The Mekong, one of the world's great rivers, rises in high Tibet and flows through a gap in the mountains of eastern China. Below the Chinese border forms the boundary between Laos and Burma and then between Laos and Thailand, then wanders into Cambodia, then crosses the southern part of the Republic of Vietnam, whence finally, fanning out in a broad delta area, it reaches the China Sea. It carries about the same volume of water as the Mississippi, and a far greater burden of economic and political problems.
The still unharnessed Mekong has enormous technical possibilities for irrigation, hydropower, and flood control. A number of substantial engineering and scientific studies already have been made on a multilateral basis along the reaches of the river south of China. As elsewhere in the world, these physical considerations, troublesome as some of them may be, are the simplest of the problems. The engineers know how to build big dams, locks, and power plants. It is the economic and social questions—such as when and whether the investment would pay out, how the costs and benefits should be shared, how patterns of agriculture and family living would be affected—that are the hardest. There has been little inquiry along these lines, at a time when new national aspirations in a troubled southeast Asia have sharpened and colored the already keen interest in development.
Last fall, at the invitation of the committee for Coordination of Investigations of the Lower Mekong (organized with the help of the UN's Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East) a team of social scientists surveyed the needs for social and economic data and analysis that would be required in a well-rounded plan for developing the Mekong. The work was supported by the Ford Foundation. John V. Krutilla, associate director of RFF's water resources research program, served as a member of the group which was headed by Gilbert White, professor of geography at the University of Chicago.
"We have just done the length and breadth of the Mekong," Krutilla wrote in one letter to RFF colleagues, "from the delta to Luang Prabang by airplane, Land Rover, power boat, and—on one venturesome stretch—by armored column. From Vientiane to Luang Prabang we flew up the gorge of the Mekong as it cuts through the mountains. To get some idea of the spectacle, just imagine the Grand Tetons (without the snow) hundreds of miles in every direction with a river like the Mississippi flowing through them."
In the course of more leisurely side trips, Krutilla noted the wide variety of economic and social situations—for example, present generating capacity of 8,000 kilowatts and no rail or truck links with the outside world in one area where a 2,000,000 kilowatt plant is an engineering possibility. Yet lack of communication does not keep out economic repercussions from far away. "Because of floods and kenaf [a fiber used in rope making] crop failures in Pakistan last year, farmers in northeast Thailand made a killing, replaced thatch with corrugated metal roofs and otherwise improved the appearance of things considerably. The prosperity was short-lived. This year the price of kenaf is down from 5¢ to 10¢ per kilo."
Even the great Mekong floods, Krutilla added, have their place in the traditional economy, flooding riceland without the benefit of irrigation works and leaving behind ponds and lakes from which the people net fish with ease. The interval between the old ways and the new, presumably better, future could be painful.
"To avoid the risk that some of the development projects now being discussed might turn out to be colossal embarrassments to everyone concerned, it is important to have plans that embrace far more than the engineering features ... This is a large order and sometimes the problem seems as intractable as a bushel basket full of wire coat hangers, but I think we are making progress."
A version of this article appeared in print in the February 1962 issue of Resources magazine.
