Land and resources - World Vision International · 2016. 7. 22. · Philippines President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo The opportunity of Johannesburg Jürgen Tritten,German Minister for

A W O R L D V I S I O N J O U R N A L O F H U M A N D E V E L O P M E N T

Third Quarter, 2002

The environmentMaintaining our home

Land and resourcesPhilippines President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo

The opportunity of JohannesburgJürgen Tritten, German Minister for Environment,

Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety

Human rights and the environmentSierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope

The linchpin generationWorld Resources Institute President Jonathan Lash

http://www.globalfutureonline.org

Preserving Earth

THE PROBLEM with the environ-ment is that there’s not as much ofit to go around as there used to be.Well, not as much to pollute at will,anyway.

‘At the start of the industrial rev-olution 200 years ago, no one thoughtthat burning fossil fuels for energywould increase in scale until it desta-bilised the world climate,’ writes sci-entist and author David Suzuki in thisedition.Today, things are different.

A study published in the Augustissue of the Journal of Climate claimsthat pollution from industrial nationsmay have been a major factor in the1970-85 African drought and subse-quent famine that left 1.2 million peo-ple dead. Researchers say the droughtmay have been brought on in part bysulphur dioxide particles from powerplants and factories in NorthAmerica, Europe and Asia.

Our only homeJürgen Trittin, Germany’s Environ-

ment Minister, outlines in our leadarticle positive changes that can beset in motion at the upcoming UnitedNations World Summit onSustainable Development if we havethe courage and the will to do so.World Resources Institute PresidentJonathan Lash examines ethical issuesbehind the environmental crisis.Philippines President Gloria Arroyolooks at poverty reduction as a keyelement in furthering sustainabledevelopment. And Sierra ClubExecutive Director Carl Pope dis-cusses challenges faced by environ-mentalists in the developing world.

It seems common sense, but wefoul our nest at our own peril, andlately we’re doing so at an alarmingrate of speed. Taking care of planetEarth is in everyone’s best interest.Until we find something better, it’sour only home. ■

— Randy Miller

Development and the environment

The opportunity of Johannesburg 1Germany’s Minister for the Environment Jürgen Trittin discusses challengesand opportunities awaiting delegates at the upcoming United Nations WorldSummit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg.

Taking care of the Joneses 3Award-winning scientist and author David Suzuki, Chair of the David SuzukiFoundation, examines the role of ethics in development.

Battling poverty in the Philippines 6Her Excellency Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, President of the Philippines, looksat poverty reduction as a means of furthering development in her country.

The linchpin generation 8

Environmental ethics 10

Snow today, gone tomorrow 12

How agroforestry is saving farmland in Zambia 13

Human rights and the environment 15

The responsibility of business for the environment 17

Envisioning an eco-economy 19

Tourism as a tool for sustainable development 21

Investing in partnerships for sustainability 22

How fair trade helps the environment 23

Correspondence should be addressed to:

Global FutureWorld Vision 800 W. Chestnut Ave.Monrovia, California 91016-3198USATelephone (1) 626-303-8811FAX (1) 626-301-7786e-mail: [email protected]

OR:

World Vision6 Chemin de la Tourelle1209 Geneva, SwitzerlandISSN 0742-1524

Global Future is published quarterly by

World Vision to encourage debate and discus-

sion on development issues.

Publisher Dean R. HirschEditor Randy Miller

Contributing correspondents: Kelly Currah,

Melanie Gow, Brett Parris, Matt Scott, Don Brandt,

Heather MacLeod, Joe Muwonge, Siobhan Calthrop,

Ruth Kahuranangh,Alan Whaites.

All opinions expressed in Global Future

are those of the authors.

Articles may be freely reproduced, with acknowl-

edgement, except where other copyright is indicat-

ed.Annual subscription in USA: US$15, but sent

free of charge to NGOs in the South.

COVER PHOTO BY BEAWIHARTA, (C) REUTERS 2000: AN INDONESIAN PLANTATION WORKER RIDES TO WORK IN KAMPAR.

Third Quarter, 2002

http://www.globalfutureonline.org

IN EARLY SEPTEMBER 2002, tenyears after the Earth Summit in Rio deJaneiro, heads of state and other lead-ers will gather in Johannesburg for theWorld Summit on SustainableDevelopment.

Ever since Rio, the concept of ‘sus-tainable development’ has beenacknowledged as the political leitmotiffor all environmental, economic andsocial policy. Its implementation, how-ever, has been rather mixed.

Of course, there havebeen a number of respectablesuccesses in some importantareas, such as progress ininternational negotiations forclimate protection, whichallows for the Kyoto Protocolto take effect sooner thanexpected. In Germany, forone, a policy change in nuclearenergy has been advanced.However, on a global scale, agenuine turnabout towardtruly sustainable developmentis still pending. In the long run,structural changes and eco-nomic growth made possibleby globalisation can be main-tained only by also taking intoconsideration the ecologicalimpact. In addition, one mustbear in mind that conflicts andcrises do not stop at borders,and that sustainable develop-ment also requires peace.Peace, however, cannot existwithout global justice andequity: between the Northand the South, between thegeneration of today and thatof tomorrow, between mankind andthe natural environment.

Renewable resourcesTwo billion people worldwide have

no access to a reliable source of ener-

gy. Addressing this need through atruly sustainable development processis one of the great challenges of thecoming years. Decentralised energyprovision through renewableresources can be a real contributiontoward poverty alleviation, especiallyin rural areas. For this reason, theGerman government and its partnersin the European Union are appealingto the Johannesburg Summit to com-mission an action-oriented pro-

gramme for a sustainable energy poli-cy. Such a policy, originating in the dis-similar situations in industrialised,newly–industrialised or developingnations–should clearly identify con-crete tasks and options for relevant

players, such as civil society or theWorld Bank.

Similar rulings are needed for theproblem of water supply, especiallyaccess to clean drinking water.

The ever-accelerating process ofglobalisation urgently calls for a

worldwide ecological and socialframework in order for globalisationto work for rather than against sus-tainable development.A single state is

not in a position to establish such aframework, for in a globalised marketeconomy, offences such as ecologicaland social ‘dumping’ cannot be pre-vented by national legislation alone.Fortunately, the World Trade

The opportunityof JohannesburgJürgen Trittin

Global Future — Third Quarter, 2002 1

German Environment Minister Trittin empties a sack of cans into a recycling container in Berlin.

ALEXANDRA WINKLER, (C) REUTERS 2001

On a global scale, agenuine turnabouttoward truly sustainabledevelopment is stillpending.

Organisation Conference in Dohatook this issue a step forward, and weshould be building on that. During thenext trade round, environmental con-cerns will be on the agenda for thefirst time.

New partnerships neededNot only should international

trade policy be challenged, privateindustry also must live up to itsresponsibility for an ecologically and

socially acceptable economy. To thisend, we need new partnerships andnews ways of co-operating with eachother. One possible approach couldbe the process of dialogue by whichwe are currently engaging the privatesector, unions and NGOs to developbasic principles for improving environ-mental standards in conjunction withprivate foreign investments. InJohannesburg, we plan to present ourexperience with this dialogue, thereby

making a contribution to ‘best prac-tices’ in environmental policy.

In order to draw added attentionto issues of environmental protectionwithin an economically dominatedglobalisation process, Johannesburgmust also be the starting point for giv-ing increased prominence to theUnited Nations EnvironmentProgramme (UNEP), which shoulddevelop into a more influential WorldEnvironment Organisation. If the UN’senvironmental agency is to effectivelycombat the world’s ecological haz-

ards, this body will have to be on equalfooting with the World FoodProgramme, the World HealthOrganisation, the World TradeOrganisation and the InternationalLabour Organisation.

For many of the urgent environ-mental issues on the agenda inJohannesburg, the right decisions forsustainable global development canonly be reached if we exert ourutmost efforts to mobilise the resolveand determination of all participatingstates.Who knows if and when therewill be another such opportunity forfinding creative, bold and sustainablesolutions? With this in mind, an inter-national pact–a ‘global deal’ as itwere–must be brokered inJohannesburg. Rather than vanish intothin air as a simple footnote of the Rioconference, the concept of sustainabledevelopment should instead becomeworldwide reality by way of practical,action-oriented decisions at theJohannesburg Summit. ■

Jürgen Trittin is Minister of the Environment forGermany.

2 Third Quarter, 2002 — Global Future

Who knows if and whenthere will be anothersuch opportunity forfinding creative andsustainable solutions?

ALEXANDRA WINKLER, (C) REUTERS 2001

DEVELOPMENT, in terms ofNorth/South relations and economicchange, is complicated business. It’sabout politics and economics, societyand the environment. But ultimatelyit’s about ethics.

Time and time again, we hearabout how we live in a ‘global village’.Indeed, radio, satellite television, cellphones and the internet now allow usto communicate with virtually anyonewho possesses the same technology,any time, in any part of the world.Many corporations are also truly‘global’. You can buy a Big Mac or aCoke today in places that had never

heard of these luxuries a decade ago.But globalisation and international

development are about much more

than just consumer goods or fastfood.They’re about recognising that allhuman beings belong to the samespecies and share a common history, a

common environment and a need fornatural resources. Human beings arenow the most ubiquitous mammalspecies on the planet. Our actionshave worldwide consequences–to ourenvironment and to each other. Thatmeans people living in rural Africa orNew York City, on the islands of Tuvaluor in Canada’s far north, are no longerstrangers, but neighbours. And neigh-bours, I was taught, look out for oneanother.

Wrong side of the tracksRight now, a huge portion of the

world is still living on the wrong sideof the tracks.According to the WorldBank, 1.3 billion people struggle tosurvive on US$1 or less a day, while 3billion people eke out an existence onUS$2 or less a day.That kind of pover-ty takes its toll through malnutrition,disease, disaster and unrest. And the


Taking care of the JonesesDavid Suzuki

Globalisation andinternational develop-ment are about morethan just consumergoods or fast food.

Right now, a huge portion of the world is still living on the wrong side of the tracks, with some 1.3 billion surviving on less than $1 a day.

PHO

TO

BY

ST

R, (

C)

REU

TER

S 20

00

local environment suffers.When poorfamilies are starving, protecting anendangered species is the least oftheir concerns. Endangered or not, ifit’s edible, they’ll kill it and eat it. Ifthey need more range or farmland forcattle or crops, then they’ll cut downand burn pristine rainforests. And wecan’t blame them.

The result is a feedback loop asenvironmental degradation con-tributes to poverty, which contributesto more degradation. It’s a particularproblem for developing nationswhose populations tend to be moreconnected to the environmentthrough farming, fishing, gathering andherding than those living in the devel-oped world. And it’s why improvingliving standards in the developingworld is vital to protecting the globalenvironment.

Paradoxically, while it is the poorwho suffer the most from environ-

mental degradation, addressing globalenvironmental problems is a duty ofthe rich. The best example of this isclimate change–a problem causedalmost entirely by wealthy nations. Atthe start of the industrial revolution200 years ago, no one thought that

burning fossil fuels for energy wouldincrease in scale until it destabilisedthe world climate. What a bizarrenotion! Back then, resources–espe-cially the atmosphere–seemed virtual-ly limitless. How could burning a littlecoal change the world?

The problem, of course, is that we

haven’t burned just a little, we haveburned a lot of fossil fuels, startingwith coal, then oil, gasoline and nownatural gas.We’ve gone from consum-ing the annual energy equivalent of400 million tonnes of oil two cen-turies ago to over 30,000 milliontonnes today. Nations that got thejump on the industrial revolutiongreatly benefited from this energybinge. It has enabled us to build exten-sive infrastructures for public health,transportation, water, sewer andpower. And it’s vastly improved thelength and quality of our lives.

Greenhouse gasesBut burning all that fossil fuel has

released enormous amounts of green-house gases, like carbon dioxide,which trap heat in the lower atmos-phere, thereby causing global warmingand climate change.And these changesare just beginning to show. In the


In the Antarctic,collapsing ice shelvesare cooling the watersand threatening thefood chain.

Canadian Arctic, thinning ice is makingit harder for some species, like polarbears, to hunt. In the Antarctic, col-lapsing ice shelves are cooling thewaters and threatening the foodchain. In the Himalayas, melting glaci-ers are creating unstable lakes thatpose a flood threat and endanger tensof thousands of people. Extremeweather events, another sign of globalwarming, also appear to be increasingin frequency and intensity.

Wealthy nations, which have bene-fited the most from cheap fossil fuelenergy consumption, will also sufferthe least from climate change.Developing countries, even thoughthey have benefited the least from thefossil fuel energy bonanza and con-tributed the least to global warming,will suffer the most. Why? First, theydon’t have the money and infrastruc-tures to deal with problems like risingsea levels, expanded disease vectors,

increased floods, droughts and otherextreme weather events. These newproblems will further strain resourcesthat are already overtaxed. Second,developing countries have the misfor-tune of geography.They just happen tobe located in some of the areas thatclimate scientists say will be mostaffected by a changing climate–areaslike the sub-tropics and tropics,including sub-Saharan Africa and low-lying island states.

Developing nations already bearthe brunt of natural disasters.According to the International RedCross and Red Crescent Societies,88% of those affected by natural dis-asters–and two-thirds of the peoplekilled by them over the past decade–live in the world’s least developednations. Such disasters are already onthe increase and those societiesexpect them to become much worseas climate change progresses.

Africa and Asia vulnerableThat is also the opinion of the

Intergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange (IPCC), a body of climateexperts charged by the UnitedNations to explore climate changeissues.According to their most recentreport on projected impacts,Africa is‘highly vulnerable’ from the effects ofa changing climate because of poverty,a reliance on rain-fed agriculture, andsusceptibility to droughts and floods.Grain yields are expected todecrease, creating food stress; manylocal species could become extinct,damaging tourism; and infectious dis-ease vectors could expand, furtherthreatening human health.

Parts of Asia are also highly vul-nerable to climate change. Low-lyingBangladesh, for example, could lose 10to 20% of its land area as sea levelsrise. This would greatly increase foodinsecurity in a country where morethan one-third of the people arealready malnourished and half do nothave access to adequate sanitation.Low-lying island states like Tuvalucould disappear altogether as seasrise, creating the first of potentially

millions of ‘environmental refugees’.Industrialised nations have benefit-

ed enormously from two centuries ofcheap, unchecked energy consump-tion.We caused the climate problem.It’s our responsibility to fix it.We musthelp developing nations break thecycle of environmental degradationand poverty, not further entrench it.We can do that by reducing our ownpollution and providing the means fordeveloping nations to progress with-

out becoming chained to pollutingfossil fuels. Renewable energies, likewind and solar, can provide cleanpower to homes in areas that cur-rently meet their energy needs withdirty fuels or simply don’t have powerat all.

Developed nations have an ethicalobligation to reduce our emissionsthat are causing climate change.

To shirk this responsibility and saythat we will simply increase humani-tarian aid to affected nations as theirwater tables shrink and their cropswither is to forever deny their peoplea chance at the prosperity and goodhealth that we currently enjoy.That isunwise politically and practically, for itwill condemn a good portion of theworld’s people to a continued cycle ofpoverty, which breeds unrest, con-tempt and violence. More important,in a globalised world, we cannot pre-tend that the plight of people on theother side of the planet is not ourconcern.They are our neighbours.Wecreated the problem. To turn ourbacks on them now is ethically uncon-scionable. ■

Scientist and author David Suzuki is president ofthe David Suzuki Society, based in Canada.


We cannot pretend thatthe plight of people onthe other side of theplanet is not ourconcern.

PHOTO BY STR, (C) REUTERS 2000

THE PHILIPPINES is one with the restof the United Nations member-statesin pursuing the development goals setin September 2000 at the UNMillennium Summit. Our contributionto the global target of reducing by halfthe proportion of people living inextreme poverty by the year 2015 isthe reduction in our own incidence ofpoverty from 34.2% in 2000 to 25-28% in 2004.

Indeed, winning the battle againstpoverty is the over-riding goal of ourgovernment’s national developmentagenda, which revolves around fourmain components.

The first is an economic philoso-

phy of free enterprise appropriate tothe 21st century. We recognise thatour new fight against poverty is set inthe battleground of the new economy,and in order to succeed, we need totap the opportunities presented bythe global market.We believe that thisphilosophy will create more jobs insectors that count most to ease theburden of the poor.

The second component is a mod-

ernised agricultural sector founded onsocial equity. In the Philippines, pover-ty continues to be mainly a rural phe-nomenon and is agriculture-based.More than two-thirds of poor house-holds in the country live in the coun-

tryside and are dependent on farmingand fishing. Our national agenda aimsto bring economic development tothese areas where development isneeded most.

The third component is a socialbias toward the disadvantaged to bal-ance our economic development.Thissocial bias is anchored in the redistri-

bution of economic opportunities andon enhancing the capabilities of thepoor to participate in nation building.This is intended to bring immediaterelief to the longest-suffering groups

Battling povertyin the PhilippinesHer Excellency Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo


Winning the battleagainst poverty is theover-riding goal of ourgovernment’s nationaldevelopment agenda.

Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo greets fire victims during a visit to Isabela town on Basilan Island in May 2002.

PHOTO BY ERIK DE CASTRO, (C) REUTERS 2002

on the fringes of our society.The fourth component is to raise

moral standards in government andsociety. To ensure that our gains arenot dissipated through corruption, weendeavour to create an environmentconducive to good governance, whichis characterised by a sound moralfoundation, a philosophy of trans-parency, and an ethic of effectiveimplementation.

Redistributive reformMore on the third component:

social bias toward the poor and mar-ginalised is at the front line of the bat-tle against poverty. Redistributivereform is our primary framework forimproving the level of human develop-ment. It shapes the direction of oureconomic growth over the next sev-eral years. Components of this frame-work include the following:

First, priority is being given toasset reform programmes or theredistribution of physical andresource assets to the poor, especiallyland and credit.This entails fast-track-ing the transfer of farm lands to farm-ers under our ComprehensiveAgrarian Reform Programme; protec-tion of small fisher-folk’s rights toaquatic resources; implementation ofurban development and housing, espe-cially socialised housing for urbanpoor groups; quicker validation ofancestral domain claims to indigenouspeoples under our IndigenousPeople’s Rights Act; and equal owner-ship rights for women.

Second,we are working to providemore fully for the financial and institu-tional requirements of human devel-opment services.We have set specifictargets for making available basic edu-cation, health, shelter, water and elec-tricity for the poor and marginalisedsectors.

Third, we are working to increaseemployment opportunities for thepoor over and above what the marketwould provide, and to strengthen thecapacities of marginalised groups toengage in productive activities.Towardthis end, the government is providing

funds for the modernisation of agri-culture and fisheries in the hope ofproviding 1 million jobs. We are pro-viding employment opportunities toout-of-school, out-of-work youth, andmicro-finance loans to 300,000 newborrowers per year who, after theclassic Grameen Bank formula, aremostly women.

Fourth, we are encouraging partic-ipation of the poor in governance andinstitution building, and the inclusionof civil society groups in policy-makingat national and local levels. We areworking to strengthen the represen-tation of different sectors ofPhilippine society in national and localgovernments.

Fifth, we are working to providesocial protection and security fromviolence for the basic sectors, so theycan fully exercise their political, socialand economic rights and join the

mainstream of society.Social protection includes three

components. First, social welfare assis-tance through regular governmentprogrammes that maintain a minimumstandard of living among the poor andreduce risks from such threats as vio-lence, illness, disability, old age, unem-ployment, resettlement and harvestfailure. Second, safety nets or bridgingmechanisms that mitigate the adverseimpact of economic dislocations andshocks, disasters and calamities, andstructural adjustments on specific dis-advantaged and vulnerable groups.And third, social security to diversifyand mitigate the risks among the poorarising from retirement, unemploy-ment, illness and disability.

Enforcement of lawsSecurity from violence means

strengthening the enforcement of our

laws against sexual harassment andrape; legislation against domestic vio-lence; stricter enforcement of the lawagainst illegal demolitions, and thestronger participation of urban poorgroups in cases involving relocation,and prohibition of exploitative labour.Through existing government struc-tures, we recognise indigenous cul-tures and practices, including commu-nal management of resources and tra-ditional health and education prac-tices. Security also means protectingthe environment to ensure its long-term sustainability.

In order to implement thesethrusts, we have instituted severalgovernance reforms, includingstrengthening private-sector partici-pation in infrastructure development;developing greater partnershipsamong governance actors, govern-ment, business and civil society ininfrastructure and market develop-ment; improving the enforcement ofanti-corruption laws; and institutingpublic sector accounting and auditingreforms.

The creation and transformationof institutions to fight poverty aremore urgent than ever today. Weakand ineffective institutions–such asproblematic poverty-rights laws,biased markets and onerous require-ments for setting up business–moreoften hurt the poor and disadvan-taged than the rich. The povertyreduction thrusts of our government,therefore, seek to transform and cre-ate new institutions in order to effec-tively respond to the country’s mar-ginalised groups.

The task of halving poverty by2015 is formidable, and calls fornations to focus their resources onclear, focused and comprehensivedevelopment programmes. It alsorequires greater mutual assistance,and closer co-operation and solidarityamong nations. ■

Her Excellency Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo isPresident of the Philippines.


We are working tostrengthen thecapacities of marginal-ised groups to engage inproductive activities.

THE GENERATION BORN in the20th century and living in the 21stconfronts profoundly difficult environ-mental choices with irreversible con-sequences for the future. Our deci-sions about ecosystems, extinctionand global warming will determine afuture our children cannot reshape.

People aspire to leave a cleanerand safer world to their children, butthe pressures of poverty, rising popu-lation and environmental degradationcontinue to stymie their dreams. Inevery respect, human developmentand human security are closely linkedto the productivity of the world’secosystems. Our future rests squarelyon their continued viability.

The most serious environmentalproblems confronting us are thosethat affect the greatest number ofpeople, especially the poor in thedeveloping world.The squalid slums inthe sprawling cities in the poorestparts of the world are growing explo-sively, expanding by a million people aweek.Within a decade or so, if trendscontinue, there will be 27 cities in thedeveloping world that will be biggerthan New York.

Two major problemsAmid the plethora of problems

that this potent mix of environmentaldegradation, poverty, and populationpressure will create, two stick out:the growing fresh water crises andglobal warming

Our research shows that freshwa-ter ecosystems, which occupy lessthan one percent of the Earth’s sur-face, are the most imperilled. Much ofthe degradation of the world’s fresh-water systems is due to habitatdestruction, the construction of damsand canals, introduction of non-native

The linchpin generationJonathan Lash


Our decisions aboutecosystems, extinctionand global warming willdetermine a future ourchildren can’t reshape.

A diver points to damaged coral on Australia’s Great Barrier Reef, which may be attribut-able to global warming. Scientists predict coral bleaching will likely increase in the future.

PHOTO BY HO, (C) REUTERS 2000

species, pollution, and over-exploita-tion. More than 20% of the world’sknown 10,000 freshwater fish specieshave become extinct, been threat-ened, or endangered in recentdecades.

While many regions of the worldhave ample freshwater supplies, fourout of every ten people currently livein river basins which are experiencingwater scarcity. By 2025, at least 3.5 bil-lion people or nearly 50% of theworld’s population will face waterscarcity. In addition, 29 of the world’sriver basins–with a projected popula-tion of 10 million each by 2025–willexperience further scarcity.

The quality of the world’s freshwater is already severely degraded,and annually, polluted water is esti-mated to contribute to the deaths ofabout 15 million children under fiveyears old. Without necessary invest-ments in clean water, an estimated 1.2billion people will be condemned to alife of avoidable illness, poverty andpremature death.

Market solutionsWhile most solutions have

focused on technologies that provideclean water, market solutions must bebetter explored, especially as citiesand other urban areas rapidly grow.Water prices do not currently reflectthe actual cost of the services thatfreshwater ecosystems provide–suchas pollution filters, habitat for wildlife,and food production. Thus, there arefew incentives to use water efficiently,nor to manage it in terms of riverbasins or watershed–not politicalboundaries.

Global warming is a difficult envi-ronmental problem for the public toappreciate–except when viewed asextreme weather events. It is movingslowly in human terms.Yet, the world’sleading climate scientists have con-cluded that human activity is causingglobal temperatures to rise at a ratefaster than any time in the last 10,000years. Most of the warming hasoccurred in the last 50 years due toincreasing emissions of greenhouse

gases, especially from the burning ofoil, coal, gas and wood.

Over the next 100 years, temper-atures are predicted to rise by anadditional 1.4 to 1.8 degrees Celsius,with sea levels potentially rising bynearly a meter.At first glance, this maynot seem significant, but with the largenumber of people living along coastalareas, the impact will be great.Already,citizens of Tuvalu are emigrating toAustralia or New Zealand as risingwaters claim their land. People in richcountries may be able to adapt easilyto these changes, but not the develop-

ing countries.Global warming puts unique

ecosystems at risk–such as the alpinetundra and the prairie wetlands ofNorth America. Bleaching of coralreefs and damage to mangroveecosystems will affect food supply andlivelihood, especially in the tropics.Astemperatures increase, desertificationwill worsen and agricultural produc-tivity diminishes.

Even if we were to stop emittinggreenhouse gases immediately, theeffects of global warming will be with

us for at least a century. Many of thechanges, particularly in such ecosys-tems as glaciers, coral reefs and tropi-cal rainforests, will be irreversible.

No other environmental problemneeds a truly worldwide collaborativeaction than stopping global warming.The Kyoto Protocol, while not per-fect, is a step in the right direction.

While it is heartening to knowthat cities like Seattle, northeasternU.S. states and Canadian provinceshave pledged to abide by the targetsset by the Kyoto Protocol, these arenot adequate replacements for coun-tries, acting in concert with othercountries, to stop an environmentalproblem that affects us all.

There are no silver bullets to solvethe world’s environmental problems,but we have reached the junctionwhere we need to take action to stopour plunge into the irreversibility ofenvironmental degradation. The solu-tions will not be easy; in fact theycould be politically perilous for ourleaders and would demand a lot ofsacrifice from us. But we have to bitethe bullet because our children andgrandchildren will not have the luxuryof reversing our plunge. ■

Jonathan Lash is President of the World ResourcesInstitute (http://www.wri.org/wri), an environmentalthink tank that goes beyond research to createpractical ways to protect the Earth and improvepeople’s lives.


No other environmentalproblem needs a trulyworldwide collaborativeaction than stoppingglobal warming.

The most serious environmental problems confronting us are those that affect the greatestnumber of people, especially the poor in the developing world, Lash says.

PHO

TO

BY

AN

TH

ON

Y N

JUG

UN

A, (

C)

REU

TER

S 20

01

http://www.wri.org/wri

EVER SINCE human beings acquiredsedentary lifestyles and began to formpermanent settlements about 8,000to 10,000 years ago, their impact onthe environment has been enormous.Sociologists Donald Light, Jr. andSuzanne Keller have observedthat ‘stationary residenceencouraged the developmentof written language, the calen-dar, organised scientific inquiry,complex stratification systems,an organised priesthood, insti-tutionalised religion and thestate, among many otherimportant social institutions.’

Unprecedented growth inconsumption and productionlevels has led to the environ-mental crisis that we now faceglobally and locally. Globally,we are confronted with suchenvironmental concerns asglobal warming and its effectson the environment, the deple-tion of the ozone layer and thedestruction of the tropical rainforest. Locally, we are con-fronted with environmentalconcerns such as air, noise andwater pollution, soil degrada-tion, overcrowding and desert-ification.

Only symptomsAlthough urbanisation,

over-population and industrial-isation have contributed nega-tively to the environment,these factors ultimately areonly symptoms of more basicdifficulties. A major cause ofthe stress on the environmentis behavioural, namely, the atti-tude informed by the mistakenassumption that nature is aninexhaustible, indestructibleand free supply source for

whatever we may desire.Even though urbanisation, industri-

alisation and technological advance-ment have extended our capacity forthe destruction of the environment,environmental destruction did not

come suddenly upon us.According toJames M. Henslin, ‘Our acts ofdestruction join a continuous line thatstretches back into prehistory.’

All of this is to say that anthro-pocentrism–or egocentrism–is at theheart of the environmental crisis,which is hardly a modern phenome-non. Humans have acquired a certaintaste and standard of living.To sustainthe standard of living, Henslin says,‘weare poisoning our land, skies, waterand food. Our dilemma is how to

Environmental ethicsEmmanuel Asante


PHOTO BY JEAN-PAUL PELISSIER, (C) REUTERS 2001

maintain or even increase our stan-dard of living while not destroyingourselves through the rapaciousdestruction of the environment.’ Thequestion is, must development bringabout the destruction of our environ-ment?

None of us is isolatedThe environmental crisis con-

fronting us cannot be addressed in anisolated manner. There is a need tosee the crisis in global terms.Again, tocite Henslin, ‘none of us is isolated.We may not see the connectionsbetween ourselves and others, but weare all part of an extensive interde-pendent system that interrelateshumanity, technology and the environ-ment.’

This means that we cannotapproach the environmental crisisthrough an egocentric approach toenvironmental ethics. The environ-mental crisis cannot be addressed viathe myths we have created about our-selves and the environment. Weassume that, as human beings, we arefundamentally different from all othercreatures on Earth, over which we areto exercise control, and that we aremasters of our own destiny, and socan choose our developmental goalsand do whatever is necessary toachieve them. We assume that theworld is vast and provides unlimitedresources and opportunities forhuman beings, who have been des-tined to rule over nature for theirown good.

Egocentric assumptionsThe fact is, our attempts to master

the environment on the basis of theseegocentric assumptions have led tothe environmental crisis we face

today.We have succeeded in destroy-ing our environment in our search forunsustainable development. What weneed is a sustainable development,which, according to the UnitedNation’s World Commission onEnvironment and Development, is‘development that meets the needs ofthe present without compromisingthe ability of future generations tomeet their own needs.’

The linkage of development to theconcerns for the future calls for botha preservationist and a conservation-ist approach to development. Thepreservationists, on the one hand,advocate the preservation of naturalresources, both because of their ownintrinsic value and for the enjoymentof future generations. The conserva-tionists call for efficiency in the man-agement of human resources. Theyadvocate, Miller says, the applicationof the most modern and efficient‘management techniques to thehuman care for and use of naturalresources.’

Good management neededBoth the preservationist and con-

servationist approach to environmen-tal stewardship are necessary for sus-tainable development. Miller observedthis when he wrote: ‘With increasingpopulations, accelerated demand fornatural resources, and diminishingglobal supplies of raw materials, theemphasis on good management isincreasingly important. At the sametime, the preservationist concern forsetting aside parklands, maintainingwild and scenic territories, protectingold-growth forests, and limitingdestruction of rainforests is moreimportant today than ever before.’

Both the preservationist and con-servationist approach lie at the heartof the African’s general conception ofthe human society, which involves thedead, the living and the unborn.Authentic development in Africa can-not be pursued in isolation of boththe past and the future. Developmentshould uphold the integrity of theenvironment, understood both as a

heritage from the past and as a legacyto future generations.

This can happen, Miller says, only ifsustainable development is prioritisedas we ‘change the character and qual-ity of economic growth and develop-

ment, to conserve and, if possible,enhance the resource base, to movetoward population stabilisation, to re-orient science and technology, to inte-grate responsible, sustainable eco-nomic planning into our ongoing envi-ronmental assessment and analysis,and to work toward the reformationof the global economic and resourcemanagement systems.’

Our attempts to master the envi-ronment to enhance our humanity inthe context of unbridled develop-ment, which thrives on the myth ofunlimited resources, could lead to theeventual destruction of humanity. Wemust adopt both a preservationist anda conservationist approach to devel-opment. ■

The Very Reverend Dr.Emmanuel Asante is anauthor and President of Trinity TheologicalSeminary in Ghana. He is also Senior Pastor of theTrinity United Church at Legon,Accra.

References:–Henslin, James H. Social Problems, 2nd ed.Englewood, Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1990.–Light, Jr. Donald and Suzzane, Keller,Sociology, 2nd ed. New York; Alfred A.Knopt, 1979.–Miller, Alan S. Gaia Connections, Savage,Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 1991.


Anthropocentrism isat the heart of theenvironmental crisis,which is hardly amodern phenomenon.

The environmental crisiscannot be addressed viathe myths we havecreated about ourselvesand the environment.

YOU COULD NEVER SEE much ofKilimanjaro when I was a boy, sent upits slopes to look after the goats nearmy family home at Hai.The awesomemountain was almost perpetuallyshrouded in clouds, and most of whatyou could see was white–more than12 square kilometres of icy snow, lyingin pristine majesty on the earth’sequator.

Today, the cloud cover is sparser,and underneath it only a few strips ofglistening white snow adorn the blue-brown summit.

A group of American scientists, ledby Professor Lonnie Thompson ofOhio State University, exposed ourloss to the world in 2001. Nearlythree-quarters of the mass of ice onKilimanjaro has been lost, reducingthe area covered to two square kilo-metres. There’s no snow now onMawenzi Peak. If you want to see thehistorically famous snows ofKilimanjaro you must go to Kibo Peak,and you may only have a few years leftin which to do that.

What you can find at the top ofKilimanjaro is rubbish. There’s plentyof litter up there–but then, I’m toldthat’s even true on the top of Everest.It’s a bitter parable.A few people messup our environment, and most of usdon’t even know what we are losing.

Short-term changes in a glaciermean little, but the longer-term histo-ry of Kilimanjaro is part of a growingbody of evidence that we are in themiddle of serious and perhaps man-made global warming, however muchsome governments might want todeny it.

Exaggerated weather patternCurrently, we are struggling with

food shortages in Southern Africa.Poor politics and AIDS have con-tributed, but an exaggerated weather

pattern that led to floods one yearand drought the next played a bigpart. More than a year ago scientistswith the Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change and the UNEnvironment Programme were pre-dicting decreased rainfall and foodstress in southern Africa; environmen-tal pollution by the developed Westhas left people hungry in the non-industrial South.

Wherever I travel in Africa peopleassure me that the seasons are chang-ing.These are not old folk with rosy-hued memories of childhood, but life-and-death recollections of farmerswho spent their lives exposed to theelements, learning how to interpretthe patterns in order to feed theirfamilies. Our weather has become lesspredictable, more extreme; our sea-sons have lost the punctuality thatonce made them more reliable thanimported calendars.

Africa cannot simply point the fin-ger of blame at the developed world.We are already seeing the devastationof our natural resources and land-scapes on a significant scale, and theultimate responsibility is ours.

Developing nations, anxious tostimulate self-sustaining economies,are embracing mining and heavyindustry, hydro-electric schemes andforest clearance, with often inade-quate controls on their effects.Wherethere are governments and laws,uncontrolled avarice may still spoilthings. Powerful elites are taking overpreviously common land at a prodi-gious rate, and the exploitation ofancient forests for short-term gain isrampant. It is frankly inconceivable tome that Kenya’s recent erratic rainsand village-swallowing mudslides havenot been a consequence of environ-mental asset stripping there.

The situation is worse where

there are no effective governments orlong-lasting conflicts. In most cases,entrepreneurs and the western-basedcompanies who use the hardwood,gems, oil or rare metal ores are notdeliberately setting out to destroy theenvironment.They argue that they areoffering a market; it’s up to the localsto guard the environment. It’s tooeasy in a chaotic, under-regulated orcorruptible environment to cut cor-ners and get away with morally inde-fensible activities. International com-panies really should not be ignorant ofthe effects of their buying policies.

Pressure on governmentsWhen short-term economic gain

overrides long-term environmentalsustainability, globalisation sounds hol-low.There is pressure on the govern-ments of all developing nations toattract investors. In the reasonabledesire to remove bureaucratic hur-dles, we may also remove a species offrog here or a mangrove swamp therewith a sweep of a pen. Revenue andemployment are worthy goals, but notat the expense of irreplaceable envi-ronmental features. Yet trans-nationalpartners could play an important rolein protecting the environment, takingit into account and resisting the easyoption of bribing corrupt officials foran unworthy carte blanche.

Ethical corporations can take astand on behalf of justice for the poorand oppressed. For environmentaldegradation is primarily an issue ofjustice, almost always an example ofpowerful nations, politicians and cor-porate shareholders taking advantageof the weak and voiceless. If richtourists can’t see snow onKilimanjaro, too bad. But if farmerscan’t grow crops in the foothillsbecause the streams have all dried up,that’s a tragic threat to family liveli-hoods. ■

Wilfred Mlay is World Vision’s Regional VicePresident for Africa.

Snow today, gone tomorrowWilfred Mlay


AT A TIME when many farmers ineastern Zambia are facing a seriousfood deficit, some 12,000 who havetaken part in an environmentallyfriendly agroforestry programme findthey not only have enough to eat, theyalso have some left over to sell. It allhas to do with what is being donewith the land when crops are notbeing grown on it.

Improved fallow technologies areenabling resource-poor farmersrealise several benefits, chief of whichis increased soil fertility, includingimproved soil organic matter andwater-use efficiency, leading toimproved maize production andincreased household food security.Those who have taken up this tech-nology are able to plant on time and

can grow crops without going intodebt.The biomass created helps con-trol weed growth and makes fieldseasier to till, a significant factor espe-cially where both labour and cost areconstrained. Sesbania sesban fallowshave been recorded to produce 10 to20 tonnes per hectare of fuel woodafter 1-3 years of fallowing. Firewoodproduced on-farm could ease theworkload of women and children whooften have to travel long distances togather it. Other benefits of the systeminclude: reduction of soil erosion (dueto improved soil structure, cover, andtrees acting as wind breaks), produc-tion of forage and browse, productionof building materials, and decreaseddeforestation from firewood harvest-ing. Maize yield increases following atwo-year improved fallow generally

last for two to three years. During theearly phase of adoption, some farmersare even able to sell seed.

The farmers involved are takingpart in a programme called Zambia’sIntegrated Agroforestry Project(ZIAP). With involvement from theInternational Centre for Research inAgroforestry (ICRAF) and theMinistry of Agriculture, the farmersapplied a strategy of short-term agro-forestry designed to replenish nutri-ents more rapidly to fallow cropland.Improved fallows build upon tradition-

al fallow practices by incorporatingfast-growing, nitrogen-fixing vines,shrubs and trees into traditional fal-lows in order to speed up the naturalsoil regeneration process.While tradi-

tional fallows requirearound eight years–or,sometimes, as many as20–to replenish nutrientsto the soil, improved fal-lows can restore soil fertili-ty in just two years,depending on the rainfalland the growth of selectedtree species.

DrawbacksThe main drawbacks

that farmers encounterwith the technologyinclude: the need to waitfor two years before seeingresults; protecting fallowfields from fire during thedry season; protecting fieldsfrom free-ranging livestock;susceptibility of somespecies to insect attacks;lower germination in sandysoils; and nematode build-up (especially in the case ofSesbania sesban). To

How agroforestry is savingfarmland in ZambiaJoe Muwonge


It all has to do withwhat is being donewith the land whencrops are not beinggrown on it.

Author Joe Muwonge examines a healthy ear of corn in one of the assisted fields in Zambia.

PHOTO BY GRACE GAVIAO, WORLD VISION ZAMBIA

LIKE MANY non-governmentalorganisations,World Vision is commit-ted to sustainable development.Withthis, there is the recognition that, fordevelopment to be ‘sustainable’, theenvironment must be, too. Projectsdesigned to increase food productivi-ty have invariably led to means toabate soil erosion and water run-off,increase soil nutrients and grow foodsupplements. Often, these pro-grammes depended on the introduc-tion of better organic farming andagroforestry systems and techniques.Environmental renewal wasn’t themotivating reason for rural projects,but World Vision staff soon recog-nised that renewing an abused bioscould significantly reduce incidencesof abject poverty.

World Vision also, however, bringsa particular concern to its engage-ment with the environment that aris-es from being faith-based. We have aresponsibility or a trust for creationthat is deep and personal.This is seen

in the biblical book of Genesis, whichteaches that God gave humankind theprivilege of naming other createdspecies. Naming brings with it a pow-erful tie between both parties. Thegarden image in Genesis connotesthat humans are caregivers and care-takers of God’s creation. MostChristian environmentalists use theterm ‘steward’ to convey the idea thatwe are part of the environment (thecreated), while having special respon-sibilities as worshipful custodians,being ‘made in the image of God.’ Thisconcept is explored in greater detailin World Vision’s new report onChristianity and the environment:God’s Stewards, available [email protected].

Order and care

Stewardship means that ‘dominionand subjugation’ cannot implyhumankind’s indiscriminate masteryover the rest of creation.This is seenin Genesis 2:6-8 and 15, wherehumankind is created and placed inGod’s garden to till and keep it. Fromthese and other verses, the image ofdominion conveys order (till) andcare (garden keeper). Subdue is thework given to humankind by God tobring order out of chaos.To ‘...inhabit

the land that God has given is a gift,transforming it into a house whereGod can be worshipped.’ An imageemerges that is near to that of stew-ard, guardian or caretaker.

Far from being an anti-environ-mental religion, Christianity, as seenthroughout the Bible, is very pro-lifein all its aspects.The primary mistakethat some observers make is equatingWestern civilisation with Christianity.The two are inter-related, of course,but also distinct.The intellectual sepa-ration of ‘nature’ from humankind wasmade possible by the Enlightenment,which, from a Christian perspective,led to the misleading division ofknowledge into academic disciplines.Generally, Christianity in the Westuncritically absorbed the neo-platonicbody-mind, human nature dualisticmindset of the Enlightenment.Somehow, technology passed frombeing a steward’s tool to better carefor the garden to a means of control-ling and devastating the environment.The institutional church in the Westshould be rightly criticised for abusingits prophetic call on behalf of justiceof creation. ■

Don Brandt is Senior Researcher for WorldVision International.

counter these, communities havedevised local by-laws for fire protec-tion, and for protection against straylivestock. ICRAF has recommendedthat farmers be given a range ofoptions so that they choose thosemost appropriate for their situation.The project is also promoting croprotation and has, in addition, intro-duced Lablab purpureus, a leguminousvine that restores soils to reasonableproductivity within one year. In allcases, technical backstopping byICRAF is a necessary service toensure no harm is caused to the envi-ronment.

Seed supplyOn balance, improved fallow sys-

tems are proving their potential in theDry Miombo Woodlands of easternZambia, where the prevailing agricul-tural problem is nitrogen depletion,and where resource-poor farmers are

in need of cost- and labour-savingtechnologies. Many farmers, includinga delegation of traditional chiefs, havevisited the project, urging that it bedisseminated to their districts.The key

constraint against a quick expansion isthe supply of seed, some of whichneeds to come from sources outsidethe country. One critical challenge,therefore, is how to engage public pol-icy into scaling up initiatives that havepotential. Addressing this issue wouldlift a heavy burden that resource-poorhouseholds must bear in order to sur-vive. Such a step would also be friend-ly to the environment. ■

Joe Muwonge is World Vision’s Associate Directorfor International Programmes.The author acknowl-edges the contributions of Cassim Masi andDonald Phiri of the World Vision ZambiaIntegrated project, which included compilation of2001/02 maize yield data.

God’s StewardsDon Brandt


One critical challengeis how to engage publicpolicy into scaling upinitiatives that havepotential.

SOMETIMES WE AMERICANS don’trealise how lucky we are. Sure, we doface certain challenges. For instance,our public lands and National Forestsare being sold off to the highest bid-der. Congress is about to pass anenergy bill that fails to reduce ourdependence on oil. And the Bushadministration has offered a plan onair pollution that threatens the CleanAir Act and does little to clean up thecoal-fired power plants whose sootand smog cause thousands of prema-ture deaths each year. So it’s beenhard for environmentalists in theUnited States to look on the brightside lately.

But other activists might envy ourproblems.We are at least able to con-duct our work largely free from thethreat of persecution and physicalintimidation. For countless men andwomen around the world who seekto defend the earth–or just to pre-

serve traditional ways of life for theircommunities–being an environmental-ist means risking violence, rape, tor-ture and even murder.

As the world’s resources growscarcer and global competitionincreases, environmentalists are evermore at risk. Local economic andpolitical interests–often with the com-plicity of powerful multinational cor-porations–are willing and able to sup-press those who challenge the social,economic and environmental statusquo.And that can have a chilling effecton environmental progress.

Joined forcesSierra Club and Amnesty

International USA have joined forceson a campaign to promote publicawareness of the link between humanrights and the environment.The cam-paign highlights specific cases ofhuman rights abuses against environ-

mentalists, and uses these individualcases to tell a wider story. But thephenomenon exists in far more casesthan can ever be documented. Theproblem is also intimately linked tothe increase in trade and economiccontact between countries. And thatmeans that if we want to do some-thing about it, the United States mightbe a good place to start.

Aleksandr Nikitin was a Russian

navy captain who got a first-hand viewof his country’s decaying nuclear sub-marine fleet, and of the effect it washaving on the marine environment ofthe Arctic Sea.When Nikitin reportedhis findings, he was arrested by theRussian government and charged withespionage and treason. Although hewas ultimately acquitted after years inprison, Russia’s crackdown on envi-ronmental whistle-blowers did not

Human rightsand the environmentCarl Pope


As the world’s resourcesgrow scarcer and globalcompetition increases,environmentalists areever more at risk.

A few of the 50 Dutch environmentalists protesting Esso last July join forces to blockade the entrance of a petrol station near Arnhem.

PHOTO BY MICHAEL KOOREN, (C) REUTERS 2001

end there. Grigory Pasko, anothernavy captain, was sentenced to fouryears in a labour camp for exposingthe navy’s illegal dumping of nuclearwaste into the Sea of Japan.

Sometimes there’s no high-profileenvironmental hero to draw attentionto the story, but that doesn’t make theproblem any less severe. In anothercountry, a government plan to build amassive dam would flood 800 villagesand submerge 100,000 hectares ofsome of its most fertile land.The areaincludes the habitats of various endan-gered species, including the pink riverdolphin, the clouded leopard, and thegolden eagle.

Trail of destructionGlobalisation–which so far has

largely meant Western corporations

investing in developing countries–hasspread faster than the institutions ofdemocracy, civic participation, andenvironmental protection, which mustaccompany it. Too often, this hasmeant that foreign investment has left

a trail of environmental destruction inits wake, and the people affected havelacked the rights and resources toresist it.

The Sierra Club has alwaysbelieved that citizen participation in

government decision-making is thekey to environmental protection, andthat may be particularly true in theinternational arena. The environmentdepends upon the efforts of ordinarypeople, especially in parts of the worldwhose legal and political institutionsare under-developed. If these ordinarypeople are going to be able to takeaction to protect their environment,they must be assured basic rights ofpolitical participation, personal securi-ty, and the ability to speak and organ-ise without fear of violent retaliation.

Keeping practices secretGiving communities the informa-

tion they need to protect themselveswould be a crucial step forward. In theUnited States, companies are requiredto disclose information on theamount and type of pollution theyemit into the air, water and ground.But when U.S. companies do businessoverseas–often in countries with farweaker environmental standards–theycan keep their practices secret. SierraClub,Amnesty International, and morethan 200 environmental, labour,human rights, indigenous rights andcommunity rights groups, are support-ing the International Right to Know(IRTK) initiative, which would compelU.S. companies operating abroad todisclose basic information on theirenvironmental, human rights andlabour standards.

As Congress considers grantingthe Bush administration the authorityto sign the United States onto moresweeping global trade agreements,they should also act to increase theamount of information available tocommunities. Global trade can be aforce for good, but only if ordinary cit-izens are given the tools, theresources, and the rights they need tomake sense of it. Only then will thosewho seek to give the earth a voice betruly empowered to conduct theirwork in peace and security. ■

Carl Pope is Executive Director of the Sierra Club.For more information on the Sierra Club’s HumanRights and the Environment campaign, go tohttp://www.sierraclub.org/human-rights.


We believe that citizenparticipation in govern-ment decision-makingis the key to environ-mental protection.

‘Globalisation has spread faster than democracy and environmental protection’

PHOTO BY SCOTT OLSON, (C) REUTERS 2001

http://www.sierraclub.org/human-rights

THE INTERNATIONAL businesscommunity has a tremendous oppor-tunity to do something positive forthe environment–particularly in thedeveloping world. With global busi-nesses now representing 51% of theworld’s wealth (this includes the GDPof global countries), global businesshas become exceptionally powerful.We in the business community havethe opportunity to employ effectivebusiness practices to bring about pos-itive change in the environment–orelse, in decades to come, face marketsthat will no longer be able to affordthe products and services that ourbusinesses provide.

Already, in round figures, two-thirds of the world’s more than 6 bil-lion people have incomes of less thanUS$2 a day. With spirallingpopulation growth in devel-oping countries, businesshas an enormous opportu-nity to create a businesscase for creating jobs,improving quality of lifeand, as a result, improvingthe environment. I wouldsuggest these three thingsgo hand in hand.

Going backwardsIn my 30 years of travel-

ling around the world doingbusiness, it has becomeincreasingly obvious thatdeveloping countries inmost cases are going back-wards, while developedcountries continue to prof-it enormously from the lowlabour rates and low envi-ronmental requirements ofdeveloping countries.

In some cases, the pro-duction cost of consumergoods in developing coun-

tries is as little as 5% of the final retailprice of those products in a devel-oped country.This gives businesses anenormous amount of margin to playwith–a margin which, if used wisely,

could be used to improve the envi-ronment and way of life in the coun-tries where those products originate.

Having set up the Alay BuhayEducation Foundation in thePhilippines some 16 years ago, I have

personally come to see first handwhat a difference business peoplewho take responsibility can make. Ourorganisation now educates 2,300 chil-dren and provides micro-fundingschemes for their parents, whichenable them to take responsibility fortheir own children and their environ-ment. Unless we in business do whatwe can to help citizens in developingcountries understand the ramifica-tions of a polluted environment–andhelp them find solutions to theseproblems–we can expect in 40 to 50years to have turned civil society inour own developed countries againstus, and probably lost most of our mar-kets.

Businesses can helpBusinesses can be of enormous

help by taking responsibility for theway they affect the environment,directly and indirectly. Often, businessabdicates responsibility to the peoplethey purchase their products from. Ifthe person purchasing these products

The responsibility of businessfor the environmentStephen Tindall


I have personally cometo see first hand whata difference businesspeople who takeresponsibility can make.

Developing countries in most cases are going backwards, while developed countries continue to profitenormously from low labour rates and low environmental requirements of developing countries.

PHO

TO

BY

MA

RIA

NA

BA

ZO

, (C

) R

EUT

ERS

2001

took responsibility to effectivelyinclude the workers in the developingcountry’s factories as ‘their people’,then business could have a profoundeffect on environmental standardsboth in their own countries and in thedeveloping world.

Scientists already are telling us wemust clean up our environment inorder to avoid self-destructing in 300or 400 years.This means reversing theever-increasing amount of carbonbeing pumped in to the atmosphere. Itmeans finding close-looped manufac-turing techniques that prevent pollu-tion from entering the atmosphere,ground water and rivers. It meanspurchasing and manufacturing prod-ucts only from managed, sustainableforests. And it means finding cleanproduction methods in agriculturethat enable better quality crops to begrown without the use of chemicalsthat are harmful to the soil, groundwater and atmosphere.

Exporting topsoilIn many countries the largest

export is topsoil, which is washeddown the rivers and into the sea.Fragile freshwater and marine eco-

systems are dying by the minute, as aresult. Deserts are encroaching rapid-ly on arable land. Businesses, workingin partnership with NGOs, civil soci-ety and central and local govern-ments, must begin tackling these prob-lems. It has the resources to lead andshould do so.

Some leading manufacturers arediscovering that they can make theirproducts on a cyclical basis ratherthan the traditional take-make-wasteapproach. This means finding rawmaterials that are recyclable or natu-rally renewable. Companies are,therefore, in effect, leasing their prod-ucts to consumers, who essentiallyreturn them at the end of the prod-uct’s useful life to be renewed, recy-cled and leased to the next customer.

The biggest contribution that busi-ness can make is to rethink and

redesign its processes.With all the scientificadvancements in theworld today, there is noreason products cannotbe re-engineered to ful-fil the same function, butin a sustainable way.They can be made fromrenewable resourcesand provide the samefunction at cheaperprices.

Local materialsTo cut down on the

amount of pollution cre-ated by aeroplanes andships used in transport-ing their products, glob-al companies need tolook for ways to pro-duce their productsusing local and renew-able raw materials from

home markets.Years of research haveconvinced me that businesses will findthat by redesigning their processesand their thinking they can becomeenhancers of the environment. Theywill also find that, by emulating nature,these processes will be more efficient,less costly and more profitable totheir shareholders. Therefore, theycreate a win-win situation, whereboth the environment and the peopleinvolved in producing the productsbenefit dramatically, as do sharehold-ers, staff members and consumers.

All it takes is a rethink of how onecan do business, and how, by takingthis on responsibly, these companieswill change the hearts and minds ofdeveloped country consumers whowill endorse and support them. Itseems a preferred alternative to culti-vating an anti-globalisation lobby,which, if not taken seriously, coulddestroy them. ■

Stephen Tindall is a businessman and environmen-tal advocate living in Australia.


Businesses, working inpartnership with NGOs,civil society andgovernments, must begintackling these problems.

PHOTO BY CARLOS CORTES, (C) REUTERS 2002

WE READ ABOUT the deterioratingrelationship between the global econ-omy and the earth’s ecosystem in dailynews stories on shrinking forests, col-lapsing fisheries, falling water tables,rising temperatures, melting glaciers,and more destructive storms. Ourexisting economy is destroying its nat-ural support systems. It cannot take uswhere we want to go.The challenge isto restructure the economy–to buildan eco-economy–so that economicprogress can continue.

We can see glimpses of the eco-economy emerging in the wind farmsof northern Germany, the solarrooftops of Japan, the reforestedmountains of SouthKorea, and the steelrecycling mini-mills ofthe United States.

Today wind turbinesare replacing coal minesin Europe. Denmark,which has banned theconstruction of coal-fired power plants, gets15% of its electricityfrom wind. ForSchleswig-Holstein, thenorthernmost state inGermany, it is 19%. ForSpain’s northern indus-trial province of Navarra,it is 22%.

Wind powerIn the United States,

North Dakota, Kansas,and Texas have enoughharnessable wind energyto satisfy national elec-tricity needs. Densely populatedEurope has enough off-shore windenergy to meet all its electricityneeds. China can double its currentelectricity generation from windalone.Wind is a vast energy resource,

one that cannot be depleted.Advances in technology have low-

ered the cost of generating electricityfrom wind from U.S. 38¢ per kilowatt-hour in the early 1980s to under U.S.4¢ at prime wind sites today–a figurethat is competitive with oil, gas, andcoal. The low-cost electricity thatcomes from wind turbines can beused directly or to electrolyse waterto produce hydrogen. Hydrogen pro-vides a way of both storing and trans-porting wind energy. It is also the fuelof choice for the fuel cell engines thatevery major automobile manufactureris now working on.

With a modest U.S. 1.7¢ per kilo-

watt-hour wind-production tax cred-it, new wind farms have come on-linein the last few years in Minnesota,Iowa, Kansas, Colorado, Wyoming,Oregon and Washington.We are nowlooking at a future where farmers and

ranchers in the United States, whoown most of the wind rights, couldone day be supplying not only most ofthe country’s electricity, but also muchof the hydrogen–to fuel our automo-biles. We now have the technologiesneeded both to stabilise climate andto declare our independence fromMiddle Eastern oil.

In addition to new energy indus-tries, recycling industries will replace

mining industries. The United Stateslast year produced 58% of its steelfrom recycled scrap. Steel recycling isconcentrated in small, electric arcminimills that are widely distributed

around the country,feeding on the localsupply of scrap.

Germany leads theworld in paper recy-cling, with 72 percentof its paper comingfrom recycled stock. Ifthe entire world wereto achieve the Germanlevel of recycling, itwould reduce thewood used for papermaking by nearly onethird.

Closing the loopToday, major corpo-

rations are committedto comprehensive recy-cling, to closing theloop in the materialseconomy. Others arestarting to phase out

their use of fossil fuels.STMicroelectronics in Italy andInterface, a leading manufacturer ofindustrial carpet in the United States,are both striving for zero carbonemissions. Shell Hydrogen and

Envisioning an eco-economyLester R. Brown


We now have the tech-nologies needed to bothstabilise climate and de-clare our independencefrom Middle Eastern oil.

PHOTO BY GUANG NIU, (C) REUTERS 2001

DaimlerChrysler are working withIceland to make it the world’s firsthydrogen-powered economy.

People appear hungry for a vision,for a sense of how we can reverse theenvironmental deterioration of theearth. More and more people want toget involved.Wherever in the world Igive talks, the question I am askedmost frequently is, What can I do?People want to do something.

My response is always that weneed to make personal changes,involving everything from using bicy-cles more and cars less to recyclingour daily newspapers. But that will notbe enough. We have to change theeconomic system. And that requiresrestructuring the tax system: reducingincome taxes and increasing taxes onenvironmentally destructive activities,such as carbon emissions, the genera-tion of toxic wastes, and materialgoing to landfills.We have to work torestructure taxes to get prices toinclude the ecological costs.

Ecological costsØystein Dahle, former vice presi-

dent of Exxon for Norway and the

North Sea, summed it up brilliantlywhen he said, ‘Socialism collapsedbecause it did not allow prices toreflect the economic costs. Capitalismmay collapse because it does notallow prices to reflect the ecologicalcosts.’ Our challenge is to restructurethe tax system so that market pricestell the ecological truth.

Can we move fast enough? Weknow that social change takes time. InEastern Europe, it was fully fourdecades from the imposition of social-ism until its demise.Thirty-four yearspassed between the first U.S. SurgeonGeneral’s report on smoking andhealth and the landmark agreementbetween the tobacco industry andstate governments to reimburse stategovernments US$251 billion forsmoking-related health care expendi-

tures. Thirty-eight years have passedsince biologist Rachel Carson pub-lished Silent Spring, the wake-up callthat gave rise to the modern environ-mental movement.

Sometimes societies move quickly,especially when the magnitude of thethreat is understood and the nature ofthe response is obvious, such as theU.S. response to the attack on PearlHarbour. Within one year, the U.S.economy had largely been restruc-tured. In less than four years, the warwas over.

There is no middle path. Do wejoin together to build an economythat is sustainable? Or do we stay withour environmentally unsustainableeconomy until it declines? It is not agoal that can be compromised. Oneway or another, the choice will bemade by our generation. But it willaffect life on earth for all generationsto come. ■

Lester R. Brown is Founder and President of theEarth Policy Institute, and Founder and formerPresident of Worldwatch Institute.


Our challenge is torestructure the taxsystem so that marketprices tell the ecologicaltruth.

PHOTO BY MAL LANGSDON, (C) REUTERS 2000

INTERNATIONAL TOURISM hasincreased greatly over the past fewdecades. According to World TourismOrganisation statistics, internationaltourist arrivals world-wide reached688 million in 2001, a drop of only 1%from the previous year, due to the 11September attacks. Recovery isalready well underway.The industry isexpected to regain pre-crisis levels bythe third or fourth quarter of thisyear. A World Tourism Organisationstudy conducted to examine how thetourism industry is likely to evolveshows that international touristarrivals are likely to increase at anannual rate of around 4%. They areexpected to rise to nearly 1.5 billionby 2020–almost three times the num-ber of arrivals recorded in 1998.

The impact that these hundreds ofmillions of tourists moving around theglobe may cause upon the naturalenvironment and upon the social andcultural fabrics of host communitiesneeds to be anticipated, carefully stud-ied and continuously monitored iftourism is to effectively contribute tosustainable development. This needsto be clearly understood becausethere are complex and close relation-ships between tourism and the natur-al and cultural environments.

Elements that make up the naturaland cultural environment are, in fact,the raw materials for this industry. Butunlike other economic activities thatare intrinsically based on an irre-versible modification of nature, thetourism industry should take specialcare not to deplete these inputs, sincesuch depletion would reduce theircapacity to attract tourists.

Reciprocally, environmental disas-ters or substantial changes to the nat-ural environment, such as intensiveand indiscriminate felling of forests,abusive extraction of marine

resources, shipwrecks of oil tankers,and industrial pollution of rivers, candrastically affect the possibility ofdeveloping tourism in areas endowedwith natural or cultural assets.

Tourism can contribute to thepreservation and improvement of nat-ural areas, places of historic and cul-tural interest, and even urban environ-ments. By giving economic value tothe landscape and to archaeologicalsites, tourism generates income fortheir conservation and appreciationby people. Similarly, tourism canimprove environmental awareness ofboth visitors and local residents.Adequately conducted eco-tourismand other forms of nature-basedtourism are powerful tools for edu-cating the general public about thefragility of ecosystems, endangeredspecies and their conservation, andenvironmental matters in general.

Year of eco-tourismThe United Nations designated

2002 as the International Year of Eco-tourism, highlighting the rising impor-tance of tourism, for both the envi-ronment and economic development.

Indeed, well managed and proper-ly planned, tourism is one of the envi-ronment’s best friends. It is capable ofgenerating earnings for states–tax rev-enues, in particular, where they arelacking–and helpful when it comes topreserving and enhancing the naturaland cultural resources that serve asthe very bedrock of tourism.

If properly oriented in its develop-ment and management, the tourismindustry can see its negative impactson the environment reduced and itsbeneficial effects enhanced.To achievesuch an ambitious goal, the WorldTourism Organisation has developedand tested a set of indicators of sus-tainable tourism development that

allow local decision-makers and plan-ners to measure the environmentalhealth of a destination. Similarly, it hasdeveloped and disseminated planningtechniques and guidelines for thedevelopment of tourism at the locallevel. An Agenda 21 for Travel andTourism has been produced by theWorld Tourism Organisation and aconglomerate of private tourism com-panies as an essential reference, help-ing governments and private tourismbusinesses to become more environ-mentally responsible.

Tourism has become critical formaintaining local agriculture and tradi-tional fishing in many countries, forwhich it provides new outlets. It per-mits the survival of traditions and cul-tural practices that otherwise wouldface an uncertain future. It offersexceptional opportunities for encoun-ters between peoples who may other-wise know little of each other.Tourismalso supports the survival of handi-craft production and other employ-ment opportunities, especially indeveloping countries.

For many developing countries,tourism has become a major sourceof foreign exchange earnings, especial-ly for women. Tourism is one of thefew economic activities that lendsitself to small enterprise. As such,tourism helps promote business inremote areas, where tourism attrac-tions are often located, arrestingmigration to urban areas.

Tourism can contribute to povertyalleviation in all types of societies, pro-vided that strong local communityinvolvement is ensured from the verybeginning. It has become one of themost dynamic economic, social andcultural realities of today’s world, withclose linkages to the natural environ-ment.The chief concern we face nowis to ensure that tourism flourishes ina truly sustainable manner, from theenvironmental, social and economicpoints of view. ■

Francesco Frangialli is Executive Director of theWorld Tourism Organisation. For more information,visit their website at www.world-tourism.org.

Tourism as a toolfor sustainable developmentFrancesco Frangialli


NONE OF US can achieve sustainabledevelopment alone. Partnerships arevital. That is why, over the past threeyears, New Zealand’s administrationhas promoted the concept that gov-ernment works with the rest of thecommunity. It may be easier to workin one’s own silo. In the short term, itis quicker and more efficient–and youcan hide mistakes. But it doesn’t pro-duce a sustainable environment oreconomy, or a happy society.

In my own Environment portfolio,developing a strategy to managewaste nationwide is an example ofcentral and local government workingtogether in the design of strategy andtargets. To achieve those targets, allthe government bodies will have towork closely with those industriesinvolved in the production or disposalof much of our waste.

The New Zealand Waste Strategyis a product of Local GovernmentNew Zealand, the umbrella group rep-resenting local councils and theMinistry for the Environment. It sig-nals a new relationship between cen-tral and local government based onpartnership.This kind of collaborativeeffort must become more common inthe future if we are to successfullytackle crosscutting issues.

Everyone has a responsibilityThe strategy makes it clear that

waste is our problem and everyonehas a responsibility to do somethingabout it: the householder, the manu-facturer, the retailer, local governmentand waste collectors. It confronts thelinkage between economic growthand environmental degradation, andunderlies the need to break this con-nection.Authorities are also beginningto introduce to their communitiesmeasures that reflect the full cost ofwaste disposal, measures that I am

sure will have a dramatic effect on theamount of waste produced.

I’ve been working in a similar waywith the dairy industry, tackling itsenvironmental issues. To help achievea durable solution to water qualityissues, the Minister of Agriculture andI convened a top-level group fromNew Zealand’s largest dairying group,Fonterra, regional councils, theMinistry for the Environment and theMinistry of Agriculture and Forestry.That group will produce concreteproposals to improve our waterwaysby the end of this year.

The Growth and InnovationFramework is another governmentinitiative founded on partnerships.

Private sector task forces have beencreated to make sure that the key sec-tors–selected for their potential forsustainable growth–are developedtogether, employing the skills on bothsides. Those sectors (biotechnology,information and communicationstechnology, and the creative indus-tries) were chosen because of theirsustainability, as well as their potentialcontribution to New Zealand’s sus-tainable growth rate and hence thewell-being of New Zealanders.

Our government believes in pro-moting innovation and enterprise,doing things differently to build eco-nomic prosperity, and in being collab-orative, compassionate and inclusive.We believe these are values that canenhance social, cultural, economic andenvironmental health in the 21st cen-

tury. We promote sustainability ineverything we do to preserve optionsfor future generations.

As well as being a partner, the gov-ernment also has a vital leadershiprole in sustainable development.

Part of that role is in addressingthe key sustainable developmentissues and setting standards for thecountry.An important example of thatis the work underway on transport. Itwill mean a move away from fundingroads to funding land transport andmore money for public transport, andpromoting walking and cycling. It willput sustainability at the core of strate-gic transport decisions.

Describing linkagesLeadership is also part of the rea-

son we are close to implementing asustainable development strategy thatwill emphasise the importance ofpartnerships, and will provide, for thefirst time, a single statement of thegovernment’s view of sustainabledevelopment, and how it sees itselfcontributing.

There is also value in simply set-ting out the connections and describ-ing the linkages as we see them.Thataction alone can generate new ways ofthinking and working together.

Lastly, I want to touch on theinternational aspects of sustainabledevelopment. Partnerships betweencountries, as well as other groups, areat the core of the work being done toprepare for the upcoming WorldSummit on Sustainable Development.There are global issues that have to beconfronted and addressed. Some ofthem are environmental, like climatechange and the ozone layer. Some aresocial, like refugees and the worldwidedecline in fertility. Others are eco-nomic, like trade barriers and the dis-tribution of wealth worldwide.

Whatever the issue–whether it islocal or international in scope–part-nerships are vital for achieving a sus-tainable way forward. ■

Marian Hobbs is New Zealand’s Minister for theEnvironment.

Investing in partnershipsfor sustainabilityMarian Hobbs


Working in one’s ownsilo may be moreefficient, but it doesn’tproduce a sustainableenvironment.

IS IT POSSIBLE that a small decisionby a consumer in the ‘developed’world can benefit the environment? Isit possible that it can benefit the poor?Yes. How and where consumers pur-chase their coffee, tea or fruit canbenefit the environment and the poor.

Fair Trade is an emerging con-sumer-led and NGO-supportedmovement that is reshaping purchas-ing patterns across Europe, and it ispoised to sweep into other ‘devel-oped’ economies of the world. It is aninnovative concept that connects pro-ducers and consumers in more equi-table, meaningful and sustainable ways.

It happens through the developmentof consumer interest and the creationand cultivation of socially responsiblecompanies. It is both values- and mar-ket-driven.

Fair Trade allows farmers in thedeveloping world to gain a significant-ly higher share of the final price forthe crops they grow. This happensthrough the creation of local co-oper-atives, which market the crops to thedeveloped world, ensure that prod-ucts are grown in sustainable ways,and guarantee that revenue is proper-ly distributed to the members of thecooperative.

Certified organicWith the global price of coffee

trading at a 30-year low, non-FairTrade coffee farmers received an aver-age of about US$.20 per pound fromthe middlemen through which they

are forced to sell. Fair Trade coffee co-operatives receive a minimum ofUS$1.26 per pound for their coffee,and receive an additional US$.15 perpound premium if itis also certifiedorganic.

Fair Trade certi-fied coffee is grownon small, family-runfarms. These farm-ers typically growtheir coffee in theshade of a taller for-est canopy, whichprovides habitat forwildlife such as mi-gratory songbirds.

With respect tothe values uponwhich Fair Trade isbased, find belowthe seven principlesof the Fair TradeFederation, the largest association ofFair Trade organisations:1. Fair wages2. Cooperative workplaces3. Consumer education4. Environmental sustainability5. Financial and technical support6. Respect for cultural identity7. Public accountability

Environmental sustainability isdescribed as engaging in environmen-tally friendly practices that manageand use local resources responsibly.However, the vast majority of FairTrade products are also organicallygrown products.

There are not only ideological orvalue-driven reasons for growingproducts organically. There are alsovery practical commercial reasons.Chiefly, many of the Fair Trade grow-ers of these products could not once,or cannot now, afford the high pricesof chemical fertilisers and pesticides.

They have not only chosen, but alsohave been forced to learn or relearn,the sustainable and organic methodsof farming.

Highly advanced in EuropeIn Europe, where Fair Trade is

most widely supported and mosthighly advanced, the list of Fair Tradeproducts has expanded significantly. Ithas grown from coffee and tea to

chocolate, wine, groundnuts, mangoes,bananas, and honey. Products are nowfound not only in NGO-run shops andchurch basements, but also on super-market shelves and in mainstreamretailers. New products and processesare being certified on a regular basis.Moreover, the fastest growing seg-ment of the market is for productsthat are both Fair Trade-produced andorganic.

The prospect for sustained growthin Fair Trade globally is good. Thismeans that the demand for environ-mentally sustainable methods will alsogrow. Supporting the mechanisms ofFair Trade provides not only sustain-able incomes for farmers, it also pro-vides environmentally sustainableapproaches to farming. ■

Christopher Shore is Director of World Vision’sMicroenterprise Development Group.

How fair tradehelps the environmentChristopher Shore


How and whereconsumers purchasetheir coffee, tea or fruitcan benefit the environ-ment and the poor.

PHOTO BY BEAWIHARTA, (C) REUTERS 2000

IN 1722, A DUTCH CAPTAIN, JacobRoggeveen, landed on a remote islandoff the coast of South America, whichis now known as Rapa Nui, or EasterIsland. He encountered a populationthat had depleted its environment andundermined its society through theobsessive construction of the Moai,the haunting monolithic statues thatlitter the island today.

According to archaeologists, theinhabitants of Easter Island startedbuilding these statues around 1400,and continued at an increasing rate.The statues represented gods andmemorials to tribal chiefs and becamesynonymous with power and politics.However, the time, materials andenergy needed to build more andmore statues used up almost all the

wood on the island, which led todeforestation and soil erosion. As thepopulation grew, food become scarce,as the land could no longer supply theneeds of the community. With nomore wood, the islanders could notbuild ships to escape their denudedland, and the civilisation collapsed intochaos.

Intertwined needsAccording to historian E.R. Carr,

history is cyclical, and the history ofEaster Island should be considered awarning for the present.The needs ofthe population and the care of theenvironment are intertwined: societycannot work in exclusion of the other.Although this appears obvious, it has

taken some time for developmentspecialists and environmentalists toagree and work together in creating asustainable environment.

Especially in the past decade, wehave come to realise that sustainabledevelopment is not possible without astable environment, and that the envi-ronment needs communities withsecurity of food and health to remainpreserved. As an international devel-opment agency,World Vision is work-ing in community development pro-grammes to ensure that care for theenvironment is at the heart of itswork in communities.World Vision isalso a Christian agency that takes seri-ously God’s call for the people of theworld to act as responsibile stewardsof creation.World Vision’s desertifica-tion programmes in Senegal, re-forestation programmes in Zambia,and env

Documents

Land and resources - World Vision International · 2016. 7. 22. · Philippines President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo The opportunity of Johannesburg Jürgen Tritten,German Minister for