I have always been a Christmassy person. One of my friends calls me her Christmas friend for my propensity to tie bows and ribbons on everything all year long.

I think it’s the twinkle I love: the glisten of decorations and the golden glow of fairy lights. In the depths of darkest winter, the whole of life somehow seems more sparkly.

And I love Christmas foods; mountains of rich, boozy mince pies and heart-warming vats of cinnamon-scented mulled wine. I love the first deep breath of a fragrant Christmas tree, and the sweet tanginess of a freshly peeled tangerine fished from my stocking on Christmas morning.

And I love being with my family. Admittedly it’s not always peaceful or perfect, but there is always a great deal of jolliness.

But mostly I love the feeling of love that seems to infuse every heart in the world.

I am approaching Christmas 2011 with more sadness and a little less joy than usual though. It has been a year of loss for me and for my family; the loss of loved ones.

When I think of the people I have lost – whether through death or by other means – I remember the women who I met in Africa this summer. Most of them had suffered loss too – the loss of their husbands or their children. I spoke to one mother in Mandera county who had walked for 10 days from Somalia to find food and water in neighbouring Kenya. She carried her two year old son on her back for the entire journey. And then he died of malnutrition the day after she reached help.

I think about that woman and I wonder what she is doing now. It’s raining in Mandera at the moment – the longed-for rains, thankfully, have come. Is she still in Kenya? Or has she returned to her village in Somalia? Has she found her husband? Are the rest of her children healthy, or has she lost more? Has she been able to find enough food to sustain her family? I hope with every molecule of my body that she is safe and well, and that her family is thriving.

Christmas inspires both gratitude for what we already have and sparks a certain greater openness to generosity, kindness and compassion. Charles Dickens wrote in the most festive of novels, ‘A Christmas Carol’, that Christmas is “a good time: a kind, forgiving, charitable pleasant time: the only time…in the long calendar of the year, when men and women seem by one consent to open their shut-up hearts freely, and to think of people below them as if they really were fellow-passengers to the grave, and not another race of creatures bound on other journeys.’

As I prepare to leave my desk for two whole weeks of festive celebration, my heart is with all the people I met when I was in Africa, and for every vulnerable, forgotten, underprivileged woman, man and child around the world. As the embers of 2011 settle and the bright lights of 2012 beckon, I am sending them all of my love and good wishes.

Next year I hope we can all do more to help build a fairer world, one which is free from poverty and injustice.  Two billion people live in abject poverty, with less than 80 pence a day. That’s two billion too many. People, please help the people.

Thank you – and happy Christmas.

Nirmala Bogati and her husband Shyam Bogati are a sought after couple in their village. Both Nirmala and Shyam are dairy farmers from Chitwan District and are confident that they can earn better in their own village than their neighbours who often resort to foreign employment.

Recently, Nirmala and Shyam shared their story of success to Radio Audio’s Khulduli.com programme.  Through khulduli.com their stories were broadcasted to 35 districts in Nepal. This is a story of a regular couple who defied odds and ditched foreign employment to work on their farm instead. 

Shyam states, “I had been raising cows and selling milk for the past 15 years. I lost four cows in a month and that is when we hit the lowest point in our lives. I thought of going to a foreign country but luckily our future had something better in store for us.”

Nirmala heard about the MASF-Dairy component Project providing series of training sessions on livestock management, shed management, techniques to increase milk production, feed and fodders, mineral blocks as well as practical knowledge on overall dairy value in Nepal. She immediately shared the information with her husband and decided Nirmala would attend the training classes.

“As soon as I attended the classes I was confident I could improve our living standard. My husband and I started growing quality grass for our livestock, we kept our livestock clean, we sought timely medical care, and we provided the livestock with the mineral blocks which helps in digestion and provides essential nutrients. And in time the milk production increased and our income too. In a year we have added two cows which totals to four milking cows. We sell NPR 200,000 worth milk and our net profit is NPR 120,000. Our monthly income is around NPR 20,000,” said Nirmala.

Through the radio programme both Nirmala and Shyam share the importance of home grown opportunities. They also state that they are earning much more and are happy that the whole family is together. Nirmala and Shyam encourage those seeking foreign jobs to work and seek opportunities in Nepal and Shyam hands out his mobile number to those seeking information on good practices of dairy farming.

You can listen to their story at http://www.aradioaudio.com/index.php?pageName=taaza&nid=255

Nirmala and Shyam have shown that if there is a will there is a way out. 

 

A recent study by Practical Action indicates that about 61 per cent households in Nepal do not have access to minimum energy required for lighting. Addressing Nepal’s energy problems requires an increase in access to modern form of energy.

Devi has three children to look after. All day long she has many chores to complete – cook and clean. By the time she finishes her daily chores its already dark. She does not have kerosene left to light her room and she cannot afford it either. She wants to comb her hair, wash her face, and change into something comfortable for a good nights sleep but she cant because she cannot see a thing; forget finding anything. You and I can still do many things after dark but Devi’s day ends once the sun sets.

The only source of lighting left is the kitchen fire, once the fire is out there is not even a single source of light left in the house. You and I have access to many kinds of energy to light our homes as we have the resources but Devi does not.

Devi has to walk an hour to get to the nearest motor able road access and wait for a taxi (which may or may not come) to take her to the nearest market which is an hour drive. But she also needs money to buy kerosene and money is scarce. With little money she has she purchases basic necessity such as salt, sugar and cooking oil. Devi’s life is hard. Can you imagine living like her in the dark after the sun sets?

Recently, Practical Action installed a 400 watt vertical axis wind turbine (VAWT) in her village of six households. All six households now have access to clean energy.

“My life is so much better now that we have clean energy for lighting in our homes. We could barely afford the trip to buy kerosene,” s aysDevi.

The newly installed wind turbine supplies energy equivalent to 2 light bulbs for each 6 households in Devi’s village. She is happy with the change and say “We can also charge our mobile phones and watch TV.”

Devi’s niece now has light to study and complete her homework.

 

This is a power station operator showing us how he controls the flow of power to each household. The wind turbine is integrated with 260 watt peak of solar energy system.

“I am so happy now,” says Devi. “I can do so much even after the sun sets. I don’t have to hurry and finish my chores and we don’t eat dinner at 5pm anymore. We have the luxury of eating when we want. Time is no more a restriction, all thanks to the wind energy.”

Most of the rural hilly villages in Nepal are not connected to the national grid. Go to www.practicalaction.org and see how you can donate and change the lives of women like Devi.

Watch more success stories from rural Nepal at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgg3s3m-7sQ

We are attending two great science conferences early next year

The ASE conference is an annual must for all science teachers interested in finding out what the latest science resources available are for keeping up to date on current policy and practice.  On 5-7th January we will be there to show teachers the great resources we produce and how they can enhance their science teaching.  If you are attending do please come and see us, we’d love to find out what you like about our work and what else you’d like us to produce,  go to http://www.ase.org.uk/conferences/annual-conference/

Then on 25th February if’s off to the ‘What is science for? ’ conference in Widnes , which will focus on the importance of global issues in science teaching. Sessions will include:

• Andrew Hunt – Making sense of our global interdependence through science
• Prof Malcolm Dando – Bioethics and biological weapons
• Eric Fewster – Science and engineering for relief and development
• Prof Justin Dillon – “Doing” science versus “Being” a scientist: Making sense of young people’s aspirations and attitudes to science
• Prof Justin Dillon (Workshop) – Climate change education within the new National Curriculum: threats and opportunities for teachers and students.

To book for this conference please go to  www.whatissciencefor.eventbrite.com

 

Buried amongst the acres of coverage of the financial crisis and whether or not the UK is in the EU any more, it’s hard to tell exactly what the outcome of the Durban Climate Change Summit really is. That is the problem. Hardly anyone cares any more – or so you would be led to believe. Green house gas emissions are still shooting up despite this global economic crisis. According to the World Bank’s 2010 World Development Report, if all the coal-fired plants scheduled to be built worldwide in the next 25 years come into operation, their lifetime CO2 emissions will equal those of all coal burning since the start of the Industrial Revolution. It hardly bears thinking about.

Flooding in Bangladesh

Durban seems to have set us off on a journey towards a legally binding agreement to reduce greenhouse gas in a decade’s time, but to get everybody even to start seems to have involved accepting delay and avoiding the key decisions about who should make cuts and when. This is in a context where even the International Energy Agency, reckons that we need to have got our investment in low carbon energy infrastructure sorted by 2017 at the latest to have any prospect of hitting the 2°C limit on global temperature rises.

The Durban agreement doesn’t look to me as if it has done anything to help us achieve that. Once again we have ducked the issues and planet and people will pay for it.

Around dawn today, Sunday 11th December, the COP President banged the gavel down on the final session of negotiators at the climate summit in Durban. What was agreed? well, it isn’t a complete disaster. The Kyoto Protocol, the only legally binding agreement to reduce emissions, will continue into a second commitment period. In parallel, a process for building a more comprehensive and ambitious treaty regime was launched – one that will include all countries in binding commitments to reduce emissions. Important decisions were made on adaptation, finance, and technology. On adaptation (the negotations track I have been following for 6 years) there is now a clear framework for supporting developing countries in accessing information to help them adapt, in preparing national adptation plans, and in working towards arrangements for loss and damage following climate change-related disasters such as droughts, floods and hurricanes in the most vulenrable countries. On finance, while arrangements for the Green Cllimate Fund are now agreed – there was no agreement on how to raise money for the fund! and without strong commitments on reducing emissions from the largest polluting countries, no amount of arrangements for adaptation will be effective, in the face of rising temperatures.

So, while the Durban conference avoided total failure, and has perhaps staved off future climate disaster, governments by no means responded adequately to the mounting threat of climate change. The decisions adopted here fall well short of what is needed. It’s high time governments stopped catering to the pressure of the oil and coal lobby, and started acting to protect people and planet.

The climate negotiations, also here at COP17, are based on the understanding that first the industrialised countries should reduce, then the developing countries shall reduce later, as they should not be constrained in their development because they need to solve their poverty problems first.

A side-event  on Friday at the end of the first week of the COP showed a somewhat different side of the big picture: climate mitigation with reduced emissions can go hand in hand with poverty reductions in many developing countries.

At the event, seven representatives from NGOs in the INFORSE network showed successful solutions from their countries on local solutions that can help the poor to get better access to energy and at the same time mitigate climate change.

They told about improved cookstoves from Mozambique that saves 40% of the wood for cooking, Indian biogas plants that replace other fuel for cooking and retain the fertiliser in cow dung, solar lanterns that replace kerosene lamps, Jatropha plants for oil for local power production in Mali, and several other good examples.

The side event went on with proposals for scaling up the successes to national level,  for instance, with reduced investments with subsidies and reduction of taxes & import duties (for solar photovoltaiq panels), with easier permissions to make mini-grids in off-grid areas, and with feed-in tariff for renewables in areas with electric grid. This could partly be financed with climate financing, and could give basic energy access to all for just a fraction of the 100 billion US$/year that the industrialised countries have committed to give to climate mitigation and adaptation in developing countries in 2020.

It is very promising that basic energy access and reduction of poverty  does not need the large increases in CO2 emissions that it caused in industrialised countries during the last 200 years. And if universal energy access with renewable energy could be part of climate agreements, it would give enormous benefits for some of those that need it the most.

On the other hand, universal energy access will not solve the climate crisis. For that we need sharp reductions in the industrialised countries and also actions by the large emitters in the global South. Only then global emissions can peak in the next few years and then be reduced.

The presentations of the side event are online at http://www.inforse.org

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) launches to African beats

It certainly wasn’t an event typically seen during the fortnight of UN climate negotiations here in Durban.  An audience singing joyfully along with women farmers, Southern African youth grinning as they performed traditional dances, and the whooping and ululations ringing around the room, would have been enough to make you remember this day as something rather special and different.

But what really made the 4th of December launch of the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) stand out, was the feeling of inspiration, optimism and empowerment, as 14 Pan-African networks joined together to demand and implement Food Sovereignty for Africa.  After a week of increasingly depressing climate negotiations, with corporate false solutions, and a steady grinding down of expectations, AFSA’s launch and message reminded us all that we are together, we have the solutions, and there is nothing to stop us making them happen.

Of course, it is precisely because of the multiple threats to Africa’s food systems, farmers, communities and ecoystems, that this alliance has come together.  “There are so many challenges facing our continent,” said Anne Maina of the African Biodiversity Network (ABN), one of AFSA’s member networks. “Together AFSA’s member networks represent a huge constituency and we are all in agreement that Food Sovereignty is the way forward to ensure resilient food systems and ecosystems in the face of climate change and destructive development.”

Million Belay of Melca Mahiber, an Ethiopian member of ABN, explained that  “food Sovereignty is an approach to agriculture that is radical, but self-evident too. It holds the interests of small-scale food producers, their communities and ecosystems, as critical to strengthening resilient food systems.  For too long, food policy has focused on yield at any cost – and undermined the very systems and people on which food production depends.  Food Sovereignty is a powerful concept and framework that is clear about embracing solutions, and challenging the threats.”

Agnes Yawe of Participatory Ecological Land Use Management (PELUM), a network with members in 10 countries elaborated further: “The Alliance for Food Sovereignty is working to promote agroecology as a solution for climate change, feeding people, biodiversity, livelihoods and healing the soils.  It is about using and conserving the resources that are freely available to communities. These are appropriate for our economies, and our small scale farmers, who don’t need the expensive chemical inputs that are being pushed on us.”

Food Sovereignty also recognises the enormous value of indigenous knowledge about agriculture and ecosystems.  Mphatheleni Makaulule, an indigenous community leader from Venda in the North of South Africa, expresses the clarity with which her people see climate change and industrialised food systems: “We cannot have health in a sick climate.  In our territories, the soil, water and indigenous forest is already in disorder, and that affects the ecosystem.  The indigenous seeds from the indigenous knowledge are our hope to adapt with this climate change, and this is why we want food sovereignty.”

Amid the celebrations, the groups shared sobering information about the way that false solutions to climate change and hunger are actually a key cause of Africa’s problems. Simon Mwamba of the East African Farmers’ Federation (ESAFF) told the room “The COP17 negotiations should not be used to advance the push for the Green Revolution in Africa, which traps farmers into cycles of debt and poverty.  The green revolution will just enhance the corporate grip over agriculture and farmers, thereby threatening food sovereignty.  Such practices force smallholder farmers to be dependent on agrochemicals, while eroding the seed diversity that Africa needs for resilience to climate change and a food secure future. Genetically Modified (GM) crops will be even worse ”

Nnimmo Bassey of Friends of the Earth Africa added “Climate Change is killing our continent and peoples, but so are the so-called solutions proposed by profit-hungry corporations.  This is why we are coming together as AFSA, to speak out for African solutions to the problems caused by the industrialised North.”

As the gathering sang their last round of the rousing South African soul song “that’s why I’m a farmer now,” we all knew that the challenges ahead are many.  But the energy that swelled around the room has filled all with the optimism that Food Sovereignty can show us the way.

 

 

 

AFSA outline their vision and the need for Food Sovereignty in Africa, in their new report “Food Sovereignty Systems: Feeding the world, regenerating ecosystems, rebuilding local economies, and cooling the Planet – all at the same time”. 

I have just received the annual report from Practical Action’s work in Nepal. It’s full of great facts, photos and some stories.

But for now I want to share the story of Bir, because I think it’s great and because it shows I think how hard people have sometimes to try before they succeed.

Bir’s home is in Nepal but he moved to India in search of a better job. He is still a young man and I imagine when he left it was with high hopes and dreams of a better future. He was there 9 years but even so returned home empty handed.
He says “having no opportunity and alternatives at home I migrated to India along with my neighbours. Despite working every day I failed to earn enough “
Back at home he once again tried every way to eke out a living from his small farm. He couldn’t get any other work.

After 8 months he started to work with Practical Action. He learnt about better forms of agriculture, compost making, nursery management and how to grow crops that could be sold.

After the training he wanted to test his skills so planted ginger, he was careful having so little he didn’t want to risk his money but “Fortunately my ginger turned out excellent and I sold 950KG of ginger for Nepalese rupee 28,000 (£244) in the market. I had never ever earned this much money at once.”

Bir has changed his life. He is now sharing his knowledge and currently helping 60 farmers also benefit from the learning and experience he has.

What I loved about this case study was the reality of the situation, the fact that Bir was helped but actually more importantly that he has gone on to help others – this pass it on approach is central to Practical Action. And the final part of the story where the person Bir has been talking to says that Bir now exudes confidence.

Someone who maybe came back from India with a feeling of failure is now a confident leader in his community able to help others.

Practical Action, Nepal annual report

Climate change for a long time now has stopped being a question of ‘if…’ and more a matter of ‘how much’ (and the answer to that currently isn’t very nice).

To deal with this, enter technologies. They fall into three categories:

1) Mitigation – reducing emission from human activities, from home efficiency devices to renewables and nuclear energy;
2) Adaptation – ways of dealing with the impacts of varying rainfall, temperature, sea level rise and increased frequency and magnitude of disaster events. Most urgent for the poorest groups and those in low lying states where the most vulnerability lies, but planning is also under way for London, Durban, and other developed cities.
3) Geo-engineering – large and unproven projects to remove carbon from the atmosphere or reflect the solar radiation. Includes; ocean iron fertilization projects; mirrors in space; pipes; dreams.

Arguably, the most iconic climate change related technology is the wind turbine, used for clean energy generation. Less is known about the possibility of mirrors in space, and probably for the best. But adaptation technologies are equally mysterious for many people in developed countries. This is springs from a lack of awareness that people in developing countries feel climate change most acutely – “first and worst”.

Nevertheless, adaptation is happening spontaneously as people respond to the altered conditions they find in their area. Technologies, whether used to diversify livelihoods or protect assets, can make this easier, but people will also have to adapt their technologies in order to keep them appropriate.

Enter climate uncertainty – not knowing precisely how climate change will manifest in a specific area over the next two-three decades – and you have a problem that requires new ways of thinking about technology and a new way of doing development.

Today’s Geek Club (Practical Action’s online discussion forum) from 10am to 4pm will discuss the issues of technology for adaptation. This is set against the back drop of the current round of climate negotiations in Durban, South Africa, where countries are discussing proposals for ‘technology transfer’ to developing countries to support adaptation. Come and join us as we consider the how, what, and why not of adapting to climate change.

Agricultural extension has long been the poor relation to agricultural research. Even after the 2008 World Development Report reminded policy-makers of the importance of agriculture in alleviating poverty and put it back on to the development agenda again, agricultural extension remained out of favour. Funds for R&D were spent on the higher-profile R and not the lower status D. Public extension systems continued to be run down and the private sector served only a small minority of farmers.

But at last, people are talking about extension (or rural advisory services) again. The first significant conference in about two decades was held in Nairobi in November. The International Conference on Innovations in Extension and Advisory Services brought together over 400 people from 75 countries including those from government ministries, major agricultural fora and research centres and representatives from civil society and farmers’ leaders. There was a huge diversity of opinion and some inspirational presentations including that of Dr Ben Corrêa da Silva from the Brazilian Ministry of Agrarian Development who spoke of the refocusing government agricultural extension services away from the large commercialised farmers (who can afford private services) towards small family farms where the needs were greater. It was great to hear someone in a government position calling for changes in favour of smallholder farmers!

Practical Action was one of the few INGOs there. I attended along with colleagues from Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, UK and Kenya. We were invited because of our work with local or community-based extension systems – a vital component in many of our agricultural programmes. Our presentation, showing that local systems can provide sustainable, cost-effective services to marginalised farmers, received a lot of interest and is available here.

There were many lively debates and some great opportunities to strengthen links with government staff in Kenya and Zimbabwe in particular, and forge ties with international researchers.

The meeting culminated in the Nairobi Declaration a statement calling for renewed priority to be given to extension services, including a mix of public, private and civil society approaches, and with the focus on demand-driven services for smallholder farmers. This is definitely a step forward: extensions systems are no longer frozen out. But there is still a long way to turn intentions into consistent actions.

I am feeling more positive than I expected to feel, about progress here, at least on adaptation. Discussions are still continuing on what should be written into the decision text on national adaptation planning. A decision on the Adaptation Committee, a new body that will have a significant role in overseeing adaptation at the national level in developing countries, is likely to be left for ministers to decide in terms of who will be on the committee – whether mainly experts in adaptation, and whether a majority from developing countries, and whether to have representatives from civil socieity as well. To keep positive I keep my head down, focusing on adaptation, as the discussions on addressing the desperate need to cut emissions are STILL not progressing much.

Meanwhile, I have also had a lot of opportunities to discuss how we need to change our global food production system towards one focused on an ecological approach – to strengthen resilience of small farmers, to strengthen ecosystems eroded by industrial agriculture, and to reduce the emissions created by intensive monocultures fed by chemical fertilisers. Yesterday I gave a presentation which will be put onto the web, and today I facilitated a wide ranging discussion between around 35 people from many organisations, including the World Food Programme – and we were all of a similar mind on the need for agriculture change, and the need to be vigilant, and mount a counter attach on teh strong lobbies of the agriculture industry and the rhetoric of teh World Bank, on what they call Climate Smart Agriculture. The rhetoric sounds quite good – but the money is not going to support the smallholders as they imply, but the opportunities for developing carbon markets in agriculture.

It’s great to find so many organisations who think along the same lines as Practical Action, both in the north and in the south, and to be able to work with them here to campaign for change.

I was absolutely delighted last Thursday to be present at the headquarters of IBM UK in London  to witness the launch of a new charity, Energy Aid. The idea behind Energy Aid  – that British Industry support the creation of a new initiative to help tackle energy poverty in the developing world – emerged from a suggestion made by Practical Action during an IBM sponsored conference at HRH The Prince of Wales’ START festival last summer. (START was a festival aimed at inspiring people and businesses in the UK to start taking action to make their own lives and activities more environmentally sustainable.)

From our work at Practical Action, we know that access to modern forms of energy – electricity in the home, a clean source of heat for cooking, energy for small enterprises to earn a living- is a prerequisite for development. Without access to basic energy services movement out of poverty simply isn’t possible.

We also know, from our experience in developing countries, that this is not an insoluble problem. Although the vast bulk of people without electricity live in rural areas, out of reach of connections to national grids, affordable electricity can still be provided by simple micro hydroelectricity projects, small wind turbines or solar panels. And clean and efficient cooking stoves can make huge improvements in terms of reducing the time and effort spent collecting fuel and reducing the death toll from smoke pollution in the home.

But we also know that, 132 years after Edison introduced the incandescent light bulb, 1.4 billion people are still in the dark and 2.7 billion still cooking over open fires. This cannot be right and we must find a way of tackling the problem. That is why I was so pleased to be part of the launch event last week.

As one of the founding Trustees of Energy Aid I am tremendously excited by the prospect ahead and look forward to being involved in what I believe is a ground breaking and innovative new charity to tackle one of the most pressing problems of poverty – the lack of access to energy services in the developing world.  If you want to find out more about the charity please go to www.energyaid.org

The news surrounds my day. I wake up to the Today programme and start to think about going to bed after Newsnight. In between I will glance at the BBC to see if there are reports relevant to Practical Action’s work.

Last night I switched off the news. That’s a big thing for me. The much repeated reports on the economy, Euro, Greece, Sarkozy and Merkel meetings, etc. All depressing and unnecessarily gloomy.

I wanted to shout ‘get a life’. ‘Remember how blessed we are’ or ‘stop talking us all into depression’.

This time last year I was in Kenya hearing about our work in some of the world’s most terrible slums. I remembered a time when I spent weeks working alongside women there. They had hard lives, lived in shacks, many had HIV/AIDs, they worried about their kids, about their education and safety, and they were desperate for clean water, for decent food for their families. The Church run textile factory where I worked provided us all with lunch and the women were grateful. Sitting together eating, I enjoyed being with them, they weren’t gloomy, they were curious and took every chance to laugh, they worked to try and make the business a success. In terrible circumstances they were striving to make things better.

We have so much – for many of us – I totally accept not all, to have less would take some adjusting but really make little difference in our lives. What would make a difference is if we could savour what we have and if our news stories could help us rejoice in life not feel down.

I’ve just seen Practical Actions December letter to supporters. And I want to join in saying – thanks for helping us provide clay pot fridges, thanks for helping us teach people how to make reduced smoke stoves (so that thousands of lives have been saved and ill health reduced), thank you for gravity ropeways, for helping people get decent loos, clean water to drink, thank you for helping us help people grow more food so that they can feed their families.

Thank you for being positive about life. For knowing you can make a difference.

Thank you for helping the world have a happier Christmas!

As its December I hope it’s not too early to wish you a ‘Happy Christmas’

Last week the Green Belt Movement (GBM) and GBM’s technical partners Woods Hole Research Center (WHRC) hosted panel discussion on the impact climate finance projects from a grassroots perspective.

We started with a minute’s silence for our founder Wangari Maathai who sadly passed away in September this year. It was a poignant moment – Wangari had planned to speak out at COP17 about the challenges of implementing forest carbon projects. Wangari founded GBM over thirty years ago with a prescience of what we now face, and how environmental degradation was already making the lives of rural women in Kenya a struggle.

Wangari became the first environmentalist and first African woman to receive the Nobel Peace Prize in 2004; she was a fearless campaigner for women’s rights and the environment. Wangari used to say how humble she felt because we need the trees, but they do not need us. My colleague, Mercy Karunditu, spoke about the work that Wangari started with grassroots women when she founded GBM in 1977. Mercy explained: “conservation and protection of Kenyan water towers is doable with the grassroots communities if only they are guided, advised and allowed to own the process. This way they are able to link improved livelihoods with environmental conservation.” Mercy works with communities to reforest the Aberdares and Mt Kenya mountains– some of the most critical water catchment areas in Kenya – producing water and hydropower for most of the population. However the restoration sites are under heavy pressure from overgrazing, charcoal burning and other unsustainable forest practices. Since 2006 GBM has been trialling climate finance projects- under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and others.

The reality of delivering a project with communities planting indigenous trees are highlighted in our Community Forest Climate Initiatives reported launched at the event. Community participation and biodiversity are some areas of concern when implementing a forest carbon project- from our perspective these are fundamental to a project that would address climate change. Current technical requirements mean it is unlikely community groups, without support from NGOs with technical capacity, would be able to start up a climate finance project. Furthermore, from GBM’s experience, until governments put in place strong forest governance, carbon projects and REDD projects will be unlikely to succeed. Therefore these projects will remain in the hands of private companies and consultants, rather than being vested in rural communities who live in and/or rely on these forests for their livelihoods.

GBM’s Prof Karanja said: “If we continue with carbon offsetting – where polluters are able to offset their emissions through buying credits- Africa, Asia and South America will become hewers of wood and drawers of water. We need clear identifiable indicators of reduction of emissions from the major polluters before they can enter the carbon buying market in the south.”

We started the event with Constance Okollet of Climate Wise Women who spoke of the extreme drought and floods that hit villages in her home area since 2007 – the Tororo district of Eastern Uganda. Constance spoke of how women and their families lost everything in floods and then starved as a severe drought followed. She explained how they first thought that God was angry with them- what else could cause such devastation, later they understood that this was climate change. The stark realities of how vulnerable villagers are to extreme weather events makes uncomfortable listening. This is what we need to keep at the forefront in our minds as we urge governments to commit at COP17 to robust, scientifically sound and time-specific global action.

As I have been attending more sessions at the ICC today I asked Max Bloomfield to cover the events of the street parade taking place through the streets around us, and here is his account:

As the numerous large armoured police vehicles crept towards me I was initially a little concerned at the heavy police presence at the start of the walk. Thankfully this thinned out and was just a cautionary approach from the SAPD, for the rest of the parade, over a kilometre long and composed of numerous sections of civil society, faith-based, and organised labour groups amongst others, was pleasantly spirited and boisterous. Starting early this morning at Botha’s Garden and working it’s way down Dr Pixley Kaseme Street, towards the ICC, the parade filled the air with the sounds of singers, chanters, music, and once again, vuvuzelas.

Although the streets nearby were filled with shoppers as normal, the main parade streets were filled close to capacity with fascinated locals and fervent climate change activists alike, not to mention a great deal of press-coverage. The parade included less well known groups such as the Airport Farmer’s Association, The Rural People’s Movement and the Landless People’s Movement, next to global giants such as WWF and Greenpeace. Very slowly the parade has made its way down to the ICC where it is currently pausing to allow short speaches to be made, and for statements gathered from participating groups to be handed over to Christiana Figueres, the Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC. It doesn’t look like anyone here will run out of energy before the parade heads to the Old Pavilion site later this afternoon where it will end.

This week I have been following closely the negotiations on adaptation – discussing a number of issues that though they sound remote from the realities of how climate change is affecting people’s daily lives around the world, do have the potential for helping governments support their vulnerable populations. And the signs, on Friday night, are that the draft decisions look quite promising. These decisions are on issues such as the content of National Adaptation Plans, the nature of the support body that will guide developing country governments, and the extension of a programme of workshops and reports on different topics important for adaptation. Negotiations will go on through much of tonight, and probably most of tomorrow. I’m not staying up all night – but I will be back at the conference centre tomorrow to see how things have progressed.

Layak Ram Chaudhary is one of the most enthusiastic farmers I have ever come across, with a knack for technology and innovation. Just with a small patch of land, I am overwhelmed to see him making fortunes, winning public laurels and becoming an inspiration. He is one of many farmers in Joshipur, a village in the Kailali district of Nepal who have made a sound return on investment in vegetable farming.

The secret? Layak Ram showed me his polyhouse and off-farm cultivation and proudly explained how it has helped him become successful in vegetable farming. “The paddy we cultivated here for a long time would hardly feed 11 members of my family for three to four months,” he said. “I was compelled to work as a wage labourer for many years just to meet the ends. When I got an opportunity to participate in the vegetable cultivation training, I learned about the polyhouse cultivation.”

He learned various technologies during the 10-day training on vegetable farming provided by Practical Action.

“They have helped me do things right,” he said. “During the first year, I planted cauliflowers and tomatoes in my land and earned NRS (Nepalese Rupees) 10,000.00 (£77). My family’s happiness knew no bound. The earnings gave a new sight to my father and he also encouraged me to pursue it further. The next year observed sharp increase in my income to Nrs 70,000.00 (£541). It offered me more motivation to buy a tractor which I paid for in instalments. Since then, I have never looked back in life. I continue to raise my production levels and generate more earnings, helping me to educate my children and sisters with pride. The polyhouse has now become a main source of income and it is the appropriate technology to farmers especially those who possess only a small patch of land.”

Ashik Mandal, technical assistant, District Development Office, Kailali, said polyhouses can be made with locally available materials that can significantly reduce the construction cost, as affordability is a major concern for many farmers.

“The most discerning benefit of the polyhouse is that the farmers can grow both seasonal and off-season vegetables at the same time – off season vegetables fetch an attractive price,” he said. “Though a small investment and labour is required to erect it first time, excellent earnings from off-season produces can well offset such investment. The construction site must be a firm land and free from potholes as the bamboo’s sticks may decay in the loose and moist land and house may fall apart. These houses generally last for three years.”

E F Schumacher’s vision and ideas continue to generate increasing momentum in how appropriate technology can challenge the poverty by pulling poor farmers out of grave poverty and famine. On the occasion of his 100th birthday, my wishes are due to him while I also offer congratulatory mention to our local hero, Layak Ram for his extraordinary and exemplary work.

 

Yes, but provided they exist for the majority of urban population, who are now more than 50% of slum dwellers in towns and cities of developing countries. Our work in Kenya and partners work in 5 other African Countries show that pro-poor tariffs is a totally neglected areas in many countries. Promiting people’s choices and control over technologies in urban areas is becoming a major challenge. This is due to many reasons including government control and nature of technologies. Therefore our attention is on the conditions under which technologies are delivered and tariffs is one of those important conditions. In many cases government standards and tariffs are far from the capabilities of the poor people. This means influencing decision makers on affordable systems is still an important part of our work.

Yesterday I spoke with a guy for whom technology and poverty reduction just didn’t compute ‘what’s the link” he asked me ‘poor people need food, clean water, education and jobs”. To me the relationship between technology and each of these needs is clear. For example you need access to decent agricultural tools to farm your land well. The difference if you focus on technology is sustainability.

You can give emergency food aid, you can even provide food aid for 20 or more years, the problem is that it doesnt end poverty rather it builds dependancy. It doesn’t set people free.

Technology gives people the tools they need to make a real difference in their own lives- from ploughs that increase agricultural production to water pumps that free up kids so they can now go to school rather than spending hours collecting water, etc. A long time ago Practical Action, or ITDG as we were then called, used to have a saying ‘ a hand up not a hand out”. in many ways that sums up what we are about.