文章 Articles

Smartening up global infrastructure

On Monday, John Briscoe praised China for its development role in poor countries. Here, Peter Bosshard argues that a more sophisticated approach to energy development is possible – at home and abroad.

Article image

Investment in agriculture, infrastructure and industrialisation is an essential pillar of economic development. A hard-won lesson of past experience is that such investment must integrate social and environmental factors if it is to achieve successful long-term development.

Like other countries, China pays a heavy price for past efforts at economic development that ignored the nation’s social and environmental limits. Mindless industrialisation destroyed forests and impoverished whole regions. The overgrazing of fragile grasslands is expanding deserts and blanketing northern China with ever more frequent sandstorms. Short-sighted industrial investments pollute the country’s air, soil and water. According to one statistical estimate, such pollution causes 750,000 premature deaths in China every year.

The lessons that apply to economic development generally also hold true for the water and energy sectors. If built smartly, dams are an important option for electricity and water supply in many countries. Yet as the independent World Commission on Dams has found, “In too many cases an unacceptable and often unnecessary price has been paid to secure [their] benefits, especially in social and environmental terms”. Up to 80 million people have been displaced for reservoirs around the world, and many of them were impoverished in the process. Dams that trap sediments have caused the loss of thousands of square kilometres of fertile deltas and have made coastal cities (such as New Orleans) more vulnerable to storms. The high-level Millennium Ecosystem Assessment found that dams and other river diversions have turned freshwater into the ecosystem in which species are most threatened by extinction.

In China, hydropower can help to move the country away from polluting coal consumption. Yet, like in other countries, many dam projects have not respected the limits of ecosystems and society, with serious long-term costs to the whole country. The Three Gorges Dam has unleashed uncontrolled erosion and experts fear it may have massive long-term impacts on the ecosystems of the Yangtze River, its delta, and the East China Sea. At least 18 million people have been displaced by reservoirs in China. While Chinese resettlement policies are comparatively thorough, abuses have caused frequent protests. If not planned and operated diligently, dams can also create serious seismic risks. Chinese scientists working at home, in Japan and the United States have found strong evidence indicating that the Zipingpu Dam may have triggered the Wenchuan earthquake of 2008.

The lesson of this experience is not that no more dams should be built. But smart water- and energy-sector development entails more than dumping concrete into a river. To avoid long-term costs to the environment, public health and the economy, social, environmental and economic factors must be considered equally when the most appropriate water and energy options are identified. Increasingly, the best options will turn out to be renewable energy from wind, geothermal and modern biomass plants and improvements in water and energy efficiency. Today’s developing countries don’t need to use the approaches and technologies of the early twentieth century to resolve the problems of the twenty-first.

If China had avoided a deterioration in the nation’s energy efficiency during the 10th Five-Year Plan, it could have saved more electricity than the Three Gorges Dam is generating – and at a lower cost. While some European countries have almost completely switched their agriculture to drip irrigation, which saves both water and money, China is currently using this practice on only 5% of its irrigated lands. In many poor countries, less than 3% of the potential for renewable energy and drip irrigation has been exploited. These technologies are the markets of the future. And, unlike many large dams, they will not cause regrets for future generations.

If, after a balanced assessment process, a dam appears to be the best option, it should be built with precautions that reflect the lessons of past experience. If indeed poor countries still have a large hydropower potential to exploit, then they can afford to be discerning. State-of-the-art environmental standards will ensure that the best projects are selected, and built in a way that avoids negative surprises in the future.

The Chinese government is pragmatic and quick to learn from mistakes – its own and those of others. It has ramped up environmental-protection measures and is promoting a rapid expansion of renewable energy and energy-efficiency options. The government has stopped a few dam projects that were violating laws and regulations and decided to pay retroactive compensation to all the people who were displaced by reservoirs in the past.

Overseas, Chinese dam companies and financiers started out by building dams – such as the Merowe Dam in Sudan and several projects in Myanmar (Burma) – without proper social and environmental standards. Some of these projects caused serious social, environmental and safety concerns, and tarnished the reputation of Chinese investors. China’s main dam builders and financiers are now strengthening their environmental guidelines. The Chinese government has also started to support investment in renewable-energy projects such as solar and wind farms in Africa and other regions. And while Western donors like to build new projects, let them fall into disrepair and then build new projects again, Chinese aid is good at maintaining and restoring the projects it has built in the past.

In too many cases, Chinese laws and guidelines continue to be disregarded in dam projects at home and abroad. It takes strong oversight and credible sanctions to ensure that the public interest in balanced, long-term development prevails over short-term financial interests and outright corruption. A strengthened role for civil society will help to recognise problems early and avoid costly mistakes. Strong environmental organisations will help to close the gap between laws and regulations and the realities on the ground. International Rivers is proud to work together with Chinese civil society and hydropower companies in closing this gap.


Peter Bosshard is policy director of
International Rivers. A Swiss citizen, he holds a PhD from Zurich University. Bosshard has worked to strengthen international environmental standards for 20 years and currently directs a programme to encourage environmental reforms among China's overseas dam builders.

Homepage image by dazsnow 大龙
Also in this series:
John Briscoe praises Chinese finance abroad
BG Verghese speaks on third pole rivers
Graeme Kelleher defends dam building
Joydeep Gupta looks at tension in south Asia

发表评论 Post a comment

评论通过管理员审核后翻译成中文或英文。 最大字符 1200。

Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated. Maximum characters 1200.

评论 comments

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

题目很奇怪

我觉得这个题目很奇怪,尤其作者是西方人。改善全球基础设施?发达国家的基础设施哪里需要改善?意大利的威尼斯城不是还在竭尽全力维持城市的古老面貌吗?不同国家不同地区面临的情况是不同的,何必用这么大一个题目?需要改善设施的只是一些欠发达国家,甚至像中国这样的发展中国家都不需要改不改善的,他们只需要合理的规划而已。像建大坝这种事,谁定义大坝为基础设施了?

另外文章中说,紫坪铺水库大坝或许是引发2008年汶川地震的罪魁祸首。我对这这说法基本上相当怀疑,就像说西南大旱是由于三峡大坝的建立引起一样。我个人更倾向于这些自然灾难更多是由于地球自身的活动造成的。当然人为的因素不可忽略,但是人类也不要太把自己当回事,当地球觉得我们这些寄生生物让它感到不舒服时,自然要反应一下。

文中还说,欧洲的捐助者们喜欢建造新的项目,之后令其荒废,然后再建造新的项目;而中国的援助者们则擅长维护、重建过去建造的项目。这个我也无从考证,据我所知,中国国内的各级地方政府非常喜欢建造新项目,或许这些企业到了非洲,就脱胎换骨了?

The title is odd

I think this title is very odd, especially since the author is a Westerner. Smartening up global infrastructure? In developed countries, where does the infrastructure need to be improved? Venice city in Italy is making every effort to maintain the city's old face, isn't it? Different countries and areas have different situations, so why take such a big topic? Just some of the less developed countries need to improve their infrastructure. Even for the developing countries like China, it is not necessary to improve it. All they need to do is some reasonable planning. Even such things as dams contruction, who defined them as infrastructure?

Furthermore, the article says that the Zipingpu Dam may have triggered the Wenchuan earthquake of 2008. I am very suspicious about this argument, which is just like blaming the Three Gorges Dam for the Southwest drought. Personally I am more inclined to think that these natural disasters are caused by the activities of the earth. Human factors can obviously not be ignored, but human beings should not take themselves too seriously. When the Earth feels not comfortable with us, the parasites living on it, it certainly has some reactions.

The article also mentioned this: 'and while Western donors like to build new projects, let them fall into disrepair and then build new projects again, Chinese aid is good at maintaining and restoring the projects it has built in the past.. ' I cannot prove this, and as far as I know, local governments at all levels in China really like building new projects. Have these enterprises changed as soon as they arrived in Africa?

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

国际河流组织是非民主的以及有害的

国际河流组织是一个非常不民主的组织,他们通过使用其资金和在美国游说,极大地损害了贫困人民的利益。

国际河流组织的目标是,通过阻挠给大坝项目提供资金来阻止大坝的修建。他们的这种阻挠,使得甚至世界银行都不再赞助大坝建设了。

他们做了很多丑事,有一个在乌干达的例子。他们用种种借口反对布加哥利修建大坝致使该项目推迟了5年。

中国参与发展大坝项目对非洲来说是天赐之福。当然中国和其他相关国家在他们的项目中必须考虑到人民和环境的需求,做出恰当的决定。但是这些决定不能由西雅图的人通过更多的美金来支配,而没有任何义务和责任感。

中国政府应该礼貌性地听取国际河流组织的意见,然后继续他们在非洲所做出的杰出贡献。

塞姆拉米

IRN is undemocratic and dangerous

The International Rivers Network is a deeply undemocratic organisation that has done great damage by using its funds and lobbying power in the US against the interests of poor people.

IRN's mission is to prevent dam building by blocking funding for dam projects. They were such a nuisance that even the World Bank stopped funding dams.

One example of the damage they have done comes from Uganda. Opposition to the Bujagali dam on trivial pretexts caused a five year delay. Economic impacts were huge. Electricity production fell short, thousands of jobs were lost, poverty increased and children died as a result.

China's entry as a developer of dam projects is a godsend for Africa. Of course China and the countries concerned must consider the needs of people and environment in their projects and take appropriate decisions. But decisions cannot be dictated by people in Seattle with more dollars than sense but no responsibility and no accountability.

The Chinese authorities should listen politely to IRN's suggestions and then get on with the excellent work they are doing in AFrica.

Semarumi

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

一个有攻击性的评论

塞姆拉米的评论攻击的不仅是国际河流组织,也包括无数z致力于保护人类和环境的地方团体和组织。国际河流组织的工作人员来自10个国家,其办公室遍布世界各地(而不仅仅在西雅图的)。但是只有当地团体提出要求,我们才会非常积极参与。

布扎加里大坝来是乌干达全国职业环保人协会(NAPE)强烈反对的项目,因为它严重违反了世界银行的环境保护政策。该项目也在涉及公司承认行贿乌干达的能源部长的事件后下马。国际河流组织不是反对建设该水坝,而是为了确保他们不进行破坏性建设而支持诸如NAPE这样的组织。

彼得 博斯哈德

An offensive comment

Semarumi's comment is offensive not only for International Rivers, but also for the innumerable local groups and organizations which try to protect affected people and the environment. International Rivers has staff from 10 countries and offices around the world (even though not in Seattle). But we only become active if local groups ask for it.

In the case of the Bujagali Dam, it was Uganda’s National Association of Professional Environmentalists (NAPE) which opposed the project because it severely violated the World Bank’s environmental policies. The project collapsed after a company involved in it admitted to having bribed Uganda’s energy minister. International Rivers is not opposed to dam building, but we proudly support organizations like NAPE which make sure they are not built in a destructive way.

Peter Bosshard

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

对真相感兴趣的读者请看

虽然我不愿意继续这场争论,中外对话的读者们应去看看最新一期的《替代水源》(Water Alternatives)杂志,读读由约翰·布里斯科写的世界大坝委员会的故事。委员会建成了大坝,却眼睁睁看着它被不民主的力量利用。

( http://www.water-alternatives.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=45&Itemid=44 )

他们还可以了解到,是中国使那些非洲国家逃脱了"阻碍发展"的环保主义者的压力。

然后他们会作出自己的决定。

(我为将国际河流组织定位在西雅图而道歉。主要是因为稿件虽来自非洲居民,却是从西雅图提交的。他们的总部在加州伯克利)。

塞姆拉米

For readers interested in the truth

While I do not want to prolong this exchange, readers of China Dialogue should go to the current issue of Water Alternatives and read the story of the World Commission on Dams by John Briscoe who established it and saw it taken over by determinedly undemocratic forces.

( http://www.water-alternatives.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=45&Itemid=44 )

They can also learn about the role that China has played in enabling African countries to escape the efforts of the environmentalists to block their development.

Then they can make up their own minds.

(And apologies for locating IRN in Seattle. The confusion arose because it was from Seattle that they wrote submissions that were presented as though they came from African residents, who they abused as mouthpieces. They are based in Berkeley, California)

Semarumi