孔恩瀑布是湄公河最大的瀑布，水電站建設正威脅著這個流域。如果水電站如期建成，將對伊洛瓦底海豚和另一個瀕危物種-巨大鯰魚產生重大影響。水電建設將阻擋魚類的大規模遷，影響該地區內數百萬人的生計。這短片是生態恢復和建立區域聯盟於2008年製作。
星期日, 六月 14, 2009
孔恩瀑布-湄公河命懸一線(上)
孔恩瀑布是湄公河最大的瀑布，水電站建設正威脅著這個流域。如果水電站如期建成，將對伊洛瓦底海豚和另一個瀕危物種-巨大鯰魚產生重大影響。水電建設將阻擋魚類的大規模遷，影響該地區內數百萬人的生計。這短片是生態恢復和建立區域聯盟於2008年製作。
星期六, 四月 25, 2009
中國鋁業越南開礦惹民憤
(左圖為於越南中央高地開採鋁土礦的中國工人 / 來源：越南網)中國鋁業(SSE: 601600, HKE: 2600)近來惹人注目的不只是入股澳洲力拓的消息，還有旗下的越南中央山地鋁土礦項目受到當地民間的強烈反彈，事態發展相信是中越兩國政府始料不及。
中國企業『走出去』近年蔚然成風，一方面由於欠缺國際認可的環保和勞工等標準而受到非議，而且更有人擔心中國企業的擴張是變相的資源掠奪和殖民。雖然筆者並不認同後者的觀點，但對於前者，中國企業絕對有很多改善的空間。之前曾撰文論及，在此不贅。
越南近年最熾熱的輿論反響
儘管中越兩地政府一再強調環保和本地工人優先就業，然而民間對於環保的擔憂從沒停止，因為外同類項目污染當地環境的例子屢見不鮮，而且中國企業輸入中國勞工都是家常便飯。中鋁更表明了要輸入2,000名中國工人，更讓人質疑越南政府屈服於中國壓力，未能兌現承諾。
整個事態有兩點相當矚目。其一是自從越南政府宣佈中鋁參與開採後，媒體對於反對聲音時有報導，而且一位德高望重的退休將領更站出來反對中鋁的參與，認為這是中國的另一種入侵，勾起當年中越戰爭兩國的舊恨。
越南媒體放寬管制？
一直以來，越南政府與中國政府，嚴格控制媒體，但在今次事件，多個越南媒體鮮有地作出詳細報導，並為政府的決定解話，這可算是繼早前山蘿大壩引起的移民問題後，另一次放寬報導。
另一個引人注目的，是越南國內的反華情緒。事實上，連中國媒體也注意到這個情況，在報導事件時強調項目是基於中越兩國友好互利的基礎，形容反華情緒並非越南社會的主流，而只是個別人的炒作。
反華愛國情緒成異見人士切入點
不過，就像中國近年冒起的『憤青』，越南同樣也有類似的社會風氣，對於外國企業開採天然資源相當忌諱，但越南不像中國，欠缺相關技術，往往依賴外國援手，中國企業自然成為了廉價的首選。
與中國近年吻合的是，越南民間社會和媒體同樣以愛國思想為主軸，這事件造就了流亡海外的反越共人士難得的機會，匯合越南國內的輿論，奏起批評中國企業的大合唱，與政府的經濟優先論調相反。而越南政府也不敢貿然回應這種輿論，只好觀望而後動。
不過，即便如此，越南政府對媒體仍有最終控制權，一時的放寬並不代表什麼。只是民間逐漸找到了突破管制的窗口，而愛國情緒又是否最佳的窗口，我認為必須小心謹慎。
中央山地原住民仍沒法突破
可是，越南輿論一致以愛國、保障本地勞工和環保為基礎，反對中鋁的參與，卻沒有辦法提出越共過往的傷痕。當年北越統一南越，開始清剿親美的中央山地原住民。
為了捍衛自己的基督信仰，當地原住民抵抗共產黨的入侵，最後都被清剿離開中央山地，被迫流亡鄰國柬埔寨和美國。而今，很多流亡原住民都沒法返回中央山地，因為越南政府已把土地變成咖啡和橡膠樹的種植場，也正在建造很多水壩發電。
當越南民間為中央山地的發展鬧得沸沸揚揚，固然是挑戰資源開採全球化的趨勢，但他們又能否為山地原住民的權利發一點聲音，似乎可能是下一波值得探討的議題。
網路行動：
- The Save Tây Nguyên Campaign (Viet Tan)
- 2,000 Chinese laborers may work on Central Highlands alumina project (Vietnam Net Bridge)
- In Vietnam, New Fears of a Chinese 'Invasion' (TIME)
- Bauxite bashers (The Economist)
- Vietnam's China Mining Plans Spark Rare Criticism (AFP)
- 越媒炒作中國幫越南開礦 (環球時報(中國))
- 越南人對中國投資項目存疑慮 (參考消息(中國))
越南Save Tay Nguyen Campaign
越南近年旱見的環保運動，反對開採鋁土礦破壞環境。其中，中國鋁業是開發商之一，備受外界關注，同時，越南政府默許媒體報導人大和資深將領的反對聲音，也是異數。
星期四, 三月 05, 2009
Sudan and China's Dam building frenzy
It is so coincidental that Sudan held the inauguration of the Chinese-funded Merowe dam in the Nile River, while the International Criminal Court issued a warrant to the current President, Omar al-Bashir. Ironically, when the international community called for the obligation of Sudan's President, China called for a suspension of the warrant. Even though the warrant does not take any effect as Sudan is not a signatory of such treaty, and may not help resolve the conflicts between the current regime and the opposition, China's declaration does not help minimize its image in its inclination to the authoritarian regime, and their intent to solve the internal conflicts within Sudan.
Meanwhile, China has announced their involvements in dam projects of various places, which are somewhat groundbreaking and even controversial. The first mainstream dam project on the Brahmaputra in Tibet, Zangmu, has made important progress. The contract for the concrete and aggregate processing services have already been awarded to China's Gezhouba Group. In addition, in another news, Tibet Autonomous Region's government ordered to stop any new construction plan in the Zangmu dam's flooded area last year. All these implied that the Gezhouba Group will start preparation and construction of the project very soon.
However, the politics among countries of Brahmaputra river basin is more complicated than that in the Mekong, since India also has dam plan in the upstream of Bangladesh. India here definitely lost the moral ground in front of China's plan. So how can the downstream civil society respond to these governments' positions?
On the other hand, China's interest is not only limited to Tibet, but also Ecuador. Recently when China's vice-Premier, Hui Liangyu, visited Ecuador, he also signed a package of agreements in bilateral trade and economic cooperation. One of the potential projects is the Coca-Codo-Sincalir hydropower project. Both Gezhouba and Sinohydro have already submitted their bid to the project, together with the project finance proposal. If built, this will be the first large dam project in Ecuador, which is funded by China.
This year seems to be the year of recovery for dam building. China has announced their intention to approve a large number of domestic hydropower projects, in order to balance the proportion of energy sources and serve as an effort to combat global warming. In addition, many developing countries are seeking assistance from China to build dams. How can we put a brake before such projects are approved? What kind of strategy can we put to halt such projects until the people can get prior informed consent and fulfill the rest of WCD guidelines such as energy option assessment. This will be the major challenge for environmental activists.
Meanwhile, China has announced their involvements in dam projects of various places, which are somewhat groundbreaking and even controversial. The first mainstream dam project on the Brahmaputra in Tibet, Zangmu, has made important progress. The contract for the concrete and aggregate processing services have already been awarded to China's Gezhouba Group. In addition, in another news, Tibet Autonomous Region's government ordered to stop any new construction plan in the Zangmu dam's flooded area last year. All these implied that the Gezhouba Group will start preparation and construction of the project very soon.
However, the politics among countries of Brahmaputra river basin is more complicated than that in the Mekong, since India also has dam plan in the upstream of Bangladesh. India here definitely lost the moral ground in front of China's plan. So how can the downstream civil society respond to these governments' positions?
On the other hand, China's interest is not only limited to Tibet, but also Ecuador. Recently when China's vice-Premier, Hui Liangyu, visited Ecuador, he also signed a package of agreements in bilateral trade and economic cooperation. One of the potential projects is the Coca-Codo-Sincalir hydropower project. Both Gezhouba and Sinohydro have already submitted their bid to the project, together with the project finance proposal. If built, this will be the first large dam project in Ecuador, which is funded by China.
This year seems to be the year of recovery for dam building. China has announced their intention to approve a large number of domestic hydropower projects, in order to balance the proportion of energy sources and serve as an effort to combat global warming. In addition, many developing countries are seeking assistance from China to build dams. How can we put a brake before such projects are approved? What kind of strategy can we put to halt such projects until the people can get prior informed consent and fulfill the rest of WCD guidelines such as energy option assessment. This will be the major challenge for environmental activists.
星期日, 三月 01, 2009
Beyond Nu River campaign - Quest for theoretical framework
This year could be the right time to review and move beyond my commitment to the Chinese environmental movement.In the M-POWER meeting in Kunming, I submitted a short research paper on the Mekong's media space, in an attempt to break through the existing deadlock in the movement. But in the meantime, I came across a bigger framework, which struck me and already assigned a much broader vision to my initiatives.
While my researcher friend is looking into the framing of the Nu River campaign's discourse, I am looking for the existing theories that may be comparable to such discourse. What I refer here is Deliberative Democracy.
I thought one of the reasons why I chose media space is that the media is playing an active role in deliberation and building civil society in the free world's politics, but not yet in the most of the Mekong region.
Will the media play such a role? Are there potential for the media to fully reflect all the viewpoints of various stakeholders in development? Will this happen in the Mekong region? Should I choose other channels than traditional media?
Probably before going into the theory of Deliberative Democracy, I have to answer myself the questions like "Can deliberation lead to better (re)solutions?"
May or may not. I have to admit that I am a beginner to such theory. I believe that many colleagues intentionally or un-intentionally attempt to experiment deliberation in their own platforms, such as the M-POWER meeting in Kunming, the TERRA/FER's Mekong mainstream dam meeting in Bangkok, or even the hydropower consultation organized by Mekong River Commission (MRC).
Several NGO friends join the three meetings, but I only joined the previous two. I can only make very preliminary comparison, according to my friends. M-POWER meeting does not seem to be a good idea for deliberation. I suspect the problem might come from its "pseudo-academic" setting, while the other two are NGO meeting and government consultation respectively.
The first key question that comes to my mind is: How can a deliberation happen where various stakeholders feel meaningful, and feel equally treated? Are there criteria towards a successful deliberation? What kind of setting will help?
In the TERRA meeting, it is basically an NGO meeting, and the officials joined by invitation. Finally, only a few technocrats and MRC officials joined the meeting. As I said, I did not join the MRC consultation, so I cannot comment. But I suppose that the consultation is basically led and dominated by MRC officials.
I believe in either TERRA meeting or MRC consultation, not all the stakeholders feel equally treated. Unfortunately M-POWER meeting has yet to fill in the gap. The NGO friends even think that creation of more similar platforms does not help.
My second question is: do we need more forum for deliberation? Or do we need other forms of deliberation than simply forum? How can we make sure all the stakeholders equally treated?
Another key issue that surrounds Deliberative Democracy is: can development debate be effective throughout deliberation? Are there past success stories? Can deliberation be effective in countries where the development discourse normally dominate, like China?
As my friend indicated, it may be too early to put the existing framework for the Nu River campaign. But we both agreed that there must be places that the existing framework (deliberative democracy?) and Nu River campaign discourse converge.
Definitely there are many questions left unanswered, and many gaps not yet filled. This is perhaps the mission I am going to pursue and complete in the rest of my life.
星期二, 二月 24, 2009
星期六, 十一月 22, 2008
星期五, 十一月 21, 2008
订阅：
帖子 (Atom)
