Healthy forests protect our climate and moderate our weather. As the ‘Godzilla’ El Niño builds in the weeks ahead of Paris talks, it is a timely warning that deforestation is partly to blame for its impacts
Indonesia is smouldering and Godzilla is to blame. But even though this is reality, not a monster movie, there is still a hero: the tropical rainforest.
A man carries his son through the haze on the way to his house as fires burn peatland and fields at Ogan Ilir in Palembang. Photo credit: Ulet Ifansasti/Getty Images
This year’s El Niño, the ocean-traveling climate cycle notorious for throwing the weather off kilter, is nicknamed “Godzilla”. While it is projected to deliver plenty of rain to some parts of the world, including drought-parched California, it is already causing dangerously dry conditions in the tropics. Papua New Guinea, for example, is experiencing its worst drought in decades, which spells doom for coffee and food crops.
The last time El Niño was this intense, in 1997, five million hectares of rainforest went up in smoke in Indonesia at a time when rain usually falls in sheets. The forest fires generated gigatonnes of carbon dioxide, equivalent to 13-40% of the world’s fossil fuel emissions at the time. The resulting haze, which spanned an area from northern Australia to the Philippines to Sri Lanka, caused widespread health problems and grounded airplanes.
Standing, healthy forests, the Earth’s “sweat glands”, pump moisture into the atmosphere, providing the globe with its greatest defense against droughts, forest fires and other weather-related disasters. Without this buffer, we’re more exposed and vulnerable to the whims of extreme weather.
To maintain an effective buffer, it is imperative that global efforts to protect forests are accelerated. Tropical forests are important climate bulwarks, and the impact of cutting them down packs a wallop beyond the release of the vast stores of carbon they hold. Tearing down forests also changes the earth’s surface, triggering major shifts in rainfall and increases in temperature worldwide that can be just as disruptive to the climate and weather as those caused by carbon pollution.
One of the most ambitious forest commitments to date, last year’s New York Declaration on Forests, recognises the “double whammy” impact of deforestation on the climate and weather. This agreement among corporations, governments, NGOs and indigenous groups to end deforestation by 2030 includes a call to restore and regrow forests in addition to protecting already-standing forests.
Planting forests eventually stores carbon. But it takes an agonizingly slow 50-100 years or more for new forests to absorb the amount of carbon released when a tropical forest is cleared and burned. It is far more effective to prevent the forests from falling in the first place. But planted forests can provide a different, underappreciated benefit to the world’s climate and weather – and they do so more quickly than they recover carbon or the plant and animal life they once held.
Within a decade, most planted forests in tropical regions develop a closed canopy, as branches from one tree touch those of the next. At this stage of growth, they transform substantial amounts of water in the soil – which they reach via roots far deeper than found in crops or grasses – into moisture in the air, which cools the atmosphere above and the area around them. This process also generates moist conditions and rainfall locally and in the surrounding region.
It also generates the mass movement of air and conditions in the upper atmosphere that ultimately influence rainfall and temperature, both close by and far away. When forests are standing, they give us our climate and they can help protect us against a changing climate.
But when forests are cut down, these systems are disrupted. Changes in circulation due to tropical deforestation ultimately hit the upper atmosphere, where they cause ripples, or teleconnections, that flow outward in various directions, similar to the way in which an underwater earthquake can create a tsunami. The atmosphere connects climate in one place to climate in the rest of the world.
Deforestation across the tropics, therefore, might alter growing conditions in agricultural areas in south-east Asia, South America and Africa, and as far away as the US Midwest, Europe and China. This means that cutting down forests could imperil the world’s breadbaskets, even those thousands of miles away from the tropical forest belt – with dire implications for the ever-increasing demands on the world’s food supply.
As the Godzilla El Niño bears down and the climate talks in Paris heat up, remember that deforestation is partly to blame for its impacts. Deforestation worsens droughts, making El Niño more damaging than it would otherwise be. Healthy forests protect our climate and moderate our weather.
The international community assembling in Paris in December cannot keep global warming below 2C without both protecting the world’s remaining tropical forests and restoring vast areas of tropical forest that have already been lost. If we do not ensure the future of our forests, this year’s Godzilla El Niño may prove to be a puny harbinger of the monsters to come.
By Deborah Lawrence (an environmental sciences researcher at the University of Virginia), The Guardian of London
On 1 October 2015, the Indian government submitted India’s Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). It has been received to surprisingly wide acclaim, in the media, by large non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and policy experts.
Manmohan Singh, Indian Prime Minister. Photo credit: macedonianonline.eu
Climate change policy documents have become developmental road maps. In presenting either mitigation of carbon emissions or adaptation measures, the 38-page INDC touches upon existing and planned policies in the areas of urbanisation/smart cities (p 13), transport (p 14), agriculture (p 20), water (p 21), public health (p 22) and coastal regions (p 23). Preliminary estimates, it says, suggest India needs $2.5 trillion to meet its stated climate change obligations between now and 2030. India is clearly expecting “low-cost international finance.” The rightness of the principle notwithstanding, it is doubtful whether international funding on any meaningful scale will actually be received.
Some aspects of the INDC are indeed welcome: a huge expansion of grid-connected rooftop photovoltaic has been planned (p 9). It lists a number of energy efficiency measures, including standards issued to 478 industrial plants in eight energy-intensive sectors, and improved standards in appliances, lighting and buildings (p 11). The expansion of mass rapid transit systems (MRTS) of over a thousand kilometres in a number of cities has been proposed (p 15). However, India’s INDC is deeply problematic at its core.
Hiding behind the Poor
Central to the INDC are two proclamations: “to reduce the emissions intensity of its GDP [gross domestic product] by 33% to 35% by 2030 from 2005 levels,” and to generate “about 40% cumulative electric power installed capacity from non-fossil fuel based energy resources by 2030” (p 29).
Emissions intensity refers to the amount of carbon dioxide (co2) and other gases emitted per unit of GDP. A reduced intensity implies a slower rise. But working through the numbers reveals that it will result in a massive rise in India’s total emissions. Given the worsening economic crisis worldwide, let us conservatively assume that India will have an annual GDP growth rate of 5% over the period 2005–30. This would imply, after accounting for the reduced emissions intensity of 33%–35%, India’s emissions in 2030 would be 2.5 times what they were in 2005. According to an Indian Network on Climate Change Assessment (INCCA)/Ministry of Environment and Forests report, India’s gross emissions in 2007 were 1,904 million tonnes of co2 equivalent, CO2-eq (INCCA 2010: i). (CO2-eq includes other greenhouse gases, GHGS, as well, such as methane and nitrous oxide, measured in terms of their capacity to trap heat relative to co2.) So in 2030, India’s emissions would be equivalent to about 5 billion tonnes of co2, very likely more. This is staggeringly high, and would form a significant part of straining the Earth’s capacity to absorb GHGs.
This large rise in emissions is justified, by government and several independent observers, in terms of a “development deficit.” Since India needs to still develop, it is only reasonable, they say, that our emissions will grow significantly. In this is an implicit assumption that future emissions will be to everybody’s benefit. This has little basis in reality: despite electricity generation capacity more than doubling, from 1,12,700 MW in 2004 to 2,34,600 MW in 2014, 304 million people in India still have no access to electricity (INDC: 5). Or take energy/fossil fuel use: in rural areas, 87% of Scheduled Tribe and 70% of Scheduled Caste households still use firewood for cooking (Rukmini 2015). Consider poverty: incorporating multiple indicators to measure poverty beyond just calorie intake, such as hygiene, clothing, education and health, one study found that “69% of India is below the poverty line …the rural situation is much worse at 84%” (quoted in Shetty 2008: 13). Or take the nature of employment, a key factor in persistent, rising inequality: while there has been an increase in jobs in recent years, almost the entire increase has been in the unorganised sector (Shetty 2008). Crucially, real wages for factory workers in 2012 were lower than they were in 1996.
There is no denying the justified, huge demand for electricity among the common people. There is also no denial of the huge benefits of electricity on people’s lives. But there is no basis to assume that their lot is going to improve magically due to a pathway that would treble India’s emissions by 2030. Nor is the future direction promising, given the recent attacks by the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government on rights of organised workers and forest communities, its attempt (aborted so far) to amend land acquisition laws and its regular criticisms of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) and the Forests Rights Act.
What is even worse, the underclasses in whose name India’s sharp rise in emissions is being legitimised, tend to be the worst victims of climate change impacts, as seen during the Uttarakhand disaster (2013), the Mumbai floods (2005) and in the Sunderbans. The gains for the poor from much higher emissions are small, the adverse impacts huge.
Meanwhile, the better-off are growing. According to Kotak Wealth Management, the number of households with a minimum net worth of Rs 250 million has been rising steadily: 62,000 households in 2010, 81,000 in 2011, 1,00,900 in 2012, 1,17,000 in 2013–14. So when the Indian government states in the INDC that India’s per capita emissions are only 1.56 metric tonnes (p 2), it is shamefully hiding behind the poor. It has the temerity to say “this is because Indians believe in nature friendly lifestyle and practices.” This ignores the lifestyles of the 1,75,000 households with assets of one million dollars or more (RUPE 2014: 41), whose per capita carbon emissions are much higher than the average European and even American. The ecological footprint of the richest 1% of Indians is over 17 times that of the poorest 40% (Shrivastava and Kothari 2012). India’s valid position regarding differentiated responsibilities and historically unequal emissions between countries is not reflected in similar scrutiny of inequality between the rich and the poor within India itself.
This lack also pervades the INDC’s proposals regarding climate change adaptation. Reducing risk and improving the capacity of people to adapt to climate change is linked to effective poverty eradication, improving food security through sustainable farming, promoting greater biodiversity, improving public health, and strengthening community resilience. These linkages have simply not been made explicit.
Indiscriminate Expansion
This rise in wealth of and consequently higher consumption by the better-off has resulted in a huge and indiscriminate planned expansion of electricity generation, which the INDC reflects.
First, the INDC uses the term “non-fossil fuels” rather than “renewables.” This allows the government to include nuclear power. It sets a target of 63 gigawatts (GW) by 2032, a huge expansion from the current and under-construction installed capacity of 10 GW. It calls this power “a safe, environmentally benign and economically viable source!” After Chernobyl and Fukushima, to call nuclear power “safe” is delusional. And if one looks at the impacts of nuclear fuel mining, and the still-unsolved problem of safe disposal of nuclear waste, calling it “environmentally benign” is plain dishonesty. Nor is it economically viable, partly because “every reactor constructed by the Department of Atomic Energy has experienced cost overruns” and “importing 10,000 MW of foreign reactors would cost trillions of rupees” (Ramana 2012: 189). All these reasons make nuclear power the least suitable form of generating electricity in a climate crisis.
Second, within “renewable,” the INDC includes “a vast potential of more than 100 GW” of hydropower. Of India’s 46 GW of currently installed hydroelectric capacity, an overwhelming 42 GW comprises large hydro. Since there is no mention of priority to micro-hydel, the INDC clearly implies a further expansion of large hydroelectric projects. Dozens of such projects are under construction or being planned, especially across the fragile Himalayan ecosystem. The enormous displacement, ecological damage to rivers and riverine ecosystems, submergence of forests, impacts on agriculture and people downstream, and methane emissions from reservoirs will all intensify with the expansion of large hydro, which cannot by any stretch of imagination be designated as “clean energy.”
Third, the INDC also slips in “clean coal” as “clean energy.” Coal of any quality has to be mined from mostly forested and inhabited areas, so its expansion will mean massive deforestation and displacement. The INDC says “coal will dominate power generation in future,” which hardly seems like a vision of an environmentally and socially sustainable future. The Modi government has recently drastically cut down the list of forested areas in which coal mining would not be allowed. Coal combustion and fly ash cause mercury poisoning; exposure to other heavy metals, such as arsenic and lead, even to premature deaths. And as the climate scientist James Hansen has pointed out, a single large coal thermal project causes the extermination of innumerable species as a consequence of co2emissions over its lifetime. We appreciate that coal mining in particular is a huge source of employment, however hazardous, for lakhs of workers. Discussions about the possibilities of transitioning from coal and other fossil fuels to clean energy, and how “green” employment could be part of this are therefore urgent. Some union federations and other collectives in India have been engaging with these questions, but the INDC and the government in general are silent.
We are not against all forms of electricity generation. But an indiscriminate expansion of power generation which the INDC proposes will have huge adverse impacts on communities everywhere. Even climatically benign large solar parks and wind farms have social and environmental hazards, such as grabbing land from farmers and pastoralists, and damaging ecosystems. Rooftop solar aside, we are concerned about the ultra mega solar power projects and 25 solar parks mentioned (INDC: 9), with several private corporations making blistering profits.
Hence, it would have been heartening had the INDC stated instead that much of the 40% generation from non-fossil fuels would be decentralised renewable energy (DRE, including solar, wind, hydro, biomass). DRE is not only ecologically less damaging but also more easily managed (and even set up) by communities, and therefore more able to provide quick energy access to the poor. Large-scale electricity production goes into centralised grids, from where access to the underprivileged has been poor. This issue of energy justiceis mirrored by the issue of energy democracy: who decides about energy source, distribution and price? With DRE, decision-making can much more easily be with communities who need the energy.
A Sinking Feeling
Another important area is potentially harmful. The INDC says India will create by 2030 an additional carbon sink of 2.5 to 3 billion tonnes of co2-equivalent. India will enhance carbon sequestration by 100 million tonnes of CO2-equivalent per year, by afforesting 5 million hectares (mha) and improving forest cover over another 5 mha (pp 16, 29).
It is hypocritical to talk of new areas under forests when existing forests, some of it millions of years old, are being axed in the name of development. Forestland diversion for mining, irrigation, power, industry, expressways and urbanisation is intensifying, with over 6 lakh hectares of forestland diverted since 1992 (CSE 2012). Compensatory afforestation of a few species can never replace this loss. Now funded under compensatory afforestation schemes, afforestation also takes over lands from communities dependent on them, often in violation of their rights. What is more, the NDA government proposes to hand over 40% of “degraded” forests to private capital. This will entail the further enclosure of commons lands. All of this has harmful implications for all forest communities, so it is not clear exactly what “increasing the forest/tree cover” would imply.
Beyond Tipping Points
We also need to situate India’s INDC within a larger frame. By now, all the major carbon emitters and 148 countries overall have submitted their INDCs. What do their proposals imply for the planet?
The US says it will reduce its absolute emissions by 26%–28% below 2005 levels by 2025. It has shifted its baseline year from 1990, which it was in the Kyoto Protocol, to 2005. With a 1990 baseline, the US’s reduction target is a mere 13%–15%, much less than needed. Its emissions in 2013 were actually 7.4% higher than its 1990 levels (Narain and Bhushan 2015). China proposes to lower its carbon emissions intensity by 60%–65% from 2005 levels. It has also said it will try to peak its emissions before 2030, but has mentioned no target, and its emissions by then should be in the range of 13–15 billion tonnes. If one adds India’s 5 billion tonnes of CO2-eq, and the US figure, then just the big three will have taken emissions well beyond what the planet can absorb.
Include the emissions of all the other big emitters, and we have a recipe for massive disaster. The Delhi-based research and advocacy organisation, Centre for Science and Environment, says the carbon budget is being overshot:
INDCs submitted by all major emitters indicate that cumulative emissions between 2012 and 2030 would be in the range of 700–800 billion tonnes of CO2…the world is not on a path to the 2 degrees C target. This would be disastrous for poor people across the world (CSE 2015).
It would be even more disastrous for innumerable species, with a staggering proportion of all species worldwide committed to extinction.
Completely missing from India’s and all these INDCs is a sense of urgency. Last year was the hottest year in recorded history. July 2015 was the hottest month in 1,627 months, since monthly records began in January 1880. Several feedbacks in the climate system (ecosystem responses that cause further warming) such as melting Arctic ice, methane escaping from thawing permafrost, more water vapour in the atmosphere, etc, have already kicked in. They will soon begin to feed on each other on a scale that will make it impossible for us to intervene. The INDCs and negotiating positions that India, China, the US and other major emitters bring to the table at the COP21 in Paris in December would need to be far more ambitious and qualitatively different if the planet is to avoid crossing dangerous levels of global warming.
About 5,000 persons in Oloibiri area of Bayelsa State have benefitted from a health outreach organised by The Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Ltd (SPDC) Joint Venture in furtherance of its Health-in-Motion campaign. Working closely with the Bayelsa State Government, Ogbia Local Government Council and other partners, SPDC took the comprehensive health outreach to 18 communities giving the beneficiaries dental and eye care/surgery, screening for blood pressure, blood sugar, cholesterol and malaria, HIV/AIDS counseling and testing, immunisation, pharmaceutical and laboratory services as well as treatment for chronic and minor ailments.
Managing Director of The Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Ltd (SPDC), Mr. Osagie Okunbor (centre), with a Special Recognition Award presented to him by the Chartered Institute of Personnel Management, Nigeria at their 47th annual conference on October 15 in Abuja. He is flanked on the left by the Treasurer, CIPM, Mrs. Ifeoma Adeniji, and the President, Mr. Tony Arabome.
SPDC also used the outreaches to create awareness on the Oloibiri Health Programme, a Shell-sponsored three-year initiative that is expected to promote universal health coverage, strengthen existing health systems, establish learning and operations research, and enhance the social determinants of health in Oloibiri field communities. The Bayelsa State Commissioner for Health Dr. Ayibatonye Owei flagged off the outreach at Ogbia town on September 10 as he dewormed children and presented Long Lasting Insecticide Treated Nets (LLITNs) to pregnant women.
He said: “This health programme Shell is implementing in Ogbia Local Government Areas is most commendable as no other oil company has done such a thing in Bayelsa State despite many years of oil extraction.”
The health outreach then moved to Kolo Creek communities where the Agholo of Agholo, HRH N.D. Amakuro, expressed joy at diverse health professionals providing quality service to the people. The traditional ruler was happy at the implementation of the Oloibiri Health Programme, and that the Kolo General Hospital was earmarked to serve as the secondary facility/referral centre for the programme.
Managing Director of The Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Ltd and Country Chair, Shell Companies in Nigeria, Mr. Osagie Okunbor (2nd left), conducting Vice President Yemi Osinbajo round the Shell exhibition stand at the 21st Summit of the Nigeria Economic Summit in Abuja… on Tuesday, October 13, 2015
Some beneficiaries testified to the kind of care they received in the hands of the doctors and nurses. Mrs. Oremediepre, a once active woman leader in the community who was diagnosed with severe myopia (short sighted) for several years, received spectacles to correct her condition.
She said: “Today, I can see well. I am grateful and will always remember Shell for this.”
SPDC’s Regional Community Health Manager, Dr. Akinwumi Fajola, commented: “The welcome in Oloibiri has been very warm. I’ve been involved in the Health-In-Motion programme since it began in 2009 and the gratitude and smiles of beneficiaries is enough reward for all the planning and hard work. SPDC has demonstrated tremendous care for the health of the people through the programme.”
The SPDC JV has supported community health projects in the Niger Delta since the 1980s, with equipment and pharmaceutical donations as well as the construction of hospitals and implementation of malaria and HIV/AIDs control programmes. Today, the SPDC JV supports 20 health centres in the region.
Poor pay and remote location in South Korea are driving away potential employees says GCF, as it prepares to sign off on first funding projects
GCF executive director Hela Cheikhrouhou. Photo credit: news.gcfund.org
The UN’s flagship Green Climate Fund says it is “severely understaffed” because its salaries aren’t attractive and few want to move to its South Korean HQ in Songdo.
Its directors say it needs more resources and 72 new full-time staff by 2018 to operate effectively.
Some posts have been vacant for two years says the GCF, which had a total approved administrative budget for 2015 of $19,566,866. $11.21 million is set aside for salaries and consultants.
As a result it has employed 62 temporary staff, ballooning its consultancy costs by 185%.
Core GCF teams are also relying on 11 interns to keep the organisation – which has received funding pledges of over $10 billion – ticking over.
“Many potential candidates have been candid that the current headquarters location is difficult in terms of possible spouse employment, and the GCF current compensation package is not attractive enough in comparison to their current employers to warrant a move,” reads its 2015 Annual Update.
The Fund is seen as a key part of efforts to develop a global climate change deal, which will need to drive billions towards developing countries, allowing them to invest in green infrastructure and prepare for future extreme weather impacts.
Risk management, portfolio building and litigation are cited as areas requiring urgent focus. The “quality and level of support on offer to countries could be compromised” unless key positions are filled, the document adds.
Speaking to France 24 news outlet, GCF executive director Hela Cheikhrouhou admitted concern that support for the fund for leading donors could dry up, just as it was coming online.
“It’s important we maintain the momentum and the ambition… my concern is now the fund is operational, starting to work and developing countries are getting familiar with it, that we lose the momentum.”
Regular funds every year “are not yet assured” the Tunisian official added.
The plea for more funds comes two weeks before a key board meeting in Zambia from November 2-5, where the GCF will reveal the first projects it plans to support.
Eight funding proposals worth $168m were published on its website on Thursday, three targeted in Africa, two in Latin American and the others in Fiji, the Maldives and Bangladesh.
Projects include $25m of investment in an East African solar fund, $40m for a Bangladesh climate resilience programme and $22m for energy efficiency green bonds in Mexico, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica, and Colombia.
President Muhammadu Buhari is scheduled to perform the ground breaking ceremony of the new 260km Super Highway Dual Carriage Road running from Calabar in Cross River State to the northern part of the country on Tuesday, 20th October, 2015. Host, Governor Ben Ayade, has fixed the venue of the event for Obung Village, Netim Clan, Akamkpa Local Government Area.
But something appears to be wrong somewhere.
This is the second time this event has been scheduled to hold. Mr President reportedly cancelled the first because, according to reports, he was unhappy over the fact that the proposed road was routed through the Cross River National Park, and had no environment assessment study. He did not seem to like the potential impact of the facility on the conservation spot, it was gathered.
Speedily, Cross River State officials went back to the drawing board and came up with a new road plan that has apparently avoided the National Park. Satisfied, they rescheduled the event and invited Mr President and dignitaries from home abroad.
But, alas, it has been discovered that the superhighway has been re-routed from the Park and into a UN-REDD+ pilot site, precisely through critical forest communities like Ekuri, Etara and Eyeyen. Ekuri is said to have the largest community-owned forest in Africa.
Observers fear that the superhighway passing through a UN-REDD+ pilot site will compromise the integrity of both the programme and Nigeria as a whole as a participating country.
“An EIA (environmental impact assessment) report could have provided answers to some of them but there is none,” said a source close to the UN-REDD+ project.
The highway, which will stretch from Calabar through Obudu to the North, is one among the three legacy projects promised by Governor Ayade during his governorship campaign.
The road project has reportedly kicked off with massive deforestation in Obung/Nsan Community in Akamkpa Local Government Area with heavy duty equipment/bulldozers deployed at project site.
President Buhari rejected the state government’s initial invitation to perform the project’s groundbreaking ceremony on the grounds of non-conformity with environmental standards.
Mr President, in a statement, had said the project had no EIA conducted and therefore should not go on.
In a reaction, the Environmental Rights Action/ Friends of the Earth Nigeria (ERA/FoEN) commended President Buhari, saying that he deserves kudos for turning down the groundbreaking of the project.
The ERA/FoEN stated that investigations reveal tensions and anxiety in the Obung/Nsan Community in Akamkpa Local Government Area over the development because, according to the organisation, the road project is anticipated to lead to massive deforestation, degrade biodiversity and contribute to climate change.
ERA/FoEN Executive Director, Godwin Ojo, stated: “The present administration has shown a clear sense of responsibility and commitment to the cause of the people and environment by turning down Governor Ayade’s invitation to perform the groundbreaking ceremony of a project that was set to take off with no consultation whatsoever with the people and no EIA conducted.”
Ojo explained that the National Park has one of the oldest pristine rainforests in Africa, and has been identified as a biodiversity hotspot with rare primates, which includes chimpanzees, drills and gorillas hence must not be disrupted.
He adds: “While we hail President Buhari for rejecting the project we want this administration to go further by demanding the Cross River government make public the mandatory Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIA) that meet the standards of the Federal Ministry of Environment legislation and made public for citizens participation.
“The solution to the traffic challenge and opening up Calabar to commerce is dualising the Calabar-Ikom-Obudu Federal Highway that is already in existence. As a first step, the route of the new road should be discussed and planned openly with civil society groups, management of the National Park, and other stakeholders.”
Going further, he suggests that the Federal Government should upscale the value of the national park to a UNESCO Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Reserve and a World Heritage Site (WHS) to prevent on-going and future encroachments.
He underlines the need for the Federal Government to urgently resolve the boundary of the Oban Division of the national park to be generally acceptable to all parties, the state, communities and the park institution.
Also in a reaction to the development, Ako Amadi of the Community Conservation and Development Initiatives (CCDI) said: “We are contending with a catastrophe that puts Nigeria’s efforts at natural resource management and disaster risk reduction in jeopardy. A modern highway through largely primary forest opens up several practical possibilities for the rapid destruction of an ancient system that houses immense biodiversity and carbon stocks.
“Why do our governments wait for the slightest opportunity to desecrate natural environments, but at the same time spend huge sums of money on urban lawns and gardens, and golf courses that are never properly maintained anyway? The day we spend our own taxpayers’ money on nature conservation, and not depend exclusively on international development agencies we probably would then place a premium on protecting forests.”
Paddy Ezeala, former spokesperson the Cross River National Park and the Nigerian Conservation Foundation, remarked: “This so-called super highway has been on the cards of government for more than 25 years. I wrote one of the initial press releases calling for expeditious action in the establishment of the Cross River National Park. I eventually became the first press officer of the Park when it was established. We feel pain at seeing those efforts going up in smoke owing to a chain of environmentally-untoward activities and decisions of those who think they are hungrier for ‘development’ than the rest of us.
“Something drastic and comprehensive has to be done about the management of our National Parks and other protected areas. Nobody would have thought of putting a highway through the National Park if conservation had taken its rightful place in the consciousness of Nigerians.”
A sneezing monkey, a walking fish and a jewel-like snake are just some of a biological treasure trove of over 200 new species discovered in the Eastern Himalayas in recent years, according to a new report by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF).
The walking fish was discovered in the Indian state of West Bengal. It is a vibrant blue dwarf snakehead fish. It breathes air, and can survive on land for up to four days. The fish can even wriggle up to quarter of a mile over wet ground between bodies of water. Photo credit: pressexaminer.com
The vibrant blue dwarf “walking” snakehead fish can breathe atmospheric air and survive on land for up to four days. And the newly-found monkey’s upturned nose leads to a sneeze every time the rain falls.
In total, 211 species were discovered between 2009 and 2014 – that’s an average of 34 new species annually for the past six years. The report maps out the volume of new species found by scientists from various organisations including 133 plants, 39 invertebrates, 26 fish, 10 amphibians, one reptile, one bird and one mammal.
“I am excited that the region – home to a staggering number of species including some of the most charismatic fauna – continues to surprise the world with the nature and pace of species discovery,” said Ravi Singh, CEO of WWF-India and Chair of WWF’s Living Himalayas Initiative.
Conserving Biodiversity
One of the most biologically diverse places on Earth, the Eastern Himalayas – spanning Bhutan, north-east India, Nepal, north Myanmar and the southern parts of Tibet – are also under grave threat. Due to development, only 25% of the original habitats in the region remain intact and hundreds of species that live in the Eastern Himalayas are considered globally threatened.
Climate change is by far the most serious threat to the region but population growth, deforestation, overgrazing, poaching, the wildlife trade, mining, pollution and hydropower development have all contributed to the pressures its fragile ecosystems.
“The challenge is to preserve our threatened ecosystems before these species, and others yet unknown are lost,” said Sami Tornikoski leader of the WWF Living Himalayas Initiative. “The Eastern Himalayas is at a crossroads. Governments can decide whether to follow the current path towards fragile economies that do not fully account for environmental impacts, or take an alternative path towards greener, more sustainable economic development.”
WWF is actively involved in supporting the countries of the Eastern Himalayas’ progress towards green economies that value ecosystems and the services they provide to the millions of people in the region. Located in one of the most ecologically fragile regions on Earth, the WWF Living Himalayas Initiative urges a strong regional collaboration to ensure that people in this region, live within the ecological means and remain within the boundaries of one planet.
And through the USAID-funded Asia High Mountains project, WWF is working with communities on the edge of the region’s snow leopard range, where the many impacts of climate change and unsustainable development are already being felt. We are also influencing policy, which governs natural resource management across snow leopard range, and contributing to a future where both people and biodiversity can thrive.
“Together we can secure a brighter future for the region’s people and biodiversity, including its rich array of species – those that we already know and those still waiting to be discovered,” said Tornikoski.
Abuja-based WaterAid Nigeria and Makurdi-based First Step observed the 2015 Global Handwashing Day (GHD) on Thursday by seeking changes in hygiene habits. While WaterAid targeted children as change agents, First Step has urged the society in general to embrace the handwashing campaign.
Handwashing
WaterAid Nigeria announced the launch of a hygiene themed proposal writing competition for selected schools in the nation’s Federal Capital Territory. The competition, which aims to support children develop skills necessary to allow them become change agents, will ask students to write about the state of hygiene or sanitation in their schools and/or surrounding communities and what they think is a simple and cost-effective way to address the issue.
The best proposals will be funded to implement the recommended hygiene projects in their schools and/or surrounding communities.
The GHD is a campaign on 15 October each year to motivate and mobilise people around the world to wash their hands with soap as a key approach to disease prevention. WaterAid officials described the occasion as “an important opportunity to emphasise handwashing as an effective way to prevent disease and reduce child mortality and morbidity with its subsequent impact on overall health and school attendance.”
The organisation also joined the Federal Ministry of Water Resources, European Union (EU), United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the National Task Group on Sanitation (NTGS), the Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council (WSSCC) and other stakeholders to commemorate Global Handwashing Day with students at the Community Secondary School in Asokoro, Abuja.
Speaking at the handwashing event, Ms Tolani Busari, WaterAid Nigeria’s Head of Governance, encouraged students to make regular handwashing with soap a habit at home and at school and become hygiene champions in their schools and communities.
Ms Busari further spoke about the importance of handwashing with soap and its benefits for helping prevent diseases and saving lives.
The theme for this year’s Global Handwashing Day, “Raise a hand for hygiene,” encourages the creation of a strong social norm of good hygiene in schools and communities by asking children/students, people and organisations to stand up, be identified and be counted as hygiene champions. The theme is also a reminder that it is possible for governments to count how many people wash their hands and have access to hygiene facilities in homes, schools, and healthcare centres. Governments must measure hygiene indicators to know where resources should be concentrated.
This year’s Global Handwashing Day follows the historic adoption of the new United Nations’ Global Goals on Sustainable Development for 2030. The goals, which were agreed on by 191 countries including Nigeria, contain a goal focussed on access to water, sanitation and hygiene for all.
At the end of October, representatives from more than 100 countries and UN agencies in Bangkok will discuss how to measure progress towards the development targets agreed under the Global Goals. WaterAid is calling on all influential officials to help achieve the full health benefits of improved access to water and sanitation by ensuring indicators on hygiene are included as a measure of progress for the goal on water and sanitation for all.
Dr. Michael Ojo, Country Representative, WaterAid Nigeria, said: “Every day across the world, 1,400 children under five die from diarrhoea caused by dirty water and poor sanitation and hygiene. That’s one child every minute. Nigeria has recorded practically no progress in the area of sanitation and hygiene in the past 25 years and only 9% of the population have gained access to improved sanitation in that time. Only an estimated 12% of the population have a handwashing facility with soap and water at home.
“The recent agreement of the Global Goals, which aim to eradicate extreme poverty by 2030, have brought us one step closer in ensuring such tragedies will be a thing of the past. However, there is still a long road ahead and a lot of work to be done to ensure the world delivers on the potential of these goals.
“Hygiene, and in particular handwashing, are frequently overlooked, and yet they make a huge difference to the health and wellbeing of the global population. Out of all water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) interventions, hygiene promotion has proven to be particularly effective in reducing mortality and morbidity from child diarrhoea, and has been identified as the most cost-effective disease control intervention.
“WaterAid is calling for the vital role of hygiene to be included as an indicator for Goal 6, which works towards ensuring the availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all. Handwashing and wider hygiene practice will be vital if we are to achieve the Global Goals related to health, education and water and sanitation access.”
Whilst the provision of improved water supply and sanitation facilities make it easier to practice good hygiene, on their own they are not sufficient to significantly decrease morbidity and mortality rates. Handwashing is critical for maximising the health benefits of investments in water supply and sanitation infrastructure and combating many health risks.
According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), handwashing with soap and improving hygiene practices can cut cases of diarrhoea by up to about 50%.
In Makurdi, Benue State, Executive Director, First Step, Mrs Rosemary Hua, called on policy makers, stakeholders and the society in general to embrace the habit of hand washing with soap.
Mrs Hua, who made this clarion call on Thursday in her opening remarks on occasion of the observation of the Global Handwashing Day, pointed out that event is apt as fostering and supporting local culture of hand washing with soap cannot be overemphasised.
She maintained that hand washing with soap is an easy, effective and affordable way to prevent diseases and save lives.
“We are creating awareness on the benefits of hand washing with soap specifically to maternal and child health, children and schools with reference to women and children as agents of change,” she added.
In a good will message, the Benue State Commissioner for Water Resources, Nick Wende, who spoke through Nathan Ichor stated that hand washing with soap is important in maintaining a healthy life.
“We need water to wash hands and we at the Ministry will try to make potable water available, statewide to enhance the practice,” he stated.
Also speaking, the State Commissioner for Women Affairs and Social Development, Mrs Mwuese Mnyim, who was represented by the Permanent Secretary, Tsegba Igbalumun, described the celebration as a re-awakening of the habit of hand washing with soap.
She called for all hands to be on deck in sustaining the habit of hand washing for the benefit of public health.
Earlier, President, Medical Women Association, Benue State Chapter, Dr. Priscilla Utoo, sued for partnership and synergy in practicing the habit of hand washing with soap, adding that, together, as a team, everyone achieves maximally.
In separate remarks, Timothy Chiese who represented the Benue State Rural Water and Sanitation Agency (BERWASA), Esther Kpeeteh, who represented the Permanent Secretary, Benue State Universal Basic Education Board, Mrs. Judith Hirnyam, representative of civil society organisations (CSOs) in the state, Mrs. Mary Makeri, reiterated the importance of hand washing with soap, noting that the habit is crucial to healthy and good living at a very low cost.
The GHD 2015 was marked in Makurdi by WaterAid Nigeria in collaboration with First Step, Benue State Chapter of Medical Women Association, Benue State Ministry for Women Affairs and Social Development featuring over 27 primary and secondary schools across the state.
High points of the celebration included demonstration of proper hand washing with soap, performance of hand washing theme song and distribution of hand washing songs CD and water containers to participating schools.
Organisations from 16 countries back Nnimmo Bassey’s call to support indigenous people, youth and women on the frontlines of climate change. Bassey, Chair of Global Greengrants Fund, is a Nigerian environmental and human rights activist. Global Greengrants supports community-based projects that address climate change and make our world safer and healthier
Nnimmo Bassey
This is a defining moment in the climate crisis. In six weeks, negotiators from countries around the world will arrive in Paris for the 21st United Nations Climate Summit. You will hear world leaders call these negotiations monumental. And perhaps they will be – if participants act decisively to stop dirty fossil fuels from laying waste to our health, to our ways of life and to the planet our young people will inherit.
The real hope for a climate change solution lies in remote corners of Latin America, Asia, Africa, the Pacific Islands and the Middle East, where people are carrying out bold solutions to stave off the impacts of climate change, even as they fight to survive the forces destroying their environments and forcing them to abandon their homelands.
No matter the outcome of the official talks, the months ahead are an opportunity to give power to community leaders – including indigenous people, youth and women – on the front lines of climate chaos and environmental destruction by extractive industries. People who struggle to stay ahead of rising seas, and who take a stand every day against illegal logging, large-scale mining and dirty energy development to protect their environments, rights and ways of life.
For example, Turkana communities have thrived in northern Kenya’s flat, desertscape for generations. But years of parching droughts have put this pastoral culture in danger of collapse. To make matters worse, rampant oil exploration and development threaten grazing land and, in some cases, have forced local pastoralists from their lands without their consent.
Enter recent law school graduate Ekai Nabenyo. Ekai and other youth in his native Turkana village founded the Lorengelup Community Development Initiative to teach local people about climate change and the link to oil development. In 2014, the group led a project to improve a local school, powered by solar panels. In just one year, school attendance has risen from 200 to 500 and has become a focal point for climate change education in the community.
Thanks to bold leaders like Ekai, communities worldwide have made enormous strides on their own, with limited resources, in the face of climate destruction. Imagine what they could do with more consistent flows of support.
Governments and funders gathered in Paris should earmark climate finance for local organisations that know what is needed and require resources to implement their effective projects. Civil society and funders must also join together to address these global issues. The cost is low, but the impact is great.
Over the past ten months, in partnership with the Oak Foundation and youth groups around the world, Global Greengrants has directed more than $400,000 to young climate leaders who are part of a youth movement that is gaining momentum every day. They are networking across borders and languages to raise awareness about climate change and call for significant action at the global level.
In December, front line climate activists will join Global Greengrants in Paris to network and raise their voices so that their stories of resilience and courage can be heard at the highest levels.
Those of us in communities where oil coats our waterways, super storms wipe out our farms, and water scarcity shrivels our crops know that true progress on climate chaos will happen from the ground up.
The grassroots has ignited. It is time to listen to their voices.
Signed by:
Africa Agenda, U.S.A.
African Youth Initiative on Climate Change, Kenya
BothENDS, Netherlands
Development Research Communication and Services Centre, India
Earth Island Institute, U.S.A.
Earthworks, U.S.A.
EDGE Funders Alliance, U.S.A.
Fondo Acciόn Solidaria AC, Mexico
Foundation for the Peoples of the South Pacific, Solomon Islands
Fundaciόn Tierra Viva, Honduras
Global Greengrants Fund, U.S.A.
Global Greengrants Fund / UK & Europe, U.K.
Green Camel Bell, China
Green Development Advocates, Cameroon
Green Longjiang, China
Green School Green Generation, Indonesia
Health of Mother Earth Foundation, Nigeria
International Rivers, U.S.A.
Millennium Community Development Initiatives, Kenya
National Association of Professional Environmentalists, Uganda
No REDD in Africa Network, Nigeria
Oilwatch Ghana, Ghana
Pesticide Action Network North America, U.S.A.
Pesticide Action Network International
Rainforest Action Network, U.S.A.
The Samdhana Institute, Indonesia/Philippines
Tautua Samoa Party, Samoa
Wuhu Ecology Center, China
Women Environmental Programme, Nigeria
Yayasan ParaPerintis, Indonesia
To celebrate Africa’s second annual Mercury-Free Dentistry Day, the African Centre for Environmental Health on Monday October 13 joined civil society groups across the continent by releasing a plan on how the continent can leapfrog into pollution-free dentistry.
According to scientists, dental amalgam is 50% mercury, considered a dangerous neurotoxin. The pollution-free alternatives to dental amalgam are affordable, effective, and available, observers say. Led by the African Region, over 120 nations have signed the Minamata Convention on Mercury, which calls for an immediate scaling down of amalgam use.
Meeting in Nigeria in 2014, African NGOs adopted the Abuja Declaration for Mercury-Free Dentistry for Africa, now endorsed by 40 civil society organisations (CSOs). Noting Africa’s ability to leapfrog steps that the West used in development, the Abuja Declaration states that Africa shall be first to end amalgam use.
Meeting in Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire, 25 April 2015, francophone NGOs adopted “The Abidjan Plan to Implement the Abuja Declaration,” described by the activists as a common-sense set of steps to change dental school curriculum, provide consumers and parents with information about their choices in the dental office, and change government policies to favor mercury-free dentistry.
At the summit, participants voted to create a road map that can be implemented in every African nation, from Senegal to Tanzania, from Egypt to South Africa.
Consequently, the Abidjan Plan was released to celebrate Mercury-Free Dentistry Day for Africa.
Dominique Bally, Chairman of the Centre, said: “Mercury-free dentistry protects our people and our environment’s health. With the Abidjan Plan to implement the Abuja Declaration, we will reduce the mercury in fish that our children eat. We will protect the health of dental workers who are breathing toxic mercury vapors. We will work hand-in-hand with the dentists of our great region to leapfrog the technology into 21st century dentistry for Africa. We will expand oral health care for children.”
Here is the Abidjan Plan to implement the Abuja Declaration:
I. The Abidjan Plan to Implement the Abuja Declaration
A. Political, legal and institutional level
Work for government policies that will phase out amalgam use in Africa by the year 2020.
Disseminate the Minamata Convention on Mercury and accelerate its ratification in each country.
Create in each country a framework for consultation and collaboration between ministries (environment, health, education, commerce, industry, customs, insurance, etc.) for better management of mercury-free fillings’ import and use.
Change government programmes and insurance policies to cease favouring amalgam and to start favouring alternatives.
Make an inventory or supplement the existing baseline data on the use of dental amalgam in each country.
Strengthen cooperation and partnership between NGOs and dentists to eliminate the use of mercury in dentistry.
Strengthen the legal framework by developing regulatory texts regulating the use of dental amalgam.
Develop a prototype for mercury-free dentistry in hospitals based on the model of institutional dental care programmes implemented in military hospitals.
B. Training, research and development level
Change dental school curriculum to emphasise composite, ionomers, and other minimally-invasive and mercury-free dental fillings.
De-emphasise teaching amalgam, and then phase out instruction in amalgam.
Provide training in mercury-free filling placement to older dentists.
C. Information-education-communication level
Provide information to dental consumers/patients, telling them that amalgam is mainly mercury and that non-toxic alternatives are available.
Urge dental consumers/patients to choose mercury-free fillings.
Disseminate the Abuja Declaration in each country.
Raise awareness and disseminate information to all stakeholders involved in the implementation of the Minamata Convention on Mercury and in the reduction of mercury use in dentistry, especially insurers and distributors of biomedical products.
Educate the public authorities why amalgam should be phased out by 2020.
II. Why Civil Society Needs to Implement the Abuja Plan
Africans are well aware of the impact of toxic products manufactured elsewhere and dumped in Africa after Western consumers no longer prefer them. A current example is lead paint. Coming next, it would appear, is dental amalgam, which is 50% mercury.
A ban on amalgam in Europe is probable…and a shift of sales to Africa is likely to follow. Pro-mercury commercial interests from Europe, America, and Australia launched a campaign to keep and expand amalgam use in the East Africa Community nations and now intend to expand that programme.
That amalgam is a chief source of mercury pollution is undeniable. Africa’s political leadership is opposed to amalgam use. At the Minamata Convention negotiations, African governments and the African region collectively wrote the prototype language that was adopted in the Convention: a road map on how to scale down amalgam use, steps which are to begin now, not at some future date. In 2012, the Africa region was also first to propose an absolute ban on placing amalgam in the milk teeth. In 2015, the European Union health science committee agreed, calling for the end of amalgam use in children and pregnant women.
Africa is developing fast via leapfrog development steps – getting telephones without the intermediate step of land lines, getting banking without the intermediate step of building branch banks. Africa is using superior technology to meet development goals. Likewise, no reason exists for Africa to repeat the mistake of Europe by having mass use of mercury fillings, then switching to mercury-free fillings. Africa will leapfrog straight to mercury-free dentistry.
For the aura of inevitability for mercury-free dentistry that we are building, Africa will get there first before other regions.
The Women Advocates Research and Documentation Centre (WARDC), Women Rights to Education (WREP), Women Consortium of Nigeria (WOCON) and Gender Equality Peace and Development Centre (GEDPC) have called on the Federal Government of Nigeria to support rural women in small holder farming so as to address hunger and poverty in Nigeria.
Founding Director of WARDC, Dr Abiola Akiyode-Afolabi. Photo credit: topcelebritiesng.com
The call was made in commemoration of the International Day for Rural Women observed yearly on October 15. It is a United Nations’ designated day to celebrate and honour the role of rural women and their importance in enhancing food production and rural development.
Founding Director of WARDC, Dr Abiola Akiyode-Afolabi, said in a statement: “The International Day for Rural Women is set aside to give special focus to the critical place occupied by rural women in the struggle to reduce poverty and improvement of food security especially in developing countries of Asia and Africa.
“Over 50% of Nigerian women live in the rural areas and perform about 70 percent of agricultural labour force. In spite of their role, they lack access to agricultural inputs and finance, they have less than 14 percent land holding rights, while culture, traditions and discriminatory laws continue to deny the women equal access to government programmes at national and state levels.”
Ms Mimido Akchapa of WREP stated: “Over 70 percent of land in Africa is held under traditional titles and customs controlled by men. This is also applicable to Nigeria where in some instances, over 90 percent of land are held and controlled by men while women as wives or daughters in many communities have little or no access neither controls over such lands. They continue to suffer in silence due to discrimination on the basis of their gender and not because they have less strength or intelligence to perform rural activities in the Agricultural value chain.”
While Prof Patricia Donli, Executive Director of GEDPC,was of the opinion that government has not done enough, she emphasised: “The prioritisation of support for commercial farmers by subsequent government at national and state levels and the politicisation of development programmes have also added to the plight of rural women because national budget for the agricultural sector which targets commercial farmers already exclude rural women from enjoying the benefits of government programmes.”
Jumoke Rasak of WOCON contended: “Agricultural policies and programmes have remain gender neutral while rural development programmes are often not cash backed hence the perpetuation of poverty and hunger in Nigeria.”
The Women groups argue thatNigeria is a signatory to international instruments and policy framework of the African Union and the United Nations which mandates the government to protect and promote the rights of women to land and other development needs. Recent reports from some progressive democracies across Africa such as Kenya and Mozambique suggest that concrete legal steps are being taken to safe guide equal access of men and women to land and properties.
Dr. Akiyode-Afolabiconcluded: “This International Day of Rural Women provides a rare privilege for the President to empower rural women in terms of accessibility to land and farm inputs, loans, markets and preservation of farm produce so that they can cultivate more land, earn more from their farming, participate and be represented in decisions that affect their livelihoods and automatically improve food security, reduce poverty and economic well-being of all Nigerians.”
