Hydropower policy and site-level contestation under the...
Transcript of Hydropower policy and site-level contestation under the...
Hydropower policy and site-level contestation under the political transition:
Challenges for Ending the Power Cut in Nepal
Dr. Hari Dhungana & Gyanu Maskey
Southasia Institute of Advanced StudiesOctober 9 2015
www.sias-southasia.org
Outline Hydropower in Nepal
Background: Urgency of HEP development
Objectives
Methodology
Hydropower Policies –investment friendly
Hydropower Policies-benefits to local peoples
Site level challenges
Conclusion
Hydropower potential & utilisation in South Asia
Country Feasible (MW) Installed (MW) Harnessed
India 84044 39,060 46.48%
Pakistan 59000 6,555 11.11%
Nepal 43000 659 1.53%
Bhutan 24000 1,488 6.2%
Srilanka 2550.7 1,401 54.93%
Bangladesh 755 230 30.46
Total 213,350 49,394 23.15
Nepal occupies third place in terms of hydropower potentiality but appeared last with respect to utilization.
Source: NEA
Demand & supply
Fiscal Yr Demand (MW)
Supply (MW)
Load shedding (MW)
2013/14 1201 791 410
2014/15 1291.80 706.861 585
Annual Report, NEA
• Total capacity for 99 hydropower projects (issued generation licenses) 2225.433 MW (DoED)
Background Experience of Load Shedding Post-conflict period: Growing optimism in
Nepal for hydropower development Survey and generation licenses
Still, projects facing local struggles and resistance
significant challenges on projects that cannot be overlooked
Objectives
Hydropower policies –investment friendly
Hydropower policies-benefits of local people
Site level Challenges (UM-A Hydropower Project)
Methodology
Review of Policy Documents
Case study at Bhulbhule, Lamjung
Field observation
FGDs
KII/SSI
Stakeholder Consultation
in Kathmandu
Political transition
Post-2006 transition: still ongoing after constitution promulgation
Over the past 13 years, vacuum of elected leadership in the local governments
no meaningful deliberation and contestation in regard to local affairs
DDCs, VDCs and municipalities run by centrally appointed civil servants and exercising powers
Policies: investment friendly post-1990 policies
break the monopoly of NEA
securing investment
Hydropower Development Policy 2049 (1992)
Water Resources Act 2049 (1992)
Electricity Act 2049 (1992)
Associated regulations
Environmental Protection Act 2053 (1996)
Environmental Protection Regulations 2054 (1997).
In 1993 HMG promulgated Nepal's first Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines 2050 (1993, revised in 1997)
Policies Provisions on
- eight five-year plan (1992-1997) - Hydropower Development Policy of 1992
• open market and liberalization
- Hydropower policy 1992- Water resource act 1992
• domestic private sector, foreign investors, community producers as well as the NEA
• BOOT model
• provisions on licensing, power purchase agreement, tariff fixation, acquisition of land, and environmental conservation
-Twenty-Year Hydropower Development Plan Formulation Task Force
• projects local people as a problem• Sensitise people and regular dialogues
Policies Provisions on
- 38-point Electricity Crisis Resolution Action Plan (2009)
• concessions around investment• waiver of the provision for doing EIA for power projects, only IEE
-Project Development Agreement Procedure, 2069, amendment 2070
• clear, transparent and managed agreement process
Acquisition of land-1992 hydropower policy
- 2001 hydropower policy
-2009 Plan
• government acquire land upon request of hydropower developers • use Land Acquisition Act of 1977
• promising support required to acquire land. • encourages voluntary exchange of land• government intervention when lands are not voluntarily acquired
• need for simplifying the process of land acquisition
Policies Provisions on
Resettlement & Rehabilitation-Hydropower policy 2001 •assistance in regard to resettlement
and rehabilitation by the government
-EIA- Ordinance 2006
• installed capacity between 1 and 50 MW -IEE those greater than 50 MW: full EIA
Policies Provisions on
Royalty distribution
- Hydropower development policy of 1992/ Electricity Act 1992
•hydropower developers to pay royalty to central government
HydropowerPolicy 2001 to return 10% of the royalty from a hydropower project to the district where it is located
Second amendment of the Self-Governance Regulations (2004)
Electricity Ordinance (2007)
• DDCs (12%), which is then redistributed to VDCsDevelopment Region (38%) national exchequer (50%). • Smaller projects, with capacity up to 1000 KW, exempted from the payment of royalty.
Policies: Local Benefits
Policies: Local Benefits
Policies Provisions on
Use of local labor and skillsHydropower Policy 1992 • Local people to benefit directly
• Use of local labor and skills• foreign investors to transfer technology to Nepalese citizens.
Hydropower Policy 2001 • similar points about benefit to local • reaffirms the provisions of local governance legislation to share revenue with local governments.
Water rights of local peopleHydropower policy 1992 Hydropower policy 2001
• silent on water rights• legal provisions will be made to prevent adverse effects on the availability of water
Policies Provisions on
Compensation for harms • no clear provisions• EIAs identify the potential harms & recommend
•2009 Plan • suggests the formation of “Compensation Determination and Distribution committee”
Resettlement and rehabilitationHydropower Policy 1992
•silent about the resettlement
Hydropower policy 2001 • rehabilitate and resettle the families as per standards set by HMG.
Ten-year plan • need for developing a National Resettlement policy •be based on international standards” •Govt support in resettlement process•Better living standards and socio-economic conditions of the displaced people
Policies Provisions on
Consultation & Consent of local/ind peoples• hydropower policies – both of 1992 and 2001
• provision in EIA
• ten-year plan
• Silent
•for identifying environmental impacts
• suitable training to local human resource
• Twenty Yr Plan • silent on indigenous people’s demands,• develop understanding between project developers, local people and people’s representatives
Env protection, norming & EIA• 1992 electricity Act • hydropower development policy
• Environmental Protection Act (1996) and Regulations (1997)
• minimum adverse impact on the environment
• More than 5MW -EIA , IEE for smaller projects• minimum of river flow- EIA or 10% flow
Policies Provisions on
• Ten-year plan • specific provisions on EIA• simplify EIA and its approval, • specify approval timeline• comments and recommendations from different ministries and agencies
• Ordinance 2006 • installed capacity between 1 and 50 MW- IEE• those greater than 50 MW: full EIA
Some issues in policies
policies : local people’s mobilizations primarily as an obstruction.
not diagnosed in regard to how this is happening,
absence of mechanisms of representation and articulation of local people’s concerns in an institutionalized manner
10 yr-plan report, 20 yr plan report
No indication of consulting with National Human Rights Commission, NFDIN
Case study site-UM-A HP Project
50 MW capacity
Sino Hydro and partner Sagarmatha Power Company
Bhulbhule VDC of Lamjung
The Rs 10 billion project
signed a power purchase agreement with the NEA for 6.95 cents per unit.
Original date of completion: end of 2016
Tunnel at Nandeshwora
Project Impacts: Positive
Access to road to Bhulbhule VDC
Economic development
Employment Opportunity
Local business
First traffic tunnel in Nepal
Increased awareness among people
Negative Impacts
Dust/smoke-air pollution Sound pollution-vehicles/blasting
/crusher plant Blasting impact for tunnel
construction-cracks in houses Drying of water sources Reduction in grazing area Decrease in agricultural production Less no. of tourists Cultural impact on river Loss of fishes Social evils
Challenges at site level Social and local demands
Lead to obstructionism, blockage, strikes
Demands on compensation, increasing wages, blasting impact
Chare Khola-girls death
Indigenous peoples concerns FPIC
UMA HP- NEFIN advocating
EIA Not made public
Technicalities of EIA
Grievance Handling District: Hydropower Promotion and PCC
Site level: PCC- to mediate (members from 5 affected VDCs)
Late formation
Accused of not fully acknowledging local peoples
Patron politics prevailing
Preferential hire of labors
Neighborhood Support Programme (Npr 40 million for 3 yrs)
Compensation mechanisms/database No clear provisions
EIA identifies potential harms and offers recommendations
Cracks due to blasting effect in tunnels
Compensation determination and distribution committee (as per 2009 Plan): DTO, PRO, PCC< EMU
Blockage on dust
Resettlement AND REHABILITATION Dam site area
Tanglinchok: Categorized into 3 groups on the basis of risk due to the tunnel 11, 8, 5 HHs for 15 months-10, 2.5, 1 lakh
Surge Tank area
1 permanent (14 lakhs) 4 temporary (15 mnths-3 to 8 lakhs)
• Pay Rs 10,000 month land rent• Toilet/drinking water/kitchen garden/livestock• Elecricity, water pipes, gobar gas
Observations In Bhulbhule, villagers emphasize distributive
issues
To them, justice is about avoiding harm and deriving benefits from the project.
Their demands resonate with Nepal’s regulations on environmental impacts and hydropower projects, which equally stress distributive concerns over procedural rights.
Conclusions
Post 1990 in Nepal have encouraged the investment on hydropower projects from private sector
Policies and laws have also provisioned for local peoples benefits
Some policy provisions are unclear, some weak at implementation
Increasing local and social demands: site level challenges
Recommendation
HEP promotion requires hassle-free local environment, and a predictable environment
Establish effective local dialogue process to facilitate HEP development—with democratic space and to heed to multiple demands
Clarify the rights of indigenous groups
Clarify and agree with indigenous
Indigenous vis-à-vis local community
You tube video on UM-A Hydropower Project: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWVO4FtE6dQ