Unequal power relations generated by river fragmentation exist within multilayered sociopolitical dynamics. Despite location-specific differences, global analysis presents overarching patterns of hydro development implications. Conflicts continue to rise between those that own the legal right to alter river flows, and those that maintain a relationship dependent on the continuation of historical flow regimes. While it is argued that “ecological problems arise from deep-seated social problems,” it could also be interpreted that various social problems have been generated through a misevaluation and thus mismanagement of natural resources like rivers (Barbosa 2009, 30). Often, it is at a local community level where resistances to environmental injustices are most effectively combatted. However, the complex dynamics river basins exploitations produce must not only be analyzed on a multilayered platform, but also mitigated using strategies that draw from more than one field. More quantifiable factors which induce social responses include community displacements, heritage site losses, food security issues, potable water quality degradation, and land damages due to infrastructure construction (Cernea 2004). Ambiguous results often emphasize a general lack of sufficient compensation for quantifiable factors, in addition to intricate economic impacts and community tensions.
Fragmented or delayed information regarding a hydro project in a community deters the ability to make well-educated responses and decisions during a relevant time period. “Social perceptions of the environment are affected by political, economic, and social processes, where those in power often manipulate scientific knowledge to further their own interests” (Campbell 2009, 93). Recognizing the potential for manipulation and fragmentation of information regarding river development is important when considering the potential for large profit margins in the private sector. Furthermore, unofficial compensations and promises such as job opportunities and energy access have contributed to a pattern of intercommunity disagreements over development in many cases. While a citizen energy accessibility gap is felt by many countries, and hydropower is often promoted as a means to close this void, the added energy is often not directed towards citizen energy demand. For example, both Kenya and Tanzania could “supply the whole population with electricity by their hydropower capacity installed at present, if it were not used by industry, for example, for mining operations” (Zarfl 2014, 167).
River development resistance movements, although highly variable based on project type, size, basin flow dependencies, economic relationships, overarching political contexts, and other factors, have become commonalities in many hydro intensive countries. In spite of the conflicting goals of resistance movements and the political and financial powers endorsing hydro development, social strategies have the potential to motivate and shape fundamental changes in water management systems. The extent to which this impact is realized, however, depends greatly on the effectiveness and momentum of multilayered resistance strategies.