Dams and transnational advocacy: Political opportunities in transnational collective action

Possible arguments to explain the gradual decline in big dam development and its site transferring from developed to developing countries include technical, economic, and political factors. This study focuses on the political argument---the rise of transnational anti-dam advocacy and its impact on state policy-making. Under what conditions does transnational anti-dam advocacy matter? Under what conditions does transnational advocacy change state dam policies (delay, scale down, or cancel)?;It examines the role of transnational anti-dam actors in big dam building in a comparative context in Asia. Applying the social movement theory of political opportunity structure (POS) and using the qualitative case-study method, the study provides both within-case and cross-case analyses. Within-case analysis is utilized to explain the changing dynamics of big dam building in China (Three Gorges Dam and proposed Nu/Salween River dam projects), and to a lesser extent, Sardar Sarovar Project in India and Nam Theun 2 Dam in Laos. Different domestic and international POS (DPOS and IPOS) impact the strategies and outcomes of anti-dam advocacies in these countries. The degree of openness of the POS directly affects the capacity of transnational efforts in influencing state dam policies. The degree of openness or closure is measured by specific laws, institutions, discourse, or elite allies (or the absence of these) for the participation of non-state actors on big dam issues at a particular moment. This degree of openness is relative, varying over time, across countries and regions.;This study finds that the impact of transnational anti-dam activism is most effective when both DPOS and IPOS are relatively open. Transnational anti-dam advocacy is least effective in influencing state dam policies when both DPOS and IPOS are relatively closed. Under a relatively open DPOS and closed IPOS, transnational anti-dam advocacy is more likely to successfully change state dam policies and even facilitate the opening of relatively closed IPOS. In contrast, under a relatively closed DPOS and open IPOS, transnational anti-dam advocacy can hardly exist. Without the domestic anti-dam pressure from below, international anti-dam efforts from above are less likely to affect state dam policies or open up closed DPOS.