EDITORIAL: Doubts about dams

A panel of experts advising the land ministry has proposed re-evaluating dozens of dam projects. The experts argue that the government should reconsider the viability of dam construction in light of other flood control methods and adopt the alternatives wherever possible.

They list as many as 25 alternative methods, including regulations on the use of land near rivers and reinforcing existing embankments. A total of 84 dam projects, including those operated by prefectural governments, should be reviewed, according to the panel.

For years, dam construction was regarded as an effective method of water control. However, the huge impact that these projects have on the environment is raising doubts about the appropriateness of many dams. There are fewer sites suitable for building a dam and building costs have swollen in recent years. Getting a community to accept a dam project can take years. The sensible approach is to reconsider dam projects instead of continuing with them for the simple reason that they have been started.

It is, however, doubtful whether the proposed review will produce the intended results. According to the proposal, the re-evaluations will be conducted by the very entities responsible for the projects. The regional development bureaus at the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, the local branches of the government-affiliated Japan Water Agency or the prefectural governments in the cases of prefectural dam projects will play the leading roles in the reviews, while holding talks with the local governments concerned.

In the case of the Yanba Dam, the ministry's Kanto Regional Development Bureau, which has been promoting the project, would carry out the re-examination along with the governments of five surrounding prefectures and the Tokyo metropolitan government. Those authorities have been putting pressure on land minister Seiji Maehara to continue with construction. It is hard to imagine that these bodies would make a serious effort to come up with good alternatives.

The land minister will be able to order a further review if he is not satisfied with the results, but, in practice, will the minister be able to reject decisions reached by local communities? We still recall how Maehara's decision to scrap the Yanba Dam project, announced immediately after he took office in September, provoked strong protests from the communities concerned and considerable political confusion.

The panel also says the existing level of flow volumes should be used as the yardstick for the reviews. These volumes have been criticized for being too high and would require building huge embankments in urban areas if the embankment approach is adopted.

The costs involved could reinforce the case for dam building. The land ministry appears set to start the re-evaluations in September, but it should establish a system capable of delivering reasonable decisions. It is vital that independent citizens get involved in the process.

The committee established by the ministry's Kinki Regional Development Bureau to write a new river development plan for the Yodogawa river includes citizens as well as experts among its membership. It has attracted public attention by allowing observers to express their opinions and it has thereby created the momentum necessary for a major shift in river policy. Such a review can gain public trust only if the process involves forthright debate among the participants.

The government should also act swiftly to work out the specific plans promised by Maehara to help rebuild the livelihoods of local communities affected by the suspension of the projects. Many residents in areas expected to be submerged because of dam building are leading the drive for the projects because they cannot envision economically viable futures in their communities.

Since the proposed reviews may lead to the suspension of dam projects, the government should also establish a framework to refund money that local governments have put down to subsidize the projects.

The local governments can then look at the arguments for the dams and for alternative measures solely on their merits.

--The Asahi Shimbun, July 20