KENYA: High-quality flower trade reliant on the poorest migrant workers

Source: Business Daily (Nairobi) "Post-Poll Violence Looms Over Horticulture Sector"
Expectations were high that players in the horticultural industry would raise their glasses to toast for remarkable earnings last year, but their expectations and hopes have turned into worry.
The sector had an impressive run in 2007 , with earnings climbing by 64 per cent to Sh49.5 billion, buoyed by strong demand in key international markets, surprising even analysts who had raised concern over diverse challenges such as the food miles concept, a strengthening shilling against the dollar and expiring trade arrangements with Europe.
But an outbreak of violence related to the disputed presidential election results, especially around the main growing areas around Naivasha and west of the Rift Valley seems to have spoiled the party for producers, as fear mounts over gangs blocking the shipment of produce from the farms and disrupting labour.
Violence and protests followed the Electoral Commission's declaration of Mr Mwai Kibaki as winner of the presidential election whose outcome the opposition ODM has challenged.
ODM and election observers have complained of differences in some of the final results announced by commissioners and those read out at the constituencies.
Because of the violence, the horticultural industry , instead of enjoying the pickings, is now preparing for a nervous brain- storming meeting in Nairobi today to map out its future.
"The developments are not good and all of us are meeting to try and find a way out of the situation," Ms Jane Ngige, the chief executive of the Kenya Flower Council told Business Daily.
The latest wave of unrest especially around Naivasha and Kericho has raised great concern in the sectors as thousands of people providing casual labour in the flower farms have been displaced from their homes.
Analysts warn that the displacements will hit the flower farms that require intensive labour in picking and packaging .
Besides the shortage of manpower, there is also a massive threat to shipment of consignments to Nairobi and Eldoret International airports from where they are transported to markets abroad. Gangs of youth have since the weekend been erecting illegal roadblocks along the main Kericho/ Nairobi highway, paralysing traffic.
Hasit Shah, the Fresh Produce and Exporters Association of Kenya (FPEAK) chairman said there have been major repercussions to the industry following the skirmishes in Naivasha at the weekend which have triggered a mass exodus of mainly migrant workers.
"Most of the farms are operating with limited capacity. The situation is tense and most workers are afraid to stay ," he said.
Vehicles drive around a burning roadblock in Naivasha, a key flower growing area.
"The entire western Rift region has been hit. In the past two days, produce from most of these areas is not coming through to Nairobi. We are how, A KEY ever, making arrangements to airlift the produce from all affected areas," he added.
Issa Wafula, the Kenya Agricultural and Plantations Workers Union (KPAWU) assistant secretary- general said from workers from the western region who remained in Naivasha have not been able to access their stations since fresh chaos broke out this week.
Mr Wafula has appealed to the government to move fast and save the industry from collapse."Seventy per cent of flower farm labour force is provided by workers from western Kenya. This is why we urgently appeal to the Government to restore peace before more damage is done to the farms", he told the Business Daily.
James Finlay Ltd's subsidiary-Flamingo Holdings- that owns flower and vegetable farms in Lake Naivasha and Timau areas says it was also affected by the weekend skirmishes.
"We have lost five days of work because there were many blockades on the road. Each day, we are not sure that the roads are open. "We can only ship flowers when the roads are passable," Nec Davies, the Finlays managing director said.
His company, which also runs tea plantations in Kericho, but which was less affected, said all of its processed tea was lying in its Kericho stores until the situation improves.
Reduced and cancelled airlines' operations, stoppages of road transport and production losses in the past one week will mainly feature at the meeting of producers, farmers and exporters in Nairobi today,
Other issues on the agenda-which are to be presented to Government, include decisions by customers and clients to cancel commercial and technical visits and divert into Egypt, Morroco and West African producers.
"Delays in ports meant that chemicals, fertilisers and agro inputs could not get to farms on time. Many farms in the Rift Valley were vandalised and workers have not returned to all the units," Mr Shah whose organisation represents some 100 small scale growers, said.
With impressive earnings from 2007, industry players fear political turmoil was scaring away potential investors and increased investment until they are guaranteed of security of their assets.
The good run by the horticulture industry last year was because of demand in the international market helped by poor weather conditions in Europe during the second quarter of 2007 that opened the window for local producers to increase their sales.
Traditionally, the onset of summer in the northern hemisphere reduces sales volumes for local exporters as their counterparts in Europe take advantage of improved weather to increase their output.
Last year, however, unpredictable weather attributed to climate change upset Europe's horticultural production in key source markets such as the UK.
That meant prolonged period of demand for imports from countries like Kenya.In its latest monthly economic review, the Central Bank of Kenya said horticultural exports increased both by volume and value, capturing the change in fortunes for the local growers

CLIMATE CHANGE: not a priority say "Big Business"

Big business says addressing climate change 'rates very low on agenda'
Poll of 500 major firms reveals that only one in 10 regard global warming as a priority
Source: Independent (UK) by Tricia Holly Davis, Geoffrey Lean and Susie Mesure

Global warming ranks far down the concerns of the world's biggest companies, despite world leaders' hopes that they will pioneer solutions to the impending climate crisis, a startling survey will reveal this week.
Nearly nine in 10 of them do not rate it as a priority, says the study, which canvassed more than 500 big businesses in Britain, the US, Germany, Japan, India and China. Nearly twice as many see climate change as imposing costs on their business as those who believe it presents an opportunity to make money. And the report's publishers believe that big business will concentrate even less on climate change as the world economy deteriorates.
The survey demolishes George Bush's insistence that global warming is best addressed through voluntary measures undertaken by business – and does so at the most embarrassing juncture for the embattled President. For this week he is convening a meeting of the world's largest economies to try to persuade them to agree with him.
The meeting – in Hawaii on Wednesday and Thursday – follows the US's refusal to accept binding targets for reducing carbon dioxide emissions, the main cause of global warming, in international negotiations in Bali last month, and is seen as an attempt to develop a less rigorous approach to the crisis.
But the new report shows that even business does not support this, with four out of the five companies surveyed wanting governments to take a central role in tackling climate change.
The survey, carried out by the consulting firm Accenture, found that only 5 per cent of the companies questioned – and not one in China – regarded global warming as their top priority. And only 11 per cent put it in second or third place.
Overall it ranked eighth in business leaders' concerns, below increasing sales, reducing costs, developing new products and services, competing for talented staff, securing growth in emerging markets, innovation and technology. Although most are taking limited action to reduce their own emissions, almost one in five had done nothing.
Mark Spelman, global head of strategy at Accenture, told The Independent on Sunday at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week: "Climate change is not going to get nearly the same degree of attention here as it would have achieved if the economic outlook were brighter. Whenever there are underlying economic concerns, people will focus on them."
The report makes it clear that – in contradiction of the Bush administration's position – business is waiting for governments to take the lead. Nearly half of all the companies worldwide said that climate change was already a major issue for them and three in five expected it to be so within five years. But more than half confessed to be struggling to understand its implications.
Matthew Farrow, head of environment for the Confederation of British Industry, agreed that companies are having a hard time digesting climate change, but added: "The core financials need to be right, but business also needs to understand how climate change will affect the marketplace and realise those business opportunities."
Some 67 per cent of the businesses surveyed agreed they have a role to play in tackling global warming, but only four out of 10 felt in a position to fulfil it. In China only 14 per cent of those questioned felt in a strong position.
The report concludes: "Businesses clearly are seeking long-term signals about where and how to invest. They are reluctant to make big investments in climate change-related initiatives until the scope of future regulation becomes clearer".
This point has been made to US and European governments by businesses in their own countries. The European Corporate Leaders on Climate Change group, made up of the heads of major companies – which persuaded both Tony Blair and EU President José Manuel Barroso to make climate change a priority – has called for "a strong and clear policy framework" to enable cuts in emissions.
And the US Climate Action Partnership – which includes the heads of blue-chip companies such as General Electric, DuPont, and Alcoa – has urged Mr Bush to "establish a mandatory emissions pathway" leading to a reduction of up to 30 per cent in US emissions within 15 years.
Yesterday, Mark Kenber, policy director at the Climate Group, said: "These disappointing findings highlight the fact that carbon pricing mechanisms are not yet strong enough for businesses to incorporate climate change risks and opportunities into traditional business strategy".

'Creative Capitalism': Equity and sustainability as natural economic outcomes

Bill Gates made a nice speech at Davos - seen in full here - his call for "creative capitalism" challenges those big companies to show that they have the skills, capacity for doing the right thing [on a range of development issues] while also making money. He is in effect saying: "earn your bonuses/ wages ... show us how clever you are".

"If we just have the company that was doing the best in the sector matched by other companies, say all the drug companies were doing as well as GlaxoSmithkline thinking about the needs of the poor, if the banks were thinking micro-financing as well as the best, if the cell phone companies were thinking how the cell phone can even help the poor low cost financial transactions then we could see the condition of the poor improve dramatically,” Gates said.

BONO, GORE, SARKOZY pledge recognition of GLOBAL ECONOMIC EQUITY and CLIMATE CHANGE

Al, Bono and Nick have more in common than pretty wives and large second homes. They are all committed to solving global economic equity and climate change simultaneously. Apparently. At least, committed to chatting about it.

Source: CBS.
Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore and Irish rock singer Bono warned the World Economic Forum in Davos on Thursday that efforts to tackle climate change and global poverty were lagging, and not improving conditions as much as is needed.
Bono also stressed the interconnectedness of the issues of climate change and third world debt relief, as the environmental and economic consequences of global warming will only exacerbate efforts to reduce poverty, "and in fact undo all of the work that we've been trying to do over the years."
He noted that French President Nicolas Sarkozy told him earlier this month that he, too, would try to keep France's commitments to the poorest of the poor even though he had his own campaign commitments to improve the lives of the French people.
More here.

CLIMATE CHANGE and GLOBAL ECONOMIC EQUITY: Recognition by Gordon of developing country claims on ecological space

Joint Statement issued by PM Gordon Brown with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh includes reference to climate change issues. They jointly recognise the importance of long-term convergence of per capita emission rates equitably through the UNFCC provision and principles, in particular the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. In other words, weighting those issues of concern [in the climate change debate at least] to developing countries, in particular those relating to addressing adaptation, technology, and financing arrangements. In the field of bilateral cooperation on climate change, the two Sides expressed satisfaction over the announcement of a UK-India Agreement on the second phase of UK-India Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Study. This talk is encouraging, but the reliance on the untested carbon trading "silver bullet" is easily misinterpreted as a smokescreen for "we intend doing very little about equity issues".

Source: e-Gov Monitor

10. India and the UK recognise the need to find effective and practical solutions to address concerns regarding climate change and its implications for human kind. These would include mitigation and adaptation strategies in a manner that supports further economic and social development in particular of developing countries. Long-term convergence of per capita emission rates is an important and equitable principle that should be seriously considered in the context of international climate change negotiations. They expressed satisfaction over the successful outcome at Bali that reaffirmed the relevance of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), including its provision and principles, in particular the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. The process established under the Bali Road Map should aim for enhanced implementation of the UNFCCC and give due weight to issues of concern to developing countries, in particular those relating to addressing adaptation, technology, and financing arrangements. In the field of bilateral cooperation on climate change, the two Sides expressed satisfaction over the announcement of a UK-India Agreement on the second phase of UK-India Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Study.
The UK and India are convinced that development of the international carbon market is important for the future and wish to explore new approaches to market related investment that offer the potential to drive technology transfer. The two Sides shall work towards the success of the second Phase of a project aimed at identifying the barriers to low carbon technology transfer. They will also collaborate on a project piloting implementation of programmatic CDM in India this year to jointly explore the potential of this to facilitate up-scaling of carbon market investment in accordance with India’s future development priorities. Both sides recognised the importance of Research and Development collaboration on low carbon energy technologies and welcomed the broadening dialogue between the two countries on clean coal technologies and other power generation technologies.

EU, CLIMATE CHANGE and ECONOMIC EQUITY: Can equity be maintained through the EU's latest plan?

Climate change proposals for sweeping emissions targets/ cuts by the EU announced today indicate first this issue is being taken seriously and that the EU wishes to be a world leader in this [not just the UK]. Yet, the taxes proposed are on many basic items - such as electricity, heating, etc - products that the poor [and elderly] consume as a higher proportion of their disposable income. When the focus was on the illogical food miles issue, the proposed taxes on air freight would have disproportionately hit higher-value/ luxury products such as fresh produce. While illogical, inefficient and socially costly to developing countries, equity issues in consumer countries were not a consideration. Furthermore, what of small and medium enterprises in the EU - scraping by currently, facing higher energy costs anyway. Selling out and becoming a shelf-stacker in Lidl becomes a more viable option than struggling on with the family business. Are we continuing to pursue those easier targets at the expense of economic equity [nationally and internationally] and ignoring the potential win-wins from appropriate taxing of industry, incentives for innovation? Furthermore, what if predictions about climate change's sequencing/ timing and ferocity are overstated; what cost to our economies from such "eyes wide shut" knee-jerk reactions from Brussels?

Source: Deutsche Welle

The European Commission will on Wednesday, Jan. 23, unveil sweeping plans to fight global warming, under heavy fire from industry and many EU member countries over the possible costs of the scheme.
Consumers too will not escape the costs, which Commission chief Jose Manuel Barroso said would amount to a total of around 60 billion euros ($86.6 billion) a year -- 0.5 percent of gross domestic product. Commission officials, however, have said the bill might be double that.
The package is an attempt by the EU executive to translate into action the aim of EU leaders, announced last March, to cut emissions of the gases that cause climate change by 20 percent by 2020, compared to 1990 levels.
The measures, including a new look at state aid for environment projects, will set the 27 nations specific targets for renewable energy use, to ensure that 20 percent of the bloc's energy in 2020 comes from these forms.
he commission has come under attack from virtually all sides, including in-house, even before the plans are examined by EU countries and the European Parliament, a process Brussels hopes to conclude by the end of the year.
"These proposals are going to raise electricity prices for households and enterprises," said EU Commission Vice-President Günter Verheugen from Germany. "This has to be openly said to citizens."
Carbon dioxide emissions from industry totaled more than two billion tons in 2005, around half of the greenhouse gases produced in the EU. Much of the other half comes from transport and agriculture.
Under the EU's emissions trading scheme, set to expire in 2012, nearly 12,000 energy-intensive plants can buy or sell permits to emit carbon dioxide.
In future such permits, currently provided free, would be managed by member states and gradually increase in price. The system would also be extended to other sectors like aviation, petrochemicals, ammonia and aluminum.
Some companies have complained they could be forced to move abroad, taking jobs with them, and according to Green MEP Claude Termes, major steelmakers were knocking on the Commission's door on Monday.
The threat to employment is a powerful argument, but Barroso has warned that the energy and climate status quo is unacceptable.
"Taking action is not cost free," he said Monday. The price of inaction "could even approach 20 percent of GDP. The longer we delay, the higher the costs."
EU countries are concerned about the burden they will have to assume on renewable energy.
Around 8.5 percent of the bloc's energy comes from renewable forms, like biomass, wind and solar power, but future load sharing will be based on GDP; simply put, on a nation's wealth.
This has particularly angered Sweden, which already derives around 40 percent of its energy from renewable sources, but could, according to Green party calculations be asked to raise that to 52.7 percent.
Stockholm argues that it is being punished, rather than rewarded, for the eco-friendly efforts it has already made.
In Germany, 18 percent of energy would have to come from renewable resources, according to the proposal, doubling the current percentage.

CLIMATE CHANGE and ECOLOGICAL SPACE: The rich are damaging the poor!

UCLA have provided evidence of another universally accepted truth - that the rich have larger eco-feet. Is this more numbers or re-packaged numbers to confuse the consumer and baffle the policy-makers? Historically, there is strong evidence that the richer countries have "environmentally damaged" other [usually poorer] countries through their actions. Here, some eco-economists quantify this. Evidence on CC is that "Greenhouse emissions from low-income countries have imposed $740 billion of damage on rich countries, while in return rich countries have imposed $2.3 trillion of damage." It strikes me as odd that a cost-benefit study looks only at costs. The policy action from such figures is unclear [OK, I should have google-d the original paper and read it]. Is the net damage of $3 trillion efficient? Expect more silo-ed studies like this putting numbers to CC. Probably a [life]raft of Willingness to Pay studies aswell. It all points to a empty "so what?". Or does it, my willingness to be proved wrong, remains high. If there is a transfer of funds as hoped for: "This is an accounting tool that allows you to say how much the high-income world owes the low-income world for the environmental externalities we impose on them,"], then let's hope it doesnt get spent on Mercedes and Gucci ...

Source: Guardian (UK)

The environmental damage caused to developing nations by the world's richest countries amounts to more than the entire third world debt of $1.8 trillion, according to the first systematic global analysis of the ecological damage imposed by rich countries.
Using data from the World Bank and the UN's Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, the researchers examined so-called "environmental externalities" or costs that are not included in the prices paid for goods but which cover ecological damage linked to their consumption. They focused on six areas: greenhouse gas emissions, ozone layer depletion, agriculture, deforestation, overfishing and converting mangrove swamps into shrimp farms.
Greenhouse emissions from low-income countries have imposed $740 billion of damage on rich countries, while in return rich countries have imposed $2.3 trillion of damage. This damage includes, for example, flooding from more severe storms as a result of climate change.
Likewise, CFC emissions from rich countries have inflicted between $25 billion and £57 billion of damage to the poorest countries. Increased ultraviolet levels from the ozone hole have led to higher healthcare costs from skin cancer and eye problems. The converse figure is between $0.58 and $1.3 billion.
"We know already that climate change is a huge injustice inflicted on the poor," said Dr Neil Adger at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research in Norwich, who was not involved in the research, "This paper is actually the first systematic quantification to produce a map of that ecological debt. Not only for climate change but also for these other areas."
"This is an accounting tool that allows you to say how much the high-income world owes the low-income world for the environmental externalities we impose on them," he said.
More here.

CLIMATE CHANGE, CARBON TRADING and ASIA: first futures trading for Asia in Mumbai

India's Multi Commodity Exchange opens Asia's first-ever commodity exchange to offer trades in carbon credits - among the select few including Chicago Climate Exchange and the European Climate Exchange. Carbon credits are generated by enterprises in the developing world by using cleaner technologies and saving on energy consumption. This consequently reduces their greenhouse gas emissions. For each reduced tonne of carbon dioxide emission, an organisation receives a carbon emission certificate, which it can sell, either immediately or through a futures market, just like any other commodity. Only time can tell if we are witnessing a "race to the top" or "tunnelling to the bottom", national gains and sub-national poverty or win-wins??

Source: Business Standard Reporter

Multi Commodity Exchange (MCX), the country’s largest commodity exchange, today launched futures trading in carbon credits - one of the fastest emerging intangible commodities in developing countries including India.The trading unit of carbon credits is fixed at 200 tonne. Today, five annual contracts are available on the platform with respective expiries on 15 December 2008, Dec 2009, Dec 2010, Dec 2011 and Dec 2012.The tick size has been fixed at Re 0.50 per tonne while the exchange has decided to facilitate delivery on the expiry of the respective contracts.The initiative makes it Asia's first-ever commodity exchange and among the select few along with the Chicago Climate Exchange and the European Climate Exchange to offer trades in carbon credits."The launch of carbon credits is significant as more and more countries are adhering to global carbon emission norms," said Joseph Massey, deputy managing director, MCX.Carbon credits are generated by enterprises in the developing world by using cleaner technologies and saving on energy consumption. This consequently reduces their greenhouse gas emissions. For each reduced tonne of carbon dioxide emission, an organisation receives a carbon emission certificate, which it can sell, either immediately or through a futures market, just like any other commodity. Carbon trading is carried out under an UN-mandated international convention on climate change.Under the Kyoto Protocol, carbon credits, or carbon emission reduction certificates, are issued by the executive board of Clean Development Mechanism - the highest international body to register projects and issue credits.

Cameroon: Climate Change Will Have Dreadful Consequences - Experts

Journalists are being trained to keep a keen eye on the potential shocks and trends that climate change will put in motion that can scupper economic growth options for Cameroon.
Source: The Post (Buea) by Kini Nsom & Ernest Sumelong

Climate change may soon have a toll on Cameroon's agriculture, economy and health, experts have revealed.
They raised the concern on Monday, January 14, during a training course on reporting climate change, organised by the British High Commission in Yaounde."Our activities - felling trees, burning bushes and emitting gases into the atmosphere - have direct consequences on our environment. We must regulate them to prevent impending consequences of climate change," Dr. Gabriel Tchatat, one of the facilitators told The Post.
Tchatat said global warming, which is an indicator of climate change, will cause the disappearance of watersheds, savannah and lakes like the Lake Chad watershed and so on.
According to him, demography, agriculture, industries, urbanisation, deforestation etc., cause climate change.
Other facilitators - Drs. Joseph Amougou, Jacob Tche and Ernest Moloua - corroborated Tchatat; adding that there can hardly be economic development in Cameroon without considering climate change.
"Everybody is concerned about this; there would be loss of biodiversity, fertile lands and increase in pests. "Agriculture contributes 40 percent of the Gross Domestic Product, GDP, and that is really important for our economy," Dr. Moloua posited.
"Without integrating climate change in every project, there can be no development," Amougou argued.The researchers cited residents of Douala and the northern provinces of Cameroon who are already suffering from excessive heat and diseases.
Climate change became a major concern when President Paul Biya addressed the UN General Assembly in Geneva in November 2007. He announced the creation of the Climate Change Observatory, even though it is yet to go operational.
However, the researchers faulted government for failing to make concrete efforts in spite of its pledge to fight climate change. They also said government has failed to communicate and get the population involved. Administrative authorities at the training admitted that communication is important if the population must understand and participate in the fight.
Thus, the facilitators maintained that journalists must, through environmental reports, educate the population on what role they can and should play in fighting climate change.
Meanwhile, the course instructor Janet Barrie, former BBC news presenter, urged reporters to write stories that will cause people to act.

CLIMATE CHANGE and The Famous SHORT ECONOMIST: Stern resources online

Rabett Run has a long list of resources online about Stern Review including from the CC Economist himself, supplementary material, critiques from Nordhaus, Varian, Stiglitz, etc. Well worth a browse ... well that's my weekend reading taken care of! [btw, couldnt find a picture online of Stern standing next to anyone for perspective ... so u will have to take my word for it!]

CLIMATE CHANGE, BUSINESS AND EQUITY: Its all about the money ...

Source: ClimateCorp.com - “Bali Special Report – was it good for business?” By Zara Maung

The logistical challenge of tackling climate change was displayed perfectly at the UN climate conference in Bali, Indonesia, by the constant stream of taxis queuing up to ferry conference attendees from one five star hotel in Nusa Dua to another. A modest free bike hire service did exist for the event but unfortunately bike lanes didn’t.
The Bali bicycle analogy also sums up the businesses’ approach at the post-Kyoto political negotiations: “We can run the low carbon economy” was the message to governments, “but you need to build the infrastructure to make it work”.

The balance sheet
Although businesses were not included in the negotiations at Bali, business and investors organisations such as the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and International Emissions Trading Association (IETA) had a strong presence at the conference side events. The general attitude from companies towards the political process at Bali was a mixture of idealist hope for a global plan on combating climate change, along with increasing frustration that the politicisation of climate change was in fact holding back meaningful progress.
The main factors holding businesses back from investing in low carbon solutions are price, price and more price. The price of developing new technologies is too high, the price of carbon is too unstable, the prices consumers are willing to pay for low carbon goods is not high enough – all were recurring comments from businesses throughout the conference.
So what did they get in return for their pleas for better market conditions? Well, Yvo de Boer, general secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), came to the press on week one of the conference with a very clear view of what needed to be done to drive private low carbon investment. Quoting figures from the UNFCCC report on investment and financial flows, which was published shortly before the talks, he noted how much global investment and financial flows relied on private sector involvement - 86 per cent of it to be precise.
He acknowledged that businesses would need policy certainty, incentives to invest in new technologies and that international and public capital would need to be channelled towards climate friendly and climate proof investments. “The problem is that governments don’t want to pay for all of this” he told the press frankly.
The frustration of knowing what needed to be done set against all the political stalling that occurred (alongside serious sleep deprivation) would have driven any sane man to tears by the end of the talks. Many of the developing countries, who could only afford to send two or three delegates to the conference compared to the large team from the US, simply had to drop out of the talks at times due to sheer exhaustion, which might in part explain the raw deal they ended up with on adaptation funding. The meagre fund is to contain money collected from a 2 per cent adaptation levy on Kyoto Clean Development Mechanism projects, the emissions abatement projects in the developing world that fuel the carbon markets with tradable credits.
Being an outsider, following the last few days of negotiations was a little like waiting at the hospital bed of a comatosed patient. There was nothing much going on but you still hung on day and night waiting for some signs of life. Luckily Al Gore’s refreshing speech provided welcome respite and the waiting paid off. At the end of the talks we were proudly presented with a somewhat patchy but promising Post-2012 road map. The road map was so called because of its express purpose to lead countries towards a post-2012 agreement in Copenhagen at the end of 2009.

Policy certainty
After 13 consecutive years of UNFCCC conferences and 10 years of Kyoto, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the best these global powwows on climate change can give us is an indication of what might happen policy wise on the national scale. Even the Kyoto Protocol, as low as its 5 per cent emissions reductions targets for 2012 were, could not prevent Japan, Canada and a host of European countries from emitting over their limits.
Accordig to media reports at the end of 2007, Japan, Italy and Spain face payments of as much as $33 billion in carbon credits combined for failing to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions as promised under the Kyoto treaty. Other analogies at the national level include the bi-lateral deals on technology transfer being brokered between the US and Asia.
Nevertheless, some measures agreed under the Bali road map had good prospects. Promises by developing countries to measure and cut their emissions suggested that we can expect a stronger focus on renewables and energy efficiency policies in the big emitter nations such as China and India.
The much anticipated REDD policy, a handy acronym for “Reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries” also came into swing. Deemed of high importance because deforestation is estimated to account for 20 per cent of global emissions, countries agreed to work on methods to preserve tropical forests, the type of forest best suited to absorbing carbon.
Providing disputes over indigenous peoples’ rights are peaceably settled, it seems the post 2012 future for forests may be based on selling avoided deforestation credits, with governments being issued the credits by a UN authoritative body for preserving their trees. Some impoverished forested states, such as Indonesia’s West Papua and Aceh are taking the hint and trying to get in on the act early. They plan to seize on the new confidence in forestry credits to sell them on the voluntary markets as soon as possible.
Developing countries lost out at the talks. Promises by developed countries to transfer technology to developing nations (which have lingered unfulfilled since the start of Kyoto) continue to be vague. China did however manage to bully the European Union and US on the last day of the talks into agreeing to measure and report on their contributions to technology transfer.
Downright negative was the agreement to set up an inadequate adaptation fund for developing countries. The fund will also be unpredictable, with the amount raised from the CDM levy estimated at somewhere between $80-300 million by 2012. This is hardly a drop in the ocean for places like Bangladesh, which already needs emergency flood prevention and management measures costing billions of dollars.
Calls from the finance world and development NGOs, before the talks, to simplify the Clean Development Mechanism’s overly bureaucratic registration process seemed to go unheeded. The problem of finding buyers for existing CDM carbon credits was tackled via the launch of a (somewhat bizarre) website called www.cdmbazaar.com, the CDM’s own matchmaking website, where buyers and sellers of carbon credits are able to make contact.

Technology hurdles
Vague promises from rich countries to transfer clean tech to poor ones tend to fall down on two counts: firstly private companies, not countries, own much of the technology in the first place; secondly developed countries are not putting enough money into clean tech investment in their own countries, let alone being in a position to transfer the technology. Sun Guoshun, a Chinese delegate at the Bali conference explained that China desperately needed clean coal technology from America. Cedric Philibert from the International Energy Agency pointed out, however, that these technologies, including Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) technology and carbon capture and storage were yet to reach the commercial stage.
The Bali talks brought countries one step closer to accepting carbon capture and storage in geological formations for use in CDM projects. More is to be decided on this front at the 2008 conference in Poznan, Poland. The notion that fossil fuels could continue to be used “in a clean way” was a strong concept at Bali but the challenge remains to prove that the technology works and that high costs of CO2 storage can be drastically reduced.
The riddle of bringing clean technologies to the commercial stage is one that governments and companies alike are failing to solve. Clean tech solutions already exist in many cases but commercial take up is low. Examples include the revolutionising low cost, low carbon French invention, the MDI air car, which runs on compressed air. The car has been ready for years but big manufacturers have not yet taken the bait (save India’s Tata Motors, which had promised to produce 8000 air cars this year). Not surprisingly, the rapidly developing markets in India and China are finding opportunities in the area of clean tech. Ten years on, they might have turned the issue of technology transfer completely on its head.

Nasty leakage
It would be impossible to sum up the global political process on climate change without mentioning “leakage”. It doesn’t sound very pleasant and indeed to most Kyoto signatories it is not. From the time developed countries started to address their responsibilities to tackle climate change at Kyoto in 1997, factories that have been leaving developed countries in droves, looking for cheaper manufacturing processes in developing countries.
Leakage refers to the emissions that have leaked out of one country into another when a factory has relocated. A paper released by Chinese academics in 2007 relating 25 per cent of China’s greenhouse gas emissions directly to US and European supply chains. China, for example, provides the leading global supply of steel, which requires a dirty, high carbon manufacturing process part of which was transferred from Europe in the 1990s.
Unfortunately the term used by developed countries for leakage until now has been “emissions reductions” - emissions reductions that count towards Kyoto targets.
“Kyoto signatories have to be responsible for the emissions of factories that have moved to other countries since the Kyoto agreement”, argued Kevin Conrad, one of the more outspoken delegates for Papua New Guinea at Bali (who famously told the US to “get out of the way”).
The leakage debate is picking up steam as developing countries are being pressured into making their own emissions reductions, and is sure to be tackled in more depth in coming talks, though the outcome is entirely uncertain. Companies hoping to ‘offshore’ their emissions in response to the introduction of cap and trade schemes may want to take note however.
Already a form of environmental protectionism is being hinted at in the EU, with suggestions of a carbon tariff on dirty imports. These measures are popular with the diminishing German steel industry, whose production processes are three times less carbon intensive than China’s.

Going it alone

Despite numerous complications in the move towards the elusive low carbon economy, forward thinking companies were keen to point out at Bali that they had made the most of the opportunities so far. Most moves were made in the carbon markets, which are set to take off globally.
The long term price of carbon was subject to much speculation at Bali. Whilst some banks have taken pains to predict accurate price for carbon on the European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS), other investors, such as Fortis bank predict the price of carbon could be anywhere between zero and 100 Euros over the coming phases of the scheme.
Karen Degouve from the European Carbon Fund, a CDM project investor, concurred with Fortis at an IETA event, saying, “Prices could go anywhere from zero to the roof”.
Cmpanies seemed to agree that we would soon see a global roll out of mandatory carbon markets. “We’re going to see multiple markets although a unique carbon price might not happen for another 10 years” said Degouve.
This could include Japan, Canada, Australia, US – all of which have started voluntary carbon markets.
Mile Bess from Camco International, a big CDM project developer, predicted that within two to three years “the biggest game in town” would no longer be the EU ETS. Bess said the EU scheme was “a valuable model”, although he expected a mandatory US market to start to take over, acting as a driver for carbon markets globally.
“What we need to see is what happens post-tightening”, he said, referring to the reduction in emissions allowances given to EU nations under each four-year phase of the ETS. Phase I of the ETS collapsed after emissions allowances were too generous, and the price of carbon dropped to around 1 cent, so all eyes are now on phase II, which started in January 2008, and the time of writing stood at €22 per tonne of CO2.
Fabian Gaioli, from Morgan Stanley’s MGM International, another CDM project developer, warned that carbon credits under the CDM may become more expensive, as the highly profitable ‘low hanging fruit’ HFCs reduction projects start to dry up. HFCs are very potent greenhouse gases - around 1300 times more potent than CO2. Projects may move towards renewable energy and energy efficiency, he said, but will require more capital to set up and offer less returns.

Fate of the CDM
The Australian renewables company Pacific Hydro has been making the most out of the Kyoto Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), having directed much of its new investment $ 0.5 billion so far, into developing countries, such as Chile, where the company’s wind and hydro projects have earned money from carbon credits. However, the future of the CDM is left hanging in the balance from 2012 onwards, when the first phase of Kyoto ends. According to JP Morgan’s Odin Knudson, who spoke at an Asian Development Bank side event, companies were being dissuaded from getting involved in setting up CDM projects every year the uncertainty continued.
Pacific Hydro chief executive Andrew Richards expressed the same sentiments, complaining at a WBCSD event about the lack long term planning on the international level. “Nothing exists beyond 2012 except fairly long term targets” he explained, referring to the faraway target of a 50 per cent cut in the global emissions of 2000 by 2050, which was set by scientists at the IPCC.

Business technology
Technology transfer was a hot debated topic amongst businesses at Bali. David Hone, climate change manager at the energy company Shell, stood up at the WBCSD event to explain all the difficulties of getting clean coal technology to the market. He compared our relatively primitive coal technology to the fast moving electronics industry pointing out the fundamental difference between them. Without consumers willing to pay the extra for their energy, as they would for the latest electrical gadget, the development of the product could not be funded.
Richards meanwhile bashed the “politicisation of technology”, arguing that clean coal was “not a cure all” solution.
Jonathon Lash, head of the World Resources Institute attempted to convince us that the world would see an “explosion of low carbon technologies” over the next ten years, driven by a price on carbon, which he believed would be a steady $25 a ton in the US within five years. Once a green technology booms in one country, said Lash, it will spill over national boundaries regardless of politics, driven by consumer demand. He used the example of GE’s Ecoimagination energy efficient products, which he said cost $100 million to market but in the long run added to GE’s value by 10 cents a share. Proving his point that technology has no boundaries, 65 per cent of ecoimagination sales were outside of the US.

Domestic solutions
Although it has its faults, the strength of international meetings such as Bali is that they allow fresh ideas and sometimes painful truths to be unearthed about how countries deal with climate change. Despite the political charades, it is the ripple effect of positive agreements on the international level within nations, businesses and consumers that matters. The global talks will continue, but meanwhile the real action on climate change will happen at home

Climate Change and Poverty Top Google's Giving Priorities

Good to see Google.org is listening to someone - maybe even Tall Economist [!]. Google will be focusing on Climate change and poverty - let's hope it will marry these two rather than discretely focus and report on each ...

Source: The Chronicle of Philanthropy
Tackling climate change, emerging health threats, and poverty in developing countries will top Google.org’s philanthropic agenda
After more than a year of research and planning, the charitable arm of the Mountain View, Calif., search-engine company announced today the focus for its efforts over the next five to 10 years:
To support efforts that make plug-in hybrid electric vehicles commercially available. Such cars are essentially hybrids with larger batteries that can be recharged from a standard outlet, which further reduces the amount of gas needed to run them.
To support the development of renewable energy sources that can be produced on a large scale and at a lower cost than conventional energy sources, such as coal.
To support efforts to make it easier for small and medium-size businesses in developing countries to gain access to the capital and expertise they need to grow and create more jobs.
To support projects that improve the flow of information related to public services, such as education, health, water, and sanitation, in developing countries. This program, known as the Inform and Empower Initiative, will focus on India and East Africa at the start.
To support efforts to identify emerging health and environmental threats, such as infectious diseases or drought, and take steps to mitigate their impact and prevent them from becoming local, regional, or global crises.
‘Best Solutions’
Google’s decision to operate its philanthropic arm largely as a for-profit entity gives it the ability to make both grants to nonprofit organizations and investments in for-profit companies involved in solving social problems. To date, Google.org’s giving and investments total $75.4-million.
In the program to promote plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, for example, Google.org has awarded $1-million in grants to nonprofit organizations, such as CalCars and Plug-In America, that raise public awareness about the cars. But it also has issued a call for proposals for $10-million in investments.
“We want to be open if the best solution is in the private sector or if the best solution to a given problem is to invest in a for-profit company,” says Jacquelline Fuller, head of advocacy and communications at Google.org.
Google.org has already made investments of $10-million each in eSolar, a company in Pasadena, Calif., that builds solar power plants, and Makani Power, an Alameda, Calif., wind-energy company.
Operating as part of the company, rather than as a corporate foundation, also gives Google.org greater latitude in lobbying and advocacy, something Ms. Fuller expects the organization will take greater advantage of now that it has decided its top priorities.
“Advocacy really is a tool that can be used to advance an agenda, but you first have to get very clear about what you’re trying to do,” she says.
Early ‘Flag’
Google didn’t always plan to take a hybrid approach to its philanthropy. Early on, the company set up the Google Foundation, which still exists today, with an endowment of $90-million.
One of the first grants that the foundation wanted to make was to the One Laptop Per Child Foundation, in Cambridge, Mass. The organization’s mission was close enough to Google’s business that foundation officials worried the grant could be construed as aiding the company.
“That was a flag early on” for the Google executives leading the company’s philanthropic efforts, says Ms. Fuller.
“They began asking questions like, ‘What really are the pros and cons of doing this so separate as a 501c(3)?’ and realized that it was preferable for Google — not for everyone, but for Google — to hold the majority of its resources outside of a foundation structure,” she says.
In 2004, before Google went public, the company’s founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, wrote a letter that said they wanted to use 1 percent of the company’s equity and 1 percent of profits to support philanthropic work, a total that Ms. Fuller says currently comes to almost $2-billion.
But while Google.org relishes the freedom its largely for-profit status affords, the organization does also make grants to charities. In fact, one of its first projects was to create a new nonprofit organization: Innovative Support to Emergencies, Diseases and Disasters, or Instedd.
The new organization will seek to improve the early detection of global health threats and humanitarian crises, as well as the process of preparing for and responding to them, by working with governments, health and relief organizations, and scientists to develop software and other technology tools to improve the sharing of information and collaboration. In addition to a $5-million grant from Google.org, the organization has also received financial support from the Rockefeller Foundation and contributions from several philanthropists.
Instedd’s first project will be to work with 20 partners on efforts to identify emerging infectious diseases and improve the ability to respond to them in Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam, and Yunnan Province in southern China.
“We are so connected as a global population now with travel and trade,” says Eric Rasmussen, the new organization’s chief executive officer. Before joining Instedd in October, Dr. Rasmussen served as chairman of the department of medicine at the Naval Hospital Bremerton, near Seattle. “If we do not spot [health] events transpiring early enough, it doesn’t take much for them to escape.”
Instedd’s software engineers will first look at existing technologies to see how they can be adapted for disease tracking and humanitarian response, only developing new software when other options can’t be found. Engineers have already built several tools using technologies from Microsoft, Google, Facebook, and Twitter.
Other large grants include a $3-million award to TechnoServe for its efforts to support businesses, spur job creation, and strengthen antipoverty programs in Africa; $2.5-million to the Global Health and Security Initiative, which tracks international biological threats; and $2-million to Prath am, in Mumbai, to study India’s educational system.
Staff of 40
Google.org currently has 40 employees, and plans to add a few more staff members now that its giving and investment priorities have been established.
Employees have come from various backgrounds, and include an epidemiologist, a former vice president at Goldman Sachs, and a former assistant secretary of energy.
Google.org has already seen the value of building a team comprising people with different training and backgrounds, says Ms. Fuller.
“There was a lot of tears and angst to go from a white sheet of paper down to five initiatives,” she says. “It was really good as we were in the room trying to narrow it down to have people with these different perspectives talking about how they thought we could best contribute.”
Google.org hopes that it will be able to encourage other corporations to both increase their giving and to think about it more creatively.
But Ms. Fuller says that the organization is uncomfortable with the excitement Google’s entry into philanthropy has caused.
“We don’t feel like we are sprinting on the scene with the answers,” she says. “We’ve got a lot to learn from others. So we really disagree with the slant that some people are trying to take, that this is new or different or better. It’s just that this is Google’s way of doing things.”

CLIIMATE CHANGE AND GLOBAL ECONOMIC EQUITY: Zoellick/ World Bank's take; CC is a core development and economic challenge

Developing nations hit hardest, least able to adapt. Zoellick report the World Bank will help by integrating climate change adaptation and mitigation into core development work, providing innovative and below-market rate financing, markets, technology and research. The TallEconomist salutes this approach, but asks if simply assuming climate change as a development risk is enough? I am keen to see the WB find innovative ways of leveraging the carbon credit that developing countires have - making their ecological space work for them. Can the WB give voice to these concerns at an international level? Can the WB be the developing nations' champion and not just its donor? Skeptically, I see nothing here that diverges from core World Bank work - I hope the reality of operationalising this programme in developing countries will yield the success the WB so sorely needs and doesnt backtrack on the promise the countries so heartily need.

Source: NYT Blogs, map: Distribution of Climate Change Risks, World Bank, October 2007, IDA and Climate Change: Making Climate Action Work for Development, mimeo.





Q. Citizens in developing countries are most vulnerable to the impacts of climate changes now in progress on a global scale. The changes in the weather patterns, from droughts to flooding, will affect the poorest in those countries. How is the World Bank dealing with the phenomenon of unprecedented climate change in its poverty reduction strategy, if at all?
Rita ChangHong Kong


A. Rita, you are correct. As you can see in the attached map, poor countries are much more likely to be affected by droughts, poor crop yields, floods, hurricanes and wind storms – likely consequences of climate change. Since 2000, poor countries have experienced three times more floods and twice as many wind storms than they did 20 years ago. And the poor people in these countries – people who live on less than $2 a day –are the most affected and least able to adjust. Climate change is not only an immense environmental threat; it is a core development and economic challenge.
This is why at the recent Bali conference on climate change, I outlined how the World Bank Group can support developing countries as they combine growth and development with protection of the environment.
How can the World Bank Group help?
• First, by integrating climate change adaptation and mitigation into core development work. Climate change policies cannot be the frosting on the cake of development. They must be baked into the recipe of growth and social development. We can help countries incorporate climate change and low-carbon plans into agriculture and land use policies, urban development strategies, water policies, transport plans and so forth.
• Second, we can help by providing innovative and below-market rate financing to promote investments both in low-carbon and adaptation projects. We already do this through the Global Environment Facility and Carbon Finance. We will do more thanks to donor governments contributing record sums to the latest replenishment of the International Development Association (IDA), the World Bank’s fund for the poorest countries. We will also work with donors to develop new funding innovations.
• Third, we will pioneer and advance new market and trading mechanisms, such as for carbon trading.
• Fourth, recognizing the vital importance of new technologies that can generate energy while limiting the impact on climate, we are working with partners on new financing and incentives schemes to facilitate technology deployment and transfer to developing countries. Some will involve alternative energy. But given the high use of coal in developing countries, it would help enormously if we could help develop and disseminate, for example, carbon sequestration technologies.
• Fifth, the sums involved are too large to handle with public funds, so we need to encourage policy changes to help create an enabling environment to tap resources from the private sector. IFC, the private sector arm of the World Bank Group, can help spur these investments.
• Sixth, we will work with developing countries to support policy research on climate change and development to help share information and tools for analyzing the impacts and developing cost-effective strategies. We are now working with six large countries on customized assessments of pathways to low-carbon growth.
• Finally, if we are able to advance these six activities, we should have the experience and knowledge to play a supportive role to the UN and the negotiating partners as they develop a new climate change agreement.
Let me give you a concrete example of how we are helping negotiators develop a post-Kyoto Protocol.
Deforestation and change in land use accounts for about 20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, and over a third of emissions from developing countries. In many developing countries, deforestation and forest degradation account for a majority of the carbon emissions. However, the Kyoto Protocol does not include a mechanism for rewarding reduced emissions from deforestation and degradation in developing countries: It rewards countries for planting trees, but does not encourage them to keep trees standing. So with the support of 10 donors, the World Bank has launched a Carbon Forest Partnership Facility. It will pilot incentives to communities for reducing emissions from deforestation while improving their livelihoods and safeguarding indigenous peoples. By highlighting this concept and showing a way to address it financially, the World Bank helped advance its inclusion in the framework that was agreed among negotiators at the Bali Conference.
I cannot end this entry without mentioning that the World Bank Group is carbon-neutral!

KENYA's poor farmers hard hit by political unrest

Mounting evidence that Kenyan political situation is harming the country's exports and that this isplacing costs squarely on the small-scale farmers involved with the export horticulture trade. Most of these farmers are GLOBALGAP certified - but the realy question is - will this certification count for anything in the market after political storms have stilled?

Source: The Nation (Nairobi)
Horticultural farmers in Murang'a North and South Districts have lost millions of shillings since the post-election unrest begun.
Most affected are French beans growers who have depended on the crop as the sole source of income for years.
Thousands of tonnes have gone to waste due to lack of markets, while middle men take advantage of the situation to give the farmers a raw deal.
Farmers have to contend with the situation and watch helplessly as their produce goes to waste, due to lack of storage facilities and lack of access to markets.
The area has about 23 French beans buying centres.
Before the skirmishes, each of the centres was handling an average of 1,200 kilogrammes of the produce daily.
"We invested heavily, hoping to catch good markets in January and February that would help us raise school fees for our children and meet other requirements," said Ms Agnes Wanjira.
Like many other farmers in the upper side of Murang'a North District, she diversified from coffee to French beans' farming, due to better and faster returns.
Farmers say major buyers have not bought the produce since the day of elections. Though the farmers would have wished to sell the beans to brokers at throw away prices, the middlemen traders could not cope with the high supplies and only bought a little.
"Most of these traders sell in the normal local markets and could not buy in bulky. They offered as little as Sh10 per kilogram compared to major buyers like Frigoken Company that paid Sh30 per kilo of the beans," said Ms Wanjira from Mugoiri.
The beans require frequent picking to maximise production and turn into waste if not harvested in time. After picking, they need to be stored in a freezer, something the farmers do not have.
"Buyers tell us they would be taking a risk in buying the beans since they are not guaranteed of delivering the purchases to their stores and other destinations," Mr Irungu said

CLIMATE CHANGE and WHALES: Greenpeace hypocrisy? or a globally sustainable trade-off?

Greenpeace are claiming success after chasing Japanese whalers from the seas around Antarctica. That is, they have successfully chased away internationally sanctioned activities of one of the least efficient fishery nations in the world. And made it even less efficient. What is the carbon cost of stopping the whale hunt? Why does Greenpeace feel it is fine to expend tonnes of carbon stopping legal whale hunts but also lambast developing world farmers for flying their produce to supermarkets? Dont forget the fleet they are chasing is becoming more inefficient by the day and will be going at high speeds, burning more and more fossil fuel. AND dont forget the value of the whale meat is increasing as the story is splashed across the press.

Maybe they are Economists and have done a calculation that shows each whale saved/ life extended is worth XX tonnes of carbon. My question is "Dear Mrs Greenpeace, is one whale life worth more or less than one African farmer?". What do you think the answer will be? Comments in civil tongue this time please ...

Source: www.chinaview.cn -- "Greenpeace: Japanese whalers chased from Antacrtica"
BEIJING, Jan. 14 (Xinhuanet) -- Greenpeace activists claimed Sunday they had chased Japanese whaling ships Nisshin Maru and Yushin Maru through dense fog and over hundreds of miles, driving them out of the whaling grounds off Antarctica.
"We came here to stop the fleet from whaling and we have done that. Now they are out of the hunting grounds they should stay out," said Greenpeace Japan campaigner Sakyo Noda.
But Greenpeace added that it expects the ships to refuel and offload whale meat onto a tanker outside the whale grounds, raising the possibility that the ships might try to return.
Greenpeace's ship Esperanza confronted the Japanese whalers in the Antarctic Ocean early Saturday after a 10-day search, and the hunting ships immediately steamed off with the activists in pursuit, the environmentalists said in a statement.
They warned they would take non-violent action to try to stop the ships from killing whales — a promise that in the past has led to activists in speed boats trying to put themselves between whales and Japanese harpoons, and once to a collision of ships.
A spokesman for Japan's whale hunt called Greenpeace's actions illegal and demanded it stop its disruptive actions.
"Greenpeace actions are illegal under international law (and) it's time the public stopped treating Greenpeace as heroes," Glenn Inwood, spokesman for the Institute of Cetacean Research, in Tokyo, Japan, said Monday. "It's time the public saw this fringe group for what they really are: environmental imperialists who are trying to dictate their morals to the world."
Japan dispatched its whaling fleet to the icy water of Antarctica in November to kill about 1,000 whales under a program that Tokyo says is for scientific purposes, but which anti-whaling nations and activists scoff at as a front for commercial whaling.

CLIMATE CHANGE AND EQUITY: Can Crops Be Climate-Proofed?

Source: SciDev.Net (London) and AllAfrica
Climate change threatens food crops across the world. Now scientists are re-focusing their efforts on crop resilience, rather than yields.
Among the most worrying aspects of climate change is its effects on the world's food supply. The worst-case scenario is stark: Africa's Sahel region will produce fewer cereals, rice cultivation in Asia will be under threat, there will be fewer vegetables -- with potatoes and beans potentially wiped out -- and livestock and fisheries will be severely stressed.
Climate change is making crop scientists review their research agenda. Until now, their main focus was on improving yields. But with successive International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports warning that increased droughts and floods will shift crop systems, 'climate-proofing' of crops has become crucial. The Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) institutes are now investigating how to make crops' more resilient to environment stresses.
Working blind
But efforts are hampered because few climate models predict changes for individual regions, making it difficult to predict how climate change will affect growth and yields of specific crops in each region.
"A partnership between climatologists and crop scientists will be valuable in developing regional analogues," says Martin Parry, IPCC co-chair and a scientist at the UK-based Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research.
And the need is urgent. At a meeting of CGIAR institutes in Hyderabad, India, in November 2007, Parry said that the estimated window for implementing mitigation and adaptation programmes has shrunk from 30-40 years to 15.
He advised CGIAR scientists to put climate change at the heart of research programmes.
Others agree. As Kwesi Atta-Krah, deputy director-general of the Italy-based research organisation Biodiversity International says, "Plant breeders now need to focus on the future as well as the present, and use the vast genetic resources in gene banks and in the wild that hold potential for adaptation of major crops to a changing climate."
Rice crops most vulnerable
Rice crops are most vulnerable to global warming. Studies worldwide show that rising carbon dioxide levels may initially increase growth, but the benefit is temporary. Rising temperatures make rice spikelets -- the slender branches containing rice flowers -- sterile, and grain yields will fall.
Asia and sub-Saharan Africa will be amongst the most severely affected by climate change. About 90 per cent of the world's rice is grown and consumed in Asia (where 70 per cent of the world's poor live), and sub-Saharan Africa is the world's fastest growing rice consumer. The most vulnerable agricultural systems are the rain-fed uplands and lowlands that form almost 80 per cent of total rice land in Africa.
Reiner Wassman, coordinator of the Rice and Climate Change Consortium at the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in the Philippines, says IRRI strategies should include breeding rice that can survive climate change. He wants to see plants that can tolerate higher temperatures and/or flooding, that flower in the mornings before temperatures rise, and that transpire (lose water through evaporation from leaves) more efficiently to cool the air around them.
His hopes are buoyed by IRRI's latest research into the rice line 'sub1', which survived submersion for 17 days (see Scientists create flood-resistant rice). The line could provide genes for flood tolerance.
In Africa, the Africa Rice Centre (WARDA) is focusing on its NERICA (New Rice for Africa) varieties. These combine traits of Africa's Oryza glaberrima -- such as drought and local disease tolerance -- with the high yields of Asia's Oryza sativa.
Looming disaster for wheat?
Drought is also a big concern for the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre (CIMMYT) in El Batan, Mexico. The IPCC's predictions of increasing droughts spell disaster for half of the developing world's wheat growing areas.
The problem is particularly acute in central and west Africa, where the poor depend on wheat but get an annual rainfall of less than 350 mm, says CIMMYT scientist Rodomiro Ortiz.
CIMMYT has launched a hunt for drought tolerance in wild wheats and 'landraces' -- traditional crops that have adapted to local conditions over centuries. The centre is also teaming up with the Japan International Research Centre for Agricultural Sciences to map drought-tolerant genes in wheat and maize.
CIMMYT is using its findings in both traditional breeding and genetic engineering programmes. For example, researchers are working on genetically engineered wheat containing the DREB gene of Arabidopsis thaliana -- a relative of mustard plants -- that may confer tolerance to drought, saline soils and low temperatures. CIMMYT is testing yields of genetically engineered plants with the DREB gene under varying water stress.
However, Ortiz cautions that the plant is still experimental. Most published studies simulated drought conditions in greenhouses more rapidly than would occur naturally. Ortiz wants more experiments under natural water stress conditions.
Shrinking diversity
Scientists look for useful genes in plants grown only locally, and CIMMYT already has maize breeding programmes that work with local communities. But researchers fear many useful wild species could disappear.
"Climate change is leading to significant losses of genetic resources in several regions of the world," says Atta-Krah. He says diversity among crop species must be effectively conserved, managed, and used to improve crops and adapt to climate change.
One striking example of shrinking diversity is Latin America's beans. Peter Jones, a scientist at the International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) in Columbia, says that of the 17 wild species of the Arachis genus -- the pea family that includes the peanut -- 12 will be extinct by 2055 due to climate change.
We must systematically map important bean species and ensure important collections have more than five live specimens, adds Jones.
The world's livestock are also in the danger zone. A 2006 assessment of global animal genetic resources by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization estimated that 70 per cent of the world's unique livestock are in developing countries. Many breeds already risk extinction. On average, one livestock breed is lost every month, mainly due to globalisation of livestock markets.
Climate change will strike further blows. According to the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) in Kenya, climate change will affect livestock by changing the yield and nutritional quality of their fodder, increasing disease and disease-spreading pests, reducing water availability, and making it difficult to survive in extreme environments.
"Climate change will have impacts at the ecosystem level that are poorly understood," says ILRI's deputy director-general for research, John McDermott. Effects will vary between the rain-fed highlands in the Great Lakes region of eastern Africa, the coastal regions of south, east and west Africa, and the forests of central Africa. The exact consequences for each ecosystem need to be analysed in detail.
Water holds the key
The common theme in all these changes is water availability. Already, one-third of the world's people live in river basins where they face water scarcity. But climate change will have other effects on agricultural irrigation.
The timing and size of river flows will change, affecting river water schemes, says Colin Chartres, director-general of the Sri-Lanka-based International Water Management Institute. He adds that receding glaciers mean less water will be available in spring, which could affect some 17 per cent of the world's population, including those irrigating the Indus basin. Changes in groundwater recharge could also affect irrigation in China, India, Mexico and the United States.
Chartes says scientists need to go beyond coarse global models, and develop specific river-basin and farm-scale models of how climate change will affect river water availability and lake levels. He also calls for more precise models of how climate change may affect fish productivity in oceans, seas and inland fisheries.
A tentative start
As the problems become apparent, CGIAR centres are working on better understanding their implications.
The India-based International Centre for Research in Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) research strategy for 2007-2012 targets climate change issues in the short- and medium-to-longer term.
ICRISAT director-general, William Dar, says ICRISAT is working to make millets, sorghum, pigeon pea and groundnut better adapted to major climate stresses. The organisation has already developed varieties tolerant to heat, high soil temperatures, low and variable rainfall, and diseases.
What is needed now, says Dar, is a better knowledge of the physiology behind stress tolerance, wider gene pools, and more effective screening methods for useful genes.
CIAT is developing computer software to analyse future climate scenarios. Examples include 'MarkSim' to simulate daily weather for up to 100 years anywhere in the tropics, and 'Homologue' to compare climate and soil throughout the tropics.
The International Centre for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) has studied how areas in and around Egypt, Morocco and Sudan are coping with water scarcity in rainfed and irrigated grasslands, as well as traditional watershed management systems.
But the task ahead is tough. As Jones points out, historically the average time between scientists beginning to hunt for useful traits and a new stable variety growing in farmers' fields has been 46 years. "So that is how far ahead we should be looking at the start of every project," he says.
And as one participant at the Hyderabad conference commented, "You may put all those traits for tolerance to drought, salt and pests in a plant -- and then find it has no yield!"

CLIMATE CHANGE AND ECONOMIC EQUITY: Biofuel incentives still forgetting about deforestation

In the face of mounting evidence that jatropha and other biofuel options are environmentally damaging to produce - monoculture issues, pollution, deforestation, short-term fertile cycles on land, land grabbing, loss of community benefits, elite capture, etc - some car firms are more interested in having something to report on their greencredentials in 2008's Annual Report ... HOWEVER, it will be beneficial in some locations - as Damlier state: "Since jatropha can be cultivated on barren land, it does not compete for land that is being used for food production, and thus provides farmers with an additional source of income". Let's hope its not just rich plantation farms only that benefit, and that the degraded land is re-invigorated through this production.

Source: African Agriculture: "Car maker Daimler, partners explore jatropha as a biodiesel source"
German carmaker Daimler AG has teamed up with Archer Daniels Midland and Bayer CropScience to explore tropical plant jatropha as a biodiesel fuel, Daimler said.
"Biodiesel derived from jatropha nut kernels has properties similar to those of biofuels obtained from oilseed rapes. It is also characterised by a positive CO2 balance and can thus contribute to protecting the climate," the companies said in a statement.
The partners aim to develop production and quality standards for jatropha-based biofuel. ADM runs several biodiesel refineries worldwide, while Bayer plans to develop herbicides, insecticides and fungicides for Jatropha plants.
Daimler has already completed a five-year project which demonstrated that jatropha can be used to make biodiesel. It will continue to explore the interactions between the fuel and engines.
Jatropha, a wild plant, has never been professionally cultivated, the statement said, suggesting the plant could be grown on 30 million hectares of land, especially in South America, Africa and Asia.
"Since jatropha can be cultivated on barren land, it does not compete for land that is being used for food production, and thus provides farmers with an additional source of income," it added.

CLIMATE CHANGE and HEALTH: Malaria buzz

Climate Change Fueling Malaria in Kenya, Experts Say
Eliza Barclay in Tumutumu, Kenya
for National Geographic News
Esther Njoki lay on a slender cot in the women's ward of Tumutumu Hospital, lucid for the first time in days after being ambushed by fever and delirium. The emaciated 80-year-old had survived a bout of malaria, but her doctor said it nearly killed her.
Malaria has long been endemic to Kenya's humid coast and swampy lowland regions, but it has only rarely reached Njoki's village on the slopes of Mount Kenya (see Kenya map).
In recent decades, however, scientists have noted an increase in epidemics in the region, as well as in sporadic cases like Njoki's.
Many medical and environmental experts attribute the spike in malaria to climate change, in the form of warmer temperatures and variations in rainfall patterns. (See a map of global warming's effects.)
"We are now finding malaria in places that we did not expect to find it, particularly the highland regions that used to be too cool for malaria," said Dorothy Memusi, deputy director of the Malaria Division in Kenya's Ministry of Health.
Parasites, Mosquitoes Affected by Climate
Malaria is an infectious disease caused by parasites in the blood system. Symptoms include fever, severe joint pain, and in extreme cases, anemia—a deficiency in red blood cells—because the parasites use red blood cells to reproduce.
Changes in temperature can affect the development and survival of malaria parasites and the mosquitoes that carry them, according to a joint 2004 study by the State University of New York, Buffalo, and the Kenya Medical Research Institute.
Rainfall also influences the availability of mosquito habitats and the size of mosquito populations, the research found.
Shem Wandiga is a professor of chemistry at University of Nairobi who has studied the relationship between climate and malaria.
He said malaria epidemics first appeared in Kenya's highlands in the 1920s, but during the last 20 years, the frequency of outbreaks in the region has been more pronounced.
"The best climate conditions for malaria are a long rainy season that is warm and wet, followed by a dry season that is not too hot, followed by a hot and wet short rainy season," Wandiga said.

CLIMATE CHANGE and ECONOMIC EQUITY: The People's Car arrives in India

Climate change evangelists are in uproar over the launch of Tata's latest locally-relevant innovation, the 'People's car'. With sales of cars going up, emissions worries are compounded by incomplete information and a lack of thinking about the equity [economic and social] that India's population deserves. First, the People's Car will replace inefficient emitting motos -- basically lawnmower engines working overtime. Second, these will be efficient petrol users and emitters -- assuming higher passenger loads. Third, safer [hopefully]. Fourth, benchmarking efficiency, price and quality in the Indian automotive sector for all other manufacturers, designers and planners to follow. Fifth, locally built enhancing multipliers. And finally, from an "ecological space" viewpoint, Indian consumers have a lot of carbon spare to burn in economically enriching ways. The People's Car is not perfect, but it is way better than consuming imported cars.

Tata says: "Indian car sales are predicted to more than quadruple to $145bn by 2016. Company chairman Ratan Tata said the launch of the Nano was a landmark in the history of transportation. Further, the car was "a safe, affordable and all weather transport - a people's car, designed to meet all safety standards and emissions laws and accessible to all".
Environmental critics have said that the car will lead to mounting air and pollution problems on India's already clogged roads. The car had passed emission standards and would average about 50 miles to the gallon, or five litres per hundred kilometres.

DOMINO EFFECT? Regional economic cost of KENYAN problems becoming apparent

Kenya's position as a hub for transport and trade in East and Southern Africa is aptly demonstrated by the current problems and subsequent disruption. Fisheries companies in neighbouring Uganda cannot access packaging boxes let alone export through the usual channels into SOuth Africa. Compounding this are price rises as oil costs increase owing to distribution problems. The spectre of snowballing poverty is emerging. From an economic perspective, it is during times of shocks that an economy relies on its key export sectors to continue and to help drip-feed the rest of the economy through the mire. Yet, it seems a mixture of the hub business model and the reliance of many of the companies at the vanguards of fragile economies on Kenya's throughput might produce a catastrophic domino effect starting with the richer and more reliable internationally-trading companies. What this means for the majority of poorer, locally trading and subsistence farmers and workers remains unclear but is not for continued unfettered growth. Let's hope this forecast is wrong.

Source: "Uganda: Three Fish Exporters Suspend Operations", New Vision (Kampala)
Macrines Nyapendi
THREE fish exporting companies have suspended operations due to high production costs caused by the post-election violence in Kenya. The plants are Oakwood based at Kansensero landing site, Wild Catches in Butiaba, Lake Albert and Marine and Agro.
"Skyrocketing fuel prices and lack of packaging materials has forced us to temporarily close down. If the violence in Kenya continues, all processors will halt operations," a source said.
Solid packaging boxes imported from South Africa, which come into the country by road through Kenya, have not arrived.
Dick Nyeko, the commissioner for fisheries, said the processors who suspended operations use generators because they are not connected to the main power grid.
He added: "But even those who are connected to the main power grid may be affected by the surging prices of the Nile Perch at the landing sites and the depreciating dollar."
"The fuel crisis has severely affected fish exports because boats fishing Nile Perch use petrol engines. Nile Perch prices at the landing sites have been rising by 10% daily," Nyeko said.
A kilogramme of Nile Perch at the landing sites was at sh3500 before the crisis.
Hundreds of fishermen in Butiaba and Kasensero landing sites are stuck with fish.
"The situation is getting worse by the day. Our main buyers have stopped us from supplying them, yet the other processors are in Kampala. We cannot take fish to Kampala plants because we don't have contracts with them," a fisherman in Butiaba said.
Fish export earnings stand at over $150m (sh255b) annually with fish being the second largest forex earner after coffee.
Nyeko said the violence in Kenya is a blessing to the lake's ecosystem.
"The pressure mounted on the Nile Perch species has reduced. This will help regeneration of stocks," he explained.
Last week, the processors and the fisheries department officials had a meeting to plan how they could avert the crisis.

CLIMATE CHANGE AND EQUITY: Kenya Hit By Food Shortage After Poor Rains

Poorer rains in the Greater Horn of Africa region are forecast to spell bleak futures for pastoralists and all those who rely on their production system for cheap protein [nyama choma]. Climate change is expected to exacerbate these trends, spelling potential disaster for the pastoral communities and for the macroeconomy as imports of protein will need to rise and the management of rangeland is reduced. Fortunately, we can expect a rise in price/value of such meat, increasing incentives to be involved.

Source: BuaNews (Tshwane)
Judith Akolo
The long-term implications of last year's poor rain seasons in the Greater Horn of Africa region, affecting mostly Kenya, will be bleak.
Kenya, as well as Uganda, Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sudan, Tanzania, Rwanda and Burundi, are experiencing a shortage of pasture for animals, poor crop harvests and reduced drinking water availability due to insufficient rainfall during the short-rains period last year.
This is according to Famine Early Warning Systems (FEWSNET), which is funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
The worst hit area is to be central Kenya, with impacts being felt in southern Kenya and parts of Somalia and Ethiopia.
Poor rainfall during the 2007 short-rains season has left southern portions of Kenya with insufficient pasture, drinking water and crop yields.
The northern pastoral areas of Kenya have also experienced a below normal short-rains season, the FEWSNET report says.
While control operations are ongoing following a locust invasion in parts of northern Kenya, the current situation is threatening livelihoods, because of a shortage of pasture and browse for livestock.
Some locations in the area have also experienced two consecutive seasons of failed rainfall.
Kenya is also currently experiencing political unrest following the announcement of President Mwai Kibaki, as winner of the 27 December presidential election.
Opposition leader Raila Odinga disputes the election result which gave victory to President Kibaki by a very narrow margin and he accused the president of rigging the election to stay in power.
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown earlier this week appealed to Kenya's political leaders to urgently hold talks to end the riots in which more than 300 people are reported to have died.
All local radio and television stations in Kenya on Sunday evening aired a special joint prayer session for peace.
The one-hour programme dubbed "Prayer for peace, Kenyans unite", involved leaders from the Catholic, Baptist and Pentecostal churches, as well as from the Muslim and Hindu faiths, who converged to pray for peace, unity, truth and justice.