Namibia’s Marine Resources Act has won Silver in the 2012 Future Policy Award. The jury stressed that the Act has served to institute an economically and ecologically viable fishing industry in the African country. The 2012 Future Policy Award highlights exemplary solutions to protect the world’s oceans and is initiated by the World Future Council, an international policy research organisation that provides decision-makers with effective policy solutions.

The winners were announced during a press conference at the United Nations Headquarters in New York on 26 September 2012.

With Namibia’s Marine Resources Act (2000) the World Future Council once again praises African policy making: in 2011, the topic of the Award was “Forests for People” and Rwanda took home the Gold Award for its National Forest Policy (2004).

“With the Future Policy Award we want to cast a spotlight on policies that lead by example. The aim of the World Future Council is to raise awareness for exemplary policies and speed up policy action towards just, sustainable and peaceful societies,” explains Alexandra Wandel, Director of the World Future Council. “Namibia is demonstrating that developing an ecologically, economically and socially sustainable fishing industry is possible. The principles applied closely follow international guidelines for sustainable fisheries management and can guide management and governance of fisheries in other countries”.

While Namibia inherited heavily overexploited and unregulated fisheries when it gained independence in 1990, the country has largely halted the decline of its fish stocks over the last two decades.

Namibia is located beside the Benguela Current, which is famous for being one of world’s richest fishing grounds. The fishing industry contributes to the Namibian economy by paying for licenses to fish and via levies on all fish caught.

The Marine Resources Fund levy is used to fund research and training. By following the policy of ‘Namibianisation’, the number of Namibians employed as crew-members and off shore has increased. Today, more than 13,000 are employed in Namibia’s fishing industry.

The country’s Marine Resources Act (2000) regulates key drivers of degradation of marine capture fisheries: bycatch, illegal fishing, and sets restrictions on fishing gear, depth and times.

Access to fish stocks is now controlled through the allocation of rights, and monitored at sea and in the harbours. Catch limits for each of the eight main commercial species are set annually.

Individuals and companies are required to apply for licenses to fish, and are given a non-transferrable quota, that is the maximum they are permitted to fish in a given year.

Populations of these species are monitored, and if they fall below a critical threshold, a moratorium is set and fishing is banned until the fish stock has recovered.

To reduce by catch and discarding of non-target species, rules have been set to land all fish caught and levies are imposed on a per tonne and per species basis. Vessels are obliged to carry observers to monitor activities. There is 100 per cent observer coverage and a history of strict prosecution of anybody caught fishing illegally.

Monitoring and surveillance efforts are also undertaken in cooperation with the neighbouring countries South Africa and Angola. This regional cooperation in ensuring common monitoring and surveillance of the regional fish stocks can serve as an example for other nations and regions.

An international jury comprised of experts from academia, politics, international bodies, civil society and indigenous groups from all five continents had assessed the Future Policy Award nominations against the World Future Council’s Seven Principles for Future Just Lawmaking. Honourable mentions were bestowed upon South Africa’s Integrated Coastal Management Act, 2008 and California’s Ocean Protection Act, 2004. In total 31 policies from 22 countries were considered for the award.

The winning policies will be celebrated at an award ceremony on 16 October 2012 at the 11th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in Hyderabad, India.

The ceremony will be convened by the World Future Council, the UN Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), The Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), with support from the Okeanos Foundation.

Oceans cover 71 per cent of the earth’s surface, contain 90 per cent of the earth’s biomass and produce more than half of the oxygen we breathe. Millions of coastal people worldwide depend on marine resources as a crucial source of food, income and employment.

In Africa, 35 million people depend on the fisheries sector for their livelihoods. But our oceans are under severe stress from overfishing, pollution and climate change. It is estimated that 85 per cent of our global fisheries are currently over exploited or exploited to their maximum.

The reasons for this are destructive fishing practices, high bycatch and discard rates, fishing subsidies that contribute to overcapacity as well as illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. The threats that the world’s fisheries are facing go back to poor governance and a lack of regulation.

Despite a number of international agreements to manage our oceans and coasts and despite commitments to global targets to conserve marine biodiversity, the threats are accelerating and implementation of policies has been slow.

There is an urgent need for effective policy implementation for sustainable and equitable fisheries management in order to ensure the livelihoods and food security of current and future generations that depend on them.

“After independence, the fish stocks were so depleted due to unregulated fishing activities to an extent that nobody thought they would ever recover, but the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources put effective policies in place, and today we can fish. Collectively, we are now the custodians of this resource and we have to use and manage it in a sustainable way”, says M.T Amukwa, Chairperson of the Namibian Hake Association. “We cannot operate carelessly as if there is no tomorrow – future generations will not forgive us if they find resources depleted.”

Traditionally, marine capture fisheries have not played a major role in Namibian life. Today, food security is being improved for the most vulnerable; the government actively supports fish consumption by making it available at reduced prices for disadvantaged groups. The focus on training and creating employment for local people shows how good policies can have positive effects on quality of life and contribute to poverty eradication.

AUTHOR: Henry Neondo
URL: http:// www.africasciencenews.org
E-MAIL: neondohenry [at] yahoo.com

The study, authored by William Anderegg of Carnegie Institution for Science at Stanford University and Jeffrey Kane and Leander Anderegg of Northern Arizona University, reviews dozens of scientific papers dealing with the ecological impacts of climate change on forests.

Although forests reflect more light and decrease local temperatures, there are a host of other issues that are exacerbated by global warming. Forests reduce the impacts of climate change by sequestering carbon and releasing oxygen, however, less trees means more carbon and less oxygen. This constitutes a dangerous feedback loop. Declining forests are being impacted by global warming and this is interfering with the natural processes that mitigate climate change.

As reviewed in a Mongabay article, “Forests cover 42 million square kilometers or 30 percent of Earth’s land surface…Forests store 45 percent of the carbon found in terrestrial ecosystems and sequester as much as 25 percent of annual carbon emissions from human activities, helping mitigate a key driver of climate change…clear-cutting of forests in the tropics accounts for 8-15 percent of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.”

As stated in Science Daily, “From an ecosystem perspective, forest die-off will also likely affect hydrological processes and nutrient cycles…decomposition of fallen trees releases carbon into the atmosphere, thus producing a warming effect…Debris from fallen trees could also increase a forest’s fire risk.”

These impacts have a very real economic costs. Forests account for trillions of dollars of annual economic activity. Mass tree mortality will incur substantial losses to the timber industry and could cause declines in real-estate property values.

Forests cover 42 million square kilometers or 30 percent of Earth’s land surface. Every continent on Earth is being impacted by forests loss with the exception of Antarctica. In the US, there has been an increase in the incidence and severity of forest fires since 2000. A wide range of forest are being impacted including the Redwood forest in Marin, CA. Rainforest in Borneo. Forests in Southeast Asia, the Russian Far East, and the Amazon has been particularly affected by drought over the past 20 years. Roughly a million hectares of Amazon rainforest suffered from severe drought stress in 2010.

Although more research is required, the study suggest a troubling global trend that could cost billions of dollars and substantially accelerate climate change.

AUTHOR: Richard Matthews
URL: http://www.thegreenmarketoracle.com
E-MAIL: smallbusinessconsultants [at] gmail.com

A Bill is developed through consultative process involving many stakeholders but it is the responsibility of the parent ministry of wildlife and mineral resources and the Attorney General who will present it before parliament.

Mbugua said the Bill once enacted into law will help Kenya effectively manage the rising human-wildlife conflicts.

The Bill has been put on hold since its development in 2008. While the activists blame the KWS for forestalling it, KWS on the other hand points fingers at the Parliament and the office of the AG for the delayed debating of the Bill.

Among issues it aims to address include compensation. Between 1971 to 2007, compensation for life lost stood at Ksh30, 000. This has however been raised to Ksh200,000 by the new Bill.

Injury had been pegged to Ksh5,000. It has also factored compensation for loss of crop and community participation.

Mbugua said the human-wildlife conflicts in Kenya are worsening and hotspots include Laikipia, Taita-Taveta, Rumuruti, Narok, Transmara, Rombo, Lamu, Imenti South and Njukini.

He said people use all sorts of equipment to kill wildlife like spears, traps, bullets, machetes etc.

Although there are more than 100 mammal species but elephants constitute the largest cause of these conflicts followed by hippos (15000) lions (2000), leopards, crocodiles and snakes and primates are major causes of human-wildlife conflicts.

He said that notwithstanding, KWS responds to more than 95% of reported cases.

Animals are attacked due to predation (1648 cases last year), infringement on crops, and attack on humans.

Trying to explain the reason for the rise in the conflicts, Mbugua said by 1920, Kenya’s population was less than 3 million but this has risen to 40million people leading to more cases of the conflicts as people move into areas that were migratory routes for wildlife.

He said the delay by the government to enact a land use policy led to people to infringe on migratory routes.

This is made worse by poor water distribution for both livestock and wildlife in the farms and parks which allows herders to often take their livestock to search for water in areas they are likely to meet wildlife.

Mbugua cited poaching as one other challenge facing wildlife conservation.

To help minimize conflicts, the KWS has began engaging communities, try to fence off areas with high incidents of human-wildlife conflicts and use GPRS system to help monitor movement of wildlife and later advise herders to stay away from areas where wildlife are.

AUTHOR: Henry Neondo
URL: http:// www.africasciencenews.org
E-MAIL: neondohenry [at] yahoo.com

Speaking in Nairobi at the first regional conference on forest by the International Union of Forest Research Organisations and the Forestry Research Network of sub-Saharan African (FORNESSA), Wekesa said the Masai who have lived with the wild animals for generations know the economic importance of lions and wildlife in general and “it is puzzling as to why they would rise up against wildlife now,” he said.

“There are a group of people out to economically cripple Kenya’s economy, and not the Masai. These people are merely camouflaging as Masai but we are doing our investigations,” he said.

He said the Masai have known the importance of the lions living in their midst. The Masai have always lived with the lions. They are a group of economic saboteurs. The masai as they are known understand the importance of wildlife.

“A lion today is so much worth to Kenya in terms of the economy and the government is so concerned of the development,” he said.

He said the government has taken strategic measures to deal with the matter. It plans to take to parliament a Wildlife Draft Bill, which had been pending for some years now but got delayed with the promulgation of the new constitution.

Following the constitutional development, the Attorney General called for withdrawal of all bills to allow for harmonization with the new constitution.

Wekesa said that the recent development has forced the government to move with speed to have the Bill redrafted with stiffer penalties.

“This has been done and the Bill is now queuing up for cabinet discussion,” he said.

Wekesa said the Bill allows for adequate compensation for livestock loss, damage to crops and addresses the issue of punishment.

“Any death or loss from wildlife, will be properly be compensated,” he said.

Currently, livestock damage is paid Ksh50, 000, human death is paid KSh200, 000 and no compensation for crop damage.

As it is today, the punishment is light and offenders can kill a wild animal and pay Ksh50, 000 with a smile and st6ill return to kill more.

As a short term measure, the minister has instructed KWS to remove all the lions in people’s wildlife sanctuaries back to the government-managed national parks.

“This will however affect the communities as they have also been benefitting from the wildlife sanctuaries they have created.

Wildlife experts say 70 per cent of Kenya’s wildlife is in community lands.

The government is also engaging communities to create wildlife corridors to allow wildlife to move. So far, corridors have been done in Kwale and Aberdares and allow wildlife to move freely as they search for water and pasture without interference from settlements.

Meanwhile, Wekesa has called for use of modern technologies to resolve challenges Africa faces in the conservation of her forests.

He said scholarly demand often appears out of tune with reality where quick solutions are needed.

Pointing out that forests are endangered by poverty and illiteracy, Wekesa said only research can step in with workable solutions despite poor funding.

In bid to help improve on forest cover , Wekesa said the government has engaged the private sector and local communities to conserve and restore degraded forest areas by enacting a law that requires at least 10 per cent of land both in public and privately owned is set aside for trees.

AUTHOR: Henry Neondo
URL: http:// www.africasciencenews.org
E-MAIL: neondohenry [at] yahoo.com

The IV IWMC’s scientific program will include keynote addresses from leading wildlife conservation and management experts, panel discussions on critical issues—such as Africa’s rhino crisis and other illegal trade concerns across the world—workshops, and symposia. In addition, the IWMC will offer an exhibition component, where delegates can network with like-minded professionals from other countries.

As environmental stewards, it’s our responsibility to protect the environment and make the right choices for future generations.

Twitter: Twitter: @iwmc2012 
Facebook: IWMC 2012

To register click here. For up to date information on speakers, symposia, educational field trips, and more, click here visit the Congress website. For more information contact Darryl Walter, Director of Membership Marketing and Conferences, The Wildlife Society, +1-301-263-6000, dwalter@wildlife.org or Nafeesa Ally; Project Manager: The Conference Company: +27-31-303-9852 or Nafeesa@confco.co.za

AUTHOR: Richard Matthews
URL: http://thegreenmarket.blogspot.com/
E-MAIL: smallbusinessconsultants [at] gmail.com

March 5, 2012. President Correa(r) and Yuan Guisen(c), China's Ambassador to Ecuador, look on as Ecuador's Minister of Non-

PSD: A condition afflicting individuals and governments that, once in power, implement policies contrary to the paradigm shift that is vital for the well-being of the planet and its inhabitants, and for which they were elected to implement. Often, it is characterized by demagoguery, hypocrisy and a reverting back to ruinous policies that violate human rights and worsen environment degradation. It is aggravated by the lure of quick, easy, money posed by extractive industries, such as mining and oil.

Picture this if you can: A World Bank and a IMF extractive industries director are going over the latest developments in South America over a cup of coffee in Washington. The World Bank director turns to the IMF representative and says: “Jeez, isn’t it funny how things turn out!! Socalled progressive governments down south following pretty much our model of development and implementing some of our least palatable extractive policies”

It wasn’t supposed to be this way. The political change that swept over most of South American nations during the past decade or so, was supposed to usher in major paradigm shift: from the anthropocentric to a more biocentric mode of life. From a capitalistic to a more genuinely socialistic and democratic perspective.

In Ecuador, the transformation was about giving nature Constitutional rights, and people the right to a harmonious, or integral way of life. It was meant to usher in a radical change from a purely economic paradigm to a more holistic one; putting social, cultural and environmental wealth on an at least equal footing with economic wealth. The whole idea of development was to be radically transformed. Less materialism; more social, cultural, environmental health. Less extractivism and natural resource pillaging; more sustainable initiatives benefiting local economies. Sustainability was meant to encompass all three main pillars of development, and not reaffirm what it means today: sustained, and infinite economic growth. The elements above the surface: soil, water, biodiversity and forests would be seen as being worth far more than subsurface minerals. Other species had a right to co-exist with humans. Importantly, the impetus for most of these changes in perspectives came not from politicians, but from the citizens, who were key protagonist in the re-writing of Ecuador’s, and other Constitutions in the region.

The shift was also meant to fortify civil society groups who expected to work closely with government and help government in the transition, and take part in consolidating the changes. Power itself was supposed to undergo a radical transformation- more in tune with the people and respectful of the environment, and less responsive to powerful home-grown and transnational economic interests. There was to be a major shift in geopolitics: less dependency on the “imperialistic North”, more healthy South-South commerce, cultural and other exchange.

As far as the model of government, it was supposed to be the beginning of the end the egopower of the Caudillo- or strong-man- model of governing, and democracy would flourish. Everyone thought that respect for free speech and freedom of expression would grow. Parliaments were to be open to the people, and the Parliaments would really listen to what the they said. Governments would rule by the Constitutions and the rule of law, and not based on populist policies. Genuine participatory government was to become the norm. It was taken for granted that Free, Prior and Informed Consent for Indigenous Peoples and communities would be fully respected.

I’m referring about the shift in governments and politics that has shaken South America in the past 10 or so years and that put new leaders, some from the extreme left- some supposedly progressive- into power. Ecuador, Bolivia, Argentina, Venezuela; perhaps Paraguay. Brazil for many. The change was supposed to usher in a new whole new paradigm of development. No more development schemes to ravaged Planet Earth in the name of economic growth and for the purpose of creating avid consumers, meanwhile enriching Northern economies and feeding unsustainable lifestyles. Capitalism was to be replaced by a green and democratic socialism.

Instead, we have leaders like Bolivia’s Morales, an indigenous-campesino socialist leader who came to power trumpeting human and environment rights, and who is now pursuing a road through the middle of a protected area known as Tipnis. In late 2011, his government violently repressed indigenous protesters who were marching to the capital to protest the plan. President Morales claims that the road is needed to develop the country. It has been pointed out that the road would also perfectly suit the commodities-export regional initiative known as IIRSA. In spite of the international condemnation that the repression against the protesters sparked and ongoing national resistance, Bolivia’s president is still determined to go ahead with his plans.

Stung by native resistance to his government’s development plans, Evo Morales recently tried to discredit the opposition, allegedly stating that “environmentalism is the new colonialism” (1). It’s hard to believe that someone like Evo Morales wouldn’t know that modern environmentalism was largely inspired by Native Americans, and disappointing that he would equate environmentalism with colonialism, which was anything but green. But Morales is not the only president in South America following tried-and-tested neoliberal development plans, or using the police to violently repress the resistance said plans provoke.

In Ecuador, Rafael Correa, who was packaged to the public as a progressive and who was voted into power partly based on his pro-environment platform, has followed some of the World Bank’s most effective prescriptions to allow the North to continue helping themselves to the country’s resources. His regime is dead set on transforming Ecuador, a mega biologically and culturally diverse nation, into yet another mining country exporting raw mineral resources to the North. The government, for example, is not satisfied that “only” 5% of the country has been explored by mining corporations, and would like to see it expanded to not less than 40%, and is looking all over the world for partners to start mining the Andes.

Correa’s mining policies highlight the contradictions of his government perspective on development perhaps like no other issue. For example, while outwardly supporting a green initiative to leave massive amounts of petroleum under the Yasuni protected area in exchange for cash from developed economies, Correa’s government is opening new pristine areas for mining and oil development. In the case of mining, it is specially tragic, since Ecuador is the only Andean nation free of large-scale metal mining, and has the unique opportunity- and more than enough renewable resources to do it- to choose a different development path, avoiding the numerous and well-documented ills that mining development brings to developing nations. Because of its great and irreversible environmental impacts, large-scale mining permanently closes a country’s door to develop sustainable economic activities wherever it operates.

Resistance and Mining

Correa’s mining plans are being implemented in spite of virulent protests from campesino communities and Indigenous Peoples, and after decades of experiencing all the problems that petroleum “development” has inflicted on the country, its people, and the economy. Petroleum development in Ecuador is synonym for severe erosion of ethnic diversity in the country’s biodiverse Amazon region, poisoning of untold numbers of rivers and streams and making thousands of locals sick with cancer and other life-threatening diseases. Partly because of this grim past with petroleum, and partly based on knowledge of mining’s real impacts in tropical rainforests regions and local communities, Correa’s plans have met stiff resistance and sparked widespread social protests in the country. The latest protests against mining in March of this year showed that the resistance is not limited to impacted communities, or led by a handful of organizations. The protests brought together thousands of individuals from most of the country’s indigenous organizations, campesino groups as well as from dozens of other civil society groups- including several large unions- to the streets in Quito. It was a shock that the government is still trying to assimilate.

Beyond oil development’s social and environmental curse, the development has created a noxious dependency on the black gold that has suppressed other sectors of the economy and that, for decades, has been the main provider of the national budget. It also put blinds on functionaries that made it impossible for them to imagine a life without the money from exporting commodities. Thus, now that oil is running out, what more perfect choice can there be- and one that the World Bank would approve of- than to developed the country’s untapped mineral resources! What will happen 20-30 years down the road when the minerals also run out and Ecuador’s pristine places have been transformed into open pit nightmares leaching heavy metals is not hard to imagine.

Along with the rush to open the whole country to mining by- you might have guessed ittransnational mining companies, a whole “development package” is aggressively being sold to the people. Development, in the best tradition of capitalism, is being equated with things like high-paying jobs, paved roads, large hydroelectric dams, open-pit mines, clinics, computers and so forth. In other words, material development. And, it’s not that these things are are necessarily all bad, the problem lies in that they reinforce the failed model of development that is killing the oceans, wiping out biodiversity, and turning the planet into an oven and its citizens into compulsive consumers. The extractive development model also keeps developing countries poor and tied to exporting primary resources. For many who helped the current government come to power, the regime’s development plans is an unforgivable regression from what it was supposed to have been. In fact, disgust with his way of governing and his betrayal of the party’s ideals that President Correa was supposed to represent, drove many of his closest collaborators to abandon his party’s so-called Citizen’s Revolution, and join the opposition.

The Compass Needle Shifts East (or, goodbye Uncle Sam, hello Uncle Cheng!)

One of the fundamental changes in the new development scheme was supposed to include a shift in geopolitical orientation; lessening the connections to the imperialistic North, and strengthen South-South exchange. However, instead of South, the economic and political compass needle is increasingly pointing East. Iran, for example, has shown a great deal of interest in Correa’s government, and Ecuador responded by greatly expanding relations with Iran and, at the same time, supporting the Gaddafi and Assad governments, in accord with Chinese political interests.

Financially, the eastern shift is not much different. Loans from institutions like the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank and the IFM have been almost completely eclipsed by loans from Chinese state-controlled banks like the China Development Bank and the China Export Import Bank. China, for example, has lent nearly 9 billions dollars to the Correa government in the past couple of years to cover budget deficits during the past several years, which is helping to fund his lavish, and popular, social programs. And it’s not just only Ecuador that is on the radar screen for Chinese financial institutions. according to a recent report (2) ,in Latin America, “China’s lending to the region in 2010 was more than the World Bank the Inter-American Development Bank and the Export-Import Bank of the United States combined”.

In addition to high-profile loans, China is also funding some of Ecuador’s biggest infrastructure projects, including the country’s biggest hydroelectric project, and is interested in fully funding a massive 13 billion dollar petrochemical complex on Ecuador’s coast. For its part, Ecuador signed special deals with the Asian giant to repay part of the loans by exporting a significant percentage of Ecuador’s exportable oil production. The loans are no gift to the Ecuadorian people either; the country is paying about 7% interest on them, much higher than what other international lenders charge.

And, as with the World Bank and other western international lenders those loans don’t come without strings attached. For now, the visible strings are access to petroleum and copper, but in the future it could include other metals, agricultural land, lumber, and whatever other resource the Chinese are in need of. Or, as BBC news article (3) bluntly put it:

One of China Development Bank’s specific tasks is to try to alleviate and, where possible, eliminate bottlenecks in supplies of raw materials or land for China’s economy.

This is cause for concern after Correa’s recent statement that there is no limit to borrowing from China.

An attractive aspect of these loans is that, from the perspective of governments like Ecuador’s, the money comes without those “bothersome” transparency, human rights, labor, respect of Indigenous People’s rights, and environmental safeguards. The loans also come without the insistence from the lenders that the money be used to help the country mitigate poverty. Needless to say, the “flexibility” is a real temptation for corrupt governments to misuse the funds, and makes it easier to prolong their stay in power by subsidizing popular social programs, regardless of their economic or environmental sustainability.

The Copper Connection

Ecuador’s enthusiasm for Chinese financial support didn’t stop with the petroleum deals. In March of 2012, the country signed its first mining contract, paving the way for the construction of Mirador, the country’s first large-scale open-pit mine. Mirador happens to be a copper mine, and it happens to be owned by a Chinese consortium made up of two of China’s largest stateowned corporations. In inking the deal, the Correa government didn’t let legalities get in the way, even after the nation’s Comptroller General findings leaked to the press revealed 17 major irregularities with the mining project, most of them sufficient to have annulled the project.

Another troubling factor in this particular grab for copper is that, according to an external audit, the project’s Environmental Impact Statement was severely deficient, leaving out key data, and not considering essential factors like seismic risks. Yet, the study was approved days before the signing of the contract with the Chinese. The outrageous disregard of laws to accommodate Ecuador’s largest debtor is very disturbing, and is emerging as the model the government will follow for other extractive projects. A similar disregard for the rule of law to facilitate other mining and oil projects in the southeast of the country, which includes not respecting community consultation processes, and redrawing boundaries of protected areas to accommodate mining and oil interests, have helped further tarnish the government’s discredited environmental policies. Taken together, the flagrant disregard for the law sends a signal that the government will push mining no matter what; even if that ‘what’ means gross violations of human and collective rights, a severe weakening of democratic values and institutions, and wide-scale environmental degradation. A study released by the country’s Ombudsmen in late 2011 (4) on human rights violations drew attention to the link between the country’s extractivist plans and human rights violations, when it came to the conclusion that a significant share of the violations were linked to resistance to extractive projects, and that there was a systematic criminalization of the social protest. A study released in April of 2012 by one of Ecuador’s most prestigious universities came to similar conclusions (5).

One unique aspect of the deal with the Chinese, which has raised some concern, is that Correa pressured the companies to pre-pay 100 million dollars in future royalties. I know of no other country in the world where mining companies pay royalties years before a mine is even built. The gamble on the part of the Chinese is not much of an issue, since it has been shown that State-owned Chinese corporations are willing to lose a lot of money- 600 million dollars in the case of the Mecca Metro (6), for example- in order to win political, and other kinds of favors from countries rich in resources.

What the advanced royalty payment does is give the government money to use in the mining region to attempt to neutralize the opposition and gain the support from the communities by paving, building, wiring and sanitizing the place. It also makes it possible to show off mining´s positive side (concrete ‘development’). However, it also ties the hands of Ecuadorian governments- present and future- to effectively avert, or control mining’s insidious environmental and social impacts.

When it becomes evident that the government is not interested in applying the legal safeguards protecting communities and collective and environmental rights, the outcome is bound to be communities taking the law into their hands to protect their environment and social and cultural health, and avoid relocation at all costs. Repression then becomes the most likely response by a government dependent on rents extracted from mineral exports, and heavily in debt with the company’s host nation that exploits its minerals.

The Mirador site is located in the mountainous and biodiverse Condor Range, tucked away in Ecuador’s southern Amazonian region. The tropical rainforest where the mine would be located is within the Tropical Andes Biological Hotspot, the world’s most diverse Biological Hotspot. There are more species of mammals, plants, insects, bird, amphibians, and reptiles in a few hundred hectares of this habitat than whole provinces in China and of most other countries. The Mirador concession is also exceptionally rich in pristine rivers and streams that are fed by 2 to 3 meters of annual rainfall. Unfortunately, lying below this singular biodiversity and water-rich world lies copper and other metals sought by industrial economies. The Condor Range is also home to the Shuar People, ancestral dwellers of the forests. Sadly, the Shuar have been unable to avoid the usual division that extractive companies create by offers of high-paying job and easy money. Those who bought into this modern siren song- including the myth of responsible mining- say they want western-style development, and think they can navigate through the dangerous waters of large-scale mining, avoiding the negative impacts to their peoples and their environment.

The controversy is really about copper, a must-have commodity for China’s hyper economy, which currently consumes around 9 million tons per year, or 40% of the world’s production. The voracious appetite for this base metal, just coming from China, has tripled its price in the last few years, and sparked a veritable international scramble to secure access to exploit the metal. And, just so that there’s no doubt about where the copper is heading- as in the days of colonial pillaging- the new owners stated that 100% of the copper from Mirador will be shipped to China as a unrefined 30% copper concentrate. There, it will be purified and resold, and made into consumer goods. Copper is so important to the Chinese economy that in order to make sure its industries doesn’t run out, during the past five years China’s corporations- both private and publicly-owned- have spent billions of dollars accumulating copper properties all over the world. The purchase by the Chinese of Corriente Resources, the Canadian owners of Mirador and other nearby concessions, was worth nearly 700 million dollars.

The Recycled Paradigm

Instead of being progressive, the paradigms in the continent are recycled junk models from other failed paradigms, and not at all creative. Nature continues to be a storehouse of “resources”, or commodities, to be extracted, exported and/ or transformed into goods for the exclusive benefit of humans. Rivers are still seen as merely potential sources of hydroelectric projects, forests are the home to so many cubic meters of lumber, the ocean is one big fishery and shark fins are for making soups.

In Ecuador, the main objective of the new version of an export-commodity base is, firstly to GROW economically, and in the process, secure enough cash to fund some much needed social programs, but also many populist, non-sustainable ones. Economic growth continues to be the sacred cow it’s always been, and the same distorting indicators are being used to measure wealth, just as in the heyday of neoliberalism. Gross National Product, not Gross National Happiness is still king and, because it’s difficult or inconvenient to put a monetary price on ecosystem services or for the government tax them, these services are worthless. Poverty is still measured only in dollars and cents, and the environmental destruction and social and cultural havoc produced by mining and other extractive industries are still seen as “unfortunate costs” of development; externalities for someone else to pay in another time.

As far as the living and non-living elements of an ecosystem are concerned, including human communities, it matters not at all what economic or political system is the author of their demise. Whether in the name of pure capitalism and free markets, or socialist or communist principles that justify the destruction of our Home to, paradoxically, improve living conditions of the human population, devastation is devastation.

Duality of Progress

There’s no denying that there have been some very positive changes in Ecuador, as well as the other countries mentioned. Social spending has gone way up, there is less economic poverty, and many economically impoverished citizens, for the first time, have access to basic services, like free medical attention. Public education is also, in theory, free for everyone, to university. I say in theory because the country was unprepared for the increase in demand for this and other services, and the systems collapsed. And, like many other populist governments before it, this one has also been accused of using these popular programs to buy support. But overall, and in spite of the fact that the richer are richer these days in Ecuador, one cannot ignore the fact that positive economic and social progress has been made. Parallel to these positive achievements, however, the flush of financing is also going to some questionable ends, including funding sharp increases in defense spending, putting Ecuador at the stop of defense spending per portion of the GNP in South America (7); higher even than Colombia, which has to confront a decades-long civil war.

One Huge Step Backwards for Collective Rights

One of the most noxious policy decisions regarding development taken by the Correa regime, and widely rejected by civil society and Indigenous groups, is that of not recognizing communities or Indigenous People’s right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent, or accepting communities decision on development plans as binding. The President, along with key cabinet members, have publicly said, on numerous occasions, that they equate the consultation process with the simple act of socialization of projects, and that consent by affected stakeholdersincluding local governments- is not to be considered. This refusal to recognize this key civil society safeguard, and the right of these two fundamental civil society groups to choose a different path of development, is seen as a huge step backwards in the establishment of collective rights. It also makes a complete mockery of the government’s sustainability discourse. Ironically, it’s a policy expected more from the conservative right and capitalist interests, than from the progressive left.

The Risks of Questioning Development

In Ecuador, persons and organizations who challenge the government’s development plans are either anti-development, agents of the political right, or just dumb, infantile ecologists, and/or all of the above. Lately Correa has, as Morales, added a xenophobic ingredient to his attack on the opposition to extractive development by saying that it is funded by rich gringos.

And, there is a lot to challenge. In this paradigm that refuses to die, there is no room for the 7 noble principles behind Sumak Kawsay- or harmonious living- and the rights of nature nature become little more than nice terms to exploit. Human and Indigenous Peoples rights are seen as obstacles to development, and development goals keep being set in shiny desks in the capitals, far away from the land and people they would destroy or relocate. In other words, and as our two imaginary functionaries from the Bank and the IFM might say: ´My oh my, business is humming along as usual!’

To make sure nothing stands in the way of this new “progressive” steam-roller, if your organization’s idea of development is not in line with the government’s National Development Plan- which was done without any kind of meaningful participation from civil society- your organization can lose its legal status and the directors become the target of aggressive smear campaigns by government officials. If it occurs to you to exercise your Constitutional right to resist extractive activities, you are arrested, labeled a terrorist and can be jailed for years. Whereas before, it was the corporations who were going after the protest leaders, it is now the State who criminalizes the protests. Since Correa came into office, for example, nearly two hundred indigenous and campesinos have faced, or are now facing, terrorism or other similar criminal charges for taking part in protests against mining and other extractive projects4,5. In fact, the main organization representing the Indigenous Peoples of Ecuador, CONAIE, and who actively supported candidate Correa, has had to brunt relentless attacks from Correa the President ever since they parted ways, primarily due to the government’s mining policies. The attacks against CONAIE is only one facet of a sinister and sustained effort to undermine the influence of non-governmental organizations in the country that don’t support the government’s development plans- and especially its mining plans. The lack of tolerance in Correa’s government for differing perspectives regarding the development model the country should follow is frightening.

There are many other examples of the steep cost that civil society and nature in Ecuador are paying for this version of Development Shift Disorder, and for questioning its premises. These include, criminalization of the protest, concentrating power in the Executive Branch and fatally debilitating the Legislative and Judicial branches of government, intimidating the country’s free press and hampering freedom of expression.

You probably think that we were out of our minds in believing that some of these fundamental changes would take place, and you might be right. However, keep in mind that the principal authors of the country’s new Constitution that embodied most of the progressive above ideas was the people; so this time much more was expected from the State. Also, if you’ve been involved in walking the long road towards achieving social justice and environmental sustainability, and serious about the need for urgent paradigm change redefining development’s basic premises, then you know that hope springs eternal and that utopia is not a unreachable dream, but a journey; a path we must constantly walk even in the face of overwhelming obstacles and constant betrayals. Not to do so makes us accomplices of a paradigm so destructive that it now threatens all life on Earth.

1. http://www.diaadia.com.ar/mundo/evo-le-cierra-puertas-estados-unidos
2. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-17/chinese-loans-to-latin-america-top-world-bank-idb-combined.html
3. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12212936
4. http://www.cedhu.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=116&Itemid=7
5. http://www.uasb.edu.ec/UserFiles/372/File/pdfs/NOTICIASYSUCESOS/2012/Informe%20Derechos%20Humanos%20(CD)%20.pdf
6. China Railway Corporation is the same company that is part owner of the Mirador copper mining project 8 http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2033238,00.html
7. http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120511/DEFREG02/305110006/South-American-Defense-Spending-Doubles-5-Years-Report?odyssey=nav%7Chead

AUTHOR: Carlos Zorrilla
URL: http://decoin.org
E-MAIL: toisan06 [at] gmail.com

Dr. George Amato, the Institute’s director, also pledged to support training, collaborative research, exchange programmes and equipment for the laboratory.

He was speaking at the weekend during a luncheon hosted in honour of a KWS delegation to the US recently.

The KWS director, Mr Julius Kipng’etich, is leading a delegation of KWS officers to develop partnerships to support the Kenya Wildlife Service Fund as well as raise funds for the planned forensic laboratory to be set up at KWS headquarters in Nairobi.

Once complete, the forensics and molecular biology laboratory is expected to enhance studies in population genetics and reduce poaching activities by providing credible prosecutorial evidence in court. The forensic laboratory will be a state-of-the-art facility and a regional referral centre for molecular diagnostics of wildlife-related crimes.

The KWS delegation is also lobbying US-based wildlife conservation groups and the US Congress on Kenya’s position at the forthcoming Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) in Bangkok, Thailand.

Dr. Amato noted that KWS had made significant achievements in the last eight years and was proud to partner with it.

In appreciation, the KWS Director noted increased partnership between Kenya and the US, especially with the Institute, had increased tremendously as KWS was keen on using science-based decision making in management.

Mr Kipng’etich also underscored the need for Kenya to be able to prove cases of bush meat trade and identifying contraband wildlife products at the airports and other ports of entry and trace their countries of origin.

The Sackier Institute for Comparative Genomics is the premier American research centre for wildlife conservation genetics, molecular ecology, wildlife forensics, small population biology and training of graduate student. It also holds the world’s largest frozen tissue depository centre.

The luncheon was also attended b Dr. Felicity Arengo, the Associate Director Centre for Biodiversity Research for American Museum, Dr. Mcaloose, Head of Pathology at the Wildlife Conservation Society.

A number of US-based business executives pledged to support the Kenya Wildlife Service Endowment Fund by becoming its ambassadors.

Mr. Michael Emmerman, the managing director of Newbewrger Berman LLC, a major finance and investing company, pledged to support the fund.

Other pledges came from Drew Kellerman Deutscher Bank – African investments, Tom Mims, the CEO of Emerging Africa and Bonnie Wiper, the President of Thinking Animals.

Earlier, the KWS delegation met Mr. Paul Tudor Jones, the CEO of Tudor Investments, who also made a commitment to support wildlife conservation in the Northern Kenya.

AUTHOR: Henry Neondo
URL: http:// www.africasciencenews.org
E-MAIL: neondohenry [at] yahoo.com

Source: New Scientist

Between 7-12 May, NL-Aid is enjoying a spring recess. From 13 May, you can read articles of our authors again. Untill that time, we have selected Youtube videos in which the strength of people is centered;). In this episode: Oceans.

AUTHOR: Hans Sluijter
URL: www.NL-Aid.org
E-MAIL: info [at] www.NL-Aid.org

Source: WWF

Between 7-12 May, NL-Aid is enjoying a spring recess. From 13 May, you can read articles of our authors again. Untill that time, we have selected Youtube videos in which the strength of people is centered;). In this episode: Overfishing.

AUTHOR: Hans Sluijter
URL: www.NL-Aid.org
E-MAIL: info [at] www.NL-Aid.org

Source: World Resources Institute

Between 7-12 May, NL-Aid is enjoying a spring recess. From 13 May, you can read articles of our authors again. Untill that time, we have selected Youtube videos in which the strength of people is centered;). In this episode: Reefs at risk.

AUTHOR: Hans Sluijter
URL: www.NL-Aid.org
E-MAIL: info [at] www.NL-Aid.org