A total of 146 countries, representing almost 87 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, have submitted their intended national climate action plans to the United Nations.
UNFCCC Executive Secretary, Christiana Figueres. Photo credit: eaem.co.uk
This means that so far over 75 percent of all member countries to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have responded. This includes all developed countries under the Convention and 104 developing countries, or almost 70 percent of UNFCCC developing member states.
Over 80 percent of the plans include quantifiable objectives and also over 80 percent include intended actions to adapt to climate change.
Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, said: “Over the past few months, the number of countries submitting their climate action plans to the Paris agreement has grown from a steady stream into a sweeping flood. This unprecedented breadth and depth of response reflects the increasing recognition that there is an unparalleled opportunity to achieve resilient, low-emission, sustainable development at national level. ”
“The INDCs can be seen as an impressive portfolio of potential investment opportunities that are good for each individual country and good for the planet,” she said.
The UNFCCC secretariat, as requested by Parties to the Convention, will provide a synthesis report of all these plans, known as Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), on November 1.
More countries will continue to submit their plans ahead of the Paris UN climate change conference from 30 November to 11 December, 2015.
The European Union is also counted as a separate “Party” to the UNFCCC in addition to all its members, which means that a total of 147 Parties to the Convention have submitted plans.
National Level Planning Across Diverse National Circumstances.
The Paris agreement is to be a turning point that puts the world on track to the low-emission, climate resilient and sustainable future that is the only way to keep global average temperatures from rising beyond 2 degrees Celsius, the internationally-agreed defence line against the worst impacts of climate change.
In a paradigm shift towards a truly national response to climate change, countries facing many diverse circumstances, from poorest to richest, from largest to smallest, have presented INDCs which are national in scope and with the increased focus on quantifiable objectives.
Many INDCs also take a long term vision of climate action, underlining a growing understanding that unlocking the opportunities from ambitious climate action will require a transformation of how power is produced and consumed and how environments are managed now and over decades to come.
In addition, many countries from all continents, including some of the poorest and most vulnerable to climate change, have presented INDCs that include necessary action to adapt to climate impacts to protect continued sustainable development.
Cooperative Effort to Complete Climate Action Plans
Developed world governments, UN agencies and intergovernmental organisations, have been providing assistance to developing countries to prepare their plans.
“The impressive number of INDCs is only matched by the unique process that has underpinned their submission, with many developing countries having been assisted by developed country governments, the United Nations system and others to prepare them in detail and on time,” said Ms Figueres.
“In addition, many countries have engaged in an unprecedented dialogue across government ministries, sectors of their economy and often involving other stakeholders in order to finalize their contributions. This intense engagement and reflection within nations provides a good foundation for current and future ambition,” she said.
Director General/CEO, National Biotechnology Development Agency, Professor Lucy Ogbadu, insists that Biotechnology has been used for more than two decades without a single, documented safety concern, and that Nigeria cannot afford to be left out in the global agricultural biotechnology revolution
Professor Lucy Ogbadu. Photo credit: economic confidential.com
Nigerian scientists in the field of Biosciences at this particular time in our history are delighted that their nation is among the comity of nations on course in appreciation and application of Biotechnology research with all its potentials to improve the quality of life and create job opportunities for her people.
Immense benefits derivable from this technology are globally acknowledged and they are as varied as the vast scope of the technology itself dating back to the first, second and third generation versions. Global interest by the ordinary, of the impact of Biotechnology centre mainly on Food security, Health benefits as well as Environmental preservation among others. Consequently, Nigeria as a developing nation confronted with challenges of food insecurity, poverty and inadequate health care was quick to embrace Biotechnology by producing a well-developed, robust and all-inclusive Biotechnology Policy. The institutional framework – the National Biotechnology Development Agency – prescribed by the policy to oversee its implementation, in living up to expectation is instrumental in playing the pivotal role of coordinating activities under national and international programmes. Though the birth and nurture of this policy is credited to the Federal Ministry of Science and Technology, the operationalisation is all-inclusive and open to a wider participation of relevant ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) namely Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Federal Ministry of Health, Federal Ministry of Environment and Federal Ministry of Education lending itself to an emerging vibrant synergy that is already yielding dividends and promises greater benefits for the nation.
Nigeria’s Biosafety law is a monumental delight to all her scientists drawn from these MDAs as well as the tertiary institutions who jointly participated in systematically making and presenting a convincing case for the enactment of the law. Successful operation of a Biosafety law in the country ensures that Nigeria’s well over 70 million farmers will begin to reap the significant benefits of modern Agricultural Biotechnology similar to economic transformations currently experienced in Brazil, India, Burkina Faso, Egypt and South Africa that have all adopted this modern approach to boost their food and cash crop production activities. By having a Biosafety law in place, Nigeria has commenced a silent revolution towards attaining the following goals:
Transforming agriculture from subsistence to commercial/business level. Farmers all over the world are witnessing improved yield, and therefore improved access to food not only for their families but as well as producing excess for export. It should be noted that the adoption of higher yielding biotech crops by farmers across the world, continue to deliver substantial agronomic, environmental, economic, health and social benefits to farmers and society at large. In some cases, farmers have seen a reduction in the use of pesticides by 75 percent thus reducing their exposure to chemicals.
Addressing food security challenges of a growing population by not only making food available in sufficient quantity but in quality to meet dietary needs for an active and healthy life. The bulk of our staple foods and invariably our diets are mainly carbohydrate thus predisposing the populace to diseases associated with imbalanced diets. Biofortification of such staples offers a lasting solution to the health challenge confronting a large proportion of the populace whose income level restricts their access to other foods containing good amounts of protein and micronutrients.
Empowering our agricultural research institutes to continue with their work on biotech crops and ultimately commercialize the positive outcome of their research findings for the benefits of farmers. Our scientists are working assiduously to release certain crops of interest currently in research pipeline. These are crops like cowpea, cassava and sorghum that have defied all conventional efforts at tackling problems of pest infestation, poor nutrient content. In no distant time, Bt cowpea resistant to maruca pest, Africa Biofortified Sorghum laden with vitamin A, Iron and Zinc as well as Cassava plus fortified with vitamin A which are currently undergoing multilocational/adaptation trials, will be available to meet dietary needs of our people.
Consolidating the diversification of economy from oil revenue to a more sustainable revenue generation from massive food/cash crops activities supported by modern agricultural biotechnology. The importance of this to a country like Nigeria known as a net importer of major food items, moving from that to becoming an exporter nation of agricultural produce cannot be overemphasised.
Global stand
International organisations have through empirically tested methods attested to the safety of GM foods and products. The following international bodies have made unequivocally positive statements:
The European Food Safety Agency,
International Service for the Application of Agricultural Biotechnology and Acquisition (ISAAA).
African Union (AU) and NEPAD Africa Biosafety Network of Expertise,
The World Health Organisation (WHO),
Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO),
US Department of Agriculture,
Australian Food Safety Standards Organisation
Biotechnology has been used for more than two decades without a single, documented safety concern. Nigeria cannot afford to be left out in the global agricultural biotechnology revolution.
Global Realities and biotechnology intervention
Global human population is projected to rise up to 9.6 billion by 2050 while climate change raises additional problems for agriculture in terms of water and temperature stress, increased disasters and extreme weather conditions. What these portend are unique food security challenges.
Though some progress has been made in meeting the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) on extreme poverty, malnutrition, infant mortality and food security, much work remains to be done to ensure that citizens of all countries enjoy the full opportunity of healthy and sustainable access to food.
Biotechnology and genetic engineering, while not being the only solution to these challenges, offers great potential in addressing many specific concerns in food production, including micro-nutrient deficiencies, productivity and yield gaps, pest and disease problems.
There exists an international scientific consensus that the “genetic modification” process itself does not raise any risks over conventional breeding approaches but rather offers a quicker and more precise approach.
The debate around genetically modified products continues and is often characterised by emotive and misleading information about purported dangers that are not supported by any scientific evidence. Nigerian biotechnologists are well trained and strategically positioned for practice and regulatory function.
We hereby declare our commitment and determination
To work collectively to improve the communications environment, including the use of the latest as well as traditional communication strategies to ensure effectiveness.
To work inclusively, with all stakeholders, even those opposed to this technology, in an effort to build consensus and common understanding.
To promote choice, so that farmers, consumers, and other end-users can make informed decisions that reflect their best interests.
To address the concerns of people at all levels, to ensure the widest participation possible.
To demonstrate how agricultural production challenges can be tackled using biotechnology, and how it can directly contribute to food and nutrition security, poverty alleviation, job creation and sustainable economic development.
To support credible scientists who are most trusted by the public and governments, to be effective communicators and to have a closer relationship with media and policymakers to ensure that scientifically informed messages reach target audiences.
Mithika Mwenda, Secretary General of the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA), believes that Africa’s climate action pledges show commitment to a fair and binding deal in Paris
Mithika Mwenda, Secretary General of the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA). Photo credit: cloudfront.net
As of October 1, 47 out of 54 African countries have submitted their national plans for the UN climate deal, or Intended nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs.) Africa’s vast and environmentally diverse landscape and coastal areas mean that each of its country’s climate action plans vary widely and can include comprehensive emission reduction plans, sectoral targets, policy frameworks, regulations and other tools such as carbon markets, subsidies and incentives.
South Africa’s proposes that its emissions will peak by 2025, plateau until 2035 and thereafter decline. Morocco, for example, has proposed an increase of solar power to a 14% share in its electricity generation capacity by 2020. Among their climate action pledges, African countries have made some bold and strong targets, showing their fierce commitment to reducing global emissions. Ethiopia, one of the first African countries to submit has pledged: a 64% reduction on business as usual emissions by 2030. And Comoros has made the most ambitious target of an 84% reduction in emissions by 2030. Such bold commitments show that Africa’s potential to reduce emissions is great, even though it has contributed the least to building these levels in the first place.
With Africa bearing the brunt of climate change impacts, adaptation has been given as much focus as mitigation in countries’ targets. Adaptation is crucial to protecting and promoting development gains, especially in Africa.
One thing is for sure, and seen in common throughout all of Africa’s climate action plans: all pledges are premised on getting the means of implementation and adequate resources from developed nations. Not just in terms of finance, but in technology transfer and enhancing the capacity of African nations to meet their climate pledges.
Whatever policy measures we put in place cannot be at Africa’s cost alone. It’s affecting the whole world, everyone is affected, and we all have to chip in. Civil society in the north must start to unite and put pressure on their governments to commit to a fair and just agreement for the world, not just for Africa.
African civil society will be holding their governments to account on committing new resources from national budgets for investment to help people adapt and build climate resilience. As well as getting the necessary contributions from other countries, strong leadership and coordination amongst responsible agencies is imperative to guarantee their effective implementation and to achieve the intended levels of ambition.
It’s certainly a huge step in the right direction that so many African countries have taken affirmative action to contribute to this landmark global deal and have shown their commitment to climate action. These action plans should empower and support our people to build their resilience to the devastating impacts of climate change. The INDCs are an important part of an ongoing process.
World leaders must deliver strong commitments to close the funding gap and help Africa adapt to the devastating effects of climate change. They should ensure that Paris delivers a fair, ambitious and binding deal at a level adequate to stop climate change and keep global warming well-below 1.5°C.
Yet with two months to go until countries aim to strike a global climate pact in Paris, collective commitments do not meet the internationally agreed limit of 2C. Governments will need to focus on revising their goals from 2025 onwards to avoid the catastrophic effects of climate change worsening still.
Paris starts things, it’s not an endpoint. Heads of state need to work together to see firm and equitable policies implemented as we move towards 2020 and beyond. We’re talking about saving lives here. The world has a unique opportunity to collectively turn one of the biggest challenges facing humankind into one of the greatest opportunities to build a healthy planet.”
Africa’s climate pledges are as follows:
1/10 – Botswana: 10% emissions cut by 2030, from a 2010 baseline. Cost estimate US$18.4 billion.
1/10 – Cameroon: Cut emissions up to 32% by 2035 on business as usual, depending on international support.
1/10 – Sierra Leone: Pledges to keep emissions “relatively low” (close to 7.58MtCO2e) by 2035, or achieve neutrality by 2050, conditional upon international support.
1/10 – Guinea: A 13% reduction on emissions by 2030, compared to 1994 levels, excluding land use and forestry, conditional upon international support.
30/9 – Togo: Emissions cuts of 11% from business as usual by 2030, rising to 31% with international support. Price tag US$3.5 billion.
30/9 – Lesotho: An unconditional 10% reduction in emissions compared to a business-as-usual scenario by 2030, or a conditional reduction of 35% by 2030, dependent on international support.
30/9 – Mozambique: Estimated emissions cuts of 76.5 MtCO2eq over 2020-30, from business as usual
30/9 – Liberia: Emissions cuts of 15% from business as usual by 2030, subject to international support.
30/9 – Rwanda: Target still under development. US$24 billion price tag for water, energy and agriculture measures.
30/9 – Malawi: Mix of policies could cut per capita use from 1.4t CO2e in 2010 to 0.7-0.8t in 2030, if fully implemented, compared to increase to 1.5t under business as usual.
30/9 – Zimbabwe: Plans to keep per-capita emissions from energy sector 33% below business as usual by 2030, provided there is sufficient support.
30/9 – Burundi: Aims to cut greenhouse gases 3% below business as usual by 2030, rising to 20% on international support.
30/9 – Sao Tome and Principe: Cut emissions 24% by 2030 on 2005 levels. Country is a net carbon sink.
30/9 – Guinea Bissau: Aims to boost renewables’ share of the energy mix to 80% by 2030 and develop a national reforestation programme by 2025. Section on adaptation includes to increase protected area coverage from 15 to 26%.
29/9 – Congo: Cut emissions by 48% by 2025 and 55% in 2035 below business as usual levels.
29/9 – Tanzania: cut emissions by 10-20% below business as usual by 2030.
29/9 – Zambia: Emissions cuts of 25% from business as usual by 2030 with domestic resources, costed at US$15 billion, increasing to 47% with an estimated $35bn of international support.
29/9 – Namibia: An 89% cut to greenhouse gas emissions from business as usual by 2030, mainly through reducing deforestation. Price tag: US$33 billion.
29/9 – Swaziland: Aims to double the renewable share of its energy mix by 2030, compared to 2010 levels. Also pledges to develop a national emissions inventory, baseline and business as usual projections, in order to draw up a national mitigation goal by 2020.
29/9 – Mauritania: 22.3% emissions cuts by 2030 below business as usual, of which five-sixths hinges on international support. Total cost for mitigation and adaptation estimated at US$17.6 billion.
29/9 – Cape Verde: Will specify GHG cuts from energy sector in second half of 2016, sets targets to achieve 100% grid access by 2017. Renewable energy penetration to rise to 3o% by 2025, or up to 100% on international finance.
29/9 – Niger: Commits to cut GHGs 3.5% below business as usual by 2030, rising to 34.6% with international support
29/9 – Benin: Aims to cut greenhouse gas emissions 3.5% below business as usual levels by 2030, rising to 21.4% with international support. Budget to meet mitigation and adaptation goals is US$ 30 billion, $2.32 billion of which Benin will provide.
28/9 – Mali: Cut emissions from agriculture 29%, energy sector 31%, land-use change 21% below business-as-usual by 2030.
28/9 – Chad: Cut emissions by 18.2% below business as usual by 2030, rising to 71% on international support
28/9 – Mauritius: 30% emissions cut by 2030 compared to business as usual, subject to international support.
28/9 – Central African Republic: Reduce emissions 5% on business as usual levels by 2030. Total cost of $3.69 billion; $3.46 relies on international cash.
28/9 – Burkina Faso: An unconditional pledge to reduce emissions by 6.6% below business-as-usual levels by 2030, with a further 11.6% reduction conditional upon international support. Includes interim pledges for 2020 and 2025.
28/9 – Gambia: A 44% emissions cut by 2025, compared to business as usual projections, and a 45% cut by 2030.
26/9 – Senegal: GHG cuts of 6% by 2030 from business as usual, rising to 31% on international finance. Cost of plan comes to $21.5 billion.
25/9 – South Africa: Aims to ‘peak, plateau and decline’ emissions by 2030, requires $53 billion for adaptation to climate impacts.
25/9 – Seychelles: Will slash emissions 29% on a business as usual basis by 2030, costing an estimated $309 million
24/9 – Madagascar: 14% cuts on business as usual by 2030.
24/9 – Eritrea: An 80.6% reduction in emissions by 2030, compared to business-as-usual levels. 39.2% of this is unconditional, and can be financed using domestic resources.
23/9 – Ghana: 15% emission cuts on business as usual by 2030.
21/9 – Equatorial Guinea: Cut emissions by 20% by 2030 compared with 2010 levels.
17/9 – Comoros: 84% cut in GHG emissions by 2030 on business-as-usual.
16/9 – Tunisia: 13% cut in carbon intensity by 2030 from 2010 levels, rising to 41% with international cash
4/9 – Algeria: 7% unconditional cut to greenhouse gas emissions from business as usual by 2030, rising to 22% with international support
18/8 – Democratic Republic of Congo: 17% GHG cuts by 2030 on 2000 levels, covering agriculture and forests, conditional on $21 billion of support.
14/8 – Djibouti: Cut emissions 40% from business as usual by 2030 using domestic resources, or another 20% with international support. Take measures to adapt to increasing risk of water scarcity.
24/7 – Kenya: 30% greenhouse gas emissions cut from business as usual by 2030; “significant priority” placed on adapting to climate impacts.
10/6 – Ethiopia: 64% greenhouse gas emissions cut by 2030 on business as usual.
6/06 – Morocco: 32% greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 on business as usual.
1/4 – Gabon: 50% greenhouse gas cuts by 2025 compared to business as usual. The INDC also includes plans for a national carbon market and a domestic green fund.
PACJA is a continental coalition of civil society organisations (CSOs) from diverse backgrounds in Africa that aims at unifying and coordinating isolated civil society efforts on climate change advocacy in Africa, so as to ensure that pro-poor and people-centred response measures are given attention as governments in Africa seek to mainstream climate change into national poverty reduction and sustainable development strategies and actions.
The decision of six Congo Basin countries to work with donors to protect their forests is a positive step, but will only be as successful as its implementation, Greenpeace Africa has said.
The Congo forest. Photo credit: newsecuritybeat.org
The Central African Forest Initiative, announced during the UN Sustainable Development Summit in New York this week, will see donors including Norway, Germany, the UK and the European Union pledge financial support for countries including Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Cameroon and Gabon to protect their forests and slow illegal logging and conversion of forests.
“Greenpeace welcomes this initiative, we believe that rainforest protection can only be effective if there is a joint and strong commitment from both African governments and international donors,” said Irène Wabiwa Betoko, Senior forest campaign manager with Greenpeace Africa.
“But any such agreement has to be backed up with meaningful action. Strong pre-conditions need to be set up for disbursing funds and safeguards aimed at eradicating corruption in the forestry sector need to be instituted. Governments need the means and capacity to ensure these reforms can realistically be implemented.”
Norway was the first donor to announce its financial support, pledging up to $47 million annually between 2016 and 2020.
“Experience tell us that such agreements are easier said than done,” said Wabiwa Betoko. “Communities on the ground who depend on the Congo Basin forests for their livelihoods are often the first to lose out when it comes to weak forest governance and weak political will to ensure words become actions.”
Plans by the Ogun State government to privatise water through a Public Private Partnership (PPP) model promoted by the World Bank is a recipe to enslave citizens of the state and generations yet born, the Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth Nigeria (ERA/FoEN) and the Amalgamated Union of Public Corporations, Civil Service, Technical and Recreational Services Employees (AUPCTRE) have said.
Activists protesting water privatisation in Lagos. Photo credit: watergrabbing.net
The ERA/FoEN and AUPCTRE disclosed in a statement on Wednesday that neither was any consultation made, nor was there input from civil society and the labour unions in all the stages that got the bill to the table of Governor Ibikunle Amosun. The bill, awaiting the governor’s signature, is said to have speedily passed through the State House of Assembly on 13 May, 2015.
ERA/FoEN spokesman, Philip Jakpor, disclosed in the statement: “The development in Ogun resembles that of Lagos where intense local and international demands for disclosure in October 2014 forced the World Bank to open up on a water privatisation scheme, which centres on the appointment of its private arm – the International Finance Corporation (IFC) to design a PPP water scheme. The Lagos project, just like what is unfolding in Ogun State is shrouded in utter secrecy, with no input from critical segments of the population that it will supposedly benefit. The bank had initially said it had no deal with the Lagos government but swiftly announced it had cancelled the IFC contract following global pressure.”
ERA/FoEN Deputy Director, Akinbode Oluwafemi, was quoted in the statement as saying: “It is utterly disappointing that the Ogun State government is toeing the same path we have observed and campaigned against in Lagos. We urge Governor Amosun not to sign away the sovereignty of the state residents by this anti-people initiative promoted by the World Bank.”
Oluwafemi stressed, “PPPs have a devastating track-record which include rate hikes, sporadic access, unsafe water, and infrastructure neglect so we are in solidarity with the Ogun people in rejecting this false solution to making a basic human right accessible.”
Ogun State Secretary of AUPCTRE, Babatunde Omotola, said: “The bewilderment of Ogun people is further heightened by the fact that the bill before the governor will worsen their plight having watched for years how successive administrations have deliberately allowed public water infrastructure to collapse to pave the way to a loan arrangement which will place more burden on the residents.”
According to Omotola, while the Ogun State government is obligated to identify ways to ensure the rights of citizens to safe and potable drinking water, prioritising the human right to water above and over profit motives should be the driver of such a policy. “We also demand a probe of all the loans thus far sunk into water projects in Ogun State,” he added.
The groups urged the state government to halt the planned privatisation and, instead, integrate broad public participation in developing plans to achieve universal access to clean water including investing in the water infrastructure necessary to provide universal water access, to sustain and create jobs, improve public health, and invigorate the Ogun economy.
Every time it rains, Barbra Nyawiza, a teacher at Ngaara Primary School in Mbarara district, gets reactions. She sneezes and snoots.
Farmers worldwide are already feeling the effects of rising temperatures and more frequent droughts as a result of climate change
Scientists believe this primary school teacher is most likely allergic to rain.
Jeconeous Musingwire, an environmental scientist, believes Nyawiza is sensitive to acidic pollutants in the rain.
He says such pollutants are a result of gases emitted from industries and vehicles, among others, that end up leading to acid rain.
When introduced into atmosphere, substances from these industries and vehicles such as sulphur dioxide, nitrous dioxide, and carbon monoxide mix and react with water, oxygen, and other chemicals to form acid rain.”
Musingwire insists that they are such chemicals in the rain water that Nyamwiza is allergic to.
He says that in the south western region of Uganda where Nyamwiza lives, acid rain is usually experienced in the month of August after the mid-year dry season.
These gases accumulate in the atmosphere during the midyear drought. They then mix and react with water, oxygen, and other chemicals as the rain season starts in the middle of August.”
Musingwire blames these dangerous gases on the people who have destroyed the environment through deforestation, emission of harmful gases into atmosphere from their factories and vehicles among others.
He says acid rain is not only harmful to human health but also to plants and animals and contaminates water making it unfit for human consumption and increasing its acidity.
“A combination of climate change and acid rain threatens the future of life on the earth.”
One of the persons in the region who has witnessed severe effects of acid rain is Jenaurio Mazimba, a local mason.
“It usual has corrosive effects on buildings we build. It ‘eats’ our limestone and then we have to use other materials or spend more money buying other limestone. ”
Ian Atamba, a PhD researcher and forestry officer with Uganda’s National Forestry Authority, says it is sulphur dioxide in this rain that leads to corrosion on limestone, sandstone, and marble.
He also notes that acid rain has affected several forests in the region.
“It usually damages leaves of trees and exposes them to toxic substances. What do you expect when leaves which are the main source of food for trees are damaged? Trees die.”
“But farmers in the region have the key to ending this problem.”
Atamba says that to solve this problem, farmers should invest in afforestation and reforestation.
“Trees will absorb these hazardous greenhouse gases. They actually store the carbon in their bodies.”
Last year, a Nasa-led study found that forests worldwide absorb 1.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide every year as they photosynthesise and grow.
By Adella Mbabazi
This story was produced under the CSE Media Fellowships Programme for Global South.
The Benue State House of Assembly has called on Dangote Cement Company in Gboko, Benue State, to own up to her Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and adhere to proper Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in the discharge of their duty.
A cement factory. Photo credit: broadstreetng.com
The state Assembly made this known on Tuesday, September 29, 2015 during plenary and in debate on the Report of the Ad-Hoc Committee on the Poor Condition of Federal Roads in Benue State and Matters Related Thereto.
The Assembly directed the State Ministry of Industries, Trade and Investment to ensure that Dangote Cement Company complies with the directives.
The house gave the directive, stating that Dangote Cement Company, Gboko should liaise with the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) and the Federal Ministry of Environment in order to acquire a valid EIA certificate and comply with all safety standards in the operation of the company to avoid sanctions.
Speaking earlier, in the lead debate, the Ad-Hoc Committee Chairman, Mrs Ngunan Addingi (Buruku/APC), had explained that their findings indicate that Dangote Cement did not have a valid Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and has failed to adhere to safety standards in its operations as revealed by NESREA and the Benue State Environmental Sanitation Agency (BENSESA).
To this end, she called for urgent steps to be taken to address the problem for the wellbeing of staff of the company, the host community and the state in general.
In their separate contributions, the Majority Leader of the House, Mr Benjamin Adanyi (Makurdi South/APC); Deputy Majority Leader, Mr Nick Eworo (Obi/APC); Minority Leader, Sule Audu (Agatu/PDP); Terhemba Chabo (Gboko West/APC) and Kester Ikyenge (Logo/PDP), who commended the work done by the ad-hoc committee, noted that it is pertinent to forge a way to salvage the sorry state of federal roads in the state.
They added that companies operating in the state must be awakened from their complacency to live up to their corporate social responsibility.
In their submission, Majority Whip, Mr Titus Uba (Vandeikya-Kyan/APC); Minority Whip, Mr Tor Aye (Katsina-Ala West/LP); Mr Egli Johnson (Otukpo/Akpa/PDP) and Mr Daniel Abbagu (Ukum/APC) urged all companies operating in the state to work in synergy with the host communities and the government in order to carry out their corporate social responsibility according to the dictates of international best practices.
Commenting on the performance of Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) in the state, Mr. B.B Nungwa (Kwande West/APC) scored them low, saying they needed to wake up to do their job very well and make the state’s roads safer to ply.
Ruling on the matter, Speaker, Benue State House of Assembly, Mr. Terkimbi Ikyange (Ushongo/APC), who advised that Dangote Cement Company, Gboko should put in place safety measures for both staff and visitors, requested the company to submit to the House within one week, evidence of compensation paid all staff who had industrial accident or who died in the course of discharging their duty with the company from 2006 to date.
The house, rising from 33 findings by the ad-hoc committee, made 27 recommendations which include: Urging Dangote Cement Plc, Gboko to urgently liaise with NESREA and the Federal Ministry of Environment in order to carry out all processes leading to the issuance of an EIA to the company; Urge NESREA and BENSESA to follow up Dangote Cement Plc, Gboko and ensure that the company complies with all their recommendations with regards to safety standards, including Environmental Management Plan (EMP), Air Quality Permit, landscaping, removal of solid waste materials, metal scraps, repair or upgrade of oil trap, effluent discharge plant, issuance and enforcement of the use of Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) by staff and visitors, provision of adequate conveniences for staff and visitors, and installation of warning signs. That both NESREA and BENSESA do avail the House with copies of Dangote’s compliance with their recommendations within three months and subsequent follow up by the House.
Other recommendations included that Dangote Cement Plc, Gboko to live up to its responsibility and honour its pledge to construct modern parking lot for its vehicles and another parking lot for third party vehicles within two months and that if any person attempts to disrupt the process of work by extorting money from the company, it should be reported to the House of Assembly in writing; That the House should charge FERMA to direct its contractors to fill up excavations they carry out on highways promptly to avoid exposing road users to unnecessary danger; and FERMA should continue repairing bad sections of roads and filling up of already dug out in Taraku, Ugbokolo and other parts of the state. That if any member of the community attempts to prevent the Agency from discharging its legitimate duties, it should write to the chairman of such local government and submit a copy of the letter to the House of Assembly for further actions.
It will be recalled that the House had set up the ad-hoc committee on 5th August, 2015 following a motion moved by Mrs. Agaigbe Utsaha (Gboko East/APC), who lamented the deplorable state of Makurdi-Gboko federal road, which she noted had claimed many lives through accidents and caused a lot of discomfort to commuters, thereby calling for FERMA to be directed by the House to carry out repairs at bad portions of the road.
The five member ad-hoc committee which was chaired by Mrs Ngunan Addingi (Buruku/APC) and included Mr. Daniel Abbagu (Ukum/APC), Mr Terkaa Ucha (Vandeikya-Tiev/PDP), Dr. Adoga Onah (Oju I/PDP), Adam Okloho (Adoka/Ogboju/APC) as members with Mr Alfred Odeh as Secretary was to find out if Dangote Cement Company, Gboko has a valid EIA, if the Dangote Cement Gboko plant lives up to her corporate social responsibility and why the company has failed to repair portions of bad road within her precinct and to establish a parking lot for her vehicles.
Also, the ad-hoc committee was to interface with FERMA and Federal Ministry of Works in the state in order to acquire necessary information on the state of federal roads in the state and any other matter related to thereof.
September 2015 saw the launch of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This has been a long journey for many. To highlight the challenges and opportunities facing Africa, the Africa Progress Panel (APP) has just released a publication titled, “Global Goals, African Realities: Building a Sustainable Future for ALL“.
Caroline Kende-Robb, Executive Director, Africa Progress Panel. Photo credit: app-cdn.acwupload.co.uk
These new international targets to improve people’s lives and protect life on the planet, do much more than just extend for another 15 years the remit of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
The SDGs represent an unprecedented collective global push to tackle the root causes of poverty, through a sharper focus on issues of justice, inequality and equity. They embrace the need for a global transformation that leaves no one behind and gives every child a fair chance of leading a decent life. And they showcase our commitment to protect future generations by limiting climate change, adopting renewable energy and managing resources sustainably.
The SDGs will only succeed, however, if they can succeed in Africa — whose rapidly growing population most needs the change that the agenda describes. That’s why the same concerns that drive the SDGs have been taken up over the last four years by the APP.
The Panel, led by Kofi Annan (the father of the MDGs), actively promotes an agenda for change that calls for Africa’s resources, creativity and dynamism to be better harnessed for the benefit of all Africans. In successive annual reports, the Panel has charted a roadmap to improve the wellbeing and prospects of the continent’s people — including those who have been left behind by the recent economic growth surge. Its policy recommendations have been adopted at the highest levels.
The carbon-intensive energy systems that drive our economies have set us on a collision course with our planetary boundaries. We can avoid that collision. As a global community, we have the technology, finance and ingenuity to make the transition to a low-carbon future, but so far we lack the political leadership and practical policies needed.
Africa’s highly centralised energy systems often benefit the rich and bypass the poor and are underpowered, inefficient and unequal. Two in three Africans lack access to electricity.
This energy crisis is also a moment of great opportunity, however. Demand for modern energy is set to surge, fuelled by economic growth, demographic change and urbanisation. As the costs of low-carbon energy fall, Africa could leapfrog into a new era of power generation. The region has an abundance of renewable energy in the form of solar, hydro, wind, and geothermal power. Utility reform, new technologies and new business models could be as transformative in energy as the mobile phone has been in telecommunications.
Tackling Africa’s interlocking climate and energy problems will require strengthened international cooperation. The recently ended SDG summit and the global climate talks in December provide a platform for deepening cooperation and making a down-payment on measures with the potential to put Africa on a pathway toward an inclusive low-carbon energy future and the world on a pathway to avoid climate catastrophe.
Last week, the APP attended the African Development Bank’s (AfDB) launch of their New Deal on Energy for Africa to fast-track universal access to power by 2025: lighting up and powering Africa in 10 years, not 50 years. It was incredible to see and feel the rising ambition and political will to get Africa connected, fast – a plea that was made in our 2015 report.
After outlining his core priorities in the energy sector, President Adesina added, “As I have always said, Mr. Annan is “Africa’s jewel and contribution to the world”. I thank him and the members of the Africa Progress Panel for their wonderful work on the APP 2015 Report.”
Just as the 2015 report focuses on managing Africa’s extensive renewable-energy resources for the good of all Africans, the 2014 report, Grain, Fish, Money: Financing Africa’s blue and green revolutions, examines the vast potential of the sector that most poor Africans work in — agricultural production. The report highlights the gulf between that potential and the growing dependence on food imports. Closing that gulf would provide a powerful catalyst for reducing poverty, generating jobs, feeding urban populations and creating new market opportunities for investment.
African agriculture is no longer a “development problem” but a huge business opportunity. The time has come to unleash Africa’s green and blue revolutions. These revolutions can generate a much-needed improvement to Africa’s food and nutrition security. More than anything, malnutrition on the continent is a failure of political leadership.
The 2014 report also turned the spotlight on the continued massive plunder of vital African resources, including fish stocks and forests. Illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing has reached epidemic proportions in Africa’s coastal waters.
The 2013 Africa Progress Report, Equity in Extractives: Stewarding Africa’s natural resources for all, showed that in many countries, revenues from oil, gas and mining have been widening the gap between rich and poor. A decade of highly impressive economic growth, spurred largely by global demand for African commodities, has not brought comparable improvements in health, education and nutrition.
As the commodity super-cycle unwinds, it is time to ask some tough questions. Some major opportunities for investment, the development of linkages to the local economy and revenue mobilisation during the boom years were not effectively seized. African and OECD governments should be cooperating far more closely to address systemic tax evasion, the outright plunder of valuable assets and the extensive use of off-shore tax havens by foreign and domestic investors.
The 2012 Africa Progress Report, Jobs, Justice and Equity: Seizing opportunities in times of global change, called on African leaders to tackle the deep, persistent and enduring inequalities across the continent. Countries across Africa are becoming richer but whole sections of society are being left behind. After more than a decade of buoyant growth, almost half of Africans still live on less than $1.25 a day. The current pattern of trickle-down growth is leaving too many people in poverty, too many children hungry and too many young people without jobs. Unequal access to health, education, nutrition, water and sanitation is reinforcing wider inequalities.
Viewed through the lens of the SDGs, the equitable growth agenda is more relevant than ever: on current trends one-third of Africans will still be living in extreme poverty in 2030. Africa will account also for a rising share of child and maternal deaths and out of school children.
These reports each focus on a different aspect of the same story. Their vision is the same as the vision behind the SDGs: the need to manage resources wisely and sustainably so that every citizen has a fair chance of leading a healthy, prosperous, fulfilling life, free of poverty. Many African countries are rising to that challenge. Indeed, Africa can help feed the globe’s burgeoning population, spearhead technical innovations, and lead the world on climate-resilient, low-carbon development.
As Kofi Annan says, “Africa is on its way to becoming a preferred investment destination, a potential pole of global growth, and a place of immense innovation and creativity. But there is also a long way to go — and Africa’s governments must as a matter of urgency turn their attention to those who are being left behind. I believe Africa and its leaders can rise to this challenge. If they do, Africa will become more prosperous, stable and equitable.”
Kofi Annan adds that the SDGs are an opportunity for us all to think about what fairness means today, and how the goals can help make the world a more equitable place. He adds, “Humanity can only flourish if we work together. This is why I support the GlobalGoals.”
By Caroline Kende-Robb (Executive Director, Africa Progress Panel)
Land clearing on peatland, Indonesia. Photo credit: Ryan Woo/CIFOR
Fifty years ago, Indonesia was rich with pristine forest.
And then – boom!
Between 1980 and 2000 – a timber logging boom. Illegal logging followed – so, another boom in the 10 years from 2000, and then the palm oil boom came after that.
Pristine forest was severely logged and turned into degraded forest. What was left was slashed and burned, made ready for oil palm and wood plantations of different scales.
This landscape transformation provided benefits and costs to various actors. But fire and haze were also part of the landscape transformation.
Under President Joko Widodo, the Government of Indonesia has committed to reducing – or even zeroing – fire incidences in Indonesia. And although some improvements have been made, fire and haze continue.
This year, the country is facing El Niño, which will cause drier weather and increase the occurrence of fire and haze.
Solutions are needed, because current actions mostly deal with fighting fires and are not systematically harnessing the politics and economy of fires.
Reviewing fire policy and laws (what works and does not work), mapping actors and their networks and economies, providing clear and transparent spatial maps, and engaging with key policy makers and practitioners are key for reducing fire and haze.
Spatial Plan Needed
Unclear spatial planning is constraining the fire reduction effort.
At a stakeholder consultative meeting in Pekanbaru on 25 March, the need for agreement and an enforceable spatial plan was underlined.
This is not enough.
All stakeholders need to again sit down and discuss spatial mapping and try to reach agreement. Negotiating the interests of conservation, legality, business, local livelihoods, carbon emission reductions and so on is vital, but so too is the understanding that an “ideal” solution may not exist.
When discussing the history of a degraded area, negotiations should cover not only space but also duration. For example, an area that has been converted illegally from a conservation area to oil palm plantation could remain oil palm for a certain number of years to provide compensate for the investment by private sectors or local communities.
However, after that designated time period, it would be time to restore the area to forest.
Illegal land transactions can, and do, occur in concession and state lands, where the area is not really secured. This economic demand for lands that are degraded, burned and planted with oil palm largely drives the land transformation from pristine forest into the agricultural plantations that provide huge benefits to certain actors.
The government needs to create disincentives for illegally degraded, burned and oil-palm-planted lands by putting a legality standard over the land being sold.
Stopping Illegal Activity
Detecting, anticipating and prosecuting organised crime involved in illegal land transactions causing fire and haze is the role of legal institutions. At the same time, police, lawyers and judges dealing with related forest and environmental laws must receive training.
President Joko Widodo’s administration has already established a task force to resolve conflicts in Indonesia’s forests.
The task force will be a joint collaboration between Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MOEF), the Home Affairs Ministry, the Agrarian Ministry, and the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK). To ensure the success of this task force, the public must be made aware of the importance of reducing fire and haze, using mass and social media.
Preventing Peat Degradation
Peat degradation is the main source of Indonesia’s carbon emissions through fire. Preserving peat is not only about a valuable ecosystem, it is also about the people who live there.
To reduce fire on peatlands, we need to develop immediate livelihood and income sources for indigenous and local communities living on already-degraded land. These could include annual crops, horticulture, agroforestry and planted trees depending on peat depths, along with related small-scale industries along the value chains.
At the same time, those communities living on good peatland need assistance to develop their livelihood and income sources – with the help of such schemes as payments for ecosystem services and REDD+.
Strengthening and providing financial support to grassroots organisations such as will ensure their effectiveness in supporting fire detection and early warning systems.
Local initiatives at the microlevel should restore peatland by blocking canals, wetting the peat and planting Jelutong, rubber and pineapple plants.
Scaling up into landscape levels or hydrological units will need deeper thinking and multi-stakeholder approaches as water is a scarce resource and can be a source of conflict in the dry season.
Planning and executing water-level management at the landscape level through – among other actions – canal blocking would ensure fairness for both small-scale and large actors.
Community and livelihood development are necessary to sustain peat restoration. Sharing the good practices of local initiatives and the private sector in peat ecosystem restoration and encouraging the adoption of those practices will help create uniformity.
Finally, reducing fire and haze is not only a “TO DO” list to follow as outlined above; it’s also about HOW to do things and WHO should be doing them.
How and Who
We can use a ‘landscape approach’ to reconcile agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses to answer the question of HOW.
In this approach, the government, smallholders and other key stakeholders will be called to consider their multiple goals in the landscape, understand the drivers, set priorities, take action and monitor progress.
Understanding WHO really are “the stakeholders of fire” is a key to the success of the landscape approach. This approach will be guided by the ten principles of a landscape approach, which emphasise adaptive management, stakeholder involvement, and multiple objectives.
Collective actions among ASEAN country members – to reduce fire and haze through continuous dialogue, pooling funding and concrete actions on the ground – are needed to realise the vision of a haze-free ASEAN by 2020.
Finally, thinking globally, linking to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is required to get better support from national and international communities.
By Herry Purnomo (a scientist based at CIFOR in Bogor – h.purnomo@cgiar.org)
For the last two months, the Bantu and Bagyeli communities of Bella have watched as workers from a forestry company have entered their territory and started razing their forest lands. Removal of logs has damaged their crops, and has come so close to houses as to put them at risk of damage from the felling.
Forest-based communities in Cameroon have limited or no recognition of their customary land rights under Cameroon law. Photo credit: farm8.static.flickr.com
Government officials, who informed community chiefs about the activities (which are also due to follow in the neighbouring villages of Nkollo, Gwap and Moungué), have asserted that the felling is legal, although none of the usual procedures appear to have been followed, and no documentation of the exploitation licence has been provided to the communities. To date, requests for further, concrete information about the alleged licences remain unfulfilled.
The timing of the deforestation activities is highly suspicious. In March 2015, a three year provisional concession granted over the customary lands of all four villages to Biopalm Energy Ltd – a Malaysian palm oil company owned by RSPO member Geoff Palm Ltd – expired, without the company having commenced work. It appears no further concession was granted at the time (a concession must be granted by decree, and none has been published) – but rumours are that the company is in negotiations with the government. Despite sending the company a letter asking for it to clarify its intentions in December 2014, the communities are still unaware of what, if any, proposals are on the table.
Forest-based communities in Cameroon have limited or no recognition of their customary land rights under Cameroon law. Despite that, the communities – who were not consulted over and, on the whole, opposed the original concession – are resisting the return of the company. The (un)timely entry of the forestry companies – who are removing timber at an astonishing rate – is likely to dispirit the communities and weaken their resolve, something which is no doubt not lost on the authorities. However, in a recent field visit, FPP also heard rumours that, in Biopalm’s absence, other large companies already operating in the area may be moving in. Without transparency and access to information, the citizens of Bella, Nkollo, Gwap and Moungué remain left in the dark.
