Special Focus: 1 Innovative Approaches to Climate Change …worldinfo.org/wp-content/uploads/library/wer/english/2012_Spring... · Exploration in the Yasuní ITT Rainforest On the

Special Focus:

Spring-Summer 2012, vol. XXIV. 1,2

Education brings choices.Choices bring power.

World Ecology Report is printed on recycled paper.

1

67

8

9

910

10

1111

12

13

13

13

14

16

Moment of silence commemorating Chornobyl and Fukushima Daiichi.*

Innovative Approaches to Climate Change Mitigation: The Case of Oil Exploration in the Yasuní ITT Rainforest

On the evening of Friday, December 18th 2009 – after witnessing the failure to reach agreement on a follow-on accord to the Kyoto Protocol by the close of the last regularly scheduled day of negotiations at the Confer-ence of the Parties fifteen and the Meeting of the Parties five to the Unit-ed Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) – I stated, in an interview for Climate Spark TV at the NASA Club in Copen-hagen, Denmark, that “only when it becomes economically beneficial to mitigate climate change, will it become politically expedient [to do so].” In making this statement, I assumed that the political push for a binding climate change mitigation agreement would occur only after renewable energy and other high-technologies advanced to a point where mitiga-tion efforts would confer substantial financial gains. Nearly three years later, no one technology nor any grouping of multiple technologies, has offered significant financial incentives thus dispelling the notion that economic gain would spur mitigation efforts.

Yasuni National Park. Most biodiverse place on Earth could open for oil exploration. Source: http://earthfirstnews.wordpress.com/tag/yasuni-national-park/

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Special Focus:Innovative Approaches to Climate Change Mitigation: The Case of Oil Exploration in the Yasuní ITT Rainforest

Food for Thought:Geo-engineering ProjectsOil in Africa

Good NewsEcotourism: towards green growth

Health and Environment:Illegal Waste Dumping

Did You Know?The Gibe III Dam Disaster in EthiopiaThe Social Environmental Protection FloorCauses of High Food Price Volatility

Chornobyl UpdateBiodiversity impacts of nuclear accidentsIAEA Improving Global Security in Seoul

VoicesUNITAR Forum on “Opportunities and Challenges for a Green Economy”UN HEADQUARTERS Briefing on: An Interactive Dialogue on “Harmony with Nature”Statement of WIT to the Commission for Social DevelopmentTEDMED Conference 2012

Point of View:Hope for the future or Another Kind of Climate Change

World Ecology ReportWorld Information Transfer

Spring-Summer 20122

While technological change, has not provided the economic incentives required to under-write political action on climate change mitigation – even as we ap-proach the Rio+20 Earth Summit, what many believe to be the last best hope for a binding accord on global sustainability – there have been simple but profound ad-vances in conservation. One notable success is in the energy sector. Specifically, Ecuadorian President, Rafael Correa agreed to permanently halt oil extraction in the Yasuní Ishpingo-Tambococha-Tiputini (ITT) rainforest, perhaps the most ecologically diverse ecosystem on the planet, if donors would pay Ecuador fifty percent of the value of lost revenues. By the end of 2011, the Yasuní ITT Initiative, raised US$116 million (exceeding the re-quired US$100 million) in payments due by years’ end and successfully stalled the extraction of more than 900 million barrels of oil. Given the fact that the energy sec-tor is by far, the largest emitter of greenhouse gases, this initiative warrants analysis to determine if it can serve as a model for multiple, larger scale interventions.

Why Technological Innovation Has Not Led To Mitigation Policy:

Before analyzing the Yasuní ITT Initiative it is instruc-tive to briefly discuss why technological innovation has not provided the economic motivation to underwrite substantive, binding climate change mitigation policies. This discussion will illuminate why simple, easily imple-mented, albeit seemingly mundane initiatives such as the Yasuní ITT are far better suited to have a meaning-ful impact on climate change mitigation and sustainable development.

Past precedent appears to lend credence to the argu-ment that profitable high-technological innovation can result in the adoption of mitigation policy and foment change. For example, the United States’ embraced the Montreal Protocol of 1987 and led an initiative to phase-out ozone depleting chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) in fa-vor of ozone neutral refrigerants and propellants such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFC) because U.S. industries had a significant lead in these areas and would therefore be able to capture a significant and highly profitable mar-ket share for goods using CFC alternatives.

Given this experience, it is natural to look for a high-technology or grouping of high-technologies that would appear to offer a miracle cure. While HFC might have been just that for the ozone depletion problem, there

does not appear to be a similar comprehensive solu-tion for anthropogenic climate change. For example, solar photovoltaic (PV) is perceived by many as consti-tuting a large part of the solution. However, despite solar PV’s long history (the photovoltaic effect was dis-covered in 1839 and commercial silicon PV cells were marketed by Western Electric as early as 1954), myriad serious barriers remain, limiting solar PV’s efficacy as a large-scale solution. Chief among these are land use concerns and storage capacity. Extrapolating off of John Sheffield’s calculations, and assuming an average effi-ciency of 40 W(e)/m2 for solar energy to meet current energy demand of approximately 6,200 Mtoe/a, a solar field slightly larger than two United States would be re-quired.1 Even if space were available and a field of this size were technologically feasible, solar is an intermit-tent generator and current battery technology proves woefully insufficient to provide storage for solar electric-ity. Likewise, other renewable technologies face similar daunting barriers. This is not to say that these high-tech-nologies, employed together will not have a significant impact on climate change mitigation. However, neither one high-technology nor a collection of the most prom-ising high-technologies is likely to provide more than a partial solution.

Moreover, high-technology solutions pose addi-tional problems. Firstly, they require massive changes to infrastructure in order for them to be implemented. Secondly, focusing on one high-technology or a small-grouping of high-technologies results in a ‘crowding-out’ effect whereby top scientific talent, research fund-ing, etc. is directed towards those high-technologies at the expense of other promising approaches. The result is path dependency focusing on one or a small group-ing of high-technologies. This is the case with solar PV, whereby after NASA advanced the development of the

1. Sheffield postulates that at an efficiency of 40 W(e)/m2, .1% of the earth’s land mass less Antarctica would be required to generate 4,000 Mtoe/a from solar plants. Also according to Sheffield, current world energy demand is 6,200 Mtoe/a. Thus, .155% of the earth’s land mass less Antarctica would be required. The earth’s total land mass Is approx. 57,500,000 mi2 (Science Desk Reference American Scientific. New York: Wiley, 1999: 180.) less Antarctica’s 5,500,000 mi2 (http://www.coolantarctica.com/Antarctica%20fact%20file/antarctica%20environment/whats%20it%20like%20in%20Antarctica.htm) gives a total of 52,000,000 mi2. Of which, the United States consti-tutes 3,717,813 mi2 (UN Official Figures) or .071496% of total land mass. Two United States equals .142993% or just shy of the required .155%. NOTE all figures are approximate.

3World Ecology ReportWorld Information Transfer

Spring-Summer 2012

technology for use in space, much focus was applied to terrestrial uses for solar PV at the expense of other op-tions. Finally, in much the same way that increasing effi-ciency paradoxically causes consumers to do more of an energy consuming activity undermining the gains gen-erated from increased efficiency (e.g. with the increase in fuel economy of modern cars, instead of using less gas, drivers are now using their vehicles more frequently and over longer distances thus negating per mile fuel savings), the large-scale implementation of affordable, renewable energy is likely to cause an increase in de-mand for energy. Given these realities, low-technology solutions such as the Yasuní ITT Initiative provide prom-ising alternatives (or at least compliments) to high-tech-nology innovations.

Project Overview:The Yasuní ITT Initiative began when, in June of

2007, Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa announced that he would be interested in permanently leaving the Yasuní ITT rainforest’s oil in the ground, provided do-nors contributed half the value of the oil for projects aimed at conservation, social development and poverty eradication in the Yasuní ITT rainforest. The Yasuní ITT rainforest, containing in excess of 900 million bar-rels of crude oil represents approximately twenty percent of Ecuador’s proven reserves. The total value of which (depending on oil prices) could exceed US$10 billion and represents approximately US$700 million per an-num in revenue to the Ecuadorian state. Moreover, the proposed project would avoid more than 400 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, roughly equivalent to the annual emissions of France.

After three years of research, the Yasuní ITT Initia-tive was launched in mid-2010. Specifically, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) established a trust fund, “the Ecuador Yasuní ITT Trust Fund,” to administer funds raised pursuant to the Yasuní ITT Ini-tiative. The fund will collect fifty percent of the forgone oil revenue, over a period of ten years. The target goal for year one, 2011, of US$100 million was exceeded by US$16 million. For 2012 and 2013, the required fund-raising amount has more than doubled to US$291 mil-lion, the remaining seven years are likely to have targets in excess of the fund, US$350 million. The total future value of the fund, US3.6 billion, will make this the larg-est fund of its type. For year one, funds were sought

directly from governments and large corporate donors (pledging at least US$100 thousand). Henceforth, do-nations from individual contributors as low as US$25.00 may be accepted and the Initiative plans to ramp up mainstream and social media based advertising in fur-therance of this new potential fundraising source.

The fact that the Yasuní ITT Initiative is underway and has exceeded its goal for 2011 is remarkable. All the more significant is the reality that it is occurring in Ecuador. A country which derives 35 percent of it GDP and approximately one third its tax revenue from oil rev-enue. Moreover, Ecuador is the eleventh largest export-er of oil to the U.S., with oil exports comprising more than half of the nation’s export revenues.

Project Analysis:Admittedly, the Yasuní ITT Initiative is still in its early

stages, nevertheless an analysis of its potential successes and likely shortcomings are warranted. Not only will this serve to increase understanding of the Initiative but it may also aid in adjusting key components to avoid shortfalls.

The main benefit of this Initiative is it keeps vast quan-tities of oil in the ground, thereby avoiding emissions, deforestation and destruction of the Yasuní ITT rain-forest while preserving the home of the ‘un-contacted’ indigenous people who have lived there for centuries. As regards the foremost benefit, avoiding emissions, it is unclear if the full 400 plus million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions avoidance that would have resulted had this oil been extracted will be realized because Presi-dent Correa has already authorized oil exploration and

Source: saveyasuni.wordpress.com


Spring-Summer 20124

extraction in other parts of the country to make up for a portion of the shortfall. Moreover, if the oil does not flow from Ecuador, former consumers of Ecuadorian crude, including the U.S. will purchase more oil extract-ed elsewhere. Nevertheless, even if the emissions reduc-tions are not as high as projected, the fact that oil is not being extracted from Yasuní ITT is still highly valuable in that it preserves what many scientists believe to be the most bio-diverse ecosystem on the planet and ensures that ‘un-contacted’ indigenous peoples in the area are not displaced. Beyond its immense biodiversity, saving the Yasuní ITT rainforest is especially significant for two reasons. First, forests, especially rainforests, serve as a massive carbon sink. Nevertheless, deforestation leads to a global loss of thirteen million hectares of forest each year, releasing six and a half billion tons of carbon di-oxide per annum. Second, deforestation is especially prevalent in Ecuador, where, as of 2009, an estimated thirty percent of the Ecuadorian rainforest had been de-stroyed – making Ecuador, the second most deforested place in South America (after Paraguay).

The Yasuní ITT Initiative confers additional benefits given the proposed uses for the funds generated. Spe-cifically, the Trust Fund will invest in the conservation of 4.8 million hectares while administering and protecting an additional five million hectares belonging to indig-enous and Afro-Ecuadorian peoples. In addition 1 mil-lion hectares of degraded and eroded land belonging to smallholders will be revitalized. In sum a total of nearly 11 million hectares will be revitalized and/or protected. In addition to better land management, funds will also be directed to projects throughout the country aimed at increasing energy efficiency as well as Ecuador’s re-newable energy portfolio. Funds will also be devoted to poverty eradication and social development; including investment in education and health as well as to support advanced research in the field of environmental science.

The focus on poverty eradication in the Amazon is

especially significant given the link between oil extrac-tion and increased incidences of poverty. Paradoxically, poverty rates are highest in areas where extraction oc-curs. For example, in 2006, 66.8 percent, more than two thirds the Amazonian population fell below the poverty line. This is compared to a national average of 49.1 per-cent; 20.9 percent in Quito and 43.6 percent and 52.4 percent in the neighboring highland and coastal prov-inces (respectively).

However, it should be noted at this time that some have raised concerns regarding Ecuador’s commitment to the Initiative. Some donors and environmentalists have questioned Ecuador’s ability to abide by the agree-ment over the long term given political instability. Cer-tainly, the terms of the agreement are secure for as long as UNDP administers the Trust Fund, but once the money has been completely disbursed (at least a decade off – likely far longer) there are concerns that future leaders will attempt to extract the oil for profit. The feasibility of doing so is somewhat questionable given the interna-tional backlash that would result. Additionally, even a decision to extract the oil in the distant future would not undo many of the positive benefits financed by the Trust Fund. Moreover, it remains unclear if the Initiative will continue to be able to raise the funds required each year to keep the project afloat. The quota for 2012 is nearly tri-ple last year’s target. Though, it is likely that the Initiative will be able to leverage last year’s overwhelming fundrais-ing success coupled with the inclusion of private donors for 2012 to achieve its commitment this year and into the future.

Global Project Implications:Given that the success of this project is at least prob-

able, analyzing the most significant global implications is justified. Two effects are especially interesting. First, the effects on global oil prices of removing a significant percentage of Ecuadorian crude from the market. Sec-

Source: sosyasuni.org/en/index.php


Spring-Summer 2012

ond, there are potential international implications from the Initiative given that this type of ‘avoided emissions’ scheme might be adapted and included in international climate change mitigation treaties.

As regards the effects on the international market for crude oil, the project is likely to have a negligible effect, while the total reserves in the Yasuní ITT rainforest ex-ceed 900 million barrels, this equates to approximately 250 thousand barrels per day over the ten year life of the project. While significant compared to Ecuador’s cur-rent production of 486 thousand barrels per day, this pales in comparison to total world oil consumption of more than 85.7 million barrels per day. Additionally, the market is not losing a full 250 thousand barrels per day given that Ecuador has stepped up consumption elsewhere. Furthermore, had Ecuador not increased consumption elsewhere to compensate, other countries could have stepped in to fill the void. For example, in response to the recent embargos against Iranian oil, Sau-di Arabian Oil Minister Ali al-Naimi stated “I believe we [Saudi Arabia] can easily get up to 11.4 [to] 11.8 [mil-lion barrels per day] [up from 9.8 million barrels per day – a 1.6 to 2 million barrel per day increase] almost immediately, in a few days. Because all we need is to turn valves. Now to get [an additional .7 to 1.1 million barrels per day] we probably need about 90 days [sic.]. As such, this Initiative is unlikely to have any significant effects on oil prices – certainly not to the extent necessary to foment a change in consumption patterns – unless it is repeated in numerous other areas.

As regards employing the Yasuní ITT Initiative’s model elsewhere, some nations fear that the model will be replicated and written into a binding climate change mitigation accord thereby forcing multiple ad-ditional projects which would both require donor gov-ernments to foot a large portion of the bill and could potentially foment a substantial rise in oil prices. This fear however is largely unfounded. Pamela Martin, au-thor of Oil in the Soil: The Politics of Paying to Protect the Amazon, a book which focuses on the Yasuní ITT Initiative, states that “[The precedent set by Yasuní ITT is] very limited in scale.” She stipulates that “[i]t [the precedent] only applies to countries situated between the Tropics of Capricorn and Cancer which have tropi-cal forests, a certified high level of biodiversity, and a credible program for investment in sustainable energy programs.”

Even though the Yasuní ITT Initiative’s model may not be broadly applicable, other ‘avoided emissions’ schemes are being employed with a wider reach. For example, in the field of land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF), The United Nations Collaborative Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (UN-REDD and UN-REED+) functions similarly to the Yasuní ITT Initiative in that it establishes a monetary value for the carbon stored in forests. Specifically, UN-REDD provides for investment in developing countries for the purpose of reducing emissions from forestry related activities. In addition, UN-REDD+ helps subsidize sus-tainable forestry as well as conservation, increasing the amount of forest by making trees more valuable alive than dead. Thus, even if the Yasuní ITT Initiative is not a globally applicable solution, it can still be replicated in certain areas and complimented by other initiatives such as UN-REDD and UN-REDD+ which leverage simi-lar principals of ‘avoided emissions.’

Conclusion:In summary, while it is clear that high-technology

drivers for mitigation have not proved to be a panacea, low-technology solutions such as the Yasuní ITT Ini-tiative and other similar projects can confer numerous benefits including avoided emissions, reforestation, un-derwriting the transition to renewable energy and fund-ing health and educational programs. While the Yasuní ITT Initiative clearly has flaws – especially regarding the less than complete 400 million plus metric tons of car-bon dioxide avoidances – it also confers numerous ben-efits and as such, is a model that ought to be replicated. In addition, the Initiative has shown that deployment of non-traditional economic drivers (i.e. trust fund rev-enue as opposed to revenue from the design, sale and operation of high-technology solutions) necessitates fur-ther research. Research might also be conducted to ex-amine non-economic drivers for climate change mitiga-tion and sustainable development (see Koven, 2010 for a discussion of security and diplomatic/international stature related motivations for mitigation and sustain-ability projects).

Sources: B. S. Koven, The Guardian, Sciencemag.org, inventors.about.com, J. Sheffield, R. B. Rycroft, P. L. Martin, ecocentric.blogs.time.com, B. Walsh, eia.gov, channelnewsasia.com, unredd.org


Spring-Summer 20126

Geo-engineering is the artificial altering of the envi-ronment in order to mitigate the effects of global warming. While it is not a new idea, Bill Gates brought geo-en-gineering once again to the public’s attention by pour-ing millions into high-risk projects this past February.

A multitude of projects are in discussion at the moment, but the injection of sulfate particles into the atmosphere to reflect sunlight has been proven the most effective thus far, both in the lab and in na-ture. The 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo, which de-posited approximately 9 tons of sulfur in the stratosphere, released sulfate aerosols that cooled the earth by approximately 0.5o Celsius within a year (Katz, 2010). Through observation, scien-tists linked the release of sulfuric aerosols in volcanic eruptions to the cooling of the Earth. The sulfuric aero-sols act as a manufactured ozone layer, absorbing and scattering incoming solar radiation. They also have a propensity to increase cloud condensation nuclei, lead-ing to an increase of the cloud’s density, height, and lifetime, which all result in a higher reflectivity (Mat-thews and Calderia, 2007).

In contrast to most other geo-engineering schemes, the results of solar radiation management will be seen quickly as it is fast acting, cost effective, and easy to im-plement since the technology required already exists. In 2002, Paul Crutzen, a Nobel prize winning atmos-pheric chemist, estimated that the annual cost of strato-spheric sulfur injection would be 25-50 billion dollars, compared to the estimated 400 billion dollars for the yet to be effective Kyoto Protocol. Its feasible execution will allow for the prevention of climate tipping elements concerning the world at the moment, such as the loss of Greenland’s glaciers.

FOOD FOR THOUGHT:

Geo-engineering Projects

However, sulfates bring as many threats as they do promises. The mass-specific light scattering efficiency of a sulfate is strongly dependent on its radius; while the efficiency peaks at 0.3 μm diameter, it decreases rapidly for larger or smaller droplets. It is difficult to produce sulfate aerosol with an appropriate size distribution, and therefore there is no guarantee that the project would substantially offset the doubling of carbon dioxide (Keith, 2010). The project may not only be inefficient, but also destructive. After the Pinatubo eruption, the blue cast of the sky was notably brightened, and even turned white, resulting in both a change of ecosystem productivity because of modified photosynthetic behav-ior and a reduction in the output of solar power systems. Furthermore, although non-reactive in the mesosphere, sulfates can slowly transport to the lower stratosphere and provide reactive surfaces for reservoirs of chlorine to produce chlorine monoxide. The chlorine monoxide depletes ozone by decomposing it into oxygen gas.

Despite its promising results, Geo-engineering has merely reached the research phase and has been paid lit-tle to no attention, until recently. The covertness stems from fear that people will consider geo-engineering as an

Geoengineering could slow down the global water cycleSource: https://www.llnl.gov/news/newsreleases/2008/NR-08-05-04.html


Spring-Summer 2012

action to reduce global warming instead of as its intended purpose- risk control. The primary purpose of the project is not to allow humans to continue to pollute the planet, but rather to minimize the effects of the already existing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Continued research on geo-engineering coupled with citizen cooperation to reduce carbon dioxide emissions will hopefully mitigate the impact of global warming on Earth in the future.

Author: Gabriella LoConteSources: Katz, J. “Global Response to Global Warming: Geo-engineering with Stratospheric Aerosols.”; American Physical Society. 64.17 (2010): 22-41. Print.; Keith, D. W. “Photopho-retic levitation of engineered aerosols for geoengineering.”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 107.38 (2010): 16428-16431. Print.Matthews, H. D, and K. Caldiera. “Transient climate–carbon simulations of planetary geoengineering.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United Statesof America 104.24 (2007): 9949-9954.

In the last week of March 2012, oil was found for the first time in the Turkana region of Kenya. This discov-ery brings the dream of economic promise to many Kenyans, espe-cially as Turkana is one of the poorest regions in Kenya. However, Kenyans are concerned that the oil wealth will fall into the hands of a corrupt government instead of directly benefiting the people. Uganda, which struck oil under Lake Albert in November of 2011, shares a similar di-lemma with Kenya in how to approach the future of oil production in the region with political, envi-ronmental, and economic questions.

The large fishing community of Uganda is wor-ried about their livelihood, now that their way of living is compromised by the greater economic promise of oil. The government has signed new contracts with Tullow Oil, even though there is a parliamentary resolution banning the signing of contracts before there is a chance to develop new oil laws for the region. In retaliation, civil society organizations have threatened to work with outside organizations to ban Tullow Oil from access to their oil and resources of the country. The majority of Ugandans fear corruption in the government will be the roadblock in their access to the wealth from oil; there is already a large gap between the rich and poor in the country. The Ugandan government has been accused of

OIL IN AFRICA taking bribes, starting with $300,000 in signing bonuses from Tullow Oil that has gone missing.

There are also en-vironmental concerns related to the discovery and production of oil, keeping Africans in trend with the rest of the world that fears economic de-pendency on oil and its overall effects. The air

emissions from refining crude oil severely impact the ozone layer; oceans and land contaminated by leaks and spills can be affected for years, where the environment surrounding some spills are never fully rectified. Drilling for oil removes vegetative cover on the land, as well as all of the hazards that come with construction. Entire habitats could be disturbed from the noise, dust, erosion, and expo-sure to contaminants.

While the discovery of oil as a natural resource in a region is at first looked at as economic blessing, countries such as Uganda and Kenya know that there can be unforeseen curses as well. The entire world community looks to see how these countries will handle corruption and environmental concerns.

Author: Lauren RavaSources: www.npr.org/2012/03/28/149512221/the-good-and-bad-of-kenyas-first-oil-strike; www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15588257; www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2012/mar/21/transparency-compensation-uganda-oil-sector; allafrica.com/stories/201202210872.html; africanarguments.org/2011/12/13/angola%E2%80%99s-new-oil-banking-legislation-by-kissy-agyeman-togobo-song-hai-advisory; teeic.anl.gov/er/oilgas/impact/drilldev/index.cfm.


Spring-Summer 20128

Ecotourism: towards green growth

Ecotourism is tourism with a relatively low-impact on the envi-ronment, while contributing to the local economy, engendering cross-cultural exchange, and fos-tering environmental education. The concept developed in the early 1960’s, when significant criticisms were being levied against traditional tourism, otherwise known as “mass tourism”, characterized by package deals to popular destinations, with limited interaction with local popu-lation, high levels of security and a contrived experience with local life and culture. Mass tourism has lead to adverse ecological and socio-cul-tural effects.

In Cancún, Mexico, UNESCO has described the negative environmen-tal effects that the tourism industry had on the Nichupté lagoon1, a high biodiversity ecosystem. The increase of waste and pollution brought by hotels and related industries led to severe ecosystem degradation and decline of local fishing economy. Nichupte is just one example of the destruction of local ecosystems, as well as rural livelihoods and local economies.

The developing world has recently embraced and encouraged ecotour-ism as a means of attracting foreign investment while preserving their natural resources. Various countries have adopted ecotourism as their national tourism policy. Costa Rica is considered to be one of the leading

countries. Before 1960, Costa Rica had no environmental policy, which was resulting in widespread defor-estation of the countryside. Because of international, civil, and scientific pressure the government decided to act to protect its biodiversity by creat-ing a unique ecological experience for the tourists visiting their rain forests. In Asia, countries such as Sri Lanka or Laos have also developed a very important ecotourism indus-try. In Africa, Botswana has created a special Ecotourism Certification System comprising of quality and sustainability standards such as com-mitment with local communities, na-ture conservation, and interpretation of surrounding environments to the guests. In Kenya, there are a num-ber of community tourism projects, ranging from complete community management to a partnership with an investor or trust.

Ecotourism allows for economic development with limited envi-ronmental degradation. It brings together the good qualities of tra-ditional tourism while reducing environmental degradation and de-pletion of natural resources. Thus, ecotourism, by definition, is com-

patible with the concept of the green economy.

In the coming Rio+20 confer-ence, it could be a key sector leading to sustainable development and thus helping reach international consen-sus. The World Tourism Organiza-tion, the UN specialized agency for sustainable tourism, has long been advancing tourism’s capacity to lift people out of poverty while protect-ing the planet and supporting eco-nomic growth.

Ecotourism is not a panacea for green growth since its success de-pends on many factors, such as the characteristics of the natural re-sources of the countries, the policies leading towards its implementation and most importantly, the demand of the tourists themselves. However, the current developments of the sec-tor and its success show that it is an alternative to mass tourism in many countries and that policies advanc-ing ecotourism should be promoted in the context of green growth.Author: Julia NaimeSources: http://www.unesco.org/csi/wise/nichupte.htm; Botswana Tour-ism Organization (BTO); World Tourism Organization (WTO); Ministerio Turismo Costa Rica; UNESCO


Spring-Summer 2012

The collapse of communism in Central and Eastern Europe was twenty-two years ago, yet many of these for-mer Soviet bloc countries still the face repercussions of the regime. Even those that entered the European Un-ion in 2004, many still lag both socially and economically behind their Western counterparts.

A problem that has been ongoing in Central and East-ern Europe for decades now has been the poor manage-ment of illegal waste dumping, mostly in rural areas. In fact, illegal waste trafficking along with disposal activities has become one of the fastest growing areas of organized crime in Europe1 as traffickers are engaging in a low risk but high profit business. Traffickers, who usually work in cooperation with businesses, make use of abandoned fac-tories and gravel pits to house the illegal waste.

The effects from this illicit practice include ecological damage, communal health risks, and financial burdens to resolve and reverse the dumped waste. It is hard for waste receiving countries to pin point where the waste is coming from as it transcends borders. However within

the Central and Eastern countries poor legislation, inad-equate infrastructure, lack of political determination to undertake waste management problems, and lack of en-vironmental awareness are some of the factors that con-tribute to the continued existence of this problem.

Countries that have repeatedly been in the media for il-legal waste dumping have been Hungary, Romania, and the Czech Republic. These three countries have had several in-stances in the past few years where municipal waste was com-ing from Germany, where the costs of waste disposal is rising. Hungary is up in arms dealing with German waste2

Ways to combat this illegal practice vary from country to country. Some popular recommendations include us-ing risk profiling to recognize potential illegal disposal sites, protecting those who work in retrieval of illegal waste repositories, relevant law enforcement, and taking on a multi-agency approach throughout waste transport control operations.3

One thing is clear that with so many countries involved it will be hard to control illegal waste trafficking, even though both citizens and the environments are feeling the consequences. Author: Natalia BaranowskiSources: Stated by Europol, the European Union’s law enforce-ment agency; 2 Recommendations found in Europol OC-SCAN Policy Brief

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT:

Illegal Waste Dumping

The Gibe III Dam Disaster in Ethiopia

The Gibe III Dam construction in Ethiopia began in 2006, in an effort to regulate flood cycles in the region. However, there are many economic, social, and international concerns with the formation of the dam. First, the artificial flood would only last ten days as opposed to the natural build-up of flood water. Local people of the region have adapted to the envi-ronment over hundreds of years, and regulating the floods would drasti-cally increase hunger and the possi-

bility of ecological collapse. It will re-duce the water flow to Lake Turkana in Kenya, especially during the first few years as the reservoir fills. The construction of the dam will directly affect the thousands of fishers and pastoralists who depend on the lake in the Turkana region.

As food and other resources be-come scarce due to the regulation of water, the region will be subject to more conflict between strug-gling tribes that already clash. Local groups have campaigned for the end of construction, including implor-ing Chinese funders to rethink their economic support to the construc-tion of the dam. Ethiopia is one of the world’s poorest countries, with only 15% of the population having access to electricity. The govern-ment continues to construct hydro dams because they believe that they will have the opportunity to export electricity, but the most efficient way

to bring electricity to their people is to build decentralized power plants near unelectrified communities. In addition, the Gibe III Dam violates a number of international treaties and laws, including Ethiopia’s Environ-mental Law and the UN Convention on Biological Diversity.

Ethiopia’s potential to become a great exporter of hydropower has the potential for realization, but the Gibe III Dam is highly regarded as a disas-ter that will not achieve the intended results for the country. Finding alter-nate solutions that do not negatively affect the welfare of their people or harm the environment is the greatest challenge, without pouring resources into insufficiently studied innova-tions like the Gibe III Dam. Author: Lauren Rava

Sources: www.internationalrivers.org/en/

africa/ethiopia/gibe-iii-dam; www.guard-

ian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/25/ethiopia-

gibe-hydropower-dam


Spring-Summer 201210

In the context of our fragile economic recovery, the prices of food, oil and other commodities have risen again, as they did in the middle of 2008. In December of 2010, the FAO food price index reached its 2008 peak; sugar, oils and fats being among the agricultural products that most sig-nificantly increased. For instance, the price of rice rose by 127%: wheat by 136%; corn by 125%, soybean by 107% and milk by over 80%. These changes severely impact the poor, who have no resilience to such abrupt changes.

There are many possible causes that can explain the rising food prices. Many analysts point out to the occurrence of seasonal drought in grain producing countries, or the oil price hikes that have lead to an increase in fertilizers, pesticides and transportation. Others attribute price hikes to the use of crops for biofuels, or the increasing demand rise of emerging economies such as China. The factors associated with climate change or the continued policies of subsidies in the developed countries are not neg-ligible causes either.

There’s an additional factor that many do not take into account. This factor is the speculative trading of food commodities that is taking place in many futures trading markets, a phenomenon that is attributed to the “financialization” of commodities. The “financialization” of commodities is the process by which the value of commodity goods –such as food, oil, and water- is determined by financial markets (determined by expectations and speculation) instead of by exchange markets (determined by supply and demand). The United States 1936 Commodity Exchange Act provides that the “excessive speculation in any commodity under contracts of sale of such commodity for future delivery causes sudden fluctuations or unwar-ranted changes in the price of such commodities”. That is, when there’s speculation of the future prices of commodities, the market is artificially distorted. Given that the market is neither regulated under current US leg-islation (Commodity Futures Modernization Act, 2000) nor in the European Union, there has been undisclosed speculation of food prices in the finan-cial markets of the developed world. Pension funds, banks, and institutional investors are the leading participators of the commodities market.

Many of the world’s poorest people spend more than half their income on food. Price hikes for cereals and other staples can force them to cut back on the quantity or quality of their food. The sharp spike in food prices has raised the number of starving people in the world. What can be done to reverse the trend of price volatility that is negatively impacting people across the world, particularly the poor? The access to information regard-ing commodities trading is essential, as in any financial market. Thus, to mitigate it, it is essential to increase transparency levels and disclosure of the future commodity markets. Second, there has to be regulatory meas-ures that limit and oversee the speculation, in the international as well as national level (especially US and EU).

As the president of the Dominican Republic, Leonel Fernandez, stated in the recent high-level meeting on Price Volatility in the UN, the problem of food security is multidimensional. The causes explaining food price volatil-ity are not mutually exclusive. There is a need to increase productivity and increase support for farmers, change subsidies, and create resilience to climate change. But financial speculation is a major cause of the observed volatility and should be treated in tandem. Author: Julia NaimeSources: UN Briefing, World Bank, FAO, International Fund for Agricultural Devel-opment, IFAD, UNCTAD http://unctad.org/en/docs/gds20111_en.pdf

CAUSES OF HIGH FOOD PRICE VOLATILITYThe Social Environmental Protection Floor

Romulo Paes de Sousa, the Dep-uty Minister of Social Development, Brazil, introduced the concept of the Social Environmental Protection Floor at a Side Event at the United Nations on March 19, 2012. He urged that this concept be adopt-ed in the final outcome at The UN Commission on Sustainable Devel-opment.

Precautions must be taken as countries transition into a green economy and move towards sustain-able development. A social environ-mental protection floor can provide a “safety net” for countries. It can do this by providing developing coun-tries with basic access to healthcare, nutrition and income security. It can also protect citizens against personal losses and natural disasters.

An example of the importance of the social protection floor is to look at farmers throughout the develop-ing world. To enable them to adopt new sustainable farming practices, insurance should be available to pro-tect them from potential risks. This will enable farmers to take the nec-essary steps towards sustainable agri-culture.

Strengthening social protection may provide incentives for develop-ing countries to engage in conser-vation activities and environmental protection programs. People who are focused on daily survival usually do not give priority to environmen-tal qualities. Therefore, having a so-cial protection floor would provide more income security to empower people to engage in environmental conservation. Author: Samantha SteinbergSource: http://uncsd.iisd.org/news/brazil-suggests-inclusion-of-socio-environmental-protection-floor-in-rio20-outcome.


Spring-Summer 2012

On April 26th, 2012, the Chor-nobyl nuclear disaster would reach its twenty-sixth anniversary. Twenty-five years after the nuclear disaster in Ukraine, Japan experienced the same incident in Fukushima Dai-ichi. According to the IAEA Direc-tor General, countries learned from the Chernobyl disaster and adopted

CHORNOBYL UPDATE

new measurements to minimize the consequences of a nuclear plant cat-aclysm.

Following the Chernobyl inci-dent, the main health issue was the radioactive iodine which is a short term isotope. Later the concern be-came caesium-137 which lives in the soil for generations.

The explosion at the Chornobyl nuclear power plant in 1986 released vast amounts of radioactive material over an area of 200,000 km2 in eastern and central Eu-rope. In 2011 the reactors of Fukushima and Daiichi re-leased significant radiation. Both nuclear disasters have been assessed as seven on the official IAEA INES scale. Such disasters disrupt the ecological environment and biodiversity as radiation has negative effects on survival of animals and humans. Radiation has short-term as well as long-term impacts on biodiversity.

Short-term impacts have an ecological aspect, such as the abundance of the species, the distribution, and their rarity. The long-term impacts include the evolution-ary aspects, such as the reproduction and mutations rates. Recent studies in the field of conservation biology have evaluated the impact that radiation has on bird bio-diversity in both Chornobyl and Fukushima. Analysis of 14 species common to the two areas revealed a negative effect of radiation on abundance particularly in Fukushi-ma, demonstrating a negative consequence of radiation immediately after the accident. The negative relationship between radiation and abundance of rare species indi-cates that rare species are the most affected by radiation.

The evolutionary consequences of the nuclear disas-ter were that mutations rates have increased by a fac-tor of 20 due to the release of radionuclides (unstable atoms). The slightest mutation can lead to selective ge-netic death. Average deleterious mutations can be pre-

sent for as long as 167 generations, thus mutants will be able to disperse outside contaminated areas. As a consequence, the Fukushima and Chornobyl disaster may have significant consequences for population size and population viability of many species due to large number of selective deaths. Animal abundances pro-vide reliable early warning signals of the impact of envi-ronmental perturbations on biological systems. Another factor that will hinder the bird species’ viability is the skewedness of the mortality rates across age and sex of birds.

A study of the sex ratios of birds post Chornobyl in-dicated a differential mortality in females that has lead to strongly male-skewed sex ration in the most con-taminated areas. Additionally, the abundance of bird species can also be explained by increase of parasites as a result of radiation. Increased mutation rates may provide selective advantage to host because such host will be less able to defend themselves. Second, the ra-dionuclides may directly weaken the ability of hosts to defend themselves, as in the case of immune defenses of humans against viral and bacterial parasites. Author: Julia NaimeSources: “Abundance of birds in Fukushima as judged from Chornobyl”, Anders Moller et. all; “Elevated Mortality among Birds and Chornobyl as Judged from Skewed Age and sex ratios”, Anders Moller, Bonisola-Alquati et alt.; “Conservation consequences of Chornobyl and other nuclear accidents”, A.P. Moller and T. A. Mousseau (2011)

BIODIVERSITY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR ACCIDENTS

The radioactivity released from the Chernobyl incident was esti-mated to be 200 times more than what was released by both the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Na-gasaki. In 1986, the IAEA had 103 member states, seventy of which signed two international conven-tions (the Convention on the Early Notification of a Nuclear Accident and the Convention on Assistance in the case of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency) that were

Source: blogs.nature.com/news/2011/09/directly_comparing_fukushima_t.html



implemented five months after the nuclear incident.

In 2011, the nuclear plant Fukush-ima-Daiichi released a large amount of radioactive material. Caesium-137 landed over 4,000 square miles evac-uating over 20,000 Japanese resi-dents from their homes. The U.S. National Council on Radiation Pro-tection (NCRP) estimated that the caesium-137 released in Japan was eighty-five greater than the amount released following Chernobyl inci-dent given the size of the region.

Following Fukushima-Daiichi di-sas ter in Japan, world leaders met at the Nuclear Security Summit at Seoul. They stressed the importance of strengthening the nuclear security to avoid future incidents.

After Fukushima, countries real-ized that a nuclear disaster can oc-cur at any time leading IAEA mem-ber states to adopt new advanced measurements in the event of cata-strophic events.

Currently, nuclear plants are an important source of energy. How-ever, following Chernobyl, Germany took the initiative and shut down its nuclear plants in order to use renew-able energy. All countries, except Israel, that possess nuclear weapons possess nuclear plants as well. Not only do they transform atoms into energy, they also remain functional for 60 to 80 years. Nevertheless, since the nuclear disaster at Chernobyl, the number of functional reactors has declined. Hopefully, they will continue to decline in the future.

Author: Tarek Hamdan

Sources: “The Dream that

Failed”, The Economist, March 10th

2012; economist.com/node/21549098;

unscear.org/unscear/en/chernobyl.html;

unscear.org/unscear/en/fukushima.html;

iaea.org/newscenter/features/cherno-

byl-15/cooperation.shtml; akiomatsumura.

com/2012/04/682.html; www.un.org/sg/

statements/?nid=5170

IAEA IMPROVING GLOBAL SECURITY IN SEOUL

World leaders met at the Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul, South Korea in the last week of March 2012 to discuss nuclear security and reducing the threat of nuclear terrorism. The Summit’s communique recognized the role of the IAEA in assisting with international cooperation in regards to individual countries fulfilling their nuclear security obligations.

Voluntary contributions to the IAEA Nuclear Security Fund were encour-aged so that the IAEA can assist countries both domestically and interna-tionally with their nuclear security concerns. THE IAEA was also encour-aged by the world leaders to organize meetings highlighting the important connections between nuclear safety and security, in light of the Fukushima accident in March 2011. The importance of multilateral instruments to ad-dress nuclear security was underlined, with the mention of the amendments to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (CPPNM).

The IAEA Illicit Tracking Database program was also emphasized, which makes available any information on nuclear materials currently outside of regulatory control. Promoting a global security culture was mentioned in the communique, along with IAEA initiatives in information security. Inter-national cooperation among nation states was particularly highlighted in the communique and at the Summit, as the IAEA recognizes that without coop-eration among states, nuclear security cannot be achieved.Author: Lauren Rava, Sources: iaea.org/newscenter/news/2012/iaeakeyrole.html

Source: onioni2.blogspot.ca/2011/05/summary-of-detected-radioactive.html


Spring-Summer 2012

UNITAR Forum on “Opportunities and Challenges for a Green Economy” – March 23rd, 2012

The UNITAR Forum held its “Opportunities and Challenges for a Green Economy” meeting on March 23rd, 2012, where the focus was pos-sible green solutions and how they are to be achieved. Biotechnology was a proposed solution to a green economy and also a source of renew-able energy. It could be used in the area of transportation, which is the second largest energy user and by far the largest oil user. While it is rec-ognized that fossil fuels will be a re-source for many years to come, it has come time to begin the transition to renewable resources as well. Bio-technology would create jobs and can make 914 million tons of fuel.

The role of ICT networks as a re-source to connect many countries is another area to explore. There is a concern in the Rio+20 documents that ICTs are not being utilized to their full potential; they can be used to mobi-lize and connect with people around the world at any moment. Having the ability to connect with people in this way would reduce transportation, roads, gasoline, and entire conferenc-es could be held on a screen.

Speakers: Ms. Yvonne Lodico, Mr. Gary Fowlie, H.E. Mr. Jim McLay ambassador of New Zealand, Mr. Jus-tin Perrettson.

UN HEADQUARTERS Briefing on: An Interactive Dialogue on “Harmony with Nature”

Speakers: Owen Gengerich, Mark Lawrence, Joshua Farley, Pat Mooney and Brian Czech.

Summary: Professor Gengerich spoke about the history of our uni-verse and stressed on how we are de-stroying species and deforesting our planet. He argued that the more we advance technologically, the more we destroy our planet and its inhabitants. He also spoke about the destruction of the ozone layer and that we should be more careful since it is what protects us from the UV rays of the Sun.

Lawrence talked about the side ef-fect of what we do. He argued that even though it is unintential, we are well aware of the harm we cause. Our ac-tions are polluting our planet at a very high and scary rate. He said we are at the “Anthropocene” era, which began either with the industrial revolution in the 1800 or with World War II. He

STATEMENT OF WORLD INFORMATION TRANSFER, INC. to The Commission for Social Development

Fiftieth session, 1-10 February 2012Your Excellencies, Distinguished Delegates and Dear Colleagues,World Information Transfer, (WIT), an NGO in General Consultative Status with

ECOSOC, Associated with DPI, with reference to UN Document E/CN.5/2012/1, Section 3, (b) iv, WIT offers the following recommendation:

Unrestrained population growth has been continually ignored by politicians even when dealing with issues such as poverty, food production, natural resource deple-tion, world’s ability to provide jobs and decent living standards. Even though popula-tion growth rates have slowed, population increase remains the single greatest threat to remediating Climate Change and its consequences to the health and sustainability of this planet..

The Rio Summit in 1992 also ignored the population issue. The delegates, in-stead of insulating themselves from the religious and cultural pressures and focus-ing on the one issue that impacts the quality of the environment and sustainable development, let dogmas and fear of retribution shadow their negotiations.

Unfortunately, by ignoring the importance of family planning it is impossible to pre-vent child abuse, child labor, human trafficking and human slavery. Unless every child born is assured of food, shelter and education, we will continue to throw money at keep-ing children barely alive and ignorant instead of giving them an opportunity of growing up to become healthy, educated and contributing members of the world society.

Therefore, WIT recommends continued linking of poverty eradication to family planning, the goal of which is simply, healthy families. The means to this goal is free education.

Thank you for your attention.

raised an important issue: How can we live in harmony with nature if we don’t live in harmony with ourselves.

Farley as well as Czech stressed how the growth of the world economy is leading to an increase in the use of non-renewable resources and hence destroying our environment even fast-er. Our endless pursuit of economic growth leads to the degradation of our planet. The higher a country’s GDP is, the more we destroy our planet. Hence, we need to find a middle point that would work for the economy as well as the environment.

They talked about different rules for sustainability that should be im-plemented. Among them were:

1. Pollution outflows cannot ex-ceed absorption capacity

2. Renewable resource extraction cannot exceed regeneration process

3. We must leave a healthy, clean, and safe environment for future generations.

Conclusion: the more we seek economic growth the faster we will destroy our planet. It is time we learn to share our environment.



Occupy Wall Street protesters expressed verbal violence against a range of ethnic and religious groups including Moslems and Jews. Its agenda never clarified, the na-tional protest movement gathered much of its momen-tum from pent up resentment and frustration.

Civil Society typically considers itself to be the protec-tor and advocate for justice. Non-governmental actors have a history of pushing their governments to expand human rights, protect workers, broaden educational op-portunity, safeguard human health. Recent events give us pause to question whether this historical role has changed particularly since the last time the United Na-tions convened a world summit. The World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance,” (Durban, South Africa, August 31-Sept 7, 2001) became an opportunity for some Civil Society representatives to express age old bigotry, most

Point of View, continuing from page 16 notably - and shockingly - in the form of anti-semitism. While governments have various geo-political reasons to repeat ethnic and religious hatred, what motivates non-governmental groups to behave so corrosively?

9/11 occurred four days after the conclusion of the failed World Summit against racism. Quite consistent with the hatred expressed in Durban, rumors quickly circulated that Jews and Israel caused the attacks or were forewarned. Another journalist, Daniel Pearl, of the Wall Street Journal, was decapitated by 9/11 compatri-ots. Pearl was targeted as a Jewish, American journalist.

The last UN Summit, in 2001, deteriorated into dem-onstrations of bigotry and hatred, the exact opposite of its stated purpose. We hope that climate change does not now also imply a degraded emotional climate for international negotiations. The crucial goal of a sustain-able future won’t advance within such a heated atmos-phere.

TEDMED Conference 2012

The TEDMED Conference, held this past April at the Kennedy Center in Washington D.C., was an experi-ence filled with innovative and for-ward thinking topics on health and technology. TEDMED stands for tech-nology, entertainment, and design, but focuses on medicine and health issues as well. This collaborative expe-rience addressed the problems, solu-tions, and challenges that lie ahead in the medical field.

Dr. Francis Collins, the director of the Human Genome Project ad-dressed the need to make the drug dis-covery pipeline faster. Over 4,000 dis-eases have known molecular causes, but only 250 of those have treatments. Dr. Collins proposed that the National Institute of Health should work more closely with the private sector to en-hance the access to information and repurpose drugs that have been used to cure other diseases.

Technological innovations in the medical field were also addressed at TEDMED, and will be a key tool for

future doctors. David Icke discussed his pliable electronics that look like tattoos, but monitor a heartbeat and ECG. John Qaulter, co-founder of Bio-Digital Systems, presented the freely accessible 3D interactive human. This technology is a teaching mechanism for medical students to learn anatomy, health conditions, and treatments. Todd Park, the US Chief of Technol-ogy said Cincinnati has experimented with electronic health record sharing and has seen promising results.

The current medical system was a topic of concern for many speakers at TEDMED. Dr. Ivan Oransky, the executive editor of Reuters Health commented on the increased “medi-calization” in society. Dr. Jacob Scott mentioned that medical students and current doctors could be great con-nectors, but their innovation is being held back in the modern biomedical

field. Doctors need to channel their creativity, calling this “imaginectomy.”

Chief Medical Examiner of the HealthDay News, Cynthia Haines, who attended TEDMEN, knows the medi-cal system is facing problems, but saw innovative solutions underway that could help Americans minimize their health risks. Detecting inflammation, which could lead to heart disease and other illnesses is one preventative measure that is being looked at. She discussed how relaxation exercises such as Reiki and aromatherapy re-duce the risk of illnesses. The Patients role in health care is also a growing theme in the TEDMED conference, and how Americans should take re-sponsibility for their health and share the “power” and knowledge between doctors and patients.

The next TEDMED Conference will be held next April in Washington D.C., which will take on a whole new set of discussions surrounding tech-nology and health. Sources: 1)http://medgadget.com/2012/04/tedmed-2012-day-2-rock-star-scientists-and-patients-aiming-to-knock-out-disease.html2)http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-cin-dy-haines/tedmed-2012_b_1422040.html3)https://www.biodigitalhuman.com/de-fault.html


Spring-Summer 2012

World Information Transfer, Inc., (WIT) is a not-for-profit, non-govern-mental organization in General Consultative Status with the United Na-tions, promoting environmental health and literacy. In 1987, inspired by the Chornobyl nuclear tragedy, WIT was formed in recognition of the press-ing need to provide accurate actionable information about our deteriorat-ing global environment and its effect on human health. WIT exercises its mandate through:• World Ecology Report (WER). Published since 1989, the World Ecology

Report is a quarterly digest of critical issues in health and environment, produced in four languages and distributed to thousands of citizens throughout the developing and developed world.

• Health and Environment: Global Partners for Global Solutions Con-ference. Since l992, WIT has convened what we believe to be one of the world’s premier forums for the presentation of scientific papers by in-ternational experts on the growing clinical evidence supporting the link between degrading environments and diminished human health. The conference has been convened as a parallel event to the annual meeting of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development. The scientific pa-pers presented at the conference are available on WIT’s web site.

• Health and Development CD ROM Library. This project consists of a library of CDs each of which focuses on a subject within the overall topic of Development and Health information. Our Human Information CD ROM Library offers one bridge across the “digital divide” for both devel-oped and developing countries. The project is continuous with future topics being developed.

• Health and Development CD ROM Library for Ukraine. In conjunc-tion with UNDP, WIT has developed a country specific library disc for distribution in schools and centers in Ukraine.

• Humanitarian Aid. In conjunction with the K.Kovshevych Foundation, WIT provides humanitarian aid to schools, hospitals and orphanages in areas devastated by environmental degradation. Shipments include com-puters, clothing, toys and medical equipment.

• Internship. World Information Transfer (WIT) offers internships in New York City, where our main office is located. Our goal is to encour-age future leaders in health and environment. Our interns spend the majority of their time at the United Nations.

• Scholarship Program. With the support of the K. Kovshevych Founda-tion, WIT offers scholarships to intellectually gifted university students in need of financial assistance to continue their studies in areas related to health and environment.

• www.worldinfo.org WIT provides through its web site up to date science based information on the relationship between human health and the natural environment, including the papers from the WIT’s annual con-ference, the archived World Ecology Reports, and our new Ecology En-quirer, an e-newsletter written by our Interns targeted to young people.

• Centers for Health & Environment. The aim of the Centers is to pro-mote research, education and solutions. The first center was opened in Ukraine in 1992.

World Information Transfer

World Ecology ReportWorld Information Transfer, Inc.(ISSN #1080-3092)475 Park Avenue South, 22nd FloorNew York, NY 10016TELEPHONE: (212) 686-1996FAX (212)686-2172E-MAIL: [email protected] EDITION AVAILABLE ON:

http://www.worldinfo. orgFOUNDER & EDITOR-IN-CHIEF:

Dr. Christine K. DurbakMANAGING EDITOR:

Dr. Claudia StraussCONTRIBUTING EDITORS:

Natalia Baranowski, Tarek Hamdan,

Barnett S. Koven, Gabriella LoConte,

Julia Naime, Lauren Rava,

Samantha Steinberg, Mehdi Tolou

CIRCULATION MANAGER:

Carolyn ComittaLANGUAGE EDITORS:

CHINESE - Eddie Ng Hon Fai,

Yangtze Sun, Geoffrey Yeung

SPANISH - Patricia Munoz Tavira

UKRAINIAN/RUSSIAN -

Oleh Harasevych, Stefan Heryliv

REGIONAL DIRECTORS

CANADA:Martha B. Trofimenko,Barrister and Solicitor, 123 La Rose Ave. Apt. 610Toronto, ON M9P 3T3Tel: (416)248-8800E-mail: [email protected]

CHINA:Au Yin Yu (Josephine)3 Hop Yat Road 4th Floor,Kowloon, Hong Kong, China

EASTERN EUROPE:Prof. Mykola Prytula,Stefan GerylivK. Levychkoho11a, #15, Lviv, UkraineTel/Fax: (380) 322 76-40-39 & 76-68-18E-Mail: [email protected]

EUROPEAN UNION:Dr. Michel LootsOosterveldlaan 196B-2610 Antwerp, BelgiumTel: 32-3-448-05-54; Fax: 32-3-449-75-74E-Mail: [email protected]

LATIN AMERICA:Patricia Munoz TaviraSleutelstraat 38, 2000, Antwerp, BelgiumTel: 32 (0) 48 66 79006 E-mail: [email protected]

USA:Dmitry Beyder3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd.Portland, OR 97239Tel: 646-924-8464E-mail: [email protected]

World Information Transfer is a Non-Profit, Non-Governmental Organization in General Consultative Status with the United Nations, Promoting Health and Environmental Literacy.

Board of DirectorsDr. Christine K. Durbak, CHAIR & CEORoland DeSilvaEXECUTIVE VICE CHAIRDr. Claudia Strauss VICE CHAIRCarolyn T. ComittaSECRETARYBarnett KovenTREASURERDr. Oksana BaczynskyjDr. Bernard D.GoldsteinValeriy KuchinskyDr. Philip J. LandriganDr. Patricia MyskowskiDr. Maria PavlovaDr. Scott RatzanProf. Mark RobsonDr. William N. RomJay Walker



HOW YOU CAN HELP:

WIT is a non-profit, internation-al, non-governmental organiza-tion, in consultative status with the United Nations, dedicated to forging understanding of the relationship between health and environment among opin-ion leaders and concerned citi-zens around the world. You can help us with your letters, your time, and/or your donations.

World Information Transfer

World Ecology Report475 Park Ave. South, 22nd FloorNew York, NY 10016

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed it’s the only thing that ever has”

MARGARET MEAD

NON-PROFITORGANIZATION

U. S. POSTAGE PAIDCEDAR RAPIDS, IA 52401

PERMIT NO. 860

POINT OF VIEW:

Hope for the future or Another Kind of Climate Change

Rio + 20 (the nick name for the United Nations Con-ference on Sustainable Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, June 20-22, 2012)) reminds us that we have spent two decades envisioning a future where coopera-tion and compromise would lead to a clean and sustain-able environment. With the stresses of climate change already upon us, and global population growing in the most stressed parts of the world, such a future remains distant, despite the advances to protect the planet’s re-sources. The long, disparate list of the Rio summit’s key issues suggests tough negotiations ahead. In the current climate of frustration and inflexibility, govern-ment representatives will need to refocus their energies on our common future.

Civil Society might take the responsibility of urging collaborative negotiations based on the art of compro-mise. And some sectors have. However, one segment of Civil Society, instead, has chosen to blame capitalism for many perceived injustices including climate change.

Quoting from the “Declaration of Social Movements Assembly” during the 2012 Thematic Social Forum, Por-ta Alegre, Brazil, Jan. 28, 2012: “If today we fight, the future is ours;” and “there is no solution inside the capi-talist system!” and “the inspiring strength of movements like the Arab Spring, Occupy Wall St., “indignados” and the struggle of Chilean students, the Social Movements Assembly call upon popular forces and activists of all countries to mobilize actions – coordinated at world

level – to contribute to people’s emancipation and self-determination, reinforcing the fight against capitalism.”

A look at the last century would suggest that if today we fight, the future is war. Capitalism in one form or an-other has been around since humans organized them-selves into stationary communities. What alternative economic arrangement would successfully replace it? In the last century communism tried and failed, until it incorporated capitalist elements.

Particularly disappointing in the Social Forum Dec-laration is the omission of complexity in understand-ing capitalist economies. In the Declaration, capitalism is treated as a scapegoat: it is simplified, stereotyped, viewed as the enemy, and like all effective stereotypes served up as a lodestone for anger and hate.

The Arab Spring protests, the Occupy protests pro-duced important results but also exposed underlying rage. In Cairo’s Tahrir Square, the South African CBS journalist, Lara Logan, was sexually brutalized by a male mob until she was rescued by a group of soldiers and women. Her attack exposed the violence with which so many women in the Arab world live. UN-Women re-ports (http://www.un.org/womenwatch) that justice is denied to millions of women, even though their liv-ing conditions have generally improved globally. The UN Commission on the Status of Women will address the theme of Violence at its 2013 annual session. Some Continuing on page 14

Documents

Special Focus: 1 Innovative Approaches to Climate Change …worldinfo.org/wp-content/uploads/library/wer/english/2012_Spring... · Exploration in the Yasuní ITT Rainforest On the