sign in sign up
<<
Home , Hydropower

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Congress, 15 February 2010 Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress 2010 International Hydropower Association Kristin Schumann, Lau Saili, Richard Taylor, Refaat Abdel‐Malek

1. Introduction Hydropower accounts for 16% of all global production (2007, EIA 2010) and it is one of the world’s most widely used renewable, low-carbon energy . It plays an important role in enabling communities around the world to meet their and needs. In some regions the pace of hydropower growth has been rapid but with little guidance to ensure development is sustainable. However, some of the most promising and influential initiatives to improve development, such as the Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Protocol, have been driven by the hydropower sector itself. This addresses the progress that hydropower has made in the context of sustainable development over the past 15 years. Firstly, it will define what sustainability means in the hydropower context. Secondly, the application of sustainable hydropower development in practice will be examined. Finally, prominent initiatives that the sector has and is making to increase the sustainability performance of hydropower will be outlined.

2. Sustainable Development Background "The concept of sustainable development does imply limits, not absolute limits but limitations imposed by the present state of technology and social organizations on environmental resources and by the ability of the to absorb the effects of human activities. But technology and social organization can both be managed and improved to make way for a new era of ." (WCED 1987, 8) The concept of living in harmony with nature is as old as humankind. However, a modern conception emerged in the term ‘sustainable development’ with the rise of green movements in the late 1960s and early 1970s. It was a key theme of the United Nations (UN) Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm in 1972, which gave rise to the Stockholm Declaration. The Declaration proclaimed that it was possible to achieve economic growth in an equitable way while avoiding or minimizing negative impacts on the environment. The concept was developed over following years culminating in the 1987 UN report Our Common Future (WCED 1987), which established the almost universally used definition of sustainable development as “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (WCED 1987, 8). This definition captured the spirit of the times whereby government, business, and civil society have strived to make development sustainable. This movement was capped by the 1992 Rio Declaration of the UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro and reaffirmed in the Johannesburg Declaration of the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002. The concept of sustainable development has developed from being depicted by as three concentric circles, through three pillars supporting a roof, to three integrated circles (Figure

1

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010 1). Initially, social and economic development was seen to be constrained by the environment. This concept developed towards a concept where economic, environmental, and social dimensions where all pillars of the same house and needed equal attention. The most current concept is that a dynamic interplay between the social, economic, and environmental dimensions of human activity needs to maintain a healthy environment, promote and invest in sustainable livelihoods, and foster economic growth. This balance is best shown by three integrated circles, which imply that none of the sustainability dimensions can be promoted without establishing trade-offs with the two others.

Sustainable development

Economy

Social Economy Society

Protection

Growth

Progress Environment Environment Social Economic Environmental

A. Three Concentric Circles B. Three Pillars of Sustainability C. Three Integrated Circles Figure 1: Three Visual Representations of Sustainability The three dimensions of sustainability and how they should be balanced are the subject of much debate across academic and professional disciplines, and the public and private sectors. This reflects that sustainability has been an ‘essentially contested concept’ (Gaillie 1956), normative in nature and reflective of the acceptability of a particular development activity in the context of a particular society in a given place and time. Indeed, sustainable development is often criticised as a nebulous ‘catch-all’ which means all things to all people. Within the debate, two broad schools of thought are evident, sometimes referred to as ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ sustainability (Beckerman 1995, Neumayer 2003). The strong sustainability approach is radical in that it calls for bottom-lines in the social and environmental dimensions, since trade-offs may be the result of power asymmetry between negotiating/affected parties or the inability of an to negotiate for itself. Following this approach entails that the pursuit of development must not to irreversible impacts on the environment: resources should not be depleted and should not be altered. The alternative sustainability approach is based on collaboration and sensible compromise and considers that trade-offs between the three dimensions of sustainability are necessary in order to achieve sustainable development. Advocates assert that socio-economic development, particularly priorities such as poverty eradication, cannot be realised without modification of ecosystems. This second, cooperative approach therefore recognizes the necessity of trade-offs if development is to be achieved. However, it does not in itsself provide applicable sustainability indicators or a practical guidance for policy makers and the private sector when making decisions on investment and infrastructure development.

2

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010 In the policy arena the issue of sustainability has an interplay between the top-down and bottom-up policy dynamic. Top-down sees policy-makers legislating or regulating to oblige decision-makers and planners to comply with sustainability criteria. In the bottom-up dynamic, private actors start making business more sustainable without a hard regulatory environment in place (usually motivated by a healthy dose of risk aversion). In both dynamics, civil society has an important role to play as an ‘honest broker’ and educator of public policy makers and private sector decision-makers; it is the knowledge and awareness-raising which civil society actors bring to the table that helps change the way policy and business is done. It is against this historical and conceptual backdrop that ardent criticisms of hydropower increased in the 1990s; from civil society at national levels into regional and international domains. From reaction to pro-action the sector has developed sustainability tools, engaging in dialogue across sectors and stakeholders. This long journey has been to define what sustainability should mean in a hydropower context at the international level and how this should be practically applied and measured in the field.

3. Sustainable Development Dimensions of Hydropower “Diversify by developing advanced, cleaner, more efficient, affordable and cost- effective energy technologies, including fossil technologies and technologies, hydro included, and their transfer to developing countries on concessional terms as mutually agreed.” (WSSD 2002b, 19e) The World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002 stipulated in of its Plan of Implementation that hydropower should be included in the drive to increase the contribution of renewable energy throughout the world. Hydropower technology itself does not impede the ability of future generations to meet their needs, however, sustainable development and the way hydropower has sometimes been developed have not always been in harmony; different development goals must combine and historical practices must change with new knowledge. Hydropower has been developed in its modern form over the past hundred years principally to provide cheap electricity for national economic development and safeguard a country’s . In recent times this has been further supplemented by mitigation and adaptation targets. Since 2000, however, the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) have shifted the goal of hydropower to eradicating poverty, changing unsustainable patterns of consumption and production, protecting and managing the natural base, and sustainably developing the world’s least developed countries. Any debate on hydropower sustainability needs to consider its many faces and effects. Projects can be run-of-, include storage or recycle water between reservoirs in the form of pumped storage. Projects can be in densely populated areas requiring resettlement, or be remote from any settlement. A can fragment a river where fish is plentiful and require conservation measures or a dam may impact a river of marginal . and reservoirs can be located in different climate zones, which will have different impacts on , vegetation and operational challenges. A hydropower project might be the mere addition to generate electricity and income for a water-provision or -control , or the reservoir might primarily be a result of a hydropower

3

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010 development, in which case potentials for other uses have to be considered. Whatever the scenario, hydropower will have environmental and social impacts that will be project-related, multiple and could be negative or positive. Table 1 highlights the strengths and weaknesses that hydropower projects can have in the different sustainability domains. While the reasons for hydropower development in the national, regional and international context are many, so too are the actors, encompassing a wide spectrum of financial institutions, owners/operators/developers, governments/regulatory bodies, intergovernmental agencies, civil society, and affected stakeholders. Some of the lobbying against hydropower is based on a quasi-ideology that large-scale projects for example are intrinsically negative and must not be built or contemplated. Hjort-af-Ornas (2008) develops the example of an all-negative mega-hydropower concept which, for hydropower opponents, has become symbolic for the sector, regardless of the diversity of projects and the multitude of effects, including the benefits for which a project is built. This approach neglects the complex multiple economic, social and environmental implications of hydropower projects. Saghir states that “hydropower has a powerful contribution to make to regional cooperation and development and to the allocation of increasingly scarce . … Hydropower is complex and brings a range of economic, social and environmental risks. Some are inherent in the sector; many can and must be addressed by thoughtful implementation of good practices and a commitment to a sustainable triple bottom line approach” (The 2009, 2).

a. Economic Dimensions In economic terms, sustainability can be described as the maintenance of capital. The efficient use of economic resources requires that the best options are selected, that alternatives have been carefully evaluated, and that there are no hidden and unforeseen costs that could emerge in the future. Although realistically even the best option can have unforeseen cost, economic considerations have traditionally been a central plank in decision-making processes related to infrastructure planning. Hydropower is generated by water flowing through and as long as the reliability of the water resource is maintained, economic sustainability is not an issue. In terms of inter- generational equity, one of the main sustainable development aspects, hydropower has a major contribution to make, since a significant part of the economic costs comes at the construction stage yet projects have a very long . Once constructed and capital expenditure amortized, a project is virtually immune to further inflationary pressures. Operation and maintainance costs remain low while electricity can be produced very cheaply over many human generations. A cost factor for older hydropower schemes may be rehabilitation or upgrading - but they are seldom decommissioned. Economically sustainable projects also have favourable energy payback ratios (the amount of energy derived from a scheme compared with that put into its construction and operation).

4

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010

Advantages Disadvantages Economic Provides low operating and maintenance costs High upfront investment Provides long life span (50 to 100 years and more) Hydrology-dependent Water storage and release flexibility can follow In some cases, the storage capacity of reservoirs may electricity demand peaks and troughs decrease due to sedimentation Provides reliable service Requires long-term planning Includes proven technology Requires long-term agreements Instigates and fosters regional development Often requires foreign contractors and funding Hydro storage can make water available for other uses Conflicting water uses can occur Provides highest energy efficiency rate (payback ratio and conversion process) Instigation and revenue generation for other water uses, e.g. tourism, irrigated agriculture, leiure, sports Creates employment opportunities particularly during the construction phase Avoids use and cost Provides by exploiting national resources Optimizes power supply of other generating options (thermal and variable renewables) Social Opportunity for capacity building by local/indigenous May involve resettlement governments, companies and individuals. Often provides flood protection May restrict navigation May enhance navigation conditions Local use patterns will be modified Often enhances recreational facilities Waterborne diseases vector may need to be checked Enhances accessibility of the territory and its resources Requires management of competing water uses (access roads and ramps, bridges) Provides opportunities for construction and operation May impact local people’s livelihoods with a high percentage of local manpower May improve living conditions Construction phase can be followed by unemployment May sustain livelihoods ( freshwater, supply) Can disrupt local people’s relationship with land and water Environmental Produces no atmospheric pollutants and only very few Inundation of terrestrial habitats GHG emissions and can help to slow climate change Enhances air quality Modification of hydrological regimes Produces no waste Modification of aquatic habitats Avoids depleting non-renewable fuel resources (i.e. Water quality needs to be monitored/managed , gas, oil) Can create new freshwater ecosystems with increased Barriers for fish migration, fish entrainment productivity Enhances knowledge and improves management of Species activities and populations can be altered valued species due to study results Neither consumes nor pollutes the water it uses for Sediment composition and transport can be altered electricity generation purposes Table 1: Strengths and weaknesses of hydropower projects (IHA 2003)

5

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010 In addition, the many facets of hydropower have an important contribution to make in integrated energy systems due to their flexibility and reliability. In many remote regions especially in developing countries without integrated national electricity grids, smaller hydropower schemes, run- of-river or reservoir supported, provide the only reliable access to electricity, and potentially water storage, thereby increasing quality of life at a household level as well as spurring private sector development. Furthermore, with the ascendance of climate change, the hydropower provides is also increasingly being seen as a mechanism by which other diffuse and variable renewable energy sources (wind, wave, solar) can play a larger role in providing electrical power of commercial quality. On the adaptation side, this storage capability places the technology in the unique position to capitalise on the changing hydrologic cycle, acting as insurance against droughts and thereby increasing water security.

Wind Solar Nuclear 2% 0% 16% Geothermal 0% 1% Hydropower 16% Fossil 65%

Figure 2: Global Electricity Generation by Type in 2007 (IEA 2010)

As shown in figure 2, in 2007, hydropower generated 16% of all global electricity production, with other renewable energy sources totalling 3%. Therefore, when electricity options are assessed for new energy developments, there is strong impetus for fossil fuel or nuclear as opposed to renewable energy sources. Due to its ability to store energy for more diffuse or weather-dependent renewables such as solar and wind, hydropower can play a strategic role in . Indeed, the national energy security reasons hydropower schemes were originally developed for, apply with equal force in the climate change context. Lastly, there can be no sustainable development without demonstration of and equitable distribution of economic benefits. The high level of service provided by multi-purpose hydropower is a driving force for local, national and regional development. For these reasons, hydropower is a powerful catalyst for sustainable development.

b. Social Dimensions Hydropower schemes have the ability to significantly reduce poverty and enhance quality of life in the communities they serve. Families with little access to water and energy services spend a disproportionate amount of money and time on these two resources and their reliance on poor

6

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010 quality fuels along with a lack of access to and present essential health risks. Poverty is commonly associated with -gathering and deforestation. Access to electricity promotes new economic activity, empowers women and improves the quality of the family life by reducing menial domestic chores such as firewood collection, improves health and education services, and provides a cleaner and healthier home environment, such as . Hydropower can be developed on a wide range of scales to meet diverse needs and market and power conditions. While small-scale, decentralized development can bring light and power to remote and rural communities, large-scale hydropower infrastructure with reservoirs, often provides multiple-use benefits, particularly through increased availability, reliability and quality of supplies and reduced flood risks.

Figure 3: Exploited Hydropower Potential by Region (IHA, 2006) The vast majority of the world’s remaining hydropower potential is in developing countries (Figure 3). By addressing both energy and water needs, and offering the solution of multi- purpose development that can support drinking water supply and agriculture, aquaculture and tourism industries, hydropower can make a valuable contribution to achieving the MDGs. In regions with rapid hydropower development, however, guidance and control need to ensure that planning is based on sustainability considerations. Negative consequences for human populations include resettlement-related impacts, reduced fish resources, loss of fertile conservation areas due to reservoirs but also riverbank erosion or insufficient water releases downstream. While many of the social impacts are directly related to environmental effects, the significance of social topics has been underestimated in past hydropower development. It is increasingly being recognized that social responsibility cannot be achieved without systematic community participation. It has become a sectoral focus to draw on the negative lessons by introducing a new approach to project implementation, where a hydropower project becomes linked to regional and rural development and maximises the additional benefits. Hydropower developments are therefore nowadays mostly developed by recognizing entitlements and sharing benefits with directly affected people, communities or other stakeholders.

7

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010 c. Environmental Dimensions Hydropower projects do not export impacts such as acid or atmospheric pollution and rarely increase gases. Therefore, hydropower has a valuable contribution to make to combat global warming and and can enhance inter- and intra-generational equity. Furthermore, as an infrastructure strategy to address water storage and management, hydropower reservoirs will help adapt to decreased water reliability and more frequent floods and droughts. While hydropower projects can have impacts on their local environment where, for example, the basin and ecosystem are sometimes permanently altered, these changes can be mitigated if well- managed and have to be considered in relation to the project benefits and in comparison to other energy options. Hydropower has the possibility to integrate in the basin hydrology and to create opportunities for recreation and ecotourism as well as mitigate ecosystem disruption through multiple strategies. During the past two decades research and international hydropower sustainability initiatives, which will be explored later in this paper, have substantially improved understanding of the nature and mitigation of impacts of dams on riverine ecosystems, particularly those associated with hydropower developments. In line with this increased knowledge base, the management of environmental impacts arising from hydropower continues to improve. Targeted studies and monitoring programmes have identified viable mitigation options and provided long-term assessments of their effective need. Increased legislative and regulatory mechanisms and the greater transparency of decision-making have also driven these improvements. Changes in the approach to project planning and design have resulted in the maximisation of positive outcomes and the reduction in severity or avoidance of negative impacts. In the light of sustainability, contemporary industry best practice considers topics such as downstream flow regimes, rare and endangered species, passage of fish species, pest species, health issues and impact of construction activities.

4. Strategic Considerations “The picture is a particularly confusing one, because some aspects of the argument involve ... life threatening considerations at a global scale, whereas others are matters of qualitative judgement at a local level.” (POS 1993, 37) In addition to economic, social, and environmental dimensions, there are strategic considerations that do not fit neatly into the three concentric circles of sustainability. For example, time and space are critical elements often taken for granted or overlooked in the analysis. Sustainability weighs the present against the future (intergenerational equity), but strongly addressing the future can divert attention from the pressing needs of existing generations (intra-generational equity). Furthermore, the judgement whether loss in ecosystem function is acceptable and which ecosystem perturbations are sustainable will also depend on the time required for the ecosystem to stabilize (Marshall & Toffel 2004). The evaluation of which development paths are sustainable may also be influenced by whether technologies currently exist that could restore or improve ecosystem function, and if they do not, how likely one thinks that such technologies will be developed in the future. Assessing whether an action is sustainable

8

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010 also depends on the benchmark used as a basis of comparison. Marshall and Toffel (2004) give the example of ’s deforestation during the . Now, several generations later, there is little cultural memory of England’s before the Industrial Revolution and the current state of the has become an appropriate benchmark. Another important consideration when enquiring about hydropower sustainability is the eco- efficiency approach. Less would be necessary if the use of electricity in many industries and appliances was made more efficient. Similarly the use of water resources could be made more efficient in many regions. Worldwide 3 billion people rely on traditional biomass for cooking and heating, 1.5 billion have no access to electricity (AGECC 2010, 7), and an estimated 90% of the 3 billion people who are expected to be added to the population by 2050 will be in developing countries where the current population has no sustainable access to drinking water and adequate sanitation (WWAP 2009, 29). In the face of these numbers prioritizing equal access to water and energy throughout the world will entail increasing supply and efficiency hand-in-hand. It is also not ethical to expect developing countries to cut or arrest their development, which is often characterized by putting the dimensions of economic and social development ahead of environmental ones. Poverty reduction, water resource and electricity development will require a thorough consideration of all energy and infrastructure options, technology transfer, and the acknowledgement that developing countries need growth as part of their sustainable development. With the modernisation of developing countries the concept of sustainability takes on a further political dimension. Is it fair for the developed world to impose its own sustainability values on developing countries’ development aspirations? Is the idea of sustainability universal or different in Asia to that in or Europe? Who decides? These are the strategic political issues not only hydropower, but all development faces worldwide.

5. The World Commission on Dams and the Dams and Development Project “We believe there can no longer be any justifiable doubt about the following: Dams have made an important and significant contribution to human development, and the benefits derived from them have been significant. In too many cases an unacceptable and often unnecessary price has been paid to secure those benefits. ... By bringing to the table all those whose rights are involved and who bear the risks associated with different options for water and energy resources development, the conditions for a positive resolution of competing interests and conflicts are created.” (WCD, 2000, xxviii) At an international level, the debate on the sustainability of hydropower culminated in the 1990s. Figure 4 shows the initiatives that have existed towards sustainability performance in the hydropower sector. The Manibeli Declaration by a coalition of 326 NGOs from 44 countries in 1994 called on the World Bank for an immediate moratorium on the funding of large dams. One of the conditions for the moratorium to be lifted was that the World Bank would set up an independent comprehensive review of Bank-funded large dam projects. This initiated a process of review of the sustainability performance of dams, including hydropower projects internally by the World Bank. In 1997 the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the World Bank initiated the World Commission on Dams (WCD) in Gland, .

9

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010 The WCD commissioned a Knowledge Base to provide an appropriate information base for the commission’s final report. The programme for the Knowledge Base comprised eight case studies; three country studies; seventeen thematic reviews on social, ecological, economic, financial, and institutional aspects of large dams; four regional consultations—in Colombo, São Paulo, Cairo, and Hanoi; and a ‘cross-check survey’ that included quantitative data on 125 dams. The secretariat also received 947 submissions from individuals or institutions (Dingwerth, 2005).

Figure 4: Sample of Sustainability Initiatives in the Hydropower Sector The WCD’s final report Dams And Development, A New Framework For Decision-Making, was published in 2000. While there is disagreement on its detailed recommendations, there is clear acceptance of the core values listed in the report: equity, efficiency, participatory decision- making, sustainability, and accountability. In addition, there is broad agreement on the objectives of the report’s strategic priorities. However, while the intention of developing industry guidelines was welcome, the WCD report was, as the Chair Prof. Kader Asmal highlighted at the final WCD Forum meeting, intended to be guidelines with a small ‘g’ (Fujikura & Nakayama 2009, 180). Furthermore, “the time constraints posed had effects on the implementation of the WCD process. The WCD Forum was not given any power to comment on the draft report, although they were allowed to look at every piece of material collected by the secretariat” (Fujikura & Nakayama 2009, 185). It was therefore understood by the hydropower sector that these guidelines were developed as a starting point for further refinement, and not with the intention of legal requirements. Thus, the increasing focus on hydropower sustainability initiated an international dialogue with the aim of reviewing and improving performance. As a follow-up to the WCD the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) hosted the Dams and Development Project (DDP), which, in its first phase, promoted the WCD core values and strategic priorities, and, in its second phase, worked toward improved decision-making, planning and management of dams. However, while this multi-stakeholder initiative certainly

10

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010 helped to raise awareness of the impacts of poorly managed dams, the DDP did not lead to a consensus on future processes and practice.

6. Hydropower Sector Approaches to Improving and Promoting Sustainable Practices

“The dam and hydro profession today does not only comprise technicians, but it is a multi- disciplinary body including environmental specialists, ecologists, biologists, social scientists and economists. Together they represent a wealth of expertise which can ensure that future projects are planned, constructed and operated with full respect for society and the environment.” (IEA Hydro 2000, 2) In 1995, the International Hydropower Association (IHA) was formed under the auspices of UNESCO as a forum to promote and disseminate good practice and further knowledge about hydropower. The association represents the hydropower sector internationally and has the mission to champion continuous improvement and sustainable practices, building consensus through strong partnerships with other stakeholders, and driving initiatives to increase the contribution of renewables, especially hydropower. Initiated through the WCD, the hydropower sector had started reacting to international criticisms. As part of this effort, IHA had participated actively in the DDP. Parallel to this process, IHA decided to take the initiative to act towards improving sector performance by raising awareness of impacts, promoting good practice, providing sustainability measurement guidance, recognizing good practice and disseminating knowledge through communication of good examples.

a. Raising awareness In 2000, IHA published the IHA Comments on the Final Report of the World Commission of Dams (IHA 2000) outlining the industry perspective on the applicability of the WCD recommendations and opportunities for additional studies within the sector. This was followed, in 2003 when IHA published The Role of Hydropower in Sustainable Development (IHA 2003). This paper aimed to increase awareness of the role hydropower can play in sustainable development as an important source of renewable energy as well as a provider of reliable water resources. It addressed the beneficial side of hydropower while proposing ways to mitigate or avoid detrimental effects.

b. Promoting Good Practice In the absence of applicable guidelines resulting from the WCD and subsequent international sector performance review initiatives, IHA developed the IHA Sustainability Guidelines, with their most recent version published in 2004. These guidelines promote good practice in an effort to fill the gap of missing implementation guidance for sustainable hydropower and have been an internal tool for the sector to adjust its practices in the environmental, social and economic spheres.

11

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010 c. Measuring Good Practice In order to overcome the lack of a tool by which to assess hydropower’s sustainability performance, IHA developed the IHA Sustainability Assessment Protocol to assist the hydropower sector in evaluating performance against criteria in the IHA Sustainability Guidelines. The Protocol promotes and makes measurable the consideration of environmental, social and economic sustainability in the assessment of new energy supply options, new hydro projects and the implementation, management and operation of new and existing hydropower facilities. The IHA Sustainability Assessment Protocol started life as a Compliance Protocol in early 2004 and was adopted by IHA members in 2006. It has recently undergone a multi- stakeholder review by the Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Forum (HSAF), which will be presented in section 7 of this paper.

d. Recognizing Good Practice – The IHA Blue Planet Prize In a climate of growing criticism, it was essential to balance the debate with some attention to the positive effects hydropower can have in basin-wide development. In collaboration with UNESCO, IHA has awarded the IHA Blue Planet Prize to operators showing outstanding performance in sustainable management of hydropower schemes. Awards have been given to:  the Andhikhola Rural Scheme () in 2005 for exceptionally positive socio-economic impacts,  the Arrow Lakes Generating Station (Canada) in 2005 for excellence in environmental, social and technical aspects,  Sechelt Creek (Canada) in 2005 for its social and environmental impacts,  Salto Caxias (Brazil) in 2003 for excellence in social aspects,  the Palmiet Pumped Storage Scheme (South Africa) in 2003 for its economic and technical performance as well as its synergy with the environment, and  King River Power Development (Australia) in 2001 for innovations in design and construction as well as its environmental management system. One of the priorities of the sustainability initiatives of IHA will be to continue to award more exceptional hydropower schemes with the IHA Blue Planet Prize, since this has proven to help raise awareness and to promote good practice.

e. Communicating Examples It is important to record and to disseminate good and proven best practice. This is especially important for hydropower development in developing countries where most new projects are and will be built. Particular issues might have no precedence and expertise may be lacking, however in different circumstances, it is helpful for engineers, planners and operators in these countries to be able to draw from the experiences of others.

12

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010 While hydropower schemes and their establishment always have a unique aspect with regards to their setting, social and environmental challenges and technical opportunities, it is not necessary to reinvent the wheel for every project. Several databases have been set up to collect examples and to make them available for future project planners and operators, e.g. DDP Good Practice and Lessons Learnt Database1, IEA Hydro Annex 8 on Hydropower Good Practices2, IHA Blue Planet Prize, and Sustainable Hydropower Website3.

7. Towards a multi-sectoral approach to defining hydropower sustainability: The Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Forum (HSAF)

“Sustainability assessment must take seriously the obligation to recognize interdependencies and to seek multiple reinforcing gains on all fronts. This is assisted by setting a comprehensive agenda that covers the full suite of core requirements for moving towards sustainability. Yet it is also crucial to establish firm guidance for trade-off decisions, to ensure that sacrifices are made only where there is no viable 'less bad' alternative.” (Gibson et al. 2006, 172) While the above-mentioned efforts have been mostly internal to industry, it emerged that not all solutions could be found within a sector, whose expertise and approach is naturally technical and inward looking. A multi-sectoral approach to sustainable hydropower was necessary to consolidate different actors and viewpoints. The HSAF was initiated in 2007 after a meeting between WWF, (TNC) and IHA about endorsement of the IHA Sustainability Assessment Protocol (2006) by parties outside the sector. The Forum members comprise representatives of developed and developing country governments, the hydropower sector, social and environmental NGOs, and both commercial and development banks (see Figure 5). Reference groups to the Forum members and two open consultation periods, which included trialling of a reworked draft, were built into the HSAF work programme to obtain views beyond the immediate Forum membership.

Developing Countries NGOs ‐ Environmental Aspects  Dr Yu Xuezhong, Institute of Water Resources  Mr David Harrison, Senior Advisor, Global and Hydropower Research, PR China Freshwater Team, The Nature Conservancy  Mr Zhou Shichun, China Hydropower  Dr Joerg Hartmann, Lead, Dams Initiative, Consulting Group Co., PR China World Fund  Mr Israel Phiri, Manager PPI, Ministry of Energy and Water Development, Zambia NGOs ‐ Social Aspects  Mr Michael Simon, Lead, Development Developed Countries Banks/NRM, Oxfam  Mr Geir Hermansen, Senior Advisor,  Dr Donal O’Leary, Water Sector Specialist, Department of Energy, Norad, Transparency International  Prof Gudni A Johannesson, Director General, Finance Sector ‐ Economic Aspects National Energy Authority,  Ms Kirsten Nyman, Policy Advisor for  Ms Courtney Lowrance, Environmental Sustainable Hydropower, GTZ, Germany Specialist, Equator Principles Financial (observer) Institutions Group  Ms Daryl Fields, Senior Water Resources Hydropower Sector Specialist, World Bank (observer)  Dr Refaat Abdel‐Malek, President, International Hydropower Association Forum Chair  Mr Andrew Scanlon, Coordinating Author, IHA • Mr André Abadie, Sustainable Finance Ltd. Sustainability Assessment Protocol Forum Coordinator  Dr Helen Locher, IHA Figure 5: HSAF members

1 http://www.unep.org/dams/documents/ell.asp 2 http://www.ieahydro.org/annex8.htm 3 http://www.sustainablehydropower.org/

13

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010 Throughout their two-year work programme, the HSAF members have jointly reviewed and recommended enhancements to the IHA Sustainability Assessment Protocol (2006). During its work programme from March 2008 to July 2010, the HSAF completed nine meetings and 6 webinars aimed at better understanding the existing (2006) Protocol and key issues (including benefit sharing, corruption, downstream flow regimes, economics and finance, governance, resettlement, strategic assessments, technical considerations, transparency) and to propose a revised Sustainability Assessment Protocol.

Figure 6 HSAF Engagement Activities during Consultation Phase 2

Figure 7 Draft Protocol Trials during Consultation Phase 2 Meetings and trials were undertaken throughout the world and involved all sectors (see Figure 6 and 7). Direct stakeholder outreach was also achieved by engaging an external consultancy in telephonic outreach and in the evaluation of two online questionnaires which

14

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010 had been set-up for the respective consultation periods. Some 7000 stakeholders were regularly informed of the activities of the HSAF and, excluding the Forum reference groups, approximately 300 independent stakeholder submissions were received through feedback forms, questionnaires, trialling or consultation reports. All findings of consultation were considered and made public in three documents: Consultation 1 Outcomes Report4, Consultation 2 Outcomes Report5, and Trialling Outcomes Report6. Consultation activities were focussed on raising awareness about sustainability initiatives in the hydropower sector and the HSAF, on trialling the draft documents at a number of hydropower schemes and on establishing contact with stakeholders and obtaining their feedback on successive drafts. The objective was to ensure that the final proposal of a revised Sustainability Assessment Protocol was a credible and useful tool. With the extensive feedback from many sectors the final product is expected to be comprehensive and inclusive of stakeholder opinions. One of the key challenges of the Forum’s work was to keep the Protocol practical, objective, and able to be implemented across a range of contexts. This two year multi-sectoral revision period was seen as a first phase in developing a broadly endorsed sustainability assessment tool for which there are many possible future pathways, including development of a sector standard.

8. The Road Ahead

“There is no single solution to the world’s quest for more, cleaner energy and effective water management. Energy and water for sustainable development depend not only on supply choices, but also on how these choices are implemented. It requires the creation of a level playing field among available energy options and global governance involving all stakeholders in a participatory decision-making process.” (IHA 2003, 10) Hydropower is a renewable, clean energy source that helps to minimise global warming effects, avoiding the increasing demand for energy generated by fossil fuels and thus leaving a cleaner world to future generations. Hydropower does not deplete natural resources and is paid for by the same generation that built it. It constitutes a lasting source of electricity and often water management with long viability and very low maintenance costs, which one generation passes on to several future ones. By enabling present generations to meet their needs without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs” hydropower fulfils this essential criterion of sustainable development. In light of the important role that hydropower can play in spurring energy reliability and regional development, any approach to sustainability which argues that ecosystems and populations must remain untouched fails to productively contribute to the sustainability debate locking present and future generations into a cycle of ‘undevelopment’. It is the interfacing and dialogue between

4 http://www.hydropower.org/sustainable_hydropower/HSAF-Phase_1_Consultation/HSAF- Phase_1_Consultation_Outcomes_Report_FINAL.pdf 5 http://www.hydropower.org/sustainable_hydropower/HSAF-Phase_2_Consultation- Final_Outcomes_Report.pdf 6 http://www.hydropower.org/sustainable_hydropower/HSAF- Trialling_Outcomes_Report_Final_5MAR2010.pdf

15

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010 previously polarized approaches and parties that has made the progress in improving hydropower sustainability over the past two decades possible. At the heart of the debate on the sustainable character of hydropower, is whether sustainability is seen as an absolute and universal concept, where a process is either sustainable or not in any place at any time, or whether it allows for a more flexible definition, where what counts is the balance between negative effects and positive benefits. If the costs of those benefits require changes in social and environmental capital, then the decision to move forward or not is normative, based on a society’s value system and on the possibilities that exist within a project or an energy resource development context. After the publication of the protocol, IHA and partners will work towards the formalization of the protocol application by conducting assessments at a wide a range of hydropower projects. IHA will review the IHA Sustainability Guidelines from 2004, engage in training and capacity- building initiatives and maintain a governance entity for future Protocol reviews. In order to assure sustainable hydropower development, the public and the private sectors will have to intensify dialogue with stakeholders, share success stories and commit to orientate actions with sustainability principles. In the fight against poverty and climate change there is no single solution, but in the ever changing global context, with rapid growth of developing countries and associated increase in essential energy and water services, it is reasonable and prudent to assume that sustainably managed hydropower will remain part of the solution. The adoption of an approach that allows for trade-offs, yet respects socio-environmental bottom-lines and enables meaningful dialogue between stakeholders is now prerequisite.

16

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010 References  The Secretary-General’s Advisory Group on Energy and Climate Change (AGECC), 2010. Energy for a Sustainable Future. Report and Recommendations. New York. Available at: http://www.unesco.org/water/wwap/wwdr/wwdr3/tableofcontents.shtml [Accessed 30 June 2010].  Beckerman, W., 1995. How Would you Like your ‘Sustainability’, Sir? Weak or Strong? A Reply to my Critics. Environmental Values. 4(2), pp167-179.  Dingwerth, K., 2005. The Democratic Legitimacy of Public-Private Rule Making: What Can We Learn from the World Commission on Dams? Global Governance, 11, pp.65-83.  Frey, G.W., Linke, D.B., 2002. Hydropower as a Renewable and Resource Meeting Global Energy Challenges in a Reasonable Way. , 30, pp. 1261-1265.  Fujikura, R., Nakayama, M., 2009. Lessons learnt from the World Commission on Dams. International Environmental Agreements, 9, pp. 173-190.  Gaillie, W.B., 1956, Essentially Contested Concepts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 56, pp.167-198.  Gibson, R.B., Hassan, S., Holtz, S., Tansey, J., Whitelaw, G., 2005. Sustainability Assessment: Basic Components of A Practical Approach. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. London.  Goodland, R. Daly, H., 1996. Environmental Sustainability: Universal and Non-Negotiable. Ecological Applications, 6(4), pp. 1002-1017.  Hjort-af-Hornas, A., 2008. Turning Hydropower Social. Where Global Sustainability Conventions Matter. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer.  International Energy Agency (IEA), 2006. Key World Energy Statistics. Paris. Available at: http://www.iea.org/Textbase/nppdf/free/2006/Key2006.pdf [Accessed 30 January 2010].  International Energy Agency Implementing Agreement on Hydropower Technologies and Programmes (IEA Hydro), 2000. Hydropower and the World’s Energy Future. The Role of Hydropower in Bringing Clean, Renewable Energy to the World. Available at: http://www.ieahydro.org/reports/Hydrofut.pdf [Accessed 30 January 2010].  International Hydropower Association (IHA), 2006. IHA Sustainability Assessment Protocol. London. Available at http://www.hydropower.org/sustainable_hydropower/IHA_Sustainability_Assessment_Pr otocol.html [Accessed 30 January 2010].  International Hydropower Association (IHA), 2004. IHA Sustainability Guidelines. London. Available at: http://www.hydropower.org/sustainable_hydropower/IHA_Sustainability_Guidelines.html [Accessed 30 January 2010].  International Hydropower Association (IHA), 2003. The Role of Sustainable Hydropower. IHA White Paper. London. Available at: http://www.hydropower.org/downloads/RoleOfHydropowerInSustDev_IHA%20White%2 0Paper.pdf [Accessed 30 January 2010].

17

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010

 International Hydropower Association (IHA), 2000. IHA Comments on the Final Report of the World Commission on Dams, London.  International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2005. Contribution to Special Report Renewable Energy Resources (SRREN). Bonn.  Klimpt, J.-E., Rivero, C., Puranen, H., Koch, F.,2002. Recommendations for Sustainable Hydropower Development. Energy Policy, 30, pp.1305-1312.  Marshall, J.D., Toffel, M.W., 2004. Framing the Elusive Concept of Sustainability: A Sustainability Hierarchy. Environmental Science & Technology. 39(3), pp.673-683.  Neumayer, E., 2003. Weak versus Strong Sustainability: Exploring the Limits of Two Opposing Paradigms. 2nd ed. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.  Owens, S., 1994. Land, Limits and Sustainability: A Conceptual Framework and Some Dilemmas for the Planning System, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 19, pp. 439-456.  Planning Officers’ Society (POS), 1993 Planning for Sustainability. Winchester.  The World Bank, 2009. Directions in Hydropower. Washington. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWAT/Resources/Directions_in_Hydropower_FINA L.pdf [Accessed 30 June 2010].  The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), 2006. The Future of Sustainable Development. Re-Thinking Environment and Development in the Twenty-First Century. Geneva. Available at: http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iucn_future_of_sustanability.pdf [Accessed 30 January 2010].  United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), 1992a. Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. Rio de Janeiro. Available at: http://www.un- documents.net/rio-dec.htm [Accessed 30 January 2010].  United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), 1992b. Agenda 21. Rio de Janeiro. Available at: http://www.un-documents.net/agenda21.htm [Accessed 30 January 2010].  United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), 2007. Dams and Development. Relevant Practices for Improved Decision-Making. Nairobi. Available at: http://www.unep.org/dams/files/Compendium/Compendium.pdf [Accessed 30 January 2010].  United Nations General Assembly, 2000. United Nations Millennium Declaration. New York. Available at: http://www.un-documents.net/a55r2.htm [Accessed 30 January 2010].  Williams, C., Millington, A.C., 2004. The Diverse and Contested Meanings of Sustainable Development. The Geographical Journal. 170(2), pp.99-104.  World Commission on Dams (WCD), 2000. Dams and Development: A New Framework for Decision-Making. Geneva.  World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) 1987. Our Common Future. Chapter 2: Towards Sustainable Development. Geneva, Available at: http://www.un- documents.net/ocf-02.htm [Accessed 30 January 2010].  World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) 2002a. Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development, Johannesburg. Available at: http://www.un- documents.net/jburgdec.htm [Accessed 30 January 2010].

18

Hydropower and Sustainable Development: A Journey Article submitted to the World Energy Congress, 15 February 2010

 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) 2002b. Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development. Johannesburg. Available at: http://www.un-documents.net/jburgpln.htm [Accessed 30 January 2010].  World Water Assessment Programme (WWAP), 2009. The United Nations World Water Development Report 3: Water in a Changing World. Paris UNESCO Publishing, and London: Earthscan. Available at: http://www.unesco.org/water/wwap/wwdr/wwdr3/tableofcontents.shtml [Accessed 30 June 2010].

19