Dorna Javan - Radio Zamaneh - August 1, 2022
The drying of Lake Urmia is caused by a combination of complex factors, and simple media coverage or generalizations are not enough to fully grasp the situation. Reviving the lake will require more than just technical solutions; it will also need a deep understanding of the region's social, political, and economic context, as well as consideration of the needs and demands of the local population.
The existing chaos in Iran's media and social networks, along with their significant silence or rushed coverage of the ecological crisis surrounding the drying of Lake Urmia following recent online campaigns and Twitter storms, is the primary motivation for writing this piece.
This chaos, confusion, and often distortion of public opinion, fueled by the dissemination of misleading and unscientific information under the hashtag #SaveUrmiaLake, not only does not help this campaign but acts as a destructive force against a "collective action" in a political-social space like Iran, where collective action and activists are harshly suppressed.
The factors behind the drying of Lake Urmia over the past 20 years and the reasons for the failure of its revival projects in the past 8 years are numerous, multifaceted, and complex. Media and group-driven simplifications not only fail to explain the complexity of the crisis but also contribute to the crisis itself.
Therefore, here I aim to address the complexity of this issue, contrary to what has been portrayed in recent media productions, including some Persian-language media abroad that had previously remained silent on the demands of the people of Azerbaijan and Lake Urmia but have now suddenly raised their voices. I want to demonstrate that, contrary to the approach of some of these media outlets, the core problem lies within the overall system and structure, and discussing issues like the incompetence and corruption of local officials or blaming the people only diverts public attention from the root causes of the issue. The people, who have a legitimate demand to prevent the destruction of their environment and the dangers of a large-scale ecological disaster, should be recognized and supported for their sense of responsibility and collective action, rather than being victims of multifaceted repression by a central-focused civil society.
The Simplifications that Cause Problems
Despite the crucial importance of studying the "limitations of a political system and policymaking," which is analyzed through the "public action" research approach, unfortunately, we continue to witness confusion, disjointed statements, vagueness, and ignorance in the various levels of "generalization" of an issue like the ecological disaster of Lake Urmia's drying.
In light of the news and reports that have emerged in recent weeks about the critical situation of Lake Urmia, civil and political activists, as well as the people of the Azerbaijan region, have launched widespread protests on social media to attract the attention of the government, representatives, and relevant officials. The peak of this was the #UrmiaLake or #SaveUrmiaLake virtual campaign, which unexpectedly became a trend without support from Iran's mainstream media. However, some central activists and Persian-language media outlets employed a specific strategy to counter these protests: reducing the crisis to the incompetence of local officials, deflecting responsibility, and blaming the people of the region.
The first wave of ecological protest movements, which included ecological mobilizations involving various political-social actors (2006–2015) in East and West Azerbaijan cities, was met with neglect and was not covered by central civil society and Persian-language media, both inside and outside the country. Today, after 17 years, this movement has gained significant attention, although it has been accompanied by a distortion of public opinion from the people’s demands. This uncooperative, irresponsible, and repressive movement not only strengthens the notion of a fragmented Iranian society but also acts as a key factor in the rise of radical groups in ethnic regions, who have lost hope in the central civil society and intellectuals.
The reductionist and deflecting approach to the Lake Urmia crisis by central media, which excludes the primary audience of this movement—namely the state and the political system—shifts the focus to factors at a smaller or local level, thus removing the main audience from scrutiny and demands. So, one must ask: Why does the focus of demand shift to the demanders of the issue? Why, overnight, is the Lake Urmia basin transformed into an autonomous region with officials seemingly representing the entire region? Why is the critique not directed at a complex policymaking system that clearly operates in a centralized and focused manner, but rather at the local people because of the outcomes of this system?
I will begin answering these questions by examining one of the main factors behind this chaos, which is one of the primary causes of this crisis—the neglect of the interdisciplinary approach. This is critical both in addressing the Lake Urmia issue and in understanding its drying process, as well as in the policymaking stages, from decision-making to the implementation and evaluation of revival projects. In the second and final part of the article, I will discuss the reasons behind the drying of Lake Urmia to show the impact of human factors and large-scale policymaking in creating this crisis.
The Gap in Interdisciplinary Studies: When Sociology is Excluded from the Lake Revival Process
The issue of Lake Urmia’s drying can be studied through various branches of science and different approaches. However, the complex and lengthy process of its revival and saving it—i.e., preventing this ecological disaster—requires an interdisciplinary approach that includes both natural sciences and engineering studies on one hand and social sciences on the other.
Understanding and studying the technical aspects of Lake Urmia’s drying through the branches of natural sciences, engineering, and geography plays a crucial role in accessing information regarding physical changes in the lake, the effects and results of its drying, as well as obtaining data on meteorological changes in the region, ecological features of the water and soil, recording morphological changes, the water and ecological balance of the lake over specific time periods, and data related to human activities in the lake’s watershed. However, another part of this process involves studies in political science, sociology, and interdisciplinary studies related to policy examination, decision-making, execution, and evaluation, as well as organizational sociology and studies on social movements, grassroots mobilizations, popular participation, and their demands. These can all be analyzed under the concepts of "public action" and "collective action" in political science and sociology.
However, in recent years, the perspectives of social science experts in the study and implementation of projects related to Lake Urmia have largely been ignored. Primarily, two bureaucratic entities—the Lake Urmia Restoration Headquarters and the research group at Sharif University—along with the government, have paid little attention to these studies, and apparently no budget has been allocated for them. The situation is similar in academic research. Among the hundreds of articles and theses addressing Lake Urmia in the fields of natural sciences and engineering, few studies have examined water governance, the political and social issues surrounding it, and the legal aspects related to Lake Urmia. There has also been a lack of research in environmental policy and sociology.
 |
| Lake Urmia – Photo: Mojtaba Esmaeilzadeh |
The importance of the lack of studies from the perspective of social sciences can be examined at both the national and regional levels. Just as it is necessary at the national level to understand the mechanisms of a political system, its policy-making bodies, and its actors, at the local level, such knowledge of the decision-making bodies, their connection to central institutions, and an in-depth understanding of the social characteristics of the local community and its concerns is equally crucial. However, at the regional level, not only have studies related to the socio-political and demographic context of the region (based on field methods and in-depth or semi-structured interviews) rarely been conducted, but this neglect of the social and political dimensions of the crisis has continued sharply in research projects related to the restoration of Lake Urmia.
Unfortunately, while specialists in fields like climatology, water resources, agriculture, soil science, geology, and environmental sciences have been extensively involved in the ecological crisis studies of Lake Urmia, social science experts have not been similarly engaged. This lack of involvement is one of the primary reasons for the failure of the restoration projects for Lake Urmia.
The importance of social science studies in this regard stems first from the epistemological (knowledge-based) and empirical (experiential) need for detailed understanding of the political, social, economic, cultural, and ethnographic context. The absence of this information can undermine the implementation and results of projects, even if technical water-related projects around Lake Urmia are carried out correctly. For example, failed initiatives like "no-cultivation," "land use change," "locking well meters," or "drip irrigation," all part of the projects executed by the Lake Urmia Restoration Headquarters, can be cited. These failures are primarily due to a lack of understanding of the social-economic and ethnographic characteristics of the region.
Therefore, studies that neglect to address the local community and its political, social, and economic features—ranging from past concerns in the region to inter-institutional relations, hierarchical structures of power, and the conflicting interests of political forces at the regional level—cannot be expected to succeed. Furthermore, such studies cannot be expected to influence the awareness of local people, whose participation is crucial for the success of these policies.
On the national level, these studies are important for identifying the primary causes of an ecological crisis or disaster and the political system's (i.e., the government and its institutions) approach to addressing it. These studies are especially significant in a system that is highly centralized and directly impacts regional political and economic structures, causing regional bureaucratic bodies to also face the consequences. Thus, social science studies, which focus on the mechanisms of the political system, power relations, inter-institutional relationships, decision-making processes, budget allocation, policy-making, implementation, and evaluation—while also paying attention to social, economic, and public demands—are crucial in understanding the root causes of the problem and can strengthen regional projects and raise local awareness.
Yet, despite the extensive involvement of engineers and experts in climatology, water resources, agriculture, soil science, and environmental studies in the ecological crisis of Lake Urmia, social science experts have been scarcely engaged. This neglect remains one of the principal causes of the failure of the restoration projects.
Revisiting the question: Why did Lake Urmia dry up? Neglecting the question of why Lake Urmia dried up answers the question many are asking today: Why wasn’t the lake restored? Contrary to the claims made during Ahmadinejad's administration, Lake Urmia did not experience drought in previous centuries, nor was it affected by global climate change—although this issue is also, on a global scale, a result of human activities, including the production and emission of greenhouse gases. Instead, its drying up was mainly the result of anthropogenic factors, i.e., human activities in the lake's watershed area—activities driven by national-level policies and large-scale projects.
Proving the role of this factor—the human origin of Lake Urmia’s drying—was not easy for earth scientists and water experts, especially in the face of media campaigns during Ahmadinejad's administration, which attempted to attribute the cause to climate change. Some of the sampling for laboratory studies from the lake bed was conducted under difficult and unusual conditions, such as nighttime and secretive operations. After the first popular protests in Azerbaijan in April 2010, the shores of the lake were under the control of security forces for a while. This example, the restriction on sampling and research studies in Lake Urmia between 2010 and 2013, authorized by official government permits, is indicative of the heavy security atmosphere surrounding the issue. In the meantime, the delay in addressing the ecological disaster and applying "political measures" to restore it further worsened the lake’s condition in the 2010s, complicating restoration efforts.
Human activities, which were mainly implemented in line with national-level policy-making, are responsible for about 80% of the lake’s drying and the drying of other wetlands and aquatic ecosystems in the country. These include agricultural development plans, policies for self-sufficiency in food production, issues related to water governance, the management of water resources, and the lack of integrated water management—all of which can be classified under national development policies. The limitations and flaws in the policy-making, implementation, and evaluation systems, the presence of clientelistic relationships in the policy-making system, conflicts of interest between the Ministry of Energy and the Ministry of Agriculture, and the existence of groups ambiguously referred to as the "water mafia" are some of the factors that have contributed to the crisis.
Indeed, these factors at the national level have led to water crises and multiple ecological disasters across the country, to the extent that no region remains unaffected by water stress in both surface and underground water resources. Ninety-two percent of Iran's water share is used in agriculture—at least 30% of which evaporates due to outdated irrigation techniques and other technical issues—while agricultural productivity is lower compared to neighboring countries that use less water in agriculture. Although this issue has been raised since the 2000s and has been a point of contention between the Ministry of Energy and the Ministry of Agriculture, it has yet to be addressed within the framework of national policy-making.
As explained in public action studies, the analysis of water policies and environmental policies within the context of the country’s political structure and policy-making is essential. At the regional level, which is an extension of these national policies, several events over the past 30 years have contributed to the crisis in Lake Urmia. These include the expansion of agricultural land, land-use changes, the shift in crops to water-intensive products like orchards and sugar beet farms, road construction, and the presence of over 100 dams and thousands of legal and illegal wells in the watershed area, all of which are physical and technical factors in the lake’s drying. On the political and structural side, issues such as "violations of the law," "bureaucratic corruption," and "clientelist relationships" among various organizations and the restoration headquarters, as well as the influence of interest groups disrupting the implementation of policies and projects, are key political and structural factors contributing to this crisis. Undoubtedly, both the physical-technical and political-structural factors are outcomes of the policymaking of a centralized system.
In such a system, where studies on the complexities of macro-policies, the barriers and causes of failure in policy implementation, and the institutional and legal deficiencies are rarely conducted, we are now witnessing the advancement of projects aimed at rehabilitating an ecological disaster, focusing on physical and technical solutions, without epistemological understanding of the political, economic, social, and ethnographic context of the Urmia Lake basin. As long as the structural deficiencies of the system, along with the obstacles and limitations of "public action," are not studied, "public policy analysis" and consequently "policy evaluation" will yield no results or achievements.
The formation of the Urmia Lake Restoration Headquarters, which occurred in 2013 due to the widespread protests of people in West Azerbaijan, East Azerbaijan, and Ardabil, was partly the result of the populist slogans of presidential candidates during the election campaigns. Hassan Rouhani’s promises in the region and their implementation, including the establishment of the National Working Group for the Urmia Lake Rescue and subsequent formation of restoration headquarters in East and West Azerbaijan, were rushed, without careful planning or consideration of the flaws in the policy-making system.
The research projects that were never carried out or were abandoned midway, the unfinished infrastructure projects, and the numerous incomplete plans aimed at attracting public participation were all projects intended for the restoration of Urmia Lake that were funded but failed precisely due to the lack of social-political studies and infrastructure. Despite this, there has still been no accurate assessment of the programs and projects carried out by the Urmia Lake Restoration Headquarters — whose allocated budget remains shrouded in ambiguity, with no transparency regarding them.
However, what can be directly assessed through the "observation" of the Urmia Lake basin is the following: the situation is worsening, and a massive pool of millions of tons of salt, the harmful effects of which on the lives and health of the local population become more apparent by the day, is all that remains of the once beautiful and vibrant lake.
After 17 years of demands and ecological mobilizations in the Urmia Lake basin by various groups, environmental NGOs, national minority rights activists, and some local officials, the people of the region are still relentlessly pursuing their rightful claim. But will the lake be restored?
Perhaps experts in the fields of water and environmental science may have a different opinion, and scientific, technical-engineering "ecological" solutions may still be on the table, but my answer to this question, considering the approach of the policy-making system in Iran and the country's water and environmental policies, and in general, considering the structure and characteristics of its political system, is unfortunately negative. This is because even if technical solutions, such as releasing a percentage of water from dams and gradually restoring the lake in the long term — which some experts believe is the most reasonable solution — are possible, the limitations of the policy-making system in the country, which I have discussed, prevent their realization.
In fact, it must be said that engineering solutions, infrastructural projects, or agricultural control measures in the region, such as reducing irrigation and regularly providing water rights to the lake, will only succeed if they are accompanied by precise studies and research on the political, social, economic, and cultural characteristics of the region, as well as the demands and concerns of its people. Furthermore, this must be paired with deep reforms in the political structure and a reduction in the limitations of the policy-making system. Otherwise, the restoration of the lake will not be possible.