Geographical comparison of dam removal projects: France vs USA

Project design, acceptability and implementation: A comparative geographical approach to hydropower dam removal projects on both sides of the Atlantic

Coordinator(s)

Laurent Lespez and Marie-Anne Germaine

Scientific context

The experience acquired as part of the socio-geographical aspect of the programme to monitor the removal of the Selune dams and the difficulties encountered in ensuring the social acceptability and political construction of the project demonstrate the need to deepen this study and to place it in an international context in order to measure its scope. It is across the Atlantic that the most active dam removal policy is being pursued, and that structures over 10 metres high are being dismantled. A great deal of research has been carried out on the rivers of the West Coast of the United States in connection with the dismantling of very large structures, some of which have developed landscape and socio-economic aspects, as in the case of the Elwha River in the state of Washington.

On the other hand, little work has been done on the socio-economic issues raised by the successful operations developed on the American East Coast. Yet, the catchment areas there have hydro-geomorphological characteristics (rivers of moderate energy) and geographical features (ancient agricultural development, population density, proximity of major urban centres, etc.) that are much closer to those of the rivers of north-west France.

Subject(s) of study

This project looks at the implementation of dam removal operations, how they are carried out and the interplay of players involved, by comparing the case of the Selune in France with other similar cases in the United States.

Objectives

The project is based on the completion of a geography thesis to carry out a comparative study of the current operation on the river Selune with cases of transverse structure removal identified on the east coast of the United States in the states of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Connecticut and Maine. These include:

• To compare the implementation of these different projects by examining their genesis, the socio-economic, political and landscaping context in which they developed, and the objectives they pursued.
• To identify the players involved in these projects, including the promoters, financiers, local authorities and users.
• To look at the landscape transformations and the specific treatments planned or carried out as part of the projects studied, such as the design of the channel and the treatment of the riverbank, the installation of facilities for users (paths, recreational facilities, reception of the public, etc.) and/or the introduction of communication about the new restored site (ecological enhancement, media coverage).

Methods

Several methods are used:

• Collection and analysis of studies and documents accompanying the implementation of dam removal projects, with the support of content analysis tools.
• Interviews and questionnaires.

Laboratories involved

• LGP – Physical Geography Laboratory, CNRS/Université de Paris Est-Créteil
• LAVUE – Architecture, Town Planning and Environment Laboratory, Mozaïque Laboratory, CNRS/Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense