Organizers: Michelle Irengbam (Dartmouth College), Chris Sneddon (Dartmouth College), Filippo Menga (University of Bergamo), Lena Hommes (Wageningen University) (the PDF of this call can be downloaded here)
The future of large dams and hydropower development is uncertain and contested. While governments, engineering firms, and many development professionals see the coming decades as a boom time for hydropower (Ansar et al. 2014; Zarfl et al. 2015), communities and their allies in non-governmental organizations (NGOs) across the planet have organized sustained social movements questioning the efficacy and ethics of continuing to dam rivers (Kircherr 2018; Thorkildsen 2018; Flaminio 2021). Past and current hydropower developments have engendered conflict across a range of spatial and temporal scales. In the face of the degradation of riverine ecosystems and livelihoods, human displacements, and cultural dispossession, such conflicts are often violent (Del Bene et al. 2018, Owusu et al. 2017). Although hydropower conflicts are often described in terms of their interrelated social, political and environmental dimensions (Sneddon 2002), the literature thus far lacks a vibrant characterization of what constitutes conflict, of how to categorize different forms of conflict, and of what conflicts generate over the short- and long-terms in relation to “solutions”. Additionally, these conflicts occur across a wide range of spatial (and temporal) scales, from decades-long struggles over transnational river basins such as the Mekong and Nile, to more localized and immediate conflicts pitting communities against states or private actors (Sneddon and Fox 2006; Menga 2017; Flaminio 2021). The vast majority of scholarship on water conflicts focuses on the transnational scale while conflicts at subnational or local levels, although occurring more frequently, are often overlooked or downplayed. Yet a focus on local level conflicts arising from, for example, opposing water ontologies may offer a broader and more nuanced understanding of conflict dynamics and how to promote more socio-ecologically just human-river relations (Boelens 2015; Yates et al. 2017).
In addition to developing more nuanced theoretical work on the assumptions that underpin analyses of conflicts, we see multiple opportunities to re-think the relations between water conflicts and hydropower development. These include: how to effectively visualize conflicts through maps and other forms of cartographic representation drawing on critical data analysis (Alley et al. 2014); the role of financialization of hydropower in engendering conflict (Ahlers 2020); the slow, silent and “hidden” forms of violence propagated by dam projects (Blake and Barney 2018); and many others. We seek to revisit past and contemporary thinking on water conflicts by highlighting the importance of subnational and localized conflicts, while also brainstorming ways to effectively bring together theory and praxis on the future of hydropower development. Themes of interest include but are not limited to:
- Rethinking hydropower conflicts—defining & categorize different forms of conflict
- Hydropower conflicts and the politics of scale (spatial and temporal)
- Modern hydraulic vs alternate/indigenous water ontologies
- Relationship between human displacement, resettlement and compensation, and conflicts
- Visualizing hydropower conflicts using maps and other cartographic methods
- Hydropower development and associated conflicts in comparative perspective
- Conflicts over dams in light of new theories of water-society relations (e.g., hydrosocial cycle, hydrosocial territories, critical hydropolitics, socio-hydrological worlds)
If interested, please submit an abstract of 150–200 words to Michelle Irengbam (Michelle.Irengbam.GR@dartmouth.edu) and indicate your preference for an in-person or virtual session by Wednesday, 13 October 2021. We will finalize the panel and notify participants by Friday, 15 October 2021. Please note that paper abstracts must be submitted to the AAG by Tuesday, 19 October 2021. Details about the meeting here: http://www.aag.org/aag2022nyc
References
Alley, K. D., Hile, R., & Mitra, C. (2014). Visualizing hydropower across the Himalayas: Mapping in a time of regulatory decline. HIMALAYA, the Journal of the Association for Nepal and Himalayan Studies, 34(2), 52-66.
Ansar, A., Flyvbjerg, B., Budzier, A., & Lunn, D. (2014). Should we build more large dams? The actual costs of hydropower megaproject development. Energy policy, 69, 43-56.
Blake, D. J., & Barney, K. (2018). Structural injustice, slow violence? The political ecology of a “best practice” hydropower dam in Lao PDR. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 48(5), 808-834.
Boelens, R. (2015). Water, power and identity: The cultural politics of water in the Andes. Routledge.
Flaminio, S. (2021). Modern and nonmodern waters: Sociotechnical controversies, successful anti-dam movements and water ontologies. Water alternatives.
Kirchherr, J. (2018). Strategies of successful anti-dam movements: Evidence from Myanmar and Thailand. Society & Natural Resources, 31(2), 166-182.
Menga, F. (2017). Hydropolis: Reinterpreting the polis in water politics. Political Geography, 60, 100-109.
Sneddon, C., & Fox, C. (2006). Rethinking transboundary waters: A critical hydropolitics of the Mekong basin. Political geography, 25(2), 181-202.
Sneddon, C., Harris, L., Dimitrov, R., & Özesmi, U. (2002). Contested waters: Conflict, scale, and sustainability in aquatic socioecological systems. Society &Natural Resources, 15(8), 663-675.
Thorkildsen, K. (2018). ‘Land yes, dam no!’ Justice-seeking strategies by the anti-dam movement in the Ribeira Valley, Brazil. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 45(2), 347-367.
Yates, J. S., Harris, L. M., & Wilson, N. J. (2017). Multiple ontologies of water: Politics, conflict and implications for governance. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 35(5), 797-815.
Zarfl, C., Lumsdon, A. E., Berlekamp, J., Tydecks, L., & Tockner, K. (2015). A global boom in hydropower dam construction. Aquatic Sciences, 77(1), 161-170.
Filippo Menga 