Burkina Faso is phasing out the production of genetically modified cotton introduced by Monsanto Co., the world’s largest seed company, because growers are unhappy with the short length of its fibre.
Monsanto spokesman, Billy Brennan
Africa’s biggest cotton grower is reducing the acreage for genetically modified cotton this season until it’s completely phased out in 2018 and replaced by conventional cotton, the West African nation’s cabinet said in a statement published late on Wednesday.
The results of a pilot project with Monsanto that began in 2003 “aren’t favourable in the sense that the length of the fibre after ginning has degraded and no longer responds to the needs of the market,” according to the statement.
The decision may negatively impact Burkina Faso’s status as a top cotton exporter, hurt employment and increase farmers’ exposure to pesticides, Monsanto spokesman Billy Brennan said in an e-mailed statement. “We continue to have discussions” to “find a path towards mutual resolution” for genetically modified cotton in Burkina Faso, Brennan said.
The nation’s three cotton companies and the national cotton farmers’ union will seek 48 billion CFA francs ($82 million) in compensation for lost harvests from Monsanto, Helene Traore, a spokeswoman of Sofitex, one of the companies, said by phone. They’re scheduled to meet for talks with Monsanto next week, she added.
The U.S. Foreign Agricultural Service said in a report earlier this month that Burkina Faso’s cotton producers had planned to meet with Monsanto in late March to try to solve the issue.
“We’ve lost years because of this cotton,” said Mana Denis, a cotton farmer in the western city of Dedougou who welcomed the announcement. “They imposed it on us, but it didn’t produce the desired effects,” he said Thursday.
The 2016-2017 crop is estimated at 700,000 tons, the government said in the statement. Neighbouring Mali is the region’s second-biggest producer, while Ivory Coast ranks third. Cotton is the nation’s second-biggest export after gold and accounts for 20 percent of shipments.
The first decade of the 21st century was ripe with discoveries and innovations in the animal kingdom. From 2001 to 2010, new species were found, ground-breaking animal research was published, and some species were brought back from the brink of extinction. But the past 10 years also saw some animals wiped from existence.
Here’s a look at the species that were declared extinct this decade, with the West African black rhino topping the list.
West African black rhino
West African black rhino
The rarest of the black rhino subspecies, the West African black rhinoceros, is now recognised by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) as extinct. The species, Diceros bicornis longpipes, was once widespread in central Africa, but the population began a steep decline due to poaching. The rhino was listed as “critically endangered” in 2008, but a survey of the animal’s last remaining habitat in northern Cameroon failed to find any sign of the rhinos, either a true siting or even evidence of its presence, like feces or feeding signs. No West African black rhinos are known to be held in captivity.
Baiji dolphin
Baiji dolphin
The last documented sighting of China’s baiji dolphin, or Yantze River dolphin, was in 2002, and while the species is listed as critically endangered, scientists say it may already be extinct. In 2006, scientists from the Baiji Foundation travelled up the Yangtze River for more than 2,000 miles equipped with optical instruments and underwater microphones, but were unable to detect any surviving dolphins. The foundation published a report on the expedition and declared the animal functionally extinct, meaning too few potential breeding pairs remained to ensure the species’ survival.
The decline in the baiji dolphin population is attributed to a variety of factors including overfishing, boat traffic, habitat loss, pollution and poaching. Deemed “the goddess of the river,” the dolphin’s skin was highly valuable and used to make gloves and handbags.
Golden Toad
Golden toad
The golden toad, which is sometimes referred to as the Monteverde toad or the orange toad, was a species that lived only in the Monteverde Cloud Forest Biological Reserve in Costa Rica. It was once a common species, but no specimen has been seen since 1989. The toad’s breeding sites were well-known and closely watched — in 1988, only eight males and two females could be found, and in 1989, only a single male could be located. Extensive searches for the golden toad since then have failed to locate another specimen, and the species was declared extinct in August 2007. The amphibian disease chytridiomycosis, airborne pollution and global warming probably contributed to the species’ demise.
Hawaiian Crow
Hawaiian crow
This native Hawaiian bird was declared “extinct in the wild” in 2002 when the last two known wild individuals disappeared. Some birds remain in captivity, and between 1993 and 1999, more than 40 birds were hatched in a captive breeding program. The birds were released into a lightly managed habitat and closely monitored, but releases were abandoned in 1999 because of increasing mortality. A reintroduction plan is being developed, but about 75 Hawaiian crows would be needed for the plan to work. The reasons for the bird’s extinction is not fully understood, but researchers speculate that an introduced disease, such as avian malaria, might have played a significant role in the species’ decline.
An illustration of Pyrenean iIbex
Pyrenean ibex
The Pyrenean ibex is one of two extinct subspecies of the Spanish ibex. The species was once numerous and roamed across France and Spain, but by the early 1900s its numbers had fallen to fewer than 100. The last Pyrenean ibex, a female nicknamed Celia, was found dead in northern Spain on Jan. 6, 2000, killed by a falling tree. Scientists took skin cells from the animal’s ear and preserved them in liquid nitrogen, and in 2009 an ibex was cloned, making it the first species to become “unextinct.” However, the clone died just seven minutes later due to lung defects.
What caused the Pyrenean ibex’s extinction remains unknown, but some hypotheses include poaching, diseases and the inability to compete with other species for food.
Spixs macaw
Spix’s macaw
Although 71 Spix’s macaws exist in captivity (like the two pictures here), the last known bird in the wild disappeared in 2000 and no others are known to remain. The species is currently listed as “critically endangered” instead of “extinct in the wild” because not all areas of potential habitat have been thoroughly surveyed. The bird is native to northern Brazil and in 1987 the three known remaining birds were captured for trade. However, a single male bird was discovered in 1990 and paired with a female bird in captivity, but seven weeks after the female’s release, she collided with a power line and died.
The decline of the Spix’s macaw is attributed to hunting and trapping, habitat destruction and the introduction of Africanised bees, or “killer bees,” which compete for nesting sites.
Liverpool pigeon
Liverpool pigeon
The Liverpool pigeon, or spotted green pigeon, is an extinct bird species of unknown origin, although some researchers speculate it might have lived in Tahiti. The only remaining specimen of the bird resides in the Merseyside County Museum, and scientists say it’s likely that the species was close to extinction before European exploration began in the Pacific. The International Union for Conservation of Nature assessed the species in 2008 and declared it extinct, but the reasons for its extinction remain unknown.
Black faced honey creeper
Black-faced honeycreeper
The black-faced honeycreeper, or po’o-uli, is endemic to Hawaii’s island of Maui and is listed as “critically endangered/possibly extinct.” Of the three known birds discovered in 1998, one died in captivity in 2004 and the remaining two have not been seen since that year. Scientists say the species may already be extinct, but surveys in all areas of potential habitat are needed to confirm this. If any have survived, the population would be extremely small. Habitat destruction and the rapid spread of disease-carrying mosquitoes are thought to be responsible for the species’ decline.
An impression of Alaotra grebe
Alaotra grebe
The alaotra grebe, which is also known as a Delacour’s little grebe or a rusty grebe, was declared extinct in 2010, although it might have been extinct years earlier. Scientists were hesitant to write the small bird off too soon because it lived in Lake Alaotra, which is located in a remote part of Madagascar. Thorough surveys of the area in 1989, 2004 and 2009 failed to find any evidence of the species, and the last confirmed sighting of the bird was in 1982.
The alaotra grebe population began to decline in the 20th century because of habitat destruction and because the few remaining birds started mating with little grebes, creating a hybrid species. Considering the bird’s restricted range and lack of mobility, scientists declared it extinct, and today, only one photograph exists of an alotra grebe in the wild.
Holdridge’s toad
Holdridge’s toad
The Holdridge’s toad was a species endemic to the rainforests of Costa Rica. While it was declared extinct in 2004 because the animal has not been seen since 1986, surveys in 2012 resulted in the toad’s status being upgraded to critically endangered. Its population size is likely less than 50 individual toads. The main cause of the toad’s population decline and extinction is likely chytridiomycosis, an amphibian disease, perhaps in collaboration with the effects of climate change.
The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA) has said that, during the last year, African farmers planted a total of 3.5 million hectares of Biotech/GM Crops. This was also during the 20th year of global GM crops commercialisation.
Dr. Margaret Karembu
Director of the Afri-Centre of ISAAA, Dr. Margaret Karembu, who presented Africa’s report during the launch of the 2015 Annual Report on Global Commercialisation of Biotech Crops, said that so much was achieved in the continent on biotechnology and biosafety during the year under review.
“For Africa, 2015 was the 18th year of successful commercialisation of biotech crops. The cumulative hectarage from 1998 to 2015 in Africa stood at 3.5 million hectares (Ha). Three countries, Burkina Faso (350,000 Ha), South Africa (2.3 million Ha) and Sudan (120,000 Ha) spearheaded the commercialisation of biotech crops. This production of biotech crops translated to an estimated economic benefit of approximately $2 billion,” Dr. Karembu said.
The exponential growth, according to her, was recorded in spite of severe drought that led to crop failure in many countries of the continent.
“For instance, a devastating drought in South Africa contributed to a 23% decline in hectarage, demonstrating the vulnerability of the continent to climate change. In 2015, South Africa approved the drought tolerant maize trait under WEMA – Water Efficient Maize for Africa project. This timely intervention will go a long way in mitigating the effects of climate change on food security.
“In Burkina Faso, the government in consultation with key players in the cotton industry decided to temporarily scale down the hectarage under insect resistant (Bt) cotton over the next two years. This will allow scientists to address the short-staple length issue observed in current varieties. The short-staple length issues are in no way related to the Bt technology, which continues to offer numerous benefits. By 2014, the farm income gains accrued by Burkinabe farmers amounted to $41 million,” she explained.
Karembu further said that Sudan’s 4th year of Bt cotton growing recorded an impressive 95% adoption rate for which hectarage under Bt cotton soared six-fold from 20,000 ha in 2012 to 120,000 ha in 2015. “Close to 45,000 farmers planted Bt cotton in 2015 compared to the initial 10,000 farmers in 2012 indicating satisfaction with the technology.”
The Director further said that, in the last 18 years, eight countries had conducted and are still conducting trials on crops that would address African challenges. “The research focuses on key food security crops such as banana, cassava, cowpea, sorghum, sweet potato, maize, potato and rice. As a result, Africa could contribute five new biotech crops to the global biotech basket in the coming years.”
In the biosafety regulatory landscape, she said that South Africa was the only country that had Biosafety Law by 1998. “After then, 19 other African countries have developed their biosafety legislation and, in 2015, Africa’s most populous country, Nigeria, enacted its biosafety law in order to tap into the technology’s benefits. In the same year, Kenya’s National Biosafety Authority for the first time, received two applications for open field cultivation of genetically modified maize and cotton,” Karembu said, adding that initiatives to operationalise biosafety laws in other countries as well as the harmonisation of regional biosafety policies were ongoing.
Although during the period 1996 to 2015, biotech maize was successfully grown globally in about 15 countries by millions of farmers on 600 million hectares and benefitting $50 billion of increased revenues, “Except South Africa, farmers in Africa, where the need for improved maize is greatest, suffered a big opportunity cost because they were denied the chance to adopt biotech crops for lack of regulation and support in their respective countries.
“In addition to maize, biotech cotton gave enormous benefit to farmers especially in China and India. In 2014 and 2015, an impressive 95 percent of India’s cotton crop was planted with biotech seed while China’s adoption in 2015 was 96 percent. Between 1997 and 2014, biotech cotton varieties brought an estimated $17.5 billion worth of benefits to Chinese cotton farmers, and they realised $1.3 billion in 2014 alone,” Karembu further said.
She called on African governments to focus on accelerating adoption of those proven technologies that were appropriate in addressing Africa’s unique challenges and reposition itself towards being a global player in development and ownership of emerging technologies.
The last of the four scheduled Regional Meetings ahead of Habitat III, the United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development, will hold 18-20 April 2016 in Toluca, Mexico. Habitat III is billed to take place in Quito, Ecuador, from 17 to 20 October this year.
Toluca, Mexico
The three-day forum in Mexico represents that for the Latin America and the Caribbean region.
Previous Regional Meetings held in Jakarta, Indonesia 21-22 October 2015 (Asia-Pacific); Abuja, Nigeria 24-26 February 2016 (Africa); and Prague, Czech Republic 16-18 March 2016 (Europe/North America).
Similarly, Thematic Meetings have held as stakeholders countdown to Quito. These gatherings were at: Tel-Aviv, Israel 7 September 2015 (Civic Engagement); Montreal, Canada 6-7 October 2015 (Metropolitan Areas); Cuenca, Ecuador 9 – 11 Nov 2015 (Intermediate Cities); Abu Dhabi, UAE 20 January 2016 (Sustainable Energy and Cities); Mexico City, Mexico 9-11 March 2016 (Financing Sustainable Urban Development); Barcelona, Spain 4 – 5 April 2016 (Public Spaces); and Pretoria South Africa 7 – 8 April 2016 (Informal Settlements).
According to the organisers, the aim of the Toluca meeting is to exchange views and experiences, as well as to propose inputs to the formulation of a New Urban Agenda that should provide principles and tools for sustainable urban development.
Themed “Liveable and Inclusive Cities: The Global Challenge of Sustainable Development”, the conference will debate approaches and new paradigms that will constitute the future of cities in the region. Recognising the differences between countries, governments will meet to make commitments that will impact the definition of the New Urban Agenda.
Toluca, officially called Toluca de Lerdo, is the state capital of State of Mexico as well as the seat of the Municipality of Toluca. It is the centre of a rapidly growing urban area, now the fifth largest in Mexico.
Indeed, in resolution 66/207 and in line with the bi-decennial cycle (1976, 1996 and 2016), the United Nations General Assembly decided to convene the Habitat III Conference to reinvigorate the global commitment to sustainable urbanisation, to focus on the implementation of a “New Urban Agenda”, building on the Habitat Agenda of Istanbul in 1996.
Member States of the General Assembly, in resolution 67/216, decided that the objectives of the Conference are to secure renewed political commitment to sustainable urban development, assess accomplishments to date, address poverty, and identify and address new and emerging challenges. The Conference will result in a concise, focused, forward-looking and action oriented outcome document. Habitat III is to play an important role in making cities and human settlements equitable, prosperous, sustainable, just, equal and safe.
Habitat III is one of the first major global conferences to be held after the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Development and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Observers point out that it offers a unique opportunity to discuss the important challenge of how cities, towns and villages are planned and managed, in order to fulfil their role as drivers of sustainable development, and hence shape the implementation of new global development goals and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.
The final declarations from the Regional and Thematic Meetings are considered official inputs to the Habitat III process.
Peabody Energy Corporation, the world’s largest private-sector coal company, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on Wednesday (13 April 2016), spelling the end of coal and a bleak outlook for the entire fossil fuel industry.
Jenny Marienau, U.S. Divestment Campaign Manager with 350.org
Coal has been in a structural decline since 2013 and observers believe that the development highlights the need to create a comprehensive plan for a just transition away from fossil fuels.
“Peabody Energy’s bankruptcy is a harbinger of the end of the fossil fuel era,” said Jenny Marienau, U.S. Divestment Campaign Manager with 350.org. “Peabody is crashing because the company was unwilling to change with the times – they doubled down on the dirtiest of all fossil fuels, and investors backed their bet, as the world shifted toward renewable energy. They have consistently put profit over people, and now their profits have plummeted. Our world has no place for companies like Peabody.”
As oil prices plummet and renewable energy attracts record levels of investment, Peabody is the latest major United States-based coal corporation to file for bankruptcy. Peabody is the 50th coal company to declare bankruptcy since 2012, following announcements from Alpha Natural Resources and Arch Coal in the last few months.
In their 2014 SEC filings, Peabody citedthat the fossil fuel divestment movement “could significantly affect demand for our products or our securities.” During the Paris climate talks in December, 350.org and Divest-Invest announced that more than 500 institutions representing over $3.4 trillion had committed to some level of fossil fuel divestment.
“Peabody Energy has lost 95 cents on the dollar over the course of the last year. It’s more clear than ever that divestment is the morally and financially smart thing to do,” said 350.org’s Senior Global Analyst, Brett Fleishman. “The country’s largest pension systems urgently need to take a deep look at the fossil fuel companies on their books. This bankruptcy, in a series of others, will ripple through communities, leaving a wake of economic and environmental destruction. There is literally no reason every institutional investor shouldn’t divest from coal.”
In 2015, Peabody was found to have broken the law by providing false and misleading statements about the financial risks of climate change.
A coalition called on Peabody Energy’s President and CEO to take meaningful steps to protect the American public, the climate, public lands, and workers, calling on the company to withdraw pending coal lease applications, relinquish coal leases, and reclaim its mining operations.
“Institutions around the world are divesting from coal companies like Peabody because they see the writing on the wall: the fossil fuel age is coming to an end,” said May Boeve, 350.org Executive Director. “As we repower our economy with 100% renewable energy we must repower our communities, as well. That includes a just transition for Peabody’s employees and prioritizing workers in the fossil fuel industry. Peabody shouldn’t take these communities down with them.”
The groups also called on Peabody to ensure the needs of workers and retirees are fully met, and that communities – including the St. Louis community – are aided as they transition from coal.
“This is a company that wilfully and deliberately sought to delay, dismantle or destruct climate action. Perhaps if they had spent more time and money diversifying their business rather than on lobbying against climate action and sowing the seeds of doubt about the science, they might not have joined the long (and ever growing) list of bankrupt global coal companies,” said Bill McKibben, co-founder of 350.org.
This May, groups are coming together under an unprecedented mobilisation to Break Free from fossil fuels, targeting major fossil fuel projects around the world. Through this platform, the global fossil fuel resistance movement will join actions taking place across 6 continents which aim to stop dirty fossil fuels and speed up the just transition to 100% renewable energy.
“We are on the brink of a historic, global shift in our energy system,” said Marienau. “It’s high time that our governments invest in a just transition for the security of communities and workers rather than bail out destructive corporations like Peabody whose inherent business model depends on planetary destruction.”
A United States lawmaker, Gwen Moore, has written the president of the World Bank Group (WBG), raising concerns about the international finance organisation’s role in the water sector. The House of Representatives legislator, in the correspondence, called on the Bank to stop funding and promoting water privatisation pending an independent review and congressional hearings on conflicts of interest created by its investments in water privatisers.
Rep. Gwen Moore
The World Bank is alleged to be complicit in a controversial water Public Private Partnership (PPP) in Lagos.
Rep. Moore particularly noted the role of the World Bank private arm – the International Finance Corporation (IFC) – as advisor to governments and marketer of PPPs which, claims the Lagos-based Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the earth Nigeria (ERA/FoEN), have proved disastrous in several countries including the Philippines and India.
The letter, released on Tuesday (April 12), was addressed to World Bank President Dr. Jim Yong Kim, with copies to U.S. Secretary of Treasury Jacob Lew and newly appointed IFC Executive Vice President and CEO Philippe Le Houérou. It comes in the wake of the water crisis in Flint, Michigan, where an anti-democratic model of governing led to a public health catastrophe. The inquiry focuses on the WBG’s conflict of interest resulting from its multiple roles as advisor to governments, worldwide marketer of privatisation models – such as PPPs – and investor in private water corporations that benefit from the very projects it facilitates.
Moore, who is the Ranking Member of the Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee, has a key role overseeing the U.S.’s relationship with the WBG and other development institutions and has long been a champion of water access issues. Last year, the Congresswoman joined 22 other members of the Congressional Black Caucus in a letter of support to ERA/FoEN and other groups in Nigeria organising to block a planned water privatisation scheme in Lagos.
According to Moore: “Water access is a fundamental human right no matter where you live,” even as she added that, Dr. Kim and his team have the responsibility to put the World Bank’s mission – alleviating global poverty – above the pursuit of profits.
Shayda Naficy, a water privatisation expert at Corporate Accountability International, said: “The World Bank is stacking the deck, dealing the cards and placing all the bets, putting profits above human need. For years it has ignored the concerns of those most affected by this blind pursuit, but with Congress asking questions, it can no longer pursue this path with impunity.”
Moore’s letter comes as ERA/FoEN asked Governor Akinwunmi Ambode of Lagos State to make a public statement declaring his stance on a controversial PPP in the water sector in Lagos which the Bank said it cancelled after pressure from civil society and labour groups.
ERA/FoEN Deputy Director, Akinbode Oluwafemi, was quoted in a statement released on Wednesday as saying: “Rep. Moore’s correspondence is not only timely, it also captures the very questionable role played by the World Bank in denying the largest segment of society which cannot pay the fundamental right to a free gift of nature.
“It is shameful how the World Bank has for years been promoting a toxic PPP water privatisation scheme across the globe as success story. This wicked scheme was also sold to the Lagos government through an IFC advisory contract which civil society and labour rejected. While we still see the Lagos government tinkering with the idea, we make bold to say that access to water is a fundamental human right which is not negotiable.”
Oluwafemi pointed out that the Ambode administration must not shy away from its responsibility through a conspiracy of silence, even as he added that the state cannot be an exception in the march towards ensuring every citizen of the world is not denied the basic human right that water represents.
“We insist that the Lagos government reject contracts designed by, involving, or influenced by the IFC, which operates to maximize private profit and develop a comprehensive plan for achieving universal access to clean water in the state. This must be done in concert and with the full consent of the people. PPPs are not democratically designed. They are unacceptable,” insists the activist.
Gwen Moore is the U.S. Representative for Wisconsin’s 4th congressional district, serving since 2005. She is a member of the Democratic Party.
Minister of Environment, Amina J. Mohammed, has said that Nigeria is ready to deploy biotechnology to boost the nation’s economy.
A group photograph featuring, among others, Environment Minister, Mrs Amina Mohammed; Environment Minister of State, Ibrahim Usman Jibril; Director-General of NABDA, Professor Lucy Ogbadu; DG/CEO of NBMA, Mr. Rufus Ebegba; and Dr. Rose Maxwell Gidado, Country Coordinator of OFAB
She told media executives at the close of a courtesy visit to her office in Abuja on Tuesday by a delegation of the Open Forum on Agricultural Biotechnology (OFAB) in Africa Programming Committee (PC) that Nigeria is blessed with experts in biotechnology, and that the National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA) is there to ensure safety application of the technology.
In a statement endorsed by Dr. Rose Maxwell Gidado, Country Coordinator of OFAB, the minister reportedly revealed that biotechnology has a big role to play in the Great Green Wall project, “which has started and has an agency that is at the forefront to ensure that it is line with AU initiative.”
“We have 1,500 kilometers across and 15 kilometers deep, what we need to do is to make that corridor, an economic one, not just trees but economic trees, jobs for people, how we can deal with energy solutions, connecting services within agriculture, not just stopping the desert but reclaiming the desert,” Mrs. Mohammed was quoted as saying.
“The National Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA) can come in the area of economic trees. The gestation period for trees used to last for three, four years but today we are looking at eighteen months or less, that is biotechnology, this is where we need collaboration to ensure that we are able to do things quicker than usual, but we have to ensure safety and transparency in what we do. There are always good and bad sides, and we must take care of the bad side,” she adds.
Speaking on safety issues, the minister discloses, “We need more research and we need to listen to people where they have concerns, we have to answer those frequently asked questions because without responding to people’s concerns, we are leaving perception of not caring or not doing our homework. We have to be more open to people and transparent to everyone, also hear everyone’s concern and address them, with Biosafety Agency in place; we can begin to do that.”
Cautioning the Biosafety Agency, she underlined the need for education, saying: “Education is key; ignorance brings fear, opposition and pushes back things that are good for us. But with education, it is taken care off. Those involved in carrying people forward in the world of science forget and leave many behind and which becomes a challenge.
“I am grateful you are all here, helping us understand GMOs better. The administration under (President Muhammadu) Buhari is clear on diversification. NABDA is key, and has a role to play in the agricultural sector, that is why the agency needs to educate the public. We all need to collaborate to make every Nigerian feel comfortable about the technology. Many people need to be carried along. At the moment, there is drought in Ethiopia, which could also affect other African countries and that’s why the technology is being considered for use to overcome this drought challenge. Nigeria needs to prepare ahead. Nigeria needs to button up but safety must be ensured,” she enthuses.
In her remarks, the Director-General of NABDA, Professor Lucy Ogbadu, highlights the challenges facing the country in the area of agricultural food production, which she stresses is characterised by low productivity due to pest and insects’ infestation; desertification, gully erosion, flood, micronutrient deficiency, and coupled with population increase.
Nigeria needs to adopt and embrace biotechnology, she declares, adding that transgenic varieties of crops are more productive, precise in gene transfer, as they overcome the limitations of traditional breeding and allow scientists to use new traits from many kinds of plants and other living things.
Prof. Ogbadu lists the secondary benefits to include: reduction of carbon emission, soil degradation reduction, water conservation, nitrogen fertilizer usage, enhanced bio-fuel production, and reduced use of pesticides.
Concluding her presentation, she reports that Nigerian scientists have waited for 14 years to have a Biosafety law to operate fully like their counterparts in other countries.
The DG/CEO of NBMA, Mr. Rufus Ebegba, reaffirms his commitment to ensure the safety of modern biotechnology practice in Nigeria and its contribution to the economic growth.
“Nigerians should be re-assured that NBMA will do her best in making sure that any GMO released for commercialisation is safe for consumption and possess no threat to human or environment,” he assures.
A Kenyan court ruling has rejected a petition by the British American Tobacco (BAT) to stop the adoption of regulations that would facilitate implementation of Kenya’s Tobacco Control Act 2007.
Health officials say tobacco smoking is dangerous to health
BAT Kenya Limited last year April filed a petition at the Constitutional Court in the High Court of Kenya, Nairobi asking it to declare that the Tobacco Control Regulations 2014 developed by the Ministry of Health to facilitate the implementation of Tobacco Control Act 2007 is null and void.
The tobacco company had argued that the due process was not followed in the making of the regulations and that particular sections of the regulations contravened their rights as outlined in the Bill of Rights and other Articles of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 and that they were therefore unconstitutional.
The regulations had been tabled in Parliament on 5th December 2014 and gazetted as required and were to take effect on 5 June 2015. Kenya Tobacco Control Alliance (KETCA) and the Consumer Information Network (CIN) were joined in the case as interested parties. On 4th June 2015, a day before the Tobacco Control Regulations 2014 could take effect, the Judge issued conservatory orders suspending the implementation of the regulations (at the request of BAT) until the case is heard and determined.
The court however ruled, among others, that, according to the documents presented to it, there were various meetings during the framing of the regulations that BAT was represented in, and consulted. Reports of public forums and other consultations were shared and the regulations were presented to Parliament which offered another platform for public participation through the Parliamentary process. It noted that, in effect, there was sufficient public participation, hence, the Tobacco Control Regulations 2014 cannot be declared null and void on the basis of lack of sufficient public participation, among others.
This ruling comes at a time when a BAT employee-turned-whistleblower, Paul Hopkins, recently revealed that BAT has engaged in “systematic bribery” to thwart tobacco control laws throughout Central and East Africa. Already, Kenya has launched an investigation into this alleged bribery and authorities in the U.S. and the U.K. are considering investigating BAT’s bribery.
In a reaction to the ruling, the Lagos-based Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth Nigeria (ERA/FoEN) has hailed the development, saying that Nigeria’s Ministry of Health and that of other countries on the continent must be on their guard.
The ERA/FoEN Deputy Director, Akinbode Oluwafemi, disclosed in a statement: “This ruling is victory for the Kenyan people and an indication that they refuse to be intimidated by the tobacco industry. Despite BAT arm-twisting through the suit, the Kenyan Ministry of Health and tobacco control advocates such as the Consumer Information Network have demonstrated doggedness and determination to push through life-saving laws which other countries of the continent must emulate.”
According to him, as Nigeria’s health ministry begins the establishment of regulations for implementation of the National Tobacco Control Act, it must note and learn from the Kenyan example which has become an observed pattern that BAT is replicating across Africa.
Oluwafemi added: “BAT aversion to the life-saving laws is not new. It only adds to a woeful list of the company’s antics aimed at continuing the marketing its deadly wares on the continent unchallenged. While we continue to anticipate the findings of current and pending investigations into BAT’s alleged bribery of officials in neighboring countries, we remind Nigerian authorities that BAT acts the same in Nigeria as it does in Kenya. We must be watchful for similar activities in Nigeria.
“While we are yet to get over the recent revelations of BAT employee-turned-whistleblower, Paul Hopkins, that BAT has engaged in systematic bribery, to thwart tobacco control laws throughout Central and East Africa, including Kenya, the corporation is at it again.”
He advised that Kenyans must not go to sleep with the ruling and instead anticipate appeals and other clogs thrown in the way of implementation of the Tobacco Control Act 2007, even as he urged speedy implementation of the regulations to save Kenyans from lifelong addiction to tobacco.
“For Nigeria which is BAT largest market on the African continent, we anticipate that the health ministry must be watchful and refuse BAT presence on the table or its suggestions through bodies that it may be affiliated with. The Kenyan litigation should serve as eye-opener for the sort of tobacco industry tactics we could face in Nigeria. We must be prepared to protect our recently-passed act to ensure it reaches its lifesaving potential,” Oluwafemi noted.
Every year, the world marks Water Day on Mach 22. In this article, a founding member of WaterSan Perspective, Ama Kudom-Agyemang, who is based in Accra, Ghana, wonders if there is a reason to celebrate water in Ghana
Access to potable water remains a major challenge in sub-Saharan Africa. Photo credit: vanguardngr.com
To some Ghanaian media persons who hosted radio and television discussions in relation to celebration of World Water Day, there is absolutely no reason to do so. Their contention is that some Ghanaians still lack access to safe water.
One of the television discussions was done against the background of a news story from a community in the Volta region, where the people are just fetching water from a filthy stream, because there is no other source of water. In some instances, the water source is just a murky pond that community members share with cattle. Besides, the periodic outbreaks of cholera and other diarrhoea-related diseases, which are all water related are blemishes in the country’s water status.
To these media personalities, as long as a cross section of Ghanaians still lack access to safe water, there is no cause for celebration.
But upon sober reflection, these bothersome water related issues also provide the basis for Ghanaians and the world at large to celebrate water. In 1992, the United Nations instituted March 22nd as World Water Day, to draw global attention to the importance of water as a vital resource to life. The celebration is also used to remind people everywhere that scarcity and misuse of fresh water, pose a serious and growing threat to sustainable livelihoods and development. Furthermore, the celebration is an opportunity to learn more about water related challenges and be inspired to take action to make a difference.
Consequently, since 1993, World Water Day has been celebrated annually to highlight an aspect of water that requires urgent attention. Themes such as water for life, water for the future, coping with water scarcity, clean water for a healthy world, water and food security, the world’s water is there enough, and women and water, have been the focus for past celebrations.
The international celebration for this year’s World Water Day focused on “Water and Jobs,” while the Ghana national theme was, “Improved Safe Water Access for Sustainable Livelihoods.” Both themes highlighted the two-way relationship between water and the decent work agenda in the quest for sustainable development.
The celebration made water the subject of media reportage and debates throughout the country. The media engagement brought to the fore, the issue of how water scarcity and shortages in supply are undermining job sustainability, livelihood opportunities and socio-economic development in some parts of the country.
If you consider that Ghana is an agrarian nation with significant number of people engaged in agriculture, then, the issue of sustainable water availability becomes crucial. Water availability for agriculture becomes urgent especially in the face of dwindling farm lands, competing land uses, soil erosion and degradation, and climate change impacts. So, improved safe water access for sustainable livelihoods is not just about water for domestic use, but also water for agriculture, industry and the environment.
Therefore, we celebrate water because it is about the – 1.5 billion people – including farmers and all other workers whose jobs depend on the availability of freshwater.
In his statement to commemorate the Day, UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon noted that “all workers can be harmed by poor water and sanitation.” The statement said “of two million work-related deaths every year, nearly one-in-five are caused by poor quality drinking water, inadequate sanitation and poor hygiene.”
According to the statement, the Secretary General was concerned about the fact that people with the least access to water and sanitation often also lack access to health care and stable jobs, thereby perpetuating the cycle of poverty. The statement said the Secretary General was convinced that “the basic provision of adequate water, sanitation and hygiene services at home, at school and in the workplace enables a robust economy by contributing to a healthy and productive population and workforce.”
Rafael Pacchiano Alamán, Minister of Environment and Natural Resources of Mexico, as the incoming president of the 13th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP 13) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), in a joint letter with Braulio Ferreira de Souza Dias, CBD Executive Secretary, has urged his global counterparts to ratify the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilisation to the Convention on Biological Diversity as soon as possible.
Rafael Pacchiano Alamán, Minister of Environment and Natural Resources of Mexico
Reiterating that the entry into force of the Nagoya Protocol at COP 12 was a significant achievement for the international community, Minister Pacchiano and Dr. Dias highlighted their common goal of reaching 100 ratifications before the CBD meetings being held later this year in Cancun, Mexico. They said that, by ratifying or acceding to the Nagoya Protocol, Parties will contribute to maintaining the diversity of genetic resources and their associated traditional knowledge for improving livelihoods and for the development of new products and services.
Nigeria is yet to ratify the international treaty.
The letter (https://www.cbd.int/doc/agreements/agmt-mexico-2016-04-01-en.pdf) highlights the contribution of access and benefit-sharing (ABS) to the global agenda on sustainable development and in particular the relevance of ABS in light of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its Sustainable Development Goals adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in September 2015.
The Nagoya Protocol entered into force on 12 October 2014 and has now been ratified by 73 countries. It was gathered that ratifying the Nagoya Protocol prior to the Second meeting of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing will also enable countries to participate in decision-making at this meeting and to further advance the global implementation of this landmark treaty.
The Protocol was adopted at the 10th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP10) in 2010, in Nagoya, Japan, and entered into force on four years later. The Protocol significantly advances the objective of the Convention on the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilisation of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge by providing greater legal certainty and transparency for both providers and users of genetic resources.
By promoting the use of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge, and by strengthening the opportunities for fair and equitable sharing of benefits from their use, the Protocol will create incentives to conserve biodiversity, sustainably use its components, and further enhance the contribution of biodiversity to sustainable development and human well-being.
