English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Pro

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Presents AI Discovery search usage as a premium feature

AI Discovery

Presents AI Discovery explain and summary usage as a premium feature

Content Analysis

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

1500 Top-up

3000 Top-up

Zendy Basic

2500 Top-up

Zendy Unlimited

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Dam planning and construction is notoriously difficult. It is highly complex, involving a multitude of social, environmental, economic and technological questions that often become politicised in the process; negative impacts are often concentrated on small, vulnerable groups within society, while the benefits are typically spread in a much more diffuse pattern; it requires changing riverine ecosystems, often irreversibly so; and it takes a very long time, with often harsh consequences if mistakes are made. These challenges have generated decades of debate around dams and development, yet it is not clear how dam planning and management can be improved. To address this question, the present study used Q methodology to analyse the views of social and environmental researchers on dams in Latin America on the principles that should guide dam development. The Q analysis rendered three idealised viewpoints: The first suggested that defending the rights of vulnerable people should be the main priority, as a counterbalance to the natural bias towards economically and politically powerful actors within the political economy of dam construction. The second implied adoption of a holistic and scientific vision towards dam decision-making and a focus of efforts on perfecting formal procedures and participatory processes to build better dams in the future. The third called into question the need for dams altogether and concentrated attention on invisible and overlooked aspects of dam decision-making, particularly past injustices, and the rights of indigenous communities to determine their own model of development. Each viewpoint represents an alternative vision for future dam planning and clarifies the choices available to policy-makers and development actors. Moreover, viewpoints give insights into the motivations of those who seek to inform debates on dams and development. While they were identified in the context of dam-decision making, our findings may also be relevant to other fields of sustainable development.

In search of the good dam: contemporary views on dam planning in Latin America