Today is 15 October 2009 and Blog Action Day 09 is here! Blog Action day sees bloggers around the world write blogs on an issue that affects humanity and this year the theme is CLIMATE CHANGE
I thought I would add a twist to it by looking at climate change and poverty as I strongly believe that these two go hand in hand in the parts of the world where my work is based.
On the whole the people I work with in East Africa are in rural areas and live off the land. This means that they rely on the land for food and financial security. In a typical village with a woodland and river streams, the trees and land will provide building materials for shelter, fuel and the river will provide water and fish. The trees are cut down both for fuel but also to make charcoal that is sold on mostly to city and town dwellers. They also rely on the land to provide recreation and entertainment!
How I hear you ask, well for a start they grow all the ingredients for fruit juice and alcohol, and again trees and animal hides are used in the making of music instruments. There are no cinemas, theatres, Supermarkets, there is no electricity and they cannot turn a tap on for water. This is their lot!
The other type community I work with are slum dwellers. These are mostly folk that have left the sort of life I have described above to try their luck in the city! They live in the most appalling environment you can imagine and I would argue that the folk in rural setting have a much better quality of life than the slum dwellers. Their environment is littered with plastic bags, stagnant water that attracts malaria causing mosquitoes, they may have electricity but this is unreliable and expensive and therefore the most popular fuel here is charcoal and paraffin. They often cook in the same room they sleep in.
The activities of both these communities are bound to have an impact on climate change through land degradation and activists have started to take action to get folk in these communities to change their ways.
On my last visit to Uganda in May this year I met a coffee grower whose family have grown coffee for 50 years! His entire crop is being threatened by a virus called coffee wilt, the same virus affects banana trees. This is a real threat to his livelihood. Coffee trees need shelter from the harsh African sun and this shelter is provided by the banana trees. The same land is used to grow vegetables such as beans, carrots and potatoes in a system called inter cropping. This means that the household has food security and income from coffee.
One morning old man Hassan had a visit from a government official who requested that he gives up part of his land to plant pine trees in order to help the environment. The pine trees would be provided for free and there maybe a cash incentive too! Old Man Hassan said NO and I asked him why?
I have two daughters due to go to university and that has been possible because of coffee and they are about to cost me more in fees and maintenance for pre=”for “>whislt at university over the next 4 years. How will afford to keep them at University if I cut down the coffee trees and plant Pine instead? furthermore, how will we as a family feed ourselves if we give over the land to Pine growing?
I could see his reasoning, there is no welfare state to take care of his basic needs, he has no hope of accessing AID to help him directly with his priorities as he sees them, should he care about planting more trees for the sake of the environment?
I have recently written about the effects of plastic bags on poverty in the developing world and you can read about that here.
Plastic bags are also the route cause of sewer blockages and this is leads to stagnant water in city slums that attract mosquitoes. Our reaction here in the developed world has been to send mosquito nets. In this CNN report Ozwald Boateng and his colleague Hassan Kimbugwe ask why not get rid of the sewers that provide a breeding ground for mosquitoes?
These slum dwellers have found ways of earning an income and cleaning up the environment at the same time. A project in Burkinafaso sees women collecting plastics bags from their streets and making handbags out of them, whilst the women in Uganda make beads out of paper . These projects are very exciting from the point of view that they provide income for the women but also provide a means of recycling both paper and plastic in countries where recycling is not part of the fabric.
They are some tough questions that remain, one that springs to mind
Can we realistically protect the environment and lift folk out of poverty at the same time?
We here in the west are demanding more recyclable materials such as Sisal and as we can’t grow them the developing world is growing them for us. But did you know that this may involve cutting down forests or woodlands?
As usual if you have a view or thoughts on any of the issues raised here please share them
Ethnicsupplies's Weblog 
October 15, 2009 at 10:31 am
Can we realistically help folk out of poverty and the environment at the same time? Of course we can, it’s just a matter of creative thinking and changing the stereotypes.
Also people in the west need to think about the actions and the consequences as you point out about Sisal. 2 years back there was a huge thing about bio diesel and how it would help third world countries by growing the fuel… until they realised perhaps belatedly that in growing the fuel they would stop growing their food.
Responsibility is a big part of this.
October 15, 2009 at 11:10 am
Many thanks for joining the discussion Sarah.
You are absolutely right we need to examine the impact of our actions on folk in the developing world. The food security issue is increasingly an issue for concern and has implciations for folk in the developing in ways that we can only imagine.
Land being given up for bio fuels instead of food, is a none starter, my suggestion would be that technology is improved that can turn food by products into fuel without compromising teh food security of folk that are most vulnerable to hunger and starvation
October 21, 2009 at 6:41 am
To my mind there are three huge dangers the world faces.
Firstly there is a large super-volcano
under Yellowstone Park. It is an unstable
volcanic are and overdue for eruption.
This volcano is, however, unlike the type
that destroyed Pompey. If it blows it may
well create a cloud of debris that will
hide the sun from being seen anywhere on
earth for up to three years, which is
enough time for most of us to starve and
freeze.
We can’t do much about that problem,
and we know it.
Our second difficulty, I suspect,
arises from our denial of how far,
and how fast, things have already
come.
In our arrogance we believe that
‘science’ will provide us with
answers to what is already an emergency.
The mistaken belief is that plugging
in solar energy, nuclear, or wind
power will result in continued ‘cheap’
transport.
I write ‘cheap’ reservedly since it
is our children who must pay the price
for what we consume so wantonly now.
Take a look around any room. Everything
from the paint to the light fittings
has been touched by hydrocarbons.
The TV remote, the Computer keyboard and
case, the door knob, all derived from
oil probably?
And it’s running out.
Science and sanity are separate,
science can no more provide solutions
in an insane world than can a faculty of
witch doctors.
The third, and main, difficulty is that we’ve
become infected with consumerism. Good
luck to those women who scrape a living
making handbags and beads from refuse,
but do we really need more handbags
or necklaces?
Do we need more than one wristwatch,
or camera in our lives? Why are the
seas cluttered with container ships
bringing Christmas decorations from
the Far East?
Why does what once was the family
fishmonger now sell joss sticks
and carved ornaments back in my
home town?
And whither happiness? In the
quest for quality are we all
not working harder and harder to
promote ourselves on Twitter
whilst living on diets of gourmet
fast-food.
Surprisingly it is the fashion
industry that has largely sponsored
the beautifully crafted film ‘Home’
by Yann Artus-Bertrand, which reveals
us to already be in a global resources
emergency; an ecological disaster
that most westerners simply ignore.
When will our political leaders have
the courage to start rationing
our precious resources now, just as
resources are rationed in times of
war?
As Sarah implies, our lifestyles
are unsustainable. Too many have
abandoned the land for a city life,
which in supporting a ‘sophisticated’
minority creates a thraldom in
which Spiritual values are lost to
the agnostic and religious alike.
October 21, 2009 at 9:38 am
Welcome to the discussion Stephen. You raise some interesting points specifically around the whole issue of consumerism, yes we do not need all that stuff that we buy, and to use your analagy of how many wrist watches we need, the point is we can only wear one at a time. We generally don’t stop to think about the implications of the level at which we are consuming and the impact of this on the bottom billion in particular as well as the availability/sustainability of resources in future.