Monday, March 11, 2013

GGGI » Cambodia aims for green economy


Cambodia has adopted a national policy to achieve economic development through sustainable utilisation of the environment and natural resources during a cabinet meeting presided over by President Hun Sen.

In recent years, Cambodia has been the beneficiary of tremendous economic growth, with the IMF forecasting the economy to have expanded by 6.3 per cent to 6.5 per cent in 2012. Yet the rapid consumption of natural resources resulting in unsustainable deforestation practices and worries over purported plans to use toxic chemicals in mines has risen greater awareness of the startling environmental impact unchecked growth can have.

The National Green Growth Roadmap 2013-2030 was approved during the weekly meeting of Cambodian governmental ministers on March 1 and proposes several short-, medium- and long-term solutions to obtaining sustainable growth in tune with sustaining natural capital.

The new developmental policy will work to oversee that the public is provided greater access to clean water and sanitation, renewable energy, information and technology, better mobility, finance and investment tools, food security and sustainable land use.

“The strategic plan for green growth 2013-2030 is to promote Cambodian economy towards the green economy, focusing on effective use of natural resources, environmental sustainability, green jobs, green technologies, green finance, green credit, and green investment,” a statement issued to the media said.
Cambodia already operates under several internationally recognised legal instruments for its economic development model, namely the memorandum of understanding on green growth cooperation signed with South Korea’s Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI).

Officially launched on in March 2010 by former South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, the GGGI focuses on advising member countries to form sustainable growth models through the conservation of natural resources.

Sunday, March 10, 2013

Green growth or deep green economy?

The green economy debate has been raging in South Africa for at least five years. ‘Green economy’ is also known as ‘low-carbon transition’, ‘sustainable development’, and so on.

The concept of a ‘green economy’ is not new and one can trace its advent to the 2007/8 financial crisis, during which countries sought to undertake stimulus spending in parts of the economy where it was thought there was some spare capacity for growth and jobs.

Each country has to define the green economy concept for itself and by itself. Sometimes the green economy is like that thing you do not know what it should really look like but you have a feel for it. In South Africa, we have numerous ‘conceptual battles’ regarding what we mean by a green economy but it is still seen as an adjunct issue – something thrown at the economic world by environmentalists. Some think it is an opportunity to redress deep inequality in exclusive minerals-based economies so that an inclusive economy is built, where economic benefits are more widely distributed. But how exactly one addresses this inequality through green grown or a green economy intervention is a question that still needs answers.

So, what kind of green economy makes sense for South Africa? To try something out in this arena, we must have a brief characterisation of our economic situation. Here are few issues that will influence the extent to which a green economy is possible in the interim: we have high unemployment, especially among the youth (the official current unemployment rate has been consistent at 25% to 27% for close to two decades, we are reaching saturation point regarding taxable income, after achieving remarkable success in tax collection, facilitated by the South African Revenue Service, a premier institution with strong tax collection and enforcement capability. Economic development and growth are the only way to get us out of this quagmire, if we are to sustain all the demands on the fiscus and economy. The trend towards a 3% to 4% budget deficit – which some consider to be too conservative – is likely to continue to 2015 and beyond, limiting the extent to which the State can intervene in the development of new economic sectors. Our social welfare and public employment budget is growing and is now close to 50% of the national budget. We are leaning towards spending more on consumption than growing the country’s productive base. Fixed gross domestic investments from both the public and private sectors are the lowest we have seen for two decades. They should be around 25% of gross domestic product but have been less than 20% for a very long time. Finally, our savings rates are appalling, compared with other emerging economies. Debt-to-income ratios are close to 70% and, in some cases, as high as 80%.

The current state of play in the economy holds relevance because it influences the extent to which we can achieve deep green economy interventions. These macroeconomic conditions have influence over the following factors, which are critical for a green economy development or a low-carbon transition, and include:

• Risk/grant money to support new innovations.
• To overcome cost hurdles, we need to find ways to reduce capital costs.
• Long-term infrastructure needs some form of guarantee from government, but government’s ability to grant these will depend on its fiscal health (ability to grow taxes).

Going forward, we must get things right here in South Africa:
• We need to make the old economy more efficient in terms of how we use resources and be more productive so we increase its income potential. Improved income means more taxes and more spending in the economy.
• We need to diversify our energy base so we create opportunities for alternative energy, increase investment flows into this sector and find the means to maintain long-term visibility so as to encourage deep investment and co-benefits in the form of industrial and manufacturing growth. Increased flow of capital to the productive economy is the biggest challenge we face today. Nations cannot progress and sustain their needs if the balance is not shifted.

• We need to find an economic model that allows stronger linkages to be built between the old mining-dependent economy and a new type of economy that talks to this green economy concept. One makes the old economy more efficient and productive using green economy strategies and one builds completely new sectors through new technologies, infrastructure and resource uses to sustain existing jobs, create new jobs and lower dependence on the minerals sector.

A narrow window of opportunity exists for us to undertake meaningful and deep green economy interventions. This will require coordination by government, labour and the private sector. It will require a lot of effort and will not simply emerge by osmosis. This will require better integration of mining into the rest of the economy and, perhaps, a different economic model for mining, given the neglect of social issues that was laid bare by the eruption of labour violence at Marikana.

No green economy growth will happen if we do not fundamentally change the current way of thinking about the economy, the place of mining (which will not solve all our challenges if we are too dependent on it) and the need to diversify our productive economic base.

Saturday, March 9, 2013

Pacific.scoop.co.nz » Solomon Islands serious about green economy transition

Prime Minister Gordon Darcy Lilo is convinced that vital economic sectors in Solomon Islands should move to a green economy approach. Following the first Roundtable on Development, Society and Environment PM Lilo believes all stakeholders will create …Solomon Islands serious about green economy transition
Honiara, Solomon Islands, 7 March 2013 – Prime Minister Gordon Darcy Lilo is convinced that vital economic sectors in Solomon Islands should move to a green economy approach.

Following the first Roundtable on Development, Society and Environment PM Lilo believes all stakeholders will create innovative partnerships and ownership of programs and projects.

“This dialogue has enabled us to focus on long term policies, strategies and programs and facilitate dialogues for stakeholders to monitor their application in Solomon Islands.” PM Lilo said while closing the Roundtable on Wednesday afternoon in Honiara.

“As a result of all our efforts, I am sure that we will see signs of sustainable development in all these sectors,” PM Lilo added.

The three day discussions focused on developments in forestry, fisheries, education, tourism and the mineral resources sector.

PM Lilo accepted the recommendations made in the Roundtable discussions, including:
Engaging more with stakeholders including communities other than the public and private sectors;
1. Weak or absence of sound policies, legislation and regulations;
2. The need for enforcement of policies, legislation and regulations;
3. More consultation with landowning groups for easy identification of land and agreement on land usage;
4. The importance of a better understanding of the investment issues in certain locations of major projects, to create conducive investment climates;
5. Greater coordination when designing, implementing and monitoring national projects.

The Roundtable expressed that the country has to shift to a Green Economy model. The Green Economy model abides by at least four principles: (i) maintains and enhances human relationships, (ii) lifts the community and the individual, (iii) is based on equity and fairness, and (iv) enhances the integrity of ecosystems and life-support systems.

The Roundtable also agreed to establish a Green Economy Platform that will take the lead in guiding this process of transition.

The three day Roundtable was the Solomon Islands Government’s initiative to find an effective way to achieve a more inclusive model of development – a development model that benefits all the people of Solomon Islands. It is was attended by over 30 representatives from government, the private sector and civil society from Solomon Islands.

The event was supported by IUCN and the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ).

Friday, March 8, 2013

Energy poverty deprives 1 billion of adequate healthcare, says report

By
Neglect of energy undermines healthcare and education, leaving patients, teachers and children in the dark

Energy
poverty has left more than 1 billion people in developing countries without access to adequate healthcare, with staff forced to treat emergency patients in the dark, and health centres lacking the power they need to store vaccines or sterilise medical supplies, according to a report.

In India, nearly half of all health facilities – serving an estimated 580 million people – lack electricity, according to this year's Poor People's Energy Outlook (pdf), published on Wednesday by the NGO Practical Action. A further 255 million people are served by health centres without electricity in sub-Saharan Africa, it says, where over 30% of facilities lack power.

"For critical and urgent health services such as emergency treatments and childbirth, staff have no option but to cope as well as possible in low lighting or in the dark, increasing the risk for all patients, including mothers and babies," the report says.

Even where health centres have access to power, frequent power shortages significantly hamper the ability to provide quality care, it says.

In Kenya, for example, only 25% of facilities have a reliable energy supply, and blackouts happen at least six times a month, for an average of 4.5 hours at a time. This "directly affects services such as childbirth and emergency treatment, and limits night-time services. It can also lead to wasted vaccines, blood and medicines that require constant storage temperatures. Backup generators can be extremely expensive," the report says.

Energy has shot up the international agenda, buoyed by the Sustainable Energy for All initiative led by UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon, which aims to achieve universal access to energy by 2030 along with efficiency gains and increased use of renewable energy. Wednesday's report, however, warns that too little attention has been paid to the needs of critical community services, putting progress on development goals, particularly on health and education, at risk.

"Governments, donors and utilities focus mostly on domestic use and access for enterprise," the report says. "Yet some of the most important aspects of people's daily wellbeing are dependent on the reliable delivery of modern energy not to their homes or places of work, but to schools, clinics, institutions and community infrastructure."

In Bangladesh, the government has failed to prioritise or even measure energy needed and used by critical community services, Maliha Shahjahan, energy specialist for Practical Action, said. "Government spending in energy sector is not considering the needs of the energy poor people of Bangladesh … [and] the government is mostly concern about the urban users, both domestic and private sectors," she said.

Practical Action's advocacy lead on energy issues, Helen Morton, said: "The historic neglect of energy in community services undermines the ability to deliver education, healthcare and ultimately development. [This report] makes the case for the energy services that poor people want, need and have a right to – providing communities with the power to challenge their poverty."

In addition to surveying the energy needs of health facilities, the report also estimates that half of primary school students in developing countries – more than 291 million children – go to schools without access to electricity.

For many, this could mean struggling with cold, damp and poorly ventilated rooms, which can exacerbate health problems, it says. In Bangladesh, Practical Action researchers found teachers forced to keep classroom windows open during the cold season in order to let in natural light. In Bolivia, they heard how students at one school had to cut their lessons short to collect firewood needed to cook their midday meals on inefficient wood stoves.

According to estimates, sub-Saharan Africa has the lowest rate of primary school access to electricity, at 35%, compared with 48% in south Asia and 93% in Latin America. In some sub-Saharan African countries, such as Burundi, only 2% of primary schools have electricity. As with health centres, schools in rural areas are disproportionately affected by energy poverty, notes the report.

Drew Corbyn, energy consultant at Practical Action, said many community facilities may be using solar energy, or other small-scale energy technologies, although data on their use and impact is extremely sparse. "Some of these intermediate technologies can play a very big role, and really transform service delivery … rather than waiting for the grids to extend," he said.

The report sets out a new, multi-tier framework for measuring people's access to energy, developed by Practical Action with the UN and the World Bank, as an alternative to current systems that it says ignore the needs of poor people by focusing on large-scale, grid-based energy supply.

"Critical to determining how we tackle energy poverty is the way in which access to energy is defined," it says. "In the past, energy access has been described as household connection to grid electricity and the use of a modern fuel. This fails to recognise the use of energy for productive ends or community services, neglects the role of intermediate energy technologies and does not consider how people use and ultimately benefit from energy."

Energy poverty deprives 1 billion of adequate healthcare, says report

Africa Environment Day 2013 Highlights Green Economy - Sustainable Development Policy & Practice

By IISD Reporting Services

The 11th Africa Environment Day was convened in Tunis, Tunisia, under the theme “Partnership for Africa’s Transition to Green Economy in Support of African Renaissance.” Participants used the opportunity to stress the role of the green economy in achieving a sustainable future on the continent.

Under the auspices of the African Union (AU), those in attendance spoke of assessing Africa’s path to a green economy and its linkages to poverty eradication, environmental protection and sustainable development. Both the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) noted that the green economy and its ability to leapfrog technologies will allow countries to increase their resilience to disasters.

Others, highlighting that transitioning to a green economy needs to be country-specific, urged strengthening and establishing partnerships in line with the outcomes of UN Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD, or Rio+20). They also underscored the Partnership for Green Economy in Africa and its role in supporting countries in creating national green economy strategies. Participants also addressed: the role of biodiversity in providing a foundation for sustainable development; sustainable use of natural resources; the need to curb further land degradation and drought; and the importance of protecting existing forests and restoring degraded lands and water systems.

In regard to land degradation, the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) highlighted African calls at Rio+20 for "the international community to commit itself to a land-degradation neutral world by setting sustainable development goals on land use, with targets towards achieving zero net land degradation.”

Africa Environment Day is also known as Wangari Maathai Day, in honor of her contribution to sustainable development and environmental protection. It is held annually on 3 March. It was proclaimed by the AU in 2002 to raise awareness on pressing environmental issues in Africa.
Africa Environment Day 2013 Highlights Green Economy - Sustainable Development Policy & Practice

Thursday, March 7, 2013

Framing Sustainable Development Goals With Mountain Perspectives: Post Rio+20 Actions

Dr. Madhav Karki writes about the commitments made by the member countries during Rio+20 summit on various sustainable development goals (SDGs) on low carbon green economy principles and good governance practices, in socio-economic and environmental perspectives.

He argues that post Rio+20 actions should be more cohesive, participatory, multi-disciplinary and simple in approach, so that they  could be easily communicated and adopted by the communities. The adoption of these principles through focused developmental targets in concurrence with low carbon, green, resource efficient pathways as per local needs are the important areas of actions by country governments.

He argues about various priority areas as post Rio+20 actions on climate adaptation & mitigation plans, poverty eradication targets and reviewing specificities of national policies and processes in context to mountains.

If you are interested in further observations and comments on this discourse visit the ‘Mountain Perspective’ discussion thread: http://tinyurl.com/d2ly35q

Framing Sustainable Development Goals With Mountain Perspectives: Post Rio+20 Actions

Wednesday, March 6, 2013

Which sustainability is discussed at the World Forests Summit?

By Winnie Overbeek.
While the big players in the field of tree plantations gather in Sweden, EJOLT reports from the reality of their expansion in the South. The debates on sustainability seem to come from two different planets, until you realize that one planet is actually imposing its will on the other. It boils down to how you define sustainability: for people or for profit?

Criminalization of activists and communities struggling against industrial tree plantations in the global South increases. This is closely related to the ongoing and unlimited expansion of these plantations in regions like South Sumatra, Indonesia. The biggest environmental network of Indonesia, WALHI, calculated that about 66% of the area has been taken over by (among others) oil palm, acacia and rubber tree companies

Yesterday, the World Rainforest Movement received an appeal from Nitra Primiade, the wife of Anwar Sadat, the local WALHI director. She wants her husband to be released from prison. Anwar was beated and arrested weeks ago during a protest of peasants and he continues to be in jail together with peasant leaders. His crime: defending the rights of local peasant communities that lose their lands to the expansion of the plantation companies. As their mode of living heavily depends on forests, they are basically fighting for their very survival. WALHI knows about more than 100 of these conflicts in the region, all involving communities against companies.

The same pattern of violations is visible in many other countries in the global South. Stora Enso, one of the biggest pulp and paper companies in the world, is involved in severe human rights violations around its eucalyptus plantations and cardboard mill project in Guangxi (China). Today, a press release was sent out to give visibility to a complaint letter, signed by a group of 11 NGOs, including WRM, to ask the UN Human Rights Council to seriously investigate the case.

Meanwhile, March 5 and 6, 2013 some major companies related to the pulp and paper sector meet in the World Forest Summit in Sweden. They are gathered around the motto of “Achieving sustainable forest management at a global scale”. But what can be learnt from the experiences on the ground is that industrial tree plantations are not forests. They are areas with one single tree that do not benefit people. They even steal their lands and jeopardize their mode of living. The only thing sustainable in this process is destruction for profit.

If the World Forest Summit intends to discuss and achieve sustainability, one of the first steps would be to stop the expansion of industrial tree plantations in the global South, while attacking the unsustainable consumption of paper which drives the expansion of these plantations. The EJOLT report “An Overview of Industrial Tree plantations in the Global South: conflicts, trends and resistance struggles” (http://www.ejolt.org/2012/06/an-overview-of-industrial-tree-plantations-in-the-global-south-conflicts-trends-and-resistance-struggles/) indicates that the people in the global South do not demand for more plantations. Not even for sustainable monoculture plantations, as if that is possible. They demand for social and environmental justice and an urgent halt to human rights violations.

Which sustainability is discussed at the World Forests Summit?