The Dam Debate - The bias of the Forest Advisory Committee
- Part 1 -

Chabungbam Amuba Singh *

The Nehruvian development doctrine - "Dams as Temples of Resurgent India" - has been suddenly thrown to the wind by the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) (of the ministry of Environment and Forest) in respect of the proposed Tipaimukh and the Dibang Hydroprjects.

With the global anti-Dam passion of the first years of the 21st century still looming warm it is not easy to bring to light the discriminatory attitude of the FAC. However with a little scrutiny the thinly hidden bias can be exposed. Before we do that a few words about the anti-Dam hype of the recent past are pertinent.

The World Commission on Dams (WCD) was a body of individuals (not representing any nation or organisation) established in May 1998 by the World Bank and the World Conservation Union (IUCN). It was winded up immediately after it gave its report - "Dams and Development - A New Framework for Decision Making"- in November 2000.

Very few countries and International financing institutions have supported the recommendations of the WCD. Countries like China and Turkey outright rejected the WCD report. The International Commission on Large Dams (ICLD) and the International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage (ICID) also rejected it . Even the World Bank itself has "refused to adopt any of the WCD recommendations into its binding policies"

Even the United States where many high decibel dam-critics have flourished showed mixed reactions to the WCD recommendations.

It is in the aftermath of the WCD hype that China (which has the 20300 MW Three Gorges Dam) has embarked upon an ambitious plan of tapping the huge hydropower potential of the lower Tibet region and the Yunan region.

The chief concern of the WCD was the issue of mammoth displacement of people by large Dam projects. The late Laxmi Chand Jain, a Commissioner of WCD, had noted (quoting figures from the Mid-term Appraisal of the Planning Commission of India) that " 25 million persons have been displaced since 1950 on account of development projects, of which 40 % are tribal. Less than 50 % have been rehabilitated. The rest have been pauperised by the development process".

The biggest displacement of people, in the history of development projects in the world, is caused by the Three Gorges Dam in China, the largest dam in the world. It has displaced more than 1.3 million people, resulting in more than 70 people displaced per megawatt installed power.

It is important to realise that the WCD digressed too much away from its primary concern - the issue of uprooting of people by large dam projects. This inessential digression (from its prima donna of cause) is, perhaps, the main reason for the rejection of its report by many countries and international bodies and the reluctance of the World Bank itself to accept it.

After studying the response of various countries and organisations to the WCD recommendations the World Bank came out in November 2003 with a landmark report titled, "Good Dams and Bad Dams: Environmental Criteria for Site Selection of Hydroelectric Projects".

In the light of this World Bank document should the Tipaimukh and the Dibang be seen!

Coming to the FAC's view of the Tipaimukh Dam project, here is its main observation:-
" The Tipaimukh Dam project involves diversion/submergence of around 243.29 sq km of forest, which is more than one-fifth of the total forest land area of 1181.4 sq km diverted so far for execution of 497 hydro projects in the country after the Forest (Conservation) Act- 1980 came into force. Thus the per megawatt forest land required comes out to be around 16 hectares which is higher than the national average."

Sounds a pretty good argument! Yet, while making this observation the FAC has turned a Nelson's eye to the following facts about the largest Hydro-Electric projects in the country:

Table-1 : Largest Hydro Electric Dam Projects

(Source:- 1. National Register of Large Dams 2009, Central Water Commission;
2. Central Electricity Authority of India report dated 13 June 2013. )
( The top three are exclusively for power generation, and were completed before 1980.)
( > = more than ; * as mentioned in the Supreme Court judgement of 2000:
PAP=Project Affected Person, is a family unit rather than a person)
(# This is from a World Bank Document. There are reports claiming much higher figure.)

We have listed the completed Hydroelectric Dam projects in the country having 1000 MW or more installed capacity( we have not included non-dam tunnel projects like the Naptha Jhakri and the Dehar)

For comparison, we give the figures for the proposed Tipaimukh Dam project at Sl. No.8 below -

8. Tipaimukh (Manipur)    < 240    1500    < 16    2027    1
            ( < = less than )

The numerical parameters "Hectares flooded/ MW" and "People displaced/MW" are indicators adopted in the World Bank reports for assessment of large dams. The above table shows that the proposed Tipaimukh Dam is the clear winner over the top five largest Hydroelectric projects in the country.

The Forest Advisory Committee, on the contrary, has projected this good dam as a villain/loser by
(i) arbitrarily introducing a parameter called "forest area displaced" and an
ill-conceived 'national average'.
(ii) not taking into consideration dams constructed before 1980;
(iii) completely ignoring the largest completed Hydroelectric projects;
(iv) pitting a dam in the thickly forested North East against the majority of dams in non-forest regions.

The anti- North East bias of the FAC becomes evident when we note the following facts:
(a) The forest clearance of the Indira Sagar Dam project was given in 1987. This project (also called the Narmada Sagar Dam) has submerged 414 sq km of forest for producing just 1000 MW power and irrigating an area of just 1200 sq km.
(b) The forest clearance for the controversial Sardar Sarovar Dam project was given in 1985. This project has submerged 137 sq km of forest.

These two projects on the river Narmada account for half of "the total forest land area of 1181.4 sq km diverted so far for execution of 497 hydro projects in the country after the Forest(Conservation) Act -1980..". The two together have submerged 22 hectare of forest land per megawatt which is higher than the 16 Ha/MW for the Tipaimukh.

Then the obvious question is, ' Why not the clearance for the Tipaimukh and the Dibang?' The sudden paradigm shift by the FAC from the Nehruvian strategy of development is hitting hard at the hope and aspiration of the North-East, as we shall discuss bellow.

To be continued...