Salient technical issues for resolving hydropower conflicts involving instream flow

We studied the role of technical clarity in successful multi-party negotiations. Our investigations involved in-depth interviews with individuals who were the principal participants in six consultations conducted under the auspices of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) hydroelectric power project licensing process in the United States. We employed a Most Similar Systems research design by selected the six most similar cases from 26 that were nominated by supervisors in the US Fish and Wildlife Service. We identified all the people who had participated in the negotiations and conducted structured interviews with them. Our research question was formulated as follows: What was the effect of on-site studies on the course of the negotiations? Technical information about fish and wildlife issues was especially important in the cases we studied because the negotiations concerned questions that were amenable to scientific inquiry. The principal environmental issues in the six cases were fish passage, instream flow for fish habitat, and entrainment offish in hydropower turbines. We concluded that technical clarity was one of the most critical elements in resolving these conflicts. As used in our study, technical clarity has two parts: values and facts. Values refers to elements of professional judgment such as which species to study. Facts refers to the findings from scientific investigations. The most successful negotiations were marked by a shared understanding of facts and values among the parties. In the successful negotiations the research findings helped encourage bargaining because the studies pointed out opportunities for mutual gain. In the least successful studies research findings framed the negotiation as win-lose and discouraged compromise.