Just Africa

DRC Rainforests—Crucial to Combating Global Warming!

In Copenhagen this week, delegates from 160 countries are gathered to come up with a global plan for reversing global warming, and combating the effects of climate change.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC or Congo) is home to the world’s second largest rainforest, covering over 515,000 square miles, the greatest expanse of rainforest in all of Africa.  The rainforest covers roughly 60% of the country.

Deforestation in the DRC is driven by small-scale slash and burn agriculture, as well as mining and commercial logging.  From 1990-2005 the DRC lost more than 26,000 square miles of forest to logging, close to 5% of all the rainforest. However, between 2002 and 2005 the government of the DRC granted 15 million hectares, over 57,000 square miles of rainforest concessions to logging companies- or more than 9% of the total rainforest.  If the trend continues, by 2050 the DRC risks loss of 40% of its forests, and this loss will release 34.4 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.  Currently only 43,000 square miles of the rainforest has a protected status, safeguarding it from commercial uses.

The rainforest in the Congo directly affects weather and rainfall patterns both in the region, and in the North Atlantic.  Loss of forest has a direct and disastrous effect on global warming and will result in increased flooding, heat waves, droughts, and rising oceans. Deforestation effects climate change in two distinct ways. 

First, forests serve as reservoirs for carbon.  The forests in the DRC account for 8% of all global carbon stores, the 4th largest carbon reservoirs of any country in the world. According to Simon Lewis, a researcher at the University of Leeds,  "Tropical forest trees are absorbing about 18% of the CO2 added to the atmosphere each year from burning fossil fuels, substantially buffering the rate of climate change." 

Second, the process of cutting down the trees in the forest and plowing the earth itself releases carbon into the atmosphere.  Emissions from deforestation are about 25% of all global carbon dioxide emissions resulting from human activities.

Reversing the trend of deforestation in the DRC is essential to combating global climate change.

You can help reduce deforestation in the DRC and combat global warming by signing up for action alerts on Africa Action's website. Staying aware and active in the fight to reduce deforestation in the DRC is essential to ensuring that local populations are able to thrive in an ecologically sustainable way and benefit from their own resources. 

During the holiday season, shop responsibly! Make sure that any gifts that you purchase do not contain timber from the Congo rainforests. Learn more by visiting the Forest Stewardship Council at: http://www.fscus.org/faqs/fsc_products.php.

By Meryl M. Zendarski

W.A. Flooding and Climate Change in Africa

      It has been a wet summer in West Africa as severe flooding has taken a huge toll on the region. The Horn of Africa underwent a similar situation in 2006 when extreme droughts through the end of 2005 were followed by unseasonably heavy rains, which resulted in widespread flooding. At the time, Simon Mechale, the head of Ethiopia’s disaster agency, characterized the devastating flood problem as "the worst that has been observed in a generation." 1 This year, U.N. officials estimate some 600,000 people across West Africa have been hit by heavy flooding, killing at least 25 in Ghana and seven in Burkina Faso. Africa is already infamous for its natural flood and drought cycles 2. The effects and degree of these natural disasters has grown over the decades due largely to the effects of global warming and continued poor land use. This imbalance will make subsistence farming, upon which millions of Africans depend, even more precarious. It will also exacerbate famine and disease.  Oxfam and Christian Aid relief estimate climate change is increasingly hampering the efforts of millions to escape poverty and that 182 million people in Africa are at risk of dying as a consequence of climate change by the end of the century 3.
    Although a number of relief organizations have brought to the fore the effects of global warming and climate change on Africa, the dire situation has largely been ignored. This cannot continue. World leaders should not only work to address the underlying causes (as demonstrated in the G-20’s commitment to end Fossil-Fuel subsidies by 2020) 4 but continue working toward helping poor countries that are struggling to mitigate the effects of global warming. African Governments face difficult decisions regarding balancing job creation with environmental conservation. The international debate over conservation is often a touchy one for developing nations, largely because they feel that the developed world benefited from a time of unbridled carbon-fueled industrial development. As the world’s leading nations and the U.N. work to fight global warming, they must reach out to include leaders of the developing world, especially Africa which is suffering the harshest consequences with the least ability to withstand it. Embracing the input of third-world leaders offers not only a more consolidated approach to the issue but offers a much stronger chance of actual reform.
    Unfortunately Africa’s problems with global warming cannot only be attributed to the actions and attitudes of the West. The overwhelming numbers of those affected are unfortunately part of the problem itself. According to the UN the continent is losing forest twice as fast as the rest of the world. In sub-Saharan Africa alone, only 7.5% of the rural population has access to electricity.5 The overwhelming alternative is charcoal. In fact an enormous and often lucrative charcoal industry has emerged. Roads throughout the countryside all over Africa are replete with makeshift lean-tos holding charcoal cut and burned from the local forests and bagged for sale to the city. Where Africa once boasted seven million square kilometers of forest, a third of that has been lost - most of it to charcoal. Wood and its by-product charcoal, unless radical steps are taken, are likely to remain the primary energy source for decades.
    What is needed are comprehensive education plans. Wangari Maathai, the Kenyan Nobel peace laureate, has worked hard to educate and engage citizens in her homeland through the Greenbelt movement. "One adaptation option for Africa is to keep her forests standing so that they provide essential environmental services such as carbon sinks," she said. The Greenbelt movement works to promote the planting of indigenous trees in forest catchment areas, private farms and public spaces so as to preserve local biological diversity, enhance natural beauty, and prevent soil erosion. Sensitization and mobilization seminars are held to disseminate information on the importance of tree planting6.
    Despite the success of the Greenbelt movement and others, the argument is a notoriously tough sell. For years many efforts to stall the growth of the Sahara by planting trees at its edges have been undercut (literally) by people seeking fuel for food and shelter. The long-term solutions to Africa’s plight are difficult in a region of the world where today’s considerations are of paramount importance over next year’s or even next week’s.
    The untold cost of the devastating floods in West Africa remains to be seen. Beyond the loss of property and the cases of loss of life, the flooding has ruined large amounts of food crops and land, risking food shortages and even starvation. Furthermore, flooding severely damages infrastructure in the areas affected, spoiling clean water supplies and inviting disease. Unfortunately the desperate times risk inviting more desperate measures and the cycle of extremes will continue.



1 http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=87&art_id=qw1156502520623A162

2
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/09/08/west.africa.flooding/

3 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8272603.stm

4 http://www.carbonpositive.net/viewarticle.aspx?articleID=1678

5 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8272603.stm

6 http://gbmna.org/w.php?id=13

The Biofuel Frenzy...

With the world’s rapidly dwindling oil supplies and the threat of irreversible environmental damage, the United States allied with its European eco-friendly counterparts, have committed to investing in cleaner, and more renewable energy sources. Though this may sound eco-friendly, their choice of environmentally safe projects has Africans often agreeing to self-detrimental deals.

Reminiscent of anything we’ve seen before…? 

The biofuel industry supported by wealthy investors- the auto industry and key decision makers- is booming internationally, especially on the continent. What has been traditionally regarded as a western induced phenomenon has morphed into an arguably global collective to “save our planet”. Not to say that collaborative efforts are uncalled for, but what concerns me is the irony of the situation.

In their quest to build their economic empires, western governments were quite selfish and exploitative in their ventures. Yet now, that they need a helping hand, or rather a certain agenda pushed, whom better to turn to then the iron fists of our Mugabe’s and Melesse’s? With a few backroom deals and the assurance that their citizens won’t or shall I say cannot react, corrupt African governments can successfully implement various projects.

Due to limited land in many of these European nations, African soil is becoming a hot commodity. Sun Biofuels, a UK based energy company, currently has projects in Ethiopia, Tanzania, and Mozambique. In exchange for free land, they promise to invest millions in infrastructural projects. In Tanzania for instance, the company has promised £20 million in construction projects for 22,230 acres of land. Other European companies have also been closing deals beyond borders. The Norwegian firm Biofuels Africa has secured the rights to the 93,860 acres and Kavango BioEnergy, a British company, plans to invest millions of euros in northern Namibia.

Is this not traditional capitalism at its finest- Africa supplies Europe’s demands?

And although we should not be surprised at this historic relationship, supporting the biofuel market raises some very critical questions. In a time of food scarcity on the continent and even fluctuating food prices in the west, can we morally and ethically grow these edible crops to run our cars?  Should Africa have to pay for the West’s over indulgence in fossil fuels? Even more upsetting is level of deception that has been incorporated in securing some of these lands.

A recent Business Week article exposed Biofuel Africa’s dirty tactics in Ghana. The company wrested away land clearing and usage rights from a village chief who could neither read nor write. They were on their way to securing thousands of acres when the Ghanaian Environmental Protection Agency put a stop to the process. In Tanzania as well, many head villagers were outraged when Sunbiofuels began their projects without even contacting village elders.

While some of you may argue that for many of these struggling nations these deals are beneficial and can improve the quality of many lives, Tanzanians have already begun voicing their skepticism.  Journalist Khoti Kamanga of the University of Dar es Salaam warns against the side effects of energy plantations. “The population Kamanga writes, is usually uninformed, while the cultivation of energy plants usually goes hand-in-hand with forced resettlement”

With very little or no assurance that these companies will hold up their end of the bargain, alongside suspicious methods, and not to mention the ethical dilemmas that these practices raise, I wonder to what extent this could realy help Africans.  Don't get me wrong while I do realize that "going green" is the newest trend sweeping the west, and other priorities such as world hunger may not currently be as popular, I am a firm believer that some causes no matter how vintage they may seem, should just never go out of style.

Two Key Concepts for Sustainable Development

Rich and poor nations cannot tackle climate change in identical ways, given that they do not have identical technological capabilities and degrees of responsibility in the crisis. Based on this principle, the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the most universally accepted multilateral environmental agreement) lays down different prescriptions depending on a country’s level of development.

• Developed countries are responsible for learning to mitigate global warming. Mitigation addresses the roots of the problem: how can individuals and industries change their practices to hinder the process of global warming? Solutions include cutting greenhouse gas emissions, using renewable energies, reforesting, etc.

Climate Debt

Opponents of the World Bank’s solution to climate change, the Climate Investment Funds (CIFs), recommend the UN Framework Convention on Climate Chance (UNFCCC) as a much better alternative. One of their key grievances is the Bank’s intention to issue loans as well as grants to help developing countries hinder and adapt to climate change.

Why would such loans be illegitimate? The UNFCCC makes it very clear: developed countries are primarily responsible for climate change. Therefore, “as historical polluters and due to their higher technological and economic capabilities, developed countries should shoulder the main burden for resolving the crisis” (Celine Tan, Third World Network). Issuing loans for climate financing will put poor countries into illegitimate debt for a problem caused by the industrialization and economic growth of richer nations. At a time when poor countries have to face their own development challenges, debt repayments will further entrap them in economic stagnation.

Can the developing world trust rich nations with tackling climate change?

That climate change is occurring globally with disastrous consequences, and that unsustainable economic policies are to blame, is no longer under question. The real issue now is not only how do we solve this crisis, but also who — who is most apt to take the lead in tackling climate change.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) seems like a sensible candidate. Last December, at the Climate Change Conference in Bali, Parties to the UNFCCC established a multilateral fund to provide technological assistance to developing countries. The G77 + China, as well as over a hundred civil society groups worldwide, are backing this initiative because it is grounded in the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities.” Essentially, it mandates developed countries, as historical polluters with higher technological and economic capabilities, to take on the largest share of responsibility and leadership in combating climate change.

Contestant #2 is the World Bank. This past week, Oct. 13-17, the World Bank held a series of meetings in Washington, DC to discuss the implementation of its new initiative against climate change, the Climate Investment Funds (CIFs). In the Bank’s own words, these funds “will enable a dynamic partnership between the MDBs (Multilateral Development Banks) and developing countries to undertake investments that achieve a country's development goals through a transition to a climate-resilient economy and a low carbon development path.”

This proposal is under harsh criticism by developing countries for putting the global fight against climate change under the Bank’s inequitable governance structure. The G77 + China condemned the Bank for diverting attention and financing away from the more democratic and transparent UNFCCC proposal. Ten of the world’s richest countries have already pledged over $6 billion to the CIFs; about a third of this number was pledged by the US. “There is clearly money for climate actions, which is the good news, but the bad news is it is in the hands of institutions that do not necessarily serve the objectives of the Convention [on Climate Change],” said Bernaditas Muller, chief negotiator for the G77 + China.