Post‐dam construction and livelihood revitalization of affected communities at Ghana's Bui dam

Abstract

AbstractEvidence around dam building worldwide has revealed that the impacts of dam projects can make the livelihoods of the project‐affected people worse off several years after the dam is commissioned. Despite six decades of Ghana's dam building experience, there is paucity of information on the impact of new programs implemented during post‐dam construction on local livelihoods. This study filled in the gap by examining whether the new livelihood enhancement programs introduced by the Bui Power Authority (BPA) at the Bui dam have revitalized local livelihood activities that had been disrupted by the dam construction and resettlement processes. Explorative qualitative data were collected through key informant interviews (KIIs), focus group discussions (FGDs), and field observation in the seven resettled communities at Bui and Jama Resettlement Townships and in three non‐resettled communities at the Bui dam area, including the host community. Purposive sampling was used to select a total of 130 participants for the KIIs and FGDs. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis approach. Results showed that, in general, the new livelihood support programs in the resettled communities such as cage aquaculture production, weaving, and pottery have positively impacted the socioeconomic livelihood activities of the resettlers in recent years compared to the period soon after resettlement. However, low crop yields due to poor soil fertility and small size of farmlands, lack of appropriate equipment to fish on the open water, and land compensation delays were reported to be undermining the livelihood revitalization efforts of the BPA. For effective revitalization of socioeconomic livelihood activities, the new programs should be more inclusive to cover the elderly, the host community, and possibly the neighboring communities instead of its current tilt toward the youth and the resettled communities. The findings showed the persistent impacts of dams on local population and highlighted how livelihood programs could revitalize local socioeconomic livelihood activities. The study contributed to addressing the conceptual question on whether it is possible for livelihood activities of project‐affected people to be reconstructed several years after disruption.