Lancang Development in China:
Downstream Perspectives from Thailand
Pianporn Deetes
Southeast Asia Rivers Network
For the past two years locals along the banks of the Mekong River in
Chiang Khong District of Chiang Rai, Thailand have experienced the most
extreme and adverse river changes in memory. During the rainy seasons
of 2002 and 2003, four households living in Pak Ing village lost an entire
bank of land to the river because of the unnaturally turbulent flow of
the river. More seriously, on the opposite bank at Baan Don Sawan, a community
in Laos, land and homes for 113 families were swept away with the flow.
“I have no idea if my house will still be here next year,” said Mr. Boonkong
whose land is on the edge of the riverbank near where his neighbor’s houses
slid into the river due to bank erosion. “I hope our family won’t be the
next one,” he said in a worrying tone. It is not difficult to foretell
the future if one stands on the bank looking upstream at the rapid flow
of the river.
For these villagers, the Mekong has drastically changed only recently.
Velocity, sedimentation levels, and most acutely, water fluctuations have
caused great ecological damage and deterioration. These impacts have directly
contributed to the difficulties of those whose way of life is dependent
upon the river for fishing, riverbank cultivation, water supply, and shelter.
China’s Unacceptable Scheme
The culprit of these drastic changes is a Chinese-led navigation channel
improvement project along the Mekong. The Chinese scheme entails the installation
of a series of 8 dams cascading down the Mekong River. The Manwan dam
is already in place and has changed the course of the river and the five
downstream nations that share its borders. The series of planned dams
would control the flow of the river and with the help of rapid blasting;
enable the passage of large transport and cargo ships. Besides boosting
business for the transport business the dams would also create a large
amount of energy for Chinese use. However, China has been insistent that
the dams are a benefit to all by controlling downstream flooding.
However, according to a year of in-depth research by SEARIN and Chiang
Khong Conservation Group working closely with the locals, the adverse
downstream impacts of the scheme are not beneficial but are disastrous
and even dangerous.
Drastic River Fluctuations
Fluctuation in water levels has caused immense harm to the river resulting
in massive impacts to those whose lives are dependent upon it. Since China
implemented the navigation channel improvement project in the 2001 dry
season, water fluctuation has been noticeable. The joint committee (JCCCN)
announced that regulation of the river flow would be conducive to navigation
and project construction from 15 December 2002 to 15 April 2003. Throughout
the 2002 and 2003 dry seasons ships were given permission to navigate
for one day and then pause for three days to allow for rapid blasting.
During this period, water levels rose and lowered as announced, affecting
the entire ecosystem and millions of lives. One thousand kilometers downstream
of the Manwan dam, from the northern-most blasting sites to the Thai-Lao
border in the northeastern part of Thailand, villagers witnessed strangely
drastic water fluctuations.
Additionally, water fluctuation was not limited to the blasting period
but was experienced year round. In recent rainy seasons water had not
rose as high as in past years. Villagers reported that though it rained
heavily for days, the river level was still lower than compared with the
normal water level at the same time as in past years. No one can be certain
of the water level in the Mekong anymore.
Water Levels harm Fishing
Fisherfolk complained they could not fish in conditions where the river
rose to one meter in only a few days and then lowered swiftly. As most
fish in the upper reaches of the Mekong are migratory species swimming
upstream for reproduction, the fish are dependent on the annual river
flow; the fluctuating flow inevitably results in a great decline of fish.
A ‘flagship’ endangered species of the river, the Mekong Giant catfish
is at a high risk of extinction. Due to its migratory pattern, the fish
swim for great distances from downstream to the upper parts of the Mekong
in order to reach the rapids and whirlpools, their spawning ground. Before
1994 and prior to the building of the Chinese dam, around 40 giant catfish
were caught annually. The catch numbers gradually fell after the dam started
its operation. For the last 3 years, since the rock and rapid blasting
project started not a single giant catfish has been caught. Out of the
80 giant catfish fishing boats typically fishing the waters of the Mekong,
only a couple tried desperately to catch the fish but they couldn’t find
any.
Ecosystem and Economic woes
Not only does the deterioration of the ecosystem mean a decrease in food
security for local people, but also economic and social structures are
disrupted which are so tightly linked to a healthy ecosystem.
Mekong seaweed, ‘Kai’ as it is called by the Thai and Lao, is the main
source of protein for villagers living in the upper reaches of the river.
Kai grows on rapids and shallow riverbanks during the dry season when
the water is clear and sunlight can reach it. For many local women, Kai
is their families’ food security as well as a source of income. Due to
the changing water levels, Kai has not grown along the sediment filled
Mekong from the Burmese-Lao border to Chaing Khong district in the north.
Dry season vegetables widely grown along the riverbank have been fatally
affected as well. Usually when the dry season approaches and water levels
decrease, riverbanks and islets come into sight. Locals cultivate their
vegetables for household consumption in the lush land fertilized by sediment
from the river flow. For many poor families without farmland, products
from the riverbank garden are their only source of income and sustenance.
However, now these gardens are virtually gone and seem like distant memories.
In recent years, villagers throughout Chiang Khong district from Baan
Had Bay to Baan Had Saytong lost their farmland because of bank erosion
and floods. There are also reports for the same impacts from villagers
in the Northeast of Thailand nearly 1,000 kilometers downstream.
“We could get all the vegetables we wanted from the riverbank garden.”
said Mr. Boonkong of Pak Ing community. “But it was only the past, now
all the land is gone.”
For those whose land still remains, unexpected floods that had never
occurred in the dry season before the rapids blasting project, have submerged
their seedlings three times during the cultivation period.
Chaotic Ports
Though the navigation project has been planned for a decade by the Chinese,
flaws in planning are obvious, especially the social and environmental
aspects. Port construction in Thailand is a crystal clear example of poor
planning where the government moved forward with rapid development projects
that do not consider impacts on the environment and the local people.
In Chiang Khong, ports were rebuilt three times showing an inadequate
planning process. The first port was reconstructed at a new site because
the former structure was inappropriate given the river flow. The structure
was ruined due to the erratic river flows before a year had even passed.
The second port included a section that extended 90 meters over the water.
The Lao government was so concerned about the obstruction of the waterway
they had it destroyed. Additionally, the current remodeled port is still
not built to satisfaction especially for the people living in its proximity.
It was built upstream of Chiang Khong town directly affecting the town’s
water supply system which relies on river water.
Even worse, in Thailand’s Golden Triangle District of Chiang Saen, ports
have been constructed and destroyed twice because of their poorly planned
structure and location. The port was built in the center of a 700-year-old
historical site. Trade-related activities are now invading local ancient
sites chasing away the native residents. It is not easy for one who has
lived in a quiet town to be suddenly inundated by air-pollution from the
60 cargo trucks that enter the port daily. The small, cozy and calm ancient
town of Chiang Saen has been transformed into a medley of disorganized
karaoke bars, shops, and warehouses. Moreover, Chinese merchants are taking
over businesses that were once owned by local Thai people. Along the riverside
road near the port, there is only one shop still locally owned.
No Information Disclosure, Unacceptable EIA
In addition to the harmful and adverse impacts that local people are
experiencing, they have had little knowledge and input of the dam project
that has affected their lives. Through out project implementation, communities
depending on the Mekong have not been informed about development in the
river. They are only witnesses to the immense changes, bearing the brunt
of the impacts.
At the decision-making level most of the responsible Thai authorities,
especially those from environmental agencies had little information on
China’s scheme. In many cases officials have no idea of the plans and
impacts upstream.
The Free Navigation Agreement signed by China, Burma, Laos, and Thailand
allows ships from the four countries to navigate freely on the upper reaches
of the Mekong. However the agreement does not specifically cover the navigation
improvement project and the blasting of rapids and shoals. After the agreement
the Chinese team dynamited rapids and shoals. China claims the project
has been implemented according to the Environmental Impact Assessment
(EIA) that they say meets international standard and complies with environmental
laws of the individual countries.
China continues to claim to uphold the high standard of its EIA that
was conducted by a Chinese team. However, in April 2003 the Thai cabinet
approved a bold resolution to halt the project on the Thai-Lao border
until a new EIA is conducted. The decision made by Thailand brings into
question the legitimacy of China’s claims.
In another action against the validity of China’s claims, an independent
EIA review undertaken by the Monash Environment Institute and sponsored
by the Mekong River Commission found, ‘the EIA is unacceptable in many
respects. Far too much of the content is based on speculation, the data
that is used is patently inadequate, longer-term impacts are almost entirely
overlooked, and the cumulative impacts (both social and environmental)
are essentially ignored.’
No One Dares to Question China
Until today many of the decision-makers in some riparian countries have
not been aware of the project’s impacts on their own population. Although
there are those who are aware, none of the riparian governments dare to
neither criticize nor raise questions against China. Neither do they take
any action to make the project more responsible and comply with the law
concerning environmental and social aspects.
Particularly in the case of Thailand, the Free Navigation Agreement signed
by the Thai Ministry of Transport and Communication violates the Thai
law. The Mekong along the Thai-Lao border is designated as an international
wetland. Any development project planned in this area requires an adequate
EIA and approval by the cabinet according to Thai environmental law.
Additionally, the Agreement does not directly cover the navigation channel
improvement. According to Thai law the Thai Harbor Department is responsible
for the free navigation on behalf of the Royal Thai Government and does
not have the right to implement the navigation channel improvement project.
Most importantly, the lack of information disclosure and lack of participatory
decision-making process violates the 1997 Thailand Constitution, which
underscores people’s rights to information, community rights, and rights
to participation in development projects.
It is apparent that most Thai government officials know the dam and navigation
improvement projects violate the law. However, there is no vocal opposition
to these destructive infrastructure projects. Instead, the Thai government
bows to China’s pressures and publicizes that Thailand signed the agreement
giving support for the blasting.
Regional or Local Issues?
One would think that the Mekong region does not have any governance agreements
to address this kind of trans-boundary chaos
While the Mekong River Commission obtained its own agreement authorized
by Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam, the two upstream countries Thailand
and Laos broke the promise and undertook this fatal project with China
and Burma.
It has been clear that this joint project upstream seriously affects
downstream residents. In November 2002, village representatives from Chiang
Khong had a meeting with Mr. Joern Kristensen, the former CEO of the Mekong
River Commission, on impacts from the project. The former CEO insisted
that the impacts faced by the locals were only local issues. He affirmed
that the first phase of the project would not create any environmental
impacts, disregarding the fact that no adequate EIA was done and an independent
EIA review carried out for the MRC agreed with this finding. Hence, no
one can affirm that such impacts would not be created.
In June 2003, the former CEO of MRC said that China has agreed to carry
out only phase one of the project. This raises a question about the position
of the MRC and it’s ability to speak out for China, while there has not
been any official response on the project publicized by China.
Unstoppable Project?
While the adverse impacts of the projects have been obvious and villagers
and NGOs have been trying to demand for a halt to the project until a
new EIA is completed, the projects continue to move forward. The last
step of the first phase to blast 3 remaining rapids at the Lao-Burmese
border on December 15, 2003 may not be stopped. In August 2003, the villagers
in Chiang Khong saw a Chinese team conducting a survey to Luang Prabang,
Laos.
Voice of the Voiceless
In this time of uncertainty, villagers in northern Thailand have not
lost hope. They are trying to voice their concerns to stop the destructive
project. Villagers have been demanding information disclosure, genuine
EIAs, and people’s participation in decision-making.
While the new EIA for the rapids on the Thai-Lao border has not been
implemented, villagers are conducting their own research based on local
knowledge of the riverine ecosystem and natural resources. Since this
is what they rely on for life, they wish to present how important the
River is to them and the voiceless residents hope that the decision-makers
may hear their voice.
Growing Concerns in Thailand
Unlike the people living downstream in Thailand, who are able to raise
concerns about destructive projects, the people in China who are also
affected are not able to voice their opinions and needs. They are the
victims who bare the most costs and generally the most marginalized people
whose rights have been largely ignored. Lack of civil society in China,
Laos and Burma is a growing problem.
From our trip to Yunnan and visits with local villagers impacted by the
Manwan dam, we observed the difficultly that villagers have in truly voicing
their concerns. What is occurring in those villagers is similar to what
occurred in Thailand over the last 3-4 decades. In Thailand, these days
it is not easy to build a dam. The growing concern for environmental and
social issues has made dams a controversial issue for at least a decade.
Thai people are keeping a close watch on Thai dam builders who are expanding
to build dams in neighboring countries leading to suffering of local people
elsewhere.
Thai people who are consumers of electricity generated from dams in Yunnan
would not be happy if they knew the cost paid by the environment and livelihoods
of the locals upstream. Still, the information has not been given to the
Thai public. It is challenging to publicize the issues and raise the awareness
of Thai consumers.
According to the fact that currently there is a 40 percent electricity
oversupply in Thailand, it is unnecessary to build dam for such purposes.
However, dam builders claim that Thailand will need more energy in the
future. However, one should note how many projects Thailand is committing
to buy electricity from. In addition, there are many other options for
electricity, including demand-side management and renewable resources.
If the government recognizes and brings option assessments into policy
making, they will see that there is no need for dams.
Two dams on the Lancang, the Jinghong and Nuozhadu, are proposed to supply
electricity to Thailand through the ASEAN Power Grid. The question is
who will buy the energy when most countries in the region intend to export
their electricity including China, Laos, Vietnam and Thailand.
These proposed dams would not only put those in China at risk, but also
villagers along the Mekong River and Thai consumers.