skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Cleaning up the big muddy: A meta-synthesis of the research on the social impact of dams

Abstract

Scholars have been exploring the social impacts of dams for over 50 years, but a lack of systematic approaches has resulted in many research gaps remaining. This paper presents the first systematic review of the literature on the social impacts of dams. For this purpose, we built a sample of 217 articles published in the past 25 years via key word searches, expert consultations and bibliography reviews. All articles were assessed against an aggregate matrix framework on the social impact of dams, which combines 27 existing frameworks. We find that existing literature is highly biased with regard to: perspective (45% negative versus 5% positive); dam size (large dams are overrepresented); spatial focus (on the resettlement area); and temporal focus (5–10 years ex-post resettlement). Additionally, there is bias in terms of whose views are included, with those of dam developers rarely examined by scholars. These gaps need to be addressed in future research to advance our knowledge on the social impact of dams to support more transparency in the trade-offs being made in dam development decisions. - Highlights: • Very first systematic review of the research on dams' social impact • Biases in the literature identified, e. g. large dams over-studied,more » too much focus solely on resettlement area impacts • Implications of these biases for understanding of the topic are discussed.« less

Authors:
; ;
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22589260
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Environmental Impact Assessment Review; Journal Volume: 60; Other Information: Copyright (c) 2016 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
13 HYDRO ENERGY; DAMS; HYDROELECTRIC POWER; SOCIAL IMPACT

Citation Formats

Kirchherr, Julian, E-mail: julian.kirchherr@sant.ox.ac.uk, Pohlner, Huw, E-mail: huw.pohlner@oxfordalumni.org, and Charles, Katrina J., E-mail: katrina.charles@ouce.ox.ac.uk. Cleaning up the big muddy: A meta-synthesis of the research on the social impact of dams. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1016/J.EIAR.2016.02.007.
Kirchherr, Julian, E-mail: julian.kirchherr@sant.ox.ac.uk, Pohlner, Huw, E-mail: huw.pohlner@oxfordalumni.org, & Charles, Katrina J., E-mail: katrina.charles@ouce.ox.ac.uk. Cleaning up the big muddy: A meta-synthesis of the research on the social impact of dams. United States. doi:10.1016/J.EIAR.2016.02.007.
Kirchherr, Julian, E-mail: julian.kirchherr@sant.ox.ac.uk, Pohlner, Huw, E-mail: huw.pohlner@oxfordalumni.org, and Charles, Katrina J., E-mail: katrina.charles@ouce.ox.ac.uk. Thu . "Cleaning up the big muddy: A meta-synthesis of the research on the social impact of dams". United States. doi:10.1016/J.EIAR.2016.02.007.
@article{osti_22589260,
title = {Cleaning up the big muddy: A meta-synthesis of the research on the social impact of dams},
author = {Kirchherr, Julian, E-mail: julian.kirchherr@sant.ox.ac.uk and Pohlner, Huw, E-mail: huw.pohlner@oxfordalumni.org and Charles, Katrina J., E-mail: katrina.charles@ouce.ox.ac.uk},
abstractNote = {Scholars have been exploring the social impacts of dams for over 50 years, but a lack of systematic approaches has resulted in many research gaps remaining. This paper presents the first systematic review of the literature on the social impacts of dams. For this purpose, we built a sample of 217 articles published in the past 25 years via key word searches, expert consultations and bibliography reviews. All articles were assessed against an aggregate matrix framework on the social impact of dams, which combines 27 existing frameworks. We find that existing literature is highly biased with regard to: perspective (45% negative versus 5% positive); dam size (large dams are overrepresented); spatial focus (on the resettlement area); and temporal focus (5–10 years ex-post resettlement). Additionally, there is bias in terms of whose views are included, with those of dam developers rarely examined by scholars. These gaps need to be addressed in future research to advance our knowledge on the social impact of dams to support more transparency in the trade-offs being made in dam development decisions. - Highlights: • Very first systematic review of the research on dams' social impact • Biases in the literature identified, e. g. large dams over-studied, too much focus solely on resettlement area impacts • Implications of these biases for understanding of the topic are discussed.},
doi = {10.1016/J.EIAR.2016.02.007},
journal = {Environmental Impact Assessment Review},
number = ,
volume = 60,
place = {United States},
year = {Thu Sep 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016},
month = {Thu Sep 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016}
}
  • In this article we take a closer look at resistance to the practice of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in mining and energy projects in Guatemala. Collectivities resisting mining and hydropower projects in Guatemala are increasingly using the evaluations of EIAs conducted by international independent professionals. Reaching out to international experts is facilitated by local communities' engagements in transnational networks bringing together activists, NGOs, scientists, journalists and others. We argue that resistance movements resort to international professionals to challenge the limits imposed on them by the national legislation and institutional arrangements as well as by the way in which EIAs aremore » performed in the country. Further, the engagements in networks that facilitate access to knowledge contribute to strengthen the legitimacy of communities' claims. Challenges to and complaints about EIAs are ways in which affected communities try to reclaim their right to participate in decision-making related to their local environment and the development of their communities. Both complaints about EIAs and the use of transnational networks to attain better participation in decision making processes at local levels, illustrated in this study for Guatemala, are common responses to the advancement of extractive industries and hydropower development across Latin America. The widespread of initiatives to challenge EIAs involving international experts in the region show that EIAs have become a sort of a transnational battleground. - Highlights: • Communities’ opposition to extractive projects is rooted in lack of participation in decision-making, including EIAs • Experts’ evaluations of approved EIAs confirm communities’ claims of poor practices in the public sector • Research presented here shows that local communities linked to transnational networks are able to scale up their demands.« less
  • Only three years ago, Gulf of Mexico drilling activity was so moribund that it was termed the Dead Sea. But the market has changed so there is now effectively 100 percent utilization in several important categories of offshore rigs, and almost every type of offshore rig is now getting higher use and better rates. What makes these changes so profound is that few industry participants saw this tightness developing, and almost no one predicted that it would occur so soon. Even the largest offshore contractors were pleasantly surprised as they watched their key drilling markets tighten so uickly after manymore » years of vast oversupply. Today, while neither the Gulf of Mexico nor the North Sea could be described as booming, they are not falling apart either. The combination of both markets merely being normal at the same time has made a big impact on the worldwide supply and demand for offshore drilling. The need for steady and increasing offshore oil and gas production has never been so high. The technology now in place is allowing the development of offshore areas deemed almost impossible less than a decade ago. Also, the vast excess supply of offshore equipment is gone for many forms of drilling, and the need for steadily higher dayrates is real and will merely increase over time.« less
  • The enhanced recovery from the last report was 113 bbl; the enhanced recovery, current, is 124 bbl. The oil anticipated at conclusion is 150 to 200 bbl. The workovers during the reporting period included perforations in injection well J 14 plugged with plastic from failure of coated tubing. Acidizing and swabbing restored injection rate. The injection and production history is attached to this report. Operator ceased polymer injection June 20, 1976, and began injecting filtered supply water, TDS 4,000 ppm.
  • A 9-year, $35.5-million tertiary recovery project has been begun in the Big Muddy Field in Wyoming. It will evaluate a chemical flooding process employing an aqueous surfactant slug followed by polymer. (DLC)