In June this year when world leaders gather for the Rio+20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, the theme will be the future we want. The world leaders will be negotiating a sustainable future, one that builds on two decades of achievements with integrating environment and development, and at the same time draws on lessons from difficulties facing developing countries toward achieving such integration. And for leaders from developing countries, there will be the proverbial call for more and increased aid to tackle poverty, food insecurity, and climate change impacts.

But perhaps the most important aspect of the negotiations will be the aspirations of those whose livelihoods are at stake; those who face the risk of being alienated in the new Global Green Economy. They are the world's 2 billion or so smallholder farmers who still depend on subsistence practices, and whose livelihoods are exposed to the vagaries of climate change. Will they likely fall victims, yet again, of an ambitious global deal that promises a lot but delivers little? With the theme of the future we want, Rio+20 promises to be different for many reasons, but most importantly because of the focus on the Global Green Economy.

Undoubtedly, biodiversity and forests remain a global priority as the planet's natural capital for a sustainable future, including climate change mitigation and adaptation. What is needed now is a focus on policies and incentives for developing countries where the natural capital directly underpins human survival. 

When world leaders will gather in Rio de Janeiro at the UN Conference on Sustainable Development in June 2012, two big topics will be on the agenda; 1) Green Economy and 2) Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development. Although the former tends to overshadow the latter, there is an urgency to solve the institutional challenges related to sustainable development, not only at the international but also at the national level.

The 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development declared that "in order to achieve sustainable development, environmental protection shall constitute an integral part of the development process and cannot be considered in isolation from it" (Principle 4). The UN Millennium Declaration reaffirms this need with Goal 7 to "ensure environmental sustainability" and a related target to "integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes and reverse the loss of environmental resources" (Millennium Development Goal 7, Target 7a). 20 years later we are still facing serious shortcomings both at the multilateral, regional and national level in terms of integrating environment into the development processes. Former UN secretary General Kofi Annan confirmed this during the launch of the Global Sustainability Panel's report; "Twenty-five years after the Brundtland report, our political systems have failed to deliver the integrated action that is so urgently needed."

"Vùng đất Uma chân phúc": Bliss land eco-village in Hochiminh City, Vietnam is founded on the principles of sustainable development.

Our objectives are the establishment of self-sufficient Organic Farming model communities. We will provide all possible services to empower people to improve their quality of life by fostering the development of workers, cooperatives, self-reliant communities, environmental protection, universal ethics and spiritual values.

read more about the project 

By Mohamed I Bakarr, ELP 2006  

In June this year when world leaders gather for the Rio+20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, the theme will be the future we want. The world leaders will be negotiating a sustainable future, one that builds on two decades of achievements with integrating environment and development, and at the same time draws on lessons from difficulties facing developing countries toward achieving such integration. And for leaders from developing countries, there will be the proverbial call for more and increased aid to tackle poverty, food insecurity, and climate change impacts.  

But perhaps the most important aspect of the negotiations will be the aspirations of those whose livelihoods are at stake; those who face the risk of being alienated in the new Global Green Economy. They are the world's 2 billion or so smallholder farmers who still depend on subsistence practices, and whose livelihoods are exposed to the vagaries of climate change. Will they likely fall victims, yet again, of an ambitious global deal that promises a lot but delivers little? With the theme of the future we want, Rio+20 promises to be different for many reasons, but most importantly because of the focus on the Global Green Economy.  

Developing countries have a lot to gain from a Global Green Economy, and Rio+20 will set the stage for the kinds of policy and institutional transformations needed at multiple scales. But the potential for addressing rural poverty will depend on the extent to which links between ecosystem services and human well-being is emphasized in the new global deal. Undoubtedly, biodiversity and forests remain a global priority as the planet's natural capital for a sustainable future, including climate change mitigation and adaptation. What is needed now is a focus on policies and incentives for developing countries where the natural capital directly underpins human survival.  

The potential for harnessing biodiversity and forest resources in the context of sustainable livelihoods tends to present formidable challenges for governments in balancing long-term and short-term gains. Yet experience over the last two decades suggests that mobilizing and empowering rural communities to manage forest and tree resources can play an important role in overcoming this challenge for long-term economic prosperity. For example, successes with tree-based practices such as cocoa and coffee agroforestry and farmer-managed natural regeneration in parts of the developing world are evidence of how such empowerment can lead to multiple benefits for environment and development.  

Because the practice of integrating high value trees in production landscapes is widespread in developing countries, it represents a legitimate business opportunity for poor land users to generate income. The practice is a potentially invaluable option for bringing the global green economy down to the grassroots level where transformational impact is much needed. Therefore putting in place the right policies, incentives, and institutional frameworks is a must for developing countries to harness the Global Green Economy for addressing rural poverty.

A critical need in this regard is the urgent need for developing countries to delineate and support effective management of important forest areas to safeguard biodiversity and ecosystem services. This need should take into account clear links between watershed value, carbon stocks, and biodiversity importance as a means of reinforcing urgency for protection. At the same time, it should establish the basis for incentivizing communities to integrate such high value areas with production systems (crop, livestock, agroforestry) where livelihood practices are underpinned by ecosystem services.

Incentives can be fostered through financial means or policy options that explicitly recognize the value of role of farmers and other land users in promoting sustainable land and forest management practices. The incentives should be based on collaboration between the public and private sectors, including the global development community. Such incentives will facilitate up-scaling of practices that safeguard and sustain ecosystem services (carbon sequestration, biodiversity protection, water availability and flow) in production landscapes. Knowledge of these ecosystem services in production landscapes will help to streamline practices, and to prioritize options for land users to invest for their livelihoods and ecosystem resilience.  

In conclusion, it is clear that world leaders already have their work cut for them when they gather in Rio in June. The choices they must make for the future we want depends on how far they are prepared to accommodate the needs of 2 billion land users whose lives are at stake. The Global Green Economy can only succeed if it influences the empowerment of communities to exercise greater control over management of natural capital on which their livelihood depends. Otherwise new and existing financial mechanisms for food security, poverty reduction, and climate change mitigation and adaptation will fall short of aspirations for a sustainable and resilient future. And that is not the future we want.

By Elise Christensen, ELP 2010

When world leaders will gather in Rio de Janeiro at the UN Conference on Sustainable Development in June 2012, two big topics will be on the agenda; 1) Green Economy and 2) Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development. Although the former tends to overshadow the latter, there is an urgency to solve the institutional challenges related to sustainable development, not only at the international but also at the national level.  

The 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development declared that "in order to achieve sustainable development, environmental protection shall constitute an integral part of the development process and cannot be considered in isolation from it" (Principle 4). The UN Millennium Declaration reaffirms this need with Goal 7 to "ensure environmental sustainability" and a related target to "integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes and reverse the loss of environmental resources" (Millennium Development Goal 7, Target 7a). 20 years later we are still facing serious shortcomings both at the multilateral, regional and national level in terms of integrating environment into the development processes. Former UN secretary General Kofi Annan confirmed this during the launch of the Global Sustainability Panel's report; "Twenty-five years after the Brundtland report, our political systems have failed to deliver the integrated action that is so urgently needed."

Improved environmental management can contribute to better health, wellbeing and living conditions and reduce vulnerability to natural disasters, especially for the poor. To combat poverty, to promote security and to preserve the ecosystems that poor people depend on for their livelihoods, sustainable development needs to be placed at the centre of each country's national plans, systems and institutions.

One way to do this is through the process that has come to be known as "poverty-environment mainstreaming"1 which aims to integrate the relationship between environment and poverty reduction in government policies, strategies and institutions, thereby changing the very basis for political decisions and priorities. This will entail fundamental changes in ways of thinking about development, growth and natural resources and it will require political will from national authorities.

Despite the growing evidence that the environment is one of the most important building blocks for economic growth, the goal of "sustainability" is still seen as different from - and sometimes also in conflict with - the goal of development. With few exceptions, environmental leaders and environmental ministers face a constant problem with "selling" its sector to other sectors and to convince that the environment should be treated on an equal footing with other macro-economic priorities.

An important task we have ahead of us is therefore to change the perception that sustainability is a luxury that governments cannot afford. We rather need to convey that sustainable development is an asset we cannot afford not to invest in. This requires the help of empirical evidence and arguments that can show that investment in the environment will contribute to gains at the national and macro-economic level, including contributing to reducing poverty and improving living conditions for the population. How can we separate climate adaptation from agriculture or water management from health care? Showing the economic costs of environmental degradation in one sector and how it affects another may assist in changing "business as usual". Although the use of economic arguments represents a new approach for most environmental leaders, it is becoming more and more prevalent - and there are already indications of success. For example:

By Aman Singh

ELP 2006

Chief Coordinator/ Founder
Krishi Avam Paristhitiki Vikas Sansthan (KRAPAVIS)
Bakhtpura, Siliserh, Alwar - 301001 {Rajasthan}, India
website: www.krapavis.netne.net
Email: krapavis_oran@rediffmail.com 

By Denis J. Sonwa

CIFOR & ELP 2010

Rio 1992 settled sustainable development as a way to move ahead while taking into consideration socio-economic and environmental issues. UNFCCC and CBD were signed in the spirit of this important event of 1992. The Congo Basin had been recognized as important for the international community because of its forest, which provides many products and services useful for to the planet. Biodiversity is important in the agenda linking the international community with the Basin. In line with Rio 1992, some countries of the region have already protected around 1/5 of their territory. This has been accomplished with help from conservation organizations such as WWF, WCS, CI & IUCN. Thanks also to these organizations, sustainable management practices are gradually been adopted by some logging companies. 31% of logged area in the basin was under a management plan in 2008 and the certification process (such as FSC) is gradually moving ahead. Since Johannesburg 2002, the US has played an important role in bringing together the partners around CBFP (http://www.cbfp.org/) to take care of the Congo Basin. The platform has been facilitated by the US, France, Germany, and is now in the hands of Canada. They help COMIFAC (Central African Forests Commission) to try to achieve its goal of sustainable forest management. Several of the protected areas in the region and the 12 landscapes defined for biodiversity conservation were put in place after the creation of the PFBC (see Congo Basin State of the Forest 2008 & 2010, http://www.observatoire-comifac.net/edf2010.php?l=en). Despite all these improvements in institutional development and biodiversity conservation, the populations of the region are still living in extreme poverty. Despite the richness of the region in natural resources such as forest, oil, mining and arable lands, people continue to struggle for survival. War has also contributed to impoverishment in the region.

Sustainable development is about social, economic and environmental development. In the Congo Basin region,environmental development has received more attention than both social and economic development. With the climate change the high priority in the international agenda in recent years, what can be observed in the sustainable development application is found in the UNFCCC implementation in the region: emphasis is placed on how to protect/restore forests in the REDD+ initiative. Adaptation, which can be useful to alleviate suffering of the local communities to climate change, is not a priority on the agenda in the region[1]. The recent "Joint Declaration of Intent on REDD+ in the CONGO BASIN Between Central African and Donor Countries" (http://www.cbfp.org/news_en/items/Durban-Congo_Basin-REDD-EEE.html) is an illustration of such difference on efforts between forest resources and populations: while we have a declaration on forest protection that will benefit the global community, we do not have such declaration on the adaptation that could aid local communities.

Rio 2012 will need to highlight the importance REDD+ Governance - Safeguards and adaptation to climate change in tropical forests such as the Congo Basin. For the moment, the Zero draft document of Rio+20 has only one paragraph on forests, with emphasis on biodiversity. It does not highlight goods and services from forests, and particularly the role that they can play in adaptation for example. After 20 years, it evident that an improvement had been seen in forest biodiversity conservation in the region. This is a good achievement for the international community and this will need to be supported. But the poor populations of this region have not had the same chance/attention as forest resources.... Without putting peoples at the center of initiatives concerning this part of the world, Rio dynamics may be leading to a Congo Basin that is not sustainable. Is that the Congo Basin the international community wants in the future?

By Faiz Kakar

ELP 2008

Introduction:

Water table depletion is one of the key environmental issues of Balochistan Province in Pakistan, because the community from this province has recently transitioned from orthodox livestock dependency to agricultural based practices. The population is now using the fertile land and exploiting the underground water like never before. The province lies in Arid Zone, and the only source of irrigation is underground water. The land of the province is very fertile and popular for fruit and grain production, leading it to be called a fruit basket of the country. Electricity is the main and cheap source to pull out the underground water for irrigation. The Government policy of a flat rate for electricity exacerbates an already precarious situation. Many farmers collect underground water twenty-four hours a day because they are paying a fixed amount for their electricity bill, based on this Government policy. Furthermore, high delta plantation of apple trees with ancient flood irrigation practices is very common in entire province. The misuse of the irrigation water now jeopardizes the water table which has been maintained in equilibrium for centuries.

It is recommended by different groups, NGOs, and government agencies that the conservation of water must be done through the promulgation of environmentally friendly policies that assure proper water management practices in affected areas. Such practices must include high efficiency irrigation systems and transition of farmers from high to low delta cropping across the province.

In the light of this situation, a research project entitled "Water conservation and combating desertification through sustainable Agriculture Practices" was submitted to UNEP Eco-Peace Leadership Center, Republic of Korea for consideration and was presented in an annual forum in the Republic of Korea in 2011. The main goal of the project is to alleviate poverty in the area through research and awareness creation. The research will compare low delta crops with high delta, while awareness creation among farmers will encourage them to divert from the practices of high delta cropping and flood irrigation to low delta cropping and high efficiency irrigation practices.

The project was initiated with following objectives:

1. To sensitize and mobilize the local communities (approximately 50,000 inhabitants) about the scarcity of natural resources and their rational use
2. To demonstrate and execute the best practices of sustainable agriculture for wise use of natural water resources (One Acre)
3. To divert the agriculture based households from high delta crops towards low delta, high commercial value and cash crops
4. To conduct a comparative study of low and high delta crops for water conservation

Project activities include: planning, meeting with stakeholders, data collection, establishment of low delta crop plot, printing of leaflets as awareness material, establishment of a Micro Irrigation System, production of research reports, regular monitoring reporting, conducting seminars, and submitting a project completion report.

Educational Materials

Progress of the project:

The project was initiated in the month of the December 2011. During the initial stages, the project was planned with the stakeholders, different meetings were conducted, and awareness material about low delta crops was developed, printed and distributed among farmers. A plot of low delta crops - grapes - has been established, and after the development of a questionnaire for research, the data has been collected and analyzed. I am confident that the project will be completed in time with expected output in August 2012. A unique aspect of the project is the seeking of regular inputs from my advisor at Kangwon National University, Republic of Korea. I also submitted progress reports to UNEP EPLC, Republic of Korea and my host organization on a monthly basis with pictorial proof. The cooperation of both institutions in implementation of the project is remarkable. Stay tuned for results and implications of this study.

About Eco-Peace Leadership Programme (EPLP)

EPLP is the program on leadership development and capacity building for GOs and NGOs of developing countries from Asia and the Pacific Regions and is being run by UNEP Eco-Peace Leadership Center which is jointly supported by United Nations Environmental Programme(UNEP) and Eco-Peace Leadership Center Foundation of Republic of Korea. The address of the Center is College of Forest & Environmental Science,Kangwon National University, Hyoja 2dong, Chuncheonsi, Kangwondo 200-701, Republic of Korea.

back to top 

Karin Svadlenak-Gomez, ELP 2005, 

Research Institute of Wildlife Ecology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria

At the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro twenty years ago, governments agreed on momentous commitments to make global development "sustainable". The goal was to continue to improve human wellbeing without destroying the natural foundations it is built on for future generations. This meant addressing huge interlinked environmental challenges: the drastic decline of global biodiversity, anthropogenic climate change, desertification and deforestation, ozone depletion, and pollution, to name but a few.    

Several global and regional environmental conventions came into force during the years that followed the Summit. Over the past two decades national and local governments and organizations, including a multitude of civil society groups, have fashioned new laws and regulations, funded and implemented large and small projects and initiatives, entered into partnerships with businesses, created new biodiversity and carbon markets -- all aimed at improving the way we govern our natural environment and resources.  

And yet after all this time, it seems to me that real commitment to sustainable development remains insufficient. The OECD recently published the  OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050, which warns that the global economy is likely to quadruple by 2050 and the associated rising living standards will bring about ever increasing demands for energy, food and natural resources and even more pollution. In March 2011, seeing that member countries could not meet earlier commitments to halt biodiversity loss by 2010, the European Commission adopted a new strategy to halt the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services in the EU by 2020 and devised a vision for 2050 to protect, value and restore its natural capital, to preserve both the intrinsic value of biodiversity and its contribution to human wellbeing. Yet the OECD report cautions that given current trends, biodiversity will continue to be under pressure, e.g. from land use change and climate change, over-exploitation of natural resources (think fish), and from conversion of primary forest to plantations (ironically often to meet the drive for "green" energy sources). I have found myself becoming cynical about lofty political commitments, because so often I get the impression that - no doubt worthy -- policies are insufficiently translated into concrete on-the-ground action.   Short-term economic gain still trumps long-term sustainability more often than not.    

How to overcome this dilemma? One of the most important steps toward sustainability is cross-sectoral collaboration among different stakeholders. To address the drivers of biodiversity loss we need integrated approaches to managing our environment. This means we have to look at biological, economic, political, social, and legal issues.     We need to overcome barriers in people´s heads, where protection of the environment and the economy appear to be viewed as irreconcilable.  

One example of a project that attempted to use a holistic approach is " Econnect- restoring the web of life", which was led by our Research Institute of Wildlife Ecology and financed by the EU. Over a period of three years, the project aimed to lay the foundation for maintaining and restoring an ecological continuum across the Alps. The Alpine Arc is a biodiversity-rich region that traverses nine countries and includes a series of rather unique and diverse ecosystems. At the same time the region provides important economic and cultural benefits to its inhabitants and visitors. While several protected areas throughout the Alps are meant to protect Alpine biodiversity, the surrounding landscape is often fragmented. From an ecological point of view it is important to make the entire landscape permeable for wildlife, to connect isolated nature reserves in network form.  The project therefore looked at how policies may affect natural areas and how ecological networks may in turn affect the planning of spatial/infrastructure development and economic activities. Our Institute cooperated with a large number of partners, drawing on complementary competencies at the regional, national and transnational levels (administrations, international NGOs, scientific institutions and national parks).  What emerged, not surprisingly, was that beyond physical biological barriers, it is equally important to address legal and socio-political impediments to effective landscape-level management for biodiversity. In particular, for connectivity networks to function, land use planning processes have to be agreed and coordinated among different relevant sectors. Equally essential is the creation of a comprehensive legal framework for the realisation of connectivity measures, which may necessitate the adaptation of national laws, regulations and competencies. Last but not least, a mechanism for conflict management and regular, long-term communication with the wider public, including the continuous exchange of ideas through partnership networks are crucial.  

Of course this project, like all policy level projects, can only be a first step towards removing barriers to "downstream" action. The battle to get a grip on the drivers of biodiversity loss and other sustainability issues continues in the face of seemingly relentless calls for economic growth fuelled by consumption, here in Europe and elsewhere. The question is: will Rio + 20 be able to change the global economy´s course?  

back to top 

By Sara Minelli, ELP 2010

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) are the offspring of the Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. While the awareness of the global community to climate change and biodiversity loss has dramatically increased since the Rio Summit, the significance of land and soil to humanity remain obscure to many.

Land is the earth's infrastructure for life. The rate and quality of production generated from the land depends on its major components, soil and its fertility. Land productivity is exploited for biological products of economic value (e.g. food, forage, fiber, timber) by land users of the pastoral, farming and agro-pastoral communities. However, land and soil not only support direct users, but also indirect users: the entire human population derives benefits generated by soil such as vegetation cover, atmospheric oxygen, climate regulation, and water filtration provisions. Soil functions and services acquire the status of a global common whose protection benefits all, yet each year an estimated 24 billion tons of fertile soil are lost due to unsustainable exploitation of land productivity by pastoral, farming and agro-pastoral users.

Land degradation directly affects 1.5 billion people globally.Worldwide, when poverty is assessed in terms of infant mortality rate, 74% of the poor (42% of the very and 32% of the moderately poor) are directly affected by land degradation. When occurring in drylands, where productivity is constrained by water, land degradation is termed desertification. In the drylands, due to drought and desertification, 12 million hectares of land are transformed into new man-made deserts each year. That is an area with the potential to produce 20 million tons of grain every year. Over the next 25 years, such losses may reduce global food production by up to 12 per cent, increasing world prices by as much as 30 per cent.

This continuing loss of fertile soil can be offset in two ways: by managing currently non-degraded fertile lands in ways that do not cause degradation (hence by applying sustainable land management practices) and by restoring already degraded land. Two billion hectares of land worldwide is suitable for rehabilitation through forest and landscape restoration; 1.5 billion hectares would be best-suited to mosaic restoration (e.g. agroforestry). Payment for ecosystem services can be an appropriate tool engaged in preventing degradation of non-degraded land, and even more effective in supporting restoration of already degraded land. If the annual rate of reclamation equals the annual degradation rate, then a zero net rate of land degradation (ZNLD) would be attained and the area of global fertile land would remain stable, with clear benefits for humanity and future generations.

The international community has already agreed to set several long-term outcome-oriented targets for achieving sustainable development, through reducing biodiversity losses, mitigating climate change, and alleviating poverty. Since land degradation and desertification is at the backdrop of biodiversity loss, climate change, and poverty, a globally agreed, quantitative, sustainable development target focusing on such degradation, such as the ZNLD, is required. The UNCCD's submission to the Preparatory Process for the Rio+20 Conference stated: "If we do not take bold actions to protect, restore and manage land and soils sustainably, we will miss climate change adaptation and mitigation, biodiversity, forests and Millennium Development Goals targets; we will not alleviate rural poverty and hunger, ensure long-term food security or build resilience to drought and water stress. This will lead to consequences including more political conflicts over scarce resources and continued forced migrations."

back to top 

By Didi Anada Carushila, ELP 2003

"Vùng đất Uma chân phúc": Bliss land eco-village in Hochiminh City, Vietnam is founded on the principles of sustainable development. Our objectives are the establishment of self-sufficient Organic Farming model communities. We will provide all possible services to empower people to improve their quality of life by fostering the development of workers, cooperatives, self-reliant communities, environmental protection, universal ethics and spiritual values.

Our Project has 6 hectares and 2 hectares Lands. located at Phuoc Tan, Bien Hoa City, about 1.30 hrs from Ho Chi Minh city, Viet Nam.

We have a team of 8 teachers who are volunteering to work on this project. We are on the process of planning and we are looking for any suggestions, and grants:) as we put this project in place.

Our slogan: "Many people come here to take, let you be the one who is here to give"  (P.R.Sarkar)

This project is founded on the following 5 primary requisites of an Ideal Sustainable Community:

economic self- RELIANCE; to provide food throughout the year, sufficient local raw materials produced through agriculture and scientific farming. These raw materials will provide the basis for industrial units and agro-industries such as dairy farms, horticulture, sericulture, etc. We focus on cooperative industry to produce the basic necessities of life.

-       Production of sufficient fibers and fabrics for clothing.

-       General and special medical units: alternative medical treatments.

-       Grow, raise, and trade our own food, medicines, and forestry products in an environmentally responsible, bioregional network.

SOCIAL&EDUCATION: Encourage an atmosphere for spiritual practices, progressive social action, and the practice of healthy lifestyles. Support local and global change through learning, teaching, and networking. Provide primary and post-primary schools that encourage moral principles.  

ECOLOGY& ENERGY: Afforestation and harvesting rain water, conservation of surface water through a system of ponds, canals, dams, lakes. To use and develop ecologically sound technologies for water, waste, energy, construction, and other essential systems. (Solar, wind, biogas, biomass. Small-scale hydroelectric.)

ENGAGING WORK PLACES: Industries and agriculture will be run on a cooperative basis. With a more decentralized economy, people will have more direct control over their work and feel more responsibility for their jobs. Construct alternative houses for workers and low income family.

SPECIAL FEATURES OF A Sustainable Community

• An Ideal farm: integrated farming & Agricultural Training Centre
• Flour mill to produce flour.
• A bakery
• A seed bank: Cheap Seed Distribution Centre.
• A Free Plant Distribution Centre.
• Sericulture and silk weaving centre.
• Bio-gas plants (Water hyacinths for producing bio-gas.)
• Apiculture (bee-keeping)
• Animal sanctuary. (Only bio-fertilizers; cow dung, neem spray, etc.)
• Alternative energy.

IDEAL FARMING: Integrated farming should include:

• Agriculture (proper use of fertilizers& pest control)
• Horticulture (fruits tree)
• Floriculture
• Sericulture
• Lac culture
• Apiculture (Bee-keeping)
• Dairy farming
• Animal husbandry
• Irrigation and water conservation
• Pisciculture (Fish-farming)
• Cottage industries
• Energy production
• Research centres

SPECIAL EMEGENCY SURVIVAL PLANTS PROGRAM

They are the minimum items necessary for physical survival.

• Vegetables: People cannot remain healthy without vegetables. One quarter of the land is to be allotted for: Wax gourd, Bottle gourd, Pumpkin, bitter gourd, cucumber, creepers
• Fruits: a vital part of human diet, purifying body, nutritious and medicinal value
• Pluses: Black gram, Soybean
• Potato: Carbohydrates substitute for cereals
• Fodder for dairy cows: sweet potatoes and black gram, are good fodder for animals. One of the best grasses to encourage milk production in cows is napier grasses (pennisetum purpureum)
• Herbs and medicinal plants

back to top 

By Juliana Quaresma, ELP 2012 

Program Assistant, UNDP / Equator Initiative

ELP Alums from Kenya got together for dinner in Nairobi in March!

Robert Murtland (Northern Ireland, ELP 2001) shares that he will most likely be going to India to work next month on a forestry project in Rajastan.  He also shares an interesting historical link between Londonderry and Berkeley: There is a link between Londonderry and Berkeley via the Anglo Irish thinker and bishop George Berkeley (1685-1753), who was Dean of Londonderry/Derry from 1724-1732. His heart was in the New World and after a failed attempt to establish a college for training ministers for the colonies and missionaries to the Indians, he returned to Ireland, donating his books and property in Newport Rhode Island to the newly formed Yale College. Berkeley's influence is reflected in the institutions of education named in his honor. Both the University of California, Berkeley and the City that grew up around the university were named after him. A residential College in Yale University also bears Berkeley's name as does the Berkeley Library in Trinity College Dublin. Just about now the Round the World Clipper race is in San Francisco the Derry Londonderry boat is fourth at the moment. There should be a group of local officials from here joining in the event they are also scheduled to visit Berkeley, due to this historic connection.  

back to top

Celia Harvey (UK/USA, ELP 2006) had twins (Emily, Daniel) in early December!

Frank McAvor (Ghana, ELP 2008) writes: I am currently working on a project christened The effect of Climate change on Food security in Ghana. It is a research project trying to assess what the effect of climate change on Food production has been over the past 20years and what our projections are for the future.  The project is sponsored by the Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Programme (CAADEP). It is quite involving and takes me away from the family most of the time, but I guess they understand and I am enjoying it.

Karin Teixeira Kaechele (Brazil, ELP 2008) shares that she is going to start on May 29th a one year MPA in Environmental Science and Policy at SIPA/ Columbia University, NY. She is very happy with this opportunity to learn more about international trade and public affairs, with a focus on environmental issues.

Margherita Vitale (Italy, ELP 2010) notes that since last November she works in the Ministery for the Environment Office in a program for voluntary commitments on GHG reduction of the Italian private sector. She will participate to Rio+ 20 in June, and hopes to meet some ELPs there.

Nazima Shaheen (Pakistan, ELP 2010) writes: I have been selected for prestigious Australian Development Scholarship for Master of Environment with a specialization in Climate Change from University of Melbourne. I applied for this earlier in 2009 but my application couldn't be selected. Last year when I applied again, I got it! I moved to Melbourne in the second week of January. I think one of the key reasons I was selected this year is my improved leadership and analytical skills, and the Beahrs ELP was one of the major contributors in refining those skills.

back to top 

Roberta del Giudice (Brazil, ELP 2011) writes that she is working with a new initiative in Rio de Janeiro, an Environmental Stock Market - BVRio. They will soon start with Carbon, environmental compensations, and Reverse Logistics.

Maureen Hamiyanze (Zambia, ELP 2011) shares: The Elimination of Child Labour Programme under Hodi finally came to an end on 31st December. An opportunity has arisen for me to set up an NGO called 'Future in Our Hands, Zambia'. The organization will seek to continue some of the programs left by the Hodi project. The NGO has been registered! It's a scary step but here we go! The skills and knowledge from the ELP will come in handy for sure and all the support from fellow ELPers will be highly appreciated!

Intan Asmara (Indonesia, ELP 2011) has moved to Sharjah, UAE (15 minutes from Dubai) and no longer works with Mercy Corps Indonesia. "It's a bitter sweet moment to leave Indonesia and Mercy Corps, sad but also excited in the same time. I am here because my husband got a new career opportunity. Until now, I have no definite plans about a career yet, but I think to take Master degree. Meanwhile, I am enjoying life as a full time house wife."   

Eak Rana (Nepal, ELP 2011) writes that he is still at the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) in REDD+ project - managing the project. He has also been awarded a PhD Scholarship and will leave for Charles Sturt University, Albury New South Wales, Australia in July 2012!