Category: All Fragilecologies

Fragilecologies Archives
29 November 2006

The stories of corruption, mayhem and of murder have mounted up over the past few decades. Of course there have been great leaders (from my point of view) in Africa, many of those who ushered in African independence for their countries such as Nkrumah, Ben Bella, Keita, Azikwe, Senghor, Nyerere, and so on. But what about those responsible for widespread killing: they do not deserve to go unchallenged and unpunished nationally as well as internationally.

Charles Taylor (BBC News)

African leaders who have been responsible for murdering and maiming thousands of their citizens have had a free ride for decades. They have managed to stay in power for relatively long times, arranged to intimidate their countrymen, continued to rob their treasuries of public funds which are often destined for European and other banks. Remember Idi Amin of Uganda? How about Mengistu of Ethiopia? Bokassa of the Central African Republic? The former died in exile in Saudi Arabia. Mengistu found refuge and is alive and well in Zimbabwe. Bokassa died in France in exile. Several government leaders responsible for the genocide in Rwanda escaped to other places. The Sudan government is allowing for genocide to take place in West Darfur, as I write these words.

Sese Seku (Mobutu) of the Congo ( Zaire ) bled the treasury of his country, much as King Leopold did in the late 1800s, on the order of $8 billion US dollars.

By returning Charles Taylor to Sierra Leone to face his accusers, it is hoped that African leaders in the future may think twice about ravaging their country’s treasuries. In other words, the Taylor case can set a precedent. Hopefully, current as well as future leaders will get the message that they can no longer get away with murdering opposition leaders, acting out genocidal behavior against other ethnic groups, turning food shortages into famines, or occupying neighboring territory for personal gain (as is the situation by Zimbabwe, Uganda and Rwanda in their occupation and stealing resources from the eastern half of the Congo today).

Whatever the reasons may have been behind the Nigerian president’s decision to send Taylor back to face those who accuse him of having carried out horrific acts of violence against his own people, that president must be applauded for hopefully having set this precedent. Let’s hope that this turns out to be a turning point for African leaders, policing instead of ignoring the abhorrent actions toward their citizens of their fellow political leaders. In the past, the silence with regard to their criticism has been deafening!

Fragilecologies Archives
11 October 2006

The following thoughts were prompted by an Arctic Science Conference session held in Fairbanks , Alaska from 2-4 October 2006. The topic of the session was called “Africa and Alaska : Similarities and Differences in Human Dimensions” and included 3 speakers from Africa (Kenya, Nigeria and the Sudan).

What does Africa have in common with Alaska? To many people, a first response would be that both places begin and end with the letter “A”. Full stop. Nothing else could possibly be similar. Alaska is a state in the United State,s and it is so far to the north that it stretches i to the Arctic Circle. Much of Sub-Saharan Africa is centered on the equator.

When people think of Alaska, they might think of permanent ice, glaciers, and snow. They might also think of polar bears and seals. In some places, the sun shines sometimes for 24 hours a day and at other times the sun does not appear at all. Alaska has lots in common with other countries that straddle the Arctic Circle.

African Springbok

For its part, sub-Saharan Africa is not familiar with snow. It does have a few glaciers with perennial ice and snow (at least until recent years; global warming is melting them around the globe), but it brings to mind pictures of hot and wet, or hot and dry. Fields are covered with various types of vegetation, from jungle to desert landscapes. The African animal populations are considered pretty unique as well, when one thinks of African giraffes, hippos, rhinos, camels, and gorillas.

Obviously, it is easy to find difference between the Tropics and Arctic regions. But, hidden from view and hardly ever compared are their similarities. So, I would like to suggest a few of them for you to consider. The purpose is to say that, even though these societies are so different in culture and in ecological setting, there are levels at which human activities and environmental settings can be compared. Therefore, cross-cultural studies can yield insights that studies of one culture or country alone might not be able to see.

1. perceptions of what is a harsh climate

To those of us living in the mid-latitudes of Europe, Asia, and North and South America, the climates of the Tropics and the Arctic regions are likely to be considered “harsh” climates in which to live. Yet, inhabitants of these regions like the climates under which they live, or at the least, have learned to adjust to the climate conditions in their respective eco-zones. They are tolerant of the climate, water, and weather-related conditions under which they and their ancestors have lived. Most likely Africans would consider Alaskan Natives to be living in a harsh climate, while accepting their own as being less harsh. The same might be said about Native Alaskans’ views about those living in Tropical Africa. It would be interesting to compare the views of these people about how they view their climate settings as to whether they see theirs as being a good or a bad climate.

Over 40 years ago, a geographer wrote about the few locations on Earth he referred to as the Earth’s problem climates. Today, it has become quite obvious that all the inhabited locations on earth can be considered to have problem climates, or problems directly or indirectly linked to prevailing climate conditions. Climate can be viewed as either a resource, a hazard or as a constraint to human activities, to ecosystems and to animals. Inhabitants in these disparate regions have accepted the climate conditions under which they live and have adjusted their lifestyles accordingly so as to mesh with the prevailing extremes of cold, hot, wet, humid or dry climate and weather, extremes that would most likely make people from other regions shudder just to think about them.

2. societal responses to climate constraints

Over centuries societies, and the individuals that make them up, have devised ways to cope with harsh climate-related conditions. They have devised technological ways to overcome constraints as well as techniques or ways of doing things. Examples are plentiful and vary from place to place although some of those ways are common to different places: refrigeration, air conditioning, irrigation, heat, clothing, shelters, and even concepts such as ëcomparative advantage’ where regions can trade with other regions products they can produce for things they can’t produce, oranges, coffee, tea for example.

Comparing these methods to cope with a varying, changing and harsh climate (whether hot or cold, wet or dry) can be enlightening and identify new ways to deal with climate, water and weather extremes.

3. coping with creeping changes in the environment and in society

Most changes to the environment in which people are involved are of the creeping kind (slow onset, increments but accumulating). Creeping changes, many of which are adverse to human interests accumulate until they turn into an environmental crisis at some time in the future. This is a valid statement for all eco-regions from hot to cold and from wet to dry. Traditional societies have been coping for centuries if not millennia with incremental natural changes to the environment. Today those traditional societies are impinged upon by national government regulations as well as by human induced relatively rapid changes to their local environments. Comparing how traditional cultures have perceived and responded to creeping environmental changes to their environments, whether natural or human induced, can yield interesting and potentially useful insights, regardless of the eco-zones in which they live.

4. changing seasonality and changes in climate comfort zones

Global warming has occurred throughout most decades of the 20th century and has apparently accelerated in the past couple of decades. As a result, the natural flow and characteristics of the seasons (that is, seasonality) have been changing. Traditional societies in sub-Saharan Africa and in Alaska have been forced to cope with those changes, because such creeping seasonal changes can affect directly their livelihoods and ways of living. They have had to cope with those changes on their own for the most part often with little help or understanding from their national governments. How societies have coped (or not coped) with seasonal changes can be instructive in identifying the importance of seasonality to traditional societies that depend for their well-being on the seasonal availability of flora and fauna that their local climate provides.

Concluding thought

Many examples can be drawn from sub-Saharan Africa and from Alaska that merit useful comparison. For example, it would not be difficult to argue that traditional societies are in a subordinate colonial relationship with their national governments. Other examples of comparisons could be centered on climate-related factors that can affect traditional societies in many negative ways: their ability to hunt, fish, gather or grow food, to find jobs and to survival strategies and tactics in economies that are wholly subsistent or that are a mix of subsistent, welfare-dependent and cash economies.

In other words, societies can identify analogous situations in other countries and cultures, such as responses to extreme climate, water and weather related events, and can then learn from each other about how others deal with analogous if not similar risks that result from environmental changes.

Fragilecologies Archives
29 September 2006

I attended a recent meeting in Amsterdam on climate and water. The underlying theme of the meeting related to protecting the Netherlands (also known as Holland) from the potential onslaught of the increase in sea level that is expected to result from a global warming of the atmosphere.

The meeting was billed as an attempt to link science with the application of society to address societal needs. I first thought this would be just another climate change meeting in an interesting place. The Netherlands is relying on climate science to gain a glimpse of its own future. Its leaders have no choice, because the country is situated in the delta of one of Europe’s major rivers, the Rhine. Historically, it has been locked in combat with the climate system: coastal storms as well as heavy precipitation at the headwaters of its rivers.

Founded in the early 1200s, over the centuries The Netherlands has spread its settlement and economic development into marshlands. Amsterdam is also known for its canals. In fact, it prides itself on the technological prowess of its citizens for having developed intricate geo-engineering construction works of various types of barriers to the sea and innovative ways to drain moisture from waterlogged soil. In other words, they reclaimed land from the sea. Today, 70% of the country is either at or below sea level, protected from the sea by dikes and other barriers.

The blue shaded area on this map shows the part of The Netherlands that is below sea level. Another third of the country is at sea level, leving the country vulnerable to flooding.

The devastating Dutch floods in 1953 provided a wake-up call to the government. Massive flooding and associated death and destruction resulted from storm surges, heavy weather, and inadequate dike construction. I remember watching “Newsreel” film coverage of the 1953 floods in a movie theater when I was 13 years old. More than 50 years later, I can still picture the destruction wrought by the North Sea waters. Following this disaster, the Dutch government designed and put into practice the “Delta Plan,” designed to protect the lowlands from similar flood events by building barriers to arrest flooding in the estuaries in the country’s lands below sea level.

At the delta of the Rhine, the country is vulnerable to flooding from the Rhine and the Meuse Rivers. The government believed that the Rhine, for example, was under control as a result of channels and other engineering efforts to control river flow. It was reminded that the risk was real when the country was flooded from the land side, not the sea, in 1993 and again in 1995, causing considerable damage. Once again the country was reminded of its vulnerability to climate.

However, one could argue that the existing concern of government and Dutch citizens about global warming (sea level rise and glacial melt) was sharply increased by a climate-related disaster thousands of miles away — in New Orleans. Hurricane Katrina in late August 2005 brought home to the Dutch government just how vulnerable it is, even with its barriers and dikes. It sees the country as a potential victim of global warming. In the past, the government led the people to feel protected and that it would be able to help them in time of flood emergencies of major magnitude. That feeling is eroding as the government has acknowledged its limited capacity to protect the country from the foreseeable consequences to low-lying areas by the effects of global warming. It is telling the people they must devise flood tactics and strategies for themselves in a situation where government help cannot be realized. That is the lesson of the Katrina debacle.

The government is embarking on attempts to climate-proof The Netherlands. This has prompted government ministries to brainstorm about future survival strategies. This is the first climate meeting I have attended (other than at official Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change meetings) at which all participants agreed that global warming is real and that human activities are a causative factor as the result of fossil fuel burning (coal, oil, natural gas) and land-use practices (e.g., tropical deforestation). Scientific uncertainties did not deter participants from discussing how to climate-proof the future of The Netherlands. For the Dutch, global warming is considered too serious and too urgent to be neglected.

Because of the country’s geographical location, The Netherlands is seriously designing innovative ways to climate-proof their country as best they can. They realize that the centuries-old dike system will not provide protection from sea level rise related to global warming. They have already designed tactical ways to live on water as, for example, one can see houseboats that line the canals in the city. Now they are considering how to protect their major international airport, which is built on land below sea level. One suggestion is to develop a floating runway system.

There are about 200 countries in the world with varying degrees of governmental concern about global warming. The United States government appears to be at the end of the continuum where little concern about global warming is shown. At the opposite end is The Netherlands. It has taken Hurricane Katrina more seriously than has the USA as a glimpse of a warmer world.

The government will do all in its power to protect its citizens and its territory, lest it becomes a much smaller country with millions of environmental refugees fleeing low-lying areas. In this regard, they are global leaders and are to be commended.

Fragilecologies Archives
10 July 2006

I went to see the movie “An Inconvenient Truth” narrated by Al Gore, former Vice President under Bill Clinton. It was better than I expected: much better. I was worried that the message and reason for making the movie — to bring the usable science of global warming to the American people — would get mixed up with the personal feelings that people might have about Vice President Gore. The movie, however, did separate the message from feelings about the messenger.

The truth is that I expected to see it as a large screen advertisement and preamble for Gore’s run for the presidency in 2008. I left the movie relieved of that suspicion. Gore was clearly on the high road as he presented his case that human activities are a major force behind the unprecendented contemporary heating up of the Earth’s atmosphere.

It is a different kind of movie about the environment. Gore is in front of a large audience that is listening to his presentation, which is focused around the use of PowerPoint slides. Behind him is a large screen onto which is projected the set of slides that include graphics, photos, and some film clips. The large screen, bigger than a computer monitor, makes the graphics supporting his words even more understandable.

The presentation makes a solid scientific case that humans have the potential as well as the capability to alter the chemistry of the Earth’s atmosphere, thereby heating up global temperatures. The message contains lots of facts presented in a way that most of the public can easily understand. He even makes reference to those who do not believe that humans can influence the global climate. His science-based slide show is compelling.

Usually, at the end of a movie when the credits begin to roll, the audience’s eyes start to glaze over as they get up to leave the theater. Not this time. Not many stay to see who the gaffer was, or even the associate producer, editor, etc. But these credits are different: people stayed because of the clever way the credits were interspersed with suggestions about how individuals can help to reduce the carbon dioxide emissions that result from their activities.

So why do I talk about “an inconvenient Gore”? The movie makes the science quite understandable to the public and shows that global warming is a problem with more dire consequences than most people realize. It shows how the United States has isolated itself by refusing to sign onto the Kyoto Protocol that calls on signatories to reduce greenhouse gas emissions over time. Yet, the movie shows how we — Americans — are a major part of the problem and therefore should be a major part of the solution.

Unfortunately, as with many other political issues, President Bush and his Republican-controlled Congress have buried their heads in the sand, as they have done on a number of international issues: selective support for nuclear proliferation (it’s OK for some countries but not for others); denial of a government’s obligation to help American victims of so-called natural disasters (such as victims of Hurricane Katrina in late August 2005); lack of popular support for the war in Iraq; defying existing international and domestic laws.

Bush’s go-it-alone “history will absolve me” attitude is facing a frontal challenge, at least on the global warming issue, by Gore and his movie. The timing is bad for Bush’s administration because scientific consensus squarely supports the foreseeability of human activities having a negative impact on the global atmosphere and therefore on global-to-local climates.

For the anti-global-warming Bush administration, the timing of the movie is politically inconvenient: the 2006 US Congressional election is but a few months away. The signs of global warming are mounting each month: Arctic ice cover is shrinking, glaciers from Greenland to the Antarctica are receding, sea level is rising, vector-borne diseases are migrating from the tropics and appearing in the mid-latitudes.

As a result, arguments by the so-called skeptics against those who believe that human activities (fossil fuel burning and tropical deforestation) can alter global climate are falling on increasingly deaf ears, except for some (a shrinking number) diehard conservative new sources (e.g., the Wall Street Journal, Fox News, the Washington Times).

Bush would have probably wanted “An Inconvenient Truth” to hit theaters after the 2006 mid-term elections, as he hopes that all bad news will wait until then: about the Iraq situation, the national debt, immigration, an overstretched military, and his dwindling popularity.

Ah, yes. With “An Inconvenient Truth” comes an Inconvenient Gore, as far as Bush is concerned. Although President Bush recently stated to the press that he had no intention of seeing “An Inconvenient Truth,” he cannot escape from the Inconvenient Gore.

Fragilecologies Archives
7 July 2006

There are lots of climate-related publications coming out of sub-Saharan Africa these days. Many of them are about the science and impacts of climate, water and weather extremes. In fact, there has been a significant increase in the amount of coverage on climate-related issues for that continent during the past few decades. Episodes of drought aside, in the early post-independence period (starting in either the 1950s or 1960s depending on the particular country being liberated), news about African development prospects alluded to positive (that is, hopeful) trends in the development paths that Africa’s first set of leaders of independence movements were likely to follow. In other words, hopes were very high for economic and political development throughout the continent.

The information coming out about Africa these days, in general, paints a picture of gloom and doom: wars, invasions of neighboring countries, ethnic rivalries, occupation forces, genocides, warlords, mercenaries, corruption, dictators, food shortages, child soldiers, unspeakable crimes against humanity, refugee camps under military attack, coastal pirates and environmental transformation of all kinds of ecosystems (e.g., cutting down trees in order to open new lands for agriculture) which often turn out to be environmental changes for the worse.

Africans and Global Warming

Despite this rather bleak picture of Africa that has been painted by the media as well as by reality, sub-Saharan Africa does have an emerging bright spot. Thanks to the process of “capacity building”, climate literacy in Africa has improved in the area of understanding of and concern about global warming of the Earth’s atmosphere and its likely impacts on many aspects of the continent’s ecosystems and human well-being.

For well over a decade African researchers and government agents have been immersed in issues, conferences and research activities about the interactions among climate, society and the environment, with special attention given to global warming by multilateral and bilateral funding agencies.

The good news out of Africa is that many African researchers in various disciplines are now well aware of the science of global warming, the ecological impacts of global warming, the politics involved (both national and international), the costs of action as opposed to inaction, foreseeable societal and economic impacts, and the ethical and equity issues that pervade both the causes and consequences of, and responses to, global warming. In fact, one could contend that, with regard to global warming, human capacity (individual and institutional) is increasingly being built on the African continent. At the very least, a threshold has been crossed, suggesting that this interest in climate issues of variability, change and extremes can only continue to grow stronger and more widespread, if provided with the moral as well as the financial support to do so.

However, what I think is lacking is the untethered funding that is needed for Africans to develop their own path of research planning and follow-through on climate, water and weather activities — not only for global warming but for seasonal, interannual and decadal variability and extremes. No doubt, there is very strong interest to improve food security throughout sub-Saharan Africa . Any steps that can move toward improving food security today would most likely serve as a major step toward coping with the yet-unknown consequences for water resources and food production of climate change impacts on water and food across the continent.

In sum, human capacity on climate issues (i.e., capabilities to carry out climate and climate-related research) exists in sub-Saharan Africa . What is needed now, and urgently, are financial resources so they can develop their own climate-related agenda.

What is the situation across the Atlantic Ocean for African-Americans in the USA ?

African Americans and Global Warming

The African American community in the United States presents a different picture than that for Africans. For whatever reason, it appears that, with some exceptions, the African-American community has not been deeply involved in the global warming issue, especially in the part of the issue that I am concerned about, the societal impacts. A key exception was carried out by Environmental Justice Professor Robert Bullard, Clark Atlantic University ( Atlanta , Georgia ), in November 2000 in The Netherlands. He organized an International conference on “Climate and People of Color”.

He noted on his website [http://www.ejrc.cau.edu/climatechgpoc.html] that

Numerous studies document that the poor and people of color in the United States and around the world have borne greater health and environmental risks than the society at large when it comes to workplace hazards, pollution from chemical plants, municipal landfills, incinerators, abandoned toxic waste dumps, lead smelters, and emissions from clogged freeways. The environmental and economic justice movement was born in response to these injustices and disparities. The movement’s diverse allies have much to offer policymakers in resolving many of the problems that have resulted from industrial pollution and human settlement patterns.

Finding solutions to global climate change is one of the areas that desperately need the input from those populations most likely to be negatively affected, poor people in the developing countries of the South and people of color and the poor in the North. Global climate change looms as a major environmental justice issue of the 21st century.

Another recent expression of interest in climate’s impacts on the minorities focused specifically on the United States . The US Congressional Black Caucus, a group that includes all African-American members of the US Congress, commissioned a report

that focused on the potential impacts of global warming on African Americans. The report (entitled “Black Americans and Global Warming: An Unequal Burden”) was released to the public in July 2004. The report supported Bullard’s (among others’) contention that minorities (in America , African Americans specifically) are most likely to suffer disproportionately as a result of the foreseeable impacts of climate change (for example, flooding, heat waves and high energy prices).

Most likely, they already are suffering disproportionately from the impacts of today’s climate variability and extreme events, such as Hurricane Katrina’s impacts in New Orleans in 2005 and Hurricane Floyd’s impacts in North Carolina in 1999. To be sure, all poor people along with people in other socio-economic strata in these areas, regardless of race, were adversely affected by these events. However, the African-American communities have been the worst affected with regard to adverse impacts (deaths) and in the economic recovery process as well, when compared with other nearby communities and socioeconomic groups.

The report of the Caucus seemed to dwell primarily on energy-related issues, especially the impacts of the rising costs to Black consumers of energy (heat, light, gasoline, for example). However, there are many more obvious and subtle climate-related impacts that can adversely affect Black Americans. Some of those adverse impacts were exposed on TV and in newspapers worldwide as Hurricane Katrina made landfall along the US Gulf Coast on August 29, 2005.

Poor people, many of whom were African-Americans, were the primary victims of Katrina. They were living in areas known to be most vulnerable to flooding, as much of New Orleans had been built below sea level and protected by levees from invasion of waters from the Gulf of Mexico and Lake Ponchetrain. Making a risky situation even riskier, poorer people in New Orleans were also the least likely to have life or property insurance coverage on their lives and property, transportation or cash in hand for a rapid escape from the potential threats from Hurricane Katrina.

A brief comparison of two parts of the city, one predominantly Black and the other White, underscores the demographic differences and disadvantages between these communities: the Lower Ninth Ward (African American) and the Lake District (Caucasian).

While reflecting on the discriminatory impacts of Katrina and how it exposed the vulnerabilities of African-American minority residents, I was reminded about the devastating impacts of Hurricane Floyd (September 1999) which, today, few remember. It damaged greatly a predominantly African American town called Princeville, as well as nearby communities. In the first year or two after having been hit by Hurricane Floyd, Princeville still struggled to get support to rebuild itself, whereas other adversely affected communities seemed to have been on the mend at a much faster pace.

In 2004 (a year before Katrina), I sought to encourage the development of a “Climate Affairs” program for undergraduates at the Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). This was (and still is) an attempt to develop awareness of and interest among African-Americans (i.e., to build capacity) in climate-related science, impacts and equity issues. This can empower the African-American community to better cope with the obvious and not so obvious ways that climate variability, change and extremes can influence human activities in general and their communities in particular.

Keeping Bullard’s earlier statement in mind,

Finding solutions to global climate change is one of the areas that desperately need the input from those populations most likely to be negatively affected, poor people in the developing countries of the South and people of color and the poor in the North.

there are not many African-Americans focused on climate-related impacts. At least, I have not encountered many over the years at various climate-related meetings I have attended.

There are some African-American scientists researching the science of climate change, and there are many Africans who have come to the USA to teach science at the university level.

The main point of a comparison of Africans and African Americans focused on climate impact assessments is to underscore what I believe is an urgent need to sharply and quickly increase the involvement in climate-related impact assessments of African-Americans, the minority most likely to be adversely affected by global warming. Only by getting involved directly in climate impact studies related to climate change — whether public health, disaster preparedness, political and legal aspects, risk assessments, and so on — will African Americans be prepared to do their own bidding in political circles, for the greater protection of the African-American community, not only from global warming but from other climate and weather extremes as well, such as hurricanes, floods, vector-borne diseases (e.g., mosquitoes), and other climate-related problems.

As an observer of several decades of climate and climate-related research activities, I believe this is a neglected area of concern that warrants greater recognition by African Americans as well as by those who fund education and training programs. An African-American research community would benefit greatly by building individual and institutional capacity with regard to designing and fostering reliable and sustainable coping mechanisms of disadvantaged or marginalized minority groups. This is an area of research and research application where African climate-related impacts researchers can help to build climate-related capacity among African Americans.

Fragilecologies Archives
3 July 2006

By Dr. Sandy A. Johnson : Guest Editorial

It is now late June, nine months and counting since Hurricane Katrina ravaged the Gulf Coast of the United States. The storm laid waste to 90,000 square miles of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama (an area about equivalent to the United Kingdoms, or North and South Korea combined, or an area only slightly smaller than the state of Oregon). At last count, more than 1,600 Katrina-related deaths were reported with 1,296 people killed in Louisiana. Three hundred thousand homes were destroyed or made uninhabitable, and hundreds of square miles of infrastructure were lost (Dept. of Homeland Security, 2006). All that remains of small Gulf Coast towns are ribcages of pilings and blackened, dying trees.

The great City of New Orleans is but a shadow of its former self. Of the city’s pre-storm population, less than half have returned. Those who are here live a schizophrenic existence of pride in their survival, hope of rebuilding, and sorrow at the utter devastation which surrounds them. The exiled await answers and some certainty before deciding when, or if, to return. There are a few densely occupied and relatively undamaged areas of the city. Among these areas are the historic French Quarter and Garden District. A short walk or drive away from these places, however, reveals a ghost town of empty buildings and broken cars still covered with dust from the mud and sludge which the storm washed over 80% of the city. Many lives and livelihoods are in limbo. The future is as precarious as the geography, with both city and state dependant upon the largess of the federal government to assist in reconstruction and fortification of a failed levee system and eroding wetlands. Since returning to my home, I have visited the destroyed, the reborn, and the haunts that never went away, and revisited to witness the progress, or lack thereof. With the 2006 hurricane season upon us, the future of the city hangs on a levee’s edge.

It was somewhere between Jackson Avenue and Melpomene Avenue, riverside of St. Charles in the Lower Garden District that I found a house which has become my signpost for New Orleans ëbefore’ and ëafter’ Katrina ñ or ëpre-K’ and ëpost-K’ in the vernacular. It is a rambling and ramshackled three-storied beauty. Like the city it is in, this house has a history. In the pre-K era, the peeling paint and benign neglect added character. Tourists devoured it. The charm, the culture, the history. The locals took pride in this history, in the unique architecture and flavor of New Orleans . But locals also understood that beneath the quaintly crumbling exterior lay real problems of poverty, neglect and mistrust. This is the house of our hopes and our fears, of our past and our present as we struggle with questions, uncertainties, representation, leadership and policy surrounding the reconstruction of our city.

The wooden exterior of this house is an alligator-skin pattern of flaking white paint and mildewed wood. When you look at it, you are not quite sure when the decrepitude began. Was it left in ruin before the storm, or is it so badly off now because of the storm? Was it abandoned and neglected, fallen into hard times in a hothouse of humidity and carelessness? Or was it beaten down by a disaster?

Had there not been a Katrina would anyone besides the next-door neighbor care about this house? Would I look at this beautiful wreck and be outraged that nine months after the storm it is still a wreck? Would you read about this wreck, many miles away from its shadow, and care? Care why it is where it is? Care about the people who may or may not have contributed to its decay? Decried the use of your tax dollars to repair it? Or decried the use of your tax dollars in Iraq instead of fixing this wreck?

And then how shall we fix it? Shall we demolish it and start from scratch? Rely on engineering and science to make this wreck into the bionic building? Better, stronger and safer than ever it was? Will we demolish it and let the swamp have it back? Admit our folly and false reliance upon our own cleverness to contain and control nature with levees?

Will we subdivide this house it in the interest of diversity? Or will we see if the owner has insurance and then allow her to stay? But what if the original occupant wants to come back, and has no insurance? Do we let him? But what if he was renting, or worse, was renting and has a criminal record? Should we not allow him to come back to his home? Should we make a space for him, or just for those who own? Those who are not “that element” whoever “that element” actually is?

Should we only let those with gainful employment into this wreck? Or should it be families? But if it is families, what do we do about schools? Or healthcare? How do we make sure there is economic opportunity? How do we make sure they are safe? If we chose not to build the bionic building, is a return to how things were before the storm good enough? Do we build a future at the cost of our past? Or hold to the past and jeopardize our future?

And how should we decide what to do with this wreck? Should we ask the experts? But what if they are ënot from around here’? Do we want outsiders telling us what to do with our wreck? And aren’t the experts the ones who got us into trouble in the first place? Maybe we should just ask the locals ñ oh wait, not everyone is back here yet to decide. Shall we then just listen to those who have been able to return? Should their voice count more than those who are not yet back? How long should one be away before she loses the right to have a voice in rebuilding? Should we even care about those who have abandoned the city?

Yes. Here, between Jackson and Melpomene, riverside of St. Charles in the Lower Garden District stands this house. Over one room the roof is collapsing. Other parts of the crown are bald ñ the slate blown away or fallen off. Porch steps sag, and the portico is anything but inviting. Was it this way before the storm? Maybe. Should it be left this way, abandoned to its own past?

Before answering, look closer. A lace curtain is drawn across a second-floor window. Behind the curtain, frames are piled against a wall. There is a wicker chair. A mirror. Cardboard boxes and a stray hat. These belie the forsaken façade of the house. This wreck may have stood abandoned for years, or may still be home and haven. The glimpse through the window suggests memories and life. The house itself is redolent with the decay of experience. Like the city, whether the house is living or dying is not certain. Time, elections and elected officials, policy and practice will ultimately determine its fate. But for now, it is there. The beautiful wreck stands.

Department of Homeland Security. 2006. The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina: Lessons Learned. Report submitted February 23, 2006. Available on-line http://www.whitehouse.gov/reports/katrina-lessons-learned.pdf. Accessed May 12, 2006.

–Sandy A. Johnson, sandy_a_johnson@hotmail.com

Fragilecologies Archives
23 June 2006

In the United States, some people still do not believe that the climate of the globe is changing. Yet it is. It always has, in fact. But now it seems that human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels and tropical deforestation are increasing the amount of heat-trapping greenhouse gases. Hence, the atmosphere is warming up rapidly, because of us and not because of natural processes. What to do, given that the US economy, as well as the economies of all countries, developing as well as industrialized, are dependent on burning fossil fuels in the absence of the cheap availability of cleaner forms of energy.

The higher latitudes (the polar regions) are heating up faster than the mid-latitudes by a lot. So the Arctic region is showing major signs of warming, which now scares Native Americans, the Inuit, and those living in polar regions. The senators from Alaska support the increased extraction of oil from their state. A few senators consider global warming “the greatest hoax” ever put over on the American people. To me, Alaskans who are calling for more sucking of oil out of the ground as their state’s climate drastically changes in unfavorable and likely surprising ways is like a person shooting himself in the foot with his own gun! Usually, when this happens in the movies it happens by accident. In this case it seems they are shooting themselves in the foot on purpose.

(Arctic warming graphic from http://whyfiles.org/211warm_arctic/ and polar bear AP photo from http://news.bbc.co.uk)

Arctic ecosystems and people dependent on them are like the proverbial “canary in the mine”!! Miners would keep an eye on the canary in a cage because the canaries are sensitive to deadly gas leaks, providing a warming to the miners to “get out of the mine.”

So, The message could read as follows:

FROM: INHOFE
To:Inuit
Re: Concerning global warming and negative impacts

Don’t worry. It’s a hoax.

P.S. I suspect the Inuit will question the messenger as well as the message.

Fragilecologies Archives
21 June 2006

By Dr. Lino Naranjo : Guest Editorial

El década de los 90 Michael Glantz de la NCAR en los Estados Unidos introdujo el concepto de “Climate Affairs,” una frase difícil de traducir al castellano sin correr el riesgo que pierda su esencia innovadora dentro de los estudios relacionados al clima. Se trata de integrar, más que combinar, en un enfoque multidisciplinario, todos los aspectos científicos, sociológicos, económicos e incluso éticos implicados en los eventos climáticos y su impacto social. Se trata de establecer programas de educación dirigidos a políticos, empresarios, científicos, personas individuales y todos aquellos que de alguna forma se enfrentan alguna vez a la toma de decisiones vinculadas al impacto del clima sobre la sociedad.

Dentro de la variabilidad del Sistema Climático, existe un fenómeno recurrente que cada cierto numero de años es capaz de perturbar la vida de decenas de millones de personas a lo largo del Planeta; es el evento El Niño, que provoca un profundo impacto en la atmósfera, transmitiendo su influencia a regiones muy alejadas entre si. El evento El Niño es considerado por muchos “una fabrica de desastres”, esta consideración pudiera parecer exagerada si tenemos en cuenta que algunas de las anomalías climáticas asociadas, también provocan efectos positivos para algunas regiones (como la disminución de la actividad de huracanes en el Caribe), sin embargo, los daños potenciales que un evento es capaz de ocasionar son realmente enormes.

Durante cada evento El Niño muchos países del Continente Americano, Asia, África, Oceanía e incluso algunas localidades de Europa sufren anomalías climáticas (sequías, lluvias intensas, huracanes, fuegos, etc.) desastrosas para las sociedades y las economías, cuyos efectos suelen durar por años. En este contexto, resulta importante tener en cuenta que una parte muy significativa de las regiones mas afectadas por el fenómeno El Niño, así como de otras donde existen impactos atribuibles, son latinoamericanas o están compuestas por comunidades de origen latinoamericano , con graves problemas sociales y economías débiles que dificultan el establecimiento de niveles adecuados de respuestas ante las catástrofes naturales. Durante el evento El Niño de 1997-98 y según datos de NOAA, de los más de 33 millones de dólares en perdidas económica que se registraron a nivel mundial, alrededor del 55% correspondió a países de Centro y Sur América. Incluso, en países ricos como Los Estados Unidos, donde también el evento El Niño es capaz de provocar anomalías climáticas importantes y eventos extremos, existe una comunidad latinoamericana numerosa con niveles de pobreza superiores al norteamericano medio y con un nivel superior de vulnerabilidad.

Preparar mejor a las comunidades de estos países para enfrentar mejor los efectos negativos de El Niño y saber aprovechar sus efectos positivos, pasa por una labor educativa intensiva a todos los niveles de la sociedad. Los educadores en todos los niveles de los sistemas educativos de los países y comunidades, deben animar a sus estudiantes a estudiar las interacciones entre el clima, la sociedad y el ambiente. Aprender sobre El Niño no es solamente una necesidad para los educadores en las escuelas sino también, es muy importante para aquellas personas que ya se encuentran trabajando en los diferentes sectores económicos y sociales. Las instituciones deben aprender de sus operaciones pasadas durante los eventos El Niño e identificar fortalezas, debilidades, limitaciones jurisdiccionales, y conflictos en las respuestas institucionales a los pronósticos y los impactos y las instituciones científicas nacionales necesitan el apoyo de sus gobiernos, así como de las agencias donantes internacionales, para emprender estudios sobre los problemas regionales y locales relacionados con El Niño.

Un programa educacional en la concepción de “El Niño Affairs” debe ser un mecanismo efectivo para lograr los objetivos de mejorar la capacidad de respuesta de la sociedad. Debe ser un esfuerzo concertado, centrado en las Universidades u otros centros de enseñanza propios y de acuerdo a las condiciones especificas de las sociedades latinoamericanas, que c ree un público más conciente y educado (incluido los medios de comunicación y los políticos), que p rovea una perspectiva multidisciplinaria del fenómeno El Niño. Que permita además un mejor uso de las predicciones dándoles a los investigadores nacionales una mayor implicación social de sus esfuerzos y nos fuerce a echar una mirada a El Niño como un sistema integral donde la sociedad juega un papel fundamental.

Resulta un hecho que muchos gobiernos e instituciones ya conocen muchos de los problemas provocados por los impactos de las anomalías climáticas relacionadas a El Niño en sus países o comunidades, pero, por una variedad de motivos, no han tomado las medidas necesarias de adaptarse con eficacia a sus devastadores, efectos. Lamentablemente, las lecciones aprendidas en desastres anteriores, a menudo no son utilizadas cuando se hace probable la ocurrencia de un desastre similar.

Ya hace mas de 8 años que el ultimo gran evento El Niño de 1997-1998 ocurrió; algunos de los enormes desastres provocados por el, ya han sido superados, otros se mantienen en las mentes de los hombres, de las sociedades y sus huellas aun se mantienen frescas. No sabemos con exactitud cuando volverá a ocurrir un nuevo evento de esas características, pero lo que si sabemos con certeza es que volverá. ¿Tenemos derecho a permanecer inertes?

Creo firmemente que debemos prepararnos y que un esfuerzo mancomunado en la concepción de “El Niño Affairs” es posible; más que posible, necesario y más que necesario imperioso.

Lino Naranjo Diaz
MeteoGalicia. Xunta de Galicia
lino.naranjo@meteogalicia.es

Fragilecologies Archvies
1 June 2006

In retrospect, the post-World War II period was, politically speaking, an exciting one: post-war reconstruction of Europe, the Marshall Plan, the creation of NATO and the Warsaw Treaty Organization, the A-bomb and the H-bomb, the Iron curtain, the Cold War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, colonial wars for independence, and increasing affluence in many parts of the world. Even under the economic, political and ideological pressures of the Cold War, it was in many ways an era of rising expectations in poor as well as in rich countries.

In the late 1950s, a period of coups, emerging guerilla wars and wars for independence, James C. Davies came up with a theory about rising expectations and the likelihood of armed conflict. His idea became known as the Davies J-curve. Here is how it works: for a given individual, life is getting better in real terms: increasing salary and benefits, improved nutritional status, the ability to purchase better modes of transportation, among other items well beyond his or her basic need. However, the individual wants more than s/he can afford. S/he thins that his or her standards of living should be getting better at a faster rate than it is. In other words, the pace of reality is not keeping up with his or her expectations about how much better it should be. Nevertheless, while it may be frustrating to the individual not to have his or her reality keep up with his or her rising expectations, the individual’s situation is not so bad that it leads either to conflict or to frustration. That’s the situation in an era of rising expectations, as it was, say, in the 1960s.

Davies J-Curve

Problems arise, however, if there happens to be a sudden downturn in that individual’s well-being, while his or her expectations are still on the rise. This results in a relatively rapid, sharp decline in one’s actual well-being. Thus, a major gap is created between one’s expectations and one’s reality. Frustration ensues, thereby generating discontent. This was Davies’ explanation for social unrest and the increased potential for political unrest in a given country. The J-curve was devised as one explanation for why unrest and conflict occurs. I would contend that today we are witnessing the application of the J-curve to domestic politics. Here’s how:

The U.S. engaged in a “War on Terrorism.” We now have a cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security. We have a color-coded terrorism early warning system of sorts in place. We have toppled the Taliban regime in Afghanistan and many al-Qaeda personnel have been captured or put out of commission around the globe. The expectations of the American public have been raised about the success of the U.S. and its allies in containing terrorism abroad as well as at home. For a while, our expectations about winning a war on terrorism were rising, but not as fast as we would have liked.

Suddenly, we are told about the fact that the government has been receiving warnings at an increasing rate about an increase in al-Qaeda “chatter” about possible attacks on shopping malls, tall buildings, apartment houses, hospitals, water supplies and even the possibility of blowing up the Brooklyn Bridge.

Following this increase in news items about the belief that al-Qaeda (as well as the Taliban in Afghanistan) have been regrouping, top government officials (senators, the Vice President, the FBI Director and now the Secretary of Defense) talk about their belief that terrorist attacks will definitely happen in the not too distant future somewhere on American soil. We are told about how porous our international borders really are. They tell the public through the electronic and printed media (newspapers, TV, and radio), that terrorist attacks will be devastating, maybe even cataclysmic.

The way I see this change in outputs from the government about how successful we are in the war on terrorism and on the homeland security front is as follows: government officials are making statements that in essence are designed to lower the expectations of the public about the government’s ability to prevent all terrorist acts on our soil. The problem with this situation is the following: if we expect less from our government, we will get less. The point is that, while it is difficult for a government, any government, to keep up with the rising expectations of its citizens (demands, wishes, needs), it can easily match declining expectations. Not only that. It can cause the expectations of its citizens to decline – about the state of the economy, of environmental protections, about war – and about a war on terrorism.

Davies J-Curve modified by Glantz

The government, in a way, is admitting that its war on terrorism is much more difficult and protracted than it had at first realized. As a result of this realization, it has been preparing the public for events that it is admitting it cannot prevent. Hence, our expectations – that is, to expect less from the government – will match reality. In fact, we show little reaction to failures because we are being asked tacitly to expect less from our government. As our expectations of success decline, our government can easily match those expectations. Hence, this will reduce public frustration over the lack of government success in eradicating terrorist acts against America. Instead of being frustrated and thereby prompted to oppose the government, the citizenry in general shrugs its collective shoulders, sighs and goes on with its daily routine, expecting even less from its government.

Davies, James C. 1962. “Towards a Theory of Revolution”, American Sociological Review, Vol. XXVII. p. 5-18.

Fragilecologies Archives
15 May 2006

This idea for a “Spare Time University” may sound a bit crazy to other people, but to me it is an idea that can work. I want to develop a way to get a lot of people involved in knowing about today’s problems and proposed solutions in various aspects of life, especially those aspects related to climate, water, and weather.

Everyone knows that weather and climate influence many things that can lead either to a good harvest at the end of a growing season, or to a poor harvest. Weather and climate can affect the amount of moisture in the soil, the water needs at different times in the life cycle of a crop (from sowing the seed to harvest). Climate affects the abundance of pests that can eat crops (such as locusts), the abundance of mosquitoes, and so forth. Prolonged droughts or heavy rains can be quite disruptive and destructive of human activities and settlements. And now there is a lot of talk about the likelihood of a change in the climate that people have come to know and cope with.

A lot of people are too busy or do not have the opportunity to take formal courses in school, whether it is at the high school or the university level. They are too busy trying to put food on the table. Or they do not have the funds to go to places of higher learning. I want to bring those places to them — for free — to those who want to participate. Radios, cellphones, and newspapers: these are ways that could be used to get information to the people who toil all day to make enough money to feed their families.

“Usable” information is a top priority of a Spare Time University: new agricultural methods, new fishing techniques, different ways to till the soil or terrace a hilly landscape, and methods used elsewhere to harvest water in dry areas, and so forth. This kind of information can be brought to villagers who want to listen or read about it and learn more.

The information for each course can be relatively short and to the point. It can be highly user-friendly, without using a lot of scientific words. There is time to read or listen to the courses, however we finally decide to deliver them to the villages and remote areas, as well as to poorer neighborhoods in major cities around the world.

The reason that I think the idea of a Spare Time University is urgently needed in sub-Saharan Africa right now is that the traditional approaches to education and training appear to be painfully show and overly selective, with some of the selection criteria for acceptance into high schools and universities left over from the Colonial Era — and with a strong European bias.

Spare Time University is not an idea developed for developing countries. The truth is that it was an idea developed by the Chinese government a few decades ago. As I understand it, the notion of a Spare Time University was developed to help to close the gap between those going to universities to earn advanced degrees, and those people who labor in the fields and factories, who have neither the time nor the level of education to gain access to and succeed in a formal university setting. It was an attempt to level the playing field in society by enabling workers to participate in university courses and to be part of the development process of the country. As I said earlier, it can be carried by cellphone, radio, TV, or newspapers.

In the industrialized world, there is considerable interest in what we call a “Free University” and in informal educational programs that are designed for “K-to-Grey”; that is, designed for people from kindergarten (K) to old age (grey). Learning is truly a lifelong process. So, what do you think of this idea for sub-Saharan Africa?