Uganda has recently started construction on its newest dam. This will most probably wipe out all of the white water rapids up stream of the dam and put an end to commercial rafting in the area but will also generate a significant amount of power for the country.
I'm somewhat torn.
Personally I'm devastated. In an ideal world, the needs of the country outweigh the enjoyment of a relatively small number of rich tourists and those that live on the river would be compensated for their loses. But this isn't an ideal world.
On the one hand it's a tragedy, both personally for me as a Nile Kayaker and professionally for my friends that make their living on the Nile and have a great life there. I've good friends that own Kayak The Nile and run rafting companies such as Nalubale and Nile River Explorers. We've had great parties next to one of the greatest spectacles in the world and will hopefully have many more before it's gone. My friends are, quite rightly, angry at the Government for starting construction on a major new river based project without consulting either them or any of the other people that make their living from the river.
On the other hand Uganda is in desperate need of power (as is the rest of the region) and my enjoyment is not enough to stop a major new piece of infrastructure. A project of this size will generate huge amounts of employment and, if done properly, could have a significantly positive impact on the income of communities around the area. There aren't that many people (relatively speaking) enjoying the adventure aspect of the river and the taxi drivers, hotel keepers and restaurant owners will still be in business serving the construction companies - probably at greater profit.
If this was a properly implemented, constructed and managed project I'd be really torn.
As you can see from the picture in the first link, the backers of this project appear to be the China International Water and Electricity Corps. Considering the mess the Chinese have made of the Three Gauges dam on both environmental and human rights levels, the omens don't look promising for a properly planned and implemented project. Then there's the tense politics surrounding the flow of the river Nile which could lead to even more insecurity in the region.
As the Daily Monitor points out, tourism is a huge income for Uganda and rightly so; it's a stunningly beautiful country. Rafting is a reasonably large part of that but nature tourism is the majority. Unsurprisingly considering that Uganda has one of the greatest ranges of biodiversity in Africa and forms the sources of many of the environmental phenomenon on the continent such as the source of the Nile, river basins for Lake Victoria's tributaries, one of the last tropical glaciers in the Rwenzori Mountain Range (and the highest range in Africa) and a major part of the Rift Valley in the Albertine Rift.
New oil or mineral exploration, however, could have seriously negative impacts on this because they're largely being undertaken in or near National Parks. At least, though, exploratory companies are making positive noises towards environmental protection and the Equator Principles may govern further financing for development - lending some degree of international agreement to resource development. This is particularly important considering the downstream impacts from the area. Before any of that, however, there are the rights of people to their land and the incentive for people with any sort of power to grab land in order to make a quick profit. Not to mention the worrying power politics that seems to come hand in hand with finite resource discovery.
Obviously electricity generation, oil production and mining will bring much needed income to Uganda. If done properly this should help millions of people gain a better standard of living and generally help the country develop economically. But considering the inequalities in the country, the examples set so far by the ruling elite and the questionable moral precedent set by the Chinese backers, that's not guaranteed. Yes this is development and development needs industry to fuel the economy, but at what cost? Will this cost be too much for Uganda and, considering it's position at the ecological heart of the continent, for Africa?
I'm somewhat torn.
Personally I'm devastated. In an ideal world, the needs of the country outweigh the enjoyment of a relatively small number of rich tourists and those that live on the river would be compensated for their loses. But this isn't an ideal world.
On the one hand it's a tragedy, both personally for me as a Nile Kayaker and professionally for my friends that make their living on the Nile and have a great life there. I've good friends that own Kayak The Nile and run rafting companies such as Nalubale and Nile River Explorers. We've had great parties next to one of the greatest spectacles in the world and will hopefully have many more before it's gone. My friends are, quite rightly, angry at the Government for starting construction on a major new river based project without consulting either them or any of the other people that make their living from the river.
If this was a properly implemented, constructed and managed project I'd be really torn.
As you can see from the picture in the first link, the backers of this project appear to be the China International Water and Electricity Corps. Considering the mess the Chinese have made of the Three Gauges dam on both environmental and human rights levels, the omens don't look promising for a properly planned and implemented project. Then there's the tense politics surrounding the flow of the river Nile which could lead to even more insecurity in the region.
As the Daily Monitor points out, tourism is a huge income for Uganda and rightly so; it's a stunningly beautiful country. Rafting is a reasonably large part of that but nature tourism is the majority. Unsurprisingly considering that Uganda has one of the greatest ranges of biodiversity in Africa and forms the sources of many of the environmental phenomenon on the continent such as the source of the Nile, river basins for Lake Victoria's tributaries, one of the last tropical glaciers in the Rwenzori Mountain Range (and the highest range in Africa) and a major part of the Rift Valley in the Albertine Rift.
New oil or mineral exploration, however, could have seriously negative impacts on this because they're largely being undertaken in or near National Parks. At least, though, exploratory companies are making positive noises towards environmental protection and the Equator Principles may govern further financing for development - lending some degree of international agreement to resource development. This is particularly important considering the downstream impacts from the area. Before any of that, however, there are the rights of people to their land and the incentive for people with any sort of power to grab land in order to make a quick profit. Not to mention the worrying power politics that seems to come hand in hand with finite resource discovery.
Obviously electricity generation, oil production and mining will bring much needed income to Uganda. If done properly this should help millions of people gain a better standard of living and generally help the country develop economically. But considering the inequalities in the country, the examples set so far by the ruling elite and the questionable moral precedent set by the Chinese backers, that's not guaranteed. Yes this is development and development needs industry to fuel the economy, but at what cost? Will this cost be too much for Uganda and, considering it's position at the ecological heart of the continent, for Africa?
I'm also torn as always about this. I wrote a blog post about it actually, funnily enough when I hung out at Kayak the Nile for the day when I was in Uganda recently. Mine focuses on the previous dam. http://joannebeale.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/kampala-uganda/. I think it's an issue that will always be difficult to weigh up.
ReplyDelete