The Enforcement of the Self-Interests of Nature Transformers

Chapter

Abstract

This paper describes morally questionable practices of designers and builders of water megaprojects to gain political and financial supports for their ambitious plans. History of the Gabčǭkovo -Nagymaros hydroelectric power plants on the Danube, the Grand Canal of Alsace on the Rhine and many other megaprojects show numerous examples of manipulation, like overriding reasonable engineering limits; underestimating the project costs; cheating the common weal; giving false promises of benefits; promising success against rivals to politicians,; making fit the argumentation to the ruling political ideology; suppressing and censoring critics. In many cases, such practices lead to success which brings negative economic, environmental and social impacts of the megaprojects. The Grand Canal of Alsace (abandoned at half), and the Gabčíkovo -Nagymaros project (stopped the construction of the Nagymaros dam and restored the free-flowing river) are rare exceptions.

References

  1. Bogárdi, J., et al. 1952. Vélemény a Bratislava-Visegrád közötti Duna-szakaszon tervezett vízlépcsők hatására bekövetkező hordalék- és jégviszonyokról (Opinion of the impact of dams planned for the Danube’s Bratislava-Visegrád section on sediment and ice conditions, Manuscript).Google Scholar
  2. Bogdánfy, Ö. 1914. A vízerő: mérnöki kézikönyv (Hydropower: Engineering handbook). Budapest: Budapest Magyar Mérnök- és Építész Egylet.Google Scholar
  3. Carkoglu, A., and M. Eder. 2001. Domestic concerns and the water conflict over the Euphrates-Tigris river basin. Middle Eastern Studies 37 (1): 41–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chioc, M. 2002: The Rhine: An eco-biography, 1815–2000. Seatle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  5. Descargues-Grant, M. 2011. Swift and the Ruin(s) of history. Études Épistémè 19 (1): 113–128.Google Scholar
  6. Fearnside, P. M. 1989 “Brazil’s Balbina Dam: Environment versus the legacy of the pharaohs in Amazonia. Environmental Management 13 (4): 401–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fitzmaurice, J. 1996. Damming the Danube: Gabcikovo/Nagymaros and post-communist politics in Europe. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  8. Flyvbjerg, B., M. S. Holm, and S. Buhl. 2002. Underestimating costs in public works projects: Error or lie? Journal of the American Planning Association 68 (3): 279–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fürst, H. 2003. The Hungarian-Slovakian conflict over the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Dams: An analysis. Intermarium 6 (2): 1–15.Google Scholar
  10. Galambos, J. 1993. An international environmental conflict on the Danube: The Gabcikovo-Nagymaros dams. In Environment and democratic transition, ed. A. Vari and P. Tamas, 176–226. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Goldsmith, E., and N. Hildyard, eds. 1984. Social and environmental effects of large Dams. Volume 1. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.Google Scholar
  12. Goldsmith, E., and N. Hildyard, eds. 1986. The social and environmental effects of large Dams. Volume 2: Case studies. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.Google Scholar
  13. Görbedi, M. 1989. 1020 nap az őrtornyok árnyékában: A tiszalöki fogolytábor története (1020 Days in the Shadow of Watch-towers: The History of the Tiszalök Prisoner Camp). Tiszalök: Költségvetési Üzem.Google Scholar
  14. Gregory, P. R., and V. Lazarev. 2003. The economics of forced labor: The Soviet Gulag. Stanford: Hoover Institution Press.Google Scholar
  15. Gruner, W. 2006. Jewish forced labor under the Nazis: Economic needs and racial aims, 1938–1944. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jolánkai, Gy. 1957. A Tisza-völgy északi része vízhiányának pótlása a Dunából átvezetett víz dombvidéki tározásával. Vízügyi Közlöny 3 (1): 3–21.Google Scholar
  17. Josephson, P. 2002. Industrialized nature: Brute force technology and the transformation of the natural world. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  18. Higgins, I. 1994. Swift’s politics: A study in disaffection. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. I.L.M. 1993. Czech and Slovak federation-european commission-hungary: London agreement on the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project. International Legal Materials 32 (5): 1291–1292.Google Scholar
  20. International Court of Justice. 1998. Judgment in case concerning the Gabčíkovo- Nagymaros Project. International Legal Materials 37 (1): 162–242.Google Scholar
  21. Kiss, G. 1947. TVA on the Danube? Geographical Review 37 (2): 274–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lévai, A. 1983. Opponensi vélemény (Examiner’s report). In A Duna távlati komplex hasznosítása (The long-term complex utilization of the Danube). Budapest: MTA-OMFB.Google Scholar
  23. Lunstrum, E. 2011. An uncomfortable fit? Transfrontier parks as MegaProjects In Engineering Earth, : The Impacts of Megaengineering Projects, ed. S. D. Brunn, 1223–1242. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  24. McCully, P. 2001. Silenced rivers—The ecology and politics of Large Dams. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  25. Mosonyi, E. 1948. Magyarország vízerői (Hydropower of Hungary) Vízügyi Közlöny 30 (Separatum): 1–15.Google Scholar
  26. Mosonyi, E. 1951. Vízerő-gazdálkodásunk időszerű feladatai (Current Tasks of our hydropower management). Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Műszaki Tudományok Osztályának Közleményei, 515–540. Budapest: MTA.Google Scholar
  27. Mosonyi, E. 1961, March. Új elgondolások vízerőink kihasználásában (New concepts about the utilization of our hydropowers). Hidrológiai Tájékoztató 17–18.Google Scholar
  28. OVIBER Kft. 1994. A szlovákiai C-variáns vízépítő mérnöki értékelésének végleges szakvéleménye (The final expert opinion on the hydraulic engineering evaluation of the Slovakian Variant C) Budapest: OVIBER.Google Scholar
  29. Parasuraman, S., and S. Sengupta. 2001. World commission on Dams: Democratic means for sustainable ends. Economic and Political Weekly 36 (21): 1881–1891. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4410669.Google Scholar
  30. Rainer, J. 2002. The new course in Hungary in 1953. Cold War International History Project, Working Papers No. 38, Washington DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for ScholarsGoogle Scholar
  31. Ratcliff, J. 2012. Art to cheat the common-weale: Inventors, projectors, and patentees in English satire, ca.1630–1670. Technology and Culture 53 (2): 337–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Record of Meeting. 1985. Befejezetlen múlt: Gerő Ernő a vízlépcsőről (Unfinished Past: Ernő Gerő about the Dam). Beszélő 1 (14): 20–28.Google Scholar
  33. Reilly, P. 1982. Jonathan swift: The brave desponder. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Rogers, P. 1975. Gulliver and the engineers. The Modern Language Review 70 (2): 260–270. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3724280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rothschild, J., and N.M. Wingfield. 2000. Return to diversity: A political history of east central Europe since World War II, 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Sajó, E. 1931. Emlékirat vizeink fokozottabb kihasználása és újabb vízügyi politikánk megállapítása tárgyában. (Memorandum about greater utilization of our waters and establishing our new hydropolitics. Manuscript)Google Scholar
  37. Sands, P. 2010. Water and international law: Science and evidence in international litigation. Environmental Law & Management 22 (4): 151–161.Google Scholar
  38. Swift, J. 1726. Gulliver’s travels. Webster’s Thesaurus Edition (2005), Las Vegas: ICON Group International, Inc.Google Scholar
  39. Vagholikar, N. 2011. Dams and Environmental governance in North-East India. In India infrastructure report 2011: Water: Policy and Performance for Sustainable Development, ed P. Tiwari and A. Pandey 360–369. Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://indiasanitationportal.org/sites/default/files/IIR-2011_1.pdf#page=401.
  40. Vargha, J. 1981. Egyre távolabb a jótól (More and more distant from that which is good). Valóság 24 (11): 1–23.Google Scholar
  41. Vargha, J. 1984. (Pseud.: Kien Péter) “A Nagy Szlovák Csatorna” (The Great Slovak Canal). Beszélő 9 (1): 1–19.Google Scholar
  42. Vargha, J. 1997. Vízerő és politika (Hydropower and politics). In A hágai döntés (The decision at The Hague), ed. Janos Vargha, 221–287. Budapest: Enciklopédia Kiadó.Google Scholar
  43. Weijnen, T. 2010. Governance of large infrastructures: The cases of the canals of King Willem I, the Suez Canal and the Rhine-Main-Danube waterway. An application of new institutional economics. Enschede: University of Twente. http://purl.org/utwente/doi/10.3990/1.9789036530729. Accessed 30 July 2013.Google Scholar
  44. Williams, R.C. 1995. The environment, borders, and politics: The significance of central Europe’s Gabcikovo-Nagymaros hydroelectric project before and after 1989. Middle States Geographer 28 (2): 242–255.Google Scholar
  45. Zinke, A. 2005. The hydropower station Gabčíkovo: Deficits in hydrology (Sediment Transport, Groundwater) and biology. In Hydrology and limnology–another boundary in the Danube River Basin. Report on the International Workshop organized by the International Association for Danube Research (IAD) and sponsored by the UNESCO Venice Office, 49–59. Petronell, Austria, 14–16 October 2005.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.BudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations