The French Government has recognised the crucial role played by civil society as key stakeholder in the ongoing dialogue process for a post-2020 climate change agreement.
Speaking recently at the “Policy Dialogue on Climate Change” held in the sidelines of the African Union Summit in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, Nicolas Dasnois, from the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Development, pointed out that views from all stakeholders should be considered if the world is to deliver an ambitious and all-inclusive deal for climate change.
Dasnois said that the next Conference of Parties (COP21) is the largest event the French Government has ever organised, and that “the momentum has already kicked off,’ he said at the joint event organised by the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance and Development Agency, Oxfam.
Participants at the Dialogue
Over the last couple of years, various civil society groups have directed their anger towards the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) over what they term as deliberate attempt to frustrate their participation and contribute to the negotiation processes.
Non-governmental Organisations (NGOs) have observed that the progressive limitation of observer participants through quota system is meant to kill their vocal stand on some critical issues and sometimes the manner in which the negotiations are conducted.
Speaking at the side-event event, top African negotiator and Tanzanian head of delegation to the UNFCCC Richard Muyungi underscored the importance of unity among African stakeholders, including the civil society, saying that this was the only way to ensure the continent’s position is respected at the global level.
“Of course we have come from far and the African Group is the most formidable block in Negotiations, we must note that that the coordination framework among key African organs and initiatives has made our voices louder,” he told participants.
“I wish to thank the people of Ethiopia and particularly the Late Prime Minister Meles Zenawi for steering the Conference of Heads of State and Government on Climate Change (CAHOSOCC) which President JakayaKikwete took over. We now have the commitment of our political leaders at the highest level possible,” added Muyungi.
The event was held as part of policy dialogues on climate change spearheaded by PACJA and its partners to ensure African governments acknowledge the need and urgency for a progressively fair, equitable and ecologically just climate change deal in Paris that is responsive to African realities and aspirations.
The event also addressed by the African Climate Policy Centre’s Johnson Nkem and the Pan African Parliamentarians Network on Climate Change (PAPNCC) President Awudu Cyprian Mbaya was aimed at sharing reflections and perspectives on what the outcomes of COP20 means for Africa and its people as well as contributing to African Union’s debate and preparatory process in the countdown to COP21. Organisers also sought to strengthen coordination and relationship with African Union, particularly its organs and initiatives.
Lilongwe in Malawi is expected to achieve economic growth lower than 5.8 percent projected earlier for 2015.
President Peter Mutharika said in his state of the nation address regarding the current floods that preliminary assessment shows that the damage caused to the economy is estimated in million dollars, excluding the cost of the relief programmes.
Weeks of very heavy rainfall have triggered widespread flooding in Malawi. Photo credit: Water Journalists – Africa
Figures from Capitol Hill are enough evidence that business operations in Malawi have come to a halt due to heavy rains and floods. Problems of electricity, water and public infrastructure are huge and companies are feeling the pinch. While aid is being channelled to flood victims, the private sector is caught in untimely delivery or provision of goods and services.
The Malawi Confederation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry (MCCCI) has since said floods have adversely affected businesses. It further says agriculture and mining sectors have been affected most as they are likely to experience low productivity in the 2015.
MCCCI chief executive officer chancellor Kaferapanjira said the damage to water supply has culminated into water shortages in cities and towns, electricity blackouts have led to companies using fuel generators. The private sector body adds that floods have also jeopardised irrigation systems, food storage and processing facilities of the various companies.
He added that insurance companies are likely to spend more on insurance claims. Suffice it to say that they have an obligation to assist the need through relief items.
“Some of this donation has come in kind, for example, Carlsberg donated water worth K80 million kwacha the time the city had no water in Blantyre and they had to use Mulunguzi Dam because there was no water in town,” said Kaferapanjira.
Field observations and follow-up rapid assessments by an Inter-Agency assessment team that comprises government UN agencies and others have shown that livestock and farmlands have been affected. This is enough a sign to economists that output in the sector will be reduced.
In his state of the disaster address last week, President Peter Mutharika alluded that heavy rains and floods will, therefore, bring many negative socioeconomic effects to the Malawian economy. Mutharika said the growth for Malawi is largely driven by agriculture, manufacturing, electricity, water and mining sectors.
“In essence, this means that the problem of food insecurity among households is heightened to levels that will put a lot of pressure on the budget, to assist the households affected by the floods across the country. In this case, the budget in excess of K3.6 billion will be required for replanting. Concerns of further flooding are high as rains are forecast to continue for some months,” he said
Meanwhile members of the private sector have predicted doom for their business as companies and people will not be able to pay back credits or insurances fees timely or else such companies will have to pay out insurance claims.
Prakash Patil, chief executive officer of the General Alliance Malawi, an insurance company explains that despite such developments, they would assist their clients and victims.
“We are saddened by the floods and we join the concerned families by donating the amount through the VPs office so they buy basic needs,” he said
The Malawi Government said it is estimated that around 116, 000 farmers country-wide have been affected with 35, 000 hectares of cropland impacted.
The President said maize, rice, groundnuts, cotton, and fish has been lost. It is also estimated that a total of K2.9 billion worth of livestock has been lost.
He added that total food production of households will be reduced during the 2014/15 agriculture season unless farmers re-plant their fields, meaning that a special budget would be needed for replanting.
Meanwhile, Malawi’s Response Plan is seeking US$81 million to address immediate needs of people who have been affected by the floods and the United Nations funds totalling $150,000 are being utilised to strengthen the operation and coordination capacity at district level.
It remains a fact that heavy rainstorms and floods hit 15 out of the 28 districts in Malawi such as Rumphi, Balaka, Karonga, Nsanje and Chikwawa, among other districts. The floods have killed many people and rendered more than 638,000 persons homeless.
However, Lilongwe says, these numbers are expected to rise as more information is received and analysed, and rains continue to fall.
Professional urban planners in Nigeria have adopted measures aimed at addressing pressing national issues of security and fraud perpetrated via physical development ventures. This comes in form of an omnibus and multi-use document acceptable to authorities in government and the corporate world.
President of the Nigerian Institute of Town Planners (NITP), Dr Femi Olomola (standing); with National Secretary of the NITP, Ogbodo Alex (left); representative of the Town Planners Registration Council of Nigeria (TOPREC), Daini Adeleke (right); and representative of the Association of Town Planning Consultants of Nigeria (ATOPCON), Tayo Awomoso (extreme right)
Tagged “Land Use Planning Report,” the document will be prepared by members of the profession registered by the Town Planners Registration Council of Nigeria (TOPREC). When eventually operational, it will accompany applications for:
Building plan approval/permits;
Issuance of certificates of occupancy (C-of-Os);
Opening of Corporate accounts with banks; and,
Incorporation/registration of new companies with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC).
Dr Femi Olomola, President of the Nigerian Institute of Planners (NITP), who made the disclosure on Friday in Lagos during the inauguration of a seven-man committee to produce a model copy of the report, said: “The art, science and profession of town planning principally revolves around ensuring the orderly arrangement and use of land having absolute regard to overriding public interest.”
Committee members: from left: Hakeem Olatunji Badejo (chairman), Michael Simire, Toba Oyebanji, Hakeem Roy-Larinde, Mrs Claudia Akinyemi (secretary) and Bisi Adedire.
According to him, the concept of the report is novel and has never been done in any part of the world, and therefore requires creativity on the part of the committee members, which cut across public and private sector planners as well as those in the academia.
The committee comprises: Hakeem Badejo (chairman), Mrs Claudia Akinyemi (secretary), Bisi Adedire, Michael Simire, Toba Oyebanji, Dr Wale Alade and Hakeem Roy-Larinde.
Olomola explained that the envisaged universal professional use of the document calls for a robust and somewhat flexible Terms of Reference (TOR).
His words: “Your TOR is best contextualised in this scenario of our imagination of a plot of land measuring, say, 648 square metres (the usual 60 feet x 120 feet). The plot can either be developed or vacant. Imagine a minimum of 1,000 metres radius (say 55 plots) drawn round the plot thus giving a minimum area of 3,142,000 square metres (314 hectares approximately).
“A thorough Land Use Analysis Survey of this land must be carried out followed with the land use analysis map with all the identified land uses coded in the NITP-approved professional colour code. A 12- to 15-page report on the plot has to be written addressing the following:
Name of the owner of the plot; information on title to the land; type of existing development or proposed on the plot; building plan approval/permit number if there is an existing development on the plot and a detailed location plan of the site.
Statement on current government approved or proposed town planning Development Plan covering the area where the plot is located – regional/master/district/local plans as applicable.
Report on the Land Use Survey/Analysis.
Professional opinion on the proposed use of the plot in question.”
NITP Fellows at the forum: Mrs Catherine George (left), Bunmi Adeyeye and Makinde Ogunleye
A brain storming session that followed the inauguration raised questions related to using GPS to locate the plot of land in question, the report’s huge potential as a result of its potentially detailed information, fees to be charged, zoning density, as well as inter-professional competition/resistance.
The daylong event was graced by dignataries such as: the first national vice-president of the NITP, Luka Achi; national secretary, Ogbodo Alex; executive secretary, Barka Madziga; president of TOPREC, Prof. Layi Egunjobi (represented by Daini Adeleke); chairman of the Association of Town Planning Consultants of Nigeria (ATOPCON), Moses Ogunleye (represented by Tayo Awomoso); Nigeria’s first female town planner and past chair of Lagos NITP, Mrs Catherine George; as well as Makinde Ogunleye and Bunmi Adeyeye (both past chair of Lagos NITP).
Nnimmo Bassey, Director, Health of Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF), in a recent presentation made in Lome, Togo explores the myriad of environmental challenges militating the African continent’s progress
Nnimmo Bassey
A reading of the theme of this ITUC New Year School, Organising and Mobilising Workers for Africa’s Development, indicates that this is a clarion call for workers to interrogate what we term development and then see how actions development actions impact on the environment. Beyond agreeing on what we call development we should work to determine the path we must take to achieve development as we define it and not notions of development that may not build our desired futures. Workers are indeed central to the progress of Africa and thus it is essential that workers grapple with the issues taken on at this School. Technological advances may reduce the amount of labour required for certain processes, but no matter how advanced, the human factor, the human labour, can only be negated at great peril.
Development is a highly politicised word. Ordinarily it should mean change from one form to another, as in metamorphosis or biological growth or as an improvement. When the term is used these days the tendency is to think about development as a linear process where progress is measured against what obtains in the so-called first world and the worst is seen in the so-called third world, better known as the Global South. This characterisation has built in the catch-up mentality among the nations of Africa. And the attempts to catch up has been consistently roadblocked through international financial instruments like the so-called Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs) or more blatantly as we have seen in the case of Lumumba, Cabral, Sankara and other critically conscious post-colonial political leaders in Africa.
The catch-up mentality has led many leaders to see a jumping on the wagon of globalisation as the only way to make progress. Others have accepted that earning of foreign exchange, maintenance of foreign reserves and dependence on the Global North is the only way to ensure the inflow of foreign exchange and related goods that are often of the luxury sort. Thirdly, there has been a rigidly enforced notion and acceptance of neoliberal economic principles designed specifically to scuttle progress in nations that depend on raw materials exports for income.
Samir Amin’s statement on globalisation is good for to look at here: “The neo-colonial plan for Africa is indeed the worst pattern of integration in the global system. It cannot produce anything but the further decline in the capacity of African societies to meet the challenges of modern times… Globalisation does not offer to Africa any solutions to its own problems. Foreign direct private investments in Africa are, as everybody knows, negligible and exclusively concentrated in mineral and other natural resource sectors.”
Obviously there has to be another way of participating in the global system. According to Amin, Western agencies generally see countries that are dependent on foreign aid for survival of their state apparatus as “less developed.” We also note that when aid or certain supports are offered, nations fall over each other to prove that they are poor and highly indebted – if those are the conditions for qualification for a bailout.
In my book, To Cook a Continent, we looked at the pattern of infrastructural development in Africa and saw that the pattern remained one that aids exploitation and concluded that “Over the years the continent was charted for its usefulness, with railways and highways and ports facilitating extraction and packaging for waiting consumers and manufacturing plants in the North. This story remains the same to this day.”
Development and the Environment
Having clarity on the political underpinning of the concept of development is essential to understanding what drives the environmental actions of states and corporations. These are serious environmental implications associated with any development path nations adopt.
Dominant concepts of development have led to the division of the world into developed, developing or underdeveloped world. While a campaign for degrowth is rising in Europe due to the realisation that our planet cannot satisfy the current rate of production and consumption of goods, for us the struggle is for justice and the right to live in dignity. So, if we are talking of development in current terms we may as well be talking about imminent kicking in of post development in some societies and further underdevelopment in others.
If the industrialised nations will be incapable of securing resources to maintain present production and consumption, what is the probability that other regions, including Africa, would be reasonable to pursue a catch-up strategy by following a path that leads to a cul-de-sac. The question being grappled with in other spaces, especially in Latin America is whether we should be figuring out development alternatives or alternatives to development. This is the challenge we should tackle at this school also. Are there concepts and ways of life we have ignored while we accepted competition and exploitation as creeds? What doUbuntu, harambe, buen vivir, Kumak kawsay speak to us?
What yields progress: Improvement of material condition? Or is progress the path illuminated by accumulation of wealth through acting as middlemen such as by the lumpen bourgeois? The wealth and resources of our middlemen or agents of global capital are not linked to the material transformation of society that would lead to the building up of the infrastructure of the nation. Their wealth is mostly a function of one thing: playing the role of the middleman or the commission agent to facilitate national exploitation. One of the key thoughts of Frantz Fanon, for example, was that it is not enough to change our material conditions but that we must utilise our knowledge to build a new narrative for the future that we want.
Foreign direct investments make politicians rejoice while the people and the environment take a beating. Consider the case of the developments at Lamu in Kenya – where a seaport, railway lines, international airport and tourist resorts are a massive intrusion in an area with a rich historical and cultural history. With Lamu as in other areas across the continent, people want to know whose idea are our governments pushing and who would benefit from the execution of those ideas? Are inclusive environmental and socio-economic impact studies carried out before these projects are embarked upon or the studies when carried out at all are mere perfunctory exercises? Are impacted and displaced peoples resettled or adequately compensated?
The Land is not Neutral, Neither is the Seed
Many African communities refer to their citizens as sons or daughters of the soil. In some contexts we proudly declare that that the environment is our life. In fact one person declared that if you want to defeat a people all you need to do is to destroy their environment. This is particularly important to us, Africans, because our lives are bound to the environment, we are indeed sons and daughters of the soil.
Whereas some persons may see the environment as a neutral object to be appropriated, transformed and owned, it is not so for the African. Any disturbance of our soils and waters has impacts on our agriculture, health and socio-cultural wellbeing. The dislocation and alienation of citizens from their natural environment and the disruption of social safety networks create very traumatic situations for our peoples. These environmental impacts can be comparable to violent confrontations that they often directly translate into.
Our agriculture is part of our culture and serves us well. One big challenge to our agriculture is that Africa is a major frontier to the agricultural biotechnology industry. Most African governments and even labour leaders believe that industrial farming is the only way the world can hope to feed itself in the future. Many also believe that Africa cannot be fed by smallholder agriculture. Our governments and experts bemoan the opportunity Africa missed when the Green Revolution train passed her by. No wonder Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and their collaborators thought of an Alliance for Green Revolution for Africa (AGRA) to bring about a new Green Revolution on the continent. This is arguably an ill-advised catch-up idea. However, a major multidisciplinary study by the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) showed clearly that future food security actually lies in the hands of smallholder farmers who do not depend on massive chemical inputs. The report, Agriculture at Cross Roads, adopted in 2008, stated that the role of agricultural biotechnology would be very slim indeed, if at all.
Despite rigorous reports by scientists and rejection by farmers and consumers, the biotech industry with very powerful political backing continues to hack away at the resolve of the people to refuse this technology of which there is no proof of safety. In addition, governments pay scant attention to the Precautionary Principleof the Convention on Biological Diversity (CDB) – a principle that urges that caution be exercised when there is doubt about safety of actions that may jeopardise biosafety.
Africa has indeed been in the firing line of the biotech industry. In the early to mid -2000s the track was via food aid. We recall the huge political battles over efforts to introduce GMOs through food aid in Zambia (2002), Angola (2004) and Sudan (2004). These days the approach is through the argument that Africans are malnourished and lack vitamins needed to stem malnutrition, blindness and stunted growth (in children). So there is a new alliance to fight malnutrition in Africa and shameless governments have signed on rather than taking steps to solve the nutrition or even hunger gaps in their countries.
In Nigeria there have been field trials of genetically modifying cassava for enhanced vitamin E levels. Now they are working hard on a species of bananas with capacity to produce vitamin A aimed at Uganda. The industry targets major staple crops on the continent including cowpeas and potatoes. Genetically engineered cotton has been one approach to break through resistance by consumers and to show that GMOs can work with smallholder farmer. This attempt did not work in South Africa and today the poster child is Burkina Faso. We await independent studies to confirm if Burkina Faso is a real success or whether farmers are still enjoying start up packs and subsidies that would be withdrawn in the near future.
GMOs pose several environmental challenges including erosion of biodiversity, dependence on chemical inputs and genetic piracy or colonisation. To make matters worse, they neither yield more than natural varieties nor are they more nutritious. Once introduced into an environment the contamination becomes permanent.
Environmental Costs and Benefits of Development
Environmental costs are those costs that arise from damage done to the environment. They are not covered or find space on our national accounting books. When they appear at all on corporate balance sheets they are shown as corporate social responsibility (CSR) outlays. With CSR, those that cause environmental harm present a façade of care for impacted communities. Environmental costs are tolerated because the environmental benefits are reaped by powerful entities – be they state actors or corporations while those costs are externalised unto voiceless communities.
Market solutions to pollution emerged in the early 1960s by way of monetary compensations for environmental harm. The problems of externalities were solvable “through voluntary negotiations between the polluter and those adversely affected, leading to agreements about fair compensations from the polluter. This kind of transaction supposedly makes all parties better off. Polluters get their profits while those affected by the pollution get compensation that exceeds the value of the damage inflicted on them.” The problem is that you cannot really find the right monetary compensation for ecological damage as some of these are persistent and are irreversible.
This brings to mind the recent agreement by Shell, the oil company, to pay the sum of 55 million Pounds Sterling as compensation for huge oil spills from their pipelines in 1998 and 1999 at Bodo, Ogoniland in Nigeria. It was agreed that a chunk of the cash would go for social infrastructure in the community while the balance would be shared equally among the 15,600 fisherfolk that were directly impacted. The fact that each of those persons whose livelihood had been irreparably damaged would receive about N600,000 or about $3,200 raised some conversations on social media. One person sent a chat to me over twitter urging that fund managers should be approached to help the community folks handle the money – fearing that they may otherwise squander their sudden wealth. That sort of thinking indicates a shallow understanding of the value of local livelihoods. The compensation amount does not by any stretch of the imagination compare to what fisherfolk spend in buying fishing boats and equipment. And the pollution at Bodo, like in many other parts of Ogoniland, is so bad that up to 30 years of work will be needed to effect adequate remediation.
A troubling phenomenon is the trade in toxic wastes. Global trade is indeed so one sided that it would permit the dumping of toxic waste in poorer nations ostensibly to provide them avenue for foreign exchange earning. One particular leaked email by a World Bank claimed that Africa is under-polluted and that it would make economic sense to dump wastes in Africa since the death of men from postrate cancer was a long shot for Africans that would not live to the age of 65 (to worry about the disease) in the first instance.
Nature, Exploitation and Ecocide
The rise of market environmentalism sees nature as commodity and looks for ways to ameliorate environmental and social costs in terms of monetary compensation. Efforts are put into placing a price tag on life and if anything is considered worthless then it is fair game to destroy it. And things only have worth if humans know of what use to put them. The fact that Mother Earth is seen as a slave of man is a clear manifestation of ignorance and unreasonable haughtiness.
It is essential for us all to recognise that everything in Nature has intrinsic or existence value. They all have non-use value. This non-use value does not require that utility be derived from direct use of the resource because the value comes from the resource simply existing. Moreover, life is a web of relationships and everything or life forms are interconnected in this web of life. Trying to determine value simply on the premise of ‘service’ to humanity is absolutely unreasonable. The insistence that Nature most be seen in terms of monetary or exploitation value has been characterised as the reality of colonisation in the 21st century: not just the enslavement of people but of the planet.
A concept developed by HOMEF that can help us deepen this aspect of our conversation is that of Re-Source democracy. According to HOMEF, “Re-source democracy hinges on the recognition that a natural ‘resource’ fundamentally belongs to Nature and secondly to communities of species and peoples who live in the territory or have traditionally held the territory where the ‘resource’ such as forests, rivers or grazing lands exists. Re-source democracy is about stewardship that recognises the right of citizens to establish rules and to act in line with traditional as well as best available knowledge to safeguard the soil, trees, crops, water and wildlife first as gifts of Nature and secondly to enjoy the gifts as necessary provisions that support their lives and livelihoods as well as those of future generations. Re-source democracy calls on us to re-source, to re-connect with Earth – our source of life – and to respect her as a living being with inherent rights, and not just a ‘resource’ to be exploited.”
Climate Crisis and the rise of False Solutions
Africa is arguably the most vulnerable continent to climate change. The visible impacts include floods from unusually heavy rainfalls, droughts and increased desertification. Climate change will usher in new dimensions of water stress on the continent and more citizens will be forced into becoming climate refugees. It portends more conflicts.
Sea level rise is also a threat. Weak infrastructure and cities located on low-lying coastal areas are all vulnerable. It is very important to note that for every global temperature rise, Africa experiences 50 per cent rise higher than the global average. It is also known that to put the planet on a course that would keep global average temperature rise at not more than 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels up to 80 per cent of known fossil fuel reserves must be left in the ground. By the way, when we speak of a global average of 2 degrees Celsius for Africa that means 3 degrees. Food production capacity may reduce by 50 per cent in some cases by 2020 and will be severely compromised in all cases if high temperature rise happens.
Current United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Conference (UNFCCC) of parties negotiations have failed to give any hope that temperature increase above pre-industrial levels will remain within acceptable levels. To compound matters, climate negotiations focus on market mechanisms that allow for carbon offsets rather than having measurable, legally binding emissions cuts at source as required by science. What we have had is the promotion of voluntary emissions reduction since the Climate COP15 in Copenhagen in 2009. As we speak, the world is on course to have catastrophic temperature increases if nothing substantial happens at the forthcoming Climate COP21 in Paris in December 2015. One of the requirements to curb temperature rise is to leave at least 80% of known fossil fuels reserves underground. Is this something that countries that have fossil fuel resources would agree to? How about those that are going into extreme extraction such as fracking rather than leaving known conventional reserves untapped?
Whatever is the case, it is clear that there must be an urgent transition from dirty energy as represented mostly by fossil fuel sources. This transition does not necessarily mean job losses but may actually lead to the creation of more jobs that are also cleaner and safer.
The enthronement of false solutions to climate change poses direct sources of environmental challenges in Africa by way of problem shifting from the Global North to the Global South. One example is the investment in production of raw materials for biofuel production that has meant the grabbing of lands on the continent for cultivation of crops including jathropha. Another example is the introduction of the concept of Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD) and other market solutions that allow polluters to keep polluting once the can pay for a carbon stock in a designated and colonised forest somewhere in Africa or elsewhere. REDD forests often mean violence, human rights abuses, displacement and impoverishment of forest communities, despite all the safeguards introduced. One example is what the Sengwer peoples are suffering in Kenya as we speak.
Energy and Power Grids
As is evident in the Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) agreed by the African Union in 2012, there is no reference to renewable energy development on the continent. The emphasis is on fossil fuel driven energy supply and national or mega grid lines. It is not surprising that this should be so, because the drivers of the PIDA process are multinational extractive companies, oil companies and international and private financial institutions. Rather than invest on green energy and autonomous supply systems that do not rely on problematic national grids emphasis is made for the construction of coal fired plants, gas plants and probably nuclear plants. Big dams rather than micro ones will probably be on the cards. We must not ignore the fact that Africa has abundant solar, thermal and other resources needed from providing green and renewable energy on the continent. Investment on renewables is certain to generate more jobs than the enclave extractive sector jobs would ever do.
Continent Grab
One response to the food crisis has been a rise in speculations and a massive land grabbing in Africa. According to the World Bank by 2010 fully half of the cropland acquisition projects by foreign interests in the world were on lands in Africa. Beyond the number of acquisitions the quantum of land grabbed was also larger because the unit areas for projects in Africa tended to be higher than those elsewhere. They amounted to about two thirds of all land acquired then. In 2009 DRC promised some 7 million acres of land to ZTE, a Chinese firm, and also gave 1.2 million acres to Atama Plantation, a Malaysian firm, for oil palm plantations. Considering that African lands have been acquired at what has been termed “basement prices” what is happening here amounts to nothing short of a continent grab.
Environmental Corruption and Workers Safety
Weak governance structures and systems engender resource corruption beyond the popular financial corruption. Resources get corrupted when governments run lax environmental regulations and thus permit reckless exploitation of natural resources all in the bid to earn more foreign exchange. Superficial approaches to local content development can also lead to lax laws or non-enforcement of laws. These scenarios have direct implications for the safety of workers involved in the extractive or production sectors.
Lax laws are not given only to corporations such as those in the mining and petroleum sectors; they also pertain to the execution of projects such as highways, airports, seaports, housing developments and other structures donated by foreign governments. Some African governments also prefer foreign donors, like the Chinese, that do not have open conditionalities and do not ask political questions when making offers of assistance in exchange for the natural resources they crave for. By keeping a wilful blind eye such donors can support countries that are notorious for human and environmental rights abuses.
Technological advancements have tried to make more efficient products as well as increasing the rate of recycling and reuse of materials. The problem has been that energy efficiency, for example, does not curtail the rate of consumption of energy as people simply appear to love using more and more rather than less. It has been said also that cheaper gasoline prices may make Americans drive more and worry less about the fuel efficiency level of the automobiles they own. That is a scenario where economy and environmental imperatives clash.
A major trend, however, tends to be in the direction of making disposable products or those with inbuilt obsolescence. What this means is that as products are rapidly superseded by newer models they have to be disposed us. The disposal sites for these products are often found in the Global South were they are sold as cheap items for a people desirous to live the sort of lives advertised on television and glamourized in movies. Thus it can be said that globally, “economic benefits of resource efficiency measures in manufacturing sectors are dissatisfactory as long as the corresponding products end up as hazardous waste in poorer regions.” These products also indicate to us that a whole lot of the mining going on is simply not needed.
The rampant exploitation of the environment goes in tandem with the exploitation of labour. Just as the previously hidden market forces now openly drive the supply of goods, so do the market forces blatantly drive the exploitation of labour. We can even add that in this age of disposable goods, it appears that labour can be disposed of with little thought. Let us say this in other words. The environment and the labour force take a beating in the drive for nature’s resources to be supplied to the highest bidder. Workers get dispensed with because of the teeming pool of the unemployed and because poor workers are not the market for most of the goods they (workers) produce.
Cases where workers have been disposed of with little care include those that were mowed down at Marikina, South Africa and some 13 Zambian workers that were shot dead by their Chinese colleagues. If we add atrocities against informal workers we call to mind the about 52 artisanal miners reportedly buried alive in Bulyanhulu mining area in 1996.
Other acts of wilful and harmful deception against workers include cases where workers are given doses of milk in the supposition that it is an antidote to pollution that fills certain workplaces. Rampant violence against women at workplace speaks volumes on gender inequalities and related exploitation.
The point is that labour, just like the local communities where polluting activities happen, suffers double violence – one from repression and the other from pollution. Workers in the extractive sector, especially those in uranium and other mines, are as exposed to toxic pollutants as communities are. It could even be argued that unsuspecting workers may unwittingly expose themselves to more harm than that suffered by polluted communities. This could happen because of the fact that workers are often closer to these pollutants as they work with or in them. The same is the case with industries where environment health measures are not given prime of place.
It is important that labour unions give attention to the quality of the environment in which their members work or live. Environmental health concerns if adequately taken care of could cut down on the frequency and types of illnesses that are experienced at the workplace.
Environmental Intensity
Extraction of minerals is often resource intensive. It has been reported that vast amounts of water used in fracking, for example, cannot be returned to natural water cycles because it is loaded with a toxic cocktail of chemicals. Such waste waters have to be stored in retention tanks in perpetuity – a clear impossibility. One metal that is crucial for industrialisation is copper. Its extraction is considered to rank among the top 10 environmentally intensive materials. Deposits of the metal have been largely depleted and mostly very poor grades involving large volumes of ore, with huge disposal problems, are being mined these days. Acid mine drainage is a huge problem associated with gold mining and directly affect ground water. Mines are abandoned without proper decommissioning. Mining communities enjoy the least benefits of resources extracted from their territory: Niger Delta (Crude Oil), Kono, Sierra Leone (Diamond), Obuasi, Ghana (Gold), Witbank communities, South Africa (Coal) – to mention a few.
Stuck in the Crude (Niger Delta)
Since crude oil and natural gas are being explored and exploited virtually everywhere on the continent, it would not be out of place to end this short discussion with a focus on that sector. The environmental challenges of petroleum resources exploration and exploitation are wide and well known.
Women have the power to put India on the course to a green sustainable future, specifically, poor rural women working in the agriculture sector.
Manmohan Singh, Indian Prime Minister. Photo credit: macedonianonline.eu
India’s economy is predominately agrarian and increasingly female dominated. 80% of all economically-active women are employed by the agricultural sector.
As men are migrating to urban areas for employment opportunities, partly as farming is now a more risky business, the women are staying back and keeping the homes and farms afloat.
Aditi Kapoor from Alternative Futures has labelled this the ‘feminisation’ of the agriculture sector, with a 7.6% increase in the proportion of workers in the sector in India being women over the last two decades.
According to the Government’s own assessment, the agriculture sector is facing serious risks due to the current impacts of climate change: increasing temperatures, erratic rainfall patterns and a higher number and severity of floods, droughts and cyclones.
A number of studies project that unless India adapts to the impacts of climate change, there is a probability of 10-40% loss in crop production in India by 2080- 2100 due to global warming. Economic growth, food security and fighting poverty stand to lose.
Women are at the front line of these impacts. Not only due to their involvement in the agriculture sector, but also because they face the burden of the household tasks such as fetching water, fuel wood and fodder.
As these resources become scarcer, they struggle more to provide for their families.At the same time they often face more restricted access to key assets such as land, money or political voice, than men. Different gender roles and status thus shape people’s opportunities and capacities to adapt to the impacts of climate change.
As agricultural work has become increasingly ‘women’s work,’ land ownership has been increasingly masculinised. In terms of both the number of landholdings, and the size of the land, there is a growing gender gap. This has serious implications for women’s access to credit to invest in adaptation technologies or set up new sources of livelihood. In some cases it also limits their ability to participate in local decision-making bodies and support systems.
As climate change makes its impact felt in India, the central and State Governments are formulating their plans and policies for adapting to these new environment. However, for these to be successful, the specific opportunities and challenges that women face in adapting to the impacts of climate change need to be understood and addressed.
For example, organic farming is being promoted by many State Governments in India for both environmental and food security reasons. However, what is often ignored is that it requires more manual labour, and this extra burden falls predominately on women. At the same time, women have less access to the support and inputs being offered by the Government to transition to organic farming, mainly due to the lack of land rights. Without specific efforts to promote labour-reduction measures for organic farming, and work through women’s groups to promote them, the policy could fail and/or have negative consequences for women empowerment.
Aditi Kapoor has shown that India’s climate plans and investments are not in general ‘gender aware’. For example, her in-depth study of four State Action Plans on Climate Change reveals that there is little or low priority given to women agriculture. Even when efforts have been made, for example by setting a target of 33% female participation in training programmes, they reveal ignorance about the reality of women’s role in the sector.
CDKN has commissioned a short documentary that gives a voice to these ‘missing’ women in India’s climate plans. Rather than portraying women as victims of climate change, it shows how women should be considered and supported as positive and crucial agents for delivering climate compatible development.
The film’s director, Krishnendu Bose, gained the trust of a group of local women in the hill state of Uttarakhand, and trained them in basic filmmaking techniques. The Nayi women then told their story about how women can be leaders in the fight against climate change.
The women have benefited from a State Government initiative to set up ‘Van Panchayats’ (forest community governments) which bring together forest department officers and villages to jointly manage village forests. A third of the members of the executive committee and half of the general body members are mandated to be women.
“In 2005, after the policy came in, we together with the panchayat (village government) and sarpanch (village leaders) made our own rules and regulations….cutting grass would be 500 INR fine (GBP 5)…chopping green leaves, 100 INR fine (GBP 1) … and the defaulting person deposits her sickle, and we auction it”
“This way, we women protected our forest”
The women have also formed a cooperative, taking knowledge from local NGOs and gather dry leaves to use for organic farming. The products are then shared within the community, contributing to food security. At the same time, they are bringing to life traditional farming practices as they have seen how commercial farming has been affected by climate change.
These strong, pro-active women are taking charge of their community.
“The 2005 rule said that a woman could become the sarpanch (village leader). The men protested against this. But, a women sarpanch was elected. This is good for the forest. And we women benefit from it. Now even men have started supporting us.”
Their message to the government is that this is just the first step. For true empowerment, other power hierarchies must be tackled, such as providing women with land ownership. Enhancing such capacities will help women, as well as the rest of their communities, cope and better adapt to climate change and fight environmental degradation.
By Elizabeth Gogoi (CDKN) (Published courtesy: Lead International)
Farmers in Nigeria’s north eastern state of Taraba are being forced off lands they have farmed for generations to make way for US company Dominion Farms to establish a 30,000 ha rice plantation.
A rice plantation. Photo credit: www.osundefender.org
The Dominion Farms project forms part of the G8’s New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition in Africa and the Nigerian government’s Agricultural Transformation Agenda, which are both intended to enhance food security and livelihoods for small farmers in Nigeria. A new report, however, finds that the Dominion Farms project is having the opposite effect.
The report was produced by two Nigerian NGOs, Environmental Rights Action (ERA)/Friends of the Earth Nigeria (FoEN) and Centre for Environmental Education and Development (CEED), with the support of Global Justice Now and GRAIN. It is based on field investigations and interviews conducted with local farmers, community leaders and government officials.
The report shows how the lands provided to Dominion Farms are part of a public irrigation scheme that thousands of families depend on for their food needs and livelihoods. The local people were not consulted about the Dominion Farms project and, although the company has already started to occupy the lands, they are still completely in the dark about any plans for compensation or resettlement. Dominion Farms is involved in a similar land grab for a rice farm in Kenya that has generated conflicts with local communities.
“The only story we hear is that our land is taken away and will be given out. We were not involved at any level,” says Rebecca Sule, one of the affected woman farmers from the Gassol Community in Taraba State. “For the sake of the future and our children, we are requesting governmental authorities to ask Dominion Farms to stay away from our land.”
“Our land is very rich and good. We produce a lot of different crops here, and we farm fish and rear goats, sheep and cattle,” says Mallam Danladi K Jallo, another local farmer from Gassol. “But since the Dominion Farms people arrived with their machine and some of their working equipment, we were asked to stop our farm work and even leave our lands as the land is completely given to the Dominion Farms project.”
“The local people are united in their opposition to the Dominion Farms project,” says Raymond Enoch, one of the authors of the report and director of CEED. “They want their lands back so that they can continue to produce food for their families and the people of Nigeria.”
Nigeria is already suffering from violent conflicts and insecurity, especially in the North. Land grabs for agribusiness projects will only make the situation worse.
On Thursday 16 January 2015, we saw the launch of action/2015– a historic campaign and global movement calling for the eradication of extreme poverty and inequalities worldwide within a generation – held all over the world.
Around the world people took to the streets in rallies and marches to demand action – including Liberia, Mauritius, Nigeria, Indonesia, Uganda, Belgium, El Salvador, Costa Rica and many more.
According to a new research, almost a billion extra people face a life of extreme poverty if leaders duck key decisions on poverty, inequality and climate change due to be taken at two crucial summits in New York and Paris later this year, with billions more continuing to face a life of hardship.
That’s the warning by more than a thousand organisations around the world that launched the new campaign, calling on local and world leaders to take urgent action to halt man-made climate change, eradicate poverty and address inequality.
A new 2015 agreement on climate change, that will harness action by all nations, took a further important step forward in Lima, Peru last December after two weeks of negotiations by over 190 countries.
Nations concluded by elaborating the elements of the new agreement, to be agreed upon in Paris this year, while also agreeing the ground rules on how all countries can submit contributions to the new agreement during the first quarter of 2015.
But the new calculation released by the action/2015coalition shows that, even using relatively conservative scenarios, the number of people living in extreme poverty – on less than $1.25 a day – could be reduced dramatically from over a billion to 360 million by 2030. Based on work by the University of Denver, in the year 2030, about 4% of the global population would live in extreme poverty, (compared to 17% today) if critical policy choices on inequality, poverty investment and climate change are made this year and implemented thereafter. Estimates of other researchers, looking at a longer list of variables, show that the eradication of extreme poverty is achievable for the first time in history – a key objective of the campaign.
However, if leaders fail to deliver and build on the growing momentum for ambitious deals at the UN Special Summit on Sustainable Development in September and the UN Climate talks in Paris in December, and scale back their efforts, the number of people living in extreme poverty could actually increase to 1.2 billion by 2030. This increase would be the first in a generation (since 1993) and almost a billion higher (886 million) than if resolute action is taken. Under this scenario 1 in 3 of the world’s population would live under $2 a day.
Malala Yousafzai, Nobel Prize winner, who put her life on the line for the right to education, said: “2015 must be the year the world wakes up and delivers a safer, more just future for children and young people. We all must play our part in ensuring this is the case. Do not let this opportunity go to waste.”
Alongside Malala, dozens of high profile activists from Queen Rania of Jordan and Bono to Ben Affleck, Bill and Melinda Gates and Mo Ibrahim have backed the coalition of over a thousand organisations in more than 120 countries around the world.
In Nigeria, popular musician D’Banj, leading actress Genevive Nnaji, and the first Nigerian Idol winner Timi Dakolo, also joined their voices to the campaign, which is calling on world leaders to agree plans to eradicate poverty; prevent dangerous climate change and tackle inequality at these summits.
Action/2015 announced by Malala when she accepted the Nobel Peace Prize – is one of the biggest campaigns ever to launch – combining environmental, human rights, development organisations and faith networks. From household names like Amnesty International, Save the Children and WaterAid to grassroots NGOs working with local communities, the movement aims to make sure the agreements of 2015 are shaped by the people.
Speaking for action/2015, Amitabh Behar, Indian anti-poverty activist, said: “If we get this wrong, we could see the number of people living in poverty increase for the first time in our generation. But if we get it right – tackle poverty, inequality and climate change – we could eradicate extreme poverty within a generation. With two summits of this importance within just months of each other, 2015 could be one of the most important years for our planet since the end of the Second World War, but only if we rise to the occasion.”
At the launch, activities took place in more than 50 countries all around the world from Lebanon and Liberia to Nigeria and Norway to South Africa and Sri Lanka. Many of these were spearheaded by 15 year olds – a constituency who will be among the most affected by the agreements.
While the Secretary-General of the United Nations Ban Ki-moon met a group of 15-year-olds in New York to discuss the need for global action in 2015, a group of 15-year-olds presented their hopes for the future to Finance Minister, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, at a live concert featuring popular musician, D’Banj.
Speaking about why she got involved in the campaign, Maryam, a Nigerian child rights activist, who will turn 15 this year, said: “By 2030 I will be an adult, and may have children of my own. My generation might not be the ones making decisions today, but we will be the ones to make sure that our leaders take full responsibility for the actions they take this year. I and thousands like me are demanding they make the right choices, because our future is at stake. We ask that they make choices which are dictated by the needs of future generations and not choices that are dictated by short-term politics.”
Action/2015 is calling on the public to join them in their calls to ensure world leaders commit to a better world. Throughout 2015, the campaign will provide ways for everyone everywhere to get involved in influencing the outcomes of these global debates that could achieve: an end to poverty in all its forms; the meeting of fundamental rights, tackling inequality and discrimination; an accelerated transition to 100% renewable energy; and, a world where everyone can participate and hold their leaders accountable.
The African Union Commission (AUC) and NEPAD Agency have launched the AU Implementation Strategy and Roadmap to achieve the 2014 Malabo Declaration, for agricultural growth and shared prosperity. The Strategy was launched Tuesday night at a high-level dinner on the fringes of the 24th AU Summit in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Dr Ibrahim Mayaki. Photo credit: www.nepad.gov.ng
In his statement to 300 senior officials, NEPAD Agency Chief Executive Officer Dr Ibrahim Mayaki said that the Strategy is a celebration of leadership, partnership and regional integration since the commitment made by African leaders in 2003 to give Agriculture-led development a priority and which resulted in the adoption of the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP). Dr Mayaki said that African leaders have realised that “most of Africa’s national problems do not have optimum national solutions, but regional solutions”.
AUC Commissioner for Rural Economy and Agriculture, Mrs Tumusiime Rhoda Peace, emphasised that the Strategy would transform agriculture for more inclusive growth, by focusing on increased agricultural production, intra-African trade, resilience of livelihoods, and strengthening the governance of land, water and other natural resources.
Rhoda Peace urged that the 2014 Malabo Declaration expresses a firm commitment toward attaining an agriculture revolution in Africa. African leaders and all stakeholders involved must be accountable to actions and results, she said.
The event brought together Members of the AU Executive Council (Ministers of Foreign Affairs), the Permanent Representative Committee (Ambassadors), AU Senior Officials, Regional Economic Communities (RECs); Chief Executives from the private sector, farmer organisations; CSOs, Youth and Women organisations, and Development Partners.
The roadmap will guide African member states and development partners to accelerate agricultural growth so as to achieve the 2025 vision for shared prosperity and improved livelihoods. Key to the process is the CAADP Results Framework to track progress and ensure accountability of governments starting 2017.
The high-level event brought together Members of the AU Executive Council (Ministers of Foreign Affairs), the Permanent Representative Committee (Ambassadors), AU Senior Officials, Regional Economic Communities (RECs); Chief Executives from the private sector, farmer organisations; CSOs, Youth and Women organisations, and Development Partners.
It also marked the formal closure of the 2014 AU Year of Agriculture and Food Security, and officially commenced actions taken towards the Malabo Declaration which was adopted by African Heads of State and Government at the 23rd AU Assembly in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea, in June 2014.
The Strategy was formally launched by the Chairperson of the AU Executive Council, Ms Fatma Vall Mint Soueinae.
The 2014 Malabo Declaration emphasises on seven key commitments. These are:
Recommitment to the Principles and Values of the CAADP Process
Commitment to Enhancing Investment Finance in Agriculture
Commitment to Ending Hunger in Africa by the year 2025
Commitment to agriculture contributing to poverty reduction at least by half by the year 2025, through Inclusive Agricultural Growth and Transformation
Commitment to tripling Intra-African Trade in Agricultural commodities and services, by the year 2025
Commitment to Enhancing Resilience of Livelihoods and Production Systems to Climate Variability and other related risks
Commitment to Mutual Accountability to Actions and Results
Studies find informal markets provide essential sources of food and income for millions of poor, with milk and meat that is often safer than supermarkets
Delia Grace. Photo credit: www.flickr.com
Misguided efforts to control the alarming burden of food-related illnesses in low-income countries risk intensifying malnutrition and poverty – while doing little to improve food safety. Blunt crack-downs on informal milk and meat sellers that are a critical source of food and income for millions of people are not the solution.
That’s a key finding of a new book released on Tuesday by the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) and partners – Food safety and informal markets: Animal products in sub-Saharan Africa – that probes the complicated world of traditional or ‘informal’ markets in livestock products. These are often called ‘wet’ markets because they use so much water in cleaning due to the perishable and often contaminated nature of the foods they sell. These venues sell most of the livestock and fish products consumed in Africa. And they are growing rapidly as rising populations and incomes drive greater demand for meat and milk.
While the food sold in informal markets is often safe, in Africa and elsewhere in the developing world, they are suspected of spreading dangerous pathogens ranging from Salmonella and E. coli to SARS, avian influenza and tuberculosis. But ILRI researchers warn that the push for greater food safety standards in these markets must be informed by an understanding of their vital role as a provider of food and income to several hundred million people who rank among the world’s poorest.
‘Our work across eight countries found that we are right to be concerned about food safety in informal markets – from milk in Mali, to fish in Ghana, to chicken in Mozambique, to beef in Kenya – particularly for spreading gastrointestinal diseases that are a leading cause of sickness and death in developing countries,’ said Delia Grace, programme leader for food safety and zoonoses at ILRI. ‘But it also shows that we are wrong to think that we can just adopt solutions developed in wealthy countries that favour large commercial operations over small producers. That will just exacerbate hunger and further limit money earning options for the poor.’
Research by ILRI and partners shows that in most developing countries, more than 80 per cent of livestock product purchases occur through informal markets – and in places where there is no ‘formal’ alternative, like a western-style supermarket, close at hand. And the studies find that this situation is unlikely to change for decades to come. Also, even where supermarkets are an option, studies in East and Southern Africa have found that, due to a poorly patrolled chain of custody between producer and seller, milk and meat sold in supermarkets may pose a greater health threat than what is sold in traditional markets.
Moreover, small producers have many attractions for poor consumers. They are typically within walking distance for people who lack cars and they offer the opportunity to purchase fresh food in small amounts—part of what is known in East Africa as the ‘kadogo’ economy. (Kadogo is street slang for ‘small.’) In addition, many sellers in traditional markets will extend credit and typically offer the traditional foods their customers prefer.
The researchers note that the poor consumers in developing countries who suffer the most from food-borne illness are often the same people who survive by selling meat and milk at the local wet market or street stall, or who depend on informal markets to supply affordable, nutritious food for their families.
‘We need to understand how much disease is caused by unsafe milk and meat in low-income countries and also how much they contribute in terms of nutrition and income’, said Kristina Roesel, co-coordinator of the Safe Food, Fair Food Project at ILRI. ‘We need to understand the complete picture so we can work to improve food safety without harming food and economic security.’
For example, in sub-Saharan Africa, one out of ten, and possibly more, cases of gastrointestinal or diarrheal diseases are caused by food-borne threats – and these afflictions rank among the top three killers in the region and are a leading cause of death for children under the age of five. Milk, meat, fish and fresh vegetables are common carriers of disease-causing pathogens. But at the same time, these foods are essential for maintaining health and proper childhood development. Moreover, around the world, around one billion smallholder farmers rely on livestock for their livelihoods, with sales of milk and meat through informal markets providing much needed income.
The main lesson from research on food safety issues in Africa, the authors say, is that in the developing world, ‘policymakers need to look to the facts, not just the fears, before moving to curtail meat sales at the local wet market or purchases of unpasteurised milk from traditional street vendors’.
‘Hazards Are Not Always Risks’
A key finding that emerges from the book is that in low-income countries, it’s important to separate potential hazards – bacteria, viruses, parasites, chemicals and toxins – from the real-world risks they are likely to present to consumers.
Data from sites across East Africa, for example, have found that the raw, unpasteurised milk commonly available from street vendors and traditional markets may contain many health hazards. Yet the actual risks to consumers may be negligible – due to the common practice in this region of boiling milk before consuming it.
In other situations, hazards are strongly associated with serious health risks. For example, the book includes a study of Fulani herding communities in Mali adamantly opposed to boiling milk because they believe boiling destroys milk’s life-giving properties. In Mali, researchers found efforts to encourage milk boiling can actually disrupt the social order of herding communities. Similarly, in Ethiopia, young men often view the consumption of meat – particularly meat from the loins, diaphragm, hump or thighs of a ruminant animal – as something that imparts strength and courage and thus, by definition, is ‘safe’ for consumption, even when eaten raw and with obvious health risks. ‘A man without a tapeworm is not a man’, said one of the study respondents.
‘Food safety policy should be guided by rigorous research to understand the ways food is produced and consumed in different societies so we can devise strategies that are most likely to reduce the risks, particularly to poor consumers,’ said Roesel.
Successful efforts to reduce food safety risks in informal dairy markets in Kenya offer evidence that analysing the flow of food products from producer to consumer can identify opportunities for effective interventions. In this instance, training informal milk vendors and offering them incentives to improve milk handling practices that can transmit diseases such as brucellosis, tuberculosis and diarrhoea generated lasting benefits worth $28 million per year.
Similarly, analysing how food moves from farm to fork along Nigerian beef chains led to effective and efficient interventions by identifying where contamination was most likely to occur. In Nigeria, butchers were found to be the hotspot for contamination. But providing training and simple technologies led to an 18 per cent decrease in unsafe meat. This in turn generated savings of $780 for each butcher trained by reducing costs of illness associated with eating contaminated meat, while the cost of training was just $9.
The study also found that most consumers using informal markets themselves care a lot about food safety. This is evidenced in their purchasing behaviour. For example, up to 40 per cent of consumers in Vietnam switch to alternative meats in the wake of animal disease epidemics. Researchers have found that poor consumers are willing to pay a 5 to 15 per cent premium for safety-assured products, and that demand for food safety increases with economic development, rising income, urbanisation, increased media coverage and education level.
Informal Markets: The Past and Future of Food Sales
Many policymakers mistakenly believe that food-borne illness in developing regions will rapidly decline as the modernisation or ‘supermarketisation’ of food sales steadily supplants informal markets. But the ILRI studies show that Africa’s supermarket food is not necessarily safer than food in informal markets and also that informal markets are unlikely to disappear – and could even become stronger – in the coming decades.
Indeed, the research shows that consumers prefer informal to formal markets, and not just for their lower prices, but also because traditional markets tend to sell fresher food. They also sell local products and breeds, which many consumers continue to prefer – and those preferences seem to intensify as incomes rise. For example, in Africa and Southeast Asia, consumers often prefer local chicken breeds over cheaper imported breeds.
‘Informal markets are growing, not shrinking, across the developing world and in many ways mirror the “locavore” trend occurring in wealthy countries,’ said Grace. ‘If we are going to improve food safety in these markets, we need policies that are guided by an understanding of producer and consumer behaviour, local diets and customs, and interventions that can reduce illness without imperilling food security or increasing poverty.’
The ILRI works with partners worldwide to improve food and nutritional security and to reduce poverty in developing countries through research on efficient, safe and sustainable use of livestock – ensuring better lives through livestock. The products generated by ILRI and its partners help people in developing countries enhance their livestock-dependent livelihoods, health and environments.
