This is because this position fails to consider that issues of injustice usually do not take in to account the benefits of certain projects in the long term. As Blackorby et al. (2002) suggest, social choices and planning decision are not made in a vacuum, and the choices and policies of the present have a direct impact on future generations. It seems obvious that whilst this dam may reduce the capabilities of the people directly affected in the local area, it could have substantial benefits over a larger region. An example of this comes from India and the Sardar Sarovar dam, where Wood (1993) suggests that whilst the dam may cause harm to those in the valley, it will produce substantial amounts of hydroelectric power, drinking water, flood protection, and habitat for certain species. Arguably, these benefits will be spread to more people and will enhance the capabilities of those affected, at the expense of harming a few people than those who have been affected. Moreover, the negative effects of the dam could be easily remedied with proper investment and planning. From this, it seems acceptable and just in this situation that the dam should be built because even though some people from either side are being affected, at a larger scale greater goods are being produced for a greater number of …show more content…
The American government holds a trust doctrine between themselves and native peoples, which denotes that the government must protect tribal lands, protect their right to self-government, and act in good faith towards the tribe (Tsiosie, 2003). Whilst we can infer that the land of the native Americans was not protected fully, we do not know the specific treaty that was held between the natives and the government. Whilst it is unlikely that the natives would allow the US to dam the river, it is conceivable. Moreover, there are examples that suggest that many nations may have lobbied and approved to have this facility on the river. An example of this is the initial approval of the waste facility in the Navajo reservation cited by Cole & Foster (2001) due to its economic benefits. Another instance of tribal power being respected is the construction of the Dalles Dam, where a cash settlement was agreed with the native people to offset the negative benefits of the dam (Church et al. 2015). This example also implies that the building of the dam was necessary, but the government still wanted to provide good faith to those