The NCEA issued an advisory review of an EIA report summary for the large-scale Arun III hydropower project in Nepal. It had various critical observations. Based on this and other information, the World Bank decided to withhold its funding and instead explore opportunities for small-scale water power projects.
Significant details
The Commission’s advice discusses the way in which the proposal had been selected from a number of alternatives. The selection did not take place according to social environmental criteria, but only took economic factors into account. The alternatives presented in the EIS bear no relation to the project itself, and yet they are presented as alternative options for implementing the same proposal. Moreover, the project has not been placed within broader planning context for development of the Arun catchment, and international management aspects have been ignored. Local and national costs and benefits of the proposal (social and environmental costs and benefits included) have not been compared, while the impact of the greater accessibility of the valley on its ecological sustainability has not been estimated. The Commission also found the level of detail in the descriptions of the mitigation measures in the executive summary to be insufficient for making a reliable judgement. The document contains no review of data on the safety of the dam. Concerning social sustainability, the description of the current situation and the explanation of predicted impacts are inadequate, making it impossible to evaluate the mitigating measures. In addition, the EIS provides insufficient information on the institutional infrastructure required for the project, and the way this can be put into place and financed. The EIS was compiled for the World Bank, which decided in early August 1995 to withhold its authorization for a loan, and to investigate with Nepal whether a small-scale exploitation of water power would be possible.