I

n the era of globalization, Indonesia seems to have become one of the best participants, as evinced in many multilateral conventions, regional and international forums it has held.

However, there is one development sector where our government has missed the thread of global productivity competition, related to energy management, agriculture, irrigation, fisheries, rivers and water ecosystems.

Historically, among a number of energy plantation alternatives, large dams seem to have been considered a national solution for energy, irrigation and flood control.

In the 2008 national large dam seminar in Jakarta, the government promoted hydropower as the easiest and cheapest energy alternative, considering our '€œunlimited'€ water supply.

Every year, large and small dams have been built by foreign institutional loans to meet fast-growing electricity demand.

The above axioms are justifiably referring to global development a half century ago, especially in the 1960-1970s peak era of dam euphoria, when approximately 5,000 dams were built each year. However, experiencing multidimensional polemics and high aftermath costs, countries in other continents have retreated from building dams. Dam initiatives reduced to 40 percent in the 1990s.

The US and Europe seem to have led in dam decommissioning, experiencing river stream alteration harmful to fisheries and sedimentation unsafe to people, typically to a lesser extent than Indonesia, which experiences garbage/mud sediments in rivers. Within the last 50 years, US administrations have dismantled some 1,000 dams.

The more developed a nation, the more aware it is of the unalterable essence of rivers for human health and clean livelihoods.

The trend has been going worldwide, as climate change makes the safety of dams and the high cost of retrofitting them a serious argument for decommissioning, according to Patrick McCully, the executive director of the International Rivers Network.

Importantly, rivers with relatively clean water streams running freely are vital sources for most ecosystems. Even the Irrawaddy River flowing from China to Myanmar is said to be the lifeblood of millions of Myanmarese.

In a personal statement entitled '€œIrrawaddy Appeal'€ in August 2011, Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi managed to release an international call to reassess the 6,000 megawatts (MW) Myitsone Dam that then displaced 16,000 people without definite compensation, while experts cited the risks of heavy ecological disaster and earthquake-prone exposures. It took only a few weeks of national deliberations for Myanmar President Thein Sein to announce halting the US$3.6 billion project for the duration of his term.

The World Commission on Dams (WCD) report entitled '€œDams and Development: A New Framework for Decision-Making'€ in 2000 is a milestone in the evolution of dam issues. The WCD is 68 representatives of government institutions, the private sector, international financial institutions, civil society organizations and dam-affected people, set up in 1997 in Curitiba, Brazil.

Although the final report was launched by Nelson Mandela in December 2000, so far no Indonesian government seems to have ever adopted the WCD'€™s recommendations.

Dams do not stand by themselves but instead entail multidimensional polemics that need to be addressed nationally.

Further, being on the Ring of Fire, there are more implications for Indonesia on dam essential technologies and exposure, in the context of sustainable development, the core issue in today'€™s globalization.

Common understanding should bear and creatively anticipate the risks, evaluate existing alternatives and plan the most productive livelihoods.

With public participation and government institutions that are accountable for dam developmental causes and effects, hopefully our country will see new alternatives to build social economic renewal within environmental resilience.

We must learn from the Situ Gintung tragedy in 2005, which spilled 1,500 cubic meters of waters over breaking walls, with much cost and social burdens to bear.

And as time unfolds, from Sabang to Merauke, we must learn from publications that discuss breaking dam walls, collapsing levees. Even in the capital, environmental harm, social restlessness and life cycle distractions continue.

Because dam effects implicate localities themselves, administrations should promote discourses with stakeholders, striking a transparent culture in dam development. Number one of the seven strategic priorities of the WCD report recommends visible acceptance of local communities and number two recommends transparency on water, energy and food measurements.

Uniquely, the WCD has understood one of the most controversial national projects, the half-century-aged plan of the Jatigede Dam, which is said to have progressed to 80 percent construction.

The WCD deems the Jatigede project notorious for not meeting a number of its strategic priorities, especially on transparency regarding alternative measurements, river ecosystem sustainability and security related to its earthquake-prone geographical location.

For fear of such high social and ecological risks without satisfactory transparency, the World Bank withdrew from participating further in Jatigede.

Until then vice president Jusuf Kalla'€™s visit to Beijing in 2007 to secure a loan agreement with the Chinese government and its banking consortium led by China Eximbank, the dam project was given to Sinohydro, Corp., the largest Chinese hydropower builder responsible for the Three Gorges Dam.

Kalla proudly meant for Jatigede to emulate the magnificent Three Gorges Dam, in both function and construction, because of the similar geological characteristics of standing on fault lines.

Perhaps being over-occupied with steady corruption and political turmoil, our officials lack thoroughness. Searching for the Three Gorges Dam on the Internet, we see international critiques, articles, blogs, analysis, comments, concerns and speculation on the so-called '€œmost disastrous dam in the world'€.

Accordingly, the WCD concluded that the end result of dam projects should be the sustainable improvement of human welfare.

So, the question behind the achievement of '€œbuilding the second largest national dam together with the largest global hydropower builder'€ is this: If thousands of villagers still do not know where to go, should they leave their homeland?

The writer is a freelance journalist.