水电流域利益共享:理论、实践与潜力

Louis Lebel , Phimphakan Lebel , Chanagun Chitmanat , Patcharawalai Sriyasak
{"title":"水电流域利益共享:理论、实践与潜力","authors":"Louis Lebel ,&nbsp;Phimphakan Lebel ,&nbsp;Chanagun Chitmanat ,&nbsp;Patcharawalai Sriyasak","doi":"10.1016/j.wrr.2014.10.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Hydropower dams typically produce benefits for their developers. At the same time, large dams have various negative environmental and social consequences, in particular, upon those who must be resettled or whose livelihoods are disrupted. The anticipated and actual revenue earned by hydropower plants from the production and sale of electricity could be shared with residents of hydropower watersheds, to help offset these adverse impacts of construction and operation. The purpose of this paper is to examine the different ways in which such benefits have been shared in the Sirikit Dam hydropower watershed in Northern Thailand. Four different models for benefit sharing, each with a history in the case study site, were identified: compensation for resettlement; corporate social responsibility; community development funds; and payments for ecosystem services. The earliest program on resettlement was of limited effectiveness, because short-term compensation was insufficient to improve livelihoods or alleviate poverty. The corporate social responsibility program has been ad hoc, with achievements not always geared toward priority needs. The recently launched Power Development Fund is a promising framework, as it involves long-term sharing of revenues from the sale of electricity for projects proposed by local communities and agencies. A pilot exploration of watershed fund, based on payments for ecosystem services concepts, looked likely to falter from lack of interests among potential buyers and other institutional barriers. The case study demonstrates that different benefit sharing models have their merits and limitations which vary as a project matures – a lesson important for the Mekong Region.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101278,"journal":{"name":"Water Resources and Rural Development","volume":"4 ","pages":"Pages 12-28"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.wrr.2014.10.006","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Benefit sharing from hydropower watersheds: Rationales, practices, and potential\",\"authors\":\"Louis Lebel ,&nbsp;Phimphakan Lebel ,&nbsp;Chanagun Chitmanat ,&nbsp;Patcharawalai Sriyasak\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.wrr.2014.10.006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Hydropower dams typically produce benefits for their developers. At the same time, large dams have various negative environmental and social consequences, in particular, upon those who must be resettled or whose livelihoods are disrupted. The anticipated and actual revenue earned by hydropower plants from the production and sale of electricity could be shared with residents of hydropower watersheds, to help offset these adverse impacts of construction and operation. The purpose of this paper is to examine the different ways in which such benefits have been shared in the Sirikit Dam hydropower watershed in Northern Thailand. Four different models for benefit sharing, each with a history in the case study site, were identified: compensation for resettlement; corporate social responsibility; community development funds; and payments for ecosystem services. The earliest program on resettlement was of limited effectiveness, because short-term compensation was insufficient to improve livelihoods or alleviate poverty. The corporate social responsibility program has been ad hoc, with achievements not always geared toward priority needs. The recently launched Power Development Fund is a promising framework, as it involves long-term sharing of revenues from the sale of electricity for projects proposed by local communities and agencies. A pilot exploration of watershed fund, based on payments for ecosystem services concepts, looked likely to falter from lack of interests among potential buyers and other institutional barriers. The case study demonstrates that different benefit sharing models have their merits and limitations which vary as a project matures – a lesson important for the Mekong Region.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101278,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Water Resources and Rural Development\",\"volume\":\"4 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 12-28\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.wrr.2014.10.006\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Water Resources and Rural Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212608214000266\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Water Resources and Rural Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212608214000266","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

水电大坝通常会给开发商带来收益。与此同时,大型水坝对环境和社会产生了各种负面影响,特别是对那些必须重新安置或生计受到破坏的人。水电站从生产和销售电力中获得的预期收益和实际收益可以与水电流域居民分享,以帮助抵消这些建设和运营的不利影响。本文的目的是研究泰国北部诗丽吉大坝水电流域共享这些利益的不同方式。确定了四种不同的利益分享模式,每种模式在案例研究地点都有历史:重新安置补偿;企业社会责任;社区发展基金;以及为生态系统服务付费。最早的安置方案效果有限,因为短期补偿不足以改善生计或减轻贫困。企业社会责任项目一直是临时的,其成就并不总是面向优先需求。最近启动的电力发展基金是一个很有前景的框架,因为它涉及到为当地社区和机构提议的项目出售电力的长期收入分成。基于生态系统服务付费概念的流域基金试点探索,可能会因潜在买家缺乏兴趣和其他制度障碍而步履蹒跚。案例研究表明,随着项目的成熟,不同的利益分享模式有其优点和局限性,这对湄公河地区来说是一个重要的教训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Benefit sharing from hydropower watersheds: Rationales, practices, and potential

Hydropower dams typically produce benefits for their developers. At the same time, large dams have various negative environmental and social consequences, in particular, upon those who must be resettled or whose livelihoods are disrupted. The anticipated and actual revenue earned by hydropower plants from the production and sale of electricity could be shared with residents of hydropower watersheds, to help offset these adverse impacts of construction and operation. The purpose of this paper is to examine the different ways in which such benefits have been shared in the Sirikit Dam hydropower watershed in Northern Thailand. Four different models for benefit sharing, each with a history in the case study site, were identified: compensation for resettlement; corporate social responsibility; community development funds; and payments for ecosystem services. The earliest program on resettlement was of limited effectiveness, because short-term compensation was insufficient to improve livelihoods or alleviate poverty. The corporate social responsibility program has been ad hoc, with achievements not always geared toward priority needs. The recently launched Power Development Fund is a promising framework, as it involves long-term sharing of revenues from the sale of electricity for projects proposed by local communities and agencies. A pilot exploration of watershed fund, based on payments for ecosystem services concepts, looked likely to falter from lack of interests among potential buyers and other institutional barriers. The case study demonstrates that different benefit sharing models have their merits and limitations which vary as a project matures – a lesson important for the Mekong Region.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Exploring water security and water demand determinants in rural areas. The case of canton Cotacachi in Ecuador Bacterial contamination of drinking water and food utensils: Impacts of piped water on child health in north-western Bangladesh A critical mass analysis of community-based financing of water services in rural Kenya Comparison of informal rainwater harvesting systems to conventional water sources in terms of microbiological water quality The economic contribution of a recreational fishery in a remote rural economy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1