Missing Voices on the Nu River Dam Project

China Watch Home About China Watch

November 29, 2005
By Yingling Liu

The Nu River dam project, suspended by Premier Wen Jiabao in April 2004 after a heated controversy, got a boost after local officials proposed a smaller-scale project while lobbying the premier during his trip to the Yunnan province in July. The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the project is currently under review, and will likely get approved in the next month. China's State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA) is resolute that this EIA will be publicly disclosed, encouraging a new wave of public participation in the decision-making process.

Among all of the debate so far over the proposed dam, there is one group of stakeholders whose voice is largely unheard: the mostly poor local residents, who currently earn their livelihoods through subsistence farming methods. If the project advances, power companies expect windfall profits and local authorities at various levels anticipate augmented tax revenue—while local farmers will allegedly benefit from the project through job creation and cheaper electricity.

But while a 2003 report commissioned by the Yunnan provincial government predicted that the dam project would bring 440,000 long-term employment opportunities, this forecast is dubious. Furthermore, what portion of jobs actually created by the project will go to farmers, most of whom are members of ethnic groups and short of technical training, remains to be seen: in an interview with the China International Herald Leader , local power authorities said they were expecting 170 new jobs, only 40 percent of which would be filled by local residents. More jobs are promised once the local government gains more tax revenue from power generation, but such opportunities will only materialize a decade or so after the completion of the project.

The proposed benefit of cheaper electricity for local residents also remains to be seen. With most of the electricity to be transferred to the power-thirsty east, little will be left for the farmers, and the experience of others provides a disappointing precedent. For example, a key promise by the local governments in the development of the neighboring Manwan Dam , which started construction in 1986, was to replace firewood with electricity for locals. More than a decade later, after the dam started producing power in 1993, local residents could hardly afford their electricity bill, which reflected the same rates paid by recipients in the much richer east.

While the local benefit from the construction is at best overstated, displaced populations will experience various challenges. According to the initial plan , roughly 60,000 mu (approx. 9,840 acres) of arable land will be submerged, forcing some 50,000 people to relocate. The compensation they are entitled to receive is the standard set previously by the Three Georges Dam project, at 50,000 — 70,000 RMB (5,000 — 8,434 USD) per person. This, so far, has not been secured. Life after relocation is not promising, either. In China, more than half of people relocated as a result of large dam projects are living in poverty, according to China Youth Daily . In addition to the financial plight, many of them also suffer mentally, failing to adapt to a new living environment and a dramatic change in lifestyle.

While some proponents of the project see large-scale hydropower generation as an option for ameliorating pollution from coal-fired power stations and alleviating local poverty, the decision-making process is complicated and sensitive, opaque to the group most concerned. Lacking channels to access information vital for their future and to express their concerns, local farmers have long been passive recipients of any decisions regarding their livelihoods.

There have been signs in recent years that space is opening up for limited public participation in the Nu River dam project. Its evolution shows nascent evidence of participatory decision-making by environmentalists, experts and a small group of concerned citizens in mega-construction projects with huge social and environmental significance. SEPA's resolution to make its EIA public is another encouraging gesture in breaking the monopoly of a few powerful interest groups over the decision-making process. In such development projects, bringing all related parties to the negotiating table—especially the long underrepresented—will likely prolong the project, but any outcome will inevitably maximize the interests of society as a whole.