Post on 17-Mar-2022
STAKEHOLDERS, PARTICIPATION AND BENEFIT SHARING: APPROACH TO MIDDLE YEYWA
ADVANCING SUSTAINABILITY IN RENEWABLE ENERGY
Yangon, October 2018
Dr. Stephen Sparkes
Vice President, International Power
1
Stakeholder Engagement
Dialogue situation
Exchange of ideas
Mutual Respect and trust
Both sides listening and talking
Implies doing things together as
partners
Implies mutual understanding and
benefits
It is NOT a one-way event:
3
Understanding the Hydropower Context
Examples of high environmental and
social impacts
Lack of dialogue between
stakeholders – lack of trust
History of forced relocation and
conflict in potential investment areas
Fear of resettlement and loss of
resources and livelihoods
Lack of benefit-sharing for remote
areas impacted by hydropower
4
Basic Project Design Features
160m arch with centrally located crest
spillway of 2 bays and a left bank spillway
with 3 bays
The underground powerhouse complex with
4 183.75 MW vertical axis Francis turbines
with a total installed capacity of 735 MW
70 km long and narrow reservoir that will be
around 135-140 m at the dam; 11 km2 with a
total volume of 400 million m3
3.8 access road, approach road upgrades
and 300 m replacement bridge
5
Village locations
6
6 Villages on right bank: ca.
4,000 inhabitants
2-3 villages on left bank: ca.
2,300 inhabitants
Northern areas to be
investigated
One bridge
Dirt roads to villages but
main road paved
Difficult access to river
Understanding the Context for Middle Yeywa
Pre-feasibility/Scoping Study of the
Project Area in 2015
- Verified low-level of social impacts
- Possible relocation of a few structures/
houses along road corridors but no
resettlement
- Security concerns on left bank
- Ethnic minority group but well
integrated into local economy
Challenging resettlement in Upper
Yeywa Project ongoing
7
Stakeholder Analysis
Stakeholder Goal Method Timing
Villages in area of influence
Inform and obtain info and cooperation
Village meetings for input into planning
Start at Scoping and continue
Village leaders Inform and obtain info and cooperation
Formal and informal discussions for input
Start at Scoping and continue
Local Government Inform Meetings As required
State Government Inform and coordinate with gov’t programs
Formal and individual meetings
Regular updates
MoEE and MoNREC Ongoing dialogue for support
Formal and individual meetings
Regular updates
SSA South Inform Informal meetings As required
Lenders/Embassy Inform Meetings As required
NGOs Inform and coordinate with programs
Public Meeting and individual meetings
Part of EIA process or as required
8
First Meetings during Scoping Study
Introduce the project
- Main features and location
Overview of expected impacts
- No resettlement
- Very limited loss of land
- Dust and noise issues
Note all concerns and expectations
- Interest in paid work and training
- Request for improved roads and
electricity
People generally positive after
being told of low impacts
10
Discussions with Village Leaders
Goals:
- Gather data on village and confirm
information and statistics
- Further clarifications about impacts
- Listen to concerns and more detailed
expectations
- Assess experience in dealing with outside
interventions
Outcomes:
- Positive attitudes
- Confirms general socio-economic conditions
and integrated status
- Reconfirms expectations for improved
infrastructure
11
Meetings with Local and State Government
Goals:
- General information about all aspects of
the project
- Obtain support and cooperation
- Obtain detailed information about
government programs and activities in
the project area, as well as plans
Outcomes:
- Good atmosphere and cooperation –
interest in project plans
- Obtained overview of ongoing and
planned infrastructure development
activities and ways to coordinate efforts
12
NGOs and Middle Yeywa
“Operational” NGOs
- Meeting to inform about the project
and to find out about their programs
- Generally sceptical to hydropower but
possible cooperation in areas of
conservation
“Advocacy” NGOs
- Principally opposed to hydropower
development in Myanmar
- Shan opposition groups based in
Thailand and in Europe
- Protests, media campaign and
letters to Norwegian government
- Consider proactive media actions
14
SAVE THE NAMTU RIVER
Participatory Approach to Planning
Important to establish a dialogue with
all key stakeholders
Projects need trust and cooperation in
order to manage risks – especially
when there are security considerations
Need to establish the “Feedback Loop”
– show views are taken seriously
Aim is to come to an agreement on
moving forward together
15
Introduction to the project Concerns and
Expectations
Assess options (project context) Confirm
expectations
Comments to mitigation
Review and draft mitigation
Finalize in draft EIA
Challenges of Benefit-Sharing
Legal requirement for expropriation
with correct land documents
No system for determining
production loss or usufruct traditions
Compensation based on fixed rates
below market estimates
Long battles in the courts as
stakeholders challenge rates
Lack of sustainability in legal
approach – not compliant with IFC
16
Case Study 1: Albania (Devoll)
Two plants on the Devoll river with a total
production of 729 GWh (256 MW)
Loss of agricultural land and livelihoods for
637 households
50% of income derived from farming
Complex history of ownership and 80%
without documents
Rates based on ca. 3 years of harvest and
could not be challenged in courts
17
Additional Mitigation for Devoll
Restoration program based on
production – estimates based on
“recovery cost”
Consultations to consider “package
options”: vineyards, trees, olive
groves, vegetables, livestock and
machinery
Tailored solutions to match labour,
resources, skills, etc.
Monitoring of restoration process
to ensure restoration
18
Case Study 2: Political Challenges in Peru Long history of confrontation with central
government and extraction industries
- No benefit-sharing mechanism
Volatile political situation especially
before local elections
Target for ambitious politicians
- “You vote for me and you will get more
benefits from the project”
- Can lead to protests and blockages
How to deal with this?
- Work to build board support in communities
- Elicit support from local and national
government agencies
- Recourse to the courts for ruling
19
CSR Programs
Consultation planning
process with all
communities after
acquisition
Identification of needs
and support options to
establish good relations
Ongoing assessment of
results and follow-up
with communities
20
Case Study 3: Indian Requirements
Indian law stipulates in
Himalchal Pradesh:
- 2% of investment costs
- 2.5% of profit during operation
- Other legal requirements for
forestry and water release
Challenges of dealing with
local government:
- Technical competence
- Equitable distribution of funds
- Ensuring funds reach impacted
communities
- Accountability
21
Distribution of winter clothes at old age home; support for Dewali ceremony
Case Study 4: Indigenous People as Investment Partners Challenges in obtaining acceptance
with indigenous peoples – related to
land and resource rights
Partnerships with First Nation
groups – funding for investments
and dividends
Seeks consensus on resource use
Respect for traditional rights
Creates employment opportunities
and social benefits
Ensure revenue in long-term for
communities, investors and gov’t
22
Situation for Middle Yeywa
No institutionalize benefit-sharing
mechanism but tradition for project to
have social development program
Project to negotiate a solution with
stakeholders (villagers/gov’t)
Necessary to obtain support and
cooperation from local stakeholders
- Eliminate risk of protests and delays
- Ensure benefits
- Important source of information about
the security situation
23
Proposed Community Development Imitative
18.10.20
24
Relatively low impacts allow for
larger development program
Based on detailed consultations with
communities and government
Draft EIA to focus on:
- Rural roads
- Rural electricity
- Water Supply
- Maintenance during Operation