Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Forum Consultation Session World Water Forum Side Event 19 March 2009 Istanbul 1
Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Forum
Consultation Session
World Water Forum Side Event19 March 2009
Istanbul
1
Chair – Brian Richter, The Nature ConservancyIntroductions of Forum members Overview presentation – Helen Locher, Forum
CoordinatorDiscussion of Issues
Forum processForum objectivesProtocol applicationProtocol content
Forum member commentsClosing
2
Session Outline
Initiatives Lifting Performance in the Hydropower Sector
3
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2009 2012
IEA Implementing Agreement for Hydropower
World Commission on Dams
UNEP Dams and Development Project Phase 2
IHA Sustainability Guidelines
IHA Sustainability Assessment Protocol
Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Forum
Sustainable Hydropower Website
IHA Blue Planet Prize
Eugene Green Energy Standard (Europe-based)
Low Impact Hydropower Institute (North America)
CHOICE Project for green hydropower (Europe)
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2009 2012
Phase 1 Phase 2
Phase 1
2011
2011
2008
2008
2010
2010
Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Forum
The HSAF is a collaboration of representatives from different sectors who aim to develop a broadly endorsed sustainability assessment tool to measure and guide performance in the hydropower sector.
The Forum members are jointly reviewing and recommending enhancements to the IHA Sustainability Assessment Protocol (2006), developed to assess social, environmental and economic performance of hydropower projects and operating facilities against criteria described in the IHA Sustainability Guidelines (2004).
4
Advantages (e.g….)Builds on WCD, DDP and other principles
and policiesBalance across economic, social,
environmental issuesPractical approach to measure sustainabilityContinuous improvement (6 versions since
2003)Strong endorsement by the hydropower
sectorOpportunities (e.g….)Broader ownership and wider applicationBetter meet the needs of other sectorsHarmonisation with other standards Improve on emerging concepts Increase objectivity Improve support info e.g. technical guidance
notes
Why the IHA Sustainability Assessment Protocol?
5
Developing Countries Dr Yu Xuezhong, Institute of Water
Resources and Hydropower Research, PR China
Mr Zhou Shichun, China Hydropower Engineering Consulting Group Co., PR China
Mr Israel Phiri, Manager PPI, Ministry of Energy and Water Development, Zambia
Developed Countries Mr Geir Hermansen, Senior Advisor,
Department of Energy, Norad, Norway Prof Gudni A Johannesson, Director
General, National Energy Authority, Iceland
Ms Kirsten Nyman, Policy Advisor for Sustainable Hydropower, GTZ, Germany (observer)
Hydropower Sector Dr Refaat Abdel-Malek, President,
International Hydropower Association Mr Andrew Scanlon, Coordinating
Author, IHA Sustainability Assessment Protocol
NGOs - Environmental Aspects Mr David Harrison, Senior Advisor,
Global Freshwater Team, The Nature Conservancy
Dr Joerg Hartmann, Lead, Dams Initiative, World Wildlife Fund
NGOs - Social Aspects Mr Michael Simon, Lead,
Development Banks/NRM, Oxfam Dr Donal O’Leary, Water Sector
Specialist, Transparency International
Finance Sector - Economic Aspects Ms Courtney Lowrance,
Environmental Specialist, Equator Principles Financial Institutions Group
Ms Daryl Fields, Senior Water Resources Specialist, World Bank (observer)
Forum Chair Mr André Abadie, Sustainable
Finance Ltd.
The members of the Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Forum comprise representatives of developed and developing countries, environmental and social NGOs, commercial and development banks and the hydropower sector, with membership guided by the common efforts of IHA, WWF and TNC.
Forum Membership
6
Forum Funding
Initial contributions pledged at the Forum commencement comprise:
German government - £84k Icelandic government - £100k International Hydropower Association - £25kNorwegian government - £250kThe Nature Conservancy - £25k
In kind contributions estimated to total more than £720k
The Forum is seeking additional funds to complete its work programme and enable fuller consultation and trialling on Draft Protocol.
7
Overview of Forum Work Plan – 2008-09 (PHASE 1)
8
Forum Meetings – 2008-09
9
Milestone Reports – 2008-09
10
Proposals Arising from the Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Forum
11
Proposed Protocol Structure
Underpinning Principles
Section I Section II Section III Section IV
Set of Aspects Aspect NameDescriptionPolicy Objective
Objective Evidence
Attributes, Guidance Notes, Scoring Instructions
Principles - a set of core sustainability values that underpin the Protocol
Sections – stand-alone assessment tools relevant to a particular project life cycle stage
Aspects – a set of key sustainability issues to be assessed for each section
Attributes – criteria for each aspect which form the basis for determining sustainability performance on that aspect
Policy objective – identifies what is trying to be achieved
Objective evidence – evidence provided by an auditee and used by an assessor to verify whether and to what degree an attribute has been met
12
Strategic Assessments
Project Operation
Project Preparation
Project Implementation
Commence hydropower project preparation
Award of construction contracts
Project commissioning
Sec I Sec II Sec IVProtocol Sections:
Project Stages:
Decision Points at the end of each project Stage:
Sec III
Proposed Protocol Sections
13
Section II Economic / Technical / Governance Aspects
Section II Social Aspects Section II Environmental Aspects
Demonstrated Need Social Impact Assessment Environmental Impact Assessment
Public Sector Governance Social Management Plan Environmental Management Plan
Transboundary Issues Cultural Heritage Catchment Management
Regulatory Approval Indigenous Peoples & Ethnic Minorities
Reservoir Management
Site Selection and Design Optimisation
Public Health Environmental Flows & Downstream Sustainability
Integrated Project Management Resettlement Biodiversity, Habitats & Protected Areas
Corporate Governance Affected Communities Pest & Invasive Species
Economic Viability Community Acceptance Sedimentation and Erosion
Financial Viability Asset & Community Safety Management of the Hydrological Resource
Labour and Working Conditions
Construction Management Plan Communications
Procurement Project Benefits
Section II – Project Preparation – Proposed Aspects
14
15
ASPECT NAME: SECTION II CULTURAL HERITAGE
DESCRIPTION: This aspect addresses the level of impact and planning for protection and
conservation of tangible and intangible forms cultural heritage. This aspect is important because cultural heritage artefacts can be damaged or lost through the physical landscape changes brought about by hydropower project construction and operation, as well as through associated infrastructure impacts (e.g. new roads, transmission lines). Furthermore, non-physical cultural heritage such as traditions, festivals and rituals can also be impacted through hydropower project impacts to local communities.
INTENT: Cultural heritage is identified, recognised and addressed.
SAMPLE ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS: xxx xxx xxx xxx
NOTES ON STANDARD ATTRIBUTES:
xxx
xxx ASPECT SPECIFIC SCORING INSTRUCTIONS: Aspect Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5
Level of protection of cultural heritage
xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
EXAMPLES OF OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE: Heritage impact statements Conservation plans Heritage plans and agreements
CRITERIA TO BE MET FOR ASPECT TO BE CONSIDERED NOT APPLICABLE: xxx ASPECT RELEVANCE TO CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES: xxx (xxx means to be filled in)
ASPECT NAME: SECTION II CULTURAL HERITAGE
AUDITORS COMMENTS ON RELEVANCE OF THE ASPECT TO THE PROJECT BEING ASSESSED: SCORE:
Process Attribute Level (1-5)
Auditor’s Comments
Quality of the Assessment Processi
Quality of the Management Planningi
Appropriateness of the Resource Capacityi
Quality of the Consultative Processi
Performance Attribute Level (1-5)
Auditor’s Comments
Level of Stakeholder Supporti
Level of Protection of Cultural Heritageii
i Refer to Standard Attribute Scoring Instructions (pages x-x) plus notes opposite page ii Refer to aspect-specific scoring instructions opposite page OVERALL SCORE:
HIGH AVERAGE LOW NOT APPLICABLE
Uses, Users and Maximising Impact
16
The IHA Sustainability Assessment Protocol (2006) is a voluntary assessment framework of sustainability in the hydropower sector.
Potential applications for the Hydropower
Sustainability Assessment Protocol are broad in terms of who uses it and for what purpose.
How can the hydropower sustainability assessment protocol be used?
17
All sectors providing a common basis for dialogue on sustainability issues. Governments, potential financiers and other decision-makers can use the Protocol to
ensure that new hydropower developments are an appropriate solution for the context in which they are proposed.
Companies, governments, financial institutions and NGOs can all use the Protocol to guide development of new hydropower facilities.
Companies, governments and development agencies to assess the sustainability of existing operations and develop programs for improvement.
NGOs and civil society to evaluate the sustainability of hydropower projects at different life cycle stages and to form a basis for dialogue and for holding operators and financiers to account.
Developers, financial institutions and other investors in assessing the risks of potential investments and as part of due diligence.
The hydropower sector in seeking external qualification for financing from banks, carbon credits (e.g. CDM/JI), renewable energy credits (e.g. RECs), recognition in voluntary markets (e.g. green certificates); and the administrators of these schemes in judging admission
Verification agencies certifying a level of sustainability. Hydropower owners/operators for corporate sustainability management and training
Potential Users and Uses
18
Potential Future Pathways
Sector guidelines
Good Practice Information e.g. the Sustainable Hydro Websitewww.sustainablehydropower.org
Awards & recognition Schemes
Sustainability & performance standards
Capacity building through training
Programs
Hydropower sustainability
certification schemes
Reflected in national and
regional legislation and policies
Reflected in bank safeguards policies
Industry benchmarking
Basis for common stakeholder
dialogue
Admission criteria for specific
markets
19
Obtaining Views of Stakeholders
20
All HSAF members have formal reference groups and/or networks of stakeholders with whom they discuss the HSAF work.
Two open consultation periods are built into the HSAF process:
1. Phase 1: Jan-Feb 2009. Focussed on developing relationships with stakeholders, building understanding of the HSAF process and getting initial feedback on protocol content (Key Components Document).
2. Phase 2: Jul-Aug 2009. Will focus on more detailed protocol content review and the practical application of this assessment tool. This phase will involve regional consultation meetings. A program of trialling the draft revised protocol will be conducted at the same time.
Consultation Strategy
21
>180 people accessed the on-line questionnaire
>80 people submitted partial or full on-line responses
>23 on-line resondents provided detailed comment on individual sections
Majority of on-line respondents were from hydropower sector (companies or consultants) or research organisations, with some banks and inter-governmental organisations also responding. Very few NGOs responded on-line.
The Consultation Consultant put a lot of personal effort into following up with NGOs / civil society to gain an understanding of their issues, through direct emails and phone calls.
Translation of the 5-page HSAF overview document into Spanish to assist the effort to reach non-English speaking NGOs.
Gaps in response largely governments and climate change organisations.
Consultation Phase 1 Outcomes
22
23
THEME ISSUE
Forum Process
•Lack of representation of civil society on HSAF•Forum generally identified as an IHA process not cross-sectoral (seen as positive and negative)
Forum Objectives
•Confusion about whether we’re developing a standard or not•Relation to WCD•Implementation and enforcement
Protocol Application
•4 section structure seen as logical•Many concerns about scoring, how it will work, how complicated it will be, use of weighting•Interest in a minimum requirement to be set•How well it could be scaled to hydropower of various sizes•Adapting/tailoring to individual country circumstances
Protocol Content
•Too many issues and attributes, needs to be simple, don’t mask big issues•Insufficient emphasis or attention on human rights, resettlement, benefit sharing and climate change
Consultation Phase 1 Issues Raised
Chair – Brian Richter, The Nature ConservancyIntroductions of Forum members Overview presentation – Helen Locher, Forum
CoordinatorDiscussion of Issues
Forum processForum objectivesProtocol applicationProtocol content
Forum member commentsClosing
24
Session Outline
Response to Consultation Outcomes Report.
Development of Draft Protocol (June 09)
Consultation and trialling.
Analysis of potential pathways forward, and development of a proposal for a follow up work program.
Development and release of Final Protocol.
Commencement of follow-on phase focussing on implementation pathways.
Next Steps
25
For More Information:www.hydropower.org/sustainable_hydropower/hsaf.html