Sustainable development dilemmas: Using mixed methods to understand the conflicting opinions on large dams.

Abstract

This multi-scalar investigation explores the scholarly, public, political and economic debate surrounding large dams, which has remained intractable for decades. Proponents argue that the potential benefits of large dams, such as energy and water storage, outweigh their profound negative impacts on people and nature. Opponents argue the reverse, and question whether dams are appropriate and effective. The energy transition and sustainable development imperatives add new narratives to the debate, warranting fresh investigation of the trade-offs, especially for hydropower. This thesis makes five contributions to the literature using a political ecology framework. First, I examine the history of two iconic large dams in India, their decision junctures and themes, and compare the common drivers and debates that cut across both dams. Understanding large dams within India - the most populous country in the world - is critical as Indian decision-making on hydropower is likely to have global implications for the energy transition. Second, I widen the investigation to the debate around large dams in the Global South, characterising three divergent opinion groups and identifying areas of agreement and disagreement. I find opinions are formed not just objectively and based on material interests, but are also influenced by ideologies. A discriminator in the three opinion groups is differing beliefs in whether the local socioeconomic impacts of large dams are positive or negative. Based on this, in a third contribution, I find socioeconomic activity decreases over three years when large dams are constructed, using a unique econometric analysis of satellite imagery (night-time lights), dam locations and construction dates. My fourth contribution is to ground-truth the satellite imagery within my case studies in India. Finally, I combine empirical insights to infer that elements of the hydropower debate are more similar to nuclear than to other non-fossil fuel energy sources. I argue that understanding hydropower as an extreme “nuclear option” may help both sides of the debate to understand each other better.