The Dynamics of Social Inequality in the Kali Gandaki ‘A’ Dam Project in Nepal: The Politics of Patronage

One of the arguments in the implementation of dam projects is that the benefits will ultimately lead to a win-win situation for all. Large dams in particular are viewed as panacea for the pervasive poverty in the Himalaya-Ganga (Dixit 1994). Critics of this argument counteract by arguing that people in rural areas are not winning because they receive little direct benefits. Displacements of local families from dam interventions are also critiqued as a price paid for development. Ethical questions are often raised because of the inequitable distribution of benefits and affected people being more vulnerable or worse off (Cernea 2000). Meanwhile, hierarchical relationships of patronage between state bureaucrats and locals, class and other striations also bring about disputes, unequal resettlement and compensation provisions and take more time to negotiate (Gandhi 2003). Within this context, state pol ic ies and laws provide the framework for compensating the people affected direct ly and indirectly. However, the main assumption as taken here is that the hierarchical structure of the Nepalese state and society and the ubiquity of patronage politics will negatively affect even those development programmes that aim at inclusion and redistribution. This hierarchical structure emerges out of a complex social structure where caste, ethnicity and class do not fit into neatly structured divisions. Baral (2000) views inequalities to stem from a hierarchical state that thrived on a system of patronage that has been historically and socially exploitative in nature with the ruling classes enjoying the benefits. With social inequalities and patronage inherent in Nepal i society , development processes are, therefore, apt fields for their manifestation. Dam interventions are not exempt. Equity issues are gaining importance. As the World Commission for Dam report (2000:120) points out, ‘the emergence of equity as a crit ical ingredient of development underlines that this “balance sheet” approach is unacceptable as it ignores the typical mismatch between the distribution of the gains and losses of a project across different societal groups’. What, then, are the ground realities in the case of Nepal? What are the outcomes in terms of equality/ inequal i ty when large hydropower plants are implanted upon local communities vis-à-vis the distribution of resources—financial and natural (of land and water)? This paper attempts to link in answers to these questions focusing on patronage relations in the Kali Gandaki (KG) ‘A’ project area. Before unfolding the research assumptions to these questions, the following section will briefly explain the concepts of patronage.