Copy the page URI to the clipboard
Amankona, Daniel
(2022).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21954/ou.ro.00014798
Abstract
China has become the most important global funder of large hydropower dams over the last two decades, offering development opportunities for Global South countries. However, hydropower dams can negatively affect surrounding communities and ecosystems. There are widespread allegations that China’s poor record on social and environmental standards stems from their chosen financing models and construction practices.
Drawing on social-ecological systems (SES) thinking and critical political ecology, this study investigates these issues through a qualitative study of Ghana’s Bui Dam. It uses a rapid ethnographic methodology and data from secondary sources, in-depth interviews, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and transect walks.
The study found that the dam has significantly changed river flow, soil characteristics, and the local ecosystem. This has affected how local communities organise their lifestyles and relationships to their local resource base, with serious implications for their welfare. Negative social impacts include water-borne diseases, displacement, and livelihood disruption. Livelihood diversification has become an important adaptation option. The dam has also wrought positive changes including the provision of modern houses, improved roads, potable water, expanded markets, growth in the tourism and hospitality sectors, upgraded healthcare, and increased access to electricity for resettled communities and Bui Dam staff.
The dam’s impacts vary across spatial scales. Livelihood disruption is more severe for communities downstream and in the floodplains. Upstream communities have experienced phenomenal growth in the fisheries and trading sectors while farming remains profitable. In sum, the dam has brought new livelihood opportunities, eroded others, and brought some into conflict.
Overall, the ‘China factor’ does not render the Bui dam unique among African dam projects. However, Chinese actors were only able to meet their geopolitical and geoeconomic interests in constructing the dam by working through the agency of the Ghanaian state. The Chinese government facilitated access for Sinohydro via Chinese state capital while Ghana’s political elites negotiated the investment deal and engineering contract. As such, Ghanaian state institutions made key decisions that shaped the dam’s socio-ecological impacts.
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)
