314 Int. J. Water, Vol. 12, No.

4, 2018

Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water:

evidence from hydropower initiatives of
China-Pakistan Economic Corridor

Ejaz Gul
School of Economics,
Bahauddin Zakariya University,
Multan, Pakistan
Email: ejazgul@bzu.edu.pk

Abstract: More than 76% of the total budget of China Pakistan Economic
Corridor (CPEC) is allocated to renewable and non-renewable energy
initiatives. This paper elucidates socioeconomic impacts of three hydropower
projects of CPEC named as Suki Kinari, Karot and Kohala Hydropower
Projects. Primary data on selected socioeconomic variables (SVs) was collected
from respondents of the areas where these projects are located. Data was
analysed statistically to ascertain existing trends before construction of these
projects. Changes in socioeconomic variables (SVs) after construction of these
projects were calculated using Khewa’s Model. To get representative equations
of trends, digital analysis of data was carried out using computer assisted
quantitative data analysis software (CAQDAS). After this, socioeconomic
indexes (SEIs) of households were calculated before and after construction of
these projects using Newton-Leibniz Integration Process (NLIP). Results
indicated that there is a substantial increase in socioeconomic status of the
households after construction of these hydropower projects.
Keywords: China-Pakistan Economic Corridor; CPEC; hydropower; energy;
socio-economic; index; households; CAQDAS; Newton-Leibniz integration
process; NLIP.
Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Gul, E. (2018)
‘Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water: evidence from
hydropower initiatives of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor’, Int. J. Water,
Vol. 12, No. 4, pp.314–341.
Biographical notes: Ejaz Gul is an emerging social scientist. He is widely
recognised for his incisive contributions on socio-economic issues including
social capital, socio-economic status of households, energy and environment.
He has pioneered avenue of using dynamic mathematical models and has
extensively used it with digital interfaces in numerous national and internal
scholarly contributions. He earned his doctorate from the Bahauddin Zakariya
University, Multan with a highly acknowledged document on economic
analysis of energy alternatives using factors matrix approach. He is presently
committed in exploring social impacts of development ventures including
projects being undertaken in China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.
This paper is a revised and expanded version of a paper entitled
‘Socioeconomic gains of household from hydropower initiatives of China
Pakistan Economic Corridor: evidence from dynamic two point temporal
model’ presented at International Conference on China-Pakistan Economic
Corridor, Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Women University, Peshawar, 28 February
2018.

Copyright © 2018 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

 Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water 315

1 Introduction

According to latest estimates, current demand of electricity in Pakistan is approximately

20,000 megawatts whereas supply is approximately 14,000 megawatts. Thus a gap of
6,000 megawatts exists between demand and supply of energy. This gap is widening with
time owing to increase in population, industries and technological advancements. This
increased consumption of energy, with no added production is worsening the crisis. To
overcome this crisis, Government of Pakistan has very rightly included 21 energy
projects in the ongoing China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Approximately 76%
of the total budget (US$ 46 billions) of CPEC has been dedicated to these 21 energy
projects. Out of these 21 energy projects, there are three hydro energy projects which
have been initiated under the umbrella of CPEC. These three energy initiatives include
Suki Kinari, Karot and Kohala hydropower projects. Seventeen percent of the total
budget of energy sector has been devoted for these three hydropower projects. Total
accumulative power generation capacity of these three projects is 2,690 megawatts which
when added to the national grid will substantially reduce the existing energy crisis. It is
worth mentioning here that hydro is the cheapest renewable energy source and Pakistan is
excessively blessed with this source of energy. Therefore, hydropower is the most
suitable energy solution at the global level as it is user cum environment friendly with
least quantity of CO2 emission.
This paper has been written with two fold aim; firstly to investigate the
techno-economic benefits of the three hydropower projects, secondly to ascertain the
socio-economic impacts of these hydropower projects. Data collected from the
households of Suki Kinari, Karot and Kohala was analysed by two methods; statistical
analysis by latest statistical analysis software (SAS) and digital analysis by computer
assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS). Then existing and projected
socio-economic status of households was calculated by Newton-Leibniz Integration
Process (NLIP). The difference between existing and projected socio-economic status
indicated that these hydropower projects will do wonders in elevating the life standards
of surrounding households. By reaping the benefits of flowing water, we will be able to
reduce perpetual energy crisis and at the same time it will improve the socio-economic
status of households of surrounding areas.

2 Literature appraisal

Hydro energy and socio-economic status of households has been the subject of research
by many social scientists around the globe. Most of the researchers have indicated in their
studies that besides availability of energy, living standards of households improve with
construction of hydro energy projects.
Ahmed has investigated the increase in yield due to improved irrigation and its effect
on the income of farmers. He concluded that with improvement in irrigation and more
availability of water farmers’ income increases and life standards improves (Ahmad,
2005). Similarly, Ahmed (1999) elucidated that farm size and availability of water has
significant effect on the per capita income of farmers. Aleseyed has deeply explored the
local socio-economic benefits of dams. He concluded that construction of dams improves
socio-economic conditions of households of surrounding areas (Aleseyed, 2003). Ashraf
316 E. Gul

has investigated the effects of water conservation and its effects on the agriculture and
income of farmers. He concluded that with optimal utilisation of natural water economic
benefits increases (Ashraf, 1999). Similarly, Ashraf has elucidated the effects of modern
technologies on water conservation and utilisation. He highlighted that modern
technologies should be used for efficient utilisation of natural resources (Ashraf, 2001). A
very impressive study on construction of dams has been carried out by Bell. He explained
that construction of hydropower structures on rivers has benefits and costs but benefits
mostly outweigh the costs (Bell, 1995). Bhatta has explained that we should learn from
experience of energy crisis in other countries and how they have overcome that crisis. It
was highlighted in the study that exploration and utilisation of available energy sources
should be instituted to overcome energy crisis (Bhatta, 2016). Bhutta has explained that
even small dams have socio-economic benefits for the society. He explained that
construction of many small dams in 20th century has benefited the societies as their
socio-economic conditions improved after construction of dams (Bhutta, 1999). Brabben
has conducted study on rural livelihood and irrigation in Bangladesh and Nepal. It was
elucidated in the study that socio-economic conditions of rural households improve with
availability of increased irrigation water (Brabben, 2004). Burney has investigated the
linkage between socio-economic development and electricity consumption. It was
explained in the study that as per pita electricity consumption increases, the
socio-economic development increases. It was brought in the study that developed
countries have higher per capita electricity consumption than developing and
underdeveloped countries. To increase per capita electricity availability, we have to
generate more electricity by utilising energy sources. With increased availability of
electricity, socio-economic development of society increases (Burney, 1995). Cheema
has carried out research on changes in socio-economic conditions of rural community due
to construction of Mirwal and Shahpur Dams. He concluded that farmers’
socio-economic conditions get improved after construction of small dams (Cheema,
1997). Eberts carried out very informative research on socio-economic models in
renewable energy. He concluded that socio-economic development targets can be
achieved with judicious utilisation of renewable energy sources (Eberts, 1980). Gul has
investigated the effects of construction projects on the socio-economic development of
households in the project areas. He inferred that people in surrounding towns were
benefited from the dividends of the projects undertaken in Kle, Tubmenberg and Sanjie
towns of Liberia (Gul, 2012). Hayat has elucidated that efficient use of water and modern
energy sources have positive effects on agriculture productivity. Resultantly,
socio-economic life of the farmers and households is upgraded (Hayat, 2010). Hoege
investigated benefits and costs of dams and other hydro structures. It was asserted in the
study that construction of hydro structures have positive and negative impacts on society.
The benefits of construction of dams generally outweigh the costs (Hoege, 2002).
Kessides has explained that infrastructure development has direct linkage with economic
development of country and this includes development of energy infrastructure
(Kessides, 1993). Kiani has investigated the linkage between productivity, farm size and
availability of irrigation water. He concluded that greater agriculture productivity can be
achieved with good quality irrigation system (Kiani, 2008). An old but very relevant
study on energy and human welfare was conducted by Orr. He brought out that human
 Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water 317

welfare is closely netted to availability of energy. Human welfare increases with

increased availability of energy (Orr, 1977). Pettingill has elucidated that construction of
dams has both economic and environmental benefits. It was highlighted in the study that
dams are the economic and environmental friendly sources of renewable energy. It also
boosts up the socio-economic welfare of the masses and over all development (Pettingill,
2006). Pradhan has indicated that how villages and rural areas got developed after
construction of hydropower initiatives. It was elucidated in the study that households of
towns are benefited from the hydropower initiatives and their living standards get better
(Pradhan, 2010). Preziosi has explained the methods of probabilistic assessment of small
dams. It was indicated in the study that thorough assessment of benefits and costs should
be done before undertaking the initiative because welfare of masses is deeply linked with
construction of dams (Preziosi, 2008). Rajović has explained in a study that optimal and
judicious utilisation of natural resources is a contributing factor of socio-economic
development. It was concluded in the study that efficient utilisation of natural resources
increases socio-economic development, however, sustainability of natural resources
should be taken into account (Rajović, 2013). Shrestha carried out research on
contribution of hydroelectric power to Nepal’s economic development. It was concluded
in study that hydroelectric projects ensured sustainable and environmental friendly
utilisation of natural water source, therefore, these projects contributed to the economic
development of Nepal. The greater availability of hydroelectricity at the cheaper rates has
been a major contributing factor in economic development (Shrestha, 2010). Singal has
elucidated that planning of hydropower initiatives should be undertaken and opinion of
technical experts and masses should be given due weightage. The most feasible plan
should be implemented to benefit the masses (Singal, 2010). Song conducted extensive
research on the economic benefits of construction of dams. It was concluded that socio-
economic benefits of dams should be thoroughly evaluated before construction. Masses
should be benefited by construction of dams instead of causing harm (Song, 2011).
Sørensen has indicated that economic welfare of masses is closely linked to resources.
Natural resources should be optimally used for welfare of population (Sørensen, 2016).
Toba has inquired into the welfare effects of electricity generation in Philippines. She
concluded that welfare of people increased with increase in per capita electricity
availability and consumption (Toba, 2007). World Commission on Dams has developed a
new framework for decision making on construction of dams. It has been emphasised in
the new framework that construction of dams is closely linked to economic development
and welfare of population (World Commission on Dams, 2000).

3 Overview of energy projects in CPEC

There are 21 energy projects which are being initiated under CPEC. These include
projects related to coal, hydropower, wind, solar and gas. Projects have been divided into
two categories; the priority projects and other projects. A brief account of these projects
is given in Table 1.
318 E. Gul

Table 1 Details of energy projects included in CPEC

Projects Megawatts Cost (US$ million)

Priority projects
Port Qasim Electric Company coal fired, Sindh 1,320 1,980
Sahiwal coal-fired power plant, Punjab 1,320 1,600
Engro coal-fired, Thar, Sindh 660 1,000
Surface mine, Thar coal field, Sindh (3.8 metric ton per acre) - 860
Gawadar coal power project, Gwadar 300 360
Muzaffargarh coal power project, Punjab 1,320 1,600
Rahimyar Khan coal power project, Punjab 1,320 1,600
Thar mine mouth power plant, Sindh 1,320 1,300
Quaid-e-Azam solar park, Bahawalpur, Punjab 1,000 1,350
Dawood wind farm, Bhambore, Sindh 50 125
Wind farm, Jhimpir, Sindh 100 250
Sachal wind farm, Jhimpir, Sindh 50 134
Sunnec wind farm, Jhimpir, Sindh 50 125
Suki Kinari hydropower project, Kyber Pakhtunkhwa 870 1,802
Karot hydropower project, Azad Kashmir and Punjab 720 1,420
Total (priority energy projects) 10,400 15,506
Other energy projects
Gaddani power park project 2,640 12,120
HUBCO coal power plant, Hub, Balochistan 660 970
Chichoki Mallian combined-cycle power plant, Punjab 525 550
Salt range mine mouth power project, Punjab 300 800
Kohala Hydel project, AJK 1,100 2,397
Pakistan wind farm (Jhampir, Thatta, Sindh) 100 150
Thar mine mouth oracle power plant, Thar, Sindh 1,320 1,300
Total (other energy projects) 6,645 18,287
Total energy projects 17,045 33,793
Source: Planning Commission of Pakistan
The total cost of 21 energy projects is US$ 33,793 million which is 76% of the total
outlay of CPEC. As shown in Figure 1(a), US$ 33,793 million has been allocated to
energy generation from different energy sources. The major share of funds has been
given to production of energy from coal (40%) and gas (37%). For hydro energy source,
US$ 5,619 million has been kept which is 17% of the total funds allocated for energy
projects. Similarly, 4%and 2% of the funds have been dedicated to development of solar
and wind energy sources respectively.
 Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water 319

Figure 1 (a) Allocation of funds (US$ million) for different energy sources (b) Energy generation
(megawatts) from different energy sources (see online version for colours)

(a)

(b)

With spending 76% of the total investment, 21 energy projects will produce a total of
17,045 megawatts of energy. Out of this, 2,690 megawatts (16%) of energy will be
produced by the three hydropower projects. Energy generation by different sources of
energy is shown in Figure 1(b). Coal exploration and utilisation has been particularly
focused in energy sector priorities as Pakistan is blessed with huge reservoirs of coal.
9,840 megawatts (58%) of energy is planned to be produced from coal. Similarly, 3,165
megawatts (18%) of energy will be produced from gas. Likewise, 1,000 megawatts (6%)
and 350 megawatts (2%) of energy will be produced from solar and wind respectively.
After this brief appraisal of energy projects in CPEC, research areas of the three
hydro energy projects are introduced in the next section.

4 Socio-demographic profile of research areas

Three projects are located at Suki Kinari, Karot and Kohala towns. Suki Kinari
hydropower project is located close to Kaghan Valley in District Mansehra of Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa Province, Karot hydropower project is located in Punjab Province and
320 E. Gul

Kohala hydropower project is located in Azad Kashmir, close to city of Muzaffarabad,

the capital of Azad Kashmir. Locations of the three hydro energy projects are indicated
on the map of Pakistan in Figure 2.

Figure 2 Locations of three hydro energy projects in CPEC (see online version for colours)
 Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water 321

Suki Kinari, Karot and Kohala are small towns with population ranging from 25,000 to
30,000 individuals. Households are composed of nine to ten individuals per house.
Literacy rate is around 30%. Current socio-demographic profile of the three towns was
assessed during field visits to research areas. Statistics were obtained from the local
administration of the three towns and relevant departments of respective districts. These
statistics are shown in Table 2.
Table 2 Socio-demographic profile of three towns where hydro energy projects are located

Socio-demographic features Suki Kinari Karot Kohala

Area of the town (square 250 300 385
kilometres)
Population (thousand 25 28 30
individuals)
Population density 100 93 78
Population growth rate (%) 2.2 2.39 2.6
Average household size (per Nine to ten Eight to nine Nine to ten
house)
Gender ratio (male: female) 1:1 1:1 1:1
Literacy rate (%) 30 35 30
Number of hospitals/rural Twenty bed rural Ten bed rural health Twenty be rural
health unit within a distance health unit at the unit at the distance health unit at the
of 20 kilometres distance of 15 of 12 kilometres. distance of 5
kilometres. One bed One bed for kilometres. One bed
for approximately approximately 2,800 for approximately
1,250 patients patients 1,500 patients
Number of schools Two primary and a Two primary and a Two primary and
high school each for high schools each for two high schools
boys and girls boys and girls each boys and girls
Number of houses Approximately 2,500 Approximately 2,800 Approximately 3,000
Access to clean drinking 60% (springs and 30% (water tanks, 40% (water tanks,
water (%) streams) springs and streams) springs and streams)
Sanitation Two lavatories per Two lavatories per Two lavatories per
house. No house. No house. No
community sewerage community sewerage community sewerage
disposal mechanism disposal mechanism disposal mechanism
Major source of income Agriculture and Agriculture and Agriculture, labour
labour labour and foreign
remittances
Households’ income (PKR Approximately Approximately Approximately
per year) 450,000 450,000 480,000
Source: Data obtained from local administration and related websites
These three towns have primary and high school education system for boys and girls. For
routine health issues of the households, rural health units are available in vicinity of three
towns.
322 E. Gul

Households mostly live in houses constructed with bricks. Clean drinking water is
obtained from natural springs and streams. Lavatories are being used for sanitation. The
prime source of income is from agriculture in the three towns. Farming is mostly done on
hill terraces and in the plains where available. Irrigation is mostly done through natural
streams and tube wells. Electricity is available in the three towns; however, frequent
power breakdowns compel households to use alternative means of energy such as solar
and fuel generators. Households’ income ranges from 450,000 to 480,000 Pakistani
Rupees (PKR) per year with three to four earning members per house. Some of the male
and female members of the households are engaged in labour as daily wagers. Formal
and informal trade and business activities are also undertaken by the earning members of
households in the three towns. Similarly, members of few households in the towns have
jobs in the foreign countries producing foreign remittances.
After this brief introduction of three towns where hydro energy projects are located,
research methods used for conduct of this study are elucidated in the next section.

5 Investigation procedures

Comprehensive research design was evolved to conduct this study. Research design
followed during conduct of this study is shown in Figure 3. The techno-economic
analysis of three hydro energy projects was an inescapable step. Therefore, this analysis
was carefully carried out after field visits to three project sites and discussion with
experts. In techno-economic analysis of three hydro energy projects, costs and benefits of
power generation was thoroughly deliberated. The cost of one watt of energy was
calculated from the data available to assess the economic ambience of these projects.
Moreover, the contribution of three projects in reducing existing energy crisis was
ascertained.

Figure 3 Research design for the study

 Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water 323

Thorough evaluation of socio-economic effects of these projects was carried out to

ascertain their effects on the households of three towns where these projects are located.
A functional model was developed for calculation of socio-economic index of
households. Based on the variables included in the model, primary data was collected
from the households of three towns. Likewise, interviews of the local leaders and
educated people were also conducted to validate data obtained from the households.
Two methods were used for analysis of collected data; statistical analysis was carried
out with latest SAS and digital analysis was done with CAQDAS. Digital analysis
provided iterated and attenuated digital models of the data along with representative
equations of socio-economic index and value of coefficient of determination, R2.
Changes in values of socio-economic variables (SVs) after construction of three hydro
energy projects were calculated by Khewa’s model.
After doing data analysis, socio-economic indexes of households of the three towns
were calculated before and after construction of three hydro energy projects using NLIP.
After this calculation, values of socio-economic indexed before and after construction of
dams were compared and results were finalised. At the end, conclusions and policy
recommendations have been proffered.
After brief account of research methods, techno-economic analysis of the three hydro
energy projects is discussed in the next section.

6 Techno-economic analysis of the projects

As explained in Section 3, the three planned hydro energy projects are presently in initial
stages. Total accumulative energy generation from the three planned projects is 2,690
megawatts at the total cost of 5,619 US$ million. It is expected that with construction of
these three power projects current gap between supply and demand of energy will be
reduced substantially.
Suki Kinari hydropower project will produce 870 megawatts of energy at the cost of
1,802 US$ million. It is an under construction, run of the river hydropower project
located on the Kunhar river in Kaghan valley of District Mansehra, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
Province. Kunhar River is a snow fed river and hence variation in rain fall is not expected
to affect river flow. Project is expected to be completed in 2020. Project is one of
Pakistan’s largest private sector power development projects, and is being constructed as
part of the CPEC. The project is being built on a ‘Build own operate and transfer’ basis
for 30 years, after which ownership will be turned over to the government of Pakistan.
The dam is being developed by Pakistan’s Suki Kinari hydro group and China’s
Gezhouba group. Designed to produce 2,958 gigawatt hours annually, this mega project
alone is expected to increase Pakistan’s existing available power generation capacity by
more than 5%.
Karot hydropower project is planned on Jhelum river near Karot Village in Punjab
Province, some 1.7 kilometres upstream of Karot bridge and 74 km upstream of Mangla
dam. Project site is located approximately 65 kilometres from Islamabad. Karot Dam will
produce 720 megawatts of energy at the cost of 1,420 US$ million. Dam will generate
mean annual energy of 3,436 gigawatt hours. It is presently an under construction run of
324 E. Gul

river concrete core rock fill gravity dam and is expected to be completed in 2020. It is
being developed by the China Three Gorges Corporation (CTGC), which has developed
China’s three Gorges dam. Project is funded by China’s Silk Road fund. China will issue
loans to Karot power company, which is a subsidiary of China’s Three Gorges
Corporation. It will be built on a ‘Build own operate transfer’ basis for 30 years, after
which ownership will be turned over to the Government of Pakistan.
Kohala hydropower project is a run of the river rock fill gravity dam, located at
Kohala in Muzaffarabad District, Azad Kashmir. Dam site is just upstream of Domel on
Jhelum River 174 km from Islamabad. Dam will produce 1,100 megawatts of energy at
the cost 2,397 US$ million. Dam will generate mean annual energy 4,800 gigawatt hours.
Kohala hydropower project is the firm’s biggest investment of CTGC in the Pakistani
hydropower market as of yet. CTGC is required to construct the project ‘Build own
operate transfer’ basis for 30 years, after which ownership will be turned over to the
government of Pakistan.
The technical features of three hydro energy projects are shown in Table 3 and the
technical designs are indicated in Figure 4.
Table 3 Technical details of the three hydro energy projects

Suki Kinari Karot hydropower Kohala

Features
hydropower project project hydropower project
Location Suki Kinari (Kaghan Karot, Punjab Kohala, Azad
Valley), Khyber Province Kashmir
Pakhtunkhwa Province
Current status Under construction Under Under construction
construction
Type of dam Embankment, asphalt Embankment, Embankment,
concrete lace, rock-fill asphalt concrete roller compacted,
gravity dam face, rock-fill concrete gravity
gravity dam dam
Source Kunhar river River Jhelum River Jhelum
Height of dam (metres) 54.5 95.5 57
Length of dam (metres) 336 460 212
Length of reservoir (kilometres) 3.1 27 6.4
Year of work commencement 2014 2016 2017
Year of likely completion 2020 2020 2021
Power station Run of the river Run of the river Run of the river
Installed capacity (megawatts) 870 720 1,100
Annual generation (gigawatt 2,958 3,436 4,800
hours)
Cost (US$ millions) 1,802 1,420 2,397

The contribution of these three hydro energy projects was evaluated in detail. Two
aspects were particularly focused during this evaluation. Firstly, by what percentage the
existing gap between supply and demand of energy will be reduced after construction of
these dams. Secondly, what will be the cost of energy production (US$ per megawatt)
based on construction cost of the three projects. Energy generation capability and the cost
of each dam are shown in Figure 5.
 Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water 325

Figure 4 Technical designs of the three hydro energy projects (see online version for colours)

Figure 5 Evaluation of energy generation capability and the cost of three hydro energy projects
(see online version for colours)

Current gap between demand and supply of electricity is approximately 6,000 megawatts.
The 2,690 megawatts produced by these three hydro power projects is approximately
45% (2,690 / 6,000 * 100 = 44.83%) of the gap between demand and supply of energy.
This means that 45% of the gap between demand and supply of energy will be reduced by
construction and commissioning of these three dams. This is a huge achievement for
Pakistan in the context of CPEC. This will directly benefit the masses as power
326 E. Gul

breakdowns will reduce. Per capita availability of electricity will increase and living
standards of masses will be better than before.
It is also worth mentioning that hydro is a cheapest renewable energy source. Pakistan
is blessed with hydro source of energy throughout its landscape. Hydro is the most
environment friendly energy source as it has least amount of CO2 emission thus causing
minimum environmental degradation. It is cheap source of energy because after initial
capital cost, the fixed and variable operation and maintenance costs are comparatively
less. It has the added advantage of design life which is longer (normally 50 years)
compared to other energy alternatives. Thus, in the long run hydro energy production is
always cost effective.
To have an assessment of cost of production based on the cost of construction only, a
simple and straight forward approach was adopted. Cost of energy production was
calculated by equation (1).
C
Cost per megawatt (US$) (1)
E
where ‘C’ is cost of the project, ‘E’ is energy produced by the project and 106 is a factor
to convert a megawatt into watt. By putting values in equation (1) we obtained the cost of
one megawatt of energy for the three hydro energy projects. Results are tabulated in
Table 4.
Table 4 Cost of energy production based on construction cost of projects

Cost (US$ Energy Cost per megawatt (US$) based on

Hydropower projects
million) (megawatts) cost of construction only
Suki Kinari 1,802 870 2.07
Karot 1,420 720 1.97
Kohala 2,397 1,100 2.18
Total 5,619 2,690 2.09

It can be seen from Table 3 that for three hydro energy projects, cost per megawatt of
energy is around 2 US$ or 180 PKR (considering 1 US$ = 90 PKR) which is by all
standards very economical. However, point to note here is that this comparison is based
only on construction cost of the three projects. It does not include capital cost, fixed and
variable operational and maintenance costs as those are not yet known. Nonetheless, per
unit cost assessment based on construction cost is also an accepted method of calculation
globally.
After brief techno-economic analysis of the three hydro energy projects, model
development for assessment of socio-economic status of households is discussed in the
next section.

7 Model development for assessment of socio-economic status

Besides benefits of energy generation, the three hydro energy projects will have
socio-economic blessings for households of three towns where these projects are located.
The best method to assess socio-economic benefits of the three projects is to calculate
socio-economic status of households before and after construction of these projects. It is
 Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water 327

worth mentioning here that socio-economic status is the combined function of income
and expenditure of households. As the projects are yet not completed, the socio-economic
status of households after the construction of these projects was calculated in 2025
(five years after commissioning of these projects).
Socio-economic status of households of the three towns was represented by
socio-economic index ‘SX’ which was taken as dependent variable. Eleven relevant SVs
‘SVs’ (explanatory variables) were selected to find out their effect on dependent variable.
Symbol and description of each variable is shown in Table 5.
Table 5 Description of dependent and explanatory variables

Variables Symbols Description

Socio-economic index SX An index showing socio-economic status of households
Agriculture IA Income from agriculture per year
Foreign remittances IF Income from foreign remittances per year
Formal and informal IBT Income from informal business and trade per year
Labour IL Income from labour per year
Male education EM Expenditure on male education per year
Female education EF Expenditure on female education per year
Health EH Expenditure on health per year
Clean drinking water EW Expenditure on clean drinking water per year
Electricity and energy EE Expenditure on electricity and energy per year
Sanitation ES Expenditure on sanitation per year
Housing and services EH Expenditure on housing and services per year
Note: All the income and expenditure variables are in Pakistani Rupees (PKR).
Although eleven explanatory variables show income and expenditure of the households,
we were not interested in their separate effect. We were interested in the combined effect
of income and expenditure as an indicator or index of socio-economic status of the
households. Therefore, using Leonhard Euler functional notation, socio-economic index
of households was taken as a combined function of these eleven variables and
relationship is represented by equation (2).
Socio-economic Index SX f I A , IF , I BT , I L , E M , E F , E H , E W , E E , ES , E HS (2)

It is worth mentioning here that some these variables may look odd in the context of
urban areas but these are very valid in the context of three towns where hydro energy
projects have been initiated.
To find out value of socio-economic index (SX) we used NLIP as shown in
equation (3):
n 11

Socio-economic Index, SX ³
n 1
representative equation  λ (3)

where ‘n’ is the number of explanatory variables which were eleven in this study. The
term ‘equation’ was obtained from the digital analysis of data and term ‘λ’ is a constant
which accounted for all the missing variables and errors.
328 E. Gul

Using equation (3), the values of socio-economic indexes were calculated for the
three towns before and after construction of three hydro energy projects. However, first
we had to find out the representative equations as indicated in equation (3). These
representative equations for the three towns were obtained from digital analysis of the
data before and after construction of three hydro power projects.

8 Data collection

Secondary data was collected from the official web sites of relevant departments of
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province, Punjab Province and Azad Kashmir. Survey was
conducted to collect primary data on eleven explanatory variables from households of
three towns; Suki Kinari, Karot and Kohala. Satellite imageries of these towns are shown
in Figure 6. There are 25,000 to 30,000 houses in each town. The major difficulty in the
collection of primary data was that households were located on both sides of the river in
each town which accentuated the accessibility issues.

Figure 6 Satellite imageries of three towns (see online version for colours)

Three data collection teams were formed and one team was sent to each town. Data was
collected from randomly selected 1,500 houses (500 houses each town) using survey
method. So, for each explanatory variable we had 500 values in each town. Field visits
and interviews of local leaders, technical experts, investors, teachers and educated
commoners were also conducted which were useful in assessing the prevailing
 Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water 329

socio-economic conditions of households of the three towns. Characteristics of the

respondents from the three towns are indicated in Table 6.
Table 6 Characteristics of the respondents from the three towns

Composition Education Age Gender Size

Technical experts Minimum graduate 25–50 No gender bias. 20
Local community leaders Minimum metric years for However, at least 100
all 20% of
Teachers Minimum intermediate categories respondents from 60
Investors Minimum intermediate each category 20
were females
Educated commoners Minimum metric 300

The extensive data collection from households of three towns took about four months. All
efforts were ensured to avoid errors in the data collection. Analysis of collected data will
be discussed in the next section.

9 Data analysis

Data collected from the households of three towns was summarised and tabulated. This
data was analysed by two methods; first, statistical analysis was done with SAS to
ascertain descriptive statistics; second, digital analysis was carried out with CAQDAS to
obtain digitally iterated and attenuated models for SVs in the three towns before and after
construction of three hydro energy projects.

9.1 Statistical analysis of data before construction of three hydro energy

projects
Results from statistical analysis of collected data before construction of three hydro
energy projects are indicated in Table 7.
Table 7 shows that average income of the households in three towns before
construction of three dams was PKR 574,800 per year which means that per month it is
just PKR 47,900 or US$ 532 (taking 1 US$ = PKR 90). This indicated that households in
these rural villages are impoverished. However, average income per year of Kohala is
relatively better than the other two towns due to heavy share of foreign remittances.
In income block, mean for income from agriculture activity is more than remaining
variables. This indicated that households of three towns rely mainly on agriculture
activities for their income. Income from foreign remittances also has sizeable share in
income block. Similarly, a greater share of expenditure (38%) was taken by electricity
and energy followed by housing and services. The reason for this was that due to non-
availability of electricity and frequent power shut downs, households were using different
sources of energy such as solar panels and fuel generators. Expenditure on housing and
services include new construction, renovations and uplifting works to facilitate the living.
The point worth noting is the high expenditure on health. The only 2% expenditure on
clean drinking water by households can be the reason of 21% expenditure on health. The
percentage shares of different variables in income and expenditure blocks are indicated in
Figure 7.
 330

Table 7
E. Gul

Average income per year (PKR) Average expenditure per year (PKR) Total Total
Towns Foreign Formal and informal Male Female Clean Electricity Housing and income expenditure
Agriculture Labour Health Sanitation per year per year
remittances business and trade education education drinking water and energy services
Suki Kinan (Kaghan) 140,040 79,356 121,368 126,036 12,000 12,000 85,500 3,600 128,900 35,630 40,890 466,800 318,520
Karot 176,280 146,900 158,652 105,768 36,000 18,000 95,900 9,200 162,800 45,890 70,820 587,600 438,610
Kohala 201,000 247,900 113,900 107,200 36,000 30,000 90,400 9,800 186,700 66,450 95,440 670,000 514,790
Descriptive statistics
Mean 172,440 158,052 131,306.67 113,001.333 28,000 20,000 90,600 7,533.33 159,466.67 49,323.33 69,050 574,800 423,973.33
Standard deviation 30,660.88 84,823.61 23,974.32 11,311.04 13,856.41 9,165.15 5,202.88 3,419.55 29,043.82 15,694.23 27,318.04 102,202.94 98,950.25
Results of statistical analysis before construction of three hydro energy projects
 Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water 331

Figure 7 Share (%) of different variables in income and expenditure of households (see online
version for colours)

9.2 Estimation of values of variables after construction of three hydro energy

projects
After analysis of collected data before construction of three hydro energy projects, the
values of variables were estimated for 2025, five years after commissioning of the
projects. For future estimates of these variables, Khewa’s model was applied. This
empirical model has been developed for increase in per capita income due to increase in
agriculture productivity, business and labour as a result of a development initiative.
Empirical evidences have also indicated that foreign remittances decreases with
development due increase in per capita income at homeland. Increase in agriculture
activities, business and labour reduce dependency on foreign remittances. Therefore,
increase in the per capita income due increased agriculture productivity, business and
labour after commissioning of three hydropower initiatives was calculated by
equation (4):

If Ie d E (4)
2
332 E. Gul

where ‘If’ is estimated future income due to increase in agriculture productivity, business
and labour. Similarly, ‘Ie’ is existing income, ‘d’ is duration years since date of
commissioning which is 5 years in our case and ‘E‘ is a factor which depends on the
prevailing conditions of a particular SV. Value of ‘E‘ varies between 0.6 and 0.7 for
agriculture, between 0.5 and 0.6 for business activities and 0.5 and 0.95 for labour. The
bracket for labour is wide due to versatility of works created by development initiatives.
Similarly decrease in the foreign remittances after commissioning of three
hydropower initiatives was calculated by equation (5):

If Ie d : (5)
2
where ‘Ω’ is a factor which depends on the prevailing conditions of foreign remittances.
Its value varies between 0.25 and 0.4.
It is evident that when income increases, the expenditure also increases by varying
percentages. Based on the prevailing tendencies of expenditure, variations
(increase/decrease) in expenditure variables after construction of three hydro energy
projects were calculated by the same equations and results were consolidated. Detailed
calculation sheet is shown in Table 8.
Table 8 Calculation sheets for increase and decrease in values of variables before and after
commissioning of three hydro energy projects

Existing Future Increase or Increase or

d/2
Variable Towns value P n value decrease decrease
(years)
(PKR) (PKR) (PKR) (%)
Agriculture Suki Kinari 140,040 2.5 0.66 - 231,066 91,026 65
Karot 176,280 2.5 0.62 - 273,234 96,954 55
Kohala 201,000 2.5 0.62 - 311,550 110,550 55
Foreign Suki Kinari 79,356 2.5 - 0.39 77,372 –1,983.9 –2.5
remittances Karot 146,900 2.5 - 0.32 117,520 –29,380 –20
Kohala 247,900 2.5 - 0.29 179,728 –68,172.5 –27.5
Business Suki Kinari 121,368 2.5 0.57 - 172,949.4 51,581.4 42.5
and trade Karot 158,652 2.5 0.6 - 237,978 79,326 50
Kohala 113,900 2.5 0.53 - 150,917.5 37,017.5 32.5
Labour Suki Kinari 126,036 2.5 0.57 - 179,601.3 53,565.3 42.5
Karot 105,768 2.5 0.59 - 156,007.8 50,239.8 47.5
Kohala 107,200 2.5 0.93 - 249,240 142,040 132.5
Male Suki Kinari 12,000 2.5 0.6 - 18,000 6,000 50
education Karot 36,000 2.5 0.55 - 49,500 13,500 37.5
Kohala 36,000 2.5 0.46 - 41,400 5,400 15
Female Suki Kinari 12,000 2.5 0.6 - 18,000 6,000 50
education Karot 18,000 2.5 0.6 - 27,000 9,000 50
Kohala 30,000 2.5 0.57 - 42,750 12,750 42.5
 Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water 333

Table 8 Calculation sheets for increase and decrease in values of variables before and after
commissioning of three hydro energy projects (continued)

Existing Future Increase or Increase or

d/2
Variable Towns value P n value decrease decrease
(years)
(PKR) (PKR) (PKR) (%)
Health Suki Kinari 85,500 2.5 - 0.2 42,750 –42,750 –50
Karot 95,900 2.5 - 0.19 45,552.5 –50,347.5 –52.5
Kohala 90,400 2.5 - 0.16 36,160 –54,240 –60
Clean Suki Kinari 3,600 2.5 0.89 - 8,010 4,410 122.5
drinking Karot 9,200 2.5 0.68 - 15,640 6,440 70
water
Kohala 9,800 2.5 0.56 - 13,720 3,920 40
Electricity Suki Kinari 128,900 2.5 - 0.14 45,115 –83,785 –65
and energy Karot 162,800 2.5 - 0.15 61,050 –101,750 –62.5
Kohala 186,700 2.5 - 0.16 74,680 –112,020 –60
Sanitation Suki Kinari 35,630 2.5 0.45 - 40,083.75 4,453.75 12.5
Karot 45,890 2.5 0.52 - 59,657 13,767 30
Kohala 66,450 2.5 0.61 - 101,336.25 34,886.25 52.5
Housing Suki Kinari 40,890 2.5 0.93 - 95,069.25 54,179.25 132.5
and Karot 70,820 2.5 0.45 - 79,672.5 8,852.5 12.5
services
Kohala 95,440 2.5 0.42 - 100,212 4,772 5

9.3 Statistical analysis of data after construction of three hydro energy projects
After these extensive calculations, data was again tabulated and statistical analysis was
carried out with SAS. Results of statistical analysis after commissioning of three hydro
energy projects are indicated in Table 9.
Table 9 indicates that income from increased agriculture productivity, business and
labour has increased while income from foreign remittances decreased. Similarly,
expenditure on male education, female education, clean drinking water, sanitation and
housing increased while expenditure on health and electricity reduced after construction
of three hydro energy projects. Percentage increase and decrease in the values of
variables after construction of three hydropower projects is shown in Figure 8.

9.4 Digital analysis of data before and after construction of three hydro energy
projects
After statistical analysis, data was shifted to CAQDAS for development of digitally
iterated and attenuated models of trend for eleven variables before and after construction
and commissioning of three hydro energy projects. The two digital models provided
representative equations of socio-economic index of households of the three towns where
three hydro energy initiatives have been planned. Moreover, these models also provided
the values of coefficient of determination ‘R2’. The two digital models before and after
construction of the three projects are shown in Figures 9 and 10 respectively.
 334

Table 9
E. Gul

Average income per year (PKR) Average expenditure per year (PKR)
Total Total
Towns Formal and Clean Electricity Housing income per expenditure
Foreign Male Female
Agriculture informal business Labour Health drinking and Sanitation and year per year
remittances education education
and trade water energy services
Suki Kinan (Kaghan) 231,066 77,372.1 172,949.4 179,601.3 18,000 18,000 42,750 8,010 45,115 40,083.75 95,069.25 660,988.8 267,028
Karot 273,234 117,520 237,978 156,007.8 49,500 27,000 45,552.5 15,640 61,050 59,657 79,672.5 784,739.8 338,072
Kohala 311,550 179,727.5 150,917.5 249,240 41,400 42,750 36,160 13,720 74,680 101,336.25 100,212 891,435 410,258.25
Descriptive statistics
Mean 271,950 124,873.2 187,281.63 194,949.7 36,300.00 29,250 41,487.5 12,456.67 60,281.67 67,025.667 91,651.25 779,054.53 338,452.75
Standard deviation 40,257.36 51,572.37 45,265.24 48,474.13 16357.57 12,527.47 4,821.85 3,968.78 14,797.47 31,284.02 10,687.83 115,328.25 71,615.88
Results of statistical analysis after construction of three hydro energy projects
 Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water 335

Figure 8 Increase and decrease (%) in the values of variables after construction of three
hydropower projects

Figure 9 Digital model of data before construction of three hydro energy projects (see online
version for colours)
300000

250000

Kohala = 4536.7x2 - 65128x + 289786

200000 R² = 0.5251
Value (PKR)

Karot = 2896.1x2 - 44318x + 225980

150000 R² = 0.4566
Suki Kinari (Kaghan)
100000 Karot
Kohala
Suki Kinari = 1606.4x2 - 26726x + 157855
R² = 0.3011
50000

0
Agriculture Foreign Formal and Labour Male Female Health Clean Electricity Sanitation Housing and
Remittances Informal Education Education Drinking and Energy Services
Business and Water
Trade
SVs

Figure 10 Digital model of data after construction of three hydro energy projects (see online
version for colours)
350000

300000

250000

Kohala = 5750.5x2 - 87872x + 381044

Value (PKR)

200000 R² = 0.7408

150000 Suki Kinari (Kaghan)

Karot = 4548.1x2 - 72893x + 330219
Karot
R² = 0.7389
100000 Kohala

Suki Kinari = 4109.9x2 - 63237x + 274735

50000 R² = 0.6123

0
Agriculture Foreign Formal and Labour Male Female Health Clean Electricity Sanitation Housing and
Remittances Informal Education Education Drinking and Energy Services
Business and Water
Trade
SVs
336 E. Gul

10 Measurement of socio-economic status of households by NLIP

Using representative equations obtained from digital modelling of data, socio-economic

index (SX) of households of the three towns was calculated before and after construction
of three initiatives using NLIP.

10.1 Socio-economic index of three towns before construction of three hydro

energy projects
The equations of socio-economic index for the three towns before construction of hydro
energy projects are given below.
n 11

SX(Suki Kinari) ³ 1,606.4x

n 1
2
 26,726x  157,855 (6)

n 11

SX(Karot)
n 1
³ 2,896.1x 2  44,318x  225,980 (7)

n 11

SX(Kohala ) ³
n 1
4,536.7x 2  65,128x  289,786 (8)

These equations were solved by NLIP. For example equation (6) for socio-economic
index of Suki Kinari Town can be written as under.
n 11

SX(Suki Kinari) ³
n 1
1,606.4x 2  26,726x  157,855 dx

ª1, 606.4x 3 26, 726x 2 º

SX(Suki Kinari) lim «   157,855x  λ »
1o11 ¬ 3 2 ¼
‘C’ is a constant which accounted for all errors in data and variables. By putting the
limits in the equation we obtained the quantified value of SX.
ª1, 606.4(11)3 26, 726(11) 2 º
SX(Suki Kinari) «¬   157,855(11)  λ »
3 2 ¼
ª1, 606.4(1)3 26, 726(1) 2 º
«   157,855(1)  λ »
¬ 3 2 ¼
SX(Suki Kinari) [712, 706.19  1, 616,923  1, 736, 405  λ]  [145, 027.47  λ]
SX(Suki Kinari) [832188.19  λ]  [145027.47  λ]
SX(Suki Kinari) [832188.19  λ  145027.47  λ]
SX(Suki Kinari) 687,160.72

Similarly, equations (7) and (8) were solved to find out values of SX(Karot) and SX(Kohala)
which were 884,657.67 and 1,001,450.34 respectively. The highest value of
socio-economic index before construction of three hydro energy projects was obtained
 Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water 337

for households of Kohala Town. This indicated that prevailing socio-economic conditions
of Kohala Town are comparatively better than the other two towns.

10.2 Socio-economic index of three towns after construction of three hydro

energy projects
The equations of socio-economic index for the three towns after construction of hydro
energy projects are given below.
n 11

SX(Suki Kinari) ³
n 1
4,109.9x 2  63,237x  274,735 (9)

n 11

SX(Karot)
n 1
³ 4,548.1x 2  72,863x  330,219 (10)

n 11

SX(Karot)
n 1
³ 5, 750.5x 2
 87,872x  381,044 (11)

These equations were solved by NLIP. For example equation (9) for socio-economic
index of Suki Kinari Town can be written as under.
n 11

SX(Suki Kinari) ³
n 1
4,109.9x 2  63,237x  274,735 dx

ª 4,109.9x 3 63,237x 2 º
SX(Suki Kinari) lim «   274,735x+λ »
1o11 ¬ 3 2 ¼
‘C’ is a constant which accounted for all errors in data and variables. By putting the
limits in the equation we obtained the quantified value of SX.
ª 4,109.9(11)3 63,237(11) 2 º
SX(Suki Kinari) «¬   274,735(11)+λ »
3 2 ¼
ª 4,109.9(1) 63,237(1)
3 2
º
«   274,735(1)+λ »
¬ 3 2 ¼
SX(Suki Kinari) [1,823, 425.63  3,825,838.5  3, 022, 085  λ]
[1,369.97  31, 618.5  274, 735  λ]
SX(Suki Kinari) [1, 019, 672.13  λ]  [244, 486.47  λ]
SX(Suki Kinari) [1, 019, 672.13  λ  244, 486.47  λ]
SX(Suki Kinari) 775,185.66

Similarly, equations (10) and (11) were solved to find out values of SX(Karot) and SX(Kohala)
which were 944,934.34 and 1,087,508.34 respectively. The highest difference in the
value of socio-economic index before construction and after construction of three hydro
energy projects was obtained for households of Suki Kinari (Kaghan) Town. This
338 E. Gul

indicated that socio-economic conditions of households of Suki Kinari will improve more
after construction of three hydro energy projects compared to other two towns.

10.3 Results from NLIP

After solving representative equations of socio-economic index of households for the
three towns, consolidated results obtained from NLIP are shown in Table 10.
Table 10 Results obtained from NLIP

Socioeconomic index Socioeconomic index Difference (before and

Increase
Towns (SX) before construction (SX) alter construction after construction of
(%)
of hydro energy projects of hydro energy projects hydro energy projects)
Suki Kinari 687,160.72 775,185.66 88,024.94 12.81
Karot 884,657.67 944,934.34 602,76.67 6.81
Kohala 1,001,450.34 1,087,508.34 86,058 8.59

Table 10 represented a very interesting scenario. As it has already been elucidated that
socio-economic index is combined effect of income and expenditure variables, results
obtained from NLIP were conclusive and tangible. Results indicated that three hydro
energy projects have immense socio-economic ambience for the households of three
towns. Results are graphically represented in Figure 11.

Figure 11 Graphical representation of results from NLIP (see online version for colours)

86058
Kohala 1087508.34
1001450.34

60276.67
Towns

Karot 944934.34
884657.67

88024.94
Suki Kinari 775185.66
687160.72

0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000

Socioeconomic Index (SX)
Difference (Before and After Construction of Hydro Energy Projects)
Socioeconomic Index (SX) After Construction of Hydro Energy Projects
Socioeconomic Index (SX) Before Construction of Hydro Energy Projects

As indicated in Figure 11, households of Kohala town had the highest

socio-economic index before construction of the three hydro energy projects and it
attained the highest value even after construction of the three projects, but the difference
between socio-economic index before and after the construction of project was not as
significant as it was for the households of Suki Kinari. So we can say that socio-
economic condition of the three towns will improve after construction of the three hydro
 Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water 339

energy projects under CPEC but improvement will more for the households of Suki
Kinari compared to other two towns. Increase (%) in the socio-economic index of the
three towns after construction of three hydro energy projects under CPEC is shown in
Figure 12. As indicated in the figure, socio-economic index of the households of Suki
Kinari, Karot and Kohala will be annually increased by 12.81%, 6.81% and 8.59%
respectively. The annual increase (%) in socio-economic index for households of Suki
Kinari is more than the other two towns. Point to note here is that Suki Kinari has the
lowest socio-economic profile amongst the three towns. This indicates that while hydro
energy projects are generally a source of blessing, the community with low
socio-economic profile is benefited the most.

Figure 12 Increase in socio-economic index after construction of three hydro energy projects
(see online version for colours)

11 Conclusions and policy recommendations

Analysis of data and results indicated that Suki Kinari, Karot and Kohala hydro energy
projects planned under CPEC have tech-economic and socio-economic benefits for
Pakistan and particularly for the households of surrounding towns. While on one hand
accumulative energy generated by these ventures will reduce the perpetual gap between
energy supply and demand by 45%, on the other hand socio-economic index of the
households of Suki Kinari, Karot and Kohala will improve annually by 12.81%, 6.81%
and 8.59% respectively. This is significant blessing of CPEC for a developing country
like Pakistan. However, there are certain policy implications emanating from this study.
These are enumerated below for ease of comprehension.
x Hydro is the best and most feasible energy alternative for Pakistan as we are lavishly
blessed with hydro energy source. Therefore, Pakistan should utilise its hydro energy
generation potential optimally. The existing energy generation from hydro sources is
6,775 megawatts which is 30% of the total output. Unfortunately, we could not fully
explore the hydro potential of our country due to technical, administrative and
political reasons.
x In the current energy mix of Pakistan, approximately 85% share is taken by
non-renewable sources of energy generation. These sources are depleting at faster
rate and it is expected that by 2025 these sources will be depleted by almost 50% of
340 E. Gul

existing capacity. This situation warrants re-orientation of existing energy generation

efforts by putting greater reliance on renewable sources.
x We should build more hydro structures and build it soon to reduce dependence on
non-renewables. Energy generation from hydro sources should be around 40-50% of
the total output by year 2025. Realising this, three hydro energy ventures have been
included in the CPEC which is much needed and very apt step by the Government of
Pakistan.
x Geographical, hydrological and meteorological conditions of Pakistan indicate that
hydro sources will not get depleted in the foreseeable future. Besides the politically
disputed Kalabagh dam (3,600 megawatts), there are three main dams which can be
conveniently constructed; Bhasha (4,500 megawatts), Bunji (5,400 megawatts) and
Dasu (3,800 megawatts). There are many sites in the hills of northern areas where
small hydropower projects can be initiated to fulfil the energy needs of households in
the far flung deprived areas where most of the population live without access to
electricity. Energy policy by Government of Pakistan needs to be re-aligned
accordingly.
x Alongside, we have to reconfigure and re-orientate our technical, administrative and
political landscape to develop greater national consensus on the optimal utilisation of
hydro energy sources. We can ill afford suffering from worsening energy crisis
because of these hurdles.
CPEC provides a handy opportunity to reap the available blessings of flowing water.
With our political and institutional efforts, we must make CPEC a great success for
greater prosperity of the region and member states.

References
Ahmad, B. (2005) ‘Factors affecting yield and profitability of carrot in two districts of Punjab’,
International Journal of Agriculture and Biology, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp.794–798.
Ahmad, M. (1999) ‘Evidence on farm size and land productivity: implications for public policy’,
The Pakistan Development Review, Vol. 38, No. 4, pp.1135–1153.
Aleseyed, M. (2003) ‘The local economic effects of large dam reservoirs: US experience 1975–95’,
Review of Urban and Regional Development Studies, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp.91–108,
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-940x.1998.tb00089.x.
Ashraf, M. (1999) ‘Water conservation and its optimum utilization in Barani areas’, Journal of
Science, Technology and Development, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp.28–32.
Ashraf, M. (2001) ‘Evaluation of resource conservation technologies under skimmed groundwater
applications’, Journal of Drainage and Water Management, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp.1–10.
Bell, T.C. (1995) ‘Harnessing rivers with dams has benefits and costs’, Water International,
Vol. 20, No. 3, p.121, DOI: 10.1080/02508069508686459.
Bhatta, U.D. (2016) ‘Energy crisis: learning from experience and the way forward’, Hydro Nepal,
Vol. 19, No. 3, pp.136–139, DOI: 10.3126/hn.v19i0.15339.
Bhutta, I.A. (1999) ‘Achievements and issues in 20th century in small dams (rainwater
harvesting)’, Proceedings of the National Workshop on Water Resources Achievements and
Issues in 20th Century and Challenges for the Next Millennium, pp.64–69, Pakistan Council of
Research in Water Resources, Islamabad, Pakistan.
 Reaping socio-economic blessings of flowing water 341

Brabben, T. (2004) ‘Irrigation can sustain rural livelihoods: evidence from Bangladesh and Nepal’,
Journal of Agriculture and Social Science, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp.201–130.
Burney, N.A. (1995) ‘Socio-economic development and electricity consumption: a cross-country
analysis using the random coefficient method’, Energy Economics, Vol. 17, No. 3,
pp.185–195, DOI: 10.1016/0140-9883(95)00012-j.
Cheema, M.A. (1997) ‘Base line survey for farmer’s organizations of Mirwal and Shahpur small
dams’, International Irrigation Management Institute Report, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp.36–39.
Eberts, P.R. (1980) ‘Socio-economic models in renewable natural resource utilization’, Renewable
Resources: A Systematic Approach, pp.171–219, DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-158350-7.50013-7.
Gul, E., Chaudhry, I.S. and Fatima, F. (2012) ‘Economic evaluation of project sites using cardinal
numbers approach’, Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp.485–495.
Hayat, R. (2010) ‘Contribution of water use efficiency of summer legumes for the production of
rain fed wheat’, International Journal of Agriculture and Biology, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp.655–660.
Hoege, K. (2002) ‘Dams and dikes: benefits, costs and option assessment’, Proceedings of the
Symposium, World Water Day, pp.3–11, DOI: 10.1201/b12889-3.
Kessides, C. (1993) ‘The contributions of infrastructure to economic development: a review of
experience and policy implications’, World Bank Publications, Vol. 32, pp.103–109.
Kiani, A.K. (2008) ‘Farm size and productivity in Pakistan’, European Journal of Social Sciences,
Vol. 7, No. 2, pp.42–52.
Orr, L. (1977) ‘Energy and human welfare: alternative technologies for power production’,
Resource Recovery and Conservation, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp.279–280, DOI: 10.1016/
0304-3967(77)90017-8.
Pettingill, L. (2006) ‘Environmental vs. economic benefits of dams from different perspectives’,
World Environmental and Water Resource Congress 2006, pp.113–123, DOI: 10.1061/
40856(200)461.
Pradhan, G.L. (2010) ‘Village development through hydropower’, Hydro Nepal, Vol. 5, pp.36–39,
DOI: 10.3126/hn.v5i0.2492.
Preziosi, M. (2008) ‘Probabilistic assessment of small earth fill dams’, Dams and Reservoirs,
Vol. 18, No. 1, pp.27–30, DOI: 10.1680/dare.2008.18.1.27.
Rajović, G. (2013) ‘Natural resources as a factor of socio-economic development: the case North
Eastern Montenegro’, Journal of Energy and Natural Resources, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp.7–26,
DOI: 10.11648/j.jenr.20130202.11.
Shrestha, R.S. (2010) ‘West Seti hydroelectric project: assessment of its contribution to Nepal’s
economic development’, Hydro Nepal, Vol. 5, pp.45–76, DOI: 10.3126/hn.v5i0.2478.
Singal, S.K. (2010) ‘Planning and implementation of small hydropower projects’, Hydro Nepal,
Vol. 5, pp.17–56, DOI: 10.3126/hn.v5i0.2480.
Song, Y.J. (2011) ‘Analysis and research on evaluation of economy benefits of small watershed
warping dams system’, AMR, Vol. 6, No. 6, pp.403–408, DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/
amr.403-408.3026.
Sørensen, B. (2016) ‘Resources and economic welfare’, Energy, Resources and Welfare, pp.5–53,
DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-803218-3.00002-1.
Toba, N. (2007) ‘Welfare impacts of electricity generation sector reform in the Philippines’, Energy
Policy, Vol. 35, No. 12, pp.6145–6162, DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2007.07.018.
World Commission on Dams (2000) Dams and Development: A New Framework for Decision
Making, p.356, Earthscan Publications Limited, London.