Is hydropower worth it? Exploring amazonian resettlement, human development and environmental costs with the Belo Monte project in Brazil

Nations in the Global South have turned to massive hydropower projects to provide for the energy needs of their growing economies. Large-scale hydropower projects cause untold environmental damage to river ecosystems, to fish biodiversity, and displace millions of people globally. Much research documents these impacts, yet we do not know if these populations support the development of hydropower. In this paper, we aim to understand how direct experiences with resettlement might influence the support or opposition to hydropower development considering energy justice, particularly the restorative and procedural tenets, as a motivating framework. Our research is based on social survey data from a population resettled during the construction of the Belo Monte dam in the Brazillian Amazon. Results from partial proportional odds models suggest that a slim majority feel that hydropower is worth the cost, yet even this support declines as perceived impacts increase. These populations hold nuanced views and are not uniformly negative about dams, regretting the negative outcomes for them but believing the government discourse that the energy needs of the country may require them to sacrifice for the larger good. Support for hydropower as well as energy injustices might vary considerably across communities that are impacted differentially by Belo Monte.

Automated summary

Nations in the Global South have been turning to massive hydropower projects to meet their energy needs, but these projects have significant environmental and social impacts. Research based on a population resettled during the construction of the Belo Monte dam in the Brazilian Amazon shows that while a slim majority feel that hydropower is worth the cost, this support decreases as perceived impacts increase.