Introduction
Flowing from Vietnam's central highlands into Cambodia's northeastern provinces of Ratanakiri and Stung Treng before converging into the Mekong River, the Se San River is the lifeblood and source of cultural richness and biodiversity for approximately 50,000 people living along the river. The fisherman and farmers come from a myriad of ethnicities and depend on the river as a source of food, water and livelihood (Fisheries Office and NTFP, 2000: 7). Over the past decade, the construction and operation of the 720 megawatt Yali Falls hydropower dam, along with several other dams on the Se San River in upstream Vietnam, have caused significant changes to the river's hydrology and water quality, adversely affecting downstream populations in Cambodia.
I look at the successes that the affected Cambodian communities on the Se San River have had in promoting transboundary dialogue with dam builders in Vietnam in minimizing impacts and in their involvement in dam-related decision-making. This was possible through community mobilization, network building, advocacy work and promoting opportunities for dialogue by the Se San Protection Network (SPN), which has established a new discourse of river water management. SPN is working to demonstrate the need for a more comprehensive and participatory dialogue process in order to ensure that the needs and rights of all water users are being addressed so that future water utilization schemes are equitable and sustainable.
Hydropower impacts on the Se San River basin
In 1993, the Electricity of Vietnam (EVN) began construction on the first and largest hydropower project on the Se San River, the 720MW Yali Falls dam, located approximately 80 kilometers from the border of Cambodia. The US$1.2 billion dam was built by EVN with funding from the Russian and Ukrainian governments, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) and with technical support from SWECO, Statkraft Grøner and Electrowatt Engineering. Additionally, the World Bank also provided Vietnam with a loan of US$ 575 million to build a 500 km transmission line from Yali Falls to Ho Chi Minh City. From the start of the project, downstream communities were not informed nor consulted during the process of developing the dam and this has remained the case throughout the operation of the dam.
Following construction of the dam, downstream communities began to experience serious changes to the river's hydrology and water quality. Changes to the river's hydrological regime were first noticed in 1996, when the cofferdam broke resulting in massive flooding in downstream Cambodia. After this flood and until 2003, irregular and frequent flooding, dry-ups and daily erratic water fluctuations continued without warning and resulted in the deaths of at least 35 people by drowning as well as the destruction of homes, property and livestock. Changes to the river's flow also began to threaten food and livelihood security, as there was a sharp decline in fish and fisheries; riverbank agriculture and paddy fields were washed away with floods; and gold panning, which was once an important alternative source of income for these communities became impossible due to water surges. As the water quality of the Se San began deteriorating, villagers experienced an increase in illness, including diarrhea, skin rashes, vomiting and other water-borne diseases. Many of these adverse impacts continue today, contributing to increased poverty, livelihood insecurity, food shortages and health problems for the Se San villagers (NGO Forum on Cambodia, 2005: 22).
While the impacts of the Yali Falls dam have yet to be remedied or resolved, Vietnam has continued to construct additional dams on the Se San River. There are currently two additional dams in operation, the 260 MW Se San 3 and the 96 MW Se San 3A, and three more dams in the process of being built, the 100 MW Pleikrong, the 360 MW Se San 4 and the Se San 4A re-regulating dam. These dams threaten the lives of the Se San villagers through even further deterioration of living conditions and loss of livelihood.
Networking and downstream community mobilization
In response to the difficulties faced by local communities affected by hydropower development, SPN was established in 2001 in order to document the social, economic and environmental impacts of the dam and to serve as a legitimate representational body. The network engages in dialogue and negotiation for the resolution of dam-related issues and to ensure equitable water usage in the future.
The initial proposal for a village representative network was developed by a group of local and international non-governmental organizations that came together to assess the local situation on the Se San River through consultation with local communities and the initiation of an investigative impact study. This first study outlined the serious problems occurring downstream of Yali Falls dam on the Se San River and called upon the Cambodian government to begin addressing the issue and negotiate with Vietnam. The group also recommended the establishment of a comprehensive local, national, regional and international coalition to provide technical and advocacy support to local communities. In December 2001, SPN was formally launched along with a Se San Secretariat and Se San Steering Committee in Ratanakiri Province (Australian Mekong Resource Centre, 2003: 3–4).
Over the next three years, a community representative network was formed through a process of broad mobilization of affected areas. The network was based on traditional community structure and included local authorities and appointed community representatives from the village, commune and district level. By early 2004, the network had expanded to include all 60 villages located along the Se San River in Ratanakiri province.
The process of strengthening the community
Once SPN grew into a comprehensive network, it began to undergo a process of network strengthening in order to obtain legitimacy and credibility as a dam-affected people's movement capable of representing the needs and rights of the Se San people at the local, national and international level. This process included a wide array of coordinated and simultaneous activities, including: capacity building, empowering local community members to be their own best advocates, developing a body of knowledge through research initiatives and advocacy coalition building (Trandem and Kim, 2006: 6–10).
Building the capacity of local network members was essential for the network to take concerted action to successfully engage in dialogue and negotiation with dam builders, government authorities and other stakeholders. Regular trainings and information dissemination meetings held at the local level educated communities about how dams operate, their options and rights as dam-affected communities, and how to analyze and strategize for advocacy work.
The next step focused on empowering network members to be their own best advocates. Through a participatory and consensus building approach, which included a series of consultations and workshops, the network was able to create a unified voice of demands and reach agreement about how to strategically work towards accomplishing them.
Simultaneous to capacity building and advocacy, the network both initiated and participated in an ongoing process of research to document evidence that supported claims about the dam's impacts. Through studies conducted by outside consultants as well as local community members, researchers compiled reports on a wide-range of impacts, including economic losses, fish population studies and community response to the changes and difficulties in their lives as a result of the dams. While serving as evidence to the dam's harms, the research has also served as a basis of initiating dialogue and increasing public and stakeholder awareness.
Lastly, SPN worked to mobilize a multi-layered advocacy coalition to support the work of the community network. This coalition has included allies within civil society, local government authorities and the media, who have been actively engaging in advocacy to raise awareness while targeting influential stakeholders at various levels. This coalition used strategies such as letter writing, meetings, lobbying and media outreach to help generate international pressure and create political space for dialogue.
Together these activities helped strengthen the confidence of network representatives and increased their ability to articulate and argue their concerns and rights to dam builders, government officials and other stakeholders. This in turn has increased the legitimacy of the network as a key stakeholder and helped create opportunities for constructive multilateral stakeholder dialogue.
Promoting opportunities for transboundary dialogue
Since its formation, SPN has grown and been strengthened by integrated, community-based dialogue. The network believes that promoting opportunities for discussion, questioning and expressing discontent is essential for defining the problem, seeking solutions and engaging in negotiation. In order to achieve negotiation, SPN has actively advocated for dialogue and, with supporting partner NGOs, has rallied provincial authorities to help get the issue on the national agenda, and then urged Cambodian government officials to negotiate with Vietnam while also pressuring the dam's other stakeholders to push Vietnam to resolve the problem. Throughout this process, the network has called on the dam's stakeholders to allow downstream communities the opportunity to negotiate for themselves at the decision-making table.
To reach this point of understanding and cooperation, SPN held rounds of meetings with provincial, district and local authorities throughout its early years. Once strong local support for the network was established, SPN met with decision-making authorities and stakeholders that were arranged by SPN's Secretariat and partner organizations. These meetings included key Cambodian officials of the Cambodian National Mekong Committee, Standing Committee on Dams and Canals along the Borders of Cambodia, National Assembly of Cambodia, and other relevant ministries with the objective of sharing information and attempting to persuade them to engage in dialogue and negotiation with Vietnam.
At the regional level, SPN has met with the regional governance organization, the Mekong River Commission (MRC), requesting them to initiate communication and dialogue between stakeholders in order to find a solution to the problem, while also asking them to play a stronger role in water governance and conflict management by ensuring compliance of the 1995 Mekong Agreement.
SPN has sought engagement with key technical and financial supporters of Vietnam's dams, in an attempt to hold them accountable for their involvement for the impacts suffered by downstream communities. Meetings have been held with Sida, SWECO Grøner and the Asian Development Bank (ADB). SPN also hosted a visit by the World Bank, so that they could see firsthand the impacts that Cambodian communities are experiencing.
Finally, dialogue has also occurred in the form of regular forums, celebrations, workshops and conferences. These events have helped increase discussion among stakeholders and have led to formal recognition of the dam's impacts and some steps towards possible negotiation.
Reflecting on challenges and successes
Given the transboundary nature of the Se San River and the political sensitivity of the issue, there has yet to be serious and meaningful negotiation with the parties involved either bilaterally or multilaterally. However, despite the lack of negotiation thus far, the case of the Se San River and SPN can be considered significant in that the network has attempted to negotiate outcomes through the promotion of opportunities for dialogue and negotiation rather than wait for solution to be found (Hirsch and Wyatt, 2004: 53). By doing this, the network has been able to place the issue squarely before Vietnamese and Cambodian government officials while making a firm list of demands. By challenging stakeholders to engage in dialogue, the network has raised awareness of the impacts suffered by communities downstream of Yali Falls dam and has forced many stakeholders in the Mekong River basin to reconsider the meaning of good water governance and recognize the need for greater stakeholder involvement in the decision-making processes related to water use in the Mekong and its tributaries. In demanding that stakeholders be held accountable and that affected communities have the ability to participate in decisions about their lives and futures, the network has endured both successes and challenges.
One of SPN's first successes was its ability to present a unified statement of concerns and demands as a representative body at the National Se San Workshop held on 27 November 2002 in Phnom Penh (Hirsch and Wyatt, 2004: 61). Although this workshop was attended mainly by provincial authorities (key government officials and the MRC Secretariat declined to attend), the network was able to vocalize some of the problems occurring along the Se San while appealing to the national government to provide assistance. Together, SPN representatives requested that the natural flow of the river be restored, that no further dams be built until communities are compensated for past damage, that the government of Cambodia negotiate with Vietnam to find a solution, and that the MRC and other stakeholders carry out further studies in consultation with the local people (Ratanakiri Se San Communities, 2002). While these requests have since evolved over time, the November 2002 presentation was significant in showing the network's ability to act as a representative body and to demand further dialogue and negotiation on the issue.
Another important success as a result of the network's advocacy efforts has been the Vietnamese and Cambodian governments' acknowledgment, along with other stakeholders, that the Yali Falls dam has caused negative impacts downstream. The first recognition came in the form of a verbal apology at a November 2002 conference, when a representative of Vietnam's Ministry of Industry stated 'we are very sorry for the losses of the people living downstream on the Se San River caused, of course, by releasing water from Yali Falls dam's reservoir in February 2000' (Se San Protection Network, 2003: 6). The second acknowledgement came in August 2003, when, at the recommendation of SPN, the Cambodian National Mekong Committee sent a facsimile to Vietnam's National Mekong Committee, stating the concerns of the Se San villagers and requesting that Vietnam respond accordingly. Another acknowledgment came as a result of the work of the network and its international coalition to build strong public opposition to the Se San 3 dam, which in turn led the ADB to call for additional studies to fully assess the downstream impacts of Yali Falls dam and to reconsider financially backing the dam. Vietnam's response to the ADB was to announce that it 'no longer needed ADB's assistance to proceed with the project' (White, 2000: 2). Finally, the network achieved recognition for its work in the December 2006, 'Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) on the Cambodian part of the Se San River due to Hydropower Development in Vietnam', report that was conducted by SWECO Grøner for EVN and validated many of the negative impacts experienced and reported by the Se San community.
Unfortunately, the network's successes have been paralleled by many challenges. There has yet to be any compensation or mitigation for the impacts suffered, and Vietnam continues to build hydropower dams on the river. Access to information on these dams and the river's hydrology remains restricted. Commitments expressed by stakeholders to address the transboundary impacts of Se San dams often are made without political conviction, as seen by the shortcomings of the past bilateral Joint Se San Committee, which lacked public participation and sufficient funds. Trust among stakeholders is also limited, making cooperation difficult. Additionally, Se San communities continue to struggle to be seen as legitimate stakeholders and have had the unfair burden of having to initiate dialogue among stakeholders in order to ensure that discussion on the issue moves forward.
Conclusion
Through strategic collective action, promoting transboundary dialogue and demanding stakeholder accountability, the dam-affected communities living along the Se San River have developed a strong network of community representatives demanding to be heard. The SPN network is challenging the current way in which water-related decisions are being made through the promotion of inclusive, meaningful and equitable multi-layered stakeholder participation and representation. By creating opportunities for stakeholder engagement, SPN has helped to open up space for dialogue while also encouraging improved regional water governance and conflict management.
While the network has faced both success and difficulty in promoting transboundary dialogue, communities on neighbouring rivers being threatened by hydropower development have taken SPN's example and are working to voice their concerns. Communities along the Srepok and Sekong rivers are now also engaged in efforts to protect their way of life in the face of upstream dams. To reflect this expansion of the network, the SPN Secretariat has changed its name to the 3S Rivers Protection Network . Together these communities are working to make their voices heard so that impacts from past dam construction are remedied and future development projects ensure ecological sustainability and social equity.
References
- Australian Mekong Resource Centre (2003) 'The Se San Protection Network: A review of its formation and initiatives', unpublished report, Australian Mekong Resource Centre: Sydney.
- Fisheries Office and NTFP (2000) A Study of Downstream Impact of the Yali Falls Dam in the Se San River Basin in Ratanakiri Province, Northeast Cambodia, Ratanakiri: The Fisheries Office.
- Hirsch, Philip and Andrew Wyatt (2004) 'Negotiating Local Livelihoods: Scales of conflict in the Se San River basin', Asia Pacific Viewpoint 45(1): 51–68. | Article |
- NGO Forum on Cambodia (2005) Down River: The consequences of Vietnam's Se San River dams on life in Cambodia and their meaning in international law, Phnom Penh: NGO Forum on Cambodia.
- Ratanakiri Se San Communities (2002) Joint Statement from Ethnic Minority Groups Living Along the Se San River in Ratanakiri, Ratanakiri: Se San Protection Network.
- Se San Protection Network (2003) 'Learning from Transboundary Environmental Conflicts', Mekong Update & Dialogue 6(4): 5–6, Sydney: Australian Mekong Resource Centre.
- Trandem, Ame and Sangha Kim (2006) 'Grassroots community network mobilizing struggles for advocacy on the Se San River', unpublished report, 3S Rivers Protection Network: Ratanakiri.
- White, Wayne C. (2000) A Review of the Se San 3 Hydropower Feasibility Study, Toronto: Probe International.
