Six prominent advocates of climate and energy justice have been arrested and detained in Vietnam for their efforts to help wean the country from coal. Among them is environmental justice lawyer Dang Dinh Bach, who is serving a five-year prison sentence. Bach was the founder and director of the Law and Policy of Sustainable Development Research Centre, where he dedicated his life to the public health of marginalised communities. The UN Human Rights Council Working Group on Arbitrary Detention released an opinion earlier this year regarding Bach’s imprisonment, finding it a “violation of international law” and expressing concerns about a “systemic problem with arbitrary detention” of environmental defenders in Vietnam. 

Another leading defender of climate justice in Vietnam, Hoang Thi Minh Hong, founder of the environmental group CHANGE VN, was recently sentenced to three years in prison. To date, the United Nations, United States, United Kingdom and European Union have all released statements condemning her recent conviction and sentencing. 

It is in this context that we urge multilateral development banks like the ADB and World Bank, along with donor governments, not to bulldoze ahead with the plans for implementing the JETP or associated projects. Doing so would mean acting as complicit bystanders in the silencing and reprisals faced by community rights, workers’, environmental and climate advocates.

Elsewhere in the region, including the Philippines and Indonesia, ADB and World Bank Group plans to dole out hundreds of millions of dollars in public funds, to enable coal companies to refurbish or retire their facilities, have been heavily criticised by environmental, climate and social-justice groups. Though these schemes are labelled as contributions to a Just Transition – and are explicitly being considered as part of the JETP arrangements in Indonesia – the reality is that project operators are not being held culpable for the harm and damage wrought by their coal-fired power plants on community livelihoods, workers’ health and the environment. 

Clear promises to retain or provide dignified retirement packages and redress for health impacts for workers remain nonexistent, and proposals for “green jobs” lack commitments that would ensure core labour rights as per international conventions. Instead, the plans being put in place prioritise “repurposing” rather than decommissioning coal plants – allowing facilities that once burned coal to be refurbished to rely upon burning other resource-intensive, high greenhouse gas-emitting fuels such as woody biomass or waste. Meanwhile, workers and residents in surrounding communities will still be left to face the prospect of working and living in areas where the air, land and water are contaminated.

Alarmingly, it appears the same model of “repurposing” coal facilities will be proposed for financing under the Vietnam JETP.  Plans moving forward in the name of Just Transition are being backed by a powerful set of corporate and financial actors. In response, civil society, community groups and workers’ alliances across the region have consistently called for banks and donor governments to establish clear commitments – to ensure there are safe spaces where people can voice concerns and provide feedback, to inform the planning process before plans move to the implementation phase. 

The high-level political declaration announcing the JETP in Vietnam affirmed the importance of consultation with diverse stakeholders, including NGOs and civil society, to achieve a “broad social consensus” on the country’s energy-transition pathway. But the disabling environment for civil society and community-based groups in Vietnam means it is impossible to engage meaningfully in any consultative processes, free of the fear that another of their representatives may be next in line to be arbitrarily detained, charged and imprisoned. The ADB and the World Bank Group also have clear provisions guaranteeing access to information, transparency and public participation enshrined in policy, none of which is possible in the current context in Vietnam. 

Crucially, the Asia Pacific Climate Week and the gatherings associated with the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation should be a time when both the  ADB and World Bank Group finally “walk the talk” by issuing statements that offer support for the release of these environmental and human-rights defenders. More broadly, they must commit to suspending Just Transition-related planning processes and financing until there are safe, meaningful spaces for community, workers’  and civil-society groups to raise questions, concerns and grievances.

Meanwhile, mobilisation by civil-society groups outside of Vietnam, to secure the release of Bach, Hong and other incarcerated environmental and human-rights defenders, will continue. So, too, will collective efforts to advance processes, principles and practices of equitable, rights-based Just Transitions within, across and beyond the region.

Tanya Lee Roberts Davis is the Just Transitions Advocacy Coordinator at NGO Forum on ADB

The post Questioning Development Banks’ Commitments to Just Transition appeared first on Southeast Asia Globe.

Not far from the truck down an old logging trail, rangers in Cambodia’s Virachey National Park conducted a biodiversity survey within the protected area, much of which is unexplored. The dense forest is one of the last relatively untouched landscapes in the fast-developing Mekong region.

“Logging and poaching is an issue but the park has a way of protecting itself,” said Thon Soukhoun, who has been a ranger since the forest became a national park in 1993. “Nowhere in the country is like Virachey, it is Cambodia’s gem.”

Nestled in the Kingdom’s northeastern corner on the borders of Laos and Vietnam, Virachey was among the first Cambodian forests declared a protected area 30 years ago. At more than 3,300 square kilometres – nearly five times the size of the capital, Phnom Penh – it was the largest national park in the country at the time.

But as Southeast Asia races to cut reliance on fossil fuels, partly through climate finance schemes, Cambodia is risking this regional biodiversity hot spot for renewable energy.

Confidential documents and maps leaked to Southeast Asia Globe from meetings between developers and government officials this year indicate at least two hydropower projects within the park are quietly underway. These files show initial assessment work has begun at the dam sites in the core of Virachey, which is also a heartland for the indigenous communities along Cambodia’s borders.

To counter the thirst for development, researchers are monetising the national park in a different way by putting a dollar sign on Virachey’s value as a potential carbon credit project. This in an attempt to prove the protected area may be worth more standing then if felled.

The stakes of this trade-off are high. Dam construction will threaten endangered species by altering river flow and clear-cutting old-growth trees, according to environmentalists. The same leaked papers also indicate one of the dams will create a 215-hectare reservoir, flooding that section of forest.

Conservationists also fear hydropower dams in Virachey may jeopardise hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of conservation funding from the U.K. for the sake of “clean” energy, the very definition of which they challenge.

“To build a dam within this valuable area within the national park, you would have to create access roads, cut down trees and disturb wildlife,” said Pablo Sinovas, country director for the international conservation nonprofit Fauna & Flora. “I would not call any energy coming out of that ‘clean’.”

In the three decades since Virachey was made a national park, Cambodia has lost more than 30% of its forest cover. Protected areas, often only safeguarded on paper, have been deeply affected by this large-scale logging.

While Virachey hasn’t gone unscathed, the park’s ruggedness protected it from the brunt of this deforestation. The forest is now known by Sinovas and other wildlife experts as a “final frontier” for biodiversity in the Mekong region, due largely to its transboundary habitat for animals migrating across the triple border.

As development discussions continue behind closed doors, Chou Phanith, an associate professor at the Royal University of Phnom Penh specialised in environmental economics, is calculating how many tonnes of carbon dioxide Virachey can absorb and potentially sell as carbon credits.

In Phanith’s words, “money talks”.

If the forest is monetised before dam construction breaks ground, it could lead to a debate about whether or not Virachey is worth more standing than if toppled for hydropower, Phanith said. He pointed out the dams are being proposed in one of the areas with the highest potential for carbon storage.

“If forest ecosystems do not have any economic value, policymakers and the private sector will always regard forest ecosystems as less important than development,” Phanith said. “We calculate the economic value of a functioning forest ecosystem as part of a win-win strategy, where we don’t always block development but force sustainable and responsible development.”

The dam proposals in Virachey aren’t entirely new. The first published document on energy production in the park dates back to a 2009 master plan for hydropower development in Cambodia, backed by the state-run Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).

Miyoshi Asagi, counsellor for the Japanese embassy in Cambodia, said JICA’s involvement with these dam developments ended when the masterplan was published.

In August, JICA announced it is developing a new road map to clean energy for Cambodia. Asagi said she is “aware hydropower plants have lots of debate” and that “there are no projects in the pipeline for hydropower.”

An October report by WWF, released before the World Hydropower Congress this month, found that the ecological toll of dams in the Lower Mekong Basin outweighed the rewards of renewable energy.

The report stated “as hydropower development grows, the cascading nature of its impacts could be wider and more significant than understood today.”

The potential dams in Virachey are located on and named after the Prek Liang River. This waterway is a tributary to the Sesan River, which is part of Cambodia’s “3S River Basin”, itself a major tributary to the Mekong River. 

The Mekong is reeling from compounding hydropower pressures, with additional dam developments threatening to further choke off the once-mighty river.

In Cambodia, the government typically provides little transparency for major infrastructure projects. Basic documents such as environmental and social impact assessments are not often made public.

While officials from both the ministries of environment, as well as mines and energy, did not respond to multiple requests for comment, Minister of Environment Eang Sophalleth attended the Cambodia Climate Change Summit in November.

During a question and answer session at the summit, Sophalleth responded to Globe’s inquiry about energy plans in national parks, such as Virachey, by broadly talking about balance and the need to address developments in a “scientific matter”. He then said national security through energy security is a priority.

Sophalleth continued that the ministry “not do things because we feel like doing it”, he said that environmental studies and impact assessments are done “properly… before we decide to do all of this.”

When asked if these documents will be made accessible, he said: “When the public is receptive enough to accept it, to read, to think and to see what we are trying to achieve, yes.”

The leaked files reviewed by Globe, which span several years, indicate an opaque web of four potential companies that were at some point involved in the hydropower plans for Virachey.

Three are developers from South Korea – KTC Company, Kyung An Cable and Korean South-East Power – while the fourth is a Phnom Penh-based electrical equipment supplier called Rich-Grid Technologies. None replied to requests for comment and it is unclear which, if any, are now involved with the project.

“These are very sensitive documents,” said Bunleap Leang, director of the local environmental organisation, 3S Rivers Protection Network (3SPN). He said that involved groups prefer to keep potentially controversial plans under wraps. “If the dam is good from the perspective of the government and the developer then, to them, no one else needs to know.”

Plans may be further along than simple discussions. Bunleap said he confirmed through the 3SPN network that hiring at Tabok village, near one of the proposed dam sites, has already begun.

Virachey tumbles from Cambodia’s lowlands up into the biodiversity hotspot that is the Annamite Mountains, explained the conservationist Sinovas, comparing it to “two worlds converging in the park.”

At the time the sites were studied for potential hydropower, little to nothing was known about the effect these developments would have on biodiversity and forest health, Sinovas noted. But that’s changed in the 15 years since.

“As we started to understand more and more about what was in the park we are realizing its conservation is critical for Cambodian and regional biodiversity,” said Sinovas.

Fauna & Flora has set up roughly 140 camera traps within Virachey, documenting the critically endangered sunda pangolin, northern yellow-cheeked gibbon and a half-dozen other threatened species.

The national park is also the first place large-antlered muntjacs were recorded in Cambodia and is the last possible refuge for kouprey, the Kingdom’s national mammal, which has not been seen in decades.

“Virachey is one of those areas where deforestation levels have been much lower. That is partly why we have all of this wildlife,” Sinovas said. “Doing anything to damage that would not be in the national interest of Cambodia.”

He added the immediate impacts of construction are backed with longer-term threats such as poaching, illegal logging and other forest crimes common in Cambodia’s more accessible protected areas.

Earlier this year, the U.K. embassy in Phnom Penh confirmed about $730,000 is earmarked for Virachey as part of Britain’s global Biodiversity Landscape Fund.

Marc Thayre, deputy head of mission at the embassy, said the “vast majority of the funding” for the Mekong region is bound for Virachey.

“This is designed to increase the value of the park as a park itself,” said Thayre, who hoped the funds “realign the idea of what an asset is” by putting more value to the forest if left standing then if exploited.

Thayre shifted in his seat when asked about the proposed dams.

“If you want to tackle issues, like climate change and biodiversity, then you have to work in all places in the world with all governments,” he said. “We have to be honest with ourselves about the challenge and tradeoff between environment and development. There will always be some tension there.”

He also pointed to the conflict between “building things in national parks” and the “challenge of local communities not having power.”

“The world changes all the time,” he said. “There are always exit strategies written into any programs we do anywhere in the world. I hope that won’t be the case.”

Cambodia’s hunger for development has recently been joined with a craving for carbon credits.

Such credits are intended to limit emissions by preventing deforestation in places that might otherwise be vulnerable to development, such as Virachey. Major polluters then offset their fossil fuel emissions by essentially sponsoring the protection of these forests through carbon credit purchases.

In recent months, Cambodia’s carbon credits have come under scrutiny that goes beyond global questions over the effectiveness of credits as a whole.

The largest registered carbon credit zone is facing allegations of human rights abuses from the global advocacy group Human Rights Watch. In response, the world’s leading carbon credit registry service, Verra, suspended issuing new credits to the Southern Cardamoms REDD+ project.

Cambodia’s appetite to sell carbon credits, however, remains unsatisfied.

With the ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity, Phanith studied the feasibility of REDD+ sites in Cambodia and found about 40% of the Kingdom’s total landmass – about 79,200 square kilometres – could be considered for carbon credits.

Virachey stands as one of the top carbon credit prizes.

In research conducted for the centre and viewed by the Globe, Phanith identified three core areas within Virachey with an estimated total carbon storage capacity of 28 million tonnes.

Phanith calculated credits for the park could be worth more than $200 million in total if left as is, depending on the market rate for carbon. He stressed this didn’t even begin to factor in the benefits of healthy hydrology, biodiversity and other ecosystem services.

If the proposed dams are built, they’d be in one of the three core areas identified by Phanith.

“If you want to develop Virachey into hydropower dams, or whatever, make sure the economic value is more than [the cost of carbon]. If it is, go ahead,” he said. “But be willing to pay [that] anyways to offset.”

But dollar signs can’t account for everything.

Forty seven rangers are assigned to Virachey, many are from the indigenous groups who live in the park.

Several are from the approximately 60,000-strong Brau ethnic minority group from Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam. To them, Virachey is more than a carbon sink or a potential energy source.

While on patrol, indigenous rangers laughed as they encouraged Globe reporters not to kill the leeches sucking on their arms, legs, neck and right ear. They called it a “forest tax” owed to Virachey. Instead of killing the leaches, rangers smoked tobacco-leaf cigarettes to ward off the blood-suckers.

As the patrol ended for the day, a shivering breeze swept in as the sunset painted the Veal Thom grasslands gold.

Sra Er, who is Brau and leads Virachey’s Taveng Ranger Station, said to set alarms for 2 a.m. for star-gazing.

When the time rolled around, Er was embarrassed.

The night sky was shielded by overcast clouds and the moon’s glare. To make up for the miserably early morning, Er unscrewed a gasoline canister filled with homemade rice wine.

Under the red glow of a headlamp as he sipped the spirit, Er spoke about the Brau peoples’ connection to Virachey, which he said was the reason he became a ranger.

When asked about potential dams in the park, he grew silent and shook his head.

“We care about Virachey and we protect the park from what we can,” he said.

This article was produced by a collaboration between The Japan Times and Southeast Asia Globe, with support from The Pulitzer Center’s Rainforest Investigations Network.

A Khmer-language version of this story can be found here, with translations by Sophanna Lay and Nasa Dip.

The post For renewable energy, Cambodia risks ‘final frontier’ Virachey National Park appeared first on Southeast Asia Globe.

នៅតាមផ្លូវដើរក្នុងព្រៃ ខ្ញ៉ំដើរតាមឧទ្យានុរក្ស នៅពេលដែលពួកគាត់ធ្វើការសិក្សា អំពីជីវចម្រុះនៅក្នុងតំបន់អភិរក្ស ដែលភាគច្រើននៃតំបន់នោះ នៅមិនទាន់បានគេចូលដល់់នៅឡើយទេ។

នេះជាឧទ្យានជាតិវីរៈជ័យ ជាតំបន់អភិរក្សធម្មជាតិដ៏ស្រស់ស្អាតមួយ របស់កម្ពុជាដែលមិនមានការរំខានពីខាងក្រៅ ហើយស្ថិតនៅតំបន់មេគង្គដែលមានការអភិវឌ្ឍដ៏លឿន។

លោក ធន់ សុខុន  បានបំពេញការងារជាមន្ត្រីឧទ្យានុរក្ស ចាប់តាំងពីព្រៃនេះត្រូវបានគេកំណត់ជាឧទ្យានជាតិនៅឆ្នាំ ១៩៩៣ បានប្រាប់ខ្ញុំថា៖ «ការកាប់ឈើ និងការដាក់អន្ទាក់ គឺជាបញ្ហា ប៉ុន្តែឧទ្យាននេះក៏មានរបាំងធម្មជាតិការពារខ្លួនឯងដែរ»។

«គ្មានកន្លែងណាដែលដូចទៅនឹងវីរៈជ័យទេ។ វីរៈជ័យគឺជាគ្រាប់ពេជ្ររបស់កម្ពុជា»។

ប្រទេសនៅអាស៊ីអាគ្នេយ៍កំពុងប្រកួតប្រជែងគ្នា កាត់បន្ថយឧស្ម័នកាបូនិកនៅក្នុងវិស័យថាមពល ដោយមួយចំនួនគឺតាមរយៈការផ្តល់នូវមូលនិធិអាកាសធាតុ។ ចំណែកឯកម្ពុជាវិញ កំពុងតែធ្វើសកម្មភាពអភិវឌ្ឍន៏ តំបន់ដែលសំបូរទៅដោយជីវៈចម្រុះរបស់ខ្លួន ដើម្បីបង្កើននូវថាមពលដែលកកើតឡើងវិញ។ 

សកម្មភាពបែបនេះបានធ្វើឱ្យមានការជជែកវែកញែក អំពីផលប៉ះពាល់ដល់ធនធានធម្មជាតិ ក្នុងការទាញយកថាមពលកកើតឡើងវិញមកប្រើប្រាស់។ ក្រុមអ្នកអភិរក្សបារម្ភថា គម្រោងសាងសង់ទំនប់វារីអគ្គីសនីនៅវីរៈជ័យ នឹងធ្វើឱ្យរាជរដ្ឋាភិបាល [កម្ពុជា] ខាតបង់ជំនួយរាប់សែនផោនពីប្រទេសអង់គ្លេស ដែលគាំទ្រដល់ថាមពល «ស្អាត» ហើយនេះគឺជាអ្វីដែល ក្រុមអ្នកអភិរក្សព្យាយាមទប់ស្កាត់ ដើម្បីកុំឱ្យមានការកាប់បំផ្លាញ។

ដើម្បីទប់ស្កាត់នូវការអភិវឌ្ឍ ក្រុមអ្នកស្រាវជ្រាវបានប្រែក្លាយវីរៈជ័យទៅជាព្រៃដែលរកចំនូលបាន តាមរយះសក្ដានុពលឥណទានកាបូន។ នេះជាការព្យយាមបង្ហាញថាតំបន់ការពារមានតម្លៃលើសលប់ បើពុំមានការប៉ះពាល់ផ្ដេសផ្ដាស។

ស្ថិតនៅភូមិភាគឦសាននៃប្រទេសកម្ពុជា វីរៈជ័យស្ថិតក្នុងចំណោមព្រៃដំបូងដែលត្រូវបានប្រកាសជាតំបន់អភិរក្ស នៅឆ្នាំ ១៩៩៣។

ដោយមានផ្ទៃដីជាង ៣,៣០០គីឡូម៉ែត្រការ៉េ ទំហំប្រមាណជិតប្រាំដងនៃរាជធានីភ្នំពេញ វីរៈជ័យគឺជាឧទ្យានជាតិដ៏ធំជាងគេបង្អស់ នៅក្នុងប្រទេសកម្ពុជានាពេលនោះ។ 

អំឡុងពេលបីទស្សវត្សរ៍មកនេះ  កម្ពុជាបានបាត់បង់ព្រៃច្រើនជាង៣០ភាគរយនៃព្រៃសរុប រួមទាំងឧទ្យានជាតិផងដែរ ដែលភាគច្រើនត្រូវបានអះអាងថាជាព្រៃអភិរក្សត្រឹមតែលើឯកសារ ប៉ុន្តែជាក់ស្តែងទទួលរងនូវផលប៉ះពាល់ ពីការកាប់ឈើទ្រង់ទ្រាយធំ។ 

ខណៈ វីរ់ៈជ័យមិនទាន់រងផលប៉ះពាល់ សភាពរឹងមាំ និងក្រាស់ឃ្មឹករបស់ព្រៃនេះបាន ការពារវាពីកាប់បំផ្លាញដ៏ធ្ងន់ធ្ងរ ហើយត្រូវបានអ្នកជំនាញចាត់ទុកជា «ដង្ហើមការពារចុងក្រោយ» សម្រាប់ជីវចម្រុះនៅតំបន់មេគង្គ។ នេះក៏ពីព្រោះ​តែវា​ជាដែនជម្រកសត្វព្រៃដ៏សម្បើម ដែលអនុញ្ញាតឲ្យសត្វព្រៃ អាចបម្លាស់ទីឆ្លងកាត់ទឹកដីប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ឡាវ និងវៀតណាមបាន។

ប៉ុន្តែគម្រោងសាងសង់ថាមពលវារីអគ្គីសនី នឹងបង្អាក់នូវអនាគតរបស់ព្រៃមួយនេះ។

ផែនការសាងសង់ទំនប់វារីអគ្គីសនីយ៉ាងតិចពីរនៅវីរៈជ័យ ដែលគាំទ្រដោយរដ្ឋាភិបាលកម្ពុជា អាចនឹងបង្កផលប៉ះពាល់ដល់តំបន់អភិរក្សនេះ។

បើយោងទៅតាមក្រុមអ្នកជំនាញបរិស្ថាន ដំណើរការសាងសង់ទំនប់វារីអគ្គីសនី នឹងគំរាមកំហែងដល់សត្វដែលកំពុងរងគ្រោះ និងជិតផុតពូជ ដោយសារតែបម្រែបម្រួលនូវចរន្តទឹកធម្មជាតិ ដែលធ្វើឱ្យជម្រកសត្វត្រូវលិចលង់ ព្រមទាំងការកាប់ឆ្ការដើមឈើធំៗ។ អ្នកអភិរក្សក៏មានការព្រួយបារម្ភផងដែរថា ការសាងសង់ផ្លូវទៅកាន់គម្រោងទំនប់ទាំងនេះ អាចនឹងបើកឱកាសឱ្យឧក្រិដ្ឋកម្មសត្វព្រៃ និងព្រៃឈើ ដែលកើតមានជាទូទៅនៅក្នុងតំបន់ការពារផ្សេងៗ រាតត្បាតដល់វីរៈជ័យ ។  
ក្រុមអ្នកអភិរក្សបានជម្រុញថា អគ្គីសនីណាដែលបានផលិត និងបង្ករផលប៉ះពាល់បរិស្ថាន មិនអាចរាប់ជាថាមពល «ស្អាត» នោះទេ។  ជាពិសេសប្រសិនបើការអភិវឌ្ឍធ្វើឱ្យប៉ះពាល់ដល់កេរ្តិ៍ឈ្មោះ របស់ឧទ្យាជាតិវីរៈជ័យ ដែលគេចាត់ទុកជា ឧទ្យានបេតិកភណ្ឌអាស៊ាន និងជាព្រៃអភិរក្សដែលមានទំហំទឹកប្រាក់ ៦០០,០០០ ផោន ដែលជាជំនួយទទួលបានពីស្ថានទូតអង់គ្លេសប្រចាំកម្ពុជា។

ស្របពេលដែលកិច្ចពិភាក្សាអំពីការអភិវឌ្ឍ សុទ្ធសឹងជាការប្រជុំបិទទ្វារ សាស្ត្រាចារ្យរង លោក ជូ ផានិត នៅសាកលវិទ្យាល័យភូមិន្ទភ្នំពេញ កំពុងតែសិក្សាទៅលើបរិមាណនៃឧស្ម័នកាបូនិក ដែលឧទ្យានជាតិវីរៈជ័យអាចស្រូបយកបាន ហើយថែមទាំងអាចដោះដូរជាមួយនឹង ជំនួយទៅលើការកាត់បន្ថយឧស្ម័នកាបូនិក។ លោក ផានិត បានមានប្រសាសន៍ថា នេះជា «ការពិភាក្សាអំពីផលប្រយោជន៍»។

លោកមានប្រសាសន៍ថា ប្រសិនបើជំនួយមកដល់មុនពេលគម្រោងសាងសង់វារីអគ្គីសនីចាប់ផ្តើមនោះ គេអាចនឹងថ្លឹងថ្លែងអំពីផលប្រយោជន៍ រវាងការរក្សាទុក និងការអភិវឌ្ឍវារីអគ្គីសនី ថាមួយណាផ្តល់ផលចំណេញច្រើនជាង ជាពិសេសនៅពេលដែលគម្រោងនេះ ត្រូវបានគេដាក់ស្នើរឱ្យមានការសាងសង់នៅក្នុងបរិវេណ ដែលអាចស្រូបយកឧស្ម័នកាបូនិកបានច្រើន។

«ប្រសិនបើប្រព័ន្ធអេកូឡូស៊ីរបស់ព្រៃ មិនបានផ្តល់នូវផលប្រយោជន៍សេដ្ឋកិច្ច អ្នកនយោបាយ និងក្រុមហ៊ុនឯកជន នឹងតែងតែចាត់ទុកការអភិវឌ្ឍសេដ្ឋកិច្ចមានសារៈសំខាន់ជាងជាអេកូឡូសុី»។ លោកផានិត បានមានប្រសាសន៍។ លោកបានបន្តថា៖ «យើងថ្លឹងថ្លែងគុណតម្លៃសេដ្ឋកិច្ច នៃអេកូឡូស៊ីរបស់ព្រៃឈើ ជាផ្នែកមួយនៃយុទ្ធសាស្ត្រឈ្នះឈ្នះ។ នេះមានន័យថា យើងមិនមែនរារាំងរាល់សកម្មភាពអភិវឌ្ឍន៏ទាំំងអស់នោះទេ ប៉ុន្តែយើងដាក់គំនៀប ដើម្បីឱ្យការអភិវឌ្ឍប្រព្រឹត្តទៅដោយចីរភាព និងមានទំនួលខុសត្រូវ»។

គម្រោងសាងសង់ទំនប់វារីអគ្គីសនីទ្វេរដង

គម្រោងអភិវឌ្ឍវារីអគ្គីសនីនៅវីរៈជ័យ បានផ្អាកដំណើរការជាយូរមកហើយ។ របាយការណ៍ចុងក្រោយ ទាក់ទងនឹងការផលិតអគ្គីសនីនៅឧទ្យានជាតិខាងលើនេះ បានចេញជាលើកដំបូងនៅឆ្នាំ ២០០៩ ដែលជា ផែនការមេសម្រាប់អភិវឌ្ឍវារីអគ្គីសនី នៅប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ដែលទទួលបានការជួយជ្រោមជ្រែង ពីគម្រោងរបស់ទីភ្នាក់ងារសហប្រតិបត្តិការអន្តរជាតិជប៉ុន ឬចៃកា (JICA) របស់រដ្ឋាភិបាលជប៉ុន។

លោកស្រី Miyoshi Asagi ទីប្រឹក្សាអមស្ថានទូតជប៉ុនប្រចាំកម្ពុជា បានមានប្រសាសន៍ថា៖ «អង្គការចៃកាមិនជាប់ពាក់ព័ន្ធក្នុងការសាងសង់ទំនប់វារីអគ្គីសនីនេះទេ»។ លោកស្រីបានបន្តថា៖ «ពួកយើងបានចូលរួមក្នុងការស្រាវជ្រាវ និងផែនការមេដែលបានធ្វើរួច ការពាក់ព័ន្ធរបស់អង្គការចៃកា បានបញ្ចប់ហើយ»។

ប្រទេសជប៉ុន ត្រូវបានគេចាត់ទុក ជា​ ម្ចាស់ជំនួយដ៏សំខាន់ របស់កម្ពុជា។ ប្រទេសទាំងពីរបានរំលឹក ខួប ៧០ឆ្នាំ នៃទំនាក់ទំនងការទូត ក្នុងឆ្នាំនេះ។
នៅខែសីហា អង្គការចៃកាបានប្រកាសនូវ ផែនការថ្មីដើម្បីថាមពលស្អាត សម្រាប់ការអភិវឌ្ឍប្រទេសកម្ពុជា។ លោកស្រី Asagi មានប្រសាសន៍ថា គាត់ «ជ្រាបអំពីការជជែកវែកញែកជាច្រើន​ ពាក់ព័ន្ធនឹងវារីអគ្គីសនី» ហើយលោកស្រីបានលើកឡើងថា «មិនមានគម្រោងអភិវឌ្ឍវារីអគ្គីសនីនោះទេ»។

សំណុំឯកសារ រួមទាំងផែនទីសាងសង់ដ៏សម្ងាត់ ត្រូវបានគេបានលើកយកមកពិភាក្សាក្នុងកិច្ចប្រជុំនៅឆ្នាំនេះ ដោយមានការចូលរួមពីអ្នកអភិវឌ្ឍន៍ និងមន្ត្រីរដ្ឋាភិបាលកម្ពុជា ដែលបានសង្កត់ធ្ងន់ទៅលើគម្រោងសាងសង់ទំនប់វារីអគ្គីសនី។ គម្រោងសាងសង់ទំនងជាមិនបង្អង់យូរទៀតនោះទេ។ យោងតាមការកាសែត The Japan Times បានបង្ហាញថា ការសិក្សា និងវាយតម្លៃអំពីការសាងសង់បាននឹងកំពុងចាប់ផ្តើមហើយ។

យោងទៅតាមឯកសារជាច្រើនបានបង្ហាញ នូវការអភិវឌ្ឍទំនប់វារីអគ្គីសនី បីកន្លែងដ៏មានសក្តានុពល ស្ថិតក្នុងឧទ្យានជាតិវីរៈជ័យ ដោយដាក់ឈ្មោះតាមទន្លេព្រែកលៀង ជាដៃទន្លេហូរចាក់ចូលទៅទន្លេសេសាន ដែលជាផ្នែកនៃ «ទន្លេ៣» ក្នុងប្រទេសកម្ពុជា។ 

ទន្លេសេកុង ទន្លេសេសាន និងទន្លេស្រែពក គឺជាដៃទន្លេមេគង្គ ដែលកំពុងរងផលប៉ះពាល់ដោយសារតែ ការប្រមូលផ្តុំនៃទំនប់វារីអគ្គីសនី ជាមួយនឹងការអភិវឌ្ឍទំនប់​ បន្ថែម ដែលគំរាមកំហែងដល់ទន្លេមេគង្គ ដែលកាលពីមុនមកមិនធ្លាប់មានការអភិវឌ្ឍច្រើនបែបនេះឡើយ។

គ្មានឯកសារណាមួយ រាប់តាំងពីការវាយតម្លៃផលប៉ះពាល់បរិស្ថាន ដល់ការសិក្សាអំពីលទ្ធភាព ត្រូវបានបង្ហាញជាសាធារណៈដោយរដ្ឋាភិបាលកម្ពុជា ឬអ្នកអភិវឌ្ឍន៍ឡើយ។

លោក លាង ប៊ុនលៀប នាយករបស់អង្គការបណ្តាញការពារទន្លេបី សេសាន ស្រែពក សេកុង (3SPN) មានប្រសាសន៍ថា «‍ឯកសារទាំងនេះជារឿងដ៏រសើប»។ លោកបានបន្តថា អ្នកដែលពាក់ព័ន្ទចង់​រក្សា​ផែនការដ៏​ចម្រូងចម្រាសនេះជារឿងសម្ងាត់។ «ប្រសិនបើរដ្ឋាភិបាល និងអុ្នកអភិវឌ្ឍន៍យល់ឃើញថា សំណង់នេះមានប្រយោជន៍ អញ្ចឹង​សម្រាប់ពួកគាត់ គឺគ្មាន​នរណាម្នាក់ចាំបាច់ដឹងអំពីដំណឹងនេះទេ»។

ផែនការសាងសង់នេះ អាចមិនត្រឹមតែជាការពិភាក្សាធម្មតាទេ។ លោក ប៊ុនលៀប បានបញ្ជាក់តាម​រយៈ​បណ្តាញ 3SPN ថា មានការជ្រើសរើសកម្មករឱ្យមកបម្រើការ​នៅ​ភូមិ​តាបុក ស្ថិតនៅក្បែរកន្លែងមួយ ដែលគេគ្រោងនឹងសាងសង់ទំនប់ក្នុងចំណោមទំនប់វារីអគ្គីសនីជាច្រើនទៀត បានចាប់ផ្តើមហើយ។ 

ឧទ្យានជាតិវីរៈជ័យស្ថិតក្រោមដែនសមត្ថកិច្ចរបស់ក្រសួងបរិស្ថាន ចំណែកក្រសួងរ៉ែ និងថាមពល ជាអ្នកដឹកនាំគម្រោងសាងសង់ទំនប់វារីអគ្គិសនី តែខាងក្រសួងទាំងពីរ មិនបានឆ្លើយតបទៅនឹងសំណើរសុំការអត្ថាធិប្បាយលើដំណាក់កាលអភិវឌ្ឍទំនប់វារីអគ្គីសនីទេ ។

ការចំណាយដ៏ច្រើនទៅលើការផលិតថាមពលស្អាត

ព្រែកលៀងគឺជាសរសៃឈាមដ៏សំខាន់របស់វីរៈជ័យ ហើយគម្រោងអភិវឌ្ឍន៍ទំនប់វារីអគ្គីសនី ក៏ស្ថិតនៅក្នុងឧទ្យានជាតិនេះដែរ។ 

លោក Pablo Sinovas នាយករបស់អង្គការសត្វព្រៃ និងរុក្ខជាតិអន្តរជាតិប្រចាំកម្ពុជា (Fauna & Flora) នៅកម្ពុជា ពន្យល់ថា ចាប់ពីតំបន់ទំនាបនៃឧទ្យាននេះ ដែលស្ថិតក្នុងទឹកដីប្រទេសកម្ពុជា រហូតដល់តំបន់ដ៏សំខាន់សម្រាប់ជីវៈចម្រុះ ដែលជា ជួរភ្នំអណ្ណាម ប្រៀបដូចជា «ពិភពពីរជួបគ្នានៅឧទ្យានតែមួយ»។ 

លោក Sinovas កត់សម្គាល់ថា នៅពេលដែលតំបន់ទាំងនោះត្រូវបានគេសិក្សាដើម្បីសាងសង់វារីអគ្គិសនី គេស្ទើរតែមិនបានដឹងអំពីផលប៉ះពាល់របស់វា ទៅលើជីវចម្រុះ និងព្រៃឈើឡើយ។ 

ប៉ុន្តែអ្វីៗបានប្រែប្រួលនារយៈពេល ១៥ឆ្នាំក្រោយ។

លោក Sinovas មានប្រសាសន៍ថា៖ «នៅពេលដែលយើងចាប់ផ្តើមយល់កាន់តែច្រើន អំពីលក្ខណះពិសេសនៃតំបន់នេះ យើងក៏ចាប់ផ្តើមភ្ញាក់ខ្លួនថា ការអភិរក្សមានសារៈសំខាន់ដល់ជីវចម្រុះក្នុងតំបន់​​ និងសម្រាប់កម្ពុជា​»។

អង្គការ Fauna & Flora  បានដំឡើងកាមេរ៉ាប្រមាណ ១៤០គ្រាប់ នៅវីរៈជ័យ ដោយធ្វើការផ្តិតយករូបភាពសត្វកំពុងរងគ្រោះ និងជិតផុតពូជ ដូចជាសត្វឈ្លូសយក្ស (large-antlered muntjac) សត្វទោចថ្ពាល់លឿង (northern yellow-cheeked giboon) និងសត្វមួយចំនួនទៀត។

ឧទ្យានជាតិនេះគឺជា ជម្រកដំបូងដែលសត្វឈ្លូសយក្សបង្ហាញខ្លួន ហើយជាកន្លែងដែលវាត្រូវបានគេធ្វើកំណត់ហេតុ និងជាជម្រកចុងក្រោយសម្រាប់គោព្រៃ ដែលជាសត្វថនិកសត្វតំណាងប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ដែលបានបាត់ខ្លួនអស់ជាច្រើនទសវត្សរ៍មកហើយ។

លោក Sinovas បានមានប្រសាសន៍ថា៖ «វីរៈជ័យគឺជាតំបន់មួយដែលអត្រាកាប់បំផ្លាញព្រៃឈើមានកម្រិតទាប»។ លោកបានបន្តថា់៖ «នេះជាមូលហេតុមួយដែលសត្វទាំងនេះនៅមានជីវិត»។

«ការធ្វើអ្វីមួយដែលប៉ះពាល់ដល់ជីវៈចម្រុះ មិនមែនជាផលប្រយោជន៍ជាតិ (កម្ពុជា) នោះទេ» លោកបានបន្ថែម។ 

ក្រៅពីផែនការសាងសង់ទំនប់វារីអគ្គីសនី ឯកសារនេះបានបង្ហាញថា វារីអគ្គីសនីត្រឹមតែមួយប៉ុណ្ណោះ អាចធ្វើឲ្យដីព្រៃចំនួន ២១៥ហិកតា​ នឹងត្រូវលិចលង់ ដោយសារបរិមាណទឹកដ៏សម្បើម របស់អាងស្តុកទឹកនៃវារីអគ្គីសនី។

លោកបានបន្តថា៖ «ជាក់ស្តែងថាមពលស្អាត ពិតជាសំខាន់ណាស់» ក្នុងកាត់បន្ថយនូវបម្រែបម្រួលអាកាសធាតុ។ ប៉ុន្តែ «វាក៏អាស្រ័យទៅតាមតំបន់ និងអាស្រ័យទៅតាមរបៀបផលិតវាដែរ»។ 

សម្រាប់គាត់ វីរៈជ័យមិនមែនជាកន្លែងសម្រាប់វារីអគ្គីសនីទេ។

លោក Sinovas បានបន្តថា៖ «ដើម្បីសាងសង់ទំនប់នៅក្នុងឧទ្យានជាតិផ្ទាល់ អ្នកនឹងត្រូវបង្កើតផ្លូវ កាប់ដើមឈើ និងបង្ករការរំខានដល់សត្វព្រៃទៀត»។ «ខ្ញុំមិនហៅថាមពលដែលចេញមកពីកន្លែងនោះថា [ថាមពល] ស្អាតនោះទេ»។

កាលពីដើមឆ្នាំនេះ ស្ថានទូតអង់គ្លេសប្រចាំកម្ពុជា បានបញ្ជាក់ថា នឹងផ្តល់ប្រាក់ប្រមាណ ៦ សែនផោន ដល់ឧទ្យានជាតិវីរៈជ័យ ដែលជាផ្នែកមួយនៃ មូលនិធិការពារតំបន់ទេសភាពជីវៈចម្រុះ របស់ចក្រភពអង់គ្លេស។ លោក Marc Thayre ជាអនុប្រធានបេសកកម្មនៅស្ថានទូតអង់គ្លេស បានមានប្រសាសន៍ថា «ជំនួយភាគច្រើន» ដែលបានផ្តល់ជូនប្រទេសនៅតំបន់មេគង្គ ក្នុងនោះឧទ្យានជាតិវីរៈជ័យទទួលបានច្រើនជាងគេ។ 

លោក Thayre មានប្រសាសន៍ថា៖ «ជំនួយនេះត្រូវបានគេធ្វើឡើង ដើម្បីលើតម្កើននូវគុណសម្បត្តិនៃតំបន់នេះ»។ «យើងត្រូវបង្វែរឱ្យពួកគាត់មកគិតសារជាថ្មី អំពីគុណតម្លៃនៃតំបន់ ហើយទប់ស្កាត់កុំឱ្យមានការទាញយកផលប្រយោជន៍ ពីធនធានធម្មជាតិនៅតំបន់នេះ ជាជាងអភិវឌ្ឍន៍»។ 

លោក Thayre ផ្អាកនិយាយបន្តិចមុនពេលគាត់ឡើងអង្គុយលើម៉ូតូ នៅពេល [ខ្ញុំ] សួរគាត់អំពីគម្រោងអភិវឌ្ឍវារីអគ្គីសនី។

«ប្រសិនបើអ្នកចង់ដោះស្រាយបញ្ហា ដូចជាបម្រែបម្រួលអាកាសធាតុ និងជីវៈចម្រុះ អ្នកត្រូវធ្វើការជាមួយរដ្ឋាភិបាលទាំងអស់គ្រប់ទីកន្លែង» លោក Thayre មានប្រសាសន៍។ «យើងត្រូវស្មោះត្រង់ជាមួយខ្លួនយើង អំពីបញ្ហា និងការសម្របសម្រួលផលប្រយោជន៍ រវាងបរិស្ថាន និងការអភិវឌ្ឍ។ ត្រង់នោះហើយជាចំណុចដ៏តឹងសសៃក» លោកបានបន្ថែម។ 

លោកសម្គាល់ថា គម្រោងនេះបង្ហាញនូវជ្រុងពីរផ្សេងគ្នា រវាង «ការសាងសង់វារីអគ្គីសនីនៅក្នុងឧទ្យានជាតិ» និង «តម្រូវការអគ្គីសនីរបស់ប្រជាជនក្នុងសហគមន៍»។

លោកបន្ថែមថា៖ «ពិភពលោកប្រែប្រួលគ្រប់ពេល»។ «រាល់គម្រោងដែលយើងធ្វើនៅគ្រប់ទីកន្លែង គេតែងឃើញមានយុទ្ធសាស្ត្របញ្ចាប់បេសកម្ម សរសេរនៅក្នុងឯកសារ។ ខ្ញុំសង្ឃឹមថា នេះមិនមែនជាបញ្ហាឡើយ»។

ការពឹងផ្អែកលើឥណទានកាបូន

ការអភិវឌ្ឍនៅកម្ពុជា មានការផ្សារភ្ជាប់ទៅនឹង ការស្វែងរកជំនួយតាមឥណទានកាបូន។

ឥណទានកាបូន គឺជាជំនួយដើម្បីកាត់បន្ថយការបញ្ចេញឧស្ម័នផ្ទះកញ្ចក់ ដោយបញ្ចៀសនូវកាប់បំផ្លាញព្រៃឈើនៅគ្រប់ទីកន្លែង ដោយសារការអភិវឌ្ឍ។ ឧទាហរណ៍មានដូចជា​​ ដូចឧទ្យានជាតិវីរៈជ័យជាដើម។ ក្រុមប្រទេសឧស្សាហកម្មដែលបង្កការបំពុលធំៗ ទូទាត់ការបំភាយឥន្ធនៈហ្វូស៊ីលរបស់ពួកគេ ដោយឧបត្ថម្ភជាដល់ការការពារព្រៃឈើទាំងនេះ តាមរយៈការទិញឥណទានកាបូន។

ក៏ប៉ុន្តែនាប៉ុន្មានខែថ្មីៗនេះ ការផ្តល់នូវឥណទានកាបូនដល់ការកាត់បន្ថយឧស្ម័នផ្ទះកញ្ចក់របស់កម្ពុជា ​បានស្ថិតនៅក្រោមការតាមដានម៉ត់ចត់ អំពីប្រសិទ្ធិភាពនៃជំនួយនេះ។ 

តំបន់ឥណទានកាបូនដែលបានចុះបញ្ជីធំជាងគេ កំពុងប្រឈមមុខនឹង ការចោទប្រកាន់ពីការរំលោភសិទ្ធិមនុស្ស ពីអង្គការឃ្លាំមើលសិទ្ធិមនុស្ស (Human Rights Watch)។ ជាការឆ្លើយតប សេវាចុះបញ្ជីឥណទានកាបូនឈានមុខគេរបស់ពិភពលោកហៅថា Verra បានផ្អាកការចេញឥណទានថ្មី ដល់គម្រោងរេដបូកក្រវាញខាងត្បូង។

គោលបំណងរបស់កម្ពុជាក្នុងការទាក់ទាញនូវឥណទានកាបូន នៅមិនទាន់មានការប្រែប្រួលឡើយ។ 

ដោយធ្វើការជាមួយនឹងមជ្ឈមណ្ឌលអាស៊ានសម្រាប់ជីវចម្រុះ លោក ផានិត បានសិក្សាពីលទ្ធភាពនៃទីតាំង គម្រោងរេដបូក (REDD+) នៅប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ហើយបានរកឃើញប្រហែល ៤០ភាគរយ នៃផ្ទៃដីសរុបរបស់កម្ពុជា ប្រហែលនឹង ៧៩,២០០គីឡូម៉ែត្រការ៉េ អាចត្រូវបានគេពិចារណាសម្រាប់ ការផ្តល់ឥណទានក្នុងការកាត់បន្ថយឧស្ម័នផ្ទះកញ្ចក់។

តំបន់ដ៏ធំនៃឧទ្យាននេះនៅតែមិនទាន់មានគេចូលទៅដល់ ដោយមានព្រៃឬស្សីក្រាស់ឃ្មឹក លាយឡំនឹងព្រៃបៃតង និងព្រៃរបោះ។ មានតែផ្លូវសម្រាប់ចូលទៅកាប់ឈើក្នុងព្រៃប៉ុណ្ណោះ ជាផ្លូវដែលអាចធ្វើថ្មើរជើងបាន ដោយ​មាន​មន្ត្រី​ឧទ្យានុរក្សយក​ចិត្ត​ទុក​ដាក់​ និងមិន​ឲ្យ​អ្នករួមដំណើរបន្សល់ដានចេញជាផ្លូវថ្មីឡើយ។ 

លោកផានិត បានកំណត់តំបន់ស្នូលចំនួនបីនៅវីរៈជ័យ ដែលមានសមត្ថភាពស្រូបឧស្ម័នកាបូនខ្ពស់ជាងគេបង្អស់ រហូតដល់ទៅ ២៨លានតោន។ តាមរយះ លំនាំគណនាបរិមាណបំភាយឧស្ម័នផ្ទះកញ្ចក់ ចំនួននេះស្មើនឹងការបំភាយឧស្ម័នប្រចាំឆ្នាំសរុប របស់រោងចក្រផលិតថាមពលធ្យូងថ្មជិត ២៥ រោងចក្រ។

​មានតម្លៃ​មធ្យម ១០ដុល្លារ ក្នុង​មួយ​តោន ក្នុងនោះលោក ផានិត បាន​គណនា​ថា វីរៈជ័យ​អាច​មាន​តម្លៃដល់ទៅ ២៨០លាន​ដុល្លារ ​ប្រសិន​បើមិនមានការឈូសឆាយ។ លោក​បាន​សង្កត់​ធ្ងន់​ថា នេះ​ [យើង] មិន​បានគិតអំពីកត្តា​ផល​ប្រយោជន៍ ​នៃ​ជលសាស្ត្រ​ដែល​មាន​សុខភាព​ល្អ ជីវចម្រុះ និង​សេវា​ប្រព័ន្ធ​អេកូឡូស៊ី​ផង​។

លោក ផានិត បានពន្យល់ថា ការលើកទឹកចិត្តផ្នែកហិរញ្ញវត្ថុនាំឱ្យមានរបៀបមធ្យោបាយចំនួនពីរ។

មធ្យោបាយទីមួយ ប្រសិនបើព្រៃឈើមានតម្លៃខ្ពស់ជាង សក្ដានុពលអភិវឌ្ឍន៍ នោះអ្នកបង្កើតគោលនយោបាយ នឹងផ្អាកគម្រោងដោយឯងៗ។ មធ្យោបាយ​ទីពីរ ​ដែល​កម្ពុជា​ដើរ​ជា​ញឹក​ញាប់ គឺព្រៃឈើ​បង្កើត​ប្រាក់ចំណូល បាន​តិច​ជាង​​តម្លៃដែលទទួលបានពីការ​អភិវឌ្ឍ​។

ប្រសិនបើមានមធ្យោបាយទីរពីរត្រូវបានអនុវត្ត មានន័យថា ទំនប់​វារីអគ្គីសនីព្រែក​លៀង​ នឹង​ត្រូវ​សាងសង់​នៅ​កណ្តាល​តំបន់​ស្នូល​មួយ​ ក្នុង​ចំណោម​តំបន់​ស្នូល​ទាំង​បី​ដែល​បង្ហាញ​ដោយលោក ផានិត។ នៅក្នុងករណីនោះ លោកផានិត បានមានប្រសាសន៍ថា យ៉ាងហោចណាស់ក៏មានតម្លៃដែលគេដឹង ដើម្បីឱ្យក្រុមហ៊ុនត្រូវបង់ និងទូទាត់សងការខូចខាតព្រៃឈើដែរ។

«ប្រសិនបើចង់អភិវឌ្ឍវីរៈជ័យឱ្យទៅជាទំនប់វារីអគ្គីសនី ឬជាអ្វីផ្សេង ត្រូវប្រាកដថា វាបង្កើតចំណូលបានលើស ២៨០លានដុល្លារ។ ប្រសិនបើអញ្ចឹងមែន ធ្វើទៅ» លោកផានិត បន្ថែម។ «ប៉ុន្តែត្រូវហ៊ានចំណាយ ២៨០លានដុល្លារ ដើម្បីទូទាត់»។

តស៊ូដើម្បីវីរៈជ័យ

លុយមិនអាចធ្វើអ្វីៗបានគ្រប់យ៉ាងនោះទេ។

ប្រជាសហគមន៍ការពារធម្មជាតិ​ចំនួន ៤៧នាក់ ​ត្រូវ​បាន​ចាត់​ឲ្យ​ទៅ​វីរៈជ័យ ដែល​មាន​ន័យ​ថា​ 

រាល់៧០គីឡូម៉ែត្រការ៉េ មានអ្នកឆ្មាំម្នាក់។ ពួកគាត់ភាគច្រើនមកពីសហគមន៍ជនជាតិដើមភាគតិច ដែលចាត់ទុកតំបន់ការពាររបស់ពួកគាត់ ដូចទៅនឹងផ្ទះយ៉ាងអញ្ចឹង ហើយការល្បាតមួយលើកៗ ចាយពេលកន្លះខែ។

សម្រាប់ពួកគាត់ វីរៈជ័យគឺមានសារៈសំខាន់ជាងការស្រូប និងរក្សាកាបូន និងប្រភពថាមពលទៅទៀត។

នៅឧទ្យានឯណេះវិញ ប្រជាសហគមន៍ការពារធម្មជាតិជាជនជាតិដើមភាគតិច កំពុងសើច ខណៈដែលពួកគាត់ប្រាប់ខ្ញុំកុំឱ្យសម្លាប់សត្វទាក ដែលកំពុងជញ្ជក់ឈាមលើដៃ ជើង ក និងត្រចៀកខាងស្តាំរបស់ខ្ញុំ។

ពួកគាត់​ហៅ​វា​ថា​ជា​​ «​ពន្ធ​ព្រៃឈើ​» មានន័យថាសត្វនេះជាអំណោយរបស់ព្រៃ រាល់ពេលមានមាន់ថ្មីចូល។ ជាជាងសម្លាប់ពួកវា ពួកគាត់បានជក់បារីបង្ហុយ ដើម្បីការពារពីសត្វទាក ខណៈពេលដែលខ្ញុំបកវាចេញយ៉ាងវេទនា និងយ៉ាងប្រុងប្រយ័ត្នទៅតាមដែលខ្ញុំអាចធ្វើបាន។

ប្រជាសហគមន៍ការពារធម្មជាតិមួយចំនួន ព្រម​ទាំង​មន្ត្រីឧទ្យានុរក្សនៃ​ក្រសួង​បរិស្ថាន គឺជា​ជនជាតិ​ភាគតិចព្រៅ ដែល​មាន​កម្លាំង​ប្រមាណ ៦០,០០០នាក់ មក​ពី​ប្រទេស​កម្ពុជា ឡាវ និង​វៀតណាម។

ជាបង្គោលព្រំដែនដែលខណ្ឌចែកប្រទេសទាំងបី​  វីរៈជ័យ​ជា​បេះដូង​​របស់សហគមន៍​ជនជាតិ​ដើម។

នៅពេលដែលការល្បាតរបស់យើងបានបញ្ចប់ នៅតំបន់ភ្នំវាលធំមានខ្យល់បក់រំភើយៗ អមដោយសូរិយាអស្តង្គត ដែលប្រែក្លាយផ្ទៃមេឃទាំងមូលទៅជាមាស។

លោក ស្រា អឺ ដែលជាជនជាតិភាគតិចព្រៅ និងជាប្រធានស្នាក់ការរដ្ឋបាលព្រៃឈើតាវែង ណែនាំខ្ញុំឱ្យកំណត់ម៉ោងរោទិ៍របស់ខ្ញុំនៅម៉ោង ២ រំលងអធ្រាត្រ ដើម្បីមើលផ្កាយ។

ពេលដល់​ម៉ោង​២​រំលង​អធ្រាត្រ លោក អឺ ខ្មាស​ខ្ញុំយ៉ាងខ្លាំង។

ដោយសារតែយប់នោះ តារារាប់លាងដួងត្រូវបាំងជិតដោយពពក និងរស្មីដួងច័ន្ទ។ ដើម្បីកុំឱ្យខ្ញុំខកចិត្ត លោក អឺ មួលគម្របកានដាក់ស្រាអង្ករ ដែលជាស្រាដ៏ពិបាកលេប។

នៅក្រោមពន្លឺពណ៌ក្រហមនៃចង្កៀងពាក់ជាប់ក្បាលរបស់ខ្ញុំ និងទោរទន់ទៅតាមឥទ្ធិពលនៃស្រារបស់គាត់ លោក អឺ ប្រាប់ខ្ញុំអំពីទំនាក់ទំនងរបស់ប្រជាជនព្រៅទៅនឹងទឹកដីនេះ ដែលគាត់បានរៀបរាប់ថា វាជាហេតុផលដែលគាត់ធ្វើឱ្យគាត់ក្លាយទៅជាឆ្មាំព្រៃ។

«ពួកយើងខ្វល់ខ្វាយអំពីវីរៈជ័យ ហើយពួកយើងការពារឧទ្យាននេះទៅតាមលទ្ធភាពរបស់ពួកយើង» គាត់បានប្រាប់។

អត្ថបទនេះត្រូវបានផលិត ដោយការចូលរួមរវាង The Japan Times និង Southeast Asia Globe ដោយមានការជ្រោមជ្រែងពី បណ្តាញស៊ើបអង្កេតព្រៃទឹកភ្លៀង នៃ មជ្ឈមណ្ឌល Pulitzer

The post ការអភិវឌ្ឍ «ចរីភាព» ៖ កម្ពុជាប្រឈមនឹងការបាត់បង់ជីវចម្រុះនៅឯព្រំដែន appeared first on Southeast Asia Globe.

បន្ទាប់ពីក្រុមហ៊ុន និងស្ថានទូតនានាបានសម្តែងការព្រួយបារម្ភអំពីការប្រើប្រាស់ថាមពលធ្យូងថ្ម រដ្ឋាភិបាលកម្ពុជាបានសន្យាថា ផែនការរបស់ខ្លួនក្នុងការអភិវឌ្ឍរោងចក្រថាមពលអគ្គិសនីដើរដោយធ្យូងថ្មថ្មី ចំនួន៣កន្លែង ជាគម្រោងចុងក្រោយបង្អស់។

ចាប់តាំងពីឆ្នាំ ២០២០ មក ផលិតកម្មថាមពលនៅទូទាំងពិភពលោក បានបន្តធ្វើពិពិធកម្មចាកឆ្ងាយពី ការប្រើថាមពលធ្យូងថ្ម ដោយសារតម្លៃលើទីផ្សារមានការប្រែប្រួល ដែលធ្វើឱ្យកក្រើកឧស្សាហកម្មនេះ និងតម្លៃប្រេងឡើងថ្លៃ។ ទោះបីជាគម្រោងធ្យូងថ្មទាំង៣ ហាក់តស៊ូបាន ទៅនឹងគោលជំហរកាត់បន្ថយជំនួយរបស់ចិន ទៅលើរោងចក្រធ្យូងថ្មនៅក្រៅប្រទេសក៏ដោយ ក៏គម្រោងរោងចក្រអគ្គីសនីដែលនៅខេត្តកោះកុង និងឧត្តរមានជ័យ ដែលកំពុងស្ថិតក្នុងដំណាក់កាលផ្សេងៗគ្នានោះ កំពុងញាំញីដោយការពន្យារពេលដំណើរការ។ ទន្ទឹមនឹងនោះ នៅខេត្តព្រះសីហនុ ប្រតិបត្តិការនៃរោងចក្រធ្យូងថ្មកំពុងមានសកម្មភាព ចំនួនពីររបស់កម្ពុជា មានទីតាំងនៅក្នុងស្រុកតែមួយ កំពុងបង្កក្តីបារម្ភដល់ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋក្នុងមូលដ្ឋាន។

ក្រុមការងារ Southeast Asia Globe រាយការណ៍ពីទីតាំងនីមួយៗនៃគម្រោង​ទាំងបីនេះ។ ជាមួយរូបភាពសរុប ប្រមាណ ៤ ៣០០សន្លឹក ក្រុមការងារ Globe ក៏បានសំភាសន៍ និងនិយាយជាមួយមនុស្ស៣៥នាក់ រាប់ពីប្រជាពលរដ្ឋពាក់ព័ន្ធ និងប្រជានេសាទដែលជួបការលំបាក ដល់កម្មកររោងចក្រ មន្ត្រីមូលដ្ឋាន និងអ្នកជំនាញផ្នែកថាមពល។ សូមអានអត្ថបទទី១ នៃបទយកការណ៍​ ការពឹងផ្អែកលើអគ្គីសនីធ្យូងថ្ម របស់ Globe ហើយបន្តមើលអត្ថបទទី២នេះ ដែលជាបទរាយការណ៍អមជាមួយរូបថត៖

ខេត្តឧត្តរមានជ័យ

នៅខេត្តឧត្តរមានជ័យ រោងចក្រអគ្គីសនីធ្យូងថ្ម ហាន សេង ដែលអាចផលិតថាមពលបាន ២៦៥មេហ្គាវ៉ាត់ ជាគម្រោងសម្រេចបានពាក់កណ្តាល បានហួសថ្ងៃកំណត់ការបិទបញ្ចប់ការសងសង់ តាំងពីឆ្នាំមុនមកម្លេះ។ ដោយសារតែជំនួយធ្លាក់ចុះ ម្ចាស់គម្រោងបានបង្វែរគម្រោងនេះ ឱ្យទៅក្រុមហ៊ុនម៉ៅការសាងសង់ថ្មីវិញ ដែលមិនត្រឹមតែបន្តការផលិតអគ្គីសនីដោយធ្យូងថ្មប៉ុណ្ណោះទេ ប៉ុន្តែក៏សម្លឹងឃើញ នូវការវិនិយោគបន្ថែម លើថាមពលសូឡានៅទីតាំងនេះផងដែរ។

«​ខ្ញុំ​ចង់​ឲ្យ​អ្នក​រាល់​គ្នា​ក្នុង​សហគមន៍​របស់​ខ្ញុំមានអគ្គិសនីប្រើប្រាស់ ប៉ុន្តែ​ខ្ញុំ​ក៏​មាន​ការ​ព្រួយ​បារម្ភ ​អំពី​ហានិភ័យ​សុខភាព​ដល់​កម្មករ និង​ប្រជាជន​ក្នុង​មូលដ្ឋាន​ផង​ដែរ»។ រូបភាព៖ Anton L. Delgado ផ្តល់ឱ្យ Southeast Asia Globe

ច្រេក ពេជ្យនេង

ខេត្ត​កោះ កុង​

នៅ​ខេត្ត​កោះកុង ក្រុមហ៊ុន​រ៉ូយ៉ាល់​គ្រុប​កម្ពុជា ​នៅ​មិន​ទាន់​បាន​បញ្ចប់​ការ​សាងសង់​រោងចក្រ​ថាមពល​អគ្គិសនី ៧០០ មេហ្គាវ៉ាត់ ​ដែល​គ្រោង​នឹង​ដំណើរការ​នៅ​ឆ្នាំ​នេះនៅឡើយ។ ទោះ​បី​ជាយ៉ាងណា ​អ្នក​ស្រុកដែលនៅតំបន់នោះពីមុន​ នៅ​តែ​បន្ត​តវ៉ាទៅលើសំណងមិនសមរម្យ ភាពអយុត្តិធម៌ និង​ការ​បង្រ្កាបមកលើប្រជាជន នាពេលពួកគាត់ត្រូវបានគេបណ្ដេញចេញ។

ខេត្ត ព្រះសីហនុ

នៅខេត្តព្រះសីហនុ គម្រោងសាងសង់រោងចក្រអគ្គីសនីធ្យូងថ្មថាមពល ៧០០មេហ្គាវ៉ាត់ របស់ក្រុមហ៊ុន Cambodia International Investment Development Group (CIIDG) មានទីតាំងស្ថិតនៅតាមបណ្តោយផ្លូវជាតិតែមួយ ជាមួយនឹងរោងចក្រអគ្គីសនីថាមពល ២៥០មេហ្គាវ៉ាត់ របស់ Cambodian Energy Limited (CEL) ដែលកំពុងដំណើរការស្របពេលគ្នា។ ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋរស់នៅស្រុកស្ទឹងហាវ ក៏បានបង្ហាញអំពីកង្វល់របស់ពួកគាត់ ជុំវិញនឹងផលប៉ះពាល់សុខភាព និងបរិស្ថាន ដែលបង្កឡើង ដោយរោងចក្រអគ្គីសនីធ្យូងថ្មផងដែរ។

រាយការណ៍បន្ថែមដោយ៖ Andrew Haffner និង ឡាយ សុផាន់ណា

អត្ថបទនេះទទួលបានការគាំទ្រពីជំនួយ News Reporting Pitch Initiative ពីមូលនិធិខុនរ៉ាតអាឌិនណៅអ៊ែរ​ Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung ប្រចាំកម្ពុជា

The post ការពឹងផ្អែកលើថាមពលធ្យូងថ្មរបស់កម្ពុជា៖  បីឆ្នាំក្រោយការប្រើប្រាស់ទ្វេរដងលើផូស៊ីលឥន្ធនះ appeared first on Southeast Asia Globe.

After companies and embassies expressed concerns about coal, the Cambodian government pledged that its plans to develop three new coal-fired power plants would be the Kingdom’s last foray into coal-fuelled electricity.

Since 2020, energy production globally has continued to diversify away from coal, as volatile markets rock the industry and spike fuel prices. Despite surviving China’s funding cuts to overseas coal, the planned power plants in Koh Kong and Oddar Meanchey are in varying stages of inertia, plagued by long delays. Meanwhile in Sihanoukville, the operations of two of Cambodia’s active coal complexes in the same district are raising concerns among local residents.

Southeast Asia Globe reported from each of these locations. While taking more than 4,300 images, Globe spoke to 35 people about the projects; from concerned residents and struggling fisherfolk to plant workers, local officials and energy experts. Read Part I of Globe’s Counting on Coal project and continue to see Part II, an accompanying photo story. Click or tap any image to expand for a slideshow.

Oddar Meanchey province

In Oddar Meanchey, the 265-megawatt, semi-built Han Seng project missed its deadline to go online last year. Falling revenue for the Chinese companies in charge pivoted the project to new contractors, who are sticking with coal but also investing in solar energy production at the same power plant.

“I want electricity to be accessible to everyone in my community, but I am also concerned about the health risks to workers and local people,” she said. Photo by Anton L. Delgado for Southeast Asia Globe.

Chrek Pechneng

Koh Kong province

In Koh Kong, the Royal Group of Cambodia conglomerate has yet to break ground on a 700-megawatt power plant scheduled to go online this year. Though former residents continue to allege unfair deals and heavy-handed evictions.

Sihanoukville province

In Sihanoukville, Cambodia International Investment Development Group’s (CIIDG) new 700-megawatt coal project shares a road with the already operational 250-megawatt Cambodian Energy Limited (CEL) power plant complex. Steung Hav residents fear for the effects these two coal sites could have on their health and environment.

Contributed reporting by Andrew Haffner and Sophanna Lay. A Khmer-language version of this story can be found here, with translations by Sophanna Lay and Nasa Dip.

This article was supported by a ‘News Reporting Pitch Initiative’ from the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung Foundation in Cambodia.

The post Counting on coal: A visual guide to Cambodia’s big bet on fossil fuel appeared first on Southeast Asia Globe.

Locals toasting to happy hour down the road from the front gate of the site complained of months of delayed pay for a relative working there as a security guard, adding there was no set date for operations to resume. There was little more information at the nearby Ou Svay commune hall.

“Maybe the plan changed to complete construction by 2025?” questioned Roeun Phearin, who was a commune consultant for the plant. “The construction is now paused and we don’t know the reason because it is the internal information of the company.”

Cambodia bet big on coal in 2020. The Kingdom doubled down on fossil fuel that year with plans to develop three coal power plants to meet rising electricity demand and, in the process, flip most of Cambodia’s power production from renewable sources to coal.

The move bucked the global push for clean energy and dismayed sustainability advocates, but the announced plants are now facing years of delay – raising questions about when, or if, the Kingdom’s last coal projects will go online.

When announced, all three plants were attached to China’s infrastructure-focused Belt and Road Initiative. But while China’s 2021 pledge to cut support for coal power abroad killed projects elsewhere in Southeast Asia, Cambodia’s plans appeared to survive the chopping block.

Southeast Asia Globe documented the slate of projects across three provinces, as well as Cambodia’s original coal-fired power plant. Of these three sites – which the Cambodian government pledged are its last coal plants – two are in varying stages of inertia. The third is finished and operational.

In deep-rural Oddar Meanchey province, the 265-megawatt, semi-built Han Seng project missed its deadline to go online last year. Falling revenue for the Chinese companies in charge pivoted the project to new contractors, who are sticking with coal – but also now investing in solar energy at the same plant.

Meanwhile, near the coast in Koh Kong province, the politically connected Royal Group conglomerate has yet to even break ground on a 700-megawatt power plant initially scheduled to go online this year. Former residents of the area allege unfair deals and heavy-handed evictions.

Finally, just across the Bay of Kampong Som in Sihanoukville province, Cambodia International Investment Development Group’s (CIIDG) new 700-megawatt coal project appears to be the only of the three to hit its expected completion targets.

Just down the same road from it in Steung Hav district is another plant, the 250-megawatt Cambodian Energy Limited (CEL) coal complex, which was the first of its kind in the Kingdom. Local residents fear for the effects these power plants could have on their health and environment.

“This is not good for us,” said fisherman Hang Dara, who left his job as an electrician at CEL because of health concerns. “But it will be much worse for the next generation in this province since they now have even more coal projects.”

Future of fossil fuels

While addressing the U.N. in 2021 and in order to stay “committed to harmony between man and nature”, President Xi Jinping pledged China would stop building coal-fired power projects abroad and step up support for renewables and low-carbon energy.

As a major financier and equipper of coal-fired power plants, China’s announcement was hailed as a major step toward achieving the Paris Agreement’s goal to limit global temperature rise by cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

The fate of 77 Chinese-backed coal projects around the world that were in varying stages of development before Xi’s pledge were still uncertain as of October, according to the Helsinki-based Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA).

Almost half of those power plants would be in Southeast Asia.

If these 37 projects in Indonesia, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and the Philippines are operated for their standard 25-to-30-year lifespans, CREA calculated they’d emit a total of nearly 4,230 million tons of carbon. That’s a little less than U.S. emissions for just last year, the centre said.

The three coal projects in Cambodia continued after China’s pledge, but 14 power plants were officially cancelled in Indonesia and Vietnam, according to CREA, nixing the production of 15.6 gigawatts of coal-fired energy.

“With the very dramatic drop of costs for clean energy and the increase of costs for coal, the Cambodian government has the chance to re-evaluate if those coal plants are the best way to meet Cambodia’s power needs,” said Lauri Myllyvirta, lead analyst at CREA.

Cambodia is opting into an especially precarious position, Myllyvirta said, as the country mostly depends on foreign imports of coal.

“The wild swings in coal prices and global coal markets in the past three years have vividly demonstrated the economic risks of depending on fossil fuels,” he said, adding that price fluctuations would only “become more volatile.”

In 2021, Cambodia imported approximately $222 million worth of coal, according to records from the U.N. Comtrade Database processed by Harvard Growth Lab’s Atlas of Economic Complexity.

The trade data underlines the role of Indonesia as Cambodia’s largest coal exporter for more than a decade. Nearly 85% of coal imported by Cambodia from 2012 to 2021 came from Indonesia.

Zulfikar Yurnaidi, a senior officer at the ASEAN Centre for Energy in Jakarta, agreed with Myllyvirta that the future of coal is increasingly uncertain. Yurnaidi said the international “allergy towards coal” continues to be an unaddressed ASEAN issue.

“We cannot wish coal and fossil fuels gone right away,” Yurnaidi said. “Support from foreign financial institutions is still required. Maybe not to install a dirty power plant, but to help us reach the end goal of reducing emissions by upgrading fossil fuels and investing in renewable energy.”

As coal funding runs dry, international climate finance has risen in Southeast Asia with millions of dollars going into the ‘just energy’ transitions in Vietnam and Indonesia. After the third Belt and Road Forum in mid-October, Cambodia’s Prime Minister Hun Manet announced Chinese state-owned power companies had offered the Kingdom more than $600 million for renewable energy projects.

Despite foreign funding, Yurnaidi said ASEAN’s emphasis on economic growth will continue to require coal while bloc member-states shift to renewable energy sources.

“ASEAN is a very huge ship with hundreds of millions of people and trillions in GDP,” Yurnaidi said. “With the energy transition, we know this ship needs to take a turn. But we cannot just make a sudden roundabout because then everyone will fall into the sea.”

Counting on coal

Cambodia’s bet on coal seemed to embody that idea.

In the aftermath of Covid-19, Cambodia’s Power Development Master Plan charts the way for the country’s energy expansion from 2022 to 2040 and predicts a steady rise in national demand for energy.

The first five years of every “energy scenario” within the plan prioritises the development of Cambodia’s proposed roster of three new coal sites.

At a meeting before the 26th U.N. Climate Change Conference in 2021, also known as COP26, Cambodia’s Minister of Mines and Energy Suy Sem said the country would no longer approve additional coal projects.

The years of construction delays facing two of the power plants have some experts wary of potential energy shortages. Chea Sophorn, an energy project manager who specialises in renewable developments, said shortages would depend on how quickly the Kingdom’s post-Covid economy, and thus energy demand, recovers.

But with international investors turning away from fossil fuels, Sophorn emphasised that securing support to jump-start the two stalled projects could be difficult.

“What type of investor will still be able to finance stranded assets like this?” questioned Sophorn, explaining that without China there are few to no places for these projects to turn.

Cheap Sour, an official with the Ministry of Mines and Energy, declined to comment and referred to the ministry spokesman, Heng Kunleang, who left Globe’s text and voice messages on read. Eung Dipola, the director-general of the ministry’s Department of Minerals, was unavailable for comment.

Construction in Cambodia

In Oddar Meanchey, financial difficulties have already pushed the companies backing the $370 million Han Seng power plant to pivot.

The state-owned Guodian Kangneng Technology Stock Co. suffered a massive decrease in its net profit for shareholders in the first half of last year and brought in a new contractor, Huazi International, in September. 

The plan to install 265 megawatts of coal-fired power hasn’t changed – but Huazi has since announced intentions to add 200 megawatts of solar capacity to the site. This is the first time any other type of energy production has been associated with the struggling Han Seng power plant.

Just two kilometres from the semi-constructed project site, the Yun Khean coal mine, which would supposedly one day supply the plant, is operating as usual.

Boy Troch, who lives a stone’s throw away from the mine’s slag heaps, believes mining operations contaminated the groundwater beneath his farm, damaging crops and sickening wildlife.

“There are a lot of lands affected by the mine, but village and commune chiefs do not care,” Troch said, pointing at shifting heaps of coal-streaked earth across the road from his land.

With his grandchildren by his side, Troch said he feared coal mining would proliferate in his district if the power plant went online.

“We are afraid to protest because our voice isn’t heard,” Troch said. “We are ordinary people. We are more afraid that they will evict us from this land.”

In Koh Kong, stories from evicted residents may validate these fears.

Royal Group, one of the largest investment conglomerates in Cambodia with direct ties to former Prime Minister Hun Sen, received a nearly 170-hectare land concession in 2020 within Botum Sakor National Park for the coal power plant.

People living on the site without land titles complained of rough, uncompensated evictions. Former resident Keo Khorn’s home was torn down in 2021 by a government task force. With 37 evictees, he petitioned for reparations.

“We all came together to complain about the company,” Khorn said. “Everyone heard us, the provincial ministries and the national ministries. But no one did anything.”

The project site is currently vacant, but workers are clearing forests around the location. These areas, also within the national park, were given to Royal Group in a second, nearly 10,000-hectare land concession this year.

Thomas Pianka, with Royal Group’s energy division, flatly refused to speak with Globe reporters.

“No, I don’t need to talk to you,” he said before hanging up a call.

Where coal plants are actually operating, residents in Sihanoukville province have different worries. 

A plant security guard for the older Cambodia Energy Limited site said other workers have told him about health concerns, but said the company has never mentioned any risks.

The guard’s deputy village chief, Ly Socheat, said she regularly fields complaints about the smell from the power plant. Socheat said many of the families in her village have stopped collecting rainwater in fear of contamination from the coal.

While Socheat attended several meetings about potential employment opportunities at the power plant, she has also never been informed of any potential health impacts.

Residents complained of respiratory issues and headaches. But coal-fired power plants have also been linked to cancer – a 2019 study estimated 1.37 million cases of lung cancer around the world will be linked to such plants by 2025.

In the waters just off the coast, fisherman Hang Dara recounted why he left his job as an electrician at CEL to instead cast for crabs by the power plant. He believed the plant’s discharged water was heating the bay and harming the environment.

“I was very worried about my health,” said Dara, who explained he had severe headaches and chronic coughs while working at the power station. “But now I am very worried about the health of the fish.”

As Dara stood by the bow, his fishing partner Loy Chaeum drove from the stern. As they passed coal loading docks supplying the two power plants, Chaeum excitedly pointed out a vulnerable Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin surfacing for air.

“I don’t see many dolphins now, they don’t like the coal. Like us, they must go farther and farther away to survive,” said Chaeum, who explained he motored across the bay every morning in search of a better catch.

That brings him closer to Koh Kong, where one day there may be another coal-fired power plant.

“If they build it, there will be nowhere for them or us to go,” he said, turning back to land, having lost sight of the dolphin.

Contributed reporting by Andrew Haffner and Sophanna Lay. A Khmer-language version of this story can be found here, with translations by Sophanna Lay and Nasa Dip.

This article was supported by a ‘News Reporting Pitch Initiative’ from the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung Foundation in Cambodia.

The post Counting on coal: Cambodia’s fossil fuel push flounders with delays appeared first on Southeast Asia Globe.

These hurdles and more have come to light amidst a would-be financing boom from wealthier nations to help Vietnam and Indonesia phase out carbon fuels and cut emissions.

The two countries are the newest beneficiaries for the Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP), one of the largest such funding programmes to date. Backed by a consortium of national governments, financial institutions and development agencies from more developed economies, JETP promises to inject $30 billion into the development of renewable energy infrastructure in Vietnam and Indonesia.

Originally announced in 2022, JETP now burgeons as one of the shinier climate initiatives in the region. But observers across Southeast Asia are increasingly questioning how the financing body will carry out the ambitious programme. While some flag potential issues with transparency and governance of the financing, others have pointed to the receiving states’ often-conflicted human rights and environmental records.

“We don’t have all the details on JETP implementation yet,” said Gregory Poling, a senior fellow for the Southeast Asia Program at the Washington think-tank Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). “The funding mechanisms and other details remain unclear and will be negotiated with each country.”

As established by the financing consortium, known as the International Partners Group (IPG), both Vietnam and Indonesia are required to set up a Secretariat organisation to manage the programme’s funds.

This would mark the JETP initiative’s first foray into Southeast Asia – to date, the programme has only been implemented in South Africa, with much less in total financing.

Leaked details from the South African arrangement revealed in 2022 that the government and its state-owned utility would take on billions of dollars in debt as 97% of the funds were structured as loans.

This revelation has made some analysts speculate that the funding for the JETP arrangements in Vietnam and Indonesia could follow suit. As those negotiations continue, both donors and benefactors of the initiative are now tasked with charting a massive technological and social transition while also taking pains not to stifle emerging economies. The road ahead may present a blueprint for the rest of the world to follow – or a cautionary tale of the modern era.

“The transition to a net zero global economy will not be easy, equally distributed, or necessarily clean, and donors must help affected populations if they expect developing nations to buy into this vision,” said Poling.

Transparency concerns

Funds from the JETP are expected to be channelled through grants, loans or investments.

Vietnam is still in the process of establishing its Secretariat entity to handle JETP funding. Indonesia has already created its own oversight group, but the details of expected funding remain mostly undisclosed.

The Indonesian Secretariat is a coordinating body hosted by the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources and is supported by the Asian Development Bank. This Secretariat is described as a central hub for stakeholders and is tasked with managing implementation and facilitating communication to support the country’s transition goals.

On top of the shrouded details of the programme, there are signs that investors are turning away from clean energy technologies in Southeast Asia.

A recent report from the consulting firm Bain and Company highlighted a decrease in green investment in the region to $5.2 billion in 2022, about 50% less than the prior year.

Though Indonesia, along with Singapore, accounts for the majority of this investment, the total rate is far below the necessary cumulative investment of an estimated $1.5 trillion needed for the region to achieve its collective climate targets by 2030.

Out of this massive lump sum, an expected $1.1 trillion is specifically needed for the transition to clean and efficient energy.

Vietnam’s impasse

In Vietnam, the leap to decarbonisation seems even more arduous as the country is often jolted by the brunt of the developing climate crisis.

As a heat wave swept across the region last month, record-breaking temperatures as high as 44.1 degrees Celsius stagnated in the country’s northern districts. Hanoi and other local municipalities reacted by issuing energy conservation decrees to soften the load on power grids.

At the same time, Vietnam’s energy mix is still mostly coal-powered. The country is heavily reliant on coal to generate electricity and ranks among the world’s top-20 coal producers.

Nevertheless, Vietnam aims to be “net-zero” for carbon emissions by 2050 with plans to generate two-thirds of its electricity with renewable sources in 2045.

With the majority of the coal-fired power plants under state ownership, Vietnam’s centralised economy places the government as the primary driver of the energy transition. But there are concerns regarding officials’ commitment towards the county’s ambitious decarbonisation goals.

Vietnam’s 2045 goal to be predominantly powered by renewables closely aligns with its aspirational timeline for becoming a high-income country.

That broader goal will require plentiful energy, for which the Vietnamese government has been investigating liquified natural gas (LNG), a cost-effective bridge to renewables often touted as the ‘cleanest’ of fossil fuels. Along with the maturation of as-yet unproven technologies such as carbon capture and green hydrogen, Vietnam’s energy transition may not be as fast as the JETP financing body would like to see.

“I think the recognition that gas must be a part of the region’s energy mix for the medium term, and that a dogmatic commitment to only fund renewables is self-defeating, is widely held among energy analysts and experts, even if some activists and donor country officials are slow to admit it,” said Poling.

By suppressing dissent, the authorities can maintain a tight grip on the narrative

Emile Palamy Pradichit

Natural gas isn’t the only thing catching heat in Vietnam’s participation in JETP. The government’s prolonged crackdown on civil society has also bred scepticism of their climate agenda as well as threats to their international aid.

Last month, police arrested Hoang Thi Minh Hong, former CEO of the environmentally focused civil society organisation CHANGE VN, on tax evasion charges.

Human rights experts believe Hoang – an activist seen by some as instrumental in bringing programmes such as the JETP to Vietnam – was arrested on trumped-up charges.

Human rights groups are now urging world leaders to pressure Vietnam on its repression of civil society before shelling out billions of dollars in assistance from the JETP.

“It is essential to scrutinise whether this assistance is being used to truly advance sustainable development or merely as a means to enhance the government’s image on the global stage,” said Emile Palamy Pradichit, founder and director of Manushya Foundation and an international human rights lawyer. “By suppressing dissent, the authorities can maintain a tight grip on the narrative and avoid scrutiny or accountability for potential shortcomings in their climate initiatives.”

The contradiction of the Vietnamese government receiving aid for climate initiatives while simultaneously suppressing climate activists presents a “dissonance between rhetoric and action,” said Pradichit.

Indonesia’s push-and-pull with coal

Meanwhile, Indonesia is facing its own potential domestic hurdles – in part due to the extractive industry in vast nickel reserves, a dual-edged solution to its green energy transition.

Resource-rich Indonesia also has another mineral issue. It’s the world’s largest exporter of coal for electricity and relies on the fuel for about 60% of its own electricity. Despite the archipelagic state’s future net-zero climate goals, critics have called its commitments into question due to a continuation of coal-friendly policies.

These include exemptions for coal plants already in the works or attached to “nationally strategic projects”, such as a so-called “green industrial park” that would span more than 40,000 acres on Indonesia’s side of the Borneo island.

The park is being built with the hope of becoming a hub for green manufacturing by tapping into the country’s nickel supplies. The Indonesian government is actively seeking partnerships with CATL, a Chinese battery manufacturer, as well as Tesla to establish electric vehicle battery production in the country.

The vision for this industrial park is to ultimately rely on solar power and hydropower sourced from a nearby river to meet its energy needs. However, due to a lack of hydro- and solar power infrastructure, the country’s clean transition remains stalled and reliant on coal.

Putra Adhiguna, a research lead at the U.S.-based Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA), said Indonesia’s domestic coal industry has “realised that it will probably reach peak coal capacity within the next few years.”

“With the JETP, I think we are in a critical period,” said Adhiguna

This has left the state utility, Perusahaan Listrik Negara (PLN), looking to secure a long-term domestic coal market by going to the extent of converting some of the coal to become gases or methanol, said Adhiguna. These actions by the state-utility are leaving partners in the JETP with concerns about the vitality of the transition.

“I think finding the middle ground between the state utility as the main actor, the PLN and the donor group will be the most challenging part,” Adhiguna said. “Of course, each has its perspective about what needs to be prioritised.”

Balancing such interests will likely be imperative for the success of arrangements such as the JETP and other ambitious climate finance initiatives. As such measures take steps from the planning stage into practical implementation, donors and recipient states alike will need to untangle a hefty knot of societal issues.

“Funding for training and upskilling needs to be a major effort of donor countries and local governments,” said Poling. “So do efforts to mitigate environmental and social damage caused by emerging ‘green’ technologies, such as the destructive effects of mining and processing those minerals currently required for battery production.”

The post A $30 billion pledge for Vietnam and Indonesia shows pitfalls of climate finance appeared first on Southeast Asia Globe.

In his new book, Carbon Colonialism: How Rich Countries Export Climate Breakdown, University of London lecturer Laurie Parsons dives into how this same colonial paradigm shapes the global economy and the lives of millions.

Following 15 years of investigating where Cambodia fits into global supply chains for garments and other manufactured goods, Parsons is now shedding light on some of the most influential factors driving the worsening climate crisis. 

Carbon Colonialism calls into question the myth of global prosperity and carbon reduction promised by laissez-faire capitalism. 

Parsons spoke with Southeast Asia Globe about the motivation behind his book, the steps needed to reverse course and the “green shoots” of hope that are keeping him optimistic. 

What led to the inception of this book?
This book brings together a lot of insights. Most of my career has been devoted to trying to make sense of all these different aspects of environmental pressures pushed by the global economy and explain how they manifest in Cambodia.

I’ve worked in almost every Cambodian province, at least 23 out of the 25, to try to make sense of different kinds of livelihoods and try to narrate the connection to the global systems wherein Cambodia sits.

Can you explain what you meant when writing this line: “[The] ability to sweep the uncomfortable, the unpalatable, the dirty, and the dangerous under the murky carpet of global production was always a feature of colonialism”?
This comes down to the great myth of colonialism. What kept the whole enterprise of colonialism going for hundreds of years was this idea of “terra nullius,” which means “empty lands” or “nobody’s lands.” That was the guiding lighthouse of colonialism. The idea it is fine to do whatever you want in these areas because anything colonists bring there is better than what is there.

That same essential logic purveys the way economic development happens. That idea that the expansion of the global economy into these regions must be better than the local economy is fundamental to the way our global economy behaves in the Global South.

For example, there is a lot less scrutiny around what happens when a new garment industry starts up in a country like Cambodia, because it is seen generally as a good thing. Nations in the Global North, like the U.K., believe that however we expand our global economy into those areas, is better than nothing.

What are the tangible impacts of ‘terra nullius’ continuing in countries, like Cambodia, which are on the receiving end of ‘carbon colonialism’?
It creates a massive incentive for all of the worst, dirtiest and cheapest elements of production to happen away from the regulation. This is a fundamental problem we have had in our global economy and society recently. We have certain areas of the world that are really heavily environmentally regulated, the rich parts. Then other parts of the world which are much more loosely regulated, the poor parts.

All of the worst parts of production get moved to the poorer, less regulated parts. This doesn’t necessarily happen because someone wants to do this evil thing, it is just what happens with incentives. If you have uneven regulation, and no legislative framework to stop that from happening, then the worst parts are going to move to where the regulation doesn’t reach. That is a key thing we see in Cambodia.

This relates to the idea of the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ approach to long and complex supply chains” that you wrote about in your book. Can that be changed?
Up to this point, there has been relatively little you can do. But that is just beginning to change. The positive thing is that we are beginning to finally see the first ‘green shoots’ of the mindset of global production beginning to emerge.

This year, the new Supply Chain Law in Germany comes into force. This will give anyone affected environmentally or by labour rights abuses by a company trading in Germany, the right to challenge that company in a German court. This is an absolute game-changer for the way we think about international production. Again, this is just a tiny green shoot.

We need to recognise the fact that wealthy countries aren’t wealthy because of what happens within their borders but because they are able to exploit this global system of production.

What paved the way for us to get to this point?
In the last 50 years, economies have outgrown politics. In developed countries, economies were contained within borders and both economy and politics matched each other. If the economy was doing something that people didn’t like, in theory, there was a chance to have some power over that.

But in the rich world now – in Europe, the U.K. and the U.S. – that has really changed. Our economy has gone global and our politics have stayed national. Huge multinational companies are developing their current power to essentially do whatever they want without any legislative pullback and that is a massive problem.

Are climate risks, in terms of natural disasters, an equaliser between the countries both perpetuating ‘carbon colonialism’ and experiencing it?
You can’t take money out of the equation when it comes to climate risk.

There is a distinction between a natural hazard, like strong winds or rising sea levels or heavy rain, and the disaster that results from that. Hazards only become disasters when they meet poverty and vulnerability.

When thinking about climate risk, you can not take out the global economy from the equation because that is what distributes the landscape of vulnerability and poverty.

Despite the “green shoots” emerging, how would you respond to a pessimistic reader?
Whether you take an optimistic or pessimistic viewpoint over the problems we face in our global environment comes down to whether you think it is possible for people to take power.

Positivity is difficult. But the first step is the hardest, which is overcoming the invisibility and the disconnectedness of everything – getting beyond the simplistic and misleading ways we conceptualise the supply chain.

If you’re not aware of the environmental context in which you live then you are essentially in a similar position to a house cat. As in, you believe in your independence and capacity to understand your own environment. But actually you are dependent on a system you are not aware of. Being aware of this kind of underlying logic to our global economy is crucial to any aspect of living our lives.

Don’t be a house cat.

The post New book unveils ‘Carbon Colonialism’ in Southeast Asia appeared first on Southeast Asia Globe.

Just a few weeks after the world gathered in Egypt to wrestle with climate action at the UN Climate Conference (COP27), governments convened in Canada to negotiate a new global deal for nature. Central to both was a just energy transition that meets climate and energy goals while minimising the impact on people and nature. And at the heart of this transition was hydropower.  

In a region pummeled by the impacts of climate change, where it is necessary to scale up adaptation while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions and halting nature loss, energy decisions made now matter more than ever. Across Southeast Asia, the renewable default option has always been hydropower – long regarded as a ‘green’ and stable source of electricity to support regional development and fast-growing economies. But its costs and increasing vulnerability mean it is high time to re-evaluate the trade-offs and chart a new, more sustainable energy course.

At COP27 many were lobbying to fund a doubling of hydropower generation by 2050 to help meet the ‘Net Zero’ goal in an effort to combat climate change. This includes a wave of new projects in Southeast Asia, despite the fact that a massive increase in hydropower would actually undermine efforts to achieve climate and energy goals and reverse nature loss. Planned hydropower would fragment 260,000 kilometres of free flowing rivers, including those that support the greatest diversity of species and are of greatest value to people. They would also produce less than 2% of the renewable energy needed by 2050 to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees. The impacts of drought and floods on hydropower energy generation and the time it takes to build hydropower plants hampers the speed of the global energy transition and could mean we fail to meet energy demands quickly enough.

The increased frequency of climate induced shocks, combined with the environmental and societal impacts of high impact hydropower and other unsustainable development, will leave the region more vulnerable to the worsening impacts of climate change. Increasing alterations in rainfall and river flows will also diminish the capacity of hydropower dams to deliver energy security. 

Accelerating climate change is causing not only more extreme but also more frequent floods and droughts, making hydropower in the Greater Mekong region increasingly risky and unreliable. Recent droughts slashed hydropower generation in China, where the world’s largest hydropower plant almost ground to a halt last August following in the footsteps of Brazil, another massive producer of hydropower, that saw its dams drain in the summer of 2021 and resorted back to oil and gas as a stop-gap solution. Following droughts in the US and Europe this summer, numerous countries saw their hydropower production shrink. Continuing to rely primarily on hydropower could result in a renewed reliance on fossil fuels when hydropower production is low or halted, and jeopardise energy security, economic growth and development. 

A recent WWF study warns that 61% of hydropower dams worldwide will be in river basins with high to extreme risk of water scarcity, floods, or both, by 2050. In Southeast Asia, we face a high degree of cumulative climate-related risks, including excessive rainfall, increased intensity of monsoons and associated flooding. Trends in recent decades show increases in rainfall in the wet season and decreases in the dry season. Yet these major changes are still not being factored into decisions about what renewables to build and where.

Hundreds of new hydropower projects are planned in the Lower Mekong Basin to meet surging demands for power without fuelling climate change. These out-dated plans must be reassessed in light of the increasing risks to hydropower plants, the plunging price of alternative renewables, like wind and solar, and growing awareness of the impacts of hydropower dams on people and nature – and, particularly, the resilience of the Mekong delta. 

Home to 20 million people, the delta sustains thriving communities and economies, incredibly productive fisheries, and a rice bowl that feeds 245 million people across the world. But it is sinking and shrinking, mostly due to loss of sand and mud from the river trapped by hydropower dams upstream. Additional dams will cumulatively impact the Mekong’s natural flow of sediment, stripping the river system of the material that maintains the delta and keeps it above the waves. 

This loss of sediment and nutrients will reduce the fertility of floodplain fields and the capacity of mangrove forests to survive and thrive – undermining one of the delta’s strongest natural defences against storms.​​ More dams will also block fish migration routes, threatening freshwater and coastal fisheries that provide food and livelihoods for millions.

New high impact hydropower in the Mekong basin will only accelerate the loss of biodiversity. Along with the climate crisis, the world is facing a worsening nature crisis, particularly in the world’s rivers, lakes and wetlands. Freshwater species populations have crashed by 83% on average since 1970 – far faster than marine or terrestrial species. One of the key factors behind this fall is the fragmentation of free flowing rivers – and a major cause of fragmentation is poorly planned hydropower development.

WWF’s analysis found that up to 80% of all planned hydropower dams are in areas with high or very high risk to freshwater biodiversity, such as the Amazon, Irrawaddy, rivers across the Balkans, and the Mekong.

The cost of these trade-offs is too high, especially as the price of alternative renewable sources has fallen so dramatically, with solar and wind generation often boasting lower costs per/kWh than hydropower, and without the considerable social and environmental impacts. They are also quicker to develop. 

Plunging prices of solar and wind generation, combined with battery technology and alongside comprehensive planning tools for site selection can help build regional power grids that are low carbon, low-cost, low carbon and low conflict (LowCx3) solutions. For the first time in history, we can meet our regional – and global – climate and energy targets without sacrificing our remaining free-flowing rivers and the overall health of our river systems. Plans must be reassessed to develop the right renewables in the right places, so as to maintain energy security, support economic growth, halt loss of biodiversity, and mitigate and adapt to climate change. 

There is still a role for hydropower. Existing dams and plants will be needed to produce power and stabilise energy grids. But new hydropower projects must be more rigorously assessed and cancelled if their negative impact is too great. New projects should only be approved if they are part of an overall sustainable energy mix, planned and sited to minimise impact. There is also significant potential to increase energy generation from existing hydropower and non-hydropower dams through refurbishment and retrofitting.

Building more high impact hydropower dams in the Mekong basin is a classic example of prioritising mitigation over adaptation. Reducing emissions should not be at the expense of resilience. It is not enough that we shift from high- to low-carbon energy sources. We must ensure a just energy transition that not only minimises the transition’s negative impacts on nature and people, but instead ensures they benefit. 

Climate change is already here, bringing more extreme flooding and droughts. The region needs to urgently focus on adaptation as much as mitigation. Southeast Asia can opt for an alternative path, which mitigates climate change while strengthening adaptation. By choosing to invest in the right renewables in the right places and by scaling up funding for LowCx3 solutions, we can ensure energy security and a thriving future for nature and all people that depend on rivers.

Lan Mercado is WWF’s Regional Director for Asia Pacific.

The post Climate change cements hydropower as risky renewable appeared first on Southeast Asia Globe.

But the dam came at a high cost.

The project caused major environmental and ecological impacts such as the inundation of 69,640 hectares of terrestrial habitat which harmed the health of plant and animal species. It also negatively impacted indigenous communities as they were pushed off their land forcing them into poverty.

Many say this case reflects the lived realities that local communities face across every corner of Southeast Asia when dealing with such massive development and energy projects. These projects continue to harm marginalised social groups and other vulnerable populations across the region and often have severe repercussions on the environment.

But it is a difficult problem to address. According to the United Nations, the world’s population will reach 9.7 billion by 2050, with almost two-thirds living in urban areas. With this increased population, there will inevitably be a higher demand for energy. But fossil fuels may not be enough to meet this demand as the energy source is finite in nature.

Yet there is an increased dependency on fossil fuels, and this will exacerbate environmental degradation, climate researchers say. As fossil fuel combustion releases greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere, decades of scientific research has shown that these emissions contribute to global warming. The reality is if we do not reduce the amounts of carbon dioxide released by burning fossil fuels, we will see a rapid rise in global temperatures and this could have wide reaching ramifications for Southeast Asia.

Southeast Asian governments have shown some commitment on transforming the region from using fossil fuels to renewable sources of energy to advance climate action at a faster rate. However, as multinational corporations expand energy projects across the region, local indigenous communities are being driven out.

Given this reality, it’s imperative that we choose safer and less environmentally damaging sources of energy as we move forward as a civilisation. It’s also important that we ensure equal and equitable access to clean energy for all sectors of society. The question remains whether we have considered the impacts of energy transition on vulnerable groups in our societies.

As in the case of the Bakun Dam, governments and multimillion dollar corporations often obtain land and renewable energy resources without consulting local communities. There is a lack of participatory planning from stakeholders to chart a course of action to tackle environmental issues while also maintaining society’s ecological needs. This inevitably leads to environmental injustice, whereby the benefits of the environment only reach a privileged few while the negative environmental and economic externalities affect vulnerable communities.

The Bakun Dam displaced many indigenous communities in Sarawak as the dam drowned their rainforests and released billions of tons of methane into water reservoirs that the communities relied on to survive.

To address this problem, the Sarawak local government provided resettlement opportunities at a palm plantation site. However, the Long Lawen community claimed they would not be able to resettle there as the location had limited usage for cultivation due to restrictions on land and agriculture implemented by the local government.

Instead, the group relocated to a different area and built their own micro-hydropower dam to sustain themselves. Despite their efforts, the dam was only able to produce between four and six kilowatts each day, an amount too small to power their homes properly. The community then campaigned that some of the power from the mega dam be funnelled into their community as well. But international indigenous rights laws fail to mainstream inclusivity in the country’s decision-making process, further highlighting the deeply embedded cultural politics of the energy planning process in the region.

Policies and strategies must be explored beyond technocratic solutions to include grassroots empowerment to ensure that vulnerable groups are not systematically impacted. Although technocratic solutions allow policymakers to use scientific and technical expertise to make important decisions and create changes, it is crucial that local communities be given the same decision-making power to support transformative resilience on the ground.

In many cases, ‘sustainable’ programs often place a huge burden on communities who can least afford it. The greatest irony is that these programs reward those who consume the most energy by giving them unlimited access to benefits and incentives. This consequently gives rise to inequitable distribution of energy across all incomes and demographics.

The basic tenets of environmental justice is that communities receive equal protection of their land , housing, health, education, and employment. And environmental justice and human rights are deeply connected. Understanding institutional biases and seeking collaboration with stakeholders to change the system is pertinent to achieving fair environmental justice and a better human rights landscape.

The process of mobilising diversified knowledge is vital in attaining environmental equality and equity. We can learn from indigenous communities like those in Sarawak who have lived in harmony with nature for centuries.

Through their knowledge of land-based stewardship, we can develop practical ways to protect and restore carbon-rich, biodiverse forests and other ecosystems essential to fight climate change and species collapse.

Green activism has grown to a remarkable scale in the region. And as environmental justice is firmly embedded in the wider political, social, and economic dynamics of Southeast Asia, it is necessary to ensure that it is truly achieved.

Yet environmental justice is no trivial matter. We need a paradigm shift for environmental consciousness that encompasses equal human protection, one where the people of this earth and the planet can thrive together.

Qayyimah Al-Zelzy is a Volunteer Research Associate at the Global Awareness & Impact Alliance (GAIA) Brunei.

The post Sustainable energy projects are driving out Southeast Asia’s indigenous populations appeared first on Southeast Asia Globe.