africa 539Zimbabwe 213Algeria 107Morocco 92Tunisia 72

Nigeria 45Côte d’Ivoire 22Angola 15Dem. Rep. of Congo 14Kenya 14

Namibia 13Libya 12Madagascar 10Cameroon 9Mauritius 9

Burkina Faso 8Ethiopia 8Mozambique 8Lesotho 7Egypt 6

Swaziland 6Ghana 5Sudan 4Zambia 4Botswana 3

Malawi 3Benin 2Congo 2Guinea 2Mali 2

Senegal 2Seychelles 2Sierra Leone 2Tanzania 2Togo 2

Gabon 1Liberia 1Uganda 1Total 1 269

Western EuropeSpain 1 196France 569Italy 524United Kingdom 517Norway 335

Germany 311Sweden 190Switzerland 156Austria 149Portugal 103

Finland 55Cyprus 52Greece 46Iceland 20Ireland 16

Belgium 15Denmark 10Netherlands 10Luxembourg 3Total 4 277

South AmericaBrazil 594Argentina 101Chile 88Venezuela 74Colombia 49

Peru 43Ecuador 11Bolivia 6Uruguay 6Paraguay 4

Guyana 2Suriname 1Total 979

Eastern EuropeAlbania 306Romania 246Bulgaria 180Czech Republic 118Poland 69

Yugoslavia 69Slovakia 50Slovenia 30Croatia 29Bosnia-Herzegovina 25

Ukraine 21Lithuania 20Macedonia 18Hungary 15Latvia 5

Moldova 2Total 1 203

North and Central AmericaUnited States 6 575Canada 793Mexico 537Cuba 49Dominican Republic 11

Costa Rica 9Honduras 9Panama 6El Salvador 5Guatemala 4

Nicaragua 4Trinidad & Tobago 4Jamaica 2Antigua 1Haiti 1Total 8 010

AsiaChina 22 000India 4 291Japan 2 675South Korea 765Turkey 625

Thailand 204Indonesia 96Russia 91Pakistan 71North Korea 70

Iran 66Malaysia 59Taipei, China 51Sri Lanka 46Syria 41

Saudi Arabia 38Azerbaijan 17Armenia 16Philippines 15Georgia 14

Uzbekistan 14Iraq 13Kazakhstan 12Kyrgyzstan 11Tajikistan 7

Jordan 5Lebanon 5Myanmar 5Nepal 3Viet Nam 3

Singapore 3Afghanistan 2Brunei 2Cambodia 2Bangladesh 1

Laos 1Total 31 340

Austral-AsiaAustralia 486New Zealand 86Papua New Guinea 3Fiji 2Total 577

Regions and Number of Regions and Number of Regions and Number ofcountries dams countries dams countries dams

Source: Based on ICOLD, 1998, IJHD, 2000 and other sources. Regional categories do not match the ICOLD classification given for Figures V.4 –V.8.

Table V.3 Dams in 140 countries

375



Regional Profiles of Large Dams

seirtnuocdetceles,noitcurtsnocrednusmadforebmuN4.VelbaT

smadegralforebmunyB noitcnufyB

aidnI 069 a

596 b

61 c sretem06evoba–

noitagirrI

anihC 082 a

09 c sretem06evoba–lortnocdoolF

egarotsdepmupgnidulcni,rewopordyHyekruT 391 a

902 c sretem06ehterom–ylppusretawdnarewopordyh,noitagirrI

htuoSaeroK

231 a

4c sretem06ehterom–

doolf,rewopordyh:esoprup-itluMtnemeganamylppusretaW

napaJ 364 d

09 a

15 c sretem06nahterom–31 c sretem001ehterom–

htiwlortnocdoolfesoprup-itluMylppusretawdnarewopordyh

narI 84 c sretem06evoba– esoprup-itlumdnaelgnis,noitagirrIylatI,)7(aireglA,)01(niapSedulcnisretem06revosmadgnidliubyltnerrucseirtnuocrehtO:etoN

.)5(noitaredeFnaissuRehtdna)5(aleuzeneV,)6(lizarB,)8(ainamoR,)9( c

a 7991,DLOCIb ydutSyrtnuoCaidnIDCWc 0002,DHJId 9991,napaJ,noitcurtsnoCfoyrtsiniM

Western and Eastern Europe:hydropower in the North andirrigation in the South led damdevelopment in Europe

At the turn of the twentieth century, mostlarge dams in Europe were found in the

United Kingdom (220 dams).1 By 2000,more than 4 277 large dams were registeredin Western Europe; Spain built the most(about 1 200), followed by France, Italy andthe United Kingdom, each with more than500 large dams. Until 1960, France and Italywere building dams at the same rate as

smadegralnoscitsitatslanoigerfoyrammuS5.VelbaT

dlroW a eporuE aisAdnahtroN

lartneC lartneC lartneC lartneC lartneCaciremA aciremA aciremA aciremA aciremA

htuoSaciremA aciremA aciremA aciremA aciremA

acirfA-lartsuA

aisA aisA aisA aisA aisA

smadegralforebmunlatoTanihChtiw

02452 a

00084~ a

0845 04313 0108 979 9621 775

thgiehegarevA b )m( 13 33 33 82 73 82 33riovreseregarevA b mk(aera 2) 32 7 44 31 03 34 71

yticapacriovreser.gvA b noillim(m3)

962 07 862 899 1101 388 502

elbisaefyllacinhceTlaitnetopcirtceleordyh c

)raey/hWT(

07341 5221 0086 0661 5662 0571 072

cirtceleordyHlaunnAnoitcudorP c )raey/hWT(

3462 255 357 007 435 26 24

elbisaefyllacinhcetdetiolpxElaitnetopcirtceleordyh c )%(

%81> %54> %11> %24> %02> %5.3>

a nidebircsedesohtwollof72.Vhguorht61.VserugiFnidnaelbaTsihtnisnoisividlanoigerehttub,8991DLOCIsiatadfoecruosyramirpehTlabolgehtwohsetacidni1.VelbaT.seirtnuocrebmemehtnosdnepedgnitropeR.deretsigersmad02452sahretsigeRDLOCI8991ehT.3.VelbaT

.anihCnismadforebmunehtgniebeussiniamehthtiw,tadevirrasismadegral00084ylraenfoetamitseb .noigerybaeraecafrusdnayticapacriovreser,thgiehmadegarevaehtetaluclacotdesusawesabatad8991DLOCIehTc .ygreneotninoigernisrevirrojamehtniwolfdnadaehrevirllafonoisrevnocehtnodesabsiytilibisaeFlacinhceT.0002DHJI

Annex V


Spain. East European countries have about1 200 large dams; Albania (306 dams, almostall for irrigation) and Romania (246 dams, forall purposes) have built the most in the region.

As shown in Figure V.17, hydropower andthen irrigation and water supply have beenthe main purposes of dams in Europe. Thereis marked contrast in reservoir use (andimportance) across Europe, which reflectstopography, rainfall and national polices,particularly on hydropower. Numeroushydropower reservoirs – often located inmountainous regions and in Nordic coun-tries – are distinguished from the generallysmaller irrigation and water supply reservoirslocated in lowland and southern regions ofEurope.2 Approximately one-quarter ofdams in Europe are multi-purpose. Hydro-power provides more than half of the electrici-ty supply in several European countries (86%in Albania and 90% in Iceland, for example)and more than 99% in Norway.3

Dam construction and hydropower develop-ment passed its peak in the 1960s in manyparts of Europe. At present there is a focuson refurbishment and upgrading dams andadapting to new regulations. In 2000, some2 460 MW of additional hydroelectricgenerating capacity was under constructionin 22 countries, with the most significantnew dam development under way in Bosniaand Bulgaria. According to industry sources,other active hydropower developers areGermany (in the eastern part), Greece,Iceland, Italy, Macedonia, Portugal, Slove-nia and the Ukraine.4 Refurbishment is themain focus in many East European coun-tries, and plans for additional dams forpower and flood control have also beenmade. Spain is most active in dam buildingoverall for other purposes and is now imple-menting a number of multi-purposeschemes. Spain has plans for further damconstruction for drought management,though there is debate on these plans.

Figure V.16 Large dams commissioned per decade in Europe


Num

ber

of d

ams

0

200

400

600

800

1 000

1 200

Decades

1940

s

1950

s

1960

s19

30s

1920

s

1910

s

1900

s19

70s

1980

s

after 1

990

before

1900

s

Source: ICOLD, 1998.Note: Rates of dam commissioning in the 1990s areunderreported.

Figure V.17 Breakdown by purpose of dams inEurope

Hydropower33% Multipurpose

25%Irrigation

19%

Flood Control3%

Other3%

Water Supply17%

377



Asia: the most active regiontoday for dam development –and historically for irrigation

Asia as a region, and particularly China andIndia, is one of the most active in the worldin terms of the number of dams in opera-tion, under construction and planned.China, with half the world’s large dams andan active construction programme, domi-nates the picture. ICOLD (1998) has 8 500large dams listed in the Asian region, butWCD estimates there are more than 30 000.

Most large dams in Asia were built forirrigation, followed by hydropower, floodcontrol and water supply functions. Aquarter are multi-purpose. These tend to bethe larger projects. There are neverthelesslarge differences across Asia in the purposeand type of dams. The primary purposes fordams built today include irrigation in Indiaand Turkey; flood control and power,

including pumped storage, in China; floodmanagement and hydro-pumped storage inJapan; and irrigation and power supply inIran. Hydropower provides more than 50%of the national electricity supply in nineAsian countries. It represents 19% of thetotal power generation in China, 25% inIndia, and 19% in the Russian Federation.The balance is largely based on coal-firedgeneration.

India, China, Turkey, Japan and Iran areamong the most active dam-building coun-tries overall. The overall rate of large dambuilding peaked in Asia in the 1970s–1980sat over 200 dams per year. Statistics (exclud-ing China) show the pace of constructionslowed in the 1990s, reflecting multipletrends, including a focus on improvingexisting surface irrigation infrastructure.Still, in 2000 more than 83 000 MW ofadditional hydroelectric generating capacitywas under construction in 23 countries. The

Source: ICOLD 1998. Note: Rates of dam commis-sioning in the 1990s are underreported. Figures aboveexclude China

Figure V.18 Large dams commissioned per decade in Asia


Irrigation63%

Multipurpose26%

Hydropower7%

Water Supply2%

Other4%

Flood Control2%

Figure V.19 Breakdown by purpose of dams in Asia

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Num

ber

of d

ams

Decades

1940

s

1950

s

1960

s19

30s

1920

s

1910

s

1900

s19

70s

1980

s

after 1

990

before

1900

Annex V


majority of the development is in China,followed by India, Indonesia and Iran.

The Russian Federation, where economicand institutional restructuring are underway, has focused on completing largeprojects started under the former politicalsystems but abandoned in the 1990s. Otherpriorities include the rehabilitation of largedams in operation. Russia is planning toconstruct five new large dams. Democratisa-tion and the emergence of NGOs have ledto greater involvement and public debate onwater and energy, though active participa-tion of non-governmental interests indecision-making is limited as yet.

A discussion of the issues around the devel-opment of dams in the Asian region may befound on the WCD website in the report onthe South Asia Consultation held in Co-lombo, Sri Lanka, in December 1998 andthe East and Southeast Asia Consultation inHanoi, Vietnam, in February 2000.

North and Central America:80% of the region’s dams arein the United States

Of more than 8 000 large dams in Northand Central America, about four-fifths(6 575) are in the United States. About40% of these are multi-purpose. Hydropowerprovides over 50% of the electricity supplyin 7 of the 15 countries in the region,including Canada, Guatemala and Hondu-ras. Canada has the highest hydropowergeneration in the world; combined with theU.S., North America produces over aquarter of the world’s hydropower.5 Floodmanagement and recreation have becomeprincipal uses of large dams in the UnitedStates, and operations are increasinglydetermined by those seasonal requirements.There are large variations in climate in theregion, which determine the predominantuse of dams locally. In southern and aridareas of the region, irrigation and watersupply are more important.

Figure V.20 Large dams commissioned per decade in North andCentral America

Source: ICOLD, 1998. Note: Rates of dam commissioning in the 1990s are underreported.

Num

ber

of d

ams

Decades

0

200

400

600

800

1 000

1 200

1 400

1 600

1 800

2 000

1940

s

1950

s

1960

s19

30s

1920

s

1910

s

1900

s19

70s

1980

s

after 1

990

before

1900

Figure V.21 Breakdown by purpose of dams inNorth and Central America


Multipurpose40%

Other6% Recreation

9%

Flood Control13%

WaterSupply10%

Hydropower11%

Irrigation11%

379



Dam commissioning in the region increaseddramatically after the Second World War andpeaked in the late 1960s at about 180 damsper year. Commissioning rates have recentlydecreased to about 40 dams per year (in 1990–95). In the United States, the rate of decom-missioning has now exceeded the rate ofconstruction of newly licensed large dams.

No new hydropower development is currentlyplanned in the United States, and some30 000 MW of existing hydropower is due tobe relicensed in the next 20 years. The majoractivities in the United States and Canadaoccur around refurbishment, upgrading,optimisation of the operation of dams and, inthe United States, decommissioning. Mostnotably, over 400 dams of all sizes, thoughmostly small, have been decommissioned inthe United States. The only major damreported under construction in the UnitedStates is in Puerto Rico (multi-purpose); adam for a new water supply reservoir inCalifornia (Diamond Valley Lake) wascompleted in 1999. Canada has a large

hydropower potential – and while more damsare proposed, especially in Quebec, Labradorand Newfoundland, there is uncertainty oversuch developments.

Central America has more active dam-building programmes or plans. In 2000, some2 124 MW of hydroelectric generating capaci-ty was under construction in five countries.High-head small hydropower is activelypursued. Among those active in the region areGuatemala, El Salvador, Costa Rica andHonduras. Mexico has 540 dams in operationand no major dams currently under construc-tion. While more dams are planned, industryconsiders the outlook uncertain, given therestructuring of the power sector.6

South America: hydropowerhas driven dam building in theregion, with Brazil leading

Almost two-thirds of the 979 large dams inSouth America are in Brazil (594 in 1998).The primary purposes for building large dams

Figure V.22 Large dams commissioned per decade in South America


Figure V.23 Breakdown by purpose of dams inSouth America


Multipurpose26%

Flood Control18%

Hydro-power24%

Other4%

Water Supply13%

Irrigation15%

Num

ber

of d

ams

Decades

200

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

1940

s

1950

s

1960

s19

30s

1920

s

1910

s

1900

s19

70s

1980

s

after 1

990

before

1900

Annex V


have been hydropower generation and floodcontrol. Among multi-purpose dams, irriga-tion, flood control and water supply functionsare important. The peak of the dam buildingin South America took place in 1960-79,when an average of 17 dams per year werecommissioned.

The region’s most active hydropower develop-ers have been Brazil – which generates over93% of its electricity from hydropower –Venezuela (73%), Ecuador (68%), Chile(57%) and Colombia (68%).7 Hydropowersupplies more than half of electricity genera-tion in 10 of the 12 countries in the regionthat have dams, including Paraguay (nearly100%) and Peru (74%).

As of 2000, some 18 000 MW of additionalhydropower capacity were under constructionin 10 countries in Latin America.8 Despite thelarge hydropower potential of the region, theexpansion of natural gas networks, regionalinterconnection of power grids and therestructuring and privatisation of the power

industry have made the prospects for largehydropower dams more uncertain. Industryprojections indicate that further developmentin the short to medium term is likely to occuraround medium and small hydropower dams.9

A discussion of the issues around the develop-ment of dams in the region may be found onthe WCD website in the report on the LatinAmerica Consultation held in São Paulo,Brazil, in August 1999.

Africa: irrigation andhydropower have been themain drivers for dam building

Of the over 1 269 large dams in Africa,South Africa (with between 539 and 791)and Zimbabwe (with between 213 and 233)together account for over 60% of the damson the continent.10 Irrigation is the singlelargest purpose for building large dams inAfrica, especially in the northern andsouthern regions that have large arid orsemi-arid zones. In central and other parts of

Figure V.24 Large dams commissioned per decade in Africa


Figure V.25 Breakdown by purpose of dams inAfrica


FloodControl

1%

Irrigation50%

Other2%

Multi-purpose

21%

Water Supply20%

Hydropower6%

Num

ber

of d

ams

Decades

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

1940

s

1950

s

1960

s19

30s

1920

s

1910

s

1900

s19

70s

1980

s

after 1

990

before

1900

381



Africa, which are less arid, hydropower isthe primary reason for dam building.

In South Africa, large dams have a capacityequivalent to 50% of mean annual riverflow. Most dams have irrigation and watersupply as their main uses (just 1.9% ofelectricity generation is hydropower). InZimbabwe, 87% of the large dams areembankment dams and hydropower ac-counts for 17% of electrical supply, mainlyfrom the Kariba dam jointly operated withZambia. The Southern African Power PoolArrangement will have a major impact onthe region and its investment in powersupply infrastructure in the future. In Africahydropower contributes more than 80% ofelectricity production in 18 countries, andover 50% in 25 countries. Droughts in EastAfrica in the 1990s affected power genera-tion significantly in those regions wherereservoirs were drawn down.

Irrigation and water resources developmentprojects are under way in northern Africa,

especially in Tunisia, Morocco (where 7large dams are under construction) andAlgeria (with 13 dams being built). As of2000, more than 2 000 MW of additionalhydroelectric generating capacity was underconstruction in 17 countries. Zimbabwe andSouth Africa have a number of irrigation andwater supply large dams under construction.

A discussion of the issues around the develop-ment of dams on the African continent maybe found on the WCD website in the reporton the Africa and Middle East Consultationsheld in Cairo, Egypt, in December 1999.

Austral-Asia: close to half thedams were built for watersupply

Of the nearly 577 dams in the region, themajority (486) are located in Australia. NewZealand has 86. Almost 50% of the large damsin the region were built as single-purposewater supply dams. Hydropower and irrigationwere the next most important reasons for dam

Figure V.26 Large dams commissioned per decade in Austral-Asia


Figure V.27 Breakdown by purpose of dams inAustral-Asia


Flood Control2%

Multipurpose14% Irrigation

13%Other

2%

Hydro-power

20%

Water Supply49%

Num

ber

of d

ams

Decades

20

40

60

80

100

120

0

1940

s

1950

s

1960

s19

30s

1920

s

1910

s

1900

s19

70s

1980

s

after 1

990

before

1900

Annex V


building. Hydropower accounts for more than50% of electricity supply in four countries inthe region (Fiji, New Zealand, Papua NewGuinea and New Caledonia).

Dam building peaked in Australia and NewZealand in the 1980s (at about 10 largedams per year) and slowed dramatically inthe 1990s. At present no new major dams orlarge hydropower projects are under way inAustralia and New Zealand, though NewZealand recently completed a water supplydam. Both Australia and New Zealand havereformed the water and power sector regula-tory framework, and restructured or privatised

water management and power sector institu-tions. While there are several new dams beingcarried as options in longer-term planning, itappears unlikely they will go ahead in theforeseeable future.11

Australia and New Zealand do have severalprojects under way to heighten and refurbishexisting dams and are generally focusing onimprovement, safety and optimising theoperation of existing dams. Current trendsin Austral-Asia are towards small-scalehydropower development within the re-gion’s island states and towards water supplyprojects as demand grows.

Endnotes

1 This classification of Europe includesWestern and Eastern Europe but excludes theRussian Federation and Turkey, which arereported under the Asia Region.

2 EEA, 1999.

3 Albania and Iceland from IJHD 2000;Norway from UNDP et al, 2000.

4 IJHD, 2000.

5 UNDP et al, 2000.

6 IJHD, 2000.

7 Brazil from IEA, 2000.

8 IJHD, 2000.

9 Ibid.

10 Lower figures from ICOLD, 1998; higherfigures from IJHD, 2000.

11 IJHD, 2000.

383

United Nations Declarations


Annex VI

United NationsDeclarations

The Right to Development

The General Assembly,

Having considered the question of the right to development decides to adopt the Declarationon the Right to Development on December 4, 1986, the text of which is annexed to thepresent resolution.

ANNEX

Declaration on the Right to Development

The General Assembly,

Bearing in mind the purposes and principlesof the Charter of the United Nationsrelating to the achievement of internationalco-operation in solving internationalproblems of an economic, social, cultural orhumanitarian nature, and in promoting andencouraging respect for human rights andfundamental freedoms for all withoutdistinction as to race, sex, language orreligion,

Recognising that development is a compre-hensive economic, social, cultural andpolitical process, which aims at the constantimprovement of the well-being of the entirepopulation and of all individuals on the

basis of their active, free and meaningfulparticipation in development and in the fairdistribution of benefits resulting therefrom,

Considering that under the provisions of theUniversal Declaration of Human Rightseveryone is entitled to a social and interna-tional order in which the rights andfreedoms set forth in that Declaration canbe fully realised,

Recalling the provisions of the InternationalCovenant on Economic, Social and CulturalRights and of the International Covenanton Civil and Political Rights,

Recalling further the relevant agreements,conventions, resolutions, recommendations

Annex VI


and other instruments of the United Na-tions and its specialised agencies concerningthe integral development of the humanbeing, economic and social progress anddevelopment of all peoples, including thoseinstruments concerning decolonisation, theprevention of discrimination, respect for andobservance of, human rights and fundamentalfreedoms, the maintenance of internationalpeace and security and the further promotionof friendly relations and co-operation amongStates in accordance with the Charter,

Recalling the right of peoples to self-determination, by virtue of which they havethe right freely to determine their politicalstatus and to pursue their economic, socialand cultural development,

Recalling also the right of peoples to exer-cise, subject to the relevant provisions ofboth International Covenants on HumanRights, full and complete sovereignty overall their natural wealth and resources,

Mindful of the obligation of States under theCharter to promote universal respect for andobservance of human rights and fundamentalfreedoms for all without distinction of anykind such as race, colour, sex, language,religion, political or other opinion, national orsocial origin, property, birth or other status,

Considering that the elimination of themassive and flagrant violations of thehuman rights of the peoples and individualsaffected by situations such as those resultingfrom colonialism, neo-colonialism, apart-heid, all forms of racism and racial discrimi-nation, foreign domination and occupation,aggression and threats against nationalsovereignty, national unity and territorialintegrity and threats of war would contrib-ute to the establishment of circumstancespropitious to the development of a greatpart of mankind,

Concerned at the existence of seriousobstacles to development, as well as to thecomplete fulfilment of human beings and ofpeoples, constituted, inter alia, by the denial

of civil, political, economic, social andcultural rights, and considering that allhuman rights and fundamental freedoms areindivisible and interdependent and that, inorder to promote development, equalattention and urgent consideration shouldbe given to the implementation, promotionand protection of civil, political, economic,social and cultural rights and that, accord-ingly, the promotion of, respect for andenjoyment of certain human rights andfundamental freedoms cannot justify thedenial of other human rights and fundamen-tal freedoms,

Considering that international peace andsecurity are essential elements for therealisation of the right to development,

Reaffirming that there is a close relationshipbetween disarmament and development andthat progress in the field of disarmamentwould considerably promote progress in thefield of development and that resourcesreleased through disarmament measuresshould be devoted to the economic andsocial development and well-being of allpeoples and, in particular, those of thedeveloping countries,

Recognising that the human person is thecentral subject of the development processand that development policy should there-fore make the human being the mainparticipant and beneficiary of development,

Recognising that the creation of conditionsfavourable to the development of peoplesand individuals is the primary responsibilityof their States,

Aware that efforts at the international levelto promote and protect human rights shouldbe accompanied by efforts to establish a newinternational economic order,

Confirming that the right to development isan inalienable human right and that equali-ty of opportunity for development is aprerogative both of nations and of individu-als who make up nations,

385



Article 1

1. The right to development is an inalien-able human right by virtue of whichevery human person and all peoples areentitled to participate in, contribute to,and enjoy economic, social, cultural andpolitical development, in which allhuman rights and fundamental freedomscan be fully realised.

2. The human right to development alsoimplies the full realisation of the right ofpeoples to self-determination, whichincludes, subject to the relevant provi-sions of both International Covenantson Human Rights, the exercise of theirinalienable right to full sovereignty overall their natural wealth and resources.

Article 2

1. The human person is the central subjectof development and should be the activeparticipant and beneficiary of the rightto development.

2. All human beings have a responsibilityfor development, individually andcollectively, taking into account theneed for full respect for their humanrights and fundamental freedoms as wellas their duties to the community, whichalone can ensure the free and completefulfilment of the human being, and theyshould therefore promote and protect anappropriate political, social and econom-ic order for development.

3. States have the right and the duty toformulate appropriate national develop-ment policies that aim at the constantimprovement of the well-being of theentire population and of all individuals,on the basis of their active, free andmeaningful participation in developmentand in the fair distribution of the bene-fits resulting therefrom.

Article 3

1. States have the primary responsibility forthe creation of national and internation-al conditions favourable to the realisa-tion of the right to development.

2. The realisation of the right to develop-ment requires full respect for the princi-ples of international law concerningfriendly relations and co-operationamong States in accordance with theCharter of the United Nations.

3. States have the duty to co-operate witheach other in ensuring development andeliminating obstacles to development.States should realise their rights andfulfil their duties in such a manner as topromote a new international economicorder based on sovereign equality,interdependence, mutual interest and co-operation among all States, as well as toencourage the observance and realisationof human rights.

Article 4

1. States have the duty to take steps,individually and collectively, to formu-late international development policieswith a view to facilitating the fullrealisation of the right to development.

2. Sustained action is required to promotemore rapid development of developingcountries. As a complement to theefforts of developing countries, effectiveinternational co-operation is essential inproviding these countries with appropri-ate means and facilities to foster theircomprehensive development.

Article 5

States shall take resolute steps to eliminatethe massive and flagrant violations of thehuman rights of peoples and human beings

Proclaims the following Declaration on the Right to Development:

Annex VI


affected by situations such as those resultingfrom apartheid, all forms of racism andracial discrimination, colonialism, foreigndomination and occupation, aggression,foreign interference and threats againstnational sovereignty, national unity andterritorial integrity, threats of war andrefusal to recognise the fundamental right ofpeoples to self-determination.

Article 6

1. All States should co-operate with a viewto promoting, encouraging and strength-ening universal respect for and observ-ance of all human rights and fundamen-tal freedoms for all without any distinc-tion as to race, sex, language or religion.

2. All human rights and fundamentalfreedoms are indivisible and interde-pendent; equal attention and urgentconsideration should be given to theimplementation, promotion and protec-tion of civil, political, economic, socialand cultural rights.

3. States should take steps to eliminateobstacles to development resulting fromfailure to observe civil and politicalrights, as well as economic, social andcultural rights.

Article 7

All States should promote the establish-ment, maintenance and strengthening ofinternational peace and security and, to thatend, should do their utmost to achievegeneral and complete disarmament undereffective international control, as well as toensure that the resources released by effec-tive disarmament measures are used forcomprehensive development, in particularthat of the developing countries.

Article 8

1. States should undertake, at the nationallevel, all necessary measures for the

realisation of the right to developmentand shall ensure, inter alia, equality ofopportunity for all in their access to basicresources, education, health services,food, housing, employment and the fairdistribution of income. Effective meas-ures should be undertaken to ensure thatwomen have an active role in thedevelopment process. Appropriateeconomic and social reforms should becarried out with a view to eradicating allsocial injustices.

2. States should encourage popular partici-pation in all spheres as an importantfactor in development and in the fullrealisation of all human rights.

Article 9

1. All the aspects of the right to develop-ment set forth in the present Declarationare indivisible and interdependent andeach of them should be considered in thecontext of the whole.

2. Nothing in the present Declaration shallbe construed as being contrary to thepurposes and principles of the UnitedNations, or as implying that any State,group or person has a right to engage inany activity or to perform any act aimedat the violation of the rights set forth inthe Universal Declaration of HumanRights and in the International Cove-nants on Human Rights.

Article 10

Steps should be taken to ensure the fullexercise and progressive enhancement ofthe right to development, including theformulation, adoption and implementationof policy, legislative and other measures atthe national and international levels.

387



Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 217 A (III)of 10 December 1948

On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimedthe Universal Declaration of Human Rights the full text of which appears in the followingpages. Following this historic act the Assembly called upon all Member countries to publicisethe text of the Declaration and “to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expoundedprincipally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on thepolitical status of countries or territories.”

PREAMBLE

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignityand of the equal and inalienable rights of allmembers of the human family is the founda-tion of freedom, justice and peace in theworld,

Whereas disregard and contempt for humanrights have resulted in barbarous acts whichhave outraged the conscience of mankind,and the advent of a world in which humanbeings shall enjoy freedom of speech andbelief and freedom from fear and want hasbeen proclaimed as the highest aspiration ofthe common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to becompelled to have recourse, as a last resort,to rebellion against tyranny and oppression,that human rights should be protected bythe rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote thedevelopment of friendly relations betweennations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nationshave in the Charter reaffirmed their faith infundamental human rights, in the dignityand worth of the human person and in theequal rights of men and women and havedetermined to promote social progress andbetter standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledgedthemselves to achieve, in co-operation with

the United Nations, the promotion ofuniversal respect for and observance ofhuman rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of theserights and freedoms is of the greatest impor-tance for the full realisation of this pledge,

Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEM-BLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DEC-LARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as acommon standard of achievement for allpeoples and all nations, to the end thatevery individual and every organ of society,keeping this Declaration constantly inmind, shall strive by teaching and educationto promote respect for these rights andfreedoms and by progressive measures,national and international, to secure theiruniversal and effective recognition andobservance, both among the peoples ofMember States themselves and among thepeoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

Article 1

All human beings are born free and equal indignity and rights. They are endowed withreason and conscience and should act towardsone another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2

Everyone is entitled to all the rights andfreedoms set forth in this Declaration,without distinction of any kind, such asrace, colour, sex, language, religion, political

Annex VI


or other opinion, national or social origin,property, birth or other status. Furthermore,no distinction shall be made on the basis ofthe political, jurisdictional or internationalstatus of the country or territory to which aperson belongs, whether it be independent,trust, non-self-governing or under any otherlimitation of sovereignty.

Article 3

Everyone has the right to life, liberty andsecurity of person.

Article 4

No one shall be held in slavery or servitude;slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibit-ed in all their forms.

Article 5

No one shall be subjected to torture or tocruel, inhuman or degrading treatment orpunishment.

Article 6

Everyone has the right to recognitioneverywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7

All are equal before the law and are entitledwithout any discrimination to equal protec-tion of the law. All are entitled to equalprotection against any discrimination inviolation of this Declaration and against anyincitement to such discrimination.

Article 8

Everyone has the right to an effectiveremedy by the competent national tribunalsfor acts violating the fundamental rightsgranted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest,detention or exile.

Article 10

Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fairand public hearing by an independent andimpartial tribunal, in the determination ofhis rights and obligations and of any crimi-nal charge against him.

Article 11

(1)Everyone charged with a penal offencehas the right to be presumed innocentuntil proved guilty according to law in apublic trial at which he has had all theguarantees necessary for his defence.

(2)No one shall be held guilty of any penaloffence on account of any act or omis-sion, which did not constitute a penaloffence, under national or internationallaw, at the time when it was committed.Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposedthan the one that was applicable at thetime the penal offence was committed.

Article 12

No one shall be subjected to arbitraryinterference with his privacy, family, homeor correspondence, nor to attacks upon hishonour and reputation. Everyone has theright to the protection of the law againstsuch interference or attacks.

Article 13

(1)Everyone has the right to freedom ofmovement and residence within theborders of each state.

(2)Everyone has the right to leave anycountry, including his own, and to returnto his country.

Article 14

(1)Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoyin other countries asylum from persecution.

(2)This right may not be invoked in thecase of prosecutions genuinely arisingfrom non-political crimes or from actscontrary to the purposes and principles ofthe United Nations.

389



Article 15

(1)Everyone has the right to a nationality.(2)No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of

his nationality nor denied the right tochange his nationality.

Article 16

(1)Men and women of full age, without anylimitation due to race, nationality orreligion, have the right to marry and tofound a family. They are entitled to equalrights as to marriage, during marriageand at its dissolution.

(2)Marriage shall be entered into only withthe free and full consent of the intendingspouses.

(3)The family is the natural and fundamen-tal group unit of society and is entitled toprotection by society and the State.

Article 17

(1)Everyone has the right to own propertyalone as well as in association with others.

(2)No one shall be arbitrarily deprived ofhis property.

Article 18

Everyone has the right to freedom ofthought, conscience and religion; this rightincludes freedom to change his religion orbelief, and freedom, either alone or incommunity with others and in public orprivate, to manifest his religion or belief inteaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19

Everyone has the right to freedom of opin-ion and expression; this right includesfreedom to hold opinions without interfer-ence and to seek, receive and impart infor-mation and ideas through any media andregardless of frontiers.

Article 20

(1)Everyone has the right to freedom ofpeaceful assembly and association.

(2)No one may be compelled to belong toan association.

Article 21

(1)Everyone has the right to take part in thegovernment of his country, directly orthrough freely chosen representatives.

(2)Everyone has the right of equal access topublic service in his country.

(3)The will of the people shall be the basisof the authority of government; this willshall be expressed in periodic andgenuine elections which shall be byuniversal and equal suffrage and shall beheld by secret vote or by equivalent freevoting procedures.

Article 22

Everyone, as a member of society, has theright to social security and is entitled torealisation, through national effort andinternational co-operation and in accord-ance with the organisation and resources ofeach State, of the economic, social andcultural rights indispensable for his dignityand the free development of his personality.

Article 23

(1)Everyone has the right to work, to freechoice of employment, to just andfavourable conditions of work and toprotection against unemployment.

(2)Everyone, without any discrimination,has the right to equal pay for equal work.

(3)Everyone who works has the right to justand favourable remuneration ensuringfor himself and his family an existenceworthy of human dignity, and supple-mented, if necessary, by other means ofsocial protection.

(4)Everyone has the right to form and tojoin trade unions for the protection ofhis interests.

Article 24:

Everyone has the right to rest and leisure,including reasonable limitation of workinghours and periodic holidays with pay.

Annex VI


Article 25

(1)Everyone has the right to a standard ofliving adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, includ-ing food, clothing, housing and medicalcare and necessary social services, and theright to security in the event of unemploy-ment, sickness, disability, widowhood, oldage or other lack of livelihood in circum-stances beyond his control.

(2)Motherhood and childhood are entitledto special care and assistance. All chil-dren, whether born in or out of wedlock,shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 26

(1)Everyone has the right to education.Education shall be free, at least in theelementary and fundamental stages.Elementary education shall be compulso-ry. Technical and professional educationshall be made generally available andhigher education shall be equally accessi-ble to all on the basis of merit.

(2)Education shall be directed to the fulldevelopment of the human personalityand to the strengthening of respect forhuman rights and fundamental freedoms.It shall promote understanding, toler-ance and friendship among all nations,racial or religious groups, and shallfurther the activities of the UnitedNations for the maintenance of peace.

(3)Parents have a prior right to choose thekind of education that shall be given totheir children.

Article 27

(1)Everyone has the right freely to partici-pate in the cultural life of the communi-

ty, to enjoy the arts and to share inscientific advancement and its benefits.

(2)Everyone has the right to the protectionof the moral and material interestsresulting from any scientific, literary orartistic production of which he is theauthor.

Article 28

Everyone is entitled to a social and interna-tional order in which the rights andfreedoms set forth in this Declaration can befully realised.

Article 29

(1)Everyone has duties to the community inwhich alone the free and full develop-ment of his personality is possible.

(2)In the exercise of his rights andfreedoms, everyone shall be subject onlyto such limitations as are determined bylaw solely for the purpose of securing duerecognition and respect for the rights andfreedoms of others and of meeting thejust requirements of morality, publicorder and the general welfare in ademocratic society.

(3)These rights and freedoms may in nocase be exercised contrary to the purpos-es and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30

Nothing in this Declaration may be inter-preted as implying for any State, group orperson any right to engage in any activity orto perform any act aimed at the destructionof any of the rights and freedoms set forthherein.

391



The Rio Declaration

Rio Declaration on Environment and Development

The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development,

Having met at Rio de Janeiro from 3 to 14 June 1992,

Reaffirming the Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment,adopted at Stockholm on 16 June 1972, a/ and seeking to build upon it,

With the goal of establishing a new and equitable global partnership through the creation ofnew levels of co-operation among States, key sectors of societies and people,

Working towards international agreements which respect the interests of all and protect theintegrity of the global environmental and developmental system,

Recognising the integral and interdependent nature of the Earth, our home,

Proclaims that:

Principle 1

Human beings are at the centre of concernsfor sustainable development. They areentitled to a healthy and productive life inharmony with nature.

Principle 2

States have, in accordance with the Charterof the United Nations and the principles ofinternational law, the sovereign right toexploit their own resources pursuant to theirown environmental and developmentalpolicies, and the responsibility to ensurethat activities within their jurisdiction orcontrol do not cause damage to the environ-ment of other States or of areas beyond thelimits of national jurisdiction.

Principle 3

The right to development must be fulfilledso as to equitably meet developmental andenvironmental needs of present and futuregenerations.

Principle 4

In order to achieve sustainable develop-ment, environmental protection shall

constitute an integral part of the develop-ment process and cannot be considered inisolation from it.

Principle 5

All States and all people shall co-operate inthe essential task of eradicating poverty asan indispensable requirement for sustainabledevelopment, in order to decrease thedisparities in standards of living and bettermeet the needs of the majority of the peopleof the world.

Principle 6

The special situation and needs of develop-ing countries, particularly the least devel-oped and those most environmentallyvulnerable, shall be given special priority.International actions in the field of environ-ment and development should also addressthe interests and needs of all countries.

Principle 7

States shall cooperate in a spirit of globalpartnership to conserve, protect and restorethe health and integrity of the Earth’s ecosys-tem. In view of the different contributions toglobal environmental degradation, States have

Annex VI


common but differentiated responsibilities.The developed countries acknowledge theresponsibility that they bear in the interna-tional pursuit to sustainable development inview of the pressures their societies place onthe global environment and of the technolo-gies and financial resources they command.

Principle 8

To achieve sustainable development and ahigher quality of life for all people, Statesshould reduce and eliminate unsustainablepatterns of production and consumption andpromote appropriate demographic policies.

Principle 9

States should cooperate to strengthen endog-enous capacity-building for sustainabledevelopment by improving scientific under-standing through exchanges of scientific andtechnological knowledge, and by enhancingthe development, adaptation, diffusion andtransfer of technologies, including new andinnovative technologies.

Principle 10

Environmental issues are best handled withparticipation of all concerned citizens, atthe relevant level. At the national level,each individual shall have appropriateaccess to information concerning theenvironment that is held by public authori-ties, including information on hazardousmaterials and activities in their communi-ties, and the opportunity to participate indecision-making processes. States shallfacilitate and encourage public awarenessand participation by making informationwidely available. Effective access to judicialand administrative proceedings, includingredress and remedy, shall be provided.

Principle 11

States shall enact effective environmentallegislation. Environmental standards,management objectives and priorities shouldreflect the environmental and developmentcontext to which they apply. Standardsapplied by some countries may be inappro-

priate and of unwarranted economic andsocial cost to other countries, in particulardeveloping countries.

Principle 12

States should cooperate to promote asupportive and open international economicsystem that would lead to economic growthand sustainable development in all coun-tries, to better address the problems of envi-ronmental degradation. Trade policy measuresfor environmental purposes should notconstitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiablediscrimination or a disguised restriction oninternational trade. Unilateral actions to dealwith environmental challenges outside thejurisdiction of the importing country should beavoided. Environmental measures addressingtransboundary or global environmentalproblems should, as far as possible, be based onan international consensus.

Principle 13

States shall develop national law regardingliability and compensation for the victims ofpollution and other environmental damage.States shall also cooperate in an expeditiousand more determined manner to developfurther international law regarding liabilityand compensation for adverse effects ofenvironmental damage caused by activitieswithin their jurisdiction or control to areasbeyond their jurisdiction.

Principle 14

States should effectively cooperate todiscourage or prevent the relocation andtransfer to other States of any activities andsubstances that cause severe environmentaldegradation or are found to be harmful tohuman health.

Principle 15

In order to protect the environment, theprecautionary approach shall be widelyapplied by States according to their capabili-ties. Where there are threats of serious orirreversible damage, lack of full scientificcertainty shall not be used as a reason for

393



postponing cost-effective measures toprevent environmental degradation.

Principle 16

National authorities should endeavour topromote the internalisation of environmen-tal costs and the use of economic instru-ments, taking into account the approachthat the polluter should, in principle, bearthe cost of pollution, with due regard to thepublic interest and without distortinginternational trade and investment.

Principle 17

Environmental impact assessment, as anational instrument, shall be undertaken forproposed activities that are likely to have asignificant adverse impact on the environmentand are subject to a decision of a competentnational authority.

Principle 18

States shall immediately notify other States ofany natural disasters or other emergencies thatare likely to produce sudden harmful effects onthe environment of those States. Every effortshall be made by the international communityto help States so afflicted.

Principle 19

States shall provide prior and timely notifica-tion and relevant information to potentiallyaffected States on activities that may have asignificant adverse transboundary environ-mental effect and shall consult with thoseStates at an early stage and in good faith.

Principle 20

Women have a vital role in environmentalmanagement and development. Their fullparticipation is therefore essential to achievesustainable development.

Principle 21

The creativity, ideals and courage of the youthof the world should be mobilised to forge aglobal partnership in order to achieve

sustainable development and ensure a betterfuture for all.

Principle 22

Indigenous people and their communities andother local communities have a vital role inenvironmental management and developmentbecause of their knowledge and traditionalpractices. States should recognise and dulysupport their identity, culture and interestsand enable their effective participation in theachievement of sustainable development.

Principle 23

The environment and natural resources ofpeople under oppression, domination andoccupation shall be protected.

Principle 24

Warfare is inherently destructive of sustain-able development. States shall thereforerespect international law providing protec-tion for the environment in times of armedconflict and cooperate in its further devel-opment, as necessary.

Principle 25

Peace, development and environmentalprotection are interdependent and indivisible.

Principle 26

States shall resolve all their environmentaldisputes peacefully and by appropriatemeans in accordance with the Charter ofthe United Nations.

Principle 27

States and people shall cooperate in good faithand in a spirit of partnership in the fulfilmentof the principles embodied in this Declarationand in the further development of internation-al law in the field of sustainable development.

Annex VII


Annex VII

Members of theWorld Commission on Dams

Professor Kader Asmal, Chair, is a promi-nent member of President Thabo Mbeki’sCabinet as Minister of Education of theRepublic of South Africa. Under NelsonMandela, he was the Minister of WaterAffairs and Forestry and led the fundamen-tal review and reform of South Africa’swater resource management policy. Prior tohis return from exile in 1990, ProfessorAsmal was a law professor at Trinity CollegeDublin for 27 years, specialising in humanrights, labour and international law. From1980 to 1986 he was Dean of the Faculty ofArts (Humanities). He was also founder ofthe British Anti-Apartheid Movement aswell as the Irish Anti-Apartheid Movementin 1963, and its chairperson until 1991.

In 1983, Professor Asmal received the PrixUNESCO for the advancement of humanrights. In 1993, he became a member of thenegotiating team of the African NationalCongress at the Multi-Party NegotiatingForum, and in May 1994 was elected to theNational Assembly. In 1996, he was award-ed the Gold Medal Award for conservationfrom the World Wide Fund for Nature–South Africa. He is also a patron of theGlobal Water Partnership. On 22 March2000 – World Water Day – Professor Asmalwas awarded the 10th Stockholm Water Prizeby the Stockholm Water Foundation. Hisselection to chair the World Commission onDams was the result of a comprehensiveglobal search process and consultation withparticipants at the Gland workshop.

395

Members of the World Commission on Dams


Lakshmi Chand Jain, Vice Chair, hasserved on India’s National Planning Com-mission and Planning Boards of severalstates and was appointed High Commission-er for India to South Africa for 1997–99. Hewas a member of the Government of India’sIndependent Committee to report onselected aspects of the Sardar SarovarProject. He has also served as the Chairper-son of the Industrial Development Services,a techno-economic consultancy organisa-tion in India, for 30 years. L.C. Jain receivedthe prestigious Ramon Magsaysay Award forPublic Service in 1989.

Donald J. Blackmore is the Chief Executiveof the Murray-Darling Basin Commission, inCanberra, Australia. He has brought princi-ples of environmentally sustainable watermanagement to a major river basin initiallyfocused on irrigation and hydroelectricpower generation. Since 1990 he has servedas Director and Deputy Chairperson ofAustralia’s Land & Water Resources Re-search & Development Corporation. Healso was a member of the InternationalAdvisory Panel for the Aral Sea.

Joji Carino’s work began as an activist andanalyst of indigenous peoples’ issues in hernative Philippines, particularly in relationto dam projects in the Cordillera region.Over 25 years she has worked as an activecampaigner and advocate of indigenouspeoples’ human rights. She now works forthe Tebtebba Foundation (IndigenousCentre for International Policy, Research,and Education). Well known for defendingthe interests of tribal and other indigenouspeoples and minorities, she has effectivelycarried her agenda into global fora.

José Goldemberg is a professor at theUniversity of São Paulo, Brazil, and hasbeen recognized for his work on the future ofenergy globally. He was the chairman andCEO of the Energy Company of the State ofSão Paulo. He has served as Rector of hisUniversity, and as Secretary of Science andTechnology for the Federal Government ofBrazil and as Minister of Education. He

currently serves in senior capacities with theInternational Energy Initiative and theIntergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange. His most recent work has been asChairperson of the World Energy Assessment.

Judy Henderson trained professionally as amedical doctor. She served as Chair ofOxfam International, was a board memberof the Environmental Protection Agency ofNew South Wales, Australia, and a formerboard member of Greenpeace International.She has a distinguished record of involve-ment in social and environmental issuesinternationally. She is currently a boardmember of the Ethical Investment Agency.

Göran Lindahl is the President and CEO ofABB Ltd., a global technology group withheadquarters in Zurich. He is a member ofthe Advisory Board for the Alliance forGlobal Sustainability, deputy chairman ofthe Prince of Wales Business Leaders Forumand on the advisory board of the WorldChildhood Foundation. He is also a frequentspeaker at the World Economic Forum. Anelectrical engineer by profession, he hasbeen involved in many major electricityinfrastructure projects, including largehydroelectric schemes. As the head of ABB,Göran Lindahl leads one of the world’slargest industrial companies. The ABBGroup employs about 160,000 people inmore than 100 countries.

Deborah Moore was until recently SeniorScientist at Environmental Defense, a US-based NGO, where she continues as Con-sulting Scientist working to protect livingrivers worldwide. In the western UnitedStates, Moore has worked with NativeAmerican communities and the U.S.Congress to design and promote innovativewater rights and river restoration arrange-ments. Internationally, she has contributedto many global water policy fora, includingthe Dublin Conference on Water and theEnvironment, and analysed the performanceof large-scale river development projectsand alternatives in Asia and Latin America.

Annex VII


Medha Patkar graduated in physicalsciences and did postgraduate research insocial sciences. She was a member of thefaculty at the Tata Institute of Social Sci-ences before founding the Narmada BachaoAndolan (Struggle to Save the NarmadaRiver) in India, a people’s movementagainst the construction of large dams onthe Narmada River and for alternatives inwater, power and development. She is afounding member and National Convenorof the National Alliance of People’s Move-ments. She is internationally recognised as acampaigner for human and political rights.

Thayer Scudder is an emeritus professor ofanthropology at the California Institute ofTechnology. His work over 40 years onsocioeconomic issues associated with riverbasin development has been definitive in thefield. His work in Africa is best known, but hehas undertaken studies of sustainable resourceuse in all parts of the world with a focus onresettlement and socioeconomic issues relatedto infrastructure development. He has alsoserved on a number of independent reviewpanels for dam projects in Africa and Asia.

Jan Veltrop worked with the Harza Engi-neering Company from 1954 to 1994 exceptfor a three-year period when he served as

Dean of the Faculty of Engineering at theUniversity of Nigeria. He was Chairmanof the U.S. Committee on Large Dams(1981-82) and President of the Interna-tional Commission on Large Dams (1988-91). At Harza he was Chief Engineer,member of the Board of Directors, andretired as Senior Vice President. Heworked on many world-class hydroprojectssuch as Mangla, Tarbela, Guri, Yacyreta,Karun-I, Ertan and Bath County pumped-storage; received ASCE’s Rickey Medal in1997 for his contributions in the field ofhydroelectric engineering; and was electeda member of the National Academy ofEngineering in 1998.

Achim Steiner (WCD Secretary-General, ex-officio Commissioner) has served as anadvisor on international development policyas well as economic planning and naturalresources management. During his career hehas worked for both governmental and non-governmental organisations, with extendedassignments in India, Pakistan, Germany,Zimbabwe/Southern Africa, the UnitedStates, and Vietnam. Most recently, heserved as Senior Policy Advisor for GlobalPolicy with IUCN in Washington and ChiefTechnical Advisor with the Mekong RiverCommission/GTZ, based in Hanoi, Viet Nam.

397

A Profile of the WCD Secretariat


Annex VIII

A Profile of theWCD Secretariat

Programme Staff Finance & Administration Staff(on September 1, 2000) (on September 1, 2000)Secretary-GeneralAchim Steiner – Germany

Bruce Aylward – United States Solly Fazel – South AfricaJeremy Bird* – United Kingdom Jacques Coetzee – South AfricaChristopher Clarke – South Africa Lucia Hickman – South AfricaLawrence Haas* – Canada Noluthando Magadla – South AfricaSaneeya Hussain* – Pakistan Yumna McCann – South AfricaMadiodio Niasse – Senegal Pamela Morris – South AfricaS. Parasuraman* – India Nadia Richards – South AfricaCorli Pretorius – South Africa Phumla Yeki – South AfricaJamie Skinner – United KingdomJames Workman – United States

* Team Leader

Research FellowsThe WCD Secretariat was fortunate to have a large number of research fellows contributing tothe work programme during the life of the Commission. The time they spent at the Commis-sion ranged from one month to nine months.

Mark Cassidy – Australia Alice Ojwang – KenyaSophia Chan – Canada Saule Ospanova – KazakhstanLuis Paulo Ferraz – Brazil Sarah Porter – United StatesNicolas Gutman – Argentina Chaminda Rajapakse – Sri LankaLaurence Haller – Switzerland Manrique Rojas – Costa RicaHuynh Thuba – Viet Nam Sohini Sengupta – IndiaAnneli Lagman – Philippines Jason Switzer – CanadaKhutso Madubanya – South Africa Pamela Wallace – MalawiSandi Nielsen – Zimbabwe Webster Whande – ZimbabwePumeza Nodada – South Africa

Annex VIII


Temporary Staff

The Commission would like to recognise the contribution of the following individuals whojoined the Secretariat for various periods of time:

Programme Staff Finance & Administration Staff

Kate Dunn – Canada Nikki Boltman – South AfricaPat Govender – South Africa Kathy Bova – South AfricaSanjeev Khagram – United States Michel Cozien – South AfricaElisabeth Monosowski* – Brazil Salih Hendricks – South AfricaEric Noel – Australia Ian Fennell – United KingdomEngelbertus Oud – The Netherlands Marshay Mackay – South Africa

Ashleigh Meier – Zimbabwe

Consultants and AdvisorsThe WCD also wishes to acknowledge the contribution of the following individuals for theirspecial inputs as consultants and advisors to the Secretariat and the Commissioners:

Jeremy Berkoff – United KingdomMaggie Black – United KingdomDick Cloete – South AfricaTim Cullen – United KingdomRobert Goodland – United StatesPablo Gutman – ArgentinaMark Halle – SwitzerlandMinoru Kuriki – JapanDonal O’Leary – IrelandKatarzyna Ronda – South AfricaJohn Scanlon – AustraliaMark Svendson – United StatesLinda Starke – United StatesAllan Taylor – South AfricaMartin ter Woort – Canada

399

Index


Index

The index does not cover the Executive Summary (pages xxvi-xxxvii) or the glossary (Annex II). Page numbers given initalics indicate illustrations, figures or tables.

Aactivist groups 18-20ADB 41, 45, 47, 48, 54, 57, 62, 114, 171,

188African Development Bank (AfDB) 41,

54, 56, 62, 171, 188Agno River basin 111agriculture 6, 12, 42-6, 100-101, 137-48Akosombo dam 81, 107, 108, 110, 115,

116, 118alternatives to dams 23, 135-64, 178-80,

178, 221-24, 262, 263, 266-70Amu Darya River 88Andra Pradesh II & III 128aquatic ecosystems 77-83, 90, 234-39Aral Sea 88Argentina 106, 117, 144, 305Arun III dam 19, 172Asian Development Bank see ADBAslantas dam 31, 42, 44, 49, 56-7, 63, 82,

85, 116alternatives considered 178cost recovery 48, 48costs and benefits 100, 121, 121,124, 125cropping pattern and yields 45-6cultural heritage 117displaced communities 105, 106,107financial assistance 173irrigation 44, 46, 116, 141, 190

Asmal, Kader viii, 28, 394Asurini people 107, 122Aswan High dam 13, 59, 107

cultural heritage 117, 117displacement 103flood management 59health 118

loss in fish production 85sediment management 81

Australia 11, 75, 79, 82, 83, 88, 139, 145,159, 231, 296, 304

Austria 91, 177

BBakolori dam 18, 35, 112Bakun project 111Balbina dam 111Bangladesh 13, 111, 146, 160banks 188-90, 315-16Bargi dam 106, 128baseline assessments

ecosystems 293-94social conditions 296-97

Batang Ai dam 107Bayano dam 111benefit-sharing mechanisms 243, 253-54,

300-301benefits see costs and benefitsBenin 81, 115Bhagani Tildeh river catchment 144Bhumibol dam 107bilateral financing agencies 187-90, 315bilharzia 118biodiversity

in aquatic ecosystems 77-83in terrestrial ecosystems 75-7Convention 234, 235, 238

biomass systems 154birds 78, 83, 87black stilts 78blackfly 80Blackmore, Donald ix, 395Botswana 84Brazil 11, 14, 84, 101, 101, 107, 108, 110,

111, 112, 127, 141, 144, 231

see also Tucurui damEarth Summit (1992) 234financial assistance 172participation in decision-making 177

Brazil Ceara Water Resources 128British Columbia 53Buffalo Creek dam 64bulk water supply 56-7Burnett River 296Burundi 104

CCambodia 145, 145Cameroon 84, 85, 231, 239Canada 4, 11, 14, 31, 59, 112, 128, 226

see also Grand Coulee damcanal lining 140capital costs 39-41, 48, 49, 70Cariño, Joji ix, 395Case Studies ix, 30, 31, 38, 40-42, 44-45

53-54, 350-53see also names of specific dams

Cerro de Orro dam 107Ceyhan Basin 31, 173Chad 112Chagga people 174Chakma people 111Challawa Gorge dam 113Chandil dam 18Chashma project 67Chico River 19Chikugo River 59Chile 19, 111, 143China 4, 7-9, 10, 13, 14, 17, 21, 62, 66,

100, 107, 113, 180see also Three Gorges dambenefit-sharing 127, 128corruption 187

Index


cultural heritage 118displacement of communities 104,107, 108, 109, 110electricity 152environmental conditions 190financial assistance 189flood management 160, 161health issues 118irrigation 140, 141, 144, 144, 146reparations 128water supply 158

Chinantec Indians 107Chixoy dam 18, 106Churchill Rivers project 111civil society organisations 205, 314-16climate change 7-8, 22, 53, 60, 64, 69, 74,

75-7, 149, 223Colombia 105, 127, 142, 172Colorado River ii, 78-9, 92, 125, 143, 145Columbia Basin project 44, 45, 47, 47,

49, 59, 62, 122, 128Columbia River 80, 82, 88-9, 175, 231Columbia Treaty (1968) 175Colville tribe 106, 128, 190command area 43, 43, 70compensation 105, 106, 107, 114, 124,

230, 238, 241, 242see also reparations

compliance 185-90, 190, 204, 244-50compliance plans 244, 301construction costs 39-40construction phase 99-100contracts 242-43, 298-300Convention Concerning the Protection &

Integration of Indigenous & OtherTribal & Semi-Tribal Populations inIndependent Countries (1959) 23-4

corruption 186-87, 249cost

overruns 39-42, 54, 68recovery 38, 48-9, 56, 62

cost-benefit analysis (CBA) 46, 180-82, 186Costa Rica 172costs and benefits 37, 21, 120-29

see also cost-benefit analysiscountry studies 30, 350, 351cropping intensity 43, 45, 70cropping patterns 45Cross-Check Survey ix, 28, 30, 31, 42,

43, 44, 50, 53, 62, 64, 353-56cultivation techniques 141cultural heritage 116-18, 285

DDaguangba Multipurpose project 128dam safety 63-5, 186, 272dam-building countries 9, 11Damodar Valley Corporation 60dams

debate 2-3, 17-21

existing 225-33, 291-93in the pipeline 276-77multi-purpose 39, 44, 62-3, 68opposition to 18-21

Danjiangkou project 108Danube River 177decision-making 169-75, 199, 202, 205,

206, 208-11, 263, 263, 280-81participation in 176-77, 177, 204,215, 217, 219, 222

decommissioning 10-11, 92, 184-85, 232-33demand-side management 148, 149, 150-

51, 157-60, 180Denmark 157Dhom dam 106Diama dam 119diseases 115, 118-19displacement of communities 16-17, 102-

112, 207, 240see also resettlement

dispute resolution 307distributional analysis 288Dongting Lake 161drainage 139, 161

EEarth Summit (1992) 234Echo Park dam 19economic growth 4-5economic internal rate of return see EIRReconomic profitability

hydropower dams 54-6irrigation dams 47-8water supply dams 58

ecosystem enhancement 86-7, 231ecosystems

baseline surveys 293-94impacts 10, 15-16, 16, 21-2, 73-93,234-39

Egypt 13, 59, 66, 107, 116-18, 145EIRR

Ghazi-Barotha project 291irrigation dams 46, 47, 48Kariba dam 55multi-purpose projects 62water supply dams 58

electricity 14, 101, 101, 116, 121, 128,148-56, 150see also hydropower

Embera people 107, 111employment 101-102, 115Endangered Species Act (1974) 19energy resources 148-56, 153-54entitlements 240-43environmental flow assessments (EFA)

294-95environmental flow releases (EFR) 238-39environmental impact assessments (EIA)

19, 89, 177, 182-83, 183, 187, 236,241, 282-85

environmental impacts 21-2, 25, 223-24,289, 289, 291-92see also ecosystems impacts

Epupa dam 19, 117equity 125-29, 204, 205Ertan project 127European Union 15European Wind Energy Association 154evaluation studies 47, 54, 184, 226-27,

274, 312existing dams see damsexport credit agencies (ECA) 188, 246,

312, 316

Ffinancial agencies 188-90, 315-16financial internal rate of return see FIRRfinancial profitability

hydropower dams 54-6irrigation dams 46-8water supply dams 58

findings see WCD findingsFinland 91Finnish International Development

Agency (FINNIDA) 174FIRR

irrigation dams 46water supply dams 58

Fisching Project 177fish 16, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82-3, 84-6, 119,

231, 237, 295-96, 296fisheries 84-6, 90, 113, 295-96flood control

benefits 58-59limitations 60, 83dams 58-62

flood management 14-15, 60-62, 68, 84,160-63, 161, 162, 239

floodplain ecosystems 83-4, 90, 145, 145,147, 237-38

Food and Agriculture Organisation(FAO) 140, 316

foreign assistance 170-73, 173, 174Forestry Stewardship Council (FSC) 246forests 75, 76, 83, 161France 4, 10, 81, 91, 92, 231free, prior & informed consent 218-219,

280-82Freudenau dam 177Friesach project 177Funtua dam 104

GGansu province 144, 144Gariep dam 44, 115, 121, 122, 124Gavaio da Montanha people 107, 122gender disparities 114, 116, 216Germany 4, 14, 154, 158Gezira-Managil irrigation schemes 140Ghana 81, 107, 108, 110, 115, 146

401

Index


Ghazi-Barotha project 128, 291Gland Workshop iii, vii, 18, 21, 27, 28Glen Canyon dam 78-9, 79global warming see climate changeGlomma and Laagen Basin 31, 40, 50, 53,

59, 66, 103, 179alternatives considered 178costs and benefits 121, 121, 124,125fish passes 82political decision 170services 121, 122

Goldemberg, José ix, 395governance 22-3, 205, 209Grand Coulee dam 31, 44, 49, 50, 51, 53,

66, 100alternatives considered 178cost recovery 62costs and benefits 47, 121, 122, 123-24, 124, 125, 190cultural heritage 117displacement of communities 105,106, 113, 115ecosystems 80, 81, 82, 85, 86, 88-9employment 99, 102flood control 59performance 55, 55political decision 170reparations 128

Great Fish River 80greenhouse gases (GHG) 74, 75-7, 76, 77,

90, 92, 122, 149, 223, 287-88gross value of production 45-6groundwater abstraction 146groundwater pumping 139, 139Guatemala 18, 106Gwembe Tonga people 18, 106, 107, 114,

119Gwembe Tonga Rehabilitation and

Development Programme 128

HHadejia River 113Hainburg dam 177Hanoi 14Harvey Basin Restoration Trust 75health issues 100, 115, 118-20, 236, 241,

284Hells Canyon dam 82Helsinki Rules (1996) 252, 254Henderson, Judy viii, 395Hendrik Verwoerd dam 170Hillsborough dam 86Himba people 117HIV/AIDS 100, 115, 119Ho Chi Minh City 14

Hoa Binh 107Houay Ho dam 108human rights see rightsHungary 185Hydro-Québec 128hydropower 12, 14, 101, 102hydropower dams 49-56, 62, 68Hydropower and Environment 91

IIbaloy people 111ICOLD World Register of Dams 314Iguacu River 177Ilisu dam 19, 188impact assessments 241, 282-85, 306-307

see also environmental impactassessmentsenvironmental flow assessments294-95

impoverishment risk analysis 241, 297-98Inanda dam 117India 4, 7, 9, 10, 10, 17, 19, 21, 41, 58,

66, 104, 172see also Sardar Sarovar projectcosts and benefits 123-24, 127cultural heritage 117, 118displacement of communities 18,106, 107, 108, 110, 115ecosystems 75electricity 152environmental conditions 190financial assistance 171-72, 188flood control 60health issues 118irrigation 13, 44, 100, 140, 141, 144,145, 146reparations 128water supply 157, 158

indigenous peoples 19, 38, 105, 106,110-12, 207, 216, 218-20, 256

Indonesia 4, 105, 108, 113Indus Basin Irrigation System (IBIS) 44,

48-9, 67, 122, 122, 140Indus River 59, 90industrial usage of water 13-14Innu people 112Inspection Panel 19Integrity Pacts 249, 305Inter-American Development Bank 41,

171, 172, 188, 216Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change (IPCC) 7International Association for Impact

Assessment 314International Bank for Reconstruction &

Development (IBRD) 170see also World Bank

International Commission on Irrigation& Drainage (ICID) 27, 173, 314

International Commission on Large Dams(ICOLD) 11, 27, 65, 73, 172, 173,314, 370

International Court of Justice 254International Covenant on Economic,

Social & Cultural Rights (1966) 24International Energy Agency 91, 314International Energy Association (IEA) 73International Finance Corporation (IFC)

188, 230International Hydropower Association

(IHA) 73, 173, 314International Labour Organisation

(Convention 169) 216, 219International Organisation for Standardi-

sation (ISO) 246, 314, 315, 318International Rivers Network (IRN) 27, 41International Water Management

Institute 68investment 11, 13, 249-50Iran 10Ireland 295irrigated area 43, 43, 44-5irrigation 12-13, 13, 100-101, 137-48

dams 42-9, 62, 68systems 138-43

ISO 14001 management system standard257, 315, 318

Israel 141Itá dam 107, 110Itaipu dam 127IUCN see World Conservation Union

JJain, Lakshmi Chand viii, 395Jama’are River 113Japan 9, 10, 59, 60, 127, 157, 158, 231Japanese encephalitis 118Jordan 141

KKainji dam 85, 109Kano River project 113Kao Laem dam 105, 107Kaptai dam 111Kariba dam 18, 31, 40, 42, 50, 52, 53, 55

access to electricity 128alternatives considered 178costs and benefits 121, 121, 124, 125displacement of communities 103,106, 115, 190ecosystems 75, 85, 86employment 99, 102financial assistance 173health 118, 118-19political decision 170reparations 128

Kedung Ombo dam 108Kelly Barnes dam 64Kenya 84, 104, 107, 146

Index


Kiambere Reservoir 104, 107Kolyma River 113Korea 237Kotri barrage 88, 112Kpong dam 110Kuna people 107, 111Kyoto Protocol 287

LLake Chad 84Lake Roosevelt 122Laos 20, 75, 108, 113, 145, 183large dams

functions 12, 12regional distribution 8types 11

legislation 127-28, 185, 186-87, 189, 200,216, 226, 242-43, 249, 255, 298-301

Lesotho 231Lesotho Highlands Water Project 19-20,

119, 187licensing procedures 185, 226, 232-33,

272, 274life-cycle assessment 286-87Lindahl, Göran ix, 395Lingjintan project 113, 190Liu-Yan-Ba project 107Logone-Chari system 84Lubuge project 127

MMadden dam 117Maguga project 119Mahaweli Development Programme 105,

114, 115, 319Maheshwar dam 188malaria 118, 119Malaysia 107, 111, 141, 162, 162Mali 83, 84, 112Manantali dam 84, 112, 119Manibeli Declaration 26maps 31Marshall Plan 170Matsubara dam 59Maya Achi people 18, 106Mazatec people 18, 106Mekong River 84, 145mercury levels 118, 119Mexico 18, 49, 106, 109, 111, 145micro-irrigation systems 141migration 82-3Miguel Aleman dam 18, 106Mississippi River 160Missouri River 111mitigation measures 82, 90, 91, 93, 241-43

see also compensation; resettlementmitigation, resettlement and development

action plan (MRDAP) 298-300Mohale dam 231Moore, Deborah x, 395

Morocco 66, 145Morse Report (1992) 26Mozambique 86Mubuku project 109Muda Irrigation Scheme 141multi-criteria analysis 223, 224, 236, 285-

86multi-purpose dams see damsmultilateral financing agencies 187-90, 315Multilateral Investment Guarantee

Agency (MIGA) 230Mun River 84Mur River 177Murray Darling Basin 88, 231Murray River ii, 79, 83, 140

NNam Ngum River 59-60, 61, 256Nam Theun II 20, 75Namibia 19, 117Nangbeto dam 107, 115Narmada River 128Narmada Sagar dam 117Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal 104National Environmental Protection Act

(1969) 19natural vegetation 139, 158-59needs assessment 222, 262, 263, 264-65negotiated outcomes 208-211, 208negotiations 218, 219, 280-81Nepal 13, 19, 53, 172, 256, 317Netherlands 160New Zealand 78Niger 112Niger River 83, 84, 85Nigeria 18, 58, 84, 104, 109, 112, 113, 140Nile Delta 81, 85, 145Nile River ii, 59non-dam options see alternatives to damsNORAD 174, 183Norway 11, 31, 91, 178, 185, 190, 237

see also Glomma and Laagen Basinnuclear power 153Nya Heun people 108

OO&M costs see operational & mainte-

nance costsOECD Convention on Combating

Bribery of Foreign Public Officials inInternational Business Transactions(1997) 187, 249

OECD countries 4, 30Ogallala aquifer 146Okavango Delta 84Ontario Hydro Study 65operation issues 183-84operational & maintenance (O&M) costs

48-9, 48, 54, 62opposition to dams see dams

options for energy & water needs seealternatives to dams

Orange River 44, 80, 81, 88, 125, 170, 178Development Project 102, 122Pilot Study 80

O’Shaugnessy dam 18

PPak Mun dam 19, 31, 40, 51, 55, 113, 115

alternatives considered 178costs and benefits 55, 121, 124, 125cultural heritage 117displacement of communities 104ecosystems 82, 84, 85environmental impact assessment183, 190financial assistance 173

Pakistan 7, 13, 31, 67, 113, 122, 128, 140,291see also Indus Basin; Tarbela damfinancial assistance 173irrigation 141, 145, 146

Panama 107, 111, 117Panama Canal 102Pangani Falls Redevelopment Project 174Pangue project 111Papaloapan River Commission 18, 106Paraguay 106, 144Parakaná people 106, 107, 122,participation in decision-making see

decision-makingPatkar, Medha viii, 396Pecos valley 145Pehuenches people 111performance 21, 38, 45

Columbia Basin project 47evaluations 184findings 68-9flood control dams 58-62hydropower dams 49-56improvement 138-40, 227-28multi-purpose dams 62-3water supply dams 56-8

performance bonds 247-48, 301, 303-304,304

Philippines 19, 58, 101, 110-11, 188plankton 81Poland 61-2political decision-making 169-70, 170Pollan dam 295pollution 7Pongolapoort dam 83, 84, 85population 3, 17, 17Porto Primavera dam 84Position Paper on dams and the Environment

(1997) 27private sector 205, 207, 314-15project

benefits see benefit-sharing mecha-nisms

403

Index


implementation 262, 272-73operation 263, 274-75preparation 262, 270-71

project-level impact assessments 283-85public acceptance 177, 215-20

Rrain-fed agriculture 143-45, 144rainwater harvesting 158, 158Rajasthan 144Ralco dam 19, 111Ramsar Convention on Wetlands 86, 234,

235, 238recycling of water 145-46, 159Regional Consultations ix, 28, 32, 98,

117, 357regulations see legislationreparations 128-29, 133, 229, 230-31resettlement 17, 20, 22, 103, 105, 106,

107-110, 128, 241-43, 298-300review panels (IRP) 302-303Rhine River 160Rhone River 81, 160Rift Valley fever 118, 119rights 19, 20, 22, 24, 200-202, 203, 203,

204, 206, 256rights and risks approach 202, 206-210,

215, 216, 240, 241Rio+10 process 313, 316Rio de Janeiro 234Rio Declaration on Environment and

Development (1992) 24, 200, 201,391-393

Rio Grande project 127Rio principles 201-203, 207risk

analysis 241, 297-98assessments 290-91, 291

risks 26, 186, 207-208, 207, 237river fragmentation 87, 88-9River Severn 64rivers see also aquatic ecosystems

flow regimes 78-81, 81restoration 10, 234-36shared 173-75, 174, 251-56, 306-307transformation by dams 15-16, 15

Role of Dams for Irrigation, Drainage andFlood Control (2000) 27

rural electrification 154-55Russia 11, 14Ruzizi project 104Rwanda 104

Ssafety see dam safetySahel 83salinity 66-8, 69, 139-40, 139, 159salmon 78, 81, 82, 85, 89, 113, 295Salto Caixas project 177San Roque dam 111, 188

São Paulo 34, 101, 101Sardar Sarovar project 19, 26, 104, 105,

108, 114, 115, 118, 172Saudi Arabia 146schistosomiasis 118, 119Scudder, Thayer viii, 396sediment management 81-2, 293sedimentation 10, 16, 44, 62, 65-6, 65, 69,

75, 81, 138-39, 228Senegal 84, 112, 145, 231, 239Senegal River 84, 112, 116, 127shared rivers 173-75, 174, 251-56, 306-

307shared values 199, 199, 202, 206Shepparton Irrigation Region 139Shimouke dam 59Shuikou project 127Silenced Rivers (1996) 27Singkarak project 113Sirindhorn dam 107Slovakia 179Sobradinho reservoir 112social conditions, baseline assessments

296-97social impacts 16-17, 22, 25, 97-130, 289-

90, 289, 291-92socio-economic impacts 99-102, 112-14,

182, 223-24, 228-31, 241Sokoto River 112solar photovoltaics (PV) 154solar thermal systems 154South Africa 11, 20, 53, 88, 115

see also Gariep dam; Orange RiverDevelopment Projectaccess to electricity 128cultural heritage 117ecosystems 82, 83, 84, 85, 87water supply 158-59

South African National Water Act 231,239, 253

South Korea 10Spain 9, 11, 15, 185Spokane tribe 106Sri Lanka 51, 105, 114, 115, 145, 317Sri Sailam project 106, 107stakeholder analysis 279-80stakeholders forum 217-18, 279-80, 286statistics 368-82Steiner, Achim x, 396Sterling Forest 159strategic impact assessment 282-83submissions 29, 32, 211, 357-58Sudan 84, 112, 118, 118, 140Sudd 84Sulawesi 105supply-side options

energy 151-54water and irrigation 143-48water supply 158-59

surface irrigation 46, 141, 228

Suriname 305Sweden 91, 237Swedish International Development

Agency (SIDA) 174Switzerland 91Syr Darya River 88

TTana River 84, 104tank systems 144-45Tanzania 172, 174Tarbela dam 31, 42, 44, 46, 50, 51, 52, 53,

56-7, 99alternatives considered 178costs and benefits 121, 122, 123,124, 125displacement of communities 105,106, 107, 112, 128, 190ecosystems 82, 88financial assistance 173flood management 59gender disparities 114-15, 115sedimentation 66

tenders 270Tenughat reservoir 60terrestrial ecosystems 75, 75Teton dam 64Thailand 19, 31, 105, 107, 108, 142, 145,

158, 183, 317see also Pak Mun dam

Thematic Reviews 28, 30, 32, 33, 356-57Theun Hinboun project 113, 183Three Gorges dams 19, 104, 118, 187,

188, 189Tiga dam 113Tocantins Basin 173Togo 81, 107, 115Tong River 237Tonga people see Gwembe Tonga peopleTransparency International 187, 315Trinidad 86Trushuli-Devighat hydropower station 53,

256trust funds 247-48, 304-305Tucurui dam 31, 42, 50, 53, 102

alternatives considered 178costs and benefits 121, 121, 122,123, 124, 125displaced communities 105, 106, 107ecosystems 75, 77, 82, 85-6, 86financial assistance 173financial performance 55, 56health issues 119, 119, 122and legislation 127, 190

Turkey 10, 19, 31, 44, 45-6, 48, 117, 131,173, 188see also Aslantas dam

Turkmenistan 66

Index


UUganda 109, 157-58UN Convention on Biological Diversity

234, 235, 238UN Convention on Law of Non-Naviga-

ble Use of International Watercours-es 175, 252, 254, 256, 306, 307

UN Declaration of Human Rights (1947)200, 202, 387-90

UN Declaration on the Right to Develop-ment (1986) 24, 200-201, 202, 383-86

UN Draft Declaration on the Rights ofIndigenous People 216

UN Millennium Report 199, 209UNDP Human Development Report

(2000) 203, 203UNDP World Energy Assessment 150-51United Kingdom 158, 159, 317United Nations 140, 316United Nations Charter (1945) 23, 199United Nations Conference on the

Human Environment (1972) 182,201

United Nations Development Programme316

United Nations Educational, Scientific &Cultural Organisation 316

United Nations Environment Programme316

United States 4, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 21, 31,61, 111, 169, 170, 185, 226see also Grand Coulee damcorruption 187ecosystems 91, 93, 231flood management 160irrigation 140, 143, 146water policy 237water supply 159

United States Agency for InternationalDevelopment (USAID) 173

United States Bureau of Reclamation 173

Universal Declaration on Human Rights(1948) 23, 387-90

Upper Krishna project 118Upper Sinú River 105urbanisation 4Urrá 1 dam 105, 113

VVaal River 88values see shared valuesVan der Kloof dam 53, 115, 121, 122, 124vegetation 75, 76, 77, 80, 83, 94, 139,

158-59Veltrop, Jan x, 396Venezuela 144Victoria dam 51Vietnam 14, 62, 107, 145, 185Volta River 81, 85, 110

WWaimiri-Atroari people 111Waitaki River 78water

appropriation methods 143-45quality 7, 88, 139-40, 158rights 143supply 156-60supply dams 56-8tariffs 58, 142, 147, 157water-stressed countries 6, 7, 7waterlogging 66-8

WCDestablishment 25-8mandate 28, 195members viii, ix, x, 394-6policy framework 202, 203-206process 29Secretariat 397-8

WCD Forum 27, 29, 31WCD Global Review xxviii-xxxWCD Knowledge Base 29, 38, 56, 58, 68-

9, 359-67

priorities for strengthening 317WCD findings

compliance 190-91decision-making 188-89ecosystems impacts 92-3needs 163-64planning 191-92socio-economic impacts 129-30

wetlands 83-4, 86-7, 145, 145Wetlands International 86-7wind power 153-54Working for Water programme 158-59World Bank 19, 20, 27, 40, 41, 42, 45, 47,

48, 49, 54, 58, 62, 67, 171-72, 182,230Operations Evaluation DivisionReport (OED)(1996) 26, 27, 41, 46,56, 114policies 188

World Commission on Dams see WCD

XXiaolangdi dam 109-110

YYacyreta project 106Yakutia 113Yangtze River 62, 104Yantan project 127Yellow River ii, 107Yemen 145yields 12, 45-6

ZZaire 84, 104Zambezi River 85Zambia 31, 107, 114, 121, 128, 145

see also Kariba damZimapan resettlement 109Zimbabwe 31, 91, 107, 115, 121, 237

see also Kariba damaccess to electricity 127-28