The war may be won, now it’s time to win the peace. Rebuilding a country after a war is not only about reconstructing health services, roads, ports, airports and schools. It is also about cleaning up the environment and restoring damaged ecosystems to secure the future supply of natural resources and ecosystem services needed for filtering air and water, ensuring food supply, and providing erosion control and fertile soil.



Oil wells on fire in Kuwait during the first Gulf War in 1991. According to one estimate that war caused environmental damage costing $40 billion.

War causes human suffering and grief. People are killed or wounded, made homeless, hungry and thirsty. Families are separated, education systems collapse and the mental health of civilians and soldiers is seriously harmed. It might seem ridiculous to worry about the damage war does to the environment, to ecosystems and their animal species. However, human suffering caused by war is often prolonged by environmental destruction. After a war, rebuilding is necessary—not only for buildings, roads, railways, the education system and health care, but also for ecosystems. A country recovering from war must restore drinking water supplies, damaged wetlands, agriculture, forests, lakes and the marine environment as ecological and economic recovery is often linked.“One can easily clean up the language of war—‘collateral damage, friendly fire, smart bombs’—but cleaning up the environmental consequences is a far tougher task… too often the impact on the Earth’s life support systems is ignored,” notes Klaus Toepfer, Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

Direct and indirect environmental effects
We have all seen the black fumes from burning oil wells on television. These fires are undoubtedly causing harm to people and polluting the region’s ecosystems. In addition, there are other kinds of pollution due to oil spills and hazardous waste leaking from damaged industries, destruction of sewage treatment plants, and much more. The war in Iraq has placed a great environmental burden on a region with already fragile ecosystems and where about 20 percent of the population lacked access to clean drinking water even before the war. In addition to the direct activities involved in waging war, there are often severe environmental effects caused by resource plunder in the wake of war, or in order to finance it. This has been the case in several extended internal wars in Africa.
    According to one estimate, the 1991Gulf War caused environmental damage costing $40 billion. Iraqi forces destroyed more than seven hundred oil wells when fleeing from Kuwait, leading to soil and water contamination still remaining ten years afterwards. According to the World Resources Institute, burning wells released nearly half a billion tons of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide. This burning alone made Iraq the ninth largest polluting country in 1991. Oil, soot, sulphur and acid rain fell as far as 1,900 kilometres away, poisoning plants and animals, contaminating water and choking people. Average air temperatures in the region were reported to have dropped by almost ten degrees Celsius due to smoke from the burning oil that reduced sunlight.
    Four million barrels of oil were released into the Persian Gulf, affecting large areas of the coastline. The destruction of sewage treatment plants resulted in large fish kills due to the discharge of more than 50 millions litres of untreated sewage water into Kuwait Bay every day during the war and its aftermath. The marine environment suffered from oil spills, shading from the smoke, and a sea surface microlayer made toxic to plankton and the larvae of marine organisms. Worse still, the sea temperatures dropped. Birds, otters, dugongs and prawn fisheries were severely affected. In 1991-92 total biomass in the Saudi Arabian prawn stock was only a quarter of pre-war levels. Wars also pose a serious threat to biodiversity. For instance, several Iraqi wetlands are of international importance as a staging and wintering area for waterfowl. The Gulf and Sea of Oman region is home to several important marine turtle habitats with five out of the seven of the world’s marine turtle species.
    Another war-related environmental problem now gaining media attention is damage from depleted uranium (DU), used in projectiles designed to pierce armour. UNEP is now investigating the effects from weapons containing DU in Iraq. Previous UNEP assessments in Kosovo, Serbia and Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina concluded that radiation levels were low and did not threaten human health or the environment, but they also noted that many scientific uncertainties remain. Many blame DU ammunition for causing birth defects in children in the Gulf area and “Gulf War Syndrome” in veterans.

Agent Orange in Vietnam
Agent Orange was one of many herbicides used during the Vietnam War by USA in the 1960’s to kill plants and leaves, which provided cover for their enemies. However, Agent Orange was also contaminated with TCDD, or dioxin, an environmentally persistent compound. TCDD has since been linked to several types of cancer and reproductive problems in both humans and animals. According to one estimate, defoliants eliminated 50% of the mangrove forests in Vietnam and had serious effects on the wildlife population. Recently, a study published in the prestigious scientific journal Nature found that the total amount of dioxin sprayed during the war was up to four times as great as was previously estimated.

Environmental problems causing conflicts
War is among the leading causes of concentrated environmental destruction, but unsustainable use of natural resources and degraded natural ecosystems can also cause conflicts, directly or indirectly. There are several examples where frustration and lost livelihood due to resource degradation have led to conflicts that may at first glance seem to be ethnic or religious in nature. Several analysts have suggested that most conflicts in Africa in the future are likely to be over water. The Nile River is a likely setting for such conflicts as populations grow and available fresh water per capita decreases. Although international wars over water have not yet occurred, lack of water has already led to several localised conflicts.
    The Rwanda conflict, often considered a textbook case of ethnic conflict, has today been redefined by many analysts as having a more complex origin. Analysts emphasise the underlying causes of such conflict, such as population growth, land scarcity, soil erosion, and unequal land distribution and access to resources.

Economic and ecological recovery linked
The links between ecology and economy, and environmental sustainability and development, are increasingly recognised in the international development community. The environment is not only something we can afford to care about when we become sufficiently rich. It provides goods and services that sustain development, so after a war, goals to combat disease, poverty and hunger must not come at the expense of the environment. Environmental concerns must therefore be part of any strategy to rebuild a country and promote sustainable development.“Economic and ecological recovery will be linked. Preparing for both is the only way to improve the lives of Iraqis,” Jonathan Lash, president of the World Resources Institute noted. “Rapid action to repair environmental damage can often support humanitarian relief efforts in vital ways,” said UNEP’s Klaes Toepfer. Actually, the United Nations’ recent US$2.2 billion appeal for emergency assistance to Iraq during the coming six months will provide money for several environment-related activities. One activity that will probably be prioritised is the restoration of the degraded Mesopotamian Marshlands in southern Iraq. These marshes have been home to human communities for five millennia and sustain two-thirds of west Asia's wintering wildfowl, 11 globally-threatened bird species and 3 globally-threatened mammal species. Owing to upstream dams and drainage the marshlands have been severely degraded. Moreover, Saddam’s troops drained the marshes and burned villages to quell an uprising after the 1991 Gulf War. UNEP notes that about 90% of the circa 20,000 square kilometres of marshlands have been lost, making this one of the greatest environmental disasters in history.

World Bank’s statistics still lack high-quality sustainability measures

There is still a lack of adequate statistics that measure the state of the environment, according to this year’s World Development Indicators from the World Bank. But there are interesting new attempts to develop sustainability indicators.

World Development Indicators (WDI) is the World Bank's annual compilation of data describing development. It includes some 800 indicators about people, environment, economy, states and markets. There are several arguments for developing sustainability indicators that integrate economic and environmental aspects. However, presenting such integrated accounts can be costly and difficult, so for now we have to settle with several physical indicators and descriptive statistics that also provide useful environmental information:

More at :

http://www.worldbank.org/data/wdi2003/index.htm

“Jazz science” to tackle the problems of poor farmers

"Natural resource management is like jazz; it requires constant improvisation." J. Sayer and B. Campbell use tempting language when arguing for a new kind of natural resource management to solve the problems of poor farmers. In their prizewinning article there is hardly any scientific taboo that remains unchallenged.

    To tackle the complexity of problems poor farmers in developing countries face, a new kind of research is needed, according to a prizewinning scientific article by Jeffrey A. Sayer of the World Wildlife Fund and Bruce Campbell of CIFOR (Center for International Forestry Research). They suggest an entirely different culture and organisation of research, which abandons the "transfer of technology" philosophy of earlier decades. This philosophy led to enhanced yield of a few cash crops by improving resistance to pests and diseases, but the gains often missed the poorest of the poor and degraded soils, water, biodiversity, and non-cultivated land. Instead, argue Sayer and Campbell, long-term improvement of the well-being of poor farmers will require "Integrated Natural Resource Management (INRM)".
    The word "integration" might sound rather harmless nowadays. The term has been over-used and is difficult to implement in practice. However, Sayer and Campbell present many concrete suggestions including focusing on an "adaptive learning cycle," in which researchers are one of many stakeholder groups. In this way research becomes a natural element of the management process. The authors make no distinction between research and management. “In the ideal scenario,” they write, "all management is experimental and all research involves managers." Thus, researchers are not just watching, measuring, counting - they are among those trying to develop solutions through joint action.
    When Sayer and Campbell develop the underlying principles of INRM, they are - willingly or not - riding roller coaster with the emotions of any classical natural science disciple trained in the 60s or 70s. For instance they encourage adaptive decision-making and suggest that locally developed INRM-models can be scaled up to yield results across broad eco-regional domains. Finally, they claim that INRM must involve conscious improvisation, just like jazz. The only question is how many gifted improvisers there are out there.

/Bernhard Huber

Source:

Sayer, J. A. and B. Campbell. 2001. Research to integrate productivity enhancement, environmental protection, and human development. Conservation Ecology 5(2): 32. [online]
URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol5/iss2/art32
(This article received the 2002 CGIAR Science Award for Outstanding Science Article.)

Sustainability challenges for economies in fast transition

Many economies in East Asia seem to grow too fast. While development has entailed significant improvements in welfare, it has also taken a heavy toll on the environment. For development to become sustainable, science and society must collaborate and build on human creativity, encourage communities to manage their own resources and adjust livelihoods.

     Nations experiencing rapid economic growth pose a special set of challenges for sustainable development. Scientists have an important role to play in this development--but many scientists find it difficult to accept the role of politics or “unrealistic” human demands. Society, on the other hand, often finds scientists vague, idealistic and arrogant, says Dr. Louis Lebel of Chang Mai University in Thailand. To harness science for sustainability, we need to change both science and society, notes Dr Lebel, and it’s already happening. We must now envision transitions towards sustainability together – with scientists as citizens and citizens as scientists.
    Dr. Louis Lebel and his group of researchers work to maintain livelihoods for upland farmers, coastal aquaculturalists and urban inhabitants in Thailand and Vietnam. He stresses the differences facing transitional economies compared to the development path of presently industrialised nations. The main difference is speed. East Asia has been experiencing extremely rapid economic growth for the past few decades and has had relatively little time to plan. Thus, there are many unfinished agendas. New agendas arise before old ones are finished and they do not have the resources to do everything at once.
    One forgotten agenda is the environment. While development has brought sizeable improvements in human welfare, particularly in health and education, market access and infrastructure, these changes have also placed a heavy toll on the environment. Fast growth, rapid urbanization and industrialization has lead to increases in atmospheric emissions, widespread deforestation, increased use of pesticides, overexploitation of fisheries and coastal ecosystems and chemical pollution.
    Sustainable development means much more than economic growth and increased technological sophistication. It is not about one answer, such as an optimal land use pattern or urban layout, but about building and maintaining capacity to adapt and innovate.
    Since much of society does not fully perceive or understand the workings of natural ecosystems as necessary for humans to develop, science can contribute to an increased understanding of key ecosystem functions and their economic importance. But other key parts of this capacity lie in human creativity, social networks, cooperation and competition. In countries experiencing rapid economic and social changes, building and maintaining the adaptive capacity of communities to self-organize, manage their own resources and adjust their livelihoods is crucial.

/Lisa Deutsch

Source:

This summary is based on the lecture "Harnessing science for sustainability in transitional economies: changing science or society?" presented by Dr. Louis Lebel as a part of the Stockholm Seminars, at the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm, Sweden, March, 2003.


More at:

http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/BCSIA/forum.nsf/people/LebelLouis
http://albaeco.com/sthsem

New Swedish International Biodiversity programme

The Sida-financed Swedish international biodiversity programme (SwedBio) has been officially launched. It will promote knowledge about the role of biodiversity for development in general and for poverty alleviation in particular.  

Scientists, aid workers, representatives of the Swedish Ministry of Finance and Ministry of the Environment, and many more visited the opening ceremony of SwedBio, The Swedish International Biodiversity Programme. It was established by Sida and the Swedish Biodiversity Centre (CBM) at the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU) and Uppsala University. Sida finances the programme.
    - Often biodiversity is viewed from an esthetical, ethical or romantic point of view, but biodiversity can be valued in monetary terms as well, said Mats Segnestam, head of the Environment Policy Division at Sida.

    SwedBio’s central message is that biodiversity should hot be of concern only to environmentalists. The diversity of life – from microorganisms vital for soil fertility, to the range of plants and animals used for food and shelter, to the variety of forests and other ecosystems protecting water supplies – is crucial for sustainable development in a global perspective. Poor people are the most directly dependent on these diverse resources, and are most vulnerable when biodiversity is lost. Hence, control of and access to biodiversity are intimately linked to poverty, food security, livelihoods, equity, health and trade. SwedBio will work with everything from access to genetic resources and biosafety to ecosystem services, community involvement and ethical issues. SwedBio will work cross-sectoral with the biodiversity issues, says Maria Berlekom, SwedBio Programme Coordinator.
    SwedBio will support Sida's work to further integrate biodiversity aspects in development cooperation and assist Sida in its function as an advisory body to the Swedish government on the linkages between biodiversity and development. The programme will further contribute to capacity building--at Sida, as well as within the Swedish academic community, NGOs and governmental bodies. It will also co-operate with and financially support national and international programmes, projects and NGOs.

More at:

http://www.cbm.slu.se/swedbio/swedbio.htm

“New consumers in developing countries cause environmental damage”

When people increase their purchase power they tend to eat more meat and buy cars. This means increased environmental damage from new consumers in the developing countries. The world community must act now and the rich countries must begin.

Economic development creates new consumers. Growing consumption tends to cause environmental damage. A new article in the leading science magazine Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, highlights this issue and suggests what can be done about it. In particular the article focuses on China and India, which have the largest total numbers of new consumers, meaning individual consumers with a purchasing power of at least $2500 per year (using purchasing power parity a way to balance price levels across countries).
    The article identifies over 1 billion new consumers, in 17 developing and three transition countries. The new consumers have incomes far greater than national averages and in total they have an aggregate spending capacity comparable to that of the U.S. In 16 of the countries the top 20% of the population enjoy 50% or more of the national income. These new consumers tend to switch to a meat-based diet and many purchase an automobile. Increased consumption of meat puts pressure on international grain supplies and can lead to water shortages. Producing 1 kg of beef uses 8 kg of grain, and for every kilogram of grain produced, 1000 kg of water is required. In addition, these new consumers possess over one-fifth of the world’s cars, and the proportion is growing fast. Global carbon dioxide emissions from motor vehicles increased by 26% between 1990 and 1997, four times faster than the total growth of carbon dioxide emissions.
    The two British researchers behind the study conclude that it is in the self-interest of the new consumer countries, and the global community, to address this new environmental threat. The first step, of course, is for consumers in the rich world to modify their consumption. The new consumers in the developing countries are unlikely to alter their consumption unless this happens, the authors conclude. They also suggest a number of policy options for developing countries, including investment in urban mass transit systems and bicycle networks, and restrictions on cars in overcrowded areas. They also advocate more efficient use of water for the growing of grain, removing the large subsidies for grain and water that hold down meat prices, and a “food conversion efficiency” tax that puts high taxes on the least-efficient converters of grain, such as beef.
    The authors continue by suggesting how the use of other natural resources can be improved through shifts in tax systems, “greener” economic indicators, the elimination of ‘‘perverse’’ subsidies, and application of new ecotechnologies.


Source:

Norman, Myers and Jennifer, Kent. 2003. New consumers: The influence of affluence on the environment. PNAS, April 15, vol. 100, no. 8, pp. 4963–4968.
    

Science prize for sustainable water use and sanitation

The 2003 Stockholm Water Prize goes to Peter A. Wilderer, for developing decentralised, cost-effective and small-scale systems for sustainable water use and sanitation. 2003 Stockholm Water Prize laureate German Professor Peter A. Wilderer was one of the first to cast doubt on the transfer of Western, centralised, large-scale urban sanitary solutions to the rest of the world. Instead, he has long promoted decentralised, cost-effective small-scale wastewater treatment and water reuse. This approach will most certainly become even more important in the future, considering that many cities in poor developing countries grow extremely rapidly.     In the 1970’s Professor Wilderer brought together scientists of different disciplines, and worked to bridge the gap between science, the public, industry, business and public authorities. According to the international nominating committee, “He holds the view that, in the long term, environmental engineering can only be successful if the interrelationships between environmental factors, ecological and microbiological systems, and human activities are understood in detail.” Wilderer recently initiated the program "Safe Blue Danube" to develop measures to detect, avoid and counteract flooding and accidental pollution in the Danube river, its tributaries and delta in the Black Sea.     The Stockholm Water Prize of $150,000 is awarded August 14, during the annual World Water Week in Stockholm. The prize was established in 1990 by the Stockholm Water Foundation and is presented annually in honour of outstanding achievements in water science, management, action or awareness building. More at: http://www.siwi.org/swp/swp.html “Biodiversity crucial for achieving Millennium Development Goals” Sustainable use and conservation of the world's biological diversity is crucial for achieving the Millennium Development Goals. This was concluded at the meeting “Biodiversity after Johannesburg” in London, 2-4 March. Wetlands, like this one in Costa Rica, have high biodiversity and supply a number of natural resources and ecosystem services to humans. Photo: Nils Kautsky Biodiversity is essential to halve severe poverty and improve human health, food production and water supply. This was concluded at “Biodiversity after Johannesburg” a meeting with more than 160 participants from government, international organisations, NGO’s, academia and the private sector. It was one of the first major follow-up meetings to the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg last summer.     Conserving biodiversity is not only a matter of protecting species in remote nature reserves. It is about safeguarding natural systems that regulate climate, form soil, pollinate crops, cleanse air, filter water and provide medicines and raw materials for countless goods. The World Summit did recognize that biodiversity is a development issue, but biodiversity issues are still under-represented in the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) framework, said Jeffrey Sachs, special advisor to the UN Secretary-General. Klaus Toepfer, UNEP’s Executive Director, added that the capacity of ecosystems to produce goods and services is “essential for meeting human needs, and ultimately influence the development prospects of nations…when that capacity is diminished, the most serious toll is exacted on the poor who are the most vulnerable to floods or crop failures.”     Jeffrey McNeely, of The World Conservation Union (IUCN), summarised the meeting by underscoring that biodiversity is in fact intimately related to all of the MDG’s. He reminded that biodiversity gives us the ability to adapt to changing conditions in the future and noted that the benefits of biodiversity often fail to reach the poor. Finally he stressed the need for strengthened political support for biodiversity conservation and called for economic indicators of unsustainable consumption.     The meeting was organised by a number of organisations, including the Equator Initiative, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), UN Environment Programme (UNEP), and the Department For International Development (DFID). It was the first of two meetings in London dealing with the linkages between biodiversity and sustainable development. The second meeting will take place in May.      More at: About “Biodiversity after Johannesburg”: http://www.undp.org/equatorinitiative/secondary/biodiversity.htm About the Millennium Development Goals: http://www.undp.org/mdg/ A crash course on biodiversity for the non-specialist: http://www.wri.org/wri/biodiv/bri-ntro.html The quote: “Poverty can lead to environmental destruction. Likewise a degraded environment can aggravate poverty.” Odigha Odigha, one of the winners of this year’s “Nobel Prize for the Environment”- the Goldman Environmental Prize. Odigha is a Nigerian forest activist and educator, leading the campaign against industrial logging in the forests of Cross River State in Southeastern Nigeria.