Search

A series of surveys and interviews were conducted with families relocated from the site of the Bili-Bili Dam project in South Sulawesi, Indonesia, to remote transmigration areas in the same province. At the time of the survey, all families had received their full amount of cash compensation for relocation. In addition, they had been given an opportunity to join the Transmigration Programme (TP) to receive land and houses for free; however, many suffered from hardships and their strong attachment to their homeland forced them to return. The results of this survey show that families who joined the TP did in fact use their compensation money to purchase small pieces of land and homes close to their original village. Those who were successful and saved money while living in TP areas, as well as those who sold their land in the TP areas, mostly returned to the dam vicinity and were able to purchase land and homes in that area. It is therefore concluded that this resettlement scheme was successful. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Development projects requiring displacement of people often result in their impoverishment; however, sustainable resettlement programmes can be devised with the introduction of alternative technologies that will enable the resettlers to exploit new productive opportunities. The majority of resettlers in the Saguling reservoir lacked the capital to invest in fisheries development and subsequently alternative technologies were introduced, enabling them to engage in aquaculture, but without success. This paper aims to examine the reasons why the introduction of alternative technology failed to establish in the Saguling reservoir, using data obtained through a literature review, interviews and a field survey. The analysis emphasizes seven factors that are crucial in the evaluation of the success of technology transfer and diffusion efforts in general. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The performance of previous involuntary resettlement schemes for dam construction projects leaves much to be desired. The question to be asked is whether the present policy of development aid agencies is appropriate for countries where more dams will be built. This study examines the applicability of Japanese "soft technologies" to determine whether the existing policy is really instrumental in mitigating impacts. The study was carried out through analysis on Saguling and Cirata dam construction projects on the island of Java, Indonesia, in which 3,038 and 6,300 families were resettled, respectively. The emphasis of resettlement plans for these dams was on transmigration and aquaculture. The following findings were made: land-for-land policy was not fully met; transmigration schemes did not work as planned; resettlers failed to enjoy the benefits from aquaculture development fully due to the high capital needed; employment by dam construction projects was limited; and insufficient capital and training prevented resettlers from enjoying profits from secondary development. Lessons learned included: some mechanism should have been established for those who changed jobs from agriculture to other sectors; provision of urban land rather than farmland, as has been practised in Japan, should have been considered; and establishment of funds, as practised in Japan, should have been pursued. Such funds may be used for enhancing the infrastructure of the project area to promote secondary development for the purpose of creating new jobs for resettlers. It may also meet unexpected expenditures incurred after completion of a dam. Funds could also be utilized to give construction firms monetary incentives to employ resettlers. The creation of funds may be instrumental in safeguarding job security of resettlers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Forced population displacement caused by dam construction has been regarded as the most serious issue of water resources development. Nevertheless, the best practice is still not yet established. This paper aims to examine the performance of the involuntary resettlement scheme applied to the Cirata Dam project in Indonesia to obtain clues for improvement. Aquaculture development in the reservoir succeeded in creating new jobs for resettlers. Most resettlers ended up with less farmland than they had previously owing to the increase in land price. The land-for-land compensation scheme is preferable to cash compensation. Participation of resettlers in the planning and implementation of the resettlement scheme still had room for improvement. Some intermediate mechanism, between villagers and those implementing the resettlement scheme, should be devised. More careful and streamlined efforts should have been made as regards the secondary development of the project, so that those displaced could enjoy the benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]