Real Risk

Resettlement is likely to stress both the resettled and host

communities – there is already intense competition for resources,

and this will intensify under the altered ecological conditions as

a result of the dam’s operation. Resettlement will also stress social

support networks which are constrained by the geographical

distance over which they are able to stretch. Thus, those indi-

viduals who are resettled may be moved away from their existing

sources of social support.

Effective resettlement schemes are known to be difficult to

achieve and there is a significant possibility that those displaced

by the project will find themselves worse off after resettlement

than they were before. As Scudder (2001) observes: “Within the

major dam building countries, I am aware of none, including the

United States, China and India, that can document that they have

been able even to restore the incomes of a majority of resettlers.”

Dam operation

The operation of the dam will also impact the 200,000 or so

people living downstream of the dam.

Currently this group is

not considered as directly affected by the dam and thus will not

receive any compensation.

The operation of the dam stands to significantly alter the exist-

ing flow-regime of the river. Currently the dam is being designed

to meet peak power demand in Gauteng, South Africa. This will

require the generation of twice-daily mini-floods which would

destroy the vegetable gardens currently located on the bed of the

degraded river channel. This would at worst destroy the funda-

mental dry-season livelihood strategy of those living downstream

of the dam, and at best have dramatic impacts on food (in)secu-

rity in the area. As well as the generation of mini-floods, the

reservoir will also impair the river’s ‘natural’ flooding regime,

which will have negative impacts on both commercial and artisan

fishing downstream. Further, flood risk will be exacerbated as

people’s flood memory is lost as a result of a more regulated river

flow – this will make the inevitable very large floods more cata-

strophic than they would have otherwise been.

The inundation of the reservoir also predisposes the area to the

generation of seismic activity via reservoir-triggered earthquakes

(RTE) and reservoir-induced sesimicity (RIS).

The lack of record-

ing of the general plate kinematics in the area,

and the

conservative manner in which the maximum credible earthquake

(MCE) has been estimated for the Estima Fault has generated

concern that the maximum design earthquake (MDE) for the

project could have been severely underestimated.

Research has shown quite clearly that sophisticated, local-level

risk-management systems have evolved in the bairro to cope with

the altered ecological conditions as a result of Cahorra Bassa.

They continue to evolve under the conditions of a changing

climate, and include social mechanisms which allow for the evolu-

tion of risk management strategies and which maintain social

order and regulate vital microeconomic systems. In addition, they

include traditional values which ensure that vulnerable groups

and individuals are able to access resources and social capital in

times of stress.

The Mphanda Nkuwa dam is likely to bring some benefit to

Mozambique in the form of foreign revenue, which could allevi-

ate balance-of-payments issues, and generate room for further

growth in large industry. The construction and subsequent oper-

ation of the Mphanda Nkuwa dam will at the same time act to

undermine many of the aforementioned local-level risk manage-

ment strategies. Such impacts will be felt as a result of:

• Rapid and dramatic alterations to the river’s ecology

• Stress on existing mechanisms for ensuring social control

• Erosion of traditional values through the rapid imposition of

modernizing influences.

As such, the benefits and risks associated with the construction

and operation of the dam are not evenly distributed, effectively

debunking cost-benefit arguments that fail to account for the

distribution of such costs and benefits.

Need for an effective medium

Much effort has been spent on mainstreaming disaster risk into

the developmental discourse. Despite this, applied research clearly

indicates that even in light of recommendations from such

reputable institutions as the WCD, risk as a holistic concept

continues to be excluded from the development-in-practice taking

place on the African continent. The risk fraternity continues to

seek out examples of best practice in implementing local risk

management activities, and while this is very useful, the need for

effective advocacy to implement applied community risk assess-

ment to planned large-scale developmental processes has in this

case remained largely untouched or ineffective.

Applied research has significant value on the African continent,

and schemes such as those provided by GGF and ProVention’s

Applied Grants Programme must be supported. However, risk

discourse is failing to engage sufficiently to halt large planned

developmental projects that could significantly undermine the

existing livelihood and risk management strategies being

employed at the local level.

In light of NEPAD’s approach to mega-projects and China’s

growing influence on the continent (with its express stance of

non-interference), issues of effective advocacy desperately need

addressing. As such, the growing numbers of people involved in

the field of risk management need to find an effective medium

and forum in which they can lend their voices to the develop-

mental dialogue. Without such action, even the best local-level

risk management practices are reduced to merely sticking plasters

across the gaping wounds of ‘development’.

[

] 74

A community mapping exercise

Photo: James Morrissey, 2005